THE .

MEANING OF ICONS

Leonid Ouspensky
Vladimir Lossky
* / V
THE MEANING OF ICONS
THE MEANING
OF ICONS
BY
LEONID OUSPENSKY
AND
VLADIMIR LOSSKY

TRANSLATED BY

G. E. H. PALME R

AND

E. KADLOUBOVSKY

ST. VLADIMIR'S SEMINARY PRESS

CRESTWOOD, NEW YORK
1989
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Ouspensky, Leonide.
The meaning of icons.

Translation of: Der Sinn der Ikonen.

Includes indexes.
1. Icons, Russian. 2. Orthodox Eastern Church and
art. I. Lossky, Vladimir, 1903-1958. II. Title.
N8I89.S609713 1982 704.9'482 82-22979
ISBN 0-913836-77-X
ISBN 0-913836-99-0 (pbk.)

© Copyright 1952
By Leonid Ouspensky and Vladimir Lossky:
© Copyright 1982
By Leonid Ouspensky

Published By
St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press
Revised Edition Published in 1982

Second Printing 1983

Third Printing 1989

First Published 1952, in German and English

By URS Graf Verlag, Bern/Olton; Then in
1969 By Boston Book and Art Shop, Boston.

ISBN HARDCOVER: 0-913836-77-X

ISBN PAPER: 0-91.3836-99-0

Printed in the United States of America

By
Eastern Press, Inc.
New Haven, CT
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD by Titus Burckhardt . 7

PUBLISHER'S PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION . 8

TRADITION AND TRADITIONS by Vladimir Lossky . 9

THE MEANING AND LANGUAGE OF ICONS by Leonid Ouspensky. 23

THE TECHNIQUE OF ICONOGRAPHY by Leonid Ouspensky . 51

EXPLANATION OF THE MAIN TYPES OF ICONS: 57

The Iconostasis by Leonid Ouspensky . 59
The Holy or Royal Door by Leonid Ouspensky . 67
Icons of Christ by Vladimir Lossky . 69
The Saviour Acheiropoietos by Vladimir Lossky. 69
The Pantocrator by Vladimir Lossky . 73
Icons of the Mother of God by Vladimir Lossky . 76
Our Lady of the Sign by Leonid Ouspensky . 77
The Hodigitria by Vladimir Lossky . 80
The Smolensk Mother of God by Vladimir Lossky . 81
The Tichvine Mother of God by Vladimir Lossky. 85
The Kazan Mother of God by Vladimir Lossky . 88
The Mother of God Enthroned by Leonid Ouspensky . 89
Icons of Loving-Kindness by Leonid Ouspensky . 92
The Vladimir Mother of God by Leonid Ouspensky . 96
The Tolga Mother of God by Leonid Ouspensky . 97
The Korsun Mother of God by Leonid Ouspensky . 100
The Mother of God of the Passion by Vladimir Lossky . 102
Saint John the Forerunner by Vladimir Lossky . 104
Saint John the Forerunner by Vladimir Lossky . 105
The Archangel Michael by Vladimir Lossky and Leonid Ouspensky . 108
Portraits of the Apostles Peter and Paul and an Icon of the Apostle Paul by Leonid Ouspensky . 109
St. Luke the Evangelist by Vladimir Lossky. 112
St. John the Evangelist by Vladimir Lossky . 113
An Icon of the Holy Bishop Abraham by Leonid Ouspensky . 116
St. Gregory Palamas by Vladimir Lossky.. 119
The Holy Bishop Nicholas, the Miracle-Worker of Myra, by Leonid Ouspensky . 120
St. Basil the Great and the Great Martyr St. George by Leonid Ouspensky. 124
The Head of St. George the Martyr by Leonid Ouspensky . 127
St. Sergius of Radonej by Leonid Ouspensky. 128
St. Simeon Stylites by Vladimir Lossky . 129

St. Macarius of Unsha and Yellow Waters by Leonid Ouspensky . 132

St. Demetrius of Thessalonica by Vladimir Lossky . 133

The Great Martyr St. Paraskeva Piatnitza by Leonid Ouspensky . 136

The Great Martyr St. George and the Dragon by Leonid Ouspensky . 137

The Holy Prophet Elijah in the Desert by Leonid Ouspensky . 140

Collective Icons by Vladimir Lossky . 141

The Principal Festivals . 145

The Birth of the Holy Virgin by Vladimir Lossky. 145

The Raising of the Cross by Vladimir Lossky . 148

The Protection of the Mother of God by Vladimir Lossky . 151

The Presentation of the Holy Virgin in the Temple by Vladimir Lossky . 153

The Nativity of Christ by Leonid Ouspensky . 157

The Nativity of Christ by Leonid Ouspensky . 160

The Baptism of the Lord or Epiphany by Leonid Ouspensky . 164

The Presentation of Christ in the Temple by Vladimir Lossky . 168

The Annunciation by Leonid Ouspensky. 172

The Raising of Lazarus by Leonid Ouspensky. 175

The Entry into Jerusalem by Leonid Ouspensky . 176

The Cross by Vladimir Lossky. 180

The Resurrection by Leonid Ouspensky . 185

The Descent into Hell by Leonid Ouspensky .. 187

The Spice-Bearing Women at the Sepulchre by Leonid Ouspensky . 189

Mid-Pentecost by Vladimir Lossky . 193

The Ascension of Our Lord by Leonid Ouspensky . 194

Icons of Pentecost by Leonid Ouspensky . 199

The Holy Trinity by Leonid Ouspensky . 200

The Descent of the Holy Spirit by Leonid Ouspensky . 207

The Transfiguration by Vladimir Lossky. 209

The Transfiguration by Vladimir Lossky. 209

The Dormition of the Mother of God by Vladimir Lossky . 213

INDEX OF PLATES. 217

INDEX OF ILLUSTRATIONS . 220

SUGGESTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . 221

 FOREWORD

The art of icons is a sacred art in the true sense of the word. opment of this art emerges almost spontaneously. Fundament¬
It is nourished wholly on the spiritual truth to which it gives ally the icon remains always the same; changes of style arise
pictorial expression. For this reason it is often inadequately from the meeting between the timeless spirit of Tradition and
and faultily judged, when approached from outside with cri¬ circumstances conditioned by time and place, which merely
teria borrowed from profane and purely human art. No one cause the unfolding of diverse potentialities, latent in the
will better interpret it than a man whose mind is rooted in the nature of the icon itself. The emphasis in this book as regards
same spirit. These are the basic considerations which have de¬ historical review lies on Russian iconography, which not only
termined the composition of this book. is the best explored, but also represents the peak oj the whole
Most works on art place historical development in the fore¬ art; Leonid Ouspensky says rightly that just as Byzantium
ground; they analyse the interplay of ethnic and geographical brought theology to a certain perfection in words, Russia has
inf unices, which bear upon the art in question, and seek there¬ done likewise in pictures. The technique of iconography, which
by to explain the art itself, whilst the intellectual content of cannot be separated from its spiritual meaning, is given a
pictorial representation plays a subordinate role. In the art of separate chapter.
icons, however, it is the content that is the criterion of form. The second part of the book is concerned with the typology
The conscious and established doctrinal character of this art of icons: the principal traditional compositions are illustrated
determines not only the iconography, but also its artistic form by means of typical examples and based on references to Holy
and general style. This is possible only because the meaning Scripture. Such a method agrees with the fundamental mode
of an icon touches a centre so near mans essence that it governs of approach indicated above; and in keeping with this the
virtually all aspects of the work of art, from its didactic elements reproductions of the icons have been arranged not chronologic¬
to the imponderables oj artistic inspiration. ally but according to the ‘fellin'' (or order) assigned to the
‘

It is otherwise in profane art, where the subject of a picture themes on the Iconostasis.1 A description of the most important
forms only an occasion for the artist to express his own genius, iconographical types serves, besides, to meet a general and
which may be more vital than the subject chosen, and which growing need. In contrast to a predominantly sentimental
derives its richness from elsewhere. interpretation of pictures, which one so often sees coupled with
A sacred art has, through its very content, access to a living pseudo-mystical sayings, it is to wisdom itself, as contained
and truly inexhaustible source. Hence, it is in its nature to in theological and liturgical writings, that this book seeks to
remain true to itself, even where a particular artist has not give expression. Precisely because spiritual realities, which in
fully realised the spiritual depth of a given subject, and so the last analysis are our concern here, do not permit of being
does not draw direct from the spring of holiness, but only captured completely either in pictures or in words, the juxta¬
reflects more or less oj that light which is comprehended in position of visible symbol and written doctrine can give the
sacred jorms sanctioned through traditional rules. most powerful help towards realising in anticipation the source
This had to be stated clearly at the start, in order to justify from which springs the inspiration of both forms of expres¬
the form of presentation of this book. In his introduction Leo¬ sion.—Nothing would be more presumptuous than to wish
nid Ouspensky outlines the theological background in relation to replace traditional wisdom with the standpoint of modern
to icons and shows their close affinity to the experiences of psychology, which is quite out of place here. There is just as
contemplative life. But since ultimately everything depends little possibility of grasping spiritual content psychologically,
on the reality of the Tradition, it was essential jor its under¬ as of explaining psychologically the essence of beauty.
standing to have also a fundamental elucidation of the latter's The examples of icons reproduced were chosen for their
nature. Hence the introductory essay by Vladimir Lossky was truth to tradition, truth expressed both by the iconographical
put first, even though it may make the greatest demand on canon and by their spiritual spontaneity. It was not by chance
readers untrained in theology. From this presentation of the that in most cases Russian icons of a comparatively early
spiritual premises oj icons, an insight into the historical devel¬ period were chosen. The hieratic strictness of iconography has

1 The screen, decorated with icons, dividing the Sanctuary from the nave in an Orthodox church. See ch. 5 below.

7
nothing akin with crude awkwardness, even if sometimes the could not be found of all “classical” compositions, nor was it
spiritual appears to clothe itself in the child-like. possible to make a quite faultless reproduction of every icon
Contingent circumstances influenced the choice of icons, in chosen.
that virtually only those works were accessible for reproduction It need hardly be said that both the authors of this book
which to-day are in Western Europe, Greece and America. themselves have lived and worked within the spiritual frame¬
Nevertheless, an advantage lay in this limitation, since most work that conforms with the art of icons. Leonid Ouspensky
of the icons published elsewhere constitute the repetition of has himself earned merit as an iconographer in the actual prac¬
certain well-known examples, mostly from Russian museums, tice of iconography. Vladimir Lossky is well known for his
whereas this volume reproduces a number of unknown, or very studies on the mystical theology of the Eastern Church.1
little known, icons of good style.—Examples of equal merit TITUS BURCKHARDT

PUBLISHER’S PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

This second edition of The Meaning of Icons has been produced with the active cooperation of Professor Leonid A.
Ouspensky. It contains sixteen new plates and a number of illustrations in color, which, in the previous edition,
appeared in black-and-white. The text referring to new illustrative material has been appropriately modified, and
several other adjustments and corrections have been made.

Indices of plates and illustrations have been added, as well as a select bibliography.

St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press expresses its gratitude to The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Castle De
Wijenburgh, Echteld, Netherlands; Christies, New York; National Museum, Paris; Benaki Museum, Athens; The
Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston; Dr. Hans Skrobucha of The Icon Museum, Recklinghausen; Robert
and Hetty Roozemond; Dr. John Sinsky; Dr. Siegfried Amberg; Mr. Paul Schaffer of A La Vielle Russie; and a
special appreciation to Mr. Richard Temple of The Temple Gallery in London for his advice and assistance.

1 See for example The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (and other works), St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1976.

Note.—The Old Testament quotations have been taken from the English version of the Scptuagint; for the New
Testament the Authorized Version was used.

8
TRADITION AND TRADITIONS
 Tradition (Tiagadoaig, traditio) is one of those terms adversaries, having tacitly recognised in Tradition a
which, through being too rich in meanings, runs the risk reality other than that of Scripture. Instead of being the
ot finally having none. This is not only due to a secu¬ vnoOecnf2 itself of the sacred books, their fundamental
larisation, which has depreciated so many words of coherence due to the living breath passing through them,
the theological vocabulary—“spirituality”, “mystic”, transforming their letter into “a unique body of truth”,
“communion”—detaching them from their Christian Tradition would appear as something added, as an ex¬
context in order to make of them the current coin of ternal principle in relation to Scripture. Henceforth, the
profane language. It the word “tradition” has suffered patristic texts which attributed a character of “pleroma”
the same fate, this has happened all the more easily be¬ to the Holy Scripture3 became incomprehensible, whilst
cause even in the language of theology itself this term the Protestant doctrine of the “sufficiency of Scripture”
sometimes remains somewhat vague. In effect, if one received a negative meaning, by the exclusion of all that
tries to avoid mutilating the idea of tradition by eli¬ is “Tradition”. The defenders of Tradition saw them¬
minating some of the meanings which it can comprise, selves obliged to prove the necessity ofunion between two
but attempts to keep them all, one finds oneself reduced juxtaposed realities, each of which remained insufficient
to definitions which embrace too many things at a time alone. Hence a scries of false problems like that of the
and no longer seize what constitutes the real meaning primacy of Scripture or of Tradition, of their respective
of “tradition”. authority, of the total or partial difference of their con¬
As soon as precision is desired the over-abundant con¬ tent, etc. ... How is the necessity of knowing the Scrip¬
tent has to be broken up, and a group of narrow con¬ ture in the Tradition to be proved, how is their unity
cepts created, the sum of which is far from expressing which was ignored in separating them to be found
that living reality called the Tradition of the Church. again? If the two are “fulness”, there could be no ques¬
A reading of the erudite work of Father A. Dcneffe, tion of two “plcromas” opposed to one another, but of
Dcr Traditionsbegriff1, raises the question whether tra¬ two modalities of one and the same fulness of the Re¬
dition is capable of being expressed in concepts, or velation communicated to the Church.
indeed whether, as with all that is ‘‘life”, it “overflows A distinction which separates or divides is never per¬
the intelligence” and would have to be described rather fect nor sufficiently radical: it does not allow one to
than defined. There are, in fact, in some theologians of discern, in its purity, the difference of the unknown
the romantic epoch, such as Mohler in Germany or term, which it opposes to another that is supposed to be
Khomiakov in Russia, beautiful pages of description, in known. Separation is at the same time more and less
which tradition appears as a catholic plenitude, and than a distinction: it juxtaposes two objects detached
cannot be distinguished from the unity, the catholicity from one another, but in order to do this it must first
(“Sobornost” of Khomiakov), the apostolicity or the of all lend to one the characteristics of the other. In
consciousness of the Church possessing the immediate seeking here to juxtapose Scripture and Tradition as
certitude of revealed truth. two independent sources of Revelation, Tradition is
Faced with these descriptions, faithful in their general inevitably endowed with qualities which belong to
line to the image of the Tradition in the patristic writings Scripture: it will be the ensemble of “other writings”
of the first centuries,' one is anxious to recognise the or of unwritten “other words”, that is, all that the
character of “plcroma” belonging to the tradition of Church can add to the Scripture on the horizontal plane
the Church, but cannot all the same renounce the ne¬ of her history. There will thus be on the one hand the
cessity of drawing distinctions, which is imposed on all Scripture or the Scriptural canon, and on the other hand
dogmatic theology. To distinguish does not always mean the Tradition of the Church, which in its turn can be
to separate, nor even to oppose. In opposing Tradition divided into several sources of Revelation of unequal
to Floly Scripture as two sources ot Revelation, the value: acts of Oecumenical or local Councils, writings
polemicists of the Counter-Reformation put themselves of the Fathers, canonical institutions, liturgy, icono¬
from the start on the same ground as their Protestant graphy, devotional practices, etc. ... But then could this

1 In the collection Miinsterische Bcitriige zur Theologie, vol. 18 (Munster, 1931).

2 The expression is from Saint Irenacus Adi'. Haer., 1, 1, 15-20.
3 See the article of Father Louis Bouyer, The Fathers of the Church on Tradition and Scripture, in Eastern Churches Quarterly, VII (1947),
special number on Tradition and Scripture.
still be called the ‘‘Tradition” and would it not be more face, opposing books written with ink to discourses
exact to say, with the theologians of the Council of uttered with the living voice. In both cases it is a question
Trent, “the traditions”? This plural well expresses of the word that is preached: “the preaching of the
what is meant when, having separated Scripture and faith” here serves as the common foundation, which
Tradition instead of distinguishing them, the latter is qualifies the opposition. But is not that to attribute to
projected on to the written or oral testimonies which Tradition something which still makes it akin to Scrip¬
are added to the Holy Scripture, accompanying or fol¬ ture? Is it not possible to go further in search of the pure
lowing it. Just as “time projected in space” presents an notion of Tradition?
obstacle to the intuition of Bcrgsonian “duration”, so Amongst the variety of meanings that can be noted
too this projection of the qualitative notion of Tradi¬ in the Fathers of the first centuries, Tradition sometimes
tion in the quantitative domain of the “traditions” receives that of a teaching kept secret, not divulged,
disguises rather than reveals its real character, for Tra¬ lest the mystery be profaned by the uninitiate.2 This is
dition is free of all determination, which in limiting situ¬ clearly expressed by St. Basil, in the distinction which he
ates it historically. makes between doy/ua and xtjQvy/ua.3 “Dogma” here
An advance will be made towards a purer notion of has a sense contrary to that given to this term to-day:
Tradition, if this term is reserved to designate solely the far from being a doctrinal definition loudly proclaimed
oral transmission of the truths of faith. The separation by the Church, it is a “teaching” (<5tdaoxaX(a) un¬
between Tradition and Scripture will still subsist, but published and secret, that our fathers kept in silence,
instead of isolating two sources of Revelation, one will free from disquiet and curiosity, well knowing that in
oppose two modes of transmitting it: oral preaching being silent one safeguards the sacred character of the
and writing. It will then be necessary to put in one cate¬ mysteries.4 On the other hand the x^qvypta (which
gory the preaching of the Apostles and of their succes¬ means “preaching” in the language of the New Tes¬
sors, as well as all preaching of the faith practised by a tament) is always an open declaration, whether it be a
living ministery; and in the other category, the Holy doctrinal definition5, the official prescription of an ob¬
Scripture and all other written expressions of the re¬ servance6, a canonical act7 or public prayers of the
vealed Truth (these latter differing in the degree of their Church.8 Although they call to mind the “doctrina
authority recognised by the Church). This approach arcana” of the Gnostics, who also lay claim to a hidden
affirms the primacy of Tradition over Scripture, since apostolic tradition9, the unwritten and secret traditions
the oral transmission of the Apostles’ preaching pre¬ of which St. Basil speaks differ from it notably. Firstly,
ceded its written recording in the canon of the New the examples that he gives in the passage that we have
Testament. It will even be said: the Church could mentioned show that St. Basil’s expressions relating to
dispense with the Scriptures, but she could not exist the “mysteries” do not concern an esoteric circle of a
without the Tradition. This is just only up to a certain few perfect men in the interior of the Christian com¬
point: it is true that the Church always possesses the munity, but rather the ensemble of the faithful parti¬
revealed Truth, which she makes manifest by preaching, cipating in the sacramental life of the Church, who are
and which could have equally well remained oral and here opposed to the “uninitiate”, those whom a pro¬
passed from mouth to mouth, without ever having been gressive catechism must prepare for the sacraments of ini¬
fixed by writing.1 But however much the separability tiation. Secondly, the secret tradition (doypta) can be de¬
of Scripture and Tradition is affirmed, they have not yet clared publicly and thus become “preaching” (xrjQvypia)
been radically distinguished: one remains on the sur¬ when a necessity (for example the struggle against a

1 Saint Irenaeus envisages this possibility: Adv. Haer. Ill, 4, 1.

2 Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, VI, 61 (Stahlin, 462).
:i St. Basil, Treatise on the Holy Spirit, XXVII: P.G. 32, Coll. 188A-19.3A, or On the Holy Spirit. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1981.
4 Ibid., coll. 188C-189A.
5 St. Basil (Letter 51, ibid., col. 392 C) calls opoovmog “the great declaration of piety (to /ueya Tfjg evoeflelas xr'iQvypa) which has made
manifest the doctrine (doyyta) of salvation” (Cf. Letter 125, ibid., col. 548B).
6 Homily on fasting. P.G. 31, col. 185C.
7 Letter 251. P.G. 32, col. 933B.
8 Letter 155. Ibid., col. 612 C.
9 Ptolcmaeus, Letter to Flora, VII, 9. Ed. Sources Chretiennes, vol. 24, p. 66.

12
heresy) obliges the Church to make its pronouncement.1 oil, cucharistic cpiclesis, the custom of turning towards
So, if the traditions received from the Apostles remain the east during prayer and that of remaining standing
unwritten and subject to the discipline of secrecy, if the on Sunday and during the period of Pentecost, etc.).
faithful did not always know their mysterious meaning2 3, If these “unwritten customs” [rd dyqacpa rcov eO&v),
this is due to the wise economy of the Church, which these “mysteries of the Church” [dyqacpa r f]g’ Exx?,r]otag
surrenders its mysteries only to the extent that their open /.ivarr'iQin), so numerous that one could not expound
declaration becomes indispensable. One is here faced them in the course of a whole day5, are necessary for
with one of the antinomies of the Gospels: on the one understanding the truth of the Scripture (and in general
hand one must not give what is holy to the dogs, nor the true meaning of all “preaching”), it is clear that the
cast pearls before swine (Matt, vii, 6), on the other secret traditions point to the “mysterial character” of
hand “there is nothing covered, that shall not be re¬ Christian knowledge. In effect, the revealed truth is not
vealed; and hid, that shall not be known” (Matt, x, a dead letter but a living Word: it can be attained only
26; Luke xii, 2). The “traditions guarded in silence in the Church, through initiation by the “mysteries”
and in mystery”, that St.Basil opposes to oral preaching or sacraments6 into the “mystery which hath been hid
in public, make one think of the words that were told from ages and from generations, but now is made
“in darkness”, “in the ear”, “in closets”, but which manifest to his saints” (Col. i, 26).
will be spoken “in light”, “upon the house-tops” The unwritten traditions or mysteries of the Church,
(Matt, x, 27; Luke xii, 3). mentioned by St. Basil, constitute then the boundary
It is no longer an opposition between the dyqacpa and with Tradition properly so-called, and they give glimp¬
the eyyqacpa, oral preaching and written preaching. The ses of some of its features. In effect, there is participation
distinction between Tradition and Scripture here pene¬ in the revealed mystery through the fact of sacramental
trates further into the heart of its subject, ranging on the initiation. It is a new knowledge, a “gnosis of God”
one side that which is kept in secret, and for this reason [yvdroig Oeov) that one receives as grace, and this gift of
must not be recorded in writing, and on the other, all gnosis is conferred in a “tradition ” which is, for St. Basil,
that is the subject of preaching and that, once having the confession of the Trinity at the time of baptism: a
been publicly declared, can henceforth be ranged on the sacred formula which leads us into light.7 Here the hori¬
side of the “Scriptures” [Tgatpat). Did not Basil him¬ zontal line of the “traditions” received from the mouth
self judge it opportune to reveal in writing the secret of the Lord and transmitted by the Apostles and their
of several “traditions”, thus transforming them into successors crosses with the vertical, with the Tradition—
xr}Qvyptara>z This new distinction puts the accent on the the communication of the Holy Spirit, which opens to
secret character of the Tradition, by thus opposing a members of the Church an infinite perspective of my¬
hidden fund of oral teachings, received from the Apostles, stery in each word of the revealed Truth. Starting from
to that which the Church offers for the knowledge of traditions such as St. Basil presents to us, it is then neces¬
all; hence it immerses “preaching” in a sea of apostolic sary to go further and admit the Tradition, which is
traditions, that could not be set aside or under-estimated distinguished from them.
without injury to the Gospel. Even more, if one did In fact, if one stops at the boundary of the unwritten
this “one would transform the teaching that is preached and secret traditions, without making the last distinction,
(to xrjQvy/ua) into a simple name”, devoid of meaning.4 one will still remain on the horizontal plane ofthe:ra(?a(5o-
The several examples of these traditions offered by St. Ba¬ aeig, where Tradition appears to us as “projected into
sil all relate to the sacramental and liturgical life of the the realm of the Scriptures”. It is true that it would be
Church (sign of the Cross, baptismal rites, blessing of impossible to separate these secret traditions from the

1 Tho example of opoovaiog is typical in this sense. The economy of St. Basil on the subject of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit is explained
not only by a pedagogue’s care, but also by this conception of the secret tradition.
2 St. Basil, Treatise on the Holy Spirit, ibid., coll. 189C-192A.
3 Ibid, coll., 192A-193A.
4 Ibid, col., 188AB.
6 Ibid, coll., 188A; 192C-193A.
6 On the identification of these two terms and on the “mysterial” meaning of the sacraments in the writers of the first centuries, see
Dom Odo Casel, Das christlichc Kultusmysterium (Regensburg, 1932), p. 105 et seq.
7 St. Basil, ibid. (X), col. 113B.
Scriptures, or more generally, from “preaching”, hut historical document, “archives”, and to justify the
one could always oppose them as words spoken in secret Gospel by the texts of the Old Testament, declaring:
or guarded in silence and words declared publicly. The “For me, my archives, they are Jesus Christ; my in¬
fact is that the final distinction has not yet been made violable archives are His Cross and His Death and His
so long as there remains a last element which links Tra¬ Resurrection, and the Faith which comes from Him...
dition with Scripture—the word, which serves as the He is the Door of the Father, by which enter in Abraham,
foundation for opposing hidden traditions to open Isaac and Jacob, and the prophets, and the Apostles, and
preaching. In order to isolate the pure notion of Tra¬ the Church.”2 If by the fact of the Incarnation of the
dition, in order to strip it of all that is its projection on Word the Scriptures are not archives of the Truth, but
the horizontal line of the Church, it would be necessary its living body, the Scriptures can be possessed only with¬
to go beyond the opposition of secret words and words in the Church, which is the unique body of Christ. Once
preached aloud, ranging together “the traditions” and again one returns to the idea of the sufficiency of the
“preaching”. These two have this in common that, Scripture. But here there is nothing negative: it does
secret or not, they are none the less expressed by word. not exclude, but assumes the Church with its sacraments,
They always imply a verbal expression, whether it is a institutions and teachings transmitted by the Apostles.
question of words properly so-called, pronounced or Nor does this sufficiency, this “plcroma” of the Scrip¬
written, or whether of the dumb language which is ture, exclude any other expressions of the same Truth
addressed to the understanding by visual manifestation that the Church will be able to produce (just as the ful¬
(iconography, ritual gestures, etc.). Taken in this general ness of Christ, the Flead of the Church, docs not exclude
sense, the word is not uniquely an external sign used to the Church—the complement of His glorious humanity).
designate a concept, but above all a content, which is One knows that the defenders of the holy images founded
defined intelligibly and declared in assuming a body, in the possibility of Christian iconography on the fact of
being incorporated in articulate discourse or in any other the Incarnation of the Word: icons, just as well as the
form of external expression. Scriptures, arc expressions of the inexpressible, and have
II such is the nature of the word, nothing of what is become possible thanks to the revelation of God, which
revealed and makes itself known can remain strange to it. was accomplished in the Incarnation of the Son. The
Whether it be the Scriptures, preaching or the “apostles’ same holds good for the dogmatic definitions, the exe¬
traditions guarded in silence” the same word X.oyog or gesis, the liturgy, for all that, in the Church of Christ,
Xoyta can equally be applied to all that constitutes ex¬ participates in the same fulness of the Word as is con¬
pression of the revealed Truth. In fact, this word cease¬ tained by the Scriptures, without thereby being limited
lessly recurs in patristic literature to designate equally or reduced. In this “ totalitarian” quality of the incarnate
the Holy Scripture and the Symbols of faith. Thus, Word, all that expresses the revealed truth is then related
St.John Cassian says on the subject of the symbol of to the Scripture and, if all were in fact to become “scrip¬
Antioch: “It is the abridged word (breviatum verbum) ture”, “the world itself could not contain the books
that the Lord has given... contracting into a few words that should be written” (John xxi, 25). But since the
the faith of His Testaments, in order to contain briefly expression of the transcendent mystery has become pos¬
the meaning of all the Scriptures.”1 If one next reflects sible by the fact of the Incarnation of the Word, since
that the Scriptures are not a collection of words about all that expresses it becomes in some sort “scripture”
God, but the Word of God [Xoyoq rov 0eov), one will beside the Holy Scripture, the question arises as to
understand why, above all since Origen, there has been where finally is the Tradition that we have sought by
the desire to identify the presence of the Divine Logos detaching progressively its pure notion from all that
in the writings of the two Testaments with the Incar¬ can relate it to the scriptural reality?
nation of the Word, by which the Scriptures were As we have said, it is not to be sought on the horizontal
“accomplished”. Well before Origen, St.Ignatius of lines of the “traditions” which, just as much as the
Antioch refused to see in the Scriptures nothing but an Scripture, are determined by the Word. If again we

1 “Hoc est ergo breviatum verbum quod fecit Dominus... fidem scilicet duplicis Testamenti sui in pauca colligens, ct sensum omnium
Scripturarum in brevia concludens” (De incarn., VI, 3: P.L. 50, col. 149A). The “breviatum verbum” is an allusion to Rom. ix, 27, which
in its turn quotes Isaiah x, 22. Cf. St. Augustine, De Symholo, I: P.L. 40, col. 628; St.Cyril ofjerusalem, Catcch. V, 12: P.G. 33, col. 521 AB.
2 To the Philadelphians, VIII, 2, and IX, 1 Sources Chrcticnncs, 10, 2nd ed., p. 150.

14
wished to oppose it to all that belongs to the reality of unique mode of receiving it. We say specifically unique
the Word, it would be necessary to say that the Tradition mode, and not uniform mode, for to Tradition in its pure
is Sil ence. "He who possesses in truth the word of Jesus notion there belongs nothing formal. It docs not im¬
can hear even its silence (zfjg fjovyiag avrov dxoveiv)”, pose on human consciousness by formal guarantees of
says St. Ignatius of Antioch.1 As far as I know this text the truths of faith, but gives access to the discovery of
has never been used in the numerous studies which quote their inner evidence. It is not the content of Revelation,
patristic passages on the Tradition in abundance, always but the light that reveals it; it is not the word, but the
the same passages, known by everyone, but with never living breath which makes the word heard at the same
a warning that texts in which the word "tradition” is time as the silence from which it came3; it is not the
not expressly mentioned can be more eloquent than Truth, but a communication of the Spirit of Truth, out¬
many others. side which the Truth cannot be received. “No man
The faculty of hearing the silence of Jesus, attributed can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost”
by St. Ignatius to those who in truth possess His word, (i Cor. xii, 3). The pure notion of Tradition can then
echoes the reiterated appeal of Christ to His hearers: be defined by saying that it is the life of the Holy Spirit
"he that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” The words of in the Church, communicating to each member of the
Revelation have then a margin of silence which cannot Body of Christ the faculty of hearing, of receiving, of
be picked up by the cars of those who are outside. knowing the Truth in the Light which belongs to it, and
St. Basil moves in the same direction when he says, in not according to the light of human reason. This is true
his passage on the traditions: "There is also a form of gnosis owed to an action of the Divine Light cot to [tog

silence namely the obscurity used by the Scripture, in rr/s yviboEcoc; rfjg bo^r\g rov Oeov-2 Cor. iv, 6), the
order to make it difficult to gain understanding of the unique Tradition, independent ofall “ philosophy ”, ofall
teachings, for the profit of readers.”2 This silence of the that lives by the “tradition of men, after the rudiments of
Scriptures could not be detached from them: it is trans¬ the world, and not after Christ” (Col. ii, 8). This free¬
mitted by the Church with the words of the Revelation, dom from every condition of nature, every contingency
as the very condition of their reception. If it could be of history, is the first characteristic of the vertical line
opposed to the words (always on the horizontal plane, of the Tradition: it is inherent in Christian gnosis—
where they express the revealed Truth), this silence “Ye shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall make
which accompanies the words implies no kind of in¬ you free” (John viii, 32). One cannot know the Truth
sufficiency or lack of fulness of the Revelation, nor the nor understand the words of the Revelation without
necessity to add to it anything whatever. It signifies that having received the Holy Spirit; “But where the Spirit
the revealed mystery, to be truly received as fulness, of the Lord is, there is liberty” (2 Cor. iii, 17).4 This
demands a conversion towards the vertical plane, in liberty of the children of God, opposed to the slavery
order that one may be able to "comprehend with all of the sons of this world, is expressed by the “frankness ”
saints” not only what is the “breadth and length” of (diaQQijoia), with which those can address God who
the Revelation, but also its “depth ’’and its “height” know Him whom they worship, for they worship the
(Eph. iii, 18). father “in Spirit and in Truth” (John iv, 23, 24).
At the point which we have reached, we can no longer Wishing to distinguish Tradition from Scripture, we
oppose Scripture and Tradition, nor juxtapose them as have sought to strip the notion of all that could make it
two distinct realities. We must, however, distinguish akin to scriptural reality. We have had to distinguish it
them, the better to seize their indivisible unity, which from the "traditions”, ranking these latter, together
lends to the Revelation given to the Church its character with the Scriptures and all expressions of the Truth, on
of fulness. If the Scriptures and all that the Church can the same horizontal line where we have found no other
produce in words written or pronounced, in images name to designate it than that of Silence. When therefore
or in symbols liturgical or otherwise, represent the differ¬ Tradition has been detached from all that could receive
ing modes of expression of the Truth, Tradition is the its projection on the horizontal plane, it is necessary to

1 To the Ephesians, XV, 2 Sources Chr6tiennes, 10, 2nd ed., p. 84.

2 Op. cit., col. 189BC.
3 Cf. St. Ignatius of Antioch, To the Magnesians, VIII, 2 Sources Chreticnnes, 10, 2nd ed., p. 102.
4 Sec St. Basil’s interpretation of this text, op. cit. XX, coll. 164C-165C.

15
enter another dimension in order to reach the term of which this transmission is received in the Holy Spirit
our analysis. Contrary to analyses such as philosophy (Tradition as the principle of Christian knowledge), it
since Plato and Aristotle conceives them, and which will none the less be impossible to separate these two
end in dissolving the concrete by resolving it into general points; hence the ambivalence of the term “tradition”,
ideas or conceptions, our analysis leads us finally towards which designates simultaneously the horizontal line and
the Truth and the Spirit, the Word and the Holy Spirit, the vertical line of the Truth possessed by the Church.
two Persons, distinct but indissolubly united, Whose Every transmission of a truth of faith implies then a com¬
twofold economy, whilst founding the Church, con¬ munication of the grace of the Holy Spirit. In effect,
ditions at the same time the indissoluble and distinct outside of the Spirit Who “spake by the prophets”, that
character of Scripture and of Tradition. which is transmitted cannot be recognised by the Church
as word of Truth, word akin to the sacred books in¬
★
spired by God and, together with the Holy Scriptures,
“recapitulated” by the Incarnate Word. This wind of
The culmination of our analysis—Incarnate Word and Pentecostal fire, communication of the Spirit of Truth
Holy Spirit in the Church, as the twofold condition of proceeding from the Father and sent by the Son, ac-
the fulness of the Revelation—will serve us as a turn¬ tualises the supreme faculty of the Church: the con¬
table from which to set forth now on the way of synthesis sciousness of revealed Truth, the possibility of judging
and to assign to Tradition the place which belongs to it in and of discerning between true and false in the Light of
the concrete realities of ecclesiastical life. It will first of all the Holy Spirit: “it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and
be necessary to establish a double reciprocity in the to us” (Acts xv, 28). If the Paraclete is the unique Cri¬
economy of the two Divine Persons sent by the Father. terion of the Truth revealed by the Incarnate Word, He
On the one hand, it is by the Holy Spirit that the Word is also the principle of the Incarnation, for the same Holy
is made incarnate of the Virgin Mary. On the other hand, Spirit by Whom the Virgin Mary received the faculty
it is by the Word, following His Incarnation and work of becoming Mother of God, acts as function of the
of Redemption, that the Holy Spirit descends on the Word as a power for expressing the Truth in intelligible
members of the Church at Pentecost. In the first case, definitions or sensible images and symbols, documents
the Holy Spirit comes first, but with a view to the In¬ of the faith, of which the Church will have to judge
carnation, in order that the Virgin may be able to con¬ whether or not they belong to its Tradition.
ceive the Son of God, come to be made Man. The role These considerations are necessary to enable us to find
of the Holy Spirit is here then functional: He is the again, in concrete cases, the relationship between the
power of the Incarnation, the virtual condition of the Tradition and the revealed Truth, received and expressed
reception of the Word. In the second case, it is the by the Church. As we have seen, Tradition in its primary
Son Who comes first, for He sends the Holy Spirit notion is not the revealed content, but the unique mode
Who comes from the Father, but it is the Holy Spirit, of receiving the Revelation, a faculty owed to the Holy
Who plays the principal role: It is He Who is the aim, Spirit, which renders the Church apt to know the In¬
for He is communicated to the members of the Body carnate Word in its relationship with the Father (supreme
of Christ, in order to deify them by grace. So here the gnosis which is Theology, in the proper meaning of this
role of the Incarnate Word is, in its turn, functional in word, for the Fathers of the first centuries) as well as the
relation to the Spirit: It is the form, so to speak, the mysteries of the Divine Economy, from the creation of
‘‘canon” of sanctification, formal condition of the re¬ heaven and earth of Genesis, to the new heaven and
ception of the Holy Spirit. new earth of the Apocalypse. Recapitulated by the In¬
The true and holy Tradition, according to Philaret of carnation of the Word, the history of the Divine Eco¬
Moscow, ‘‘does not consist uniquely in visible and verbal nomy will make itself known by the Scriptures, in the
transmission of the teachings, the rules, institutions and recapitulation of the two Testaments by the same Word.
rites: it is at the same time an invisible and actual com¬ But this unity of the Scriptures could be recognised only
munication of grace and of sanctification. ’,:l If it is neces¬ in the Tradition, in the Light of the Holy Spirit commu¬
sary to distinguish what is transmitted (the oral and nicated to the members of the unique Body of Christ.
written traditions) and the unique mode according to The books of the Old Testament, composed over a

1 Quoted by G. Florovsky, in The Ways of Russian Theology, Nordland Publishing Company, p. 214.

16
period of several centuries, written by different authors and not the living vivifying Word, perfect expression
who have often brought together and fused different of the Revelation that it possesses independently of the
religious traditions, have only an accidental, mechanical existence of old discordant manuscripts or of new “cri¬
unity for the eyes of the historian of religions. Their tical editions” of the Bible.
unity with the writings of the New Testament will One can say that the “Tradition” represents the cri¬
appear to him factitious and artificial. But a son of the tical spirit of the Church. But, contrary to the “critical
Church will be able to recognise the unity of inspiration spirit” of human science, the critical judgment of the
and the unique object of the faith in these heteroclitic Church is made acute by the Holy Spirit. It will have
writings, woven by the same Spirit Who, after having then a quite different principle: that of the undiminished
spoken by the prophets, preceded the Word in rendering fulness of Revelation. Thus the Church, which will
the Virgin Mary apt to serve as means for the Incarnation have to correct the inevitable alterations of the sacred
of God. texts (that certain “traditionalists” wish to preserve at
It is only in the Church that one will be able to recog¬ any price, sometimes attributing a mystical meaning to
nise in full consciousness the unity of inspiration of the the stupid mistakes of copyists), will be able at the same
sacred books, because the Church alone possesses the time to recognise in some late interpolations (for ex¬
Tradition—the knowledge in the Holy Spirit of the ample, in the comma of the “three that bear record in
Word Incarnate. The fact that the Canon of the writings heaven” in the first epistle of St.John) an authentic
of the New Testament was formed relatively late, with expression of the revealed Truth. Naturally authenticity
some hesitations, shows us that the Tradition is in no has here a meaning quite other than it has in the historic
way automatic: it is the condition of the Church having disciplines.1 Not only the Scriptures, but also the oral
an infallible consciousness, but it is not a mechanism traditions received from the Apostles have been con¬
which will infallibly make known the Truth, outside served only by virtue of the Tradition—the Light which
and above the consciousness of individuals, outside all reveals their true meaning and their significance, essen¬
deliberation and all judgment. In fact, if the Tradition tial for the Church. Here more than elsewhere Tradition
is a faculty of judging in the Light of the Holy Spirit, exercises its critical action, showing above all its negative
it obliges those who wish to know the Truth in the and exclusive aspect: it rejects the “profane and old
Tradition to make incessant efforts: one does not remain wives’ fables” (i Tim. iv, 7), piously received by all
in the Tradition by a certain historical inertia, in keeping those whose “ traditionalism” consists in accepting with
as a “tradition received from the Fathers ” all that which, unlimited credulity all that is insinuated into the life of
by force of habit, flatters a certain devout sensibility. the Church to remain there by force of habit.2 At the
On the contrary, it is by substituting “traditions” of epoch at which the oral traditions coming from the
those kinds for the Tradition of the Holy Spirit living Apostles began to be fixed in writing, the true and the
in the Church, that one runs most risk of finding oneself false traditions crystallise together in numerous apo¬
finally outside the Body of Christ. It must not be thought crypha, several of which circulate under the names of
that the conservative attitude alone is salutary, nor that the Apostles or other saints. “We are not ignorant”
heretics are always “innovators”. If the Church, after says Origen3, “that many of these secret writings have
having established the Canon of Scripture, conserves it been composed by impious men, from among those who
in the Tradition, this conservation is not static and inert, make their iniquity sound loudest, and that some of
but dynamic and conscious—in the Holy Spirit, Who these fictions are used by the ‘Hypythiani’, others, by
purifies anew “the oracles of the Lord”, “pure oracles: the disciples of Basilides. We must then pay attention, in
as silver... proved in a furnace of earth, purified seven order not to receive all the apocrypha which circulate
times” (Ps. xii, 6). If that were lacking, it would have under the names of saints, for some have been composed
conserved only a dead text, witness of an ended epoch, by the Jews, perhaps to destroy the truth of our Scrip-

1 Origen, in his homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, after having expressed his views on the source of this Epistle, of which the teach¬
ing is Pauline but the style and composition denote an author other than St.Paul, adds this: “If then some Church considers this Epistle as
written by St. Paul, let it be honoured also for that. For it is not by chance that the ancients have transmitted it under the name of Paul.
But who wrote the Epistle? God knows the truth.” (Fragment quoted by Eusebius, H.E. 1. VI, c. 25: P.G. 20, col. 584C.)
2 In our days still, the literature of the Synaxaria and the Leimonaria offer similar examples, not to mention liturgical monstrosities which,
for certain people, also receive a “traditional” and sacred character.
3 Commentary on Matthew, series XXVIII: P.G. 13, col. 1637.

17
tures, and to establish false teachings. But on the other or compiler. Without belonging to the “apostolic tra¬
hand vve must not reject as a whole all that is useful for dition ” properly so-called, the dionysian Corpus belongs
throwing light on our Scriptures. It is a mark of great¬ to the “patristic tradition”, which continues that of the
ness of spirit to hear and to apply these words of the Apostles and of their disciples.2 The same could be said
Scripture: ‘Prove all things; hold fast that which is of some other writings of this kind. As for the oral tra¬
good’ (i Thes. v, 21).” Since the deeds and the words ditions claiming apostolic authority, above all in so far
that the memory of the Church has kept since apostolic as concerns customs and institutions, the judgment of
times “in silence free of disquiet and of curiosity”1 the Church will take account not only of their meaning,
have been divulged in writings of heterodox origin, but also of the universality of their usage.
these apocrypha, though separated from the scriptural Let us note that the formal criterion of the traditions,
Canon, should none the less not be totally rejected. The expressed by Saint Vincent of Lerins: “Quod semper,
Church will know how to extract from them some quod ubique, quod ab omnibus”—can only be applied
elements apt for completing or for illustrating events in full to those apostolic traditions which were orally
on which the Scriptures are silent, but that Tradition transmitted during two or three centuries. The New
recognises as true. Further, amplifications having an Testament Scriptures already escape from this rule, for
apocryphal source will serve to colour the liturgical they were neither “always”, nor “everywhere”, nor
texts and the iconography of some feasts. One will use “received by all”, before the definitive establishment
then apocryphal sources, with judgment and moderation, of the scriptural Canon. Whatever may be said by those
to the extent to which they may represent corrupted who forget the primary significance of Tradition, wish¬
apostolic traditions. Recreated by the Tradition, these ing to substitute for it a “rule of faith”, the formula of
elements, purified and made legitimate, return to the Saint Vincent is still less applicable to the dogmatic
Church as its own property. This judgment will be definitions of the Church. It is enough to recall that the
necessary each time that the Church has to do with o/uoovaiog was nothing less than “traditional”; with a
writings claiming to belong to the apostolic tradition. few exceptions3, it was never used anywhere or by any¬
She will reject them, or she will receive them, without one except by the valentinian gnostics and the heretic
necessarily posing the question of their authenticity on Paul of Samosatc. The Church has transformed it into
the historical plane, but considering above all their con¬ “pure oracles: as silver... proved in a furnace of earth,
tent in the light of the Tradition. purified seven times” in the crucible of the Holy Spirit
Sometimes a considerable labour of clarification and and of the free consciousness of those who judge within
adaptation will be necessary, in order that a pseudo¬ the Tradition, allowing themselves to be seduced by no
graphic work may be finally utilised by the Church as habitual form, by no natural inclination of the flesh and
a witness of her Tradition. It is thus that Saint Maximus the blood, which often assume the appearance of an
the Confessor had to make his commentary on the “Cor¬ unconsidcred and obscure devotion.
pus dionysiacum”, in order to uncover the orthodox The dynamism of the Tradition allows of no inertia
meaning of these theological writings, which were cir¬ cither in the habitual forms of piety, or in the dogmatic
culating in monophysite circles under the pseudonym of expressions that are repeated mechanically like magic
Saint Dionysius the Arcopagitc, adopted by their author recipes of Truth, guaranteed by the authority of the

1 St. Basil, op. cit., col. 188.

2 It would be as false to deny the traditional character of the work of “Dionysius”, by basing oneself on the fact of its non-apostolic
origin, as to wish to attribute it to the convert of Saint Paul, on the pretext that these writings were received by the Church under the title
of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite. Both these attitudes would equally reveal a lack of true consciousness of the Tradition.
= Before Nicaea, the term ofioovaioQ is found in a fragment of the commentary of Origen to the Epistle to the Hebrews, quoted by
Saint Pamphilius the Martyr (P.G. 14, col. 1308), also in the “Apology of Origen” by the same Pamphilius, translated by Rufinus (P.G. 17,
coll. 580-581), and in the anonymous dialogue “On true faith in God”, falsely attributed to Origen (ed. W. H. van dc Sande Bakhuyzen,
Leipzig, 1901, I, 2). According to Saint Athanasius, Saint Dionysius of Alexandria was accused, about 259-261, of not recognising that
Christ is consubstantial with God; Dionysius is said to have replied that he avoided the word ofioovaioQ which is not in the Scripture, but
recognised the orthodox meaning of this expression (Saint Athanasius, Dc sententia Dionysii, No. 18: P.G. 25, col. 505). The treatise “On
faith” where one finds the expression o^ioovaioQ in the Nicene sense (P.G. 10, col. 1128) does not belong to Saint Gregory ofNco-Ccsaraea;
it is a post-Nicene writing, probably of the end of the IVth century. Thus, the examples of the term oyioovaiot; amongst the orthodox
writers before Nicaea are for the most part uncertain: one cannot trust the translation of Rufinus. In any case the use of this term is very
restricted and has an accidental character.

18
Church. To preserve the “dogmatic tradition” docs not embrace the whole account of doctrinal history from
mean to be attached to doctrinal formulae: to be within its beginnings down to our own days, by reading the
the Tradition, is to keep the living truth in the Light of Enchiridion of Denzinger or the fifty in-folio volumes
the Holy Spirit, or rather—it is to be kept in the Truth oi Mansi, the knowledge that one would thus have of
by the vivifying power of Tradition. But this power the mystery of the T rinity would be no more perfect than
preserves by a ceaseless renewing, like all that comes was that of a Father of the IVth century who speaks of
from the Spirit. the 6/j.oovoiog, nor than that of an antenicene Father
★
who docs not yet speak of it, nor than that of a Saint Paul,
to whom even the term ‘ ‘ Trinity ’ ’ remains as yet strange.
“To renew” docs not mean to replace ancient ex¬ At every moment of its history the Church gives to its
pressions of the Truth by new ones, more explicit and members the faculty of knowing the Truth in a fulness
theologically better elaborated. If that were so, we should that the world cannot contain. It is this mode of knowing
have to recognise that the erudite Christianity of pro¬ the living Truth in the Tradition that it defends in
fessors of theology represents a considerable progress in creating new dogmatic definitions.
relation to the “primitive” faith of the disciples of the “To know in fulness” does not mean “to have the
Apostles. In our days there is much talk of "theological fulness of knowledge”; this belongs only to the world
development”, often without taking account of the to come. If Saint Paul says that he now knows “in part”
extent to which this expression (which has become al¬ (1 Cor. xiii, 12) this ex /uegovg does not exclude the
most a commonplace) can be ambiguous. In fact, it im¬ fulness in which lie knows. It is not later dogmatic
plies, among some modern authors, an evolutionary development that will suppress the “knowledge in part”
conception of the history of Christian dogma. Attempts of Saint Paul, but the eschatological actualisation of the
arc made to interpret in the sense of a “dogmatic pro¬ fulness in which, confusedly but surely, Christians here
gress” this passage of Saint Gregory of Nazianzus: “the below know the mysteries of the Revelation. The know¬
Old Testament manifested clearly the Father and ob¬ ledge ex /negovg will not be suppressed because it was
scurely the Son. The New Testament manifested the false, but because its role was merely to make us adhere
Son, but gave only indications of the divinity of the to the fulness, which surpasses every human faculty of
Holy Spirit. Nowadays, the Spirit is amongst us and knowledge. Flencc, it is in the light of the fulness that
shows Himself in all His splendour. It would not have one knows “in part” and it is always through this ful¬
been prudent, before recognising the divinity of the ness that the Church judges whether the partial know¬
Father, openly to preach the divinity of the Son, and ledge expressed in such or such a doctrine belongs, or
as long as that of the Son had not been accepted, to im¬ not, to Tradition. Any theological doctrine which pre¬
pose the Holy Spirit, if I dare so express myself.”1 But tends to be a perfect explanation of the revealed mystery
“the Spirit is amongst us” since the day of Pentecost will inevitably appear to be false: by the very fact of
and, with Him, the light of the Tradition: that is to say, pretending to the fulness of knowledge it will set itself
not only what has been transmitted (as would have been in opposition to the fulness, in which the Truth is known
a sacred and inert “deposit”), but the very force of in part. A doctrine is traitor to Tradition when it seeks
transmission conferred on the Church and accompany¬ to take its place: gnosticism offers the striking example
ing all that is transmitted, as the unique mode of re¬ of an attempt to substitute for the dynamic fulness,
ceiving and possessing the Revelation. However, the given to the Church as the condition of true knowledge,
unique mode of having the Revelation in the Holy a kind of static fulness of a “revealed doctrine”. On the
Spirit is to have it in fulness, and it is thus that the Church other hand, a dogma defined by the Church, in the form
knows the Truth in the Tradition. If there was an in- of partial knowledge, each time opens anew an access
creaseinknowledgcof theDivinc mysteries, a progressive towards the fulness outside of which the revealed Truth
revelation, “light coming little by little”, before the can be neither known nor confessed. As an expression
coming of the Holy Spirit, it is otherwise for the Church. of truth, a dogma of faith belongs to the Tradition,
If one can still speak of development, it is not knowledge without all the same constituting one of its “parts”.
of the Revelation in the Church which progresses or is It is a means, an intelligible instrument, which makes
developed with each dogmatic definition. If one were to for adherence to the Tradition of the Church: it is a

1 Discourse XXXI (5th theological), c. 26: P.G. 36, col. 101C.

19
witness of Tradition, its external limit, or rather the risk wounding those without, and the other separating
narrow door which leads to knowledge of Truth in the us from our own brothers.”1
Tradition. In replying to the lack of understanding of the external
Within the circle of dogma, the knowledge of the world, which could not receive the Revelation, in resist¬
revealed mystery that a member of the Church will be ing the attempts of the “ disputers of this world ” (1 Cor.
able to attain, the degree of Christian “gnosis”, will i, 20) who, in the womb of the Church itself, seek to
vary in proportion to the spiritual measure of each. understand the Truth “after the tradition of men, after
This knowledge of the Truth in the Tradition will then the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ” (Col.
be able to increase in a person, in company with his ii, 8), the Church finds herself obliged to express her
increase in sanctification (Col. i, io): a Christian will faith in the form of dogmatic definitions, in order to
be more perfect in knowledge at the age of his spiritual defend it against the thrust of heresies. Imposed by the
maturity. But would one dare to speak, against all the necessity of the struggle, dogmas once formulated by
evidence, of a collective progress in the knowledge of the Church become for the faithful a “rule of faith”
the Christian mystery, a progress which would be due which remain firm for ever, setting the boundary
to a “dogmatic development” of the Church? Would between orthodoxy and heresy, between knowledge
this development have started in “gospel infancy” to within the Tradition and knowledge determined by
end to-day—after a “patristic youth” and a “scholastic natural factors. Always confronted with new difficulties
maturity”-—in the sad senility of the manuals of theo¬ to overcome, with new obstacles of thought to remove,
logy? Or indeed should this metaphor (false, like so the Church will always have to defend her dogmas.
many others) give place to a vision of the Church like Her theologians will have the constant task of expound¬
that which is to be found in the Shepherd of Hertnas, ing and interpreting them anew according to the in¬
where it appears in the features of a woman young and tellectual demands of the milieu or of the epoch. In the
old at the same time, bringing together all ages in the critical moments of the struggle for the integrity of the
“measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph. faith, the Church will have to proclaim new dogmatic
iv, 13)? definitions, which will mark new stages in this struggle,
Returning to the text of Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, that will last until all arrive at “the unity of the faith,
so often misinterpreted, we shall see that the dogmatic and of the knowledge of the Son of God” (Eph. iv, 13).
development in question is in no way determined by an Having to struggle against new heresies, the Church
inner necessity, which would effect a progressive in¬ never abandons her ancient dogmatic positions, in order
crease in the Church of the knowledge of revealed to replace them by new definitions. These stages are
Truth. Far from being a kind of organic evolution, the never surpassed by an evolution and, far from being
history of dogma depends above all on the conscious relegated to the archives of history, they preserve the
attitude of the Church in face of the historical reality, character of the ever actual present in the living light
in which she has to work for the salvation of men. If of the Tradition. One will be able to speak then of
Gregory spoke of a progressive revelation of the Trinity dogmatic development only in a very limited sense: in
before Pentecost, it is in order to insist on the fact that formulating a new dogma the Church takes as her point
the Church, in her economy in relation to the external of departure dogmas which already exist, and which
world, must follow the example of the divine pedagogy. constitute a rule of faith that she has in common with her
In formulating these dogmas (cf. xr]Qvypa in Saint Basil, adversaries. Thus, the dogma of Chalcedon makes use
see page 14 above), it must then conform to the neces¬ of that of Nicaea and speaks of the Son consubstantial
sities ofa given moment; “not unveiling all tilings with¬ with the Father in His Divinity, to say afterwards that
out delay and without discernment, and none the less He is also consubstantial with us in His humanity;
keeping nothing hidden until the end. For the one would against the monothelites, who in principle admitted
be imprudent and the other impious. The one would the dogma of Chalcedon, the Fathers of the Vlth Council

1 Op. cit., c. 27: P.G.36,col. 164B. It is known that Gregory of Nazianzus reproached his friend St. Basil for excess of prudence so far as
concerns the open proclamation of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit, a truth which had the character of traditional evidence for members
of the Church, but exacted a moderation in economy in respect of the “pncumatomachs”, whom it was necessary to bring to the unity
of the faith.

20
will again take up its formulae on the two natures, in that the hfe of the Church may produce. The first attitude
order to affirm the two wills and the two energies of is that of the revolutionary innovators, of the false pro¬
Christ; the Byzantine Councils of the XlVth century, phets who sin against the expressed Truth, against the
in proclaiming the dogma on the Divine Energies will incarnate Word, in the name of the Spirit to which they
refer, amongst other things, to the definitions of the lay claim. The second is that of the conservative for¬
Vlth Council, etc. In each case one can speak of a “ dog¬ malists, the pharisees of the Church who, in the name
matic development” to the extent that the Church of the habitual expressions of Truth, run the risk of
extends the rule of faith, whilst remaining, in her new sinning against the Spirit of Truth.
definitions, in conformity with the dogmas already In distinguishing the Tradition, in which the Church
received by all. knows the Truth, from the “dogmatic tradition” that
If the rule of faith develops as the teaching ministry she establishes by her teaching ministry and that she
of the Church adds to it new acts having dogmatic preserves, we find again the same relationship as we have
authority, this development, which is subject to an been able to establish between Tradition and Scripture:
“economy” and pre-supposes a knowledge of Truth in one can neither confound them nor separate them, with¬
the Tradition, is not an augmentation of this latter. This out depriving them of the character of fulness that they
is clear if one is willing to take account of all that has possess together, hike Scripture, dogmas live in the Tra¬
been said on the primordial notion of Tradition. It is dition, with this difference that the scriptural Canon
the abuse of the term “tradition” (in the singular and forms a determinate body which excludes all possibility
without an adjective to qualify it and determine it) by of further increase, whilst the “dogmatic tradition”, in
authors who see only its projection on the horizontal keeping its stability as the “rule of faith”, from which
plane of the Church, namely, that of the “traditions” nothing can be cut off, can be increased by receiving, to
(in the plural or with a qualification which defines them), the extent that may be necessary, new expressions of
it is above all a vexatious habit of designating by this revealed Truth, formulated by the Church. The en¬
term the ordinary teaching ministry—it is these which semble of the dogmas, that the Church possesses and
have allowed such frequent talk to be heard about a transmits, is not a body constituted once and for all,
“development” or an “enriching” of tradition. The neither has it the incomplete character of a doctrine
theologians of the Vllth Council distinguish clearly “in process of becoming”. At every moment of its
between the “Tradition of the Holy Spirit” and the historical existence, the Church formulates the Truth
divinely inspired “teaching (didaoxaXta) of our Holy of the faith in its dogmas, which always express a fulness
Fathers”.1 They were able to define the new dogma to which one adheres intellectually in the light of the
“with all rigour and justice”, because they considered Tradition, whilst never being able to make it definitively
themselves to be in the same Tradition as allowed the explicit. A truth which would allow itself to be made
Fathers of past centuries to produce new expressions of fully explicit would not have the character of living
the Truth whenever they had to reply to the necessities fulness, which belongs to Revelation: “fulness” and
of the moment. “rational explicitness” mutually exclude one another.
There exists an interdependence between the “Tra¬ However, if the mystery revealed by Christ and known
dition of the catholic Church” (viz. the faculty of know¬ in the Holy Spirit cannot be made explicit, it does not
ing the Truth in the Holy Spirit) and the “teaching of remain inexpressible. Since “all the fulness of the God¬
the Fathers” (viz. the rule of faith kept by the Church). head bodily” dwells in Christ (Col. ii, 9), this fulness of
One cannot belong to the Tradition whilst contradicting the Divine Word incarnate will be expressed as well in
the dogmas, just as one cannot either make use of the the Scriptures as in the “abridged word” of the sym¬
dogmatic formulae received in order to oppose a for¬ bols of faith2 or of other dogmatic definitions. This ful¬
mal “orthodoxy” to every new expression of the Truth ness of the Truth that they express without making

1 H. Denzinger, Enchiridion Symbolorum, No. 302 (Ed. 26, pp. 146-147): ... rfjv (3aadixfjv cboneg egxo/xevoi rgiflov, enaxoXovOovvxeg
rfj derjyogq0 didaoxaXt'a rcov aylwv naregcov fj/ucov, xai xfj nagadooei rfjg xaOoXixfjg exxXrjOtag' tov yag ev avrfj oixrjoavxog ayiov nvevfia-
rog elvai ravrrjv yivwoxofiev■ ogl^o/iev av * axgifieig ndarj xai e /u/ueXeta ... walking, so to speak, on the royal road, following the divinely
inspired teaching of our Holy Fathers, as well as the Tradition of the catholic Church (for we know that it belongs to the Holy
Spirit which dwells in the Church), we define in all rigour and justice...
2 See above, page 14, the quotation from Saint John Cassian.

21
explicit, allows the dogmas of the Church to be akin presenting to us the same supra-scnsible reality in
to the Holy Scriptures. It is for this reason that the Pope “aesthetic” expressions (in the proper sense of the word,
Saint Gregory the Great brought together in the same that which can be perceived by the senses). But the in¬
veneration the dogmas ot the first four Councils and the telligible element does not remain foreign to icono¬
four Gospels.1 graphy: in looking at an icon one discovers in it a
All that we have said on the “dogmatic tradition” “logical” structure, a dogmatic content which has de¬
can be applied to other expressions of the Christian termined its composition. This docs not mean that icons
mystery that the Church produces in the Tradition, con¬ are a kind of hieroglyph or a sacred rebus, translating
ferring on them equally the presence of the “fulness of dogmas into a language of conventional signs. If the
him that filleth all in all” (Eph. i, 23). Just like the intelligibility, which penetrates these sensible images, is
“divinely inspired didascalia” of the Church, the mono¬ identical with that of the doemas of the Church, it is
graphic tradition also receives its full meaning and its that the two “ traditions ”—dogmatic and monographic
intimate coherence with other documents of the faith —coincide in so far as they express, each by its proper
(Scripture, dogmas, liturgy) in the Tradition of the Holy means, the same revealed reality. Although it transcends
Spirit. Just as much as dogmatic definitions, it has been the intelligence and the senses, the Christian Revelation
possible for the icons of Christ to be allied with the Holy does not exclude them: on the contrary, it assumes them
Scriptures, to receive the same veneration, since icono¬ and transforms them by the light of the Holy Spirit,
graphy sets forth in colours what the word announces in the Tradition which is the unique mode of receiving
in written letters.2 Dogmas arc addressed to the in¬ the revealed Truth, of recognising it in its expressions
telligence, they are intelligible expressions of the reality whether scriptural, dogmatic, monographic or other and
which surpasses our mode of understanding. Icons im¬ also of expressing it anew.
pinge on our consciousness by means of the outer senses, VLADIMIR LOSSKY

1 Epistolarum lib. I, Ep. XXV: P.L. 77, col. 613.

2 ‘ We prescribe the veneration of the holy icon of Our Lord Jesus Christ in rendering to it the same honour as to the Books of the Holy
Gospels. For just as by the letters of these latter we all come to salvation, so by the action of the colours in images, all—learned as well as
ignorant—equally find their profit in what is within reach of all. In effect, just as the word is set forth by letters, painting sets forth and
represents the same things by colours. Hence, if someone docs not venerate the icon of Christ the Saviour, may he be unable to see His face
at the second coming...” (Denzinger, No. 337, pp. 164-165 of ed. 26.)—If we cite here the third canon of the anti-photian Synod (869-870),
whose acts have been broken by the Church (not only in the East but also in the West, as shown by F. Dvornik in The Photian Schism,
London, 1948, pp. 176-177 and passim), it is because it gives a beautiful example of the rapprochement current between the Holy Scriptures
and iconography, united in the same Tradition of the Church. Cf. the sequel of the text quoted, on the icons of the Mother of God, of angels
and of saints (Denzinger, loc. cit.).

