The term “Gothic” originated in the Renaissance, when humanists and classicizing writersderogatorily referred to “the Goths” who – in the humanists’ view – had destroyed classical culture. In architecture these Renaissance writers differentiated between the Gothic buildings and their favoured classical style.
Medieval Gothic cathedrals amaze numerous people worldwide. Every year they attract visitors, whether they are Catholics, Christians from other denominations or even non-believers. We generally associate with these magnificent buildings specific features like pinnacles, gargoyles, spires, pointed arches, flying buttresses, tapering pillars, spacious interiors, profuse decoration, ribbed vaults, a large-scale use of stained glass and the circular oculus.
These are also many of the salient characteristics of Gothic architecture. In relation to architecture the term Gothic was actually coined during the Renaissance. Especially Italian humanists as well as classicizing writers and architects of the 16th century like the painter Giorgio Vasari (1511-74), for example, referred to “the Goths” in a derogatory way to distinguish classical architecture from the – in their view – “barbaric” style in the medieval period.
According to Vasari in his The Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects (Italian: Le Vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori, e architettori; 1550, enl. ed. in 1568), this “monstrous” style showed no sign of “any accepted ideas of sense and order.” Broadly speaking, the Renaissance writers linked medieval architecture to the 5th-century Gothic tribes that – in their opinion – had been responsible for destroying the classical culture of the Roman empire.
Instead of the – in Vasari’s words – “accursed buildings” with their pointed arches, the Renaissance men favoured principles or features they attributed to classical architectural style including human dimensions, simplicity, elegance, symmetry and balance. Even though the 16th-century writers correctly pointed out the differences in the architecture of the classical, medieval and Renaissance or early modern period, they made a complete misjudgment regarding the aesthetics and the qualities of Gothic structures.
Intriguingly, Gothic architecture evolved from the Romanesque architectural style. The latter is characterized, for instance, by thick walls, round towers, tunnel vaults, semi-circular arches and windows that are limited in number and size. As far as the Gothic cathedrals are concerned, they originated in northern France during the 12th century. Today, medieval Gothic cathedrals are scattered about Europe. Undoubtedly, one of the most famous of them is Notre-Dame de Paris, which was built between 1163 and 1345.
Needless to say, the recent fire in this impressive place of worship justifiably shocked a very large number of people across the globe because it resulted in immense damage. Thank God and thanks to the firefighters and men like the courages priest, Jean-Marc Fournier, the fire neither destroyed the whole building nor consumed sacred relics such as the Crown of Thorns and several of the irreplaceable artworks.
However, the horrible event has understandably worried a lot of people, above all the French. Notre-Dame de Paris constitutes a house of God, one of the iconic landmarks of Paris and a part of Western civilization. For this reason, statements that depict the famous Gothic cathedral as a mere building are inappropriate. A sign of hope is certainly the great willingness to donate money for the rebuilding.
Was the beginning of both George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire and Game of Thrones partly inspired by a scene in two medieval versions of Perceval’s quest for the Holy Grail, when Perceval sees three blood drops in the snow?
In George R.R. Martin’s series of novels A Song of Ice and Fire(ASOIAF) and its TV-adaptation Game of Thrones(GoT) Jon Snow’s storyline arguably indicates slight similarities to Perceval’s journey in the two medieval romances or Holy Grail legends Perceval ou le Conte du Graalby Chrétien de Troyes and Parzivalby Wolfram von Eschenbach. Both ASOIAF and GoT also refer to a common feature in Holy Grail legends – the wasteland motif.
Further allusions to the aforementioned versions of Perceval’s quest may be the frequent use of particular combinations of different colours. For example, the various references to black and white perhaps allude to the magpie image in Wolfram’s Parzival. Alongside these colours, we as readers or viewers notice several depictions, events or scenes which explicitly or implicitly mention the colours red and white.
