Introduction:
In this stylistic analysis we will examine two Christian Art pieces; the first being a Fresco the “Veiled Woman” (https://depts.washington.edu/hrome/Authors/calaroni/Enterintotheunderground/245/246/Velatacubicle.jpg/pub_image_view.html ) situated in the Catacombs of Priscilla (3rd CE), and the second being a Mosaic the “Virgin and Child” in the Apse (https://www.worldhistory.org/uploads/images/7973.jpg?v=1641458702) located in Hagia Sophia (9th). The two first parts of this essay are dedicated to the Formal, Stylistic and Aesthetic properties of each piece independently, taking into consideration their period and context of creation. The third part is a visual comparison of both pieces for their differences. Finally, the conclusion will relate their similarities.
The “Veiled Woman”:
We can observe the painted lines of this fresco are thin and simple. Few depths and shadowing work were done, those only at strategical places. The central figure has the most line's details compared to the other figures; being smaller and positioned at the back perspectively speaking.
The figures shapes are large due to their robes, we recognize the figures genders not by their body shapes but due to their hair length and attributes, such as the woman at the center being veiled, or the woman on the right with longer hair and holding a baby. The first and second figure on the left are men.
Also, two lines are painted on the front of a few robes. When figures are standing those are straight when they are sitting those form an angle, which helps create some volume in the fresco. We can make up the seat, by the contrast of color and shapes between their robes and those, which shape is considerably simple. Further the second to the left woman figure has rounder effect on her robe compared to others.
And the robe's shape of the lady on the right has one of the rare, pronounced depth and detailed shadowing accent in this fresco; she is seated, the robe “drappe” on her left side shows a flatter belly.
The artist used mustard yellow, brown and red color tones, which are still vibrant. The central figure caught our attention by its size (front), posture and most of all the garnet red robe opposed to the other figures which have more blemish color tones. The central figure's face has highlights on the nose, mouth and throat areas as well as a pinkish color on the cheeks. The figures in the background have only a few highlighted “points” on their faces, their faces lines are painted in a more angular manner compared to the central figure.
As well the central figure's hands have contrasted light brown and red color palette, to show the inner hands reliefs, and highlights going from the thenar to the thumb.
There is no landscape but thick garnet red lines marking this area of the Fresco. The background has a grainy effect, like granite. There are light red and brown tones on an off-white background.
We can observe the central figure has accentuated texturing on her robe, the two lines of the robe have detailed patterns and the veil on her head, shows the artist brush's strokes are made lighter to create transparency and lightness in the texturing. The drappe of the robe is accentuated at the sleeves, creating a textile texture, flowing down the figure's forearms.
There is movement in the Fresco due to the interactions depicted (with hands, eyes). For example, the baby's left arm reaching for the figure holding him, or the looks exchanged between the three figures on the left part.The movement does not reside in the details of the painting, but the interactions depicted.
The general aesthetic of this Fresco looks stern and ceremonious, this by its simplicity and the central figure demeanor.
In the Roman empire from 3rd CE, frescoes in catacombs began to appear. (B. Williamson 2004 p.4) Sculptures, mosaics, silver and bronze casts, and vases were as well popular medias. But the Christian idea of salvation and resurrection of the body (Honour & Fleming 2018 p.219), could be better linked to Frescoes, I would assume those were a better fit due to their durability. The artist, as many at that time, was most likely not Christian (Honour & Fleming 2018 p.219-220), thus the aesthetic and formal choices here were not Christian per say. The choices in colors and
combination of lines were determined by the artist's own capabilities and material available. In Ancient Rome, Frescoes were used for decorative purposes in homes. So, it brings forth an important aspect of this fresco, the techniques and aesthetic used are Ancient Rome's ones, at the service of a Christian Catacomb. Also pigments which were brighter and rare were the most expensive elements in Frescoes. This fresco could be a Buon Affresco because the colors are still vibrant, and its original value must have been reasonable as there are some bright colors but used modestly.
The “Virgin and The Child”:
The depicted figures and other elements contours in this mosaic are very neat, due to the use of assembled tesserae. The lines formed by tesserae alignment and combinations for those are complex and meticulous. Both the child and woman's faces are detailed, with lines displaying the reliefs of the highbrows, eyes, mouth, nose, and chin.
As the lines are very neat and flat due to the mosaic technique, we can see the artist relied on color contrasts and assemblage to create shadows, highlights, shapes, and forms. This can be seen on the robe of the Child, were a lot of golden yellow and deep brown are used in contrast for the “drappe” but as well a bit of white. The same effect is used but in more a subtle way on the woman figure's robe, dark, light blue (color frequently used when depicting the Virgin) (B. Williamson 2004 p.14-15) and black are used in contrast with a small amount of white. This creates shadows and depth in the robes, with a purpose to counterbalance the neat lines.
