Sunday, 21 February 2016

Medievalism(s)

The OMS gathered this past Thursday to beat the ubiquitous Fifth-Week blues with a lively and fascinating discussion of medievalism –– the study of the use of medieval narratives, characters, settings, and aesthetics in post-medieval art, architecture, media, and culture. (That's a mouthful.)




Dr. David Matthews, senior lecturer in Middle English at the University of Manchester, started the evening with a talk on "Industrious Medievalism" –– not only the medievalism of the Industrial Revolution, but also medievalism in structures and things that are functional, such as the Woodhead train tunnel pictured above. Dr. Matthews explained his interest in the ethics of medievalism –– whether it was liberating, revolutionary, conservative, nostalgic –– its promotion of certain values, and its ability to be of use to people.

Dr. Matthews reminded us to be aware of the anachronism inherent in a train tunnel designed to look like a medieval tower; the steam engine, which looks outdated to us, would have looked distinctly modern to a mid-19th century viewer, and probably very much at odds with the tunnel from which it's emerging. But the tunnel serves a purpose: it deflects attention from the modernity of the train running through it. The crenelated tower is part of a reassuring, nostalgic idiom; as Dr. Matthews pointed out, we tend to find more humanity in anything that came before a given, disliked trend (see: some Baby Boomers' dislike of Millenial use of technology to communicate and date). But medievalism has more to do with modern perceptions and values than with actual medieval cultural artifacts; the Derwent Dam, built in 1916, drowned two actual medieval villages, but imitates a medieval fortress in design:

 

Dr. Matthews then turned to the ethics of medievalism. Medievalism, with its hearkening back to monarchical and feudal forms of social organization, provides an alternative set of ethics to capitalism; it's bound up, too, with green ethics, supposedly gesturing towards a time when man lived in greater harmony with nature. Its nostalgic idealism, however, is essentially conservative. Such great names as Tolkien, Lewis, and Morris gestured toward such idealism in their works (for a good example of Tolkien's ideas about industry, check out the unsavory descriptions of Saruman's iron forges). But Dr. Matthews argued that medievalism doesn't always bear the kind of moral weight artists, authors, and politicians place on it; it has no inherent moral utility. Indeed, medievalism, by its nature, cannot resolve the questions and problems of progress –– technological and otherwise –– because it is essentially concerned with reiterating the past.

 

Dr. Carolyne Larrington, a Teaching Fellow of St. John's College here at Oxford, discussed a specific, and very successful, example of medievalism: the hugely popular TV series Game of Thrones, based on the book series A Song of Ice and Fire. Your friendly webmaster will, of course, write about this topic with complete objectivity, because she is in no way invested in the series and is certainly not awaiting April with bated breath, freaking out about whether Jon Snow is dead and eagerly anticipating Tyrion's next move.

Dr. Larrington argued that one of the great successes of George R. R. Martin's books lies in the author's structural understanding of how medieval societies work –– or don't, as the case may be. The strengths of the world of Game of Thrones lie in the cultures of Westeros: King's Landing is a portrait of a late medieval city, with a well-developed court culture, crafts industries, and public markets. "But where is the civil service in King's Landing?" Dr. Larrington asked. "Who's policing the streets? Where are the lawyers? 

 

Winterfell, on the other hand, seems to mimic an Anglo-Saxon kingdom: highly militarized, lacking in the chivalric court culture of the Red Keep, and dependent upon the personal loyalty of retainers and bannermen to their lord. The Ironborn have been compared to the Vikings, but, as Dr. Larrington noted, bear more similarities to the popular image of Vikings than to actual Scandinavian peoples of the Middle Ages. The Dothraki are based on Mongol society under Genghis Khan, with a capital city (Vaes Dothrak in Essos, Karakorum in the Övörkhangai province of Mongolia) famed as a thriving cultural centre improbably placed in the middle of a desert. However, Dr. Larrington counts Essos as a failure in the Game of Thrones universe, due to the obvious Orientalism in its presentation. 

