Indigenous Icons: Has Anyone Ever Come Across Any and Why are more not done?

T

Thekla

Guest
Gxg (G²);67144230 said:
It's cool witnessing the ways that culture influences art on so many different levels - I really enjoyed this piece as an example of that, where Zaccheus Meets Jesus



And this one is the dedication of Jesus:

e7ebcc0c097d774871f636a0fae87f6a.jpg


And of course, outside of that, here's Jesus loves children - Chinese style

jesus_children.jpg

In addition to that, this is the "Our Lady of China"

our-lady-of-china-2.jpg


our-lady-of-china.jpg

This one is of the women arriving at the tomb after Jesus rose - and the Baptism of Christ:

women-arriving-at-the-tomb.jpg


thebaptismofjesus_he_qi_3.jpg

This one is of Jesus in Japan:

jesus_japan.png

Additionally, these on the life of Christ are very noteworthy as it concerns the Thai Style...









This one is fascinating as well, as it concerns Jesus's life - from Thailand

life-of-jesus-kennedy-a-paizs-thailand.jpg

Finally, this one (by Sawai Chinnawong ) depicts Mary listening to Jesus with her sister Martha on background.... Bible narratives in the Thai setting. While the second one is Jesus praying in Gethsemane in the style of Thangka paintings

8118b2e8df7c6c6b8fc6b7c8682e69a8.jpg



18be5dbe08c6e6204e7cb4e8ec7f986b.jpg

Here it might be useful to delineate (at least in Orthodox practice) the difference between Liturgical/worship expressions/pointers and art.

In Orthodox countries, there are (as in the US, etc.) Feast carols; the Nativity Carols, Epiphany Carols, etc. etc. Likewise decorative arts with Christian themes, as well as decorations, etc.

The various carols are distinct from hymnography, and are not used Liturgically. The same is true of Art in a Christian theme, which is not used Liturgically.

So there is in these cultures a separate (and often overlapping) Art tradition which distinct and has more distinct cultural markings. Of course, in cultures long Christian, the previous point stands - the re-creation of the culture as Christian after the deliberate rupture with previous cultural forms makes these less obviously distinct from the Liturgical forms.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
Gxg (G²);67128414 said:
I can definitely get that iconography had influences from other cultures beyond the Byzantine world when seeing Egyptian and Jewish cultural presentations and thus tracing the roots of things makes a world of difference :)

I just wonder how differently things would have looked if the center of civilization that iconography developed happened outside of the Byzantine context. In example, after the Jewish and Egyptian influences - if the center of Christian thought had shifted to the Mongols in East Asia, how different would things have looked...Or if the Jewish influences were built upon from the Jewish communities within the Indian context/culture and then things went from there

kashi-report-1795-3.jpg





d07c043790d76bd70058cba176ffb3cc.jpg

Here's one example, of course, of Indian Madonna and Christ



Of course, one can never know ... and in part because God did what He did, where He did, when He did it.

One can imagine a different culture being prepared by God and embracing the task of preparation, and thus the entire OT and NT written by a different people/s, in a different language/s.

Would everything look different ? I honestly don't know. But as I trust the will of God in this matter, I don't myself see the need for speculation on this matter.
 
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
Gxg (G²);67139785 said:


I think that as a long as a dialogue is occurring with the past, then that's what should be considered when it comes to the ways that the world develops today - I makes a world of difference when knowing how things are more so like links in a chain - each connecting each thing together...

And the styles have shifted greatly in time. Here's one, for example, showing Christ driving out the merchants...


850izgnanie.jpg

And another showing his transfiguration (Miniature from an Armenian Gospel (Ms 6201. Fol 6). 1038. Matenadaran, Yerevan, Armenia).


And for more...








Here, for example, is Khludov Psalter (detail), 9th century. The image represents the Iconoclast theologian, John Grammaticus



And of course, here i (as well as another) - some of the saints who were against icons, ironically..


I am not sure that illumination is considered iconography, though it may have (Liturgical) iconographic features.

There are a variety of iconographic styles (as I have pointed out), but they cleave to central templates of icon-making.

I think what may be important is to have a better sense of what is Liturgical iconography ... it is not "image" (as in any pictorial representation), it is not "art", it does not belong to the sphere of aesthetics (a distinction developed over centuries but, in the west, beginning with what used to be called "the Renaissance") and thus does not belong to a self-referential or even de-centered specialization (the category of pre-modern and modern arts). It does not belong to the artist, nor to a culture, but to the Church. (Note that Liturgical icons are not signed.)

So, for example, in the examples from a broad swath of origins (Coptic, Ethiopian, etc.) there are no figures shown in frank profile. (Unlike earlier Egyptian and Greek frieze art from these cultures.)

Note also that iconography (Liturgical) spans a variety of mediums - including mosaics of various materials as well as iirc tempera (egg and oil based) both being mediums well suited for walls. Presently I think acrylic might be used, though acrylic paints tend to have a more 'plastic' color than the same in oil. In this, though, there is again a persistence of a certain quality - relative opacity.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
To clarify: did a wee bit of searching, and at least Glasgow Univ. Twelfth Century Byzantine manuscript of the Greek Gospels considers illumination to be a "sister art" to iconography (ie not the same). I would tend to think this is correct as the process is different, but I do not know for sure.

http://academics.ivc.edu/arts/visual/history/Projects/byzantineicons/Illumination.

htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_art

this seems to be the view (illumination as a "sister art" of iconography) of more than Glasgow Univ. dept.

