Zoomorphic and fantastical motifs in the decoration of Brâncoveanu charters

1. Introduction

Among the various types of written historical sources, chancery documents occupy a special place, being renowned for the wealth and variety of information they provide, highlighting aspects of a political, socio-economic, cultural-religious, linguistic and genealogical nature, amongst others. For this reason, the charters – that is, those official documents issued by the prince and authenticated by his autograph signature, as well as by the country’s seal and the testimony of the great boyars of the Divan, and written by the clerks of the princely chancellery – have been systematically published, since the last century, with those from Wallachia appearing in Series B of the Documenta Romaniae Historica collection. However, given the impressive number of documents, the effort required to identify and gather them (as they are held in various institutions, libraries, and national and county archives, scattered throughout the country), and taking into account, first and foremost, the difficulty of reading and understanding the text, their scholarly publication for the Muntenian region did not take place until the reign of Constantin Șerban (1654–1658, 1660), with the last volume of the Series covering the year 1657 at the earliest1. It should be noted that, separately (in addition to individual articles in various journals), numerous other documents have been published, both as text and facsimile, whilst for the period of the reign of the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu (1688–1714), catalogues containing documents held by the Library of the Romanian Academy<img id="2"/> and the National Archives<img id="3"/> have appeared relatively recently, to mark the three-hundredth anniversary of his martyrdom for the faith of his forefathers (1714), catalogues of documents held by the Library of the Romanian Academy2 and the National Archives3, presented in exceptional graphic design, which also allows for the observation of certain distinctive features, such as those relating to decorative styles. In this study, we aim to examine precisely this aspect, wishing to highlight a specific category of Brâncoveanu miniatures, namely the zoomorphic motifs—both realistic and fantastical—as well as to understand the significance of their presence on this type of document, which, as official sources, represent the state rather than the voivode as a private individual.

Therefore, for the purposes of our analysis, we are considering several charters issued by the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu and decorated with animal miniatures, noting that, when they are ornamented (for they may also be plain), documents from that period predominantly feature floral elements, which are depicted alone or in bouquets—large, colourful (pal red verging on pink and gold leaf were widely used), elaborately and intricately rendered—placed on the frontispiece, in the composition of the initial letter, on the side border and beneath the text, on either side of the princely monogram, lending the document balance, symmetry and elegance. As can be seen from the specialist literature, studies on Brâncoveanu miniatures have focused on the examination of manuscripts and only sporadically on the analysis of charters, occasionally to compare pieces by the same scribe, establishing, however, that we are justified in speaking of a Brâncoveanu ‘style’4, particularly due to the remarkable unity represented by the plant decoration across all areas of artistic creation. The minimal differences that can be observed do not stem from the structure of the decorative repertoire, but from the conception of how the space is decorated5. It has therefore been observed that there is a parallel between the ornaments in the engravings of Brâncoveanu prints and the decoration of tombstones and church portals, as well as between the plant motifs in manuscripts and those in the charters of that period6. However, the types of miniatures found in Brâncoveanu documents are different; although known, they have not been the subject of specific research.

Our attention was drawn to the zoomorphic elements7, which are, in fact, very beautiful, not only because they are rarely found both on Brâncoveanu documents and, more generally, on charters, compared to the abundant floral decoration, but also because we sought to understand the purpose of depicting animals on solemn, official state documents that deal with specific administrative and legal matters, rather than literature, mythology, etc. In our previous research into the illustrations on charters, we focused on those depicting holy figures8, noting that they emphasise a Christian conception of society and the state, specific to Orthodoxy, serving not merely a decorative purpose, but constituting genuine testimonies to the autonomy of the Romanian Principalities in relation to the Ottoman Empire, which, in accordance with their status as tributary states, guaranteed the preservation of their institutions, such as the Church and the Christian Principality9. Consequently, documents featuring icons10 bore witness (if we refer solely to their decoration, whilst noting, however, that the text itself often opened with quotations from the Old and New Testaments, as well as from the Holy Fathers) the existence of a Christian state, whilst the floral elements highlighted the taste and aesthetic sensibility of the scriptorium miniaturists, who, through the engraved heraldic symbols, emphasised the solemnity of the documents and the involvement of the state as a whole, rather than that of the voivode as an individual. Furthermore, the depictions of animals—whether real or fantastical—on these same documents indicate more than a mere decorative role, contrasting, through the peculiarity of their representation, with the sobriety of the sources and the issuers.

Recalling the depictions of animals in the Transylvanian ecclesiastical architecture and sculpture of the time11, in religious painting, in Byzantine mosaics12, in book illustration13, as well as the animal symbols of the Evangelists14, we have sought to unravel the significance of their presence on state documents, believing that, beyond the beauty of the decoration, they may also convey a message. Whilst we have previously focused our analysis on Wallachian documents featuring animals (deer, various kinds of birds, eagles, vultures, peacocks, owls, snails, snakes, dragons, winged horses, mermaids and mascheroni), using the chronological period 1614–1675 as our reference point15, in what follows we shall therefore turn our attention to the Brâncoveanu charters, whilst limiting ourselves, however, to a few specific examples. It should be noted that, on this occasion, in the two parts of our study, we shall refer to documents illustrated with snakes and, respectively, birds, representing elements that also appear in the sculpture of the Brâncoveanu era, but which belong to the Byzantine tradition (which, in turn, also has an Eastern component), adopted in Wallachia, whilst other motifs, such as the dolphin in sculpture or mermaids in miniatures and engravings16, appear under the influence of Western art, through the circulation of Venetian books in the Romanian-speaking world or of certain Kiev prints, the latter themselves bearing Baroque influences17.

As a spatial and temporal reference, we note that we have encountered animal motifs on charters in Wallachia but not in Moldavia, and, in terms of dating, they date from the reign of Prince Radu Mihnea 18, when the abbotship of Dealu Monastery was held by the renowned hierarch and calligrapher Matei al Mirelor, thus placing us at the beginning of the 17th century, so that, by the middle of that same century—that is, during the reign of Prince Matei Basarab (1632–1654) and the scholar Udriște Năsturel (1596–1658/1659), his wife’s brother, the continuity and indeed the use of this relatively dense decorative style on state documents can be observed, culminating in the second half of the 17th century, a period during which the trilingual manuscript of Metropolitan Ștefan I of Ungrovlahia (1648–1653, 1655–1668) 19, the Service Book 20, which bears numerous similarities to the miniatures found in chancery documents from the same period. This detail suggests that these animal and fantastical compositions were created by the same artists—whether local or from elsewhere—who were influenced by Eastern zoomorphic miniatures, but who were active in Wallachia, being familiar with this ornamental style, as well as by their apprentices, trained in the same spirit.

Animal motifs are found, for this period, in religious manuscripts and printed works, such as, for example, in Liturgy Books produced in Wallachia or circulating widely within that region. During the time of Saint Constantine Brâncoveanu, animal motifs were still used in documents, although plant and floral ornamentation predominated; subsequently, from the Phanariot period onwards, it was used less frequently, with the result that only certain zoomorphic elements became more common. Among these more common motifs, which persisted until the 19th century and served a symbolic rather than merely aesthetic purpose, we note snakes. In what follows, we provide a few examples of such Brâncoveanu documents, and, finally, we shall attempt to establish the symbolic significance of these representations, taking as our guide the words of the Saviour Jesus Christ: ‘Be wise as serpents and harmless as doves’ (Matthew 10:16).

2. Brâncoveanu charters

On 5 December 1688, Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu confirmed to Boyar Mihai Cantacuzino (1640–1716), former Grand Spătar, 250 stânjeni of land in Fundeni, near Bucharest, which he had received from the former prince Șerban Cantacuzino (1678–1688), and in turn added a further 250 stânjeni in the area, taken from the princely estate. The document is interesting for its content, but, for our study, particularly from the perspective of its decoration, bearing the initial ‘M’ (standing for Milostieiu Bojieiu, meaning ‘By the Grace of God’, representing, at the time, the so-called ‘formula of devotion’) adorned with two serpents, depicted back-to-back, with their mouths open and tongues protruding, their bodies intertwined, and their tails ending in two flower stalks; above them is a crown, whilst the sides of the letter are depicted as two ancient columns; the entire composition is framed within a rectangle, bordered by a double border. The charter, which bears on its frontispiece the coat of arms of Wallachia (the cross-bearing eagle), the princely monogram in crimson, the movable stamped seal and the voivode’s autograph signature, is written on parchment by Radu Șufar21, son of Gherghe Șufar, a well-known scribe of the time, originally from Târgoviște, the former capital of Wallachia and a renowned centre of culture and religion. This design (featuring two serpents placed inside the letter, their bodies twisted around each other, rather than each climbing separately, sideways, up the two pillars of the initial) is less common than the second one, but we also find it used on another charter, issued just a few years later and written by the same scribe, which we shall present later (Fig. 1).

