You are on page 1of 9

Zbornik radova Vizantolo{kog instituta H, 2007 Recueil des travaux de lInstitut detudes byzantines XIV, 2007

UDC: 75.041.5(495.02)

^EDOMILA MARINKOVI] (Kragujevac)

FOUNDERS MODEL REPRESENTATION OF A MAQUETTE OR THE CHURCH?*


The text deals with some terminological problems concerning the so-called founders model. Although it is commonly used to designate the depicted architecture in the hand of the church founder, the expression founders (ktetors) model is often confusing and misleading. The main question is whether the Byzantine architects used actual model/maquettes for constructing their churches and if so, could these models/maquettes have been used for the architecture depicted in founders portraits? In other worlds is the representation in the donors hand the image of a built church or its maquette, produced as a project model? The different aspects of the problem we analysed the legal, technical and symbolic functions of these representations support our assumption that the architectural design model/maquette did not serve as a specimen for representations of architecture on founders portraits. This specific type of architecture depicted was created after the building itself was completed.

Among the vast, wide-ranging repertoire of architectural imagery in Byzantine art, the representation of a church building as depicted in the founders portrait occupies an exceptional place, not only in monumental painting, but also in mosaics, reliefs, and illuminations. The only exceptions, according to Nancy [ev~enko, are the icons where such representations generally have not been documented.1 Numerous representations of founders models have been found in the territories of the
* This paper is based on my master's thesis about various aspects of depicted founders architecture, done at the Art History Department of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade, under the direction of Prof. Marica [uput in the spring of 2005. Besides my advisors support, I benefited a great deal from the insightful reading and suggestions by Academician Zaga Gavrilovi}, Prof. Marian Malet, Jelena Bogdanovi} and Prof. Richard Marx. I would like to express my gratitude to all of them. 1 Nancy Patterson-[ev~enko, The Representation of Donors and Holy Figures on four Byzantine Icons, Delt. Crist. Arc.Et. IZ (199394) 157. The only exception regarding the above stated opinion is the two-sided icon representing the Trapezuntine emperor, Alexios III Komnenos, and Saint John the Forerunner, holding the very schematic representation of a domed church, today in the Holy Monastery of Dionysiou, Mount Athos, Greece. This icon is from 134990. Cf. Byzantium, Faith and Power (12611557) ed. H. C. Evans, N. York 2004, 9, fig. 1.7.