We can, for instance, just point to Jon’s direwolf, Ghost, with his white fur and red eyes. Moreover, particularly with regard to ASOIAF, at the Wall in the snow-covered area far north of the fictional continent of Westeros Jon Snow suddenly imagines his uncle Benjen Stark’s death, when his uncle leaves Castle Black for an expedition into the haunted forest:
“As he watched his uncle lead his horse into the tunnel, Jon had remembered the things that Tyrion Lannister told him on the kingsroad, and in his mind’s eye he saw Ben Stark lying dead, his blood red on the snow.” (A Game of Thrones (GT), 179)
Later – before fleeing from the free folk beyond the Wall – he remembers the execution of the deserter from the Night’s Watch:
“Jon remembered another killing; the deserter on his knees, his head rolling, the brightness of blood on snow…his father’s sword, his father’s words, his father’s face…” (A Storm of Swords 1: Steel and Snow (SoS), 566)
Intriguingly, there is a reference to blood on the snow in the consulted versions of Perceval’s quest, too.
Three Blood Drops in the Snow – Perceval’s Inner Vision
At one point, Perceval rides across a snowy field, spotting three blood drops. It is noteworthy that the snowfall during the night before borders on a miraculous event because it is summer (cf. esp. Wolfram’s Parzival). The three blood drops in the snow result from a bleeding bird (or, more precisely, a goose) after a falcon’s attack.
Seeing the blood drops in the snow, Perceval falls into a trance-like state. Although scholars assess this episode in Wolfram’s Parzival differently, through the mix of the colours red and white he thinks to recognize his beloved’s beautiful face. Note that in Chrétien’s version his beloved is Blancheflor, whereas in Wolfram’s Parzival her name is Condwiramurs.
Undoubtedly, the three blood drops in the snow cast a kind of love spell over Perceval who experiences a form of inner vision or introspection. Consequently, the interplay of red and white enables Perceval to look inwardly. His thoughts of his beloved in his trance-like state apparently gives him strength to continue his search for the Holy Grail.
Since Perceval has this inner vision of his beloved’s facial beauty that encourages him to resume his quest for the Holy Grail, this scene is a significant event. If we now put the emphasis on the analysis of the possible meanings of the colours red and white in ASOIAF as well as in GoT, we may figure out slight similarities between the scene above and an event in the beginning parts of the first novel and the pilot episode.
White Fur and Red Eyes – A Close Look at the Discovery of the Dead Female Direwolf and Her Pups
The Prologue of A Game of Thrones about the horrifying confrontation between three men of the Night’s Watch and the Others (i.e. the White Walkers and the wights / undead) is followed by a chapter with Lord Eddard (or Ned) Stark’s son Bran as the point-of-view (POV) character. GoT, ASOIAF‘s TV-adaptation, roughly adheres to this order in its opening sequences of scenes. However, it is appropriate to primarily concentrate on the novel.
Subsequent to the execution of the deserter from the Night’s Watch, Ned Stark, his sons Robb and Bran(don), his alleged bastard son Jon Snow, his ward Theon Greyjoy and other men return to the home of the Starks, Winterfell. On their way back Robb Stark discovers a dead female direwolf that was killed by a stag’s antler. (Contrary to the descriptions in the novel, in GoT Ned Stark and the boys together with Theon as well as two other members of the Stark household first find a dead stag and, then, the dead direwolf.)
Given that the direwolf is the sigil of House Stark and the stag is the sigil of House Baratheon, the dead animal is certainly a potent of the upcoming disaster for House Stark, as the course of ASOIAF and GoT reveals. Regardless of this bad omen, the direwolf’s pups are alive. Evidently, Ned Stark decides not to have the pups killed due to Jon’s insightful remarks:
““There are five pups,”…“Three male, two female.”…
“You have five true born children,” Jon said. “Three sons, two daughters. The direwolf is the sigil of your House. Your children were meant to have these pups, my lord”
Bran saw his father’s face change, saw the other men exchange glances. He loved Jon with all his heart at that moment…The count had come right only because Jon had omitted himself.” (GT, 19)
Nevertheless, a sixth pup emerges shortly afterwards.
Jon’s discovery of the sixth pup is significant because of the little animal’s appearance:
“His fur was white, where the rest of the litter was grey. His eyes were as red as the blood of the ragged man [i.e. the deserter] who had died that morning. Bran thought it curious that this pup alone would have opened his eyes while the others were still blind.” (Ibid., 21)
The male pup’s striking features are his white fur and his red eyes. Jon eventually gives him the name Ghost.
