Voloshinov, Alexander v. 1999 'the Old Testament Trinity' of Andrey Rublyov. Geometry and Philosophy (Ocr)

8/11/2019 Voloshinov, Alexander v. 1999 'the Old Testament Trinity' of Andrey Rublyov. Geometry and Philosophy (Ocr)

1/11

eon rdo

"The Old Testament Trinity" of Andrey Rublyov: Geometry and PhilosophyAuthor(s): Alexander V. VoloshinovSource: Leonardo, Vol. 32, No. 2 (1999), pp. 103-112Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1576693.

Accessed: 20/02/2014 17:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The MIT PressandLeonardoare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Leonardo.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1576693?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1576693?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress


2/11

HISTORICAL

PERSPECTIVE

T h e l d Testament

r i n i t y

o

n d r e y

Rublyov

Geome t ry n d

hilosophy

Alexander

V Voloshinov

ANDREY

RUBLYOV AND

HIS

OLD TESTAMENTTRINITY

Andrey

Rublyov

(1360-1370-1430)

is

the

pride

and

glory

of

Russian culture. The creator of the

famous Old Testament rin-

ity

(Fig.

1)

was one of

the

three most

significant

persons

of

medieval

Russia;

the other two

being Sergius

of Radonezh

(1321-1391)

and

Dmitry

Donskoy

(1350-1389).

This Russian

trinity

left such a

deep

trace on the national

culture that all

three were canonized

by

the Russian

Orthodox

Church. If

the names of Sergius of Radonezh and Dmitry Donskoy sym-

bolize the

spiritual

and

military

renaissance of

Old

Rus and

the first

steps

towards liberation

from the

Mongol

and Tartar

yoke,

the name

of

Rublyov

is

connected not

only

with

the

flowering

of Russian art

but also with the revival

on Russian

ground

of

the

Byzantine

art

that had been ruined

in the

Osmanli

fire

[1].

Already

in

Rublyov's

lifetime

his icons

were

worth their

weight

in

gold: they

were

hunted

by

collectors,

who did not

stop

far from violence

and fraud.

Rublyov's

authority

was

so

high

that,

when

the canons

of

painting

the

Trinity

were

con-

sidered at the

Stoglavy

Sobor

in

1551

in

Moscow,

the verdict

was

unequivocal:

"To

paint

from ancient

samples

like Greek

artists

painted

and like

Andrey Rublyov painted

.

.."

[2].

It is

quite

understandable that, since the name of

Rublyov

was so

popular,

there

appeared

a

huge

number

of icons as-

cribed

to the hand of the

great

master.

The wave

of uncritical

attitude

towards the

heritage

of

Rublyov

was followed

by

a

hypercritical

one.

Nowadays

only

one

icon of

Rublyov's

circle

(excluding

the

famous frescos

from the

Cathedral

of

the

Dormition

of the

Virgin)

is an

undoubtedly genuine

work.

But

what an icon it is

It is the

masterpiece

of the

great

mas-

ter-the icon

Trinity

rom the

Trinity

Cathedral

in

the

Trinity-

St.

Sergius Monastery.

In

Sergiev

Posad

(thanks

to the

glory

of

Sergius

of

Radonezh and

Andrey Rublyov

this

small

town

not far from

Moscow

became the

capital

of

the

Russian Or-

thodox

Church).

Still the exact date

of creation

of

the icon

is

unknown-it could be either 1411 or 1425-1427 [3].

If the name

of

Rublyov

personifies

the art

of Old

Russia,

Trinity ymbolizes

the

highest peak

of

that culture.

Rublyov

and

his

Trinity

ecame

synonyms

for

the

Russian

people,

and

for a

foreigner

the whole

history

of Russian Art

is

not

infre-

quently

overshadowed

by

this

glaring peak.

What

marvels,

startles and almost scorches us

in

Rublyov's

work s not at

all the

subject,

or the numeral

"three,"

r the

cup

on the Communion able

... but the fact that

it

showed

us

truly

he Revelationbeheld

by

him.

Among

the restlesscir-

cumstances

of

the

time,

among

the

discords,

the local

wars,

the

generalsavagery

nd the

Tartar

nterventions,

among

this

lack of

peace

thathad

depravedRus,

there

opened

to the

eye

of

the soul this

infinite,

imper-

turbable,

indestructible

peace,

"the

lofty peace"

of

the celestial

world

.

. .

And this

inexplicable

world

. . .

this

incomparable sky-

blue-not the

earthly sky-blue,

but the

true

heavenly azure,

this

unspeakable

dream of

Lermontov,

who

longed

for

it,

this

ineffable

grace

of the mutual

bows,

this

peaceful

unwordliness,

this infi-

nite

submissiveness to

each

other-we consider the artistic

contents

of

the

"Trinity"

4].

ABSTRACT

The

philosophical

nd heo-

logical

ontent

of a

masterpiece

of

OldRussian

con-painting-

Andrey ublyov's

rinity-is

e-

garded

n he

light

of its

geom-

etry.

The

aspects

under

tudy

are

the

geometrical roperties

f the

rectangle

f

the

Trinity

which

en-

erate

a

sequence

of

circumfer-

ences related

by

the

goldenpro-

portion)

ndalso someof the

peculiarities

n

the

composition

f

the icon.The

roles of the

circle,

the

octagon

and nverse

perspec-

tive

n

the

Trinity

re

discussed.

Theauthor

stablishes

orrespon-

dence

between he

theological

triadRevelation-

llumination-Trans-

formation,

hichmakes

up

he

fundamentalontentofthe

Trinity,

and hemirror nddynamic ym-

metriesof the icon.

THE

CONSTRUCTION

OF

THE RECTANGLE OF THE

ICON

Let us

note

that

Old Russian icons were

necessarily painted

in

an arc. The linear

parameters

of the

margins

of the

arc

of

the

Trinity

the

height

of

the

margins h0

and its width

1)

are

pro-

portional

to

the linear

parameters

of the

arc

h,

I

and

to

the

linear

parameters

of the icon itself

H,

L:

h

=

H

-

L

(h

=

H

h,l-

1o 1 L 2 2

This fact is evident from the

similarity

of

the

triangles:

the

di-

agonals

of

the icon are

at

the same time

the

diagonals

of

the

arc. As a

result,

it

makes no difference

whether the

propor-

tions of the

composition

of

the

icon are

calculated on the in-

ner outline-the outline of the

arc-or on the

outer contour

of

the whole

icon.

According

to the

logic

of a

pictorial

com-

position,

the

proportions

of the

composition

should be

corre-

lated

with its

inner contour. But from

the

point

of

view of

per-

ceiving

the

icon

as

a

whole,

the

parameters

of

the

composition

should correlate

with

the

outer contour of the

icon.

By

keeping

the

proportion

the

same,

Rublyov

solves this

problem

[5].

