A Review of The Talisman by Sir Walter Scott

 

Some years ago, I reviewed the nineteenth-century literary work concerning twelfth-century England by Sir Walter Scott, Ivanhoe. What many modern readers are unaware of, however, is that Scott composed other works of the same era. They are known as Tales of the Crusaders. The first among them is The Bethrothed. The second, though, is The Talisman. As I've been reading the second work, I hope to share information about it with the reader here. 

The Talisman has many similar qualities to G. A. Henty's Winning His Spurs. Both works tell of knights serving King Richard the Lionheart during the Third Crusade. Likewise, each work concerns a heroic medieval character saving a damsel in distress. One of the greatest differences, however, is the setting. Henty's Winning His Spurs is not only set in the Holy Land, but also in England. It tells the story of Cuthbert, an Anglo-Saxon, before the crusade in England, during the crusade as Cuthbert is in the Holy Land, and of the character's return to England after the crusade. Scott's work, however, is set only in the holy land as The Talisman is only concerned with the crusade itself. Whereas Winning His Spurs tells of events concerning Richard the Lionheart's capture on his expedition through Europe while returning from the crusade, Scott's The Talisman was more interested in the conflict between the crusaders and the Saracens in the holy land ( possibly because the other historical events were already referenced in his previous work, Ivanhoe.''

While all of these works make good reads concerning literature about the Middle Ages, and the crusades in particular, for me, Ivanhoe remains the greatest published fiction work of the twelfth century. I ultimately felt that Scott's writing in Ivanhoe was still more appealing than that of The Talisman. Likewise, I found the characters in the former to be more interesting. While Sir Kenneth's expedition in the Holy Land was an attractive adventure to me, the love triangle between Ivanhoe, Rowena, and Rebecca gave Ivanhoe a more complicated story than the Talisman would tale. Indeed, Kenneth does heroic things in The Talisman, but the stakes are never raised like they are in Ivanhoe. In Ivanhoe, Rebecca comes near to death after being accused of witchcraft by the Knights' Templars until the titular character challenges the villain, Bois Guilbert to a final duel. While Sir Kenneth challenges Marquis Conrad to a final duel at the end of The Talisman, no important deed of salvation is needed on Kenneth's part. The latter challenge has more to do with a rivalry between the two nobles. 

The Talisman features many exciting events. At the beginning of the story, Kenneth meets ways with an emir, whom he later learns to be Saladin. Likewise, the novel plays out the events of Richard the Lionheart's sickness as Saladin sends Richard aids to help the crusader king recover. In general, by reading The Talisman, I learned about some aspects of the medieval crusading army that I had not known about previously. 

The 1954 film, King Richard and the Crusaders was based on The Talisman, Personally, the film has its moments. However, I find it to be inferior to the 1952 adaption of Ivanhoe. 

In general, The Talisman is a good work of literature. However, I cannot compare its literary qualities to nearly as strong as those of Ivanhoe, one of my favorite works of literature. While I believe that The Talisman is an underrated work of literature, I can see why it does receive the publicity of Ivanhoe.  To anyone who finds interest in crusades history or literature of the romantic era, I recommend that they read The Talisman. 

English Literature and the Middle Ages

 

Literature often comes in many forms: poetry, drama, and prose. Writers through the ages have used literature to convey different purposes: man's relationship to God, man's relationship with other men, man's relationship to creation, and man's relation to himself. Literature allows us to see ourselves by relating to the characters we read about. By reading about Molly Gibson crushing on Roger Hamley in Wives and Daughters, we can click with her because we see how she withholds her feelings for him within her. Indeed, the same effect of literature is true for us as we read Treasure Island. Jim Hawkins's desire for adventure connects with our desire to explore things outside what only our eyes see. 

Many use different hermeneutics to understand literature. Some emphasize the theory of literature. This has been the typical approach of many at Cambridge University. Those who take this approach often separate the ideas of the work from the historical context and emphasize the text primarily.  Others, however, typically study literature with its historical context and culture. This latter work is often done at Oxford University. Between these two methods of interpretation, I agree mostly with Oxford. 

