List of Texts

I hope this isn't too late to help people, but if you all wanted to make sure you touched all the readings here's a complete list. :-)

Augustine: Confessions and City of God
Athanasius: Life of Antony
Sulpicius Severus: Martin
Beowulf
Gregory: Histories of the Franks
Laws of the Salian Franks (reader)
Life of Radegund
Life of St. Benedict
Rule of St. Benedict
Bede: Lives of the Abbots
Song of Roland
Anselm: Proslogion, Gaunilo's Reply
Galbert: Murder of Charles the Good
Chretien de Troyes: Knight of the Cart
Marie de France: Lais
Fabliaux
Joinville: Life of St. Louis
Salimbene: The Chronicle
Black death texts (reader)
Bocaccio: The Decameron
Life of Cola di Rienzo

Best of luck to everyone!! Almost done....

OFFICE HOURS NEXT WEEK

Stacey and I will only be holding office hours next week BY APPOINTMENT ONLY. So, if you would like to meet with us you need to email us at least 24 hours in advance. The only day we are both unavailable to meet is Friday May 9th. Good luck!

Last Blog

My bad that last one was a false alarm. Anyway, I was wondering if you guys could just go over again some key points to think about while we are writing. For instance, is it more important that we frame questions as usual, or suggest some conclusions being the final. I know we have gone over things like this before, I just wanted to be. Anyway, somebody should bring some food I had it last time, I nominate Edward and Joel.

Last Blog

While i am still worrying over which sources to use, my main concern has switched to which topic to pick. While part 1 has helped me eliminate some choices, i am worried about which topic is the "best" one to do and i would like to discuss them in class

final post

I'm actually feeling a bit better now that I've worked through part 1. I am interested in questions that I'd rejected at first, am rejecting questions I was sure I'd want to write my essay on, etc. There are some that I passed over at first that I'm still very content passing over. :-) But I feel a lot more secure having at least been into each one of them enough to see what kind of answer I could start to construct. I think I just learned that I need more time than I thought I did to really digest a question. I'm still nervous. But that's to be expected going into an exam. Basically, it's going to be ok.

final blog assignment 10

This is the final blog assignment, and it is once again about the final exam. Please raise any last concerns or questions you have about the final so that we can sort through them on Friday in discussion section.

Readings for this week

Finish Life of Cola for Wednesday.

10:10

Wow... this story is hilarious in a sad kind of way. Clearly it is saying alot about the role of 'common' women (that is to say, not a noble woman.) First of all, its interesting to take note of the fact that women were expected to perform physical labor and serve their household.

It is also interesting to notice that not all nobility married for political conveniences. However, this is a romantic story so the factuality of it should be questioned. In this short story, women have next to no rites. Although it is possible that the lack of rites is due to the difference in political status, even when Griselda was his wife.

In short, the themes that I noticed were: love can be a factor in noble marriages (not necessarily just politics), women are expected to do physical labor and support their household, to marry below your class is looked down upon, and, the nobility have absolute power (even life and death as it relates to their children) over 'commoners.'

In this story, Griselda was in an abusive relationship. She married Gaultieri with the promise that she would be obedient no matter how outrageous his demands were. She couldn’t question them or hesitate to do what he ordered. Here, the woman plays the role as servant to her husband, like in many other stories. However, she also comes across as the protagonist. Even Gaultieri’s vassals question his outrageous demands. The author even says that “a strange humour took possession of him,” the “him” being Gaultieri. Gaultieri appeared to be testing her patience hoping she would fail. However, she never broke her vow. When Gaultieri told her to get rid of her daughter, she did. When Gaultieri told her to get rid of her son, she did. When Gaultieri wanted to divorce Griselda for the daughter of a count, she did. Even after that, Gaultieri asked her to be his servant. Through all these tribulations, Griselda remained obedient. In the end, she was rewarded with being his husband.
From the text, it was clear that a ceaselessly obedient wife was the ideal. Even Gaultieri’s vassals were critical of his treatment of Griselda. She was put through trial after trial and passed all tests. However, I can’t help but think that her obedience went unrewarded. Gaultieri initially married her. Then, she obeys several outrageous demands that eventually move her down from nobility. But in the end, she reclaims her position as wife. She didn’t get anything she didn’t have prior to the “tests”. Despite this, Griselda is the model for women from that time.
In previous texts, women were supposed to be obedient to their husbands. However, a relationship in which the male dominated typically ended with the departure of the wife. In the Lais, the women would have been rescued from their one-sided relationships by another man, and the two would live happily ever after. However, in this story despite the torment Gaultieri causes her, Griselda continually obeys her. In this text, there is more of an emphasis on obedience than in the Lais and other previous texts.

I thought the importance of the final story in the Decameron, about the Marquis of Saluzzo, was the power structure. This story demonstrates the relationship between the ruler and ruled, nobles and peasants, and husbands and wives. More importantly, however, it focuses on the idea of marriage from the husband’s perspective. Interestingly, this story shows that Gualtieri thinks of marriage as a burden and a wife would make him miserable. He also declares there are faults in the finding process by saying it is pointless to find a wife based on pedigree. His views on marriage demonstrate that, at least for him, marriage is not desirable and it is, instead, a duty he must perform. While Gualtieri’s treatment of his wife was cruel and he did not suffer any consequences, the narrator’s disapproval of Gualtieri shows that, while women were in a subordinate position to men, they were not meant to be mistreated. Interestingly, this story’s views on women parallels the Fabliaux, “Berengar of the Long Arse’s.” However, the story applauds Griselda’s patience and implies that women, despite mistreatment, must endure it, therefore, strengthening their ties to a subordinate position. Finally, the story implies that “strong” women were not viewed favorably because, as Gulatieri fears, he would “enjoy no peace.” Lastly, this story’s view on the role of women is the opposite of “The Knight of the Cart’s,” where Lancelot was virtually Guinevere’s slave, which suggests that the role of women has changed since Chrétien’s time.

Boccaccio Day 10 Story 10 cont.

Yeah so I responded without knowing the question.

The Decameron represented women as slaves and servants to their male counterparts.  They, for the most part, did not have a lot of independence and did as they were told.  In story 10, Gualtieri's wife does exactly what she is told and is forced to accept any test that is placed upon her.  This would be a negative representation of women at the time due to the fact that this woman did not have the power to act on her desires or emotions.  She was forced to hide her true feelings about Gualtieri's actions, and did not object to anything he ordered.  However, in story 1, the woman takes in the dying Marquis and decides on her own accord to have sex with him.  This action would be looked down upon and would be punished in this time period.  This is a positive portrayal of women in my opinion though because she had the confidence to do what she wanted without regard to the consequences.  

Assignment for 12pm Section

Please respond to the following questions using Day 10, book 10 as your source. What is the overall message of this story with regard to the role of women? Which characters do you think are meant to be positive presentations of womankind? Which negative?

Feel free to make comparisons with any of the other stories from the Decameron or previous texts especially the fabliaux. Please remember you must do this assignment in order to receive credit for this Friday's section.

Boccaccio Day 10 Story 10

Throughout this story, I was amazed by how Gualtieri continually needed to test his bride in such a sadistic manner.  Perhaps sadistic is the wrong word because he intended to discover if she was truly going to make him happy in life and did not necessarily derive pleasure from her pain.  Anyway, he was wrong to put her through this series of tests solely for his own benefit for over a decade.  He should not make his bride suffer just because he is so determined to prove that a woman cannot make him happy in life.  Maybe he is just destined to be miserable and should not drag a woman into his anguish.  Gualtieri should have been reprimanded and demoted in class, although I am aware that only birth determines class and nothing else.  It is surprising how his wife puts up with all this without getting an ulcer of some sort.  She deserves a promotion in standing without a doubt.

Final blog (or, blog on the final)

In terms of the final, the only real worry I have is doing justice to all of the texts that we've read. While I know that's not possible or required (because not all the texts apply to all of the questions), it's still daunting to look at all the material that we've read and think about getting it all into some kind of coherent whole. I'm intimidated by the opportunity, i guess. That and, I'll be frank, I haven't read everything. It's going to be a rough next couple of weeks. Other concern is hand cramps. And that's not a frivolous worry, either. 2 hours is a lot of writing.
Good luck to everyone. I hope we can dig into what we really want to say!

Blog Assignment

Blog about any questions/concerns you have for the final.

readings

Wednesday: Black Death texts (reader)
Boccaccio, Decameron, author's foreword and all of day one

Friday: Boccaccio, Decameron, day 2 story 2, day 3 story 3, day 4 story 4, day 5 story 5, day 6 story 6, day 7 story 7, day 8 story 8, day 9 story 9, and day 10 story 10.

Next week: Life of Cola

Ghostparty!

