Byzantine icons. Russian and Byzantine icons

The exhibition “Masterpieces of Byzantium” is a great and rare event that cannot be missed. For the first time, a whole collection of Byzantine icons was brought to Moscow. This is especially valuable because it is not so easy to get a serious idea of ​​​​Byzantine icon painting from several works located in the Pushkin Museum.

It is well known that all ancient Russian icon painting came out of the Byzantine tradition, that many Byzantine artists worked in Rus'. There are still disputes about many pre-Mongol icons about who painted them - Greek icon painters who worked in Rus', or their talented Russian students. Many people know that at the same time as Andrei Rublev, the Byzantine icon painter Theophanes the Greek worked as his senior colleague and probably teacher. And he, apparently, was by no means the only one of the great Greek artists who worked in Rus' at the turn of the 14th-15th centuries.

And therefore, for us, the Byzantine icon is practically indistinguishable from the Russian one. Unfortunately, science never developed precise formal criteria for determining “Russianness” when we talk about art until the middle of the 15th century. But this difference exists, and you can see this with your own eyes at the exhibition in the Tretyakov Gallery, because several real masterpieces of Greek icon painting came to us from the Athens “Byzantine and Christian Museum” and some other collections.

I would like to once again thank the people who organized this exhibition, and first of all the initiator and curator of the project, researcher at the Tretyakov Gallery Elena Mikhailovna Saenkova, the head of the department of ancient Russian art Natalya Nikolaevna Sharedega, and the entire department of ancient Russian art, which took an active part in the preparation of this unique exhibition.

Raising of Lazarus (12th century)

The earliest icon on display. Small in size, located in the center of the hall in a display case. The icon is a part of a tyabl (or epistilium) - a painted wooden beam or large board, which in the Byzantine tradition was placed on the ceiling of marble altar barriers. These chapels were the basis of the future high iconostasis, which arose at the turn of the 14th-15th centuries.

In the 12th century, the 12 great holidays (the so-called Dodekaorton) were usually written on the epistyle, and the Deesis was often placed in the center. The icon that we see at the exhibition is a fragment of such an epistyle with one scene of “The Raising of Lazarus.” It is valuable that we know where this epistyle comes from – from Mount Athos. Apparently, in the 19th century it was sawn into pieces, which ended up in completely different places. In recent years, researchers have been able to discover several parts of it.

The Raising of Lazarus. XII century. Wood, tempera. Byzantine and Christian Museum, Athens

The Raising of Lazarus is in the Athens Byzantine Museum. Another part, with the image of the Transfiguration of the Lord, ended up in the State Hermitage, the third - with the scene of the Last Supper - is located in the Vatopedi monastery on Athos.

The icon, being not a Constantinople or capital work, demonstrates the highest level that it has reached Byzantine icon painting in the 12th century. Judging by the style, the icon dates back to the first half of this century and, with high probability, was written on Mount Athos itself for monastic needs. In painting we do not see gold, which has always been an expensive material.

The traditional gold background for Byzantium is replaced here by red. In a situation where the master did not have gold at his disposal, he used a symbolic substitute for gold - the color red.

So here we have one of the earliest examples of red-background Byzantine icons - the origins of a tradition that developed in Rus' in the 13th-14th centuries.

Virgin and Child (early 13th century)

This icon is interesting not only for its stylistic decision, which does not quite fit into the purely Byzantine tradition. It is believed that the icon was painted in Cyprus, but perhaps an Italian master took part in its creation. Stylistically, it is very similar to the icons of Southern Italy, which for centuries was in the orbit of the political, cultural and religious influence of Byzantium.

However, Cypriot origin cannot be ruled out either, because at the beginning of the 13th century, completely different stylistic styles existed in Cyprus, and Western masters also worked alongside the Greek ones. It is quite possible that the special style of this icon is the result of interaction and a peculiar Western influence, which is expressed, first of all, in the violation natural plastics figures, which the Greeks usually did not allow, and deliberate expression of the design, as well as decorative details.

The iconography of this icon is curious. The Baby is shown wearing a blue and white long shirt with wide stripes that go from the shoulders to the edges, while the Baby's legs are bare. The long shirt is covered with a strange cloak, more like a drapery. According to the author of the icon, before us is a kind of shroud in which the body of the Child is wrapped.

In my opinion, these robes have a symbolic meaning and are associated with the theme of the priesthood. The Child Christ is also represented as a High Priest. Connected with this idea are the wide clave stripes running from the shoulder to the bottom edge - an important distinctive feature of the bishop's surplice. The combination of blue-white and gold-bearing clothes is apparently related to the theme of the coverings on the altar throne.

As you know, the Throne in both the Byzantine church and the Russian one has two main covers. The lower garment is a shroud, a linen cover, which is placed on the Throne, and on top is laid out precious indium, often made of precious fabric, decorated with gold embroidery, symbolizing heavenly glory and royal dignity. In Byzantine liturgical interpretations, in particular, in the famous interpretations of Simeon of Thessalonica at the beginning of the 15th century, we encounter precisely this understanding of two veils: the funeral Shroud and the robes of the heavenly Lord.

Another very characteristic detail of this iconography is that the Baby’s legs are bare to the knees and the Mother of God is pressing His right heel with her hand. This emphasis on the heel of the Child is present in a number of Theotokos iconographies and is associated with the theme of Sacrifice and the Eucharist. We see here a echo of the theme of the 23rd Psalm and the so-called Edenic promise that the woman’s son will bruise the tempter’s head, and the tempter himself will bruise this son’s heel (see Gen. 3:15).

Thus, the bare heel is both an allusion to the sacrifice of Christ and the coming Salvation - the embodiment of the high spiritual “dialectic” of the well-known Easter hymn “Trampling on Death.”

Relief icon of St. George (mid-13th century)

Relief icons, which are unusual for us, are well known in Byzantium. By the way, Saint George was often depicted in relief. Byzantine icons were made of gold and silver, and there were quite a lot of them (we know about this from the inventories of Byzantine monasteries that have come down to us). Several of these remarkable icons have survived and can be seen in the treasury of St. Mark's Basilica in Venice, where they were taken as spoils of the Fourth Crusade.

Wooden relief icons are an attempt to replace jewelry with more economical materials. What attracted me to wood was the possibility of the sensual tangibility of a sculptural image. Although sculpture as an icon technique was not very widespread in Byzantium, we must remember that the streets of Constantinople, before its destruction by the crusaders in the 13th century, were lined with ancient statues. And the Byzantines had sculptural images, as they say, “in their blood.”

The full-length icon shows Saint George praying, who turns to Christ, as if flying from heaven in the upper right corner of the center of this icon. In the margins is a detailed life cycle. Above the image are shown two archangels who flank the not preserved image of the “Prepared Throne (Etymasia)”. It introduces a very important time dimension into the icon, recalling the coming Second Coming.

That is, we are not talking about real time, or even the historical dimension of ancient Christian history, but about the so-called iconic or liturgical time, in which the past, present and future are intertwined into a single whole.

In this icon, as in many other icons from the mid-13th century, certain Western features are visible. During this era, the main part of the Byzantine Empire was occupied by the crusaders. It can be assumed that the person who ordered the icon could have been connected with this environment. This is evidenced by the very non-Byzantine, non-Greek shield of George, which is very reminiscent of shields with the coats of arms of Western knights. The edges of the shield are surrounded by a peculiar ornament, in which it is easy to recognize an imitation of Arabic Kufic writing; in this era it was especially popular and was considered a sign of the sacred.

In the lower left part, at the feet of St. George, there is a female figurine in rich, but very strict vestments, which falls in prayer at the feet of the saint. This is the unknown customer of this icon, apparently the same name as one of the two holy women depicted on the back of the icon (one is signed with the name “Marina”, the second martyr in royal robes is an image of St. Catherine or St. Irene).

Saint George is the patron saint of warriors, and taking this into account, it can be assumed that the icon ordered by an unknown wife is a votive image with a prayer for her husband, who in this very turbulent time is fighting somewhere and needs the most direct patronage of the main warrior from the rank of martyrs.

Icon of the Mother of God and Child with the Crucifixion on the back (XIV century)

The most artistically remarkable icon of this exhibition is the large icon of the Mother of God and Child with the Crucifixion on the reverse. This is a masterpiece of Constantinople painting, most likely painted by an outstanding, one might even say, great artist in the first half of the 14th century, the heyday of the so-called “Palaeologian Renaissance”.

During this era, the famous mosaics and frescoes of the Chora Monastery in Constantinople, known to many under the Turkish name Kahrie-Jami, appeared. Unfortunately, the icon suffered greatly, apparently from deliberate destruction: literally a few fragments of the image of the Mother of God and Child have survived. Unfortunately, we see mostly late additions. The crucifixion scene is much better preserved. But even here, someone purposefully destroyed the faces.

But even what has survived speaks of the hand of an outstanding artist. And not just a great master, but a man of extraordinary talent who set himself special spiritual goals.

He removes all unnecessary things from the Crucifixion scene, concentrating attention on the three main figures, in which, on the one hand, one can read the ancient basis that never disappeared in Byzantine art - stunning sculptural plasticity, which, however, is transformed by spiritual energy. For example, the figures of the Mother of God and John the Evangelist seem to be written on the border between the real and the supernatural, but this line is not crossed.

The figure of the Mother of God, wrapped in robes, was painted in lapis lazuli, a very expensive paint that was literally worth its weight in gold. Along the edge of the maforia is a golden border with long tassels. The Byzantine interpretation of this detail has not survived. However, in one of my works I suggested that it is also connected with the idea of ​​the priesthood. Because the same tassels along the edge of the robe, also complemented by golden bells, were an important feature of the robes of the Old Testament high priest in the Jerusalem temple. The artist very delicately recalls this internal connection of the Mother of God, who sacrifices Her Son, with the theme of the priesthood.

Mount Golgotha ​​is shown as a small hill; behind it is visible the low city wall of Jerusalem, which on other icons is much more impressive. But here the artist seems to be showing the scene of the Crucifixion at a bird's eye level. And therefore, the wall of Jerusalem appears in the depths, and all attention, due to the chosen angle, is concentrated on the main figure of Christ and the figures of John the Evangelist and the Mother of God framing Him, creating the image of a sublime spatial action.

The spatial component is of fundamental importance for understanding the design of the entire double-sided icon, which is usually a processional image, perceived in space and movement. The combination of two images - the Mother of God Hodegetria on one side and the Crucifixion - has its own high prototype. These same two images were on both sides of the Byzantine palladium - the icon of Hodegetria of Constantinople.

Most likely, this icon of unknown origin reproduced the theme of Hodegetria of Constantinople. It is possible that it could be connected with the main miraculous action that happened to Hodegetria of Constantinople every Tuesday, when she was taken to the square in front of the Odigon monastery, and a weekly miracle took place there - the icon began to fly in a circle in the square and rotate around its axis. We have evidence of this from many people - representatives of different nations: Latins, Spaniards, and Russians, who saw this amazing action.

The two sides of the icon at the exhibition in Moscow remind us that the two sides of the Constantinople icon formed an indissoluble dual unity of the Incarnation and the Redemptive Sacrifice.

Icon of Our Lady Cardiotissa (XV century)

The icon was chosen by the creators of the exhibition as the central one. Here is a rare case for the Byzantine tradition when we know the name of the artist. He signed this icon, on the bottom margin it is written in Greek - “Hand of an Angel”. This is the famous Angelos Akotantos - an artist of the first half of the 15th century, of whom quite a lot remains large number icons We know more about him than about other Byzantine masters. A number of documents have survived, including his will, which he wrote in 1436. He did not need a will; he died much later, but the document was preserved.

The Greek inscription on the icon “Mother of God Kardiotissa” is not a feature of the iconographic type, but rather an epithet - a characteristic of the image. I think that even a person who is not familiar with Byzantine iconography can guess what we are talking about: we all know the word cardiology. Cardiotissa – cardiac.

Icon of Our Lady Cardiotissa (XV century)

Particularly interesting from the point of view of iconography is the pose of the Child, who, on the one hand, embraces the Mother of God, and on the other, seems to tip over backwards. And if the Mother of God looks at us, then the Baby looks into Heaven, as if far from Her. A strange pose, which was sometimes called Leaping in the Russian tradition. That is, on the icon there seems to be a Baby playing, but He plays rather strangely and very much not like a child. It is in this pose of the overturning body that there is an indication, a transparent hint of the theme of the Descent from the Cross, and, accordingly, the suffering of the God-Man at the moment of the Crucifixion.

Here we meet with the great Byzantine drama, when tragedy and triumph are combined into one, a holiday - this is both the greatest sorrow and at the same time a wonderful victory, the salvation of mankind. The Playing Child foresees His coming sacrifice. And the Mother of God, suffering, accepts the Divine plan.

This icon contains the endless depth of the Byzantine tradition, but if we look closely, we will see changes that will lead to a new understanding of the icon very soon. The icon was painted in Crete, which belonged to the Venetians at that time. After the fall of Constantinople, it became the main center of icon painting throughout the Greek world.

