The Sinai Pantocrator: Iconography 101
This is the first of two articles. Part two will appear on Sunday.
By Luiz Coelho
Most churchgoers have probably seen this representation of Jesus Christ. The icon of Christ Pantocrator located at St. Catherine's Monastery in Sinai, Egypt (the Sinai Pantocrator) is regarded as one of the earliest examples available of what would be later described as Byzantine Iconography (or painting). Earlier pieces probably existed. In fact some features of the Sinai Pantocrator already were stable enough to conclude that such an icon was developed in the midst of a transitional style of Eastern representations of Christ in Majesty. However, all other pieces either were lost due to lack of preservation, or more likely were destroyed during the iconoclastic controversy. Consequently, this example of the Pantocrator is one of the oldest extant examples of an emerging style, heavily influenced by early Christian spirituality and Hellenistic philosophical thought, that would replace older artistic traditions and become a reference not only to the Eastern Christian world, but also to the West, and to the fringes of the Christian world.
The style expressed in the Sinai Pantocrator is an example of a genre which emerges from the late Roman Empire and from what would be called the Byzantine Empire, or the Roman Empire of the West. This style would survive in most of Eastern Europe, and Christian areas in the Middle East, leading to regional and periodic variations, such as Early, Middle and Late Byzantine, Coptic, Russian, and Armenian. It also would provide important elements upon which later styles would be developed in Western Europe. In fact, some scholars would regard Romanesque and Early Gothic paintings as a “Western” iconographic tradition. The importance behind the Sinai Pantocrator lies in the innumerable sub-products which emerged later and which were continuously used for Christian worship, and remain important for us Christians in our own day.
The image found in St. Catherine's Monastery of Christ as the Pantocrator , which is Greek for “Ruler of all,” is a 33 X 18 cm encaustic painting on wood, probably done during the 6th century A.D. It shows a frontal portrait of Christ holding a Gospel book in one hand, and blessing the viewer with the other hand. Behind him, one can see what seems to be a city. Around his head a gold leaf halo indicates to the viewer that this painting is not the portrait of a mere man, but of a divine figure. In this case, the iconographer wishes to indicate that this is an image of God Incarnate.
This emerging iconographic style is characterized by several influences, so that it is impossible to determine with any certainty where it was painted. One influence is Roman portraiture, which flourished during most of the Roman Empire. Paintings were often commissioned by wealthy families and portrayed people in dignifying frontal poses with an austere look. Like them, the Sinai Christ also follows a frontal pose and has an air of nobility. Another visible influence is the Egyptian school of Fayum, Lower Egypt. It is understood that large encaustic paintings started to replace reliefs on sarcophagi lids during the Roman era, and are a clear example of the merger between the Roman and Egyptian portraiture traditions. In fact, the Sinai Pantocrator resembles these paintings in pose, aspect and materials much more than any other work of art from that period. Obviously, the link between depictions of people in the afterlife and the Risen Son of God was very evident, and the evolution of such portraiture is clearly understandable.
Another source of influence for Byzantine iconography was a style of Syrian paintings that emerged during the Roman Empire as a merger of Asian and Hellenistic traditions. This style was essentially symbolic with outlines, isocephaly (all heads on a level), bodies without weight or substance, and space reduced to a minimum. Many of those characteristics are found in the Sinai Pantocrator too, and its further descendants would take them to the edge. The portrait of Christ takes control of the scene, practically hiding the landscape behind him, which still has some elements of the illusionistic decorative Roman tradition of painting. It sends a clear message that the subject of the portrait, and not an elaborate architectural landscape, is what matters in this new style.
Luiz Coelho, a seminarian from the Diocese of Rio de Janero, spends part of the year in the BFA program at the Savannah College of Art and Design. His Web site includes his art and his blog, Wandering Christian, on which he examines "Christianity in the third millennium, from a progressive, Latin American and Anglican point of view."

Well done. This is a very thorough and well rounded discussion of a treasure of Christian iconography. The Siani image of Peter shares some of the same characteristics which only supports your theory that this was an established way of presenting Christ, his Mother, the angels and the saints at that time. I look forward to reading your next installment.
Posted by Peter Pearson
|
June 26, 2009 8:54 AM
Fascinating stuff, Luiz. Thanks.
Posted by Jared Cramer
|
June 26, 2009 10:07 AM
Thanks Luiz!
Very pedagogic text where I found useful information on the old iconography. Beautiful piece!
Francisco Silva
Posted by xicoassis
|
June 26, 2009 1:25 PM
Dear Luiz,
The historical review is excellent and thanks for the crispy icon too (I´m copying it for future reminders about ¨Blessing the viewer¨. So many gifts).
Breathtaking stuff at your website...wow, I love the way you keep discovering and reinventing yourself...very inspiring to see you tighten your focus on life, church, the arts...meanwhile you sharpen your ever-revealing definitions for all of us to see!
Abrazos, siempre!
Leonardo Ricardo
Posted by Leonardo Ricardo
|
June 26, 2009 1:43 PM
Thank y'all for the kind comments!
I'm leaving a link to the icon Fr. Pearson mentioned:
http://touregypt.net/featurestories/catherines2-5.htm
and also to an early depiction of the Panagia Kyriotissa, also from St. Catherine's monastery:
http://touregypt.net/featurestories/catherines2-2.htm
Posted by Luiz Coelho
|
June 26, 2009 1:45 PM
Excellent! I had noticed the background architectural detail before but never really put it all together. That one insight is subtle but significant, I am sure. Keep writing.
Posted by Peter Pearson
|
June 26, 2009 2:41 PM
y´all...good Lord, you´ve gone Southern on us all (albeit it´s North for you).
Happy Days/daze
Posted by Leonardo Ricardo
|
June 26, 2009 8:30 PM
Luiz,
Thank you for posting this great piece on the icons of St. Catherine's Monastery. Excellent and great to read.
Peter+
http://santospopsicles.blogspot.com
Posted by Peter Carey
|
June 27, 2009 8:35 AM
By the way... Fr. Pearson, who posted a couple comments here, is a well-known iconographer. I recommend his book "A Brush with God." It's theoretically a book that teaches you how to write icons, but I often find the best insights on iconography in what iconographers have to say, and not art historians!
Most of what "matters" to me regarding iconography is related to the beautiful process of creating one icon.
LR, I find y'all a very easy and gender neutral contraction. :) I've used forever, especially now that I'm surrounded by southerners.
Posted by Luiz Coelho
|
June 27, 2009 8:41 PM
I've only come across this icon recently (I'm a Presbyterian!). It disturbed me a bit at forst as the expression seemed to be a sneer. But then I divided the image in half straight down the middle of the nose, mirrored each half then formed two images. What a magnificent result - this must be deliberate. One image is of a pale, wan, sad figure - the 'pale Gililean type but the other is of a winsome smiling figure, at peace with himself. Can the creator of the ican have done this deliberately as an expression of the subtle majesty of the Christ who is at one and the same time, the sacrificed Lamb of God, the sufffering servant and the one abandoned by the Father yet also the risen Lord, reigning in majesty, threatened by no-one, the Prince of Peace?
Posted by Drew
|
July 9, 2009 6:27 PM
Responding to Drew: Oh I would say it is very deliberate indeed. I daresay one side is the Resurrected or Ascended Christ and the other is the human Christ. 2 natures: one body so both natures have to be there to be am image of Jesus.
Posted by SisterGloriamarie
|
July 12, 2009 8:22 PM