“Hands off That Sacred Image!

The Vladimir Icon and Its Power

Maria Sergeevna Bakatkina

Department of Slavic Languages and Literature

University of Virginia

April 2017
 2

Content

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………. 3

Chapter 1. The Vladimir Icon and Its Restorations …………………….………...…… 8

Chapter 2. A Journey of a Single Image through the History of Russia ...…………… 26

Chapter 3. The Reflection of the Vladimir Icon in Visual Arts ....………………….…47

Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………….… 75

List of Images ……………………………………………………………….………... 76

Bibliography ……………………………………………………………….…………. 78
 3

«Страшная история России вся прошла перед Твоим Лицом»

- М. Волошин1

On December 4th, 1998, a Russian avant-garde artist, Avdei Ter-Ogan’ian, made a

performance called The Young Atheist (“Юный безбожник”) as a part of the exhibition

at Moscow Manege. His performance included three icons, the Vladimir icon, Spas

Nerukotvornyi, and Pantocrator (Spas Vsederzhatel’), and a poster with the following

words:

Dear connoisseurs of contemporary art, here you can get a wonderful source for

blasphemy. Spas Nerukotvornyi - 200 rubles; the Vladimir icon - 150 rubles; Spas

Vsederzhatel’- 120 rubles. The gallery offers you the following services:

Desecration of the icon purchased by young infidels - 50 rubles; You can

desecrate the icon personally under the guidance of young atheists - 20 rubles;

You can get advice for desecrating icons at home - 10 rubles.2

Nobody volunteered, and the artist began to cut the icons with an axe (fig. 1). After the

performance the criminal case was initiated against the artist on charges of inciting

religious hatred.3 To avoid punishment Ter-Ogan’ian fled to the Czech Republic, and in

2010 the case was closed due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.

This particular event demonstrates that iconography plays a significant role in

Russia today. It is interesting that for his art project Ter-Ogan’ian chose the Vladimir

icon, a religious piece of art of the twelfth century. How and why did this medieval

Russian icon find its way in today’s art world? Why does the icon continue to be viewed

1 М. Волошин, “Стихотворения. Статьи. Воспоминания современников” вступ. ст. З. Д. Давыдова,
В. П. Купченко. (М.: Правда, 1991) 257.
2 Запрещенное искусство: «1998. Юный безбожник. Тер –Оганьян» Web. http://artprotest.org/cgi-
bin/news.pl?id=295 Accessed on April 13, 2017.
3 Запрещенное искусство: «1998. Юный безбожник. Тер –Оганьян» Web.
 4

as sacred and holy image that cannot be used in the contemporary art like Ter-Ogan’ian’s

project? Through the analysis of history and visual images of the Vladimir icon I show

how this icon became an object of immense political, religious, and cultural significance

that has been used to influence people for centuries. I attempt to answer following

questions: what are the factors and reasons that made this icon special? Why and how did

this particular icon gain its power and popularity that continues to impact greatly Russian

life even today? Why would the contemporary Russian artists continue to use the

Vladimir icon in their works?

The first chapter of this work focuses on the icon’s symbolism, usage of colors,

and meaning. The Vladimir icon has been with the Russian people for hundreds of years,

so we cannot imagine what kind of damage the icon had to endure. I examine every

restoration that was performed during the last eight centuries that helped to preserve and

save one of the most important icons of Russia.

The second chapter is devoted to the icon’s history. I trace its path from

Constantinople to Moscow and its existence in Russia, from its arrival in Kiev up until

today by analyzing primary sources. I focus on its life during the Soviet regime in which

it was not only miraculously spared, but also restored and preserved. In addition, I show

how for centuries the icon continued to be the most important symbol of Russian

nationhood and Orthodoxy.

The last chapter examines the icon’s impact on the Russian art world. Again I

scan the whole range of Russian history showing the impact that the Vladimir icon

produced on art from the medieval to the contemporary period. I show how artists use

this holy image in their works, first recreating or coping it, later adding it to their historic
 5

and epic scenes, and then simply using it as part of their art works like the artists of the

Sots art movement.

The presentation of this famous icon in the works of Russian writers is largely

omitted from my thesis for the following reasons. First, the whole literary Russian

medieval period from the twelfth to eighteenth century was devoted solely to Orthodoxy

and the Russian ruling class, so the icon was featured in the writings from this period

frequently, and I mentioned some of these works in my second chapter. Second, even in

the nineteenth century, the iconography continues to play a significant role in literature.

For example, only in Pushkin’s works I found over one hundred accounts of icons and

red corners. There are several works, in which Pushkin mentions the Vladimir icon, the

most noteworthy of these being his play Boris Godunov, where the author tries to

reconstruct the atmosphere of medieval life in Moscow.

We expect that Russian literature of the early twentieth century should be less

demonstrably influenced by iconography; however, symbolists and modernists have a

tremendous number of works devoted to iconography of Mother of God, where the icon

of Vladimir takes the center stage. Surprisingly, even during the Soviet period we can

find depictions of the icon in literature. For example in his book, The White Guard,

Bulgakov includes the Vladimir icon in the scene when Elena Turbina prays to the icon

in order to save her brother’s life.4 Numerous literary representations testify to the icon’s

powerful symbolism. The focus of this thesis, however, is the Vladimir icon’s origins and

its visual renditions throughout history.

4 Михаил Булгаков,“Белая гвардия” (Москва: Издательство “Наш Дом - L’Age d’Homme,” 1998)
216.
 6

Most of my primary sources are old Russian texts that were composed between

the eleventh and eighteenth centuries. These materials can hardly be called reliable

documents or historical facts, and their fundamental unreliability presents a challenge to

scholars. Every chronicle is a collection of materials that were written, edited, shorten,

lengthened, and revised. The churchmen and scribes wrote the oldest Russian Chronicles

in the monasteries and the only perspective that they promote is a Christian point of view.

Later, the texts were composed at the princely courts and their goal was to endorse a

certain power or ideology of the current ruler. Some of them contained factual historical

entries, while others can be viewed as fictional monuments of literature.

All of them comprise different legends and myths that cannot be verified as

truthful thus there are problems with the veracity of sources. However, the Chronicles are

the only survived medieval Russian texts that have any early historical accounts of the

Vladimir icon. Therefore, I resort to medieval chronicles with an understanding that the

line between fact and fiction is often blurred. My focus remains of the representation of

the Vladimir icon in the written and pictorial texts; without claiming the accuracy of

history that these sources offer, I prioritize the stories that they tell and their influence on

the reading audiences throughout centuries.

In addition, the biggest part of my research is based on works written by well-

respected authorities of the iconography in Russia, Aleksandr Anisimov and Igor’

Grabar’, who devoted their lives to the restoration and preservation of Russian medieval

art, including the Vladimir icon. However, I also analyze a broadcast of Rossiia-Kul’tura;

it is a Russian television network that specializes in programs on Russian history,

science, music, literature, and art. While not a scholarly sources per se, this program
 7

offers a valuable perspective on the matter as, on the one hand, a popular forum,

accessible to the broad public, and on the other, a broadcast prepared by the specialists of

the Tret’iakov Gallery, the museum which presently houses the Vladimir icon.

Fig. 1. A. Ter-Ogan’ian. The Young Atheist (“Юный безбожник”), 1998. Photo.

 8

Chapter 1

The Vladimir Icon and Its Restorations

What is an icon? It seems that “icon” is an overused word in today’s life. We tend

to think about icons on our cellphones that we see on our displays; the word evokes

anything from the charismatic film star, Ben Affleck, to the artistic masterpiece of

Leonardo da Vinci, Mona Lisa. The word itself comes from the Greek eikon, which

means a ‘likeness, image or picture.’5 For art critics and specialists icons stand for just a

piece of art that is a tempera painting on wood. However, in the Christian world, an icon

is “a representation of some sacred personage, in painting, bas-relief, or mosaic, itself

regarded as sacred, and honored with a relative worship or adoration.”6 Believers saw

icons as “a door opening onto the Heavenly Kingdom – through the icon the Christian

could enter into contact with the spiritual world where his faith and acts were judged on

the basis of the laws of God.”7

In this work, I define and refer to icons as paintings on wood panels made for

rituals and decoration of the Russian Orthodox Church and for private prayers at home.

This means that the icon is a form of art which both promotes and supports Christian faith

in both medieval Russia and today, and which communicates the ways in which believers

may understand and view their world. Today, there are thousands of icons; however, only

a few can be truly considered to be part of the foundation of iconography that greatly

influence every sphere of Russian life. One of them, the Theotokos of Vladimir or Our

Lady of Vladimir (Владимирская Икона Божией Матери), which hereafter I will refer

5 Robert Cormack, Icons (London: The British Museum Press, 2014) 1.
6 Century Association and Boris Mestchersky. Russian Icons: Loan Exhibition, December 4 to January 4,
1941 (New York, 1940) 7
7 Vladimir Ivanov, Russian Icons (New York: Rezzolli, 1988) 12.
 9

to as the Vladimir icon, is one of the oldest existing icons in Russia, and is the focus of

my thesis (fig. 2).

In this chapter I focus on symbolism of the Vladimir icon, its description, and

physical changes that occurred during eight centuries of the icon’s life. Because of the

long and devastating history of Russia, the icon endured several restorations. The main

questions are, what were the usage and functions of the icon originally? What kind of

modifications had to be done over several centuries in order to save it? In what condition

is the icon today?

I will begin with a simple description of the icon, the meanings of its colors, and

its symbolism. The original size of the icon was 78 x 55 cm; later, additional parts were

added, expanding the size to 106 x 69 cm. The icon has two sides: on the front side we

see the Mother of God with the child (fig. 2) and on the back is depicted the Hetoimasia8

and instruments of Christ’s Passion (fig. 3). Today the icon can be viewed in the Hall

Museum Church of St Nicholas in Moscow.

The Vladimir icon is generally referred to as an “Icon of Loving Tenderness,” or

Umilenie. Loving Tenderness icons are chiefly distinguished by the close, cheek-to-cheek

embrace of the mother and son. The icon reminds us of the love that connects Mary and

Jesus. We interpret her sorrow as she already sees her son bearing the cross. Her eyes

have an inward, contemplative quality, “the Virgin’s eyes are not curious, investigating

or even understanding, but eyes which reveal to us our true selves.”9 The child rests on

8 The Hetoimasia (Gr. “preparation”), or Throne of Preparation, is one of the most widespread images in
iconography, particularly in Orthodox Christianity. The empty throne is a pre-Christian symbol of invisible
or absent authority.
9 Henri Nouwen, Behold the Beauty the Beauty of the Lord: Praying with Icons (Norte Dame, IN: Ave
Maria Press, 1987) 36.
 10

her arms and gently embraces her. One of Mary’s hands holds Jesus, while the other

draws the viewer’s attention to him.

The child looks at his mother attentively. The distinguishing detail of this icon is

Christ’s bare feet, a powerful symbol of his physical reality: “he walked among us,

leaving his footprints on the earth.”10 There is an additional detail of love, the arm of

Christ around Mary’s neck. His garment is gold, the color of the kingdom of God, and it

is the main indication of the real identity of Jesus. On Mary’s dress we see three golden

stars (one is hidden behind Christ’s body) that indicate her identity: “her virginity before,

during and after her son’s birth.”11

The face of Mother Mary is painted with a greenish-olive sankir (a mixture of

ocher and soot) and transparent layers of bright ocher; the colorful layers are fused, and

tonal transitions cannot be discerned. On the illuminated parts we can see smears of

white, while the shadows and contours are red and brown. The sophisticated features of

the face merge together, displaying the Greek type of image together with the timeless

spiritual ideal of the Orthodox culture. All of this expresses the language of Byzantine

artistic tradition of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The outlines of a thin, aquiline

nose transfer into the straight and long eyebrows. On the bridge of the nose, a shadow

forms a sorrowful wrinkle under the eyebrows. The dark, almond-shaped eyes are

directed towards the viewer. Tightly closed lips are red. The same color strokes mark the

corners of Mary’s eyes.

The face of the Divine Child is made in a similar technique, but sankir here is

lighter. A large part of the hand that is placed on the neck of the Mother is modeled in the

10 Jim Forest, Praying With Icons Rev. expanded ed. (Orbis Books, 2008) 78
11 Ibid., 80
 11

same way as well. Initially the head of mother was covered with the cloak, and the

outline of the hair of the baby was smaller in size. Judging from the fragments of Christ’s

clothes, they were painted with dark ocher and gold; on the outstretched right hand, the

light transparent sleeve of shirt is visible.12

On the back side we see the throne covered with a red cloth with dark borders and

gold ornaments. On the throne there is a closed Gospel, four nails of the Crucifixion and

a crown of thorns. On the Gospel sits a white dove with a halo, symbolizing the Holy

Spirit. Behind the altar are an Orthodox cross, a spear, and a cane with a sponge on its

side. At first the researchers noted the semantic relationship between the sorrowful image

of the Virgin on the front side and the image of the throne on the back of the icon and

believed that it was a common depiction in the iconography of Mother of God.13

The color of the back side is light ocher with brown stains and with red letters IС

ХС НИ КА that means “Jesus Christ Conquers.” The IC and XC are the first and last

letters in the Greek words for Jesus and Christ, respectively. НИ КА is connected to the

word for victory, which we know from the Greek “Nike.”

A historian and restorer of old Russian paintings and a chief authority on the icon,

Aleksandr Anisimov, in his book The Vladimir Icon of Mother of God, claims that this

image was painted between the late fourteenth century and the beginning of the fifteenth

century.14 The icon painter is unknown, however, Anisimov writes that it is possible that

Andrei Rublev did the first restoration of the back side.15 For a long time iconographers

12 A. Anisimov, The Vladimir Icon of Mother of God (Prague: Seminarium Kondakovianum, 1928) 38.
13 Этингоф, 139.
14 Anisimov, 38.
15 Ibid., 39.
 12

and specialists continued to believe that the Hetoimasia and instruments of Christ’s

Passion was the painting on the back of the icon that dated back to the fourteenth century.

