Iconographical details of Western origin in some scenes of the Crucifixion from the end of the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries*

The article discusses the presence of iconographical details of Western origin in the scene of Christ’s Crucifixion in the post-Byzantine period. It focuses on the role of works by painters from the Cretan and Epirote schools in their distribution among the next generation of icon-painters. From here a detailed examination of the compositions of the Crucifixion on three monuments in the territory of modern-day North Macedonia, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina, dated to the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, is carried out. The comparison with monuments from the same period originating mainly in Greek territories leads to hypotheses regard-ing the painters’ provenance or the place of their education. A rare version of the scene from the second half of the seventeenth century from the territory of Bulgaria is also discussed.

The determination to preserve tradition is an essential feature of Byzantine art. This applies even stronger to works from the period of Ottoman rule. However, Orthodox art has never been an isolated system, especially with regards to iconography. A variety of influences can be discerned at different historical moments; these depend on diverse factors, and they are expressed with varying intensity. In the post-Byzantine period, influences quite often come from the West. An apparent example of this is a version of the scene of Christ's Crucifixion based upon models from the late Gothic period and the Italian Renaissance; it appears in icons and wall paintings in the Balkans in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Images of the scene containing Western elements have long intrigued researchers in Greece. 1 The most profound and * The present study is the result of research carried out within the project for support for young scholars and doctoral candidates Church painting in the territory of Bulgaria and the Greek painters from the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth century (contract ДФНП-17-119/28.07.2017), financed by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. I would like to express my gratitude to my scientific consultant on the project, Assoc. Prof. Dr Margarita Kuyumdzhieva, for her invaluable input. ** m.kolusheva@gmail.com 1 Yet, there is no integral study of the phenomenon. Until the mid-1980s, the problem was discussed sporadically, mainly with reference to scenes of the Crucifixion on Cretan icons. Those publications will be acknowledged at the relevant points of the article.
integral study belongs to Angeliki Stavropoulou-Makri, who outlines the main iconographical features of the scenes from two wall-painted ensembles in Epirus dated to the third quarter of the sixteenth century; there, she identifies the specific iconographical models that were borrowed from the Western tradition. 2 Subsequently, her publication becomes a starting point for any author seeking to examine images in a similar context.
The present study offers a summary of the existing data in order to outline the stages of influence of the Western details of the scene on the Balkan painters in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and to track the influence that earlier works exert upon wall painting from the end of the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth centuries. The analyzed material comes mainly from the territory of modern-day Greece, and it has already been described; however, a few examples of similar influence from Slavic territories will be added. To the present moment, their specific features have remained outside the scholars' focus. The detailed examination of the individual elements of the scenes, together with their comparison to known examples from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, will inevitably pose the question about the location where the painters learned their trade, as well as about their affiliation to one common artistic circle that shares similar iconographical characteristics of their works. *** , Pietro Lorenzetti (ca 1280-1348), Barnaba da Modena (1328-1381. 3 The fainted Virgin Mary in the arms of the women; grieving John next to her; Mary Magdalene kneeling at the base of Christ's cross; Longinus as one of the horsemen by the three crosses; the crowd of witnesses of Christ's death; the demon that grabs the impenitent thief 's soul: all these elements comprise a radically elaborate composition that contrasts with the known images in Byzantine art where the strictly symbolical nature of the scene is preserved even in the most extensively narrative versions. The first indications that Orthodox painters were familiar with such compositions are found among the painters who were in immediate contact with the late Gothic and Renaissance art in Italy, such as those from the island of Crete. Horsemen, with the centurion Longinus among them in some of the compositions, appear as early as the second half of the fourteenth century in the scene in the churches St Paraskevi in Viannos (1360), 3 For detailed visual material v. M. Κωνσταντουδάκη-Κιτρομηλίδου, Τρίπτυχο με σκηνές από το Πάθος του Χριστού στη Δημοτική Πινακοθήκη της Ραβέννας, Θησαυρίσματα 18 (1981) 165; Stavropoulou-Makri, La création, 244, n. 9; X. Proestaki, Western influences on 17 th -century post-Byzantine wall paintings in the Peloponnese: roots in the 16 th century, BS 68 (2010) 294-296.
