Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 03
Author(s): Jas Burgess
Publisher: Swati Publications

Previous | Next

Page 59
________________ FEBRUARY, 1874.] WEBER ON THE KRISHNAJANMASHTAMI AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE ORIGIN OF THE FESTIVAL OF KRISHNAJANMASHTAMI Translated from the German of Prof. A. Weber. (Continued from page 25.) The question now presents itself, as to what Christian land we are to think of as the Svetadvipa of the legend. As the journey is by sea, we must take the nearest, Alexandria. Lassen (II, 1100) prefers Parthia, "because the tradition that the apostle Thomas preached the Gospel in that land is an old one;" but I am unable to see how that can turn the scale one way or the other. The connection with Alexandria by sea is relatively the easiest, and we have documents of all sorts in sufficient number to prove that there was a brisk traffic by that route. Direct proof for this supposition there is none. We can therefore only posit it as a probability. The case is somewhat better when we proceed to ask to what date the pilgrimage to the Svetdvipa is to be assigned. We can answer with confidence that it must of course have been at some adate previous to Muhammad; i. e., as far as Alexandria is concerned, before the year 640, in which it was taken by the Moslems. But can we define the time more closely? Here it would be of great consequence if we could find reason to suppose that the festival of Krishna's birthday, which is the starting-point of our investigations, and the pictorial representation of him as a suckling at the mother's breast, which forms an integral part of that festival, came to India as early as the journey of Narada. For the picture could have been taken over only at a time when "the Madonr'a and Child" had already on their side won a firm and sure place in Christian ritual. But the legend of the Mahd Bharatat contains, as might have been expected from its character, nothing of the kind, and we cannot therefore avail ourselves Conf. the previous note on the identity in Kalidesa's time of Vishnu and Krishna. In the account of the ten avatáras of Vishnu which follows immediately after, Satvata (Krishn) is spoken of only as a warlike hero who came into the world to conquer numerous demons and assist the Pandavas. It is true that Kansa is at the head of these demons (the account begins M. Bh. XII. 12953: dvâparasya kaleschaira samdhau paryavasanike | pradurbhavaḥ Kansahetor Mathurayam bhavishyati), but no details are given of the way in which he "appeared." II give the chief passages from Piper. "This omission of Mary (from a representation on Roman sarcophagi of the infant Christ) serves to prove how far from prominent the honour paid to her was at that time, that is, in the fourth century. And we know from other sources that the epoch of the Nestorian controversies which circled round the name Mother of God' (Beorókos) was the decisive one for the Maria-cult. The first Maria churches in Christendom were built at Rome and Constantinople immediately after the condemnation of Nestorius (who was not willing to use that name without a reservation) and the recognition of the title by the general council of Ephesus in the year 431. 47 of such an argument in fixing the probable time of Nárada's journey. But we may make use of such a chronological argument when we consider the birthday festival itself, and the way in which Krishna is represented in it. Here, however, we are on the strange ground of Christian archaology, and must try first to learn our way a little. According to the view hitherto almost universally accepted, the "Madonna with the Child" is a subject little known to the early Christian centuries. According to Piper's representation, for example, the adoration of the Virgin was even in the fourth century far from prominent, and we are to date its decisive introduction from the Nestorian disputes in the fifth century. The S. Maria Maggiore church, built by order of Sixtus III. (432), after the council of Ephesus in honour of Maria GeoTOKOS (Mother of God), which still exists, and is adorned with mosaics of the same date representing "the beginning of the life of the Lord," from the Annunciation to the scene in the Temple, has no representation of the birth itself. And in fact the birthday of Jesus began to be celebrated after the fourth century. Haas, in the Mittheilungen der K. K. Central Commission zur Erh. der Baudenkmäler (1,859 pp. 208, 209), bears similar testimony. So does Mrs. Jameson in her praiseworthy book Legends of the Madonna as represented in the Fine Arts (2nd ed. London, 1857). And Mrs. Jameson discusses the very representations with which we are concerned here, those in which the Madonna is suckling the Child, and refers them directly to the Nestorian controversy. For Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, asserted that the Virgin Mary The church at Rome still stands. It is the Church S. Maria Maggiore, and is adorned with mosaics of that date, the oldest church pictures extant, in which the first part of the life of the Lord is represented, from the Annunciation to the scene in the Temple. The birth is not among these scenes, and in the adoration of the wise men the infant Christ. And is sitting, not in the lap of the holy Virgin, but alone on a throne; which is a departure from the traditional representation of the oldest Christian art, as we find it on sarcophagi and in the pictures on the walls of the catacombs. And the representation of the birth of Christ in general is rare at this date; it is found, among the many Roman sarcophagi, as we have shown above, only on two, and on the two sarcophagi from Milan and on one at Arles. This is of doctrinal importance, not so much as regards Mary, but on account of the conception of the person of Christ himself and of the whole work of redemption, and this prominence of the end of his life as contrasted with the beginning corresponds exactly to a similar phenomenon in the sacred calendar, where it is still more surprising. The celebration of the death and resurrection of Christ weekly every Friday and Sunday, and yearly at Easter, dates from the second century, while the birth of the Lord was first celebrated in the fourth."

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420