Agnes Randolph, the Countess of Dunbar is one of my favorite Scots. She’s also known as Black Agnes due to her dark hair and eyes. Her ordeal began in 1338 when William Montague, the Earl of Salisbury, lay siege to Dunbar Castle. Agnes’ husband, Patrick, was away fighting the English on another front and it was left to Agnes to defend their home with only a few soldiers for help. Salisbury, considered one of the great commanders of his day, thought he would have an easy victory against a lone woman, but he hadn’t counted on Agnes’ indomitable spirit, courage, and perseverance. First, he catapulted Dunbar with boulders, destroying part of the battlement. Her response was to dress in her best gown, and with her ladies-in-waiting, and walk the fortifications. She dusted the broken walls as if there was nothing amiss, letting her enemy know she was not going to be intimidated. Then he tried to force the gate with his battering ram. Lady Agnes had her men bring the largest boulder they could find (it was probably one that Salisbury had just thrown at them) and drop it onto the ram, thus squashing it. It is said she jeered at Salisbury’s men as they ran for their lives. Salisbury even tried to bribe one of Agnes’ guards into opening the gate. He promised the man a fortune for betraying his mistress. The guard seemed to agree, but unbeknownst to Salisbury it was a trap. That night when he and a small group of English soldiers tried to sneak into the castle, the portcullis came down, springing the trap. Unfortunately, one of Salisbury’s men had gotten ahead of him while passing through the gate, and Agnes thinking the English commander would be in the lead, trapped the wrong man. Salisbury was getting desperate. He tried to starve them out by putting boats in the surrounding water, forming a blockade. Without food and supplies life for Agnes and her people began to look bleak. Help arrived in the shape of Sir Alexander Ramsey of Dalhousie, a Scottish knight. One dark night he sailed across the water, it’s thought he accessed the keep using a natural cavern built into the castle’s foundation. He delivered food and supplies to the besieged populace, relieving the famine. The next morning Agnes had a fresh loaf and some wine delivered to Salisbury with her compliments, letting him know that he could not break her. In an act of desperation Salisbury brought Agnes’ brother, John Randolph, the Earl of Moray, as a prisoner to Dunbar. He informed Agnes that he would kill her brother if she didn’t submit. She didn’t surrender. She told Salisbury to go ahead and kill him because her brother had no children, and she would inherit his lands if he died. It sounds heartless but you have to remember at the end of a siege the nobility were allowed to live, but the servants, peasants, and soldiers were all put to death. So there was a lot more riding on this than her brother’s life. By the way, John survived the ordeal and died in 1347. The siege finally ended when Ramsey, under cover of darkness, maneuvered his men, across the water and into the castle. He joined forces with Agnes’ men and launched a surprise attack, through the main gate, scattering the English. Black Agnes withheld and triumphed against a five-month siege. She did it using courage, persistence and shear stubbornness. But I think she was a woman ahead of her time. Surrender was not an option, and she understood that sometimes it’s more important to appear strong than to actually be strong. No blog on the medieval world would be complete without a post about Eleanor of Aquitaine. There are those who consider her the most enlightened woman of her time and others who think she was foolish and vengeful. Born in 1122, she was the daughter of William X, Duke of Aquitaine, and Count of Poitiers. William’s lands where estimated to be equal or larger than the king of France. It is no surprise that when her father and brother died suddenly in 1137, she found herself married to Louis, later to become Louis VII of France. By all accounts, the marriage went well at first. Eleanor gave Louis a daughter, but their relationship deteriorated when Eleanor joined him on the Second Crusade. The scandal started when the pair reached the Holy Land and Eleanor sided with her Uncle Raymond against Louis. Accounts written after the fact, by William of Tyre and John of Salisbury, claim that Eleanor had an affair with Raymond, but neither of these are firsthand accounts and both writers were known supporters of the French king, so it’s hard to believe that they are completely accurate. It is known that Eleanor spoke out against her husband’s military decisions, and agreed openly with her uncle, an action that at the time was considered scandalous. I think the real problem was that Eleanor didn’t respect Louis as a military leader. She was a rich, powerful, opinionated woman and so instead of bending to her husband’s will, as was expected, she spoke out against him. She also blamed him for the death of Raymond who was killed by the Muslims soon after Louis’ withdrawal from the Holy Land. Louis, for his part was disappointed that Eleanor had failed to give him a son. In 1149 she appealed to Pope Eugene for a divorce, claiming they were too closely related to have ever married in the first place. Unfortunately, the Pope refused to grant her an annulment. Claiming the marriage was sound, he attempted to reconcile the couple. Eleanor was virtually forced into Louis’ bed. This led to her giving birth to their second daughter in 1151. (It bothers me that she was forced