Holy Theotokos in Meronas, Amari (ca 1380) (fig. 1) and later in the exonarthex of Valsamonero Monastery (after 1431). 4 On several images from Crete there are also depictions of St Mary Magdalene kneeling at the feet of the Saviour: a posture that is highly untypical for the Eastern Orthodox tradition. 5 A composition fully developed in the tradition of Western art can be found in works from the fifteenth century, once again by Cretan painters. The icon from the National Museum in Stockholm, 6 as well as that from Odigitria Church on Kimolos Island, 7 dates from the first half of 4 M. Μπορμπουδάκη, Η τοιχογραφική διακόσμηση του ναού της Παναγίας στο χωριό Μέρωνας Αμαρίου. Νεα στοιχεία, in: Αφιέρωμα στον ακαδημαϊκό Παναγιώτη Λ. Βοκοτόπουλο, ed. Β. Κατσάρος, Α. Τούρτα, Αθήνα 2015, 421, εικ. 5. According to the author, the distribution of elements of Western origin on wall paintings on the island is limited (ibid., 422). 5 In the churches St Stephan in Kastri, Milopotamos (1391) and St John in Seli (1411). V. A. Foskolou, Mary Magdalene between East and West. Cult and image, relics and politics in the late thirteenthcentury Eastern Mediterranean, DOP 65-66 (2011-2012 figs. 14-15. 6 M. Vassilaki suggests that it was done by a painter from Constantinople or Crete (Χειρ Αγγέλου. Ένας ζωγράφος εικόνων στη βενετοκρατούμενη Κρήτη, ed. Μ. Βασιλάκη, Αθήνα 2010, 90-91, nο. 11). 7 The icon contains many unusual details: to the right of Christ's cross a Catholic priest serves the Eucharistic mystery with  . 2), as well as that from the Loverdos Collection (ca 1500) 9 -from the second half of the fifteenth century. The renowned Cretan painter Georgios Klontzas, known for his work from the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries also created several triptychs that are similar to late Gothic Crucifixion scenes. 10 In Cyprus, also under strong Western influence, Christ's blood which pours down into a goblet; another priest performs a holy baptism with the water from Christ's wound; on top of the cross there is an allegoric depiction of a pelican with its young. Around the centre of the composition are the half-length figures of 28 prophets and apostles, and at its periphery are the symbols of the Evangelists. The scrolls they hold contain inscriptions of the Creed and prophecies to do with the Crucifixion. The texts are in Greek and have been rewritten at a later moment. There are grounds to assume that the icon was done by a Greek painter for a Catholic commissioner (Βυζαντινή και μεταβυζαντινή τέχνη, ed. Λ. Κυπραίου, Αθήνα 1985, 96-98, nο. 97 we find the composition in Holy Theotokos Eleusa Podithou Church in Galata (sixteenth century). 11 In the Balkans, post-Byzantine painting and the big art schools that formed around painters from Crete or from locations in the Balkans that maintained close relations with the Western world reached its zenith in the second half of the sixteenth century. Among these painters are Theophanes the Cretan and Zorzis, authors of the mural paintings in the most influential monasteries on Mount Athos and the Meteora, 12 as well as Frangos Kate-11 S. Frigerio-Zeniou, L' art "italo-byzantin" à Chypre au XVI e siècle. Trois témoins de la peinture religieuse: Panagia Podithou, la chapelle latine et Panagia Iamatikê, Venise 1998, 41-57, figs. 3-4, 56 Fig. 3. Crucifixion, Stavronikita Monastery, 1545/1546 lanos and the brothers Georgios (an Orthodox priest) and Frangos Kondaris, born in Thebes but known mostly for their work in the area of Epirus. 13 These painters borrowed iconographical types from Italian engravings, icons and canvases and included them in their repertory, although within certain limits, and in a manner that preserved the Byzantine appearance of the images. The process affected the depictions of the scene of the Crucifixion too. Some of the elements that the painters included in the scene had long been recognized in Eastern Orthodox art, 14 or had become popular to a certain extent in the Balkans in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 15 . 4. Crucifixion, St Dimitar Church in Veltsista, after 1558 (photo: I. Vanev) ever, a number of features unequivocally reveal that these painters were familiar with the scene model circulated in Western Europe. In the catholicons of the monasteries Great Lavra (1534/5) and Stavronikita (1545/6) ( fig. 3) Teophanes the Cretan depicts a black demon grabbing the soul of the impenitent thief. 16 This didactic theme 16 For the depiction from the catholicon in Lavra v. Millet,Recherches,fig. 476. For that in Stavronikita v. Χατζηδάκης,Ο κρητικός,72,εικ. 98. On both scenes, an angel carrying the good thief 's soul to the Heavens is depicted. The theme can also be found in the catholicon of Koutloumousiou Monastery (Millet,Monuments de l' Athos,Pl. 162.1). For the angel and the demon taking the thieves' souls v. Semoglou,op. cit.,[58][59]. M. Chatzidakis suggests that the features of the composition in Stavronikita were borrowed from Andreas Pavias's icon. For this icon v. supra, n. 8. These characteristics apply largely to the scene from Lavra too (Χατζηδάκης, Ο κρητικός, 72). Later one of Theophanes's sons, Neophytos, who painted the murals in the metropolitan church Dormition of the Theotokos in Kalabaka (1573)   Observations by Angeliki Stavropoulou-Makri, the chief researcher of the mural paintings in both churches, as well as of the scene of the Crucifixion itself, reveal that Kondaris's model is an amalgam of a variety of elements. Some of them were not known even to their most renowned contemporaries or to the Cretan painters from the fifteenth century. 20 According to Stavropoulou-Makri, the Kondaris brothers were in direct contact with Western works of art whence they borrowed images such as the fainted Virgin Mary on the ground, and the men breaking the thief 's ankles; the latter appear in co mpositions from the Byzantine period but here they are represented as horsemen. 21 Other components of the scene can be found both in Gothic Crucifixion scenes and in some of the icons painted in Crete. Among them is the depiction of Longinus on horseback, as well as that of Mary Magdalene kneeling at the base of the cross. 22 A third portion of components already gained popularity in Continental Greece through the work of the two major art schools in the sixteenth century; namely, these are the devil grabbing the impenitent thief 's soul, and the horsemen.  