22
THE MEANING AND LANGUAGE OF
 Icons used for prayer (eixcov — image, portrait) that The existence of iconoclastic currents in the first cen¬
date from the first centuries of Christianity have not turies of Christianity is well known and perfectly in¬
reached us, but we know of them botli from Church telligible. Christian communities were surrounded on
Tradition and from historical evidence. As we shall sec all sides by paganism with its idolatry. It was therefore
in studying individual images, Church Tradition traces natural that many Christians, both of Jewish and of
the first icons back to the lifetime of the Saviour Himself pagan origin, conscious of the negative experience of
and the period immediately after Him. As is well known, paganism, should strive to protect Christianity from the
the art of portraiture was at that time flourishing in the infection of idolatry, which could insinuate itself through
Roman Empire. Portraits were made of relatives and of artistic creation; basing themselves on the Old Testa¬
distinguished people. Therefore there arc no grounds ment prohibition of images, they denied the possibility
for supposing that Christians, especially those of pagan of their existence in Christianity as well.
origin, were an exception to the general rule, all the However, despite the occurrence of these iconoclastic
more so since even in Judaism, which adhered to the Old tendencies, there existed the fundamental line which was
Testament prohibition of images, there existed at that gradually and consecutively developed in the Church,
time currents of opinion which accepted human images. though with no kind of external formulation. Expression
In the History of the Church by Eusebius we find, for of this fundamental line is given by the Church Tradition
instance, the following phrase: “I have seen a great telling us of the existence of an icon of the Saviour
many portraits of the Saviour, of Peter and of Paul, which during His lifetime and of icons of the Holy Virgin im¬
have been preserved up to our times.”1 Before this pas¬ mediately after Him. This tradition testifies that right
sage Eusebius describes in detail a statue of the Saviour from the beginning there had been a clear understanding
he had seen in the city of Pancas (Caesarea Philippi) in of the significance and possibilities of the image, and that
Palestine, erected by the woman with an issue of blood, the attitude of the Church towards it never changed,
who was healed by the Saviour (Matt, ix, 20-23 i since it is derived from the actual teaching on the Divine
Mark v, 24-34; Luke viii, 43-48).2 Incarnation. This teaching shows that the image is neces¬
Eusebius’ testimony is all the more valuable since he sarily inherent in the very essence of Christianity, from
was personally very antagonistic to icons. Consequently its inception, since Christianity is the revelation by God-
his reference to the portraits he had seen is accompanied Man not only of the Word of God, but also of the Image
by the disapproving comment that it is a pagan custom.3 of God.

1 Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia (265-340), History of the Church, Book VII, ch. 18.; P.G. 20, col. 680.
2 The bas-relief on one of the IVtli century sarcophagi preserved in the Lateran Museum is supposed to be a reproduction of this statue.
3 The existence of such an attitude towards art in the first centuries of Christianity gave birth to the assertion that “Christian Art was
born outside the Church and, at least in the beginning, developed against its will. Christianity, which stemmed from Judaism, was naturally
as averse to any kind of idolatry as was the religion of its origin.” This opinion of L. Brehicr (L'Art Chretien, p. 13, Paris 1928) expresses
a view that is very wide-spread on the relationship of the ancient Church to art. Yet, leaving aside the identification of icon-worship with
idolatry—an identification incomprehensible to the conscience of a believer of the Church—this assertion seems to us as little convincing
as the testimonies of ancient writers quoted in its support. For example, the most implacable of them, Clement of Alexandria (ca. 215),
protesting against images, obviously has in mind idols, for he indicates at the same time which symbols should be represented on seals, and
some of these symbols include human figures (The Pedagogue, I, III, c. XI; P.G. 8, col. 633). And references to the “Fathers of the Church”,
Tcrtullian (160-240) and Origcn (185-249), arc still less convincing, for, despite the respect in which they are held by the Church, not only
were they never regarded as Fathers or saints, but much of their teaching was rejected by the Church as not acceptable. Consequently, it seems
to us more justifiable to accept the opposite assertion, based, first of all, on the fact of the existence of images in the catacombs, which, as is
well known, served as the place of the cult. Hence, these images were known to simple believers as well as to the higher ecclesiastical hierarchy
and their distribution points to definite guidance by the Church. As regards the well known 36th rule of the local Council of Elvira (Spain),
held about 300, the rule so often quoted, which forbids depicting on church walls that which is the subject of worship and veneration
(placuit pictures in ccclcsia esse non dchcre ncc quod colitur et adoratur in parictibus depingatur), it docs not provide sufficient basis for interpretation
in an iconoclastic sense. The fathers of this Council arc speaking only of images on walls, that is to say of monumental painting forming an
integral part of the building, and say nothing of images of other kinds which existed then and are preserved till to-day (e.g. on sarcophagi).
One can only conclude that this prohibition is due to practical reasons and not to an attitude towards sacred images based on principle.
In this latter case the rule would have been formulated quite differently and would not have forbidden uniquely representations on walls.
The Council was held shortly before the persecutions of Diocletian, which could already be foreseen. Therefore this text could equally be
interpreted as a desire to protect the sacred images from outrage. (Cf. Hcfcle, Histoire des Conciles, vol. I, part 1, p. 240. Paris, 1907.)

25
 “ No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten their works to images as to a normal and generally
Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath de¬ accepted institution of the Church.3
clared1 him” (John i, 18)—has revealed the image—the Of the appearance of icons ot the first centuries of
icon of God. Through His Incarnation, God the Word Christianity we have no knowledge, and lack all data
“being the brightness of his glory, and the express image for judgment about it. However, on the basis of the
of his (the Father’s) person” (Heb. i, 3), reveals to the latest investigations, it is possible to form a clear idea
world, in His Divinity, the image of the Father. When of the general trend in the art of that period. In his fun¬
Philip asks: “Lord, shew us the Father”, the Lord damental work on the history of Byzantine art, V. N.
answers: “Have I been so long time with you, and yet Lazarev, examining all the complex circumstances
hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me among which early Christian art originated, and basing
hath seen the Father” (John xiv, 8, 9). As “in the bosom himself on a whole series of previous investigations,
of the Father”, so after Incarnation, the Son is consub- arrives at the following conclusion: “While associating
stantial with the Father, being, according to His Divin¬ itself in many things with classical antiquity, especially
ity, His image, equal in honour. This truth revealed in with its later, more spiritualised forms, it nevertheless
Christianity lies at the foundation of its pictorial art. evolves for itself a series ofindividual tasks from the very
So the image not only does not contradict the essence of beginning of its existence. It is by no means a classical
Christianity but, being its basic truth, is inalienably con¬ antiquity Christianised, as Sicbel tried to prove.4 The
nected with it. This is the foundation of the tradition new thematic content of early Christian art was not
showing that the preaching of Christianity to the world purely external fact. It reflected a new outlook, a new
was from the beginning carried out by the Church religion, an understanding of reality that was new by
through word and image. Precisely on this basis the origin. Consequently the new content could not be
Fathers of the Vllth Oecumenical Council were able to clothed in the old forms of antiquity. It needed a style
say: “The tradition of making images... existed even that would express in the best possible manner the spi¬
at the time of the preaching of Christianity by the ritual ideals of Christianity. So all the creative efforts oi
Apostles... Iconography is by no means an invention Christian artists were directed towards the elaboration
of painters but is, on the contrary, an established law of this style.”5 Further, the author refers to the work of
and tradition of the Catholic Church.”2 This fact of the Dvorak6 and speaks of the fact that this new style begins
image being from the start inherent in Christianity to take shape, in its main outlines, even in the paintings
explains its appearance in the Church and how it silently of the catacombs.
and imperceptibly occupied its natural place in Church The themes ofthe catacomb paintings, beginning with
practice as something self-evident, despite the Old Testa¬ the 1st and Ilnd centuries, include, besides allegorical and
ment prohibition and subsequent opposition. Already symbolical representations, such as an anchor, fish, lamb
in the IVth century a whole series of Church Fathers, and so forth, a whole series of pictures drawn from the
such as Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gre¬ Old and New Testaments. These paintings correspond
gory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom and others, refer in to the sacred texts, biblical, liturgic and patristic.

1 “Declared”—the Greek word is it;r)y7)ciaTo, revealed.

2 Acts of the Council, 6th Session.
3 Thus, for instance, St. Basil the Great says in his 17th Discourse on the day of the holy martyr Barlaam, “Arise now before me, you
iconographers of the saints’ merits... Let me be conquered by your pictures of the valiant deeds of the martyr!... Let me look at this fighter
most vividly depicted in your image... Let also the Instigator of the fight, Christ, be represented in your picture.” (P.G. 31, col. 489 AC.)
The well known direction of one of the greatest ascetic writers of antiquity, St. Nilus of Sinai (died 430 or 450) is very characteristic in the
same sense. It is addressed to the Prefect Olympiodorus, who had built a church and was intending to embellish it with decorative paintings
and scenes of daily life. Nilus writes: “Let the hand of the artist fill the church on both sides with pictures from the Old and the New Testa¬
ments, in order that the illiterate, who cannot read the Divine Scriptures, should, by looking at the painted images, bring to mind the valiant
deeds of those who served God with all sincerity and be themselves incited to rival the glorious and ever-memorable exploits, through which
they exchanged earth for heaven, preferring the invisible to the visible.” (St.Nilus, Epist. P.G. 79, col. 577.)
4 Christliche Antike, 1-11, Marburg, 1906-1909; Das Werden christlicher Kunst, Repert. f. Kunstw., 1916, pp. 113-129; Friihchristliche
Kunst, Munich, 1920.
6 V. N. Lazarev, History of Byzantine Painting. Moscow, 1947, p. 38. In Russian.
• Katakombenmalereien; Die Anfdnge der christlichen Kunst (Kunstgeschichte als Geistesgeschichte), Munich, 1924.

26
The fundamental principle of this art is a pictorial ex¬ of life, but answer them. At that time of martyrdoms,
pression of the teaching of the Church, by representing the sufferings are not shown, just as they arc not described
concrete events of sacred History and indicating their in liturgical texts. What is shown is not the suffering it¬
inner meaning.1 This art is intended not to reflect the self, but the bearing there must be towards it, as the
problems of life but to answer them, and thus, from its reply. This explains the wide popularity in the catacombs
very inception, is a vehicle of the Gospel teaching. The of such subjects as Daniel in the lion’s den, the martyr
main outline of the art of the Church is already beginning Thecla, and so forth.
to be formed here. Illusory three-dimensional space is From the very first centuries, Christian art was deeply
replaced by the plane of reality; the connection between symbolical and this symbolism was not exclusively the
figures and objects becomes conventionally symbolical. feature of this period of Christian life. It is essentially
The image is reduced to a minimum of detail and a maxi¬ inseparable from Church art, because the spiritual reality
mum of expressiveness. The great majority of figures it represents cannot be transmitted otherwise than
are represented with their faces turned towards the con¬ through symbols. Yet in the first centuries of Christian¬
gregation, for the importance lies not only in the action ity this symbolism is mostly iconographic, i. e. connected
and interaction of the persons represented, but also in with a subject. For instance, to indicate that the woman
their state, which is usually a state of prayer. The artist holding a baby is the Mother of God, next to her is
lived and thought in images and reduced forms to the depicted a prophet pointing to a star (Balaam).2 To in¬
limit of a simplicity, the depth of whose inner content dicate that baptism is the entry to a new life, the baptised,
is accessible only to the spiritual eye. He cleansed his even a fully grown man, is represented as a boy or a
work of everything personal and remained anonymous; small child (see p. 165, the description of the icon of
his essential concern was to transmit tradition. He under¬ Christ’s Baptism), and so on. Separate symbols were
stood, on the one hand, the necessity of being cut off used not only from the Old and New Testaments (lamb,
from sensory enjoyment, and on the other, the need to good shepherd, fish...) but also from pagan mythology,
use all visible nature in order to express the world of as for instance, Cupid and Psyche, Orpheus, etc. In
the spirit; for to transmit the invisible world to sensory using these myths, Christianity re-establishes their true
vision demands not hazy fog but, on the contrary, pe¬ and profound meaning, filling them with a new con¬
culiar clarity and precision of expression, just as to ex¬ tent. This adoption by Christianity of elements of pagan
press apprehensions of the heavenly world the holy art is not limited only to the first period of its existence.
Fathers use particularly clear and exact formulations. Later, too, it takes from the world around it all that may
The beauty of early Christian art lies in the fact that serve it as a means and form of expression, just as the
there was not as yet an unfolding of the fullness contained Fathers of the Church used the instrument of Greek
within it, but only a promise of limitless possibilities. philosophy, adapting its understanding and language to
That this art was connected with sacred, texts does not Christian theology. Through the classical traditions of
mean that it was divorced from life. Apart from the fact Alexandrine art, which had preserved Greek Hellenism
that it speaks in the pictorial language of its time, its link in its purest form3, Christian art becomes heir to the tra¬
with life lies not in the representation of one or another ditions of the ancient art of Greece. It attracts elements
event or psychological moment of human life and of art from Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor, etc., introduces
activity, but in the representation of this activity itself, into the Church all its heritage and uses its attainments
as for instance, representations of different kinds of work for the fullness and perfection of its pictorial language,
and profession, as a sign that work consecrated to God transforming it all to correspond to the requirements of
is sanctified. Moreover, as we have already said, the Christian dogmatics.4 In other words, Christianity se¬
themes themselves of this art do not reflect the problems lects and adopts from the pagan world all there was of

1 At times the meaning of individual pictures becomes clear only when taken together with others amongst which they occur. For
example, in the scries of three pictures, i) a fisherman taking a fish out of water, 2) baptism and 3) the paralytic carrying his bed, the first
image is the symbol of conversion to the Christian faith, then is shown how, through baptism, man is made whole from sins and infirmities.
Rome, catacomb of Callixtus.
2 The Roman catacomb of Priscilla, Ilnd century.
3 V. N. Lazarev, op. cit. vol. I, p. 48.
4 Given such a complex formation of Christian art, to derive the Christian image from the Egyptian sepulchral portrait, as is some¬
times done, is an excessive simplification of its genesis, incorrect both historically and dogmatically.

27
its own, that is, all that was “Christian before Christ”— way, it realises that unity in multiplicity and richness in
all that was scattered through it as separate, splintered unity, which both in totality and in details expresses
particles of truth—and links them together, joining the catholic principle of the Church. As applied to the
them to the fullness of the revelation. “As this bread language of art, it means not uniformity or a certain
was scattered among the hills, but, being gathered, has general stereotyped manner, but the expression of a
become one, so let Thy Church be gathered together single truth in varied forms of art appropriate to every
from the ends of the earth into Thy Kingdom;” thus people, time and individual man, forms which allow us
is this idea expressed in the Eucharistic prayer of ancient to distinguish between icons of differing nationalities
Christians.1 This process of gathering is not the influence and differing epochs, despite the similarity of their
of the pagan world upon Christianity, but the influx content.
★
into Christianity of those elements of the pagan world,
which by their very nature had to flow into it; it is not
a penetration of pagan customs into the 'Church, but As we have said earlier, in the conscience of the Church
their “ churchification ”, not a “ paganisation of Christian the Divine dispensation is organically connected with
art”, as is often thought, but the Christianisation of the image. Therefore the doctrine relating to the image
pagan art. is not something separate, not an appendix, but follows
Tin’s incorporation with the fullness of the revelation naturally from the doctrine of salvation, of which it is
touches all sides of human activity.What is gathered into an inalienable part. In all its fullness, it has been inherent
the Church is all in human nature that is inherent, in the Church from the very first, but, like other aspects
created by God; and this includes creative art, sanctified of its teaching, it becomes affirmed gradually, in response
by its participation in the building of the Kingdom of to the needs of the moment, as for instance in the 82nd
God, the task of the Church in the world. Therefore rule of the Trullan Council, or in reply to heresies and
what the Church accepts from the world is determined errors, as in the iconoclastic period. It was the same here
not by the needs of the Church but by those of the as with the dogmatic truth of the two natures of Christ.
world, for in this participation of the world in building This truth was professed by the first Christians in a more
the Kingdom of God (depending, of course, on its free practical manner, by their very life, and did not yet have
will) lies the principal meaning of its existence. And in¬ a sufficiently full theoretical formulation; but later, by
versely, the principal meaning of the existence in the force of external necessity, due to the appearance of
world of the Church itself is the work of drawing this heresies and false teachings, it was formulated with pre¬
world into the fullness of the revelation—its salvation. cision. So too with the icon; the dogmatic basis for its
Therefore, the process of gathering, which began in the existence was first laid down by the Trullan Council of
first centuries of Christianity, is the normal and conse¬ 691-2, in connection with a change in the symbolism
quently unceasing work of the Church in the world. In of Church art; in the course of its development the rule
other words, this process is not limited to certain par¬ mentioned marks a most important stage, for here, for
ticular periods of its existence, but is its constant function. the first time, it is given direction in principle. This
As the Church proceeds with its building work it absorbs 82nd rule of the Trullan Council says: “Certain holy
and to the end will continue to absorb from outside all icons have the image of a lamb, at which is pointing the
that is genuine and true, however scanty and incomplete, finger of the Forerunner. This lamb is taken as the image
and it supplements what is lacking. of grace, representing the true Lamb, Christ our God,
This process docs not depersonalise. The Church docs Whom the law foreshowed. Thus accepting with love
not reject particularities connected with human nature the ancient images and shadows2 as prefigurations and
or with time and place (for example national, personal symbols of truth transmitted to the Church, we prefer
or other features), but sanctifies their content, filling it grace and truth, receiving it as the fulfilment of the law.
with new meaning. In their turn, these particularities do Thus, in order to make plain this fulfdment for all eyes
not interfere with the unity of the Church, but bring to sec, if only by means of pictures, we ordain that from
into it new forms of expression, peculiar to them. In this henceforth icons should represent, instead of the lamb

1 Didachc, IX, 4, Les Peres Apostoliques, Doctrine des Apotres, pp. 16-18. Paris, 1926.
2 Cf. Heb. viii,5 and x, 1.

28
of old, the human image of the Lamb, Who has taken sentation of what they symbolised, to the uncovering
upon Himself the sins of the world, Christ our God, so of their direct meaning, to that which was manifested in
that through this we may perceive the height of the time and so became accessible to sensory perception,
abasement of God the Word and be led to remember His representation and description. The image, appearing
life in the flesh, His Passion and death for our salvation in the Old Testament symbol, through incarnation be¬
and the ensuing redemption of the world.” comes reality, which in its turn appears as the image of
First of all, this rule is an answer to the situation which the future glory of God, the image of “ the height of the
existed at that time, namely, that in Church practice, abasement of God theWord ”. The subject itself, the ima¬
side by side with historical representations, symbols re¬ ge ofjesus Christ, is a testimony of His coming and His life
placing the human image of God were still used.1 The in the flesh, the kenosis of the Deity, His abasement. And
significance of the 82nd rule lies, first of all, in the fact the way this abasement is represented, the way it is trans¬
that it is based on the connection of the icon with the mitted in visual representation, reflects the glory of God.
dogma of the truth of the Divine Incarnation, with the In other words, the abasement of God the Word is
life of Christ in the flesh; this is the commencement of shown in such a manner that in looking at it we see and
the basing of the icon on Christological dogma, which contemplate His divine glory in His human image; and
was later to be widely used and which, in the period of we come thus to know that His death means Salvation
iconoclasm, was to be further developed by apologists and Redemption of the world. The latter part of the
of icons. Moreover, the Council discontinues, as belong¬ 82nd rule indicates wherein the symbolism of the icon
ing to a stage already past, the use of symbolical subjects consists. The symbol is not in the iconography, not in
in place of the human image of Christ. It is true that the what is represented, but in the method of representing,
Council mentions only one symbolical subject—the in how it is represented. In other words, the teaching of
lamb. Yet, immediately after this it speaks in general of the Church is transmitted not only by the theme, but
“ancient images and shadows”, evidently seeing in the also by the mode of expression. In this way the de¬
lamb not merely one of the symbols but the foremost finition of the Trullan Council not only lays down the
of them; so that uncovering the meaning of this symbol beginning of the formulation of the dogmatic signi¬
would naturally lead to the uncovering of all other sym¬ ficance of the icon, but at the same time indicates the
bolical subjects. It bases its injunction on the fact that possibility of making art reflect, by a new symbolism,
Old Testament prefigurations were fulfilled in the New the glory of God. It emphasises the meaning and import¬
Testament and ordains a transition from the symbols of ance of historical reality, showing that a realistic image
the Old Testament and of early Christianity to a repre¬ alone can transmit the teaching of the Church, and dc-

1 In connection with the change in the position of the Church, when under St. Constantine it acquired a legal right of existence in the
Roman Empire, the character of Church art also changed. At that time a great wave of new converts began to flood the Church, which
brought the need for more spacious churches and a corresponding change in the character of preaching. The symbols of the first centuries,
which belonged to a small number of initiates, for whom their meaning and content were clear and intelligible, were less intelligible to the
new converts. Hence, in order to make a grasp of the teaching of the Church more accessible to them, a more concrete and clear pictorial
expression of this teaching became necessary. In this connection there appeared, in the IVth and Vth centuries, great historical cycles of events
from the Old and New Testaments, large, monumental paintings. The majority of the principal Church feasts became established at that time,
as well as the main outlines of the compositions corresponding to them, which are still preserved to this day in the Orthodox Church. It
should be noted that the themes of the Church art of that time frequently have a definite character of dogmatic answers to questions arising
in the sphere of faith and reflect the dogmatic struggle of the Church with existing heresies. For instance, in answer to the Arian heresy
condemned by the first Oecumenical Council (325), on either side of the image of the Saviour are placed Alpha and Omega (Rev. xxii, 13)
indicating that Jesus Christ is consubstantial with God the Father (Louis Brehier, L'Art Chretien, p. 67, Paris, 1928). After the condemn¬
ation of Nestorius by the Ephesian Council in 431 and the solemn proclamation of the truth of the Godbearing of Mary, there appears
a triumphal image of the Mother of God, with the Divine Child enthroned in glory. The same subject of struggle against ncstorianism
gives rise to a whole cycle of pictures in the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome, emphasising the Divinity of the Child Jesus and the
significance of the Mother of God. Frescoes in the Vlth century churches of St. Sophia and the Holy Apostles in Constantinople also reflected
the struggle with the teachings of Nestorius and Eutyches (V. N. Lazarev, op. cit. p. 51). Dogmatic warfare by means of images was waged
also in the subsequent centuries. Thus, for example, after the end of the iconoclastic period, the image of the Saviour Emmanuel (see the de¬
scription of this icon, p. 77) was very widely used as a testimony of the Divine Incarnation. This image was used in the struggle against the
heresy of theJudaisers in Russia in the XVth century. Against the same heresy there appeared, in the iconography of the XVth and XVlth
centuries, a whole series of new subjects, demonstrating the connection between the Old Testament and the New as its successor.

29
fines all the rest (“images and shadows’ ) as not express¬ an image, so the image is also a word. “ What the word
ing tire fullness of grace, although worthy of reverence transmits through the ear, that painting silently shows
and capable of satisfying the needs of a certain epoch. through the image, says St.Basil the Great”2, and “by
This statement does not quite abolish the iconographic these two means, mutually accompanying one another
symbol, but makes it auxiliary, ofsccondary importance. ... we receive knowledge of one and the same thing. ”3
Essentially this rule lays down the foundation of the In other words, the icon contains and professes the same
iconographic Canon, that is, a certain criterion forjudg¬ truth as the Gospels and therefore, like the Gospels, is
ing whether an image is liturgical, just as in the domain based on exact concrete data, and in no way on invention,
of words and music the Canon determines whether a for otherwise it could not explain the Gospels nor cor¬
text or a hymn is liturgical. It establishes the principle respond to them.
of correspondence of the icon with the Holy Scriptures Thus the icon is placed on a level with the Holy
and defines in what this correspondence consists: the Scriptures and with the Cross, as one of the forms of
historical reality and the kind of symbolism which truly revelation and knowledge of God, in which Divine and
reflects the coming Kingdom of God. human will and action become blended. Apart from its
Thus the Church gradually creates an art new both direct meaning, each alike is a reflection of the higher
in form and content, which uses images and forms drawn world; each alike is a symbol of the Spirit contained in
from the material world to transmit the revelation of the them. Consequently, the meaning both of the word and
Divine world, making this world accessible to under¬ of the image, their role and significance arc the same.
standing and contemplation. This art develops side by The image, like the Divine service, transmits the teach¬
side with the Divine services and, like the latter, expresses ing of the Church and expresses the grace-given life of
the teaching of the Church in conformity with the word the sacred Tradition in the Church. Through the Divine
of the Scriptures. This conformity between word and service and through the icon, revelation becomes for
image was particularly clearly expressed by the ordi¬ believers their property and precept for life. For this
nance of the Vllth Oecumenical Council, which re¬ reason Church art acquires from the very beginning a
established the veneration of icons.Through the voice of form in keeping with what it expresses. The Church
the fathers of this Council the Church rejected the com¬ evolves an entirely special category of image, in accord¬
promise proposal to place their veneration oficonsona ance with its nature, and this special character is con¬
level with that of sacred vessels, and ordained that it be ditioned by the purpose it serves. The Church is a “king¬
on a level with the Cross and the Gospels:—with the dom not of this world” (John xviii, 36) existing in the
Cross as the distinctive symbol of Christianity, with the world and for the world, for its salvation. Its nature is
Gospels, as representing a complete correspondence peculiarly its own, distinct from the world, and it serves
between verbal image and visible image.1 The formu¬ the world precisely by being thus different from it.
lation of the Holy Council says :“We preserve, without Consequently the manifestations of the Church, through
innovations, all the Church traditions established for which it fulfills this service, be they word, image, singing
us, whether written or not written, one of which is or some other, differ from analogous manifestations of
icon-painting as corresponding to what the Gospels the world. They all bear the seal of their transcendental
preach and relate... For if the one is shown by the other, nature, which externally distinguishes them from the
the one is incontestably made clear by the other.” This world.
formulation shows that the Church sees in the icon not Architecture, painting, music, poetry cease to be
a simple art, serving to illustrate the Holy Scriptures, forms of art, each following its own way, independently
but a complete correspondence of the one to the other, of the others, in search of appropriate effects, and become
and therefore attributes to the icon the same dogmatic, parts of a single liturgic whole which by no means dimin¬
liturgic and educational significance as it docs to the ishes their significance, but implies in each case renun¬
Holy Scriptures. As the word of the Holy Scriptures is ciation of an individual role, of self-assertion. From forms

1 This is why it is impossible to understand the image of a feast or a saint, to discover the meaning and significance of its details, unless
one knows the corresponding Divine service, and, in the case of a saint, also his life. The existing analyses and explanations of icons go wrong
as a rule precisely because acquaintance with these is merely superficial, and sometimes totally lacking.
2 Discourse 19, On the 40 Martyrs. P. G. 31, col. 509 A.
3 Acts of the Vllth Oecumenical Council, Act 6.

30
of art with separate aims, they all become transformed The 82nd rule of the Trullan Council gives directions
into varied means for expressing, each in its own domain, as to how to express most fully and precisely the teach¬
one and the same thing—the essence of the Church. In ing of the Church in an image; in contrast to this, the
other words, they become various instruments of the Kontakion gives a dogmatic explanation of the canonical
knowledge of God. It follows that from its very nature image, that is, an image which already corresponds to
Church art is a liturgic art. Its liturgic character is not its purpose and answers the requirements of liturgic art.
due to the fact that the image serves as a framework This brief but wonderfully full and exact formulation
and addition to the Divine service, but to their complete of the teaching on the icon thus of necessity also con¬
mutual correspondence. The mystery enacted and the tains the whole teaching on salvation. It is reverently
mystery depicted are one, both inwardly in their mean¬ preserved by the Orthodox Church and lies at the found¬
ing and outwardly in the symbolism which expresses ation of Orthodox understanding of the icon and atti¬
this meaning. This is why the image of the Orthodox tude towards it.
Church, the icon, does not define itself as an art belong¬ T he first part of the K ontakion discloses the connection
ing to one or another historical epoch, nor as the express¬ between the icon and Christological dogma, the basing
ion of the national peculiarities of one or another people, of the icon on the Divine Incarnation. The subsequent
but only by its function which is as universal as Ortho¬ part discloses the meaning of the Divine Incarnation,
doxy itself, being determined by the very essence of the the fulfilment of God’s design concerning man, and con¬
image and its role in the Church. Since in its essence the sequently concerning the world. Essentially, both these
icon, like the word, is a liturgic art, it never served parts of the Kontakion are a reiteration of the patristic
religion but, like the word, has always been and is an formula: “God became man in order that man should
integral part of religion, one of the instruments for the become god.” The last part of the Kontakion gives
knowledge of God, one of the means of communion man’s answer to God, our profession of the saving truth
with Him. This explains the importance which the of the Divine Incarnation, the acceptance by man of the
Church attributes to the image—an importance such Divine dispensation and his participation therein. By the
that of all victories over a multitude of various heresies, last words of the Kontakion the Church shows in what
it was only the victory over iconoclasm and the re¬ our participation is expressed, and in what consists the
establishment of the veneration of icons that was pro¬ fulfilment of our salvation.
claimed as the Triumph of Orthodoxy, celebrated on The characteristic feature of the Kontakion is that it
the first Sunday of Lent. is addressed not to one of the Persons of the Holy T rinity,
★
but to the Mother of God. Thus it represents a liturgic,
prayerful expression of the dogmatic teaching about the
The fullest teaching on the icon was given by the Vllth Divine Incarnation. It is evident that just as the negation
Oecumenical Council (787) and by those holy Fathers of the human image of the Saviour implies the negation
who were apologists of the icon during the iconoclastic of the Divine Motherhood1, so the affirmation of this
period. In concise form it is contained in the Kontakion icon exacts first of all the manifestation of the role of
of the Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy, estab¬ the Mother of God, veneration of Her as the indispens¬
lished, as we have seen, to commemorate victory over able condition of the Incarnation, the cause of the fact
iconoclasm. The text of this Kontakion is as follows: that God became representable. According to the teach¬
ing of the Fathers, it is precisely on the fact that the
“The indefinable word of the Father made Himself God-Man, Jesus Christ, had a representable Mother that
definable, having taken flesh of Thee, O Mother of this image is based. “In so far as He proceeded from a
God, and having refashioned the soiled image to its FatherWho could not be represented, ” says St.Theodore
former estate, has suffused it with Divine beauty. But the Studite2, “Christ, not being representable, cannot
confessing salvation we show it forth in deed and have an image made by art. In fact, what image could cor¬
word.” respond to the Divinity, the representation of which is

1 This was the case with the extreme wing of the iconoclasts of the VUIth and IXth centuries. In fact, though a large number of icono¬
clasts tolerated images in the Church and protested only against their veneration, the extreme wing, on the contrary, denied the veneration
of anything material and thus arrived logically at the negation of all earthly sanctity, of veneration of the Virgin and the saints.
2 Refutation 3, ch. 2, sec. 3. P.G. 99, col. 417C. See On the Holy Icons, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1981.

31
absolutely forbidden in divinely-inspired Scripture? But depict His Person, since the icon can only be a personal,
from the moment when Christ was born of a represent¬ hypostatical image, while nature, “essence has no in¬
able Mother, he clearly has a representation which cor¬ dependent existence, but is seen in persons”.3 The icon
responds with the image of His Mother. And if He had is connected with the original, not on the strength of
no image made by art, that would mean that He was an identity between its own nature and his nature, but
not born of a representable Mother, that He was born because it depicts his person and bears his name, which
only of the Father; but this contradicts His whole connects the icon with the person it represents and gives
economy.” Thus, once the Son of God became Man, it the possibility of communion with him and the possi¬
was necessary to represent Him as man.1 This thought bility of knowing him. Owing to this connection
is the main theme of all the fathers who defended the “homage paid to the image is transmitted to the ori¬
veneration of icons. The fact that the Son of God is ginal” say the holy Fathers and the Oecumenical Coun¬
representable according to His flesh assumed of the Vir¬ cil, quoting the words of Basil the Great. Inasmuch as
gin is contrasted by St.John Damascene and the Fathers the icon is an image, it cannot be consubstantial with the
of the Vllth Oecumenical Council with the fact that original; otherwise it would cease to be an image and
God the Father, being inconceivable and invisible, is would become the original, would be of one nature with
thereby incapable of being represented. "Why do we it. The icon differs from the original precisely by the fact
not describe the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ? Because that it has another, different nature4, for “the represent¬
we have not seen Him... But if we saw and knew Him ation is one thing, and that which it represents is an¬
as we did His Son, we should try to describe and depict other.”5 In other words, although the two objects are
also Him (the Father).. ,”2 say the Fathers of that Coun¬ essentially different, there exists between them a known
cil. The same question of depicting God the Father arose connection, a certain participation of the one in the other.
in 1667, at the Great Council of Moscow, in connection For the Orthodox outlook, the possibility of being at
with the Western composition at that time popular in the same time identical and different is quite evident—
Russia, depicting the Holy Trinity with God the Father hypostatically different, yet in nature identical (the Holy
represented as an old man. Basing itself on the holy Trinity), and hypostatically identical, yet in nature differ¬
Fathers, and in particular on the great confessor of faith ent (the holy icons).6 This is what St.Theodore the Stu-
and apologist of the veneration of icons, St.John of dite has in view when he says, “As there (hi the Trinity)
Damascus, the Council points to the impossibility of Christ differs from the Father in hypostasy, so here He
describing God the Father and forbids His representation differs from His own image in nature. ”7 And at the same
in icons. time “the image of Christ is Christ, and the image of a
In depicting the Saviour, we do not depict either His saint is that saint. The power is not split asunder, the glory
Divine or His human nature, but His Person in which is not divided, but the glory becomes the attribute of him
both these natures are incomprehensibly combined. We who is depicted.”8

1 On this subject, see also the explanation of the first part of the Kontakion of the Triumph of Orthodoxy in the commentary on the icon
of Christ, p. 72.
2 Acts ot the Vllth Oecumenical Council, Act 4.
3 St.John of Damascus. On the Orthodox Faith, Book III, ch. 6. P.G. 94, col. 1004 A.
4 This point constituted the fundamental difference between the Orthodox and the iconoclast. The iconoclasts regarded the image as
consubstantial with the original having one and the same nature with it. Starting from this premise, they came to the logical conclusion that
the only possible icon of Christ is the Eucharist. “Christ deliberately chose, as an image of His Incarnation, bread, which bears no likeness
to man, in order to prevent idolatry” (exposition of the iconoclastic doctrine at the Vllth Oecumenical Council). “But nothing was more
alien to the Orthodox worshippers of icons than to identify the icon with the person it represented. The holy Patriarch Nicephorus... having
indicated the difference between the icon and its original, says, ‘Those who do not understand this difference are justly called idolators.’”
(G. Ostrogorsky, Gnoseological grounds of the dispute regarding the holy icons, Seminarium Kondakovianum, vol. 2, p. 50. Prague, 1928.
Russian.) The entire argument of the iconoclasts is in this way derived from one fundamental premise—a wrong understanding of what
the image is. This is why the Orthodox and the iconoclasts could come to no mutual agreement; they spoke different languages and
all the arguments of the iconoclasts missed the mark.
5 St. John of Damascus, 3rd Discourse in Defence of the Holy Icons, par. 16. P.G. 94, col. 1337 AB. See also On the Divine Images, St.
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1980.
6 G. Ostrogorsky, op. cit. p. 49.
7 St. Theodore the Studite, Refutation 3, ch. 3, par. 7. P.G. 99, col. 424.
8 St.John of Damascus. Commentary on St. Basil the Great, appended to 1st Discourse in Defence of Holy Icons. P.G. 94, col. 1256A.

32
 \

'
i

\ ' i (
St. Theodore the Studite. Design for an icon. , '*i f ,k f

St. John of Damascus. Design for an icon.

The Vllth Oecumencial

Council of Nicaea. Design for an icon.

33
 Thus God the Word, the Second Hypostasis of the “suffused it with Divine beauty”. The Fathers of the
Holy Trinity, describable neither by word nor by image, Vllth Oecumenical Council say, “He (God) recreated
assumes the nature of man, is born of the Virgin Mother him (man) into immortality by giving him this inalien¬
of God, while remaining perfect God, becomes perfect able gift. This recreation was more in God’s likeness
Man; becomes visible, tangible and therefore des¬ and better than the first creation—this gift is eternal”3,
cribable. In this wise, the very fact of the existence of the the gift ofcommunion with thcDivine beauty and glory.
icon is based on the Divine Incarnation. And the immu¬ Christ, the new Adam, the beginning of the new creature
tability of the Divine Incarnation is affirmed and de¬ —the heavenly man bearing the Holy Spirit within
monstrated by the icon. So in the eyes of the Church him—brings man to that aim for which the first Adam
the denial of the icon of Christ appears as a denial of was created and from which he turned away through
the truth and immutability of the fact of His becoming his fall; He brings him to the fulfilment of the design
man and therefore of the whole Divine dispensation. of the Holy Trinity concerning him: “Let us make man
Defending the icon in the period of iconoclasm, the according to our image and likeness” (Gen. i, 26). Ac¬
Church was not defending merely its educational role, cording to this design, man should be not only an image
and, still less, its aesthetic value; it was fighting for the of God, his Creator, but should also bear His likeness.
very foundations of the Christian faith, the visible testi¬ Yet in the description of the accomplished act of creation
mony of God become man, as the basis of our salvation. “And God made man, according to the image of God
“I have seen the human image of God, and my soul is he made him” (Gen. i, 27), nothing is said about like¬
saved” says St.John of Damascus.1 Such an under¬ ness. It is given to man as a task, to be fulfilled by the
standing of the icon explains the steadfastness and in¬ action of the grace of the Holy Spirit, with the free
transigence with which its defenders faced torture and participation of man himself. Freely and consciously,
death in the period of iconoclasm. “since the expression ‘according to the image’ indicates
If the first part of the Kontakion of the Sunday of the capacity of mind and freedom”, man enters into the
Triumph of Orthodoxy formulates the dogmatic basis design of the Holy Trinity concerning him and creates
of the icon, its second part, as we have said, by revealing his likeness to God, insofar as is possible for him, “for
the essence of the Divine dispensation—the fulfilment the expression ‘according to likeness’ means likeness to
of God’s design concerning man—at the same time re¬ God in virtues (perfections)”4, in this way participating
veals also the meaning and significance of the icon. in the work of Divine creation.
The Divine Person of Jesus Christ, Who possessed all Thus, if the Divine Hypostasis of the Son of God
the fullness of Divine life, and Who at the same time became Man, our case is the reverse: man can become
became perfect Man (i.e. man in all things but sin), not god, not by nature, but by grace. God descends in be¬
only re-establishes in its original purity the image of God coming Man; man ascends in becoming god. Assuming
defiled by man in his fall (“having refashioned the soiled the likeness of Christ, he becomes “the temple of the
image to its former estate”)2, but also conjoins the Holy Ghost” which is in him (1 Cor. vi, 19), re¬
human nature assumed by Him with the Divine life— establishes his likeness to God.5 Human nature remains

1 1st Discourse in Defence of the Holy Icons, ch. 22. P.G. 94, col. 1256A..
2 This “soiled image” is the cause of its prohibition in the Old Testament. The loss of the likeness of God in the Fall distorted the image
of God in man and the representation of this distorted image inevitably led to idolatry. In strict consequence, the cult images of the Old
Testament could only be such symbols as the rod, the golden pot (Heb. ix,4), etc., i.e. the icon of the icon, for they alone could be images
of the future fulfilment of the promise in the New Testament. The only exception were the images of cherubims, made according to God’s
command (Ex. xxv, 18-22) as of beings already established in their service of God. Moreover, their images were allowed only in a place
and position which emphasised their subordination to God (guardianship of the ark of testimony). Essentially, this exception annulled the
prohibition, since it gave it a conditional pedagogical meaning. It admitted in principle the possibility of the cult image on the one hand
and of representing the spiritual world by means of art on the other.
3 Acts, ibid. Act 6.
4 St.John of Damascus, Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book II. c. 12, On Man. P.G. 94, col. 920 B.
5 This is the origin of the Church Slavonic term prepodobny (literally “very like”), used with reference to the monastic type of sanctity.
This word, created in the time of St. Cyril and St. Methodius to translate the Greek word otuog, indicates that a man has acquired the lost
likeness to God. It has no corresponding word in other languages. On the other hand, the reverse terms nepodobny (unlike), ncpodobiiiyc
(unlikeness) can be traced back to very ancient times. Plato uses them in the philosophical sense (AvofioCoi i)Tug rrdvrov or tonov) in the dia¬
logue, The Statesman, to express the dissimilarity between the world and its idea. St. Athanasius the Great uses it already in the Christian

34
what it is—the nature of a creature; but his person, his that a saint is more truly a man than is a sinner, since, by

hypostasis, by acquiring the grace of the Holy Spirit, reassuming likeness to God, he achieves the original

by this very fact associates itself with Divine life, thus purpose of his being, is clothed in the incorruptible
changing the very being of its creaturely nature. The Beauty of the Kingdom of God, in the creation of which
grace ol the Holy Spirit penetrates into his nature, com¬ he participates with his life. Therefore, beauty itself as
bines with it, fills and transfigures it. Man grows, as it the Orthodox Church understands it, is not a beauty
were, into the eternal life, already here on earth acqui¬ belonging to the creature, but an attribute of the King¬
ring the beginning of this life, the beginning of dei¬ dom of God where God is all in all . . . St. Dionysius the
fication, which will be made fully manifest in the life Areopagite calls God Beauty "owing to the splendour
to come. He sheds on every being, to each in its proper measure”,
The revelation of this future transfigured corporality and also because he sees in Him "the cause of the
is shown to us in the Transfiguration of our Lord on harmony and the brilliant raiments of every creature,
Mount Tabor. "And was transfigured before them: and for He illumines all things, like light, by pouring out
his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white beauty from that radiant source, which wells up from
as the light" (Matt, xvii, 2). In other words the whole Himself.”5 Thus every creature shares in Divine Beauty
body of the Lord was transfigured, becoming as it were a in its proper measure, and bears as it were the seal of its
radiant raiment of the Deity. "As regards the character Creator. Yet, this seal is not God’s likeness but merely a
of the Transfiguration’’, say the Fathers of the Vllth beauty belonging to the creature. It is a means, and not
Oecumenical Council, referring to St. Athanasius the the end; a way where "the invisible things of him from
Great, "it was not that the Word laid aside His human the creation of the world are clearly seen, being under¬
form, but rather that the latter was illumined by His stood by the things that are made, even his eternal
glory.”1 Thus in the Transfiguration "on Mount Tabor power and Godhead . . .” (Rom. i, 20). The beauty of
not only does the Deity appear to men, but manhood the visible world lies not in the transitory splendour of
appears in Divine glory.”2 A man who has acquired the its present state, but in the very meaning of its exis¬
grace of the Holy Spirit becomes a participant of this tence, in its coming transfiguration laid down in it as a
Divine glory, this "uncreated and Divine radiance”, as possibility to be realised by man. In other words, beauty
St. Gregory Palamas3 called the light of Mount Tabor. is holiness, and its radiance the participation of the
In other words, uniting with the Deity, he becomes creature in Divine Beauty.
illumined by His uncreated light, thus assuming the On the plane of human creative work, beauty is the
likeness of the radiant body of Christ. St. Simeon the crowning given by God, the seal of the conformity of
New Theologian describes his personal experience of the image to its prototype, of the symbol to what it
this inner illumination in the following words, amongst represents, that is, to the Kingdom of the Spirit. The
others: "Having become all fire in his soul, he (man) beauty of an icon is the beauty of the acquired likeness
transmits the inner radiance gained by him also to the to God and so its value lies not in its being beautiful in
body, just as physical fire transmits its effect to iron.”4 itself, in its appearance as a beautiful object, but in the
However, as iron is not transformed into fire but fact that it depicts Beauty.
remains iron, merely becoming purified, so here the As regards the relationship of the representation, the
entire human nature becomes transfigured but nothing icon, with what it represents, the Fathers of the Vllth
in it is destroyed or taken away. On the contrary, being Oecumenical Council say the following, clearly in
purified of extraneous, foreign and sinful elements, it answer to the accusation of nestorianism made by the
becomes spiritualised and illumined. So it can be said iconoclasts against the Orthodox. “Although the Ca-

sense: “He, Who has created the world, seeing it agitated by tempests and in danger of being engulfed in the ‘place °f unlikeness’, took the
helm of the soul and came to its aid, setting right all its transgressions.” St. Augustine says in his Confessions (VII, io, no. 16): “I saw
myself far from Thee, in the region of dissimilitude” (Et inveni me longe esse a Te in regione dissimilitudinis).
1 Acts, act 6.
2 Works of Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna, Discourse 12. Moscow, 1873, p. 99, Russian.
3 P.G. 150, 1225 A, ch. 149. Quoted from Father Basil Krivoshein, The Ascetic and Theological Teaching of St. Gregory Palamas, Semina-
rium Kondakovianum, 8, Prague, 1936, and Eastern Churches Quarterly, Oct. 1938, p. 201.
4 Discourses of St. Simeon the New Theologian, Discourse 83, sec. 3, page 385, Moscow, 1892. In Russian.
6 St.Dionysius the Areopagite, The Divine Names, ch. 4, sec. 7. P.G. 3, col. 701C.

35
tholic Church depicts Christ in His human aspect, it and, being continually renewed, live eternally in the
docs not separate His flesh from the Divinity conjoined body of Christ, the Church. Since, like Jesus Christ,
with it. On the contrary, it believes that the flesh is God and Man, the Church is an organism both human
deified and professes it to be one with the Divinity, and Divine, it combines in itself, indivisibly, yet without
in accordance with the teaching of the great Gregory confusion, two realities: the historical, earthly reality
the Theologian and with truth. Yet it does not thereby and the reality of the grace of the Holy Spirit which sanc¬
make the flesh of our Lord not deified. Just as a painter tifies all things. The meaning of Church art, and in part¬
who makes a portrait of a man does not, thereby, render icular of the icon, lies precisely in that it transmits, or
him inanimate, but on the contrary the man remains ani¬ rather testifies visually to these two realities, the reality
mate and the painting is called his portrait because of its of God and of the world, of grace and of nature. It is
likeness to him, so also we, in making an icon, confess realistic in two senses. Just like the Holy Scriptures, the
the body of the Lord to be deified and regard the icon icon transmits historical fact, an event from Sacred
as nothing else than an icon, representing a likeness of History or an historical personage, depicted in his real
the prototype. For this reason the icon receives the name physical form and, again like the Holy Scriptures, it
of the Lord. Through this alone is it in communion with indicates the revelation that is outside time, contained
Him; and for this reason it is worthy of homage and is in a given historical reality. Thus, through the icon, as
holy.”1 As these words show, the icon is a likeness not of through the Holy Scriptures, we not only learn about
an animate but of a deified prototype, that is, is an image God, but we also know God.
(conventional, of course) not of corruptible flesh, but of If transfiguration is an illumination of the entire man,
flesh transfigured, radiant with Divine light. It is Beauty the enlightenment through prayer of his spiritual and
and Glory, represented by material means and visible material constitution by the uncreated light of Divine
in the icon to physical eyes. Consequently everything Grace, the manifestation of man as a living icon of God,
which reminds of the corruptible human flesh is con¬ then the icon is an external expression of this trans¬
trary to the very nature of the icon, for “flesh and blood figuration, the representation of a man filled with the
cannot inherit the Kingdom of God; neither doth cor¬ grace of the Holy Spirit. Thus the icon is not a represent¬
ruption inherit incorruption” (i Cor. xv, 50), and a ation of the Deity, but an indication of the participation of a
temporal portrait of a saint cannot be an icon, precisely given person in Divine life. It is a testimony of the concrete,
because it reflects not his transfigured but his ordinary, practical knowledge of the sanctification of the human
carnal state. It is indeed this peculiarity of the icon that body.2
sets it apart from all forms of pictorial art. Through the Incarnation of the Son of God, man re¬
So, depicting the Hypostasis of the incarnate God ceives the possibility not only to restore his likeness to
the Word, the icon testifies to the immutability and full¬ God with the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit, that is,
ness of His Incarnation. On the other hand, by this icon to make an icon of himself by inner doing, but also to
we confess that the “ Son of Man” depicted in it is truly reveal his grace-given state to others in word-images
God—revealed Truth. Man’s striving towards God, the and visual images. In other words he can create an ex¬
subjective, personal side of faith meets here with God’s ternal icon out of the matter surrounding him, which
answer to man, with revelation—the objective expe¬ has been sanctified by the descent of God upon earth—
rienced knowledge, which man expresses in word or in “we show it forth by deed and word.” Thus holiness
image. For this reason, liturgic art is not only our offer¬ is the realisation of possibilities given to man by the
ing to God, but also God’s descent into our midst, one Divine Incarnation, an example to us; the icon is the
of the forms in which is accomplished the meeting of means of revealing this realisation, a pictorial exposition'
God with man, of grace with nature, eternity with time. of this example. In other words, the icon transmits vi¬
Forms which record this mutual interpenetration of the sually the realisation of the patristic formula we have
Divine and the human are handed down by Tradition mentioned earlier: “God became Man so that man

1 Acts, act 6.
2 Therefore to ascribe to the icon, as is often done, monophysitism or a leaning towards monophysitism is completely to misunderstand
its essence. What is usually taken for monophysitism is the presence in the icon of an indication of the second reality we have mentioned,
which distinguishes it from other forms of art. However, on the same grounds, monophysitism could also be ascribed to the Holy Scriptures,
for no less than the icon, they too contain an indication of that same reality, and for the same reason and in the same sense differ from all
other literature.

36
should become god.” The outcome of this is the organic the saints revered in the icons, to say nothing of the icons
link, which exists in the Orthodox Church, between the of the Saviour and the Mother of God. Even if some saint
veneration of icons and the worship of saints. It also is not familiar to him, he can always say to what order
explains the care with which every external feature of of sainthood he belongs: whether he is a monk, a martyr,
a saint is preserved. Thanks to this the iconography of a bishop, etc. Reverently preserving the memory of
saints is distinguished by extraordinary stability. This is saints and their characteristics, the Orthodox Church
due not only to the desire to preserve the image sanctified has never accepted the painting of their icons from the
by Tradition, but also to the need to preserve a living imagination of the artist, or from a living model, for this
and direct connection with the person represented in the would involve a complete and conscious rupture with
icon. Therefore, the icon perforce shows the nature of the prototype, and the prototype with whose name the
the service of a saint, whether he be an Apostle, a bishop, icon is inscribed would be arbitrarily replaced by another
a martyr... and reproduces with particular care his char¬ person. In order to avoid invention, and a rupture be¬
acteristic, distinctive traits. This iconographic realism tween the image and the prototype, monographers paint
lies at the basis of the icon and is thus one of its most im¬ from ancient icons and make use of aids. To ancient
portant elements.1 Moreover, the personal, the indi¬ monographers the faces of the saints were as familiar as
vidual is often indicated merely by subtle lines and shades, those of their close friends. They painted them either
especially when the persons depicted have external fea¬ from memory or in other cases used sketches, drawings,
tures in common. This is why when many icons are etc.3 When the living Tradition began to be lost to¬
grouped together, they produce on someone strange wards the end of the XVIth century, these aids were
to them an impression of uniformity, even of a certain systematised and so-called personal and interpretative
stereotyped monotony. Exactly the same impression is manuals (Podlinniks) appeared. The first give a schematic
produced by a superficial reading of the lives of saints. iconography of the saints and the feast days (see the
Both in icons and in the lives of saints, the first thing schemes reproduced here), with an indication of the
that emerges is not the individuality but its subordination basic colours; the second give the same indications of
to that of which it is the bearer. the basic colours and a brief description of the character¬
However, defect of resemblance does not cause a lack istic features of the saints. From that time till now these
of connection with the prototype or a lack of veneration manuals serve as necessary technical aids to monogra¬
towards him. St.Theodore the Studite says: “Even if we phers. They should in no event be confused with the
do not recognise that the icon represents an image identi¬ iconographic Canon or with the sacred Tradition, as is
cal with its prototype owing to lack of skill, yet our words sometimes done.
will not be inept. For veneration is not shown to an icon We find the same constancy in the iconography of the
inasmuch it falls short of resembling the prototype, but festivals, and for the same reason. The very great majority
inasmuch it represents a likeness to it.”2 Thus resem¬ of these images dates from the first centuries of Christian¬
blance may be confined to reproducing faithfully the ity and originated in the actual localities where the events
characteristics of the prototype and, without expressing took place. Almost all these images, like the festivals
his individuality, to being satisfied with the likeness, themselves, originated in Syria and Palestine. They
as for instance in the drawings offered in this book. How¬ were accepted by the Church as historically the most
ever, faithfulness to the prototype is usually such that an exact4, and are still carefully preserved by the Orthodox
Orthodox churchgoer has no difficulty in recognising Church. Here, too, striving above all to avoid any kind

1 To regard an icon as a personification of some idea, virtue, etc. as is often the case (for instance, to take the Holy Martyr Paraskeva
as personifying the death of the Saviour, and the Holy Martyr Anastasia as personifying His Resurrection, and so on) shows a very theoretical
approach to the question, deprived of all factual foundation. It is true that allegories are sometimes admitted in icons, as for instance the per¬
sonification of the river Jordan, of the wilderness, the sun, the moon, and so on, but this is never so with icons of the saints.
2 2nd Refut., c. 3, sec. 5.; P.G. 99, col. 421.
3 “According to the custom established in the Orthodox Church... long before a saint was canonised and his remains disinterred, icons
of saints who had commanded most respect among people while still alive were made and were already distributed in the time of the gene¬
rations nearest to him. General, distinctive information about the saint was preserved, as well as sketches, drawings and verbal notes.” (N. P.
Kondakov, The Russian Icon, Part I, p. 19. In Russian.) Cases are also known in Russia when icons were already made, though not distri¬
buted, during the saint’s lifetime, if not directly from nature, at least from memory.
4 “Christian art”, says N. P. Kondakov, “generally built its compositions on a realistic basis, reproducing, be it only in the setting and
details, the actual conditions in which Christian events took place.” (Op. cit. p. 22.)

37
of invention, the icon adheres strictly to the Holy This manifestation of light is shown in the icon by the
Scriptures and Holy Tradition, transmitting the facts halo, which is thus an exact pictorial representation of an
as laconically as do the Gospels and representing only actual manifestation of the spiritual world. But the spi¬
what a particular text or tradition relates and what is ritual state itself, the inner perfection of a man, of which
indispensable to transmit the extra—temporal revelation this light is an external manifestation, can be trans¬
manifested in a given concrete event. Just as in the Holy mitted neither by word nor by image. As a rule when
Scriptures, only those details are admitted which are the fathers and ascetic writers come to the description
necessary and sufficient for this purpose. In some images of the actual moment of sanctification they characterise
of festivals several moments, differing as to time and it as a silence, since it is totally indescribable and in¬
place of action, are joined together into one composition expressible. However, the effect of this state on human
(for instance, in the Nativity of Christ, the Birth of the nature and in particular on the body can in some measure
Mother of God, the Spice—bearers at the Sepulchre, be described and depicted. Thus, as we have seen, St. Si¬
etc.). Thus, like the Divine Service, the icon transmits the meon the New Theologian has recourse to the images
meaning of the festival as fully as it can be transmitted. of fire and iron. A Russian Bishop Ignatius Brian¬
The second reality, the presence of the all-sanctifying chaninov, who lived in the XIXth century, gives a more
grace of the Holy Spirit, holiness, cannot be depicted by concrete description of it: “When prayer is sanctified
any human means, since it is invisible to external phy¬ by Divine grace...”, he says, “the whole soul is drawn
sical sight. Meeting saints in life we pass them by without towards God by some incomprehensible power, sweep¬
noticing their holiness, for holiness has no external ing the body with it... In a man... not only the soul,
characteristics. “The world docs not see the saints just not only the heart, but also the flesh becomes filled with
as the blind do not see the light’’, says the Metropolitan spiritual comfort and bliss—joy in the living God...”2
Philaret.1 But while remaining invisible to the unillu¬ In other words when a man reaches a state in which his
mined eye, holiness is evident to the eye of the spirit. usual dispersed condition,” thoughts and feelings coming
Recognising a man as a saint and glorifying him the from the fallen nature”3 is, with the help of the Holy
Church indicates his holiness by visible means in icons, Spirit, replaced by a state of concentrated prayer, the
using a symbolical language it has established, such as whole being of a man becomes one in a total soaring to
haloes, and particular forms, colours and lines. This God. "All that was disorder in him”, says St.Dionysius
symbolism indicates what cannot be conveyed directly. the Areopagite, “becomes order; what was without
But, by this means, revelation coming from the world form acquires form, and his life... becomes fully illu¬
on high, being expressed in matter, becomes manifest mined by light.”4 Corresponding with this state of the
for every man and accessible to his understanding and saint, his whole image in the icon, his face and other
contemplation. This symbolism reveals what a man has details, all lose the sensory aspect of corruptible flesh and
attained by his striving and how he has attained it. Con¬ become spiritualised. Transmitted in the icon, this trans¬
sequently the iconographic Canon, mentioned earlier, formed state of the human body is the visible expression
determines not only the subject of an icon, what is de¬ of the dogma of transfiguration and has thus a great
picted, but also how it should be depicted, by what means educational significance.5 An excessively thin nose, small
it is possible to indicate the presence of the grace of the mouth and large eyes—all these are a conventional me¬
Holy Spirit in a man and to convey his state to others. thod of transmitting the state of a saint whose senses
We have said earlier that an icon is an external ex¬ have been “refined” as they used to call it in the old
pression of the transfigured state of man, oi his sancti¬ times. The organs of sense as well as other details, such
fication by uncreated Divine light. Both in the writings as wrinkles, hair, etc., all are subjected to the general
of the holy Fathers and in the lives of Orthodox saints, harmony of the image and, together with the whole
we often meet with this manifestation of light, a kind body of the saint, united in one general sweeping to¬
of inner sunlike radiancy coming from the faces of saints wards God. All is brought to a supreme order; in the
at moments of high spiritual exaltation and glorification. Kingdom of the Holy Spirit there is no disorder, “for

1 Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna, vol. 3, Discourse 57 on the Annunciation. In Russian.
2 Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, Ascetic Experience, vol. I. In Russian.
s Ibid.
4 The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, ch. 2, III, sec. 8. P.G. 3, col. 437.
5 See for instance, the face of Apostle Paul (p. 111), of St. George the Martyr (p. 126) and others.