Fig. 2. Detail, Unknown artist, Our Lady of Vladimir, first third of the 12th century, tempera on
wood. Hall Museum Church of St Nicholas, Moscow.
 13

Fig. 3. The Hetoimasia and instruments of Christ’s Passion. The back side of the icon, Our Lady
of Vladimir, 14th century, tempera on wood. Hall Museum Church of St Nicholas, Moscow.

However, in 2014, under the strictest secrecy, the restorer of the Vladimir icon, Dmitrii

Sukhoverkov, explored the icon using radiography. This allowed him to look inside and,

more importantly, expand the images on the front and back side of the icon. It was

thought that the method would detect traces of an earlier painting with the image of the

Throne and instruments of Passion of Christ. However, an X-ray showed something quite

different. On the reverse side were found traces of nails, to which an oklad would have
 14

been affixed in ancient times. The location of the traces shows the precise contours of a

saint’s face (fig. 4).16

17
Fig. 4. Traces of nails on the back side of the icon. Web: TVKultura. 13.03.2014.

Now researchers have to answer a more difficult question - whose face is hidden

under the layers of paint in the Vladimir Icon? “It seems that this is the image of an

omophorion, it is the details of clothes of saints or bishops. And on this basis we have

seen some items, and we have made a quite reasonable assumption that it is a picture of

the saint,” says Sukhoverkov in an interview.18 There are several versions as to who it

could be, but the main one is Nikolas the Wonderworker. Scientists say that it is still just

an assumption. Studies have yielded unexpected results, which have yet to be

comprehended.19 Thus, the image of the Hetoimasia and instruments of Christ’s Passion

16 “Что скрывает обратная сторона иконы Владимирской Божьей Матери?” TVKultura. 13.03.2014
http://tvkultura.ru/article/show/article_id/109585/ Accessed February 5, 2017.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
 15

on the back side of the icon were painted over another, much older image. The reasons

why the Church did allow it are still unclear.

Most of the time the back sides of the icons could be seen only during the

religious processions. The Vladimir icon was also originally created with the intent that it

could be carried outside of the Cathedral during different events: Easter processions, wars

and battles, and special events that required the blessings of the Mother of God.20 The

practice of taking icons of Mother of God out of churches also was adopted from

Byzantium.21 It usually was done every week on Fridays, during religious celebrations, or

during any siege of the Byzantine cities.22 In order to take the icon out, each of them

would be brought out on special handles. Perhaps, in Kiev and Vladimir the icon had a

handle in the form of a three-bladed fork, which was later removed with expansion of the

size of the icon for а new oklad (fig. 5).

Fig. 5. The miniature, Blagodarstvennoe molenie pered ikonoi Vladimirskoi. (Благодарственное

моление перед Владимирской иконой после победы над булгарами). XV century. The Radziwiłł Codex
(p. 205).

20 “икона выносная”
21 Этингоф, 141.
22 Ibid., 141.
 16

The first information about the precious oklad of the icon, which was made by

Prince Andrei Bogoliubskii’s order, dates back to 1155: “[...] И вковал в икону более

тридцати гривен золота, не считая серебра, драгоценных камней и жемчуга, и,

украсив ее, поставил ее в своей церкви во Владимире.”23 It is likely that the icon’s

size was expanded for this massive oklad.24 This rich adornment of the icon reflected the

value that it had in the Vladimir principality, where it became the main shrine of the new

Cathedral of the Assumption in Vladimir. The icon was probably placed in a special icon

case (a kiot) and was taken out during the processions.25 It demonstrates the importance

of the icon and its popularity.

Every part of the oklad was stored separately from the icon in the sacristy of the

cathedral or the prince’s treasury. In 1237 the Tatars took away this precious piece of the

icon and it was never recovered. New oklad and a renovation of the icon were made by

the order of Prince Iaroslav Vsevolodovich. After the miraculous salvation of Moscow, in

1395, it was newly decorated (with the blessing of Metropolitan Kiprian the old oklad

was updated and supplemented). After that, the icon was brought to Moscow, where

Metropolitan Fotii commissioned the production of a new gold oklad (fig. 6).26 On the

sides of the oklad were engraved twelve images of feasts in keeled frame, through which

the images are perceived as independent icons. Also, in addition to the oklad, in 1657 a

23 ПСЛР T. 2. 78.
24
И. А. Стерлигова, “Драгоценный убор древнерус. икон XI–XIV вв.” (Москва, 2000) 224–225
25 Ibid,224.
26 К. И. Невоструев, “Монограмма Всероссийского митр. Фотия на окладе Владимирской
чудотворной иконы Пресв. Богородицы в Моск. Успенском соборе” // Сб. на 1866 г., изд. об-м
древнерус. искусства при моск. Публичном музее. М., 1866) 177–181
 17

special riza was made for the Vladimir icon (Fig. 7). Now both the oklad and the riza are

currently stored in the Armory of the Kremlin.

Fig. 6. Oklad of the Vladimir Icon, XV century, The Museum of Moscow Kremlin.

Fig. 7. Riza of the Vladimir Icon, 1657, The Museum of Moscow Kremlin
 18

Renovation (Ponovlenie) and Restoration of the Icon

When the Byzantine and ancient Russian icon painters were going to write an

icon, they took a cypress or lime board and put chalky soil, called gesso, on it. First, the

gesso was ground onto the surface. Sometimes in special cases the icon painters covered

it with gold, and then wrote on it with tempera (a paint diluted with egg yolk). They

applied fixers on top of the paint layer: boiled linseed oil followed by varnish to protect

the painting. After a hundred years, when the protective layer had been darkened by time

and dirt, the icon painters updated the icon - added tempera right on top of the previous

image, at the same time trying to maintain the old contours, which could only be guessed

under age-old dirt. Each new layer was again coated with varnish. This process was

repeated over and over for many centuries.

Anisimov explains: “Each [old Russian icon] is not just one but multiple images,

one atop the other.”27 We should not forget that for the icon of Vladimir this layering was

produced for eight centuries. The icon became a cake with several layers, full of

mysteries. What lay under the next layer? How could the historians determine what was

the most valuable layer?

In his book, The Vladimir Icon of Mother of God, Anisimov writes that the

Vladimir icon can no longer be called an art piece that was created by one master, instead

“она [икона] является случайнымъ совмъщенiемъ разновременныхъ добавленiй къ

уцълъвшимъ по-счастью фрагментамъ древняго оригинала и добавленiй къ этимъ

добавленiямъ.”28

27
Jefferson J A Gatrall and Douglas M Greenfield, Alter Icons: The Russian Icon and Modernity
(Pennsylvania State University Press: University Park, Pennsylvania, 2010) 90.
28 Anisimov, 26.
 19

According to the accounts of the last major restoration work, the Vladimir icon

was restored four times before 1919. First, in the first half of the thirteenth century, after

the destruction of Batu, Anisimov notices that during one of the Tatars’ raids, the icon

was brutally stripped of its first oklad, which heavily damaged the icon’s wooden base.29

Iaroslav II of Vladimir ordered the first renovation (or ponovlenie) of the miraculous

icon: “И оттолъ ciй чудотворный Богородичинъ образъ подобно прежнему своего

благолепiя достойное украшенiе прiемлетъ».30 Therefore, Anisimov assumes that the

icon was restored and decorated again and put in its rightful place in the Dormition

Cathedral of Vladimir.31

Second, at the beginning of the fifteenth century, during the work on the

decoration of the Moscow Cathedral of the Assumption, the icon’s next restoration

occurred.32 By the beginning of the fifteenth century (about 1411), the following parts

were subjected to the restoration: the part of the Virgin Mary and Christ’s clothes on the

bottom left, the baby’s hand and shoulder, his feet, his hair and neck, Mary’s right hand,

her ear, some dark green cap and a gold fringe on the cloak. The deep brown tone of the

cloak, combined with the greenish ocher color of baby’s himation33, decorated with gold,

forms a characteristic range of warm colors. The artist, who exercised the restoration of

the icon, was likely Andrei Rublev.34

29 Anisimov, 17
30 ПСРЛ т. 21, 541.
31 Ibid. 17
32 Ibid. 19
33 Himation - a garment consisting of a rectangular piece of cloth thrown over the left shoulder and
wrapped about the body. (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/himation).
34 A comparison of colors of the Vladimir icon related to the beginning of the XV century, with its copy
made by Andrei Rublev in 1408 brings to this conclusion. И. Грабарь, «Андрей Рублев». «Вопросы
реставрации», 1, 1926, 42-43.
 20

The third significant renovation of the Vladimir icon is associated with the

paintings of the Moscow Cathedral of the Assumption, executed in 1514. Vasilii III of

Russia ordered the ponovlenie. At that time, icon painters repainted the largest part of

Mary’s clothes, her left hand, the majority of Christ’s clothes, and wrist of his right hand.

Even a special precious icon case was made for the icon. Anisimov states that one of the

reasons of this restoration was because the icon “возбуждала опасенiе за свое

дальнъйшее существованiе.” 35 He considers this updating to be one of the most

important and serious.

It is important to mention some of the minor repairs that were made in 1566 and

in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The faces of Mother of God and the son,

unlike other parts of icons, were repainted without imposing a new layer of gesso36

directly on top of the old varnish, which contributed to their preservation.

Finally, in the 1890s, the Cathedral of Annunciation in Moscow was under

significant reconstruction for the coronation of Nikolas II, and the Vladimir icon was

freed from Fotii’s oklad and given to the famous icon painters and restorers, Osip

Chirikov and Mikhail Dikarev, for restoration. The restorers found out that the icon was

extremely dark, “Въ настоящее время ее невозможно и разсмотръть хорошенько.”37

However, Chirikov and Dikarev did not add anything new, or even try to restore the

original image; instead, their main achievement was a temporary preservation of the icon

35 Anisimov, 22.
36 Gesso (левкас) - in the iconography it is a name of soil, which is a chalk, stirred with the animal or fish
glue with the addition of linseed oil.
37 Anisimov, 23.
 21

from further destruction. The icon was placed back in the Cathedral of Annunciation in

Moscow.38

Later, with the establishment of the Soviet regime, the policy toward iconography

and religion changed significantly. The Soviet state had a good reason to fear the power

of icons, as it enforced a policy of atheism. The conservation of icons became a powerful

tool in the fight against the Church and religion, and the Soviet restorers played a central

role in transforming the icon from an object of veneration into secular work of art. After

Chirikov and Dikarev’s restoration and until 1919 the icon was not touched. Then the

Russian commission of the disclosure of ancient Russian art monuments began the last

major restoration of the icon, which returned to the icon its original appearance.39

The last restoration began when on December 14th, 1918, a group of twelve

people came into the Moscow Kremlin. They were revolutionaries, priests, art specialists,

and financiers, who came to examine and evaluate the Vladimir icon.40 However, the

most valuable piece was the Vladimir icon. Aleksandr Anisimov, Igor’ Grabar, and

Grigorii Chirikov were Russian major art historians and artists who were among the

twelve members of this group. After removing the cover, specialists discovered a nearly

unintelligible image on a panel ravaged by mold and wood rot. When they saw the icon

they recorded their first impressions:

Икона покрыта густым слоем потемневшей, вскипевшей олифы,

на которой появились грибообразные наросты и вспученности, начавшие

сдирать живопись и вызывать осыпь краски. На лике Богоматери по щеке

38 Anisimov, 23.
39 G.I. Vzdornov, “Komissiia po sokhraneniiu i raskrytiiu pamiatnikov drevnei zhivopisi v Rossii 1918 -
1924” (Sovetskoe iskusstvoznanie, no. 2, 1980) 306.
40 Ibid. 306
 22

в вертикальном направлении легко заметно вздутие. По левой стороне

доски имеются трещины, когда-то заделанные… Фон весь покрыт

мелкими выпадами от гвоздей.41

The creation of the Commission for the Conservation of Monuments and disclosure of

ancient painting in June 1918 coincided with the beginning of the Civil War. The very

existence of such commission in a country that was torn by strife and hatred was a

miracle, and the work of art historians and restorers was a scientific and human feat. The

Bolsheviks saw it as an instrument of attack on the Church, and the Church saw it as

means of salvation from the religious sites of revolutionary terror and vandalism.

On December 20, 1918, Chirikov started disclosing the icon. He began with the

head of the Child, and passed several layers before he was able to find out that the part of

the cheek was fully intact. The fact that in spite of eight centuries of life, the most

valuable part of the icon, the face of Christ, survived.42 Later, it turned out that not only

did the face of the Christ Child survive, but the face of the Virgin Mary did as well, also

written by the hand of the Constantinople icon painter.

In his work, Anisimov concludes that the painted surface of the icon retained from

its ancient original painting very small pieces, but those pieces are the most significant

ones. We see today from the painting of the Byzantine painter the faces of the Mother

and the son, the biggest part of his left hand, a part of his right hand, a big part of gold

background above Mary’s head, and a fraction of the inscription, the letters ΜΡ ΘΥ,

which means Mother of God (fig. 8).43 The last restoration was not only expressed in

41 E. Guseva, Bogomater’ Vladimirskaia: Sbornik materialov (Moskva: Avangard, 1995) 30.
42 Anisimov, 26.
43 Ibid. 28.
 23

updating of the painting but also in filling of the missing parts of the icon with the new

gesso.

In March 1919, Chirikov finished, and the Vladimir icon appeared for the first

time in the form that is now familiar worldwide. After it, Anismov said following words:

Перед лицом таких икон, как Владимирская, легче всего понять,

почему в истории христианства почитание Богоматери играет такую

исключительную роль. […] Человечество в образе Матери, скорбящей за

распятого Сына, видело наиболее полное воплощение той стихии духа,

которая зовётся любовью и только любовью и которая не знает ни закона

справедливости, ни закона возмездия — никаких законов, кроме закона

жалости и сострадания.44

Shortly after finishing the restoration of the Vladimir icon, in summer 1919,

Anisimov was arrested for the first time due his brief affiliation with the Constitutional

Democrats (Kadets) in 1917.45 On October 6, 1930 he was arrested for the last time

because of his work and research on the Vladimir icon that had been published in Prague.

