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 Alexander is often the measuring stick with which rulers are held to – he represents a level of heroism that superceded all moral considerations, he was Matthew’s godlike king.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.
Medieval Chroniclers -- A blog for the use of participants in Nipissing University's HIST 5216
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
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.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
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.
Birds in the Art of Matthew Paris
When I first searched “Matthew Paris” into ARTstor the results contained numerous amounts of birds; most of which contained drawings of birds. This raised a number of questions in my mind, mainly ones concerning the validity in their place in his art. A great variety of the images found showcased birds in the marginalia, and since the written message of the page was not included in the image, it is very difficult to locate a direct meaning of the birds in the margins. As noted by Susan Lewis in The Art of Matthew Paris, the marginal drawings of Matthew Paris have some meaning.
Consider points 3 - 5 as outlined by Susan Lewis. (Lewis here is concerned with marginalia, and it’s skewing of meaning by Matthew Paris in the works of Roger of Wendover.
In most cases, however, where Paris's addition alters Wendover's original entry, the marginal illustration clearly expresses the change in meaning or emphasis, as we saw in the elaborate drawing of the sea fight off Sandwich (PI. I).
Matthew often introduced entirely new and unrelated subjects into the earlier part of the chronicle and drew the reader's attention to his novel material by means of his marginal illustrations.
In two isolated cases, Matthew introduced marginal illustrations for which no text reference is given either in Roger's original entry or in an addendum by Matthew, although a textual basis may be found elsewhere in the Chronica Majora or in the Historia Anglorum, as we shall see for the drawings of the martyrdom of St. Al-ban (PI. VIII) and the device on the Templars' seal (Fig. 47).
Assuming the birds that frequent the art of Matthew Paris are not just the result of a bizarre fascination, but the result of carefully placed suggested imagery or symbols, it is important to recognize what each symbol is meant to represent.
Considering the birds use symbols in Christian art sheds some light on their meaning.
Stork
Many birds, such as the stork, announce the coming of spring and so are symbols of the Annunciation. As such, storks also represent Mary’s qualities of piety and chastity. Other sources claim the stork represents happiness and joy since the bird’s feeding on snakes can be viewed as a positive force that helps eradicate our evil instincts.
Goldfinch
Because they eat thistles and thorns, goldfinches are a symbol of Christ’s Passion. Raphael’s painting, “Madonna of the Goldfinch,” clearly shows young Jesus lovingly stroking a goldfinch.
Peacock
The peacock has several meanings. Because of a legend that its flesh does not decay, the peacock represents immortality and resurrection. Because of the “eyes” in its tail, it symbolizes the Church. Because of its habit of strutting, it is said to stand for vanity and pride. The peacock is seen here in Fra Filippo Lippi’s “Adoration of the Magi.”
Eagle
This bird is a symbol of Christ and His Divine nature. Because of the eagle’s powerful strength and its penetrating sight – as it soars above the earth observing even the smallest objects below – it may be a symbol of the Lord's omniscience and ever-watchful care.
Sparrow
The sparrow symbolizes God’s concern for the most insignificant living things. In the same way God loves and watches over the sparrow, he knows each person is unique and to be treasured and consequently surely watches over humans.
Dove
The dove with its gentle loving nature represents the presence of the Holy Spirit and the virtues of peace, meekness, and purity. It is among birds what the lamb is among animals. This bird is reminiscent of Noah’s dove that brought back the olive branch to show the waters had receded and God had made his peace with humanity.
(As per: Bailey, Colin J. The Art Quiz Book: 2000+ Questions on Painters and Paintings. Station Press: Scotland, 1995.)
Consider the following symbols when looking at the pictures in my presentation!
Consider points 3 - 5 as outlined by Susan Lewis. (Lewis here is concerned with marginalia, and it’s skewing of meaning by Matthew Paris in the works of Roger of Wendover.
In most cases, however, where Paris's addition alters Wendover's original entry, the marginal illustration clearly expresses the change in meaning or emphasis, as we saw in the elaborate drawing of the sea fight off Sandwich (PI. I).
