Going through these sixteen weeks has for sure been interesting for me. I have learned many new things about medieval times. One of the most interesting things that I learned in this class was learning about how much woman differ to men in most of the stories that we read. I found it interesting that most of the stories that we read the main character was a man. When we read the few that had woman as the main character it made me want to read it more. In this time I learned that men are mostly the main character because women are thought of as to not be important. I am glad that I took this class and I found many things interesting every time I came to class. I hope that as we enter into finals week we all can stay calm, not stress, and remember why we are all here. We are almost done!! Thank you all for making our classes fun and interesting!
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Friday, April 29, 2016
Happy Finals!
Wow. This semester was challenging and harsh. I have never stress ate so much in my life. However, I learned a lot. I learned that King Arthur was Welsh, not Anglo-Saxon. I learned that Medieval people had a very different and vibrant viewpoint on Christianity. I learned that there are professors that expect the world but don't expect a matching handbag. I had fun, pulled out all my hair, and worked my butt off. I think that my favorite part of this class was the reading. The class was focused on a specific time period but everything was so varied. I got to read about my favorite legends, and discuss them overly enthusiastically while annoying people. I liked that there were always things that everyone disagreed on but we almost always found something in common. All in all, this semester was challenging, and fun, and will probably be one of my favorite classes I have ever taken. Thank you Dr. Mann and my fellow classmates. It's been great.
Thursday, April 28, 2016
What I Learned
I believe the most interesting thing that I learned in this class was the concept of sexuality in the Middle Ages, with regards to both men and women.
Homosexuality wasn't really acknowledged, at least, the difference between a man having sex with a man or a woman weren't considered entirely different nor put into different sexuality categories like they are today. Emphasis was placed on what we would define as 'hetero' relationships, but that was for child bearing purposes, not necessarily societal outcasting.
Homosexual sex and other non missionary sex was considered a 'waste of semen' and not for child bearing purposes, and was thus frowned upon, but not to any outrageous level.
Also, the idea of God and Jesus preferring 'pure virgins' was widely accepted and encouraged in this time period, discouraging any type of sex at all. There are many references in literature to purification: physically, sexually, and emotionally. The desire to be 'pure' for to earn Jesus and God's favor was widely preferred and idealized by many, and it is reflected in their literature. They took communion and refused many sexual encounters as a method to keep themselves 'pure'. Also, 'purity' was equally desired among men and women, and wasn't as one sided as it is today. Women were nearly if equal in being 'cleansed' of sexual encounters as men.
I learned a lot in terms of sexual identity, and I will carry this knowledge when I continue to read and analyze Middle English Literature.
Homosexuality wasn't really acknowledged, at least, the difference between a man having sex with a man or a woman weren't considered entirely different nor put into different sexuality categories like they are today. Emphasis was placed on what we would define as 'hetero' relationships, but that was for child bearing purposes, not necessarily societal outcasting.
Homosexual sex and other non missionary sex was considered a 'waste of semen' and not for child bearing purposes, and was thus frowned upon, but not to any outrageous level.
Also, the idea of God and Jesus preferring 'pure virgins' was widely accepted and encouraged in this time period, discouraging any type of sex at all. There are many references in literature to purification: physically, sexually, and emotionally. The desire to be 'pure' for to earn Jesus and God's favor was widely preferred and idealized by many, and it is reflected in their literature. They took communion and refused many sexual encounters as a method to keep themselves 'pure'. Also, 'purity' was equally desired among men and women, and wasn't as one sided as it is today. Women were nearly if equal in being 'cleansed' of sexual encounters as men.
I learned a lot in terms of sexual identity, and I will carry this knowledge when I continue to read and analyze Middle English Literature.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
The End
Fellow bloggers,
This semester has flown by and cannot believe this is the final blog post. This class is not like any other class I have taken. I honestly learned so much, pretty much everything we talked about this semester was new material for me. Therefore this blog post will be dedicated to the most interesting topic in medieval lit. My favorite topic so far this semester was all the Marie de France poems. I am a little more familiar with her work and have always loved it, so those were the most intriguing to me. However, I loved the discussions that were in class. I loved the directions that Dr. Mann guided us in, we pulled out many interesting, wild, and out there themes from our readings. Examples of the most interesting ones were: heterosexual love triangles, swords=penis=power, and the theme of penetration with swords = penetration in sexual activity.
This has been a fun, but informational class and I am so happy that I got the chance to be apart of it!
Saturday, April 23, 2016
Short Story: The life and death of Sir Gowther and Margery Kempe
Hello Fellow Bloggers,
I wanted to do something a little more creative in this blog post. Yes, I know it's a tab longer than usual, but it's a fast read, I promise. I'm going to take a page out of Margaret Atwood's book and do a short story.
(A)Sir Gowther meets Margery Kempe. Gowther hates her, but she has a penchant for being good entertainment. Gowther grows quickly tired of her and kills her. Margery's husband, still being her husband is not too fond of the fact that his wife was just killed and gets revenge, killing Gowther.
(B) Sir Gowther meets Margery in passing at the market and runs into her again as he just begins his penitence. He listens to her screeching sobs as she fawns over his likeness to Jesus. This quickly irritates him and everyone in the market. One man says, "This young man has no tongue, weep not lady," to which Margery responds, "This creature finds this young man looks a lot like our sweet savior and God," *intense sobbing follows.* Because of all the sobbing, the crowd grows restless and attacks her in a very Julius Caesar way and kills her. In this process, Gowther also gets trampled in the mosh and dies.
