during the Medieval and Early Modern Periods

: This paper discusses supplicatory liturgical processions ( litae ) and their routes in eleventh-century Constantinople by examining a hitherto neglected source; the eleventh-century Praxapostolos Dresden A104. References to supplicatory processions found in this source are examined in comparison with one of the most important sources on Byzantine ceremonial: the tenth-century kanonarion-synaxarion known as the Typikon of the Great Church. By comparing the evidence relating to the use of sites within the city during commemorations that included a procession in these two sources it is possible to draw some conclusions in terms of the way the litanic landscape changed between the tenth and eleventh centuries. The paper aims to present new evidence relating to the way annually commemorative processions were performed in Byzantine Constantinople.


INTRODUCTION
Supplicatory religious processions (litae) formed an important part of Byzantine ceremonial culture. 1 In the empire's capital, Constantinople, they took place either in times of danger or annually in celebration of the various feast days held throughout the liturgical year. By the tenth century, depending on the date of Easter, there were between three to nine days with a lite in a month (Fig. 1). These lengthy 2 public performances were often attended by the emperor, his court, the patriarch, and members of the clergy, bearing a range of objects, including processional crosses, thuribles, torches, icons and relics along routes that connected a variety of sites within the city. 3 As noted by Magdalino, 248 churches in tenth-century Constantinople were used for liturgical celebrations (Magdalino, 2007, pp. I, 27); of these, approximately one-fifth were featured in supplicatory processions. 4 Other sites also formed part of the processional routes in addition to churches located both within and outside the Theodosian wall: these included fora, the city gates, and open spaces (Fig. 2). 5 The audience for these public events would have included Constantinopolitans of all backgrounds and visitors, merchants, pilgrims, and prisoners of war. 6 These processions were part of processes of forging communal memory, and as such, they played a significant role in shaping ideas about the city's identity as a sacred space, the identity and fate of the Byzantine ecoumene, and the emperor's position as God's representative on earth.
One of our best sources for the study of processional activity in the Byzantine capital is the Typikon of the Great Church; 7 a kanonarion-synaxarion that is a liturgical book containing information on the commemorations ordered for each day of the year, where the celebrations were due to take place, and the appropriate readings and hymns for the day. As a reflection of lived tradition (Getcha, 2012), the Typikon is con-sidered one of the most significant sources for understanding the liturgical practice of Constantinople and its parishes (Parenti, 2011). Juan Mateos produced an edition of the Typikon in two volumes, one for each cycle of the liturgical year. Volume 1 (1962) is dedicated to the fixed cycle, starting from the 1 st of September to the 31 st of August. Volume 2 (1963) is dedicated to the mobile cycle for the feasts whose celebration date depended on Easter.
One source which has not featured in discussions about processions in Constantinople and was not part of Mateos' edition, is the Praxapostolos Dresden A104, 8 a manuscript containing the Acts and Epistles from the New Testament but also a kanonarion-synaxarion with liturgical instructions for the year starting with the mobile cycle at Easter and then the fixed cycle from the 1 st of September to the 31 st of August. The manuscript initially had 186 full sheets but was damaged by fire during WWII. Luckily part of it has been recently restored and published by Akentiev (2009) based on material in the A. Dmitrievsky archive, including copies made by Dmitrievsky himself (Akentiev, 2009, p. 4). Dated to the second half of the eleventh century based on the palaeography (Flusin, 2004), it reflects the Constantinopolitan cathedral practice earlier in the early eleventh century (Akentiev 2009, p. 27).
The content of Dresden A104 possesses many similarities with another extremely valuable source for the study of processions in the Byzantine capital: the tenth-century Book of Ceremonies (De Ceremoniis). Compiled by emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos, the Book of Ceremonies provides details about ritual activity in which the emperor played an active role. According to the Book of Ceremonies, the patriarch led seventeen processions in which the emperor participated. 9 These processions are part of the Byzantine cathedral rite; in the tenth century there are two rites in Constan- Figure 1. Number of processions per month according to the Typikon of the Great Church. Information from both liturgical cycles combined (the year AD 950 was selected randomly to be able to calculate the Easter date). See also Manolopoulou, 2019. tinople one of the Great Church (ecclesiastes) and one of the monasteries and "other churches" (hagiopolites). Sometime after the first half of the eleventh century the monastic tradition influenced the cathedral practice (Parenti, 2011, pp. 456-459). 10 Akentiev's work is remarkable since Dresden A104 is an extremely valuable source as it provides evidence for how the monastic tradition might have influenced the cathedral practice in Constantinople during this period (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 9-20;Parenti, 2011, pp. 461-463).
