Icons and their dating

The first, number sixteen, is alleged be two wings of a Brancaleon triptych and is dated to the "second half of the fifteenth century" (p. 1500, and also alleged to have been painted by Nicolò Brancaleon (plates and texts, pp. Fletcher notes that "only two or three manuscripts and an icon signed by Brancaleon survive, but it has been possible to attribute a further small group of paintings to him or his workshop on the basis of their similar style and technique" (p. She continues, "To that group these luminous paintings can be surely added.They are especially close to one of the signed works showing the Baptism in the church of Wafa Yesus." She further appends below a copy of the miniature to give visual support to her assertion.

icons and their dating-62

However, this scholar actually writes that Dawit had an image (icon) statuette made in her [Mary's] likeness and adorned it with gold and silver and precious stones.

He prayed constantly to this image, day and night (p. He rightly concludes that it cannot be determined with absolute certainty whether the object was an icon (painting) or a statuette (p.

Furthermore, the explanations given to a foreign collector regarding various parts of the crosses may have been invented by dealers in the antique shops of Addis Ababa, or perhaps even by some country priests.

Certainly, none of the explanations given have any confirmation in the Rules of the Ethiopian Church.[14] Turning to the paintings, I shall also limit myself to remarks regarding two panel paintings which Fletcher attributes to an Italian expatriate painter in Ethiopia, Nicolò Brancaleon. The panels represent two scenes from the story of St. The second item, number seventeen, is a " Diptych icon [sic] of the Virgin and Child with the Apostles" dated ca.

Both its identification and its date of origin are problematic.

Again Fletcher gives several references in order to substantiate her statements.The review you are about to read comes to you courtesy of H-Net -- its reviewers, review editors, and publishing staff. He writes that "icons on panels [sic] are extremely rare before the time of King Dawit (r. Dawit especially encouraged devotion to the Virgin, praying daily before a Marian icon and commissioning the first Ge'ez edition of The Miracles of Mary (Nägärä Maryam), which he had translated from Arabic" (p. According to current research, the earliest panel painting was tentatively dated to the first half of the fifteenth century, which is definitely not "before the time of King Dawit."[2] Neither was King Dawit the founder of the Solomonic dynasty which came to power over a century before his rule.If you appreciate this service, please consider donating to H-Net so we can continue to provide this service free of charge. The statement that he prayed "daily" before "a Marian icon," is based on the authority of scholar Getatchew Haile.One was to accurately designate the objects and the second to assign their dates of origin.In order to substantiate the attributions she gives a number of references, but instead of serving as useful aids, they tend to lead to confusion and possible doubt about the veracity of her information. They are similar in type, but the references which should support their dating contribute, instead, to further confusion.One could argue with other statements in the introduction, but let us turn to Arcadia Fletcher's catalogue.

Tags: , ,