Interdisciplinary Study of a 15th-Century Byzantine Embroidery Fragment from St Elisabeth’s Cathedral in Košice (Slovakia)

Abstract

This study investigates a Byzantine embroidery fragment found in the Cathedral of St Elisabeth in Košice, Slovakia, which is believed to come from a 15th-century epitrachelion. Through interdisciplinary research, including art historical analysis, archival studies, and material research, the embroidery was identified as a rare example of Byzantine liturgical textile art in Slovakia. The iconography includes Archangel Gabriel and four Eastern Church Fathers. Comparative studies suggest possible origins in Greek or Romanian monastic workshops. Despite the information provided by radiocarbon dating and stylistic comparisons, the embroidery’s precise provenance and historical context invite further research.

1. Introduction

A fragment of Byzantine embroidery, which was documented at the Cathedral of St Elisabeth in Košice (Slovakia) at the beginning of the 20th century, has become an object of interest to scholars in recent years. Initial research has confirmed that it is a fragment of an epitrachelion, probably dating from the 15th century. However, its place of origin has not been clarified, nor has it been established how this relic of the Byzantine liturgy came to be placed in a Roman Catholic church and used to decorate a Roman Catholic liturgical vestment (Hasalová et al. 2020). To learn more, we conducted interdisciplinary research, including archival and art historical research, and material research on the embroidery fragment.

After the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottomans in 1453, the Byzantine Empire as a political entity ended. However, its cultural influence has persisted in many countries, mainly due to the continuity of the Byzantine liturgy, which provides an ideological framework for the fine and decorative arts. The Košice embroidery is exceptional because only a few examples of medieval (and post-medieval) embroideries of the Byzantine liturgical tradition used on the territory of Slovakia have been preserved (Hasalová and Piatrová 2015a). This Byzantine liturgical object—a fragment of an epitrachelion—was sewn onto a chasuble, an object used exclusively in the Latin rite. The use of a fragment of a Byzantine epitrachelion as a chasuble ornament is documented in Eichstätt in Bavaria (Woodfin 2012, pp. 41–43), but no other cases are known.

2. The Context of the Embroidery Fragment

The liturgical vestment of the priest is based on biblical sources and has a symbolic dimension that refers to the inner transformation of the human being: the “old man” becomes the “new man” (Eph 4:24), and the liturgical minister puts on Christ by putting on vestments (Gal 3:27). The image of “putting on Christ” does not mean putting on a cultic mask, but we understand it as a process of Christian metanoia. When the priest puts on the liturgical vestments, it is a symbolic expression of this new man as “being in Christ”. Thus, the liturgical vestments remind the priest that he is in the process of becoming the new Christ—alter Christus—and that is how he is perceived by the faithful. His vestments distinguish him from the group of worshippers in the temple; from the other side of the altar, he represents Christ himself.

The epitrachelion, with its embroidered religious images, is an object that conveys a message. Its division into several scenes that depict specific saints turns it into a visual “reader”. The concrete object, the epitrachelion, is intended for liturgical use. The priest and bishop who wear it carry these events on their persons and present them during the liturgy without words as examples worthy of imitation. In the religious action, the liturgical service, the epitrachelion thus acquires performative significance, giving it a dramaturgical effect before the eyes of the community of the faithful and the celebrants. Although the entire epitrachelion was not visible during the liturgy and many of the faithful in the church could not even see it and thus discern the embroidered scenes or the technological finesse of the craftsmanship, this object (like other liturgical vestments) was made for the purpose of performance before an audience of the faithful. Liturgical vestments uniquely combine sacred and aesthetic functions.

As the cleric dresses, the epitrachelion has its order and place; prescribed prayers accompany the donning of the liturgical vestments in preparation for the liturgy. In that intimate, mystical situation, the cleric’s relationship with God dominates. The liturgical vestment is intended to remind him of his role in the ecclesial community, from which he is set apart by his dress and position at the altar: he must clothe himself in Christ in the spirit of the Gospel. The whole process of dressing in vestments is a performance, in the sense of the enactment of a relationship. (Hasalová and Piatrová 2015b; Braun 1907; Paci 2008).