According to the Typikon of the Great Church, there are sixty-one processions in the fixed cycle and seven in the mobile cycle of the liturgical year. The reconstructed part of Dresden A 104 gives us information about twenty-five days with processions (Tables 1 and 2). Not all of these days, though, include processions in the relevant entries of the Typikon (Table 2). It is intriguing to explore to what extent this difference between the information given by Dresden A104 and the Typikon is representative of a change in processional activity within the city between the tenth and eleventh centuries. To do so, this paper will present references to processions in Dresden A104 discussed in comparison with those found in the Typikon.
Since the text of the Dresden A104 does not survive in its entirety, it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions regarding any changes in the number of processions overall. However, it is possible to examine the use of space, any new processions introduced during feast days, and whether there are any changes in established processional routes.

DRESDEN A104 AS A SOURCE FOR PROCES-SIONAL ACTIVITY IN CONSTANTINOPLE
As with every element of Byzantine ritual, processions were designed in such a way as to engage the senses in full. 11 The staging was key to this; light from processional torches, jewelled crosses 12 and Gospel Books were all symbols of Christ and became active participants in the celebration; 13 the streets that the rulers were to pass were to be cleaned and adorned "with boxwood sawdust and with ivy and laurel and myrtle and rosemary, and with a variety of other sweet-smelling flowers that the particular season offers." (De ceremoniis I, I, 16-22, eds. Dagron andFlussin, 2020, pp. 6-7, English trans. Moffatt andTall, 2012, p. 6). 14 Information about the way the senses were engaged during celebrations is obtained mainly from the detailed descriptions of the way these processions were organised in the De Ceremoniis and the later account of  Dresden A104 is also rich in such information. For example, there are details relating to participants, 16 their decorum and the objects they used. For instance, we learn that at Easter, the hired candle-lighters wore their shirts untucked (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 46-48) or that during the celebration of All Saints, participants were wearing white shirts (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 56-57). 17 We also get information about material culture involved in processions that facilitated ritual, not just in terms of practicalities but also perceptions of the sacred: similarly to the De Ceremoniis, there are also references here to candles, processional torches and candleholders, 18 incense and nard 19 (e.g. Vespers on Easter Sunday, Akentiev, 2009, pp. 46-48, 131), processional crosses and their cases, the gospel, and the order these objects appeared during movement (e.g. on 14 th of Sunday the cross was to proceed with the gospel, Akentiev, 2009, p. 104).
Another critical element of staging these processions and the effect this had on the way they were experienced and perceived by both Constantinopolitans and 'others' 20 relates to the presence of the leaders of the city and the empire: the emperor and the patriarch. The way they appeared in public mattered and was infused with symbolism. For example, we know that during processions, emperors often made an appearance by walking barefoot as an act of humility and penance 21 or riding at the backs of their white horses. 22 In terms of processions during feast days, we know that the emperor joined the main body of the procession during specific moments either by riding, walking or even sailing. 23 Dresden A104 provides similar information relating to the way the patriarch participated in the lite, something that is not clear neither in the Typikon or the De Ceremoniis. For example, we learn that on Palm Sunday, he rode to the church of the Forty Martyrs 24 on a donkey, following the crowd that walked towards the church holding crosses and palms (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 120-121). During the feast of Ss Peter and Paul, on the 29 th of June, either he could accompany the procession that moved towards the Holy Apostles 25 on foot or ride there. The clergy led the procession if he decided to ride (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 124-125). The same was the case for Easter Monday when he could either join the procession on foot or ride straight to the church of the Holy Apostles where he met the emperor (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 48-50, 131-132).
