St Francis & the Franciscans

Giotto di Bondone, Stigmatization of St Francis, 1325, Basilique Assise

St Francis' Life
For the blog I have decided to briefly summarize the extracts of ‘Thomas of Celano First And Second Lives of Saint Francis’ given to us in the reader. Thus my blog entry considers the fantastical elements of St. Francis’ life.

^“Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses, nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat.” Matthew 10:9

Francesco Bernardone was born approximately 1181 into a wealthy merchant family. In his youth he entertained a military career and lived an urban life. He undergoes a drastic transformation were he ultimately rejects this way of living. This conversion begins in 1202, were during a military expedition he is captured by the Perugians for a year, feeling profoundly reshaped from this experience however the pull towards a religious life is reinforced when he visits the church of St. Damian on his return from the war. Here the voice of the Holy Spirit urges Francis to rebuild the damaged Church. This in turn drives him to essentially cut ties with his father after he steals from him to fund the restoration of the St. Damian church.

St. Francis’ devotion to the impoverished life is inspired by Christ and the Apostles, he felt certain that this was his calling. Destitution and piety was the imperative of the Franciscan order, through poverty they could essentially imitate Christ and his apostles. They had no possessions or property and would wonder place to place preaching and begging. The Franciscans were inconstant praise of God; some would suspend themselves with ropes so they would not fall asleep whilst praying or expose themselves to extreme cold for the spiritual experience. They also held the clergy in high respects, for this there order was accepted in 1209 by Pope Innocent III, although Francis and his first twelve followers were initially turned away.

 He’d preach indiscriminately, and was known for his unwavering benevolence, even to the animal kingdom.  His connection with the natural world is that of legend, as his ability to communicate and control with animals often transcends human capability. In these tales Francis preaches to birds or fish who wait for his sermon to finish and will leave only when he gives them permission to do so. He was also famed for being able to miraculously heal, the bread which he would blessed was said to cure sickness. Things he touched was said to have the same quality, people would cut off pieces of his clothing, and at times he was almost stripped naked. 

The Franciscan order founded the tradition of recreating the nativity scene. St. Francis, while staying in the town of Greccio, wanted to witness the memory of Christ on the day of his birth. The manger they created was said to have healing capabilities as the people who visited seemed to regain their health.  This event occurred during the last years of St. Francis’ life, during this time he receives the stigmata. He is visited by a vision of God nailed to a cross with six wings. Afterwards marks appear on his body that replicate the wounds Christ receives during crucifixion. St. Francis was canonized in 1228, two years after his death.

-- Anna

St Francis' beliefs

A link which is interesting to read in order to see how their life style worked: Saint Francis of Assis, The Rule:  (c.1233)

http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/stf01007.htm

I think it is very interesting to note, that whilst Francis was devoted to the church, he was still a critic of the monetary style way of life, which showed an individual’s absolute devotion to God. The second reading in our reader; Medieval Civilisation by Kay Slocum, has some very interesting points on this subject. 

Some images of St Francis:

St Francis renouncing his inheritance

--Mia

Urbanisation and St Francis: Le Goff's argument

The article by Le Goff starts by describing the times in which Francis would have grown up. This description involves the rapid increase in population that occurred from the year 1000. This lead to better farming practices and urbanisation. Urbanisation caused the greatest changes to society as material wealth became a strong motivator rather than Christian ideals, thus leading to towns becoming centres of great power rather than Christian authorities.

It was from this that the Church began to change. This was through the Gregorian reform. Le Goff states that the reform “was more than a process of releasing church society from feudal secular domination.” What the reform also did was separate the laity from the clergy and a return to the true apostolic life.

The reform of the Church was also a natural reaction to the changes of society. These are shown in the establishment of new Orders, the development of the canonical movement and the acceptance of ecclesiastical diversity. The new Orders created had a focus on returning to the original Order of Saint Benedict with emphasis on manual labour and a simple life without any forms of monastic wealth. The canonical movement created a new balance between the active and contemplative life. The acceptance of ecclesiastical diversity allowed lay people to become more involved in Christian practices but still allowed for the separation between clergy and laity.

The Church also changed some of its doctrinal formations and religious practices to cater to the new society. In the case of sin, penance became less important than the admission of guilt. This revolution of thought in the Church aided another revolution: the scholastic revolution. New urban schools sprung up either focussing on theology or law. The creation of many new schools allowed for new methods of thinking and practice to become prominent symbolised by the creation of scholasticism.

Yet the Church had some major setbacks. These setbacks were the failure of Crusades, the struggle against heresies and its inability to deal with the new pleasures created by wealth. The Church also failed to properly engage itself within the new urban system and remained rurally focussed.