Imagine

This document provides details of the circumstances in which Mihai Cantacuzino came to enjoy the princely grants. Thus, we learn that, on the one hand, he owned land in Fundeni, on the banks of the Colentina, where he wished to build a fishpond; on the other hand, adjacent to this was a princely estate, which was of no use whatsoever, being overgrown with brambles; Consequently, the former prince Șerban Cantacuzino, after consulting with the country’s metropolitan, Teodosie, and with the boyars, decided to grant the boyar Mihai Cantacuzino 250 stânjeni. Subsequently, in order to extend the area granted to him, Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu, having seen the previous deed, granted the said boyar a further 250 stânjeni, also from a princely estate that was unproductive, specifically so that a fishpond, complete with a mill, might be constructed for the benefit of the boyar’s household. Thus, the charter was issued for the benefit of the honourable and faithful boyar of His Highness Méle, Mihaiu Cantacuzino, formerly spătar, and his sons, however many God may grant him, so that they might have the favour and gift whichhad received from him, the late uncle of His Lordship Méle, Șerban Cantacuzino, Voivode, in full and permanent right; by virtue of which favour and gift he was granted an estate here in the countryside of the city of Bucharest, namely a princely estate of 250 stânjeni, which lies beyond the market town of <a> and extends to the outskirts of the city, as far as the lower boundary of the estate meets the Colentinii stream, which is bounded above by the estate of the Căldărușani Monastery and below by the estate of Mărcuță’s monastery [...] because, being a princely estate, and His Highness having observed that it is overgrown with thickets and brambles and yields no sustenance, nor does it bring His Highness any revenue [...] I have also granted him an estate right next to this one, which is likewise royal property, measuring 250 stânjeni22. We also learn that Mihai Cantacuzino possessed a neighbouring plot of land as part of his dowry, whilst in the surrounding area the monasteries of Căldărușani and Mărcuță held estates outside the domain. The 500 fathoms received as a gift from the two princes, with whom, incidentally, he was related to, were added to those the boyar already held as a dowry; he then set about developing the area, as he wished, as the text tells us, to build a fishpond with a mill in Fundeni, on the Colentina riverbed. Other plots of land had come into Mihai Cantacuzino’s possession through exchange. For example, a deed dated 20 June 1686 attests that the boyar had entered into an exchange with Paisie, the abbot of the Radu-Vodă Monastery in Bucharest, receiving from the monastery community an islet on the River Colentina, known as ‘Între Lacuri’, and giving the monastery an estate in the village of Parapanul, mentioned in the text as being in Ialomița County23. The exchange satisfied both parties, as it expanded their estates, as the boyar wished to create a fishpond, having received an area right by the water, whilst offering the monastery a further 117 stânjeni (previously purchased by the boyar from Radu, the son of Stan’s priest from that village, and a further 140 from Oancea and other locals) in Parapan, where the monastery already owned land, and a further 140 stânjeni, previously donated by Stan the iuzbașa24.

On 2 May 1690, the same Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu confirmed to Captain Marco of Ploiești ownership of a number of pogoane of vineyard and a barren plot on Cernătești Hill, purchased from Stan Brașoveanul, issuing, to this effect, a charter on paper, written in black and red ink (the latter used only for the heading, the prince’s monogram and certain details), a document which, at the end, also records the name of the scribe: And I, Radul the scribe, son of 25 Gherghe the scribe of Târgoviște, wrote this here in the fortress of Bucharest, on the 2nd day of May26, in the year 7198 <1690>27. The document is of interest to our study due to its decoration: it features the initial letter M—the significance of which we indicated in the description of the previous document—adorned with floral elements, as well as two snakes with twisted bodies, their heads pointing in opposite directions, their mouths open, so that three teeth can be seen on the one on the left; their tails end in the form of bouquets of flowers, a detail also found, incidentally, in Brâncoveanu’s sculpture 28; above them is a closed crown, the entire composition being framed within a rectangle. The snakes are depicted together, between the two pillars of the letter M, although in other instances they ascend separately, each coiled around one of the initial’s legs. We also note that, in this composition, the snakes are positioned back-to-back, whereas in other miniatures they face each other. On the frontispiece, the coat of arms of Wallachia is depicted, namely the eagle with a cross in its beak, flanked by the sun and the moon on either side; the entire composition is set upon a round shield with a wide border, adorned with flowers (Fig. 2).

Imagine

From the text, we learn that the vineyard plots—some established and productive, whilst others were on barren land, totalling 6 pogoans29, had previously belonged to Stan Brașoveanul of Ploiești, who, in turn, had bought them from Toma and Odor, and sold them to Marco for 141 thalers (33 thalers each for a productive pogoan29 and 12 thalers for a barren pogoan of celery29), of his own free will, with his neighbours acting as witnesses, and by virtue of certain deeds. These final details were not mentioned by chance, but to emphasise that the sale had been conducted fairly, in accordance with the right of pre-emption, in other words, with the notification and consent of the neighbours, who, alongside relatives, were entitled to preferential purchase. On the basis of these findings regarding the legality of the transaction, the voivode confirmed to Captain Marco and his heirs the respective pogoane as full, permanent and hereditary property29, as stated in the authenticated document, which listed the great boyars of the Divan, bore the prince’s autograph signature and was sealed with his seal.

Another document adorned with serpents is that of 8 February 1693, by which the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu confirmed to Radul Grecul and his wife, Iana, daughter of Șandru and Marica, an estate in the village of Comănești, Gorj County, comprising Romanian peasants, mill fords and orchards. The document, written on parchment by Mihai, son of Stan the logothete of Târgoviște, is richly illustrated with floral and heraldic motifs; however, what interests us in particular is, once again, the ornamentation of the initial letter M30. Thus, on the two shafts of the letter, two golden serpents wind their way upwards, their mouths open, with a vase of flowers and intertwining vines between them. Between the vines flanking the coat of arms of Wallachia are arranged, symmetrically, two further birds, distinct from the heraldic eagle, standing back-to-back with their wings folded but their heads turned, gazing at one another31 (Fig. 3).

Imagine

Of the various depictions of snakes on the initial letter, this type is the most commonly used, having also been observed on other documents written by the same logofăt, Mihai, son of Stan the logofăt of Târgoviște, dated 25 May 1690 [Lord Constantin Brâncoveanu confirmed to Radu Pârcălab, son of Balomir, of Cuneștii de Jos, his ownership of the estate in this village (Fig. 4)]32 and, respectively, dated 22 April 1692 [the same prince confirmed to Mihalcea, the chief baker, the estate of Golești in the county of Slam Râmnic33; in the case of this document, above the snakes coiled around one another and on the central pillar of the letter, whose tails end in flowers, a bird can be seen, probably an eagle or a vulture, in flight, and the two pillars of the initial ‘M’ are rendered in such a way that they resemble two lit candles; to the left of this initial is the symbolic invocation, the sign of the Holy Cross, also resembling a candle, decorated with plant motifs in ochre, red and green (Fig. 5)]34.

Imagine

Imagine

The document dated 25 May 1690 is also of interest for its content, as it provides the context for the confirmation of the Cunești estate to Radu Pârcălab and his children. Thus, we are told that, during the reign of Prince Antonie-Vodă (1669–1672), Balomir, the father of Radu the governor, had purchased portions of the estate in Cunești from Radu the treasurer and other local neighbours, using money and deeds to attest to the legality of the transactions. For a time, Balomir and Radu held the land without issue; however, on this occasion, confirmation of their title was required from Voivode Constantin Brâncoveanu, as the deeds had been lost, whilst, during his reign, the Tatars had passed through the outskirts of the country, heading towards Vidin (a place name mentioned as ‘Diiu’), marching against the Germans and stopping at Cunești, where they found the spot where Radu’s clothes and possessions were buried; they took these, and with them disappeared the documents that had been kept in the clothes: For this estate mentioned above was purchased by Balomir, the father of Radu the steward, and by Radu the steward of Cunești, from Radu the treasurer [...] and from the landowners of Cunești de Jos [...] as far back as the days of Prince Antonie … with deeds of sale and witness statements; and both Balomir and his son, Radul the steward, have held this estate, including the entire boundary, in peace, until now, during the reign of Méle. So when they were there recently, it so happened that the khan and the Tatars passed through the country, along the border, across the marsh, marching up to Diiu against the Germans; and as they came upon their manor house35 there, at Cuneștii de Jos, the Tatars found all the clothes and belongings that Radu the steward had buried; they took them all, and as the deeds of purchase for this estate were also amongst those clothes, they were taken along with the clothes and were lost36. Left without any documents, Radu the steward turned to a royal official, namely Cârstea the Grand Treasurer37, who was nearby in Găunoși; he, in turn, in order to ascertain the truth, questioned the elderly local residents, and they in turn testified with all their hearts36 that the estate had been purchased by Balomir and held in peace. Consequently, having received the assurance of his governor Cârstea, who had investigated the matter on the spot and written a letter to that effect, the lord, as sovereign of the entire land, by virtue of the right of dominium eminens, confirmed to Radu, the bailiff, his ownership of those parts of the village inherited from his father.

A somewhat similar situation—namely, the loss of title deeds due to invasions, though on this occasion by the Habsburgs—is also described in another document adorned with serpents. Drafted by the same logothete, Mihai, son of Stan, the deed was issued by the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu on 14 February 1691, in favour of the monk Onufrie (‘Onofrie’ in the text) and his brothers Stanciu, Drăghia and Radu, the sons of Ștefan, the monk from Fundeni, to whom he confirmed the estate at Fundeni, in Ilfov County38. From the text we learn that these brothers had previously purchased the estate: ‘And having taken it into their possession and possessing deeds of purchase and royal documents.’ And afterwards, when they were now39 at the time when the Germans came here into the country and there was much plunder and looting, they too were plundered; everything they possessed was taken from them, and their documents and deeds of ownership were lost. So, having been left without these documents, they gathered together the local nobles and neighbours from there and the surrounding area [...] to draw up a letter of testimony stating that, in truth, the monk Onofrie and his brothers owned an estate in Fundéni, purchased some time ago, comprising 105 stânjăni, and thatdocuments and deeds pertaining to the estate had been lost when the Germans plundered them, as I, His Majesty, have seen, and as is stated in the letter from these witnesses40, written above, bearing their signatures, in the hand of the monk Onofrie. For this very reason, I have also given this document of mine to the monk Onofrie and his brothers, Stanciul, Draghia and Radul, the sons of Stefan the monk of Fundéni, who are mentioned above, so that this estate, comprising 105 stânjăni of permanent land41, might belong to them.

