Paul condemned gyno-idolators along with fornicators & adulterers

While men-abasing “courtly love” became a highly refined form of oppression in medieval Europe, its constituents gyno-idolatory and gynocentrism have been prevalent throughout history. The man enslaved in love, soldiering on watch for his beloved and lamenting that he is locked out, is a common figure in ancient Roman elegiac poems. That’s the context in which Paul of Tarsus condemned gyno-idolatry among particular categories of men’s sexual wrongdoing.

Paul’s condemnation of idolatry should be interpreted within its specific context. Paul declared:

Do not be deceived! Neither fornicators nor idolators nor adulterers nor catamites nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy, neither drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

{ μὴ πλανᾶσθε οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται οὔτε κλέπται οὔτε πλεονέκται οὐ μέθυσοι οὐ λοίδοροι οὐχ ἅρπαγες βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν } [1]

At least four of the first five categories concern sexual immorality. Among those categories, catamites are men who typically, consensually are penetrated sexually by other men. Sodomites are men who typically, consensually penetrate sexually other men. Those terms indicate that Paul’s condemnation of sexual immorality is addressed specifically to men.[2] Fornicators thus means men who have sex with women to whom they are not married. Adulterers similarly means men who have sex with married women, but who aren’t those women’s husbands. But what about “idolators” situated in the middle of those terms?

Idolators as a figure of harlotry isn’t a gender-consistent interpretation. Idolatry in Hebrew scripture is associated with feminine harlotry. For example, the prophet Hosea criticized Israel:

My people consult their piece of wood,
and their wand makes pronouncements for them,
For the spirit of harlotry has led them astray;
they play the whore, forsaking their God. [3]

{ עַמִּי בְּעֵצֹו יִשְׁאָל וּמַקְלֹו יַגִּיד לֹו כִּי רוּחַ זְנוּנִים הִתְעָה
וַיִּזְנוּ מִתַּחַת אֱלֹהֵיהֶֽם׃ }

In Hebrew scripture, Israel, meaning the chosen people of God, is commonly figured as a woman. In Christianity, the church, meaning of the people of God, is also commonly feminine. Men’s sexual welfare disadvantage and women’s sexual privilege have created throughout history sexual markets in which men predominately pay women for sex. That means that whores historically have been predominately women. Idolators as a figure of harlotry implies that the idolators are women. That’s inconsistent with the context of Paul condemning men’s sexual immorality.[4]

With extraordinary inspiration, Paul used the term idolators to condemn gyno-idolators as another category of men engaged in sexual immorality. Gyno-idolatry involves men treating women, who are fully human beings, as if women were goddesses, or at least superior human beings. King Solomon was a pre-eminent gyno-idolator. Lucretius, the great Roman debunker of delusions, strongly condemned gyno-idolatry. Yet the brilliant Roman author Ovid suffered horrible punishment for not being a gyno-idolator. Benighted medieval knights like Lancelot became celebrated for their gyno-idolatry. Under increasingly totalitarian gynocentrism, gyno-idolatry has become a nearly unspeakable form of sexual immorality.

King Solomon falling into gyno-idolatry

Men, do not worship your girlfriends! Husbands, do not idolize your wives! If you engage in such idolatry, you are no better than fornicators, adulterers, catamites, and sodomites. So said the wise man that Christians now call Saint Paul.

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. The English translation is insubstantially adapted from that of Orr & Walther (1995).

[2] 1 Corinthians 6:5 also indicates that Paul is addressing men. Orr & Walther (1995), p. 250, doesn’t recognize that Paul is specifically addressing men here. That Paul condemned men’s sexual immorality should not be interpreted to condone women’s sexual immorality. Women are no more sexually moral than men are. Paul surely recognized this reality. See, e.g. 1 Corinthians 5:1, Romans 1:26-7, Galatians 3:28.

Ephesians, which may have been written by a disciple of Paul, uses idolatry (εἰδωλολάτρης) to encompass fornication, impurity, and greed. Ephesians 5:5.

[3] Hosea 4:12. More generally, see Hosea 3:10-5:4 and Jeremiah 3.

[4] Orr & Walther (1995), p. 255, doesn’t recognize the gender problem in idolators being a figure of harlotry from Hebrew scripture.

[image] King Solomon falling into gyno-idolatry. Painting by Giovanni Venanzi di Pesaro, made in 1668. Via Wikimedia Commons.

