Iconography Ancient Rus' was sacred. The entire creative process was subject to strict canonical regulations. This, on the one hand, impoverished the iconography of Ancient Rus', since the master used an already given iconography. However, at the same time, this made it possible to focus on the “essence of the subject of spirituality”, focusing attention on deep penetration into the image and the process of recreating it with the help of exquisite

Old Russian icon painting was subject to laws not only in the image technique itself, but also in the choice of material for it. Traditionally established techniques were also used in the method of preparing the surface for the image, the composition of the soil, and the technology for preparing paints. The iconography of Ancient Rus' also presupposed a mandatory sequence of writing.

The images were painted using paints whose binding component was tempera (a water emulsion with egg yolk). As a rule, wooden boards were used as a base. Preparing the board for writing was quite long and laborious. We chose a log with a very strong inner layer. The production of boards for icons was carried out by woodworkers (wood-makers); icon painters themselves did this very rarely.

Small icons were painted on one board. For large images, several boards connected to each other were used.

A middle recess (ark) was cut out on the front of the board. He created some kind of window. A frame (field) was formed along the edges.

By the nature of the fastening of the boards, the depth of the ark, and the width of the margins, one can often determine the place and time of production of the board. On ancient icons (11th-12th centuries), the ark, as a rule, was made deep and the margins wide. Later, boards were made with narrow margins. Starting from, you can find icons without borders.

The ground was gesso. This is a mixture of alabaster or chalk with fish (sturgeon) glue. The board was coated several times with glue (liquid and hot), then pavolok (fabric) was applied to it, rubbing it with the palm of the hand. The gesso was applied after the pavolok had dried. The soil was applied in several layers. Its surface was carefully leveled and sometimes polished. In some cases, relief was applied.

The image was applied to the prepared soil surface. The iconography of Ancient Rus' involved the gradual application of a drawing. First, the first image was drawn with light touches of soft coal from birch branches. The second drawing, more detailed, was done either in black).

Sometimes masters used “copybooks” obtained from icons that served as samples. In this way the image was reproduced.

Then the letter began. At the first stage, all the necessary details were “gilded”, then “preliminary” writing was carried out (buildings, clothes, landscapes were painted). The images of faces were performed on final stage. There was also strict consistency in working with paints.

The painting of icons was carried out according to manuals (“originals”). They contained information about the technology of writing one or another image.

It should be noted that in terms of its internal and external organization, the icon is a very complex work of art. However, in the 19th century, icon painters were treated as second-class artists, considering the icon to be primitive. Ancient masters were accused of ignorance of techniques for creating direct perspective and human anatomy. At the same time, the icon is the result of virtuoso technique and high image culture. The use of tempera painting required special skills that were acquired over the course of many years training.

The icon painters of Ancient Rus' perceived writing as an act of communication with another world. This required physical and spiritual cleansing.

Scarce information has survived to this day about the masters of antiquity. However, the pages of historical evidence, the margins and backs of icons, and the walls of temples preserve the names of ancient icon painters. Among them should be named the monk Alimpiy, his contemporaries Stefan, Gaga, Sezhir, Radko. One of the most famous icons, “Trinity,” was painted by Andrei Rublev.

These icons have protected Russia for centuries. They stopped armies, healed the sick and saved them from fires.

1. Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God

According to legend, the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God was painted by the Evangelist Luke himself. It was brought to Russia at the beginning of the 12th century as a gift to Prince Mstislav.

The icon was recognized as miraculous after it three times withdrew the invaders’ troops from Moscow.

Now the icon is in the Church-Museum of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi at the Tretyakov Gallery.

2. Icon "Trinity"

The famous Trinity icon was painted by Andrei Rublev in the 15th century for the iconostasis of the Trinity Cathedral. Over the 600 years of its existence, the icon was renewed five times, but after the restoration in 1919, the author’s layer was again discovered.

Now the icon is kept in the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow.

3. Kazan Icon of the Mother of God

The Kazan Icon of the Mother of God was found on the ashes in 1579 after the Mother of God appeared three times in a dream to the girl Matrona. Today, the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God is one of the most popular in Russia. It is believed that it was her patronage that helped Pozharsky’s militia expel the Poles from Moscow.

Of the three miraculous lists, only the St. Petersburg one has survived to this day; it is now kept in the Kazan Cathedral in St. Petersburg.

4. Tikhvin Icon of the Mother of God

It is generally accepted that Tikhvin icon The Mother of God was found in Tikhvin in 1383. The icon is revered as miraculous. According to legend, it was her intercession in 1613 that helped save the Tikhvin Mother of God Assumption Monastery from the Swedish invasion.

Now the icon of the Tikhvin Mother of God is in the Tikhvin Dormition Monastery.

5. Smolensk Icon of the Blessed Virgin Mary

The Smolensk Icon of the Blessed Virgin Mary was brought to Russia in the 11th century. She was credited with many miracles, including saving Smolensk from the invasion of Batu Khan in 1239.