Matthew often introduced entirely new and unrelated subjects into the earlier part of the chronicle and drew the reader's attention to his novel material by means of his marginal illustrations.
In two isolated cases, Matthew introduced marginal illustrations for which no text reference is given either in Roger's original entry or in an addendum by Matthew, although a textual basis may be found elsewhere in the Chronica Majora or in the Historia Anglorum, as we shall see for the drawings of the martyrdom of St. Al-ban (PI. VIII) and the device on the Templars' seal (Fig. 47).
Assuming the birds that frequent the art of Matthew Paris are not just the result of a bizarre fascination, but the result of carefully placed suggested imagery or symbols, it is important to recognize what each symbol is meant to represent.
Considering the birds use symbols in Christian art sheds some light on their meaning.
Stork
Many birds, such as the stork, announce the coming of spring and so are symbols of the Annunciation. As such, storks also represent Mary’s qualities of piety and chastity. Other sources claim the stork represents happiness and joy since the bird’s feeding on snakes can be viewed as a positive force that helps eradicate our evil instincts.
Goldfinch
Because they eat thistles and thorns, goldfinches are a symbol of Christ’s Passion. Raphael’s painting, “Madonna of the Goldfinch,” clearly shows young Jesus lovingly stroking a goldfinch.
Peacock
The peacock has several meanings. Because of a legend that its flesh does not decay, the peacock represents immortality and resurrection. Because of the “eyes” in its tail, it symbolizes the Church. Because of its habit of strutting, it is said to stand for vanity and pride. The peacock is seen here in Fra Filippo Lippi’s “Adoration of the Magi.”
Eagle
This bird is a symbol of Christ and His Divine nature. Because of the eagle’s powerful strength and its penetrating sight – as it soars above the earth observing even the smallest objects below – it may be a symbol of the Lord's omniscience and ever-watchful care.
Sparrow
The sparrow symbolizes God’s concern for the most insignificant living things. In the same way God loves and watches over the sparrow, he knows each person is unique and to be treasured and consequently surely watches over humans.
Dove
The dove with its gentle loving nature represents the presence of the Holy Spirit and the virtues of peace, meekness, and purity. It is among birds what the lamb is among animals. This bird is reminiscent of Noah’s dove that brought back the olive branch to show the waters had receded and God had made his peace with humanity.
(As per: Bailey, Colin J. The Art Quiz Book: 2000+ Questions on Painters and Paintings. Station Press: Scotland, 1995.)
Consider the following symbols when looking at the pictures in my presentation!
Matthew Paris' Itinerary and Imaginary Pilgrimages
There are many debates over what the purpose of Matthew Paris' itinerary map was used for. One major argument on the reason for Paris to create his itinerary was to give his fellow cloistered monks a chance to attend pilgrimages to holy places that they could not physically go on. The itinerary illustrates the route that a person on pilgrimage would take from London to Rome. This is not a traditional map, but uses graphics and illustrations in a vertical justification to guide the “pilgrims” through the various towns and landwards along the way. In actuality this itinerary was not meant to act a a map for a physical journey. It was essentially a tool for monks in St. Albans to use for imagined pilgrimages to Rome. This illustrated itinerary helped the cloistered monastic communities to use their hearts and not the their feet to makes pilgrimages. Each illustration allowed them to visualize each location along the route. The monks were ultimately able to achieve their goal of “Attaining vision of God, moving the soul from this world to the Heavens begin with the texts (and images) inscribed in the physical and material world of the manuscript page.”1
The organization of the itinerary is in a vertical or “strip-map” justification. This allows for the paths from London and Italy to be easily visible. Each page was organized into two columns, and as Suzanne Lewis describes they are, separated by bands lightly tinted in blue, pink, pale rose, and green, and each segment is read from the lower left corner from bottom to top. This wide range of colours appears to be very common in Paris' illustrations, especially blue. One reason for such colourful maps could be to help differentiate between different locales, help divide regions, or to help guide the reader along a specific path. Additionally, the distance between each locale is depicted on a vertical line and for the most part is a day's journey (jurnee).2 Moreover, the representation of the various towns and villages along the journey were visible evident, for as explained by Lewis, “(e)ach town is captioned and marked by an architectural vignette comprising crenellated walls, towers, and churches.”3 The importance of these visual representations are that they give the monks a very specific image in order to fully conceptualize their pilgrimage with as much detail as possible.