But again - yes, there have been always a variety of "styles" within iconography, but these styles all share a visual/symbolic language. Two iconographers using the same template/design (and this related to the template of Scripture, which is imagistic, and describes events in a particular place and time) may vary somewhat color (this may also be an effect of medium as well as pure color choice for balance), number of brush strokes, particularities of shape within shape template forms, etc.

The reliance on a common visual language and Scripture-templates keeps the language of iconography common, and Orthodoxy from becoming "Balkanized".*

* hate to use this term, but it is the only English-language term that comes to mind to describe the concept I mean.

for more on the history and usage of the term "Balkanized", see Maria Todorova's excellent book, Imagining the Balkans which (roughly) begins with the statement by Count Hermann Keyserling:

"If the Balkans hadn't existed, they would have been invented."

What the Count missed was precisely that the concept of the Balkans was an "invented" concept: a concept that was not invented by those called Balkans.

That a secular culture insists on inventing a category for its own purpose is the opposite of what the common language of Liturgical iconography does - a reversal of Babel by the use of a visual language that is grounded in Scripture and the language of Scripture that is not only word but image.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
T

Thekla

Guest
Finally, on the matter of particular things used or not used in iconography:

Particularities (if you will), like the lotus flower in question, do enter iconography in (incarnational) historical depictions -- not in the depictions of Christ, or the Theotokos, the Apostles, etc., but in the icons of the Saints.

That is, icons reflect the truth of the incarnation in part through historic accuracy; thus, if the lotus flower were a feature in Scriptural account, or the lives of Scriptural figures, then it would be included.

There are indeed icons with such cultural specifics which are grounded in historicity/accuracy.

So, for example, there is an icon of St. Juvenaly (iirc) which includes a kayak - his mode of transportation, and the site of his martyrdom. In iconography, this could not be replaced by a speedboat or sailboat (hope that doesn't sound flip) as this would not be accurate.

In the icon of St. Alexander Schmorell, he is depicted holding a cross and a white rose; this because he was martyred because of his actions as a member of the White Rose (which included Lutherans, RCatholics, Buddhists, iirc, and likely more).

An icon of St. Herman of Alaska with scenes from his life depicts a "Summer house" made of poles and skins typically used by Aleuts and other sub-arctic peoples.

The icon of the Chinese Martyrs has, at the left corner, a Russian looking church and at the right corner a building in a Chinese style of architecture. These buildings tell us something of the historic context of the event, so including both styles of architecture is an important feature (like the kayak) that could not be replaced by, say, a building or buildings in the style of the Bauhaus or the Neoclassical (revival) as it would wrest the event away from its historical context and thus accuracy.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I am not limiting hand gestures to the west, or even to cultures within the west; in fact, I am noting the origin of this particular sign to the spelling out of a particular Christian meaning in the language of the Gospel (Greek).
I can definitely understand the origins of the sign itself in regards to what the Gospel language meant to the Greeks - my mindset was never ignoring that as much as noting that other places using the hand guesture (which was appropriated for the use of the Gospel language in Greek) would always have differing meanings depending on the place one went in the Roman Empire.

With the specific hand guesture in view that was used in the icons, the Greek world never had it where it universally meant what the Christians chose to make the meaning into.
And noting also, within Christian history, the origin of the hand-blessing in Jewish practice, and the continuance of the use of hand-blessing among Christians, but corrected/updated to include the identification of Jesus Christ and Christian understanding.
More than agree as it concerns the hand-blessing itself evolving out of the Jewish world and evolving - as that goes back to the issue of hand-signs evolving over time depending on local
.

From the same site:

Symbolism of the Blessing
The fingers spell out “IC XC”, a widely used four letter abbreviation of the Greek for Jesus (IHCOYC) Christ (XPICTOC). It is by the name of Jesus that we are saved and receive blessings: “At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;” (Phil 2:10).

The three fingers of Christ – as well as spelling out “I” and “X” – confess the Tri-unity of God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The touching finger and thumb of Jesus not only spell out “C”, but attest to the Incarnation: to the joining of divine and human natures found in the body of Jesus Christ.


Thus, in iconography there is a particular and very specific meaning to the hand-sign which is maintained in iconography regardless of the particular language of the particular iconographer.
With iconography, we know what the hand symbol was made to mean when it came to the meaning given to that specific symbol - hence why the symbol is said in any culture it is presented in that the symbol is meant to show Christ in the way it does.

Of course, that is different from the dynamic of cultures (where the hand symbol never existed) and other cultures choosing to do the same dynamic of having a symbol meaning something in their culture evolve to promote a Christian message.