In August, 1937, at the height of the Great Terror Aleksandr Anisimov was sentenced to

death on the charges that he was a “glaring monarchist, fascist sympathizer, and slanderer

of Soviet literature and art.”46 On August 26, he was shot and killed.47

44 A.Anisimov, “Istoriia Vladimirskoi ikony v svete restavratsii,” Institut archeologii I iskusstvoznaniia.
Trudy sektsii iskusstvoznania 2 (Moskva, 1928) 70
45 Gatrall and Greenfield, 96.
46 Ibid. 104.
47 Ibid. 104.
 24

Fig. 8. Chart of the Icon’s restorations and damages. Anisimov, The Vladimir icon, 1928.

In conclusion, in 1999 the icon was moved from the State Tret’iakov Gallery to

the Church of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi in Moscow (fig. 9). This is the place where the

icon can be visited today. Continuing to be a museum piece, now the main icon of Russia

is available to all believers. The art critics and servants of the Church were able to find a

solution that satisfies both sides. The church is a part of the Tret’iakov Gallery, which

can be accessed directly from the halls of the museum. Especially for the icon a special

icon case was produced, which provides the necessary temperature and humidity even

during worship. Museum staff regularly monitors the conditions of the icon, and at the
 25

same time the temple priest and his parishioners can pray to the miraculous image. From

the shadows of the church, as well as eight hundred years ago, the face of the Virgin

Mary looks at us, bending over her Child. Today the icon can be viewed as both a

museum object and a sacred piece of faith. It is one of a few successful cases when the

museum and the church cooperate productively.

Fig. 9. The Vladimir icon in the Church of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi, Moscow. Photo, 2010.
 26

Chapter 2

A Journey of a Single Image through the History of Russia

In this chapter, I argue that the Vladimir icon was used by leaders to manipulate

their subjects during many periods of Russian history between the eleventh and twenty-

first centuries. I decided to trace the history of this icon through analysis of primary

sources that are the only materials that directly relate to the history of the icon in

medieval Russia. There are several questions that I raise and try to resolve in this chapter:

from where, when, and why was the icon brought to Kievan Rus’? Where and why was

the icon moved through the centuries?

The earliest Russian available sources that we have today are chronicles or

letopisi. In most cases, they consist of annual recordings organized in a chronological

order. The initial Russian annals are the Primary Chronicle, or the Tale of Bygone Years

(“Повесть временных лет”) written by the monk, Nestor. Even though the first entries

begin around 1040, the source provides a historical account that starts in 6360 (852) and

continues through 6885 (1377). Unfortunately, the original text of the Chronicle did not

reach us, but we do have its copy. Today, the most successful translation of the Tale of

Bygone Years is made from the Laurentian Chronicle (“Лаврентьевская летопись,” 14th

century) and the Hypatian Chronicle (“Ипатьевская летопись,” 15th century). The

Laurentian Chronicle includes the oldest extant version of it, and mostly provides

accounts of the events in Northern Russia (Vladimir-Suzdal), the region that is the most

interesting and important for my research because the name of the icon comes from the

city, Vladimir.
 27

The Hypatian Chronicle is the second oldest text; it provides information about

Kievan Rus’ and has several entries that are not mentioned in the Laurentian Chronicle.

The analysis of both sources helps me to see the history of the icon from different

perspectives and allows to conduct a more detailed research. Also, as one of my primary

sources I use in the Book of Royal Degrees (Степенная книга). This document was

commissioned by Makarii, Metropolitan of Moscow, and written in 1560 by Andrei, Ivan

the Terrible’s personal confessor and icon painter. The Book was one of the first attempts

to codify Russian history by illustrating the political and ideological policy in Russia.

Later, Mikhail Lomonosov used it as his main source for his fundamental work on

Russian history, Drevniaia Rossiiskaia Istoriia. In addition, the Book represents a

monumental piece of Russian literature that provides a depiction of the Vladimir icon in

the sixteenth century.

The Tale of Bygone Years gives us the earliest accounts of the icon. The

Laurentian Chronicle tells us that the Vladimir icon was indeed brought in the twelfth

century from Constantinople (in East and South Slavic languages, including in medieval

Russia, Constantinople was referred to as Tsargrad (Царьград)): “Того же лета

(6663/1155) пошел Андрей от отца своего в Суздаль и принес с собой икону святой

Богородицы, которую привезли в одном корабле с Пирогощей из Цесаряграда.48 As

we see from the passage, there are several important points to note. First, the icon is

simply called “иконa святой Богородицы” (an icon of the Mother of God). How do we

know that it is the same icon as the Vladimir icon? We are certain that in the 1150s only

Andrei Bogoliubskii was the Grand prince of Vladimir-Suzdal. It was Bogoliubskii who

48 ПСРЛ т.1. 148.
 28

made Vladimir the new capital. Even the Hypatian Chronicle provides for us almost the

same entry. Therefore, Andrei Bogoliubskii was a son of Yuri (Georgii) Dolgorukii, who,

according to the Book, actually ordered the icon of mother Mary to be delivered from

Constantinople to Kiev (Вышеград) in the same period of time:

Сему убо великому князю Георгию отъ Царяграда принесенъ бысть въ

Киевъ Пирогощeю купьцемъ чюдотворный образъ Пречистыя Богоматери,

иже зватися обыче икона Владимерская, его же написа богогласный Лука,

списатель Христова Евангелия. 49

The Book retells the same story and provides the name of the icon, “Владимерская.”

Thus, these primary sources, the Book and the Laurentian Chronicle, give us evidence

that the two entries describe the same event: the delivery of the Vladimir icon to Kievan

Rus’ from Constantinople. Conclusively, we know that the Laurentian Chronicle was

written much later than the event occurred, thus, we can conclude that the Vladimir icon

was already extremely popular and famous, and the author did not need to specify its

name in his work because the readers knew exactly that “иконa святой Богородицы”

(“an icon of the Mother of God”) referred to the Vladimir icon.

It is important to mention that both primary sources bring up the word

Pirogoshchaia (“Пирогощая”). While the Laurentian Chronicle states that there were

two icons that were brought from Constantinople, “an icon of the Mother of God” and

Pirogoshchaia, the Book clearly refers to a merchant called Pirogoshchaia, who

delivered just one icon to the prince. We see here a discrepancy in the sources. Should we

consider that there were two icons, or just one, the Vladimir icon? If we follow the

49 ПСРЛ т. 21, 429
 29

version of the Book, then “an icon of the Mother of God” and Pirogoshchaia represent

just one icon. In that case we will have a contradiction between primary sources.

The Tale of Igor’s Campaign (“Слово о полку Игореве”), written anonymously

in the early 12th century shortly after Igor’s failed raid in 1185, also mentions the icon

Pirogoshchaia and its location near Kiev: “Вьются голоси чрезъ море до Кіева. Игорь

ъдетъ по Боричеву къ святой Богородицъ Пирогощей.”50 However, the author of the

Laurentian Chronicle clearly states that the Vladimir icon had already been moved to

Vladimir in 1155 and stayed there until Dmitrii Donskoi’s campaign of 1380. The icon

could not possibly be in two places at the same time. Scholars, including Anisimov,

believe that the icon came from Constantinople in the 1130s along with an icon called

Pirogoshchaia.

In addition, a Russian historian, Dmitrii Alshits, in his work “What does

‘Pirogoshcha’ mean in Russian letopisi?” analyzes the primary sources the Laurentian

Chronicle, the Hypatian Chronicle, the Sofia First Chronicle (“Софийская первая

летопись”), and the Novgorod First Chronicle (“Новгородская первая летопись”). He

concludes that on the ship from Constantinople were brought two icons, one was the

Vladimir icon and the other one was a lost icon called Our Lady of the Burning Bush

(“Неополимая Купина”) (fig. 10).51

As I mentioned before, that the Book was written much later, and the author was

probably not familiar with the Icon Our Lady of the Burning Bush or Pirogoshchaia. In

addition, the word “Pirogoshchaia,” is derived from the ancient Greek. “Goshcha” means

50 «Слово о полку Игореве» Web: http://www.vehi.net/oldrussian/opolku.html Accessed on October, 10,
2016.
51 Д.Н. Альшиц, “Что означает “Пирогощая” русских летописей и Слова о полку Игореве.” В кн.:
Исследования по отеч. источниковедению. М. — Л., 1964. 482.
 30

a guest or merchant, and “pira” means wheat or flour.52 That is why the author of the

Book combines two icons into one and uses the name for a merchant rather than for an

icon. That gives us an idea that the icon Pirogoshchaia was not popular by the sixteenth

century, or the writer did not have any knowledge about it. Alshits proves that the

discrepancy could be a result of a loss of the icon, a change of its name, or simply the

distortion of the information by the neglect of a scribe. Thus, in this work I consider that

there were two completely different icons.

Second, even though the Chronicles do not give us an exact date of the delivery of

the icon to Kiev, we can assume it happened between 1130 and 1155 because according

to the Laurentian Chronicle, the construction of the church Pirogoshchaia began in 1131:

“Въ то же лъто заложи церковь Мстиславъ святыя Богородица Пирогощюю.”53 It

means that both icons arrived shortly before or after the foundation of the monastery. But

we can be certain that in 1155 Andrei Bogoliubskii took the Vladimir icon to the city of

Vladimir.

Third, from the first entries of the Chronicle that describe the icon, we see that the

Vladimir icon was well-respected and highly cherished. In medieval Russia the most

venerated icons were always heavily decorated with gold, silver, and jewels, called oklad

or riza. Nikodim Kondakov, a major Russian medieval art historian, mentions that the

Russians began to cover their icons with the riza under Greek influence, and naturally

even more decoration was applied to the icons in private hands.54

52 Ibid. 476
53 ПСРЛ т.1, 132
54 Nikodim Kondakov, Icons (Parkstone Press: New York, 2008) 48
 31

Fig. 10. One of reproductions of the Icon Our Lady of the Burning Bush. XVI c. Solovetskii
Monastery.

Andrei Bogoliubskii considered the Vladimir icon as his defender and protector, and as it

was mentioned above he invested the icon with precious metals and stones. It shows that

the icon was important and highly venerated, but it also represented extremely precious

spiritual and material treasure.

Returning to the history, after arriving in Kiev from Constantinople, the icon was

placed in the Devichii Monastery in Vyshgorod, the city ruled by Andrei Bogoliubskii.

He did not show any interest in ruling Kiev as Dolgorukii, his father, did. After

Dolgorukii’s death, Prince Andrei did not take the opportunity to control Kiev; he
 32

disliked Kiev, and he was tired of the struggle for it. Instead, Prince Andrei became the

prince of Vladimir, Suzdal, and Rostov. In 1155 Prince Andrei took all the valuable

things, including the icon, from Kiev and left for the Vladimir, Suzdal, and Rostov

region. By making that decision, Prince Andrei “had abandoned sacred tradition. Never

before had the promise of inheritance of the Kievan throne been so unequivocally

rejected.”55 His new capital was Vladimir, where he laid the foundation for the Dormition

Cathedral in 1158 and placed the icon in it. The icon was the first and main icon of the

Cathedral and became the first wonderworking obraz in the city.

It is important to mention that the Hypatian Chronicle claims that Prince Andrei

removed the icon illegally, without his father’s permission: “Томъ же лътъ иде Андрей

отъ отца своего изъ Вышегорода бъ Суждаль, безъ отцъ волъ; и взя изъ

Вышегорода икону святоъ Богородици,”56 while the Laurentian Chronicle omits any

impression of Andrei’s improper behavior. This discrepancy can be explained by the fact

that Kievan monks, who wrote the Hypatian Chronicle, would not have supported

Andrei’s plan to transfer political power from Kiev to a new city, Vladimir.

It is possible that in order to justify Andrei’s illegal acts of removing the icon and

establishing of a new capital, the Skazanie o Chudesakh Vladimirskoi Ikony Bozhei

Materi (“Сказание о чудесах Владимирской иконы богоматери”) was written in

Bogolyubskii’s lifetime. In his article, “Legends of the Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir,” a

Russian historian, David Miller, writes “Bogoliubskii’s aspirations to glorify Vladimir as

55 Ellen S. Hurwitz, Prince Andrei Bogoliubskii: The Man and the Myth (Firenze: Licosa Editrice, 1980)
12.
56 ПСРЛ т.2, 78
 33

a leading center of Russia in place of Kiev gave rise to the first collection of legends.”57

In the Skazanie, we read of the first miracle, in which “the restless” icon departs from its

resting place three times. Prince Andrei saw it as a sign and takes the icon to Vladimir

lands, an act clearly part of his ideological-political program. 58 Another prominent

Russian medieval historian, Ellen Hurwitz writes that Bogoliubskii’s plan was to shift the

power from already weakening Kiev to Vladimir. 59 He saw that Kievan Rus’ was

becoming irrelevant to the future of the whole state, and the region of Vladimir, Suzdal,

and Rostov was assuming a new role as a successor of Kiev. Here, the icon played a

major role in his affair.

In this way, the cult of the Vladimir icon manifested in the Skazanie, which

describes ten miracles directly related to Prince Andrei and the city of Vladimir. For

example, one of them tells a story of how the icon saves twelve residents of Vladimir

(probably the number twelve stands for twelve apostles) from being crushed under the

collapsed gates of the city. Another describes the events of 1164, when Prince Andrei and

his guards embarked on a crusade against the Bulgars taking the Vladimir icon for their

protection: ”Въ то же лъто иде князь Андръй на Болгары […]; и поможе имъ Богъ и

святая Богородица. […] Князь Андръй воротися с побъдою, видъвъ Болгары

избиты. Се же бысть чюдо новое святое Богородици Володимерское. 60 It was

believed that the icon helped Prince Andrei to win, and thus one more miracle was added

to the list of wonders.

