Britaix 17-18 (LERMA, UR 853, amU) is pleased to announce a cycle of seminars dealing with the making visible of religious scandals in the early modern period. scandales religieux de la période moderne. We will hear from specialists of French and British history, looking into how manuscripts expose or conceal scandals, but also reflecting on how historians from France and Britain approach those sources.
All session are open to all, just drop me an email at laurence.sterritt@univ-amu.fr.
Session 1 : 26 January 2026, 16.00 – 17.30 (French time) La visibilisation des scandales liés au mariage du clergé et des religieuses
– Elena Guillemard (U. Lyon 2): “Tactiques cléricales face à l’Inquisition : demander une dispense de mariage pour éviter le scandale (17e-18e siècle)”
– Laurence Lux-Sterritt (U. Aix-Marseille): « ‘Of nuns and men’: ou la question des scandales amoureux dans les archives conventuelles »
Session 2: 29 April 2026, 16.00– 18.00 Visibilisation et controverses religieuses
– Caroline Galland (U. Paris Nanterre): « Mitigations” sous surveillance : un scandale mauriste entre invisibilité et sur-visibilisation »
– Claire Schiano-Locurcio (U. Montpellier 3) : “Écrire le scandale : culture du conflit et contestation de l’autorité ecclésiastique chez les Clarisses anglaises en exil”
Session 3: 18 May 2026, 16.00 – 18.00 Making the polemics of the Brussels Benedictines visible
Jaime Goodrich (U. Wayne State) et Emilie Murphy (U. York) « Disputing spirituality at the English convent in Brussels (1620-1652) »
Session 4: 12 October 2026, 16.OO – 18.00 Visibilisation des scandales sexuels au sien du clergé
– Nicolas Guyard (U. Montpellier 3): « Construire le scandale. Visibilité, genre et agentivité autour de l’affaire du Curé Causse, Sète, milieu du XVIIIe siècle ».
– Myriam Ternant (U. Paris Nanterre): « La visibilité différée ou l’instrumentalisation de la sexualité ecclésiastique autour de l’affaire du curé Dardet, paroisse de l’île Saint-Denis, 1746-1767 »
Session 5: 7 December 2026, 16.00 – 18.00 The clandestine good Jesuit and the visible bad Jesuit
– James Kelly (U. Durham): « ‘A suppurating ulcer’: making visible transnational conflict between English religious orders in seventeenth-century Valladolid »
– Maddy Heightley-Phillipps (U. Durham) : « ‘Please send them here with any friends or merchants you can trust’: Jesuit Involvement in Female English Catholic Book Networks. »
Britaix 17-18 is now part of a project which, within LERMA, gathers colleagues from varied fields to explore the concept of ‘visibilisation’ from an interdisciplinary perspective. On 27 January 2025, Nathalie Bernard, Francesca Genesio, Ruth Menzies, Anne Page and Laurence Sterritt got together to discuss what ‘visibilisation’ meant to them through the prism of their own research but also finding echoes with colleagues from other disciplines.
The season of blog posts by some of our Master’s students is upon us once more. Lula Brunel, Isaure Emmanuelli and Hector Erb share their research into Yorkshire martyr Margaret Clitherow.
In contemporary British Catholic culture, Margaret Clitherow is regarded as a symbol of courage, devotion, and sacrifice, and has a significant legacy.
Born in 1556, Margaret Clitherow was raised protestant. She married John Clitherow in 1571 and converted to Roman Catholicism three years later. Being a Catholic, she did not attend mandatory protestant church services, which resulted in fines. However, these fines were paid by her husband; it is safe to say that Margaret Clitherow’s status as a married woman helped her subvert authorities. She was first imprisoned in 1577. She would then be arrested repeatedly during her lifetime, but always managed to escape death.[[1]]
However, her downfall came when she started harbouring priests and hosting mass. She was seized on March 10th 1586, during a raid on her home where authorities found evidence against her, such as a priest hole and catholic ornaments.
In 1584, The Act against Jesuits, seminary priests, and such other like disobedient persons had been passed by the Parliament. It targeted not only Jesuits and seminary priests but also people who harboured them who —if caught— would be fined and imprisoned for felony, or even executed for treason.[2] This sealed Margaret Clitherow’s fate.
She was put on trial and refused to plead guilty or innocent, stating that only God could judge her. Her refusal to plea resulted in an inevitable death sentence. She was sentenced to “peine forte et dure” which translates to “strong and harsh punishment”. She was crushed to death, pressed under her very own door which has been said to weigh 800 pounds.[[3]][[4]][[5]] Her death was so gruesome that Queen Elizabeth I, a Protestant, is said to have written a letter to her people, distancing herself from the execution.[[6]]
Margaret Clitherow gave her life to the Catholic cause. Canonised in 1970 by Pope Paul VI[[7]], she is a symbol of strength and hope. In their article Margaret Clitherow, Catholic Nonconformity, Martyrology and the Politics of Religious Change in Elizabethan England, Peter Lake and Michael Questier quoted Claire Cross, stating that “the Margaret Clitherow that has come down to us is largely a creation of Mush’s martyrological skills and polemical agenda.”[[8]] Indeed, all that has been written about Margaret Clitherow stems from John Mush’s account of her; The Life and Death of Mistress Margaret Clitherow[[9]], a hagiography he wrote the year she died.
According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a hagiography is a biography of a saint or a venerated person. It is also an idealising or idolising biography.[[10]] John Mush’s account of Margaret Clitherow fits both these definitions. John Mush was an English Roman Catholic priest and Margaret Clitherow’s confessor. Not only that, Clitherow was executed for harbouring him as well as another priest.[[11]] Naturally, Mush was biased when writing his account.
But how exactly did he manage to create this image of a Saint?
(Excerpt from the table of contents)
It all lies in the way he chose to write about her, from the words he used to the way he constructed his sentences. Upon reading his account for the first time, what is immediately noticeable is the way he has titled each chapter.
John Mush chose to describe Clitherow using words such as “virtuous”, “humility”, “perfect charity”, “obedience”, “zeal”, “devotion” and “abstinence” which all paint a picture of the ideal woman. Indeed, in patriarchal British 16th-century society, women were to be obedient, humble, and devoted to their duties as housewives. The choice of these words is not insignificant because they are qualifying adjectives that are semantically loaded; they hold an important meaning and positively influence how the reader will perceive Margaret Clitherow. Furthermore, all of these words are associated with the lexical field of Sainthood. It is possible that Clitherow was an ideal woman and respected the gendered norms of the time, however, there is a clear embellishment of her character through the language used.
(Excerpt from Margaret Clitherow’s trial, p.413)
In the text, the word “martyr” (as well as the derived word “martyrdom”) appears 150 times. Mush often refers to Margaret Clitherow as “the martyr” which, again, was not an insignificant choice. He especially refers to her as such during her trial, which emphasises the idea of sacrifice and courage. Plus, using such repetition pushes the reader to assimilate the idea that Margaret is “the martyr”; her name and the word become synonymous.
Furthermore, the idea that Margaret Clitherow has not committed any crime and hence, doesn’t need a trial, is repeated several times. According to her, no one can judge her except God, as everything she has done was for Him. Her actions are strictly between her and God because, in His infinite wisdom, He is the only one who is able to understand her doings.
(Excerpt, p.415)
This last sentence is very reminiscent of the words Jesus Christ spoke on the cross: “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they do”[[12]]. The use of such a powerful reference reinforces the notions of altruism and sacrifice, again painting the image of a woman who knows she is right and ready to die for her cause.
Once more, it is not impossible that she could have said those words while on trial. Nevertheless, there once more seems to be an exaggeration of facts by the language used. There is an undeniable theatrical and dramatic dimension to this text, which is precisely what played in Margaret Clitherow’s favour because passages like these appealed to readers’ emotions. This was precisely John Mush’s intention because, in a zealously religious society, emotion dominated logic.
“Paradoxically the more careful the reading and closer the examination [of Mush’s text], the further the woman recedes and a series of archetypes begin[s] to move into her place.”[[13]]
This quote is extremely pertinent because it touches on a very factual matter: Margaret Clitherow’s status as a symbol precedes her womanhood.