Before this class my opinions regarding the Medieval Era were confined to the time I dressed up as a viking for Halloween. Stricken with this opinion I considered the Medieval Era as a place where it rained all the time and people gave away Butterfingers.

Now that I have taken this class I know they didn't have Butterfingers, Twix being the favored candy of the era.

Looking at it now, I see the large role played by Christianity and the trickle down effect it has on every person. It seems as if everyone is assigned their place in the hierarchy of life and stuck their for life. There is need for roles and jobs but no texts have ever indicated any real leisure or zeal for living. It seems like these old school bros need a lesson in how to kick it. This idea is one diametrically opposed to my world view. I can not even fathom how life like this would be. If I weren't given the freedom to get drunk at noon and throw hot dogs into traffic, I would have no idea what to do with myself. I lot of times we get caught juxtaposing our social constructs under the days of old but I have no doubt that if I lived in this era I would be dead. Not just because I lived like 500 + years ago, I'd be killed for acting like a moron.

I also agree that Saints aren't born, but rather made. I think this Sainthood is key and exalted not because of their holiness or utter sanctity but because they pose a staunch departure to the waves of the day. Leaving the world behind, you may find that these peo

(I left the world behind. Like a saint! Get it?)

My original stereotypical generalizations, as to the definition of medieval, remain. However, this course has given me a deeper look into what civilization was like and who these people were. When I think of medieval, I still imagine knights fighting for honor, for country, and for God. While this course has solidified these beliefs, it has also shown me that knights were people capable of reading, writing, and loving. There is an emotional side to this time period that seems to be ignored when discussed. Everyone is a godless killing machine, and if not they are saints. However, by reading the literature we see the many dimensions of medieval people.
A saint is not always born. In Augustine’s case, he had to struggle. He did not know what to believe. He was human. This was a man who eventually became bishop, but throughout his childhood he struggled with morality and religion. Despite this, he was able to claim an extremely important title in the church.
To me medieval people were very similar to us. They suffered, struggled, loved, manipulated, and killed. They were human.

medieval

Medieval Civilization begins with Augustine's rise as bishop and the fall of Rome, followed by the disorder throughout Europe. The land mass is divided into many different kingdoms that are in continual conflict with one another. Religion was the driving force behind medieval socity. Civilization progressed by the progression of Christianity throughout Europe. Battles were waged to spread the word and contain and dismember paganism. Christianity united the different kingdoms together to create a balance of power throughout the land. The different kingdoms honored priests and bishops alongside that of kings and knights. The knights fought valiantly on behalf of the king and their land. The religious figures of society wielded political power and took part in the decisions that the king was faced to make. Thus, religion and government were fused into one single culture that defines the medieval age.

Medieval Times (i posted nothing the first time on purpose)

I believe Christianity to be the major underlying ideology that fuels the "medieval" time period.  We began the class with the fact that Christianity was not heavily represented in the world.  The religion slowly built strength and threatened eastern nations.  Bishops and and priests were determined to convert as many people as they could to their religion, and knights focused on protecting the Christian faith.  These crusaders were willing to kill to enforce its teachings, evident in the wars that broke out due to differences in religious doctrine.  After numerous conquests and missions to add believers to the faith, Christianity undoubtedly proved to be more significant than human life.  Roland and Chronicles demonstrated an undying passion heavily influenced by unquestionable confidence in the truth of biblical teachings.  The underlying devotion to religious doctrine throughly shaped the actions and writings that took place during this time.

Medieval Times

Medieval to me means the period in which we are studdying, which I believe is from the "fall" of the Roman Empire to around the Enlightenmnt. That is the time, but to me the term means four diferent things in a religious context. It first means the spreading of a relatively new religion across the Mediterranean and Gaul. In this time scholars were making sense of this religion and dramatic displays of faith made saints. Next, meieval means the institutionalization of that Christian religion as bishoprics spread and gain influence over Frankish kings and their people. This religion is also seen in slightly different forms in Norse settlers and in England. Next, we see a period of further institutionalization in which warriors go to defend their religion while the educated begin to use reason to govern their lives under God and make sense of certain religious messages. Lastly, is the period we study now. So far, I see from Salimbene the questioning of the "most holy" pope, using the concepts of scripture and reason, both of which he seems deeply familiar with, to do. New reformist orders are prominent and the different interperatations of Christianity seem to each be strong, yet still strongly accept the Roman papal authority. I think many people see the "medieval age" as a loss of individualism and a move towards Christian communities. Yet, we have seen that often times, it is a few individuals like Augustine, or Gregory that teach and impose Christianity on communities that are often conscerned with many very individualistic things. Joinville and Salimbene are clearly highly educated and while their conscerns are diferent than ours, and the period that immediately follows them, they are not lacking in enlightened or intelligent views. In fact, Medieval is a misnomer. This period could be split up and analysed into several different periods time and time again. Out of this period develops nations, and that is about the only thing other than religion I can see that joins it together as one age.

Originally the medieval world to me was defined by knights doing chivalrous deeds, their relationship to kings, wars, plague and, of course, the dominance of Christianity. However, after going through the course, I realize my original perception of the medieval world was based on a small and, more likely, fake time period. Now, however, the medieval world to me is defined by a struggle to survive and become dominant in a world filled with competition. In Augustine’s book, we saw that Christianity was in no way the only or even the dominant religion, and even Augustine, a Saint, was once a non-Christian. However, The History of the Franks offers a stronger example of this example. Early in the book, we see kings converting between religions for military reasons, hoping that the Christian god will “work” better than the Pagan gods. The existence of wars between brothers, uncles, and even fathers helps show that a constant struggle for power existed. However, even soldiers could not be depended on, if a King was unable to provide “loot,” such as Lothar, soldiers would rebel. While the time of Joinville and the Song of Roland, seems to have been slightly more peaceful and stable, their worlds were stilled filled with wars against a new enemy “Saracens.” Therefore, Medieval means to me a world filled with both physical and mental dangers where people had to struggle to live and survive.

Garden of Earthly Delights

Here is a link to a super large full version of the Hell side of Hieronymus Bosch's Garden of Earthly Delights triptych:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~colbert/GardenHUGE.jpg
You can also do a Google image search for Garden of Earthly Delights to find the entire triptych.

Blog Assignment 9

What does "medieval" mean to you?

Reading Assigments

Wednesday: Salimbene, Chronicle 3-61 (in your reader)
Friday: Salimbene, Chronicle 147-175 (in your reader)
Monday: Catch Up Suckas!

Reading Assignments

Wednesday: Salimbene, Chronicle bks. 3-61-This is in your reader.

Blog Assignment

There is no blog this week because you are writing papers. However, if you would like to make up one of your blogs-go back to one of the prompts that you neglected and go for it!!!

Third Paper

Could anyone post the topics for the third paper on the blog?  I couldn't make it to class this morning and I would really appreciate it.

Thanks,

Adam

this week's readings

Continue reading Joinville. Finish The Life of Saint Louis by Friday.

Optional paper 3 due Monday, 14 April. If you would like to create your own paper topic, you must have it approved by Wednesday. Email your topic ideas to Jason, Ericka, and Stacey for approval. You can also use the suggested paper topics, distributed today in class.

As you know, if you choose to do the third paper, the lowest of your three paper grades will be dropped.

sorry this is real late

In The knight of the cart love is something that lancelot seeks. He sees his fair maiden, who happens to be a queen, and he will go to all ends to make the destiny of his love come true. His love is idealized in this story. In the Lais, love is also given a fairty tale aspect to it, and we again see the destiny in the story being the destiny of love and not of a society or religion. However, in the Lais, there are many female characters that are focused on in a protagonistic or near protagonistic light. In the knight of the cart the female characters are either destractions or corruptors of Lancelots love, or they are the reason for a shameful love triangle. Love is celebrated weh achived in the Lais. In the knight of the cart love has consequences on all involved no matter how great it may seem.

First off, I liked Chreiten de Troyes's story on "The Knight of the Cart (Lancelot) much better than "The Lais of Marie de France." The reason being is because I was quite fond of the journey and the obstacles Lancelot had to endure to reach his Queen Guinevere (I can seriously relate to his courage to accomplish is goal). Not to mention, I found it quite interesting how Lancelot earned his name 'Knight of the Cart' in the first place (from when the dwarf made him ride in the cart that was normally used by the imprisoned). Moreover, although the majority of women were regarded as maidens in the story, I adored the amount of control women had over men during this time.

The two texts are similar in that they both are love stories based on heroism and adultery. Moreover, I also realize that in 'The Knight of the Cart,' deal-making is an expression of truth and loyalty in getting jobs done. Christianity also arises in this story when Lancelot goes to the church to pray. Also, these two texts are similar in that they both depict women having some type of emotional stronghold over the men. Both texts illustrate "the crazy things love can make one do" and proves that if one displays hatred towards another and plots against them; karma sets in reversing that hatred towards the hater. "Evil can easily rebound on him who seeks another's misfortune" (Marie de France 60).

