Page 127 - Uros Todorovic Byzantine Painting Contemporary Eyes

Chapter II
The restoration of Orthodoxy instigated by Andronikos II Palaiologos (1282–1328) was contemporaneous with the further blossoming of Hellenism in Byzantine painting. Sub- sequently, after the spiritual and political crises caused by the Hesychast Debate (1341– 1352), as we shall see in more detail later, Byzantine painters again observed the images of their cultural past in a new light. Thus, contrary to Mango’s earlier cited opinion, when Byzantine architects and artists turn towards their past, this should not be under- stood as an “antiquarian involution” but as a spiritual renewal within an orientation to- wards the archetypal, and above all towards that which is spiritual and mystagogical.
Therefore, as we shall demonstrate in this chapter, the phenomenon of the Palaiolo- gan Renaissance need not be a subject of deception or confusion, but an object of a very particular kind of aesthetic appreciation. We shall elaborate on how in the domain of painting, Hesychasm exercised a distinct mystagogical influence, one which in the Palaiologan period amounted to a spiritual kind of renaissance. Thus, the author’s hope is that the present study contributes to the wider understanding and appreciation of the paradoxical climax of Byzantine art at a time when the Byzantine world was being rap- idly crushed by the Ottomans.
If in respect to Hesychasm, we agree with the relevant positive opinions of George Ostrogorsky, Miloje Vasić, John Meyendorff, and Kallistos Ware, then we ought to accept that the influence of Hesychasm in Byzantine society of the Palaiologan period can only properly be understood as culturally intrinsic – in a sense that irrespective of the fluctu- ations of its intensity throughout different periods, it existed uninterruptedly in both the consciousness and the subconscious of the Orthodox people. It is thus logical to assume that individual painters, or perhaps even entire ateliers, were influenced by Hesychasm in ways which would not have been comprehended by them on an entirely rational lev- el – the way we approach and comprehend the state of our contemporary art in analyt- ical seminar or symposium discussions.
On the contrary, the majority of these painters were most likely predominantly con- cerned with technical matters, as theological contemplation would have been regarded as a fundamental prerequisite to becoming a fresco-painter. This of course means that the hesychast influence in Byzantine painting can be manifest in more than one (stereo- typical) way. To say the least, it can be manifest: not just in the compositional arrange- ment, not just in the drawing, and not just in the colour treatment.
Since hesychast teaching, as we shall see, is the teaching of the vision of the uncreat- ed light, in the present chapter, it is necessary that we give special attention to the treat- ment of light in the painting of the Palaiologan period. Light, which throughout the en- tire history of Byzantine painting remains steadily within the human figure, appears to
125