andrewcriddle

Freke and Gandy used as the frontispiece of The Jesus Mysteries an amulet now lost showing a crucified figure with the inscription ORPhEOS BAKKIKOS. If authentic this amulet would probably date from c 300 CE.

There have been claims at Bede's blog http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2006...l_archive.html http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2004...crucified.html and elsewhere http://sternfels.blogspot.com/2006/0...us-amulet.html that this amulet was a (probably 19th century) forgery


These claims ultimately go back to a 1926 German article in AGGELOS I've tracked down this article and althuogh my academic German is too poor for me to offer a translation I can give a paraphrase.

The major part of the article is a long section by Johannes Reil who sees no problems with authenticity on technological grounds (ie the amulet could have been carved using the techniques of late antiquity). However he has several problems with the iconography.

1/ The depiction of the crucified figure is medieval rather than Late Antique (I'll discuss this in more detail below)

2/ The cross is Latin in shape + as in later depictions of crucifixion rather than the T shaped cross (and other variants) typical before 500 CE.

3/ The depiction of the crucified figure as alone withuot crucifiers co-crucified or devotees is unparalleled in antiquity and only appears later.

In the light of modern knowledge 2/ and 3/ may be less evidential than Reil supposes although IIUC there is still no example from antiquity of a solitary crucified figure on a Latin cross.

4/ The image of the moon and seven stars is very strange but may be a later development of the early symbolic use of the sun and moon in images of the crucifixion with the sun removed in response to the claim in the synoptic Gospels that the sun was darkened. I find this plausible myself others will regard it as speculative.


Point 1/ is IMO the strongest argument and I regard it as compelling. The figure on the amulet has bent legs brought together at the feet and hangs from bent arms this is characteristically medieval in contrast to the stright upright figure usual in images of the crucifixion from antiquity. I will try and illustrate this below

First 2 antique crucifixion scenes



Now 2 images of the amulet



Finally some medieval images



It should be clear how the crucified figure resembles the medieval rather than the antique examples.

(For further study of the iconography of the crucifixion http://www.textweek.com/art/crucifixion.htm is a good site)

Andrew Criddle

Ratel

Although I was suspicious of this "crucified Orpheus" amulet when I first saw it, and still am, I know I have seen an ancient crucifixion picture that has both legs bent up more drastically than either the "Orpheus" or the Medieval examples shown here. Also, the knees were facing sideways rather than toward the viewer, if you can picture what I'm talking about. I hope I can recollect what book I saw this in, as I'm sure no one is going to take my word for it.

How is the fact that Orpheus was dismembered and not crucified accounted for by this theory?

countjulian

There were a lot of variants in ancient myths, and indeed Orpheus has quite a few. Those who support the amulet theory say that it merely represents a strain of the myth we have never seen. Of course, the fact that the amulet is a freakin' fake doesn't help very much.

andrewcriddle

I'm not sure what picture you're referring to but the depiction of crucifixion in Late Antiquity did vary with some of the examples in one way or another somewhat resembling the Orpheus amulet

Note the hanging arms in the Alexamenos graffiti (c 200 CE) http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/.../graffito.html
Also Johannes Reil in his article says which I would tentatively translate as It still remains true IMO that
a/ the figure in the Orpheus amulet taken as a whole resembles medieval rather than Late Antique depictions
b/ In the Orpheus amulet the lower legs and feet are brought together in a way that is standard in medieval Latin representations but seems unparalleled in the earliest depictions of the crucifixion.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

I've been investigating further the iconography of crucifixion and how it relates to the Orpheus amulet and felt it worth posting my findings

Among my main sources are the intersting web page http://www.aug.edu/augusta/iconography/crucifixion.html and the interesting book Byzantine Art by Robin Cormack.

Early representations of the crucifixion are generally of the Christus Victor type with little indication of suffering and death and with Christ almost 'reigning from the cross'. Later the Christus Patiens type becomes prominent with the suffering and death of the crucified saviour made more prominent. This later develops particularly in the Western tradition after 1000 CE into images emphasising the pathos of the crucifixion and designed to encourage meditation on Christ's suffering.

If authentic the letter shapes of the Orpheus amulet indicate a date no later than 400 CE. However this amulet is clearly of the Christus Patiens and in some ways a late form of this type.

However, this way of depicting the crucifixion develops well after the middle of the 1st millennium with the main early examples 8th and 9th century
this 8th century image with crown of thorns closed eyes and blood from the side of Christ may be one of the earliest examples of the developing Christus Patiens convention.

Canon 82 from the council in Trullo in 692 may well have been intended to promote this image of the crucifixion. Emphasising the reality of Christ's suffering and death it would be a response to the Muslim claim that Jesus did not really die on the cross.

Hence the Orpheus amulet taken at face value dates from 400 CE or earlier, but iconographically makes little sense in the pre-Islamic world.

Andrew Criddle

S.C.Carlson

This kind of mixture of features from different eras is not unusual for forgeries.

Stephen Carlson

Aquila Pacis

New article, new approach:

English:
http://www.carotta.de/subseite/texte...akkikos_en.pdf

German:
http://www.carotta.de/subseite/texte...akkikos_de.pdf

Clivedurdle

Fascinating.

Especially the comment about the Eucharist ritual deriving directly from the Imperial Cult.

And this term "xian". I would seriously research annointing rituals and the development of cults around that.

The true gods and perfumes.....

Love the comment about people assuming artefacts are xian and are depicting a crucifixion!

Clivedurdle

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/p/philyra.html

http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/Cronos.html

Nothing like a good dose of parallelism!:devil1: