Alexamenos graffiti

[perseusomega9]

NP, I could care less about convincing you otherwise, especially because it's has nothing to do with my question.

[The Crow]

I agree with Jay here. The photo on the left has what looks like a mans body with a horses head.The photo on the right does not even resemble it.

[PhilosopherJay]

Hi perseusomega,

In response to the original question, as there is not good evidence that the image represents anything to do with Christianity, there is no good evidence that it represents any sect of Christianity.

Here is a wider image of the graffiti that shows numerous vertical, slanted and horizontal lines that apparently have nothing to do with the picture. If one looks around the picture, one can find at least a dozen intersecting vertical and horizontal lines forming crosses.



Warmly,

Jay Raskin

NP, I could care less about convincing you otherwise, especially because it's has nothing to do with my question.

[PhilosopherJay]

Hi the Crow,

The question is not why they do not look alike. The question is where could the artist have gotten the idea to show a God with outstretched hands, if he did not wish to indicate a crucifixion.
Let's see...here's a coin from the time of the emperor Domitian (81-96 CE). According to Suetonius, he was the first Roman Emperor who had demanded to be addressed as dominus et deus (master and god). Wait, I see two T shaped crosses under the image. Does this mean that the God/Emperor Domitian was crucified?


Warmly,

Jay Raskin

I agree with Jay here. The photo on the left has what looks like a mans body with a horses head.The photo on the right does not even resemble it.

[DCHindley]

Jay,

I agree with others who think you are expecting too much of a graffiti. To me the Alexamenos graffiti figure, whatever it was supposed to depict, has its arms suspended by ropes from the crossbeam. Alexamenos may have simply been Jewish. After the first Jewish war (66 CE +) when the prisoners were executed en masse on so may crosses that it literally denuded the country of trees I am sure that this was known by many at least as rumor. For someone who perhaps had a low opinion of Judeans anyways, these mass executions may have seemed to have proved that the Judean god had no power whatsoever. The popular story that this or that Roman general entered the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple and saw that what the Jews worshipped was an image of an ass's head may also be envisioned. So, to mock his friend (or enemy), he depicts Alexamenos as worshipping a crucified ass. Whoo hoo!

The image that was posted as a parallel (bloodstone seal in the British Museum, inv MME 1986.05-01.1)* is a magical amulet which mentions Jesus Christ along with several other pagan figures, which is not unusual for magical materials of the period of production (3-4th century CE Gaza). The common attribution to a Gnostic sect is just a guess based on Christian prejudice that the world revolves around Jesus Christ. The figure on the amulet also seems to have his arms suspended by ropes. I think it is interesting that this appears to depict not a crucifixion as a cause of death, but the exposure of a dead corpse impaled on a gibbet through the anus (ewww!).

The gibbet, though, also looks like it could be made of long thin nails, which might suggest crucifixion as nails from a crucifixion were known to possess magical curative qualities, but mixing of metaphors seems to be the magical way, so it may just represent the fabricating magician's POV, and says nothing of actual crucifixion practices. It's an amulet, not a historical depiction ...



DCH

*http://phdiva.blogspot.com/2011/08/earl ... ixion.html

[spin]

Jay,

I agree with others who think you are expecting too much of a graffiti. To me the Alexamenos graffiti figure, whatever it was supposed to depict, has its arms suspended by ropes from the crossbeam. Alexamenos may have simply been Jewish. After the first Jewish war (66 CE +) when the prisoners were executed en masse on so may crosses that it literally denuded the country of trees I am sure that this was known by many at least as rumor. For someone who perhaps had a low opinion of Judeans anyways, these mass executions may have seemed to have proved that the Judean god had no power whatsoever. The popular story that this or that Roman general entered the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple and saw that what the Jews worshipped was an image of an ass's head may also be envisioned. So, to mock his friend (or enemy), he depicts Alexamenos as worshipping a crucified ass. Whoo hoo!

The version I know is with Antiochus Epiphanes cited by Josephus:

Contra Apion 1.7
for Apion hath the impudence to pretend that, "the Jews placed an ass's head in their holy place;" and he affirms that this was discovered when Antiochus Epiphanes spoiled our temple, and found that ass's head there made of gold, and worth a great deal of money.

