Why are Orthodox images more racially realistic?

[Opal0427]

Why do Roman Catholic images often adopt the race of the region, and are usually white? When did this start and is there any kind of official teaching about it like the current teaching that mass can be said in the language of the region? Have there been officially recognized times when Mary or Jesus appeared to people looking like the most common race of that region that wasnt Middle Eastern or Jewish?

It seems odd to me that my Pray the Rosary booklet has a White Jesus and Mary throughout (esp since the other characters in the images are rarely blonde with blue eyes) when Orthodox icons of Mary and Jesus have maintained a very realistic look featuring Middle Eastern Jews consistently over centuries.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

We know that Jesus and Mary are not limited to the forms they had while they were alive (Jesus shows us this in the Gospels, after His resurrection), so there’s nothing wrong with showing them in a culturally-appropriate manner.

We also know that, throughout the ages, Mary has appeared to cultures in a “cultural” way, such as with Guadalupe, where she looked like a native Mexican-born woman. I believe that when she appeared in Akito, she has more traditionally-Asian features.

Put simply, there’s no reason to get worked up about it, so we don’t. We don’t know what they looked like, so it’s of little consequence. In Mexico, most rosary booklets have Our Lady of Guadalupe on them. In other areas, they have other booklets. It’s just not something we concern ourselves with, as it doesn’t have any impact on the message of the Gospels.

 

[Wesrock]

Are the Orthodox images intentionally more authentically “first century Jew” or more reflective of the imagery from churches in Greece, Turkey, Syria, and Egypt (that is, reflective of the populations that lived in those areas). I’m leaning towards the latter, and I mean that as no insult to Orthodox icons.

 

[RealisticCatholic]

I’m not sure about the history.

But - the Catholic artistic tradition is very diverse, and it surely includes the ones you find in the Orthodox world, too, as there are Catholic counterparts to the various Eastern traditions. Not only Byzantine, but Coptic, Syriac, etc.

Also, the Eastern Orthodox cultures are, well, Eastern-based. As far as I can tell, the “whiteness” is mostly reflective of the Western cultures and societies and the people that make them up.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

It seems odd to me that my Pray the Rosary booklet has a White Jesus and Mary throughout (esp since the other characters in the images are rarely blonde with blue eyes)

Your rosary booklet depicts Jesus and Mary as blonde with blue eyes?

 

[PapyrusDouay]

Are the Orthodox images intentionally more authentically “first century Jew” or more reflective of the imagery from churches in Greece, Turkey, Syria, and Egypt (that is, reflective of the populations that lived in those areas). I’m leaning towards the latter, and I mean that as no insult to Orthodox icons.

This is my thought too. Christians around the world have always made Jesus, Mary, and others appear in art in their own cultural image. Their own skin color, clothing, physical features, etc. i think it’s naturally easier to relate to someone (even God) when they/He is more like you.

That said, many of the Eastern Churches, both Catholic and Orthodox come from areas near the Holy Land, and that is reflected in their art.

Also, Eastern Iconography is INCREDIBLY detailed and symbolic. Everything from choice of colors to size of individuals to orientations and whether a book is opened or closed have meanings and purposes. It’s not merely for the aesthetics, but to convey something. So there could very well be more to it as well, but beyond just being aware of that, and without digging out some old books, I really can’t speculate much more.

 

[HeDa]

In the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth there are paintings of Our Lady from all over the world. Each very different in looks but still recognisable as virgin Mary Mother of God. If I have the possibility to go there again I would spend at least 3-4 hours there.

I’ll put one link to it. There are lots of images on the internet. https://www.seetheholyland.net/church-of-the-annunciation/

 

[Mary888]

Are the Orthodox images intentionally more authentically “first century Jew” or more reflective of the imagery from churches in Greece, Turkey, Syria, and Egypt (that is, reflective of the populations that lived in those areas).

Yes. The ethnic accuracy is important in EO if possible but the most important part is the symbolism attached to the icon. The auras, letters on the icons, the significance of the entire image if it is a more complex one. Symbolism is the most important part in EO iconography. To make it certain about who the icon is. The symbolism is also important to make sure the person evoked is through his or her attributes of faith and is represented in Heaven (glorified).
As for the strictness of the images I am not sure the OP has seen enough EO images. Virgin Mary also has blue eyes, green eyes, black eyes, brown eyes. Her is skin is fair or darker, depending on the materials used. Icons mixing wood and silver will result in a darker skinned Mary since her face looks darker than shining silver. Paintings on oil usually present her as very fair. It’s important she is depicted as the Mother of God not that she is depicted trying to guess exactly how she looked like, since nobody knows for sure.