Thus, the text refers to the Habsburg invasion of Wallachia, an event which took place between November 1689 and January 1690, when, amidst the fighting, the documents were lost; the previous deed also related to this event, although the Tatars were fighting on the side of the Ottomans and the Wallachian voivode; however, on their way to Vidin, whilst stopping at Cunești, in Ialomița County, where they found the hidden goods, they took them, and the documents sewn into the clothes were thus lost42. In both cases, the voivode reconfirmed the properties held by those who had suffered losses, the procedure involving several stages: firstly, the examination of local witnesses, to verify that the estates had been acquired lawfully (regardless of the manner of acquisition, i.e. by inheritance, purchase, exchange, etc.), with deeds, witnesses, pre-emption rights and peaceful possession, and thus were not the subject of any legal proceedings; in the subsequent stage, on the basis of documents issued by the magistrates (documents known as ‘letters’), the lord issued charters confirming the right of ownership over those lands. The charter of 1691 bears the sign of the Holy Cross, decorated with floral elements and a single coiled snake, rising towards the top with its mouth open; the initial is also adorned with flowers, rendered solely in black and red ink (Fig. 6).

Imagine

Two snakes with open mouths sit at the base of the initial ‘Î’, which opens the text of the charter dated 25 April 169543, by which the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu endowed Hurezi Monastery, his own foundation, conceived as a princely necropolis, with properties (the villages of Hurezi, Râmești, Șărăneasa, Slăvitești, Runcul and Otești in Vâlcea, with Romanians; Baia de Fier, Gorj County; Puțuri, Gioroc and Bratovoești in Dolj; Sălcuța in Mehedinți; Belciugata and Cojăști in Ilfov), revenues (customs duties from Cerneți), estates, vineyards, Romanians and Gypsies; and the Polovragi Monastery44 in Gorj County was subordinate to it as a metochion. We also learn of the context in which the Hurez family came to hold the Polovragi Monastery under their authority—a boyar foundation established by the chamberlain Danciu Pârâianu, previously dedicated to the Holy Sepulchre, However, adverse historical circumstances led to the monastery’s wealth being squandered, the Romanians leaving, and the monks no longer having the income to maintain it, with the result that the cells had fallen into disrepair; Patriarch Dositei Notara of Jerusalem (1669–1707), who often visited Wallachia during the reign of the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu, found it in this precarious state, and since the Holy Sepulchre derived no aid or benefit from it, but rather suffered further decline43, the said patriarch, having consulted with the descendants of the founders, asked the prince to take it as a metochion for his new foundation.

The document, written on parchment by Isar the logothete (a well-known scribe of the time and, according to some researchers, a miniaturist, who consequently wrote not only chancery documents but also manuscripts, whilst his son, Lefter, was in turn involved in the work of the scriptoria of the time)45, preserved in the form of a scroll over 3 metres long, is decorated on the frontispiece and beneath the text with icons of the Saviour Jesus Christ, surrounded by angels, Saints John the Theologian and John Chrysostom, and the Holy Prophets Solomon and David46. The document also features carefully crafted floral ornamentation, using coloured inks and gold leaf, as well as the state coat of arms. However, from the perspective of the present topic, we draw attention to the zoomorphic ornament of the initial ‘Î’, at the base of which are depicted two serpents, in the form of dragons47, with their bodies coiled and their mouths open (Fig. 7).

Imagine

Whilst, from an iconographic point of view, the serpent symbolised, in this instance, wisdom (for it was a dual-meaning symbol, referring both to the devil’s temptation and to its defeat through the Saviour’s Sacrifice on the Cross), the preface preceding the text itself also emphasised this virtue, that is, true wisdom which comes from God and not the worldly wisdom of the Greeks, which is of no use; in other words, the wisdom praised by the Holy Prophet Solomon, whom he identifies with the Son of God, through Whose help man, by living righteously and doing good deeds, may attain heavenly blessings: Praising this wisdom, the most marvellous and most wise Solomon proclaims it to be higher and more worthy than all God’s other creations, both heavenly and earthly. For this reason, he says that the light of its beauty far surpasses the radiance of the sun and the moon, and neither the stars nor all the other beautiful and marvellous bodies we see in the heavens are of any worth before wisdom; among earthly things, he again testifies that it is more precious than gold and of greater value than all the diamonds and other riches of the world. Solomon speaks, however, not of wisdom in the sense of the philosophy of the Greeks, since that is misguided and vain, comprising nothing but the misguided and dark opinions of men. Rather, the wisdom which Solomon praises is the uncreated wisdom of God, a wisdom which sits at the right hand of God and enlightens every person who comes into the world43.

Other serpents, in the form of dragons or serpents, can also be seen on the ornate initial of the charter dated 25 November 1688, written by Mihailovici, the logothete Conțescul, by which Lord Constantin Brâncoveanu confirmed to his uncles—Constantin Cantacuzino, former Grand Steward; Mihai, Grand Spathar; and Iordache, former Grand Spathar— the estates and Gypsies left behind following the death of their mother, Elina, wife of the late Constantin Cantacuzino, former Grand Chamberlain48 (Fig. 8).

Imagine

3. A brief retrospective on the use of the zoomorphic snake motif

Before attempting to unravel the purpose and significance of the zoomorphic snake motif found on state documents, it is worth recalling that this motif, featuring snakes depicted either in their natural form, or as dragons—even winged ones—appears in religious manuscripts from the 17th-century Orthodox Christian world, written in Romanian, Greek or Church Slavonic, depicted alongside other miniatures and zoomorphic or floral motifs. For example, the Service Book49 of Metropolitan Stephen I of Ungrovlahia or Wallachia is richly illustrated with miniatures depicting saints, flowers or animals, both real and fantastical, so that the approach to ornamentation reveals both Eastern and Western influences50, which can be explained by the fact that, in the scriptoria of Wallachia at that time, both local and foreign calligraphers were active, however, the miniaturist or miniaturists who worked on the Service Book did not sign their names (Fig. 9).

Imagine

As regards the subject of this study, it is interesting to note the similarity of animal motifs appearing in this liturgical manuscript and in 17th-century Wallachian charters—documents which date back to the reigns of Matei Basarab, Antonie Vodă of Popești (1669–1672), Grigorie I Ghica (1660–1664, 1672–1673) and Gheorghe Duca (1673–1678), a practice that continued during the reign of the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu, with some of the documents having been drafted by the same scribes, who did not change with the accession of a new prince. It is possible that they also produced the miniatures, though this hypothesis remains to be confirmed, following an analysis of several sources; our research is based on the fact that the scribes, unlike the miniaturists, signed their work, and we can thus compare the various ornaments appearing on documents attributed to the same calligraphers.

Thus, on folio 6v of the Service Book, the initial is adorned with four serpents, two with their mouths facing upwards and two with their mouths facing downwards. It should be noted that a similar depiction is also found on documents from the Phanariot period. For example, four winged serpents appear on the charter dated 15 September 1767, by which Alexandru Scarlat Ghica, Prince of Wallachia (1766–1768), confirmed the statutes of the (monastery with a hospital) of Saint Pantelimon in Bucharest. The document, written and illustrated by the renowned priest Flor, was also adorned with icons of the monastery’s two patron saints, Pantelimon and Visarion, as well as with the allegories of the virtues of Justice and Wisdom, the latter of whom holds a snake in her right hand and a mirror in her left—details which help us to understand the symbolism of the snake in iconography51 (Fig. 10).

Imagine

Another religious manuscript, featuring animal miniatures rendered in the same style as those found in the Service Book and the Wallachian charters examined, is a Greek miscellany comprising the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom52, which dates to the first half of the 17th century53 and which, before entering the collections of the Romanian Academy Library, had belonged, like the Service Book54, to the Central Seminary in Bucharest. Alongside icons, floral and plant motifs, snakes also appear. On folio 19r, for example, the initial is decorated with a snake, whilst on the right-hand side of the same folio is depicted an icon of the Mother of God, with the Infant in her lap, giving her blessing, surrounded by Seraphim. In the centre of the folio is an icon of Saint John the Baptist, depicted in accordance with Byzantine iconography as a man wearing a halo but with wings, to emphasise his angelic existence, and immediately below him, a capital letter is topped by two fantastical creatures, with wings and the bodies of serpents, whose heads—crowned above—are turned downwards. On the stem of the letter we read the name of Daniil the hieromonk55, who is probably the cleric depicted on the left, with his hands outstretched in prayer (in some cases, the position of the hands symbolised the donor), though he is wearing a pectoral cross (Fig. 11). It is possible that this image is a self-portrait of the miniaturist, who wrote his own name, or that it depicts the patron of the Liturgy Book, possibly the abbot of a monastic community within the Romanian-speaking world or the Greek-speaking Orthodox world, given that, as a rule, the pectoral cross was worn by bishops and abbots, but also by some priests of particular merit56. On folio 27 of the same manuscript, a hierarch appears, dressed in specific vestments, wearing a mitre, holding in his left hand a bishop’s crozier, which ends at the top with a bar, beneath which are two snakes (Fig. 12). On folio 8v, the two pillars of the Greek initial ‘P’ end in serpent heads, forming a sort of portico, beneath which a saint—a hierarch, as indicated by his vestments—is depicted. Above him is a Seraphim, and on either side are two birds, which appear to be peacocks; the entire composition is decorated with floral and plant motifs. Snakes on the bishop’s crozier, this time curving upwards and facing each other, can also be seen in the image of a hierarch in Ms. rom. 1271, held at the Academy Library, with the text entitled precisely The Bishop’s Staff57 (Fig. 13).

