Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism

by Thomas Inman

First published in 1869, this remarkable early work of comparative mythology intended for the general public takes great pains to remind the reader that there is no danger of suddenly finding oneself transformed into a Buddhist or a "Mahometan" merely by allowing one's eyes to alight upon symbols of a non-Protestant faith. It also feels the need to introduce the reader to the idea of religious "arcana," that some concepts were once deemed fit only for select and secret ears, and then proceeds to cheerfully reveal some of those secrets, such as the phallicism of church steeples and spires. With the assistance of numerous charming illustrations, Inman introduces his 19th-century readers to the metaphorical links between Christianity and the civilizations of the ancient world-India, Babylonia, Assyria, Egypt, and others-from shared abstract figures of stars and crosses to nature symbology (fish, trees) to particular arrangements of the human figures in religious portraits that cross cultures. But it is the author's enchanting handholding that makes this work so appealing today: it speaks to a new enthusiasm among the public for an approach to religion-and religion as mythology-that is rational, logical, and beginning to approach the modern. British doctor and mythologist (1820-1876) is also the author of Ancient Faiths Embodied in Ancient Names as well as several books on hygiene.

212 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1869

Reviews

[The Overflowing Inkwell · Rating 2 out of 5]

Alternatively titled "How to See Dicks in Everything", I was intrigued by the author's insistence that all the typical symbols of Goddesses - in Europe, at any rate - trinity, eggs, snakes, etc., were all symbols of the male god. That the male god was represented in trinity, while his female consort was singular, as befitting each other's genitals, thus forming a 'mystic four.' I would have loved to see his take then, on the Europeans with their Triple Goddesses, the symbolism of eggs as (obviously) connected to female reproductive power, and so on. I suppose the symbolism Inman discusses could be restricted to the Middle East and the Mediterranean, as that is as far as his definition of 'Pagan' here stretches; and I would love to see more modern research on this topic to see how much of this is still held by the historical and archaeological communities that deal in them. I shall have to look it up!

Also had a laugh at this brilliant section near the beginning:

...we cannot doubt that the symbols, etc., of Paganism have a meaning, and that it is as lawful to scrutinise the mysteries which they enfold as it is to speculate upon the Urim and Thummim of the Jews. Yet, even this freedom has, by some, been denied; for there are a few amongst us who adhere rigidly to the precept addressed to the followers of Moses, viz., "Take heed that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods?" (Deut. xii. 30.) The intention of the prohibition thus enunciated is well marked in the following words, which indicate that the writer believed that the adoption of heathen gods would follow inquiry respecting them. It is not now-a-days feared that we may become Mahometans if we read the Koran, or Buddhists if we study the Dhammapada; but there are priests who fear that an inquiry into ecclesiastical matters may make their followers Papists, Protestants, Wesleyans, Baptists, Unitarians, or some other religion which the Presbytery object to. The dislike of inquiry ever attends those who profess a religion which is believed or known to be weak.

[Beryl · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very informative, but the layout made it awkward to read.