Tag Archives: prophecy

The Other Sister Research Seminar: Prophecies and Politics Outside Enclosures: Visionary Women in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe

By Sarah Carruthers

On Friday, November 22, 2024, The Other Sister Research Group held a thematic meeting on the topic of Prophecies and Politics Outside Enclosures: Visionary Women in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe

Our invited scholars and readings were:

  • Frances Kneupper, “Female Prophets Transcending Gender Expectations During the Great Schism – The Revelations of Constance of Rabastens and Marie Robine,” in Mediävistik im kulturgeschichlichen Kontinuum, edited by Gerda Brunnlechner, Nadine Holzmeier, et al. (Niva Mediaevalia), Göttingen: V&R Unipress, 2024. (to appear)
  • Eleonora Cappuccilli, “Domenica da Paradiso and the Prophetic Discipline of the Body and Soul,” in Body, Gender, Senses: Subversive Expressions in Early Modern Art and Literature, edited by Carin Franzén and Johanna Vernqvist, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2024, pp. 11-29.
  • Unn Falkeid. “‘The Most Illustrious and Divine of All the Sibyls.’ Saint Birgitta in the Prophetic Visions of Tommaso Campanella and Queen Cristina of Sweden,” in The Legacy of Birgitta of Sweden, edited by Anna Wainwright and Unn Falkeid, Leiden: Brill, 2023, pp. 277-307.

For the first time we also had a respondent, our co-organizer Delfi Nieto-Isabel

Frances Kneupper began by explaining that prophetic authority could be both claimed and dismissed. Men justified their prophetic voices through text, including scripture and reading, whereas women (or at least men who wrote about women) justified their prophetic voices through the body, such as the stigmata and illness. Frances emphasised the differences between these two traditions: the male prophetic tradition was educated and written, while the female prophetic tradition was oral and more bodily. However, Frances stressed that the occasional merging of these two traditions is understudied. She explained that the female and male prophetic traditions at times drew on each other, for instance in the cases of Vincent Ferrer and Marie Robine, regarding concerns about the Antichrist. Moreover, Constance of Rabastens and Marie Robine broke the molds with their prophetic voices. Both were laywomen and illiterate, who used their roles as prophets to participate in the political uncertainty and the papal schism which formed the social background to their prophetic visions and engagement with apocalyptic rhetoric.

Eleonora Cappuccilli spoke next about Domenica da Paradiso, focusing on the questions and paradigms surrounding this prophetic figure. Eleonora notes that scholars have primarily focussed on Domenica’s lived and embodied experience, but Domenica’s body is in dialogue with her intellect. Domenica’s body could be both positive and active, becoming the link to the divine for the prophet. Dominica used extreme ascetism against her body, but Eleonora noted that martyrdom of the body has limits. Nevertheless, Eleonora explained that the earthly body also opens women to the divine and that the imitatio Christi does not have a limit. For hagiographers, prophetic women doubting themselves shows their legitimacy because doubt is answered by God. Domenica and Constance are connected to St Birgitta of Sweden, as Birgitta is authorized as a widow and prophet, and these women used their positions as prophets to influence the political climate that emerged around the fourteenth-century papal schism between Rome and Avignon. Domenica is not as political as Birgitta and Constance, but she calls on the Pope in 1526 to warn him of catastrophe. Eleonora underscored that a prophet could function as a critic even in a supportive capacity for an authority figure, but prophecy could also expose women to public circulation and legal danger. 

Unn Falkeid was the session’s third speaker. Unn began by explaining that this article emerged from her latest book. Because the article does not go into great depth about Birgitta of Sweden, she reminded the group about Birgitta’s life. She was born as an aristocrat, married at thirteen, and had eight children. In the 1340s, she became a widow and started to engage in public political debates while creating her own religious order. Birgitta moved to Rome, established a monastic rule, and traveled widely in Italy, where she produced her Liber celestis. According to scholarship, Birgitta was one of the most influential figures of the visionary tradition in the late Middle Ages. At the end of her life, she is at the height of her authority in Rome. Birgitta had a significant influence throughout Italy and was a key figure in the Italian Renaissance. Unn worked with Anna Wainwright on a research project on Birgitta of Sweden that produced a database and articles. The article presented today is one of the articles that emerged from this research project. Unn and Anna Wainwright’s most surprising discovery was that in the early modern period, long after her death, Birgitta was still invoked as a prophetic authority.

