text:
Talk:Depiction of Jesus

Alexamenos graffito
The edit to this section which I performed was removed entirely although the information is contained in other references already cited, and also contains inaccurate information. Most scholars date it to the 1st century, not the 3rd. Some propose dates as late as the 3rd, but that is not the predominant view rather the minority view. Additionally, the image is intended to represent Alexamenos in his worship of the crucified figure which has an upsilon over its shoulder, generally interpreted as indicating that the crucified figure was a Jew. These facts are self-evident and well referenced. It is important to assume good intentions when others edit, but I do wonder about the motive considering the inaccurate information that was reverted. There have been many from a certain religious denomination who seek to discredit the image because if it is from the first century it would manifest that Jesus was crucified on a cross and not an upright pole. This frightens some people. I'd appreciate a clarification from the individual who changed my edits because he doesn't accept direct contact through Wikipedia. Bbltype (talk) 18:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Alexamenos graffito is the initial place for this. Johnbod (talk) 20:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Later it became a staff
In the earliest Christian art Jesus wields a wand. In the 4th century it is portrayed as a staff. Kazuba (talk) 06:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:The Head of Christ by Warner Sallman 1941.jpg
The image Image:The Head of Christ by Warner Sallman 1941.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --09:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Christ Enthroned (Teaching)
I couldn't find an image here of this sculpture, which is supposed to be one of the oldest depctions of Christ. Is it not authentic, are there copyright issues or what is the reason? I mean the one from the Museo delle Terme: Fulcher (talk) 13:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * We certainly can't cover every work, especially here. That one comes under traditio legis really, not that this work is mentioned there either. Johnbod (talk) 15:25, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Good shepherd m2.jpg

I looked up that museum and it also has this Good Shephered image from the 4th century. I don't know if it fits but if you guys want to include it, go head. History2007 (talk) 15:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In fact the GS was probably not intended as a portrait of Christ, more a symbol of him. We have an image already. Johnbod (talk) 17:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point. And you may want to add that very text to the article because it clarified it for me, and it may do so for others too. History2007 (talk) 20:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's in there, & in the pic caption (just changed). Johnbod (talk) 21:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

New image
Johnbod, the new image you added is very interesting, as is the detail that image had on Commons. Question: Is there anywhere a semi-definitive agreement as to what is the "earliest" realistic surviving image, 3rd-4th century? The Good shepherd type images are not realistic images, while this detail is amazingly similar to many of the later icons. Any refs on that? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 17:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'm trying to work this out, but there doesn't seem to be much surviving before 300, & then its mostly sarcophagii. Then there were different types co-existing, including the bearded one that later came to dominate, which was indeed there from very early on. Johnbod (talk) 18:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

 * In any case, you just opened a new, and interesting avenue. This detail seems to have a beard and the hand also seems to show, if one looks carefully enough. When I have time, I will build a page for the location: which does not have an English Wiki-entry. Later this year I may be passing by there, and will see if I can somehow find or get more clear image. Cheers History2007 (talk)

 * By the way John, if you want to "name this image" and build a page for it once you have done some more research, you will just get it entered into the art history world as a new entry. And that will be almost a first case where Wikipedia starts an entry. Of course, you would need a nice way around the Wiki-rules but there are always ways. History2007 (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * added more now - the Zanker book is all online & has good detail, though his line is somewhat distinctive. Johnbod (talk) 03:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

 * These last changes since the new image look pretty good now. I saw that you added a link to the detail at the end, but my guess is that most people will not notice it. If you could somehow work in teh detailed image in the main page, that would make it even better. History2007 (talk) 07:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe - the trouble is they are both so dark... Johnbod (talk) 13:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

 * As I said, I will try to see if I can get a lighter one later this year. Yet, I was impressed by it as is, and I think others may be impressed too. We will see I guess. History2007 (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be good - I made the link more prominent anyway. I tried the detail as the main pic, but you really have to peer at it. Johnbod (talk) 16:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * We can look at it this way: that image has been there for many centuries now, so let us wait a few months to see if I can find a lighter one. I am not sure, but I will try it, for it is so interesting. Cheers History2007 (talk) 17:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

86.80.43.76 (talk) 16:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC) The earliest image of christ can also be 'Sarcophagus of the 'Two brothers', c. AD 330-350. Museo Pio Cristiano, Vatican' Sourch: A world history of art by Honour and flaming, revised seventh edition, P 297 fig 7.17. ithis one i could find on the internet http://personal.stthomas.edu/plgavrilyuk/PLGAVRILYUK/Baptism/Peter%20preaches1.jpg

Hinton St Mary mosaic, England
Is this worth a mention? No finds from the site later than 270AD, and the mosaic has been tentatively dated to 4th century. Stronach (talk) 11:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Tertullian on Jesus' appearance
"Tertullian (d.220) believed, following Isaiah:53:2, that Christ's appearance was unremarkable"

Tertullian was a very early Christian, less than two centuries from Christ; and he himself certainly doesn't refer to the Isaiah passage -- why the complete lack of mention of the possibility that this represents a genuine tradition from those who knew Jesus personally? 165.91.166.90 (talk) 03:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, he does mention Isaiah 53:2, but several chapters later (ch 17 of Against Marcion); the initial mentions appear in ch 9 ("“His body did not reach even to human beauty to say nothing of heavenly glory.”) and perhaps obliquely in ch 7 (though this may simply refer to the mortality of His human body).

Also, the Celsus bit suggests that there might be historical basis for it. (It certainly seems more likely that Christians would portray a historically physically unattractive Jesus as an idealized figure, than that Christians would portray a historically handsome Jesus as physically unattractive.)

The current article suggests that Tertullian believed that Jesus was physically unattractive because of an interpretation of Isaiah 53:2; that is not the impression Against Marcion gives.165.91.166.218 (talk) 18:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Timescale tilt
As I look at the table of contents, this article looks tilted towards early depictions. But there are major other themes, there is little text about the Renaissance, etc. And various themes such as depictions during Crucifixion, Ministry etc. have not been addressed. Are the Transfiguration style depictions not worth mentioning? Comments? History2007 (talk) 17:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Uncle
My did keep say this is Michel Angelo's uncle.Is this true?184.44.129.253 (talk) 19:34, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there 184.44.129.253. The Divine Mercy image that you posted (and I unfortunately have since had to remove as a copyright violation) is unlikely to be depicting Michaelangelo's uncle as Jesus Christ. The reason is that the artist who painted the image (Adolf Hyla) did so in 1943, nearly 400 years after Michaelangelo died, so I don't believe that there was much way for him to know what Michaelangelo's uncle would have looked like. If you can find any reliable sources that state that Hyla did in fact use Michaelangelo's uncle as the basis for the depiction of Jesus, then go ahead and add them - they'd certainly be quite interesting to read. Merry Christmas! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 01:41, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move. Cúchullain t/ c 17:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Depiction of Jesus → Depictions of Jesus – Yesterday, I requested a move of Depictions of Muhammad when I noticed the inconsistency of its title and this article's. Per WP:PLURAL, that seemed right. But discussion there indicated that just didn't feel right. Since that's not much of a policy argument, I'll say this is by the Naturalness and Consistency characteristics of WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. There are two other articles that begin with "Depiction of." One is an unreferenced essay I've nominated for deletion. I almost included the other one on this request, but since they're not particularly similar topically, I'll hold off on that one to see what happens here. By comparison, four articles begin with "Depictions of," including three that deal with religious founders. I really just want consistency here, and comments at the Muhammad request convinced me this is the right way to achieve it. --BDD (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak support. This article seems to have been titled according to WP:PLURAL (wasn't it called "Images of Jesus" at one point?) and contorts the lead sentence into conformance by stating The depiction of Jesus in art took several centuries to reach a conventional standardized form... when it would seem more natural and correct to state instead Depictions of Jesus in art took several centuries to reach a conventional standardized form.... And while the lead talks about "depiction" as a singular practice, the entire body of the article refers to specific depictions as part of a group, which would naturally imply a plural title. As I stated in my comment at Talk:Depictions of Muhammad, WP:COMMONSENSE suggests that we shouldn't slavishly apply the WP:PLURAL guideline just because doesn't include an exhaustive list of exceptions. The singular-form title here seems force-fit to the guideline. Because I don't feel particularly strongly about my arguments here, I designate my support for this renaming as "weak". ~Amatulić (talk) 17:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No actually it wouldn't "seem more natural and correct to state instead Depictions of Jesus in art took several centuries to reach a conventional standardized form...." (my sentence I think). Johnbod (talk) 01:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Support - Is part of a group of "something", also more natural way of speaking. The article is not about specific depictions, but about the depictions as a whole.--ZooFamily (talk) 20:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yees, so .... isn't it better to use the singular to cover the concept? Johnbod (talk) 01:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Oppose, just to be contrary. Do we really have nothing better to do? Jesus and Muhammad are not exactly comparable in this respect. Johnbod (talk) 01:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Very POV opinion. BTW: Support this move as it encompasses a concept, or a group of things, not a single unit. --Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎  00:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * ?? But that is exactly why we should use the singular, just as the French do in Représentation de Jésus-Christ dans l'art chrétien]. Your arguments make no sense at all. Johnbod (talk) 01:38, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A> What happens on the French Wikipedia does not determine what happens here, French has it's own rules for grammar, capitalization, guidelines etc. It's a separate project. B> Saying that "Jesus and Muhammed are not exactly comparable" is extremely Point of View, depending on what you are talking about, your personal perspectives, and religious beliefs. A depiction is a single instance, the scope of this article, the subject of this article, is the depictions, all of them, as a group, not one individual instance, or any individual instance. And by the way The French do not use the singular in the same way, as their article title is "(Artistic) Representation of Jesus Christ in Christian art" - not the singular noun representation here, but the concept of representation - or portrayal - which designates not a single art piece, but the whole group of christian art. Do we need to make our English title lengthy to conform to the French one? No, English wikipedia says use the simplest title possible that accurately represents the subject.--Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎  04:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

 * UnQuébécois—The question is which term is preferable. Is the article more addressing itself to "depictions" of Jesus or "depiction" of Jesus? Were we concerning ourselves with "depictions" of Jesus we would be including those that transpire in the present. We would also be including obscure "depictions" that have occurred over time. This article contains the conclusions of scholarly research—which can be revised over time. But this article is addressing itself to the path that "depiction" took, to arrive at widespread acceptance of what Jesus "looked like". The article concerns itself with the solidification in art of an iconography indicating that a figure in a painting is that of Jesus. Outlying images are not necessarily included or considered. Such "depictions" are not supportive of some of the conclusions that scholars reach on this subject. Therefore "depiction" is the more correct term because the underlying question is: by what route was the dominant or almost dominant iconographies arrived at? We are in this article primarily examining "depiction" because we are examining a selective route. Sure there are other "depictions" of Jesus but the implied conclusion in an article such as this is that those other depictions were not strongly adopted in art by the time that particular facial features—long hair and beard for instance—became the norm and were seen widely in art, especially painting. Bus stop (talk) 13:53, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Oppose I don't think the article is about "Depictions of Jesus". It is about "Depiction of Jesus". There is a subtle difference, in that the article tries to make sense of and see patterns in how Jesus is depicted as varying by factors such as time and place and other factors. "Depictions of Jesus" sounds indiscriminate while our article is discriminating. The examination of this subject is selective as addressed by reliable sources and hence our article. I think "Depiction of Jesus" is the more correct title of the two titles under consideration. Bus stop (talk) 02:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Support - Following the nominators arguments & it is about a group concept. --MrBoire (talk) 01:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

 * MrBoire—it is because the reference is to a concept that the term in the title should be "Depiction". The term "depictions" refers to individual images while the term "depiction" refers to the concept of visual representation. Bus stop (talk) 02:51, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Just a note: I've notified both "WikiProject Christianity" and "WikiProject Visual arts" that this discussion is taking place. Bus stop (talk) 03:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Support Per WP:PLURAL, "Articles that actually distinguish between multiple distinct instances of related items" would seem to apply.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 09:43, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't - I suggest you read that bit again. It applies to things like Moons of Jupiter. This is par excellence a generalizing article. Johnbod (talk) 12:33, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand your point. But I don't agree with it. Other articles that are Depiction of are general, but other articles that are Depictions of are of specific things. The article in question necessarily and inherently compares specific depictions. Positing the article as being about depiction of Jesus in some general sense lacks context.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 12:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually it doesn't. It describes developments in the iconography of the millions of images of Jesus, every now or then mentioning or illustrating ones typical of a major type. Johnbod (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Moderate oppose I can myself see how we could have separate articles for each title. One, "Depiction of Jesus," dealing with the "history of the depiction of Jesus in art," and the other "Depictions of Jesus," possibly redirecting to something like "List of significantly variant artistic representations of Jesus." Of the two, though, I tend to think that the former, which would deal with the general topic of the "depiction of Jesus," would probably be the more important of the two. John Carter (talk) 19:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Weak support, per WP:PLURAL. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 22:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Oppose. The article covers the subject "The depiction of Jesus [over time]", and is not a study of individual artworks.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose per SmokeyJoe. I was expecting to support, but having read the article I believe the current title is a more accurate description of the content. Jenks24 (talk) 09:21, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Early church rejection of images of Christ
The page ought to make some balancing mention of early church opposition to the making of images of the Image of God, and their perceived connexion with idolatry. Irenaeus for example, writes, 'They style themselves Gnostics. They also possess images, some of them painted, and others formed from different kinds of material; while they maintain that a likeness of Christ was made by Pilate at that time when Jesus lived among them. They crown these images, and set them up along with the images of the philosophers of the world that is to say, with the images of Pythagoras, and Plato, and Aristotle, and the rest. They have also other modes of honouring these images, after the same manner of the Gentiles.' Contr.Her.I.XXV.6. Philip Schaff comments on this, 'This censure of images as a Gnostic peculiarity, and as a heathenish corruption, should be noted.' (Footnote 300 in loco). Lactantius wrote, 'But if all imitation is not particularly a serious matter, but as it were a sport and jest, then there is no religion in images, but a mimicry of religion.' Inst. Bk.2.XIX. Justin, Tertullian, Athanasius and Augustine inter alia echo vehement sentiments against worshipped images centuries before iconoclasm, which would look hypocritical in the extreme if they too had venerated images of Christ. Then Hosius of Cordoba, Athanasius' companion 'in arms' initiated the Elvira Synod, the 36th canon of which reads: 'Ne picturiae in ecclesia fiant. Placuit picturas in eccclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur et adoratur in parietibus depingatur.'. Gnostics used images of Christ in the second, but how early can the confessionally Nicene churches date their use? Cpsoper (talk) 20:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I see you have gone and done so, but we are not (WP:PRIMARY) supposed to use primary sources, as you have done, and without the evidence pointing the other way, including catacomb images, pointing the other way - the earliest of these are usually dated late 2nd century. Aniconism in Christianity and I think Early Christian art also cover this area. Condemnation of images by Church Fathers is (as above) itself usually evidence of their use, is it not? A balanced modern scholarly account should be followed; there are issues around the Elvira canon & other quotes referred to above, as you may know. At what date does it start to make sense to talk about "confessionally Nicene churches" I wonder? Johnbod (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate the importance of avoiding OR, and the danger primary sources may introduce. I have substituted Philip Schaff's comment rather than just refer to Irenaeus' text. However I note that one living author has recently complained of the considerable inaccuracy insisting on secondary sources can cause, especially when primary sources themselves are as explicit and lucid as subsequent critics. It should be not be difficult to identify churches and groups after 325 AD that embrace with the Nicene Creed, though I grant before it, such a task requires judgement and will remain somewhat subjective. The other pages you've referred to are helpful, though incomplete, and it may also be worth crosslinking to Aniconism in Christianity. If there is a preponderance of evidence that Christians used real depictions, not visual symbols, of Jesus Christ, before the fourth century, however it doesn't seem to be found in either. Irenaeus seems to indicate in the second century it was a purely Gnostic, not to say Carpocratian, practice, and so Schaff understands him. Lactantius wrote extensive condemnation of the use of images as aids in worship, in the 'Origin of Error' (Book II, chapter II, Divine Institutes, ANF), without any reference to their employment by Christians. Cpsoper (talk) 13:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, you may be aware of Calvin's allusion (Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 1, Chapter V. Section 6.) to Augustine's opposition to the use of images, possibly referring to this quote from the exposition of Psalm 115.7, 'This is the chief cause of this insane profanity, that the figure resembling the living person, which induces men to worship it, has more influence in the minds of these miserable persons, than the evident fact that it is not living, so that it ought to be despised by the living.' Cpsoper (talk) 14:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Material from the Jesus page
There are length discussions on the Jesus page and I am parking the depictions material from there here, reducing it there. Some of this is not present on this page and should be added if you guys want. I am not watching this page anymore. History2007 (talk) 08:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Despite the lack of biblical references or historical records, for two millennia a wide range of depictions of Jesus have appeared, often influenced by cultural settings, political circumstances and theological contexts. As in other Christian art, the earliest depictions date to the late 2nd or early 3rd century, and survivors are primarily found in the Catacombs of Rome. In these early depictions, which use popular rather than elite Greco-Roman styles, Jesus is usually shown as a youthful figure without a beard and with curly hair, often with different features from the other men in the scenes, such as his disciples or the Romans.