Μονοδένδρι, Αθήνα 1991, 111). Makri does not report the texts on the scrolls of the prophets Isaiah and Moses that are depicted behind the fortification walls of Jerusalem. 24 With the exception of the icon from the beginning of the fifteenth century. V. supra, n. 7. 25 In the refectory of St John the Theologian Monastery on the island of Pathmos (late twelfth -early thirteenth centuries), in Theotokos Church in Studenica Monastery (1209), and in Sopoćani Monastery (ca. 1265). V. Živković, op. cit., 363-364, with bibliography. 26 In  The work of the Kondaris brothers, and in particular their scene of the Crucifixion, undoubtedly influenced a great number of the painters that worked in the region of Epirus. The mural paintings in a number of churches there bear evidence to that. Some murals are rather similar to Kondaris's composition and there is a high probability that it served as their model. Examples are found in the scenes from Dormition of the Theotokos Church (early seventeenth century), also in Veltsista, 28 Holy Theotokos Evangelistria Monastery Church in the village of Agios Minas (after 1576) in the area of Zagori, Epirus, 29 and in Holy Theotokos Source of Life Monastery Church (1637) in the village of Polilofo, close to Ioannina. 30 The painter Mihail from Linotopi, who worked in this region for the greater part of his career, follows almost exactly Kondaris's composition in St Nicholas Church in Vitsa (1617/8) 31 ( fig. 8), in St Zacharias Monastery on Gramos Mountain, Castoria region 32 and Transfiguration Monastery in Çatistë, modern-day Albania (1626). 33 On other occasions, both he personally and painters from his workshop demonstrate a preference for the Byzantine version, adding to it individual details from the Kondaris composition. 34 Among the other painters that turned to this new model are the members of two of the most eminent painters' families -Kakavas and Moschos from Nauplion, who did a great number of mural paintings in Peloponnese, 35 as well as some anonymous painters who worked in and 1 (Kraljevo 1975) 112, sl. 6, crt. 4. The author gives his attention to the men breaking the thief's ankles -a rare iconographic detail, present in the scenes in Crna Reka Monastery, Toplichki Monastery and St George Church in Banjane (v. ibid., 119). 28 Stavropoulou-Makri, Les peintures, 19. 29 According to an inscription on the façade of the church, it was erected in 1575/6. The last section of the donor's inscription containing the year in which it was painted has not been preserved. J. Houliaras suggests that the mural paintings were done in the same year (Ι. Π. Χουλιαράς, Οι τοιχογραφίες του ναού της Γέννησης της Θεοτόκου στην Κορίτιανη. Συμβολή στη μελέτη της μνημειακής ζωγραφικής του α' μισού του 17 ου αι. στα Κατσανοχώρια, Ιωάννινα 2015, 24-27, 82-84, εικ. 62 35 Proestaki, Western influences, 309-311, figs. 16-18. The author focuses on the fact that painters from the Kakavas family prefer models inherited from the works of painters from the Epirus School, and especially those of the Kondaris brothers, in another publication: eadem, around Stemnitsa -a town in the Peloponnese. 36 Xanthi Proestaki, who has studied the Western influences on the painting style on the peninsula in the seventeenth century, emphasizes that they too follow Kondaris's iconographysometimes very closely, sometimes through the inclusion of just a few details. Proestaki does not discuss how the scene from Veltsista became so popular in a relatively distant region such as the Peloponnese, but I find it logical to suspect influence of some non-surviving mural paintings from Thebes 37 -the hometown of the Kondaris painters, as well as of some frescoes in the area around the town. 38 A similar iconographical model can be found at other locations in Greek territories too: on the Ionian is-   (1625); 40 in Wallachian monuments from the second half of the seventeenth century. 41 We have grounds to believe that the workshops of Mihail from Linotopi and of the Kakavas and Moschos families had de viso contact with works by Kondaris; however, such an assumption would seem uncertain about other painters. In the latter's works certain elements have been added to the traditional iconographical type of the 39 Present on the scene here are the Virgin Mary fainted on the ground, Longinus on horseback and many horsemen. The top part of the scene was destroyed. D. Triantaphyllopulos  The scene of the Crucifixion is located in the lunette under the north arm of the cross; it was done by the same painter who worked on the altar and in the eastern part of the nave (ibid., 70). The frescoes in the church have been partially painted over. 44 The characters represented here include Mary Magdalene at the Cross, as well as four horsemen behind the walls of Jerusalem (Σαμπανίκου, Ο ζωγραφικός διάκοσμος, 128-133, πίν. Ζ'). According to the donor's inscription the wall paintings are the work of Priest John from Stagoi (Kalabaka) and his children (ibid., 32, 307). According to the observations of Evi Sampanikou, the scene in the chapel follows the composition of the metropolitan church Dormition of the Theotokos in Kalabaka (1573)   47 This element of the scene, the Virgin Mary approaching the cross together with the women, and St John the Theologian grieving next to her, is probably borrowed from the scene in Philantropinon Monastery. The prophet David (here positioned quite far from the episode to which his prophecy refers), as well as the many horsemen, are probably known to the painter from Kondaris's composition. V. Χουλιαράς, Οι τοιχογραφίες, 50-51, εικ. 9, 35. According to Houliaras the wall paintings can be dated to 1623 (ibid., 82). 