Apollonius of Tyana on eunuchs’ passion

Most eunuchs today are either men who have have castrated themselves for career advantage, or men who have been made eunuchs by castration culture. Both groups have been poorly understood. Even the revered first-century neo-Pythagorean sage Apollonius of Tyana wasn’t able to reason coherently about eunuchs. Failure of reason regarding castration culture and eunuchs shows general patterns of reason’s failure.

Apollonius discussed the passion of eunuchs with his disciple Damis. Their pseudo-Socratic dialogue lacked even superficial reason:

In the evening, Apollonius said, “Damis, I am pondering within myself why barbarians think eunuchs chaste, and admit them into their women’s quarters.” “Why, a child can see that,” said Damis. “Castration takes away their ability to have sex, and that is why they have access to harems, even if they would want to sleep with the women.” “What then do you think has been excised from them, erotic feelings or the ability to sleep with women?”

{ Ὁ δὲ ἑσπέρας ἤδη “ὦ Δάμι,” ἔφη “θεωρῶ πρὸς ἐμαυτόν, ἐξ ὅτου ποτὲ οἱ βάρβαροι τοὺς εὐνούχους σώφρονας ἡγοῦνται, καὶ ἐς τὰς γυναικωνίτιδας ἐσάγονται.” “ἀλλὰ τοῦτο,” ἔφη “ὦ Ἀπολλώνιε, καὶ παιδὶ δῆλον. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἡ τομὴ τὸ ἀφροδισιάζειν ἀφαιρεῖται σφᾶς, ἀνεῖνταί σφισιν αἱ γυναικωνίτιδες, κἂν ξυγκαθεύδειν ταῖς γυναιξὶ βούλωνται.” “τὸ δὲ ἐρᾶν” εἶπεν “ἢ τὸ ξυγγίγνεσθαι γυναιξὶν ἐκτετμῆσθαι αὐτοὺς οἴει” }[1]

If eunuchs might want to sleep with women, then erotic feelings haven’t been excised from them. Apollonius’s question suggests that he didn’t listen well to what Damis just said. Perhaps Apollonius didn’t listen well because he was offended that Damis suggested that his mind was inferior to that of a child. But Damis didn’t even listen well to himself, for he replied:

“Both,” he said, “since if the organ that throws the body into frenzy has been done away with, no one can have sexual passion.”

{ “ἄμφω,” ἔφη “εἰ γὰρ σβεσθείη τὸ μόριον ὑφ᾿ οὗ διοιστρεῖται τὸ σῶμα, οὐδ᾿ ἂν τὸ ἐρᾶν ἐπέλθοι οὐδενί.” }

Even today’s college sex police feel sexual passion. Damis’s statement is nonsense. Moreover, it contradicts his earlier indication that eunuchs might want to sleep with women.

sculpture of wandering philosopher, probably Apollonius of Tyana

Events soon demonstrated that eunuchs want to sleep with women. Arranging incredibly for peace with the Eretrians and Parthians, Apollonius and the Parthian king Vardanes conversed:

They were conversing among themselves in this way when a shout of eunuchs and of women together rose from the royal quarters. A eunuch had in fact been caught in bed with one of the king’s wives. The eunuch was doing everything seducers do. The guardians of the harem were dragging him along by the hair. That’s how the king’s slaves are summoned. The senior eunuch said he had long since noticed that this one was in love with the woman. He had warned him not to talk to her, or to touch her neck or her hand. Among all the women in the harem, he was forbidden to dress only this one.

{ Τοιαῦτα δὴ λαλούντων πρὸς ἀλλήλους, κραυγὴ τῶν βασιλείων ἐξεφοίτησεν εὐνούχων καὶ γυναικῶν ἅμα· εἴληπτο δὲ ἄρα εὐνοῦχός τις ἐπὶ μιᾷ τῶν τοῦ βασιλέως παλλακῶν ξυγκατακείμενός τε καὶ ὁπόσα οἱ μοιχοὶ πράττων, καὶ ἦγον αὐτὸν οἱ ἀμφὶ τὴν γυναικωνῖτιν ἐπισπῶντες τῆς κόμης, ὃν δὴ ἄγονται τρόπον οἱ βασιλέως δοῦλοι. ἐπεὶ δὲ ὁ πρεσβύτατος τῶν εὐνούχων ἐρῶντα μὲν τῆς γυναικὸς πάλαι ᾐσθῆσθαι ἔφη, καὶ προειρηκέναι οἱ μὴ προσδιαλέγεσθαι αὐτῇ, μηδὲ ἅπτεσθαι δέρης ἢ χειρός, μηδὲ κοσμεῖν ταύτην μόνην τῶν ἔνδον, νῦν δὲ καὶ ξυγκατακείμενον εὑρηκέναι καὶ ἀνδριζόμενον ἐπὶ τὴν γυναῖκα }[2]

King Vardanes judged the eunuch to deserve to die for seeking to have sex with a royal wife.

Nonetheless, the king asked Apollonius for advice on punishing the eunuch. Apollonius declared that the eunuch’s punishment should be to live. Vardanes was astonished:

“So you don’t think he deserves to die many times over for creeping into my bed?” “I spoke as I did,” Apollonius replied, “not to get him a pardon, but a sentence that will waste him away. If he lives diseased and grasping at impossibilities, neither food nor drink will please him, nor the sights that cheer you and your attendants. His heart will pound, he will often start from sleep (that is said to be the most frequent symptom of sexual passion), and no consumption will waste him so much, no hunger will so gnaw his stomach. But if he is not the sort of man that clings to life, Your Majesty, he himself will one day beg you to kill him, or he will kill himself, bitterly regretting this present day in which he did not suffer instant death.” That was Apollonius’s advice, so wise and mild, which led the king to spare the eunuch’s life.

{ “εἶτα οὐ πολλῶν” ἔφη “θανάτων ἄξιος, ὑφέρπων οὕτως τὴν εὐνὴν τὴν ἐμήν;” “ἀλλ᾿ οὐχ ὑπὲρ ξυγγνώμης” ἔφη “βασιλεῦ, ταῦτα εἶπον, ἀλλ᾿ ὑπὲρ τιμωρίας, ἣ ἀποκναίσει αὐτόν. εἰ γὰρ ζήσεται νοσῶν καὶ ἀδυνάτων ἁπτόμενος, καὶ μήτε σῖτα μήτε ποτὰ ἥσει αὐτὸν μήτε θεάματα, ἃ σέ τε καὶ τούς σοι συνόντας εὐφρανεῖ, πηδήσεταί τε ἡ καρδία θαμὰ ἐκθρώσκοντος τοῦ ὕπνου, ὃ δὴ μάλιστα περὶ τοὺς ἐρῶντάς φασι γίγνεσθαι, καὶ τίς μὲν οὕτω φθόη τήξει αὐτόν, τίς δὲ οὕτω λιμὸς ἐπιθρύψει τὰ σπλάγχνα; εἰ δὲ μὴ τῶν φιλοψύχων εἴη τις, αὐτός, ὦ βασιλεῦ, δεήσεταί σού ποτε καὶ ἀποκτεῖναι αὐτὸν ἢ ἑαυτόν γε ἀποκτενεῖ, πολλὰ ὀλοφυρόμενος τὴν παροῦσαν ταύτην ἡμέραν, ἐν ᾗ μὴ εὐθὺς ἀπέθανε.” τοῦτο μὲν δὴ τοιοῦτον τοῦ Ἀπολλωνίου καὶ οὕτω σοφόν τε καὶ ἥμερον, ἐφ᾿ ᾧ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἀνῆκε τὸν θάνατον τῷ εὐνούχῳ. }

Apollonius essentially proposed a punishment worse than death: perpetual lovesickness. For that punishment to be effective, the eunuch couldn’t be capable, as other men are, of being cured of lovesickness. Castration culture lessens the possibilities for women and men to enjoy satisfying love. But being castrated doesn’t necessarily prevent satisfying love or overcoming lovesickness.[3]

Hebrew scripture provides more sophisticated thinking about eunuchs and love. Writing perhaps about 200 BGC, the Jewish scribe Ben Sira of Jerusalem stated:

Like a eunuch lusting to violate a young women is the person who does right under compulsion.

{ ἐπιθυμία εὐνούχου ἀποπαρθενῶσαι νεάνιδα οὕτως ὁ ποιῶν ἐν βίᾳ κρίματα }[4]

Drawing upon deeply rooted disparagement of men’s sexuality, the meaning of “violate” here is best understood to mean to have sex of reproductive type. A eunuch with an intact, sexually functioning penis could have penis-in-vagina sex with a women. But all eunuchs had at least their testicles removed. Men without testicles cannot provide semen necessary for new life. As a castrated man, a eunuch is incapable of generating new life. A person who does right under compulsion similarly cannot receive moral credit for choosing to do right.