to sleep with a man she hated, and that having a daughter was considered a shortcoming.) The fact that she had failed to provide Louis with a son marked the end of their marriage. The pope could no longer force them to stay together and in 1152 he granted their divorce, on the grounds of consanguinity. (They were too closely related.) But surprisingly their daughters were declared legitimate and Eleanor’s lands were returned to her. Within eight weeks of her divorce Eleanor married Henry Plantagenet, even though she was even more closely related to him than she was Louis. Henry became king of England in 1154. Their marriage seemed to go well for the first fourteen years or so. The couple had five sons and three daughters. And the always-active Eleanor played a role in running Henry’s kingdom. But her marriage turned hostile in 1166 when it became known that Henry had fallen in love with another woman, Rosamund Clifford. In 1173 Henry’s son also named Henry, in a dispute over his inheritance, took up arms against his father, instigating a revolt. He was joined by his brothers, Richard and Geoffrey. Some say that this was Eleanor’s doing, in revenge for her husband’s affair, and others say that her sons came to her for help, and she couldn’t turn them away. It is known that relationships within the royal family were always acrimonious. Bickering and disagreements were commonplace, whatever the motivation, the revolt was short lived and doomed to fail. Henry the younger was defeated by his father. While on the run, he contracted dysentery and died. His final request was that his father would show his mother mercy. King Henry imprisoned Eleanor. She remained under guard until Henry II’s death in 1189. Her second son, Richard, who was known as Richard the Lionheart, was crowned that same year and promptly declared Eleanor regent. He joined the Third Crusade and left, it is thought that he spent less than six months in England during his ten years as king. Eleanor, who was now in her late sixties, showed no signs of slowing down, she seemed to enjoy her time as head of state, and it is a role for which she was eminently suited. On his return from the Holy Land, Richard was captured and held for ransom in Germany. Eleanor negotiated his release, despite the fact that her younger son, John, tried to pay the Germans to keep him imprisoned. Richard died in 1199 in his mother’s arms after being shot in the arm during a siege. The wound turned gangrenous causing a long and painful death. Now his younger brother, John, took the throne and Eleanor’s active role in English politics ended, although she was still a strong presence in Aquitaine, where she spent her final years. She died in 1204 having outlived eight of her ten children and was buried in Fontevrault next to her husband, Henry. I have avoided mentioning her influence on culture and courtly love, mainly because scholars today have their doubts as to whether Eleanor’s Court of Love ever existed.
To me she seems to have been a take-no-prisoners kind of woman. She was strong-willed and obviously not afraid to speak her mind. And she clearly didn’t love her first husband because she didn’t care about humiliating him. There are those who have accused her of having affairs, but this is hard to prove, especially after eight hundred years. But she was a strong-minded, wealthy woman and powerful people don’t always follow the same rules as the rest of us. There is no doubt in my mind that if Eleanor were alive today she would be a politician, captain of industry or military leader. She was educated, well-read, and articulate, things that for us are positive attributes but in the twelfth century these were attributes more suited to a man. Put simply, I believe she was a woman who was out of step with her time. I have read accounts where Isabella of France, the wife of Edward II, is labelled a she-wolf. She is described as being so vicious, and so ambitious that she murdered her husband in an attempt to gain power for herself. But is that really true? To understand Isabella you have to understand her husband, Edward II I would like to point out that the Isabella depicted in Mel Gibson’s movie Braveheart is wholly fictional and while it is a wonderfully entertaining story, it is not a documentary and the scriptwriters did take some poetic licence with the facts. The real Isabella never met Edward I. Furthermore, at the time of Wallace’s death she was about ten years old, so she didn’t have an affair with him or give birth to his son. We don’t know the exact year of Isabella’s birth, probably because she was a girl and therefore not important. (That’s not my opinion, but rather the attitude of the times.) Her father, Phillip IV, has been described as a cold, unemotional man and his contemporaries called him a human statue. He saw no problem in marrying his pre-teen daughter to a man in his twenties whose sexuality was already in question. I rather doubt that Isabella expected love from her marriage. After all, the nobility didn’t marry for love. Their marriages were contracts in which she would have been expected to support her husband and bear his children, and for most of her married life Isabella did just that. The biggest problem with Isabella’s marriage wasn’t Edward’s sexual orientation. I’m sure there have been plenty of homosexuals in the past who have ruled successfully and had very good working relationships with their spouses. No, Edward’s preferences in the bedroom were not the problem; the real issue was the fact that he was a weak