Between image and depiction: The Second Commandment in the Context of Catacomb Painting

Tiurina Svetlana Nikolaevna ORCID: 0009-0006-3503-6267 Postgraduate student; Aesthetics Sector; Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences 109240, Russia, Moscow, Goncharnaya str., 12, building 1, 501 svetlanatyur@bk.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

Catacomb painting occupies an important place in the study of early Christian art. It is a complex object of research, combining elements of symbolism, stylistic traditions and theological content. The ambiguity and syncretic nature of catacomb painting require the use of various methodological approaches for its analysis and interpretation.

The subject of the research is methodological approaches to the study of catacomb painting with an emphasis on the problem of overcoming the Second Commandment (Exodus 20:4) and its interpretation in the context of early Christian culture. The paper explores the interpretation of the Second Commandment, which prohibits the creation of images, in the context of early Christian culture. Although in the New Testament tradition the second commandment is associated with love for one's neighbor, the emphasis on the Old Testament prohibition allows us to reveal the unique mechanisms of adaptation and transformation of the sacred in catacomb painting, where restriction becomes the source of the formation of a new artistic language.

The study of catacomb painting covers a wide range of disciplines, including archaeology, art history, cultural studies, and philosophy. This allows us to consider it not only as an artistic phenomenon, but also as evidence of the worldview of early Christian communities. This article examines both the history of the study of catacomb painting, starting with the first archaeological research, and modern approaches to its interpretation. Special attention is paid to the influence of the cultural and philosophical context on the formation of early Christian art.

The research methodology combines iconographic analysis with interdisciplinary approaches: the study of the formation of religious and social identity of early Christian communities, the analysis of the role of the viewer in the interpretation of images, the identification of dialogue between pagan, Jewish and Christian traditions, as well as the study of the role of sensory perception in the formation of religious experience. Comparative analysis is used to evaluate various methodologies, as well as a contextual approach to understand how catacomb painting functioned in the context of perception and interpretation of the Second Commandment in early Christian culture. The criterion for evaluating approaches is their ability to explain the uniqueness of catacomb painting as a phenomenon that goes beyond the traditional art historical analysis.

The relevance and novelty of this work is due to the fact that in recent decades there have been more and more studies of catacomb art, both art criticism ("The Catacomb period in the art of the early Christians" by Kuznetsova—Bondarenko E.S.; Tyulyukov D.I. 2020 and "Funeral portrait in the art of the early Christian catacombs" by Obraztsov K. 2021), and cultural studies ("Evidence of Roman catacomb painting on the worldview of Christians of the pre–Constantine era" Chernova A.V.; Sharkov I.G. and "Images of early Christian art in the context of the study of Christianity of the I - IV centuries" Lyakh E.E. 2017). In this regard, the issue of categorization and description of the methodology of research on catacomb painting is becoming more acute, but at the moment At the moment, there are no works structuring approaches to the study of this object of study that can offer a new perspective on the history of the study of catacomb painting.

The relevance of this work is due to the need to overcome some limitations of approaches to the study of catacomb painting, which, focusing on historical, stylistic or iconographic analysis, leave out the philosophical interpretation of the impact of prohibition on the images and artistic practice of early Christians. Despite the extensive historiography, the key question of how literal observance of the Old Testament prohibition transformed into the aesthetics of symbolic absence remains poorly understood.

The scientific novelty consists in offering a new perspective based on affective perception and the concept of the image as a means of spiritual communication, which allows us to take a fresh look at the problem of interpreting the Second Commandment.

In conclusion, catacomb painting is considered as a unique phenomenon requiring an interdisciplinary approach. The analysis of various approaches allows us to take a fresh look at the problem of interpreting the Second Commandment and highlights the importance of catacomb painting in the context of early Christian culture.

Description of the catacombs

The funerary art of ancient Rome was rich in many forms: rituals, monuments and structures. Usually, such art was elitist: its customers were representatives of the nobility, who were able to afford the cost of decorating funeral sites and conducting appropriate rituals. As a result, the burials, cemeteries, and necropolises created varied in terms of complexity, quality of execution, and materials used, depending on the financial capabilities and preferences of the customer.

Starting from the 2nd century AD, during the late antiquity, the Romans increasingly abandoned the practice of cremation. The spread of Christianity accelerated this process, which, in turn, necessitated the expansion of the areas allocated for burials. As a result, new underground burial galleries and tombs began to appear, called catacombs. These structures were artificially created underground corridors and halls that served as burial sites for pagans, Mithraists, Jews and Christians ^{[2, pp. 650-673]}. The most extensive and multi-tiered network of catacombs was created in Rome.

Inside the catacombs, there were also spacious rooms called cubicles, which served as crypts. It was in cubicles that the largest number of early Christian images were preserved. The most common images were of scenes of meals, the Good Shepherd, the Monk, the lamb, and scenes from the Old Testament. Researcher A. Fricken, in his description of the catacombs, notes:

"It is necessary to wander for a long time in these underground galleries, now high and relatively spacious, now narrow and low, where a person can barely pass; it is necessary to penetrate into the remote corners of the catacombs, and descend to their last floors in order to get a full understanding of the vastness of this underground world, and, together, make sure that We can still learn a lot about the people who dug it up, left a touching expression of their feelings, beliefs, hopes and were buried in it" ^{[8, p. 40]}.

Such a mysterious and reverent perception of catacomb art, as can be seen from the description of A. F. von Fricken, has been a common place for many researchers since the 15th century.

Alexey Fedorovich von Fricken was the author of the first Russian–language study on catacomb painting: "Roman catacombs and monuments of ancient Christian art" (1872-1889), which is a revision and development of the work of Giovanni Batista de Rossi "Roman catacombs and monuments of the original Christian art" (1822-1894). Giovanni Batista de Rossi accepted Considered the father of Christian archaeology, his research marked the beginning of a large-scale research interest in Christian catacombs.