57 David B. Miller, “Legends of the Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir: A Study of the Development of
Muscovite National Consciousness” Speculum, vol. 43, no. 4, 1968, p660. www.jstor.org/stable/2855325.
58 J. Pelenski,
“The Contest for the ‘Kievan Succession’ (1155-1175): The Religious-Ecclesiastical
Dimension” Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 12/13, 1988, www.jstor.org/stable/41036344 767.
59 Hurwitz, 56.
60
ПСРЛ т.1, 150
 34

Bogoliubskii’s main target was to make Vladimir a strong and powerful center of

Rus’. In order to achieve his plan, Bogoliubskii needed to establish a new

Metropolitanate of Vladimir that would be independent of Kiev. The Chronicle tells us

about the 1169 condemnation and execution of Fedor, who was Andrei’s candidate for a

new position. A history professor at Colombia University, Jaroslaw Pelenski in his article

“Kievan Succession” analyzes primary sources and identifies Prince Andrei’s intention to

destroy Kiev “as the center of power and sacral symbolism.” 61 Byzantine patriarch

rejected Andrei’s idea, Prince Andrei asked the new Metropolitan of Kiev, Constantine

II, to approve his candidate. However, this request was also denied, and unexpectedly, his

effort resulted in the execution of Fedor.

To justify his execution, Fedor was presented in the worst possible light. The

Chronicle states that Fedor locked all churches in Vladimir, including the Dormition

Cathedral, with the icon: “И церкви всъ въ Володимери затворити и ключъ

церковныъ взя: и не бысть ни звоненья, ни пънья по всему граду и въ сборнъй

церкви въ ней же чюдотворная Мати Божiя.” 62 He was punished by “митрополит

Константин, [который] повелел ему язык отрезать, как злодею и еретику, и правую

руку отрубить, и глаза ему вынуть, ибо хулу наговаривал на святую Богородицу.”63

We see that the icon was mentioned in the story twice: first, Fedor closed this

particular icon in the Cathedral, which was considered a severe crime; and second,

Fedor’s exile and punishment, which were viewed as miracles performed by the icon:

“изгнали Бог и святая Богородица Владимирская злого и пронырливого и гордого

61 Pelenski, 762.
62 ПСРЛ т.1, 152
63 Ibid. 152
 35

обманщика лживого владыку Феодорца из Владимира.”64 The author of the Chronicle

depicts the Vladimir icon performing a miracle that visits this brutal and inhumane

punishment on a person. It is probably the first description of an execution of an

ecclesiastical figure in such drastic form in early Russian medieval literature.

We can conclude that the Vladimir icon was the main instrument in

Bogoliubskii’s political agenda. With the help of the icon, he was able to gain the support

and trust of his military men during the Bulgars’ campaign, and from his people by

creating and spreading the icon’s miracles, and building a major church of Vladimir, the

Dormition Cathedral, and installing the icon in it. In this way, he developed and

constructed a new, powerful principality. Therefore, the icon can be viewed as a symbol

of his power and authority.

The next entry of the Chronicle that mentions the icon is the story of

Bogoliubskii’s death. In 6683 (1174) Prince Andrei was killed in his bed by twenty of his

disgruntled retainers in Bogoliubovo. The body was brought back to Vladimir, but the

clergy was scared to carry out the requiem mass for the prince. The city of Vladimir

suffered riots and disorder. Povest’ ob ubienii Andreia Bogoliubskogo describes it as

following: “грабежи начались и в самом Владимире.”65 But then the priest Mikula,

who had helped Andrei move the Vladimir icon to the city, walked around the city with

the icon and a miracle happened – the riots stopped: “пока не стал ходить Микула с

образом святой Богородицы в ризах по городу - тогда прекратились грабежи.”66

This is the last miracle claimed for the icon in Bogoliubskii reign.

64 ПСРЛ т.1, 151
65 Poets’ ob ubienii Andreja Bogoluybskogo. Web: http://bibliotekar.ru/rus/47.htm Accessed on
November 5, 2016.
66 Ibid.
 36

During the Mongol invasion of Rus’ there is no claim the icon intervened to save

Vladimir from Mongols. Thus, during Khan Batu’s invasion of Vladimir in 1237, the

icon let the city and the church burn: “[…] и преименитый градъ Владимеръ взя и

соборную церковь около ея и внутрь наволочиша лъсу поганiи и пожьгоша.”67 It did

not interfere to prevent Mongols from ruining the city of Vladimir and killing Russian

people. However, the icon did survive, and it was believed that it saved the ruling family

of Prince Iaroslav.

However, later the Tale of the Carnage of Mamai (“Сказание о Мамaевом

побоище,” 15th century) describes how the icon helped to Prince Dmitrii Donskoi. His

famous victory over the Tatars in 1380 on Kulikovo Field is depicted as a result of

superpower of the Vladimir icon. According to the “Tale of the Carnage of Mamai,”

Dmitrii Donskoi took the icon from Vladimir for his campaign and prayed to it before the

battle: “И затем приступил к чудотворному образу госпожи богородицы, который

Лука евангелист написал.”68 Scholars date the writing of the tale between 1404 and

1434, almost immediately after the event, and it shows that the icon was moved from

Vladimir for the first time. The victory had immense positive consequences on Russian

life, thus the icon became even more popular and received a new title - a protector of

Russian lands.

The story continues in 1395, the time of Timur’s advance on Moscow. He wanted

to restore the power and influence of the Mongol Empire and promote Islam by

conquering and destroying Russian lands. Timur moved on Moscow first. Prince Vasilii

decided to defend his people and the city, and all possible measures were taken to save

67 ПСРЛ т.21, 429
68 «Повести о Куликовской битве» Web. http://lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=4981 Accessed
on October 10, 2016.
 37

Moscow; the Vladimir icon was brought to Moscow again. Prince Vasilii and his people

prayed to the Mother of God and Russian saints day and night. The Tale about Timur’s

Invasion (“Повесть о Тимур Аксаке”), written between 1402 and 1413, and the Book of

Royal Degrees tell the story similarly. The Tale gives the following account:

В тот самый день, как принесли икону пречистой Богородицы из Владимира в

Москву, — в тот же день Темир Аксак-царь испугался, и устрашился, и

ужаснулся, и в смятение впал, и нашел на него страх и трепет, вторгся страх в

сердце его и ужас в душу его, вошел трепет в кости его, и тотчас он отказался

и убоялся воевать Русскую землю, и охватило его желание побыстрее

отправиться в обратный путь, и скорей устремился в Орду, Руси тылы показав,

и повернул с соплеменниками своими восвояси; возвратились без успеха,

впали в смятение и заколебались, как будто кто-то их гнал.69

The author of the Book of Royal Degrees writes that Timur wanted to destroy

Christianity completely. Prince Vasilii ordered the delivery of the icon from Vladimir,

and when the obraz arrived the population of the city was praying. But only in the Book

is it claimed that in the moment of prayer, Timur saw a terrifying vision of the Virgin

leading a limitless heavenly army against him, and he decided to turn his hordes back.70

Timur not only changed his mind and left Moscow safely, but also died a horrible death

because of his attack on Christianity and the new capital of Orthodoxy. The intolerance

of Mongols and Islam reached extreme levels, as depicted in the Book. The style and the

content of the legends of the icon reflect the concept of Moscow the Third Rome. Again

the icon performed a miracle, and Prince Vasilii built a church in its honor.

69 “Повесть о Тимур Аксаке” Web: http://old-ru.ru/05-19.html Accessed on November 10, 2016.
70 ПСРЛ т. 21, 437
 38

While the original was taken to Moscow and placed in its new home, the

Dormition Cathedral, between 1395 and 1408 the city Vladimir entrusted Andrei Rublev

with the task of reproducing the Vladimir icon for the Dormition Cathedral of Vladimir.

It is believed that this was the first reproduction of the icon, and its main purpose was to

replace the original (more details on Rublev’s reproduction are in chapter 3).

Next, in 1408, Edigei, a Mongol commander of the Nogai Horde, suddenly and

unexpectedly approached Moscow. His main goal was to weaken Rus’ and restore

Mongol influence and domination. At that time the Grand Prince of Moscow, Vasilii I,

was in Kostroma. The population of the city was terrified, and the only way they could

protect themselves was to pray to God and the Vladimir icon: “и взирая со слезами на

животворящую икону пречистой Богоматери.”71 According to the Tale of Edigei’s

Invasion (“Сказание о нашествии Едигея”), written at the end of the fifteen century,

after the prayer Edigei became fearful and left the city immediately:

[…] величавого и гордого агарянина Едигея устрашил, навел на

измаилтянина трепет перед своей всевышней и карающей десницей. […]

Быстро посылает он к городу, сам прося мира: и как захотели горожане, так и

замирился с ними окаянный Едигей и отошел.72

The same story is retold in the Book, in which the prayers to the icon saved Moscow

again. However, according to the medieval Russian historians, Edigey changed his mind

because the Nogai Horde was in turmoil. He took three thousand rubles from Muscovites

as a payoff and left.

71 “Сказание о нашествии Едигея» Web: http://old-ru.ru/05-20.html Accessed on November 10, 2016.
72 Ibid.

 39

Later, in 1451 a new prince of the Nogai Horde, Mazovsha, reached Moscow. He

burned down city’s suburbs. During this fire, Metropolitan Ion with people marched in

processions on the walls of the city with the icon. The day of the fire was also a special

holiday devoted to the icon, Polozhenie chestnoi Rizy Presviatoi Bogoroditsy

(“Положение честно́й Ризы Пресвятой Богородицы”). In the morning, Moscow

residents saw that their enemies disappeared. Mazovsha and his army fled because the

Tatars heard an unusual noise in the distance and imaged that the prince was coming with

the great army. In fear Mazovsha turned his horse back, and his soldiers followed: all

rushed to escape. We read the story called “The Miracle about Quick Tatarshchine” from

the Book:

Гражане же ко утру готовляшеся на брань. Милосердный же Бог вложи въ

Татарская сердца страхъ и трепетъ, яко не токмо на утрiя не обретошася у

града поганiи, но скоро устремишася на бъгъ, чающе по себъ великаго

воиньства, гоними невидимою силою Божiею и моленiемъ Пречистыя Его

Матере.73

As we see, there were several documented times when the Vladimir icon saved

and protected Moscow and Rus’ during the Mongol invasions. One more distinct event,

which is mentioned in primary sources, is Mehmed I Girei and his campaign to conquer

Moscow in 1521. During this war, the Tatars enslaved numerous men and women, killed

children, and destroyed a large number of churches and cathedrals. According to the

Book, the Vladimir icon kept the city of Moscow untouched. The legend states that while

a holy fool, Vasilii, was praying to the icon for protection, suddenly it moved

73 ПСРЛ т. 21, 515
 40

miraculously from its place, and the whole church lit up for a moment. For an instant, the

Tatars saw a vision of a huge Russian army standing behind the city. When Mehmed I

Girei heard the news, he sent a scout to check the information. The messenger came back

with a report that the army was even greater than their first estimation. The Mongols did

not dare to attack and left without fighting.74

As I mentioned above the Book of Royal Degrees was written during Ivan the

Terrible’e rule, it includes a new myth about the origins of the icon and it was not

mentioned before. It states that Apostle Luke drew the icon while looking with his own

eyes upon the true Mother of God during her lifetime and painted the miraculous image

of the Mother of God.75 It is also believed that the icon was made from a piece of wood

that was taken from Jesus Christ’s table, at which he and his mother used to dine.

Additionally, it provides a long story of how the icon traveled from Palestine to Vladimir.

The Laurentian and the Hypatian Chronicles do not have such an account, and as

we know that in time of Ivan the Terrible, Moscow continued consolidating power and

dominance, and the ruling elite needed to gain political support. In 1968, David Miller

argued that in 1560 scribes headed by Metropolitan Makarii wrote about the icon as the

tool of divine patronage of Muscovite princes. It seems that it was a literary circle of

Metropolitan, which put together and expanded earlier unconnected stories about the icon

into a coherent historical legend.76 The Book demonstrates how by creating a new myth

Russian autocracy continued to retain its power and influence and the icon was a main

instrument in this affair.

74 ПСРЛ т. 21, 599
75 ПСРЛ т. 21, 425
76 Miller, 663.
 41

During the Time of Troubles the Vladimir icon played a small role as well.

During the years of interregnum between the death of the last Russian Tsar, Fedor

Ivanovich, in 1598, and the establishment of the Romanov Dynasty in 1613, Russia

suffered a famine, many civil uprisings, imposters, and foreign interventions. When the

last member of the Rurik Dynasty died without an heir on January 7, 1598, Fedor’s wife,

Irina (Aleksandra) Godunova, instead of accepting the throne, decided to retire to the

Novodevichii Monastery, where she took monastic vows. Her brother, Boris Godunov,

was unanimously elected Tsar of Russia. Patriarch Iov, Muscovite powerful boyars, and

common people of Moscow gathered together and marched in a procession with the

Vladimir icon to the Novodevichii Monastery to ask Irina (Aleksandra) Godunova to give

her brother blessings. This account was recorded in the Tale about Honorable Life of

Fedor I of Russia (“Повесть о честном житии царя Федора Иоанновича”) that was

written by Patriarch Iov in the 16th century):

И на Сырной недълъ во вторникъ взяша честный крестъ и святыя иконы и

образъ пречистые Богородицы Владимерскiя, […] и со всъмъ множествомъ

народа прiидоша въ Новой монастырь въ Дъвичей и пъша молебны и

молишася царицъ Александръ.77

It is important to notice that the icon was used during crucial processions and taken

outside of the Cathedral of the Dormition in the Moscow Kremlin even though the icon

was already nearly four hundred years old and extremely fragile.