146

^edomila Marinkovi}

Byzantine Empire but most of them, rather, come from the countries under its cultural influence, such as Armenia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Sicily, Russia and Serbia.2 The representations of churches in founders portraits from Serbian medieval monuments form the core of our research. Therefore, the visual material from forty Serbian churches is presented in a monographic way in order to provide a complete and chronological repertoire of these representations. Furthermore, over sixty images from Byzantine monuments are used as comparative material, and this enabled us to gain a more comprehensive idea of the material in medieval Orthodox Christian art as a whole.3 Our first step was to define the problem of the representation of a church building and to establish precise and clear terminology, since the commonly used expression founders (ktetors) model is often confusing and misleading. Compared with other representations of architecture, the church buildings depicted in founders portraits belong to what Anka Stojakovi} has defined as essential images4 of the illustrated architecture and have, as well as the accompanying
Armenia: the Holy Cross Church in Aghtamar (915921). Bulgaria: St. Michael's Church in Ivanovo (12181241), the Church of SS. Nicolas and Panteleimon in Boiana (1259), the Church of the Holy Virgin in Donja Kamenica (XIV century), St. Nicolas Church in Stani~enje (13311332), St. Nicolas Church in Kalotina (13311334), the Ossuary Chapel in Ba~kovo (13311371), and St. Marinas Church in Karlukovo (mid. XIV century). Georgia: the Church of St. Sion in Ateni (first half of the VII century); Korgo (VIII century); St. John the Baptist in Opiza (923937); Dolisquana (937954); St. John the Baptist in Oskhi (963973); St. Nishan in Haghpad (967991); the Church of the Holy Virgin in Tzarostavi (end of the X century); the Chapel of the Catholicon in Udabno (mid. XI century); the Church of the Nativity of the Holy Virgin in Gelati (11061125); the Church of the Holy Virgin in Betania (mid. XII century); the Dormition of the Theotokos in Vardzia (11841186); St. Nicolas Church in Qincvisi (around 1207); Sicily: Monreale, Cathedral (11711183). Russia: Kiev: St. Sophia (1045); the Church of the Holy Saviour in Neredica (1245); the Church of the Assumption of the Holy Virgin in Volotovo (1352). Serbia: the Church of the Ascension in Mile{eva (12191228), the southern chapel of the exonarthex in the Theotokos Evergetis Church in Studenica (around 1235), the Church of the Holy Trinity in Sopo}ani (12701276), the Church of the Annunciation in Gradac (around 1275), Kings Dragutin Chapel in Djurdjevi Stupovi (12821283), the Church of St. Achilleos in Arilje (12951296), the Church of SS. Joachim and Anna in Studenica (1314), St. George's Church in Staro Nagori~ino (13161318), the Church of the Annunciation in Gra~anica (around 1320), St. Peters Church in Bijelo Polje (around 1320), St. Nicolas Church in Stani~enje, the Holy Virgin Hodegetria Church in the Patriarchate of Pe} (before 1337), St. George's Church in Gornji Kozjak (around 1340), the Church of the Annunciation in Karan (13401342), the Church of the Annunciation in Dobrun (1343), the Church of the Holy Saviour in De~ani (1343), St. George's Church in Polo{ko (13431345), the Church of the Holy Archangel Michael in Lesnovo (13461347), the Chapel in the Church of the Holy Virgin in Treskavac (13501360), the Church of the Assumption of the Holy Virgin in Matei~ (13551360), St. Nicolas Church in Psa~a (13651371), the Church of the Ascension in Ravanica (after 1389), St. Nicolas Church in Rama}a (around 1395), the Church of St. Elias in Rudenica (14021405), the Church of the Holy Trinity in Manasija (before 1418), the Theotokos Evergetis Church in Studenica (repainted in 1568), St. Georges Church in Vra}ev{nica (repainted in 1737). Some other examples of depicted founders architecture have dissappeared and are known only from written sources. 3 ^. Marinkovi}, Image of a completed church: The representation of architecture in founders portraits in Serbian and Byzantine Art, Belgrade (forthcoming). Hereafter: Marinkovi}, Image. 4 A. Stojakovi} uses this term as opposed to framing images or Tania Velmans term decor architectural. A. Stojakovi}, Arhitektonski prostor u slikarstvu sredwovekovne Srbije, N. Sad,
2

Founders model representation of a maquette or the church?

