medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture

John,

Of course entry to an order would eventually be 
quite formalized. It is still the words that 
count and failure to fulfill that vow is still a great sin..

The more formulaic types (e.g., Gudea, Naram-Sin, 
Azitiwadda, Mesha, Tel-Dan, etc. on down the 
millennia) have the following elements:

who (PN, ancestry) and 'who' is [king, governor, etc.] (entitlement formula),
to whom (deity in the majority of texts -- but in 
Imperial Honoraries, the Imperator, governor, local elites, etc.),
Then in "full" texts typically what, when, why, and where.
How is a fairly common inscriptional element in 
Assyrian and Babylonian votives/vows and --
most particularly -- in Greek Honorifics and 
decrees. (Greek decrees and honorifics discuss 
how the stele should be carved, where it should 
be placed, and when. Why. to whom, what, and who 
are, of course at the beginning.

However, the order or structure of vows of a 
formal nature has little to do with personal vows 
made, for instance, to a Saint. In fact, very few 
personal vows include more than two or three 
elements: who, what or why, and to whom. Further, 
at a dedicated site where there is only one deity 
or Saint, the "to whom" frequently is not stated at all.

Scholars have tried to determine whether an 
inscription is dedicatory or memorial from the order...
unfortunately, order on formal vows is a bit more involved than that.

OTOH, I knew I should sit on my hands.

Regards,

Rochelle
>medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>
>In terms of the procedures for making vows, the 
>Rule of Benedict 58 and 59 is quite explicit as 
>to the ceremonies to be followed when a person 
>enters the order and when an oblate is to be 
>dedicated to it.  Other solemn pledges and 
>professions might well have employed similar elements and gestures.
>
>--John Howe, Texas Tech
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions 
>of medieval religious culture 
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of rochelle altman
>Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 12:30 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [M-R] vows
>
>medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>
>Hello, Meg,
>
>The vow is ancient, probably pre-historical
>record, and is a contract between the vower and a deity.
>"Do this for me and I'll do that for you." So,
>yes, as Jim points out for St. Thomas, it was a
>very serious matter indeed to not fulfill a vow.
>For this reason, the OT (Deut. 23:23) states that
>it is better not to make a vow than fail to fulfill one.
>
>Funerary inscriptions, for instance, are vows,
>made before a deity, to never forget the
>deceased. This is the reason the majority of
>known and used ossuaries, as well as the more
>widely known Greek grave circles, do not have a
>name inscribed. (Linear A and B were known, just
>never used on a grave or grave site... much to
>the aggravation of archaeologists. Early
>alphabetic writing dates back to the 18th-century BCE.)
>
>Jim is correct, in *personal* vows/contracts
>(e.g. heal me and I'll decorate your statue), it
>is the choice of words and the intent, that
>matters, not the word order. There are, however,
>some fairly formulaic vows in Phoenician from the
>Tophet at Carthage (pre-7th BCE). (Well, just how
>many ways can you phrase the vow to always
>remember the deceased and to invoke Tanit/Shamash
>to hold the deceased in her/their care?) The
>early Christian "here lies + PN" is a formula and
>a vow to remember made before the Lord and places
>the deceased in the care of the Lord.
>
>Funeraries are *private* vows. *Public* vows,
>though, had some severe restrictions on who could
>make (fecit) a vow and are another matter: they
>are very formulaic. This is because of the
>entitlement formula -- that already appears on
>votive statues of rulers back at Akkad.
>
>Those ancient -- and Medieval rulers -- were not
>boasting; they had to state who and what they
>were to explain why they were entitled to make
>the public offering. We still use the entitlement
>formula on every contract whether between a
>utility to supply gas/electricty/internet/etc.
>and the contractee or between a mortgage lender
>and the purchaser of a piece of real estate.
>Governments use the formula to state why they can tax.
>
>Jim, that's not a far-fetched idea: vows are
>personal contracts -- whether from a ruler or a
>private person -- and the contract is precisely
>what is important -- not the precise order of the
>wording. The vow and the consequences of failure
>to fulfill the vow if the favor is granted is one
>of those "doesn't everybody know that" items that
>did not require official dicta.
>
>I have an article forthcoming that covers this
>material through the early CE period. If you are
>interested, I'll let you know when it comes out. (Supposed to be next month)
>
>Regards,
>
>Rochelle
>
>medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>
> >Hello Margaret,
> >Just judging from the miracle collections I am
> >familiar with, most notably those of Canterbury
> >and Chartres, what seems most instrumental in a
> >vow is the very fact that it was made, and
> >in the making was intended.  St Thomas certainly
> >seems to have been very well informed of
> >the vows made to him, and whatever form they
> >took, he held the vowees to the letter; and if
> >they didn't comply with their vows, he was quick
> >to punish and to punish severely.  Similarly,
> >in vows to the Virgin Mary, it seems that it was
> >her invocation, in whatever form, that was the
> >important aspect of whether she "heard" the
> >petition or not.  I rather think (on no very firm
> >grounds, I'm afraid) that it was not so much a
> >formula of any specific kind that was most
> >important in these matters, but a direct
> >communication between the devotee and a saint, who
> >apparently had ears open to hear any sort of vow
> >made to him or her.  The "Church" -- with a
> >capital C, of course -- appears to have been
> >relatively irrelevant in such matters, and in fact,
> >there are many aspects of medieval religion for
> >which scholars all too readily, I believe, look
> >in vain to the hegemonic pronouncements of the Church for answers.
> >Cheers,
> >Jim Bugslag
> >
> >On 25 Nov 2007 at 14:47, Cormack, Margaret Jean wrote:
> >
> > > medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and
> > > culture
> > >
> > >  Greetings all,
> > >  I´m sure most list-members are quite familiar with the literature on
> > >  medieval
> > > miracles and canonization procedures, but I´ve run across a query
> > > which I don´t think I´ve ever seen addressed. Are there, in the
> > > ancient or medieval traditions, official formulas or instructions for
> > > making a vow? For what may be vowed? I am specifically interested in
> > > vows to saints for health or other purposes, not (for example)
> > > careless vows, as in the case of Jephtha´s daughter. I have the
> > > feeling this was just common knowledge - everybody knew roughly what
> > > to do - but I wondered whether theologians (or authors of
> > > penitentials?) may have said about it, if anything. I´d be
> > > particularly interested in learning of terms in other languages that
> > > might correspond to the Icelandic 'confirm, formalize' - in the
> > > Icelandic miracle collections, we are often told, after a vow, 'and
> > > then s/he festa heitit', which I would translate as 'formally
> > > confirmed (the English analogue for 'festa' is 'fasten') the vow.
> > > There is, however, no indication of what was actually done in this
> > > procedure (which happens when the vow is made, I am not talking about
> > > paying the vow when the cure has been received, a different matter
> > > entirely). I believe that both Vauchez and Finucane have written about
> > > the 'power' of the vow being in the words themselves (so, at any rate,
> > > claims the article I am reading.) I will dig out these references, but
> > > wondered whether there is any further literature on the subject. I
> > > would not, myself, have seen medieval vows as particularly good
> > > examples of 'the power of words', but if there is literature on this
> > > topic I´d like to know about it. Indeed, I´d be happy for a detailed
> > > encyclopedia article on the general topic of vows in the Christian
> > > tradition, if one exists.
> > >  Thanks in advance,
> > > Meg Cormack
>
>**********************************************************************
>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
>
>**********************************************************************
>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

**********************************************************************
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