isbn 978-3-529-01490-1 · 9 783529 014901 isbn 978-3-529-01490-1 raptor and human – falconry and...

9 783529 014901

ISBN 978-3-529-01490-1

Raptor and human – falconry and bird symbolism throughout the millennia on a global scale

Kar

l-H

einz G

ersm

ann ∙

Olive

r G

rim

m (ed

s.)

Rap

tor

and

hum

an –

fal

conry

an

d b

ird

sym

bolism

Karl-Heinz Gersmann ∙ Oliver Grimm (eds.)

Falconry, the art of hunting with birds (Frederick II) and a living human heritage (UNESCO), has left many traces, from western Europe and northern Africa to Japan. The oldest ascertained testimonies belong to the first millennium BCE. The present book, a cooperation between falconers and scientists from different branches, addresses falconry and bird symbolism on diverse continents and in diverse settings.

1 1

1 1

1 1Advanced studies on the archaeology and history of hunting

edited by the ZBSA

Ad

van

ced

stu

die

s on

th

e a

rch

aeolo

gy

an

d h

isto

ry o

f h

unti

ng e

dit

ed

by t

he Z

BSA

Raptor and human – falconry and bird symbolism throughout the millennia on a global scale

Advanced studies on the archaeology and history of hunting, vol. 1.1–1.4

Edited by the ZBSA/Centre for Baltic and Scandinavian Archaeology in the Foundation of the

Schleswig-Holstein State Museums, Schloss Gottorf, Schleswig (northern Germany)

Raptor and human –falconry and bird symbolism throughout the millennia on a global scale

1 1

Edited byKarl-Heinz Gersmann and Oliver Grimm

Publication in considerable extension of the workshop at the Centre for Baltic and Scandinavian Archaeology (ZBSA) in Schleswig, March 5th to 7th 2014

Technical Editor: Isabel Sonnenschein

Layout, typesetting and image editing: Matthias Bolte, Jürgen Schüller

Print and distribution: Wachholtz Verlag – Murmann Publishers, Kiel/Hamburg 2018

https://www.wachholtz-verlag.de/raptor-and-human.html

ISSN 2511-8285

ISBN 978-3-529-01490-1

Bibliographical data of the German National Library. The German National Library catalogues this publication

in the German National Bibliography; detailed bibliographical information is available online under

<http://dnb.d-nb.de>.

All rights reserved, including the reprint of extracts, in particular for duplication, the insertion into and

processing in electronic systems and photomechanical reproduction and translation.

© 2018 Centre for Baltic and Scandinavian Archaeology (ZBSA) in the Foundation of the Schleswig-Holstein

State Museums, Schloss Gottorf, Schleswig, Germany.

The editors have made every effort to identify all copyright owners. In the case that copyrights have not been

cleared, please contact the editors or the publishing house.

Cover picture: Skilled eagle master. Western Mongolia, August 2011 (photo used with the permission of Dr. Takuya Soma).

Top to the left: Seal of the Danish king Knud IV (late 11th century). Redrawing. Taken from M. Andersen/G. Tegnér, Middelalderlige segl-stamper i Norden (Roskilde 2002) 129.

Falconry definition

Falconry is defined as the taking of quarry in its natural state and habitat by means of trained birds of prey (according to the International Association for Falconry and Conservation of Birds of Prey [IAF] = www.iaf.org).

The global perspective of the book. Orange: Eurasian steppe (presumed area of origin of falconry); green: the areas considered in the book (map Jürgen Schüller, ZBSA).

5.000 km Base Map: ESRI data set 9.3/ ZBSA Göbel 2014

Base Map:ESRI Data 9.3/ ZBSA Göbel 20143.000 km

UNESCO recognition of falconry as Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity (cf. Hewicker in this book, Fig. 6).

Frederick II of Hohenstaufen with a bird of prey. Miniature in his falconry book (folio 1v, Codex Pal. lat. 1071, Univer-sitätsbibliothek Heidelberg/Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana). Redrawing. After: Hunting in Northern Europe (Neumünster 2013) 344 fig. 1.

Frederick II of Hohenstaufen was an early global actor in the 13th century, bringing together falconers and falconry tradi-tions from far and wide.

Deutscher Falkenorden (DFO)(Cultural Division, CIC/Headquarters, and CIC/German Delegation)

The Archives of Falconry (Boise, Idaho, USA)

Emirates Falconers‘ Club Hagedoorn Stichting (Netherlands)

Book sponsors

Association Nationale des Fauconniers et Autoursiers (France)

European Foundation for Falconry and Conservation

The Falconry Heritage Trust (Wales)

International Association for Falconry and Conservation of Birds of Prey

Nederlands Valkeniersverbond Adriaan Mollen

North American Falconers’ Association

The Peregrine Fund (USA)

Marshall GPS

Japanese Falconiformes Center

Club Mariae Burgundiae (Belgium)

Orden Deutscher Falkoniere

X

List of contents

Book 1

Forewords Clausv.Carnap-BornheimandBeritV.Eriksen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 HisHighnessSheikhMohammedBinZayedAlNahyan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 OliverGrimm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................... 4 Karl-HeinzGersmann . . . . . . . . . . .................................................... 6 OliverGrimmandKarl-HeinzGersmann. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 AdrianLombard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 10

Glossaries Birdglossary .......... . . . . . . . . ................................................... 12 Falconryglossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 13

Indices Shortindex:byauthor. . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 14 Shortindex:byregion . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 16 Shortindex:bytopic . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 16

Summaries SummaryEnglish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 18 SummaryGerman . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 26 SummaryRussian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 35 SummaryArabic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................... 44

Chapter 1 – Falconry in action and raptor propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

ThomasRichter Practicalitiesoffalconry,asseenbyapresent-dayfalconer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

MohammedAhmedAlBowardi,MajedAliAlMansoori,MargitGabrieleMüller,OmarFouadAhmadandAnwarS.Dawood FalconryintheUnitedArabEmirates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

AtaEyerbediev Thisworldisahuntingfieldandgooddeedsaretheprey–theethicalsideoftradition. . . . . . 101

DennisKeen Thehunter,theeagle,andthenation:Qazaqtraditionalknowledgeinthe post-Sovietworld...... . . . . . . . . .................................................. 113

KeiyaNakajima Japanesefalconryfromapracticalpointofview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

XI

Karl-HeinzGersmann Somethoughtsontheemergenceandfunctionoffalconryfromtheperspectiveof apracticingfalconer . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................. 141

EllenHagen Frommuseumeducationtopracticalfalconry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

S.KentCarnie NorthAmericanfalconry,fromitsearliestcenturies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

S.KentCarnie TheArchivesofFalconry:aNorthAmericanefforttopreservethetangibleheritage offalconry . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

JevgeniShergalin FalconryHeritageTrust:history,structure,goals,currentandfuturework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175

Hans-AlbrechtHewicker TheHistoryoftheDeutscher Falkenorden(DFO)anditsinternationalrelations. . . . . . . . . . 187

TomJ.CadeandRobertB.Berry Theinfluenceofpropagatingbirdsofpreyonfalconryandraptorconservation. . . . . . . . . . . . 195

Chapter 2 – Raptors in zoology and biology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .221

FrankE.Zachos Birdsofprey–Anintroductiontotheirsystematics,taxonomyandconservation . . . . . . . . . . 223

AnitaGamauf Palaearcticbirdsofpreyfromabiologicalpointofview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Chapter 3 – Human evolution, history of domestication and the special role of the raptor-human relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

KristiinaMannermaa HumansandraptorsinnorthernEuropeandnorthwesternRussiabeforefalconry . . . . . . . . . 257

DirkHeinrich Aretrainedraptorsdomesticatedbirds? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

WalterBednarek Emotionsandmotivationofthefalconerandhisrelationshipwiththetrainedraptor– attemptatanevolutionary-biologicalinterpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285

SaraAsuSchroer Aviewfromanthropology:falconry,domesticationandthe‘animalturn’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

XII

Chapter 4 – Raptors and religion, falconry and philosophy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323

DavidA.Warburton Egyptandearlier:birdsofpreyinthehumanmindatthedawnofhistory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325

ByKerryHull,MarkWrightandRobFergus Avianactors:transformation,sorcery,andprognosticationinMesoamerica. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347

DanielaBoccassini Falconryasroyal“delectatio”:understandingtheartoftaminganditsphilosophical foundationsin12th-and13th-centuryEurope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367

Chapter 5 – History of falconry: pioneers of research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389

LeorJacobiandMarkEpstein HansJ.Epstein:falconry’sextraordinaryhistorian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391

RolfRoosen “Thenoblestformofhuntingever”–KurtLindnerandfalconry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403

Chapter 6 – History of falconry: basic reflections and new perspectives . . . . . . . . . . 421

IvanPokrovsky Stableisotopeanalysisinraptorandfalconrystudies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423

AlexandraPesch Confidingbirds:someshortremarksonthe“head-with-bird-on-top-of-horse-motif” onMigrationPeriodgoldbracteates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431

VeraHenkelmann Theevidentialvalueoffalconrydepictionsinbookilluminations,onseals,andon tapestriesinmiddleEurope. . . . . . .................................................. 449

WietskePrummel Thearchaeological-archaeozoologicalidentificationoffalconry–methodological remarksandsomeDutchexamples................................................. 467

Book 2

OliverGrimm FromAacheninthewesttoBirkainthenorthandMikulčiceintheeast–some archaeologicalremarksonbirdofpreybonesandfalconryasbeingevidencedin premodernsettlementcontextsinpartsofEurope(preandpost1000AD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479

XIII

UlrichSchmölcke CentralEuropeanburialswithbirdsofpreyfromthemiddleofthe1stmillenniumAD– ashortsurveyoftheearlyhistoryofarchaeozoologyinconnectionwiththeseburials . . . . . . 495

StephanDusil FalconryinthemirrorofnormativesourcesfromCentralEurope(5th–19thcenturies) . . . . . . . 507

BaudouinVandenAbeele “Onthedunghill”:thedeadhawkinmedievalLatinandFrenchmoralisingliterature . . . . . . 523

RicardoManuelOlmosdeLeón ThecareofhuntingbirdsinthelateMiddleAgesandRenaissanceaccordingto theSpanishfalconrytreatises(1250–1565) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539

RobertNedoma Newwordsfornewthings–anoverviewonlexicalborrowing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557

Chapter 7 – Eurasian steppe: geographic origins of falconry?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563

PavelKosintsevandAlekseiNekrasov AnarchaeozoologicalsurveyofremainsofbirdsofpreyintheWestEurasiansteppe . . . . . . . 565

LeonidYablonsky(†) WeretheEarlySarmatiannomadsfalconersinthesouthernUrals,Russia,during the4thcenturyBC?. . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................. 579

UlambayarErdenebat AcontributiontothehistoryofMongolianfalconry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587

TakuyaSoma EthnoarchaeologyoffalconryinnomadicandsedentarysocietyacrossCentralAsia– rethinkingthe“BeyondtheBoundary”phenomenonofancientfalconryculture . . . . . . . . . . 603

