評論
打印
And all of these notions have of course passed into the Abrahamic mainstream of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
這些概念都進入了亞伯拉罕諸教—猶太教、基督教與伊斯蘭教的教義里。
And it's when you come to the animal that the King is riding on the silver dish that you get a shock, because he's not on a horse but on a fully-antlered stag. He straddles the beast without either stirrups or saddle, gripping it by the antlers with his left hand, while his right hand deftly plunges a sword right into its neck-blood sprays out, and at the bottom of the plate we see the same stag in the throes of death. This whole image is quite clearly a fantasy, from the great crown at the top which would quite clearly have fallen off if you'd been riding, to the idea of killing your own mount in full leap. We're in the realm of symbol.
如果你注意到銀盤上國王的坐騎，一定會大吃一驚。他騎的并不是馬，而是長著大鹿角的牡鹿。他直接跨坐在沒有鐙也沒有鞍的鹿背上，左手抓著鹿角，右手的匕首靈巧地刺入鹿脖子，鮮血飛濺。銀盤的底部還有另一頭垂死的牡鹿。整幅圖畫都有些不真實，比如他頭頂的大皇冠，如果真的在騎行，一定早就掉下來了，而刺死正在飛奔的坐騎更是教人不可思議。
What's really going on here? In the Middle East, for centuries, hunting scenes have been a common way of representing royal power. Assyrian kings, well protected in their chariots, are shown bravely killing lions, from a safe distance. But Shapur is doing something else. This is the monarch in single combat with the beast, and he's risking himself not out of pointless bravado, but for the benefit of his subjects. As protective ruler we see him killing certain kinds of animals, the beasts that threatened his subjects: big cats which preyed on cattle and poultry, wild boar and deer which ravaged crops and pastures. So images like this one are visual metaphors for royal power, conceived in Zoroastrian terms.
這到底是怎么回事？千百年來，狩獵場景在中東一向是表現王權的普遍形式。我們曾看到敘利亞國王坐在重重護衛的馬車里，在安全距離外英勇地殺死了獅子。沙普爾所做的略有不同。他挺身犯險，與野獸單打獨斗，并非盲目逞能，而是在保衛臣民的利益。作為臣民的保護神，我們看到他殺死的都是些危害百姓生活的動物，如獵食家禽家畜的猛獸，破壞莊稼和牧場的野豬與鹿等。這樣的圖畫是瑣羅亞斯特教善神的代言人，將戰勝一切惡勢力，完成身為國王的重大職責。