When reading about Margaret Clitherow, it is possible to find information that contradicts itself. For instance, some write that she was pregnant when executed.[[14]] Whether it is true or not, this adds to the tragic dimension of Margaret Clitherow’s story. Furthermore, many facts about her remain unclear; such as her date of birth or motives to sacrifice herself for Catholicism. It has been said that Margaret Clitherow refused to plead because she wished to protect her children and close ones from being subjected to torture, which is highly altruistic. However, one can ask oneself: did her refusal to plea stem from this very reason? Or did she know that by doing so, she would be perceived and remembered as a martyr?All of these vague elements blur the lines between reality and fiction; turning Margaret Clitherow into a myth which is embellished over time.
In his account, John Mush wanted to create the image of a local and current Saint, one that would influence and encourage his contemporaries. He primarily wished to inspire Catholic women. Sixteenth-century England’s patriarchal society was — surprisingly— the perfect cover, allowing women to partake in clandestine activities. Although women could be imprisoned, sometimes for a long period of time, the Council in the North was generally reluctant to resort to this step.[[15]] Furthermore, according to John Mush, Margaret Clitherow saw her prison experience as beneficial.
(Excerpt, p.370)
In this excerpt, it is understood that prison was a positive experience, where one can strengthen their faith, uninterrupted by everyday life. This romanticised and even idealised vision of prison aimed at downplaying reality because if the consequences did not seem severe, then perhaps more people would be tempted to partake in the maintaining of the catholic faith; notably those who were in comfortable positions to do so.
Through clever elements like these, John Mush was able to create Saint Margaret Clitherow, The Pearl of York. In a post-Reformation England which sought to rid itself of Catholicism, Margaret Clitherow brought hope to those who needed it the most. Fighting for what she believed in, she was fervently devoted to her faith until her very last breath.
A true symbol of devotion and sacrifice, she has inspired many and remains a staple of Catholicism.
Bibliography
Primary source:
Mush, John. ‘A True Report of the Life and Martyrdom of Mrs. Margaret Clitherow’ in The Troubles of Our Catholic Forefathers Related by Themselves, edited by John Morris, 360-440. London: Burns and Oates, 1877.
Connors, Ryan . “The Pearl of York Isn’t Famous York Minster, but This Martyr.” Aleteia — Catholic Spirituality, Lifestyle, World News, and Culture, March 25, 2023.
Jenkins, John Philip, The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, and Gloria Lotha. “Peine Forte et Dure | English Law.” Encyclopedia Britannica, November 30, 2010.
Lake, Peter, and Michael Questier. “Margaret Clitherow, Catholic Nonconformity, Martyrology and the Politics of Religious Change in Elizabethan England.” Past & Present, no. 185 (2004): 43–90.
[3] John Philip Jenkins, The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, and Gloria Lotha, “Peine Forte et Dure | English Law,” Encyclopedia Britannica, November 30, 2010.
[6] Zoe Screti, “Margaret Clitherow, the Pearl of York,” Historic UK, accessed April 28, 2023.
[7] Ryan Connors, “The Pearl of York Isn’t Famous York Minster, but This Martyr,” Aleteia — Catholic Spirituality, Lifestyle, World News, and Culture, March 25, 2023.
[8] Peter Lake and Michael Questier, “Margaret Clitherow, Catholic Nonconformity, Martyrology and the Politics of Religious Change in Elizabethan England,” Past & Present, no. 185 (2004): 43–90.
[9] Mush, John. ‘A True Report of the Life and Martyrdom of Mrs. Margaret Clitherow’ in The Troubles of Our Catholic Forefathers Related by Themselves, edited by John Morris, 360-440. London: Burns and Oates, 1877.
[13] Anne Dillon quoted by Peter Lake and Michael Questier, “Margaret Clitherow, Catholic Nonconformity, Martyrology and the Politics of Religious Change in Elizabethan England,” Past & Present, no. 185 (2004): 43–90.
[14] Claire Ridgway, “Margaret Clitherow (C.1552-1586) – the Tudor Society,” The Tudor Society, March 1, 2021.
[15] Peter Lake and Michael Questier, “Margaret Clitherow, Catholic Nonconformity, Martyrology and the Politics of Religious Change in Elizabethan England,” Past & Present, no. 185 (2004): 43–90.
The season of blog posts by some of our Master’s students is upon us once more. In this post, Mathilde Arrosa and Juliette Naudin take a look at the Gunpowder Plot in contemporaneous publications, focusing especially on J. H. Gent’s 1612 A True and Perfect Relation of that most horrid & hellish conspiracy of the gunpowder treason.
Fig. 1 Remember, remember the fifth of November https://www.flickr.com/photos/woolamaloo_gazette/4078960006.
Most people will know these words and other tokens of popular culture: the Anonymous mask, the 5th of November, and so on. All relate to, and are products linked with the Gunpowder Plot. But one does not have to go far to see the number of historical inaccuracies contained within the modern representations of the plot. Especially with modern productions, such as the historical drama television Gunpowder miniseries produced by Kit Harington, one can see a narrative drawn up. However, this type of storytelling was also present in the material contemporary to the event itself. But how have the narratives of the time shaped the way we tell, perceive, and remember the Gunpowder Plot? It was done primarily with the construction of an anti-Catholic narrative. In addition, this storytelling was incomplete. Eventually, these two major aspects have crystallised, leading to new modern perspectives and questions on the topic.
In A True and Perfect Relation of that most horrid & hellish conspiracy of the gunpowder treason (1612) J.H Gent forms an anti-Catholic narrative, using different strategies: through portraying the plotters and Catholics as malevolent, describing the plot as an egregious event, but also, depicting Protestants as protected by God.
Fig. 2 The Gunpowder Plot Galop, 1866. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cover_-_The_Gunpowder_Plot_Galop_(1866)_-_BL.jpg.
One of Gent’s goals was to create a negative image of the Catholics. He does so explicitly by describing Papists and plotters with unfavourable words such as: “some practices of the Papists to make new stirs”[1] and “They lived bloodily in superstition, they practised divellishly in all manner of impiety”[2] for the plotters. There are more instances of this behaviour in the book, but these examples clearly depict Catholics as burdensome as well as vile. Because only dissenting words are used, there is no room left for any sympathy, mediation, or nuance.
Gent also explicitly describes the plot negatively several times in his book. Here too, no place is left for sympathy: “that most monstrous & before unheard of mischief, the Plot of the Gunpowder-Treason.”[3] and “This Horrid Treason”[4]. As the plot and the Catholics are described resentfully, even people who were not involved in the said plot (for Protestants tended to see all Catholics linked together, as part of some secret association) are associated with those negative images. In a way, because both the plot and the plotters are described as so, in opposition, Protestants are implicitly shown as victims. The Catholics and their plots are so wicked that Protestants can only be victims against their villainy. However, they are not helpless either, they have God on their side.
Naturally, Gent presents the idea that God watches over the Protestants and therefore they are protected. “The Lord is our Keeper, the Lord is our Defence at our right Hand. Which God of his Infinite Mercy still stretch out to our Protection, and continue us in Peace and Quietnesse”.[5] By weakening the validity of Catholics who are not protected directly by God, Protestants and their faith are strengthened and superior. By focusing on these different aspects Gent emphasises Protestants while Catholics are weakened.
This primary source also conveys a false telling of events. Indeed, Gent mentions both the Main and Gunpowder Plot, but even then, there seems to be a focus on the latter. Additionally, the account of what preceded and led to these events is diminished.
The Main Plot is mentioned and explained; however, this description is much lighter and less negative than the way the Gunpowder Plot is described: “by his declaring his constant resolution for the maintenance of the Religion here Established; a conspiracy was entred […] their design being to surprize the King and Prince Henry, and securing of them, […] there by violence to obtain their own pardons, a Tolleration of Religion, and a removal of some Councellours, &c. And to conceal this Treason the better, Watson devised Oaths of secresie”[6]. In this description much more moderate words, and in lesser quantities, are used. This implies a focus on the Gunpowder Plot, though they were violent attempts before.
But it is not only the descriptions of both plots that are either watered-down or exaggerated, it is also the events preceding both plots. “[Elizabeth] dying, the Papists of England were in great hopes that her Successour King James of Scotland, […] would not only remit and surcease those rigours they had before suffered, but would also grant them free Exercise and Toleration of their Religion, [that was in vain] when they perceived to be frustrated and disappointed, at that Kings very first coming in and assumption to this Crown”[7]. Here the past century of persecutions against Catholics are reduced to their frustration towards James, resulting in a violent outburst.