Imagine

Imagine

Imagine

The hypothesis that Daniil the hieromonk was the calligrapher and miniaturist of Ms. gr. 1427 at the Academy Library is somewhat supported by a similar case involving another Liturgy Book, commissioned by the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu (we do not know exactly for which monastic community), written in Wallachia, in Greek, dated 1693–1697, illustrated with numerous images of saints, flowers and animals, including snakes, and currently preserved in the collections of the National Museum of Art of Romania. On folio 34v, within an ornate initial letter, a priest is depicted kneeling before the Holy Table, where the Holy Chalice is placed; above him, in a mysterious manner, stands an angel. Scholars, having analysed the piece, have concluded that it may be a depiction of the hieromonk Calinic, who wrote and illuminated the manuscript58, commissioned by the martyr voivode; their names appear several times, inscribed in the text, in their memory. For our part, we are inclined to believe that the hieromonks Daniil and Calinic are the calligraphers and miniaturists of the two 17th-century Greek Liturgies, which share strong decorative similarities, including in their depiction of animals, illustrated by simple or winged serpents, in the guise of dragons), and it cannot be ruled out that their images are in fact self-portraits. It is worth noting that, in both cases, they ask to be commemorated in prayer, which leads us to conclude that the self-portrait miniatures depict people who were alive at that time (Fig. 14).

Imagine

Ms gr. 1371, splendidly adorned with polychrome miniatures, also features similar images. For example, on folio 20r (Fig. 15), two coiled serpents are depicted, climbing up the stems of the letters. The manuscript, dated 1734, contains the Services of the Holy Archangels Michael and Gabriel, Porphyrius and Onesiphorus, celebrated on 8 and 9 November respectively, and belonged, as indicated by a note made by Al. Tzigara-Samurcaș, to Queen Elisabeth (1843–1916) of Romania, who, following the death of her husband, King Carol I (1839–1914), retired to Curtea de Argeș: Presented by Her Majesty Queen Elisabeth on 18 March 1915, on the eve of her departure for Curtea de Argeș59.

Imagine

4. The Christian significance of the zoomorphic symbolism of the serpent

To summarise briefly what has been set out, we may note that snakes, depicted in various forms (simple snakes, serpents or dragons, winged or with tails ending in flowers), are found, according to written sources, both on official documents from Wallachia, particularly in the 17th century during the reign of Saint Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu, and on liturgical manuscripts60, adorning frontispieces, initial letters or bishoprical staffs. It can also be observed that snakes accompany certain personifications of the virtues, particularly Wisdom, depicted as a young woman holding a snake in her right hand and a mirror in her left, which we also find on Wallachian charters, particularly from the Phanariot period, but also in foreign printed works from the 17th century, for example in Cesar Ripa’s Iconologia, which illustrates certain embodiments of virtues or vices61. Whilst on official documents from the Romanian region Wisdom is depicted holding a snake in one hand and a mirror in the other, it can be seen that, in Cesar Ripa’s printed work, this virtue was depicted with a snake and a sphere, whilst Prudence was depicted with a mirror and a snake62. Indeed, in some cases, snakes appear in the design of Western publishers’ imprints63. In works such as the Physiologus or the Bestiary, with roots in the literature of the early centuries, known in both the East and the West, but which also circulated, in translation, within the Romanian-speaking world, the serpent was a symbol of wisdom, through which Christians were urged to care, first and foremost, for their souls, even if their bodies were ill, following the example of the snake which, when wounded, protects its head and, in this way, on the one hand, saves its life, whilst, on the other hand, its body recovers64. Still with reference to the snake’s behaviour, one could also learn that it is of no use to harbour malice in one’s soul; rather, just as the snake expels its venom, so too should a person cast out all malice from their heart. In this regard, Christians were advised, through parables, as follows: So too, O man, when you have venom in your heart, leave it behind and do not enter the church with it, lest you provoke God’s wrath and drive away from yourself the holy angel, your guardian. But make peace with everyone and soothe your heart, then enter the church65.

The motif of the serpent was frequently used in religious art in the Eastern, Byzantine66 and post-Byzantine worlds, as well as in the West, as it also recalled the bronze serpent raised by the Holy Prophet Moses in the wilderness, an Old Testament foreshadowing67 of the Crucifixion, Resurrection and Ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ68. Of course, the use of this zoomorphic motif in ancient and Christian art69 was intended, above all, to highlight the positive aspects, whilst not neglecting, nor the negative ones, which evoked, for example, the temptation in the Garden of Eden70 or human hypocrisy71. Based on scriptural passages72, snakes appear, as mentioned in a previous note, on the bishops’ croziers, suggesting the discernment of the bishops73, whilst on princely charters, where they are depicted, we believe they symbolised the wisdom of the princes. This virtue was a gift from God, which the voivode was required to demonstrate, upon his ecclesiastical investiture, through the bishop’s recitation of specific prayers and anointing with Holy Chrism, just as, in days of old, prayers were read over the Byzantine emperors and they were anointed, even though the custom of the actual, physical anointing with consecrated oil, followed by Holy Chrism, was first recorded for Byzantine sovereigns as late as the 12th century74. Although the act itself emphasised the important role of the Church and, by extension, of the patriarch in the proclamation of a basileus75, nevertheless, through the prayers read over him and through the anointing, the emperor received a special grace, the patriarch declaring him holy at the moment of anointing; the basileus entered the sanctuary through the imperial doors and received Holy Communion like a cleric, separately with the Body and Blood of the Lord76. These details also indicate that the sovereign had to be a Christian, for the three Romanian Lands retained, vis-à-vis the Ottoman Empire, their autonomy, their institutions, and thus their Christian form of government.

In the extra-Carpathian Romanian Principalities—Wallachia and Moldavia—where the Byzantine harmony between the Orthodox Church and the Principality was cultivated, the metropolitan prayed that the prince might receive from God blessing and wisdom, so that he might guide the people entrusted to his care77. We recall, in this regard, that the Cantacuzino Chronicle recounts the moment when Saint Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu was elected prince by the boyars, followed by the service at the Metropolitan See, when the voivode entered the Holy Altar, through the imperial doors, where he circled the Holy Table, whilst the Ecumenical Patriarch Dionysius IV Șeroglan78, who was then in Wallachia, read the prayers79.

The prayer itself, which was recited at the prince’s coronation, has also been preserved in several manuscripts. For example, the Arhieraticon of Metropolitan Stephen I of Ungrovlahia itself described the church ceremony, with the service in Church Slavonic and the liturgical instructions in Romanian. It is worth noting that the initial letter (G), which opens the prayer in question, is adorned with a winged serpent (Fig. 16), whilst another letter (T), on folio 94v, where the text of the prayer continues, features a crown set within a floral composition (Fig. 17). From the text we learn that the prince’s robes were placed on the throne; the prince would prostrate himself, kiss the bishop’s hand, kneel, whilst the metropolitan read the prayer to him80; then, taking the robes and handing them to him, he would say ‘axios’81. The ceremony concluded with the metropolitan taking the crown from the antimension and placing it upon the prince’s head. Ms. rom. 1138, in turn, records the prayer read by the bishop to the prince, who was kneeling before the Holy Table, in the Holy Altar, and we note, for the purposes of our topic, the plea for wisdom for the prince, so that he might govern well the people entrusted to him in this way by the Lord82.

Imagine

Imagine

5. Epilogue

We consider that, in the context of the meaning of Christian perfection—specific to Orthodoxy—through the acquisition of the virtues necessary for spiritual guidance or the socio-political governance of the righteous and faithful people, the presence of serpents on the princely charters of Wallachia in the 17th century must be understood. Thus, just as on the bishops’ croziers the serpents emphasised the discernment of spiritual guides, so too, on chancery documents, the serpents suggested the wisdom of the worldly rulers of the Christian people, both being gifts from God, received through a special religious consecration. By extension, let us recall that when an abbot was installed, a prayer was also read over him, so that he might receive sound judgement, enabling him to guide the community entrusted to him as is fitting. Our conviction that this is the significance of the motif’s use on charters is further reinforced if we analyse the placement of the serpents on the documents: on the ornate initial, next to or on the symbolic invocation (the Holy Cross), or on the letter M (from the formula of devotion, ‘the princes ruling by the mercy of God’), it is also there, in the case of Brâncoveanu charters, that the cross-bearing eagle is depicted, which referred to the state coat of arms, especially when this heraldic symbol was not placed at the centre of the frontispiece, but only on the seal83.

