Proving Woman (36 page)

¹⁰¹
Menesto`,
Il processo
, intro., pp. XXVII–XXXII.

¹⁰²
The line of questioning pursued by the examiners corresponds to the progressive pathologization of female spirituality, discussed
in the section entitled “Disintegrating Proof” of chap. 5, below.

¹⁰³
Processus
, Clare of Montefalco, Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Riti, Proc. 676. This document is dated 22 August 1308.

¹⁰⁴
Menesto`,
Il processo
, Sr. Johanna, witness no. 1, ad art. 162, pp. 88, 90; Sr. Thomassa, witness 39, ad art. 142, p. 249; Sr. Francescha, witness
67, ad 162, p. 341;
Processus
, Clare of Montefalco, Proc. 676.

¹⁰⁵
Menesto`,
Il processo
, pp. 434–36. Thomas’s testimony did not, however, stand up very well to cross-examination: his view that the signs were false
was based solely on the chaplain’s antipathy to worship of the cross; he did not know the extent of Clare’s acquaintance with
the evil clerics in question; and he admitted that she was unaware of their reputation. He was also not sure whether Clare’s
falling proceeded from a good or bad spirit.

¹⁰⁶
On Dorothea’s wounds, see
Vita latina
2.24, pp. 86–87;
Vita Lindana
chap. 17,
AASS
, October, 13:508; and Kieckhefer,
Unquiet Souls
, p. 27. Her canonization is discussed in greater detail in Elliott, “Authorizing a Life,” pp. 185–90.

¹⁰⁷
The two Johns examined Dorothea together after her arrival in Marienwerder. This examination is described in
Vita Lindana
chap. 56, in
AA SS
, October, 13:530 (according to the original numbering, which appears in the margins). The later
Vita latina
, moreover, makes it clear that she was examined at the beginning of her relationship with John as well as before her enclosure
as an anchoress (3.28.e, g, pp. 150, 151). Cf. III, article 18 in the process of canonizaton (Stachnik,
Akten des Kanonisationsprozesses
, pp. 21–22). It seems probable that the two Johns submitted their findings to the bishop, John Moïnch—a conjecture based
on the fact that he then seems to have conducted his own, somewhat informal, examination of Dorothea (see
Akten des Kanonisationsprozesses
, III, ad 5, p. 413; III, ad 22, p. 417; III, ad 26, p. 418). Also Christ mystically sent her before Moïnch, after he had
told Dorothea that he wanted a vision revealed to him (
Liber de
festis Magistri Johannis Marienwerder offenbarungen der Dorothea von Montau
c. 92, ed. Anne-liese Triller, Forschungen und Quellen zur Kirchen-und Kulturgeschichte Ostdeutschlands, vol.

25 [Cologne: Boïhlau, 1992], p. 159).

¹⁰⁸
On her background and her arrival in Marienwerder, see Hipler, “Johannes Marienwerder,” pp. 36–42. For Dorothea’s pre-Marienwerder
days, see Hans Westpfahl, “Beiträge zur Dorotheenforschung,”
Zeitschrift fu
ï
r die Geschichte und Altertumskunde Ermlands
27 (1939): 122–74.

¹⁰⁹
See Anneliese Triller, “Häresien in Altpreussen um 1390?” in
Studien zur Geschichte des
Preussenlandes: Festschrift fu
ï
r Erich Keyser zu seinem 70. Geburtstag dargebracht von Freunden
und Schu
ï
lern
, ed. Ernst Bahr (Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1963), pp. 400–401.

¹¹⁰
Stachnik,
Akten des Kanonisationsprozesses
, III, ad 20, p. 84. Dorothea would occasionally confess to the priest Ludike, who denounced her for excessive piety, but
especially for the unusual things she said in confession, probably concerning her mystical experiences (ibid., III, ad 11,
20, pp. 107, 108). Inquisitors would sometimes summon people for suspicions over the unusual content of their visions. The
Bolognese friar Avantius claims he received a penitential cross from the inquisition for visions and dreams (
visiones et sompnia
) alone, nothing else (Paolini and Orioli,
Acta
, p. 71).

¹¹¹
John refers to the necessity of going on pilgrimages to ensure Dorothea’s safety and of how she was vilified for her spiritual
gifts (
Vita latina
3.9.a, 3.26.b, pp. 123, 147;
Vita Lindana
,
AA SS
, October, c. 41, c. 55, 13:520, 529).

¹¹²
For Clare’s process, see Menesto`’s introduction,
Il processo
, pp. XXVIII–XLV. The initial efforts were seemingly abandoned at the curial stage for unknown reasons (p. XXXVII). For Dorothea’s
canonization, see Ute Stargardt, “The Political and Social Backgrounds of the Canonization of Dorothea von Montau,”
Mystics Quarterly
11 (1985): 107–222.