(C) Sir Gowther has met Margery Kempe in passing multiple times, never before had there been an issue, but as Gowther is waiting for God to forgive him, war breaks out between the sultan and the king with whom he resides. While dressed in Black armor and fighting for the king, Gowther gets distracted, as many men do, by a woman weeping for the souls of them all in such a wailing pitch that it distracts Gowther. Both Gowther and Margery are slain because Gowther was distracted by Margery and Margery was on a battlefield, so I don't know why she didn't see it coming.
(D) Sir Gowther has achieved the White armor and Margery is coming into her sainthood, repenting for all their sins, they have never met before, but in this moment they do. Margery is making her way back from Jerusalem and Gowther is about to take over his father-in-law's kingdom, but he has made a trip home to rebuild some of the abbeys he destroyed. He meets Margery on the road and they chat for a long while. Gowther tells her his plan and she weeps tears of joy and makes a request of him. She wants to live a secluded saint's life and Gowther agrees to make accommodations for her. Unfortunately, Gowther and Margery are in the wrong place at the wrong time and both are taken out by arrows, because the hobbits want their shire back and have enlisted the help of Legolas and his army of elvish men. It all ends the same; in the end they are both killed in their pursuits of a holier life.
Both Gowther and Kempe wanted and achieved redemption in the eyes of the Lord. The question is who were they performing for? Did they do anything in the name of God or was it all in the name of their names? To bring themselves fame, no matter what is was for or the means it was achieved by, was their ultimate goal, did they win?
I wanted to do something a little more creative in this blog post. Yes, I know it's a tab longer than usual, but it's a fast read, I promise. I'm going to take a page out of Margaret Atwood's book and do a short story.
(A)Sir Gowther meets Margery Kempe. Gowther hates her, but she has a penchant for being good entertainment. Gowther grows quickly tired of her and kills her. Margery's husband, still being her husband is not too fond of the fact that his wife was just killed and gets revenge, killing Gowther.
(B) Sir Gowther meets Margery in passing at the market and runs into her again as he just begins his penitence. He listens to her screeching sobs as she fawns over his likeness to Jesus. This quickly irritates him and everyone in the market. One man says, "This young man has no tongue, weep not lady," to which Margery responds, "This creature finds this young man looks a lot like our sweet savior and God," *intense sobbing follows.* Because of all the sobbing, the crowd grows restless and attacks her in a very Julius Caesar way and kills her. In this process, Gowther also gets trampled in the mosh and dies.
(C) Sir Gowther has met Margery Kempe in passing multiple times, never before had there been an issue, but as Gowther is waiting for God to forgive him, war breaks out between the sultan and the king with whom he resides. While dressed in Black armor and fighting for the king, Gowther gets distracted, as many men do, by a woman weeping for the souls of them all in such a wailing pitch that it distracts Gowther. Both Gowther and Margery are slain because Gowther was distracted by Margery and Margery was on a battlefield, so I don't know why she didn't see it coming.
(D) Sir Gowther has achieved the White armor and Margery is coming into her sainthood, repenting for all their sins, they have never met before, but in this moment they do. Margery is making her way back from Jerusalem and Gowther is about to take over his father-in-law's kingdom, but he has made a trip home to rebuild some of the abbeys he destroyed. He meets Margery on the road and they chat for a long while. Gowther tells her his plan and she weeps tears of joy and makes a request of him. She wants to live a secluded saint's life and Gowther agrees to make accommodations for her. Unfortunately, Gowther and Margery are in the wrong place at the wrong time and both are taken out by arrows, because the hobbits want their shire back and have enlisted the help of Legolas and his army of elvish men. It all ends the same; in the end they are both killed in their pursuits of a holier life.
Both Gowther and Kempe wanted and achieved redemption in the eyes of the Lord. The question is who were they performing for? Did they do anything in the name of God or was it all in the name of their names? To bring themselves fame, no matter what is was for or the means it was achieved by, was their ultimate goal, did they win?
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Arthurian Dystopian Story?
Greetings!
This post is going to be a little out there but bear with me. Part of the Arthur legend is that he will return when England needs him so I kept thinking about Arthur returning to a post-apocalyptic England. I don't know exactly how England would get into a situation where Arthur would just reappear but I do think it would be funny if Avalon just opened up and dropped Arthur (and maybe Lanval) right in the middle of Harrods.
Again, I do not have much details on this interesting story idea. Mainly because my brain just likes to skips to the parts it thinks would be most interesting. So there would have to be some way that Arthur hooks up with a group of people trying to save England but he is so confused as to if it really is still England that he kind of does not believe them.
I also really want him to start off by speaking his version of the English language and then have to switch to the modern version. This switch would come with a line something along the lines of, "This language feels weird in my mouth. Are you sure this is English?"
It's highly unlikely I would ever use this idea, so if anyone of you wants it have at it! I would love to see what could be done with this.
This post is going to be a little out there but bear with me. Part of the Arthur legend is that he will return when England needs him so I kept thinking about Arthur returning to a post-apocalyptic England. I don't know exactly how England would get into a situation where Arthur would just reappear but I do think it would be funny if Avalon just opened up and dropped Arthur (and maybe Lanval) right in the middle of Harrods.
Again, I do not have much details on this interesting story idea. Mainly because my brain just likes to skips to the parts it thinks would be most interesting. So there would have to be some way that Arthur hooks up with a group of people trying to save England but he is so confused as to if it really is still England that he kind of does not believe them.
I also really want him to start off by speaking his version of the English language and then have to switch to the modern version. This switch would come with a line something along the lines of, "This language feels weird in my mouth. Are you sure this is English?"