Reference:

Orr, William F., and James Arthur Walther. 1995. I Corinthians: a new translation; introduction with a study of the life of Paul, notes and commentary. Anchor Bible series. New York: Doubleday.

Wynnere and Wastoure: reject gender subordination to be a winner

Anne of Austria, Queen of France

Wynnere and Wastoure {Winner and Waster}, an alliterative Middle English poem written in the 1350s, features the personifications Winner and Waster in debate. Their debate encompasses husbands’ gender subordination to their wives under the delusions of courtly love. In the Middle Ages, shrewd men recognized that gyno-idolatry is not only a sin, but also a waste.

Winner pitied those men who, like Waster, allowed their wives to dictate their spending. The situation hints of domestic violence against husbands:

“Now,” said Winner to Waster, “I wonder in my heart
at these poor, penniless men that buy precious furs,
saddles of silk, circled with sumptuous rings,
lest they anger their wives, whose wills they must follow.
You sell wood after wood in only a short time,
both the oak and the ash, and all that grows there.

Now it is auctioned and sold — my sorrow is greater —
and wasted all willfully, to please your wives.”

{ “Now,” quod Wynner to Wastour, “me wondirs in hert
Of thies poure penyles men that peloure will by,
Sadills of sendale, with sercles full riche.
Lesse and ye wrethe your wifes, thaire willes to folowe,
Ye sellyn wodd aftir wodde in a wale tyme,
Bothe the oke and the assche and all that ther growes;

Now es it sett and solde, my sorowe es the more,
Wastes alle wilfully, your wyfes to paye. } [1]

Today women spend about $2.30 for every dollar men spend.[2] That’s far more significant than the mythic “wage gap” widely featured in untruthful news media. To fill the gender spending gap, men must spend more. To overcome historical gender inequality, men must spend not according to their wives’ orders, but according to their own choices and desires.

Husbands spending excessively according to their wives’ orders benefits no one. Wives become ridiculous-looking, and husband don’t get more sexual satisfaction:

Those that had been lords in land had noble ladies.
Now they are foolish gals of the new fashion, so nicely attired,
with broad, drooping sleeves hanging down to the ground,
overlayed and underlined with ermine on every side.
It is as hard, I swear, to give them good handle in the dark
as to a innocent, simple wench that never wore silk.

{ That are had lordes in londe and ladyes riche,
Now are thay nysottes of the new gett, so nysely attyred,
With side slabbande sleves, sleght to the grounde,
Ourlede all umbtourne with ermyn aboute,
That es as harde, as I hope, to handil in the derne,
Als a cely symple wenche that never silke wroghte. }

Women buy expensive clothes and fancy adornments to please themselves. Most men simply prefer to enjoy women naked.

Men who attempt to buy women’s favor gain women’s contempt and increase their own risk of death. The woman-pleaser Waster objected to Winner’s truthful analysis:

It sits well for a man to provide for his beloved,
to follow her wishes to win her heart.
Then she will love him truly, like her own life,
make him bold and eager to smite with his sword,
to shun disgrace and shame where men are gathered.

{ It lyes wele for a lede his leman to fynde,
Aftir hir faire chere to forthir hir herte.
Then will scho love hym lelely as hir lyfe one,
Make hym bolde and bown with brandes to smytte,
To schonn schenchipe and schame ther schalkes ere gadird }

Women don’t love men for giving them stuff and being their lackeys. Women use certain men to get stuff. Women love charming jerk-boys. Study medieval women’s love poetry if you are ignorant. And men, value your own life. Women, particularly beloved women, are highly capable of inciting men to violence. Just say no to violence against men. Be confident in the knowledge that your masculinity is intrinsically glorious.[3] Make love, not war.

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Wynnere and Wastoure ll. 392-7, 407-8, Middle English text from Ginsberg (1992), my modern English translation, benefiting from those of Gardner (1971) and Millett (2014). The subsequent quote is similarly from Wynnere and Wastoure ll. 409-14. This poem survives in one manuscript, British Library, Additional MS 31042 (written in the fifteenth century). The poem was probably authored in the period 1352-70. Millett (2014), introduction.

[2] See, e.g. Silverstein & Sayre (2009), Nielson (2013), Smith (2014). These and other sources indicate that women control roughly 70% of consumer spending. That spending share implies that for each dollar men spend, women spend 70% / 30% = $2.33.