All this relates to the Franciscan movement. We can see that the failures of the Church lead to the swelling urban population wanting something different. The Franciscan movement can be see as capitalising on this sentiment as well as capitalising on the pre-existing movement towards the simple life of St. Benedict to contrast against the unattractive side of urban life.

--Tom

Clarification

Clarification I:
There are no classes on campus for ATS1316 in week 8. Your posts on the Crusades and Crusade Historians post, below, constitute your 'virtual tutorial' for this week.

Clarification II:
Blogs by presenters in week 9 will go live on Wednesday. Everyone needs to read and comment on these, even if they are not presenting.

Clarification III:
For presenters in weeks 9-11:

Topic	St Francis (wk 9)	Crusades (wk 10)	Black Death (wk 11)
Blog Post to Kathleen	5pm Tue. 24th April	5pm Tue. 1st May	5pm Tue. 8th May
Presentation	Mon. 30th April	Mon. 7th May	Mon. 14th May
Essay Due	Fri. 11 May	Fri. 18 May	Fri. 25 May

Important Announcement

Unfortunately the audio of the week 7 lectures have not been recorded. The slides are available, however, on both MULO and Blackboard. I am very sorry for the inconvenience, but sometimes technology does fail. I know that some of you have clashes and need to rely on the recordings. I would urge, however, those of you who can attend the lectures to do so, because that is the only absolutely guaranteed way that you have of hearing the material
Cheers, Clare

Crusades and Crusade Historians

 [Edit: spelling of Tyerman corrected - thanks to JJ.]

Truce between Christians and Saracens.

Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, Parker MS 16II, f.139v.

In lectures during week 7 Clare raised the issue of thinking about where historians are coming from when they write. I'd like us to try and incorporate this into our discussions in this week's virtual tutorial. I've provided some links that give you other people's perspectives on Christopher Tyerman, author of the chapter on the Meaning of the Crusades, and his work. There are reviews of one of his recent books by Jonathan Philips - another well-known historian of the Crusades - and Dame Janet (a.k.a. 'Jinty') Nelson, a prominent early medievalist. I've also given you a link to an interview with Dr Tyerman himself. If you can, I recommend reading through these after you've looked at Tyerman's chapter. Address the questions in the reading pack, but also consider whether Tyerman's view seems to represent a consensus; and how his views differ from or relate to those of others who have written and thought about the Crusades.





Urban II preaching at Clermont


• Review of God's War by Jonathan Phillips in The Telegraph, September 2006.
• Review of God's War by J.L. Nelson in the London Review of Books, 2007.
• Interview with Christopher Tyerman about his book God's War.

In this interview, Tyerman talks about how it is misleading and ahistorical to draw direct connections between modern wars in the Middle East and the medieval crusading movement. I agree with him on this point, and it brings me to a general matter I forgot to mention in class, which is: while modern parallels and experiences can be useful tools for helping us think about the past, we should never confuse them with historical argument itself, which always has to be based in the evidence and context of the period. I'm sure you knew this - but especially following our discussions about ANZAC cove and Canterbury it seemed a good time to remind ourselves of this point...



Urban II preaching the crusade



But back to the Crusades! The Institute for Historical Research in London runs a monthly seminar about the Crusades, so clearly there's no shortage of opinion and debate on the topic.



The same was true at the time of the very first crusade. As Megan told us a couple of weeks back, pope Urban's sermon was recorded in different versions by a range of observers. Does applying similar principles of interpretation to these reports help you think about how and why they differ? Where were these medieval writers coming from, do you think? Why were they writing? Who was in their assumed audience?
Post your thoughts and responses to these readings below by Monday evening. Then we'll be moving on to St Francis and Co.!

Women's Roles

Stephanie starts us off with a montage of thought-provoking images:

1. Duccio, Madonna and Child also called Stoclet Madonna or Stroganoff Madonna, c. 1300

2. Masaccio, The Expulsion, c. 1425 (Adam and Eve being expelled from Heaven)

3. Unknown, Jeanne d’Arc, c.1450

4. From “The Book of Margery Kempe”, 1436

5. Lucca, Hildegard, Volmar und Richardis, Liber Divinorum Operum, c. 1230 (Hildegard receiving a divine vision)

6.  Gerbert de Montreuil, Le Roman de la Violette, c.1400 (a medieval brothel)

Trishna adds:

