A Side of Tartar's Sauce

The account of the Tartar people by Matthew Paris is a surprisingly objective account. The discussion that Paris writes into his account is almost wholly based on statements made by a former archbishop of Russia named Peter, who was forced to flee Russia after the Tartar (Mongol) invasion (page 28). Paris also relies for Tartar information from other refugees, including Albanians, who arrive at the St. Albans monastery.

Paris (through Peter) informs us that twelve chieftains led these people, the leader of which was called ‘Tartar Khan’ (known to us today as Genghis Khan). We are told that he has 3 sons, Thesir Khan, Chun Khan and Bathatar Khan (page 28), and were raised in conditions that were particularly barbaric (rude, lawless and inhuman). Historian Jack Weatherford in his work, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, notes that the actual names of Khan’s children were actually Jochi, Chaghatai, Ogodei and Tolui.

The account of the Tartars found in the Chronicle details much of their history concerning military conquests, political interactions and religious strife. Paris informs us that, “Thesir Khan proceeded against the Babylonians; Churi Khan against the Turks; and Bathatar Khan remained at Ernac, and sent his chiefs against Russia, Poland, Hungary, and several other kingdoms; and three, with their numerous armies, are now presumptuously invading the neighbouring provinces of Syria” (page 29). Though the names are different, these children would later found major political and geographic dynasties after the death of Genghis Khan. Unfortunately, the book does not list different forms of the sons’ names, but the following are listed as being their later dynastic founding’s:

· Jochi – “Golden Horde” à Russia

· Chaghatai – “Moghul Empire” à India

· Tolui, through his sons:

o Hulegu – “Ilkhanate” à Persia and Iraq

o Khubilai – “Yuan Dynasty” à China

The details and story that Matthew Paris provides to readers is remarkably objective, and though there is at times language that would denote condescension, Paris is no Gregory of Tours. While Gregory constantly denounced those who did not embrace the Christian faith or the Church (Arians, pagans, etc.), Paris is more standoffish when it comes to describing the habits and beliefs of the Tartars. As Paris (and Peter) are apt to note they are not Christian – “God and his Son in heaven, and Chiar Khan on earth” (page 29) – but do have a deep spirituality that reflects some of the tenets that many Christians embrace. For example they fear sentence of future condemnation may be passed against them (page 30).

For most of the time period from 1246 to 1252 A.D. Paris relates the political and empirical movements that the Tartars undergo in Europe and in the Middle East. What seems to be most important for Paris is the reluctance, if not outright defiance by European and Islamic princes/kingdoms towards the Tartar envoys and empire. The threat of the Tartars seems to be able to unite many of the European kings, and at times lessen hostilities with Arabs who also fought against them.

Paris also concerns himself with the news that Peter (the same man as before) had succeeded in converting the king of the Tartars (pg. 319). Again we see Paris being rather objective with his relating of this news, stating that the French King and various bishops were pleased with the conversion, but little opinion is given by Paris about these news events.

I will expand on some other things that Paris notes about the Tartars in my talk in class that were not included in the pages assigned to read as well.

Role of Death and Obits

...by Jordan Crosby

The role of death and obituaries in Matthew Paris’ English History is similar to the presentation I gave last week. The theme throughout this collection of readings, and the works presented by Suzanne Lewis have the view that those who persecute Christianity and their followers are people of non-Christian faith, and will ultimately be punished for their religious beliefs, and their horrible acts. In English History, this is seen with the wretched death of Engelram de Coucy, the father of the Queen of Scotland, who met his death in a remarkable way. Engelram was described as being the old persecutor of the Church, notably the church of Clairvaux. Paris notes that he died a double death as in his lifetime he was obsessed with materialism, while in spiritual life he was “a sad dissipater” (7) One day, while riding his horse, the horse stumbled and Engelram fell backwards into deep water, and was dragged by his stirrups. While he was falling, his sword became unravelled from his sheath, and it stabbed him as he was drowning, thereby dying a double-death. Paris commented that he departed this life to reap the fruits of his ways (7), which can suggest to the reader that he is in hell, with all the other materialistic sinners.

