The book The Life of Jesus by the French philosopher and writer Ernest Renan, which emphasised the human nature of Christ, had a significant influence on the interpretation of the subject.

[18] The trip provided Polenov with a substantial corpus of observations pertaining to the nature and architecture of Palestine, as well as the appearance and customs of its population.

However, the outcomes of the journey did not significantly advance Polenov's progress towards the realization of his intended painting of Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery, as he devoted minimal time to making sketches and studies during the expedition.

[20] To address this deficiency, Polenov took a year's leave from his academic position and, accompanied by his wife, Natalia Vasilyevna, departed for Rome at the end of October 1883.

According to Natalia Vasilyevna, "Savva treated his work very kindly and examined his sketches sincerely and not empty-handedly", which "gave Vasily new zeal".

[23] In the summer of 1885, the artist worked at the Menshovo estate near Podolsk, where he created a full-length sketch for Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery, executed in charcoal on canvas.

[21] In addition to his immediate family and Savva Mamontov, Polenov consulted with the artists Konstantin Korovin and Viktor Vasnetsov, as well as the physiologist Pyotr Spiro, during the painting process.

[27] Apparently, this was Nikolai Vasilyevich Nikitin, an Active State Councillor, who served as the chief inspector of printers, lithographers and similar establishments in Saint Petersburg.

[28] In any case, Nikitin was reluctant to grant permission for Polenov's painting to be included in the exhibition and reported the matter to the Saint Petersburg town governor Pyotr Gresser.

[29] On the morning of the day when Alexander III was expected to arrive, the exhibition was inspected by Konstantin Pobedonostsev, the Ober-Procurator of the Most Holy Synod, who was accompanied by the town governor Pyotr Gresser.

Alexander III and his wife Maria Feodorovna arrived twenty minutes later, accompanied by the Grand Dukes George Alexandrovich and Konstantin Konstantinovich.

[clarification needed][1] During the Second World War, a number of paintings from the collections of the State Russian Museum were relocated to Molotov (Perm).

[37] On the one hand, Polenov deliberately selected the location of the scene to be the outer courtyard of the Jerusalem Temple for reasons of historical accuracy.

The deliberate introduction of this inaccuracy could be justified by the symbolic significance and importance of the Mount of Olives in the context of that period of Jesus's life.

According to the art historian Tamara Yurova, "the canvas is filled with the image of very lively and specific people, but they are all captured in a brief moment and therefore seem suddenly frozen in their reaction to what is happening, in their expression", and the characters depicted by Polenov "are more different from each other in their outward appearance than in their inner feelings".

One can discern a certain softness, a noble posture, a "freedom of gesture and pose", as well as a complex mental life, which collectively distinguish Christ from his disciples, who appear more constrained in their thoughts, feelings, and movements.

The artist sought to emphasise the human nature of Christ, attempting to portray his appearance in a manner similar to that of the ordinary people around him.

This was also the case in the early versions of the main canvas, but a few days before the first public showing of the painting, Polenov removed the cap, persuaded by his mother, Maria Alekseevna.

[46] According to Polenov, and with the assistance of his wife Natalia Vasilievna, the art critic Alexander Sobolev produced a detailed description of the painting, which was subsequently published in Russkiye Vedomosti in 1887 and in a separate brochure.

[46][52] The woman depicted on the steps of the temple is the widow from the Gospels, whom Jesus described as "more beautiful than marvellous slabs of marble".

[46][54] During his many years of work on the subject associated with the canvas Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery, Polenov produced more than 150 drawings, studies, sketches and versions of the painting.

[1] It is likely that this is the same painting which was sold in November 2011 at Bonhams' Russian auction in London for £4,073,250, or approximately $5,381,742 (oil on canvas, 118 × 239 cm), under the title He That Is Without Sin Among You.

Although the painting sold at the auction is dated 1908, it was written about as having participated in the 1924 exhibition in New York City, where it was acquired by Charles Richard Crane.

[4] In his article The Exhibition of the Peredvizhniki, published on 1 March 1887, in the Novosty I Birzhevaya Gazeta, the art critic Vladimir Stasov devoted only a few sentences to Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery.

Stasov noted that in working on this painting Polenov "approached his task very carefully, travelled to Palestine, studied on the spot the architecture, the local types of people and nature, the light effects"; all of this produced "very interesting and powerful results".

[69] The writer and critic Vsevolod Garshin in his Notes on Art Exhibitions, published in March 1887 in the Saint Petersburg magazine Severny Vestnik, praised Polenov's painting, in which, in his words, "there is not a single [instance of] what they call drapery, it is all a real dress, clothes; and the artist, who has closely studied the East, has managed to dress his heroes in such a way that they really wear clothes, live in them, rather than put them on for scaffolding or posing in front of a painter".

He wrote that "at first glance at a painting it is as if you do not notice its main figure", but this is only a superficial impression caused by a sudden feeling of inconsistency with established ideas.

[70] The artist Yeghishe Tadevosyan described Polenov's Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery as "a bright, cheerful, hot-sunny work", and called it "a daring challenge to religious prudes".

[71] The art historian Aleksei Fedorov-Davydov posited that, having rejected the tenets of official religion and ecclesiasticism, Polenov in his work had offered a realistic interpretation of both Christ and the entirety of the Gospel narrative.

[72] Nevertheless, in comparison with the painting Christ and the Sinner by the academic painter Henryk Siemiradzki, Fedorov-Davydov asserted that Polenov's work was "more serious, noble, substantial and artistic".