“picturing holy places: on the uses of architectural symbolism in icon and ornament,” religion...

P ic t u r in g H oly P t.ac.ES;© n THE U ses o f A r c h it e c t u r a l P l e b e s in

O r n a m e n t a n d Ic o n

J o h n R e n a r d

Saint Louis University

In t r o d u c t io n

andscape owes more to culture than to nature, observed Simon Sehama in his Landscape and Memory, for it consists of “constructs of the imag'

ination projected onto wood, water, and rock” (Schama 61 W م( hat we are told and learn to think about landscape has a far more profound effect on the way we understand it than the actual experience of nature itself. In many ways the holy places that mark off the sacred landscapes of the great religious traditions share this im portant feature with landscape and sacred space understood more broadly. Sanctity of place, and indeed any given holy place itself, is far more a function of the compressed formulaic imagery canonized by longstanding tradition, more a distillate of community m em ' ory, than of a geographic reality made concrete in the actual experience of pilgrims. In this instance, the construct of the imagination projected or ^ e r im p o s e d on [sacred] nature is architectural.

During a visit some years ago to the shrine village of Chimayo, New Mexico, 1 noticed a curious public display of religious imagery that brought hom e the peculiar nature of the way religious communities communicate visually about their holy places. O n the front walls of several houses were stylized depictions of the village’s santuario٠ They were clearly symbolic and adhered to a formula that called for such elements as glorified faces of ]esus and Mary floating in space around the sanctuary (fig. 1). A part from that, the content of the images was n o t particularly startling in itself. T hat the images stood on houses within only a few minutes walk from, and within eyeshot of, the pilgrims’ goal, was far more arresting. Were these drawings merely decorative? Were the owners of the houses engaging in a com petí' tive display of pictorial skill? W hy depict a building that in several instances stood within sight of the homes that displayed the images? Chim ayo’s archi' tectural icons recalled for me a plethora of analogous imagery from several other religious traditions.

In various parts of the M iddle East one encounters images of M ecca’s fea'ba on elaborate wall tiles and simple house murals alike. W hy have so

R e lig io n andthe A r ts 5:4 (2001): 399-428. © Koninklijke Brill N V, Leiden

R e l i g i o n andthe A r t s

ي

ل . Santuario of Chimayo, New Mexico, drawn aceording to formula on front of a private residenee within sight of the Santuario itself, 1980’s.

(A uthor’s photo)

many Muslims seen fit to represent their most sacred site in this manner? Cairene domestic mural images of Mecca and M edina (fig. 2) recall and cel' ebrate the ow ner’s Hajj to a distant land, b u t the Chimayo images were of a very different sort, so close to the site they depicted. Kyoto museums dis' play stylized hanging scroll images of major Shinto shrines that had once owned these pictures of themselves (fig. 3).

W hy had the devotees of the shrines produced these amhitecturally detailed images? A nd why did they call them marídalas? A growing fascina' tion w ith the ubiquitous use o^m lritectural imagery in a variety of religious traditions has led me to seek underlying themes, and I propose here a way of organizing some of this intriguing visual data for further study.

Helen Rosenau observes in her Vision of the Temple: The Image of the Temple in Jerusalem in Judaism and Christianity: “The history of art deals on occasion with persistent amhitectural images, which, because of their relig' ious symbolism and connotations, inspire continuous rc im ^ p re ta tio n and

400

John Renard

ص

ءءص

^٠ Wall mural of a Cairo apartm ent showing the Ka'ba and modes of eonveyanee for pilgrims to Meeea. (A uthor’s photo)

rediseovery. T he m ost signifieant among these is, perhaps, the image of the ]ewish Temple in ]erusalem, whieh represents a focus of religious em otion for bo th ]udaism and Christianity” (13 Her historical investigation of this م(iconographie theme suggests ways in which it can serve eomparative com nections between two of the three Abrahamie faiths. Three years earlier ]oseph G utm ann had edited a eollection of artieles. The Temple of Solomon, which discussed aspeets of the same subjeet, bu t considered only medieval and earlier historical data, including the Islamic tradition as well.

I propose to expand on their initiatives with an already broad topic by suggesting that religious amhitectural imagery can offer im portant insights across a still wider spectrum of traditions, even when the specific icono ' graphic subjects are no t the same. In so small a space as this I can hope to offer only the merest hin t as to the broader ^ssib ilities. W here Rosenau could focus on iconographie dee lopm en ts, I shift to more general consfeh erations of form and religious funetion, in the hope of offering a framework for further comparative study by speeialists in theology and religion. Arehitecture has been the unifying theme in a series of artieles published in this journal on comparative studies in religion and the visual arts. T he series began by suggesting an overall m ethod for comparative studies.* A second

401


_يئه

3. Symbolic diagram, a shrine mandala dated 1330, of Kyoto’s Gion Shrine, possibly used for devotional m editation. Using a com bination of plan and elevation, it shows the small pagoda (tahoto, upper left), main gates, and principal ritual space of the shrine (center), as well as various

subordinate stations within the precinct. After Kageyama 90. pi. 77.

402

John Renard

piece then applied the m ethod speeifically to comparing religious architect ture in two traditions.^ T he third part of the series adjusted the m ethod to deal w ith the category of ritual object by focusing on the phenom enon of miniaturized amhitecture in a variety of religious traditions as a case study.^ Here I will again adjust the details of the m ethod in relation to the broad category of religious ornament, and use the theme of architecture in two dimensions to exemplify the method^. My purpose is no t to draw any grand comparative conclusions, b u t merely to suggest how viewers might “read” the religious significance of the images and begin to appreciate bo th the enorm ous appeal of the of sacred sites as icons, and the complex processes involved in the visual com m unication of the u d e rs ta n d in g of “holy place.”

M e t h o d : F o r m , C o n t e n t , C o n t e x t , a n d F u n c t io n

Formal Considerations

I include in this category principally twoMimensional designs, b u t for co i^ le ten ess will also refer to materials in high relief and sculpture inte- gralfy attached to either buildings or objects, in which the architectural imagery is part of a larger composition. The m ost com m on of these designs are drawings and paintings and schematic diagrams of whole architectural structures, some in plan, some in elevation, some combining plan, elevation, and section. They occur in murals, wall panels, as illustrations in pilgrimage manuals, and as postcard or poster-like images that pilgrims can carry easily. Some partial architectural r^erences and visual allusions mere- fy suggest or “quote” the sacred place by including some visually memorable feature or some object associated directly with the place. These designs appear in various media and techniques, including painting, especially manuscript, b u t also some in the form of scrolls or murals; textiles and carpets; ceramic, especially wall tiles; and stained glass windows.