The epitrachelion, part of the liturgical vestments of a Byzantine priest, is a sign of priestly rank. It is a long strip of cloth, about 10 to 12 cm wide and 150 cm long, which the priest wears symmetrically around his neck, from which it falls almost to his knees (analogous to the Latin stole). The surviving epitrachelia from the 14th and 15th centuries, found in monastic treasuries and world museums, are richly to luxuriously decorated. In the past, luxurious epitrachelia were made of silk, embroidered with silver, gold, gilded, or silk thread. In the most elegant forms, tiny pearls usually complemented the embroidery. Less luxurious epitrachelia made less use of metallic threads and had wool backing instead of silk. Epitrachelia could be finished with decorative tassels and knots or left with a simple border (Woodfin 2012; Millet 1947; Zographou-Κοrré 1985; Theocharis 1986).

The Košice epitrachelion fragment is sewn onto a chasuble, the liturgical vestment of a priest of the Roman rite. In its liturgical function, the Košice chasuble with its Byzantine embroidery is an example of the elevation of liturgical practice above the strict letter of the rules, which are different for the Eastern and Western rites. Foreign examples of embroidery on Byzantine liturgical objects are known thanks to the specialised literature (Millet 1947; Johnstone 1967; Musicescu 1969; Woodfin 2004). In some cases, foreign objects were also used in the Western Roman Church, such as the famous Dalmatic of Charlemagne, now on exhibition in the Treasury of St Peter’s Basilica in Rome. It is a Vatican sakkos (as it is called in the literature), made in Constantinople or Thessaloniki in the 14th century. It has been in the Vatican inventory since the 1489 (Woodfin 2004, p. 300). In other cases, objects from the Byzantine ecclesiastical environment were kept in the sacristies of churches, and it is not clear whether they were also used in the Roman liturgy. Examples include the Byzantine embroidery in the monastery of Fonte Avellana in Umbria or the oldest known Byzantine embroidery (dated between 1185 and 1195), which was found in Germany in the cathedral treasure of Halberstadt (Woodfin 2004, p. 296).

Such “ecumenical circulation”, or interconfessional exchange of artefacts, took place in various ways. One possibility was through diplomatic gifts—for example, an altar cloth with a depiction of St Lawrence (c. 1261) was one of several gifts from the Byzantine Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos to Genoa in confirmation of the renewal of a trade agreement with the city (Kalantzidou 2016, p. 20). Another example is the Prague embroidery—a fragment of the 12th-century vestment of St Wenceslas from St Vitus’s Cathedral in Prague (Zeminová 1999, pp. 65–67)—or the ‘magnificent ecclesiastical vestment’ presented to Pope Urban V in Rome in 1370 by Clara Dobokai, widow of the Wallachian Duke Nicholas Alexander (†1364) (Fejér 1842, p. 212). Trade routes and crusader plundering were other sources of artefacts. Luxurious textiles were used as political weapons and contributed to the powerful image of the Byzantine Empire (Kalantzidou 2016, pp. 20–27).

The movement of sacred objects of high artistic value and expert craftsmanship suggests that they were appreciated not only for their liturgical function but also for their artistic and aesthetic value (Avenarius 1992, pp. 24–26). Byzantine liturgical objects in private collections support this view. Icons and Byzantine art were probably traded by numerous Greek merchants documented in Košice and the entire Tokaj region (Szeghy 2014, pp. 40–53; Gyulai 2014).

3. The Material and Iconographic Analysis of the Embroidery

The fragment of the embroidered epitrachelion decorates the dorsal side of the chasuble. The chasuble is made of burgundy velvet with a lining of burgundy cotton twill. It measures a maximum of 104 cm in length and 70 cm in width. The fragment of the epitrachelion is bordered with a beige viscose band 2.4 cm wide. On the basis of the technique and material, we date the chasuble itself to the first third of the 20th century.

The epitrachelion fragment is 96 cm long and 12.7 cm wide. The embroidery, worked on red silk that has a linen background, consists of silk threads in beige, red, yellow, green, and blue. Silver thread with a layer of gilding is also used. The embroidery features a combination of a stockinette stitch, stem stitch, split stitch, and embroidery over cord. Identical materials and techniques are used in all of the embroidered fields.

The strip of embroidery on the chasuble is composed of several parts. Based on an analysis of the material and embroidery techniques, we conclude that they came from a single workshop, and it is highly probable that they were part of an epitrachelion. A more detailed analysis would only be possible during a restoration, when the embroidery would be removed from the chasuble and a more detailed study of its layers and details would be possible.