38
God is the God of order and of peace. ”1 Disorder is an emphasised by the fact that saints arc usually represented
attribute of the fallen man, the consequence of his fall. turned towards the congregation, either full-face or
This docs not mean, of course, that the body ceases to be three-quarters. They are hardly ever represented in pro¬
what it is; not only does it remain a body but, as we file even in complex compositions where their general
have said earlier, it preserves all the physical peculiarities movement is towards the central point of the compo¬
of the given person. But they arc depicted in the icon sition and of its significance. In a certain sense the profile
hi such a manner that it shows not the earthly coun¬ breaks communion, it is already the beginning of ab¬
tenance of a man as does a portrait, but his glorified sence. Therefore it is allowed chiefly in the case of per¬
eternal face.2 3 sons who have not yet attained sanctity. (See for instance
If this language of icons has become unfamiliar to us the shepherds or the wise men in the icon of the Nativity
and seems “naive” and “primitive”, the reason is not of Christ.)
that the icon has “outlived” or lost its vital power and The icon never strives to stir the emotions of the faith¬
significance, but that “even the knowledge that the ful. Its task is not to provoke in them one or another
human body is capable of spiritual comfort... is lost by natural human emotion, but to guide every emotion
men. * as well as the reason and all the other faculties of human
The method mentioned above does more than convey nature on the way towards transfiguration. As we have
symbolically, by means of the image, the transfigured said earlier, sanctification by grace does not eliminate
state of the saint; it also has a defmite creative and any faculties of this nature, just as fire docs not eliminate
instructive significance. It addresses itself to us and gives the properties of iron. In the same way the icon, in
guidance and instruction as to how we should comport depicting the body of a man with all its peculiarities,
ourselves in our prayer, our communion with God. It does not eliminate anything human: it does not exclude
shows us that our senses should not be dispersed and either the psychological or the worldly element. It also
distracted from prayer by manifestations of the external transmits the feelings of a person (the perturbation of
world. We find a beautiful verbal illustration of this the Mother of God in the Annunciation, the constern¬
method of iconography in the Philokalia, in the words ation of the Apostles in the Transfiguration, etc.), his
of St. Antony the Great: “This Spirit”, he says, “com¬ knowledge, his artistic creativeness (sec, for instance, the
bining with the mind... teaches it to keep the body in account of the icon of the Nativity) and the particular
order—all of it, from head to foot: the eyes, to see with external occupation, be it ecclesiastical (a Church digni¬
purity; the ears, to listen in peace, not to delight in tary, a monk) or temporal (a prince, a warrior, a doc¬
slander, gossip and abuse; the tongue, to say only what tor.. .) which the given saint has transformed into spiri¬
is good; ... the hands, to be above all brought into tual endeavour. But, just as in the Holy Scriptures, the
movement only to be raised in prayer and for works whole load of human thoughts, feelings and knowledge
of mercy...; the stomach, to keep the use of food and is represented in the icon at its point of contact with the
drink within the necessary limits...; the feet, to walk world ol Divine Grace, and in this contact all that is not
rightly and follow the will of God... In this way the purified is burnt up as by fire. Every manifestation of
whole body becomes trained in good and undergoes a human nature acquires meaning, becomes illumined,
change, submitting to the rule of the Holy Spirit, so that finds its true place and significance. Thus it is precisely
in the end it begins in some measure to share in such in the icon that all human feelings, thoughts and actions,
properties of the spiritual body, as it is to receive at the as well as the body itself, arc given their full value.
resurrection of the just.”4 Thus the icon does not cut Thus the icon is both the way and the means; it is
itself off from the world, docs not lock itself up within prayer itself. Hence its hieratic quality, its majestic sim¬
itself. The fact that it addresses itself to the world is also plicity and calmness of movement; hence the rhythm

1 St.Simeon the New Theologian, ibid. Discourse 15, par. 2, p. 143. In Russian.
2 As an example of the translation of the earthly aspect of a saint into an icon, let us cite the following case: at the disinterment in 1558
on the remains of St. Nicetas, archbishop of Novgorod, remains which proved uncorruptcd, a posthumous portrait was made of his face
and sent to the Church authorities with the following letter: “Sir, for the sake of the saint’s mercy, we have sent you on paper an image
of St. Nicetas, the Bishop, ... and you, Sir, please order an icon to be painted—an image of the saint, from this original.” (N. P. Kondakov,
The Russian Icon, Ill, part 1, p. 19.)
3 Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, ibid.
4 Philokalia, Russian translation, 1877, vol. I, p. 21, and Early Fathers from the Philokalia, London, 1954. p. 41-

39
ot its lines, the rhythm and joyfulncss of its colours, inside itself, but merely serves as a background to it, for,
which spring trom perfection of inner harmony.1 A according to the very meaning of the icon, the action
man’s transfiguration communicates itself to all the sur¬ is not enclosed in or limited to a particular place, just as,
roundings, for an attribute of holiness is the sanctification while being manifested in time, it is not limited to a
of all the surrounding world with which a saint comes certain time. Thus a scene which takes place inside a
into contact. Sanctity has not only a personal, but also a building is always shown as taking place with the build¬
general human, as well as a cosmic significance. There¬ ing as background. It was only in the seventeenth cen¬
fore all the visible world represented in the icon changes, tury that iconographcrs, influenced by the West, began
becomes the image of the future unity of the whole to depict events as taking place inside a building. Archi¬
creation—the Kingdom of the Holy Spirit. In accord¬ tectural buildings are connected with the human figure
ance with this, all that is depicted in the icon reflects not by the general meaning and composition, but very often
the disorder of our sinful world, but Divine order, peace, there is no logical link between them (see, for instance,
a realm governed not by earthly logic, not by human p. 134 St. Macarius of Unsha and p. 115 the Evangelist
morality, but by Divine Grace. It is the new order in Luke). If we compare the manner in which an icon re¬
the new creation. This is why what we see in the icon presents a human figure with the manner in which it
is so unlike what we see in ordinary life. The Divine depicts a building, we shall see a great difference between
Light permeates all things, so there is no source of light, them. With rare exceptions, the human figure is always
which would illumine objects from one side or another; constructed correctly—everything is in its right place.
objects cast no shadows, for no shadows exist in the The same applies to the clothes: their details, the folds,
Kingdom of God. All is bathed in light, and in their etc. arc perfectly logical. But architecture, both in form
technical language iconographcrs call “light” the back¬ and grouping is often contrary to human logic and in
ground of the icon. People do not gesticulate; their separate details is emphatically illogical. Doors and wind¬
movements are not disorderly, not haphazard. They ows arc often pierced in wrong places, their size does
officiate, and each of their movements bears a sacra¬ not correspond to their functions, etc. (see a character¬
mental liturgic character. Beginning with the clothes istic example in the icon of the Annunciation, p. 171,
of the saint, everything loses its usual haphazard cha¬ where the foot of an incomprehensible structure hangs
racter: people, landscape, architecture, animals. To¬ over an equally incomprehensible opening in the ceiling).
gether with the form of the saint himself, all are governed The meaning of this phenomenon is that architecture
by one rhythmic law, all are centered on the spiritual is the only element in the icon with the help of which
content and act as one harmonious whole: the earth, it is possible to show clearly that the action taking place
the vegetable and animal kingdoms are not depicted before our eyes is outside the laws of human logic, out¬
with a view to bringing the spectator closer to what we side the laws of earthly existence. It is noteworthy that
see in the surrounding reality, but in order to make this illogical character of architecture existed in Russian
nature itself participate in the transfiguration of man icons right up to the beginning of decadence, that is,
and consequently to connect it with existence outside up to the moment when, at the end of the XVIth and
time. Just as all creation fell through man’s fall, so it is the beginning of the XVIIth centuries, the understand¬
made holy through his holiness. Therefore there can ing of the iconographic language began to be lost. From
be no separate icon of creatures, without man. that time onwards the architecture becomes logical and
Architecture plays a peculiar role of its own in the icon. there ensues a fantastic, fairy-tale profusion of purely
While it serves, as does landscape, to denote that the logical architectural forms.
event depicted in the icon is in truth connected historic¬ It is clear from the aforesaid that the task of the icon
ally with a definite place, it never contains this event in no way includes the creation ot an illusion of the sub-

1 Although the icon is above all a language of colours, which are as symbolical as the form and the lines, we do not touch here upon their
symbolism and deal very little with it in the accounts of individual icons because, with the exception of some fundamental colours, its
meaning has been almost entirely lost in the centuries. Consequently there is a danger of individual arbitrary interpretations, which lead to
the realm of conjectures, at times very tempting, but deprived of authenticity and therefore not always, or rather never convincing, although
E. Trubetskoy has succeeded in noting down certain general principles. (See: Icons: Theology in Color, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1975,
Revised Edition 1983.) Starting from the general principle of Orthodox symbolism, we must say that one should not attach a symbolical
meaning to every shade, nor in the iconography—to every detail and every line of the drawing. In both cases symbolism is only in the
fundamentals: in the principal colours and general lines.

40
ject or event it depicts, for, according to its very de¬ have left us verbal descriptions of the Kingdom of God,
finition, the icon (that is, the image) is opposed to illu¬ which was within them (Luke xvii, 21), so others have
sion. When we look at it, we not only know but also also left descriptions of it, but in visible images, in the
see that we stand not before the person or the event it¬ language of artistic symbols; and their testimony is just
self, but before its image, that is, before an object which, as authentic. It is the same revealed theology, only in
by its very nature, is fundamentally different from its images instead of words. It is a kind of drawing from
prototype. This excludes all attempts to create an illu¬ nature by means of symbols, as are the verbal descrip¬
sion ofreal space or volume. In the icon space and volume tions of the holy Fathers. “ For we speak of it from con¬
are limited to the surface of the panel and must not templation”, testifies St. Simeon the New Theologian,
create an artificial impression of going beyond it. Yet “therefore what we relate should be called a record of
it is not two-dimensional art in the sense that Eastern art what has been contemplated rather than an idea”
is two-dimensional. The pictorial idea of volume always (vorjfxa).2 The holy image, just like the Holy Scriptures,
exists in the icon in the treatment of figures, faces, gar¬ transmits not human ideas and conceptions of truth, but
ments, buildings, etc. The composition of an icon is truth itself—the Divine revelation. Neither historical
always spatial and has a defmite depth. It expresses three nor spiritual reality admit of any invention. Therefore,
dimensions, but these three dimensions never violate the as we have said, the art of the Church is realistic in the
plane of the panel. Any violation of this plane, however strictest sense of the word, both in its iconography and
partial, damages the meaning of the icon. The preser¬ in its symbolism. In true Church art there is no idealisa¬
vation of the reality of the plane is greatly assisted by so- tion, just as it does not exist in the Holy Scriptures or the
called inverse perspective, the point of departure of Liturgy. Nor can it exist there, for idealisation intro¬
which lies not in the depth of the image, but in front duces a subjective, limiting element and so inevitably
of the image, as it were in the spectator himself.1 A man mutilates, or distorts truth to a greater or less extent.
stands, as it were, at the start of a pathway which is not The current opinion that Church art, and in particular
concentrated on some point in depth, but which un¬ the icon, are idealistic, that the icon conveys a certain
folds itself before him in all its immensity. Inverse per¬ higher idea, an opinion based on the fact that the realism
spective does not draw in the eye of the spectator; on the of this art is unlike anything usually understood by this
contrary it holds it back, precluding the possibility of its word, is pure misunderstanding. In actual fact it is just
penetrating and entering into the image in depth; and it the reverse: as soon as idealisation appears in an image
concentrates the attention on the image itself. it ceases to be an icon. This is quite intelligible for, from
The monographic symbolism that we have described himself, a man can give an account only about himself.
naturally gives rise to the question: on what grounds No one can give an account of Divine life from him¬
do we assert that the symbols used to convey the trans¬ self. “Who can speak from himself of some object he
figured state of man do actually indicate it, and are not has not seen before?... How is it possible to speak and
leading us to an invented, fantastic world?We can answer proclaim anything about God, about Divine things and
this question with the words of Apostle Paul: we “are about God’s saints, that is, how can one say what kind
compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses” of communion with God these saints are granted and
(Hcb. xii, i). And indeed, if in the iconography of saints what is that knowledge of God, which is within them
and of events of the Holy Scriptures the Church has and which produces ineffable actions in their hearts—
adopted the versions which express historical reality how can anything of this be said by a man who has not
most fully and exactly, the reality of the Kingdom of the already himself been illumined by the light of know¬
Holy Spirit is communicated by men who have acquired ledge?”3 Consequently an icon cannot be invented.
the rudiments of this Kingdom while still here, in the Only those who know from personal experience the
conditions of our earthly life. Just as some great spirituals state it portrays can create images corresponding to it

1 The opinion that the ancient iconographers did not know direct and therefore used inverse perspective has no foundation and is refuted
by the icon itself. If we look with attention at Rublev’s icon of the Trinity, for example (p. 198) we see that both perspectives are used in it:
the direct and the inverse. Thus the opening cavity for the drawer in the table and the building are represented in direct perspective, while
the foot-stools of the Angels, the table itself and the heads of the Angels are in inverse perspective. This method of combining the two
perspectives is not rare in ancient icons; still, preference is always given to inverse perspective.
2 Ibid. Discourse 63, par. 3, p. 115. In Russian.
3 St. Simeon the New Theologian, ibid. p. 116.

41
which arc truly “a revelation and evidence of things written in books and the grace of God rests on it, for
hidden ”1, in other words, evidence of man’s participa¬ what is portrayed is holy.”4
tion in the life of the transfigured world he contem¬ For this reason, the creation of an icon belongs to a
plates, just as Moses created images such as he had seen category fundamentally different from that usually un¬
and made cherubims as he had seen them2, that is, after derstood by this word. It has the character of catholic
the pattern he had seen in the mountain (Ex. xxv, 9). (soborny), not personal, creation. The iconographer
Only such an image can be authentic and convincing transmits not his own “idea” [vorjfia), but “a description
and can thus show us the way and direct us to God. No of what is contemplated”, that is factual knowledge,
artistic fantasy, no perfection of technique, no artistic something seen if not by himself, by a trustworthy wit¬
gift can replace actual knowledge, drawn from “seeing ness. The experience of this witness, who received and
and contemplating”.3 transmitted the revelation, is increased by the addition
of the experience of all those who have received it after
It would, of course, be wrong to conclude that saints him. In this way the singleness of the revealed truth is
alone can paint icons. The Church does not consist of joined with the multiform personal experience of those
saints alone. All its members leading a sacramental life receiving it. In order to receive and pass on the testimony,
have the right and the duty to follow in their footsteps. the iconographer must not only believe that it is genuine,
Therefore every Orthodox iconographer, living in the but must also share in the life, by which the witness of
Tradition, can make genuine icons. Still, the inexhaust¬ the revelation lived, must follow the same way, that is,
ible source feeding Church art is the Holy Spirit Himself, be a member of the body of the Church. Only then can
Who acts through the Church by means of men illu¬ he transmit the testimony received consciously and
mined by Divine grace; men who have attained to exactly. Hence the necessity for continual participation
direct knowledge of God and communion with Him in the sacramental life of the Church; hence also the
and who have therefore been glorified by the Church moral demands the Church makes of monographers.
as saint-iconographcrs. Thus the role of Tradition is not For a true iconographer, creation is the way of asceticism
limited to transmitting the actual fact ot the existence and prayer, that is, essentially, a monastic way. Although
of an icon. On the one hand it transmits the image of an the beauty and content of an icon arc perceived by each
event from Sacred History, or of a saint glorified by the spectator subjectively, in accordance with his capacities,
Church, as a remembrance of the event or the saint. they are expressed by the iconographer objectively,
O11 the other hand it is a constant inexhaustible fountain through consciously surmounting his own “1” and
of knowledge communicated to the Church by the Holy subjugating it to the revealed truth—the authority of
Spirit. Therefore the Church has repeatedly emphasised the Tradition. The usual “I see it like that”, “I under¬
the necessity to follow the Tradition, either through stand it like that”, is entirely excluded in this case. The
rulings of Councils, or through the voice of its digni¬ iconographer works not for himself, not for his own
taries, and enjoined that icons should be painted “as the glory, but to the glory of God. Therefore an icon is
ancient holy monographers painted them”. “Portray never signed. The freedom of an iconographer consists
in colours according to the Tradition; ” says St. Simeon not in an untrammelled expression of his personality,
of Thessalonica, “this is painting as true as what is of his “I”,5 but in his “liberation from all passions and

1 St.John of Damascus. Third Discourse in Defence of Holy Icons, ch. 17.; P.G. 96, col. 1337B.
2 St. Patriarch Tarasius, Acts of the Vllth Oecumenical Council, Act 4. Mansi, Coll. Cone. XIII, coll. 5-7.
3 St. Simeon the New Theologian, ibid. p. 115.
4 Dialogue against heresies, c. 23.; P.G. 155, col. 113D.
6 On this plane the creative art of an iconographer is diametrically opposed to the creations of Western or Westernised religious art,
where freedom is understood as a totally untrammelled expression of the artist’s personality, of his “I”, and where individual emotions,
beliefs, understanding and the experience of one or another human personality are placed above the profession of the objective truth of Divine
revelation. Without the sacrament of confession, which purifies through repentance, the whole creative work of a painter becomes as it were
a public confession. Without repentance, this public confession docs not purify or liberate the artist, but infects the spectator with all he has
in him. Here the “freedom” of the artist is manifested at the expense of the freedom of the spectator, on whom is imposed the personal
perception of the artist, screening him off from the reality of the Church. An artist who consciously or unconsciously follows this course, is
the slave of his senses and his emotions and so the image he creates inevitably loses its liturgic content and significance. Moreover an indivi¬
dualistic approach to art in the Church destroys its unity, breaks it up, deprives individual artists of the link with one another and witli
the Church. In other words, the principle of catholicity is replaced by the cult of individuality, exclusiveness, originality, an extreme mani-

42
lusts of the world and the flesh”.1 It is the spiritual free¬ the image consecrated by the Church, introducing no
dom of which Apostle Paul speaks, “Where the Spirit personal or emotional content, but placing all those who
of the Lord is, there is liberty” (2 Cor. iii, 17). The pray before one and the same reality and leaving each
guiding principle on this way is the iconographic Canon person free to react to the extent of his possibilities and
mentioned above. It represents not a sum-total of ex¬ in accordance with his character, his needs, his circum¬
ternal regulations restricting the creativeness of the artist, stances, and so forth. Moreover, just as a priest officiates
but an inner necessity consciously accepted as a construct¬ according to his natural gifts and peculiarities, so an
ive rule, as one of the aspects of Church Tradition, iconographcr transmits an image according to his cha¬
parallel with the liturgic, ascetic and other traditions. racter, gifts and technical proficiency.
In other words, the Canon is the form which the Church Iconography, therefore, is not copying. It is far from
gives to the subjugation of the human will to the will being impersonal, for to follow Tradition never shackles
of God, their union, and this form actually enables the the creative powers of the iconographer, whose indi¬
personality not to be the slave of its sinful nature, but to viduality expresses itself in the composition as well as
overcome it, subjugate it, be “master of its own actions in the colour and line. But the personal is here much more
and free” 2, or as Apostle Paul says, “All things are law¬ subtle than in other arts and so often escapes superficial
ful for me, but I will not be brought under the power observation. The absence of identical icons has been
of any” (1 Cor. vi, 12). This way gives a maximum noted long ago. Indeed, among icons on the same sub¬
freedom to the creative art of a man, and the source ject, although they are sometimes remarkably alike, we
which feeds it is the grace of the Holy Spirit. Therefore never find two absolutely identical icons (except in cases
only the creative art of the Church is a direct particip¬ of deliberate copying in more modern times). Icons are
ation in the Divine act, an action fully liturgic and there¬ not copied but are painted from, which means their
fore the most free. free creative transposition.
The degree to which art has liturgic quality is in direct
★
ratio to the spiritual freedom of the artist. An icon may
be technically perfect but of a very low spiritual level;
and conversely, there arc icons roughly and primitively Starting from the meaning and content of the icon, the
painted which stand on a very high spiritual level. Fathers of the Vllth Oecumenical Council confirmed
The task of an iconographcr has much in common that the blessed state of a man could be expressed by
with the task of a priest officiating. Theodosius the Her¬ means of matter sanctified by the Incarnation of God;
mit draws a definite parallel between them. He says, and they ordained the setting up of icons for veneration
“The Divine Service of icon representations draws its everywhere, in the same way as the image of the holy
origin from the holy Apostles. The priest and the icono¬ life-giving Cross, “in the holy churches of God, on
graphcr should be either chaste, or married and living in sacred vessels and vestments, on walls and panels, in
accordance with the law; for the priest, officiating with houses and on roadways.”4 This ordinance of the holy
divine words, prepares the Body of which we participate Council shows that in the consciousness of the Church
for the remission of sins; while the artist, instead of using the role of the icon, transmitted by Tradition, is not
words, draws and images a body and gives it life, limited to preserving a memory of the sacred past. Its
and we venerate icons for the sake of their prototypes.” 3 role, both in the Church and in the world, is not con¬
Just as the priest can neither alter liturgic texts at his servative but dynamically creative. The icon is regarded
discretion nor bring into their reading any emotions, as one of the ways by means of which it is possible and
such as may impress upon the faithful his personal state necessary to strive to achieve the task set before mankind,
or perception, so also an iconographcr must conform to to achieve likeness to the prototype, to embody in life

festation of which is seen, for instance, in the newly decorated Roman Catholic Church in Assy (France). In this sense the example of Ber¬
nadette of Lourdes is very significant: “ Shown an album of pictures of Our Lady, she rejected with horror the Renaissance ones: she tolerated
Fra Angelico’s; but lingered with a certain satisfaction over quite early, rigid, depersonalised mosaics or frescos.” (Rev. C. C. Martindale,
S.J., What the Saints looked like. Catholic Truth Society, B. 397, p. 4.)
1 St. Simeon the New Theologian, Discourse 87, ibid. p. 456.
2 St.John of Damascus, On the Orthodox Faith, Book II, ch. 27. P.G. 94, col. 960D.
3 The Iconographic Manual of Bolshakov, edited by A. I. Ouspensky, Moscow, 1903, p. 3.
4 Ordinance of Vllth Oecumenical Council.

43
what was manifested and transmitted by God-Man. one or another people. Thus the stern hieratic character
With this significance, icons arc placed everywhere as of the Byzantine icons is not opposed to the tenderness
the revelation of the future sanctification of the world, and warmth of Russion icons, for God is not only the
of its coming transfiguration, as the pattern of its real¬ Almighty and the stern Judge, but also the Saviour of
isation and, finally, as the promulgation of grace and the world, Who sacrificed Himself for the sms of men.
the presence in the world of holy objects, which sanc¬ As in the early period, so also later, the icon is not limited
tify. “For the saints were filled with the Holy Spirit to expressing only the dogmatic, spiritual, that is, the
even in their lifetime. After their death too the grace inner life of the Church. Through the men who create
of the Holy Spirit inexhaustibly dwells in their souls and it, it has a living link with the outer world, manifesting
in their bodies lying in their graves, in their countenances the spiritual countenance of each nation, its character,
and in their holy images.”1 its history, responding to all the complex problems of
Thus, in the XIVth century, in reply to the scholastic time and place by means and methods corresponding
doctrine advanced in the controversy over the light of to each epoch, and each people. But however strongly
Tabor, when the Church was forced to set down as a the features connecting the icon with the outer world arc
dogmatic definition its teaching on the deification of displayed, they are still only external traits and not the
man, it already taught of the action in man of Divine essence of the icon which consists, above all, in expressing
energy, of his illumination by grace, his transfiguration, Church dogma.
not only by means of facts, through the spiritual ex¬ In accordance with the gift of expression, belonging
perience of its saints, but also by images, in the language to an individual man and to a whole nation, and also
of art. This doubly realistic language of Church art, in accordance with the measure in which the revelation
which made its appearance in the early Christian era, is experienced in practice, it is transmitted in the image
received its dogmatic confirmation in connection with with greater or less perfection. These two conditions
the establishment of the dogma of the Incarnation of the lie at the basis of both the similarities and the differences,
Second Person of the Holy Trinity (“God became which exist between icons of different peoples and pe¬
man”), in the first period of Church history, which cul¬ riods. The degree to which the gift of expression is
minated in the Triumph of Orthodoxy. In the second subordinated to the revelation it has to express, deter¬
period, in the course of the six centuries following the mines the spiritual level and the purity of the image.
Iconoclasts, when the central question was that of the In this sense the most characteristic example is that of
Holy Spirit in connection with the defence of the second Byzantium and Russia, the two countries where Church
aspect of the same dogma (“that man might become art reached the highest level of expression. The art of
god”), the pictorial language of the Church was made Byzantium, ascetic and stern, solemn and refined does
more perfect and precise. This period saw the final not always reach the spiritual height and purity charac¬
shaping of the iconographic language which became teristic of the general level of Russian iconography. It
classical and which entirely corresponds to the con¬ grew and was formed in times of struggle and this
tent of the icon. This was the period of the blossom¬ struggle left its imprint upon it. Byzantium is the fruit
ing of Church art in different Orthodox countries: in of the culture of the ancient world, whose rich and
Greece, in the Balkans, in Russia, in Georgia and else¬ varied inheritance it was called on to introduce into the
where. Church. In this task, its inherent gift for profound and
However, as sainthood itself, of which the icon is a subtle thought and word enabled it to bring into the
reflection, manifests itself differently in different peoples Church all that concerned the verbal language of the
and epochs and corresponds to their peculiarities, so Church. It produced great theologians; it played a great
each nation and each period, by transmitting in images role in the dogmatic struggle of the Church, and in part¬
the same truth, creates different types of icons, at times icular the decisive role in the struggle for the icon. And
very similar, but often differing greatly from one an¬ yet, in the image itself, despite the high level of artistic
other. There is no contradiction in this, for a single expression, there often remains some trace of the antique
revelation manifests itself in different aspects in accord¬ inheritance it had not quite outlived, which makes it¬
ance with the requirements of one or another epoch, self felt, in greater or less degree, in different aspects

1 St.John of Damascus, ist Discourse in Defence of Holy Icons, par. 19.; P.G. 94, col. 1249CD.

44
which reflect on the spiritual purity of the image.1 Even rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden
the masterpieces of the classical period of that art, such is light” (Matt, xi, 29-30). The Russian icon is the
as the Xllth century mosaics of St. Sophia in Constan¬ highest expression in art of godlike humility. This is
tinople, are not entirely devoid of sensual grossness; why, in spite of its extremely deep meaning, it has a
one feels in them that peace of soul and body has not yet child-like lightness and joy and is full of tranquil peace
been completely attained.2 And IXth century mosaics and warmth. Having come into contact through Byzan¬
in the same St. Sophia are definitely imbued with an¬ tium with the traditions of the ancient world, especially
tique sensuality.3 Later too we often meet with the same in their basic hellenism and not in their Roman version,
traces of antique art and dependence on matter, both in Russian iconography was not fascinated by the charm
Byzantine and in subsequent Greek icons. of this inheritance. It uses it only as a means, introduces
On the other hand Russia, which was not bound by it completely into the Church, and transfigures it; and
the complex inheritance of antiquity and the roots of thus the beauty of antique art acquires its true meaning
whose culture were much less deep, attained to an ex¬ in the transfigured countenance of the Russian icon.4
ceptionally high level and purity of image, which makes Together with Christianity, Russia received from
Russian iconography outstanding among all the rami¬ Byzantium at the end of the Xth century an already
fications of Orthodox iconography. It was indeed given established liturgical image, a formulated doctrine con¬
to Russia to produce that perfection of the pictorial cerning it and a mature technique worked out in the
language of the icon, which revealed with such great course of centuries. Its first teachers were visiting Greeks,
force the depth of meaning of the liturgic image, its masters of the classical period of Byzantine art, who
spirituality. It can be said that if Byzantium was pre¬ from the very beginning, in the frescos of the first
eminent in giving the world theology expressed in churches, as for instance in St. Sophia of Kiev (1037-
words, theology expressed in the image was given pre¬ 1161/67), used Russian artists as assistants.5 The activity
eminently by Russia. It is characteristic in this sense that of their pupils, the first known Russian saint-iconogra-
until the times of Peter the Great there are few spiritual phers, belongs to the Xlth century. These were monks
writers among Russian saints; on the other hand many of the Kiev-Pechersky monastery: St. Alipy, who died
saints were iconographers, from plain monks to metro¬ about 1114 and his collaborator St. Gregory. St. Alipy
politans. The Russian icon is no less ascetic than the is regarded as the father of Russian iconography. He
Byzantine. Yet its asceticism is of quite another order. began to paint icons from childhood under visiting
Here the accent is not on the arduousness of the endea¬ Greek masters; later he became a monk, and was or¬
vour, but on the joy brought by its fruit, on the easiness dained into priesthood. He was distinguished by a never
and lightness of the Lord’s yoke, of which He Himself flagging diligence, humility, chastity, patience, fasting
speaks in the Gospels, which are read on the days of the and love for meditation on divine subjects. “Never
holy ascetics, “Take my yoke upon you, and learn of were you angered by those who offended you, nor re¬
me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find turned evil for evil”, says the Church hymn in his

1 In general, the development of Church art in Byzantium was “connected with a whole scries of long-drawn crises—renaissances of
antique classical art... Such a recrudescence of antique art was very strong in the IVth century, when triumphant Christianity had adopted
almost in toto the pictorial apparatus of antiquity. Analogous returns to classical art were phenomena which occurred sporadically in Byzan¬
tium” (V. Lazarev, History of Byzantine Painting, vol. I, p. 39. In Russian). Essentially, these recrudescences of ancient classical art were
nothing more than echoes, in the realm of Church art, of the general process of introducing everything into the Church, a process affecting
all sides of the world outlook of antiquity. In this process of infusion into Christianity, there came into the Church many things which did
not belong to it and so could not be assimilated, but nevertheless left their imprint on the art of the Church. Thus the effect of these “re¬
naissances” was to introduce into this art the illusory and sensual character of pagan art, which is totally alien to Orthodoxy. Much later
the same elements, artificially resurrected in the Italian Renaissance, obtruded themselves into Church art under the guise of naturalism,
idealism, and so forth.
2 For example the Deisis, a mosaic of the Southern gallery.
3 For example the mosaics of the apse: the enthroned Mother of God with the Child and Archangel Gabriel on the vault of the sanctuary.
4 Russian iconography represents the largest and so far the most fully explored field of Orthodox Church art. Therefore in what follows
we dwell briefly on the outlines of this art alone, not touching on the art of other Orthodox countries.
5 V. Lazarev, op. cit. p. 94. Since Christianity had spread in Russia even before the Xth century, there seems no doubt that local Russian
iconographers already existed in periods earlier than the official acceptance of the Christian religion, although we have no positive data
about this.

45
honour.1 He was one of the ascetic monks who made in the Xlllth century this gloomy colouring begins to
the Kiev-Pcchersky Lavra famous.2 Through St. Alipy be replaced by the bright and variegated colours charac¬
and Gregory Russian Church art, from its very incep¬ teristic of Russian art. A greater inner and outer dyna¬
tion, was guided by men enlightened by knowledge mism and a greater tendency to preserve the plane sur¬
received through direct revelation, of which Russian face make their appearance. The early icons, while
iconography had such a number later. Unfortunately, bearing Russian features, are still more or less dependent
despite evidence as to a great number of icons painted on Greek patterns. Presumably the Xllth century was
by these first iconographers, there exist to-day only a period of assimilating principles and forms of Church
suppositions and conjectures about them; we have no art inherited from Byzantium; in the Xlllth century
authoritative information. Generally we can form an these already begin to assume the national Russian
idea of the Kiev period of Russian Church art mainly aspect, which found its final expression in the XIVth
from frescos and mosaics. The Tartar invasion of the century.3 Icons of this period are distinguished by fresh¬
middle of the Xlllth century, which involved the greater ness and directness of expression, vivid colours, sense of
part of Russia, not only destroyed many existing icons rhythm and simplicity of composition. The activity of
but considerably hindered the production of new ones. the saint-iconographers St. Peter, Metropolitan of Mos¬
Most of the very few icons of this period that have been cow (died 1326), and St.Theodore, Archbishop of Ros¬
preserved and so far discovered belong to the end of the tov (died 1394), also belong to this period.
Xlth, the Xllth and the Xlllth centuries. Moreover, The XIVth, XVth and the first half of the XVIth cen¬
almost all of them are more or less correctly attributed turies represent the finest flowering of Russian icono¬
to Novgorod, which also was a source of art in the Xlth graphy which coincides with the finest flowering of
century. Russian sainthood, namely that of the ascetic type, which
Icons of the pre-Mongolian period have the excessively declines sharply in the second half of the XVIth century.
monumental character which distinguishes mural paint¬ This time produced the greatest number of canonised
ings, under the influence of which Russian iconography saints, especially the XVth century. From 1420 to 1500
remained even in the XIVth century, and a laconic the number of canonised saints reached fifty.
character of artistic expression both in composition and The borderline between the XIVth and the XVth cen¬
in the figures, gestures, draperies, etc. The prevailing turies is connected with the name of the greatest icono-
colours arc dark, restrained and gloomy. Yet already grapher, St. Andrew (Rublev) who worked with his

1 Troparion, Tone 8. Canon to the saint.

2 See M. and V. I. Ouspensky: Notes on ancient Russian iconography. St. Alipy and A. Rublev, p. 6. St.Petersburg, 1901. In Russian.
3 Local peculiarities influence and determine also the particular character of artistic creation. For instance, the preference of the people
of Novgorod for the simple, the powerful and the expressive was reflected also in the Church art of Novgorod. I. Grabar gives a beautiful
description of this art: “The ideal of the man of Novgorod is strength, and beauty—the beauty of strength. His art is at times clumsy, but al¬
ways magnificent, for it is strong, majestic, overwhelming. Such is the iconography of Novgorod—vivid in colour, strong and daring,
with sure brush-work, with outlines made by a confident hand, decisively and imperiously.” (I. Grabar, Problems of Restoration, p. 57,
Moscow, 1926. In Russian.) The artists of Novgorod use pure unblended colours in which red, green and yellowpredominate. The vivid colour¬
fulness of Novgorod icons is based on contrasts of opposing colours. The icons are dynamic in composition and drawing.
The icons of Suzdal are distinguished by their aristocratic character and exquisiteness and elegance of proportion and line. They have
“a peculiarity which distinguishes them sharply from those of Novgorod. Their general tone is always cool, tinged with blue and silver
as opposed to those of Novgorod, which are invariably weighted towards warm yellow and golden hues. In Novgorod, ochre and vermilion
predominate, but ochre never predominates in a Suzdal icon and even if used is always subordinated to other hues, which produce the im¬
pression of a scale of silvery-blues.” (Problems of Restoration, ibid. p. 61.)
The general colour of Pskov icons is usually dark and is limited to three hues, not counting the background—red, brown and dark green,
and at times only to two—the red and the green. It is typical for a Pskov master to use gold to indicate high-lights, by means of parallel
or radiating lines. (G. N. Dmitriev, Guide to the Russian State Museum, 1940. In Russian.)
The icons of Vladimir and then of Moscow, which followed it and became dominant in the XIVth century, differ from other icons in
that they are based on an exact equilibrium of different hues for the purpose of creating a harmonious whole. Owing to this the palette of
the Vladimir and later of the Moscow school is distinguished not so much by the intensity, as by the harmony of its colours, in spite of the
existence of individual vivid tones (A. I. Anisimov, Masterpieces of Russian Painting, London, 1930). In contrast to the elongated faces
of Novgorod icons, those of Moscow have the characteristic of rounded faces.
Naturally, all these features have a merely relative and rather conventional value and, for modern knowledge, arc only provisional.
In addition to the centres already mentioned there were of course others, not yet investigated, as for instance Smolensk, Tver, Riazan and
others. Moreover, constant discovery of new icons renders it necessary to make frequent amendments.

46
friend and teacher, St.Daniel (the Black). In the last painting often becomes exquisite and formally refmed.
ten years a whole scries of frescos and icons painted by This period shows a great perfection of technique, ele¬
him have come to light, the first place among which is gance of lines, exquisiteness of forms and colour. The
occupied by his unsurpassed Trinity. The extraordinary art of Dionysius is full of a special lively joyousness, the
depth of the spiritual vision of St. Andrew found its proportions of his figures are elongated and exquisite
expression through his exceptional artistic talent. The with an accentuated grace of movements. The outlines
creative art of Andrew Rublev is the most vivid mani¬ arc flowing, smooth and strong. His limpid colours with
festation in Russian iconography of the antique heritage. their delicate greens, pinks, pale blues and yellows have
All the beauty ofantique art here comes to life, filled with a singularly musical quality.
a new and true meaning. His art is distinguished by a The XVIth century preserved in full the impregnation
youthful freshness, a sense of measure, a supreme har¬ of the image by the Spirit; nor do we see the vividness
mony of colours, an enchanting rhythm and music of of colours diminish; on the contrary, they assume a still
line. The influence of St. Andrew on Russian Church richer variety of shades. This century, like the preceding
art was immense. References to him have been preserved one, continues to produce remarkable icons. Yet in its
in manuals of iconography, and the Council convoked second half, the majestic simplicity and classical mode¬
to decide questions connected with iconography in 1551 ration, which had endured throughout centuries, begin
in Moscow by the Metropolitan Makary, himself an to totter. The broad planes and the monumental feeling
iconographer, accepted the following resolution: “to of the image, the classical rhythm and the antique
paint icons from ancient patterns, as did the Greek icono- purity and strength of colour also disappear. There
graphers and as did Andrew Rublev and other celebrated appears a desire for complexity, virtuosity and abund¬
artists”.1 If any of his icons perished, it was recorded ance of details. The hues become darker and duller and
in the annals as an event of great consequence and public in the place of the former limpid light colours, opaque
importance. The art of St. Andrew left its impression earth-hued shades make their appearance which, com¬
on all XVth century Russian Church art which, in that bined with gold, create an impression of pompous and
period, reached the height of its artistic expression. It somewhat gloomy splendour. This period is a turning
is the classical period of Russian iconography. The ma¬ point in Russian iconography. The dogmatic meaning
sters of the XVth century attain to an extraordinary per¬ of the icon ceases to be felt as the essential point and the
fection in the control of line, in skill in inserting figures narrative moment frequently assumes a dominant role
into a defined space, finding excellence of correlation (see the icon of the Nativity of Christ, p. 160). A whole
between silhouette and free background. This century series of new subjects appear suggested by the influence
is in many ways a repetition of the preceding one, but of Western prints.
differs from the latter in its greater equilibrium and more This period and the beginning of the XVIIth century
perfect structure. A11 exceptional sense of rhythm per¬ is connected with the activity of the new Stroganov
meating everything, an extraordinary purity and depth school, formed in north-east Russia under the influence
of tone, the strength and joyousness of colours fully ex¬ of the Stroganov family who were great lovers of
press the joy and serenity of an art which has reached iconography. The characteristic feature of Stroganov
its maturity and is blended with an unusual depth of masters of that time are complex icons with many small-
spiritual insight. scale figures and a minute finish. They are distinguished
The second half of the XVth and the beginning of the by a remarkable fineness and virtuosity of execution
XVIth centuries arc connected with another genius and resemble jewelled objets d’art. The design is com¬
whose name ranks with that of St. Andrew—Dionysius plicated and rich in details; the colouring tends to con¬
who worked with his sons. His art is based on the Rublev form to one general hue, thus losing the brightness of
tradition and represents a brilliant culmination to Rus¬ the individual colours.
sian XVth century iconography. Yet this culmination In the XVIIth century the decline of Church art sets in.
is to a certain extent connected with a preponderance This decline was the result of a deep spiritual crisis, a
of the external means of expression. Towards the end secularisation of religious consciousness, thanks to which,
of the XVth and the beginning of the XVIth centuries despite the vigorous opposition of the Church2, there

1 N. V. Pokrovsky, Notes on Monuments of Russian Iconography and Art, p. 356. St. Petersburg, 1900. In Russian.
2 From the moment that distortions began to appear in Church art and the Church was forced to make official pronouncements concerning
iconography, it always protected the canonical forms of liturgic art, both through Councils (for instance, the Council of the Hundred Chap-

47
began the penetration not merely of separate elements in times of complete decadence, frescos and icons, de¬
but of the very principles ofWestern religious art, which prived of all other merit, arrest the eye by the har¬
are alien to Orthodoxy. The dogmatic content of the mony and strength of the general effect. Even now, on
icon vanishes from the consciousness of men and symbol¬ the level of bad commercial production these things
ical realism becomes an incomprehensible language for have that ‘everything in its place’ which is so often
iconographers fallen under the influence of the West. lacking in modem painting.”2 Such is the force of
The link with Tradition is broken. Church art becomes Church tradition which, even on a low level of artistic
secularised under the influence of the nascent secular creation, preserves echoes of great art. Moreover this
realistic art, whose father is the famous iconographer artisan level was not and is not an absolute rule. Side
Simon Oushakov. This secularisation is a reflection in by side with the image which had lost its link with the
the domain of art of the general secularisation of the life Church Tradition and had become half-worldly or
of the Church. The result is a mixing of Church image wholly worldly and bad icons painted by artisans, there
and worldly image, of Church and world. Symbolical were always produced and are still being produced icons
realism, based on spiritual experience and vision, dis¬ of a high level, both in Russia and in other Orthodox
appears through the absence of the latter and through countries (see p. 130), amid the decadence which had
losing its link with Tradition. This fact gives birth to an attacked them at different times. Iconographers, who
image which no longer testifies to the transfigured state did not desert the iconographic tradition of the Church,
of man—to spiritual reality—but expresses different have carried through these centuries of decadence and
ideas and opinions connected with this reality; thus preserved to our times a true liturgic image, often of
what is realism in secular art becomes idealism when great spiritual content and high artistic level.
applied to Church art. This also gives rise to a more or
★
less arbitrary treatment of the subject itself, which be¬
comes merely an occasion to express this or that idea
or conception, inevitably leading to a distortion of hi¬ As we have said, Christianity is the revelation not only
storical reality as well. of the Word of God but also of the Image of God, in
Loss of the consciousness of the dogmatic meaning which His Likeness is revealed. This godlike image is
of art inevitably led to the distortion of its very foun¬ the distinctive feature of the New Testament, being the
dations1 and no artistic gift, no exquisite technique visible witness of the deification of man. The ways of
proved able to replace them; so that iconography be¬ iconography, as means of expressing what regards the
came half-craft or simply a craft. Deity, are here the same as the ways of theology. The
Yet the dogmatic consciousness of the image was not task of both alike is to express that which cannot be
lost by the Church and it would be wrong to think expressed by human means, since such expression will
that this decadence was the end of the icon. The craft always be imperfect and insufficient. There are no words,
of iconography had always existed side by side with nor colours nor lines, which could represent the King¬
great art; but in the XVIIIth, XIXth and XXth centuries dom of God as we represent and describe our world.
it assumes a dominant significance. But even here “even Both theology and iconography are faced with a problem

ters in the XVIth century and the Great Moscow Council in the XVIIth century) and in the persons of its higher dignitaries. Thus at the
Triumph of Orthodoxy, the Patriarch Nicon (1652-1658) used to destroy icons painted under Western influence and anathematised all
those who would in future paint them or keep them in their homes. The Patriarch Joachim (1679-1690) writes in his testament: “I ordain
in the name of the Lord that icons of God-Man and of the most Holy Mother of God and of all the saints should be painted according to old
versions ...; and above all that they should not be painted from Latin and German images, which are unseemly, invented in accordance
with personal whims, and which corrupt the Tradition of our Church. Such irregular images as exist in churches must be removed.” (Bol¬
shakov Manual, published by A. I. Ouspensky, Moscow, 1903, in Russian.) In the Greek Church where decadence had set in earlier, already
in the XVth century St. Simeon of Thessalonica, in his writing Against Heresies (ch. 23), points to elements ofsecular art penetrating into liturgic
art and thus distorting the meaning of the icon: “Again, emphasising all that we have said, holy icons are often painted not in accordance with
tradition, but in other manners; they are adorned not with iconographic but with naturalistic clothes and hair, and thus give not the image
and likeness of the original, but are painted and adorned without reverence, which is quite opposed to the nature of the holy icon.”
1 Just as religious thought was not always on the level of theology, so artistic creation was not always on the level of genuine iconography
even before then. Therefore one cannot take every image for an indisputable authority, since it may correspond to the teaching of the Church,
or may not correspond to it and thus lead into error. In other words, one can distort the teaching of the Church by image as well as by word.
2 I. Grabar, History of Russian Art (article by P. Muratov), vol. 6, p. 48. In Russian.

48
which is absolutely insoluble—to express by means be¬ Mount Athos who died in 1938, describes his personal
longing to the created world that which is infinitely experience ill the following words: “There is a great
above the creature. On this plane, there are no successes, difference”, he says, “between merely believing that
for the subject itself is beyond comprehension and no God is, knowing Him from nature or from the Scrip¬
matter how lofty in content and beautiful an icon may tures, and knowing the Lord by the Holy Spirit.”
be it cannot be perfect, just as no word image can be “The Lord is known in the Holy Spirit, and the Holy
perfect. In this sense both theology and iconography Spirit is in the whole of man—in his soul, his mind and
are always a failure. Precisely in this failure lies the value his body.” “He who has come to know the Lord by
of both alike; for this value results from the fact that the Holy Spirit assumes the likeness of the Lord; as
both theology and iconography reach the limit of human St.John the Evangelist said, ‘We shall be like him; for
possibilities and prove insufficient. Therefore the me¬ we shall see him as he is’ (1 John iii, 2), and we shall
thods used by iconography for pointing to the King¬ behold his glory.”1 Thus as the living experience of
dom of God can only be figurative, symbolical, like the the deification of man continues to exist, so, too, lives
language of the parables in the Holy Scriptures. But the the iconographic Tradition, and with it even its tech¬
content expressed in this symbolical language is immu¬ nique; since as long as this experience is alive, its ex¬
table, both in the Scriptures and in the liturgic image. pression, whether in word or image, cannot disappear.
Just as the teaching concerning the purpose of Chris¬ In other words, being the outer expression of the like¬
tian life—the deification of man—continues to exist, so ness of God in man, the icon cannot disappear just as the
the dogmatic teaching concerning the icon continues likeness of man to God itself cannot disappear. The
to exist and live in the Divine services of the Orthodox words of St. Simeon the New Theologian, spoken in
Church, thanks to which the right attitude to the icon the Xlth century, apply here, as they apply to any
is preserved. For an Orthodox man of our times an icon, period of the Church’s history: “Those who say that
whether ancient or modern, is not an object of aesthetic now there are no men who could be... worthy of re¬
admiration or an object of study; it is living, grace- ceiving the Holy Spirit... of being regenerated through
inspired art which feeds him. In our times, as of old, the grace of the Holy Spirit and of becoming the sons
not only does the icon continue to be painted accord¬ of God with consciousness, practical experience and
ing to the Canon, but the consciousness of its content vision, overthrow the whole dispensation through In¬
and significance is again awakening; for now, as before, carnation of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ
it corresponds to a definite concrete reality, a definite and clearly deny the renewal of God’s image or of
living experience, which is at all times alive intheChurch. human nature, corrupted and slain by sin.”2
For example, one of our contemporaries, a staretz of L. OUSPENSKY

1 Archimandrite Sophrony, Wisdom from Mount Athos: The Writings of Staretz Si/ouan 1866-1938, St. Vladimir s Seminary Press, 1975.
2 Simeon the New Theologian, Discourse 64, p. 127. Moscow, 1892. In Russian.

49
THE TECHNIQUE OF ICONOGRAPHY
 In speaking of the content and significance of the icon, pression of illusion, here the margins of the icon play
we had in view the liturgic image independently of the an opposite role and hinder this impression of illusion.
medium of its execution, that is of whether the icon is For the purpose of getting more solid cohesion with the
painted, or carved in wood or stone, or executed in ground, the surface of the panel is fmcly scored with
fresco or mosaic. However, the method which has the some sharp instrument. This roughened surface is
richest possibilities and corresponds best to the mean¬ covered with liquid size and well dried, usually for
ing and purpose of the icon, is classical painting with egg twenty-four hours. Then a piece of loosely woven linen
tempera. Its technique has behind it many centuries of is glued on to it, which serves as an underlayer for the
tradition, going back to the most remote antiquity. This ground. This underlayer is very important, for it binds
capital is carefully preserved, like the living tradition of the ground more firmly to the panel, protects the panel
icon-painting, and is handed down from generation to from splitting, and when it begins to warp, prevents the
generation, going back to its source in Byzantium, and ground from flaking off.
from thence apparently to the ancient world. Naturally The next operation, the preparation and application
new materials appear in the course of time, and are care¬ of the ground (levkas) is complex and important. To
fully studied and adapted to icon-painting. Yet the prepare the ground one uses alabaster or the highest
methods of this technique, elaborated by many centuries grade chalk and the best quality of size.1 The panel is
of practice, form a traditional system and are used by coated with several consecutive applications of this solu¬
contemporary icon-painters almost without change. tion of glue and chalk, care being taken to make each
The process of preparation of an icon possesses a com¬ coating as thin as possible. The number of applications
plex character of its own and is divided into a series of should be between three and eight, depending on the
operations, requiring great skill and experience. The consistency of the ground. Each coating is thoroughly
traditional and most convenient material has always dried and cleaned, that is the surplus of chalk is rubbed off
been a wooden panel, the selection of which is of tre¬ and all dust is carefully removed. As a principle, the thin¬
mendous importance both for the painting of the icon ner each individual layer of ground, the better they are
and for its preservation. The most suitable are panels bound together. The ground or levkas must be hard,
made of non-resinous wood, such as lime, alder, birch of a uniform consistency, evenly white and smooth
(which bind best with the ground), cypress and so forth. throughout, free from cracks and matt in its final appear¬
Pine is also frequently used, but the least resinous kind. ance.
The panel chosen for an icon must be totally dry, with¬ When the panel has been thus prepared, the drawing
out knots, and must be carefully planed. To protect it of the proposed icon is made on it with a brush or a pen¬
from the possibility of early warping and cracking, on cil. An experienced iconographcr either draws it from
the back are inserted, but not fixed, two horizontal struts his head, if the subject is well known to him, and guided
made of some harder wood. A recessed space is usually by the meaning of the image, lays out the composition
made on the face of the panel, the margins of which and the figures as he wills, or, if the theme is little known
serve as a frame for the icon. This natural frame has a to him, he uses the help of other icons, iconographic
practical significance, since it strengthens the resistance manuals, preliminary sketches and so forth.2 The draw¬
of the icon to warping, and also allows the hand to be ing is then scratched onto the ground along the outlines
rested against the wood without touching the paint and principal lines with some sharp tool, such as a
during work. Moreover, it corresponds to the meaning needle—this is the so-called stylus. This method, adopted
of the icon: if the frame of a picture emphasises the im¬ in iconography from frescos, is a great help in the work.

1 Chalk ground is less lasting than alabaster, but it is cheaper and is more convenient for working. The simplest recipe, out of a great
number used by modern icon-painters, is the following: 12 grams of gelatine are dissolved in 200 grams of hot water (in ancient times fish
glue was used and the process of preparing the ground with it was different). This hot solution is used both for the first coating of the panel
and the glueing of the linen. The same proportion of water and glue is used also for the ground. It should be noted that the first application
is done with a stronger solution, namely, three slightly heaped table-spoons of chalk are slowly added to the afore-mentioned solution of
glue and water, the solution is allowed to stand, the whole is thoroughly mixed and is thereupon applied to the panel with a brush. For further
applications, the same solution is taken, but with the addition of 5 spoonfuls of chalk. This solution is used for the necessary number of appli¬
cations, being warmed up each time in a double saucepan.
2 Manuals may be not only ancient but also modern. For example the sketches reproduced in this book were done in our times in Paris
as the personal material of an iconographer.

53
for it allows the original outlines to be preserved with¬ and to get a correct proportion of egg and pigment
out being blurred by the paint during work. But of depends entirely on the experience of the iconographcr.
course it is not obligatory to follow this engraved line; In any case, when dry, the colour should be matt and
for example, if the pattern of the design does not quite stable. If there is too much yolk, the colour when dry
correspond to the colour effect required, the outline will be glossy and will crack. If there is too little, it is
can be altered by the brush in the process of painting. easily rubbed off. When properly prepared these paints
When the outlines and principal lines have been thus are a precious and very convenient material for paint¬
engraved, the preliminary drawing is carefully rubbed ing. They are suitable both for brush-work and for the
out. laying of washes and a combination of both methods
Ifsome areas have to be covered with gold throughout, may be varied indefinitely. They dry as rapidly as water
this should be done before the painting, for otherwise colours, which allows of quick work, but they are not
the gold would adhere to the paints. This refers, of so easily washed off. Their durability increases with time,
course, only to whole areas, whether large or small, and their resistance to chemical decomposition under
such as the background, haloes, and so forth. the influence of sunlight is much greater than with water
Gold lines (done with liquid gold), such as are used for colours or oil paints.
instance on the Saviour’s garments and so forth—a me¬ The painting of an icon proceeds by definite conse¬
thod called “assiste”—are done later. Areas are usually cutive stages. At first the whole icon is covered, that is,
covered with leaf gold, an exceedingly complicated and all its areas are covered with fundamental local tones,
delicate process, requiring great experience and skill. with no half-tones or darks.On these fundamental tones,
After gilding, careful drying and removal of surplus to preserve the graphic structural composition, the
gold, the actual painting starts. For this, first of all take a original drawing of the icon is re-traced, along the in¬
fresh yolk, and free it from the white by shifting it from cised principal lines and outlines, with a darker tone of
the palm of one hand to the other (if the white gets into the same colour. Two methods are used for work on the
the paint it will crack), pierce it and pour the contents “dolichnoye” 2, the figures, the landscape, etc. The first
into a glass. Then add an equal volume of water, mix is to put in the darks with very liquid colours and to
well and, to protect the liquid from deterioration, add a leave the lighter places untouched; the second—to use
little vinegar.1 Then the resulting mixture is again stirred the basic tone for darks and to build up the lights in
and used as a binding substance for pigments; it is kept several layers of colour getting successively lighter, re¬
in a well corked bottle. ducing the area of light with each subsequent layer and
The fundamental colours used in iconography are the gradually shading it away in the direction of the dark.
“earths” (that is, mineral pigments) and natural organic This work, and frequently the first covering, are done
colours. Artificial colours are only used as supplement- with liquid colours, applied in translucent layers called
aries. As in composition and drawing the artist is bound washes. This method is very varied and its application
only by the meaning of the image, so in colours he is in one way or another depends on the art and skill of the
bound only by the fundamental symbolic colours of individual painter. It requires great knowledge and ex¬
the garments of persons represented and of course by perience, for the artist has to take into consideration all
facts (for instance, dark or grey hair and so forth). He is the positive and negative effects of one layer showing
completely free both as regards the combination of from under another, including the fundamental white
colours and their hues, and the colours of the land¬ background. The faces are done in the same consecutive
scape, architectural features and so forth. Thus the palette manner, by several applications, always building up
of each iconographcr is entirely individual. from the basic dark tone to the light. This fundamental
The pigments are used in the form of fme powders, principle of transition from dark to light goes back,
dissolved in the prepared yolk and, for actual use, are through Byzantium, to Greek portraiture. Layers of
diluted with water. The amount of egg introduced into paint, superimposed one upon another, create a barely
the pigment varies. For example, white, ochre, blue and perceptible relief, lo\ver in the darks and higher in the
umber require a greater amount of egg than the others, lights. In this way the icon is not only painted, but also

1 In winter less vinegar is used, in summer more; in either case, less than the volume of the yolk. In Italy they used, instead of vinegar,
the juice of a fig-tree, in Germany beer, in Russia kvass.
2 i.e. the whole surface except faces and other uncovered parts of the body.

54
as it were modelled, according to the traditional re¬ with them and using them. There is no need to speak
quirements of an icon’s structure. When the lights have of the durability of the technique of iconography—the
been put in, the outlines blurred by the washes are re¬ icon itself is proof of that. Unlike the contemporary
traced and details are re-drawn. On highlight areas are artist, the iconographer, in ancient as in our own times,
put “enliveners”, indicating the brightest touches of takes part in the creation of an icon right from the start
light upon the three-dimensional objects represented on (at least from the start of preparing the ground) to the
the icon, the necessary inscriptions are made, and the end. Consequently, he knows the materials entering
completed icon is dried for several days. into his work and their qualities, and can always take
After drying, the icon is covered with olipha. Olipha into account both their merits and defects. It is worth
—boiled linseed oil—is prepared according to various noting that, despite the complications and difficulties of
recipes. As a rule, different kinds of resins are added to working with egg tempera, oil paints, when they
the boiling oil, in particular amber. The operation of appeared later, were not adopted for iconography until
covering the icon with olipha also requires great skill, its decadence. In Russia, in particular, oil paints were
since an unskilled application of it may easily ruin the not used in iconography till the XVIIlth century, and
icon. Olipha plays a double role: first, it protects the even then only partially. The reason for this evidently
paint from the destructive influence of damp, light, air lies in the fact that, owing to their sensual character,
and so forth, secondly it has an effect on the colour. oil paints are unfit to express the asceticism, spiritual
Permeating the paints, olipha gives them greater trans- richness and joy belonging to an icon.
lucence and depth, unifies them and gives the icon a A significant feature of the technique of iconography
general warm golden hue. The painter usually takes into is the selection of basic materials which enter into it.
account this unifying action of olipha. On the other In their totality, they represent the fullest participation
hand, however, the protective layer of olipha, left on the of the visible world in the creation of an icon. As we have
surface of the icon, easily absorbs dust and soot from the seen, this includes representatives, so to speak, of the
air, as a result of which the colours lose their brilliance vegetable, mineral and animal worlds. The most funda¬
and with time the icon becomes dark. Still, when the mental of these materials (water, chalk, pigments,
layer of olipha is removed the colours protected by it egg ...) are taken in their natural form, merely purified
are revealed under it in their original richness and full¬ and prepared, and by the work of his hands man brings
ness of tone (see, for instance, the icon of St.Paraskeva them to serve God. In this sense the words of the Prophet
the Martyr, p. 138, where a layer of olipha has been left David, spoken by him at the blessing of the materials
in the bottom right-hand corner). Olipha is the best and for the building of the temple, “All things are thine,
safest means of preserving an icon, and no varnish can and of thine own have we given thee” (i Chron.
compare with it. By permeating the paint, it connects all xxix, 14) are still more applicable to the icon where
the layers of colour and penetrates through to the matter serves to express the image of God. But these
ground, fixes them and with time transforms them into words acquire their highest significance in the Liturgy
a uniform solid mass. If ancient icons have preserved to at the offering of the Holy Gifts to be transformed into
this day all their astonishing freshness and brilliance of the very Body and Blood of Christ: “Thine own of
colour, this is mainly due to olipha. Thine own we offer to Thee, in all and for all.” Thus
This, in brief general outline, is the process of creating matter too, offered in the icon as a gift to God by man,
an icon, a process which at least demands a sound know¬ in its turn emphasises the liturgic meaning of the icon.
ledge of the constituent materials and skill in dealing LEONID OUSPENSKY

55
 THE MAIN TYPES OF ICONS

"►
*■
 The iconostasis represents one of the most important architectural features of Orthodox THE
churches. It is an unbroken screen, composed of icons, separating the Sanctuary, where the ICONOSTASIS
sacrament of the Eucharist is celebrated, from the central part, the nave, where the con¬
gregation stands. It consists of several rows of icons placed on horizontal wooden transoms,
either close to one another, as, for instance, in the XVth century iconostases, or separated
from one another by half-columns, the result being a great number of icons enclosed in
separate, and often carved, gilt or painted frames.
It is well known that the original iconostasis in the form of a screen between the Sanctuary
and the nave has existed in Christian churches from very ancient times. We find information
about ancient screens in the writings of Church Fathers, for instance Saint Gregory the
Theologian and Saint John Chrysostom, and in ancient historians, such as Eusebius. The
form and height of these original screens varied. Sometimes they were solid low walls or
balustrades, the height of a man’s chest, on which one could lean with one’s elbows, at other
times they were higher latticed screens or a row of columns with an architrave. They were
often made ot particularly precious materials and decorated with sculpture or painted images.
On the inner side, that is, on the side of the Sanctuary, was a curtain which was drawn open
or closed in accordance with the various stages of the church service. In this way the Sanctuary
screen made the Sanctuary both visible and at the same time inaccessible.
The Sanctuary screen began to grow more complex very early. Even in Byzantium icons
of the months—according to the church calendar or menology—and icons of holy days began
to be placed there. At first under the architrave, and later upon it, immediately over the
Royal Door, was an icon of the Saviour, and later a triptych of the Saviour, the Holy Virgin
and John the Baptist (composed either of one long wooden panel or of three separate icons),
the so-called Deisis. This triptych of the Sanctuary screen, brought to Russia from Byzantium,
is supposed to be the initial form, from which the Orthodox iconostasis gradually evolved
on Russian soil. This evolution took the shape of adding to the above mentioned icons and See reproduction on
of increasing the number of storeys or tiers. By the XHIth and XIVth centuries Russia al¬ page 61, and

ready possessed iconostases of many tiers; much later, in the XVIIth or XVIIIth centuries, illustration on
page 62.
this form spread from Russia to other Orthodox countries.
To understand the liturgic meaning and significance of the iconostasis, it is necessary to say
a few words about the meaning of the symbolism of the church building itself, transmitted
to us by the holy Fathers; this symbolism is the guiding factor in the construction of Orthodox
churches and the arrangement of the images in them. In the first centuries it was expressed
merely in the general idea of the church as a place sanctified by the presence of God, which,
during the services, was filled with angels and contained men who were absolved and sancti¬
fied. This general idea of a church (more a matter of inner experience than of outer repre--
sentation) began to unfold itself in ever greater detail from the IVth century. It was chiefly at
this time that Christian church services began to acquire a definite form, whilst together with
this, and in answer to ritual requirements, there began to evolve a definite plan and a definite
arrangement and decoration of the various parts of the church.1
Eusebius already dwells in detail on this symbolism in his eulogy of Bishop Paulinus on
the occasion of the building of a church in Tyre.2 At the basis of this symbolism lies the teach¬
ing of the Church on the redeeming sacrifice of Christ and its ultimate aim, which constitutes
the very essence of Christianity—the future transfiguration of man and, through him, of the
whole world. In its entirety the church is the image of the future, renewed world, where God
“filleth all in all” (Eph. i, 23). Saint John of Damascus says: “The law, and all that con¬
forms to the law, was a shadow of the image of the things to come, that is, a shadow of the
service we have, and the service we have is the image of the good things to come; but the
things themselves (Heb. x, 1) (i.c. reality itself)—arc the heavenly Jerusalem, made not of
matter nor with hands, just as the divine Apostle himself says, ‘ For here we have no continuing
city, but we seek the one to come’ (Heb. xiii, 14), which is the heavenly Jerusalem ‘whose
builder and maker is God’ (Heb. xi, 10). For everything both conforming to the law 59
 and conforming to our service, came into being for the sake of this (i.e. of the heavenly
Jerusalem).”3
Opposite page: On the basis of this interpretation each part of the Christian church draws its meaning from
Iconostasis, Russian, its general position and function in the course of the divine service. According to the inter¬
XVIth century, pretation of Saint Maximus the Confessor and the holy Patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem,
Side chapel
the church is the image of the immaterial and of the sensory worlds—of the spiritual and the
(Nativity of the
physical man. The Sanctuary is the symbol of the first, the nave—the symbol of the second.
Theotokos)
in the St. Sophia At the same time both these parts constitute an indivisible whole, in which the first enlightens
Cathedral, Novgorod. and feeds the second, so that the latter becomes a sensory expression of the former. This cor¬
Photo: I. Grahar relation re-establishes the order of the universe violated by the transgression. This interpret¬
ation is further developed in detail in the explanations of the symbolism of the church and
the liturgy by the holy Patriarch Germanus of Constantinople, the great confessor of Ortho¬
doxy of the time of the iconoclast heresy, and by Saint Simeon, Metropolitan ofThessalonica.
According to the first, “the church is the earthly heaven where God, Who is above heaven,
dwells and abides, and it is more glorious than the tabernacle of witness. It is foreshadowed
in the patriarchs, is based on the Apostles... it is foretold by the prophets, adorned by the
hierarchs, sanctified by the martyrs, and its high Altar stands firmly founded on their holy
remains...” As Saint Simeon ofThessalonica says, “it represents what is on earth, what is
in heaven, and what is above the heavens.” He explains more precisely: “The narthex cor¬
responds to earth, the church to heaven, and the holy Sanctuary to what is above heaven.”4
All the paintings in the church are arranged in accordance with this symbolism. Thus it is
not an arbitrary conglomeration of individual images, but a definite system corresponding
to the part of the building where a particular image is placed.
In connection with these interpretations the Sanctuary screen also has a symbolic meaning.
The holy Fathers liken it to the boundary between two worlds: the Divine and the human,
the permanent and the transitory (as for instance Saint Gregory the Theologian in the Ode
to the Bishops). Saint Simeon ofThessalonica gives the following explanation: “The columns
on the iconostasis represent the firmament, dividing the spiritual from the sensory. Therefore
the y.oa/utTrjg (transom or horizontal beam) denotes the union through love between the
heavenly and the earthly. This is why above the kosmit, in the centre between the holy icons,
there are images of the Saviour and the Mother of God, which means that they abide both in
heaven and among men.”5
As we shall see further, this symbolism finds its clearest and fullest development in the icono¬
stasis, which was later evolved from the Sanctuary screen. Although, on the one hand, it is a
screen dividing the Divine world from the human world, the iconostasis at the same time
unites the two worlds into one whole in an image which reflects a state of the universe
where all separation is overcome, where there is achieved a reconciliation between God and
the creature, and within the creature itself. Standing on the boundary line between the Divine
and the human, it reveals by means of images as fully as possible the ways to this reconciliation.
The iconostasis reproduced here is a folding one, composed of fifteen sections, attributed
to the middle of the XVIth century.6 It is an example of the classical composition of an
Orthodox iconostasis. Such iconostases were used for prayers in private houses and also,
owing to their small size, especially when folded (height 22 inches, length 77 inches) could be

See insert, page 64A. taken on journeys or campaigns. The difference between it and church iconostases consists
Portable Iconostasis, in the fact that it has no lower part consisting of local icons and of the three doors: the central,
Russian, middle of leading into the Sanctuary, the so-called Royal Door, the north door, leading to the Sacri¬
XVIth century. ficial Table, and the south one leading to the dcaconry. The usual upper storey is also absent—
17 x 22 inches.
that of the Forefathers—representing the initial Church of the Old Testament, from Adam
Coll. Dr. John Sinsky
to the law of Moses, in a scries of Old Testament patriarchs presaging the Church of the
New Testament.
Below this, and making the upper row of our iconostasis, is the Prophets’ storey. It consists
60 of images of Old Testament prophets with open scrolls in their hands, on which arc written
61
 13

12

11

10

Diagram of a church iconostasis: l. The Holy Door; a and a1: Annunciation; b, c, d and e: The four Evangelists. 2. The
Last Supper, j. The jambs of the Holy Door with figures of the Holy Fathers the Liturgists. 4. Icon of Christ or icon of the
event or the person to whom the church is dedicated. 5. Icon of the Mother of God. 6. and 7. The northern and the southern
doors with images of the Archangels or of sainted deacons. 8. and 9. Other icons. 10. Tchin. 11. Icons of the liturgical feasts.
12. The row of the Prophets. 13. The row of the Patriarchs.

