Saints and Animals in the Middle Ages by Dominic Alexander (review)

REVIEWS 259 Dominic Alexander, Saints and Animals in the Middle Ages (Woodbridge and Rochester: Boydell Press 2008) viii + 200 pp. In this compact volume, Dominic Alexander engages in a synthetic and comparative study of saints’ lives that feature animal motifs. Utilizing an expansive bibliography of vitae from Western Europe, North Africa, and Byzantium, Alexander examines the emergence of topoi and their changing social significance from the fourth through the thirteenth centuries. His overarching aim is to counter the historiographical trend that considers such stories to be a reflection of a medieval sentimentality towards nature. Rather, Alexander contends that they represent social tensions between the ecclesiastical authors and society at large, particularly as class-based social institutions grew stronger in the tenth through the twelfth centuries. The study is presented in nine brief chapters. The first serves as an introduction , describing the interactions between hagiographers and society at large and raising the question of to what extent the writers drew on existing stories to construct saints’ lives. Alexander argues that “if changes in a society’s attitude towards nature are to be found through the deeds of saints, then closer attention must be paid to the literary traditions of hagiography and the spiritual and rhetorical depth of these stories” (18). Alexander devotes his second chapter to exploring the literary traditions of early Christian hagiography, particularly of the Egyptian saints, drawing interesting parallels to earlier biblical and nearEastern stories. His third chapter explores the themes associated with saints, animals, and the wilderness of sixth-century Western Europe. Here he traces a more authoritarian theme to the stories, with nature miracles reinforcing coenobitic obedience to an abbot. The fourth chapter examines what Alexander describes as “the Irish variant,” the tendency for miracles in Irish hagiography to include domesticated animals. Alexander’s next two chapters are his strongest; in each he explores a specific theme: goose resurrections in Chapter 5 and hermits and huntsmen in Chapter 6. In each, he continues his close-reading method to argue that parallel stories with themes beyond the norms of hagiography indicate a corpus of “popular” literature in circulation beyond the ecclesiastical context. While Alexander draws distinctions between the church and society at large that exclude the possibility of oral transmission of these motifs through ecclesiastical actors, his arguments for a wider circulation of stories beyond the strictures of hagiographic tradition are compelling. Moreover, his interpretation of these stories as social indicators is at its best in these chapters. The final three chapters are case studies, diverging from the largely thematic organization of the book. Alexander examines Farne Island and the cult of St. Cuthbert, the tradition of protecting animals in holy sites, and the interactions between St. Francis and animals in turn. Throughout these chapters, Alexander argues strongly that there was no true sense of empathy towards nature, but rather the saint and animal stories were reflective of social agendas and tensions . Alexander’s arguments in these final chapters are dependent on strictness in hagiographic conventions that may be overemphasized. When a vita includes a motif or theme beyond the norm, Alexander concludes that the theme must be of “popular” origin. While he may in fact be correct he does not carefully explain the means by which these stories may have been transmitted between the REVIEWS 260 laity and ecclesiastics, nor take into account the creative abilities of hagiographers . Thus, his hagiographers in the final chapters appear more concerned with suppressing ‘popular’ belief than with any cultural or ecclesiastical agenda. Alexander’s readings are without question his greatest strength. Through his analysis, utilizing the skills of both a cultural historian and folklorist, he is able to convincingly argue the existence of a stock of European folklore from which hagiographical elements were drawn. His wide scope in both geography and time lends his study value as a synthetic compilation of vitae featuring saints and animals; few studies so thoroughly explore a single hagiographical trend throughout the Middle Ages. His bibliography, particularly of vitae, is extensive and useful. Despite these strengths, Alexander’s tendency towards excessive qualification undercuts many of his arguments in Saints and Animals. While his study raises tantalizing questions for cultural and religious historians, Alexander addresses...