48 In general the painter follows the classical Byzantine model (v.  reason that art historians failed to pay attention to their specifics, even though a portion of the monuments has already been the subject of monographic studies. Such compositions are found in three monastery churches where the frescoes are chronologically close to each other: Holy Archangels in Kučevište, North Macedonia, Dormition of the Theotokos in Piva, Montenegro, and St George in Lomnica, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Here we will examine them in the context of the development of the scene towards the end of the sixteenth century in the Balkans. The scene in the church in the Monastery of the Holy Archangels in Kučevište (1591) is badly preserved and quite faded 50 ( fig. 9). Aneta Serafimova, the author of the monographic study on the monument, highlights a number of unusual features in the iconographical model; however, she does not provide comparative material. Her conclusion is very general -the image is not typical either for the monuments of Mount Athos or for those from the diocese of the Patriarchate of Peć. 51 The Virgin Mary fainted on the ground with the women caring for her is one of the elements of Western origin that we recognize in the scene from Kučevište. Another is Mary Magdalene, kneeling at the base of Christ's cross. Even though her image is included in the published scheme of a part of the scene, 52 her presence is not acknowledged in the text of the monographic study. Mary Magdalene is depicted in the centre of the composition, hugging the cross with both arms. She is dressed in a scarlet robe, and her loose hair hangs on her shoulders.   56 As to the text of the scroll that Serafimova deciphers, in the studied period it is common that the inscribed prophecies do not necessarily correspond to the prophet in the image. 57 It seems more probable that the prophet in Kučevište is Habakkuk, who is also depicted as young and beardless; also, he is included in two of the painters' manuals as a part of the Crucifixion scene. 58 The components listed above make the scene from Kučevište quite similar to that of the Kondaris brothers. However, here we find another episode that is missing in the examined Crucifixion scenes from the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries from the territory of modernday Greece: the mixing of the vinegar and gall. The episode is positioned close to Christ's cross. Two men face each other on both sides of a big vessel. One is sitting, stirring the gall, and the other is standing, pouring the vina green mantle with white lining (in some cases ermine). The mantle slides off her back, revealing a part of the lining. On many occasions, as in the scene from Kučevište, the saint is dressed in a plain red robe. 54 64 The scene is located in the central nave of the temple, on the northern wall. It is signed with an inscription: raspetJe h+ vo. My great gratitude to the Bishop of the Eparchy of Budimlja and Nikšić Joanikije Mićović, Hierodeacon Sava Vukajlović, and particularly to the abbot of the monastery Hieromonk Eftimij Škuletić for granting me access and permission to photograph the frescoes. I am especially grateful to Assoc. Prof. Ivan Vanev for the photographs. 65 The donor's inscription was first published by Lj. Stojanović, Stari srpski zapisi i natpisi I, Beograd 1902, no. 950. It provides controversial information about the year of completion of the frescoes on the altar and the nave, and as a result scholars date the works differ- Fig. 10. Crucifixion, Dormition of the Theotokos Church in Piva Monastery, 1603-1605 this moment, it has not been published or discussed, as there is still no integral study of the murals of this monument from the territory of Montenegro, which is representative for the period. 66 The positioning of the main characters follows the traditional model of the scene: the grieving Virgin Mary and Saint John the Theologian flank Christ on the cross. As demonstrated above, some of the elements that comprise the remaining part of the scene already gained certain popularity among painting ateliers from the beginning of the seventeenth century, mostly through Kondaris's scene. Thus, a kneeling Mary Magdalene is depicted 67 in the foreground, above Adam's skull in the Calvary cave; a small devil above the impenitent thief 's mouth pulls his soul out. The composition is flanked by two groups of horsemen approaching the crucifixes from both sides. The group to the left consists of characters whose presence in the scene is highly unusual. The horseman in the foreground is depicted with a crown on his head -probably Pontius Pilate, accompanied by the two high priests (fig. 11). This feature corresponds to the testimony in the Gospel of John; according to it Pontius Pilate went to Calvary in order to post a sign reading "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" (J 19, 19). The episode is known as part of the Passions cycle, 68 and its representation in the scene of the Crucifixion is rather rare. The only parallels of which I am aware at the present moment are an unpublished icon from the Dousikou Monastery in Thessaly (probably sixteenth c.), the mural paintings from the church Birth of the Theotokos in Koritiani, Epirus (first half of the seventeenth c.) and the monastery church of St Nicholas in Šiševо (1630 Fig. 11. Crucifixion, detail, Piva Monastery, 1603-1605 In Piva, behind the Virgin Mary we see a soldier without a nimbus, whose physical features and clothing fully correspond to those of the centurion Longinus ( fig.  12). He pierces Christ's right side with his spear, which is unusual for the iconography of the scene in post-Byzantine painting. Without naming them explicitly, the Evangelists speak of two individuals present at the Crucifixion -the centurion who believed in Christ, 70 and the soldier who pierced him with his spear. 71 Subsequently both soldiers were associated with St Longinus, to whom a great number of vitae are dedicated. There is a variety of versions concerning the identity, deeds and martyrdom of this saint. The earliest surviving Greek vita (sixth-seventh c.) identifies him as the centurion -an identification accepted not only in the hagiographical tradition 72 but in the Eastern iconography of the scene too. 73 In the West- 50-51, εικ. 9, 35;and in Šiševо v. K. Antevska, Manastir Sv. Nikola Šiševski, in: Matka. Kulturno nasledstvo, ed. E. Dimitrova et al., Skopje 2011, 225. I  Nevertheless, the fact that the earliest Latin version of his vita from the middle of the fifth century (where the saint is identified as the spearman) is based upon a now lost Greek version, we can assume that such a text probably existed: A. N. Kri͡ ukova,Longin Sotnik. Pochitanie L. S. na Zapade,in: PĖ 41,431. 73 One depiction of the scene of the Crucifixion from Theotokos and the Holy Trinity Church in the village of Kalatenes on Crete ern hagiographical literature, 74 and respectively in Western European art, 75 Longinus is usually identified with the spearman.
