CULTURES, BELIEFS

AND TRADITIONS
MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN PEOPLES

Editorial Board:

Hebrew University, Jerusalem

University of California at Berkeley
FLORIKE EGMOND, Leiden University
GusTAV HENNINGSEN, Danish Folklore Archives
MAYKE DEJONG, University of Utrecht
MIRI RUBIN, Pembroke College, Oxford University
ELI YASSIF, Tel Aviv University
ESTHER COHEN,

WILLIAM BRINNER,

VOLUME 4

c
f/1

Social

FS

:...ES

OBSCENITY
,, ,
Social Control and Artistic Creation in
the European Middle Ages

EDITED BY

es

JAN M. ZIOLKOWSKI

sity

t,.C

si0Ct5

NX
180

.cl/-Lf

BRILL
LEIDEN BOSTON KOLN
1998

For this new series Cultures, Beliefs and Traditions manuscripts and manuscript proposals
are invited by the editors and publishers. Please send these to Professor Esther Cohen,
Department of History, Hebrew Universi9', Jerusalem, Israel.
This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Obscenity : social control and artistic creation in the European Middle

Ages I edited by Jan M. Ziolkowski.
p. em. - (Cultures, beliefs, and traditions, ISSN 1382- 5364
; v. 4)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 9004109285 (cloth : alk. paper)
1. Arts, Medieval- Censorship. 2. Arts, European- Censorship.
3. Erotica- Censorship- Europe.
I. Ziolkowski, Jan M. , 1956II. Series.
NXI80.C44028
1998
98- 11433
700'.4538'0902-dc21

List of Illustrati01
Acknowledgments

Introducing

Introduction
Jan M. ,Ziolk,
Poetic Language
Leslie Dunton-

7he Rhetoric

of Ol

CIP

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme

Obscenity : social control and artistic creation in the European Middle
Ages I ed. by Jan M. Ziolkowski.- Leiden; New York; Koln; Brill,
1998
(Cultures, beliefs and traditions ; Vol. 4)
ISBN 9Q-O I 0928- 5

ISSN 1382- 5364

ISBN 90 04 10928 5

Copyright 1998 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 77ze Netfterlandr

Obscenity in the l
tion
Jan M. ,Ziolk
Erotica and Sati1
Dajjdd Johns/
The Obscenities t
larity
Jan M. ,Ziolk
Spanish Cazurro l
Francisco Mri1
Fowl Play in My
a Middle Engl
Louise 0. Va.

All rights reserved. No part qf this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in a'!)l form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written
permission from the publisher.

Visualizing Obsceni

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal

use is granted by Brill provided that
the appropriate fees are paid directly to 77ze Copyright
Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910
Danvers MA 01923, USA .
Fees are subject to change.

Obscenity under
nated Manusc1
Michael Cam1
Obscenity and Al
Them, Now/1
Madeline H.

PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

CONTENTS

ata
n Middle

List of Illustrations .
Acknowledgments.

Vll

lX

Introducing Obsceniry

l-5364

ilsorship.
956-

- 11433
CIP

ne
pean Middle

(oln ; Brill,

Introduction
Jan M. Ziolkowski
Poetic Language and the Obscene
Leslie Dunton-Downer

The Rhetoric

of

3
19

Obsceniry

Obscenity in the Latin Grammatical and Rhetorical Tradition

Jan M. Ziolkowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
41
Erotica and Satire in Medieval Welsh Poetry
Dajjdd Johnston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
60
The Obscenities of Old Women: Vetularity and Vernacularity
73
Jan M. Ziolkowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Spanish Cazurro Poetry
Francisco Marquez- Villanueva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Fowl Play in My Lady's Chamber: Textual Harassment of
a Middle English Pornithological Riddle and Visual Pun
Louise 0. Vasvari . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

ted, stored in

Visualizing Obsceniry
Obscenity under Erasure: Censorship in Medieval Illuminated Manuscripts
Michael Camille . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Obscenity and Alterity: Images that Shock and Offend Us/
Them, Now/Then?
Madeline H. Caviness . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . 155

VI

CONTENTS

The Which on the Wall: O bscenity Exposed in Early

Ireland
Patrick K Ford
.. 176

Performing Obsceniry
Carnival Obscenities in
Eckehard Simon . . .
Alien Bodies: Exclusion,
7he Ointment Seller
Alfred Thomas. . . .

German Towns
. . . . . . . . . .
. . 193
Obscenity, and Social Control in

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214

Legal Obsceniry
Leccherous Songys: Medieval Sexuality in Word and Deed
Ruth Mazo Karras . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Obscene and Lascivious: Behavioral Obscenity in Canon
Law
James A. Brundage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
Unto the Pure All Things Are Pure: The Byzantine Canonist Zonaras on Nocturnal Pollution
Marie 7heres Fagen . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 260
Courting Obsceniry in Old French
The Fabliaux, Courtly Culture, and the (Re)Invention of
Vulgarity
Charles Muscatine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Modest Maidens and Modified Nouns : Obscenity in the
Fabliaux
R. Howard Bloch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
293
Getting to the Bottom of St. Caquette's Cult
Bruno Roy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
308
Obscene or Not Obscene: On Lady Reason, J ean de Meun,
and the Fisherman from Pont-sur-Seine
Per Nykrog. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
Obscenity and Hagiography in Three Anonymous Sermons
Joyeux and in Jean Molinet's Saint Billouart
Jacques E. Merceron.
332
Index . . . . . . . . . .

345

1. Kissing couF
2. Crucifixion '
3. Face of serp
4. Moors with
5. Two-headed
6. Devil erased
7. Devil erased
8. Idol with ge
9. Creation of
10. Nude male
11. Nun leads a
12. Copulating <
13 . Copulating <
14. Bare-arsed fi
15. Ape defecati
16. Demi Moon
17. Demi Moore
18. Jan van Eye
19. "Visitation"
20. Thamar givi
21 . Exhibiting "'
22 . Sheela-na-gi1
23. "Virginia W
24. Virgin and '
25. Apotropaic )
26. Torture of
27. Torture of
28. The Aelfgyv
29. The Aelfgyv
30. 'jack of Hil
31 . 'jack of Hil
32 . Normans se1
33. Normans se
Embroidery)

ux Embroidery)
Bayeux EmbroiACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ong Ut)

facing page
imerick
Fontaine)

