Irene Jacobs

196 Chapter 4 after he had converted Muslims to Christianity in Ifriqiya,671 Elias is described as ἀκλινής (unswerving, steady) – the same adjective also used for the pillar (στῦλον […] ἀκλινέστατον) in the passage of the Life of Greogory. In the passage of the Life of Elias the metaphor is equally used to refer to his inner stability. In this case, it specifically refers to Elias’ lack of fear and strong faith in God in a life-threatening situation:672 He did not dread the death-bringing sentence that was pronounced against him, but he remained steadfast [ἀκλινής] and undaunted, expecting God’s help, which also happened: for a voice came towards him from above, saying: ‘May you rejoice, combatant! You [will] get out of this prison tomorrow.673 In this passage, immobility is thus used to express Elias’ control over emotions and faith in God. The metaphorical language of immobility in the Life of Gregory is not unique, but reflected in other hagiographies as well. In the metaphorical language reflected in the three saints’ Lives the immobility of the saint is expressed as something impressive: he remained immobile/steadfast in the face of difficulties, particularly demons and temptations. These are conceptualised as forces that could make the saint change position and posture. Particularly the expressions in which temptations are equalled with forceful waves conceptualise movement as an impediment to the saint’s inner stability. So, not only is immobility, in contrast to mobility, conceptualised as a virtuous quality of the monk - contributing to his sainthood – movement (of water) is also explicitly conceptualised as endangering inner stability. In other words, virtue is conceptualised in terms of immobility, and temptations in terms of movement. 4.5 Conclusion The analysis in this chapter aimed to establish whether studying conceptual metaphors would advance our understanding of Byzantine conceptions of mobility and immobility, with a focus on the Life of Gregory of Decapolis. Because mobility and immobility were used as source domains rather than target domains, the conceptual metaphors did not directly reveal conceptualisations of mobility or immobility. Language of travel and immobile objects were used to express something else (life, politeia, virtue). However, the conceptual metaphors do suggest connections between mobility, immobility and virtue in the minds of medieval Greek language users, and therefore do indirectly suggest 671 I agree with Taibbi Rossi that it is likely that the episode is supposed to have taken place in Ifriqiya. For the discussion whether the Aghlabid ruler in Ifriqiya or the caliph of the Abbasid Caliphate in Bagdad is referred to, see Rossi Taibbi (1962), p. 138. 672 The narrative portrays Elias as if he already knew the outcome of the situation, namely that he would be released again. 673 […] οὐκ ἔπτηξε τὴν ἐξενεχθεῖσαν κατ’ αὐτοῦ θανατηφόρον ψῆφον, ἀλλ’ ἔμενεν ἀκλινὴς καὶ ἀπτόητος, ἐκδεχόμενος τοῦ Θεοῦ τὴν ἀντίληψιν, ἧς δὴ καὶ τέτυχεν· φωνὴ γὰρ γέγονε πρὸς αὐτὸν ἄνωθεν· «Χαίροις, ἀθλητά!—λέγουσα—· αὔριον ἐξέρχῃ ταύτης τῆς φυλακῆς ἀβλαβής». Life of Elias 17, lines 322-327.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw