Advertisement

postmedieval

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 132–146 | Cite as

Heavenly hermaphrodites: sexual difference at the beginning and end of time

  • Leah DeVun
Original Article

Abstract

This article examines how ancient and medieval Christians invoked ideas about ‘hermaphrodites’ to work out fundamental questions about who we are as humans. What was the original or ideal state of humanity? Was the division of sex into male and female an inherent part of human nature? Certain Christian theologians, beginning in antiquity, claimed that Adam – the first human, according to the biblical book of Genesis – was an ‘androgyne’ or ‘hermaphrodite,’ that is, a combination of male and female sex. Similarly, some medieval theologians speculated that all post-resurrection bodies were androgynous. In conversations about both the creation and the resurrection, questions about sexual difference thus surfaced repeatedly, revealing key assumptions about the sexed body and its place in the narrative of Christian history. This article suggests that such debates were key to ancient and medieval efforts to determine which sexes were legitimate sexes, and therefore which lives were redeemably human.

References

  1. Ajootian, A. 1997. The Only Happy Couple: Hermaphrodites and Gender. In Naked Truths, eds. A. O. Koloski-Ostrow and C. L. Lyons, 220–42. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Aquinas, T. 1964–81. Summa theologiae: Latin text and English translation, Introductions, Notes, Appendices, and Glossaries. New York: Blackfriars.Google Scholar
  3. Augustine of Hippo. 1894. De Genesi ad litteram, ed. J. Zycha, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 28: 1. Vienna, Austria, and Prague, Czech Republic: F. Tempsky; Leipzig, Germany: G. Freytag.Google Scholar
  4. Augustine of Hippo. 1968. De trinitate, eds. W.J. Mountain and Fr. Glorie, Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina, 50–50A. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.Google Scholar
  5. Augustine of Hippo. 1972. De civitate Dei, trans. H. Bettenson. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
  6. Augustine of Hippo. 2002. On the Trinity: Books 8–15, ed. G.B. Matthews and trans. S. McKenna. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Biblia Latina cum Glossa Ordinaria: Facsimile Reprint of the Editio Princeps Adolph Rusch of Strassburg 1480/81. 1992. Eds. Karlfield Froehlich and Margaret T. Gibson. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.Google Scholar
  8. Bouchard, C.B. 2003. ‘Every Valley Shall Be Exalted’: The Discourse of Opposites in Twelfth-Century Thought. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Boyarin, D. 1993. Carnal Israel: Reading Sex in Talmudic Culture. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, P. 1988. The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Butler, J. 1988. Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory. Theatre Journal 40(4): 519–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bynum, C.W. 1982. Jesus as Mother: Studies in the Spirituality of the High Middle Ages. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Bynum, C.W. 1995. The Resurrection of the Body in Western Christianity, 2001336. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Cadden, J. 1993. Meanings of Sex Difference in the Middle Ages. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Chen, M. 2012. Animacies: Biopolitics, Racial Mattering, and Queer Affect. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clark, E.A. 1983. Heresy, Asceticism, Adam and Eve: Interpretations of Genesis 1–3 in the Later Church Fathers. In Ascetic Piety and Women’s Faith: Essays on Late Ancient Christianity, 353–86. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
  17. Clark, E.A. 1986. Adam’s Only Companion: Augustine and the Early Christian Debate on Marriage. Recherches Augustiniennes 21: 139–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cohen, A.S. and A. Derbes. 2001. Bernward and Eve at Hildesheim. Gesta 40(1): 19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cohen, J. 1989. ‘Be Fertile and Increase, Fill the Earth and Master It’: The Ancient and Medieval Career of a Biblical Text. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Nashville Statement, 2017 (https://cbmw.org/nashville-statement).
  21. Daston, L. and K. Park. 1995. The Hermaphrodite and the Orders of Nature: Sexual Ambiguity in Early Modern France. GLQ 1: 419–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. DeVun, L. 2008. The Jesus Hermaphrodite: Science and Sex Difference in Premodern Europe. Journal of the History of Ideas 69(2): 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. DeVun, L. 2015. Erecting Sex: Hermaphrodites and the Medieval Science of Surgery. In special issue Scientific Masculinities, ed. E.L. Milam and R.A. Nye. Osiris 30(1): 17–37.Google Scholar
  24. Duclow, D.F. 2014. The Sleep of Adam, the Making of Eve: Sin and Creation in Eriugena. In Eriugena and Creation, eds. W. Otten and M.I. Allen, 235–61. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dunning, B.H. 2011. Specters of Paul: Sexual Difference in Early Christian Thought. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Elliott, D. 1999. Fallen Bodies: Pollution, Sexuality, and Demonology in the Middle Ages. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  27. Elliott, D. 2013. Rubber Soul: Theology, Hagiography, and the Spirit World of the High Middle Ages. In From Beasts to Souls: Gender and Embodiment in Medieval Europe, eds. E.J. Burns and P. McCracken, 89–120. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  28. Henry of Ghent. 1972. La ‘Lectura ordinaria super sacram scripturam’ attribuée à Henri de Gand, ed. R. Macken. Louvain, Belgium: Éditions universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