In some cases, the patriarch could even decide whether to participate in the celebrations like for example, on the Friday of the first week of Lent (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 69-70). The latter could affect the way the celebration of the day was performed (e.g. Thursday of the sixth week after Easter celebrating the Ascension of Christ, Akentiev, 2009, pp. 53-55, 134). The same applied when the emperor was present (e.g. on the 25 th of March celebrating the Annunciation, Akentiev, 2009, pp. 180-120), which answers questions as to how the celebrations were observed when the emperor was outside the capital or not able to attend a feast.
We know from the De Ceremoniis that the emperor did not always participate in the lite led by the patriarch. The emperor could join the celebrations on specific feast days at specific points and times. 26 In the De Ceremoniis, the two processions are indicated with the epithet οἰκείας, meaning "one's own." 27 The information in Dresden A104 suggests that this could be the case for the patriarch as well: for example, on Saturday of the fifth week of Lent, there was a synaxis at the Theotokos at Blachernae 28 celebrating the assistance offered by the Theotokos on the various occasions that the city found itself under attack. 29 The church of the Theotokos and its relics were closely connected to the idea that Constantinople was a 'God-protected city' and therefore played an important part in the city's history. The celebration started at the Great Church the day before; the procession left the church around the 10 th hour and moved to the Forum where there was a station. 30 Celebrants then moved to the Chalke Gate, where they awaited the patriarch's arrival. 31 After the prescribed readings and hymns, the procession then moved to the Theotokos Blachernae for the celebration of the day. At some point, the lite exited the church of the Theotokos and returned to the Great Church for the dismissal. Interestingly, the patriarch did not accompany the lite; he could either stay at the Holy Soros, the chapel that hosted the robe of the Theotokos or at the nearby monastery of Chamaetzoukalos, where he rested. 32 He would then move to the Holy Soros 33 for the orthros 34 (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 75-77).
Dresden A104 also provides evidence of ritualistic movement within the city that would not be considered a lite. Specifically, there are references to the movement of members of the clergy between churches or processional crosses in preparation for celebrations; for example, on Palm Sunday, the processional cross of the Great Church was to be carried out without a lite (ἄνευ λιτῆς) to the Forty Martyrs from where the lite for the day would subsequently start (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 77-78). The element of the procession that made it a lite was its supplicatory character and the use of a processional cross. This is important as it further highlights the fact that processional activity within the city did not include only one type of processional movement and that there is a clear distinction between the lite-i.e. the supplicatory procession with a cross led by the patriarch or his representative-and other movements with religious elements, for example, the proeleusis of the emperor.

PROCESSIONAL ROUTES AND THE EVOLU-TION OF THE LITANIC LANDSCAPE
Dresden is also extremely important in terms of understanding the way the litanic landscape evolved over time. Both the Typikon and Dresden A104 include references to processions according to older customs which indicate changes in processional routes. For example, on Palm Sunday, the Typikon notes a second procession from Saint Tryphon to Saint Romanos 35 according to an old tradition (Typikon II, ed. Mateos, 1963, pp. 64-67)-something that is not included in Dresden A104 (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 77-78). Another example is the earthquake procession celebrated on the Monday after Pentecost; the Typikon describes two processions, one for Pentecost itself and one to commemorate an earthquake that took place during the reign of Maurice (Typikon II, Mateos, 1963, pp. 140-141). 36 In Dresden A104, the earthquake procession is marked as an old custom, while there is no mention of a second procession (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 56, 135).
These references in the Typikon to processions taking place according to older traditions raise the question of whether there was more than one lite taking place during the day. In Dresden A104, we have evidence of two separate liturgical processions simultaneously, meeting at some point and following different routes (i.e. the 24 th of June, Nativity of John the Baptist, Akentiev 2009, pp. 123-124, 160). This is not evident in the Typikon, but the absence of such evidence does not mean that at least during major feast days, there were not more than one pro-cessions taking place at one time in celebration of the same event.
There are thirteen days that both Dresden A104 and the Typikon list a procession and twelve days with a procession listed in Dresden A104 but not in the Typikon (Table 2). Processional routes that can be found both in the Typikon and Dresden A104 are generally those that started at the Great Church and then terminated at a designated church that was then used for the liturgy of the Eucharist, with or without a station at the Forum. These churches were the Great Church, the chapel of Saint Peter 37 and the Great Baptistry, 38 the church of the Holy Apostles, Theotokos Chalkoprateia 39 , Theotokos Blachernae, St Paul at the Orphanage 40 and the church of All Saints. 41 There was also a processional route that extended from Hagia Sophia to the church of the Theotokos Pege 42 beyond the Theodosian walls, having exited the city via the Pege Gate where a station was held. Other routes that occur in both sources include the ones connecting the Great Church with the two main churches of the Theotokos in Constantinople located at Chalkoprateia and Blachernae and those that connected the church of the Forty Martyrs to the Great Church (Fig. 3).