man who always submitted to a stronger male. It seems that when Edward married Isabella he already had a favorite, a partner with which he shared his throne. The man in question was Piers Gaveston, a handsome, athletic man. They met in 1300 and became inseparable. By the time of Edward and Isabella’s marriage in 1308, Edward had been in his relationship with Piers for eight years. Isabella was about twelve years old and although she had friends, and relations in court nothing could have prepared her for marriage to a man who was so completely dominated by his partner. To give you an example of just how subjugated Edward was, when he travelled to France to marry Isabella he left Piers in charge of England. The English barons were outraged, Piers wasn’t even nobility. When Edward returned with his young bride, Piers was wearing the jewelry Phillip had given Edward as a wedding gift. That did not get things off on the right foot, and things were rocky for a while, but to give Piers his credit he did try to get along with Isabella, and give her the respect due to her as queen. But more credit is due Isabella, she was a dutiful wife who suffered through her husband’s humiliating infatuation. She even intervened diplomatically on Edward’s behalf with her father and then later her brother Charles IV, ensuring Edward’s place on the English throne. In 1312, Piers was captured by the English barons, who had become increasing unhappy with his influence on the king and his use of royal favour to bolster his own position. He was executed. This devastated Edward, but forced him to rely on Isabella and for a while they got along quite well. It interesting to note that Isabella’s first child, Edward 111, (No they didn’t have much imagination when it came to names.) was born in 1312. In fact, three of her four children were born in this period between favorites. Unfortunately, in 1318 Edward chose a new favorite, Hugh Despenser. Now Hugh was a thoroughly evil, greedy man who used his relationship with the king to line his own pockets. He would imprison widows until they signed their lands over to him and it is believed he even broke the limbs of a noble woman named Lady Barat, torturing her, until she agreed to give him her lands. He was completely unscrupulous and used his relationship with the king to seize lands, and punish enemies. By 1320 Hugh dispenser was the defacto ruler of England, a circumstance that enraged the populace rich and poor. Hugh was a threat to Isabella and her children. She spent five years pretending to like him, but the fact is that sooner or later he would have turned against her, and she knew that Edward would never stand up to his favorite. In 1325, under the guise of a diplomatic mission, she fled to France. It is here that she met Roger Mortimer, a baron in exile. The pair became lovers and conspirators, planning to end the reign of Edward and Hugh. With the support of a group of English exiles, they raised a small army and in September 1326 invaded England, landing in Essex. But here’s the thing, circumstances were so bad in England that when Edward called for support from the barons and general population no one came to his aid. He summoned 2000 men to meet the invaders at Orwell, but only 55 showed up. Instead of amassing a huge force to repel the invaders the barons, who hated the Hugh Despenser, joined the invasion force. When Edward and Hugh realised they had no allies they fled, heading for Wales. Isabella and Mortimer were in pursuit and within two months Edward and Hugh were captured. Within ten days of his arrest, Hugh was declared a traitor, put on trial, and executed. Edward was a different problem. No one knew how to proceed, a king had never been deposed before, but they couldn’t put him back on the throne. His failings, both personal and political had led the kingdom to disaster. He was held prisoner first at Monmouth Castle and later at Kenilworth Castle. Finally, in 1327 he agreed to abdicate in favour of his son Edward III. As Edward III was still a minor Isabella and her lover, Mortimer, ruled as regents in his place. As a diplomat Isabella came into her own. She negotiated peace with the Scots ending a war that had lasted 32 years. In late 1327 Mortimer had Edward II killed. This was a necessity for them as plots to have the Edward II reclaim his thrown kept resurfacing and in the end killing him was the only way to ensure peace. Unfortunately, Isabella and Mortimer had learned nothing from the plight of Edward and Hugh. They, too, used their reign to amass a fortune for themselves. They became massively unpopular, sparking turmoil and unrest in England. In 1330 Edward III who was now eighteen arranged a coup and seized power from his mother. The young king had Mortimer brought up on fourteen charges one of which was murdering his father Edward II. Mortimer was executed immediately. Isabella was spared, but she was banished from court and sent to live at Castle Rising, where she lived out her days in relative luxury. It’s known that she went hunting, had many visitors including her son and grandchildren, but was never in court again. I think more was made of Edward’s sexual preferences than his inability to rule because under church law homosexuality was considered heresy, and committing heresy made Edward unfit to be king. Just being a useless king wasn’t a good enough reason to get rid of him. In the medieval world the king was chosen by God, and that meant no one could challenge him. But chosen or not, the fact was that he was completely inept.
