The Transfiguration of Moses: the Horned Motif in Medieval Art

Sara Marquez

2014

1

The Transfiguration of Moses: the Horned Motif in Medieval Art

As an artist, how does one depict a supernatural transformation? How does one draw or

paint a phenomenon that is grander than any verbal description can capture? This was the

dilemma of medieval artists who attempted to convey the amazing transfiguration of Moses after

he met face to face with God. His face was so altered, so radiant with supernatural light, that our

language does not even contain a word to describe the characteristic. As a result, the motif that

some artists adopted to convey this event – that is, the horned Moses motif – has created debate

among art historians as to its true meaning. Confusion and disagreement abound regarding the

horns that often appear in these early depictions of Moses. Some trace the cause of this to a

mistranslation in the Vulgate version of the Bible, that is the translation by St. Jerome, produced

between 390 and 405 and dominant throughout the medieval period. Some connect it with the

very open negativity toward Jews in the early Middle Ages. In this paper, I will present some

arguments to support the position that the purpose of the motif of horns on Moses was to serve as

an identifier to point out to the viewer which figure is Moses. Additionally, there is reason to

believe that the perception by Christians of the eleventh and twelfth centuries of Jews within that

portion of the Bible referred to as the Old Testament was different than the way they perceived

the Jews living among them at the time. The prejudices they held against Judaism did not

retroactively apply to Old Testament personages.

Where it Begins

One of the first known occurrences of an image of Moses with horns is found in an

English manuscript dating around A.D. 1025-1050.1 This manuscript, previously known as the

Aelfric Paraphrase, is a simplified version, or a paraphrase, of the first six books of the Bible. It                                                                                                                          1 Ruth Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses in Medieval Art and Thought (Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of California Press, 1970) p.13.

2

was possibly written in response to a demand for a version of the Scriptures that would be more

easily understood by lay people, who were not highly educated.2 It is now more commonly

known as the Old English Illustrated Hexateuch, and will be referred to in this paper as the

Hexateuch. The fact that this manuscript was written specifically for easy comprehension by its

readers is very important in understanding the horned Moses that appears in it. Illustration is

used nearly as heavily as text in communicating to the reader, with 500 pictures supporting the

stories.3 “They reflect an attempt to translate literally – into pictures – the narrative, textual

content.”4 A.N. Doane, Professor of English (Emeritus) at the University of Madison-Wisconsin,

summarizes that the Hexateuch should be considered, “a unique integrated communication object

that is an intelligent selection and modification of contingently available motifs and models.”5

We can draw from this that it was with great care and forethought that the illustrators formed

their images, with simple understanding and recognition as their goal.

The Transfiguration of Moses

Ruth Mellinkoff, in her book The Horned Moses in Medieval Art and Thought, discusses

this first appearance of the horned Moses in ancient art. She identifies folio 105v as the first

image in the manuscript where this adornment of horns by the original artist is found without the

suggestion of later inking-over.6 This illustration depicts the moment in the book of Exodus

when Moses returns to his people carrying the newly reprinted tablets (Fig.1).7 At the top of the

page Moses is conversing with God. The two figures seem to be in mid-transaction. God, to the                                                                                                                          2“Old English Hexateuch,” British Library Online Gallery, Sacred Texts, accessed May 9, 2012 <http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/englishhex.html>. 3 A.N. Doane. “The Illustrated Old English Hexateuch, Cotton Claudius B. iv: The Frontier of Seeing and Reading in Anglo-Saxon England (review).” JEGP, Journal of English and Germanic Philology 108.3 (2009): 395-399. Project MUSE. Web. 5 May. 2012. <http://muse.jhu.edu/>. 4 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, 16. 5 Doane, The Illustrated Old English Hexateuch. 6 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, 17. 7 See Exodus 34:29 New American Bible

3

left, holds one tablet in his left hand while he raises his right hand in a gesture of blessing.