But how was the rectangle itself constructed? Since

H

h

5

-..-.

1.25

=

-,

L

I

4

the

answer seems evident: the

proportions

of the

rectangle

of

the

Trinity

are determined

by

the ratio of

integers

5:4. The

construction

of the

rectangle

with the

help

of

a

circumfer-

ence inscribed

in

the four

squares

is

evident from

Fig.

2.

Alexander V. Voloshinov

(mathematician,

philosopher),

Saratov State Technical Univer-

sity

(SSTU),

6

Delovaya

St.,

Apt.

14,

Saratov

410040,

Russia. E-mail:

.

LEONARDO,

Vol.

32,

No.

2,

pp.

103-112,

1999 103

1999

ISAST

This content downloaded from 194.95.59.195 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 17:42:13 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/11

Fig.

1.

AndreyRublyov,

The

Old Testament

rinity,

empera

on

wood,

142

x

114

cm,

c.1420.

The icon

from the

Trinity

Cathedral in

the

Trinity-St.

Sergius Monastery

in

Sergiev

Posad.

The

integer

ratios of the sides are

characteristic of Russian

icon-painting

in

general.

As the well-known

proportion

theorist A. Titz

[6]

established,

the inte-

ger

ratios of H:L

dominate in

Russian

icons

of

the fourteenth and

fifteenth

centuries,

namely:

4:3

(-30%);

5:4

(-30%);

3:2, 6:5,

7:5

(-12% each).

Only

approximately

4%

of these icons are

made

up by non-integer

ratios of their

linear

parameters.

From ancient times,

integer

propor-

tions

have

traditionally played

a

leading

role

in

spatial

arts,

especially

in architec-

ture,

which has been

conditioned

in

its

turn

by

the

exceptional

role

of

the inte-

ger proportions

of

consonances

in

music

discovered

by Pythagoras

[7].

According

to

Vitruvius,

the ratio of an

octave

(2:1)

[8]

is beautiful for a

temple,

and rela-

tions of a fifth

(3:2)

and a

major

sixth

(5:3)

are

suitable for an atrium

[9].

The ancient

theory

that

proportions

that are

pleasant

to

the

ear should be

also

pleasant

to the

eye

was

accepted

and

developed

in

the time of the Renais-

sance. Leon

Battista

Alberti wrote:

"There are

numbers,

with

the

help

of

which

the

harmony

of sounds fascinates

the

ear,

the

same numbers

fill the

eyes

and soul with wonderful

delight.

We

must use the

proportions,

taken from

musicians,

who

are

great

masters

in

that

kind of numbers" [10].

When

Rublyov

was

choosing

the inter-

val of

major

third

(5:4)

as the

proportion

of

the

rectangle

of the

Trinity,

he could

not have known this statement of

his

younger

contemporary,

for

Alberti's

trea-

tise Ten Books on Architecturewas

pub-

lished in

Florence

in 1485-13

years

af-

ter

Rublyov's

death. But

Rublyov

was

sure to have known

through Byzantine

architects and

icon-painters

the

idea

of

applying

musical

proportions

in

spatial

arts.

The

same

ancient masters were too

sophisticated

in

the arts and

in

math-

ematics

to confine themselves

merely

to

the

integer proportions.

On the

wooden

panel

from Hesire's

sepulcher

in

Saqqarah

(twenty-eighth

century

B.C.),

the architect Hesire is shown with

two

measuring

canes in his

hands,

the

lengths

of

which

are

related as the side

(1) and the diagonal (5 ) of the

double

square

X5

:1. There is

only

one

step

from the

diagonal

of the double

square

to the coefficient

of

the

golden

section

0

=

(

5

+

1)/2

=

1.618033989

... or its inversion

4

1/D

=

(

5

-

1)/

2

=

0.618033989 ...

That

very

step

was

made

by

Euclid in his Elements

11

].

Masterpieces

of Ancient Greece and

Rome

and Old Russian art

testify

to

the

fact

that old

masters knew the

propor-

tions based on

irrational relations such

as

(

~2:1,

F5J:1

and,

finally,

(

5

+

1)/

2:1.

The same Vitruvius recommends

the relation

42:1

[12] as well as the

musical

integer proportions

of atria.

Old

Russian

masters,

who

were

ac-

quainted

with

the

wisdom

of

Antiquity

through Byzantium,

were

sure to know

the secrets of the

golden proportion.

Such

being

the

case,

while

making up

the boards for his

Trinity,Rublyov

could

have

marked not the "musical"

rect-

angle

5:4 but the

"golden" rectangle

./j:1,

the

diagonal

of which is the

co-

efficient of

the

golden

section

(. The

geometry

of

constructing

that rect-

angle,

based on the modification

of Eu-

clidean method of two

squares,

is evi-

dent from

Fig.

3.

The

rectangles

5:4 and

-vI:I

are al-

most

indistinguishable

from each other

to the

eye (Fig.

4):

the relative differ-

ence of their

diagonals

A

=

1.05%.

But

behind

the outer

equality

of

the

two

rectangles

there are two

contrary

phi-

losophies

of art: the

philosophy

of

the

modulus-the arithmetical addition

of

the

multiple

to the modulus

magni-

tudes,

leading

to "musical"

propor-

tions,

and the

philosophy

of the

coeffi-

cient-the

geometrical

multiplication

by

the coefficient

of the

increase,

lead-

ing

to

the irrational

proportions

and,

in

particular,

to

the

golden

ones.

What

philosophy

did

Rublyov pro-

fess? We do not know the answer.

As for

the

proportions

of

the

rectangle

of the

icon,

they

are

just

between 5:4 and

4-

:1,

as

if

Rublyov

were

laughing

at fu-

ture

investigators.

As it befits

a

true

mas-

terpiece

of

art,

the

rectangle

of

the

Trin-

itykeeps

the secret of its construction.

104

Voloshinov,TheOld TestamentTrinity



4/11

5

141

4

4

N

1

Fig. 2. The rational "musical" method of constructing the rect-

angle

of the icon with the ratio 5:4

=

1.25.

The

diagonal

of

the

rectangle

is

equal

to

41

/4

=

1.601.

THE "GOLDEN"

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE

RECTANGLE

a/:1.

No

matter how the

rectangle

of

the Trin-

ity

was

constructed,

it

possesses

the

unique "golden"

characteristics of the

rectangle

XF

1 that have not been ex-

plored

until now.

In

the

rectangle

a/ :1 let us

examine

the

succession

of

the inscribed and cir-

cumscribed circumferences and rect-

angles

(Fig.

5).

As

it

is

easy

to

show

from

the

similarity

of

triangles

OAB,

OCD,

OEF,

..,

the

following

equalities

are

just

ii

-1,272

for the radii of the circumferences

rk:

25

.-=1,25

1

k

4

rk

=-

,rk-rk-

=-

(k

=

1,2,3,...).