In some cases, the processional routes described in the Typikon and Dresden are very similar. For example, for the celebration of Wednesday after the feast of All Saints, the procession instructed by the Typikon moved from the Great Church to the Forum and reached the Theotokos at Palaia Petra (Typikon II, ed. Mateos, 1963, p. 146). 43 In Dresden A104, however, more stations are included and more details regarding the areas through which celebrants would process. Specifically, the procession moved from the Great Church to the Forum, where there was a station. It then passed the Kyros quarter 44 and reached Saint Anna at Deuteron 45 , where another station was held before moving towards the city walls and yet another station at or just before the gates themselves. 46 A fourth station was held at Stavrion after the procession had traversed the districts of Geranion, Thermoupoleos, and Chersapon. The route then terminated at the church of the Theotokos at Palaia Petra (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 57-58, 136).
In other cases, processions in the two sources have the same starting point and destination, but there is a change in stations: for example, on the 15 th of August during the celebrations for the Dormition of the Theotokos. In Dresden A 104, a procession started at the Great Church, then moved to the Forum and reached the church of the Theotokos at Blachernae. If the emperor wished to participate, he joined the procession at the church of the Theotokos at Blachernae (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 126-127). 47 The Typikon, on the other hand, provides a different processional route and does not mention the emperor. According to the text, the celebration of the day took place at the church of the Theotokos at Blachernae and all other churches in Constantinople dedicated to her. The patriarch moved possibly either from the Great Church or the Theotokos Chalkoprateia, where he was for the vigil, to the church of Saint Euphemia at Petrion. 48 From there, a procession moved to the church of the Theotokos at Blachernae (Typikon I, ed. Mateos, 1962, pp. 368-373). 49 On other occasions, the processional routes found in the two sources are entirely different. For example, the route that the lite followed on the 24 th of June during the celebrations of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist. On this day, Dresden A104 records two processions and provides details about the way the feast was to be celebrated. The first procession started from the church of Saint John the Baptist at the Euboulos hospital 50 involving the patriarch, the deacons and the cantors, and the processional cross of the church. The procession moved towards the Great Church at the Holy Well, where it met a second procession that had set out from the Great Church. Then, if the patriarch wanted, he went to the patriarchate or joined both processions that moved to the church of Saint John at Sphorakiou. 51 When they reached the church, the procession that started from the Great Church entered the church of Saint John and celebrated the liturgy there. The procession that had started from the hospital then moved to the Forum before returning to the hospital (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 123-124, 160). The Typikon refers only to one procession starting from the Great Church and moving to the church of Saint John at Sphorakiou (Typikon I, Mateos, 1962, pp. 318-319).
Similarly, a different route is given for the lite instructed on the 29 th of June as part of the celebrations for the memory of Ss Peter and Paul: Dresden A104 notes a procession to the Holy Apostles. As discussed above, if the patriarch wanted, he accompanied the procession on foot; otherwise, he rode to the church. The feast day was also to be celebrated at the church of Saint Peter at the Great Church by the church members that were on duty on that week (hebdomadarioi) (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 124-125). The Typikon also provides information about a procession on this day and notes that the synaxis is taking place at the Holy Apostles, at the Orphanage, and the church of Saint Peter at the Great Church. The processional cross of the Orphanage was to be brought to the Great Church the day before, possibly to the chapel of Saint Peter. The lite exited the church with the patriarch and moved to the Holy Fountain of the Great Church. At that point, the patriarch then returned straightaway to the Chapel of Saint Peter, where the celebration continued. The procession, accompanied by the Consul and the Orphanotrophos and all the political and civic authorities, moved with the cross to the Orphanage. On the day itself, at the second hour, a procession exited the church and moved to the Chapel of Saint Peter, where the liturgy was completed (Typikon I, ed. Mateos, 1962, pp. 324-327). 52 There are also processional routes in Dresden A104 that cannot be found in the Typikon: for instance, the processional route on the Sunday of the First week of Lent (Sunday of Orthodoxy), connecting the Blachernae to the Great Church (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 71-73, 140-141), and another for the Saturday of the fifth week of Lent during the Synaxis of Theotokos at Blachernae (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 75-77). The latter started at the Great Church before progressing to the Forum, the Chalke Gate, the Theotokos Blachernae, and then returning to the Great Church. The route connecting the Great church to the Blachernae is not new since there are processions in the Typikon that follow a route connecting the two churches (e.g. the procession prescribed for the celebrations performed on the 26 October (Typikon I, ed. Mateos, 1962, pp. 78-81) (Fig. 4). The new element in the Dresden A104 is the start-point of the procession in Blachernae.
