Simon Ushakov (1626–86), the premier icon painter of seventeenth-century Muscovy, emerged in the consciousness of the Romanov court and its bureaucracy in mid-century, when the Armory (Oruzheinaia palata) had expanded its functions far beyond the creation, maintenance, and preservation of a royal arsenal. The Kremlin had invited to the capital some of the most talented domestic artists and craftsmen, as well as foreign counterparts, to raise the quality and style of cultural artifacts worthy of a new dynasty and a new patriarchate. Innovations in color, shading, perspective, composition, and design in painting and engraving all made inroads into Muscovite art, especially affecting the tastes of the Kremlin court elites, the nobility, and wealthy merchant-entrepreneurs like the Stroganovs and the Nikitnikovs.Footnote ¹

Such an expansion of the visual artistic sphere and the written words incorporated in it resonates with Simon Franklin’s fourth, subjective and individual, aspect of the graphosphere, defined as “the space of the visible word.” Considerations of time can reveal a graphosphere’s emergence and consequent change in both function and form as it adapts to new circumstances. Franklin astutely identifies the encoding and decoding fundamental to the process by asking “What do graphospheric phenomena mean, not just for those who produce them, but for those who experience them or engage with them?”Footnote ²

Such questions become consequential when one considers a remarkable fact from Ushakov’s life and career. What did it mean for him to sign his name and additional information onto more than 150 icons when the vast number of icon painters in the world who had preceded him remained anonymous? What effect did it have on those who worked beside him in the icon workshops of the Armory, his colleagues, his pupils, the Kremlin’s bureaucrats, and his patrons? And how did time and context affect the growing delimitation and exploitation of iconic space bearing the material text of his evolving graphosphere? To gain insight into the patterning of his signature moves I have made use of the large collection of Ushakov’s icons featured in a detailed catalogue prepared for the 2015 exhibition of his life and work at the Tret′iakov gallery in Moscow.Footnote ³

We have no record of Ushakov’s previous training. In 1648, at age twenty-two, his apparent talent earned him a position in the Armory’s Silver Chamber as znamenshchik (banner designer), a cover term for a designer of decorative gold, silver, and enamel artifacts, maps and charts, religious embroidery, and military banners. His later work demonstrates that in addition to developing designing skills, he gained experience in the intricate production of icons.

In 1652, he was given a major assignment, to paint a copy of the famous twelfth-century Byzantine icon, later called in Muscovy the Vladimir Mother of God (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Simon Ushakov. Vladimir Mother of God; Golgotha Cross. Copy of the 12^th–Century Byzantine original. Church of the Archangel Michael in Ovchinniki. Icon in full, recto and verso, and detail of signature on verso. Moscow. 1652. Reproduced by permission from the State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow. Inv. № 21454. Text: In the year 7160 this icon was copied from the very miracle-working icon of the most pure Vladimir Mother of God and painted to measure by the sovereign’s icon painter Simon Feodor’s (son), begun on the 19th day of June and completed on […] day.

He signed the copy in the fashion of the earlier Stroganov icon painters, some of whom were now employed in the Kremlin: namely, he wrote on the back of the icon, in the lower space of the so-called field (pole) that framed an image of the Golgotha Cross. We see here the first version of his signature elements: the date anno mundi 7160, a brief description (if warranted by context), his title, gosudarev ikonopisets (the sovereign’s icon painter), and his name, Simon Fe(o)dorov, “Simon, Fe(o)dor’s (son)” followed by the precise dates of inception and completion of the icon.Footnote ⁴ There is little doubt that his impressive career was the product of his artistry, his determination to bring greater realism in depiction over time, his confidence in his talent, and his administrative, that is to say, bureaucratic skills. The commanding assertion of the 1551 Stoglav, that the ideal icon painter must be humble and submissive (smiren i krotok), did not restrain Ushakov.Footnote ⁵ He apparently saw himself as an icon painter for a new age, committed to moving forward in a direction vital to that identity. Over the course of the 1650s, he was assigned major projects for the tsar and the patriarch, as well as directing the restoration of images in the major churches around the Kremlin’s Cathedral Square. In this setting, he could begin to elevate a model of the professionally consummate icon painter proactively, over time becoming the artistic counterpart of Franklin’s professional scribe.Footnote ⁶ In 1660, he was promoted to master icon painter, and in 1663 was summoned by the tsar to transfer from the Silver Chamber to direct the Armory’s icon workshops under the aegis of boyar Bogdan Matveevich Khitrovo. These career advancements all increased his bureaucratic responsibilities inside the workshops, where he engaged with teams of icon painters working on frescoes, internal and external.