It's highly unlikely I would ever use this idea, so if anyone of you wants it have at it! I would love to see what could be done with this.
Double your fun
I meant to say this in class today, but don't feel shy about using the blog to work out issues with your paper. You're required to keep blogging through the end of the semester (two more weeks!), so you might as well make it useful for yourself.
Potential avenues:
Potential avenues:
- Drafting intro or certain paragraphs for comment
- Explaining stumbling blocks and crowdsourcing input
- Posting "scraps"--things you write that are interesting but only tangentially related to your argument and therefore they have to be cut
- A place for reflection on the writing process
You're all in this together; might as well act like it.
Happy writing!
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
The Divine Proportion
Here is a question for you, fellow medieval bloggers, when you read a text do you ever look for patterns? Common numbers, images, colors, symbols?
When we read Cleanness, did you notice anything peculiar about the way the text was set up? I know a handful of us were confused by the speaker of the first part and how within one text there were stories within stories, which were all connected by a common theme.
In the article, Importance of Medieval Numerology and the Effects Upon Meaning in the Works of the Gawain- Poet, Cusimano explores the possible patterns of certain medieval works including Cleanness. Cusimano states that the text follows a common homiletic tradition which is the division of subject into three parts and unified by a common theme.
Cusimano also explains that this structure directly reflects the concept of the Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all within one divine creator. Three parts to a whole. (The Divine Proportion)
In Cleanness, we have the story of the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Belshazzar. In each story we are shown how God deals with sin or uncleanness. These stories may all be different, however, they are unified with the common theme of the ways individuals can be spiritually unclean, much of which is evidenced through their actions.
By seeking out the possible patterns of a text you are actively pursuing much more than just the gist of the text. You will begin questioning why the text was written this way or that way, a curiosity will grow, and you will find yourself with opinions and beliefs that stretch far beyond, "eh I liked it."
Cusimano's article opened my eyes to literary numerology which answered questions I really wasn't aware I had, I can say for certain that in the future my mind will be more attune to the possible patterns within literary works.
If you would like to read the full article you can follow the link here: http://scholarworks.uno.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2203&context=td
When we read Cleanness, did you notice anything peculiar about the way the text was set up? I know a handful of us were confused by the speaker of the first part and how within one text there were stories within stories, which were all connected by a common theme.
In the article, Importance of Medieval Numerology and the Effects Upon Meaning in the Works of the Gawain- Poet, Cusimano explores the possible patterns of certain medieval works including Cleanness. Cusimano states that the text follows a common homiletic tradition which is the division of subject into three parts and unified by a common theme.
Cusimano also explains that this structure directly reflects the concept of the Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all within one divine creator. Three parts to a whole. (The Divine Proportion)
In Cleanness, we have the story of the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Belshazzar. In each story we are shown how God deals with sin or uncleanness. These stories may all be different, however, they are unified with the common theme of the ways individuals can be spiritually unclean, much of which is evidenced through their actions.
By seeking out the possible patterns of a text you are actively pursuing much more than just the gist of the text. You will begin questioning why the text was written this way or that way, a curiosity will grow, and you will find yourself with opinions and beliefs that stretch far beyond, "eh I liked it."
Cusimano's article opened my eyes to literary numerology which answered questions I really wasn't aware I had, I can say for certain that in the future my mind will be more attune to the possible patterns within literary works.
If you would like to read the full article you can follow the link here: http://scholarworks.uno.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2203&context=td
Monday, April 18, 2016
The Concept of Feminine Ugliness in Medieval English Poetry
Since I have chosen to write my final paper about the portrayal of women in Medieval literature I figured I would look up some scholarly articles about this topic. I found this article that discusses the concept of feminine ugliness and I thought it was very interesting because this is a concept I plan to write about in my paper. Here are a few of the points that the authors make about how feminine ugliness was portrayed in Medieval poetry.
Ugliness-definition through contrast. In order for the authors to explain this concept they had to define what beauty was at the time.
"Female hair had to be long and blonde; foreheads had to be smooth and moderate-sized; eyebrows had to be delicate; a chest had to be white; breasts had to be firm and little, and the like" (Curry 3).
"Whiteness was the unquestionable norm. Apart from such idealizations, it was also customary to emphasize women's beauty with comparisons to beautiful things such as lilies, the rising sun, the nightly sky, or red roses" (Evans 233).
The authors state that ugliness was the exact opposite of these features and that is how Medieval poetry perceived women who were ugly. They would be explained as the opposite of these features.
This next one is my favorite! Ugliness- stigma of inadequacy. This is another way that authors portrayed women and their ugliness by showing their lack in certain feminine fields.
"When it came to women, descriptions of beauty accorded with the medieval demand that a respectable damsel had to act as the "desirable object of conquest and love" and motherhood (Kasten 256), while highlighting her ugliness was to reveal her assumed shortcomings in these fields."
So basically women who were seen as beautiful in these texts were damsels in distress that needed a strong man to swoop in and save them and if a women didn't have those qualities she was seen as ugly. How about instead of seeing her as ugly she should be seen as a powerful woman who could do just fine on her own without needing a man to rescue her!
My question to all of you is where have we seen this portrayal in the texts that we have read this semester? Were the women portrayed in the same light as the damsel in distress or were they portrayed in a different way?
I found this article to be very interesting and it is worth taking a look at especially if your final paper will be about the portrayal of women in the texts that we have read this semester.