Before one can interpret an amhitectural image some basic awareness of how the artist p u t the image together is helpful. This has to do with the principal visual techniques for representing amhitecture in two dimensions and the ways one can use more than one amhitectural drawing type in the same image. I refer n o t to representations made with the utilitarian intent of showing an architect how to make a building, or of indicating how the building has been assembled. These designs arise out of a more complex set of purposes linking them functionally in many respects to tlree-dim en-

403


sional miniatures. First there is the relatively simple plan drawing that offers a view from above. Second, a simple elevation drawing ean represent any level of arehitectural eomplexity, from an archway framing an Evangelist in a Carolingian Gospel book, to the elaborate facade of a splendid Byzantine cathedral. Third, a com bination o ^ c c e s s iv e elevations set at angles to one another can suggest some depth and hin t at three'dimensionality and x ^ n s iv e n e s s in a whole building complex or city. Finally, a deliberate com ' bination of plan with elevations in series, bringing together in one m om ent the recessive views a bird flying over might enjoy in consecutive moments, begins to approach t ta e e d i^ n s io n a li ty of design (Grabar 174'85 As we م(will see, the type o ^ p re s e n ta tio n bears no direct relationship to the ques' tion of whether a particular design is m eant to reproduce an actual struC' ture or merely to evoke a more generic image of “[sacred] building.”

T he question of how those various devices “represent” their subject and how one identifies their content is more complex. As in the case of archi' tectural miniatures, twO'dimensional imagery exhibits considerable variety. Direct visual representation occurs in several ways. Some images depict an im portant holy space in a quari'narrative manner, as part of an unfolding story. These include, for example, miniature paintings, pilgrims’ house

·■دممايو'بإمح؛؛م'.1

4 ^ م n ^ e e n th /e a r ly twentieth'Century pilgrim’s souvenir painting showing, with a com bination of plan, section, and elevation, the main

features of the northern style H indu temple of ]agannath at Furi in the state of Orissa. A round the diagram are various deities of mythological im portance b u t secondary to the principal deities of the temple. British

M useum, BM O A 1880.304, from Blurton, fig. ا4م

404

John Renard

murals (fig. 2 above), a Byzantine m anuseript of the C hureh of the Holy Apostles—eomplete w ith allusions to a second famous strueture in its four knotted Solomonie temple columns—as setting for the Ascension, Bible illustrations of the temple of Solom on (Haussig pi. 2), images of the Ka'ba as seen from ground level in illustrations of poetry or history (Binney #40). In such cases, interest in m inute detail varies enormously, depending on the artist’s skill, the text being illustrated, or the size of the image, for example.

O ther images lay out the holy place in a topographical fashion, whether in strict plan or in a kind of projection with some am biance o ^ersp ec tiv e that allows the viewer to see the elevation as well as the plan (fig. 3 above), or those tha t take the liberty of combining plan, elevation, and section (fig. 4), depending on which features are best indicated by one view or the other. T he intent is evidently to represent the overall proportions and im portant sacred precincts within the space—its sacred topography—and often also to identify clearly specific items of furniture or structure within the larger space.

ءص،صم.

dm f fS.CUÍTO tnjmndu.

5. G roundplan with elevations of the Hofy Sepulcher in ]erusalem, showing the R otunda of the Resurrection on the left, with the body of

]esus entom bed in a central space surrounded by altars to the north, west and south, and an opening toward the east, where the place of Golgotha

and other sacred sites stand in a courtyard to the west of the church’s once separate basilical hall. Early thirteenth century text,

De Locis Sanctis Jerusalem. After Legner, vol. 3, pi. 6.

405


Images of this sort might include, for example, wall tiles or pilgrim-book images of Meeca or M edina (Atil 1987 #23), ]erusalem as a whole or the Sepulcher or the Temple, and Shinto shrine mandalas. Superb examples of the last two subjects display a wide range of im portant elements of the gem res. Kyoto’s G ion shrine mandala indicates the full layout of the great enclo- sure as well as the pagoda, indicating the shrine’s complex relationship with Buddhism , and the central ritual space w ith its inner courtyard (fig. 3 above). The early thirteenth century De Locis Sanctis Jerusalem depicts the Sepulcher’s ro tunda of the Resurrection containing the body of ]esus, the surrounding space with gates at three of the cardinal points, and the attached basilical ball (fig. 5).

Some images transform the sacred space explicitly into a map of the cosmos in which the diagrammatic presentation sets the holy place square- ly in the center of it all (Frugoni 20-29). Sometimes the four directions are expressly indicated, as in the Codex Amiatinus scheme of the Tabernacle in the Wilderness, forerunner of the Temple, the earliest know n image of its kind produced by Christians (Ferber, fig. 10). Sometimes even the various levels of heaven and hell appear in coordination and correspondence with the seven planets, as in a pair of images of Mecca and M edina (Fisher 42-3 [illus. on 101]). There seven lines (heavens) surround the whole image, another seven (planets or “fixed stars”) frame the Ka'ha alone, and major symbols of the cosmos, such as the ?reserved Tablet (a celestial archetype of the Q u r’an) and the Tree of Celestial Bliss are displayed promi- nently (fig. 6).

Still in the realm of form b u t moving gradually foto that of content, one needs to appreciate how these images go about c o i^ u n ic a tin g their mes- sage via architectural themes as such. Ta w hat are these images referring and how does one know that? Some images clearly depict specific and well know n buildings, either in their entirety or by means of visual allusion (Frugoni 17, pi. 20). O ther images allude to the particular sacred site indirectly, using visual metonymy and synecdoche. Some highly schematized and symbolic images merely suggest the holy place by showing some facet or feature of it that calls the whole complex to mind (Frugoni 109, pi. 65). Some of this type also bring together, by a conflation of sacred space, more than one holy place or structure. In such a minimalist view everything depends on the evocative quality of a fow items of cultic interest so tha t the sacred space is effectively reduced to its “essential” elements and thereby given a tram cendent quality that associates the actual earthly place with a larger cosmic structure or heavenly archetype. A n Islamic image might include a ^mall representation of the K a'ba alone, a plain black square or

406

John Renard

ن،امحع׳جءلخ.

6 ,Cosmological diagrams of the sacred precints of Mecca (right) مshowing multiple ‘levels’ around the Ka'ha and a symbolic sacred mourn

tain above, and M edinia (left); also showing symbols of several sacred stations within the precincts and another sacred m ountain above.

