#Музей имени Андрея #Рублева. В связи с постоянными вопросами наших друзей и коллег вынуждены пояснить, что всё последнее время из-за министра культуры Владимира Мединского наш Музей постоянно лихорадит, так что все иные «официальные страницы, группы etc.» находятся вне компетенции научного коллектива Центрального музея древнерусской культуры и искусства имени прп. Андрея Рублева: https://rublev-museum.livejournal.com/486620.html
Научный коллектив и Профком ФГБУК «Центральный музей древнерусской культуры и искусства имени Андрея Рублева» (РПРиУ) предупреждают о мошенниках в соцсетях, действующих в интересах уголовника М.Б. Миндлина (ст. 159 УК РФ), осужденного за расхищение бюджетных средств и мошенничество в составе организованной преступной группы: http://www.stoletie.ru/obschestvo/v_monastyr_so_svoim_ustavom_463.htm
Уголовник Михаил Миндлин опозорил Музей имени Андрея Рублева!
Генпрокуратура РФ: "объекты и земельный участок ФГБУК «Центральный музей древнерусской культуры и искусства имени Андрея Рублева» неправомерно используются коммерческой структурой, руководителем которой является сын директора музея. На территории объекта культурного наследия федерального значения «Ансамбль Андроникова монастыря» вопреки ст. 51 Градостроительного кодекса РФ и охранному обязательству самовольно возведено здание ресторана. В церкви Архангела Михаила (XVII века постройки) проводятся бизнес-встречи и конференции": http://www.genproc.gov.ru/smi/news/news-81205/
Т.н. «официальный сайт Центрального музея древнерусской культуры и искусства им. Андрея Рублева», «официальная страница Музея имени Андрея Рублева в Facebook», «официальная открытая группа ФГБУК "Центральный музей древнерусской культуры и искуссства имени Андрея Рублева"», а также т.н. «представительство Музея им. Андрея Рублева» в ЖЖ и ВКонтакте - это тролли и проходимцы (Дмитрий Степанков, Борис Фрадкин, Константин Братчиков, он же «Фома Удальцов», он же «Максим Красиков», «Елена Кузнецова» и др.) из частной компании педераста Федора Рындина (его отец музейный директор-казнокрад Геннадий Викторович Попов), которые НЕ ИМЕЮТ никакого отношения к нашему Музею и не работают в нём!
"Вести. Москва": "Древнерусская культура, православие и прокуратура сегодня неожиданно сплелись в один клубок громкого скандала. Как выяснилось, в Музее имени Андрея Рублева, на территории Андронникова монастыря, работает незаконно возведенный ресторан, а церковное здание приспособили под бизнес-встречи. Бизнесом руководит Федор Рындин, сын директора Музея Геннадия Попова": http://www.vesti.ru/videos/show/vid/487831/#
#Музей имени Андрея #Рублева.
В нашем музейном блоге не раз освещался вопрос о богословской трактовке
чудотворной иконы «Живоначальная Троица» письма прп. Андрея Рублева (†
17.10.1428), а также о многострадальной судьбе этой национальной святыни
в годы воинствующего безбожия:
Всем интересующимся данной тематикой предлагаем познакомиться с
интервью, которое дал Санкт-Петербургской митрополии академик Олег
Германович Ульянов, где можно найти исчерывающие ответы на многие
вопросы: https://aquaviva.ru/journal/molchanie_v_kraskakh
Напомним, что 26 ноября 1918 г. чудотворную икону «Живоначальная
Троица» письма прп. Андрея Рублева, в числе еще трех икон, извлекают из
местного ряда троицкого иконостаса. При этом деянии присутствуют:
архимандрит Кронид, члены Комиссии по охране памятников искусства и
старины (Ю.А. Олсуфьев, П.А. Флоренский, П.Н. Каптерев), члены Комиссии
по раскрытию древней живописи в России (И.Э. Грабарь, А.И. Анисимов и
др.). Рублевский шедевр переносят в здание Митрополичьев покоев, где
измеряют и фотографируют. В тот же день на нижнем этаже покоев
начинается очередная расчистка чтимого образа, которую провели И.И.