Furthermore, the itinerary, along with Paris' other maps present their readers with locales that many not be to scale or actually exist, but as Lewis argues, “it expresses a typical medieval conception of the map's real function...to emphasize the most interesting or significant localities.”4 This organizational structure of the cities and roads, makes them appear to “occupy an ambiguous space, at once charged with the concreteness of their labels and limited topography and abstracted from their surrounding geogra-phy by their ambivalent relationship to their frames.”5 Thus, it can be argued that because the monks were not actually completing this pilgrimage in reality, they were most concerned with particular locales being represented within the itinerary, and less on having them presented on a precise and accurate scale or be on a direct path to their final destination.
Additionally, the way in which Paris organizes and presents his itinerary to his audience is representative to his view of history, which is very teleologic. It is Paris' belief (along with other Catholics of this time) that they are working within a “Divine Plan” being instructed by God. This explains why all of his maps and geography are pointing towards regions of great religious importance and are based around religious pilgrimages. These places are holy sites, which may contain various important relics that would familiar to the Benedictine monks who would go on this “pilgrimage.”
Overall Paris' itinerary, presents his audience with a very dynamic and interactive representation of a specific journey, but also symbolizes their life journey as Catholics. Essentially, this maps keep his audience in motion. It keeps them constantly moving forward toward their final destination, which in this case is a real holy city. However, this can figuratively correlate with both their personal “final destination” of heaven, or the Catholic “final destination” as told in the Book of Revelations.
1 Daniel K. Connolly, "Imagined Pilgrimage in the Itinerary Maps of Matthew Paris," The Art Bulletin 81, no. 4 (1999): pp., 599.
2 Suzanne Lewis The Art of Matthew Paris (Berkley: University of California Press, 1987), 323.
3 Lewis, 323.
4 Lewis, 322.
5 Connolly, 606.
Remind me in class to return your book...I have it with me
Matthew Paris
...by Jordan Crosby
-Was a Benedictine Monk and English Chronicler who lived from 1200 to 1259 A.D. He was based at St. Albans Abbey in Hertfordshire, which he joined in 1217, and thereafter became the Abbey’s official recorder of events. His history was a rather unique piece of art, due to the many illustrations he made throughout his works.
-His “Chronica Majora” has been seen as a major revision of the works of Roger Wendover’s “Flowers of History , whom Paris may have served as an assistant to for a period of time. Following Wendover’s death, Matthew Paris took it upon himself to make many additions and changes to Roger’s part of the chronicle (56), which is a prelude to my thesis for this assignment.
-The argument I will be trying to make is that through his works and his maps, Matthew of Paris distorts many of Roger’s original intentions in favour of his own personal loyalties and prejudices which includes England, St. Albans, and the role of prophecies. At the same time, he shows xenophobic and intolerant attitudes to those with different ideologies or race. Ultimately he believes divine justice will punish those wrongdoers who have beliefs that differ from his own.
-The additions and changes to Wendover’s works, as well as the penchant for violence is first told through the events on St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1217. Along with a gory picture depicting the battle, Matthew gives a text with a radically different interpretation about the French defeat under Eustace “the Monk”. (59) Wendover originally stated that the French fleet was entrusted to Eustace, who had the task of conducting it safely to London to give to Louis, in an attempt to usurp the throne from young Henry III (59). While crossing the Channel, they engaged the English. (59) While they both discussed the defeat and decapitation of Eustace, Wendover’s report gave credit to Philip de Aubeney as the hero, while Matthew did not even mention him at all (60). Rather Paris gave credit to his own personal friend Hubert de Burgh, (whom Roger didn’t even mention) and was using his own loyalties to his friend in his works. Matthew Paris also triumphantly declares his xenophobic outburst of hatred towards the French, and relishes in Eustace’s death, seeing it as divine justice, in which the guilty (French) are punished, while the virtuous (English), like his friend Hubert, are rewarded. (61).
