Abstract

 
 
 In this paper, I adduce new evidence that the decorative program of Ukrainian iconostasis contained the images-metaphors and one of them was a coat of arms of the donor. The iconoraphic programme of the Ukrainian iconostasis, during the 17th — 18th centuries is regularly complemented by coats of arms of Hetmans, Cossack leaders and high- ranking Orthodox clergy. These images are placed in the antependium of iconostases, usually there are several coats of arms and they belong to different family members. Accommodation of the groups of coats of arms in the iconostasis, not just the coat of arms of the donor, indicates that that was the plan that can be understood only in semantic programme of iconostasis. In the system of iconic (portrait) images of the iconostasis, the coats of arms is understood as a kind of codes, that were associated to a specific person, becoming not only his distinctive sign or sign with legal meaning, but the symbol, denoting the person and functioning as his portrait. In this sense emblems formally did not conflict with other personal images in the iconostasis and could be included in its symbolical space. At the same time, by virtue of its form of emblem, the coat of arms did not become on a par with icons, so even though it was placed in the iconostasis, it was expelled from the circle of images intended for worship. In the location of coat of arms in the iconostasis can be seen soteriological expectations of the customer and his family.
 
 
Highlights
I adduce new evidence that the decorative program of Ukrainian iconostasis contained the images-metaphors and one of them was a coat of arms of the donor
These images are placed in the antependium of iconostases, usually there are several coats of arms and they belong to different family members
In the system of iconic images of the iconostasis, the coats of arms is understood as a kind of codes, that were associated to a specific person, becoming his distinctive sign or sign with legal meaning, but the symbol, denoting the person and functioning as his portrait
Summary
П. Белецкий, Украинская портретная живопись XVII–XVIII вв., Leningrad 1981. 5. Chernihiv eparchial tidings 1863: Chernihiv eparchial tidings, 24(1863), p. Чугреева, ‘Ряд икон синодиков и его литургическое значение в системе иконостаса’, in: Иконостас. Никольский Военный собор в Киеве, Kyiv 1910. Aspects of monumental art in Byzantium, Boston 1964. Свято-Троицкий-Ильинский монастирь, ныне Троицкий архиерейский дом, его прошлое и современное состояние: 1069–1911 г., Chernihiv 1911. Filaret 1874: Филарет (Гумилевский), Историко-статистическое описание Черниговской епархии, vol 5, Chernihiv 1874. 1 S.N.I. 1884, p. 658–660. 2 Gnutova, Shchedrina 2006, p. 688, 689. 3 Chugreeva 2000. 4 Ibidem, p. 671. 5 Uspensky 1992, p. 24. 6 Golubtsov 1915, p. 594
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.