Gina Blooms' article does a close analysis of George Sandys' 1632 translation of the myth of "Narcissus and Echo" with a focus on the portrayal of the character, Echo, and the implications of 'moralizing' effect that Sandys sought to convey to this Early Modern audience. In her article, she outlines for us the Early Modern view of Ovid's metamorphoses, the deliberate choices that Sandys' made as he was translating the myth, and finally his
She begins with a discussion of Early Modern views towards Ovid's Metamorphoses, and Sandys struggle to find an appropriate place for pagan mythology in a Christian world that sought to find philosophical and moral truth in the literature that was studied during the time period. She notes the during this search for morality, these myths were translated and altered to make them fit for their Early Modern audience.
She then demonstrates this moralizing process in Sandy's translation of the myth of "Narcissus and Echo," taking careful note of how his translation makes a deliberate effort to give Echo a sense of vocal agency that is not present in the original Latin of Ovid. One particular instance that stands out is the translation of Echo's response to Narcissus's words, " 'ecquis adest?' (is anyone here? [III. 380])" (Bloom 131). She points out that a previously adequate translation of Echo's response could have been: " 'adest' ('here'), but Sandys deliberately translates Narcissus' words as " 'Is any nigh?' " (131), thus allowing Echo to respond with the words, "I." Rather than going for a direct translation, he opts to utilize the aural possibilities that are offered by the English language. In doing so, he grants Echo a sense of agency over the use of her voice.
While this definitely conveys a greater sense of agency for the female Echo, her autonomy is also undermined she is depicted immorally. This is apparent in Sandy's commentary on the myth. Through his commentary, Sandys maintains that Echo's voice is not an original voice; she is merely a "sound," not a "figure" (146). And even he acknowledges her voice, it is only as part of a tradition of "loquacious and lascivious women" (148). As Bloom notes, Sandys "needed to normalize, in order to dismiss, Echo's unintentional but effective vocality" (149).
Bloom's article clearly demonstrates the need for close examination of the texts that were utilized in the Early Modern Era. As people of the time period realized, women most definitely had voices and a sense of agency, even if their voices were characterized as immoral. Why else would such a translation cause such anxiety amongst those who read it?
Bloom, Gina. "Localizing Disembodied Voice in Sandys's 'Narcissus and Echo.' " Ovid and the Renaissance. Ed. Goran Stanivukovi. Toronto: U Toronto Press, 2001: 129-154.
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Saturday, November 30, 2013
The Symbolic Torch of Ancient Marriage Rituals in The Life of Christina of Markyate
The Symbolic Torch of Ancient Marriage Rituals in The Life of Christina of Markyate
As The Life of Christina of Markyate progresses, it is notable that the most significant aspects of Christina's life are marked by the men who surround her: Sueno, her childhood teacher; Burthred, her husband; Roger, her spiritual director; the unnamed cleric, her companion after the death of Roger; Geoffrey, her patron and disciple, and most importantly, Christ, her proclaimed spouse. While this hagiography was written to celebrate Christina and her achievements as a religious figure, the hagiographer cannot describe her without including a description of a masculine figure who stands beside her at all times. In fact, Dyan Elliott notes that "On the most fundamental level, Christina of Markyate was stalked by the spectre of marriage," despite attempts to create the idea of an "alternative intimacy" (Elliott, Alternative 161). These alternative intimacies exist as Christian constructs: heteroasthecism, synekatism, and the sponsa Christi. While The Life of Christina of Markyate attempts to present these heterosexual alternative intimacies as orthodox constructs that are able to exist within a celibate clergy, it simultaneously reinforces the centrality of marriage in the lives of women. In The Life of Christina of Markyate, I argue that while there is a visible shift from marriage to sexual renunciation with the growing influence of Christianity, the patriarchal aspects of the ancient marriage ceremony are merely reconfigured into Christina’s relationships with men. In examining the use of fire imagery, it is clear that the symbolic torch of the Greek and Roman marriage is carried into the Middle Ages. However, because this is a text focusing on the devout nature of Christina, this visually hazardous symbolic metaphor cannot be maintained. As she progresses on her religious journey a new metaphor of light is used to describe the relationships that she maintains later in her life. Ultimately, Christina's relationships can be contextualized by examining them along with the marriage rituals of classical antiquity
Before we can examine the continuities of the Greek and Roman marriage tradition within early Christianity and the high Middle Ages, it is first necessary to examine the changes that took place as Christianity gained its foothold during the transitional period between Late Antiquity and the early years of the Middle Ages. Peter Brown's "Bodies and Minds: Sexuality and Renunciation in Early Christianity" describes the shifting priorities of those who converted to Christianity from what Tertullian describes as the "present age," or the period in which there was "an endlessly repeated cycle of birth and death" (Brown 483). To illustrate the opposing views that were held at the time, Brown gives us two contrasting individuals: Sosipatra and Macrina. For the civic-minded Roman Sosipatra, it was essential that she marry and give birth to three children (487-8). For the Christian Macrina, it was essential that she abandon marriage and seek sexual renunciation. When Macrina chose a celibate lifestyle, she felt that by avoiding marriage and any other sexual relations, she would be able to put an end to the endless cycle of death that Tertullian refers to in his description of the "present age." Thus, the sexual renunciation and the avoidance of marriage became the mark of a good Christian.
Yet, the concept of marriage is not completely eradicated. Elliott’s work clearly demonstrates that marriage continued to exist in a number of ways among many levels of the Christian population. Firstly, Elliott notes that "the rise of the clergy, whose ultimate success, as Peter Brown has pointed out, was owing to their acceptance of preexisting social structures, which included marriage" (Elliott, Spiritual 31). In fact, among the laity, Paul specifically argues for "the traditional reproductive function of marriage" (24). Despite the influence of Christianity and the emphasis on sexual renunciation, the institution of marriage is upheld. However, this is merely among the laity. Marriage continues to have its hold within Christianity even among the clerical order. These marriages takes the form of what Elliott calls, "alternative intimacies." The three offshoots of marriage that manifest within The Life of Christina of Markyate are (1) synekatism, (2) heteroasthecism and (3) the sponsa Christi. All three of these "alternative intimacies" have their roots in the patristic times and resurface during what Elliott calls the "Age of Affect" in twelfth-century religious texts, such as The Life of Christina of Markyate. Christina and Roger, and Christina and the unnamed cleric practice synekatism, or heterosexual cohabitation (32). Christina and Geoffrey practice a form of heteroastheticism as “a man and a woman, each committed to the celibate life, [where they] manifest an intense attachment to one another” (Elliott, Bride 150). And when Christina makes takes a vow of virginity, she forms “a mystical marriage with Christ” (2) and becomes a sponsa Christi.
As Elliott clearly demonstrates in her work, the ancient institution of marriage had a firm grip upon society, despite the emphasis on sexual renunciation within the Christian religion. This cannot be a surprise considering the role that marriage had to play in the lives of women in the ancient world. Anne Carson’s article, “Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire” describes the fears that worried the ancient Greeks. A woman’s sexuality was considered “savage” (Carson 149), especially to men. The voracious sexual appetite of a woman “drains his manly strength and delivers him to the ‘raw old age’ of premature impotence” (141). However, the “savage” nature of women could be tamed through marriage and the bearing of legitimate children. In fact, “the act of sexual intercourse that engenders or aims at engendering offspring is called ‘work,’ while all other varieties of erotic activity are ‘play’ ” (149). The same type of mentality persists in the Roman Empire. Richard Frank’s article, “Augustus’ Legislation on Marriage and Children,” demonstrates the importance that was placed upon marriage and the birth of legitimate children. Under Augustus' reign, these laws were made to “penalize sexual indulgence, promote child-bearing, and restore the family” (Frank 41). The laws implemented in Rome are the same laws that led Peter Brown to the conclusion that austerity was considered one of the core virtues of the Roman Empire. While Brown presents austerity and sexual renunciation as oppositional mindsets in the Roman world, it is important to notice that both parties felt that sexuality had to be controlled. Unrestrained sexuality became synonymous with negative ideas. For the ancient Greeks and Romans, “Passion for another’s body disturbed, obsessed and obstructed reason and the freedom of the mind” (Rousselle 3). Desire was feared. Amongst the Greeks, all sexual actions that were not for the purposes of procreation was considered “play” at best, and destructive of a man’s virility at worst. Amongst the Romans, laws were enacted promoting marriage and childbirth as productive behavior and punishing lascivious behavior that was considered destructive to the well-being of the Empire. Sexual relations were categorized as either productive or destructive and marriage became the sanctifying force that determined whether a relationship was considered appropriate.