, 2015, The Concept of Feminine Ugliness in Medieval English Poetry, München, GRIN Verlag, http://www.grin.com/de/e-book/305985/the-concept-of-feminine-ugliness-in-medieval-english-poetr
http://www.grin.com/de/e-book/305985/the-concept-of-feminine-ugliness-in-medieval-english-poetry
This is a depiction of Dame Ragnelle!
This is the typical depiction of what it mean to be a "beautiful women". We can see that she clearly has long hair, she is pale, and she is able to attract a man.
Ugliness-definition through contrast. In order for the authors to explain this concept they had to define what beauty was at the time.
"Female hair had to be long and blonde; foreheads had to be smooth and moderate-sized; eyebrows had to be delicate; a chest had to be white; breasts had to be firm and little, and the like" (Curry 3).
"Whiteness was the unquestionable norm. Apart from such idealizations, it was also customary to emphasize women's beauty with comparisons to beautiful things such as lilies, the rising sun, the nightly sky, or red roses" (Evans 233).
The authors state that ugliness was the exact opposite of these features and that is how Medieval poetry perceived women who were ugly. They would be explained as the opposite of these features.
This next one is my favorite! Ugliness- stigma of inadequacy. This is another way that authors portrayed women and their ugliness by showing their lack in certain feminine fields.
"When it came to women, descriptions of beauty accorded with the medieval demand that a respectable damsel had to act as the "desirable object of conquest and love" and motherhood (Kasten 256), while highlighting her ugliness was to reveal her assumed shortcomings in these fields."
So basically women who were seen as beautiful in these texts were damsels in distress that needed a strong man to swoop in and save them and if a women didn't have those qualities she was seen as ugly. How about instead of seeing her as ugly she should be seen as a powerful woman who could do just fine on her own without needing a man to rescue her!
My question to all of you is where have we seen this portrayal in the texts that we have read this semester? Were the women portrayed in the same light as the damsel in distress or were they portrayed in a different way?
I found this article to be very interesting and it is worth taking a look at especially if your final paper will be about the portrayal of women in the texts that we have read this semester.
, 2015, The Concept of Feminine Ugliness in Medieval English Poetry, München, GRIN Verlag, http://www.grin.com/de/e-book/305985/the-concept-of-feminine-ugliness-in-medieval-english-poetr
http://www.grin.com/de/e-book/305985/the-concept-of-feminine-ugliness-in-medieval-english-poetry
This is a depiction of Dame Ragnelle!
This is the typical depiction of what it mean to be a "beautiful women". We can see that she clearly has long hair, she is pale, and she is able to attract a man.
Saturday, April 16, 2016
New Dialogue between Kind Arthur & Lancelot
Dialogue between King Arthur & Lancelot. Lancelot is in
charge of the King’s troops.
King: “Have many days have you searched for the holy grail?”
Lancelot: “Only a few days my king.”
King: “There was talk of a dragon over the black ridge. You
and your men should go there first thing in the morning.”
Lancelot: “But why your majesty?”
King: “Because if the holy grail is suspected to be guarded then
I would imagine it would be guarded by that monster. Now go and rally your men
for the morning.”
Lancelot: Bows and turns to exit the throne room.
The reasons why I picked these
characters to make dialogue between these two is because the subject they were discussing about I watched the
1975 Monty Python and the Holy Grail. King Arthur and Lancelot are both figures
for medieval literature we hear about more than any other person. So naturally
you would want these two to team up and go after something of great importance.
Reading this in class also made me remember parts of this. They were best friends maybe even closer. Again I showed how close these two really were, but here Lancelot also show obedience.
Dialogue between King Arthur & Lancelot. Lancelot is in
charge of the King’s troops.
King: “Have many days have you searched for the holy grail?”
Lancelot: “Only a few days my king.”
King: “There was talk of a dragon over the black ridge. You
and your men should go there first thing in the morning.”
Lancelot: “But why your majesty?”
King: “Because if the holy grail is suspected to be guarded then
I would imagine it would be guarded by that monster. Now go and rally your men
for the morning.”
Lancelot: Bows and turns to exit the throne room.
Who I would like to meet
Hello bloggers!
For my blog post this week, I would like to focus on who I would like to meet! The person I would like to meet is Merlin. Merlin is a very interesting character to me. I feel that I find him so interesting because he is so different than what I thought he was going to be. I find this to be ironic because this really embodies his character; Merlin never seems to be what everyone thinks he is. Growing up, I loved watching The Sword in the Stone. (The Disney version.) In the Disney version, he was this cooky old man that had magical powers and was obviously a good guy. The first picture below is what I thought he was and would be in the text. Below that picture is a much older picture of him. These are two very different images and I feel that they depict him differently in each. Unlike the Disney version, Merlin had his own agenda; that includes disguising a man so he can trick a woman into having sex with him. (Much different from Disney.) Although these details seems to make Merlin a less desirable character, I feel that they make him more interesting. These details make me want to know him and meet him. Overall, I feel that Merlin is a complicated character who I would love to meet.