There are many copies of the Smolensk icon, but the prototype was lost during the occupation of Smolensk by German troops in 1941.

6. Iveron Icon of the Mother of God

In the 9th century, the Iveron Icon was kept in the house of a pious widow, who saved it from destruction by lowering it into the sea. Two centuries later, the icon appeared to the monks of the Iveron Monastery on Mount Athos.

In the 17th century, a copy of the miraculous icon was brought to Russia. Today you can venerate the image in the Novodevichy Convent.

7. Don Icon of the Mother of God

The Don Icon of the Mother of God is double-sided, with the Dormition of the Mother of God depicted on the reverse. The authorship of the icon is attributed to Theophanes the Greek. According to legend, the Cossacks presented this miraculous icon to Dmitry Donskoy before the Battle of Kulikovo in 1380.

Today, the icon is kept in the Tretyakov Gallery and leaves it every year on September 1 (August 19, old style). On this day, the image is transported to the Donskoy Monastery for the festive service.

8. Icon of the Sign of the Blessed Virgin Mary

The Icon of the Sign of the Blessed Virgin Mary dates back to the 12th century. In 1170, when Andrei Bogolyubsky besieged Veliky Novgorod, during a procession along the walls, the icon was pierced by a random arrow. The icon began to cry, and Bogolyubsky’s troops fled in horror.

The image is still kept in the St. Sophia Cathedral in Veliky Novgorod.

9. Kursk-Root Icon of the Mother of God

The icon was found in the forest near Kursk on the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary in 1295. At the site of the acquired image, a spring immediately began to flow.

According to legend, after the Tatar-Mongol raid the icon was cut in half, but as soon as its parts were combined, it miraculously “grew together.”

In 1920, the Kursk Root Icon of the Mother of God was taken from Russia by Wrangel’s army. Since 1957, it has been kept in the Znamensky Cathedral of the Synod of Bishops in New York.

10. Feodorovskaya Icon of the Mother of God

The exact date of painting of the Theodore Icon of the Mother of God is unknown, but the first mentions date back to the 12th century. The icon is considered miraculous; it was saved from fire several times, and in 1613, nun Martha blessed her son Mikhail Romanov with this icon when he was elected to the kingdom.

You can venerate the miraculous icon at the Epiphany-Anastasia Convent in Kostroma.

11. Pskov-Pechersk Icon “Tenderness”

The “Tenderness” icon is a 1521 copy of the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God. According to legend, the Pskov-Pechersk Icon protected Pskov from the siege of the Polish King Stephen in 1581.

Now the icon is in the Assumption Cathedral of the Pskov-Pechersk Monastery.

12.Saint Nicholas (Ugresh Icon)

The Ugresh Icon appeared to Dmitry Donskoy on his way to the Kulikovo Field in 1380. Later, a monastery was founded on that site, where the image was kept until the monastery was closed in 1925.

Now miraculous icon is located in the State Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow.

13. Icon “Savior of Eleazar”

The revealed image of the Savior of Eleazar was found in November 1352. The icon was recognized as miraculous, and the tree on which the icon was found was walled up in the vault of the temple built where the icon was found.

Since August 2010, the icon of the Savior of Eleazarovsky has been kept in the Spaso-Eleazarovsky Monastery near Pskov.

14. Icon of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker (Nicholas of Mozhaisk)

The icon was painted in the first half of the 17th century from the famous carved sculpture depicting St. Nicholas the Wonderworker with a sword in his hands. In 1993-1995, the icon was restored, revealing the lower layers of paint.

Now the image is in the Church of the Descent of the Holy Spirit in Mozhaisk.

15. Icon of the Mother of God of the Seven Arrows

The revealed image of the Icon of the Mother of God of the Seven Arrows was found in the bell tower in Vologda. For many years, parishioners walked on it, mistaking it for a floorboard. The image was recognized as miraculous during the cholera epidemic in 1830.

Today, the revealed image has been lost, but one of the famous copies, the myrrh-streaming icon “Seven Arrows,” is located in the Church of the Archangel Michael in Moscow.

16. Icon of the Holy Matrona of Moscow

Matrona of Moscow was canonized only in 1999, but her icon, painted in the 21st century, has already been recognized as miraculous. The list contains a particle of the saint's veil and relics.

You can venerate the shrine in the Intercession Monastery in Moscow.

17. Icon of Blessed Xenia of St. Petersburg

Blessed Xenia of St. Petersburg was canonized in 1988, but they began to venerate the blessed one during her lifetime.

The most famous image is located in the Smolensk Church in St. Petersburg, where everyone can venerate it.

18. Icon of the Transfiguration of the Lord

The icon of the Transfiguration of the Lord was painted in 1403. For a long time, Theophanes the Greek was considered its author, but recent research has shown that the icon was painted by an unknown icon painter of the same period. The creation of the image is associated with the restoration and reconsecration of the Transfiguration Cathedral in Pereslavl-Zalessky.

