Correspondence
Correspondence between FA Mitchell Hedges and Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church
President of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
312 WEST 77th STREET • NEW YORK 24, N. Y.
Tel. Susquehanna 7-0077
January the 6th, 1954
RE. No ….46/53/ 1650
Mr. F.A. Mitchell Hedges, Esq. Farley Castle Farley Hill nr. Reading Berkshire, Great Britain.
Sir:
Thank you very much for all the information that you have so kindly extended to me in your letter of the 30th December.
That information and especially the photograph give us the posbility to do some research in order to identify the Icon. The present gems with which the Icon is decorated bear witness of it being highly venerated. We are now looking for exact descriptions of the Icon that was stolen from the Convent in Kazan in 1904. Some scientist will be working on this matter for us in the best American library
This work would be easier to a large extent if you could kindly give us some more information especially in regard to the exact dimensions of the Icon in your possession. We would also be glad to know is it enclosed in a metal case or is it covered only on the front? Could you or some experts identify the nature of the wood on which the Icon is painted and do you know in which year the Icon was acquired by Sir Lindsay Parkinson in Poland?
As I told you in my last letter,we would heve to collect the money to acquire the Icon from you. But we cannot begin the drive before we get full information and before we are fully convinced that the Icon being genuine. After some preliminary work to that end we will discuss your proposal in detail. I will not fail to write to you as soon as possible.
At present I wish to tell you how very much we appreciate your desire that the Icon should not be acquired by any Government it is quite possible that the communist government wished to get hold of the icon with a purpose which has nothing in common with religious aims
very truly yours
Metropolitan Anastassy
Reply from Mitchell-Hedges
13/1/54
The Metropolitan Anastassy
President of the Russian Orthodox Church
312 West 77th Street
New York 24
New York USA
Your Grace,
I must thank you for your letter of the 6th January just received, in regard to the Icon, The Black Virgin of Kazan.
The painting of the Virgin and child is cased on the front only, as you can see from the photograph, with what I am told is gold. The dimensions are approximately 12½ in length by 10¾ in breath.
I do not know at what period it was acquired by Sir Lindsey Parkinson, who I believe is now deceased. I have investigated the authenticity of the Icon in many quarters and I think one may take it that there is no question of it being the original Icon which was stolen in 1904. I can hardly conceive that the religious ceremony conducted in the presence of the Archduchess Zenia at Hampton court Palace by the very Reverend Archimandrite Nicodemus and Father George Sheremeteff would have taken place if they had not gone into the matter and were quite convinced it was genuine Icon.
I am told that the jewels alone are worth more than an amount of £25.000 but of course it would be absolute sacrilege of the worst description to have it broken up.
In the meantime I am being very worried from quarters which you know, to part with the Icon and I entirely agree with you when you say that it is quite possible that the communists are desirous of acquiring the Icon for other that religious aims. As I wrote you my own personal belief is that their chief desire would be to exhibit and quite probably collect a fixed fee from all who came to ask the Blessing of the Black Virgin.
I do hope your inquires will be successfully concluded very shortly. If I knew definite that you were going to acquire it I could then truthfully say that the icon was definitely going back to where it rightfully belongs and that was the importunities of others and will be an end to my worry from that direction
very sincerely yours
F A Mitchell Hedges
Reply from the Synod
President of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
312 WEST 77th STREET • NEW YORK 24, N. Y.
Tel. Susquehanna 7-0077
February the 2nd, 1954.
REF. No.. 46/53/160 ……
Mr. F.A. Mitchell Hedges, Esq. Farley Castle Farley Hill. nr. Reading Berkshire
Great Britain.
Sir:
Your letter of 13th January, for which I must thank you very much, was received in due time, but I has not able to answer it at once because I was just waiting for some more information in connection with the investigation we are conducting.
I think I can now say for certain that the Icon in your possession is not the one that was stolen in Kazan in 1904. It appears that the stolen Icon was considerably smaller (10.1/2″ in length by 8.3/4″in breadth. The valuable case in which it was stolen was originally made at the time of John the Terrible (16th century) with the crown and some of the gems of later date, whereas the metal work and gem setting on your Icon is of the 18th century and the painting according to specialists is of the 17th century.
We therefore conclude that your Icon may be one of the also wonderworking copies of the original Icon of Kazan and namely that it may probably be the Icon which was stolen from the Moscow Cathedral of the Virgin of Kazan in autumn 1917. This Icon was also very much venerated in Russia and was covered with a richly decorated plate.
In general we had several wonderworking Icons, copies of the Icon of Kazan, of which the Icons of Moscow and St. Petersburg were venerated nearly as much as their prototype of Kazan.