The Tale about Honorable Life of Feodor I of Russia has one more account in

which the icon is mentioned. During Godunov’s rule, the first and most successful

77 ПСРЛ т. 14, 50
 42

imposter in Russian history appeared: False Dmitrii I. With the support of the Polish-

Lithuanian Commonwealth elite, Dmitrii ascended the throne after Godunov’s death in

1605. Patriarch Iov of Moscow was Dmitrii’s main obstacle and enemy, thus one of his

first orders was to eliminate the Patriarch. The imposter’s men found Patriarch Iov in the

Cathedral of the Dormition during his liturgy. When villains started tearing off his

clothes, the Patriarch took off his pоnagia (a small image of Our Lady worn by bishops

on the chest) and put it next to the Vladimir icon with a prayer: “Онъ же взя съ себя

понагъю и пришедъ ко образу Пречистые Богородицы, еже написа богогласный

Евангилистъ Лука.”78

In despair the Patriarch turned to the icon for help. The Vladimir icon did not

perform any miracle here, and it did not save Patriarch Iov of Moscow from the severe

punishment to which he was sentenced. Luckily for him, he survived and even outlived

False Dmitrii I. It shows that people continued appealing to the icon in the situations

when the country, the city of Moscow, the Orthodoxy, or the autocracy was under threat.

The next era in Russian history is the reign of Petr the Great at the end of the

seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth centuries. Based on the Enlightenment

Petr led a cultural revolution in Russia. Petr’s reforms had an immense impact on the

state and many institutions, including religious ones. An art historian with special

expertise in the history of Russian icons, Nikodim Kondakov, in his book The Russian

Icon refers to this period of time as a period of suffering. Suffering from an “excessive

admiration of everything western, […] educated Russians ceased to care for icons, forgot

78 ПСРЛ т.14, 65
 43

them, and no longer looked after them.”79 Icon painting and production, once centered in

Moscow and Novgorod, “hid itself in the depths of Russian countryside.” 80 The

production of the traditional icons was stopped and many icons were destroyed or ripped

off their precious oklads.

However, even Petr the Great did not dare to remove the Vladimir icon from its

place in the Kremlin. In 1698, over 2,000 military men, called Strel’tsy, secretly fled to

Moscow to establish a contact with Sofia Alekseevna, who wanted to remain on the

throne. However, they failed and the uprising was suppressed immediately. Petr was

outraged and ordered extremely severe and brutal punishments for all the rebels.

Patriarch Adrian appealed to the revolutionary emperor to show mercy to the Strel’tsy

after their uprising. He came to Petr the Great with the Vladimir icon to ask for a

pardon.81 Petr rejected the Patriarch’s plea, the Strel’tsy were tortured and killed without

remorse. The emperor personally executed many of his victims with his own hands.

According to historian Jacob Abbott, Petr took a drink of brandy after each execution,

and “he was just an hour in cutting off the twenty heads.”82 Thus, from this historic event

we see that the icon remained in the Kremlin even during Petr’s rule, but it was not used

or appealed to.

In the course of Russian Imperial rule, the Vladimir icon was removed from the

Cathedral of the Dormition only once. During the Napoleonic War of 1812, when the

French army was about to reach Moscow, Aleksandr I decided to surrender the old

capital and evacuate all the valuables from the city. Before Kutuzov’s army retreated

79 Nikodim Kondakov, The Russian Icon trans. Ellis H. Minns. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1927) 2.
80 Ibid. 3.
81 «Сказанiе о чудотворной иконъ Богоматери, именуемой Владимiрской» (Москва. 1849), 43
82 Jacob Abbott, Peter the Great (Harper&Brothers Publishers: New York, 1902) 169.
 44

beyond Moscow, the icon was exported from the Kremlin to the city of Vladimir. It was

returned to its place before the spring of 1813.83

The Romanov dynasty ended with the death of Nikolas II. As an art historian,

Robert Nichols notices in the book Alter Icons, Emperor Nikolai II linked himself closely

with the Russian icons, and he was surrounded with icons from his childhood until his

death.84 The last tsar had the Vladimir icon refurbished for his coronation in 1894. Also,

in 1914, when Germans invaded Russia, Nikolai came to Moscow where he and his

family kissed the blessed icon and asked the Mother of God for help.85 It was the last

episode in royal Russia that had connection with the Vladimir icon.

The October Revolution of 1917 brought to power the Bolshevik regime that

seized church properties. The Bolsheviks declared a war on religion and the arts of

Orthodoxy – from church buildings to the sacred vessels, vestments, and icons housed

within them – were subjected to an unremitting campaign of destruction, degradation, and

displacement. The control over icons shifted decisively from the church to the museum.

One of the many contradictions of this period is that Soviet Russia became the vanguard

in the practice of scientific art restoration, focusing on the medieval icon.86

Therefore, the home of the Vladimir icon, the Cathedral of the Dormition in the

Moscow Kremlin, was closed and the icon was given to a museum for restoration. In

1930 the icon was handed to the State Tret’iakov Gallery, where it was put on a display

for everyone to see. However, even during the Soviet faithless period a new myth

83 Anisimov, 23
84 Robert Nichols. «Nicholas II and the Russian Icon», Alter Icons (The Pennsylvania State University
Press: Pennsylvania, 2010) 74
85 Anisimov, 23
86 Wendy R. Salmon “The Triumph of Science over Superstition: the Fate of Russian Icons in the Early
Soviet Era” Modern Greek Studies Yearbook. (University of Minnesota: Minnesota, Vol 22/23;
2006/2007), 1.
 45

managed to appear. In the book Munitsupal’naia Militsiia v Rossiiskoi Federatsii, Viktor

Volokhov, a chief of the State Department of Internal Affairs of the city of Moscow,

describes a new legend that in December of 1941, Stalin ordered a special command,

according to which the Vladimir icon was placed on a plane that circled Moscow before

the Soviet counterattack.87 Thus, it illustrates that even during the communist regime

people continued to create stories about this wonderworking icon.

During the Brezhnev period, the policy against the church slowly changed. In

1980 Moscow hosted the Olympic games, and according to the Charter of the

International Olympic Committee, the Olympic Village had to have a temple or a chapel

for the athletes to have the opportunity to pray before the competition. On July 2, 1980 a

chapel in honor of the Vladimir icon was consecrated, where among other icons was one

of the copies of the icon. Many people believed that because of the prayers of the

Vladimir icon, many Soviet athletes won at the Olympics-80.88

1993 marks the most recent claims for the Vladimir icon’s miraculous power, the

year of the Russian constitutional crisis. It was a political conflict between the Russian

president Boris Yeltsin and the Russian parliament that was resolved the military force.

The Patriarch of Moscow Aleksii II and the mayor of Moscow, Yurii Luzhkov, ordered

the icon to be taken from the Tret’iakov Gallery and delivered it to the Epiphany

Cathedral at Elokhovo where they asked the Virgin to protect the country from the a civil

war and bring the nation to peace.89 As we know, the crisis was swiftly resolved, and

Yeltsin was able to preserve his power. As I mentioned before, in 1999 the icon was

87 В. Волохов, “Муниципальная милиция в Российской Федерации: исторический опыт и
перспективы: Документально-публицистическое исследование” (М.: Издательство Главного
архивного управления города Москвы, 2012) 295
88 Ibid, 297
89 Ibid, 305
 46

moved to the Church of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi, which is a part of the State Tret’iakov

Gallery. There, for the first time after the revolution, the Patriarch offered an official

prayer to the Vladimir icon.90

In conclusion, the Vladimir icon is the oldest existing Byzantine icon delivered to

Kievan Rus’ in the twelfth century. Through the accounts of the primary sources, we can

trace its journey from Constantinople to Moscow from the Russian medieval period

starting in the 12th century up to today. It became a symbol of the continuity of Russian

national aspirations even after the Rurikid princes and Romanovs died out. Orthodox

Russians continue to venerate and honor the icon today. The course of history shows that

the icon has been used as a political instrument to consolidate power and control over

regions and people, as a piece of art that has to be restored and preserved, and as a

beautiful symbol of faith and devotion.

90 Ibid, 305
 47

Chapter 3

The Reflection of the Vladimir Icon in Visual Arts

For centuries the Vladimir icon has been extremely famous and has been

venerated by many people of Russia. Its miracles and legends became popular and spread

around Russian lands quickly. In order to venerate and worship the icon almost all

principalities and cities needed their own Vladimir icon. Thus, icon painters had to

produce an immense amount of reproductions of the icon called spiski (copies of a certain

icon). Since every icon is considered to convey divine energy, God’s power and truth, an

icon painter played the role of a mediator. The copy and the original were considered

equal, and the spisok carried the same name as the original. Therefore the question of the

authenticity for an icon never arises.

Today there are over 300 surviving medieval reproductions of the Vladimir icon.

Some of them became popular and got their names after their places of origin, while

others simply bear the name of the original. In addition, not only are there spiski of the

icon, but we also see illustrations of it in chronicles, murals, icons that took just a base of

the Vladimir Icon, and even depictions of the icon in secular and contemporary art. It is

impossible to examine and analyze all reproductions of the famous icon, so in this

chapter I will just give a few examples that illustrate impact that the Vladimir icon has

had on religious and secular art. I will demonstrate how the influence that originated in

the twelfth century continues to affect contemporary Russia and even appears in the

culture of other countries.

The first images of the Vladimir icon appear in the Radziwiłł Codex or

Königsberg codex that was written before 1487. In his article, “Notes on the Radziwiłł
 48

Codex,” Oleksei Tolochko, a director of the center for Kievan Rus’ studies at Institute of

Ukrainian history, calls the Codex the most recognizable manuscript containing the

chronicle text. He claims that it is the only illuminated medieval chronicle that survived,

and has the largest set of illustrations (613 in total).91 Due to its constant replications, the

Radziwiłł Codex survives today, and is believed to be a copy of a lost illuminated

manuscript of the thirteenth century. We do not know the name of the authors or the

place where it was written; however, it is certain that the manuscript left the Great

Russian territory and from the Moscow or Vladimir district traveled to what is now

Belorussia, then to Lithuania, where it finally fell into the hands of Radziwiłł family.

In any case, for this research it is crucial to analyze the illustrations from the

Radziwiłł Codex. There are three miniatures that depict the icon and represent the

historical events that were discussed in the previous chapter. The first miniature tells us

the story of how the icon was brought from Constantinople to Vladimir (fig.11). The

Vladimir icon is in the center of the miniature. It stands on the three-part handle.92 On the

left we see Andrei Bogoliubskii and boyars, and on the right stand two clerics with books

in their hands. All of them point to the icon with their hands and gazes as a symbol of the

blessing and salvation that the icon gives people. The gold color is a representation of

divine power and the splendor of the celestial kingdom where there is never any night.

91 Oleksei, Tolochko. “Notes on the Radziwiłł Codex” Studi Slavistici, Vol 10, Iss 1, 2014, 30.
92 As I mention in the introductory chapter the icon had originally a special handle that allowed taking the
icon outside of the church.
 49

Fig. 11. The miniature, Postonovlenie Bogoliubskim Ikony Bogomateri Vladimirskoi.

(Поставление кн. Андреем Боголюбским иконы Богоматери Владимирской. Миниатюра из
Радзивиловской летописи.) XV century. The Radziwiłł Codex (p. 200).

The second miniature accompanies the article about the victorious campaign of

1164, in which Bogoliubskii won the battle against the Volga Bulgars (fig. 5). Here we

see the prayer in front of the icon. While some soldiers kneel, Bogoliubskii and his

trusted men raise their hands praising the icon’s miraculous power. Again the icon is

centered, but here the faces of the Mother of God and Christ do not come into contact.

We know that it is the Vladimir icon only from the story that is written beneath the

picture.

The last miniature from the Radziwiłł Codex depicts one legend that appears only

in this Letopis’ (fig. 12). The scripture tells us how Bogoliubskii’s younger brother,

Vsevolod III Bol’shoe Gnezdo, obtained political power and became the Grand Prince of

Vladimir. After Andrei’s death there was a feud between his brothers for power over the

Vladimir and Suzdal regions. When Vsevolod was approaching the city, the people of

Suzdal saw the Vladimir icon floating in the air, an event they treated as a divine sign.
 50

They proclaimed that Vsevolod was the only legitimate candidate to rule the cities of

Vladimir and Suzdal. As we know, he won an easy victory over his enemies. Thus, this

miniature portrays Vsevolod, coming to the city and the icon flying in front of city’s

walls announcing his arrival and authority. These are the first reproductions of the icon

that stand along with the text depicting its history.

Fig. 12. The miniature, XV century. The Radziwiłł Codex (p. 222).

Spiski

The next most famous reproduction of the icon (spisok) is the Vladimir icon from

the Assumption Cathedral of Vladimir that was painted around 1408 by the famous icon

painter Andrei Rublev (fig. 13). It is considered to be the first copy of the Byzantine icon.

The city of Vladimir lost the original when it was taken to Moscow after Timur’s

invasion, and the city needed a new protector and savior. Rublev’s reproduction was not

just a common reproduction of the icon; it was an exact copy of it. The size, 104 x 69 cm,

is the precise size of the Byzantine icon. This type of spisok was very rare and its main

purpose was to act as a substitute for the original when necessary. Of course, when

Moscow became extremely powerful, the Vladimir icon was removed from Vladimir to
 51

the new capital; Rublev’s task was to create an icon that could replace the original

without anyone noticing it.

There are several questions to address: how do we know that Andrei Rublev was

the one who painted this version of the icon? Why did Vladimir’s government entrust

Rublev with this job? What are the differences between the copy and the original? What

happened to Rublev’s copy?

Today it is clear that it is not possible to trace Rublev’s work chronologically, as

Russian icon painters never signed or dated their works. It was prohibited to write a name

on any icon in medieval Russia. Furthermore, we have very little information about

Rublev’s life in general.