Ben Sira recognized a eunuch’s grief in not being able to create life sexually. Ben Sira observed:

Good things poured out upon a closed mouth are like offerings of food placed upon a grave. Of what use to an idol is a food sacrifice? An idol can neither eat nor smell. In such a position is the one punished by the Lord. He sees with his eyes and groans as a eunuch groans when embracing a young woman.

{ ἀγαθὰ ἐκκεχυμένα ἐπὶ στόματι κεκλεισμένῳ θέματα βρωμάτων παρακείμενα ἐπὶ τάφῳ τί συμφέρει κάρπωσις εἰδώλῳ οὔτε γὰρ ἔδεται οὔτε μὴ ὀσφρανθῇ οὕτως ὁ ἐκδιωκόμενος ὑπὸ κυρίου βλέπων ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ στενάζων ὥσπερ εὐνοῦχος περιλαμβάνων παρθένον καὶ στενάζων }

Men’s seminal blessing has great importance in Hebrew scripture. The groan of the eunuch embracing a young woman is the grief of love without the Lord’s seminal blessing.

According to Hebrew scripture, God’s love embraces faithful eunuchs. God creates every person in mind, body, and soul. Faithful persons respect all this work of the Lord:

Blessed also is the eunuch whose hands have done no lawless deed, and who has not devised wicked things against the Lord. Special favor will be shown to him for his faithfulness, and a place of great delight in the temple of the Lord.

{ καὶ εὐνοῦχος ὁ μὴ ἐργασάμενος ἐν χειρὶ ἀνόμημα μηδὲ ἐνθυμηθεὶς κατὰ τοῦ κυρίου πονηρά δοθήσεται γὰρ αὐτῷ τῆς πίστεως χάρις ἐκλεκτὴ καὶ κλῆρος ἐν ναῷ κυρίου θυμηρέστερος }[5]

Not being able to reproduce sexually doesn’t necessarily separate eunuchs from the Lord’s blessing:

To the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths,
who choose the things that please me
and hold strongly to my covenant,
I will give in my house and within my walls
a monument and a name
better than sons and daughters.
I will give them an everlasting name
that shall not be cut off. [6]

{ לַסָּֽרִיסִים אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁמְרוּ
אֶת־שַׁבְּתוֹתַי וּבָֽחֲרוּ בַּאֲשֶׁר חָפָצְתִּי וּמַחֲזִיקִים
בִּבְרִיתִֽי׃
וְנָתַתִּי לָהֶם בְּבֵיתִי וּבְחֽוֹמֹתַי יָד וָשֵׁם טוֹב
מִבָּנִים וּמִבָּנוֹת שֵׁם עוֹלָם אֶתֶּן־לוֹ אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִכָּרֵֽת׃ ס }

Life isn’t punishment for faithful eunuchs. Although part or all of their genitals have been cut off, eunuchs aren’t necessary cut off from God. They don’t have to die from lovesickness. They can live and love as good and faithful servants of God, just as all persons can.

Apollonius of Tyana had an unreasonable and cruel view of a eunuch’s passion. Persons can make life into punishment for themselves through lovesickness. That’s as true for eunuchs as for persons who aren’t eunuchs. The cure for lovesickness is the same for both: attainable love.

* * * * *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Philostratus, Life of Apollonius of Tyana {Τὰ ἐς τὸν Τυανέα Ἀπολλώνιον} 1.34, ancient Greek text and English translation (modified slightly) from Jones (2005). The subsequent quotes from Life of Apollonius of Tyana are similarly sourced. The subsequent one above is also from Life of Apollonius of Tyana. Philostratus probably wrote his Life of Apollonius of Tyana about 230 GC. The translation of Conybeare (1912) for the Loeb Classical Library is freely accessible online. Here are more textual resources about Apollonius of Tyana.

For “κἂν ξυγκαθεύδειν ταῖς γυναιξὶ βούλωνται,” Jones translated “even if they want to sleep with the women.” Conybeare has “no matter how far their wishes may go.” I’ve highlighted the subjunctive in the Greek by inserting “would” before “want” in Jones’s translation.

[2] Life of Apollonius of Tyana 1.37. The subsequent quote above is also from id.

[3] Apollonius elsewhere disparaged Spartan men for appreciating their own bodily beauty and enjoying luxurious clothing. Life of Apollonius of Tyana 4.27. The ancient regime in Sparta included mothers horrifically devaluing their sons’ lives. Apollonius’s support for Sparta’s ancient regime lacks compassion and wisdom, just as did Apollonius seeking punishment worse than death for the eunuch in love with one of the king’s wives.

In some instances, Apollonius showed admirable concern for men’s lives. For example, Apollonius in Corinth saved Cynic philosopher Demetrius’s student Menippus from being devoured by a female vampire (a lamia). Life of Apollonius of Tyana 4.25. Apollonius in Cnidus cured a man madly in love with a statue of Aphrodite. Life of Apollonius of Tyana 6.40.

[4] Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) 20:4, Greek text from the Septuagint, my English translation benefiting from widely available translations. The Hebrew text for this verse hasn’t survived. Here’s information on the complex textual history of Sirach. The subsequent quote above is similarly from Sirach 30:18-20.

[5] Wisdom of Solomon (Wisdom) 3:14, Greek text from the Septuagint, English translation based on the Revised Standard Version.

[6] Isaiah 56:4-5, Hebrew text from the Westminster Leningrad Codex, via Blue Letter Bible, English translation based on the Revised Standard Version.

[image] Ancient wandering philosopher, probably Apollonius of Tyana. Sculpture made in second century GC and found in Gortyn, Crete. Source image thanks to Christian Vandendorpe and Wikimedia Commons.

Reference:

Jones, Christopher P., ed. and trans. 2005. Philostratus. Life of Apollonius of Tyana. Loeb Classical Library 16 and 17. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

gender equality & sexual harassment in medieval understanding

In thirteenth-century Germany, a priest who ranked as the provost of a religious order became gravely ill. He apparently was lovesick. He believed that having sex with a woman was the only possible cure for him. So he had sex with a woman despite his vow of chastity. He died a few days later. A contemporary Cistercian monk, Caesarius of Heisterbach, said only, “I commit the judgment of his soul to God {Judicium animae Deo committo}.”[1]

A monastic novice recognized that such a moral failing wasn’t particular to men. After hearing this story, the novice said:

We spoke before about holy Job’s maxim: “The life of man upon the earth is temptation.” Isn’t this to be understood for both sexes?

{ Estne praedicta sententia sancti Job: tentatio est vita hominis super terram, de utroque sexu intelligenda? }[2]

The monk teaching the novice responded:

Yes, because this word “man” means both sexes. Both sexes are subject to the same emotions. Just as by women the devil weakens and overthrows men, so too by men does it win over many women.

{ Est, quia hoc nomen homo, utrumque sexum comprehendit, et eisdem motibus uterque sexus subiacet. Sicut enim diabolus per feminas viros deiicit et enervat, ita per viros mulierum multitudinem lucratur. }

Using the word “man” for women and men obscures men’s gender distinctiveness and should be avoided. But underlying values are more important than mere words. Both the monk and the novice communicated an admirable medieval understanding of gender equality. That authentic sense of gender equality has lamentably been lost in the frenzy to demonize, criminalize, and incarcerate more men in our benighted and bigoted age.

opening page of a manuscript of Caesarius of Heisterbach's Dialogus Miraculorum

The novice and the monk both forthrightly recognized that women sexually harass men. Consider the case of a noble woman in charge of a castle that she held with her husband. One day this woman was seized with the “spirit of fornication {spiritus fornicationis}.” Her husband was then away from the castle:

Now suddenly she was so strongly inflamed that she ran here and there and couldn’t stand nor sit. She behaved as if a hot iron had been pulled out of her thigh. When she could no longer ignore the fire of love, she went down to the castle’s porter, and ignoring chastity, wanted to have sex with him. With much urgency she begged him for sex.

{ Nam subito tam valide est inflammata, ut huc illucque discurrens, stare vel sedere non posset, ac si ferrum candes in suo femore excepisset. Cumque ignem amoris tolerare non posset, ad portarium castri, castitatis oblita, descendit, et ut sibi commisceri vellet, cum multa instantia supplicavit. }[3]

The porter was in a dangerous situation. He could be fired or falsely accused of attempted seduction or rape if he refused the lady’s urgent request for sex. Nonetheless, the porter dared to say no to his workplace superior:

Since he was a good man, the porter responded: “What is this that you’re saying, master-lady? Where is your sense? Respect God and have regard for your honor.” Caring for neither of these, when she had suffered being rejected by the porter, she with a nod from God exited the castle and ran to the river that flowed by the castle. She immersed herself in the cold waters and sat there until she had restrained the tinder of her burning libido.