As emphasized by A.E. Medennikova, De Rossi was able to maintain active contacts with scientists from all over the world.:

"Evidence of this is his letters, carefully and scrupulously preserved by himself and subsequently included in the department of manuscripts of the Vatican Library, which cover the period from 1842 to 1894" ^{[4, p. 205]}. Among his correspondents were D. V. Ainalov, N. P. Kondakov, G. S. Stroganov, A. S. Uvarov, Yu. A. Kulakovsky and I.V. Tsvetaev. The researcher also mentions that there is some reason to believe that Fyodor Reiman is a Russian artist, whom Tsvetaev commissioned to make copies of the catacomb frescoes, and created illustrations for the famous work of J.B. De Rossi "Roma Sotterranea". However, the implementation of this project was interrupted due to the death of the scientist ^{[4, p. 207]}.

It is noteworthy that by the 19th century, there were misconceptions in the scientific community about the history and purpose of the catacombs, which today have been refuted by studies of the 20th century.

Before proceeding to a detailed analysis of the historiography of the methods of studying catacomb painting, it is important to consider the two most common erroneous hypotheses of that time. In particular, there was a widespread hypothesis about the invention of catacombs by early Christians, as well as the idea of their use as a refuge from persecution. The resolution of these contradictions and the refutation of these hypotheses were achieved in the first half of the 20th century thanks to the works of P. Shitger, A.M. Schneider and P. Testini.

The refutation of the hypothesis that the catacombs served as a refuge from persecution was made possible by the introduction of new dating principles. P. Stieger developed a dating methodology based not on stylistic analysis of murals, but on determining the geological age of the rocks from which the catacombs were carved. Using this method, Stieger found that the main use of the catacombs occurred in the fourth century, that is, in the period after the Edict of Milan. This confirmed the thesis that they were not intended to hide from persecution. Moreover, P. Stieger argued that there are no Christian catacombs dating back to the time of the apostles, and the earliest of them date back to the II century.

The second erroneous hypothesis was the claim that the catacombs were invented by the early Christians. The refutation of this hypothesis became possible due to the systematization of historical evidence carried out by A.M. Schneider and P. Testini by the mid-1920s. Thus, the archaeological study of the catacombs has received a solid scientific basis. In particular, the excavation results showed that no catacombs were built until the end of the second century, and early Christians were buried in common pagan cemeteries. Moreover, a study of the Jewish catacombs in the garden of Villa Torlonia dating back to the 3rd century has shown that they arose simultaneously with the Christian ones and are not the forerunners of the Christian ones. Rather, we can talk about their common artistic antique base.

After analyzing the main characteristics, hypotheses, and historical evidence that allow us to form a general idea of the nature of the catacombs, their purpose, and the reasons for decorating them with murals, it seems advisable to proceed to the consideration of current issues facing modern researchers. Within the framework of this study, special emphasis will be placed on issues that previously could have remained outside the field of view of the scientific community.

Some questions of historiography

The history of the study of Roman catacomb paintings dates back to the Renaissance, in the XV century. The first researchers, mainly Roman antiquarians, assumed that the catacombs were the homes of early Christians and served as a shelter from persecution. In particular, the Roman Academy of Antiquaries, headed by Julius Pomponius Laetus (founded in 1465), conducted research on the catacombs of Saints Peter and Marcellinus, as well as the catacombs of St. Callistus.

However, the methodology of the early surveys was limited: the research was descriptive and based on a cursory study of archaeological data. In addition, their interpretations were closely linked to church dogmas, which subsequently, according to Pope Paul III, led to the suspension of further study due to the contradiction of the views of the Vatican Church.

Among the pioneers in the study of the catacombs, the church historian and archaeologist of the XVI century Onufry Panvinio also stands out. His approach, based on the analysis of written sources, made it possible to compile a list of burial sites of early Christians in Rome, including the catacombs of Saints Sebastian, Lawrence and Valentine. Panvinio, like his contemporaries Filippo Neri and Caesar Baronia, adhered to the tradition of the church understanding the catacombs as monuments of faith. F. Neri, in addition to research, also conducted sermons in the catacombs of St. Sebastian, and Ts. Baronia, in his work "Ecclesiastical Annals", introduced the term "underground Rome", highlighting the history of the Church, based on archaeological data, although within the framework of a theological perspective. During this period, the main research task was to discover evidence of the early Christian Church, which often led to inaccurate periodization due to the influence of religious beliefs.

A certain fascination with the Roman catacombs probably provoked the search for traces of the early Apostolic Church in them, which influenced the methodology of early research. The emphasis was on religious significance and the possibility of a broader interpretation was overlooked.

A significant contribution to the study of the catacombs was made by Antonio Bosio, whose discoveries were described in his work "Underground Rome" in 1593. Despite criticism from the Vatican and the subsequent suspension of research, Bosio's work laid the foundations for a new methodological approach. Bosio formulated the principle of the primacy of written sources over images in catacombs. His detailed drawings of murals and sarcophagi, published posthumously in Roma Sotteranea (1632), became important material for subsequent generations of researchers ^{[16, p. 278]}.

In the first centuries of the study of catacombs, methodology was characterized by two key features: firstly, adherence to church dogmas, which could reduce the objectivity of research data; secondly, preferential attention to the description of material evidence found in the catacombs, without emphasis on the interpretation of plots or architectural solutions. By the middle of the 17th century, scientific research of the Roman catacombs was suspended, and the catacombs themselves were devastated. The study of the catacombs resumed only in the 19th century, and during this period, not only Italian, but also French, German and British scientists joined the research.

Significant changes took place in the methodology of studying the Roman catacombs in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Roman school began to develop its own scientific approach. Giuseppe Marchi (1795-1860) put forward the position that the analysis of catacombs is impossible outside of their architectural and archaeological context. He also actively opposed the emptying of catacombs and the seizure of murals, which indicates an increasing attention to the integrity and preservation of archaeological material.

