> And so I end this very brief history of the Bible.
>
> The Supple Doctor.
Finally, I can claim to be disappointed in Bill East's brief history.
It's over? Not being a biblical scholar but an art historian, I
have been expecting some reference to illustrated Bibles (I hope I
haven't missed one). These begin to survive from the 5th and 6th
centuries: the Cotton Genesis, the Quedlinburg Itala, the Rossano and
Rabbula Gospels, and a little later, the Ashburnham Pentateuch. From
an art historical perspective, this is where direct consideration of
the Bible usually begins. Until fairly recently, these were
considered along lines formulated prominently by Kurt Weitzmann, who
used methods derived from textual analysis to devise elaborate
recensions of earlier illuminated Bibles. These, in turn, were
brought ot bear on the new appearance in the 5th century of biblical
narratives in other contexts, such as the Old Testament sequences
decorating the nave walls of S. Maria Maggiore (in mosaics)
and S. Paolo fuori le Mura (wall paintings; now destroyed) both in
Rome. Weitzmann's approach is now under reconsideration, but I
wonder if list members have any thoughts on this development. It
is understandable that this brief history should have dealt
exclusively with the word, but do images, too, make a contribution to
the history of the Bible?
Cheers,
Jim Bugslag
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|