Although some images exist at the synagogue at Dura-Europos, Judaism forbade images, and there is no record of its influence on the depictions of Jesus. The oldest Christian paintings are from the Roman Catacombs, dated to about 200, and the oldest Christian sculptures are from sarcophagi, dating to the beginning of the 3rd century. Christian depictions of the 3rd and 4th centuries typically focused on New Testament scenes of healings and other miracles. Following the conversion of Constantine in the 4th century, Christian art found many wealthy donors and flourished. In this period Jesus began to have more mature features, and was shown with a beard. A new development at this time was the depiction of Jesus without a narrative context, but just as a figure by himself. By the 5th century depictions of the Passion began to appear, perhaps reflecting a change in the theological focus of the early Church. The 6th century Rabbula Gospels includes some of the earliest surviving images of the crucifixion and resurrection. By the 6th century the bearded depiction of Jesus had become standard in the East, though the West, especially in northern Europe, continued to mix bearded and unbearded depictions for several centuries. The depiction with a longish face, long straight brown hair parted in the middle, and almond shaped eyes shows consistency from the 6th century to the present. Various legends developed which were believed to authenticate the historical accuracy of the standard depiction, such as the image of Edessa and later the Veil of Veronica. Partly to aid recognition of the scenes, narrative depictions of the Life of Christ focused increasingly on the events celebrated in the major feasts of the church calendar, and the events of the Passion, neglecting the miracles and other events of Jesus' public ministry, except for the raising of Lazarus, where the mummy-like wrapped body was shown standing upright, giving an unmistakable visual signature. A cruciform halo was worn only by Jesus (and the other persons of the Trinity), while plain halos distinguished Mary, the Apostles and other saints, helping the viewer to read increasingly populated scenes.

The Byzantine Iconoclasm acted as a barrier to developments in the East, but by the 9th century art was permitted again. The Transfiguration of Jesus was a major theme in the East and every Eastern Orthodox monk who had trained in icon painting had to prove his craft by painting an icon of the Transfiguration. However, while Western depictions aim for proportion, in the Eastern icons the abolition of perspective and alterations in the size and proportion of an image aim to reaches beyond man's earthly dwellings.

The 13th century witnessed a turning point in the portrayal of the powerful Kyrios image of Jesus as a wonder worker in the West, as the Franciscans began to emphasize the humility of Jesus both at his birth and his death via the nativity scene as well as the crucifixion. The Franciscans approached both ends of this spectrum of emotions and as the joys of the Nativity of were added to the agony of crucifixion a whole new range of emotions were ushered in, with wide ranging cultural impact on the image of Jesus for centuries thereafter.

The Renaissance brought forth a number of artists who focused on the depictions of Jesus and after Giotto, Fra Angelico and others systematically developed uncluttered images that focused on the depiction of Jesus with an ideal human beauty. Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper which is considered the first work of High Renaissance art due to its high level of harmony became well known for depicting Jesus surrounded by varying emotions of the individual apostles at the announcement of the betrayal. Meanwhile, the Protestant Reformation, especially in its first decades, violently objected to almost all public religious images as idolaterous, and vast numbers were destroyed.

By the end of the 19th century, new reports of miraculous images of Jesus had appeared and continue to receive significant attention, e.g. Secondo Pia's 1898 photograph of the Shroud of Turin, one of the most controversial artifacts in history, which during its May 2010 exposition it was visited by over 2 million people. Another 20th century depiction of Jesus, namely the Divine Mercy image based on Faustina Kowalska's reported vision has over 100 million followers. The first cinematic portrayal of Jesus was in the 1897 film La Passion du Christ produced in Paris, which lasted 5 minutes. Thereafter cinematic portrayals have continued to show Jesus with a beard in the standard western depiction that resembles traditional images.

 * I have belatedly added most of this, en bloc from "By the 5th century depictions of the Passion began to appear ..." as a "Later periods" section. I haven't looked to see if more can be integrated. Johnbod (talk) 15:48, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Modern depictions of Jesus
Shouldn't this article include modern depictions of Jesus? Like the one in South Park, for example. --Epitectus (talk) 15:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * If we did I doubt it would need to feature that. Apart from the predominant continuation of the traditional depictions there are plenty of one-off modern depictions but they are really too diverse to cover in an article like this. Has South Park had much influence on other depictions? It seems unlikely. Johnbod (talk) 17:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Still, the fact that Jesus is still being depicted is notable, even more so that it is being done in popular culture. Though I agree with you that this would not be in sync with the current tone and approach of the article. Either this article isn't really covering depictions of Jesus, and the title has to change, or a modern section for modern depictions has to be added, along with a slightly modified introduction on the subject. --Epitectus (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Link (to de:wiki)
This interwiki goes to Jesus in der Popmusik, “Jesus in Popmusic”. This is not the matching subject. Rather de:Christusbild, but there seems to be no article de: Bildliche Darstellung Jesu. --Schwab7000 (talk) 12:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