Outside of Italy at this time, Desiree Raoul-Rochette, a French archaeologist, published a significant work on late Antique art. Raoul-Rochette initiated a whole galaxy of researchers who studied the history and painting of the catacombs, among whom were Giuseppe Marchi and Giovanni Battista de Rossi, the latter's work "Roman Catacombs and monuments of primitive Christian Art" (1822-1894) had a huge impact on subsequent research. The works of Giovanni Battista de Rossi were subsequently adapted and revised by archaeologists from Russia (for example, Alexei Fedorovich von Fricken), France, Great Britain and Germany.

In addition, the authenticity of the relics also remained a subject of debate. Despite this, Giovanni Battista de Rossi is rightfully considered the founder of Christian archaeology, as his work laid the foundation for the further development of the discipline.

By the beginning of the 20th century, a stable archaeological base had been formed, based on the methodology of studying the material evidence of the catacomb era. This contributed to the expansion of research, involving specialists from the fields of art history, cultural studies, history and philology, which opened up new perspectives for interdisciplinary research. Nevertheless, two fundamental issues remained relevant for all areas of catacomb study, in particular, for the study of catacomb art. The first question concerned the functional purpose of the catacombs: were they used as shelters from persecution? The second question was related to the origin of early Christian painting, namely: how was its appearance possible in the context of the biblical prohibition on images formulated in the Second Commandment? These two questions became the starting point for most studies of the 20th and 21st centuries.

The first issue concerning the use of catacombs as shelters from persecution was resolved in the first half of the 20th century thanks to the work of P. Shitger, A.M. Schneider and P. Testini, which was discussed in detail in the first part of this study.

Thus, concluding the review of the history of the methodology of studying Roman catacomb painting from the 15th to the 20th century, it should be noted that the second half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century were marked by a shift in research focus towards the second fundamental issue concerning the origin of early Christian painting. Experts from the fields of art history, cultural studies, and exegesis focused their efforts on finding an answer to the question of how these images could have appeared in the context of the biblical prohibition.

The next part of this study will present a detailed analysis of the methodological approaches that have become widespread in recent decades and are used to study the origin of early Christian catacomb painting. Special attention will be paid to the key issues studied by modern researchers in this field, as well as the problem of effective integration of data from archeology, history, art history, philology and other related disciplines necessary for the formation of a more holistic and multidimensional understanding of catacomb painting.

Things among things and an image among images

The second commandment, which forbids the creation of "idols and all images" (Exodus 20:4), calls into question the very possibility of Christian art. How did the early Christians, observing this prohibition, create a visual language expressing the transcendent? Catacomb painting, which originated in the early Christian era, offers an answer to this question, but existing research methodologies often overlook the depth of this aesthetic contradiction.

In the context of studies of catacomb painting in the second half of the 20th century, Peter Brown's The World of Late Antiquity (1971) is significant, in which the author outlines the period of late Antiquity as an independent era on the border between antiquity and the Middle Ages. The chronological framework of this period, according to Brown, varies depending on political and religious factors, covering the III – VIII centuries of our era.

"Although the division of history into ancient, medieval and modern has long been generally accepted, its application to the history of philosophy and culture causes serious difficulties" ^{[3, p. 3]}. However, the periodization proposed by Peter Brown had a significant impact on the study of catacomb art, setting new conditions for its study. First of all, the understanding of the general historical context has expanded, which made it possible to consider catacomb painting not only as the initial stage in the development of early Christian art, but also as a phenomenon reflecting the peculiarities of a particular era. In addition, Brown emphasized the syncretism and diversity of religious practices characteristic of Late Antiquity, which made it possible to consider catacomb painting on a par with other forms of funerary art of that time.

As for the methodology and formulation of the question of the origin of catacomb painting, significant changes have also taken place here. First of all, this is due to Peter Brown's emphasis on the social history of art, namely on how social processes and structures influenced the perception and formation of art in late antiquity. In the context of catacomb art, this stimulated the study of the social status of customers, performers and viewers, their daily lives and religious beliefs. The second important aspect was the history of mentalities, that is, the study of how people of late antiquity thought, felt and perceived the world around them. This served as a starting point for analyzing the worldview of the early Christians, the history of their perception and, in the case of this study, allowed us to identify the prospect of studying the history of perception of catacomb painting. Finally, another area of methodological research concerned the iconographic analysis of the subjects presented in the catacombs. The deep and multifaceted syncretism of the late Antique society led to a revision of the categories of description of artistic symbols and allegories. For example, Peter Brown used the concepts of "dialogue" and "continuity" to describe Late Antique culture and art, which proved to be productive for the interpretation of catacomb painting.

The influence of Peter Brown's research stimulated the development of interdisciplinary methodologies in the study of catacomb painting. In this study, the focus will be on two key aspects: firstly, on the analysis of various methodological approaches to the problem of interpreting the biblical prohibition on images (the Second Commandment); secondly, on the study of the history of perception of catacomb painting.

In the following presentation, five main methodological approaches will be considered using the example of selected works that directly address these issues. The analysis will be carried out in the following sequence:

1) the iconographic method;

2) the concept of identity;

3) the concept of artistic style;

4) the concept of dialogue;

5) The concept of the spectator's figure.

1) The iconographic method

A detailed examination of the iconographic method in the study of catacomb painting is impossible without referring to the work of archaeologist and art historian Andrei Grabar "Christian Iconography: A Study of Its Origins" (1968), published three years before the publication of Peter Brown's The World of Late Antiquity. It was this monograph that initiated a systematic approach to the study of early Christian art. A key aspect of Grabar and his followers' method is the study of the process of forming artistic images in catacombs and the reasons for their similar visual expression. Thus, in an effort to answer the question of the origin of early Christian art, the iconographic method focuses on the field of art criticism, that is, on the question of the formation of artistic style. At the same time, the very problem of interpreting the Second Commandment remains outside the brackets, and the focus shifts towards integrating catacomb painting into the general history of early Christian art.