{ Cum ille, sicut vir bonus, respondit: “Quid est quod loqueris, domina? Ubi est sensus tuus?” Respice Deum, attende honorem tuum.” Illa nihil horum curans, cum a portario repulsam pateretur, nutu Dei, de castro exiens, ad flument praeterfluens cucurrit, aquis gelidis se immersit, in quibus tamdiu sedit, donec fomitem ardentis libidinis restringeret. }

The nod from God perhaps saved the porter from unjust punishment for refusing his superior’s sexual solicitation. Men experiencing inappropriate or misdirected sexual desire are commonly advised to take a cold shower. That advice is just as applicable to women, as God’s nod to the lady indicates.[4]

Lacking Twitter hashtags for support, solidarity, and mobbing, medieval men suffered alone from women’s sexual harassment of them. For example, a medieval lay-brother delivered a barge of wine from his monastery to a merchant in Flanders. A maid-servant prepared a bed for him to stay overnight at his host’s house. She also prepared a bed for herself at the lay-brother’s feet. After he went to bed and the room was dark, she silently undressed. She then acted with a sense of sexual entitlement:

She reclined in the bed she had prepared, and with her nude feet pushed on the soles of the lay-brother’s feet and coughed so that he would know that she was there.

{ in lectum preaparatum se reclinavit, nudis pedibus conversi plantas pulsans, et quia ipsa foret, tusciendo se prodens. }[5]

Men can perceive women treating them like dogs. The lay-brother got up, dressed himself, and went to the window of the bedroom. There he prayed, waiting for morning to come. The naked maid-servant was stunned that he was ignoring her. Eventually she got up, got dressed, and left. Men should not have to suffer this sort of unwanted disruption to their sleep.

Caesarius of Heisterbach learning at the feet of Saint Benedict of Nursia

In addition to sexual harassment, men have also endured the penal justice system’s bias toward punishing persons with penises. Consider the medieval case of a young clerk who came to the German city of Soest. He was “tall and handsome {corpus procerus, pulcher aspectus}.” Not surprisingly, he attracted the female gaze:

A certain woman-citizen living in that city cast her eyes on him. She became so inflamed in love that she said to him: “If you will embrace me in every way, all that is mine will be yours.”

{ In hunc femina quaedam eiusdem civitatis civis oculos iniecit, adeo ab illo inflammata, ut diceret: “Si volueris meis amplexibus uti, omnia mea tua erunt.” }[6]

This high-status woman, who apparently was already married, deserves credit for taking the initiative in seeking an amorous relationship and for being willing to provide materially for a man she loved. But all her moral credit was wiped away when she wouldn’t take no for an answer:

The young man, remembering holy Joseph, despised her words and promises. When she perceived she could get nothing from him, she accused him before the judges of sexually assaulting her. He denied that charge, but he wasn’t believed. He was sent into a walled prison, the place for those condemned to death.

{ Cuius verba vel promissa cum iuvenis, memor sancti Joseph, despiceret, et illa nihil se proficere cerneret, de oppressione illum coram iudicibus accusavit. Qui cum negaret, nec ei crederetur, missus est in claustrum murorum, locum scilicet damnatorum. }

Do women need to be taught not to falsely accuse men of crimes? Teaching probably would have been futile in this case. This woman was love-crazy:

Stimulated by lust, she pretended that the clerk made her insane. She climbed the prison wall with a ladder, threw herself down, and embraced the young man. She begged him to have sex with her. But she got nothing from him.

{ Illa, stimulante luxuria, a clerico se dementatam simulans, murum cum scala ascendit, doersum se praecipitavit, iuvenem amplexatur, ad commixtionem illum sollicitans. Nec sic profecit. }

As has long been regular practice, judicial officials blamed the man:

The judges learned of this. They pulled the innocent young man from prison and sent him to be burned at the stake as if he were an evil wizard. When he was burning such that his ribs were open and his lungs could be seen, he chanted the angelic greeting, that is, “Hail Mary” and so on. All could hear it. Immediately one of the bystanders, a relative of the falsely accusing woman, snatched a burning cinder and thrust it into his mouth. She said: “I will stop these prayers of yours.” She thus suffocated him.

{ Hoc cognito iudices, extrahentes innocentem, tanquam maleficum et magum miserunt in ignem. Qui cum arderet, ita ut patentibus costis pulmo eius videretur, salutationem angelicam, id est, Ave Maria et cetera, cunctis audientibus decantavit. Mox unus de circumstantibus, mulieris cognatus, titionem ardentem arripiens, orique eius immittens, ait: “Ego auferam tibi orationes istas;” et suffocavit eum. }

An innocent young man was burned at the stake because a crazy woman was madly in love with him. As he was being burned, a bystander stuck a burning cinder into his mouth so no one could hear what he was saying. At least this medieval case wasn’t as bad as what a falsely accused man could suffer on college campuses today.

snow-covered memorial to Caesarius of Heisterbach

Men are not more evil or more intrinsically criminal than women are. Women and men have the same emotions, including sexual desire. Why then are men around the world vastly gender-disproportionately incarcerated by penal justice systems? Gender enlightenment can start with thinking about that question.

* * * * *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Caesarius of Heisterbach, The Dialogue on Miracles {Dialogus miraculorum} 4.101, Latin text from Strange (1851), my English translation, benefiting from that of Scott & Bland (1929). Subsequent quotes from Dialogus miraculorum are similarly sourced, with the subsequent two above from id. 4.101.

Caesarius wrote his Dialogus miraculorum about 1220. He heard the story of 4.101 in the provost’s house from a priest of the provost’s order. Moreover, Caesarius knew that priest personally.

Lovesickness was recognized as a serious illness in medieval Europe. For example, a medieval man lamented:

The fire is gathering strength and my end is near,
for death has its grip on my bones deep within me.

The fate that this emaciated body of mine forebodes
is what it claims as its own after endless wasting.

I feel the pain, excruciating pain,
my heart wounded and filled with passion,
and I struggle to drive out the seeds of love.

{ Imminet exitus igne vigente
morte medullitus ossa tenente.

Quod caro predicat haec macilenta,
hoc sibi vendicat usque perempta.

Dum mala sentio, summa malorum,
pectora saucia, plena furorum,
pellere semina nitor amorum. }

Carmina Burana 73, “With Cronus confined and locked {Clauso Cronos et serato},” stanzas 7a-8a, Latin text and English translation from Traill (2018).

[2] The novice quotes Job 7:1, with the Latin translation apparently deriving from the Septuagint: “Is not the life of man upon the earth a trial {πότερον οὐχὶ πειρατήριόν ἐστιν ὁ βίος ἀνθρώπου ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς}?” The current Vulgate for Job 7:1 is “Is not the life of man upon the earth a hard service {militia est vita hominis super terram}?” While the Vulgate was the dominant text of scripture in medieval Europe, other Latin translations also existed.

[3] Dialogus miraculorum 4.102. The lady was a noble chatelaine {chastelaine}, meaning she governed the castle. The subsequent quote above is similarly from this story. Scott & Bland (1929) bowdlerizes the translation. Caesarius of Heisterbach reports that a priest told him this story.

[4] After the chatelaine cooled herself in the river, she thanked the porter for refusing her sexual advance. She declared that now she wouldn’t accept being propositioned for sex even if she were paid 5000 marks of gold. In other words, she was thinking about being a prostitute.

Caesarius appended to this story an earthly, feminine image of God:

So does the merciful Lord, who like a merciful mother, permits her beloved child to crawl around a fire to feel well the warmth of the fire, but when the child wishes to enter the fire, she draws it back with much haste.

{ Facitque pius Dominus, ut mater pia, quae infantem dilectum circa ignem reptantem bene ignis calorem sentire permittit, sed intrare volentem cum multa festinatione retrahit. }

While Jesus was a fully masculine man, God encompasses male and female and isn’t limited to the gender binary.

[5] Dialogus miraculorum 4.100.

[6] Dialogus miraculorum 4.99. Subsequent quotes above are also from this story.

Men’s beauty, so seldom acknowledged publicly, tends to prompt women’s lust. Such was the case in England with a man appointed to preside over a convent:

He was moreover of tall stature and dignified appearance, with ruddy cheeks and cheerful eyes.

{ Erat autem staturae procerae, decorus aspectu, genas habens rudicundas, oculos laetos }

Dialogus miraculorum 4.103. A young nun of this convent often gazed upon this man. Prompted by her female gaze, she amorously propositioned him. He emphatically refused. She then said that if he wouldn’t have sex with her, she would die. In short, she claimed she was mortally lovesick. This man-leader cured her of her lovesickness by arranging a meeting in which he took off his clothes and showed her his ascetic body. It was roughened by a hair shirt, eaten with worms, and covered with sores and grime. That correction to the female gaze cured the young nun of her lovesickness.

