Iconography

Iconography is a tradition in the Eastern Orthodox churches, as inherent to worship as liturgies, observance of feast days, Biblical or religious texts. Iconographers are no more 'artists' than the writers of the books of the Bible are 'authors.' The differences on the views of religious imagery in the Western and Eastern churches makes it difficult for Westerners to learn to view icons in a non artistic way, but in a religiously observant way. 

While many hymns or sermons may be eloquent or poetic, their merit is based on theological significance, and similarly, icons may be elegant and pleasing to the eye, but their significance is the theological role they play, not how 'realistically' they depict events. 

During the iconoclastic controversies that occured in the 8th century in Byzantium, the theological importance of imagery was questioned. While other political motives played a role in the mass destruction of religious imagery in this period, a major theological point was the depiction of God in icons.  Were icons an attempt to make an image of God/Christ when the 2nd Commandment forbade it? 

However, iconodules of the period, who supported the theological importance of icons, insisted that no one worships the icon itself, but what is beyond the icon. Icons are doors to the unseeable. The mystical theology of the Eastern Church is more rife with explanations of what is 'beyond' and the hierarchy of the heavens, with icons playing a role in guiding worshippers from the mundane level to the heavenly realms beyond the imagery. John of Damascus is a notable theologian and iconodule, and he wrote to support the idea that icons visually transmit the truth and the message that sermons or written texts transmit verbally.

With this said, I would like to show an interesting example of the iconographic tradition. 'Art' has nothing to do with the paintings on the monasteries of Northern Moldavia. It is theologically truths depicted visually, with figures and colors. 

Below is the image of the Last Judgment, possibly one of the more famous images from any of the painted monasteries. This image takes up the entire wall of the church, and intricately depicts the iconographic elements of the Last Judgment. A few 'mundane' details slip into the iconographic depiction: Ottomans are depicted on the side of the damned, as is a disliked pope; while Moldavian leaders are depicted to the right of Christ.

Despite the more elaborate scheme of the early 16th century northern Moldavian iconographic fresco, it has essential similarities with an early 14th century fresco from Chora in Constantinople/Istanbul. Christ in a mandorla is surrounded by the elect, a stream of red fire spews to his left, where the damned have been separated.
Over 100 years and hundreds of miles, indeed a separate era all together, divide these two images. The Moldavian image is on a rural church in a border principality, while the Chora image was commissioned by a powerful statesman in 'the' city, Constantinople. While the Chora image was painted, Constantinople still ruled the Eastern Orthodox world, Moldavia did not yet exist as a principality.  When the Moldavian image was commissioned, Moldavia prevailed as the only Orthodox principality able to resist complete domination by the Ottomans, it was the post 1453 C.E. world with Muslim Ottomans ruling the former seat of the Eastern Church. Nevertheless, the basic format and patterns of the image are maintained.  

Western religious art developed rapidly, reflecting the creativity of each individual artist, and a piece of Italian art from the 13th century would be drastically different from 15th century Dutch art, for example. However, iconography is not 'art,' and, as can been seen in the two Last Judgments, the religious heritage is respectfully maintained across borders and centuries.