147

inscriptions, a fundamental role in establishing the iconographic motif of the church founder. The ability of the observer to recognise the actual building emphasises one of the basic functions of these motifs. These representations show a certain level of stylisation. But, a church building as depicted in a founders portrait preserves the basic features of its original (such as domes and, where they exist, towers, as well as many specific details), enabling one to recognise the entire structure and connect the image with the completed architecture. Similarly, the inclusion of the founder, by means of his portrait, as a historical character in the painted assembly of the timeless heavenly dwellers, the representation of a church in his hands, indicates the introduction of architectural reality in the broader repertoire of mainly symbolic architectural backdrops. The representation of the church building in founders portraits, as part of the iconographic motif of the founder, is usually called a founders model or model of the church. This expression is widely used in both Serbian and Byzantine literature.5 Our question is whether these terms are the appropriate ones?
1970, 34. E. Lipsmeyer shares the same opinion as Stojakovi}. Cf. E. Lipsmeyer, The Donor And His Church Model In Medieval Art From Early Christian Times To The Late Romanesque Period, unpublished PhD Thesis (Rutgers University, New Jersey 1981), 121. Hereafter: Lipsmeyer, Donor. 5 In Serbian: model crkve (F. Gerke, Kasna antika i rano hri{}anstvo, Novi Sad 1973, 218; V. \uri}, Vizantijske freske u Jugoslaviji, Beograd 1975, 35, 44, 57, 75, 80 (Hereafter: \uri}, Vizantijske freske); Grupa autora, Istorija primewene umetnosti kod Srba, Beograd 1977, 221; \. Bo{kovi}, Osvrt na neka pitanja arhitektonskog re{enja crkve sv. Mihajla u Stonu, Gunja~in zbornik (1980) 141; R. Qubinkovi}, Crkva Sv. Nikole u Stani~ewu, Zograf 15 (1984) 77. B. Todi}, Gra~anica, BeogradPri{tina 1988, 130, 170, 171; Idem, Srpsko slikarstvo u doba kraqa Milutina, Beograd 1998, 33, 36, 44, 49, 55, 57, 62, 299, 328, 333; S. Gabeli}, Manastir Lesnovo, Beograd 1998, 31, 32, 33, 114, 116, 117; V. Kora}, Spomenici monumentalne srpske arhitekture XIV veka u Povardarju, Beograd 2003, 43, 50, 57, 66). in English: Model of the church (O. Demus, The mosaics of Norman Siciliy, London 1949, 302, 304; C. Morey, Early Christian Art, London 1953, 164, 179; A. and J. Styilianou, Donors and dedicatory inscriptions, supplicants and supplications in the painted churches of Cyprus, JOBG IX (1960) 98, 99, 103, 104; Idem, Painted churches of Cyprus, Stourbridge 1964, 53; V. Lazarev, Old Russian Murals and Mosaics, London 1966, 48, 127, 236; J. Spatharakis, The portrait in Byzantine Illuminated Manuscripts, Leiden 1976, 189, 248; T. Malmquist, Byzantine 12th Century Frescoes in Kastoria, Uppsala 1979, 85, 87; Lipsmeyer, The Donor, 56, 59 et passim; S. Kalopissi-Verti, Dedicatory Inscriptions and Donor Portraits in Thirteenth Century Churches in Greece, Wien 1992, 99, 101; A. Kirin-G. Gerov, New Data on the 14th Century Mural Painting in the Church of St. Nikola in Kalotina, Zograf 23 (199394) 53; A. Eastmond, Royal Imagery in Medieval Georgia, Pennsylvania 1998, 56, 61, 62, 103, 104, 113, 144, 149, 156, 201). Model of the church building (H. Franses, Symbols, Meaning, Belief: Donor portraits in Byzantine Art, PhD thesis, London University 1992, 8). in German: Das Modell der Kirche (O. Benndorf, Antike Baumodelle, Jahreshefte des Osterreichisches Archaologishen Instituts in Wien Bd. V, 1 (1902), 178; F. W. Deichmann, Ravenna. Hauptstadt des Spateantiken und Abendlandes. IIII, Wiesbaden 19691976, 178, 180, 345, 373; Ch. Ihm, Die Programme der Christlichen Apsismalerei vom 4. Jahrhundert bis zum Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart 1992, 24, 139, 142, 144, 164, 173, 194; Naumann-Belting, Die Euphemia Kirche an Hippodrom zu Istanbul und ihre Fresken, Berlin 1966, 190; H. und H. Buschhausen, Die Marienkirche von Apollonia in Albanien: Byzantiner, Normanien und Serben im Kampf um die Via Egnatia, Vienna 1976, 155, 170, 178, 179, 180, 181). in French: le modele de leglise (T. Velmans, Les fresques dIvanovo et la peinture byzantine a la fin du Moyen Age, JSav (1965) 381; M. Chatzidakis, A propos de la date et du fondateur de Saint-Luc, CA XIX (1969) 134; M. Tati}-Djuri}, Liconographie de la donation dans lancien art serbe, Actes du