In general, this beginning part of the story contains important aspects concerning foreshadowings, symbolism and the meanings of the colours red and white. Additionally, the text mentions clear deviations from the norm in the represented (quasi-medieval) fantasy world. All these issues not only underscore the significance of this event but also help to point out some possible connections to the scene when Perceval sees the three blood drops in the snow.
Besides the potent of the upcoming disaster and the portrayal of Ghost’s appearance, other distinctive features of this part (including the Prologue) in addition to specific signs allow us to link this sequence of scenes to future events, to interpret the meanings of red and white and to draw (,at least, slight) parallels to the Perceval scene above. We will list these points in the following:
The banner or blazon of the Starks is “a grey direwolf racing across an ice-white field” (GT, 14; cf. 813).
Bran witnesses the beheading of the deserter: “Blood sprayed out across the snow, as red as summerwine…Bran could not take his eyes off the blood. The snows around the stump drank it eagerly, reddening as he watched” (ibid., 15). (There is no snow during the execution scene in the pilot of the TV-series.)
Ned Stark beheads the deserter with one single stroke. He carries out the execution with his greatsword Ice. We later learn that this greatsword is used by Ser Ilyn Payne to execute Ned in the capital of Westeros, King’s Landing (cf. Ibid., 727; season 1.9).
As indicated in the Prologue, the alleged deserter from the Night’s Watch, Gared, encounters the Others (or the White Walkers). He is on an expedition into the haunted forest together with two other rangers – the young commander Ser Waymar Royce and Will, who – from a tree – sees the killing of Royce. (By the way, in GoT the roles are swapped. Will survives the violent encounter, becomes witness of Gared’s decapitation by a White Walker and is, then, executed as a deserter by Ned Stark.)
A few striking passages that depict the bloody confrontation between Royce and the Others read as follows: “The young lord cried out in pain. Blood welled between the rings. It steamed in the cold, and the droplets seemed red as fire where they touched the snow” (GT, 10).
Gared (or Will) just flees south to escape from the horrifying beings. However, he is viewed as a deserter. (Technically, he is one.) Before his execution he insists on having encountered the Others or the White Walkers.
While Gared (or Will) is sentenced to death by Ned Stark for alleged desertion, the latter is subsequently decapitated on Joffrey’s order for alleged treason (cf. Ibid., 726). Prior to his beheading he, in vain, tries to prevent Joffrey from becoming king, after uncovering that this boy is actually the product of the incestuous relationship between Cersei and her brother Jaime, the Kingslayer.
Several lines in the beginning parts of the first novel draw the attention to the weather conditions in the north of the represented world: “The late summer snows had been heavy this moonturn” (ibid., 17). For this reason, when the other men together with Bran arrive at the site of the dead direwolf, Robb stands “kneedeep in white, his hood pulled back so the sun [shines] in his hair” (ibid.). (We already noted the absence of snow during this scene in GoT.)
The emergence of a (big) dead direwolf or direwolves, so to speak, apparently deviates from the represented world’s norms. According to Theon, ““[t]here’s not been a direwolf sighted south of the Wall in two hundred years”” (ibid., 18). (In the TV-adaptation Robb makes a similar statement.)
Undoubtedly, the female direwolf’s death was caused by a struggle or confrontation between two animals (i.e. the direwolf and a stag).
Almost probably, the list is not sufficient. Yet, it will do for our purpose.
The Prologue / the opening scene, the execution of Gared / Will and the discovery of the dead female direwolf and her living pups undeniably mark important events. Especially in the first novel of ASOIAF, certain issues make possible connections between these events and the Perceval scene appear more plausible. Hence, perhaps the scene of Perceval looking at the three blood drops partly inspired George R.R. Martin, as far as the beginning of ASOIAF is concerned.
Among these aspects are the references to the heavy summer snow, the violent struggle between the animals and, of course, the blood on the snow as well as the colours red and white, even though the summer snow does not amount to a miraculous incident in this area of the represented world, the direwolf is dead and the explicitly mentioned blood is the result of the beheadings of men. Instead of truly “miraculous” weather conditions as in (Wolfram’s version of) the Perceval scene, strange incidents take place.