Суслов, В.А. Тюлин, Г.О. Чириков (лики). Работа по расчистке рублевской
иконы была ими окончена 7 декабря 1918 г. (Отдел рукописей (архив)
Государственной Третьяковской галереи. Ф. 67/202): https://expertmus.livejournal.com/28442.html
После спешной расчистки «Троицу» письма прп. Андрея Рублева потащили в
1919 г. на Первую реставрационную выставку в Москве в б. Строгановском
училище. А ведь именно в этот трагический год 11 апреля по директиве
безбожных властей были вскрыты и выставлены на поругание св. мощи прп.
Сергия Радонежского.
«Советская Россия - осажденный лагерь. Все на оборону!» (1919).
Отнюдь не случайно, что в 1919 г. также с подачи властей получил
широкое распространение агитационный плакат под названием «Советская
Россия - осажденный лагерь. Все на оборону!». Его нарисовал художник Д.
С. Орлов, работавший под псевдонимом «Д. Моор», который был известен
своим воинствующим безбожием и антирелигиозными карикатурами.
В центре его плаката мы видим круг, в котором своеволием художника
оказываются сгруппированы: слева направо – рабочий, коммунист и
крестьянин - в точности, как фигуры Ангелов на «Троице» прп. Андрея
Рублева. Судя по всему, художник скомпоновал свой шарж на представлении,
что в центре «Троицы» - Бог Отец, под «руководством» которого действуют
Сын («рабочий») и Святой Дух («крестьянин»). Данная трактовка
рублевской «Троицы» появилась еще в эпоху Ивана Грозного, когда стали
утверждать, что «посередине Бог Отец, а с обеих сторон – Бог Сын справа,
Святой Дух – слева».
Вся «тройка» на плакате 1919 г. словно нависает над столом, на
котором развернута карта победоносного наступления на врагов советской
власти. Под центральным сюжетом, по ободу его обрамляющему, надпись:
«Рабоче-крестьянская оборона». От центральной «тройки» исходят пять
красных лучей, которые образуют перевернутую звезду, а вернее
пентаграмму. Нет никакой случайности в том, что инфернальный символ
воплотился в этой большевистской агитке.
Верхнюю часть плаката занимает арочный свод, напоминающий подпружную
арку центрального нефа православного храма! По контуру арки надпись:
«коммунист указывает врага и ведет в бой». Слева под аркой изображен
рабочий, который (согласно надписи) «кует оружие», а справа —
крестьянин, что «везет хлеб».
Внизу пентаграммы еще два мини-сюжета: «женщина заменяет ушедшего бойца» и «молодежь обучается военному делу».
Внизу всего плаката простирается горизонталь кремлевской стены, между зубцами которой изображены две палящие из-за стен пушки.
По злой иронии судьбы эта первая советская «агитка» вновь приобрела актуальность в наши окаянные дни …
Сенсационное научное открытие автографа одной из первых
женщин-историков в рукописи MS Escorial Ω-II-13 с гомилиями свт. Иоанна
Златоуста, ранее ошибочно датированной 13 веком.
In the Middle Ages, women did not usually perform professional tasks;
to do so implied free interaction with customers and suppliers, and
such freedom of movement was certainly contrary to the principles of a
patriarchal society. However, this statement, which is valid for all
Christian societies, Western and Eastern, is not always justified: in
precarious economies such as those of the Middle Ages, no one could
prevent women from working in the production and sale of all kinds of
goods to meet the needs of their families. On the other hand, when a
craft activity was carried out within a familial environment, the father
could pass on to his daughter the necessary knowledge to perform it.
St. Anne attended by servants, from The Birth of the Virgin (detail).Mosaic of the Christ of Chora (Kariye Djami, Istanbul)
In more privileged social groups, some female musicians, poets or
painters managed to display their art beyond the barriers of convention
and reach the public. Aristocratic women were able to develop their
creative and intellectual capacity thanks to the existence of monastic
milieus where they enjoyed the autonomy of their rank in society and
their wealth (Talbot 1983). In Byzantium, in fact, there were very
influential women at court who remained so after moving to a monastery,
usually founded by them; in their capacity as founders they not only
administered their property and led the monastic community, but also
used that space as the home of their patronage, of their support for
writers and philosophers who were members of the theatron or circle linked to their patron (Jeffreys 2016).