Then,

the radii

of

the circumferences

rk

and the linear

parameters

of

the rect-

angles

hk

and

1k

re related

in

golden

proportion

-

hk

-=

=

D

(k

=

1,2,3, ...)

rk+l hk+l

ik+l

Finally,

it

is

easy

to

prove

that

only

the

rectangle

:1

possesses

these

charac-

teristics.

So,

the

rectangle

of the

Trinity

natu-

rally

raises a succession of circumfer-

ences,

related to each

other

by

the

golden proportion.

Consequently,

for

any

point

inside the circle

[rk,

rk

+

],

there is a

corresponding point

inside

Fig.

3. The irrational

"golden"

method of

constructing

the

rect-

angle

of

the

icon

with the ratio

Af

:1

1.272.

The

diagonal

of

the

rectangle

is

equal

to -D 1.618.

18//

Fig.

4.

Comparison

of

the

rectangles

601

/(

:1

-

1.272

(up-

per figure)

and

5:4

=

1.25

(lower

figure).

The

diagonal

of

the

rectangle

5:4 with

the relative error A

=

1.05%is equal to the

coefficient of

the

golden

section (.

Voloshinov,

The Old Testament

Trinity

105



5/11

presents

the

idea of God's

triplicity

as

three circles:

A

G

the

circle on the

opposite

end

of the di-

ameter

that is in

golden proportion

with

the

given

point.

As a

result,

there is an

unlimited scale of

golden

proportions

relative to the center of the

composition

of the

Trinity-the

point

of

intersection

of the

diagonals

of

the

rectangle.

The

first three

circumferences,

r,

r2,

r3,

play

the main role in the

composition

of the

Trinity:

he

smallest of

them limits

the

circle

r3,

while the other two

limit

the

corresponding rings.

Let us note

(Fig.

5)

that

AC=OE=

1O2

2

and

CE=I

3

2

i.e. the

radius of

the inner circle

(OE)

and the

width of the

outer

ring

(AC)

co-

incide,

and

the width of the

middle

ring

(CE)

s

in

golden

proportion

with

them.

Regarding

the incline

of the

diago-

nals,

since

tg

a

=

tg

ZBOA

=

aV

(Fig.

5),

then

a

=

51?50'. But

that

is

just

the

angle

of

the incline of

the

apothem

of

Cheops' Pyramid

So

AOGH,

made

up

by the diagonals of the rectangle V :1

(Fig.

5),

is

similar to the

frontal

outline

of

Cheops' Pyramid.

Abundant

empirical

material has

been

collected

testifying

to the fact

that

this

rectangle-the

rectangle

of

the

Trinity-is

the most common

among

the

formats of

pictures

in

different

epochs

and

genres

[13].

On the

other

hand,

G.

Fechner

deduced in his

experiments

that

initiated

empirical

aesthetics

[14]

Fig.

5.

The

"golden"

characteristics f the

rectangle

4:1.

h

that the format of the

golden

propor-

tion 1.618

of

rectangles

is

aesthetically

preferable.

V.

Petrov in

his work

[15]

gives

a rather

convincing

theoretical-in-

formational

explanation

of G.

Fechner's

results;

but still

the

question

as

to

why

the

format ~1.3 is

aesthetically prefer-

able remains

open. Perhaps

it is

the shift

of

the

golden

proportion

from the

outer

contour

of the

empty

rectangle

to the

inner

structure

containing

the content

of the

picture

that can

be

considered

one of

the reasons

why

the

rectangle

-4

:1

is

aesthetically preferable.

Now

let us

pass

on

from

these

general

observations to the

geometrical

and

philosophical analysis

of

Rublyov's

Trin-

ity

tself.

THEME

1. THE

THREE

CIRCLES OF THE

TRINITY

From

time immemorial

the

circle has

been considered the

most

perfect

shape,

since of all

two-dimensional

fig-

ures

only

a

circle

coincides

with itself at

any

turn round its

center,

possessing

the

highest

degree

of central

symmetry.

Because of

this,

from ancient

times

different cultures have used the circle to

symbolize

the

sky,

the

path

of

the

sun,

the

sphere

of

the

heavens-everything

lofty,

perfect,

eternal and

close to

God.

The

aesthetics of

the

circle,

with its

highest

degree

of

perfection,

led

Pythagoras

to the

hypothesis

of a circu-

lar

trajectory

of

planetary

orbits.

No

wonder,

then,

that in the

last

(thirty-

third)

song

of

the last

(third)

part

of

his

Divine

Comedy, s the last

truth,

Dante

Nella

profonda

e

chiara

sussistenza

Dell'alto lume

parvemi

tre

giri

Di

tre colori e

d'una contienza

-Paradise, XXXIII,

115

It

is no

wonder, then,

that

many

art

critics-M.

Alpatov,

V.

Lazarev,

L.

Ouspensky,

N.

Tarabukin,

N.

Demina

and others-tried

to find

circles in the

composition of the Trinity 16].

It is hard to know

whether

Rublyov

had

read Dante's

greatest

book. Most

probably

he did

not-the

distance be-

tween

medieval Russia

and the Italian

proto-Renaissance

was too

great

in

those

days.

But the

golden property

of the

rectangle

j

:1

easily helps

us to

find

Dante's

three

circles in the

composition

of the

Trinity.

It is

astonishing

how or-

ganically

the

composition

of the

Trinity

is

inscribed into

these three

circles: the

circle of the

three

faces,

the

circle of the

arms and

wings

of the

angels

on the

sides, the circle of the arms of the angel

in

the middle

and the

cup (Fig.

6).

The

majority

of

art

critics,

noting

the

circular

composition

of

the

Trinity,

did

not take the

trouble of

making

concrete

drawings.

And even if

they

pointed

to

the

circle,

as Titz

does

[17],

it was a

circle with a lowered

center,

which

was

dictated

by

the

hypothesis

of

the "musi-

cal" method

of

constructing

the rect-

angle

5:4

(see

Fig.

2),

as

opposed

to the

golden rectangle,

which

yields

circles

around the actual

center of the

icon.

These circles

form

concentric

rings

connecting the face of the left angel

with

the hand of

the

right

one,

the face

of the

angel

in the

middle with

the

cup,

etc.,

as

pointed

out

in

Fig.

6.

Rublyov

puts

the two central

elements

con-

nected

by

the

golden

proportion-the

face of the

angel

in the

middle and the

cup-on

the same axis

and,

at

the same

time,

slightly

shifts their

axis from

the

vertical. So there

appears

an

extraordi-

nary expression

and

magnetic

unity

in

perceiving

the two

most

important

ele-

ments of the

icon.