As for the logothetes involved in drafting these documents, it is possible that they also executed the miniatures; however, we do not yet have sufficient evidence to be certain. Nevertheless, we can observe that similar styles were used in the documents written by the same scribes, which would suggest that the scribe and the miniaturist were one and the same person; however, we do not have a definitive answer at present. For example, the charters signed by Mihai, son of Stan the logothete of Târgoviște, were decorated with miniatures, featuring, in their composition, two snakes coiled upwards, with their mouths open, climbing the two pillars of the initial ‘M’, whilst Radu Șufar, son of Gherghe Șufar84 of Târgoviște, wrote ornate documents using a different zoomorphic motif, featuring two snakes whose bodies were intertwined, though positioned in the centre of the initial rather than separated.

We also note also that the logothetes were from Târgoviște, the former capital of Wallachia and a major cultural centre with a tradition in the art of calligraphy, as well as the fact that they mentioned their lineage, their parents being from the same capital city. Apart from the documents dating from the time of the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu, both logofeți mentioned had also drawn up other documents, which were notable for their zoomorphic decoration: Radu Șufar, son of Gherghe, had signed a document from 1674 85, whereby Prince Gheorghe Duca confirmed the monastery of Călui’s tribute to the Patriarchate of Jerusalem (ornament featuring two snakes), whilst Mihai, son of Stan, appeared on a document from Prince Antonie Vodă, issued in 167086 (two snakes climbing the pillars of the initial letter), as well as on another from 167387, from the time of Prince Grigorie I Ghica (adorned with two mermaids). It is thus evident that these logofeți served in the voivode’s chancellery under several rulers, a period in which we observe a practice of decorating charters with zoomorphic motifs, whether real or fantastical—a feature that would not become prevalent during the Phanariot era, when, perhaps, only snakes were used more frequently, precisely because they symbolised an essential attribute of the princes), nor was it observed in the preceding period, which leads to the conclusion that this ornamentation, through the use of certain zoomorphic motifs, represented a characteristic feature of the decoration of Wallachian documents in the 17th century. We may link this artistic phenomenon to the presence, within the Romanian cultural sphere of that period, of calligraphers familiar with the art of other regions—perhaps even hailing from them—who worked in Wallachia during the 17th century, influenced by post-Byzantine and Oriental art, with a penchant for zoomorphic decoration, as well as by Western Baroque elements, which had found their way in, particularly through Kiev and Venetian printed works, many of which were collected in the library of the humanist Udriște Năsturel 88.

Indeed, in 17th-century Wallachia, there was a period of ecclesiastical and cultural effervescence, fuelled in part by the presence of foreign scholars and theologians in the region89. However, the trend for zoomorphic decoration did not take hold. Isar Logofețel and Mihailovici Logofăt Conțescul were, in their own right, renowned calligraphers of the time, and may well have been the creators of the miniatures.

In conclusion, the Brâncoveanu charters emphasised, through certain passages in their content (the formula of devotion, the preamble with quotations from Holy Scripture and from the Holy Fathers of the ‘One’ Church) and through their miniature form (in this instance, through zoomorphic elements with symbolic significance), the existence of a Christian state, ruled by an Orthodox Christian prince, invested through an ecclesiastical ceremony, who, alongside the bishop (in the case of our study, the Metropolitan of Ungrovlahia), watched over, at least in theory, beyond the temptations arising from the weaknesses or shortcomings of human nature, circumstances, etc., over his subjects90, in a country enjoying full autonomy, although, from a political point of view, it was under Ottoman suzerainty, yet surrounded by Christian Great Powers with claims to its allegiance.

• 1

  See Documenta Romaniae Historica (DRH), B, Wallachia, 1657, ed. Gheorghe Lazăr (coord.), Oana Rizescu, Elena Bedreag, Florina-Manuela Constantin, Bucharest, Ed. Romanian Academy, 2024.

• 2

  See Constantin Brâncoveanu. Documents from the Collections of the Library of the Romanian Academy, ed. Library of the Romanian Academy & Metropolitan See of Oltenia, Bucharest & Craiova, published by the Metropolitan See of Oltenia, 2014.

• 3

  See Claudiu Victor Turcitu, Constantin Basarab Brâncoveanu. A Princely Portrait and Retrospective of an Era (1654–1714), vols. I–II, Bucharest, DAR Publishing Development, 2018 (vol. I), 2019 (vol. II).

• 4

  Regarding the various chronological boundaries of the Brâncoveanu style in art, identified with the reign of the Holy Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu, but also with the reigns of the voivodes Șerban Cantacuzino and Nicolae Mavrocordat or, more broadly, with the period from the mid-17th century to the mid-18th century, see the bibliographical references to Violeta Barbu, Brâncoveanu Miniature, Bucharest, Meridiane Publishers, 2000, p. 105, note 2; see also Florin Constantiniu, O istorie sinceră a poporului român [A Sincere History of the Romanian People], 4th ed., Bucharest, Univers Enciclopedic Gold, 2010, p. 177: In Wallachia, the long reign of Constantin Brâncoveanu (1688–1714) coincided with the emergence of a distinctive style, known as the ‘Brâncoveanu style’, a synthesis of Renaissance and Baroque elements, rooted in the ancient local artistic traditions.

• 5

  Violeta Barbu, Brâncoveanu Miniatures..., p. 19.

• 6

  Violeta Barbu, Brâncoveanu Miniatures..., p. 19, with reference to other bibliographical sources, such as: Teodora Voinescu, ‘Observations on the Brâncoveanu Style: The Portal’, in Studies and Research in Art History (SCIA), XV, 1968, no. 1, p. 12; Ion Barnea, ‘An 18th-century Romanian Miniaturist: Popa Flor’, in The Romanian Orthodox Church (BOR), LXXI, 1948, no. 11–12, p. 591; see also Tereza Sinigalia, ‘Art in Wallachia’, in The History of the Romanians, vol. V, ed. Acad. Virgil Cândea, Bucharest, Ed. Enciclopedică, 2003, pp. 966–979: What distinguishes this style from the art of other periods is a unity of overall vision and detail found in architecture, painting and the decorative arts. Common motifs – twisted acanthus tendrils, hazel flowers, tulips or sunflowers – treated in a similar manner, but using different techniques, bring architectural decoration closer to the ornamentation found in painting, embroidery, woodcarving on iconostases and liturgical furniture, silverwork or even book decoration (ibid., p. 977).

• 7

  The title page of the book Pogrebania, printed in Târgoviște in 1650, foreshadows the book-like frames of the portals on the tomb of Mihai Cantacuzino. Furthermore, zoomorphic ornamentation was used in the sculpture of the Brâncoveanu period, even on the iconostasis, with elements including birds, a winged dragon, a shell, a lion, a wolf, a dolphin, a snake, a snake ending in a vine, as seen on the iconostases of the churches at Filipeștii de Pădure (1692) and Măgureni (1693–1694), as well as at the chapel of the princely court at Mogoșoaia (1705), to which may be added the portal of the church at Fundenii Doamnei (1699) and the complex at Cotroceni (1683); see Teodora Voinescu, ‘Observations on the Brâncoveanu style. The Portal’..., p. 12; Florentina Dumitrescu, ‘Observations on the Brâncoveanu style. The decoration of the iconostasis’, in SCIA, XV, 1968, no. 1, pp. 26–27.

• 8

  See Oana-Mădălina Popescu, ‘God is marvellous in His saints. Holy images in ancient Romanian manuscripts’, 2nd ed., Bucharest, Dinasty Books Publishing House and Printing Works, 2021.

• 9

  Mihai Maxim, ‘The Romanian Principalities and the Ottoman Empire’, in The History of the Romanians, vol. V..., pp. 803–851; Ion I. Croitoru, *Orthodoxy and the West in the Spiritual Tradition of the Romanians. The Unity of Orthodoxy and the Defence of the Orthodox Faith against Protestant Propaganda in the 17th Century, vol. I, Târgoviște, Cetatea de Scaun Publishers, 2012, pp. 85–97.

• 10

  We use the term ‘icons’ to describe the images of the Saints, the Angels, the Mother of God and the Saviour Jesus Christ, as depicted in manuscripts and printed works, in accordance with the canons of ecclesiastical painting, looking beyond their liturgical and devotional role, as found in places of worship or in the homes of the faithful.

• 11

  Violeta Barbu, Brâncoveanu Miniatures..., p. 106, notes 33–34, with reference to Pavel Chihaia, ‘A Romanian sculptor from the Brâncoveanu era’, in Revista Muzeelor, XV, 1968, no. 1, p. 22: the zoomorphic stone sculptures at the churches of Colțea, Fundenii Doamnei, Bordești, Câmpulung, Berca and Râmnicu-Sărat are the work of a single team, led by Lupu Sărățan; see also Cătălina Velculescu, Ileana Stănculescu, Iuliana Damian, ‘Griffins and Roses in the Time of Constantin Brâncoveanu’, in The Testimonial Spirituality of Romanian Culture in the Time of Constantin Brâncoveanu, ed. Rev. Dr Ștefan Zară, Studia academica series, vol. I, Râmnicu Vâlcea, Praxis Publishing House of the Archdiocese of Râmnic, 2014, pp. 173–200.

• 12

  For example, such depictions of animals are found in the mosaics of the Byzantine basilica at Bir-Ftouha, Tunisia, near ancient Carthage, dating from the 5th–6th centuries, or on oil lamps decorated with stags, discovered in the area, at Tebessa (3rd–5th centuries), where the stags are placed above a chalice, thus highlighting the connection with the Divine Eucharist (Louis Charbonneau-Lassay, La mystérieuse emblématique de Jésus-Christ. Le Bestiaire du Christ, Ed. Albin Michel, Paris, 2006, p. 255). As regards the Romanian context, for the presence of stags in the paintings of certain churches in Wallachia and Moldavia, see, for example, Victor Brătulescu, Secular Elements in Religious Painting, excerpt from the Bulletin of the Commission for Historical Monuments, XXVII (1934), Bucharest, 1936.

