3513659948

12 Waldemar Deluga 8

Theatrum Biblicum by Peter de Jode. This too is based on the same sketch by de Vos, who was undoubtedly one of the most accoinplished artists of Antwerp at the end of the 16th century; his work was copied repeatedly by local engravers.

A third graphic work based on the same drawing is Adrian Collaerfs copper engraving in the cycle Vita, Passio et Resurrectio Jesu Christi}⁹ In this case, however, major alterations have been madę to the composition, no doubt as a result of the greater inventiveness of the artist concemed.

Paintings imitating graphic pieces are common in the work of Lvov and Halitsch (Halicz) artists, which suggests there was little local resistance to chang-ing the iconographic conventions. The Prazdnik’s as a key element of the iconosta-sis underwent the most extensive Latinisation. The oldest-known examples on Ukrai-nian territory that are entirely preserved are from as late as the early 17th century -a period in which a homogeneous style became established, This new type con-sisted of: a row of inset icons, the Prazdniks²⁰, and Deesis (Christ enthroned along-side Mary, St. John and the Apostles).²¹ The origin of the Prazdniks has not been ftilly explained, but the hypothesis put forward by Pokrovskii is acceptable. He suggests that they were formed in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, from where the style spread to Russia.²²

In the Ukrainę, a special row was allotted in the iconostasis to a scene of the Passion of Christ usually in imitation of western prototypes. At the same time, a new, morę modest form of iconostasis appeared. Together with the development of wood-carving and new omamental decorations, this led to the expansion of tlie fomi of iconostasis. As in the Catholic Church, this change was tlie result of the generał use of the style of Comelis Floris of Antwerp.

¹⁹    F. W. H. Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish etchings and engravings' and woodcuts ca. 1450-1700, IV, Amsterdam [1954], p. 202.

²⁰    J. B. Konstantynowicz, Ikonostasis, Studien und Forschungen, I, Lemberg 1939. This problem was discussed at a conference in Moscow in 1991: Les “prazdnik” en tant qu’element de 1’iconostase”, XVIII‘ Congres International des Etudes Byzantines, resumes des Communications, I, Moscou 1991, p. 279. Cf. M. Nagy, Nuygati hatasok a XVIII, szazadi magyarorszagi ertodox ikonosztazionok ikonogrźdiaban, Egyhazak a valtozó vilagban, Esztergom 1991, p. 223-226; S. Taranischenko, Ukrains’kyi ikonostas, Zapysky Naukovoho Tovaiystva imeni T. She\>chenka, CCXXV1I, 1994, p. 141-170; E. V. Pitaleva, Nekotorye voprosy stanovleniia barochnykh form ukrainskikh ikonostasov. K probleme urkrainsko-russkikh khudozhestvennykh sviazei, Filevskie chteniia..., VII, Moskva 1994, p. 83-89.

²¹    Cf. R. Mazurkiewicz, Deesis. Idea wstawiennictwa Bogarodzicy I św. Jana Chrzciciela w kulturze średniowiecznej, Kraków 1994.

²²    N. Pokrovskij, Ewangelie v pamiatnikakh ikonografii prieimuschchestvenno vizantijskikh i russkikh, St. Petersburg 1892, p. 13.