190

This book originated in a conference that was held 13-15 May

1995. The conference could not have taken place without the
help of two graduate students. William Layher, in Germanic Languages and Literatures, served as the part-time administrator of
the Committee on Medieval Studies, which sponsored the event.
Lynn Ramey, now Dr. Ramey, performed miracles as the conference organizer. Thanks to her unflagging equanimity and competence, participants were able to focus on obscenity as an intellectual issue rather than uttering obscenities at things that went
wrong. The final person I wish to thank in connection with the
conference is my wife. As a forensic chemist Liz spends her workdays with the grittiest of obscenities- the people and evidence
connected with rapes, murders, and other crimes. During the
conference as well as the subsequent gestation of this additional
obscenity, she showed a patience and supportiveness for which I
offer my heart and thanks.
As the conference talks made the great transition to becoming chapters in a book, I had further assistance. Joyce Backman
contributed to the copyediting of the final drafts. With both speed
and consummate professionalism, Susan Hayes entered the copyediting changes into the computer. Last but definitely not least,
Bette Anne Farmer provided indispensable support in keeping the
project on course. Without her generous willingness to assist me
above and beyond her other work, this volume could not have
taken shape.
To my colleagues in the medieval community at Harvard University and especially to those on the Committee on Medieval
Studies, I am grateful for their having supported, financially and
morally, a project that may have occasioned them occasional
worry. I hope that they will find the studies presented in this
volume to be anything but frivolous , salacious, or otherwise disreputable and to offer ample assurance that the topic of obscenity can be both entertaining and edifying. Although obscene words
and acts will be found described in many of the essays, none of
the authors has shown any sign of falling prey to Tourette's syndrome, that tic known less formally as "foul-mouth disease" and

ACK OWLEDGME TS

more classically as "coprolalia." The obscenity, however risque,

distasteful, or amusing, is always directed toward scholarly ends.
For its tolerance to a comparatist engaged in such dirtyminded
toils, I offer thanks in closing to a small paradise in Florence
that is also part of the University: Villa I Tatti, the Harvard
University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies. A better working environment than the people and books of I Tatti would be
impossible to imagine.
Jan M. Ziolkowski

however risque,
Lrd scholarly ends.
such dirtyminded
adise in Florence
'atti, the Harvard
es. A better work. I Tatti would be

1,

INTRODUCING OBSCENITY

INTRODUCTION
Jan M. Ziolkowski

Obscenity looms large these days as a social, political, legal, and

cultural issue, and it has been in vogue for more than a decade
among intellectuals. 1 If ever a topic in medieval studies could
benefit from interdisciplinary examination and appeal not only
to experts but also to a broader public, it would seem to be
obscenity. To be understood more comprehensively, the concept
of obscenity should entail consideration of words, images, acts,
representations, and gestures; and the verbal analysis should
embrace what can be reconstructed of both the spoken and the
written, ranging from grammatical and rhetorical treatises on the
proper use of language, through legal texts on the same subject,
to belles (or not so belles) lettres. Thus one pleasure of this book
lies in its variety, in materials explored as well in approaches
taken.
Contrary to the expectations of those who suppose that the
Middle Ages were dominated by a dour and intolerant religiosity, manifestations of what would pass for obscenity today abound
in medieval literature and art. In compiling this collection I admit
to having a desire to shake all of us- whether scholars, students,
and aficionados of medieval cultures or nonspecialists interested
in a historical perspective on the occurrences and definitions of
obscenity- out of our narrow prejudices about the myriad forms
of life and art in the Middle Ages.
As we will see, medieval writers and artists were sometimes
less inhibited than their counterparts today. In spite of being (or
maybe because of being) large and powerful, the church in the
Middle Ages was capable of great forbearance. Surprising as it
may sound, there was probably less systematic institutional repression of obscenity in the medieval centuries than there had been
1 For instance, see L'Obscene: Colloque, Pau 1983 (Pau, 1983), and "L'Obscene," special issue of Traverses 29 ( 1983).

JA

M. ZIOLKOWSKI

in antiquity- or than there has been m our own day in many

countries around the world.
Ample attention has been paid to the unique circumstances
surrounding obscenity in the twentieth century, when mass media
and state censorship have come into play. Obviously mass media
did not exist in the Middle Ages, which more than any other
era deserves billing as the age of the manuscript; and the manuscript codex was anything but a mass product. Even censorship,
the medieval forms of which are traced provocatively by Michael
Camille in this volume, is too restrictive a concept to embrace
all of the phenomena to be examined. According to one astute
observation, obscenity can be "viewed as the counter-code to
whatever orthodoxy prevails." 2 Controversies over obscenity in
the twentieth century have provided a fresh optic for thinking
about obscenity in the Middle Ages by raising the question of
the relation between social control and artistic expression. For
the subtitle of this book, and for the broadening of my own
thinking, I am indebted to a conference on the twentieth century organized by Susan Suleiman, which was called "Social Control and the Arts. " 3
Looking in the opposite direction- not from the late twentieth century backward but from the Middle Ages forward- we
can find much that, whether through contrast or similarity, can
deepen insights into obscenity in our own epoch. Precisely what
may we postmoderns expect to derive from examining in a
crossdisciplinary forum the manifestations-and please note the
deliberate plural- of obscenity in the Middle Ages? One way to
gain perspective and to realize which of our views are peculiarly
ours is to explore similar phenomena and the debates about them
in other times and places. Medieval Europe offers a marvelous
laboratory in which we can conduct our soundings.
Today more than ever, obscenity holds considerable importance. Although more and more of the world's governments profess to adhere to values of free speech, in the United States we
have experienced searing debates over the purported obscenity
2

Renatus Hartogs and Hans Fantel, Four-Letter Word Games: The Psychology of
Obsceniry (New York, 1968), 20.
3 Published as Social Control of the Arts: An International Perspective (Cambridge,
Mass., 1990).

of books such as
Lady Chatterley's Lo
photographs of F
Howard Stern, a1
examples is mean
across the entire SJ
in print (even in
the radio, in teler:
sive callers or by
the internet, in p;
not a week goes
nection with caus1
sion, and feminisrr.
terpoint). But the
does not mean tr
modern creations.
title of the essays
Pornography: Obscenl
equally manifest i
published in the :
granted that the i
it the exclusively
Not only in co
of obscenity in tht
too have medieva
classicists. In classi

+ The literature on
Back Everywhere: The L
and Charles Rembar,

Cancer, and FanTI)i Hill

5 Obsce nity charge

numerou articles and
Mother Jones 19 ( over
Ruled Obscene in Fie
Siano, "Boxing Diana
6 Michelson, Speaki1
ing press as a demarc<
ern life and its vexatic
with the commercial f
increasing general lite1
era! human appeal. 1
how problematic its a

INTRODUCTION

day in many

circumstances
en mass media
sly mass media
han any other
and the manen censorship,
ely by Michael
pt to embrace
r to one astute
ounter-code to
r obscenity in
,c for thinking
he question of