Implicitly indicating some men’s awareness of their beauty, Caesarius included two stories disparaging men for wearing tight leather leggings. In one of the stories, the leaders of a Benedictine (Black Order) monastery in France sent a young monk from a noble, well-connected family to King Philip to complain about another noble pillaging the monastery. The young monk told the king that the noble was carrying away the monastery’s goods, leaving the monks with scarcely anything. King Philip responded:

“Truly, my lord, that is well apparent in your leggings. If that other had left you enough leather, your leggings wouldn’t be so tight. The nobler you are, the more humble you should be.” Then desiring after this reproof to please him, the king added: “You shouldn’t be burdened by my reproof, which is made for your good. Return to your monastery, and that other noble won’t trouble you any longer.”

{ “Vere, domine, hoc bene apparet in calciis vestris. Si aliquid dimississet vobis corei, non essent tam stricti. Quanto estis ceteris nobilior, tanto esse debetis humilior.” Tunc volens post correptionem illum placare, adiecit: “Non vos gravare debet correctio mea, quia ad bonum vestrum facta est. Revertimini ad claustrum vestrum, et de cetero non moestabit vos nobilis ille.” }

Dialogus miraculorum 4.12, “About Philip, King of the Franks, who reproached a black monk about tight leggings {De Philippo Rege Francorum, qui nigrum monachum ob stricta calciamenta reprehendit}.” Dialogus miraculorum 4.13 similarly has “Philip, King of the Romans {Philippus Rex Romanorum}” criticize an abbot for wearing tight leather leggings.

[images] (1) First page of a copy of Caesarius of Heisterbach’s Dialogus Miraculorum. Folio 2r of University Library Düsseldorf, MS C 27. Source image via Wikimedia Commons. (2) Caesarius of Heisterbach (on right) as a novice learning at the feet of Benedict of Nursia (on left), a sixth-century monastic leader. Detail from folio 2r of University Library Düsseldorf, MS C 27. Source image via Wikimedia Commons. (3) Snow-covered memorial stone for Caesarius of Heisterbach. It was erected in 1897 “to recognize his importance for the local history and the knowledge of the people’s life of the Hohenstaufen time {zur Anerkennung seiner Bedeutung für die heimische Geschichte und die Kunde des Volkslebens der Hohenstauferzeit}.” Text from plaque on memorial. Source image via Wikimedia Commons. From 1199 to about 1240, Caesarius lived as a monk at the Cistercian Heisterbach Abbey. Heisterbach Abbey, founded about 1192, is in the Seiben Mountains in the North Rhine-Westphalia region of present-day Germany. All that now remains of Heisterbach Abbey is a choir cloister.

References:

Scott, Henry von Essen and C. C. Swinton Bland, trans. 1929. Caesarius of Heisterbach. The Dialogue on Miracles. 2 vols. (vol. 1, vol. 2). London: Routledge.

Strange, Joseph, ed. 1851. Caesarius of Heisterbach. Dialogus miraculorum: textum ad quatuor codicum manuscriptorum editionisque principis fidem accurate. 2 vols. (vol. 1, vol. 2). Coloniae: J.M. Heberle.

Traill, David A. 2018, ed. and trans. Carmina Burana. Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library, 48-49. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

shepherds, angel, and devil converse about Jesus’s birth

A Christmas play preserved in the Carmina Burana is no children’s Christmas pageant. This highly sophisticated play, probably composed around 1160, begins with an unusual Order of Prophets {Ordo Prophetarum}: Isaiah, Daniel, a Sibyl, Aaron, and then Balaam sitting on his ass. The play emphasizes that Mary would give birth without the joy and blessing of a mortal man’s seminal gift:

Behold, a virgin will give birth without a man’s seed.
By that she will cleanse the world from the crime of sin.

While retaining the lily of chastity’s flower,
a virgin, blessed with childbirth, gives birth to a king.

This new star brings a new message
that a virgin not knowing any intercourse with a man
and continuing as a virgin after giving birth,
will bear a son bringing salvation to the people.

Just as this branch lacking all nourishment has flourished,
so too a virgin without loss of flesh will give birth.

{ Ecce virgo pariet sine viri semine,
per quod mundum abluet a peccati crimine.

cum retento floridae castitatis lilio,
virgo regem pariet felix puerperio.

Haec stellae novitas fert novum nuntium,
quod virgo nesciens viri commercium
et virgo permanens post puerperium
salutem populo pariet filium.

Ut haec floruit virga omni carens nutrimento,
sic et virgo pariet sine carnis detrimento. }[1]

While emphasizing that the savior of the world came without a woman and man’s sexual intercourse, the play is earthy and includes detailed human characterizations.[2] Moreover, the play’s last verses show a mother’s courageous love for her son:

All hardships I will endure to avoid danger to my son.
As his mother I am ready. I shall go now. Come with me!

{ Omnia dura pati, vitando pericula nati
Mater sum presto. Iam vadam, tu comes esto! }

A closely associated play includes the destruction of idols.[3] The Carmina Burana’s Christmas play isn’t a paean to gynocentrism, even less to gyno-idolatry. A conversation among shepherds, an angel, and the devil emphasizes the play’s celebration of personal encounters.

Prior to the nativity play within this play, Augustine of Hippo and the president of a synagogue debate the credibility of a virgin birth. Their debate occurs in the intellectual style of debates within the church.[4] It concludes with a slightly adapted Christmas sequence from no later than the eleventh century and a slightly adapted Easter liturgical chant. Neither Augustine nor the synagogue president prevails in argument. Augustine then tells his opponent to learn from what he sees. With an angel’s annunciation to Mary, the nativity play within a play begins.

Within the nativity play, three magi, kings of learning from the East, struggle to interpret the Christmas star. One magus declares:

I’m frequently tormented by problems of the quadrivium
and my mind’s reasoning suffers shipwreck
when I consider this star bearing the indication
that its newness bears a new message.

I have studied the courses and natures of the constellations
and I recall investigating their very number.
But when inspect this one, I once again marvel
that nothing appears about it in any of the ancient authorities.

{ Per curarum distrahor frequenter quadruvium
rationis patiens et mentis naufragium,
cum hanc stellam video portantem indicium,
quod ipsius novitas novum portet nuntium.

Cursus ego didici et naturas siderum
et ipsorum memini perscrutari numerum.
sed cum hanc inspicio, ego miror iterum,
quia non comparuit apud quemquam veterum. }

The magus speculates that the star portends the birth of a great king whom the world will obey and revere. The other magi similarly display their learning and struggle to the same extraordinary conclusion.

Meanwhile, an angel appears to unlearned rural folk — shepherds. The angel declares:

Shepherds, I announce to you a message of great joy.
God has clothed himself in a garment of your flesh.
His mother do not give birth to him from fleshly intercourse.
Indeed, a mother continuing as a virgin has had a son.

{ Magnum vobis gaudium, pastores, annuntio:
Deus se circumdedit carnis vestrae pallio,
quem mater non peperit carnali commercio;
immo virgo permanens mater est ex filio. }

But then the devil tells them:

Don’t believe such words, you simpleminded shepherds!
Be assured that what cannot be proved true is nonsense.
As for a divinity being buried in a manger,
it’s disclosed to the eye to be an extreme falsehood.

{ Tu ne credas talibus, pastorum simplicitas!
Scias esse frivola, quae non probat veritas.
Quod sic in praesepio sit sepulta deitas,
nimis est ad oculum reserata falsitas. }

Shepherds commonly see animals having sexual intercourse and subsequently giving birth. Animals, not a god, typically rest in a manger. The shepherds thus decide to continue to graze their animals.

Ignoring the devil’s arguments, the angel urges the shepherds to go quickly to the manger and venerate the mother and child. The shepherds go to do so. Then the devil whispers in their ears:

You simple-minded clump, see how clever
he is. He’s making up such stories contrary to truth,
and also dressing up his lies with baubles,
rendering in rhythmic verse all his pronouncements.

{ Simplex coetus, aspice, qualis astutia
eius, qui sic fabricat vero contraria
utque sua phaleret nugis mendacia,
in rhythmis conciliat, quae profert, omnia. }

The devil’s disparagement that the angel pronounces in Latin poetry is learned humor. The devil and even the ignorant shepherds are also speaking Latin poetry.[5] After more conflicting words from the angel and the devil, one shepherd says to his companions:

Listen again, brothers! What incompatibility!
First I hear something, then something to the contrary.
My simple soul and my confused understanding
is ignorant about which of these wise words is more apt.

{ Audi, frater, iterum! Qualis repugnantia!
Inde quaedam audio, hinc quaedam contraria.
Meus simplex animus, mea mens non sobria
ignorat quae potior sit horum sententia. }

The resolution doesn’t come through more sophisticated reasoning. A chorus of angels gathers and sings:

Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to people of good will. Halleluja! Halleluja!

{ Gloria in excelsis Deo, et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis.
Alleluia! Alleluia! }

Upon hearing the angelic chorus, another shepherd says to his companions:

These singing voices make my heart breath.
From this music within myself I have joy.
So let us proceed together to the manger
and on bended knees adore the son!

