<i>The Practice of the Bible in the Middle Ages: Production, Reception, and Performance in Western Christianity</i> (review)
2012; The Catholic University of America Press; Volume: 98; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1353/cat.2012.0252
ISSN1534-0708
Autores Tópico(s)Medieval Literature and History
ResumoReviewed by: The Practice of the Bible in the Middle Ages: Production, Reception, and Performance in Western Christianity Lesley Smith The Practice of the Bible in the Middle Ages: Production, Reception, and Performance in Western Christianity. Edited by Susan Boynton and Diane J. Reilly. (New York: Columbia University Press. 2011. Pp. xii, 364. $89.50 clothbound, ISBN 978-0-31-14826-9; $29.50 paperback, ISBN 978-0-231-14827-6; e-book, ISBN 978-0-231-52739-2.) Susan Boynton and Diane J. Reilly have brought together fourteen essays to “explore the liturgical, exegetical, and pastoral expressions of the Bible in physical, textual, and aural forms and the way these shaped contemporary understanding of the Bible’s contents and its place in Christian society” (p. 6). It is a tall order and one only partially achieved. The book includes an introduction by Boynton and Reilly and essays by Boynton (on liturgy), Richard Gyug (on Beneventan), Isabelle Cochelin (on monastic Bibles), Jennifer Harris (on Bible and history), Reilly (on lectern Bibles), Lila Yawn (on giant Bibles), Frans van Liere (on twelfth-century exegesis), Bert Roest (on mendicant exegesis), [End Page 779] Eyal Poleg (on sermons), Laura Light (on the Paris Bible), Stella Panayotova (on illustrated Psalters); Richard Marsden (on English translations), Clive Sneddon (on French translations), and Emily Francomano (on Castilian translations). None of the essays is without interest, and some are excellent, but they sit together uneasily. The target audience is unclear—some (indeed, some of the best) essays seem to have been given the brief of a wide survey of their particular field (e.g., Marsden on 1000 years of English Bible translation); others present a much more specialist corner of the landscape. A general reader might want to know how “lectern Bibles” and Italian giant Bibles differ, and why each needs its own chapter. Specialism would not in itself be a disadvantage, were it not for the gaping lack of some huge subjects; for instance, there are essays on the Bible in English, French, and Castilian vernacular translations, but no mention of German, even given the importance of the Old High German version of Tatian’s Diatesseron. Again, a glossary contains words such as cloister and psalter—which suggests an intended nonspecialist audience—but one essay includes apotropaic, Mosan, Deësis, and palladium without any explanation. The interested beginner will come away with a rather lopsided view of the wider subject. Nonetheless, some broad points emerge. The first is the variety of texts that might be counted as “the Bible” in the Middle Ages, including a host of vernacular versions. Second, we can see the tolerance—indeed, we might even think encouragement—of medieval people (including church authorities) of this variety. Far from the picture of a single, unchanging, carefully controlled text, the Bible in the Middle Ages was a many-splendored thing. Lesley Smith Harris Manchester College, Oxford Copyright © 2012 The Catholic University of America Press
Referência(s)