When one looks closely at the language that is used to describe Christina’s various relationships, it becomes clear that these “alternative intimacies” bear a close resemblance to certain ancient ideas of marriage. It is no wonder that these heterosexual bonds are questioned with such ferocity. The same language, symbolism, fears and desires drive people from both time periods. Through an examination and comparison of the fire imagery in Christina’s heterosexual relationships parallels emerge with the marriage ceremonies of Ancient Rome and Greece. The symbolic nature of fire conveniently described heterosexual relationships. Fire, as both a productive and destructive force of nature was used to describe relationships in the ancient times, as well as relationships in the Middle Ages. Nadia Margolis’ article, “Flamma, Furor, and Fol’Amors: Fire and Feminine Madness from the Aeneid to the Roman D’Eneas” compares the fire imagery that was prevalent in the both time periods, connecting the Roman classical epic to the twelfth-century courtly romance. Fire is utilized to describe the relationships between the Roman Aeneas, Dido, and Lavinia and the French Eneas, Dido and Lavine. Within the Aeneid, Margolis asserts that fire imagery is divided into two categories: the “good” fire that represents the “stability and shelter of home and hearth” and the “evil” fire that represents the “destruction and defilement with respect to that very same social institution” (Margolis 133). Vergil’s work is obsessed with sociopolitical aspects of the plot since the main concern of the work is the “social institution” or the future well-being of Rome. The “good” fire describes the love between Aeneas and Lavinia which leads to their marriage and the founding of Rome, while the “evil” fire describes the lustful love between Aeneas and Dido which leads to the destruction of Carthage. Within the Roman D’Eneas, fire is also utilized to describe the same relationships in its own narrative. However, the fire imagery does not concern itself with the sociopolitical obsessions of the Aeneid, instead it focuses on the love narrative central to the courtly romance. The good fire describes the fin’amors of Eneas and Lavine, while the evil fire describes the fol’amors of Eneas and Dido. The use of fire imagery to describe the manner in which a relationship can be either productive or destructive emanates from Vergil’s writing as well as the courtly romances of the Middles Ages.
While The Life of Christina of Markyate is a hagiographical text, it bears many similarities to the romances written in the same time period. In “The Loves of Christina of Markyate,” C. Stephen Jaeger likens Christina to that of a romance heroine in the courtly narrative tradition. According to Jaeger, the text is “rich in reverberations with courtly love” (Jaeger 111). He compares Christina’s hagiography to the romance of Tristan and Isolde. He notes that Christina’s “trickery and cunning” (104) in her manner of avoiding undesirable men, and her love for Geoffrey which allows for the “dynamics of rise” (112) are both motifs found in the courtly narrative tradition. With the similarities between the classical epics, the courtly romances and Christina’s hagiography, cannot be strange to see the same fire imagery in this hagiographical text. When the hagiographer describes Christina and her relationships, he uses the same productive and destructive symbolism of fire. The same words such as flamma, ignis, incendium, scintilla, ardesco, and ardeo make a frequent appearance. Thus, the symbolic meaning of fire remained within the Middle Ages in both the secular and clerical tradition.
This fire imagery is more powerful when it is considered in the context of the time period. While fire is still considered a hazard in today’s modern world, it is less of a concern now than it was in the Middle Ages, an age when fire was used with extreme caution. Heller’s article, “Light as Glamour: The Luminescent Ideal of Beauty in the Roman de la Rose” gives us a better sense of how people regarded fire during the time period. She states that “Night was full of menaces and dangers in this world where artificial light was scarce… [but] artificial light was dangerous as it was the cause of fires in a world of wood” (Heller 937). Fire was one of the few coveted sources of light available to those in the Middles Ages, but it was also a source of great danger. Thus fire became an adaptable symbol for both production and destruction in early literature.
While The Life of Christina of Markyate is a hagiographical text celebrating Christina as a would-be saint, it does not fail to describe Christina’s more inappropriate relations with the men around her. The most obvious of these men are Ralph and the unnamed cleric. In Christina’s relationships with these men, the destructive fire of lust is most prominent. After Christina’s vow of virginity, the devil is “burning [exaredescens] with desire to upset her” (CM 40-1) causing Ralph to lust after her. While Christina resides with the cleric, the devil shoots his “fiery darts [ignita iacula] at him causing him to desire her. These lustful desires are described with the destructive fire reminiscent of the same destructive fires of the inappropriate relationships in Roman literature. In a manner similar to the ancient Greeks and Romans, the same fear of uncontrolled sexuality is present in this hagiographical text. Just as Dido’s lust leads to the destruction of Carthage, Ralph and the unnamed cleric’s lust leads them act inappropriately towards Christina.
However, the text does not limit itself to the use of destructive fire imagery, productive fire imagery is also present within the relationship of Christina and Roger. Similar language is used to describe this relationship: Christina and Roger are “stimulated [arsissent] by such heavenly desire…[and] The fire [calor]… which had been kindled [succenssus fuit] by the spirit of God and burned [ardebat] in each one of them cast its sparks [scintillas] into their hearts by the grace of that mutual glance” (102-3). The only difference between this fire and the fire previously mentioned is the source of the fire. The fire that burnt within Ralph and the cleric is caused by the devil, while the fire that burnt within Christina and Roger is caused by God. Thus, the fire that burns between Christian and Roger is a productive fire that cannot harm them.
While Christina and Roger's relationship is sacred and both parties are able to maintain their chastity, the language that describes their relationship is remarkably similar to the language invoked by the ancient Romans to describe their marriage ceremonies. As Christina and Roger spend more time with each other, their love is likened to “a large flame [flamma] springing from two brands [duabus facibus] joined together [coniuntis]” (102-3). The very mention of the word, coniunctis, invokes the idea of marriage in classical antiquity and the Middles Ages. According to Hersch, the “ancient Roman authors made it clear that a wedding is the union of two people… and described it with the verb iungere, meaning ‘to join’ ” (Hersch 15). Elliott also notes that in the Middle Ages “coniungere…[is] a word with unmistakably matrimonial overtones” (Elliott, Alternative 175). The association of the Latin word, iungere, to marriage is maintained even with the passing of time. Furthermore, the duabus facibus utilized to describe their relationship are also suggestive of the ritualistic meaning of torches in the ancient marriage ceremonies. While Talbot translates facibus as “brands,” it can also be translated as “torches.” These are the same torches that are prevalent in Roman literature, where just “the mention of torches alone was enough to signal that the wedding had taken place” (Hersch 164-5). The joining of these torches was “symbolic of a new unbreakable link between households” (175). When the two torches, representative of Christina and Roger, are joined together a bond that can be likened to a matrimonial bond is created. While it may seem incongruous to compare the bond between Christina and Roger to a marital bond, it is significant to remember that marriage was considered a sanctifying force. In this specific instance, the fiery desires within Christina and Roger are sanctified through their “marriage.” Furthermore, their relationship is symbolized by the productive fire of God that can lead them to a higher state of existence.
The spiritual nature of Christina and Roger's relationship can be further emphasized by the incident with Roger's cowl, when it catches fire. Protected by an inner fire kindled by God, Roger cannot be harmed. While Roger is praying, the devil, invisibly incensed visibly set fire [igne] to the cowl that clung to his back as he prayed, and even so could not distract him" (CM 103-4). This incident bares a close resemblance to the ordeals by fire, which Thomas Head describes in his article, "Saints, Heretics, and Fire: Finding Meaning through the Ordeal" (Head 220). According to Head, relics were sometimes tested for their authenticity by submitting them to an ordeal by fire. Relics that survived were deemed authentic. Because Roger “liv[ed] contrary to the flesh'...[his flesh was] resistant to Augustine's 'purgatorial fires' ” (Head 229). Thus, Roger's spirituality has not been compromised by his decision to reside with Christina. His resistance to physical fire proved his religious sentiment. "[T]he fire [ignis] that burned inwardly in his spirit...rendered his body insensible to the material fire [ignem]" (CM 104-5). He cannot be harmed because there is no guilt present in his relationship with Christina.