{ Ad hanc vocem animi produco suspirium.
Ex hac intus habeo citharizans gaudium.
Procedamus igitur simul ad praesepium
et curvatis genibus adoremus filium! }[6]

The shepherds go the manger singing “Gory to God!” and adore the newly born babe. Beautiful singing wins!

May the artist who created the human from mud
and smeared the blind man’s eyes with sacred spit
release you from sin and save your souls.
I greet you, “Peace be with all of you!”

{ Artifex, qui condidit hominem ex luto,
et linivit oculos caeci sacro sputo,
salvet vestras animas crimine soluto:
“Pax vobis omnibus!” ego vos saluto. }[7]

* * * * *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Carmina Burana 227, “Christmas play {Ludus de Nativitate},” vv. 1-2 (from Isaiah’s prophecy), 9-10 (from Daniel’s prophecy), 16-9 (from the Sibyl’s prophecy), 36-7 (from Aaron’s prophecy), Latin text and English translation (modified) from Traill (2018). For alternate English translations, Bevington (1975) Ch. 7, and Pakenham (1947). Subsequent quotes are similarly from the Ludus de Nativitate, unless otherwise noted.

On the play dating to around 1160, Baumgaertner (1979) p. 13, Bevington (1975) p. 178. The play was copied by the master-scribe of the Codex Buranus, H1-Conrad, probably at Neustift (Novacella) near to Brixen (Bressanone) in South Tyrol about 1230. Godman (2016) p. 107, Godman (2015) pp. 246-9.

Bevington ranked this play as “among the most splendid and elaborate works of dramatic art ever produced by the medieval church.” Bevington (1975) p. 178. In addition to an Order of Prophets {Ordo Prophetarum}, the play includes an Order of the Star / Magi {Ordo Stellae}, an Order of the Shepherds {Ordo Pastorum}, and an Order of Rachel {Ordo Rachelis} / Massacre of the Innocent Boys.

Sibyls were female prophets in ancient Greece. In medieval Europe, Christians regarded Virgil, Eclogues 4 as foretelling the birth of Jesus. This sibyl prophetically uses words from Matthew 1:21. Similar words are included in the communion antiphon for the mass of the nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

[2] For example, Herod is depicted as a scheming, murderous megalomaniac. In the end, “Herod is consumed by worms {Herodes corrodatur a vermibus}.”

[3] Carmin Burana 228, “Play about the king of Egypt {Ludus de rege Aegypti}.”

[4] The debate between Augustine and the president of the synagogue draws upon the sixth-century pseudo-Augustine Sermon against Jews, Pagans, and Arians concerning the creed {Sermo Contra Judeos, Paganos, et Arianos de Symbolo}. On the debate in Ludus de Nativitate, Lee (2006).

Augustine is characterized as “restrained and discreet {sobrius et discretus} (stage direction preceding v. 90). He nonetheless figures the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary like Jupiter coming to Danae:

Just as a sunbeam comes in through a solid window
and the passage through is completely open to it,
so the Son of the Father on high will slip
into the virgin’s womb and yet do her no harm.

{ Ut specular solidum solis intrat radius,
et sincere transitus servit ei pervius,
sic in aulam virginis summi patris filius
lapsum quidem faciet, et tamen innoxius. }

Here Jesus slips into Mary’s womb like a sunbeam through a solid window. Jupiter slipped into a bronze chamber as “golden rain {pluvium aurum}” to impregnate Danae with Perseus. Ovid, Metamorphoses 4.611.

[5] In the shepherds’ play in N-Town, Wakefield, and Chester cycles (mystery plays), the shepherds puzzle over the Latin words the angels sing. Carlson (2006) pp. 29-32.

[6] Lee noted:

This episode thus does not simply portray “the conflict between rational faithlessness and belief in divine miracle,” as Bevington observes, but more accurately counters logic with an invitation to see for oneself, which will lead to belief and to understanding.

Lee (2006) p. 92.

[7] Carmina Burana 224, stanza 1 (of 3), Latin text and English translation (modified slightly) from Traill (2018).

[images] (1) Hymn “Let resound in praise {Resonet in laudibus},” from the Gradual of the Augustinian Collegiate Church of St. Castulus in Moosburg, Germany. It was written in 1360. This hymn may date from much earlier, perhaps from about the year 850 in Metz (see descriptive text here). Recording by the Capella Antiqua Munich in 1977. Via YouTube. (2) “Hallelujah” by Leonard Cohen from his album Various Positions (1984). Via YouTube.

References:

Baumgaertner, Jill P. 1979. “The Benediktbeuern Ludus De Nativitate: Journey to Fulfillment.” Christianity & Literature. 28 (3): 13-30.

Bevington, David M. 1975. Medieval Drama. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Carlson, Marvin. 2006. Speaking in Tongues: language at play in the theatre. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Godman, Peter. 2015. “Rethinking the Carmina Burana (I): The Medieval Context and Modern Reception of the Codex Buranus.” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies. 45 (2): 245-286.

Godman, Peter. 2016. “Re-thinking the Carmina Burana II: The Child, the Jew, and the Drama.” Viator. 47 (1): 107-122.

Lee, Christopher A. 2006. “Augustine vs. Archisynagogus: Competing Modes of Christian Instruction in the Benediktbeuern Ludus de nativitate.” Florilegium. 23 (2): 81-97.

Pakenham, Alphonsus L. 1947. Carmina Burana: an annotated English translation of No. CCII of Codex Lat. 4460 of the Staatsbibliothek of Munich. M.A. Thesis, Loyola University of Chicago.

Traill, David A. 2018, ed. and trans. Carmina Burana. Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library, 48-49. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

epic violence against men involves women

The Iliad and the Aeneid, epics that are classics of classics, recount massive violence against men. That gender profile of violence scarcely registers in the reception of these and other epics. Vastly gender-disproportionate violence against men, like vastly gender-disproportionate incarceration of men, hasn’t mattered. That’s an imaginative, emotional, and deliberative failure. Some are satisfied merely with blaming men for killing men (or more pretentiously, blaming patriarchy), as if blaming men makes men’s deaths less of a personal and social loss. Epic violence against men concerns deep social structures of gender. Epic violence against men unquestionably involves women.

Benoît de Sainte-Maure’s twelfth-century Roman de Troie explains why men came to fight in the horrific Trojan War. Regarding Greek men-soldiers, Benoît declared:

As many troops as one could have
whether by force or by command,
by volunteering or by other means,
by summons or by entreaty,
were assembled at Athens.

{ Quant qu’il porent de gent aveir
Ne par force ne par poëir,
Par gré ne par autre maniere,
Par somonse ne par preiere,
A Athenes fu assemblee }[1]

Men, but not women, have long been compelled to fight in wars. Today, the U.S. has fully gender-integrated armed forces, but only men are still legally compelled to register to be conscripted. Women, who comprise the majority of voters in the U.S, help to sustain that fundamental gender inequality.

Elite men have much broader choices than do ordinary men. Benoît explained why thirty-three kings and dukes came to fight for the Trojans:

Many of them came there
for fame, for renown, and for love,
and a number for feudal obligation,
and others because of familial relations.

{ Dedenz se mistrent li plusor
Por los, por pris e por amor,
E li auquant por seignorage,
E li autre por parentage }

Social status for men — fame, renown, and love — depends to a large extent on women’s evaluations of them. Men compete with other men to win women’s favor.

Henry I, Count of Anhalt engages in violence against men as women watch

From behind the walls of Troy, Trojan women watched their men engaged in the brutal violence against men of the Trojan War. It was a horrific spectator event:

On top of Troy’s walls were the ladies,
none of whom had a calm heart,
and all the daughters of the king.
They were there in order to watch the great battle.
Helen was the most anxious one there,
and the most downcast, and the most afraid.
A thousand young women and a thousand wealthy women,
noble and courtly, appeared there.
Not one of them wasn’t fearful.

{ Les dames furent sor les murs,
Que de rien n’ont les cuers seûrs,
E totes les filles le rei,
Por esguarder le grant tornei.
Heleine i fu moût paorose
Et moût pensive e moût dotose.
Mil puceles e mil borgeises
I perent gentes e concises:
N’i a celi ne seit dotanz. }

Some women watched from gilded windows. Women identified specific men preparing for brutal battle:

One of the women called to the other
while she pointed: “See there Paris!
There is Hector, so it seems to me,
and see over here is Polidamas,
who soon will angrily charge into the fray.
He much resembles a fine knight.
See how his steel helmet fits him.
There is Troilus’s division.
Look! Now Deiphebus is emerging.
See how close now the sides are to each other.
Soon we shall have in full stride
a thousand horrific jousts.
Much we have to be fearful,
for the lives and the health
and the joys of our young men
are being put into the balance.
May death not part them from us.”