-Hubert’s ascension in Paris’ works can be attributed to his love of prophecy. He details how the Lord came to Hubert in a deep sleep carrying the cross telling him to keep an eye out for images he may run into shortly thereafter. The next day Hubert sees a priest fleeing with a cross, crying to the Lord for help. Hubert got off his horse, and “under the guidance of that priest, he liberated his country”. (85). This is supposed to show how God rewards virtue, and Paris takes the time to put his friend in the best light, as a man favoured by a divine vision (85).
-Matthew of Paris was also fascinated with Merlin and the use of prophecies. What fascinates Matthew Paris with Merlin’s prophecies is that it espouses the view of the providential destiny of England revealed through predictions, the moral dilemma of good and bad rulers, and foreign oppression of the English people. (95). The pictures of Merlin suggest that he is Christlike and divine in origins, which he uses in his interpretation of him. While red and white dragons had symbolized the Saxons and Britons in Roger’s work, Matthew put some additional feedback into it, interpreting the boar of Cornwall as King Arthur. He thus sees the fulfillment of Merlin’s prophecy in the future destiny of England, which would be ruled by a monarch, why was generous and good (96). Merlin thus represents what England ought to be, rather than what it currently is (97).
-While Matthew is supporting figures he believes to be consistent with his morals and beliefs, he attacks those that do not conform to such standards, such as the prophet Mohammed. Medieval reader who read the works of Mohammed were shocked by the vivid details of the prophet’s sexual life, and were appalled by him. This led many people, including Matthew Paris, to believe that his claims about having revelations from God, were totally false. Standing in stark contrast to his illustrations of Merlin as divine, Paris visually focuses on Mohammed’s death, as deserved punishment for the life he led (100). The picture shows Mohammed standing with a scroll with additional text by Paris originally written by Roger. Focus is only given to Matthew’s words however. 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. Just like the previous story of St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1217, he uses an extraordinary use of violence to conform to the moral message he is trying to get across.
-Matthew of Paris believed that historical events could be known through prophetic revelations. A last example of his prejudices and loyalties lies in the martyrdom of St. Alban. The story of his death is “pure interpolation” (107), as he is adding his own stories to Roger’s text. Nowhere in Roger’s text does he mention anything about St.Alban’s martyrdom, but 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 read removed, the executioner’s eyes fall out (107). Another grisly, gruesome tale meant to depict a message of punishment to those who persecute his beliefs, and the ability of saints to suspend the laws of nature. (107) The main message however is that “we are obliged to see evil dead generating its own retribution” (109).
-This story allowed Britain to claim its own martyr, but Matthew’s illustration was problematic because it skipped chronological order to bring it into juxtaposition with King Offa’s discovery of the relics (110). Offa was claimed by Paris to have found the relics in 793, which flowed all the benefits of the Benedictine monastery, which was found on the grave of St. Alban (111). The illustration 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 illustrations to punish those who disagreed or attacked St. Albans and the relics, as the case with Fawkes de Breave. He had a crime against St. Albans and the prophecies, and Matthew put new crimes (murdering his cook) and new interpretations into his crimes. He eventually showed a picture of Fawkes with a poisoned fish in his mouth, which served St. Alban’s triumph over this Norman foe (116-9). Therefore, his illustrations, served his personal loyalties to St. Albans, and attacked those claims who disagreed with him which included Fawkes, but also the papacy, as he had a negative opinion of the pope’s Innocent III and Lateran IV.
-Matthew’s maps are a testament, due to the fact that maps were a rarity at the time. Much like his writings, in which he would distort facts in favour of his preconceived notions, he would do the same in his maps. He would believe that the world was oval, circular, and at times rectangular (322). His maps, would also conform to his loyalties and prejudices, which was seen in one of his maps where he singled out two churches that were very similar to his St. Albans churches, both which were very rich and privelaged (333).
