History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.
I was reading Cranky Professor last night and learned from him that images of the Prophet Mohammad are not prohibited in all branches of Islam. For evidence, he links to portrayals of the prophet by a number of Muslim artists. Believing that they are universally prohibited, he says, is a"zombie error" than will. not. die. Michael has much to teach me because he is a specialist in early Islamic art. I had thought that a general bias against representational art predisposed it to be largely geometric, so my ignorance was whole battalions of zombies. The post leads to an interesting discussion between Michael and John Burgess, who blogs at Crossroads Arabia.
The post and the discussion raised two other interesting issues: 1) if the prophet was commonly depicted as veiled, how is it that a Catholic city like St. Louis ends up having a"Veiled Prophet Celebration"? and 2) what is the English derivation of the word"mirage"? Tom Spencer, who used to blog at HNN, is the reigning expert on the Veiled Prophet celebration in St. Louis. He explains that the celebration was first organized by St. Louis businessmen in imitation of New Orleans' Mardi Gras festivities after the great strike of 1877, but I don't know that he explains why it is named after a Muslim tradition. The other matter, about the derivation of the English word"mirage" simply occurred to me as I read Michael's post. The OED finds it occurring in English no earlier than 1803 and that it came from the French,"mirage," which referred to illusionary visions commonly seen by French soldiers as they marched across Egyptian deserts. I cannot help but think that the phenomenon was given that name by the contemptuous Napoleonic soldiers' transliteration of the Arabic"Mi'raj," which is the word for the prophet's bodily ascension into heaven.
As the post suggests, I had looked it up before posting. You still have not cited French usage prior to Napolean's invasion of Egypt.
David Nicholas Harley -
11/27/2005
As someone who once worked as a historical lexicographer for the OED, I am the last person to claim that it is infallible. However, if you wish to rest on its authority, it is as well to know what it says.
"French mirage (1753 in sense 1, 1829 in sense 2, 1956 in sense 4) < mirer to be reflected (see MIRE v.2) + -age"
David Nicholas Harley -
11/27/2005
As someone who once worked as a historical lexicographer for the OED, I am the last person to claim that it is infallible. However, if you wish to rest on its authority, it is as well to know what it says.
"French mirage (1753 in sense 1, 1829 in sense 2, 1956 in sense 4) < mirer to be reflected (see MIRE v.2) + -age"
John H. Lederer -
11/26/2005
From http://www.vpparade.org/vphistory.htm
:
"In 1817, Thomas Moore the Irish poet created the poem, Lalla Rookh: An Oriental Romance. The setting for his writing was Khorassan, a province of ancient Persia and his main character was an eighth-century “war mongering trickster”. Little did Moore know that his Veiled Prophet of Khorassan would become the foundation for a St. Louis tradition that would last for more than 127 years."
There is more on the origins at the URL
Ralph E. Luker -
11/24/2005
Thanks for the googling instructions, Mr. Oehlenschlaeger, but the real trick is to read what you find when you "google." When you do that, you'll find that the "veiled prophet" is a Muslim tradition, even if it doesn't refer to Mohammed. So, my comment about "why it is named after a Muslim tradition" is right on target. Also, while you're giving googling lessons, you might also want to go over and instruct the Cranky Professor. But don't forget the reading!
Jakob ?hlenschl?ger -
11/24/2005
The obvious reason that he doesn't explain "why it is named after a Muslim tradition" would be that it doesn't seem to be the case. The good old google-search leads to http://www.vpparade.org/history.htm pretty fast, where a more likely reason for the name is given: That it's named after The Veiled Prophet of Khorassan and not Mohammed.
Some times people stop their search after google, but it's just as bad to stop before using google.
Ralph E. Luker -
11/23/2005
Mr. Harley, Your argument is with the OED -- not with me -- and when you are arguing with the OED, even on matters of French derivation, I should think you'd want to cite evidence and examples of earlier French usage. I'm willing to be taught, but without evidence to the contrary I'm inclined to take the OED's word for it.
David Nicholas Harley -
11/23/2005
-------------The OED finds it occurring in English no earlier than 1803 and that it came from the French, "mirage," which referred to illusionary visions commonly seen by French soldiers as they marched across Egyptian deserts. I cannot help but think that the phenomenon was given that name by the contemptuous Napoleonic soldiers' transliteration of the Arabic "Mi'raj".........
An amusing but totally cod etymology, surely. The word is recorded far earlier in French and is regularly derived from the verb "mirer". It is thus closely connected with "mirror" and, more remotely, with "miracle" and "admiration".
Ralph E. Luker -
11/22/2005
Ben, You are asking me if I am sure of something that I didn't say. The answer would be "No." That's why I didn't say it. I'd simply argue that iconoclasm is deeply rooted in all three western religions and is one logical extension of their monotheistic claims.
On the other hand, yes, iconoclasm occurs in a range of manifestations. Smashing metaphorical idols is not exactly the same as destroying monuments. But you also have to recognize that our objections to the smashing of monuments is a secularized and rather detached instinct. There's less fervor (less belief?)in a believer who laments the destruction of a different believer's great work of art.
Ben W. Brumfield -
11/22/2005
Ralph, are you sure that there were no instances of iconoclasm in the western world outside the Abrahamic tradition? I seem to remember something about the defacement of Hermes in Athens, not to mention a great deal of Yezhov-airbrushing among various rulers of the ancient near east.
I'm not sure if those examples are in the same spirit as blowing up the Bamiyan Buddhas or smashing up the Ely Ladychapel, though.
Ralph E. Luker -
11/21/2005
Iconoclasm as a generalized stance has venerable roots in all three of the major western religions and could be said to be one of their legacies to much of modern secular thought, as well.
Brian Ulrich -
11/21/2005
A valid point, especially with regard to Islam where there is no normative orthodoxy. I think part of my reaction comes from the suspicion that many people reading CP's post will already have in their heads the attitude that the Islamic attitude toward images is somehow wrong, and that therefore highlighting the fact some Muslims don't follow that particular tenet is saying that "See, not all Muslims are crazy Puritans," and implicitly that those who do, are.
Jonathan Dresner -
11/21/2005
I've had to have that conversation in my world history classes on ocassion. It's a useful reminder. The problem -- as I see it -- is that it's easy to go too far with that sort of separation, and postulate some sort of "pure, true" faith entirely separate from the practices of the faithful. The same problem comes up with regard to Judaism very frequently, as the multiple traditions of the faith run into the diverse non-traditional/neo-traditional syncretism of modern life, and the words "Judaism teaches" and "Jews believe" become land mines.
Brian Ulrich -
11/21/2005
Well, you could distinguish more between "Islam" and "Muslims," with the latter not always strictly following the former.