ÁdámBollók AhistoryoftheHungariansbeforetheendoftheninthcentury:areading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 619

ClausDobiat,withanarchaeological-historicalintroductionbyOliverGrimm TheriderfibulafromXanteninwesternGermany(around600AD)withareference tothefalconryofnomadichorsemenoftheEurasiansteppe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 637

HansNugteren NamesforhuntingbirdsandfalconrytermsinKipchak(NorthwesternTurkic). . . . . . . . . . . 645

JürgenUdolph EasternSlavicnamesofbirdsofprey–tracesofcontactwithTurkicpeoples? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 663

XIV

Chapter 8 – Roman Empire: the West (Rome) and East (Constantinople) with very little evidence for falconry up to the 5th/6th centuries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 683

FlorianHurka FalconryandsimilarformsofhuntingaccordingtoancientGreco-Romansources. . . . . . . . 685

AndreasKülzer SomenotesonfalconryinByzantium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 699

Chapter 9 – Case study: raptor catching, raptor trade and falconry in northern Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................. 709

OliverGrimmandFrans-ArneStylegar AshortintroductiontoNorway,itsVikingAge(800–1000/1050)andthequestionof theoriginoffalconryinthecountry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711

TerjeGansum TheroyalVikingAgeshipgravefromGokstadinVestfold,easternNorway,andits linktofalconry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................. 717

RagnarOrtenLie Falconry,falcon-catchingandtheroleofbirdsofpreyintradeandasalliance giftsinNorway(800–1800AD)withanemphasisonNorwegianandlaterforeign participantsinfalcon-catching. . . .................................................. 727

IngeSærheim Placenamesfromsouth-westernNorwaywithreferencetothecatchingoffalcons......... 787

LydiaCarstens Landofthehawk:OldNorseliterarysourcesabouttheknowledgeand practiceoffalconry. . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................. 799

MariaVretemark BirdsofpreyasevidenceforfalconryinSwedishburialsandsettlements(550–1500AD). . . . 827

SigmundOehrl AnoverviewoffalconryinNorthernGermanicandinsulariconography, 6th/7thcenturiesADtoc.1100AD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841

ÅsaAhrland ImageryofbirdsofpreyandfalconryintheHighandLateMiddleAges(1150–1500) intheNordiccountries–reflectionsofactualhuntingpracticesorsymbolsofpower? . . . . . . 861

JoonasAhola,FrogandVilleLaakso TherolesandperceptionsofraptorsinIronAgeandmedievalFinno-Kareliancultures throughc.AD1500. . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................. 887

XV

MattiLeiviskä TheroleofbirdsofpreyinFinnishplaceandpersonalnames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935

AnneBirgitteGotfredsen TracesoffalconryinDenmarkfromthe7thtothe17thcenturies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947

Book 3

DirkHeinrich,withanappendixbyWolf-RüdigerTeegen FalconryintheVikingAgetradingcentreofHaithabuanditssuccessor,themedieval townofSchleswig? . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................. 973

NataschaMehler,HansChristianKüchelmannandBartHolterman TheexportofgyrfalconsfromIcelandduringthe16thcentury:aboundlessbusiness inaproto-globalizedworld. . . . . . .................................................. 995

BrianSmithandJohnH.Ballantyne Thecollectionoffalconsand‘hawkhens’inShetlandandOrkney,1472–1840. . . . . . . . . . . . 1021

KristopherPoole ZooarchaeologicalevidenceforfalconryinEngland,uptoAD1500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027

DavidHorobin Thepenandtheperegrine:literaryinfluencesonthedevelopmentofBritishfalconry (8thcenturytothepresent). . . . . . . ................................................. 1055

EricLacey Thecharterevidenceforfalconryandfalcon-catchinginEnglandandWales, c.600–c.1100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................. 1089

RichardAlmond Huntingfromthefist:lookingathawkingandfalconryinlatemedievalEngland(1000–1500) througharthistory. . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................................1117

KesterFreriks BirdtrappingandfalconryinValkenswaard,theNetherlands,fromthe17thto the20thcenturies–aboutwildbirdsasjewelsonthefalconer’shand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149

IgnazMatthey ThesymbolismofbirdsofpreyandfalconryinthevisualartsoftheNetherlands, 1400–1800 . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1171

XVI

Chapter 10 – Raptors and falconry in premodern Europe: overall studies........1193

JoséManuelFradejasRueda FalconryontheIberianPeninsula–itshistoryandliterature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1195

AlgirdasGirininkasandLinasDaugnora PremodernhuntingwithbirdsofpreyinthehistoricalLithuanianlands: entertainment,politicsoreconomicnecessity?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1215

LiinaMaldre,TeresaTomekandJüriPeets BirdsofpreyfromVendelAgeshipburialsofSalme(c.750AD)andinEstonian archaeologicalmaterial . . . . . . . . . ................................................. 1229

AndreiV.Zinoviev EarlyfalconryinRussia. . . . . . . . . ................................................. 1251

BaudouinVandenAbeele MedievalLatinandvernaculartreatisesonfalconry(11th–16thc.):tradition,contents, andhistoricalinterest . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................. 1271

Chapter 11 – Raptors and falconry in premodern Europe: specific studies . . . . . . . 1291

BabetteLudowici Chambergrave41fromtheBockshornschanzenearQuedlinburg(centralGermany): evidenceofthepracticeoffalconrybywomenfromthemiddleofthe1stcentury?. . . . . . . . . 1293

RalfBleile FalconryamongtheSlavsoftheElbe?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303

Wolf-RüdigerTeegen Theskeletonsofaperegrineandasparrowhawkandthespatialdistributionofbirds ofpreyintheSlavonicfortificationofStarigard/Oldenburg(Schleswig-Holstein, northernGermany,7th–13thcenturies). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1371

ZbigniewM.Bochenski,TeresaTomek,KrzysztofWertzandMichałWojenka FalconryinPolandfromazooarchaeologicalperspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1399

VirgílioLopes HuntingscenewithhawkfromMértolainPortugal(6th/7thcenturiesAD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1411

CliffA.Jost Adepictionofafalconeronadiscbroochofthe7thcenturyfromthecemetery ofMünstermaifeld,DistrictofMayen-Koblenz,south-westernGermany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1421

KatharinaChrubasik ThetombofthePolishKingWładysławIIJagiełło(1386–1434)anditspossible connectionwithfalconry. . . . . . . . ................................................. 1427

XVII

AndreasDobler TheLandgravesofHesse-Kasselandfalconryinthe18thcentury.Depictionsof ahuntwithfalconsintheSchlossFasaneriemuseumnearFulda,Hesse(Germany). . . . . . . . 1439

Book 4

MartinaGiese The“Deartevenandicumavibus”ofEmperorFrederickII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1459

MartinaGiese EvidenceoffalconryontheEuropeancontinentandinEngland,withanemphasis onthe5thto9thcenturies:historiography,hagiography,andletters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1471

AgnieszkaSamsonowicz FalconryinthehistoryofhuntinginthePolandofthePiastsandtheJagiellons (10th–16thcenturies) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1491

SabineObermaier FalconryinthemedievalGermanTristanromances. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1507

BaudouinVandenAbeele FalconryinOldFrenchliterature. .................................................1519

IngridA.R.DeSmet PrincessoftheNorth:perceptionsofthegyrfalconin16th-centurywesternEurope. . . . . . . 1543

PéterKasza FalconryliteratureinHungaryinaninternationalperspective......................... 1571

RobertNedoma GermanicpersonalnamesbeforeAD1000andtheirelementsreferringto birdsofprey.Withanemphasisupontherunicinscriptionintheeastern SwedishVallentuna-Rickebyburial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1583

JürgenUdolph FalconryandbirdcatchinginGermanicandSlavonicplace,fieldandfamilynames. . . . . . . 1603

Chapter 12 – Raptors and falconry in premodern times in areas outside Europe. . 1629

KarinReiter FalconryintheAncientOrient?I.Acontributiontothehistoryoffalconry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1631

KarinReiter FalconryintheAncientOrient?II.TheSources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1643

XVIII

KarinReiter FalconryinUgarit . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................. 1659

SusanneGörkeandEkinKozal Birdsofpreyinpre-HittiteandHittiteAnatolia(c.1970–1180BCE): textualevidenceandimagerepresentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1667

PaulA.Yule ArchaeologyoftheArabianPeninsulainthelatepre-IslamicandearlyIslamicperiods (1stmillenniumCE):backgroundsketchforearlyfalconry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1691

AnnaAkasoy FalconryinArabicliterature:fromitsbeginningstothemid-9thcentury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1769

TourajDaryaeeandSoodabehMalekzadeh Falconsandfalconryinpre-modernPersia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1793

UlrichSchapka ThePersiannamesofbirdsofpreyandtrainedraptorsintheirhistoricaldevelopment . . . . . 1809

LeorJacobi ‘ThisHorseisaBirdSpecialist’:FalconryintrudesuponthePalestinianMishnahin SasanianBabylonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................. 1831

LeslieWallace TheearlyhistoryoffalconryinChina(2ndto5thcenturiesAD)andthequestion ofitsorigins.................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1847

FangyiCheng Fromentertainmenttopoliticallife–royalfalconryinChinabetween the6thand14thcenturies. . . . . . . . . ................................................. 1865

FangyiChengandLeopoldEisenlohr AncientChinesefalconryterminology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1883

Ho-taeJeon FalconryinancientKorea . . . . . . . ................................................. 1891

TakayoKaku AncientJapanesefalconryfromanarchaeologicalpointofviewwithafocusonthe earlyperiod(5thto7thcenturiesAD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1919

YasukoNihonmatsu Japanesebooksonfalconryfromthe13thtothe17thcenturies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1937

JoséManuelFradejasRueda FalconryinAmerica–Apre-Hispanicsport? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1947

367

Falconryasroyal“delectatio”:understandingtheartoftaminganditsphilosophicalfoundationsin12th-and13th-centuryEurope

ByDanielaBoccassini

Keywords: Falconry, courtly culture, falconry treatises, John of Salisbury, Adelard of Bath, Chrétien de Troyes, Theodore of Antioch, Frederick II of Hohenstaufen

Abstract: Hunting with raptors and hunting with hounds became distinctive features of the European elite’s lifestyle during the Middle Ages. The association of falconry with the concept of nobility con-ceived as courtliness and inner discipline – rather than as training to physical aggression and combat – began to assert itself in Norman territory (both Sicilian and English) starting in the middle of the 12th century. It found its full theorization as a royal art under Emperor Frederick II. This paper presents and analyzes a number of texts that bear witness to this shift in perspective. The process is traced from texts by 12th-century authors such as John of Salisbury, Adelard of Bath, Chrétien de Troyes, up to the philosophically grounded theoretical statements of Theodore of Antioch (Frederick II’s philosopher). The role played by falconry in the shaping of courtly culture, the author argues, is much greater than usually acknowledged.

an aPPraisal of the situation in western euroPe arounD 1100 aD

DuringtheMiddleAgesveneryandfalconryimposedthemselvesthroughouttheEuropeanconti-nent,wheretheysoonbecamethecovetedprerogativeofsovereignsandthenobility,theirfavoritesportsor“delectations”.Thesocialandproceduralpre-eminenceofthesehuntingtechniquesremainedunchallengeduntilthemomentwhenfirearms–initiallyemployedonlyforwarringpurposes–alsobecamewidespreadashuntingweapons.Throughthe14thtothe16thcenturies,thesehighlyritualizedpracticeswerecomplementedbyanabundanceoftechnicaltreatises,oficonographicrepresentationsandliteraryrecreationsofthemostdiversekind,whereintheentirespectrumofthequestformean-ingwasvariouslyengaged:fromtheliteralandthemerelyinstrumentallevels,tothemorecomplexepistemologicaldimensionsofmetaphorandallegory,withsomeremarkable,albeitrarer,incursionsinthemostrarefiedareaofsymbolismandanagogy.1Surprisinglyperhaps,itisinfactatthismoresubtlelevelthattheartoffalconryinparticularsucceededinconcentratingandmaximizingtheexpressionofitspowerfulpotentialfordisclosingmeaning,especiallyduringthe12thand13thcen-

1 Thereaderwillfindamorein-depthsurveyofthesedifferentdimensionsoffalconryinvan Den abeele1994andinmybookonthissubject:boccassini 2003;forasurveyofthetreatisesinMedievalandEarlyModernFranceseeboccassini 2009.

368

turies–atatime,thatis,whennewconfigurationsofknowledgeoriginatingintheMediterraneanareawerelargelyreshapingtheContinentalEuropeanunderstandingoflife.Thistransmissionofadifferentwayoflookingattheworldentailedprovidingnewperspectivesandopeningnewvistasontheenigmaticrelationthathumanbeingsentertainwiththespecificsofthenaturalworldaroundthemandthemysteriousvastnessofthesurroundinguniverse;falconryprovedcentraltotheenter-prise.Itismostspecificallythiscrossroadofculturalimplicationspertainingtotheartof“manning”(trainingand/ortaming)raptorsthatIwishtoexploreinthispaper,bybrieflyanalyzingalimitednumberofexemplarydocumentaryevidence.2

UnknowntoGraeco-RomanAntiquity,huntingwithraptorsbegantocapturetheimaginationofEuropeanaristocracyduringtheMigrationPeriod,soonbecomingadistinctivefeatureoftheelite’slifestyle(Prummel 2013)–theemblemoftheirnobility,oftheirsocialstatusandidentity–whichcomplementedthemucholderandwell-establishedpracticeofhuntingwithdogs(Fischer 2013; Schmölcke 2013).Thepassionwithwhichthearistocracypracticedbothoftheseactivitiesbroughtaboutaprocessofcontrolandprogressiverestrictionsofhuntingrights,spanningtheMiddleAgesandaffectingtheentirecontinent(zug tucci 1983; galloni 1993; Giese 2013).Anyattempttogaugetheculturalsignificanceofthisphenomenonshouldthereforebesetagainstthelargercontextofmedievalnobility’slifestyleandvalues;inotherwords,wecannotlimitourselvestosupposingthatsuchextremelysophisticated,highlycodifiedandofteninordinatelyexpensivehuntingpracticeswereintendedmerelytoprocurefood,orasinconsequentialpastimes.Giventhenotableamountofritualizationassociatedwiththeseactivities,andinconsiderationoftheevidenceprovidedbymedievalburialsites(forNorthernEuropeanevidenceseee.g.vretemark2011),inordertoassesstheirsignificanceweneedtodelveintotheconceptofnobilityanditsfoundationalargumentsaspertainingtotraditionalsocietiesuptoandincludingtheMiddleAges,whenthesacrednessofallhumanactionsinrelationtothenaturalworld,andtheirartfulrepresentationinvisualandwrittenform,stilloutweighedthemodern,increasinglyprofane(ifnotprofaning)outlookonlife(huizinga 1955; eliaDe1965;servier1994).

Giventhatourmainfocuswillbefalconryinthe12thand13thcenturies,weneedtostartbyassessingthesituationsuchasithaddevelopedinthepreviouscenturies.BothhuntingwithdogsandhuntingwithraptorsarevariouslyattestedandsolidlyestablishedthroughoutEuropewellbeforetheyear1150.However,theassociationoffalconrywiththeconceptofnobilityconceivedascourt-linessandinnerdiscipline–ratherthanastrainingtophysicalaggressionandcombat–begantoassertitselfinNormanterritory(bothSicilianandEnglish)startinginthemiddleofthe12thcentury.Thispeculiarphenomenonwasaccompaniedbyasizeableproductionofmanualsandrecipebooksthat,tovaryingdegrees,aimedatestablishingfalconrynotjustasahuntingpracticebutratherastheforemostartoftraining(andtoanextenttaming,hence“knowing”)themysteriousandelusivewildraptors.Theoverallpurposewastopromotethemergerofthisdisciplinewithotherartswhose

2 Wildraptorsaretrainedbyfalconerstomodifytheirinstinctivebehavior;althoughtheywillneverbecomedomesticated,throughtheprocessoftheir“manning”theydoundergoacertaindegreeoftaming,thatistosaytheylearntotoleratenotonlyhumanproximity,buthumanagencyaswell.Inthispaper“training”and“taming”areusedinterchangeablytoindicatethisprocessofeducationofraptors,whichneverseekstoachievefulldomestication.ForanexcellentsurveyoftheoriginsandearlypracticesoffalconryseeDobiat2013,whosetstheintroductionoffalconryintoCentralEuropearound400AD,andidentifiestheperiodfromthe5thtothe11thcenturiesasaphase“duringwhichfalconryspreadsacrossallofEuropeandsimultaneouslyexpressestheneedofahighersocialclasstodisplayitsprestige”(344).Dobiatagreeswithmeinseeingthe12thand13thcenturiesascharacterizedbyanintensificationandmodificationofthepracticesandstatusoffalconry(foramorein-depthanalysisoftheseissuesseeboccassini2003).Theshiftoccurs,Icontend,inrelationtotheintroductionintoEuropeoffalconrytechniques,valuesandconceptionsdevelopedthroughthecenturies inthemilieusoftheIranianandArabiccultures–atranslatiowhichhappenedsimultaneouslywiththetransmissionofthelargeandvariedbodyofspeculativeandscientificknowledgestemmingfromtheso-calledAristotelianphilosophy.

369

transmissioninwrittenandexperientialformwasbeingsponsoredbyavid,devotedpatronsinthatverysameNormanmilieu.Theprocessculminated inFrederickIIofHohenstaufen’sDe arte venandi cum avibus (1220–1250),theunsurpassedlifetimeaccomplishmentofasovereignforwhomthetwoparallelartsofgoverningabodypoliticandoftrainingraptorsvirtuallycametocoincide(gieseinthisbook).

Ifwenowturntoconsiderthetechniqueofhuntingwithdogs,duringthissameperiodhighlyritualizedpracticesbegintobeattestedinCentralEuropeandespeciallyFrancenotonlyforthepursuitofgamewithdogs,butmorespecificallyforthecorrectproceduretofollowsoastodealreverentiallywiththatmostnobleofquarries,thestag.Thisisattested,forexample,byTristan’sartfulknowledgeofbothmusicandhunting.Accordingtovariouswrittenversionsofthelegend,itwashewhoinitiatedtheCornishtotheartof“breaking”thedeer,thusturningtheirearliersavagehuntingbutcheryintoarefinedcourtlypractice(rooney1993,87–88).Ashasbeensubtlynoticed,theperformanceofsuchritualswasnotonlyperceivedasprovingsuperiordiscernment;atadeeperlevel,itwasalsounderstoodasreflectingtherightfulnessofadeeplyinscribedordo mundi–anordo mundiassumedtoberecognizedandacceptedbytheanimalsthemselves.3

Althoughwelackprecisestatisticaldatatothiseffect,itmaybesensibletoaffirmthatuptotheendofthe14thcenturythe“desport”ofveneryremainedthepreferredprerogativeofafeudal,mostlywar-orientednobility,whilethe“desduit”offalconrymetthetasteofacourt-basedaristocracythatwasgenerallyalsoendowedwithahigherlevelofliteracy.Thisseemsconfirmedbythefactthatalltreatisesillustratingthetechniquesofvenerydatefromthe14ththroughthe16thcenturies,andquiteobviouslyintendedtorecreate–whiletheyalsoambitionedtooutdo–thecompetingtraditionoffalconrytreatises,whichwasnotonlyolder,butchargedwiththeprestigeofahigherculturalaura(boccassini2009).

Bythefirstcenturiesofthesecondmillenniumthesetwoaristocraticsportshadbecomesimul-taneouslycomplementaryandantagonistic:whiletheysharedmanyatrait,theydifferedradicallyinthemannerinwhichtheyconceivedofthebasicpurposeofhunting.Thesport(from“desport”)ofvenery–huntingthestagwithtrainedhounds–wasconsideredthenoblestofalltypesofearth-basedpursuits,awar-likeactivity intendedtostrengthenthephysicalvigorofthehunterand,accessorily,toprovidefood.Ontheotherhand,falconry–huntingbirdsorsmallgamewiththehelpofhawks(trainedraptors)–wasdeemedtobethenoblestofalltypesofair-basedpursuits:firstandforemostaneducationalandcontemplative“delectatio”,bereftofaggressiveactiononthepartofthefalconer(letalonetheuseofweapons),andonlymarginallyorientedtowardsprocuringfood.

Inanutshell,venerytrainedthehuntertodevelopafearlessembodimentofthesoul,whilecon-versely,falconrytrainedthefalconertoacquirethesubtlerskillsneededforachievingtheensoulmentofthebody.Iftraininginveneryprovednecessaryforthepurposesofsurvivalanddefense,traininginfalconrywouldprovetobethemeansofopeningthedoortotherefinedartsofinnermastery,eventuallyculminatinginthewisdomofself-sovereignty.

chrétien De troyes’ romances: transitioning from venery to falconry

Literatureofthesecondhalfofthe12thcenturyatteststhatexcellenceinbothveneryandfalconrywasanecessaryprerequisiteforanaccomplishedknightbelongingtothecourtlymilieu,thatwas

3 “Throughtheundoing[oftheprey’sdeadbody],thetransitionbetweenthetwostatesofrespectedandreveredgameandcarcassforthetableiseffectedformally.Atthesametimethehunterisexoneratedfromtheblameheincursthroughkillingthebeastand‘makeshispeace’withnature.Thedeermustbesystematicallydestroyedandbrokendownintopartswhichareinthemselvesseparateandnewentities;itisritually“undone”andreconstructed”(rooney1993,88–89).

