Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Man and Culture
Reference:

The Principle of Typological Parallelism of Testaments in Christian Iconography: on the Problem of Terminology

Sycheva Yuliya

ORCID: 0000-0002-7835-4576

Postgraduate student of the Department of General Art History, Faculty of History, Lomonosov Moscow State University

119991, Russia, g. Moscow, Lomonosovskii prospekt, 27 k 4

yuliya.sycheva13@mail.ru
Other publications by this author
 

 

DOI:

10.25136/2409-8744.2022.3.38269

Received:

12-06-2022


Published:

19-06-2022


Abstract: The object of research in this article is the terminological apparatus that is being formed in the foreign and russian historiographical tradition, describing concepts related to the principle of typological parallelism of Covenants in Christian iconography. This principle is based on the doctrine of "Reconciliation of Testaments" (considering Old Testament events as prototypes of New Testament history) and underlies the organization of plots already in a number of monuments of early Christian art. In the era of the High Middle Ages, this principle became one of the fundamental in the iconography of monuments of painting, sculpture and decorative and applied art. The subject of the study was the process of adding up the generally accepted terminology in studies devoted to the iconographic technique in question. The article also raises the problem of correlation between terms used in foreign and domestic historiography. Based on the analysis of the addition of the terminological apparatus in research on Christian iconography, the article concludes that there is no unified system of terms in modern science, especially in the domestic one, to describe the extremely important and widespread phenomenon of Christian iconography – the reflection in the pictorial cycles of the principle of "Reconciliation of Covenants". Tracing the etymology of the concepts used, the author of the article clearly demonstrates the existing contradictions in the terms "type", "antithype" and "antithype", and also analyzes the difficulties that arise when translating these concepts into Russian. Based on this research, it becomes possible to offer the most correct and unambiguously interpreted terms. The relevance of the study is explained by the absence in the Russian research literature of a system of terms for the iconographic principle under consideration, as well as individual Old Testament subjects-prototypes and their New Testament analogies.


Keywords:

Christian iconography, typological parallelism, biblical typology, medieval art, Concordatio Testamenti, Old Testament types, Émile Mâle, André Grabar, Louis Réau, Engelbert Kirschbaum

This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

One of the key principles of Christian iconography is the principle of typological parallelism, based on the comparison of the events of the Old and New Testaments. Formulated as a theological postulate in the writings of apologists and fathers of the Church, the principle of "Reconciliation of Covenants" is reflected in the iconographic program of monuments since the era of early Christian art [1, P. 144]. The history of the study of this phenomenon develops in parallel with the development of iconography as one of the methods of art studies. The typological principle has been addressed by researchers in general works on Christian iconography [2-7], in monographic studies devoted to a group of monuments or individual monuments, in whose iconography the method of typological parallelism is especially articulated [8-14]. However, despite the long historiographical tradition, at the moment there is no comprehensive study devoted to the formation of a stable circle of prototypes in iconography, the influence of textual sources, the choice of principles for the organization of plots within the iconographic program. Moreover, there is still no complete clarity in the use of terms describing this iconographic technique. This article is devoted to this aspect.

One of the first major generalizing studies in the field of Christian iconography, where the typological method in iconography is considered in relatively detail, can be called the book published in 1898 by Emile Mal "Religious Art of the XIII century in France" [2]. Based on the images included in the decoration system of French cathedrals, Mal attempted to "decipher" the lost language of medieval symbolism.

In one of the chapters of his work, the scientist traces the history of the formation of the doctrine of "Reconciliation of Covenants" from the works of early Christian theologians to the XIII century, as the main sources of typological programs, he names the Ordinary Gloss (which, however, mistakenly attributes to Valafrid Strabo), and the "Speculum Ecclesiae" of Honorius Augustodunsky [2].

Then Mal turns to the phenomenon of typological parallelism of Testaments in his study on religious art of the XII century [3]. In this work, published in 1922, the researcher pays great attention to the stained-glass windows of Abbot Suger in Saint-Denis and their influence on the further spread of typological iconography. The desire to attribute some iconographic innovations to the exceptional ingenuity of Suger was criticized by later researchers, but Mal was one of the first to attempt to trace the ways of transformation of typological iconography in the XII century.

In his works devoted to the art of the XII and XIII centuries, Emile Mal, referring to the typological interpretation, uses the concepts of "comparison of Testaments" (fr. "opposition des Testaments") [3, P. 158], "harmony (harmony, consistency) Testaments" (fr. "les harmonies des Testaments") [3, P. 158]. Since Mal associates the spread of this type of iconography with the influence of the stained-glass windows of Suger, sometimes he uses the concept of "symbolism of Saint-Denis" (fr. "symbolisme de Saint-Denis") in a meaning equivalent to the "typological principle". He calls the Old Testament prototype plots "types" (Fr. "types"). However, the researcher does not formulate a clear definition of the typological method in iconography and its boundaries: describing the prototypes of the Virgin Mary on the archivolts of the portal in Lan, he in a single row, referring to the texts of Honorius Augustodunsky, cites both Old Testament prototypes (the Fleece of Gideon, the Burning Bush), and "bestial" (the Virgin with a Unicorn) [2].

The next attempt to define the term "typology" (or "typological principle") was made by the French art historian Louis Reo.  In the dictionary of terms of art and archeology, he defines typology as "the parallelism of types and antitypes, figures and prefigurations of the Old and New Testaments" [15].

In his fundamental three-volume study "Iconography of Christian Art", published in 1959, L. Reo devotes to this phenomenon a chapter entitled "Typological symbolism or the agreement of the two Testaments" [4, p. 192]. Later in the text, to describe this exegetical principle, he uses the concepts of "typological doctrine", "parallelism of the Old and New Testaments". In the same chapter, Reo also concerns the symbolism associated with the animals mentioned in the Bestiary (fr. "symbolism animal") [4, P. 197]. As an example, he cites the typological stained glass windows of French Gothic cathedrals. It is significant that, despite the use in the iconographic program of these stained-glass windows not only Old Testament subjects, but also parallels associated with "bestial" animals (lion, phoenix, etc.), Reo calls the stained-glass windows typological (and not "symbolic" or "allegorical"), thus extrapolating this term not only on the parallelism of the events of the Old and New Testaments, but also on the symbolic parallelism of the plots of the gospel story and the properties of animals from the Bestiary.

With regard to the characters in connection with which cycles of types arise, Reo distinguishes Christological, Mariological and hagiological types. To the latter group he refers not only the apostles and evangelists, but also the venerated historical saints, which no longer fits into the strict limitation of the term "typological principle" only by the Old and New Testament parallelism. As an example for the latter group, Reo, among other things, cites the manuscript of John of Stavlo, in which scenes from the life of St. Benedict are compared with Old Testament scenes [4]. The table of correspondences of New Testament plots and their prototypes also contains plots from the Bestiary, the "Scholastic History" of Peter Komestor (the dream of King Astyages as a prototype of the proclamation of the birth of the Virgin Mary) [4, P. 201], etc.

Separately, it is worth touching on another issue of a terminological nature, which L. Reo raises. We are talking about the terms used in relation to the Old Testament educational plots and characters and their New Testament parallels. Reo considers the terms developed by medieval theologians, "type" (Latin "typus", Fr. "type") and "antitype" (Latin "antitypus", Fr. "antitype") [4, P. 192]. From them he deduces the name of the method of exegesis itself – typology ("typologism") (fr. "typologie"). The researcher, however, notes that there may be ambiguity in the term "anti–type", since some authors confuse the Greek prefix "anti" (Greek. ???? – "against") with the Latin "ante" (let. ante - "before, before") and therefore use the term "anti-type" in relation to the events preceding, that is, the Old Testament, and not vice versa [4, P. 192]. To avoid such methodological ambiguity, Reo suggests using the terms "figure" (fr. "figure") in relation to New Testament scenes and "prefiguration" (or "prototype") (fr. "pr ? figure") in relation to Old Testament plots, since the prefix "pre-" is unambiguously read as: antecedents. In this connection, the French researcher considers it appropriate to call the method not "typological" (fr. "m'thode typologique"), but "figurative" (fr. "m'thode figurative") [4]. Russian Russian studies, as far as we have been able to analyze, do not have a term equivalent to the proposed Reo, which is quite understandable by the fixed meaning of the word "figurative" in the Russian language, including in its opposition to the concept of "abstract". Using this word in the context of a typological method without references is quite problematic. It is also impossible to translate in this context the phrase "m?thode figurative" as a pictorial method (for similar reasons related to the established meaning of the word "pictorial").

The terms "parallelism of the two Testaments", "typology" are then used by Andre Grabar in his research on the origins of Christian iconography, this work is a course of lectures delivered at Princeton and published in 1968 in English. An expanded edition in French was published in 1979 [5]. The researcher calls the Old Testament plots, which act as prototypes to the New Testament ones, "types" (fr. "type s") and "prefigurations" (Fr. "pr ? figures"), but also "antetypes" (Fr. "ant?types") [5, P. 177]. Thus, unlike L. Reo, A. Grabar a does not refer the term "antithype" to the New Testament plots, which brings to mind Reo's thoughts about the existing vagueness of terminology.

If Grabar's research is an experience of "dynamic" analysis of transformations within the iconographic method, then another fundamental work, the eight-volume "Lexicon of Christian Iconography", edited by E. Kirshbaum since 1968 [6], is an experience of systematization and classification.

The author of the dictionary article on the typological principle in iconography was Peter Bloch, who explored some aspects of this topic in his work on the role of the Old Testament in Christian art [16]. In the article of the Dictionary, the typological principle is defined as "the comparison of Old Testament events and characters with the New Testament" [6, S. 395-404], however, further in the article other sources of prototypes (not only the Old Testament) are considered, for example, "Physiologist" [6, S. 398]. Thus, the methodological problem of the boundaries of the definition of the phenomenon "typological principle" outlined by us remains unclear. Turning to the terminological question, we note that Peter Bloch uses the concepts of "type" and "prefiguration" (German: "Pr–figuration") to denote Old Testament plots and "antitype" for New Testament ones, thereby consolidating this terminology.

The concepts of "typology" and "prefiguration" ("prototype") discussed above are used in major studies of recent decades without any new connotations that did not appear in the previous historiographical tradition [17-19].

In order to further trace the history of the question of the definition of the concept of "typology" and the terminology used in this context, let us turn to the study of T. Fabin 2016. The author mentions the term "figuralism" (Eng. "figuralism") as a synonym for the concept of "typology" [20, P. 1], based on the fact that the Greek word "typos" is translated into Latin as "figura". The use of this term, as well as the similar concept of "figurative method" ("m?thode figurative"), which L. Reo proposed to use, in Russian-language literature is complicated by translation difficulties.

There is no well-established tradition in Russian historiography regarding terminology. The terms "prototype" and "pro-educational" are used by researchers quite often [21], but there is no single analogue of the term "Typologie" (French, German) or "Typology" (English). it was not worked out. The calculus of the term "typology" without a definition has not yet settled in the Russian-language literature. Note that this translation option is fully justified: In the French-Russian Dictionary of Art Terms, E. Y. Zolotova gives the following definition of the French term "typologie": "typology, parallelism of the Old Testament and the New Testament (the basis of iconography of medieval Christian art)" [22]. The use of the definition, for example, in the phrase "exegetic typology" [23, p. 77], makes it possible to clarify the context and avoid ambiguity. It also seems correct, as follows from all the previous information, to use the phrase "typological principle" in this context. To designate the New and Old Testament subjects included in the iconographic program based on the typological principle, the concepts of "type", "antitype", "prototype" and "prefiguration" are most often used in Russian literature [24, p. 76],[25].