[3] The Parlement of the Thre Ages, ll. 246-9, describes the experience of a man whose glorious masculinity was appreciated:

And then returned to the court that I came from,
with ladies fully lovely to embrace in my arms,
and to clasp them and kiss them and comfort my heart,
and then to dance with dear damsels in their chambers.

{ And than kayre to the courte that I come fro,
With ladys full lovely to lappyn in myn armes,
And clyp thaym and kysse thaym and comforthe myn hert,
And than with damesels dere to daunsen in thaire chambirs }

Old English text from Ginsberg (1992), my modern English translation. The Parlement of the Thre Ages was authored in the second half of the fourteenth century. It, along with Wynnere and Wastoure, are the last two items in British Library, Additional MS 31042. Ginsberg (1992), introduction.

[image] Portrait (excerpt) of Anne of Austria, Regent of France, 1643 to 1651. Copy of a lost painting by Peter Paul Rubens. Preserved under accession # INV 1794 in Louvre Museum, Paris. Via Web Gallery of Art and Wikimedia Commons. According to Wikipedia, “She {Anne of Austria} never lost her love for magnificent jewellery, and she especially loved bracelets, which emphasized her famously beautiful hands.”

References:

Gardner, John. 1971. The Alliterative Morte Arthure: The Owl and the Nightingale:  and Five Other Middle English Poems in a Modernized Version with Comments on the Poems and Notes. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Ginsberg, Warren, ed. 1992. Wynnere and Wastoure ; and, the Parlement of the thre ages. Kalamazoo, Mich: Published for TEAMS by Medieval Institute Publications.

Millett, Bella, trans. 2014. “Wynnere and Wastoure: Introduction and Translation.” Wessex Parallel WebTexts (online).

Nielsen Co. 2013. “U.S. Women Control the Purse Strings.” Newswire: Demographics. Apr. 2.

Silverstein, Michael J, and Kate Sayre. 2009. “The Female Economy.” Harvard Business Review. 46 (September).

Smith, Julia Llewellyn. 2014. “Womenomics: why women are the future of our economy.” The Telegraph (UK newspaper). April 27, online.

traditional thoughts: adultery with Helen of Troy barren & devastating

Paris seducing Helen of Troy with the help of goddesses

Paris, the very beautiful son of the Trojan king, set out to abduct the most valued person in Sparta. That person was Helen, a very beautiful woman and the wife of the Spartan king Menelaus. While men’s physical beauty is much less commonly acknowledged than women’s, Helen appreciated Paris’s beauty. She enthusiastically eloped with him and passionately had sex with him. She pressed down on him, holding him in gynocentric sexual subordination. According to the traditional, twelfth-century account of Joseph of Exeter, Helen and Paris’s sexual encounter produced merely stained sheets. That foreshadowed the senseless destruction of men’s lives in the brutal violence against men of the Trojan War.

Helen knew what she wanted and moved to engage with unknown men. Helen had come to the island of Cythera to serve the love goddess Venus at her temple there. When she heard that Paris’s ship had landed on the island, she went to him:

So through Cythera’s cities rumor swiftly spread
that Paris, Priam’s son, had come. Persons from everywhere
filled the port to meet him. Helen, the mighty-faced Laconian woman,
directed her steps to the shore to see the unknown men,
and is brought to Helea overlooking the sea.

{ ergo Citheriacas preceps it fama per urbes
priamiden venisse Parim, plebs undique portus
occursu complet. At pollens ore Lacena
ignotos visura viros ad litora gressus
dirigit acclinemque freto defertur Heleam. } [1]

A beautiful woman with her mighty face could easily overwhelm even a strong warrior-man. But Paris, too, wielded the weapon of physical beauty:

After Paris became aware of Helen’s presence, his armed men
he left behind, trusting in beauty and conscious of his face.
Here, there, his steps cover wherever Tyndareus’s daughter Helen goes,
tirelessly wandering in a leisurely walk.
He incites her to look and feeds her fire.
In a short time he captures and gains her love.
Indeed, moving on his course neither too fast nor too slow,
to balance his beauty his poise helps, with his broad shoulders
and head held high. He walks lightly on the sand,
eyeing the Laconian woman Helen with a wondering look,
forgetting to continue his steps. Fearing to be
acting suspiciously, he quickly transfers his gaze elsewhere,
as though amazed at what he sees.