For my blog post this week, I would like to focus on who I would like to meet! The person I would like to meet is Merlin. Merlin is a very interesting character to me. I feel that I find him so interesting because he is so different than what I thought he was going to be. I find this to be ironic because this really embodies his character; Merlin never seems to be what everyone thinks he is. Growing up, I loved watching The Sword in the Stone. (The Disney version.) In the Disney version, he was this cooky old man that had magical powers and was obviously a good guy. The first picture below is what I thought he was and would be in the text. Below that picture is a much older picture of him. These are two very different images and I feel that they depict him differently in each. Unlike the Disney version, Merlin had his own agenda; that includes disguising a man so he can trick a woman into having sex with him. (Much different from Disney.) Although these details seems to make Merlin a less desirable character, I feel that they make him more interesting. These details make me want to know him and meet him. Overall, I feel that Merlin is a complicated character who I would love to meet.
http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/disney/images/5/56/Merlin_official.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120320065319
http://www.mythencyclopedia.com/images/mlw_0001_0003_0_img0132.jpg
Friday, April 15, 2016
Morte D'Arthur Character List
I remember hearing in class a few people saying that they had problems following the characters in Le Morte D'Arthur. I agree that there are a lot of people in these stories and it is hard to keep them straight. So below so made a bit of a chart of some of the more important characters in the story.
Thursday, April 14, 2016
If I could've met
If I could've met anyone in the texts I would love to have met King Arthur and documented everything going down throughout his life. I mean, yeah, he's fictional, but he had a very dramatic and exciting life. He had a magic sword, was possibly bisexual, and had a huge castle and lots of knights.
I've also read from other sources that a lot of his knights had superhero-like magical powers and that would've been cool to see.
There's just so much drama in his life, like his family, his knights, and his quests. The quest for the Holy Grail is an interesting one I would've liked to follow, as well as his journey to Avalon.
Also, it would be interesting to see how the mythology of the knights began, as history tells that knights were often simply warriors for hire that served a lord, and the nobleness and chivalry was as much of a myth as the story of Arthur.
I also could've went up to Arthur and said "Look, Mordred's...not a great dude. And you probably shouldn't listen to everything Gawain says and needs." Then, we could have more King Arthur adventures...at least for five more minutes before something else equally as terrible happens.
It would just overall be great to be a bystander in one of the most influential and famous founding myths in world history.
I've also read from other sources that a lot of his knights had superhero-like magical powers and that would've been cool to see.
There's just so much drama in his life, like his family, his knights, and his quests. The quest for the Holy Grail is an interesting one I would've liked to follow, as well as his journey to Avalon.
Also, it would be interesting to see how the mythology of the knights began, as history tells that knights were often simply warriors for hire that served a lord, and the nobleness and chivalry was as much of a myth as the story of Arthur.
I also could've went up to Arthur and said "Look, Mordred's...not a great dude. And you probably shouldn't listen to everything Gawain says and needs." Then, we could have more King Arthur adventures...at least for five more minutes before something else equally as terrible happens.
It would just overall be great to be a bystander in one of the most influential and famous founding myths in world history.
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Views and Values of Knights throughout Morte d'Arthur
For this blog post I decided to get a scholarly article about the Knighthood throughout our most recent readings, Morte d'Arthur. The author of this post, Robert Kelly, describes the different points of view, from others, about knighthood and the 3 values of knighthood. Kelly states that there are three very different points of views of Knights during this time. "for the exercise of arms, as the ethical code of a governing class, and as an 'order' or vocation to the priests" (106). These views were all throughout the eras of Knights, all throughout the 15th century, and were a result of different situations that were happening. The author also stated different values of knighthood. "The Heroic Knight, who embodies the values of the 'first Christian Warriors', the Worshipful Knight, who embodies 'the more secular values of late medieval feudalism', and the True Knight, who embodies the 'values of the Christian feudalism of the High Middle Ages'"(106).
My question for you, is that while seeing the descriptions of the Knights which do you believe the Knights, such as Gawain, Tristram, Lancelot, and the other Knights are perceived as?
My reaction to this article, is it was very interlude risk and also helped myself with the reading while referring to the Knights. It also took me back to the reading of Sir Gowther, when he was the 3 different colors as being described as the 3 values of Knights. The black as being the Heroic Knight. The red as being the Worshipful knight and the white as being the True knight. Especially the while knight because know he was in his truest and newest form, for now he was pure.
Kelly, Robert L. "Knighthood in the Morte
d'Arthur." South Atlantic Modern
Language Association 53.3 (1988):
105-08. Print.
Another Outlook on Beowulf
I
chose to read an article on Beowulf.
Peter J. Leithart is the
author of this article. He believes so many things that I never thought about
with in Beowulf. A few examples are the fact that Heorot was created for the
enjoyment of man, but also in the likeness of Eden and that angers Grendel,
Grendel as we know is upset because he is an outcast from the others who get to
enjoy Heorot and all it has to offer. When Grendel dies however, his mother’s vengeance
is extremely personal. The men killed her kin, and she will kill theirs. This
read is extremely interesting and I suggest everyone read and see his outlook.
It’s not so much how we discussed in class about Grendel’s anger for Heorot is
not just because he is outcasted, but because of the noise they make, and all
Grendel knew was what he was raised in, which was swampy-grossness. He gives a
different but interesting spin. I’d like to know everyone’s thoughts on his
outlook.
I found this picture extremely interesting.
https://www.google.com/search?q=images+of+beowulf+and+grendel&biw=1051&bih=501&tbm=isch&imgil=H8WN9Xj3uG5TqM%253A%253Bn4Xspw30SFw3iM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.awesomestories.com%25252Fasset%25252Fview%25252FGRENDEL-S-MOTHER-Beowulf&source=iu&pf=m&fir=H8WN9Xj3uG5TqM%253A%252Cn4Xspw30SFw3iM%252C_&usg=__bshcZkl1hoPZ4YE_1E9otcbV9MA%3D&ved=0ahUKEwj_xa-F14zMAhUkvIMKHbNSD6wQyjcIMQ&ei=c8oOV7_AKqT4jgSzpb3gCg#imgrc=H8WN9Xj3uG5TqM%3A
Sunday, April 10, 2016
The Round Table
The Knights of the round table is a basic blue print to how forms of government, fraternities, and other organizations are structured. Each Knight at the round table had a specific job that they were suppose to take care of and report back to the table to let the others know what was going on. Governments and fraternities today operate on the same principles, which shows how much things have not changed over thousands of years. The round table is a good system since it allows for different minds to work together to be able to come to a decision based on a group instead of one person just making a decision. The round table is one of the first democratic styles of decision making, and ahead of its time.