Delfi Nieto-Isabel was the session’s respondent. She indicated that she would first discuss how the papers work together, then turn to how her own work on prophetic women fits in, and then bring the key themes of the session’s prophetic women together. Delfi emphasised that prophecy is never about good things: it has an aura of negativity and catastrophe surrounding it. Although there were prophetic religious women before, the fourteenth century was a turning point. Drawing on the Book of Revelations, such women were concerned with the Antichrist and criticized the Pope, as the fourteenth century was a time of papal schism, leading to an increase of apocalypse rhetoric based on the Book of Revelation. On the other hand, Delfi stressed that in this session’s papers the relationship between intellectual and emotional authority is mediated for women. In the early fourteenth century, female prophets could respond to and draw on scripture in their writing and prophecies directly. By the late fourteenth century, male theologians drew on scripture, while women needed to negotiate the way in which they approached scripture, using a male figure to record their oral prophecies, claiming ignorance of the scripture draw on in the prophecy, and presenting their prophecies as embodied rather than intellectual. Delfi emphasised that earlier women paved the way for these later prophetic women. She then noted that another theme in this session is illiteracy, which is sometimes a trope and sometimes real. Prophetic women were able to participate intellectually, as the somatic body and reason interact in prophetic writing. Delfi stressed that there is both a turning point and a tension present here. For instance, the fourteenth-century beguine Na Prous is much more focused on her intellect and is less bodily, but the source that provides us with Na Prous’ visions is a legal source based on her testimony, not a source based on the tradition of affective piety associated with women, such as Catherine of Siena’s Dialogue or Birgitta of Sweden’s Liber celestis. Delfi indicated that this tension comes from women moving away from the aesthetics of the body in the fourteenth century. Delfi gave temporality as another reason for this tension, as the coming of the apocalypse is a concern in Franciscan circles at the time. 

Frances then responded to Delfi, saying that she is curious about the Franciscan prophetic circles. How did this tradition continue and change throughout time? And how was the tradition disseminated and continued?

Next, Eleonora responded to Delfi, mentioning the relationship between literacy and intellectual production. Birgitta’s pen was moved by God. Yet, women had to justify their non-traditional way of life. Eleonora stresses that orality is connected to the collective production of prophetic writing, and that women used orality to justify their tertiary lifestyles to their audiences. Eleonora stressed that prophetic women called on authority figures to pray, act immediately, take power, and interact with God. She also remarked that the mortification of the body filtered in and out. Prophetic women drew on the imitatio Christi, as Christ died for everyone. Christ touches everyone as equals, but in some moments the Passion becomes a political message. Eleonora said that a key theme is the relationship between the prophetic message and self-doubt. Eleonora then drew on Unn’s thinking, saying that Birgitta was sometimes misinterpreted, saying that theologians, systematised and challenged living saints. How should they use someone’s joy? Joy for prophetic women was divine, not diabolic. Eleonora said that doubt is always present, but women could not be deluded by the devil if they knew their hearts were clear. Prophetic women placed reform on themselves; it is true and from God.

Next, Unn responded to Delfi and Eleonora, explaining that Birgitta turned into a figure who became part of the language of prophecy. Unn argued that prophecy was way for women to enter politics, differentiating prophetic and mystical language. Unn also said that Birgitta’s language was vague, making it easy to re-use. Thus, her revelations gained popularity in the early seventeenth-century, and her Liber celestis turned into a tough document for the Church to grapple with. 

Delfi then asked a question to all three speakers about heresy: “What is the connection between prophecy and heresy? How does it play out?” 