Moses, to the right and facing God, clutches a second tablet in his left hand, while stretching out

an exaggerated right hand, stressing the moment at which man receives the law from God. It is

significant to note that Moses at this point does not have horns just before his blessing by God.

As our eyes travel down the page, we find Moses a short time later, as he stands for the first time

before the people, transfigured, tablets in hand, with horns reaching upward from his head. The

Israelites stand before him in awe, shielded from his grandeur by a veil, for this transformed

figure is too great for them to gaze upon. From this point on, Moses is identified within the

Hexateuch by the motif of horns on his head.

This theme of the before and after of Moses’ transformation is repeated in the Gebhardt

Bible from Admont, ca. A.D. 1130 (Fig. 2). On folio 68v, Moses is seen receiving the law from

God. Moses, on the righthand side, leans backward and away from God. His head bears no sign

of horns, and his face is turned away from the magnificence of God’s presence. In folio 69r of

the same manuscript, Moses is shown horned after having received the Law. God leans out from

behind his celestial barrier, with his hand raised in blessing over Moses. Moses now looks fully

on the face of God without further consequence.

The implication in both of these examples is that Moses’ appearance after his close

encounter with God is physically altered. Such alteration somehow suggested something

radiating out of his head, whether it be light or rays, or some other physical effect. The fact that,

in subsequent images of Moses within the same manuscript, Moses is still marked by the

addition of horns, suggests either that he went forth from that day on bearing the mark of that

transfiguration, or that the artist wants us to be reminded of the singular event by the continued

use of the horn motif.

4

The idea of a transfiguration of Moses, that is, his taking on a physical change reflective

of the presence of a deity, stems first from the Jewish understanding of the nature of God

himself. At various times in the “Old Testament,” the overwhelming holiness of God is described

as having physical effects on humans. The ancients believed that looking upon the face of God

would bring instant death.8 Up until this point in the narrative, no one had seen God face-to-face

and lived to tell about it. The obvious favor of Moses in the eyes of God, coupled with the forty

days he had spent in God’s presence, was manifested in the countenance of Moses as a radiance

that was so inhuman that it struck fear in the Israelites.

Another source of the idea of the transfiguration comes out of a recurring human

experience. Transfiguration is a recurring event within messiah stories throughout history. In the

Illiad at the arming of Achilles, and in the account of the Arthurian Grail,9 this transfiguration is

frightening for those who see it. Also, in the German myth of Seigfried who slays the dragon,

Suhr claims that, upon bathing in the dragon’s blood, Seigfried’s skin became ‘horned’ and he

was transfigured as one who could not be killed in battle.10 Likewise, Kirshna was transfigured

after battling his foe:

[T]he whole horizon was in a blaze from the heat given off by the beast. Encompassed by twining snakes, Balarama exhorts him to put off mortal man and reveal himself as a divinity. The females of the snake-king exclaimed: “Thou art recognized, O god of gods. ... Thou art light supreme, inscrutable; thou art the mighty lord, the portion of that supreme light. …Thyself as an oviparous, hooded snake, art the upholder of the world. Krishna also took on the horned skin of the serpent to cope with the monster, and revealed his divinity in terms of a transfiguration.11 Christ was also said to have been transfigured. Moses and Elijah appeared in the sight of

                                                                                                                         8 Ex. 33:20; Gn. 16:13, 32:31; Jgs. 6:22, 13:22. 9 E. G. Suhr, “The Horned Moses,” Folklore, Vol. 74:2 (Summer, 1963), pp. 387-395, 387. 10 Suhr, “The Horned Moses,” p.390. 11 Suhr, “The Horned Moses,” p.90.