{ postquam Helenes Paridi patuit presentia, classem
deserit ac forme fidens et conscius oris
huc illuc gressum librans, qua Tindaris ibat,
indefessa vagis incessibus ocia texit
certantesque offert vultus, incendia nutrit
mutua captatumque brevi lucratur amorem.
quippe nec ad cursum preceps nec segnior equo
librato gestu formam iuvat, auctus in armos,
in caput erectus. tenero delibat harenam
incessu figitque oculo mirante Lacenam
oblitosque gradus sistit; suspectus haberi
mox metuens transfert celeres ad cetera visus,
ceu stupeat, quicquid spectat. }

Paris didn’t plead his love to Helen and beg to serve her as a self-abasing courtly lover. He allowed her to see his magnificent masculinity and looked for her to respond with interest. She responded with self-restraint:

More modestly she
looks at him obliquely and doesn’t smile fully.
She would like to uncover totally her face, display her cheeks
and her naked breasts, but a sense of modesty
reproves and represses these piled-up excesses, which mixed with
fear make her heart beat unevenly.

{ moderantius illa
obliquos vultus et non ridentia plene
ora gerit totasque velit cum pectore nudo
ostentare genas, sed castigator adultos
comprimit excessus animi pudor, egraque mixtus
pulsat corda metus. }

Men, in their romantic simplicity, generally want an interested woman to show them at least her naked breasts. Women tend to care more about wealth in addition to fleshly beauty:

As soon as Helen had drawn in the sight of charming, non-Tyndarean foreign gold and the ship with purple sails,
she hesitates, unsure of what to do. She would provide
her hand, if asked, but she wants to be forced.

{ ut vero explicitas peregrini Tindaris auri
blandicias hausit complutaque murice vela
conspexit, quid agat, heret, prebere rogatas
prompta manus cogique volens. }

A beautiful girl in Chrétien de Troyes’s late-twelfth-century Arthurian romance Lancelot arranged a fake rape to stimulate Lancelot. Like most men, Lancelot didn’t find that event sexually stimulating. Men should just say no to women’s rape fantasies, or least insist on a written, legally binding contract with hefty payment for the repugnant sexual service that the woman wants.

The foolish Paris resolved to abduct Helen without even receiving payment for her desired sexual service. Under the cover of darkness he entered Venus’s temple. A “frail crowd {debile vulgus}” of women was there celebrating the festival with Helen.[2] The intrusion of the armed men turned Venus’s temple into a wild uproar:

The Laconian woman Helen
was reaching out to him and calling to him with a happy expression —
the Trojan Paris thus abducts her, or rather she abducts him.

{ rapit ergo Lacenam
tendentemque manus et leta fronte vocantem
dardanus aut rapitur potius. }

Joseph of Exeter bluntly described to the gyno-idolator Paris the horror and folly of his action:

Enjoy the spoils,
plunderer, and recognize your gods! After many hardships
you leave with the reward of annihilation and carry back to your mother
fiery ruin she didn’t want to engender. Alas, you are doomed. You know not
what calamity, what violence you carry back with your
fleeing fleet.

{ gratare tropheis,
predo, tuis, agnosce deos! post aspera multa
excidium lucratus abis revehisque parenti,
quas nollet peperisse, faces. heu, perdite, nescis,
quas tecum clades, quantos fugiente tumultus
classe refers. }

Throughout the ages, nothing could be worse than a son doing what his mother didn’t want him to do. That’s what Paris did. Ensuring that modern scholars would call him names like “misogynist,” Joseph of Exeter even dared to criticize a woman:

And you Helen, daughter of Leda, more foul than the marsh Hercules drained, more blazing than the fire breathed on Bellerophon, leave the marriage bed of spouses and once again be sought out by the husband you despise.
You were never abducted, but are running away. }

{ tuque, Herculea corruptior unda,
Bellorophonteo flagrantior igne, sereno
certa minus, thalamos linquis, Ledea, iugales
et spreto tociens iterum querenda marito
numquam rapta fugis. }

Most mothers wouldn’t want their son to marry a woman like Helen of Troy, or even to become involved with such a woman. Nonetheless, Helen fell far short of being a truly strong, independent woman like the sixth-century Byzantine Empress Theodora.