Another tale from Paris’ English History surrounds the finding of the dead body of a boy in London. Upon inspection of the deceased body, it was discovered that his legs, arms, and under his chest was in scripted with Hebrew characters. It was thus believed that the Jews had killed the young boy to taunt and insult Jesus, and either crucified or beat him so badly that he died before he would be crucified. It tied into the death of Jesus, and the belief that members of the Jewish faith and religion crucified Christians. Marks on the boy’s body are in agreement with the belief that the boy was beaten and tortured to death. It was found out that the boy had been sold to the Jews, and when blame was begun to be placed on them, the Jews took to flight and never returned (21-2). After the discovery of his body, and in line with Gregory of Tours (as the Christian boy was a martyr in that it was believed he died for his faith) the Lord brought miracles out through the deceased boy. Gregory of Tours wrote that martyrs when they died became representatives of God, and would perform miracles for ordinary believers. At the same time as the young boy’s body was discovered, miracles in the name of Christ began to appear as health would be restored to the sick, in the praise of Christ, and seen at the tombs of England’s most holy people (22). In his English History Matthew Paris also pays obituaries to people, seen in the death of Margaret (sister of the King of Scotland) to which he announces she was buried with proper ceremony and respect amongst the preacher brethren (37). Paris also pays homage to William (Bishop of Winchester), who paid his debt to nature, and died in the prime of his life who was noted for both his good learning and morals. (37) Matthew Paris is paying debt to those good moral Christians who died, and are deemed worthy of his praise.

Somebody does not have to die in order to show not only the power of God, but of Matthew Paris’ preference and loyalty for Christianity. While Paris shows how those who move away from God will be punished, those who accept him will be rewarded. This is similar to Gregory of Tours (tale of Chilperic), and Paris shows the tale of the King of France on his deathbed. The King, about to die, has the holy cross and crown of Christ placed on him, and he made an oath that if Christ should save him from death, he would assume the crown and dedicate his life to visiting the Holy Sepulchre and rule in favour of the poor and needy (38). Due to the acceptance and power of Christ, the King was restored full health, and even visited St. Albans (where Matthew Paris is from, and which he greatly adores in his writings) where he offered gifts of thanks and obedience.

These same messages are seen in Suzanne Lewis’ writings of Matthew Paris. Lewis shows how Matthew attacks those figures that do not conform to his religious beliefs, rather abusing them, such as the prophet Mohammed. Medieval readers who read the works of Mohammed were shocked by the polygamist nature of the prophet’s sexual life, and were greatly appalled. This led many people, including Matthew Paris, to believe that his claims about having revelations from God were totally false. Matthew Paris visually focuses on Mohammed’s death as deserved punishment for the life he led (100), which did not conform and insulted Christian beliefs. His obituary shows Mohammed standing with a scroll stating his unabashed love of adultery, which mocks and gives a religious reason of why Mohammed died.
Since he turned away from the light of the Lord, and lived a life of sin, he was greatly punished with death. Rejecting notions that the prophet had merely died by poisoning, Matthew gives a more gruesome description, as he was accustomed to, saying “He then however fell on a dung heap and...rolled about, gnashing his teeth and foaming at the mouth. A hungry pig, upon discovering that shameless man whose open mouth exalted the stink of undigested meat, set upon him and suffocated him until he was half-dead, dismembered and torn” (100). The punishments meted out to Mohammed corresponded to the punishments allocated by the Holy Trinity. Matthew’s words are quite clear, polygamy is evil, and those who are guilty of it will be punished. His conception of history is shaped by a desire to show patterns of moral retribution, even if he has to make them up (101), and this story supports that belief.

Suzanne Lewis shows that Matthew Paris believed that historical events could be known through prophetic revelations. The punishment meted out to those who persecute Christians, is best seen in the martyrdom of St. Alban. While the story of his death is seen as being “pure interpolation” (107), Matthew adds it in to show moral justice, but to also defend his St. Abbey’s church. His version of martyrdom has the operation of divine justice, because when St. Alban has his head removed, the executioner’s eyes fall out (107). This is meant to depict a message of punishment to those who persecute his Christian beliefs, punish those who persecute such beliefs, and show the ability of saints to suspend the laws of nature. (107)

This story allowed Britain to claim its own martyr, (which Gregory of Tours was obsessed with) but it shows how Matthew used death to show his personal loyalties for his religious beliefs in favour of others.

