Black Madonna/ Our Lady of Perpetual Help

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholickat4
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

catholickat4

Guest
Hello,
Not sure if this is the right place to post this question but…
Regarding the “Black Madonna”/Our Lady of Czestochowa. Is this Icon the same as Our Lady of Perpetual Help Icon?
Was OLPP just painted later, copying the one of Our Lady of Czestochowa? They are obviously very similar.

Forgive my ignorance about how these works of art are related. But I would love to know.
I have read (about both) that they were painted by Luke the Evangelist, which makes me ask if we are talking about the same icon but with just two different names. But then…isn’t one in Poland and one in Rome so…???
Again forgive my ignorance.
But please help my understanding, somebody out there.
I would appreciate it.
K
 
Our Lady of Perpetual Helps is called Theotokos of the Passions. It is not the same icon as Our Lady of Czestochowa. The Theotokos of the Passions will have Archangel Michael and Gabriel on the icon with the symbols of Christ’s Passion (cross, nails) and you will see the child Jesus fearful of what he must go through, symbolized by his sandal falling off his foot.
 
Yes, thank you for the responses.
But I am still perplexed.
I know they are not exactly the same. And I am familiar with OLPP. I have a couple of prints of it in my home and look at it often, and have read about the meaning of the different aspects of it.
But then I was reading about the Black Madonna/Our Lady of Czestochowa (which I wasn’t familiar with) and it is similar-looking so I was just wondering if whoever painted OLPP was perhaps looking at the Black Madonna one, or had it in mind, when painting OLPP…and sort of copied it (to a certain extent) to create OLPP? (Come to think of it, isn’t Our Lady of Sitka very very similar too…and sort of a copy of that style too? Maybe it too was made with the Black Madonna in mind?)

I guess it is the Black Madonna one that was painted (according to tradition) by St. Luke, and NOT OLPP that was painted by Luke. I suppose OLPP was painted much much later by someone who had definitely seen renditions of the Black Madonna and had it in mind as he painted OLPP?
Sorry if these are silly question.
Maybe we just can’t know all the details until Heaven.
 
Icons of the Theotokos normally has her carrying the child Jesus. This is because the entire doctrine of Mary in the East revolves around her being the Theotokos, “the one who bore God”. It is rare that she will be depicted on an icon without Christ.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Icons of the Theotokos normally has her carrying the child Jesus. This is because the entire doctrine of Mary in the East revolves around her being the Theotokos, “the one who bore God”. It is rare that she will be depicted on an icon without Christ.
Click to expand...
Right, its s little confusing with some of the Icons though. There are a couple from Poland which are similar also. The Madonna of Tuchów comes to mind also.
 
catholickat4 said:
Yes, thank you for the responses.
But I am still perplexed.
I know they are not exactly the same. And I am familiar with OLPP. I have a couple of prints of it in my home and look at it often, and have read about the meaning of the different aspects of it.
But then I was reading about the Black Madonna/Our Lady of Czestochowa (which I wasn’t familiar with) and it is similar-looking so I was just wondering if whoever painted OLPP was perhaps looking at the Black Madonna one, or had it in mind, when painting OLPP…and sort of copied it (to a certain extent) to create OLPP? (Come to think of it, isn’t Our Lady of Sitka very very similar too…and sort of a copy of that style too? Maybe it too was made with the Black Madonna in mind?)

I guess it is the Black Madonna one that was painted (according to tradition) by St. Luke, and NOT OLPP that was painted by Luke. I suppose OLPP was painted much much later by someone who had definitely seen renditions of the Black Madonna and had it in mind as he painted OLPP?
Sorry if these are silly question.
Maybe we just can’t know all the details until Heaven.
Click to expand...
You must bear in mind that a number of icons and statues of Mary are claimed to be made by St. Luke (sometimes even the one painted/carved by him).

