I’ve always wondered if the Byzantine version of Jesus, as seen in countless mosaics, was derived at all from imagery of Alexander the Great. Is there any likely connection?
No. Alexander was always (mostly?) beardless. Except for Roxanna. :old rolleyes:
Alexander got a few mentions, but nothing like Cyrus the Great, the most celebrated goy in the OT.
It’s normal practice to provide a link to the column under discussion.
FWIW, Cyrus of Persia actually freed the Jews from captivity, and there was speculation that he was the promised messiah.
Apparently, the spurious tale that modern depictions of Jesus were based on Cesare Borgia can be traced back to Alexandre Dumas in his 1839 essay on the Borgias from “Celebrated Crimes”. It is a common meme in atheist FB pages and needs constant debunking. Somehow it is supposed to discredit Christianity, but all it does is make some atheists looked uninformed.
ISTM Hellenistic/Byzantine iconography would have had an established set of visual tropes in its “language”, which would lead to images of Christ sharing characteristics with images of Justinian or of Alexander as a function of artistic conventions about “this is how we represent a supreme ruler” rather than out of direct appropriation of the image.
Wouldn’t that have worked more the other way though? As in, Justinian’s images would be more influenced by portrayals of Christ, and probably various previous Roman/Byzantine Emperors, than the other way around?
I always understood a LOT of the traditional Western Church portrayals of Christ to be based on syncretism with Apollo and other sun gods (Sol Invictus?). So in other words, the early Christians deliberately portrayed Christ in much the same way that Apollo had been portrayed, to sort of supplant him.
Well, in North America, we certainly seem to favour the white boy European style Jesus, though he still looks like a hippy. I’m surprised Republicans haven’t given him a proper brush cut yet. Black Jesus is an interesting variation, hanging with his homeboys in the hood. Jesus of Montreal was another interesting variation, with a diminutive and soft spoken Quebecer taking on the identity of the Lord and Saviour. As I see it, man creates God in his own image; we see what we want to see.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comic Julia Sweeney once riffed on the difference between the crucifixion images she’d seen in Italy (where the expressions emphasize the pain and suffering) and Utah, where the Nordic-looking faces bore an expression that resembled John Wayne sneering, “This all ya got, Roman?”
Many moons ago Robin Williams riffed on the Second Coming, saying Jesus is pissed off and “this time he isn’t going to look like Ted Nugent.”
Considering the hardware Ted supposedly packs around… :dubious:
IIRC William’s joke would have been 15-20 years ago. I think Nugent may have had a different stage image in those days. “Crazy hippie in a loincloth” or something like that? (I know next to nothing about him.)
Along those lines: http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d97/Clothahump/JustBefore.jpg
As per this historical and archaeological evidence, the link is probably the first known depiction of Jesus.
[URL=“http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/a_history_of_the_world/objects.aspx#44”]
Looks a bit like the Jolly Roger before he lost all the weight.
That hook. Those bushy eyebrows. That native tan. He’d be a shoo-in for Utah governor.
I heard somewhere that a short-haired, beardless Christ, as in the mosaic linked above, was the standard image for centuries. Then the Turin Shroud was discovered, and the face on the shroud became the standard.
No cite, I just heard it somewhere.
Cyrus this, Cyrus that. Trump will ban them all. 