For
ilg of my own
twentieth cen'd "Social Con-

he late twenti;s forward- we

similarity, can
Precisely what
xammmg m a
olease note the
s? One way to
s are peculiarly
about them
,rs a marvelous
tgs.
lderable impor>vernments pronited States we
orted obscenity

zes: The Psychology of

1Spective (Cambridge,

of books such as James Joyce's Ulysses and D. H. Lawrence's

Lady Chatterley's Lover, the comic monologues of Lenny Bruce, the
photographs of Robert Mapplethorpe, the radio programs of
Howard Stern, and the lyrics of 2 Live Crew. 4 As this set of
examples is meant to convey, the obscenities have been spread
across the entire spectrum of communication and entertainmentin print (even in comicbooks and license plates), 5 viva voce, on
the radio, in telephone calls (whether made by anonymous abusive callers or by customers of dial-a-porn services), in music, on
the internet, in photographs, on television, or in film. Probably
not a week goes by without obscenity stirring polemics in connection with causes as diverse as pedophilia, freedom of expression, and feminism (with the two last-mentioned often set in counterpoint). But the mere fact that obscenity is currently significant
does not mean that obscenity and pornography are exclusively
modern creations. The assumption of modernity is evident in the
title of the essays edited in 1993 by Lynn Hunt, 7he Invention qf
Pornography: Obsceniry and the Origins qf Modernity, 150o-JBOO. It is
equally manifest in Speaking the Unspeakable: A Poetics qf Obsceniry,
published in the same year by Peter Michelson, who takes for
granted that the introduction of the printing press brought with
it the exclusively modern category of pornography. 6
Not only in comparison with modern studies has the notion
of obscenity in the Middle Ages been oddly underscrutinized. So
too have medievalists neglected the topic when compared with
classicists. In classical studies I would single out three books: 7he
4 The literature on obscenity law is vast: see Edward de Grazia, Girls Lean
Back Everywhere: Tize Law of Obscenity and the Assault on Genius (New York, 1992);
and Charles Rembar, The End of Obscenity: The Trials of Lady Chatterley, Tropic of
Cancer, and Fanny Hill (New York, 1986).
5 Obscenity charges against the comicbook author Mike Diana generated
numerous articles and opinion pieces in 1994: e.g. Sean Henry, "Comic Threat,"
Mother Jones 19 (November-December 1994), 67- 69; Calvin Reid, "Comic Book
Ruled Obscene in Florida," Publishers Weekfy 241 (4 April 1994), 10- 12; Brian
Siano, "Boxing Diana," The Humanist 54 Guly- August 1994), 38.
6 Michelson, Speaking the Unspeakable 1: "And if we take the commercial printing press as a demarcation of modernity, pornography is coextensive with modern life and its vexations," and 3: "That modern pornography developed along
with the commercial press, a professional as distinct from a patronized literati,
increasing general literacy, and popular forms of prose fiction indicates its general human appeal. That suppression accompanied its development indicates
how problematic its appeal is."

JAN M. ZIOLKOWSKI

Maculate Muse: Obscene Language in Attic Comedy (1975, 1991), by

Jeffrey Henderson; The Garden of Priapus: Sexualiry and Aggression in
Roman Humor (1983, 1992), by Amy Richlin; and Pornography and
Representation in Greece and Rome ( 1992), edited by Amy Richlin.
The equivalents of these contributions in the field of classics do
not yet exist for the medieval period- unless this volume now
provides it! 7
It has been argued by another scholar of ancient obscenity:
"Two radical changes in western society have made possible new
perceptions of classical literature, leading to unprecedented opportunities for study and debate. The first revolution has been the
dissolution of the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic, and the resulting
partial lifting of taboos on the literary use of erotic material and
explicit language." 8 A danger arises here: if premodern obscenity differs essentially from (post)modern because of breakdowns
in religion and culture, we may fail to understand what earlier
people perceived as obscene. Instead of understanding their own
terms, we may impose our conceptions of obscenity upon them.
Taboos about obscenity have not been fully removed in medieval
studies, or anywhere else for that matter. But exactly where to
pin responsibility for the original emplacement of those taboos
is a different matter. James Brundage, with his command of medieval canon law, has established that modern patterns of sexual
conduct show a striking continuity with medieval Christian patterns.9 But does it follow that the norms of sexual conduct coincide with those of verbal conduct or artistic expression? The argument has been made that "the clergy has been keenly aware of
the anti-authoritarian and basically subversive nature of obscenity and the church has always inveighed against profanity, possibly because it felt its own position threatened by it." 1 Charles
Muscatine has countered forcefully that medieval Christianity was

7 Special recognition should be made of the fir t explicit attempt to deal

with obsceruty in medieval texts as a literary-aesthetic problem: see Wolf-Dieter
Stempel, "Mittelalterliche Obszoniti:i.t als literarasthetisches Problem," in Die nicht
mehr schiinen Kiinste. Grenzplziinomene des Asthetischen, ed. H . R. J auss (Munich, 1968),
187- 205.
8
See W. H. Parker, ed., Priapea: Poems for a Phallic God (London, 1988),
preface.
9
See James A. Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Sociery in Medieval Europe
(Chicago, 1987), 579- 594.
10
Hartogs and Fante1, Four-Letter Word Games, 21- 22.

less responsible
guage than wa
cUe Ages witne
own codes of
Manners and o
a long line of
century. 12 To
George Washi1
of Civiliry & L
110 proscriptic
came into wid
was taking roc
have much me
to govern both
work for our 1
The other gr
ity pointed is
is noteworthy
than on any s
ing such excq
"Legend of Good
Women Speak i1
broadly accept
than in mediev
inist attempt t1
primarily with
Despite a title
cally or chrono
inist Theory of th
a casual mentit
Jack of chronolc
stood in the
ignates unprote
11

See Charles
Court and Poet, ed.
French Fabtiaux (Ne,
12
For instance,
Behavior (New York
13
Boston, 1988.
14
Obscenity is 1
15
Caputi, Volupt

INTRODUCTION

1(1975, 1991 ), by
and Aggression in
1d Pornography and
by Amy Richlin.
ld of classics do
this volume now

ncient obscenity:
lade possible new
ecedented oppor.on has been the
and the resulting
otic material and
emodern obscene of breakdowns
cand what earlier
anding their own
enity upon them.
iloved in medieval
exactly where to
of those taboos
command of meatterns of sexual
al Christian patual conduct coinssion? The argukeenly aware of
ature of obscent profanity, posby it." 1 Charles
l Christianity was