And while these persecutions are reduced to the sole quiescence of James, other aspects of the political and social contexts also tend to be diminished, some even made invisible.
Fig. 3 The Execution of the Conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot, 1606 https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw81947/The-Execution-of-the-Conspirators-in-the-Gunpowder-Plot-Guy-Fawkes
“And their memory shall be cursed throughout all Generations.”[8]
To understand the reasons that have led to the Gunpowder Plot, some would tell us to examine Elizabeth’s reign. But this tense climate had started building up way before: with Henry VIII when he was declared as the Supreme Head of Church, effectively breaking with Rome. This would lead to a series of religious identity crises in England, where anti-Catholic sentiments would develop and crystallise during the reigns of both Elizabeth I and James I, becoming part of the national identity and ideology.
In her essay Gunpowder, Treason and Scots, Jenny Wormald argues that for the gunpowder plot: “we still lack a coherent historical explanation”. She continues: “The historical image of the Gunpowder Plot is thus dominated by fireworks, Catholic defensiveness […] it is dominated in a different way by the scholarship […]. But there remains a problem. […] We still need answers to the two most basic questions, why was there a Gunpowder Plot, and what did the plotters really want?”[9]. In fact, to understand that dichotomy in representations and narratives, the context and the plotters and their motivations have to be understood.
It cannot be denied that James needed to be accepted by Catholics to secure his throne. But even more than just reaching for English Catholics support, James sought support of the European Catholic powers while trying to instil enough tolerance as to keep Catholics satisfied without alienating the Protestant political power of England. To clearly understand the frustration of the plotters, it is essential to understand who they were; desperate men who spend many years before the plot, even before James’ succession, to seek solutions, eventually asking help from Spain in the hope of securing peace for English Catholics. Facing the harsh reality that no one, even Spain would come to help them, they were the only possible actors to ensure the end of these persecutions.
As Jenny Wormald points out: “There was far more to the Gunpowder Plot than a mere reaction to James I’s disappointing of Catholic hopes; it was a complex brew of international intrigue and national passion, and much work remains to be done before it can be fully understood.”[10] After more than 400 years, it is still worth the shot to look out for this event that is so well known and so little understood.
Fig. 4 The Gunpowder Plot Conspirators https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw133798/The-Gunpowder-Plot-Conspirators
Due to the nature of some historical sources, there is bound to be some sort of degradation over time, whether physical (manuscripts torn or incomplete) or more ideological (the purpose of the text being over, under interpreted, or completely deformed). But that is not entirely the case with the Gunpowder Plot. There seemed, in historical documents, to be ideological deformations which worsened over time. These incomplete or biased stories were unsteady grounds with which historians had to base their research on, rendering a clear rendition of the plot even uncertain today. Though modern representations of a historical event might offer an alluring insight, and it is with careful steps one must tread when researching any topic.
“I see no reason why the gunpowder treason should ever be forgot.”
Bibliography
Gent, J. A true and perfect relation of that most horrid & ; hellish conspiracy of the gunpowder treason. Dis-covered the 5th of November, anno Dom. 1605. Collected out of the best and most authentique writers, and now re-published. For further information, and to remember the people of England of Gods vvonderfull mercies and deliverances vouchsafed them, for his great name, and for his churches sake, in the defence and maintenance of the Protestant religion, established in these na-tions. With the names of those traytors that suffered for that bloody plot. London: Fr. Coles, 1612.
Wormald, Jenny. “Gunpowder, Treason, and Scots.” Journal of British Studies 24, no. 2 (April 1985): 141–68. https://www.jstor.org/stable/175701
Cette université d’été virtuelle, financée par la Cité des Écritures de la Sorbonne Nouvelle, est composée de quatre journées de formation centrées sur la localisation, l’exploitation et l’édition de manuscrits anglophones de la première modernité (1500-1700).
Elle s’adresse à un public d’étudiant.es, de masterant.es, de doctorant.es et d’enseignant.es chercheuses, toutes disciplines confondues (littérature, histoire, histoire culturelle, histoire des idées, philosophie…), qui dans le cadre de leurs travaux de recherche ou de leur projet professionnel ont besoin (i) de se familiariser avec les archives relatives à l’histoire et littérature du monde anglophone (ii) de comprendre comment ces écrits ont été conservés et transmis, (iii) de pouvoir lire les écritures manuscrites. La formation se déroulera en anglais.
Elle est divisée en quatre grandes thématiques:
les écrits religieux;
les correspondances;
les manuscrits à l’ère du numérique;
les éditions.
Lors des quatre matinées, se succèderont les interventions d’universitaires et de professionnels internationaux (bibliothécaires, archivistes et responsables de collections); les après-midi seront consacrées à des ateliers de paléographie, en lien avec la thématique de la journée. Ces ateliers suivent une progression, il est donc nécessaire d’y participer régulièrement et dans l’ordre.
L’INSCRIPTION EST OBLIGATOIRE JUSQU’AU 15 MAI 2023 EN REMPLISSANT LE FORMULAIRE SUIVANT:
LUNDI 12 JUIN 2023 : Les écrits religieux de la période moderne
8h45: Accueil par les organisateur.trices, informations sur le déroulé de la formation
9h00-10h00 : Giles Mandelbrote (Lambeth Palace Library), ‘Lambeth Palace Library through four centuries’
10h00-10h30 : questions et échanges avec le public
Café virtuel, vous êtes invité.es à laisser vos caméras et micros ouverts durant les pauses pour pouvoir échanger
11h00-12h00 : Claire Gheeraert-Graffeuille (Université de Rouen), ‘Lucy Hutchinson’s autograph manuscripts: a key to understanding her work?’
12h30-13h00 : questions et échanges avec les participant.es
Modérateur.trice: Anne Page
14h30-16h30 : atelier de paléographie (sources religieuses) animé par Guillaume Coatalen et Anne Page
MARDI 13 JUIN 2023 : La littérature autrement : les corpora épistolaires
9h00-10h00 : Miranda Lewis (Université d’Oxford, directrice de Early Modern Letters Online), ‘The lives of letters in EMLO’
10h00-10h30 : questions et échanges avec le public
Café virtuel
11h00-12h00 : Daniel Starza-Smith (King’s College London), ‘Editing a manuscript letter: from first encounter to edited text’
12h30-13h00 : questions et échanges avec les participant.es
Modérateur.trice: Guillaume Coatalen
14h30-16h30 : atelier de paléographie (lettres) animé Guillaume Coatalen et Aurélie Griffin
MERCREDI 14 JUIN 2023 : Mener un projet d’édition numérique
9h00-10h00 : Chris Langley (Open University), ‘Mapping the Scottish Reformation: Religious Change, Manuscripts and Open Data’
10h00-10h15 : questions et échanges avec les participant.es
Café virtuel
10h30-11h30 : Jessica Edmondes (Bodleian Library), ‘Digital storytelling with early modern literary manuscripts’
11h30-11h45 : questions et échanges avec les participant.es
Café virtuel
12h00-12h30 : Aude de Mézerac-Zanetti (Université de Lille), ‘Transcribing and producing a digital edition for MS 128 Corpus Christi College (Cambridge): technical and editorial challenges in a collaborative and pedagogical project’
12h30-12h45 : questions et échanges avec les participant.es
Modérateur.trice: Aurélie Griffin
14h30-16h30 : atelier de paléographie (l’écriture de chancellerie) animé par Guillaume Coatalen et Aude de Mézerac-Zanetti. Une partie de cet atelier comprendra une démonstration de transcription par intelligence artificielle
JEUDI 15 JUIN 2023 : Éditer les manuscrits de la période moderne
9h00-10h30 : Table ronde avec trois éditeur.trices de manuscrits: Laurence Lux-Sterritt (Aix-Marseille Université), Guillaume Coatalen (CY- Cergy) et Jessica Malay (University of Huddersfield)
Modérateur.trice: Aude de Mézerac-Zanetti
Café virtuel
11h00-10h30 : John Morrill (Cambridge University) et Joel Halcomb (University of East Anglia), ‘How and how not to edit early modern documents’.