St. Albans death was important he shows, because his burial allowes Offa to find the relics in 793, which flowed all the benefits of the Benedictine monastery (111). Matthew’s depiction of Offa pointing towards the relics, served the purpose of fighting off rival claims to the St. Alban relics, which had been going on for hundreds of years. (111). Matthew would use death as a means of punish those who disagreed or attacked St. Albans and the relics, as the case with Fawkes de Breave. He was a man who persecuted Christians, much like Engelram de Coucy, and was charged with committing a crime against St. Albans and the prophecies. Matthew embellished new crimes (murdering his cook) and new interpretations into his acts, which served the message of saying those who did not conform to Christianity, but made a mockery out of it and persecuted those who believed it, would be punished harshly. He provided an obituary of Fawkes with a poisoned fish in his mouth, which served St. Alban’s triumph over this Norman foe (116-9), and made the message clear...persecute or mock Christianity, and you will be punished, while if you adhere to it, you will be greatly rewarded by the Lord....Gregory of Tours anyone???

The World of Matthew Paris, and the Documents Therein

The Chronica Majora by Matthew Paris is a valuable resource for historians because it provides a plethora of documents (official letters, memoranda, and laws) that inform the narrative of thirteenth century England. The majority of the primary sources deal with communications between the Pope, Kings and Emperors, and occasionally there are documents validating the financial standing of a citizen or institution, and even rarer still, is the documents that detail instructions from the King, Pope, or Emperors to the lower echelons of society.
Matthew Paris is very aware of the duality, or faults of sources, but he also describes them as containing a sense of finality. To explain, Matthew Paris describes the uses of documents in the case of a financial dispute; he states “the evident iniquity of the whole course of the proceedings is also shown by the causes which includes and...are defended by the incorruptible truth and by public documents.” (Matthew Paris, Vol. 2, 166). In this case documents are used to validate truths, but do not, in the eyes of Matthew Paris, solely constitute truth.
The first document provided in the Chronica Majora is a letter from the Pope to the prelates of England, reaffirming the virtues of the Church of England, and providing some level of financial instruction. Matthew Paris later explains that these letters back and forth were common, but not without “the expense of a large sum of money.” (17 - Matthew Paris AD 1244) Another curious note, is the political foresight, or awareness that the letter seems to contain; at the end of the letter, after all of the financial instruction/suggestion, the Pope explains, “He [the King] may more easily endure the burden of his expenses, and that, by doing so, you may be at a future time to claim for yourselves the favour and thanks of the said king (which you, without doubt, are in want of)....” (17 - Matthew Paris AD 1244), and continues to state that, later this will aid in Church promotion from the King. The bluntness of this message is striking because one would suspect that political motivation while a pragmatic reality, should not be so obviously voiced. One would expect an aura of benevolent compliance. The honesty portrayed in the letter from the Pope to his prelates suggests a certain level of honesty in the primary sources, however this in not entirely true of all documents included in Matthew Paris’ work.
However, before delving into the problematic nature of the documents included in Matthew Paris’ additional document appendix of the Chronica Majora another example should be discussed. In my opinion, one of the more intriguing pieces is a French translation of the King’s concern for peace and safety in his kingdom. The document inherits a mild paranoia when discussing the number of armed men that are to be placed in each town, the recruitment of other armed men (based on their cattle and land owning), and then a breakdown of material wealth in relation to service. (432. Matthew Paris, Vol. 3 “Additamenta”). The documents main points are summarized in six succinct, and at times not so succinct points.

"Done in the presence of the archbishop of York, at Westminster, the 20th day of May, in the thirty-sixth year of our reign, Henry, the son of John.

Articles.

1.That watch be kept in every town, as they have been wont to be kept, by good and able men.