  29. Honorius Augustodunensis. 1974. Clavis physicae, critical edition of the first part (§§ 1315), ed. P. Lucentini. Roma, Italy: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura.Google Scholar
  30. Horstmann, C., ed. 1885. The Life of Adam and Eue, aus Ms. Harl. 4775. In Nachträge zu den Legenden, Archiv für der neuren Sprachen und Literatur 74: 353–65.Google Scholar
  31. Isidore of Seville. 2006. Etymologies. Ed. and trans. S.A. Barney, et al. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Joannes Scotus Eriugena. 1976. Periphyseon: On the Division of Nature, eds. and trans. M.L. Uhlfelder and J.A. Potter. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  33. John of Salisbury. 1990. Policraticus: Of the Frivolities of Courtiers and the Footprints of Philosophers, ed. and trans. C.J. Nederman. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Macdonald, D.R. 1988. Corinthian Veils and Gnostic Androgynes. In Images of the Feminine in Gnosticism, ed. K.L. King, 276–92. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press.Google Scholar
  35. Markow, D. 1983. The Iconography of the Soul in Medieval Art. Ph.D. diss., New York University.Google Scholar
  36. Martin, D.B. 2006. Sex and the Single Savior: Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.Google Scholar
  37. Meeks, W.A. 1974. The Image of the Androgyne: Some Uses of a Symbol in Earliest Christianity. History of Religions 13(3): 165–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Metzler, I. 2006. Disability in Medieval Europe: Thinking About Impairment During the High Middle Ages, c. 11001400. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Mills, R. 2015. Seeing Sodomy in the Middle Ages. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moore, R.I. 2012. The War on Heresy. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Murdoch, B. 2003. The Medieval Popular Bible: Expansions of Genesis in the Middle Ages. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer.Google Scholar
  42. Murdoch, B. 2009. The Apocryphal Adam and Eve in Medieval Europe: Vernacular Translations and Adaptations of the Vita Adae et Evae. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Noort, E. 2000. The Creation of Man and Woman in Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Traditions. In The Creation of Man and Woman: Interpretations of the Biblical Narratives in Jewish and Christian Traditions, 1–18, ed. G.P. Luttikhuizen. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.Google Scholar
  44. Otto of Freising. 1912. Chronica sive historia de duabus civitatibus. Ed. A. Hofmeister, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum ex Monumentis Germaniae Historicis separatim editi. Hanover and Leipzig, Germany: Hahn. English trans. in Otto of Freising, 2002. The Two Cities: A Chronicle of Universal History to the Year 1146 A.D, ed. and trans. C.C. Mierow. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Pagels, E. [1979] 1989. The Gnostic Gospels. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  46. Pegg, M.G. 2008. A Most Holy War: The Albigensian Crusade and the Battle for Christendom. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Petrey, T.G. 2016. Resurrecting Parts: Early Christians on Desire, Reproduction, and Sexual Difference. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Petrus Comestor. 2005. Scolastica historia: liber Genesis, ed. A. Sylwan. Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Medievalis, 191. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.Google Scholar
  49. Rolker, C. 2014. The Two Laws and the Three Sexes: Ambiguous Bodies in Canon Law and Roman Law (12th to 16th Centuries). Zeitschrift der Z. Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte kanonistische Abteilung 100: 178–222.Google Scholar
  50. Salisbury, J.E. 1986. The Latin Doctors of the Church on Sexuality. Journal of Medieval History 12: 279–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Secunda, S. 2012 The Construction, Composition, and Idealization of the Female Body in Rabbinic Literature and Parallel Iranian Texts: Three Excurses. Nashim 23: 60–86.Google Scholar
  52. Snorton, C.R., and J. Haritaworn. 2013. Trans Necropolitics: A Transnational Reflection on Violence, Death, and the Trans of Color Afterlife. In The Transgender Studies Reader 2, ed. S. Stryker and A.Z. Aizura, 66–76. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Van der Lugt, M. 2001. Pourquoi Dieu a-t-il créé la femme? Différence sexuelle et théologie médiévale. In Ève et Pandora: la création de la femme, ed. J.-C. Schmitt, 89–113 (notes on 262–67). Paris, France: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  54. Vogt, K. 1991. ‘Becoming Male’: A Gnostic and Early Christian Metaphor. In The Image of God and Gender Models in Judaeo-Christian Tradition, ed. K.E. Børresen, 172–87. Oslo, Norway: Solum Forlag.Google Scholar
  55. Ximenii de Rada, R. (Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada). 1992. Breviarium historie catholice (I-V), ed. Juan Fernández Valverde. Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis, 72A-B. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leah DeVun
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of HistoryRutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations