See the Book

PIETA

53.7 x 46.7 x 2.3 cm

Emmanuel Tzanes, 1657

The Virgin, seated on a rock, holds in her arms the lifeless body of Christ, lying almost horizontal. On the left and turned towards her stands Saint John the Theologian, while on the right, in corresponding pose, is Joseph of Arimathea, holding a white winding sheet in both hands. The Virgin wears a deep red maphorion and a blue dress, John a pale rose himation and a deep blue chiton, and Joseph a grey-blue chiton and himation. The rock is brownish white adorned with delicate blossoming shoots. At the bottom of the icon, in red capital letters on the gold ground, the inscription: ΧΕΙΡ ΕΜΜΑΝΟΥΗΛ ΙΕΡΕΩC ΤΟΥ ΤΖΑΝΕ (Hand of Emmanuel Tzanes, priest), and on a smaller scale the date: AXNZ’ (1647). Laboratory examination by Stergios Stasinopoulos has confirmed the authenticity of the signature, which had been overpainted in red sometime in the past, as is the case with the icon of the Deesis, by the painter Leos, Cat. no. 34.

The rendering of the Lamentation in our icon constitutes the Byzantinizing version of the Pieta, a common theme in Italian painting, that was established and disseminated in Cretan icons from the fifteenth century onwards, the best known examples being the icons by Andreas Pavias in Rossano and from the circle of Nikolaos Tzafouris in the Benaki Museum.¹ The depiction of the subject in the Byzantine manner, as in our icon, is reproduced in many icons from the late fifteenth century onwards. The late fifteenth-century icon by the painter Petros Klados, in the church of Santa Fosca in Venice (Fig. 164),² is the earliest known example of this iconographic type that assembles in its composition figures deriving from three different scenes of the cycle of Christ’s Passion:³ Christ and the Virgin from the Lamentation, Saint John from the Crucifixion and Joseph from the Descent from the Cross. The sixteenth-century icon in the Musei Civici, Padua is a conscientious copy of Petros Klados’s work,⁴ while seventeenth- and eighteenth-century icons in the Greek Institute in Venice, in Bologna, the Benaki Museum, Mount Athos and Belgrade, are variations of it.⁵

In our icon Emmanuel Tzanes follows Petros Klados’s model. The similarities extend to the colours of the garments, the treatment of the drapery, even to Christ’s Italicizing, almost diaphanous white loincloth; a minor difference is observed in the rendering of Christ’s body, which is in a more conservative Byzantinesque art in Tzanes’s icon. In style too Tzanes follows the fifteenth-century model; the faces and Christ’s body are painted with firm outlines, while the deep brown foundation is highlighted by tiny, parallel white lines. The drapery is arranged in angular planes, devoid of Italian influence which is only perceptible in the softer folds of Christ’s loincloth. Extreme conservatism is apparent in several of Emmanuel Tzanes’s works, which frequently copy fifteenth-century prototypes; it is to be seen in the icons of Saint Spyridon, 1635, in the Museo Correr, Venice, and Saint Anthony, 1645, in Corfu, which are assigned to the painter’s Cretan period, as well as in the later icons of Saint Nicholas, 1683 (Cat. no. 30) and the Virgin Kardiotissa in Venice.⁶ Other signed icons by Tzanes in a remarkably conservative vein, such as the Descent into Hell (Anastasis) and Christ in Glory, 1648, date from the time of his sojourn on Corfu.⁷

The date 1657 on our icon falls in the three-year interval (1655-1657) when Emmanuel Tzanes’s whereabouts are uncertain: he may have still been on Corfu, since the first testimony of his presence in Venice is in March 1658.⁸ However, the imitation of the earlier model of Petros Klados’s icon, which was probably in Venice from the early sixteenth century,⁹ perhaps indicates his earlier arrival in the Serenissima, as Mertzios suggested.¹⁰ Considering the diffusion of the fifteenth-century model in sixteenth-century icons, such as the Padua icon, it is quite feasible that Tzanes had seen other icons of similar iconography and art in the region, without of course ruling out the possibility that he was acquainted with analogous icons while living in Crete or even Corfu.

CONDITION Very good. Laboratory examination by Stergios Stasinopoulos showed that the
signature had been repainted sometime in the past. See Appendix IIL.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Chatzidakis 1948, 471, no. 4. Vocotopoulos 1990, 106 (it was not included in the
list of Tzanes’s works because the author could not check the authenticity of the signature at that
time).

Notes
1. E.g. see N. Chatzidakis 1993, 32.
2. N. Chatzidakis 1993, 32-35, no. 3, with bibliography and other examples.
3. See N. Chatzidakis 1993, 32, and Kalafati 1995, 140ff.
4. N. Chatzidakis 1993, 32, 34 and 152, no. 36.
5. Chatzidakis 1962, no, 153, 159. Angiolini-Martinclli 1984, 57ff., no. 7, fig. on p. 15. Xyngopoulos
1936, no. 30, 43-44, pl, 22 (forged signature of Emmanuel Tzanes). Tatić-Djurić 1979, 551-569, fig. 1. Unpublished icon on Mount Athos, in M. Chatzidakis’s photographic archive.
6. Vocotopoulos 1990, no. 72, 108-110, figs 50-51, See Cat. no. 30, 276ff., nn. 3-6, and
Vocotopoulos 1990, 106-107, 114-115.
7. Holy Metropolis of Corfu 1994, figs 132 and 133. See also an icon of the Virgin Amolyntos,
1635, East Christian Art, 1987, no. 62, 76.
8. Vocotopoulos 1990, 106, Drandakis 1974, 37, n. 8.
9. See N. Chatzidakis 1993, no. 3, 34.
10. Mertzios 1939, 242.