In acknowledging both the productive and destructive nature of the bonds between men and women and the idea that the metaphorical fires can be conquered and channeled into acceptable relationships, the hagiographer is able to successfully assert that the controversial moments of synekatism in Christina’s life are sacred. However, the hagiographer acknowledges that the dangers of synekatism are great as he maintains the use of fire imagery even with Christina’s successful cohabitation with Roger. "Exaredescens," the word used to describe Ralph's desire for Christina and "arsissent", the word used to describe the relationship between Christina and Roger, derive from the same Latin root word: "ardesco with definition of "to catch fire" ("Ardesco"). In the scene with Roger's cowl, the material "igne/ignem" caused by the devil is the same "ignis" burning within his soul. The same fiery language is used to describe both the lustful fires of the flesh and the sacred fire of spirituality because of the potential danger of relationships involving synekatism. While Christina and Roger are both devout Christians, they are merely humans. Roger, fearful and aware of the danger that is present in his relationship with Christina, “would not consent to see her or speak with her” (CM 101). The fire of concupiscence is constantly present as it is demonstrated by Christina’s incident with the cleric. While their relationship is pure in the beginning, their uncontrolled sexual appetites eventually get the better of them, and as the cleric constantly pursues Christina, Christina also constantly desires the cleric. Christina’s desire, just like all desire, is described in terms of fire. When her struggles are described, they are described as a “wretched passion [incendio]” (114-5). While incendio can be translated as “passion,” an alternative definition is actually “fire” (“Incendium”). Because Christina is human she is not exempt from the fires of human desire. She is subject to concupiscence like everyone around her.
While the moments of synekatism in Christina’s life are sanctioned, the fiery metaphor associated with the risk of desire is too precarious to be used throughout the entire text. After Christina’s direct encounter with God, “the fire of lust [libidinis ardor] was so completely extinguished that never afterwards could it be revived” (118-9). With its close linguistic and symbolic ties to sexual desire and marriage, the fiery imagery is never used again to describe Christina’s relationships. And it is no longer necessary as Christina never resides with any other male figures in her life again.
After Christina’s many encounters with synekatism, a new visually stimulating metaphor of light is introduced by the text to describe her other heteroasthetic relationships. Because Christina does not reside with Geoffrey, the fire imagery is rendered unnecessary. Yet, as Elliott points out, Christina’s relationship with Geoffrey is still “expressed in quasi-romantic endearments” (Elliott, Alternative 161). Their relationship “parallels the traditional understanding of the wife’s role as ancillary to the male” (162). Once again, Christina’s relationships cannot be described without employing language more appropriate to the language of marriage. Thus, a faint reminder of the productive fire imagery is present in Christina’s thoughts about Geoffrey. As Christina is praying, she sees him and describes him with a “brightness [candor] mixed with ruddiness [rubore]” (CM 148-9). The relationship between Christina and Geoffrey like all relationships in this text is described in terms of light imagery. Because her relationship with Geoffrey is more sacred, the use of fire imagery is avoided. Instead their relationship is described as a light that is both bright and ruddy; it is a heteroasthetic relationship that is both pure and impure. The purity of their relationship is described by the light imagery, while the impurity is emphasized in the use of the word “rubore,” which has multiple meanings. While the word generally describes “redness,” it can also be used to describe “redness of the face caused by shame” (“Rubor”). Thus, the redness of shame clouds the bright purity of their relationship. Because this is a human relationship between a male and female, it will never have the quality of brightness that is associated with the divine nature of God and the Virgin Mary. There will always be a risk associated with heterosexual relationships. Nevertheless, it is a productive relationship, albeit slightly tainted by desire just like Christina’s other human relationships with Roger and the cleric.
Christina’s ultimate marriage is her marriage to Christ, as she becomes the sponsa Christi. The idea of the sponsa Christi has its roots in the Roman tradition, as Elliott points out, Ambrose “brought the consecration of the virgin in line with secular marriage” (Elliott, Bride 46). She notes that these young virgins “receive the flammeum not simply from her parents, as in a traditional Roman wedding, but at the hands of the bishop” (46-7). Furthermore, the sexual consummation of the Roman marriage was represented in the joining of the women to the church, thus the “church gave birth to many children without the pain of labor” (47). However, the torches symbolic of the Roman marriage are not present in this marriage because they have been transformed into a light that is untainted. This is the same light present in Christina’s relationship with Christ. As she shows her devotion to Christ as his bride, she is granted these many visions of light. The first instance of these visions occurs after Christina endures the trials inflicted by her family, “Christ, wishing to comfort His spouse, gave her consolation through His holy Mother” (75). This vision of the Virgin Mary is one that is accompanied by brilliant light. The Virgin Mary says to Christina, “I will…bring you to the brightness of day [clara luce diei]” (76-77). This clara luce diei is a light that stands in contrast to the light of fire. Unlike the light provided by fire, daylight is both brighter and safer. This phrase also stands in contrast to the light that is used to describe the relationship between Christina and Geoffrey. While the light of that relationship is describe with the word, “rubor,” or “redness,” the word, “clara,” can be translated as not only “bright,” but also “clear” (“Clarus”). This light is untainted by any human desire. Later, as she is praying again, she is granted another vision of the Virgin Mary. The Virgin Mary and the angels are resplendent and “their brightness [splendor] exceeded that of the sun by as much as the radiance of the sun exceeds that of the stars” (110-1). This “splendor” is once again compared to natural light. This divine light is the brightest of all lights in the Middle Ages, as it is described to be brighter than the sun It is a light that is not dangerous, but beneficial. After all, in the Middle Ages, work could only be accomplished by the light of day. Abandoning the dangerous light imagery of the traditional marriage, this new light imagery describes the relationship between Christina and Christ. Unlike the marriage of classical antiquity, the marriage of the sponsa Christi is a new type of marriage, one free from any destructiveness that could stem from human sexual desires. It is one of prayer and devotion. It is a productive marriage that raises Christina’s status higher in the Christian world.
As ideas about heterosexual relationships evolved with the spread of Christianity, the fire imagery that described these relationships evolved along with it. Marriage and the images of carnal fire were no longer appropriate in a religious environment, where sexual renunciation was held up as the ideal. However, because marriage was such as essential part of society it could not be abolished even amongst the clergy. Uncontrolled sexuality was feared and marriage was the means by which sexuality could be controlled. Thus, the same language and symbolism of the ancient marriage ceremony reappears to describe heterosexual relationships within the clergy. The utilization of fire imagery did not condone heterosexual relations, but it did warn the clergy against the destructive nature of these intense relationships. Synekatism, the most similar of these alternative intimacies to actual marriage was the most dangerous. Just like the relationships of classical antiquity, these close relationships between a male and female ascetics had to be sanctified because they feared that the carnal fire between them would become too intense and destructive. On the other hand, heteroastheticism without cohabitation was more acceptable, but even then a certain level of impurity was connected with the idea that two members of the opposite sex could develop such a close bond. The purest of bonds that could be formed between a male and female was the theoretical bond between a female ascetic and Christ.
