<?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">14.05.13</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>14.05.13, Moss, Fatherhood and its Representations in Middle English Texts
               (Marita von Weissenberg)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>von Weissenberg</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
          <aff>Xavier University</aff>
          <address>
            <email>vonweissenbergm@xavier.edu</email>
          </address>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2014">
        <year>2014</year>
      </pub-date>
      <product product-type="book">
        <person-group>
          <name>
            <surname>Moss, Rachel E.</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
        </person-group>
        <source>Fatherhood and its Representations in Middle English Texts, </source>
        <year iso-8601-date="2013">2013</year>
        <publisher-loc>Cambridge</publisher-loc>
        <publisher-name>D.S. Brewer</publisher-name>
        <page-range>Pp. ix, 224</page-range>
        <price>$99.00</price>
        <isbn>9781843843580</isbn>
      </product>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright 2014 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> Dr. Rachel E. Moss' examination of fatherhood addresses a remarkably large lacuna in
               the scholarship of the family and masculinity. By bringing letters and romances into
               a creative dialogue, this book discusses paternal power as well as the social and
               literary expectations of fatherhood. We are introduced to a variety of fathers in
               these texts: fathers as a force for masculinizing adolescents; fathers who shaped
               identities as well as narratives by being the figures against whom sons measured
               themselves, seeking to impress and eventually replace <italic>pater</italic> as
               heads of households. We encounter sons, stepsons, and bastard sons as subordinate men
               who were ruled by fathers in both literature and letters, just as wives and daughters
               were--as women. We read of good daughters as submissive, silent support of a father's
               authority over the household and their rare voices as reminders to be good fathers:
               to hold the good of the household and family at the forefront of actions and
               decision. The absence of a father and his authority or its misuse, we learn, caused
               anxieties in both social and literary fora.</p>
    <p>Fatherhood was a form of authority. This notion runs like a red thread though the
               book, which ends with the observation that our conceptions of patriarchy must be
               revisited. Patriarchy was not, Moss argues, centered on male dominance, it was
               centered on fathers: "the complex dynamics of a system that privileges fatherhood"
               (190). Patriarchy, lineage, and fatherhood were intrinsically tied to power exercised
               by the head of the household--the father. A father's role and duty was to use his
               authority for the benefit and continuation of his patrimony, as this study shows,
               adding its methodology, sources, and analysis to an increasingly strong choir of
               scholarly voices on pre-modern men. </p>
    <p>The fathers in Moss' study were essential to the gentry and mercantile classes. It
               was the fathers' responsibility to further their family, and emerging class, in
               political and economic success, ensuring continuation of the line. As vessels of
               patriarchal continuity, but also as practical and legal heads of households, not to
               mention through affective ties to members of the family, fathers filled important
               roles in society and literature. Fathers, in short, mattered (190).</p>
    <p>Dr. Moss divides her study into five chapters. The first, "Situating Fathers: The
               Cultural Context," is more than a contextualization of the gentry and mercantile
               fathers she studies in their social, cultural, and literary milieu--it also places
               this rising group of Englishmen (and here "men" is of course essential) in a period
               of change in England. The "long fifteenth century" was a time when political
               representation in Parliament was broadened to include county landholders in addition
               to knights--the ability to wield a pen was more important for social mobility than
               skill with a sword (18). Indeed, their relationship to the written word in many ways
               characterized the gentry and mercantile men in Moss' book. The author not only
               introduces the reader to the gentry families she studies (the Celys, Pastons,
               Plumptons and Stonors, as well as Armburghs), but contextualizes the literary world
               that permeated their social strata and culture: exchanging letters and reading
               romances.</p>
    <p>With the Paston family as example, Moss draws a picture of the gentry's written
               world. Recurring motifs, 'memes,' appealed to the reader's imagination (37) and made
               romances engaging to multiple generations of readers in gentry and mercantile
               families, in whose inventories most of the included romances appear. Many of these
               memes were based on family relationships that were eminently familiar and relevant to
               gentry audiences, as shown by their letters, also a genre heavily based on forms and
               conventions. Moss convincingly demonstrates that these two literary genres, in all
               their formulaic wording, indeed partly because of it, show fathers as occupying the
               same social and cultural roles, rights, and expectations, and that these tie
               intrinsically to questions of authority and lineage.</p>
    <p>The book's second chapter, "Becoming a Father, Becoming a Man," uses the framework of
               examining letters and romances explained in the previous chapter to underline a
               well-established argument for medieval masculinity: fathering children was a key
               component of attaining mature masculinity in medieval society (see Moss' excellent
               footnotes for this scholarship). This is not a banal addendum to the scholarship--far
               from it. Through her careful method of placing romances and letters in dialogue, Moss
               adds nuance to the process of maturing from adolescence into manhood. She complicates
               fatherhood by comparing wedded and unwedded fathers--the latter who are returned to