As hand signs in general are not typically (in the ancient cultures under discussion) known, nor even the cultural origin (ex.: were the Roman hand signs shown ubiquitous, were they adopted from other cultures, did other cultures that became Christian use these signs or did they give up particular hand-signs ?) then it becomes difficult to know much else about them. That they were adopted in iconography, to form a common visual language can be demonstrated by looking.
This is not unlike the adoption of certain Biblical phrases into the vernacular, or Christian concepts, or even the specialization of existing terms away from their vernacular meaning. This is a sort of "steeping" of a language/culture in the Scriptures.

The same phenomenon can be traced in the English language, for example, by studying phrases, now common, from Shakespeare. I don't think it is possible to say for sure whether all of these were indeed Shakespeare's invention.

But one could argue that Orthodox Churches in the British Isles or in the States should use Shakespearian phrases instead of Biblical phrases/illustrations in the worship in order to be authentically British, or English, or USAmerican.
Very true and more than agree, as that was something which was never in question.

Yes of course it is; I agree.
Cool to know....


And non-hand sign icons abound as well; but again, these visual images as you have noted above are still in the visual language of the Scriptures.
To be clear, the goal is always lining up with the visual language of the scriptures regardless of cultural context. A differing visual presentation from what another culture does (when both are focused on scripture) doesn't change the intent with what scripture says
It is not western cultures imposing their hand-signs on other cultures per se, but holding in many cases a Scriptural standard to the language of the image. In other cases, it is the repeated use of this visual language that has made the language for Orthodox universal - no matter what the particular hand-signs were in the receiving culture.
The Scriptural standard, of course, is where other cultures have pointed out is not always necessary. A hand-sign used in one culture and then made normative for all as the standard does not necessarily show that the symbol used is what God sanctioned to be used for all time.

Other places see the universality of what the language means (as is the case for Orthodoxy) - but that universality isn't automatically opposed to differing symbols used in addition to it for those within a culture where Orthodoxy comes into being. It's really no different than having the universality of the Liturgy done - and yet having space allowed for other things to occur in worship forms that are relevant to the people familiar with them instead of feeling it as if it's an "either or"

And the hand blessing signs (spelling Christ) were not "made up". They reflect Scripture (like the use of the footstool, or Christ having His feet in a particular place in the icon "the Harrowing of Hell" and the Biblical phrase "make ... enemies the footstool of your feet").

Remember, many of these now Orthodox cultures had no written language which would suggest they used hand-signs for communication.

Either the Roman signs were universal by the time of the conversion of the Slavs, or they adopted the existing hand-signs in iconography instead of their own.
No one was saying hand blessing signs were made up, so that response would not really be in place in discussion IMHO - for there's no debate that they reflect Scripture as was the goal). What was said, of course, is that the Early Church did NOT always have that symbolism prior to it being developed to illustrate Christ. Prior to that, there were other ways of expressing ....before things became codified.

Many cultures which are now Orthodox did have written language in addition to hand-sign communication - but one standard was brought in to keep everyone on the same page, whereas others had no written language at all and the hand-sign communication was present.

For cultures which were Hindu and still are - with hand-signs already being utilized on differing levels and some of the symbols being exactly the same as in Orthodoxy while others show the same thing an Orthodox hand-sign does even though the sign is different - it can make a difference.


And something to consider when it comes to commonality with hand symbols is the aspect of how cultures can interact with one another in many ways. I am reminded of Greco-Buddhism




Cultures can allow for ideas to travel - and thus, for the symbolism of the Hand Symbol used in the Orthodox world in showing the Gospel to have come from somewhere else shows that it was another culture that should also be considered strongly when seeing what they have to say on differing symbols that can be used.

As another wisely noted:


Christian Imagery and Mudras
I’ve spent my entire life as a practicing Greek Orthodox Christian. Greek churches are breathtakingly beautiful houses of worship that are decorated with ornate carvings and Byzantine-style paintings. I’ve been looking at Byzantine imagery of Christ, the Virgin Mary, and various other angels and saints for as long as I can remember—but it wasn’t until I began practicing yoga and learning about mudras that it my eyes registered what I’ve been seeing all these years.

Prithvi Mudra
Mudras have been depicted not only in Buddhist/Hindu imagery for centuries, but in Christian as well. Christ is often painted with His right hand in prithvi mudra, in which the tips of the thumb and ring finger are joined. Prithvi mudra is said to provide stability and cure weaknesses of the body and mind.

SaintNicholas.jpg


icon10_lg.jpg


Icons of Christ and Saint Nicholas with hands in prithvi mudra.​

Another interesting realization I had is that occurrences of prithvi mudra aren't limited to Byzantine religious icons alone. To this very day, Greek Orthodox priests often hold the fingers of their right hand in prithvi mudra while making the sign of the cross during a spoken blessing, say over a meal. Prithvi mudra is also known as the Sign of Benediction or Blessing.

Pran Mudra

PranMudra.jpg
There are also depictions of Christ with His right hand in pran mudra (little finger and ring finger connect with the thumb), which is said to increase vitality and protect the body against disease. Of course, one can hardly avoid the most obvious mudra in Chrsitian imagery—anjali mudra—Christ with prayer hands at heart center. I don’t know about what others think of all this, but I am completely and utterly fascinated by it. Because this is yet another common thread linking Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism—three belief systems that I am increasingly intrigued by as I learn more about them.