In connection with the extraordinary detail of Longinus in the scene from Piva, we must also mention the depiction of the scene of the Crucifixion from the monastery church Holy Theotokos Evangelistria in Agios Minas, Epirus (after 1576). 76 In his description of it, (fourteenth c.) is indicative in this aspect; here the centurion is signed as Ο ΛΟΓΙΝΟΣ: v. К. Λασσιθιωτάκη, Εκκλησίες της Δυτικής Κρήτης (Α΄Επαρχία Κισάμου), Κρητικά Χρονικά 21 (1969) 195-196, εικ. 33. The matter of the different versions of Longinus's image in the Orthodox tradition has been discussed by Miodrag Marković (v. idem,Ciklus Velikih praznika,111). He also examines several rare cases where Longinus has been identified with the spearman -the Syrian Gospel of Rabbula (sixth c.) and the images in several churches in Cappadocia (late twelfth-early thirteenth centuries). 74 For the saint's earliest hagiographical text in Latin v. the literature cited in n. 72. The differences between the Eastern and the Western traditions are also reflected in the apocryphal texts. As M. Marković mentions, a Greek version of Acta Pilati (early fifth c.) associates Longinus with the centurion, and a Latin one -with the spearman: v. idem, Ciklus Velikih praznika, 111. The Saint's Life by Metaphrastes was not translated into Latin before the second half of the sixteenth century (v. Kri͡ ukova,Longin Sotnik. Pochitanie L. S. na Zapade,431). 75 1, 3, 6. 76 The scene was described in detail by J. Houliaras -according to him it generally follows the models from the monuments in Veltsista (v. idem, Η εντοίχια, 82-84, εικ. 62). A more substantial deviation and a relatively rare occurrence in my opinion is the posture of the impenitent thief; he is depicted leaning forward, with waving hair and his head hung low. This character has been portrayed in the same Fig. 12. Crucifixion, detail, Piva Monastery, 1603-1605 J. Houliaras focuses on the soldier who pierces Christ's body. He directs his attention to the faded nimbus around the soldier's head and concludes that the painter probably intended to depict the centurion Longinus at this spot but upon realizing his mistake he tried to erase the nimbus, as such a position would not correspond to the Gospel story. 77 In this scene, Longinus is depicted on horseback behind the above-mentioned figure.
Whatever the reason for the erased image, it is hardly a 'mistake' of the painter. As we will demonstrate further below, Longinus is depicted as the soldier piercing Christ's body in another scene too -that from Lomnica Monastery. This reiteration in several wall-painted ensembles from the beginning of the seventeenth century is quite unusual for Byzantine iconography, and it is hardly accidental. Although such identification can be observed in other traditions too, 78 most probably the reason for the manner in the chapel of the monastery church Holy Theotokos Mavriotissa in Castoria (1552), in St George Church in Banjane (1548/9) and in the nave of Toplichki Monastery (1536/7). 77 Ibid., 82, n. 532. 78 In one version of Longinus's vita, preserved in two Georgian manuscripts (tenth-eleventh centuries): v. N. N. Krasheninnikova, inclusion of the detail in these three Balkan monuments can be explained by the hypothesis that Western models reached the painters not through the works of members of the Cretan and Epirote schools but in another way, unknown to us.
Three additional episodes that also display certain peculiar features have been added to the foreground of the scene from Piva. Same as in Kučevište, to the left we see Virgin Mary fainted on the ground, with the women caring for her. To the right is the episode of the Division of the Garments. What is unusual here are the clothes and the actions of each character. Usually the episode includes three figures dressed either as soldiers or as civilians, sometimes with Jewish hats. In Piva Christ's cloak is held by three Jews (fig. 13); the one on the right wears an unusual tall hat; the elderly man in the middle cuts up the cloak with scissors; and the third one on the left holds   . 13. Crucifixion, detail, Piva Monastery, 1603-1605 three coloured sticks used to cast the lot (Mt 27,35;Mc 15,24;L 23,34;J 19,(23)(24). The three coloured sticks are an exceptionally rare detail here, 79 as well as the tall hat of the character to the right. Both elements are present in the episode from Dormition of the Theotokos Church in Zervat, Albania (1605/6) ( fig. 15). Another similarity between the scenes in Piva, Zervat and Kučevište is the emphasis on the episode Mixing the Gall with Vinegar. In all three monuments, it is portrayed in a different manner 80 but the attention paid to it sets these scenes apart from the most representative models from the sixteenth century, where the episode is not depicted at all. The next scene of the Crucifixion that I would like to examine is in St George Church of Lomnica Monastery (1607/8) 81 ( fig. 16). According to Ljiljana Ševo, the author of a monographic study on this monument, in terms 79 There are images of the soldiers playing dice. According to some researchers this detail is of Western origin; it is known from Holy Theotokos Rassiotissa Church in Castoria (1553), and from the Ravenna triptych by Georgios Klontzas (1562-1608). Cf. Γ. Γούναρης, Οι τοιχογραφίες των Αγίων Αποστόλων και της Παναγίας Ρασιώτησσας στην Καστοριά, Θεσσαλονίκη 1978, 111-114, πίν. 31β, 32α; Κωνσταντουδάκη-Κιτρομηλίδου, op. cit., 163, n. 59, πίν. Θ΄. 80 In Piva the mixing is done by two youngsters sitting next to each other to the right of the vessel. In Zervat the episode is positioned in the foreground of the scene, to the left, and in terms of composition it is close to the model in the church Dormition of the Theotokos of Karlukovski Monastery in Bulgaria (1602). V. the depiction in: V. Pandurski, Manastirskata stenna zhivopis v Karlukovo, Sofii͡ a 2002, 101-107, sh. IX, il. 23, 83-86. In Kučevište the position of this episode in the altar, above the Vision of Saint Peter from Alexandria, hints at the emphasis upon it by the painters/creator of the programme. A. Serafimova sees here a probability for a semantic parallel between the division of Christ's garments and his torn chiton from Arius's heresy being sought after: eadem, op. cit., 84. 81 Lj. Ševo, Manastir Lomnica, Beograd 1999, 78-79, sl. 20, 35. The painting of the murals in the monastery's catholicon began in the late 1570s, when the painter Longinus did the upper parts of the altar and the nave. A few years later, in 1607/8, four painters completed of composition the Crucifixion from Lomnica is similar to the scenes from Pustinja Monastery, St Spas Church in Štip, The Birth of Christ Church in Arbanassi and St Theodore Tyron and St Theodore Stratelates Church in Dobarsko. She believes that these monuments were done -much as the one in Lomnica -by 'unambitious travelling painters, mainly Greeks' . 