Given at the Society of Antiquaries of London, on March 5, 2013
The history of childhood is a rapidly expanding area of study that attracts scholars from many different disciplines using a wide range of material to help us form a better idea of the life of children and youngsters in the past. Yet the same problems that beset the often reviled French historian Philippe Ariès half a century ago still hamper scholars today, viz. the difficulty of how to read visual evidence. This is especially true of the medieval period, and of monuments in particular – an important aspect of memory and memoria studies.
Tomb effigies and monuments offer important evidence on how dead children were commemorated and thus also on the status of children in the Middle Ages. Too often it has been assumed that deceased children were simply ‘forgotten’ because they were too numerous and too unimportant – merely genetic and dynastic failures. Ariès’s claim that monuments to children are absent in the medieval period and that this indicates an absence of affection has already been countered by the numerous surviving examples across Europe. Yet the existence of such monuments does not simply prove affection for a dead child, either, for their prime function was to attract prayers for the soul of the deceased.
Advertisement
Age does not appear to have been a major consideration in medieval commemoration. Many memorials only state the date of death, and not the date of birth or age of the deceased, so that it is difficult to establish whether the deceased died young. Moreover, many medieval effigies appear to have been designed to reflect the belief that all mankind will assume the perfect age in heaven. Children may thus be presented on monuments as much older than they actually were when they died – a phenomenon that we find across Europe.
The first task is to identify monuments to children correctly. The difficulty is not only the frequent lack of documentation but also the fact that these monuments are not always easy to recognise as child memorials. Seemingly adult figures may prove to be children – or offspring of any age. Yet too sentimental an approach can lead to miniature effigies being interpreted as children because of their size, whereas these often commemorate heart (or viscera) burials instead. For monuments to function it was essential that contemporary viewers were able to read them. If we wish to use these memorial as evidence for childhood in the past, we need to be able to understand them first, and the ideas underlying their appearance.
Deceptive appearances? Reading medieval child monuments
Lecture by Sophie Oosterwijk
Given at the Society of Antiquaries of London, on March 5, 2013
Tomb effigies and monuments offer important evidence on how dead children were commemorated and thus also on the status of children in the Middle Ages. Too often it has been assumed that deceased children were simply ‘forgotten’ because they were too numerous and too unimportant – merely genetic and dynastic failures. Ariès’s claim that monuments to children are absent in the medieval period and that this indicates an absence of affection has already been countered by the numerous surviving examples across Europe. Yet the existence of such monuments does not simply prove affection for a dead child, either, for their prime function was to attract prayers for the soul of the deceased.
Age does not appear to have been a major consideration in medieval commemoration. Many memorials only state the date of death, and not the date of birth or age of the deceased, so that it is difficult to establish whether the deceased died young. Moreover, many medieval effigies appear to have been designed to reflect the belief that all mankind will assume the perfect age in heaven. Children may thus be presented on monuments as much older than they actually were when they died – a phenomenon that we find across Europe.
The first task is to identify monuments to children correctly. The difficulty is not only the frequent lack of documentation but also the fact that these monuments are not always easy to recognise as child memorials. Seemingly adult figures may prove to be children – or offspring of any age. Yet too sentimental an approach can lead to miniature effigies being interpreted as children because of their size, whereas these often commemorate heart (or viscera) burials instead. For monuments to function it was essential that contemporary viewers were able to read them. If we wish to use these memorial as evidence for childhood in the past, we need to be able to understand them first, and the ideas underlying their appearance.
Related Posts
Subscribe to Medievalverse