 |
 |
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture********************************************************************** To join the list, send the message: subscribe 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: unsubscribe 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/medieval-religionHi Tom,
Does Cheney write about this explicitly somewhere (in which case please send bibliography!) or do you want us to browse through "Councils and Synods"?
I have been debating the same issue as Paul, though in my case I am dealing with prohibitions against "superstition" of various sorts, and/or magic and witchcraft.
Certain items - worshipping "trees, stones, and springs" - appear so often that I find myself wondering the opposite of Paul, whether they were just being copied over and over.
However, it is interesting that some Norwegian codes pick up the trio but have "waterfalls" instead of "springs". Apparently that is where the local supernaturals hung out.
As you point out, there are more prohibitions in Penitentials than legal textx, but with the same caveat - presumably penitentials are initially composed to cover the largest number of sins, and so might include some that are not locally applicable. I would think that it would be the occasional unique prohibition that would be of interest. If anyone out there is working on prohibitions against magic/witchcraft/superstition/idolatry, or knows of good compilations of primary sources (I'm aware of the basic ones, Peters and Edwards, also with Kieckhefer on magic) please let me know.
All the best to all,
Meg
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions of medieval religious culture <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Thomas Izbicki <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2018 6:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [M-R] Legislation as evidencemedieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and cultureAnother possibility, is that the local authorities were reactions to decrees of general councils, esp. Lateran IV. But not just rubber stamping them. C. R. Cheney is good on how decrees were adapted & then recycled. If you spent a lot of time turning the pages of Mansi's Sacrorum conciliorum or of Concilia Germaniae, you find a lot of rote repetition or minor adaptation. Did these bishops and their clergy simple feel obligated to restate thelaw? A compilation like Lyndwood's Provinciale presents a more selective approach, but still on standard topics, most not concerned with topics like sodomy.
Manuals for confessors may reveal more of particilar concerns. Visitation records often show who was suspected of what offense, butthey often concerned adultery or fornication, where they get away from reporting the state of church, manse and cemetery.
Tom Izbicki
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions of medieval religious culture <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Paul Chandler <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2018 6:14:57 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [M-R] Legislation as evidencemedieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture********************************************************************** To join the list, send the message: subscribe 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: unsubscribe 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/medieval-religionThere seems to be a presumption, or perhaps it is a hermeneutical principle, that repeated prohibitions of certain behaviour indicate that the behaviour in question is an ongoing problem. So, for example, if the legislation of a religious institution repeatedly provides punishments for homosexual behaviour or the possession of private property, it is safe to conclude that homosexual activity or private wealth are common misbehaviours in that institution or in that period.********************************************************************** To join the list, send the message: subscribe 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: unsubscribe 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/medieval-religion
I'm wondering if a particular author or authors proposed this interpretation? Ot is it simply a common-sense assumption? Could anyone direct me to relevant bibliography?
Do you think there is any merit in an alternative explanation that such legislation may be not so much -- or not only -- a response to recurring offences but an expression of fears and anxieties. In other words, that such legislation might have a character that is more deterrent than reactive? In the above cases could it be an expression of homophobia, or anxieties about inequality, as much as clear evidence of infringements? Is there bibliography along these lines?
Just wondering. I'd be most grateful if anyone has any comments. -- Paul Chandler
--
Paul Chandler, O.Carm.
Holy Spirit Seminary | PO Box 18 (487 Earnshaw Road) | Banyo Qld 4014 | Australia
office: (07) 3267 4804 | mobile: 044 882 4996
[log in to unmask]