Hi everyone,
In week 5 it's going to be another
bumper discussion! Lectures will be introducing us to the rise of two
important components of late medieval urban life: communes and
universities. The twelfth and thirteenth centuries saw the foundation of
some of the most famous universities in Europe, for example, these two,
which in some ways still look as though one might bump into a medieval
student around any given corner...
And in tutorials we will be discussing
universities and education in more detail. In particular, we'll use the
story of the two people pictured below
as a juicy entrée into issues related to education at the time. Think
about Abelard's
Historia Calamitatum in light of the questions in
the reading guide. What does his story tell us about intellectual and
philosophical life and thought in twelfth-century France (apart from
some pretty gory things about castration...)? If the extract whets your
appetite, or you just want to know
Heloise's side of the story (!), look for their letters which are published in various editions and
available in the library; or look for the works of Monash's own
Professor Constant Mews, who is a world expert on their correspondence.
 |
| Abelard & Heloise |
7 comments:
Not on topic I know but... to paraphrase Philippa Gregory in her most recent historical work, up until the mid twentieth century every history was written by a man who was taught by man who based his teachings on the ideas of a man, who wrote about men, whose thesis had been ultimately examined by a man and then critiqued by men. Women played an equal role to everybody else in medieval society yet there was one big difference; most women couldn’t read or write and those who could were greatly outnumbered by men who could (nun’s education was certainly secondary to that of the monks). It is not a case of women not having history but a case of it never having been told. Unless we recognise this and try to progress above a history that was written decades ago by now dead men who only ever studied men, then we ignore 50% of the happenings in any period of history. Unless the work of historians who also happen to be female, as well as the stories of medieval citizens who also happened to be female is studied at tertiary level then the whole basis of a medieval university which was to progress the state of knowledge and education is made redundant by the fact that we still can’t acknowledge that 50% of the population means 50% of the history. Women make up 50% of the population, always, and thus they make up 50% of the history, always.
Happily, Stephanie, the situation is definitely changing at tertiary level and in research. We have some talented PhD students here at Monash addressing the balance, including one who is working to show how Heloise, shown in the image with her teacher/lover Abelard, was not as exceptional or unique in her level of education or erudition as previous generations have assumed. In fact, lots of women could read and many could probably write in this period: we have lots of their letters to show for it... but they did still get left out of 'History' for a long time, because of what 'History' was thought to signify, viz., big political narratives. Luckily there's now recognised to be a lot more to understanding past societies - even if 'big political narrative' is pretty much the main focus at first year level. (You could think of it as the skeleton which you'll be able to flesh out in more specialised subjects later on.)
So true ! ☺
One of the most interesting things I found in the readings was the status Abelard gained as a scholar. It shows the value that learning had acquired particularly. Ideas and independent thoughts now seemed to have a place alongside the devotion the Christianity inspired. One of the most interesting phrases in Edward Peters’ text was that 1150-1325 was « an age of spiritual unrest and reform ». I don’t really understand this so if anyone has so clues… Terry Jones writes that « the medieval monk is an emblem of unworldliness » something which I think would derive from the strict obedience and seclusion noted in St. Benedict’s rule which by the 11th century had become the doctrine by which most monasteries lived by. The unrest and reform o which Edward refers I think was largely the result of external changes. By now the Church had much wealth and a strong foothold all over Europe and could thus afford the huge spiritual structures that remain today that would have given it a very the majestic feel. To match the grand architecture, the Church needed to expand it knowledge to be far greater than that of most people. Equally so did the nobility; perhaps as a way of distinguishing themselves above commoners. So it seems two simultaneous streams of education developed, and while both started out with meagre funds, pupils and teachers, grew to be immensely influential and respected.
I got really interested in the building/refurnishing of churches in the reading. I went on a French exchange a couple of years ago to a school in Toulouse, which was literally around the corner from St. Sernin (See page 121 in readings). Reading about how the Church was planned so pilgrims could get as close to relics as possible with the ambulatory really makes the layout of the Church make sense to me now.
What a great experience, Tom!
It's amazing how important relics must have been to the population at the time. I remember a few years ago I visited the spectacular Cologne Cathedral which (although wasn't properly built until the 19th century) the archbishop of Cologne began building it to "properly house" the relics of the Three Kings in 1164 so that pilgrims from all over Christianity could come worship.
I was just wondering with Peters' description of Abelard, about how Abelard just kind of dropped out of the military, would that have been possible? I remember reading somewhere about harsh penalties for that kind of thing.
I also think it would be really interesting have heard his thoughts on religion and theology if he was continually condemned by various councils. Generally people who question religious theories and yet retain their belief have really fascinating views on all sorts of things.
I'm very interested in how these universities stood the test of the middle ages. Medieval Europe couldn't have been the most nurturing environment for the preservation and study of knowledge and learning. And yet. Were these universities set up in a way under Charlemagne and his successors that they somehow remain preserved and protected? Or was this not the case at all at?
Post a Comment