Abraham History Has Always Represented

¶ … Abraham

History has always represented a deep source of inspiration especially for visual artists. In the case of actual events, there are two approaches that the artist can follow in his artistic endeavor; he can either recreate the events according to historical facts, or focus on their symbolism and thus present a more or less accurate factual description. Regardless of the approach, an artistic creation is tributary to the perspective of the artist. This is how one can explain certain works of art which are based on a real event or set of events, but does not aim at reproducing reality, but at offering oftentimes a deeper meaning which is conveyed through symbolism. In the case of Parting of Lot and Abraham, a mosaic created in the fifth century, the artist focuses on the symbolism of the biblical event; hence every detail becomes significant in the creational process. The mosaic is presently located in Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome. Thesis: The Parting of Lot and Abraham does not only present an important event in history, but also explores the symbolism of the division between good and evil. Also, as far as the history of religions, the event depicted by the mosaic represents a significant division of beliefs. This paper strives to elaborate on a set of technical and symbolical details which support this thesis. In order to understand the significance of the parting of Abraham and Lot, it is highly important to establish a few Biblical facts, and to get a deeper understanding of the figures involved in this event. Abraham is a figure in the Torah, Bible and the Qur'an, and is considered the forefather of the Israelite people. God promised Abraham that his children will found a nation which will be blessed (Genesis 12:3). In Christian tradition this prophecy is interpreted as a direct reference to Jesus Christ. Lot was Abraham's nephew, the son of the Aran, Abraham's brother. God commanded Abraham to travel to the Land of Canaan, and the latter obeyed. Abraham made the voyage with his nephew, Lot (Genesis 12:1-5). The two embark on a voyage to Egypt. Abraham, with his wife Sarah, his nephew Lot, and their peoples departed from Ur of the Chaldees and came unto the Land of Canaan. Here, Abraham decided to separate from his nephew because of strife between his herdsmen and Lot's (Genesis 13:6-7). Lot chose the fertile and irrigated land lying east of the Jordan River near the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 13:10-12) whereas Abraham took his herds down to Hebron where he would build an altar to Yahweh.

On the parting of Lot and Abraham, Saint Augustine wrote, "Consequently these are the words of Abraham to Lot, when taking precaution against this evil, 'Let there be no strife between me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen; for we be brethren. Behold, is not the whole land before thee? Separate thyself from me: if thou wilt go to the left hand, I will go to the right; or if thou wilt go to the right hand, I will go to the left.'" (Saint Augustine: 543). To Saint Augustine, this was the first instance in human history when the partition of earthly things was done between two men according to their "greatness," in the sense that Abraham allowed Lot to express his choice as to the direction he wants to go: "From this, perhaps, has arisen a pacific custom among men, that when there is any partition of earthly things, the greater should make the division, the less the choice." (Ibid)

The mosaic in question is a great example of Early Christian Art. The Parting of Lot and Abraham was constructed as a symbolic depiction of the separation of the Church from the Synagogue. This feature is mirrored both by its technique and its message. In this sense, the technique was based on the mixture of marble and glass tessera. Glass tessera is a kind of cubic tile used in mosaics that were initially used in Antiquity. However during the first centuries AD, tesserae were made from colored or clear glass such as in the case of the Parting of Lot and Abraham where the glass tesserae that were employed have an important function because they create shading from light to dark nuances. As far as composition, the Parting of Lot and Abraham is a mosaic with dominant foreground figures which enhances the message of the artist as the core of the Biblical story is displayed in a very direct and powerful way through the two characters, Lot and Abraham, who are placed in the foreground. One of the most distinctive features as far as its symbolic connotation is the fact that the two characters are placed in the center of the mosaic with a considerable gap between them which emphasizes the irreversible decision to part. Being a mural, the mosaic expands high up on the wall of the basilica with a width of about 5ft, running down the nave aisle at a very high level. Abraham is depicted on our left moving towards Canaan. On our right we can see Lot moving the opposite way, i.e. towards Sodom with his two daughters. There is a very theatrical feeling about the mosaic. In this sense, the figures are somewhat fixed as the gesture and mimics are stage like, and the action appears simplified. This technique is employed in order to draw the attention to the significance behind the facts and figures presented by the mosaic.

The mass behind the two figures which are placed in foreground is shown using dark contrasting colors and tones which have faded considerably over time. In fact, the mass of heads in the background is a common Roman art device suggesting that the division is not only between Lot and Abraham, but between two peoples, and ultimately, two moral categories, i.e. good and evil. The shading also gives a three dimensional effect to the mosaic, this being a highly characteristic quality of Roman art. Nonetheless, the illusion of spatial depth is reduced by the strong outline of the figures. The cities are at best suggested, as Roman art in general does not focus on a replication of true landscapes, but on sketches which replace the illusion of reality and "trueness." Moreover, the size of human and animal figures is not true to real proportions because the mosaic is mostly symbolical, not mimetic.