2.That pursuit by hue and cry be made according to the ancient and proper form, in such way that the negligent what will not follow the cry may be taken as accomplices of the evil-doers, and be given up to the sheriff. Moreover, hi every town, four or six men, according to the number of the inhabitants, shall be appointed to make the true and cry with promptitude and perseverance, and to pursue evil-doers, if any should arise, and it should become necessary, with bows and arrows, and other light arms, which ought to be provided for the custody of the whole town, and which may always remain for the use of the aforesaid town. And beside the foregoing, there shall be provided, out of each hundred, two free and loyal men of most influence, to be over them, and to see that the watches be duly made as well as the pursuits aforesaid.

3.That no stranger be taken in to lodge, except in the daytime, and that he depart also in broad daylight.

4. That no stranger be received in country villages for more than one day, or two at the utmost; except in the time of harvest, unless his host will answer for him.

5. If any evil-doer, or other person about whom unfavourable suspicions are entertained, is taken by the watchmen, or by other loyal subjects of our lord the king, the sheriff or the bailiff of the hundred shall receive him without delay, and without any payment.

6.Orders shall be given to the mayor and bailiffs of every city and town, that if any trader or foreigner bring money.,, and, showing it to them, asks for a safe-conduct, they shall grant him a safe-conduct through the bad places and doubtful districts ; but if he loses anything, for want of safe-conduct, or under their safe-conduct, restitution shall be made to him out of the common funds of that town or city." (434 - 435, Matthew Paris, Vol. 3)

This document accurately summarizes the nature of the documents -- often they are curatorial, and concerned with policy, administration issues between the higher echelons of medieval society.
Matthew Paris projects a skeptical tone when discussing the sources he included in the Chronica Majora, and he even goes so far as to explain instances of documentation fraud. There is an instance where the Pope sent a letter to the King, made note of the redeeming or validating quality of a charter because it “had been attested by our own handwriting.” (33 - Matthew Paris AD, 1244). Admittedly, it is not Matthew Paris drawing attention to this concern, but it is mentioned by the author of the letter -- the Pope. This could inform the climate of documents in the year 1244, for they were not the sole, independent conveyors of truth, but they were simply written documents that could be moulded, shaped, manipulated and falsified at the whim of any temperer. A notable instance of documentation fraud occurs in the translation of Tartar letters, and the embellishing of pro-France facts. These pro-France facts falsely encouraged the readers to join the then French King, and offer some level of comfort to Christians who may have found the pro-French attitudes alarming. In short, there is the obvious two-faced, play-both-sides nature to the documents. Along with being aware of the duality of some letters and documents, Matthew Paris is also aware of the nature of documents that allow for ethically sketchy activities. On page 366 of Vol. 2 of Chronica Majora Matthew Paris describes an instance whereby, with aid of a papal documents, “Bernard de Nympha” “unjustly” collects a “large sum of money from the crusaders, for the use of Earl Richard.” According to Matthew Paris, this was more an act of robbery, instead of a lawful enforcement of protocol. Perhaps this is an instance where the reader gains a sense of Matthew’s volatile personality, and his disapproval of certain actions of the authorities; but maybe, and on a deeper level, this showcases Matthew’s awareness in the faults of documents. In short, documents do not align with the moral good however this is not unique to the times of Matthew Paris.
As stated before, The Chronica Majora is a valuable tool for historians because of the amount of primary documents that Matthew Paris weaves into his narrative. However, there is some level of consternation in the historical community centered around the insertion of a document involving the “account of King Henry III’s dispute with the barons and the clergy in 1244.” (213. The ‘Paper Constitution’ Preserved by Matthew Paris). This documents proposes a “series of startling, radical provisions for the control of executive and judicature” (Ibid) and according to historians, the documents placement in the narrative is anachronistic. The actions suggested by the document were not put into place in 1244, as Matthew Paris suggests. Mr. Denholm-Young, argues for the anachronistic nature for some of the material included in Matthew Paris’ Chronica Majora, and is a stark reminder of the nature of all documents -- they must be looked at it with a critical mind.

