left: the Green Man; megalith
acrylic and mixed media on canvas; 80cm x 60; 2006
The Origins of the Green Man
There seem to be several conflicting theories concerning the origins of the Green Man and the fact that the term ‘Green Man’ was coined comparatively recently by Lady Raglan in 1939 does not help matters.
Lady Raglan, ‘The Green Man in church architecture’, Folklore Vol.50 1939.
Many mediaeval English and French churches contain images of the Green Man but he is to be found at sites, not just in Europe, but all over the world.
The fact that this image is to be found over such a wide area would suggest that this is an image ingrained deep within the human psyche or, if there is a common source, that it is very ancient indeed - or both.
It is clear that there is very little evidence to substantiate any theory about it’s origin and that we can only build a picture of the development of this image through circumstantial evidence and by intelligent guesswork.
In the simplest terms that are two main directions to research about the Green Man and many variations on these directions. Firstly there is the theory, that has grown out of Sir James George Frazer’s The Golden Bough (1890s) and been fed by Robert Graves. This approximately follows the idea that images such as the Green Man were inherited from a pre Christian age and can be identified with paganism and the regeneration of the ‘king’ and the growing season. In other words the images are closely associated with nature, as you would expect from the foliage that is integrated with the carvings.
left and lower left: the Green Man; sacrifice
acrylic and mixed media on canvas; 76cm x 61; 2007
1. detail; 2. full frame; 3. detail
This view is strongly opposed by Anthony Weir and James Jarman who argue against any connection with an earlier religion and state that the Green Man image is part of ‘a family of motifs originally intended to depict the Seven Deadly Sins - with the Green Man representing Lust.’
Anthony Weir and James Jerman, Images of Lust - sexual carvings on medieval churches, Batsford 1986.
What I find hard to follow is the rather narrow definition of this image. I also find difficulty with the way that this argument is put forward in that the authors dismiss other theories for reasons of lack of evidence. I cannot find any real evidence for any of the theories but most of them have some degree of possibility.
We can see from Petrach’s writing that the people of the medieval world feared raw nature and had withdrawn (in a religious sense) into an enclosed world of Christianity. However, there is the possibilty that there were other ideas that influenced the majority of the population who would not have associated the natural world with sin and with lust. It is possible, as some authors have suggested, that elements of an earlier religion, or religions, coexisted with early Christianity and were absorbed by it.
James Obelkevich writes, ‘It is hard to avoid the conclusion that paganism was dominant and Christianity recessive in popular religion. Paganism was rarely christianized, but Christianity was often paganized.’
James Obelkevich, Religion and rural society - South Lindsey 1825-1875, Clarendon, 1976.
last updated Saturday 5th January 2008
left: green man; roof boss, the Lady Chapel, Ely cathedral
