After the fall of the Roman Empire, the influence of theater was somewhat limited. The Christian Church opposed organized theater in this era, which caused theater to be largely absent from daily life. Church authorities declared theater to be obscene and dangerous to audiences. This did not prevent the proliferation of ritualistic ceremonies in the medieval period, however: the growth of guilds and medieval towns facilitated the expansion of theatrical performances. Hrotsvit of Gandersheim, a canoness in a tenth-century abbey in northern Germany, created some of the first significant dramas in the history of Western literature. Classical authors Virgil, Ovid, and Terence influenced Hrotsvit’s Christian dramas. Scholars marvel at Hrotsvit’s knowledge of theology and classical literature; few could believe that a woman possessed such expansive and qualitative knowledge. Interestingly, Hrotsvit’s plays may never have been intended for live performance; instead, the plays may have been intended for reading and reflection (Zarrilli p. 72). Hrotsvit’s play Dulcitius has had arguably the most significant implications in presenting alternative views to traditional Christian axioms.

In Dulcitius, Hrotsvit explores classical notions of Christian faith, as well as the pious dynamic among men and women. In the play, Dulcitius (a Roman governor), Diocletian (a Roman emperor) and Sissinus (a Roman count) attempt to forcefully coerce three virgin women (Agape, Chionia, and Hirena) to renounce their devotion to Christ and the Christian faith. The men torture the women with imprisonment and attempted public exposure. Despite their efforts, the men cannot convince the women to reject Christianity. Agape and Chionia are burned at the stake, but their bodies remain unharmed and their souls rise to heaven, symbolizing their unyielding faith. Hirena attempts an escape, but she too is killed while reaching toward heaven.

The men in this drama are presented as weak, incompetent and unfaithful. Dulcitius mistakenly embraces pots and pans, which leaves his face blackened by soot. The women remark that “it is only right that he should appear in body the way he is in his mind: possessed by the Devil” (Norton 220). In addition, Diocletian ridicules the women for following the “useless, newfangled ways of the Christian superstition” (Norton 218). Moreover, the men are unable to flatter the women or use force to cause their renunciation. The women, on the other hand, are portrayed as relentlessly strong and faithful. They refuse to give in to persuasion and torture. As a result, Hrotsvit challenges the image of women as the weaker sex, as well as their connection to Eve, who symbolizes women as prone to disobedience and temptation in ‘The Fall of Man.’

Kovarik articulates the widespread implications of the printing revolution in his first chapter. Printing led to increased dialogue and confrontation among literate thinkers. Printing allowed standard knowledge to be disseminated easily, and to be developed by others around the world. Gutenburg’s introduction of moveable type printing led to the Bible being translated into vernacular languages. Christian fundamentalists interpreted this innovation as an attack on the Christian religion, as it allowed ‘ordinary’ people and reformers to interpret the Bible for themselves. This facilitated the Protestant Reformation, as well as other alternative perceptions of the Christian faith.

In many ways, the advent of printing had a similar effect as Hrotsvit’s depiction of women. Both challenged traditional biblical notions (women in Hrotsvit’s case, original interpretations in printing’s case), and constituted radical changes in modes of thinking. Printing also challenged established political thought by circulating previously non-discussed ideas to large audiences. In many cases, if printing did not directly cause revolution, it most definitely played an important role (American/French Revolutions, for example). David Hume conceptualized printing freedom as a ‘cool’ form of media: “press freedom can not excite popular tumults or rebellions… A man reads a book or pamphlet alone coolly” (Kovarik p. 29). Theater, on the other hand, is a live spectacle, which could very well have elicited a strong, tangible reaction from audiences when radical ideas are shown. It would be interesting to investigate how audiences responded to Hrotsvit’s plays.

Questions:

• Does Hrotsvit’s depiction of women remind you of Ibsen’s portrayal of Nora in A Doll’s House? Where do we see radical concepts distributed today?
• If Hrotsvit were trying to present a similar concept today, would she still elect to use theater as her outlet, or would she choose a different form of media?

– Connor Rooney