The embroidery depicts five figures: an angel and four saints identified in the Church tradition as the Fathers of the East. From top to bottom, they are the Archangel Gabriel, St John Chrysostom, St Gregory the Theologian (Nazianzus), St Cyril of Alexandria, and the early Christian martyr St Demetrius of Thessalonica, known as the Great Martyr (Figure 1). These are portrait icons—icons of saints. Like the saints of the West, those of the Eastern Church are depicted with attributes, that is, objects related to the saint’s life or the instruments of his martyrdom. A common attribute of Byzantine saints is an open scroll with an inscription. Also essential for identification purposes is the clothing (hermits dressed austerely or in tattered clothes, clerics in clothing corresponding to their priestly degree, etc.).

The figures in our embroidery, which have glorioles around their heads and are placed in imaginary architecture, can be identified by the names embroidered above their heads. The inscription of the saints’ names also distinguishes them as icons. According to some authors, an icon becomes a true icon only through its inscription (Florenskij 2000, p. 55). The names are written mostly in Greek majuscule, with an occasional minuscule (there is a small “alpha” in the name of St Demetrius and a small “ní” in the name of St John Chrysostom). Both the script and the language are Greek.

The saints are dressed identically in the liturgical vestments of a bishop of the 12th to 15th centuries. They wear the upper garment, a phelonion with large crosses (known as a polystaurion) worn today by all priests of the Byzantine rite. This garment can be seen in embroidery and other forms of Byzantine art (mosaics, icons) (Woodfin 2004, p. 297). St Demetrius is depicted in civilian clothes. His headgear is very unusual. This iconographic type is first attested in the 15th century and is of Macedonian origin (Xyngopoulos 1957; Sisiou 2014).

Byzantine liturgical vestments not only distinguished the various priestly grades—deacon, priest, and bishop—but also the ranks of the clergy (archbishop, metropolitan, and archimandrite). The sakkos (similar in cut to the Roman dalmatic) and the epimanikia (“armlets”) are also marks of status. In addition to the polystaurion, the saints portrayed in the Košice embroidery also wear epimanikia, an epigonation (a vestment in the shape of a rhombus hanging on a string over the left shoulder and falling over the right hip), and an omophorion (a broad band of fabric placed on the upper garment over the shoulders). The epitrachelion—the type of garment from which the Košice embroidery came—can also be seen on the figures (Hasalová and Piatrová 2015b, pp. 177–245).

The icon of the Three Hierarchs (“Consecrators”), that is, the three great theologians of the 4th century—St Basil the Great, St Gregory the Theologian, and St John Chrysostom—will provide an analogy for the iconographic interpretation and dating of the embroidery. On icons, all three saints are usually depicted wearing the same garment—a phelonion with a cross motif, especially on icons made before the 16th century; on newer icons, St John Chrysostom may wear a sakkos, while the other two bishops wear a polystaurion. The similarity of their dress may represent their equality before God and man—this is the essence of the feast of the Three Hierarchs—but also testifies to the practice of wearing a phelonion decorated with crosses by both bishops and patriarchs until the beginning of 16th century.

In this embroidery, the saints hold open scrolls with very fragmentary text. From the evidence of similarly preserved epitrachelia, we assumed that these texts could be parts of prayers from the Byzantine liturgy, such as those seen on preserved epitrachelia from the monastery of Putna (Putna 97, 99, 103). This type of epitrachelion, on which the saints hold scrolls in their hands, is also preserved in other monasteries—at Dionysiou (4a, 2 and 3) and Athens (3) (Millet 1947). We can identify the texts on scrolls with the help of a list of customary inscriptions used on scrolls of individual saints (Babić and Walter 1976, pp. 270–71):

• St John Chrysostom has a fragment of the Prothesis text on his scroll: Ὁ Θεός, ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, ὁ τὸν οὐράνιον ἄρτον (no. 1 in Babić and Walter’s list).
• St Gregory has a fragment of the Trisagion prayer: Ὁ Θεὸς ὁ ἅγιος, ὁ ἐν ἁγίοις ἀναπαυόμενος (no. 6 in Babić and Walter’s list).
• St Cyril has a fragment of the second prayer of the faithful from the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom: Πάλιν καὶ πολλάκις σοὶ προσπίπτομεν (no. 10b in Babić and Walter’s list).

The inscriptions above the figures’ heads are abbreviated and difficult to read because the black thread with which they were embroidered has fallen out. Therefore, in some cases, we can only suggest a reading based on known analogies. Beginning from the top, the inscriptions are suggested as follows:

• Archangel Gabriel (Figure 2)
  on the left: О A—holy
  on the right: ΓAΒΡΙHΛ—Gabriel/O EYA(γγελισμος)—Annunciation.

