the dark lilac, velvety chocolate and reddish-brown mountains amid the buff sand of the desert. From this came the tones that run through Egyptian dress, decorated in dark lilac and chocolate brown on a ground of buff unbleached linen, and through the simple scale of Egyptian wall-paintings with brown and lilac on a buff ground. We find the same thing in the Ravenna mosaics: here the figures of holy men and women are almost without exception in pale buff with lilac adornments of clothes and insignia upon a dark blue ground. We shall later see that the icons which bear in Russian tradition the name of Korsún are all distinguished by a scale of dark chocolate or brown upon a buff ground and these Korsun’ icons, which came to Russia from Chersonesus Taurica, Caffa, and Trebizond, were copies of Greco-Oriental icons. Even more significant is it, that by setting out a series of icons, we can show how the early Venetian icon-painting with its rich and deep colouring, dark purple, dark lilac, dark green, rich blue, and dark brown or chocolate, was derived from the Greco-Oriental models. Great painters arrive at a consummate chiaroscuro, almost eliminate true colour and only make use of an endless gradation of tones. It turns out that this tonality was already in use in the earliest icon-painting. This is the place to emphasise the fact that it was only the use of a chiaroscuro which almost excluded colour which led in the case of certain iconic types to an unearthly paleness. Upon this paleness the aesthetic enthusiasts for icons have seized to support their view that the fundamental aim of the icon is to express the incorporeality of the saints in their orders. The fact is that the Syro-Egyptian type, in its historical form, was in existence in Russia in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and was embodied in the icons of S. Nicholas the Wonderworker and S. John the Forerunner as rendered in certain severe styles. However, this was merely temporary and in no way to be taken as determinative for the majority of schools or for other periods. The essence of the icon consists in the traditional striving after strong relief: from this proceeded, as we shall see, the system of lightened planes in Byzantine and Russian icon-painting. The yolk of egg medium particularly lends itself to the system of laying one coat upon another, each made lighter than the last by the addition of white lead to the ochre. It also gives full value to the pure and bright colours of the pigments: in this it differs much from the western tempera (white of egg medium) which inevitably gives a dead tint to the flesh. At its point of departure, the icon derived both from a higher artistic portrait and from a more artistic technique, for the encaustic process demanded at once a skilled and practised craftsman and an artist of advanced talent. But of course, this situation could not remain for ever. It was rendered impossible by the transference of the craft to a fresh nation and the lack of models. The transfer of the icon from Syria and Egypt to Greece and Byzantium resulted in a striking difference in its characteristic features, this became more so the case when it came to Russia. Rich reddish ochre, a warm brown, brick-red, and black – these were the traditional colours of the Egyptian craft worked upon wood. On this basis came the addition of dark green, indigo, and deep lilac. Such is the colouring of the Greco-Oriental mosaics so far known to us, those in Cyprus, Ravenna, and some of those in Rome and of the Greco-Oriental icons. Quite different and incomparably brighter is the decorative colouring of the wall-paintings and mosaics of Constantinople, the true Byzantine style.[19] Accordingly, the Byzantine icon also makes a significant departure from the Greco-Oriental colouring, and adopts the bright tones of miniatures and frescoes. The same was the case at Novgorod, where the Greco-Oriental originals passed away and gave place to others, so that the icon-painters, left without models and painting iconostases, went over to a bright style of painting. In such cases the most characteristic feature is the predominance of so-called folk-colours, specifically, bright red (vermilion) and light green. In the ways outlined above, the icon resembled the portraits. What then are the fundamental differences? The icon of a saint differs from his portrait in being its mere copy or replica for which a general resemblance is sufficient; it keeps the general type of his face, his distinguishing marks, his character, but as it is a mere journeyman’s copy and it cannot give the refinements of individual features. The face of S. John the Baptist is always typical, but in it there is no individuality, so too in the faces of Mary and the other saints. Nonetheless, we can pursue this, and see how far icons derive from individual, though not artistic, portraits.
12. Bust of Saint Nicholas and Saints in Medallions, 10th to 11th century.
Saint Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, Egypt.
13. The Crucifixion and Saints in Medallions, 11th to 12th century.
Saint Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, Egypt.
14. The Annunciation, end of the 12th century.
Saint Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, Egypt.
15. Our Lady with Child Between Two Angels, 6th to 7th century. Santa Maria in Trastevere, Rome.
16. The Baptism of Christ, 10th century. Icon from one of the Twelve Great Festivals of the Iconostasis.
Saint Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, Egypt.
17. The Archangel Saint Michael, 11th century.
Icon of gilded silver, enamel and precious stones.
Saint Mark’s Basilica Treasure, Venice.
18. The Spiritual Ladder of Saint John Climacus, 11th to 12th century.
Saint Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, Egypt.
19. The Council of Nicaea I, Melkite Icon from the 17th century. Abou Adal Collection, Paris.
The iconic type is also subject to history, as it has had different characteristics at different times. The Greco-Oriental icon gives us real or realistic types, whereas the Byzantine or purely Greek type, through its connexion with the idealistic Greek sculpture of the latest period and with Byzantine illuminated manuscripts, exchanges the realist principle for a generalized ideal model. We must not forget that the source of the icon is in the characteristic style adapted to the representation of departed relatives. Hence, the general outline of the portrait, its impressionism pose, its deep and thoughtful glance, turned downwards or to the side, the slightly drooping eyelids, the majestic restfulness, and a certain retirement from the outer world. All this was absorbed into the icon, and served as a foundation for the ideal features of Christ, the Virgin Mary, S. Nicholas and the like, being really a very ancient heritage from the severe religious art of Egypt. But, as Byzantine icon-painting was practised from the ninth century as a journeyman’s craft, only the general scheme or type of the icon was within its reach, and it was in this shape that it spread to Russia, Georgia, Armenia, the Balkans, southeastern Europe and Italy. Later, in each of these countries, under the influence of the efforts made by native craftsmen, this iconic scheme changes, comes to life, and likewise degenerates and loses its character.
When the pictured portrait of a saint became an icon the position it took was that of a devotional icon (molénnaya from molit’ sya to pray), that voiceless friend in the faith to whom people turned with their prayer, as if they were entrusting their prayers to him. As they prayed, they made the sign of the cross upon the breast and kissed the icon and this became the regular practice. It was just what was done when saying farewell to a martyr, when people signed themselves with the cross to signify to all around that they belonged to the Christian community and kissed him by way of farewell to the dead brother in the faith. The Church accepted the use of the icon as a pious popular custom which helped faith and gave it general support among the people, and allowed the icon to establish itself
By ‘Byzantine’ the author generally means ‘Constantinopolitan’, or at least truly Greek, but sometimes he falls into the ordinary vague use of the term.