Were Isabella’s action’s justified? Maybe. Her uprising against her husband was definitely popular. And I don’t think she was as calculating as she has been made out to be. For most of her marriage she sided with her husband against those who wanted to overthrow him, but Edward’s relationship with Hugh Despenser pushed her to a breaking point where she couldn’t take anymore. Personally, I would describe her as a woman pushed to brink of desperation rather than a she-wolf. If I had written her story I would have made her a better regent. She didn’t do a very good job of ruling England, but she did save the throne for her son. How could a woman go from being prostitute to empress? Believe it or not the answer is – love. But I’ll get to that later. First let me tell you about Theodora’s early life. She was born around 500AD, into a world where the old Roman Empire was in the process of dying, giving birth to the new Byzantine Empire. No one knows the exact date or her birth which is not surprising when you consider her humble origins. Her father was a bear trainer in the Constantinople Hippodrome and her mother was a dancer. Her father died when she was still a child, forcing her and her sisters to become dancers and actresses too. In this world an actress was the equivalent of a prostitute. Theodora would dance for the nobles and then entertain them in private. We don’t know the exact age she started this profession, but I do know that by today’s standards she was way too young. At the age of sixteen, she became the escort to a wealthy man named Hecebolus. By all accounts she was beautiful, witty, and intelligent. When he was appointed to the position of governor to the minor North African province of Pentapolis, she accompanied him. We don’t know exactly what happened in their relationship, but after four years Hecebolus threw her out of his house, penniless. This had to have been a low point for Theodora. She was in a foreign land, far from home, with nothing but the clothes on her back. Once again, she was forced to rely on her looks and charm to provide an income. She travelled through the Middle East making her way back to Constantinople. Now this is where the records become a little shaky. Some sources say she was in Antioch others say Alexandria, Alexandria, at that time, was the capital of Egypt. Wherever it happened at some point in her early twenties Theodora met Pope Timothy, the thirty-second pope of the Eastern Church. She converted to Monophysite Christianity. This is a form of Christianity that was considered heretical in Constantinople. She renounced her previous life as a courtesan, and returned to Constantinople in 522AD, making her living spinning wool. It was here that she met Justinian and fell in love. I should mention this is not as surprising at it might seem at first glance. Justinian wasn’t emperor yet, but he was heir to the throne. And he had also been born into poverty. It was Justinian’s uncle, Justin I, who as an illiterate soldier worked his way to the position of emperor. Justin took Justinian under his wing, educated him, and named him heir. So Justinian probably understood, all too well, the circumstances that had forced Theodora to become a courtesan. The biggest obstacle standing in their way was a law forbidding a high-class official such as Justinian from marrying a low class courtesan. Justin I changed this law and the couple were married in 525AD. Justinian became emperor in 527AD following the death of his uncle. Theodora ruled alongside him. I don’t think it was that she revelled in the power. I think she was a good judge of character, astute and Justinian knew he could always count of her to have his best interests at heart. In 532 AD when anger over high taxes, religion, and political corruption caused a riot, Justinian was advised by his officials to leave the city. It was Theodora who counselled him to remain and quell the uprising. He took her advice and successfully crushed the revolt. In her time as empress she championed women’s causes passing laws that prohibited forced prostitution. She also expanded the rights of women in divorce and property ownership, gave mothers guardianship rights over their children, forbade the killing of a wife who had committed adultery, stopped the killing of unwanted infants by exposure, and instituted the death penalty for rape. She also closed brothels and created convents where ex-prostitutes could support themselves by other means. Together with Justinian, she restored the empire gaining back some of the territories lost to the Germanic tribes in the West. They also built bridges, aqueducts, and churches, including Hagia Sophia which is still standing today. Theodora died in 548AD of cancer. Justinian never remarried, dying seventeen years later in 565 AD.
