<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf8'?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/1.1/JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article dtd-version="1.1" article-type="book-review">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id>TMR</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>The Medieval Review</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">1096-746X</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Indiana University</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">14.05.04</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>14.05.04, de Nie, Poetics of Wonder (Lisa Bitel)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Bitel</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
          <aff>University of Southern California</aff>
          <address>
            <email>bitel@usc.edu</email>
          </address>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2013">
        <year>2013</year>
      </pub-date>
      <product product-type="book">
        <person-group>
          <name>
            <surname>de Nie, Giselle</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
        </person-group>
        <source>Poetics of Wonder: Testimonies of the New Christian Miracles in the Late
                  Antique Latin World, Studies in the Early Middle Ages 31</source>
        <year iso-8601-date="2012">2012</year>
        <publisher-loc>Turnhout</publisher-loc>
        <publisher-name>Brepols</publisher-name>
        <page-range>Pp. xii, 530</page-range>
        <price>€130.00</price>
        <isbn>978-2-503-53148-9</isbn>
      </product>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright 2013 Trustees of Indiana University. Indiana University provides the information contained in this file for non-commercial, personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.</copyright-statement>
      </permissions>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <p> In previous works, Giselle de Nie has guided readers through the otherworld of late
               antique/early medieval miracles and wonders. In her new book, de Nie visits the
               period when not all Jesus followers believed in miracles, seeking to explain how a
               "miracle-embracing mentality" descended upon Western Christians. The earliest
               Christian writers were ambivalent about miracles, which reminded them of pagan
               healing shrines; they only began to circulate stories of miracles in the late fourth
               century. Texts from the fourth and fifth centuries contain arguments for and against
               belief in miracles, but read together the same texts reveal an emerging <italic>imaginaire</italic>, of miracles that has permeated Christianity to the present day.
               Other historians have studied the social and cultural contexts of Christian miracles
               in this period, but they have failed, according to de Nie, to track changing
               religious attitudes toward miracles, or ponder evidence for individual experience of
               miracles in late antiquity.</p>
    <p>The book is deeply learned, sympathetic to religious experience, and only mildly
               flawed in the execution of its argument. It is long and dense, but this should not
               deter anyone from dipping into its detailed chapters. de Nie repeatedly summarizes
               her main points. It is also a brave book. de Nie confronts one of the most
               challenging problems of modern academics: How do we interpret reported evidence for
               historical experiences of religion, especially when the evidence refers to
               supernatural causes? Did, as Steven Justice has phrased it, the Middle Ages actually
               believe their miracles? [1] de Nie chooses as her case study for this problem a
               particular historical moment (386 C.E. to about 460), a single if complex faith
               tradition (Christianity), and a particular place (the Roman West). She probes the
               works of selected late antique authors for "comprehensive as well as in-depth
               explorations into the individual imagistic patternings" of reported miracle events,
               while assuming "the meditative/affective manner" that such texts demanded of
               Christian readers in the late antique West. </p>
    <p>Modern experts on the pre-modern typical maintain an anthropological distance from
               evidence for miracles, prophecies, visions, and other wonders. Take Hildegard of
               Bingen's famous visions. Some interpreters have argued that Hildegard's visions
               represent a polymathic theology. Others have suggested that Hildegard suffered from
               migraines that produced her visions. Still others have understood Hildegard's opus as
               an act of resistance to the <italic>cura mulierum</italic>. All of these
               interpretations avoid the fundamental question, though, of whether Hildegard did or
               did not receive divine illumination.</p>
    <p>de Nie tackles the reality of miracles head on, beginning with a brief review of
               relevant philosophical, psychological, and scientific literature about human
               perception. de Nie describes three existing scholarly approaches to the understanding
               of miracles: the traditional Christian position that miracles are divine
               interventions in the natural order; the scientific position, which posits natural
               causes for seemingly miraculous events; and a psychological approach via Jungian
               concepts of synchronicities and fluid self identity, which may or may not involve
               imagination or extra-sensory perception. de Nie attempts to learn from these various
               methods while maintaining a kind of sympathetic "wonder" in her interpretation
               (27-28).</p>
    <p>de Nie is less interested in proof for miracles than in why they became so important
               in the late fourth century. Miracles initially went out of fashion, according to the
               author, after the first generations of Jesus followers. Early Christians read their
               savior's miracles as tools for conversion. According to their religious leaders,
               newly converted Christians no longer needed miracles--which smacked of pagan magic
               anyway--to believe, but only the words of their savior and the model of their
               martyrs. However, throughout late antiquity, pagans and Christians alike continued to
               patronize magicians and soothsayers, and to visit healing shrines. Once Christianity
               became legal and popular, its leaders were less threatened by magical practices from
               other disciplines. Christians began to visit the most holy dead at tombs and at
               shrines, and to seek the saints' help. In the late fourth century, believers began to