370

thendevelopinginWesternEurope.ThepoeticworksoftheFrenchpoetChrétiendeTroyes(c. 1135–1181/91),whosenarrativesofknightlyadventuresanddepictionoftheArthurianworldim-mediatelyenjoyedalargesuccess,provideuswithsomeofthemostsignificantreferencestotheculturalpracticesofthetimes.Forexample,inCligès,ChrétiensystematicallyreferencesTristanasafather-figuretohischaracters,attributingtohimlegendarymasteryinbothveneryandfalconry(aswellasinothercomplementaryknightlyactivitiessuchasfencingandarchery),thusconformingtoearlieroralandwrittentraditions,accordingtowhichTristanrepresentedtheparagonofknighthoodonallaccounts.4However,Chrétiendeclares,nowadaysyoungerknightssuchasCligèshavebecomeevenmoreknowledgeableandskilledthantheirmythicalmasterineachandalloftheknightlyarts:

“CefuCligés,quienluiot|Senetbiauté,largeceetforce.|Cistotlefustotoutl’escorce,|Cistsotplusd’escremieetd’arc|QueTristanzliniésleroiMarc,|Etplusd’oisiaus,etplusdechiens.|EnCligésnefaillinusbiens”(chrétien,ll.2740–46).“SuchwasCliges,whocombinedgoodsenseandbeauty,generosityandstrength.Hepossessedthewoodaswellasthebark;heknewmoreoffencingandofthebowthandidTristan,KingMark’snephew,andmoreaboutbirdsandhoundsthanhe;inCligestherelackednogoodthing.”(HereandelsewheretranslationbyW.W.Comfort).

NotonlyCligès,butallofChrétiendeTroyes’romancesareamongtherichestandmostcomplexliterarywitnessestothestatusthatveneryandfalconryenjoyedatthetimewhencourtoisiewasbeingintroducedtoWesternEuropeasaprincipleofcultural,moralandsocialrefinementforaneliteheretoforemoreadeptatwarring.Erec et Enideinparticular,Chrétien’sfirstroman,superblythematizestheprovidentialcomplementarityofveneryandfalconryfortheEuropeanfeudalsociety,whileforeshadowingtheultimatesuperiorityoffalconryovervenery–apropositionthatthelargemajorityofChrétien’saudiencewouldlikelyhaveconsideredunacceptableifopenlystatedassuch.Letusthereforetakeacloserlookattheinnerdynamicsofthismostrevealingnarrative,writtenaround1170foroneofEurope’smostrefinedandinterculturallyself-awarecourts:thecourtofMarieofChampagneinTroyes(incidentally,Chrétien’seponymoustown).

Erec et Enidejuxtaposesandintertwinesfalconryandhuntingatthesymboliclevelinitsopeningsection(ll.27–1840),whileapparentlydroppingallreferencestohawksandhoundsthroughtherestofthepoem.Atadeeperlevel,however,suchlaterneglectisonlyapparent.Thesubsequentsectionsofthenarrative,infact,intendtoillustratetheprofitableconsequencesthattheintroductionofthe“falconryprinciple”asaneducationaltoolmaygeneratebothatthelevelof individualself-realization,andasmeansofaccomplishingahigherformofcollectivegovernance.ThisveryfirstofChrétiendeTroyes’immenselypopularromansisthereforeoneoftheearliestvisionaryexpressionsofthatprocessofacivilizingtranslatio studiiwhichhadoriginatedintheMediterraneanbasinandwassoontomobilizetheculturallandscapeofContinentalEuropeaswell.

ItisespeciallysignificantthatChrétienintroducedthenewvaluesconveyedbythesymbolismofthemannedraptorbymeansofthemoreancienttopos,deartohispublic,ofthemagichuntoftheotherworldlywhitestag.Asthepoetexplicitlystatesinhisintroduction,thisallowshimsubtlytoextractfromatraditional“conted’aventure”thenarrativeofanewtalerepletewithwisdom,soastoproduceanunprecedentedculturalmerger–amergerhefamouslycalls“unemoutbeleconjunture”.5

4 Oldertextsandlegends,however,madeofTristanamasterofveneryonly,aswehavealreadyseen(cf.note3).Tomyknowledge,ChrétienisthefirsttodescribeTristanasaskilfulfalconeraswell,andthereasonseemsobvious:giventhatTristanrepresentsanarchetypalfigureforhisaudience,endowinghimwithknowledgeoffalconrywouldsafelypromotethatpracticeamonghisreaders.

5 “Ettrait[d’]unconted’aventure|Unemoutbeleconjunture|Parqu’empuetproveretsavoir|Quecilnefaitmiesavoir|Quisascïencen’abandone|TantconDexlagracel’endone”(ll.13–18“hederivesfromastoryofadventureapleasingargumentwherebyitmaybeprovedandknownthatheisnotwisewhodoesnotmakeliberaluseofhisknowledgesolongasGodmaygivehimgrace”).

371

ThisishowChrétien’sromanbegins:withtheevocationofChrist’sresurrectionandtheannounce-mentofanimminentnewlife.“UnjordePasque,autensnovel,|ACardigantsonchastel”(ll.27–28“OneEasterDayintheSpringtime|inhiscastleofCardigant”)Arthurshareswithhiscourtthewishtohuntthewhitestaginordertoreviveanancientcustom(“porlacostumeressaucier”,l.38)–eventhough,asthewisestofhisknightsremindshim,thattraditionalhuntmayentailill-fatedconsequences:theritualofthekissattachedtoit,whichentailsthekingpubliclykissingtheladyhewilldeemtheprettiest,maycauseirreparableantagonismamongtheladiesandknightsgath-eredatArthur’scourt.Theking’sdesireforthetraditionalhunt’s“desport”,however,prevailsoverGauvain’swarning,andthus“lematinetpargrantdeduit|ironschacierleblanccerftuit|enlaforestaventurouse|cestechaceestmoutmerveillouse”(ll.63–67,“TomorrowmorningweshallallgailygotohunttheWhiteStagintheforestofadventure.Andvery[marvellous]thishuntwillbe”).

SoonKingArthur’sinspireddecisiontore-enactthetraditionalmagichunttothewhitestagprovesfarmore“merveillouse”thananyoneexceptGauvainhadanticipated.Initially,thekingsuccessfullypursuesthefleeingstagwiththehelpofhischampionsandtheirhounds(ll.117–124;277–284),whileyoungErec,aloneamongtheknights,ratherthanparticipateinthebelligerentcompetitionfortheelusiveprey,electscourteouslytoaccompanythequeenwithoutcarryinganyweapons.ItisthusthatErecisdrawnbythecallofinexplicable,unsettlingeventsintoamagicchaseofhisown.Asaconsequence,afterthekillingofthestagbytheking,whilethecourt’swisemendebateabouthowtodefusetheconflictarisenamongtheknights,inherdeepwisdomQueenGuinevreinsightfullyperceivesthesalvificpotentialofErec’smysteriousadventureforthecourt’spresentpredicament.Noactionpertainingtotheritualconclusionofthehuntofthewhitestag,shedeclares,istobeundertakenuntilErec’sreturn.

LedbyhispursuitoftheinexplicablyarrogantknightYderintoanunfamiliar“chastel”,uponhisarrivalthereErecnoticesthattheknightsandladiesthrongingitsalleysarebusyfeedingandsport-ingdifferentvarietiesoftrainedraptors,whileothersareintentonplayingmoreorlessexoticboardgames:“Liunpaissoientparcesrues|Espreviersetfauconsdemues,|Etliautreportoientfors|Ter-ceus,oistorsmuezetsors.|Liautrejüentd’autrepart|Oualamineouahasart,|Cilaseschasetcilastables”(ll.351–357,“Somewerefeedinginthestreetstheirsparrow-hawksandmoultingfalcons;othersweregivinganairingtotheirtercels,theirmewedbirds,andyoungyellowhawks;othersplayatdiceorothergameofchance,someatchess,andsomeatbackgammon”).Erec’sfatedadventuresoonleadshimtomeethisfuturewife,themostbeautifulandvirtuousEnide,theonlydaughterofapoorvavasour,andthustowin–throughhisownprowess,combinedwithherbeautyandherwisdom(inotherwords,throughthepowerofthecouple’sinnernobility)–thecovetedprizeforthelocalyearlycompetition:abeautiful,masterfullytrainedandmaturesparrowhawk(“Soruneperched’argent|unsesperviersmoutbienassis|oudecinqmuesoudesis|limieudresc’onporrasavoir”;ll.566–569,“therewillbesetuponasilverperchasparrow-hawkoffiveorsixmoultings–thebestyoucanimagine”).

ThisverybirdthusbecomesthesymbolofErecandEnide’sexemplarylove,whichsoonbringsabouttheirunionandtheirreturntokingArthur’scourtinCaradigan(“Siestoientigaletper|Decortoisieetdebeauté|Etdegrantdebonaireté, |Siestoientd’unematiere, |D’unemorsetd’unemeniere,|…|Onquesdeussibelesymages|N’asamblaloisnemarïages”;ll.1500–1512,“Aperfectmatchtheywereincourtesy,beauty,andgentleness.Andtheyweresoalikeinquality,manner,andcustoms[…]Lawormarriageneverbroughttogethertwosuchsweetcreatures”).CelebratedatKingArthur’scourt,ErecandEnide’smarriageissymbolizedbythesparrowhawkthatEnidecarriedwithherasheronlytreasure(“Etdelezluisadouceamie,|Quil’espreviern’oblïamie:|Asonespre-viersedeporte,|Nuleautrerichecen’enporte”;ll.1437–1440,“Erec[has]besidehimhissweetheartevermindfulofherhawk.She[rejoicesinherhawk]having[takenalong]nootherriches”).Butpreciselythatsole,apparentlyinconsequentialpropertynowrevealsitselfasthetruequarrythat

372

thetraditionalhunttothewhitestaghasbroughtbacktothecourtasawhole:theeventmarkstheaccessionofKingArthur’ssuzeraintytothenew,foreigndimensionofcourtoisieasiteventuallyflourishesunderthe“falconryprinciple”.

Thesocialandculturalconsequencesofthenew,civilizingruleimmediatelyengageKingArthur’scourtinapowerfulothermanneraswell:Erec’svictoryoverhisantagonistYderundertheaegisofthesparrowhawkbringsaboutnothisenemy’sdeath,butanewlifeofhis–anewlifeaccessedbywayofYder’ssubmissiontoloyalfriendshipandintegrationwithintheprecinctofthecourt’srule,whichinturnbringsaboutamiraculousincreaseofcollectivejoie.6

AclosereadingoftherestofChrétien’sromanwouldbeoffsubjecthere,butafewgeneralremarksmayproveuseful.ThechallengesthatErecandEnidearecalledtofaceinthesecondpartofthenarra-tivebecomehighlyrevealingif,andonlyif,theyarereadinthelightofthe“falconryprinciple”:theirvicissitudesplainlyexemplifythepainfulinnertrainingthatthetwospousesneedtofaceinordertoachieveahigherlevelofself-realization.Asallmedievalfalconersweretaughtbytheirmasters,bytheirmanuals,andbytheirowndirectexperience,therecanbenohopetosucceedintamingtheouterwildbird(andultimatelynorealpurposeinattemptingtodoso)iftheinnerbird–one’sownpsyche–isnotsubmittedtothesamerigorousprocessofbehavioraltransformation.