Not everyone loved Justinian and Theodora. The couple most certainly had their detractors, but even those who hated Theodora never accused her of immoral behaviour, or of not supporting her husband. Personally, I like the fact that she used her power to help women and children, changing laws to make their lives better. She was a woman who squeezed her lemons into lemonade and for that she is an excellent example for us all. Grace O’Malley (Gráinne Ní Mháille in Irish Gaelic) was born into a noble family in 1530 in Co. Mayo, Ireland. It is believed her father taught her how to sail and conduct business as a young girl. Words used to describe her include: trader, pirate, chieftain, and the English considered her a traitor. It’s interesting to me that most of what we know about Grace comes from English writings and not Irish sources. If I find out why she was ignored by her own people, I’ll let you know. At the age of sixteen Grace married her first husband Donal O’Flaherty by whom she had three children, two boys and a girl. It is believed to have been a politically motivated marriage, but they stayed together for nineteen years, until his death. Sources differ on what happened next, some say she assumed leadership of the his clan on her son’s behalf, and others say the O’Flaherty’s refused to give her what she was due on her husband’s death. Under Brehon law (The Irish had their own system of laws that governed every part of their life.) any property she held when she entered the marriage would have stayed in her possession. She would also have been entitled to half of any profits they made while married. Whatever the truth, it seems that Grace returned to the O’Malley clan in 1564. This is when she starts her life as an independent woman. With a base of operations on Clare Island, she earned a living using her father’s ships, and a private army of two hundred men. She traded, and demanded taxes from ships in her waters; this is where the piracy comes in. She was known for being an able sailor and commanded her ships in person. In 1566 she married for the second time to Richard Burke (Also known as Iron Richard Bourke.) This was a trial marriage for one year. A trial marriage was another Irish tradition. A couple would marry for one year at the end of which they could decide whether to stay married or not. Grace moved her men and ships to Rockfleet Castle on Achill Island. It is believed, she then divorced Richard. But they must have been fond of each other because they stayed close until his death in 1583. By Richard, she had one son, Theobald. It is rumoured, she gave birth to him aboard one of her ships. Now, this was a time when the English were forcing their way across Ireland, compelling the old Gaelic noble families to submit to English rule. At the heart of the matter is the English Crown’s insistence that the Irish adopt the English rule of succession, meaning that a title would automatically go to the eldest son. In the Irish clan system a vote was taken to choose the chief from the nobility of the clan. By ending the Irish vote of succession the English cheated Richard out of his leadership of the Mac William clan. Richard and Grace unite, supporting each other against their common enemy, resisting English rule over their lands. When Richard dies in 1583 she returns to her power base at Rockfleet Castle. In 1584 Sir Richard Bingham is appointed English Governor. Bingham’s job is to subdue the Irish population. Grace resisted using her fleet to raid coastal towns, and disrupt English trade. She also carried supplies and troops for the rebels. Bingham seems to have really hated Grace, claiming she was "nurse to all rebellions in the province for this forty years." Pretending to want to negotiate a truce, Bingham finally captures her in 1586. He condemns her to death. She is saved when her son-in-law offers himself as a hostage. Grace continues to seek support for her cause, consulting with the O’Neill and the O’Donell clans in Ulster, who in turn, are seeking help from the King of Spain. Bingham reports Grace to Queen Elizabeth I, accusing her of treason. Bingham continues to provoke Grace, stealing her possessions and ships. Grace writes to the Queen appealing for justice. In 1593 Bingham captures her son and charges him with treason, a charge punishable by death. Grace takes a gamble and journeys to England to meet with Queen Elizabeth at Greenwich.She was now sixty-three years old and showed no signs of slowing down. Grace promises to fight the Queens’s enemy’s, if her ships and livelihood are returned. Elizabeth in turn has a great deal of compassion for Grace describing her as this aged woman. Perhaps Elizabeth finds in Grace a kindred spirit, because the Queen releases Grace’s son. Bingham is recalled to England the following year. Grace returns to Ireland and her way of life, dying of what appears to be natural causes in 1603.