Since the 20th century famous icon kept in the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow.

19. Icon of St. Spyridon of Trimythous

One of the miraculous images of Spyridon of Trimifuntsky is located in the Church of the Resurrection of the Word on the Assumption Vrazhek. Inside the icon is an ark containing the relics of the saint.

20. Icon of St. Basil in prayer to Christ

The icon was painted at the end of the 16th century for the Cathedral of the Intercession on the Moat, which is better known as St. Basil's Cathedral.

The icon is still kept in the same place and is one of the oldest images of the temple.

21. Savior Not Made by Hands Simona Ushakova

The icon of the Savior Not Made by Hands was painted by Simon Ushakov in 1658. The icon painter was criticized for the uncharacteristic depiction of the face of Christ, but later it was this image that became the most popular in Russia.

Now the icon is kept in the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow.

22. Icon of the Savior in the Power of Andrei Rublev

The Icon of the Savior in Power was painted by Andrei Rublev and his apprentices for the iconostasis of the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir in 1408.

The icon can be seen in the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow.

23. Icon of Seraphim of Sarov

One of the most revered icons of Seraphim of Sarov is kept in the Danilov Monastery in Moscow. The image is an exact copy from the cell icon of Schema Abbess Tamar and contains a rosary, part of the saint’s mantle and part of the stone on which he prayed for a thousand days.

Regarding that branch of art that subsequently assumed very extensive proportions in Rus', that is, church icon painting, we have only one Russian name from the pre-Tatar era; it was Alimpiy, a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery, a student of those Tsaregrad masters who painted the Pechersk Assumption Church. In this field, our teachers were exclusively Greeks (“Greek” and “Korsun” writing). Apparently, all the main Russian churches of that time were painted by Greek masters, and the surviving examples of church frescoes testify to the complete dominance in Rus' of the contemporary Byzantine style with its strict faces and moderate, dry tones of coloring corresponding to the religious mood. There is no doubt, however, that already in that era the Greek masters had numerous Russian students. In addition to the icons written on the board, interior walls Temples were then completely covered with fresco paintings, so that from the very beginning the Greeks alone could not satisfy the great demand for icon painters and, of course, carried out their work with the help of Russian students. Probably, by the end of this period there already existed Russian partnerships, or “squads” of icon painters, who worked under the guidance of their “elders” and took contracts for the painting of churches, as we see a little later in Novgorod and in Northern Rus' in general. But the masters leading such squads, apparently, were Greeks for a long time. So, according to the chronicle, at the end of the 12th century in Novgorod, Grechin Petrovich painted one church on the gates of the Kremlin; his name, however, reveals in him not a natural Greek, but rather a southern Slav who arrived from the borders of the Greek Empire.

Iconography of Ancient Rus' - Annunciation of Ustyug, XII century

Constrained by firmly established traditions and rules of Greek icon painting, Russian painters could little show their tastes and their creativity in works of this branch of art. But there are other kinds of monuments that clearly testify to their playful imagination, to their ability not only for slavish imitation. These are drawings of headpieces and capital letters, which are abundantly decorated with the pages of some handwritten books that have come down to us from that era (starting with the Ostromir Gospel). The models for them, of course, were the same Byzantine and partly Bulgarian miniatures; but Russian art brought here many original details, as well as a wonderful, lively combination of colors and shapes. Distinctive feature These drawings are made up of a whimsical interweaving of belts and branches: with various fantastic animals and birds, especially dragons and snakes, whose tails intertwine the figures of people and animal monsters. The style of these works is in full accordance with the intricate armor patterns and images on the walls of Suzdal churches mentioned above. There is news that the same armored decorations on church walls were used not only in North-Eastern, or Suzdal Rus', but also in South-Western, or Volyn-Galician Russia, and that the sculptural images were covered even different colors and gilding.

Iconography of Ancient Rus' - Savior Not Made by Hands. Novgorod school, ca. 1100

There is no doubt that in all such decorations (ornaments) independent Russian art and unique Russian taste were strongly manifested. This latter, with the well-known talent of the tribe, from time immemorial was brought up on luxurious examples of art and industry, both Greek and Eastern (mainly Persian), which, through military booty, trade and other relations, constantly flowed into Eastern Europe, as is clearly evidenced by many metal products, covered with elegant ornaments, and the remains of patterned fabrics found in the graves of pagan Rus'. Particularly remarkable in this regard is a pair of tur horns, found in the large Chernigov mound, bound in silver with images of fantastic birds and plants intertwining with each other.