In classical antiquity, marriage developed as a concept to contain the wild sexuality of women. It was the sanctifying force that allowed for a bond between a man and a woman to develop in a legitimate and acceptable manner. And just as the language and symbolism of marriage are maintained with the passing of time, the patriarchal aspects of marriage are also maintained. While actual marriages did not exist within the clerical setting of the Middles Ages, men continued to exert their control through these alternative intimacies. While Christina’s movement into the religious realm is one of her most empowering moments, her life is still constantly controlled by the men who surround her and her actions are constantly monitored. McNamara accurately notes that while “the proponents of virginity understood that it released women from their normal inferior status, lifting them to the status of man. It is unlikely that so disruptive an arrangement would have won much favor from early Christian writers” (McNamara 30). Thus, this fear of Christina had to be dispelled in her hagiography. From the very beginning of the hagiography, she moves from one man to another man, from her father Autti to her patron Geoffrey. Her two years with Alfwen, a female anchoress, are simply mentioned and their relationship is barely described. On the other hand, her relationships with men are always emphasized. Autti holds a significant amount of influence over her life. Roger determines when they are able to reside with each other. And even when Christina becomes Geoffrey’s spiritual director, Geoffrey exerts a certain level of control over Christina as her patron. She even becomes the flowering herb that he can use as herbal remedy in his vision (Elliott, Alternative 178). And while Christina gains a higher status in the religious community as the sponsa Christi, society cannot accept her unless she and her sexuality are under the direct control of a divine power. Her sexuality and desire must be driven out by the divine Christ baby that appears to her. Ultimately, marriage becomes the controlling force that limits Christina.
Works Cited
Anonymous. The Life of Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth Century Recluse. Trans. C.H. Talbot. New York: Oxford UP, 1987. Print.
“Ardesco.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Brown, Peter. “Bodies and Minds: Sexuality and Renunciation in Early Christianity.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 479-93. Print.
Carson, Anne. “Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 135-70. Print.
“Clarus.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Elliott, Dyan. “Alternative Intimacies: Men, Women and Spiritual Direction in the Twelfth Century.” Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth-century Holy Woman. Ed. Samuel Fanous and Herietta Leyser. London: Routledge, 2004. 160-83. Print.
---. The Bride of Christ Goes to Hell: Metaphor and Embodiment in the Lives of Pious Women. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P. 2012. Print.
---. Spiritual Marriage. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1993. Print.
Frank, Richard I. “Augustus’ Legislation on Marriage and Children.” California Studies in Classical Antiquity: 8 (1975): 41-52. Print.
Head, Thomas. “Saints, Heretics, and Fire: Finding Meaning through the Ordeal.” Monks & Nuns, Saints & Outcasts: Religion in Medieval Society. Ed. Sharon Farmer and Barbara H. Rosenwein. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 2000. 220-38. Print.
Heller, Sarah-Grace. “Light as Glamour: The Luminescent Ideal of Beauty in the Roman de la Rose.” Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies: 76.4 (2001 Oct): 934-59.
Hersch, Karen K. The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity. New York: Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.
“Incendium.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Jaeger, C. Stephen. “The Loves of Christina of Markyate.” Christina of Markyate. Ed. Samuel Fanous and Henrietta Leyser. New York: Routledge, 2005. 99-115. Print.
Margolis, Nadia. "Flamma, Furor, and Fol'amors: Fire and Feminine Madness from the Aeneid to the Roman d'Enéas". Romanic Review: 78.2 (1987 Mar.). 131-147. Print.
McNamara, Jo Ann. “Chaste Marriage and Clerical Celibacy.” Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church. Ed. Vern L. Bullough and James Brundage. Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1982. 22-33. Print.
“Rubor.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Rousselle, Aline. Porneia. Trans. Felicia Pheasant. New York: Basil Blackwell, 1988. Print.
As The Life of Christina of Markyate progresses, it is notable that the most significant aspects of Christina's life are marked by the men who surround her: Sueno, her childhood teacher; Burthred, her husband; Roger, her spiritual director; the unnamed cleric, her companion after the death of Roger; Geoffrey, her patron and disciple, and most importantly, Christ, her proclaimed spouse. While this hagiography was written to celebrate Christina and her achievements as a religious figure, the hagiographer cannot describe her without including a description of a masculine figure who stands beside her at all times. In fact, Dyan Elliott notes that "On the most fundamental level, Christina of Markyate was stalked by the spectre of marriage," despite attempts to create the idea of an "alternative intimacy" (Elliott, Alternative 161). These alternative intimacies exist as Christian constructs: heteroasthecism, synekatism, and the sponsa Christi. While The Life of Christina of Markyate attempts to present these heterosexual alternative intimacies as orthodox constructs that are able to exist within a celibate clergy, it simultaneously reinforces the centrality of marriage in the lives of women. In The Life of Christina of Markyate, I argue that while there is a visible shift from marriage to sexual renunciation with the growing influence of Christianity, the patriarchal aspects of the ancient marriage ceremony are merely reconfigured into Christina’s relationships with men. In examining the use of fire imagery, it is clear that the symbolic torch of the Greek and Roman marriage is carried into the Middle Ages. However, because this is a text focusing on the devout nature of Christina, this visually hazardous symbolic metaphor cannot be maintained. As she progresses on her religious journey a new metaphor of light is used to describe the relationships that she maintains later in her life. Ultimately, Christina's relationships can be contextualized by examining them along with the marriage rituals of classical antiquity
Before we can examine the continuities of the Greek and Roman marriage tradition within early Christianity and the high Middle Ages, it is first necessary to examine the changes that took place as Christianity gained its foothold during the transitional period between Late Antiquity and the early years of the Middle Ages. Peter Brown's "Bodies and Minds: Sexuality and Renunciation in Early Christianity" describes the shifting priorities of those who converted to Christianity from what Tertullian describes as the "present age," or the period in which there was "an endlessly repeated cycle of birth and death" (Brown 483). To illustrate the opposing views that were held at the time, Brown gives us two contrasting individuals: Sosipatra and Macrina. For the civic-minded Roman Sosipatra, it was essential that she marry and give birth to three children (487-8). For the Christian Macrina, it was essential that she abandon marriage and seek sexual renunciation. When Macrina chose a celibate lifestyle, she felt that by avoiding marriage and any other sexual relations, she would be able to put an end to the endless cycle of death that Tertullian refers to in his description of the "present age." Thus, the sexual renunciation and the avoidance of marriage became the mark of a good Christian.
Yet, the concept of marriage is not completely eradicated. Elliott’s work clearly demonstrates that marriage continued to exist in a number of ways among many levels of the Christian population. Firstly, Elliott notes that "the rise of the clergy, whose ultimate success, as Peter Brown has pointed out, was owing to their acceptance of preexisting social structures, which included marriage" (Elliott, Spiritual 31). In fact, among the laity, Paul specifically argues for "the traditional reproductive function of marriage" (24). Despite the influence of Christianity and the emphasis on sexual renunciation, the institution of marriage is upheld. However, this is merely among the laity. Marriage continues to have its hold within Christianity even among the clerical order. These marriages takes the form of what Elliott calls, "alternative intimacies." The three offshoots of marriage that manifest within The Life of Christina of Markyate are (1) synekatism, (2) heteroasthecism and (3) the sponsa Christi. All three of these "alternative intimacies" have their roots in the patristic times and resurface during what Elliott calls the "Age of Affect" in twelfth-century religious texts, such as The Life of Christina of Markyate. Christina and Roger, and Christina and the unnamed cleric practice synekatism, or heterosexual cohabitation (32). Christina and Geoffrey practice a form of heteroastheticism as “a man and a woman, each committed to the celibate life, [where they] manifest an intense attachment to one another” (Elliott, Bride 150). And when Christina makes takes a vow of virginity, she forms “a mystical marriage with Christ” (2) and becomes a sponsa Christi.