5

the disciples while on the mountain and God’s voice proclaimed from the heavens, “This is my

son, the beloved; he enjoys my favor. Listen to him.” The face of Jesus “shone like the sun, and

his clothes became as dazzling as light.”12

These many descriptions of transfigurations of religious messiahs show a common thread

throughout humanity regarding the effect of holiness on the countenance. That this same concept

would show up among the people of Israel and be carried forward into Christianity is not

surprising. Whether the stories were shared verbally across nations, or the human experience

found expression in similar ways from continent to continent, it remains a recurring element of

the physical manifestation of holiness. Moses was viewed as the great leader of the Israelites

who brought them the law that set them apart from all other religions. Likewise, for the

Christians, he was the bearer of the word of God, and the foundation for Christ’s coming.

The Misunderstanding of St. Jerome’s Translation Caused Confusion

Another popular assertion for the appearance of horns on Moses is that there was an error

in Biblical translation from the Hebrew writings to the popular, or Vulgate, translation of the

Bible.13 In Exodus 34:29, Moses descends from the mountain with the second set of stone tablets

to greet his waiting people. His face, after being in the presence of God, was qeren, a Hebrew

word with two possible definitions.14 The translator, St. Jerome, (342-420) was a learned

Christian, fluent in Latin and Greek, who had studied under the tutorship of the famous

polytheist grammarian Donatus.15 Jerome took it upon himself to learn Hebrew as a corporal

discipline after a period in his life when he was tempted by many trials.16 Later, when he took up

                                                                                                                         12 Matt.17:2, 5 13 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, p.1. 14 ibid. 15 Alban Butler, Lives of the Saints, Vol III (New York: Kennedy, 1956), p.686. 16 Butler, Lives, p. 687.

6

the work on the Vulgate translation, “[i]t was thought that he could not be further instructed in

his knowledge of Hebrew, but this was not his own judgment of the matter and he applied again

to a famous Jewish master, Bar Ananias, who came to teach him in the night-time, lest the Jews

should know it.”17 Mellinkoff underlines the careful, scholarly approach used by Jerome in

considering whether to interpret qeren as “glorified” or “horned.”18 She further asserts that, in all

his many subsequent writings, Jerome shows no indication that he believed that Moses had solid

horns on his head in this scene, and that he suggests a contrary position in his Commentary on

Ezekiel.19 In this, he clearly equates his understanding of “horned” as “glorified.”

Mellinkoff also points out how many other early theologians also supported this view of

the horns as radiant light. Among them, she cites the British monk St. Gildas of the sixth

century;20 Rashi, a well-known, highly regarded French Rabbi born in 1030;21 and Petrus

Comestor (1100), author of Historia Scholastica, the most popular and well-circulated book of

the Middle Ages.22 Rashi wrote:

And when he descended from the mountain with the tablets, his face appeared to be horned, and he himself did not know it, that is, wonderful rays of splendor emanated from his face, that struck [or blinded] the eyes of those who were watching.23

This explanation from the well-read and respected Rashi became the most popular and accepted

understanding of “horned” through the Middle Ages.24 Mellinkoff’s research strongly supports

the position that Jerome knowingly chose “horned” as a metaphor during his careful translation.

                                                                                                                         17 Butler, Lives, p. 691. 18 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, p. 77. 19 ibid. 20 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, p. 81. 21 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, p. 84. 22 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, p. 85. 23 ibid. 24 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, p. 86.

7

It is hard, then, to fall back on the accusation that this was a mistake by Jerome. In the article,

“The Horned Moses,” E.G. Suhr states:

My own experience has taught me to beware of accusing an ancient scribe or artist of making an error or using faulty symbolism in drawing; frequently this accusation turns out to be a confession of ignorance or an unwillingness to take into consideration adverse evidence for a pet theory, a procedure which tends to bounce back with a vengeance.25 I too, then, will avoid this misstep and consider other possible reasons for Jerome’s

choice of this word. As was mentioned above, the word qeren could be understood as either

‘radiant’ or ‘horned.’ It is possible that the word ‘horned’ had a different definition in that day

than the one we are familiar with. Jerome seems to equate horned with glorified, as is shown in

his Commentary on Ezekiel: “the common people with their clouded eyes could not look at

Moses’ face because it had been ‘glorified,’ or as it says in the Hebrew, ‘horned.’”26 A logical

conclusion could be that Jerome used ‘horned’ metaphorically.27

Negative Motifs in Medieval Old Testament Artwork

Another possibility that has been argued is that Moses’ horns could have been meant as a

demeaning, pejorative sign. In considering this, it is important to explore other visual examples

of negativity during this time. There is no doubt that prejudice against Jews in Europe grew

during the Middle Ages,28 and there is concrete evidence of this in artwork of the period.