148

^edomila Marinkovi}

S. Radoj~i} in his book Portraits of Serbian medieval rulers discussed the representations of church buildings in the founders hands and used the term model of endowment.6 This expression is based on the fact that it is the founders privilege to be depicted with the church he is endowing. Only the founder of the church had such a privilege, while other donors could not exercise the same authority. Cecilia Davis-Weyer, in her study dealing with the establishment of Roman apsidal composition in early Christian Art, includes a large number of examples of models of endowment dating from the IV to the VIII century, and concludes that the founders, especially the popes, offer their models to Christ in the presence of the Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul.7 Peter Bloch in his lexicographic entry votive representation (Dedikationsbild) uses the term architectural model for church buildings in the hand of the founder. He considers that founders offered churches to Christ as a symbolic sacrifice, which resembles the martyr wreaths carried by other figures depicted in the scene.8 Dirck Koks, Ludwig Heinrich Heidenreich and Elisabeth Lypsmeyer, also dealt with this problem and used similar terminology.9 The term founders model is, therefore, widely accepted for architectural representations in the hands of founders. It is based on two assumptions.
XIVe Congres International des etudes byzantines (Bucarest 1971) 312; D. Panayotova, Les portraits des donateurs de Dolna Kamenica, ZRVI 12 (1970) 150, 152; A. Grabar, LEmpereur dans lArt byzantin, London 19712, 109; T. Velmans, Le portrait dans lart des Paleologues, Lart et societe a Byzance sous les Paleologues, Venice 1971, 110, 113, 122, 131; A. Grabar, Leglise de Boiana, Sofia 1978, 69; D. Pignet-Panayotova, Recherches sur la peinture en Bulgarie du bas Moyen Age, Paris 1987, 103, 114, 115, 225, 227; S. Tomekovi}-Reggiani, Portraits et structures sociales au XIIe siecle. Un aspect du probleme. Le portrait laique. Actes du XV Congres International des etudes Byzantines II B (Athenes 1976) 826. in Italian: modello di una chiesa, G. Ieni, La rappresentazione delloggetto architettonico nellarte medievale con riferimento particolare ai modelli di architettura caucasici, Atti del primo simposio internazionale di arte armena (Venezia 1975) 250, 252. Hereafter: Ieni, La rappresentazione. in Russian: model cerkvi ([. Amirana{vili, Istoria gruzinskogo iskustva, Moskva 1950, 116, 117; V. N. Lazarev, Istori Vizantisko `ivopisi, Moskva 1986, 85, 111, 159; G. I. Vzdornov, Volotovo, freski Uspeni na Volotovom posle bliz Novogoroda, Moskva 1989, 15, 16). in Bulgarian: model na crkvata (A. Vasiliev, Ktitorski portreti, Sofi 1960, 6, 7, 24, 25, 26, 30, 45, 46. Hereafter: Vasiliev, Ktitorski portreti; E. Bakalova, Ba~kovskata kostnica, Sofi 1977, 35). in Macedonian: modelot (Z. Rasolkoska-Nikolovska, Crkvata Sv. Gorgi vo Goren Kozjak vo svetlinata na noviete ispituvawa, Simpozijum 1100 godi{nia smrtta na Kiril Solunski I (Skopje 1970) 224, 225; N. No{pal-Nikuqska, Za ktitorskata kompozicija i natpisot vo Markoviot manastir selo Su{ica, Skopsko, Glasnik Instituta za nacionalna istorija XV, II (Skopje 1971) 229; E. Dimitrova, Manastir Matej~e, Skopje 2002, 185). 6 S. Radoj~i}, Portreti srpskih vladara u sredwem veku, Beograd 19972, 74. 7 C. Davis-Weyer, Das Traditio-Legis Bild und seine Nachfolge, Munchener Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, dritte Folge, XII (1961), 134. 8 P. Bloch, Das Dedikationsbild, Lexicon der christlichen Ikonographie, Bd. I, Freiburg 1968. 9 Model of a church: D. Kocks, Stifterdarstellungen in der italienischen Malerei des 1315. Jahrhunderts, Inauguraldissertation der Universitat zu Koln, 1971, 41; Architectural model: L. H. Heydenreich, Architecturmodell, Reallexicon zur deutchen Kunstgeschichte I, Stuttgart 1937, 918940; model, donor model, model of a church: Lipsmeyer, Donor, IX, 26, 32, 56, 59, 64 et passim.

Founders model representation of a maquette or the church?