Dr. Larrington pointed out the ways in which Game of Thrones is concerned with social organization, and the practicalities of medieval communities and proto-states: the Iron Bank of Braavos draws the viewer's attention to the economic underpinning of the the relationship between Westeros and Essos, and the monetary cost of kingship. The rise of the "Sparrows" in King's Landing addresses the balance of power between church and state, and the relationship of the monarch to religious institutions. Indeed, much of Game of Thrones is devoted to interrogating how kingship, good and bad, works; Aragorn, as Larrington wittily noted, wasn't required to have a tax policy. Religion, too, is questioned in the world of Game of Thrones: the miracles of R'hllor may be real, but his priests inspire terror.

 

Dr. Larrington pointed out the ways in which Game of Thrones is concerned, too, with power struggles –– noting that Petyr Baelish, one-time Master of Coin and the closest thing King's Landing has to a civil servant, is similar to a certain Geoffrey Chaucer in his initially quiet political rise, and that Martin addresses power imbalances in the world of gender, looking at the particular, and often highly dangerous, challenges of being a woman in the sorts of societies that populate Westeros. It also deals with the possibility of redemption, by refusing to engage in black and white morality. Game of Thrones may, however, ultimately be successful because the medieval world is what Dr. Larrington called a 'familiar other' to us: a culturally accepted backdrop for fantasy stories. We owe many of our institutions –– European statehood, universities, romantic love –– to the Middle Ages. The romantic, chivalric dream of late-medieval courts, knights and tourneys is certainly still alive in our culture; brutal warrior societies (complete with sidelined female characters) have recently been made popular by shows like Vikings and The Last Kingdom. Popular-culture medievalism certainly won't be disappearing any time soon.

 

Next up? A graduate student presentation day to kick off Trinity Term, followed by our Trinity Term Meeting on Global History, in partnership with the Byzantine Society! Keep an eye on our blog, Facebook group, and Twitter for updates.

Monday, 15 February 2016

Friendly Reminder, Revised

Lovely medievalists and medieval aficionados,

Our pre-meeting dinner on Thursday is no longer at Quod - we're branching out! We'll be at Marco's New York Italian on the High Street. Take a look at the menu and, whether you're joining us for dinner or not, get excited for our wonderful speakers and, of course, all the free wine.

Friday, 29 January 2016

Moste Charmynge Þynges fram þe Internette

Moste amusing þynges yposted upon Þe Toaste by þe ladye of Vertu ond Intelect, Mallory Ortberg:

Texts from the 'Pearl' Poet

Reasons I Would Make An Excellent Fisher King and You Should Consider Me for the Position

Yow sholde followe Medievalist BB8 on Twitter.

 

Þis is a þynge þat real People doth do: Medieval MMA. Heere is a Clippe, Ich presume.



And, on a more serious note, here are some articulate, kind, and timely reminders from respected voices in our field for female medievalists, feminist medievalists, queer medievalists, medievalists of color, and anyone in our community who has been made to feel dismissed or marginalized. Our field needs all of us.

Here, several prominent medievalists articulate a 2016-worthy manifesto for inclusiveness in the field of medieval studies.

And from Elaine Treharne on Twitter at Stanford, particularly to Old English scholars in the wake of recent events, but applying to everyone who studies the Middle Ages:



In the immortal words of Bill and Ted, keep being excellent to each other. And please email your friendly webmaster at caroline.batten@ell.ox.ac.uk to sign up for our Hilary Term dinner on Thursday 18 February! Places are limited.

Tuesday, 26 January 2016

Friendly Reminder!

Remember to sign up for our pre-meeting dinner this term! Come meet the speakers, ask them all your questions, and enjoy a sophisticated set menu at Quod on the High Street. Dinner is at 18:00 Thursday 18 February, and the meeting will follow at 20:00. We have very limited spaces, so email your friendly webmaster (caroline.batten@ell.ox.ac.uk) as fast as your hands can type.