As Elliott clearly demonstrates in her work, the ancient institution of marriage had a firm grip upon society, despite the emphasis on sexual renunciation within the Christian religion. This cannot be a surprise considering the role that marriage had to play in the lives of women in the ancient world. Anne Carson’s article, “Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire” describes the fears that worried the ancient Greeks. A woman’s sexuality was considered “savage” (Carson 149), especially to men. The voracious sexual appetite of a woman “drains his manly strength and delivers him to the ‘raw old age’ of premature impotence” (141). However, the “savage” nature of women could be tamed through marriage and the bearing of legitimate children. In fact, “the act of sexual intercourse that engenders or aims at engendering offspring is called ‘work,’ while all other varieties of erotic activity are ‘play’ ” (149). The same type of mentality persists in the Roman Empire. Richard Frank’s article, “Augustus’ Legislation on Marriage and Children,” demonstrates the importance that was placed upon marriage and the birth of legitimate children. Under Augustus' reign, these laws were made to “penalize sexual indulgence, promote child-bearing, and restore the family” (Frank 41). The laws implemented in Rome are the same laws that led Peter Brown to the conclusion that austerity was considered one of the core virtues of the Roman Empire. While Brown presents austerity and sexual renunciation as oppositional mindsets in the Roman world, it is important to notice that both parties felt that sexuality had to be controlled. Unrestrained sexuality became synonymous with negative ideas. For the ancient Greeks and Romans, “Passion for another’s body disturbed, obsessed and obstructed reason and the freedom of the mind” (Rousselle 3). Desire was feared. Amongst the Greeks, all sexual actions that were not for the purposes of procreation was considered “play” at best, and destructive of a man’s virility at worst. Amongst the Romans, laws were enacted promoting marriage and childbirth as productive behavior and punishing lascivious behavior that was considered destructive to the well-being of the Empire. Sexual relations were categorized as either productive or destructive and marriage became the sanctifying force that determined whether a relationship was considered appropriate.
When one looks closely at the language that is used to describe Christina’s various relationships, it becomes clear that these “alternative intimacies” bear a close resemblance to certain ancient ideas of marriage. It is no wonder that these heterosexual bonds are questioned with such ferocity. The same language, symbolism, fears and desires drive people from both time periods. Through an examination and comparison of the fire imagery in Christina’s heterosexual relationships parallels emerge with the marriage ceremonies of Ancient Rome and Greece. The symbolic nature of fire conveniently described heterosexual relationships. Fire, as both a productive and destructive force of nature was used to describe relationships in the ancient times, as well as relationships in the Middle Ages. Nadia Margolis’ article, “Flamma, Furor, and Fol’Amors: Fire and Feminine Madness from the Aeneid to the Roman D’Eneas” compares the fire imagery that was prevalent in the both time periods, connecting the Roman classical epic to the twelfth-century courtly romance. Fire is utilized to describe the relationships between the Roman Aeneas, Dido, and Lavinia and the French Eneas, Dido and Lavine. Within the Aeneid, Margolis asserts that fire imagery is divided into two categories: the “good” fire that represents the “stability and shelter of home and hearth” and the “evil” fire that represents the “destruction and defilement with respect to that very same social institution” (Margolis 133). Vergil’s work is obsessed with sociopolitical aspects of the plot since the main concern of the work is the “social institution” or the future well-being of Rome. The “good” fire describes the love between Aeneas and Lavinia which leads to their marriage and the founding of Rome, while the “evil” fire describes the lustful love between Aeneas and Dido which leads to the destruction of Carthage. Within the Roman D’Eneas, fire is also utilized to describe the same relationships in its own narrative. However, the fire imagery does not concern itself with the sociopolitical obsessions of the Aeneid, instead it focuses on the love narrative central to the courtly romance. The good fire describes the fin’amors of Eneas and Lavine, while the evil fire describes the fol’amors of Eneas and Dido. The use of fire imagery to describe the manner in which a relationship can be either productive or destructive emanates from Vergil’s writing as well as the courtly romances of the Middles Ages.
While The Life of Christina of Markyate is a hagiographical text, it bears many similarities to the romances written in the same time period. In “The Loves of Christina of Markyate,” C. Stephen Jaeger likens Christina to that of a romance heroine in the courtly narrative tradition. According to Jaeger, the text is “rich in reverberations with courtly love” (Jaeger 111). He compares Christina’s hagiography to the romance of Tristan and Isolde. He notes that Christina’s “trickery and cunning” (104) in her manner of avoiding undesirable men, and her love for Geoffrey which allows for the “dynamics of rise” (112) are both motifs found in the courtly narrative tradition. With the similarities between the classical epics, the courtly romances and Christina’s hagiography, cannot be strange to see the same fire imagery in this hagiographical text. When the hagiographer describes Christina and her relationships, he uses the same productive and destructive symbolism of fire. The same words such as flamma, ignis, incendium, scintilla, ardesco, and ardeo make a frequent appearance. Thus, the symbolic meaning of fire remained within the Middle Ages in both the secular and clerical tradition.
This fire imagery is more powerful when it is considered in the context of the time period. While fire is still considered a hazard in today’s modern world, it is less of a concern now than it was in the Middle Ages, an age when fire was used with extreme caution. Heller’s article, “Light as Glamour: The Luminescent Ideal of Beauty in the Roman de la Rose” gives us a better sense of how people regarded fire during the time period. She states that “Night was full of menaces and dangers in this world where artificial light was scarce… [but] artificial light was dangerous as it was the cause of fires in a world of wood” (Heller 937). Fire was one of the few coveted sources of light available to those in the Middles Ages, but it was also a source of great danger. Thus fire became an adaptable symbol for both production and destruction in early literature.
While The Life of Christina of Markyate is a hagiographical text celebrating Christina as a would-be saint, it does not fail to describe Christina’s more inappropriate relations with the men around her. The most obvious of these men are Ralph and the unnamed cleric. In Christina’s relationships with these men, the destructive fire of lust is most prominent. After Christina’s vow of virginity, the devil is “burning [exaredescens] with desire to upset her” (CM 40-1) causing Ralph to lust after her. While Christina resides with the cleric, the devil shoots his “fiery darts [ignita iacula] at him causing him to desire her. These lustful desires are described with the destructive fire reminiscent of the same destructive fires of the inappropriate relationships in Roman literature. In a manner similar to the ancient Greeks and Romans, the same fear of uncontrolled sexuality is present in this hagiographical text. Just as Dido’s lust leads to the destruction of Carthage, Ralph and the unnamed cleric’s lust leads them act inappropriately towards Christina.
However, the text does not limit itself to the use of destructive fire imagery, productive fire imagery is also present within the relationship of Christina and Roger. Similar language is used to describe this relationship: Christina and Roger are “stimulated [arsissent] by such heavenly desire…[and] The fire [calor]… which had been kindled [succenssus fuit] by the spirit of God and burned [ardebat] in each one of them cast its sparks [scintillas] into their hearts by the grace of that mutual glance” (102-3). The only difference between this fire and the fire previously mentioned is the source of the fire. The fire that burnt within Ralph and the cleric is caused by the devil, while the fire that burnt within Christina and Roger is caused by God. Thus, the fire that burns between Christian and Roger is a productive fire that cannot harm them.
While Christina and Roger's relationship is sacred and both parties are able to maintain their chastity, the language that describes their relationship is remarkably similar to the language invoked by the ancient Romans to describe their marriage ceremonies. As Christina and Roger spend more time with each other, their love is likened to “a large flame [flamma] springing from two brands [duabus facibus] joined together [coniuntis]” (102-3). The very mention of the word, coniunctis, invokes the idea of marriage in classical antiquity and the Middles Ages. According to Hersch, the “ancient Roman authors made it clear that a wedding is the union of two people… and described it with the verb iungere, meaning ‘to join’ ” (Hersch 15). Elliott also notes that in the Middle Ages “coniungere…[is] a word with unmistakably matrimonial overtones” (Elliott, Alternative 175). The association of the Latin word, iungere, to marriage is maintained even with the passing of time. Furthermore, the duabus facibus utilized to describe their relationship are also suggestive of the ritualistic meaning of torches in the ancient marriage ceremonies. While Talbot translates facibus as “brands,” it can also be translated as “torches.” These are the same torches that are prevalent in Roman literature, where just “the mention of torches alone was enough to signal that the wedding had taken place” (Hersch 164-5). The joining of these torches was “symbolic of a new unbreakable link between households” (175). When the two torches, representative of Christina and Roger, are joined together a bond that can be likened to a matrimonial bond is created. While it may seem incongruous to compare the bond between Christina and Roger to a marital bond, it is significant to remember that marriage was considered a sanctifying force. In this specific instance, the fiery desires within Christina and Roger are sanctified through their “marriage.” Furthermore, their relationship is symbolized by the productive fire of God that can lead them to a higher state of existence.
