MrMacSon wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 5:02 pm
While aniconism is the absence of material representations—ie.icons—of the
[theologial
] worlds
of various cultures, it's a term largely applied to the early
monotheistic Abrahamic religions
Trust me, if I could remove all the Abrahamic associations/presuppositions in the wording we use I would. Words like
"pagan",
"gnostic", and even
"religion" only get in the way of our understanding of the ancient world. IMO, the term "religion" shouldn't even be applied to when you look at "Hinduism", Buddhism, Shinto, "Chinese folk religion", etc.
MrMacSon wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 5:02 pm
I wonder if the Roman empire's deification and iconography for its emperor, starting of course with Julius and
(his adopted son, his great-nephew) August Caesar, was a major impetus for the genesis of 'iconification' more widely, including outside the empire.
That is a terrific point, I'll look into any imperial (propagandistic?) motivation behind the advent of anthropomorphic images in the region. Also good to note that these Greco-Buddhist sculptures feature the Buddha flanked by Indra and Herakles, with Herkales eventually turning into the
Vajrapani figure represented in all kinds of Buddhist cultures, including the Shaolin, Tibetan, and Japanese traditions. Otherwise, we also see all kinds of Greek figures in Indo-Greek art (2nd century BC-1st century AD), including Apollo, Daphne, Athena, Poseidon, Herakles, Aphrodite, and the Nereids. Syncretism was
strong in this era.
(I now wonder if the origin of the
walking on water ability we see in Christ and the Buddha stems from the common origin of the Orion myth)