               circulate stories of miracles that demonstrated the intercessory powers of their
               saints. Theologians subsequently reconsidered the religious validity of miracles.</p>
    <p>de Nie asks more precisely, how did major thinkers come to embrace miracles? It
               started with Ambrose, who cautiously promoted the acquisition of saintly relics and
               their wonder-working powers as part of his campaign to retain control of the church
               in Milan, after Arians tried to wrest it from him. de Nie explicates Ambrose's works
               and career, then moves systematically through similarly close readings of works by
               Sulpicius Severus, Paulinus of Nola, Augustine, and Paulinus of Périgueux, as well as
               many of their associates and critical opponents (notably Donatists). She traces each
               writer's evolving, sometimes conflicted position on the validity of miracles, sermon
               by sermon, line by line, as each wondered: Were miracles a pagan illusion or a
               Christian event? Real or imagined? Tangible and visible wonders wrought by the most
               holy dead, or signs of divine intention obvious only to the sensitive viewer? The
               thoroughness with which de Nie dogs these discussions through letters, doctrinal and
               theological tracts, hagiography, and many other sources is utterly persuasive, yet
               also makes for exhausting reading--kind of like watching a cinema verité film about a
               scholar immersed in thought. de Nie's language is a sometimes overwrought and her
               sentences convoluted. Her explication of evidence is occasionally repetitive. She
               indulges in learned diversions, some of which entertain but also occlude her main
               argument (although I admittedly enjoyed the two-page discussion of dance as metaphor
               in the <italic>De laude</italic> of Victricious of Rouen, which led to an
               explanation of the Processional Three-step, 83-84). </p>
    <p>On the other hand, if de Nie had streamlined her prose, readers would lose a valuable
               lesson in scholarly method: the parsing, almost word by word, of sermon after sermon
               of Augustine; the pondering of derivations and translations; the identification of
               slight shifts in opinion by some of Christianity's greatest minds. de Nie depends
               upon the qualifications and seeming contradictions apparent within each writer's
               works in order to demonstrate his changing understanding of miracles in the cosmic
               scheme. Her discussion of events at Uzalis, as rendered by Augustine's sermons on
               miraculous healing (347-357), offer a good example. de Nie does not reimagine the
               sequence of Augustine's ideas so much as <italic>think with</italic> the Bishop of
               Hippo as he witnesses the cure of two pilgrims to Saint Stephen's shrine over several
               days. Augustine first insisted that the saints served only as spiritual models for
               other Christians; he then began to admit the value of saintly intercession, and
               finally to appreciate visible wonders that occurred at the saint's tomb. Augustine,
               de Nie explains, taught himself to "read" these miracles even as he witnessed them
               with his eyes. The sight of an afflicted pilgrim rising, completely healed, from the
               floor of a shrine, was for Augustine like reading a sermon on divine mysteries. The
               words on the page and the pilgrim's dance were at once events caused by saints and
               signs of Christian truth sent by God to receptive believers. Visible wonders
               reaffirmed invisible transformations of the pilgrim's heart and Augustine's beliefs.
               Eventually, Augustine chastised fellow Christians who complained about getting no
               answers to their prayers to the saints. How do you know, the bishop demanded, that
               you have not experienced an interior miracle that has cured you of unseen ills? Later
               writers, such as Paulinus of Périgueux, used Augustine's ideas as the basis for a
               more fully developed poetics of miracles, thus creating a model for the experience of
               miracles that still endures among Catholics.</p>
    <p>I have learned much from this book. I am extremely grateful for the sources cited in
               de Nie's 2017 footnotes. I agree with her that we will never understand religions of
               the past until we can maintain wonder at what we do not understand--whether because
               we lack evidence or because we refuse to believe it. Yet we cannot pretend to
               understand medieval mentalities while we purposely misread the evidence that does
               exist, such as explicit discussions of supernatural phenomena and extraordinary
               religious experience. To render such experience in purely non-religious terms is
               anachronistic and reductive. Even de Nie cannot resist explaining some reports of
               healing miracles with neurological causes. With the notable exception of Jeffrey
               Kripal, [2] few scholars dare to cite evidence for paranormal experience in their
               critical analyses of religious phenomena. We still fear the doctrinal blinders of
               pre-Enlightenment scholarship and we know--from experience, from history, or from
               common sense--how easy it is to fake evidence and trick other people into believing
               what they see.</p>
    <p>Isn't that what the Apostle Thomas worried about, though? The surprise is that
               rational doubt also pervaded late antique discussions of Christian wonders. No one in
               the late fourth century expected miracles just because Jesus had reputedly performed
               them. Christ's followers did not accept the existence of miracles without argument.
               Instead, they negotiated the possibility of miracles as they debated the intercessory
               potential of the most holy dead. Late antique Christians were not born into a world
               already filled with God's marvels and messengers. Like Augustine and Ambrose, they
               had to train themselves to see miracles and to read them as purposeful irruptions of
               material reality by an invisible God. </p>
    <p>--------</p>
    <p>Notes:</p>
    <p>1. Steven Justice, "Did the Middle Ages Believe in Their Miracles?," <italic>Representations</italic>103 (2008): 1-29.</p>
    <p>2. Jeffrey J. Kripal, "Visions of the Impossible: How 'fantastic' stories unlock the
               nature of consciousness," <italic>Chronicle of Higher Education</italic>, Chronicle
               Review (Mar. 31, 2014); online at
               http://chronicle.com/article/Embrace-the-Unexplained/145557/.</p>
    <p/>
  </body>
</article>