There is not an entire significant change between the authors because they do both have the same direction and that is to create love stories. Also, it did not make any different that one of the authors happened to be a woman (although she may have been slightly more descriptive); both text for the most part aimed in the same direction.

Love in the Lais and Knight of the Cart

I found it interesting how both authors regarded love as a completely absurd notion. That's not to say that these authors did not regard love as a powerful force, however, these authors certainly seemed inable to see the 'logic' or 'sense' in love.
In 'Knight of the Cart', Lancelot is described as donig absurd things, such as trying to kill himself (twice!) when he finds out that his love with Guinevere may not be realized. When dueling the 'evil M-something' he even positions himself so that he can stare at Guinevere while fighting at the expense of his combat positioning. However, by contrast, we see Guinevere's marriage to the king as totally acceptable and reasonable. Although they may not love each other, from everything we can see, their marriage is practical.
In the Lais, Marie outright states a similar point when she says "
Long life is not the recompense
For love without measure or sense;
But love itself is the measure of
Love; reason can't be kept in love."
In other words, love leaves to a short life (death), and reason must be kept out of love. Although love is romanticized in these texts, it is most definately described as an illogical and impractical feeling that should be left out of relationships.

What I found most interesting about the two authors, was how adultry is a consistent topic. In Chretien's story, Lancelot's love seem to have conquered all and was not a social concern. while in the lais, it felt like the stories were more like anecdotes that want to tell the rest of the world that adultry is to be ashamed of, unless there's true love involved.
Another point I want to discuss about is the noble-ness of the knights. what is a knight? and what makes a good one? any one who does not do unethical things seems to be a good knight. Lancelot jumping into the kart was looked down upon, because it looked as if it was a bad thing, and the civilians became unappreciating of his action. the bravery and the 'strength' of a person also makes a good knight - that's why Meleagant fought Lancelot 3 times. He wanted to show his strength. With strength, comes glory and fame, and respect by all. Lancelot seem to have won that much easier, as have Bisclavret and the guy from the mountain of two lovers. Bought to them were long history of fame, because of the strength, and nobility they have.
One major difference I seem to have notice, but cannot support strongly yet, is that, in Chretien's writing, women have seem to have been so easy to earn their love. by Lancelot performing the task to behead a villian, Lancelot's glory battle at the coluseum, and Lancelot's encouter with the girl who wanted to sleep with him. while in Marie de France's writing, Ladies would end up liking the guy, only when the guy likes her first, as shown in bisclavet, le fresne, and equitan.

"The Knight of the Cart" and the Lais of Marie de France both dwell on the concept of love and the role it plays during that time period. Love acts as the driving force of the plot in the stories. The protagonist is compelled by passion in his actions. Thus, his heroic deeds are usually illogical. The two accounts are different in that Marie's stories focus solely on the protagonist's actions based on passion alone, while in "The Knight of the Cart" the protagonist's actions are swayed by logic and honor. Lancelot pauses a moment before jumping into the dwarf's cart because he knew he would be ridiculed by other people, yet a passion for both his mission and the queen overcame the reason inside of him. Yet, he honors the truce made by the king through the queen to not kill Meleagant, King Bademagu's son. Although he seems to do it solely because his lover tells him too, at the same token he is also honoring the king's demand. I like "The Knight of the Cart" better because it was an interesting and compelling narrative and gave more insight into that world that the fictitious story was based on.

Boom Boom Boom

"The Knight of the Cart" and the "Lais" both transcend the ethics of the time and seek to condone (or at least rationalize) one of the greatest sins of the time. This movement indicates a more liberal view of law and how human feeling can transcend traditional barriers of what is right and wrong. However similar these books  are in their philosophical aims both take drastically different routes. 

"The Knight of the Cart" rationalizes adultery through the achievement of great feats and acts of valor. Getting down is something Lancelot must earn. The woman has little say in the process. Although love is portrayed, it only exists within set boundaries. No matter what Lancelot does, he can only get his "swerve on" once. Love isn't transcendent like it is in "Lais". 

People don't work for love in "Lais" it is something that comes in, takes over, and usurps all others in the order of importance. You don't have to work to get love, you have no choice but to submit your will to carnal desires. this gives a hint of romance and alludes to further developments. It is also starkly different because love (and lust) is ultimately portrayed as a good thing. 

I'm glad "Lais" exists. It makes the heart sing with hope and long for the carnal spark that leads to deep, life long immersion. If "Knight of the Cart" resonated with me, I would probably try and get action by walking girl's home from parties. I prefer the latter so I prefer the "Lais". 

Both “The Knight of the Cart” and the Lais were similar in that the authors of the stories seemed to approve of adulterers as long as they were in love. Moreover, there is a sense that people married for power, shown by Guinevere not liking Arthur as much and the girl in Guigemar marrying the old lord. Interestingly, there is a major difference Lancelot throws away his honor for love, shown by him losing the tournament and sitting in the “cart,” and the characters in the Lais don’t, the lovers either die or reveal their love and make it legal. This brings up another difference, Guinevere and Lancelot’s love stays secret, while the ones in the Lais become public. I think the change in the perspectives in miniscule because the main theme is still true love conquers all it’s just that Marie de France imposes more restrictions with the idea of “equal” lovers. However, the characters in “The Knight of the Cart” implies that betraying the king is fine for love, but the Lais, through the “Equitan” shows that betrayal is not an option. Therefore, the authors seem to disagree to the extent love she be pursued, and if it should be made public or not. To be honest, I preferred the Lais because there was a sense of closure and the stories seemed more on topic, while “the Knight of the Cart” had an ambiguous ending about the end of their love and the story had random plot points.

further reading (totally optional!)

If you guys like the King Arthur readings and the time period we're studying now, here are some fun things you might want to read or view:

Le Morte D'Arthur (The Death of Arthur) is one of the definitive King Arthur texts. Written in the 15th century (so three centuries later than the period we're studying now), this is a long, tough read.
http://www.amazon.com/Morte-DArthur-Arthur-Legends-Classics/dp/0451528166/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207177679&sr=8-10

Way more accessible is The Once and Future King. T.H. White based much of his narrative on Le Morte D'Arthur, but this 20th century version is much easier to read.
http://www.amazon.com/Once-Future-King-T-White/dp/0006483011/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207177953&sr=1-1

If you don't want to read The Once and Future King, the Disney movie "The Sword in the Stone" is actually an incredibly faithful retelling of the first section of the book.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0057546/

And, if you are into the royals behind Robin Hood, the Lais of Marie de France, etc, you should definitely see "The Lion in Winter," a truly fantastic movie with Peter O'Toole, Katharine Hepburn, and a young Anthony Hopkins.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0063227/

Finally, the book that began my obsession with Eleanor of Aquitaine is A Proud Taste for Scarlet and Miniver. This book is a young adult historical fiction novel (so, needless to say, a very fast read). The book follows Eleanor as she waits in heaven for Henry II to be released from purgatory and thinks back on her life as first the Queen of France and then the Queen of England.
http://www.amazon.com/Proud-Taste-Scarlet-Miniver/dp/068984624X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207178424&sr=1-1

Blog Assignment 8

For this week's blog compare Chretien de Troye's "The Knight of the Cart" to the Lais of Marie de France. How are they different/similar? Is there a significant change in the perspective of the authors? Which do you like better and why?

Reading Assignments

Wednesday, Marie de France, Lais, prologue and chps 1-6.
Friday: Fabliaux (pdf file)
Monday: Joinville, Life of St. Louis through part II, ch. 10

Just a joke, (hope I dont offend anyone)
assume there is something that nothing greater can exist.
.
.
.
I tried to talk to this 'something' that nothing greater can exist. after 5 minutes, I found out that I was only talking to myself. I guess, nothing greater than me can exist.

Reading from handout?

I wasn't able to make it to class Wednesday (sorry!!), and as such I don't have a handout. Could someone please hook me up with the specifics of the readings please?

muchos gracias

Counts and leaders (blog assignment)

What interested me in Galbert of Bruges account of The Murder of Saint Charles the Good were the qualities that made a “good” count. Galbert seems to praise Charles because he “took such measures to strengthen the peace, to reaffirm the laws and rights of the realm, that little by little public order was restore” (pg 83). This praise shows that counts, which may be generalized to all leaders of that time, were expected to bring stability to their world. Interestingly, this expectation seems to stem from the idea that the count, or leader, is the source of stability, and this is shown when people insisted he stay in the “fatherland” for “the peace and well-being” of it (pg 91). Galbert later highlights more of Charles’s virtues when tells of Charles’s altruism in helping to relieve the poor’s situation by ensuring that they were regularly fed and clothing those who needed clothes. Interestingly, this seems to suggest a possible parent-child relationship between ruler and ruled, which is confirmed when some robbed country people begged for Charles’s “customary parental help” (pg 105). Therefore, because Charles is praised for his altruism and his ability to provide stability, Galbert through Charles shows that good counts and leaders were judged by their ability to provide their subjects with security.