-From reading Matthew’s readings, I get a picture that he is both very loyal and prejudiced, in that he has absolute faith in what he believes in, while abhorring ideas that are not. While this is not a new thing, he unabashedly puts in material which other people have not discussed or acknowledged as fact, in order to present his worldview as being truthful. I like his absolute strong nationalism, and his maps, in that despite his prejudices at times, tried to make it more truthful by actually record the world he saw around him, and getting firsthand accounts. He is very much aware of his surroundings, and this he should be celebrated for, but he should also be questioned for his prejudices as it is hard to discover what he is relaying and what he is inventing.
...by Jordan Crosby
-Was a Benedictine Monk and English Chronicler who lived from 1200 to 1259 A.D. He was based at St. Albans Abbey in Hertfordshire, which he joined in 1217, and thereafter became the Abbey’s official recorder of events. His history was a rather unique piece of art, due to the many illustrations he made throughout his works.
-His “Chronica Majora” has been seen as a major revision of the works of Roger Wendover’s “Flowers of History , whom Paris may have served as an assistant to for a period of time. Following Wendover’s death, Matthew Paris took it upon himself to make many additions and changes to Roger’s part of the chronicle (56), which is a prelude to my thesis for this assignment.
-The argument I will be trying to make is that through his works and his maps, Matthew of Paris distorts many of Roger’s original intentions in favour of his own personal loyalties and prejudices which includes England, St. Albans, and the role of prophecies. At the same time, he shows xenophobic and intolerant attitudes to those with different ideologies or race. Ultimately he believes divine justice will punish those wrongdoers who have beliefs that differ from his own.
-The additions and changes to Wendover’s works, as well as the penchant for violence is first told through the events on St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1217. Along with a gory picture depicting the battle, Matthew gives a text with a radically different interpretation about the French defeat under Eustace “the Monk”. (59) Wendover originally stated that the French fleet was entrusted to Eustace, who had the task of conducting it safely to London to give to Louis, in an attempt to usurp the throne from young Henry III (59). While crossing the Channel, they engaged the English. (59) While they both discussed the defeat and decapitation of Eustace, Wendover’s report gave credit to Philip de Aubeney as the hero, while Matthew did not even mention him at all (60). Rather Paris gave credit to his own personal friend Hubert de Burgh, (whom Roger didn’t even mention) and was using his own loyalties to his friend in his works. Matthew Paris also triumphantly declares his xenophobic outburst of hatred towards the French, and relishes in Eustace’s death, seeing it as divine justice, in which the guilty (French) are punished, while the virtuous (English), like his friend Hubert, are rewarded. (61).
-Hubert’s ascension in Paris’ works can be attributed to his love of prophecy. He details how the Lord came to Hubert in a deep sleep carrying the cross telling him to keep an eye out for images he may run into shortly thereafter. The next day Hubert sees a priest fleeing with a cross, crying to the Lord for help. Hubert got off his horse, and “under the guidance of that priest, he liberated his country”. (85). This is supposed to show how God rewards virtue, and Paris takes the time to put his friend in the best light, as a man favoured by a divine vision (85).
-Matthew of Paris was also fascinated with Merlin and the use of prophecies. What fascinates Matthew Paris with Merlin’s prophecies is that it espouses the view of the providential destiny of England revealed through predictions, the moral dilemma of good and bad rulers, and foreign oppression of the English people. (95). The pictures of Merlin suggest that he is Christlike and divine in origins, which he uses in his interpretation of him. While red and white dragons had symbolized the Saxons and Britons in Roger’s work, Matthew put some additional feedback into it, interpreting the boar of Cornwall as King Arthur. He thus sees the fulfillment of Merlin’s prophecy in the future destiny of England, which would be ruled by a monarch, why was generous and good (96). Merlin thus represents what England ought to be, rather than what it currently is (97).
