Exhibitionist With Fishes

[poliphilo]

The west front of Rochester cathedral is Romanesque. Beautiful arcading, beautiful diaper work.



I called Ailz over.

"See that figure in the central lunette. I think it's a Sheela-na-gig. What do you think?" She thought it was too. But it was a long way off the ground and we couldn't be sure of the details.

When I got home I blew up the image and it became rather more mysterious.



I think we can agree that it's an exhibitionist- that's to say- a grotesque figure displaying "those parts that men delight to see". They can be either male or female- and in this instance someone has taken a hammer to the crucial area so we can't be sure. I imagine the vandalism was deliberate- and probably took place in the 19th century- when people were more irked by public indecency than at any time before or since. The face is well-weathered but I rather think I can see a big moustache and a little beard, so it's probably male. But the really odd thing is it has a large fish in either hand.

Is it a merman? A river god?

Rochester sits on the banks of the river Medway so that last suggestion is the one I'm going for...

Comments

[cmcmck]

You're making me homesick, already!

[poliphilo]

Sorry about that.

Rochester is one of my favourite towns. It has everything you could possibly want- castle, cathedral, river, quaint and historic architecture, Dickens, charity shops, bookshops- and nobody knows it's there.

[cmcmck]

But becoming more and more like London on the Medway and in the end, we couldn't stay any longer- we were priced out and we're not short of a bob or two!

[poliphilo]

Did you see the newspaper report about how the influx of young Londoners into the home counties is strengthening the Labour party in areas which the Tories think of as their birthright?

[cmcmck]

That said, Rochester has long been a marginal as have Gillingham and Chatham & Aylesford.