ThethirdandfinalsectionofChrétien’snarrativedwellsextensivelyonthecrowningceremonyofErecandEnide.Thisisfarfrombeingtheexpected“happyending”toanadventurousstorythough;structurally,thenovelcouldhaveeasilyendedonthemuchsimplerandnaturalreunionoftheprotagonists’hearts,withthetwoonceagaintrustingeachotherafterthechallengestheysuccessfullyhadovercome(ll.5245–5248).ItiscertainlynotbychanceifthedaywhenErecandEnidearecrownednewsovereignsofErec’ssmallkingdombyoldKingArthurandhiswiseconsortGuinevreturnsouttobethedayofChrist’sNativity.Thetwoyouthsthuscometoincarnateanewly-borntypeofsovereignty:thenovelruleofinnermasterythat,whilecomplementingtheoldruleofoutersuprem-acy,inevitablyalsosupersedesit.7

Itisinthiswaythatthestillunfamiliarinstitutionoffalconrytriumphsoverthetime-honoredtra-ditionofvenery;theancientbelligerentattitudeisreplacedbytheasyetunfamiliarcriterionofself-taming.Erec’sceremonialdressexplicitlyillustratestheprinciplesthattheyoungsovereignintendsto“wear”asfoundationaltohiskingship.Inscribedinthefabric,wovenbyfourfairies“pargrantsensetpargrantmaistrie”(l.6737,“Fourfairieshadmadeitwithgreatskillandmastery”)aretheimagesofthehigherliberalarts:Geometry,Mathematics,MusicandAstronomy.ThesewerenoneotherthantheartswhosefoundationswerebeingrenewedintheWestbynumeroustreatisesthatcommittedphilosopherswereactivelytranslatingfromArabicintoLatin,alongwithothermanualsoutliningthecomplexandintricatepracticesoffalconryaspracticedintheMiddleEast.Theartsofthequadriviumwere,inotherwords,thefoundationsofthenewapproachtonature,toknowledge,toinneraccomplishmentandsovereignty,suchastheNormankingsofSicilywereintheprocessof

6 If,ashasrighlybeennoticed(fassò2003,91),YdercanbesaidtostandforErec’sdouble,itdoesnotseemespeciallyhelpfultoreadtherelationshipbetweenthetwoinFreudianterms,preciselybecausesuchaninterpretationisunabletodoanythingusefulwiththe“falconryprinciple”.IratherseeErec’srelationshiptoYderinJungianterms:YderinthisperspectiverepresentstheouterprojectionofErec’saggressiveego,whosewild,rapaciousinstinctsneedtobetrained(ratherthantamed)throughanintegrationofthefeminineprinciple.InlinewithboththeessenceofJungiandepthpsychologyandthepreceptsoffalconryastheartofinnertraining,theendresultoftheprocessisneitherarejection,norarepression,noratriumphoftheaggressiveprincipleperse,butrather,aharmoniusintegrationofitfortheneedsofjusticethroughitstrainingby,andunionwith,thefeminineprinciple.Thesymbolofsuchmiraculouslytransmutativeconiunctio propitiatedbytheuniversalforceofloveisthetrainedfalconquietlysittingonErec’sfist.

7 BothmaDDox(1978)andmorerecentlyfassò(2003[1981])haverecognizedtheimportanceofthenewsovereigntyprincipleandsomehowrelatedittothesymbolismofthefalcon.However,notbeingsufficientlyfamiliarwiththeinneraimsofthe“falconryprinciple”,bothfailtoseeinwhatwayexactlytheimageofthefalconstandsforthenewphilosophicalandcourtlyidealstransmittedbyChrétiendeTroyes.

373

discoveringandpromotingattheircourt,andsuchastheirheirFrederickIIwouldsoon–toalargeextentinvain–trytospreadthroughouthisvastEmpire.

falconry from “sPort” to “art”: outline of a cultural shift

ThechangeinperspectivesubtlychartedbyChrétiendeTroyesinhisromanintervenesatatimewhentheintroductionofAristotelianphilosophy–aspresented,inparticular,bytheDe animaanditscommentaries–wasbeginningtoconveyanewunderstandingofthehumanbeings’relationshiptothenaturalworldandtheirroleinit.Seenaspoisedatthetopoftheearthlychainofbeing,humanswerealsoconceivedofaspotentiallyconnectedtothetranscendentangelicintelligencesbytheverywayinwhichtheirmindswereabletoreceiveanddevelopthepowersofreasoningandintellection.Insuchaperspective–labeledasAristotelian,butinfactdeeplyimbuedwithconceptsoriginatinginNeoplatonicemanationism,wherethesoul’scelestialnaturewastypicallyvisualizedintheshapeofawingedcreature–theeducationofthehumanbeings’potentialintellectcouldwellberegardedasaprocessoftrainingandinnertransformation.This,asIwillarguelater,translatedintoanewpreeminenceofthefeminineprinciplesofknowledgeasbothSophiaandNature,especiallyinconnectionwiththenobilitatingexperienceoflove,suchascourtlyculturewouldlatercodifyit.Itisafactthatthestudyofphilosophy,theexerciseofcourtlyloveandthepracticeoftheartoffalconryappeardeeplyintertwinedinthosemilieusthatconceivedhumannobilityintermsofaninnertransmutationratherthanasanouteraffirmation–anessentiallyspeculativedynamicmuchmorecomplexandsophisticatedthanhadbeenthecaseinEuropeduringtheearlymedieval,feudalperiod.

ThisrevolutioninperspectiveentailedtheupholdingofaheuristicprincipleneverbeforepromotedorencouragedwithintheboundariesofChristendom,namely:pleasure.Inthisparticularworldview,pleasurebecamethemeansofachievingnothinglessthanperfecthappiness.Incontrasttoacenturies-oldearliertradition,whichviewedhappinessasthegrosssatisfactionofthebaseimpulsestransmittedbytheexternalsenses,thenew“Aristotelian”(i.e.Aristotelian-Platonic)perceptionconstruedhappinessastheunfailingresultofaprocessofabstractionwhichispropertotheactofintellection.

WhilevariousAristoteliantreatisespresentinganew,noblerviewofhumanitywerebeginningtobetranslated,commenteduponandcirculatedonEuropeansoil(andshortlybeforeChrétiendeTroyeswrotehisromancesillustratingthenewidealofnobilitytowhichtheliterateelitecouldhopetoaspire),JohnofSalisbury(c.1120–1180)wasbusycompilinghistreatiseonpoliticalphilosophy,thePolicraticus(1159),acollageofexemplathroughwhichtheEnglishscholarandchurchman,whohadbecomefamiliarwithmostofthepowerfulpeopleofhisday,proceededtodiscussallaspectsofcontemporaryethicalandpoliticallife.Thefirstoftheeightbooksofthislengthytreatiseopensonanindictmentofthemightyonesandoftheirlaxethics:absorbedinthepleasuresaffordedthembytheirrank,Johnargues,aristocratsneglectreason–theonlyattributetrulysuitableforhumanbeingsandsovereigns–andthusturnintohideousbrutes.Amongthenumerous“sensuumvoluptates”decriedbyJohnaslikelytocausesuchamonstrousmutation,huntingwinshandsdown.Letusreadtheentirepassage,soasfullytograspthespecifictermsinwhichthesecretarytotheArchbishopofCanterbury,himselffuturebishopofChartres,madehispoint:

“Thesoul,deceivedbyallurementsofmanykinds,provingfalsetoitsowninnerlight,byasortofself-betrayalgoesastrayastheresultofitsdesiresamidthedeceptionsoftheouterworld.[…]Thusthecreatureofreasonbecomesabrute;thustheimageoftheCreatoristransformedintoabeastbyvirtueofasortofsimilarityincharacter;thusmandegeneratesandfallsfromhispinnacle,havingbecomeliketovanity,forthereasonthat,swollenwithpridebecauseofhonoursacquired,pridehas

374

destroyedhisunderstanding.Who[is]morecontemptiblethanhewhoscornsaknowledgeofhimself[…]?Whomorebrutishthanhewho,bylackofjudgmentandlustfulpassiondisregardshisowninterestsinattendingtothoseforeigntohimandunceasinglyoccupieshimselfnotmerelywiththeinterestsbutevenwiththediversionsofothers?Whomorebestialthanhewho,neglect-ingduties,risesatmidnight,sothatwiththeaidofdogskeenofscent,hisactivehuntsmen,hiszealouscomrades,andhisretinueofdevotedservants,atcostoftime,labor,money,andeffort,hemaywagefromearliestdawntilldarknesshiscampaignagainstbeasts?(Policraticus bookI,ch.1;translationPike,pp.11–12).

Isonethenworthyoflifewhosesoleinterestinitisthetrivialoneofwagingcruelwarfareagainstbeasts?Thosewhodelightinthattypeofhuntinginwhichbirdsaretaughttopursuetheirkind,ifyouthinkthatthissortofbird-catchingistobeincludedinthetermhunting,areafflictedwithamilderformofinsanitybutwithsimilarlevity.Huntingontheground,asitismoredependable,isalsomoreprofitablethanthatinthesky”(Policraticus bookI,ch.4;translationPike,p.16).8

Asavictimtotheworld’sillusionsandtohisownmisguideddesires,accordingtoJohnofSalisburytherationalcreature“perdiditintellectum”(whichwashisinnerlight)and“deformaturinbestiam”:abeastwho,duetosomekindofbehaviorallikenesstohisnewfellowcreatures,entertainsnootherdesirethantochaseotherbeasts.

Havingthuslaunchedhisattack,theauthorofthePolicraticussubsequentlysomewhatmitigateshispositions.Giventhatbodilypleasuressimplycannotbebannedfromthearistocracy’severydaylife–heconcedes–thealternatesolutionwouldbetohavethemcoexistwithreason.Physicalactivitiesdeemedpleasurableshouldthereforebepracticedinmoderation,withtheonlyaimofrestingthespirit,wornoutbythespiritualquest,“notforthepurposeofgivinguphispursuitofvirtuebuttoacquirenewstrengthandvigor”.Itbefallseachindividualtochooseforthemselves,andtofacetheconsequencesoftheirchoice.9

JohnofSalisbury,therefore,weavestogether ideasproceedingfromdifferentculturalback-grounds:ontheonehand,heendowsreasonwithabsolutepreeminence,tothepointofespousingthetheoryoftheoppositionbetweenhumanaandbrutalia;andyet,theonlyactivityhedeemsworthyofmanasabeingendowedwithreasonisnot–aswouldbethecaseinanAristoteliancontext–thephilosophicalquest,butratherthepursuitofavirtuethatisutterlyChristian,ifnotecclesiastical,incharacter.Ontheotherhand,itisalsoclearthatthe“virtutisexercitium”asJohnunderstandsitrules

8 “[…]animusmultiplicilenociniorumfraudecaptus,quadamalienationesui,abinteriorebonodeficiens,perexterioramendaciavariisconcupiscentiisevagetur.[…]Sicrationaliscreaturabrutescit,sicimagoCreatorisquadammorumsimilitudinedeformaturinbestiam,sicaconditionissuaedignitatedegenerathomo,vanitatisimilisfactus,eoquodexhonorecollatointumuitetatumoreperdiditintellectum.Quisenimeoindignior,quisuiipsiuscontemnithaberenotitiam?[…]Quideobrutius,quiexdefecturationis,etimpulsulibidinis,dimissispropriis,alienanegotiacurat,etnonmodonegotiis,sedetalienisotiisiugiteroccupatur?Quideobestialius,quiomissoofficio,demedianoctesurgit,utsagacitatecanum,venatorumindustria,studiocommilitonum,servulorumfretusobsequio,temporisetfamaeiactura,rerumlaborisquedispendio,denocteadnoctempugnetadbestias?”(John of salisbury [1909],389b–c,vol.I:18–19).“Quomodoergodignusestvita,quinihilaliudnovitinvita,nisivanitatisstudiosaevireinbestias?Quosverospeciesillavenationisoblectat,utavesavibusinsequantur,sitamenhocgenusaucupiivenationicenseasannectendum,mitioriquidemvexanturinsania,sednoninparilevitate.Venaticatamterrestrisquamaëreaquantosolidior,tantofructuosiorest”(John of salisbury [1909],392c,vol.I,24).