With respect to the “reality” and rules of this quasi-medieval fantasy world, transgressions of norms occur at the beginning of ASOIAF and GoT on differet levels. Apart from the occurrence of the Others / White Walkers, the onset of the fantastic, and the deserter who breaks the “law”, such a deviation from the norm is the presence of the big female direwolf and her pups on the southern side of the Wall.
Strangely enough, as Jon accurately observes, the number and sexes of the five direwolf pups correspond to the number and sexes of the “legitimate” Stark children (i.e. Robb, Sansa, Arya, Bran and Rickon). Therefore, the five Stark children, in Jon’s words, are really “meant to have these pups” (GT, 19). Fittingly, the grey direwolves later resemble the grey one on the sigil of House Stark in contrast to the sixth pup, Ghost, whose fur is white and whose eyes are red.
This pup stands out from the rest of the grey looking litter. By differing from the other five pups, Ghost – with his white fur and red eyes – is a good match for Jon Snow, the alleged bastard. His direwolf, in a way, mirrors Jon’s situation or position within the Stark family. He somehow belongs to the Starks without being (treated as) a full family member.
Ghost’s distinctive physical characteristics – his white fur and his red eyes – are occasionally emphasized in the course of ASOIAF, when Jon is the POV character: “…Ghost hunched with white fur bristling. He made no sound, but his dark red eyes spoke blood (A Storm of Swords 1: Steel and Snow (SoS), 219).” In particular, the red eyes may imply the concept of vision.
As the final sentence indicates, part II will deal with the idea of vision in connection to the colours red and white.
Although we know little about Saint George, he arguably served as a soldier and was martyred on this day (i.e. 23 April) in 303 during a persecution of Christians under the Roman Emperor Diocletian because he presumably refused to recant his faith. In legends and in iconography he is usually depicted as a dragon slayer.
St George has been the patron saint of England since the 14th century. King Edward III founded the prestigious Order of the Garter in 1348, choosing St George as its patron. For this reason, the cult of St George became immensely popular.
Cannon, John. Ed. Dictionary of British History. Rev. ed. Oxford: OUP, 2009.
A short entry about the nickname of the Dominicans – “domini canes” (Eng. “hounds of the Lord”)
In the medieval Dominican church Santa Maria Novella in Florence visitors find impressive frescoes. One of them is called (in English) Allegory of the Active and Triumphant Church and of the Dominican order. It was created by the 14th-century Italian painter Andrea di Bonaiuto da Firenze or Andrea da Firenze. You can see it in the Spanish Chapel (or, actually, Cappellone degli Spagnoli).
A part of this fresco apparently illustrates, among other people, three Dominican saints – St Peter of Verona, the founder of this Catholic order St Dominic and the famous Doctor of the Church St Thomas Aquinas – and black and white spotted hounds. St Thomas seems to debate and teach non-Christians as well as heretics, while St Dominic preaches to a group of people.
St Peter of Verona appears to order black and white spotted dogs or hounds to fight off wolves. The hounds represent the Dominicans, alluding to their nickname.
Dominicans wear white habits and black cloaks. Thus, they are / were referred to as Blackfriars in England. Because the Dominicans zealously preached, adhered to doctrinal law and acted against heretics, they received the nickname “domini canes” or, in English, “hounds of the Lord or God”. It was a Latin pun on Dominicans (domini means, in English, of the Lord and canes means dogs or hounds).
Several times Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has referred to Logos and the relationship between faith and reason. His – nowadays neglected – contributions enable us to get a better understanding of these issues.
For quite some time a lot of people have been talking about Logos or logos. Certainly, this is an important issue because it significantly helps in shedding light on the relationship between faith and reason.
However, in my view, Pope Emeritus Benedict’s contributions in this regard have unfortunately been neglected. In general, the relationship between faith and reason as well as the discussion of Logos take centre stage in several of his published writings and speeches. His famous Regensburg lecture, for instance, revolved around these issues, although the media laid the focus on his citation of a statement by the Byzantine emperor Manuel II about Muhammad at the end of the 14th century.
