#1
Martin Andersen		 October 5th, 2014 08:23 PM
birth-giving Mary?
 
While the mountain Nestorian at one time are abiding to strict mosaic law, not daring to depict Jesus as noting but a composite symbol, they have no problem depicting a birth-giving naked Mary? and not one of her - but four?



This whole thing must be a strange joke?

best Martin

#2
Filiberto Boncompagni		 October 6th, 2014 08:21 AM
Hi Martin,

Actually they are eight, if you consider the missing half of the sumak.

There are even more in the modern sumak, the one conveniently omitted by Horst in his salon:



But here the birth-giving Mary wears blue trousers. Jeans, perhaps?
More in accordance with modern fashion but a little uncomfortable for giving birth.

Regards,

Filiberto

#3
Filiberto Boncompagni2		 October 7th, 2014 12:35 PM
Hi Martin,

Now that I think about it, as far as I remember I NEVER saw or heard of any representation of a “birth-giving Mary” in the tradition of Christian art.
I doubt there such a thing.

Those are men with pending genitalia, as it was presumed the first time Horst posted that image in 2006, in the “nude figures on rugs” thread.

Regards,

#4
Filiberto Boncompagni2		 October 8th, 2014 11:21 AM
Hi Martin,

Perhaps I should be more precise in my wording: I am not aware of ANY birth-giving Mary's images in the whole of Christian Iconography: all the images of the Nativity I know represent scenes AFTER the birth has taken place. Never during the labor.
But I am open to evidence - excluded the one above, of course. We have only Horst's word - as evidence - for that.
Regards,

#5
Martin Andersen		 October 8th, 2014 12:46 PM
Hi Filiberto

There might be some samples in post-1960’s psychedelic underground comic counter culture (and perhaps a few art brut pieces), but as a part of Christian tradition? Well I have never heard of it, but I would of course also be very curious to see them if they exist

best Martin