with astonishing authority. Art historians believe the manuscript
dates from the mid-10th century—the so-called Macedonian Re-
naissance, a time of enthusiastic and careful study of the language
and literature of ancient Greece, and of humanistic reverence for the
classical past. It was only natural that artists would once again draw
inspiration from the Hellenistic naturalism of the pre-Christian
Mediterranean world.
David, the psalmist, surrounded by sheep, goats, and his faithful
dog, plays his harp in a rocky landscape with a town in the back-
ground. Similar settings appeared frequently in Pompeian murals.
Befitting an ancient depiction of Orpheus, the Greek hero who
could charm even inanimate objects with his music, allegorical fig-
ures accompany the Old Testament harpist. Melody looks over his
shoulder, and Echo peers from behind a column. A reclining male
figure points to a Greek inscription that identifies him as represent-
ing the mountain of Bethlehem. These allegorical figures do not ap-
pear in the Bible. They are the stock population of Greco-Roman
painting. Apparently, the artist had seen a work from Late Antiquity
or perhaps earlier and partly translated it into a Byzantine pictorial
idiom. In works such as this, Byzantine artists kept the classical style
alive in the Middle Ages.
VLADIMIR VIRGINNothing in Middle Byzantine art better
demonstrates the rejection of the iconoclastic viewpoint than the
painted icon’s return to prominence. After the restoration of images,
icons multiplied by the thousands to meet public and private de-
mand. In the 11th century, the clergy began to display icons in hier-
archical order (Christ, the Theotokos, John the Baptist, and then
other saints, as on the Harbaville Triptych) in tiers on the templon,
the low columnar screen separating the sanctuary from the main
body of a Byzantine church.
The renowned Vladimir Virgin (FIG. 12-29) is a masterpiece
of Middle Byzantine icon painting. Descended from works such as
the Mount Sinai icon (FIG. 12-18), the Vladimir Virgin clearly re-
veals the stylized abstraction resulting from centuries of working
and reworking the conventional image. The artist was probably a
Constantinopolitan painter, and this icon exhibits all the character-
istic Byzantine traits: the Virgin’s long, straight nose and small
mouth; the golden rays in the infant’s drapery; the decorative sweep
of the unbroken contour that encloses the two figures; and the flat
silhouette against the golden ground. But the Vladimir Virginis a
much more tender and personalized image of the Theotokos than
that in the Mount Sinai icon. Here Mary appears as the Virgin of
Compassion, who presses her cheek against her son’s in an intimate
portrayal of Mother and Child. The image is also infused with a
deep pathos as Mary contemplates the future sacrifice of her son.
(The back of the icon bears images of the instruments of Christ’s
Passion.)
The Vladimir Virgin,like most icons, has seen hard service.
Placed before or above altars in churches or private chapels, the icon
became blackened by the incense and smoke from candles that
burned before or below it. It was frequently repainted, often by infe-
rior artists, and only the faces show the original surface. First painted
in the late 11th or early 12th century, it was taken to Kiev (Ukraine)
in 1131, then to Vladimir (Russia) in 1155 (hence its name), and in
1395, as a wonder-working image, to Moscow to protect that city
from the Mongols. The Russians believed that the sacred picture
saved the city of Kazan from later Tartar invasions and all of Russia
from the Poles in the 17th century. The Vladimir Virgin is a histori-
cal symbol of Byzantium’s religious and cultural mission to the
Slavic world.
Late Byzantine Art
When rule passed from the Macedonian to the Comnenian dynasty
in the later 11th and the 12th centuries, three events of fateful signif-
icance changed Byzantium’s fortunes for the worse. The Seljuk Turks
conquered most of Anatolia. The Byzantine Orthodox Church broke
finally with the Church of Rome. And the Crusades brought the
Latins (a generic term for the peoples of the West) into Byzantine
lands on their way to fight for the Cross against the Saracens (Mus-
lims) in the Holy Land (see “The Crusades,” Chapter 17, page 442).
Crusaders had passed through Constantinople many times en
route to “smite the infidel” and had marveled at its wealth and mag-
nificence. Envy, greed, religious fanaticism (the Latins called the
Greeks “heretics”), and even ethnic enmity motivated the Crusaders
when, during the Fourth Crusade in 1203 and 1204, the Venetians per-
suaded them to divert their expedition against the Muslims in Pales-
tine and to attack Constantinople instead. The Crusaders took the city
and sacked it. Nicetas Choniates, a contemporaneous historian, ex-
pressed the feelings of the Byzantines toward their attackers: “TheLate Byzantine Art 33512-29Virgin (Theotokos) and Child, icon (Vladimir Virgin),
late 11th to early 12th centuries. Tempera on wood, original panel
2 61 – 2 1 9 . Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow.
In this icon, the artist depicted Mary as the Virgin of Compassion, who
presses her cheek against her son’s as she contemplates his future.
The reverse side shows the instruments of Christ’s Passion.1 ft.