149

First, there is an evident similarity between the actual architecture and its painted representation. Numerous authors emphasise that the similarity between the represented and the real architecture in the founders setting is significant.10 The second assumption is rooted in the institution of the donation of an object. Andre Grabar in his book Lempereur dans lart Byzantin discusses the architectural models that the Byzantine emperors, like the Roman ones, either received from enslaved barbarians, or offered to a god or deity.11 These models represented a substitute for those conquered possessions (cities, for instance) that could not be uprooted and exhibited during triumphal imperial ceremonies. These models were not only characteristic of Roman or early Christian art but also existed in the Syrian and other Middle Eastern cultures before the Classical period. The Latin term for this kind of model was simulacrum and it also referred to the similarity of the model to the structure it represented.12 Therefore, it is reasonable to ask whether the Byzantine architects used actual maquettes for constructing their churches and if so, could these maquettes have been used for the architecture depicted in the founders portraits? In other words is the representation in the donors hand the image of a built church or its maquette created as a project model? Behrendt Pick in his study Die tempeltragenden Gottheiten und die Darstellung der Neokorie auf den Munzen questions whether the construction represented on coins is the architectural model of a temple (Modelle), or an illustration of the actual temple (Abbild der wirklichen Tempel), alluding to the way Neokoros privileges were depicted on the coins of Asia Minor. It is well known, and many authors agree, that the Neokoros coins represent a direct iconographic model for the founders motifs in early Christian art. Pick concludes in his study that the Neokoros coins depict real structures, but because of the specific medium (a minted coin) and the limited space, the architecture represented was subject to substantial schematic abbreviation and, therefore, they bear little resemblance to their prototype.13 Analysing classical archi10 () vrlo realisti~ki naslikanom modelu hrama. \uri}, Vizantijske freske, 100; () na osnovu ktitorskih modela naslikanih u rukama donatora mogu se donositi prili~no pouzdani zakqu~ci o prvobitnom izgledu i fazama izgradwe pojedinih crkvenih gra|evina. D. Vojvodi}, Leksikon srpskog sredweg veka, Beograd 1999, ktitorski portret; Vrno e predal arhitekturnoto ustrostvo na sgradata i ni dava predstava za ne ni prvona~alen vid. Vasiliev, Ktitorski portreti, 25; Une donne supplementaire en faveur de lexactitude des details (underline by ^. M.) du tableau votif nous a ete fournie par lanalyse de larchitecture du monument qui nous a permis davancer et de soutenir lopignion qu a lorigine leglise de St. Nicolae presentait reelment les deux invraisemblables tours-clocher qui figurent sur le dessin de la maquette soutenue par les donateurs. C. L. Dumitrescu Le voivode donateur de la fresque de Saint Nicolae-Domnesc (Arges) et le probleme de sa donation sur Vidin au XV siecle, Revue des etudes Sud-Est europeens, XVII n. 3, (1979) 545, n. 16; Una corrispondenza puntuale fra oggetto rappresentato si puo riconoscere generalmente soltanto nelle scene di donazione del edificio. Ieni, La rappresentazione, 250. 11 A. Grabar, LEmpereur dans lArt byzantin, London 19712, 154. 12 P. Azara, La representation des modeles dans lart ancien: un embleme de la creation architecturale? Maquettes architecturales de lAntiquite, Actes du colloque de Strasbourg, 35 decembre 1998, Paris 2001, 431432. 13 B. Pick, Die tempeltragenden Gottheiten und die Darstellung der Neokorie auf den Munzen, Jahreshefte des Osterreichisches Archaologishen Instituts VII (1904) 141.

150

^edomila Marinkovi}

tectural project models/maquettes, Otto Bendorf reached a similar conclusion: the temples in the hands of the emperors or gods on the coins with the Neokoros privilege frequently are not replicas of the architectural project model/maquette (Wiederholung des Modells) but illustrations of the completed building (Nachbildung des fertigen Werkes), in this case the donated temple.14 The production of architectural project models was quite widespread in Antiquity, especially established in Greece after the VII century BC. Therefore, the terminology related to this phenomenon was quite developed, precise and adequate. Apart from the technical terms Hypographeus and Anagrapheus, the terms Typos and Paradigma were most frequently used to indicate a sketch or a schematic drawing used for construction.15 In his first book, Vitruvius mentions the graphic representation of the exterior appearance of the construction, which he calls exemplaribus pictis.16 The Latin term exemplar is frequently used as a synonym for the Greek term paradigma, about which we have just spoken. We know that realistic models (architectural and votive) existed in Classical art. However, in Christian art the representations of the founder with the church occur in a completely altered context. Inherited from the Classical past, the previously used expression founders model remained unchanged, even though it should necessarily have been adapted to the idea which explains why the church was being constructed and donated. Therefore, the expression founders model is a misplaced interpretation because it is imprecise and has more than one meaning. Founders model, above all, can mean the miniature version of an existing structure, which is the original for the depiction. The meaning of this term in the medieval context reflects other frequently used terms the depicted church, representation of the church in founders portraits, and depicted model. Subsequently, the term founders model implies that it is a model of the structure it represents. Then again, the idiom founders model could stand for a maquette the design of a structure that was made prior to its realisation. There are very few models of this kind preserved in Byzantine art, with the exception of one found in ^erven, Bulgaria, and several others in Russia and Armenia.17 Their meaning and role in the
14 O. Benndorf, Antike Baumodelle, Jahreshefte des Osterreichischen Archaologishen Instituts in Wien, Bd. V, 1. Heft (1902) 175197. Recently the same problem with similar conclusions was discussed by S. Friesen. Cf. S. J. Friesen, Twice Neokoros: Ephesus, Asia and the Cult of the Flavian Imperial Family. Religions in the Graeco-Roman World, Leiden 1993, 65. 15 To paradigma. Also: protipon, upodeigma, proplasma. A. Orlandoj, Lexikon Arcaiwn Arcitektonikwn Orwn, Aqhna 1986, 198 (with the quotation from ancient sources). See also: M.-Chr. Hellmann, Recherches sur le vocabulaire de l'architecture grecque dapres les inscriptions de Delos, Paris 1992, 31721, 318. 16 Vitruv, De architectura libri decem Textus, ed.: C. Fensterbusch, Darmstadt 1964/76, cap. 1, 4. 17 V. Dimova, Model na crkva v ^rven, Muzei i pametnici na kulturata XII (Sofi 1972) 2122; A. L. kobson, Model hrama iz raskopok ski-kermen v Krmu i problema novogo arhitekturnogo stil v Vizantii, Zograf 8 (1977) 3034; P. Cuneo, Les modeles en pierre de larchitecture armenienne, REArm VI (1969) 202215. Although the architectural model from the Xeropotamou Monastery (Mt. Athos) is from the period that is remote to one discussed above, it is essential to mention it. Cf. M. Polubiou, To Kaqoliko thj Monhj Xhropotamou, Aqhna 1999. I would like to express my gratitude to Academician Gojko Suboti} for drawing my attention to this book.

