t this point it seems to be appropriate to include some reflections on the function of figurative expression in general. The ancient ornaments of our churches haven’t got a merely aesthetic function, they don’t simply make the house of God more solemn and richer. Their function goes far beyond: like the word, liturgy and religious performances so widespread when the Basilica of Assisi was decorated, they take part in the preaching, that is to say they contribute to spread God’s word among people from any social rank. Since the very beginning, that was the basic function of the Christian figurative illustration and was kept such during the Middle Ages, even if sometimes a biased use of painting dimmed its primeval task.
From a text by Bishop Paolino da Nola, consecrated in 409, we know that already at his time they used to cover the sacred surfaces with “dummy beings” (animantibus adsimulatis). What got him to decorate his basilica dedicated to Saint Felice, was the fact that the Saints’ glory and fame attracted believers and stimulated them to deepen their knowledge. “They swarm here from afar, pushed by their faith. But they are illiterate and uneducated, sometimes even ill-informed, as they can’t read. But as soon as they come in visual contact with the pictures, the objects of their worship, the joy of contemplation rises in them”.
This passage puts into evidence the power of suggestion that gives life to the picture.
“Their perseverance is such as to make them get torches, when darkness falls, and instead of yielding to the pleasures of wine, they enjoy the contemplation and the understanding of the Saints’ lives.”
Bishop Paolino then acknowledged the value of illustrations as a means of education and preaching. Indeed, he attributed it a dynamic strength not inferior to the written word. That is how we are to interpret the exhortations given by the ecclesiastic authorities in the course of centuries. The words of Antonio il Grande, died in 604, are often quoted: “Painting is tolerated in churches as its figurative representations on their walls teach the uneducated, unacquainted with literature, what they cannot learn from books”.
Images and pictures, though, have not always got only esteem and appreciation but opposition and hatred; it is enough for us to note that the function of images and figurative representations came out of the quarrels about it elevated and sublimated, as it was shown by the Byzantine iconoclasm ended in 843.
At the time when the pictorial covering of St Francis’s church was completed, representation was still considered as the “Writing of laymen” (Durando il Vecchio). However we must be aware that the words “laymen, illiterate” in those times were not attributed the same meaning as today. Printing had not been invented yet and illustrations then required a very deep study to be properly interpreted.
Already the Fathers of the Eastern Church had concerned themselves with the relation between figurative representation and spoken word, that is read, as “reading” in those times was but “reading aloud”. They got to the conclusion that the eye is less easily deceived than the ear.
The image gets its function from the Holy Scriptures. That is the result of the reflections of the Greek and Latin Fathers. Therefore the concept of “figure” or “image” or “portrait”, represented for them something quite different from what will be meant later on, for example during the Renaissance, by using the same expressions. The epoch before the Renaissance tried to paint man as God sees him, that is as the Bible saw him. Paolino da Nola (353-431) answered a friend of his who had asked him for a portrait by these words: “Which picture shall we send to you? The one of the worldly man or the heavenly one? I know you wish the enduring image the heavenly King loves in you”. In the image one doesn’t look for the faithful reproduction of nature, but one wants to discover whether that image has got any resemblance to the original image of the new Adam. The image was to be a pale and mysterious copy of the heavenly man, of the splendour of Christ. Such a conception can be inferred also from the gestures and features of the figures of the period. The colours, too, assumed a symbolic meaning, and the relation between the single scenes and the figures in the space acquired a greater and greater importance.
When one is about “to read” a pictorial representation , that is to examine and interpret it, one must therefore concentrate his attention on the fundamental question: whether its contents are in relation to the Scriptures and whether they are the expression of the biblical message.
How are “illustrations” to be read? The Fathers of the Greek church have handed down to us a few pieces of advice on the matter. Teodoro Studion, who has dealt with the Greek theology in illustrations in the most complete way, warns against the risk of studying one figure or scene, considering it only in itself. He reminds us that the Evangelist and the painter are to complete each other and to consider that only because of this intimate and mutual relation, they are able to contribute to proclaim the announcement of the redeeming work. That is where the modern man finds the obstacle that hampers his attempt at getting near to the medieval metaphoric world. The figurative art of the Middle Ages lends itself to the deep understanding of its contents only if put in relation to the word from which it originated.
Here are the words of a contemporary man:
“Whatever is necessary for decorating a church, it has its origin in the divine mysteries, and everything pours out a celestial sweetness, but only if it finds a careful observer, who knows how "to suck" honey from the rock and make oil come out of the hardest stone”.
Gherard Ruf
O.F.M.CONV