However, in regard to illustrations of “Old Testament” figures during the eleventh and twelfth

centuries, it is difficult to uncover many occurrences of the horned motif on biblical Jews other

than Moses. There are occasional examples of this which carry a suggestion of an association

                                                                                                                         25 Suhr, “The Horned Moses,” p. 389. 26 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, pp.77-78. 27 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, p. 77. 28 Deborah Higgs, Strickland, Saracens, Demons and Jews, Making Monsters in Medieval Art (Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press), p. 95.

8

with the devil, as in the drawing in Jacobus de Teramo’s Das Buch Belial (1473), in which

Solomon is shown “binding demons to his service” (Fig. 3). The belief that King Solomon had

powers, “including not only the makeup of the universe and the potencies of the elements, but

also ‘the forces of the spirits and the thoughts of humans, the varieties of plants and the powers

of roots,’”29 is found in many ancient documents, including the Testament of Solomon, dated to

at least as early as the later fifth or early sixth century.30 This Testament contains the story of

how Solomon used a magical ring to, “subdue a whole host of demons and set them to work on

the construction of the Temple.”31 In the illustration of Solomon bending these demons to his

will, the horned individual has been identified as Solomon’s Jewish aide.32 Given that the

accuracy of this statement could stand in doubt, we will discuss the illustration as though this

figure were indeed Jewish. This person in question stands directly to the side of Solomon. He is

dressed in robes of the day, as opposed to the also-horned demons approaching Solomon, who

are unclothed. It is important to point out that Solomon was also a Jew, and yet he is not shown

horned. To note that the aide is Jewish is equivalent to noting that he is human, that he is male,

or that he dates from the same Biblical era as Solomon himself. It is not relevant to the nature or

intent of the drawing. That his aide is wearing horns could be an indication of the fact that he is,

at the moment of the illustration, involved in dealings with Satan, regardless of his religious or

ethnic affiliation; he could even be a personification of Satan himself.

Most often, the “negative” mark of Old Testament Jews is the Judenhut, the pointed hat

worn at this general time by Jews. However, that this indicator is negative is also open for

                                                                                                                         29 Gideon Bohak, Ancient Jewish Magic: A History (Cambridge; New York; Melbourne: 2008) p.93. 30 Bohak, Ancient, p. 180. 31 ibid. 32 Geoff Dennis, “Solomon the Sorcerer,” Jewish Myth, Magic and Mysticism, January 7, 2009, accessed May 9, 2012 < http://ejmmm2007.blogspot.com/2009/01/solomon-sorcerer.html> .

9

debate. These hats originated within the Jewish community and only took on a negative

connotation after the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 when it was ordered that they be worn so

that Jews could be easily identified within the public at large.33 The Jewish hat can also be found

in illustrated Hebrew manuscripts (Fig. 4) suggesting that, at least initially, it was regarded by

European Jews as "an element of traditional garb, rather than an imposed discrimination."34

Therefore, one could assert that the hat was also used as an identifier of Jewish people within

illustrations, much as the horns easily identify Moses. This would be especially true of

manuscripts pre-dating the Fourth Lateran Council.

An example of this is found in folio 2v of an English psalter, ca. 1200 CE (Fig. 5). In this

pair of illustrations, a horned and haloed Moses is shown first on the left walking alongside the

Ark of the Covenant, which is being carried by Israelites who are bareheaded. On the right, again

horned and haloed, Moses displays the grapes of the Promised Land while surrounded by six

Israelites, three of whom are bareheaded while three wear headdresses of three very different

styles. Only one of these three hats resembles what has been termed the Judenhut. It would be

hard to argue that this one hat, in this context, is derogatory while the other two are not.

