Abstract
The article describes the experience of compiling and classifying an extensive, but poorly unified terminological base used by researchers in the field of iconography. We are not talking about terms used to put the content of images into words, but about key theoret-ical terms, such as “sample”, “model”, “original”, “copy”, “quote” and other similar concepts employed in iconographic thought. The paper discusses the usage of these terms by both classical and modern authors, such as N. V. Pokrovsky, A. Grabar, F. Bruno, G. Svartsensky, J. Alexander, etc. Further, we propose to arrange the concepts into four classes: (1) defini-tions referring to an entire image and its components; (2) definitions relating to the content of a single work or a cycle in their entirety or divided into units of meaning; (3) terminology around a “sample–copy–quote” type of relationship between individual images and the cop-ying process itself; (4) the terms describing the visual toolkit of a particular master or a group and ways of its transmission both within and outside his workshop, including guides, manu-als and instructions for craftsmen. In each class, the terms are listed in the order from basic and elementary to more complex and sophisticated. The classification is not complete and requires further work
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