9 “Verum,simoderatioadhibeatur,inhisinterdumsensuumvoluptateversarisapientinonarbitrorindecorum;utsaepenumerodictumest,nichildecorumestsinemodo.Nametotiariinterdumsapientifamiliareest,nontamenutvirtutisexercitiumevanescat,sedquomagisvigeatetquodammodorecreetur.[…]Sienimmodestefiatadrecreationem,subotiandilicentiaexcusatur;siadlascivientisanimivoluptatem,caditincrimen” (Policraticus bookVIII,ch.12;John of salisbury [1909],761b–c–d,vol.II,315–316).“Ifmoderationisdisplayed,Idonotjudgeitunbecomingasagetodwellattimesuponthepleasuresofthesenses;ashasoftenbeensaid,nothingisunseemlyexceptthatwhichisbeyondmeasure.Itiscustomaryforthesagetorestoccasionally,notforthepurposeofgivinguphispursuitofvirtuebuttoacquirenewstrengthandvigor.[…]Modestlypursuedforpurposesofrecreation<thesepleasures>areexcusedunderthelicenseofleisure;butiffordissipation,theyfallundertheheadofcrime”(translationPike,p.373).

375

outallpossibleconnectionswithpleasure:inaculturalmilieuwheretheNicomachean Ethicshadnotyetbeenrediscovered,pleasurecouldonlybeconceivedintermsofblind,recklesssubmissiontothecallofthesenses.Soastomitigatetherigorofsuchviews(humanavsbrutalia,virtusvsvoluptas),JohnofSalisburyintroduceswhatmayappearasanapproximationoftheAristoteliannotionofmediocritas.Nevertheless,hiscondemnationofhunting–beitterrestrialoraerial“insania”–seenexclusivelyintermsofasensualandbrutalpleasure,iscompletelyinlinewiththewidespreadprac-ticesofthepre-courtlyfeudalaristocracy,aswellaswiththetraditional,disparagingpositionsoftheChurchonsuchmatters(zug1983;galloni1993).

Undoubtedly,theauthorofthePolicraticuswouldhardlyhavebeenabletoimaginethatanyonefromanywalkoflifemightwanttocomposeatreatisedealingwithhuntingtechniques.Andyet,abouttwentyyearsearlierAdelardofBath(c.1080–after1152),oneofthemosthighlyesteemedEnglishscholarsofhistimes,hadgonetothetroubleofauthoringahawkingtreatise.HavingtravelledtotheNormankingdomofSicilyandtheNormanPrincipalityofAntioch,wherehesayshelearnedhisscientificmethodologyfrom“Arabicmasters”,AdelardspenttherestofhislifeathomeasatutortothechildrenoftheEnglishnobility,aswellasatranslatorintoLatinofvariousArabicworks,mostlypertainingtotheartsofthequadrivium:mathematics,geometry,music,andastronomy.Healsoauthoredafeworiginalwritingssuchashisthreedialoguesonphilosophy(De eodem et diverso),onnature(Questiones naturales),andonhawking(De avibus tractatus),allstructuredasaconver-sationbetweenAdelardhimselfastheteacherandthefigureofayoungnephewasthepupil(aDelarD1998,xi–xlii).

TheDe avibus tractatus–oneoftheoldesthawkingtreatisesevercomposedinEurope–waspre-facedbyalengthydialoguebetweenAdelardandhisnephew,wherefalconryisintroducedasanartconducivetotherecreationofthemind,intermsmuchmorepositivethaninthePolicraticus,andinanoutrightphilosophicalperspective:10

“Nephew:Sinceourmindhasbecomequitesatedwithdiscussingthecausesofthings,somethingofdelightratherthangravityshouldbeinterposed,togivejoytothemindandrelieveitsweari-ness.Fortheintellectwhichdoesnotpauseisjustlikeabow:ifyouneverceasetostretchit,itwillbecomeslack.Therefore,inmyopinion,somethingmustbechosenthatisagreeableaswellasprofitable.Ithinktherightactionisifyourevealwhateveryoufeelismorefinelyexpressedconcerningthenatureandhandlingofhawks,especiallysincewebelongtotheraceofEnglishmenandtheirjudgmentisapprovedbeyondthatofallotherpeople,anditisanestablishedqualityofthatjudgment,thatthemorewidelyitisshared,themoreitflourishes.Adelard:Certainly,letusdothat,sothatwearenotaccusedeitherofignoranceorofspite.Weshall,then,discusswhatwehavelearnedfromthepracticeofthepresent-daymastersandnolesswhatwehavefoundwrittendowninthebooksofKingHarold,sothatwhoever,beinginterestedinthissubject,hasthisdisputationathand,ifhepracticesthisactivity,canbecomeanexpert.Soletyourpartbetoaskquestions,butminetoexplain.”11

10 ItisdifficulttogaugewhetherAdelardofBathevercameintocontactwithanyoftheAristoteliantreatises,andtowhatextentwithhiswritingsheconsciouslyintendedtobreakawayfromtradition.Ashehimselfdeclared,hewashoweverproudofconveyingthroughhiswritings«whathehadlearnedfromhisArabicmasters»(aDelarD 1998, xxix).

11 aDelarD [1998],238–241;<nePos>:“Quoniaminrerumcausisdisserendisanimusnosteradmodumestfastiditus,adeiusdemdilatationemetfastidiirelevationemaliquidmagisdelectabilequamgraveinterponendumest.Intellectusenimnonpausanssicutetarcus:sinumquamcessastendere,lentuserit.Quaremeoiudiciotalealiquidquodetiocundumetutilesit,eligendumest.Idautemrectefieriputosideaccipitrumnaturaetusuquicquamelegantiussentisaperias,precipuecumnosAnglisimusgenereeteorumsententiapreceterisgentibussitprobata,eteiusdemsententieconstetqualitasutquantopluribusdividiturtantomagisefflorescat”.aDelarDus:“Sitsane,neautinscitiaautinvidiaarguamur.Eaigiturdisseremusquemodernorummagistrorumusudidicimus,etnonminusqueinHaroldiregislibrisscriptareperimus,utquicunquehisintentushancdisputationemhabeat,sinegotiumexercuerit,peritusessepossit.Tuumitaquesitinquirere,meumverumsitexplicare”.

376

AccordingtoAdelard,thenoblestactivityinwhichmancanengageistheenquiryintothecausesofthings(rerum causae)12;thereisnoreferenceheretoreligiousmorality,asAdelardintendstokeeparigorouslyphilosophicalapproach.Asfortheconversationthatthephilosopherandhisnephewcarryoutforthepurposeofrestingtheirwearymindsaftertheeffortsoftheirintellectualchase,itclassicallyintendstobebothanentertainingandausefuldialogicalexchange.13ContrarytoJohnofSalisbury’s(later)pointofview,thispleasurable(“delectabilis”)conversationonthesubjectof“deaccipitrumnaturaetusu”entailsnoriskofmoraldanger,eventhoughitpertainstothesphereofhunting;quitethecontrary,itevenhastheambitiontohelpthosewhoengageinsucha“negotium”toexcelinit!14Thatistosay:eventhoughtheconversationallowsforthe“delectation”ofhawkingtotakeplaceatthetheoreticallevel,itsreferencestotheexperientialsideoftheartiscontinuousandclearlyspelledout.NoteworthyisalsothetermAdelardusestodefinetheactivitythatcan“delight”themind:“aliquiddelectabile”,incontrastwiththe“grave”pertainingtothephilosophicalinquiry,andinequalcontrasttotheterm“voluptatem”usedinadisparagingsensebyJohnofSalisbury.

Inaboutthosesameyears,anotheramongEurope’smostancientfalconrytreatises,knownasDancus rex,wasmakingitsappearanceattheNormancourtofSicilyinPalermo.Insomeofthemanuscriptsthathavebeenpreserved,thisshortmanualisprecededbyanarrativeprologue,whichtellsofhowkingGallacianushadtravelledtothecourtofkingDancusforthesolepurposeofbeinginstructedintheartoffalconry.Thefollowingisthespeechthatthetravelerholds,onceheisadmittedinthepresenceofthesovereignhehassearchedforwithsuchdeterminationastorelinquisheverythinghepossessed,exceptfortheperduringawarenessofhisownroyalstatus:

“Icomeinmyconditionofkingtoseeandhearifwhatpeoplesayistrue,meaningthatyouareawiseman[sapiens],andthatyouknowanartbywhich[or:inwhich]youhavebecomeevenwiser[sapientior],thatistosayyouhaveabirdcatchanotherbird,wherebyIwanttobeyourdisciple.”15

IfkingGallacianushasdecidedtoundertakealong,possiblydangerous,journeyandhaswishedtohumblehimselftothepointofaskingDancuspermissiontobecomehisdisciple,suchaneventcouldonlyoccurbecausehehascometotherealizationthatfalconryhasnothingtodowithanyordinaryactivity(“negotium”),orworse,anycontemptibleformofbaseentertainment(“solatium”).Rather,falconryhasbeenpresentedtohimasanart,practicedbyasovereignofunequalledwisdomforthesolepurposeofperfectingthatverywisdom.Thereisnotrace,here,ofanyassociationoffalconry

12 Seearistotle,Metaphysics982b4:“andthisistheknowledgeofthemostknowable,andthethingswhicharemostknowablearefirstprinciplesandcauses;foritisthroughtheseandfromthesethatotherthingscometobeknown,andnotthesethroughtheparticularswhichfallunderthem.Andthatscienceissupreme,andsuperiortothesubsidiary”andibid.20:“thereforeifitwastoescapeignorancethatmenstudiedphilosophy,itisobviousthattheypursuedscienceforthesakeofknowledge,andnotforanypracticalutility”.

13 Thisisatopos ofnumerousprologuesintheWesterntradition,ofHoratianascendency(Ars poetica,ll.333–334).However,Adelardhasturnedthetraditional“dulce”intosomething“delectabile”andtheusefulisvaguelyreferredto,withouteverbeingexpresselynamedassuch.

