H. Pichura Kacer, MS, Izobrazitel'noje Iskusstvo Belorussii Dooktjabr

238 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES author does not hesitate to point out Astasyn and Hrodoo di-splay similar features which are common to the Byz:antino-Gothic characteristics, and East Slavonic tradibion, he is at pains it is to the gTeat credit of ,the author to stress essential differences, which that he has widened ·considerably the even at this early stage were becom scope of our knowledge of architec ing a distinctive .feature of Byelo tur.a,l forms from this period by his russian architecture (p. 21). For the research. sake of completeness, it is regrettable The baroque style made an early that he was not able to ·include in his and spectacular appearance in Byelo study •the eacrly mediaeval churches russia during the period 1584-1593, of Smolensk, whkh although now .in when an Italian architect, Giovanni Russia, more properly he!long from Bernardoni, built ,the Great Church an architectural point of view to the at N:iasviz. Among the most -or,iginal Polack-Videbsk tradition. structures of ,thios style Canturija The period extending from the mentions the chuvches of Hrodna, the 14th .to the mid-17th century must Uni-ate church of Kniazycy, ,the ralte •as one of the most fruitful -in Church of St Nicholas in Mahilou, the evolution of a specifically Byelo and the charmingly simple church of russian ·style in archi,tecture. Cantu Michaliski. The •author g,ives numer rija pays due regard to ·the common ous ·examples of baroque style town traditions of the East Slavs, but he haHs (Minsk, Niasviz, Viciebsk, Mahi archly introduces a fourth 'Brother lou, and Causy) urban dwelling nation' (sic) (p. 26), namely Lithu houses (including urban ensembles ania proper with its capital in Vilna, and model villages buUt by some of which played a predominant role in the more enlightened magnates in the reception of West European tastes Hrodna, Pastavy and Varniany) and and ideas in-to Ren:missance Byelo country palaces and manors. He also russia. Indeed, Gothic influences were provides a section on wooden strongly felt in the building of such churches and synagogues. The 18th monumen:ts as the oid castle -in Hrod century witnessed some extremely na, the fortified castle of Mir, and proficient town planning schemes. and the manor-house of Hajciuniski, as the building of innumerable churches well as in tihe splendidly original in the rococo style with an el:ab ,churches of Synkavicy (late 15th 1c.) ora tely g,abled facade flanked by two Malamafajsk (early 16th c.), Suprasl, towers, which are so much a pa1,t of the Church of ,the Bernardins in the Byelorussian rural scene. Vilna and the beautifully proportion There is a particularly interesting ed churnh of Smarhon. These chapter on 18th and 19ith century churches are closely related by wooden chaty and farm buildings. certain common features, such as More than any other previous author, their elaborately gabled facades, their Canturij,a, (who strangely enough is four ·corner towers with plain conical a Georgiian by nationality) has given roofs, their Gothic arches and honey a coherent, well-balanced ,and extra comb fan-vaulting. Although buiLt ordin:arily fully documented survey of principally as Orthodox places of Byelorussian architecture. In view of worship, they are quite unlike any the work's ·exceptional quality, it is comparable building of similar dat~ hard to see why only 2000 copies have in Russia. Other churches in Byelo been printed. russia at Isk.aldz, Kamai, Hniezna, H. Pichura Kacer, M. S., Izobrazitel'noje iskusstvo Belorussii dooktjabr'skogo perioda, 'Nauka i technika', Minsk, 1969. 202 pages. Illustrations. The history of Byelorussian ant has Suprasl frescoes), M. Scakacichin (the yet to be thoroughly explored. engTavings of Skaryn,a and Voscank.a) Individual s-tudi'es on particular and T. Rievuskaj:a fthe wall-paiI11tin~s aspects ·of Byelorusstl•an painting, of the Tupicevskij monastery), but no engraV'ing and sculpture, have been systematic abtempt has been made to published in the past, both prior to present the history of Byeloruss,ian and during the Soviet period, by art as forming a coherent whole. A authors such as P. Pokryskin (the few tentative, and indeed valuable, Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:46:06AM via free access REVIEWS 239 steps were ,taken in this direction by nica (14th-15th c.). that of St. Onuph the InstitUJte of Byelorussian Culture rius from Mscislau, and the frescoes in Minsk during ,the later 1920s, but of the monastic Church of the Annun these were abruptly checked by the ciation in Suprasl (1551). In an unaccountable vagaries of official introduclion ,to thi>s chapter, K 0acer dom. Since the end of rthe last war, stresses the continuing links and however, scholars have shown a interaction between the cultures of reviv,ing interest in ,the history of Byelorussia, Russia and <the Ukraine Byelorussian art, par,ticularly during throughout this period; indeed, he the period before 1917. Kacer has seems to attribute to these links an proved himself to be one of the most importance equal to if not grea,ter able and dedioated pioneers in this than that of the West European influ field, and the amateur of Byelorussian ences penetrating into ByeloruS1Sia antiquities w,ill remember his brief through LHhuania (pp. 32-3). The but admirable outline of the history of evidence which he produces in support archi-teclure (Belorusskaja architektu of a Russian or even a drevnerusskij ra, Gosizdait BSSR, Minsk, 1956). His influence on Byelorussian art during latest work appears with -the blessings thi!s period is unconv,incing. As an of ,the leading official sculptor of the example, Kacer refers (p. 36) to tJhe BSSR, Z. Azhur, and rthe cooperation Msci:s~au .icon of Sit. Onuphrius, ,in of A. Lis, the biographer of that most which, however, the realistically authoritative historian of Byeloruss dmwn body of the Saint, and the ian art, Mikola Scakacichin. clean-shaven nobleman kneeling in Kacer discerns eight distinct periods prayer and dressed Hke some Burgun in his work, six of which he deals dian count, have more 0in common with at some length. The monuments with Flanders than Wlith the icono of ,the protohistoric period, which fall graphy of Moscow. Even :the more more properly within the province of purely Byzantine Andrejka, who in the archaeolog.ist, are considered very the 15th century decorated the Chapel succinotly. of ,the Holy Trinity in LubLin wiith frescoes of great splendour, depicted The second period, which Kacer, Biblical scenes, such •as the flagella w1th some reluctance, calls ,that of tion of Christ, which are never the 'West Russian' principalities, encountered in Ancient Russian art, includes the evolution of .frescoes and and which are obvious examples of miniatures in the lands of Polack, Gothic influences (p. 39). Hrodna, Turau-Pinsk, Viciebsk, Minsk and even Smolensk. Although he In dealing with por,trait-painting in readily poi1111ts ot11t 1tha1t miniatures suc-h Byelorussia during the Renaissance as those from .the manuscript Life of period. Kacer very rightly sets out to the Blessed Abraham of Smolensk correct the popular misconception (12th-13th ce111turies), have many cha fostered 'in some official publicaitions racteristics in common with similar that this style only developed in works from Russia and the Ukraine, Byelorussia during the 17th and 18th Kacer is at pains to explain that the centuries (p. 42), and he establishes common heritage of 'Ancient Rus' that a flourishing 'school of portraitists was analogous to the spread of a existed as early as it.he 15th century. common 'Romance' style of arc The grea,t; Renaissance engraver hitecture and art throughoult mediaev Fmncis Skaryna is dea1t with very al France. England and Germany (p. adequately, but Kacer's secbion on 20). In addition to the often described sculp,t;ure relies overmuch on the frescoes of ,the St. Saviours Euphro works of expatriate Byelorussian syne Church in Polack, theml!thor gives ,artists working in Moscow. Similarly details of the lesser-known wall the delicate miniatures of Bohdan Anisimovic, which properly belong to paintings of 0the Annunciation Church in Viciebsk, and the stone bas-relief this period, are passed over in silence. icons of Minsk (pp. 25-6). In the chapter covering the art of The period extending from the 15th the late 16th and the 17th centuries, to the late 16th century is officially the author follows his usual course known as rthe period of the 'forma in considering successively the devel tion of Byelorussian national cons opment of painting, poDtirai!t-pai111ting, ciousness'. To ,this era belong the frescoes, engrav,ing and sculp,t;ure. famous icon of St. Paraskieva Pia1t- Thanks to Kacer's research, the whole Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:46:06AM via free access 240 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES of this troubled period of Byelorussian technical proficiency, such as the history comes rto life, as ,the author portraitists A. Semes (1808-1864), V. describes the rise of the baroque style Vankovic (1799-1842). K. Korsalin in art, ,through the works of ithe (1809-1872) and I. Oleskievic, fixed on iconographer Apanas Piharevic, and .the canvas ,the elegant life and features engravers P. Mscislaviec (late 16th c.), of the luminaries of Vilna society in T. Makoilski (1575-1630), and Maksim the age of Barsceilski, Cacot, and Voscanka (fl. 1680-1708). His treat Dunin-Marcinkievic. Perhaps the most ment of the school of ·engraving at genial painter of the age was I. the Vilna Confraternity of the Holy Chrucki (1806-1885), the son of a Ghost, is not, however, as well Byelorussian Uniate priest, who ex documented as it might be (pp.

Load more