{ E l’une d’eles l’autre apele;
Al dei mostrent: “Vez la Paris;
La rest Hector, ço m’est avis:
E vez deça Polidamas,
Qui ja s’ira ferir el tas.
Mout ressemble bien chevalier:
Vez com li siet l’eaumes d’acier!
Ça rest li conreiz Troïlus.
Vez! or s’en ist Deïphebus.
Vez come or sont ja près a près!
Ja i avra de plain eslais
Mil jostes faites haïnoses.
Mout devons estre paoroses,
Que les vies e les santez
E les joies de noz aez
Veons en si faite balance.
Que mort n’en face desevrance,
N’i a nule doter n’en deie.” }

In medieval Europe, women loved men. Women didn’t want to see their men killed or to have their men imprisoned. Yet women did little to prevent violence against men. Helen, one of the women watching fearfully the battles of the Trojan War, was the primary cause of the Trojan War.

Epic violence against men is starkly explicit. Benoît narrated:

Then commenced the ferocious battle,
awful, extraordinary, and murderous.
You would have seen there so many in anguish,
who were wounded and who were lamenting,
who slew and maimed each other.
Large were the lines and rows of combatants,
large were the battle and the contests,
large were the chases and throngs of fighting.
They hadn’t armed their heads well enough
to prevent their brains being smashed,
and their entrails and their guts splattered.
The mire of their blood was huge on the field.
So many lay dead and fallen
that no man could count them.

{ Puis comença li estors fiers,
Pesmes, estranges, doloros:
La veïsseiz tant angoissos,
Qui sont navré e qui se plaignent,
Qui s’entrociënt e mahaignent.
Grant sont li renc e li conrei,
Grant la bataille e li tornei,
Granz les chaces e les meslees;
Si n’ont les testes si armees
Qu’il ne s’espandent les cerveles,
Les entrailles e les boëles.
De lor sanc est grant la paluz.
Tant i gist morz e abatuz,
Nus hom n’en set esmee faire; }

Watching such violence against men would have been vomit-inducing to persons not inured to it. Benoît typically focused on the fighting of famous men. But Benoît wasn’t just narrating the exploits of heroes. Consider the following battle description:

An admiral, Morin d’Aresse,
fell dead, not living any longer,
from such a blow Menelaus gave him.
Isdor, Morin’s brother, had so harshly struck
a noble count that he was lifted
from his saddle and died.
Chirrus shattered his lance
when he thrust it through the body of a Greek
descended from counts and kings.
Meles of Orop was the nephew of Thoas.
Meles engaged Celidonias,
whom he knocked from his horse
and wounded in the middle of his face.
Hermagoras avenged his brother.
He struck a foe beneath his sword belt,
causing his lungs and guts
to spill out over the bow of his saddle.
Scedius was a noble king
and very esteemed among the Greeks.
Mauden Clarueil engaged him and
struck Scedius right in the eye
so that it came flying out of his head.
Scedius would have fallen in pain
if he hadn’t held onto his horse with both hands.
He was never completely well again.

{ Uns amirauz, Morins d’Aresse,
Est chaeiz morz, ne vesqui plus:
Tel coup li dona Menelus.
Isdor, sis frere, i ra ataint
Un riche conte e si empeint
Que mort le seivre de la sele.
Chirrus sa lance i enastele:
Par mi le cors fiert un Grezeis
Estrait de contes e de reis.
Meles d’Orep niés fu Thoas:
Cist joinst o Celidonias,
Que del cheval l’a enversé
E par mi la chiere navré.
Hermagoras son frere venge:
Celui fiert si desoz la renge
Que li poumons e la boële
Li chiet sor l’arçon de la sele.
Scedius ert uns riches reis
E mout preisiez entre Grezeis:
O cestui joinst Maudanz Clarueil;
Si l’a feru tres par mi l’ueil
Que fors del chief li est volez.
De l’angoisse chaîst pasmez,
S’il ne se fust tenuz as mains;
Dès or n’est mie del tot sains. }

Here Benoît explicitly combined high status with brutal violence against men. Being brutalized in war united ordinary men and elite men.

Women rewarded men for their prowess in violence against men. Consider, for example, Antigone and Ismene, daughters of Oedipus, the former king of Thebes. In the twelfth-century Roman de Thèbes, Antigone and Ismene watched from the walls of Thebes as a large group of men besieged the city. The besiegers were fighting on behalf of Polynices, who was Antigone’s and Ismene’s younger brother. The current ruler of Thebes was Eteocles, their older brother. Athon, a son of a king from the East, came to fight on behalf of Eteocles because he was in love with Ismene. He could have for the same reason fought on behalf of Polynices. Antigone was in love with Parthenopaeus, the king of Arcadia. He was fighting on behalf of Polynices. Antigone and Ismene thus watched as their beloved men fought against each other’s side.

Antigone wanted to be with Parthenopaeus after she learned that he had killed a man in battle. He killed Itys with a violent spear thrust. Then he seized Itys’s horse and sent it to Antigone via a youth. The youth greeted Antigone:

“The king of Arcadia, your beloved,
has sent me and this to you,” he said.
“Know that he is fighting well as he should.
He has left one foe totally dead on the field.
He sends that man’s war-horse to you here.”

{ Li rois d’Archade, vostre amis,
m’a ça, fet il, a vous tramis.
Sachiez que bien i joint a droit,
un en lessa u champ tot froit,
le destrier vous tramet ici. }[2]

Antigone had no need of a war-horse. Nonetheless, she was very pleased. She responded:

I offer him my thanks.
May he know well that for this gift
I intend to give him a great reward.
May he know well, without any doubt,
that he has me and my entire love.
When he leaves the battle,
ask him to come and talk with me.
Have him come here and I shall see him.
I don’t know when I will have the opportunity again.

{ Seue merci,
sache bien que por icest don
l’en cuit rendre grant guerredon.
Ce sache bien sanz nule doute
que il a moi et m’amor toute.
Quant il partira du tornoi,
mant lui que il parolt a moi.
Par ci s’en tort si le verrai,
ne sai quant g’i recouverrai. }

The great reward that she wanted to give him apparently was to have sex with him. Sex might be as much a reward to her as it is to him. But men’s sexuality is social devalued such that women regard sex with men as a reward to them. Men commit violence against men to earn that “reward.”

Ismene was eager to give Athon such a reward. She saw Athon strike Garsy of Marre with a strong blow. Garsy was knocked off his war-horse into the mud. Athon then took away Garsy’s horse. Ismene was watching:

Ismene saw this blow very clearly
and also the war-horse that Athon seized.
She very clearly recognized Athon
from the sleeve of silk
that he had as a personal identifier
laced to the end of his lance.
She pointed him out to her sister,
saying to her tenderly in private:
“That is Athon I can see there.
See how he spurs his horse in this battle,
I must love him above all things,
for he is doing all this here for me.
May I never be a king’s daughter,
if I’m not led astray through love for him.
Whether I do right or I act foolishly,
I will lie with him, so I believe,
because fire doesn’t spread in secret
as much as the love I have for him within me.

{ Icest coup vit tres bien Ysmaine
et le destrier qu’Athon amaine.
Ele cognut tres bien Athon
a la manche du syglaton
que il avoit par connoissance
lacié el soumet de sa lance.
A sa seur l’a moustré au doi,
belement li dist en secroi:
“Ce est Athes que je la voi,
veez com broche a cel tornoi!
Sor toute rien amer le doi,
car tout ice fet il por moi.
Ja ne soie fille de roi,
se pour s’amor ne me desroi.
Ou face bien ou ge foloi,
coucherai moi o lui, ce croi,
car feux n’esprent si en requoi
com fet l’amor que j’ai o moi.” }

Ismene was delighted that Athon was fighting for love of her. That’s sickening.[3]

medieval woman awards prize to man-knight

Love and war became perniciously associated in literature through Gallus’s influential Latin love elegy in the first century BGC. Grotesque effects can be seen in the behavior of Antigone and Ismene during the brutal violence against men at Thebes:

About their beloveds they joked and laughed,
and they argued about their men’s prowess,
because each, in her own opinion,
believed that she had the better one.
Antigone said to Ismene:
“You can talk with good spirit
because you kiss and embrace Athon
and all day have intercourse with him.
I cannot have intercourse with my mine,
nor kiss him nor embrace him.
I will never see him, unhappy one,
except from here, through these battlements.”
“Now envy will never die,” Ismene said.
“I’m not taking away anything from you, dear friend.
If I take my ease with my beloved
and do whatever pleases him greatly,
why would that upset you?
You would soon do the same
if you could have your beloved.
May God give me pleasure and joy!”

