Symposia, Conferences, Workshops by Elena Kostic
TEXTS INSCRIPTIONS IMAGES, ART READINGS Thematic annual peеr-reviewed edition in Art Studies in two volumes 2016/ vol. I – Old Art, 2016
Actual Problems of Theory and History of Art, 2023
Holy King Milutin and His Age: History, Literature, Art, 2023
The Institute of Art Studies, BAS holds its Art Readings colloquia on a yearly basis. Since 2015,... more The Institute of Art Studies, BAS holds its Art Readings colloquia on a yearly basis. Since 2015, the conference has been divided into two modules: Old Art & New Art. This year’s Old Art module titled Heroes/Cults/Saints was occasioned by the 500th anniversary since the dormition of St George the New Martyr of Sofia. It was attended by renowned researchers from Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, Albania and the Republic of Macedonia. The organisers strive to offer a developing annual platform for art historians, archaeologists, musicologists, literary historians and architects from the Balkans, who are exploring arts from Antiquity to the end-nineteenth century.
The next conference, slated to be held in early April 2016, is themed Texts/Inscriptions/Images. Generally, this wording evinces the idea of examining the role of word in arts as well as presenting art itself as a language and correspondingly, as communication.
The expectations of the organisers are to encourage presentation of papers that would come up with texts significant to the development of arts, setting sustainable trends in shaping the tastes both of the artists themselves and the recipients of arts. These could be ancient treatises on painting, architecture, music or manuals containing lessons or notes by particular masters on their creative practices. Recent observations about representations of visual arts of the type of Byzantine ekphraseis are also eligible. In this regard, literary historians, architects, art historians, musicologists and art restorers are expected to present their ideas of the so-called intertextuality, for instance, in their scientific reports.
The papers may trace the relationships between texts and representations, between canon and creative interpretations, accentuating the path of a passage from a manuscript or a book to the painted area or to re-contextualising it in vision. This segment allows epigraphers for presenting the sources of, say, biblical or hymnographic quotes and highlighting the function of the latter in the decoration of churches, commenting on the impact of apocryphal works, bringing to light palaeographic, dialectical specifics of inscriptions on icons, murals, sacred vessels, proposing instruments for epigraphic dating. The presented inscriptions may be in Cyrillic, Greek or Latin letters.
Traditionally, the focus of the papers will be on the Balkans’ historical conditions, but we also encourage studies relating geographically to wider regions. Generalising observations about the existing until the end-nineteenth century relationship between word and work in fine arts, architecture, music; their interaction with other types of languages, including questioning the already established scientific stereotypes as viewed by contemporary intervisuality are also welcomed. And last but not least, recent theoretical observations are expected about the presence of word in visual arts and about the principles of building musical-verbal images.
Papers by Elena Kostic
Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Byzantine Studies - Thematic sessions of free communications, 2016
The authenticity and dating of the well-known Cyrillic inscription from Bitola, which was
brought... more The authenticity and dating of the well-known Cyrillic inscription from Bitola, which was
brought to light in 1956 during the demolition of Çavus mosque, where it had been placed in second
use as a threshold, is being reviewed. Since then, it has been kept at the local museum. It consists
of a 0,98 x 0,61 x 0,27 m. marble slab, broken into two pieces. A relatively small part of the bottom
left corner of the inscription is missing. The text consists of 12 lines with missing letters both at the
beginning and at the end of each line. The bottom left part which accounts for one quarter of the
inscription text has been damaged and no traces of its letters have survived.
Although the inscription is of exceptional interest, the first study that attempted to fill in the
missing text, was carried out by Vladimir Mošin only one decade after it was brought to light. Since,
it has been the subject of studies of numerous researchers. Most of them reckon that the inscription
is the last written source of the First Bulgarian State with an accurate dating, while others question
this view and argue that it dates from the 13th century. According to a third view that was expressed
ten years ago, the inscription is falsified.
The most extensive study about the inscription was conducted in 1970 by Jordan Zaimov, who
had a different view than Mošin about the missing text. Even though his suggestion was deemed
unfounded, it is still embraced today by modern researchers in publications about the history of the
First Bulgarian State.
After an on-the-ground examination of the monument, we found out that the inscription
carrier originates from an older building, most likely from the Roman era, as evidenced from the
top narrow surface of the marble, where there are holes and channels to fit Π-shaped metal joints.