After examining the chronicles of Matthew Paris, it becomes apparent that he was a man of uncompromising opinions. In Paris’ writings, one gets the sense that nothing was sacred, despite the fact that he himself was a clergy member. More to the point, any topic was fair game, including the papal authorities. Within the 1244 chronicle, Pope Innocent IV was thoroughly lampooned. At the mercy of Paris’ pen, the Holy Father was characterized as a greedy coward, corrupted by evil. The evidence cited by the author is relatively strong, thus justifying his slanderous remarks. These unflattering observations may very well have been true, and to this avail the author injects his own assessments of the pope into the chronicle. Rather than simply record what was reported to have transpired, like a normal chronicle, Paris writes more along the lines of commentary, his own personal commentary. He critiques the pope.

The 1244 chronicle starts with a discussion regarding the schism between the pope and Frederic II, the Holy Roman Emperor. Matthew Paris clearly has a prerogative to utilize inflammatory language, which is one aspect of his commentary. In the first subheading of the chronicle, the title proclaims, “How the pope secretly took to flight”. Discussing the escapades of Innocent IV, the author insinuated that the Holy Father was a coward, avoiding the Emperor’s “expected” anger by running away in the middle of the night. If this assessment was not libel enough, Paris even provided an alternative motive – namely that the pope had fled Rome because he wanted to receive certain tributary gifts waiting for him on the other side of the Alps. Hence, the Holy Roman Empire was thrown into near chaos on account of one man’s fear, or worse yet his vanity.

As the chronicle unfolds, the pope is mentioned in various realms of discussion, including: Emperor Frederic II, taxation of the English clergy, the Scots-Anglo border wars, his hideaway in Genoa, and departure to Lyons. A commonality shared within all of these diverse discussions is the popes alleged greed. When it comes to monetary contributions, the pope possesses an “ever open bosom”. In this particular domain, Matthew Paris is a player rather than merely an observer. In 1244, the pope sent the prelates of England a request for funds, which Paris subsequently replicated into the chronicle. Since Paris is a player in this particular issue, his accounts are more akin to commentary rather than neutral reporting. The author concludes this segment by stating that the pope’s requests were wisely turned down. The reasons for this rejection was because King Henry III’s simultaneous funding request was deemed “more worthy”, while the pope’s request was discredited as “provisions for unknown purposes”.

Although it is shocking to hear a Roman Catholic clergymen speaking in such an advert manner, Matthew Paris attested that the Devil instigated Pope Innocent IV’s avarice. Furthermore, after the (not so) Holy Father dispatched an aggressive clerk to England for the purposes of shakedowns and extortion, Paris referred to the pope as a “cruel authority”. Through his papal moneyman Master Martin, the author contended that the pope sought to enslave the English kingdom. Given that Matthew Paris had such strong opinions regarding the pope, his chronicle reads more like a commentary than anything else. Full of flare and disdain, Paris’ attacks on Pope Innocent IV are far too personal to merely be a disinterested rendition of 1244 events. It is as though the pope was on trial, and Matthew Paris was the prosecution. Within the chronicle, he builds his case.

Kings in One Year in Matthew Paris’ Chronicle

One Year in Matthew Paris’ Chronicle

Overview of Kings in Chronica Majora
Kings are an important part of history for Matthew Paris. As Lewis points out, “since St. Albans owed its very existence and continuing prosperity to royal patronage, [kings] hold a position of paramount importance.” Surprisingly, this act of good will of the crown on which the abbey depended upon did not limit Paris’ exhibition of his own feelings and biases. Paris’ accounts within the Chronica Majora are coloured with criticisms of the King’s policies. “Unlike most monastic chroniclers, whose traditional conceptions of old feudal loyalties left them unprepared to deal with the emerging political integration of monarchies in England and France, [in dealing with kings] Matthew reveals [and maintains] a remarkable sense of English identity and pride, often verging on xenophobia.”