Fig. 13. Тhe Vladimir icon from the Assumption Cathedral of Vladimir, spisok Andrei Rublev.
1408. Тhe Vladimir-Suzdal museum.

Although to answer some of these questions with certainty is impossible, leading

art historians, Igor Grabar and Viktor Lazarev, believe that it was Rublev, who created

the famous copy. In his work Andrei Rublev, Grabar was the first who claimed that
 52

Rublev made this spisok. Most scholars date the icon to the period of time between 1408

and 1410 and associate it with the appearance of murals and iconostasis of the

Assumption Cathedral of Vladimir by Andrei Rublev and Daniil Chernyi. Grabar writes:

“Здесь все, сверху донизу, от Рублева — холодный голубоватый общий тон,

характер рисунка, черты лица, с типичной для Рублева легкой горбинкой

носа, изящные руки, прекрасный силуэт всей композиции, ритм линий

и гармония красок.”93

In addition, the Troitskaia Chronicle (“Троицкая летопись,” 15th century) tells

us that in 1408 Rublev together with Chernyi painted the Assumption Cathedral in

Vladimir: “Того же лета мая в 25 начаша подписывати церковь каменую великую

съборную святая Богородица, иже в Владимире, повеленьем князя великаго,

а мастеры Данило иконник да Андрей Рублев.”94 Thus, we have evidence that Rublev

was in Vladimir at that time and was working at the Cathedral. It is entirely possible that

the city of Vladimir asked Rublev to paint one more icon for the Cathedral.

As I mentioned above, Rublev’s copy of the icon was made in the size of the

original with ancient added fields, but there are different pyramidal outlines of the

silhouettes of the figures, and the position of the left hand of the Virgin is lower.

Researchers explain the inconsistency of icon’s composition as Rublev’s creative

innovation.95 It was also suggested that the spisok of the Vladimir icon showed a new

look that the original had after its first restoration.

In addition, the composition of the copy has peculiar features that are

characteristic of Andrei Rublev’s works (harmony, rhythm smooth consistency, soft

93 И. Грабарь, «Андрей Рублев». «Вопросы реставрации» 1, 1926, 42-43.
94 Ibid, 43.
95
Ibid, 43.
 53

lines, pyramidal silhouette). This copy differs also by the position of both feet of infant

Christ; Rublev depicts them on one level, which reinforces the impression of lightness of

his figures. The icon served the city of Vladimir and its people for centuries until the

Bolshevik regime came to power, at which point the icon was restored and placed into a

museum. Today the icon is at the Vladimir-Suzdal museum.

Interestingly, in the Cathedral of Annunciation in Moscow, there was an

iconostasis that was formed in the seventeenth century and collected ornate small icon

that are called piadnitsa. These small icons, called “piadnitsy,” were the size of a “piad’”

or nine inches. Saints’ devotees prayed to images of the Savior and the Blessed Virgin

Mary, which they could carry everywhere. They were brought from the Kremlin

Armoury (icons repository) and the Treasury. Many of them belonged to the ancestors of

the tsars and great princes. The number of reproductions (piadnitsy) of the Vladimir icon

was nine, far exceeding the number of other icons of the Virgin. Among the icons of the

Annunciation Cathedral remained the most revered reproduction of the sixteenth century,

a big piadnitsa, which had a golden oklad (fig. 14).

According to its artistic features, the icon belongs to the works of the early

sixteenth century. Its iconography is quite different from the original: it shows only one

hand of Christ Child; the other, with which he embraces Mother’s neck, is not shown.

Between faces and bowed shoulders we can see the infant’s cloak with visible gold

edging. This failure to preserve the miraculous image of the original could occur because

of the oklad that hid the hand. This icon probably was made for one of Princes’ home

chapel.
 54

Fig. 14. Piadnitsa the Vladimir icon, Cathedral of Annunciation, Moscow. XVI c. Moscow
Kremlin Museum.

The next spisok that requires special attention is the Icon of Our Lady of

Volokolamsk (fig. 15). According to the Legend of Bringing the Icon of the Holy Virgin

in the St. Joseph Volokolamsk Monastery (“О принесении иконы Пречистыа

Богородицы Владимеръскыа, и чюдо святого о диаке Петре,” 1570s), in the second

part of the sixteenth century a “certain nobleman” (“некий вельможа”) commissioned

this spisok:

Имея великую веру к Богу, Пречистой Богородице и преподобному

Иосифу… он [некий вельможа] дал обет, что воздвигнет в обители на

Святых вратах каменную церковь во имя Сретения Владимирской иконы

Пречистой Богородицы. И прежде основания церкви отправил в обитель

храмовую икону Пречистой.96

The icon was brought to the Monastery on March 2, 1572, and it was the exact

96 The Legend of Bringing the Icon of the Holy Virgin in the St. Joseph Volokolamsk Monastery Web:
http://iosif-vm.ru/saint/skazanie Accessed on January 15, 2017.
 55

reproduction of the original icon. Icon of Our Lady of Volokolamsk was also decorated

with very expansive oklad and the quality of the painting was equal to the original. The

main question is, who was the nobleman that ordered and decorated the icon? The

Legend of Bringing the Icon tells us his name: “Прежде названному вельможи

Григорию, так чудно икону украсившему.”97 The researchers found out that it was

Grigorii Belskii, better known as Maliuta Skuratov. He was one of the most cruel and

odious leaders of the Oprichnina during the rule of Ivan the Terrible, who strangled the

Metropolitan of Moscow, Filip II.98

We can see sorrow and grief on the face of Our Lady of Volokolamsk. The icon

shows the pain and brutality that Mother Mary’s son has to endure. The tragedy is

expressed even in colors of her clothes and the dark green background. With her left hand

pointing to her son, Mary lets us know the joy of repentance, purification of the soul, and

salvation. On the margins of the icon the archangels stand with the holy Metropolitans of

Moscow, Petr and Ion. This is a distinctive feature of the Volokolamsk Icon of Our Lady.

The choice of these patrons of Moscow is not accidental; it is they who in the eyes of the

sixteenth century Muscovites were intercessors of the capital city during the invasion of

foreigners.

The original of the sixteenth century was taken from the monastery in 1954. In

1959, Briagin restored the icon, and since then it has remained in the collection of the

Central Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art of Andrei Rublev in Moscow. In

March of 2007 the monastery received a copy of the icon that was brought and painted by

97 Ibid.
98 «Православная энциклопедия», под ред. Патриарха Московского Алексия II. Т. 9 (Москва:
Церковно-научный центр. 2005) 3.

 56

the Moscow painter, Fomin.99

Fig. 15. The Icon of Our Lady of Volokolamsk, 1572. Rublev’s Museum.

One more famous spisok is the Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir Oranskaia (fig. 16).

The icon represents an exact copy of the Vladimir icon, painted by the archpriest of the

Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kondrat with help of another icon painter, Grigorii

Chernyi. At the bottom of the icon are Moscow saints: Metropolitan Petr, Aleksii and

Ioan, Prince Mikhail of Chernigov and Boiarin Fedor, Prince Dmitrii, Moscow holy

fools, Vasilii and Maksim.

According to Skazanie o Ikone Bogomateri Oranskoi (“Сказание о иконе

99 Ibid, 3.
 57

Богоматери Оранской,” 1662) in the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich near Nizhnii

Novgorod lived a pious man named Petr Gladkov. He was a nobleman who ordered the

spisok. In 1629 he became seriously ill and the Vladimir icon healed him. After it, he led

a virtuous life and had great respect and reverence to the Vladimir icon. He wanted an

exact copy of the miracle-working icon of Vladimir and turned to archpriest Kondrat.

With the help of the icon painter Grigorii Chernyi Kondrat fulfilled Gladkov’s desire.

After receiving the icon, Petr took it into his estate, the village Bocheevo.100

For five years the icon remained in his house. In 1634, in the fifth week of Lent,

Gladkov heard a voice in a dream, commanding him to go. He saw a hill and there again

he heard a voice saying to him: “Put a cross here and build a church in honor of Our Lady

of Vladimir.”101

The same vision and the same command were repeated three times. Gladkov

reckoned that it was the will of God and decided to obey. He went in search of the hill

that he saw in his dreams. For a long time he was wandering in the forest, when finally he

saw a light on a top of a hill near the Orano field. When he ascended to the top, he

immediately recognized the hill. Then he went to Moscow and asked the Patriarch Filaret

for a charter to construct a temple on the hill in honor of the Vladimir icon. Returning

from Moscow, Gladkov first put the marble cross on the chosen spot, and then proceeded

with the construction of the temple, which was called the Oranskii Bogoroditskii

monastery.102

100 Дмитрии Лихачев, “Сказание о иконе Богоматери Оранской.” Словарь книжников и книжности
Древней Руси. Ч. 3. Вып. 3 (СПб., 1998) 395
101 Ibid.397
102 О.В. Дегтева, «Судьба Оранской Иконы Божьей Матери» Вебсайт: Вознесенский Печерский
мужской монастырь. http://www.pecherskiy.nne.ru/text/publish_other/11.2006.8 Accessed on January
15, 2017.
 58

Fig. 16. The Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir Oranskaia

After the revolution, the Oranskii Monastery was ruined, the reverend was shot,

and the holy icon was confiscated and transferred to the Historical and Architectural

Museum of Nizhnii Novgorod, where the icon remains today. In 1993 a copy of the

spisok was returned to the monastery.

The last reproduction that I want to discuss is Zaonikievskaya Icon of Our Lady of

Vladimir (Fig. 17). Its name derives from the place of the residence, Zaonikievskii

Monastery. It was uncovered in 1588 by the pious Vologda villager, Ilarion, the future St.

Iosif Zaonikievskii. He was a sick man, and after long and fervent prayers to the Blessed

Virgin Mary and the saints of God for the return of health, Saints Cosmas and Dam’ian

appeared and promised healing. They showed him a place he had to visit. Arriving at the
 59

holy place, Ilarion suddenly saw the light and the extraordinary icon of the Mother of

God appeared. He humbly knelt down and kissed the holy image, and immediately he

was healed. After these events, he took monastic vows with the name of Iosif and

founded Zaonikievskii Monastery on this spot (named it because it was located behind

the Anikievskii forest that derives from the name of a robber Anika who lived there).

This spisok of the miraculous Vladimir icon was placed in the monastery, became famous

for numerous healings, and attracted many Orthodox believers.

Fig. 17. Zaonikievskaia Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir, 1588

The Icon of Our Lady in Ushakov’s Works

Simen Ushakov was a leading master of the Kremlin Armoury (or Armoury

Chamber) and the central figure in Russian art of the seventeenth century. It was the era
 60

of continued struggle for the Russian throne, the struggle with the Polish-Swedish

intervention, the peasant war led by Stepan Razin, while schism divided Russian society

and the Orthodox faith. This century marked the start of Rus’ road to modernization.

There were changes in centuries-old concepts and habits of the Russian people. The

changes were evident in the art of that time as well, especially in the paintings of the

second half of the seventeenth century.

It is important to understand the difference between a sacred icon and art as such.

The icon painter does not transfer into the icon anything of his personal worldview that is

in any way different from the Orthodox Christian doctrine. The iconographer becomes

the mediator of the Church’s outlook. Icon is a window into another world that is eternal.

The authorship of the icon painter is not disclosed deliberately, for the authorship of the

icon belongs to the whole church. And the occupation of icon painting is not a way of

self-expression of the artist, but obedience, ascetic feat.

Artistic painting of any genre is an image created with the help of the artist’s

fantasy and personal worldview. The art painting reflects the individuality of the author;

his personal, original features are reflected in the work. Moreover, every artist strives to

find his unique manner. One of the highest achievements of authorial activity is the

creation of a new style, new directions and techniques in painting. The master’s canvases

are inextricably linked with his name, manner, and biography.

In 1551 Tsar Ivan the Terrible called Stoglav (a religious council), which

approved the inclusion of Tsars, as well as legendary or historical figures, within the

pantheon of permitted images. As a result, icon painting widened its scope considerably

and many changes were made in the production of icons. Most distinctively these
 61

innovations emerged in the work of Simen Ushakov.

Simen (Pimen) Fedorovich Ushakov was born in 1626. The years and the place of

training of the future iconographer are unknown. Nothing is known about him until he

entered the state service in the Silver Chamber of the Kremlin in 1648. Ushakov was

involved in the writing of icons, frescoes, drew maps, plans, made drawings for coins and

jewelry on the gun, and portraits.103

Of the eleven icons of Mother of God that Ushakov painted, four are

reproductions of the Vladimir icon. The earliest known icon of Ushakov - a copy of

Russian main icon, the miraculous Vladimir icon, dates back to 1652. Ushakov made it

for Zamoskvoretskaia Church of Archangel Michael in Ovchinnikov (fig. 18). We learn

about the authorship of Ushakov from his signature on the icon.104 It says: ”Лета 7160

(1652) году списана сия икона с самыя чудотворныя иконы пресвятыя Богородицы

Владимирския и мерой, а писал государев иконописец Симан Федоров. Зачата

июня 19 день.”105

Ushakov’s style and performance of his painting in this icon is dry, not even

attempting to transfer the colors, massiveness, and uniqueness that would distinguish his

style in the future. But it is important to note that in his early monument Ushakov uses

unusually light skin color in the writing of the faces. Today the icon is in the Tret’iakov

Gallery.

103 Georgii Filimonov, Simen Ushakov (Universitetskaia Tipogr, 1873) 4.
104 The author’s signature on Russian icons appear from the middle or the second half of the seventeenth
century.
105 Христианство в искусстве. Web: http://www.icon-art.info/masterpiece.php?lng=ru&mst_id=1869
Accessed on January 15, 2017.
 62

Fig. 18. The Vladimir icon by Simon Ushakov. The Tret’iakov Gallery.