Ushakov’s endgame with a signature inscription would mark his work as a gold standard for his colleagues and students in the Kremlin workshops, as well as the elites of Muscovite society—church and state—and the wealthy and powerful merchants, many of whom belonged to his parish church in the Nikitniki neighborhood of Kitai-gorod, immediately to the east of the Kremlin. Important contacts could lead to patronage from inside and outside the Armory, monetary sources that would supplement the meager salary and provisions offered by the government.Footnote ⁷

In 1653, a year after copying the Vladimir Mother of God, he painted a large, full-length icon of Metropolitan Filipp and five years later a Kazan Mother of God, both icons linked by the same signature move (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Simon Ushakov. Kazan Mother of God. Icon in full and detail of signature on lower bevel. 1658. From the V. N. Alekseev Nabokov collection, reproduced by permission of UPRAVIS. Text: In November of the year 7167 this icon was painted by the sovereign’s icon painter Simon, Feodor’s son, Ushakov.

Not content with his name hidden from view, he signed both icons on the front; and not on the lower field as one might expect, but above it, in the liminal space of the beveled strip (luzga) enclosing the ark (kovcheg)—the incised, lower flat surface bearing the holy image itself—and separating it from the field.

In the typology of the graphosphere, signature inscriptions qualify as secondary writing, produced as part of an object and reasonably limited to relevant specifications. Now certain kinds of inscription were mandatory for an icon, traditional abbreviations for Jesus Christ (и҃с x҃с), the Mother of God (м҃р ѳꙋ), and the saints, for example, emblems and identifiers that authorized and authenticated the image. Authorial signatures by contrast were not mandatory; indeed, they were rare. But they offered the possibility of becoming authenticators of high quality by a devoted master, appealing to elite styles and tastes. In this role, their place in the graphosphere was specifically indexed to literacy.Footnote ⁸

A good example of such a promotional marker appeared in 1659, when the remaining members of the wealthy Nikitnikov merchant clan and their patrons commissioned an elaborate icon of the Annunciation with Akathist for the local tier of their Church of the Trinity in the Nikitniki neighborhood of Kitai-gorod (Figure 3).Footnote ⁹

Figure 3.

Iakov Kazanets, Gavrilo Kondrat’ev, and Simon Ushakov. Annunciation with Akathist. Local tier. Church of the Live-Giving Trinity in Nikitniki, Kitai-gorod, Moscow. Graphic figure in full (central panel of Annunciation framed by scenes based on Akathist of the Mother of God) and detail of cartouche with signature above lower bevel over corners of two Akathist scenes. 1659. The icon is housed in the State Historical Museum, Moscow. Inv. № 82848. See illustrations of the icon in Karpova, ed., Simon Ushakov—tsarskii izograf, 72–73. Text: This icon was painted for the Church of the Holy Trinity, an edifice built by the esteemed merchant Grigorii Nikitnikov in Kitai-gorod. The figures and settings were painted by Iakov Kazanets; select details were completed by Gavrila Kondratʹev. But the faces for the entire icon were painted by Simon, Feodor’s son, Ushakov. It was finished in 7167 from the Creation of the World and 1659 from the Incarnation of the Son of God, on July 28.

Figure 3 Long description

The first panel shows a large religious icon. The central area depicts two standing figures facing each other. Smaller rectangular scenes are arranged around the central panel, filling the top, sides and bottom areas of the icon. Each smaller scene contains multiple figures in various settings. A small circular marker is visible near the lower left corner of the icon. The second panel shows a close-up of an ornate cartouche. The cartouche has a decorative border with scrollwork and curved flourishes along the top and sides. Inside the cartouche, multiple lines of calligraphic script are arranged in a centered layout. The script is in Church Slavonic language. The first line of text is visually larger than the lines that follow. The remaining lines are smaller and closely spaced. The text reads: Annunciation with Akathist. Simon Ushakov dash tsarskii izograf comma This icon was painted for the Church of the Holy Trinity comma an edifice built by the esteemed merchant Grigorii Nikitnikov in Kitai-Gorod. The figures and settings were painted by Iakov Kazanets semicolon select details were completed by Gavrila Kondrat′ev. But the faces for the entire icon were painted by Simon comma Feodor′s son comma Ushakov. It was finished in 7167 from the Creation of the World and 1659 from the Incarnation of the Son of God comma on July 28.