Some final thoughts: I've written this before, but I have to write it again. I'm completely blown away by the fact that the more I study yoga, Buddhism, and Hinduism, the more apparent it becomes that in life, everything is connected in the most divine and mysterious way.



Here it might be useful to delineate (at least in Orthodox practice) the difference between Liturgical/worship expressions/pointers and art.

In Orthodox countries, there are (as in the US, etc.) Feast carols; the Nativity Carols, Epiphany Carols, etc. etc. Likewise decorative arts with Christian themes, as well as decorations, etc.

The various carols are distinct from hymnography, and are not used Liturgically. The same is true of Art in a Christian theme, which is not used Liturgically./QUOTE]
Some of this was noted earlier when it came to the use of imagery and the differing contexts - the established rules and general practices for iconagraphy when it comes to Liturgical practice doesn't change the use of icons/images in differing settings and expressions of the Gospel through the arts in other forms. It's not an "either or" when God's Spirit is involved...
So there is in these cultures a separate (and often overlapping) Art tradition which distinct and has more distinct cultural markings. Of course, in cultures long Christian, the previous point stands - the re-creation of the culture as Christian after the deliberate rupture with previous cultural forms makes these less obviously distinct from the Liturgical forms.[
TThat is more than understood. Of course, as said before, re-creation of a culture as Christian does not always have to involve a deliberate rupture with all facets of previous cultural forms and what often happened can be a matter of seeing what happened rather than claiming that's why it HAD to happen.

Of course, one can never know ... and in part because God did what He did, where He did, when He did it.
That goes back to the dynamic of how we have a recording of seeing what went down and see the results but do not always have the room for saying that's how it HAD to have happened or that how it happened was how God WANTED it to happen, as if other things couldn't even develop.
One can imagine a different culture being prepared by God and embracing the task of preparation, and thus the entire OT and NT written by a different people/s, in a different language/s.

Would everything look different ? I honestly don't know. But as I trust the will of God in this matter, I don't myself see the need for speculation on this matter.
Of course. On my side, trusting in God's faithfulness does not change the fact that we only see what has happened and yet we have freedom to consider how many things the Lord allowed to happen rather than forcing things to occur - and assuming that other things could not develop.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I am not sure that illumination is considered iconography, though it may have (Liturgical) iconographic features.

There are a variety of iconographic styles (as I have pointed out), but they cleave to central templates of icon-making.
Illumination and iconography can overlap at many instances - although many designs that appear as illumination are done with an iconography perspective.

On a side note, one excellent place for information on the issue can be seen here:



  • Announcing the Orthodox Illustration Project – Orthodox Arts


I think what may be important is to have a better sense of what is Liturgical iconography ... it is not "image" (as in any pictorial representation), it is not "art", it does not belong to the sphere of aesthetics (a distinction developed over centuries but, in the west, beginning with what used to be called "the Renaissance") and thus does not belong to a self-referential or even de-centered specialization (the category of pre-modern and modern arts). It does not belong to the artist, nor to a culture, but to the Church. (Note that Liturgical icons are not signed.) So, for example, in the examples from a broad swath of origins (Coptic, Ethiopian, etc.) there are no figures shown in frank profile. (Unlike earlier Egyptian and Greek frieze art from these cultures.)
If anyone says Iconography is simply art, of course they would be off - it is a means of connecting with God. Nonetheless, it would be inaccurate to remove it from the world of art in all levels when it comes to the concepts borrowed from the artistic culture (as seen in how the Greek Orthodox icons derived from Hellenic Art, from the lighting to the Halos used to describe the Greek/Roman deities)to make a means by which others could connect with God and rules for how to do Liturgical Iconography in the Church since it is for the Church - with the focus not just on aesthetics. Another noted it best in On the Differences of Western Religious Art and Orthodox


Note also that iconography (Liturgical) spans a variety of mediums - including mosaics of various materials as well as iirc tempera (egg and oil based) both being mediums well suited for walls. Presently I think acrylic might be used, though acrylic paints tend to have a more 'plastic' color than the same in oil. In this, though, there is again a persistence of a certain quality - relative opacity.
Very true.

Finally, on the matter of particular things used or not used in iconography:

Particularities (if you will), like the lotus flower in question, do enter iconography in (incarnational) historical depictions -- not in the depictions of Christ, or the Theotokos, the Apostles, etc., but in the icons of the Saints.

That is, icons reflect the truth of the incarnation in part through historic accuracy; thus, if the lotus flower were a feature in Scriptural account, or the lives of Scriptural figures, then it would be included..
The dynamic with Iconography, of course, that is lost with the historical is that not all aspects of portraying Christ involve things which were found in Scriptural accounts. There were no accounts in scripture of Christ with a Halo (even though we see the Transfiguration) - and none, for that matter, with him ever holding a lamb as some icons show...even though he is described as the Good Shepherd.

16bea0ff76ccb0ebb95bc3ecfe4dc56d.jpg

Nor do we see Mary the Mother of God described as holding any kind of Rose...



