[ Enciclopedia of Aesthetics, ed. M.Kelly. Vol.1. N.Y.-Oxford, 1998. Pp. 321-323 ]
BYZANTINE AESTHETICS -- one of the trends in medieval aesthetics that has been formed within the Greek-speaking culture of Byzantium (4-15th c.). It is based on the aesthetic ideas of Antiquity (first of all, Neoplatonism) and early Patristics. Early Patristics, in fact, rejects the majority of aesthetic values of the ancient (pagan) world -- the so-called "aesthetics of negation" -- and focuses around spiritual beauty and the ideas of Christian symbolism which just start to take root at that time. B.a. develops in several directions.
1. Patristic aesthetics -- the main theoretical trend
in B.a. Its formation starts already in the pre-Byzantine period (the 2-3rd
c. Church Fathers) within the new Christian ideology on the basis of Graeco-Roman
and old Hebrew aesthetics: the process which is mainly completed towards the
6th c. Substantial contributions to the development of B.a. are made by Athanasios
of Alexandria, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom, and pseudo-Dionysius
the Areopagite. The most significant categories of Patristic aesthetics are
the beautiful, light, image, symbol, allegory, sign, name, art. The transcendent
ideal of B.a. is the incomprehensible and indescribable God in the antinomical
unity of his three hypostaseis. He is the source of beauty which surpasses
all beautiful things. All the universe (material as well as spiritual) is
a system of images, symbols and signs (omens) which point at him and uplift
to him. In particular, all the beautiful things of the material world, including
the hand-made -- light, colour, and the innumerable images of literary, musical,
and (Christian) representational arts -- bring spiritual joy to the perceiver
and are, ultimately, the images (eikon), symbols (symbolon)
and signs (semeion) of God and the heavenly spheres, i.e., the non-conceptual
forms of expression of spiritual essences. The anonymous Christian Neoplatonist
who is active sometime around 500 and enters the history of culture under
the name of pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite develops most fully the concept
of the symbol in B.a. in its most general form. He sees the universe (including
social formations) as a hierarchical system of the ascent (uplifting) of man
to God and the conveyance of supreme knowledge from God to man through the
steps of this hierarchy of celestial and terrestrial orders, or taxeis.
According to pseudo-Dionysius, aesthetic elements have an important role in
both processes. The spiritual "uplifting" (anagoge) is accomplished
by means of antinomical "likening" to (homoiosis), and "imitation"
of (mimesis), God. As for the transfer of "knowledge" downwards
from above, it happens in the form of "illuminations," or progressive
"light-giving" (photodosia). Symbols, images, signs, and
representations perceived by the senses -- including the sphere of art almost
in its etirety -- are one of the forms of conveyance of spiritual light to
a human person. For his time, pseudo-Dionysius elaborates the theory of symbolism
most fully. His treatise "Symbolic Theology" has not survived until
our days, but he gives a rather detailed account of this theory in other works
and letters. Symbols, both natural and artificial, serve at the same time
the purpose of concealing (from the non-initiated) and revealing truth. Men
must learn to "see" and correctly decipher the symbol. Pseudo-Dionysius
distinguishes between the two main categories of symbols: the "like"
which have a certain likeness with the ptototype, and the "unlike,"
or "unlike likenesses" (anomoia homoiotes). It is the latter
that he esteems most highly, for it is with their help that the ascent to
the spiritual essences is accomplished with greater ease. The human spirit
which perceives the "unlike likenesses" does not stop at their external
form -- as the one that clearly has nothing in common with the object it designates
-- but goes on to search for the true prototype. Their main goal is to stir
the soul by the "dissimilarity of representation" as such and direct
it towards the perception of something quite removed from any representation,
i.e., supreme spiritual values. Thus, according to pseudo-Dionysius, who develops
the ideas of Philo, Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa -- his predecessors in the
field of allegorical exegesis -- many sensible and even ugly and obscene phenomena
and objects can serve as symbols of high spirituality. By their own nature,
symbols are polysemantic. A complete comprehension of a symbol causes ineffable
pleasure. Pseudo-Dionysius understands the beautiful in the material world
as the symbol of absolute transcendent Beauty, which , in its turn, is the
"cause of consonance and lustre in all that exists." The ideas of
pseudo-Dionysius have had a significant impact on medieval Christian aesthetics,
both in the East and in the West.
It is the period of iconoclasm (8-9th c.) which sees further development
of Patristic aesthetics: when the theory of the image in representational
arts (or the theory of the icon, see: Icon) is being elaborated in
detail, together with several other related questions on art. John of Damascus,
Theodore of Stoudios, Nikephoros patriarch of Constantinople, and the Fathers
of the 7th Ecumenical Council assign a number of functions to the icon. Their
ideas later form the foundation of Orthodox aesthetics, including the theories
of Russian religious thinkers of the beginning of the 20th c. In particular,
the icon is understood as a representation of the ideal visible appearance
(the "inner eidos," according to Plotinian terminology) of the prototype.
The process of active formation of Patristic aesthetics, which becomes a certain
norm for the Byzantine -- and even broader Orthodox (including Russian religious
aesthetics, q.v.) -- culture, comes to its completion towards c.850-900.
In the following period (10-14th c.), only the theory of light receives further
development (by Symeon the New Theologian and Gregory Palamas). The discussion
of the problem of "Taboric light" (Christ's transfiguration, or
shining, on mount Tabor, cf. Mth. 17.2, Lc. 9.29) leads Gregory Palamas and
his followers to the assertion of the possibility, in a certain situation,
of sensible perception of non-created divine light.