¹¹³
On popular and local sainthood, see Vauchez,
Sainthood
, pp. 147–56. Also see the case study “Anti-Semitism and Popular Culture: The Cult of St. Werner,” in idem,
The Laity in the
Middle Ages: Religious Beliefs and Devotional Practices
, trans. Margery Schneider (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1993), pp. 141–52. On the concurrence of these
heresies, see Stephen Wessley’s dissertation, “Enthusiasm and Heresy in the Year 1300: Guglielma of Milan, Armanno Pungilupo
of Ferrara and Gerard Segarelli” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1976). Wessley argues that the condemnation of this set
of heresies resulted from a coalition between the mendicants and the papacy. Cf. Franciscan chronicler Salimbene’s own assessment
of the contestation over Armannus in n. 151, below.

¹¹⁴
Armannus’s case is preserved in the summary of the papal investigation, edited by Gabriele Zanella in the appendixes of
Itinerari ereticali: patari e catari tra Rimini e Verona
, Istituto storico italiano per il medio evo, Studi storici, fasc. 153 (Rome: Istituto storico italiano per il medio evo,
1986). Aviad Kleinberg discusses Armannus in terms of the contrast between the vox populi and papal canonization. See
Prophets in Their Own Country: Living Saints and the Making of Sainthood
in the Later Middle Ages
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), pp. 37–39. Also see his examination of the case of Marcolinus of Forli (d. 1397),
pp. 31–37. Cf. Carol Lansing’s
Power and Purity: Cathar Heresy in Medieval Italy
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 92–95; Mariano d’Alatri, “Culto de santi ed eretici in Italia nei secoli XII
e XIII,”
Collectanea
Franciscana
45 (1975): 100–101; idem, “L’eresia nella Cronica di Fra Salimbene,”
Collectanea
Franciscana
37 (1967): 366–73; Zanella,
Itinerari ereticali
, introd., pp. 16–29; Lea,
Inquisition
, 2:240–42. On mendicant hostility to Armannus’s cult, see Wessley, “Enthusiasm and Heresy,” pp. 209 ff. Armannus also allegedly
hated the mendicant orders, particularly the Dominicans, whom he referred to as rapacious wolves (ibid., p. 210). Salimbene
alleges that there were several cases similar to that of Armannus in other towns (Salimbene,
Chronicle
, p. 514 [736]). See Michael Goodich, “The Politics of Canonization in the Thirteenth Century: Lay and Mendicant Saints,”
in
Saints and Their Cults: Studies in Religious Sociology, Folklore and History
, ed. Stephen Wilson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), pp. 174–75.

¹¹⁵
Zanella,
Itinerari ereticali
, app. 1, pp. 70–85.

¹¹⁶
Ibid., pp. 84–89.

¹¹⁷
For the document repealing the interdict, see ibid., app. 2, pp. 104–7. For the inquisitors’case against Armannus, see app.
1, pp. 48–70.

¹¹⁸
Lansing,
Power and Purity
, p. 93.

¹¹⁹
Zanella,
Itinerari ereticali
, app. 1, p. 90.

¹²⁰
Bollandists, “Proce`sverbal,” p. 476.

¹²¹
The papal inquiry reports that the inquisitor’s case against Armannus was opened in 1285. This must be the formal date, since
some of the testimonies are from as early as 1270 (Zanella,
Itinerari ereticali
, app. 1, p. 48). Thomas of Cantimprérelates a similar episode in Antwerp concerning a certain William Cornelius, an ascetical
preacher of poverty who was buried in honor but eventually disinterred and burned as a heretic (
De apibus
2.47.3, pp. 432–33).

¹²²
Wessley, “Enthusiasm and Heresy,” pp. 203–4. This was the position taken by fifteenth-century Pellegrino Prisciano.

¹²³
Zanella,
Itinerari ereticali
, app. 1, p. 70.

¹²⁴
For an overview of Guglielma and the Guglielmites, see Stephen Wessley, “The Thirteenth-Century Guglielmites: Salvation through
Women,” in
Medieval Women
, ed. Derek Baker, Studies in Church History, subs. ser., vol. 1 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1978), pp. 289–303, and Luisa Muraro’s
Guglielma e Maifreda: Storia di un
’
eresia femminista
(Milan: Tartaruga, 1985). Barbara Newman’s remarkable study “WomanSpirit,Woman Pope” places the Guglielmites in the wider
historical context of representations of the female aspect of the Trinity, in
From Virile Woman to WomanChrist:
Studies in Medieval Religion and Literature
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995), pp. 183–223, esp. pp. 185–95. Guglielma’s desire to be buried at the
monastery and her bequest are mentioned in various testimonies (see, for example, the comments of Sibilia, widow of Beltramus
Malcozati,
Processi . . . Guglielma
, 2:353). The political difficulties at the time of her death are alluded to in the testimony of Andreas Saramita, ibid.,
p. 170. The body was duly translated in October, an event discussed below.