In this icon of the outstanding master Angelos we see how he balances on the verge of transformation unique image in a sort of cliche for standard playbacks. The images of light-gaps are already becoming somewhat mechanistic; they look like a rigid mesh placed on a living plastic base, something that artists of earlier times never allowed.

Icon of Our Lady Cardiotissa (XV century), fragment

Before us is an outstanding image, but in a certain sense already borderline, standing at the border of Byzantium and post-Byzantium, when living images gradually turn into cold and somewhat soulless replicas. We know what happened on Crete less than 50 years after this icon was painted. Contracts between the Venetians and the leading icon painters of the island have reached us. According to one such contract in 1499, three icon-painting workshops were to produce 700 icons of the Mother of God in 40 days. In general, it is clear that a kind of artistic industry is beginning, spiritual service through the creation of holy images is turning into a craft for the market, for which thousands of icons are painted.

The beautiful icon of Angelos Akotanthos represents a striking milestone in the centuries-long process of devaluation of Byzantine values, of which we are all heirs. The more precious and important becomes the knowledge of true Byzantium, the opportunity to see it with our own eyes, which was provided to us by the unique “exhibition of masterpieces” in the Tretyakov Gallery.

Page 1 of 4

IN Russian Empire in the XVIII-XIX centuries. There was an opinion (and not only among the Old Believers) that only those painted in the so-called “Byzantine style” were a real icon. The “academic” style is supposedly a rotten product of the false theology of the Western Church, and a work written in this style is supposedly not a real icon, simply not an icon at all. This point of view is false simply because the icon as a phenomenon belongs, first of all, to the Church. The Church, of course, recognizes an icon in the academic style. And it recognizes not only at the level of everyday practice, the tastes and preferences of ordinary parishioners (here, as is known, misconceptions, ingrained bad habits, and superstitions can take place). Icons of the academic style began to exist in Holy Rus' from the middle of the 18th century, and became widespread in the first half of the 19th century. Many famous icon painters of this time worked in an academic manner.

Written in the strict style of Russian Art Nouveau

without imitating the members of the "Abramtsevo" circle

with an emphasis on Russian-Byzantine decor.

Icon "St. Elizabeth". St. Petersburg, beginning of the 20th century. 26.5x22.5 cm.

Setting - A.B. silverware factory Lyubavina.

Icon "Holy Queen Helen". St. Petersburg, beginning of the 20th century.

Setting, silver, gilding. 84º. 92.5x63 cm.

Painting is pure modern. Reminds me

Gustav Klimt ("Salome" and "The Kiss". 1909-10)

Icon Mother of God"Kazanskaya".

Wood, mixed media, gold leaf. 31x27x2.7 cm.,

Stylistics of Russian Art Nouveau. Moscow, beginning of the 20th century.

Icon “St. Great Martyr Healer Panteleimon.”

Wood, oil, Russia, late XIX - early XX centuries,

size with frame 72x55 cm.

The frame is also in Russian Art Nouveau style:

wood, gilding, enamel painting.

Stylistics of Russian Art Nouveau.

Wood, oil. Brass basma.Russia, after 1911.

Circle of Mikhail Nesterov.

"Lord Almighty." Around 1890. 40.6x15.9 cm.

Board, oil, gilding.

Circle of Nesterov-Vasnetsov.

Three temple icons (Triptych). Icon "Lord Almighty" (h=175 cm).

Icon "Archangel Michael" (h=165 cm.).

Icon "Archangel Raphael (h=165 cm.). Turn of the XIX-XX centuries.

Stylistics of Russian Art Nouveau.

Our Lady of Jerusalem with the upcoming Apostle John

Theologian and Equal-to-the-Apostles Queen Helena. 1908-1917

Oil, zinc.

Silver frame with enamel frame by Khlebnikov. 84º.

Moscow, 1899-1908. 12x9.6 cm.

S.I. Vashkov. Firm Olovyanishnikov and Co.

Moscow. 1908-1917. 13x10.6 cm.

In the style of Russian Art Nouveau.

PREFACE

The era of Art Nouveau at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries is trembling for the Russian ear. - era Silver Age the entire Russian culture with its pale wax cult of symbolism undoubtedly led to radical changes in the worldview of Russian people. Trilogy D.S. Merezhkovsky's "Christ and Antichrist", in which the writer expressed his philosophy of history and his view of the future of humanity, was begun by him in the 1890s. Her first novel, “Death of the Gods. Julian the Apostate,” the life story of the 4th century Roman emperor Julian, was later called by critics among the strongest works of D.S. Merezhkovsky. It was followed by the novel “The Resurrected Gods. Leonardo da Vinci" (1901); critics noted, on the one hand, the historical accuracy of the details, and on the other, tendentiousness. In 1902, “Julian the Apostate” and “Leonardo da Vinci” were published as separate books by M.V. Pirozhkov - like the first two parts of the trilogy. At the beginning of 1904 " New way"(No. 1-5 and No. 9-12) began publishing the third novel of the trilogy, Antichrist. Peter and Alexey" (1904-1905) - a theological and philosophical novel about Peter I, whom the author "paints as the incarnate Antichrist," as noted, largely under the influence of the corresponding idea that existed in the schismatic environment. Ask what this has to do with Russian icon painting - the most direct: after all, Emperor Peter the Great, who rejected not only national artistic tastes, but also what his subjects liked in the West - high Catholic baroque, is considered the "gravedigger" of this very "high" baroque only in architecture, but also in painting. When in 1714 the Tsar banned stone construction throughout Russia except St. Petersburg, the creators of the “Naryshkin” Baroque masterpieces new capital were not useful. European mediocrity was built there, the Protestant “Holland” invented by Peter was created. So what? After the lifting of the ban in 1728, even earlier - after the death of Peter in 1725, all over Russia they turned to the interrupted tradition, and Peter's Petersburg remains the appendix of Russian culture, causing virtually no imitations. Once again, something alien is rejected, the bridge is thrown, the tradition continues to live. Baroque is back. In the first half of the 18th century, Russia still preferred professionally painted images, which artistically continued the “Armory Chamber style” with a combination of medieval and new painting techniques. The volume in these images was modeled very restrainedly, the color was highly decorative, gold spaces were widely used, which is why icons of this trend were called “gold-space”. The manner of “gold-gold writing” in the 18th–19th centuries. was considered ancient, “Greek-Orthodox”, its stylistic side was influenced by the Elizabethan Baroque, but turned out to be quite stable in relation to classicism.

Bryullov K.P. "Crucifixion". 1838 (Russian Russian Museum)

At the same time, the canonical icon is being replaced by icons of “academic writing” - paintings on religious themes. This style of icon painting came to Russia from the West and was developed in the post-Petrine era, during the synodal period of Russian history. Orthodox Church, and with the development of the influence of the Academy of Arts, picturesque icons in the academic style, painted in oil technique, began to widely spread in icon painting. This direction, which used the technical and formal means of post-Renaissance painting, became noticeably widespread only towards the end of the 18th century, when the activities of the Academy of Arts, founded in 1757, fully developed.

Borovikovsky V.

Holy and blessed prince

Alexander Nevsky.

Wood, oil. 33.5x25.2 cm.Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow.

Icons for capital churches were previously commissioned from artists of new training (works by I. Ya. Vishnyakov, I. N. Nikitin and others - for the Church of St. Alexander Nevsky in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg, 1724, D. G. Levitsky - for churches of Saints Cyrus and John on Solyanka and St. Catherine on Bolshaya Ordynka in Moscow, 1767), but usually this was associated with orders from the court. There are also cases when individual icon painters studied with professional artists (I. Ya. Vishnyakov, I. I. Belsky), but these cases still remained isolated. Until academic education and, accordingly, academic icon painting became a relatively mass phenomenon, pictorial images remained the property of the most educated and wealthy elite of society. The spread of secular painting, especially portraiture, contributed to the perception of the icon as a realistic portrait of a saint or as a document recording a particular event. This was reinforced by the fact that some lifetime portraits of the 18th–19th centuries. after the canonization of the ascetics depicted on them, they began to function as icons and formed the basis of the corresponding iconography (for example, portraits of Saints Demetrius of Rostov, Mitrofan of Voronezh, Tikhon of Zadonsk).

VladimirBorovikovsky.

Icon"St. Catherine" from

Kazan Cathedral in St. Petersburg. 1804-1809.

Cardboard, oil. 176x91 cm. Timing belt.

Icons made in the academic style, which is characterized by solemnity and historicity, adorn a huge number of Russian churches. The great saints of the 18th - 20th centuries prayed before icons painted in this style; monastery workshops worked in this style, including workshops of outstanding spiritual centers such as Valaam or the monasteries of Athos. The highest hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church ordered icons from academic artists. Some of these icons, for example, the works of Vasily Makarovich Peshekhonov, remain known and loved by the people for many generations, without coming into conflict with the icons of the “Byzantine” style.

In the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the predominant form of recognition of merit in all types of activities was the title of court supplier. In 1856, by decree of Emperor Alexander II, the title of Iconographer of the Court of His Imperial Majesty, and with it the right to use the State Emblem of Russia and the inscription “Privileged Master of the Court of His Imperial Majesty” on the workshop sign, was granted to Vasily Makarovich Peshekhonov. Obtaining the title of Iconographer of the Court of His Imperial Majesty was preceded by a long work.

V.M. Peshekhonov. Nativity of the Mother of God - Annunciation. 1872

Wood, gesso, mixed technique, gold embossing.

Size 81x57.8x3.5 cm.

Or here's another:

Brief information: For more than ten years, Vasily Makarovich Peshekhonov painted icons for all newborn babies imperial family: icon of St. Alexander Nevsky for Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich, future Emperor Alexander III (1845–1894); the image of St. Nicholas - for Grand Duke Nikolai Alexandrovich (1843–1865); icon of Holy Prince Vladimir - Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich (1847–1909); an icon of St. Alexis, Metropolitan of Moscow, for Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich (1850–1908). Already in the position of court icon painter, V.M. Peshekhonov wrote for all the children of Emperors Alexander II and Alexander III “images in proportion to their height,” that is, icons whose size corresponded to the height of tall newborn babies. The last order of Vasily Peshekhonov for the imperial family, mentioned in archival sources, was made for a newborn Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna in 1882. Biographical information about the Peshekhonov family is very scarce. Vasily Makarovich Peshekhonov came from a family of hereditary icon painters. His grandfather Samson Fedorovich Peshekhonov and his wife Praskovia moved to St. Petersburg from the Tver province at the beginning of the 19th century, which is why in literature the Peshekhonovs are sometimes called Tver residents. In the 20s of the 19th century, their son Makari Samsonovich Peshekhonov (1780–1852) moved to St. Petersburg with his family - his wife and four sons. Alexey, Nikolay and Vasily were also skilled icon painters; Fyodor did not engage in icon painting due to disability. Makari Samsonovich was a master of personal and personal writing and founded the Peshekhonov workshop, known throughout Russia. Since the 30s of the 19th century, the workshop and house of the Peshekhonovs were located in St. Petersburg at the address: “on the Ligovsky Canal opposite Kuznechny Lane, in the Galchenkov House, No. 73.” Writer Nikolai Leskov repeatedly visited the workshop and noted the stylishness, high professional and moral qualities of the Peshekhonovs. He expressed his impressions from these visits in his stories, creating collective images of icon painters. In 1852, Makariy Samsonovich died along with his son Alexei during a storm on the Black Sea, and the icon-painting artel was headed by Vasily Makarovich. The activities of the Peshekhonov workshop and the flowering of the Peshekhonov style of icon painting date back to the 1820s–80s. In addition to works for the imperial family, the workshop under the leadership of Vasily Makarovich completed more than 30 iconostases for monasteries and churches in Russia and abroad. Restoration work, iconostases for 17 churches in St. Petersburg, as well as the Samara, Saratov, Tver and St. Petersburg dioceses, the Cathedral in Tokyo, the Trinity Cathedral of the Russian Spiritual Mission in Jerusalem, seven iconostases for the churches of the Valaam Monastery, as well as wall and icon case icons – this is not a complete list of the workshop’s work. Iconostases by V.M. Peshekhonov decorated the cathedrals and other cathedrals of such cities as Rybinsk, Volsk, Tver, Kirillov, Novaya Ladoga, Simbirsk, Chistopol. In 1848–1849, the Peshekhonovs participated in the restoration of the St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. The work was headed by Makariy Samsonovich Peshekhonov. He was given the task of preserving ancient painting and restoring it only in lost fragments. According to contemporaries, Peshekhonov's frescoes were executed at a high artistic level. Unfortunately, the painting resumed by the Peshekhonovs was almost completely destroyed by the development of mold. This fact is the reason for unjustified criticism of the Peshekhonovs as restorers, because the results of the restoration of St. Sophia of Kyiv in 1843–1853 in the scientific literature are usually assessed as a failure: the ancient frescoes were almost completely recorded. However, it should be taken into account that by 1853 only five fragments of works from Peshekhonov’s workshop remained; Currently, only one has survived - a restoration insert for the mosaic in the sail of the main dome with the image of the Apostle John the Theologian - an excellent illustration of the skill and talent of the Peshekhonovs.