While the chronicles and illustrations frequently express disproval of royal action and policy, Lewis believes that it is a result of a comparative evaluation of the more modern rulers with that of Alexander the Great. Alexander is often the measuring stick with which rulers are held to – he represents a level of heroism that superceded all moral considerations, he was Matthew’s godlike king. “Alexander plays a key role at the head of a long succession of rulers illustrated in the Chronica Majora, beginning with the founder of Britain and reaching into Matthew's own time, when the awesome task of governing Europe fell divided upon the shoulders of Henry III, Louis IX, and Frederick II.”

Henry III
Henry III was named so because when the earlier Henry died, who was originally in third succession to become king, his father was still living. At his succession, Louis of France had begun a war that was perceived as a usurpation. The war that continued, in the portrayal of a crusade, occurred on land and on sea. The sea aspect of the battles will be remembered as being the tale of St. Bartholomew’s Day and Eustace the Monk. The two separate events are merged by Paris in an attempt to clarify the “incoherence and confusion” of these events. The war was basically a taking and keeping of castles. In true Chronica fashion, the descriptions of the French in the war are less than stellar:
Roger Wendover, who was at this time prior of the Benedictine house at Belvoir, remembers with disgust and dismay the ravages of the French troops: And there everything fell into the hands of these robbers, because the soldiers of the French kingdom, being as it were the refuse and scum of that country, left nothing at all untouched, and their poverty and wretchedness were so great that they had not enough bodily clothing to cover their nakedness.”
Paris characteristically maintains the focus on the vengeful xenophobia of the war, particularly turning points which emphasize the French defeat.The peace that concluded the war in 1217 was amicable and depicted as such with the two princes Louis and Henry, beardless and crowned, surrounded by water to represent the Thames Island it was reached on.

Henry III was crowned again in 1220. The ceremony was, as we’re told, properly performed. Events like this fit well with Henry’s love of pomp and celebratory ritual. Henry’s wedding in 1236 to the French Queen’s sister was prime example. The marriage, well quite the extravagant affair, also signified a new alliance with France that would have a profound effect on the rest of Henry’s reign. Paris attended many functions, beginning with the wedding mentioned above, and as a result he was able to provide great details in the Chronica. This is of note as his accounts of future events depict “that … Henry III was well acquainted with him and knew that he was writing a chronicle. Paris' frequent references to meetings and conversations with the king at St. Albans, Westminster, Winchester, and York suggest that he was on good terms with Henry and that the king had some interest in his historical writings.” Yet in spite of this apparent relationship between the two, Paris considered Henry to be “a spiteful caricature” which Lewis suggests could have been derived from his “deep-seated mistrust of all monarchs and his violent disapproval of most governmental actions.” Overall, his subservience to popes and dependency on the advice of the queen’s French relatives demonstrates to Paris his tyrannical, weak-minded nature which leaves him in the darkness of Alexander’s shadow. On occasion we have reason to note revisions which show a softening; however, his disproval remains abound.

Examples include:
1. Henry Ill's first vain attempt to recover lost Angevin lands in France in 1230
a. He foolishly believed he would gain a foothold across the channel so he lead an invasion full of pomp and regalia expecting to be treated as conqueror by merely arriving. As he waited in vein he fell ill and returned home by October.
b. Matthew illustrates this expedition which he believed a fiasco with the return home showing the king alone “in the front of the vessel, his chin aggressively thrust forward in a truculent pose, suggesting something of his pompous and blind determination, while four knights in mail huddle apprehensively behind the mast, and the helmsman steadies their course with a lateral steering oar” While Roger flatly records Henry's return from France without comment, Matthew notes bitterly that the king came back empty-handed, "having wasted an infinite amount of money, and having caused the deaths of innumerable nobles, weakened them with sickness and hunger, or reduced them to extreme poverty.”
2. Henry’s renounced truce with King Louis.
a. On June 8 Henry renounced his truce with King Louis and moved south, but there was no substance or organization to the rebel movement, and the venture came to nothing. While Paris was able to wet his xenophobic palate when, overcome by hunger and thirst due to the wells being stopped and the rivers and springs becoming poisoned, the French troops fell. It wasn’t long until a truce was recommenced.
3. Battles with the Welsh
a. Despite a few minor triumphs between 1240 and 1246, Henry's attempt to impose English control over Wales also ended in failure. Although Paris, following in the footsteps of Gerald of Wales, perceived the Welsh in an appalling light, his pictorial chronicle of truces punctuated by outbursts of guerrilla warfare and treachery is intended to reveal the instability and inherent weakness of both sides.
4. Enguerrand de Coucy
a. Throughout the Chronica Majora Matthew Paris continues to complain of the king favoring the French at the expense of the English barons, seldom missing an opportunity to prove the untrustworthiness and general moral issues of the French over which providential punishment frequently prevailed. Paris takes special satisfaction in seeing a particularly reprehensible individual receive his just desert.
b. In 1244 he blames the deterioration of the friendship between Henry and the king of Scotland on the latter's matrimonial alliance with the daughter of Enguerrand de Coucy who, "like all the French, was known to be the chief, or rather one of the chief, enemies of the king of the English." We end up learning of his unfortunate double death, a sort of karmic retribution.