licit attempt to deal

!em: see Wolf-Dieter
Problem," in Die nicht
au s (Munich, 1968),

God (London, 1988),

ery in Medieval Europe

less responsible for modern-day prohibitions against obscene language than was medieval courtly tradition. 11 Mter all, the Middle Ages witnessed the imposition of an etiquette from which our
own codes of conduct derive. Whether knowingly or not, Miss
Manners and other such guides to behavior stand at the end of
a long line of books that took prototypical form in the twelfth
century. 12 To cite one famous instance, at the age of fourteen,
George Washington cobbled together a little work entitled Rules
of Civiliry & Decent Behaviour in Company and Conversation. 13 These
110 proscriptions are largely the same as books of manners that
came into wide use in the twelfth century, when courtly culture
was taking root throughout western Europe. These rules, which
have much more to do with social class than with religion, seek
to govern both speech and behavior in ways that laid the groundwork for our own framework of good manners.
The other grand change to which the scholar of ancient obscenity pointed is feminism. In reference specifically to obscenity, it
is noteworthy (and I base this assertion on impressions rather
than on any systematic tabulation) that feminism- notwithstanding such exceptions as Sheila Delany's The Naked Text: Chaucer)s
((Legend of Good Women ') (1994) and E. Jane Burns's Bodytalk: When
Women Speak in Old French Literature (1993)- has achieved more
broadly accepted results in ancient and early modern scholarship
than in medieval studies. 14 Furthermore, the most systematic feminist attempt to analyze the status of the obscene is concerned
primarily with pornography in contemporary American culture.
Despite a title that makes a claim undefined either geographically or chronologically, Mary Caputi's Voluptuous Yearnings: A Feminist Theory of the Obscene (1994) omits the Middle Ages, apart from
a casual mention of Saints Francis and Anthony of Padua. This
lack of chronological depth makes sense only if obscenity is understood in the parochial American sense as a legal term that designates unprotected speech. 15
11
See Charles Mu catine, "Courtly Literature and Vulgar Language," in
Court and Poet, ed. Glyn S. Burgess, (Liverpool , 1981 ), 10; Muscatine, The Old
French Fabliaux (New Haven, 1986).
12
For in tance, Judith Martin, M iss Manner's Guide to ExcruciatinglY Correct
Behavior (New York, 1982).
13
Boston, 1988.
14 Obscenity is not even listed in the index to Burns's Bodytalk.
15
Caputi, Voluptuous Yearnings, 95n6.

JAN M. ZIOLKOWSKI

Yet the Middle Ages could teach us much about our own
broader conceptions of obscenity. Mter all, it was in the controversy over the Roman de La rose (the so-called querelle) that there
surfaced for the first time both the idea of a connection between
sexually explicit language and misogyny and the goal of eradicating such language (even through the destruction of books). 16
Christine de Pisan took a stand not altogether unlike that of
some feminists in the antipornography camp today- notably
Catharine MacK.innon- in objecting to the poem partly on the
grounds that it fostered antifeminist attitudes and partly on the
grounds that it contained dirty language that would arouse lust
in its readers. 17
The querelle and indeed the very manuscript tradition of the
Roman de La rose, in which the most controversial sections were
sometimes deleted but in other instances expanded, indicate how
crucial it is that we be attentive to subtle distinctions between
one textual community and another. 18 For in the end, whether
we are talking about then or now, obscenity will always be inextricably connected with community standards. As a consequence,
we cannot define obscenity without adumbrating the ethical system of the community within which it is so delineated.
To understand the standards we hold today and to ponder
whether we wish to modify them, we need to contemplate the
contexts in which they originated. How much have the benchmarks changed? In the early Middle Ages, writing belonged almost
exclusively to a small official community: the church. Since the
16
For the texts, see Eric Hicks, ed. Le Debat sur "Le Roman de La rose": Christine de Pisan, Jean Gerson, Jean de Montreuil, Gontier et Pierre Col (Paris, 1977);
Joseph L. Baird and John R. Kane, La Qy.erelle de La Rose: Letters and Documents
(Chapel Hill, 1978). A concise description of the debate with reference to
obscenity will be found in D. W. Robert on, Jr. , A Priface to Chaucer: Studies in
Medieval Perspectives (Princeton, 1962), 361 - 363.
17
Sylvia H uot, The "Romance of the Rose" and Its Medieval Readers: Interpretation, Reception, Manuscript Transmission (Cambridge, 1993), 22.
18
Ibid. , 12: "one also finds the deletion of passages that co ntained obscene

language or were explici tly erotic or of questionable orthodoxy. The expansion

of R eason's humorous comments about ob cenity in several manuscript families shows that many medieval reader were quite prepared to accept her
remarks, although one cannot tell whether or not they interpreted them, as
Fleming does, as orthodox Augustinianism; but the deletion of this passage in
other redactions shows that not all medieval readers were prepared to accept
it. "

main language
tongue but Lati
tween obscenity
monolingualism
is a situation i
tongues, operat(
and Flemish in
ern Italy, or Sp;
States. Diglossi<
coexists with a
used by an edt
and colloquial f.
world, spoken
recently, or, La1
west.
It would be 1
ciples governing
medieval Europ1
anatomical

the core of obsc

and unspeakable
can safely use i
pudendum, labia,
late, or difecate; I
would run the st
with a hammer
more than perp
different if I use
could roll down
ing world and sh
ing them to rea<
for a dictionary).
less- or speechle
nificance of the
amusing little be
been shot in the

19
Jan M. Ziolko
Literature," in The
1991 ), 193-213.

INTRODUCTION

about our own

was in the conuerelle) that there
mection between
e goal of eradition of books). 16
if unlike that of
today- notably
partly on the
ild partly on the
ould arouse lust

tradition of the
al sections were
ed, indicate how
inctions between
he end, whether
always be inexs a consequence,
? the ethical syslineated.
and to ponder
contemplate the
ave the benchbelong d almost
hurch. Since the

nan de La rose": Chrise Col (Paris, 1977);

Letters and Documents
e with reference to
to Chaucer: Studies in

ual Readers: Interpreta-

1.
tt ontained ob cene
The expansion
aJ manuscript famiared to accept her
rnterpreted them, as
n of this passage in
prepared to accept

main language of the church in the west was not a fully living
tongue but Latin, we have to be alert to possible differences between obscenity in the diglossia of the Middle Ages and in the
monolingualism or bilingualism of our own world. 19 Bilingualism
is a situation in which two fully living languages, two mother
tongues, operate alongside each other: examples would be French
and Flemish in Belgium, German and Italian in parts of northern Italy, or Spanish and English in many stretches of the United
States. Diglossia is a circumstance in which a mother tongue
coexists with a father tongue (usually a scriptural language is
used by an educated elite): examples would be classical Arabic
and colloquial Arabic (or other languages) in the modern Islamic
world, spoken Greek and classicizing Greek in Greece until
recently, or, Latin and the vernacular languages in the medieval
west.
It would be worthwhile to assess how much the lexical principles governing obscenity in modern English maintain those in
medieval Europe. In English we have two sets of words for the
anatomical parts, sexual acts, and bodily functions that lodge at
the core of obscenity. For us the vernacular contains the obscene
and unspeakable, whereas the Latin poses no threat. Any of us
can safely use in many formal contexts the Latin penis, vagina,
pudendum, labia, or scrotum, or the Latinate testicles, cunnilingus, fellate, or defecate; but if we resorted to the native equivalents, we
would run the strong risk of giving offense. I could hit my thumb
with a hammer and shout out "Feces!" without occasioning much
more than perplexity in my hearers, but the reaction would be
different if I used the Germanic equivalent of the same word. I
could roll down my car window anywhere in the English-speaking world and shout "Copulate!" at other drivers without prompting them to reach for a weapon (probably they would rummage
for a dictionary). Without the Latin derivatives we would be helpless- or speechless- when forced to be formal. This is the significance of the anecdote that Robert Graves recorded in an
amusing little book on swearing. He told of a soldier who had
been shot in the buttocks and who, when asked by a distinguished
l 9 Jan M. Ziolkowski, "Cultural Diglos ia and the Nature of Medieval Latin
Literature," in 77ze Ballad and Oral Literature, ed. Joseph Harris, (Cambridge,
1991 ), 193- 213.

