BOOK
III-
■which gives it a moft grotefque appearance. It is placed in
the ikreen, and enclofed within a large iilver covering,
which is only taken off on great feftivals, or ior the curiofity
of ftrangers. This picture is more antient than the other
paintings : according to the tradition of the church, it was
brought from Greece to Kiof when that city was the refi-
dence of the Ruffian fovereigns; from thence it was conveyed
to Volodimir, and afterwards transferred to Mofcow.
It feems a Grecian painting, and was probably anterior to
the revival of that art in Italy *■.
In this cathedral are depofited the remains of the Ruffian
patriarchs.
I Taw feveral paintings o f the Virgin
-in the north o f Italy fimilar to this : a few'
were faid to be theprodu&ionsof Si. Luke,
others o f Gimabue, or-his fcholars. T h e
complexion in thefe was likewife o f "a dillky
hue, and plainly from the fancy fcf the
painters. This leads me to imagine that
the Grecian painters originally reprefeii'ted
the Virgin o f a dark complexion, which
was-copied by the earlieft Italian artifts, C i-
mabue and his immediate fcholars, who received
the art fjom the Greeks. Le Bruyn,
Ipeaking o f this piilure o f St. Luke at MoA
cow, fays, “ It is very gloomy and aimoil
“ black j but whether this proceeds from.
“ the effe&s o f time, or the fmoke o f ta--
“ pers, or the fancy o f the painter; certain
“ it is, there is no great matter in. it.” &c.
Travels, v. I. p. 70. An ingenious author,
in a late publication, mentions in the mo-
naftery o f Monte-Virgine, a Coloffal portrait
o f the Virgin Mary, which pafles
for the work o f St. Luke the Evangel#,
and adds, “ There are in Italy and elfe-
“ where fome dozens o f black, ugly Ma-
“ donnas, which all pafs for the work o f
it his hands, and as fuch are revered.” T o
which paffage he fubjoins the following
note, but without citing his authority;
“ T h e origin o f this fable, or rather mif-
« take, appears to be, that about the time
“ that paintings o f holy fubje&s came into
“ fafbion, there lived .at Conftantinople a
“ painter called Luke, who, by'many re*
“ prefentations ,of the Virgin, acquired a
“ very tranfcencjent reputation. He was a
“ man of-exemplary life, and on account of
“ his .piety, and the edifying ufe he made
“ o f his talents, was generally known by
“ the name o f the. Holy Luke. In procefs
m o f .time, when the epocha and circum*
* “ fiances I f? his life were forgotten by the
f t vulgar,-and I# performances had ac*
“ quired by age a fmoky, duiky caft, fuffi-
“ cient- to perplex the fhort-fighted con-
“ noifleurs o f thofe days, devotees afcribed
his pi&ures to the Evangelift, who was
“ pronounced a painter, becaufe they knew
“ o f no other faint o f the name, and be*
“ caufe i f he had been a painter, np one
“ could have had fuch opportunities °
“ examining and delineating the features
** o f the holy model.” Swinburne s Tra*
vels in the Two Sicilies, p. 123* Forpiop
o f the introdu&ion o f painting into Ru ,a
arid Italy by the Greeks, fee the Pefcrip-
tion o f the Cathedral o f St, Sophia at No*
vogorod.
The firft of thefe was Job, before whofe time the primate CHAP-
of the Ruffian church was fuffragan to the patriarch n f , 1 ' ,
Conftantinople. Job, being metropolitan archbiihop of
Mofcow, was, in the year 1588, initialled in this cathedral
patriarch of Ruffia, by Jeremias patriarch of Conftantinople,
with all due folemnities. The ceremony of tranilating the
fee from the capital of Turkey to this city is thus defcribed
by an author, who was himfelf prefent *.
« On the 25th of January, 1588, the Greek patriarch,
“ accompanied with the Ruffe cleargie, went to the great
“ church of Prechefte, or our Ladie, within the Emperour’s
“ caftle, where he made an oration, and delivered his refig-
“ nation in an inftrument of writing, and fo laid down his
“ patriarchal ftaffe; which was prefently received by the
“ métropolite of Moiko, and divers other ceremonies ufed
“ about the inauguration of the new patriarch.”
The moft venerable of Job’s fucceflors in the patriarchal
fee was Philaretes, who, though no fovereign himfelf, is
celebrated as being father to that line of Ruffian monarchs,
diftinguiihed by the name of the Houfe of Romanof f. His
fecular name was Feodor : he drew his lineage from Andrew,
a Pruffian prince, who came into Ruffia about the
* Fletcher’ s Ruffia, Chap. 21. This ing formally demanded the confent o f the
author adds, that Jeremias, whom he calls four patriarchs o f Alexandria, Antioch
Hieronimo, had been either baniihed from Conftantinople, and Jerufalem, to the efta-
Conftantinople b y the T u rk s , or depofed blilhmeht o f a new patriarch in Ruffia, they
by the Greek clergy, that he came to Mof- acceded to the requeft, and folemnly decow
without any invitation from the Ruf- puted Jeremias to Mofcow, who inverted
ftans, in order to obtain money from the the metropolitan Job with the new dignity,
tzar Feodor Ivanovitch, and that with this K ing on the Greek Church, p. 406.
view he propofed the tranflation o f the pa- f In confequence o f a cuftom prevalent
triarchal lee from Conftantinople to Mof- among theRuffians to adopt the appellation
c°w. o f the grandfather for a family name, the
Others deny that he was either depofed new royal line was called Romanof, in ho-
or baniihed ; and relate, that the tsiar hav- norir o f Roman, Feodor’ s grandfather.
V ol. I. . S f middle