And at the same time, the academic style of icon painting causes heated controversy, both among icon painters and connoisseurs of icon painting. The essence of the controversy is as follows. Supporters of the Byzantine style, who create icons “in the canon,” accuse icons in the academic style of lack of spirituality, and a departure from the traditions of icon painting, but in a philosophical sense, this is still the same debate about what is more important for us: the soul of a specific living person with its sins and errors or inanimate church canons that prescribe the behavior of this soul. Or is there still some kind of golden mean: a compromise between the canon and reality, tastes, fashion, etc. Let's try to understand these accusations. First about spirituality. Let's start with the fact that spirituality is a rather subtle and elusive matter; there are no tools for determining spirituality, and everything in this area is extremely subjective. And if someone claims that the miraculous image of the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God, painted in the academic style, and which, according to legend, saved St. Petersburg during the war, is less spiritual than a similar icon in the Byzantine style - let this statement remain on his conscience . Usually, as an argument, you can hear such statements. They say that icons in the academic style have physicality, rosy cheeks, sensual lips, etc. In fact, the predominance of the sensual, carnal principle in the icon is not a problem of style, but of low professional level individual icon painters. One can give many examples of icons painted in the “canon” itself, where the “cardboard” inexpressive face is lost in numerous curls of extremely sensual decorations, ornaments, etc. Now about the departure of the academic style from the traditions of icon painting. The history of icon painting goes back more than one thousand five hundred years. And now in Athonite monasteries you can see blackened, ancient icons dating from the 7th-10th centuries. But the heyday of icon painting in Byzantium occurred at the end of the 13th century, and is associated with the name of Panselin, the Greek Andrei Rublev. Panselin's paintings in Karey have reached us. Another outstanding Greek icon painter, Theophanes of Crete, worked on Mount Athos at the beginning of the 16th century. He created paintings in the Stavronikita monastery and in the refectory of the Great Lavra. In Rus', the icons of Andrei Rublev of the first third of the 15th century are rightly recognized as the pinnacle of icon painting. If we take a closer look at this entire almost two-thousand-year history of icon painting, we will discover its amazing diversity. The first icons were painted using the encaustic technique (paints based on hot wax). This fact alone refutes the popular belief that a “real” icon must necessarily be painted in egg tempera. Moreover, the style of these early icons is much closer to icons in the academic style than to the “canon.” This is not surprising. To paint icons, the first icon painters took as a basis Fayum portraits, images of real people that were created using the encaustic technique. In fact, the tradition of icon painting, like everything in this world, develops cyclically. TO XVIII century, the so-called “canonical” style fell into decline everywhere. In Greece and Balkan countries this is partly due to the Turkish conquest, in Russia with Peter’s reforms. But this is not the main reason. Man’s perception of the world and his attitude towards the world around him, including the spiritual world, is changing. The man of the 19th century perceived the world around us differently than a man of the 13th century. And icon painting is not an endless repetition of the same patterns according to drawings, but a living process based both on the religious experience of the icon painter himself and on the perception of the spiritual world by the entire generation. This free competition of styles, which exists in Russia today, is very beneficial for the icon, since it forces both sides to improve quality, to achieve true artistic depth, convincing not only for supporters, but also for opponents of a particular style. Thus, the proximity of the “Byzantine” school forces the “academic” to be stricter, more sober, and more expressive. The “Byzantine” school’s proximity to the “academic” school keeps it from degenerating into primitive craftsmanship.

But there were icon painters in Russia who managed to find a middle ground between these two styles. These include Ivan Matveevich Malyshev.

Signed icon "St. Nicholas the Wonderworker".

Artist Ivan Malyshev.

22.2x17.6 cm. Russia, Sergiev Posad,

studio of the artist Ivan Malyshev, 1881

At the bottom of the icon, on a gilded field

an inscription in the old spelling is placed:

“This icon was painted in the workshop of the artist Malyshev

in Sergievsky Posad in 1881."

On the back is the workshop's signature seal:

"Artist I. Malyshev. S.P.

The most revered icon in Rus'. Since Ivan Matveyevich died in 1880, and the icon is dated 1881 and bears the seal of SP (and this corresponds to the last icons of Malyshev himself), and not TSL, then we can safely say that he managed to write down the personal, and everything else was completed by his sons. Obviously, the artist himself could not complete such a number of icons. In Malyshev’s workshop there was a division of labor usual for that time; he was helped by hired workers and students. Three sons of the artist are known. The eldest sons, Konstantin and Mikhail, apparently learned the art of icon painting from their father and worked with him. In the monastery statements for the payment of salaries, they are mentioned together with their father, and, as a rule, Ivan Matveevich himself signs for the receipt of the salary. According to the same statements, it is clear that if the minister was illiterate, then another one signed for him, and the reason was indicated. It is difficult to imagine that the sons of Ivan Matveevich were illiterate; rather, this was the way of relationships in the family. After the death of Ivan Matveevich, Konstantin headed the family workshop, which was located in a house on Blinnaya Mountain (the house burned down at the beginning of the 20th century). Konstantin Ivanovich also assumed the responsibilities of the headman of the Elias Church. In 1889–1890 he renewed the wall paintings of the Elias Church. Through his diligence, the floor of the temple was laid out from fire-resistant tiles, similar to the ceramic coating in the Refectory Lavra Church. In 1884, under his leadership, the iconostasis of the Kazan Church was painted (the dome of which had previously been painted by Ivan Matveevich). Ivan Matveevich's youngest son Alexander, like his father, was educated at the Imperial Academy of Arts. He studied in St. Petersburg from 1857 to 1867. Upon completion, he received the title of class artist of the third degree. Apparently, in hometown did not return, got married and stayed to live in St. Petersburg. The names of Ivan Matveevich and Alexander Ivanovich Malyshev appear in the register of professional artists.

Brief information: Malyshev,Ivan Matveevichis one of the most famous icon painters of the second half of the 19th century. In 1835, something happened in the life of Ivan Matveevich important event : he leaves for St. Petersburg and goes to study at the Imperial Academy of Arts as a free student. According to the Charter of the Academy, for free-students (or outsiders), training lasted six years. Few Russian icon painters can boast of such education. Ivan Matveevich Malyshev (1802–1880) is one of the most significant icon painters of the second half of the 19th century, who worked in the Lavra (we can see the icons of his workshop today in the Ilyinsky Church of Sergiev Posad and in the Spiritual Church of the Lavra). Systematic teaching of icon painting in the Lavra began in 1746 with the establishment of the Icon Painting Class at the newly created seminary and continued, with varying degrees of success, until 1918. In the process of establishing the Lavra icon painting school as an educational structure, several stages can be distinguished, and the most striking of them is this is the period of the mid-19th century (from 1846 to 1860–1870). This is the time when the Lavra was ruled by Metropolitan Philaret (Drozdov) and the governor, Archimandrite Anthony (Medvedev). Under them, the icon painting school found a rebirth, expanded and became known throughout the Orthodox world. The icon painter Ivan Matveevich Malyshev was also at the origins of this revival. Under the direct leadership of the Lavra's governor, Fr. Anthony in the 1850s, Malyshev directed the Lavra icon painting school towards the revival of traditional icon painting. This path turned out to be neither short nor simple, but this is exactly how it seemed at that period of time and development. The intended goal - “for the development and maintenance of the Greek Style of writing” - is clearly indicated in the manual that was given to Malyshev as the leader, or more precisely, the “owner of the school,” Fr. Anthony. This manual is a set of 16 rules that stipulate both moral requirements for students and teachers, and artistic priorities that should be adhered to when training future icon painters. Malyshev was also the founder of a large icon-painting workshop, which he created in the city. He was known to the royals and was awarded many awards. Coming from a poor peasant family, Ivan Matveevich was able to receive a good education at the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts (apparently, like his older brother Nikolai, an architect). Malyshev's work was highly appreciated by his contemporaries. Here, for example, is a review that was placed in the Irkutsk Diocesan Gazette for 1864: “The icons in the iconostasis, on the high place, at the altar and some on the walls were painted in the Sergius Lavra by the artist Malyshev. They were painted in the Byzantine-Russian style and are distinguished by their artistry , so, especially, with a pious and edifying character. Looking at them, you do not stop only at the artist’s talent, the elegance of the colors, the richness of imagination, as in Italian painting, but your thought goes further than the ordinary, human; contemplates the spiritual, heavenly, divine; your feeling is filled with reverence and aroused to prayer; your soul is fed by biblical and holy thoughts and feelings. Churches..."

Temple icon "Lord Pantocrator".

Wood, oil, gold leaf.152x82 cm.

Russia, Sergiev Posad, studio of the artist I. Malyshev, 1891.

At the bottom of the icon, above the gilded field, is the inscription:

“This icon was painted in the artist’s workshop

Malyshev in Sergiev Posad in 1891.”

Christ sits on the throne in bishop's robes and with the Gospel open. Essentially, in the icon we see iconographic version“Christ the Great Bishop”, however, supplemented by a characteristic element of the text “Christ the King by the King” - a scepter in the left hand of Christ. Ivan Malyshev headed the icon-painting workshop of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra from 1841 to 1882. Here, in the main Russian icon-painting workshop, icons were created for the most significant churches, as well as for the orders of the royal court, aristocracy and high clergy. The artist personally created a special icon painting style, which determined the style of the works of the entire workshop as a whole and had a huge influence on mass icon painting in Russia in the second half of the 19th century. Malyshev retained the main features of the traditional, canonical style, but brought them to a special harmony in accordance with the principles of classicism and academicism, thereby bridging the hitherto existing gap between traditional and academic manners in icon painting. The works of the mature icon painter Malyshev are distinguished by the finest glaze elaboration of faces and garments, classical proportions, realistic plasticity of figures and a number of other qualities inherent in the presented icon.

GENESIS OF THE NATIONAL RUSSIAN ICON IN THE LAST QUARTER OF THE 19TH CENTURY

In the 80s-90s of the 19th century in Russian religious “academic” painting,as in all Russian art, there is a dynamic process of creating its own national school. The main achievements in the field of new form and decoration of icon design were directly related to the traditions of Russian national art, culture and craft, the origins of which we find, of course, in the Russian lubok and in the design of ancient Church Slavonic manuscripts. And this happened just in the 80s. During this decade, critical realism dominated in painting, and the early impressionism of V. Serov, K. Korovin and I. Levitan was formed. Against this background, new trends began to appear - a gravitation towards modernity was revealed, its gradual formation, and in some cases its complete acquisition, as happened with Mikhail Vrubel. In Abramtsevo, where interest in folk art arose and an attempt to revive it merged with early forms of modernism, in 1882 V. Vasnetsov and D. Polenov built a small church, which gave a reorientation from the pseudo-Russian style to the neo-Russian one. It combines the forms of Art Nouveau with the forms of ancient Russian architecture of the pre-Mongol era. The small-sized Abramtsevo church became the forerunner of Russian Art Nouveau and became firmly entrenched in the history of Russian art. Although Russian architecture had to wait another decade and a half before the Art Nouveau style took more or less definite forms. In painting and, especially, in monumental religious painting, this happened somewhat faster. To some extent (albeit distantly) the forerunner of Art Nouveau was the late academic painting of Semiradsky, Bakalovich, Smirnov and other artists who gravitated towards “beautiful” nature and to “beautiful” objects, spectacular subjects, that is, to that “a priori beauty” the presence of which has become one of the prerequisites for the Art Nouveau style. The cult of beauty was becoming a new religion. “Beauty is our religion,” Mikhail Vrubel stated bluntly and definitely in one of his letters. In this situation, beauty and its direct carrier - art -endowed with the ability to transform life, to build it according to a certain aesthetic model, on the principles of universal harmony and balance. The artist - the creator of this beauty turned into an exponent of the main aspirations of the time. At the same time, the strengthening of the role of socially transformative ideas of beauty of that time is very symptomatic, because in Russia the overwhelming majority of the population lived below the poverty line. It turns out that the theme of beauty was forced to coexist next to the theme of compassion for these unfortunate people (the Wanderers artists). Only religion could unite them.

The artistic ideology of the national neoclassical Russian icon of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the author of which is considered to be V.M. Vasnetsov, is clearly based on a belief in a special religious meaning of beauty and bears the clear influence of the aesthetics of F.M. Dostoevsky, who declared beauty to be an absolute value in his novel “The Idiot”. In the novel (Part 3, Chapter V), these words are spoken by the 18-year-old youth Ippolit Terentyev, referring to the words of Prince Myshkin conveyed to him by Nikolai Ivolgin and ironizing the latter:

“Is it true, Prince, that you once said that the world would be saved by “beauty”? “Gentlemen,” he shouted loudly to everyone, “the prince claims that the world will be saved by beauty!” And I claim that the reason he has such playful thoughts is that he is now in love. Gentlemen, the prince is in love; Just now, as soon as he came in, I was convinced of this. Don’t blush, prince, I’ll feel sorry for you. What beauty will save the world? Kolya told this to me... Are you a zealous Christian? Kolya says that you call yourself a Christian. The prince looked at him carefully and did not answer him.”