Cosmological Miscellany, folios 145V and 146R, O ttom an, 1760, ?rivate Collection: with permission, Kresge A rt Gallery,

Michigan State University.

cube with no depiction of the surrounding sanctuary (fig. 7, second regis~ ter of images from top of trnck).

Some images of the sanctuaries of Mecca and M edina suggest their suh~ ject economically and allusively, using selected elements such as the curtain or veil over the Ka'ba or a movable stairway used for preaching sermons (Fisher 42~3أ Tucci). ]ewish representations ٠؛ sacred vessels that imm edi' ately conjure up images of the long'since destroyed ]erusalem Temple are very common. Ritual implements include, for example, the m enorah and its tongs and snuffers, A aron’s budding rod, the cherubim on the cover of the ark, the tablets of the law, and the container of the shewbread (Gutm ann, Temple 126) (fig. 8).

407


E D F O R D

?٠ Pakistani tm ck showing the K a'ba in Mecca and the green dome over M uham m ad’s tom b in Medina, twiee in horizontal registers toward the top of the superstructure. Copyright photo , courtesy o f]am al]. Elias.

408

John Renard

תה^ההמטרהמק״؛מזזהכערירכחעד

··■· ־ م؛إمسك

ء7بمةم

هاي

ע\ע\יז׳מעך

יכמטרח؛؛זהמתחמזרה5י§٠ Temple implements used in a visual “y n eedoehe” t© remind viewer of

glories ©f the whole temple, now destroyed. Am ong the ritual ©bjeets depieted are the tahlet^ ©f the law, the twelve l©aves of Sbow bread, the

men©rah, the laver and tongs. Fr©m a manuscript page dated 1299. Bibli©tèque Nationale de France, BN M.S. Hebr. 7, fob 12 V, Solom on

ben Raphael, Ferpignan, Aragon.

409


Christian, ]ewish and Muslim artists alike have used the two knotted pih lars, Boaz and Jachin, to remind the viewer instantly of Solom on’s temple (Rosenau, Vision 34 م(

W ell-known actual sacred structures, however, do no t account for all of the significant architectural imagery. Many twoMimensional images depict some more generalized building type rather than some actual historic structure. In this case the type carries some powerful symbolic associations of the sort I will discuss shortly. These structural types are sometimes shown in plan (Tucci; fig. 9 below).

Tibetan mandalas reveal the plan of the classic stupa with its alternation of circle within square within circle within square. Some also use elevation, as in mandalas that feature a style of pagoda associated with specific Buddhist sects (Kageyama pi. 51). Here as well one encounters images that seem to fall in between two and three dimensional imagery. These include items related in form, b u t more difficult to connect convincingly in function because it seems in these cases to shade toward the purely decorative. A ch itec tu ra l imagery is often used as the setting or background for ritual objects; that is, the object itself is n o t in architectural form. Such things as Hanukkah lamps that have a “back wall’ in building form belong here (Grossman 18(M; G utm ann 1964, passim)٠ Many traditions also use archi~ tectural settings on I^ n u sc rip t pages to house a text. Sometimes the micro- graphic text itself forms the outline of a building (G utm ann 1978).

Content: Interpreting the Nature of the Architectural Imagery

Historian of Islamic A rt Oleg Grabar’s no tion of ornam ent as m ediator of meaning offers a theoretical pivot. Grabar describes ornam entation as a visual order, part of the larger category of decoration, that mediates meaning through various types of visual design or semiotic classes. To G rabar’s four f ig u ra l/r^ e te n ta tio n a l ^ t if e - in a n im a te nature (floral and vegetal themes), calligraphy, geometry, amhitecture־ I w ould add a fifth: animate nature. Each class may occur in any of a num ber of combinations. In The Mediation of Ornament Grabar devotes a chapter to “T he Imermediary of Architecture.” Am ong several hundred ^ rc h m e n t pages discovered during the renovation of an ancient m osque in Yemen were two from a once-com- plete text of a Q ur’an of exceptionally large format, dating perhaps from as early as the eighth century. These two folios contain elaborate architectural drawings (Grabar pis. 16-17, figs. 127-128) that appear to depict plan and elevation riimrltaneously, so that one sees no t only the entrance facade, bu t

410

John Renard

سظ

ه

־م;آةأ

؛?؟؟'ص

9 Mandala, Tibetan, a meditational device showing a s^^holie stn^a in مplan, w ith gates at the four eardinal points, through which the m editator

enters spiritually and progresses toward the center of the stupa/city to the center of the self/cosmos. © Saint Louis A rt M u seu m : Gift of Mr.

and Mrs. Stephen w . Rule.

411


the sueeessive rows of areades proceeding from front to back, and the apse- like feature (the mihrab indicating the direction of Mecca) tha t seems to project from the back wall, as well as all three of the remaining walls (fig. 10).

10. R c o m tru c tio n of Frontispiece from a Koran, ^ rc h m e n t, eighth cen׳ tury (?), San’a National Museum, from Oleg Grabar, The Mediation of

Ornament (Frinceton University Fress, 1992), fig. 127, © Trustees of the National Gallery of Art.

T he structures are ym m etrical vertically b u t n o t horizontally, and in the apse of one building there appears to be a stairway of some sort whose upper portions have been lost due to deterioration of the parchment.

Grabar suggests that there are three levels on which one might interpret the peculiar images. O n the cultural or historical level it is relatively easy to

412

John Renard

conclude that the building represented is a mosque, either a particular one or merely a type. Many features, from the lamps hanging in the archways to the hypostyle com truction to the rear niche and stepped platform (evidently the minbar, or pulpit, used by m osque preachers), suggest such an identification.

O n the codicological level, however, new questions arise when one takes into consideration the presence of the images in a text of the Q u r’an. Several passages of the scripture employ amhitectural r^erences to ?aradise, b u t it seems unlikely that the pictures illustrate those or any other Q u r’anic allusions to buildings, given the general absence of illustrations from scriptural ^ n u s c r ip ts . Illumination that employs architectural motifs, on the other hand, often appears in Q ur’ans to mark the beginnings of new sections of text (suras, or chapters). As a device for organizing space in two dimensions or for presenting text or image within a visual frame, architectural imagery appears in numerous examples from many traditions (Grabar 166 ج1)م

O n a third level, Grabar argues, one can find a possible explanation as to the function of such architectural contexts. He calls it the “optisemic” level, on which one ^ rce iv es signs visually. A t this level the eye merely “rec~ ognizes a broad category of experience [such as architecture] ... w ithout n e o essarily being aware of specific details” (Grabar 172). But how might one sort out the various ingredients of these curious images? Here a w ord about the use of semiotic classes and semantic fields will be helpful. In “Shrines and Talismans: Domestic Islam in the ?ilgrimage ?aintings of Egypt” (1987), ]uan Cam po finds that the paintings, all found on the facades of private dwellings (fig. 2 here), exhibit two semiotic classes: Arabic inscriptions and figurai (“iconic figures”) painting. N oting that each of the semiotic classes may include any of five semantic fields (for inscriptions: God, M uhammad, ?ilgrim age/Holy ?laces. Blessing, Victory; for figures: ?ilgrimage, Islamic themes, Egyptian culture, natural phenom ena, arabesque and talismans). Cam po goes on to analyze how the paintings com bine two or more of the ten possible semantic fields (see also Cam po 1991).