Other new processional routes included those mentioned in the special instructions issued for cases where two liturgical cycles coincided. Take, for example, the route connecting the church of the Forty Martyrs with the Forum and the church of the Theotokos Chalkoprateia as when Palm Sunday and Holy Thursday coincided with the feast of Annunciation on the 25 th of March. 53 Similarly, the route connecting Hagia Eirene 54 to the Forum and the church of the Theotokos Chalkoprateia when Holy Friday fell on the 25 th of March. Although the route from the Forum to Chalkoprateia was used in several processions in the Typikon, no processions began at either the church of the Forty Martyrs of Hagia Eirene before following this route. 55 Another innovation in terms of processional routes that we can see in Dresden A104 involves the hospitals of the city, the Hospitals of Sampson and Euboulos. 56 Both of these sites were part of new processional routes that connected a. the Euboulos hospital to the church of Saint John at Sphorakiou and the Forum (the 24 th of June, Nativity of John the Baptist discussed above) and b. the hospital of Sampson with the Great Church and the Forum on the 27 th of June, during the celebrations for the memory of St Sampson, the wanderer). The procession for this day is similar to the one which took place on the 24 th of June: the patriarch led the procession from the hospital of Sampson to the Great Church. When the procession reached the church of Saint Peter near the Great Church, the patriarch returned to the patriarchate. The procession then moved to the Forum before returning to the hospital, where the liturgy took place at the church of the Saint (Akentiev, 2009, p. 124). The Typikon does not refer to a procession but notes that the celebration in honour of the Saint took place at the hospital with the participation of the patriarch (Typikon I, ed. Mateos, 1962, pp. 322-323).
It is also worth discussing the reference to the small isle of Prota in Dresden A104 since there is no mention of the isle in the Typikon of the Great Church. Prota was a small isle close to Constantinople, a place of hermitage, exile and burial. 57 Dresden A104 refers to a lite performed on Saturday after Easter moving from the Great Church to Theotokos at Prota for a synaxis (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 52, 133). In the Typikon, the day is dedicated to the memory of Saint John the Baptist, with the synaxis taking place at his church at Sporakiou (Typikon II, ed. Mateos, 1963, pp. 106-107). Therefore, the reference to the Prota is if not an innovation, a good example of processional route that invites us to rethink the boundaries of the ceremonial landscape of Constantinople during this period. Most importantly though, this is the first evidence we have of a procession that does not move by land and connects Prota (Πρῶτα) with the main city.

REMARKS
Processions did not involve only moving within the city. The movement was only a small part of what these public performances involved although extremely vital to the way they were orchestrated and experienced. By using the whole landscape of the city as a theatre for staging a performance, they carefully painted an image that was also part of the rich visual culture of Byzantium, infused with symbolism, they served the vital purposes of proclaiming imperial power, establishing a connection with God, and asserting dogmatic superiority. It was important for this message to be communicated during ritual to both faithful subjects and 'others' alike-whether enemies or allies. Appearances mattered and the way the political and ecclesiastical leaders of the empire appeared in public was crucial to their branding. Careful staging therefore was at play. Therefore, the reconstructed text of Dresden A104 is an extremely valuable source for the study of Constantinopolitan processional activity since its details regarding material culture, decorum and the use of city space significantly enhance our understanding of the way these processions were staged and performed. The level of such detail is only comparable to the level of information that we obtain from the De Ceremoniis.