The spiritual nature of Christina and Roger's relationship can be further emphasized by the incident with Roger's cowl, when it catches fire. Protected by an inner fire kindled by God, Roger cannot be harmed. While Roger is praying, the devil, invisibly incensed visibly set fire [igne] to the cowl that clung to his back as he prayed, and even so could not distract him" (CM 103-4). This incident bares a close resemblance to the ordeals by fire, which Thomas Head describes in his article, "Saints, Heretics, and Fire: Finding Meaning through the Ordeal" (Head 220). According to Head, relics were sometimes tested for their authenticity by submitting them to an ordeal by fire. Relics that survived were deemed authentic. Because Roger “liv[ed] contrary to the flesh'...[his flesh was] resistant to Augustine's 'purgatorial fires' ” (Head 229). Thus, Roger's spirituality has not been compromised by his decision to reside with Christina. His resistance to physical fire proved his religious sentiment. "[T]he fire [ignis] that burned inwardly in his spirit...rendered his body insensible to the material fire [ignem]" (CM 104-5). He cannot be harmed because there is no guilt present in his relationship with Christina.
In acknowledging both the productive and destructive nature of the bonds between men and women and the idea that the metaphorical fires can be conquered and channeled into acceptable relationships, the hagiographer is able to successfully assert that the controversial moments of synekatism in Christina’s life are sacred. However, the hagiographer acknowledges that the dangers of synekatism are great as he maintains the use of fire imagery even with Christina’s successful cohabitation with Roger. "Exaredescens," the word used to describe Ralph's desire for Christina and "arsissent", the word used to describe the relationship between Christina and Roger, derive from the same Latin root word: "ardesco with definition of "to catch fire" ("Ardesco"). In the scene with Roger's cowl, the material "igne/ignem" caused by the devil is the same "ignis" burning within his soul. The same fiery language is used to describe both the lustful fires of the flesh and the sacred fire of spirituality because of the potential danger of relationships involving synekatism. While Christina and Roger are both devout Christians, they are merely humans. Roger, fearful and aware of the danger that is present in his relationship with Christina, “would not consent to see her or speak with her” (CM 101). The fire of concupiscence is constantly present as it is demonstrated by Christina’s incident with the cleric. While their relationship is pure in the beginning, their uncontrolled sexual appetites eventually get the better of them, and as the cleric constantly pursues Christina, Christina also constantly desires the cleric. Christina’s desire, just like all desire, is described in terms of fire. When her struggles are described, they are described as a “wretched passion [incendio]” (114-5). While incendio can be translated as “passion,” an alternative definition is actually “fire” (“Incendium”). Because Christina is human she is not exempt from the fires of human desire. She is subject to concupiscence like everyone around her.
While the moments of synekatism in Christina’s life are sanctioned, the fiery metaphor associated with the risk of desire is too precarious to be used throughout the entire text. After Christina’s direct encounter with God, “the fire of lust [libidinis ardor] was so completely extinguished that never afterwards could it be revived” (118-9). With its close linguistic and symbolic ties to sexual desire and marriage, the fiery imagery is never used again to describe Christina’s relationships. And it is no longer necessary as Christina never resides with any other male figures in her life again.
After Christina’s many encounters with synekatism, a new visually stimulating metaphor of light is introduced by the text to describe her other heteroasthetic relationships. Because Christina does not reside with Geoffrey, the fire imagery is rendered unnecessary. Yet, as Elliott points out, Christina’s relationship with Geoffrey is still “expressed in quasi-romantic endearments” (Elliott, Alternative 161). Their relationship “parallels the traditional understanding of the wife’s role as ancillary to the male” (162). Once again, Christina’s relationships cannot be described without employing language more appropriate to the language of marriage. Thus, a faint reminder of the productive fire imagery is present in Christina’s thoughts about Geoffrey. As Christina is praying, she sees him and describes him with a “brightness [candor] mixed with ruddiness [rubore]” (CM 148-9). The relationship between Christina and Geoffrey like all relationships in this text is described in terms of light imagery. Because her relationship with Geoffrey is more sacred, the use of fire imagery is avoided. Instead their relationship is described as a light that is both bright and ruddy; it is a heteroasthetic relationship that is both pure and impure. The purity of their relationship is described by the light imagery, while the impurity is emphasized in the use of the word “rubore,” which has multiple meanings. While the word generally describes “redness,” it can also be used to describe “redness of the face caused by shame” (“Rubor”). Thus, the redness of shame clouds the bright purity of their relationship. Because this is a human relationship between a male and female, it will never have the quality of brightness that is associated with the divine nature of God and the Virgin Mary. There will always be a risk associated with heterosexual relationships. Nevertheless, it is a productive relationship, albeit slightly tainted by desire just like Christina’s other human relationships with Roger and the cleric.
Christina’s ultimate marriage is her marriage to Christ, as she becomes the sponsa Christi. The idea of the sponsa Christi has its roots in the Roman tradition, as Elliott points out, Ambrose “brought the consecration of the virgin in line with secular marriage” (Elliott, Bride 46). She notes that these young virgins “receive the flammeum not simply from her parents, as in a traditional Roman wedding, but at the hands of the bishop” (46-7). Furthermore, the sexual consummation of the Roman marriage was represented in the joining of the women to the church, thus the “church gave birth to many children without the pain of labor” (47). However, the torches symbolic of the Roman marriage are not present in this marriage because they have been transformed into a light that is untainted. This is the same light present in Christina’s relationship with Christ. As she shows her devotion to Christ as his bride, she is granted these many visions of light. The first instance of these visions occurs after Christina endures the trials inflicted by her family, “Christ, wishing to comfort His spouse, gave her consolation through His holy Mother” (75). This vision of the Virgin Mary is one that is accompanied by brilliant light. The Virgin Mary says to Christina, “I will…bring you to the brightness of day [clara luce diei]” (76-77). This clara luce diei is a light that stands in contrast to the light of fire. Unlike the light provided by fire, daylight is both brighter and safer. This phrase also stands in contrast to the light that is used to describe the relationship between Christina and Geoffrey. While the light of that relationship is describe with the word, “rubor,” or “redness,” the word, “clara,” can be translated as not only “bright,” but also “clear” (“Clarus”). This light is untainted by any human desire. Later, as she is praying again, she is granted another vision of the Virgin Mary. The Virgin Mary and the angels are resplendent and “their brightness [splendor] exceeded that of the sun by as much as the radiance of the sun exceeds that of the stars” (110-1). This “splendor” is once again compared to natural light. This divine light is the brightest of all lights in the Middle Ages, as it is described to be brighter than the sun It is a light that is not dangerous, but beneficial. After all, in the Middle Ages, work could only be accomplished by the light of day. Abandoning the dangerous light imagery of the traditional marriage, this new light imagery describes the relationship between Christina and Christ. Unlike the marriage of classical antiquity, the marriage of the sponsa Christi is a new type of marriage, one free from any destructiveness that could stem from human sexual desires. It is one of prayer and devotion. It is a productive marriage that raises Christina’s status higher in the Christian world.
As ideas about heterosexual relationships evolved with the spread of Christianity, the fire imagery that described these relationships evolved along with it. Marriage and the images of carnal fire were no longer appropriate in a religious environment, where sexual renunciation was held up as the ideal. However, because marriage was such as essential part of society it could not be abolished even amongst the clergy. Uncontrolled sexuality was feared and marriage was the means by which sexuality could be controlled. Thus, the same language and symbolism of the ancient marriage ceremony reappears to describe heterosexual relationships within the clergy. The utilization of fire imagery did not condone heterosexual relations, but it did warn the clergy against the destructive nature of these intense relationships. Synekatism, the most similar of these alternative intimacies to actual marriage was the most dangerous. Just like the relationships of classical antiquity, these close relationships between a male and female ascetics had to be sanctified because they feared that the carnal fire between them would become too intense and destructive. On the other hand, heteroastheticism without cohabitation was more acceptable, but even then a certain level of impurity was connected with the idea that two members of the opposite sex could develop such a close bond. The purest of bonds that could be formed between a male and female was the theoretical bond between a female ascetic and Christ.
