Agnes Kriza
University of Cambridge, Great Britain
Western iconographic adoptions of Russian icons are exceptionally rare up until the 16th century. The famous Four-part icon of the Kremlin Annunciation Cathedral, however, painted between 1547 and 1551, contains a number of Western elements. The most controversial one amongst them is the so-called Gnadenstuhl, the Trinitarian image of God the Father holding the Crucifix, with the curious wings covering the body of the crucified Christ. The fact that the Western origin of the imagery was evident even for the contemporaries is attested by the controversy between dyak Ivan Viskovaty and Metropolitan Makary (1542–1563), erupted in Moscow in 1553. Ivan, protesting against some incomprehensible innovations of mid-16th century, Russian painting, focussed in particular on the winged Gnadenstuhl. Interestingly, however, Makary, one of the greatest and most educated patrons of medieval Russian Orthodox art, was not concerned by this alien detail on the Kremlin icon and even defended this innovation whilst he rejected any possible link with the heretic Latins. Art historians are puzzled as to how to reconcile this contradiction, suggesting that Makary either was not honest or “did not comprehend the theological content of the image.”
In this paper, challenging both the dishonesty and the ignorance of Makary, I will scrutinize the Metropolitan’s overlooked response to Viskovaty in which he explains the meaning of the Gnadenstuhl and Christ’s wings. The aim of this investigation is twofold. Firstly, I seek to decipher the message of this imagery on the Four-part icon. Secondly, I intend to explore the motives behind Makary’s defence which can shed new light on the problem of Western-Eastern interactions of this period. At the end of my paper I will raise the question as to whether it is possible to speak about “Western influence” in 16th century Russian painting.