Iconography of Ancient Rus' - Angel of Golden Hair (Archangel Gabriel), late 12th century

Sakharov "On Russian icon painting." St. Petersburg 1850. Rovinsky “History of Russian schools of icon painting until the end of the 17th century” (Zap. Archaeol. Ob. VIII. 1856). Buslaeva " General concepts about Russian icon painting" (Collection for 1866 of the Society of Ancient Russian Art in Moscow), "Christian Antiquities and Archeology". St. Petersburg. 1863, 1864 and 1871. Published by Prokhorov. His same "Russian Antiquities". St. Petersburg. 1871 and 1875. "Antiquities of Russia, the State", published luxuriously by the Highest order, based on the drawings of Academician M. 1849 - 53. "Monuments of ancient Russian architecture". siecle d "apres les manuscripts. Avec 100 planches en couleur. Paris. 1872 - Publication owned by the Art and Industrial Museum in Moscow, undertaken by its director Butovsky. The peculiar elegance of the Russian ornaments collected here prompted the famous French architect and scientist Violet le Duc to take over a special work dedicated to the history of Russian art: L "art Russe, ses origines," ses elements constitutifs, son apogee, son avenir Paris.

The talented work of Violet le Duc, which recognizes the original creativity of ancient Russian art and the decisive preponderance of Eastern, Asian influences and elements over Western European and partly Byzantine ones, aroused the revival of the question of Russian art and aroused quite a significant number of objectors. Among the last ones, the most worthy of attention are: prof. Buslaev - " Russian art in the assessment of a French scientist" (Critical Review. M. 1879. Nos. 2 and 5). St. Petersburg. His "Russian art and architecture in Russia from the 10th to the 18th centuries". St. Petersburg. 1878 (published by Count Stroganov). Abbot Martynov - L "art Russe (Revue de l" Art chretien. II serie, tome IX). These objectors, although some indicated. weaknesses the work of Violet le Duc, but could not refute its main provisions. Incidentally, they support an exaggerated view of the influence of Western Romanesque style on the architecture and ornaments of Suzdal churches of the 12th - 13th centuries. Among the supporters of Violet le Duc, the author of the aforementioned “History of Russian Ornament,” Butovsky, spoke especially energetically in his brochure “Russian Art and Opinions about It,” etc. M. 1879.

In the era of feudal fragmentation of Rus', the Vladimir-Suzdal principality became another center for the development of painting.

The flourishing of the local painting school in the 12th-13th centuries is evidenced by:

The image of Dmitry Solunsky is interesting. He does not look like an ordinary saint, but, contrary to the canons of the church, he looks more like a majestic prince, in whose hands unshakable power over the destinies of people is concentrated. Probably, the people especially needed a strong prince in times of devastation and instability.

Early icons of the Novgorod school

The development of Old Russian painting at this stage was associated with processing and improvement. The Church was increasingly stricter about it, fought against pagan tendencies, and dictated its own rules. And despite everything, the masters still managed to introduce features of folk ancient Slavic culture into painting.

Therefore, the Novgorod icon seems somewhat rough, archaic and even primitive. But it is characterized by ringing, bright colors. Saints and archangels are drawn as stocky and squat, and the Novgorod icon itself becomes flat, linear, in contrast to the chiaroscuro and play of color that was rich in the painting of Kievan Rus. At the same time, the icons of the Novgorod school of the 13th-15th centuries are classics of ancient Russian painting. They showed the talent of the people, their worldview, their understanding of beauty.

The most famous surviving icons of the Novgorod school of the 12th century are:

• “The Savior Not Made by Hands” is an icon of the Novgorod school of ancient Russian painting (now kept in the Tretyakov Gallery); already in the 13th century it was considered a shrine and served as a model for writing other works of painting.

• The icon of Peter and Paul from the St. Sophia Cathedral of Novgorod (11th century) is kept in the Novgorod Museum;
• Saint George. Two images have survived: one full-length (now kept in the Tretyakov Gallery), and the other half-figured (located in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin);
• “The Sign” (XII century): an icon that is kept in the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral. The emotionality and spiritual openness in the image indicate local artistic traditions in painting;

Novgorod icons, like monumental wall paintings, are characterized by a love of life and a joyful atmosphere. The paintings of the Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary on Volotovo Field are a phenomenon no less outstanding than the icons.

Works of great Russian painters of the 14th-15th centuries

Feofan the Greek

Theophanes the Greek came to Rus' as an already established master. The Church of the Transfiguration on Ilyinaya Street is one of those where frescoes made by the famous master have been preserved. His talent was embodied not only in wonderful wall paintings, but also in the founding of a painting school. After all, he had a lot of students and followers, each of whom brought his creativity to people. Last famous work Feofan was the iconostasis of the Annunciation Cathedral in the Moscow Kremlin, which he painted together with Andrei Rublev and Prokhor from Gorodets.

Andrey Rublev

Icons are now the national treasure of Russians. The Stoglavy Cathedral in 1551 proclaimed Rublev’s icons as a role model.