Helen of Troy eagerly leaving with Paris ("The abduction of Helen of Troy")

Despite his great masculine beauty, Paris had to provide Helen with expensive gifts in order to secure her love. After Paris brought Helen home, she began to lose interest in him. He had to act to supplement men’s socially constructed, inferior gender value:

The skillful adulterer
secures the dynamic seducer-woman’s favor.
Soothing her imagined fears, he heaps up Indian ivory,
Arabian incense, Midas’s rivers of gold, and Chinese silk.
And the world’s greatest riches, whatever draws out the sky’s
delight, and the sea’s clarity along with the earth’s fertility —
all these bought an easy bedding, overcame resistance to his
embraces, established her fidelity.

{ gnarus adulter
pollicitis fluxum meche sancire favorem
et fictos lenire metus, ebur aggerat Indum,
thura Sabea, Mide fluvios et vellera Serum.
ac mundi maioris opes, quodque educat aer
iocundum, pontus clarum vel fertile tellus,
hec faciles emere thoros, domuere rebelles
amplexus, pepigere fidem. } [3]

In romantic gift-giving across history, men have given women far more expensive material gifts than women have given men. Gender equality cannot be achieved until women compensate men for this historical gender imbalance. Men must receive adequate payment for their erection labor.

Helen and Paris’s encounter was a sexual failure. With Helen pressing down on him from her position of gynocentric domination, Paris was unable to fulfill men’s burden of performance:

Helen, not holding back for him to kiss her,
not holding back when he kisses her, with her full chest
lies on him, spreads her lap, presses him with her mouth,
and plunders his hidden love. As his love-force expires,
the purple bed-sheet witnesses to knowing his hidden dew.

{ non iam oscula reddit,
non reddenda negat Helene, sed pectore toto
incumbens gremium solvit, premit ore, latentem
furatur Venerem, iamque exspirante Dyone
conscia secretos testatur purpura rores. } [4]

In short, Paris’s life-enhancing semen spilled onto the bed-sheet. Modern literary criticism implies that Helen raped Paris, except most modern literary critics through willful ignorance and bigotry don’t recognize that women rape men. Within a more historically sensitive, common-sense literary reading, Helen and Paris’s sexual encounter wasn’t fulfilling.

Joseph of Exeter’s traditional thought represents a Helen of Troy worth serious study today. With Helen and Paris’s affair, Joseph shows critically the social devaluation of masculine beauty and the social construction of men’s inferior gender value. In providing poetic details of Helen and Paris’s sexual encounter, Joseph teaches that gynocentric domination hinders sexual fulfillment and fertility. Most importantly, Helen and Paris’s affair led to horrendous violence against men. Helen’s life was valued more than many thousands of men being killed. Modern classical scholars have scarcely acknowledge that reality.[5] The deep classical learning of medieval Latin scholars such as Joseph of Exeter can help to overturn gynocentrism and raise the social value of men’s lives.

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Joseph of Exeter, De Bello Trojano {About the Trojan War}, also known as Ylias Daretis Phrygii {Iliad of Dares Phrygius} 3.218-22, Latin text from Bate (1986), my English translation drawing on that of id. and Rigg (2005). Subsequent quotes above are (cited by Latin line number in Book 3): 223-35 (After Paris became aware…), 235-40 (More modestly she…), 245-8 (As soon as she…), 282-4 (The Laconian woman…), 284-9 (Enjoy the spoils…), 289-93 (And you {Helen}…), 322-9 (the skillful adulterer…), 329-33 (Helen, not holding back…). A reasonably good Latin text for the De Bello Trojano’s passages on Helen of Troy is available online.

Helen of Troy was from Laconia (also know as Lacedaemonia). That’s an ancient Greek region for which Sparta is the dominant city. The epithet “of Troy” is a modern description. It obscures Helen’s marriage with King Menelaus of Sparta, Helen’s adultery with Prince Paris of Troy, and the brutal violence against men of the Trojan War. Helen might be better called “Helen of Many Men’s Deaths.”

Along with the Byzantine scholar John Tzetzes, Joseph of Exeter rightfully ranks among the greatest classical scholars of all time.

[2] The phrase “debile vulgus {frail crowd}” is from De Bello Trojano 3.276. Bate (1986), p. 139, translated that phrase as “the gentle sex.” Bate described Joseph of Exeter’s phrase as:

not a very elegant way of describing the gentle sex. Another example of Joseph’s anti-feminism.