MAPS!! YAY!!

Here is a good link to physical maps of Europe: http://www.euratlas.com/

Reading Assignment

Friday: Galbert (see handout)
Monday: Chretien de Troye, "Knight of the Cart" found in your Arthurian Romances book.
Wednesday: Marie de France, "Lais" Prol. I-VI.

Blog Assignment 7

Free blog this week!!

Readings

The reading is available at Leavey reserves in book form. There are 3 copies available at the reception desk in the History Dept and they may be checked out for two hours at a time. The best thing would be to make your own personal copy of this. Please email me or Stacey if you have any questions.

Reading Assignments

This weeks reading is on the handout Jason gave in class.

Office Hours

My office hours will be on Wednesday after class.

change of office hours

My office hours on Monday will be from 9-10 instead of from 12-1. I am sorry for this inconvenience.

Best,
Stacey

2 items

1) I can't find the William of Poitiers reading either.

2) I am not having office hours today.

In the Song of Roland, the author's portrayal of heroism is shown through the actions of Roland. Roland is a valiant warrior who stays behind with eleven of his other peers and twenty thousand franks to protect eh hold that the Franks have on Spain. Along with his fellow counts, he protects their share of Spain from the pagans. His heroic character is derived from the virtues of integrity, loyalty, and courage. The loyalty to his king shown in Roland's character can also be seen when Beowulf taithfully returns to his homeland to pay respect to his king after killing Grendel. Beowulf's courage that he had for the daunting talk of slaying Grendel can be compared to the predicament faced by the twelve counts left behind when they are heavily outnumbered by the pagan armies that attack the Franks.

Heroism is very similar in Beowulf and Song of Roland. In both instances, death in battle is glamorous. Both Roland and Beowulf took on challenges in which the odds were against them. And despite dying, the two are highly revered for their bravery. Roland was stupid for not calling for support. However, because he died in battle his fame grew. The one difference between the two portrayals of heroism seems to be the reward. In Song of Roland, there is an emphasis on religion. It’s the Christians versus the Muslims. Fittingly, Roland is granted eternal salvation. Meanwhile, Beowulf was granted fame.

The Song of Roland: What Makes a Hero

In The Song of Roland Heroism is largely similar to that of Beowulf. In Beowulf the lead character was famed for having the strongest grip and uses it in battle. Similarly. delivering devastating blows are often revered by soldiers and lead knights in The Song of Roland: "The Archbishop says: 'That was a strike worthy of a knight!'" (41). Ferocity in battle is clearly glorified as well as bravery in battle as we discussed in class. However, in The Song of Roland I see more of an emphasis on a knight also being cunning and wise. It isnt't enough for the knight to be bold in battle he must be brave as well. I would agree with the idea put forth in class that Oliver, combined with Roland would be te perfect knight. Also, there is another emphasis on wisdom and character when we look at Charles the Great. Marsiliun questions Ganelon about Charles repeatedly to which he continually responds that his lord is braver than any man, and more virtuos, and holds his men in such great esteem that he needs not fear anyone (180. Also, later in the story, I;m not sure where, Charles is described as wise enough to see through Ganelon's plan for ROland and curses him for it. So in this tale, differing form Beowuf, the hero is of strong stature and mind. He is reasonable and furious. One question I have that may help discussion is that while we see a downfall of a hero in both stories, what values are present in the time of the 11th century that make Roland's downfall in battle more tragic, and how did they differ from a world where almost everyone percieved Beowulf as having a glorious downfall.

ya i need help also
like i found the title page which is combined with the five books of the Histories by rodulfus Glaber
but i cant actually find the Life of St. William/deeds i guess
i found the pope urban speeches tho

help with William

Hey,
sorry for the extra post but I am having a lot of trouble finding the William of Poitiers readings. Could someone who knows where in the reader they are please give me what readings they're between or something? I've looked through the thing 2 or 3 times now. Thanks!
Julia

Song of Roland posts

I've also chosen to respond to both posts this week.

1) Song of Roland and Heroism-
As we discussed in class, there are as many possible answers to the question "Who's the hero" as there are characters in the text. Is it Roland, whom the text is named for and who occupies so much of the talking and thinking time of the other characters present? Is it Charlemagne (who the text was originally named for) and in whose name this great battle is fought? He is presented as the essence of the ideal ruler. Is it Oliver, whose consistent balance of wisdom and battle valor (sometimes tragically) offsets Roland's single-mindedness? All of these are possible, and I believe all of them are correct. To me, the hero in Roland is a set of ideas and values. It is an abstract rather than an individual, something readers or listeners could strive towards. But comparing that conclusion with Beowulf, we come up with the important distinction of complexity. Beowulf, though just as gory and fun, was a simpler story. Beowulf was the hero. He always made the right decision, always won the battle, always got the treasure. Roland presents a much more complicated, dramatic picture and allows us to question much more deeply the nature of medieval heroism.

2) Ganelon's Trial and Medieval Justice-
Although I would like to agree with Harris' insightful post about the growing complexity of the legal system (noticing a trend here?), I disagree that the medieval French way of dealing with the law as presented by Ganelon's trial more closely resembles modern justice systems. Charlemagne's system seems to be more heavily based on practicality and logic than on high minded conceptions of right and wrong. We as a 21st century class agree that what Ganelon did (betrayal, treachery, murder etc) was wrong. But when he is brought to trial, there is a large contingent of Roland and Oliver's home population that thinks he should just be let go. After all, they argue, Roland is dead, the damage is done and no amount of punishment is going to reverse that. It isn't logical to deprive the king of a wise advisor just because he settled an internal feud with Roland. The idea that there is such a thing as private murder is also something foreign to our system of justice. But in this world, it was a personal disagreement, personally settled and doesn't concern the larger population.

Office Hours

I will be having office hours after section on Friday should anyone want to discuss their papers.

Although Ganelon was eventually hanged, he was neither found guilty by the “court” nor was he really on trial for leading Roland to his death. In fact he freely admits to plotting against Roland; however, he does attempt to claim innocence by declaring he did not betray the king and, by extension, the kingdom. This shows that feuds or killing others for revenge is not a crime and only family members are expected to take action, which embodies the concept of taking the law into your own hands. Moreover, the king makes it clear he wants Ganelon to be hanged, but, because he was found innocent by vote, this incident shows that king or rulers have limited power in the justice system. While the king’s wish fails to persuade the majority, Thierry chooses to take the king’s side and votes for Ganelon’s haning. More importantly, Thierry’s dissension seems to be enough to do so, which is demonstrated by Pinabel challenging Thierry to combat to prove Ganelon’s innocence. This turn of events shows that, while crimes are judged by a council, the verdict can always be contested and force, not reason, can be used. Because force is the deciding factor, medieval justice is shown to focus around strength of arms, and not reason. Lastly, Ganelon's trial as a whole shows that medieval justice is less about laws and justice and more about practicality, because the stronger person, the survivor, will be more useful in battle than the weaker person who was defeated. This claim is further strengthened by the council declaring Ganelon innocent due to their belief no one would be willing to fight Pinnabel to prove Ganelon guilty, which shows they did not wish to waste time with a pointless verdict.

Reading Assignments

Friday: William of Poitiers, Deeds of William and The Two Speeches of Pope Urban, both in the reader
Monday: Anselm of Bec, Prosologion: prologue, 1-5; Guanilo's reply and Anselm's response.

Blog Assignment 6

How does the author's portrayal of heroism in the Song of Roland compare to some of our earlier texts like Beowulf?

Or

What might the description of Ganelon's trial tell us about concepts of medieval justice?

You can answer one of these questions OR you can answer both questions and get credit for two blogs for those of you who have been naughty and not blogged as much as you should have. Remember, these count for 10% of your overall class grade!!!

Tapestry in Motion

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1rcbn_the-bayeux-tapestry

Important Note on Readings!!!

The Life of King William is in the course reader.

Readings for this week

Wednesday: Song of Roland
Friday: William of Poitiers, Life of King William

Paper- Extremely Rough Assembly

NOTE: I have my quotes all pulled and ready, I just haven’t had time to put them in yet. Also this is an extremely rough assembly, certainly a far cry from any finished product. However I think you can see a clear thesis and the points that I am getting across. Thanks for reading if you decide to read it.

Thesis: In the Barbarian West, evil is that which doesn't fit into their society.

In the Barbarian West, evil was not defined as the manifestation of what was bad or malignant but rather as the unfamiliar or unchristian. Looking through The History of the Franks, The Life of Cuthbert, and Beowulf a pattern of evil emerges more like a social trend and less like some far reaching human concept.
NOTE: Rewrite thesis so the trends so evident in Gregory and Cuthbert lead up to how Beowulf uses these for heightened drama.