Founders model representation of a maquette or the church?

151

constructing process has not been verified, and the term founders model applied to them is similar to the one used for the depicted architectural representation of the church building. Similarly, a substantial number of founders models made in relief, with their three dimensional aspect, very closely resemble the actual appearance of the architectural model. These reliefs do not differ from the architectural models in appearance, but in their votive function. P. Cuneo thus makes a difference between three other, similar models model reliquary, acroteria model and technical model.18 These kinds of models are typical only for Armenian and Georgian art. The phrase commonly applied for these kinds of models is architectural objects, architectural models or stone models. The sophisticated relationship between the depiction of the architecture in the hand of the founder and the architectural design model-maquette is further complicated by the possible existence of another type of depiction the depiction of the architectural design model or maquette. Generally applied terms, such as founders model or church model, can, in particular, incorrectly refer to the depiction of the model, depicted model or even maquette drawing, also applied to indicate the representation of a church building in a founders portrait. The precise phrase is further complicated by the continual application of the terms model and maquette often applied as synonyms. Usually, the church was painted only after the finalisation of the construction work, which often started from the dome and the apse at the east end and proceeded westwards. Following this order, the representation of the founders portrait with a church, at least in Serbian art, was one of the last images depicted in the line of the compositional scheme of the nave or narthex. Even when the church was painted inside, immediately after the architectural works were completed (which was rarely the case) this scheme would make it possible for the artist to depict the church in the hands of the founder, according to the structure which had already been built. Therefore, I suggest that the most suitable terms are founders architecture or more precisely the image of a completed building. It is reasonable to assume that the representation of the church was that of the completed building, using certain drawing principles of architectural representations.19 In most of the cases we analysed, we were able to establish the viewpoint from which the painter most probably observed the church before he depicted it inside the building. Even more interestingly, the position of these compositions in the church interior and the standpoint in the vicinity of the church, show a very strong relationship, at least in Serbian art.20
Cuneo, op. cit., 215, 218, 223. Some of these principles are: the augmentation of some structural features of the church building (such as domes and portals), reduction in the number of the same architectural or decorative elements and an inversion of 180o in the position of some architectural elements (for example windows). Cf. Marinkovi}, Image, 6972. 20 For example: if the church is shown from the southern side (in the narthex of the Church of the Holy Ascension in Mile{eva), its place in the interior is on the north wall, and vice versa. In more than
18 19

