|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"If contemplation with the intellect had been sufficient, it would have sufficed for the Word to come among us intellectually only" (Theodore Studite) ![]() Christ Acheiropoietos: Icon of Christ "not made by the hand of man" Moscow School, 12th c. Top of Page ![]() St. John the Forerunner Cretan School, 14th c. Top of Page ![]() Descent from the Cross Cyprus, 14th c. Top of Page ![]() The Good Shepherd Catacombs of Rome 3rd c. Top of Page ![]() The Mother of God Enthroned Patmos Monastery 15th c. Top of Page ![]() 02704 Virgin and Child Enthroned, ca. 850. Oldest surviving mosaic in Hagia Sophia, Constantinople. Top of Page Top of Page Top of Page Top of Page Top of Page Top of Page |
Byzantine Icons, Frescoes and Mosaics
(Orthodox Byzantine Icons) Click link to read what it takes for an icon to be a byzantine icon Introduction: The Essential Feature of Icons Contents 1. Image of the invisible, presence of the Invisible 2. The first images 3. The Holy Virgin Mary proclaimed Mother of God 4. Iconography and Iconoclasm in Byzantium 5. The triumph of Orthodoxy 6. Conclusion 7. Bibliography We have known icons since at least the 5th or 6th century. Even so, they
seemed to have disappeared in the first half of the 20th century. They did not disappear, however,
but they were suppressed. In the Soviet era in Russia, for example, icon painting was forbidden.
Nonetheless, several icon painters painted or restored icons in secret. Then icons made a comeback.
So one may raise the question 'what is it that makes icons so special' ? What is it that makes
people, monks and others, even risk their lives by continuing to paint icons? Image of the invisible, presence of the Invisible
The icon is an efficient means for knowing God, the Holy Virgin and the Saints. It's
not a work of art that only illustrates the Holy Scriptures. It constitutes a confession of
religious truths. Says St. Paul "Christ is the visible image of the invisible
God" (Col. 1, 15). The first images
It took a long time before we saw the icon appear the way we know it today through its
ancient representations. Its development was influenced by complex historical contexts and many
cultural dependencies. It was also influenced by the war of the holy images during which the fury
of the iconoclasts destroyed innumerable
highly venerated icons. The Holy Virgin Mary proclaimed Mother of God
In the beginning of the 4th century iconography starts to develop in an important way.
Among the numerous reasons for this, is the coming to power of
Emperor Constantin, in the 4th century,
and his spectacular conversion. Christianity is made the State religion in 380, and the Church
enters an era of peace. It is then that an esthetic creation gets underway that will determine art
for the next centuries. The Third Ecumenical Councel (1), (2) is held in Ephesus
in 431 and proclaims Mary : Mother of God. One starts to represent
the Mother of God sitting solemnly on the trone with the divine Child sitting on her lap : the
Mother of God Kyriotissa (see icon to the left). Also see the mosaic of the Virgin and Child
Enthroned (one screen down). Dating back to about the year 850, it reportedly is the oldest
surviving mosaic in the Hagia Sophia, Constantinople, Turkey. Iconography and Iconoclasm in Byzantium
However, a major conflict breaks out between partisans and enemies of icons, between
defenders of Orthodoxy and heretics, between iconodules (icon lovers) and iconoclasts (image
breakers) : the Iconoclasm* from 730 to 843. It's a doctrinal war.
A first period (730 to 780) starts in 730 when Leon the Isaurian (726-741) decretes the prohibition
of the icon cult which he classifies as idolatry. But it is not just a religious quarrel; it is the
close of an era, the coming together of all sorts of tendencies, religious, political and
economical that put into question all values in each and every domain. It is a complex phenomena.
Nevertheless, dogmatic question points form the root of the problem. Following a period of
reinstatement of the holy images (780-813), a new iconoclastic period (813-842) breaks out which
ends in 842. The triumph of Orthodoxy
A new Synod opens in 843 and Orthodoxy triumphantly wins out with the exaltation of
icons in all churches : The indescribable Word of the Father becomes
describable when it is incarnated in You, Mother of God. The iconoclasm reveals a crisis
with enormous consequences. The dispute concerning the holy images is fundamental because it is
intimately linked to the very essence of christianity, to the Incarnation. Conclusion
Once one has examined the cult of icons, its long history and the rules governing the
technique of painting (writing) icons, it will be understood that: Bibliography
DONADEO Maria, Icônes de la Mère de Dieu, Paris, 1987 Copyright © 2002-2006 PW de Ruyter. Updated : 18 May 2006 |
Top of Page
Top of Page Top of Page Top of Page |
Return About Ancient, Medieval and Contemporary Byzantine Icons hand-painted in
the Traditional Eastern Orthodox style 'Icon' is derived from the Greek word 'eikon' meaning 'image'. 'Image' as it is used here is more than a picture. Here is a link to a reference where Bishop Nicholas explains 'image' very well, and with it he explains the deeper meaning of the icon. 'Icon' in the context of the Orthodox Church is a painting of Christ, of the Theotokos (the God Bearer or Mother of God), of the Great Feasts of the Orthodox Church, of Angels and Saints, and of scenes in the life of Jesus and Mary. 'Byzantine icons' refers to Ancient, Medieval and Contemporary icons hand-painted in the Traditional Eastern Orthodox style of the 10th-15th centuries. This 'style' was actually laid down in specific rules that were established in that period following the Orthodox victory over the iconoclasts (a), (b), (c) in the year 843. These rules were formalized in order to make sure that an icon was a byzantine icon only when it had been painted in accordance with these rules. When making mention of Ancient icons, Medieval icons, or Contemporary icons, one simply is more specific about when the icon was written or painted (that is, according to the Traditional Eastern Orthodox style). One is naturally inclined to ask : "What is the importance of sticking to these rules?" and "Aren't artists people that are not particularly fond of rules?" and "What is involved in the Traditional Style?" Part of the answer to those questions is that an icon painter ought to be an iconographer. "What then is an Iconographer?" The short answer to that question is that an iconographer is both a painter and a theologian. Just as the Evangelist wrote the Gospel with divine inspiration and assistance, with his hands merely being instruments to put down the words on paper, so is it that the Iconographer in his spritual endeavor to write icons asks for divine intervention, and allows that divine intervention to move his hands to get the paint onto the wood in a manner that is in accordance with God's will. Writing an icon, presupposes, on the part of the Iconographer, not only a prayerful attitude, but also a lifestyle of prayer, meditation and fasting. Says internationally acclaimed Master Iconographer Xenia Pokrovsky "A real iconographer is a theologian, a person having a deep spiritual life, knowledgeable about Scriptures, Christian dogmatics, liturgy, hagiography, etc.". (Izograph Studio, Frequently Asked Questions, 2nd last paragraph.) If you have made it to here, you will be able to appreciate Paul Azkoul's article The Icon: A Manifestation of Theology. Here is a direct link to the article http://www.traditionaliconography.com/theology.asp. The next 2 articles highlight the painstaking physical details an iconographer needs to pay attention to if he is to work in the traditional style. - Creating fine Icons http://www.roca.org/Vladimir/creating.htm (Vladimir Baranov) - Traditional Icons http://angelamanno.com/icon/traditional.html (Angela Manno) I think that an icon painting artist is going "beyond mere icon painting" when he is writing an icon while thereby taking into account the previously mentioned notions of Paul Azkoul, Xenia Pokrovsky and Nick Papas. If indeed we can now set an iconographer apart from an icon painter, and we have a notion of how an icon is different from a painting, then a large part of what I hoped to convey in these lines has been accomplished. Return Top of Page Return to Welcome Page |