Modérateur.trice: Anne Page
14h30-16h30 : atelier de paléographie
(sur des textes proposés par les participant.es)
16h30-16h45: dernier café virtuel, échange entre les participant.es et clôture de la formation
On 11 and 12 May 2023, the SELVA (the French Société d’Étude de la Littérature de Voyage du monde Anglophone) will celebrate the twentieth anniversary of its creation by our esteemed member and own founder, Professor Jean Viviès. On this occasion, a two-day conference will be held at the university of Côté d’Azur, Nice.
Jean Viviès will open the conference, and members of Britaix 17-18 Nathalie Bernard and Ruth Menzies will be presenting papers. To view the programme of this exciting event, click HERE.
BRITAIX 17-18 welcomes you to its latest seminar on Lived Religion, which will be held via Zoom on Monday 17 April, from 16.30 to 18.30 (Paris time, or 15.30-17.30 BST).
To attend, please register via Eventbrite below.
W. M. JACOB, Evidence for Lay Religious Devotion and Public Practice in Eighteenth Century England
There appears to be little evidence from even the comparatively recent past of the early twentieth, the nineteenth and eighteenth centuries of religious practice in the home, or in public or private spaces. Prior to a national census of attendance at places of worship in 1851 there is little usable evidence about British church attendance. In any case, censuses of church attendance provide little evidence of people’s religiosity. Diaries and letters, when carefully read, provide indications of routines of daily household prayers and private devotional life, but such evidence is largely restricted to the ‘better-off’. Printers’ and publishers’ lists suggest that theological and devotional books and collections of sermons dominated the English publishing and bookselling trade during the eighteenth and most of the nineteenth centuries. However, more oblique evidence can be gleaned from eighteenth century parish records showing the ‘middling sort’ played an active part in maintaining parish churches, levying rates to fund repairs and improving and beautifying their churches and building new churches. Much money was contributed for such purposes, and communal life in towns and villages centred on parish churches (see W.M. Jacob, Lay people and religion in the early eighteenth century, 1996). There is also much evidence of religiously-inspired philanthropic activities, one of the commonest of which was providing funds to teaching poor children the Catechism and to read and write, and perhaps arithmetic. Large numbers of laypeople of the better and middling sorts subscribed to or helped to endow such schools and teaching, and devoted time and care to managing them, including providing poor people’s children with Bibles and Prayer Books, and providing for daily family prayers at home, and also overseeing children’s apprenticeship in households of devout employers. Surviving records of these ‘charity schools’, provide a window on to grass-roots religious practice in private and public spaces in towns and villages in eighteenth century England.
W.M. Jacob is the author of Lay people and religion in the early eighteenth century (1996), The Making of the Anglican Church Worldwide (1997), The Clerical Profession in the Long Eighteenth Century, 1680-1840 (2007), and Religious Vitality in Victorian London (2021) and numerous articles on the social history of religion in eighteenth and nineteenth century England and Wales. He is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and was a Research Fellow of King’s College London. He is an independent scholar.
Le séminaire BRITAIX 17-18 est heureux de vous convier à sa prochaine séance sur la religion vécue, qui se tiendra le lundi 6 mars 2023 de 16h30 à 18h30, en Zoom.
Séance « Vivre sa religion dans la clandestinité »
Laurence Lux-Sterritt, « Continuité et adaptations : la religion vécue des catholiques du XVIIème siècle. »
Durant le long règne de la reine Elisabeth I (1558-1603), le parlement met tout en œuvre pour imposer l’uniformisation des croyances et des pratiques, sous l’égide de la nouvelle Église anglicane réformée. Le royaume se dote d’un arsenal pénal sévère, pour invisibiliser les catholiques qui demeurent. Les professions les plus prestigieuses leur sont interdites, les déplacements et les réunions également. Officiellement, ils n’ont plus ni lieux publics où pratiquer, ni prêtres, livres ou objets sacrés pour accompagner leur dévotion. Dans ce contexte hostile, les catholiques qui refusent de se conformer entrent peu à peu dans une logique non plus de simple résistance mais d’adaptation et de transformation. Pour que la foi perdure, ils développent des pratiques plus souples, plus personnelles. Tandis que la religion est vécue loin du contrôle des clercs, elle prend des formes parfois insolites. En terre anglicane, les catholiques créent de nouvelles façons de vivre leur religion de façon secrète et militante à la fois. Cette communication explorera la vie dévotionnelle et la religion vécue des catholiques anglais et gallois, et plus particulièrement les pratiques des familles au sein desquelles une ou plusieurs filles sont plus tard devenues religieuses. Dans les foyers où elles ont grandi, comment vivait-on sa religion dans la clandestinité ?
Laurence Lux-Sterritt est Maitresse de Conférences HDR en civilisation britannique et spécialiste de la période moderne au sein du Laboratoire d’Études et de Recherche sur le Monde Anglophone (LERMA, UR 853).
Anne Dunan-Page, « De la clandestinité à la tolérance : meeting-houses, domesticité et sociabilité au XVIIIe siècle »
Depuis la Réforme, les diverses formes de dévotion domestique pratiquées par ceux qu’on appelait des non-conformistes en dehors de l’Église d’Angleterre, qu’ils soient protestants ou catholiques, alimentaient des peurs religieuses et politiques autour du « conventicule ». Plus ou moins tolérés tout au long du XVIIe siècle, certains puritains et puritaines, en particulier, construisirent leur identité religieuse, et, plus tard, institutionnelle, autour de rencontres privées qui se déroulaient dans une ou plusieurs pièces de leurs propres maisons, tout en investissant en parallèle, pour les prêches, des lieux publics, des tavernes ou des bâtiments loués à des corporations professionnelles. À partir de 1660, ces rencontres devenant interdites, les non-conformistes se replièrent une fois de plus dans des espaces privés jusqu’à ce que la loi de Tolérance de 1688 autorise officiellement les lieux de culte protestants. Dans cette intervention, j’examinerai tout d’abord les questions qui se posent lorsque la religion investit le foyer et les conséquences en termes de perception d’un espace personnel, intime, celui de la maison, qui devenait un espace social, celui de la congrégation. Ensuite, plutôt que d’examiner les le culte clandestin jusqu’en 1689, je souhaiterais me positionner précisément au moment où la loi autorisa le retour dans des lieux spécifiquement dédiés à l’exercice de la religion. Grâce à des documents d’archives peu connus (baux, actes de propriété, contrats avec des artisans, trusts, inventaires mobiliers…), je tenterais de montrer que les non-conformistes pensèrent d’emblée leurs nouveaux lieux comme des complexes semi-privés – toujours appelés meeting houses – où coexistaient espaces publics et espaces privés, matérialisant ainsi une continuité profonde avec leur héritage domestique. Cette enquête permettra de poser les jalons d’une étude à venir sur les fonctions sociales des chapelles du XVIIIe siècle que les autorités persistaient à ne pas traiter comme des « églises ».
Anne Dunan-Page est Professeure d’Études Anglophones à Aix-Marseille Université et membre du Laboratoire d’Études et de Recherche sur le Monde Anglophone (LERMA, UR 853).
Lors de la deuxième et dernière année de notre cycle d’étude sur la notion de mise en texte, nous aborderons la question des normes et des codes, quand les différents acteurs de la mise en texte, des auteurs, traducteurs et éditeurs, en passant par les imprimeurs et jusqu’au lectorat réinventent les conventions qui régissent le rapport à la production écrite.
Lundi 9 janvier 2023, de 16h30 à 18h30. Cette séance aura lieu en hybride: sur le campus Schuman d’AMU, à la Maison de la Recherche, salle 2.44, ou en ligne via Eventbrite INSCRIPTION
Guillaume Coatalen (Cergy Paris), « Mise en page des manuscrits anglais de la première modernité : l’espace du sens ».
La mise en page des manuscrits varie considérablement d’un genre de texte à l’autre, et même à l’intérieur d’un genre donné. Si elle obéit à des contraintes pratiques, comme la quantité de papier disponible, la mise en page se plie à des conventions pour la plupart non écrites. Ainsi Jonathan Gibson a pu démontrer que la distance entre la signature et le texte d’une lettre manuscrite était proportionnelle au respect accordé au destinataire de la lettre. En règle générale, l’espace est une marque de valeur, elle peut même inviter la méditation ou le recueillement. Mais quand est-il des cas intermédiaires ? Peut-on envisager une véritable poétique de l’espace du manuscrit, et selon quels critères ?
