medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Thomas Izbicki <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>The cross is the origin of the idea that illiterate persons sign with an X.
the 11th-12th c. charters i've seen from the Chartrain (as best i can dimly
remember them) usually didn't make much of a distinction (that i could tell)
between the cross and the "S[ignum]" placed before the names in the
"signature" lists.
"S[signum]" was more common, i believe, (the "S" being "crossed"), and i can't
recall ever comming across a "signature" (i.e., the name after the "S") which
was clearly an autograph --they were always in the same hand as that of the
closing sections of the charter.
this goes for folks who were clearly literate, like abbots and bishops.
of course, such a "test" for "literacy" is only useful for true "originals"
(that term is used quite loosely in such things as the Inventaire Sommaire of
the Archives, and can just refer to any ms which is contemporary with the act
memorialised in the charter) --the "signatories" of charters would not
normally be signing copies.
however, in those instances where a cross was used, i *do* remember seeing a
few crosses which definitely appeared to be "autograph" --quite clumsily made,
sometimes festooned with a smudge or two.
even so, i wondered whether this might be due to factors other than profound
illiteracy, like, perhaps the fellow wasn't seated at the desk when he stroked
the cross, but might have been standing up before it, which might account for
the awkwardness.
of course, even if one were "literate", that doesn't mean that he/she was a
*writer*, and had the necessary eye/hand muscle co-ordination which only comes
from a great deal of practice.
all of which is to say that even a clumsily executed "+" does not make a _de
facto_ case for illiteracy.
i don't recall whether or not the cross (never an "X", btw***) was placed
before or after the name, depending upon the fellow's status, but it seems
like the *format* of the signatory/witness list ruled and there was a
consistency to that which was observed, rather than the status of the
signatories' status.
but, i'm certainly not sure of that last point.
c
*** I think of most charters as being more than "just" juridical instruments,
more than property transfers (which most of them are). With their occassional
opening invocations, sometimes lengthy, theological _arrangae_ at the
beginning and closing elements which frequently invoked supernatural elements
in various ways, they were also the written records of semi-sacred events.
and the "cross" used to validate the "signatur" of a principle party should
probably be understood in this context.
"Lots of useless other data points just enlarge the consciousness of the
agrieved showing how particular the pain is."
--Burma Shave
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|