As to the

philosophical

content of

the

geometry of the circle, I should say that

it

corresponds

in the best

possible way

to

the

ecclesiastical

dogmata

of

Triunity,

Homoousios,

Non-Amalgamation,

and

Inseparability:

the

Triunity

of the

angels

in

the one

circle,

and the

Homoousios

(or

consubstantiality)of

the

algorithm

of

constructing

the

circle,

which is

uniform

for

all

points

of the circle.

The

Non-

Amalgamation

is the

qualitative

distinc-

tion of

every

new

point

of

the circle.

106

Voloshinov,TheOld TestamentTrinity

B



6/11

The

Inseparability

is

the unlimited

self-

similarity

of

circular motion. In

the icon

the

middle

angel, although

higher

than

the

others,

is

equal

to

them

in

the

circle;

he

neither

suppresses

nor dominates

the others. Thus

the circular

composi-

tion of the

Trinity

s much

richer

philo-

sophically

and

geometrically

than

any

of

the known

linear

compositions

(for

ex-

ample,

the

Pscovian icon of the six-

teenth

century:

Old

Testament

Trinity).

The question "Whois who in the Trin-

ity?"

parked many

a

heated

argument;

Czar

Ivan IV the Terrible

posed

the

ques-

tion to

the

Stoglavy

Sobor

in

1551. The

answer of

the Sobor was:

"Christ is the

angel

in the

middle,

the one

higher

than

the

others."

Thus,

in

the

Orthodox

church,

God the Son was

put higher

than

God the

Father,

while in the Catholic

church

they

are

equal.

As

evinced

by

the

geometry

of the

Trinity,Rublyov

cannot

be

reproached

for

inspiring

the

Sobor

with their decision. For

Rublyov

all the

three

hypostases

are

equal

in

the

circle.

Four hundred years later the Sobor's

decision was

supported by

distinguished

art critics

M.

Alpatov

and V.

Lazarev

[18],

while

theologians

N.

Golubtsov

and

A.

Veletev

[19]

were of

another

opinion.

The latter

noticed a

"Majestic

element" in

the

angel

in

the middle that

corresponds

more to the first

hypostasis

of

the

Trinity,

i.e. God the

Father. Ac-

cording

to

A.

Veletev,

the

angel

in the

middle-God the

Father-is

inclining

the Son

(the

left

Angel)

toward self-sac-

rifice for the

redemption

of

sin,

as

evi-

denced

by

the

expressive

bent of His

head towards the Son. The right angel-

the

Holy

Ghost-is bent

over the

Com-

munion table

more than the others and

is most

sorrowfully pensive.

But the wisest

opinion

in

this

matter

seems to be that

of G.

Pomerantz,

a

modern

philosopher

and

culturologist:

The man

who

really

feels

Rublyov's

Trinity

s

sure to feel

that the

question

"Who is

who?"

is

idle and

digressing

from the

main

point,

that

Non-Amal-

gamation

and

Inseparability

of the an-

gels

is

the

very

essence of the

matter;

and if

we

try

to

see

a

difference be-

tween them

we are sure

to turn

the

Trinity

into "three

goats,"

as Maister

Ekkehard said

[20].

THEME

2.

THE

THREE

OCTAGONS OF

THE

TRINITY

The

theme of the

octagons

is the

logical

continuation of the

theme of the

circle.

The number

8 was

associated with

eter-

nal

life

in

the

medieval Christian

cul-

Fig.

6.

Theme

1.

Three

"golden

circles" of

the

Trinity.Centrally symmetrical golden pro-

portions of the most important symbolic elements of the Trinity.

ture. We can also remember

Leonardo

da Vinci's

plan

of

a

cathedral

[21],

the

foundation

of

which is a

rectilinear octa-

gon

and a

"not musical" scale of

propor-

tion

'2:1.

Just

like the

circle,

the

octagon

in the

composition

of the

Trinity

was noticed

by

M.

Svechev

[22],

D.

Likhachyov

[23]

and

others,

but

no

one had

pointed

out its

concrete

position

in

the icon.

If

we con-

struct a

circumference,

touching

not the

vertical but the horizontal sides of the

arc of

the

icon

(Fig.

7),

and

also

do

the

constructions shown in

Fig.

7,

we can

easily

find

not

one,

but three

octagons.

The first

(the

largest)

of them em-

braces all the

elements

of

the

composi-

tion with

mathematical

precision.

As il-

lustrated

in

Fig.

7,

the four

inclined

sides of

the

octagon

mirror the

slopes

of

the thrones

and

pedestals

of the

angels,

the

axonometrical

axis

of the left build-

ing

(either

Abraham's house

or

a

temple)

and even the

tangent

to

the

right

mountain. The second

octagon,

with the

same mathematical

precision,

involves the main elements of the

com-

position-the angels

and the sacrificial

cup.

And

finally

the third

octagon-the

smallest-includes the focal

point

of

the

composition-the cup

and the

arms

stretched

out towards it.

Besides

its

symbolic

link to eternal

life, the main octagon also has a certain

compositional meaning. Opposed

to the

smooth,

gentle

arcs of the circular com-

position

(see

Fig.

6),

which would have

been too

amorphous,

Rublyov

instead

outlines

with

the

sharp,

hard borders of

the

octagon.

Thus the celestial circle of

angels

is confined within the

octagonal

frame

of

earthly

elements: the

tree,

the

mountain,

the

temple

and the

pedestals,

which

symbolize

correspondingly

the

Voloshinov,7he Old TestamentTrinity

107



7/11

world

of

animate

nature,

the

world of

inanimate

nature,

the

world of eternal

culture and the

world

of

everyday

life.

THEME 3.

THE

INVERSE

PERSPECTIVE OF THE TRINITY

If there is

mathematical strictness

in ar-

ranging

elements in the

plane

of an

icon,

then there is absolute chaos

in

conveying

space

within the

plane.

This

fact has been noticed not only in

Rublyov's

works,

but in all Russian icon-

painting;

that

is

why

Russian

icon-paint-

ers have

long

been accused of

"naivete,"

"incorrectness"

and

even

"primitiveness"

in their

geometry.

For

example,

it

is

easy

to

notice

the

super-

position

of at least three

points

of

view

in the

Trinity:

the left

angel

is shown

from the

right,

the

right

one from the

left and

the

angel

in the middle from

the

front.

Furthermore,

the

pedestal

of

the left

angel

is

depicted

in

slight

in-

verse

perspective,

while the

pedestal

of

the

right

one is

depicted

axono-

metrically.

The

temple

on the left

is

also

depicted axonometrically,

but its

spatial

axis is directed

opposite

the

axis

of

the

right pedestal (Fig.

8).

It is

easy

to

imagine

the

edges

of the Commun-

ion

table,

which is

covered

by

the

an-

gels'

knees:

following

the

logic

of con-

structing

the left and

right parts

of the

icon they can only diverge (Fig. 8).