This specifies an ass's head, unlike other references such as Tertullian, but then what Tertullian says may not refer specifically to christians anyway: it's not clear to me at least:

Ad Nationes 11:1-2
In this matter we are [said to be] guilty not merely of forsaking the religion of the community, but of introducing a monstrous superstition; for some among you have dreamed that our god is the head of an ass, an absurdity which Cornelius Tacitus first suggested. In the fourth book* of his histories, where he is treating of the Jewish war, he begins his description with the origin of that nation, and gives his own views respecting both the origin and the name of their religion. He relates that the Jews, in their migration in the desert, when suffering for want of water, escaped by following for guides some wild asses, which they supposed to be going in quest of water after pasture, and that on this account the image of one of these animals was worshipped by the Jews.

Tertullian says "our god", which should not be a reference to Jesus, but of, umm, god, as the reference to the Jews later also suggests.

These two references point away from a christian interpretation of the graffito, which springs from the 3rd c. during the reign of S.Severus, based on the location where it was found. Crucifixion was a subject of mime performances (see eg AJ 19.94), as is dressing up. Someone might have been using mime imagery to have a shot at this Alexamenos. The thing that I should add is that christians were supposed to have been persecuted at that time, so it is strange that such a graffito was left intact if it referred to a christian. As soon as the victim saw the parody, he would have attempted to destroy it. It is certainly not clear that we are dealing with a christian image.

[DCHindley]

Jay,

The popular story that this or that Roman general entered the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple and saw that what the Jews worshipped was an image of an ass's head may also be envisioned. So, to mock his friend (or enemy), he depicts Alexamenos as worshipping a crucified ass. Whoo hoo!

The version I know is with Antiochus Epiphanes cited by Josephus:

Contra Apion 1.7
for Apion hath the impudence to pretend that, "the Jews placed an ass's head in their holy place;" and he affirms that this was discovered when Antiochus Epiphanes spoiled our temple, and found that ass's head there made of gold, and worth a great deal of money.

You are right (as always). Now that I think about it, it was at least one or two Roman generals who entered to take a peek, perhaps to see if the story about Antiochus Epiphanes was true, and were disappointed to see that the H of H was totally empty of images.

Epiphanius relates that the Borborites thought that the God Sabaoth had an ass' head:

"Some say Sabaoth has the face of an ass; others, the face of a pig" (Panarion 26.10.6).

Also, that Judeans worshipped an ass:

"They say that one book is a “Birth of Mary,” and they palm some horrid, baneful things off in it and say that they get them from it. (2) On its authority they say that Zacharias was killed in the temple because he had seen a vision, and when he wanted to reveal the vision his mouth was stopped from fright. For at the hour of incense, while he was burning it, he saw a man standing there, they say, with the form of an ass. (3) And when he had come out and wanted to say “Woe to you, whom are you worshiping?” the person he had seen inside in the temple stopped his mouth so that he could not speak. But when his mouth was opened so that he could speak, then he revealed it to them and they killed him. And that, they say, is how Zacharias died" (Panarion 26.12.1ff).

Apparently there is an interesting article on this in the 1901 Jewish Encyclopedia:

https://studylight.org/encyclopedia/tje/view.cgi?n=2027

Beware that my browser tells me that "There is a problem with this website’s security certificate," but so are the ones for my employer sponsored Health Savings Account and a couple other ones related to the Online Pharmacy mandated by my company's health Insurance plan.

DCH

[PhilosopherJay]

Hi DCHindley,

The dangling by ropes is a good observation. It certainly matches the amulet crucifixion. I am wondering why the Alexanenos image does not have both hands dangling as the amulet does.


Note that the attaching line seems to be attached at the top of the forearm, just below the elbow, a very odd position to attach a rope. It is quite different than the amulet which has both hands attached at the wrists. At the same time, there does not seem to be any visible attachment of the other arm. Rather it seems to bend awkwardly backwards and upwards and actually seems to go above the horizontal line. We get the impression of one arm dangling loosely and the other arm bending up and backwards and being tightly bound. Try to bend your arm up and backwards in this fashion. It is virtually impossible.
If we lose the horizontal line, we lose the impression of the second arm twisting in an impossible fashion backwards. Both arms can now be imagined in an outstretched normal praying/gathering position with the forearms slightly forward. It matches the position of the arms in the Domitian coin in the above post very well.