{ De leur amis joent et rient,
de leur proueces contralient,
car chascune, au sien espoir,
en cuide le meillor avoir.
Anthigoné dist a Ysmaine:
“Tu puez parler de teste saine,
car Athon baises et acoles
et toute jour a lui paroles.
Je ne puis pas au mien parler,
ne lui baisier ne acoler.
Ja nel pourrai veoir, chetive,
se de ça non, par ceste eschive.”
“Ja ne mourra,” fet ele, “envie!
Je ne vous toill du vostre, amie!
Se je faz o le mien mon aise
et cele rien qui mout li plaise,
pour quoi vos en seroit il mal?
Ja ferïez vous autretal
se pouïez le vostre avoir.
Diex m’en doint bien et joie avoir!” }[4]

Ismene didn’t have pleasure and joy with Athon for long. Tydeus struck Athon a mortal blow to the chest. Athon fell to the ground and was soon bathed in his own blood. On the brink of death, he was brought back into Thebes. He opened his eyes at the sound of Ismene’s voice and then immediately died.

Literature influential for thousands of years provides an important perspective on human social life. Epic violence against men in such literature has largely been regarded as natural. Yet vastly disproportionate violence against men isn’t natural. Ending epic violence against men requires greater imagination. The Life of Aesop and Lucian’s True Story, both from the second-century GC, Walahfrid Strabo’s ninth-century response to elegiac love and war, the eleventh-century Verses from Ivrea {Versus Eporedienses}, and great medieval troubadour poetry are under-appreciated resources for overcoming the epic curse of violence against men. You can make a different. Read, and imagine more!

* * * * *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Benoît de Sainte-Maure, Roman de Troie, vv. 5589-93, Old French text from Constans (1904), English translation (modified slightly) from Burgess & Kelly (2017).

Subsequent quotes from the Roman de Troie are similarly sourced. Those above are vv. 6909-12 (Many of them came there…), 8081-89 (On top of Troy’s walls were the ladies…), 10602-19 (One of the women called to the other…), 12704-17 (Then commenced the ferocious battle…), 9890-9914 (An admiral, Morin d’Aresse…).

[2] Roman de Thèbes, vv. 4611-5, Old French text from Raynaud de Lage (1968), English translation (modified slightly) from Burgess & Kelly (2021).

Subsequent quotes from the Roman de Thèbes are similarly sourced. Those above are vv. 4616-24 (I offer him my thanks…), 4677-94 (Ismene saw this blow very clearly…), 5879-98 (About their beloveds they joked and laughed…).

[3] Men fighting amid the horrific violence were aware of women watching them. Paris perceived Helen watching him fight with her husband Menelaus:

But Menelaus made him slip
from a blow, right next to the river.
Over the cropper of his horse
Paris fell. He was much ashamed from this
because Helen was watching him.

{ Mais Menelaus l’a fait glacier,
A l’empeindre, tot contre val.
Par sor la crope del cheval
Paris chaï: grant honte en ot
Por Heleine, que l’esguardot. }

Roman de Troie, vv. 11364-8. That wasn’t a particular effect of Helen. Hector also felt shame on the battlefield under women’s gaze:

When Hector perceived that he was covered in blood
and forcibly driven from the battlefield,
and he saw Helen and his sisters
and seven hundred ladies watching from the towers,
anger from shame entirely seized him.
From evil intention he shuddered and trembled.
He turned madly to oppose the Greeks.

{ Quant il se vit ensanglantez
E par force del champ getez,
E vit Heleine e ses sorors
E set cenz dames par les tors,
Ire ot e honte tôt ensemble;
De mautalent fremist e tremble.
Torne desvez contre Grezeis. }

Roman de Troie, vv. 14129-35.

Gautier d’Arras’s late-twelfth-century romance Ille and Galeron {Ille et Galeron} describes Roman women watching Ille and Roman soldiers fight Greeks:

The young women who are sitting at the casements
are keenly watching from the windows
how Ille goes, how Ille comes,
how beautifully he conducts himself.
The pray to God to protect him from harm
and have greater compassion for him
than for their brothers who are out there.

{ Les puceles qui sont as estres
ont mout esgardé des fenestres
com Illes vait, com Illes vient,
com belement il se contient;
Diu proient qu’il le gart d’anui
et ont grignor pitié de lui
que de lor freres qui i sont. }

Gautier d’Arras, Ille et Galeron, vv. 2843-9, Old French text and English translation (modified) from Eley (1996). Ille castigates fleeing Roman soldiers by reminding them of the women watching them:

Bad men, vile and cowardly,
where are you fleeing in this way?
Are you going to announce to those in the tower
that you have been defeated in the battle?
Are you going to announce the news
to the ladies and to the young women?
Alas, how evil that they have ever seen you!

{ Malvaise gent, vix et laniere,
u fu(i)iés vos en tel maniere?
Alés vos noncier a la tour
que vencu estes en l’estour?
Alés vos noncier les noveles
as dames et as damoiseles?
Lasses, com mar vos virent onques! }3001-7

Ille et Galeron, vv. 3001-7, sourced as previously. The Roman men, ashamed, returned to fight and die in the horrific violence against men.

[4] “The verb parler here (v. 5886) seems to be used in the sense of ‘to have sexual relations with.'” Burgess & Kelly (2021) p. 121, n. 92. On such use, see also note [2] and associated text in my post on the lai of Argentille and Haveloc. Above I’ve used the less explicit term “intercourse.”

Subsequently, Antigone and Salemander together watched Parthenopaeus and Eteocles, their respected beloveds, fight each other. Roman de Thèbes, vv. 8641-78. Drias joined the fight and killed Parthenopeaus.

[images] (1) Henry I, Count of Anhalt (1218-1252) engages in violence against men as women watch. Illustration from Codex Manesse, made between 1305 and 1315. Manuscript preserved as UB Heidelberg, Cod. Pal. germ. 848, folio 17r. Thanks to University of Hiedelberg and Wikimedia Commons. (2) Rudolf von Rotenburg, who lived in Germanic lands in the middle of the thirteenth century, receives for his fighting prowess a prize from a woman. Codex Manesse, folio 54r. Thanks to University of Hiedelberg and Wikimedia Commons. Other, similar images exist in the Codex Manesse.

References:

Burgess, Glyn S., and Douglas Kelly. 2017. The Roman de Troie by Benoît de Sainte-Mauré: a translation. Gallica, 41. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer. Reviews by Sylvia Federico and by Cristian Bratu.

Burgess, Glyn S., and Douglas Kelly, trans. 2021. The Roman de Thèbes and The Roman d’Eneas. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Constans, Léopold, ed. 1904-12. Le roman de Troie, par Benoît de Sainte-Maure, publié d’après tous les manuscrits connus. Société des Aanciens Textes Français. Paris: F. Didot. Vols. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

Eley, Penny, ed. and trans. 1996. Gautier d’Arras. Ille et Galeron. London: King’s College London, Centre for Late Antique & Medieval Studies.

Raynaud de Lage, Guy, ed. 1968. Roman de Thèbes. Paris: Champion. Published online by ENS of Lyon in the Base de français médiéval, last revised 2013-06-18. Part 1. Part 2.

Montaigne on the work of human reason

The sixteenth-century philosopher Michel de Montaigne pondered human reason. He observed:

I was recently letting my mind range wildly, as I often do, over how human reason is a vacant and rambling instrument. I normally see that men, if you ask them about facts, occupy themselves most willingly in searching for reasons rather than in searching for truth. They ignore the things that exist right there, and occupy themselves with examining causes … They pass over the actualities, but they examine carefully consequences. They begin normally in this way: “How does this come about?” — But does it actually exist? That is what should be said! Our discourse is capable of decorating a hundred other worlds and discovering their principles and foundations.

{ Je ravassois presentement, comme je faicts souvant, sur ce, combien l’humaine raison est un instrument libre et vague. Je vois ordinairement que les hommes, aux faicts qu’on leur propose, s’amusent plus volontiers à en cercher la raison qu’à en cercher la verité : ils laissent là les choses, et s’amusent à traiter les causes. … Ils passent par dessus les effects, mais ils en examinent curieusement les consequences. Ils commencent ordinairement ainsi: Comment est-ce que cela se faict? — Mais se fait il? faudroit il dire. Nostre discours est capable d’estoffer cent autres mondes et d’en trouver les principes et la contexture. }[1]

Montaigne respected Greek and Latin classics as repositories of human experience and wisdom. He preferred specific things and events embedded in narrative over speculative theory. In short, he recognized value in realistic stories.

Portrait of Michel de Montaigne about 1565

Sex with a lame person has long been regarded as more pleasing than sex with a non-lame person. The eminent Christian theologian Erasmus of Rotterdam early in the sixteenth century cited in Greek and Latin the proverb, “The lame man best performs as a man {Ἄριστα χωλὸς οἰφεῖ / Claudus optime virum agit}.”[2] This classical wisdom wasn’t merely elite thinking. Drawing upon the authority of Erasmus, Montaigne declared:

It’s said that in Italy a common proverb asserts that one who hasn’t had sex with a lame woman doesn’t know sex in its sweet perfection. Chance, or some particular incident, long ago placed that saying in the mouth of the common people. And this is said for males as well as females, for to the Scythian who solicited her for sex, the Queen of the Amazons responded, “The lame man does it the best.”

