"The proudest boast of Celtic monasticism was that, in the words of the Antiphonary of Bangor:
This house full of delight
Is built on the rock
And indeed the true vine
Transplanted out of Egypt."
William Dalrymple, "The Egyptian connection," New York review of books 55, no. 16 (October 23, 2008): 79, online at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21979. Pp. 79-80 especially are a popular summary of "Coptic influence on the Celtic Church" on the one hand, and emergent Islam on the other, such that "both the art and sacred calligraphy of Anglo-Saxon England and that of early Ummayad Islam grew at the same time out of the same East Mediterranean culture compost and common Coptic models": "if a monk from seventh-century Lindisfarne or Egypt were to come back today it is probable that he would find much more that was familiar in the practices and beliefs of a modern Muslim Sufi than he would with, say, a contemporary American evangelical. Yet this simple truth has been lost by our tendency to think of Christianity as a Western religion, rather than the thoroughly Oriental faith it actually is." Practices, yes. But core beliefs? I don't know Sufism well enough to judge. Two further tidbits: "The Irish wheel cross, the symbol of Celtic Christianity, has recently been shown to have been a Coptic invention, depicted on a Coptic burial pall of the fifth century, three centuries before the design first appears in Scotland and Ireland" (here Dalrymple cites Walter Horn, "On the origins of the Celtic cross," in The forgotten hermitage of Skellig Michael (University of California Press, 1990)); and "The theology of the Desert Fathers was deeply austere, with much concentration on judgment and damnation, a concern that they passed on to the Irish monks."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
My not being familiar with who Dalrymple is, the following question naturally arises. Is he aware that, by the time of Christ there were Celtic peoples spread from Central Turkey in Asia Minor (Galatia was a celtic kingdom) to most of Iberia, the British Isles and Europe south of the Rhine? The earliest known Celtic settlements were in what is now southwestern Switzerland. Secondarily, do the patterns to which he refers as Coptic and/or Islamic (Sufi) arise in those societies with Islam or do they predate it substantially?
Blessings and regards,
Keith Toepfer
Probably, Keith. You know much more about this than I, but at issue here, I think, are the roots of certain specifics of so-called "Celtic" Christianity (not to mention Islam), not which people is older (if that's your question). "Secondarily," what he's saying, I think, is that what evidence we have places it in Coptic (i.e. Christian) Egypt first, and only subsequently in Celtic (but also Islamic) cultures. So that Coptic (i.e. Christian) Egypt was the source of elements of the culture of both.
Dalrymple's own home page is here: http://www.williamdalrymple.uk.com/Pages/Biog.html. The impression it gives is of an extremely gifted popular historian, but perhaps (?) not an academic one. I hadn't been familiar with him either, and don't know what quibbles the specialists may have with his work. In general, though, those who write for the New York review of books are pretty substantial.
I give a link to the article itself in the main post, if you're interested.
I guess my comment wasn't particularly clear. In reading the quoted excerpt, and recognizing that it was just that, before I would accede to his suggested conclusion, I would want to know whether there is an absence of archaeological/historical evidence that the particular elements of "art and sacred calligraphy" in which he sees commonality arose between what he imputes to be the source (Coptic culture) and what he sees as the heirs, or recipients. I don't deny the strong possibility of cross-cultural links allowing such symbology and calligraphy to be communicated from one culture to another. However, having said that, there is a period from at least 600 BC until 50 or 100 AD during which many of the stylistic features found in common might have passed between the cultures, but before there was a Coptic Christianity.
The other issue which would need to be addressed, and may be elsewhere in The Egyptian Connection, is the fact that the Celtic languages had no written form until after Christianity had been brought to the Celts. I could go on at length about that, but you may already have some familiarity with the history. The difficulty we English-speakers have in reading all Celtic languages comes from the way in which the early Christian missionaries to the Celts, particularly in the British Isles, chose to symbolize the native language, which latter is very highly inflected.
Blessings and regards,
I'm not following you, Keith. Take the so-called "Celtic" cross, for example. Are you suggesting that it may have existed among (or been passed to) the Celts between 600 B.C. and A.D. 50, i.e. "before there was a Coptic Christianity", or, indeed, any Christianity at all?
I am also confused by your "between". Is your emphasis on the possible role of a pre-Christian Egypt? Or a pre-Islamic Arabian Pennisula? Islam itself doesn't arise until the seventh century C.E. So which pre-Christian culture are you suggesting did the passing to the pre-Christian Celts? And if the issue for you is the period 600 B.C.-A.D. 50, then why the need for an absence of evidence "between" "Coptic culture" and the Celts/Muslims? By "Coptic culture" do you mean pre-Christian Coptic culture?
Ignorant and confused, that's all.
Thanks, Keith.
Symbols associated with the "Celtic" cross, e.g. this one (http://www.symbols.com/encyclopedia/26/2624.html), which this work of quick reference traces back to 3500 B.C., and perhaps even the "Celtic" form of the Latin cross itself, are very ancient. Is that your main point?
Just trying to follow what you're saying. Perhaps I should reread the review.
I am driven to conclude that I was having difficulty communicating clearly. Your last comment, referencing the symbols associated with the Celtic Cross tracing back to 3,500 B.C., is exactly what I was getting at. What I was attempting to point out is that the pre-Christian Egyptian, Arabian and Celtic civilizations provide a minimum of 600+ years prior to the possibility of Christianity, and an additional 700 or so years prior to the beginnings of Islam, in which to culturally "cross pollinate" each other, which doubtless happened, even if we cannot fully determine to what extent.
I don't know if you are familiar with the ideas in the late 1960s book and documentary by Erich von Daniken, Chariots of the Gods, but reading the excerpt from Dalrymple reminded me of nothing so much as the sort of uninformed assertions by the latter also exemplified by the former. Unless supported thoroughly elsewhere in the work it sounds like the all too common inference of causality from the observation of correlation.
If either of the two of us is ignorant and/or confused, our error is dwarfed by van Daniken. My question is whether what is clearly true of van Daniken's thinking is equally true of Dalrymple's.
Thank you for "worrying" my comment persistently enough to tease out my meaning. I apologize for writing such an obscure bit of prose in an attempt at clarity.
Blessings and regards,
Keith Toepfer
Post a Comment