10

JA

M. ZIOLKOWSKI

female visitor in which part of his body he had been wounded,

replied "I'm so sorry, ma'am, I don't know: I never learned
Latin." 20
This kind of double standard has had humorous repercussions
in the peculiar world of academic publishing. Sexually explicit
passages in foreign languages have commonly been rendered in
English translations not into English but into Latin. To take one
example, the 1939 translation by Clement Egerton of the medieval
Chinese novel The Golden Lotus slips out of English and into Latin
whenever the content becomes too graphically sexual. 21 To verify that Egerton's choice of language was not merely a vestige
of Victorianism that had to end with World War II, we need
only look at a 1961 translation of a seventh-century Chinese
erotic manual published by E. ]. Brill: whenever the text gets
steamy, the language shifts from English into Latin! 22 Perhaps
the oddest manifestations of this syndrome occur in Richard von
Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia sexualis, the tantalizing macaronic German-Latin texture of which may well have propelled more than
one adolescent in Germany to learn Latin. 23 Nor are others of
us in the English-speaking world exempt from this kind of prudishness. To this day the most frankly sexual verses of Ausonius'
Latin Cento Nuptialis are not rendered into English in the Loeb
Classical Library on the translation pages but are merely reproduced in Latin. 24 If the situation had been identical in the
Middle Ages, we would have to wonder how a Latin writer could
have achieved obscenity- and whether a vernacular writer had
to make an extraordinary effort to avoid it.
In general we must avoid the opposing pitfalls of either underestimating or overestimating the extent and nature of obscenity
in the Middle Ages. On the one hand, it is hazardous to assume
20 Robert Graves, Lars Porsena or the Future of Swearing and Improper Language
(New York, 1927), I 0- 11; quoted with slight variation by Hartogs and Fantel,
Four-Letter Word Games, 38.
21
Clement Egerton, tr. 77ze Golden Lotus. A Translation, from the Chinese Original, of the Novel Chin P'ing Mei, 4 vols. (London, 1939).
22 Robert Hans van Gulik, Sexual Life in Ancient China; A Preliminary Survey of
Chinese Sex and Sociery from c. 1500 B. C. until 1644 A.D. (Lei den, 1961 ).
23 Richard von Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia sexualis: there have been many editions and reprintings of both the German original and English translations (the
first unexpurgated edition in English was New York, 1965).
24 Ausonius, ed. Hugh G. Evelyn White, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1919- 1921 ),
I, 370-393.

that obscenity
which they tc
sex, and little
dle Ages were
kin who refle<
wrote his baw
we endanger <
that obscenity
ture in the Mi
robes, that the
olity and exe1
The truths of
than either of
Squeamishn
may have be
throughout th:
What is often
ety- scatology,
attested in cht
ture; and it is
of sexually exp
as has befaller
twentieth-centt.:
because Eurot=
Christian, peo
obscene today.
In investigat
essential first st
tine. 26 Althoug
pronouncemen
a millennium

25 See Ross G.
in 77ze Politics of E
ference on Editorial
Frank (New York
26 Another va!
in Paul's Epistle t
turpiloquium, of wh
theologian and
chio, Les Peches d
vale, tr. Philippe E

INTRODUCTIO

been wounded,
I never learned

fus repercussions
pexually explicit
rendered in
tm. To take one
l of the medieval
!1 and into Latin
exual. 21 To verrnerely a vestige
Var II, we need
century Chinese
er the text gets
Latin! 22 Perhaps
in Richard von
macaronic Gerelled more than
pr are others of
ps kind of prudses of Ausonius'
ish in the Loeb
are merely reidentical in the

writer could
rular writer had
of either underure of obscenity
rdous to assume
d Improper Language
rlartogs and Fantel,
rom the Chinese OrigPreliminary Survey qf
den, 1961 ).
ave been many ediish translations (the
Mass., 1919- 1921 ),

11

that obscenity was everywhere- that people lived a crude life in

which they took primitive pleasure in belching, farting, having
sex, and little else. According to this view, people in the Middle Ages were very simple folk. Chaucer was a guffawing bumpkin who reflected tastes typical of the common people when he
wrote his bawdy Reeve's and Miller's Tales. On the other hand,
we endanger a full appreciation of the Middle Ages if we assume
that obscenity was nowhere- that the men who controlled culture in the Middle Ages were monks clad in dark and dank wool
robes, that they permitted neither themselves nor others any frivolity and exercised the severest censorship on artistic creation.
The truths of the Middle Ages were much more complicated
than either of these stereotypes would permit us to intuit.
Squeamishness about the obscene, especially the sexually obscene,
may have been far greater in the late nineteenth century and
throughout this century than it ever was in the Middle Ages.
What is often classified as obscene in our time and in our society- scatology, artistic displays of genitalia, and so forth- is widely
attested in church art and is discussed often in medieval literature; and it is probable that no such thoroughgoing expurgation
of sexually explicit language and art occurred in the Middle Ages
as has befallen medieval texts at the hands of nineteenth- and
twentieth-century editors. 25 The assumption is untenable that
because European societies in the Middle Ages were strongly
Christian, people could not tolerate what we characterize as
obscene today.
In investigating medieval Christian outlooks on obscenity an
essential first step is to come to grips with the thinking of Augustine.26 Although his authority was not unquestioned, Augustine's
pronouncements on obscenity carried enormous weight for at least
a millennium after he wrote them. According to him, the sex25 See Ross G. Arthur, "On Editing Sexually Offensive Old French Texts,"
in 17ze Politics qf Editing Medieval Texts: Papers given at the twenty-seventh annual Confirence on Editorial Problems, University qf Toronto, 1- 2 November 1991, ed. Roberta
Frank (New York, 1993), 19- 64.
26 Another valuable approach i through the concept of turpitudo in speech
in Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians 5:4. In medieval theology this was designated
turpiloquium, of which the most fascinating description is in the twelfth-century
theologian and preacher Raoul Ardent: see Carla Casagrande and Silvana Vecchio, Les Peches de La langue: Discipline et ethique de Ia parole dans la culture medievale, tr. Philippe Baillet (Paris, 1991 ), 281 - 289.