Nowadays, Grace O’Malley she is seen as an Irish hero and rebel. She was born into a time of great upheaval. The old Irish way and the Brehon system of laws were being eradicated by the English. Did she see herself as a rebel, a role model for women and Irish resistance? I don’t know, but her actions seem to indicate that she saw herself first and foremost as a mother, and leader. And like all good leaders she did what was necessary to continue her way of life. Whether it be raiding or negotiating with a queen. She was a strong woman and an excellent example to us all. Every May there is a festival, in Clew bay, Co. Mayo, to honour her life. I wish I could be there. March 2014 was Women’s History Month in the United States and March 8th 2014 marked International Women’s day, so this is a tad tardy, but I wanted to write something to commemorate all the brave and courageous women that have fought as warriors in a man’s world. The medieval era was one where war was commonplace, so there are countless examples where women were forced to defend their people and their homes. I thought I would introduce some of them to you in this post. Matilda of Tuscany 1046 – 1115
Matilda was an Italian noblewoman who was renowned for her military strategy in defense of the Pope Gregory VII The Order of the Hatchet This was a military order of knighthood for women. It was formed in 1149 by Raymond Bergenger, Count of Barcelona, to honour the women of the town of Tortosa who took up arms to defend the town against a Moor attack. They fought with anything at hand, including hatchets. Nicola de la Haye In 1217 Nicola, Constable of Lincoln, held Lincoln Castle against the French forces for one month until help could arrive. She was in her sixties at the time. Christina Bruce In 1335 Christina defended Kildrummy Castle from an English attack, led by David Strathbogie, until her husband, Andrew Murray, could come to her aid. Agnes Randolph – Countess of Dunbar In 1338 Agnes held Dunbar castle against a five-month siege by the English. She succeeded in utterly defeating and demoralising her enemy. My post on 14th December 2013 goes into more detail. Joanne De Montfort also known as Joanne of Flanders In the siege of Hennebont, in 1342, she dressed in armour and led raids, protecting the town in the name of her infant son. Joan of Arc 1412 – 1431 No blog on medieval women warriors would be complete without mentioning Joan of Arc. She led the French forces against the English and was responsible for their victory and the coronation of King Charles VII. Captured by the English, she was tried for heresy, not as a witch as some believe. The main charges against her seem to stem from her wearing men’s clothing. But the Catholic Church dictated that women were allowed to wear men’s clothes in order to protect themselves. Joan was justified in wearing her suit of armour on the battlefield. In May 1431 she was executed by burning. She was so influential and inspiring that the English destroyed her body and dumped it in the River Seine, so no relics could be collected. Margaret of Anjou 1430 - 1482 Her husband, Henry VI of England, was prone to frequent bouts of insanity, so Margaret ruled the kingdom in his place. By all accounts she was not a very nice person. Leader of the Lancastrian faction in the War of the Roses, she led several battles against the Yorkists before ultimately being defeated. This list is by no means complete. It seems that the average medieval noble woman was expected to defend her home and that instruction in the martial arts was not as limited as you might expect, as shown in this illustration from the Walpurgis Fechtbuch – a fourteenth century German training manual. If there is an historical woman warrior that has sparked your interest I would love to hear about her. This week’s blog was inspired by a friend who told me about the female pope. As a religious leader in her community she had attended a presentation on the subject of Pope Joan. I grew up in the catholic church and was surprised that I had never heard of her. Could this be true? Had there really been a woman pope in the middle ages? For those of you unfamiliar with the story of her life I’ll give you the short version. Pope Joan reigned around 855 AD as Pope John VIII. Some say she reigned for two weeks others say two years. When told as a twelve year old that she would be unable to continue her studies as a woman, she disguised herself as a monk, travelled with her tutor, to Greece where she continued her education. From there, accompanied by her lover, she went to Rome where she became a clerk in the Vatican. Her rise seems to have been meteoric; she was promoted to cardinal, and was elected pope in 855 AD. Unfortunately she became pregnant and gave birth to her child during in a public procession. The crowd on learning that the pope was a woman executed her immediately, some say she was stoned and others say she was dragged by a horse. Apparently there is a street that popes avoid known as the Vicus Papissa or the street of the female pope. Did Pope Joan really exist or is she a work of medieval fiction? Although this is supposed to have happened over eleven hundred years ago the sequence of popes was well documented, and not just their succession, but also their abhorrent behaviour. This was a time when political intrigue ruled. There was backbiting, slurring, and in 897 Pope Stephen VII had the rotting corpse of his predecessor, Pope Formosus, dug up and put on trial. And as much as the church might want to bury these details, they can’t. Not only is it recorded in the papal archives, but it’s also a matter of public record, everyone knew. So what do the records say about Pope Joan? Historians seem to agree that records were altered, but not before the thirteenth century when her story came to light, and it seems that they were altered to add her to the record, not delete her. What about the date 855AD? This comes back to those papal records. Pope Leo IV died on 17th July 855 and Pope Benedict III was consecrated as his successor on 29th September. Did Pope Joan reign sometime in this two-month gap? Unfortunately, no. A man named Anastasius made a grab for power, imposing himself onto the papacy. Known as the antipope, he was, by all accounts, an odious man, who imprisoned his rival, Benedict, in an attempt to gain control. But he was unable to stay in office without the support of the nobles and people, thus Benedict became pope on 29th September. Anastasius is still on record as papal librarian in 872 AD. So he wasn’t executed by the crowd after giving birth. I also think that a man like Anastasius would’ve had enemies and if they could have unmasked him as a woman they would have. There are many more arguments for and against, but I suppose I always come back to the common sense approach, which leaves me feeling that this is a work of medieval fiction, mainly because if a woman disguised herself as a priest someone would’ve noticed. And how could she conceal herself for any length of time? It would have taken her years to become a cardinal. Plus, bishops and cardinals, especially in the ninth century had servants, and servants see things. You’d think someone would’ve noticed that her beard didn’t grow and she didn’t have an Adam’s apple. The whole thing feels very much like a medieval warning to women, especially the grizzly end. A woman who was smart and calculating enough to disguise herself for years, and become pope, would be intelligent enough to avoid pregnancy. But medieval scholars believed that women were driven by a need for sex and where unable to contain their primal urges. So to them Pope Joan’s horrific end was inevitable. I think the story has stayed alive because it has appealed to different people at different times in history. There have even been two movies made about her. The account was widely used in the reformation to discredit the papacy and more recently has been used to justify female priests. Personally I have no problem in believing that a woman could fulfill the role of pope, I just don’t know that it has happened in the past. Here is a short two-minute video by CNN on the subject. Highland folklore holds that the Brahan Seer lived in Northwest Scotland in the 17th century. He was born Coinneach Odhar, or in English, Kenneth Mackenzie, on the Island of Lewis. It was said that he became afflicted with the gift of second sight as a child. Apparently he had a special stone with a hole through the centre, when he looked through the hole he was able to see the future. As an adult he worked as a labourer for the Seaforth Mackenzie’s and is credited for many accurate predictions. Some of which include: The Battle of Culloden in 1745 The joining of the Great Glen lochs by a canal The railway coming to the highlands The oil industry in Aberdeen And the destruction of the Highland Clans There were many more prophecies, too many to mention in this post but his last prediction is the one that lead to his death. It seems that the Earl of Seaforth was away in Paris and his wife, Isabella, wanted news of her husband. She sent for Kenneth who assured her the Earl was well but wouldn’t elaborate. Isabella demanded details, telling Kenneth she would have him killed if he wasn’t more forthcoming, and so he told her that her husband was in the arms of a woman more beautiful than herself. Furious, Isabella had Kenneth thrown into a barrel of boiling tar. There’s a memorial at Channory Point where he’s believed to have died. It sounds nasty doesn’t it? Imagine causing your own death by predicting the future. The only problem with this story is that historians can’t find any evidence that it’s true. There is no proof of Coinneach Odhar being born on Lewis in the 17th century. There is however a Coinneach Odhar that lived in the Highlands in the 16th century. Parliamentary records from 1577 show two writs were issued for his arrest as a principal enchanter. I suppose this could have been a result of the witch-hunts I talked about last week. It is believed the 16th century Coinneach was involved in a plot to murder the children and rightful heirs to the Munro clan at Foulis in Easter Ross.