82 Similarities of the Crucifixion scene from Lomnica to some scenes done by Serbian painters leads her to the conclusion that in this period in the Balkans there existed shared models that were disseminated in the area. 83 In her conclusions, Ševo does not take into consideration the monuments from the Greek territories, and in her discussion she omits the most peculiar features of the scene. Firstly, the group of several men with nimbi approaching to the right of the Crucifixion. Obviously, these are the Apostles; in Lomnica, the painters decided to depict them as witnesses of the Saviour's death. This is highly untypical for this scene, even though the Gospel of Luke describes that, besides the women, all of Christ's acquaintances watched from a distance (L 23, 49). Even more unusual is the depiction of one of the men with nimbi represented to the left of the Cross. He is positioned closest to Christ, bowing his head down to his palms, covered by his robe as a sign of special reverence, probably for something that he receives near the Cross. The publication of what this famous painter started; their names are cited in the donor's inscription: Yovan, Yovan, Nicholas and George (ibid., 28). 82 The particular similarities between the scenes have not been listed, and neither have the features of the scene of the Crucifixion been discussed. The author directs her attention to the fact that several details known from earlier monuments are missing in the scene, and also that all three crosses have been depicted (ibid., 115, n. 118). According to her, the thieves' postures are very similar to those in Dobarsko (ibid.,179). 83 The author refers to the scene from the church in Crna Reka. V. ibid., 115, with bibliography. Zervat, Albania, 1605/1606 the image does not allow for a more detailed observation. The object could be the blood and water flowing from Christ's wound after his ribs were pierced (J 19, 34). 84 According to a popular version of the life of Longinus from the twelfth century in the West, 85 as well as in the Armenian tradition, 86 when the flowing blood covered his eyes, he was healed of his blindness. 87 In Lomnica Longinus is positioned behind that group of characters. In her description of the scene, Ševo notes that Longinus is pointing to Christ with his hand but she does not mention that he is holding the spear piercing the Saviour in his other hand. If indeed the Apostle closest to the Crucifixion receives the drops of the Saviour's blood in his hands, then we can assume that the painters followed a version of the hagiographic text where the Apostles were present at the Crucifixion and one of them -and not Longinus, contrary to the belief in the Western and Armenian traditions -was healed miraculously. Of course, this remains only a hypothesis. Nevertheless, the identification of Longinus with the soldier who pierced Christ's ribs brings the image closer to those from Piva and Evangelistria Monasteries.

Fig. 14. Crucifixion, Dormition of the Theotokos Church in
Finally, I would like to highlight another detail from the depiction of the scene in Lomnica that was not discussed by Ševo. In her opinion, the figure to the right of Christ's Cross is a 'young man without a nimbus leaning 84 For the dogmatic meaning of this detail in the earliest depictions v. Wessel,op. cit.,[39][40][41] For the emergence and distribution of this legend in Western medieval literature v. Kri͡ ukova,Longin Sotnik. Pochitanie L. S. na Zapade,432. The story is found in several compilations, including Legenda Aurea of the Dominican friar Jacobus de Voragine: idem, The golden legend, London 1998, 102. 86 Devriki͡ an, Shirini͡ an, Longin Sotnik. V armi͡ anskoĭ tradit͡ sii, 435-438. 87 In a number of Crucifixion scenes in the West Longinus is shown pointing a finger to his eyes (v. Bagnoli,op. cit.,(16)(17)figs. 1,3;Aavitsland,op. cit ., 334, fig. 7). onto the lower beam of the cross' . 88 Without doubt, this is Mary Magdalene, kneeling before the Cross. Her presence should be highlighted as a common motif in the scenes from Kučevište, Evangelistria, Piva, Zervat and Lomnica.
In order to place the Crucifixion scenes from these three monuments on the diverse map of post-Byzantine painting from the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth centuries, firstly we should try to determine the extent of their similarity to the images of the scene in representative monuments from the sixteenth century in Mount Athos, the Meteora and Epirus. A comparison to this group of works reveals a highest similarity to the compositions of the Kondaris brothers' workshop in Veltsista. The similarities can be found in the images of the fainted Virgin Mary (Kučevište, Piva); Mary Magdalene, kneeling at the base of the Cross (Kučevište, Piva, Lomnica); the devil waiting for the thief 's soul (Piva); the many horsemen (Piva). These images date from the end of the sixteenth and the first decade of the seventeenth centuries and are among the earliest examples of the influence of the Veltsista composition; they bear evidence to the actual iconographical trends that the painters followed.
We can hardly give an answer to the question whether the painters knew Kondaris's work de viso. However, it is certain that the scenes from the three monuments stand apart from the compositions from the beginning of the seventeenth century that follow Kondaris closely -even through a simplified model (for example, the works of Mihail from Linotopi). The distinctive feature here is the introduction of certain details that are absent in the most representative monuments from the sixteenth century. Above, we demonstrated that some of them are found 88 Ševo, op. cit., 79. Fig. 15. Crucifixion, detail, Dormition of the Theotokos Church in Zervat, Albania 1605/1606 in other wall-painted ensembles too -Holy Theotokos Evangelistria Monastery in Agios Minas and Dormition of the Theotokos Church in Zervat. Some of the painters draw from the artistic heritage in the diocese of the Archbishopric of Ohrid from the fifteenth and the sixteenth centuries (the Mixing of the Gall and Vinegar episode in Kučevište, Piva, Zervat), whereas others can be found in the territory of modern-day Greece (Pontius Pilate's depiction in Piva), although very rarely. At present, I am not aware of any known parallels for one of the details -the presence of the Apostles at Calvary, along with the actions of one of them by Christ's Cross (Lomnica). Two particularly rare episodes are typical for the group of monuments that we have examined thoroughly here: Longinus, piercing Christ's ribs [Piva, Lomnica, Evangelistria (?)], as well as the iconographical features of the group of Jews, dividing the garments (Piva, Zervat).