F.M. Dostoevsky was far from strictly aesthetic judgments - he wrote about spiritual beauty, about the beauty of the soul. This corresponds to the main idea of ​​the novel - to create an image of a “positively beautiful person.” Therefore, in his drafts, the author calls Myshkin “Prince Christ,” thereby reminding himself that Prince Myshkin should be as similar as possible to Christ - kindness, philanthropy, meekness, a complete lack of selfishness, the ability to sympathize with human troubles and misfortunes. Therefore, the “beauty” that the prince (and F.M. Dostoevsky himself) speaks of is the sum of the moral qualities of a “positively beautiful person.” This purely personal interpretation of beauty is typical for the writer. He believed that “people can be beautiful and happy” not only in the afterlife. They can be like this “without losing the ability to live on earth.” To do this, they must agree with the idea that Evil “cannot exist.” normal condition people” that everyone has the power to get rid of it. And then, when people are guided by the best that is in their soul, memory and intentions (Good), then they will be truly beautiful. And the world will be saved, and it will be precisely this “beauty” (that is, the best that is in people) that will save it. Of course, this will not happen overnight - spiritual work, trials and even suffering are needed, after which a person renounces Evil and turns to Good, begins to appreciate it. The writer talks about this in many of his works, including the novel “The Idiot.” For example (part 1, chapter VII):

“For some time, the general’s wife, silently and with a certain shade of disdain, examined the portrait of Nastasya Filippovna, which she held in front of her in her outstretched hand, extremely and effectively moving away from her eyes.

Yes, she’s good,” she said finally, “very much so.” I saw her twice, only from afar. So do you appreciate such and such beauty? - she suddenly turned to the prince.

Yes... like that... - the prince answered with some effort.

So that's exactly what it is?

Exactly like this.

For what?

There is a lot of suffering in this face...- the prince said, as if involuntarily, as if talking to himself, and not answering the question.

“You may be delirious, however,” the general’s wife decided and with an arrogant gesture she threw the portrait back onto the table.”

The writer in his interpretation of beauty is a like-minded person of the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), who spoke about « moral law inside us”, that “beauty is a symbol of moral goodness”. The same idea by F.M. Dostoevsky develops this in his other works. So, if in the novel “The Idiot” he writes that beauty will save the world, then in the novel “Demons” (1872) he logically concludes that “ugliness (anger, indifference, selfishness) will kill...”

Mikhail Nesterov. Philosophers (Florensky and Bulgakov).

And finally, "The Brothers Karamazov" - last novel F.M. Dostoevsky, which the author wrote for two years. Dostoevsky conceived the novel as the first part of the epic novel “The History of the Great Sinner.” The work was completed in November 1880. The writer died four months after publication. The novel touches on deep questions about God, freedom, and morality. During the times of historical Russia, the most important component of the Russian idea was, of course, Orthodoxy. As we know, the prototype of Elder Zosima was Elder Ambrose, now glorified among the saints. According to other ideas, the image of the elder was created under the influence of the biography of Schemamonk Zosima (Verkhovsky), the founder of the Trinity-Hodegetrievskaya Hermitage.

Do you really have such a conviction about the consequences of people’s depletion of faith in the immortality of their souls? - Elder Ivan Fedorovich suddenly asked.

Yes, I stated this. There is no virtue if there is no immortality.

Blessed are you if you believe so, or are you already very unhappy!

Why are you unhappy? - Ivan Fedorovich smiled.

Because, in all likelihood, you yourself do not believe in the immortality of your soul, or even in what has been written about the church and the church issue.

Three brothers, Ivan, Alexey (Alyosha) and Dmitry (Mitya), “are busy resolving questions about the root causes and ultimate goals of existence,” and each of them makes his own choice, trying in his own way to answer the question about God and the immortality of the soul. Ivan’s way of thinking is often summed up in one phrase:

"If there is no God, everything is permitted"

which is sometimes recognized as the most famous quote from Dostoevsky, although it is not in this form in the novel. At the same time, this idea “is carried through the entire huge novel with a high degree of artistic persuasiveness.” Alyosha, unlike his brother Ivan, is “convinced of the existence of God and the immortality of the soul” and decides for himself:

“I want to live for immortality, but I don’t accept half a compromise.”

Dmitry Karamazov is inclined to the same thoughts. Dmitry feels “an invisible participation of mystical forces in the lives of people” and says:

“Here the devil fights with God, and the battlefield is the hearts of people.”

But Dmitry is no stranger to doubts at times:

“And God is torturing me. This alone is tormenting. What if He doesn't exist? What if Rakitin is right, that this is an artificial idea in humanity? Then, if He does not exist, then man is the chief of the earth, of the universe. Fabulous! But how will he be virtuous without God? Question! I’m all about it.”

A special place in the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” is occupied by the poem “The Grand Inquisitor”, composed by Ivan. Dostoevsky outlined its essence in opening remarks before reading the poem by a student at St. Petersburg University in December 1879. He said:

“One atheist suffering from unbelief, in one of his painful moments, composes a wild, fantastic poem in which he depicts Christ in a conversation with one of the Catholic high priests - the Grand Inquisitor. The suffering of the writer of the poem occurs precisely because he truly sees a true servant of Christ in the depiction of his high priest with a Catholic worldview, so far removed from ancient Apostolic Orthodoxy. Meanwhile, his great Inquisitor is, in essence, an atheist himself. According to the great Inquisitor, love must be expressed in unfreedom, since freedom is painful, it gives rise to evil and makes a person responsible for the evil done, and this is unbearable for a person. The Inquisitor is convinced that freedom will not be a gift for a person, but a punishment, and he himself will refuse it. In exchange for freedom, he promises people a dream of an earthly paradise:“...We will give them the quiet, humble happiness of weak creatures as they were created. ...Yes, we will force them to work, but in the hours free from work we will arrange their life as a child’s game, with children’s songs, choirs, and innocent dances.”

The Inquisitor is well aware that all this contradicts the true teachings of Christ, but he is concerned about the organization of earthly affairs and maintaining power over people. In the inquisitor’s reasoning, Dostoevsky prophetically saw the possibility of turning people “as if into a herd of animals,” preoccupied with obtaining material wealth and forgetting that “man does not live by bread alone,” that, having had enough, sooner or later he will ask the question: I’m full, but what? what next? In the poem “The Grand Inquisitor,” Dostoevsky again raises the question that deeply worried him about the existence of God. At the same time, the writer sometimes put into the mouth of the inquisitor quite convincing arguments in defense of the fact that, perhaps, it really is better to take care of earthly, real happiness and not think about eternal life, abandoning God in the name of this.

“The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor” is the greatest creation, the pinnacle of Dostoevsky’s creativity. The Savior comes to earth again. Dostoevsky conveys this creation to the reader as the work of his hero Ivan Karamazov. In Seville, during the period of the rampant Inquisition, Christ appears among the crowd, and people recognize Him. Rays of light and power flow from his eyes, He stretches out his hands, blesses, works miracles. The Grand Inquisitor, “an old man of ninety, tall and straight, with a withered face and sunken cheeks,” orders him to be imprisoned. At night he comes to his captive and begins to talk to him. “Legend” – monologue of the Grand Inquisitor. Christ remains silent. The old man’s excited speech is directed against the teachings of the God-man. Dostoevsky was confident that Catholicism, sooner or later, would unite with socialism and form with it a single Tower of Babel, the kingdom of the Antichrist. The Inquisitor justifies betrayal of Christ with the same motive with which Ivan justified his fight against God, with the same love for humanity. According to the Inquisitor, Christ was mistaken about people:

“People are weak, vicious, insignificant and rebels... Weak, eternally vicious and eternally ungrateful human race... You judged people too highly, for, of course, they are slaves, although they were created by rebels... I swear, man is weaker and He was created lower than You thought about him... He is weak and vile.”

Thus, the “Christian teaching” about man is contrasted with the teaching of the Antichrist. Christ believed in the image of God in man and bowed before his freedom; The Inquisitor considers freedom to be the curse of these pitiful and powerless rebels and, in order to make them happy, he proclaims slavery. Only a chosen few are able to bear the covenant of Christ. According to the inquisitor, freedom will lead people to mutual destruction. But the time will come, and weak rebels will crawl to those who will give them bread and bind their disorderly freedom. The Inquisitor paints a picture of the “childish happiness” of enslaved humanity:

“They will tremble in relaxation at our anger, their minds will become timid, their eyes will become teary, like those of children and women... Yes, we will force them to work, but in the hours free from work, we will arrange their life like a children’s game with children’s songs , in chorus, with innocent dancing. Oh, we will allow them sin... And everyone will be happy, all the millions of creatures, except for the hundreds of thousands who control them... They will die quietly, they will quietly fade away in Your name, and beyond the grave they will find only death...”

The Inquisitor falls silent; the prisoner is silent.

“The old man would like him to tell him something, even if it’s bitter and terrible. But He suddenly silently approaches the old man and quietly kisses him on his bloodless, ninety-year-old lips. That's the whole answer. The old man shudders. Something moved at the ends of his lips; he goes to the door, opens it and says to Him: “Go and come no more. Don’t come at all... Never, never!”

And he releases Him into the “dark stacks of hail.”

What is the secret of the Grand Inquisitor? Alyosha guesses:

“Your inquisitor does not believe in God, that’s his whole secret.”

Ivan readily agrees.

“Even so! – he answers. “Finally, you guessed it.” And, really, really, really, that’s the whole secret...”

The author of "The Karamazovs" presents the fight against God in all its demonic grandeur: the Inquisitor rejects the commandment of love for God, but becomes a fanatic of the commandment of love for one's neighbor. His mighty spiritual powers, which were previously spent on the veneration of Christ, are now turned to serving humanity. But godless love inevitably turns into hatred. Having lost faith in God, the Inquisitor must also lose faith in man, because these two faiths are inseparable. By denying the immortality of the soul, he denies the spiritual nature of man. “Legend” completes Dostoevsky’s life’s work – his struggle for man. He reveals in her the religious basis of personality and the inseparability of faith in man from faith in God. With unheard of force he affirms freedom as the image of God in man and shows the Antichrist beginning of power and despotism. “Without freedom, man is a beast, humanity is a herd”; but freedom is supernatural and superintelligent, alright natural world freedom is only a necessity. Freedom is a divine gift, the most precious asset of man.

“It cannot be substantiated by reason, science, or natural law - it is rooted in God, revealed in Christ. Freedom is an act of faith."

The Antichrist kingdom of the Inquisitor is built on miracle, mystery and authority. In spiritual life, the beginning of all power is from the evil one. Never in all of world literature has Christianity been presented with such amazing force as a religion of spiritual freedom. Dostoevsky's Christ is not only the Savior and Redeemer, but also the One Liberator of man. The Inquisitor, with dark inspiration and red-hot passion, denounces his Prisoner; he remains silent and responds to the accusation with a kiss. He does not need to justify himself: the enemy’s arguments are refuted by the mere presence of Him who is “the Way, the Truth and the Life.”