In film?
Dramatic portrayals of Jesus redirects here. So then I look for the word "film"; there's nothing about it. Is there really no article or even a section of an article dealing with depictions of Jesus in film/TV? --Musdan77 (talk) 20:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 13 May 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 21:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Depiction of Jesus → Depictions of Jesus – This article doesn't discuss a single depiction of Jesus, but numerous ones (that, yes, can be discussed as a whole). . I'll note that relevant categories here are Category:Jesus in art and (parent)Category:Cultural depictions of Jesus, the latter part of Category:Cultural depictions of religious leaders. So plural is the norm. See also: Depictions of Muhammad. That said, this was a no consensus move proposal 10 years ago (see few sections above). I did read it and I don't find it compelling - the topic is IMHO still the same, and we should be consistent our naming of articles. Plural name should be better, as in, it's simpler to standardize this exception to the norm then rename dozens of other articles and categories to match this one. Alternatively Jesus in art, currently a redirect, would also be an option to conside ( Depictions of God in Western Christianity redirects to God the Father in Western art...). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose for exactly the same reasons as in the last discussion 10 years ago. The singular is much more appropriate for this article, which mentions few individual works, and focuses on the changing nature of the depiction. So the subject is "the depiction of Jesus", not "Depictions of Jesus", which suggests some listy road tour of famous works, which thank God this isn't. Depictions of Muhammad (executive summary: there hardly are any) is an odd example to use, and consistency of this sort between article titles is a very low priority. In fact, Wikipedia seems to have more "Depiction of ..." articles than ones with the plural - try a search. There's a reason "Depictions of God in Western Christianity" is only a redirect. There is also Life of Christ in art to consider for a redirect target for Jesus in art. Johnbod (talk) 15:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

This seems to have screeds of OR
This seems to be full of original research, long sections which read as a somewhat unreflective and rambling essay. Howard other editors feel about a major cull which could leave substantial material, prior to a re-write into a coherent structure? I don’t think it’s in need of BLOWITUP, but it seems pretty low quality at the moment. Springnuts (talk) 10:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It's essentially an article on art history, perhaps not your field? Any rewrite should be done by someone experienced in this area. Given the subject, odd stuff does get in, but I think is generally removed quickly. The article size has changed little in the last 7 years. There are a good number of references, mostly to high quality sources, not internet junk. What do you think is OR/excessive, and what do you think is missing? Johnbod (talk) 12:44, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm a little embarrassed because what I wrote was far too sweeping - by miles! In my defence I was on a train and using a phone, so I just picked up the bits about Revelation at the end of the Lede, and then at the start of the first section of the article read this completely unreferenced paragraph ...
 * Except for Jesus wearing tzitzit—the tassels on a tallit—in Matthew 14:36[5] and Luke 8:43–44,[6] there is no physical description of Jesus contained in any of the canonical Gospels. In the Acts of the Apostles, Jesus is said to have manifested as a "light from heaven" that temporarily blinded the Apostle Paul, but no specific form is given. In the Book of Revelation there is a vision the author had of "someone like a Son of Man" in spirit form: "dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. The hair on his head were white like wool, and his eyes were like blazing fire. His feet were like burnt bronze glowing in a furnace (...) His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance" (Revelation 1:12–16, NIV). Use in art of the Revelation description of Jesus has generally been restricted to illustrations of the book itself, and nothing in the scripture confirms the spiritual form's resemblance to the physical form Jesus took in his life on Earth.
 * ... which needs some scholarly reflection of imagery in apocalyptic literature, then looked for and could not find the Alexamenos graffito which I think probably deserves at least a mention because if it is depicting Christ it is the earliest representation of the crucifixion, nor eg Ralph Kozak's Laughing Jesus, nor anything from Stephen Prothero's "American Jesus: How the Son of God Became a National Icon". But now on a proper screen I can see that the rest of it is actually mostly good stuff and well referenced.  So basically I take it all back, and apologise for not reading it properly in the first place . When I have a moment I'll try to add some of the stuff I mentioned in, if nobody else does. Springnuts (talk) 20:42, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Never heard of these - we don't have Piss Christ or Jesus dress up either. The article certainly mainly concentrates on the early period when the remarkably persistent standard range of depictions were still being formed. The Alexamenos graffito is rather too off-beat to include, I think - the BM engraved gem mentioned in that article is more relevant. The article isn't a survey of individual depictions but about general trends that are reflected over very wide areas. The main gap I see is that we should have a section, and a proper main article, on the Niño Dios / Santo Niño tradition. We don't even have a proper category on that, which I will do. Johnbod (talk) 21:51, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Here we are - Category:Statues of the infant Jesus, Johnbod (talk) 22:10, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Are you saying that the article should be entitled something like “Early artistic representations of Jesus”? Because at the moment the title does not suggest any of the limitations which you are saying apply. And Stephen Prothero is absolutely noteworthy for his masterly survey! Springnuts (talk) 17:08, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No not at all. This isn't really about America. Johnbod (talk) 15:53, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, it is - from the opening - about "the depiction of Jesus in pictorial form". Prothero's book is precisely about the development of the pictorial representations of Jesus - in the US because that's what he is looking at - and the sociological, psychological and occasionally(!) theological forces which lie behind them. So, I'll put something in sourced from Prothero.  If you don't like it then I'd encourage you not to revert, but please do come here to make your case - then we can discuss and can seek help elsewhere if need be. Friendly regards, Springnuts (talk) 20:01, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Christianity only
Why is this article only about the depiction of Jesus in Christianity?

I asked myself this when seeing. Synotia (moan) 15:08, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Depiction of Jesus


text:
Tuition payments

Tuition payments, usually known as tuition in American English and as tuition fees in Commonwealth English, are fees charged by education institutions for instruction or other services. Besides public spending (by governments and other public bodies), private spending via tuition payments are the largest revenue sources for education institutions in some countries. In most developed countries, especially countries in Scandinavia and Continental Europe, there are no or only nominal tuition fees for all forms of education, including university and other higher education.

Payment methods
Some of the methods used to pay for tuition include:
 * Scholarship
 * Bursary
 * Company sponsorship or funding
 * Grant
 * Government student loan
 * Educational 7 (private)

 * Family (parental) money
 * Savings

By location
A number of countries, such as South Africa, the United States and the United Kingdom, have "up-front tuition policies." These policies generally include a tuition fee that is large enough to give parents or guardians "a responsibility to cover some portion of their children’s higher education costs." This responsibility can make it difficult for a low-income student to attend college without requiring a grant or one or more loans.

College tuition in the United States is one of the costs of a post-secondary education. The total cost of college is called the cost of attendance (or, informally, the "sticker price") and, in addition to tuition, can include room and board and fees for facilities such as books, transportation, or commuting provided by the college.

In Europe the first cycle is free in several countries: Austria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Malta, Montenegro, Norway, Poland, Scotland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Turkey.

In Hungary the annual tuition at a public university may exceed 15,000 euros. Only 32 percent of the students pay tuition that averages 1,428 euros for a year at a 1st-degree level and 1,552 for a year at the 2nd-degree level. A student in Hungary has an opportunity to receive a scholarship of up to 3,000 euros for living expenses and nearly 4,000 euros for good grades.

In Lithuania the highest tuition is nearly 12,000 euros and 37 percent of the students pay.

Tuition fees in the United Kingdom were introduced in 1998, with a maximum permitted fee of £1,000. Since then, this maximum has been raised to £9,000 (more than €10,000) in most of the United Kingdom, however, only those who reach a certain salary threshold pay this fee through general taxation. The UK state pays for the poorest or low income to access a university, thus university attendance remains high. There are record levels of disadvantaged people accessing a university. Scotland and Wales have abolished tuition. There are no scholarships and the only assistance is a possible loan from the government.

French tuition fees are capped based on the level of education pursued, from 183 Euros per year for undergraduate up to 388 for doctorates. Some public universities have autonomous status, meaning that they can charge much higher tuition, and all private universities charge tuition.