This contradicts the view that the inscription could have had another line on the top side of the
inscribed surface, which was allegedly removed when it was placed in the place of the threshold.
We also found out that the indicated date from the creation era (‘anno mundi’) was not read
correctly despite the fact that all its numbers are clearly defined. It seems that the inscription editors
were led to a mistake because of a reference made in the text to an emperor called John whom they
mistook for Ivan Vladislav thus placing the dating of the inscription to the years of his reign (1015-
1018). Nonetheless, the year indicated on the inscription corresponds to the year 1202/3, i.e. the
years of Ivan I, known as Kalojan (1197-1207), who, that same year, annexed to his acquisitions a
large part of the western Balkans.
It seems that it is an inscription that, looking back at the past, mentions some historical events
with a view to connecting the newly-established Second Bulgarian State to the glorious past of the
Cometopuli and, in particular, Tsar Samuel.
Uploads
Symposia, Conferences, Workshops by Elena Kostic
The next conference, slated to be held in early April 2016, is themed Texts/Inscriptions/Images. Generally, this wording evinces the idea of examining the role of word in arts as well as presenting art itself as a language and correspondingly, as communication.
The expectations of the organisers are to encourage presentation of papers that would come up with texts significant to the development of arts, setting sustainable trends in shaping the tastes both of the artists themselves and the recipients of arts. These could be ancient treatises on painting, architecture, music or manuals containing lessons or notes by particular masters on their creative practices. Recent observations about representations of visual arts of the type of Byzantine ekphraseis are also eligible. In this regard, literary historians, architects, art historians, musicologists and art restorers are expected to present their ideas of the so-called intertextuality, for instance, in their scientific reports.
The papers may trace the relationships between texts and representations, between canon and creative interpretations, accentuating the path of a passage from a manuscript or a book to the painted area or to re-contextualising it in vision. This segment allows epigraphers for presenting the sources of, say, biblical or hymnographic quotes and highlighting the function of the latter in the decoration of churches, commenting on the impact of apocryphal works, bringing to light palaeographic, dialectical specifics of inscriptions on icons, murals, sacred vessels, proposing instruments for epigraphic dating. The presented inscriptions may be in Cyrillic, Greek or Latin letters.
Traditionally, the focus of the papers will be on the Balkans’ historical conditions, but we also encourage studies relating geographically to wider regions. Generalising observations about the existing until the end-nineteenth century relationship between word and work in fine arts, architecture, music; their interaction with other types of languages, including questioning the already established scientific stereotypes as viewed by contemporary intervisuality are also welcomed. And last but not least, recent theoretical observations are expected about the presence of word in visual arts and about the principles of building musical-verbal images.
Papers by Elena Kostic
brought to light in 1956 during the demolition of Çavus mosque, where it had been placed in second
use as a threshold, is being reviewed. Since then, it has been kept at the local museum. It consists
of a 0,98 x 0,61 x 0,27 m. marble slab, broken into two pieces. A relatively small part of the bottom
left corner of the inscription is missing. The text consists of 12 lines with missing letters both at the
beginning and at the end of each line. The bottom left part which accounts for one quarter of the
inscription text has been damaged and no traces of its letters have survived.
Although the inscription is of exceptional interest, the first study that attempted to fill in the
missing text, was carried out by Vladimir Mošin only one decade after it was brought to light. Since,
it has been the subject of studies of numerous researchers. Most of them reckon that the inscription
is the last written source of the First Bulgarian State with an accurate dating, while others question
this view and argue that it dates from the 13th century. According to a third view that was expressed
ten years ago, the inscription is falsified.
The most extensive study about the inscription was conducted in 1970 by Jordan Zaimov, who
had a different view than Mošin about the missing text. Even though his suggestion was deemed
unfounded, it is still embraced today by modern researchers in publications about the history of the
First Bulgarian State.
After an on-the-ground examination of the monument, we found out that the inscription
carrier originates from an older building, most likely from the Roman era, as evidenced from the
top narrow surface of the marble, where there are holes and channels to fit Π-shaped metal joints.
This contradicts the view that the inscription could have had another line on the top side of the
inscribed surface, which was allegedly removed when it was placed in the place of the threshold.
We also found out that the indicated date from the creation era (‘anno mundi’) was not read
correctly despite the fact that all its numbers are clearly defined. It seems that the inscription editors
were led to a mistake because of a reference made in the text to an emperor called John whom they
mistook for Ivan Vladislav thus placing the dating of the inscription to the years of his reign (1015-
1018). Nonetheless, the year indicated on the inscription corresponds to the year 1202/3, i.e. the
years of Ivan I, known as Kalojan (1197-1207), who, that same year, annexed to his acquisitions a
large part of the western Balkans.