The concept of violence is reminiscent of how NBA General Managers used to deal with the Foreign Prospect. Given their basketball frame of reference, the multi-faceted game of the Europeans was not what they understood a good basketball player to be. This put an obstacle in the path of many NBA-bound players forcing them to work harder to find their place. It was not until increased Olympic success and the emergence of true foreign superstars that the NBA finally embraced the foreigner.

Begin this with the analogy that evil is not violence. That is of the utmost importance.

In these texts, a person’s deeds are partially defined by how they fit into the Author’s society. Through the venerated subjects of Gregory, he manages to describe the violent exploits of __________ with grace and no amounts of disgust. INSERT QUOTE* This description suggests that ______ is not acting on some violent urge but keeping the society in check. These additional outbursts seem excused by the lack of a governing force in the Frankish World. It is easy to imagine Gregory understanding the circumstances at work and excusing his violent subjects from damnation.
Though Gregory appears wont to excuse the occasional crime in the name of order or the lord (Lord-er?), he is quick to portray unfamiliar violence as the outbursts of barbarians. Nowhere is this clearer than in his depiction of the Arians. INSERT QUOTE AND ADDITIONAL INSIGHT. 2-3 sentences.
Also: Explain how murder seems excused when it is done for Political purposes.
Note: Explain how their understanding of violence allowed them to find a place for it in their society. Try to make the

ALSO: In previous two paragraphs, strengthen the argument of violence as a cultural institution. Cast it as say, I don’t know Ethnocentric.
OUTLINE:
The value of Chistianity from a broader perspective
Note how it is always explained when someone is unchristian.
The exploits and glorification of Cuthbert explained and compared to how Gregory treats the Imposters and the necromantic ways of others. Note how the only real difference how one is doing it for their own benefit and how the other is supposedly doing it for the glorification of god.

As Gregory begins The History with a staunch declaration of his faith, it should come as no surprise that he utilizes the concept of “evil” to protect his beliefs.

Desiderius “he set out to deceive them by the false art of Necromancy, rather than to cure them by God’s grace.” 483 A healer just like Cuthbert, however similar the methodology, the portrayals are quite different.

Beowulf is a perfect example of what is considered acceptable. Thing beyond the norm enters and causes a disturbance, serving an analogous purpose in the process, of course it must be killed.
Beowulf Quote: Wise sir, do not grieve. It is always better
to avenge dear ones than to indulge in mourning.

Blog Assignment

No Blog again this week. Work on your papers instead.

Readings

Friday: Aelfric: Lives, 171-219
Here is the link to the reading http://www.google.com/books?id=llo5Vft4AAoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=aelfric#PPA171,M1

Monday: No Reading, Paper II Due

Link to the rule of St. Columba

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/columba-rule.html

Another gospel

Gospel of Mark
Book of Durrow
This is another version of a lion

Reading Assignments

Wednesday: Asser, Life of Alfred, and Alfred the Great, pp 163-194.

WOOOO!

Reading Assignment

Friday: Bede, Life of Cuthbert, from The Age of Bede
Monday: Bede, Lives of the Abbots, from The Age of Bede
Wednesday: Asser, Life of Alfred from Alfred the Great
Selected Documents from Alfred the Great
Paper II prompts will be passed out

Blog Assignment

NO BLOG THIS WEEK!!! Just get your reading done and come prepared to discuss Bede. Also, this is a great time for those who need to catch up on their blogs to do so.

Readings

Wednesday: Gregory the Great, Life of Benedict (in your Early Christian Lives)
and the Rule of St. Benedict (1hr)

one of the things mentioned on friday was.... "who has the power to decide who the bishop is?"we came to the conlusion that the townspeople can vote, by popularity, to decide who can become bishop...but, I don't recall if we mentioned it, but the King and other high political power people gets a lot of say about who gets to be Bishop, or even just who's in the Church's position in general. In several cases, "Saint Gall replaced Saint Quintianus on his episcopal throne, with the full apporoval of the King."(GofT.IV.5), or when Cautinus was confronted Cato, "To spare you the trouble, and with no ulterior motive of my own, i will go to the King and ask his apporoval of your elevation to the episcopate."(GofT.IV.7) Then later on, townspeople wanted priest Eufronius as their Bishop, but King Lothar wanted Cato instead, townspeople eventually got Eufronius as Bishop, but again, after King Lothar had agreed.(GofT.IV.15) This shows that church-positions are definitely required to go through the 'political' structure.
Art

Adam Soroko's blog

From the early years of her life, Radegund was extremely pious and generous to those who were less fortunate than she. This is a theme that continues throughout her lifetime. "While but a small child, she herself brought the scraps left at table to the gathered children, washing the head of each one." She also gave a good portion of her tribute (not sure if it is income taxes or gifts from her husband) to the poor. "[Radegund] paid out what she received lest the burden weigh her down." Although she gave alms at a very young age, the fact that she saw such bloodshed and murder undoubtedly had a profound effect on her. From that point on, she understood the value of life and tried to preserve and better the lives of others. She would clean the diseases and sores of her people consistently in order to keep them alive and well. Radegund also was "more Christ's partner than her husband's companion." She was willing to hurt her relationship with her husband, who was not exactly a fair man in the first place, just to remain faithful and observant to the Lord. Radegund represented a strong and good-willed woman who was more powerful than even most men. However, she never abused her power. Instead, she used it to ensure that her people were better off since she only needed Christ's guidance and not wealth. She maintained her philosophies throughout her lifetime, set an example for future queens, and served as a martyr for her religion.

Although Venantius attempts to recount only one life, his Radegund, interestingly, seems to actually be split into two people who are described separately in Book one and Book two. Book one’s Radegund seems primarily interested in being “a monacha rather than a queen.” Moreover she is also seen punishing herself during Quadragesima and undergoing various voluntary tortures “so that she might become a martyr,” which shows her to be a human working towards the afterlife. However, Book two’s Radegund seems to be less concerned about going to heaven and more concerned about performing miracles. This seems to suggest that she is now not only a conduit of God’s power and his favor, but also somewhat divine. While this creation of two different Radegunds can be dismissed as insignificant, it can be used to see how people moved through the nunnery’s hierarchy. First, a new nun may have to undergo an initiation period where fasting and humility punishments are expected, such as Radegund’s experience in Book one. However, after this period is over, the nun may receive more power to do “good,” which Radegund’s divine power may represent. So, I wonder is Venantius’s recounting of Radegund’s life simply and exaggeration of her piousness made into a good story or possibly her steps to power in the church?

"Soon she divested herself of the noble costume which she was wont to wear as queen when she walked in procession on the day of a festival with her train of attendants. She laid it on the altar and piled the table of Divine Glory with purple, gems, ornaments and like gifts to honor Him. She gave a heavy girdle of costly gold for the relief of the poor. (Fortunatus 13)"
Radegund was not only saintly and wealthy, but she was portrayed as generous and helping in the course readers' reading. On the other hand, in GofT, praises her, all the way until her death. Perhaps, because Gregory wrote more about her in his other book, more descriptions could have been applied about how Gregory felt--Gregory was there at Radegund's funeral, but not much was illustrated there, as opposed to Fortunatus' writing where "everyone was weeping".

Radegund was described as a devoted person who frequents for the help of the Bishop (IX.39), deeming her someone who, thought saintly can't do everything by herself. Yet on occasions, there are descriptions about how even the king Sigibert would give support to her (GofT. IX 40) same goes as in McNamara's writing well Radegund would be heard by bishpos and nuns. In every writing, Radegund was respected and listened by most of the people around her.

Both sources show Radegund as a person so devoted to her religion that she tortured herself to show her faithfulness. However, one glaring difference between the two versions of the story is the childhood. In the first story, the author uses the second paragraph to tell us about her childhood. In the second version of the story, the author goes from his or her introduction immediately to Radegund's life as queen. Despite this difference, the childhood story was only a foreshadowing of what to expect. As a child, Radegund is described as someone wise beyond her years.
I found it interesting that there was an instance when Radegund supposedly deprived herself of food and other necessities of life without the abbess knowing. If this was the case, how come the author knows? Another thing I found interesting is the fact that in the first book she punished herself for not being the first to do things for others. It appears she is doing things for others not because she wants to, but because she wants to win a competition. This doesn't strike me as the behavior of a pious person.

Radegund had a MESSED UP FAMILY!

I'd like to pose a thought to ponder.

In our current society, during the times we live in, pyschological trauma plays an important role in the upbringing, development, and overall basis of our lives. We write off explanations to serious matters like sexual assault and abuse to be the cause of emotional scarring lingering from childhood.