In other illustrations from the same manuscript, instances of Jews wearing hats seem to

occur where the people have done some wrong. Under closer inspection, however, there is no

consistency within the manuscript in this regard. As an example, we will use folio 20r, “Moses

and the Brazen Serpent.” (Fig. 6) This picture coincides with the story that occurs in the Book of

Numbers, chapter 21:7-8. The Israelites had just spoken against Moses for having taken them

into the desert. As punishment for criticizing Moses, God sent a plague of deadly serpents upon

                                                                                                                         33 Jewish Encyclopedia, Judenhut, accessed May 9, 2012 <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/9046-judenhut>. 34 Francoise Piponnier and Perrine Mane, Dress in the Middle Ages (Newhaven: Yale University Press,1997) p. 138.

10

them. Begging for forgiveness, they approach Moses, who is instructed by God to make a serpent

of bronze mounted on a standard, which will protect any who are bitten and then look upon the

standard. In the illustration, the Israelites who had been responsible for angering God are shown

wearing the pointed hat. In contrast, in the top half of this folio, Moses is with his people at the

newly formed river that flowed from the rock at God’s command. In this story as well, the

people complained and refused to have faith.35 God responded with disappointment and

punishment, yet hat-wearing Jews do not highlight this moment of disobedience. Instead,

bareheaded, they happily scoop and drink the fresh water. This inconsistent use of the Jewish hat

image within this Psalter suggests that, at least at times, the Judenhut might not have been

viewed negatively by Christian artists and, by implication, Christian viewers.

It is important at this point to underline the absence of horns in both of these illustrations.

If it were the case that the negative sentiments of Anglo-Saxons toward Jews were the cause for

putting horns on Moses, would they not also have put horns on all, or at least some of the

Israelites in the Old Testament where they are depicted disobeying God? Not once in all of the

examples that I found did this occur. Instead, only Moses bears the mark of the horns in these

medieval images.

Redundancy of Motifs

One might make an argument that the use of horns on Moses within the Hexateuch as an

indicator or an identifier is redundant and unnecessary in light of the icon of the stone tablets. It

is true that the tablets are easily identified with Moses. An image of him with the law in hand is a

simple icon; this does not mean that the use of an additional icon would be wrong, as it is

possible to use more than one identifying feature for the same personage. In fact, there is a third

                                                                                                                         35 Nmbrs. Chptr 20.

11

feature that is used for Moses that I have noted in many of the manuscripts studied here: his bare

feet. As the Old Testament story indicates, when meeting God for the first time, Moses was

instructed to remove his shoes, for he was standing on “sacred ground.”36 Subsequently, in many

depictions of Moses, he is shown barefooted. Within the Hexateuch there are many instances

where the Israelites have footwear while Moses does not (Fig. 7, 8). Even in a place of

civilization – for instance, seated on a throne, rather than standing in the desert – Moses can be

seen with bare feet while Joshua sports rather detailed shoes (Fig. 9). This is a common portrayal

of Moses, even as common as the appearance of the horns. Its purpose is not to say that Moses

was poor or uncivilized, but to hearken back to that moment when he first stood before God as a

holy man. It would be foolish of us to criticize the artist for applying more than one of these

icons to Moses for the sake of simplicity or ease.

Moses on the Jesse Tree

The Hexateuch is not the only manuscript in which positive uses of the horns can be

established. Often Moses can be found on the Tree of Jesse, a family tree icon that illustrates

Christ’s ancestry, tracing his lineage back to the house of King David. In folio 15r of the

Shaftesbury Psalter, for instance, we find the horned Moses (Fig. 10). He is standing on the

right, holding not the tablets but a scroll, mirroring the scroll of Abraham on the opposite side of

the frame. The way Moses is identified is purely by the horns on his head. Abraham, on the other

hand, has a halo around his head. This could be problematic for the discussion here, unless the

horns are already an accepted icon of Moses’ holiness in the same way that a halo is. In this case,

it might be explained that putting a halo on Moses would be redundant, although in some

                                                                                                                         36 see Exodus 3:4,5.