A well-known, albeit relative, approach to the Art Nouveau style is noticeable in the painting of V. Vasnetsov of the 80s. At the moment when the artist moved away from the everyday genre and began to look for forms to express his ideas related to national folklore, neither the realistic system of the Wanderers nor the academic doctrine completely suited him. But he took advantage of both, greatly modifying each of them. At the point of their convergence, distant analogies with modernity appeared. They make themselves felt in the artist’s unconditional appeal to the form of panels, to large-sized canvases designed for public interiors (remember that most of the works of the 80s were created by order of S.I. Mamontov for the interiors of railway departments). The theme of Vasnetsov’s paintings also gives rise to comparison with the Art Nouveau style. Russian realists of the 60-80s extremely rarely, rather as an exception than a rule, turned to fairy tales or epics. In all European art XIX century the fairy tale was the prerogative of the romantic movement. In neo-romanticism at the end of the century, interest in fairy-tale plots revived again. Symbolism and Art Nouveau adopted this “fashion for fairy tales,” as exemplified by numerous works by German, Scandinavian, Finnish, and Polish painters. Vasnetsov's paintings fit into the same row. But, of course, the main criterion for belonging to a style should be the pictorial system, the formal language of art itself. Here Vasnetsov is more distant from the Art Nouveau style, although some shifts towards the latter are outlined in his work. They are especially noticeable in the painting “Three Princesses of the Underground Kingdom” (1884). The standing poses of the three figures, characterizing the action as a kind of theatrical performance, the usual union of naturalness and conventional decorativeness for the Art Nouveau style - with these features Vasnetsov seems to be moving “into the territory” of the new style. But much remains on the old territory. Viktor Vasnetsov is far from refined stylization, he is simple-minded, the dialogue with nature is not interrupted. It is no coincidence that the artist, like the realists of the 70s and 80s, so readily uses in his paintings sketches written from peasants and village children. Creativity V.M. Vasnetsov, as well as the activities of many other artists of the Abramtsevo circle, indicate that modernism in Russia was formed in line with national concepts. Russian folk art as a heritage for professional art, national folklore as a source of subject matter for painting, pre-Mongol architecture as a model for modern architecture - all these facts speak eloquently about the interest in national artistic traditions. There is no doubt that the artists of the previous period - the Peredvizhniki - faced the problem of the national uniqueness of art. But for them the essence of this originality was contained in the expression of meaning modern life nation. For artists of emerging modernism, national tradition was more important. This tilt towards national issues is generally characteristic of the Art Nouveau style of the series. European countries . The early work of M. Nesterov, who acquired his theme and his artistic language at the very end of the 80s, is also connected with this trend. He looked for his heroes in religious legends, among Russian saints; represented national nature in an ideal, “purified” form. Along with these thematic and figurative innovations came new stylistic qualities. True, modernist tendencies appeared in these early works in their infancy and in erased forms, which is generally typical for many phenomena of Russian painting of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, when different, sometimes opposing artistic directions simultaneously developed, mixing and influencing each other. In Nesterov’s “The Hermit” (1889), thoughtful picturesqueness, the ethereality of the figure, the emphasized role of its silhouette, the dissolution of the social motive in a state of idyllic tranquility - that is, the features that bring Nesterov closer to symbolism and modernity are combined with the immediacy of the perception of nature. In “Vision to the Youth Bartholomew” (1890), Nesterov creates a “conditionally real” landscape and connects the mythological with the real. In the work of this artist, Art Nouveau breaks through the dominant principles of the Moscow school of painting, oriented towards plein air and impressionism. This tendency manifests itself to an even greater extent in Levitan, however, already in the first half of the 90s, when he created “Above Eternal Peace” (1894). In this picture, which was the highest point of philosophical meditation of the famous landscape painter, who in the 80s strictly focused on the plein air, the barely audible notes of Böcklin’s “Island of the Dead” or the mysterious, although quite real, landscapes of V. Leistikov, the famous German Secessionist of the 90s, sounded years. However, it should be borne in mind that Levitan’s dramatic, almost tragic lyricism had completely different origins, which greatly alienated the Russian artist from both the Swiss and the German master. Levitanov's grief returns us to Nekrasov's muse, to thinking about human suffering and human sorrows. In the future, we will touch on other variants of Russian Art Nouveau, which arose in painting as a kind of development of certain stylistic trends that suddenly received the opportunity to develop into Art Nouveau. True, everything that we listed above was still an approach to a new style. However, there was one master in Russia who, in the 80s, had already established Art Nouveau as a style and symbolism as a way of thinking. This master was M. Vrubel. In 1885, after leaving the St. Petersburg Academy, the so-called Kiev period of the artist’s work began, which lasted until 1889. During these years, Vrubel's style was formed, which formed an organic part of the Russian version of the Art Nouveau style. Vrubel's creativity had different starting points of movement than Vasnetsov's, Nesterov's or Levitanov's. He was not keen on plein air (Vrubel has almost no plein air works); he was far from the realism of the Itinerants, who, in the opinion of young painters, neglected formal tasks. At the same time, Vrubel has noticeable academic traits - in the a priori nature of beauty, which is deliberately chosen as a certain object of reconstruction, in the careful assimilation of Chistyakov’s principles of constructing form, in his attraction to the stable rules of art. Mikhail Vrubel overcomes academicism much more consistently and quickly, rethinks nature, and rejects the alliance with naturalism that was so characteristic of late European academicism.

M. Vrubel. Funeral lament. Sketch. 1887.

M. Vrubel. Resurrection. Sketch. 1887.

Unrealized sketches of the paintings of the Vladimir Cathedral in Kyiv, remaining in watercolor sheets, dedicated to two subjects - “The Funeral Lament” and “The Resurrection” (1887), most clearly indicate the above. In one of the versions of “The Tombstone,” made in the technique of black watercolor, Vrubel transforms real space into an abstract convention, using the language of understatement and allusion designed for recognition. In “Resurrection” he lays out shapes as if from luminous crystals, and includes flowers in the composition that weave patterns across the surface of the leaf. Ornamentality becomes a distinctive quality of Vrubel’s graphics and painting. “Girl against the background of a Persian carpet” (1886) includes ornament as the subject of the image and at the same time puts forward the ornamental principle as the principle of the composition of the picture as a whole. Sketches of ornaments made by Vrubel were realized in ornamental panels located along the ships of the vaults of the Vladimir Cathedral. The artist created the ornaments in a new style, choosing images of peacocks, lily flowers and a wickerwork of plant forms as the initial forms. “Models” taken from the animal and plant world are stylized and schematized; one image seems to be woven into another; the pictorial element in this situation recedes into the background in front of the pattern, abstracted by linear and color rhythm. Vrubel uses curved lines. This makes the ornament tense and associated with a living form capable of self-development. M. Vrubel entered modernity in several ways, being the first among Russian artists to figure out the general direction of movement of European artistic culture. His transition to new paths was decisive and irrevocable. However, the Art Nouveau style acquired a more widespread character in Russia already in the 90-900s. D.V. Sarabyanov "Modern Style". M., 1989. p. 77-82.

THE BIRTH OF RUSSIAN MODERN MODERNITY

Vasnetsov V.M. "Our Lady

with a child on the throne."

Late XIX – early XX centuries.

Canvas, wood, gold leaf,

oil. 49 x 18 cm

Decorated in antique style

wooden carved frame.

Vasnetsov,VictorMikhailovich was born on May 3/15, 1848 in the village of Lopyal, Vyatka province, into the family of a priest who, according to the artist, “infused into our souls a living, indestructible idea of ​​the Living, truly existing God!” . After studying at the Vyatka Theological Seminary (1862-1867), Vasnetsov entered the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts, where he seriously thought about the place of Russian art in world culture. In 1879, Vasnetsov joined the Mamontov circle, whose members held readings, painted and staged plays in the winter in the house of the outstanding philanthropist Savva Mamontov on Spasskaya-Sadovaya Street, and in the summer they went to his country estate Abramtsevo. In Abramtsevo, Vasnetsov took his first steps towards a religious-national direction: he designed a church in the name of the Savior Not Made by Hands (1881-1882) and painted a number of icons for it. The best icon was the icon of St. Sergius of Radonezh is not canonical, but deeply felt, taken from the very heart, a dearly loved and revered image of a humble, wise old man. Behind him stretches the endless expanses of Rus', the monastery he founded is visible, and in the heavens is the image of the Holy Trinity.

“The history of the church in Abramtsevo is amazing because it was essentially an activity for a group of friends - talented, energetic, enthusiastic people. The result is what is proudly called “the first work of Russian Art Nouveau” (1881-1882) and is characterized as “a subtle antique stylization, harmoniously combining elements of various schools of medieval Russian architecture.” It’s not for me to judge what modernism has to do with it, but the church is really good. It seems to me that this combination of the complete seriousness of the idea of ​​​​the building (the creators were deeply religious people) with the friendly and joyful atmosphere of its creation determined the unique spirit of this building - very joyful and a little “toy-like”.

Victor Vasnetsov:

“We are all artists: Polenov, Repin, myself, Savva Ivanovich himself and his family set to work together, enthusiastically. Our artistic assistants: Elizaveta Grigorievna, Elena Dmitrievna Polenova, Natalya Vasilievna Polenova (then still Yakunchikova), Vera Alekseevna Repina are not from us We lagged behind. We drew facades, ornaments, made drawings, painted images, and our ladies embroidered banners, shrouds, and even on the scaffolding, near the church, carved ornaments in stone, like real stonemasons... The rise in energy and artistic creativity was extraordinary: everyone worked. tirelessly, with competition, unselfishly. It seemed that the artistic impulse of creativity of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance was again in full swing. But then cities, entire regions, countries, people lived with this impulse, but we only have the Abramtsevo small artistic family and circle. what a disaster, I could breathe deeply in this creative atmosphere... Now the curious go to Abramtsevo to see our small, modest, without ostentatious luxury, Abramtsevo church. For us - its workers - it is a touching legend about the past, about the experience, the holy and creative impulse, about the friendly work of artistic friends, about Uncle Savva, about his loved ones..."

V.D. Polenov“Annunciation” (1882) (gate of the iconostasis).

From a letter from E.G. Mamontova:

“How wonderful our church turns out. I just can’t stop looking at it... The church doesn’t even let Vasnetsov sleep at night, everyone draws different details. How good it will be inside... The main interest is the church. There was talk and speculation about it all day yesterday heated debates. Everyone is passionate about carving ornaments... Vasnetsov’s window is truly beautiful; not only the arches, but all the columns are covered with ornaments.”
Vasnetsov did not want to see anything ordinary in the church; he wanted this creation of creative inspiration to correspond to the joyful mood with which it was built. So, when the turn came to the floor and Savva Ivanovich decided to make it ordinary - cement mosaic (there were no slabs), Vasnetsov fiercely protested.

“Only artistic layout of the pattern”, - he insisted and began to lead her.First, the outline of a stylized flower appeared on paper, and then the drawing was transferred to the floor of the Abramtsevo church.

"... Vasnetsov himself, - recalls Natalya Polenova, - several times a day he ran into the church, helped lay out the pattern, directed the curves of the lines and selected stones according to tones. To everyone's joy, a huge fantastic flower soon grew along the entire floor."

The church was consecrated in 1882, and almost immediately after that V.D.’s wedding took place there. Polenov - he became friends with his wife during the construction of the church.

The choirs are painted with images of flowers and butterflies by V.M. Vasnetsov.

Based on drawings by V.M. Vasnetsov made a mosaic floor

with a stylized flower and construction date:

1881–1882 in Old Church Slavonic.

At the top left is the festive rite of the iconostasis.

At the top right is the prophetic order of the iconostasis.

In Mamontov’s estate “Abramtsevo” near Moscow, art workshops were created in which folk art objects, including toys, were produced and collected. To revive and develop the traditions of Russian toys, the “Children’s Education” workshop was opened in Moscow. At first, dolls were created in it, which were dressed in festive clothes. folk costumes different provinces (regions) of Russia. It was in this workshop that the idea of ​​creating a Russian wooden doll was born. In the late 90s of the 19th century, based on a sketch by artist Sergei Malyutin, local turner Zvezdochkin turned the first wooden doll. And when Malyutin painted it, it turned out to be a girl in a Russian sundress. Matryoshka Malyutin was a round-faced girl in an embroidered shirt, sundress and apron, in a colorful scarf, with a black rooster in her hands.

Abramtsevo. Folk crafts. Origins of Russian Art Nouveau.

The first Russian nesting doll, carved by Vasily Zvezdochkin and painted by Sergei Malyutin, had eight seats: a girl with a black rooster was followed by a boy, then a girl again, and so on. All the figures were different from each other, and the last, eighth, depicted a swaddled baby. The idea of ​​​​creating a detachable wooden doll was suggested to Malyutin by a Japanese toy that Savva Mamontov’s wife brought to the Abramtsevo estate near Moscow from the Japanese island of Honshu. It was a figurine of a good-natured bald old man, the Buddhist saint Fukurum, with several figures embedded inside. However, the Japanese believe that the first such toy was carved on the island of Honshu by a Russian wanderer - a monk. Russian craftsmen, who knew how to carve wooden objects nested inside each other (for example, Easter eggs), mastered the technology of making nesting dolls with ease. The principle of making a nesting doll remains unchanged to this day, preserving all the techniques of turning art of Russian craftsmen.

"Fathers" of the Russian nesting doll:

philanthropist Savva Mamontov, artist

Sergey Malyutin and turner Vasily Zvezdochkin

Brief information: Abramtsevo is the former estate of Savva Mamontov, whose name is associated with an informal association of artists, sculptors, musicians and theatrical figures of the Russian Empire of the second half of the 19th century. The circle, founded in 1872 in Rome, continued to exist on an estate near Moscow. Unique Church of the Savior Not Made by Handsimagewas built in 1881-1882 according to the design of Viktor Vasnetsov(he won the “family” competition from Polenov)architect P. Samarin, such famous artists as Ilya Repin, Nikolai Nevrev, Mikhail Vrubel, Mark Antokolsky and other members of the Abramtsevo circle participated in the design of the interior decoration of the temple.The Mamontov family of capitalists and all close artist friends participated in a detailed discussion of the project and its implementation (physically, with hands and feet).Construction Orthodox church united the creative potential of outstanding authors, which resulted in the birth of the national-romantic direction of Russian modernism.

I.E. Repin. “Savior Not Made by Hands” (1881–1882).

