Five out of Twenty-Five (one fifth) of the paintings have DOGS in them.
Since, in those days, “dogs” were an epithet for Gentiles, do you think that the artist was implying that it wasn’t just the Jewish leaders who were resposible for Jesus’s death?
Just a thought. You can bet that there were no literal dogs in the Chambers of the High Priest.
I may be reading too much into this, but having dogs in the picture is illogical if they aren’t symbolic.
Oh...Good Morning, Dan. :-)
I once read that in the Middle Ages dogs, although mostly seen as a symbol of fidelity, they could also be a representation of evil, chaos, disorder.
Excellent point, Mary-Lou. BTW, did you consult Tippy?
I know you know this, having great sea-legs as you do, even if you got blindsided that once: the trick to keeping one’s stomach calm is to ignore inboard and orient oneself by watching the horizon, which remains stable.