As a matter

of

fact,

the

problem

of

conveying

the

depth

of

space

in

the

two-dimensional

plane

of an

icon

was

not a scientific one for Russian icon-

painters

as

it

was for

European

Renais-

sance artists. Not the

geometry

of

space,

but the

geometry

of

symbol

in-

spired

the

Russian

icon-painter.

He did

not

copy

the real world

according

to

the laws of

perspective,

but

created his

own irrational world of the

space

of the

Fig.

7.

Theme

2.

Three

octagons

of

the

Trinity:

he

all-embracing octagon,

the

octagon

of

the

angels,

the

octagon

of the hands and the

cup.

icon.

That

is

why

P.

Florensky,

compar-

ing

the

straight

and inverse

perspec-

tives,

called the first one

"rapaciously

mechanistic" and the second

one

"meditatively

creative"

[24].

Since the triune God

exists for the sake

of

man,

Rublyov

turns his

Trinity

owards

the

audience. This is

possible

to achieve

either

by putting

the three

angels

in

one

row

(such

compositions

of the

Trinity

are

known,

but

they

are too

primitive

and too

"non-triune"), or by presenting the an-

gels

on

the

sides

from

opposite points

of

view,

ust

as

Rublyov

does.

But the

superposition

of the two

op-

posite points

of view leads to a

strong

in-

verse

perspective

of the Communion

table

(see

Fig.

8),

which is

flagrantly

in-

adequate

to the

perceived space.

Under-

standing

that,

Rublyov

conceals the

sides of the Communion table behind

the

knees

of the

angels.

Now

the

oppo-

site

angels

sit

a

little too

close,

leaning

upon

the

table,

but

they

hide the too-

obvious contradiction within the icon.

Note that, following the logic of inverse

perspective,

the

fact that the

image

of

the

angel

in

the

middle

(the

distant

one)

is

higher

than the

images

of the

other

two

(the

near

ones)

is

quite

justi-

fied.

It

corresponds

to the

equal posi-

tion of the

angels

in the

real

space.

We shall not

regard

here

the

geo-

metrical,

physiological

and

composi-

tional reasons

for

using

inverse

perspec-

tive in Russian

icon-painting

that were

reviewed in detail in Rauschenbach's

work

[25]. Rather,

we shall

stop

at

its

philosophy,

for the roots of

any

world

outlook,

reflected

in

art,

are to

be

searched

in its

philosophy.

It is not the Western

way

(i.e.

the

logi-

cal

cognition

of

the

particular)

but

the

Eastern

way

(i.e.

the

extralogical

con-

templation

of the

whole)

that is closer to

the

way

of the Russian

icon-painters.

Not

so much the factual

as the

elevated

meaning inspired

them. The

"un-

earthly"

geometry

of inverse

perspective

and the

geometrical

liberties

of

Russian

icon-painting

on the whole are dictated

by

the

philosophy

of

the

heavenly

world,

the celestial town, which is higher than

any geometrical

or

logical

details. Not

the

physical

side of the

picture,

but its

spiritual meaning;

not the

reviewing

of

earthly things,

but the ascension towards

Heaven-these were the

philosophy

of

the Old Russian

icon-painters.

The

versatility

and reticence

of the

philosophy

of

Rublyov's

Trinity

alled for

a similar

approach

in

the

geometry

of

the icon. That is

the

reason

for

the

com-

bination of different axonometries

in

108

Voloshinov,

The

Old Testament

Trinity



8/11

the

Trinity

and the

uncertainty

of the

outline of the Communion

table. True

art

says

much,

but

it

holds back

more.

The

power

and charm of

Rublyov's

Trin-

ity

s

in

its reticence.

THEME 4. REVELATION:

MIRROR SYMMETRY

Symmetryimplies

ideas

of

homogeneity,

invariance and

equilibrium.

Mirror

sym-

metry

has also a

tinge

of calm.

The

verti-

cal axis or the

plane

of

symmetry

(bilat-

eral

symmetry)

in

nature characterizes

the

stability

and

equilibrium

of an

object

(mirror

symmetry

of the

right

and the

left).

Snow-covered mountains are re-

flected

in

the frozen water

of a

highland

lake

(mirror

symmetry

of the

top

and

the

bottom).

The first

type

of

mirror

symmetry

is realized in the

Trinity.

As

seen in

Fig.

9,

the left and

right

sides

of the

Trinity

are

mirror-symmetri-

cal.

The outlines of the backs of the

left

and

right angels

coincide

exactly,

and

the centers of the faces also coincide ex-

actly, although

the

faces themselves and

the halos are shifted

slightly.

The

posi-

tions

of

the feet

and the

pedestals

are

shifted

slightly,

and the

temple

is

mir-

ror-symmetrical

to the mountain.

Mirror

symmetry

is broken

principally

only

in the outline

of

the central

angel:

the turn of his

body

and hands is

asym-

metrical,

his head is bent toward the

viewer's

left,

while the

cup,

at

which

he

points,

is shifted to the

right.

Finally,

the

whole

asymmetry

of the center is under-

lined

by

the Mamrean Oak-the

only

principally asymmetrical

element

of the

composition,

devoid as

it

is

of

a

mirror-

symmetrical

match.

It

is

the central

asymmetrical

angel

who

is the source of movement and

energy.

It

is from

him

that

the

Revelation

issues to

the

two

angels

on

the

sides,

who listen to

him immovable

in

mirror-symmetrical

equilibrium.

The Revelation found and

the calm of the truth found

following

it-

the

asymmetry

of the center

exploded

in

the center and calmed down

in the mirror

symmetry

of the

right

and left

sides-are,

in my opinion, the philosophical content

of mirror

symmetry

of the

Trinity.

In

this

light,

the

geometry

of the Trin-

ity

seems

to

favor not the

Stoglavy

Sobor's

decision,

but that of

theologians

N.

Golubtsov and A. Vetelev: the

angel

in

the middle is the first

hypostasis

of the

Trinity,

God the

Father,

appealing

for the

THEME 5.

ILLUMINATION:

THE THREE

CUPS OF THE

TRINITY

The

calm of the

Revelation cannot last

forever.

Having

entered the listener's

soul,

the Revelation is

inevitably replaced

by

the Illumination:

by

the

splash

of

the

listener's

thought;

the

passive perception

is

replaced by

the active creation.

What

thought

illumines

and

unites

the

Trinity?

It is the

thought

of the

cup.

The

cup

is the center of the

composi-

tion of

the

Trinity,

he main

guarantor

of

Inseparability

and

Homoousios

(consubstantiality?)

of the

Trinity.

The

movement of all

three

angels'

right

hands is

directed toward the

cup,

which

seems to

keep

the

centripetal

forces of

the

Trinity

in their eternal

circular mo-

tion. The

cup

itself,

placed

on the altar-

like

Communion

table,

expresses

the

idea of sacrifice. ". . . the

cup

which

my

Father hath

given

me,

shall I not drink

it?" (John 18:11).