N.V. Nevrev."Nicholas the Wonderworker" (1881)

V.M. Vasnetsov. Icon "Sergius of Radonezh." (1881)

E. D. Polenova.Icon "Saints Prince Fyodor

with sons Konstantin and David" (1890s)

The temple contains one of the most original and new works of Russian church art - an artistic iconostasis, which includes the icons “The Savior Not Made by Hands” by Ilya Repin, “Nicholas the Wonderworker” by Nikolai Nevrev, “Sergius of Radonezh” and “The Mother of God” by Viktor Vasnetsov, “The Annunciation” by Vasily Polenov and others. The Vasnetsov Church made a breakthrough into a completely new artistic space: it was called “Novgorod-Pskov” with “Vladimir-Moscow” elements, but it was neither Novgorod, nor Pskov, nor Vladimir, nor Yaroslavl, but, simply, Russian. Neither the church “a la” XII century, nor the church “a la” XVI century, but the church of the twentieth century, completely lying in the tradition of Russian architecture of all previous centuries. Declaring this, V. Vasnetsov, apparently, still felt insecure, which is why he attached buttresses to the new church, as if it were an “ancient” temple, which was subsequently strengthened. This technique would later be successfully repeated by A. Shchusev in the Trinity Cathedral of the Pochaev Lavra, but this time confidently, like a sign, affirmingly.

“Abramtsevo is the best dacha in the world, it’s just ideal!” wrote I.E. Repin. In the spring of 1874, the Mamontovs, traveling from Rome to Russia, visited Paris, where they met I.E. Repin and V.D. Polenov. Both of them spent their retirement there, receiving gold medals for their diploma works from the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts. Both comrades were destined for artistic careers in Russia, and both stood at a crossroads, undecided where to settle. The acquaintance with the Mamontovs, the exceptional impression gained from this acquaintance, convinced both of them to choose Moscow as their place of residence. So, since 1877, Repin and Polenov settled in Moscow, spending the winter in cozy home Savva Ivanovich on Sadovo-Spasskaya, and in the summer moving to Abramtsevo. An artist of inexhaustible temperament, Repin worked always and everywhere, he worked easily and quickly. The inhabitants of Abramtsevo were surprised: as soon as the sun rose, Ilya Efimovich was already on his feet, saying: “The hours of the morning are the best hours of my life.” The atmosphere of the estate, the general creative enthusiasm, the constant communication of artists, the absence of obstacles to creativity - all this made Repin’s period of stay in Abramtsevo especially fruitful. Ilya Efimovich practically did not work in the Art Nouveau style - it was not his style. In 1881, for the iconostasis of the Abramtsevo church, Repin painted a large image of the Savior Not Made by Hands, executed with an academicism unusual for church painting. 10 years later, Ilya Repin painted two more icons: “The Lord in the Crown of Thorns” and “The Virgin and Child.” Ilya Repin painted icons in his youth; at the age of 17 he was already considered a gifted icon painter. But then he left icon painting for painting. The great Russian artist created these icons when he was already in mature age, after the death of his father. In May 1892, the great Russian artist Ilya Repin (1844 - 1930) acquired the Zdravnevo estate, 16 versts from Vitebsk. Here, during 1892 - 1902, the artist created a number of his famous paintings and drawings. In this list, a special place is occupied by the icons “Christ in the Crown of Thorns” and “The Virgin and Child.” Orthodox faith was an integral part of the artist’s life and work. Ilya Efimovich more than once reproduced in his paintings scenes from the Holy Scriptures, the deeds of saints, and episodes from the history of the Russian Orthodox Church. Let us also remember that Ilya Repin acquired his first lessons in craftsmanship from icon painters in his native Chuguev and began as an icon painter himself, although he subsequently rarely returned to this genre. On the holy land of White Rus', the small wooden church of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the village of Sloboda (now the village of Verkhovye) became the center of spiritual attraction for Repin and his family. And, of course, this would hardly have happened if not for the strength of faith and moral qualities of the priest Dimitry Diakonov (1858 - 1907), the rector of the temple at that time. Father Dimitri gave himself entirely to the ministry:

“He loved to serve, he loved to preach, he fulfilled the duties at the first call,” recalls a contemporary. The rector’s special concern was the splendor of the temple: “Fr. Demetrius was an artist at heart: in his church, not only was it always remarkably clean and tidy, but all the existing sacred things and icons were placed in the highest degree symmetrically and with great taste: the modest iconostasis was always elegantly decorated with greenery and flowers; In general, the hand and eye of the artist were visible in everything in the temple. And so it happened that in this church, furnished with such taste as if as a reward for Fr. For his love of art, local icons of the Savior and the Mother of God by the famous Russian artist Repin were donated to Dmitry.”

Ilya Repin. The Lord is crowned with thorns. 1894.

Ilya Repin. Virgin and Child. 1895-96.

Vitebsk. Galvanized iron, oil. 101x52.5 cm.

Vitebsk Regional Museum of Local Lore.

For many, Russian Art Nouveau is, first of all, the fantastically beautiful mansions of Fyodor Shekhtel in Moscow, huge crystal chandeliers, but not properly round, but oval, with a capricious slope, table lamps with a thickened leg covered with a bright linear ornament; wooden decor wriggling like a snake into long curved lines and varnished in places with dark, in others with light ocher... For others, these are objects of Russian decorative and applied art, made in the aesthetics of Art Nouveau. For example, in the Abramtsevo estate with its nature, church and wooden houses, icons in carved and painted frames, carved wooden furniture and Vrubel majolica. Talashkino is known almost as widely as Abramtsevo. There is Savva Mamontov, here is Princess Maria Tenisheva. It was thanks to her that Talashkino became an artistic center known throughout Russia. In Flenovo, which is located about 1.5 km from Talashkino, there is the building of Tenisheva’s art workshop, as well as two buildings in the pseudo-Russian style with elements of the Art Nouveau style - the Teremok hut, built according to the design of the artist Sergei Malyutin in 1901-1902 , and the Church of the Holy Spirit, created according to the design of Sergei Malyutin, Maria Tenisheva and Ivan Barshchevsky in 1902-1908. The church in 1910-1914 was decorated with mosaics based on sketches by Nicholas Roerich, assembled in the private mosaic workshop of Vladimir Frolov. The church is amazing. It is located at the top of a forested hill. The church is very extraordinary. First of all, its form is more fantasy than Orthodox. Ocher brick; roofs - motley terracotta; a thin, defenseless neck with a heavy-looking dark crown and a thin golden cross; heart-shaped lines of kokoshniks hanging over each other in three tiers and Mosaic on the facade of the main entrance. It is called “Savior Not Made by Hands.” The color of the mosaics is still very rich - azure, deep crimson, pure ocher. The face of Christ with a detached and at the same time attentive gaze is stunning.

Mosaic "The Savior Not Made by Hands" by N.K. Roerich.

By 1905, construction of the Temple was almost completed. In 1908, the princess invited her close friend N.K. to paint the Temple. Roerich. Then the decision came to dedicate the Temple to the Holy Spirit.

The work of Nicholas Roerich (including the church work) at the beginning of the 20th century was one of the significant and deeply respected phenomena of Russian culture. N.K. Roerich was the author of the mosaics of the Church of Peter and Paul in the village of Morozovka near Shlisselburg (1906), the Church of the Intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the village of Parkhomovka in Ukraine (1906), the Trinity Cathedral of the Pochaev Lavra in the Ternopil region, also in Ukraine (1910), the iconostasis of the Church of the Kazan Mother of God in Perm (1907), paintings of the chapel of St. Anastasia in Pskov (1913).

Drawing of the western facade from the funds of the Smolensk Museum-Reserve.

“I just dropped the word, and he responded. This word is a temple... - recalled M.K. in Paris in the 1920s. Tenisheva.- Only with him, if the Lord leads, I will finish it. He is a man who lives in spirit, the chosen one of the Lord’s spark, through him God’s truth will be revealed. The temple will be completed in the name of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the power of Divine spiritual joy, connecting and all-encompassing being with its secret power... What a task for an artist! What a great field for imagination! How much can you contribute to the Spiritual Temple of Creativity! We understood each other, Nikolai Konstantinovich fell in love with my idea, he understood the Holy Spirit. Amen. All the way from Moscow to Talashkin we talked heatedly, carried away by plans and thoughts into the infinite. Holy moments, grace-filled..."

Mosaic interior surface of the entrance arch.

Nikolai Konstantinovich also left his memories of this meeting with Maria Klavdievna in 1928, the year of the princess’s death:

“We decided to call this temple the Temple of the Spirit. Moreover, the central place in it should have been occupied by the image of the Mother of the World. The joint work that connected us before was even more crystallized by common thoughts about the temple. All thoughts about the synthesis of all iconographic ideas brought Maria Klavdievna the liveliest joy. Much had to be done in the temple, which we knew about only from internal conversations.”

“Turning to a broad understanding of religious principles, we can assume that Maria Klavdievna responded to the needs of the near future without prejudice or superstition.”

The result of the “internal conversations” of Maria Klavdievna and Nikolai Konstantinovich, the creators of Russia spiritually close to each other, was the creation of a new Orthodox church - the Temple in the name of the Holy Spirit. Since ancient times in Rus' there was a tradition of building churches dedicated to the Descent of the Holy Spirit, in which the events described in the Acts of the Apostles were sung:

“And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as from a rushing strong wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And cloven tongues as of fire appeared to them, and one rested on each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.”

There was an iconography developed over centuries depicting the apostles or the Mother of God with the apostles, on whom tongues of flame descend. The peculiarity of the Temple in Flenov is that it is dedicated not to the Descent, but to the Holy Spirit himself. There is every reason to assert that the Temple in Flenov became the first in both Rus' and Russia to have such a dedication.

For the first time the image of the Mother of the World N.K. Roerich captured it in 1906. The famous orientalist, scientist and traveler V.V. Golubev ordered N.K. Roerich to paint the Church of the Intercession of the Virgin Mary on his estate, in the village of Parkhomovka, near Kiev. It was then that a sketch of the altar image “The Queen of Heaven Above the River of Life” appeared. Canon N.K. Roerich was inspired by the mosaic image of Our Lady Oranta - the Unbreakable Wall (as it was popularly called) - in the altar of the 11th-century Church of St. Sophia of Kyiv.

“When writing the sketch, many legends about miracles associated with the name of the Lady were renewed in my memory,”- the artist recalled.

“Who does not remember this Kyiv Shrine in all Her Byzantine grandeur, Her hands raised in prayer, blue-blue clothes, red royal shoes, a white scarf behind her belt, and three stars on her shoulders and head. The face is stern, with large with open eyes, addressed to those praying. In a spiritual connection with the deepened mood of the pilgrims. There are no fleeting everyday moods in him. Those who enter the Temple are seized by a particularly strict prayerful mood,” ― the artist wrote about Our Lady of Kyiv.

In the depiction of the Queen of Heaven, the artist, relying on Orthodox tradition, also synthesized two types of ancient Russian iconography: Hagia Sophia and the Mother of God. Only images of St. Sophia and the Mother of God according to Psalm 44, which reads: “The Queen appears at Your right hand in robes of gold and robes”, in the ancient Russian tradition are found in royal vestments, and only the Mother of God can be found in icons seated on a throne with her hands raised to her chest. But the sketch was not destined to come true, because... brother V.V. Golubeva, who directly supervised the work of painting the church, did not accept N.K.’s idea. Roerich. The fact is that the artist showed in the image not only the ancient Russian tradition, but also combined pagan and oriental ideas about the Mother of the World in the appearance of the Queen of Heaven. It should be noted that the artist thought of this image in connection not only with the Church of the Intercession of the Virgin Mary, but also with the Temple, the construction of which was started by M.K. Tenisheva. I saw N.K. in her Temple. Roerich has an image where “all our treasure of the Divine should not be forgotten.” Collaborating with the princess starting in 1903, and often visiting her estate, conducting excavations near Smolensk, Nikolai Konstantinovich wrote about Talashkin in 1905:

“I also saw the beginning of the temple of this life. He still has a long way to go. They bring the best to him. In this building the miraculous heritage of old Rus' with its great sense of decoration can be happily realized. And the insane scope of the design of the outer walls of the Yuriev-Polsky Cathedral, and the phantasmagoria of the churches of Rostov and Yaroslavl, and the impressiveness of the Prophets of Novgorod Sophia - all our treasure of the Divine should not be forgotten. Even the temples of Ajanta and Lhasa. Let the years pass in quiet work. Let her realize the precepts of beauty as fully as possible. Where can one wish for the pinnacle of beauty if not in a temple? the highest creation our spirit?.

So, according to N.K. Roerich, and it happened: years later, the artist embodied the image of the Mother of the World in the Temple of the Holy Spirit in Flenov.Nicholas Roerich depicted above the altar not the Russian Mother of God, but his Mother of the World. What do we see now?Inside there are only bare walls... In the materials of the All-Union Central Research Laboratory for the Conservation and Restoration of Museum Art Values ​​(VTsNILKR, Moscow) for 1974 you can read:

“No more than one-fourth of the painting has survived. Lost along with the plaster was that part of the paintings where the face of the Queen of Heaven, the central figure of the composition of the paintings, was located. The main reason for the loss is the destruction and falling of plaster layers along with the painting. Undoubtedly, the premises of the temple, together with the painting, experienced all the vicissitudes of the fate of the building, which was abandoned and then used for other purposes. But at the same time, it is obvious that during the construction and then the preparation of the wall for painting, serious miscalculations and unreasonable combinations of various incompatible materials were made.”