62
texts from their prophecies concerning the Divine Incarnation. This is why the centre of this
row is occupied by the icon of Our Lady of the Sign7 (see the analysis of this icon, p. 77) —
the image of Divine Incarnation as the fulfilment of their prophecies. Unlike the lower storey
of our iconostasis, where the difference in the movements of individual figures is only notice¬
able with careful study, here the prophets’ postures are very varied. In spite of the general
direction towards the centre, each figure has its own movement, its own gesture. Each pro¬
phesies in his own way, holding his scroll in his own manner. This row represents the Church
of the Old Testament, from Moses to Christ, which was a “presage” (Patriarch Germanus)
and a preparation for the Church of the New Testament. At the same time this row, together
with the row of Forefathers, represents the Lord’s carnal ancestors. In this way the icon of
the Divine Incarnation in the centre indicates the direct connection between the Old and the
New Testaments. The order of the prophets here is as follows: to the right of the icon of
Our Lady of the Sign (that is to the left of the spectator )are the prophets David, Zacharias
(father of John the Baptist), Moses, Samuel, Nahum, Daniel and Habakkuk; to the left of
the centre (that is, to the right of the spectator) are the prophets Solomon, Ezekiel, Elaggai,
Elias, Malachi, Elisha and Zechariah.
The next storey of the iconostasis is that of “Holy Days”. It consists of a series of pictures
representing the events of the New Testament which arc celebrated by the Church with
particular solemnity, as the principal stages of the action of the Divine Providence in the world,
that is, the growth of the revelation. This is the beginning of “the service we have”, that is
the fulfilment of what was foreshadowed and foretold in the upper rows. These holy days
express the totality of the Church teaching; they are “the pearls of the divine dogmas”, as
Patriarch Germanus calls them. In church iconostases this row is usually composed of icons
of the Resurrection of Christ and of the twelve principal holy days—six of the Lord: Nativity,
Candlemas (Presentation), Epiphany (Baptism), Transfiguration, Entry into Jerusalem, Ascen¬
sion—four of the Virgin: Her Birth, Presentation, Annunciation, Assumption—the Pente¬
cost and the Elevation of the Cross, arranged according to the course of the Church year.
Where there is free space, as in the iconostasis reproduced here, icons of other, less important
holy days arc added, as well as the icon of the Crucifixion. In our iconostasis the distribution
of icons of holy days does not correspond to the Church cycle. It is as follows: (from left to
right) Birth of the Virgin, Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple, Annunciation, Baptism,
Candlemas, Entry into Jerusalem, Women bearing spices at the tomb of Christ, Crucifixion,
Descent into Hell, Raising of Lazarus, Nativity of Christ, Transfiguration, Ascension,
Elevation of the Cross, Assumption, Pentecost. The meaning and content of the icons of these
holy days are analysed elsewhere. See pages 145-215.
The next storey of the iconostasis is called “Tchin”. It is a developed Deisis—the triptych
of the ancient Sanctuary screen. The word Deisis (Aerjaig) means prayer, in this case the stand¬
ing in prayer, before the Saviour, of the Mother of God and of John the Baptist. The Mother
of God is always on His right, according to the words of the psalm: “The queen stood by on
thy right hand” (Ps. xliv, 9). The word “tchin” means order. This order came into being
by adding to the Mother of God and John the Baptist, standing in prayer before Christ,
members of various hosts of heavenly and earthly sainthood: angels, apostles, hierarchs and
others.8
The order of their disposition in the iconostasis reproduced is as follows: on the side of the
Holy Virgin is Archangel Michael, Apostle Peter, St. Basil the Great, St.John Chrysostom,
St. Zossima, the great martyr George; on the side of St.John the Baptist—Archangel Gabriel,
Apostle Paul, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Nicholas, St. Sabbatius, the great martyr
Demetrius.
Arranged in a strict and orderly succession the saints depicted here are united in one com¬
mon movement—their prayerful elan towards the Lord sitting on His throne. By this rhyth¬
mic movement they draw the spectator, as it were, into their solemn procession. The some¬
what elongated proportions of their figures, full of deep concentration, give them a special 63
 elegance and lightness. Their harmonious outlines form sharp silhouettes, leaning, as though
moved by the wind, freely and easily towards the centre.
The Tchin expresses the result of the Divine Incarnation, the fulfilment of the Church of
the New Testament. Consequently it is the central part of the Iconostasis. The individual
images of saints represented here do not express their earthly service, although their clothes
and attributes indicate it. What is represented here is the culmination of every type of service,
of every separate path—a prayerful standing before the throne of God. The rhythmic external
order of the figures is the expression of inner order. It is the image of attainment of the normal
order of the universe, the order of the life to come, where “God” is “all in all” (i Cor. xv, 28),
the contemplation of Divine Glory. This thought is here emphasised by the image of the Sav¬
iour Himself. He is represented as sitting on His throne, with the attributes of Divine Glory,
the mandorla intercrossed by rays coming from Him, surrounded by heavenly powers, with
the Evangelists’ symbols at the corners. The mandorla is placed between two squares which
form an octagonal star, the symbol of the eighth day—the future life.9 This iconography of
the Saviour is none other than the unfolding of the prophetic vision of the Lord’s glory.
“The Lord reigns; he has clothed himself with honour: ... for he has established the world,
which shall not be moved” (Ps. xcii, 1). Consequently this iconography has also other aspects:
thus in the centre of the picture of the Last Judgment there is usually placed a Deisis with this
particular iconography of Christ as the Judge come in glory. This thought of the Last Judg¬
ment is present also here, in the Tchin. In this aspect the whole Tchin in its entirety expresses
the intercession by prayer of Christ’s Church for the sins of the world. Moreover, this icono¬
graphy represents the Saviour here, in the centre of the Tchin, both as the Head of the Church
and as the Redeemer Who has sacrificed Himself for men’s sins. This is why in our icon He
holds the Gospels open at the text: “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden,
and I will give you rest” (Matt, xi, 28)—accepting all those who come to Him, since He is
perfect love.10
The lower storey of a church iconostasis may have a local and occasional character. It is
represented here by its central part, the Royal Door, on either side of which are placed two
large icons, usually that of the Saviour and to the right of Him (to the left of the spectator)
an icon of the Virgin and Child. Sometimes the icon of the Saviour is replaced by the icon
of that particular church, that is, the icon of the holy day or the saint to which (or to whom)
the church is dedicated. Further, on the north and south doors are depicted the two Archangels,
Michael and Gabriel, or saintly deacons, as servitors in the celebration of the Mystery. If
some room is left it is filled with other icons. This storey has still kept its ancient name of the
Worship storey. It was so called because the icons of the current month, of the church
calendar, or of a holy day, which were kept here on the Sanctuary screen, were taken off and
placed on the pulpit for worship. Apparently this name was preserved because the icons for
particular occasions were not placed very high and so were the object of a closer and more
immediate communion and veneration. They are kissed, candles arc burned before them,
and so forth. It is to them that the words of Saint Simeon of Thessalonica can pre-eminently
be referred, that they “abide both in heaven and among men”. This storey lacks the strictly
rhythmic arrangement of other storeys, and is often quite asymmetrical. The icons composing
it are usually very varied and depend on local requirements and the character of a given
church.
Opposite page
(insert):
Portable Iconostasis
Russian, middle of
XVIth century,
77 x 22 inches.
Coll. Dr. John Sinsky

64
 A»BA«VUIL WAVHK

'f *
L, - .♦ *

>w\%'C
 thiWY*
• «.
/<nr6^

‘~r

>1 V

HM8
fc+*+t'f
65
 THE HOLY OR The Royal Door apparently existed from the time of the first Sanctuary screens. It consists
ROYAL DOOR of a double door with a figured top, fixed on wooden uprights. According to the testimony
of ecclesiastical writers, the Royal Door was decorated with icons from the most ancient
times.11 Their usual order of distribution, as on the door reproduced here, is as follows:
See reproduction on
page 65- the top is occupied by an Annunciation, with the Virgin on the leaf to the right of the spec¬
Holy door, Russian, tator, Archangel Gabriel on the left. Below are the four Evangelists, two on each leaf: under
XVltb century. Archangel Gabriel, Saint John and Saint Luke; under the Virgin, Saint Matthew and Saint
Photo: A La Vieille Mark. On each side, on the jambs on which the leaves of the Royal Door are hinged, are
Russie, New York
placed images of the holy Fathers, the Liturgists.
The Royal Door is the entrance into the Holy of Holies—the Sanctuary; only the clergy
may enter through it, and only at definite moments, as the church service requires. In
accordance with the symbolism of the Sanctuary, it represents the entrance into the King¬
dom of God. This is why the announcers of this Kingdom are represented on it—the Evan¬
gelists and, above them, the Annunciation, as the personification of the tidings they proclaim.
Immediately above the Royal Door, on a shield inserted into the place cut out for the top
of the door, is placed the image of the Last Supper—Christ giving communion to the
Apostles. This image represents the liturgic interpretation of the image of the Last Supper
which, taken as an historical episode from the life of the Saviour and the moment of the estab¬
lishment of the sacrament of the Eucharist, is usually placed in the “holy days” storey of the
iconostasis, if there is room.12 The subject of the Apostles’ communion emphasises and singles
out the sacerdotal office of Christ, which is here expressed in His direct action as Priest. The
characteristic feature of this image is that in it essentially the same composition is repeated
twice (see page 65); in this way it depicts the two elements of communion which are obligatory
in the Orthodox Church. On one side six Apostles are about to partake of bread, in accordance
with the words of the Lord: "Take, eat; this is my body” (p. 66). On the other side (p. 67) the
66 other six approach the cup, according to the words: "Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of
the new testament” (Matt, xxvi, 26-28). This sacrament, represented immediately above the
place where the communion of the faithful takes place, continues, administered by the
successors of the Apostles to the members of the Church, uniting them to one another and, by
lifting them up to Christ, making them participants of His flesh and His Divinity, as Saint
John of Damascus says.13
Such are, in brief and general outline, the meaning and content of the different storeys
of a classical Orthodox iconostasis. At the basis of its evolution (the growth and distribution
of icons) lies the absolute necessity to understand Christian dogma. This is why the role played
by the Sanctuary screen was not only preserved but has acquired a significance it did not have
before. Separating the Sanctuary from the nave (the Divine from the human) the iconostasis,
just as did the ancient screen, points to their hierarchic difference, the importance and signifi¬
cance of the sacrament, which takes place in the Sanctuary. At the same time it indicates,
like the ancient screen, the connection between the two worlds, heaven and earth, and it reveals
this connection pictorially, showing in a concise form, on one plane, immediately before the
eyes of the congregation, the ways of reconciliation between God and man, the purpose and
consequences of the redeeming sacrifice of Christ, the descent of God and the ascent of man.
In different storeys in a harmonious order and strict sequence are shown the stages of the Di¬
vine Dispensation. From God to man, from above downwards there goes the ray of Divine
revelation: gradually, through the preparation of the Old Testament, through things fore¬ Reproductions on

shadowed in the patriarchs and foretold by the prophets, towards the series of holy days, the pages 66-67:
The Eucharist,
fulfilment of what the Old Testament was preparing for, and through this storey towards the
ca. 1500.
coming completion of the Dispensation, the image of the Kingdom of God—the Tchin.
9 x 12 inches (each).
Below this there takes place the direct communion between God and man. These are the Photo: Temple
ways of the ascent of man. They proceed from below upwards. Through receiving the preach¬ Gallery, London
ing of the Gospels and communion by prayer, through the union of the will of man with
the will of God (in this aspect the icon of the Annunciation represents the iconography of 67
 the harmonious union of the two wills)14, and finally, through communion in the sacrament
of the Eucharist man accomplishes his ascent to the Tchin, that is, enters the oecumenical
union of the Church, becomes “of the same body” with Christ (Eph. iii, 6). The external
symbol of this union in the church service is, among other things, the symbolic gesture of
censing. The priest or the deacon swings the censer first before the icons and then before the
congregation, thus paying homage to the image of God in man and uniting in one gesture
the saints represented in the icons and the congregation—the heavenly and the earthly Church.
The expansion of the iconostasis, which ended in the XVIth century, took place in Russia
pre-eminently in the period of the highest blossoming of her sanctity and of her icon-painting
in the XIVth and XVth centuries. Therefore the depth of penetration into the meaning and
significance of the image, so characteristic of this period, was reflected in the form and the
contents of the classical iconostasis. Drawing a parallel between sanctity and icon-painting
one can say that it is the external expression and culmination of the highest period of Russian
sanctity.
The iconostasis reproduced here, representing one of the best portable iconostases known
to us, is yet insufficient for forming an idea of the classical church iconostasis, in spite of all
explanations and descriptions. It must be remembered that dimensions play a very great part.
All the same, if we magnify the figures of the Tchin to three metres, and imagine all the rest in
proportion, we may be able to form an idea, for example, of the impressive ensemble in the
creation of which Saint Andrew (Rublev) took part in 1408 in Vladimir.

1 V. Yakovlev, the periodical Faith and the Church 1904. “ The meaning of the symbolism attributed by the holy
Fathers and Church teachers to a Christian church and its component parts.”
2 History of the Church, vol. 10, c. 4.; P.G. 20, coll. 879-880.
8 Second Discourse in Defence of Holy Icons, c. 23.; P.G. 94, col. 1309C.
4 Book on the House of God, c. 12. This symbolism goes back to apostolic interpretations of the church and the
temple of God and represents a further development and unfolding of it by the holy Fathers. Thus Apostle Paul
says: “Your bodies are the members of Christ” (1 Cor. vi, 15); the church is the body of Christ (Eph. i, 23) (see
also 1 Cor. vi, 19; Col. i, 18)... The Apostle Peter likens this church to a house made with human hands, saying,
“Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house” (1 Peter ii, 5). This points directly to the view of the house
made with hands as an image of the Church not made with hands.
6 V. Yakovlev, op. cit.
6 P. Muratov, Thirty-five Russian Primitives, Paris, 1931, p. 71.
7 Cf. Isaiah, vii, 11-14.
8 Icons including many figures existed even in Byzantium. Thus in the eulogy written by the Holy Patriarch
Sophronius of Jerusalem to St. Cyrus and St.John (written in the second half of the Vllth century and quoted in
the Vllth Oecumenical Council) we read: “We saw a great and marvellous icon where in the centre were repre¬
sented in colours Christ and His Mother, our Lady the Virgin Mary to the left; to the right was John the
Baptist, the Forerunner of the Saviour... Here also were represented some of the glorious company of Apostles
and prophets and some of the host of martyrs. Among them were these particular martyrs, Cyrus and John.”
The purpose of such icons and where they were placed we do not know.
9 See the explanation of Easter icons, p. 192.
10 The Gospel text is usually chosen in accordance with the need of those for whom it is destined and correspond¬
ing to the aspect of the Saviour’s iconography which should be emphasised in the given circumstances.
11 E. Philimonov, Questions regarding the initial form of the iconostasis in Russian churches. Moscow, 1859.
12 The iconography of these images is known since the Vlth century (cf. the Rossano Gospels of Alexandrian
origin and the discos found near Antioch in 1911). They replaced the images of the sacrifice of Abraham, of Abel
and of other prototypes of the New Testament sacrifice and the still more ancient images of the fish, of loaves, etc.
13 Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book IV, c. 13, “On the pure and holy sacraments of the Lord”. P.G. 94,
col. 1144.
14 See the analysis of the icon of the Annunciation, p. 172.

68
 “The Word of the Father, transcending all determination (aneQiyQanxoc,), determined ICONS OF
Itself (jiEQieyQacpij) in Its incarnation through Thee, Bearer of God. He made the defiled CHRIST
image as of old, and penetrated it with Divine Beauty.”
This Kontakion, sung at the feast of Orthodoxy (the first Sunday of Lent), when the Church
celebrates the victory of the holy images, and also the fmal triumph of the dogma of the In¬
carnation, contains implicitly the whole doctrine of what is the “Image” par excellence.
“Image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature” (Col. i, 15), the hypostasis of
the Logos is a “short and clear declaration of the nature of the Father.”1 Man, created in the
image and likeness of God, had then the Divine Word for Archetype.2 That is why the In¬
carnation of the Son renews the image which had lost its likeness through the sin of man3:
it is not only a perfect theophany, but also the realisation of the perfect Man, to which the
first Adam was unable to attain. The icon of the Christ, God-Man, is a graphic expression of
the dogma of Chalccdon, for it represents the Divine Person incarnated, the Son of God be¬
come the Son of Man, “consubstantial with the Father” by His Divinity, “consubstantial
with us” by His humanity.
If Christ, the “last Adam” (1 Cor. xv, 45), showed Himself as the Archetype of the “first
man”, on the other hand, in His redemptive economy, He took on the likeness of fallen
human nature, which is an “unlikeness” belonging to the aspect of the “Servant”, of the
“Man of sorrows” (Is. liii, 3). Thus, whilst yet being the “true Image”, Christ united the
two aspects during His terrestrial life: that of the glorious likeness and that of the kenotic
unlikeness—“form of God” and “form of a servant” (Phil, ii, 6-7), the former being dis¬
simulated by the latter for outward eyes. Even the nearest disciples were to see Christ only
once, before His Passion, in the glorious aspect of His deified humanity, on Mount Tabor.
The Church, which sees Christ with the eyes of imperturbable faith, will always show, in
its liturgical hymns and on its icons, the God-Man preserving His majesty even in humiliation.

1 St. Gregory of Nazianzus, Or. XXX, sec. 20.; P.G. 36, col. 129A.
2 St. Athanasius, Against the Pagans, 1, 2.; P.G. 25, coll. 5C-8A.
3 St. Athanasius, On the Incarnation, 14.; P.G. 25, col. 120CD. Eng. Trans. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1977.

The icon “made without hands” (dxeiQonohjrog) or “the icon of the Lord on the cloth” THE SAVIOUR

(/uavdifiiov), known in the West under the name of the “Holy Visage”, occupies the central ACHEIROPOIETOS

place among the images of Christ. The expression “ acheiropoietos ” receives its true meaning
in the scriptural context (Mark xiv, 58): the image “made without hands” is above all the
incarnate Word, which “shewed” Itself in “the temple ofhis body” (John ii, 21). From that
time the mosaic law which forbade images (Ex. xx, 4) had no more meaning and the icons
of Christ become irrefragable witnesses of the Incarnation of God. Instead of creating accord¬
ing to their own inclination, “with their hands”, the image of the God-Man, monographers
must follow a tradition which attaches them to the original “acheiropoietos”. This tradition
acquired, at the start of the Vth century, a legendary form in the story of Abgar, king of
Edessa, who was said to have had a portrait of Christ painted. According to the Byzantine
version, the Edessa image would be an impression of the face of the Saviour on a piece of
linen, which Christ had pressed to His face and sent to the envoy of Abgar.1 Thus, the
first images of Christ, the “mandilion” and its two miraculous reimpressions on bricks—
the “keramidia”—would have been documents “made without hands”, direct and, so to
speak, material testimonies of the Incarnation of the Word. These legendary stories express 69

\
 V* 1 '■
• nil' V *- * ~7Ki
/•'» vv ^ ^
 in their way a dogmatic truth: Christian iconography—and above all the possibility of repre¬
senting Christ—has its foundation in the fact of the Incarnation. In consequence, the sacred
art of icons cannot be an arbitrary creation of artists: just as the theologian expresses by means
of thought, so must the iconographer express by his art the living Truth, “made without
hands”, the Revelation that the Church possesses in her Tradition. Better than any other
sacred image, the acheiropoietos icon of Christ expresses the dogmatic principle of iconography.
That is why the Vllth Council (787) gave it special attention2, and, to commemorate the
definitive triumph of the holy images, it is this icon of Christ that is venerated at the feast of
Orthodoxy (see the Kontakion above).
The iconographic type of the Saviour acheiropoietos shows us only the face of Christ,
with neither neck nor shoulders, framed in long hair, which falls in locks on either side. The
beard is sometimes single, ending in a point, sometimes forked. The regular features of the
visage are rendered schematically: the beautiful line of the mouth has nothing of the carnal;
the elongated and very straight nose forms, with the arched eyebrows, a pattern that recalls
a palmtree. The grave and impassive expression of this visage of the God-Man has nothing
in common with the impassiveness of indifference towards the human world that one fmds
so often expressed in effigies created by the religious art of the Far East. Here, it is the im¬
passivity of an absolutely pure human nature, which excludes sin, but remains open to all
the sorrows of the fallen world. The large dilated eyes, turned towards the onlooker, have an
attentive and saddened look which seems to penetrate to the depths of consciences, without
overwhelming them: Christ is come into the world not to condemn, but to save it (John
iii, 17). In the nimbus that surrounds the head of Christ is inscribed the sign of the Cross.
This cruciferous nimbus will be found on all the representations of Christ. The Greek letters
on the three branches of the Cross form the Divine Name revealed to Moses: 6 a>v—the

being—(Exod. iii, 14), the redoubtable Name of Jehovah, belonging to the Divine nature of
Christ. The abridged name of Jesus Christ—IC XC (above, on our icon) designates the
hypostasis of the incarnate Son. It is obligatory for inscriptions of the Name to appear on
all icons of Christ, of the Mother of God (ptq Qv) and of all the saints.
Icons of the Saviour acheiropoietos must already have been numerous at Byzantium from
the beginning of the Vlth century; and they became so above all after the translation of the
Edessa icon to Constantinople (in 944). Nevertheless, the best icons of this type that we possess
to-day are due to Russian iconographic art. One of the most ancient is the icon of the Cathe¬
dral of the Dormition at Moscow (Xllth century), painted in the monumental manner which
recalls that of frescoes.3
Our icon, painted on a banner, is the work of a Russian iconographer, carried out in Paris
about 1945. The modern technique, the artistic sense of a painter of our times, have here
served to express what is not made with the hands of man: the traditional aspect of Christ,
such as the Church knows Him.
See reproduction
on page 70:
"The Holy Face.”
8 x 9Vi inches.
Holy Trinity Church,
Vanves (Paris)
Russian
XXth century

1 See the Byzantine account of the image of Edessa, falsely attributed to Constantine Porphyrogenetes: P. G.
113, coll. 428-454. Cf. the western legend of St.Veronica.
3 Mansi, Coll, concil. XIII, coll. 189-192.
3 For example, the fresco of the Saviour Acheiropoietos at Nereditsy, of the same epoch. On icons of this type,
see N. A. Grabar, The Saviour Acheiropoietos of the Cathedral ofLaon, Zographika, 3 (Seminarium Kondakovianum),
72 Prague, 1930.
 The iconographic type of the Christ-Pantocrator (TTavToxgarcoQ, Ruler of all) expresses THE
under the human features of the Incarnate Son, the Divine Majesty of the Creator and Re¬ PANTOCRATOR
deemer, Who presides over the destinies of the world. The Pantocrator is seated on the throne,
blessing with His right hand and holding in His left hand a scroll or a book. It is thus that He
appears, for example, in the compositions of the “Deisis”, where Our Lady and St.John the
Baptist stand on either side of the throne.1 But, whether He is represented alone or surrounded
by saints, the type of the Christ-Pantocrator can always be reduced to a half-length image,
in which the throne does not appear (except in icons of the Last Judgment, which always
show the Pantocrator full length, seated on the throne of glory). The gigantic images of the
Pantocrator, represented half-length, on the mosaics and frescoes of Byzantine cupolas, have
a monumental style, which underlines the formidable aspect of the Lord, the Ruler of the
Universe, Who will come to judge the quick and the dead. However, on icons exposed to
the veneration of the faithful, the type of the Christ-Pantocrator, while still keeping the same
majesty, lacks all fearfulness. The grave expression of His face is full of sweetness; it is the
compassionate Lord, come to take on Himself the sins of the world. The book in His left
hand is open at words of the Gospel, which may vary with different icons.
The large icon reproduced on p. 71, attributed to the end of the XVth century, depicts the
Saviour as the King of Glory, surrounded by the heavenly powers.
Sitting on a magnificent carved throne the Saviour blesses with the right hand, while See reproduction-

with the left He supports the open Gospels resting on His knee with the composite text: on page 71.
Christ Pantocrator,
“Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. For with what
Russian, attributed to
judgment...” (John vii, 24; Matt, vii, 2). He is surrounded by an oval mandorla and by two
XVth century.
curved squares forming an octagonal star—the symbol of the future aeon. (A star of this shape, 31 x 40 inches.
but without the symbols of the Evangelists, is also met with in images of the Transfiguration, The Metropolitan
for instance in the paintings in Kovalevo church near Novgorod, 1380, and in a Greek illu¬ Museum of Art,

minated manuscript in the National Library in Paris, 1242, folio 92; it is found, too, in the New York

XIVth century.) Here the first square embraces only the beautifully placed, majestic figure
of the Pantocrator. This square is enclosed in the mandorla which contains cherubim as
representatives of the world of angels, surrounding the throne of God. In the corners of the
second square, traced beyond the mandorla, are placed the symbols of the Evangelists who
proclaimed the Gospel to the four ends of the world. On the left of the spectator, above, is
the symbol of the Evangelist Matthew—a man; below is the symbol of the Evangelist Mark—
a lion. On the right is an eagle—symbol of John and a bull—symbol of Luke (Rev., iv,
6-8).
The Creator, “borne on cherubims”, is depicted as having a strong but calm movement
and His movement is as it were transmitted to the created world, finding its reflection in the
quivering wings of the cherubims, in the variety of their postures and in the movement of
the beasts towards the corners of the second square.
On the second icon here reproduced (Russian, XVIth century) Christ is clothed in a
dark blue himation, but His tunic is represented as a glorious vestment, for it is woven of gold
(“assiste”).2 The abundant hair falls in locks on the left shoulder of Christ. The right hand, See reproduction on

folded in the gesture of benediction, inclines towards the Gospel, which Christ offers to the page 74.
Christ Pantocrator,
faithful. It is open at the passage from St.Matthew (xi, 28, 30): “Come unto me, all ye that
Russian,
labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest... For my yoke is easy.” The inscription
XVIth century.
and the cross of the nimbus are effaced.
45 x 37 cm.
The third icon of the Pantocrator type, reproduced here, is covered with a frame of enamel, Photo: Temple
which follows the contours of Christ, represented half-length. He is making the gesture of Gallery, London
benediction and holds the Gospel open at the same words that we noted on the preceding
icon. Here the representation of Christ is simplified, treated with less finish. The tunic is
not woven of gold and, in general, the appearance of the Saviour is less majestic: the icono-
grapher has sought to express above all the compassion and sweetness of the Lord, access¬
ible to the prayers of man. 73
74
 This icon was executed in a Russian workshop, in the second half of the XIXth century.
Despite its belonging to a period of decadence, our icon remains faithful to the iconographic
canon, as well in the conception of the Christ-Pantocrator as in the technique.

Christ Pantocrator,
Russian,XIXth century.

1 See “The Iconostasis”, p. 64 above.

2 “assistc” is a technical expression, explained in “The Technique of Iconography ”, p. 54 above. 75
 icons of the The Church has devoted to the Mother of God a cult of “hyperdulia”, exalting Her above
mother of god all the saints and all the celestial hierarchies. The place of the chosen Virgin is central in the hist¬
ory of salvation. In fact, the Divine Providence, being conformable with the freedom of
creatures, could not culminate in the Incarnation of the Son of God before the Holy Virgin
had .consented that “the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations”
(Col. i, 26) should be realised in Her, rendering Her the Mother of God. That is why Saint
John Damascene said that: “the name of Oeoroxog contains the whole history of the Divine
economy in the world”.1 The Marioloqic dogma is implied in Christology: one cannot deny
to the Holy Virgin the quality of the Mother of God, as Nestorius wished, without injury
to the dogma of the Incarnation of the Divine Hypostasis of Her Son. It is not the human
nature of Christ taken in isolation, but the very Person of the Son of God, Who was born,
according to His humanity, of the Virgin Mary—a creature rendered apt by the Holy Spirit
to receive in Her womb the Word of the Father come into the world.
The name of the Mother of God expresses a unique relationship vis-a-vis the Second
Person of the Trinity, relationship of motherhood to which a human person found herself
assigned by Divine election. This pre-eminent place in the economy of salvation, this unique
role in the Incarnation did not remain simply an instrumental function. “Mary the mother
of Jesus” (Acts i, 14) made actual the unique relationship, which linked Her to Her Son,
by manifesting it hi Her personal sanctity. But this sanctity can be no other than the “total-
sanctity”, the plenitude of the grace conferred on the Church—the complement of the glo¬
rious humanity of Christ. But whilst the Church still awaits the advent of the world to come,
the Mother of God has crossed the threshold of the eternal Kingdom; and, as the sole human
person deified—token of the final deification of creatures—She presides, at Her Son’s side,
over the destinies of the world which yet unfold in time.
The glorification, which belongs to the Mother of God, cannot be compared with the cult
rendered to the saints or to the angels. The multiple aspects of Her glory, which surpass
all that one can imagine here below, have given rise to a multitude of icons, of which we
reproduce here some of the principal types.

76 1 Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, III, c. 12.; P.G. 94, coll. 1023 and 1032.
 The icon of the Sign is among the most revered icons of the Mother of God. This image OUR LADY
OF THE SIGN
with characteristically upraised hands belongs to the type of the Mother of God Orans, but with
Christ on Her breast. The gesture of prayer, the upraised hands characteristic of the Orans, See reproduction
is not specifically Christian. It was known both in the Old Testament and in the ancient Greco- on page 78.

Roman world. It was especially wide-spread in early Christian times, not however as a simple Russian, late
XVIth century.
gesture of prayer but as a personification of prayer in the image of the Orans. Such images
9V2 x 1IV:2 inches.
are seen in frescoes in the catacombs and on the bottoms of sacred vessels found there. The
Private coll.
latter frequently have an image of the Mother of God in the posture of prayer, with the
inscription “Maria” or “Mara” (the ancient Eastern form of that name) which belong to the
beginning of the IVth century. The earliest known image of the Mother of God Orans with the
Saviour Emmanuel on Her breast—our Sign—also belongs to the IVth century. This image,
with two monograms of Christ at the sides, is in the Roman catacomb of “Cimitero
Majore”.1
Equally with the solemn image of the Mother of God Orans (without Christ), this image
of the Sign is used in Orthodox churches as the altar-piece, as an iconographic revealing of
the Church personified by the Mother of God, Who had confined within Herself the un-
confinable God.
Images of the Sign are of two kinds: in some icons Christ is depicted in a mandorla2, in
others, as in the fresco of Cimitero Majore, without it, just as in some icons the Mother of
God is depicted half-length, while in others full-length (for instance, the Yaroslavl Virgin
Orans of the Xllth-XlIIth century in the Tretiakov Gallery). In the background, on either
side of the Mother of God, fiery seraphims are sometimes painted or other angels, which
emphasise Her significance (as in the icon reproduced here) as being above the angels “more
honourable than the cherubims and incomparably more glorious than the seraphims”.
On iconostases of Orthodox churches expressing the dogmatic teaching of the Church,
the icon of the Sign, as we have seen, is usually placed in the centre of the Prophets’ storey—
the so-called Mother of God order (“tchin”), that is, as the central icon of the Old Testament
Church awaiting redemption. As is known, the Old Testament prophecies of the Divine In¬
carnation culminate not in an allegorical utterance (such as are the prophecies of Solomon,
Moses, Jacob and others) but in the clear and distinct prophecy of Isaiah, who for the clarity
and exactness of his prophecies is called “the fifth Evangelist”. “Therefore the Lord himself
shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bring forth a
son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel” (Isaiah vii, 14). The image of the Mother of
God with the Child Emmanuel in Her bosom is this very Sign announced by the prophet
and revealed to the world in its consummation. It is from this that the icon derives its name.
The Sign is the image of the Divine Incarnation, of the revelation of the Second Person of
the Holy Trinity, the manifestation of the Son of God through His human nature received
from the Mother of God. Like Isaiah’s prophecy itself, the icon of the Sign is a manifestation
of prophetic predictions of the Divine Incarnation. This is evidently why on some iconostases
(see Plate 1) the prophet Isaiah himself is absent. This is not an omission, but shows a specially
deep understanding of the meaning and content of the icon of the Sign: so long as the Sign
given by the Lord is present, the image of the prophet with his prediction is a superfluous
repetition.
One can say that as, according to the words of St. Basil the Great, “the word of truth...
in the economy of the Spirit... is so brief and concise that little means much”3 so also the
icon of the Sign in its majestic simplicity is in its content one of the most deep and complex
icons of the Mother of God. Our icon has a peculiarity rare among icons of the Sign: not only
is Emmanuel depicted here in a mandorla, but so also is the Mother of God. In other words,
side by side with the revelation of the Divine glory of the Saviour Emmanuel, the glory of
His Mother is revealed here too. For since His human nature is inseparable from His Mother,
so the glory of the Mother is inseparable from the glory of the Divine Child. Yet the mandorla
of the Mother of God differs from that of the Saviour both in colour and in the absence of 77
78
 gold work. Bluish-green, with pink round the edge passing into red, it seems to be a visual
expression of the words of the akathiston to the Mother of God, in which She is sung as
Irmos of Ode 5 ‘‘the fiery chariot of the Word”... “The brightest morning... bearing the sun-Christ”,
Irmos of Ode 3
and so forth. The symbolism of the combination of those colours evidently corresponds to
the darkness of the night of sin and ignorance and the dawn of the coming day of the res¬
titution of the world. This emphasises the cosmic significance of the Mother of God and Her
Irmos of Ode 8
role in the restitution, for She has “renewed the whole world in Her womb”.
of the Sunday canon
The cold tone of the frame covering the margin of the icon, made of beaten silver, and
of Tone I
the engraved haloes enhance the general warm tone of the icon and, beautifully blending
with the colours, give it a solemn and festive look.

1 According to N. P. Kondakov (Iconography of the Mother of God, vol. i) this fresco seems to be a copy of a
more ancient Eastern icon of the Mother of God. Another very early image of the Sign was found on an ampulla
brought in the Vth century from the East and now to be found in a museum at Bologna (reproduced by Konda¬
kov, ibid.).
2 The mandorla or the nimbus is one of the clearest and most majestic attributes of Christ. It is an iconographic
symbol in the shape of a circle or an oval signifying heaven, Divine Glory, Light. A mandorla consists of several,
usually three, concentric circles, most often of different shades of blue, pierced by the rays of light issuing from
Christ. A mandorla is the attribute of the glorified body of Christ in images depicting Him beyond the earthly
plane of being (the same can be said about His garments worked with gold). As an attribute of the Saviour Emmanuel
it emphasises the thought of the pre-eternal Child. The mandorla is used too for the Mother of God and also in
those cases when it has to represent Her glory beyond the earthly plane.
3 Works of our holy Father Basil the Great, part IV, Moscow, 1892, Discourse 3.

THE The iconographic type of the Mother of God, known under the name of “Hodigitria”
HODIGITRIA
(rjrOd)]yr]Xoia) has had a series of prototypes, which connect it with a venerable antiquity.
Byzantine tradition traces it back to an original painting by Saint Luke. According to this
story, it is related that the Mother of God blessed Her portrait saying: “My blessing will
remain always with this icon”, that Saint Luke sent the portrait of the Mother of God to
Antioch, to the “most excellent Thcophilus” with the text of his Gospel, and that towards
the middle of the Vth century this image was transferred to Constantinople, by the care of
the Empress Eudoxia, as a present to her mother-in-law Pulchcria.1 This history was generally
admitted at Byzantium towards the IXth century when the name “Hodigitria” appeared
for the first time on seals. It is not known whether this name comes from the church “of
the Commanders” (rd>v 'Odrjyojv), in which the emperors were accustomed to pray when they
left the capital at the head of an army, or whether the icon of the Mother of God as “Guide”
would have given its name to the church reconstructed by Michael III (842-867). In any case,
at this epoch, there was already attributed to the miraculous icon, which was transferred to
Blachcrnac, a particular role in the destinies of the Christian Empire. This conception con¬
tributed to the forming of the iconographic type, Byzantine par excellence, which was going
80 to be definitely elaborated in the IXth century and to receive the name of Hodigitria.2
 The Syrian prototypes of the Hodigitria, already numerous in the Vlth century, show us
the Mother of God upright, holding the Infant in swaddling clothes half lying on Her left
arm. These images were to be transformed by the Byzantine conception. On the icons of the
Hodigitria created at Byzantium, the Christ-Child always appears seated, erect, on His See reproduction
Mother’s left arm. The Infant is no longer a suckling: He is the type of the Christ-Emmanuel, on page 79.

the Infant “pre-eternal God”, full of wisdom despite His tender years. Clothed in a glorious Hodigitria.
Byzantine,
himation, woven of gold, the Christ-Emmanuel has in His left hand a scroll, whilst with His
Macedonian school,
right hand He blesses, turning full face and looking straight before Him. The Mother of
ca. first half
God, upright, straight and majestic, has no expression of intimacy towards Her Son: She looks
XIVth century.
at the spectator, or rather Her look is directed to the side, above the head of the Emmanuel. 36 x 22 inches.
The right hand of the Hodigitria, raised towards the chest, could be expressing a gesture of Photo: Temple
prayer; but rather—it is a gesture of presentation: the Theotokos shows to men the Son of Gallery, London

God Who, by Her, has come into the world. Or again—it is the attitude of the Sovereign
Who presents to Her Son the people of the faithful, to which the Christ-Emmanuel responds
with a broad majestic gesture of benediction.
The icon of the Hodigitria, created at Byzantium, calls to mind the ritual order of the im¬
perial palace, which transformed the life of the “porphyrogenctic” monarchs into a series
of official ceremonies, dissimulating all expression of personal feelings, so as to allow only
the sacred character of the imperial dignity to appear. But at the same time this majestic
detachment, alien to every manifestation of human affection, belonged most of all to a dog¬
matic icon of the divine Maternity—that of the Theotokos with the Christ-Emmanuel.
The type of the Hodigitria has given rise to iconographic variants which, having once
been consecrated by the appearance of a miraculous icon, were reproduced under a new title.
We publish here three icons of the Mother of God as “Hodigitria”, venerated in Russia.
They are reproductions of the miraculous icons of Smolensk, Tichvine and Kazan.

1 According to a passage of the First Book of the Compilation of History by Theodore the Reader (about 530),
a passage which seems to be a later interpolation. See Dobschiitz, op. cit. I, pp. 269*, 186*, 188*.
2 N. P. Kondakov, The Iconography of the Mother of God, St. Petersburg, 1914, vols. I passim and II, 152-293.

The “Hodigitria” of Smolensk (celebrated on July 28 th) may have been brought to Russia THE SMOLENSK

by Anne of Greece, wife of Saint Vladimir, or, according to another tradition, by a Byzantine MOTHER OF GOD

Princess of the same name, who married Vsevolod of Tchernigov in 1046. Vladimir Mono-
mach is said to have placed this icon in the Cathedral of Smolensk in 1101. None of the repro¬
ductions, among which several have been venerated as miraculous icons, is earlier than the
XIVth century, according to N. Kondakov.1
The Smolensk Mother of God is the Russian icon that most closely resembles the classical See reproduction

type of the Byzantine Hodigitria: the same stately attitude of the Theotokos and of the on page 82.
The Smolensk Mother
Infant-Emmanuel, the same solemn gestures that we noticed above. The icon reproduced
of God, Russian,
here is a beautiful work of the XVIth century (108 x 82 cm). The fine head of the Mother
XVIth century.
of God, carried on an elongated and graceful neck, is covered with the maphonon decorated 108 x 82 cm.
with three stars: above the forehead and on the two shoulders. This symbol of perpetual Photo: Castle De
virginity (ueiTiagOeveta)—before, during and after confinement—should figure on all icons Wtjenhurgh, Echteld,
Netherlands

81
•' !'AT.g. ■
///f-A '
•»
i:|
 Hodigitria.
Design for an icon

of the Mother of God. It is a decorative development of the three crosses which habitually
decorated the maphorion of the Virgin on more ancient icons. The himation of the Emmanuel
covers His body entirely and is woven of gold. The Mother of God, painted half-length, must
remain standing for Her Son is not on Her knees; She holds Him aloft and upright on the left
arm, in a ceremonial attitude, as in the Byzantine icons of the Hodigitria. The Archangels in
the top corners are Michael (right of the Mother of God) and Gabriel (left of Her).

1 Op. cit. vol. II, pp. 201-203.

84
 The icon of the Tichvine Mother of God (celebrated June 26th) has been venerated in THE TICK VINE

Russia since 1383. She resembles most closely the Byzantine type of the Hodigitria Eleousa MOTHER OF GOD
(the Merciful). Kondakov is prepared to consider the icon of Tichvine as the replica of a variant
which had already appeared in Byzantium.1 Certainly the classical type of the Byzantine
Hodigitria has here undergone certain modifications. The Infant-Emmanuel is no longer
represented straight before the spectator, the face turned full towards the faithful: His body
is seen from the side turned towards the right shoulder of the Mother, His face is shown
three-quarters. The Christ-Emmanuel still holds Himself very upright, seated on His Mother’s
left arm, but His attitude is less ceremonious: His right leg, folded under the simple himation
(with no gold in the weaving), allows one to see the sole of the foot, emerging from under the
left leg, which is stretched forward. Also, the gesture of benediction is less solemn: instead
of stretching out His arm majestically, the Infant raises the right hand simply in benediction. See reproduction
The body of the Mother of God is slightly turned towards the right side of the icon. Without on page 83-
The Tichvine Mother
losing the solemn expression, detached from all human affection, the Hodigitria of Tichvine
of God, Russian, first
inclines Her head towards the Infant-Emmanuel. The Mother of God does not turn her look
half XVIIth century,
towards the Child, but Her whole attitude, and above all the expression of the pensive and
Icon Museum,
saddened face, shows us a merciful Hodigitria, Who intercedes before Her Son, praying for Recklinghausen
the fallen world.
The icon reproduced here in colour is probably a work of the XVIth century. Despite later
repairs, one recognises the brush of an iconographer of the great school.
The other icon of the same type is very characteristic of Russian painting of the XVIIth
century. Comparison of the two icons gives an idea of the latitude allowed to an artist in re¬
producing a defined iconographic type.

See reproduction
on page 86.
The Tichvine Mother
of God. Russian,
ca. 1600, Moscow
School. Icon Museum
Recklinghausen

1 Op. cit. vol. II, pp. 211-212. 85

87
 THE KAZAN The icon of the Kazan Mother of God (celebrated July 8th and October 22nd) made its
MOTHER OF GOD apparition in 1579. When one speaks of the “apparition” of an icon, this term, current in
See reproduction old Russian chronicles and hagiographies, means a miraculous event by which an icon,
on page 87. hitherto unknown, becomes notable as a new source of the manifestations of grace. The story
Russian, late of the apparition of the Mother of God at Kazan, the capital of a Tartar Khanat recently con¬
With century.
quered by the Russians, may serve as a typical example. Having appeared several times in
9 1/3 x 10 inches.
succession in the dreams of a young girl, the Mother of God commanded her to point out
Private collection.
to the ecclesiastical and secular powers the place where Her miraculous icon was to be found,
buried in the earth. The clergy and the dignitaries refused to believe the message of the vision¬
ary. Finally, the young girl and her mother none the less exhumed the icon. Carried with
pomp to the cathedral, the newly appeared icon of the Mother of God became notable through
several miracles. The Kazan icon accompanied the national troops who liberated Moscow
from the Poles on October 22nd, 1612. Together with the icon of Smolensk, it gave courage
to the Russian army in 1812. Its role in the destiny of Russia can be compared to that of the
Blachernitissa at Byzantium.
Icons of the Kazan Mother of God are very numerous: it is perhaps the icon of the Mother of
God that is most wide-spread in Russia. The icon that we reproduce here must have been
made towards the end of the XVIth century, that is a short time after the apparition of the
Kazan icon. Our icon reduces the image of the Mother of God to the shoulders: thus, the
left hand which supports the Infant and the right hand, with its gesture of prayer, do not ap¬
pear. In the same way, the Christ-Emmanuel is represented only to the waist. His left hand,
which habitually holds a scroll, is hidden under the himation. As on the icon of the Hodigitria
of Smolensk, He is clothed with a himation woven of gold and remains standing quite upright,
full-face to the faithful. His blessing hand, on our icon, has been damaged by a burn, but one
can perceive that the gesture is less solemn than it was on the icon of Smolensk. Even more
than on the icon of Tichvine, the Mother of God’s head is inclined towards the Infant-
Emmanuel. The face remains grave, but expresses at the same time feminine sweetness and a
saddened tenderness: without looking directly at Her Son, the Mother of God seems to con¬
template His mission of Saviour come into the world to suffer the Passion. It is no longer
an official ceremony of presentation. The Byzantine theme of the Hodigitria is completely
transformed in the Russian icon of the Kazan Mother of God.
Our icon has recently been cleaned in Paris. It has beautiful colours: the maphorion of
fiery purple detaches itself against a background of golden ochre.

88
 This iconographic type is usually known in Russia under the name of the Cyprus Mother THE
of God1, whose miraculous mosaic icon was known on Cyprus as early as the beginning MOTHER OF GOD

of the Vllth century. This image is also called the Pechersky Mother of God from the mira¬ ENTHRONED

culous icon in the Kiev-Pechersky church.2 Remarkable versions of this icon are also found See reproduction on
in the Mistra churches ofPeribleptas (second half of the XIVth century) and Pantanassa (begin¬ page 90.

ning of the XVth century).3 This image was especially widely used in the mediaeval West, Icon attributed to
Cretan School,
where it became the favourite form of sculptured image of the Mother of God. Images
late XVth-early
analogous to our icon can also be found among the icons and frescoes on Mt.Athos.4
XVIth century.
The icon reproduced here is a solemn image of the Mother of God enthroned, holding the 25V2 x 34 inches.
Child-Christ straight before Her on Her lap and supporting Him by the shoulder with Her Benaki Museum,
left hand and by the foot with Her right. The Child is represented in the posture of the Panto- Athens
crator, blessing with His right hand and holding in His left hand a scroll pressed against His
knee. To the spectator’s left the Archangel Michael and to the right the Archangel Gabriel
approach the throne, making obeisance. Round the margins of the icon, where it is customary
to put patron saints of the family, or other specially revered saints, as well as scenes from the
Holy Scriptures or the lives of the saints, there are placed on the top margin: the Annun¬
ciation5, the Crucifixion, the Deposition, the Descent into Hell. On the margin to the spec¬
tator’s left, starting from the top are John the Forerunner, the Apostle Peter, the Great Martyr
George and the Great Martyr Katherine. On the right are St.John the Evangelist, the Apostle
Paul, the Great Martyr Demetrius of Thessalonica and St. Antony the Great. On the bottom
margin are Saints Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom, Constantine and Helen, Basil
the Great and St. Nicholas.
The Cretan School to which this icon is attributed originated in the XIVth century. Having
been purely provincial during the XIVth and XVth centuries (which is shown by the paintings
in Crete), after the fall of Constantinople it becomes its principal successor6 and begins to play
an important part, especially in the XVIth century, but already greatly influenced by the West.
The icon reproduced here represents one of the best examples of this school known to
us, and shows that individual painters still kept to the canon of iconography even at the
end of the XVIth century. The stern and majestic posture of the Mother of God with the
equally majestic Child-Christ, sitting on Her lap as on a throne, is in sharp contrast with the
postures of the angels bending towards the Mother of God and stretching out their hands
to Her in prayer. Her superiority over them as “more honourable than the angels, the arch¬
angels and all creatures” is emphasised here also by the dimensions of Her figure, which is Prayer to the most

larger than those of the angels. Holy Mother of God

No less solemn are the figures of the saints on the margins of the icon. This somewhat
official solemnity, characteristic of the strict hierarchy of the Byzantine Empire, is still more
emphasised here by the sharp, accentuated lines and the dry detailed treatment which gives
a somewhat metallic character, particularly to the garments of the saints on the margins.
These qualities, inherited by the Cretan school from the last period of Byzantine art, are its
characteristic features. But these peculiarities, though giving a certain coldness to the images, in
no way disturb the general unity of the icon, which produces a stern and strong impression.

1 Commemorated on June 9th.

2 Commemorated on May 3rd and August 15th.
3 See N. P. Kondakov, Iconography of the Mother of God, vol. II, c. 7. Petrograd, 1915.
1 Kondakov, ibid.
6 This Annunciation is almost completely analogous to the icon reproduced in Seminarium Kondakovianum,
vol. I, Prague, 1927, with an article by N. Beliaev, devoted to it. It has the same architectural background, the same
tree, the same folds of the garments. The only small difference is in the proportions of the Mother of God and the
Archangel, which in our icon are more elongated and graceful. On the basis of an analysis of iconography and style
and a comparison of this icon with examples of Mount Athos art, frescoes and miniatures the author makes the sup¬
position that this Annunciation was painted by a Cretan painter on Mount Athos in the second part of the XVIth
century.
6 V. N. Lazarev, History of Byzantine Painting, vol. 1. 89
Mj1;
 design for an icon, , Ap>
XVIIth century

ICONS OF Icons depicting the mutual gestures of lovingkindness between the Mother of God and
LOVING¬ the Babe are called “of Lovingkindness”.1 In contrast with the solemn and severe majesty
KINDNESS of the icons of the Mother of God as Hodigitria, which emphasise the Divinity of the Child-
Christ, icons of Lovingkindness are full of a natural human feeling—of mother-love and
tenderness. Here, more than in the Hodigitria, is expressed the human aspect of Divine Mo¬
therhood and Incarnation; they underline the fact that the humanity of the Mother of God
is also the humanity of Her Son from Whom She is inseparable through His birth.
See reproduction An icon of Lovingkindness is an image of the Mother grieving deeply at the coming Passion
on page 91. of the Son and enduring in silence the inevitability of this Passion revealed to Her in advance
The Vladimir Mother
(“Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also”, Luke ii, 35). The Babe Himself
of God. Russian,
is here the same as in the Hodigitria—the Boy Emmanuel, clothed in the same garments
XVlth century,
12XA x 9V* inches.
showing by their workmanship His pre-eternal Divinity. But here, by the manifestations
Photo: Temple of His purely human feelings, fear, tenderness and by His gestures, the icon emphasises His
Gallery, London human nature.
The type, Lovingkindness, whilst rare in Byzantium was to become extremely widespread
on Russian soil, becoming one of the principal themes of Russian icon-painting ,whose tend¬
ency towards expressing human feelings purified by Divine Light seems to find its per¬
sonification in the image of Lovingkindness. “It is one of the summits of Russian art. Neither
French Gothic art nor the Italian Renaissance managed to put into this image greater warmth.
They created images that were more human, but not more moving. The Russian icons of
‘Lovingkindness’justify their name, for looking at them the spectator is moved by a feeling
of deep lovingkindness, that feeling which is best described in the poetic words of St. Isaac
of Syria. According to his exposition the sign of a merciful heart is when ‘a man’s heart
burns for all creation—men, birds, animals, demons and all creatures. At their memory and
sight his eyes shed tears. Great and powerful compassion fills a man’s heart, and great suffer¬
ing wrings it, so that he cannot endure, hear or see any harm or the least pain suffered by a
92 creature. This is why he prays hourly, with tears, for dumb creation, for the enemies of
truth, for those who harm him, that they should be preserved and shown mercy; he prays also
for reptiles with a great compassion which wells up in his heart without measure until he
becomes likened in this to God’.”1 2
As we have said above (p. 39)> every human feeling expressed in an icon becomes
transfigured and acquires its full meaning in its contact with the world of Divine Grace.
Icons of Lovingkindness are perhaps the most striking example of this fact. In all the great
variety of human feelings those connected with motherhood are the most intense, for more
than any others they are connected not only with the inner but also with the physical life
of man. In the icons of Lovingkindness, the motherly caress of the Mother of God is in¬
dissolubly connected with Her tormenting pain for Her Son. This compassion she feels for
Him becomes here transformed into motherly compassion for all creatures for whom He
voluntarily sacrifices Himself. And this godlike compassion transfigures the most instinctive
part of human nature, which links man to the whole of creation—motherhood. Contact
with the Deity transforms motherly tenderness into all-embracing love and grief for the whole
of creation. “From the pain of personal loss grief becomes transformed into compassion for
the universal grief, into pain caused by the very fact that suffering exists as an inalienable
element of the world’s order.”3 This is why the Mother of God is worshipped as the Joy
of all created beings with whom She is ontologically one, joy derived from the consciousness
and belief in the motherly intercession of the “merciful heart” that cannot bear the suffer¬
ing to which these created beings are subjected. That all-embracing love, which knows no
laws except compassion and suffering, finds its fullest expression in the image of the Mother
grieving for the crucified Son.
This content of icons of Lovingkindness, with all their warmth and deeply moving quality,
completely excludes all the sentimentality and sugariness belonging to a narrow, egoistical
feeling. Neither has it any dry abstract schematism.
The general type of Lovingkindness has a great many variants. Each of the four icons
reproduced here reveals and transmits its content in its own way.

1 The Russian is Umileniye. This name is probably a translation of the Greek name, the Mother of God—
’E/^eovaa. It has seemed best, after considering possible alternatives, to adopt the title of “Lovingkindness”
for the type of icons with which this and the following four sections are concerned. There is no quite satisfactory
English translation for Umileniye, as used in this context. Various words such as mercy, compassion, pity, tenderness
suggest themselves, but are either too limited or sentimental or both. The nearest translation is probably
“lovingkindness” taken in its fullest sense as including all the gifts of Grace; it is used by Coverdale, and subsequent
English translators, in many Old Testament passages when the Septuagint has 'eZsog.
2 Ascetic Discourses of our Holy Father Isaac of Syria, Moscow, 1858, quoted from V. N. Lazarev, The Art of
Novgorod, 1947, Moscow-Leningrad, p. 114.
3 A. I. Anissimov, Icon of the Vladimir Mother of God, Prague, 1928, p. 32. 93
 THE VLADIMIR One of the most ancient versions of the image of Lovingkindness is the famous Byzantine
MOTHER OF GOD icon of the Vladimir Mother of God, belonging to the Xlth or the beginning of the Xllth
See reproduction century.
on page 94 According to tradition the icon of the Vladimir Mother of God was painted by the holy
Russian, Evangelist Luke during the Mother of God’s lifetime.1 Seeing the icon brought to Her,
XVth centur)'. She repeated her prophecy: “All generations shall call me blessed” (Luke i, 48), and looking
7x8 inches.
at it said with authority: “with this image is My grace and power”. According to the
Coll. M. Lanza
annals this icon, brought to Kiev from Constantinople and now in the Tretiakov Gallery,
Stich. to LitiyaTone 8, has been in Russia since 1155. The same year it was taken to the land of Suzdal and in 1161
on the commemora¬ was moved to Vladimir from which it got its name, and finally in 1395 to Moscow. This
tion day of the icon
icon occupied a quite special position in ancient Russia. Chronicles record every time it
was moved from one place to another and explain by its influence every important event
in Russian history. Throughout the centuries this icon gives its protection to the Russian
people and is venerated as the greatest holy treasure of the nation. The volunteer army which
delivered Moscow from the Poles in 1612 fought at the same time also for the Vladimir
icon: “It is better for us to die than to deliver the image of the immaculate Mother of God
of Vladimir to desecration.” 2
The distinctive feature of the Vladimir icon of the Mother of God is the posture of Her¬
self and the Child Whom She holds in Her right arm, bending Her head towards Him.
With Her left hand She either touches the Child’s shoulder, or (practically always) holds it
to Her breast, prayerfully extending Her hand to Him and at the same time directing the
spectator’s attention to Him. The Divine Child is always depicted with His left foot tucked
under Him with only the sole of the foot showing. The icon reproduced here is a version
of the Xlth-XIIth century icon mentioned above from which it differs by two features.
Here the Mother of God’s eyes are turned not on the spectator but over the head of the Child.
The Child has His left arm round His Mother’s neck not directly but over the maphorion
so that His left hand is not visible. The figure of the Mother of God, beautifully placed in
the panel, is full of solemn calm. The fused outline of the two figures gives the icon a strongly
monumental quality, characteristic of the best period of Russian icon-painting. The Divine
Child is represented with a lively and tender movement; pressing His face to the Mother
of God’s cheek He seems to try and calm Her hidden grief. Paying no heed to the caress,
the Mother of God gazes into the distance with a look full of deep feeling and sorrow. Her
stern and concentrated face, turned towards the caressing Son, is inwardly turned not to the
human Child but to the Maker of the world born of Her. As “the warm Intercessor before
The Service of the day God” and the “strong Protector of the world”3 She bends towards the Child, seeking from
Him mercy for those who come to Him and covering them by Her intercession.

1 In orthodox iconography there are several icons attributed to the Evangelist Luke. This should in no way
be understood in the sense that precisely those icons were the work of the Evangelist’s hand, but that they correspond
to the tradition established by him. In other words they reproduce icons at one time painted by the Evangelist Luke.
Therefore the words uttered by the Mother of God on seeing Her image painted by the Evangelist Luke are pre¬
served by the Church in services dedicated to several icons of the Mother of God. The apostolic tradition should
be taken here in the same sense as we understand it when speaking of the apostolic liturgy or apostolic rules. They
go back to the Apostles not because the Apostles themselves had written them, but because they bear the Apostles’
authority and character.
2 The Vladimir icon of the Mother of God is commemorated three times a year and all three dates are connected
with the miraculous deliverance of Moscow from the Tartars: on August 26th 1395, June 23rd 1480 and May 21st.
This last date commemorates two events: the renewal of the icon in 1514 with the participation of Metropolitan
Barlaam (an icon-painter) and deliverance from the Tartars in 1521.
96 2 Glory of the Mother of God, published by the Moscow Synod Press, Moscow, 1907.
 The Tolga icon of the Mother of God derives its name from the place where it appeared THE TOLGA

in 1314 on the river Tolga near Yaroslavl, and where later a monastery was built to house MOTHER OF GOD

the icon.2 See reproduction

Icons of the Tolga Mother of God are varied: sometimes She is depicted sitting on a throne on page 95.

with the Child standing on Her lap, as for instance in the famous icon of that name in the The Mother of God
(LJmilenie),
Tretiakov Gallery in Moscow; in others She is depicted half-length with a full-length figure
Russian, beginning
of the Child, apparently reproducing the icon hi the Tretiakov Gallery. The icon shown
XVth century.
here is a third variant of the Tolga Mother of God. It differs from other icons in that here Novgorod [?],
the Divine Child does not stretch Himself with an anxious impulse towards His Mother, Icon Museum,
but stands calmly with His hand round Her neck. This icon is devoid of all drama. It is less R ecklinghausen.1
intimate than the other icons of Lovingkindness reproduced here, but has more depth and
meaning. Motherly tenderness acquires here a passionless calm, bordering on detachment.
All human feelings and experiences have found here their ultimate meaning and so are
brought to the higher peace. The icon is striking for its exceptional spiritual purity. It seems
to be a pictorial expression of the words of the canticle sung to the Mother of God on the
commemoration day of this icon: “There is no flaw in Thy beauty, O Virgin: for Thou
alone art pure, having appeared from eternity, O Glorious One, and having illumined the
world with the rays of Thy virginity and the light of Thy purity.”
The figure of the Mother of God seems to be devoid of physical volume and weight. Her
disproportionately small hands do not grip but merely touch the Child Christ embracing Her.
Everything here is centred on the illumined faces devoid of all emotions. The dark eyes with
their long lashes, full of secret sorrow, gaze into the distance and at the same time are turned
inwards into Her own depth. The illumined sorrowful face of the Mother of God is calmly
bent towards Her Son in certitude of His mercy towards creatures; and He, pressing His
face to Her cheek, as it were answers Her sorrow by blessing Her and the world.
The execution of the icon is in keeping with its unusual depth. The smooth flowing
rhythm of lines creates a mood of calm concentration. The icon is characterised by remark¬
able drawing and the nobility of a somewhat “archaic” form which emphasises and enhances
still more the spiritual content of the image. It is painted with exceptional artistic tact in a
simple scale of colours. The faces are painted in a soft “fused” manner, with delicate trans¬
itions from light to greenish shadows. Their soft overall outline gives them a particular
wholeness, fullness and life. The tunic of the Saviour, with a greenish clavus and belt, is painted
in liquid yellow ochre with folds done in white and seems luminous from the white back¬
ground showing through. The dark maphorion of the Mother of God has soft highlights oi
red ochre. Neither the drawing, the form nor the colours are in any degree heavy. Looking
at the icon one gets the impression that it poured itself from the artist’s brush, as would prayer
that is as natural for a saint as breathing.