• 13

  In the Biblia pauperum, a 15th-century Dutch edition, the scene of the Crucifixion is depicted alongside an image of Moses raising the serpent, whilst on a hand-decorated page of the Latin Bible (Vulgate), printed in Mainz around 1450–1456 by the printers Johannes Gutenberg, Johannes Fust and Peter Schöffer, we see various types of colourful birds; on the title page of the New Testament, printed at Ostrog in 1580, we see a unicorn and a stag; the engraving depicting the Three Holy Hymnographers, found in the Cetinje Octoechos, printed in 1494 by the printer and hieromonk Macarius, depicts several animals and fantastical creatures. For further details, see Cornel Tatai-Baltă and Anca Elisabeta Tatay, An Introduction to European Woodcut from its Beginnings to 1600, Cluj-Napoca, Mega Publishers, 2026, pp. 19, 21, 103, 107.

• 14

  The traditional animal symbols of the Evangelists are: a winged man for Saint Matthew the Evangelist, a lion for Saint Mark the Evangelist, a calf for Saint Luke the Evangelist and an eagle for Saint John the Evangelist.

• 15

  See Prof. Dr. habil. Ion Marian Croitoru, Dr Oana-Mădălina Popescu, ‘Artistic Refinement and Symbolic Renewal: The Continuity of Tradition and the Emergence of New Christian Motifs in the Miniature and Ornamental Art of the Voivodal Charters from Târgoviște and Bucharest, in the 17th century”, a study submitted for publication in the volume Voivodes of Târgoviște – Founders of Orthodox Spirituality, due to be published by the Archdiocese of Târgoviște Publishing House this year.

• 16

  For example, a charter decorated with mermaids was issued by Lord Grigorie I Ghica on 26 February 1673, in favour of Lady Elina and her sister, Vlădaia, to whom he confirmed their shares in Căzăneștii de Sus, Ialomița County, following several legal proceedings they had with their relatives concerning a portion of the dowry [Oana Mădălina Popescu, ‘Fantastic elements in the decoration of a 17th-century Wallachian charter’, in Tezaur, VII, 2026, no. 6 (June), pp. 4–5].

• 17

  The bird and the snake are part of the Byzantine ornamental repertoire and were used in Transylvanian art from very earlyon […] the dolphin thus remains the only zoomorphic motif borrowed from Italian art during this later period, along with Western influences [Florentina Dumitrescu, ‘Observations on the Brâncoveanu style. The decoration of the iconostasis’..., p. 39; see also Cornel Tatai-Baltă, ‘Knowledge of Ukrainian woodcut printing in various Romanian printing centres (17th–19th centuries)’, in Transilvania, 2017, no. 4–5, pp. 7–15].

• 18

  He reigned four times in Wallachia (1601–1602, 1611, 1611–1616, 1620–1623) and twice in Moldavia (1616–1619, 1623–1626).

• 19

  For more on this hierarch, see, for example, Ion I. Croitoru, Orthodoxy and the West in the Spiritual Tradition of the Romanians. The Unity of Orthodoxy and the Defence of the Orthodox Faith against Protestant Propaganda in the 17th Century, vol. I..., pp. 388–391.

• 20

  See the Liturgy Book of Metropolitan Stephen of Ungrovlahia. Romanian Manuscript 1790 from the Library of the Romanian Academy – Bucharest, vols. I–II, ed. Ileana Stănculescu; vol. III, ed. Archimandrite Policarp Chițulescu, Bucharest, Basilica Publishers, 2021.

• 21

  The term ‘șufar’ / ‘șafar’, which is etymologically of Polish origin, means, amongst other things, a manager or dealer in cattle and horses [Dictionary of the Romanian Language (DLR), vol. XV, Romanian Academy & ‘Iorgu Iordan-Al. Rosetti’ Institute of Linguistics, Bucharest, Romanian Academy Press, 2010, p. 59].

• 22

  BAR, Historical Document, MMVII/30.

• 23

  Paraipani or Parapani, a village in Vlașca County, later Vedea, in Ilfov County, see Melentina Bâzgan, Index of Medieval Localities in Wallachia up to 1831, Bucharest, Cartea Universitară, 2004, p. 73. Today, the village has retained the name Vedea, but is situated in Giurgiu County.

• 24

  BAR, Historical Document, CXLI/68.

• 25

  A Slavonic term meaning ‘his son’.

• 26

  A Slavonic term meaning ‘days’.

• 27

  ANIC, New Acquisitions, XXXI/9; Decree published in facsimile and transcription by Claudiu Victor Turcitu, Constantin Basarab Brâncoveanu. A Princely Portrait and Retrospective of an Era (1654–1714), vol. II..., pp. 108–111.

• 28

  Florentina Dumitrescu, ‘Observations on the Brâncoveanu style. The decoration of the iconostasis’..., pp. 26–27.

• 29a29b29c29d

  ANIC, New Acquisitions, XXXI/9.

• 30

  For the meaning of this letter, see the description given above for the charter dated 5 December 1688.

• 31

  ANIC, Tismana Monastery, XLVI/15; Claudiu Victor Turcitu, Constantin Basarab Brâncoveanu: A Princely Portrait and a Retrospective of an Era (1654–1714), vol. II..., pp. 256–257.

• 32

  BAR, Historical Documents, LXXVIII/70; Constantin Brâncoveanu. Documents from the Collections of the Romanian Academy Library..., pp. 40–41, where the form ‘Cupești’ is given in the album in question instead of the correct form in the charter, which is ‘Cunești’.

• 33

  That is to say, Râmnicu Sărat, in Slavonic.

• 34

  BAR, Historical Documents, LI/6; see also Constantin Brâncoveanu. Documents from the Collections of the Romanian Academy Library..., pp. 62–63.

• 35

  The term ‘conac’ has several meanings, including ‘resting place’, a meaning with which the term is also used in the charter under consideration (Gheorghe Bulgăr, Gheorghe Constantinescu-Dobridor, Dictionary of Archaisms and Regionalisms, vol. I, Bucharest, Saeculum Vizual, 2002, p. 110).

• 36a36b

  BAR, Historical Document, LXXVIII/70.

• 37

  This refers to Cârstea Popescu, from Popești-Vlașca, who held the office of Grand Treasurer from September 1685 to August 1690, after which he signed as former Grand Treasurer; see Nicolae Stoicescu, Dictionary of the Great Officials of Wallachia and Moldavia, 14th–17th Centuries, Bucharest, Ed. Enciclopedică Română, 1971, pp. 228–229.

• 38

  BAR, Historical Documents, CXLI/49; see also Constantin Brâncoveanu. Documents from the Collections of the Romanian Academy Library..., p. 43.

• 39

  Probable lesson, abbreviated word.

• 40

  in-text citations.

• 41

  BAR, Historical Document, CXLI/49.

• 42

  It is worth noting that Mr Constantin Brâncoveanu adopted a cautious approach to foreign policy, seeking to ensure that the alliance with the Habsburg Empire was based on certain guarantees designed to protect Wallachia from Ottoman incursions, but also from subordination to the Austrians, as had happened with Transylvania. The Habsburgs sent an army against the Wallachians, under the command of General Donat Heissler, whilst the Prince of Wallachia accepted Ottoman and Tatar aid from Gazi Ghirai, son of the Tatar khan Selim Ghirai. The Austrians retreated across the mountains, but were routed at the Battle of Zărnești in August 1690, whilst Emeric Thököly, the adversary of the House of Austria, was enthroned as Prince of Transylvania (Paul Cernovodeanu, ‘The Age of Constantin Brâncoveanu’, in The History of the Romanians, vol. V..., pp. 248–269).

• 43a43b43c

  ANIC, Section 9.

• 44

  A new charter issued by Mr Constantin Brâncoveanu to confirm the ownership of the Hurezi Monastery’s estates, including those of Polovragi, which had been purchased from the Patriarch of Jerusalem, was issued on 4 April 1711; the charter, written on parchment by Gherghe, son of Iane the logothete, is adorned with a vignette featuring floral motifs framing the initial letter; the document contains no zoomorphic motifs or icons. On the frontispiece, the country’s coat of arms can be seen; the document is authenticated by the princely seal, preserved in a capsule, the lid of which bears the coat of arms of the Cantacuzino family and of Wallachia (Claudiu Victor Turcitu, Constantin Basarab Brâncoveanu. A Princely Portrait and Retrospective of an Era (1654–1714), vol. II..., pp. 318–319).

• 45

  Violeta Barbu, Brâncoveanu Miniatures..., pp. 72, 99.

• 46

  Oana-Mădălina Popescu, ‘God is marvellous in His saints. Holy images in ancient Romanian manuscripts…’, pp. 88–89, 491.

• 47

  See, in this regard, the analysis by the researcher Laurențiu-Ștefan Szemkovics, who describes them as winged dragons, coiled around one another, from whose mouths two acanthus leaves emerge [idem, Laurențiu-Ștefan Szemkovics, Documents from Constantin Brâncoveanu concerning Hurezi Monastery and certain localities in Vâlcea County (1691–1714), Brăila, Carol I Museum of Brăila, Ed Istros, 2017, p. 106]. The researcher in question provides a transcription of the text, as well as a description of the seal with which the document is authenticated (ibid., pp. 94–107, doc. no. 16).