Clotilde Prunier (Paris Nanterre) : « La mise en texte de la Mission d’Écosse au 18e siècle ».
En 1560, le parlement écossais déclare l’Église catholique romaine hors la loi. Pour faire face à la clandestinité, l’Église catholique d’Écosse organisée en Mission distincte de l’Angleterre en 1653 s’appuie notamment sur des réseaux épistolaires. Tout au long du 18e siècle, la correspondance – tant entre divers membres du clergé en Écosse qu’entre les évêques et le Collège des Écossais à Paris d’une part ou Propaganda Fide à Rome d’autre part – demeure le principal outil d’administration de la Mission. La mise en texte de la Mission d’Écosse commence donc par la rédaction de lettres qui sont avant tout un outil d’information. Elles deviennent par la suite le matériau primordial de l’écriture de l’histoire de la Mission au 18e siècle, écriture qui donne à son tour lieu à une double mise en texte : l’une, « formelle », consiste à transformer la correspondance en récit ; l’autre, « mémorielle » voire « apologétique », indissociable de la précédente, vise à laisser une trace des épreuves endurées par les « martyrs », mais aussi à justifier le clergé séculier catholique d’Écosse. Ces mises en texte, projetées ou réalisées, sont a priori destinées à un lectorat circonscrit, clairement défini selon leur visée, et vouées à circuler uniquement sous forme manuscrite. Après un court exposé de l’entreprise de mise en texte de l’historien Thomas Innes dans les années 1730, la communication s’arrêtera plus longuement sur l’exemple de l’évêque John Geddes qui, toute sa vie « active » durant (de son ordination comme prêtre à la fin des années 1750 au milieu des années 1790), s’attache à rassembler, (faire) retranscrire et résumer les éléments constitutifs des archives catholiques écossaises – tant en Écosse même qu’au Vatican et dans les Collèges des Écossais sur le continent – en vue de la mise en texte de l’histoire de la Mission.
Guillaume Coatalen est MCF (HDR) à CY Cergy Paris Université. Il s’intéresse tout particulièrement aux manuscrits et à la paléographie. Il a publié (ou co-publié) avec Bajetta, Carlo et Jonathan Gibson (éds), Elizabeth I’s Foreign Correspondence: Letters, Rhetoric and Politics, (Palgrave Macmillan, 2014), Two Elizabethan Treatises on Rhetoric the Foundacion of Rhetorike by Richard Reynolds, 1563, and A Brief Discourse on Rhetoricke by William Medley, 1575 (Brill, 2018) et avec Birkan-Berz, Carole et Thomas Vuong, (éds), Translating Petrarch’s Poetry: L’Aura del Petrarca from the Quattrocento to the 21st Century, Transcript, 8 (Legenda, 2020). Il achève actuellement une monographie sur la figure du poète dans les pièces anglaises de la première modernité.
Clotilde Prunier est professeur de civilisation britannique à l’université Paris Nanterre. Elle est l’auteur d’Anti-Catholic Strategies in Eighteenth-Century Scotland (Peter Lang, 2004) et a dirigé avec Anne Dunan-Page Debating the Faith : Religion and Letter Writing in Great Britain, 1550-1800 (Springer, 2013). Elle a publié des articles sur divers aspects de l’Écosse du XVIIIe siècle, notamment sur la perception des Highlands, sur les rôles de l’éducation, sur l’anticatholicisme (‘Anti-Popery in Eighteenth-Century Scotland: A Scottish Catholic Perspective’ dans Claire Gheeraert-Graffeuille et Géraldine Vaughan (dir.), Anti-Catholicism in Britain and Ireland, 1600–2000, Cham, Palgrave Macmillan, 2020, pp. 37–53) et sur les réseaux européens – réseaux de correspondance, mais aussi réseaux humains – de la Mission d’Écosse au XVIIIe siècle (‘« Our Countryman, the Bishop of Rodez » : Seignelay Colbert de Castlehill et la Mission d’Écosse’ dans Alain Alcouffe (dir), Seignelay Colbert de Castlehill (1735-1811) Un évêque entre Lumières écossaises et Contre-Révolution, Toulouse, Presses de l’Université Toulouse 1 Capitole, 2022, pp. 199–236)
Britaix17-18 is delighted to relay this promotional video, in which Professor Gérard Hugues presents his seminal three-volume edition and translation of Gouverneur Morris’s Journal during the French Revolution.
The rights to this video belong to his publishers, Librairie Droz.
Manon Lenormand and Klaudia Porucka, both MA students with us, read Arthur Marotti’s ‘Alienating Catholic: Recusant Women, Jesuits, and Ideological Fantasies’, in Religious Ideology & Cultural Fantasy. Catholic and Anti-Catholic Discourses in Early Modern England (University of Notre Dame, 2005), pp. 32-63. Below is their reflexive work, which they chose to present as a piece of creative writing inspired by pamphlets such as The Jesuits Intrigues (London, 1669), which pretended to be genuine guide books for the conversion of virtuous English subjects to the Roman faith.
A (not so) Early Modern Pamphlet: The Popish Plague.
In the manner of Thomas Scott or Henry Compton, this blogpost is written in the form of an anti-recusancy pamphlet such as it was custom during the Early Modern Period. It focuses on the alienation of recusant women and Jesuits with links to common myths surrounding their practices and goals. The following four chapters were based on Arthur F. Marotti’s book Religious Ideology & Cultural Fantasy. Catholic and Anti-Catholic Discourses in Early Modern England (University of Notre Dame, 2005)
It is commonly known that those who dare to challenge the Church are willing to challenge the state. After all, if you were to diminish the magnificence of our supreme leader, could we call you English? Was the Book of Common Prayer not made to unify our nation and to help us celebrate our uniqueness? We have published 39 articles of faith[2] to explore what it means to be part of our mighty Anglican Church and it is obvious to the most humble of eyes that the popish vermin cannot align their virtues to ours. Those half subjects preaching in a foreign tongue, unleashing threats of purgatory, and accusing us of heresy[3]… those foreign snakes are what lurks in the darkest hole waiting to poison our nation. In past times, the English held grudges against several nations, but the true black sheep is hiding among loyal English citizens. How can we show their real face to humanity?
The first thing that English Protestants can do, is to expose them for what they are! We have suffered because of them and are in great danger of losing everything that our great nation has accomplished with our Majesties divine help. Milton[4] warns us in his work of the archtraitor and of their use of female charm. Catholic missionary priests, especially those of the Jesuit kind, are known to work with recusant women, trying to lure more English subjects into their net. They are in allegiance with the Catholic Church in Rome and are committed to foreign powers.Women play a particular role in this game, as they trick their husbands into following their faith and bring into this world popish offspring that is to be educated outside of our English home. Those strange dangers are only the tip of this heinous mountain of doom.
Chap. II. Devilish snakes spewing their Popish venom
Ever since the arrival of the first Jesuits in our dear country in 1580,[6] things have not been the same. Our nation is in great danger, they are rotting the very core of our civilisation. They are trying to rip us of our institutions. How, you may ask? Like snakes, they are slithering into our towns and within our very homes. First, they send their offspring to foreign countries where they are taught to worship the heresy of the papish order, they send them our money so that they can spend it on the continent.[7] Then, once their offspring has been acquainted enough with these popish heresies, they send them back to our country so they can spew their poison within our homes.[8] Our wives, who are weaker than us because of their sex, are the first prey these devils target. They seduce them into Catholicism, and once seduced, they seduce their good Protestant husbands in their turn. They poison our weak women’s minds and render them seductresses who manipulate men. They shift the natural and good order of things, our women no longer abide by their loving husbands or by our loving Monarch, but by their perversities. They become wicked Popish women, who let those vipers into their bed to practise spiritual adultery.[9] Widows and married women alike, Jesuits use the weakness of their sex and mind to control their estates and their money in the name of their mission for the romische Pope.
What have they brought to our nation? They are trying to rot our institutions. Plot after plot, we discover the extent of their deceitfulness. Like devils, they disguise themselves as good citizens, only for us to find them in Parliament, plotting to burn our institutions with their hellish fires,[10] or trying to kill our dear monarch Charles II[11] so they can have their Catholic King.[12]
Chap. III. Take the burden back to Rome!