Id. p. 190, note to 3.276. In modern scholarly usage, “anti-feminism” means not pedestalizing women.

[3] Both adulter and meche are associated with gender-biased punishment of men for sexual crimes. Meche (classical Latin spelling of dative moechae, with nominative moecha) comes from the ancient Greek μοιχός, derived from the Greek for urinate, ὀμεíχω. The Latin adulter similarly has sexually disparaging connotations from its roots in adultero, meaning “corrupt.” Adams (1983) p. 351. Consistent with constructing adultery as the crime of men seducing innocent wives, moecha is attested much later than moechus. The earliest attested use of moecha is in the outrageously literary Catallus 42. Id.

Classical philologists have implicitly recognized the structural gender inequality in sexuality:

There is often no distinction made in a language between adultery (illicit intercourse which necessarily violates a marriage bond) and fornication (illicit intercourse which does not necessarily violate a marriage, and in which the female participant takes money) and also between adulterers and fornicators on the one hand, and adulteresses and whores on the other.

Adams (1983) pp. 351-2. Despite this linguistic structure, men, if they are guileful, can have illicit sex with a woman without having to pay her. Getting women to pay men for sex is a more difficult social-justice challenge.

Joseph of Exeter strongly condemned Helen’s sexual exploitation of Paris and the structural gender inequality of women expecting men to transfer resources to them:

What evil! Worst of women, were you able with vows
to buy a fond delay for your pleasure?
O what marvelous power of the delicate sex!
Woman suspends her urgent lust to gain advantage,
and does not deign to give joy unless her smile is purchased.

{ Proh scelus! an tantis potuisti, pessima, votis
indulsisse moras exspectabatque voluptas
emptorem? o teneri miranda potentia sexus!
precipitem in lucrum suspendit femina luxum
nec nisi conducto dignatur gaudia risu. }

De Bello Trojano 3.334-8.

[4] Students today are taught an utterly fanciful version of Helen and Paris’s sexual encounter:

The consummation stuns the imagination. What a sublime moment for Paris, who now lay with the most desired woman in the entire world. Undoubtedly his passion was heightened by Aphrodite, who must have considered this her most inspired achievement. As for Helen, there could have been a bittersweet response to the great moment. Until then she had experienced sex with only the aging Theseus and the prosaic Menelaus. This virile young man must have given her bliss she had not imagined, but certainly the shadow of her infidelity and the abandonment of her children must have cast itself across the love couch.

Bell (1991) p. 226. Notice that roughly four lines of this description concern Paris, and six lines, Helen. The implied gynocentrism index of 1.5 (6 lines about the woman / 4 lines about the man) is actually quite low by present-day standards. See, e.g. Blondell (2013).

Helen had only one child. That was Hermione, whom Helen had with her cuckolded husband Menelaus. Hermione in turn apparently was barren of children. Byzantine poets poignantly wrote of barrenness as making beauty a loss.

[5] A classical scholar’s recent, book-length treatment of Helen of Troy addressed on its first page beauty in classical thought:

As the manifestation of bodily excellence it {beauty} betokens women’s readiness for marriage and men’s for its male equivalent — the battlefield.

Blondell (2013) p. 1. Learned literature has long warned men of the horrors of marriage. But battlefields characteristically involve massive violence against men. Marriage is equivalent to a battlefield only in a hyperbolic metaphor that obscures the real, biased gender structure of violence and the extreme violence against men of war. For a less anti-meninist treatment of beauty in classical thought, Konstan (2015).

Modern classical scholarship is tragically clogged with abstract, tendentious ideology and threadbare anti-meninist clichés. Consider:

The female voice is especially loaded as a site of power and control. … Any speech aimed at an audience — that is to say, nearly all speech — is an attempt to exert power of some kind over another person. Women’s voices were therefore strictly policed, and silence deemed central to the female virtue of sōphrosunē, or self-restraint. … A woman’s mouth is an analogue for her sexual organs — a dangerous aperture that should preferably be kept closed.

Blondell (2013) p. 23. The phrase “power and control” is prominent in the deeply gender-bigoted Duluth Model of domestic violence. The gender bigotry and narrow self-interests of institutionally established “experts” has supported the Duluth Model for decades against marginalized voices. The claim that women’s voices were “strictly policed” is ridiculous. Scholars in more enlightened medieval Europe understood well the extensiveness of women’s speech. For an indication of the depth of the problem in classical scholarship, Wilson (2014).