Cam po works with a very well-defined series of murals. To attem pt to transfer the m ethod he employs to the present topic, covering multiple forms from a great variety of religious and cultural settings, w ould be akin to digging the Eisenhower Tunnel with a dentist’s drill. T he materials have first to be divided, allowing the formal categories to serve as a bridge. T hen within each cultural setting, and each category within that setting, the m ethod he sketches could be usefully employed. In the categories I suggest here there is some overlap with the ways architectural imagery com m uni' cates in the miniatures discussed in an earlier article.5

413


By including elements of essential beliefs and practiees, architeetural images serve a^ creedal icons. Shinto shrine mandalas, for example, often sum up visually the essence of Shinto belief, at least as it pertains to a given su)>sect within the Shinto tradition (Kageyama 90, pi. 77; fig♦ 3 above).

Symbols of sacred space, or of cosmic orientation and structure, are especially com m on content in architectural imagery. These include, for example, Islamic prayer carpets decorated with the ^che-form , sometimes simple and realistic and sometimes more stylized and abstract (Ettinghausen 1974; fig. I I below); ]ewish mizrach (“east”) tablets placed on th^erusa lem - facing wall of a hom e (Kanof pi. 146; also see fig. 12 below), and Shivviti (“1 have placed the Lord always before me”) tablets used in synagogues, bo th often lo w in g ]erusalem (W igoder 533); and Torah ark curtains showing Temple pillars and used where the ark itself does n o t have a conspicuously architectural form (Gutm ann 1964, pis. 17-20).

Artists frequently use architectural imagery to com municate concepts associated w ith sacred time or saving history. Elemish painters of the fif- teenth century, for example, often distinguish “O ld” and “N ew ” Testaments by depicting buildings in different styles (Romanesque and Gothic) or states of repair (dilapidated and newly built); or the num ber of windows, one or three, may be similarly symbolic. In the G rand H ours of ]ean Duke of Berry, the Calendar ?ages depict the O ld Law as a building being dis- mantled by twelve ?rophets who then hand the bricks to twelve Apostles, who in turn remove a veil from the bricks (Benedict pis. 2-13).

Allusions to the goal of a spiritual journey are also prom inent themes. The “shrine mandala” so often created in Shinto circles represents a nearly universal visual topos. O ne becomes a part of what one contemplates, so that to see is virtually the same as “being there,” whether “there” is an actual location or a spiritual state (Kageyama passim)٠ ?ictures of the]erusalem Temple (often shown actually as the Dom e of the Rock) or of the Wailing Wall remind ]ews never to forget ]emsalem (W igoder 308, 628; Israeli 19); depictions of the sanctuary vessels alone, in the conspicuous absence of the Temple itself, are reminders of a holy place defiled and of the desire to rebuild the Temple (Nordstrom passim, see fig. 8, above). In Hinduism, architectural plans of temples are sometimes transformed foto complex yantra diagrams—showing, in their simplest forms, interpenetrating equilat- eral triangles tha t look like a six-pointed s ta r-a n d associated also with specific sounds whose purpose is to transform through the m ediation of sight and sound (Khanna passim)٠

Architectural imagery often symbolizes power, protection, and patronage because of its natural association with authority and money, and often

414

John Renard

قه

ب’

ءس?آسي؟أةقء§ئ: أ؛سجآلة

Islamic prayer carper showing the stylized amhitectural detail of the م11mihrab, the niche in the back wall of a m osque indicating the direction of

Mecca. © S a im Louis A rt M u seu m : Gift o f ja m e s F. hallaM.

seems ro identify religious figures whose chief fonction is ro protect or ro rule. Buddhist personages, for example, hold symbols of the B uddha’s relics (Baskett pis. 24 م26)م Christian mosaics, painting and sculpture often show

4؟ 1


v؛m ٦^ *بجي

-عص.ا

י٠٠٠٢٢ "٥٢٣١ أ7 ו

.أوأ”وج׳

ءءمح؟ا

12. Mizrach tablet, in the form of a ?ersian rug, hung on the ]erusalem- oriented wall of the home, and depieting Moses and Aaron. Kashan,

Persia, 1839 بم0م R eproduced in Kaniel, Judaism٠ © David Harris.

416

John Renard

patron ^aim^ holding models of their ehurehes or eities, or secular powers bringing their eities and ehurehes as votive offerings to Christ and Mary (Frugoni pis. 37-41)

As symbols of sacred personality one finds H indu examples of temple- mandalas (groundplans) with images of the Cosmic Person ^ e r im p o s e d (Miehell 7م)ل There the fundamental m etaphor links the eonstruction of a temple, beginning with the layout of its plan, with the creation, in which the body of the primal person, Purusha, was sacrificed, its various elements yielding all created things. In the Codex Amiatinus plan of the Tahernacle, the initial letters of the Latin terms used to indicate the cardinal directions— arctos, dys iSy anatoly mesembria—spell the name of Adam, suggesting a paral- lei association of the sacred place’s structure with the first hum an and thus with creation itself (Ferber 29-30, fig. 10). T he C hurch is ]esus, the stupa is the Buddha. Am ong the m ost com m on and diversified uses of architectural imagery to denote a sacred personality are those associated with the Virgin Mary, such as in a sixteenth century ^ ly c h ro m e plaque that uses architectural images to substitute for the first w ord in a series of Marian titles: she is the Temple [of Solomon], the Tower [of David], the Ark [of the Covenant], the Enclosed G arden [of Delight], and the Fortified City [of Heaven, here using a gate or building facade as the image communicating the visual m e ta p h o r] (Chastel 5 6 ).

