NG200403008

Example : «they will in a very short time be able to land forces in England, and to put us to trouble here» (23 March 1648) 1.4. VERTICALITY SCHEMA In the metaphorical conceptualisation we will explain how the authoritarian relationship between God and the Army can be explained through the up-down orientation , that means, that the entity in the upwards position is powerful than the entity downwards. God is up , the army is down . Also, the relation between the Army and the enemies follows the same pattern. Lakoff and Johnson understand that schema with the ‘me-first orientation’ 8 . We are in an upright position in relation to others. Cromwell and the Army are good, the enemies are bad. Finally, Cromwell, himself, prefers to occupy a lower position in relation to the army, rejecting, in that way, the position that normally occupies a powerful leader. We are up, they are down .. The vocabulary and the prepositions help us to recognise these orientations. Example : «...who are men who have received gifts from Him that ascended up on high...» (4 Sept. 1654). Example: «God hath owned you...you are called with a high call» (4 July 1653). Example: We endeavoured ...to keep up the reputation of honest men in the world» (4 July 1653). Example: «My will could not be but subject to those that were over me» (23 March 1648). Example: «how it hath pleased God to beat down all your enemies under your feet, both in this kingdom and the kingdom of Scotland» (23 March 1648). Based on those image-schematic structures, conceptual metaphors come into discourse reality, let’s see how Cromwell conceptualised his relation to God, the Army and the enemies taking as a foundation some religious metaphors. CROMWELL AND THE ARMY ARE THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL 553 8 G. L AKOFF -M. J OHNSON , Metaphors We Live By (Chicago 1980) 132.