It is much more probable that Sir Lindsay Parkinson could obtain the Icon of Moscow than the one of Kazan.
The burglar Chaikine who stole the Icon of Kazan stated in Court during his trial that it was destroyed. Some of the jewels as well as particles of burned velvet with which the back of the Icon was covered were actually found in his house. The conclusion of the Court was that the Icon was probably destroyed but the fact that no ashes or particles of wood on which it was painted could be found was regarded by many as a proof that only the valuable plate was destroyed Icon itself being sold to some sectarians and possibly smuggled away from Russia.
We therefore carefully checked the version that was given to you and found expression in your letter of the 30th December, 1953. Now we are checking the possibility of your Icon being the Icon of Moscow which for our Church scarcely means less than the original Icon of Kazan.
One of the important points for the identification of the Icon would be to find out how does the Icon look from the back. Could you kindly inform me, is the back of the Icon covered with some cloth or is the wood open there, the material plate covering only the front of the Icon ?
I would very much appreciate your kind answer to this question.
Very truly yours
Metropolitan Anastassy
PS. I hope you will agree with the necessity of research in the matter of the Icon and will have patience with us while look for data for its exact identification.
Reply from Mitchell-Hedges
Private and Confidential
10th February 1954
The Metropolitan Anastassy
President of the Russian Orthodox Church
312 West 77th Street
New York 24
New York USA
Your Grace,
I must thank you for your letter of the 2nd February just received and am indeed greatly interested in the research you are working with in regard to The Icon.
By an extraordinary chance I have obtained a book “Russian Art” by Cyril G.E.Bunt and on page 145 there is an illustration reproduction of the Icon I have here. Apparently, as you surmised, it was greatly venerated and it would appear to be the actual Icon, The virgin of Kazan which was stolen from the Moscow Cathedral of the Virgin of Kazan in the autumn of 1917.
As you have concluded the metal plate which is definitely either gold or silver gilt, covers the front of the Icon only of the one I have but the back appears to have traces of cloth but, as I said, in the book “Russian Art” by Cyril G.E Bunt there is the exact illustration reproduction which cannot be mistaken. Of course, the jewels which it is emblazed are magnificent.
As I told you I am not actuated by commercial profit in this matter but am truly desirous it should be returned once again to where it rightfully belongs.
As an instance of this I have been telephoned from London and asked if I would sell it to the Bolshevik Government which are anxious to obtain it at any price considerably exceeding that which I have suggested to you, but I am, I can assure you extremely loathed to listen to any suggestions from this quarter as I am sure you will understand.
And so I shall be awaiting your further letter and I can definitely tell you that I shall not part with the Icon until I hear from you
Very sincerely yours
MH
Reply from the synod
President of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
312 WEST 77th STREET • NEW YORK 24, N. Y.
Tel. Susquehanna 7-0077
February the 18th,1954
REF. no 46/53/296 ……
Mr. F.A. Mitchell Hedges, Esq. Parley Castle Parley Hill nr Reading, BERKSHIRE, GREAT BRITAIN.
Sir:
Thank you very mach for your letter of the 10th February and the information it contains.
The book by Cyril G.E. Bunt was known to us before, but the picture he published does not solve our question. Although it may be of big importance.
Actually there were many replicas of the Icon of Kazan in Russia. Many of them were wonderworking and several were known to be richly decorated. Unfortunately Cyril Bunt gives no indication in his book which would serve to exactly identify the Icon of which he has published the picture. One can only say for certain that it is a picture of the same Icon which is now in your possession and that the picture was made at a time when the Icon was not damaged as it now looks on the photograph you so kindly sent me.
However strange it may seem to you, we still were not able to find any book with a photograph of the Moscow Icon which could be compared with yours or even with a really clear and detailed description of it. I hope that one of our specialists in iconography will be able to contact Mr. Bunt and get some helpful explanation from him as to the origin of the picture in this book.
It would be quite impossible for us to raise the necessary funds to purchase the Icon before we could tell our people that the Icon has been unquestionably identified. We therefore have to continue our investigations.
As I wrote before. I very much appreciate the desire you expressed that the Icon should be returned to our church. I therefore hope that you will understand how important it is for us to identify the Icon exactly before we make any further steeps. I also think that our investigations should not be void of interest for you as the present owner of the Icon as well. We will continue to be in touch with you and will inform you of any new dates which we will be able to find out.
Very sincerely yours
Metropolitan Anastassy
There is no further correspondence after this on file
Tags: Mitchell-Hedges | Russian Orthodox Church | Virgin of Kazan