Also, OLPP is claimed to be stolen from a church in Crete and brought to Rome by a merchant during the 15th century, I believe. Besides, the Theotokos of the Passion and the Hodegetria (which is what I assume the Virgin of Czestochowa is) are well-known enough genres.
 
patrick457 said:
I find it interesting that Mary in the OLPP image wears a blue maphorion over a red robe. Very often in these icons Mary wears a red maphorion over a blue robe.

http://www.iconsexplained.com/iec/lib/02307_virgin_ofthe_passion_amolyntos_emm_tzanes_1641_large.jpg
Click to expand...
Perhaps that is because the red symbolizes suffering, and since that icon shows the Infant being approached by the angels with the instruments of torture it anticipates His suffering. Mary stood at the Cross and offered her maternal, sinless, support to her Son, and she suffered with Him, and so her cloak is red in that icon.
 
The originals have a blue mantle. Red represents a virgin and the blue or purple mantle is worn by mothers (and also means virginity and divinity).

Original Our Lady of Czestochowska. 122.2 x 82.2 cm (48.1" x 32.4")



Original Our Lady of Perpetual Help. 17" x 21"
 
Vico said:
The originals have a blue mantle. Red represents a virgin and the blue or purple mantle is worn by mothers (and also means virginity and divinity).

Original Our Lady of Czestochowska. 122.2 x 82.2 cm (48.1" x 32.4")

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/Czestochowska.jpg/410px-Czestochowska.jpg

Original Our Lady of Perpetual Help. 17" x 21"
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5011/5539184181_f5293d87cf.jpg
Click to expand...
No, what I mean is, that in standard Byzantine iconography the blue-over-red in the case of the Theotokos is somewhat rare; a red or (especially in earlier icons) purple-colored maphorion is more common AFAIK. And the Czestochowa icon doesn’t really tell us much, since the present icon is a repainting of the original after being badly damaged by Hussite raiders in 1430. The original was apparently painted using the encaustic method (as many early icons are); medieval restorers unfamiliar with it could not apply any paint to the damaged areas since they “simply sloughed off the image.” So what they did was erase the original image and then repaint it on the original panel.
 
Blue represents humanity, Red represents Divinity. How they are displayed in relation is not so much a concern. Right the Our Lady of Czestochowa icon has a living history.
 
GaryTaylor said:
Blue represents humanity, Red represents Divinity. How they are displayed in relation is not so much a concern. Right the Our Lady of Czestochowa icon has a living history.
Click to expand...
Jesus wearing blue over red = divinity taking on humanity. But then again, upon researching, I actually find that some interpretations have it the opposite way, and interpretations that are consonant with Dorothy’s (red = passion). So you’re right. Purple at least, almost everyone agrees that it’s a royal color. 😃

BTW, about OLPP again: I mentioned earlier that it was stolen from a Cretan church. The legend of the icon has it that the merchant who nabbed it (the story has it that the icon was famous locally) took it with him when he sailed back to Italy. En route a storm threatened to capsize the boat, which was averted after the sailors prayed with the icon. The merchant arrived at Rome, fell gravely ill, and willed the icon to another merchant before dying, asking him to place it in a church where it could be venerated. The second merchant’s wife was reluctant to part with it, prompting Mary herself to appear to the merchant’s daughter, grandmother and neighbor, asking that the icon be given to a church located between the basilicas of St. Mary Major and St. John Lateran. On March 27, 1499, the icon was transferred to the church of San Matteo, operated by the Augustinians, where it remained for almost 300 years before it was temporarily lost during the French occupation of Rome in 1798, when San Matteo was demolished. (Earlier I noted that the merchant stole the icon in 1499, sorry about that.)

OLPP was once one of those icons that were attributed to St. Luke (which is somewhat common), but the Carbon-14 dating undertaken during its restoration in 1990 places it in the 14th-15th century (specifically 1325-1480). So if the story about the merchant is true, it means that he took what was then a fairly new icon with him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top