“Currently, the department of monumental painting of the All-Russian Central Scientific Research Center has developed a method for restoring the surviving fragments of paintings in the Church of St. Spirit and conservation work began on the monument. But the technological sophistication in the execution of paintings also played a negative role here. Conservation techniques and methods have also become incredibly complex, and it will take a very long time to fully complete the restoration process.”

But there was a unique painting by Nicholas Roerich “The Queen of Heaven on the Bank of the River of Life”:

“Fiery, golden-scarlet, crimson, red hosts of heavenly forces, the walls of buildings unfolding above the clouds, in the middle of them is the Queen of Heaven in a white dress, and below is a dim cloudy day and the icy waters of the everyday river of life. What is strangely striking and perhaps attractive about this composition is that, although all the elements in it are apparently Byzantine, it is of a purely Buddhist, Tibetan character. Whether the white clothing of the Mother of God among the purple hosts, or the tightness of the heavenly forces over the dim expanse of the earth gives this impression, but in this icon something more ancient and eastern is felt. It’s deeply interesting what impression it will make when it fills the entire space of the main nave of the church above the low wooden iconostasis,” was written by the symbolist poet and landscape artist Maximilian Voloshin, who was lucky enough to see the frescoes of Nicholas Roerich in the Temple of the Spirit in Flenov.The village priest, who was invited to consecrate the church, was lucky enough to see them. I can imagine how taken aback he was when he saw these frescoes in a church without an altar, without an iconostasis, which, of course, were laid out according to the Orthodox canon. Father did not understand what a masterpiece was in front of him, so he did not consecrate the non-canonical temple with non-canonical paintings. The village priest did not understand to whom and what the temple was dedicated.It should be noted that periodically disagreements with representatives of the Orthodox Church arose not only among N.K. Roerich. There were similar problems in the work of M.A. Vrubel, and V.M. Vasnetsova, and M.V. Nesterova, and K.S. Petrova-Vodkina. The process of ambiguous searches for a new style in church art, which by the beginning of the 20th century already had an almost 1000-year history, the diversity of tastes of customers, including representatives of the Church - all this could contribute to misunderstandings between the artist and the customer. It was a natural creative process, and in the case of Nikolai Konstantinovich it always ended in a compromise on both sides. That's whyRoerich himself interprets this event completely differently. Sketches of paintings for the Temple in Flenov were discussed with representatives of the Smolensk diocese and were approved.

“When the Church of the Holy Spirit in Talashkino was conceived, an image of the Lady of Heaven was proposed on the altar apse. I remember how some objections arose, but it was the proof of the Kyiv “Unbreakable Wall” that stopped unnecessary word debates,”- the artist recalled.

The Temple of the Holy Spirit was not consecrated solely because of the outbreak of the First World War, which prevented the completion of the paintings.

“But it was in the temple that the first news of the war was heard. And further plans froze, never to be completed again. But, if a significant part of the temple walls remained white, then the main idea of ​​this aspiration still managed to be expressed,”- recalled Nikolai Konstantinovich. Initially, the work of Princess Maria Klavdievna was in tune with N.K. Roerich with his understanding of the deep intertwining in Russian culture of the traditions of the East and the “animal style” of paganism.

“But, remembering the distant cradle of enamel, the East, I wanted to go further, to do something more fantastic, more connecting Russian production with its deep beginnings,” wrote N.K. Roerich, reflecting on the animal figures created by the princess using the enamel technique and presented at the Paris exhibition in 1909. “Near the concepts of the East, images of animals always crowd: beasts cursed in motionless, significant poses. The symbolism of animal images may still be too difficult for us. This world, closest to man, evoked special thoughts about fabulous animal images. Fantasy clearly cast images of the simplest animals in eternal, motionless forms, and powerful symbols always guarded the frightened life of man. Prophetic cats, cockerels, unicorns, owls, horses took shape... They established forms that were needed by some, and idolatrous for others.
I think in the latest works of the book. Tenisheva wanted to use ancient craftsmanship to capture the ancient idolatry of the hearth. Bring to life the forms of forgotten talismans sent by the goddess of prosperity to guard a person’s home. In the set of stylized forms, one senses not an animal artist, but dreams of talismans of antiquity. Ornaments full of secret meaning especially attract our attention, and so is the real task of the book. Tenisheva expands the horizons of great artistic immersions,”- noted the artist in the article “The Sworn Beast”.

“Symbols strong in spells are needed for the wanderings of our art,” ― he concluded. In the animal symbols of N.K. Roerich saw the eternal, cosmic meaning of Being, which has come down to us from the depths of centuries. The artist will call it: “buried treasure”, “lower than the depths”. From generation to generation, our ancestors, through the images of animals, conveyed the knowledge of the laws of the Cosmos through the language of symbols. The symbols of animals in the ancient mysteries spoke of the earthly nature of man, his connection with dense matter, which is transformed through the spiritual battle of St. George with the Serpent, Theseus with the Minotaur, through the “descent into hell” of Orpheus for Eurydice, Demeter for Persephone. These same “symbols powerful with spells” have come down to us in the so-called Stone Age caves, which also served as a space for the transformation of matter, a temple of mysteries, and a labyrinth for the hero. Slaying the Dragon-Minotaur in its depths, the hero freed from the snares of hell from the power of Pluto a soul that could have, like the hero, different names: Elizabeth, Eurydice, Persephone. Not by chance Christian churches often decorated on the external façade with chimeras or frightening masks.

In 1903, Vyacheslav Tenishev passed away. He died in Paris. Maria Klavdievna decided that his resting place would be their native Talashkino, where they were happy together. The Temple of the Spirit was simultaneously built as a crypt - the burial place of the spouse, and in the future, hers. There, in the basement of the temple, as if in a crypt, the embalmed body of Prince Tenishev was buried. In 1923, “Kombedov activists” opened the Temple of the Spirit and dragged the deceased Prince Tenishev out of there. The body of the “bourgeois” was thrown into a shallow hole without any honor. However, local peasants, for whom the Tenishevs created an exemplary farm on their estate and for whose children they organized an agricultural school, took Vyacheslav Nikolaevich’s body out of the pit at night and reburied it in the village cemetery. The place of his burial was kept secret, so his grave was lost.

In 1901, according to the design of the artist S.V. Malyutin, the fabulous “Teremok” was erected. Initially, it housed a library for students of the agricultural school. The building itself is very original. With its fantastic paintings, curls of monstrous flowers, strange animals and birds, it resembles a house from folk tales.

Inside there is evidence of Talashkin's artistic life. Musicians, artists, artists came here. Many of them stayed and worked at the estate for a long time: A.N. Benoit, M.A. Vrubel, K.A. Korovin, A.A. Kurennoy, M.V. Nesterov, A.V. Prakhov, I.E. Repin, Ya.F. Tsionglinsky. Repin and Korovin painted portraits of the owner in Talashkino - M.K. Tenisheva. But the Talashkin art workshops, which opened in 1900, brought true fame to these places. The artist S.V. was invited to lead the new business. Malyutina.

Over the five years of its existence, the carving, carpentry, ceramics and embroidery workshops produced many household items from children's toys and balalaikas to entire furniture sets. Sketches for many were made by famous artists: Vrubel, Malyutin, Korovin, etc. In the building of the former agricultural school there is now an interesting exhibition, indicating another direction of M.K.’s activity. Tenisheva. One of the largest collections of folk art was collected in Talashkino.

V.M. Vasnetsov.Icon "Our Lady". (1882).

It was precisely this icon that was sometimes perceived as the image of the Mother of God of Vasnetsov, which first appeared in the iconostasis of the Abramtsevo Church and which the students of the Committee of Trusteeship of Russian Icon Painting were called upon to paint. Vasnetsov himself discussed the romantic rapprochement between the idea of ​​beauty and the icon of Christ:

“By placing Christ as the light center of the tasks of art, I do not narrow its scope, but rather expand it. We must hope that artists will believe that the task of art is not just the negation of good (our time), but also good itself (the image of its manifestations).” The image of Christ in the Vladimir Cathedral was clearly designed for a special mystical contact between the artist - the author of the icon - the artisan and the viewer. Moreover, this internal connection could be achieved under one condition - the creative perception of a religious image. A special creative act was required from the artisan and the viewer in comprehending the idea of ​​absolute beauty that the artist put into the prayer image. Since art was often considered (following John Ruskin) as the self-expression of a nation, it was necessary to find the key to a special emotional perception of the “national spectator”.

Vasnetsov himself looked for this key not by copying an ancient icon, but in the artistic culture of European romanticism, as well as in the field of national epic and Russian religious philosophy. This was also noted by Igor Grabar:

“Vasnetsov dreamed of resurrecting the spirit, and not just primitive techniques; he wanted not a new deception, but a new religious ecstasy, expressed by modern artistic means.”

V.M. Vasnetsov. "The Virgin and Child". 1889.

Oil on canvas. 170x102.6 cm.

Gift of the Moscow Theological Academy from

His Holiness Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'

Alexy I in 1956.

Signed at the bottom left with a brush in brown pigment - “March 2, 1889 V. Vasnetsov”; below, with a brush and a white-orange pigment - “Emily and Adrien”. For the first time to the image of the Mother of God V.M. Vasnetsov converted in 1881-1882, painting an icon for the Church of the Savior Not Made by Hands in Abramtsevo. Subsequently, this theme was developed in the grandiose composition of the Vladimir Cathedral in Kyiv (1885-1895). The head of the work on painting the cathedral was St. Petersburg University professor A.V. Prakhov. V.M. Vasnetsov was inspired by the famous mosaic “Our Lady Unbreakable Wall"Kyiv St. Sophia Cathedral and "Sistine Madonna" by Raphael. In the center of the composition is a walking Mother of God with the Child Christ in her arms. The Child, wrapped in a shroud, leaned forward with his whole body and raised his hands, blessing those present. The heads of the Mother of God and the Child are surrounded by a soft glow. This iconography was subsequently often used in Russian icon painting. The dedicatory inscription on the painting “The Virgin and Child” indicates that it was painted by V.M. Vasnetsov as a gift to the Prakhovs after completing the paintings of the Vladimir Cathedral.

The Athos style of icon painting was formed by the mid-19th century. At this time, Russia, the largest and richest Orthodox power, is experiencing unprecedented prosperity. A huge number of temples and monasteries are being built around the world. Icon-painting workshops are being created in large monasteries, including Athos and Valaam. It is in these icon painting workshops that a unique style of icon painting is created, called “Athos”. His distinctive features- golden, embossed backgrounds, the finest painting of faces, the use of oil paints instead of egg tempera.

Iveron Icon of the Mother of God, fragment, Athos, 19th century.

St. Sergius and Herman, fragment, Valaam, 19th century.

We must understand that the creation of an icon is a living process, directly related to prayer practice. Many monks on Mount Athos, under the guidance of experienced elders, practiced the Jesus Prayer and remained in contemplation and vision of the Tabor Light. The Mother of God and the saints appeared to many of them. I think it would not be much of an exaggeration to say that they lived surrounded by saints and angels. And at some point, they were no longer satisfied with the abstract Byzantine style, which by that time had turned into an endless repetition of the same conventional, schematic images. The fathers began to paint more vivid images, trying to make the “invisible” “visible,” but without crossing the line that turns a face into a face, and an icon into a portrait. This is how the characteristic features of the Athonite style developed - golden, shimmering, embossed backgrounds - a symbol of the Tabor Light, transparent layers of paint, subtle transitions of light and shadow giving the icon an internal glow, and realistic writing of the faces. Icons began to be painted in a similar manner in Russia, including on Valaam.

At this time, Byzantine and Greek icon painting was in decline. Greece, Serbia, and Bulgaria were under the rule of the Ottoman Empire, which of course did not contribute to the flourishing of icon painting. The faces on the icons became more and more sketchy, the images more and more superficial and primitive. Things were no better in Russia. Numerous icon painting artels in Moscow, Yaroslavl, Nizhny Novgorod, Palekh, aimed at customers, most of whom were the merchant class, turned the icon into an interior decoration item, a kind of Palekh box. Usually the faces on such icons become something secondary, lost in numerous ornaments and decorative curls.

Icon painting workshop on Mount Athos. 19th century

Russian and Athonite masters are moving away from the schematic nature of late Byzantine designs and the decorative overload of Russians; return the icon to its original, spiritual meaning.

Our workshop, to the best of its modest strength, and with God’s help, hopes to revive this wonderful tradition of icon painting, and with all our hearts hopes that our icons will help everyone striving for perfection in Christ, purification of the heart, and the acquisition of Divine Love.