• 48

  BAR, Historical Documents, CXXXIV/59. For the same charter, reproduced in facsimile, see Constantin Brâncoveanu. Documents from the Collections of the Library of the Romanian Academy..., pp. 10–11.

• 49

  BAR, Ms. rom. 1790.

• 50

  The animal motifs in this manuscript serve not only a decorative purpose but also have symbolic significance, recalling the works The Physiologist and The Flower of Gifts. Indeed, these works have enjoyed widespread popularity over the centuries, providing maxims, legends and short stories that have inspired miniaturists to illustrate them in their manuscripts. The first book is a sort of manual on zoology and morality, which appeared in the 4th century, probably in Hellenistic Egypt; it was adopted by the Byzantines and passed into the world of the Slavs south of the Danube, from where a 16th-century copy eventually reached us. In the West, The Physiologus found its way through various channels to the Romance and Germanic peoples, who, adapting it to their own interests and mindset, drew inspiration from it—under the name Bestiary—for all the arts, particularly the sculpture found in palaces and cathedrals. The second book, The Flower of Gifts, is a treatise containing moral ideas, virtues and vices, in keeping with the tastes of the age, compiled in the 13th century by the Benedictine monk Tommaso Gozzadini of Bologna; it enjoyed widespread circulation in both the West and the East, eventually becoming known in our region as well, in the 16th century (Gheorghe Popescu-Vâlcea, The Liturgical Book of Metropolitan Stephen of Ungrovlahia (1648–1688), Bucharest, Meridiane Publishers, 1974, p. 13).

• 51

  BAR, Vol. 92; For a description of the document, see also Oana-Mădălina Popescu, ‘God is marvellous in His saints. Holy images in ancient Romanian manuscripts…’, pp. 165, 577.

• 52

  BAR, Ms. gr. 1427.

• 53

  Mihai Caratașu, Andrei Țârlescu, Catalogue of Greek Manuscripts in the Library of the Romanian Academy, Onești, Magic Print, 2006, p. 125.

• 54

  BAR, Ms. rom. 1790, The Service Book of Metropolitan Stephen I.

• 55

  BAR, Ms. gr. 1427, f. 19 r.

• 56

  The epigonat or bedernița is a liturgical garment, square or rhomboidal in shape, worn at knee length; it was originally part of the episcopal vestments, but was later granted to certain priests as a mark of esteem (Archdeacon Dr Vlăduț-Iulian Roșu, The History of Liturgical Vestments in the Eastern Orthodox Church from their Origins to Saint Simeon of Thessaloniki († 1429), Bucharest, Ed. Cuvântul Vieții, 2022, p. 147).

• 57

  BAR, Ms. rom. 1271, f. 19 v. This is a collection of laws, compiled in Greek by Archimandrite Jacob (who later became Bishop of Ioannina in Epirus), in 1645, by expanding upon the Syntagma of Matei Vlastares; it was later translated into Romanian and circulated in manuscript form.

• 58

  See Liana Tugearu, Miniatures and Ornaments in the Manuscripts of the Collection of Medieval Romanian Art, vol. I: Byzantine and Late Medieval Greek Manuscripts, Bucharest, National Museum of Art of Romania, 1996, pp. 163–164, 217. According to the author cited, this is therefore the Liturgy Book commissioned by Saint Martyr Constantin Brâncoveanu and catalogued as Ms. gr. 23. The manuscript features rich animal motifs, including winged serpents, a motif drawn from the Near Eastern repertoire. Regarding the symbolism of this motif, in relation to other zoomorphic motifs, the author, using the frontispiece of the title page of the Divine Liturgy according to Saint John Chrysostom as a reference point, points out that the scrollwork continues in the centre of the upper part of the frontispiece with two snake heads (a symbol with dual meaning in Christianity), above which is a small quadruped, resembling a doe (possibly an embodiment of purity), flanked by two peacocks facing each other (symbols of immortality, the destroyers of the serpent); see ibid., p. 163.

• 59

  BAR, Ms. gr. 1371.

• 60

  Oana-Mădălina Popescu, ‘Animal and fantastical symbols on religious documents, manuscripts and printed works’, in Tezaur, vol. VII, no. 8, August 2026, pp. 8–9.

• 61

  For example, as mentioned above, Intelligence was depicted as a young woman holding a snake in her left hand and a sphere in her right; Logic held flowers in her right hand and a snake in her left (the snake emphasising, in this case, Prudence, another virtue necessary for any logical endeavour, but also poison, since logic becomes poisonous to the untrained mind); Medicine held a rooster in her right hand and a snake in her left, both representing highly vigilant animals, with reference to Greek mythology, in which the snake was an ancient symbol of health and of the god Aesculapius; Perseverance was depicted with a snake biting its own tail, suggesting the passage of time, as it was also perceived by the ancient Egyptians; Prudence was personified as a young woman, holding a mirror and a snake; Health was likewise personified as a young woman, carrying a cockerel and a staff, with a snake. In contrast to these virtues, we also find the negative connotations of the snake; for example, the head of a young, blind man, swarming with snakes, which symbolised Sin. Consequently, the snake was associated, on the one hand, with intelligence, wisdom, logic, prudence and health, and on the other hand, with sin and temptation, see Iconologie, or A New Explanation of Various Images, Emblems and Other Hieroglyphic Figures of the Virtues, Vices, Arts, Sciences, Natural Causes, Different Temperaments and Human Passions, drawn from the research and illustrations of César Ripa, moralised by J. Baudoin, Paris, Louis Billaine, 1677, pp. 121, 127, 139, 181, 205, 220.

• 62

  For example, as mentioned above, Intelligence was depicted as a young woman holding a snake in her left hand and a sphere in her right. See Iconologie, or A New Explanation of Various Images, Emblems and Other Hieroglyphic Figures of the Virtues, Vices, Arts, Sciences, Natural Causes, Different Temperaments and Human Passions, drawn from the research and illustrations of César Ripa, moralised by J. Baudoin, Paris, Louis Billaine, 1677, pp. 121–122, 205. It should be noted that the author was referring to the philosophers’ view that this lofty virtue set the celestial spheres in motion, but, at the same time, he recalled that, in order to understand the lofty things properly, it is fitting, first of all, to crawl like a serpent upon the earth, so as to understand the earthly things, which are accessible to our minds. And Prudence, too, needed a mirror, so that she might know herself, and thus be able to gauge her actions according to her own strength.

• 63

  This is evident, for example, on the title page of Flavius Josephus’s work, Antiquitatum Iudaicarum, Basel, 1548, published by the renowned Froben family’s printing house; see BAR, CR, III 792 761.

• 64

  From manuscripts containing texts of the Bestiar or Physiolog type, we learn that man could acquire—by observing the behaviour of the snake—wisdom, prudence and care for one’s health, for, just as that reptile, when struck, protects its head, so too must man take care of his soul first and foremost, so that physical healing follows spiritual healing, whilst placing his hope in God. Consequently, the message of these texts featuring animal symbols is of a spiritual nature; see Physiologus. Bestiary, ed. Cătălina Velculescu, Viorel Guruianu, Manuela Anton, Bucharest, Cavallioti Publishers, 2001, p. 40: So too, O man: even if your whole body were to be wounded, yet your soul remains whole and upright before God, and your body will be healed. But if you lose your soul, all that is yours will be lost, and then nothing will be of any use to you.

• 65

  Physiologist. Bestiary..., p. 40.

• 66

  Byzantine Christian art incorporated Hellenistic and Eastern influences. In sculpture, for example, one finds floral motifs (the acanthus leaf) and figurative representations of animals, a legacy of Hellenism; geometric motifs from Iranian art, whilst some surfaces, featuring monograms of the Saviour Jesus Christ in relief, were reminiscent of the simplicity of Aramaic art (Steven Runciman, Byzantine Civilisation 330–1453, 2nd ed., trans. Damian Anfile, Bucharest, Basilica Publishers, 2023, p. 423). On a gilded silver plate, probably made in Syria around the year 500, Saint Simeon the Stylite is depicted sitting on a pillar which had, at its base, a coiled snake, thus suggesting the Saint’s supremacy over evil; see Robin Cormack, Byzantine Art, Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 11.

• 67

  The significance of this foreshadowing is therefore found in the Gospel according to Saint John the Evangelist and Apostle, which recounts, on the one hand, the Saviour’s conversation with Saint Nicodemus, in which reference is made to Saint Moses the Prophet raising the bronze serpent in the wilderness (3:4), and, on the other hand, the Saviour’s words concerning His Resurrection (12:2); see Louis Charbonneau-Lassay, La mystérieuse emblématique de Jésus-Christ. Le Bestiaire du Christ, Albin Michel, Paris, 2006, p. 783.

• 68

  And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in Him may not perish, but may have eternal life (John 3:14–15).

• 69

  In architecture, for example, a bronze snake can be found in the Cathedral of Saint Ambrose in Milan; in ancient times, the caduceus was used – that is, a staff with two coiled snakes – a symbol of the god Mercury or Hermes, but also of peace and trade (Louis Charbonneau-Lassay, La Mystérieuse emblématique de Jésus-Christ. Le Bestiaire du Christ..., pp. 787, 799).