Medieval scholasticism was never as divorced from reality as is modern literary study. Consider this pronouncement:

The anxiety surrounding female adornment is a transparent expression of the male fear — and expectation — that beautiful women will take advantage of their power over men in order to pursue their own desires.

Blondell (2013) p. 10. In literary criticism, “anxiety” and “male fear” are vacuous, pseudo-psychologizing abstractions. The adjective “transparent” pinned before “expression” is an intellectually belligerent attempt to shut down discussion of the matter. Yet woe be to the husband who doesn’t notice and praise his wife’s new dress or new necklace! Beautiful women, as well as ugly, old, bitter women, have used their power over men to impede progress in addressing social injustices such as men lacking lifespan equality with women, men being vastly disproportionately incarcerated relative to women, men lacking any reproductive rights, and men facing acute sex discrimination in child custody and “child support” rulings.

[images] (image 1) “The Persuasion of Helen” (Paris persuading Helen with the help of goddesses). Neo-Attic marble relief made probably in the first century GC. Engraved names (other than for Eros) identify the figures. From left to right they are: Pitho (Peitho, the goddess of Persuasion; sitting atop the pillar), Helen, Aphrodite (goddess of love), Eros (the Latin form of Aphrodite’s son Cupid), and Alexandros (Paris). The marble relief is preserved in Naples Museo Archeologico (inv. #6682). (image 2) “The Abduction of Helen” {sic}, oil on canvas painting by Gavin Hamilton in 1784. Both images are used under the fair-use provisions of U.S. copyright law.

References:

Adams, J. N. 1983. “Words for ‘prostitute’ in Latin.” Rheinisches Museum Für Philologie. 126 (3-4): 321-358.

Bate, Alan K., ed. and trans. 1986. Joseph of Exeter. Trojan war I-III. Oxford: Aris & Phillips.

Bell, Robert E. 1991. Women of Classical Mythology: A Biographical Dictionary. Third Printing. 1993. New York: Oxford University Press.

Blondell, Ruby. 2013. Helen of Troy: Beauty, Myth, Devastation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Konstan, David. 2015. Beauty: The Fortunes of an Ancient Greek Idea. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rigg, A. G., trans. 2005. Joseph of Exeter: Iliad (Josephus Iscanus: Daretis Phrygii Ilias). Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto.

Wilson, Emily. 2014. “Slut-Shaming Helen of Troy.” The New Republic. Apr. 26. Online.

repugnant puer senex results from child without father’s seed

Tancred depicted as puer senex

The figure of the puer senex  — the youth mature beyond his years, the boy as wise as an old man — for millennia has been used in rhetoric of praise. Virgil deployed such a figure to praise a youth. Second-century Christians described God as “a hoary old man with snow-white hair and a youthful countenance.” In the sixth-century, Gregory the Great declared of St. Benedict:

He was a man of venerable life, blessed Benedict by grace and name. Even from his boyhood he had the understanding of an old man.

{ Fuit vir vitae venerabilis, gratia Benedictus et nomine. Ab ipso pueritae suae tempore cor gerens senile. } [1]

The puer senex became a hagiographic cliché in medieval European literature. Pietro da Eboli in his twelfth-century Liber ad Honorem Augusti drew upon that literary context for horrific effect. Pietro described a repugnant puer senex as the monstrous result of a child born without a father’s seed.

The repugnant puer senex was Tancred of Hauteville, Count of Lecce. He usurped the crown of Sicily in 1189. Pietro da Eboli despised Trancred for his usurpation. Pietro declared of Tancred being anointed King of Sicily:

Oh royal anointing of most unhappy memory!
What hand dared to anoint the aborted man?
Unlucky embryo and detestable monster,
the more you seek the heights, the greater the plague you are.
You double yourself in a single body, little atom.
Always you live as a boy in back, an old man in your face.

{ O nimis infelix memorabilis unctio regni!
Uncxit abortivum que manus ausa virum?
Embrion infelix et detestabile monstrum,
Quam magis alta petis, tam graviora lues.
Corpore te geminas, brevis athome, semper in uno,
Nam puer a tergo vivis, ab ore senex. } [2]

In the Greco-Roman world, older men favored boys just reaching puberty for same-sex sexual relationships. Pietro transformed the figure of the puer senex to suggest that Tancred was merely a boy, yet one with none of a boy’s sexual appeal. Tancred thus was not a venerable puer senex, but a repugnant one.