It seems that some of the annual supplicatory processions of the tenth century that are instructed in the Typikon of the Great Church continued to be used a century or so later but there are also elements of innovation in terms of the use of sites, routes and celebrations. The evidence in Dresden A104 provides a glimpse of the way the changes in the rite that occurred during this period are reflected in the ceremonial landscape of Constantinople. The spatial distribution of churches and the networks created during these processions shape a new litanic landscape that extends beyond the city's walls; for the first time we have references to areas beyond the mainland as for example to the isle of Prota. This begs the question as to whether the patriarch and the emperor were expected to travel to other areas outside Constantinople for the celebration of feasts during the liturgical year, and whether the special instructions relating to their presence (or absence) from the celebrations are linked to this.
The examples from Dresden A104 discussed in this paper demonstrate that it was not just the emperor whose participation in the annually supplicatory processions was carefully staged but also the patriarch's. The patriarch had his own ceremonies to attend to in preparation for major feasts. He, like the emperor, also had a choice as to whether to join the celebrations or not since the law explicitly stated that a procession could take place even in his absence since the main body of the lite could be led by his representative.
What was essential, however, for a lite was the use of a processional cross. The information in Dresden A104 relating to the way processional crosses moved between churches further affirms the fact that visualising the cross was an affective experience; the cross transformed the people that formed the body of the lite into 'followers of Christ', shaping this way the moving people into a powerful symbol in itself; the participants, holding torches, following the Gospel and the cross were to literally experiencing and performing Christ's words: "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life" (John 8:12). Thus, the churches, the streets, and the gates of the city all became a canvas for painting the image of the Constantinopolitans (and by extension the orthodox Christian subjects of the empire) as the 'chosen people' following Christ. 58 The churches and sites that formed this landscape had already stood for many centuries, having been maintained and restored by several emperors. These churches hosted some important relics and were thus part of the city's fabric and identity as a 'New Rome', 'New Jerusalem' and a city dedicated to the Mother of God. 59 Supplicatory processions provided a mechanism for reaffirming these identities, which, whilst tightly bound up with the fate of the empire as a whole, were also subject to a continual process of contestation and renegotiation amidst contemporary challenges.
This image had a powerful effect on the people that painted it and visualised it insofar as it further affirmed and cultivated perceptions that the city was guarded by divine power, thereby mitigating (or at least partially alleviating) contemporary fears arising from the unpredictability of nature or the dangers posed by mighty foes.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to the editors of this volume and to the anonymous reviewers for their sug-gestions and comments on earlier drafts. Many thanks are due to Lesly Brubaker for her support and Panos Theodoropoulos for his valuable feedback. I would also like to extend my profound gratitude to the Seeger Centre for Hellenic Studies at Princeton University for funding and supporting my research. Any mistakes or omissions are mines alone.

NOTES