1 Catalogue of the Icon Museum, Recklinghausen.

2 At first a small “ one-day ” church was built on the spot where the icon was found (the name given to churches
built in one day which was a fairly frequent occurrence in old Russia); here the icon was placed and on the same day
the commemoration of its revelation was fixed for August 8th (Menaion for August 8th).
99
 THE KORSUN The name of Korsun icon of the Mother of God comes from the ancient Greek town of
MOTHER OF GOD Korsun or Chersonesus, a commercial port situated in Crimea near Sebastopol where, accord¬
See reproduction ing to old annals, the holy Prince Vladimir was baptised in 988. Generally all Greek icons
on page 98. which came through this port to Russia were called Korsun icons. This name was preserved
Russian, by the icon of Lovingkindness we arc analyzing, the prototype of which was a Greek icon
XVlth century,
from Korsun.
Moscow School.
A characteristic feature of icons of this type is, first, the head of the Mother of God strongly
7 x 10Vi inches.
bent to the left, second, the Child’s himation which has slipped down from the upper part
Coll. National
Museum, Paris of His body revealing a white tunic which is often, as in the icon reproduced here, ornamented
with embroidery. The postures of the Divine Child in these icons vary. In some He is de¬
picted in a calm posture with both legs hanging down, in others, as in our icon, with the
right leg tucked under so that only the foot shows. Moreover, in many icons of this type,
He makes a gesture of affection, clinging with His right hand to Her chin or cheek. Unlike that
in many other icons of Lovingkindness, the posture of the Child in the icon reproduced is not
devoid of a certain dramatic quality. As if in fear, He impulsively stretches towards His
Mother’s face, whilst She, as though comforting Him, gazes with grief on the spectator.
Compared with the preceding icons of Lovingkindness, full of stern inner concentration, here
the face of the Mother of God is more warm and intimate. Owing to the fact that her gaze
is directed not in line with the movement of her head but towards the spectator, the scene
docs not represent an action closed within itself; on the contrary, it is directly connected with
the external world. The motherly tenderness of the Mother of God towards Her Son is at
the same time turned outwards. Calmly bending towards the Child, She embraces with her
gaze this world spread before Her eyes, drawing it towards participation in the prayer with
which She intercedes for it before God.
This small icon, evidently for household use, strikes one by its inner warmth, which is
enhanced by its general warm colouring and by its masterly execution, showing great refine¬
ment. The technique of the brushwork, which gives the pleasing effect of enamel, is both
soft and exquisite.

100
 The icon reproduced here is another version of the icon of the Korsun Mother of God. THE KORSUN
Some of these icons depict the Mother of God and the Child turned towards the left of the MOTHER OF GOD

spectator, others to the right. Thus this icon can have the same composition turned to either See reproduction
side.1 on page 99.
The distinctive feature of the icons of Lovingkindness of this type is that they depict only Russian, Late

the upper parts of the Divine Mother and Child, practically nothing but their faces and hands, XVlth century.
8 x 14 inches.
which emphasises still more the intimate character of the icon of Lovingkindness. Of the icons
Photo: Temple
of this type reproduced here the present icon is more imbued with human feeling. Both
Gallery, London
composition and content emphasise motherhood particularly strongly. Tightly pressed to one
another the faces constitute as it were one whole, emphasising the physical link between the
Mother and the Child. Everything here is centred on the impulse of the heart. The faces are
devoid of sternness and are full of a particular intimacy and warmth. The Divine Child is
depicted with a strong, impulsive and even somewhat agitated movement. He clutches with
His right hand the edge of the Mother of God’s maphorion and, pressed against Her cheek,
as it were pulls Her towards Him. With a gesture full of tenderness the Mother of God hugs
Her Son with both hands. Her pensive, pure and tender gaze is turned into the distance. In
this icon, so markedly emphasising the physical link and tenderness of motherhood, the white
scroll which the Child holds in His left hand close to His face gives the impression of an extra¬
neous object, which has forced its way into this image of an intimate human feeling. In con¬
trast with the human intimacy emphasised by the image, this scroll in its turn emphasises the
advent in the world of the Wisdom of God in the person of the cuddling Child, Wisdom
from contact with which sufferings and sorrow are illumined and so turn to joy.
This is why icons of Lovingkindness, showing all the inscrutability of the combination of
the childish helplessness of the Babe, in need of motherly care and tenderness, with His
Divine omnipotence, engender and communicate that feeling of deep lovingkindness which
leads to the “burning of man’s heart”, “likening him in this to God” in the words of
St. Isaac of Syria. This is why, too, in the services dedicated to icons of the Mother of God,
sorrowful and repentant melodies are intermingled with joyous faith in Her ceaseless inter¬
cession and in the mercy of Her Son, Who offered Himself as a voluntary sacrifice.

1 One of these icons with the composition turned in a direction opposite to our icon is reproduced in the History
of Russian Art by I. Grabar (p. 82). This icon is painted by a pupil of the famous icon-painter of the Stroganov
School, Prokopy Tchirin and dated circa 1620. As in our icon the contours are outlined in gold, which is typical
for that period. Yet both in style and content it is far below our icon, which is painted with much greater freedom
and homogeneity of forms and in which the gold work is light and unconstrained. This gives reason to suppose
that our icon may belong to the end of the XVlth century.

101
 THE The icon of the Mother of God of the Passion (“Strastnaia”) belongs to an iconographic
MOTHER OF GOD type which appeared in the XIVth century in the frescoes of Serbia (churches of Lesnovo
OF THE PASSION
and of Konce). Two angels holding the instruments of the Passion are represented in the upper
Opposite page: corners of the icon. The Infant-Christ turns His head, looking at them with astonishment.
Russian triptych of In fear, He seeks refuge with His Mother.
1641. The icon reproduced here is a triptych, in which the image of the Mother of God occupies
17Yi x 6 inches.
the central panel (each panel measures i6x 14 cm). The Mother of God holds on Her right
Coll. P. M. J. Rouet
arm the Christ-Emmanuel, Who looks at one of the two angels, turning His head upwards
de joumel, Paris
towards the left hand corner of the icon. In fear He seizes with His two hands the left hand
of His Mother. The Mother of God has Her head slightly inclined: Her look expresses a
mournful resignation.
The two side panels each contain twelve personages on foot, ranged in two rows. The upper
row of the left-hand panel (starting from the centre): Saint John the Baptist, the Archangel
Michael, the Apostle Peter, the three Fathers of the Church—Saint Basil, Saint Gregory of
Nazianzus, Saint John Chrysostom. The same row on the right panel: the Archangel Gabriel
(by a graving error he bears the name of Michael on the metal covering of the icon), the
Apostles Paul and John, the three Metropolitans of Moscow—Saints Peter, Alexis and Jonas.
The lower row (left panel), Saint Nicholas, Saint Sergius of Radonej, Saint Euthemius of
Suzdal, Saint Cyril of Bielozersk, Saints Zossima and Sabbatius of Solovki. Same row (right
panel): Saint Leontius of Rostov, Saint Alexander Nevsky, Saint John Archbishop of Novgo¬
rod, the Holy Martyrs Catherine and Paraskeva, Saint Euphrosyne of Alexandria.
The painting carefully renders all details, recalling the calligraphic style of the miniaturists.
A covering of gold, richly chased, contemporary with the icon, covers the three panels. The
date and source of the icon can be established thanks to the inscription on the reverse of the
central panel: “March 22nd, (7)149 (equals 1641 of our era) the cellarer ofTro'itza, the Staretz
Alexander Boulatnikov, has blessed with this triptych his familiar (keleinik), the Staretz
Joachim of Solovki.” In his notice (not published), on the triptych, Father M. J. Rouet de
Journel recalls that Alexander Boulatnikov, an important personage, godfather to the children
of the Tsar, exercised the functions of cellarer at the Lavra of Trinity-Saint Sergius from
1622 to 1642. He started his monastic life in the Monastery of Solovki, where he retired again
for several years, after having resigned his post of cellarer of the Lavra. His links with the
two great monasteries explain the presence on the left-hand panel of Saint Sergius (founder
of the Lavra of Trinity) and of Saints Zossima and Sabbatius (founders of Solovki). Saint
Alexander Nevsky, Saint John of Novgorod, and the three saints of the right-hand panel,
probably represent the patrons of Alexander Boulatnikov and of his family.

102
103
 SAINTJOHN Saint John, Forerunner and Baptiser of the Lord, occupies a particular place in the cult of
THE the Church. The Tuesday of the liturgical week is consecrated to his memory and a Synaxis
FORERUNNER
of Saint John the Baptist is celebrated the day after the Feast of the Baptism of Christ
Opposite page: (January 7th). The Church celebrates not only the day of his death (August 29th) and the
Russian icon from a discoveries and translations of his relics, as she does for other saints, but also his Conception
Deisis, X Vlth century. (September 24th) and his Birth (June 24th), as she does for the Mother of God.
10'A x 12 inches.
Saint John the Baptist is the greatest “among them that are born of women”, and none the
Former Coll.
less the “least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than he” (Matt, xi, 11). This is because
A. Poliakov, Paris
the work of the Forerunner belongs to the Old Testament: it was necessary then that he should
decrease before Christ Who increased (John iii, 30). Saint John went before the Messiah
“in the spirit and power of Elias” (Luke i, 17), that other mysterious Forerunner of the second
and glorious coming of Christ. But whilst Elias made fire come down from heaven, the Fore¬
runner of the first coming of the Christ Saviour “did no miracle” (John x, 41). He was
“more than a prophet” (Matt, xi, 9), the peak of the sanctity of the Old Testament, and
none the less, before Him Who came after him, the Forerunner remained stripped of every
outward sign of his vocation, to be nothing but “the voice of one crying in the wilderness,
Make straight the way of the Lord” (John i, 20-23). Whilst Elias, having risen to heaven on a
chariot of fire, had to return to earth with Enoch, to bear witness and to die as a martyr at
the end of the times (Rev. xi, 3-10), Saint John the Baptist had already given his testimony
and suffered his martyrdom before Christ had accomplished His work of Redeemer. After
the Ascension of the Lord, the Church which will have received from heaven the baptism
by the deifying fire of the Holy Ghost (Matt, iii, 11) will in the end be able to exalt the Fore¬
runner of Christ. She will recognise the true greatness of Saint John the Baptist who is, after
the Mother of God, the greatest among men. On the icons of the “Deisis” the Mother of
God and the Friend of the Bridegroom (John iii, 29) will take their place on either side of
the Christ Pantocrator.
Our icon (XVIth century, Russian) should make a counterpart to the icon of the Mother
of God in an ensemble of the three images of the “Deisis”. Represented half-length, the Fore¬
runner is bending forward, turning towards the left side of the icon: he is looking at Christ.
Making a gesture of prayer with his left hand, he addresses himself at the same time to the
faithful, to whom he presents, with his right hand, an unfolded scroll on which one reads
his exhortation to penitence: “Repent ye: for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand... now
also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth
good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire” (Matt, iii, 2, 10). Over his raiment of camel’s
hair (Matt, iii, 4) Saint John the Baptist wears a dark himation. His long hair falls over his
shoulders, his beard is shaggy: he is a man of the desert, prototype of the great Christian
anchorites. The ascetic features of his elongated face belong to the austere message of a preacher
of penitence.
This icon has undergone some transformations. The contours of Saint John the Baptist
were edged with gold in the XVlIth century. The painting was transferred to another larger
panel: one still sees the old frame which cut a part of the halo. The little black square at the
bottom shows the state of the icon before cleaning, which was recently done in Paris.

104
105
 SAINTJOHN The second icon of Saint John the Baptist which we reproduce here represents him with
THE two large wings behind his back. By lending to the messenger of the Messiah the appearance
FORERUNNER
of an angel, the iconographers were following to the letter the words of the Prophet Malachi
Opposite page: (iii, i) referring to the Forerunner (Matt, xi, io): “This is he, of whom it is written, Behold,
Greek, ca. 1600 I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.” This icono-
Photo: Castle De
graphic type already appeared in the Xlllth century in Serbia on a fresco of Arilgie1 and in
Wijenburgh
illuminations. Icons of the Forerunner with wings were to become more frequent from the
Echteld, Netherlands
XVIth century onwards.
June 24fh,Vespers, The image of the winged Forerunner corresponds not only to his function as messenger,
Canticles of but also to the ascetic life of a “terrestrial angel and celestial man”. It is one of the multiple
St. Andrew of Crete aspects of his sanctity: “How shall we call thee O prophet’ Angel, apostle or martyr? Angel,
August 29th, Vespers, for thou hast led an incorporeal life. Apostle, for thou hast taught the nations. Martyr, for
Canticles of St. Ger- thou hast been beheaded for the Christ.”
manus of Constan¬ On our icon, the winged Forerunner stands before the face of the Christ for Whom he must
tinople prepare the way. Christ appears half-length in the celestial sphere, at the upper left-hand
corner of the icon. Represented on foot and turned towards the left, the Forerunner stands out
against the golden background of the sky. He extends his left hand in prayer, and holds a cross
and an open scroll in his right hand. Clothed in camel’s hair and with a himation which covers
his torso, leaving his two arms free, Saint John preaches repentance "in the wilderness of
Judaea” (Matt, iii, 1) and "into all the country about Jordan” (Luke iii, 3). The conical rocks
behind the Forerunner represent the wilderness. Some bushes and an axe "laid unto the root
of the trees” (Matt iii, 10) allude to the words of his preaching. In the lower left-hand corner a
cup with the head of Saint John must recall that he would end his life in martyrdom.

1 N. Okounev, in Seminarium Kondakovianum VIII (1936), pi. IX, 2.

106
 ' 1
/T <N. /, /

I |L
yi
:*."- '*

y^> 1 MJ K-'
.^1 ILfi ; j J Jr / S'
,4 r 1 Iff v i ^
;: i!'VL V^' f

v..
 THE The cosmos of celestial powers, which the Father created by the Word and sanctified in the
ARCHANGEL Holy Spirit, is higher by its nature than the terrestrial world. The appearance of angels is
MICHAEL
intolerable for the human being (Dan. viii, 17-18; x, 5-17). The liturgical texts call them
“redoubtable, terrifying”: “let us rid our spirits of all corruptible nature, that our terrestrial
lips may sing with fear the praise of the incorporeal forces, which arc like fire, like flame, like
Office of St. Michael light.” Living in the Glory of the “Triune Sun”, the angelic spirits are deified creatures,
vehicles of the uncreated glory: “God-fearing embers, enflamed by the fire of the divine
Canon of the Celestial nature.” “Secondary lights”, they spread through the universe “the fire of the inaccessible
Powers, Tone 2 Divinity, ceaselessly chanting with lips of flame the hymn of the Trinity: Holy, Holy, Holy
Matins of St. Michael our God.”
Stich. of Tone 5 None the less, despite this excellence of their nature, “the economy of the mystery” of the
Incarnation of the Word remains hidden from the angels, who have known it only by the
Church (Eph. iii, 9—11; 1 Peter i, 12). Having ascended to heaven “far above all principality,
and power, and might, and dominion” (Eph. i, 21), the God-Man, exalting the human
Canon of the Celestial nature which He had assumed, “formed the one Church of angels and of men”. The cosmic
Powers, Tone 8 order was thus transmuted by the fact of the Incarnation: the Virgin “Who had given birth
to the Fire of the inflamed ministering-spirits”, becomes “the first participant of Divinity
among all creatures”; “more eminent than the incorporeal armies, surpassing the celestial
Monday Matins, hierarchies”, She receives from the angels the glory which belongs to Her.
Tone 1 The angels are known to us above all by the ministry which they exercise vis-a-vis the
terrestrial world, ministry in which they appear to us as “ministering spirits, sent forth to
minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation” (Heb. i, 14). Hence the name ayyeXoq,
“messenger”, sent to announce or to accomplish the will of God. According to the degrees
of their ministry, the celestial powers form a hierarchy, whose different ranks, in part men¬
tioned in the Scriptures, have found a systematic elaboration in the treatise “Of the Celestial
Hierarchy” of Dionysius.1 The angelic hosts have to defend the creation against the spiritual
powers which seek to cast it into ruin. The Apocalypse shows us the celestial war, in
which Michael and his angels fight against the dragon and his angels (Rev. xii, 7-9), a
war which continues on earth in the spiritual combats in which men are assisted by
angels. Hence the warrior-like character that angelic apparitions often take. Thus, the
“captain of the host of the Lord” appeared to Joshua with a sword in his hand (Joshua
v, 13-15). The Archangel Michael “chief captain of the host” (Archistrategos) presides
over the struggle against the forces of the demons: “there where thy grace appears, the
power of the demons is pursued; for the fallen Lucifer cannot bear to see thy light. We pray
thee then to extinguish his burning features, directed against us... and to free us from his
Matins of St. Michael temptations.”
The Feast of Saint Michael and of all the incorporeal powers is celebrated on November
8th. On September 6th the Church commemorates a miraculous intervention of Saint
Michael. A Synaxis of the Archangel Gabriel is celebrated the day after the Annunciation
(March 26th). Finally, every Monday of the liturgic week is consecrated to the cult of the
angels.
See reproduction The icon that we reproduce here (Balkan, ca. 1600) is of the Archangel Michael. In his
on page 110. quality of Captain of the Hosts, the warrior angel wears a cloak which, on our icon, is red in
A rchangel Michael
colour. The sword that he holds in his right hand is at the same time his weapon and the
Balkan, ca. 1600.
insignia of his dignity of commander. In his left hand he carries before his breast an image of
25 x 14V2 inches.
Photo: Temple
Jesus Christ. The head of the Archangel is adorned with ribbons. Habitually, the ends of the
Gallery, London ribbons flow from either side of the head: they should symbolise the spiritual hearing of the
angel, attentive to the divine commands. On our icon these ribbons are partly effaced. The
inscription at the top reads: "The Archangel Michael.”

108 1 P.G. 3, Coll. 120-340.

 The images reproduced here arc interesting from several points of view. First of all, the PORTRAITS OF
Roman medal of the Ilnd or Illrd centuries from the Vatican museum representing the THE APOSTLES
heads of the two foremost Apostles, Peter and Paul, proves the existence of images of the PETER AND PAUL
Apostles in the first centuries of Christianity and thus corroborates the testimony of Eusebius, AND AN ICON
mentioned earlier (see p. 25). The characteristic features of the persons represented clearly OF THE
demonstrate that they arc portraits and thus show that they reproduce images undoubtedly APOSTLE PAUL
made from direct observation. To whom this image belonged, whether to a Christian or to
See reproduction
a pagan, grateful for some favour done to him by the Apostles, we do not know.
on page 111.
The other image reproduced here—the head of Apostle Paul—is a detail of an icon painted
Detail of an icon by
by St. Andrew (Rublev) between 1408 and 1425 for the iconostasis of the Zvenigorod
Andrew Rublev and
Cathedral of the Assumption.1 If we compare this head with the head of Apostle Paul on
Roman medallion
the medal (to the left of the spectator), we shall see that both represent the head of the same
from the
man, on the medal in profile and 011 the icon in three-quarter face. Despite an interval of Vatican Museum
12 or 13 centuries between the medal and the icon, the latter reproduces the same face with
its characteristic peculiarities and even with a certain anatomical precision. There is the same
shape of the head, the same high bald forehead, the same slightly protruding lower jaw, the
same beard falling down in curly strands. This resemblance is proof of the reverent care
with which the portrayed features of the saints are preserved in Orthodox iconography.
There is no doubt that the Russian icon-painter of the XVth century had never seen the Ro¬
man portraits and probably did not even suspect their existence. In reproducing the portrayed
features he was guided by the tradition of icon-painting, transmitted through centuries by
the icon.
Yet, in spite of the obvious likeness of the two images of Apostle Paul, there is a great
difference between them. This difference, in its turn, illustrates clearly the process of trans¬
lating a portrait into an icon. Preserving, as we have said earlier, the characteristic features
of a concrete personality, i.e. a certain known historical reality, the icon transmits it linked
with Divine reality (see p. 36), that is, depicts the flesh imbued with the all-sanctifying grace
of the Holy Spirit. This combination removes the sense of the weight of the flesh, the look
of the perishable body, so palpably reproduced in the medal. The features of the face, its lines,
the hair, all are brought into strict harmonious order. The inner life in God finds its outward
manifestation in the illumined face reproduced in the icon, and the somewhat ailing face of
Apostle Paul on the medal is translated here into his transfigured, eternal look.
Moreover, if we compare the head of Apostle Peter reproduced on the medal with his
images on icons (see for instance icons of the Assumption, the Descent of the Holy Spirit
and others), we see here too the same likeness, the same exactness of historical reality which
characterises Orthodox icon-painting.

1 I. Grabar, Problems of Restoration. Moscow, 1926.

109
 ^*T*°*. '
«*

l^vl K&£$i£
vif / •T1^- ^ fry-
hulxlmKI ** jyK
i-| s 9; J9911 I ■1 HoSv?.^ ir Ji$h& VT.‘ ¥ \

i '' \\ i r P W iWt V jf \ \
ii * <: ■ f '■ '\ v
V, \ Nil ' ■• ■ / •/** tr-^V; Y;V •
K 1
/ / \ J w’' / ‘ ml
.': )

- g 1 Jr* / \**!Ml p.
L^afr S Av A v^C<^ \VtfT
fir / * rV
Rvtv
Ill
 ST. LUKE THE Of St. Luke, the first Evangelist and the author of the Acts of the Apostles, considered
EVANGELIST also, later, to be the first iconographer, the “Monarchian Prologues” inform us: “Luke was
See reproduction a Syrian of Antioch and a doctor by profession. He became a disciple of the Apostles, and
on page 114. later an intimate companion of Paul, up to the moment of his martyrdom. After having served
Apostle and the Lord ceaselessly, and having had neither wife nor children, he died in Boeotia at the age
Evangelist Luke, of eighty-four years, filled with the Holy Spirit.”1
Russian,
Our icon was part of the left leaf of a Russian "royal door” of the XVth or XVIth century. St.
XVItb century,
Luke is represented sitting on a low seat, before a writing desk, in a room (this is suggested by
Novgorod.
Icon Museum, the architectural background). Resting his two bare feet on a stool, he is writing in a book,
Recklinghausen which he holds open on his knees. The words which can be read in the book are those of the
opening of the Gospel according to St. Luke. St. Luke is a man of middle age, with a beard
and crimped hair. Turning towards the right side of the icon, his face is shown three-quarters
view. He is clothed in a tunic, with his himation thrown over the left shoulder, to leave the
right arm free. The face expresses the pious attentiveness of the Evangelist, who is recording a
text inspired by God.

1 Corssen, “Monarch. Prologe”, in Texte utid Untersuclumgen, XV, i.

112
 “John, then, the last (of the Evangelists)’’, says Clement of Alexandria, “seeing that the ST.JOHN THE
bodily features had been brought to light in the Gospels, and being urged by the disciples EVANGELIST

and divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit, composed a spiritual Gospel.”1 Last in the time See reproduction
of its composition, the fourth Gospel is the first in its importance, according to Origen: on page 115.
“I think that, just as the four Gospels are the foundations of the faith of the Church—and Russian

on these foundations rests the entire world reconciled with God in the Christ... so too the XVIth century.
Moscow School.
Gospel according to St.John is the principle of the Gospels, and no one can seize its meaning,
40 x 34 cm.
who has not leaned on Jesus’ bosom, and has not received from Jesus—Mary, Who has be¬
Photo: Temple
come his Mother also.”2 In conformity with this conception, St.John receives the first place Gallery, London
among the four Evangelists on the iconostasis.
Our icon belongs to the left leaf of a Russian “royal door” of the XVIth century. St.John
is represented in the desert: he is seated on a rock, in a kind of rocky cavern. He is an old
man with a very high and bold forehead, clothed in a long dark blue himation, which en¬
velops his whole body. He is turning his head to the left, towards the upper corner of the icon,
as if he listened to a voice coming from heaven. Often behind him, in the upper left hand
corner, a part of the celestial sphere is represented, with rays coming forth from it. The
Revelation (i, 10-12) also shows us St.John turning to look behind him, to see “the voice
that spake with” him. In his left hand the Evangelist holds a scroll, while with his right hand
he makes a gesture addressed to the scribe, who is writing at his dictation. The scribe is a
young man with a nimbus, clothed in a scarlet himation. His name is indicated above his
head: it is Prochorus, one of the seven deacons (Acts, vi, 5), in whom a tradition, represented
by several authors, would see the nephew of St. Stephen and the companion of St.John.3
Leaning over the book that he holds on his knees, Prochorus is writing the first words of the
Gospel according to St.John: “In the beginning was the Word.”
On the frame of the icon, at the top, one sees in a semi-circle the cherubic creature, the
symbol of the Evangelist. St.Irenaeus, who was the first to see in the four sacred creatures
of Ezekiel’s vision (Ez. i, 5-14), the symbol of the four Evangelists, attributed the lion to
St.John and the eagle to St. Mark.4 A contrary attribution has been adopted in the West.
Both traditions must have existed together in Russia, where, towards the end of the XVIth
century, the eagle replaces the lion on icons of St.John the Evangelist.

1 In the Fragment of the Hypotyposes, quoted by Eusebius, H.E. VI, 14; P.G. 20, col. 552B. Cf. St.Irenaeus,
Adv. Haer. Ill, I, 1; P.G. 7, col. 845.
2 Prologue of the Commentary on the Gospel of St.John, sec. 6; P. G. 14, coll. 29-32.
3 See in Bolland., AASS., April 1st, p. 818. An apochryphal “Historia Prochori, Christi discipuli, de vita
B.Johannis apostoli” was published in Magna Bihl. Patrum, Cologne, 1618.
4 Adv. Haer III, 2, 8: P.G. 7, coll. 885—89a.

113
i ■ ;'*-*T<&»

Jr\ V^T"

M"
L i

m'\ V\

■-';
,t
■ ^
m

1&4Wb; m ^ if! \[i .-

Jlj li i
'-. .
 -*--crr- ■V srr- I -y,—-r

:L,1

. -C

115
 AN ICON OF THE The icon of the holy bishop Abraham belongs to the few very ancient icons known to us
HOLY BISHOP which have remained from before the iconoclastic period. During this latter time, as is known,
ABRAHAM
everything was destroyed that could be destroyed. Icons remained only in remote provincial
Opposite page: corners where the arm of state officials did not reach. One such icon is that of St. Abraham
Coptic icon, reproduced here; it is at present in the Frederick the Great Museum in Berlin. This icon is
Vltb century.
of Egyptian origin and is supposed to be an image of a bishop—prior of a monastery in
Prom Bawit.
Baouit. It is painted in tempera in the primitive style typical of Coptic paintings not only
Kaiser Friedrich
Museum, Berlin
of that period but of all times. The drawing is strong and full of life. For instance in the up¬
lifted left shoulder the effort with which the saint holds the Gospels in his left hand is exactly
caught and well translated. The face expresses a great and indomitable spiritual power, but
connected with an excessive detachment and even a certain breaking with life. Although
unquestionably a portrait, the image bears a simplified, schematic character, emphasised in
the sharply delineated features of the face and the rough dark outline. This icon seems to have
more in common, both inwardly and outwardly, with Romanesque frescoes than with
Russian or Byzantine icon-painting. The method by which it expresses the inner state of
St. Abraham, his sanctity, indicates an outward, somewhat formal understanding, rather than
an understanding based on experience.

! || I

Saints celebrated in
January. Design for an
icon, upper half

116
117
 Saint Gregory Palamas, Archbishop of Thessalonica (died 1359), belongs to the great line ST. GREGORY
of the Fathers of the Church. Celebrated twice in the course of the liturgical year (Novem¬ PALAMAS

ber 14th and the second Sunday of Lent), Saint Gregory Palamas is glorified as “invincible Opposite page:
champion of the theologians”, “preacher of grace”. The name of Saint Gregory Palamas Greek icon, late
belongs to the work of the great Byzantine Councils of the XIVth century, so important for XIVth century.

Orthodox dogma and spirituality: it was the victory of grace over the remains of Hellenic Photo: Aurora
Publications
naturalism, at the same time as an expression of the Christian Hellenism of the Fathers.
Every bishop-theologian who has expressed the truth of the faith, defending it against error,
once canonised is venerated by the Orthodox Church as our Father among the Saints (ev aytoig
narrjQ fj/uarv), independently of the epoch in which he lived. The “patristic epoch” is not a
kind of “golden age” limited to the first eight centuries. We have placed the image of Saint
Gregory Palamas before the icons of other Fathers chronologically earlier than Palamas,
because it offers a typical example of the icon of a bishop. Seen full face, the holy Hierarch,
clothed in his pontifical vestments (saccos and omophorion decorated with crosses), blesses
with his right hand and holds the Gospel in his left. It is the image of the Father of the Church,
who “begets through the preaching of the Gospel and swaddles by the blessing of the hands”.1
The icon that we reproduce here was executed about 1370-1380, that is to say shortly
after the canonisation of the great Bishop of Thessalonica (1368).2 This icon is then a portrait,
representing the features of the living person remaining in the memory of those who had
seen him. However, from the iconographical point of view it has a defect: the spiritual aspect
of the Saint, “preacher of the Divine Light, initiate in the celestial mysteries of the Trinity”, Vespers of the second
is not sufficiently brought out. On the contrary, the iconographer has underlined the external Sunday in Lent,
Stich. of Tone 2
qualities of Saint Gregory Palamas, those which above all struck his contemporaries; this
face expresses the fine intelligence of a dialectician, invincible in theological discussions, with¬
out allowing one to divine the inner life of a great contemplative.
The first words of the inscription are effaced. One can however read:.. .APXIEIJIZKOnOZ
rPHWP10X OEZEAAONIKHE O nAAAMAE (Archbishop Gregory of Thessalonica,
Palamas).

1 Saint Basil, Homily 8. P.G. 31, col. 305. (Cf. 1 Cor. iv, 15.)
2 V. N. Lazarev, Byzantine Icons of the XIVth-XVth Centuries, Burlington Magazine, London, Dec. 1937, p. 256.

119
 THE The quite exceptional veneration of St. Nicholas is well known. He is venerated not only
HOLY BISHOP by Christians but often also by Muslims. In the liturgic weekly cycle of the Orthodox Church,
NICHOLAS,
among the days of the week dedicated to the Saviour and to different orders of heavenly and
THE MIRACLE-
earthly sanctity, only three persons are singled out by name: the Mother of God, John the
WORKER OF
Forerunner and St. Nicholas. The reason for this special veneration of this bishop, who left
MYRA1
neither theological works nor other writings, is evidently that the Church sees in him a per¬
See reproduction
sonification of a shepherd, of its defender and intercessor. “Having fulfilled the Gospel of
on page 122.
Christ... thou hast appeared in truth as a most hallowed shepherd to the world.’’2 According
Russian
XVlth century. to his Life, when St. Nicholas was raised to the dignity of bishop he said: “...This dignity
19'A x 28V* inches. and this office demand different usages, in order that one should live no longer for oneself but
Former Coll. for others.”3 This “life for others” is his characteristic feature and is manifested bv the great
A. Poliakov, Paris variety of forms of his solicitude for men—his care for their preservation, their protection
from the elements, from human injustice, from heresies and so forth. This solicitude was
accompanied by numerous miracles both during his life and after his death. Indefatigable
intercessor, steadfast, uncompromising fighter for Orthodoxy4, “he was meek and gentle
in his disposition and humble in spirit”.
In accordance with his character and significance the Orthodox iconography of this saint
is also varied. In many icons on the upper part, on either side of the image of St. Nicholas, are
placed the Saviour with the Gospels on one side and the Mother of God on the other, holding
the bishop’s omophorion in Her hand. This image, showing the providential character of his
episcopal activity, is based on the tale told by St. Methodius, Patriarch of Constantinople
(842-846). In this tale St. Methodius says that shortly before his election as bishop St.Nicholas
saw the Saviour on one side of him, handing him the Gospels and the Mother of God on
the other, placing on his shoulders the bishop’s omophorion. Other, very popular, icons of
St. Nicholas depict him full-length, with a sword in his right hand and holding a church in
his left. The sword, the symbol of his spiritual armament, and the church emphasise here
St. Nicholas’ significance as an implacable fighter for purity of faith and as protector from
heresies of the flock entrusted to him. Of these images the best known are the wooden statues
of St. Nicholas of Mojaisk, as they are called, belonging to the beginning of the XIVth cent¬
ury, and St. Nicholas of Pskov, of the XVth and XVlth centuries.
Our icon represents an image of St. Nicholas surrounded by twelve selected scenes from
his life. In the upper part of the icon is placed the “order”, ending with the Apostles, after
whom there follows the place of St. Nicholas himself as their successor and the head of his
Church—a bishop. This points both to his place in the Church hierarchy and to the completion
of his life journey, shown in scenes taken from his life, which led him to heavenly glory. On
the margins of the icon are placed small half-length figures of family saints: to the left of the
spectator, above, St. Savva and below, the holy martyr Paraskeva; on the right the holy
martyrs, Catherine and Barbara. The four top scenes from the life of the saint, immediately
below the “order”, depict his childhood and show the manifestation of Divine Grace in
him from the moment of his birth. Thus the first scene depicts an incident which amazed
his parents when, being washed after birth, he stood in the bath upright with no one’s support.
The second scene depicts his baptism; the third, the healing by the child Nicholas of a woman
with a withered arm; in the fourth scene the father of the future bishop takes him to be taught
his letters. Subsequent scenes depict St. Nicholas helping people in their adversities, and his
death. On the left, under the scene of his birth, is his appearance ii. a dream to the Emperor
Constantine, commanding him to release three generals who through calumny were wrongly
condemned to death. Below is the scene depicting him at Myra, where he was bishop, saving
three citizens who were wrongly condemned to death. On the right St. Nicholas drives demons
out of a well by cutting down the adjacent tree which was dedicated to a pagan cult. Below
this is the appearance of St. Nicholas to distressed mariners who had turned to him in prayer
for help, and their rescue. In the left-hand bottom corner is a posthumous miracle of St.
Nicholas—his rescue of a drowning man (John, the father of the holy Patriarch Methodius
120
mentioned above; in other icons the rescued man is Demetrius, which evidently depicts
another of the saint’s miracles). Next to it is another posthumous miracle—the liberation of
a boy taken prisoner by Arabs, whom St. Nicholas returned to his parents on his comme¬
moration day. The next scene depicts his death, and the last is either his burial or one of the
stages of the transportation of his remains (the inscription over this scene is badly defaced
so that exact definition is prevented).
The holy Bishop Nicholas himself in our icon is not the stern, ascetic and redoubtable
denouncer of injustice as he is sometimes depicted, but the kind and loving father ready at
any moment to come to the rescue of those who call to him.
The icon attracts one’s attention both by the deep spiritual feeling with which it is painted
and by its soft rich colours. The small figures of the scenes taken from his life are full of vigour
and glow with rich patches of colour. (The figures of the “order” are somewhat spoiled by a
later restoration). These patches, almost devoid of any elaboration, give the impression of
coloured gems.

1 St. Nicholas was born in the town of Patara in Lycia on the southern shores of Asia Minor, supposedly about
280. (Archpriest G. Debolsky: Days of Divine Services in the Eastern Orthodox Church, vol. 1, St. Petersburg, 1901.)
He died on December 6th, according to some suppositions in 341, according to others between 345 and 352 (Ser¬
gius: Annus ecclesiasticus graeco-slavicus). His memory is celebrated on the day of his death and on May 9th to
commemorate the transportation of his remains from Myra to Bari in Italy in 1087 (ibid.).
2 Canon of Tone 3 and Sedalen of Tone 8.
8 Menaion, Dec. 6th. The Life of St. Nicholas is supposed to have been written at least as early as the Vth
century (Sergius: Annus ecclesiasticus graeco-slavicus).
4 In 325 St. Nicholas was among the 318 fathers taking part in the First Oecumenical Council which con¬
demned the Arian heresy. 121
122
123
 ST. BASIL THE These icons are ascribed to the Novgorod School of about 1400.
GREAT AND THE The two icons reproduced here were part of the “Tchin” (order) which, as we have seen
GREAT MARTYR
from the analysis of the iconostasis, occupies one of the chief places of importance in it. There¬
ST GEORGE1
fore icons of that storey were as a rule larger than those of other storeys. Our icons (the first
See reproduction 177X64 cm, the second 177X6634 cm) evidently belonged to one of the particularly grand¬
on page 123- iose iconostases. The role of an iconostasis, designed to be embraced at one glance, helped
St. Basil and St. George,
considerably to develop simple and clear compositions, strength of colours and generalised
Novgorod School
lines which give the figures the particularly precise outline so characteristic of Russian icons.
about 1400.
Coll. Dr. Amberg, Otherwise it would have been too difficult to see and distinguish the icons, especially in large
Kblliken, churches, at a great distance and height. The icons of St. Basil and St. George fully answer
Switzerland this requirement of a sharp and precise outline. Their monumental figures, beautifully inserted
into the narrow panels, are strictly proportionate. The painting shows much feeling for
colours which are bright and harmonious. They are painted with great vigour, lightness and
freedom, without any effort. The colours are now thick, laid in solid patches, as for instance
on the flame-coloured cloak of St. George, the white omophorion of St. Basil and the back¬
grounds, now light and transparent, with delicate high-lights, as on the under-garments and
the chasuble of St. Basil; they thus create an interplay of planes and give much life to the icons.
The drawing is exact and expressive. Rhythmic lines, now long, soft and flowing, now short,
sharp and angular, call to one another in contrasting harmony and are thus a means of ex¬
pression no less essential than the colours. The figures of the saints, almost motionless extern¬
ally, are full of a special inner life. Their calm inner collectedness is rendered by the bend
of the head and the stoop of the shoulders. The postures are free and natural; they tread
lightly, barely touching the ground with their feet and if it were not for the high line of the

Saints celebrated in
January. Design for an
icon, lower half

124
ground their figures would appear separated from the earth and floating above it. Both icons
are the work of the same master, endowed with great artistic culture and technical experience.
St. Basil the Great as a bishop, that is, a successor of the Apostles, comes in order of
sequence immediately after them. St. George follows the holy ascetics and usually comes
at the end of the “tchin”. Judging by the direction of the figures, our icons were not placed
on the side where they are seen on the iconostasis reproduced on page 64A, but on the
opposite side.
St. Basil the Great is represented, as is usual for bishops, in full vestments with the attributes
of his high office. Over his chasuble he has round his shoulders an omophorion with crosses
“by means of which the bishop symbolises the incarnate Son of God”1 2 or, according to
the interpretation of St.Germanos, “The omophorion worn by a bishop signifies the lost
sheep whom, having found, the Lord has put on His shoulders... It has crosses, because
Christ too carried His cross on his shoulders...” 3 As a successor of the Apostles and a teacher
of his Church he holds in his left hand the Gospels, while his right hand is stretched in a gesture
of prayer towards Christ sitting in the centre of the “order”. The figure of St.Basil is full
of majestic calm. His high rounded brow bears the seal of deep concentrated thought. We
have before us an image of a teacher of the Church, a great theologian, an interpreter of the
mystery of the Holy Trinity.
St. George is depicted in a red cloak, traditional for a martyr, and a pale blue tunic with
greenish reflections. His images are greatly varied; sometimes he is depicted on horseback,
striking down a dragon (page 139), at other times as a warrior on foot. He is also depicted as a
military tribune in patrician garments with a metal diadem on his head, a coat of mail under
his cloak, holding a cross in his right hand and a sword in his left. But here, in the “order”,
neither he nor any other holy martyrs are ever, in traditional iconography, depicted in their
military rank or with arms. As we have said in our analysis of the iconostasis, in so far as the
“order” is an image of the normal order of the universe, the order of the life to come, it is
self-evident that it can have no place for any enmity, nor therefore any arms. If St. Basil the
Great is depicted in the office for which he was glorified, for his life which was his spiritual
task, St. George is depicted as glorified for his death as a martyr for Christ, for his earthly
office was only a way to his spiritual task.4
Nor are martyrs depicted in Orthodox iconography with the attributes of their martyrdom,
for the important thing for the Church is not how and in what way they were martyred
bur for what they were martyred.
It has to be noted at this point that icons of saints depicting their martyrdom are extremely
rare (for instance, the decapitation of John the Forerunner). If they are depicted at all they
are placed on the margins of the icons of the saint as a secondary or additional element. In
other words, the centre of gravity in the icon as well as in the liturgic texts of the saint’s day
is not in the grievous character of their martyrdom, but in the joy and peace which are its
fruit.

1 St.Basil the Great, Archbishop of Cesaraea in Cappadocia, Father and teacher of the Church, died in 379.
His memory is celebrated on January 1st. St. George the great martyr, native of Cappadocia, was raised by Dio¬
cletian to the honorary rank of Count {K6jxr\q), and general, and was martyred at his orders in 303. His memory is
celebrated on April 23rd (Menaion April 23rd).
2 St. Simeon of Thessalonica, Book on the Church, c. 23.
8 Quoted from I. Dmitrievsky, Explanation of the Divine Liturgy, St. Petersburg, 1897.
4 What is said here refers only to the Tchin (or “order”), but not to the lower, local row of the iconostasis,
where St. George and other martyrs can be depicted as warriors and as carrying arms. 125
 ■

126
 In the icons of St. Basil the Great and St. George the Martyr attention is particularly drawn THE HEAD OF
to the face, both by the inner content and the manner of execution. Like the figures, the faces ST. GEORGE

of the saints are painted in a very direct and precise manner. The basic greenish-brownish THE MARTYR

tone (sankir) is laid in light and transparent; the underlying white ground of the panel shows Opposite page:
through here and there, and thus creates an interplay of light and shade which gives the colours Detail of St. George

depth and translucence. Over this darkish basic tone two lighter tones are subsequently laid
with a thick flowing wash; the first of yellow and red ochre, the second of yellow ochre
mixed with white. The final high-lights are laid with a bold and sure hand in pure white,
covering and smoothing out the uneven edges of the wash. The lights on the dark hair of
St. George are of golden ochre. The hair and beard of St. Basil are compact dark areas broken
by a few darker strokes. The whole technique is simple, sure and powerful, reminiscent of
frescoes. It is somewhat crude, but strong and precise, done with a bold sweep.
The faces of the saints are not stern. Their attraction lies in their serene “immobility”;
at the same time it is hard to decide which gives a greater impression of forward move¬
ment—the body, the hands outstretched in prayer or the eyes. The faces and eyes of the saints,
that is the features which express all the depth of man’s spiritual life, show the complete
supremacy of spirit over the flesh which characterises icons in general and particularly Russian
icons. It is as it were a pictorial expression of the words of the Cherubic Hymn sung on
Holy Saturday: “Let all human flesh keep silence... and lift itself above all earthly thought.”
The faces of both saints breathe this absence of all earthly thought in the flesh illumined by
the Holy Spirit and reduced to silence. They are free of the weight of the flesh and are filled
with spiritual serenity. The face of St. George is especially characteristic in this respect. It
lacks nothing of what belongs to human nature; yet, when one looks at it, one seems to see
not the face of a man but of an angel (see chap. 2, above p. 36). Though humanly virile, strong
and endowed with a powerful will, he strikes one by his unearthly purity and tranquillity.

127
 ST. SERGIUS St. Sergius of Radonej (1314-1392) is one of the most popular Russian saints.1 The
OF RADONEJ monastery of the Holy Trinity founded by him, at present the Trinity-Scrgius Lavra, is
See reproduction now the spiritual centre of Russia. The exceptional influence of the saint, which began during
on page 130. his life and never ceased, can be seen above all in the inner, spiritual life of the country, in its
Russian, forties of monastic life. St. Sergius had a multitude of followers, and the majority of monasteries founded
XXth century.
after his death were directly or indirectly influenced by him. He was the head and the teacher
10 x 12Vi inches.
of Russian hermits. The greater part of the saints in the XIVth and XVth centuries, inter¬
Community of St-Denis
cessors for the land of Russia at that difficult time, were his disciples, friends or correspondents.
and St-Seraphin, Paris
It is worthy of note that the monastery which grew up round him is dedicated to the Holy
Trinity—the prototype of that unity of which a monastery should be a concrete realisation
in the world. This unity, this perfect inner peace, was attained by the saint not only with
men but also with wild animals.2 In him was re-established in practice that normal order of the
universe where the whole of nature, united round man, obeys God. The monastery of St. Ser¬
gius which became the home of Russian sainthood at that period of its flowering, was also
the home of iconography. The greatest iconographer, St. Andrew (Rublev) seems to have
studied his art there and painted for it his famous icon of the Trinity. One of the first icons of
St. Sergius was painted by his nephew, St.Theodore the Archbishop of Rostov, a former
monk of the Trinity monastery.
The great influence of St. Sergius affected not only the internal but also the external life
of the country—its unification and its defence against external enemies. He gave his blessing
to Prince Dimitry of Don for his battle with the Tartars and predicted his victory which began
the liberation of Russia from them. At the same time the most striking feature of St. Sergius’
life is his exceptional humility. To relieve his brethren he undertook the most lowly tasks in
his monastery, wore threadbare, patched clothes, so that people who met him failed to
recognise in him the renowned abbot of Radonej, whose fame spread throughout the land.
He shared his meagre portion of bread, which was his only food, with a wild bear which
came to him from the forest; if there was not enough bread for the two of them, he used to
give his share to the bear. To the reproaches of the brethren he answered that “the beast does
not understand about fasting”.
The icon reproduced here conveys perfectly this humility and inconspicuousness. It has
been painted in our times in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra itself. St. Sergius is depicted in a brown
cloak with subdued dark-blue lights, a pale blue “schema” with crosses and a white under¬
cassock. These hues, together with the ivory background, give a modest, very pleasant and
restful harmony of colours. In spite of the absence of vividness and power, in spite even of a
certain timidity, this icon strikes one by its strict uncompromising adherence to the Canon.
It is a concrete proof of the existence of a living uninterrupted tradition, manifested not only
in the external adherence to the iconographic Canon but also in the spiritual penetration into
the inner image of the saint, in transmitting this inconspicuousness and humility which
distinguished St. Sergius in life.

1 The memory of St. Sergius is celebrated on the day of his death, September 25 th, and on the day of the recovery
of his remains, July 5th.
2 Their relations with wild animals is a characteristic feature of the lives of a great number of Orthodox saints,
and the meaning of these relations is everywhere the same. St. Sergius’ disciple, Epiphanius, who wrote his life,
remarks in speaking of the obedience of wild animals to the saint: “And that should astonish no one, for it should
be known with certainty that when God dwells in a man and the Holy Spirit rests in him, all is subject to him,
as all was subject in the beginning to Adam, before the transgression of God’s commandment...”

128
 Stylitism is a form of ascetic life which was started in Syria in the first half of the Vth cen¬ ST. SIMEON
tury. It consists in remaining upright or kneeling on the top of a column or pillar {arvXoq), STYLITES

on which was constructed a narrow roofless habitation. The stylite lived there, never able to See reproduction
he at full length, under sun and rain, exposed to the sight of all men. The food of the stylite on page 1)1.
was taken up by ladder. The extraordinary life of the founder of stylitism, St. Simeon Stylites, Russian,
XVIth century,
filled his contemporaries with astonishment and admiration. The celebrated Theodoret,
National Museum,
bishop of Cyrus, who was able to see St. Simeon and converse with him, wrote his life during
Paris
his lifetime.1 He himself says that the facts that he recounts are scarcely credible and adds
fmally: “If his life is prolonged, others after us will recount other marvellous feats.” 2 Another
life was written by the monk Antony, disciple of St. Simeon.3
St. Simeon, born about 3S9 in Syria, after having led a life of extremely austere asceticism
in a monastery, then in solitude, shut himself in an enclosure where he remained standing,
fasting and praying. The glory of his sanctity, the cures and other benefits that he obtained
by his prayers, drew crowds of pilgrims to him. It was to preserve his solitude and his peace
in prayer, without giving up providing for the needs of his disciples and his innumerable
visitors, that he wished to ascend a column, where he remained upright for thirty-seven years,
till his death in 459.
Pilgrims came to Tellnesin, near Antioch, from all countries. Theodoret relates that a
pilgrim, who had come from Ravenna, was unwilling to believe that Simeon was a human
being; so, to prove that he was not an angelic spirit, St.Simeon had a ladder brought, and
the pilgrim, having climbed to the top of the column, was able to touch the horrible sores
on the stylite’s feet. A life of St.Gcnovcva, written shortly after her death (at the beginning
of the Vlth century), recounts how St. Simeon sent a message to the saint, by merchants
who were travelling to Gaul.4 St. Simeon exercised an extraordinary spiritual authority.
From his column he taught the crowds twice a day, he fought heresies, addressed messages
to bishops and emperors. His feast is celebrated on September 1st.
Our icon (Russian XVIth century) represents St. Simeon on his column. It is a kind of tower
with a door and stairs inside. St. Simeon is standing at the top of the column, behind a small
balustrade. He is wearing over his yellow cassock, "the habit of the great schema of monk¬
hood” (ro fxeya oxrjfia), a brown cloak and dark blue hood. He gives the blessing with his right
hand and holds a scroll in his left. His face is framed with a beard.

1 Philothcos Historia, c. XXVI; P.C. 82, coll. 1464-1484.

2 Col. 1484BC.
3 Edited by M. Lictzmann, Das Lebcn dcs hi. Symeons Stylites (Leipzig, 1908). See the study by H. Delahaye,
Les Saints Stylites, Brussels, 1923.
4 M.G.H., SS. rerum Merov. Ill, 226 c. 27.

129
130
131
 ST MACARIUS St. Macarius, the founder of three monasteries, is better known in hagiology under the
OF UNSHA AND name “of Yellow Waters”1, for it was on Yellow Waters Lake that he was prior of the second
YELLOW
monastery he founded in the name of the Holy Life-giving Trinity. In 1432 this monastery
WATERS
was completely destroyed by the Tartars. St. Macarius then settled by the river Unsha, a
See reproduction tributary of the Volga, where he founded his third monastery. He died in 1444. Both in life
on page 134- and after death St. Macarius received great popularity and veneration. His icons existed long
Russian,
before his official celebration, which began in 1619 when July 25th was established as the
XVIlth century.
day of his commemoration. The characteristic feature of the saint, who sought solitude all
14Va x 17 inches.
Coll. Dr. Amberg, his life, was his acceptance of the task of caring for the people who were wont to gather
Kblliken, Switzerland round him and seek his protection. In accordance with the “Manual of Iconography”, he
is usually depicted holding in his hand a scroll with a prayer to Christ about giving people
daily bread, both for the body and the soul. Thus this icon represents the saint’s prayer, the
fatherly care of the prior for his children. In the top righthand corner of the icon there is
the Saviour, blessing the saint and the monastery in answer to his prayer. In the foreground
is the river encircling the monastery. Like the world of vanity, it surrounds this blessed place
where love is practised in the image of the Holy Trinity, a healthy island in a sick world—
the idea of a monastery in Orthodox consciousness. The buildings of the monastery, tiny
compared with the figure of the saint, may look naive to a western man. Yet they correspond
exactly to the meaning of the icon and would have been depicted in exactly the same way
by a modern icon-painter. This meaning lies in the fact that here the centre of gravity is
not in the result of the saint’s earthly activity, not in the monastery he had founded, but ha
the crowning of his whole earthly journey, in his sanctity. The icon clearly opposes the outer
to the more important inner work of construction. Glorified by the gift of miracles, the saint
—an animate temple not made with human hands—is at it were opposed here in his signi¬
ficance to the monastery with its inanimate temple made with human hands, which is only
a way to the aim which the saint has achieved by his strivings within its walls. St. Macarius,
in monk’s habit, stands outside the walls of the monastery he founded, no longer as its inmate
and prior, but as its heavenly protector who prays for it. His guardianship and care do not
cease with his death—they only pass to another plane.
If we compare this icon with earlier icons we shall see that despite its conformity with
the Canon of iconography, and its undoubtedly great spirituality and warmth, there is clearly
felt, especially in the figures of the Saviour and the saint, a certain spiritual weakness, a certain
absence of vigour in the form and execution, which are characteristic of many icons of that
period. At the same time the construction of the icon is masterly: the blessing Saviour,
depicted in the clouds, balances to perfection the figure of the saint.
The architecture of the monastery is evidently taken from life and is contemporary not
with the saint but with the painter. It is quite possible that it portrays the new monastery
built in the XVIlth century at Yellow Waters in the place of the old monastery destroyed
by the Tartars.

1 Sergius, Annus ecclesiasticus graeco-slavicus, vol. II.

132
 Saint Demetrius of Thessalonica, the “Great Martyr” {fieya/ofsdQrvg) with Saint George, ST DEMETRIUS
Saint Theodore the Stratclate, Saint Theodore the Tiron, and some others, belongs to the OF
THESSALONICA
number of warrior martyrs. If on the tier of the iconostasis these holy martyrs appear clothed
simply in tunics and himations, without arms, as is fitting for witnesses of Christ, on other See reproduction
icons offered for the veneration of the faithful they are represented in the garb corresponding on page 135.

to the career which they exercised during their life, that is to say armed and sometimes on Greek, ca. mid. XVth
century
horseback. The Church has never considered the condition of soldier as incompatible with
14 1/3 x 26 inches.
the quality of a Christian. Christianity is not a social or political doctrine: its action on the
Benaki Museum,
external world is exercised in a realm deeper than that of human institutions. The peace to Athens
which it aspires and the war that it preaches have nothing to do with “pacifism” or “mili¬
tarism”. If, following the example of Christ (Matt, xxvi, 51-54), the Church never wished
to be defended by the secular sword, it has never been opposed to a Christian embracing the
career of arms, to defend the values here below, sacrificing his life in the service of the common
cause. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends”
(John xv, 13). This sentence of the Gospels can be applied to what is most noble in the con¬
dition of a soldier. The Church commemorates, on August 29th, all Christian soldiers fallen
on fields of battle.
Saint Demetrius suffered martyrdom at the beginning of the IVth century during the per¬
secution by Diocletian. According to the story of his passion, Maximianus is said to have
named the young Demetrius to the position of anthypate (proconsul) not knowing that he
was Christian. Instead of obeying the order to exterminate all the Christians in Thessalonica,
Demetrius did his best to preach the Gospel. Arrested and thrown into prison, he exhorted
the young Nestor, his friend, to fight in single combat against a gladiator who was killing
Christians in the arenas by throwing them on lances. After the victory and martyrdom of
Nestor, Demetrius was pierced with lances in prison by order of Maximianus. His feast is
celebrated on October 26th.
The Greek icon of Saint Demetrius reproduced here is of the middle of the XVth century.1
Saint Demetrius is represented full face, on foot. His very short tunic does not reach his knees
and allows one to see his legs with crossed bindings. Over the tunic he wears a cuirass, and a
small cross with eight branches in the middle of his breast. A cloak is thrown over his shoul¬
ders. His helmet is hanging on the left shoulder. Armed with a lance which he holds in his
right hand, Saint Demetrius has his left hand placed on a richly ornate buckler. A high cross
(added later) behind the buckler, must represent the true arm, which rendered the martyr
intrepid at the hour of his death.

1 According to A. Xyggopoulos, Catalogue of the icons of the Benaki Museum, Athens, 1936, p. 10.

133
134
 THE The great martyr St.Paraskeva, native of Iconia (Asia Minor), was martyred during the
GREAT MARTYR persecutions of Diocletian.1 2 Her memory is celebrated on October 28th. To the Greek name
ST. PARASKEVA Paraskcva, given her at baptism in honour of the day of the week dedicated to our Lord’s
PIATNITZA
Passion, is added its translation in Russian, Piatnitza—Friday. The use of this translation added
See reproduction to the name serves as a reminder of its meaning and its connection with the achievement of
on page 138. its bearer. St.Paraskeva has been specially venerated among the Slavs since ancient times.
Russian, second half of
She is regarded as the patron of the work of women and, evidently because Friday was market
XVlth century}
day, a patron of trade.
IOV2 x 12V2 inches
Private coll., Paris
The characteristic feature of St.Paraskeva is her bold preaching of Christianity. Even
during questioning when she was asked her name, instead of a direct answer she began to
profess Christ. When she was asked why she would not tell her name, she replied: “It was
necessary first to give the name of eternal life, and only then the name of temporary exist-
ence. *
One must enter very deeply into the essence of the achievement of the saint to give the
impression of its meaning and the character of the martyr herself, as has been done in our
icon. The characteristic feature of the saint, mentioned earlier, is expressed here with great
force not only by external attributes but by her whole presence. The gesture with which
she holds the cross in her upraised hand, the austere and concentrated expression of the face
express the daring and unyielding firmness with which she preached and endured her tor¬
tures. The face and the whole figure of St.Paraskeva breathes that calm and firm faith which
neither tortures nor the sword could break. It is a typical icon of a martyr-confessor, that is
a person who crowned her life by the act of confession of truth, sealed with her blood. The
saint is represented in the traditional red cloak, the symbol of martyrdom and a deep blue
dress. In her right hand she holds the inevitable attribute of martyrdom, the weapon of her
victory—the cross, symbol of following after the passion of Christ, and in the left an open
scroll on which is written the Symbol of Faith. Each alike is an expression, by image and by
word, of the truth for the sake of which she suffered. On her head, over a white cloth, the
symbol of virginity, she wears a patrician diadem with precious stones. Two angels, one in a
red, the other in a dark-blue cloak, hold above her head a golden crown—the crown of
martyrdom—the response to her witness of the witness of Christ “Be ye my witnesses, and
The first paremia of I too am a witness”.3 Simple strong colours emphasise and strengthen the inner content of
the service of the saint, the image. The fine execution of the cloak and dress, so characteristic of the XVlth century
Isaiah xliii, 10
and done here with pure white, somewhat dulls the vividness of the red, but blends it well
with the ivory white of the head-cloth and the scroll. These colours, together with the gold
and the deep golden ochres of the face and background create a scale that is strong and calm.

1 The icon was cleaned in 1945. One can judge its state before cleaning by the square left'on the right-hand bot¬
tom margin. This icon is comparatively rare even for the XVlth century, as having not been touched up either before
it was cleaned or since.
2 Sergius, Annus ecclesiasticus graeco-slavicus, vol. II, part I.
3 Life of St.Paraskeva in the Menaion for October.

136
 St.George (yecogy6g—husbandman) is venerated as “the deliverer of prisoners and pro¬ THE
tector of the poor”1, as well as the patron of agriculture, of herds, flocks and shepherds to GREAT MARTYR

whom, according to tradition, he gave help during his life and after death. This veneration, ST. GEORGE AND
THE DRAGON
connected with the daily interests of husbandmen, is evidently the cause of his varied icono¬
graphy (see the analysis of his icon, page 126) and the great number of his icons. In particular See reproduction

St. George the Victorious, striking down the dragon, is one of the most popular subjects in on page 139.
Novgorod school,
Orthodox icon-painting, especially in that of Novgorod. This icon depicts a posthumous
XVth century.
miracle of St. George taken from the record of his life. The record relates that in a lake in
19 x 26V2 inches.
Lybia there lived a terrible dragon, which the local inhabitants, who were pagans, wor¬ Coll. Metropolitan
shipped as a deity and propitiated by giving him their children, one after another. When Museum of Art,
the turn came for the daughter of the local king, Elisaba or Elizabeth as she is called in icons2, Ne-w York

to be thus sacrificed and she was awaiting her terrible death, St. George appeared on a white
horse and with the words “in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” charged
the dragon, brandishing his lance, and having struck him with great force through his mouth
pinned him to the ground, while his horse trampled him under its hoofs. Then St. George
commanded the maiden to bind the dragon with her belt and lead him like a tame dog to
the town... And St.George slew the dragon with his sword in the town.3
Some icons, especially later examples, depict this miracle in all detail, with princess Elisaba,
the town and the princess’ parents and citizens looking on from the walls, and so forth.
There exist also representations of the final moment of the miracle, that is, the striking down
of the beast by the sword, as well as images of St. George on horseback, without the dragon.4
In other icons, as in that reproduced here, the descriptive moment is reduced only to the
essentials. This icon represents in this sense a characteristic example of the Novgorod school
of the XVth century. Its composition has the simplicity and clarity of that period. All second¬
ary details are omitted. Only the principal moment is shown—victory, that is, the very mean¬
ing of the miracle. St. George is depicted in the rich armour and accoutrement of a Roman
military commander, with shield and lance. His short figure, typical of XVth century Novgo¬
rod, seated on a stumpy horse is full of irresistible strength. The image has an extraordinary
inner impetus and dramatic quality. The folds of the cloak, almost repeating in their outline
the outline of the hills, create the impression that the rider has just torn himself off the mount¬
ain and in his headlong descent not only strikes with his lance but precipitates himself on the
dragon with the whole weight of himself and his horse.
The blessing hand emerging from a segment of a circle at the top right-hand comer of
the icon, with the inscription “Jesus Christ”5, as well as the saint’s lance surmounted with
a cross, show that he gains victory not with his own power, but through God’s help and the
power of the cross. The rider submits to this power, and so does the horse through him.
This is why the horse is often depicted with its head turned round, looking at the rider.
According to the life of the saint he appeared radiating an indescribable light. This light is
usually represented symbolically by the white colour of the horse which, according to the
interpretation of St. Dionysius the Areopagite, signifies the greatest possible proximity to the
Divine Light.6 Indicating that the saint belongs to another plane of being, it is at the same
time a personification of victory, for the rider of the white horse “went forth conquering,
and to conquer” (Rev. vi, 2). St. George was a conqueror of his tormentors in a greater mea¬
sure than other martyrs, for seeing his sufferings many of them became converted to Christ.
And here too, in this posthumous miracle, by conquering the dragon and freeing men from
it, he by this very fact liberates them from paganism. For this reason there is often shown an
angel descending from heaven and holding a crown over him—the crown of martyrdom
and victory.

