And Initiation in the Courly System
Trying to find accurate information about fin'amor and the practice of esoteric romance can be difficult for the average reader. There is no shortage of modern books seeking to adapt the imagery to neo-Pagan or New Age teachings, and there are even conspiracy theories involving secret organizations, heretics, occultists, etc., in the Courts of Love. For example, Charles Heckethorn in his "Secret Societies of All Ages and Countries" (v. 1 pg 144-145) outlines a very Masonic format that was supposedly conferred in the Courts of Love. He describes a system of degrees, of secret languages, and of proposed connections with heretical libertine "lodges". Many of Heckethorn's assertions are anachronistic, or at least out of context. However, though the troubadours were in no way the "organizers of that vast conspiracy directed against the Church of Rome", the way Heckethorn would have us believe, is there any truth to be had in any of his speculations?
The first problem to deconstruct is the mistake of judging older beliefs by modern standards, such as trying to define "esoteric" and "initiatory" via the outlines provided by later systems such as Freemasons or similar groups. Why, for instance, would anyone without an allegory based on architectural measures think of themselves as advancing in "degrees"? No. To foist these versions of "esotericism" and "initiation" back on earlier systems are modern eisegesis, and do no justice to the beliefs of people who predate the orders that have inundated the perceptions of modern practitioners. On the other hand; did "fin‘amor" develop at any point into an initiatory or esoteric ideal for any historical personages? Absolutely yes.
Before dealing with those points we must do some further deconstruction. The term "Courtly Love"- much like the term "Gnosticism" -is highly debatable in its common usage, and has created misconceptions that even scholars on the subject are guilty of fomenting. The term has become so inclusive of such a wide range of unrelated phenomena that it is sometimes almost useless and other times downright false. A most obvious example is concerning the troubadours. It is far from uncommon to see an historian make the mistake of creating a single monolithic ideal rather than looking at the surprisingly wide range of beliefs expressed in troubadour poetry (even respected specialists like Linda Paterson; "Ethnically the troubadours define themselves........" The World of the Troubadours; Occitan Identity and Self-Perception pg 4). The most that can be accurately attributed to these poet/musicians then are certain tendencies along with certain literary conventions, but not ideals or pervasive identities. So, when academicians debate whether troubadours were anti-heretic reformers....
"The Pope, then, and false doctors of the Church,
Christ Jesus, may they live in his anger!
selling Rome short:
Such damn fools and liars that heretics sing in the streets"
(Peire Vidal; A per pauc de chantor no-m lais)
.....or heterodoxist....
"and when I say 'my relief', don't think it is only my pride,
for I so love and desire her that
if I had urgent business with Death,
the robber,
I would not love God so well, nor
beg him to welcome me into paradise
as I beg her she grant me
a space of one night beside her."
(Raimon Jordan; Lo clar temps vei brunezir)
[I would like to make a special point about the previous quote. It is easy to be lulled into reading through these without emotion, and in our modern perspective we are used to reading such things as archaic fluff so that they have little effect or meaning. Far from flippant or mere secular wrangling, this statement comes from a believer who honestly doesn't feel that heaven can contain much luster without the memory of an experience which it must be judged against. This realization should allow the poem to hit you in the chest.]
.....supporters of the Templars and the Crusades.....
"She did him the highest honor, having him buried in the house of the
Templars"
(Vida for Jaufre Rudel de Blaia)
.... or mockers thereof.....
"You needn't smell like a Templar to be a Knight!"
( Queen Eleanor to her son Richard... not technically a trobairitz,
but intimately connected enough to warrant inclusion in this topic)
....pessimistic secular humanists.....
"I have made a new pact with mankind
from the far east to the setting sun;
every honest man gets a bezant"
(Piere Cardenal; Tos temps azir falsetat et enjam)
....or mystics......
