The Virgin of Vladimir icon’s intimate portrayal of mother and child created a new standard for Orthodox iconography
Title: Our Lady of Vladimir
Artist Name: Unknown Byzantine Master
Genre: Religious Icon, Byzantine Art
Date: c. 1131
Dimensions: 104 x 69 cm (41 x 27 in)
Materials: Tempera on wood panel
Location: State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow (Church of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi)
One of the most important works of Byzantine art, the Virgin of Vladimir, was made in Constantinople around the year 1131. It is a tempera on wood panel painting that stands at 104 by 69 centimeters. The central area, measuring 78 by 55 centimeters, is a remnant of the original painting; only the faces and hands of the Virgin and Christ remain from the original artwork. In the 14th century, someone had the presence of mind to place an image of the Hetoimasia on the back of the painting; this, of course, is better than the alternative that had come before it—an image of what was presumably a rather forgettable saint! The icon’s significance in Russian Orthodox spirituality and culture cannot be overstated.
The visage takes on a characteristic green-olive sankir, made from ochre mixed with soot. The soot layer does not appear to have been applied as a true paint, but rather smeared on like a translucent glaze, which is the more typical way of working in the Middle Byzantine period (c. 843-1204). This method of working with layers was also the way in which the Imperial court worked using both standard recipes and infrequently used ingredients, like ground glass and gold in the next layer, to make the surface appear brighter. The difference in brightness and translucency between these two layers would have helped exaggerate the depth of the face.
The Virgin of Vladimir Icon: Origins and Style
Byzantine painting shows extraordinary technical sophistication in the Virgin of Vladimir icon. The work is subtle in its nudges and winks; it is almost too good to be true. It is nearly perfect in one of the oldest, crudest, and most well-known tricks of the artistic trade: for building up layers of earth, ochre, and skin, so that the painter’s model in the icon can almost breathe and speak. The Virgin of Vladimir can gaze back at you for as long as you wish—though it definitely helps if you’re making penitential signs; then she is all the more likely to condescend to you.
The icon’s composition demonstrates outstanding psychological understanding of the mother-child relationship. The Virgin’s serious expression draws viewers into contemplation while at the same time she acknowledges her son’s future sacrifice. Scholars who have analyzed the icon’s deep theological significance and its role in molding Orthodox piety have commented on its almost miraculous ability to communicate across cultures (R. Yu). At the moment depicted in the icon, the child Christ presses his cheek against his mother’s face in the most intimate gesture of little boy to mother. Yet even in this moment of tender humanity, the child’s adult proportions and stylized costume call to mind his divine nature.
The initial Greek inscription “ΜΡ ΘΥ” (Mother of God) was in gold leaf on an icon that had a burnished background, of which only fragments survive today. Though most icons during the same time period were smaller and easily moved, this one had the size necessary to be in a setting where it would be worshiped by the public. The painting itself only covered the central section of the icon, while the whole panel had been protected by a “cover” of sorts on either side, thus warranting the need for the increased width.
The icon was painted on well-ready wood with egg tempera, the standard painting medium for Byzantine panel paintings. The artist did not simply apply paint to the surface of the icon but built up the image in layers, working from the dark base tones to the lighter colors that give an illusion of volume and highlight, or not, the forms that make up the image. Although technically an icon is a kind of portrait, and this particular image very likely has a prototype in some kind of painted or sculpted figure of Christ, what makes this work particularly remarkable is how profoundly spiritual this image is—despite the relatively simple means by which it was accomplished.
The maphorion (outer cloak) of the Virgin was originally a deep blue-black; Christ’s himation is earth tones and gold. Yet sophisticated as each appears, the figures seem almost to dissolve into the background. It is, of course, the background that is the space for heavenly rather than earthly activity—the busy folds and textures of drapery are inconsequential to this painting’s basic message. What may seem, at first glance, a textbook case of drapery as form-defining is in fact a devotional image in which the reality of divine presence does not need to be illustrated.
A close look at the panel’s reverse side shows it was first painted with the image of an unidentified saint. In the 14th century, this image was replaced with a representation of the Hetoimasia (the prepared throne) that was surrounded by the instruments of Christ’s Passion. This adaptation shows that the icon was originally moving toward being more venerated, and now it has evolved into receiving even more respect and being nearly worshiped by the faithful. Indeed, the addition of the Hetoimasia makes the icon that much closer to playing a bridge function between heaven and earth, which is what the icon is intended to do in Orthodox iconography.
The sacred journey of the Virgin of Vladimir icon from Constantinople to Russia marks a pivotal moment in medieval religious history. Around 1131, the Patriarch of Constantinople sent this masterpiece as a gift to Yuri Dolgorukiy, the Grand Prince of Kiev. The transmission of such a significant work demonstrated Byzantine efforts to strengthen religious ties with the Rus’ principalities. The icon’s arrival coincided with a period of intense cultural exchange between Constantinople and Kiev, as Orthodox Christianity took deeper root in Slavic lands.