• 70

  See Liana Tugearu, Miniatures and Ornaments in the Manuscripts of the Collection of Medieval Romanian Art, vol. I..., p. 171, note 10, where it is explained that the sacred texts of Christianity highlight both aspects of the symbol of the serpent: either the positive one, wisdom, or the negative one, Satanism. In accordance with the scriptural exhortation (Matthew 10:16), the bishop’s crozier is depicted as a two-headed serpent, a symbol of the wisdom and vigilance with which every hierarch must be endowed. The negative aspect is linked to the temptation of Eve, to the devil or to the sinful nature of man, which represent spiritual realities, as we see in the image of the dragon vanquished by Saint George the Great Martyr or by Saint Michael the Archangel. At the top of the iconostasis, the Holy Cross of the Saviour stands above two dragons, symbols of sin, redeemed through the divine sacrifice.

• 71

  Apart from the temptation in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3), snakes are also mentioned, again in a negative light, in the words of our Saviour Jesus Christ: ‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the graves of the righteous, and say: ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in the shedding of the prophets’ blood! Thus you yourselves bear witness that you are the sons of those who killed the prophets. But you have filled up the measure of your fathers’ iniquity! You snakes, you brood of vipers, how will you escape the judgement of hell? [...] Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone to death those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Behold, your house is left to you desolate! For I tell you: From now on you will not see Me until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord’ (Matthew 23:29–39).

• 72

  ‘Behold, I am sending you out like sheep amongst wolves; so be as shrewd as serpents and as gentle as doves’ (Matthew 10:16).

• 73

  The bishop’s crozier is a metal staff, carried by the bishop during services, topped with a cross flanked by two dragons or serpents, which allude to the bronze serpent raised by Moses in the wilderness (Numbers 21:8–9); it also signifies, as Saint Simeon of Thessalonica emphasised, the authority of the Holy Spirit, the power to guide the people, and the driving away of wild and harmful creatures [Archdeacon Dr Vlăduț-Iulian Roșu, The History of Liturgical Vestments in the Orthodox East from their Origins to Saint Simeon of Thessaloniki († 1429)..., pp. 247–251].

• 74

  Ionuț A. Tudorie, ‘Old and New in the Coronation Ceremony of 13th-Century Byzantine Emperors’, in Studia Archaeus, XV (2011), issue 3, pp. 259–308.

• 75

  Ionuț A. Tudorie, ‘Old and New in the Coronation Ceremony of the Byzantine Emperors of the 13th Century’..., p. 305.

• 76

  See Pseudo-Kodinos, Traité des offices, introduction, text and translation by Jean Verpeaux, Paris, Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1966, pp. 258, 268: The patriarch anoints the emperor’s head by making the sign of the cross with the holy chrism, saying in a loud voice: ‘holy’. All those in the ambo around the patriarch speak in turn and say three times: ‘holy’; likewise, the rest of the people say the same word three times [...] the patriarch, having received communion with the venerable Body and the venerable Blood, places a portion of the Lord’s Body into the Emperor’s hands; whereupon the Emperor partakes in the same manner of the life-giving Blood, the Patriarch holding the holy chalice whilst the Emperor himself raises the chalice to his lips, as the priests do.

• 77

  Violeta Barbu, Gheorghe Lazăr, ‘Coronatio. Liturgical Tradition in the Romanian Lands’, in The National and the Universal in the History of the Romanians. Essays in honour of Prof. Dr Șerban Papacostea on the occasion of his 70th birthday, Bucharest, Ed. Enciclopedică, 1998, p. 67.

• 78

  Bishop Dionysius was Metropolitan of Larissa and, on several occasions, Patriarch of Constantinople; prior to this, some sources mention him as the private secretary of Prince Matei Basarab; he travelled through Wallachia and Moldavia, during the reigns of Princes Șerban Cantacuzino, Constantin Brâncoveanu and Gheorghe Duca; he died in Târgoviște in 1696 (Ion I. Croitoru, Orthodoxy and the West in the Spiritual Tradition of the Romanians. The Unity of Orthodoxy and the Defence of the Orthodox Faith against Protestant Propaganda in the 17th Century, vol. I..., p. 160).

• 79

  So the boyars, together with others and with everyone else, had no choice but to act in this way; they all held a council and chose from amongst themselves a certain boyar, Jupan Costandin Brâncoveanu, the Grand Logothete, and proclaimed him their lord, for they knew him to be wise and of princely descent. Then they all bowed before him with great joy and, with one voice, said: ‘May Your Highness be our lord for a long time to come, until you reach a ripe old age.’ And straightaway they led him into the holy metropolitan cathedral with great honour, Father Theodosius the Metropolitan taking him by the hand, until they had brought him into the holy sanctuary, through the great imperial gate; and there they led him round the holy altar, kissing the holy table, the divine Gospel and the venerable cross. And bowing, they knelt before the throne, whereupon Patriarch Dionysius read the prayers for his reign over his head and blessed him. And so, having left that place, they seated him on the princely throne whilst they sang ‘many years’ to him, with all the nobility approaching to kiss his hand (History of Wallachia 1290–1690. The Cantacuzino Chronicle, critical edition by C. Grecescu and D. Simonescu, Bucharest, Academy Press, 1960, p. 190). The Slavonic expression ‘mnoga léta’ means ‘many years’. For Slavonic words in Romanian texts, see Pandele Olteanu (ed.), Old Slavonic and Romanian Slavonic, Bucharest, Didactică și Pedagogică Publishing House, 1975, p. 424 (glossary, pp. 405–458).

• 80

  See the edited version of the prayer, adapted to the specific text, in Violeta Barbu, Gheorghe Lazăr, ‘Coronatio. Liturgical Tradition in the Romanian Principalities’..., p. 63: Lord, our God, King of kings and Lord of lords, you chose the prophet Samuel and his servant David, and anointed him king over the people of Israel, Now hear our prayer, we who are unworthy, and look down from Your holy dwelling upon Your faithful servant, whom You were pleased to set over Your holy people, whom Youhave redeemed with the Precious Blood of Your Only-Begotten Son; make him worthy to be anointed with the oil of joy, clothe him with power from on high, place upon his head a crown of precious stones, grant him a long life, place the sceptre of salvation in his right hand, seat him upon the throne of truth, and instil in him the power of Your Holy Spirit; strengthen his arm, subdue all the pagan nations to him; sow in his heart a fear of You and forgiveness for sinners; keep him in unshakeable faith; make him a steadfast guardian and guide of Your holy and catholic Church, that he may judge Your people with righteousness and Your poor with justice, and save the children of the poor, and be worthy of Your righteous kingdom; for Yours is the power and the kingdom and the glory.

• 81

  BAR, Ms. Rom. 1790, f. 94v; see also the text in Violeta Barbu, Gheorghe Lazăr, ‘Coronatio. The Liturgical Tradition in the Romanian Principalities’..., p. 63.

• 82

  BAR, Ms. rom. 1138, ff. 50–51; I have selected the following from the text of the prayer, as reproduced in Violeta Barbu, Gheorghe Lazăr, ‘Coronatio. Liturgical Tradition in the Romanian Lands’..., pp. 67–68, capitalising where appropriate: O Lord, our God, Thou who with Thy ineffable wisdom hast made all things [...] and anointed King and Prophet David to reign over Israel, and crowned Solomon with glory and strengthened him with wisdom [...] Now, Most Holy King of Glory, upon our faithful Lord (name), whom You have willed to rule over us, bless him, and grant him wisdom, sound counsel, power, strength and heavenly victory over the godless pagans, the enemies of the Cross of Christ, with mercy. That, being strengthened by the power of Thy right hand, he may guide and govern this people—that is, this Christian inheritance of Thine, which Thou hast entrusted to him to rule. The Slavonic term ‘imhea’ derives from ‘imene’, which means ‘name’. Thus, it indicated that the lord’s name was to be mentioned there [Pandele Olteanu (ed.), Old Slavonic and Romanian Slavonic..., p. 424].

• 83

  Sometimes, however, the bird, in the form of an eagle, served a decorative and symbolic purpose, with the eagle itself being used in ecclesiastical art.

• 84

  As we have seen, the term ‘șufar’ also referred to commercial activity; however, if the copyist was also a miniaturist, we do not consider that the use of snakes was, in this instance, a sort of family coat of arms, reminiscent of Mercury’s attribute (the caduceus), since snakes were used in the Christian art of the time with the symbols to which we have referred, and on charters, they signified the wisdom which the rulers of the Romanians were expected to demonstrate.

• 85

  BAR, Doc, Hist., MCMXCVI/366.

• 86

  BAR, Historical Document, MMVI/8.

• 87

  BAR, Historical Document, LXIX/52.

• 88

  See, for example, several references to this scholar in Ion I. Croitoru, Orthodoxy and the West in the Spiritual Tradition of the Romanians. The Unity of Orthodoxy and the Defence of the Orthodox Faith against Protestant Propaganda in the 17th Century, vol. I..., pp. 411–418.

• 89

  For a discussion of the ecumenical nature of the Romanian Orthodox Church in the Romanian Lands and its links with Orthodoxy as a whole in the 17th century, see Ion I. Croitoru, Orthodoxy and the West in the Spiritual Tradition of the Romanians. The Unity of Orthodoxy and the Defence of the Orthodox Faith against Protestant Propaganda in the 17th Century, vol. I..., pp. 153–200.

• 90

  A detail that reflects the continuation of the Byzantine tradition amongst the Romanians.