2. Aesthetics of asceticism -- interior and implicit
rigoristic aesthetics which is being formed in the milieu of Byzantine monasticism
on the basis of the "aesthetics of negation" of the early Christians
and has an influence on the development of many aspects of Byzantine culture
and church art. The main themes of the aesthetics of asceticism, which sees
its aesthetic object, as a rule, in the inner world of the aesthetic subject
himself, are: total rejection of sensual pleasures in favour of spirituality,
the ideal of poverty, the system of special spiritual psycho-physical exercises
in combination with prayer ("intelligent making") which leads to
the contemplation of various visions -- mainly of lustrous character -- and
to the state of highest spiritual delight. The main theorists and practitioners
of this aesthetics are monks Makarios the Egyptian, Neilos of Ankyra, John
Klimax, Isaac of Nineveh (Syros), and Symeon the New Theologian. The aesthetics
of asceticism has, on the one hand a clearly expressed ethical, and on the
other -- mystical orientation.
3. Liturgical aesthetics -- a trend in the late Patristic
aesthetics which is mainly aimed at the comprehension of liturgical action
as a mystical wholeness which unites the believers with God and spiritual
orders in the process of liturgy. In particular, much attention is paid to
the elaboration and understanding of the symbolic character of the ritual,
including all artistic elements of church arts. In this context, the symbol
(or liturgical image -- typos) is understood by the late Church Fathers
(with particular consistency by Symeon archbishop of Thessaloniki, 15th c.)
as a "real" (more precisely -- sacred) carrier of divine energy,
or the spiritual power of the prototype. The symbol is seen not only as a
semiotic unit, but also as a sacred and ontological phenomenon which "manifests"
in reality its spiritual prototype to the participants of liturgical action.
4. Numerous descriptions of the works of art -- ekphrasis
-- occupy a distinct place in B.a. Their authors (Eusebius of Caesarea (Pamphilos),
Prokopios of Caesarea, Romanos the Melode, Asterios of Amaseia, Chorikios
of Gaza, Nicholas Mesarites, and others) give a very clear notion of medieval
understanding of art, thus laying the foundations of European art criticism.
The most common view among them is the mimetic understanding of representational
art, i.e., considering it a naturalistic copy of the original which produces
a strong impression on the beholder precisely through its likeness to the
material reality (here they continue the ancient traditions of the interpretation
of art). The symbolic understanding of art to them is only of secondary importance.
5. The trend which aims at imitating Antiquity preserves,
throughout the whole history of Byzantium, the traditions and main notions
of the Hellenistic-Roman aesthetics, with its particular taste for luxury,
artistic elaboration, increased ornamentation, illusionism, and clearly manifested
sensuality. This trend is especially favoured at the Emperor's court, and,
starting with c.850-900, finds supporters among Byzantine historians, philosophers,
philologists, novelists, secular poets, and even well educated urban clergy.
The main representatives are: patriarch Photios (9th c.) who starts to collect,
and comment on, ancient texts systematically; Symeon Metaphrastes, Michael
Psellos, Theodore Prodromos, Theodore Metochites. It is to this trend that
European culture owes the preservation of many ancient texts and their primary
textual and philological analysis.
Bibliography:
Bychkov, Victor V. L'estetica bizantina, Problemi teorici. Bari, 1983.
Bychkov, Victor V. "Die ästhetischen Anschauungen des Patriarchen Nikephoros." Byzantinoslavica T. L. Fasc. 2 (1989): 181-192.
Bychkov, Victor V. "Das Licht geistiger Verklärung, Einblick in die Lehre Hesychasten." Stimme der Orthodoxie (May / June 1991): 42-46.
Bychkov, Victor V. Malaya istoriya vizantiyskoy estetiki (A Concise History of Byzantine Aesthetics). Kiev, 1991.
Bychkov, Victor V. AESTHETICA PATRUM, Estetika ottsov tserkvi, vol. 1, Apologety, Blazhenny Augustin (The Aesthetics of Church Fathers). Moscow, 1995.
Grabar, André. Plotin et les origines de l'esthétique médiévale. Paris, 1945.
Hertzman, Evgenij. Vizantijskoe muzykoznanie (Byzantine musicology). Leningrad, 1988.
Hunger, Herbert. Aspekte der griechischen Rhetorik von Gorgias bis zum Untergang von Byzanz. Wien, 1972.
Hunger, Herbert. Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner. Vols. 1‑2, München, 1978.
Kitzinger, Ernst. "The Cult of Images in the Age before Iconoclasm." Dumbarton Oaks Papers 8 (1954): 83‑150.
Ladner, G. "The Concept of the Image in the Greek Fathers and the Byzantine Iconoclastic Controversy." Dumbarton Oaks Papers 7 (1953): 1‑34.
Mango, Cyril A. The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 312‑1453. Sources and Documents. Toronto, 1986.
Mathew, Gervase. Byzantine Aesthetics. London, 1963.
Michelis, Panaiotis A. An Aesthetic Approach to Byzantine Art. London, 1955.
Thümmel, Hans G. Bilderlehre und Bilderstreit: Arbeiten zur Auseinandersetzung über die Ikone und ihre Begründung, vornehmlich im 8. und 9. Jahrhundert. Würzburg, 1991.
( translated by Oleg V. Bychkov).