• St John Chrysostom (Figure 3)
  on the left: O A—Saint/Iω—John/TOMoς—Chrysostomos (“tomos”: abbreviation of Chrysostomos; the apparent T could also be an imperfect chí-rhó, constituting an abbreviated form of “chromos” and, therefore, a different abbreviation of Chrysostomos)
  on the right: o/εv (?)o or ευ (?)o

Figure 3. Košice embroidery (detail)—St John Chrysostom (authors’ photo).

Figure 3. Košice embroidery (detail)—St John Chrysostom (authors’ photo).

• St Gregory, the Theologian (Figure 4)
  O A—Saint/ΓPIΓOPIOς—Gregory/O ΘεOΛOΓOς—Theologian

Figure 4. Košice embroidery (detail)—St Gregory Theologian (authors’ photo).

Figure 4. Košice embroidery (detail)—St Gregory Theologian (authors’ photo).

• St Cyril (Figure 5)
  O A—Saint/KIPIΛΛς—Cyril

Figure 5. Košice embroidery (detail)—St Cyril (authors’ photo).

Figure 5. Košice embroidery (detail)—St Cyril (authors’ photo).

• St Demetrius (Figure 6)
  on the left: o αΓις—Saint
  on the right: ΔHMHTPIς—Demetrius

Figure 6. Košice embroidery (detail)—St Demetrius (authors’ photo).

Figure 6. Košice embroidery (detail)—St Demetrius (authors’ photo).

The choice of saints on the surviving strip of the epitrachelion was not arbitrary. They correspond to the iconographic canon, the theological sequence (the heavenly hierarchy), and the symbolism of the epitrachelion as an essential part of a priest’s liturgical vestments (Areopagita 2010). To understand the semantic context and the order of the saints on our embroidery fragment and thus the decoration of the unpreserved elements of the epitrachelion, it is essential to familiarise ourselves with the iconography used on epitrachelia. This knowledge will help us in the theoretical reconstruction of the epitrachelion as a whole.

From the 13th century onwards, the decoration on epitrachelia was a type of Deésis icon—a prayer of supplication in which saints are depicted praying to Christ. This is a symbolic expression of the priestly ministry: the responsibility of a priest to pray to God for the people entrusted to him. In epitrachelia of this type, the representation of Christ on the throne (the Pantokrator) placed at the back of the priest’s neck—that is, in the centre of the epitrachelion—was a symbolic expression of Christ’s majesty. Those closest to Christ are those whose prayers are considered to be the most effective. Flanking the icon of Christ are the angels in postures of supplication, followed by the Mother of God on the right (representing the New Testament), and, on the left, St John the Baptist (representing the Old Testament), the greatest of those born of a woman (cf. Mt 11:11), who at the Last Judgement will plead for mercy for sinners. Then come the saints and martyrs in the order established in the theological and iconographic hierarchies. The Deésis shows the various gestures of the hands: they are raised in supplication, stretched out in front of the body or pointing to Christ, the author of all graces. The saints do not “communicate” with one another; they usually have their heads bowed and their hands extended towards Christ, to whom they address their supplications for the salvation of souls (Woodfin 2012, pp. 70–72).

From the medieval epitrachelia in the group of “praying figures” (according to Millet) that have been preserved and documented, it is possible to identify two arrangements of the most common icon pairs (arrayed from right to left from the priest’s point of view, in the iconographic order) (Millet 1947, p. 29):

(A)

• Christ Pantokrator
• The Archangel Michael—The Archangel Gabriel;
• The Virgin Mary, Mother of God—St John the Baptist;
• St John Chrysostom—St Basil the Great;
• St Gregory the Theologian—St Athanasius;
• St Nicholas—St Cyril of Alexandria;
• St Demetrius—St George.

(B)

• Christ Pantokrator
• The Archangel Michael—The Archangel Gabriel;
• The Virgin Mary, Mother of God—St John the Baptist;
• St Peter—St Paul;
• St John Chrysostom—St Basil the Great;
• St Athanasius—St Gregory the Theologian;
• St George—St Demetrius.