"Virgin Queen, sacred lily
how much joy fills him
who is full of love for you;
No one can say
for the joy that can endure
one should serve and love you"
(Blanche of Castile)
My point is; to say what the troubadours were, or were not, including purveyors of "Courtly Love", (which some were in fact outspoken against) is fallacious if extended beyond literary criticism on an individual basis. In the same way that the troubadours, trobairitz, trouveres, and minnesingers must be carefully gleaned rather than simply assumed to be a defining origin for Courtly Love, so must nearly all the other factors normally equated with the movement. However, that does not imply that "Courtly Love" did not exist or have defining qualities. Two qualities, both of which are more easily dealt with beyond the confines of Courtly Love, were the notions of errantry (esp. in the orders of knighthood and grail literature), and "fin,amor" (refined love.... which has also been called "alchemical love"), and they are the primary points we can now start to construct.
So, first..... INITIATION.
The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions defines initiation as the process of transferring a person to a new perspective (state). That can be social, religious, or psychological (and in most cases is probably all three). In other words, it is the trigger, or "start" (which is the literal meaning of the word "initiation") of the new status of the individual. Rites of passages certainly fall into this category. Up through the mid 1900s there was a common rite of passage concerning dress. As infants all children were dressed the same (essentially female). As small children boys wore shorts, always, until they graduated to knickers. When a boy finally became old enough he gained the privilege of wearing long pants, and that new form of dress also implied new responsibilities. Social initiations, rites of passage, seems to have waned in the modern west so the most obvious examples of initiation are in religion (Confirmation, Baptism, etc), initiations such as boot camp in the military or graduation from an institution of learning.
Unlike the modern American social outlook, initiation was practically innate in the medieval mind and medieval society. This was so much the case, in fact, that one was even "initiated" into their profession. Apprenticeship taught not only the skills of the trade, but also the ethics and behaviors expected in the trade. It also very often used a mnemonic system which connected spiritual imagery with the trade imagery. We are all familiar with the initiatory (and esoteric) nature of the craft guilds by way of the modern Freemasons, and the religious undertones have been there from the time when the craft guild was still actually practicing a craft. In this earlier era we see the same thing in guilds of blacksmiths, merchant guilds, etc.. To add to this, the higher guilds, including the blacksmiths and the masons, often had codes of secrecy to protect their skills as well as to maintain the privacy of their economic strategies. This is not something that has completely disappeared. A number of modern professions still maintain the use of mnemonics, initiatory hazing, a code of secrecy, etc.. More to our point we see the same basic outline applied to the social role of Knighthood.
The anonymous work written sometime before 1250 called "Ordene de chevalerie" describes the basic initiation into knighthood by way of a little legend concerning Saladin. While the involvement of Saladin is most likely entirely mythological, the basic ceremony described is factual. There is a series of actions; a ritual bath, a repose, the bestowing of garb, including spurs and sword, and finally the "coll'ee" or "alepa blow", which is a strike to the face by the initiator. All of these actions are accompanied by symbolic description meant to confer a new mind-set. (besides reading the book itself, you can find a slightly more in-depth outline of the story in Maurice Keen's "Chivalry" from Yale University Press. There you will also find and excellent treatment of the social implications of the different forms of chivalry and their growth and decline through time). We have many extant variations on the meanings of these actions- some more secular and some more religious- but the basic outline and the initiatory properties exist in all of them. The newly made knight has a new perspective as to his role in life. Beyond that there was also often added initiatory observance if one joined an order of knights, whether in the Church Militant or a secular order.
It is this imagery of knighthood that is generally used as the initiatory principle in courtly literature even by those who were not knights themselves. Of course, "knighthood" was the prerogative of a specific social strata long dead (while orders of knighthood still exist, obviously, the societal function of gaining "peerage" has fallen to the wayside... some would say for the better). More important to the discussion is the implication of the practice of "fin amor" (refined love). Fin amor, like the troubadours, is something that has been generally connected to "Courtly Love". In reality though, fin amor, while certainly having a development period within the courts, existed away from the courts and was not dependant on them. Was it initiatory?