Andrei Grabar's methodology suggests that the images acted as a direct "mirror" or transposition of the Holy Scriptures. The creative process, according to Grabar, is a sequence of conscious and unconscious stages. In his interpretation, catacomb painting was not of a narrative or didactic nature, but offered the viewer an image for independent reflection. Such a view "proceeds from the idea of the creator, but also from the concept of Christianity as a revealed religion" ^{[14, p. 43]}. A key element of Grabar's methodology is the system of sign-images in Christian iconography ^{[14, p. 46]}. This system is formed as a language that adapts symbols with their original meaning to the new religious reality. To analyze this system, it is necessary to establish semantic fields, that is, groups of characters connected by a common meaning. For example, victory scenes, trophies, laurel wreaths, and hunting successes form a semantic field of triumph based not on formal similarity, but on semantic unity. The study of images in their interrelation makes it possible to identify these semantic fields, demonstrating how the context and purpose of the image transform the meaning of symbols. Moving from archaeology and historical analysis to the interpretation of catacomb paintings, Grabar complements iconographic analysis with a religious and cultural-philosophical dimension, making the transition to iconology.

This methodological approach has become widespread, but in order to demonstrate its application in the context of the study of catacomb painting, in particular, after the works of Peter Brown, it is advisable to turn to the analysis of a later study. One of the most significant modern iconographic studies in this field is the work of Sean Lizerbury "The Iconography of Early Christian Roman Art" (2021). Lizerburi analyzes the artistic diversity of late antiquity, emphasizing the coexistence of various styles and religious groups (pagans, Christians and Jews). He notes that the aesthetic views of these groups interacted and overlapped to a greater extent than was traditionally recognized in the academic environment. It is in this context that Lizerburi addresses Grabar's research, subjecting it to critical examination.

"This view is intended to serve as an adjustment to previous opinions about art of that period: that it does not deserve in-depth study and that it is completely borrowed from Roman art (the latter opinion is presented by Grabar, who, despite a close study of Christian iconography, compares it to a "technical" or "parasitic" language). Instead, the picture of the creation, borrowing and influence of art images is considered more complex" ^{[17, p. 464]}.

The iconographic method, having obvious advantages in identifying historical connections and patterns in art, has become widespread among modern researchers of catacomb painting. However, its application raises a number of important questions. First of all, how does the iconographic approach, focusing on the analysis of symbols and their meanings, affect the interpretation of an artistic work? Does it lead to a reduction of the image to a set of technical elements assembled according to the "designer" principle, as Sean Liverbury notes, while missing its integrity and uniqueness? In other words, how can such an analysis not lose sight of the specifics of the context of an artistic statement?

Moreover, it remains unclear how these issues are intertwined with the problem of interpreting the Second Commandment. How does iconography, which deciphers meanings through visual images, contribute to understanding how early Christians circumvented this prohibition? Wasn't the very process of selecting and adapting iconographic elements a peculiar form of interpretation and "circumvention" The Second Commandment, which makes it possible to express Christian dogmas and ideas through already existing visual forms? These problems, however, often remain on the periphery of iconographic research, which prevents a comprehensive study of the interpretation of the Second Commandment in the context of the genesis of early Christian art.

2) The concept of identity

A significant stage in the historiography of modern approaches to the study of early Christian art is the work of Paul Corby Finney ("The invisible God: The Earliest Christians on Art" (1994), which introduced the concept of identity into scientific discourse. Finney hypothesizes about the formation of Christian art, considering it as a product of the formation of early Christian identity and its visual expression. In particular, he explores how images of Christian art were formed, which differed in their visual form from pagan figurative art, and how these images became an intermediary between the believer and the biblical idea of salvation. For analysis, he compares literary evidence about the aesthetic ideas of the early Christians with surviving examples of both Christian and pagan art. Considering the question of the origin of Christian visual art, Finney focuses on the role of spectator perception and the formation of a special artistic style.

The key object of his analysis is the catacombs of St. Callistus, which, according to the author, represent the earliest example of the use of visual images by the Christian community. Finney notes that "the people from the catacombs of Callista stood on the threshold of Roman imperial social history. They represent a transition from the adaptation of pagan images that did not go beyond the generally accepted visual context to a new level of Christian identity that was tangible and visible. This signals the transition from implicit to explicit attributions in iconography and represents an early material expression of Christianity as a culturally isolated religious minority" ^{[13, p.151]}. Thus, Finney postulates that the emergence of Christian art is associated with the formation and self-awareness of the Christian community as a separate cultural and religious group.

Finney argues that the absence of Christian art before the year 200 cannot be explained solely by the ban on images. He believes that "invisibility" The early Christians were conditioned by their marginal position in society, rather than intentionally following the principle of iconoclasm.

"It is true that Christians were a little-known group during the first few generations of their history; it is also true that they were an invisible community in material terms until the beginning of the third century. Both of these factors are the unintended consequences of circumstances that were largely beyond the control of communities. Obscurity and invisibility were not goals that Christians actively or passively pursued at the beginning of their history" ^{[13, p. 291]}.

Finney explains the absence of Christian art before the second century by socio-economic factors, but does not reveal the reasons for the priority of catacomb painting. In this case, it is worth referring to the research of Chernova A.V. and Sharkov I.G., which highlights the paradox: even involving non—Christian masters, the community created a "language for initiates" - a system of symbols understandable only to believers. This refutes Finney's thesis, demonstrating that the prohibition of the Second Commandment is transformed not by avoiding images, but by their transformation into apophatic codes, where the form indicates the transcendent ^{[9, p. 8]}.

A specific feature of his approach is also his call to abandon modern research methods and interpret early Christian art from the perspective of the worldview of the early Christians themselves. According to Finney, the use of modern methodology distorts the objective picture of the historical development of early Christian art, especially the process of interpreting the Second Commandment.

The analysis of catacomb painting through the prism of the concept of identity opens up new perspectives for understanding the interpretation of the Second Commandment by the first Christians and its refraction in the context of the social and political realities of late antiquity. However, it must be recognized that this interpretation faces certain methodological difficulties. Despite its heuristic potential, it does not always find support in academic circles. This is primarily due to the heterogeneity of the early Christian community. The lack of sufficient written evidence to reconstruct a detailed socio-economic portrait of the Christian community of the second and third centuries complicates the task of confirming or refuting hypotheses related to the influence of identity on artistic choice and religious observance.