The Košice Byzantine embroidery probably came from an epitrachelion depicting the Deésis, of a 14th- and 15th-century type, which is documented in the scholarly literature (Millet 1947). The fragment under study is a near match for the right (from the priest’s point of view) strip of icons of variation A. However, the pose of the Archangel Gabriel in our embroidery, slightly turned to the left and with his arms outstretched to the left, excludes the possibility that he was placed on the left side of the epitrachelion; his arms would have to be extended in the opposite direction if he were communicating with a counterpart on the right side. The Košice fragment probably belongs to a third type of epitrachelion, which Millet does not class among the group of “praying figures”, but which is documented in the literature. The first pair of figures represented on this third type is not the archangels Michael and Gabriel but Gabriel and the Virgin Mary, recalling the scene of the Annunciation. The Archangel Gabriel is on the right, which corresponds to his position in the Košice fragment (Woodfin 2012, pp. 262–64).

That St Demetrius of Thessaloniki, whose depiction is canonically prescribed, appears on the embroidery is interesting. The historical background of the Košice embroidery suggests the possibility of a connection with the tradition of Cyril and Methodius in Slovakia. St Demetrius (270–306), an early Christian martyr from Thessaloniki, is associated with several legendary events. The spread of his devotion on our territory was connected with the mission of the Thessalonian brothers Sts Cyril and Methodius, who brought his devotion to Great Moravia; St Methodius wrote a hymn in his honour (Žeňuch 2017, p. 66). His popularity and icons spread into eastern Slovakia, and many churches were dedicated to him. Currently, there are 19 churches under the patronage of St Demetrius of Thessaloniki in eastern Slovakia. Hypothetically, this history provides a good (i.e., pious, devotional) reason for acquiring or keeping an embroidery with an icon of St Demetrius in the ecclesiastical environment of Košice. However, no definite conclusions can be drawn from this because, according to Millet, St Demetrius was depicted on both types of epitrachelia from the group of “praying figures” (Millet 1947, p. 29).

4. Archival Research

The Byzantine embroidery from Košice has received little scholarly attention. It is usually dated to between the 12th and 15th centuries. On the Central List of the Monument Fund of the Slovak Republic, it is registered as No. 872/1, under the title “Silk casula with embroidery, medieval, of Byzantine origin”. It was included in the Monument Fund of the Slovak Republic in 1967 and was then dated to the 15th century. The artefact is not mentioned in an earlier inventory of the movable monuments of the Cathedral of St Elisabeth, the well-known Gerecze Inventory of 1906.

The inventories of the Cathedral of St Elisabeth in Košice from 1516, 1552, 1604, 1736, and 1882 do not mention the embroidery (Némethy 1883; Pettkó 1882). Research in the archbishop’s archives in Košice did not yield any results, nor did research in the archives of the parish of St Elisabeth in Košice, where there is not even a parish chronicle (Domus Ecclesiae); the chronicle was probably stolen in 1989. The embroidery was not even included in the list of works of art and liturgical objects donated by Bishop Žigmund Bubič from his private collection to the then Košice Museum, now the East Slovak Museum, in 1896, nor in the itemisation of the collection donated by Bubič’s successor, Bishop Augustin F. Colbrie (1907–1925), in 1914. We believe that the embroidery fragment belonged to Bubič but was not among the items he donated to the Košice Museum.

Vojtech Wick, in 1936, was the first to mention a chasuble with applied embroidery. Without citing any sources, he wrote of “a chasuble whose back is made up of pieces of Greek liturgical vestments in the Byzantine style with Greek inscriptions from the 12th and 13th centuries” (Wick 1936). A year later, the chasuble was presented in Prague at the exhibition Old Art in Slovakia (Prague, June–August 1937). The exhibition catalogue described it as “Byzantine embroidery on newer red velvet from the 13th century” (Hégr 1937). In the comprehensive catalogue of the exhibition, Emanuel Poche stated that it was “a fragment of a Greek epitrachelion […], undoubtedly a Thessaloniki work from the end of the 14th century” (catalogue nos. 635–638) (Šourek 1938). In determining both the provenance and the dating, Poche appealed to the authority of the well-known Byzantologist Nikolai L. Okuniev (Havlíková 2009). Poche notes that the embroidery is more interesting for its provenance and fate than its artistry and craftsmanship. The art historian Zoroslava Drobná prepared a selection of liturgical textiles from all over Czechoslovakia for a French publication in 1950 and included this embroidery in the limited selection of artefacts. She dated it to the end of the 14th century but did not offer arguments to justify this dating. Like Poche, she indicated that it was a fragment of a Byzantine epitrachelion (Drobná 1950). Ondrej Halaga also wrote about the “Byzantine embroidery from the 14th century” in 1967, when the embroidery was declared a cultural monument, but did not cite any sources (Halaga 1967).

In recent years, the work of church historian Peter Zubko has focused renewed attention on the embroidery. In several works, he dated the embroidery to 1380, although without citing sources and generally referring to older literature. He argues that its presence in the inventory of St Elisabeth’s Cathedral in Košice is connected with a relic of the Holy Blood found there in the Middle Ages and the religious life associated with it. The relic was the destination of many pilgrims, including those from the East and members of Eastern Churches, as attested by a bull of Pope Boniface IX from 1402 (Szeghy 2014). Zubko refers to efforts to unite the Greek and Latin church traditions that are said to have taken place in the Košice area as early as 1370. In this context, he mentions a late 14th-century report that the Vlachs sent a gift of a precious liturgical vestment to Pope Urban V. And according to Zubko, “a piece of precious liturgical textile (epitrachelion) […] sewn secondarily onto a Baroque chasuble” also comes from that period (Zubko et al. 2014, pp. 34–36). More recently, Petr Balcárek referenced the embroidery in a publication, citing previously published information by Poche, Drobná, and Okuniev. He suggested that it could be a fragment of an epitrachelion or omophorion. The beards, clothing, and headgear of the figures correspond to the Palaiologan period. Balcárek believes that the embroidery is Hungarian or Cuman (Balcárek 2022, pp. 349–50).

5. Hypotheses and Questions About the Existence of Embroidery in Košice

Questions or doubts about the existence of the embroidery in the inventory of the Košice Cathedral and its connection with the Eastern pilgrims who came to Košice to see the relic of the Blood of Christ are legitimate because it is not recorded in Košice until 1936 (Wick 1936, p. 368). There are several possibilities: (1) the embroidery is indeed related to the Eastern pilgrims who came to Košice on pilgrimage to the relic of the Blood of Christ; (2) the embroidery was included in the inventory of the Cathedral of St Elisabeth only in the first quarter of the 20th century; (3) the embroidery was included in the inventory of the Cathedral of St Elisabeth (since the Middle Ages?), but its value was not recognised until the 1930s; (4) the embroidery belonged to either Bishop Bubic or Bishop Colbrie and after their deaths was included in the inventory of the Cathedral of St Elisabeth; and (5) the embroidery is related to Greek merchants whose presence in Košice is recorded from the early Middle Ages.

In this context, it is interesting to note that when the interior of the new Greek-Catholic church in Košice was being furnished between 1895 and 1908, the Roman Catholics of Košice presented as a gift an altar cushion “artistically made by local nuns” (Szeghy and Jambor 2007). We can assume that if there had been a Byzantine liturgical embroidery in the inventory of St Elizabeth’s Cathedral at that time, the Roman Catholics of Košice would have donated it to the Greek Catholics for their new church to return it to its original liturgical setting. This, too, could be an argument that the embroidery became the property of the Cathedral at a later date. If that was the case, the Košice chasuble is an exciting example of the recycling of embroidery for a completely new function and in a different ecclesiastical or liturgical setting. We do not know whether this Byzantine embroidery, which was sewn onto the chasuble—the liturgical vestment of a priest of the Roman rite—in the 20th century, was actively incorporated in the Latin liturgy or if it was used in its new form and function only for its presentation at the Prague Exhibition of Ancient Art in Slovakia in 1937. Nor do we know the historical context of the embroidery. So far, no archival sources on its origin have been found. The hypotheses mentioned above have been published but are not supported by historical sources. The historical context and original appearance of the embroidery in Košice remain unresolved.

The fabric of the burgundy chasuble (on which a fragment of the epitrachelion has been preserved) is dated in the literature to the Baroque period (Zubko et al. 2014, p. 36). Our research into the technique and material of the chasuble suggests that it was made instead in the first quarter of the 20th century (see Section 3 above). This fact opens the way for another working hypothesis—the possibility that the chasuble was made so that the embroidery could be presented appropriately at the Prague Exhibition of Old Art in Slovakia (Orosová 2010).

6. Dating and Provenance of the Embroidery

To gather facts relevant to the dating and provenance of Košice embroidery, we studied the Byzantine liturgical embroidery tradition by reviewing surviving artefacts that are mentioned in the literature.

Comparisons between the Košice embroidery and temple and monastery collections of the Greek Orthodox Church in present-day Greece (Thessaloniki, Athos, and Patmos) and the Byzantine embroidery traditions in present-day Turkey (Papastavrou and Filiou 2015), present-day Romania (parts of Wallachia and Moldavia), and Serbia have been essential. These countries, formerly part of the Byzantine Empire and still dominated by the Byzantine rite, have rich collections of religious art, including textiles, in their state museums (e.g., the Byzantine and Christian Museum and Benaki Museum in Athens, the Museum of Byzantine Culture in Thessaloniki, the National Museum in Sofia, and the National Museum in Bucharest). They have various types of embroidered liturgical vestments and covers used in the temples. Many of the artefacts are epitrachelia. They were essential to our comparative research on the Košice embroidery.

Renowned scholars of Byzantine textiles have commented on the difficulty of identifying the manufacturers or workshops that created these embroideries (Woodfin 2004, p. 295). Their makers—artisans and iconographers—are typically unknown. It is impossible to determine whether they were monastic embroiderers, artisans working for a particular monastery, or embroiderers in a secular workshop that sold its products to several monasteries (Johnstone 1967, p. 57). We know that some exceptionally richly decorated epitrachelia were made to order, usually for a patron (e.g., the epitrachelion of Stephen III the Great). However, it is impossible to determine who chose the motifs for these works: the patron or the embroiderer.

Based on the research, comparisons, and studies carried out so far, two hypotheses can be made about the origin and use of Košice embroidery. The first hypothesis, which agrees with the opinion of renowned expert Nikolai L. Okuniev, is that it is of Greek origin. Although we have not found any source material to support this claim, the extant epitrachelia presented in the literature include some that are very similar to the fragment we studied.

The Košice embroidery shows an angel and praying saints. Similar types—epitrachelia 2, 3, and 4—are found in the Monastery of Dionysiou on Mount Athos (Millet 1947, pp. LXII–LXV). Millet places them in the group that he calls the “praying figures”. The similarity is not only in the motif, that is, the iconographic type of the Deésis, but also in how the arcades are represented—in particular, the ornament that divides the arcades occupied by saints. This motif is a Greek cross with four extra stepped arms and a central square field embroidered in a different colour (Figure 7).

It resembles Epitrachelion No. 3 of the Dositheus Hieromonachus in Athens (Figure 8). The depiction of the figures in semi-profile, bent in prayer and holding scrolls, is reminiscent of how the figures on the Košice embroidery are delineated. The arcades in the two works are also very similar in their arches, capitals, and pilasters, as well as in the placement of the stitches and the types of stitches in the background. These two embroideries differ, however, in the representation of the bands that divide the single fields with saints.

The second hypothesis suggests that the embroidery may have originated in the workshop of the Orthodox monastery of Putna in present-day Romania (Cojocaru 2016; Moisescu et al. 1982; Musicescu 1969; Sullivan 2021). Putna Epitrachelion No. 99 (Millet 1947, pp. LVI–LVII) has praying saints in the arcades that resemble those on the Košice embroidery (Figure 9). It is identical to both the Košice embroidery and the epitrachelia in Athens and at the Dionysiou Monastery on Mount Athos in the shape of the arcades, capitals, and pilasters, and especially in the types of stitches and how they are slanted. The design of the background inside the vault is also identical to that seen on the Košice embroidery, although the ornaments dividing the embroidered sectors differ from those in Košice. Previously, Millet pointed out the similarity of Putna Epitrachelion No. 99 with the Dionysiou Epitrachelia Nos. 2, 3, and 4, placing them in the group of “praying figures” and identifying them as having the same subject (Millet 1947, p. 29).

Epitrachelia Nos. 2 and 3 from the Dionysiou Monastery on Mount Athos (Millet 1947, pp. LXII–LXV) are strikingly similar to the Košice embroidery in the band of ornaments dividing the fields embroidered with crosses and the depiction of the arches, pilasters, and capitals. Not only are the shapes and ornaments the same, but so is the arrangement of the stitches (Figure 10 and Figure 11).

The similarity of some epitrachelia in different monasteries can make it difficult to determine the place of production (workshop) as where they were used, as well as their present locations, may differ from where they were made. Certain epitrachelia came to monasteries as gifts from other monasteries or as gifts from wealthy believers. Recipients of such a bounty included the monastery of Putna in modern-day Romania and the monastery of Dionysiou on Mount Athos in Greece. As mentioned above, the Košice epitrachelion is challenging to classify because it resembles both Dionysiou and Putna epitrachelia. The founder of the monastery of Putna (1466), which historically belonged to the Principality of Moldavia, was Stephen III, Prince of Moldavia (1457–1504). He not only initiated the foundation of the Putna monastery but also made donations to various monasteries in the territory of present-day Romania. Other liturgical objects may have been exchanged between monasteries in Romania and Mount Athos (Năstruel 1965).