1 The Service consecrated to the Saint.

2 “The name Elisaba, or Elizabeth, is nowhere found in legends; this is an example and an indication of the fact
that the art of iconography knew traditions outside written sources.” (N. P. Kondakov, The Russian Icon, Part 1,3,
p. 135. In Russian.)
138
 3 Life of the saint, Menaion, April 23rd.
4 Moreover, many icons, for instance the Greek and the Coptic, simultaneously depict another miracle of
St. George, also posthumous (or rather one of three similar miracles)—the miracle, in answer to the prayers of his
parents, of the liberation of a boy taken prisoner by Saracens. The event is depicted in accordance with the boy’s
tale: “I had filled that glass with wine to serve to the prince when I was carried off by a radiant man on horse¬
back, who lifted me up on his horse; I held the glass in one hand and clung to his belt with the other, and so found
myself here...,” that is, in his parents’ house on the feast day of St. George (Life, ibid.).
6 Sometimes the Saviour Himself is depicted here.
6 St. Dionysius the Areopagite. The Celestial Hierarchy, c. 15, par. 8.

THE Considering that the principle of the icon is to portray only the fundamental, it seems strange
HOLY PROPHET at first sight that a special iconographic theme should be made of the episode when the Prophet
ELIJAH IN THE
Elijah, hiding in the desert, was fed by ravens (3 Kings xvii, 3-6). Yet, side by side with
DESERT1
other images of this prophet, this subject is very popular in Orthodox and specially in Russian
See reproduction iconography.
on page 142. The name Elijah, translated from the Hebrew, means “strength of the Lord”; and this
Russian,
is how the Bible describes him: a strict ascetic, full of zeal for faith in the true God, aflame
end XVth century,
with the fire of love for Him, a daring preacher; in appearance “a hairy man” (4 Kings i, 8).
Novgorod school,
Icon Museum, As such he is depicted also in Orthodox iconography. The character of the prophet, por¬
Recklinghausen trayed in image and colours, is often emphasised (for instance in the “tchin”) by the words
of the prophet himself written on an open scroll, “I have been very jealous for the Lord
Almighty” (3 Kings xix, 10, 14). The Prophet Elijah, the most awe-inspiring and powerful
of the Old Testament prophets, who was given power over the elements, who closed the
heavens (3 Kings xvii, 1) and opened them (3 Kings xviii, 45) is especially venerated by men
most firmly bound to nature—by husbandmen. Because of this power over elements and
in particular over fire, he is also regarded as a protector against fire. The inner fire of his
zeal for God was manifested in the appearance of visible fire: by the force of his prayer he
many times brought fire from heaven (3 Kings xviii, 37-38; 4 Kings i, 10-12), and was taken
alive to heaven in a chariot of fire (4 Kings ii, 11). Orthodox iconography particularly
emphasises this connection of Elijah with fire. For instance, a very wide-spread image is
that of his ascent to heaven in a chariot of fire drawn by horses of fire led by an angel. This
connection is underlined also in his half-length images, for instance in the remarkable Novgo¬
rod icon of the XIVth century in the Tretiakov Gallery in Moscow, where the powerful inner
fire of his eyes is emphasised by the flame-red background of the icon.
Our icon represents the Old Testament saint as one of those “Of whom the world was
not worthy: they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth”
(Heb. xi, 38). The powerful figure of the prophet, his head covered with a shaggy tousled
mane, his manly face with a lofty brow are full of invincible strength. In his left hand is
the usual attribute of a prophet—a scroll. With calm confidence he welcomes and contem¬
plates the appearance of the raven bringing him heavenly gifts, and stretches out his right
hand to receive them. This scene reveals the whole significance of this seemingly incidental
moment in the life of the prophet, when in answer to his burning love of God the natural
order of things is changed by the Divine Will. St. Basil the Great gives the following inter¬
pretation of this moment: “The dwelling place of Elijah was Mount Carmel, a high un¬
inhabited mountain. The wilderness received the hermit; but it was the soul that constituted
all for this righteous man and the provision for his life’s journey was hope in God. Yet
despite this mode of life he did not die of hunger; on the contrary, the most rapacious birds
of prey brought him food. Those whose custom was to steal food of others became servants
140 at his table. At the command of the Lord they changed their nature and became faithful
 guardians ot bread and meat.”2 This moment of the prophet’s service anticipated the reve¬
lation later given him on Mount Horcb of the manifestation of God in the world: “Behold,
the Lord will pass by. And, behold, a great and strong wind rending the mountains, and
crushing the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind; and after the wind
an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake: and after the earthquake a fire; but
the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire the voice of a gentle breeze” and the Lord
was there (3 Kings xix, 11-12). This prophecy, representing a prefiguration of the Kingdom
ot God is read on the day of the revelation of this Kingdom, manifested by the Lord in His
Transfiguration on Mount Tabor (see analysis of the icon of the Transfiguration, p. 209).
The icon depicting the Prophet Elijah fed by the raven, showing the very laws of nature
changed by the will of God, is in itself a prophetic prefiguration of the coming of that King¬
dom in power. Clearly the reason for its popularity lies in this significance.
The figure of the prophet, somewhat large and bulky for the panel of our icon, his calm
posture and movement are as it were an external expression of his strength and spiritual power.
The details, distributed with great artistic skill and sensitivity, give a fme balance to the com¬
position of this beautiful image.

1 The memory of Prophet Elijah is celebrated on July 20th.

2 Discourse 8; P.G. 31, coll. 317D-320A.

Collective icons, in which several saints are grouped together, are represented above all COLLECTIVE
by the menologics. These are icons which bring together, in several rows, saints and festivals of ICONS

the liturgical month, according to the order of the calendar. The type of menologic icons was See reproduction
created at Byzantium about the time of Basil II (963-1025). on page 143-
Our icon (Russian XVIth century) closely resembles the type of the menology. It is com¬ Russian,
end XVth century}
posed of four rows, of which the first contains four icons offcasts, whilst the three others bring
Novgorod school [?].
together various saints, shown standing. None the less, the principle according to which the
21V2 x 27V2 inches.
images of the feasts and of the saints were united on this icon is not that of a menology.
Icon Museum,
The festivals of the first row do not belong to a single month: one sees there the Annunciation Recklinghausen
(March 25th), the Nativity of Christ (December 25th), the Descent into Hell (Easter) and the
Conception of Saint Anne (December 9th). In the three other rows, the saints celebrated at
different epochs of the year are found represented side by side. Thus in the second row, we
see the Archangel Michael (November 8th), beside the holy Princes Boris and Gleb (August
24th), followed by Saints Constantine and Helen (May 21st). In the third row, Saint Simeon
Stylites (September 1st) stands beside Saint Simeon and Saint Anne (February 3rd): here the
iconographer was no doubt guided by the similarity of names. Finally, among the saints of the
last row one finds Saint Mary of Egypt (April 1st) and Saint Nicholas (December 6th and
May 9th). Nor is it an icon of the principal saints of the year: for if that were so, one would
not understand why the Conception of Saint Anne figures in it with the three great festivals.
Therefore, the choice of festivals and of saints was dictated by other motives, according to the
wish of whoever ordered the icon. In all probability, it is a family icon in which different
feasts and saints correspond to an individual devotion.

1 Catalogue of the Icon Museum, Recklinghausen. 141

rTT
 Below:
Saints celebrated on
11 thand 16thDecember.
Design for an icon

144
 We now briefly analyse some icons of Church festivals. These are first of all the icons of the THE PRINCIPAL
greatest festival of all—Easter (Descent into Hell and the Spice-bearers at the Sepulchre) FESTIVALS
and the icons of the twelve principal festivals, six of the Lord and four of the Mother of God
(see the analysis of the Iconostasis, p. 63), the Pentecost and the Elevation of the Cross.
Besides these, amongst the icons of the principal festivals we have placed icons of other, less
important festivals, such as: the Raising of Lazarus, the Protection of the Mother of God,
Mid-Pentecost and two icons of the Crucifixion—one painted and one carved (a Cross).
The icons of festivals, arranged to follow the sequence of the Church year, are put in the
following order: Birth of the Holy Virgin, Raising of the Cross, Protection of the Mother
of God, Presentation of the Holy Virgin in the Temple, Nativity of our Lord, Baptism, Pre¬
sentation of Christ, Annunciation, Raising of Lazarus, Entry into Jerusalem, Crucifixion,
Descent into Hell, Spice-bearers at the Sepulchre, Mid-Pentecost, Ascension, Pentecost,
Holy Trinity, Descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles, Transfiguration of our Lord,
Dormition.
In the choice of icons commented on here, whether they be icons of festivals, of Our Lord,
of the Virgin or of saints, we have been guided less by their artistic quality than by the ortho¬
doxy of their iconography. In other words, the icons reproduced here show no trace of any
dogmatic deformation, no borrowing from western art, and they transmit the unaltered
teaching of the Orthodox Church, in no way infringing the Canon of iconography.

“Thy Birth, O Mother of God and Virgin, brought tidings of joy to the whole universe: THE BIRTH

for the Sun of Justice, Christ our God, has shone forth from Thee...” (Troparion, Tone 4). OF THE

In the festival of the Nativity of the Mother of God (September 8th), the Church celebrates HOLY VIRGIN

the most holy human birth, whose “fruit most pure” was elect and sanctified from the mo¬ Vespers,
ment of conception (Conception of St. Anna, celebrated December 9th). Whilst the Con¬ Stich. of Tone 4
ception and the Nativity of St.John the Baptist, equally festivals of the Church, are given a
detailed account in the Gospels, the latter say nothing of the birth of the Mother of God.
Apocryphal sources, on the contrary, give a substantial share to the origins and childhood of
the Holy Virgin. There is, above all, the Protevangelium Jacobi of judaeo-christian origin,
a composite work, in which the part concerning the Virgin Mary goes back to the date
130-140. The venerable antiquity of this source allows the acceptance of the veracity of
certain particulars that it gives about the family of the Mother of God: the names of Her
parents, Joachim and Anna, the descent of Joachim from David, etc. Later modifications of
the primitive account of the Protevangelium Jacobi, as well as some other more recent
apocrypha, have accumulated new details, giving rise to discordant traditions. Also certain
writers give Nazareth, the homeland of Joachim1, as the Holy Virgin’s birthplace, others
Bethlehem, the birthplace of St. Anna2, others again, Jerusalem.3 The tradition of the Church
has retained only such data as would throw into relief the scriptural and dogmatic truth: 145
 the descent from the race of David and the holy birth of the Virgin, chosen to give human
nature to the Word of God. The festival of the Nativity of the Holy Virgin must be very
ancient: it is known that Justinian erected at Constantinople a church dedicated to St. Anna.1 2 3 4
Like the Nativity of St.John the Baptist, the birth of the Mother of God, promised by an
angel after the parents had long been sterile, finds Old Testament antecedents which are
habitually considered as prefigurations of the Resurrection.5 But the Nativity of the Mother
of God is more than a figure; for in the person of St. Anna—a woman freed from her sterility
to bring into the world a Virgin who would give birth to God incarnate—it is our nature
Vespers, which ceases to be sterile in order to start bearing the fruits of grace. The miraculous birth
Stich. of Tone 6 of the Holy Virgin is not due to an arbitrary action of God, entering in to break historical
continuity: it is a stage of the Providence which watches over the safety of the world, arduously
preparing the Incarnation of the Word, a stage which precedes the last decisive act—the
Annunciation, when the chosen Virgin will assent to be “the King’s Palace, in which is accom¬
Vespers, plished the perfect mystery of the two natures reunited in Christ”. “Mystery goes before
Stich. of Tone 8 greater mystery”: “the sterile door is opened and the virginal Door comes forth” to
“introduce Christ into the world”. If “the name, Mother of God (dsoroxog), contains
Vespers, the whole history of the divine economy in the world”6, the ancestor of the Virgin—this
Stich. of Tone 6 “Flower ofjesse”—could be called “David, the Father of God” [Oeojidrcog) and the name of
“parents of God” [OeojiaTogeg) would belong, in the first place, to Joachim and Anna.
Adam and Eve, parents of fallen humanity, would then rejoice to see their descendants pro¬
Vespers, duce “the Mother of Life”, “the Source of incorruption”.
Stich. of Tones i and 8 The iconography of the Nativity of the Mother of God habitually shows us St. Anna half
lying on a bed, surrounded by servants getting ready to wash the newlv-born Infant. The
Holy Virgin is generally represented in swaddling clothes, in the arms of a midwife seated
on a stool near the basin filled with water. The position and the attitude of St.Joachim allow
of several variations: sometimes he is shown standing, sometimes, as in our icon, seated and
conversing with St. Anna. On the mosaic of the monastery of Daphni (Xlth century)
St.Joachim is not represented.
The icon reproduced here was painted in Paris about 1948 by a Russian iconographcr.
The lengthened figures of Joachim and Anna, placed face to face, emphasize their majestic
character as “theopatores”. St. Anna is looking downwards, towards her Daughter held by
a seated midwife. The midwife and the three other servants, of reduced height, play the
part of accessories: attention is fixed on the Holy Parents and their Child, who has just been
bom.

1 Epiphanius the Monk, Sermon on the life of the Mother of God. P. G. 120, col. 189.
Opposite page: 2 St.John Chrysostom, Christmas Homily (Anno 396); P.G. 49, col. 354; St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary
The Nativity of the on the prophet Micah, V; P.G. 71, col. 713.
Holy Virgin. 3 St. Sophronios, Odes of Anacreon, XX; P.G. 87, col. 3821.
7 Vi X 9 inches. 1 Procopius, De aedificiis, I. 3; Bonn, edition, III, p. 185.
Holy Trinity Church, 5 Above all, the giving birth to Isaac by the sterile Sarah has often been given this interpretation.
Vanves (Paris) 6 St.John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, III, 12; P.G. 94, coll. 1029-32.
Russian
XXth century

146
147
 THE RAISING Apart from Good Friday (sec the icon of the Crucifixion), the theme of the Cross recurs
OF THE CROSS constantly in the offices of the weekly cycle, every Wednesday and Friday of the Liturgical
year. Further, the Orthodox East has devoted to the Lord’s Cross three special festivals: the
Adoration {nQoaxvvrjaig, third Sunday of Lent), the Procession {jiQoodog, August ist) and
the Raising (yxpwaiq) of the Holy Cross, celebrated on September 14th in the West as well
as in the East.
The festival of the Raising of the Cross originated in Palestine. Instituted to commemorate
the dedication of the basilica of the P.csurrection, erected by Constantine in Jerusalem, the
“festival of the Dedication” (ra eyxaivia) was soon associated with the commemoration
of the discovery of the true Cross. Eusebius, describing the dedication ceremony which took
place in 335, says nothing of the discovery of the Cross. But St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in 347,
says this: “Already the whole universe is filled with fragments of the Wood of the Cross.”1
Thus the finding of the Cross must have taken place shortly after the Dedication, around
the year 340. The legend of Edessa sought to attribute the discovery of the Cross to Pro-
tinicia, wife of the vice-emperor Claudius, in the reign of Tiberius. But the more likely
account of the discovery of the Cross by St. Helen, Constantine’s mother, was to be uni¬
versally accepted towards the end of the IVth century. Thus St.John Chrysostom2, in 395,
speaks of the three crosses discovered by the Empress Helen beneath the mound of Golgotha:
that of Christ was identified because it was found in the middle and bore the inscription.
About the beginning of the Vth century other writers3 speak of miracles thanks to which
the true Cross was recognised by St. Helen and St. Macarius, bishop of Jerusalem. Aetheria,
in her account of her journey to Jerusalem (about 400) says that the festival of the Dedication
was celebrated with great solemnity “because the Cross of the Lord was discovered on that
day.”4
The festival of the Cross was soon to eclipse almost wholly that of the Dedication. In the
Vlth century, Alexander the Monk speaks of the annual celebration, on September 14th, of
the Dedication and of the Elevation of the venerable Cross—vycocng rov xijxiov oravgov5.
The Basilian menology (ms. of the end of the Xth century) recounts that the day following
the Dedication, in 335, the people were admitted for the first time to the contemplation of
the sacred wood: the bishop, standing on a height, raised the Cross, to the cries of the faith¬
ful, “Kyrie eleison”. It is the picture of the ceremony of the vipcooiq, as it must have been
practised at Jerusalem since the discovery of the Cross. On September 14th, 614, this rite was
performed for the first time in Constantinople.6 Reconquered from the Persians by the Em¬
peror Heraclius III, the Cross was to be received in triumph at the capital of the Empire, in
628. It was to be brought there finally in 633: the Patriarch Sergius carried it in procession
from Blacherncs to St. Sophia, where the ceremony of the Raising was celebrated with great
pomp.7 From Constantinople the festival spread to other centres of the Christian oixov/uevr].
It was to be celebrated at Rome under Pope Sergius (687-701).
The festival of the Raising is a glorification of the Cross of Christ by the totality of the
universe which recognises that “the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weak¬
ness of God is stronger than men” (1 Cor. i, 25). “Seeing the Cross raised by the hands of
the bishop”, the Church glorifies the weapon of Christ by which “the curse was abolished,
incorruptible life flowered again, earthly creatures have acquired deification and the demon
Vespers, has been decisively overthrown”. But at the same time as the work of redemption, the
stich. of Tone 5 Church also celebrates the “invincible victory” of the Cross over the powers of this world
hostile to Christianity. In fact, for Christians there is no other means of victory except by
the Cross of the Lord, which is the unique sure support in the history of the world—“the
upholder of the universe”. The Empire which wishes to be Christian must then bow down
Vespers, stich. of before the Cross: it was the Cross which assured the victory of Constantine; it was the Cross
Tones 2 and 4
again which broke the power of the “barbarian peoples” and upheld the sceptres of the
Matins, Tone 8 Christian Kings. The presence of these “ Constantinian ” elements gives the festival its
political note: the Orthodox people and their basileus, the head of Christian civilisation,
148
triumph over their enemies by the invincible power of the Cross. But apart from this con¬ Kontakion, Tone 4
tingent aspect, belonging to Byzantium, the universal [nayxoo^uoq) Elevation of the ven¬
erable and lifegiving Cross has a permanent and essential aspect: that of a cosmic sanctification Matins,
by the Divine force manifested in the Cross. If Christ is the New Adam, His Cross is the New Stich. of Tone 8;
Tree of Life, giving back to the fallen world the incorruptibility of Paradise. Raised above the Canon, Tone 6

earth the Cross, which embraces the whole of heaven with its two extremities, puts to flight
the demons and pours forth grace to the four corners of the universe. See reproduction

In iconography one sometimes finds the representation of the Elevation of the Cross on page ISO.
Elevation of the Cross
associated with that of its Discovery. Then the bishop is seen raising the Cross in the upper
Icon of Russian icon-
part of the icon, whilst below, St. Helen is shown near a cave at the foot of Golgotha before
ographer, Paris, 1948.
the three crosses that she has just discovered. But generally the subject is limited to the Ele¬ IVi x 9Va inches.
vation properly speaking. The simplest composition shows us the bishop (St. Macarius of Holy Trinity Church,
Jerusalem) standing on an ambo holding a large cross in his two hands: it is the true Cross of Vanves (Paris)

Preliminary design

149
150
the Lord which he is showing to the people. The bishop is supported on either side by sub¬
deacons. Generally, one sees at his side St. Constantine and St. Helen. Sometimes the emperor
and his mother are placed together to the right of the bishop, whilst to his left is shown some
miracle (the healing of a sick or the resurrection of a dead person) produced by the virtue
of the Cross.
The architectural background behind the bishop elevating the Cross must represent the
basilica of the Resurrection built by Constantine: it is the memory of the ancient “festival
of dedication” preserved in the iconography.

1 Catechism, IV, io; P.G. 33, col. 469.

2 On St.John, Homily 85, 1; P.G. 59, col. 461.
3 Rufinus, Hist. eccl. I, 8; P.L. 21, coll. 476-477; Paulinus of Nola, Epistle XXXII, 5; P.L. 61, coll. 328-329.
1 Itinerarium Aetheriae, 48-49, ed. Sources chretiennes (Paris, 1948), pp. 262-266.
5 On the discovery of the Holy Cross. P.G. 87, col. 4072 A.
6 Chronicon pascale. P.G. 92, col. 988.
7 Nicephorus of Constantinople, Historia syntomos. P.G. 100, col. 913 A.

The festival of the Veil (in Russian “Pokrov”, which means both Veil and Protection), THE
celebrated on October 1st, was instituted to commemorate the appearance of the Mother of PROTECTION
God at Constantinople in the Xth century. This festival is almost unknown in the East. On OF THE
the other hand the Russian Church has always celebrated the Protection of the Mother of MOTHER OFGOD
God with particular solemnity. Several churches in Russia are dedicated to the “Pokrov”.
The account of the appearance is to be found in the Life of St. Andrew “the Fool in Christ”
(died 956).1 It is at the church of Blachernes, where the robe, the veil and part of the girdle
of the Holy Virgin are preserved, that the appearance occurred. During the office of the vigil,
about four o’clock in the morning, St. Andrew and his disciple Epiphanius saw a majestic
Woman advancing towards the ambo, supported by St.John the Baptist and St.John the Evan¬
gelist, and accompanied by several saints. On reaching the centre of the church, the Mother
of God knelt down and remained long in prayer, Her face bathed in tears. When She had
prayed yet again before the altar, She took off the shining veil which enveloped Her and,
holding it above Her head, extended it over all the people present in the church. Andrew
and Epiphanius alone were able to see the appearance of the Mother of God and Her veil
which shone like the glory of God, but all who were present felt the grace of Her protection.
This invisible protection of the Mother of God, interceding with Her Son for the whole
universe, protection that St. Andrew could contemplate in the form of a veil covering the Matins,

faithful, constitutes the central idea of the festival of October 1st: “The Virgin is to-day Stich. of Tone 8

present in the church: with the choirs of the saints She prays God invisibly for us. Angels and
bishops prostrate themselves, apostles and prophets rejoice: for the Mother of God inter¬
cedes for us before the eternal God.” Kontakion, Tone 3

In our icon, the Mother of God is seen standing on a small cloud, hovering in the air above
the crowd of the faithful. Clothed in Her traditional maphorion, She has both arms out¬ Matins, Tone 6

stretched in the gesture of prayer, which here expresses Her prayer of intercession. Two 151
 angels hold by either end a great veil which billows in the form of a vault over the Mother of
God. In some icons one sees yet another veil draped over the outstretched arms of the Virgin
in prayer. Sometimes (in late iconography) there is substituted for this veil, as the result of a
confusion, an episcopal omophorion. The procession of saints which surrounded the Queen of
the Heavens at the time of Her appearance is represented by two groups of apostles and
prophets with St.John the Forerunner (on the right). On his scroll: "Repent, for the Kingdom
of God is near.”
In the foreground, on the semi-circular ambo in the centre of the church, a young man with a
halo, clothed in a deacon's dalmatic, is holding in his left hand an open roll with the text of the
Christmas Kontakion in honour of the Mother of God, whilst with a gesture of his right hand
he seems to be conducting the choir. He is St. Romanos the Melodist, the famous hymnog-
rapher who lived in the Vlth century. This anachronism is easily explained: the memory of St.
Romanos, celebrated on October 1st, coincides with the festival of the Protection of the
Mother of God. The life of St. Romanos tells us that this choir boy, despised by his fellows,
received from the Mother of God, with the Christmas Kontakion, the marvellous gift of
hymnography. The new hymn of Romanos, which impressed the patriarch and the emperor,
must have earned him the rank of precentor in St. Sophia. We see, in fact, to the left of the
ambo a deacon in dalmatic humbly surrendering his place to St. Romanos. The choir of youths
and girls is placed behind the semicircle of the ambo. This scene in the life of St. Romanos,
introduced into the iconographic composition of the Protection, takes us outside the frame¬
work of history, mingling persons from the "Life of St. Romanos” with those from the "Life of
St. Andrew the Fool in Christ”. Thus, the patriarch and the emperor, both crowned with
haloes, are not contemporaries of the appearance at Blachernes. Both have their eyes turned
towards the Melodist, whose singing they are admiring. In the same way, the two monks
dressed in black hoods, behind the patriarch and the emperor in the left hand corner of the
icon, form part of the same scene. But to the right of the ambo, two persons in the foreground
are detached from the crowd of the faithful who are admiring St. Romanos. They are St.
Andrew and St. Epiphanius, the witnesses of the appearance of the Mother of God. St. Andrew
is turned towards his disciple showing him the appearance with a gesture of the right arm
extended towards the Mother of God. The "fool in Christ” is dressed only in a cloak, leaving
visible his half-naked body, his emaciated legs and arms. Epiphanius, crowned with a halo like
his master, is wearing a long tunic under his cloak.
The architectural background represents the church of Blachernes but looks more like a
Russian cathedral with five cupolas.

See reproduction
on page 154.
The Protection of the
Holy Virgin.
Novgorod school,
late XVth century.
41 x 32V2 inches.
Photo: Temple
Gallery, London.

152 1 Bolland., AASS., Maii, VI, 4—11; P.G. hi, coll. 627-888. Account of the appearance: coll. 848-849.
 The Presentation or Entry (ehxodoc) of the Mother of God in the Temple (November 21st) THE
does not belong to the most ancient festivals of the Church. None the less, it must be earlier PRESENTATION
than the end of the Vllth century, since St. Andrew of Crete had known it at Jerusalem at OF THE
this epoch. It seems that it was introduced at Constantinople a century later, under the Pa¬ HOLY VIRGIN
triarch St.Tarasius. It was to be adopted in the West only under Pope Gregory XI, who had IN THE TEMPLE
it celebrated for the first time at Avignon in 1374.
Like the festival of the Nativity of the Mother of God (see above), that of Her Presentation
in the Temple was created by the Tradition of the Church, which made use of the apocrypha
in order to emphasise—this time in the person of the chosen Virgin consecrating Herself
to the service of God—“the fulfilment of the economy of the Creator”. The mystery of Troparion, Tone 4

this marian festival, which can be compared with the Assumption, leads us into the very
treasure-house of the Tradition; the Church breaks the silence of the Scriptures and shows
us the incomprehensible ways of Providence, which prepare the receptacle of the Word,
“the Mother predetermined before the ages”, “preached by the prophets”, now introduced Vespers,

into the Holy of Holies, like a “Hidden Treasure of the Glory of God”. Stich. of Tone 4
Kontakion, Tone 4
The theme of the temple is developed in the liturgy and iconography of the Presentation.
The Epistle for the
It is the temple rebuilt by Zorobabel, less glorious than that of Solomon. The rabbinical tra¬
service, Heb. ix, 2-7
dition tells us: “ Five things which were in the first temple were no longer in the second. They
were: the Fire from on high, the Oil of anointment, the Ark, the Holy Spirit, the Urim and
Thummim.”1 The Holy Spirit abandons the Temple, to speak by the prophets. But He will
confer on the temple of the law a glory not to be compared with that of the old covenant,
by introducing into the Holy of Holies the Virgin who is to give birth to “Jesus, made an
high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec” (Heb. vi, 20). He who welcomes the
Holy Virgin, the priest Zacharias, the future father of the Forerunner, reunites in his person
the two traditions—priestly and prophetic. If he allows the Virgin to go in behind the second
veil, which is contrary to the Law, it is because he sees in Her the new Ark of the covenant,
“the living Ark”. “The angels were astonished to see the Virgin enter the Holy of Holies”: Vespers,

the Divine plan of the Incarnation remains incomprehensible “to the principalities and powers Stich. of Tone 4
Ode 9 of the Canon
in heavenly places”, which will know only through the Church “the mystery, which from
the beginning of the world hath been hid in God” (Eph. iii, 9-10). It is the secret preparation
of the humanity of Christ: in the temple of Jerusalem the chosen Virgin will prepare herself
to become later “the Temple of His Body”, that which will be destroyed and in three days
raised up. The theme of the temple, in the feast of the Presentation of the Holy Virgin,
See reproduction
allows a glimpse of that of the Church—Body of Christ. The assimilation of the Mother of
on page 155.
God to the Ark of the covenant lends a marian meaning to the verse of Ps. cxxxi sung at the
The Presentation of
Vespers of the Assumption: “Arise, O Lord, into thy rest; thou and the ark of thy holiness.” the Virgin
Many, since Origen, have used the symbolism which likens the three parts of the temple Russian,
to the three stages of spiritual life—purification, illumination and union, to which correspond XVIIth century.
Photo: Castle De
the three books of Solomon—Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs. The court of
Wijenhurgh.
the temple corresponds to active life, where the aim is cuzadeta (freedom from passions).
Echteld, Netherlands
The veil of “the Holy” (the second part of the temple) opens the way of “natural contem¬
plation” (<Pvoixrj Oecogta)—knowledge of God in the creation. “The Holy of Holies” cor¬
responds to contemplation properly so-called, which is deoXoyla, or knowledge of God in
the Logos.2 We again find the three parts of the temple in the iconography of the Presentation
of the Mother of God. Thus, in our icon the scene unfolds in the inner court of the temple,
near the entrance to “the Holy”. The priest Zacharias, clothed in his priestly robes, stands
before the doors of "the Holy” on the first step of the staircase (the fifteen degrees of the
temple which correspond to the fifteen "psalms of the degrees ’). Below, the Holy Virgin,
outstretching her arms towards Zacharias, starts to mount the steps which lead towards “the
Holy of Holies”. At the top, She is seen again, already there, sitting on the highest step, near Matins,
Stich. of Tone 1
the door of the “Holy of Holies”, where an angel comes to assist Fler. It is the degree of
contemplation, the “pre-engagement with God”, the start of the way of union during which 153
 w/MUfftflM
w jr
■i !' ' - i
*», iat
 the Holy Virgin will be “nourished on heavenly bread”. The Holy Virgin, represented
twice on our icon, has nothing of the child about Her despite Her small size, which must
indicate Her young age (three years old). She is already a perfected person: the Mother of
God clothed in the maphorion, such as will be seen, for example, in icons of the Annunciation.
In fact, St. Gregory of Nyssa says that the Song of Songs corresponds to spiritual maturity—the
age of contemplative life “which introduces the soul into the divine sanctuaries”.3 4
Behind the Holy Virgin, in the centre of the court, St.Joachim and St. Anna advance to-
Vespers, wards the priest Zacharias, presenting their Daughter to him. They are followed by young
Stich. of Tone i girls, who “with tapers in their hands” accompany the Virgin consecrated to God. Unlike
St. Anna and the Mother of God, the virgins of the temple have their heads uncovered.1 2 The
background is occupied with temple buildings.
This is a Russian icon of the XVIIth century.

1 Song of Songs, Rabba 8: in H. L. Strack und P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuett Testament aus Talmud und
Midrasch, vol. II, p. 133.
2 Origen: On Psalm cxvii; P.G. 12, col. 1581.
3 Commentary on the Song of Songs. P.G. 44, coll. 768 A and 772 A.
4 According to a manual of iconography published at Novgorod in the XVIth century, seven virgins should go
156 before Joachim and Anna, whilst the remainder should go behind them.
 The classical iconography of the Nativity of Christ, which we see in the icon reproduced THE NATIVITY
here, has its prototype on the Vth and Vlth century ampullae, in which pilgrims used to bring OF CHRIST
home from the Holy Land oil from the lamps burning in sacred places.1
The descriptive part of the icon corresponds to the Kontakion of the festival: “The Virgin
to-day bringeth forth the Transubstantial, and the earth olfereth a cave to the Unapproach¬
able. Angels give glory with shepherds, and the wise men journey with the Star; because for
our sake is born, as a little Child, God the Eternal.” Two other scenes, based on Tradition,
appear in the lower corners.
In its content the icon of Christ’s Nativity has two fundamental aspects: first of all, it dis¬
closes the very essence of the event, the immutable fact of the Incarnation of God; it places
us before a visible testimony of the fundamental dogma of Christian faith, underlining by its
details both the Divinity and the human nature of the Word made flesh. Secondly, the icon
of the Nativity shows us the effect of this event on the natural life of the world, gives as it
were a perspective of all its consequences. For, according to the words of St. Gregory the
Theologian, the Nativity of Christ “is not a festival of creation but a festival of re-creation ” 2,
of a renewal, which sanctifies the whole world. (Veniens mundum consecrare, says the “Mar-
tyrologium Romanum”—“He came to consecrate the Universe”.) Through the Incarnation
of God, the whole of creation acquires a new meaning, lying in the final purpose of its being—
its ultimate transfiguration. So all creation takes part in the event and round the Divine Child,
newly born, we see representatives of the whole created world, each rendering his fitting
service, or as the Church says—each giving thanks in his own way. “What shall we bring
Thee, O Christ, when Thou art born on earth as Man for our sake; for each of the creatures,
who have their being from Thee, brings thanks to Thee: angels their songs, the heavens a
star, the wise men gifts, the shepherds wonder, the earth a cave, the wilderness a manger,
but we—the Virgin Mother.” To this the icon adds gifts from the animal and vegetable Stichiron in
Christmas Vespers
worlds.
From the point of view of both meaning and composition, the centre of the icon, to which
all the details relate in one way or another, is the Babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying
in the manger, with the dark cave where he was born as background.3 In a homily attributed
to St. Gregory of Nyssa we find a comparison drawn between the birth of Christ in a cave
and the spiritual light shining forth in the shadow of death that encompasses mankind. The
black mouth of the cave in the icon is, in its symbolic meaning, precisely this world, stricken
with sin through man’s fault, in which “the Sun of truth” shone forth.
The Gospel of Luke (ii, 7) speaks of the manger and the swaddling clothes, “and wrapped
him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger”, and further mentions them as the dis¬
tinctive sign given by the angel, by which the shepherds were to recognise in the Babe their
Saviour: “And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling
clothes, lying in a manger” (Luke ii, 12). The stichiron tells us that the manger was the offer¬
ing of the wilderness to the Divine Child. The significance of this offering is revealed in the
words of St.Gregory the Theologian, who writes, “Bow down before mangers through
which thou, who wast dumb, art brought up by the Word” (i.e. you grow up, nourished
by the bread of the Eucharist).4 The wilderness (in this case an empty uninhabited place),
which offered refuge to the Saviour, Whom from His birth the world did not accept, was the
fulfilment of the Old Testament prefiguration—the wilderness where the symbol of the
Eucharist was given—manna. He who had rained manna—bread from heaven—on the Jewish
people, Himself became the bread of the Eucharist—the Lamb, placed upon the altar, the
symbol of which is the manger brought by the wilderness of the New Testament as an offering
to the Babe.
Cave, manger, swaddling clothes—are indications of the kenosis of the Godhead, His
abasement, the utter humility of Him who, invisible in His nature, becomes visible in the
flesh for man’s sake, is born in a cave, is wrapped in swaddling clothes, thus foreshadowing
His death and burial, the sepulchre and the burial clothes. 157
 In the cave, close by the manger, stand an ox and an ass. The Gospels do not speak of them. Opposite page:
Yet in all the pictures of the Nativity of Christ, they are immediately beside the Divine Child. The Nativity of Christ.

Their place in the very centre of the icon points to the importance given by the Church Novgorod school,
attributed to the
to this detail. It is nothing less than the fulfilment of the prophecy of Isaiah (i, 3) which has
XVth century.
the deepest instructive significance: “The ox knows his owner, and the ass his master’s crib:
171/4x211/3 inches.
but Israel does not know Me, and the people has not regarded Me.” By the presence of the Photo: Christies,
animals, the icon reminds us of Isaiah’s prophecy and calls us to the knowledge and under¬ New York
standing of the mystery of the Divine Dispensation.
Looking at the icon of the Nativity of Christ, the first thing that draws our attention is
the position of the Mother of God and the place She occupies. In this “festival of re-creation”
She is “the renewal of all born on earth”, the new Eve. As the first Eve became the mother
of all living people, so the new Eve became the Mother of all renewed mankind, deified
through the Incarnation of the Son of God. She is the highest thanksgiving to God, which
man, from among all created beings, brings to the Creator. By this offering in the person
of the Mother of God, fallen mankind gives assent to its salvation through the Incarnation
of God. The icon of the Nativity graphically underlines this role of the Mother of God,
singling Her out from among the other figures by Her central position and at times by Her
size. She is lying immediately beside the Babe, but usually already outside the cave, on a bed,
of a kind such as the Jews carried with them on their travels.
The posture of the Mother of God is always full of deep meaning and is immediately con¬
nected with dogmatic problems, which have arisen at different times or places. Alterations
of this posture emphasise, according to need, either the Divine or the human nature of the
Saviour. Thus in some images She is half-sitting, which points to the absence in Her case of
the usual sufferings and therefore to the virgin nature of the Nativity and the Divine origin
of the Babe (against the Nestorian error). But in the great majority of images of Christ’s
Nativity the Mother of God is lying down, showing in her posture a great lassitude, which
should remind those who pray of the undoubtedly human nature of the Babe, “in order that
the incarnation should not be suspected of being an illusion”, as Nicholas Mczarites says.5
Round the central group—the Divine Child and His Mother—are grouped all the details
which, as we have said, testify to the Incarnation itself and to its effect upon the whole
created world.
Angels perform a twofold service: they glorify and they bring good tidings. In an icon
this is usually expressed by the fact that some of them turn upwards and sing glory to God,
others lean downwards, towards men, to whom they bring good tidings.
These men are the shepherds. They are shown listening to the angels’ message; and often
one of them is playing the reed-pipe, thus adding human art—music—to the angels’ choir.
On the other side of the cave are the wise men, led by the star. They arc represented as
riding or, as in our icon, walking with gifts. A long ray from the star points directly to the
cave. This ray connects the star with a part of the sphere which goes beyond the limits of
the icon—a symbolic representation of the heavenly world. In this way the icon shows that
the star is not only a cosmic phenomenon, but also a messenger from the world on high,
bringing tidings of the birth of “the heavenly One upon earth”. It is that light which,
according to the words of St. Leo the Great, was hidden from the Jews, but shone forth to
the heathen. In the shepherds, the first sons of Israel to worship the Babe, the Church sees
the beginning of the Jewish Church, and in the wise men—“the beginning of nations”—
the Church of the heathen. On one side arc the shepherds—simple unsophisticated men, with
whom the world on high enters into communication directly, amid their everyday working
life, on the other side are the wise men—men of learning, who have to accomplish a long
journey from the knowledge of what is relative to the knowledge of what is absolute, through
the object that they study. In the adoration of the wise men the Church testifies that it accepts
and sanctifies all human science leading towards it, provided that the relative light of the
extra-Christian revelation brings those who serve it to the worship of the absolute light. It 159
 should be noted that the wise men are represented as being of different ages, which emphasises
the fact that revelation is given to men independently of their years and worldly experience.
In a bottom corner of the icon two women are washing the Child. This scene is based on a
tradition, which also is transmitted to us by the apocryphal Gospels of pseudo-Matthew and
pseudo-James. The two women are the two midwives whom Joseph brought to the Mother
of God. This scene from everyday life shows clearly that the Child is like any other new-born
babe and is subject to the natural requirements of human nature.
Another detail emphasises that in the Nativity of Christ “the order of nature is van¬
quished ”—this is Joseph. He is not part of the central group of the Child and His Mother; he is
not the father and is emphatically separated from this group. Before him, under the guise
of an old and bent shepherd, stands the devil tempting him. On some icons he is represented
with small horns or a short tail. The presence of the devil and his role of tempter acquires a
particularly deep meaning in connection with this “feast of re-creation”. Here, on the basis
of tradition, the icon transmits the meaning of certain liturgic texts, which speak of the doubts
of Joseph and the troubled state of his soul. This state is expressed in the icon by his dejected
attitude and is emphasised by the black mouth of the cave, which sometimes serves as a back¬
ground to his figure. Tradition, transmitted also by the apocrypha, relates how the devil
tempted Joseph telling him that a virgin birth is not possible, being opposed to the laws of
nature. This argument, assuming different forms, keeps on reappearing through the whole
history of the Church. It is the basis of many heresies. In the person of Joseph the icon dis¬
closes not only his personal drama, but the drama of all mankind—the difficulty of accepting
that which is “beyond words or reason”—the Incarnation of God.
While in some icons the Mother of God is represented looking at the Babe, “keeping in
Her heart” sayings about Him, or else looking straight before Her at the external world, in
our icon, as in many others, She looks at Joseph as it were expressing by this look compassion
for his state. In this the icon teaches a tolerant and compassionate attitude towards human
unbelief and doubt.

1 These vessels bear images of the Gospel events, which took place in the particular locality where the vessels
were made. Eusebius of Caesarea relates, in his History of the Church, that in the place of the Nativity of Christ
St. Constantine built a church, the crypt of which was the very cave of Bethlehem. It is there, according to the opinion
of archaeologists, that the scene of the Nativity of Christ reproduced upon the ampullae was represented with all
possible historical exactness. This scene formed the basis of our iconography of this Festival.
St. Gregory the Theologian, Discourse 38; P.G. 36, col. 316B.
3 The Gospels say nothing of the cave: we know of it from Tradition. The oldest written evidences of it date
from the Ilnd century: St.Justin the Philosopher in his dialogue with Trypho (about 155-160), quoting from the
Gospel of St. Matthew adds, “since Joseph could find no room in which to stay in that village, he established him¬
self in a cave not far from Bethlehem”.
4 St.Gregory the Theologian, Discourse 38; P.G. 36, col. 332A.
6 A. Heisenberg, Graheskirche und Apostclkirche, Leipzig, 1908. Part II, p. 47.

THE NATIVITY The icon reproduced here is a characteristic example of XVIIth century multiple icons with
OF CHRIST many figures. It consists of 16 scenes, differing as to time and place of action, combined into
Opposite page: one general composition. Since all these scenes are connected with the Nativity of Christ,
XVI1th century icon. either directly or indirectly, they are grouped in such a manner that one scene overlaps another;
IOV2 x 12 inches. this gives the image the character of a consecutive story and, as a whole, constitutes a mul¬
Private coll., Paris tiple icon of the Nativity.
In the upper part of the icon, in the centre, we see the usual representation of the Nativity
160 of Christ with worshipping angels, the shepherds (immediately below the manger) and Joseph
161
 tempted by the devil (below the scene of the washing of the Child). In the left hand corner
are the wise men riding to worship the Saviour, led by an angel with the star in his hands.1
Below them, in a kind of pavilion, the Mother of God sits on a golden throne, on Her lap
the Divine Child, to Whom the wise men are offering gifts. On the other side of the icon,
to the right of the Saviour’s manger, the angel appears to the wise men in a dream, warning
them not to return to Herod (Matt, ii, 12). Above this scene arc the wise men departing by
another way. Below the adoration of the wise men, we see the angel appearing to Joseph,
ordering him to flee into Egypt (Matt, ii, 13). On the opposite side is the flight into Egypt
of the Mother of God with the Child and with Joseph accompanied by his son, the future
Apostle and first bishop of Jerusalem, James. This scene has as its background an Egyptian
temple, with an idol falling down from its wall, thus representing the fulfilment of Isaiah’s
prophecy, “Behold, the Lord... shall come to Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved
at his presence” (Is. xix, i).2 In the lower left hand corner of the icon, King Herod questions
the chief priests and scribes, who hold in their hands books with prophecies of the birth of
Christ (Matt, ii, 4). Next to it is the massacre of the innocents. In the centre of this scene we
see mothers seeking their babies among the heap of slain children, whose heads are arranged
in several rows in the foreground. Above this scene, to the left, with a city wall as a background,
is a group of weeping mothers (“In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping,
and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because
they are not”, Matt, ii, 18). Beside it is the blessed Elizabeth with the infant John in her arms,
hiding in a cleft in the rock from a soldier who pursues her. “Elizabeth took John and im¬
plored the stone, saying: take in a mother with child. And the mountain took in the Fore¬
runner.” 3 Nearby is a mother hiding under a tree a baby, with a halo, wrapped in swaddling
clothes. Above this scene there is a microscopic inscription: “Nathanael lying under the fig
tree”. Neither the service of the day, nor the Apocryphal Gospels say anything about Na¬
thanael escaping death during the massacre of the innocents, as did John the Baptist. Never¬
theless, beginning with the XVIIth century, this scene frequently appears in multiple icons.
Moreover the Xlth century Greek Gospels now in the National Library in Paris have an
illustration to the first chapter of the Gospel of St.John4, depicting the meeting of Christ
with Nathanael. The illustration shows the moment when Christ talks with Nathanael who
is accompanied by Philip who had called him (John i, 45-50); while at a certain distance, in the
background, standing under a tree, is Nathanael represented as a child with a halo. Perhaps
both the Greek manuscript and the Russian icons are based on the mysterious phrase of
St.John Chrysostom in his interpretation of this text of the Gospel of St.John, “He already
knew the good disposition of Nathanael, not as a man who had watched him, but as God”,
and further: “What? Do you think Christ saw Nathanael only just before Philip called him,
and had not seen him before that with an eye that never sleeps ? He did see him, and no one
will deny it.”5 On the basis of these words of St.John Chrysostom, and also on the basis
of the fact that Nathanael is sometimes represented as an infant and sometimes as a boy, one
may surmise that the Gospel expression “ under a fig tree” should be understood as Nathanael’s
whole life. In that case, his image in the icon of the Nativity of Christ emphasises the Divinity
of the Saviour. But of course it is possible that these images of Nathanael are based on some
text unknown to us, which was used by ancient iconographers.
In the lower right hand corner of the icon is the slaying of St.Zacharias “between the
temple and the altar” (Matt, xxiii, 35). This scene, based on the words of the Saviour, is
explained in the menology for December 29th, which also gives the meaning of its presence
in the icon of the Nativity of Christ. “And they also put to death the holy Prophet Zacharias,
because when the Immaculate Virgin came to the temple with the Child for purification, he
placed Her among the virgins, where women who have husbands have no right to stand...”
In other words St.Zacharias was slain by the scribes and pharisees, and the cause of his slaying
was the virgin birth and the prophetic power of Zacharias to see the Divinity of Christ. But
162 there exists also another version of this event in the apocryphal Protevangclium Jacobi
(ch. xvi), according to which St.Zacharias was slain by the orders of Herod for refusing to
reveal to his servants the place of concealment of the infant John the Forerunner, whom
Herod took for the newly born King of Israel. In this case, Zacharias was slain during the
massacre of the innocents and suffered with them for the newly born Saviour of the world.
From the artistic point of view our icon is a very good example of multiple icons of the
XVIIth century.1 2 3 * * 6 However, the iconographer is so carried away by the story he relates that
the central subject, surrounded by secondary events to which he gives an equal prominence,
is totally lost among them and recedes to a secondary position (compare with the preceding
icon). The artist is obviously seeking to leave no space empty and the whole profusion of
details lacks unity of composition. And yet this icon possesses great spiritual warmth. Despite
the smallness of the images there are no finicky lines. Neither has it the dryness characteristic
of multiple icons of that and later periods. The manner is free, the colours are well harmonised
and distributed with great artistic taste. The prevailing tones are vermilion and dark greenish
blue. There is much gold which, with the vermilion and reddish earth, gives the icon a warm
general tone.

1 An analogous theme, i.e. an angel with the star in his hands, leading the wise men, can be seen also in the
Cathedral of Notre-Dame in Paris.
2 Menology, Dec. 26th, and also Apocryphal Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, c. xxiii.
3 The service of the day. Glory of the Innocents, Tone 8, by St. Andrew of Crete.
1 See also the Protevangelium Jacobi, c. xxii.
6 St.John Chrysostom, Discourse 20, 2: P.G. 59, col. 126.
6 A similar icon of the Nativity of Christ, of about the same period, can be found in the Old-Believers’ church
in Rogozhski Cemetery in Moscow. It is attributed to the Stroganov School. (The icon is reproduced in the book
Photographs of ancient icons of the Old-Believers’ churches of Rogozhski Cemetery in Moscow, 1913.) It has the same
16 scenes and they are placed in the same order. The only difference is that the composition of our icon is more
rich in details. For example, the Moscow icon has no angel in the upper part of the icon, where his place is occupied
by a large intricate star; there is no heap of the heads of the slain innocents; there are fewer soldiers and their postures,
like the posture of the Mother of God, are more mannered. There is also a certain difference in the architecture.
In all else there is a complete analogy between the two icons, and even the colours appear to be alike. 163
 THE BAPTISM “And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit
OF THE LORD, like a dove descending upon him: and there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art
OR EPIPHANY
my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Mark i, io, n). (From the Gospel read at
the Matins of the day.)
See reproduction Icons of the Baptism of the Lord are an exact reproduction of this Gospel testimony, with
on page 166. the addition of details corresponding to the divine service of the day, as for instance, angels
The Baptism
and allegorical figures at the feet of the Saviour. The festival of the Baptism is also called
of Our Lord.
Epiphany, since Baptism is the manifestation of the Divinity of Christ, when He openly
Russian,
XVlth century.
begins His service to redeem the world. “It is not the day when Christ was born that should
59 x 36 cm. be called Epiphany”, says St.John Chrysostom, “but the day when He was baptised. Not
Photo: Temple through His birth did He become known to all, but through His Baptism. Before the day
Gallery, London of Baptism he was not known to the people.”2
The Baptism of Christ has two fundamental aspects: on this day, the full dogmatic truth
of God in three Persons was revealed to men. “Our God, the Trinity, has this day revealed
Himself to us indivisibly; for the Father bore witness to His Parenthood with manifest
testimony, the Spirit descended from the heavens like a dove, and the Son bowed His most
Troparion, pure head to the Forerunner and was baptised...” This mystery of the three Persons in one
Royal Hours Godhead, which is beyond all understanding, was here made manifest not spiritually but
plainly, in sensory forms. John the Forerunner heard the voice of the Father and saw the
Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, confirming this voice—both of them testifying to the
appearance among men of the Son of God in the Person of the Baptised. On the other hand,
just as later Christ established the sacrament of the Eucharist while celebrating the Old
Testament Passover, so on that day, while performing the act of ablutions established by the
prophets, He establishes the New Testament sacrament of Baptism.
See reproduction In accordance with the Gospel text cited above, in the upper part of the icon there is a
on page 167. segment of a circle symbolising the opening heavens “which Adam had closed for himself
and his descendants, just as he had closed the Garden of Eden by the flaming sword”.3 This
segment of a circle signifies the presence of God, which sometimes is emphasised still
more by a hand, blessing. Thence are shed upon the Saviour rays of light, with the Holy
Spirit descending in the form of a dove. Unfortunately this most important detail has been
obliterated by time in our icon. In general it is depicted in the same manner as in the Nativity
of Christ, except that a white dove takes the place of the star.4
The holy Fathers of the Church explain the appearance of the Holy Spirit in the form
of a dove at the Lord’s Baptism by analogy with the Flood: just as then the world was
purified of its iniquities by the waters of the Flood and the dove brought an olive branch
into Noah’s Ark, announcing the end of the Flood and peace returned upon earth, so too
now the Holy Spirit comes down in the form of a dove to announce the remission of sins
and God’s mercy to the world. “There an olive branch, here the mercy of our God”, says
St.John of Damascus.5
To sanctify the waters for our purification and renewal, He Who has taken upon Flimself
the sins of the world “is covered by the waters of Jordan”, according to the hymns of the
festival. In the symbolical language of the icon this is expressed by the fact that the Saviour is
represented standing, as it were, against a background of water, as though in a cave. This
gives us to understand that not a part of His body, but His whole body is immersed in token
of His burial, for Baptism signifies the death of the Lord (Col. ii, 12). As a sign of the fact
that here the initiative belongs to Him, that He, the Master, came to the servant and asked
to be baptised, the Saviour is almost always represented as walking or making a movement
towards John the Forerunner, at the same time bending His head beneath John’s arm. With
His right hand He blesses the waters of Jordan, which cover Him, sanctifying them by His
immersion. From then onwards water becomes an image not of death but of birth into a new
life. This is why in the great majority of images of baptism in the catacombs the person
baptised, not excluding the Saviour Himself, is depicted as a child.6 Although some images
164
show the Saviour with a cloth binding His loins, the majority of icons show Him quite naked,
in accordance with the texts of the Divine services. This also emphasises the kenosis of His
Divinity. “He strips Himself, Who clothes the heavens with clouds.” It also shows the pur¬ Canon of the festival.
pose of this kenosis for, by stripping His body, He thereby clothes the nakedness of Adam, Ode 8. Matins of the
eve of the feast.
and with him that of the whole of mankind, in the garment of glory and incorruptibility.
Ibid., Ode 9
The icon of the Baptism is one of those which have the greatest number of analogies with Old
Testament prefigurations. Thus, in addition to those already mentioned, two small figures are
usually represented at the feet of the Saviour, among the fish swimming in the waters of Jordan.
One of them is that of a man, naked, turning his back to Him; the other that of a woman,
half-naked, usually running away, at times riding a fish. These details illustrate the Old Testament
texts, which enter into the divine service of the festival and are a prophetic prefiguration of
Baptism. “The sea saw and fled: Jordan was turned back” (Ps. cxiii, 3). The male figure—an
allegory of Jordan—is explained by the following text: “Elisha turned back the river Jordan
with the mantle, when Elijah had been taken up, and the waters were divided hither and thither;
and the bed of the river was to Elisha a dry pathway, as a true type of Baptism, by which
we pass through the changing course of life.” The female figure is an allegory of the sea and Sunday before
refers to the other prefiguration of Baptism—the crossing of the Red Sea by the Jews. Epiphany, Troparion

St.John the Forerunner officiates, his right hand placed on the head of the Saviour. This
sacramental gesture has always been part of the ritual of baptism.1 2 3 * * 6 7 In his left hand he some¬
times holds a scroll, the symbol of his preaching, or, as in our icon, makes a gesture of prayer
to express the trembling which seized him. “... I do not dare to hold Thy most pure head;
sanctify Thou me, O Lord, by Thy divine manifestation.”
Angels take part in the holy ritual. Texts of the Divine services, mentioning their presence, Stich. Litiya, Tone 4

speak of their state: “The choirs of angels were full of wonder, fear and joy.” But they do not
Troparion, Tone 7.
speak of the role they played. So their role is often understood and represented differently.
Epiphany, 9th Hour
Sometimes, especially in later icons, they hold cloaks in their hands, evidently playing the
role of attendants during Baptism and ready to cover the body of the Lord as He comes out
of the water. But as a rule here, as in the icons of other feasts, their role of service is merely
indicated. They are represented with their hands covered by their own cloaks as a sign of
reverence before Him Whom they serve. Their number varies: two, three or more.8 See reproduction

The icon represented here is distinguished by the very rhythmic, light and elegant character on page 167.
The Baptism of
of the drawing. The inclinations of the figures of the angels placed one above the other, and
Our Lord.
the inclination of John the Baptist repeat the lines of the river and of the figure of the Saviour,
IOV2 x 12Va inches.
concentrating on Him all the attention of the onlooker. Attributed to Moscow
school, beginning of
1 Muratov, Trente-cinq Primitifs Russes, Paris, 1931. XVlth century}
2 Discourse 37—On the Baptism of our Lord and Epiphany. Photo: A La Vieille
3 St.Gregory the Theologian. P.G. 36, col. 353. Russie, New York
1 As regards the representation of the Holy Spirit as a dove in other icons, for instance, in the descent of the Holy
Spirit on the Apostles and particularly in the Annunciation, which acquired popularity in the XVIIth century,
the Great Moscow Council (1667) gives the following explanation: “The Holy Spirit is not in His essence a dove,
but God... At the holy Baptism of Christ in Jordan the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove, and therefore
in this context alone should the Holy Spirit be depicted as a dove. But in other contexts those who have understand¬
ing should not represent the Holy Spirit as a dove. For on Mount Tabor He appeared as a cloud, and at other
times otherwise.” (Acts of Moscow Councils, 1666-1667, Moscow, 1893.)
6 Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book III, c. 16.
6 In the first centuries of Christianity a man’s age was often counted not from his natural birth but from his
birth in grace, his baptism. This is why in many epitaphs of Christians buried in the catacombs the age given is
that of an infant, whereas the size of the coffin shows that the man buried was an adult.
7 St.Dionysius the Areopagite. The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, c. II, sec. 5-7.
8 Reverence before something holy is usually expressed in iconography by covering the hands of persons
holding sacred objects. Thus bishops, for instance, often hold the Gospels in their covered hand, angels—the instru¬
ments of the Lord’s Passion, and so forth. This method was taken from an Eastern custom, which was also adopted
by the court etiquette in Byzantium, where objects handed to the emperor or accepted from him were held by covered
hands as a sign of special respect. 165
-•
rr***;r
167
 THE The Presentation or “Meeting” (-f]'Yncmavrij) of our Lord Jesus Christ (February 2nd)
PRESENTATION is better known in the West under the name of Purification of the Holy Virgin. Like the
OF CHRIST
majority of feasts of Palestinian origin, that of the Presentation of Christ in the temple belongs
IN THE TEMPLE
to Christian antiquity. Aetheria (end of the IVth century) saw it celebrated in Jerusalem with
a procession and with great solemnity.1 This feast was to be introduced in Constantinople
in the Vlth century under Justin and Justinian2, and thence to pass to Rome in the course
of the Vllth century. The practice of holding lighted candles during the office of the Hypa-
pante, introduced in Jerusalem about 450, has been preserved in the West: hence the name
of Candlemas (“ Chandeleur ”—in France, and “Lichtmesse”—in German countries).
Like the feast of the Circumcision (January 1st) the Presentation of the Christ-Child in
Vespers, Tone 1 the temple shows us the “Author of the Law accomplishing what was laid down by the Lav/”:
it is the consecration of the first born son to God (Ex. xiii, 2) and the sacrifice of the Purifi¬
cation of the Mother, forty days after the birth of the male child (Lev. xii, 6-8). The Gospel
account (Luke ii, 22-39) has served as basis both to the liturgical text and to the iconography
of the feast.
The first known representations of the Presentation of Christ in the temple are found on
a mosaic in Santa Maria Maggiore (Vth century) and on an enamelled cruciform reliquary
in the Lateran Museum (end of Vth or beginning of Vlth century). The iconography of the
feast of the Hypapante was definitely established in the IXth and Xth centuries, and remains
almost unchanged.3 Sometimes, one sees the Christ-Child carried by His Mother, or rather,
She is handing Him to St. Simeon, but more often it is the latter who is holding Him in his
arms. Christ is never represented in swaddling clothes: He is habitually clothed in a short vest
which often leaves his legs bare. Seated on the outstretched arms of the elder Simeon, He is
sometimes seen giving a benediction. It is the Christ-Child of the Emmanual type: "the Word
of the Father without a beginning (avagxog) has received a beginning in time, without
Vespers, Tone 1
separating Himself from His Divinity”. “The Ancient of Days makes Himself a Child
Vespers, Tone 5 according to the flesh.” “He who gave the Law to Moses on Sinai... to observe His Law has
Vespers, Tone 1 Himself brought to the temple.” As in the account of St. Luke, the theme of the Purification
of the Mother is almost forgotten: the central moment of the feast is the "Meeting” of the
Messiah: the meeting of the Old and the New Testament.
The scene of the “Meeting” takes place in the temple, in front of the altar, which is re¬
presented in our icon covered with a canopy. On the altar is sometimes seen a cross, a book
or a scroll. On the two sides of the altar are the Mother of God (to the left of the spectator)
and St. Simeon (to the right). The Mother of God is holding out Her two hands covered with
the maphorion in a gesture of offering. She has just handed Her Son to Simeon. The ancient
holy man, leaning forwards, holds the Child in his two hands, also covered with his garment
(as a sign of veneration). St. Joseph follows the Mother of God carrying in the fold of his gar¬
ment the offering of poor parents (Lev. xii, 8), two turtle doves or two young pigeons. These
birds were to symbolise the Church of Israel and that of the Gentiles, as well as the two
Vespers, Tone 8 Testaments, of which Christ is the unique Head. St. Anne the daughter of Phanuel "a widow of
about four score and four years”, stands behind St. Simeon, in the background. Her veiled head
See reproduction
is seen in profile; her eyes are uplifted to express prophetic inspiration.
on page 170.
The figure of St. Simeon, “the Host of God” (Oeodd'/og), is given great importance: his
The Presentation
prophetic saying, one of the three “ Canticles of the New Testament”, is sung at every Vespers
of Christ. Russian.
ca. 1500 throughout the liturgical year. Attempts have been made to see in the old saint who received
Moscow school. Christ in his arms, a Priest of the Temple. Some authors say that he was one of the Doctors
72 x 61 cm. of the Law—son of Hillel and father of Gamaliel, master of St. Paul.4 Others have supposed
Photo: Castle De Simeon to be a translator of the Bible; one of the Seventy, and that God had preserved him
Wtjenburgh, Echteld,
in life during 350 years, till the coming of the Messiah.5 The liturgical texts exalt him as the
Netherlands
greatest of the prophets: more even than Moses, Simeon deserves the title of “He who has
seen God” [Oeojizijg), for to Moses God appeared enveloped in darkness, whilst Simeon

168
carried in his arms the eternal incarnate Word. Also, “He revealed to the nations the Light, Vespers,
the Cross and the Resurrection” (an allusion to the “sword which will pierce the soul” of Stich. of Anatolius

Mary, in the same verse). The “Nunc Dimittis” receives a new meaning: the prophet asks
the Lord to allow him to announce the Incarnation in the lower regions. On our icon there Office of St. Simeon,
is nothing to denote the priestly dignity of Simeon. His head is not covered, he has the long February 3rd, Ode 6

hair of a Nazarene: his long garment stretches to his bare feet. The Christ-Child is “seated of the Canon

on the arms of the old man as on a throne”. Ode 9 of the Matins makes Him say: “I am not Vespers, Tone 8
held by the old man: it is I Who hold him, for he asks Me forgiveness.”