In 1155, Prince Andrey Bogolyubsky transported the icon to Vladimir, an act that would transform both the city’s destiny and the icon’s role in Russian history. According to medieval chronicles studied extensively over centuries, during this momentous transfer, an extraordinary event occurred which deeply influenced local beliefs (Miller). The horses carrying the precious cargo stopped near Vladimir and refused to move further. This divine sign convinced the people that the Mother of God wished the icon to remain there. The location, subsequently named Bogolyubovo – “beloved by God” – became the site where Prince Andrey built his residence.
Vladimir’s progress toward being a political and religious center was signified by the magnificent presence of the Vladimir icon. The stunning Assumption Cathedral, built to house the icon, enshrined Vladimir’s not-lost position as a place of power. From the 1160s to the 1180s, under Prince Andrei’s thumb, the northwestern segment of the 12th-century federal highway was a superhighway for the gravity in the Rus’ area of influence.
The icon confronted numerous difficult challenges in the following centuries. When Mongol soldiers stormed Vladimir in 1238, the icon itself escaped, but it was fire-damaged, and the city it was in was sacked. This miraculous survival, however, only added to the icon’s already strong aura of spirituality and importance. There was a very careful restoration done not long after, however that ‘restored’ the icon and ‘saved’ it, not only for the people that claim it is a sacred object, but also made it into a historical landmark. That restoration was an important moment.
The relationship between the icon and the Russian people grew increasingly complex as time passed. Research into historical documents reveals how the Virgin of Vladimir became an active participant in Russian political and spiritual life (Gasper-Hulvat). Medieval chroniclers recorded how princes sought its blessing before battle, how cities placed themselves under its protection, and how its presence was believed to ward off invaders.
The profound connection between the icon and its adopted homeland manifested in numerous ways. Rulers sought its presence at significant state ceremonies, while ordinary believers looked to it for comfort and intercession. This dual role – as both a symbol of state power and an object of personal devotion – distinguished the Virgin of Vladimir from other holy images. Its influence extended far beyond religious spheres, shaping Russian cultural identity and national consciousness through centuries of political transformation.
Divine Protection: Miracles and Historical Events
The legendary protective powers of the Virgin of Vladimir icon crystallized through a series of pivotal historical moments. In 1395, during Tamerlane’s invasion of Russian lands, the icon made its momentous journey from Vladimir to Moscow. Prince Vasily I spent a night in tearful prayer before it, and remarkably, Tamerlane’s forces retreated that same day. The site where Muscovites welcomed the icon delegation now houses the Sretensky Monastery, though archaeological evidence for this specific historical connection remains elusive.
The icon’s protective role in Russian history spans centuries of crucial events. Its presence in Moscow became permanently established through a complex series of political and religious developments that transformed it from a local religious treasure into a national symbol of divine protection. Historical records reveal how medieval Russian leaders increasingly turned to the icon during times of crisis, viewing it as a direct channel to divine intervention in matters of state importance.
Military victories and political triumphs attributed to the icon’s intercession gradually accumulated. Three specific dates mark the icon’s feast days, each commemorating a different historical salvation: June 3rd celebrates Moscow’s protection from Crimean Khan Mehmed Giray in 1521, July 6th marks the 1480 victory against Khan Ahmed during the Great Stand on the Ugra River, and September 8th commemorates Moscow’s deliverance from Tamerlane in 1395. The church instituted these feast days to perpetuate memory of the icon’s miraculous interventions in Russian history.
By the 16th century, the Virgin of Vladimir had become integral to Russian political mythology. Through careful documentation and analysis of historical records, we can trace how the icon’s role evolved from a purely religious object to a powerful symbol of state authority. The story of its miraculous protection of Moscow in 1395, though not recorded in contemporary sources, had become an established historical narrative by the late 15th century, with the full account appearing in documents from 1512 and the 1560s.
The icon’s significance grew even more pronounced during the reign of Ivan IV, when it became central to a series of politically charged legends linking Moscow to pre-Mongol Rus’. These narratives positioned Moscow as the spiritual successor to Rome and Byzantium, establishing a historical and theological framework that would influence both Riurikid and Romanov state policies. The careful preservation and restoration of the icon throughout this period reflected its elevated status – it underwent major restorations in 1431 and 1512, each intervention treating the work with the utmost reverence due to its sacred and political importance.
The modern era brought new challenges and transformations to the icon’s role. Under Soviet rule, it was transferred to the State Tretyakov Gallery in 1930, where it remained for over a decade. A particularly intriguing chapter in its history emerged during the Battle of Moscow, when Joseph Stalin allegedly had the icon flown around the city as German forces approached – a testament to its enduring symbolic power even in an officially atheist state. The post-Soviet period brought its own complications, including an ownership dispute between the gallery and the Moscow Patriarchate, ultimately resolved through an innovative arrangement at the Church of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi.