“Modifying the first verse of the Book of Genesis, the first verse of the whole Bible, John began the prologue of his Gospel with the words: “In the beginning was the λόγος”. This is the very word used by the emperor: God acts, σὺν λόγω, with logos. Logos means both reason and word – a reason which is creative and capable of self-communication, precisely as reason. John thus spoke the final word on the biblical concept of God, and in this word all the often toilsome and tortuous threads of biblical faith find their culmination and synthesis. In the beginning was the logos, and the logos is God, says the Evangelist.”
Later the meaning of John’s words (1:1,14) for the Christian faith is again pointed out by Benedict XVI in the third and final volume of his series about the life and teachings of Jesus Christ (Eng. Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives (2012)).
According to the Pope Emeritus, Jesus’ human existence or his flesh is, roughly speaking, “the dwelling-place of the Word, the eternal divine [Logos], in this world” (German version, 22). Christ’s origin also lies within God. Correspondingly, his origin is, so to speak, the beginning itself: “He comes from God. He is God. This “beginning” that has come to us opens up – as a beginning – a new manner of human existence (ibid.).”
Source (Alongside the Regensburg Lecture)
Ratzinger, Joseph (Benedict XVI). Jesus von Nazareth: Prolog – Die Kindheitsgeschichten. German paperback ed. Freiburg (et al.): Herder, 2014.
Many critics have unjustifiably criticized Mel Gibson’s film The Passion of the Christ which actually presents Jesus Christ’s supernatural love in the face of injustice and hatred.
Mel Gibson’s film The Passion of the Christhas stirred up emotions, controversy and extreme reactions. It was released in 2004. Since then critics have accused the film of encouraging anti-semitism and containing excessive violence and sadism. But their accusations turn out to be completely wrong.
Basically, the biblical drama – as its title explicitly indicates – covers the last hours of Jesus Christ’s life. Although there is no denying the fact that The Passion of the Christ presents violent and bloody scenes, many critics have not really focused on the film’s artistic content and its theological meaning. Judging from their criticisms, we can regard itas a – perhaps willingly – misunderstood film.
Prof. Dr. Martin Rhonheimer, a Catholic priest, brilliantly refutes the main charges against Gibson’s film in an article, reminding us of its central message: “The film’s central message is not the brutality of scourging and crucifixion but the transformation of these horrible sufferings into an offering of love to Jesus’ heavenly Father.” Rhonheimer’s article serves as the main source for the following section about the theological meaning of blood and the filmic representation of Christ.
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins – The Significance of Blood and Christ’s Supernatural Love vs Satan’s Superhuman Hatred
Several scenes point to the significance of blood. As far as the Bible is concerned, blood is one of the symbols of life.
When The Passion of the Christ shows the crucifixion, flashback scenes of the Last Supper are presented in between to make the audience aware that Christ’s blood is poured out for salvation. This corresponds to the lines in Matthew 26:28, which Jesus says in one scene: “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (King James Version; note: Jesus does not use the words of this version in the film.).
Notably, towards the end of the film Jesus does not bleed to death, while hanging on the cross. Instead, he dies consciously and freely after stating the following words: “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.” Accordingly, the God-man, Jesus, accepts his heavenly Father’s will. Moreover, he gives the impression of having the sovereignty over what happens to him.
Throughout The Passion of the Christ Jesus reacts to human injustice and hatred with supernatural love. In contrast to Christ, who endures this injustice without complaint, various humans mock and torture him without mercy. However, as can be inferred from some scenes, Satan, for instance, brings the bloodthirsty Roman torturers under his control. Thus, Jesus actually fights against Satan’s superhuman hatred of God.
That means, neither the Romans nor the Jews are demonized because the Devil is portrayed as the epitome of absolute evil. At the end of Gibson’s film, by accepting his Father’s will, Jesus defeats Satan and achieves victory.
Rhonheimer, Martin. “Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ”: A Plea for Fairness.” Logos: A Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture 8.1 (2005): 13-27.
The Passion of the Christ. Dir. Mel Gibson. Perf. Jim Caviezel, Maia Morgenstern, and Monica Bellucci. 2004. DVD. Capelight pictures, 2014.