152

^edomila Marinkovi}

However, precise iconographic instructions as to the place and manner of depicting founders portraits do not exist, to the best of my knowledge. There is nothing about the subject in the painters manuals Ermeneia. Moreover, the privileges of founders to have their portraits in their foundations, and to be buried and annually commemorated in them, were the principal founders ritual privileges.21 Thus, the founders portrait with depicted architecture potentially represents the artistic equivalent of the founders charter as a legal document.22 Therefore, the artistic language of such an image should have been formulated accordingly so as to precisely and realistically express the architectural features of the foundation. In our investigation of the problem we also analysed the legal, technical and symbolic functions of these representations which support our conclusion that the architectural design model/maquette did not serve as a specimen for representations of architecture on founders portraits.23 This specific type of architecture depicted was made after the building itself was completed. Furthermore, architectural models/maquettes are very rarely documented in the Byzantine and the Serbian tradition, though this fact does not exclude their potential existence. Even if they existed, these maquettes certainly could not have been models for the architecture depicted in the founders portrait. Above all, the idea on which the church endowment is based, and the consequent privileges arising from it, for example the privilege of being depicted holding the church, are eschatological. The founder stands before the Lords throne hoping for mercy at the Day of Judgment, carrying his church not its maquette. Hence, almost certainly the design models/maquettes, even if they were in use, could not have acted as models for the painted churches in donor portraits, but, rather, this kind of architectural imagery was produced according to the completed building.

^edomila Marinkovi} KTITORSKI MODEL SLIKA MAKETE ILI CRKVE? U {irokom repertoaru predstava arhitekture u vizantijskoj umetnosti, predstava crkve na ktitorskom portretu zauzima posebno mesto kako u monumentalnom zidnom slikarstvu, tako i u drugim umetni~kim rodovima. Wihov
three-quarters of the Serbian examples of depicted founders architecture, this so-called parallelism is obvious. Cf. Marinkovi}, op. cit., 7783. 21 V. Markovi}, Ktitori, wihove du`nosti i prava, PKJIF V (1925) 113116. 22 According to V. Djuri}s conclusions, the custom of inscribing the founders charter near the founders portrait was widespread in Byzantine Art. Cf. V. \uri}, Portreti na poveqama vizantijskih i srpskih vladara, Zbornik FF, VII/1 (1963) 257, 261. 23 Marinkovi}, op. cit., 98104.

Founders model representation of a maquette or the church?

153

broj je veoma veliki na ~itavom podru~ju koje obuhvata ne samo Vizantiju u u`em smislu, nego i najve}i deo zemaqa wenog kulturnog uticaja. Za razliku od ostalih predstava arhitekture, predstava arhitekture u okviru ktitorskog portreta pripada tzv. sadr`inskom krugu slikane arhitekture i ima, pored natpisa, su{tinsku ulogu u formirawu izgleda ktitorskog motiva. U ovoj vrsti naslikane arhitekture, mogu}nost prepoznavawa uzora predstavqa osnovnu funkciju slikane arhitekture. Pored odre|ene stilizacije ona zadr`ava osnovne odlike svog realnog predlo{ka, ~ime je omogu}eno prepoznavawe ali i veza izme|u naslikane i stvarne arhitekture. Slikana predstava crkve u okviru ktitorske kompozicije uobi~ajeno se naziva ktitorski model, ili model crkve, {to je termin koji je u {irokoj upotrebi u literaturi. Postavqa se pitawe u kojoj je meri on odgovaraju}i. Da li su arhitektonski modeli mogli slu`iti kao predlo{ci za slikanu arhitekturu na ktitorskim portretima? Da li, dakle, slika u ruci ktitora predstavqa sliku izvedene gra|evine ili wenog arhitektonskog modela? Smatramo da arhitektonski model nije slu`io kao predlo`ak za slikanu arhitekturu na ktitorskim portretima, ve} da je ova specifi~na vrsta slikane arhitekture nastala na osnovu izvedene gra|evine. Dokazi za ovakvu tvrdwu, za sada, samo su posredni arhitektonski modeli su veoma malo dokumentovani u vizantijskoj, a samim tim i srpskoj tradiciji, {to svakako ne iskqu~uje wihovo eventualno postojawe. Ipak, a na osnovu analize pravnih, teorijskih i tehni~kih aspekata ove teme, sa velikom izvesno{}u se mo`e re}i da, ukoliko su i postojali, ovakvi modeli nisu bili predlo{ci za slikawe arhitekture na ktitorskim portretima. Verovawe s kojim se podi`e i posve}uje hram, kao i prava koja iz toga proizilaze kao {to je pravo slikawa sa zadu`binom su eshatolo{ka. Pred prestolom Gospoda ktitor se, nadaju}i se u wegovu milost na Stra{nom sudu, pojavquje sa svojom crkvom, ne sa wenom maketom.

You might also like