In classical antiquity, marriage developed as a concept to contain the wild sexuality of women. It was the sanctifying force that allowed for a bond between a man and a woman to develop in a legitimate and acceptable manner. And just as the language and symbolism of marriage are maintained with the passing of time, the patriarchal aspects of marriage are also maintained. While actual marriages did not exist within the clerical setting of the Middles Ages, men continued to exert their control through these alternative intimacies. While Christina’s movement into the religious realm is one of her most empowering moments, her life is still constantly controlled by the men who surround her and her actions are constantly monitored. McNamara accurately notes that while “the proponents of virginity understood that it released women from their normal inferior status, lifting them to the status of man. It is unlikely that so disruptive an arrangement would have won much favor from early Christian writers” (McNamara 30). Thus, this fear of Christina had to be dispelled in her hagiography. From the very beginning of the hagiography, she moves from one man to another man, from her father Autti to her patron Geoffrey. Her two years with Alfwen, a female anchoress, are simply mentioned and their relationship is barely described. On the other hand, her relationships with men are always emphasized. Autti holds a significant amount of influence over her life. Roger determines when they are able to reside with each other. And even when Christina becomes Geoffrey’s spiritual director, Geoffrey exerts a certain level of control over Christina as her patron. She even becomes the flowering herb that he can use as herbal remedy in his vision (Elliott, Alternative 178). And while Christina gains a higher status in the religious community as the sponsa Christi, society cannot accept her unless she and her sexuality are under the direct control of a divine power. Her sexuality and desire must be driven out by the divine Christ baby that appears to her. Ultimately, marriage becomes the controlling force that limits Christina.
Works Cited
Anonymous. The Life of Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth Century Recluse. Trans. C.H. Talbot. New York: Oxford UP, 1987. Print.
“Ardesco.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Brown, Peter. “Bodies and Minds: Sexuality and Renunciation in Early Christianity.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 479-93. Print.
Carson, Anne. “Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 135-70. Print.
“Clarus.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Elliott, Dyan. “Alternative Intimacies: Men, Women and Spiritual Direction in the Twelfth Century.” Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth-century Holy Woman. Ed. Samuel Fanous and Herietta Leyser. London: Routledge, 2004. 160-83. Print.
---. The Bride of Christ Goes to Hell: Metaphor and Embodiment in the Lives of Pious Women. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P. 2012. Print.
---. Spiritual Marriage. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1993. Print.
Frank, Richard I. “Augustus’ Legislation on Marriage and Children.” California Studies in Classical Antiquity: 8 (1975): 41-52. Print.
Head, Thomas. “Saints, Heretics, and Fire: Finding Meaning through the Ordeal.” Monks & Nuns, Saints & Outcasts: Religion in Medieval Society. Ed. Sharon Farmer and Barbara H. Rosenwein. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 2000. 220-38. Print.
Heller, Sarah-Grace. “Light as Glamour: The Luminescent Ideal of Beauty in the Roman de la Rose.” Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies: 76.4 (2001 Oct): 934-59.
Hersch, Karen K. The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity. New York: Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.
“Incendium.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Jaeger, C. Stephen. “The Loves of Christina of Markyate.” Christina of Markyate. Ed. Samuel Fanous and Henrietta Leyser. New York: Routledge, 2005. 99-115. Print.
Margolis, Nadia. "Flamma, Furor, and Fol'amors: Fire and Feminine Madness from the Aeneid to the Roman d'Enéas". Romanic Review: 78.2 (1987 Mar.). 131-147. Print.
McNamara, Jo Ann. “Chaste Marriage and Clerical Celibacy.” Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church. Ed. Vern L. Bullough and James Brundage. Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1982. 22-33. Print.
“Rubor.” Oxford Latin Dictionary. 1982. Print.
Rousselle, Aline. Porneia. Trans. Felicia Pheasant. New York: Basil Blackwell, 1988. Print.
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
From Boys to Men: Formations of Masculinity in Late Medieval Europe
Book Review:
Growing Up Male in Late Medieval Europe
Ruth Mazo Karras’ From Boys to Men: Formations of Masculinity in Late Medieval Europe focuses on medieval masculinity during a crucial period of male development, which Karras calls “young manhood” (15). As she explores the social discourses amongst varying groups within the hierarchy of late medieval Europe, she compares and contrasts them, deconstructing the oversimplified notion that masculinity is merely the opposition of femininity. Asserting that masculine identity was acquired, she outlines the criteria that young men had to fulfill in order to be considered an adult male in their respective social backgrounds.
In Chapter 2, she focuses on the concept of knighthood in the aristocratic courts. There young men demonstrated their military prowess, and gentility as a sign of their masculinity. In Chapter 3, she focuses on the university scholars. There men were trained in rationality and moderation, as their masculinity stood in opposition to beastliness. In Chapter 4, she focuses on the towns craftsmen. There masculinity depended upon financial success and independence.
While the means by which men earned their masculine identities varied greatly, Karras points out that there were overarching themes that were present. Of these themes, she notes that masculine identity was formed through the acquisition of power that was gained through competition with other men. In the courts, knights proved their prowess through physical combat, as well as their ability to attract women. In the universities, scholars proved their prowess through verbal disputations, in which men verbally sparred with each other about various questions of debate. Lastly, town craftsmen proved their prowess through their ability to dominate other craftsmen economically by becoming the masters of their own trades.
Yet, despite the competition within each social group, Karras, also, notes that masculine identity could be reinforced through masculine bonds as well. Confraternities existed within each social group, in which young men bonded through activities, and assisted each other so they could achieve their goals. Amongst knights, brotherhoods were formed. Amongst scholars, men formed bonds through social events such as feasting, drinking, and gambling. Amongst craftsmen, masters, journeymen, and apprentices joined guilds and socialized with each other in taverns. Through these masculine bonds, men were able to both assert their masculine identity as well as empower themselves.
Karras presents an excellent overview of the formation of masculine identity in late medieval Europe. She gives both the prescriptive ideals of the time period, as well as the reality of the situation within each social group, demonstrating that there is no monolithic view of masculinity. Thus, she emphasizes that there are multiple discourses that compete with each other, creating tensions in what it means to be a man during the late medieval period. However, as she clearly notes and understands, the knights, university scholars, and craftsmen did not form the majority of the population in Medieval Europe, and she does not discuss the clergymen, or the rural peasantry in much detail.
Her work is similar to that Brent Shaw's work because it helps us examine the male role in pieces, such as "The Passion of the Perpetua." As Karras points out, this study of masculinity is a necessity, “we cannot understand women’s lives without understanding men as men” (19). With the absence of women from each of these male domains, as well as the dominance and commodification of women, it is only through a firm grasp of masculinity that we can gain an understanding of the role that women played. In moving forward, it is important that we examine the power plays that drive male-male and male-female relationships in the literature of the time.
Works Cited
Karras, Ruth Mazo. From Boys to Men: Formations of Masculinity in Late Medieval Europe. Philadephia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2003.
Growing Up Male in Late Medieval Europe
Ruth Mazo Karras’ From Boys to Men: Formations of Masculinity in Late Medieval Europe focuses on medieval masculinity during a crucial period of male development, which Karras calls “young manhood” (15). As she explores the social discourses amongst varying groups within the hierarchy of late medieval Europe, she compares and contrasts them, deconstructing the oversimplified notion that masculinity is merely the opposition of femininity. Asserting that masculine identity was acquired, she outlines the criteria that young men had to fulfill in order to be considered an adult male in their respective social backgrounds.
In Chapter 2, she focuses on the concept of knighthood in the aristocratic courts. There young men demonstrated their military prowess, and gentility as a sign of their masculinity. In Chapter 3, she focuses on the university scholars. There men were trained in rationality and moderation, as their masculinity stood in opposition to beastliness. In Chapter 4, she focuses on the towns craftsmen. There masculinity depended upon financial success and independence.
While the means by which men earned their masculine identities varied greatly, Karras points out that there were overarching themes that were present. Of these themes, she notes that masculine identity was formed through the acquisition of power that was gained through competition with other men. In the courts, knights proved their prowess through physical combat, as well as their ability to attract women. In the universities, scholars proved their prowess through verbal disputations, in which men verbally sparred with each other about various questions of debate. Lastly, town craftsmen proved their prowess through their ability to dominate other craftsmen economically by becoming the masters of their own trades.