But in the

composition

of

the

Trinity

Fig.

8.

Theme

3.

The inverse

perspective

of

the

Trinity.

A

combination of the two differ-

ently

directed axonometries

in

the

Trinity

s the reason for the

strong

inverse

perspective

of the Communion table.

.

necessity

of

offering

his

Son for the re-

demption

of sin.

For,

"Greater ove hath

no man

than

this,

that

a

man

lay

down

his

life for his friends"

(John

15:13).

Voloshinov,

The Old Testament

Trinity

109



9/11

Fig.

9.

Theme

4.

The

Revelation:

mirror

symmetry.

The

mirror

Fig.

10. Theme

5. The

Illumination:

three

cups

of the

Trinity.

The

symmetry

of

the left and

right

parts

of the icon

and the

asymmetry

three

cups

are the three

symbols

of sacrifice for

Faith,

Love and

of the central

part.

Hope.

we can

easily

see not

one

but three

cups:

the

cup

on the Communion

table,

the

cup

made

up by

the inner outlines

of

the

angels

and the

cup

made

up by

the

outer contours

of the

angels

and

thrones

(Fig.

10).

What

cups

are these?

I wish to offer the

following interpre-

tation of

the three

cups

of the

Trinity.

The

first

(inner)

cup

is Abraham's

sac-

rifice

for

Faith.

As the Old Testament

tradition

says,

Abraham

and his wife Sa-

rah met three

angels

under

the shade

of the Mamrean Oak

very

amiably.

Abraham

told Sarah

to knead "three

measures

of fine meal" and

to

"dress

a

calf tender

and

good,"

and

they

treated

the

angels.

They

surmised

that it was

God in their house and

expressed

their

Faith

in Him and their belief

in His

prophecy

that Sarah

would

have

a

son

(Genesis, 18:1-16).

The

second

cup represents

God

the

Father's

sacrifice

for the Love

of

Hu-

manity. According

to

the Father's

will,

the Son was

chosen to

be

the

Savior of

the

world and Man.

The

Son

goes

to

earth to atone

for human sins with

his

own

sufferings.

Father sacrifices

Son and

Son sacrifices himself

for the love

of hu-

manity.

That

is

the

symbolism

of

the sec-

ond

cup, greater

in

meaning

than

the

one

placed

on

the

Communion

table.

But

if

the

first

cup

contains the head

of

the sacrificial

calf,

the second

cup

can

contain

only

Our Savior-in which

case,

is the

angel

in

the middle Christ?

Maybe

this

exchange

of

roles

took

place

while

the

Revelation

was

changed by

the Illu-

mination,

for the

Trinity

itself

is

homoousian,

non-amalgamative

and in-

separable.

Finally,

the third

(outer)

cup

repre-

sents the

Trinity's

sacrifice

for the

Hope

of

Salvation.

The

third

cup

is made

up

by

the

Trinity

and contains

the whole

Trinity.

God the Father and the

Holy

Ghost

cannot leave God

the

Son alone

in the second sacrificial

cup,

for the

Trinity

is

inseparable: they

make

up

the

third and

greatest

sacrificial

cup

which

includes themselves.

They

believe

that

the sacrifice for

Love will

not

be

in

vain,

and the whole Trinitysacrifices itself for

the

Hope

of Salvation.

So,

we

have

two

contrarily

directed

movements

in

comprehending

the

meanings

of the

Trinity.

The outer

circle

of the

angels

and the

outer octa-

gon

of the

composition

lead us to the

most

sacred

place

of the

icon-the

cup

and the

angel's

hand

pointing

at

it,

which are

confined in

the

inner circle

and

octagon.

The

contrary

movement

issues from the

cup

on the Communion

table to

its

latent

semantic

generaliza-

tions in the inner and outer contours

of

the

angels.

The

idea of sacrifice could not

help

being

the cornerstone

of

Rublyov'sgreat-

est work:

it touched

every

Russian heart

in

Andrey

Rublyov's

day, especially

since

Rus itself turned

out to be

sacrificed

to

the Tartar

nterventionists

in the name

of

the salvation

of

European

culture.

THEME

6.

TRANSFIGURATION:

DYNAMICSYMMETRY

The

outburst

of

Illumination is inevita-

bly

followed

by

the

Transfiguration-the

rise of a lucid soul to the new

peaks

of

thought

and sense.

Transfiguration

is

dynamism,

the

vertical

rise,

the realiza-

tion of the truth born by the Illumina-

tion. If the

geometry

of

the

Revelation is

calm,

static and horizontal

(horizontal

mirror

symmetry),

the

geometry

of the

Transfiguration

must

be

impetuous,

dy-

namic,

vertical.

A whole

gamut

of verti-

cal

proportions

of the

golden

section in

the

Trinity orresponds

to that idea.

If

the

height

of the icon is

H

=

1,

we

can see that the line

of

the

main

golden

section

4)

let

us call

it

the line

of

the

compositional

center

1)

passes exactly

110

Voloshinov,

The Old Testament

Trinity



10/11

Fig

11.

Theme 6.

The

Transfigura-

tion:

dynamic

ym-

metry.

The series

of

the

golden

section

1,

0,

2,

03,

,4,

4,5, ,6,

47

in the

vertical

proportions

of

the

Trinity.

I _

-~

through

the

center of

the

cup

(Fig.

11).

Measuring off

4,2

upwards and O3down-

wards

from

11,

we

get

correspondingly

the

upper

line of

the

compositional

cen-

ter

l2

(this

is

the

line of

the

angel

in

the

middle)

and

the lower

line of

the

com-

positional

center

13

(this

is the

line of

the

angels'

bent

legs).

Finally,

measuring

off

,)4

upwards

and

45

downwards

from

11,

we

get

correspondingly

the

upper

mean

line

of

the

compositional

center

14

(this

is

the line

of the

halo

and

shoulders of

the

angels

on

the

sides)

and the

lower

mean

line of

the

compositional

center

15

(this

is the

line of

the

front

edge

of the

Communion table). The smaller vertical

articulations of

the

Trinity

n

golden

pro-

portion

are

also shown in

Fig.

11.

So,

the

vertical

construction of

the

composition

of

the

Trinity

s

defined

by

at

least

eight

members of

the

golden

sec-

tion series

1,

4,

02,

43,

04, 05,4

6,

47.

We

can

also

determine a

series

of

golden

proportions

that

are not

con-

nected

with

the

compositional

center

11.For

example,

the

height

of

the an-

gels on the sides from the top of their

heads

to

their feet

are

exactly

equal

to

4,

and the visible

height

of

the

angel

in

the middle

from

the

top

of

the head

to

the

Communion

table

is

42,

i.e.

the

heights

of

the

icon,

the

angels

on

the

sides,

and

the

angel

in

the

middle are

related in

the

golden

proportion.