Academic style

Icons in the academic style can be seen in almost every church. And if the temple is from the 18th or 19th centuries, then icons in the academic style, as a rule, make up the majority of the temple icons. And at the same time, the academic style of icon painting causes heated controversy both among icon painters and connoisseurs of icon painting. The essence of the controversy is as follows. Supporters of the Byzantine style, who create icons “in the canon,” accuse icons in the academic style of lack of spirituality, and a departure from the traditions of icon painting.

Will try to understand these accusations. First about spirituality. Let's start with the fact that spirituality is a rather subtle and elusive matter; there are no tools for determining spirituality, and everything in this area is extremely subjective. And if someone claims that the miraculous image of the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God, painted in the academic style, and, according to legend, saved St. Petersburg during the war, is less spiritual than a similar icon in the Byzantine style... let this statement remain on his conscience.

Usually, as an argument, you can hear such statements. They say that icons in the academic style have physicality, rosy cheeks, sensual lips, etc. In fact, the predominance of the sensual, carnal principle in the icon is not a problem of style, but of the low professional level of individual icon painters. One can give many examples of icons painted in the “canon” itself, where the “cardboard” inexpressive face is lost in numerous curls of extremely sensual decorations, ornaments, etc.

Now about the departure of the academic style from the traditions of icon painting. The history of icon painting goes back more than one thousand five hundred years. And now in Athonite monasteries you can see blackened, ancient icons dating from the 7th to 10th centuries. But the heyday of icon painting in Byzantium occurred at the end of the 13th century, and is associated with the name of Panselin, the Greek Andrei Rublev. Panselin's paintings in Karey have reached us. Another outstanding Greek icon painter, Theophanes of Crete, worked on Mount Athos at the beginning of the 16th century. He created paintings in the Stavronikita monastery and in the refectory of the Great Lavra. In Rus', the icons of Andrei Rublev are rightly recognized as the pinnacle of icon painting.

If we take a closer look at this entire almost two-thousand-year history of icon painting, we will discover its amazing diversity. The first icons were painted using the encaustic technique (paints based on hot wax). This fact alone refutes the popular belief that a “real” icon must necessarily be painted in egg tempera. Moreover, the style of these early icons is much closer to icons in the academic style than to the “canon”. This is not surprising. To paint icons, the first icon painters took as a basis Fayum portraits, images of real people that were created using the encaustic technique.

Christ Pantocrator. Sinai.
7th century
encaustic

Savior. Andrey Rublev.
15th century
tempera

Lord Almighty. V. Vasnetsov
19th century
oil

Look at the examples above. After this, it is hardly possible to say with confidence that the icons in the academic style of V. Vasnetsov were a departure from the icon-painting tradition.

In fact, the tradition of icon painting, like everything in this world, develops cyclically. By the 18th century, the so-called "canonical" style had declined everywhere. In Greece and the Balkan countries this is partly due to the Turkish conquest, in Russia with Peter’s reforms. But this is not the main reason. Man’s perception of the world and his attitude towards the world around him, including the spiritual world, is changing. A person of the 19th century perceived the world around him differently than a person of the 13th century. And icon painting is not an endless repetition of the same patterns according to drawings, but a living process based both on the religious experience of the icon painter himself and on the perception of the spiritual world by the entire generation.

Icon painting workshop Northern Athos. 2013
Icon in academic style.

Valaam Icon of the Mother of God
(fragment, face)
Icon painting workshop Northern Athos. 2010
Icon in Athonite style

The birth of a new icon-painting tradition is associated with the Russian monastery of St. Panteleimon, and the organization of icon-painting workshops at the monastery. The so-called “Athos style” originated there. Russian icon painters made some changes to the traditional technique of painting icons.

First of all, they abandoned egg tempera. Despite the strong opinion that tempera paints are highly durable, reality spoke otherwise. In a damp climate, tempera paints quickly became moldy and became covered with a cloudy, white coating. The situation was complicated by sea air. The salt settled on the icons and corroded the paint layer. I had occasion to see modern icons painted in egg tempera on Mount Athos. After 3-4 years they already required serious restoration. Therefore, Athonite masters abandoned tempera and switched to oil paints.

Another feature of Athonite Russian icons was the gold chased backgrounds. Theologically, the golden background in the icon symbolized the Light of Tabor. The doctrine of the Light of Tabor, first formulated by St. Dionysius the Areopagite was very popular on Mount Athos. To this was added the practice of the Jesus Prayer, which made it possible to purify the soul to such an extent that the Light of Tabor became visible and bodily vision. In addition to theological considerations, the use of a gold chased background also had its own aesthetics. The candlelight reflected in the numerous facets of the coinage, creating a golden shimmer effect.

Over time, in addition to the workshop in the monastery of St. Panteleimon, icon painting workshops were opened in Ilyinsky, Andreevsky and other large Russian monasteries. Almost simultaneously, in Russia, icon painting workshops opened on Valaam.

Also in Moscow and St. Petersburg, graduates of the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts are beginning to engage in icon painting. The most talented of them, K. Bryullov, N. Bruni, V. Vereshchagin, V. Vasnetsov, created icons, which later became known as icons in the academic style.

Icon painting comes to Kievan Rus after its baptism, in the 9th century, from Byzantium. Invited Byzantine (Greek) icon painters painted the churches of Kyiv and other large cities of Rus'. Until the Tatar-Mongol invasion (1237-1240), Byzantine and Kiev icon painting served as a model for other local schools. With the emergence of feudal fragmentation in Rus', separate icon painting schools began to emerge in each of the principalities. In the 13th century, a cultural gap began between Russia and Byzantium, which also reflected the fact that icons painted after the 13th century began to differ more and more from their Byzantine origins.

The northern parts of Rus' were less affected by the invasion of the Tatar-Mongol yoke. In Pskov, Vladimir and Novgorod, icon painting was then developing strongly, and stood out for its special originality. During the period of rapid development of the Moscow principality, the Moscow school was born. It was then that the “official” history of Russian icon painting begins, which begins to move further and further away from the stylistic features and traditions of its ancestor - Byzantium.

The Moscow school received its greatest development in the 14th-15th centuries and it was associated with the works of such icon painters as Theophanes the Greek, Andrei Rublev and Daniil Cherny. The same period saw the heyday of the Pskov school, distinguished by the expression of images, the sharpness of light images and impasto brush strokes.

Subsequently, the originality of Russian icon painting was supplemented by the development of the Stroganov school of icon painting, which was based on rich colors, the use of gold and silver, and refinement in the poses and gestures of the characters.

In the 16th century, Yaroslavl began to actively develop as a cultural and economic center. The Yaroslavl school of icon painting emerges, which continues to exist for almost two centuries, and makes its great contribution to the development of the history of icon painting in Russia. A wealth of design, the use of additional details in design, complex plots and much more appeared in icon painting in those centuries.

In the 17th century, the Palekh school appeared. The writing of the Palekh style is complicated by a wide variety of compositional elements, and the technique is also complicated by many shadow and light additions. The colors are rich and bright. Also during this period, oil painting was introduced into icon painting, allowing images to be conveyed more voluminously. This direction is called the “frying style” of icon painting.

In the 18th century, with the development of the Academy of Arts, picturesque icons in the academic style, painted in oil technique, began to become widespread in icon painting.

This is not the whole history of icon painting; there are quite a lot of icon painting schools, and each of them can be devoted to a separate large article.

Russian icon painting, having developed over centuries, has become so rich and diverse that many believe that it has surpassed its Byzantine (Greek) origins by an order of magnitude.

One and the same icon painted in the traditions of different icon painting schools can differ greatly in artistic perception, which is subjective; some people may like it, while others absolutely not.

Various design options, styles, techniques, compositions, colors, etc. - all this must be taken into account when ordering an icon.

At present, in general, the following techniques and styles of icon painting can be distinguished, which should be determined when writing a new icon:

• Technique: tempera, oil,
• Medieval iconography and iconography of “late” centuries.
• Writing style: picturesque, iconographic.

It should be noted. that at present, manufactured icons may have the characteristics of several icon painting schools, and it can sometimes be difficult to clearly define. Which school does the icon belong to?

Here are just some examples of all of the above:

	Tempera, icon painting style, Moscow school.		Tempera, icon painting style, icon painting of the Middle Ages, Byzantine style.
	Palekh. pictorial style, tempera.		Tempera, Yaroslavl icon painting school, icon painting style.		Tempera, Yaroslavl icon painting school, medieval icon painting.
	Moscow school of icon painting, tempera.		Rostov-Yaroslavl school of icon painting, tempera.
	Painting style, tempera.				Painting (academic) style, oil.

Icon painting is the creation of sacred images intended to mediate between the Divine and earthly worlds during individual prayer or during Christian worship. Christian tradition considers St. Luke to be the first icon painter, who painted the first faces of the Savior. The oldest surviving iconographic images are wall images in catacomb churches in Asia Minor, Greece and Italy, dating back to the 2nd-4th centuries. They are stylistically close to the Fayum portraits. The oldest icon painting technique is encaustic - melted paint mixed with wax. Hellenistic traditions were gradually reworked and adapted to Christian concepts.

Spread in the 8th century. Iconoclasm did not destroy icon painting in Byzantium, because icons continued to be created in the provinces. Based on the teachings of John of Damascus, the dogma of icon veneration was adopted at the VII Ecumenical Council (787), which brought a deeper understanding of the icon as a bearer of a piece of divine holiness.

After a period of controversy about the Tabor light, icon painting becomes a distinctive feature of the Orthodox branch of Christianity. The dispute between the monk Varlaam, who came to Constantinople from Calabria in Italy, and Gregory Palamas, a scholar-monk from Athos, concerned practice hesychasm- the ancient Eastern Christian tradition of prayer. Its essence was silent, inner prayer, which allowed a person to see the divine light, the same as the apostles saw on Mount Tabor at the moment of the Transfiguration. Varlaam denied the possibility of any mystical connection between man and God, therefore he denied the practice of hesychasm that existed on Athos. Gregory Palamas defended hesychasm as the original Orthodox teaching about human salvation. The dispute ended with the victory of Gregory Palamas. At the Council of Constantinople in 1352, hesychasm was recognized as true, and Divine energies as uncreated, manifestations of God himself in the created world. Since the victory of hesychasm, there has been an extraordinary rise in icon painting and a surge of amazing new visual solutions. Light was understood in Byzantine painting symbolically as a manifestation Divine power, permeating the world. And in the second half of the 14th century. in connection with the teachings of hesychasm, such an understanding of light in the icon became all the more important.

In icon painting, this manifested itself in the rejection of realistic depictions of faces and things and in the desire to convey the sensory world. It becomes more conventional: the painted images are not faces, but faces that reflect something more spiritual than physical. In the Western branch of Christianity at this time, painting with religious content was developing, based on the author’s interpretation of the biblical story and addressed to the sensory experience of the viewer.

The process of icon painting has its own symbolism. An icon painter, creating an icon, like the Creator, first draws the light, then the earth and water, plants, animals, buildings, clothes, etc. are “revealed,” and the last to appear is the face of a person. After painting is completed, the icon is covered with oil, which is considered as an analogue of the rite of anointing.

Icon painting is characterized by stylistic features. 1. Using " reverse perspective", when objects depicted in the foreground can be significantly smaller in size than those depicted behind them. 2. A combination in one image of events that took place at different times and in different places, or the same character is depicted several times at different moments of the action. 3. All characters are depicted in certain poses and clothes adopted by the iconographic tradition. 4. Absence of a specific lighting source and falling shadows; volume is conveyed using special shading or tone. 5. Stylization of the proportions of the human body, clothing, trees, mountains, buildings. 6. Use of special symbolism of color, light, gestures, attributes.

Periodization of Byzantine icon painting.

The Macedonian Renaissance (IX-X centuries) is distinguished by ascetic figures in frozen poses and in clothes with rigid lines of folds. The heavy, bulky figures of saints were endowed with large arms and legs like those of peasants. Their images are completely devoid of anything temporary and changeable.

Komnenian period (XI-XII centuries). Our Lady of Vladimir, one of the most elegant and poetic Byzantine icons, dates back to this period. A characteristic physiognomy develops: an elongated face, narrow eyes, a thin nose with a triangular pit on the bridge of the nose. In the latest works of the 12th century, the linear stylization of the image intensifies, the draperies of clothes and even faces are covered with a network of bright white lines, which play a decisive role in the expression of form.

The Paleologian “Renaissance” is the name given to the phenomenon in the art of Byzantium in the first quarter of the 14th century. Characterized by impeccable proportions, flexible movements, impressive posing of figures, stable poses and easy-to-read, precise compositions. There is a moment of entertainment, concreteness of the situation and the presence of the characters in space, their communication. The icons acquired complex symbolism associated with the interpretation of Holy Scripture.

Icon painting is characterized by a certain set of subjects with traditional, easily recognizable iconographies. Savior Not Made by Hands - face on a towel; Savior Almighty - with the Gospel and with his hand raised for blessing; looks like Nicholas the Pleasant, but the halo is lined with a cross; Nicholas the Wonderworker is depicted as an old man with a book in a bishop's robe.