3) The concept of artistic style

Paul Finney's research laid the foundation for further academic discussions, which were developed in the works of scientists such as Jas Elsner and Robin Jensen. In particular, R. Jensen revisits the issue of the origin of catacomb painting, considering it as one of the earliest visual evidence of Christianity. She develops the concept of artistic style as a methodological tool that allows analyzing iconography and its evolution within a specific religious and cultural context. Her approach has points of contact with iconographic analysis and offers a slightly different perspective. For example, Robin Jensen describes various points of view about the emergence of early Christian art: from the Jewish tradition or as a subspecies of Roman art, but comes to the conclusion that early Christian art deservedly belongs to a separate category ^{[15, p.2-3]}. The researcher pays special attention to funeral art in her works, conducting a comparative analysis of symbolism and motifs in Roman and Christian contexts. She thoroughly explores the influence of pagan, including imperial, cults on the formation of the early Christian visual tradition. A striking example of this analysis is her work "The Emperor Cult and Christian Iconography" (2011), which draws parallels between the Roman cult of the emperor and the iconography of the catacombs. A distinctive feature of Jensen's methodology is the expansion of iconographic and iconological approaches through the comparative study of artistic styles common in the period of late antiquity. Her research covers a wide range of issues related to the interaction of early Christian art and literature, as well as the role of visual images and architectural spaces in expressing theological ideas. Jensen convincingly proves that visual images, along with the interpretation of sacred texts, contribute to the understanding of early Christian rituals. In her works, there is a noticeable transition from an ethnic to a confessional approach in the study of art history, which allows for a more accurate interpretation of cultural and religious contexts. Jensen also seeks to overcome the criticism of Sean Liserbury, who insisted on the inadmissibility of reducing catacomb painting to a set of technical objects or an arbitrary "construction", asserting its cultural and religious significance. However, despite the introduction of a new cultural and art criticism perspective, the methodology of artistic style used in the works of R. Jensen does not prioritize the study of how, given the biblical prohibition on images, the emergence of Christian art became possible.

4) The concept of the spectator's figure

The methodology integrating catacomb painting into the broad cultural and artistic context of late antiquity is represented by the concept of the "spectator figure" developed by the British researcher Jas Elsner. Based on the questions posed by Paul Corby Finney within the framework of the concept of identity, and developing Robin Jensen's research on the artistic features of early Christian painting, he seeks to expand these approaches by integrating modern philosophy and visual research into them. He proceeds from the recognition of the privileged and canonical position of the art of Western antiquity in the academic environment, emphasizing that the study of its perception is at the same time a study of diverse, competing and often ideologized ideas about one's own past.

In his work "Art and the Roman Viewer: The Transformation of Art from the Pagan World to Christianity" (1995), Elsner analyzes the formal changes in Roman art, examining the transition from the early Empire to the late Empire, which is characterized by the replacement of naturalism by abstraction and impressionistic style.As noted by Jensen, this change is often interpreted as a rejection of pagan figurativeness in favor of symbolic Christian images ^{[15, p.2]}. However, Elsner's key goal is not just to fix these formal changes, but also to reconstruct the "history of viewing", that is, to study how how the viewer interpreted the visual images. Elsner emphasizes that the changes in Roman art should be viewed not only through the prism of stylistic elements, but also through the prism of the viewer's perception, which brought its own meanings and interpretations to the process of contemplation. He expands the traditional art criticism analysis to include a philosophical context and attention to individual experience ^{[10, pp.877-880]}.

In his other works, Elsner notes that images in Roman catacombs were used by various competing Christian communities to define and strengthen their own identity. At the same time, as Elsner notes, "In the catacomb of Marcellinus and Peter there are rooms with clearly Christian decor (although here we should pause to note that "Christian decor" means a mixture of scenes from the Old and New Testaments, which we usually read typologically as Christian, although at that time they would not have been completely immune to the Jewish interpretation)" ^{[12, p.117]}. Elsner, therefore, calls into question the rigid juxtaposition of pagan and Christian art, and suggests that the visual images in the catacombs should not be considered solely as unambiguous expressions of Christian dogma, but as elements of cultural dialogue and identity formation in the context of religious and social diversity.

Thus, the methodology of the "spectator figure" proposed by Jas Elsner forms the basis for interdisciplinary research integrating art criticism, cultural studies and philosophical approaches. However, despite this potential, the approach also faces certain methodological difficulties, similar to those that hindered previous research. The lack of written sources that make it possible to reconstruct the identity of the early Christian community makes it difficult to verify hypotheses related to the perception and interpretation of the symbolism of catacomb painting. In addition, an attempt to reconstruct the perception of allegories and symbols based on cultural data from the era of late antiquity turns out to be problematic, given Elsner's own remark about ideological bias in the academic study of the art of Western antiquity. Moreover, Elsner recognizes the difficulty of drawing a clear line between the confessional and social identity of the "viewer," which calls into question the possibility of creating an objective picture of perception. Despite the depth of his analysis, Elsner, like the researchers mentioned earlier, mainly works with catacomb paintings as images, that is, material objects inscribed in a certain line of reasoning about materiality. This raises an important question that needs to be studied in more detail: are the images in the catacombs just evidence of a new religious denomination?

5) The concept of dialogue

The concept of dialogue, as a methodological approach to the study of early Christian art, seems to be the closest in spirit and research direction to Peter Brown's The World of Late Antiquity. She continues the line of "continuity" and "dialogue" outlined by Brown in the culture and art of late antiquity, considering religious, political and social contexts as integral elements of analysis. In fact, this approach is a direct consequence of the interpretation of Brown's works and their extension in relation to early Christian art from the point of view of cultural analysis. The emergence of the concept of dialogue can be considered as a logical step in the study of catacomb art, following the establishment of a new historical periodization, where late antiquity appears not as a period of decline, but as an independent era with its own unique characteristics. The tasks facing researchers using this approach are to determine the place and role of early Christian and catacomb art in the artistic space of late antiquity, as well as to identify its interrelationships and interactions with other cultural phenomena of the era.