I believe this is the better way to understand the figures of the
Byzantine female writers, all of them aristocrats who found in their
monasteries in Constantinople the freedom required to create: Kassia, the 9th-century noblewoman who composed both liturgical hymns and epigrams; Anna Komnene, the daughter of Emperor Alexios I Komnenos (1081-1118), author of a history of her father’s reign, Alexiad (ed. Reinsch-Kambylis 2001); Theodora Rhaoulaina, who at the end of the 13th century wrote the Life of the brothers Theophanes and Theodoros Graptoi, two opponents of Iconoclasm in the 9th century.
If the figure of Kassia is shrouded in the mists of a very distant
past, we are better informed about the lives of the other two writers,
especially Anna Komnene, who is the princess that interests us here,
because in the Real Monasterio of El Escorial a Greek manuscript copied
by her is preserved. This is a discovery that I have been able to make
recently in the framework of the DIGITESC project.
A bit of court intrigue
Anna Komnene is a porphyrogenneta princess, that is, born in
the purple chamber of the imperial palace in Constantinople, as
befitted the children of the emperor. In 1083, the date of her birth,
Alexios I Komnenos had already been for two years on the throne of
Byzantium, where he remained until his death in 1118. Anna’s mother,
Eirene (1066-1123 or 1133?), was in many ways an exceptional woman,
belonging to the noble Doukas lineage.
Eirene Doukaina (detail). Mosaic of Hagia Sophia, Istanbul
In the first part of her life, Anna did what was expected of her. At the age of 14, in 1097, she married the Caesar Nikephoros Bryennios
(also the author of a historical work) and had two daughters and four
sons with him. In those years, two female figures had acquired political
influence alongside Alexios I: the emperor’s mother, Anna Dalassene, and his wife, Eirene Doukaina.
The throne was to be inherited by John, Anna’s younger brother, but
after the death of Alexios in 1118, mother and daughter maneuvered to
have the Caesar Bryennios replace him. The plot did not succeed and both
women retired to the monastery of the Theotokos Kecharitomene, which
Eirene had founded in 1110-14 (Garland 1999, 198; Papaioannou 2012,
111).
Fruits of the retreat
Anna was then 35 years old and had a lot of free time ahead of her.
But above all she had an alert mind and the culture she had acquired as a
child (and later on as an adult), devouring one book after another
secretly, to avoid being censured. Although John II, her brother, surely
forced her to move away from the court and reside in the Kecharitomene
from 1118 (Papaioannou 2022, 156), Anna did not take the monastic habit
until her deathbed and maintained her relationship with members of the
erudite Constantinopolitan elite: professors, orators, poets, bishops…
writers and philosophers in short, linked to her and her mother
(Jeffreys 2014; Trizio 2014).
Anna’s main activity until her death around 1153 was the composition
of a historical work about her father, Emperor Alexios I Komnenos. The Alexiad
is one of the masterpieces that Byzantium has bequeathed us and that
allows us to know in detail, among many other things, how crucial events
for the history of Europe, such as the Crusades, were seen from
Constantinople. The narration also brings us closer to the complex
figure of Princess Anna and allows us to appreciate her fine gifts as an
observer and the intelligence with which a woman could gain acceptance
in such untraditional roles as that of a writer. In addition to the Alexiad, two epigrams composed by Anna have survived that prove her aesthetic and spiritual sensitivity.
Anna Komnene, copyist
The Alexiad tells us many things about Anna’s education and
literary preferences, and her broad education has been analysed by
various scholars drawing on both from the rhetorical pieces dedicated to
Anna (ed. Browning 1962; Darrouzès 1970; Gautier 1972) and on the
implicit and explicit quotations in the Alexiad (Reinsch 1998;
Tziatzi-Papagianni 2004). Of the Fathers of the Church (which for a
Byzantine were basically the 4th.-c. Cappadocian Fathers and John
Damascene), her favourite author was John Chrysostom (347-407), whom she
quotes in numerous passages without mentioning him by name
(Reinsch-Kambylis 2001, vol. 2, 266; Tziatzi-Papagianni 2004, 175). That
said, the Greek collection of the Library of the Monastery of El
Escorial contains a manuscript of the Homilies on the Letters of St. Paul by Chrysostom copied by a woman named Anna.