"True lovers know that through love the haughty become humble, and
the base are ennobled"
(N'at de Mons)
"What a remarkable thing is love, for it infests a man with such
shining virtues, and there is no one whom it does not instruct to
have these great and good habits in plenty"
(Andreas Capellanus; De Amore)
In his book "Ennobling Love", Steaphen Jaeger (Prof of Germanics and Comparative lit who specializes in the history of the Courtly ideal) outlines the perspective shift that is expected of one who practices fin’amor by way of the codified sets of virtues. It is pointed out that one could not truly love if they did not attain these. This set of values is compared with the Carolingian courts where erotic language was a convention for appreciation of virtues even between men. However, there is something more involved. There seems to be a contrast between the observation that love is caused by arete (virtue), to the belief that love can also be causal for the arete in the manner described by Plutarch in his dialogue on love....
"Every lover becomes generous, single-hearted, high-minded, though
miserly before".
"This is a friendship of actions and of mutual perfecting. For each
forms in himself, as it were, the excellent qualities which please
him in the other by taking each other as a pattern"
(Aristotle, Nicomachean ethics)
We see this ideal begin literary codification in the Carolingian court, where the courtly members even go so far as to take on pseudonyms for their practice. Anglibert for instance takes the name "Homer", Alcuin is called "Flaccus Albinus", and "David" is Charlemagne. This is the beginning of exclusion in language of the courtly elite.... by definition, "esotericism" (Dictionary of Philosophy: ed Dr D Runes "Belonging to the inner circle of initiates or experts").
"May David's sweet love inspire the hearts of singers, and love for
him make poetry in our hearts. Homer the poet loves David; make
poetry my pipe!"
(Anglibert)
Before moving on to esotericism though, I would like to point out one more case of initiatory usages within the literary understanding of courtly ideal. The case is concerning Wolfram von Eschenbach's book that is so hotly debated by scholars, to the point of bitterness. The initiatory purpose of the book is well understood, even if the esoteric underlay is not agreed upon. This book belongs to the genre of literature common to the High Middle German epics known as "bildungsroman" which deals with the development of the hero through a set of maturing experiences. Even the great deconstructionist critic of the possible esoteric meanings in this work, Henry Kratz, admits this principle of change in the social setting;
"At the beginning of the romance Parzival is a raw youth, ignorant
and untaught, and at the end he has passed every test of chivalry and
has been crowned King on the most exalted throne in the world. He has
thus undeniably gone through a process of improvement, whether one
wishes to use the word "development" or not (Parzival pg 438 , Henry
Kratz ,1973).
This in spite of the fact that Kratz considers religious or depth psychology interpretations to be "deplorable in the extreme". I should point out though that such interpretations are not the failings of a few crackpots in the academic world. Kratz says "It has been going on for so long now, and so many scholars of repute have joined in the game, that it has become an accepted tenet of scholarship........ I submit that it is a false picture, and one of my chief concerns in this book is to correct it" (pg 7, Parzival 1973). Whatever side of the overall debate one falls on, the fact remains that Parzival goes from being "tump" (a fool) to being "wiz" (wise), and this process occurs within a very deliberately formulated structure.
Now on to next issue...... ESOTERICISM....
The question concerning esotericism in Parzival has been the difficult one. Where Kratz denies it's existence in the book, other scholars such as Windor McConnell (Professor of German and Director of Mediaeval studies, University of California) view it as intrinsic and consciously placed by the author ; "The current study differs from (Ernst) Dick's in that I am less concerned with the topography of the journeys into the otherworld realms per se, in particular as the latter pertain to what I believe was Wolfram's extensive knowledge of alchemy and numerology" (from the essay "Symbols of transformation in Parzival" pg 205 Companion to Wolfram's Parziaval, Camden House 1999)
When Kratz suggests that Wolfram's mention of the Phoenix (for instance) is based only on his literal belief in such a bird rather than any metaphor... "The middle ages regarded the phoenix as a real bird, and it does not follow that it would associate the allegorical nonsense with it any more that it would with a lion or any other real animal mentioned in the work" (Parzival pg 105, Henry Kratz)... he seems to fail to see obvious metaphors in. This would also include the lion by the way, which although a real animal certainly takes on an allegorical purpose for the sake of the story (as it commonly does in medieval literature, for that matter). The same is true of inanimate images like the anchor on Gamurhet's shield, and the colors the characters wear. I'm forced to agree with Neil Thomas (Lecturer in Germanic studies, Durham University) when he points out "This genetic theory, which postulates that the trobar clus was mediated to Wolfram via his claimed source "Kyot der Provenzale" has found little favor recently, not least because the reality of Kyot is now doubted" ("modes of narrative presentation" pg 130 Companion to Wolfram's Parzival), but this doesn’t imply a lack of underlying meaning based on the same imagery.
