medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Dear list members
This is only very remotely related to the purpose of this list, but maybe you
can help me to get a better understanding and more background knowledge about
the following issue:
The German Wikipedia is currently discussing the question whether they should
maintain or change their use of an asterisc (*) and a cross or "dagger" (†) as a
standard for abbreviating the terms "born" and "died" at the beginning of each
biographical articles, as for instance in:
- Ambrosius von Mailand (* 339 in Trier; † 4. April 397 in Mailand)
- Jehuda ha-Levi (* um 1075 in Tudela; † 1141)
- Mohammed (* ca. 570 in Mekka; † 8. Juni 632 in Medina)
In Germany, the use of these symbols is quite common on gravestones and in
obituary notices, at least during the last hundred or so years, and in this
context it is sometimes interpreted as symbolising the Star of Bethlehem (or
Mary) and the Cross of Christ as the beginning and end of human life in Christ.
They are also part of the so called "genealogical symbols", together with a
symbol of water for "baptised", the two rings or lemniscate for "married" and a
small square symbolizing a grave for "buried", and a few more specific symbols
of this kind.
And, needless to tell you, as asteriscus (origianlly a cussed cross with four
dots in its ankles) and obel(isc)us (originally a horizonal line or arrowlike
sign) they are of course originally part of the set of ancient grammatical notae
criticae that were later used also as reference signs for referencing marginal
notes or footnotes, or as paragraph signs, or as a sort of interpunctuation for
marking a prosodical pause.
Now the questions that I have are the following:
1) Do you happen to know more about the "sepulcral" use of this pair of symbols,
namely about its age, and/or about its presence in non-German countries?
2) Leaving aside the asterisc and focussing on the cross, do you recall the
cross in its connection with the name of a deceased person or even with the date
of this person's death in medieval or earlier inscriptions, or in manuscripts? I
am generally aware of the Chi-Rho-monogramm and of Crosses in sepulcral
contexts, and also roughly familiar with small crosses marking the beginning and
sometimes also other intersections of an epitaph or other inscription, maybe
with mostly ornamental function, or maybe for indicating -- as in liturgical
books -- where the reader is supposed to sign himself with a cross and thus
highlighting the character of the text as a prayer (especially if closed with
"Amen"). Yet I don't think I have seen a medieval epitaph or other text where a
cross is used as a shorthand for "deceased". The closest that I can remember are
small crosses on late medieval paintings, where a cross is placed above the head
of a person for marking this person as deceased (e.g. on paintings where the
donator is depicted together with deceased members of his family). But I am not
familiar with premodern parish registers, monastic registers, memorial lists, or
other texts where persons might be rated as "dead" by using a a cross.
3) Are you familiar, in your own countries and in prints of your own languages,
with the secular use of asterisc and cross as a typographic shorthand for "born"
and "died" in genealogy and lexicography or other writings? I have found, on my
own shelves, a few rare examples in French and Italian books, and a few more
examples in English books, yet the English examples are only English language
publications by German publishers or in one case an English translation of an
Italian book.
4) Would you say that this "secular" typographic use especially of the cross (or
"dagger" or obelisc) is appropriate also for marking the death of
non-Christians, and especially of Jews or Moslems? Or would you rather avoid it
in order to avoid religious offence? This is the question currently debated by
German Wikipedians, and I have found only very few explicit statements in
published sources criticizing this conventional use (more precisely, I have
found two short statements in jewish publications declaring it as inappropriate,
one of them by a Christian author explaining why he is avoiding the cross symbol
in a memorial list of Jewish victims of the holocaust)
As regards my own position in the current Wikipedia debate, I am one of those
objecting to the current usage of these symbols and demanding them to be
replaced by more neutral abbreviations. There is even a poll going on -- the
third one since 2005 --, and the current state is 202:64 votes against replacing
these symbols. Personally, I think that it actually is an issue, but I am not
sure how this German habit (at least I take it to be mostly German) of
"daggering" dead Jews and Moslems is received by the rest of the world.
If you want to respond, please feel free to send your answer off the list! Any
feedback will be appreciated!
Otfried Lieberknecht
D-40477 Duesseldorf
Klever Strasse 37
Tel. +49 (0) 172 407 6073
mailto:[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
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
|