<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<!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">22.03.15</article-id>
            <title-group>
                <article-title>22.03.15, Tanner, Medieval Elite Women and the Exercise of Power, 1100–1400</article-title>
            </title-group>
            <contrib-group>
                <contrib contrib-type="author">
                    <name>
                        <surname>Katherine Weikert</surname>
                        <given-names/>
                    </name>
                    <aff>University of Winchester</aff>
                    <address>
                        <email>katherine.weikert@winchester.ac.uk</email>
                    </address>
                </contrib>
            </contrib-group>
            <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2022">
                <year>2022</year>
            </pub-date>
            <product product-type="book">
                <person-group>
                    <name>
                        <surname>Tanner, Heather J., ed</surname>
                        <given-names/>
                    </name>
                </person-group>
                <source>Medieval Elite Women and the Exercise of Power, 1100–1400: Moving beyond the Exceptionalist Debate</source>
                <series>The New Middle Ages</series>
                <year iso-8601-date="2019">2019</year>
                <publisher-loc>Basingstoke, UK</publisher-loc>
                <publisher-name>Palgrave Macmillan</publisher-name>
                <page-range>Pp. xvii, 310</page-range>
                <price>$139.99 (hardback)</price>
                <isbn>978-3-030-01345-5 (hardback)</isbn>
            </product>
            <permissions>
                <copyright-statement>Copyright 2022 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>Heather Tanner’s excellent edited collection takes the starting point of “How many
            ‘exceptional’ women in positions of authority does it take before powerful elite women
                <italic>become</italic> the rule?” (2). This volume, carefully crafted from a number
            of conference panels and its own conference in 2015, titled, appropriately, “Beyond
            Exceptionalism,” seeks to address this important question. Much of what the volume
            reacts against, in a historiographical sense, is JoAnn McNamara and Suzanne Wemple’s
            deeply influential 1973 article on female authority in the middle ages, which posits
            that women were pushed to the side during the process of the heightened administration
            of government in the middle ages. [1] The essays in Tanner’s
            collection, in fact, question the very core of what constituted governance in the middle
            ages, partly by querying what is meant by “soft” power and governance, where we
            frequently see women exercising influence and authority (11). However, the volume not
            only expands on and challenges ideas of “soft” power and authority, but also examines
            more traditionally “hard” powers enacted by women in military and political spheres.
            Ultimately, this should make readers not only question what constitutes governance, but
            challenge more fully why there is a traditionally historiographically-gendered
            separation of “hard” and “soft” powers--and what we even mean by these terms in the
            first place. Indeed, at the very heart of the volume is the need to explore, deconstruct
            and reconstruct the possibilities of what we should consider governance and power in the
            middle ages.</p>
        <p>In exploring these ideas, most of the chapters should be considered case studies on the
            themes of the whole. RāGena C. DeAragon’s chapter examines female landholding and
            remarriages of widows in post-Conquest England, but also provides a particularly
            poignant discussion of historiography and the practice of history today (35-40). Linda
            E. Mitchell’s chapter considers the under-studied networks of the daughters of Isabella
            Marshall as “matrilinities,” a “sorority within politically engaged families” (64),
            while Kristen L. Geaman rewrites the influence of Anne of Bohemia, queen of Richard II,
            as an important factor in his reign, using the broadly accepted roles of queenship to
            exact political change through her “traditional duties” (68). Charlotte Cartwright’s
            study of Emma of Ivry as matron of the ducal Norman family in the eleventh century
            demonstrates the importance of maternal households, and Kathy M. Krause reconsiders
            female literary patronage as an act of political influence through Marie de Ponthieu’s
            commissions to sway opinion to the favour of Marie and her husband, Simon de Dammartin.
            Katrin E. Sjursen’s chapter examines women’s political roles beyond the traditional
            lifecycle ones, asking scholars to move beyond wife or widow, through the dynamic
            example of the fourteenth-century pirate and traitor Jeanne of Belleville. Tiffany A.
            Ziegler attempts to place female patronage into the urban places of Brussels through
            women’s donations to St John’s Hospital. Nina Verbanaz’ study of the Salian consorts
            demonstrates representations of co-rulership models in the eleventh and twelfth century,
            constructing their image as an “integral feature of the medieval governing fabric”
            (195). Christopher M. Kurpiewski’s examination of the Penitent Sisters of Speyer shows
            their political role in the midst of civic upheaval at the turn of the thirteenth
            century. Erin L. Jordan’s study of Alice and Constance of Antioch demonstrates areas of,
            and pathways to, rule for women in the Latin East. Miriam Shadis outlines the emergent
            political importance of queen-daughters in the early years of the Portuguese throne in
            the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. </p>
        <p>Two major strengths in the volume are its bookend chapters, the introduction co-authored
            by Tanner, Laura L. Gathagan, and Lois L. Huneycutt, and Theresa Earenfight’s closing
            chapter. Earenfight’s piece, which also somewhat acts as a conclusion to the volume,
            uses Catherine of Aragon as an example of a Foucault-centred discussion of resistance as
            power. This is a strongly-theorised chapter that demonstrates power as diverse and
            diffuse, active and passive. Earenfight--a leading figure in considering the office of
            queenship as a part of royal ruling structures--challenges us to consider new directions
            in studying gender and power with this convincing chapter. In their introduction,
            Tanner, Gathagan and Huneycutt--all masters in the field of examination and
            reconsideration of women’s authority in the central middle ages--write an introduction
            that is much more than a scaffold for the volume but is instead a lesson on
            deconstructing the McNamara-Wemple historiography. These bookends tie together what may
            otherwise be seen as a series of case studies on a theme, ranging from Crusader kingdoms
            to Portugal (though with a weight on France, England, and the Low Countries). </p>
        <p>The fear is that more casual readers may pick up this book and read only the chapter that
            might seem specifically of interest to their time or place of research, rather than
            fully delve into the richness of these connected essays. Some further editorial
            intervention might have been useful to structure the works around themes that are
            developed in many of the chapters, such as explicit or implicit deconstructions of the
            “public” and “private” (Ziegler, Kurpiewski, Geaman, Krause), studies focusing on women
            in urban contexts and spaces (Ziegler, Kurpiewski), or power beyond lifecycle roles
            (Sjursen, Jordan, Cartwright, Earenfight). Another challenge to the volume is that
            power, authority and agency are not defined, either at the level of the volume itself,
            or more generally within individual chapters. Many of these terms are quite empty
            without specific refinement and definitions; Earenfight herself in this volume questions
            why scholars use “agency” as a different version of “power” to indicate subordination:
            “agency, influence, and autonomy,” she states, “mark the gendered gradations of power
            that subtly signal that an actor is subordinate” (277). Throughout the volume, “power”
            and “authority” tend to be used interchangeably, belying Earenfight’s assertation to
            query and clarify such terms. With such a task as the volume sets itself--to demonstrate
            that elite women’s authority was unexceptional--the book very reasonably might have been
            hindered by too narrow definitions, but a sense of working guidelines for what
            constituted authority and power would have been useful: something more theoretically
            tangible to tether the case studies to the whole.</p>
        <p>But these are, very genuinely, minor quibbles with the overall volume. What this book
            represents is a significant attempt to break from received historiography and carve new
            ground for the study of women and power in the middle ages. It is a genuine intervention
            in historiography. The editors and authors are to be commended, and the volume read--not
            just a chapter that may be of casual interest, but the framing pieces that outline new
            directions for the field. With Profs. Tanner and Huneycutt now taking abstracts for
            “Beyond Exceptionalism II, c. 500-c. 1500,” a conference to be held at the John Rylands
            Library, Manchester, UK, in July 2022, we can only hope for a second volume furthering
            this discussion in the future.</p>
        <p>--------</p>
        <p>The review author wishes to express her apologies to the volume editor and authors, and
            to <italic>The Medieval Review</italic>, for the multiple pandemic-related delays in
            delivering this review.</p>
        <p>Notes:</p>
        <p>1. JoAnn McNamara and Suzanne Wemple, ‘The Power of Women through the Family in Medieval
            Europe: 500-1100,’ <italic>Feminist Studies </italic>1:3/4 (1972), 126-41.</p>
    </body>
</article>