It'll be even more thrilling than this meal pictured in the Luttrell Psalter (Lincolnshire, c. 1320-1340), which everyone is clearly very excited to be attending. Just look at the enthusiasm.

 

Friday, 22 January 2016

HILARY TERM MEETING!

Look for our awesome poster for details. Can't wait to see you all there, and, of course, hear all your Game of Thrones conspiracy theories. 





Manuscripts in the Digital Age

The OMS finished off our 2015 schedule with a bang this past November, hosting Dr. Julia Craig-McFeely and Professor Henrike Lähnemann to discuss the digitization of manuscripts and the future of the medieval codex in the digital age. The topic is timely, considering we're posting this update on a blog (even Geoffrey Chaucer hath one) and sharing it with you in the medievalist Twitter-sphere (Geoffrey Chaucer hath one of those, too).


'Old Hall' Manuscript (London, British Library Add. MS 57950)

Dr. Craig-McFeely is the Project Manager of the Digital Image Archive of Medieval Music (DIAMM), and she explained to the Society the inner workings and the founding story of one of the largest resources of digitized manuscripts in the world. She told stories of traveling around the country to photograph manuscripts, described the huge number of resources required to compile DIAMM's metadata, and passed around several of the project's published facsimiles. "This is the sexy part," she declared, as she began to talk about the power of digital restoration. She showed us 'before' and 'after' images of damaged musical manuscripts, some nearly illegible with age –– all restored to readable condition with a little computer work. She showed us how digital tools can find faded musical notes on the page and undo poor previous (read: Victorian) edits. She explained to us the difficult questions inherent in restoration: how much damage is part of the manuscript's history? What should be erased, and what should be left? She concluded by touching on an issue near, if not necessarily dear, to the hearts of all medieval scholars: funding. Digital projects, she pointed out, need constant funding because the formats of documents, photos, and other resources need to be constantly updated in order to keep up with changing technology, and not become obsolete. (One thinks of a lot of data stored on a lot of floppy disks.) If digitization is going to provide lasting resources, we need to be willing to reinvest in scholarship.


Easter sun rising over Medingen in one of Prof. Lähnemann's newly-digitized images.

"Let us understand Scripture! Not reading is evil!" Prof. Lähnemann translated from the medieval High German of one of the Medingen manuscripts. She continued on to detail her current scholarly endeavor: collecting, compiling, and digitizing the manuscripts of the Cistercian nuns of the convent of Medingen. She explained to us that in the convent itself, large numbers of manuscripts have been discovered, as well as something called "nun dust" –– the underneath-the-floorboards detritus of centuries of lives lived within the convent walls, things like lost spectacles and dropped needles. She showed us the carefully illuminated pages of the nuns' scribal work and offered insights into how these manuscripts tell us things about the nuns' lives, attitudes toward literature, and ability to circulate manuscripts. She pointed out moments of interaction between the nuns and the laypeople of the town of Medingen, and showed us how the nuns collaborated on manuscript work –– co-production, synchronized production, collective artwork –– as part of the spirit of Windesheim and Lutheran reform. The text production, she pointed out, was a communal and polyphonic process –– and editing and digitizing these manuscripts is also a communal and poylphonic process in our day and age.

Our next meeting will prove to be just as timely –– and probably have a lot more blood, guts, and sordid love affairs. Medievalism is the theme of the term, and Dr. Carolyne Larrington will be kicking us off with a look at her new (and highly anticipated by medievalists/nerds/the OMS committee members) book on medieval influence in Game of Thrones!

 
THIS NEVER HAPPENED, OKAY? IT NEVER HAPPENED. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE BUY ALL THE STARKS SOME BETTER ARMOR?!

Couldn't get tickets to her Waterstones event? The OMS has you covered, for free (if you're a member –– and membership is still only £5 for students)!

She'll be followed by Professor David Matthews of the University of Manchester, the author of Medievalism: A Critical History to explain how we even got to Game of Thrones in the first place. How do we conjure up the Middle Ages in our art and media? Why does it have such a hold on our imaginations? And what are we all getting wrong?