“Archangel Michael”, “Apostle Paul”, “Christ”, “Trinity”, “Entry of the Lord into Jerusalem”, “Ascension of the Lord”, “Annunciation”, “Baptism” -

the most famous of them. But there were a great many of them. They dispersed throughout the Russian land, bringing goodness and love to the people. The icon painter took part in painting the walls of the Annunciation Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, the Trinity Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, the Spassky Cathedral of the Andronikov Monastery, the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir (“ Last Judgment"), painted icons for the Nativity Cathedral of the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery. His work conveyed deep feelings through symbolic images, carrying spiritual meaning and a positive charge.

Dionysius

The seeds sown by his teacher Andrei Rublev were picked up and carried further through the centuries by his follower, Dionysius. He painted the Church of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary in Pafnutye in the Borovsky Monastery, the Pavlovo-Obnorsky and Joseph-Volokolamsky monasteries, the Cathedral of the Nativity of the Mother of God of the Ferapontov Monastery, and painted a number of icons for the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Most of the master's works have not survived. And those that have survived to this day, and these are: the icons of Metropolitans Peter and Alexei, “Baptism of the Lord”, “Our Lady Hodegetria”, “Savior in Power”, “Descent into Hell”, “Crucifixion” and the paintings of the Ferapontov Monastery, are confirmation great talent and glory of the icon painter Dionysius.

Originating in the distant 11th century, Russian painting absorbed the most advanced traditions of world art, harmoniously combining them with native Russian folk trends in painting. Both influences turned out to be favorable for the development of painting. She conveyed deep Christian truths to people, made religion clearer and more accessible, and made people kinder. But this is precisely what beauty should serve.

Did you like it? Don't hide your joy from the world - share it

c. 33¦ Due to the repeated plunder of Kyiv and Chernigov, early South Russian icons have not reached us. Novgorod, located in the north, was in a much better position, remaining aloof from Tatar invasion. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the most ancient Russian icons originate from Novgorod.

Throughout the 11th century, the Novgorodians were not “free to be princes.” Both princes and mayors were appointed from Kyiv. Cultural ties with this city were very lively, and, probably, many icons were brought from the south to Novgorod, where they served as objects of study and imitation for local artists. Thus the foundations were laid for the Novgorod school of icon painting, from which a number of first-class works emerged.

The earliest known Russian work of easel painting is the icon of Peter and Paul, executed around the mid-11th century (Novgorod Historical and Architectural Museum-Reserve) (ill. 1). The apostles are presented full-length, with a half-figure of Christ written in the center at the top. The heads of the apostles are not shown in a strict frontal position, but in a three-quarter turn. Paul is holding a book, in Peter's left hand is a long shaft of a cross, a scroll and three keys. The poor state of preservation makes it impossible to draw conclusions about the style and author of this monumental icon, undoubtedly inspired by fresco images. Its large size suggests, rather, that the icon was painted directly in Novgorod.

In the second half of the 11th and early 12th centuries, the princes did not erect a single building in Novgorod. Only during the reign of the Grecophile-minded Mstislav Vladimirovich (1088–1094, 1096–1117) grand-ducal construction was resumed and painting of the Church of St. Sophia began. It is possible that at this time a painting workshop was formed at the princely court, producing frescoes, icons and miniatures. The paintings of the dome of St. Sophia (1108) and miniatures of the Mstislav Gospel (1103–1117) are associated with this workshop. This workshop was probably the Byzantinizing center that largely prepared the ground for the brilliant flowering of Novgorod icon painting in the 12th century 54 .

54 Lazarev V.N. About the painting of Sofia of Novgorod. - In the book: Old Russian art. Artistic culture of Novgorod, p. 58 [see also in the book: Lazarev V.N. Byzantine and Old Russian art. Articles and materials, p. 169].

2. Georgy. 30–40s of the 12th century

Among the Novgorod icons of this time, the oldest are two images of George: one full-length (Tretyakov Gallery), the other half-figured (Assumption Cathedral in the Moscow Kremlin). Mighty figure of standing George (ill. 2) clearly stood out against the now lost golden background. In his right hand, George holds a spear, with his left he clutches a sword hanging at his hip, from behind his shoulder he can see round shield. Numerous losses of the original painting, replaced by later repairs, make it impossible to accurately restore the type of face and details of military attire. But the silhouette of the figure and its strong, rather squat proportions remained unchanged. The majestic figure of George embodies strength and military valor, largely echoing the heroic images of ancient Russian military stories. c. 33
c. 34¦

The semi-figured icon of St. probably also comes from Novgorod. George (ill. 3), possibly delivered to Moscow on the orders of Ivan the Terrible, when he removed most of its shrines from the disgraced city. George holds a spear in his right hand and a sword in his left, which he displays like a precious relic. It is known that the sword played a very special role among the Slavs. He was seen as a peculiar military emblem Rus' and as a symbol of power, in particular princely power. Apparently, the icon was commissioned by a prince unknown to us, who wanted to see in the temple the image of the saint of the same name, who was his patron.