Contexts: History and Ritual

Establishing an image’s broader historical context begins with identification by religious tradition, virtually every one of which exhibits various types of distinctive amhitectural imagery in the form of ornam entation or icon. Here I will simply summarize prime examples from the major traditions. Islamic artists have produced images of, or visual references to, Mecca, M edina, and al-Haram ash-Sharif in ]erusalem (the “Noble Sanctuary” surrounding the Dom e of the Rock), in ^ n u s c r ip t painting, on carpets (including prayer rugs) or on wall tile or murals (including house paintings) or plaques of stone or wood. From Christianity we have manuscript, canvas- or w ood-painted uses of apparently generic architectural settings tha t strongly suggest some purpose beyond the merely decorative, in addition to extensive use of ]erusalem Temple and Holy Sepulcher imagery. T he ]ewish repertoire includes ^ b ro id e re d or painted mizrachs; Torah arks, scroll mantles, and Torah shields showing the temple pillars (Gutm ann 1964 pis. 13-14; W igoder و9)?أ Hanukkah lamps with architectural back

417


drop; and small temporary “boo ths” or tents (sukkoth) deeorated with ]erusalem imagery. Buddhist examples include narrative or schematic images of stupas and pagodas. Daoist tradition has produced im portant images of famous temples that crown the sacred landscapes of holy mourn tains, as well as ritual texts using architectural imagery as symbols of aspects of ritual action (Little 304 [scene 1], 347 [item 9], and 380-81). H induism has produced extensive and elaborate diagrams of famous temples (Coleman and Eisner 166; Blurton 35, pi. 14; 45, pl.19), formally similar to Shinto’s scroll paintings of well-known shrine complexes in plan-cum-elevation format.

Eurther detailed study w ould then mean defining the specific historical context of a given item within a particular tradition, giving special attention to style, patronage, and precise ritual or other religious uses. Eor the purposes of the present schematic overview, however, the next step is to deter- mine in general the sorts of ritual contexts in and for which the various types of imagery might have been created.

O ne can identify a num ber of variables in religious and ritual settings. Images of sacred architecture appear in a wide variety of ritual contexts. Q uestions of scale, while perhaps of lesser significance than in the case of architectural miniatures, once again come to the fore. Images produced for religious institutions such as temples and churches are often much larger than those intended for domestic or personal use. Images may range in size from murals covering hundreds of square feet to wallet photos and neck- wear.

Size naturally affects visibility and the relative ease with which believers can gain access to the images. N o t all institutional images are necessarily public and may be available only to the gaze of a restricted few. N o t all domestic images are necessarily private, as for instance the various murals that adorn the outer walls of houses. M ost personal items, however, tend to be of a more private nature. A n object’s intended physical relationship to the settings in which it is used primarily can be related directly to its size and scale. O ften the same kind of imagery appears in a given tradition in a num ber of different physical settings. In the case of Islamic topographic images of Hofy ?laces, one finds examples of two dimensional imagery in bo th stationary (attached to mosque walls) and portable versions (in the form of pilgrimage guidebooks). The religious functions of the two versions are, no t surprisingly, quite different. Similarly, one finds the form of the niche (mihrab) bo th i i ^ r ^ r a t e d i n t o the wall decor of many mosques and featured in the iconography of the portable prayer rug.

As for the social dimension of how these images are m eant to be used.

418

John Renard

one finds architectural imagery on items designed for bo th com munal and individual use across the full spectrum of ritual settings. In some Muslim communities, images of the Ka'ba and M uham m ad’s tom b are an im pon tant ingredient in the iconography of over-the~road trucks (fig. 7 above). Tibetan mandala symbolism (fig. 9 above) appears on murals in group prayer space where worshippers often “use” the imagery as though they were alone.

O n the other hand, Tibetan m onks have traditionally created floor or table m ounted versions in a c o m m u n a l devotional exercise. This last obser- vation also calls to m ind that participation in the use of these images may be either purely visual or, in instances where the creation of the image is itself integral to the ritual involvement, hands-on.

The Functions of Architectural Imagery in Religious Settings

As in the case of amhitectural miniatures, twoMimensional images of sacred space also function by establishing relations of presence, imagination, and memory, depending on the symbolic valence of the imagery. These three aspects overlap to a great degree and I distinguish among them here largely for the sake of organization.

Functions associated w ith presence include the various ways in which architectural imagery symbolizes the abode of the holy. Tw o dimensional imagery, however, functions much less frequently in this way than do architectural miniatures, and I believe the critical difference lies in the superior ability of three dimensional objects to affect one’s sense of space here and now. A major exception in this case is the dedicatory function served by imagery that indicates patronage of architecture or establishes a holy place in relation to a patron saint. Some architectural imagery associated with specific structures clearly functions to indicate the patron to whom the building is dedicated, or the patron saint in whose care it is placed, or the m anner in which a patron presents the structure to a higher power. Such images appear often within the Christian tradition, sometimes on the facade of a Church, sometimes on interior frescoes or mosaics. Num erous Byzantine mosaics, at the C hora C hurch or Hagia Sophia in Istanbul for example, picture an emperor or bishop or donor handing a miniature ver- sion of a church to Mary or Jesus. This relates at least indirectly to a votive function in that dedicatory imagery sometimes reminds viewers that a particular im portant person was involved in the building or custody of the sacred place depicted (Haussig passim)٠

419


Functions more strongly associated with imagination include no t only the meditative and com emplative elements I earlier associated with archh tectural miniatures, bu t a didactic element as well. Images of the central sacred places and of structures that work as m etaphors for the self or for the context of one’s inner spiritual progress function w ith the power of

I i n m m i

M M

p H M ب

ه iniiinif

Indian calendar poster (1994) depicting five Muslim holy sites: the م13K a'ba in Mecca (upper right); M uham m ad’s tom b in M edina under its green cupola (upper left); the tom b of M u'in ad D in Chishti; a famous

Sufi saint in Ajmer, India (lower center); the two sacred sites of ]erusalem; the Dom e of the Rock and A1 Aqsa mosque (the two domes

lower left); and the tomb of the twelfth century mystic ’A bd al'Q adir al']ilani in Baghdad (lower right). T he text above reads “There is no god

b u t G od, M uham m ad is the Messenger of G od,” while the names in circular medallions below are those of Allah (right) and M uham m ad

(left). Courtesy Carl w . Ernst.

420

John Renard

complex symbols to aid the user to focus intensely on some longed-for real· ity. ( ^ te m p o r a r y Indian Muslim calendar art, for example, typically depicts holy places either alone or as background for images of devout Muslims praying. Sacred buildings include n o t only the K a'ba and M uham m ad’s tom b in Medina, bu t the Dom e of the Rock and tomb- shrines of im portant Indian Muslim saints or Friends of G od. This is imagery on which one can meditate w ith a view to going in spirit or as a kind of global context for a state o ^ a y e rfu ln e ss (fig. 13).

