medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Susan,
This actually ties in nicely with research I'm doing on Catalan miracles
from the 13th and 14th centuries. I have quite a bit about recording the
miracles (who, where, how, etc) including a question list; an early example
of such a list has been published in Dominic de Guzman's canonization
proceedings. My current research is looking at how the various sides
(investigator, notary, and witness) sought/accepted proof. I'd be happy to
discuss more of this with you off list; I'm not sure how interested the list
would be in the details (some of which are under review for publication).
As for the second question, from the stories I have seen, the distinction is
less which part of the body they are discussing, but rather the extent of
the problem. In general, contracti seem to be more severely hampered. That
said, I've found that most of the terms the Catalans and their investigators
used are quite fluid. That holds with the survey work I've done/read
outside of Catalunya.
Michelle
--
Michelle Garceau, PhD
Assistant Professor
History Department
College of Charleston
165 Calhoun Street
Charleston, SC 29401
[log in to unmask]
On 12/1/09 11:45 AM, "Susan Ridyard" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>
> I have two questions on which some list members may be able to help.
> First, do any of you have experience of working with lists of
> miracles that specify in any detail what took place when someone
> reported a miracle at a saint's shrine -- were they asked questions,
> and if so what? who recorded the miracles and how? I'm not looking
> for general info, of which I have plenty, but for very specific
> detailed accounts that will help me think about exactly how the
> Cantilupe miracles on which I'm working were proved and recorded.
>
> On a related theme, when these were put into a typological list,
> there were two distinct categories for contractis and claudis, the
> crippled and the lame. But the difference between them is hard to
> fathom. Both could include upper and lower limbs, though there are
> more specific references to hands among the contractis. Both could
> last for long periods of time; both could lead to substantial
> mobility problems, though this is emphasized more in the case of the
> contracti . Some people are said to be both claudus and contractus.
> I'm wondering whether the distinction in the minds of those who
> reported and/or recorded the miracles was between people with visible
> twisting and deformity of limbs and those who without such visible
> signs. Does anyone have experience of sources that make this kind of
> distinction and of the thinking behind them?
>
> Apologies for this long note...
> Sue
**********************************************************************
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
|