WORLD CIVILIZATION, CULTURE  AND ART HISTORY

ART OF THE SACRED PAINTINGS                                             SYMBOLIC MEANING OF THE ICONS OF THE GOSPELS

By Maximillien de Lafayette

Armenian manuscripts painting is classified into two different categories or more correctly into two divergent styles totally different like day and night yet, both styles remained identifiable and recognizable as authentic, original, pure, ethnic, traditional and national Armenian Painting Art!

1-Indigenous painting or Oriental Style:

This style is purely Armenian style and can be considered as the direct and indigenous product of Armenia as an Armenian nation,  an Armenian society and an Armenian ethnic artistic cell. It is free from foreign  artistic, religious and social influences. Many historians and art historians call it Armenian Oriental Style or simply Oriental Style. It originated from and developed its identity in the remote and mountainous areas and regions of Armenia, where natives had no direct contact or interaction with natives from other countries. Vast terrains and high mountains separated them from neighboring countries. Oriental style had a purely Armenian origin. It all began in the Armenian monasteries with Armenian monks as the originators and creators of this style recognizable from its linear qualities in forms and compositions, simplicity in illustrating and painting faces and facial expressions and omitting researched details or accentuated characteristics and details particularities in defining mountains and prairies landscape, ecological setting and natural surroundings.

Exact details in description and illustrations were not the main concerns of the artists monks. In those early days, monks were never subject to foreign influences. They did not study under foreign painters and teachers. They were confined to their monasteries. Consequently, the shapes, forms and figures drawn and illustrated in their work were taken from and inspired by what their eyes saw in their direct surroundings and living spaces. The land and faces depicted in the manuscripts were hundred per cent Armenian lands and Armenian faces.  And to render it more Armenian in style and appearances, the Armenian monks reduced their artistic mastery to simplistic presentations of human faces, bodies, hand movements -if any- and backgrounds of the painting setting. Even though, they were concerned with a certain degree of authenticity, Armenian monks never intended to represent human faces with descriptive or analytical expressions and moods as did the early or even the later Christian Classical artists in ancient or contemporary Europe. The human faces were painted with an almost primitive sincerity and simplicity. Their style of painting appeared easy to the eye, to the commoners, to regular and simple people yet, it conveyed austerity and mysticism to the learned ones. They appealed to the masses and to the privileged classes as well.

  THE ART OF  THE ANONYMOUS PAINTER OF SYUNIQ
 
Gospel, 14^th & 15^th Centuries 

This painting reflects the enormous divergence between the two styles of early Armenian illuminated manuscripts art. According to the Byzantine tradition, the prophet Moses is always represented as a young prophet standing to the right side of Jesus Christ. The prophet Elijah is always represented as an old prophet standing at the left side of Jesus Christ.  In this painting it is quite the opposite. The positions and places of both prophets  are just the contrary, they contradict the Byzantine tradition.

The Presentation of Jesus the Child to the Temple

Painting B needs more elaboration: This religious theme of the Presentation of Jesus the Child to the Temple was introduced for the first time in  early Christian art in the 5^th century. There are numerous, various and contradictory versions and adaptations of this scene through out the centuries of illuminated manuscripts painting. Some paintings’ central focus is Jesus, others  is the Presentation of Jesus the Child, others is Simeon holding Jesus the Child, while many other miniatures concentrated  on the Presentation brief ceremony itself but in a very different context and places. Some miniatures would place the Presentation outside the Temple, others would locate the event at the door of the Temple, while a third group of miniatures will place the Presentation event inside the Temple. Each miniature representation of the event has its own meaning, symbol an religious message ad infinitum. Most certainly, one would argue that all these various discrepancies are subject to a lengthy debate. In the miniature B (above), the primordial focus is based upon one subject: The first moment Simeon takes Jesus the child in his arms. This is a powerful statement. This is the main theme of the painting, not the presentation of the Child Jesus to the Temple. One of  the most predominant traits or characteristic essence of this picture is the moment when Simeon takes  Jesus the Child in his arms.  This is the very subject of this painting. In other versions, the predominant trait and center of importance  is the presentation to the temple. Years later, the symbol and meaning of all those miniatures became more critical. In later miniatures, every single trait or object depicted in a painting reflected many and different meanings and conveyed different messages, especially when Armenian artists began to focus on the background of the miniatures where the Altar began to occupy a place of predominance and religious importance in an artwork. The altar began to acquire and represent a very particular, extremely important and a special significance in the miniatures paintings.