Thursday, February 18th at 8 pm, in the Goodhart Seminar Room at Univ. As always, there will be plenty of wine and an exciting assortment of crisps. Keep watching the blog for more details and, for Society members, an invitation to dinner!

Saturday, 1 November 2014

Medieval Magic and the Supernatural


On Thursday 29th May, the Oxford Medieval Society welcomed Dr Sophie Page and Dr Carl Watkins to discuss 'Medieval Magic and the Supernatural.' This topic challenges us methodologically to unravel complex cultural concepts, as 'magic' and 'supernatural' are hard to define. Sophie and Carl are familiar with these challenges, as they have both worked extensively on these issues in the High Middle Ages. Sophie's interest in magic has grown out of her studies of the manuscript traditions of texts about magic theory and astrology. Carl takes a literary approach to systems of belief, working with narrative sources such as chronicles and hagiography. Together, they were able to talk us through how they approach some issues that come up in their research in this field.

Sophie introduced the topic of magic by exploring some issues of definitions. The boundaries around magic are blurred for the historian who might want to separate it from 'rational' aspects of intellectual culture; but this very blurring of boundaries was fundamental to medieval concepts of magic as a form of knowledge that was at once non-mainstream and elite. Sophie challenged the assumption that those who wrote about or read about magic were subversive - in particular, Richard Kieckhefer's suggestion that this was a vent for disgruntled clerics who had missed out on promotions seems too simplistic. Magical manuscripts produced by the community of St Augustine's Abbey Canterbury (which is the focus of Sophie's recent book) demonstrate that magic could be studied even in highly prestigious, mainstream contexts. Sophie argued that magic needs to be viewed as an intellectual activity integrated into its context, complete with all of its paradoxes. She suggested that we adopt a broad working definition for magic, as 'a practical art that offered the tools to manipulate the cosmos.' Such a holistic approach to magic allows us to see how it could relate to both the natural world of animals and the spiritual world of angels and demons, all in the same tradition. Likewise, such a broad definition of magic allows us to see more variety in the ways that it was deployed by writers and communities. For example, Sophie explained how the translation of theoretical texts from Arabic into Latin was an opportunity for different approaches to emerge, with some translators removing magical content from their texts, and others keeping it.

Carl explained similar issues of definitions in his recent research on visions of the dead. Medieval texts display two traditions for describing apparitions of the dead. On the one hand, moralising ghosts were portrayed as abstract visions warning the living of the threat of purgatory and hell. On the other hand, the dead who played a more central role in narratives, interacting with the living in diverse ways, were often described in tangible bodily terms. This distinction seems to be a specific feature of Medieval texts, as descriptions of visions of the dead from the Early Modern period follow only the second model, of tangible ghosts. Carl therefore encouraged us to think sensitively about how this variety of apparitions of the dead functioned in medieval thought. The historiographical and hagiographical sources that Carl works with employ these two forms of describing the living-dead in complex ways that don't fit some common assumptions about text and belief. For example, Carl pointed out that this is by no means a distinction between 'high' intellectual culture that employed accounts of the dead for moralistic metaphors, and 'low' uneducated culture that foolishly believed that the dead could return physically to earth. Like Sophie, Carl also suggested that medievalists need broader views and more sophisticated categories in order to grapple with this complex cultural phenomenon. For example, Carl pointed out that much of this literature has resonances with theories of purgatory, so we should view narratives about ghosts in the context of theological changes. In social terms, it is also possible that these narratives were used to articulate anxieties about death and community relationships - we can look to anthropology for comparative insights on these issues.


Laura Varnam, President of the Oxford Medieval Society, chaired a variety of questions that explored in more detail the case-studies presented by Sophie and Carl. It was particularly interesting to see that two distinct genres, the theoretical texts used by Sophie and the narrative texts used by Carl, brought out similar issues of contextualising the knowledge of authors and their place in broader intellectual traditions. We would like to thank Sophie and Carl for bringing together such interesting research issues.