The parallels with the scenes from Evangelistria Monastery in Agios Minas and from Zervat expand the circle of monuments with similar iconographical features further. Both churches are located in Epirus but a few features that are not typical for the region stand out in the work of the painters. The observations by J. Houliaras about the wall paintings in Evangelistria Monastery reveal that they are a combination of influences from the Epirote school and the traditions of Ohrid and Castoria from the fifteenth century. This leads him to the hypothesis that the painter could have come from a region in Macedonia; 89 however, he remains certain that the painter was Greek (although he discusses the phonetic transcription of the words and the use of the Cyrillic letter И). 90 In my opinion, in several inscriptions there is evidence that 89 Χουλιαράς, Η εντοίχια, 103-108, 504. The painter did not sign his work; there is no evidence that he worked on other wall-painted ensembles. Houliaras distinguishes only one painting style and believes that the whole ensemble was done by a single artist (ibid., 101). 90 Ibid., n. 621. the painter experienced serious difficulties when signing some of the scenes; in practice, this does not support the theory of his Greek provenance. 91 Recently, a few more wall-painted ensembles from the territory of Bulgaria (the murals in St Theodore Tyron and St Theodore Stratelates Church in Dobarsko and St Nicholas Church of the Seslavtsi Monastery) 92 have been attributed to the painter that did some of the wall paintings in the church in Zervat (including the scene of the Crucifixion). 93 The inscriptions from the church in Albania are in Greek but several signatures and scroll inscriptions from the eastern section of the nave and the altar are Cyrillic. The common features revealed through a comparison with the inscriptions in a few other monuments from the territories of Bulgaria and North Macedonia support the hypothesis that the painters belonged to a big workshop where similar iconographical and stylistic characteristics can be distinguished. 94 The iconographi-91 Namely, the inscriptions in the scene Massacre of the Innocents, signed as Υ ΔΡΟΦΟΤΟΝΙΑ (for the inscriptions I follow Houliaras's reading (ibid., n. 361), Annunciation -Ο ΕΒΑ-ΓΓΕΛΗΝ (ibid., n. 330) or the text on prophet Gideon's scroll; instead of references to his prophecies, it contains instructions of a painters' manual on how to depict the prophet ΟΜΟΙΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΠΡΟΦ[Η]/ΤΗΣ ΓΕΔΕΟΝ (ibid., n. 290). 92 Fig. 16. Crucifixion, St George Church of Lomnica Monastery, 1607/1608 cal features of the wall paintings in Zervat have not been researched yet; however, recently a few thematic similarities were emphasized -not only to the wall paintings of the above-mentioned artistic circle from the territories of modern-day Bulgaria and North Macedonia, but also to the wall paintings in Piva Monastery. 95 I believe a brief presentation of these two monuments is necessary, in particular with regards to the profile of the painters that worked on the frescoes there. This necessity is determined by several similarities to elements from Kučevište, Piva and Lomnica; these include some elements from the Crucifixion scene, but also a number of features of the wall painting programmes, the language of the inscriptions, as well as the hypotheses about the painters' provenance and place of professional education. On the linguistic level, these painters demonstrate little skill, both with regards to Greek and Cyrillic inscriptions. 96 Here I must quote an intriguing and entirely realistic hypothesis by Ševo, included in a footnote: due to the mistakes in the Greek inscriptions, she assumes that neither Greek nor a Slavic language was the painters' mother tongue and suggests they could have been ' Aromanians' . 97 Another common trend here is the painters' preference for commissions by Slavic clients, which could be rooted in their education to do inscriptions in Cyrillic. 98 A great number of researchers discussing the painters' provenance or the place of their education associate them with the region of Castoria, or, more generally, with Northern Greece; 99 according to A. Serafimova the painters of Kučevište in particular come from a workshop in Linotopi. 100 What does the scene of the Crucifixion that we examined in detail reveal in this respect? Obviously, these painters' environment was open to the introduction grupa pametnit͡ si ot krai͡ a na XVI i nachaloto na XVII vek na Balkanite, Problemi na izkustvoto 1 (2018) 75-85. The author's conclusion is that "the inscribers used various linguistic norms or orthographical types, and they combined those unsystematically, or simply transcribed them without comprehension", and that it is precisely the diversity of the linguistic data that impedes the ethnic identification of the authors (ibid., 83). 95 Namely, the inclusion of the hymn Vsemirnuyu Slavu in the wall painting programme (v. Kolusheva,The Virgin's 'Epithet',(171)(172)(173)(174)(175)(176)(177)(178)(179)(180)(181)(182)(183)(184)(185)(186)(187)(188)(189). 96 The only monastery where the inscriptions are entirely in Greek is Holy Theotokos Evangelistria; in the remaining monuments the language of the inscriptions is mixed (v. Serafimova,op. cit.,(268)(269)Ševo,op. cit.,(179)(180)Kyriakoudis,op. cit.,500). According to Tsvetan Vassilev the painter of the church in Zervat executes the Greek inscriptions better than the Cyrillic ones: idem, op. cit., 75-76. 97 Ševo, op. cit., 180, n. 17. The author uses the term 'Tsintsars' . 98 The painter from Agios Minas is an exception; his work is known to us only from there. The painter from Zervat is known for executing commissions for both Greek and Slavic clients (Dobarsko, Seslavtsi). 99 For the provenance of the painters of Piva Monastery v. cited literature in: Kolusheva,The Virgin's 'Epithet',[183][184]. Ševo believes that the work of the painters in Lomnica shares a great stylistic similarity with that of the painters in Dobarsko, and both wall-painted ensembles are based upon the Castorian iconographical models from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries: eadem, op. cit., 179. 100 A. Serafimova highlights similarities to icons from Makrialexi Monastery in the vicinity of Ioannina, done by the painters Nicholas and Mihail from Linotopi; she believes that the painters belonged to the same workshop: eadem, op. cit., 276-277. Serafimova points out that generally the painters use models that are common for monuments in Central and Southern Epirus, as well as for parts of modern-day Greek Macedonia in the thematic and iconographical respect (ibid., 276).