Obviously, this is about hermeneutics. I am confident in my own abilities on that front, and I am convinced that Wolfram uses an allegorical presentation that is conscious, and systematic. Lets take Wolfram's own words on the matter...
"This winged comparison is too swift for unripe wits. They lack the
power to grasp it. For it will wrench past them like a startled hare!
So it is with a dull mirror or a blind man's dream. These reveal
faces in dim outline; but the stark image does not abide, it gives
but a moments joy" (Hatto's translation of Parzival, chapter one,
second paragraph)
"On the other hand I have yet to meet a man so wise that he would not
gladly know what guidance this story requires, what edification it
brings" (third paragraph)
These same observation extend back to the previously mentioned "trobar cluz" as well, and imagery used by certain troubadours. Since debate concerning the meanings of Occitan poetry is more difficult, I'll leave it from this discussion (it is unimportant after the demonstration of my points elsewhere) other than to say that the debate rages on, and has reached an impasse. What exactly Guillem of Peiteus means by "contraclau" (counterkey), or just how we should take terms like "entendedors" (understanders), "Parlar cruz (hidden language), or how we should see a troubadour telling us that the true meaning of a poem is "nuill" (secret) is open to debate. My answer would go back to the first part of this argument.... it depends on the specific author.
Likewise, whether passages 130-132 in the Bahir (a Kabbalistic work of the era and area) were actually taken from troubadour imagery (as some have speculated) may be difficult to prove...
"131) And what is this divine Glory? This can be explained by a
parable: A king had a great lady in his room. She was loved by all
his knights, and she had sons. They all came every day to see the
face of the king, and they blessed him. They asked him: "Our mother,
where is she?" He said to them, "You cannot see her now." They
said; "Blessed is she wherever she is." (translated by Ronald Kenier)
But, the question simply is not so difficult in Wolfram as it is in the other two situations I just mentioned. Wolfrom not only uses imagery, he uses a language of imagery that is meant to communicate points to his audience. What is more, we see the same lingo used in stories written by other authors. If you can interpret Wolfram, you will also have a pretty good chance at Gawain and the Green Knight.
Once we get to the direct descendants of the fin’amor legacy; e.g. Dante, Cavalcanti, Boccaccio, the lingo changes in some areas while staying the same in others. One thing is for sure though, the mixture of the real life love with the mystical is explicit.
"The honor which is hers cannot be said;
To whom are subject all things virtuous,
While all things beauteous own her deity
Ne'er was the mind of man so nobly led
nor yet was such redemption granted us
that we should ever know her perfectly"
(Cavalcanti, "Who is she coming"... this from the man who chided his
friend Dante for being too allegorical)
The fact that this small group of originators for the "dolce stil nuovo" wrote of a systematic treatment of love has never been debated to my knowledge. Dante himself tells us to first read his poem literally (for it's moral content, not it's accuracy), then to look at it's allegory (Dante's Letter to Can Grande).
Dante also tells us of the ideological (and historical) link his circle of friends have with the Sicilian school created by Frederick II when he granted refuge to troubadours fleeing extermination during the Albigensian Crusade. The "Notary" and "Guitton" mentioned in canto XXIV 55 of Purgatorio are Giacomo de Lentino and Guittone d'Arezzo, representatives of this school. Essentially what Dante claims then is a direct link in intent and style of the two schools. Even if we do not take him at face value, we can see at the very most a break of 15 years from his birth in 1265 from the death of Frederick II in 1250. Cavalcanti, being born in 1250 is a little closer to that date which could certainly allow for a direct connection between the two schools.
