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.