Hi everyone!
This week in tutorial we will be concentrating on educational developments during the twelfth century, and in particular the rise of the university and specialized training and education. I am really excited about this week's tutorial as the history of education in the twelfth century is one of the focuses of my own research and it was actually through reading Abelard's Historia Calamitatum and the subsequent letters he exchanged with Heloise that I fell in love with the twelfth century and decided to pursue further study in medieval history.
Peter Abelard, as you may have noticed from his autobiography, the Historia Calamitatum(History of my Calamities), was a very controversial figure in the twelfth century. He continues to be a controversial figure in scholarship today. For some (both in the twelfth century and now) he is a genius - a prince of dialectic (logic) and theology, and a charismatic teacher and mentor. For others he's an arrogant, irritating, over-rated, puffed-up trouble-maker. Whichever way you react to Abelard there is no doubt that he was an impacting and influential personality and both his dramatic personal life, and his talent for intellectual enquiry, have ensured that he continues to intrigue medieval historians to this day. We are fortunate that Professor Constant Mews teaches and works at Monash as he is one of the world-renowned leading experts on the writings of Abelard and Heloise. As famous in the field perhaps as Abelard and Heloise in their day were, but perhaps not so controversial!
For this week I encourage you all to look over the tutorial discussion questions for this week, especially questions one and two, as well as think about the following.....
1) How does Abelard present himself in the Historia Calamitatum? Why does he present himself in such a way?
2) Was he really like the person he presents himself to be in the Historia Calamitatum? Would you like to be his student? His teacher?
3) Why is he so important in the history of education and intellectual thought?
4) What two major sins of his is Abelard keen to highlight in the Historia Calamitatum? How has he been punished for them? Why is he keen to tell us about them?
 |
| A depiction of Abelard and Heloise from a medieval manuscript |
 |
| A later artistic impression of Abelard and Heloise |
As always please post your comments, reflections, and questions below!
.........
What about Heloise I hear some of you say? It is true that we are only introduced to her briefly in this week's readings. She was a very remarkable woman and a talented intellectual in her own right. Scholars now see her as far more than Abelard's pupil. They are now beginning to realize that she actually was more of his intellectual partner and potentially influenced his own thought and philosophy a great deal. I've attached a link here to the first letter Heloise wrote to Abelard after she read the Historia Calamitatum. It is fascinating to understand her perspective on their lives together. This translation also includes a brief introduction to the scholarly controversy that has raged for decades over whether or not in fact she wrote her letters. Most scholars agree now that she did but there are still a few deniers out there!
What elements of the Historia Calamitatum does she disagree with? Why?
This translation is really old fashioned but it hopefully gives you a taste of Heloise's writing! For anyone interested in reading their entire correspondence I recommend the following translations:
Radice, Betty (trans). The Letters of Abelard and Heloise, Penguin Books: London, 1974.
McLauglin, Mary and Bonnie Wheeler (ed. and trans.). The Letters of Heloise and Abelard: A Translation of their Collected Correspondence and Related Writings, Palgrave Macmillon: New York, 2009.
And for a more controversial take on their correspondence.....
Mews, Constant J. The Lost Love Letters of Heloise and Abelard: Perceptions of Dialogue in Twelfth-Century France, Palgrave: New York, 2001.
Heloise is my personal hero so I do hope some of you are able to glance over her letter for this week!
 |
| Another absolutely over the top imagining of Heloise and Abelard courtesy of the 19th century! |
.....
And, as always, just for fun......
For anyone really really interested in understanding more about Heloise, her thought and writing do check this little article out:
It's an absolute shameless little bit of self-promotion as I wrote it for a postgraduate journal when I was a student at Oxford....but despite me being the author I think it still has something interesting to say!