               in Chapter 5--underlining that not all fathering gave adolescents access to adult
               manliness. Legitimate, married fatherhood was a key to socially acceptable
               masculinity, while unmarried fathering of children could, depending on the context,
               disprove manly self-discipline and maturity in giving into illegitimate and immature
               sexual escapades. Sexual capacity and resulting biological fatherhood was far from an
               automatic portal to full manhood. Mature, legitimate fatherhood, however, could be a
               demonstration of competency, the personal, financial, and social readiness for
               paternity and heading a household. Fatherhood was under heavy social controls, even
               if fathering may not have been, and this is evident both in letters and romances.</p>
    <p>In the next chapter, "Fathers and Sons," Moss further contextualizes adolescent and
               mature masculinity in the relationship between fathers and sons. Both letters and
               romances were characterized by the absence of the father. The letters are written to
               a father, by necessity because he was not present; romances are filled with sons'
               quests to find the father and his lineage, or blood, and by extension his identity as
               a man. A son became a man through filling the conceptual space of the father. Letters
               demonstrate the issues of heading a household and how sons approached fathers as
               supplicants, but also reveal the father as a coach to whom a son can, and must, turn
               to for advice, rulings, affirmation, and models of manliness. Successful fathers
               maintained rule over their household and raised their sons to be able to take over as
                  <italic>patresfamiliae</italic> themselves--when the time was ripe. The paradox
               in the success of fatherhood--raising competent men out of sons--is that many of the
               tensions between fathers and sons rose as sons challenged the father's authority as
               well as his social and narrative place.</p>
    <p>Moss shows that this juxtaposition is also a demonstration of the most important
               aspect of the father/son relationship: mutuality. The mutuality fathers and sons
               demonstrated socially, legally, and emotionally are an important factor in both
               romances and letters. The romance son finds his identity as a man--here Moss brings
               in her work for the previous chapter on masculinity and identity--when he has
               established his relationship with his long-lost father. The son's identity is
               dependent on the identity of the father and these men's relationship to each other,
               as well as their common lineage. This was expressed in letters through a language of
               formal duty and obligation. This has often been dismissed as formulaic by critics,
               who may, Moss generously hints, forget that letters, like any genre, are based on
               expectations, tropes, and formulas. Fathers and sons depended on each other in both
               the present-time of the written word, be it romance or letters, and for the future,
               above all the future of the lineage and continuation of paternal authority.</p>
    <p>The importance of paternal authority and patrimonial lineage is emphasized by a
               creative and illuminating analysis of the relationship between daughters and fathers
               in Chapter 4, "Fathers and Daughters." Daughters did not write to their fathers.
               However, they did write to their friends, mothers, husbands, as well as sent
               greetings to their fathers via their husbands, brothers or mothers. Hence, there was
               something in the relationship between fathers and daughters that precluded daughters
               putting pen to paper. Where the son's relationship was based on mutuality and
               formation of manhood with an eye to succession and success of the family, the
               daughter's and the father's relationship was one of opposites: he was the father, <italic>pater</italic>, of patriarchy, she the member of the family with least power
               and hence in complete submission to the father--or at least that was the social and
               literary expectation. Daughters were silent in their letters because they were
               obedient and submissive, they did not need to communicate, only to obey.</p>
    <p>In romances the authority of the father was further highlighted in incestuous and
               semi-incestuous relationships. This is a literary forum where otherwise prolific
               father/daughter relationships contain profound silences. Moss criticizes
               interpretations of incest scenes as having relied on medieval female culpability
               tropes and lifts to the forefront the question of what these narrative motifs tell us
               of fathers, not daughters. The father's authority was absolute. With this power came
               responsibility: for the daughter, the family, the kingdom, patrimonial continuity. A
               man who focused on his personal desires, be they lust for a daughter or
               over-protectiveness and refusal to allow a daughter to marry (often interpreted as
               unfulfilled incest by critics), jeopardized the long-term continuity of the
               family-line. It is here that the daughter is allowed to speak, to voice criticism of
               a tyrannical father.</p>
    <p>An interesting example is that of <italic>Emaré</italic>, who resists the advances
               of her father, Artyus. Later, when the father sentences the daughter to death, she is
               silent (122-126). The daughter speaks up against her father's selfishness that risks
               the family/kingdom's future by damaging her value on the marriage market as a virgin,
               but submits to death silently. A father's rule was absolute for the household,
               essential to fatherhood, and hence romance allows the daughter to be killed. Romance
               does not, however, allow a father to damage his lineage, and hence the daughter's
               silence is lifted by the author. The essential nature of authority in the social,
               legal, and cultural role of the father is clarified by Moss where the focus has
               traditionally been on the daughter.</p>
    <p>Iterations of fatherly authority are further highlighted in Moss' examination of
               step-fathers and fathers of bastards--"False Fathers?" as she titles Chapter 5.