The Lotus Flower dynamic is used in regards to the use of plants to describe the Lord ...plants with HIGH value, which is why Christ was called the "Rose of Sharon" - and in the same way other things were used in icons to describe Christ (even though scripture explictly did not mention them), the same dynamic can apply to other things since not even the icons themselves were fully accurate with all things happening in the time of Scripture - even though the idea of what is seen in scripture could apply

There are indeed icons with such cultural specifics which are grounded in historicity/accuracy.

So, for example, there is an icon of St. Juvenaly (iirc) which includes a kayak - his mode of transportation, and the site of his martyrdom. In iconography, this could not be replaced by a speedboat or sailboat (hope that doesn't sound flip) as this would not be accurate.

In the icon of St. Alexander Schmorell, he is depicted holding a cross and a white rose; this because he was martyred because of his actions as a member of the White Rose (which included Lutherans, RCatholics, Buddhists, iirc, and likely more).

An icon of St. Herman of Alaska with scenes from his life depicts a "Summer house" made of poles and skins typically used by Aleuts and other sub-arctic peoples.

The icon of the Chinese Martyrs has, at the left corner, a Russian looking church and at the right corner a building in a Chinese style of architecture. These buildings tell us something of the historic context of the event, so including both styles of architecture is an important feature (like the kayak) that could not be replaced by, say, a building or buildings in the style of the Bauhaus or the Neoclassical (revival) as it would wrest the event away from its historical context and thus accuracy
More than understand. Nonetheless, as we still have icons where others were involving things which were not always present in the immediate setting which a Saint or a Biblical character lived, we have to take that into account.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
To clarify: did a wee bit of searching, and at least Glasgow Univ. Twelfth Century Byzantine manuscript of the Greek Gospels considers illumination to be a "sister art" to iconography (ie not the same). I would tend to think this is correct as the process is different, but I do not know for sure.

Illumination - All Documents.

htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_art

this seems to be the view (illumination as a "sister art" of iconography) of more than Glasgow Univ. dept.

But again - yes, there have been always a variety of "styles" within iconography, but these styles all share a visual/symbolic language. Two iconographers using the same template/design (and this related to the template of Scripture, which is imagistic, and describes events in a particular place and time) may vary somewhat color (this may also be an effect of medium as well as pure color choice for balance), number of brush strokes, particularities of shape within shape template forms, etc.
Very true - and as it concerns the issue of images within iconography (as well as the sister style of illumination and the ways it overlaps), there has always been variety - and in differing places, it can play out differently.

With the Assyrian Church of the East, in example, they do have images which many are not aware of even when it is said of them that they do not have images in their services. But it is a very complicated dynamic. The Nestorian" Church of Famagusta, Cyprus, has vestiges wall paintings of saints with Syriac inscriptions and it is interesting to see. Indeed, the Frescoes of the Nestorian Church, Famagusta, Northern Cyprus, are stunning....and there are others besides it.

















And of course, there are others besides it.






As another noted best:

I'm an ethnic Indian and member of the West Syriac Church ("Orthodox") in India, which was (as Shamasha suggests, above) by all indications a part of the Church of the East pre-16th century. Personally, I'm very interested in Syriac Christianity, which is why I'm delving further into studying the Church of the East (since, the oldest Syriac aspects of the West Syriac tradition were, in my understanding, imported to the West Syriac Church from the Edessan traditions of which the CoE is the direct descendant).

I'm also trying to understand the position of the CoE regarding images and icons because of a curious thing I've observed in the Kerala Syriac Church. In some of our older Churches there are images and murals that are quite prominently displayed behind the altar. For example, there is a Church in Cheppad, Kerala, India that is supposed to date to before the arrival of the West Syriacs and Roman Catholics in India (and before the separation of the "Chaldeans" from the CoE in West Asia). And in this Church there are murals behind the altar. Some of these images are quite similar to those of another old mural-laden Kerala Church, whose images can be found at: http://inculturation.chi.ac.uk/viewcat.cfm?subCatId=63 (scroll down to: "Paliakara").

Of course, I understand the other possibilities with respect to the Kerala, India Churches:

1. The murals may not be *that* old, and hence may be due to Chaldean, Roman Catholic, or Jacobite influence. (I don't think so, since these murals have been claimed to be quite old with some corroboration from archeologists.)

2. The murals may have been a purely local development. Mural artwork is a unique characteristic of Kerala Hindus, and the Kerala Christians might have adopted the practice, despite CoE standards.​

But I thought I'd mention this, in case anyone has any information regarding past (pre-Islamic, perhaps) use of imagery by the Church of the East.

(By the way, in general, Indian Orthodox/Jacobite churches now make relatively abundant use of images; it doesn't seem that that our forefathers CoE heritage made much of an impact in this respect. Personally, I'm waiting for the day when the Indian West Syriac Churches allow celebration of the Liturgies of Mar Adai and Mar Mari---that would be immensely satisfying to me!)



g

The reliance on a common visual language and Scripture-templates keeps the language of iconography common, and Orthodoxy from becoming "Balkanized".*

* hate to use this term, but it is the only English-language term that comes to mind to describe the concept I mean.

for more on the history and usage of the term "Balkanized", see Maria Todorova's excellent book, Imagining the Balkans which (roughly) begins with the statement by Count Hermann Keyserling:

"If the Balkans hadn't existed, they would have been invented."