The rope on the first arm, seems to be just an arbitrary wall crack.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Jay,

I agree with others who think you are expecting too much of a graffiti. To me the Alexamenos graffiti figure, whatever it was supposed to depict, has its arms suspended by ropes from the crossbeam. Alexamenos may have simply been Jewish. After the first Jewish war (66 CE +) when the prisoners were executed en masse on so may crosses that it literally denuded the country of trees I am sure that this was known by many at least as rumor. For someone who perhaps had a low opinion of Judeans anyways, these mass executions may have seemed to have proved that the Judean god had no power whatsoever. The popular story that this or that Roman general entered the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple and saw that what the Jews worshipped was an image of an ass's head may also be envisioned. So, to mock his friend (or enemy), he depicts Alexamenos as worshipping a crucified ass. Whoo hoo!

The image that was posted as a parallel (bloodstone seal in the British Museum, inv MME 1986.05-01.1)* is a magical amulet which mentions Jesus Christ along with several other pagan figures, which is not unusual for magical materials of the period of production (3-4th century CE Gaza). The common attribution to a Gnostic sect is just a guess based on Christian prejudice that the world revolves around Jesus Christ. The figure on the amulet also seems to have his arms suspended by ropes. I think it is interesting that this appears to depict not a crucifixion as a cause of death, but the exposure of a dead corpse impaled on a gibbet through the anus (ewww!).

The gibbet, though, also looks like it could be made of long thin nails, which might suggest crucifixion as nails from a crucifixion were known to possess magical curative qualities, but mixing of metaphors seems to be the magical way, so it may just represent the fabricating magician's POV, and says nothing of actual crucifixion practices. It's an amulet, not a historical depiction ...



DCH

*http://phdiva.blogspot.com/2011/08/earl ... ixion.html

[PhilosopherJay]

Hi Spin,

Yes, I agree with the likelihood of the Jewish interpretation. It is only the stray lines that can be imagined as somehow being a crucifix that allows one to make a Christian interpretation.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Jay,

I agree with others who think you are expecting too much of a graffiti. To me the Alexamenos graffiti figure, whatever it was supposed to depict, has its arms suspended by ropes from the crossbeam. Alexamenos may have simply been Jewish. After the first Jewish war (66 CE +) when the prisoners were executed en masse on so may crosses that it literally denuded the country of trees I am sure that this was known by many at least as rumor. For someone who perhaps had a low opinion of Judeans anyways, these mass executions may have seemed to have proved that the Judean god had no power whatsoever. The popular story that this or that Roman general entered the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple and saw that what the Jews worshipped was an image of an ass's head may also be envisioned. So, to mock his friend (or enemy), he depicts Alexamenos as worshipping a crucified ass. Whoo hoo!

The version I know is with Antiochus Epiphanes cited by Josephus:

Contra Apion 1.7
for Apion hath the impudence to pretend that, "the Jews placed an ass's head in their holy place;" and he affirms that this was discovered when Antiochus Epiphanes spoiled our temple, and found that ass's head there made of gold, and worth a great deal of money.

This specifies an ass's head, unlike other references such as Tertullian, but then what Tertullian says may not refer specifically to christians anyway: it's not clear to me at least:

Ad Nationes 11:1-2
In this matter we are [said to be] guilty not merely of forsaking the religion of the community, but of introducing a monstrous superstition; for some among you have dreamed that our god is the head of an ass, an absurdity which Cornelius Tacitus first suggested. In the fourth book* of his histories, where he is treating of the Jewish war, he begins his description with the origin of that nation, and gives his own views respecting both the origin and the name of their religion. He relates that the Jews, in their migration in the desert, when suffering for want of water, escaped by following for guides some wild asses, which they supposed to be going in quest of water after pasture, and that on this account the image of one of these animals was worshipped by the Jews.

Tertullian says "our god", which should not be a reference to Jesus, but of, umm, god, as the reference to the Jews later also suggests.

These two references point away from a christian interpretation of the graffito, which springs from the 3rd c. during the reign of S.Severus, based on the location where it was found. Crucifixion was a subject of mime performances (see eg AJ 19.94), as is dressing up. Someone might have been using mime imagery to have a shot at this Alexamenos. The thing that I should add is that christians were supposed to have been persecuted at that time, so it is strange that such a graffito was left intact if it referred to a christian. As soon as the victim saw the parody, he would have attempted to destroy it. It is certainly not clear that we are dealing with a christian image.

[pakeha]

Hi peseusomega9,

In teaching "Humanities" courses for the past 15 years, I have come across dozens of cases where experts have mislabeled or misunderstood images for centuries. I will take this as another case, since you cannot provide any evidence to the contrary. Thanks.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Thanks for your thoughts; you've made me see this graffiti with fresh eyes.
And you're right about misunderstanding images- The Pray Codex comes to mind.