In my view, those who think that they know Biblical theology without understanding the history of the first century are either theologically gullible or blatantly arrogant. The New Testament cannot be understood in its entirety without reference to Jewish literature, Greco-Roman Culture, and Early Christianity. Tragically, many people believe that they can understand the scriptures without understanding its historical context. Likewise, many interpret the Constitution without reference to how it was understood by the founding fathers. To think that justices of the twenty-first century have a better understanding of the meaning of the Constitution than did those of the eighteenth century is absurd. I think that both of these (concerning scripture and the Constitution) are huge mistakes. 

No work of literature can be understood entirely without knowing the historical culture that it was born. This has been my view for many years, and I have thought about it while studying for an undergraduate certificate in New Testament Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. In general, all works of literature must be understood within their proper historical context. 

When we approach medieval literature, we cannot separate its literary qualities from the times of composing works. Beowulf reflects a combination of both Anglo-Saxon pagan and Christian themes. The Canterbury Tales demonstrates scandal in the church, but also, loyalty to Christianity (Chaucer never questioned the authority of the scriptures). Likewise, Le Morte d'Arthur reflects the Christian virtues of men treating women as the weaker sex by knights saving damsels in distress (1 Peter 3:7). 

At the heart of medieval literature is the role of Christianity in the medievals' lives. While many have attempted to read critical race theory, gender roles, sexuality, and queer theory into these texts, in my view, these are all forced interpretations. Whenever medieval literature does not quote scripture or refer to the authority of the church, it usually implies one or the other throughout. Even the scandalous Fabliau of Medieval France (there were English ones as well), while at times promoting immorality, many of these stories satirize religious practice, but not necessarily Christianity. Chaucer adopted some of these approaches to humor in his own works, but as explained earlier, he never renounced Christianity. In fact, Chaucer recanted anything in his works that contradicted the faith before he died.

That is not to say that the roots of some feminist thoughts are not to be found in medieval literature. Margery Kempe and other women discussed the faith more than many moderns would believe that these medieval females would have done. However, even the medievals who occasionally went outside the boundaries of their Catholic Church generally did not see themselves as against Christianity per see. 

All of English literature must be understood within its proper historical context. Of course, the same is true for the literature of any language and in any era. We cannot distinguish literature from history as two entirely distinct disciples. The two so often go together. For example, as also mentioned earlier, the New Testament is a literary work that must be understood according to the Jewish first-century audience that it was written primarily for (especially the earliest of the gospels). The authors of literary works have also used the language of their given audience to convey a grammatical meaning. Composition is devoid of knowledge of the linguistics and morphology that were used in the given culture of a literary work. The illiterate and simple men that learned from the apostles were more likely to understand the scriptures than illiterate and simple men today. This is because the former needed less education to understand the natural meaning of phrases, historical references, and theological concepts that were typically expected in their culture (at least if they were Jewish) than it is for many moderns. Indeed, many in the twenty-first century have to be scholars of both Koine Greek and Biblical Hebrew to understand the New Testament in its original languages (many scholars believe that Matthew was written in Hebrew). However, this was not the case for many Jewish believers in the first century---who, even if simple men, would often have known those languages better than the simple men of today. 

Those who interpret scripture without the study of its historical context use the same methods that progressives do for the constitution, and that liberal theorist use for literature. They wrongly believe that literature can be understood without reference to a given work's historical background. Those who believe that the Bible can be interpreted one's interpretation alone, or based on the views of others, without consent from the early fathers of Christianity, are theological liberals (whether or not they realize that about themselves) just are those who interpret the constitution without reference to those who lived at the time of its composition. 

To study medieval literature, do not simply read the famous works of the time. Engage yourself in studying the history of the crusades, the schisms of the church, the role of women in medieval society, the influence of art on people's lives, etc. Literature becomes much more fascinating when it is studied with a historical mindset. Since the New Testament is a work of literature (or works of literature), the same principle applies to it. Likewise, anything that we read about in medieval literature will be more properly understood by reading the history itself.  

Medieval Philosophy Matters

 Recently, I finished The Proslogion by Anselm of Canterbury. In it, Anselm uses reason to argue for the existence of God. For me, this is one of my favorite works to have come out of the Middle Ages. Hopefully, I will discuss more about it in a future post. 

While many today, see theology and philosophy as two separate disciplines, this was not the case for many in the twelfth-century. Indeed, many medieval philosophers saw their ideas as being in harmony with the Bible (though sometimes opposed by the church itself). As the university generally protected its people's freedom of speech, some church officeholders such as Martin Luther were able to challenge the status quo more than those outside of its setting.  

In general, all that we believe comes from a worldview. Whether or not we claim to believe in the existence of God, what we believe about the authority of religion, and how we perceive the afterlife is all reflected in our worldview. If our worldview is not based on the Bible, then it's based on something else; another religious work, one's culture, or one's upbringing. The Bible was the foundation for all of what those in the Middle Ages believed about both matter and time; this was even the case for illiterate peasants who learned Bible stories from the artwork in medieval churches. 

For many in the Middle Ages, the works of Augustine of Hippo were foundational to their theological understandings. His Confessiones (Confessions), for example, was important for its bluntness about his penitence over sin. De civitate Dei contra Paganos (The City of God), however, defended Christendom against accusations from the pagans in Rome who blamed Christianity for the former empire's downfall. De Trinitate (On the Trinity), likewise, served as a reminder to the orthodox communities of the many threats to true Christianity across the known world. Finally, in The Enchiridion (Faith, Hope, and Charity), Augustine defended God's predestination of men to salvation against some of the Semi-Pelagian groups that were at odds with Catholic Christianity. As someone who has read more than five of Augustine's works, I can personally testify to his great influence also on my own life. 

Many of us have heard of the Summa Theologica. We know that Thomas Aquinas was among the best of Medieval scholastics. However, fewer of us are familiar with his Contra Errores Graecorum. In this latter work, Aquinas wrote both against the Greek Orthodox Christians and the Muslims. While Aquinas was arguably more gentle in his dialogues than some, he reflected a growing divide between both western and eastern Christians that had been building for centuries. 

While many of the medievals differed from each other on particular points of doctrine such as what happens at mass, when is just war right, and whether or not the Virgin Mary was immaculate, they universally held to the belief that Christianity is the only way to God. Peter the Venerable, for instance, did not believe that Muslims worship the one true God as he explained in Against the Saracens*1. Likewise, the Council of Florence later dogmatically taught that all those who leave this life without water baptism shall be lost forever. 

According to Oxford historical theologian and scholar Alister Mcgrath*2, medieval theologians believed that scripture was the highest of all authorities. Indeed, because of this, many of them intended to base their views off of the Bible. Certainly, they knew that all other authorities are sinking sand and will fade with time (Ecclesiastes 1:14, Romans 12:2). Scripture, on the other hand, though, is forever (1 Peter 3:21). 

Whether or not we agree with the medievals, understanding their worldview helps us to understand them. For example, if we wish to learn more about twelfth-century England, then reading the theological writings of Anselm of Canterbury will enlighten us to common thoughts of that time. Knowing Medieval Philosophy also helps us to understand both the culture and the art of the era. One of the interesting particulars of historical studies is that both an Evangelical Christian and a professing atheist*3 can differ from each other's worldviews and yet still study the past as historians. Truly, even people whose ideas are nothing alike to each other, are able to mutually construct facts together about what it meant to live in Medieval Times. 

1*For this compilation of several of his works, see the volume Church Fathers: Medieval Continuation Against the Saracens translated by Irven M. Resneck. 

2* See Reformation Thoughts: An Introduction. 

3* According to scripture, there are no true atheists (Jeremiah 11:20, Psalm 44:21, Romans 1:19).