The

vertical

dimensions

of

the

angels'

heads

without

the

halos

are

45,

and

with

the halos

they

are

(4

(in

order

not

to

complicate

Fig.

11

these

proportions

are

not

shown).

And so

on

upwards

and

downwards

on

a

vertical the

quietly

noble "rye" gold of Rublyov's colors

turns

into

the

proudly glorious

"gold"

of

its

proportions.

As if in

a

temple,

the

mighty

chords

of

golden

proportions

of

the

Trinity

rise

vertically

in

it.

The

dynamic

symmetry

of

life,

the

harmony

of

the

truth

find

sound

in

these chords.

The

rise

to the

new

Truth-is

this

not

the

Transfigura-

tion

that

we

know

from the

New

Testa-

ment:

". . .

and

bring

them

up

into

an

high

mountain

apart,

and was

transfig-

ured

before

them:

and

his

face did

shine

as the sun, and his raiment did shine as

the

light"

(Matthew,

17:1,2).

CONCLUSION

This

investigation

of

the

geometrical

and

philosophical

aspects

of

Rublyov's

Trinity

n no

way

has

a

claim on

comple-

tion;

as

with

most

dissertations on

differ-

ent

masterpieces,

this

one

has

barely

be-

gun

to

scratch the

surface.

Stendhal

once

said:

"The

point

is

not

to

learn

to

draw,

but

to learn to

think."

Earlier,

Plato

voiced

a

similar

thought

with the motto over the entrance to his

Academy:

"Do

not enter if

not a

geom-

eter."

In

my

opinion

the

true

artist

must

be a

philosopher

and

a

geometer.

Russian

saint

Andrey

Rublyov

surely

was

both.

The

urge

to

analysis

and

discourse

is

a

human

characteristic,

especially

for

those

of us

influenced

by

a

history

of

Western

logic

and

thought.

But

maybe

it

would

be

wiser to

stop

these

efforts to

comprehend

the

incomprehensible

and

to

admit

the

divine

inspiration

Voloshinov,

The Old

Testament

Trinity

111



11/11

present

in

the

great

work

of

the

humble monk

Andrey Rublyov.

References

and Notes

1. The

number

of

writings

about

these three men

of

Old R ussia is

really

incalculable,

so

I

will mention

a

few of the most

significant:

V.

Kluchevsky,

"The

Sig-

nificance

of

Reverend

Sergius

for

the Russian

People

and

State,"

Bogoslovsky

Vestnik, November

1892)

pp.

190-204

(in Russian).

D.

Likhachyov,

The

Culture

of

Rus

in

the Time

of

Andrey Rublyov

and

Epiphanius

the

Wise

late

fourteenth-early

fifteenth

centuries)

(Moscow-Leningrad:

The

Printing-House

of the Academy of Science of the USSR, 1962) (in

Russian).

M.

Alpatov,

"On the Global

Significance

of

Andrey Rublyov's

Art,"

Khudozhnik

2

(1980)

pp.

48-57

(in

Russian).

V.

Plugin, "Sergius

of

Radonezh-Dmitry Donskoy-Andrey Rublyov,"

The

History

of

the

USSR,

No.

4,

(1989)

pp.

71-88

(in

Russian).

M.

Alpatov,

"La valeur

classique

de

Rublev,"

Commentari

(1958)

pp.

25-37.

V.

Lazarev,

Andrej

Rublev

Milan,

1966).

2.

Stoglav

(St.

Petersburg:

The

Printing-House

of

His

Majesty's

Academy

of

Science,

1863)

p.

128

(in

Russian).

3. N.

Demina,

Andrey

Rublyov

and the Artists

of

His

Circle

Moscow:

Nauka,

1972) (in Russian).

4. P.

Florensky,

"The

Trinity-St.

Sergius Monastery

and

Russia,"

in

The

Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery

(Sergiyev

Posad:

1919)

pp.

19-20

(in Russian).

5. Far from

all

ancient

icon-painters

paid

attention

to such

a "trifle."

It

is

also

disregarded

in

easel

painting,

for

the frame of a

picture,

manufactured

from

molding

of

equal

width,

changes

the

propor-

tions of

the

picture

and the frame as

a

whole.

6.

A.

Titz,

"Some General Features of the

Composi-

tions

of

the Icons of

Rublyov

and

His

School,"

in

AncientRussian Art

of

the

Fifteenth

nd

Early

Sixteenth

Centuries

(Moscow:

The

Printing-House

of the

Academy

of Science of the

USSR,

1963)

pp.

22-53.

7. As historical records

unanimously

state,

Pythagoras

discovered

the ratios for the

three most

harmonious musical

intervals called

perfect

(main)

consonances:

octave-2:1;

quint-3:2;

fourth-4:3.

The fact that the

proportions

of

perfect

conso-

nances were described with the

help

of

four natural

ntimbers, which total the sacred number

10

(1

+

2

+

3

+ 4

=

10),

drove

the

Pythagoreans

to

mystical

entrance.

The

discovery

of the

law

of consonances

uirged

on

the

Pythagoreans

to the famous motto

"all is number" and to

searching

musical

propor-

tions in the whole universe

(the

theory

of the har-

mony

of

spheres).

One hundred

fifty years

after

Pythagoras,

the

Pythagorean

scholar

Archytas

added

to

the

three

perfect

consonances two

imper-

fect

ones:

major

third-5:4;

minor third-6:5.

8.

Vitruvius,

Ten Books on Architecture

NY:

Dover,

1960).

(Book

IV,

Ch.

4,

Para.

1).

9. Vitruvius

[8]

(Book.

VI,

Ch.

3,

Para.

3).

10. L.B.

Alberti,

7Ten ookson Architecture

London:

Tiranti,

1955).

11.

Let us remember that the

golden

section

(Leonardo da Vinci's term) or the divine propor-

tion

(Johannes

Kepler's

term)

is

the

geometrical

proportion

that divides the whole a into a

larger

part

x and

smaller

part

a

-

x

so that:

a

x

x a

-

x

where

/5+1

x =a

O4,

)

= =

1.618033989 ..

2

with

4D s

the coefficient of the

golden

section.

Regarding

the inverse ratio

a

-

x : x

=

x:

a,

there is

the inversion of the coefficient of the

golden

section

1

/5-1

=-=

=

0.618033989...

q

2

Each of the

"golden" parts

of

the whole can be fur-

ther divided

in

golden proportion

and so

on,

infi-

nitely.

Therefore,

where the

golden proportion

is

implemented,

there

appears

a whole

gamut

of

golden proportions,

so

it would be more correct to

speak

of a

golden

section series

1,

?,

?2,

?