Some images that feed the imagination refer n o t so much to a specific holy place as to a state or level of spiritual experience or attainment. These are generally no t intended to look like any actual place or structure bu t rather to depict a more generic archetype of the spiritual cosmos or of the self. Ferhaps the clearest example is that of the Tibetan mandala in the form of a stupa plan, at whose center spiritual integration awaits the spirit-pilgrim able to negotiate the graveyards of the outer precincts and penetrate to the heart of the structure (fig 9 above). A nother image that appears to function similarly is the Kabbalisticplan of the “spiritual” temple. There the various sefiroth correspond in ascending order with the various zones of the temple plan, from the entry vestibule, through the various courts, all the way to the Holy of Holies (Kenton 91, shown here in fig. 14).

M editation on some images can virtually substitute for some other ritual in which the devotee is unable to participate in person. Such devices in effect bring the goal of pilgrimage to the pilgrim, and in m ost cases these involve images of very specific places and structures. Dr. Ali Asani has discovered in the photographic archives of Harvard University’s Semitic M useum pictures of Mecca that include instructions to the viewer to pray as though on pilgrimage in order to reap the spiritual benefits of actual pilgrimage (as described to me in an unpublished written com munication. See also Asani and Gavin). Louis Massignon reports, in addition, that schematic versions of the plan of the rate da, M uham m ad’s grave-garden in the m osque at Medina, as well as of the Ka'ba, served a similar purpose (Massignon 245-49). Some Shinto shrine mandalas also were intended for this purpose. For example, referring to the “secret” Sanno mandala, Kageyama explains that “T he special designation ‘secret’ (himitsu) is said to derive from the practice of com emplating such works as if one were actually making a pilgrimage to the shrine.” ̂ O f a more abstract sort are the circular labyrinths one finds on the floors of the great cathedrals of Chartres and Amiens, for example. The one on the pavem ent in the nave at Chartres, recalling the geometric form of the rose window in the West facade, invites visitors to embark on a symbolic pilgrimage to ]erusalem by

421


YAHVSHÍ10HIM

٢

L0HIM

UNIFICATIONΗΑΚ0Μ /ounzs

£S5/AH١١٢٠٧?،؛ ٠٢

١٢ ءهبم״آاما اةهءتصهقممءتةإءاااره

.؛مح»اسه اسئ/ءءت׳ثآةسمث

rt،ry׳ft

? آءءءدءث’ ة-؛-،عرء

ءءآهء هاء»ءمأأم4ر،ابم WMi-p 0ء

¥سماتء

بمظم0اا

1 ptriicÄL [م^عإلسمس \

ا4م Superimposition of symbolic “halls” of kabbalistic spiritual experience upon a stylized ground plan of Solom on’s temple, suggesting path begin-

ning at the bo ttom of the image and progressing upward and inward toward the Holy of Holies, ?ermission of W arren Kenton, from his

Kabbalah: Tradition of Hidden Knowledge (Thames and H udson Ltd.).

422

John Renard

threading their way on their knees through the eleven eoneentrie eireles to the six-petalled rose at the eenter ( h a v ^ C r a n d e l l Colem ؟64 an and Eisner 169).

Didaetie imagery eommunieates specific aspects of religious teaching largely through narrative devices, b u t no t entirely to the exclusion of sym~ holism. Images of holy places, especially of the narrative and topograph ' ic/cartographic varieties, serve a didactic purpose m ost of all. Eschatology, for example, is often em bodied in architectural imagery of the heavenly ]erusalem or other settings of a realm beyond the ordinary, even in some Buddhist images of a complex temple'like structure that represents a celes' tial clime. Occasionally the teaching occurs via visual exegesis when an architectural image is related directly to a text. Certain styles and forms of architectural imagery have sometimes been associated with particular relig' ious communities and can thus educate lhstorically even as the imagery serves a polemical purpose. Eor example, some Mozarabic ^ n u s c r ip ts use architectural styles traditionally identified as Muslim as a key device in the visual exegesis of the Book of Revelation (Dodds [1993] 29'30).

Architectural imagery also engages memory in several im portant ways. Eunerary images can do so directly and vividly by depicting the final resting places of central or other holy figures, such as the reliquary m ounds asso' ciated with the Buddha and the green dom e over the tom b of M uham m ad in M edina (figs. 7, 13). C o ^ e m o r a t iv e pictures of im portant places of pil' grimage are virtually universal devices by which accomplished pilgrims can relive their experience nostalgically. A related c o ^ e m o r a t iv e function is that of certifying that one has been on pilgrimage, as exemplified in the house murals of Egypt, w ith commensurate increase in one’s social status (Cam po; Neal and ?arker; fig. 2 above). Many H indu temples have offered pilgrims elaborate drawings and paintings of the temple to take away as mementos of their visit (fig. 4 above). These spiritual souvenirs allow the journeyers to return in memory to the goal symbolized by the temple and the deities often shown housed in it in the image.

As with three'dim ensional miniatures, architectural imagery can also provide im portant secondary functions associated with establishing ritual contexts of space, time and feeling. A ch itec tu ra l indicators of proper direc' tion in prayer are prom inent in bo th ]udaism and Islam. W hile Muslims place a prayer rug containing a niche design (and often pictures of the Ka'ba and M uham m ad’s tomb) on the floor as bo th a directional indicator and a space within which to perform their prostrations, ]ews hang a mizrach on the wall of their homes that faces ]erusalem. In addition ]ews also use wall plaques called shivviti, meaning “I have set [the Lord before me always]’

423


(Psalm 16:8); they are usually deeorated with images of, for example, im portant buildings in ]erusalem associated with the site of the Temple.

Second only to prayer orientation, the spatial function of talismanic protection from evil stands out. ]uan C am po suggests that one class of Egyptian Pilgrimage murals works this way. Near the shrine of Chimayo in New Mexico, pictures of the shrine painted on house fro m ^ in c lu d in g at least one dwelling within clear view of the shrine itself (fig. 1 above)—may very well have served a similar purpose. (1 use the past tense here because on a more recent visit 1 was unable to locate any of the images previously within easy view.) Torah “breastplates” decorated w ith allusions to the pil' lars of Solom on’s temple have traditionally hung as a shield from the m an ' tie of European Torah scrolls. T he parochet or Torah ark veil, often made of silk and inscribed with such texts as D euteronom y 5:4 (“T he Lord spoke to you face to face in the m oun t”). Psalms 68:17 (“The m ountain which G od hath desired for His abode”), and Exodus 19:9 (“1 come to you in a thick cloud”), are frequently decorated with the walled city of ]erusalem and its Temple (Kanof pi. 3). In some ]apanese and Korean Buddhist mm' pies where the cost of sculpture might have been prohibitive, one often finds mural or hanging scroll paintings. Bishamonten, the heavenly guardian who in three dimensions w ould hold a miniature pagoda as symbol of his power and authority, often appears in such paintings w ith his emblematic miniature building (Baskett pis. 24'26).