And, finally, Abelard and Heloise are today buried (or thought to be buried) at the Pere Lachaise Cemetery in Paris. Their tomb (created in the 19th century) is absolutely beautiful. If you ever get a chance to go to Paris I highly recommend stopping by! People still leave flowers for them!
 |
| Tomb of Abelard and Heloise |
 |
| Heloise's effigy on her tomb |
 |
| Abelard's likeness |
Hi all! I found the Peter's reading covered a variety of topics that were interesting but were hurried leaving many unaswered questions. How was the new interest in logic sparked and even allowed to come about? I'm sure before the clergy would have stopped any student in their tracks if they were to question the scriptures? Weren't they taught the scriptures were not to be challenged and the answer to any questions on how, who says and why was basically cause it's 'the word of God'? No wonder the new scholars of the time had such difficulty with the church. I can understand why teachers started setting up their own schools, but where did the money come from? It would have been just the rich that could afford to be taught.
ReplyDeleteIn the second reading I found Abelard to represent himself as quite the tortured soul. He had to face a lot opposition about his teaching and it's amazing he stood his ground after everything he experienced. I feel for Heloise, I think she was very brave and must have been really inlove to have retreated to a convent after all she went through. What happed to Astralabe?
hello everyone!
ReplyDeletei also found the peters reading quite rushed, but i found that i got the majority of the points out of it.
i thought it was interesting how the learning systems progressed from monastic schools to universities. i also thought it was strange that the church didnt try to stop such open thinking. (maybe they did and its just not in the readings? or i missed it?)
i found the story of abelard and heloise to be quite tragic but i thought it was cool that a woman could be recognized for her intelligence in an age were women were not really considered important. (was she accepted in her own time or only by later societies?)
thats pretty much all ive got to say this week :)
tori
The readings this week were quite interesting. I felt that the peters reading was not so much rushed but concise and it gave a good over view. I really enjoyed learning about medieval education and the was it started to develop along with reason and logic. Although this week I've been concentrating on my summary of last weeks readings and didn't get to into depth with my readings as much as I would have liked to, sorry Diana.
ReplyDeleteI found the part about law quite interesting. Especially how Roman law was sort of rediscovered and gradually applied throughout europe. I also found the reason Theologians gave for opposing trial by battle or ordeal interesting, in that they believed tempting god was a sort of blasphemy. I thought that was a bizarre conclusion to draw, and i suppose it really highlights how faith focused and fearful of god people, especially of course, Theologians, were in the Middle ages and how it really shaped everything they thought about.
ReplyDeleteThis, i thought was at a great contrast to the new logical ways of thinking, and private schools that were popping up teaching this. Especially interesting was the 'Sic et Nom', which i expected the authors of to be punished for, in a time of such extreme faith and church power.
I also thought Abelard had a bit of rough treatment. Poor bloke! What happened to Fulbert?
Blair
Hello! The readings this week I found were quite interesting, particularly the school related stuff, in regards to its up and coming prevalence. It's interesting to see the other side of religion in this regard too, similarly to what Tori spoke about with the Church not attempting to stop more open thinking. I think that our cynicism towards the church is somewhat biased in this sense through the way in which we have been brought up separate from it, making it much more easy to see them in a negative and over controlling light. I feel like the Church would have celebrated the strengthening of higher education as they already had their safe nook within society established and actively aimed to improve the quality of life that people had during the period.
ReplyDeleteJames
I enjoyed the readings this week. Abelard seemed to constantly evoke jealousy and subsequent hatred among his rival peers. This seems to be common to all historical figures who present a new way of thinking or doing things.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found particularly interesting about the Peters reading was that universities were not legally recognised, leaving students vulnerable to persecution by authorities. Also, once granted legal identity, they could move about from city to city, teaching in the learning language of Latin, because they did not own any buildings. I think the idea of a traveling university would have allowed for the networking of students and intellectuals that Peters attributed the growing interest of learning to.
I found it interesting to read about what effectively is the root of higher learning today.
ReplyDeleteI also found it fascinating to hear about the reintroduction of some roman customs as they were rediscovered such as the law courts.
Both these factors contribution in the end of the Dark Age being essential to the progression of humanity.
I think the readings may have been biased in their handlings of the church given the fact that it was so engrained into society and any written record that we have from that time would be from people who were most likely strongly religiously educated, in fact it is unavoidable. The church had a reputation for stifling outcry and at this time was one of the most powerful bodies and was strongly interlinked with every education system.