What the Count missed was precisely that the concept of the Balkans was an "invented" concept: a concept that was not invented by those called Balkans.

That a secular culture insists on inventing a category for its own purpose is the opposite of what the common language of Liturgical iconography does - a reversal of Babel by the use of a visual language that is grounded in Scripture and the language of Scripture that is not only word but image.
Balkanization is only to be feared when the culture that one is going in does not first have a common connection done to keep it on the same page with others - but from that point on, exploration can occur and unity within diversity can commence. The unity of language is not seen in evceryone speaking the same dialect but all having the same intent and understanding. Moreover, when commonality of language is taken to mean that other cultures are not able to still have their own language for other areas in addition, then it is still Babel - because people in the name of speaking the same language are still not being able to understand one another. Visual language from the perspective of communication also involves ensuring that others can still use language relevant to them in ways that they can understand since the opposite of Balkanization is just as deadly - assimilation and forced unity. Others can express scripture principles in their own language while also knowing another universal language that connects them to others.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I think the icon can adopt comfortable cultural references, but it must not lose the truth of the Biblical narrative.
One specific image that I came across which does an excellent job of Biblical narrative....from Zaire, on Jesus.

zaire-jesus.jpg

And this one is from Jesus playing with the kids...

b5dc6fccfcc9451478172d57b16dca96.jpg



For reference, Christian and pagan children played together in Kola village (6th cent Georgia). 9 pagan kids (Guram, Adarnerse, Baqar, Vache, Bardzim, Dachi, Juansher, Ramaz, Parsman) followed their friends to church but weren't allowed in. They agreed to be baptized; the icy river warmed and Angels appeared. Their parents took them home, starved and scolded them, but they wouldn't renounce Christ. Parents then threw them in a pit and stoned them until it was full. The priest was beaten and robbed.​

And this one is of Christ healing the woman with the issue of Blood in Mark 6 while the other is of Christ calming the storm (Asian)

fc3feb12b6ad6a5591198aba71797c5f.jpg


d59c2d763f84deaaa13955f1d4a5f89e.jpg
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Gxg (G²);67087269 said:



For a brief description:




10980754_10152542217356403_2340155466449517887_n.jpg



Mahamrityunjaya Mantra
ॐ त्रिएक परमेश्वर यजामहे सुगन्धिंम् पुष्टिवर्धनम् ।
उर्वारुकमिव बन्धनान् मृत्योर्मुक्षीय मामृतात्

Prayer to the One who is Victorious over Death I worship the Three-in-One God who is fragrant and who nourishes and nurtures all beings. As a cucumber is freed from its bondage by the gardener, may He liberate me from bondage to death unto eternal life


Jesus sits upon a lotus flower, giving two mudras: His right hand showing the mudra of Abhaya, symbolizing protection, peace, benevolence, and dispelling of fear, while his left hand displays the Varada mudra, symbolizing ‘open-handed’ generosity such as charity or the granting of wishes. Wikipedia writes that "it is nearly always shown made with the left hand by a revered figure devoted to human salvation from greed, anger and delusion." Behind his head is a cross halo. Fiery bands emanate from him, like an aureola. Overall, I think it's a dynamic design, and I like the gold tones throughout, which reminds me of ancient Byzantine mosaics. One thing that I question, however, is the use of the Tilak or Bindi symbol on Jesus' forehead.

Frank Wesley rarely used this symbol in his paintings of Jesus, though he did in at least one (rather, he typically opted for painting Jesus' forehead in a golden hue to represent knowledge of God). Naomi Wray writes that "here it may represent a vertical third eye, the never-closing eye of the all-seeing God." She concludes that "This was not an image readily accepted by the Christian community" (Frank Wesley: Exploring Faith With a Brush, 34).

Interestingly, the Yeshu Satsang Toronto, a monthly Hindu-style worship service lead by Chris Hale (of Christian music group Aradhna) and his wife Miranda Stone, provides sandlewood paste for followers of Jesus "to apply to their foreheads in the form of a dot (tilak). This symbolizes that the person is a spiritual seeker, serious about the pursuit of God."​

Also, here's the Dalit Madona...



And for another one:






Additionally...



With the above, it was drawn by two Catholic women artists from a village in South India. And in the village, a a certain species of tree is worshipped within animistic religion. The artists also make the tree central to worship, but it is Christ on the tree who is the object of worship.

They are all stunning to witness - although I would love to see some more in Mosaic style...and of course, when it comes to differing icons in the Orthodox world, the demonstrations do make you think..










For other Indigenous Artwork of Christ that was noteworthy, I came across this recently and was highly impressed. As noted there:

The Christian Story featured the paintings of five contemporary Asian artists: Nalini Jayasuriya (Sri Lanka); Sawai Chinnawong (Thailand); Nyoman Darsane (Bali); He Qi (China); and Wisnu Sasongko (Indonesia). While largely influenced by regional artistic and cultural traditions, their work is also informed by Western artistic traditions due in large part to the fact that many of the artists have been exposed in varying degrees to images from the canon of Judeo-Christian art. The artists consider their art as expression of their deeply held beliefs, and as a tool for evangelization to their respective countrymen and women. Despite this latter point, they all count their largest audiences and patrons among the Western faithful throughout North America and Europe. The exhibition examined these works as case studies for the development and exportation of Asian Biblical Art to the West and its reception, audience, and patronage, which continues to make this art a viable endeavor.

