Quick #MedievalTwitter thread about saints in the 9th-century Old English Martyrology that defy the gender binary.
Up first: St. Pelagia, who lived in such a manner that no one knew if Pelagia "was man or woman"
Now, the pronouns there are "she/her". However, if we peak at the Old English original, the spelling shifts slightly during the nonbinary period: "hio" instead of "heo." Remember that difference. We will see it again.
Meet St. Thecla! Thecla is AFAB but goes to a monastery and becomes a monk.
Now, again, female pronouns and a reference to Thecla being a "woman", right? Well.....
The Old English is weird! Thecla has a bunch of pronouns here, including both "heo" and the spelling "hio" we've seen before.
But also "hy" which is USUALLY a variation of the third-person plural pronoun "they."
The modern translator turned these all into "she/her"
One other point: the word that we see translated as "woman"? It's "faemne": "virgin" or "maiden."
Now, this is normally only applied to women but I swear I've seen instances where men also were described with it.
This is significant, because when the Martyrology writer states that Pelagia, for instance, appeared to be neither man nor woman, and the word used for "woman" there is "wif" [woman], not "faemne"
An old favorite, St. Eugenia, is up next. Eugenia is AFAB but lives as a monk for a while, before moving to a woman's convent and living as a nun.
This one is interesting, because the Martyrology author *seems* to be using "faemne" to mean "woman" here, saying that "nobody could find out that [Eugenia] was a faemne" in the monastery.
The pronouns are consistently "heo."
Last one is St. Perpetua, an AFAB saint who dreamed in childhood of having "the appearance of a man" and a sword that Perpetua fought with valiantly.
Perpetua fulfilled this later in life by suffering a "manly" martyrdom.
What's striking about Perpetua--like most of these examples--is that the miracle that ensures Perpetua's sainthood is achieving some version of manhood.
What makes Perpetua a saint for the author is that Perpetua dreamed of looking and acting like a man, then achieved that.
The Old English here make me think of something @MxComan said about gender and color in medieval artwork, which is that men tend to be portrayed as having slightly darker skin than women.
The Old English word translated as "appearance" is "hiwe": literally "hue"
"Hiwe" absolutely can mean "appearance" in context, but it's first and foremost a reference to color.
Perpetua dreams of having a man's color.
These saints' lives have been traditionally read as lives of women, women who either escape patriarchy through "disguise" as men or whose adoption of manly characteristics is lauded because, again, of patriarchy.
But there's other possibilities for reading.
Trans and genderqueer readings of saints have flourished in the last few years, driven by amazing books like this one: degruyter.com/document/doi/1…
Old English studies has had less of this work, but there's so many texts like this where complex things are happening with gender, including at the level of vocabulary and pronouns.
I've mentioned OE texts that carefully switch pronouns for these tales:
It's not that trans, genderqueer, and nonbinary lives are new. It's that any hints of them were edited out by modern translators like this one.
There's a lot of work to be done recovering the possible traces of such lives in texts like the Old English Martyrology.
I hate being so self-promotiony, but if you're interested in how modern translators and scholars have edited out or denied queer and trans themes in medieval lit, I have a new article on the topic, currently available for free to download:
Why are we not talking about Sir William Neville & Sir John Clanvowe, the two gay English knights buried together in a tomb with marriage motifs???
Who were friends with Chaucer and possibly the inspiration for his The Knight's Tale?
And also maybe SPIES? #MedievalTwitter
So the above image is the tombstone of Sir William Neville & Sir John Clanvowe, who died in Galata (outside Constantinople) in 1391 within days of each other. Their shields are "impaled"; that is, their coats of arms are merged. This really only happens with married couples.
The article about their tombstone tries SO hard not to say gay.
I want to highlight an example of the whitewashing & erasure of the work of scholars of color--particularly Black & Indigenous ones--in the work of white medievalists. I came across it yesterday, & it's such a clear demonstration of how their work gets credited to white people.
This isn't a critique of the article's claim or its contribution to the field of race studies in Old English.
This is about how white medievalists who start publishing on medieval race draw on the work of scholars of color while obscuring them.
So this article came out recently in PMLA, a journal that has notably blocked work on race by premodernists of colors (medium.com/the-sundial-ac…)
That matters, since this article will be highly visible and cited in a way that the work of scholars of color won't.
🧵: So several scholars of color are pointing out the problems with racists mad about the new LoTR series. I did the same. My tweet got tepid responses, while the scholars of color faced vicious racism immediately *often from the same people*
[CW: racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia]
Most the people disagreeing with me didn't make it an issue of my identity & didn't insult me. These are among the meanest ones.
Easily a third of the responses to the scholars of color were hateful.
Dr. Ramírez got six comments on his main tweet and two of those were immediately vicious insults.
🧵The AHA president's "scholarship on race is ahistorical and presentist" blog isn't an outlier view or a brave take in the face of "the woke mob" or the "radical Left". It's been the party line among many senior scholars for decades.
Take medieval studies. (Really. Take it).
Look at basically any "state of the field" forum in medieval studies from the last few decades, especially in Old English studies. A lot of the big names--Allen Frantzen springs to mind--made careers out of slamming new approaches as presentist and ahistorical.
Here's Frantzen in 1990, complaining about "revisionists" (who he calls "Professors of Otherness") rewriting the teaching of history.