Other reliefs and shadow effects created by tesserae colors combination; are the throats, they
have an incredibly special aesthetic and given a roundness right above the place where the neck meets the collar bone. Shadow lines were made with brown tesserae on the lower and upper throat (where the head begins) of each figure.
As well the throat light color palette is contrasted with a black background for the Virgin (the inside of her veil) and golden one for the child (as a halo is at the back of his head).
The tessarae's colors usage gives this mosaic full forms, reliefs and shapes. Despite the grainy effect the robes do have a light texturing.
The grainy texture is definitely apparent but does serve well the purpose of those figures and decor's regal aesthetic and holiness. Thus, its aesthetic property can be defined as a bright and divine mood.
There is no landscape but a yellow gold background, with a throne, cushions, and pedestal, where the Virgin is sitting with her son on her lap. The grainy texture serves well to depict the throne precious attributes, its colors are for all gold but has also red, white and blue for the gems of different shapes, oval, square, rectangular and round. Same for the pedestal.
The shadows mentioned above give depth to the figure's robes, but the shape of the throne and position of the pedestal show an attempt for perspective despite the lack of background. Facing the mosaic, we can observe the artist right side frontal perspective; the left foot of the throne is visible but not the right. The throne's structure at the back on the right side can be seen, and the left part of the throne is smaller compared to its right.
The movement in this mosaic is to be found in the fact both figures look to the left, and in their hands and feet, as for example the feet are not in a regular static position; nor at the same level, nor oriented in the same direction. There is playfulness about their hands: the left hands of both figures are touching; the Virgin's right hand is on the Child's right shoulder and the Child's right hand is reaching for its mother's.
Mosaics have been around for centuries already when they became an important Christian Art medium in the Byzantine Empire. (B. Williamson 2004 p.6) They were used to decorate churches and become a Byzantine Church standard “often linking Christian imagery with official and imperial imagery”. (B. Williamson 2004 p.7) Artist would use stones, pieces of glass and gems to create them. The tesserae would constitute a big part of the mosaics value in the cases where precious gems were used, this added to the artist's skills. This mosaic must have been expensive and a lengthy process to create.
Comparison of both pieces:
The frescoes and mosaics are different in their techniques, thus have their own limitations and advantages. The means and contexts of both art pieces play a big role in how they differ in terms of aesthetic and formal properties. The fresco was painted in a catacomb in the common era, where there could have been a budget limitation and specific purpose to leave behind a memory of an ordinary woman living before Christ. The mosaic located in Hagia Sophia with a bigger budget, dating from the 9th century and has a greater purpose to inspire the public after the iconoclasm as it depicts the Virgin herself and Christ. Those elements determined and influenced
aesthetic and formal choices for both. As well as entailing different traditions, beauty, and standards of their times. So, the pigments used in the fresco were determined by the context and techniques of the time, and same for the color of the mosaic's tesserae. The fresco has less bright colors and has a less regal aesthetic, a stern and ceremonious mood, compared to the Mosaic, a holy and divine mood with gold and regal decor.
The fresco's figures do not have the same throat aesthetic compared to the mosaic's, additionally, the skin tones are different in both pieces showing different formal properties, and beauty standard of different time. The fresco's figures have tanner skin tones, the mosaic's figures have paler complexions. Also, the robes and veils are of distinctive styles and the mosaic figures do not have those lines in front of their robes as the fresco's figures have. The fresco's central figures appeared to be bare feet but the mosaic's figures wear shoes and sandals.
Due to different identities the children are represented differently, the Child Christ has a halo, the baby in the Fresco not. The baby does not have any clothes, while the Christ is well dressed. Further the Virgin sits on a throne with cushions but the seats where the fresco's figures are seated, are not detailed, or have any artifices for that matter. Finally, there are two subtle patterns in the mosaic which the fresco does not have.
Conclusion:
A certain degree of stylistic and formal attributes was used in both art pieces, for example to show people sitting, bringing some volume and depth. Perspective to a certain degree was used as well in both. Their robes despite distinctive styles due to different periods are still a principal clothing standard, this goes also for the veils which adorn both central female figures. (Christian standard) Further, movement is created in both fresco and mosaic via hands motions and starring direction, which can be defined as a common method to create movement, not specific to Christian Art but arts in general. The fresco and mosaic do have those similarities and common concepts, added to their locations, which defined them as example of Christian Art. Both artists simply produced those concepts via different techniques, aesthetic properties, and different standards, those being Christian or not.
References:
H. Honour & J. Fleming (2018) A World History of Art. London: Laurence King
B. Williamson, (2004) Christian Art: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