This Burden backe to Rome 1641 [16]
For our sake, the sake of our country and the survival of our monarchy, we must kick these devils out of our kingdom! Let’s not give them an opportunity to kick us out of our own homes! We must protect our dearest monarch and government. The Jesuits and the recusant Catholic women who give them shelter have declared themselves as enemies of the state by not complying to the oath of allegiance. More than that, they befriend our greatest enemy: the Spaniards.[13]We must therefore treat them as traitors of the state. We must not let them plot against our dear nation together. They have tried putting the Spanish infanta, their Catholic offspring, by the side of our future monarch,[14] to have that dry-Nurse pretend to be a mother to our country…[15] We must continue to forbid them to poison our society. We must continue to reveal their true devilish nature to the world, and to uncover them from their disguises.
They have no place in our homes or in our towns. The first thing is to not let them have a say in the important decisions of our community, whether they want to participate in the light of the day or behind closed doors without us knowing, plotting behind our backs. That is why we must deny them any position in our society.
Chap. IV. Unite and pluck the rotten weed by its roots!
To facilitate the disposal of these traitors one must pluck the rotten weed by its roots. We must prevent the spread of Catholicism and show our unity in the conformity of our national Protestant church. How can you serve two leaders at once? Lay bare their affiliation and make them vow loyalty to our Queen Majesty! If they wish to continue in recusancy, they ought to pay fines and endure more severe sentences depending on their crimes. Jesuits, those treacherous, wandering rats, seducing women into roman degeneracy and other Machiavellian activities, must be ripped out of the holes that they are being harboured in. And those whores of Babylon, traitors to their state, will be condemned for their paganist behaviour. Their Mass, golden trinkets, and confessions only ever showed their greed for other people’s secrets and their lust. This generation of vipers has been plotting against our Monarch since 1605. Traitors and naughty wilful women preach idolatrous, superstitious, and carnal acts. We shall expose their true face and shed a light on the horns that they are trying to conceal underneath a martyr’s halo. For even when given the chance to show affection for our Protestant Church, they prefer to recite romish nonsense! They are a firebrand in the ruin of both king and country!
Our holy mission will be accomplished, be it through fines, exile, or death. We must protect what is dearest to our entire country’s well-being, the pure and benevolent power of our monarch and their state!
Chap. V. Loyal subjects bathing in God’s grace
Imagine, in a land freed of venomous vipers, our people will flourish and be united. All that will be left for those popish degenerates will be a lost paradise, with Satan walking amongst his followers. The diabolical agency of their world stems from feminine power, seduction, and idolatrous activities. Ours, will be a world reconciled with God. For our monarch works on His behalf and shall guide us towards what is good and just.
‘The world was all before them, where to choose Their place of rest, and Providence their guide: They hand in hand with wand’ring steps and slow, Through Eden took their solitary way.’[17]
Notes
[1] British Museum, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, “The Double Deliverance 1588 1605” last modified May 8, 2020, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Double_Deliverance_1588_1605_(BM_1847,0723.11_1).jpg?fbclid=IwAR00BPtyw5BvLiQYk0FE59PI-riVIXL4bcTO57TcHqJkx5wkxS1EYDqzXmU [2] In 1563 the 39 Articles of faith were published and later put in the Book of Common Prayer. They defined what it meant to be part of the Anglican Church. [3] In 1570 Pious V’s Bull Regnans in Excelsis, he excommunicates Elizabeth, describes her as “the pretended queen of England and the servant of the crime”, as a heretic, and an illegitimate heir to the throne, releasing her subjects from the oath of allegiance. [4] Marotti Arthur, ‘Alienating Catholics. Recusant women, Jesuits, and ideological fantasies’, in his Religious ideology and cultural fantasy. Catholic and Anti-Catholic discourses in early modern England, Notre Dame 2005, 64. [5] Marotti Arthur, ‘Alienating Catholics. Recusant women, Jesuits, and ideological fantasies’, in his Religious ideology and cultural fantasy. Catholic and Anti-Catholic discourses in early modern England, 33. [6]Ibid, 48. [7] John Gee, New Shreds of the Old Snare (London, 1624), 113. [8] Catholic families would send their children to the continent so they could attend Catholic schools where they would become Jesuits. The daughters were also sent to the continent to go to Nunneries that their families had to pay for. [9] Marotti Arthur, ‘Alienating Catholics. Recusant women, Jesuits, and ideological fantasies’, in his Religious ideology and cultural fantasy. Catholic and Anti-Catholic discourses in early modern England, 39. [10] This is a reference to the Gunpowder Plot on the 5th November 1605, also referred to as the Jesuit Plot. It was a failed attempt at assassinating King James I. The aim was to blow up the House of Lords. The plot was led by Robert Catesby who wished to restore the Catholic monarchy. They were closely linked to the Spanish. [11] This refers to the Popish Plot, a fictitious plot invented by Titus Oates. He declared that the Jesuits were trying to kill King Charles to replace him with his brother James, Duke of York, who was a Catholic. This led to the Exclusion Bill Crisis and the assassination of 22 men. [12] Marotti Arthur, ‘Alienating Catholics. Recusant women, Jesuits, and ideological fantasies’, in his Religious ideology and cultural fantasy. Catholic and Anti-Catholic discourses in early modern England, 48. [13]Ibid, 43. [14] This is a reference to the Spanish Match, a supposed marriage between Charles II and the Spanish Infanta. It created many tensions in England since the King was a Protestant and the Spanish royal family was Catholic. Negotiations took place between 1614 to 1623 but failed. [15] Marotti Arthur, ‘Alienating Catholics. Recusant women, Jesuits, and ideological fantasies’, in his Religious ideology and cultural fantasy. Catholic and Anti-Catholic discourses in early modern England, 36. [16] British Museum, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, “This Burden backe to Rome…” last modified May 8, 2020, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:This_Burden_backe_to_Rome_…_(BM_Ee,2.101_1).jpg?fbclid=IwAR1WFCYGr3NBBQdeLyMguaTshU-C30P3YJowJ2kIraQvNWaelSQxy-vDaTU [17] John Milton, Paradise Lost (London: Penguin Group, 2003), 288.
Taking The Veil: Catholic Nuns in 17th-century Early Modern England
As part of their MA course, students Jean-François Carvin, Justine Radojcic and Catherine Roux read Frances E. Dolan’s seminal article, ‘Why are Nuns Funny? Huntington Library Quarterly 70, no. 4 2007: p.509–35. This served as a springboard for deeper reflexion and study around the theme of the representations of Catholic nuns in early modern England.
When the monarch was designated as the only Head of the Church of England, religious conformity and loyalty to the monarch became bound.
The 16th and 17th centuries were periods of nationwide religious disturbances in England. From the reign of Queen Elizabeth I onwards, the eradication of Catholicism became part of national ideology. Being Catholic was a punishable offense and was associated with treason to the Crown and to the ‘true religion’. Parliament began passing penal laws that discriminated against non-Anglicans, and particularly Catholics, since they acknowledged the Pope’s authority. Those Catholics who refused to attend the Anglican Church services became known as recusants. The anti-Catholic sentiment was exacerbated by various crises and threats, such as the Gunpowder Plot (1605).
Intolerance regarding Catholics forced many of them to hide, convert to Protestantism or move abroad as exiles to practise their faith free from oppression. The survival of English Catholics was ensured, for instance, through the training of priests on the Continent and the Jesuit mission.
Based on the article of Professor Frances E. Dolan ‘Why Are Nuns Funny?’ (2007), the following analysis will discuss how the figure of the nun does allow us to understand what it was to be a woman of Catholic faith in 17th-century reformed England, through three main notions: representations of women and religiousness, anti-Catholic propaganda, and the political role of nuns during their exile on the continent.
Women and sexuality: representations of the holy and the body
Schnorr von Carolsfeld, Julius. “Fall of Men .” Istock Bank Image, January 2012.