What made Tancred a repugnant puer senex was being born without a father’s seed. Drawing upon deeply entrenched gynocentrism, ancient Greek myth frequently described female gods as naturally and essentially single mothers: they give birth by parthenogenesis, and hence had no need for fathers’ seminal gifts. The erudite and eminent twelfth-century master Alan of Lille ridiculed ruling sister-goddesses creating a garden without male seed. According to Pietro’s Liber ad Honorem Augusti,  “a famous doctor and a friend of piety {egregius doctor et vir pietatis amicus}” explained that the detestable Tancred was the disastrous result of a mother lacking a father’s seminal gift:

For a child to come into being, both parents must sweat fluid,
forming a droplet from which a complete child is born.
But in Tancred’s case, both parents did not sow seed;
or if they seeded, their seed did not combine well.

Thus a man was conceived solely from the mother’s seed.
The impoverished material from the mother did all it could
and gave form to a modest work.
Let us believe that this man has a father in name, not in fact;
the half-man derives this condition from his mother.

{ Ut puer incipiat, opus est ut uterque resudet,
Ex quo perfectus nascitur orbe puer.
Non in Tancredo sementat uterque parentum,
Et, si sementent, non bene conveniunt.

Concipitur solo semine matris homo.
Quantum materies potuit pauperrima matris,
Contulit et modicum materiavit opus.
Hunc habuisse patrem credamus nomine, non re:
Rem trahit a matre dimidiatus homo. }

Unlike ignorant modern writers, medieval thinkers understood that men are necessary.[3]

Dying in battle for their country and working to provide money to women and children isn’t necessary to give men value. Men’s value doesn’t depend on their works. Men’s own intrinsic masculinity is a virtuous treasure. Praise men for their tonic masculinity!

*  *  *  *  *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Gregory the Great, Dialogues 2.1.1, Latin text via Wikisource, my English translation. Quoted, with an elision, in Curtius (1953) p. 100. Virgil praised the youth Iulus as one who “before his adult years bears a man’s courage and concerns {ante annos animumque gerens curamque virilem }. Aeneid 9.311. The description of God as a puer senex is from the Passion of Saints Perpetua and Felicity. Id. pp. 98-101, which reviews the puer senexpuer senilis topos in literary history.  On puer senex becoming a hagiographic cliché, id. p. 100.

[2] Pietro da Eboli, Liber ad Honorem Augusti {Book in Honor of Augustus} l. 206-11 (Sec. 8), Latin text and English translation from Hood (2012) pp. 112-3. Subsequent quotes above are from id. The doctor is an otherwise unknown man named Urso. For more on Pietro da Eboli and Liber ad Honorem Augusti, see note [1] in my post on Sibylla of Acerra & Constance of Hauteville.

[3] The doctor Urso suggested that Tancred should have been aborted:

Quite often the unhappy cow aborts a monstrous bullock it has conceived,
and the gentle sheep aborts misshapen offspring.

{ Sepius infelix conceptum vacca iuvencum
Monstriferumque pecus mollis abortit ovis. }

Liber ad Honorem Augusti ll. 232-3, trans. Hood (2012) p. 112. Medieval child-support laws didn’t generate a market for selling abortions such as now exists in the U.S. Hence, all else equal, medieval incentives to have abortions were less.

[image] Tancred depicted as puer senex. I’ve slightly enhanced the contrast and the color balance to make the illustration easier to see. The colors of the page and illustration have surely changed over the roughly 820 years since it was created. The caption is “Tancred, an old man in face, a little boy in stature {Tancredus facie senex statura puellus}.” Hood (2012) p. 117. The illumination is from folio 103r of Bürgerbibliothek Bern {Berne Municipal Library} Codex 120 II {Liber ad honorem Augusti}. Image thanks to e-codices – Virtual Manuscript Library of Switzerland.

References:

Curtius, Ernst Robert. 1953. European literature and the Latin Middle Ages. New York: Pantheon Books.

Hood, Gwenyth, ed. and trans. 2012. Pietro da Eboli. Book in honor of Augustus (Liber ad honorem Augusti). Tempe, Ariz: Published by ACMRS (Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies).