Magdalena's duplicate icons
- Greetings all. I taught my class on the History and Development of Russian Icons at the Aethelmearc Academy a week ago. Those of you who were in the class will remember that someone pointed out I had the same icon as an example for Dionisii and also Suzdal.
I blamed it on last minute preparations. While doing some reading this week I came across an explanation for the seeming contradictions in assigning a time period, painter or school to icons. Part of the confusion is that some experts date by style, others date by time period the icon was painted. Also, as with other art forms, some believe an icon painted by the master of the school, others believe it painted by a student of the master.
I have come across other icons that have been assigned different designations by different experts.
I try to caution people in my classes that I am not an expert on icons, and I am giving the most common, obvious characteristics of the different Russian schools. In this last class I stressed what the experts call "transition periods" in the development of the Russian style of icons. And it seems like a nearly constant period of transition as the style moved from one period into the next.
As one of my reference books stated, new information (on icons) is being discovered all the time.Nothing as far as Russian icons is concerned, is written in stone.
>So true. When I was in Novgorod about 9 years ago, I got to visit the
> As one of my reference books stated, new information (on icons) is being
> discovered all the time.Nothing as far as Russian icons is concerned, is
> written in stone.
central lab where they process much of what they unearth in the many digs
there, and they were all abuzz about a recently discovered, well-preserved
birch bark piece, about the dimensions of the classic Franklin Covey
organizer, which still contained the clear outline and faint detail of a
Saint. It was very exciting, as it came from a strata of dig lower/older
than any other such "traveling icon" (as they termed it) they'd ever found.
It was VERY exciting!
I admit, however, that I never followed up to see if any subsequent papers,
articles, or books referenced it in the ensuing near-decade since. I dropped
out of the SCA very soon after that trip and am only now getting back into
the SCA. Looking into it is on my "to do" list, though.
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]