12

JAN M. ZIOLKOWSKI

ual parts- the so-called pudenda- acquired their shamefulness as

a consequence of Adam and Eve's fall, which resulted in lusts
that cannot be regulated by the will. Because of this lack of control, these organs and their actions are shameful and engender
obscenity in speech. Thus obscenity is the inevitable outcome of
the fall, a theological event. This background helps to clarify why
so much that might seem obscene to us was accepted as having
an almost editorial value in the Middle Ages; according to Augustinian principles, obscenity was its own punishment, a revelation
of the disorder in the person who produced it, a sign of original sin.
By comparison with the Middle Ages, our own days seem (to
use two most un-medieval words) puritanical or counterreformational. And, correspondingly, modern scholarship is by no means
the most liberated domain . Anyone who has consulted a major
library in researching a topic connected with obscenity witnesses
the pervasive tendency to quarantine the indispensable research
tools (if I may be permitted the double-entendre of that final
noun). The British Library in London has its Private Case; the
Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris has "L'Enfer," reputedly modeled on an "Inferno" in the Vatican; 27 and the New York Public Library marks its catalogues of erotic material with five stars
instead of classification numbers. In Harvard's Widener Library
some older volumes on "erotica" or "erotic language," formerly
housed in a repository of forbidden books and marked with the
designation "Inferno" (later "I 0 " ), are now subsumed in an XR
class, which contains (albeit unintentionally) both the "forbidden"
X and the "restricted" R of U.S. movie ratings. 28 Predictably,
not only the largest libraries implemented such lazarettos for
27 On the history of the "Inferno" in Paris, see Theodore W. Koch , "The
Bibliotheque nationale: Organization and History," Library Journal 39 (1914),
347; Alec Craig, The Banned Books of England (London, 1937), 94- 95; H enry
Marcel, H enri Bouchot, Ernest Babelon, Paul Marchal, and Camille Couderc,
La Bibliotlzeque nationale (Paris, 1907), 60n I .
28 The classification X is reported to have been an arbitrary choice of letter to indicate the cage in which the e and other delicate materials are located.
For thi information I am grateful to K enneth Carpenter, Assistant Director
for R esearch Resources in the University Library and the Harvard College
Library. On the possible connection between "Inferno" at Harvard and "L'Enfer" of the Bibliotheque Nationale, see M. B. , "Forbidden-Books R epositories,"
American Notes and Q_ueries 4 (1944), 25.

questionable b
to lock up su
continue to b
they would be
supervision of
If ignoring
ness is unfortt
obscenity whe
where other n
issue has beco
of medieval s
obscenity lurki
something tha
beholder? Or
so, how sizabl
ing of obsceni
Minimizing
ity was a par;
of letters. Am
recognized tha
places where <
cient Roman ,
and Cynics, ""
ter words wen
ural acts and
wer ones tha
and fratricide ,
words would
interpreters, "'
most others fc
Modern wr
nomenon. As
times decide
other any sen
'Omne ignotu;
of our ignora1
ignotum pro <
icism of medi
29

Walter Rec

I TRODUCTIO

shamefulness as
resulted in lusts
this lack of conf l and engender
table outcome of
ps to clarify why
1
tepted as having
ording to Augusent, a revelation
a sign of origi-

days seem (to

counterreforma> is by no means
)nsulted a major
>scenity witnesses
>ensable research
dre of that final
0
rivate Case; the
reputedly modNew York Pubal with five stars
Widener Library
guage," formerly
marked with the
umed in an XR
1 the "forbidden"
gs. 28 Predictably,
::h lazarettos for
ore W. Koch, "The
Journal 39 (1914),
937), 94-95 ; Henry
nd Camille Couderc,
itrary choice of let!11aterials are located.
, Assistant Director
!he Harvard College
Harvard and "L'EnBooks Repositories,"

13

questionable books; smaller collections also had places in which

to lock up suspect materials. In many libraries such materials
continue to be available only upon request, ostensibly because
they would be mutilated if allowed on open shelves without the
supervision of librarians.
If ignoring or hiding material because of our own fastidiousness is unfortunate, an equally undesirable tendency is to find
obscenity where other people in the past have not seen it or
where other modern researchers do not apprehend it. Yet this
issue has become one of some contentiousness in many quarters
of medieval studies. Just how many interpreters have to see
obscenity lurking for a text to qualify as obscene? Is obscenity
something that depends entirely on the eye of an individual
beholder? Or does it require a community of beholders, and if
so, how sizable must the community be to legitimate the finding of obscenity?
Minimizing the chances of inadvertent or purposeful obscenity was a paramount objective of ancient rhetoricians and men
of letters. Among others, Cicero, Aulus Gellius, and Quintilian
recognized that some interpreters would discern obscenity in many
places where others would detect nothing of the sort. In the ancient Roman world, one of the two poles was occupied by Stoics
and Cynics, who reasoned that the Latin equivalents of four-letter words were not obscene because they described perfectly natural acts and body parts. In their judgment, the dirtiest words
were ones that denoted inhumane acts : by this token, incest, rape,
and fratricide would be offensive words, whereas current cursewords would be harmless. At the other extreme were the overinterpreters, who sniffed out obscene metaphors or puns where
most others found nothing.
Modern writers on obscenity have observed a similar phenomenon. As one writer on euphemism put it, people will sometimes decide that an utterance is obscene if they cannot make
other any sense of it: "By analogy with Tacitus' famous maxim
'Omne ignotum pro magnifico' (we over-populate the empty space
of our ignorance), someone coined once the counterpart: 'Omne
ignotum pro obscaeno' (we sully what is beyond us)." 29 The criticism of medieval literature has been joined by many interpre29

Walter R edfern, Puns (Oxford, 1984), 172.

14

JAN M. ZIOLKOWSKI

tive camps, with one extreme judging nothing anywhere to be

obscene and with the other hearing double meaning everywhere.
In the annals of Middle English scholarship, a special place
belongs to the furor over whether the word queynte in Chaucer
is a pun on cunt, just as in Old French and Occitanian scholarship any word containing a syllable sounding like the noun con
is felt by some to allude to the female pudendum. 30 On the one
hand are Larry Benson and others, who regard the punsters as
overly cunning linguists who are determined to find puns in the
most improbable con-texts. 31 On the other are the con-men or
con-people, odd bedfellows who encompass both the literary critics, such as John Fleming, associated with the approach of D.
W. Robertson, Jr. , and the somewhat more newly arrived feminists such as Sheila Delany and Laura Kendrick; those in this
party believe that at least sometimes Chaucer selected queynte
because it lent itself to the sexual double-entendre. 32 Similar disputes have raged in regard to the medieval Latin of Peter Abelard
and Andreas Capellanus. Here we find Peter Dronke on one
side, with Betsy Bowden, Deborah Fraioli, Bruno Roy, and Hubert
Silvestre on the other. 33 At issue is whether such Latin words
30 On the Occitanian, ee J ean-Cha rles Huchet, "Obscenite et 'fin'amor' (Le
comte de Poitiers, premier troubadour)," Revue des langues romanes 88 (1984),