Thus, having traced the etymology and history of the use of concepts, we came to the conclusion that neither in foreign nor in domestic research literature is there an unambiguously fixed system of terms denoting the very principle of comparing Testaments in iconography, as well as groups of Old and New Testament subjects included in the iconographic program of this type. It is proposed to use the terms "typological parallelism in iconography" or "typological principle of iconography" to denote the iconographic technique itself in Russian literature, to denote Old Testament subjects – "prototype", "prefiguration" or "Old Testament type", New Testament – "New Testament antithype". The use of the definition of "New Testament" in the latter case will avoid the ambiguity in the origin of the term, which was emphasized by L. Reo and other researchers.

 

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.

Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

In the presented article, the author gives a succinct and meaningful definition of the subject and the main perspective of the study from the first lines. As it is absolutely rightly stated, "one of the key principles of Christian iconography is the principle of typological parallelism, based on a comparison of the events of the Old and New Testaments." The fact that "there is still no complete clarity in the use of terms describing this iconographic technique" determines the relevance of this work. From the standpoint of terminology ordering, the work thoroughly examines works in French, German and English written from the end of the XIX century to the present. In the course of his research, the author discovers certain inconsistencies and points them out by conducting a comparative analysis of sources, systematizing and generalizing them, and also successfully using dialectical and classification methods. The author applies all these approaches in the context of using terminology defined in foreign works for Russian-language research, which confirms the scientific novelty of the work. As noted by the author, "there is no well-established tradition in Russian historiography regarding terminology. The terms "prototype" and "pro-educational" are used by researchers quite often [21], but there is no single analogue of the term "Typologie" (French, German) or "Typology" (English). it has not been worked out." Russian Russian studies, as far as we have been able to analyze, do not have a term equivalent to the proposed Reo, which is quite understandable by the fixed meaning of the word "figurative" in the Russian language, including in its opposition to the concept of "abstract". "The use of this term, as well as the similar concept of "figurative method" ("m?thode figurative"), which L. Reo proposed to use, in Russian-language literature is complicated by translation difficulties." The author's style is distinguished by its content, obvious scientific and literate presentation. The structure of the article is clear and logical, due to the progressive analysis of the works in chronological order. Thus, in the main part of the work, the studies of such authors as E. Mal, L. Reo, A. Grabar, P. Bloch, T. Fabini are analyzed from the already mentioned positions. The content of the work demonstrates many advantages, among which the logical and structured judgments, thoroughness of conclusions stand out. Here are the quotes: "The researcher, however, notes that the term "antithype" may contain ambiguity, since some authors confuse the Greek prefix "anti" (Greek: ???? – "against") with the Latin "ante" (let. ante – "before, before") and therefore use the term "antithype" in in relation to the events preceding, that is, the Old Testament, and not vice versa." "Thus, unlike L. Reo, A. Grabar does not refer the term "antithype" to New Testament plots, which makes us recall Reo's thoughts about the existing vagueness of terminology." The bibliography, consisting of twenty–five sources (most of which are foreign), fully corresponds to the topic and specifics of the study. The appeal to the opponents is made at a highly scientific level. Constructive conclusions with the system of terms and concepts developed and proposed by the author seem to be a special value of the work: "Thus, having traced the etymology and history of the use of concepts, we came to the conclusion that neither in foreign nor in domestic research literature is there an unambiguously fixed system of terms denoting the very principle of comparing Testaments in iconography, as well as groups of Old and New Testament subjects included in the iconographic program of this type. To denote the iconographic technique itself in Russian–language literature, it is proposed to use the terms "typological parallelism in iconography" or "typological principle of iconography", to denote Old Testament subjects – "prototype", "prefiguration" or "Old Testament type", New Testament - "New Testament antithype". Using the definition of "New Testament" in the latter case will avoid the ambiguity in the origin of the term, which was emphasized by L. Reo and other researchers". This article is of undoubted value for specialists engaged in research in the field of iconography; its materials can be used in the creation of teaching aids, lectures on the history of art and iconography. It is also of interest to a wide variety of readers interested in this field of art criticism.