The Grotesque in Church ArtWildridge, T. Tindall (Thomas Tindall)
History
The Grotesque in Church Art
Wildridge, T. Tindall (Thomas Tindall)
Christian art and symbolism; Church decoration and ornament; Grotesque
Repeatedly has the statement been made that the various mythologies are
only so many corruptions of the Mosaic system. Manifestly if this could be
admitted there would be little interest in enquiring further into their
details. But there are three arguments against the statement, any one of
which is effective. Although it is perhaps totally unnecessary to
contradict that which can be accepted by the unreflective only, it is
sufficiently near the purpose of this volume to slightly touch upon the
matter, as pointing strong distinctions among ancient worships.
First, there is the simple fact recorded in the Mosaic account itself,
that there existed at that time, and had done previously, various
religious systems, the rooting out of which was an important function of
the liberated Hebrews. The only reply to this is that, by a slight shift
of ground, the mythologies were corruptions of the patriarchal religion,
not the Mosaic system. Yet paganism surrounded the patriarchs.
The second point is that most of the mythologies had crystallized into
taking the sun as the main symbol of worship, and into taking the
equinoxes and other points of the constellation path as other symbols and
reminders of periodic worship; whereas in the Mosaic system the whole
structure of the solar year is ignored, all the calculations being lunar.
If it be objected that Numbers ix. 6-13, and II. Chronicles xxx. 2, refer
indirectly to an intercalary month, that, if admitted, could only for
expediency's sake, and has no bearing upon the general silence as to the
solar periods. This second point is an important testimony to what may be
termed Mosaic originality.
The third point is that in most of the mythologies there is the distinct
mention of a Trinity; in the Mosaic system, the system of the Old
Testament, none. With the question as to whether the New Testament
supports the notion of a Trinity, we need not concern ourselves here; it
is enough that it has been adopted as an item of the Christian belief.
The mythological Trinities are vague and, of course, difficult or
impossible to understand. Most of them appear to be attempts of great
minds of archaic times to reconcile the manifest contradictions ever
observable in the universe. This is done in various ways. Some omit one
consideration, some another; but they generally agree that to have a
three-fold character in one deity is necessary in explaining the
phenomenon of existence. Some of the Trinities may be recited.
PERSIAN.
OROMASDES, Goodness, the deviser of Creation.
MITHRAS, Eternal Intellect, the architect and ruler of the world,
literally "the Friend."
ARIMANES, the mundane soul (Psyche).
GRECIAN.
ZEUS.
PALLAS.
HERA.
ROMAN.
JUPITER, Power.
MINERVA, Wisdom, Eternal Intellect.
JUNO, Love.
SCANDINAVIAN.
ODIN, Giver of Life.
HÆNIR, Giver of motion and sense.
LODUR, Giver of speech and the senses.
AMERICAN INDIAN.
OTKON.
MESSOU.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account