-While Matthew is supporting figures he believes to be consistent with his morals and beliefs, he attacks those that do not conform to such standards, such as the prophet Mohammed. Medieval reader who read the works of Mohammed were shocked by the vivid details of the prophet’s sexual life, and were appalled by him. This led many people, including Matthew Paris, to believe that his claims about having revelations from God, were totally false. Standing in stark contrast to his illustrations of Merlin as divine, Paris visually focuses on Mohammed’s death, as deserved punishment for the life he led (100). The picture shows Mohammed standing with a scroll with additional text by Paris originally written by Roger. Focus is only given to Matthew’s words however. 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. Just like the previous story of St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1217, he uses an extraordinary use of violence to conform to the moral message he is trying to get across.
-Matthew of Paris believed that historical events could be known through prophetic revelations. A last example of his prejudices and loyalties lies in the martyrdom of St. Alban. The story of his death is “pure interpolation” (107), as he is adding his own stories to Roger’s text. Nowhere in Roger’s text does he mention anything about St.Alban’s martyrdom, but 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 read removed, the executioner’s eyes fall out (107). Another grisly, gruesome tale meant to depict a message of punishment to those who persecute his beliefs, and the ability of saints to suspend the laws of nature. (107) The main message however is that “we are obliged to see evil dead generating its own retribution” (109).
-This story allowed Britain to claim its own martyr, but Matthew’s illustration was problematic because it skipped chronological order to bring it into juxtaposition with King Offa’s discovery of the relics (110). Offa was claimed by Paris to have found the relics in 793, which flowed all the benefits of the Benedictine monastery, which was found on the grave of St. Alban (111). The illustration 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 illustrations to punish those who disagreed or attacked St. Albans and the relics, as the case with Fawkes de Breave. He had a crime against St. Albans and the prophecies, and Matthew put new crimes (murdering his cook) and new interpretations into his crimes. He eventually showed a picture of Fawkes with a poisoned fish in his mouth, which served St. Alban’s triumph over this Norman foe (116-9). Therefore, his illustrations, served his personal loyalties to St. Albans, and attacked those claims who disagreed with him which included Fawkes, but also the papacy, as he had a negative opinion of the pope’s Innocent III and Lateran IV.
-Matthew’s maps are a testament, due to the fact that maps were a rarity at the time. Much like his writings, in which he would distort facts in favour of his preconceived notions, he would do the same in his maps. He would believe that the world was oval, circular, and at times rectangular (322). His maps, would also conform to his loyalties and prejudices, which was seen in one of his maps where he singled out two churches that were very similar to his St. Albans churches, both which were very rich and privelaged (333).
-From reading Matthew’s readings, I get a picture that he is both very loyal and prejudiced, in that he has absolute faith in what he believes in, while abhorring ideas that are not. While this is not a new thing, he unabashedly puts in material which other people have not discussed or acknowledged as fact, in order to present his worldview as being truthful. I like his absolute strong nationalism, and his maps, in that despite his prejudices at times, tried to make it more truthful by actually record the world he saw around him, and getting firsthand accounts. He is very much aware of his surroundings, and this he should be celebrated for, but he should also be questioned for his prejudices as it is hard to discover what he is relaying and what he is inventing.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Matthew Paris, Benedictine Superstar
Matthew Paris is an acclaimed thirteenth century Benedictine monk. Paris’ fame as a writer and artist derives from his work in the Chronica Majora where “fact and fiction, reality and imagination, merge in a uniquely conceived visual and textual drama.” (2) Suzanne Lewis alludes that Paris assumed his duties as historian at St. Albans shortly after the death of Roger Wendover and that it is from this that the lasting character of the Chronica was borne. Upon taking over Wendover’s work, Paris began editing and making what he believed to be “improvements” to the text. (56) Most of the improvements were of a stylistic nature; including the marginalia – illustrations and text in which Paris “inject[ed] himself into Wendover’s work.”(56) Paris’ additions to the text, and apparent desire to inject himself within Wendover’s text, are represented by the quantity of drawings that Paris included: “Of the 130 drawings in the Corpus Christi manuscripts, 78 appear in Wendover’s text, and almost a third of these represent Matthew’s additions, not Roger’s text.” (58) Furthermore, the majority of these additions also occurred in the telling of events during Paris’ own lifetime (1215 and 1235). (58)
From the illustrations and marginalia that Paris provides one can begin to deduce his conception of history. Lewis presents Paris’ version of history as a series of coincidental relationships in the unfolding of a divine plan through the course of human events. (92) Much of Paris’ history rests on prophecy as a framework – “divinely revealed knowledge of matters past, present and future, lying beyond the scope of our observation.” (92) The history that Paris provides us with is, as a result, filled with personal judgments and biases resulting of his own historical reality. Imagery that he provides, therefore, reflects his ideals rather than fact where “history [acts] as a mirror of moral truth.” (133)
Lewis presents the sea fight in 1217 (MS16,f52) as a “quintessential example of the bold action, violence, and pageantry for which Matthew Paris is best known.” (59) Along with the illustration provided by Paris is a revised account of the “defeat of the French fleet under the command of Eustace…’the Monk.’”(59) The illustration presents elements which are said to derive from both accounts of the naval battle.