243- 266.
3 1 Larry Benson , "The 'Queynte' Punnings of Chaucer's Critics," in Studies
in the Age of Chaucer, Proceedings 1 (1984): Reconstructing Chaucer, ed. Paul Strohm
and Thomas J. Heffernan (Knoxville, 1985), 23- 4 7.
32 Sheila Delany, "Anatomy of the R esisting R eader: Some Implications of
R esistance to Sexual Wordplay in Medieval Literature ," Exemplaria 4 ( 1992),
7- 34; Sheila D elany, The Naked Text: Chaucer's ((Legend of Good Women" (Berkeley, 1994), 137- 152; John V. Fleming, Classical Imitation and Interpretation in
Chaucer's ((Troilus" (Lincoln, 1990), 1- 44; Laura K endrick, Chaucerian Play (Berkeley, 1988).
33 Peter Dronke, "Andreas Capellanus," Journal of Medieval Latin 4 (1994)
51 - 63; Peter Dronke, "Heloise, Abelard, and Some R ecent Discussions," in
Intellectuals and Poets in Medieval Europe, Storia e letteratura: Raccolta di studi e
testi 183 (Rome, 1992), 323- 342; Betsy Bowden, "The Art of Courtly Copulation," Medievalia et Humanistica 9 (1979), 67- 85; D. Fraioli, "The Importance of
Satire in Jerome's Adversus Jovinianum as an Argument against the Authenticity of the Historia Calamitatum," Fiilschungen im Mittelalter. Intemationaler Kongress
der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Miinchen, 16- 19. September 1986 (Hannover,
1988), 5, 167- 200; Bruno Roy, "Andre le Chapelain, ou l'obscenite rendue
courtoise," in Mittelalterbilder aus neuer Perspektive. Diskussionsanstii}J zu amour courtois, Subjektivitiit in der Dichtung und strategien des Erziihlens. Kolloquium Wiirzburg 1984,
ed. Ernstpeter Rube and Rudolf Behrens (Munich, 1985), 59- 74; Bruno Roy,

such as penitus an
pronounced in su
a penile code at
If deciding wh,
reaching the sam
reporting a differ
league to the log
a female siren o
limbs to either sic
not pictured. Wh<
gravitated immedi
to be the implied
raphy: it remindec
Knowing that thi
sent a copy of th
what you do."
The volume be
similar differences
book will sometim
and I trust that
the collection a
blages of essays
North America h<
the topic of obSCI
the more likely, s!
on obscenity are
questions of what
tributes to art re
over artistic expre
and lesbians, race
This volume give:
of them to preda
conservative; in fa
on obscenity is n1
These essays ar
Une culture de L'equivoqu
"Du nouveau sur Ant

106.
34 Anthony Weir a
Churches (London, 199
35
Caputi, Voluptu01

I TRODUCTION

ywhere to be
g everywhere.
special place
in Chaucer
citanian schole the noun con
30 On the one
he punsters as
1d puns in the
e con-men or
1e literary critproach of D.
arrived femithose in this
elected queynte
32 Similar dis. Peter Abelard
ronke on one
>y, and Hubert
Latin words
, et 'fin'amor' (Le
manes 88 ( 1984),
=: ritics," in Studies
ed. Paul Strohm
e Implications of
tmplaria 4 ( 1992),
Women " (Berked Interpretation in
urian Play (Berke-

al Latin 4 ( 1994)
Discussions," in
tccolta di studi e
Courtly Copulae Importance of
st the Authenti-

'ij3 zu amour courWurzburg 1984,

- 74; Bruno Roy,

15

such as penitus and paene punned on penis, or whether cunctus was

pronounced in such a way as to call to mind cunnus. Was there
a penile code at work?
If deciding whether words are obscene is difficult, then so is
reaching the same decision about images. Let me illustrate by
reporting a difference between my reaction and that of a colleague to the logo of the Starbucks coffee chain, which depicts
a female siren or mermaid who is holding her splayed lower
limbs to either side of her head; what lies below her stomach is
not pictured. When I saw this image for the first time, my mind
gravitated immediately to what was not in the picture but seemed
to be the implied focus. My reaction was conditioned by iconography: it reminded me of mermaids in romanesque architecture. 34
Knowing that this colleague was interested in sheela-na-gigs, I
sent a copy of the logo along to him. His response: "I don't see
what you do."
The volume before you contains similar sorts of openness and
similar differences of opinion. I hope that anyone who reads this
book will sometimes disagree, more often agree, and always learn;
and I trust that people will deem the lack of a "party line" in
the collection a strength rather than a weakness. Often assemblages of essays in literary or cultural studies emanating from
North America have a particular political stamp. For a book on
the topic of obscenity to bear such an imprint would seem all
the more likely, since in contemporary American society debates
on obscenity are fraught with ideological and political concerns:
questions of what constitutes obscenity and what obscenity contributes to art recede as people contend over who holds sway
over artistic expression- and who suffers as a result (women, gays
and lesbians, races, ethnic groups, or subaltern social classes). 35
This volume gives all of these issues attention, but allows none
of them to predominate. At the same time, it is anything but
conservative; in fact, the very notion of a conservative collection
on obscenity is no doubt a contradiction in terms.
These essays are by design eclectic. Some aspects- notably the
Une culture de !'equivoque (Paris, 1992); (Montreal, 1992), 77- 87; Hubert Silvestre,
"Du nouveau sur Andre 1e Chapelain," Revue du moyen lige latin 36 ( 1980), 99106.
34
Anthony Weir and James Jerman, Images qf Lust: Sexual Carvings on Medieval
Churches (London, 1993), fig. 18a.
35 Caputi, Voluptuous Yearnings, 4.

16

JAN M. ZIOLKOWSKI

feminist- receive less attention than would have been the case if
all the invited writers had contributed papers. Even so, no salient
aspect has been omitted. Some of the essays grapple with the
problematization and theorization of the obscene, but many do
not do so- and that is as it should be in a collection that aims
for balance: if to be undertheorized constitutes an implicit political choice, then to be overtheorized is also a choice. It would
have been easy to commission a dozen or so essays that sought
to define the obscene, and such a project could have led to valuable results. But this book has a broader sweep. Some of the
essayists struggle openly to formulate their own definitions of
obscenity. Others build their investigations on texts that were
designated obscene in their own day. A few dispense with terminological hairsplitting altogether and proceed directly to the
inspection of texts or images that pass muster as obscene according to the unspoken criteria of the essayists themselves. To my
mind, all these stances can afford insights. For one thing, obscenity is notoriously difficult to differentiate from other categories
such as the sexual, erotic, ribald, vulgar, taboo, and offensive.
For another, the terms obscene and obsceniry--although they were
part and parcel of the Latin rhetorical tradition from its formation through its transference to modern spoken languages- do
not enter the lexica of the vernaculars until after the Middle
Ages. In French the term obscene is not regularly attested before
the sixteenth century, and obscenite appears for the first time in
Moliere's L'Ecole des femmes (1662).36 In English the equivalent
words are not found before Shakespeare.
The first section of the book, comprising this introduction and
Leslie Dunton-Downer's piece, approaches the topic of obscenity
generally. The second, "The Rhetoric of Obscenity," involves a
close scrutiny of obscenity as it is discussed in Latin prescriptive
treatises of grammar and rhetoric or as it manifests itself in vernacular literatures. This section opens with my essay on obscenity as it was analyzed in the Latin grammatico-rhetorical tradition; for a millennium and a half this heritage exerted a significant
influence on the definition and even the perception of obscenity.
36 In addition to the essay by Jacques Merceron in this volume, see Olivier
Pot, "La Question de l'obscenite a !'age classique," Dix-Huitieme siecle 173 (1991 ),
403 and 428n5 (for two late medieval attestations).