12

instances this was also done.37 But if the horns were a motif of holiness, it is logical to take from

this image that both men are holy prophets of God, Moses being the one who underwent a

physical transformation by having laid eyes on God himself.

In the above-mentioned Shaftesbury Psalter, only five of Christ’s ancestors are portrayed

on the Jesse Tree. In an image from the Great Lambeth Bible, ca. A.D. 1150, folio 198r, a much

more extensive family tree is illustrated, with a total of at least sixteen relatives represented (Fig.

11). All of these relatives of Christ were Jewish, yet it is only Moses who is depicted as having

horns. This, again, undermines the case for arguing that this horn motif is a negative reference to

Moses’ Jewishness.

The Difference Between Old Testament Jews and Contemporary Jews

After close scrutiny, one can conclude that the attitude toward the Jews of the Old

Testament during this time was quite different than their attitude toward contemporary Jews.

Indeed, from the advent of Christ, forward, the pejorative attitude is magnified. The reasons for

animosity toward the Jews were complex, but the Christians’ belief that the Jews were

responsible for the death of Jesus38 granted justification (in Christian minds) to all feelings and

actions against them. Thus, Jews are portrayed crucifying Christ in the Winchester Psalter of

1150 (Fig. 12), Jews are seen boiling in hell in the encyclopedia of Abbess Herrad of Hohenberg

of 1195 (Fig. 13), and many portrayals of contemporary medieval Jews also are deeply insulting

(Fig. 14).

In a recent paper exploring the meaning of a horned Moses in the Hexateuch, Dr. Asa S.

Mittman cites Nicholas Howe in establishing an emotional connection between the medieval

                                                                                                                         37 See folio 52 of the Great Lambeth Bible, folios 2v and 4 of the English Psalter, and folio 21 of Speculum Humanae Salvationis, for examples. 38 See Matt. 27, Mark 15, Luke 23.

13

Anglo-Saxons and the Old Testament Jews.39 Mittman states, “The Anglo-Saxons came to see

themselves as analogous to, indeed as modern-day versions of, the ‘Old Testament’ Jews… This

perceived affinity would perhaps have prepared readers conceptually to slip into the Jews’

position within the images and narrative.”40 This supports the theory that the perception of these

ancient heroes by Anglo-Saxon Christians was different than that of the Jews who were their

contemporaries, and that this was reflected in illustrations of them.

Perhaps more importantly, the fact remains that the Christians of medieval Europe did not

completely disregard the Jewish roots of their messiah. Had the sentiments regarding Jesus’

historical Jewish background been as vicious as those of the post-crucifixion Jews, it would have

been difficult at best for Christians to maintain the passion for the religion which flourished in

the day. Had this been true, one might wonder why the Christian church could not simply start

afresh, bifurcating its new law from the previous one, and carrying this new gospel forward

independent of the old. Instead, not only was the Hebrew Canon of the retained as the “Old

Testament”41 but much of Jewish ritual and religious practice was adopted, as well. This is

evident in that the priest who led the ceremony mirrored the role of Jewish priests; a sacrifice

was offered during the Mass; this sacrifice was performed on an altar, as in the old Jewish rite;

and the prayers spoken are very similar to those said at a Jewish Passover. These practices can be

traced back to the first ten decades of the Christian church in early Christian writings such as the

Didache §14 (c. 80 AD), 1 Clement §44 (c. 95 AD), Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho the

Jew §41 (c. 155 AD), and Irenaeus of Lyons’ Against Heresies, 4:17:5 (c. 180 A.D.)