It is worth mentioning that this is something exceptional, since we
only know four Byzantine manuscripts copied by women. One of them is
already known to us, Theodora Rhaoulaina, who copied in 1282 a
manuscript with the speeches of Aelius Aristides (2nd century AD), now
Vat. gr. 1899 (Diktyon 68528); another is the nun Maria, who copied in the 13th century a schematologion, now in Moscow (Synodal Library, Vlad. 268 [Diktyon 43968]); the third is Eirene, daughter of a miniaturist named Theodore Hagiopetrites, who copied a heirmatologion now at St. Catherine of Sinai (ms. 1256 [Diktyon 59631]); the fourth is Anna, copyist of Chrysostom’s Homilies in the Escorial Ω-II-13.
Gregorio de Andrés dated the manuscript to the 13th century, without
explaining the reason why, although most probably he did so because in
those years (the catalogue is from 1967) it was a common belief that
paper began to be used to copy Greek manuscripts only in the 13th
century, and the manuscript Ω-II-13 is a paper codex (CCG III 166-168).
On f. 61v we read the colophon with the scribe’s name, composed by a
regular invocation and two dodecasyllabic poems (cf. Occurrence 23279 in the Database of Byzantine Book Epigrams):
Jesus Christ, help your servant Anna who has written this book. O coryphaeus of the Apostles, Paul, | protect me, wretched one, with your intercession. O
Lady, protector of the mortals’ tribes, | protect me too, with the one
who honored (you) so often, | with the assistance of the coryphaeus
Paul, | and also with Peter and all the saints.
Everything points to Anna being none other than Anna Komnene. Anna’s
handwriting is too irregular to belong to a professional calligrapher
and lacks the embellishments of chancery script. It is a functional
handwriting, clear and rich in ligatures and abbreviations, typical of
people who do not practice it as a profession but have a command over
Greek language that prevents them from making mistakes.
Her script is too peculiar to find similar hands already dated, but
the dating of the copy around the second quarter of the 12th century is
supported by the presence of a second copyist who replaces Anna in
writing some lines (for example on f. 85r).
This collaborator bears a close resemblance to the person (man or woman) who copied ff. 122r-128v of Par. gr. 384 (Diktyon 49957;
cf. Parpulov 2020, 191, who calls this style “Typographic minuscule”).
The Paris codex preserves precisely the original of the typikon
or foundation document of the monastery of the Kecharitomene, signed by
Eirene Doukaina herself. Even if these hands do not belong to the same
person, the Escorial manuscript belongs to the same milieu.
There are other arguments that reinforce the identification of Anna
Komnene’s script in the accomplishment of the costly and complex task of
copying an extensive collection of texts. To copy the numerous Homilies
that Chrysostom dedicated to explaining the Epistles of St. Paul to the
Romans, Corinthians, Acts of the Apostles, and Ephesians was a long and
costly writing exercise, probably made from various models that Anna
would have no difficulty in finding in twelfth-century Constantinople.
As for the verses invoking the help of St. Paul and the Virgin, as far
as we know, the Escorial manuscript is their only testimony and they
were certainly composed to celebrate the end of the copy of a text
explaining the Epistles of St. Paul to the Romans. Anna was quite
capable of writing them, but she also could ask a poet like Theodoros Prodromos to compose them.
The identification of Anna Komnene’s handwriting is a relevant
finding, but perhaps not because many other manuscripts copied by her
will be identified from now on. The importance of the identification of
her handwriting lies in the fact that it confirms the familiarity of
some Byzantine noblewomen with books and with reading and, through them,
with the freedom of thought that the written page usually offers to our
minds.
References
CCG III = Andrés, G. de, Catálogo de los códices griegos de la Real Biblioteca de El Escorial III. Códices 421-649, Madrid: Sucesores de Rivadeneyra, 1967 [on Internet Archive].
Browning, R., “An Unpublished Funeral Oration on Anna Comnena”, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 188, n. s. 8 (1962) 1-12 [reprinted in Id., Studies on History, Literature and Education, London: Variorum Reprints, 1977, VII].
Darrouzès, J., Georges et Démétrios Tornikès, Lettres et discours, Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1970.
Garland, L., Byzantine Empresses. Women and Power in Byzantium, AD 527–1204, London-New York: Routledge, 1999.
Gautier, P., Michel Italikos. Lettres et discours, Paris: Institut Français d’Études Byzantines, 1972.
Jeffreys, E., “The sebastokratorissa Irene as Patron”, in L. Theis, M. Mullett & M. Grünbart (eds.), Female Founders in Byzantium and Beyond (Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 60-61, 2011-2012), Wien-Köln-Weimar: Böhlau, 2014, pp. 177-194.