Considering the historical evidence of the era, he introduces the concepts of "continuity" and "change", which make it possible to identify images and motifs known before the advent of Christian art and how they were transformed in the emerging Christian context.

This methodological approach is implemented by Jas Elsner in his study "Imperial Rome and Christian Triumph: The Art of the Roman Empire AD 100-450" (1998), where he analyzes the dialogue of religious traditions, the role of visual culture in the Roman Empire, the problem of the style of late Antique art, as well as its social and religious functions. Considering the historical evidence of the era, Elsner introduces the concepts of "continuity" and "change", which make it possible to trace the evolution of artistic images and motifs that existed before the emergence of Christianity, and their transformation in a new religious context. This allows him to identify both elements of the continuity of tradition and innovations introduced by Christianity into artistic practice.

He argues that "The changes, in fact, may be more our reading of the empire's phenomena from outside than the perception of those who lived at that time."… In the art arena, I think that as soon as someone abandons traditional stylistic analysis in favor of thematic analysis of images in accordance with their social and cultural functions, the evidence points to a very deep continuity" ^{[11, p.10-11]}.

At the same time, Elsner puts forward the thesis that our perception of "changes" in the art of late antiquity is often conditioned by modern interpretations, rather than an authentic understanding of the era. He argues that the rejection of formal analysis in favor of thematic and functional approaches reveals continuity in the artistic tradition rather than fixes sharp gaps. Thus, Elsner calls for a revision of the traditional interpretation of Christian art as a radical break with pagan heritage, emphasizing the need to take into account continuity and dialogue between different cultural traditions.

Jas Elsner's concept of dialogue is confirmed by the use of ancient heroes in Christian art. As A.V. Chernova and I.G. Sharkov emphasize, "the presence of ancient heroes demonstrates the dialogic nature of Christians. They ... interacted with [ancient culture]" ^{[9, p. 9]}. Thus, the form is preserved, but the content is transformed.

The issue of interpreting the Second Commandment in the context of the origin of early Christian art, which is of interest in the framework of this study, goes beyond the scope of this approach. Moreover, its formulation turns out to be impossible based on the initial data of this research method.

Concluding the review of modern approaches to the study of Roman catacomb painting, the question arises: what is the reason for such a significant variety of methodologies? This phenomenon can be explained from two sides.

Firstly, the archaeological discoveries of the late 20th century, as well as the allocation of late antiquity to a separate historical period, required a revision of the basic approaches to the study of catacomb art. New data and concepts have highlighted the need to take into account the context of cultural and historical changes during this period.

Secondly, the difficulty of studying catacomb painting is related to the nature of the available sources. The main period of use of the catacombs, covering the II–IV centuries of our era, left relatively few written evidence. This forces researchers to rely primarily on archaeological finds and material evidence found in the catacombs themselves. However, this data is not always reliable, as many frescoes, sarcophagi, and other artistic treasures were removed from the catacombs at various times, making it difficult to accurately attribute and date them. Moreover, the dating of catacomb paintings as belonging mainly to the II–IV centuries is often questioned due to the lack of accurate data on the time of creation of images, as well as because of the restorations and changes to which they were subjected.

Modern research focuses on solving several key problems. Firstly, it is the interpretation of polysemous allegories and symbols in catacomb painting, which have a complex and multifaceted character. Secondly, the issue of defining the social groups that created and used the catacombs remains controversial, which is also related to the ambiguity of the symbolism. Finally, the influence of historical bias is a significant challenge: early Christian history has been perceived as "sacred" for centuries, which often led to biased research and hindered objective interpretation.

Let's take a closer look at the five methodologies analyzed in this study, with an emphasis on their advantages and disadvantages.:

The iconographic method
This approach is an essential tool for art criticism analysis, as it allows to expand the visual context of any work. Its advantage lies in the detailed work with symbols and plots, which contributes to a deep understanding of their meaning. However, as Sean Lizerbury notes, the main drawback of the method is that it tends to consider catacomb painting as a technical object that can be disassembled and assembled like a constructor, losing sight of its cultural uniqueness.

The concept of identity
The main advantage of this methodology lies in its desire to reconstruct the general cultural and social context within which the symbols and allegories of catacomb art are interpreted. However, the difficulty lies in the limited written sources, which makes it difficult to create a complete picture of the catacomb communities and their worldview.

The concept of artistic style
This approach is aimed at studying the artistic trends of the late Antique era, their development and transformation. In the framework of this analysis, catacomb painting is considered as a transitional stage from pagan art to Christian imagery. However, a significant drawback of this method lies in its historical bias: it often interprets early Christian art from a teleological perspective, where it is viewed solely as a precursor to the medieval Christian tradition.

The concept of dialogue
Based on the research of Peter Brown, this methodology seeks to fit catacomb painting into the context of Late Antique culture, using the categories of "continuity" and "change." Its main advantage is the ability to connect catacomb art with a broad historical and cultural perspective. However, the method is limited in that it does not answer the question of the origin of this kind of art, leaving its unique features outside the scope of analysis.

The concept of the spectator's figure
This methodology focuses on the reconstruction of the "history of viewing" of catacomb painting by its contemporaries, which allows it to be viewed from the perspective of the viewer's interaction with the image. However, like the concept of identity, it faces the problem of insufficient written sources, which limits its analytical potential.

The present study focuses on the interpretation of the Second Commandment and the emergence of early Christian art in the context of religious dogmas. This question is important because it reveals something common to all the methodologies discussed earlier: the desire to analyze catacomb art either as a forerunner of Christian imagery, or as a natural result of the development of late Antique culture.