1 Most processions organised by the patriarchate or the court had a religious and supplicatory character. Here I use the term lite to refer to the outdoor supplicatory processions led by the patriarch or his representative with the use of a cross. For terminology see Baldovin, 1987, pp. 205-209. For a discussion on the way these processions were defined by contemporaries see Manolopoulou, 2016, pp. 26-30, 36-40. 2 Processions could cover up to ten kilometres in a day connecting the centre of the city marked by the church of Hagia Sophia, with the Hebdomon, the suburb outside the Theodosian Wall (Fig. 2). 3 Key studies that discuss elements of Byzantine supplicatory processions include Janin, 1966;Baldovin, 1987;Berger, 2001;Brubaker, 2001;Lossky, 2004;Andrade, 2010;Manolopoulou, 2013;2016Brubaker and Wickham, 2021. 4 The number is not absolute and does not necessarily reflect a true image of the tenth-century landscape. It is based on the data as drawn from the Typikon. For a discussion regarding the topographical information we get from the Typikon and the Patria Constantinopoleos see Magdalino, 2007, I 27. 5 For a discussion on the use of sites and processional routes see Manolopoulou, 2016, pp. 189-205;Brubaker and Whickham, 2021, pp. 146-149. 6 See also Brubaker and Whickham, 2021, pp. 142-146. 7 For primary sources on processional activity in the city see Baldovin, 1987, pp. 181-204;Manolopoulou, 2016, pp. 12-17;Brubaker and Wickham, 2021, pp. 126-127. 8 There are two manuscripts of the Constantinopolitan Praxapostolos that date from the 11 th century: Dresden A104 and Moscow Vladimir 21/Savva 4 (Galadza, 2017, pp. 62-63). See also Taft, 1991. 9 For the relationship between the Dresden A104 and the De Ceremoniis see Akentiev, 2009, pp. 26, 139-141. For a discussion on the processions described in the De Ceremoniis see Dagron and Flusin, 2020, pp. 91-112. For the participation of the emperor in liturgical feasts see Herrara, 1997. 10 See also Taft, 1992, pp. 52-77. 11 For a discussion on the way processions engaged the senses see Manolopoulou, 2013;2016, pp. 119-129;2022, pp. 375-382. 12 The processional cross was the single object that made a procession a lite. It was carried in a case as can be seen in the Menologion of Basil II (Fig. 4) and during the stations it was placed on bases. For example, during the stations at the Forum it was placed on a base in front of the door of the chapel of Constantine (De Ceremoniis, I, 19, 75, eds. Dagron and Flussin, 2020, p. 141. English trans. Moffatt and Tall, 2012, p. 75). For a discussion on the function and symbolism of processional crosses see Cotsonis, 1994. 13 Amidst extensive bibliography on liturgical experience see Taft, 2006;White, 2015. 14 See also Whickham, 2021, pp. 149-152. 15 Macrides, Munitiz andAngelov, 2013. 16 Apart from participants from the clergy and the court, the text of Dresden A104 also provides information about the way monastic communities came together with the laity on certain occasions (e.g. Sunday of the first week of Lent, Sunday of Orthodoxy, Akentiev, 2009, pp. 71-73, 140-141. 17 For the meaning of wearing white see Simeonova, 1998, p. 94. 18 Processional torches were carried during supplicatory proces-sions, whilst processional candleholders were used for holding the candles of the emperor or the patriarch during stations (e.g. De Ceremoniis, I, 10:74, Dagron and Flussin, 2020, p. 141. English trans. Moffatt Moffatt and Tall, 2012, p. 75). 19 This was a root that was used to produce incense. See also Parenti and Velkovska, 2000, pp. 143-145. 20 As for example the description of Harun Ibn Yahya procession from the Great Palace to Hagia Sophia in AD 912 (Vasiliev, 1932, pp. 158-159). For a discussion on ceremonial and perceptions by 'others' see Simeonova, 1998. 21 As for example Theodosios II during the supplicatory procession at the Hebdomon due to the earthquake of AD 447 (for discussion see Croke, 1981). Liudprand of Cremona that witnessed a procession in Constantinople which took place on Pentecost AD 968 also refers to participants being barefoot (Liudprand of Cremona, Embassy to Constantinople, IX, English translation Norwich, 1993, pp. 181-182). 22 The emperor would ride on a white horse and the patriarch on a donkey. For a discussion on the use of horses and donkeys in public processions see Perisanidi, 2021. For imperial vestment and its symbolism see Piltz, 1997. 23 See also Berger, 2001. 24 The church of the Forty Martyrs was located west of the Forum at a crossroad connecting an area in the northwest of the city called Petrion with the Forum (Janin, 1969, pp. 482-486;Magdalino, 2007, I, p. 80). 25 The Holy Apostles was the place of imperial mausolea and important relics (Janin, 1969, pp. 41-50). Amidst extensive bibliography on its importance and architecture see Mullett and Ousterhout, 2020. 26 These can be found summarised in Baldovin, 1987, p. 303. See also Dagron and Flusin, 2020, pp. 91-112, 657-681. 