In the German education system almost all universities and most universities of applied sciences are funded by the state and do not charge tuition fees. In exceptional cases universities may offer courses for professionals (e.g. executive MBA programs), which may require tuition payment. Some local governments have recently decided that students from non-EU countries can be charged, although ERASMUS students, students from developing countries and other special groups are exempt. In addition, some private institutions of higher education run on a tuition-based model.

All Nordic countries provide higher education free of charge to their own citizens. The Nordic education systems are almost entirely publicly funded. In Nordic countries education is seen as a civil right and a public service rather than a commodity. The issue of education is seen in these countries as an issue of equality. This is in part because high levels of education are a benefit to the development of society, including business and industry.

In Greece there are no tuition fees as Bachelor-level higher education and some Master-level post-graduate education is provided for free to all Hellene (Greek) citizens as a benefit of citizenship paid by taxes. Universities accept students who have excelled at high school, with the selection being done through the Panhellenic Examinations, a system of state-administered examinations. Furthermore, it is difficult for mature students to be accepted at universities. Doctorate-level higher education is often also provided for free, but some universities may charge fees for PhD degrees. Students may resort to registering at private universities (called colleges, κολέγια), which charge tuition fees, or emigrate to other countries in order to get an education.

In Spain, public universities fees are established annually by laws enacted by the governments of each autonomous community, following a series of basic criteria dictated by the central government and published in the Official State Gazette.

By institution
Tuition is charged at different rates from one type of institution to the next. Net tuition indices mark an increase in the "relative real burden" for payments at various types of institutions for higher education; in the period between 1980 and 1995; example, this burden increased by approximately 80 percent for students at public universities and by 148 percent for students at private universities. More than half of public research universities charge students differential tuition based primarily on their major and their year in college, increasing normal tuition by up to 40 percent.

Most students or their families who pay for tuition and other education costs do not have enough savings to pay in full while they are in school. Some students must work or borrow money to afford an education. In the United States, student financial aid is available to defray the cost of a post-secondary education: "Financial aid is typically thought to exert the most influence in [attendance], when admitted students consider whether to enroll in a particular institution." It is often the case that the lower the cost of the school, the more likely a student is to attend.

Developed countries have adopted a dual scheme for education; while basic (i.e. high-school) education is supported by taxes rather than tuition, higher education usually requires tuition payments or fees.

People may purchase tuition insurance to protect themselves from fees related to involuntary withdrawal (illness, death of a parent or guardian, etc.)

History

In medieval Europe, universities were mainly institutions of the Catholic Church. As they mainly trained clergy, most of these universities did not have any need to exact fees from the students with one notable exception: during the 12th century, while under the supervision of Pierre le Mangeur, the University of Paris began collecting two sous weekly in tuition.

Later, the main duty of universities in most Protestant countries was the training of future civil servants. Again, it was not in the interest of the state to charge tuition fees, as this would have decreased the quality of civil servants. On the other hand, the number of students from the lower classes was usually kept in check by the expenses of living during the years of study, although as early as the mid-19th century there were calls for limiting the university entrance by middle-class persons. A typical family, however, could not afford educating a child or young adult, even if the education itself was free. A similar situation exists today in many Third World countries, where the expenses of "free" schooling (food, books, school uniform, etc.) prevent some children from attending any school.

After World War II the tuition systems of all of today's advanced democracies still were highly similar: Education institutions in all countries charged no or only very low tuition fees. It was not before the 1950s that the countries' education systems developed in different directions. Some countries, especially Anglophone countries (for example the United States) but also Asian countries such as Japan, introduced considerable tuition payments already in the early post-war period. Other countries, particularly in Scandinavia and continental Europe, in contrast remained tuition-free. These developments were unrelated to the massive educational expansion that took place at the same time.

Since the early 1970s, the average cost of tuition has steadily outpaced the growth of the average American household. This trend continued particularly under President Reagan's higher education policies in the 1980s. Likewise, there has been a steady decrease in federal funding for grants and a rise in the interest rates of most major student loans, leaving many students struggling to pay debt for years after graduation.

College tuition for undocumented students
The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act was introduced in the U.S. Senate. It would allow the estimated 50,000 to 65,000 undocumented students in the United States to gain in-state tuition as well as a path towards American citizenship. The Act would apply only to those students with tangible proof of residence in the United States before the age of 18. This Act has stirred debate in numerous groups, including institutions, families, and the Senate itself.

As of March 2013, undocumented students in most States were required to pay the higher out-of-state students' tuition charged at public universities, often between $20,000 and $35,000 at a local public university. In addition, these students were denied federal assistance as they lacked valid Social Security numbers. Because such students often come from comparatively poor families, the costs are too high to allow many undocumented students to seek university education in the United States.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Tuition payments


text:
Koshchei

Koshchei (Коще́й), also Kashchei (Каще́й) often given the epithet "the Immortal", or "the Deathless" (Бессме́ртный), is an archetypal male antagonist in Russian folklore.

The most common feature of tales involving Koschei is a spell which prevents him from being killed. He hides "his death" inside nested objects to protect it. For example, his death may be hidden in a needle that is hidden inside an egg, the egg is in a duck, the duck is in a hare, the hare is in a chest, the chest is buried or chained up on a far island. Usually he takes the role of a malevolent rival figure, who competes for (or entraps) a male hero's love interest.

The origin of the tales is unknown. The archetype may contain elements derived from the 12th-century pagan Cuman-Kipchak (Polovtsian) leader Khan Konchak, who is recorded in The Tale of Igor's Campaign; over time a balanced view of the non-Christian Cuman Khan may have been distorted or caricatured by Christian Slavic writers.

Historicity and folk origins
By at least the 18th century, and likely earlier, Koschei's legend had been appearing in Slavic tales. For a long period, no connection was made with any historical character.

Origin in Khan Konchak
The origin of the tale may be related to the Polovtsian (Cuman) leader Khan Konchak, who dates from the 12th century. In The Tale of Igor's Campaign Konchak is referred to as a koshey (slave). Konchak is thought to have come/returned from Georgia (the Caucasus) to the steppe c. 1126–1130; by c.1172 he is described in Kievan Rus' chronicles as a leader of the Polovtsi, and as taking part in an uprising. There is not enough information to reconstruct further details of Konchak's appearance or nature from historical sources; though unusual features or abnormalities were usually recorded (often as epithets) by chroniclers, none are recorded for Konchak.

The legendary love of gold of Koschei is speculated to be a distorted record of Konchak's role as the keeper of the Kosh's resources.

Koschei's epithet "the immortal" may be a reference to Konchak's longevity. He is last recorded in Russian chronicles during the 1203 capture of Kiev, if the record is correct this gives Konchak an unusually long life – possibly over 100 years – for the time this would have been over six generations.

Koschei's life-protecting spell may be derived from traditional Turkic amulets, which were egg-shaped and often contained arrowheads (cf. the needle in Koschei's egg).

It is thought that many of the negative aspects of Koschei's character are distortions of a more nuanced relationship of Khan Konchak with the Christian Slavs, such as his rescuing of Prince Igor from captivity, or the marriage between Igor's son and Konchak's daughter. Konchak, as a pagan, could have been demonised over time as a stereotypical villain.

Naming and etymology
In the dictionary of V. I. Dal, the name Kashchei is derived from the verb "kastit" – to harm, to dirty: "probably from the word "kastit", but remade into koshchei, from 'bone', meaning a man exhausted by excessive thinness". ("Bone" here is in Russian кость kost'.) Vasmer notes that the word koshchei has two meanings that have different etymologies: "thin, skinny person, walking skeleton" or "miser" – the origin of the word "bone"). Old Russian "youth, boy, captive, slave" from the Turkic košči "slave", in turn from koš "camp".