Such approaches often reduce catacomb painting to the status of a "thing among things," which is reflected in the characteristic feature of the iconographic method, which considers it as a technical object. Most researchers ignore the question of its independent significance and status, focusing on secondary aspects such as symbolism or connection with the Late Antique tradition. As a result, the issue of the status of these images remains unresolved, which requires further reflection and in-depth analysis. Catacomb painting is not a compromise with prohibition, but an aesthetic overcoming of it. Symbols function as apophatic gestures: form is negated to indicate the transcendent. Existing methodologies, focusing on history or semiotics, miss this philosophical depth. A full understanding requires a synthesis of theological and aesthetic analysis, where prohibition becomes a source rather than a barrier to creativity.

The story of the "other" perceptions

The study of catacomb painting is associated with a number of methodological and conceptual problems that cause discussions that have not subsided to this day. The key issues requiring revision are related to the methodology of image analysis, the transition from ancient figurativeness to Christian imagery, as well as the status of the images themselves in Christian culture. Catacomb painting, which originated in the early Christian era, offers a unique answer to this paradox: it does not violate the prohibition, but transforms it into an aesthetic of absence, where symbols become mediums of the transcendent, not idols. However, existing research methodologies often miss this philosophical depth, reducing the analysis to formal or historical aspects.

The dominant hypothesis considers catacomb painting as part of the artistic heritage of late antiquity, which creates methodological difficulties: from attempts to fit it into the existing artistic tradition to hypotheses about the mutual influence of styles of the same period. However, catacomb painting is a phenomenon that defies unambiguous art criticism or cultural analysis. In this regard, it is advisable to first consider its status and explore alternative approaches to studying these images. One of the key issues is the possibility of analyzing catacomb murals as a means of understanding the interaction between paganism and Christianity.

For a more detailed substantiation of this hypothesis, it is necessary to refer to previous studies that raised similar issues, but catacomb painting was used only as an illustrative material, and not an object of independent analysis.

An example of this approach is the work of Max Dvorak "The History of Art as the History of the Spirit" (1924), where he contrasts the formal method (focused on the art form) with his method of "reverse research". Dvorak examines the transitional moments in the history of art, in particular, the transition from antiquity to the Middle Ages, and emphasizes the unique task of catacomb art, which distinguishes it from other late Antique heritage. He argues that catacomb painting seeks to convey spiritual experiences by creating visual images of religious experience ^{[1, p.29]}. The scientist supported this with a compositional example, since there was no volume in the paintings, three–dimensional space is practically eliminated, pointing us to a completely different way of displaying reality - a new religious world. We have seen similar conclusions in previous methodologies, for example, in the concept of the viewer's figure, but the fundamental difference is that in Dvorak's case, the primary question is what kind of affect such stylistic decisions led to or how religious representations outstripped visual ones, dictating new artistic solutions. The next important position of M. Dvorak is as follows: "Thus, in terms of content, catacomb painting is distinguished from contemporary classical art by two important features.: 1) the meaning and purpose of a work of art are completely shifted for the sake of abstract, mental, and theological content; 2) to understand this content to a much greater extent than ever in antiquity, the viewer's participation, knowledge, and subjective thinking are necessary" ^{[1, p.25]}.

In this context, it is important to consider the shift in emphasis in the methodology of catacomb painting research. One of the possible directions is to consider religious experience and spectator perception as the primary factors influencing the artistic and stylistic decisions of the murals' authors. This approach allows us to rethink the role of images in Christian culture and go beyond the traditional art historical analysis. However, the previous concepts of the viewer and identity face the problem of insufficient sources, as there is very little written evidence of early Christian communities in the first centuries.

In the context of this study, it is important to note that Max Dvorak was one of the first researchers to propose shifting the focus from formal to affective analysis, focusing on sensory perception and emotional involvement of the viewer as key elements in understanding catacomb painting. However, despite this methodological shift, Dvorak did not set himself the task of determining the status of catacomb images, considering them primarily as illustrative material for the analysis of "critical epochs." This approach, although productive in his time, is considered insufficient in modern studies of late antiquity of the XX–XXI centuries, since it does not take into account the unique nature of catacomb art.

His ideas were developed in the works of Erwin Panofsky, who tried to justify the transition from pagan figurativeness to Christian symbolism through the philosophical concepts of Neoplatonism. However, his analysis, based on the iconological method, included catacomb paintings in the general context of art history, which in fact negated their specificity, reducing their role to the forerunners of medieval symbolism. In my opinion, such an interpretation is insufficient, since the continuity of catacomb painting and medieval art is not so obvious and unambiguous. Panofsky interprets the symbolism of the catacomb paintings through philosophical concepts on which Christian theology itself was based. He's writing: "The aesthetic teaching of Neoplatonism is in sharp contradiction with the words of Merike: “His beauty is sufficient for the bliss of beauty” - saw in any manifestation of beauty only an imperfect symbol of its next higher form, so that visible beauty is like a reflection of the invisible, which in turn is only a reflection of absolute beauty. Such an aesthetic teaching, strikingly consistent with the symbolic and spiritual character of the artistic creations of late antiquity - in contrast to the creations of the classical period - could be accepted unchanged by early Christian philosophy" ^{[7, p.36]}.

Panofsky considers the birth of Christian art as a process of forming a new type of imagery, perception and impact on the viewer. In his work "Idea:Towards the history of the concept in Art Theories from Antiquity to Classicism" (1960) the key concept becomes the image through which he interprets the artistic forms of various periods. According to his concept, Late Antique and Christian art played a crucial role in the creation of a new visual tradition that continued into the Middle Ages.

However, this interpretation leaves open the question of the specifics of catacomb painting as a special phenomenon that cannot be reduced to the logic of the evolution of artistic forms. Unlike medieval art, catacomb murals function in a different context of perception, where the key role is played by the direct involvement of the viewer in the sacred space, rather than the distant contemplation of a symbolic image, as is typical for Byzantine icon painting.

A critical analysis of existing approaches and the identification of new methodological guidelines allows us to comprehend catacomb painting not only within the framework of iconographic analysis or philosophical concepts, but also taking into account its special status in the religious and cultural context of late antiquity. In the case of Erwin Panofsky, this was impossible, because at the time of writing his study, late antiquity was not yet considered as a separate historical epoch.