Wendover’s account: On St. Bartholomew’s Day, Eustace the Monk was entrusted to lead the French fleet and deliver it to Louis in an attempt to “usurp the throne from young Henry III.” (59) En route, they encountered an English fleet and in spite of being outnumbered engaged them in battle. The English slaughtered their opponents – blinding them with hot lime-dust – and forcing the French to suffer a quick defeat. (59) Many French threw themselves overboard, others (including the traitorous Eustace) were held prisoner. (60) After realizing this current state, Eustace offered compensation for his freedom, and in return he was decapitated. (60)
The image does include much of the elements of Wendover’s account: the hurling of lime-dust via catapult and bows, slaughter by lances and swords, and even the French jumping to avoid the confrontation. (60)
Paris’ account: “[The English] eagerly rushed on the enemy; as soon as they reached the vessels of their adversaries, they threw grappling irons and made them fast to their own ships, and boarding them with their axes… the English then attacked them.”(60)
These details are also present in the illustration. Therefore, the illustration provides a unique area where the two accounts come to life for the reader. In the far right you notice the pirate Eustace pleading for his life while a sword is drawn showing that the end is near. (60) Lewis notes that another Frenchman, potentially signaling that Paris hadn’t determined which caricature would be Eustace, is holding the sum of money that Eustace offered in Wendover’s account. Also unique to Matthew’s account is the inclusion of bishops who come out to meet the English, particularly his friend Hubert, declaring absolution for those who fought for England. (61) Many of Matthew’s biases are revealed: victory over the foreign oppression of the English people (94), the divine justice of Eustace’s murder where in the end the good English are rewarded and the evil foreigners are punished. (61) Lewis also draws attention to the fact that Hubert is included in Matthew’s account but is nowhere mentioned by Roger – an act to demonstrate his “courage and loyalty.” (61)
The inclusion of maps in Paris’ history is telling of his attention to detail. Paris’ inclusion of maps allow readers a reference to otherwise abstract spatial dimensions in the annalistic chronology. (322) The maps were not always accurate, largely due to the different understanding of the function of a map – scale was not meant to be a spatial concept but rather a scale of prominence. (322) Lewis places a great deal of respect in Paris’ maps due to the fact that it appears as though they are original works rather than replications as no two are alike. (321)
Without having read a great deal of Paris’ history, I would presume through investigating some of his illustrations that they carry the same artistic appeal coloured by his belief in “human actions unfolding as disaster, oppression, and discord against a static set of divinely inspired moral imperatives.”(134) I would expect a continuation of the positive English characters and the dastardly foreigners who attempt to overthrow them. His personal biases, national or religious, seem to play into his understandings of the world around him and undoubtedly are contributing factors to his ability to remain a well known historian to this day. Medieval history, while not always grounded in the most scientific research, is a great reflection of the historical context. Paris’ attention to detail and inclusion of documentary evidence is impressive. His inclusion of “letters, charters, papal bulls, and other archival material” present an exciting and (in some instances) objective history that both entertains and educates. (71)
From the illustrations and marginalia that Paris provides one can begin to deduce his conception of history. Lewis presents Paris’ version of history as a series of coincidental relationships in the unfolding of a divine plan through the course of human events. (92) Much of Paris’ history rests on prophecy as a framework – “divinely revealed knowledge of matters past, present and future, lying beyond the scope of our observation.” (92) The history that Paris provides us with is, as a result, filled with personal judgments and biases resulting of his own historical reality. Imagery that he provides, therefore, reflects his ideals rather than fact where “history [acts] as a mirror of moral truth.” (133)
Lewis presents the sea fight in 1217 (MS16,f52) as a “quintessential example of the bold action, violence, and pageantry for which Matthew Paris is best known.” (59) Along with the illustration provided by Paris is a revised account of the “defeat of the French fleet under the command of Eustace…’the Monk.’”(59) The illustration presents elements which are said to derive from both accounts of the naval battle.