Yet, despite the competition within each social group, Karras, also, notes that masculine identity could be reinforced through masculine bonds as well. Confraternities existed within each social group, in which young men bonded through activities, and assisted each other so they could achieve their goals. Amongst knights, brotherhoods were formed. Amongst scholars, men formed bonds through social events such as feasting, drinking, and gambling. Amongst craftsmen, masters, journeymen, and apprentices joined guilds and socialized with each other in taverns. Through these masculine bonds, men were able to both assert their masculine identity as well as empower themselves.
Karras presents an excellent overview of the formation of masculine identity in late medieval Europe. She gives both the prescriptive ideals of the time period, as well as the reality of the situation within each social group, demonstrating that there is no monolithic view of masculinity. Thus, she emphasizes that there are multiple discourses that compete with each other, creating tensions in what it means to be a man during the late medieval period. However, as she clearly notes and understands, the knights, university scholars, and craftsmen did not form the majority of the population in Medieval Europe, and she does not discuss the clergymen, or the rural peasantry in much detail.
Her work is similar to that Brent Shaw's work because it helps us examine the male role in pieces, such as "The Passion of the Perpetua." As Karras points out, this study of masculinity is a necessity, “we cannot understand women’s lives without understanding men as men” (19). With the absence of women from each of these male domains, as well as the dominance and commodification of women, it is only through a firm grasp of masculinity that we can gain an understanding of the role that women played. In moving forward, it is important that we examine the power plays that drive male-male and male-female relationships in the literature of the time.
Works Cited
Karras, Ruth Mazo. From Boys to Men: Formations of Masculinity in Late Medieval Europe. Philadephia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2003.
Doubts.
Today was just one of those days when I have severe doubts about whether I am really doing something I want to do.
Of course, this leads to a 15-minute Google search session, and a perusal of all the "wonderful' websites that hope to deter you from pursuing such a path. Very encouraging material, indeed.
On the other hand, I think I will do some reading, (or rather, I will do some more reading) on:
Peters, Robert L. Getting What You Came For: A Smart Student's Guide to Earning a Master's or a Ph.D. New York: Noonday, 1997.
I could use some advice, but my sub-par human communication skills are a major deterrent to actually asking a real person.
P.S. We, English majors, are quite pretentious with our vocabulary. Every writer has their favorite "smart" words, Nancy Partner's word of the article: "polemical". My post-colonial professor's: "nuanced." Mine: I think I'll try "liminal," it should work well with my Derridian tendencies.
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Title Unknown.
It always starts with a "simple idea." Topic: Medieval classical reception of fire imagery in The Life of Christina of Markyate. I start researching. I find a great article: Nadia, Margolis. "Flamma, Furor and Fol'Amors: Fire and Feminine Madness from The Aeneid to the Roman D'eneas." I have a bad research day: I hate sitting in the Rose Main Reading Room (which I insists smells like feet), and finding out that all my articles are useless. I mention my idea to my professor, she mentions The Letters of Abelard and Heloise. Now, I have jumbled mess of ideas in my head, and way more research than I even want to attempt.
Secondary Sources:Brown, Peter. “Bodies and Minds: Sexuality and Renunciation in Early Christianity.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 479-93. Print.
Carson, Anne. “Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 135-70. Print.
Elliott, Dyan. “Alternative Intimacies: Men, Women and Spiritual Direction in the Twelfth Century.” Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth-century Holy Woman. Ed. Samuel Fanous and Herietta Leyser. London: Routledge, 2004. 160-83. Print.
---. The Bride of Christ Goes to Hell: Metaphor and Embodiment in the Lives of Pious Women. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P. 2012. Print.
---. Spiritual Marriage. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1993. Print.
Heller, Sarah-Grace. “Light as Glamour: The Luminescent Ideal of Beauty in the Roman de la Rose.” Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies: 76.4 (2001 Oct): 934-59.
Hersch, Karen K. The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity. New York: Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.
Margolis, Nadia. "Flamma, Furor, and Fol'amors: Fire and Feminine Madness from the Aeneid to the Roman d'Enéas". Romanic Review: 78.2 (1987 Mar.). 131-147. Print.
McGuire, Brian Patrick. Friendship and Community: The Monastic Experience, 350-1250. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 2011. Print.
Dictionaries Being Consulted:
Good fire imagery. Bad fire imagery. Madness (Roman, medieval, and of course, my own). Christina of Markyate. Abelard and Heloise. Plato. Plato's Cave. Light. Truth. Christianity. Marriage. Bride of Christ. Plato's Symposium. Love. Reproduction (of babies, and ideas) as path to immortality. Diotima.
I hate having a good idea that I need to connect together. I hate the connecting. Yet, it feels so good when it all connects.
I hate Plato. Yet, it always goes back to Plato. Always. I swear the bloke haunts me. Ugh. Note to self from my Medieval professor: You're a couple hundred years too early for Plato. The people of Middle Age Europe liked Aristotle, Ovid, NOT PLATO. Time to pursue alternative philosophies. Especially in republicanism. ;D
Prospectus
for Research Essay:
Primary Source:
The Life of Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth Century Recluse. Trans. C.H. Talbot. New York: Oxford UP, 1987. Print.Secondary Sources:Brown, Peter. “Bodies and Minds: Sexuality and Renunciation in Early Christianity.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 479-93. Print.
Carson, Anne. “Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire.” Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient World. Ed. David M. Halperin, et al. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. 135-70. Print.
Elliott, Dyan. “Alternative Intimacies: Men, Women and Spiritual Direction in the Twelfth Century.” Christina of Markyate: A Twelfth-century Holy Woman. Ed. Samuel Fanous and Herietta Leyser. London: Routledge, 2004. 160-83. Print.
---. The Bride of Christ Goes to Hell: Metaphor and Embodiment in the Lives of Pious Women. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P. 2012. Print.
---. Spiritual Marriage. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1993. Print.
Heller, Sarah-Grace. “Light as Glamour: The Luminescent Ideal of Beauty in the Roman de la Rose.” Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies: 76.4 (2001 Oct): 934-59.
Hersch, Karen K. The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity. New York: Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.
Margolis, Nadia. "Flamma, Furor, and Fol'amors: Fire and Feminine Madness from the Aeneid to the Roman d'Enéas". Romanic Review: 78.2 (1987 Mar.). 131-147. Print.
McGuire, Brian Patrick. Friendship and Community: The Monastic Experience, 350-1250. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 2011. Print.
Dictionaries Being Consulted:
Oxford
Latin Dictionary
Dictionary of
Medieval Latin from British Sources
Three
Questions:
1. Fire
is both a productive and destructive force. How is the versatility of the fire
imagery utilized in The Life of Christina
of Markyate?
2. How
is the fire imagery of marriage from Classical Antiquity reworked into the
descriptions of relationships in the Middle Ages?
3. Christina’s
relationship with Roger is described in terms of fire, while Christina’s
relationship with Christ is described in terms of light. What do these
descriptions indicate about each relationship?
The focus of my essay will be on the reworking of fire
imagery from Classical Antiquity into the Middle Ages and the manner in which
it is utilized to described the relationships between Christina and Roger, and
Christina and Christ. While Peter Brown focuses on the changes that take place
with the introduction of Christianity, I argue that the while there is a shift
from marriage to sexual renunciation, the symbolic torch of the Roman marriage
is carried into the Middle Ages. Nadia Margolis’s article clearly demonstrates
this in the secular tradition of courtly love. However, I focus on the symbolic
fire in The Life of Christina of Markyate,
a hagiographical text. While the main focus of the essay will be on fire
imagery, I will also touch upon the light imagery that is prevalent within the
Middle Ages, elaborating on the significance of the use of light imagery
instead of fire imagery in Christina’s relationship with Christ. Ultimately, my
argument is that while the importance of marriage is more heavily emphasized in
Roman times, a bond between a man and a woman in either time periods can become
a sanctifying force in society even a within a religious community. In my
research, I will be working primarily with the English translation by C. H.
Talbot, but I will also utilize the Latin texts on the opposite pages.
I love having a solidified topic! ;D
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)