Of the philosophers closer to our time, mention should be made of Marie-Jose Mondzen, whose research is devoted to the Byzantine icon.: "Image, icon, economy. The Byzantine Origins of the Modern Imaginary" (2011). Her work may be useful in this study, as it helps to determine the uniqueness of the perception and images of catacomb painting in comparison with Byzantine icon painting.

The key difference between catacomb painting and Byzantine icon painting lies in the concept of image distance, namely, in the perception of presence. The Byzantine icon, despite such artistic features as reverse perspective, consciously forms a distance between the viewer and the depicted image. In this context, the study by Marie-Jose Mondzen is significant, which notes:

"An icon may have no other model than its own ultimate goal, namely, the visible experience of a certain truth, whose imprint is in its flesh and whose grace it gives presence on its horizon. The truth of an icon - truth as an existential attitude – is produced by a contemplative gaze" ^{[6, p.126]}.

Icon and catacomb painting represent different visual modes that require fundamentally different approaches to perception from the viewer. The icon functions within the framework of a specific form of perception, which presupposes a contemplative gaze and a certain level of detachment. In contrast, catacomb painting appeals to the viewer's direct involvement in an imaginative space based on a sense of presence. Mondsen, examining the conditions of the icon's existence, emphasizes that it is the result of a special "contemplative view" that has already been formed. It can be assumed that the origins of the formation of this type of perception are rooted in the traditions of catacomb painting, however, despite the possible connection, these two visual modes differ significantly.

One of the key aspects of an icon that determines its type of perception is the distance between the image and the viewer. As the researcher notes: "There is no Christ in the icon, the icon is turned to Christ, who constantly departs from it" ^{[6, p.123]}.

This distance creates a sense of transcendence and emphasizes the symbolic character of the image. "An image, an icon, always depicts a face, a personality, that is, the divine Word. In the Incarnation, God the Word perceived human nature. Therefore, the icon depicts the personality of the incarnate God" ^{[5, p. 204]}.

This is the fundamental difference between the sensuality conveyed by the icon and the included perception of the catacomb murals. The icon becomes possible due to distance and contemplation, while catacomb painting, on the contrary, presupposes a holistic perception based on the direct presence of the viewer in the figurative space. Thus, the visual modes of icon and catacomb painting represent two poles in the continuum of religious art, each of which appeals to different forms of sensuality and spiritual experience.

Based on the conducted research, it is necessary to formulate the main hypotheses, prerequisites and methodological principles of the developed approach. The starting point is to consider catacomb painting not only as a collection of images within the framework of the material history of art, but also as evidence of a different worldview from the pagan late Antique. This approach assumes that catacomb painting has its own unique system of meanings reflecting the emerging Christian identity.

The next important point is the statement that the basis for analyzing the paintings of the catacombs should be the concept of an image and its perception in the integrity of the context: from the architectural space of the catacombs to the wide cultural world of late antiquity. The emphasis is on the relationship between the material and the spiritual, on how space and culture shape the perception of an image.

The third feature is methodological in nature and consists in the application of a research approach based on the consideration of the affective component of perception. This approach allows us to capture the moment of contradiction of aesthetic paradigms that arises during the transition from the pagan worldview to the Christian one. The analysis of affect as a reaction to a visual image allows for a deeper insight into the essence of the transformations taking place.

There is a need to present a new line in the history of perception of visual culture, in which catacomb painting occupies a separate position. It is neither a continuation of an existing tradition nor a direct precursor to a new one, but is a unique phenomenon that requires separate study.

The proposed approach, based on the analysis of world perception, contextualization of the image, taking into account the affective component and the hypothesis of a separate place of catacomb painting in the history of visual culture, allows us to take a fresh look at this significant phenomenon and deepen our understanding of the late Antique era. It opens up prospects for further research and allows us to expand the horizons of historical and cultural analysis.

Catacomb painting, which arose in the context of the biblical prohibition on images, demonstrates a unique synthesis of religious dogma and creative expression. Instead of literally violating the commandment, early Christians reinterpreted it, creating an aesthetic where absence becomes a way of indicating the transcendent. The schematism and symbolism of forms such as the Lamb or the fish are not signs of artistic immaturity, but reflect an apophatic approach: the rejection of mimetic images emphasizes the impossibility of a final representation of the divine. The catacomb space, with its labyrinths and semi-darkness, transforms physical movement into a spiritual ritual, involving the viewer in an active dialogue with the sacred. The body becomes a participant in this interaction, and the frescoes are not objects of contemplation, but mediums that require interpretation and inner participation.

Borrowing ancient motifs, such as the Good Shepherd, reveals a recoding strategy: familiar images are filled with new meaning, preserving visual continuity, but breaking the link with the pagan context. This avoids idolatry by turning the form into a symbol-a gesture directed beyond the material. The key here is the difference between an "image" as a material idol and an "image" as a window into spiritual reality. Catacomb scenes like a symbolic Meal do not illustrate events, but actualize sacred meanings that require the viewer's involvement.

Thus, catacomb art should not be considered only as a precursor of medieval icon painting — it is an independent aesthetic system where the prohibition of images is transformed into a creative principle. Its analysis requires the integration of methods from different disciplines, combining the philosophical understanding of apophatics, the theological understanding of the symbol and the art historical context of late antiquity. Early Christian murals show that limitation can be a source of innovation: through the denial of form, the presence of the sacred is affirmed here, and the viewer turns from an observer into an accomplice of eternity.
In conclusion, it can be noted that catacomb painting is a unique phenomenon that requires an interdisciplinary approach. An analysis of various methodologies has shown that the iconographic method, although useful for deciphering symbols, often overlooks the cultural uniqueness of images. The concept of identity and the viewer's figure, on the contrary, allow for a deeper understanding of the social and religious context, but face the problem of insufficient sources. The proposed approach, based on affective perception and the concept of an image, opens up new perspectives for studying catacomb painting as a means of spiritual communication. This allows us to take a fresh look at the problem of interpreting the Second Commandment and highlights the uniqueness of catacomb painting in the context of early Christian culture.