1-losing-paradise.jpg



2-nalini-jayasuriya-reigning-lord_thumb.jpg



6-baby-moses_thumb.jpg


9-sawai-chinnawong-the-nativity_thumb.jpg


10-he-qi-leaving-the-tomb_thumb.jpg
 
Upvote 0

ContraMundum

Messianic Jewish Christian
Supporter
Jul 2, 2005
15,666
2,957
Visit site
✟78,078.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Personally I think indigenous icons are less than helpful. Why? Icons have already taken the true ethnicity of Jesus and the Holy Family as well as other important Biblical characters and replaced them with European or African figures. I wonder if there was historically a bit of latent or intentional anti-semitism in this development. Indigenous icons merely perpetuate the ethnic cleansing of Jesus and the Holy Family. It's an awful trend IMHO.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Personally I think indigenous icons are less than helpful. Why? Icons have already taken the true ethnicity of Jesus and the Holy Family as well as other important Biblical characters and replaced them with European or African figures. I wonder if there was historically a bit of latent or intentional anti-semitism in this development. Indigenous icons merely perpetuate the ethnic cleansing of Jesus and the Holy Family. It's an awful trend IMHO.
Interesting to consider in regards to the identity of Jesus and the Holy Family since numerous groups within the Jewish world have noted that they may have caution with presenting Biblical characters solely as European and yet they also realize the Biblical characters themselves are not divorced from the African context itself. I don't think it's anti-semitism necessarily since the characters are never presented as not being Jewish - and Jewish people have come from the European context as well as Middle Eastern (also portrayed in icons). Acts 2 comes to mind seeing the extensive background which Jews came from as well as Gentiles involved in Pentecost.

Other tribes/nations from around the world were also present in the scriptures on several levels - without them claiming that JESUS wasn't Jewish
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ContraMundum

Messianic Jewish Christian
Supporter
Jul 2, 2005
15,666
2,957
Visit site
✟78,078.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Interesting to consider in regards to the identity of Jesus and the Holy Family since numerous groups within the Jewish world have noted that they may have caution with presenting Biblical characters solely as European and yet they also realize the Biblical characters themselves are not divorced from the African context itself. I don't think it's anti-semitism necessarily since the characters are never presented as not being Jewish - and Jewish people have come from the European context as well as Middle Eastern (also portrayed in icons). Acts 2 comes to mind seeing the extensive background which Jews came from as well as Gentiles involved in Pentecost.

Other tribes/nations from around the world were also present in the scriptures on several levels - without them claiming that JESUS wasn't Jewish

I think that approach is largely a rationalization based on wishful thinking. While Jews do come from everywhere nowadays, I don't think there is a lot to suggest that the Jewish nation was as diverse in appearance then as now- it's really a bit of a speculation IMHO. Even if such diversity could be proven- would it be beneficial to depict the Holy Family in a variety of ethnic appearances? Does that not confuse the matter and water down the message that Messiah had to be a descendant of David? Also, does it not open the door an overly radical position on depicting the Holy Family- which results in all kinds of sacrilege and heresy as modern artists have done?
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I think that approach is largely a rationalization based on wishful thinking. While Jews do come from everywhere nowadays, I don't think there is a lot to suggest that the Jewish nation was as diverse in appearance then as now- it's really a bit of a speculation IMHO. Even if such diversity could be proven- would it be beneficial to depict the Holy Family in a variety of ethnic appearances? Does that not confuse the matter and water down the message that Messiah had to be a descendant of David? Also, does it not open the door an overly radical position on depicting the Holy Family- which results in all kinds of sacrilege and heresy as modern artists have done?
I can understand the sentiments - although I generally tend to see such sentiments as argument of personal incredulity (IMHO) where it seems to be not true from assumption and nothing further is developed from there. My focus is what is is factual and generally, from what I have seen in multiple Biblical Archaelogical research sources, there's nothing historically remotely saying Jews came from places "nowadays" in diversity. There were Jews listed in numerous nations in the Scriptures themselves (i.e. India to Cush, per Esther in Esther 1 on the Jews scattered throughout the Persian Empire, Egypt, Lybia, Rome, Crete, Ethiopia, etc.) and others in the same Biblical time frame had already traveled extensively - and the locations in the scriptures when it comes to Jewish communities. We also have good evidence showing others from That has been shown in archaealogy many times before.

It is definitely MORE diverse today for Jews than it was in previous times - but the diversity was no less present. In regards to the actual history in Biblical times, there are plenty of places covering Jews in all parts of the world extensively and details their activities. For reference:




As it concerns the actual message of the Gospel itself, it would be speculation to look past people living out the Message of Christ and assume "He's seen European - therefore, you're not truly loving the Gospel" - as that assumes a standard of Christ which was never presented (i.e. "You have to see me look exactly as I did - though no one has ever seen my image - in order to accept my commands of discipleship"). CHrist already talked to Gentiles as well as other Non-Jewish groups presenting Himself and never emphasized his being the descendant of David since that was relevant to the Jewish people while other groups had other things emphasized.

