Foucault’s sodomite’: Damian’s Liber gomorrhianus (1049) reopened. Taking Michel Foucault’s famous statement about the difference between the ‘Medieval sodomite’ and the heteronormative ‘19th century homosexual’ as its cue, this article surveys the discursive source of that statement in the work of Peter Damian (1007–1072) with regard to his obscure, yet consequential text, Liber gomorrhianus (presented in 1049 to Pope Leo IX, preceding the Council of Reims). Drawing on the recent research by Ranft and because Damian is such an understated figure (...) in the corpus of Medieval philosophy, an overview of Damian’s life and work is presented, especially in terms of Damian’s 11th century reforming labour ethics. Only then the article proceeds to reopen Damian’s text, indicating that the ‘Medieval sodomite’ is far removed from an elementary precursor to the modern scientia sexualis homosexual, but is indeed presented by Damian as a complex and gender-inclusive licentious person, within the context of the disintegration of sexual morality (especially within the domains of celibacy and confession) in the middle to late 11th century church and monasteries. Cross-referencing the own translation of the Latin text with the translation of Payer, the article disseminates and critiques the key concepts in Damian’s argument for the summarily deposition of lapsi [fallen priests] and the expulsion of promiscuous monks (and nuns) from the orders, especially with regard to Damian’s concepts of contra-natural and irrational fornication. Pope Leo’s deeply pastoral and insightful answer to Damian ( Ad splendidum nitentis ) is presented in the last part of the article, including his sanctioning of Damian’s complex concept of sodomy, which on that ground, became the conceptual source for the council of Reims (1049), and subsequent Medieval councils dealing with the ‘problem of sodomy’ in the church and monasteries. The canons of those councils were indeed the source of Foucault’s analysis of Medieval sexuality – yet the more fundamental source was Damian’s obscure text. (shrink)

This article, by analysing, annotating en interpreting the most recent research in all relevant departments, provides a fresh and updated overview of the Neoplatonic metaphysics of Pseudo-Dionysius (ca. 500). After providing an introduction to Dionysius’ metaphysics in terms of the contributions of Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism, the article explores his broader philosophical system. A number of traits that are uniquely Dionysic-metaphysical, are eventually isolated: the interpretation of transcendence as bound to immanence; the affirmation of God’s transcendence in the world (that (...) is, a metaphysics of ‘creation as teophany’; following E.D. Perl); the radical transcendence and simultaneous radical immanence of God (that is, God as ‘Beingness’); fundamental restrictions of language and the analogical ‘Naming’ of God; creation as a system of dialectical symbols about God; the analogical participation of the subject in creation; and unification (reditus, the ‘flowing of things back to God’). These traits are utilised to reappraise the metaphysics of Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464) in a subsequent article. (shrink)

The philosophical output of Héloïse d’Argenteuil. This article attempts to deconstruct the overhyped erotic relationship between the philosopher-monk Peter Abelard and philosopher-nun Héloïse d’Argenteuil, by surveying Héloïse’s extant texts as such, isolating three themes in her philosophical output: her concept of Cicerian love, her criticism of marriage and her notion of moral and material responsibility, which includes her understanding of an ethics of attitude and intention. When Héloïse is read against the grain of the standardised Abelard-reception, she is brought into (...) perspective as an independent thinker, who deserves more intellectual respect than to be caricaturised as either Abelard’s secret young lover, or his unwilling wife. When her texts are read as independent outputs, albeit often in the form of correspondence, she steps forward as the ‘first female philosopher of the Middle Ages’. Her relationship with Abelard, important as it was for both of them, is secondary to her standing as a philosopher proper. (shrink)