In an earlier post, I mentioned that Pierre Séguier owned the French collection (Paris) of the Oxford-Paris-Londres Bible. Pierre Séguier was one of a handful of individuals who ruled France in the seventeenth century. He purchased the Paris selection of the Bible moralisée. However, he also conducted the trial of Nicolas Fouquet, France’s Superintendant of Finances (1653-1661). (See RELATED ARTICLES.)
In the same post, I described our four Bibles as paradox literature. That paragraph is no longer part of my post. I may have erased it mistakenly or it may have been removed. It could wait. Paradox literature is defined as follows:
In literature, the paradox is an anomalous juxtaposition of incongruous ideas for the sake of striking exposition or unexpected insight. It functions as a method of literary composition and analysis that involves examining apparently contradictory statements and drawing conclusions either to reconcile them or to explain their presence.
(See Paradox in literature, Wikipedia) [1]
Yes, there is a paradox. God used an instrument that man would create: the compass. The artists who illuminated the Creation depicted tools that would make sense to their contemporaries, not to mention the artists themselves. In fact, these examples showed that man was creative. God Himself had to be recognizable. The four depictions of God we have seen could be understood by the humblest among us. Northrop Frye writes that:
Present things are related to past things in such a way that cognition becomes the same thing as re-cognition, awareness that a present effect is a past cause in another form.
Northrop Frye [2]
So, we have created myths, stories (mythoi) of causality.
RELATED ARTICLES
- Vaux-le Vicomte: Fouquet’s Rise and Fall (20 August 2013)
- Bibles mémorisées: 13th-century France (27 February 2021)
_________________________
[1] Rescher, Nicholas. Paradoxes:Their Roots, Range, and Resolution. Open Court: Chicago, 2001.
[2] Northrop Frye, Creation and Recreation (University of Toronto Press, 1980), p. 59.
Love to everyone 💕
© Micheline Walker
1st March 2021
WordPress
Micheline's Blog 
I like the fact that you have started this post with Blake’s image, while discussing much earlier artwork, dear Micheline. Striking contrast!
Be well and stay safe.
Much love,
D
LikeLiked by 1 person
Blake’s God is inside the receptacle, not outside. Yet he holds the compass and he seems so powerful. The Creation is such a mystery and it is followed by the fall of man and man falls again… Stay safe.
Much love my dear,
M
LikeLiked by 1 person
Je ne comprends pas très bien le sens de “bibles moralisées”.
Est-ce à dire que l’original était immoral ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
L’original n’était pas immoral. Hélas, les gens se rangent du côté de la bible pour se dire bons. La richesse des bibles moralisées résident dans les enluminures. Quant à la bible, c’est d’abord et avant tout une anamnèse, une mythologie, une source de métaphores. Je ne sais pas pourquoi on y a rattaché les paraboles de Jésus. Jésus n’a rien écrit et la seule sagesse qu’il ait léguée, c’est l’amour inconditionnel. Or…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jesus n’a rien écrit, bien sûr, c’était son corps même qui était la Parole.
Enfin…s’il faut en croire le dogme.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oui, son corps meurtri était la Parole. Il s’est opposé à la loi du Talion, geste révolutionnaire. Malheureusement, on a continué de s’entretuer. Il a aussi empêché qu’on lapide la femme adultère. Il ne jugeait pas les autres. Bref, il y a une humanité dans ce Dieu qui m’a toujours émue.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This makes me think of Leonardo’s Vitruvian man
LikeLiked by 1 person
Once God was depicted, that depiction could easily become conventional for those who depict the creation. These books are beautiful, but the moral is an interpretation or reading. I rather like the depiction of God with a foot out of the frame. That is the child in me. He seems to be working very hard and he looks humble. Thank you, Derrick.
LikeLiked by 1 person