The appearance of the cartouche, a figure of design associated with pictorial engravings and maps, established a delimited area in the ark to introduce the signature. Two of the icon painters were mentioned for painting the detailed setting and clothing, but Ushakov was given credit for all the faces (liki), the cover term used for any flesh left uncovered, and hence the most important parts of the image, demanding the brush of a recognized talent. The inscription encased in a decorative surround represents a bold move on the part of Ushakov, apportioning space traditionally reserved for sacred imagery and text, a mark of the confidence he had achieved as an icon painter inside and outside the Kremlin. Adjacency with the sacred served to elevate the artistic, commercial, and spiritual prestige and reputation of artist and client alike. Of additional note is the juxtaposition of the customary Eastern Orthodox dating of anno mundi 7167 and the western Christian dating of anno Domini 1659. The icon was painted during a time of tribulation in Moscow, with Patriarch Nikon having abandoned the capital for his New Jerusalem monastery in 1658, and with the rise of concern about the approach of the ominous eschatological year 1666, with its allusion to diabolical numerology (Rev. 13:18).Footnote ¹⁰

In 1660, master icon painter Ushakov introduced a new signature title, adding gosudarev (i)zograf (the sovereign’s [icon] painter) to government projects, but occasionally omitting gosudarev for those paid for through private patronage, as seen in this icon pledged for donation to St. Makarii’s monastery (Figure 4).Footnote ¹¹

Figure 4.

Simon Ushakov. The Venerable Makarii Zheltovodskii (Unzhenskii). Icon in full and detail of signature above lower bevel on the river. Reproduced by permission from the Nizhegorodskii Museum-Preserve. Inv. № GOM 14166 & 90. Text: In the year 7169 [1661]this icon was painted for the monastery of the Venerable Makarii of  Yellow  Waters on the pledge of the great master, the Most Holy Ilarion, archbishop of Riazanʹ and Murom. It was painted by the icon painter Simon Ushakov.

Ushakov here uses the space delimited by the boundaries of the waters in the lower portion of the ark as the locale for his signature. Other important patrons included boyars Bogdan Matveevich Khitrovo and Artemon Sergeevich Matveev, servitor (okol′nichii) Vasilii Semenovich Volynskii, and prince Ivan Borisovich Repnin. Among the moves closer to the center of the ark, we see a striking example in the 1668 Kykkos Mother of God, in which the space simply delimited by the scroll and the edge of Mary’s garment is filled at the top directly in the gaze of mother and child looking down at Isaiah’s text in Greek (Figure 5).

Figure 5.

Simon Ushakov. Kykkos Mother of God (The Virgin of Kykkos). Icon in full and detail. Local tier. Cathedral of Saint Gregory of Neo-Caesarea. Moscow. 1668. Reproduced by permission from the State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow. Inv. № 28691. Text: In the year of the Lord 1668, painted by Pimen, Feodor’s son, called Simon Ushakov.

The Slavic translation of the citation is rendered above the scroll and Ushakov’s signature directly below, both laid out in the same golden letters as the emblematic abbreviation for the Mother of God above Mary’s nimbus and the brief description in Greek and Church Slavonic translation beside her head: The Merciful Kykkyotissa. The representational association of golden descriptors of sacred text and signature text asserts the elevation of iconic value to the signature as an integral part of the sacred icon.

Additionally, we see a new element of Ushakov’s signature, his baptismal name Pimen, a close rhyme with Simon, his professional name. The expanded signature was Pimen, Feodor’s (son), alias Simon Ushakov. Ushakov first used this complex familial/professional moniker in 1662 and thereafter on many icons commissioned from beyond the Kremlin walls.Footnote ¹² Using a given name professionally as an icon painter might very well prompt a comparison of Ushakov with the most famous engraver in contemporary Kyivan territory, whose name is rendered simply as Iliia (fl. 1637–63).Footnote ¹³

Even Royal Gates marking the primary entrance into a sanctuary could serve as a site for Ushakov’s graphosphere, as seen in this 1672 icon from the Cathedral of the Miracle of Archangel Michael at Chonae in the Chudov monastery of the Moscow Kremlin. Ushakov is consistent in placing the roundels encircling his name and completion date in the lowest delimited zone of space within the images of evangelists John (left) and Matthew (right), respectively (Figure 6).Footnote ¹⁴

Figure 6.

Simon Ushakov. Royal Gates. Graphic figure in full and detail of signatures. Local tier. Cathedral of the Miracle of Archangel Michael at Chonae. Chudov monastery. Moscow Kremlin. 1672. Graphic figure and detail of inscriptions on images of evangelists John and Matthew.  The Royal Gates are preserved in the collection of the Museums of the Moscow Kremlin. Inv. № Ж–929/1–2. See illustrations in Karpova, ed., Simon Ushakov—tsarskii izograf, 150–51. Text: In the year 7180 [1672], painted by Pimen, Feodor’s son, Simon Ushakov by calling.