One of the most famous icons that Ushakov created is The Tree of the Russian

State (“Древо государства Московского,” 1668) (Fig. 19). The accession of the

Romanov dynasty in 1613 set a target for official confirmation of legitimacy of this

house. Renowned genealogist Maria Bychkova expressed the view that it was the first

attempt to create a family tree of the royal family copying the Western genealogy, and it

belonged to the famous icon painter Ushakov. 106 An inscription on the icon confirms the

authorship: “А писал сии образъ его государевъ зографъ Пимин зовомый Симон

Ушаковъ” (“The icon was painted by royal icon-painter Pimen, named Simen

106 М. Е. Бычкова, “Икона Симона Ушакова и идея происхождения государства Российского”
Церковная археология: Материалы первой всероссийской конференции. Ч. 2 (СПб.; Псков, 1995) 30-
31
 63

Ushakov”).107 The icon’s dimensions are 105 x 62 cm. The icon is known under various

names such as The Tree of the Moscow State, In Praise of Our Lady of Vladimir, or Tree

Planting of the Russian State is a variant of the Vladimir icon, created by Ushakov. The

image was painted for the iconostasis of the Church of the Trinity in Nikitniki, and is

now in the Tret’iakov Gallery.

The bottom of the icon shows the first Moscow Metropolitan Petr and Prince Ivan

Kalita. They plant and water the tree, which grows through the Cathedral of the

Assumption, filling the entire surface with the branches of the icon. On the branches of

the tree are medallions depicting saints of Moscow, and in the central largest medallion is

the image of Our Lady of Vladimir. On the Kremlin Wall stand Tsar Aleksei

Mikhailovich and his first wife Maria Ilinichna with their children. All the way up, in

Spas clouds are hovering angels handing the crown and robe for Aleksei Mikhailovich, as

the king of the heaven crowns the king of the earth.108

The fruits symbolize Russian saints who are depicted in medallions with scrolls in

hands. The total number of the medallions is 20, with 10 on each side. Images of saints in

medallions are arranged from bottom to top with some deviations from the historical

sequence. The left branch of the Metropolitan Petr presents the fathers of the Russian

Church: Metropolitan Aleksii, Kiprian, Ioan, Filip and Fotii, the Patriarch Iov and Filaret,

the Tsars Mikhail Fedorovich, Fedor Ivanovich, and Tsarevich Dmitrii.109

On the right-hand branch, the first medallion depicts Ivan Kalita, Prince

Aleksandr Nevskii as a clothing hermit. Behind him are the founders and abbots of

107 В. Г. Чубинская, “Икона Симона Ушакова” “Богоматерь Владимирская”, “Древо Московского
государства”, Похвала богоматери Владимирской” (Опыт историко-культурной интерпретации) //
ТОДРЛ. Л., 1985), 300.
108 Ibid. 295.
109 Ibid. 298.
 64

monasteries that are close to Moscow: St. Sergii Radonezhskii, St. Sava Storozhevskii,

St. Panfutii of Borovsk, Reverend Simon Bezmolvnik, Reverend Andronik and Moscow

blessed Maksim, Vasilii, Ioan of Moscow.110

Fig.19. The Tree of the Russian State. Simen Ushakov 1668.

The influence of the Vladimir icon was immense on the Russian iconography

during the medieval period. The reproductions or spiski of the icon were made almost in

every major city of Russia. Often the icon was even painted on the walls of cathedrals or

murals together with production of large and small sizes for churches and for private

prayers at home. People could find the analogy of the icon in even distant tiny towns and

villages. However, with the decline of the influence of the religion on politics and

society, artists were becoming secular as well. In the beginning of the nineteenth century

Russian artists were strongly influenced by European Romanticism with its emphasis on

110 Ibid. 298.
 65

emotion and individualism. Its primary importance was the free expression of the feelings

of the artist that immediately contradicted to the rules of iconography.

By the mid-century Realism became the leading force of arts that provides an

objective depiction of contemporary social reality. Realism includes the urge to explore

the human condition in a spirit of serious research, the tendency to set works of fiction in

the Russia of the artist’s own day, the cultivation of a straightforward style, but one also

involving factual detail, an emphasis on character and atmosphere, and a focus on

everyday activities of the lower classes of society without any romantic dramatization

and idealization.

“Wanderer” artists like Repin, Serov, and Petrov preferred to concentrate on

ordinary people, their lives, and social problems. The inclusion of icons was a part of

depiction of the reality, and icons still played a big role in household of the majority of

the Russian population in the nineteenth century. For example, the famous red corner can

be found in works like Surikov’s Men’shikov in Berezovе (“Меньшиков в Березове,”

1883). Also, the other way to depict icons in the secular art was historical paintings like

Surikov’s Boiarynia Morozova (“Боярыня Морозова,” 1887) or the scenes that portray

everyday life like in Pukirev’s The Unequal Marriage (“Неравный брак,” 1862) and

Repin’s Religious Procession in Kursk Province (“Крестный ход в Курской губернии,”

1883). Thus, icons became a part of the realistic setting.

In the end of the twentieth century and today the Vladimir icon continues to play a

role in the world of art. One of the contemporary artists of our time is Ilia Sergeevich

Glazunov, the major nationalist painter, portrait and landscape painter, creator of

monumental historical paintings, book illustrator, Master of Theatre and Decorative Arts,
 66

artist-architect, social activist, and teacher. Glazunov is an author of more than three

thousand works.111 There are two works that are crucial for this research, The Legend of

Tsarevich Dmitrii (“Легенда о царевиче Дмитрии,” 1967) and Eternal Rus’ (“Вечная

Россия,”1988).

Glazunov includes the Vladimir icon into one of his earliest works, The Legend of

Tsarevich Dmitrii (fig. 20). On 15 May 1591, Tsarevich Dmitrii died from a stab wound,

under mysterious circumstances, which gave the reason to believe that he was killed by

an assassin sent by Boris Godunov, who, thanks to much intrigue and blood, managed to

take over the throne. Glazunov represents Dmitrii both as a martyr and at the same time

as the transfigured saintly youth. The angel that legitimately and finally places a crown

on his head is positioned on Dmitrii’s left side, and on the right side we see the hand with

a bloody knife that mercilessly kills him. In the background Glazunov depicts the city of

Moscow (where Tsarevich Dmitrii had to ascend the throne) with its religious symbols

including the Vladimir icon in the left corner as a protector and savior of the capital.

Eternal Rus’ is a monumental work finished in Moscow in 1988 (fig. 21). The

artist devoted this masterpiece to millennial anniversary of the Christianization of Kievan

Rus’. Glazunov presents the story of the eternal Russia in the form of an endless national

march, or the Eastern Orthodox procession, originating from Hagia Sophia of

Constantinople and passing Sophia Cathedral in Kiev, the Church of the Intercession on

the Nerl’, the walls of the Kremlin, and monumental works like the Bronze Horseman

and the Motherland Calls.

111 Ilia Glazunov. Biography. Web http://glazunov.ru/en/biography Accessed January 10, 2017.
 67

Fig. 20. The Legend of Tsarevich Dmitrii, I. Glazunov, 1967.

Fig. 21. Eternal Rus’ by Glazunov, 1988.

At the beginning of the procession are clear images of Orthodox saints, statesmen, public

figures, military leaders, writers, artists, scientists, and composers. It is a gigantic artwork
 68

(size: 3 x 6 m) that promotes a version of Russian history from its origins until the

twentieth century.

The Easter (Pascha) Procession carries a large cross that is placed in the center of

the painting representing the suffering of Russia and its people. In addition to the cross,

people carry multiple famous icons such as Rublev’s The Old Testament Trinity

(“Троица,” 1411) and St. Georgii Slaying the Dragon (“Чудо Георгия о змие”, 14th

century). Of course, Glazunov skillfully includes the Vladimir icon in the very center. In

the second row of the procession behind Nikolai Gogol and Mikhail Lomonosov, the

artist places the Vladimir icon. As one of most dominant and powerful symbols of

Russia, he positions it at the center of this work.

With the new century came a new regime: in 2000 Vladimir Putin was elected

president of the Russian Federation. From the beginning of Putin’s presidency,

conservative and nationalist values took center stage, with the explicit promotion of

Russian Orthodox Church. We can see that during the Putin’s regime over 25,000

churches and 800 monasteries have been built. The church became a common source of

Russian pride and nationalism. Today, the Vladimir icon is a focal point of the debate

between ultraconservatives with their masculine heroic images and more internationally

oriented Russian artists.

The example of this dispute is art works of Alexander Kosolapov and Avdei Ter-

Ogan’ian. Alexander Kosolapov was born in 1943 in Moscow, graduated from the

sculptural department of the Stroganov Art School in 1969. He has worked in the realm

of Sots-art since 1972, combining the visual products of the communist ideology with the

products of Western mass-culture in his works. In 1975 he immigrated to the US. He has
 69

taken part in many artistic exhibitions in a number of European countries and in the

United State.112 In 2005, he created a new project called “Have You Eaten Caviar

Lately?” (“Давно ли Вы ели икру?” or “Икона-икра”) that ironically opposes American

“iconography” (fig. 22). Kosolapov was building his masterpiece upon Warhol’s concept

of American consumerism.

It depicts an outline of the Vladimir icon figure hewn entirely from caviar within

a gold oklad and was displayed in the State Tret’iakov Gallery as part of an exhibition

called Russian Pop Art. The museum’s director, Valentin Rodionov, decided it was safer

to take it down after he received a warning letter from a group of the Orthodox believers.

The letter bore the signatures of at least 50 churchgoers and priests, who argued that the

artwork violated their constitutional rights. They demanded the museum take appropriate

measures and vowed to take their own measures if they did not get their way.113 Thus, the

work was removed from the Gallery on the stated basis that the work was insulting the

feelings of the Orthodox believers.

After this incident, two men, Iurii Samodurov, former head of the Sakharov

Museum, and Andrei Erofeev, a former curator at the Tret’iakov gallery, in 2006

organized an exhibition called Forbidden Art (that included the Icon-Caviar) in order to

fight censorship in Russia. However, as a result of the exhibition, Erofeev and

Samodurov were charged with criminal charges under the Article 282 of the Criminal

112 Saatchi Gallery. “Alexander Kosolapov.” Web:
http://www.saatchigallery.com/artists/kosolapov_alexander.htm?section_name=breaking_the_ice Accessed
on February 1, 2017.
113 The Tsukanov Art Collection. Web: http://tsukanov-art-collection.ru/picture.html?id=277 Accessed on
February 1, 2017.
 70

Codex of the Russian Federation (inciting religious hatred) and were fined $ 11, 000.114

Fig. 22. Icon-Caviar. A. Kosolapov, 2007.

Another participant of this project was Avdei Ter-Ogan’ian. One of his works

called The Icons on the Cardboard (“Иконы на картоне”), was displayed as a part of the

exhibition Forbidden Art (Fig. 23). It included eight icons among which was the

Vladimir icon. On each icon was written “revolution,” “vodka,” “Kalashnikov,” “Russian

art,” “50%,” “Lenin,” “1917.” This artwork was severely damaged during a pogrom

organized by the church supporters and ultraconservatives.

These particular cases demonstrate the attitude to contemporary Russian art that

combines pop art movement and religious themes. While many people would simply see

it as an indictment of post-Soviet materialism and a call to spirituality rather than an

attack on the Russian Church, the Church sees it as an assault on Orthodoxy.

114 Э. Вермишева, Возбудительное «Запретное искусство» // Газета Ру. 2008.13 05.
https://www.gazeta.ru/social/2008/05/13/2722656.shtml Accessed on February 1, 2017.

 71

Fig. 23. The Icons on the Cardboard. Avdei Ter-Ogan'ian, 2005. After the pogrom.

As long as civil-rights advocates are predetermined to lose in Russia, the

nationalist artists remain the only participants of main current art exhibitions and events.

For example, Iurii Pantiukhin, a contemporary nationalist artist imbues his art with a

celebration of the heroic Russian past. Among his paintings are works of historical genre,

Russian landscapes, cityscapes of St. Petersburg and European cities, as well as a series

of theatrical portraits. Nevertheless, the Russian motives dominate in his works, and they

are colorful and realistic. They appear in a series of Russian architectural landscapes,

emphasizing the greatness of Russian culture and national traditions.

In 2007 Pantiukhin created a large triptych, the central part of which is called “St.

Sergii Radonezhskii and Dmitrii Donskoi. On the Kulikovo Field” (size: 243 x 203 cm)

(fig. 24). The painting is dedicated to an important event in Russian history, the scene

where Sergii Radonezhskii blesses the Grand Duke of Moscow Dmitrii Donskoi for battle

with the Mongols. Pantiukhin does not depict the battle of Kulikovo, nor does he show its
 72

outcome; instead he presents the blessings and the holy moment, the sense of confidence

and tranquility of his native land.

Sergii appears in a black robe firmly and confidently holding a raised holy

crucifix. His figure is simple, but it is central to the composition. He places his fatherly

hand on Dmitrii’s shoulder, and with this gesture his determination, firmness, and

calmness is passed to the figure of the prince, who listens to the prayers of Sergii and

with pride and dignity prepares to take the fight. He believes in God’s blessing and on his

knee he waits for fulfillment of the prayer. The artist deliberately omits the horizon; it

helps to raise the central figures, to elevate them above the audience. Behind the central

group of figures the Vladimir icon and St. Georgii are visible, embroidered on the banner,

echoing the prayer of the monk to advocate for a successful outcome of the battle. In

Pantiukhin’s paintings we can see that his chief themes are the Russian Orthodoxy and

the depiction of nationalist heroic imagery, and thus he continues to enjoy displaying his

paintings in many major art exhibitions of Russia.

In addition, the Vladimir icon’s influence extends beyond the Russian borders as

well. In August 1989 Mel Gibson and Bruce Davey founded an American-Australian

independent company called Icon Production LLC. The company has produced more

than fifty popular and well-known movies including Braveheart (1995), The Passion of

the Christ (2004), Apocalypto (2006), Mary and Max (2009), and Anna Karenina (1997).

