11.09.2019 Views

Historical Painting Techniques, Materials, and Studio Practice

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Abstract<br />

Icons preserved in the Nile valley<br />

are the least known of Egypt's antiquities.<br />

In the gap between the early<br />

Coptic icons from the fourth to<br />

sixth centuries <strong>and</strong> those of the second<br />

half of the eighteenth century, a<br />

recently discovered group of medieval<br />

icons that are difficult to date<br />

<strong>and</strong> attribute has assumed prominence.<br />

Two beam icons, painted on<br />

similarly made panels of sycamore<br />

timber, were selected to describe in<br />

detail. Even preliminary research on<br />

their technology has resulted in new<br />

material for the study of icon painting<br />

<strong>and</strong> the continuity of historical<br />

Egyptian techniques, materials, <strong>and</strong><br />

mythology into Christian times.<br />

Figure 1. Detail of the reverse side if beam<br />

B. Photograph by Z. Skalova.<br />

New Evidence for the Medieval Production of Icons<br />

in the Nile Valley<br />

Zuzana Skalova<br />

Foundation for the Preservation of Icons in the Middle East<br />

Conservation of Coptic Art Project<br />

12 Tolombat Street, Apt. 17<br />

Garden City, Cairo<br />

Egypt<br />

Introduction<br />

Even the earliest preserved Coptic icons demonstrate that they were created<br />

for monastic circles. They repeatedly portray local saints (often monks) or<br />

they express the doctrines of Coptic religious thought. This monastic patronage<br />

remained constant.<br />

Many Coptic icons were until recently in a poor state of preservation. Today,<br />

only a small number of icons in the Nile valley are restored to their full<br />

advantage (1). Consequently, few art historians have looked for old icons or<br />

recognized them (2) . However, important medieval icons hanging in the<br />

church of St. Mercurius Abu's-Saifain in Old Cairo were admired <strong>and</strong> quite<br />

correctly assessed by Alfred Butler during the 1870s. Although they were<br />

"dim with age <strong>and</strong> indistinguishable," he concluded that "the icons generally<br />

speaking are ancient <strong>and</strong> well executed." Butler's comments on the disfIgurement<br />

of the pictures caused by remarkably careless technology, when compared<br />

with Italian panels, can serve as the point of departure fo r this study<br />

(3) .<br />

During the last five years, the author has fo und, studied, <strong>and</strong> in some cases<br />

restored, some twenty medieval icons, which can be preliminarily dated between<br />

the thirteenth <strong>and</strong> the fifteenth centuries. They are nearly all large<br />

icons, clearly made for public veneration in Eastern churches. Some of these<br />

reflect distinct Coptic patronage through their iconography (4).<br />

In assembling <strong>and</strong> attributing the group, the author relied primarily on technical<br />

aspects emphasizing the icons' kinship, which clearly shows that they<br />

emerged from the same local tradition of workmanship. Common features<br />

include the use of indigenous wood (usually sycamore), the awkward construction<br />

of the panels, a ground layer containing anhydrite, a limited range<br />

of pigments, the use oflow-quality azurite blue, an unburnished golden background,<br />

<strong>and</strong> a thin gray layer of varnish (5).<br />

Stylistic <strong>and</strong> iconographic aspects are more hybrid, but also reflect a rather<br />

peripheral <strong>and</strong> culturally mixed background. This suggests that local craftsmen<br />

<strong>and</strong> foreign painters were working together in Egypt. Thus, though these<br />

paintings are varied in style, the panels have such consistent parallels in the<br />

choice of wood <strong>and</strong> peculiar carpentry, that they can be classified together.<br />

They are manufactured from narrow, roughly assembled planks held together<br />

with huge traverses <strong>and</strong> narrow boards, <strong>and</strong> nailed with big iron nails driven<br />

in from the front. The rifts between the planks are filled on both sides with<br />

plaster <strong>and</strong> covered with palm bark fiber, <strong>and</strong> sometimes textiles, to smoothen<br />

the surface (Fig.1). When compared with panels attributed to the Greek icon<br />

workshops, they appear clumsy <strong>and</strong> extremely heavy to transport, a fact that<br />

would additionally testifY to local provenance. The choice of omnipresent<br />

sycamore wood might have been dictated by scarcity <strong>and</strong> the costs of more<br />

suitable material in the Nile valley (6) .<br />

The finish of the back sides of these paintings is also characteristic for the<br />

group. They were invariably covered with a thick layer of plaster, decorated<br />

with alternating lines of wavy pink-brown <strong>and</strong> gray-blue brush strokes. This<br />

is a rare feature in icon painting, <strong>and</strong> it may suggest the formula of a work-<br />

Skalova 85

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!