‘And Adam said, This [is] now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.’ [1]
The early modern period portrayed women as frivolous and irrational creatures of lust. That belief came from Genesis in the Bible and is related to the story of the original sin. According to that view, women were seen as either prostitutes (Mary Magdalene) or young virgins (the Virgin Mary) in a patriarchal society. More than this, they had to remain discreet and obedient. The education of young women was based on detachment and acceptance which were supposed to be fundamental qualities guiding their future attitude towards sexuality.[2]
In England, the Protestant reform changed everything for Catholic women. As Judith Bennett explains in her article,[3] recusant women were targeted for their faith (the religion of the ‘Whore of Babylon’). They were also associated with ‘carnality’ and Protestantism viewed the female body in religious practices as dangerous, because Catholic women led Protestants to their spiritual downfall by seducing them. On the other hand, they were also seen as fragile creatures being seduced into Catholicism. But why were nuns the target of Protestants?
That question can be partly answered by looking at the way the Catholic Church viewed nuns in the medieval area. Indeed, the Council of Trent, held in three sessions from 1545 to 1563, drew a specific line between nuns and monks, gendering the religious and reducing nuns to ‘women’. They could not give the sacraments, leave the enclosure of the convent, much less go on the mission. The argument given was that the nun’s special role was to be the bride of Christ. Chastity, in this discourse, became the nun’s primary feature. Consequently, binding spiritual marriage to being the bride of Christ carried a sexual resonance that resulted in sexualizing the nun’s body and its virginity in the eyes of its detractors.
Engraving (plate number 21) from a Latin edition of The Dialogues of Luisa Sigea (c.1690), BL PC.30.i.10. From Sarah Toulalan’s Imagining Pornography and Bodies in Seventeenth-Century England, 2007.
Moreover, because the Council of Trent adopted strict enclosure to cut off nuns from the outside world and male supervision of the religious houses of women, Protestants’ distrust of Catholics grew even more as they saw convents as secret places where the Catholic clergy was performing profane acts. From that point of view, convents could be compared to brothels: ‘Nuns and prostitutes wore special clothes, eschewed matrimony, and inhabited separate institutional spaces.’.[4] Since the ‘naughty nun’ became a trope in the rhetorical Protestants’ discourse, the supposedly immoral Catholic cloisters provided empirical proof for their doctrinal allegations.
Furthermore, the architectural structures of the cloisters, as Frances Dolan pinpoints in her essay, were ‘made literal symbolism for describing the female body […] for nuns the external carapace of the convent walls might have served as an extreme reification of a symbolism many women used to describe and defend their chastity’. [5]
Popular representations of nuns in literature
Nuns were also seen as sexual beings because of the large body of printed material that was produced through the seventeenth century. Several works of literature like Venus in the Cloister: Or, The Nun in her Smock[6] in 1683, Putanism de Roma, or, The History of the whores and whoredoms of the Popes Cardinals and Clergey of Rome, discovered by a Conclave of Ladies, convened for the Election of a new Pope[7] in 1630 or even TheAnatomie of the English Nunnery at Lisbon [8] in 1622.
Such literature or anti-Catholic pamphlets served the purpose of discrediting both women and Catholics, linking sexual flagellation and sexual pleasure – for instance – to one of the most known Catholic acts of asceticism, portraying a hypocritical and unchaste Church.
By contrast, for many, nuns were not to be taken seriously, like in Aphra Behn’s The History of the Nun Or the Fair Vow-Breaker (1689) in which nuns ‘sing, dance, play instruments, and make ‘little plays’ to ‘divert themselves’ [9] or a ‘waste’ because some young women were too beautiful to take the veil such as Olivia and Rosaline in Shakespeare’s plays Twelfth Night (1602) and Romeo and Juliet (1597). Additionally, plays like The Convent of Pleasure (1668) by Margaret Cavendish can be interpreted today as a feminist examination of the roles of women in the 17th-century patriarchal English society but could be seen, at that time, as a model of women disrupting public order by rejecting marriage, and enjoying the single life.
Anti-Catholic propaganda: the alleged perversity of the Catholic Order
The Anatomie of the English Nunnery at Lisbon…., by Thomas Robinson. From Early English Books Online, ProQuest.
As explained in the first part, the aim of such Protestants’ texts was to prove that Catholics were either manipulators or easily influenced, or using God’s forgiveness as a false pretext to justify sinful acts. Edmund Curll, a publisher of the second English edition of Venus in the Cloister (1725), summarises it as ‘to lay open the Abuses and Corruptions of the Church of Rome…’ Though the actions described in such texts may have existed to some extent, they happened to a degree far inferior to the one that is told in such literature.
While such texts often claim to be reliable sources[10] by indicating precise locations and names of religious personnel, they can easily be exposed as uncertain.
However, the nuns’ actual activities and duties were well registered and can counter such anti-Catholic propaganda, as stated in Walker’s article: ‘the nuns had to develop income-generating activities to supplement their customary revenues; and this had to be done within the narrow cultural space imposed by their gender and social status’[11].
Beyond the walls: the political role of nuns in exile on the continent
Jenna Lay, Beyond the Cloister: Catholic Englishwomen and Early Modern Literary Culture, 2016. From OpenEdition Journals.
Women were given a central place in the Catholic resistance. What is most striking to consider is the task performed by exile nuns on the continent, ‘some dispossessed nuns joined convents abroad or banded together to attempt to continue a contemplative life; some daughters of English exiles entered local cloisters’[12]. Their cloistered nature did not prevent them from having contacts with the outside world and the political context of Britain during the 17th century. Indeed, they actively participated in the Catholic resistance by creating an early modern ‘underground railroad’, collaborating with missionaries and with the Stuarts monarchs. As explained by Claire Watkinson, ‘the period from the founding of the first English convent in exile, the Brussels Benedictines, in 1594 to the start of Charles I’s reign in 1625 marks a period where the English convents in exile emerge as highly politicized institutions’[13].
Nuns and Charles II would regularly exchange letters and nuns appeared as significant supporters of the Stuart cause. Their status as both religious and cloistered women emerged as the perfect cover. Claire Watkinson asserts that ‘On the restoration of the King in 1660 the English nuns were hopeful of securing gains from Charles II on account of their support during the English civil war’[14]. As years passed and in anticipation of a possibility of Catholicism being tolerated once again in England, these women organized themselves into various houses dedicated to the religious education of other English exiles.
As Claire Walker points out in her article, ‘monastic houses for English women proliferated rapidly during the early decades of the seventeenth century. There were thirty-six in existence by 1700, and these comprised most of the pre-Reformation orders of Benedictines, Augustinians, Franciscans, and Dominicans, as well as the reformed Carmelites, and a newly created English congregation, the Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary’[15].
Mary Ward, the founder of the institute, worked in secret to preserve the Catholic faith before establishing a community of active sisters in St. Omer, Belgium. Without a cloister, she and her followers educated young women, assisted persecuted Catholics, and spread the word of God. The Sisters lived and worked openly on the continent while clandestinely nurturing the faith in England. Mary Ward travelled throughout Europe and established schools in the Netherlands or Italy. Nevertheless, since the convents remained in exile, the shaping of a British monarchy tied to the exiled convents had to be maintained through epistolary networks.
On his accession to the throne, James II also made it clear that he intended to offer toleration for Catholics as well. According to Watkinson, the King converted to Catholicism on his deathbed and this decision would have been influenced by a nun’s advice in Flanders’. The period that Charles II had spent associating with the exiled cloisters had been crucial in shaping his faith. James’ accession to the throne appeared as a hope for the revival of Catholicism, and more particularly, a national English Catholicism. The exiled nuns on the Continent were crucial contributors to shaping a sense of Englishness. The first means to do so was through perpetuating an English Catholic education. English Catholic nuns purposefully maintained a national identity within the walls of their convents. Nuns deconstructed this well-known belief that shaped the English identity from the 17th century onwards by preserving the English identity.
Dolan’s analysis places both the notions of being a woman and being Catholic back into the context of 17th-century reformed England by showing that nuns were often reduced to their gender – which was linked to their bodies – and therefore depicted as sexual beings in both Protestant and Catholic discourses. Moreover, the different printed materials of that time indicate that Protestants used this as a means to spread anti-Catholic propaganda by turning the figure of the nun into a laughable stock character. Traces of those peculiar views remain to this day, as can be illustrated by a simple image search using the keywords ‘nuns’ on the internet. Finally, the last part of our study focuses on the important role of nuns in political matters. However, it would be relevant to add real epistolary testimonies of nuns such as Angela of Foligno (13th-century), Teresa of Ávila (16th-century) or Catherine Wigmore (17th-century) to our research in the future to distinguish fact from fiction and understand that even while they were women and religious, they still managed to influence the larger society.