Figure 6 Long description

A religious icon structured as an arched gate form, divided into four panels arranged in two columns. The left column is labeled L and the right column is labeled R. Each panel contains a painted figure of a saint or evangelist, depicted holding a book or scroll. The figures are framed within the gate structure, two on each side. At the lower portion of the panels, circular medallion-shaped text fields are visible. The script within these medallions appears aged and worn. The text is rendered in a style consistent with Church Slavonic or Old Russian lettering. To the right of the main icon, two enlarged detail views of the circular medallion inscriptions are shown separately. The upper detail view shows a medallion with multi-line inscribed text. The lower detail view shows a second medallion with similar multi-line inscribed text. The text visible in the upper medallion, translated from Church Slavonic, reads: Royal Gates. Simon Ushakov, tsarskii izograf. The text visible in the lower medallion, translated from Church Slavonic, reads: In the year 7180, painted by Pimen, Feodor′s son, Simon Ushakov by calling. The script in both medallions is arranged in horizontal lines within the circular boundary. Some portions of the text in both medallions appear worn and partially legible. The lettering is applied over a worn ground, with visible aging across the surface of both medallion fields.

After Ushakov’s icons were completed, some were eventually enclosed at different times and to varying degrees in elaborate icon covers (oklady, rizy). For an artist as prolific as Ushakov, the existence of graphospheres originally uncovered and later covered, visible and subsequently invisible, may have generated a semiotic distinction dependent on familiarity with his works. The formerly visible graphosphere had not ceased to exist, but was simply concealed. Those in the know presumed the presence of Ushakov’s signature undercover, a presence signaled indexically, by contiguity with the cover concealing it. The concealed graphosphere perceived by the savvy beholder bears analogy with narrative and temporal elements not always represented in an icon but generated by a beholder familiar with the narratological details, for example, the understood presence of Abraham, Sarah, the calf being slaughtered by a young servant, and the elaborate table setting, all implied in Andrei Rublev’s Trinity.

The icon painters and pupils employed in the workshops had access to both modes of perception. They saw firsthand the signing off on the finished icon and, depending on when the cover was provided, they knew that the signatures of Simon Ushakov were preserved just beneath, beveled towards, or within a delimited lower zone of the sacred space of the holy image. Likewise, patrons whose names were recorded alongside his through their donations of his icons to churches and monasteries knew they were there and lived with the hope that their generosity in engaging the work of a master and their love of the church would find favor for them in the afterlife: graphospheres of memory, initially visible, later concealed, but duly recalled.

Ushakov’s donation of his icon Christ Almighty Enthroned with Venerable Sergii and Nikon of Radonezh Prostrating (1684), painted two years before his death, reveals this sentiment in a lengthy signature painted on the footstool before Christ’s throne (Figure 7).

Figure 7.

Simon Ushakov. Christ Almighty Enthroned with Venerable Sergii and Nikon of Radonezh Prostrating. Icon in full and detail of signature. Local tier. Cathedral of the Trinity, Trinity-Sergii monastery. Sergiev Posad. Reproduced by permission from the Sergiev Posad Museum-Preserve. Inv. № 3212. Text: In the year 7192 [1684]…on a pledge, Pimen, Feodor’s son, Simon Ushakov by calling, painted this icon of the Savior with his mortal hand and made a covering of gold and silver and a crown of gemstones and pearls as a donation to the Lifegiving Trinity of the Sergii monastery, to the very church, for remembrance of himself and his wife Fevronia and his son Peter…and the deceased of his kin….

Hoping to ensure memory of himself, his close family, and those relatives who had passed away, he pivots dramatically to an assessment of his artistic talent, his artistic production, and entreats his listeners for their support.

These poignant words are not expressed here for the first time, but hearken back nearly two decades, taken almost word for word from the ending of “An address to a lover of icon painting” (1666–67), universally acknowledged as Ushakov’s response to his friend and artistic colleague, Iosif Vladimirov.Footnote ¹⁵ Over the course of a decade, Vladimirov had written “An epistle from a certain icon painter Iosif to the tsar’s icon painter and most skillful artist, Simon Fedorovich” (1656–66), a significant theoretical treatise on the new realism in painting.Footnote ¹⁶ Ushakov’s evident pride in his own talent, a gift neither to be underappreciated nor hidden out of modesty, surely inspired his colleagues and pupils to value their own commitment to the profession.

As an artist who worked for the state and came of age when the government was summoning its best icon painters to the capital, Ushakov and his talent were soon recognized by power brokers of Muscovite society as superior in quality. In less than two decades he rose from designer to master icon painter to head of the Kremlin’s icon workshops, sure of his craft and proud to signal his increasingly important position by signing off with his name on holy icons he had painted, an unusual action at the time. He apparently recognized early on that the visible written word was consonant with progress and success, and his signature moves became overt markers of his own rise in artistic as well as bureaucratic authority. His name, now an integral part of his art, attracted the patronage of the rich and famous. By the end of his life, he was the premier icon painter of his age. His iconic endgame had secured his fame and his memory for posterity.