1 Itinerarium Aetheriae, c. 26 in Sources Chretiennes, vol. 21, p. 206.

2 Thcophanes, Chronography, a. 534, Bonn edition, III, p. 345.
3 Pokrovsky, The Gospel in iconographic monuments, especially Byzantine and Russian, St. Petersburg, 1892, p. 108
(in Russian).
4 Sec Schottgen, Horae hebr. und Talmud, Dresden and Leipzig, 1733.
6 Eutychius of Alexandria (Xth century), Annals (in Arabic), Latin translation in Migne. P.G. m, col. 974. 169
170
171
 THE Like the Gospel story (Luke i, 26-38) and the religious service of the feast, the icon of the
ANNUNCIATION1 Annunciation is permeated with deep inner joy. It is the joy of the Old Testament promise
being fulfilled through the Incarnation of the Redeemer of the world. “To-day is the begin¬
ning of our salvation and the manifestation of the Eternal Mystery. The Son of God becomcth
the Son of the Virgin, and Gabriel announceth the good tidings of grace. Wherefore let us
also with him cry to the Mother of God: Hail! Thou that art full of grace; the Lord is with
Troparion of the feast Thee.” This joy is in the colours, in the festive rendering of details, and in the posture of
the Archangel. The majority of icons depict him in swift motion: he has just descended from
heaven and “his look is the look of a diligent servant intent on carrying out the task given
by his Master”.2 His legs are wide apart as though he were running. In his left hand he holds
a staff, the symbol of a messenger, his right hand, with a strong movement, is stretched to¬
wards the Virgin Mary; he communicates to Her the glad tidings from his Master, the
Mystery of the Divine Providence.3
The Mother of God is depicted either sitting, to emphasise her superiority over the Angel,
or as standing erect “as though listening to the King’s command”.4 As a rule She holds yarn
in Her hands, more rarely a scroll. These details are borrowed from tradition; they are men¬
tioned, for example, in the apocryphal Protevangelium Jacobi, chapter 11.
In contrast to the outer aspect, bright and festive, the inner significance of the event, the
decisive moment in the history of the world, determining its subsequent fate, is rendered
with great restraint and reserve by the posture and the barely noticeable gestures of the Mother
of God. The icon usually emphasises one of the three moments of the event.
The first: the apparition of the Archangel, his greeting, the perturbation and fear of the
Holy Virgin. In this case She turns round and, in Her surprise, drops the purple yarn She
was spinning.
The second moment—the perplexity and prudence of the Mother of God, which are
especially emphasised in the service of the festival, juxtaposing, as it does, the Annunciation,
the beginning of our salvation, with the beginning of the fall of man. Owing to the fall
of our ancestress Eve, the Virgin Mary is prudent and does not accept at once the extraordinary
tidings from the world beyond, but recalls the law of nature: “How shall this be, seeing I
know not a man;” The icon renders it by the gesture of Her hand which She holds before
Her breast, palm outwards—a sign of perplexity, of non-acceptance.
Finally, other icons depict the culmmating moment of the event—the consent of the Mother
of God. Here, bowing Her head, She presses Her right palm to Her breast—the gesture of
acceptance, of submission which has decided the fate of the world: “Behold the handmaid
of the Lord; be it unto Me according to Thy word.” Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow says
of the significance of these words: “In the days of the creation of the world, when God was
uttering Flis living and mighty ‘Let there be’, the word of the Creator brought creatures into
the world. But on that day, unexampled in the life of the world, when Divine Miriam
uttered Her brief and obedient ‘So be it’, I hardly dare to say what happened then—the
word of the creature brought the Creator down into the world.”5
But this emphasising of one of the moments mentioned is not the general rule and many
icons combine them together, showing as it were a synthesis of the psychological state of the
See reproduction Mother of God. She turns Her hand in the direction of the Angel, asking for an answer to
on page 171. the doubts assailing Her and at the same time, by bowing Her head, expresses Her submission.
The Annunciation. In our icon the eyes of the Mother of God and the Archangel are turned not towards one
Russian,
another but upwards, where we see the traditional portion of a sphere, the symbol of the high
XVlth century,
heavens, and rays issuing from it—the action of the Holy Spirit. The directions in which the
Moscow school.
17 x 21 inches.
Mother of God and the Archangel are looking meet in these descending rays. In this detail
Icon Museum, the fundamental meaning of the event is deeply felt and transmitted, namely, the unity of
R ecklinghausen action and will of God and His creature, of which the service of the festival speaks: “The
Angel serves the miracle, the virgin womb receives the Son, the Holy Spirit is sent down
(the rays), the Father sends His favour from on high (the sphere), and the transformation is
172
made by mutual consent...” Mutual consent means agreement between God and the creature. Vespers,
For the Incarnation is not only an act of God’s will, but also of the free will and faith of the Stich. of Tone 4

Holy Virgin Mary, says Nicholas Kabasilas in his discourse on the Annunciation. The angle
of the Angel’s head shows that he does not speak from himself. Speaking with the Mother
of God, revealing to Her the mystery of Divine Providence, he emphasises with his glance
his dependence on Him who sent him, he stands before the face of God. For the Mother of
God this is a moment of sanctification, the beginning of Her Divine Motherhood. “The
Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.”
Accepting the tidings of the Archangel, She answers with Her gesture not the messenger
but the Sender. Although the Angel looks upwards, his whole movement is towards the
Mother of God; but Her movement and the whole of Her is directed upwards. This movement
serves to emphasise, as it were, that the Mother of God’s consent is not a passive acceptance
of the Annunciation, but an active surrender of Herself to God’s will, a voluntary and in¬
dependent participation of the Mother of God, and, in Her Person, of all creatures, in the work
of Salvation.
The iconography of the Annunciation is one of the most ancient known iconographies of
festivals. An image of the Annunciation exists already in the Roman catacomb of Priscilla,
which archeologists attribute to the Ilnd century. Its iconography has remained fundamentally
the same—differences are merely in details. Thus, according to the custom prevailing at that
time, the Angel is represented there without wings.
Although our icon lacks the vividness and purity of colours characteristic of icons of the
XVth century, it nevertheless possesses the qualities of the best tradition and is an example
of a deep theological penetration into the dogmatic essence of the image, so characteristic of
Russian icon-painting.

1 Side by side with the icon of the Annunciation there exists an image called the “Pre-Annunciation ”. According
to tradition related also in apocryphas and commented upon by the fathers, the angel first addressed the Virgin
Mary invisibly by a spring or a well. When, frightened, she returned to the house he appeared to her again in human
form. The Pre-Annunciation is rarely met with and can be found mostly on icons depicting in detail the life of the
Mother of God.
2 Description of Nicholas Mesarites. A. Heisenberg, Grabeskirche und Apostelkirche, Leipzig, 1908, vol. II, p. 45.
3 In many icons of the Annunciation the angel is depicted as if his flight was still not quite completed; although
he stands on the ground, one wing is raised, which too is a symbol of his being a messenger. This symbol is also
transmitted in the service, when the deacon who, according to the interpretation of St.John Chrysostom, represents
an angel, symbolically repeats this gesture by lifting his stole with his right hand every time he calls the faithful to
prayer. But while at the Annunciation the flight of the angel is from heaven down to earth, in the Divine service
the deacon invites the faithful to lift themselves up with him in prayer.
4 Description of Nicholas Mesarites. See the Annunciation on the Iconostasis, PI. I above.
6 Sermon 23 on the day of the Annunciation. Moscow, 1874.

173
 The Raising of Lazarus belongs to the number of images, whose iconography has greatly THE RAISING
developed since the time of its inception. The most ancient images known of this event belong OF LAZARUS

to the first centuries of Christianity, beginning with the Ilnd century (about forty have so Russian,
far been discovered in the Roman catacombs). The great majority of them, both in the cata¬ XVItb century.
combs and on ancient sarcophagi, contain only two figures: that of Christ raising him, and Private Collection

that of Lazarus coming forth from the tomb, bound with grave-clothes. However, beginning
with the IVth century, the composition becomes more complex with the addition of those
details which can be seen also in the icons of to-day. As distinct from images of other feasts,
the inner meaning of which is revealed by representations of aspects inaccessible to sensory
perception (as for instance that of the Assumption, the Descent into Hell and others), where
many concrete details bear therefore a symbolic character, the icon of the Raising of Lazarus,
as well as that of the Convincing of Thomas, are images not of the hidden meaning not of
what is understood, but of what is concretely transmitted and visibly demonstrated. The icon
transmits the external, physical side of the miracle, making it as accessible to human per¬
ception and inquiry as it was when the miracle was performed and just as it is related in the
Gospels. In accordance with the Gospel of St.John (John xi, 1-46), the icon shows every
detail of the raising of Lazarus, and the very profusion of specific details shows the significance
attributed by the Church to that last miracle performed by the Saviour before His Passion
on the Cross. And He Himself obviously prepares it, by delaying and only coming four days
after the death of His friend, of whose illness He was aware and about which He warned
His disciples “that the Son of God might be glorified thereby” (that is, by this death). He
does not conceal this miracle, as He does, for example, the raising of Jairus’ daughter, but
on the contrary shows it openly, and in front of the whole crowd; just before performing it,
He addresses Himself to the Father and says, “Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.
And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it,
that they may believe that thou hast sent me” (John xi, 41, 42).
Following the Gospel story, the icon shows that the miracle was performed in the presence
of a multitude of people. It could be seen by everyone and the gestures of belief which some
of the crowd make show that “many of the Jews which... had seen the things which Jesus did,
believed on him.” Caves in the rock, like the cave of Lazarus, and the wall of the town of
Bethany show that the action takes place in a cemetery outside the city wall.
In the foreground, in front of a group of Apostles, is the Saviour with the sisters of the dead
Lazarus, Martha and Mary, at his feet. His aspect is regal and majestic; obeying His order to
take away the stone, a man rolls aside the stone which closed the tomb—a detail showing
that Lazarus could not come out by himself. Death itself obeys His commanding gesture and
His words, “Lazarus, come forth”; and Lazarus, bound hand and foot with grave-clothes,
that is, as he was laid in the grave according to custom, appears at the mouth of the cave,
“by a miracle confirming the miracle”. One of those present holds the edge of his grave-
clothes, according to the words of the Saviour, “Loose him, and let him go”, thus freeing
Lazarus from the grave-clothes, of which he could not free himself without others’ help.
The stench of decomposition still comes from this body after four days in the grave and
now returned to life. It compels those who loose him or stand close by to cover their nose
and mouth with their clothes. All these details, which inspired faith in many, speak of the fact
that this event belongs to the order of phenomena of this world, that here is an ordinary human
body, which the will of the Son of God has brought back to continue its life on earth, and
that everyone could vouch for the reality of the raising of Lazarus and see him in person.
In accordance with the Gospel story the Divine Service of the festival, connecting the
raising of Lazarus with the last days of the Saviour’s life on earth and His Resurrection,
reveals the inner link between these events, laying particular stress on the simultaneous
manifestation in this miracle of the Divine and human nature of the Saviour, which He Him¬
self manifests. “Thou hast wept over Lazarus as a man, and Thou hast raised him as God;
Thou hast asked where they had laid him, four days in the grave, confirming, O Lord, Thy 175
 Canon of the human incarnation.” On one side, the question: Where have they laid him? commiseration
Feast, canticle 4 and tears at the sight of the weeping sisters and friends of Lazarus—manifestations of the human
nature of Christ; on the other side, foreknowledge of his death and his raising to life—
manifestations of the omniscience and omnipotence of His Divinity, for only God could stop
decomposition and reunite the soul and body of a man four days dead. Announcing to His
disciples the death of Lazarus, the Saviour says, “And I am glad for your sakes that 1 was not
there, to the intent ye may believe” (John xi, 15). As on Mount Tabor He showed His glory
to His disciples in His Transfiguration, lest they be tempted when they saw Him crucified,
so here also, on His way to voluntary death, He shows Himself a “Vanquisher of death”,
raising a man four days in the grave, to strengthen thereby faith in His Divine omnipotence and
give a pledge to His disciples of His future Resurrection, and to all people—of the general
resurrection of the dead. “Since the first fruits of general resurrection is the Resurrection of
Christ, by raising Lazarus the Lord gave an assurance of His own Resurrection.”1 There¬
fore, this miracle was performed not only for the disciples, but also for the people, as testifying
to the future fate of all mankind and proof of the general resurrection of the dead. And to
prevent any doubts in those who were not present and could not witness the miracle, it is
reproduced in all details both in the Gospels and in the icon.
According to the Gospel story the miracle of the raising of Lazarus preceded the solemn
entry of the Lord into Jerusalem, which in its turn marked, as it were, the start of His Pas¬
sion and His ensuing Resurrection, Consequently the Raising of Lazarus, the Saturday of
Lazarus, is commemorated on the eve of Palm Sunday. Remembrances of the two events
intermingle in the services of the two feasts and the celebration of the Raising of Lazarus
merges into the triumph of the Lord’s Entry into the capital of Judaea. For this reason, the
troparion is the same for both feasts, “O Christ our God, Thou didst raise up Lazarus from
the dead, in order to give a pledge for the Universal Resurrection before Thy Passion;
wherefore we, like the children, carry the symbols of victory, and cry to Thee, the Van¬
quisher of Death: Hosanna in the highest; blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”

1 Sergius, Patriarch of Moscow, The Resurrection of Christ as contrasted with the Raising of Lazarus. Moscow, 1933.

THE ENTRY Icons of the Entry of the Lord into Jerusalem are usually distinguished by a very triumphal
INTO and festive quality, in keeping with the character of the festival itself, which breaks through
JERUSALEM the stern and collected mood of the Great Lent and is thus a foretaste of Easter joy. The
cheerful appearance of Jerusalem, often red or white, the bright colours of cloaks spread on
the road of the procession give the icon a festive look. The group of Apostles and the wel¬
coming crowd, each welded into one collective figure, with the majestic Saviour between them,
give the composition a strict equilibrium. The static character of the crowd, emphasised by
the sheer wall of the city, the flowing lines of the mountain and the tree which seem to repeat
the movement of the Lord and the Apostles and merge into them, give great life to the whole
composition.
The immediate cause of the public celebration which accompanied the entry of the Lord
into Jerusalem was, according to the Gospel of St.John, the raising of Lazarus, when “much
people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took
branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him ” (John xii, 12, 13). A palm branch is a
symbol of joy and feasting. The Jews used them to welcome people of high rank; as a symbol
of valour it was also given to reward conquerors. So the crowd gathered at the city gates
with palm branches in their hands to welcome the Lord riding a donkey as the Conqueror
of death.1 The Saviour rides sideways, his head slightly turned cither towards the Apostles
176 walking behind him, or towards Jerusalem, while His right hand cither blesses or points to
the crowd and the city. As a rule children play a great part in icons of the Entry into Jerusalem.
Usually they are cutting branches while they sit in the tree, spread garments in the Saviour’s
way and, together with the adults, welcome Him with palm branches in their hands. Al¬
though it is hard to imagine a crowd without children, especially on a feast day, the Evan¬
gelists do not mention their presence. Describing the entry into Jerusalem they say that
‘‘a very great multitude spread their garments in the way” (Matt, xxi, 8), but do not say
they were children. Yet on the icons we see that only children and not adults2 are spreading
garments.3 The Evangelist Matthew, mentioning the children who welcomed the Lord after
His entry into Jerusalem, when He drove the traders out of the temple and cured the sick,
explains their role by the words of the Saviour Himself “Out of the mouth of babes and
sucklings hast thou perfected praise” (Ps. viii, 3). On the basis ofTradition the Church ascribes

The Entry into

Jerusalem.
Design for an icon

177
 to them the same role at the entry itself.1 * 3 4 This role is emphasised both by the icons and the
divine service of the day which gives it the deepest meaning and significance.
The solemn entry into Jerusalem is the fulfilment of the prophecy speaking of Christ as
of a coming King. “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Sion; proclaim it aloud, O daughter of
Jerusalem; behold, thy King is coming to thee, just, and a Saviour; he is meek and riding on
an ass, and a young foal” (Zcch. ix, 9).5 For the Jews it is something hard to understand:
welcoming the mighty Conqueror of death, “Jesus the Prophet”, they expected Him to fulfil
the prophecies by establishing the Kingdom of Israel upon earth, that is, victory over enemies
through their physical annihilation. Actually the reverse was the case: victory over the enemies
of Israel was being prepared through their spiritual salvation. Readings on the day of the feast
from the Old and New Testaments set right this misunderstanding; they do more—they give
warning against it. Thus, after reading prophecies about Christ as a coming King at Vespers,
at Matins the Gospel of Matthew is read where the true meaning of the prophecies is revealed
by the Words of the Saviour Himself, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father ...”,
that is, absolute power. There follows an explanation of the meaning of this power (revelation
of the Father) and its true nature: “Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek
and lowly of heart: and ye shall fmd rest unto your souls” (Matt, xi, 27-30). During the
Liturgy the Gospel of St.John is read—the symbolical preparation of the Saviour for burial
(Mary anointing His feet with ointment) and the description of His entry into Jerusalem
(John xii, 1-18). In this way the meaning of the event is gradually unfolded. The Jews who
greeted the Saviour with palm branches in their hands did not receive what they expected and
renounced what was offered them and a few days later were crying to Pilate “Crucify him!”
Therefore the gladness and rejoicing of children who welcomed the Saviour with no ulterior
motive, with no thought of gain or earthly power is opposed in the service of that day to the
rejoicing of “the Jewish crowd” which expected earthly power. (“... And the children sang
Vespers, Thy praises, while the Jews lawlessly reviled Thee...”—“ O evil and adulterous crowd which
Stich. of Tone 8 hath not kept faith with thy husband, why dost thou keep the covenant which thou wilt not
inherit; ... Be thou shamed by thy children who sing, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David, blessed
Vespers,PalmSunday, is he that cometh in the name of the Lord’.”6) In icons this idea is transmitted not only by
Stich. of Tone 7 the welcome of the children with palm branches in their hands, but especially by the spreading
of garments. The spreading of garments, according to the Bible (4 Kings ix, 13), is the attri¬
bute of an anointed king. And since the Saviour is the Anointed whose “kingdom is not of
this world” (John xviii, 36) the garments are spread before Him by children instead of by
adults, who welcomed Him as the Anointed One for the earthly kingdom.
Thus the solemn Entry into Jerusalem, which is at the same time the Journey of the Saviour
towards voluntary passion and death, is an image of the installation of the King of Glory in
His Kingdom. Jerusalem itself is the image of the blessed Kingdom of God, the heavenly
Jerusalem. This is why it is represented on the icon as so festive and attired.

1 Since donkeys are little known in many parts of Russia, on many Russian icons a horse replaces the donkey.
Opposite page: 3 Except very occasionally.
The Entry in 3 This role of the children becomes emphasised very early in the pictures of the Entry, as for instance in the illu¬
Jerusalem, Russian, strations of the Vlth century Rossano Gospels, which already contain a complete iconography of the feast, and still
XVIth century: earlier on the Lateran sarcophagi where the composition was more simple. See, for instance, Plate CCCXI1I, 4,
Private Collection and CCCXIV, 5, Garucci, Storia dell’Arte Christiana, Prato, 1879.
4 The apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus also speaks of their role.
5 The beginning of the 3rd Lesson of the Feast (Zech. ix, 9-15). The first lesson is Gen. xlix, x, 2, 8-12, and
the second is the prophecy of Zephaniah iii, 14-19.
6 This is why on this day the Church blesses branches of trees (hence the name of Palm Sunday) and calls the
faithful to greet with them the Saviour riding to His immolation not as the Jews greeted Him but as “the children
178 bearing the sign of victory”.
 ■ PM Ml

'it.

»*■
 THE CROSS “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are
saved it is the power of God” (i Cor. i, 18). One cannot glorify the triumph of God incarnate,
His victory over death—the limit of our fall, without at the same time exalting the Cross of
Christ—the limit of the voluntary humiliation (“Kenosis”) of the Son of God, who was
obedient to the Father “unto death, even the death of the cross” (Phil, ii, 8). For, “in order
that we might live, it was needful that God should incarnate Himself and be put to death”.1
The Incarnation then was effected in order that the eternal Word should become capable of
death2, and Christ Himself declares that He was come “for this cause... unto this hour”
(John xii, 27). But this “hour” of the Lord, come to accomplish the work of our salvation,
is also the hour of His enemies, that of the “power of darkness” (Luke xxii, 53).3 In fact,
the real victory of Christ was His apparent defeat, for it is by death that He overthrew the
power of death. It is this that makes the “scandal” and the “foolishness” of the Cross, “fool¬
ishness” outside of which no one can attain the Wisdom of God, that remains for ever
incomprehensible to the “princes of this world” (1 Cor. ii, 8). The Cross is then the con¬
crete expression of the Christian mystery, of victory by defeat, of glory by humiliation, of
life by death—symbol of an omnipotent God, Who willed to become man and to die as a
slave, in order to save His creature. The insignia of Christ’s royalty—“I call him King,
because I see Him crucified: it belongs to the King to die for His subjects”4—the Cross is
also the very image of the Redemption, which is the economy of the love of the Trinity
towards fallen humanity: “Crucifying Love of the Father, crucified Love of the Son, Love
of the Holy Spirit triumphant by the wood of the Cross” (Philaret of Moscow).
It is needless to insist on the place that the Cross holds in the life of Christians: Christ
Himself designates it as an attribute that must belong to all who wish to follow Him (Matthew
x, 38; xvi, 24; Mark viii, 34; Luke xiv, 27). Manifestation of the “power of God” (1 Cor.
i, 18), the sign of the Cross, figuring as the object of worship, or expressed by a gesture,
is at the basis of every sacramental practice of the Church. Moreover, representations of the
Cross of Christ (sometimes replaced by emblems: anchor, trident, etc.) are known since the
earliest Christian antiquity. The iconoclasts, who were implacable against images of the
crucifixion, not only spared, but specially propagated decorative representations of the Cross
(without the Crucified) in the apses of churches.5 It can be supposed that representations of
the Crucifixion must also go back to a very distant date, if one takes account of the pagan
caricature of the graffitti of the Palatine (beginning of the Illrd century) and, above all, of the
gems engraved with the image of Christ on the Cross (Ilnd and Illrd centuries). Towards
the end of the IVth century, Prudentius, describing in a poem the mural paintings of a church,
speaks of a scene of the Crucifixion.6 In the Vth century we find a well developed compo¬
sition of the Crucifixion on an ivory in the British Museum and, a century later, on a panel
of the cypress-wood door of Santa Sabina at Rome. The fresco of Santa Maria Antiqua,
also at Rome (end of Vllth or beginning of Vlllth centuries) approaches the Syrian type
of crucifixion such as is found, for example, in the Rabula Gospels (586). Christ is there
clothed in a colobion, alive, with open eyes, holding Himself upright on the Cross. The Syrian
composition follows solely the account of the fourth Gospel: it was long to be maintained
in the West. Byzantine iconography was to create a richer type, “systematic and picturesque,
symbolical and historical”, completing St.John with elements borrowed from the account
of the synoptics: the holy women behind Mary, the centurion with the soldiers, pharisees
and the crowd behind John. It can be supposed that the synthetic picture of the scene of the
Crucifixion, given by St.John Chrysostom in his homily on St.Matthew7 served as “pro¬
gramme for a living composition” to Byzantine artists.8 For the Christ clothed in the colobion,
alive on the Cross, there was to be substituted at Byzantium, about the Xlth century, the
Christ naked and dead, the head bowed, the body bent. The Patriarch Michael Cerularius
remarked, at this time, that one had ceased to represent Christ on the Cross “in a manner
contrary to nature”, in order to lend Him “the natural human form”. But it is precisely

180 against these new representations of the Crucified, which they had been able to see at Con-
stantinople, that the legates of Pope Leo IX protested violently in 1054.9 The fact was that,
before having begun to commiserate the suffering humanity of the Lord, and sometimes
pushing naturalism to the extreme in the representation of a Christ dead on the Cross, the
West was firmly maintaining the conception of the Crucified living, clothed, impassive and
triumphant.
It can be said that Byzantium created a Crucifixion type that is classical by its sense of
proportion. Seeking soberness of composition, it rejected little by little the persons at the foot See reproduction
of the Cross, limiting itself to the essential: the Mother of God and St.John, sometimes accom¬ on page 182.

panied by a holy woman and the centurion. It is precisely this composition that we see in our The Crucifixion
Russian,
icon, produced by a Russian painter of the XVIth century.
XVIth century.
Christ is represented naked, having only a white cloth which covers his loins. The flexion
Coll. National
of the body towards the right, the bowed head, and the closed eyes indicate the death of the Museum, Paris
Crucified. His face, however, turned towards Mary, preserves a grave expression of majesty
in suffering, an expression which makes one think rather of sleep: the body of God-Man
remained incorruptible in death. “The Life has fallen asleep and hell shudders in terror.” Holy Saturday,
Victory over death and hell is symbolised by a cavern, which opens at the foot of the cross, Laudes, Stichira
Tone 2
below the rocky summit of Golgotha, the rock that was rent, at the moment of Christ’s
death, to allow a skull to appear. It is the skull of Adam who, “according to the belief of
some”, says St.John Chrysostom10, would have been buried under Golgotha—“the place
of a skull” (John xix, 17). If the tradition of iconography adopted this detail coming from
apocryphal sources, it was because it served to bring out the dogmatic meaning of the icon
of the Crucifixion: the redemption of the first Adam by the blood of Christ, the New Adam,
Who made Himself man to save the human race.
The Cross has eight extremities—a form corresponding to a very ancient tradition, considered
as the most authentic one in the East as well as in theWest.11 The upper cross-piece corresponds
to the phylactery with the inscription indicating the subject of the accusation. (Pilate’s in¬
scription is not reproduced on our icon.) The lower cross-piece is a stool (the suppedaneum)
to which the feet of Christ were nailed with two nails. Shown horizontal on our icon, the
suppedaneum of crucifixes and of Russian icons of the Crucifixion is habitually oblique. This
inclination of the lower cross-piece, upwards to Christ’s right, and downwards to His left,
receives a symbolical meaning: justification and damnation of the good and bad robbers.12
The architectural background behind the Cross represents the wall of Jerusalem. It is al¬
ready to be found on the panel of St. Sabina (Vlth century). This detail not only corresponds
to historical truth, but expresses at the same time a spiritual precept: just as Christ suffered
outside the confines of Jerusalem, Christians must follow Him and go without the walls,
bearing His reproach, “for here we have no continuing city, but we seek one to come”
(Heb. xiii, 11-14). The upper part of the Cross, with the arms of Christ extended, is detached
against the sky as background. The Crucifixion in an open place denotes the cosmic signific¬
ance'of the death of Christ, which “purified the airs” and freed the entire universe from the
domination of the demons.13
The composition of the icon is balanced and sober, despite a certain heaviness (the body of
the Christ as well as the Cross are too massive). The gestures of the persons present at our
Lord’s death are restrained and grave. The Mother of God, accompanied by a holy woman,
is on the right of Christ. She holds herself upright, drawing closer the mantle on Her shoulder,
with a gesture of the left hand, whilst Her right hand is raised towards Christ. Her face
expresses a grief contained, dominated by intrepid faith. It seems that in addressing Herself
to St.John, who is terrified, the Mother of God calls him to contemplate with Her the mystery
of the salvation, which is accomplished in the death of Her Son. The attitude of St.John,
bending forwards, expresses anguish and a kind of religious terror: he holds out his left hand
towards the Cross, whilst with the right, resting on his face, he seems to wish to close his
eyes before the spectacle of the death of his Master. The holy woman and the centurion
(without haloes) keep behind the Mother and the disciple. The former has her features con- 181
 ffi' • ?£ \

*:
■V-'
iiif _. '* ^••■‘;5-;- 'W/.jgP*.

' 1 .
'•*> *

&*‘ i l u- 'i % • ‘ •'* ,'’••/

» *
r-
#$ H&Kgjg

».€£■«,■*>■•>1 ■'■ '■'■v' • -• • ^

tVlk'Tf'iW
IU.I. \ !,ll .11

Mtd&t ,Pf\fclO' '“ ' I,

■Msssm,
r, KK V.i-.n'ii,,:

»»*!?, 3fc
r"*-v«Irv

% '-r

MW ■1 .-►!.<
5|.f’«
!l*W*-.<f|(flgO;
^a»w.»n™v^Wwfr. > if >
’•. , ■«•'w. 'ij

,> V'—<
i'**
*:«?v lS!y>rr: 26* iWMhtMr
,v? ■■
; ’.‘■•V: '■'*^'.v Z* ■% vv—-V-
\*:,:,Wm- H*y-btoki>w*i4FK* **
.,, v *i»%.v ijr-vl S^’**>• k
P^JW^y^NW
:.-W

A 'tfjL-"’'
Mt*" 5, Wh„,
«ST asPKSra-i^S!
SB?

■ ; ■
■VV,;nVJp.-i}W>

*>*«*«.V |,(t/‘
‘*'V'iV ►,*>*• r„t*r',i« ',:
Kf .^WHV^V iKf ,>•>.,I.-WV.-.•
1- tfMWM}*-*'* '*-K-t.WV r*,
K Vf*

V-Ti» ; . 'Jf.' U,*K XV.M W

jsasBPi^
>.'*
ran ' *%x- .-<JS
:**vh^7 ir*""*'’
■■<' *v££T-
i*1 r , -.^ :.' • >.-
“ ‘, riw -aV1 «>-■--

183
 tracted with grief, the left hand supporting her cheek in a gesture of lamentation. The latter—
a bearded man, with white head-dress—is looking at the Crucified and confesses His Divinity,
raising his right hand towards his forehead, as if he wished to cross himself: the fingers are
bent in a ritual gesture of benediction. The name of the centurion—Longinos—is noted above
his head. The inscription at the top, in capital letters, designates the subject of the icon:
Crucifixion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. A scale of warm colours, ranging from pale ochre
(the body of Christ, faces and hands of the onlookers) to the red-brown of the cross and the
deep purple of the Holy Virgin’s mantle, passing through the deep ochre of Golgotha, ver¬
milion (mantle of the holy woman) and light purple (St.John’s mantle), contrast very happily
with the cold background (the greenish colour of the wall). The long tunics of the two
women and of St.John are of a dark green. The sky, of a pale yellow, is the same colour as
the frame of the icon.

See reproduction The second image of the Crucifixion reproduced here is an icon sculptured and coloured,
on page 183- carved in applewood in the form of a cross. It is attributed to the Novgorod school of the
Carved portable Cross,
end of the XVth or the beginning of the XVIth centuries. The image of the Crucifixion
Russian, first half of
occupies the central part of this portable cross. The Cross, sculptured in the centre, has seven
the XVIth century.
extremities, as the upper cross-piece surmounts the stem. The suppedaneum is tilted (a pecu¬
6 x lOVi inches.
Coll. L Vytchegianine, liarity of Russian crosses). Below the Cross is the summit of Golgotha, with Adam’s head
Paris in the cave. In the background is the wall of Jerusalem. The flexion of Christ’s body is very
accentuated, as well as the inclination of His head, which falls onto His right shoulder. The
central cross-piece carries the letters ic xc. Above arc the initials of Pilate’s inscription: Jesus
of Nazareth, the King of the Jews. But higher up, on the upper cross-piece one reads: King
of Glory. The Divinity of Christ dead on the Cross is also indicated by the presence of two
angels with cloths in their hands, flying from either side of the upper crossbar. Often on icons
of the Crucifixion one also sees, in the two upper corners, the sun and the moon (or day and
night), representing the visible world terrified by the death of the Creator. This detail is very
ancient, for it is found in the Rabula Gospels. On our cross the frame of the upper branch is
occupied by an icon of the Holy Trinity (three angels appearing to Abraham). It is the Divine
Council presiding over the economy of our salvation which is accomplished on the Cross,
in the death of the incarnate Son. The scene of the Crucifixion includes four onlookers: the
Mother of God with a holy woman (to the left of the spectator), St.John and the centurion
(to the right), whose attitudes and gestures recall those of the preceding icon. These four
figures, of reduced size (above all in relation to the Christ, Who is twice as large), are placed
on the central level of the icon of the Crucifixion, beneath Christ’s outstretched arms. At the
base of the same icon, on either side of Golgotha, two persons of even smaller size represent
two great Russian ascetics—St. Sergius of Radonej and St. Cyril of Biclozersk, in attitudes
of adoration before the Cross. In the two arms of the crucifix, behind the four onlookers, six
larger figures follow them in succession. They are the two Archangels, Michael and Gabriel,
holding staves and spheres, and four Apostles. St. Michael is in the right arm of the cross,
behind the holy woman; he is followed by St.Paul and St.John who is represented with a
beard, in contrast to the young beardless St.John of the central composition. In the left arm
of the cross, St. Gabriel is accompanied by St. Peter and St. Andrew. The latter, as is known,
was considered as the Apostle of Byzantium and of Russia. Below the image of the Crucifixion,
in the neck of the cross, two frames, one above the other, each contain three images of holy
bishops. The upper one is the icon of the “Three Doctors”: St.Basil, St.John Chrysostom
and St. Gregory of Nazianzus, called the Theologian. Below are-the three great bishops of
the Russian Church: St. Alexis and St.Peter of Moscow and St.Leontius of Rostov. It can
be deduced that this cross was made before the canonisation of St.Jonas (1547), the third
metropolitan saint of Moscow, celebrated with Saints Peter and Alexis.
Our crucifix is a beautiful piece of sculpture in wood, with the smallest details carefully
worked. The colours are vivid. The frames arc painted red with a green border. The com-
184
plicated composition shows careful systematisation: the Holy Trinity, Archangels, Apostles,
Fathers of the Church—the whole Church, and, in particular, local saints, those of the Russian
Church, arc present at the Crucifixion of the Lord, each element in the position belonging
to it. The sculptor showed a very exact dogmatic and artistic sense in creating this beautiful
whole, inscribed within the form of the cross.

1 St.Gregory of Nazianzus, Or. 45, n. 28; P.G. 36, col. 661 c: £derjdr)f(£v Oeov oagxo/A,evov xai vexgov/xevov.
2 St. Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, n. 20. P.G. 25, col. 132BC.
3 On the hour of the Lord, see L. Bouyer, Le Mystere pascal (Ed. du Cerf, 1945), pp. 71-78.
4 St.John Chrysostom, De cruce et latrone, Horn. II; P.G. 49, col. 413.
5 G. Millet, Les iconoclastes et la croix, in Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique, XXXIV (1910), 96-110.
6 Dittochaeum. P.L. 60, col. 108.
7 Horn. 87; P.G. 57-58, coll. 769-774.
8 G. Millet, Rechcrches sur I’iconographie de l'Ei>angile,-y>. 426.
9 Hefele-Leclerq, Hist, des Conciles, IV, 2, p. 1106.
10 On St.John, Homily 85, 1; P.G. 59, col. 459.
11 I11 the XHIth century Pope Innocent III recognised it again in a sermon: Scrmo in communi de uno martyre.
P.L. 217, col. 612B.
12 Octoichos, Tone 8, Wednesday matins: the Cross is compared to a balance of justice.
13 St.Athanasius, On the Incarnation, c. 25; P.G. 25, col. 140AC. St.John Chrysostom, De cruce et latrone,
Horn. 2; P.G. 49, coll. 408-409.

The Resurrection of Christ, or Easter, does not enter into the cycle of the twelve principal THE

feast days of the Church. “With us”, says St.Gregory the Theologian, “it is the feast of RESURRECTION

feasts and the celebration of celebrations; it excels all other festivals, as the sun excels the
stars; and this is true not only of human and earthly feasts, but also of those belonging to
Christ and celebrated for Christ.”1 This greatest of all feasts of the Church is singled out
among other feasts as the highest manifestation of Christ’s omnipotence, the confirmation
of faith and token of our own resurrection. “If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain”
(1 Cor. xv, 17) says Apostle Paul.
Christian iconography knows several representations of the Resurrection of Christ. In
early Christian times it used the Old Testament prefiguration of the event, namely, the Pro¬
phet Jonah coming out of the whale’s belly.2 However, even in very early days, there appears
the historical representation of the Resurrection of Christ, based on the Gospel story—the
appearance of the angel to the women bringing spices to the sepulchre. According to certain
data, it existed already in the Illrd century (the Church in Dura Europos, 232).3 The icono-
graphic type concerning the Resurrection of Christ that comes next in time is the Descent
into Hell. The earliest known representation of this, belongs to the Vlth century, and is to
be found on one of the ciborium columns of St. Mark’s in Venice. These two latter compo¬
sitions arc used in the Orthodox Church as the Easter icons. In traditional Orthodox icono¬
graphy the actual moment of the Resurrection of Christ was never depicted. Unlike their
treatment of the Raising of Lazarus, both the Gospels and the Church Tradition are silent
about that moment and do not say how Christ arose. Neither does the icon show it.4
This silence clearly expresses the difference which exists between the two events. The raising
of Lazarus was a miracle, which could be perceived by all; whereas the Resurrection of Christ
185
 Jm Sv * lu”' ?v*2
AW. ^
V;^aR| i ^ v _ £*V
v ” jA^V1,' it. *
. -"v •7 r 7\
\ii/f^&\

1
was inaccessible to any perception. In the 6th Canticle of the Easter canon the Church draws
a definite parallel between the Resurrection of Christ and His Nativity.
“Having preserved the seals intact, O Christ, Thou hast arisen from the tomb, and having
left unbroken the seals of the immaculate Virgin in Thy Nativity, Thou hast opened to us
the gates of Paradise.” Just like His birth from the Virgin, the Resurrection of Christ is here
glorified as an ineffable mystery, inaccessible to all inquiry. “Not only was the stone not
removed from the sepulchre, but the seals on it were left intact when Christ arose and ‘life
shone forth from the tomb’ while yet the ‘tomb was sealed’. The resurrected Christ came
forth from the tomb just as He came in to the Apostles—through ‘shut doors’, which He
did not open; He came out of the tomb with no outer signs that a bystander could observe.” 5
The unfathomable character of this event for the human mind, and the consequent impossi¬
bility of depicting it, is the reason for the absence of icons of the Resurrection itself. This is
why in Orthodox iconography there are, as we have said, two images corresponding to the
meaning of this event and supplementing one another. One is a conventionally symbolical
representation. It depicts the moment preceding the Resurrection of Christ in the flesh—
the Descent into Hell; the other—the moment following the Resurrection of the body of
Christ, the historical visit of the spice-bearers to Christ’s sepulchre.

In the teaching of the Church, the Descent into Hell is indissolubly connected with the THE DESCENT
Redemption. Since Adam was dead, the abasement of the Saviour, Who had assumed his INTO HELL

nature, had to reach the same depths to which Adam had descended. In other words, the descent Opposite page:
into hell represents the very limit of Christ’s degradation and, at the same time, the beginning Russian,
of His glory. Although the Evangelists say nothing of this mysterious event, Apostle Peter XVth century.

speaks of it, both in his Divinely-inspired words on the day of Pentecost (Acts ii, 14-39), 21 x 16 inches.
Photo: Temple
and in the third chapter of his first Epistle (1 Peter iii, 19), “He went and preached unto the
Gallery, London
spirits in prison”. Christ’s victory over hell, the deliverance of Adam and of the righteous
men of the Old Testament is the main theme of the Divine Service of Great Saturday; it runs
through all the Easter service and is inseparable from the glorification of Christ’s Resurrection
in the flesh. This theme is, as it were, interwoven with the theme of Resurrection. “Thou
hast descended into the abyss of the earth, O Christ, and hast broken down the eternal doors
which imprison those who are bound, and, like Jonah after three days inside the whale, Thou
hast risen from the tomb.” Irmos of Ode 6 of
Following the texts of divine services, the icon of the Descent into Hell expresses the spi¬ the Easter canon

ritual, transcendental reality of the Resurrection—the descent of our Lord’s soul into hell—
and reveals the purpose and results of this descent. In harmony with the meaning of the event,
the action in the icon takes place in the very depths of the earth, in hell, shown as a gaping
black abyss. In the centre of the icon, standing out sharply by His posture and colours, is the
Saviour. The author of the Easter canon, St.John of Damascus, says “Although Christ died
as a man and His holy soul departed from His pure body, His Divinity remained inseparable
from both—I mean both soul and body.”6 Therefore He appears in hell not as its captive,
but as its Conqueror, the Deliverer of those imprisoned therein; not as a slave but as the
Master of life. He is depicted in the icon with a radiant halo, symbol of glory, usually of
various shades of blue, and often spangled with stars round the outer edge and pierced with
rays issuing from Him. His garments arc no longer those in which He is portrayed during 187
 His service on earth. They are of a golden-yellow hue, made luminous throughout by thin
golden rays (“assiste”) painted upon them. The darkness of hell is filled by the light of these
Divine rays—the light of glory of Him Who being God-Man, descended therein. It is already
the light of the coming Resurrection, the rays and dawn of the coming Easter. The Saviour
tramples underfoot the two crossed leaves of hell’s doors, that He has pulled down. On many
icons, below the doors, in the black abyss, is seen the repellent, cast down figure of the prince
of darkness. Satan. In later icons are seen here also a number of varied details:—the power of
hell destroyed—broken chains with which angels are now binding Satan, keys, nails and so
forth. In His left hand Christ holds a scroll—symbol of the preaching of the Resurrection
in hell, in accordance with the words of Apostle Peter. Sometimes, instead of the scroll He
holds a cross, no longer the shameful instrument of punishment, but the symbol of victory over
death. Having torn asunder the bonds of hell by His omnipotence, with His right hand Christ
raises Adam from the grave (following Adam, our ancestress Eve rises with hands joined in
prayer); that is, He frees Adam’s soul and with it the souls of all those who wait for His
coming with faith. This- is why, to right and left of this scene, are shown two groups of Old
Testament saints, with prophets at their head. On the left are king David and king Solomon
in royal robes and crowns, and behind them John the Forerunner; on the right—Moses with
the tablets of the Law in his hand. Seeing the Saviour descended into hell, they at once
recognise Him and are pointing out to others Him of Whom they had prophesied and Whose
coming they had foretold.1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The descent into hell was the last step made by Christ on the way of His abasement. By
the very fact of “descending into the abyss of the earth” He opened to us the access to heaven.
By freeing the old Adam, and with him the whole of mankind from slavery to him who is
the incarnation of sin, darkness and death, He laid the foundation of a new life for those who
have united with Christ into a new reborn mankind. Thus the spiritual raising of Adam is
represented in the icon of the Descent into Hell as a symbol of the coming resurrection of
the body, the first-fruit of which was the Resurrection of Christ. Therefore, although this
icon expresses the meaning of the event commemorated on Great Saturday and is brought
out for worship on that day, it is, and is called, an Easter icon, as a prefiguration of the coming
celebration of the Resurrection of Christ and therefore of the future resurrection of the dead.

1 Easter Sermon 45; P.G. 36, col. 624.

2 This representation is found in Roman catacombs, beginning with the second century, as for instance in the
catacombs of Priscilla and Callixtus.
3 American Journal of Archeology, vol. LI, no. 4, 1947. K. Weitzmann, Byzantine Art and Scholarship in America.
4 Although the subject of Christ arising is of Byzantine origin, it is found in ancient Orthodox iconography
only in illustrations, and even then extremely rarely, as for instance in the Chludov Psalter of the IXth century,
illustrated by Greeks (illustration to the words of Ps. ix, 12, “Arise, O Lord God. let thy hand be lifted up”). In
Russian iconography it appeared when decadence began to set in, towards the end of the XVIth century, under
the influence of the religious art of the West, where this theme had acquired wide popularity, starting with the epoch
of the Renaissance. It should be noted, however, that the similarity between the illustrations in the Chludov Psalter
and the Western images is a similarity only of idea, but not of form. As regards Russian icon-painters, it is obvious
that they found it hard to take a step so openly in contradiction with the Gospel texts. With few exceptions, these
representations have a more reserved character than those found in Western religious art. The Saviour is represented
traditionally in the same garments as in the Descent into Hell. The soldiers are cither absent or represented as asleep.
This subject is most often found in multiple Easter icons, consisting of a whole series of images relating to the
Resurrection; or else it appears on the same panel as the Descent into Hell, but to one side, as a complementary
image.
5 Sergius, Patriarch of Moscow, The Resurrection of Christ as contrasted with the raising of Lazarus. Moscow, 1933.
6 On the Orthodox Faith, III, c. 27; P.G. 94, col. 1097A.
7 A remarkable description of this scene is to be found in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus.

188
 . .When He had freed those who were bound from the beginning of time, Christ returned THE

again from among the dead, having opened for us the way to resurrection” says St.John of SPICE-BEARING

Damascus.1 This return from among the dead, this mystery of the Resurrection of Christ, WOMEN AT THE

which is beyond comprehension, is expressed by the icon of “The Spice-bearing Women at SEPULCHRE

the Sepulchre” in the same way as the Gospels describe it, that is, it depicts what was seen
by those who came to the Sepulchre. The Gospel of St. Matthew, describing the Resurrection
of Christ, gives us to understand that the women who came to the Sepulchre witnessed an
earthquake, saw an angel descend from heaven and roll back the stone from the door, and
saw the fear of the watch (Matt, xxviii, 1-4). But neither they nor still less the keepers were
witnesses of Christ’s Resurrection itself. According to the Gospel, the angel removed the
stone from the doors of the Sepulchre, not to enable the risen Christ to come out, as had to
be done in the raising of Lazarus, but “on the contrary, to show that He was no longer in
the sepulchre (that the sepulchre was empty) ‘He is not here: for he is risen’, and to enable
those who sought ‘Jesus, which was crucified ’ to see with their own eyes the empty sepulchre,
‘the place where the Lord lay’. This means that the Resurrection had already taken place
before the descent of the angel and before the stone was rolled away: it was an event inaccess¬
ible to any eye and beyond all comprehension.” 2 In accordance with the Gospel story, the
icon represents the burial cave in which are the empty sepulchre with the linen cloth lying
there. Beside it stands the group of spice-bearing women and on the stone sit either one or
two angels in white garments, showing the women the place where the body of Jesus had
lain. The composition of this icon is usually very simple and might even be called ordinary,
if it were not for the winged figures of the angels in snow-white garments, which give to the
icon an impression of austere and calm solemnity.3 As is well known, the Evangelists speak
differently both of the number of the spice-bearers and the number of angels. Therefore,

Design for an icon.

See note 3 on page 192

189
*U\v ■
r--i. ^
 See reproduction depending on which Gospel story is the basis of the composition, their number in the icon
on page 190. is changed. These differences do not constitute a contradiction. Fathers of the Church, for
The Spicebearing example St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Gregory Palamas, consider that spice-bearing women
Women at the Tomb,
came to the sepulchre several times and each time their number was different; thus each
Russian, With
Evangelist speaks only of one of these visits. In the Gospel of St. Luke their number is not given
century [?].
Photo: Castle De at all. This explains why in certain icons their number rises to five, six and more. However,
Wijenburgh, in the majority of icons their number does not exceed that indicated in the Gospels of St. Mat¬
Echteld, Netherlands thew and St. Mark; that is, two women are represented according to the one, and three accord¬
ing to the other. In the same way, icons either show one angel in accordance with the Gospels
of Matthew and Mark, or two, in accordance with Luke and John “the one at the head, and
the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain” (John xx, 12). Generally speaking,
this Easter icon, while bearing testimony of the accomplished Resurrection, is an exact repro¬
duction of the Gospel stories, down to the smallest details, “And the napkin, that was about
his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself” (John
xx, 7). This seemingly insignificant detail emphasises still more the incomprehensible character
of the event which had taken place. Indeed, it is precisely after seeing the linen clothes that
“that other disciple... saw, and believed” (John xx, 8). For the fact that they had retained
the form they had had when covering the entombed body, that is, wrapped together, was
an infallible proof that the body contained in them was not stolen away (Matt, xxviii, 13),
but had left them in an inexplicable manner.
Christ’s Resurrection took place on the morning after the seventh day—the Sabbath, that is
at the beginning of the first day of the week. Therefore the first day of the week is celebrated
in the Christian world as the beginning of the new life, which shone forth from the grave.1 2 3 4
The first Christians called this day not the first but the eighth5, “since it is the first of the num¬
ber that follows, and the eighth of the number which precedes it—the day which is highest
of the high ”.6 It is not only a commemoration of the day on which the Resurrection of Christ
took place historically, but is also the beginning and prefiguration of the future eternal life
for the renewed creature—what the Church calls the eighth day of creation. For, as the first
day of creation was the beginning of days in time, so the day of the Resurrection of Christ
is the beginning of days outside time, that is, an indication of the mystery of the future life,
the Kingdom of the Holy Spirit, where God is “all in all”.

1 On the Orthodox Faith, III, c. 29; P.G. 94, col. 1101 A.

2 Patriarch Sergius, ibid.
3 Later, in the XVIIth century, another composition, also ancient, was combined with the former, namely,
the appearance of Christ to Mary Magdalene. This addition is evidently connected with the appearance ofWestern
images of Christ arising from the grave. In response to the need to see the risen Christ, icon-painters found a means
of representing Him in an icon without contradicting the Gospel story. Thus two moments are represented in one
composition. The spice-bearers, standing nearer to the sepulchre, listen to the words of the angel, while Mary
Magdalene looks round and sees the Lord, Who stands in the centre of the icon, among small hills. Moreover,
since Mary Magdalene had taken Him for an ordinary man, a gardener, His glorified state is not indicated in any
way and He is depicted in the usual garments He wore before the Resurrection.
4 In Russian Sunday is called “Resurrection”.
6 Tertullian, On idolatry; P.L. I, coll. 682-683.
8 St.Gregory the Theologian. P.G. 36, col. 612C.

192
 Mid-Pentecost (Wednesday of the fourth week after Easter), by the place which it occupies MID-PENTECOST
between the Resurrection of Christ and the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is clothed in a “ double
See reproduction
splendour” which is appropriate to “the root of the two great solemnities”. Like the majority on page 191.
of” the festivals of an idea ”, this mysterious festival of grace (still unknown in theWest) must go Russian,
back to a fairly ancient time. In fact, the actual service of Mid-Pentecost, apart from more recent Novgorod school,

sticherai (of the early Vlllth century), contains liturgical elements which some would attribute XVth century.
1692 x 21 inches.
to St.Elias of Jerusalem (494-513) or to St. Anatolius of Constantinople (449-458).
Photo: Temple
The Gospel reading of Mid-Pentecost (John vii, 14-36), starting with the words: “Now
Gallery, London
about the midst of the feast (r Fjg sogr/jg pteaovagg) Jesus went up into the temple, and taught”,
is related to the event which took place “in the midst” of the feast of Tabernacles. Celebrated Ode 5 of the Canon
in autumn (Sept.-Oct.) for seven or eight days, the Jewish feast of Tabernacles was therefore
quite distinct from that of Pentecost. If the Jewish “Mid-Tabernacles” is recalled at the time
of the Christian Mid-Pentecost, it is because the words of Christ, namely “the last day,
that great day of the feast ” (John vii, 37—39), referred to the coming of the Holy Spirit, which
had to take place after the Passion and glorification of the Lord. The Gospel reading of
Pentecost (John vii, 3 7—5 3) starts where that of Mid-Pentecost ends and contains the promise
of the Holy Spirit under the image of “rivers ofliving water”. This theme of “living water”,
symbol of grace, serves as leit-motif to the office of Mid-Pentecost and justifies the pentecostal
transposition of the feast of Tabernacles.
Unlike the liturgy, the iconography of Mid-Pentecost does not seem to have developed
the theme of water. It remains very restrained, showing us Christ in the temple addressing
the word to the elders of the people. He is not standing, as on the last day of the festival,
when He spoke of the living water, but seated in the centre, on a semi-circular seat. In our
icon, six old men with linen headgear, seated three by three on either side of Christ, form
two well-balanced groups. Their attitude expresses astonishment, which makes one think
that the icon aims at illustrating simply a passage from the Gospel for the day: “How knoweth
this man letters, having never learned?” (John vii, 15). This is true of the fresco of Mid-
Pentecost in the church of St.Theodore Stratilate at Novgorod (XIVth century), in which
a bearded Christ is preaching seated in the midst of the elders of the people. But our icon
is not a simple illustration of the Gospel text referring to the event of “the midst of the feast”
of Tabernacles. In fact, Christ Who has clearly the air of teaching (the gesture of the right
hand and a “rotulus” in the left) is represented with the features of a beardless adolescent,
such as He must have been at the age of twelve when, seated in the temple among the doctors,
He astonished them for the first time by His wisdom (Luke ii, 41-50). One finds the same
Christ-Emmanuel teaching, for example in the Byzantine illuminations of the illustrated
Gospel of the Bibliotheque Nationale de Paris (Gr. 74, f° 98, Xlth or early Xllth century) See reproduction
in connection with the account of Christ’s childhood in St. Luke. However, in our icon one on page 194.

does not see Mary and Joseph, as in the Gr. 74 codex. If the features of the Christ-Emmanuel
in the icon of Mid-Pentecost recall the first manifestation of His Divine Wisdom in the temple
of Jerusalem related by St. Luke, this is not a substitute for the last declaration of the Messiah, Lesson for the festival
made in the same temple, but is designed to make a link connecting the beginning and the end, of the Circumcision

and demonstrating the unity of the teaching of the Son of God, sent into the world by the Lather
(Luke ii, 49: “Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?”—and Ode 5 of the
Canon of Mid-Pentecost: “Thou hast spoken in the temple, O Christ, before the assembly
of the Jews, manifesting Thy glory and declaring Thy relation with the Father”). The type
Emmanuel emphasises the non-temporal aspect belonging to Christ, whilst bearing witness
to the truth of the Incarnation: the Word incarnate knew the age of childhood and adolescence.
At all ages of His earthly life, Christ remains this same hypostatical Wisdom of the Father
which was made manifest for the first time to the doctors of the Law during His adolescence.
The Christ-Emmanuel of the icon of Mid-Pentecost corresponds to the hymns of this festival
which speak of “the Wisdom of God”—rj Zocpta rov Oeov—come into the midst of the
festival to promise the water of immortality.1 193
 Christ as a child among the scribes. From a Greek manuscript of the Xlth century in the Biblioth'eque Nationa/e, Paris (Grec 74, fol. 98).

Our icon, which is of the XVth century, belongs to the best traditions of the Novgorod
school. Its beautiful composition is clear and sober, with Christ in the centre, standing out
against an architectural background, and the two groups of old men, whose gestures express
a restrained emotion, emphasise still more the majestic calm of the Adolescent teaching. The
same care for sobriety is noticeable in the colours: the “glorious” clothing of the Emmanuel
in ochre with gold hatching, the three colours in the garments of the old men—vermilion,
purple and green—the white headgear, as also the white background of the wall behind Christ,
give an impression of richness created with a strict economy of colours.

1 Automelon of Tone i and Ode 8 of the Canon of Andrew of Crete. P.G. 97, col. 1432 A.

THE ASCENSION The feast of the Ascension is the feast of salvation consummated. The whole process of
OF OUR LORD salvation: birth, passion, death and resurrection are completed in the Ascension. “When
Thou hadst fulfilled for us Thy dispensation, and united the things in earth with the things
in Heaven, Thou, O Christ our God, didst ascend into glory, in no wise being parted from
those that love Thee, but Thou didst remain with them inseparably and proclaim to them:
Kontakion of the I am with you, no one is against you.” As an expression of the meaning of this festival, the
Festival theme of the Ascension used to be placed in the dome of ancient churches, thus completing
the scheme of paintings they contained.
The first glance at Orthodox icons of this feast creates the impression that they do not quite
correspond to their name. The principal place in them is given to a group consisting of the
Mother of God, angels and apostles, whereas the principal figure, the ascending Saviour Him¬
self, is almost always much smaller than the other persons depicted and is as it were
secondary in relation to them. Yet in this very disparity Orthodox icons of the Ascension
conform to the Holy Scriptures. Indeed, in reading accounts of our Lord’s Ascension in the
Gospels and the Acts one is left with the same impression of lack of correspondence between
this event and its descriptions. The fact of the Ascension itself is given there only a few words.1
The accounts of the Evangelists concentrate all their attention on something else—on the last
precepts of the Saviour, establishing and defining the role and significance of the Church
in the world and its connection and relationship with God. The Acts of the Apostles give
a more detailed description of the Ascension. This description, together with the account
in the Gospel of St. Luke, constitute the factual data (though not all of them) which lie at
the basis of Orthodox iconography of Christ’s Ascension. The centre of gravity in the accounts
of the Holy Scriptures and consequently of the iconography, lies not in the fact of the Ascen¬
sion itself, but in the significance and consequences it has for the Church and the world.
Opposite page: According to the Holy Scriptures (Acts i, 12) the Ascension of our Lord took place on
The Ascension,Russian, Mount Olivet, or the Mount of Olives. Therefore in the icon the action takes place either at
XVIth century.
the summit of the mount, as is the case in the icon reproduced here, or in a hilly landscape.
The Isabella Stewart
To designate the Mount of Olives, some olive trees are at times depicted. In accordance with
Gardner Museum,
Boston, Mass.
the special service of the festival, the Saviour Himself is represented as ascending in glory2,
sometimes sitting on a richly ornamented throne.3 In iconography His Glory is represented
as a mandorla, oval or round, composed of several concentric circles, the symbol of the high

194
 heavens. Graphically this idea is conveyed by means of an image of the visible sky as the an¬
cients saw it, which corresponds also to our modern conception of it as consisting of several
spheres (troposphere, stratosphere, ionosphere). This symbolism shows that the ascending
Saviour abides outside the earthly plane of existence and through this the moment of Ascen¬
sion acquires a character that is outside time and so gives a quite special meaning to its details,
taking them outside the narrow limits of an historical event. The mandorla is supported by
angels (their number can vary). Naturally, the presence of angels supporting the mandorla
is not due to necessity, since the Saviour ascended by His own Divine power and had no need
of their assistance. They, as well as the mandorla, are merely the expression of His glory and
greatness.4
In the foreground, with the Mother of God in the centre, we see two groups of apostles
and two angels. Here the role of the angels is different: as we know from the Acts of the
Apostles, they are messengers of Divine Providence.
The presence at the Lord’s Ascension of the Mother of God, of which there is no direct
mention in the Holy Scriptures, is categorically affirmed by the Tradition passed on in the
texts of the Divine service, such as the 9th canticle of the Canon: “Rejoice, Thou Mother of
Christ our God, seeing with the apostles Him whom Thou didst engender ascending to
heaven, and glorifying Him.” In the icons of the Ascension the Mother of God occupies a
very special position. Placed directly below the ascending Saviour, She is as it were the axis
of the whole composition. Her outline, of wonderful purity and lightness, clear and precise,
stands out sharply from the background of the white garments of the angels. Her severe
immobility contrasts no less sharply with the animated and gesticulating Apostles standing
on either side of Her. Her importance is often emphasised by Her standing on higher ground,
which singles out still more Her central position. This group, with the Mother of God in
the centre, represents our Saviour’s inheritance, gained by His blood—the Church He was
physically leaving behind on earth, which, through the promised descent of the Holy Spirit
at the coming Pentecost, would receive all the fulness of its being. The link between the
Ascension and Pentecost is revealed in the words of the Saviour Himself: “If I go not away,
the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you” (John
xvi, 7). This link between the ascension of the deified human body of the Saviour and the
coming Pentecost—the beginning of the deification of man through the descent of the Holy
Spirit—is emphasised by the whole Divine service of the festival. The place of this group—
the Church—in the foreground of the icon is a graphic expression of the significance and role
which, as we have said earlier, the Holy Scriptures attribute to the establishment of the Church
in the last commandments of the Saviour. The fact that what is meant here is indeed the
Church in its full complement and not only the people who were historically present at the
Ascension, is shown by the presence of Apostle Paul (at the head of the group on the left of the
spectator), who historically could not have been there with the other Apostles, as well as by
the significance of the Mother of God. She who had taken God into Herself, who had become
the temple of the incarnate Word, is the personification of this Church—the body of Christ,
whose Head is the ascending Christ. “... and gave him to be the head over all things to the
church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all” (Eph. i, 22, 23). There¬
fore, as the personification of the Church, the Mother of God is placed immediately below
the ascending Christ and in the icon they supplement one another. Her gesture always cor¬
responds to Her significance in the icons of the Ascension. In some it is the gesture of orison—
the ancient gesture of prayer—uplifted hands, expressing Her role and the role of the Church
She personifies in relation to God, connection with Him through prayer, intercession for the
world. I11 other icons it is the gesture of profession of faith, expressing the role of the Church
in relation to the world. In that case She, like the martyrs, holds Her hands palms outwards
before Her breast. Her severe stillness seems to express the immutability of the revealed
truth, whose keeper is the Church. The groups of the apostles and the diversity of their gest¬
196 ures express the multitude and variety of tongues and means of expressing that truth.
 The direction of movement of the whole group in the foreground, the gestures both of
the angels and the apostles, the focus of their eyes and postures, everything is directed up¬
wards (sometimes some of the apostles turn towards each other or towards the Mother of
God) towards the Source of the life of the Church, its Head Who abides in heaven. It is as it
were a graphic representation of the appeal which the Church addresses on that day to its
members: Come, let us rise and turn our eyes and thoughts on high, concentrating our Ikos and Kontakion,
looks as well as our feelings... let us imagine ourselves to be on the Mount of Olives and Tone 6

to look at the Redeemer borne on clouds.” By these words the Church invites the faithful
to join the apostles in their transport towards the ascending Christ, for, as St. Leo the Great
says, The Ascension of Christ is our elevation, and whither the glory of the Head has pre¬
ceded by anticipation, the hope of the body too is called.”5
The ascending Saviour Himself, leaving the earthly world in the flesh, does not abandon
it in His Divinity, does not desert the inheritance gained by His blood—the Church, “in
no wise being parted... but remaining with them inseparably”. “And, lo, I am with you
alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matt, xxviii, 20). These words of the Saviour refer
both to the whole history of the Church in its totality and to each separate moment of its
existence and to the life of each member of it until the Second Coming. This is why the
gesture of the Saviour is directed towards the group in the foreground whom He is leaving
behind and towards the external world. The icon conveys this connection of His with the
Church, by always depicting Him as blessing with His right hand (He very seldom blesses
with both hands) and usually holding in His left hand the Gospels or a scroll—the symbol of
the teacher, of preaching. He ascended blessing, not having blessed (“While he blessed
them, he was parted from them...” Luke xxiv, 51), and His blessing docs not cease with His
Ascension. Depicting Him in the act of blessing, the icon shows graphically that even after
the Ascension He remains the source of blessing for the apostles, and through them for their
successors and for all those whom they bless. As we have said, in the left hand the Saviour
holds the Gospels or a scroll, the symbol of the teacher, of preaching. By this the icon shows
that the Lord, while dwelling in heaven, remains not only the source of blessing but also the
source of knowledge, communicated to the Church by the Holy Spirit. The inner link
between Christ and the Church is expressed in the icon by the whole structure of the compo¬
sition linking together into one whole the group on earth with its consummation in heaven.
Apart from the meaning of this group’s movement, already mentioned, its direction towards
the Saviour and His gesture, directed towards it, express their inner inter-relation and the
indivisibility of the common life of the Head and the Body. Both the upper and the lower
parts of the icon, the earthly and the heavenly, are inalienable from one another and one with¬
out the other loses its meaning.
Moreover, icons of the Ascension have yet another aspect.
The two angels standing behind the Mother of God and pointing towards the Saviour
announce to the apostles that the ascended Christ will come again in glory “in like manner
as ye have seen him go into heaven” (Acts i, 11). “The Acts of the Apostles mention two
angels”, says St.John Chrysostom, “because there actually were two, and there were two
because only the testimony of two is established (2 Cor. xiii, i).”6 Relating the actual fact
of the Saviour’s Ascension and the teaching of the Church, the icon of the Ascension is thus
at the same time also a prophetic icon, foretelling the Second Coming ofjesus Christ in glory.
This is why on icons of the Last Judgment He is depicted as on the icons of the Ascension,
this time however not as the Redeemer but as the Judge of the universe. In this prophetic
aspect of the icon the group of the apostles with the Mother of God in the centre represents
the image of the Church waiting for the Second Coming. Being, as we have said, a prophetic
icon, an icon of the Second Coming, it unfolds before us a grandiose picture starting with
the Old Testament and ending with the culmination of the history of the world.
It should be noted that in spite of the many facets of meaning contained in the icon of
the Ascension, Ls distinctive feature is the unusually collected, as it were monolithic, quality 197
rr^ v mmmm —■ -*ir” V
‘V

*• > < v*>

• v„

i V'

. — Tftftiirir

198
ot its composition, which is especially striking in our icon. The iconography of this festival, in
the form adopted in the Orthodox Church, belongs to the most ancient iconographies of
sacred festivals. Some of the earliest representations of the Ascension, which had already
acquired a definite form, belong to the Vth or Vlth centuries (ampullae of Monza and the
Rabula Gospels). Ever since then the iconography of this festival has remained unchanged
except for secondary details.