It is interesting that the logo’s artwork features a small part of the Vladimir icon (fig. 25).

Mel Gibson explained that the company’s name was chosen because icon means “image”

in Greek, and that the inspiration came from a book on Russian icons in his house.115 The

115 “More on Our Lady of Vladimir Icon,” Reinkat. Web: https://reinkat.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/more-
on-our-lady-of-vladimir-icon/ Accessed on February 1, 2017.
 73

logo of

Fig. 24. “St. Sergii Radonezhskii and Dmitrii Donskoi. On the Kulikovo Field” (The central part). Iurii

Pantiukhin, 2007.

Icon Production LLC demonstrated that the fame and beauty of the Vladimir icon spread

far away from its home. It proves that the icon became the world famous masterpiece like

Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa and Michelangelo’s The Creation of Adam.

In conclusion, the Vladimir icon was extremely important and popular during the

Russian medieval period. Hundreds of reproductions or spiski were produced along with

wall paintings, murals, and new icons, in which icon painters represented the Byzantine

icon of Mother Mary. Later, during the Soviet regime the Vladimir icon was given to the

museum and preserved there. In contemporary Russia, there are some artists who devote

their works to historical themes, in which they include the depiction of the Vladimir icon

as a part of Russian history.

 74

Fig. 25. Logo’s artwork features Icon Production LLC.

Today there are some painters that continue to depict the Vladimir icon such as

Alexander Kosolapov and Avdei Ter-Ogan’ian, but their art faces major problems in

contemporary Russia. Even though, according to the articles 14, 28, and 29 of the

Constitution of the Russian Federation that declare that Russia is a secular state that

guaranties to its citizens the freedom of ideas, speech, conscience, and religion, in

practice we see that the artists like Alexander Kosolapov and Avdei Ter-Ogan’ian

unfortunately cannot display and show their art if it includes some of religious themes

that can offend the Russian Orthodox Church.116

116 The Constitution of the Russian Federation, 1993, text. Web: http://www.constitution.ru Accessed on
February 1, 2017.

 75

Conclusion

Most people think that an icon that barely finished in the workshop of an icon

painter would immediately take a place in a church and never leave it and people simply

have to go to the church, listen to a priest, and pray to the icon. However, in my work,

through the example of one icon, the Vladimir icon, I show that icons reflect life: they

have blood, sweat, tears, tragedy, and drama, like the life of every human. This particular

icon shares with people one of the most intriguing and fascinating stories: it was stolen,

recovered, saved, damaged, and restored; it became an object of political speculation and

a national relic for over eight centuries. This particular piece of art, like any individual,

has its own fate.

As it was shown above the Vladimir icon has made a great impact on Russian

politics, history, culture, literature, and art. It represents the history of a whole nation. It

has seen everything: Mongol invasions that left Rus’ devastated for centuries, the

consolidation of Muscovite power, the creation and development of the Russian state, the

dynasty of the Rurikides, the Time of Troubles, the coronation of all Romanovs,

Napoleonic war, the Revolution, the Soviet regime and terror, the Second World War, the

dissolution of the USSR, and today’s Putinism. It stands as a guardian and a witness of

the great history of the Russian nation:

И с тех пор в часы народных бед

Образ твой над Русью вознесенный

В тьме веков указывал нам след

И в темнице - выход потаенный. (М. Волошин).117

117 Волошин, 257.
 76

List of Images

Fig. 1. A. Ter-Ogan’ian. “The Young Atheist” (“Юный безбожник”), 1998.

Photo.
Fig. 2. Detail, Unknown artist, The Vladimir Icon, first third of the 12th century,
tempera on wood. Hall Museum Church of St Nicholas, Moscow.
Fig. 3. The Hetoimasia and instruments of Christ’s Passion. The back side of the
icon, Our Lady of Vladimir, first third of the 12th century, tempera on wood. Hall
Museum Church of St Nicholas, Moscow.
Fig. 4. Traces of nails on the back side of the icon.
http://tvkultura.ru/article/show/article_id/109585/ Accessed February 5, 2017.
Fig. 5. Благодарственное моление перед Владимирской иконой после
победы над булгарами. Миниатюра из Радзивиловской летописи. Кон. XV в. (Л.
205 об.). Kukushkina, M V, et al.. Radzivilovskaya Letopisʹ. Glagolʹ, 1994.
Fig. 6. Oklad of the Vladimir Icon, XV century, The Museum of Moscow
Kremlin.
Fig. 7. Riza of the Vladimir Icon, 1657, The Museum of Moscow Kremlin.
Fig. 8. Chart of the Icon’s restorations and damages. Anisimov, Our Lady of
Vladimir, 1928.
Fig. 9. The Icon of Vladimir in the Church of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi, photo,
2010.
Fig. 10. One of reproductions of the Icon Our Lady of the Burning Bush. XVI c.
Solovetskii Monastery.
Fig. 11. Поставление кн. Андреем Боголюбским иконы Богоматери
Владимирской. Миниатюра из Радзивиловской летописи. XV в. (Л. 200 об.)
Kukushkina, M V, et al.. Radzivilovskaya Letopisʹ. Glagolʹ, 1994.
Fig. 12. Миниатюра из Радзивиловской летописи. Кон. XV в. (Л. 222).
Kukushkina, M V, et al.. Radzivilovskaya Letopisʹ. Glagolʹ, 1994.
Fig. 13. Тhe Vladimir icon from the Assumption Cathedral of Vladimir, spisok
Andrei Rublev. 1408. Тhe Vladimir-Suzdal museum.
Fig. 14. Piadnitsa Our Lady of Vladimir. Cathedral of Annunciation, Moscow.
XVI c. Moscow Kremlin Museum.
Fig. 15. The Icon of Our Lady of Volokolamsk, 1572. Rublev’s Museum.
Fig. 16. The Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir Oranskaya.
Fig. 17. Zaonikievskaya Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir, 1588.
Fig. 18. Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir by Simen Ushakov.
Fig. 19. The Tree of the Russian State. Simen Ushakov. 1668. Tret’iakov Gallery.
Fig. 20. The Legend of Tsarevich Dmitrii, I. Glazunov, 1967. Moscow State Art
Gallery of the People's Artist of the USSR.
Fig. 21. Eternal Rus,’ by Glazunov, 1988. Moscow State Art Gallery of the
People's Artist of the USSR.
 77

Fig. 22. “St. Sergii of Radonezhskii and Dmitrii Donskoi. On the Kulikovo Field”
(The central part). Iurii Pantiukhin, 2007.
Fig. 23. The Icons on the Cardboard. Avdei Ter-Ogan'ian, 2005. After the
pogrom.
Fig. 24. Have You Eaten Caviar Lately? Kosolapov, 2007.
http://www.sotsart.com/portfolio-item/1990s
Fig. 25. Logo’s artwork features Icon Production LLC.
 78

Bibliography

Anisimov, A. The Vladimir Icon of Mother of God. Prague: Seminarium

Kondakovianum, 1928.
Anisimov, A. “Istoriia Vladimirskoi ikony v svete restavratsii,” Institut archeologii I
iskusstvoznaniia. Trudy sektsii iskusstvoznania 2. Moskva, 1928. 93-107.
Abbott, Jacob. Peter the Great. Harper&Brothers Publishers: New York, 1902.
Альшиц. Д.Н. “Что означает “Пирогощая” русских летописей и Слова о полку
Игореве.” В кн.: Исследования по отеч. источниковедению. М. — Л., 1964.
Бычкова М. Е. “Икона Симона Ушакова и идея происхождения государства
Российского” Церковная археология: Материалы первой всероссийской
конференции. СПб.; Псков, 1995. Ч. 2.
Булгаков, Михаил. “Белая гвардия.” Издательство “Наш Дом - L’Age d’Homme:”
Москва, 1998.
Волошин М. А. “Стихотворения. Статьи. Воспоминания современников,” вступ. ст.
З. Д. Давыдова, В. П. Купченко. М.: Правда, 1991.
Century Association and Boris Mestchersky. Russian Icons: Loan Exhibition, December
4 to January 4, 1941. New York, 1940.
Дегтева, О.В. «Судьба Оранской Иконы Божьей Матери» Вебсайт: Вознесенский
Печерский мужской монастырь.
http://www.pecherskiy.nne.ru/text/publish_other/11.2006.8
Gatrall, Jefferson J A, and Douglas M Greenfield. Alter Icons: The Russian Icon and
Modernity. Pennsylvania State University Press: University Park, Pennsylvania,
2010.
Glazunov Ilya. Biography. Web http://glazunov.ru/en/biography Accessed January 10,
2017.
Грабарь, И. «Андрей Рублев». «Вопросы реставрации», 1, 1926.
Guseva, E, Bogomater’ Vladimirskaia: Sbornik materialov. Moskva Avangard, 1995.
Filimonov, Georgii. Simon Ushakov Universitetskaia Tipogr, 1873.
Forest, Jim. Praying with Icons. Rev., expanded ed. Orbis Books, 2008.
Hurwitz, Ellen S. Prince Andrej Bogoljubskij: The Man and the Myth. Firenze: Licosa
Editrice, 1980.
Ivanov, Vladimir. Russian Icons. New York: Rezzolli, 1988.
Kondakov, Nikodim. The Russian Icon, trans. Ellis H. Minns. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1927.
Miller, David B. “Legends of the Icon of Our Lady of Vladimir: A Study of the
Development of Muscovite National Consciousness.” Speculum, vol. 43, no. 4,
1968.
“More on Our Lady of Vladimir Icon,” Reinkat. Web:
https://reinkat.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/more-on-our-lady-of-vladimir-icon/
Невоструев К. И. “Монограмма Всероссийского митр. Фотия на окладе
 79

Владимирской чудотворной иконы Пресв. Богородицы в Моск. Успенском

соборе” // Сб. на 1866 г., изд. об-м древнерус. искусства при моск.
Публичном музее. М., 1866.
Nichols, Robert. «Nicholas II and the Russian Icon», Alter Icons. The Pennsylvania State
University Press: Pennsylvania, 2010.
Nouwen, Henri. Behold the Beauty the Beauty of the Lord: Praying with Icons. Norte
Dame, IN: Ave Maria Press, 1987.
Pelenski, J. “The Contest for the ‘Kievan Succession’ (1155-1175): The Religious-
Ecclesiastical Dimension.” Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 12/13, 1988,
www.jstor.org/stable/41036344.
«Повесть о Тимур Аксаке» Web: http://old-ru.ru/05-19.html Accessed on October 10,
2016.
«Повести о Куликовской битве» Web.
http://lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=4981 Accessed on October 10,
2016.
Poets’ ob ubienii Andreia Bogoluibskogo. Web: http://bibliotekar.ru/rus/47.htm
Полное собрание русских летописей. т. 1, 22, 23. СПб: Типография Эдуарда Праца,
1846.
Полное собрание русских летописей. т. 21. Под ред. П. Г. Васенко. СПб:
Типография М. А. Александрова, 1908.
Полное собрание русских летописей. т. 22. Вып. 1. Хронограф редакции 1512 года.
/ Ред. С. П. Розанова. СПб, 1911. 580 с.
Полное собрание русских летописей. т. 23. Под ред. Ф. И. Покровского. СПб:
Типография М. А. Александрова, 1910. 342 с.
«Православная энциклопедия», под ред. Патриарха Московского Алексия II.
Церковно-научный центр. Москва 2005. Т. 9.
Saatchi Gallery. “Alexander Kosolapov.” Web:
http://www.saatchigallery.com/artists/kosolapov_alexander.htm?section_name=br
eaking_the_ice
Salmon, R Wendy. “The Triumph of Science over Superstition: the Fate of Russian Icons
in the Early Soviet Era,” Modern Greek Studies Yearbook. University of
Minnesota: Minnesota, Vol 22/23; 2006/2007.
«Сказание о нашествии Едигея» Web: http://old-ru.ru/05-20.html Accessed on October
10, 2016.
«Сказанiе о чудотворной иконъ Богоматери, именуемой Владимiрской» М. 1849.
«Слово о полку Игореве» Web: http://www.vehi.net/oldrussian/opolku.html Accessed
on October, 10, 2016.
Стерлигова И. А. “Драгоценный убор древнерус. икон XI–XIV вв.” М., 2000.
The Legend of Bringing the Icon of the Holy Virgin in the St. Joseph Volokolamsk
Monastery Web: http://iosif-vm.ru/saint/skazanie Accessed on January 15, 2017.
 80

The Tsukanov Art Collection. Web: http://tsukanov-art-collection.ru/picture.html?id=277

Accessed on February 1, 2017.
The Constitution of the Russian Federation, 1993, text. Web: http://www.constitution.ru
Tolochko, Oleksij. “Notes on the Radziwiłł Codex,” Studi Slavistici, Vol 10, Iss 1, p 29-
42 (2014)
“Что скрывает обратная сторона иконы Владимирской Божьей Матери?” TVKultura.
13.03.2014 http://tvkultura.ru/article/show/article_id/109585/ Accessed February
5, 2017.
Чубинская В. Г. Икона Симона Ушакова “Богоматерь Владимирская”, “Древо
Московского государства”, Похвала богоматери Владимирской” (Опыт
историко-культурной интерпретации) // ТОДРЛ. Л., 1985.
Vzdornov, G.I. “Komissiia po sokhraneniiu i raskrytiiu pamiatnikov drevnei zhivopisi v
Rossii 1918 -1924,” sovetskoe iskusstvoznanie, no. 2 (1980), p. 306.
Волохов, B.“Муниципальная милиция в Российской Федерации: исторический
опыт и перспективы: Документально-публицистическое исследование.” М.:
Издательство Главного архивного управления города Москвы, 2012.
Христианство в искусстве. Web: http://www.icon-
art.info/masterpiece.php?lng=ru&mst_id=1869 Accessed on January 15, 2017.
Этингоф, О. «Образ Богоматери» Москва: Прогресс –Традиция, 2000.