The figure of George fills almost the entire field of the icon, so that his hands touch the frame closely. This indirectly enhances the power of the figure. It seems that she is too cramped within the field allotted to her. The saint appears in the form of a brave and steadfast warrior, the patron saint of military men. His face is especially expressive, combining the freshness of youth with masculine strength. The regular oval of the face is framed by a thick head of brown hair. Large eyes looking intently at the viewer, dark, beautifully arched eyebrows, a straight nose, luscious lips - all these features are interpreted by the artist in such a way that they give the face a purely architectural structure. Carnation has a very light whitish tint, turning into a gentle blush on the cheeks. From the proximity to thick greenish-olive shadows and the energetic red outline of the nose, a light skin tone acquires a special transparency and luminosity.

A fairly clear stylistic group consists of three magnificent 12th-century icons, possibly coming from the same workshop. The first of them is the so-called Ustyug Annunciation (ill. 4), originating from the St. George's Cathedral of the Yuryev Monastery near Novgorod (now kept in the Tretyakov Gallery). The scene of the Annunciation is given here in a rare iconographic version - with the baby entering the womb of the Mother of God. At the top of the icon, the Ancient of Days is depicted in a semicircle, from whose hand a direct ray extends to the womb of the Virgin Mary. Thus, the artist showed, with the utmost clarity for his time, that the incarnation of Jesus Christ actually occurred by the will of the Almighty at the moment of the Annunciation. This iconographic type, the earliest example of which we find on a Moscow icon, apparently developed in the post-iconoclastic period, not without the influence of the festive liturgy on the day of the Annunciation (Synaxarion of March 25) and the Mother of God hymn (Octoechos). It is very typical for the concrete thinking of Novgorodians that the artist or customer settled on this particular iconographic option. In this regard, one involuntarily recalls one story given in the addition to the Sophia I Chronicle under 1347 55. Here we are told about the trip of the Novgorodians to the earthly paradise, which they wanted to see with their own eyes at all costs, in other words, they wanted to be convinced, as in the icon, of the concreteness of what was by nature transcendental.

55 Full collection Russian chronicles, vol. VI. Sophia Chronicles. St. Petersburg, 1853, p. 87–89.

In the monumental figures of the Archangel Gabriel and Mary, one can sense the author’s thorough knowledge of contemporary examples of Byzantine painting. Although the figures are somewhat heavy, which is how they differ from the images on purely Greek icons, they are characterized by strict proportionality. The motive of the archangel’s movement is convincingly revealed; his cloak lies in graceful folds, and the folds of his chiton are no less graceful. The maforium of the Mother of God was processed with the same subtle understanding of the structure of the drapery. The modeling of faces is particularly soft. A dark, greenish-olive base is used only in the shadows. Further modeling of the relief is achieved by gradually applying dark yellow ocher with the addition of more and more white in each subsequent layer, but with a sequence so consistent that the transitions from layer to layer remain almost c. 34
c. 35¦ invisible. Red blush is placed on top of the ocher, softly shading the forehead, neck and nose line. The coloring of the “Ustyug Annunciation” is generally distinguished by a certain gloominess, which is generally typical for icons of the pre-Mongol era. The brightest colors are in the top image, where we see the Ancient of Days seated on cherubim and glorified by the seraphim. Here cinnabar colors are boldly combined with blue, light blue, green and white. This image, accompanied by Slavic inscriptions, somewhat falls out of the sharpness of its colors from the general color scheme of the icon. Here the individual taste of the Novgorod artist, who strives for a special sonority of color, already makes itself felt. Apparently, in this part of the icon he was less bound by the canonical model, which is why he resorted not only to a more colorful palette, but also to a freer style of writing. Such parallel coexistence of two different painting techniques in the same icon will also be found in other early monuments of Novgorod easel painting.

The style of “The Savior Not Made by Hands” (Tretyakov Gallery) is similar in style to “The Ustyug Annunciation” (ill. 5). This icon, being double-sided, had to be kept in a separate icon case. On the back is the “Glorification of the Cross”, executed in a completely different manner than the image on the front side.

The face of Christ with hair trimmed with thin gold threads is painted in a soft “fused” manner, using subtle transitions from light to shadow. The artist is extremely restrained in the selection of colors: his meager color scheme is based on a combination of olive and yellow colors. The main emphasis was placed by the icon painter on the large eyes, which have enormous expressiveness. Having mastered the line perfectly, he allowed himself, in order to achieve greater expression, to give an asymmetrical facial structure, which is most clearly reflected in the differently curved eyebrows. The solemn “iconic” nature of this face clearly indicates that the artist who painted the Savior had good Byzantine examples before his eyes or was trained by Byzantine masters.

The image on the reverse side of the icon is interpreted differently (ill. 5). In the broad, bold, free manner of painting, in the sharp and strong juxtapositions of light and shadow, in the multicolor palette with its lemon yellow, cinnabar, pink, light blue and white colors, the hand of the Novgorod master, a contemporary of those artists who painted in 1199 Nereditsa.