Koschei, as the name of the hero of a fairy tale and as a designation for a skinny person, Max Vasmer in his dictionary considers the original Slavic word (homonym) and associates with the word bone (common Slavic *kostь), that is, it is an adjective form koštіі (nominative adjective in the nominative case singular), declining according to the type "God".

Numerous variant names and spellings have been given to Koschei; these include Kashchei, Koshchai, Kashshei, Kovshei, Kosh, Kashch, Kashel, Kostei, Kostsei, Kashshui, Kozel, Koz'olok, Korachun, Korchun bessmertnyi, Kot bezsmertnyi, Kot Bezmertnyi, Kostii bezdushnyi; in bylinas he also appears as Koshcheiushko, Koshcheg, Koshcherishcho, Koshchui, Koshel.

The term Koshey appears in Slavic chronicles as early as the 12th century to refer to an officer or official during a military campaign. Similar terms include the Ukrainian Кошовий (Koshovyi) for the head of the 'Kish' (military) (see also Kish otaman). In Old Russian 'Kosh' means a camp, while in Belarusian a similar term means 'to camp' and in Turkic languages a similar term means 'a wanderer'. The use as a personal name is recorded as early as the 15th century on Novogrodian birch bark manuscripts.

In The Tale of Igor's Campaign a similar sounding term is used, recorded being inscribed on coins, deriving from the Turkic for 'captive' or 'slave'. The same term also appears in the Ipatiev Chronicle, meaning 'captive'. A second mention of the term is made in The Tale of Igor's Campaign when Igor is captured by the Polovtsi; this event is recorded as a riddle: "And here Prince Igor exchanged his golden saddle of a prince for the saddle of a Koshey (slave)."

Nikolai Novikov also suggested the etymological origin of koshchii meaning "youth" or "boy" or "captive", "slave", or "servant". The interpretation of "captive" is interesting because Koschei appears initially as a captive in some tales.

In folk tales
Koschei is a common villain in east-Slavic folk tales. Often tales involving him are of the type AT 302 "The Giant Without A Heart" (see Aarne–Thompson classification systems). He also appears in tales resembling type AT 313 "The Magic Flight".

He usually functions as the antagonist or rival to a hero. Common themes are love and rivalry.

The typical feature in tales about Koschei is his protection against death (AT 302). To kill him you must find his death which is hidden inside an egg. The egg is hidden inside various animals, and which are then protected by containers or in remote places.

In other tales, Koschei can cast a sleep spell that can be broken by playing an enchanted gusli. Depending on the tale he has different characteristics: he may ride a three- or seven-legged horse; may have tusks or fangs; and may possess a variety of different magic objects (like cloaks and rings) that a hero is sent to obtain; or he may have other magic powers. In one tale he has eyelids so heavy he requires servants to lift them (cf. the Celtic Balor or Ysbaddaden, or Serbian Vy).

The parallel female figure, Baba Yaga, as a rule does not appear in the same tale with Koschei, though exceptions exists where both appear together as a married couple, or as siblings. Sometimes, Baba Yaga appears in tales along with Koschei as an old woman figure, such as his mother or aunt.

"Marya Morevna"
In the tale, also known as "The Death of Koschei the Deathless", Ivan Tsarevitch encounters Koschei chained in his wife's (Marya Morevna's) dungeon. He releases and revives Koschei, but Koschei abducts Marya. Ivan tries to rescue Marya several times, but Koschei's horse is too fast and he easily catches up with the escaping lovers. Each time Koschei's magical horse informs him that he could carry out several activities first and still catch up. After the third unsuccessful escape, Koschei cuts up Ivan and puts his body parts in a barrel which he throws into the sea. However, water of life revives Ivan. He then seeks out Baba Yaga to ask her for a horse swifter than Koshei's. After undergoing several trials he steals a horse and finally successfully rescues Marya.

"Tsarevich Petr and the Wizard"
Tsar Bel-Belianin's wife the Tzaritza is abducted by Koschei (the wizard). The Tsar's three sons attempt to rescue her. The first two fail to reach the wizard's palace, but the third, Petr, succeeds. He reaches the Tzaritza, conceals himself, and learns how the wizard hides his life. Initially he lies, but the third time he reveals it is in an egg, in a duck, in a hare, that nests in a hollow log, that floats in a pond, found in a forest on the island of Bouyan. Petr seeks the egg, freeing animals along the way – on coming to Bouyan the freed animals help him catch the wizard's creatures and obtain the egg. He returns to the wizard's domain and kills him by squeezing the egg – every action on the egg is mirrored on the wizard's body.

"The Snake Princess"
In "The Snake Princess" (Russian "Царевна-змея"), Koschei turns a princess who does not want to marry him into a snake.

Ivan Sosnovich
Koschei hears of three beauties in a kingdom. He kills two and wounds a third, puts the kingdom to sleep (petrifies), and abducts the princesses. Ivan Sosnovich (Russian Иван Соснович) learns of Koschei's weakness: an egg in a box hidden under a mountain, so he digs up the whole mountain, finds the egg box and smashes it, and rescues the princess.

Similar folklore figures
The Serbian Baš Čelik (Head of Steel); Hungarian 'Lead-Headed Monk'; and Slovak 'Iron Monk' also all hide their weakness inside a nested series of animals.

In works of fiction
Koshchei is mentioned as a miser in the prologue Pushkin's Ruslan and Ludmila which describes wonders of the fairy-tale land of Lukomorye: "Там царь Кащей над златом чахнет" (There tsar Kashchei is languishing over gold).

Opera and ballet

 * The villain in Igor Stravinsky's ballet The Firebird.
 * Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov wrote an opera involving Koschei, titled Кащей бессмертный, or Kashchey the Deathless.

Film

 * Kashchey the Immortal, Russian  Кащей Бессмертный, 1945 B&W fantasy directed by Alexander Rou, with Georgy Millyar as Koschei.
 * Fire, Water, and Brass Pipes, Russian Огонь, вода и… медные трубы, Ogon, 1968 fantasy directed by Alexander Rou, with Georgy Millyar as Koschei.
 * New Year Adventures of Masha and Vitya, Russian Новогодние приключения Маши и Вити, 1975 children's film.
 * Beloved Beauty, Russian Краса́ ненагля́дная, 1958 stop-animated film.
 * Along Unknown Paths, Russian Там, на неведомых дорожках, 1982 children's fantasy. Aleksandr Filippenko as Koschei.
 * After the Rain, on Thursday, Russian  После дождичка в четверг, 1985 musical children's fantasy. Oleg Tabakov as a postmodern, deconstructed version of Koschey.
 * Sitting on the Golden Porch, 1986 fairy tale film directed by Boris Rytsarev.
 * Lilac Ball, Russian  Лиловый шар, 1987 science fiction.
 * The Book of Masters, Russian Книга Мастеров, 2009 fantasy.
 * The Last Warrior, Russian Последний богатырь, 2017 fantasy. One of the few versions in which Koschey is not a villain.
 *  Sisu, Finnish 2022 movie involving a backstory where the seemingly immortal protagonist Aatami Korpi (played by Jorma Tommila) was dubbed Koschei by the Soviet soldiers.
 * How to Save the Immortal; Russian title: Кощей. Похититель невест, "Koshchey. A Bride Snatcher", is a 2022 Russian animated film with Koschei as a protagonist who gets redeemed for true love.