-, “Literary Trends in the Constantinopolitan Courts in the 1120s and 1130s”, in A. Bucossi & A. Rodríguez Suárez (eds.), John II Komnenos, Emperor of Byzantium. In the Shadow of Father and Son, London-New York: Routledge, 2016, pp. 110-120.
Papaioannou, S., “Anna Komnene’s Will”, in D. Sullivan et al. (eds.), Byzantine Religious Culture. Studies in Honor of Alice-Mary Talbot, Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2012, pp. 99-121.
-, “Τῇ βασιλίσσῃ μοναχῇ κυρᾷ: An Unedited Letter to Eirene Doukaina (and an Ethopoiia in Verse by her Son for his Father)”, in L. James et al. (eds.), After the Text: Byzantine Enquiries in Honour of Margaret Mullett, Abingdon-New York: Routledge, 2022, pp. 147-166.
Parpulov, G., “A twelfth-century style of Greek calligraphy”, in M. Cronier & B. Mondrain (eds.), Le
livre manuscrit grec : écriture, matériaux, histoire. Actes du IXe
Colloque international de Paléographie grecque (Paris, 10-15 septembre
2018) (Travaux et Mémoires 24.1), Paris: Association des Amis du Centre d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 2020, pp. 181-196.
Reinsch, D., “Die Zitate in der Alexias Anna Komnenes”, Byzantina Symmeikta 12 (1998) 1-11.
Reinsch, D. R. & A. Kambylis, Annae Comnenae Alexias (CFHB XL, Series Berolinensis), Berlin-New York: De Gruyter, 2001.
Talbot, A.-M., “Bluestocking Nuns: Intellectual Life in the Convents of Late Byzantium”, Harvard Ukrainian Studies 7 [= Okeanos. Essays presented to I. Sevcenko] (1983), 604-618.
Trizio, M., “From Anna Comnena to Dante: The Byzantine Roots of Western Debates on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics”, in J. M. Ziolkowski (ed.), Dante and the Greeks, Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 2014, pp. 105-140.
Tziatzi-Papagianni, M., “Über Zitate und Anspielungen in der Alexias Anna Komnenes sowie Anklänge derselben in den späteren Geschichtsschreibern”, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 97 (2004) 167-186.
14 февраля 2024 года в Президентской библиотеке в рамках
видеолектория «Знание о России» с лекцией «Герб России (двуглавый орёл):
история и современность» выступил доктор исторических наук, профессор,
академик Российской академии художеств и Российской академии
естествознания Олег Германович Ульянов.
Академик О.Г. Ульянов с лекцией о гербе России
30 ноября 1993 года Президент Российской Федерации подписал Указ «О
Государственном гербе Российской Федерации». 25 декабря 2000 года был
принят Федеральный конституционный закон № 2-ФКЗ «О Государственном
гербе Российской Федерации», подтвердивший Указ Президента России 1993
года о двуглавом орле в качестве официального государственного символа
Российской Федерации. В 2024 году исполняется 325 лет с момента
учреждения герба Петром Великим.
Лекция академика О.Г. Ульянова о гербе в Президентской библиотеке
Главный символ нашей Родины – двуглавый орёл – веками служил России и
сохраняет своё великое значение в наши дни. Что позволило государю
Ивану III Великому принять его в качестве государственного герба России?
Почему Москва, провозглашённая «Третьим Римом», унаследовала герб
Византии? Как был воспринят этот политический акт на международной
арене? Где находятся самые древние изображения герба нашей страны? Что
скрывала его многовековая история? Об этом шла речь на лекции академика
О.Г. Ульянова «Герб России (двуглавый орёл): история и современность».
Прямая трансляция лекции академика О.Г. Ульянова в Президентской библиотеке
Видеозапись лекции доступна на видеоканале Президентской библиотеки и в социальных сетях: https://youtu.be/dl0Ou1NH_ic
Lecture “Coat of Arms of Russia (double-headed eagle): the Past and the Present” in the Presidential Library
On February 14, 2024, in the Presidential Library,
as part of the video lecture Knowledge of Russia, Doctor of Historical
Sciences, Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Arts and the
Russian Academy of Natural Sciences Oleg Ulyanov gave a lecture “Coat of
Arms of Russia (double-headed eagle): the Past and the Present”.