And so how did a man accused of witchcraft and murder in one century become a seer in the next. Maybe there were two men with similar names living in the same area, or perhaps it’s an example of the enduring power of a good story. Look at Robin Hood. Historians widely agree that the way he’s depicted in popular legend is nowhere close to the real man. So what is the truth about the Brahan Seer? Who knows, but I do know I prefer the story about the seer could predict the future, over the tale of the man involved in a plot to murder children. I was going to write about clothing this week, but my plan came undone when I was distracted by a story I read online regarding Muriel Calder of Cawdor. It seems that at her birth, in 1498, Muriel inherited the lands of Cawdor, an estate near present day Inverness. Most of Scotland’s high and mighty seemed to covet these lands. She was kidnapped as an infant by Archibald Campbell, the Earl of Argyll, who held who held her captive for years. When she was old enough, some sources say twelve years, she married John Campbell, Archibald’s son. This was done to ensure the Cawdor lands would come into possession of the Campbells.
This story raised many questions for me. It seems that Muriel had uncles, at least four of them. Why didn’t they inherit? In Medieval England a woman rarely owned property until she became a widow, but in Scotland things were obviously different. I know that in Medieval Ireland women had much greater rights than their counterparts in the rest of Europe. They had the right to own property, address a court of law, lead their clan, and divorce their husbands. Was it the same in Scotland? Maybe. It seems that in Highland Scotland if there were no male heirs the land passed to the daughters instead of male relatives, and so Muriel became a very rich little girl. I’m amazed she wasn’t murdered by her family to prevent her wealth going to whomever she married. So what happened to this poor, little, rich girl? Well by all accounts Muriel and John had a happy marriage. Some say they had eleven children, others say they only had three. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Despite being married Muriel stayed in procession of her lands until her death in 1575, when they passed to her grandson also named John Campbell, her eldest son being already dead by this time. On reflection, I think I’m most surprised by how compliant she seems. She was taken as a baby, and forced into marriage as an adolescent. I can’t imagine going along with that. By Scottish law all she had to do was object to the marriage and that would have been the end of it. Did she really love John Campbell? Did he love her? That truth has been lost in the sands of time, but I like to think they did care for each other and despite her terrible childhood Muriel led a very happy life.
It seems to me that when the medieval period is portrayed
both on screen and in literature we hardly ever see a complete picture of what life was really like. I think this is partly due to storytelling taking precedence over reality; and in part due to the fact that it is almost impossible to recreate history. And do we really want our favorite stories marred with the unhygienic realities of life in the middle ages? I have to admit that I am guilty of this. When I write I concentrate on my characters and setting, and omit the unsavory truths. With this in mind, I’m surprised that there is so much fiction involving time travel. I for one would hate to travel back in time, and here are three reasons why:- Knights and Lords Were Little More Than Murderous Thugs. The feudal system was such that it rewarded the cruel and punished the just. So if the king asked you to murder you neighbour, who also happened to be your brother-in-law, you had better be prepared to do it. Or he could accuse you of treason and have you killed instead. Yes, most successful kings were murderous thugs too. For example; in 1377, in the town of Cesena, Italy, John Hawkwood, an English knight, and his company of mercenaries massacred between 2500 and 8000 men, women, and children. He was under orders from Cardinal Robert of Geneva, who in turn was acting in the name of Pope Gregory XI. After a lifetime of murdering and pillaging for money, Hawkwood is said to have retired to England as a country gentlemen. It hardly seems fair does it? No Tea or Coffee. Both tea and coffee were unknown in the middle ages. With tea originating in China and coffee in Ethiopia both drinks made their way to Europe at the beginning of the seventeenth century. So, as a peasant, (and yes, most of us would have been peasants) you would wake up in the morning, if you were lucky you owned a bed and a blanket. Your feet would hit the frozen dirt floor of your stone hut and your breakfast would consist of last night’s leftovers. Leaving you to face the stark reality of a cold, damp morning without a single drop of caffeine. I don’t know how mankind survived And lastly and most importantly No Indoor plumbing. Not only was there no plumbing there was no clean drinking water. Everyone, including the children, drank a weak fermented liquid called small beer. So by the end of the day you might be pretty sloshed. And just imagine that after facing your morning without a daily cup of Joe you would also have to deal with the fact that your bathroom was a hole in the ground? or if you lived in the country, a bush? Can you imagine the smell from the open sewers? Let alone the diseases this lack of sanitation would create. Some of you might rough it when go on holiday and call it camping and you might even enjoy it. Personally, I don’t call it camping I call it cruel and unusual punishment, and it’s my number one reason not to travel back in time. I’ve only mentioned my top three reasons but of course there are many more. What would be your biggest reason not to travel back in time? Here’s a 24-second video from comedian Jeremy Hotz with his view on camping. |
|