My question is this: how does St. Radegund function the way that she does without a total pyschiatric breakdown? Follow me, her father was murdered by her uncle, who ended up caring for her and her brother. Then her brother was murdered because he posed a threat to the throne, and Radegund fled to become a saint. How does someone surrounded with that much immediate tragedy stay sane?

Woman and Radegund

In all accounts of St. Radegund's life she is described as a pious wowan in that she is, "energetically alms giving", and "she believed that anything that the poor recieved from her was their own in reality." What I see in the accounts of her life from the course reader that I see as different from Gregory of Tours is the way in whicht they talk about her. In the course reader she is described mainly as important because yes she is saintly, but she is a saintly woman and God "wins mighty victories through the female sex and, despite their frail physique, He confers glory and greatness on women through strength of mind.". In general I feel like the authors in the course reader almost see to be explaining away the fact that she is a woman at times so that she might appear saintly. In Gregory of Tours, he establishes that she is a woman, yes, but he never takes the time to descrie her disadvantage of being a woman. In fact, he describes her as having great influence with God and the Frankish kings when Clotild was upset and pleaded in all directions for escape from the "menevolent" Radegund. I would like to know more textual information to gain knowledge of the views of women in the times of all the authors.

Radegund Playas!!!

As we well know in our brief literary forays (at least those that we have elected to do) that Queen/St. Radegund is among the more examined figures of the era. While the details of her marriage and various strifes are among the most noteworthy I found an interesting discrepancy in the descriptions crowning the last era of Radegund's life, in which she took care of a nunnery. 

The article in the reader details Radegund's nunnery as akin to an oasis in a desert of war. While it goes over the difficulties it manages to explain details that sketch the nunnery as a rich and vibrant place. They also explain the difficulties of running the place and examine Radegund's constant pleas for help. They portray her life outside of the spotlight as one of quiet activism and manifestation of the principal's of one's life. While this period of her life seems to be regarded as nothing more than a footnote in these histories I found it quite compelling as it is akin to the political lives led by so many leaders. Look no further than Jimmy Carter, ousted from the Presidency, Mr. Carter has pulled a Radegund and established his own domain as a peace keeping place. 

Though this is a bit of stretch, I wonder if Radegund set the template for many post political careers. 

In Gregory's work, attention was paid to Radegund's life but it glossed over most of the details. It makes her seem like a constant bother to local municipalities. However, it can be argued that most of the work went into explanation of the juicy details of Radegund's life. Being from the era Gregory was probably overcome with the popular tales and his personal relationship. He could have considered her life ending forays as mere retirement trivialities. It wasn't until later scholars that these endeavors were renowned for their worth. 

Radegund Playas!!!*

Readings

***Note-Change in Reading Schedule***

Friday: please have read up through book 9 in Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks.
Monday: Read book 10 of The History of the Franks, as well as the Thuringian War and the lives of Radegund-these can be found back to back in your reader. If you have any questions about the readings EMAIL myself or Stacey!

blog assignment 5

Compare the various lives of Radegund we read. Use specific examples.

Office Hours

Stacey and I will not be having office hours today, but I will be holding office hours on Wednesday at Litera-Tea, the coffee shop behind Doheny Library, after class until 1:00pm.

Gregory of WTF!?!?!?!?!

Because the book starts with a notion embedded in religious belief. Because of multiple arrests for slander. Resulting from a myriad of reasons... I am awestruck and befuddled by the subjective nature of Gregory of Tours' work. While the others managed to hide their slant and manage to slip into thew realm of Historical Text, The History of the Franks remains a map of one man's personal journey.

I wouldn't normally like this. In all likelihood it would cause me to bitch, piss, and moan. However, strewn about on the academic journey that is Jason Glenn's class I can't help but accept these slants as worthy of weight and more meaningful. The prism of this man's life serves as a reflecting p0ol and all0ws us a window into the hard to discern profession of Bishop. We know about the role and its importance but these writings allude to the trickeries and ultimate responsibilities of the job.

I suppose you could say I liked this book. Excuse me for abusing the "free write privilege".

Politics

In book 5 some type of politics rears its ugly head. In the beginning of book 5, Orleans and Blois attack Chateaudun. They pillage the lands of Chateaudun and then, in retaliation, the people of CHateaudun do the same. However, before the situation coudl escalate 'counts' intervened and made peace between the warring factions.

This event shattered my thought that politics were seemingly exclusively shattered by force of arms in this time period. Clearly, there are peaceful alternatives available. As mentioned earlier, however, peaceful resolutions arn't nearly as exciting as a violent and bloody struggle. So, I imagine that politics were actually used more in order to settle disputes peacefully than as described by Gregory. On the one hand, he's a historian. On the other, he wants people to read his books, so it has to be somewhat interesting.

My main interest in The History of the Franks is the idea of taking sanctuary in churches. Hermangild probably illustrates this example the best because when “he realized that he had no hope at all of winning,” “he sought sanctuary in a near-by church” (Book V Chapter 38). What interested me mainly was that this was not an isolated case, and sanctuary was often given at churches. More importantly, military leaders were unwilling to force the church to give up the protected. Gregory seems to think that the leaders were afraid of God’s retribution; however, kings often did not seem to “fear” God as much as Gregory seems to say. So, why did kings not attack the churches giving sanctuary? Was it really because they feared God or did they actually fear the churches? And if they feared the churches why did they? Therefore, because of these unanswered questions I would like to discuss in class the relationship between the churches and the rulers more deeply.

Omitted for a reason?

Chapter 34 from page 228 was omitted and later replaced back into the text. Why? My thought is that the story is a delicate issue... the questionability of everyday miracles. A boy thought it of importance to pray for a miracle to keep the grain dry from the gathering storm, and God seemingly gave him such a miracle by offering a patch of clear sky above the grain. The priests had the boy beaten for basically "wasting God's magic." There are a few problems with this that I can gather right from the start:

1. We are under the assumption at this point in history that there is no question of God's existence. Therefore God had a reason to spare the grain. In punishing the boy who prayed to God, the priests seem to be undercutting and undermining God's intentions and powers, which seems like a hypocritical backwards step in judgment. When every argument is overruled by "god has his reasons," why is this not applicable to priests?

2. Perhaps the priests saw this NOT as an act of God, but of a mere coincidence. It could be interpreted from the passage that the boy was given punishment for constantly relying on "prodigies and miracles," instead of exhibiting some self responsibility. But again, another self destructive hypothesis that doesn't match that of Christianity.

I feel as if contradictory examples such as this help to exploit some of the inconsistencies in religion throughout history. It will be interesting to see how specific Christian idiosyncracies develop through further readings and sources.

Throughout the readings, it seemed as if the things happening on the battlefields, the King's "palace", and the churches are more significant than others, as they are where more of the events happen. I wonder if it is because it is Gregory, a devoted christian, who is writing, that made everything about the churches and religion so important. I understand how the King and the Bishop have strong roles in the society, but, do people who are not as well-read and well-off care so much about the upperclass? ie.) When the famine occured, would the poor worry about the power struggles or just the limited source of food they have. Unfortunately, I would not know how more people there are suffering in the lower class than the upper class.
Happy V-Day.

In the more recent books, we see the arrival of new illnesses and new symptoms. During Augustine’s time, it seemed like everyone who was sick had the fever and eventually died. In book four of Gregory’s text, we still see people suffering and dying from the fever, but now the plague has emerged. We also see King Theudebald suffer a stroke and eventually die and Bishop Cautinus suffer “epileptic fits.” This shows a progression in medicine and may be technology as a whole. Now we have a wider range of symptoms than we did previously, leaving one to wonder how they were able to make these diagnoses. What changes in technology allowed for the discovery of these illnesses? But we must also question whether or not these illnesses were present in Augustine’s time. Could it be that everyone who had a fever would be diagnosed with a fever today?

Free Write

I think that one of the main struggles a king of this time period may have with "Christianity" is the question of power. In this case I am referencing King Lothar. He is a man who has taken over, or at least spread his influence across his world. Here he exclaims, "'What manner of King can be in charge of heaven, if he is prepared to finish off great monarchs in this fashion?" ( GT 217). Gregory tells us that some conflict between earthly power, and what the Kings thought to be greatness in their lives and the idea that they were submissive to someone with no army whom ends greatness in such a manner. I believe gregory is also commenting on whether it really matters to be great and powerful on earth to the God he knows rules over heaven. I am interested to see how Gregory sees the kings and their conflict with religion and defining power changing, if it does, in the rest of the book.

Reading Assignment

Friday: Read Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, book 8
NO CLASS MONDAY
Wednesday: read Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, book 9 and Venantius Fortunatus, Thurigian War and the Lives of Radegund-which are in your reader.

Blog Assigment #4

For this week: Freestyle blog!!! Write about whatever your little heart desires...as long as it relates to Gregory of Tours, and The History of the Franks.