Artistic Legacy and Contemporary Significance
The Virgin of Vladimir remains more popular than ever. Today, a visitor to the Church of St. Nicholas in Tolmachi, a part of the esteemed Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow, could not help but be taken aback by the rapt devotion shown by the gathered crowd in this space, which could easily be mistaken for a museum. Standing nineteen inches square, the Virgin of Vladimir is housed not in a simple frame but in a lavish case that suggests hallowed ground within the modern space really just steps away from an art gallery. In that case, the Virgin of Vladimir looks down on seemingly semi-reverent public assemblages that also serve an almost gallery-like purpose. As a byproduct of this appearance and adjacent public behavior, the Virgin of Vladimir’s power seems, if anything, only heightened by the close modernity in which she resides.
The masterpiece’s physical preservation has been a primary concern throughout its long and distinguished history. While the original work from the 12th century retains an appearance more akin to a rigid and elaborate protective covering, the surface of the icon, after its careful restoration, now bears an appearance strikingly closer to that which the original work might have retained—all without removing the appearance of monumental presence the icon has accumulated over its long history. Indeed, the appearance is now much more in line with that of a vertical relaxed-plane style of painted icon once ubiquitous in the Eastern Mediterranean, signaling something far less like a “Tomb Guardian” and, instead, a far more heavenly and approachable presence.
Countless images of Mary in Orthodox Russia were not simply made in the artists’ “own unique likeness.” Instead, they copied the image with as much faith—and, in some cases, as much near-perfection—afforded to carving a sculpture of the same. Places where the “Virgin of Vladimir” was especially well-respected in Russia have a number of instances where “erstso der vatihe,” or “attributed to the master,” was affixed to copies made. This instance of artistic “passing off” speaks not merely to “the basis for imperfection” in working traditions but also, and again, more importantly, to the environment of Marian reverence upheld in pre-Reformation and post-Reformation Rus.
Contemporary academics and creators are still as fascinated as ever with the Virgin of Vladimir’s technical brilliance. They revel in the almost impossible knack the artist had for rendering color and light through layered pigments of iodine, lead, and mercury, among others. It is said the artist who painted this iconic image transitioned between tones so seamlessly the icon’s “flesh” differs neither in appearance nor consistency, nor in the illusion of an actual “hand,” from Michelangelo’s David. The icon’s use of light and shadow to create a convincing sense of depth may be even more impressive when one considers that these techniques were not fully grasped or exploited until the Renaissance.
Today, access to the icon is secured through a special arrangement: a tunnel connects the Tretyakov Gallery to the church that houses the icon. This unusual means of access is the result of long negotiations in the 1990s between the gallery and the Moscow Patriarchate. The negotiations produced no definite resolution to the dispute. Access to the icon through the gallery remains somewhat ambiguous. But then, this entire situation is somewhat ambiguous. The icon, the church, and the gallery are now too entangled in the Russian public’s imagination for any one of them to emerge as completely in control of or completely distant from the icon. You might say that these negotiations—access through a tunnel—have allowed the icon to form an unexpected and valuable part of the dialogue between secular and sacred that characterizes contemporary Russia.
The impact of the Virgin of Vladimir reaches much farther than the broad domains of faith and art, stretching into the many-layered forms of cultural expression. The image of the Virgin has been taken up by a variety of agencies and organizations, used in contexts far removed from the holy world of Russian Orthodox Christianity. The international media company Viasat, for instance, has taken the Virgin as its logo. This desire for the Virgin in such a range of contexts is noteworthy in itself, creating an unbroken link with the past, and it is perhaps especially striking that an international media company should choose the venerable figure as its emblem.
The Virgin of Vladimir icon still serves as a bridge between past and present and is still a cornerstone of Russian spiritual and cultural identity. It may even be gaining strength in that regard, lending the Sacred Image a remarkable resilience, considering how many of the experimental and often sensational art pieces on display in contemporary museums have little, if any, spiritual underpinning. The apparent power of the icon may come from its intuitive understanding of the human condition, as expressed in the simple and direct way it communicates “love through the tragic.” Since the icon itself remains mute, unable to tell its own story, some kind of nondescript human figure in a cowl could tell this part of the icon’s story to worshipers and art enthusiasts on a private tour arranged by the museum church.
elpedia.gr
Bibliography
R Yu – “Image Acts of the Virgin of Vladimir” (2023)
Miller – “Legends of the Icon of our Lady of Vladimir” (1968)
Gasper-Hulvat – “The Icon as Performer and as Performative Utterance” (2010)
