The Iconographical Tradition in Byzantium and the Canonical Image of Christ (pp.115-134)
This section covers two parts in chapter seven, the Iconographical tradition in Byzantium and the Canonical Image of Christ. The encaustic icons of Sinai during the 6th – 7th c. were made by melting beeswax with a mixture of various colored pigments and letting it dry onto a wooden panel. For example, the icons of Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai uses this technique. The realistic Fayum mummy portraits are an example of this kind of image that influenced the style of making icons in the 6th – 7th c. These images of Egypt had a “monumental” purpose that sought to capture the beauty of the face before a loved one’s death, and later placed the portrait over the head of the mummy for burial. They sought immortality through pictorial representation. Christ Pantocrater (Omnipotent) is another early icon that later became the canonized version of the central icon of Christ in Orthodox temples. In this period, Christ appears more realistic. He wears a Greco-Roman chiton of dark blue color. He holds a jeweled book in his left hand, and He gives a blessing gesture with his right hand. Christ sits enthroned and there is a golden halo, the Divine Light, around His head. There seems to be a gradual change in purpose from Roman and Hellenistic monumental images to memorial icons of the martyrs and saints, Christ and the Theotokos. Orthodox Christianity rooted and fulfilled in Judaism “baptizes” the Mediterranean gentile cultures into purity and enlightenment, as Baker Galloway, St. John the Forerunner’s iconographer explains this “tense dialogue between paganism and Christianity.” Many early icons, then, have this Romanesque expression, vestments, and bodily shapes, and fuller, hierarchical compositions that include Christ, the Most Holy Mother of God, the angels and saints, Old Testament righteous and scenes begin to surface in temples. Early depictions of Christ have the antique type of painting that portrays Christ as a younger, Roman, beardless man who wears a poncho-like garment, that is shown in the earliest crucifixion icons in the 8th c. in Sinai. The later canonical icon of Christ – also known as Christ Pantocrater – appears more Palestinian in features with longer hair, a full beard and more mature in age. This type has been preserved the longest not because it is really more ancient but because of its connection to tradition in literary accounts of the Teaching of Addai in the 5th c. and the Acts of Thaddeus in Greek in the 7th c. These stories tell us that King Abgar of Edessa asked for healing by Christ. Khannan the archivist was sent to paint Christ’s face by the king. It became too difficult for him to depict Christ’s face, and so He wiped his face on a cloth, and that imprinted on it His face. That image became known in Byzantium as acheiropoieta, the Image Not-Made-By-Hands, or mandylion. The fight for Abgar’s health was also a fight for his soul and others. Another king from Persia, Khosrou, in the 6th c. also asked for an image of Christ to save his city and people from a destructive storm. The real face of Christ Jesus on this cloth came to Constantinople from Edessa in the 10th c. and later it was taken to Europe by the Crusaders in 1204 and it finally rested at Turin, Italy. There it became known as The Shroud of Turin. The two images turn out to be very likely the same picture of Jesus, as many scholars have discovered over the years. The shroud shows the more Semitic appearance of Christ rather than the young Roman with a tunic. Here he looks Jewish. He has longer hair, a full beard, and he appears to be more mature. The true imprint of his face is made from Christ’s sweat and blood, from which is the source of all holiness and nourishment. So, the Pantocrater at Sinai became the first canonical icon of Christ, who is the central figure in iconic scenes and compositions of later Orthodox temples. Metropolitan Hilarion argues that this antique style probably was used because Roman Christians weren’t aware of what Jesus looked like in Rome. The process of painting the icon of Christ is like the saints. There is a real person, with sweat and blood, and miracles begin to happen. There are writings, oral stories, and witnesses. People paint them after their death and more miracles and gifts and graces pour forth from their images, who are painted by human hands. But in reality Christ has painted them into the archetypal, true, living icons in paradise. That relationship takes places bodily through our senses and experiences.
There are several reasons why not many icons from this period are preserved. The icons are very old, and there were not enough of them to commonly hang on walls. In fact, for iconoclasts who opposed specifically “holy images” in Orthodox worship, there were not an abundance of icons in circulation and veneration compared to later times. Iconoclasm from within Byzantine Christianity and ideas from the Islamic world influenced this “first reformed movement” that stamped out and destroyed many painted icons, mosaics, and frescoes. In this way, like Irina Yazykova has argued in her book, Hidden and Triumphant, icons in Christianity were mostly a hidden phenomenon.
Metropolitan Hilarion, as well as Irina Yazykova, have explained that icons “fight for souls” and the Orthodox faith. The term iconoclast only comes from the 18th c. The older word used was iconomachy, and that Greek word literally means icon-battle. It was a real spiritual warfare over the incarnation of Christ that leads to the deification of humanity and creation; it was a fight for keeping our relationship with the Holy Trinity close to the senses and hearts of all Christians.