{ on dict en Italie, en commun proverbe, que celuy-là ne cognoit pas Venus en sa parfaicte douceur qui n’a couché avec la boiteuse. La fortune, ou quelque particulier accident, ont mis il y a long temps ce mot en la bouche du peuple ; et se dict des masles comme des femelles. Car la Royne des Amazonnes respondit au Scyte qui la convioit à l’amour: Ἄριστα χωλὸς οἰφεῖ, le boiteux le faict le mieux. }[3]

The Amazons rejected their male children and attacked any men who entered their land. Amazons liked to dominate men. They could more easily dominate lame men.

Montaigne reasoned about the sexual superiority of lame persons. He explained:

I would have said that the erratic movement of the lame woman brought some new pleasure to the work and some prick of sweetness to those who tried it, but I have just learned that ancient philosophy itself has decided the cause. Philosophy says that the legs and thighs of lame women cannot receive, because of their imperfection, the nourishment that normally goes to them. It thus occurs that the genitals, which are above, become more full, more nourished, and more vigorous. Or it could well be that, since this defect inhibits exercise, those who are marred by it dissipate less of their strength and thus come more fully to the games of sex. That is also the reason why the Greeks proclaimed women who worked at the loom to be more hot in lust than other women. It was because of the sedentary job that these women did, a job without major exercise of the body.

{ J’eusse dict que le mouvement detraqué de la boiteuse apportast quelque nouveau plaisir à la besongne et quelque pointe de douceur à ceux qui l’essayent, mais je viens d’apprendre que mesme la philosophie ancienne en a decidé: elle dict que, les jambes et cuisses des boiteuses ne recevant, à cause de leur imperfection, l’aliment qui leur est deu, il en advient que les parties genitales, qui sont au dessus, sont plus plaines, plus nourries et vigoureuses. Ou bien que, ce defaut empeschant l’exercice, ceux qui en sont entachez dissipent moins leurs forces et en viennent plus entiers aux jeux de Venus. Qui est aussi la raison pourquoy les Grecs descrioient les tisserandes d’estre plus chaudes que les autres femmes: à cause du mestier sedentaire qu’elles font, sans grand exercice du corps. }[4]

One might question the validity of this reasoning. Montaigne noted:

About what could we not reason in that way there? About those weavers, here I could also say that the back-and-forth movement of their seated work therefore gives them arousal and stimulation, like the jerking and shaking of coaches does for ladies. Do not these examples serve to show what I said at the beginning: our reasons often go before the actuality, and have the extent of their jurisdiction so infinite, that they judge and apply themselves even to the void itself and to the non-existent?

{ De-quoy ne pouvons nous raisonner à ce pris là? De celles icy je pourrois aussi dire que ce tremoussement que leur ouvrage leur donne ainsin assises les esveille et sollicite, comme faict les dames le crolement et tremblement de leurs coches. Ces exemples servent-ils pas à ce que je disois au commencement: que nos raisons anticipent souvent l’effect, et ont l’estendue de leur jurisdiction si infinie, qu’elles jugent et s’exercent en l’inanité mesme et au non estre? }

Such working of reason can even colonize immediate experience. Montaigne observed:

Outside of the flexibility of our inventiveness in forging reasons for all sorts of fancies, our imagination similarly can find itself easily receiving false impressions from very fanciful appearances. Based on the sole authority of ancient and widespread repetition of that saying about a lame woman, I once made myself to believe that I had received more pleasure from a women because she wasn’t rightly formed, and I even accounted this among her graces.

{ Outre la flexibilité de nostre invention à forger des raisons à toute sorte de songes, nostre imagination se trouve pareillement facile à recevoir des impressions de la fauceté par bien frivoles apparences. Car, par la seule authorité de l’usage ancien et publique de ce mot, je me suis autresfois faict à croire avoir reçeu plus de plaisir d’une femme de ce qu’elle n’estoit pas droicte, et mis cela en recepte de ses graces. }[5]

The heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing and explains only capriciously. Humans are a rationalizing animal.

the evidence suggests that disabled people were ironically seen as more unreal or inhuman than the anatomical drawing or the mythical figure of Adonis in the garden. It was only in this way that the idea of a ‘natural’ individual, one whose body and desires fit within accepted parameters, could be maintained. To allow the disabled individual to live and love without comment was to accept a continuum wherein no one fit the physical or erotic ideals that accompanied the changing beliefs of the spirit or the emerging science of the body. In Garland-Thomson’s terminology, the anatomical standard had to be ‘shored up’ by the infinite variety of the lecherous grotesque and the sexual sinner, in order to eventually emerge in the form of the normate, the socially sanctioned object of erotic desire.[6]

Reason’s best hope is in studying imaginative literature created before today’s dominant ideologies colonized our minds. Reason can then better perceive lack of imagination.

* * * * *

Read more:

Notes:

[1] Michel de Montaigne, Essays {Essais}, Book 3, Chapter 11, “On the lame {Des boyteux},” French text from the Villey & Saulnier (1965) version of the 1595 edition of Essais, my English translation, benefiting from that of Screech (1993). Subsequent English translations from Montaigne’s Essais are similarly sourced.

[2] Erasmus of Rotterdam {Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus}, Adages {Adagia}, 1849 (2.9.49), Greek and Latin text via Corpus Corporum (alternate source), my English translation. An alternate, moralizing translation: “The lame man makes the best lecher.” Mynors et al. (1982-2006) vol. 34, p. 108.

Erasmus provided a general sense of the proverb:

Customarily used when someone prefers his own lot, though it may be far from grand, to another man’s, though it seems preferable.

{ Dici solitum, ubi quispiam suam sortem vel parum egregiam anteponit alienae tametsi praestantiori. }

But Erasmus also provided an explanation for the literal sense, apparently under the assumption that the literal sense is true:

The same thing has been observed in our own day. Those who have deformed legs or lack some other limb are often sexually more effective than the rest of men, presumably by way of some natural compensation.

{ Animadversum est etiam illud nostris temporibus, plerunque qui tibiis sunt mutilis aut quopiam membro trunci, eos ad usum Veneris reliquis magis idoneos esse, nimirum paria faciente natura. }

Id. pp. 108-9. Montaigne may have been mocking Erasmus for his reasoning about a lame man’s sexual superiority.

Erasmus first distributed his Adagia in 1500. He subsequently expanded it until his death in 1536. Here’s a list of all Erasmus’s adages in Latin.

[3] Montaigne, Essais, from “Des boyteux.” All subsequent quotes from Montaigne are also from this chapter.

[4] In reference to ancient philosophy, Montaigne follows Erasmus’s explanation of better sex with the lame from Problemata attributed to Aristotle.

[5] Runyon (2013) detected symmetry in Montaigne’s Essais in chapters around the center chapter of each book. In Book 3 (consisting of 13 chapters), the symmetric chapter to “Des boyteux” (chapter 11) is “Of three kinds of intercourse {De trois commerces}” (chapter 3). In “De trois commerces,” Montaigne wrote:

On my part, I no more know Venus without Cupid than a maternity without offspring. These are things that lend and owe their essence to each other.

{ De moy, je ne connois non plus Venus sans Cupidon qu’une maternité sans engence: ce sont choses qui s’entreprestent et s’entredoivent leur essence. }

Montaigne apparently is saying that he no more knows sex without love than maternity without offspring. Here the phrase “ne connois non plus Venus” connects to “ne cognoit pas Venus” in “Des boyeux.” Id. pp. 203-4. Montaigne apparently didn’t just have casual sex with a crippled woman; he also loved her. Cf. id.

[6] McLelland (2017) p. 204.

[image] Portrait of Michel de Montaigne. Painted about 1565. Via Wikimedia Commons.

References:

McLelland, Kaye. 2017. “The lame man makes the best lecher: Sex, sin, and the disabled Renaissance body.” Pp. 189-209 in Lidman, Satu, Meri Heinonen, Tom Linkinen, and Marjo Kaartinen, eds. Framing Premodern Desires: sexual ideas, attitudes, and practices in Europe. Crossing Boundaries: Turku Medieval and Early Modern Studies 9. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Mynors, R.A.B. et al. 1982-2006. Erasmus. Adages. Vols. 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 in Collected Works of Erasmus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Runyon, Randolph Paul. 2013. Order in Disorder: intratextual symmetry in Montaigne’s Essais. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.

Screech, M. A., trans. 1993. Michel de Montaigne: the Complete Essays. London, England: Penguin Books.

Villey, Pierre, and Verdun Louis Saulnier. 1965. Les Essais de Michel de Montaigne. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.