Stephen III took over the patronage of the monasteries of Mount Athos and made donations to them (Sullivan 2019). He claimed to be the protector of the Orthodox Church even outside the Moldavian Principality. He assumed this responsibility after the Ottoman invasion because he believed that the Byzantine cultural tradition should be preserved in the principality and also considered that its retention would increase the region’s political importance. Even before Stephen III (and after him), the Moldavian princes consciously imitated the Byzantine rulers, preserving and transforming Byzantine culture, religion, and art. They were the founders of most of the monasteries on Mount Athos. Stephen III sent money to run the monasteries. Several written sources document the generosity and diversity of the support he and other Moldavian princes provided (Sullivan 2019). It is, therefore, highly likely that liturgical artefacts, including embroidery from the monastery of Putna in Moldavia, also arrived on Mount Athos. This explains the similarity between some of the epitrachelia from Putna in Moldavia and those from Dionysiou. For example, Epitrachelia Nos. 2 and 3 from the monastery of Dionysiou and Putna Epitrachelion No. 99 are similar to the Košice epitrachelion fragment.

Many of the surviving epitrachelia have their dates of manufacturing embroidered on them. Including the maker’s details or the occasion of manufacturing, and thus the date, was a common custom. The script used was Greek; in Slavic countries, Slavic words were written in the Greek alphabet and Cyrillic. Some Romanian works even used Slavic words in Greek transliteration (Gorovei 2006). The Košice fragment does not contain any dates or references to an event in the embroidered texts that would allow us to determine the moment of its creation. We compared epitrachelia from the literature that either bear a date or have documented dates. Millet dates epitrachelia that are similar to the Košice embroidery to between the second half of the 15th century and the middle of the 16th century (Millet 1947, pp. LVI–LVII). Since Stephen III donated the epitrachelion, Romanian authors date works similar to it to the last third of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th century (Cojocaru 2016). However, the production of epitrachelia with praying figures may have become conventional by the 16th century, which calls for caution in dating, especially when considering fragmentary epitrachelia without dedications such as the Košice embroidery.

In studying the Košice fragment, we ruled out an origin in the 17th century because the materials and stitches used to embroider epitrachelia changed at the end of the 16th century. All-over embroidery with metal threads was abandoned, and epitrachelia with a textile backing, such as velvet, began to predominate, with the motif embroidered or sewn directly onto the velvet. In addition, epitrachelia became broader and shorter in the 17th century, and the embroidery became more opulent, especially in the ornamental areas (Teocharis 1998). However, we know that ecclesiastical embroidery, like liturgical vestments, was produced in established patterns for decades, so precise dating can be difficult.

Thanks to the cooperation of archaeologist Peter Barta, we have supplemented the comparative dating method with an exact radiocarbon dating method (C14). The results of the radiocarbon dating show that the threads used in the embroidery can be dated to between 1400 and 1450 (Barta et al. 2018). However, this date does not rule out the possibility that the embroidery dates from the second half of the 15th century or the first half of the 16th century, as the materials used to make it may have been gathered from old stocks.

7. Conclusions

Despite several years of research into the embroidered icon from St Elizabeth’s Cathedral in Košice, some questions remain unanswered and some hypotheses unproven. We see a need for further art historical, archival, and material-technical research that could allow for more concrete conclusions about the provenance and history of the embroidery or at least narrow down the possibilities.

For the moment, we have excluded an origin in Russian territories and confirmed assumptions in the earlier literature that the Košice embroidery is a Greek/Byzantine work of the Ottoman Empire period (after 1453). We have added to the hypotheses on its provenance possible circuits of monastic works in Greek territories (Athens, Athos) and present-day Romania (Moldavian Putna). Importantly, the study of the literature has suggested that the Moldavian Principality and the monasteries of Mount Athos influenced one another. They received financial support from the Moldavian princes and exchanged artistic and liturgical objects. However, our study and comparisons are based on the literature, which lacks technological and technical data that would allow us to better understand the analogies between the Košice embroidery and related works (e.g., descriptions of stitches and embroidery procedures). It will be important to continue the search for iconographic analogies by analysing the fonts and texts used in the embroidery. Linguistic research and comparisons with texts on other epitrachelia could refine or exclude workshops, monasteries, and regions of origin. Finally, there are still unanswered questions about how the embroidery came to Košice and whether it appeared in any inventory of St Elizabeth’s Cathedral in Košice or elsewhere.