Dafydd Johnston
in Welsh poetry
peculiar conseqL
Latin Middle A
women with me
speech. My em1
mented by Franci
poetry and its o
The essays in ti
Vasvari- demom
philology to bear
draws heavily 01
Middle English l
also a double
With its emph
bridge to the nex
dations in image
sentational arts.
of certain images
ning of attempts
Madeline Cavines
the problem of t
be obscene in th
Ford's essay, whi1
non in early Irish
genitals known as
The focuses of
Obscenity" merge
contains two
theatrical settings.
control of obscen<
ted, when not, he
hard Simon preser
conduct and its s<
in the late Middl
between the farci<
The social cont
section "Legal Ob
sis of harmful wor
sent-day debate OJ

INTRODUCTION

ve been the case if

Even so, no salient
s grapple with the
cene, but many do
ollection that aims
rs an implicit polita choice. It would
essays that sought
d have led to valueep. Some of the
own definitions of
on texts that were
dispense with ter
directly to the
as obscene accordthemselves. To my
one thing, obscenm other categories
boo, and offensive.
although they were
lon from its formaken languages- do
l after the Middle
arly attested before
r the first time in

the equivalent
1is introduction and
e topic of obscenity
scenity," involves a
n Latin prescriptive
mifests itself in verilY essay on obscenjco-rhetorical tradiexerted a significant
eption of obscenity.

this volume, see Olivier

Huitieme siecle 173 (1991 ),

17

Dafydd Johnston's essay delves into the intricate obscenities found

in Welsh poetry. My second essay in this section explores the
peculiar consequences, within the diglossic environment of the
Latin Middle Ages, of the conventional association of young
women with modest speech- and of old women with obscene
speech. My emphasis on Latin-vernacular relations is complemented by Francisco Marquez-Villanueva's essay on Spanish cazurro
poetry and its connections with Arabic language and literature.
The essays in this section- especially the final one by Louise
Vasvari- demonstrate that there can be no better place to bring
philology to bear than on the topic of obscenity. Her essay, which
draws heavily on folklore , pursues the double vision within a
Middle English lyric- a double vision of cock and phallus but
also a double vision of visual and textual.
With its emphasis on visual punning, Vasvari's essay forms a
bridge to the next section of essays, all of which have their foundations in images- in manuscripts, sculptures, and other representational arts. Michael Camille postulates that the censorship
of certain images in late medieval manuscripts marks the beginning of attempts by authorities to enforce visual conformism.
Madeline Caviness' look at medieval images confronts forthrightly
the problem of the differences between what was perceived to
be obscene in the Middle Ages and what is nowadays. Patrick
Ford's essay, which sets out to define obscenity as a phenomenon in early Irish culture, deals with the famously exposed female
genitals known as sheela-na-gigs.
The focuses of "The Rhetoric of Obscenity" and "Visualizing
Obscenity" merge in the section "Performing Obscenity," which
contains two essays devoted to obscenity in theatrical and quasitheatrical settings. Both essays explore such aspects of the social
control of obscene behavior as when such behavior was permitted, when not, how it was regulated, and who policed it. ekehard Simon presents an important trove of findings about obscene
conduct and its social control during carnival in German towns
in the late Middle Ages. Alfred Thomas explores the relation
between the farcical and the sacred in a Czech-Latin play.
The social control of behavior is also the central issue in the
section "Legal Obscenity." Ruth Mazo Karras situates an analysis of harmful words in medieval English sermons within the present-day debate on pornography. This essay is followed by two

18

JAN M. ZIOLKOWSKI

papers from historians of medieval canon law, James Brundage

on the west and Marie Theres Fagen on the east. Brundage
offers an account of medieval canonists' anxieties that celibate
men might be aroused by listening to lovesongs, dirty jokes, and
lascivious dances and thereby moved to improper behavior. Fagen's
piece on the Byzantine canonist Zonaras draws a connection
between nocturnal emissions and obscenity.
The concluding section of the book, "Courting Obscenity in
Old French," is devoted mainly to the fabliaux, a genre that has
occasioned more debate over obscenity than any other. It opens
with Charles Muscatine's essay, in which he argues that courtly
culture prohibited obscenity as never before and that this new
taboo was the product of changing social circumstances. R.
Howard Bloch's essay takes issue gently with the conclusion that
the obscenity of the fabliaux resulted from courtliness, but he
too is concerned with social context. Bruno Roy, setting his sights
on farces rather than fabliaux, concludes that, whereas we tend
to view sexuality in moral terms, medieval writers viewed it as
both essentially human and essentially aesthetic. Per Nykrog takes
a similar line with regard to both the Roman de la rose and the
fabliau about the fisherman from Pont-sur-Seine: much of the
sexuality in these texts was considered indiscreet but not obscene
by audiences in the Middle Ages. The section closes with an
essay by Jacques Merceron, in which he comes to grips with the
relation between obscenity and religion. His chosen texts are the
sermons joyeux, which exemplify the three main literary traditions
of medieval Europe: the Christian, the courtly, and the obscene.
The placement of the essays on fabliaux at the end of the
book is a ruse, prompted by the suspicion that more readers will
come to the volume with an interest in Old French fabliaux than
in most of the other materials represented. If in leafing their way
to the back of this book these readers are enticed into areas they
have not yet considered, the strategy will have succeeded.

POET!

As the essays in
is an oddly plas1
on complicated
only describes t
but also capture
by virtually an)
even natural ph
obscenity at on
Before turning t
beuf, whose Old
for studies of m
detail several of
cultural obscenit
An initial pre<
in the current 1
under the indisc
ponents often eq
ously
to be contained
to operate in w
economy.2 If we
1

The designatim
judging from tl
in 1995 on the que1
wi h their work to
cultural studies to
approaches advocat
Historicism associat
resentations. While I
problems raised by
the critique by Lee
New Historicism in
erature (Madi on, 19t
2
In this regard,