27 As for example on the 8 th of September when the Nativity of the Theotokos was celebrated: "πάλιν ἐξέρχονται, καὶ ἀσπάζονται τὸν πατριάρχην, καὶ ἀποκινοῦσι μετὰ τῆς οἰκείας λιτῆς, καὶ ἀνέρχονται ἕως τοῦ πορφυροῦ μεγάλου κίονος ...Καὶ δὴ τοῦ πατριάρχου ἀνερχομένου μετὰ τῆς οἰκείας λιτῆς, προεισέρχονται" (De Cerimoniis, I, 1:487-88, 496, Dagron andFlusin, 2020, pp. 48-49, English transl. Moffatt andTall, 2012, pp. 26-33). 28 Janin, 1969, pp. 161-171. 29 Examples include the combined Avar and Persian attack of AD 626, the Arab siege of AD 717/18, and the attacks of first the Rus in AD 860 and then the Bulgars in AD 924. The Typikon mentions that the patriarch moved to the Blachernae quarter without any further details (Typikon II, ed. Mateos, 1963, pp. 52-55). 30 The Forum was the most important station in processions during the tenth century. 31 The Chalke was a gate to the Great Palace that was used in ceremonies. 32 The monastery must have been close to the Blachernae, but there is no other known information about its location and history (Janin, 1969, p. 500). 33 A chapel at Theotokos Blachernae that hosted the robe of the Theotokos. 34 A service part of the daily cycle of celebrations that took place at dawn. 35 For information regarding these churches see Janin, 1969, pp. 489-490 and 448-449. 36 For dating this earthquake see Akentiev, 2009, p. 135. 37 Adjust to Hagia Sophia (Janin, 1969, p. 398). 38 North of the Great Church (Dark and Kostenec, 2019, pp. 90-92). 39 The second of the two most important churches is dedicated to the Theotokos. It stood close to Hagia Sophia at the Chalkoprateia quarter and hosted the girdle of the Theotokos. Amidst extensive bibliography see Janin, 1969, pp. 237-242;Shoemaker, 2008;Krausmüller, 2011. 40 The church was at the Acropolis (Janin, 1969, pp. 399-400). For the Orphanage of Constantinople see Miller, 2003, especially pp. 209-246. 41 Close to the Holy Apostles (Janin, 1969, pp. 389-390). 42 Janin, 1969, pp. 223-228. 43 The church was at northeast of the gate of Charisios (Janin, 1969, p. 223). 44 Janin, 1964, pp. 378-379. 45 Janin, 1969 The church was at northeast of the gate of Charisios (Janin, 1969, p. 223). 47 This is also noted in the De Ceremoniis (II, 9, eds. Dagron andFlussin, 2020, pp. 61-63, English transl. Moffatt andTall, 2012, pp. 541-544). 48 The church has been proposed to be the modern Gul Camii, something that has not been widely accepted (Marinis, 2014, pp. 154-158). The position of the Gul Camii is within the route connecting Chalkoprateia and the Blachernae that followed the northern coastal road (parathalassia odos) (Manolopoulou, 2016, pp. 116-117). 49 Different routes are also given during the celebrations for Monday after Pentecost, and Wednesday after All Saints. 50 The hospital was northeast of the Hagia Eirene (Janin, 1964, pp. 348-349). 51 The quarter was at the north of the Mese between the Forum and the Million (Janin, 1969, pp. 152-153). 52 Akentiev notes that this procession is the one that Dresden refers to and provides more details (Akentiev, 2009, p. 161). 53 Special instructions are provided by all three sources but the procession from the Forty Martyrs to the Chalkoprateia is new (Akentiev, 2009, pp. 120-121). 54 Hagia Eirene, the church dedicated to the Holy Wisdom, today in the Topkapi Palace (Janin, 1969, pp. 103-106). 55 The procession prescribed in the Typikon for Palm Sunday also starts from the Forty Martyrs at the Bronze Tetrapylon and terminates at the Great Church but there is a station at the Forum (Typikon II, ed. Mateos 1963, pp. 64-67). It should be noted though that since the station at the Forum is also omitted from Hagios Stauros 40 (see Berger, 1987, p. 297) which it perhaps shed some light on when this change was established. 56 The hospitals of Sampson and Euboulos that they were probably next to each other and between the Hagia Eirene and the Great Church (Wolford, 2019, p. 203). 57 Janin, 1964, p. 511. 58 For a discussion on the patriarch and the emperor preceding the Gospel during ritual see Macrides, 2018. 59 There is an extensive bibliography relating to the idea that Constantinople was perceived to be under the protection of the Theotokos: see for example Baynes, 1949;Cameron, 1978;Limberis, 1994;Mango, 2000;Pentcheva, 2002.