               Gentry and mercantile letters show that when a man married a widow, he was expected
               to become head of the household and father to all the children that were part of it,
               both his own and his wife's. In some cases the relationship between a stepfather and
               a son were openly acrimonious, but more often they were framed in the same language
               of deference and respect as letters to biological fathers. Again, stepdaughters were
               silent, although they and especially their marriages were discussed in letters by
               others.</p>
    <p>The bastard and his father, however, had a complex relationship where social
               acceptability and affective relationships could be at odds. In some cases bastards
               were close to their fathers and useful servants of the family, while in other cases
               resentment was evident. The relationship was always marked by social norms. For
               example, a bastard could be written about in letters, but not as the
               letter-recipients child. Instead, he or she was referred to in relationship to the
               mother: not "your daughter" but "Margere ys dowghter," Margery's daughter (175).
               Maternity served as social context. This matrilineal language of course further
               emphasized the importance of the patrilinear and father, even in, or especially by,
               their absence.</p>
    <p>Stepfathers and illegitimate fathers had fatherly relationships with their sons and
               stepsons in all the complex, challenging, loving, and mutual complexities of
               legitimate, biological fathers and sons. Yet a negative stereotype of these
               relationships is evident in the romances, if not the letters, where for example
               "steffader," stepfather, in <italic>Guy of Warwick</italic> was shorthand "for
               something unfortunate or injurious" (161).</p>
    <p>Guardians were also "false fathers," but falser, perhaps, than stepfathers and
               fathers of bastards. The guardian was not expected to take on any affective
               responsibility for his ward, nor was there any shame as with bastards. Indeed,
               wardship was a legal transaction tied to financial gain and opportunity. Wardship
               entailed to some of the revenue of inheritance until the ward came of age, as well as
               the benefits of contracting marriage. These were lucrative business relationships and
               could be bought and sold for profit. More importantly, these examples show the
               limitations of social expectation in filling the space of a father: guardians had to
               assume the power and the responsibility to protect the patrilinear family, but not
               the affective role. Again, the father's absence highlights his social importance to
               late medieval England's gentry.</p>
    <p>Dr. Moss brings both literary and historical sources together in a convincing and
               welcome book that will profit anyone interested European family history, romances,
               letters, English gentry, literature, or masculinity. The careful contextualization in
               time (long fifteenth century) and place (England) is successful, and her conclusions
               and arguments offer much to an increasingly broad and international community of
               scholarship, both on England and broader themes shared across Europe.</p>
    <p>However, this also frames a major challenge for some readers. The evidence Moss
               presents is firmly, and commendably, anchored in the Middle English texts, but a
               reader who is not a native English speaker, or practiced in the earlier iteration of
               the language, will find the Middle English quotes an unwelcome challenge. Some
               passage- analyses contain enough summary and explanation to make the author's points
               easy to follow, while other analyses require reading the quotes--which also offers
               profitable insights into Moss' methodology, analysis, and the highly interesting
               sources themselves. Although space is limited and publishers may arguably have a
               negative view of including translations into modern English of so many vital quotes,
               given the international and non-Anglophone composition at the past year's conferences
               and articles in relevant fields, this reviewer is concerned that a portion of Moss'
               valuable work may go unexamined.</p>
    <p>Another question is what happens to the gentry and mercantile groups' changing
               situation (17). In her early contextualization of the sources and families, Moss
               highlights the era as important for social mobility as well as the socioeconomic rise
               of the gentry and mercantile class. One cannot help but wonder, when reading the
               conclusions, how the examination of fathers presented in the later chapters ties to
               this evidently important development?</p>
    <p>Moss includes two helpful appendices, although they lack somewhat in copyediting, a
               problem the rest of the text avoids. The first appendix is a series of concise
               introductions to the gentry and mercantile families from whose letters the study
               draws. The second appendix is a summary of most of the romances referred to in the
               text. Both are very useful references for a readership not familiar with all the
               sources, and served this reader well. The appendixes are an example of the book's
               excellent organization both in content and readability. Dr. Moss' study is a welcome
               contribution to several fields, most prominently, from the point of view of this
               historian, the study of family history and masculinity studies.</p>
    <p/>
  </body>
</article>
