Today, flags are to be flown half-mast in mourning for victims of yesterday’s atrocities in London.
If nothing else good comes of what happened, let us hope it will finally lead the BBC, and other media who have so lamely followed it in recent times, to consign once and for all to the dust-bin of history the term ‘militant’ as a euphemism with which to refer to perpetrators of such dastardly deeds.
There is little comfort to be gained from today’s papers. But alongside the eyewitness accounts of startled commuters and the photographs of the carnage, there is one story to lift the spirits, not without relevance to what happened yesterday.
According to a report in today’s Times, archaeologists have just unearthed in the Syrian city of Palmyra an apparently phenomenally well-preserved third century mosaic depicting St George slaughtering the dragon. Some archaeologists are reported to believe the mosaic may well be the source of the St George legend.
So closely associated today is England’s patron saint with this legend that we forget he once had an identity altogether apart from and prior to it and that it only became tacked onto the story of his life to commemorate some genuine heroic act of his which the story was intended to symbolise.
It is deeply politically unfashionable and incorrect these days to venerate the name of this saint whose status as the patron saint of England is often ridiculed today in view of his not being a native-born Englishman.
But there are many important quintessential elements of British national culture which have a foreign origin. For example, our national flag in which St George's red cross figures as the symbol of England, is known as the ‘Union Jack’ from the practice of King James 1, in whose reign England became united with Scotland and Ireland, of referring to himself by the French equivalent of his name – Jacques!
The non-English origin of the patron saint of England is one of them.
Who was St George? When and why did he become patron saint of England? How and why did the legend of the slaying of the dragon come to be attached to the story of his life? And what possible grain of comfort can be thought capable of being drawn from knowledge of any of these things, given yesterday’s atrocities?
The man who is England’s patron saint was reputedly a real Roman soldier born in Cappadocia, eastern Turkey, in the third century to converts to Christianity before their faith had become the official religion of the Roman Empire and whilst adherents of it were still being persecuted by the pagan Romans.
One Roman emperor still making life tough for the coreligionists of his parents was Diocletian in whose army George reputedly served. It was supposedly whilst on a mission to England that George discovered the suffering being inflicted on Christians by Romans, upon which discovery George supposedly returned to Rome to plead with the emperor on their behalf -- in vain, as it turned out. George was beheaded for his efforts on the orders of Dicoletian, supposedly in of all places Lydda, now in present-day Israel. He thereby underwent the martyrdom for which he was subsequently canonised.
It was not until a thousand years later that St George became official patron saint of England. This was well after, but because of, the symbolism associated with the legend of his slaying of the dragon, a legend that had become added to his name centuries before. Indeed, the legend was no more of English provenance than was the saint himself, but also like him of middle-eastern origin.
According to this legend, it was whilst journeying through Libya, then under the rule of Egyptian kings, that George heard about a dragon that, like the minotaur, feasted on a daily diet of young maidens whose supply had all but been exhausted, save for the daughter of the king of Egypt who had promised her hand to whoever would slay the dragon, an act of gallantry that George obligingly performed.
This legend had become attached to George’s name because, from early Christian times, dragons were used as symbols of the devil, unmitigated evil. The legend represents the triumph of good over evil that had been enacted by his stalwart defence of Christianity against persecution, and, at a more general level, the triumph of the Christian spirit over the forces of darkness.
It was doubtless because of the resonance of this legend about St George that caused Richard 1 to make St George's red cross, something that had come to symbolise George's own martyrdom, the emblem to be worn on their chests by all fellow crusaders who, at the end of the twelfth century, won back Jerusalem from the Saracen invaders of Palestine, albeit only temporarily.
It was another brave Englishman, or, rather, Englishwoman -- Florence Nightingale -- who also resorted to use of the same symbol as the emblem to be worn by all her fellow army nurses in the Crimean War, a war, incidentally and significantly, Britain waged in defence of Muslim Turks against Russian aggression.
Reference to the nursing of casualties of aggression leads me to the present-day relevance of St George in the light of yesterday’s horrific events in London.
St George became patron saint of England for the same reason as the legend of his slaying a dragon became attached to his name. His martydom, as does the legend, symbolises the triumph of Christian faith, hope and charity in the face of evil. A better and more fitting symbol for this country today can hardly be imagined!
It is a symbol for this country whose calls for jettisoning all British patriots should ardently resist, as they should all who currently seek to harm its inhabitants and their free, generous, tolerant, kindly way of life.
Comments (2)
Those scorning St George's Turkish origins, would be appalled if we rejected anyone else for being Turkish.
They should also be made aware, that the first Turks entered Asia Minor only 1000 years ago. So a person from that part of the world in the 3rd century could not be Turkish.
Posted by EU-Serf | July 11, 2005 4:05 PM
Posted on July 11, 2005 16:05
If the BBC will run a story on putting the colour black in the Union flag, it will no doubt run a story on abolishing the flag itself, I imagine. Both completely fail to understand the significance of a flag.
Posted by AW | July 11, 2005 1:44 PM
Posted on July 11, 2005 13:44