Television

 * In Little Einsteins, Katschai is a nesting doll who tried to steal the music power from the magical Firebird. Katschai used animal nesting dolls to try to stop the Little Einsteins team from getting to the Firebird which Katschai had locked up at the top of a building in Russia.
 * In the US television series "Grimm", in episode 9 of season 3, Koschei is the main guest character. (see Red Menace (Grimm))

Novels and comics

 * In Mendele Mocher Sforim's allegorical Yiddish novel Di Klatsche (The Nag; 1873), Koschei appears to the protagonist Srulik in the form of a wolf.
 * In Sarah J Maas's A Court of Silver Flames, Koschei the Deathless is the name given to an ancient being trapped by a spell in a lake and is believed to be a death god like his siblings mentioned in the previous books.
 * In James Branch Cabell's Jurgen, A Comedy of Justice, and in Robert A Heinlein's retelling of the story Job: a Comedy of Justice, Koshchei the Deathless appears as the most supreme being who made things as they are and is therefore universally unappreciated before Jurgen's kind words are spoken.
 * In Alexander Veltman's Koshchei bessmertny: Bylina starogo vremeni (Koshchei the Immortal: A Bylina of Old Times, 1833), a parody of historical adventure novels, the hero, Iva Olelkovich, imagines that his bride has been captured by Koschei.
 * Mercedes Lackey's novel of Stravinsky's Firebird features Katschei as the main villain, retelling the classic tale for a modern audience.
 * Catherynne Valente's novel Deathless is a retelling of the Koschei story set against a backdrop of 20th-century Russian history.
 * In the 1965 science-fiction Monday Begins on Saturday by Arkady and Boris Strugatsky, he is one of the creatures held in the NIIChaVo institute.
 * Koschei appears as a character in John C. Wright's "War of the Dreaming" novels. He offers to save the hero's wife, if the hero will agree to take the life of a stranger.
 * Koschei appears as a slave to Baba Yaga in the Hellboy comic book series, first appearing in Hellboy: Darkness Calls. Koschei's origin story is later revealed in backup stories to single issues of Hellboy: The Wild Hunt. The story is also collected in Hellboy: Weird Tales and expanded upon in Koshchei the Deathless. A sequel series, Koshchei in Hell later appeared in 2023.
 * Koschei also appears in DC Comics The Sandman: Fables and Reflections.
 * In the webcomic PS238 by Aaron Williams, the child hero 84 is currently trapped in Koschei's egg, trying to find the "eye", and in doing so, will become his new Champion of Earth to battle from now on.
 * Koschei is the primary antagonist in Marina Frants' short fiction piece "Death Becomes Him", the sequel to "A Bone to Pick".
 * Katherine Arden's novel, The Girl in the Tower, features Kaschei as the main antagonist. It is the second book in the Winternight trilogy, which is inspired by various Russian folktales.
 * In Alix E. Harrow‘s novel, The Once and Future Witches, Koschei the Deathless appears as a wicked witch in an old Russian witch tale.
 * "Koschei" appears as the real name of the Master in the Doctor Who spin-off novels, Divided Loyalties and The Dark Path.
 * Olivie Blake’s novel One For My Enemy centers around a conflict between rivaling Russian families, headed by a matriarch known as Baba Yaga and a patriarch known as Koschei respectively.

Games

 * In the fantasy tabletop role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons, he is the inspiration for the demon lord Kostchtchie, published 1983 in Monster Manual II.
 * Koschei appears as a character in the MMORPG RuneScape, under the name "Koschei the Deathless".
 * In the video game series The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing, the Death of Koschei is a key plot item in the second game. In the third game, recurring supporting character Prisoner Seven is revealed to be Koschei the Deathless, and becomes the main antagonist.
 * In the video game Shadowrun: Hong Kong, the supporting character Racter has a drone named 'Koschei', which later in the game can gain an upgrade named "Deathless" that makes the drone unkillable.
 * In the computer game Dominions 4: Thrones of Ascension, Koschei appears as a hero character for Bogarus, a faction inspired by medieval Russia and Slavic mythology.
 * The legend of Koschei the Deathless serves as an inspiration for the narrative of Rise of the Tomb Raider.
 * In the digital card game Mythgard, "Koschei, the Deathless" appears as a mythic minion in the Dreni faction.
 * In the video game Arknights, the duke of Ursus (a fictional country based on Russia) is named Koschei, and is hinted to possess the main antagonist after being killed by them.
 * Koschei is a playable piece in Mantic Games' Hellboy: The Board Game.
 * In the MMORPG Tibia (video game), there is a Lich boss named "Koshei The Deathless" who hides his soul in 4 pieces of an amulet that are scattered around the gameworld.
 * Koschei appears as an NPC in the roguelike action RPG Moon Hunters.
 * In the modern Battle royale game "Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0", Within the "DMZ" game mode, there resides a post-soviet facility known as the "Koschei Complex", named after the tale of Koschei.

title: Koshchei


text:
Talk:Anton Raphael Mengs

I don't get the nationality designation "a German Painter" for an artist born in what would be the Czech Republic today of a Danish father & who studied & worked in Italy & practiced his skill in Italy, Spain & Germany. How do we decide this artist is "German?"

Untitled
Why did you remove the proper spelling of Aussig? --Keichwa 06:00 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * There is a new link, so it might be redundant.

I changed "Rivality" to "Rivalry." Technically, the words mean the same thing, but rivality is an obsolete form. --Groomson 12:31, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Anton Raphael Mengs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140423070246/http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/walker/collections/18c/mengs.aspx to http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/walker/collections/18c/mengs.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:57, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

mid-18th century !!
"who while painting in the Rococo period of the mid-17th century" should be mid-18th century, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonRichardSmith (talk • contribs) 13:28, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Anton Raphael Mengs


text:
Rusalka (disambiguation)

Rusalka is a water-nymph in Slavic mythology.

Rusalka may also refer to:

Places

 * Rusałka, Szczecin, a lake in Szczecin, Poland
 * Lake Rusałka, Poznań, a lake in Poznań, Poland
 * Rusalka, Bulgaria, a resort on the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast
 * Rusalka Planitia, a surface feature of the planet Venus

Art and culture

 * Rusalka (opera), an opera by Antonín Dvořák
 * Rusalka (play), a major though unfinished verse play by Alexander Pushkin
 * Rusalka (Dargomyzhsky), an opera by Alexander Dargomyzhsky based on Pushkin's play
 * Rusalka (novel), a fantasy novel by C. J. Cherryh
 * Mermaid (2007 film) (Russian: Rusalka), a Russian film by Anna Melikian
 * Rusalka (1996 film), a 1996 Russian animated short film
 * "Rusalka", a song by Radarmaker

Others

 * Russian monitor Rusalka, a Russian ironclad which sank near Helsinki, Finland on September 7, 1893
 * Russalka Memorial in Tallinn, by Amandus Adamson

title: Rusalka (disambiguation)


text:
Seleucus

Seleucus may refer to:

Monarchs and other people related to the Seleucid Empire

 * Seleucus I Nicator (Satrap 311–305 BC, King 305 BC–281 BC), son of Antiochus and founder of the Seleucid Empire
 * Seleucus II Callinicus (246–225 BC)
 * Seleucus III Ceraunus (or Soter) (225–223 BC)
 * Seleucus IV Philopator (187–175 BC)
 * Seleucus V Philometor (126/125 BC)
 * Seleucus VI Epiphanes Nicator (96–95 BC)
 * Seleucus VII Kybiosaktes or Philometor (70s BC–60s BC?)
 * Seleucus, probable name of the father of Antiochus (father of Seleucus I Nicator)
 * Seleucus, a son of Antiochus I Soter and grandson to Seleucus I
 * Seleucus, one of the sons of Antiochus VII Sidetes and Cleopatra Thea
 * Seleucus (commandant), in 30 BC commandant of the eastern Egyptian border-fortress Pelusium

Other people

 * Seleucus, son of Bithys, Ptolemaic governor of Cyprus (c.145-130 BC),
 * Seleucus of Alexandria, a grammarian and sophist,
 * Seleucus of Seleucia, an astronomer,
 * Seleucus (son of Ablabius), a rhetorician and friend of Julian the Apostate,
 * Seleucus (Theodosian Praetorian prefect), Praetorian prefect of the Theodosian dynasty,
 * Seleucus (Roman usurper), a Roman usurper.