This same stylistic group includes the magnificent icon of the Angel (ill. 6), probably belonging to the Deesis rank. As already noted, such ranks were usually placed on the architrave of the altar barrier. The construction of the relief of the Angel's face and the cutting of his hair with the help of gold threads is very close to the icons of the Savior Not Made by Hands and the Ustyug Annunciation. But the icon of the Russian Museum surpasses these things in its subtlety of execution and some special nobility of design. It is difficult to find in all ancient Russian art a more spiritualized face, in which sensual charm and deep sadness would be so uniquely combined. This is the work of an outstanding master who organically mastered all the subtleties of Byzantine writing.

Clarifying the date of execution of the group of icons considered here is associated with great difficulties. It is possible that the “Ustyug Annunciation” was written shortly after the consecration of St. George’s Cathedral (1130 or 1140), but it is impossible to prove this, since it was not the main temple image (such was the full-length icon of St. George) and could have been a later contribution. The manner of writing the composition “Glorification of the Cross” on the back of “The Savior Not Made by Hands” indicates the end of the 12th century. However, we have no guarantee that c. 35
c. 36¦ the image on the back of the icon is not made after the image on the front side. The rather shaky stylistic analogies (for example, the resemblance of the Angel's head to the mosaic of the Cathedral in Montreal) do not help either. It would be very tempting to connect this entire group of Byzantinizing icons with the workshop of “Grcin Petrovits” mentioned in the Novgorod I Chronicle under 1197, however, even here there remains a lot of unclear and controversial (for example, M.K. Karger and E.S. Smirnova 56 are inclined to consider the word "Grcin" as a personal name, and not as denoting nationality). Due to the inconsistency of the above facts, it will be more careful to date the group of icons that interests us within the range from the 30s to the 90s of the 12th century.

56 Smirnova E. S. Rec. on the book V. N. Lazarev “Frescoes of Old Ladoga” (M., 1960). - “Byzantine temporary book”, 24. M., 1964, p. 223–224 (with reference to M. C. Karger's 1958 report). This hypothesis remains highly doubtful to me. It is unlikely that the chronicler referred to the artisan (and the artists were artisans by rank!) by their patronymic. Patronymic names ending in “ich” were usually used to refer to persons belonging to the highest social circles. Therefore, I am inclined to believe that the chronicle refers to the visiting Greek Petrovich, who probably enjoyed great fame.

Even if we allow the widespread import of Greek icons into Novgorod, this so strongly Byzantinizing art still needs explanation. Here it would be appropriate to recall the lively cultural ties that Novgorod maintained with Constantinople. The Grecophile-minded Bishop Nifont gravitated towards Constantinople. In 1186, the cousin-grandson of the Byzantine Emperor Manuel Komnenos, Alexey Komnenos, came to Novgorod. In 1193 and 1229, there were influential Greekophile parties in Novgorod who wanted to have a Greek archbishop. Novgorodians often made pilgrimages to Jerusalem, Constantinople, and Mount Athos. Finally, at the turn of the 12th–13th centuries, Dobrynya Jadrejkovic, the future Archbishop Anthony, visited Constantinople. All these lively relations were real channels for the penetration of Byzantine influences into Novgorod. It is also necessary to take into account that the Novgorod princes maintained cultural ties with Kiev even in the 12th century, and the latter for a long time continued to be a hotbed of Byzantine forms. The art of Byzantium primarily attracted the attention of the princely and archbishop's court. However, wider circles of Novgorod society could not help but succumb to his charm, his artistic language was so attractive.

This Byzantinizing trend did not completely disappear in the 13th century, although it had largely lost its purity. Here the local current made itself felt, under the influence of which a freer handling of Byzantine forms began. The monumental “Assumption” should be dated to the early 13th century. (ill. 7), originating from the Desyatinny Monastery in Novgorod. The Dormition is given in a complex iconographic version: at the top, Archangel Michael lifts the soul of the Mother of God to heaven, below are four soaring angels, on the sides are depicted the apostles flying on clouds to their deathbed. All other elements of the composition are more traditional in nature. The craftsmen who worked on this large icon combined large, monumental forms with a purely miniature delicacy of writing. Compared to Byzantine works of easel painting, where the figures of the apostles form free pictorial groups, on our icon the composition is strictly subordinated to the plane. The apostles and saints stand in two rows, the figures have lost all volume. The most “Greek” part of the icon is the right group, with faces of the mature “Comnenian” type; the faces of the left group, in which the Greek type is not so clearly expressed, are interpreted softer and more impersonally. Particularly successful is the head of the apostle, bending over the body of Mary and carefully peering into her face. A somewhat rigid composition, thick, dense colors, not very subtly harmonized, the emphasized flatness of the composition and individual figures, the unstable position of the legs - all this indicates the work of local Novgorod masters, in whose hands Byzantine forms began to undergo more significant changes than those that we observed in icons of the 12th century. c. 36
c. 37¦