                                                                                                                         39 Asa S. Mittman, “ ‘In those days’: Giants and the Giant Moses in the Old English Illustrated Hexateuch,” Imagining the Jew: Jewishness in Anglo-Saxon Literature and Culture, ed. Samantha Zacher (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, forthcoming 2014), 16. 40 ibid. 41 Stravinskas, Our Sunday, p. 561.

14

Horns in Other Positive Uses

As a final observation, I would like to draw attention to Mellinkoff’s chapter 8, in which

she explores the history of the bishop’s mitre in the Catholic Church. Although I will not repeat

here her outline of the development of this iconographically significant headdress, I would draw

attention to her figures 92-101.42 All of these examples, dating from the twelfth century, portray

bishops wearing tall hats with two ‘horns’ on them. They reflect a style that was chosen for the

representatives of the Christian church that clearly resembles horns. Most significant of these, in

my opinion, are the bishops’ seals, figures 92-96 (fig. 15). The church commissioned these

images for the purpose of giving official status to documents. Certainly, had the image of a man

with horns projecting from his head been considered negative, or somehow related to Jews, those

who consigned the making of the seals would not have chosen this particular visual to represent

the Christian church.

Closing Remarks

I believe that the arguments set forth here give substantial support to the theory that the

horned Moses motif in medieval art was not originally intended as a negative indicator. The

assertion here is not that there was an absence of prejudice against Jews in the eleventh and

twelfth centuries. On the contrary, there is much evidence that there was plenty. But the

consistency with which the horns are applied to Moses, and to Moses alone, within the context of

the “Old Testament” is firm evidence that the horns were an identifier of this biblical hero.

Further research which moves out of this era and later into the Middle Ages might show that the

icon began to take on a negative connotation, for each generation views history in the light of

their own experience. But I feel it is safe to establish that the initial intent – from Jerome’s

                                                                                                                         42 Mellinkoff, The Horned Moses, Illustrations.

15

translation in word to the early artists’ intention in illustration – was to signifying the honor

which set Moses apart from all mankind up to that point: the honor of having looked upon God

and survived.

1

Illustrations

Figure 1. Moses receiving that Law, Hexateuch, London, British Library, Cotton Claudius B.iv, f. 105v

Figure 2. Moses Receiving the Law and Moses after the Reception of the Law, Gebhardt Bible, Vienna, Nationalbibliothek, Ser. nov. 2701-02, f. 68v and 69r

Figure 3. Solomon, Jabobus de Teramo, Das Buch Berlial

Figure 4. The Restored Passover Sacrifice, in the Bird’s Head Haggadah, Israel Museum, Jerusalem

Figure 5. Moses with the Ark and Moses with the Grapes of the Promised Land, English Psalter, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale Lat. 8846, f. 2v

Figure 6. Miracle of the Water and Moses with the Brazen Serpent, English Psalter, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Codex Monacensis Lat. 835, f. 20r

Figure 7. Moses Murmured Against, Hexateuch, London, British Library, Cotton Claudius B.iv, f. 121r

Figure 8. Moses Blessing the Tribes and the Death of Moses, Hexateuch, London, British Library, Cotton Claudius B.iv, f. 139v

Figure 9. Moses and Joshua (above), Hexateuch, London, British Library, Cotton Claudius B.iv, f. 136v

Figure 10. Tree of Jesse, Shaftsbury Psalter, London, British Library, Landsdowne MS 383, f. 15r

Figure 11. Tree of Jesse, Great Lambeth Bible, London, Lambeth Palace Library MS 3, f. 198r

Figure 12. Betrayal and Flagellation of Christ, Winchester Psalter, London, British Library, Cotton MS. Nero C.iv, f. 21r

Figure 13. Abbess Herrad of Hohenberg, Hortus Deliciarum (MS now lost) Figure 14. Caricature of Jews, Head of Roll of Issues of the Exchequer, London, Public Records Office

Figure 15. English Bishop’s Seals