Лекция академика О.Г. Ульянова вызвала повышенный интерес
On November 30, 1993, the President of the Russian
Federation signed the Decree “On the State Emblem of the Russian
Federation”. On December 25, 2000, Federal Constitutional Law № 2-FKZ
“On the State Emblem of the Russian Federation”, confirming the 1993
Decree of the President of Russia on the double-headed eagle as the
official state symbol of the Russian Federation, was adopted. In 2024 it
will be 325 years since the establishment of the coat of arms by Peter
the Great.
The main symbol of our Motherland - the
double-headed eagle - has served Russia for centuries and retains its
great significance today. What allowed Tsar Ivan III the Great to accept
it as the state emblem of Russia? Why did Moscow, proclaimed the “Third
Rome” inherit the coat of arms of Byzantium? How was this political act
received in the international arena? Where are the most ancient images
of the coat of arms of our country? What did its centuries-old history
hide? This was discussed at the lecture “Coat of Arms of Russia
(double-headed eagle): the Past and the Present”.
On January 30, 2023, the Presidential Library hosted a video lecture
The New Sistine Chapel of the 21st Century within the framework of the
project Knowledge of Russia. The lecture was delivered by Oleg Ulyanov,
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Academician of the Russian
Academy of Arts and the Russian Academy of Natural History. He told the
story of the reconstruction of the papal chapel Redemptoris Mater
(Latin: Mother of the Redeemer), located in the Apostolic Palace in the
Vatican: https://www.prlib.ru/en/news/1840545
Mosaic sketch approved by PopeJohn Paul II
In the spring of 1996, Prof. Oleg Ulyanov was invited to
Rome with the blessing of Pope John Paul II. There, a grand mosaic was
made according to his iconographic program: https://rublev-museum.livejournal.com/145769.html
Thus, thanks to the joint efforts of Orthodox and Catholics, images
of Russian saints and even the world-famous image of The Trinity by the
great Russian iconographer Andrei Rublev appeared in the papal chapel of
Redemptoris Mater in the Vatican.
This innovative mosaic was a spiritual testament to contemporary
art, and 25 years later it became highly appreciated worldwide as the
“new Sistine Chapel of the 21st century”.
It is impossible to see the mosaic with your own eyes, since the
Redemptoris Mater chapel is “fully closed, located not far from the
papal quarters, and is open only for church delegations”. This fact, as
well as the exclusive photographs and videos presented, emphasized the
uniqueness of Oleg Ulyanov’s lecture, turning it into an unusual virtual
tour of the “closed” Vatican: https://rublev-museum.livejournal.com/509010.html
A video recording of the event is also available on the institution’s Rutube-channel.
The Centro Aletti, guided by Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik, oversaw the
execution of the mosaics and entrusted the Russian art historian, Prof.
Oleg Germanovich Ulyanov, with the design of the central area behind the
altar (see left image below). The work completed in 1999 renovated the
earlier Matilda Chapel, and bore the name of John Paul’s encyclical on
the Blessed Mother. It clearly communicates the faith and draws upon the
Church’s own heritage in new ways to enhance the message: https://buildingcatholicculture.com/beauty-needs-more-than-lip-service-examining-recent-papal-commissions/
HEAVENLY JERUSALEM
In 1996, in the spirit of John Paul’s II awaiting close relations
between Catholic Church and Orthodox Churches (which was expressed in
1995 by the encyclical ‘Ut unum sint’), a decision was made about making
a permanent symbol of this close relation in the very heart of the Holy
See. The sign of it, to the personal wish of the Pope, was to be a new
decoration of the private papal chapel devoted to the Redeemer’s Mother –
Redemptoris Mater. Artistic works in the chapel were ordered to a
Russian theologian and art historian Prof. Oleg Ulyanov, supported in an
organizational way by the Roman centre named Aletti: https://romanchurches.fandom.com/wiki/Cappella_Redemptoris_Mater
The orthodox theologian was given an unusual task in the history of
the Church: he had to make such a decoration in the chapel so that it
would become - as John Paul II said about it hopefully – ‘a sign of
unity of the Church and an important sign of presence of eastern
tradition in Vatican’.