Conclusion
As I will discuss more in my presentation to the class, Paris represents in his annal for 1244 that royal virtue is a thing of the past. Various kings since the times of Alexander fall into various categories of moral and political ignominy. As Lewis states, “Wendover and Paris approach their own time, the tarnish of familiarity evokes even greater contempt for the reigning monarchs, John and Henry III, while a new species of hero emerges in a small band of courageous barons who rebel against royal greed and injustice.” The romantic views of what should be royal virtue fails to be revealed in modern times, aside form maybe the adversary of popes – Emperor Frederick II. Virtue, for Paris, comes from the refusal to yield to the pope and the brave defence of Britian’s freedom and independence which Henry III cannot achieve due to his weak-minded relations with the French.

Apocalypse Then!

Within the Christian view of the world God was seen as creator of the universe and he controlled when it began, as well as when it ended. This ending of the world is presented in the biblical Book of Revelations, which says that there will be Final Judgement followed by the reign of the Antichrist. It was the common belief amoung Christian at the beginning of the thirteenth century that this End would be coming soon. Thus, many Christians- including Matthew Paris- began to write and create art depicting this Final Judgment or Apocalypse. Many of these verses and sketches are still in existence, and give an interesting window into the minds and lives of this generation of people who truly believed their world was about to come to an end.

The apocalyptic visions were depicted in both written verse, as well as, through rich imagery. These images and texts used a diverse array of symbols and rhetorical and allegorical tactics. They were also very dramatic in form, which shows the author's “desire to present a picture of the conflict between good and evil,” through “ a set of easily visualizable scenes and strongly-drawn characters that because of their imaginative power remain fixed in the reader's mind.” ¹ Each of the scenes depicting the Apocalypse were all commonly structured and scripted with a “threefold pattern of crisis, judgement, and salvation essential to apocalypticism.”² This structure is similar to that of a dramatic piece of theatre, which also always has a crisis, judgement, and usually ends with catharsis. This connection reemphasizes the need to use presentation and imagination to ensure that the apocalyptic message gets ingrained in the reader mind.

Matthew Paris spoke of the coming of the Antichrist on many occasions in his chronicles. For instance, Paris wrote about the destructive actions of the Tartars of 1242-3, and made a connection to these actions with the end of world- "In these times also, on account of the terrible rumors of this kind, the following verses, declaring the coming of Antichrist, were spread about.”³ Many of these rumours were started by the Joachite movement, and spread around England. This movement, led by Abbot Joachim in the late middle ages, was based on Joachim's writings, and his belief that the apocalypse would take place in 1260. Unfortunately, because the Joachim's visions were expressed through either rumours or through his very complex and vague writings this date was debatable. There were people who said it was 1260 and there were some who believed 1250⁴ There are many instances, where Joachim's visions of the coming of the Antichrist were written down in manuscripts, such as an inscription written in a bible owned by the Gilbertine house, which said:

According to the prophet Joachim,

When a thousand two hundred years and six decades

Have passed since the Virgin gave birth,

Then Antichrist shall be born full of the devil.⁵

This verse shows that this person believed that the end was coming in 1260, however, another manuscript commenting on Joachim's visions was found written by Bury St. Edmunds, which is similar to this previous one, but placed the end in 1250.⁶ By all accounts, these examples are only a small number of the written documentation on this subject matter.