¹²⁵
On the relationship between the Humiliatae house of Biassono and the Guglielmites, see Wessley, “The Guglielmites,” pp. 298–99.

¹²⁶
Processi . . . Guglielma
, Mayfreda de Pirovano, Humiliata, p. 98. This particular testimony also summarizes the Gugliemite contentions, including
Mayfreda’s role in the faith. On the impact of Joachim of Fiore’s vision of history, see Marjorie Reeves,
The In
fl
uence of Prophecy in the
Later Middle Ages: A Study in Joachimism
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1969). Regarding Joachim’s personal views, see E. Randolph Daniel, “Exodus and Exile: Joachim of Fiore’s
Apocalyptic Scenario,” in
Last Things: Death and the Apocalypse in the Middle Ages
, ed. CarolineWalker Bynum and Paul Freedman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), pp. 124–39.

¹²⁷
On their beliefs and organizational structure, see Newman,
From Virile Woman
, pp. 188–89, 193–94; Wessley, “The Guglielmites,” pp. 294–301; Muraro,
Guglielma e Maifreda
, pp. 113–51.

¹²⁸
The only remaining sentence is for the relapsed heretic Humiliata Jacoba de Bassanis de Nova, who was handed over to the
secular arm for execution (
Processi . . . Guglielma
, pp. 202–4).

¹²⁹
Ibid., Ricadona Saramita, pp. 222–24. Even had Andreas not been condemned, the family’s property was still at risk since
he eventually confessed that his mother and his sister had continued to believe in Guglielma after their abjuration to the
inquisition (pp. 174–76; cf. p. 56). The penitential crosses come to the fore because of appeals to put them aside in return
for payment of a fine (see pp. 282 ff.).

¹³⁰
Ibid., Andreas, p. 58.

¹³¹
Ibid., pp. 56–58.

¹³²
Ibid., p. 58; Myranus, chaplain of Saint Firmus, p. 70. In fact, Myranus had served as secretary to Mayfreda and Andreas
and was far from orthodox.

¹³³
Ibid., Sibilia, p. 84; Girardus de Novazano, Third Order Franciscan, pp. 92, 268. On her deathbed, Guglielma attributed the
invisibility of her stigmata to her followers’ incredulity (Andreas, p. 170)—a view paralleling orthodox explanations for
the failed cults of martyred inquisitors. See chap. 2, p. 61, above. Catherine of Siena’s stigmata were also invisible, but
at her own request. See Karen Scott, “Mystical Death, Bodily Death: Catherine of Siena and Raymond of Capua on the Mystic’s
Encounter with God,” in
Gendered Voices: Medieval Saints and Their
Interpreters
, ed. Catherine Mooney (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), p. 164.

¹³⁴
Processi . . . Guglielma
, Andreas, p. 58; Sibilia, p. 84.

¹³⁵
Ibid., Alegrantia, wife of Johannes of Perugia, p. 226. On the significance of this dinner, see Muraro,
Guglielma e Maifreda
, pp. 153–64.

¹³⁶
Processi . . . Guglielma
, Myranus of Saint Firmus, p. 76.

¹³⁷
Ibid., Felix, widow of Francinus de Casate, p. 90; Girardus, pp. 92, 268; Flordebellina, daughter of Andreas Saramita, p.
106; Sibilia, p. 84. Bellacara, wife of Bonadeus Karentani, mistakenly places the translation on All Saints’ Day, i.e., 1
November (p. 65).

¹³⁸
Ibid., Andreas, p. 172; Girardus, pp. 92, 268. Andreas and Mayfreda believed that the angel Raphael had announced Guglielma’s
birth to Constance, queen of Bohemia, just as Gabriel had foretold the birth of Christ to Mary (Andreas, p. 172).

¹³⁹
Ibid., Girardus, p. 96. More ambitiously, Andreas also rewrote the New Testament (Mayfreda, p. 100; cf. Andreas, p. 174).

¹⁴⁰
Ibid., Mayfreda, pp. 78, 194; cf. Jacobus, 66. For a discussion of Mayfreda’s ritual role, see Newman,
From Virile Woman
, pp. 191–93.

¹⁴¹
Processi . . . Guglielma
, Francischus, cleric, son of Gasparrus de Garbagniate, p. 256.

¹⁴²
Ibid., Flordebellina, p. 108; Agnes, Humiliata, daughter of Cabrius Montenarius, p. 110; Jacoba de Nova, Humilita, p. 116;
Franceschinus, son of Beltramus Malcolzati, p. 132; Petra de Alzate and Katella de Gioziis, p. 120; Dionese, wife of Jacobus
de Novate, p. 210; Stephanus, pp. 234–63; Carabella, widow of Amizonus Toscanus, p. 246; Francischus, p. 254.