medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>From: Christopher Crockett <[log in to unmask]>
>*every*thing comes from "farther east" --that's why people Journey there.
Actually, I had specific places in mind. And I think occasionally ideas may
actually originate in the "utter West."
>as best my memory serves, from a time long ago and a place far, far away,
>the Egyptian source (for the *iconography* of the Kells V&C) was/is the
>Reel Deal.
One hears a lot of theories identified as "real." Do you recall your sources
for this?
>though, not for the ridiculous reasons cited here
What reasons are cited? All the web page says is, "It is said to have been
influenced by Oriental and Egyptian art - the pose of the Virgin is stiff
and formal and lacks naturalism." I tend to agree with the statement
"influenced by Oriental and Egyptian art" which is different from your
suggestion that only Egyptian art was involved. Also, I think that the term
"Egyptian art" encompasses a great deal. What did you have in mind when you
used it to identify the source of the inspiration: Coptic manuscripts or
statues of Isis with Osiris or Isis/Osiris via Coptic MSS.? Those are three
distinct possibilities, and I expect that there are others.
>http://www.bookofkells.ie/virgin.html --which is something of an
>embarasement for a site associated with Trinity College(?), i should think.
Define "associated with." The site belongs to a company given permission by
the library of Trinity College, Dublin, to reproduce the images of the book
on a CD. Nothing says that TCD approved the content of the web site
promoting the CD--though perhaps TCD should have retained such rights.
>"It is said to have been influenced by Oriental and Egyptian art - the pose
>of the Virgin is stiff and formal and lacks naturalism."
>
>give me a brake.
Perhaps what you need is a fix, not a brake or a break. ;)
I have no interest in defending the web site which I think is done poorly,
in general, and fails to convey relevant information from a strictly
commercial viewpoint (like what makes the "special" edition different from
the regular), let alone issues of scholarship (such as referring to the
scribes of Iona and Kells as "Columban" monks, a term used for those that
followed the rule of Columbanus or belonged to the much later Columban
order). However, excuse me, but from where I sit, this statement sounds
pretty much the same as your generalization that the images were based on
Egyptian art.
>i could float the question on the medart list, see what the Prevailing
>Opinion is, these daze, but, in *my* time arguements were made based on the
>position of the Child viz-a-viz Momma, etc., the kinds of pesky details
>which iconographers consider important and dwell on.
Hmm, it seems to me that it's rather a waste of time to criticize the
efforts of a web site whose creators clearly have done a poor job of
researching their subject. You've given your opinion on the subject, but not
your sources. I'd like to hear your reasons/evidence. Or are you suggesting
that everyone at Trinity College is substandard because one commercial web
site is at fault?
>
>now, whether or not there was any *direct* Egyptian=>Kellsian influence
>rather than through intermediaries), that's another question. but, my
>memory is that the Opinion was that the influence *was* more or less
>direct.
At this point, I'd appreciate some sources rather than generalizations. For
one thing, in most topics regarding Celtica, there's been a good deal of
shifting opinions in the past few decades as a result of recent scholarship
in related fields.
>"simplification" then.
I'd suggest such terms as "adaptation" or "variation" or "regionalization"
as more appropriate and less judgmental than "perversion" or
"simplification."
> >However, does that mean an entire cultus was modeled on Isis and Osiris?
>
>depends upon what "modeled" means, i suppose.
>
>it *could* be that the later "cultus" sucked itself out of its own fingers,
>de novo; but I'd need to see more evidence before accepting that.
As I see it, of course art and theology/ritual are related, but artistic
imagery is often subject to vagaries of fashion more than theology or
ritual. So, while the images and styles artists used might change in
response to new cultural influences, the theology and other ideas as well as
the prayers and ritual actions used in veneration might remain fairly
untouched by the artistic changes. So, I think it's rather obvious that an
image might be modelled on an unrelated image used in another culture
because an artist liked it and wanted to adapt it for use in another
context, while the religious cult that used the image was not at all changed
by the new influence. To put it in concrete terms, an artist might be struck
by an image of Isis/Osiris and adapt it for use in Christian depictions of
Mary, but that doesn't mean the veneration of Mary--including theology and
ritual--was necessarily modelled on worship of Isis.
>leaving aside the (obvious) question of "archtypical" mythologies/imagery
>as something of a sticky wicket, the undeniable probability of the
>continuity between the *empire-wide* cult of Isis-Osiris => Mary-Child
>iconographies
(etc.) is, as they say nowadaze, "problematical."
My approach is more influenced by growing up in the midst of Massachusetts
politics. Tip O'Neill once said, "All politics is local." I tend to think
religion is, too. So I'll remind you that Alba (in which Iona was located)
and Ireland (where the majority of Iona monks were born) were never part of
the Roman empire. So, while they were certainly influenced by Roman artistic
trends, the role of Roman and Egyptian art in influencing Iona was probably
much less direct than you suggest. The influence of "eastern" sources, from
Coptic monasteries to those of Asia Minor, has been debated for decades and
continues to be so. Some interesting light on some of the non-Irish
materials known to be used by monks of Iona can be found in Richard Sharpe's
notes to his edition/translation of Adomnan's Life of Columba.
Francine Nicholson
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 3 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU=
http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_smartspamprotection_3mf
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|