*

Such a breezy general survey as this must acknowledge first of all its very limited intent: to offer an overview of a visual usage that occurs in a host of religious traditions and cultural settings and to suggest some of the ways in which twO'dimensional images of holy places function as visual rhetoric. Each specific instance deserves its own detailed investigation and it has no t been my purpose to suggest otherwise. Conclusions of the kind a broad comparative sweep might suggest must therefore also remain general and modest. Eirst, architectural imagery in two dimensions is distinguished from three dimensional miniaturization principally, bu t no t only, by its form. T hat may seem all too obvious to state, b u t it is significant that there is much overlap in function and content. Second, formal and functional sim ' ilarities across religious and cultural boundaries are as worthy of considera' tion as are specific symbols. Hence the benefit of G utm ann’s work on the Temple of Solom on in the Abrahamic traditions, for example, or Erugoni’s on the theme of medieval amhitectural imagery more generally. Einally, and

424

John Renard

m ost importantly, sacred places are so universally associated with, and idem tified hy, the architectural settings into which adherents of major religious traditions have transformed them, that one too easily forgets that what made so many places holy in the first place had, more often than not, n o th ' ing to do with architecture. Buildings and the symbolism derived from them have become the heirs and repositories of the increasingly distant memories of a acredness now as far removed from ordinary experience as pristine nature itself.

N o tes

1 John Renard, “A M ethod for Com parative Studies in Religious Visual A ns: A pproaehing A rehiteeture,” Religion and the Arts 1.1 (Fall 1996): 100-23. speeial thanks to Ms. Elizabeth Staley o f Saint Louis University for her edi' torial assistanee o n the p resent artiele.

2 John Renard, “C m p a ra t iv e Religious A rehiteeture: Islamic and H indu Ritual Space,” Religion and the Arts 1.4 (W inter 1997): 6 2 8 8 ־ .׳

3 John Renard, “Low Roofs O ver Infinity: A ch itec tu ra l M iniatures in a Typology o f Ritual O bject,” Religion and the Arts 2.3 (Fall 1998): 3 4 3 3 7 5 ־ .׳

4 A no ther m ajor formal category w ith which I will n o t deal explicitly mightbest be ealled religious arehiteetural allusions, either in three-dim ensional objeets th at are n o t themselves freestanding integral architectural forms [such as the niche in the M ecca-ward wall o f the m osque, the synagogue ark] o r actual structures th at incorporate into themselves allusions to o ther specific sacred structures [e.g. Bernini’s use o f the spiraled colum ns that recall deliberately the tw o nam ed pillars o f So lom on’s temple; theA lham bra’s use o f the basin on the backs o f twelve lions as an allusion to the “Sea” on the backs o f twelve oxen o f Solom on]. These are n o t mere architectural quotations for decorative purposes, b u t deliberate references to some space through the use o f a single referent.

5 See no te 3 above.

6 Kageyama 111; pi. لل4م Shrines tbat also include images o f the honji'butsuare m eant for w orship especially.

425

R e l i g i o n and the A r t s

W orks C ited

Asani, Ali. s., and Gavin, C arney E. s. “T hrough the Lens ©؛ Mirza of Delhi: The Debbas A lbum Early-Tw ؛© entieth 'Century Photographs ©؛ Pilgrimage Sites in M ecca and M edina.” M uqamas 15 (1998): 1?8'99.

Atil, Esin. The Age of Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent. W ashington D C : National Gallery, 1987.

Atil, Esin, et al. The Mu’؛)؛ of hlumic Art. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: King Ea؛sal Foundation, 1985.

Auboyer, j. et al. Oriental Art: A Handbook of Styles and Forms. N ew York: Rizzoli, 1980.

Baskett, Mar^׳. Footprints ()/ the Buddha. Philadelphia PA: Philadelphia M useum of Art, 1980.

Benedict, V ictoria and Benita Eisler, trans. The Grands Heures o f Jean, Duke of Berry. New York: George Braziller, 1971.

Binney, Edwin. Turkish Miniature Paintings and Manuscripts. N ew York: M etropolitan M useum of A rt, 1973.

Blair, Sheila s. and ]onathan M . Bloom, eds. Images ()/ Paradise in Islamic Art. H anover N H : H ood M useum of A rt, 1991.

Blurton, John. Hindu Art. Cam bridge M A : H arvard l ln .ty Press, 1992؛ver.s؛

Bosch, Frederik D. K. The Golden Germ: A n Introduction to Indian Symbolism. The Hague: M o u to n and C o., 1960.

C ahn, W alter. “Solom onic Elements in R om anesque A rt.” In G utm ann [1976]. 4 5 ' 72.

C am po, Juan E. The Other Sides of Paradise: Explorations into the Religious Meanings of Domestic space in hlum. C olum bia SC : University of South Carolina Press, 1991.

— . “Shrines and Talismans: Dom estic Islam in the Pilgrimage Paintings o f Egypt.” Journal o f the American Academy of Religion 55.2 (1987): 285-305.

Chastel, A ndre. The Myth o f the Renaissance, 1420Ί520. Geneva: Slrira, 1969.

Christe, Yves, et al. Art o f the Christian World A . D. 2 0 0 Ί5 0 0 -.Α Handbook o f Styles and Forms. New York: Rizzoli, 1982.

Colem an, Sim on and John Eisner. Pilgrimage: Past and Present in the World Religions. Cam hridge M A : H arvard University Press, 1995.

C orhin, Henry. Temple and Contemplation. Trans. Philip Sherrard. L ondon: KP1 and Islamic Publications himited, 1986.

de Angelis, M ichele A . and Thom as w. Lentz. Architecture in Islamic Painting. Cam bridge M A : Eogg A rt M useum , 1982.

D odds, Jerrilynn, ed. A l'A ndalus: A rt of Islamic Spain. N ew York: A hram s/M etropo litan M useum of Art, 1992.

426

John Renard

— . “Islam, Christianity, and the Problem of Religious A rt.” In The A rt of Medieval Spain, A .D. 500-1200, ed. Jo h n p. O ’Neill e t al. N ew York: A bram s/M etropo litan M useum of A rt, 1993. 27'37.

Erdm ann, Kurt. “Ka'bah-Fliesen.” Ars Orientalis 3 (1959): 192-196.