From what I’ve gathered from this week’s readings, women’s roles in the middle ages were not as pivotal in the public eye however they were crucial to how a family functioned and the lineage of a family. Most women did not have major roles in society, such as roles involving the church or leadership of kingdoms; however they had crucial roles in a family’s lineage and the relations between families and between villages. I found this really interesting and the fact that women were the ‘agents of alliance’ according to Le Goff as the act of them being handed over involved a lot of items and funds from a dowry. The economic process of marriage was very intriguing as there was a ‘transfer of wealth’ firstly as compensation to the family who were losing a daughter, and then in exchange between husband and wife.  Marriage between men and women was also seen as a ‘peace pact’ as it created a truce between two families and it was the woman’s job to maintain the alliance and to maintain lineages. I also found it interesting that marriage was essentially a social act and was done so to bring honour to a family. This practice was seen in the nobility as marriages were decided upon often by the status of a man and women, because once a women got married she either moved up or down in social standings. I also noticed disparities in the ages of when women got married, because while women did get married quite young (at the age of 17 or so) those of the peasantry and working class delayed the age of marriage while the richer classes had women married by the age of 15. It is clear from these readings that women’s roles and lives revolved around their families and maintaining relationships, however I wonder how this worked for monastic women, considering they didn’t have families?

In terms of expectations of women different women assumed different roles. Peasant women worked in fields and stores, sometimes taking over stores that were once owned by husbands if they died. Even upper class women were taught sewing, embroidery, weaving and other needlework.

Portrayals of women from the three demographics; Nobility, Monastic/Religious and Peasantry. All show the three different worlds they came from. A noble women would be shown in her beautiful gowns surrounded by other women similarly dressed as seen in the image on the left. 

 

Monastic Women on the other hand would be shown in the image of God almost, as they would be simply dressed and reverent looking (below left). Lastly, Peasant women would be shown as hard working as they would be working on a farm (below right).

Ironically, none of these images have any reflection of family life nor do they have any children involved. I could not find any women with children or family portraits which possibly suggest that while family life was so important and crucial, it was also a very private affair and once a woman was married any further business was to remain within the household.

Easter Week

Hi everyone,
I hope you're having a nice break - but not too much of a break, because essays are looming! Use time off lectures and tutorials to get ahead on your research if you can. In the meanwhile, here's some medieval Easter music to pass the time...

Resurrexi, Music for Easter Sunday, British Library, Crowland Gradual, c.1240.

The image shows a manuscript called a Gradual, which is a collection of musical items for the Mass. There are two musical pieces on the page. The decorated capital R is the beginning of the introit for Easter Sunday. An introit, as you might guess from the name, is sung at the beginning of the Mass. This one comes from Psalm 138, and reads, in Latin:

Resurrexi, et adhuc tecum sum, alleluia. Posuisti super me manum tuam, alleluia. Mirabilis facta est scientia tua, alleluia. Domine probasti me et cognivisti me. 

[I rose up and am still with thee, alleluia. Thou hast laid thy hand upon me, alleluia. Thy knowledge is become wonderful to me, alleluia. Lord, thou hast proved me, and known me]

Listen to a performance of a medieval setting of this psalm by Schola Cantorum here

Then, with the large black "h", begins another psalm, no. 118:
Haec dies quam fecit Dominus: exultemus et laetemur in ea

[This is the day that the Lord made: let us be glad and rejoice in it.]

Listen to a performance of a later (16th century) setting of this psalm by The King's Singers here

Can you make out any of the words, now that you know what it should say?

See you on Monday week,
Kathleen

The Passion

The Passion, for those who don't know, is a term for Jesus' crucifixion on Good Friday. In medieval times one of the symbols of this was the pelican. A widespread story, often illustrated in Bestiaries, related how the pelican fed her starving young with her own blood; this was taken as a metaphor of Christ's sacrifice. The Pelican in her Piety, as this story was called, became a common artistic motif in medieval religious architecture, and in encyclopaedic books. The image here shows the Pelican in her Piety represented in a misericord at St Mary's Abbey, Beverley, in Yorkshire, a famous example of 14th century English Gothic style. She is pecking her own breast to release the blood and feed the chicks. (They weren't shy of graphic images in those days!)

Pelican in her Piety, St Mary's, Beverley. By awmc1 @ flickr

A misericord is a little folding seat in the quire (i.e. choir) area of churches that the monks or canons could lean on during long services. It comes from the Latin for mercy, because allowing a tired singer to sit down was like taking mercy on him! In the medieval period the underneath of misericords, like the one shown here, came to be decorated in marvellous carvings, since this was the part of the seat most often visible to those moving about the church between services. Some had religious images, and others had very surprisingly secular ones, like illustrations from tales of knightly deeds and the rescue of fair maidens, or images of monsters.