Matthew Paris depicts the Apocolypse through both verse (as written above), but also through images. An example of these images is his drawing of the Nativity of Christ. This image depicts the birth of Christ, which for most contemporary people would represent the beginning of a new life- innocent, naive, pure, and full of hope. However, as Suzanne Lewis discusses in The Art of Matthew Paris, that because in the Christian middle ages there was a “closed historical chronology beginning with Creation and moving through clearly defined periods toward the Last Judgment at the end,” this is image is thus depicting the beginning of the end.⁷ This moment of new birth therefore loses that sense of hope and purity, for as Paris writes in the margins, “When twice six hundred years and fifty more. Are gone since blessed Mary's son was born, then Antichrist shall come full of the devil.”⁸ By all accounts, this marginality clearly represents the mindset of most people during this time- that their Earthly lives were about to be terminated and the world will soon be shrouded in darkness as the devil takes full reign of it.

1 Bernard McGinn Visions of the End: Apocalyptic Traditions in the Middle Ages (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 6.

2 McGinn, 6.

3 As quoted in Suzanne Lewis The Art of Matthew Paris (Berkley: University of California Press, 1987), 103.

4 McGinn, 158-9.

5 As quoted in Lewis., 104.

6 As quoted in Lewis., 104.

7 Lewis, The Art of Matthew Paris, 102.

8 As quoted in Lewis., 102.

Matthew Paris' Mappa Mundi in Contrast

When examining the work of Matthew Paris, and reading The Art of Matthew Paris by Suzanne Lewis, there were several aspects of both Paris’ work and Lewis’ analysis that stuck out in my mind. Firstly, as Lewis notes that the individual figures inserted into the margins of the work created by Roger vary widely in style and treatment depending on the context. These figures are cause for great interest as they are very detailed, colourful and at times very accurate to the descriptions given in the text. The fact that Matthew extended his copious collection of corroborative evidence to the making of precise pictorial replicas of important images indicates to me that he is meticulous when it comes to illustrating the history and stories within the manuscript to the best of his ability. For me, it appears that Matthew compiled and illustrated these books they were to centre on England and Christendom. As Lewis notes, both his textual and visual addenda are more obviously motivated by strong personal loyalties and prejudices, sometimes leading him to distort or undermine Roger’s original intention.

Many of the figures represented in the maps and margins of the works by Paris can be considered ‘normal’ people who are either well known, or noteworthy. Though Matthew inserts images representative of cities and kings (ex. The boar of Cornwall), he does not provide undue imagery of mythological, imaginative or unknown ‘things’ as representation of people. Unlike the mappa mundi from Hereford Cathedral (also seen in the video clip), Paris’ maps as well as his marginalia lack many of these mythological characters and artistic embellishment. Why is this? Why would Paris spend so much time illustrating the text with images, and not his maps? I believe that Paris drew these maps not to illustrate the imaginative, but rather the temporal world of man.

Much of the maps that Paris drew that survive today only show cities, towns, and villages. Though he does embellish them more than other cartographers from the time do, the maps themselves have a distinct absence of nature to their character. The maps do include some aspects from the natural world, such as rivers and seas; little else is given (like trees, mountains, lakes, etc.)

This lack of the natural may be due to space constraints, as he was writing and drawing these images to be included within a book, rather than a map itself, it is odd that his embellishment is in severe withdrawal compared to many of his marginalia. This is unclear why from both examining Paris’ work, and from Lewis herself.

Another interesting point to make about Paris’ maps is the space between cities. This space is treated negatively (empty and blank), rather than full of detail, indicating an uneasy relationship that Paris seems to have had with the non-human, natural world that would have been found outside of major cities that Paris illustrates. It is unclear why there is such a disconnect between images on maps like the Hereford mappa mundi which comes from the same time period of Paris’ own lifetime, and his own works. Was this only to reflect what he knew? Or was it to emphasize different things than the Hereford map, such as key centres for pilgrims or important areas of Christendom.