,

...

possessing

the additive characteristics

+

=

1

,2

+

?4

=

?,

?,

+

04

=

?.2

The

rational

approximations

of the

golden

section

coefficient

are defined

by

the ratio of the two

neighboring

numbers

of Fibonacci:

{u

}

=

1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,..

. (u

=

u + u

,,n

>

1)

so

i-oo

U

The geometrical method of constructing the

golden

section with the

help

of the

diagonal

of the

double

square

is

described in Euclid's Elements

(Book

II,

Proposition

11).

The division in the ex-

treme and

medium ratios is written of in Plato's

Timea,

but

Pythagoreans

seem to

have known about

the

golden

section,

too.

The

pentagram-their

se-

cret identification

mark and a

symbol

of health-

testifies to

it,

since

it

contains an

infinite

golden

section series.

12.

Euclid

[11]

(Book

VI,

Ch.

3,

Para.

3).

13. V. Petrov

and

N.

Pryanishnicov,

"The Formulas

of

Beautiful

Proportions,"

Number nd

Thought,

No.

2

(Moscow:

Znaniye,

1979)

pp.

72-92

(in Russian).

14. G.

Fechner,

Vorschule der Asthetik

(Leipzig:

Breitkopf

&

Harlet,

1876).

15. See Petrov and

Pryanishnicov

[13].

16. The

Trinity of

Andrey

Rublyov.

Anthology,

G.

Vzdornov,

ed.

(Moscow:

Iskusstvo,

1989) (in Russian).

17. See Titz

[6].

18. See

Alpatov

and Lazarev

in

Anthology

16].

19. See Golubtsov and

Vetelev

in

Anthology

16].

20.

G.

Pomerantz,

"Rublyov's

Trinity

and

Trinitary

Mentality"

in The

Way

Out

of

a Trance

(Moscow:

Yurist,

1995)

pp.

316-337

(in Russian).

21.

See D.

Pedoe,

Geometry

and the Liberal Arts

(Harmondsworth:

Penguin

Books

Ltd.,

1976).

22.

See Svechev in

Anthology

16].

23. See Likhachyov [1].

24.

P.

Florensky,

"The Inverse

Perspective,"

in

The

Philosophyof

Russian

Religious

Art

of

the Sixteenth o

7Twentieth enturies.

Anthology

(Moscow:

Progress-

Culture,

1993)

p.

247-264.

25.

B.

Rauschenbach,

Spatial

Constructionsn the

Old

Russian

Painting

(Moscow:

Nauka,

1975).

Glossary

axonometry (parallel perspective)-historically

the

first

artistic method of

depicting space

on

the

plane,

in which the third coordinate

(depth)

was

given along

some inclined axis. lines

paiallel

ill

the

depth

of

space

remain

parallel

in

axonometry

(thus

it

is also called

parallel perspective).

Homoousios

(consubstantiality)-(from

the Greek

"homoousios,"

meaning

"of one

substance")

one of

the main

dogmata

of the

Trinity, asserting

that all

three of its

hypostases

have the same substance. In

the "strict"

ormulation,

the

dogma

of Homoousios

affirms that the one and

only

God consists

of

three

hypostases,

each of

which

is

God

(possesses

divine

substance).

hypostasis-in

Christian

ideology, any

of the three

persons

of the

Trinity. According

to the

dogma

of

Triunity,

God is

presented by

three

hypostases:

God

the

Father,

God the

Son,

and God the

Holy

Ghost.

Inseparability-one

of

the main

dogmata

of the

triplicity, asserting

that all three

hypostases

of the

Trinity always

exist and

act

together.

The

dogma

of

Inseparability absolutely

excludes the

acting

of

one

hypostasis

of the

Trinity

independent

from

the others.

inverse

perspective-an

artistic

method

of

repre-

senting

space

on the

plane,

in

which remote ob-

jects

are shown

larger

than close ones. Lines

paral-

lel

in

the

depth

of

space

are

presented

as

divergent.

linear

(straight

or

Renaissance)

perspective-a

sci-

entific and

artistic method of

representing space

on the

plane,

in

which remote

objects

are

shown

smaller than

close ones. Lines

parallel

in

the

depth

of

space

are

presented

as

meeting

in

some

center-

the central

point

of

the

picture.

Non-Amalgamation-one

of the main

dogmata

of

the

triplicity, asserting

that all

three

hypostases

of

the

Trinity

exist

simultaneously

and

eternally,

that

they

are different

in

quality

and cannot stand

for

each other or

be

brought together.

Old

Russian

icon-painting-a unique

form of

art

in

Old R ussia that

always

had

a

religious subject

and was

destined for

religious worship.

Old

Rtissian cons are

pictorial

compositions

made as a rule on wooden

boards and

mostly

in

the

technique

of

tempera.

Rus-the initial name of

Russia,

taken from the

ancient

people

who

gave

their

name to the land

of

Russia.

Stoglavy

Sobor-the

joint sitting

("sobor")

of

the

higher clergy

of the

Russian Orthodox

Church,

Czar

Ivan IV the Terrible

and

representatives

of

the

govern-

ment, that took place in Moscow nJanuary-February

1551. It

owes the name

"Stoglavy"

("Hundred

Chaptered")

to the

code

of its

decisions,

which was

divided into 100

chapters. During

the sixteenth and

seventeenth

centuries,

the

result

of the

Stoglavy

Sobor

made

up

the

basic code

of life

for the Russian Ortho-

dox

clergy

and

its relations with

society.

The

Stoglavy

Sobor unified church rites and

instituted control over

the work of

book-writers nd

icon-painters.

Trinity-in

Christian

doctrine,

the

triunity

of

the

Father,

the Son

and

the

Holy Spirit

as three

persons

in one

Godhead.

The

idea of

triplicity

was first for-

mtilated at the

Council

of

Nicaea

in

325 that ac-

cepted

the

"Credo,"

the

symbol

of

faith,

obligatory

for all

Christians.

triplicity-the

basic

theological

doctrine

of the

Trinity,

the essence of

which

is

made

up by

the

dog-

mata

of

Triunity,

Homoousios,

Non-Amalgamation

and

Inseparability.

Triunity-one

of

the main

dogmata

of the

triplicity,

asserting

on the

one hand that God is

unique

and

on the other

hand that God

comprises

the

Trinity:

God

the

Father,

God the Son and God the

Holy

Ghost. The idea of

Triunity

s often

expressed

in

the

following paradoxical

equalities:

1

=

3 and 3

=

1.

Manuscript

received

26

March

1997.

112

Voloshinov,

The

Old Testament

Trinity

Thi d l d d f 194 95 59 195 Th 20 F b 2014 17 42 13 PM
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

Documents

Voloshinov, Alexander v. 1999 'the Old Testament Trinity' of Andrey Rublyov. Geometry and Philosophy (Ocr)