Unn responded that prophecy was a powerful assistant to women, as drawing on Birgitta could increase the authority of other women. Birgitta of Sweden’s legacy is full of tensions between the tradition of the classical saint and the prophetic figure, as she became a figure that bridges the lines between a saint and a rebel.

Frances then responded that Birgitta of Sweden’s prophetic writing was taken out of context by theologians but not substantially so, especially at the Council of Basel. Constance and Marie questioned authority, but they were disobedient, not heretical. Disobedience and heresy are not the same. Frances stressed that heresy and the rejection of authority were different.

Eleonora responded that the reason for prophecy was clear, everything is coming directly from God. Divine authority sent by God is instrumental for a prophetic woman, so her prophecies are authorised by God and she is not mistaken for a preacher, a role Biblically forbidden to women. Eleonora mentioned that the church authorities tried to exclude Domenica, who became a pawn within this system, but Domenica wanted to be autonomous. The Dominicans considered that to be an issue. Domenica’s trial revealed the detention of another prophet. Dominica took responsibility for this woman, taking spiritual care of her.

The question-and-answer period then began.

Isabelle Cochelin asked a question about the social status of prophets. Birgitta of Sweden had no issues with writing because of her high status, and her disobedience was accepted. How does this change for lower-status women?

Unn responded that Birgitta’s high status and literacy matters here. The Virgin Mary is the Queen of Heaven and Birgitta speaks with the Virgin Mary in her visions. High status does lead to acceptance. Nevertheless, Birgitta faced resistance during her life and her canonization process was challenging.

Frances responded that there are two models at play here. Birgitta acts as an inspiration for everyone, but no one else has her status. Yet, illiterate lowly women also said that God had chosen them because of their simple status, as humility was a trope used by women and their hagiographers to authorise women’s speech.

Eleonora weighed in that Birgitta took a vow of poverty at one point, making Birgitta of Sweden an unusual model as a higher-status woman.

Bob Sweetman then asked if there were any allusions to the prophet Amos in Dominica’s visions and sermons as Amos was himself a farmer prophet. Frances responded that many women connected their authority to male prophets, not female prophets. Women also drew on John the Baptist, and Domenica also acted as “a New Age Mary.”

Jane Tylus then inquired about the Virgin Mary as an example of a prophetic figure whose body is crucial. Eleonora responded that the body anchored the Virgin Mary to the earth, but the body also opened her to the birth of Christ. Unn then responded that in Birgitta’s world, the Virgin Mary functions as a sister, mother, and friend, explaining that Birgitta also experienced many of the same social roles as the Virgin Mary. The late Middle Ages is the height of Marian devotion, as the Virgin Mary was simultaneously an inspiring figure and fountain head, and the imitation of Birgitta followed in the tradition of the imitatio Mariae.

Margot Fassler then asked Unn if she can say more about the oratorio of St Birgitta composed by Decio Azzolino (d. 1689), if it had been transcribed and ever performed and recorded: if not, “these things should happen.” Unn replied to Margot that she did not know if the oratorio had been performed, but the piece would be sung. She added that the oratorio still needed to be transcribed.

Next, Devon Sherwood asked Eleonora if a permeability is present between secular and religious works. Is corporality and intercessory language present regarding Queenship? Was the political undertones of these religious works meant to be an attempt to claim secular authority? Eleanora responded to Devon that as Birgitta is noble, she is a bearer of secular authority and power. The more classical image of this type of authority is the procession of queens in a religious ritual.

Lydia Walker asked Unn and Eleonora about Campanella’s love and Domenica’s doubt. Does the relationship between gender and emotion provide authorization? Is the authentication of doubt also gendered? Unn responded to Lydia, bringing in the history of emotions, saying that love is a strong word and can be an uncertain word due to translation issues. Eleonora said that doubt is gendered. Doubt for women is a formal form of authorization, as scripture is for theologians. Eleonora stressed that human intellect cannot have complete knowledge. Doubt needed to be reflected in action. This opens a space for women as prophets. Eleonora stressed that for Domenica, the garden and the virtues of the Virgin Mary are clear influences on her imagery.