My question to my fellow bloggers is how do you feel about this comparison, and does it make you think that the old say "if its ain't broke don't fix it" applies to the comparison?
Saturday, April 9, 2016
Vindolanda
Greetings Medieval Classmates,
Today's little history lesson comes from the early end of the Medieval period in the early 5th century. Follow me down the very straight Roman paved roads of England, towards Hadrian's Wall in the Northern part of the country. This is where we will find Vindolanda. Vindolanda is trading village that was frequented by many different types of people: Roman soldiers, French, Irish and Denmark tradesmen. Vindolanda was not just a regular pit stop or bump in the road; it was actually a thriving fort city.
Because there was a lot of Roman influence over much of the structure and building of the fort, there was a lot of advanced technology at play. For example, there were pipes running underneath the fort allowing water to be brought in through the aqueduct system the Romans installed. Also found in Vindolanda, tablets that helped archaeologists learn what the people of Vindolanda ate shopped for. These tablets were made of fine wood that have grocery lists and things of the like imprinted on them. Vindolanda was considered a metropolis of action and from its size it's easy to why.
Hope you all enjoyed this little history lesson!
Vindolanda Knowledge: History 280, History of the British Isles with Dr. Welsh.
Picture: https://www.google.com/search?q=vindolanda&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=667&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjHtvOkl4PMAhWKbD4KHfkNCvYQ_AUIBygC#imgrc=HmcVNU7azueKbM%3A
Today's little history lesson comes from the early end of the Medieval period in the early 5th century. Follow me down the very straight Roman paved roads of England, towards Hadrian's Wall in the Northern part of the country. This is where we will find Vindolanda. Vindolanda is trading village that was frequented by many different types of people: Roman soldiers, French, Irish and Denmark tradesmen. Vindolanda was not just a regular pit stop or bump in the road; it was actually a thriving fort city.
Because there was a lot of Roman influence over much of the structure and building of the fort, there was a lot of advanced technology at play. For example, there were pipes running underneath the fort allowing water to be brought in through the aqueduct system the Romans installed. Also found in Vindolanda, tablets that helped archaeologists learn what the people of Vindolanda ate shopped for. These tablets were made of fine wood that have grocery lists and things of the like imprinted on them. Vindolanda was considered a metropolis of action and from its size it's easy to why.
Hope you all enjoyed this little history lesson!
Vindolanda Knowledge: History 280, History of the British Isles with Dr. Welsh.
Picture: https://www.google.com/search?q=vindolanda&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=667&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjHtvOkl4PMAhWKbD4KHfkNCvYQ_AUIBygC#imgrc=HmcVNU7azueKbM%3A
Friday, April 8, 2016
I'd Most Want to Meet.....
Hello medieval bloggers,
I am a little late on my post, but Spring Break sort of messed up my schedule and I got a little confused, but better late than never.
I am doing my post this week on a character that I would like to meet. We have started to read stories from the Arthurian time period and after the in class presentation about King Arthur's court, I think the one person I would want to meet from that court is Queen Guinevere.
https://www.google.com/search?q=queen+guinevere&biw=1280&bih=923&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjF6pSm5f_LAhUW7GMKHZ65AfsQsAQIGw&dpr=1#imgrc=okGXCAz3mvCiTM%3A
Based off of the readings that we have done in class, it seems like she maybe wasn't the nicest person in King Arthur's court, but maybe we are getting a skewed version of her. I gathered a few facts about her from Encyclopedia.com and found out that she was a beautiful and noble queen, but her love for Sir Lancelot led to her downfall. The site also said that there was numerous fights between Lancelot and Arthur after Guinevere was accused on adultery. After Arthur dies she retrieves to a convent in attempt to reprehend her sins.
Whether or not these stories are true or myth, there is one thing this court has in common with our popular culture today. I don't know about you guys, but I am always interested in watching a good love triangle flourish and then see how it ends. These facts tell us that there was a love triangle between these three characters and it ultimately led to the demise of Arthur's Knightly Court. We can easily get mad at her for committing adultery, but at the same time Kings were able to have mistresses I'm sure. I am not sure if Arthur takes a mistress ever, but I am sure being king he gets a lot of offers.
There are numerous stories that depict her as being beautiful and noble, but there are other texts that make her seem manipulative, betraying, and adulteress. this is why she is a character I would like to meet because I am curious about the accuracy of these legends. She seems like an interesting character and I tend to show more of an interest in queens than I do kings. Don't get me wrong I like studying Kings and their reign, but I think its always nice to study the Queen as well because that is a side that we don't usually read about.
I am a little late on my post, but Spring Break sort of messed up my schedule and I got a little confused, but better late than never.