And if the issue needs to be considered, we already have it where Christ has appeared to others in dreams/visions to others (like Arabs in Muslim dominated nations) and he never appeared Jewish - just as it has been with other cultures where the Lord reached out to others (even though they were later told he was Jewish and yet represented all people believing in Him) so to emphasize the Holy Family having to always appear as such would seem to assume more than what Christ himself had said.

But more importantly, no one has seen how Jews looked back in the day -and Jews in previous times were not of the mindset that the Holy Family was to be presented a certain way. To assume otherwise, I think, would be begging the question.

There's just as much heresy with people promoting things in the Jewish world when saying one can never trust in Christ when he doesn't look Jewish and yet their own definition of Jewish was based on what they grew up with - or presenting Christ as reflecting all aspects of what they grew up with in Jewish settings even when many customs of their era were foreign to Jesus.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ContraMundum

Messianic Jewish Christian
Supporter
Jul 2, 2005
15,666
2,957
Visit site
✟78,078.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
There were Jews listed in numerous nations in the Scriptures themselves (i.e. India to Cush, per Esther in Esther 1 on the Jews scattered throughout the Persian Empire, Egypt, Lybia, Rome, Crete, Ethiopia, etc.) and others in the same Biblical time frame had already traveled extensively - and the locations in the scriptures when it comes to Jewish communities. We also have good evidence showing others from That has been shown in archaealogy many times before.

But more importantly, no one has seen how Jews looked back in the day

There's the whole question. Ancient Jews scattered everywhere. Not once are we told as to what they looked like. But I reckon it's a fair guess to say that a descendant of David from Nazareth probably wasn't European, nor African, nor Asian.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
There's the whole question. Ancient Jews scattered everywhere. Not once are we told as to what they looked like.
That would not be necessary for an argument if saying that not knowing fully how others looked like meant that it's wrong to depict Jewish groups looking a certain way (starting around the 2nd or 3rd century) based on what WAS known of Jews during the time icons even began - be it physical descriptions of how Jews looked based on ancient historians or images portraying them (more discussed before on Egyptian visual descriptions in the times of the Hebrews) - or descriptions of Jews from that era - as is the case with Indian Jews (in the time of the Persian Empire) and how they were described in Indian history when it came to their journey over and knowing basics on their development.

But I reckon it's a fair guess to say that a descendant of David from Nazareth probably wasn't European, nor African, nor Asian.
How one actually sees Africa makes a world of difference - seeing how often people stereotype assuming that descendants of David were never African when Hebrew geneology was deeply tied to/connected to Africa - including David's Empire and Solomon's. People get surprised when going to Nazareth or Middle-Eastern territories and assuming "Oh they're not Middle-Eastern - they look African!!!"and never realizing where there is a pre-concieved view that being a descendant of Biblical Royal family means one could never look a certain way.

And of course, even being from Nazareth, there is nothing saying David couldn't be portrayed as European (as European Jews have noted). I have always enjoyed what Fr. James Bernstein has said about the nature of icons in general when it comes to presentation:

 
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Shalom :)

Concerning what has been on my mind, I have been very much blessed of late with one of the ministries I've kept up with that does extensive focus on the many ways Indigenous cultures are often neglected in many Liturgical circles when it comes to the arts - especially as it concerns Icons. What stood out was the ways that others who are Aboriginals, for example, do not visualize Christ or many scenes in the scriptures in the same way that others in Greek or Byzantine culture did - and when expressing it in the manner they do, it truly does stand out. ...

Does anyone have any thoughts? Do you feel an Indigenous Iconography is something others should speak on more when it comes to expressing truth?

I love those pictures. I paint, but nowhere near as expressively.

I don't think I would subdivide iconography, though. To me those are icons. YMMV.

wp_20150509_13_27_58_pro.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Catherineanne

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
22,924
4,645
Europe
✟76,860.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
I've seen some in pictures, but have never seen any first hand. I think the reason is that I'm not indigenous.

However, we do have a nativity scene about 1/2 scale at our Chruch which is very (I would say too) white. The baby Jesus, Mary and Joseph have light hair, very white skin with rosy cheeks an blue eyes.

BTW, I have no problem with any of the icons that you posted.

It is a bit strange to suggest that a native American can paint Christ as a native American, but someone who is white with blue eyes cannot paint Christ white with blue eyes. How else can we identify with Christ, except as someone familiar to us?

We begin with what is familiar and known, and then move to a greater and broader understanding. But Christ remains familiar and known, even as we do this.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I love those pictures. I paint, but nowhere near as expressively.

I don't think I would subdivide iconography, though. To me those are icons. YMMV.

wp_20150509_13_27_58_pro.jpg
Subdividing iconography does have a lot of aspects to it which are necessary to keep anything from going on, although I agree with you on the pictures being very expressive...
 
Upvote 0