The bridling of desire: views of sex in the later Middle Ages (review)

284 Reviews strategies in his method of composition. Alford has shown elsewhere that Langland's quotations are an important part of the meaning and the artistry of the poem. This essay extends that argument by applying it to an entire scene. Even more ambitious in its scope is Blythe's wide-ranging attempt to demonstrate the centrality of language in Piers Plowman, which she reads as a relendess quest for verbal truth. Certainly, there is ample evidence presented here of the pervasiveness of the theme, and the introduction of the opposing motifs of 'sins of the tongue' and 'prudent speech' provides an interesting context for reading the poem. Overall, however, the argument seems to lack a clear statement of how this theme correlates with other central themes and motifs in the work. The remaining essays deal with materials which are more explicitiy religious, in particular with pastoral literature, Biblical exegesis, and homiletics. Particularly interesting are those of Minnis on scriptural and exegetical styles, Emery on monastic 'collectaria', and Doyle, who edits an allegorical prose text based on the phrase 'lectulus nosterfloridus'. Goering makes effective use of Ockham's razor to show that Richard of Wetheringsett, the author of the Summa 'Qui bene presunt' is the same person as the Richard of Leicester and Richard Grant who are named in some of the manuscripts as the author of the work. The Speculum special forum stressed the importance of focussing on the manuscript culture of the Middle Ages, a culturetiiat'did not simply live with diversity [but] cultivated it'. In its own way, a festschrift also cultivates diversity. This one in particular, by presenting a wide range of subjects and approaches under the broad heading of philological studies not only cultivates but celebrates diversity. In so doing it appropriately pays tribute to the scholar it seeks to honour. Peter Whiteford Department of English Victoria University of Wellington Payer, Pierre J., The bridling of desire: views of sex in the later Middle Ages, Toronto/Buffalo/London, University of Toronto Press, 1993; cloth; pp. ix, 285; R.R.P. £23.00/US$39.00. Surveying theological texts from the middle of the twelfth century to the middle of the fourteenth century, Pierre Payer examines what he sees as 'an emerging consensus about what was thought to be the correct theological Reviews 285 and moral account of sex' (p. 9). His interpretive study of texts aims to balance Dominican and Franciscan sources, and to take account of developments in Canon Law during the period. Payer's tide, the bridling of desire, expresses a common medieval theme, which treated desire, in the sense of concupiscence, as a postlapsarian force that had to be reined in. Chapter One, 'Paradise', surveys scholastic enquiries into the nature of pleasure between A d a m and Eve, and theological speculation about the possibility of virginity in paradise, including the reception of Augustine's conjecture that the same pathway through which menstrual discharge passed could have served for the introduction of the male seed, thus preserving 'female integrity' (p. 36). 'The Fall, original sin and concupiscence' are the subjects of Chapter Two. This leads to the core of the book in Chapters Three to Five on marriage, covering legitimate and problematic reasons for marital relations. In the final two chapters, the virtues of temperance, continence, chastity, and virginity are examined. Throughout the texts, the aim of bridling desire either through the institution of marriage or through the ideology of chastity is reiterated. Payer deftly explicates some very convoluted instances of theological reasoning. The straightforward metaphor of the marriage debt, for instance, becomes abstract indeed once it is brought into play with ancient Christian traditions forbidding sex under particular circumstances. This gave rise to the casuistry of marital debt and to its many conflicting judgements. Roland of Cremona voiced the opinion that a married person could never sin in paying the debt, while Albert the Great concerned himself with justifying male inability to pay it (pp. 94-96). The conjugal debt itself became enforceable upon the consummation of marriage, yet either party had the right to enter the religious life within two months after the marriage ceremony, givingriseto interpretations on whether enforcing...