It seems that it is an inscription that, looking back at the past, mentions some historical events
with a view to connecting the newly-established Second Bulgarian State to the glorious past of the
Cometopuli and, in particular, Tsar Samuel.
The next conference, slated to be held in early April 2016, is themed Texts/Inscriptions/Images. Generally, this wording evinces the idea of examining the role of word in arts as well as presenting art itself as a language and correspondingly, as communication.
The expectations of the organisers are to encourage presentation of papers that would come up with texts significant to the development of arts, setting sustainable trends in shaping the tastes both of the artists themselves and the recipients of arts. These could be ancient treatises on painting, architecture, music or manuals containing lessons or notes by particular masters on their creative practices. Recent observations about representations of visual arts of the type of Byzantine ekphraseis are also eligible. In this regard, literary historians, architects, art historians, musicologists and art restorers are expected to present their ideas of the so-called intertextuality, for instance, in their scientific reports.
The papers may trace the relationships between texts and representations, between canon and creative interpretations, accentuating the path of a passage from a manuscript or a book to the painted area or to re-contextualising it in vision. This segment allows epigraphers for presenting the sources of, say, biblical or hymnographic quotes and highlighting the function of the latter in the decoration of churches, commenting on the impact of apocryphal works, bringing to light palaeographic, dialectical specifics of inscriptions on icons, murals, sacred vessels, proposing instruments for epigraphic dating. The presented inscriptions may be in Cyrillic, Greek or Latin letters.
Traditionally, the focus of the papers will be on the Balkans’ historical conditions, but we also encourage studies relating geographically to wider regions. Generalising observations about the existing until the end-nineteenth century relationship between word and work in fine arts, architecture, music; their interaction with other types of languages, including questioning the already established scientific stereotypes as viewed by contemporary intervisuality are also welcomed. And last but not least, recent theoretical observations are expected about the presence of word in visual arts and about the principles of building musical-verbal images.
brought to light in 1956 during the demolition of Çavus mosque, where it had been placed in second
use as a threshold, is being reviewed. Since then, it has been kept at the local museum. It consists
of a 0,98 x 0,61 x 0,27 m. marble slab, broken into two pieces. A relatively small part of the bottom
left corner of the inscription is missing. The text consists of 12 lines with missing letters both at the
beginning and at the end of each line. The bottom left part which accounts for one quarter of the
inscription text has been damaged and no traces of its letters have survived.
Although the inscription is of exceptional interest, the first study that attempted to fill in the
missing text, was carried out by Vladimir Mošin only one decade after it was brought to light. Since,
it has been the subject of studies of numerous researchers. Most of them reckon that the inscription
is the last written source of the First Bulgarian State with an accurate dating, while others question
this view and argue that it dates from the 13th century. According to a third view that was expressed
ten years ago, the inscription is falsified.
The most extensive study about the inscription was conducted in 1970 by Jordan Zaimov, who
had a different view than Mošin about the missing text. Even though his suggestion was deemed
unfounded, it is still embraced today by modern researchers in publications about the history of the
First Bulgarian State.
After an on-the-ground examination of the monument, we found out that the inscription
carrier originates from an older building, most likely from the Roman era, as evidenced from the
top narrow surface of the marble, where there are holes and channels to fit Π-shaped metal joints.
This contradicts the view that the inscription could have had another line on the top side of the
inscribed surface, which was allegedly removed when it was placed in the place of the threshold.
We also found out that the indicated date from the creation era (‘anno mundi’) was not read
correctly despite the fact that all its numbers are clearly defined. It seems that the inscription editors
were led to a mistake because of a reference made in the text to an emperor called John whom they
mistook for Ivan Vladislav thus placing the dating of the inscription to the years of his reign (1015-
1018). Nonetheless, the year indicated on the inscription corresponds to the year 1202/3, i.e. the
years of Ivan I, known as Kalojan (1197-1207), who, that same year, annexed to his acquisitions a
large part of the western Balkans.
It seems that it is an inscription that, looking back at the past, mentions some historical events
with a view to connecting the newly-established Second Bulgarian State to the glorious past of the
Cometopuli and, in particular, Tsar Samuel.