WHAT IS THE KEY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ROMAN-GRECO ALLEGORY AND HEBRAIC-CHRISTIAN ALLEGORY? Below in an interesting quote which details the distinction between Hebraic-Christian allegory and Roman-Greco allegory. It really comes into play when we interpret the Old Testament. The Greeks tried to fill their stories with an articulated narrative scene, a context full enough for the listener (and, later, the reader) to ignore secondary levels of significance with primary symbols. In contrast, the Hebraic-Christian writers generally emptied the narrative foreground, leaving the reader to fill the scenic vacuum with a deepening, thickening allegorical interpretation. Thus, the Hebrew allegorical-text remains open to subsequent reader interpretation (midrash), whereas the Greek text remains closed and bound to follow only the original human authors allegorical intent. The Hebrew texts actually invite our ongoing participation to fill in the allegorical hues to its narrative canvass. In terms of allegory, the Greco-Roman and Hebraic-Christian cultures both have a common starting point: a creation myth. The Old Testament’s book of Genesis roughly parallels the story of the creation as told by the Greek poet Hesiod in his Theogony (and the later Roman version of the same event given in Ovid’s Metamorphoses). The two traditions thus start with an adequate source of cosmic imagery, and both envisage a universe full of mysterious signs and symbolic strata. But thereafter the two cultures diverge. This is most apparent in the way that the style of the body of poetry attributed to Homer—the ancient Greek “Bible”—differs from the Old Testament narrative. The Greek poet presented his heroes against an articulated narrative scene, a context full enough for the listener (and, later, the reader) to ignore secondary levels of significance. By contrast, the Jewish authors of the Old Testament generally emptied the narrative foreground, leaving the reader to fill the scenic vacuum with a deepening, thickening allegorical interpretation. OLD TESTAMENT The Old Testament, including its prophetic books, has a core of historical record focusing on the trials of the tribes of Israel. In their own view an elect nation, the Israelites believe their history spells out a providential design. The Prophets understand the earliest texts, Genesis and Exodus, in terms of this providential scheme. Hebraic texts are interpreted as typological: that is, THEY VIEW SERIOUS MYTH AS A THEORETICAL HISTORY in which all events are types—portents, foreshadowing the destiny of the chosen people. Christian exegesis (the critical interpretation of Scripture) inherits the same approach. Typological allegory looks for hidden meaning in the lives of actual men who, as types or figures of later historical persons, serve a prophetic function by prefiguring those later persons. Adam, for example (regarded as a historical person), is thought to prefigure Christ in his human aspect, Joshua to prefigure the victorious militant Christ. This critical approach to Scripture is helped by the fact of monotheism, which makes it easier to detect the workings of a divine plan. The splendours of nature hymned in the Psalms provide a gloss upon the “glory of God.” The Law (the Torah) structures the social aspect of sacred history and, as reformulated by Christ, provides the chief link between Old and New Testaments. Christ appeals to the authority of “the Law and the Prophets” but assumes the ultimate prophetic role himself, creating the New Law and the New Covenant—or Testament—with the same one God of old. --ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA ENTRY ON FABLE, PARABLE AND ALLEGORY.
Posted on: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 16:26:42 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015