I am doing my post this week on a character that I would like to meet. We have started to read stories from the Arthurian time period and after the in class presentation about King Arthur's court, I think the one person I would want to meet from that court is Queen Guinevere.
https://www.google.com/search?q=queen+guinevere&biw=1280&bih=923&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjF6pSm5f_LAhUW7GMKHZ65AfsQsAQIGw&dpr=1#imgrc=okGXCAz3mvCiTM%3A
Based off of the readings that we have done in class, it seems like she maybe wasn't the nicest person in King Arthur's court, but maybe we are getting a skewed version of her. I gathered a few facts about her from Encyclopedia.com and found out that she was a beautiful and noble queen, but her love for Sir Lancelot led to her downfall. The site also said that there was numerous fights between Lancelot and Arthur after Guinevere was accused on adultery. After Arthur dies she retrieves to a convent in attempt to reprehend her sins.
Whether or not these stories are true or myth, there is one thing this court has in common with our popular culture today. I don't know about you guys, but I am always interested in watching a good love triangle flourish and then see how it ends. These facts tell us that there was a love triangle between these three characters and it ultimately led to the demise of Arthur's Knightly Court. We can easily get mad at her for committing adultery, but at the same time Kings were able to have mistresses I'm sure. I am not sure if Arthur takes a mistress ever, but I am sure being king he gets a lot of offers.
There are numerous stories that depict her as being beautiful and noble, but there are other texts that make her seem manipulative, betraying, and adulteress. this is why she is a character I would like to meet because I am curious about the accuracy of these legends. She seems like an interesting character and I tend to show more of an interest in queens than I do kings. Don't get me wrong I like studying Kings and their reign, but I think its always nice to study the Queen as well because that is a side that we don't usually read about.
Thursday, April 7, 2016
Wars of the Roses
As mentioned in class, our lovely writer of Morte de Arthur fought in the wars of the Roses, which was fought between the Lancasters and the Yorks.
As with all wars, its origins are complicated but this was a family war. Both sides made their claims for the throne descendants of the sons of Edward III. The man originally fought against in the beginning of the wars was Henry VI. He was married to a power-hungry French woman, his just as ambitious council mainly ruled for him and he was prone to fits of madness. Not the most stable king, a York rebellion set out to at least put his ambitious wife back in line after Henry temporarily returned to stability which lead to a victory for York but did not last for long. Eventually, the queen, Margaret of Anjou, gathered an army to prepare to attack the York's. The York's anticipate her and are able to depose Henry and install Edward IV as king.
Edward also comes with, what the English come to believe anyway, a very problematic wife, Elizabeth Woodville. Elizabeth is a problem for several reasons: 1) she's almost a commner/very low level gentry at best 2) she is ambitious 3) her mother was best friends with the previous queen, Margaret of Anjou 4) her mother was considered a witch 5) she herself was considered a witch. These last two reasons were the Lancastrian (as well as the Kingmaker's, Richard of Warwick and eventually York supporters) opinions for how she 1) managed to marry Edward and 2) how she managed to give herself and her family so much power.
Obviously this means another king must be deposed and order restored to the English court.
This is a task that takes a lot longer than removing Henry VI and ultimately ends up with the Kingmaker dead but Edward managing to live until the end of his reign. Fighting began again when Edward's brother, Richard III denied his young nephew and Edward's heir the throne ultimately leading to Lancastrian victory. This victory installs Henry Tudor, Henry VII, as King and brings peace by Elizabeth agreeing to marry her oldest child and daughter (also named Elizabeth) to Henry to bring both the families together to end the war.
The wars were named long after they had ended and were named for the color of the roses that represented each of the houses at war:
York = White Rose
Lancaster = Red Rose
Although, thinking about it now, it seems that the wars were partly due in part because the queens for both Henry VI and Richard IV were ambitious women who wanted to be involved with politics. Of course, in this time period women would not have been allowed to. Perhaps a very small part, but I would like to know what you all think about what the real causes of the wars were besides bad government and ambitious women.
(Source: Britannica)
As with all wars, its origins are complicated but this was a family war. Both sides made their claims for the throne descendants of the sons of Edward III. The man originally fought against in the beginning of the wars was Henry VI. He was married to a power-hungry French woman, his just as ambitious council mainly ruled for him and he was prone to fits of madness. Not the most stable king, a York rebellion set out to at least put his ambitious wife back in line after Henry temporarily returned to stability which lead to a victory for York but did not last for long. Eventually, the queen, Margaret of Anjou, gathered an army to prepare to attack the York's. The York's anticipate her and are able to depose Henry and install Edward IV as king.
Edward also comes with, what the English come to believe anyway, a very problematic wife, Elizabeth Woodville. Elizabeth is a problem for several reasons: 1) she's almost a commner/very low level gentry at best 2) she is ambitious 3) her mother was best friends with the previous queen, Margaret of Anjou 4) her mother was considered a witch 5) she herself was considered a witch. These last two reasons were the Lancastrian (as well as the Kingmaker's, Richard of Warwick and eventually York supporters) opinions for how she 1) managed to marry Edward and 2) how she managed to give herself and her family so much power.
Obviously this means another king must be deposed and order restored to the English court.
This is a task that takes a lot longer than removing Henry VI and ultimately ends up with the Kingmaker dead but Edward managing to live until the end of his reign. Fighting began again when Edward's brother, Richard III denied his young nephew and Edward's heir the throne ultimately leading to Lancastrian victory. This victory installs Henry Tudor, Henry VII, as King and brings peace by Elizabeth agreeing to marry her oldest child and daughter (also named Elizabeth) to Henry to bring both the families together to end the war.