Well-known points of contact with the Assumption, especially with its right part, are revealed by the recently uncovered icon of Our Lady of Tenderness from the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin (ill. 8), reproducing the Byzantine prototype. The icon contains unusual details such as the indefinite position of the fingers of Christ’s left hand, a short dark scarf thrown over Mary’s head, reaching only to the shoulders, and the freely flowing end of the baby’s cloak. The Byzantine master would not have allowed himself such deviations from the canon, but the Novgorod artist, who quite closely followed the strict Byzantine type in his faces, felt freer in other respects. One cannot help but get the impression that this artist artificially combined in his icon elements of two different iconographic types - Hodegetria and Tenderness. Christ, except for his head pressed against the cheek of the Mother of God, is shown in the usual pose for Hodegetria icons: in one hand he holds a scroll, with the other, as if blessing. But, having placed the scroll in the right hand of Christ, the artist was no longer able to give his left hand in a gesture of blessing. Therefore, he was forced to leave his fingers unclenched, as was usually interpreted on the icons of Tenderness, where left hand Christ is depicted reaching out to the neck of the Mother of God. This kind of contamination of various iconographic types once again speaks of the work of a local master who, unlike the Byzantines, was not accustomed to accurately copying prototypes.

The author of the excellent icon of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker (Tretyakov Gallery) went even further in this direction. (ill. 9). The saint blesses with his right hand and holds the Gospel with his left. The facial expression is unusually stern. Before us is a stern Byzantine theologian, fanatical and unapproachable. The author of the icon clearly imitated Byzantine models, whose spirit he was completely imbued with. But the more interesting are the changes he made to his work. In order to achieve greater expressiveness, he gave the head a flattened and elongated shape, arched the eyebrows, introducing sharp angles into their line, increased the hollowness of the cheeks, increased the number of wrinkles, made the forehead disproportionately large, freeing it top part from hair. Never would the Constantinople master, with his inherent sense of the organic, have broken so boldly with the Hellenistic tradition 57 . And the Novgorod master could afford this with a light heart, since he received this Hellenistic tradition second-hand, in a transformed form. And he managed to create a unique image, unlike any of the Byzantine icons that have come down to us.

57 Wed. Constantinople icon of St. Nicholas of the 11th century in the collection of the Sinai Monastery (Frühe Ikonen. Wien–München, 1965, Taf. 15).

In accordance with his ascetic plan, the artist selected spare, dark colors - a brownish-cherry-colored robe with silver assists, a silver background, and an olive-toned carnation. The wrinkles are covered with reddish-brown paint, which also slightly shades all the shadows. In the deep thoughtfulness of this palette, a high coloristic culture makes itself felt. The images on the margins of the icon are made in a completely different color palette. Standing out as bright spots on a white background, they are written easily and freely. The master who executed them was, apparently, much less connected, since he did not have an iconographic sample before his eyes. In his clothes, he boldly combines cinnabar, lemon yellow, intense blue, light blue and dark cherry tones. And in in this case I would like to talk about a purely Novgorod understanding of color. It is in these small images that the stylistic features that later gained dominance in Novgorod icon painting emerge: a bold departure from traditional Byzantine canons in the direction of increasing the liveliness of the images, an energetic, free manner of painting, a clean and bright color scheme.

Two icons originating from Belozersk are also associated with the Byzantinizing trend in Novgorod painting of the 13th century. One icon depicts standing tall c. 37
c. 38¦ Peter and Pavel (ill. 10), on the other - Our Lady of Tenderness surrounded by medallions with half-figures of angels and saints (ill. 11). Although the first piece reveals a certain stylistic similarity with the “Assumption” from the Desyatinny Monastery, it is designed in a different palette - light, pale and watery. The figures of the apostles are given in strictly frontal poses, different from the freer turns on the 11th century icon from St. Sophia Cathedral. “Tenderness” is written on a silver background, with red halos in sharp contrast. The fields of the icon are blue, the backgrounds of the medallions are pink and blue. This combination of colors alone indicates a departure from the Byzantine tradition, which also affected the solidification of the figures and the strengthening of the linear principle. The sad face of the Mother of God is characterized by a shade of special sincerity, which will later become typical for Russian icons on this topic.

The Byzantinizing trend in Novgorod icon painting reached its apogee in the 12th century. In the 13th century it still held out, but, as we see, it had already begun to undergo transformation. The general situation in Novgorod could not help but contribute to such strengthening of local features. The position of the princes became more and more unstable, the position of the mayors, who opposed the princes and defended the interests of the local boyars, strengthened, the importance of trade and craft circles, which often set the tone at the meeting, grew; from 1165, Novgorod bishops began to be called archbishops. As a result of all these changes in Novgorod art, a number of significant shifts occurred, expressed in a gradual departure from the Byzantine-Kievan traditions, which led to the crystallization of local stylistic options. This process found its reflection in icon painting. c. 38
¦