Iconography of the
Ascension on an
Ampulla of Monza,
Vlth century (after
Carucci, 434,4).

1 Ot the Evangelists only Mark and Luke speak of it; moreover the first merely states it, while the second gives
a precise but very brief description.
2 Thou, O Christ our God, hast ascended in glory...” Troparion of the Festival.
3 “On the throne of glory carried to God” (Canticle, Tone i, On Praise).
4 Generally speaking the role of the angels here may be different and varies in accordance with the texts from
the Divine service upon which a particular icon is based. For example, in some icons they do not touch the mandorla,
but turn in prayerful attitudes towards the Saviour, expressing wonder “seeing man’s nature ascending with Him”
(Canon of the Festival, canticle 3); on other icons they are depicted blowing trumpets in accordance with the words
of the antiphon, “ God is gone up with a shout, the Lord with a sound of a trumpet” (Antiphon. Stich. 4; Ps. xlvi, 5).
On the upper part of the icon, above the mandorla, there are sometimes depicted the gates of heaven, opening before
the ascending King of glory in accordance with the words of Psalm xxiii, repeated during the service, “Lift up your
gates, ye princes; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the king of glory shall come in.” These details express
the connection of this event with the Old Testament, indicating the fulfilment of David’s prophecy of the Ascension
of the Lord.
5 St. Leo the Great, Discourse 73. First text on the Ascension. P.L. 54, col. 396.
G St.John Chrysostom, Discourse on the Acts of the Apostles, par. 3; P.G. 60, col. 30.

The festival of Pentecost is of Old Testament origin. It was celebrated to commemorate ICONS OF

the giving of the law on Mount Sinai—God making a solemn covenant with His chosen PENTECOST

people—and at the same time as a thanksgiving for the first-fruits of the earth (Numbers
Opposite page:
xxviii, 26) and the new harvest (Ex. xxiii, 16). It was celebrated at the conclusion of seven
The Holy Trinity
weeks, on the fiftieth day after the Passover and so was called the feast of Weeks (Deut.
by A ndrew Rublev.
xvi, 9-10). On this day of the revelation of the law, being also the fiftieth day after the Resur¬ 44 x 5T/2 inches.
rection of Christ, the Holy Spirit descended on His Apostles and disciples by Divine Providence Tretiakov Gallery,
and in accordance with the Saviour’s promise (John xiv, 26). This descent of the Holy Spirit Moscow.

was the making of the new covenant by God with the new Israel—the Church—whereby Photo: UNESCO

the grace of the law-giving Holy Spirit took the place of the law of Sinai.1
 If all three Persons of the Holy Trinity take part in the providential action of God in
relation to the world and to man, their manifestations in this action differ from one another.
We confess God the Father, Creator of the world visible and invisible, “doing all things through
Great Vespers, the Son with the participation of the Holy Spirit”, God the Son, the Redeemer “through
Stich. of Tone 8 Whom we have known the Father and through Whom the Holy Spirit came into the world”,
and God the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, “proceeding from the Father and resting in the
Son” giving life to all living things. On the day of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles
Kneeling Prayer of
St. Basil the Great in
there was manifested the culminating action of the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, as a
Great Vespers sanctifying power, and this act is “the fmal fulfilment of the promise”.2 The descent of the
Holy Spirit, proceeding from the Father and shed forth by God the Son (Acts ii, 33), revealed
to the world the grace-given knowledge of the mystery of the Holy Trinity, consubstantial,
undivided yet distinct. Together with the fulfilment of the promise, it is the fulfilment of
the revelation concerning one God in three Persons, that is, the manifestation of the central
dogma of Christianity. If, on the day of the Lord’s baptism, the manifestation of the Holy
Trinity was accessible only to external senses—-John the Baptist heard the voice of the Father,
saw the Son and the Holy Spirit descending in the physical form of a dove—to-day, the grace
of the Holy Spirit, giving light to the whole being of man redeemed by the Son of God,
brings him to deification.3 According to the extent of his possibilities man receives the possibility
of seeing God, and of participating in the Kingdom of grace of the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit. Externally, the celebration of Pentecost, namely the decoration of churches and
houses with green branches, plants and flowers, is also a relic of the Old Testament Church.
It expresses symbolically the power of the Holy Spirit—reviving, renewing and giving life
and blossom to all things.
In the Orthodox Church, where there is no feast of the Holy Trinity in a literal sense,
it is celebrated mainly on the first day of Pentecost—the Sunday—which is called Trinity
Day. Divine service on that day expounds the dogmatic teaching on the Holy Trinity,
Whose icon is brought out for worship. The icon of the Descent of the Holy Spirit on the
Apostles is brought out on the second day—the Monday—which is dedicated to the Holy
Spirit and is called the Spirit Day. Thus two icons, totally different in their meaning and
significance, correspond to the feast of Pentecost.

1 Synaxarion for Pentecost.

2 St. Gregory the Theologian, Sermon 41 on Pentecost. P.G. 36, col. 436.
3 St. Gregory the Theologian, ibid.

THE HOLY
The expounding of the dogma of the Trinity is the fundamental theological theme of the
TRINITY
festival of Pentecost. For its iconographical expression, the Orthodox Church has adopted
the icon of the Holy Trinity representing the Biblical scene of three men appearing to our
forefather Abraham by the oak of Mambre (Gen. xviii). To show that they belong to the
heavenly world, they are depicted as three winged Angels. This image, based on a concrete
historical event, shows the first appearance of God to man, signifying the beginning of the
promise of redemption. Both the iconography and the Divine service link the beginning,
of this promise with its fulfilment on the day of the Pentecost, when the fmal revelation con¬
cerning the Holy Trinity is given. In other words, the icon of the Holy Trinity binds together,
as it were, the beginning of the Old Testament Church and the establishment of the New
Testament Church.

200
 In the 5th book of “Demonstratio Evangelica” by Eusebius of Caesarea, quoted by John
of Damascus in his third Discourse in defence of holy icons, in connection with the words
God appeared to Abraham by the oak of Mambre”, we find mention of the fact that an
image of the Holy Trinity, in the guise of three Angels, had existed in the most ancient times
at the actual place where the three men had appeared to Abraham. The existence of this
image is connected with the particular veneration, in which the place of the apparition by
the oak was held both by Jews and pagans; pagan sacrifices also had been celebrated there.1
We do not know what kind of image it was. However, from the most remote times the Holy
Trinity was depicted as an historical Biblical scene, with the Angels sitting at table under the
oak; Abraham and Sarah serve them, and their house is shown behind. A servant killing a
calf was often depicted in the foreground. In spite of the fundamental uniformity of the scene,
the grouping of the Angels changed in accordance with the interpretation given to this
Biblical event, and with the dogmatic thought which had to be emphasised. For example,
many Church Fathers understood the visitation of Abraham by the three men either as an
appearance, however indirect, of the entire Trinity2; or as the appearance of the second
Person of the Holy Trinity, accompanied by two angels.3 Such an interpretation does not
change the understanding of this event as an appearance of the Trinity, for, since each Person
of the Trinity possesses the whole fullness of the Godhead, the presence of the Son with two
angels can be taken as a representation of the Trinity. It is in this sense that the event is inter¬
preted by the texts of the Divine service, which definitely call it the appearance of the Holy
Trinity. “The blessed Abraham saw the Trinity, as far as man can, and regaled It as a good
friend.” “The holy Abraham welcomes of old the Godhead, Who is one in three Persons.” Canon of the
In accordance with the teaching of the Church and the interpretation of the Fathers, the An¬ Patriarchs’ Sunday,

gels are sometimes grouped on the isocephalous principle, that is, they are sitting at table Canticle 5
Canon of the service
side by side as equals in rank, thus demonstrating the equality of the three Persons of the Holy
of the Holy Fathers,
Trinity, which at the same time remain distinct (as for instance in the Vth century mosaic
Canticle 1
of Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome and in the Cotton Bible of the same period in the British
Museum in London). Moreover, their equality is sometimes emphasised by the identical
colour of the angels’ garments (as for instance in the Vlth century mosaic of St.Vitalius at
Ravenna)—and by their attributes. In other cases the composition has a pyramidal structure,
putting the principal emphasis on the central Angel.
For many centuries, the representation of the three Biblical men as Angels was the only
iconography of the Holy Trinity; it is still preserved in. the Orthodox Church as that which
accords best with its teaching.4
The image of the Trinity, that corresponds most fully to the teaching of the Church as
regards both its content and its artistic expression, is to be found in the greatest of works,
known as the Trinity by Rublev, painted by him for the monastery of the Trinity and See reproduction
St. Sergius, probably between 1408 and 14255; it is now in the Tretiakov Gallery in Moscow. on page 198.
As in other earlier icons of the Trinity, it depicts three Angels, but the circumstances of their
appearance are passed over in silence. The painting shows Abraham’s house, the oak and a
mountain—but Abraham and Sarah are absent. Without abolishing the historical aspect of
the event, St. Andrew reduced it to a minimum, so that the main significance lies not in the
Biblical event, but in its dogmatic meaning. This icon is also distinguished from others by the
basic form of its composition—a circle. Passing through the upper part of the nimbus of
the central Angel and partly cutting off the bottom of the pedestals, this circle embraces all
three figures, showing very faintly through their outlines. This composition of the Trinity
had existed earlier, but only in panagias, or small round icons, and on the bottoms of sacred
vessels, where, however, the composition is dictated by the shape of the object itself and
the lack of free space, and not by the dogmatic thought. Having placed the figures of the
Angels in a circle, St. Andrew united them in one general smooth and flowing movement
along the line of the circle. In this way the central Angel, though taller than the others, does
201
 not overwhelm or dominate them. The nimbus of his inclined head, leaning away from the
vertical axis of the circle, and the placing of the Angel’s feet on the opposite side, emphasise
still more this movement, which also includes the oak and the mountain. At the same time,
the inclination of the nimbus and of the feet in opposing directions, restores the equilibrium
of the composition, and the movement is arrested by the monumental immobility of the Angel
on the left and Abraham’s house above Him. And yet, “wherever we look, we see echoes
of the main circular melody, correspondences of outline, forms arising from other forms
or reflecting them as in a mirror, lines sweeping beyond the outlines of the circle or inter¬
woven in its centre—a rich symphony of forms, dimensions, lines and colours, inexpressible
in words, but delighting the- eye.”6
The icon of St. Andrew has action, expressed in gestures, communion, expressed in the
inclining of the heads and the postures of the figures, and a silent, motionless peace. This
inner life, uniting the three figures enclosed in the circle and communicating itself to its sur¬
roundings, reveals the whole inexhaustible depth of this image. It echoes, as it were, the words
of St.Dionysius the Areopagite, according to whose interpretation “circular movement
signifies that God remains identical with Himself, that He envelops in synthesis the inter¬
mediate parts and the extremities, which are at the same time containers and contained,
and that He recalls to Himself all that has gone forth from Him.”7 If the angle of the heads
and bodies of the two Angels inclined towards the central one bind them together, the gestures
of their hands are directed towards the eucharistic chalice, with the head of a sacrificial animal,
which stands on the white table as on an altar. Symbolising the voluntary sacrifice of the Son
of God, it draws together the gestures of the Angels, indicating the unity of will and action
of the Holy Trinity, Who entered into a covenant with Abraham.
The almost identical faces and figures of the Angels emphasise the single nature of the three
Divine Persons and also show that this icon in no way pretends to represent concretely each
Person of the Holy Trinity, just as in the case of other, earlier, icons it is not a representation
of the Trinity itself, that is, of the three Persons of the Godhead, since in its essence the God¬
head cannot be represented. It is still the same historical scene (although the historical aspect
is reduced to a minimum), which symbolically reveals the unity and the trinity of the God¬
head by showing its triune action in the world, the Divine Economy. This is why, despite
the likeness of the Angels, they are not deprived of individuality, the character of each being
definitely expressed as regards His action in the world.
The Angels are grouped on the icon in the order of the Symbol of Faith, from left to right:
I believe in God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.8 To the total impossibility of depict¬
ing the first Person, Who is referred to even in the Symbol of Faith in a reserved and
reticent manner, corresponds the sober and indefinite hue of the upper garment of the Angel
on the left (a pale pink cloak with brown and blue-green lights). Testimony concerning the
second Person is extensive compared with the others and even precise to the point of historical
indication (in the time of Pontius Pilate); to this there corresponds the precision and clarity
of colouring in the central Angel, whose garment has the customary colours of the incarnated
Son of God (a purple chiton and a blue cloak). Finally, the principal colour of the third
Angel is green—the colour of his cloak—which, according to the interpretation of St. Dio¬
nysius the Areopagite, signifies “youth, fullness of powers”.9 This specifically indicates the
properties of the third Person of the Holy Trinity, renewing all things and giving them
life. The subtly conceived harmony and relationship of colours of the icon of the Holy
Trinity by St. Andrew is one of its chief attractions. The cornflower blue of the cloak of the
central Angel has extraordinary vividness and purity and when combined with wings the
colour of ripe corn, it is particularly striking. The clear and precise colours of the central
Angel are contrasted with the soft hues of the other two; but even in them bright blue areas
glow here and there like precious stones. Unifying the three figures by their colouring,
Rublev seems to point to the single nature of the Persons of the Holy Trinity, and also gives
202
203
 the whole icon a tranquil and lucid joyfulncss. Thus the colour-harmony of this icon echoes
the same life as fills its images, forms and lines. “Here arc, at the same time, emphasis on the
centre, contrasts of colours, an equilibrium of the parts, its complement in hues, and gradual
transitions leading the eye away from the rich colouring to the gleam of gold (the background).
And over it all the glow of pure blue, serene like a cloudless sky.”10 This icon, with its
inexhaustible content, its harmonious equilibrium of composition, majestically calm figures
of the Angels, light, joyous summer colours could be the creation only of a man who had
stilled in his soul all agitation and doubt and was illumined by the light of knowledge of God.
The icon of St. Andrew remains to this day a classical example of the iconography of the
Holy Trinity. Tradition preserves alike its basic colours and the individual details of out¬
line and composition. Another remarkable image of the Holy Trinity reproduced here
See reproduction (p. 203) is obviously a replica of Rublev’s icon. This icon is in the Russian Museum in
on page 203. Leningrad and is supposed to have been painted not later than the end of the XVth century.11
The Holy Trinity,
Here are the same lines and postures of the Angels, though they are grouped not in a circle but
Russian, end of
on an almost straight line, with the central figure only slightly emphasised. The figures,
XVth century.
Russian Museum, practically without shoulders, are still more effeminate than in the original. The composition
Leningrad. Photograph, is more static and the figures of the Angels are united together rather by tone than by move¬
N. P. Kondakov ment. The fundamental colours of the garments are preserved, but are more subdued and
uniform. The general tone of this icon is not bright and clear as in Rublev, but restrained
and warm. Owing to the emphatic treatment of the background, the whole scene is brought
as it were nearer to earth, and the image, revealed to St. Andrew in its ineffable majesty, here
becomes more approachable and intimate.

1 The sacrifical stone and the oak were destroyed by Constantine, and a Christian basilica was built on this place.
2 For example, St. Cyril of Alexandria—in the first discourse against Julian the Apostate. P.G. 76, coll. 532-533.
St. Ambrose of Milan, Dc Exccssu Fratris sui satyri. Lib. II; P.L. 16, col. 1342.
3 St.John Chrysostom, Discourse on Genesis (P.G. 54, col. 38). St.John of Damascus, who quotes Eusebius of
Caesarea, says: “The strangers welcomed by Abraham are depicted as reclining. One is on either side, and in the centre
one more mighty and of a higher rank. The one shown in the centre is the Lord, our Saviour Himself...” (3rd
Discourse in Defence of Holy icons. Appendix.)
1 Although the representation of God the Father, as an old man, with the child—Christ—on His lap and the
Holy Spirit as a dove, either between them or on a discus, held by the Saviour, bears the title of “Fatherhood”
(this representation transposes the doctrine of the Filioque into pictorial form); it is still a representation of the
Trinity, in so far as it strives to depict the three divine Persons. Consequently, without entering into an analysis
of its meaning, we should say a few words about it. This theme originated in Byzantium. The earliest representation
of this kind known to us is an illustration to the writings of St.John of the Ladder, in a Greek manuscript belonging
to the beginning of the Xlth century (now in the Vatican Library, Ms. grec. 394, fol. 7). Later it passed to the West,
where it was accepted as an iconography of the Holy Trinity, and thence to Russia. In Russian iconography, it
served as the start of those distortions, which followed later under the influence of the West. This representation
was forbidden by the Great Moscow Council of 1667 in the following terms: “To represent the God of Sabaoth
(that is, the Father) on icons with a grey beard, with His Only Son on His lap, and a dove between Them, is exceed¬
ingly absurd and unseemly, since no one has seen God the Father. For the Father has no flesh, and it was not in the
flesh that the Son was born from the Father before all ages; although the Prophet David says: ‘I have begotten
thee from the womb before the morning’ (Ps. cix, 3)—yet this birth is not in the flesh, but is beyond all under¬
standing or expression. And Christ Himself says in the Holy Gospel: ‘Neither knoweth any man the Father, save
the Son...’ This birth, before all ages, of the only-begotten Son from the Father should be understood by the mind,
but must not and cannot be represented on icons.” (Acts of Moscow Councils 1666-1667. Moscow, 1893. On icon-
painters and the Lord of Sabaoth, c. 44.) Both the iconography of this image, borrowed from the iconography of the
Virgin, and the title “Fatherhood”, show it to be an attempt to represent the pre-eternal birth from the Father,
in addition to the human birth from the Mother. But this birth, which is beyond all understanding, is represented
as being the birth, in the bosom of the undepictable Father, of the Child, who was bom in the flesh from the Mother,
and this introduces into the Holy Trinity an anthropomorphical element. Consequently the Council condems such
a representation as a fiction, corresponding neither to the teaching of the Orthodox Church nor to any historical
reality. (As to images of the Holy Spirit as a dove, see footnote to the commentary on the icon of the Lord’s bap¬
tism.)

204
 Moreover, there appeared in the XVIth century another iconography ofWestern origin, also based on imagina¬
tion, called “Godhead in Three Persons”, depicting God the Father and the Saviour sitting side by side, with a dove
between Them. The title again shows an attempt to depict God the Father and the Holy Spirit in physical form.
5 I. Grabar, Problems of Restoration. Moscow, 1926, p. 100.
6 M. Alpatov, Andrew Rublev, p. 19. Moscow-Leningrad, 1943.
7 On Divine Names, P.G. 3, col. 916D.
8 The grouping of the Angels led at times to a misplaced precision, amounting to downright distortion. Thus,
before Rublev and after him, the central Angel, which seems always to have been understood by icon-painters as
the second Person, was often singled out by a cross within the nimbus with the inscription “Jesus Christ” and a scroll
in his hand, instead of a staff. Perhaps in opposition to these distortions, and in Russia in particular against the heresy
of Judaisers, who denied the Orthodox teaching on the Holy Trinity, there appeared, though seldom, distortions
of a different order: not one, but all three Angels were represented with a cross within the nimbus. Although the
singling out of the central Angel has a certain basis in principle in the interpretations of the holy Fathers mentioned
above, it is incorrect when applied to the representation, since it involves applying the name of God-Man to an
image, which is not His direct and concrete representation.. “When the Word became flesh, It... was given the name
ofjesus Christ” says John of Damascus (On the Orthodox Faith, IV, c. 6; P.G. 94, col. 1112BC). As regards the
nimbus with a cross, in this case the other Persons of the Holy Trinity are given the attribute of the Lord’s Passion,
thus ascribing to them a virtual participation in the specific economy of the Second Person. The question of the in¬
scription and the cruciferous nimbus was brought forward by Tsar John the Terrible at the Council of 1551 in
Moscow, called the Council of the Hundred Chapters. In reply, the Council ordained that this image should be
painted in the manner of the ancient icon-painters and of Andrew Rublev, that is, without the cross in the nimbus,
and should be “entitled ‘The Holy Trinity’, and nothing should be done from one’s own invention” (N. V. Po¬
krovsky, “Relics of Christian iconography”, St. Petersburg, 1910, p. 289, in Russian).
9 The Celestial Hierarchy, c. 15, par. 7.
10 M. Alpatov, ibid.
11 N. P. Kondakov, The Russian Icon, vol. 4, part 2. Prague, 1933.
 With the Ascension “the works of Christ while in the flesh finish, or rather the works THE DESCENT
relating to His physical sojourn on earth; and the works of the Spirit commence”, says Gre¬ OF THE

gory the Theologian.1 These works of the Spirit begin by the fulfilment of the ’’promise of HOLY SPIRIT

the Father” (Acts i, 4) in the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles on the day of Pente¬ Russian,
cost. After worshipping the Holy Trinity on the first day of the festival (Sunday), the Church Novgorod school,

offers, on the following day, special worship to the Holy Spirit, Who descended visibly on XVth century.

Christ’s disciples. 22Vi x 36 inches.

Photo: A La Vieille
Although the Acts of the Apostles (Acts, ii, 1 —13) say that the descent of the Holy Spirit
Russie, Ne-w York
was accompanied by a sound and by general perturbation, the icon shows us the reverse -
an harmonious order and strict composition. In contrast to the Ascension, where the Apostles
are gesticulating, here their postures express an hieratic calm, their movements are full ot
solemnity. They are seated; and some turn a little towards one another, as though talking.
In order to understand the contradiction between the text of the Acts and the composition
of the icon, one should bear in mind that the icon is addressed to the faithful and so shows
not what external, uninitiated people saw at this event, which made them assert that the
Apostles were “full of new wine”, but what is revealed to the participants of this event, to
members of the Church—that is, its inner meaning. Pentecost is the baptism of the Church
by fire. Being the fulfilment of the revelation concerning the Holy Trinity, it represents the
culminating moment of the formation of the Church, unfolding its life in the fullness of its
grace-given gifts and institutions. If the icon of the Holy Trinity gives an indication of the
mystery of God’s being, the icon of the Descent of the Holy Spirit reveals the providential
action of the Holy Trinity in relation to the Church and the world. “At Pentecost it is not
by His action that the Spirit is present as formerly (in the prophets and in Christ’s disciples
prior to the descent of the Holy Spirit), but He is substantially present, cohabiting and co-
existing. *
The Divine service of that day contrasts the confusion of tongues in Babylon to their har¬
monious union on the day of the Descent of the Holy Spirit. “When the All-Highest, descend¬ Kontakion, Tone 8
ing, confounded the tongues, He divided the nations; but when He distributed the tongues Holy Pentecost

of fire, He called all men to unity; wherefore with one accord we glorify the All-holy Spirit.”
For the Fathers of the Church3 say that it was necessary that the peoples, who had lost their
unity of tongue and were dispersed during the building of the earthly tower, should once more
recover this unity and should be collected together in the spiritual building of the Church,
fused into its single holy body by the fire of love. “Thus, according to the likeness of the Floly
Trinity, undivided and distinct, there is formed a new being, the holy Church, one in its
being, but multiple in persons, whose head is Christ and whose members are angels, prophets,
apostles, martyrs and all those who have repented in faith.”4 This unity in the likeness of
the Holy Trinity, this clear and precise inner structure of the Church—its single body filled
with the grace of the Holy Spirit—is indeed shown to us in the icon of the Pentecost. The
twelve Apostles, together forming a definite figure—a semicircle—are a beautiful expression
of the unity of the body of the Church, with all the multiplicity of its members. Everything
here is subjected to a strict and majestic rhythm, which is the more strongly emphasised
by the fact that the Apostles are represented in inverse perspective—their figures grow bigger
as they recede from the foreground. Their grouping is completed by an empty, unoccupied
place—the place of the invisible Head of the Church, that is Christ. This is the reason why
some ancient images of the Pentecost are completed by an ixoiiiaala—an altar prepared, a
symbol of the invisible presence of God. Some (the Evangelists) hold books in their hands,
others scrolls, as a sign of their having received the gift of teaching. Out of the segment of
the circle, that goes beyond the edge of the panel, and symbolises heaven, there descend upon
them twelve rays or tongues of fire, as a sign of baptism with the Holy Spirit and with fire,
according to the prophesy of John the Forerunner (Matt, iii, 11), and a sign too of their sancti¬
fication. Sometimes small tongues of fire are also placed on the haloes, immediately over
207
the heads of the Apostles. This shows that the Holy Spirit descended in the form of tongues,
 which alighted “on the heads of the Apostles, as a sign of sanctification both of the principal
controlling member of the body and of the mind itself” and “showing that the Holy Spirit
reposes in the saints”.1 2 3 4 5
The inner unity expressed by subordinating the Apostles to a single form and a common
rhythm in no way stamps them with uniformity. No movement in one figure is repeated
in another. This absence of uniformity corresponds also to the inner meaning of the event.
“The Holy Spirit appears in the shape of separate tongues, owing to the diversity of gifts”,
says Gregory the Theologian.6 Consequently He descended upon every member of the Church
separately and, although there is “one and the selfsame Spirit”, “there are diversities of
gifts...” and “there are diversities of operations...”. “To one is given by the Spirit the word
of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge... to another the gifts of healing...” and so
forth (i Cor. xii, 4-31).
Tradition says that, to fulfil the prophecy of Joel (Joel ii, 28-29), the Holy Spirit descended
not only on the twelve chosen Apostles, but also upon all those who were with them “with
one accord in one place” (Acts ii, 1), that is, on the whole Church. This is why on our
icon there are represented Apostles not belonging to the twelve—Apostle Paul (sitting with
Apostle Peter at the head of the circle of Apostles), and among the seventy, Luke the Evan¬
gelist (third from the top on the left) and Mark the Evangelist (third from the top on the
right).
In ancient manuscripts, the multitude, mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, is represented
at the bottom of the composition. Yet very soon it was replaced by one symbolical figure
of a King, personifying the people or peoples, with the inscription “Cosmos”. An explanation
of this figure can be found in the collections of the XVIIth century—“Why at the descent
of the Holy Spirit is there shown a man sitting in a dark place, bowed down with years,
dressed in a red garment with a royal crown on his head, and in his hands a white cloth con¬
taining twelve written scrolls? The man sits in a dark place, since the whole world had
formerly been without faith; he is bowed down with years, for he was made old by the sin
of Adam; his red garment signifies the devil’s blood sacrifices; the royal crown signifies sin,
which ruled in the world; the white cloth in his hands with the twelve scrolls means the twelve
Apostles, who brought light to the whole world with their teaching.”7
The icon reproduced here belongs to the best period of Russian iconography and repre¬
sents one of the best examples of an icon of Pentecost8, expressing most fully the ecclesio-
logical meaning of the festival connected with the central dogma of Christianity—the triune
God. The life of the Church is connected in a fundamental way with this dogma; for triunity,
that is singleness of nature and multiplicity of persons, is the principle according to which
the Church lives and builds the Kingdom of God upon earth. Both its canonical structure and
the principle of all Christian structure (Church community, monastery, etc.) is a reflection
on the earthly plane of the Divine triune life. Thus it is that both of the icons brought out
for worship at the festival of Pentecost are, in their essence, an image of the inner life of
the Church.

1 St. Gregory the Theologian, Discourse 41; P.G. 36, col. 436.
2 St.Gregory the Theologian, Discourse 41; P.G. 36.
3 St.Gregory the Theologian, Discourse 41; P.G. 36, and St.Gregory of Nyssa, In praise of the holy martyr
Stephen.
4 Archbishop Anthony, Collected Works, vol. II, pp. 75-76.
6 St. Gregory the Theologian, ibid.
6 St. Gregory the Theologian, ibid.
7 N. Pokrovsky, The Gospels in Iconographic Records, St.Petersburg, 1892, p. 463.
208 8 A detailed description of this icon is given by P. P. Muratov in his book, Trente-citiq Primilifs Russes, Paris, 1931.
 The Transfiguration,
from a Greek
manuscript,
Xlth century, in the
Biblioth'eque
Nationale, Paris
(Grec 74, fol. 28)

“Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste THE TRANS¬
of death, till they have seen the kingdom oi God come with power” (Mark ix, i; cf. Matthew FIGURATION

xvi, 28: “The Son of man coming in his kingdom”).

What follows in the accounts of the synoptics (Mark ix, 2-9: Matthew xvii, 1-9; Luke
ix, 27-36) shows us the Apostles, Peter, James and John become in their lifetimes witnesses
of this “Power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ”, “eye witnesses (enonrm) of His
Majesty” (2 Peter i, 16-18).
What is it that the three disciples were able to contemplate, when they saw the face of
Christ “shine as the sun” and His raiment “white as the light” when a “bright cloud over¬
shadowed them” (Matthew xvii, 2, 5) ? According to St.Gregory of Nazianzus this light was
the Divinity (Oeoxrjg) manifested to the disciples on the mountain.1 St.John Damascene,
speaking of this “splendour of the Divine nature” 2, of this “a-temporal glory (axQovog dotja)
of God the Son”3, observes that the comparison made by the Evangelists with the light
of the sun remains quite inadequate, for uncreated reality cannot be expressed by a created
image.4 The matter in question, then, is the vision of God and it is evident why, from
St.Irenaeus of Lyon5 to Philaret of Moscow6, the theme of the Transfiguration of Christ
has never ceased to feed the thought of the Fathers and theologians of the Church. The
Councils of the XIVth century (1341, 1347 and 1351-52) had to make it their special con¬
cern, in formulating the orthodox definition of grace, founded on the dogmatic distinction
between the inaccessible essence and the communicable energy of God. St. Gregory Palamas
(died 1359), in defending the traditional teaching on the Lord’s Transfiguration against the
attacks of certain rationalist theologians, well understood how to give full value to the im- 209
210
portance of this evangelical event for Christian dogma and spirituality. “God is called Light”,
he said, “not according to His Essence, but according to His energy.”7 The light which
illumined the Apostles was not something sensible8, but on the other hand it is equally false
to see in it an intelligible reality, which would be called “light” only metaphorically.9 The
Divine Light is neither material nor spiritual, for it transcends the order of the created, it
is the “ineffable splendour of the one nature in three hypostases”.10 “The light of the Lord’s
Transfiguration had no beginning and no end; it remained uncircumscribed (in time and
space) and imperceptible to the senses, although it was contemplated with bodily eyes...
but by a transmutation of their senses the disciples of the Lord passed from the flesh to the
Spirit.”11
Christ appeared to the disciples, not in kcnotic form, as “servant”, but in the “form of
God”12, as an Hypostasis of the Trinity Who, in His Incarnation, remains inseparable from
His Divine nature, which is common to the Father and the Holy Spirit. The manifestation
of the Divinity of Christ is then, at the same time, a thcophany of the Trinity: “The Father...
by His voice bore witness to His beloved Son; the Holy Spirit, shining with Him in the bright
cloud, indicated that the Son possesses with the Father the light, which is one like all that
belongs to Their richness.”13 First Christ showed the glory of His Divinity to the extent
that the Apostles could receive the grace of this vision, but afterwards, the brilliance of the
“bright cloud” overwhelmed their powers. Christ became invisible and the disciples fell
in terror.14 The kontakion of the festival (Tone 7), summing up the teaching of the Fathers,
tells us that the Divine Glory of Christ was manifested to the disciples “according to their
capacity”, so that later, when they should see their Master crucified, they should be able to
understand that the Passion of Him, Who is “in truth the splendour of the Father”, could
only be voluntary.
The feast of the Transfiguration (August 6th) must be very ancient, although Aetheria
did not yet know it at the end of the IVth century. However Nicephorus Callixtus15 claims
that St.Helen had built a church on Mount Tabor in 32616; this seems to have been con¬
firmed by excavations.17 Numerous homilies on the Transfiguration lead one to think that
it was celebrated in the East well before the VUIth century, when it appears as already a great
solemnity, endowed with a canon by St.John Damascene.18 In theWest, the Transfiguration
has been commemorated, since antiquity, on the second Sunday of Lent.19 The festival of
August 6th appears only in the middle of the IXth century in Spain, and for long remained
almost unknown, despite the efforts of Cluny in the Xllth century to propagate it.20 It
was to be recognised as a festival of the church only in 1475, by Pope Clement III. Unlike
the Christian East, the West considers the Transfiguration as a festival of secondary rank
(without octave).
In iconography, the symbolical images of the Transfiguration (St. Apollinare in Classe at Opposite page:

Ravenna, Vlth century), were supplanted very early by direct representations of the evan¬ The Transfiguration,
Russian,
gelical event. But the Gospel gives two accounts of the Transfiguration. According to the
Novgorod school.
version in Mark and Matthew, the Apostles fell after having heard the voice of the Father
XVth century.
and seen the bright cloud. According to Luke—they awoke from their sleep and saw the
31lA x 33 V.2 inches.
glory of the Christ. This latter version is to be found, for example, in the fresco of Toqale, Photo: Christies,
in Cappadocia (IXth-Xth century), where the Apostles are represented seated. The two ver¬ New York
sions were to be fused together in the commentary of St.John Chrysostom21: one will see
in the “sleep” (St.Luke) the stupefaction produced by the vision. It is in this sense that Nicolas
Mesarites (Xllth century) describes the mosaic of the Transfiguration in the Church of the
Holy Apostles at Constantinople.22 The attitudes of the Apostles vary. But, starting with
the Xlth century, St.Peter will always be represented kneeling, supported on his left hand,
and raising his right hand to protect himself from the light (or to make a gesture accompany¬
ing the words that he addresses to Christ). St.John (always in the centre) falls, turning his
back to the light. St. James flees before the light or falls backwards. In the XIIIth century,
icons are more frequently met, which aim to accentuate the expressive attitudes of the 211
 Apostles: they fall precipitately from the rugged summit, overwhelmed by the vision. This
iconographic type became general in the XIVth century, at the time of the controversy over
the Light of Tabor: the intention was to underline, in iconography, the uncreated character of
the Light of the Transfiguration. It is this that we see in the icon reproduced here (Russsian,
XVth century): St. Peter has fallen on his knees; so has St.John; St. James has fallen on his
back, still looking at Christ, but protecting his eyes with his hand.
Christ transfigured is represented standing on the summit of the mountain, speaking with
Moses and Elias. His raiment is shining white. The geometrical figure (in our icon it is a
hexagon) inscribed in the circle of the mandorla, must represent the "bright cloud” which
revealed the transcendant source of the Divine energies. The three rays pointed down upon
the apostles are an indication that the action in the Transfiguration is trinitarian (we often
see this symbol in other icons, such as the Annunciation, the Theophany, and others). Moses
(on the right) in our icon is holding a book; generally it is the tables of the Decalogue—Elias
(on the left) is an old man with long hair. St.John Chrysostom23 gives several reasons to
explain the presence of Moses and Elias at the moment of the Transfiguration. 1. they
represent the law and the prophets; 2. both had had a secret vision of God, one on Mt. Sinai,
Vespers, the other on Carmel; 3. Moses represents the dead, whilst Elias, taken up to heaven on a
Stich. of Tone 5
chariot of fire, represents the living. This last interpretation has been emphasised above all
Vespers, Stich. of
in liturgical texts, and has sometimes found expression in iconography: thus at Nereditza, on
Tone 4 and Tone 1:
comparison between
an image of the XVIth or XVIIth century, an angel is drawing Moses from the tomb, another
Sinai(unseen mystery) is making Elias emerge from a cloud. This insistence is comprehensible; it underlines the
and Tabor (mystery eschatological character of the Transfiguration. Christ appears as the Lord of the quick and
made manifest) the dead, coming in the glory of the future age. The Transfiguration was "an anticipation of
Vespers, stich. of
His glorious Second Coming”, says St. Basil24: the moment which opened a perspective of
Tone 4 and Tone 2;
eternity in time.
Matins, Stich. of
Tone 4

1 Sermon (40) on the Baptism. P.G. 36, col. 365 A.

2 Homily on the Transfiguration. P.G. 96, col. 552B.
8 Ibid. col. 560D.
4 Ibid. col. 565 A.
5 Adv. Haer. IV, 20, 2 and 9; P.G. 7, coll. 1033 and 1039.
2 12th Sermon (a. 1820), Works (ed. 1873) 1, 97 et seq.
7 Against Akindynos (table of contents published in Migne) VI, 9 in P.G. 150, col. 823.
8 Ibid. IV, 20. col. 818.
9 Ibid. VII, 8. col. 826.
10 Homily 35; P.G. 151, col. 448D.
11 Homily 34. Ibid. col. 429 A. On the theology of the Transfiguration according to Gregory Palamas, see Father
Basil Krivoshein, The Ascetical and Theological Teaching of Gregory Palamas. Eastern Churches Quarterly,vol. Ill, 1938.
12 Phil, ii, 6-7, cf. St. Leo of Rome, Sermon 51; P.L. 54, col. 312C.
13 St. Gregory Palamas, Homily 34; P. G. 151, col. 425 CD. Cf. the parallel between the theophany of the Trinity
at Christ’s Baptism and that of the Transfiguration.
14 St.Gregory Palamas, Homily 35. Ibid. coll. 444-445.
16 Hist, eccles., 1, VIII, c. 30; P.G. 146, col. 113CD.
16 An ancient opinion (Origen, Commentary on Ps. Ixxxviii, sec. 13; P.G. 12, col. 1548D), which became
common, would identify the “high mountain” of the Transfiguration with Mount Tabor. However, the data
of the Scriptures make one think rather of Hermon.
17 Pere Bamabe d’Alsace. Le Mont Thabor (Paris, 1900), pp. 58-61, 133-154.
18 P.G. 96, coll. 848-852.
19 By a curious coincidence, the Orthodox Church later consecrated this day to the memory of St. Gregory
Palamas.
20 Batiffol, Histoire du Briviaire Remain, p. 163.
21 On Matthew, Homily 56; P.G. 58, coll. 552-553.
22 A. Heisenberg, Grabeskirche und Apostelkirche, Zwei Basilikcn Konstantins (Leipzig, 1908), Pt. 2, pp. 32-37.
28 Op. cit. P.G. 58, coll. 550-551.
24 Homily on Ps. xliv, sec. 5; P.G. 29, col. 400CD.
212
 The feast of the Dormition (xoi^rjaiq) of the Mother of God, known in the West under THE
the name of the Assumption, comprises two distinct but inseparable moments for the faith DORMITION
of the Church: firstly, the Death and Burial, and second, the Resurrection and Ascension OF THE
of the Mother of God. The Orthodox East has known how to respect the mysterious character MOTHER OFGOD
of this event which, unlike the Resurrection of Christ, was not made a subject of apostolic
preaching. In fact, there is here a mystery, not destined for the cars of “those without”, but
revealed to the inner consciousness of the Church. For those who are affirmed in faith in
the Resurrection and Ascension of the Lord, it is evident that, if the Son of God assumed
His human nature in the womb of the Virgin, She Who served the Incarnation had in Her
turn to be assumed into the glory of Her Son risen and ascended to Heaven. “Arise, O Lord,
into thy rest; thou, and the ark of thine holiness.”1 “The grave and death” could not retain
the “ Mother of Life ”, for Her Son has transported Her (/uerearrjaev) into the life of the future age. Kontakion, Tone 2

The glorification of the Mother is a direct result of the voluntary humiliation of the Son:
the Son of God is incarnate of the Virgin Mary and is made “ Son of Man”, capable of dying,
whilst Mary, becoming the Mother of God, receives the “glory which belongs to God” Vespers,

(d£07iQ£7irjg d6£a) and is the first among human beings to participate in the final deification Stich. of Tone 1

of the creature. “God became man, that man might become God.”2 The significance of
the Incarnation of the Word thus appears at the end of Mary’s life on earth. “Wisdom is
justified of her children.” The glory of the age to come, the last end of man, is already realised,
not only in a Divine Hypostasis made flesh, but also in a human person made God. This pass¬
age from death to life, from time to eternity, from terrestrial condition to celestial beatitude
establishes the Mother of God beyond the general Resurrection and the Last Judgment,
beyond the Second Coming which will end the history of the world. The feast of August 15 th
is a second mysterious Easter, since the Church therein celebrates, before the end of time, the
secret first-fruit of its eschatological consummation. This explains the soberness of the liturgical
text which, in the office of the Dormition, permits a glimpse of the ineffable glory of the
Assumption of the Mother of God.3
The feast of the Dormition probably originated in Jerusalem. However, at the end of
the IVth century, Aetheria did not yet know it. It can nevertheless be supposed that this
solemnity was not slow in appearing, since in the Vlth century it was already widespread;
St. Gregory of Tours is the first witness of the feast of the Assumption in the West4, where
it was originally celebrated in January.5 Under the Emperor Maurice (582 to 602) the date
of the feast was definitely fixed as August 15th.6
Among the first iconographic monuments of the Assumption must be noticed the sarco¬
phagus of Santa Ingracia at Saragossa (beginning of the IVth century) with a scene which is
very probably that of the Assumption7, and a relief of the Vlth century, in the Basilica of
Bolniss-Kapanakci, in Georgia, which represents the Ascension of the Mother of God and
is matched by a relief of the Ascension of Christ.8 The apocryphal account which circulated
under the name of St.Melito (Ilnd century) was not earlier than the beginning of the Vth
century.9 It is full of legendary details of the death, the resurrection and the ascension of the
Mother of God, dubious information that the Church will take care to avoid. Thus, St.Mod-
estus of Jerusalem (died 634), in his “Praise on the Dormition”10, is very restrained in the
details which he gives: he notes the presence of the Apostles “brought from afar, by an
inspiration from on high”, the appearance of Christ, come to raise the soul of His Mother,
finally, the return to life of the Mother of God, “in order to participate corporally in the
eternal incorruption of Him, Who brought Her forth from the tomb and drew Her to Him¬
self in a manner that He alone knew”. The homily of St.John of Thessalonica (died circa
630) as well as other more recent homilies—of St. Andrew of Crete, St. Germanos of Constan¬
tinople, St.John Damascene11—are more rich in details, which were to enter both into the
liturgy and into the iconography of the Dormition of the Mother of God.
The classical type of the Dormition in orthodox iconography is habitually limited to
representing the Mother of God lying on Her deathbed, in the midst of the Apostles, and 213
 Christ in glory receiving in His arms the soul of His Mother. However, sometimes there
has been a desire to show equally the moment of the bodily assumption: one then sees, at the
top of the icon, above the scene of the Dormition, the Mother of God seated on a throne
in the “mandorla” that angels are carrying towards the heavens.
In our icon (Russian, XVIth century) Christ in glory surrounded by a “mandorla” is look¬
ing at the body of His Mother stretched on a litter. He is holding on His left arm a small
Vespers, figure of a child clothed in white and crowned with a halo: it is the “all-luminous soul”
Stich. of Tone 5 that He has just gathered up. The twelve Apostles, “standing around the bed, look on with
Vespers, terror” at the decease of the Mother of God. It is easy to recognise, in the foreground, St. Peter
Stich. of Tone 6 and St. Paul on cither side of the couch. On some icons there is shown at the top, in the sky,
the moment of the miraculous arrival of the Apostles, assembled “from the ends of the earth,
Kontakion, Tone 2 on the clouds”. The multitude of angels present at the Dormition sometimes forms an outer
border around the “mandorla” of Christ. On our icon, the heavenly virtues, accompanying
Christ, are indicated by a seraphim with six wings, two cherubim and two angels in the
mandorla. Four bishops with haloes stand behind the Apostles. They are St. James, “the
brother of the Lord”, the first Bishop of Jerusalem, and three disciples of the Apostles:
Kontakion, Tone 2 Timothy, Hierotheus and Dionysious the Areopagite, who had come with St. Paul. 12 Some¬
times groups of women represent the faithful of Jerusalem who, with the bishops and the
Apostles, form the inner circle of the Church in which is accomplished the mystery of the
Dormition of the Mother of God.
The episode of Athonios, a fanatical Jew, who had both hands cut off by the sword of an
angel, for having dared to touch the funeral couch of the Mother of God, figures in the
Troparion, Ode 3 majority of the icons of the Dormition. The presence of this apocryphal detail in the liturgy
and in the iconography of the feast is to recall that the end of the life on earth of the Mother
of God is an intimate mystery of the Church which must not be exposed to profanation:
inaccessible to the view of those without, the glory of the Dormition of Mary can be con¬
templated only in the inner light of Tradition.

Opposite page: 1 Psalm cxxxi, 8, which recurs many times in the office of the “Dormition”.
The Dormition. 2 St.Ircnaeus, St Athanasius, St.Gregory of Nazianzus, St.Gregory of Nyssa (P.G. 7, col. 1120; 25, col. 192;
Russian, 37, col. 465; 45, col. 65) and other Fathers of the Church.
XVIth century. 3 The office of the “Burial of the Mother of God” (August 17th), is of very late origin, and is on the con¬
1IV2 x 9Vi inches. trary too explicit; it is copied from the Matins of Holy Saturday (“Burial of Christ”).
Photo: Temple 4 Dc gloria martyrum, Miracula 1, 4 and 9; P.L. 71, coll. 708 and 713.
Gallery, London 5 The Bobbio Missal and the Gallican Sacramentary indicate January 18th as the date.
6 Nicephorus Callistus, Hist, eccles. XVII, c. 28; P.G. 147, col. 292.
7 Dom Cabrol, Diet, d’archeol. chret., vol. 1, pp. 2990-2994.
8 S. Amiranaschwili, History of Georgian art, p. 128, Moscow, 1950 (in Russian).
9 P.G. 5, coll. 1231-1240.
10 Encomium, P.G. 86, coll. 3277-3312.
11 Patrologia Oricntalis XIX, 375-438; P.G. 97, coll. 1045-1109; 98, coll. 340-372; 96, coll. 700-761.
12 See the passage on the Dormition in the Divine Names of Dionysius the Areopagite, III, sec. 2; P. G. 3, col. 681.

214
 INDEX OF PLATES
★ Reproduction in color

Page

61 Iconostasis. Russian, XVIth century, Novgorod. Photo: I. Grabar.

64A* Portable iconostasis. Russian, mid-XVIth century. Coll. Dr. John Sinsky.

65 Holy Door. Russian, XVIth century. Photo: A La Vieille Russie, New York.

66-67★ The Eucharist. Russian, ca. 1500. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

70* The Holy Face (Acheiropoietos). Church of the Holy Trinity, Vanves, Paris.

71* Christ Enthroned. Russian, attributed to XVth century. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,

No. 44. 101.

74* Christ Pantocrator. Russian, XVIth century. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

75 Christ Pantocrator. Russian, XIXth century.

78* Our Lady of the Sign. Russian, end of XVIth century. Private coll.

79* Hodigitria. Byzantine, Macedonian School, ca. first half XIVth century. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

82* The Smolensk Mother of God. Russian, XVIth century. Photo: Castle De Wijenburgh, Echteld,

Netherlands.

83* The Tichvine Mother of God. Russian, first half of the XVIIth century. Icon Museum, Recklinghausen,

Inv. Nr. 47.

86* The Tichvine Mother of God. Russian, ca. 1600, Moscow School. Icon Museum, Recklinghausen, Inv. Nr.

851.

87* The Kazan Mother of God. Russian, end of XVIth century. Private coll.

90* The Mother of God Enthroned. Attributed to Cretan School, late XVth-early XVIth century. Benaki

Museum, Athens, No. 3051.

91* The Vladimir Mother of God. Russian, XVIth century. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

94 The Vladimir Mother of God. Russian, XVth century. Coll. M. Lanza.

95* The Mother of God (Umilenie). Russian, beginning XVth century, Novgorod. Icon Museum, Reck¬

linghausen, Inv, Nr. 852.

98* The Korsun Mother of God (Eleousa). Russian, XVIth century, Moscow School. Coll. National Museum,

Paris.

99* The Korsun Mother of God. Russian, late XVIth century. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

103 The Mother of God of the Passion. Russian triptych of 1641. Coll. P.M. J. Rouet de Journel, Paris.

105 St.John the Forerunner. Russian icon from a Deisis, XVIth century. Former Coll. A. Poliakov, Paris.

107* St.John the Forerunner. Greek, ca. 1600. Photo: Castle De Wijenburgh, Echteld, Netherlands.

110* The Archangel Michael. Balkan, ca. 1600. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

111* Head of the Apostle Paul. Detail of an icon by Andrew Rublev and medallion from the Vatican Museum.

114* St. Luke the Evangelist. Russian, XVIth century, Novgorod. Icon Museum, Recklinghausen, Inv. Nr.

246.

217
115* St. John the Evangelist. Russian, XVlth century, Moscow School. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

117 The Holy Bishop Abraham. Coptic, Vlth century. From Bawib. Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin.

118-* St. Gregory Palamas. Greek, end of XIVth century. Photo: Aurora Publications.

122-* The Holy Bishop Nicholas, the Miracle-Worker of Myra. Russian, XVlth century. Former Coll. A.

Poliakov, Paris.

123* St. Basil and St. George. Novgorod School about 1400. Coll. Dr. S. Amberg, Kblliken, Switzerland.

126 The Head of St. George the Martyr. Detail.

130^ St. Sergius of Radonej. Russian icon of the 1940’s. Community of St-Denis and St-Seraphin, Paris.

131'*' St. Simeon Stylites. Russian, XVlth century. Coll. National Museum, Paris.

134-* St. Macarius of Unsha and Yellow Waters. Russian, XVIIth century. Coll. Dr. S. Amberg, Kblliken,

Switzerland.

135* St. Demetrius of Thessalonica. Greek, ca. 1500. Benaki Museum, Athens, No. 2976.

138*- The Great Martyr St. Paraskeva Piatnitza. Russian, second half of XVlth century. Private coll., Paris.

139* The Great Martyr St. George and the Dragon. Russian XVth century, Novgorod School. Coll. Metropol¬

itan Museum of Art, New York, No. 1972.145.13.

142-* The Holy Prophet Elijah in the Desert. Russian, end XVth century, Novgorod School. Icon Museum,

Recklinghausen, Inv. Nr. 352.

143'*' Collective Icons. Russian, end XVth century, Novgorod School. Icon Museum, Recklinghausen, Inv. Nr.

118.

147 The Nativity of the Holy Virgin. Church of the Holy Trinity, Vanves, Paris.

150 The Elevation of the Cross. Russian iconographer, Paris, 1948, Church of the Holy Trinity, Vanves,

Paris.

154-*- The Protection of the Mother of God. Russian, late XVth century, Novgorod School. Photo: Temple

Gallery, London.

155* The Presentation of the Holy Virgin in the Temple. Russian, XVIIth century. Photo: Castle De

Wijenburgh, Echteld, Netherlands.

^S'*' The Nativity of Christ. Russian, attributed to the XVth century, Novgorod School. Photo: Christies,

New York.

161 The Nativity of Christ. Russian, XVIIth century. Private coll., Paris.

166-*- The Baptism of Our Lord. Russian, XVlth century. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

167 The Baptism of Our Lord. Russian, attributed to Moscow School, beginning of XVIIth century. Photo: A

La Vieille Russie, New York.

170- *- The Presentation of Christ in the Temple. Russian, ca. 1500, Moscow School. Photo: Castle De

Wijenburgh, Echteld, Netherlands.

171- *' The Annunciation. Russian, XVlth century, Moscow School. Icon Museum, Recklinghausen, Inv. Nr.

797.

174*" The Raising of Lazarus. Russian, XVlth century. Photo: N. Ozolin.

179'*' The Entry into Jerusalem. Russian, XVlth century. Photo: N. Ozolin.

218
182* The Crucifixion. Russian, XVIth century. Coll. National Museum, Paris.

183* Carved Portable Cross. Russian, first half of XVIth century. Coll. L. Vytchegjanine, Paris.

186* The Descent into Hell. Russian, XVth century. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

190* The Spice-Bearing Women at the Tomb. Russian, XVIth century. Castle De Wijenburgh, Echteld,

Netherlands.

191* Mid-Pentecost. Russian, XVth century, Novgorod School. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

195* The Ascension. Russian, XVIth century. The Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston, Mass.

198* The Holy Trinity. Andrew Rublev. Tretiakov Gallery, Moscow. Photo: UNESCO.

203 The Holy Trinity. Russian, end of XVth century. Russian Museum, Leningrad. Photo: N. P. Kondakov.

206* The Descent of the Holy Spirit. Russian, XVth century, Novgorod School. Photo: A La Vieille Russie,

New York.

210* The Transfiguration. Russian, XVth century, Novgorod School. Photo: Christies, New York.

215* The Dormition of the Mother of God. Russian, XVIth century. Photo: Temple Gallery, London.

219
 INDEX OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT

page 33 St. Theodore the Studite, John of Damascus, Vllth Oecumenical Council.

62 Diagram of a church iconostasis.

84 Hodigitria. Design for an icon.

92 "Source of Life.” Design for an icon, XVIIth century.

116 Saints celebrated in January. Design for an icon, upper half.

124 Saints celebrated in January. Design for an icon, lower half.

144 Saints celebrated on 11th and 16th December. Design for an icon.

149 The Raising of the Cross. Design for an icon.

177 The Entry into Jerusalem. Design for an icon.

189 The Spice-bearing Women at the Holy Sepulchre. Design for an icon.

194 Christ as a Child Among the Scribes. From a Greek manuscript of the Xlth century in the Bibliotheque

Nationale, Paris (Grec 74, fol. 98).

199 Iconography of the Ascension on an Ampulla of Monza, Vlth century (after Carucci, 434,4).

209 The Transfiguration. From a Greek manuscript of the Xlth century in the Bibliotheque Nationale,

Paris (Grec 74, fol. 28).

220
 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sources:
Aetheria (Egeria), Itinerarium, ed. E. Francheschini and R. Weber, Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 175
(Turnhout, 1965) pp. 27-90; vol. 176, indexes. Eng. trans. with copious notes and supplementary documents by
J. Wilkinson, Egeria’s Travels, London, S.P.C.K., 1971.
Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiatical History, ed. E. Schwartz, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller, 9, parts 1 -3
(Leipzig, 1903-09). Eng. trans. and notes by H.J. Lawlor and J.E.L. Oulton, 2 vols., London, S.P.C.K., 1927-28.
John of Damascus, Three Discourses in Defense of the Holy Icons, J.P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus, Series
graeca, vol. 94, cols, 1232-1420. Eng. trans. by D. Anderson, On the Divine Images, Crestwood, N.Y., St.
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1980.
_, On the Orthodox Faith, J.P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus, Series graeca, vol. 94, cols. 789-1228. Eng.
trans. by F.H. Chase, Jr., The Fathers of the Church, vol. 37 (New York, 1958).
Seventh Oecumenical Council, Acta, J.D. Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio (Florence,
1759-98) vol. 12, cols. 951-1154; vol. 13, cols. 1-485. Excerpts in Eng. trans. in The Seven Ecumenical Councils, ed.
H R. Percival, Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, vol. 14 (repr. Eerdmans, Grand
Rapids, Mich., n.d.) pp. 523-587.
Symeon of Thessalonica, On the Holy Temple, J.P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus, Series graeca, vol. 155,
cols. 305-362.
Theodore of Studios, Three Refutations of the Iconoclasts, J.P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus, Series graeca,
vol. 99, cols. 327-436. Eng. trans. C. Roth, On the Holy Icons, Crestwood, N.Y., St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press,
1981.
The liturgical books of the Orthodox Church have not been translated into English in their entirety. Most useful in
connection with our subject are The FestalMenaion and The Lenten Triodion, trans. Mother Mary and K. Ware,
London, Faber and Faber, 1969 and 1978 respectively.

Secondary works:
Grabar, Andre, L’iconoclasme byzantin: dossier archeologique, Paris, 1957.
_, Les voies de la creation en iconographie chretienne, Paris, 1979.
Kolakyres, Konstantinos D., The Essence of Orthodox Iconography, Brookline, Mass., 1971.
Kondakov, Nikodim P., Ikonografiia Bogomateri, 2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1914-15.
_, Ikonografiia Gospoda Boga i Spasa nashego lisusa Khrista, St. Petersburg, 1905.
_, The Russian Icon, 4 vols. in 3, Prague, 1928-33.
Lazarev, Viktor N., Istoriia vizantiiskoi zhivopisi, 2 vols., Moscow, 1947-48.
Lossky, Vladimir N., In the Image and Likeness of God, Crestwood, N.Y., St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1974.
_, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, London, 1957; repr. Crestwood, N.Y.,St. Vladimir’s Seminary
Press, 1976.
_, The Vision of God, London, 1963-
Onasch, Konrad, Kunst und Liturgie der Ostkirche in Stichworten unter Beriicksichtigung der alten Kirche, Wien-
Koln-Graz, 1981.
Ostrogorsky, George, History of the Byzantine State, New Brunswick, N.J., Rutgers Univ. Press, 1969.
_, "Rom und Byzanz im Kampfe um die Bilderverehrung,” Seminarium Kondakovianum 6 (Prague, 1933) pp.
73-87.
_, Studien zur Geschichte des byzantinischen Bilderstreites (Historische Untersuchungen 5), Breslau, 1929.
Ouspensky, Leonide, Theologie de I'icone dans FEglise orthodoxe, Paris, Cerf, 1980; Eng. trans. corresponding to
chaps. 1-9 by E. Meyendorff, Theology of the Icon, Crestwood, N.Y., St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1978.
Pokrovsky, Nikolai V., Ocherki pamiatnikov khristianskoi ikonografii i iskusstva, St. Petersburg, 1900.
Schonborn, Christoph von, L’icone du Christ: fondements theologiques, Fribourg, Editions universitaires, 1976.
Trubetskoi, Eugene N., Icons: Theology in Color, Crestwood, N.Y., St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1973.

221
 HARYGROUE COLLEGE

1T27 00D70457 4

DATE DUE

anr i 3
No i v
DE 5’9C
jai/ ai
lift 30‘^
hE 2 it
PE 3 '91

246 Ou8s tP1 cop.2

Ouspensky, Leonid
The Meaning of icons
 THE MEANING OF ICONS
REVISED EDITION
In the last decades the art of icons has gained increased attention. Once icons were passed over by the art critics, or
at most classified as popular art, although painters such as Matisse or Picasso went to Russia especially for the sake
of studying this art. Most recently many books have been published on icon painting. Yet the present work is the
first of its kind to give a reliable introduction into the spiritual background of this art.
The nature of the icon cannot be grasped by means of pure art criticism, nor by the adoption of a sentimental point
of view. Its forms are based on the wisdom contained in the theological and liturgical writings of the Eastern
Orthodox Church and are intimately bound up with the experience of contemplative life.
The introduction into the meaning and the language of the icons by Ouspensky imparts to us in an admirable way
the spiritual conceptions of the Eastern Orthodox Church which are often so foreign to us, but without the
knowledge of which we cannot possibly understand the world of the icon.
"It is not the purpose of the icon to touch its contemplator. Neither is it its purpose to recall one or the other
human experience of natural life; it is meant to lead every human sentiment as well as reason and all other
qualities of human nature on the way to illumination.'"
"The entire visible world as depicted in the icon is to foreshadow the coming Unity of the whole creation, of the
Kingdom of the Holy Ghost.’’
The theological justification of the icon was derived by the Vllth Oecumenical Council from the fact of the
Incarnation of God. God became human for the elation and deification of Man. This deification becomes visible in
the Saints. The Byzantipe theologian often sets the calling of an icon-painter on an equal level with that of a priest.
Devoted to the service of a more sublime reality, he exercises his objective duty the same way as the liturgical
priest. The "spiritual genuineness’’ of the icon, the cryptic, almost sacral power to convince, is not alone due to
accurate observation of the iconographic canon, but also to the ascetic fervor of the painter.
A very interesting section on the technique of icon-painting is followed by the main part of the book, in which
both authors describe the most important types of icons. Apart from a detailed description of the icon screen
Iikonostas) of the Russian Church, 58 types are explained with the aid of an equal number of illustrations,
amongst which there are alone 10 various representatives of the Virgin. Special mention is due to 51 icons
reproduced in their complete colorful splendor.
The selection of subjects made in order to reveal the main features of Orthodox iconography was naturally limited
to the examples available outside Russia. But this not in the least diminishes the value of the book; on the contrary,
it led to the reproduction of many beautiful icons which had never been published before or had been unknown to a
wider public. A considerable number of museums and private collectors in Europe and America spontaneously
placed their collections at the disposal of the authors.
The size of the book is 12x9 inches. It includes 160 pages of text with drawings, 13 black and white and 51 full
color plates. It is linen-cloth and paper bound.

ISBN 0-91 W6-99-0