The wars were named long after they had ended and were named for the color of the roses that represented each of the houses at war:
York = White Rose
Lancaster = Red Rose
(Source: Britannica)
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
Reaction to "The Ambiguity Of Wulf And Eadwacer"
In Peter Baker's scholarly journal "The Ambiguity Of Wulf And Eadwacer," he discusses how critics have had difficulty in understanding the meaning of the story in the poem, "Wulf and Eadwacer." Baker writes that "Interpretations multiply and plain places are made rough; the reader, faced with deciding whether the poem is a riddle of a charm, a canine romance or the lament of a woman for her absent lover, may well wonder if he can be certain of anything about it." Baker also points out that Arnold Davidson stated that, "The very fact that the poem can be read in so many different ways suggests that it might be ambiguous and perhaps deliberately so."
In his article, Baker points out that it is commonly accepted that the speaker of this poem is in fact a woman. The reason for this is that the speaker is concerned for Wulf's safety. While this doesn't ensure that the speaker is, the argument can be made that the speaker is concerned for him because they are lovers. A more factually grounded piece of evidence that lies in the text is that in line ten of the poem, the nominative feminine Old English word "reotugu" is used. Baker goes on to say that most critics agree that the speaker is a captive in a foreign land. Wulf is her lover and an outlaw, and Eadwacer is her tyrant husband. Baker concludes however, that it is more likely that Wulf is her husband. He thinks that Wulf has been outlawed by the speakers people and she, because she is the wife of an outlaw, has been sent to live on an island where Eadwacer watches over her and has made love to her. Regardless of Baker's interpretation, the poem is still ambiguous. Baker thinks that this ambiguity is more artistic than it is puzzling and that it justifies the poems reputation as an old English masterpiece.
I took a great interest in this article because I experienced my own struggles in trying to interpret this text when I was writing about it for my midterm paper. There is much that is clearly undefined even in only reading the text as it is provided in our textbook. Despite this however, outside of our textbook there is an even larger debate over what the text is in fact saying, let alone what it means. Considering that this text was written in Middle English, the text needs to be translated into Present Day English for us to understand it. Because of the nature of how languages change over time, many of the words from Middle English no longer exist in today's English and many of the words that do remain now mean something entirely different than what they used to. I was really interested to read that the original Middle English version of the poem contained the feminine nominative word "reotugu" because there was no evidence in the text that we read. I was wondering if the speaker was a man or a woman while I was writing my midterm paper, but was unable to find any concrete evidence for either sex. By understanding this, the theory of Wulf and the speaker being star crossed lovers makes a lot of sense.
Baker's article opened up my understanding of the poem entirely. It's incredible how scholarly discussion furthers all of the parties involved in the conversations understanding of what is going on in a text. If I hadn't taken the time to read Baker's article, my perspective of what is going on in this poem would be much more limited. I'm sure that other scholars helped him understand what was going on in this text before he was able to assert his own detailed interpretation.
Source: Baker, Peter S. "The Ambiguity Of 'Wulf And Eadwacer'." Studies In Philology 78.5 (1981): 39-51. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Source: Baker, Peter S. "The Ambiguity Of 'Wulf And Eadwacer'." Studies In Philology 78.5 (1981): 39-51. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Review of The Medieval Bestiary: Animals in the Middle Ages
Occasionally, when reading medieval texts, I find myself feeling out of the loop in respect to the intended medieval audience. There is always some symbol representing some concept or idea in which a modern audience may not be attune.
If you have noticed, quite a few of the texts we have read use animals as symbols to represent something like traits. From Marie de France to Chaucer: animals are key literary tools. So when you close read and come across a reference to an animal the website, The Medieval Bestiary, is your friend.
All you have to do is type in the animal and search. You can find medieval illustrations, allegories, morals, traits, and other places in medieval literature that the animal is referenced.
Examples:
Marie de France references an eagle in her lai, Lanval in regards to the character, the mysterious lady of the woods. According to The Medieval Bestiary an eagle can represent Christ and rejuvenation or it can represent an evil spirit and a ravisher of souls.
Does that change how you view Lanval's lady love?
In Sir Gowther, Gowther's punishment is to only eat the food that was first in the mouth of a dog. In medieval culture dogs were considered to be faithful creatures who could heal wounds by licking them. This symbolizes "the wounds of sin being healed through confession."
How can we relate this back to Gowther?
In the near future we will be reading the Nun's Priest's Tale. Chaucer loved his animals, in this tale there is a rooster and a fox. I highly recommend you utilize this website while reading.
If you have noticed, quite a few of the texts we have read use animals as symbols to represent something like traits. From Marie de France to Chaucer: animals are key literary tools. So when you close read and come across a reference to an animal the website, The Medieval Bestiary, is your friend.
All you have to do is type in the animal and search. You can find medieval illustrations, allegories, morals, traits, and other places in medieval literature that the animal is referenced.
Examples:
Marie de France references an eagle in her lai, Lanval in regards to the character, the mysterious lady of the woods. According to The Medieval Bestiary an eagle can represent Christ and rejuvenation or it can represent an evil spirit and a ravisher of souls.
 | |
| Retrieved from The Medieval Bestiary. British Library. |
In Sir Gowther, Gowther's punishment is to only eat the food that was first in the mouth of a dog. In medieval culture dogs were considered to be faithful creatures who could heal wounds by licking them. This symbolizes "the wounds of sin being healed through confession."
 |
| Retrieved from The Medieval Bestiary. Kongelige Bibliotek. |
In the near future we will be reading the Nun's Priest's Tale. Chaucer loved his animals, in this tale there is a rooster and a fox. I highly recommend you utilize this website while reading.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)