Ettinghausen, Richard, et al. Prayer Rugs. W ashington D C : Textile M useum , 1974.

E ttinghausen, Richard. “Die bildliche Darstellung der K a'ba im Islamischen Kulturkreis.” Zeitschrift der Deutsche Morgenlaendische Gesellschaft, N .E XII(1934): 111-D7.

Ferher, Stanley. “T he Temple o f Solom on in Early C hristian and Byzantine A rt.” In G utm ann [1976]. 21-44.

Fisher, C arol G. and A lan. “Illustrations o f M ecca and M edina in Islamic M anuscripts.” In Islamic Art from Michigan Collections. Lansing M I: M ichigan State l htiver.s؛ty Press, 1982. 40-47.

Erugoni, Cbiara. A Distant City: Images of Urban Experience in the Medieval World.Trans. W illiam M cCuaig. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991.

G rahar, Oleg. The Mediation of Ornament. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.

Grossm an, Grace C ohen. Jewish Art. New York: Hugh Lauter Levin, 1995.

G utm ann, Josepb, ed. The Temple o f Solomon. M issoula M O : Scbolars Press, 1976.

G utm ann , Joseph . “T h e M essianic Temple in Spanish M edieval H ehrew M anuscripts.” In G utm ann [1976]. 125-144.

— . Jewish Ceremonial A rt. (.iraniaCl٢٧ NJ: Yoseloti, 1964.

— . Hebrew Manuscript Illumination. N ew York: Braziller, 1978.

Haussig, H. w. A History o f Byzantine Civilization. N ew York: Praeger, 1971.

Israeli, Yael. Jerusalem in History and Vision. Jerusalem: Israel M useum , 1968. (C atalogue 49)

Kageyama, Harcilci. The Arts ()/ Shinto. N ew York: W eatherhill, 1973.

Kaniel, M . Judaism. Poole, Dorset, England: Blanchord Press, 1979.

Kanof, Abram . Jewish Ceremonial A rt and Religious Observance. N ew York: Ahram s, c. 1970.

Kenton, W arren. Kabbalah: 1 ءإ،،،'اآ'ءأ)('ر of Hidden Knowledge. N ew York: Tham es and H udson, c. 1979.

Khanna, M adhu. Yantra, the Tantric Symbol ()/ Cosmic Unity. London: Tham es and H udson, c. 1979.

Kuehnel, Bianca. From the Earthly to the Heavenly Jerusalem: Representations of the Holy City in Christian Art o f the First Millennium. Freihurg, Germ any: Herder,1987.

Legner, A n to n . Ornamenta Ecclesiae: Kunst and Kuenstler der Romanik. 3 vols. C ologne, Germ any: Kunst u n d Künstler der Romanik: Katalog zur Ausstellung des Schnütgen-M useum s in der Jo.sei-Haulatidr-Kun.stiralle, 1985.

427

R e l i g i o n and the A r t s

Little, Stephen, et al. Taoism and the Arts of ء'ءاا'آر ،،. Berkeley ^ A : University of California ?ress, 2000.

Massignon, Louis, “f a Rawda de M edine: C adre de la M editation M usulm ane sur la Destinee du ? ro p h ete .” Bulletin ،fe l Institut fran ais darchaeologie orientale 59 (1960): 241-272.

Meier, M . Fritz. “Das M ysterium der La' ba, Symbol und W irklichkeit in der Islamls- chen Mystik,” Eranos Jahrbuch X I (1944): 187ff.

Michell, George. The Hindu Temple. N ew York: Flarper and ^ow , 1977.

Neal, A . and A. Farker. Hu)) Paintings: Folk A rt of the Greater Pilgrimage. W ashington D C : Sm ithsonian Institution, 1995.

N ordstrom , C arl-O tto . “Some M iniatures in H ebrew Bibles.” Synthronon: A rt et Archéologie ،fe la fin de Antiquité et du Moyen Age. Eds. A ndre Grabar, et al. Faris: hibrairie c. Klincksieck, 1968. 89-105.

Offenberg, A . L. “Jacob Jehuda Leon (160^-1675) and his M odel of the Temple.” Jewish'Christian Relations in the Seventeenth Century: Studies and Documents. Ed. j. van den Berg and Ernestine van der Wall. D ordrecht: Lluw er Academ ic Fuhlishers, 1988. 95-108.

Ouellette, Jean. “T he Basic S tructure of Solom on's Temple and Archaeological Research.” In G utm ann [1976]. 1-20.

Ratte, Felicity. “Architectural Invitations: l:rrages o f C ity Gates in M edieval hallan Fainting.” Gesta 38 (1999): 142-53.

Lifo, G. w. and S. Lhan. “Bedford Painting in Pakistan: T he Aesthetics and O rganization of an A rtisan Trade.” Journal o f American Pollslore. 1993: 257- 75.

Rosenau, Helen. Vision of the Temple: The Image of the Temple of Jerusalem in Judaism and Christianity. Eondon: O resko Books Ltd., 1979.

— . “T be A rchitecture o f Nicolaus de Lyra's Temple Ilhistratlons and the Jewish Tradition.” Journal of Jewish Studies 25 (1974): 294-304·

— . “Jacoh j ا [clair Leon Tem plo’s C ontribu tion to A rchitectural Imagery,” Journal o f Jewish Studies 23 (1972): 72-81.

Schama, Simon. Landscape and Memory. N ew York: Alfred Knopf, 1995.

Shaver-C randell, A nnie . Cambridge Introduction to Art: The M iddle Ages. Cam hridge, England: Cam bridge University Press, 1982.

Soucek, FtisGlla. “T he Temple of Solom on ؛١٦ Islamfo Legend and A rt.” In G utm ann [1976]. 73-124.

Sourdel-Tbom ine, Janine. “U ne image m usulm ane de Jérusalem au debut du XlIIème siècle.” Jerusalem, Rome, Constantinople. Ed. D. Poirion. Fatis: Sorbonne University, 1986. 217-33.

Tucci, G iuseppe. Theory and Practice of the Mandala. London: Rider, 1961.

Vikan, Gary. Byzantine Pilgrimage Art. W ashington D C : D um barton Oaks, 1982.

von O ppen, R. A rt on Wheels. Lahore: Ferozesons, 1992.

W igoder, G., ed. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Judaica. Jerusalem: Keter, 1974.

428

آلمآورلم؛

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATT,AS subscriber agreement.

No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)’ express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ٥۴ ajourna! typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, tbe author ofthe article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use آس covered by the fair use provisions of tbe copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initia؛ funding from Liiiy Endowment !)٦٥.

The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property ofthe American Theological Library Association.