Other uses

 * Seleucus (crater), a crater on Earth's moon
 * 3288 Seleucus, an asteroid

title: Seleucus


text:
Mirepoix

A mirepoix is a mixture of diced vegetables cooked with fat (usually butter) for a long time on low heat without coloring or browning. The ingredients are not sautéed or otherwise hard-cooked, because the intention is to sweeten rather than caramelize them. Mirepoix is a long-standing part of French cuisine and is the flavor base for a wide variety of dishes, including stocks, soups, stews, and sauces.

When the mirepoix is not precooked, the constituent vegetables may be cut to a larger size, depending on the overall cooking time for the dish. Usually the vegetable mixture is onions, carrots, and celery (either common 'Pascal' celery or celeriac), with the traditional ratio being 2:1:1—two parts onion, one part carrot, and one part celery. Further cooking, with the addition of tomato purée, creates a darkened brown mixture called pinçage.

Similar flavor bases include the Italian soffritto, the Spanish and Portuguese sofrito/refogado (braised onions, garlic and tomato), a variation with tomato paste instead of fresh tomato of the Eastern Mediterranean and Balkans region, the German Suppengrün (leeks, carrots and celeriac), the Polish włoszczyzna (leeks, carrots, celeriac and parsley root), the Russian/Ukrainian smazhennya or zazharka (onion, carrot and possibly celery, beets or pepper), the United States Cajun/Creole holy trinity (onions, celery and bell peppers), and possibly the French duxelles (mushrooms and often onion or shallot and herbs, reduced to a paste).

History
Though the cooking technique is probably older, the word mirepoix dates from the 18th century and derives, as do many other appellations in French cuisine, from the aristocratic employer of the cook credited with establishing and stabilizing it: in this case, Charles-Pierre-Gaston François de Lévis, duc de Lévis-Mirepoix (1699–1757), French field marshal and ambassador and a member of the noble family of Lévis, lords of Mirepoix in Languedoc (nowadays in the department of Ariège) since the 11th century. According to Pierre Larousse (quoted in The Oxford Companion to Food), the Duke of Mirepoix was "an incompetent and mediocre individual ... who owed his vast fortune to the affection Louis XV felt toward his wife and who had but one claim to fame: he gave his name to a sauce made of all kinds of meat and a variety of seasonings".

The term is not encountered regularly in French culinary texts until the 19th century, so it is difficult to know what a dish à la mirepoix was like in 18th-century France. Antoine Beauvilliers, for instance, in 1814, gives a short recipe for a Sauce à la Mirepoix which is a buttery, wine-laced stock garnished with an aromatic mixture of carrots, onions, and a bouquet garni. Marie-Antoine Carême, in 1816, gives a similar recipe, calling it simply "Mire-poix". By the mid-19th century, Jules Gouffé refers to mirepoix as "a term in use for such a long time that I do not hesitate to use it here". His mirepoix is listed among essences and, indeed, is a meaty concoction (laced with two bottles of Madeira), which, like all other essences, was used to enrich many a classic sauce. By the end of the 19th century, the mirepoix had taken on its modern meaning. Joseph Favre, in his Dictionnaire universel de cuisine (c. 1895, reprinted 1978), uses the term to describe a mixture of ham, carrots, onions, and herbs used as an aromatic condiment when making sauces or braising meat. The matignon is very similar to the mirepoix, except that the matignon is designed to be brought to the table and eaten with the dish or alone as a side dish.

According to the 1938 Larousse Gastronomique, a mirepoix may be prepared au gras (with meat) or au maigre (without meat). Mirepoix au maigre is sometimes called a brunoise (though strictly speaking this term more accurately merely designates the technique of dicing with a knife). A mirepoix au gras contains diced ham or pork belly as an additional ingredient. Similar combinations, both in and out of the French culinary repertoire, may include leeks, parsnips, garlic, tomatoes, shallots, mushrooms, bell peppers, chilies, and ginger, according to the requirements of the regional cuisine or the instructions of the particular chef or recipe. The analogous soffritto (frequently containing parsley) is the basis for many traditional dishes in classic Italian cuisine, and the sofrito serves a similar purpose in Spanish cuisines. In Cajun and Creole cuisine, a mirepoix or (jocularly so-called) "holy trinity" is a combination of onions, celery, and bell peppers.

Traditionally, the weight ratio for mirepoix is 2:1:1 of onions, celery, and carrots; the ratio for bones to mirepoix for stock is 10:1. When making a white stock, or fond blanc, parsnips are used instead of carrots to maintain the pale color.

German Suppengrün
Suppengrün means 'soup greens' in German; the Dutch equivalent is soepgroente. Soup greens usually come in a bundle and consists of a leek, a carrot, and a piece of celeriac. It may also contain parsley, thyme, celery leaves, rutabaga (swede), parsley root, and onions. The mix depends on regional traditions, as well as individual recipes. The vegetables used are cold-climate roots and bulbs with long shelf lives. Suppengrün act as herbs and impart hearty, strong flavors to the soup or sauce, providing a foil for other strong tasting ingredients such as dried peas and beans or pot roast. Large chunks of vegetables are slow cooked to make flavorful soups and stocks, and are discarded when the vegetables have given up most of their flavor. Finely chopped suppengrün are browned in fat and used as a basis for a finished sauce. The vegetables may also be cooked long enough until they fall apart, and may become part of the sauce or pureed to form the sauce.

Italian soffritto
In Italian cuisine, in a particular type of soffritto, onions, carrots and celery are chopped to form a battuto, and then slowly cooked in butter or olive oil, becoming soffritto. It is used as the base for most pasta sauces, such as ragù (ragoût), but occasionally it can be used as the base of other dishes, such as sauteed vegetables. For this reason, it is a fundamental component in Italian cuisine. It may also contain garlic, shallot, or leek.

According to the Italian restaurateur Benedetta Vitali, soffritto means 'underfried' and describes it as "a preparation of lightly browned minced vegetables, not a dish by itself". At one time it was called "false ragoût", because soffritto was thought to vaguely recall the flavor of meat sauce.

Polish włoszczyzna
Włoszczyzna is the Polish word for soup vegetables or greens. The word literally means "Italian stuff" because Queen Bona Sforza, who was Italian and married Polish King Sigismund I the Old in 1518, introduced this concept to Polish cuisine. A włoszczyzna may consist of carrots, parsnips or parsley root, celery root or celeriac, leeks, and savoy or white cabbage leaves, and sometimes celery leaves and flat-leaf parsley. The most typical, packaged combination is celery root, parsley root, carrots, and leeks. Włoszczyzna is usually cut up to uniform size and boiled to form a flavor base for soups and stews.

title: Mirepoix


text:
Alal

In Mesopotamian myths, the alal was a kind of demon that, to tempt men, came out of the Underworld and took various forms, temptations that the inhabitants of Babylonia were able to reject by means of amulets.

The Chaldean-Assyrian art represents these spirits in the form of horrible monsters, as in the bas-reliefs of the Palace of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh (now Iraq), today in the British Museum) and in small bronzes and clay tablets cooked in the shape of a cylinder, cone, or stamp.

Generally these demons are seen as theriocephalous, with a human body and the head of a lion with open jaws, the ears of a dog and mane of a horse. The feet are frequently replaced by bird claws of prey.

title: Alal