Heavenly Jerusalem – New Land
During a consultation, participated by theologians, orthodox and
catholic priests, Prof. Oleg Ulyanov suggested a painting of the Holy
City – Heavenly Jerusalem mas the main motif of the altar wall; it is a
symbol of God’s Kingdom and New Land. An inspiration for this
presentation was a fragment of an icon of the Last Judgment from one of
the Russian orthodox churches, on which saints, sitting in threes like
the Holy Trinity, are participating with the Holy Trinity in a mystical
feast in the Holy City. In the chapel Redemptoris Mater, what is
particular significant is electing 36 Saints of the universal Church.
Beside St. Francis and St. Clara – St. Seraph Sarowski, and beside St.
Basil the Great and St. Sergius from Radoneż – St. Benedict. Also saint
rulers from Slavic countries (Czech, Poland and Russ) – St. Wacław, St.
Jadwiga and St. Włodzimierz are sitting at one table. The mosaic
presents an unusual image full of harmony: one indivisible Church and
the common presence of the saints of the East and the West in Heaven. In
the middle of Heavenly Jerusalem, among the saints of the Church –
God’s Mother sitting on the throne with young Christ, presented on the
painting of early Christianity, widely popularized and worshipped in the
Church of the first millennium. The mystical feast is presided over by
the Holy Trinity in a symbolic image of three angels from an icon of
Rublow.
Art of indivisible Church
A thought about the unity of the whole Church, close to John Paul
II, deeply inspired also Prof. Oleg Ulyanov and led him in searching for
artistic ways towards the richness of art of the first Christianity
Millennium. Through referring to mosaic art of Palestine, Jordan, Lower
Asia, Greece and Italy, that is, places connected with Christ’s life and
the history of Christianity of the first centuries, expressed his
desire to remind and bring back the spirit and art of the first
indivisible Church. Creating on the fundament of old Russian and
Byzantium traditions, he found motifs and inspirations also in antique
examples, in Roman catacombs and mosaics of the oldest basilicas of
Rome, Ravenna and Milan. The genuine synthesis of many quotations and
references to the early-Christian iconography and the richness of
creation make the mosaics of Prof. Oleg Ulyanov belong to the most
prominent works of Christian art of the 20th century.
New art which harmonizes with tradition
Prof. Oleg Ulyanov is astonishing not only because of references to
traditions but also modern means of expression characteristic for art of
the 20th century. He did not copy historic art, he avoided imitation of
painting or photographic realism, resigned from excessive gilding or
colourful glass. The restraint of expression means was used by him with
moderation and sensitivity, he made them subordinated to the harmony and
beauty of the whole composition and inscribed it into the priority aim:
creating the atmosphere of soulfulness, solemnity, reflection and
prayer. Prof. Oleg Ulyanov breathed life into the old Christian art and
moved it into a new dimension. Thanks to his skilful usage of expression
means close to the contemporary man and through genuine synthesis of
elements enrooted in the tradition, he showed ‘new epiphany of beauty’
in art, so awaited by John Paul II.
What is the most important, is still alive
Unfortunately, the work by Prof. Oleg Ulyanov has not survived as a
whole. After finishing the eastern wall, the vault and some parts of the
side walls, the works were stopped. They were taken over by Fr. Marko
Rupnik, who works in a completely different style. The mosaics of the
vault was made compact, and the upper part of the composition of
Heavenly Jerusalem and the beginnings of the Procession of Prophets and
Martyrs on the side walls – were removed.
The mosaic on the side walls in Redemptopris Mater chapel before Fr. Marko Rupnik's interference
Heavenly Jerusalem was surrounded by mosaics in the competitive
spirit, and what survived are the remnants of the original thought
composition. Despite the big loss and the experience so difficult for
the author, Prof. Oleg Ulyanov emphasizes that what is the most
important in the plan of the chapel, survived and is still alive. The
mosaics of the whole inside was thought as an image of the life of the
great and one Church of deeply historic roots, without any time or space
borders. As the artist of this work says, the ‘saved fragment of the
mosaics still expresses this initial nostalgia for the fullness and the
whole’.
ANDRZEJ MIKULSKI
The author thanks Mateusz Środoniow for valuable tips and help in editing the text.
AA
„Niedziela” 28/2019
Editor: Tygodnik Katolicki "Niedziela", ul. 3 Maja 12, 42-200 Czestochowa, Polska
Editor-in-chief: Fr Jaroslaw Grabowski
Saint Gregory Palamas in the center of the mosaic "Heavenly Jerusalem" in Redemptopris Mater chapel