of Western models that are not traditional for Orthodox art. Some of these models were introduced to their repertory through the mediation of monuments from the region of Ioannina; others were not known to painters from the territory of Greece and perhaps should be sought in the northernmost parts of Epirus, close to the Adriatic coast. If we were to establish a hypothetical eastern border of the area where these painters could have been educated, I would suggest the artistic centres in Ohrid and Castoria, which also influenced their iconographical repertory.

***
Lastly, in this context I would like to add two later depictions of the scene of the Crucifixion originating from the Bulgarian lands in the middle of the seventeenth century. To my knowledge, the icons or wall paintings from the sixteenth-seventeenth century in this area display no direct or indirect iconographical influence of the late Gothic type of the scene of the Crucifixion. 101 The two icons where Mary Magdalene is depicted at the base of Christ's cross originate from the region of Melnik, from a painters' workshop that functioned in the region in the   Crucifixion, ca. 1662, region of Melnik, private collection (after: Gerov, Ikoni) 1660s. They were published for the first time by Georgi Gerov 102 who convincingly associates them, together with several other iconographical works, with the workshop that did the wall paintings in the ossuary of Rozhenski Monastery in 1662. 103 The icons have not been dated. 104 Their compositions are almost identical and include only the main characters of the scene. In the centre is the crucified Christ, and the other characters are positioned around him: to the left, Virgin Mary with two other women, and to the right -John and Longinus ( fig. 17). Mary Magdalene is kneeling at the base of the cross.
At first glance, the simplicity of the scene, the traditional positioning of the characters, and the unusual presence of Mary Magdalene, link the icons to several wall-painted ensembles from the territory of Central and Northern Greece. There, a similar iconographical model was used: Three Hierarchs Chapel in Varlaam Monastery (1638), and the churches in Transfiguration Monastery in Dryovouno (1652) and St Nicholas Monastery in Metsovo (seventeenth century). 105 What sets the icons from Melnik apart from these images is the absence of one traditional, even mandatory element of the scene -the Calvary Cave with Adam's skull, a symbolic representation of humanity's salvation through Christ's sacrifice. One possible explanation could be that the painter omitted the detail but its absence is more likely due to another reason -a similar iconographical model is found in one type of the scene of the Crucifixion, disseminated in the West in the fourteenth-fifteenth centuries. The simplicity of some of the examples 102 Idem, Ikoni ot Melnik i Melnishko, Sofii͡ a 2007, 28, 76-77, 84-85. 103 For the painter's activity and his works in the region v. idem, Edno atelie ot vtorata polovina na XVII vek v Melnishkii͡ a kraĭ, Izvestii͡ a na Istoricheski muzeĭ 4 (Blagoevgrad 2005) 52-59; idem, Ikoni,[28][29][30] According to the information provided by G. Gerov, one of the icons is in a private collection. There is no information about the location of the other: ibid., 76, 84. 105 For these images v. supra. Researchers studying the painting style of the three monuments come to the conclusion that in general the painters that worked on the frescoes there used mainly models from Crete, and for the scene of the Crucifixion they borrowed details from the Cretan and the Epirote Schools; v. Τσάμπουρας, Το έργο, 78-79, 151; Σαμπανίκου, Ο ζωγραφικός διάκοσμος, 235-252; eadem, Η παράσταση. is taken to the extreme -e.g. an icon from the treasury of San Giorgio dei Greci Church in Venice (second half of the fourteenth century), 106 an icon by Bernardo Daddi from Accademia Gallery in Florence (1343) 107 or an icon from Pinacoteca Nazionale in Siena (1355Siena ( -1388. 108 The imagery consists solely of Christ, the Virgin Mary, John and Mary Magdalene kneeling at the Cross. The figure of the latter has replaced Calvary Cave; this feature brings the icons from Melnik much closer to this iconographical type. An even greater similarity to them can be found in a triptych from the National Museum of Ravenna that includes the Crucifixion. It has been ascribed to a Venetian-Ferraran workshop and dated to the beginning of the fifteenth century. 109 Some researchers date this work to the sixteenth century and consider its author a follower of Andreas Pavias or Andreas Ritsos. 110 If the latter statement is correct, then we may assume that this iconographical type was known to Orthodox painters too. Did the painter from Melnik use a Western engraving or print (anthivolo) of this image of the scene directly, or did the model reach him through an image by a painter from Crete or from some other zone of contact between the Balkans and the West? This is a matter of speculation. However, the differences between the two icons from Melnik and the wall-painted works in the Balkans are indicative of the various channels through which Western iconographical details were introduced to the scene of the Crucifixion in the seventeenth century.