Wendover’s account: On St. Bartholomew’s Day, Eustace the Monk was entrusted to lead the French fleet and deliver it to Louis in an attempt to “usurp the throne from young Henry III.” (59) En route, they encountered an English fleet and in spite of being outnumbered engaged them in battle. The English slaughtered their opponents – blinding them with hot lime-dust – and forcing the French to suffer a quick defeat. (59) Many French threw themselves overboard, others (including the traitorous Eustace) were held prisoner. (60) After realizing this current state, Eustace offered compensation for his freedom, and in return he was decapitated. (60)
The image does include much of the elements of Wendover’s account: the hurling of lime-dust via catapult and bows, slaughter by lances and swords, and even the French jumping to avoid the confrontation. (60)
Paris’ account: “[The English] eagerly rushed on the enemy; as soon as they reached the vessels of their adversaries, they threw grappling irons and made them fast to their own ships, and boarding them with their axes… the English then attacked them.”(60)
These details are also present in the illustration. Therefore, the illustration provides a unique area where the two accounts come to life for the reader. In the far right you notice the pirate Eustace pleading for his life while a sword is drawn showing that the end is near. (60) Lewis notes that another Frenchman, potentially signaling that Paris hadn’t determined which caricature would be Eustace, is holding the sum of money that Eustace offered in Wendover’s account. Also unique to Matthew’s account is the inclusion of bishops who come out to meet the English, particularly his friend Hubert, declaring absolution for those who fought for England. (61) Many of Matthew’s biases are revealed: victory over the foreign oppression of the English people (94), the divine justice of Eustace’s murder where in the end the good English are rewarded and the evil foreigners are punished. (61) Lewis also draws attention to the fact that Hubert is included in Matthew’s account but is nowhere mentioned by Roger – an act to demonstrate his “courage and loyalty.” (61)
The inclusion of maps in Paris’ history is telling of his attention to detail. Paris’ inclusion of maps allow readers a reference to otherwise abstract spatial dimensions in the annalistic chronology. (322) The maps were not always accurate, largely due to the different understanding of the function of a map – scale was not meant to be a spatial concept but rather a scale of prominence. (322) Lewis places a great deal of respect in Paris’ maps due to the fact that it appears as though they are original works rather than replications as no two are alike. (321)
Without having read a great deal of Paris’ history, I would presume through investigating some of his illustrations that they carry the same artistic appeal coloured by his belief in “human actions unfolding as disaster, oppression, and discord against a static set of divinely inspired moral imperatives.”(134) I would expect a continuation of the positive English characters and the dastardly foreigners who attempt to overthrow them. His personal biases, national or religious, seem to play into his understandings of the world around him and undoubtedly are contributing factors to his ability to remain a well known historian to this day. Medieval history, while not always grounded in the most scientific research, is a great reflection of the historical context. Paris’ attention to detail and inclusion of documentary evidence is impressive. His inclusion of “letters, charters, papal bulls, and other archival material” present an exciting and (in some instances) objective history that both entertains and educates. (71)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)