14 AlthoughAdelardstickstothetraditionalterm“negotium”,ratherthanemployingtheAristotelianword“ars”,itmaybepossibletounderstandhisintentiontodwellon“naturaetusu”ofthebirdsofpreyasareferencetotheacquisitionofknowledgeofthenaturalworldinAristotelianterms.Adelard’sapproachinfactaimsatencompassingthedomainofdirectobservationandexperienceaswellasthesphereofcodifiedpractices.SeealsoMetaph.981b5–10,whereAristotledeclaresthattheloveofwisdomdoesnotconsistinanypracticalachievement,butintheabilitytoteachandinstruct:“Ingeneralthesignofknowledgeorignoranceistheabilitytoteach,andforthisreasonweholdthatartratherthanexperienceisscientificknowledge;fortheartistscanteach,buttheotherscannot”.

15 “Veniosicutrexutvideametaudiamsiestverum,sicuthomodicit,quodsapienshomoesetartemunamscisquasapientioresestis,scilicetquodfacitisunamavemcaperealiam,undeegovoloessevesterdiscipulus.”(Dancus [1963], 48–50).TheMedievaltranslationintoFrenchofthistreatiseanditsprologue(BNF,fr.2004)omitsthispassage–thuscensoringpreciselythesapientialaspectoffalconry;Iwillreturntothispoint.Giventhatnomanuscriptdatesasfarbackasthe12thcentury,wesimplycannotestablishwhereandwhentheprologuetoDancus originated,whetheritwascomposedatthesametimeasthetreatiseattheNormancourtofSicily(whichseemsthemostplausiblehypothesis),orwhether(moreunlikely)itwasaddedlaterinadifferentculturalcontext.

377

withanyofthe“sensuumvoluptates”.EvenAdelard’sphilosophicalperspectiveisexceeded:falconryhasnowbecomethesupremeformofroyalschooling,sinceitisinit,orthroughit,thatthesovereigncantrainandultimatelydeployhispotentialforwisdom.

“Sapienshomoes”,GallacianusaverstoDancus.Howarewetounderstandthisstatement?IsDancusreallywise,orishesimplyknowledgeableinanaltogethertechnicalsense?Thehesitationpertainstousmodernsonly.Infact,knowledgeandwisdommergeandbecomeinseparableoncefalconryispromotedtotherankofroyalart inaphilosophicalperspective.Aswewillseeinamoment–andasChrétiendeTroyes’novelhadalreadysuggestedthroughErec’sfinalcrowning–,thisartbecomestrulyroyalonceitstechnicalknowledgeisinteriorizedandactualizedatasubtlerlevel,thusallowingforthemergerofthetwodimensions,orratherfortheactualizingofthetech-nicalknowledgeatboththeouter(particular,concrete)andtheinner(universal,abstract)level.Anaccomplishedartistreachesthelevelofwisdominprogressivelyunderstandingtheinnerworkingsoftheart(causas rerum),thusaccessingthedimensionoftruemastery,whichinturnentailstheabilitytotransmitthatmastery,tobecomeateacheranda“sapienshomo”.16

ThetemporalandgeographicalboundarieswithinwhichthispromotionoffalconrytothelevelofanartinAristotelian,philosophicalterms,tookplace–roughlyfrom1150to1250–coincidewiththegoldenageofitswrittencodificationintheareasoftheWesternworldwheretheNormanpresencewasstronger.Throughit,alongwiththeschoolofToledoandtheremainingpresenceoftheArabsinSpain,theinfluenceofpractices,valuesandtraditionsoriginatingintheIslamicworldwastobecomesizeable.WhereasJohnofSalisbury’sviewswerestillsteepedinthecontinentaltraditionsofthecathedralandmonasticschools,AdelardofBathandtheearlyphilosophersoftheNormancourtofSicilyhaddiscoveredthattheIslamicworldcultivatedawealthofartsandsciences,whichallintendedtopromoteandachievetherealizationofwisdomasthehighestaccomplishmenthumanbeingscouldaspireto.ItisthereforenotbychancethatfalconryplayedamajorroleintheIslamicworld:there,thistransformativeart–understoodastheartoftrainingwildraptorsandofcivilizingtheirpredatoryinstinctsthroughmanning–hadthepowertosymbolizetheveryidealthatthesephilosophically-groundeddisciplinesstrovetorealize.

falconry as cognitive Dynamics: the PhilosoPher’s sPeculation

ThenextstepinthesuccessionwearetracingtakesustotheitinerantcourtofFrederickIIofHohenstaufen(1197–1250).ItisherethatthenewviewsforeshadowedinAdelard’swritingsandintheprologuetotheDancustreatisefindtheirfulfillment.Itis,inotherwords,inthatverypeculiarMediterraneancruciblethatweseeachievedtheproject,almostadream,ofassimilatingfalconry

16 IntheMetaphysicsAristotledefinesknowledgeasaprogressioninvolvingfivelevels:sensation(aisthesis),memory(mneme),experience(empeiria),art(teknne),science(episteme),whichallfinallymergeintotherealizationofwisdom(sophia).Artfollowsexperienceandprecedesscience;thediscriminatingfactoristheknowledgeandunderstandingofthecauses,whichallowsonetoreachahigherlevelofintelligence,toestablishadeeperlevelofbondingwiththeobjectandinstrumentsoftheart:“weconsiderthatknowledgeandproficiencybelongtoartratherthantoexperience,andweassumethatartistsarewiserthanmenofmereexperience(whichimpliesthatinallcaseswisdomdependsratheruponknowledge);andthisisbecausetheformerknowthecause,whereasthelatterdonot.Fortheexperiencedknowthefact,butnotthewherefore;buttheartistsknowthewhereforeandthecause.Forthesamereasonweconsiderthatthemastercraftsmenineveryprofessionaremoreestimableandknowmoreandarewiserthantheartisans,becausetheyknowthereasonsofthethingswhicharedone;butwethinkthattheartisans,likecertaininanimateobjects,dothings,butwithoutknowingwhattheyaredoing(as,forinstance,fireburns);onlywhereasinanimateobjectsperformalltheiractionsinvirtueofacertainnaturalquality,artisansperformtheirsthroughhabit.Thusthemastercraftsmenaresuperiorinwisdom,notbecausetheycandothings,butbecausetheypossessatheoryandknowthecauses”(Metaphysics981a–b).

378

toatypeofwisdomandofpleasuredeemedofroyalimportance.Thedeterminationwithwhichtheemperorhimselfpursuedthepractice,theinquiry,thestudyandthetheorizationoffalconryduringalifetimeofdedicationandlaborcannot,andshouldnot,beunderestimated(boccassini2003;manDalà2011).ButFrederickIIdidnotonlyoperatebyhisownwillfuldetermination:itisthankstotheinterventionofhisphilosopher(Arabic:hākim)Theodore,trainedintheverybestoftheIslamicschools,thatfalconryfullydevelopeditstheoreticalnewstatusasart,orevenmoreambitiously,as“scientia”.Asweshallsoonseeinmoredetail,aphilosophically-basedconceptionidentifiestwomainaspectsinsovereignty.Ontheonehandwehavefalconry,relatingtotheruler,whichbenefitsfromthecivilizinginteractionbetweenthesovereignandhisphilosopher;ontheotherhandwefindthe“inventiociviliumlegum”,whichrelatestothephilosopher,butcannotbeproperlycarriedoutwithouttheruler’sintervention.17

ItisattheStaufenimperialcourt,then,thatfalconrywastobecomeendowedwithafull-fledgedphilosophicaldignity.There,onthebasisoftheNormanheritageandthroughtheinfluenceofIslamicpremisesandpractices,falconrybecamethe“delectable”aspectofthatAristotelian“perfection”(entelekeya)thatalllivingcreaturesunknowinglystrivetoachieve,firstandforemostthehumanbeing–abeingwhoseroleisoneof“speculatioentiumetideovocaturminormundus”(“speculationofentities,andthereforeheiscalled‘microcosm’”;cf.Theodore’sLongPrologue,6;burnett1995,278).Asthe(self-declared)highestrankingofcreatures,humansareresponsibleuntoGodforthelandstheyrule,atboththesocio-politicalandthenaturallevel;hencetheyareinneedofapleasureoftheirown,whichwillhelpthemaccomplishtheperfectionspertainingtotheirlevelofsovereignty.AccordingtoFrederickandhisphilosopherTheodore,falconry,conceivedas“scientiavenandiperavesetquadrupeds”,ispreciselysucharoyalpleasure(“solatium”or“delectatio”).

Keepinginmindthegeneralthrustoftheargument,letusnowturntoexamineinsomedetailTheodore’sPrologue,auniquetextthatweavestogetherfalconry,sovereigntyandphilosophy.Notbychance,thecontextinwhichsuchunprecedentedviewswereproducedwasthecourtofFrederickII:theonlycourtonEuropeansoilwhere,inthefirsthalfofthe13thcentury,thesovereignaimedatembodyingthepracticesofmagnificenceandwisdomcurrentintheIslamicworld,whosearchetypalmodelremained,inaterritoryofNormanascendency,thewisdom-figureevokedbythenameandthemythicauraofDancusrex.18

In1240–1241,duringthesiegeofthecityofFaenza,FrederickIIpersonallycorrectedtheLatinversionofafalconrymanualknownasMoamin,whosetexthehadentrustedhisphilosopherTheodorofAntiochtotranslatefromArabic.19Thisisnotsurprising.FrederickwaswellversedinbothArabicandLatin;histheoreticalandpracticalskillsintheartoffalconryweresuperior;foryearshehaddrawnontheexpertiseofbothWesternandEasternfalconershostedathiscourt;andhehadpossiblyalreadyembarkedontheprojectofcomposinghisownexhaustivetreatiseonthesubject.WhatismoresurprisingisthefactTheodoreseemstoprefacehistranslationwithalongPrologueofhisown(noparalleltextinArabicorPersianhasbeenfoundtothisday),justasFrederickwouldlaterdofor

17 Burnettaptlynotesthat«theprefacetoFrederick’slawcode,theLiber Augustalis,doeshaveaphilosophicaltoneandshowssomesimilarityinconceptsto[Theodore’s]LongPrologue»(burnett1995,251).Beingdated1231,however,theLibermayhavebeencomposedbysomeoneotherthanTheodoreofAntioch,theauthoroftheProloguetoMoamin.Thisparallelismwoulddeservefurtheranalysis;Ihaveattemptedsomepreliminaryconsiderationsinboccassini2003,189–200.

18 SurveyingthearchetypalprinciplesonwhichtheFredericianconceptofimperialsovereigntyrestswouldnecessitateadiscussionbeyondthescopeofthisarticle.Theyare,however,moreofEasternthanWesterndescent,androotedintheconceptofthespiritualfunctionofauthoritydiscussedbyDumézilandCoomaraswamyinparticular.Forausefuloverviewseebenoist2008.

19 AnothershorttreatiseknownasGhatrifwastranslatedinthesameyearsforFrederickandisalsoprecededbyashortprologue.Forfurtherdetailsonthesetextsseeboccassini2003,96–107.