[2] Sarah Toulalan, Imagining Pornography and Bodies in Seventeenth-Century England, Oxford University Press, 2007. ‘The young woman is taught […] that passivity and receptivity are central to her sexuality and that these must be core aspects of her future sexual behaviour.’ p. 137.
[3] Judith Bennett, “‘Lesbian-Like’ and the Social History of Lesbianisms.” Journal of the History of Sexuality 9, no. 1/2 (2000): 1–24.
[4] Ulrike Strasser, State of Virginity: Gender, Religion, and Politics in an Early Modern Catholic State, University of Michigan Press, 2004. p. 70.
[5] Frances E. Dolan, ‘Why Are Nuns Funny?’ Huntington Library Quarterly 70, no. 4 2007: p.509–35, p. 517.
[6] Barrin, Venus in the Cloister: Or, The Nun in her Smock.
[7] Leti, Putanism de Roma, or, The History of the whores and whoredoms of the Popes Cardinals and Clergey of Rome, discovered by a Conclave of Ladies, convened for the Election of a new Pope.
[8] Thomas Robinson, The Anatomie of the English Nunnery at Lisbon in Portugal dissected and laid open by one that was sometime a yonger brother of the covent. who (if the grace of God had not prevented him) might have growne as old in a wicked life as the oldest amongst them. London, 1624.
[11] Claire Walker, ‘Combining Martha and Mary: Gender and Work in Seventeenth-Century English Cloisters’,The Sixteenth Century Journal 30, no. 2. 1999: p.397-418, p. 398.
[13] Claire Watkinson, Engaging nuns: Exiled English convents and the politics of exclusion, 1590-1829, PhD thesis, University of Westminster, 2016, p. 62.
The third session of our seminar on the notion of Mise en texte will be held on Monday 28 March 2022, at 16.30 EST (15.30 GMT) on Zoom.
Our guest speakers, Tessa Whitehouse (Queen Mary University of London) and Neil Keeble (Stirling University) recently co-edited a volume whose preoccupations are very akin to those of mise en texte, Textual Transformations. Purposing and Repurposing Books from Richard Baxter to Samuel Taylor Coleridge (OUP, 2019).
Early modern books were not stable or settled outputs of the press but dynamic shape-changers, subject to reworking, re-presentation, revision and reinterpretation. Their history is often the history of multiple, sometimes competing, agencies as their texts were re-packaged, redirected and transformed in ways that their original authors might hardly recognize. This session will investigate processes of editing, glossing, disputation and posthumous publication that resulted in textual mobility and varieties of authorship, using specific examples from the activities of the nonconformist ministers Richard Baxter (1615-1689) and Isaac Watts (1674-1748). We shall also consider the ways in which such textual histories and complexities can be represented in modern editions.
Please join us for this session (see the abstract below) by registering on Eventbrite, where you will find abstract, biographies and the Zoom invitation.
The study group “Texts & Their Afterlives” will host a seminar primarily aimed at students preparing the Agrégation, around James Cook’s logs and journals.
It will be held on Monday 1 March between 4.30 pm and 6.30 pm (European Standard Time). We will welcome our two guests:
Sandhya Patel (IHRIM-Université-Clermont-Auvergne) The Lives and Afterlives of Cook’s Logs and Journals and Jean-Stéphane Massiani, (Lycée Nelson Mandela, Marseille) From the Ship to the Pen: James Cook as a Writer in the Making
Please register before 28 February on Eventbrite below.
BRITAIX is delighted to announce that Alison Searle and Emily Vine (University of Leeds) will present the AHRC-funded research project ‘Pastoral Care, Literary Cure and Religious Dissent: Zones of Freedom in the British Atlantic (c. 1630-1720)’:
Monday 1 February 2021, 16.30 -18.30 European Standard Time (3.30 – 4.30 GMT)
This paper provides an overview to the research project ‘Pastoral Care, Literary Cure and Religious Dissent: Zones of Freedom in the British Atlantic (c. 1630-1720)’, which is based at the University of Leeds. It discusses the research processes and outputs of a project that has focused on the role of pastoral care and letter writing in transatlantic Protestant communities in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. It also reflects on how events of the past year, including Covid-19 and the Black Lives Matter movement, have intersected in unexpected ways with the project, and have prompted the consideration of synergies between the provision of pastoral care past and present.
Dr Alison Searle is Associate Professor of Textual Studies in the School of English at the University of Leeds. Her research focuses on the intersections between early modern literature and theology. She is co-general editor of The Complete Correspondence of Richard Baxter (forthcoming in nine volumes with Oxford University Press)
Dr Emily Vine is Postdoctoral Research Assistant in the School of English at the University of Leeds. Her PhD, from Queen Mary University of London, investigated domestic religion in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century London. Prior to joining Leeds, she was a Junior Fellow at the Institute of Historical Research.
On Friday 4 December 2020, the Lived Religion study group and their partners at QMCRLE will hold their fourth and last annual study day exploring the notion of lived religion. After ‘Documenting Lived Religion 1500 to the Present: Perspectives Across Borders’, ‘Lived Religion: Theory and Practice ‘ and ‘Lived Religion and the Book ‘, this study day will focus on ‘Lived Religion and the Visual Arts’, and will be held remotely via Zoom. You can view the programme here, and if you wish to join us, please just ask by sending us an email at either anne.page@univ-amu.fr or laurence.sterritt@univ-amu.fr.
We are delighted to announce that the session on Progress and education, which had been reported from March 2020 because of COVID-19 restrictions, was held with great success on Monday 12 October, (16.30 – 18.30) via videoconference.
Sandrine Parageau (Université Paris-Nanterre, junior IUF member), « Avancement du savoir et réforme pédagogique en Angleterre au XVIIe siècle ».
Pierre Lurbe (Sorbonne Université), « ‘Education […] is exceedingly incompetent to the great business of reforming mankind’: le pessimisme éducatif de William Godwin ».
Discutant : Jean Viviès
Our warmest thanks to our speakers for experimenting with this new format.
Monday 9 December 2019, 16.30 – 18.30, Maison de la recherche, room 2.44
Preparatory session to our Study Day funded by the GIS Institut du Genre « Figures de la spiritualité féminine dans les espaces catholiques et protestants (Europe occidentale, XVIe-XVIIIe siècles) : les systèmes religieux au prisme du genre »
– Christine Orobitg (TELEMME, AMU), « Femmes et spiritualité dans l’Espagne moderne : enjeux et paradoxes »
– Carme Font-Paz (Université Autonome de Barcelone), ‘Recovering the Value of Women’s Spiritual Writings in the Long Reformation’
Discussant : Laurence Lux-Sterritt (LERMA, AMU)
Friday 17 January 2020, 9h00 -18h00, room Duby, MMSH, 5 rue de l’horloge vieille, Aix en Provence
Study Day funded by the GIS Institut du Genre,
a joint project LERMA – TELEMME
« Figures de la spiritualité féminine dans les espaces catholiques et protestants (Europe occidentale, XVIe-XVIIIe siècles) : les systèmes religieux au prisme du genre »
Seminar « Les jeudis du genre » (GIS Institut du Genre – AMU), 16h30 – 18h30, room 2.44, maison de la recherche
Christine Orobitg (TELEMME, AMU) et Laurence Lux-Sterritt (LERMA, AMU), « La spiritualité féminine en Europe Moderne (XVIe-XVIIIe siècles) : les systèmes religieux au prisme du genre »
Session 1 : 26 January 2026, 16.00 – 17.30 (French time)
Session 2: 29 April 2026, 16.00– 18.00
Session 3: 18 May 2026, 16.00 – 18.00
.
.jpg?fbclid=IwAR00BPtyw5BvLiQYk0FE59PI-riVIXL4bcTO57TcHqJkx5wkxS1EYDqzXmU){kind=link}
.jpg?fbclid=IwAR1WFCYGr3NBBQdeLyMguaTshU-C30P3YJowJ2kIraQvNWaelSQxy-vDaTU){kind=link}