Reading Assignments

By today, Monday 02/11 you should have already read up through book 6 in The History of the Franks
Wednesday Read book 7
Friday Read book 8
** Remember your Friday reading assignment should be done by your discussion section!!! Gregory is watching...like in this lovely 19th century statue of Gregory...

II.27 (pg139)
I chose this chapter of the book mainly for the surprised factor I came about. Under most periods where there'd be a King, I expected the King to be able to command others and not have people stand up to him. However, that was not the case here, as King Clovis had to ask permission for the ewer, and moreover, King Clovis did not immediately punish the man when the ewer was broken. I think this shows part of the structure where the King himself would still have to follow rules and orders, and cannot kill others without a 'reason'. The King has to be "fair" infront of the public.
He later on still discharges the man in a much smaller group setting, just like how he has killed Syagrius in secret; Or perhaps, when I read on further, I will find out if other Kings do the same.

Blog Assignment #3

"'Your piety as a holy man has all this time been just a cover for your depraved habits,' they cried.  'God no longer permits us to defile ourselves by kissing your unworthy hands.' Bricius stoutly denied the charge.  'Bring the child to me,' he commanded.  The baby was carried in, still only thirty days old.  'In the name of Jesus Christ, the son of God the all-powerful,' said Bricius to the infant, 'if I am really your father, I order you to say so, with all these people listening.'  'You are not my father,' answered the baby." (Book II, page 105)

I found the passage about Bricius to be particularly fascinating due to the fact that it is absolutely unbelievable.  The people automatically blame Bricius for the pregnancy of the woman who washed his clothing, which reveals that word used to spread fast and people are not considered to be innocent until proven guilty at the time.  More obviously, a thirty day old baby was able to comprehend the words of a Bishop and respond to them in the same language.  The people witnessing this event most likely credited this astonishing occurrence to the sheer power of God, but it does not make sense to me.  Individuals were blinded by their faith and totally disregarded all common sense that they might have.  Once the baby admitted that his or her father was not Bricius, something he or she could not have possibly known, the townspeople accepted the baby's words as the undeniable truth.  This nonsensical event discredits this account in my opinion and proves that citizens at the time were gullible and truly believed that God could do anything.

The most interesting passage to me was in Book Two Chapter 12 when Gregory tells us that Basina left her husband Bisinus for Childeric because Childeric was “more capable.” I found this passage interesting mainly because Gregory does not seem to portray Basina negatively. Gregory’s portrayal of her was surprising because, at least in Confessions, marriage seemed more binding and breaking a marriage contract was looked down upon. Therefore, we can see how the idea of marriage changed between Augustine’s and Gregory’s view of Childeric’s world. It seems that “Childeric’s” world marriage, at least between royalty, was unstable and people could change their partners when a more suitable one was found. More specifically, it seemed that women could choose different partners and men had to show their superiority over others to keep their women because partners were chosen based on their amount of power. Lastly, women’s ability to choose new partners hints at their greater freedom than compared to Augustine’s time because of their ability to leave unsuitable partners.

(Book IV, pg. 210) “The Franks were furious with Lothar: they rushed at him, tore his tent to pieces, heaped insults upon him, dragged him out with great violence and swore that they would kill him if he refused to accompany them. When he saw how matters stood, King Lothar marched against his will.”
I found this passage interesting because it provides a little insight into what the power structure was during this time period and how it worked. My first observation is the fact that the Franks forced their king into battle. It shows that the king was not all-powerful. The way the Franks opposed their leader reminds me of rebellions. However, they rebelled not for rights or equality, but to be able to wage war against the Saxons. Eventually, the Franks persuaded Lothar to wage war. My second observation is the Franks’ refusal to wage war without their king. For some reason, no Frank chose to take the king’s position and lead them into battle. They apparently needed Lothar in order to fight. They did threaten Lothar, but that was not until he had rejected their demands multiple times. In this passage, the Franks showed both a power over and dependency on their leader.

Blog Assignment #3

I have been intrigued by the role of earthly wealth in the world that Gregory writes about. Professor Glenn is always asking "but why did Beowulf do this?" "what was beowulf's reward?" etc, etc, always looking for the answer of treasure. Material wealth obviously plays an important role in the logic of this world. But isn't that contradictory with what we know of the early Christian religious tenets? In Book One of the Histories, chapter 13, Gregory describes King Solomon and his relationship with material wealth and God..."He [Solomon] scorned earthly riches and asked for wisdom instead...It was Solomon who, in the name of the Lord, built the Temple with wonderful workmanship, using much gold and silver...no comparable building had ever been constructed in the world." This paragraph is interesting because it seems to imply that Solomon's reward for scorning earthly riches was more earthly riches than anyone else on earth. Through other passages in Gregory and our reading of Beowulf we can see that treasure was a central part of culture. But how did these cultures, the Roman and the Anglo-Saxon as understood by Gregory of Tours, reconcile this cultural facet with their clear knowledge of Christian religious pillars?

Blog Assignment #3

For this weeks blog, take a short passage from Gregory of Tours that you find interesting. Post it on the blog (just the citation) along with a paragraph explaining why its stands out to you and what we can learn from it as historians. Make sure that you read everyone else's passages and come prepared on Friday to discuss them along with your own.

*Just a reminder, the blog is due Thursday by 8:00pm. Late posts do not count!

Readings for this week

For Wednesday: Gregory of Tours through Book 3
For Friday: Gregory of Tour through Book 4 and "Laws of the Salian Franks" in the course reader

Future Readings and Assignments

I have been sick for the past couple of days, so I was wondering if anyone could tell me the readings and/or assignments due on Wednesday and Friday. Thanks a lot.

-Adam

Beowulf's arrival to slay Grendel is celebrated by Hrothgar's court because of the heroic character. He is also known through the promise made by his father to repay the Danes for their help in settling a terrible feud. Beowulf is famed throughout for his great strength and power. Yet he does not boast of his power or take advantage of it. He uses his power to do good and protect society. When Beowulf departs he is known for his slaying of the horrible creature Grendel and his vengeful mother. This heroism sheds a new light on his character. He is seen as a valiant warrrior, and is given a high rank among his own people. Thus, his fame shows his character and strength.

In Beowulf, fame is the ultimate achievement. In the Seafarer, the author says that "for every nobleman the best of reputations is glory". He goes on to map out a path to reach glory through actions against enemies and brave deeds against the devil. The theme of fame being attain through warrior like actions continues in the Wanderer. On page 107, the author of that story describes the deaths of warriors in battle as "their glorious destiny." So fame appears to be tied to being a warrior. Whether you are victorious or not, being willing to sacrifice yourself for a just cause is worthy of fame.

blog assignment 2

In Beowulf’s world, fame was often achieved through great deeds on the battlefield or through a leader’s noble wisdom. This would mean that, unless a person was a king or a well-known warrior, he would be relatively unknown. Therefore, people would often borrow the fame of family members, usually a son borrowing his father’s, by declaring themselves as son of [a warrior’s name]. By doing this, one could achieve some renown and make connections with other people. In fact, this borrowing had become so common place that everyone was introduced relative to their father no matter their social standings. However, people, namely Beowulf, eventually performed great deeds, and their fame skyrocketed mainly because kings would reward them and poems or songs would be sung. Interestingly, saints such as Martin and Anthony became famous in similar ways; they performed miracles, word spread, and people flocked to them. Despite this similarity, fame in Beowulf’s world came from a person’s own deeds and thus was something to be proud of, while the saints’ fame was not to be celebrated because it came from God’s borrowed power.

Blog Assignment 2

In the context of Beowulf I found fame to be a close parrallel to vanity. The motif of celebration and self promotion is present from the beginning of the work, even going so far as to serve as the inciting incident (when the noise of the feast awakes Grendel). This sets the tone for the rest of the tale as issues of reputation and valor are as integral as the battle with the beast. Issues of Beowulf's reputation are cast in doubt, putting a palor over the tale and utilized as a dramatic device. The importance of fame (and reputation) is put over deeds, accomplishment, and concrete realities of the assembled fictional world. This mirrors my preconceptions of the medieval world. In all the readings it seems that perception and the opinion of others is always at a premium. Through Augustine and other lives of the Saints there is no emphasis put on what someone thinks of themselves, but rather the opinion held of them by God. The same is true with Beowulf. Little effort is put into the character's or other introversions. Fame and by extension reputation have been given an enormous amount of credence in the semester. I find this fitting as even though the majority of the world was commoners, only the upper class (those who couldbe concerned with their reputation) could afford to by books.

I am wondering if the prevalent of theme and reputation is a case of an author pandering to the audience.