"And he ‘O brother, now I see the hitch
That kept back me, the Notary, and Guitton',
And put this sweet new style beyond our reach
I see how your pens follow hard upon
his voice who thus dictates the argument;
So did not ours, as I must freely own;
And further search, however far it went,
would find no other difference in the style
'Twixt old and new" He ceased and seemed content”
Dante believes that the "New Style" has returned to the pre Sicilian school of "amorous debate" that had been in decline by his time. The "scala amoris" that Dante mentions in his works is not only literary, but a convention practiced at least partially in the real world by it's followers (though it appears that he and Cavalcanti had a falling out over just how literal or allegorical certain parts should be taken.)
Still, while explicitly "initiatory" and "esoteric" by definition most of this is rather far from some modern usages of the terms in question. Let me finish with something that is more recognizable to the modern thinking concerning the outward appearance of these terms in practice.
Another school in Florence some years later- which would claim it's purpose to be in accord with that of Dante and the troubadours before him- is in the court of Lorenzo the Magnificent. By this time we see a full blown system of symbols and practices that saw itself as a refinement of ideas from such sources as Kabbalah, Hermeticism, Classical myth (Mysteries, Orphic), and Christianity. All of this was seen by practitioners such as Pico della Mirandola as feeding into a single river of initiation that went back into the distant past. Today we can snicker at the historical origin that Pico speculated, but this does not negate the practice as it was promulgated in his contemporary circle of friends. Most of Pico's actual sources were not from the distant antiquities, but from the late antiquities. This is something that Edgar Wind points out in his book on Classical motifs in Renaissance art....
"The pagan revival to which he (Pico) adhered was therefore less
a `revival of the classics' than a recrudescence of that ugly thing
which has been called `late antiquities syncretism'." (Pagan
Mysteries in the Renaissance; Edgar Wind, pg 22)
While this renaissance neo-Platonism held some rather glaring debts to late antiquities neo-Platonist offshoots (especially Hermeticism, and Plotinus) as well as the Kabbalah, it also placed these philosophies within a framework of "fin amor" in the mind of the new cameratta. As for the neo-classical origins we see Marsilio Ficino restate Proclus' list of descendants of the Orphic Mysteries (which includes Pythagoras and Plato "In Patonis Theologian") to include his own name (Opera p. 634.. Letter to Cavalcanti). This demonstrates that he certainly considered himself a practitioner of the "Orphic" mysteries. Pico also gives us an opinion; "It is written by Iamblichus that Pythagoras took the Orphic Theology as a model after which he patterned and shaped his own philosophy. And for that reason alone are the sayings of Pythagoras called sacred, that they are derived from the Orphic initiations, from which flowed, as from a fountainhead, the sacred doctrine of numbers and whatever was great and sublime in Greek philosophy".
In a letter by Lorenzo de' Medici explaining the reason for starting his sonnets on love with an image of death we see and expression of resources as it was seen within this circle of friends. To quote;
"He that examines these matters more closely will find that the
beginning of the `vita amorosa' proceeds from death, because whoever
lives for love first dies to everything else. And if love has in it a
certain perfection, it is impossible to arrive at that perfection
without first dying with regard to the more imperfect things. This
very rule was followed by Homer, Virgil and Dante: for Homer sent
Ulysses into the Underworld, Virgil sent Aeneas, and Dante made
himself wander through the Inferno, to show that the way to
perfection is by this road."
Lorenzo makes clear that there is a "rule", a system, and that it has an initiatory property. Ficino makes clear that there is a system of mysteries that he believes himself to be a part of, and Pico gives us a very clear picture of just how he sees allegorical interpretations of classical writings are to be taken.
So there we have it; the evolution of romance as a mystical system up through the Renaissance as well as an outline of the defining qualities of esotericism and initiation.
send an e-mail