-Joel Walkowski

Every character in the book had to talk about their father, of which family lineage they are from, before they can identify themselves. The story seems to take place in a land where fame and reputation are carried on and uphold from one to another. Hrothgar would first recognize Beowulf's father and his accomplishments before he recognizes Beowulf--and Hrothgar, among others, expect Beowulf to stand up to such reputation.
We can also identify how "worthy" a person from the book is, by the amount of goods they carry.
Beowulf brings some weapons on shore before fighting for Hrothgar, yet after every fight, his possessions become more expensive as with his fame. Although he returned to his home with them, he was yet again prized for his voyage to help Hrothgar. His fame back home is less, but still plentiful.
During the fight with the dragon, Wiglaf mentioned once "he considered us worthy of glory, and gave me these treasures..." (69) relating how goods were a symbol of power, and responsibility and fame.
Lastly, among the burials, plenty of goods were buried along were the person to be famous. ie.) Beowulf's burial was 'bigger' than his father's.

I relate fame to possession of goods.
I question the idea of bloodline where goods and fame and loyalty are "supposed" to be passed on from one generation to the next. Why does the author think that a hero must be heroic and powerful? is it related to the part of the thinking of the medieval era, where everyone needs to do good deed, or they would be damned?

Beowulf is described as being "the strongest and mightiest man alive." He approaches Hrothgar with what seems a list of prerequisits for the job of slaying the demon. His introduction revealed him as a powerful man "worthy of the respect of nobles." Hrothgar describs knowing him by way of his lineage. To me fame in the time of Beowulf is coupled with the might of the sword, and the bravery and respectability of the warrior. There is also a factor of noble birth in fame of this time; however, from reading it appears that with out glory in battle one cannot maintain the nobility of his name. I have just started reading Beowulf so my question is how will Beowulf's fame grow, and what factors of his tasks will cause it to grow the most.

Readings

Friday: Read Beowulf, The Wanderer and The Seafarer, which are located at the back of your Beowulf text.
Monday: Read Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, Prologue and Books 1&2.

Blog Assignment # 2

Discuss fame in the context of Beowulf, feel free to bring in comparisons from our previous readings.

Blog Assignment # 2

Discuss fame in the context of Beowulf, feel free to bring in comparisons from our previous readings.

blog assignment #1

This post is late but because I've had the chance to go through a discussion section, I feel like I'm in a better position to answer the prompt. One thing about the middle ages that this class is already changing for me has to do with credibility. I have always been curious about how different life might have been for people living around the time of Christ than it is for us today. But I never even considered that the things Athanasius and Severus wrote about, devils whose heads were touching the sky, incarnations of satan that materialize out of thin air and are driven to dematerialize simply by the sign of the cross, the saints mysteriously turning up one day covered with bruises and cuts from fighting with lucifer etc...I never even considered that these things might actually have happened. Stacey said to us in section today that this many people writing and talking about the same crazy occurences can't all be crazy. So what are they seeing? Are they recording truthfully a world so radically different from ours that a devil might actually appear to someone and be driven away simply from hearing the name of Christ? Or is it that we don't hear about these things anymore? Is it that we are so conditioned to be skeptical and disbelieve anything we can't prove with logic and rational thought that the idea of the supernatural is relegated to the realm of the impossible? I'm skeptical about my own skepticism. The readings, the force with which these authors and their subjects believed in what they recorded, are making me doubt.
But to return to that skepticism fo just a moment, I would like to talk more in sections about some rational explanations for the "possessions" that our saints deal with. The girl in Martin for example, whose father fell at Martin's feet and begged him to see her, was "possessed," but possibly mostly with a progressive muscular disorder. Even if that's the cause, though, how did Martin heal her?

I read other people's blog before I wrote mine, so, to add on a little:
I had the idea that most people were quite religious and superstituous during the middle age, because lots of people did not have much 'science' to base how natural phenomenon come about. However, I was unaware about how commited and devoted they could be about their believes. "... no one should weaken in the firmness of their commitment to the way of life he has chosen, but should always strive to increase his commitment to this undertaking as if he were just starting out ..." (Athanasius, 16)

One thing I have not fully come across, but would like to learn, is the 'reasoning' for their religious belief. Did all these people choose Christianity for the 'afterlife', or were there other things they sought?

A good topic for tomorrow's discussion is the role women played in Medival society.

a good topic for tomorrow's discussion is how people dealt with death back then compared to now, given the fact that they had such a high belief in spirits and the miracles of christianity

The readings diverge from my understandings of religion's role on the individual's lifestyle and aspirations. I did not realize that people of the middle ages were so swayed by religion at that time. I misunderestimated the power of religion during that time period.

blog assignment

The readings have clearly converged with my belief that the world at large was in the dark as it relates to science and religion. In Wednesday's lecture is was stated that Augustine had a dream about the devil and referred to himself as being possessed. This explained why movies always depict priests so easily persecuting someone for being a heritic. Spirits had a big influence on the general population of the public and are used to express things that are outside their knowledge. which in tern creates an open door to religious fanaticism. In some ways that has not changed to this day. What did diverge from my preconceived notion of the middle ages was the hype that movies put on princesses in danger, and wars and conquest. The readings reveal that life is just as monotonous back then as it is now.

The readings show a more human side to people of the middle ages. In particular, the saints come accross as more human. For the most part, Augustine's "Confessions" show how he used to sin and kind of paint a picture of his movement from sinfulness to some sort of perfection. However, in book ten he talks about how he still fantasizes about having sex with many different women as he is sleeping. I feel that it shows that although he has fought off his sinful nature, he still has to deal with the urges of his past. He didn't simply discard his old habits with severe discipline. Rather, he seems to have managed a way to not act on these urges. He still wants to have sex with many partners, but he fights an inner battle not to sin.

The readings also confirm my perceptions of the middle ages as a time that was unsanitary compared to today's standards. The fever seems to be a common killer during that time. However, now after 3 days of medication and rest one can return to full health.

The commonality of the fever leads me to wonder whether or not the fever was used to name other illness that carried the similar symptoms, but were unknown at the time.

I think there is a clear convergence with the struggle for spiritual identification and definition we see in the reading with what I believed to be true of the earlier parts of the Middle Ages. Something I believe to be overlooked quite often that divulges from my preconcieved notions is the way the people in the time period viewed the age in which they were living. In Early Christian Lives Athanasius describes how the pagan religions were essentially a deception made by the devil to trick the common man into thinking that he and his demons were holy and gods. On pg. 34 he says "Truly Jesus has utterly destroyed your powers ; stripped of your honours as an angell, you lie rolling in the mud." From this quote it seems that Christians at that time would not have viewed this time as a dark age, but instead as an enlightenment of sorts. This is the time when the devil's hold over man is weakening, and he is left "rolling in the mud".

Readings

Friday January 25th - Augustine Confessions, read books 9-10 and skim books 11-13
Monday January 28th - Augustine City of God book 1 and the letters of Symmachus and Ambrose (#17) which are both in your reader.

Hi

Sorry to be a bother, but circumstances prevented me from getting to class today. Would anyone be able to help me out with the reading assignment for friday. Thank you so much. 

Joel 

Blog Assignment 1

By Thursday 8pm, post a paragraph response to the following:

How do you see the readings diverging from and converging with your ideas about the Middle Ages? Use our discussion from last Friday as a jumping off point.

Also, pose a question about the readings for us to discuss further in class on Friday.

Hello: On Friday I failed to complete my thought concerning women and how they were absent (except his very visible Mother) from Augustine's text - The 600 hundred pound gorilla(s) in the book are women! Augustine is in a constant struggle with his lust for women. At every turn he's confessing his inability to turn to God and receive God's salvation because he is unable to release the yoke of his passion for women. Imagine the power of women: God's words - famous bishops - confessions/conversions to God from other companions - his mother's tears - his best friend's death - NOTHING can convince Augustine that God's love and comfort can be better for him than his love of women. Amazing! Women have all the power in this book; though hardly a full sentence is dedicated to any one women or her place in his life. Go Patriots.

Friday's Discussion Sections

Both 9am Friday discussion sections will meet in VKC205. If you are in the 10am section, go to Oasis and switch to either the 9am or noon sections ASAP. See you tomorrow!

NO CLASS ON MONDAY!

Remember no class on Monday Jan 21st. Let's all eat cake! Like this lovely Sutton Hoo Helmet cake...

Readings
Wednesday: Athanasius, Life of Anthony, Sulpicius Severus, Life of St. Martin. These can both be found in your Early Christian Lives book.

Readings for the week of Jan 14th-18th

The Confessions of St. Augustine
Wednesday Books 1-4
Friday Books 4-8, Handouts: Conversion of Constantine

Welcome to the blog

Hello! Welcome to our blog for History 102g. Feel free to post any time. All we ask is that you try to stay on topic and that you always be respectful of others. Stacey and I will be posting an assignment each week that will be due Thursday evening by 8pm. We will also post the assigned readings so that you always know what is going on in class.