379

hisowntreatise,withtheintendedpurposeofassertingthesuperiorityofthe“scientia”offalconry(intheAristotelianacceptationoftheword,asdefinedabove)overthevile“negotium”inwhichsuchanartwouldturnwhenmindlesslypracticedbypeopleignorantofitsprinciples.Theodore’sprologuetoMoaminwasobviouslymeantforthebenefitofpractitionersinneedofeducation:theWesternrulersandnobles,forwhosebenefittheArabictreatiseswerebeingtranslatedinthefirstplace.20

Wastheemperor’sprojectoftranslatio studiisuccessful?Therearereasonstodoubtit.Infact,thoserulersandnoblesforwhosebenefitFrederickIIandhissageswereacting,intheirgreatmajorityultimatelyrefusedtoacknowledgepreciselythephilosophicalfoundationsoftheennoblingoffalconry(andoftheartofruling)whichtheemperor,havingabsorbedthemthroughtheteachingsofhisphilosophersandinteractionswithEasternrulers,hadwishedtoteachthem.WecanbefairlyconfidentofthisbecauseTheodore’slongProloguewastobereplaced,inmostextantmanuscripts,withashorterandratheranodynetext,highlightingtheenjoymentandhealthbenefitsthatthepracticeoffalconrymaybringabout–withoutevensinglingitout,amongahostofothersportingpractices,asparticularlytherapeutic.AsforFrederick’sownscientifictreatise,itisalmostembarrassingtorealizethatitremainedignoredinitstotalityuntilthe19thcentury.21

ThetheoreticalfoundationsofthescienceoffalconryasoutlinedbyTheodoremayhaveproventoochallengingforthemajorityoftheEuropeannobility,stilllargelyuntrainedinphilosophicalmatters–butletustrytoexploretheiradmittedlycomplexarticulation.ProvidentialNature,Theo-dorearguesinAristotle’swake,hasgrantedalllivingbeingsthepossibilitytoreachtheaimoftheirperfection(“finemsueperfectionis”)notthroughthetediousrepetitionoftheirrespectiveoperations,butthroughthearisingofpleasure,afarmoreeffectivewayofachievingtheintendedgoal.IntheNicomachean Ethicsinparticular,Aristotlehadfurtherdelvedintothesemattersbystatingthatwhileeachactivityisendowedwithitsowncorrespondingpleasure(BookX,1175b,27–28),notallactivitiesandpleasuresareequallydesirable,thosepertainingtothesensesbeinginferiortothose,purelycontemplative(meditative),pertainingtotheintellect.Onlythepracticeofspeculativeactivi-tiesgearedtowardswisdomallowshumanbeingstoconnectwithandexpressthedivinepotentialresidingintheirnature(BookX,1177b,16–28),andhenceachievetheirownperfection.22Suchviews

20 “OurLord,themostsereneEmperorFrederickII,alwaysaugustkingofJerusalemandSicily,consideringthatthenobilityofthispleasurealoneshouldbemadetheirownbyemperorsandkings,andseeingthatthekingswhowerehispredecessorsandhiscontemporarieswerenotanxiousaboutthepleasurewhichwastheirownandshowntobesobynaturaltruth,butonthecontrarywerenegligent,hasorderedtheleastoftheservantswithintheboundsofhiskingdomtotranslatethepresentbookoffalconryfromArabicintoLatin,sothattheremaybearecordofthosethingswhichtheexpertiseofwisemenhasdiscoveredbyexperience,andabasisfordiscoveringthingsinthefuture.”(afterburnett1995,284).ComparingthisparagraphwithJohnofSalisbury’scondemnationofhuntingasabasebodilypleasureallowsustomeasurethegulfthatseparatedtheEuropeanfeudalworldviewfromtherefinementandawarenessoftheStaufencourtlyculture.

21 ForfurthercommentsonthesystematicideologicalcensorshipofFrederick’sviewspracticedbyanti-imperialWesternrulersofthe13thand14thcenturies,seeboccassini2003,107–119.

22 “Ifamongvirtuousactionspoliticalandmilitaryactionsaredistinguishedbynobilityandgreatness,andtheseareunleisurelyandaimatanendandarenotdesirablefortheirownsake,buttheactivityofreason,whichiscontemplative,seemsbothtobesuperiorinseriousworthandtoaimatnoendbeyonditself,andtohaveitspleasurepropertoitself(andthisaugmentstheactivity),andtheself-sufficiency,leisureliness,unweariedness(sofarasthisispossibleforman),andalltheotherattributesascribedtothesupremelyhappymanareevidentlythoseconnectedwiththisactivity,it follows that this will be the complete happiness of man,ifitbeallowedacompletetermoflife(fornoneoftheattributesofhappinessisincomplete).Butsuchalifewouldbetoohighforman;foritisnotinsofarasheismanthathewillliveso,butinsofarassomethingdivineispresentinhim;andbysomuchasthisissuperiortoourcompositenatureisitsactivitysuperiortothatwhichistheexerciseoftheotherkindofvirtue.Ifreasonisdivine,then,incomparisonwithman,thelifeaccordingtoitisdivineincomparisonwithhumanlife”.burnett(1995,242)haspointedoutthat“thepassagesfromBookXalludedtobyTheodorehavenotbeenfoundinanyothersource;theyaretheearliestcitationsofthesepassagesinLatin”,whichthereforebearwitnesstoTheodore’smasteryofthesetextsintheirearlierArabicversion.

380

hadbeenfurtherdevelopedbyAristotle’sPersiancommentatorAvicenna,andalthoughTheodoreneverreferstothelatterorhiswritingsashedoestoAristotle’s,theargumentheputsforwardissteepedinanAvicennianunderstandingofAristotle’sthought,especiallyinhisreferencetotheweakeningbyrepetition,theprovidentialactionoftheActiveIntellectthroughwhichsolelyintel-lectionmayintervene(“reciperedevirtutefluenteexintellectuagente”),thedistinctionbetweenouterandinnersenses(burnett1995,243–244),andaboveallhisdefinitionofpleasureandunder-standingoftheAristotelianentelekheiaas“perfection”(kamāl).Theselasttwopointsinparticulararethefoundationofhistheoreticalconstructaimingatestablishingtheethicalvalueofthesovereignpleasureobtainedthroughtheexerciseoftheartoffalconry(“Inasmuchastheyarekings,[rulers]donothaveanyproperpleasureotherthanhunting[…].Thenobilityofthispleasurealone[scil.falconry]shouldbemadetheirownbyemperorsandkings”).

InthesamewayasphilosophersoftheAvicennianschoolsawthesoulasbeingcomposedof“quodest”andof“quoest”–theindividualhumanbeingandthehumanessenceasitisactualizedthroughthehumanbeing’sownindividuation(hasse2008)–Theodoredistinguishesbetween,ontheonehand,theentirespectrumofthe“communesoperationes”pertainingtoman(fromeatingtointellection),andontheother,the“propriaeoperationes”pertainingtothespecificfunctionswhichhumansindividuallyfulfillwithinsociety.Itisthroughtheexerciseofthesefunctions–suchas“regnare,sacerdotizare,militare,iudicare”–thathumansindividuatethemselvesinlife,whilealsostrivingtoachievetheperfectionofthefunctiontheyfulfill,perfectionbeingwhatgivesactualitytowhatathingaimstobe(somehow,wecouldsay,thefullexpressionofthearchetypepertainingtothatfunction).23ForeachoftheindividualizingactivitiesorfunctionsTheodorefurtherdistin-guishestwotypesofpleasures,“onepertainingtotheart,anothertothepractitionerthroughwhichhecomfortsthelaborcomingfromtheactivity”.24Hethenproceedstoillustratethespecificdoublepleasurespertainingtothefourfiguresinchargeofguaranteeingproperleadershipinanygivensociety:thephilosopher,thepriest,themanofarms,theking.25Hereisacomparativetableoftheirrespectivedoublepleasures,astheorizedbyTheodore:26

23 AccordingtoAvicenna,“Perfectionissomethingwhoseexistencegivesactualitytowhatathingissupposedtobe”(inati1996,10).

24 “Etquilibetoperanshuiusmodioperationehabetduasdelectationes,unampertinentemadartem,aliamadartificemperquamcompatieturlaboremvenientemexoperatione”(afterburnett1995,278–279).InNicomachean Ethics 1176a4–29,Aristotlewritesaboutthedifferentkindsofpleasurepertainingtodifferentactivitiesofanimalsaswellashumans,butwithoutdelvingintothesubtledistinctionsoperatedbyTheodore.

25 Peculiarly,Theodorethenavoidsspecifyingthepleasurespertainingtothepriest:“Delectatioautempertinensartisacerdotissatisnotaest”.Thereisreasontowonderwhetherthiswassimplyanironicalstatement,orwhetheroneshouldseeinthisaproofoftherejection,intheimperialmilieu,oftheautonomy(orevenexistence)ofaspiritualauthorityotherthanthatofthesovereign(seeboocassini 2003,200–220;389–440).

26 “Delectatiophilosophipertinensproprieartisueestcomprehenderequodabintellectusuononevadatquicquidpotesthumananaturacomprehenderepernobiliusargumentumetdiffinitionemquaevocaturdemonstratio,etquandoloqueturveritatemdicet,etmentientemscietarguere.Reliquaautemdelectatioquaeappropriatureiestimaginarequodestinmotusuoetinquieteetindispositione.Consequituridquodrapueratvirtusrationalis,maximeinregiminedominationisetininventioneciviliumlegum,cuiusperfectioindigetauxiliodominii;namphilosophiaindigetdominiocuiindecetvirtuositatemsuam.Delectatioautempertinensartisacerdotissatisnotaest.Delectatioveromilitispertinensartisue<est>imaginareinimicosvincere,quodconsequiturpopulidefensioetnontollerantiainiuriae.Reliquadelectatioadipsumpertinensestimaginarevictoriaminludoinstrumentorumbellietinarmis.[…]Delectatioautemregispertinensregnosuoestimaginarequodpreceptumsuumsittransitivuminovilesuumsecundumintentionemsuam,etquoddiligaturetquodtimeaturasuishominibusetaconvicinissuisproutpotest.Reliquadelectatioeipertinensestspeciesvenationissecundumsuamdiversitatem,cuiusnobiliorparsestavicareaves.”(afterburnett1995,279–280,and283fortheEnglish;myemphasis).

381

Thepleasuresofthephilosopher

(1a) pertaining to his proper art“istounderstandthatwhateverhumanna-turecanunderstanddoesnotescapefromhisintellect,throughthemostnobleargu-mentanddefinition,whichiscalleddem-onstration,andthatwheneverhespeaks,hewilltellthetruth,andthathewillknowhowtoprovethatsomeoneislying”.

(1b)which pertains to himself“istoimaginewhatathingisinitsmovement,itsrestanditsdisposition.Therefollowsthatwhichtherationalvirtuehadseized–especiallyintheman-agementofrulershipandinthedrawing-upofcivillaws–whoseperfectingneedsthehelpoftherulingpower;forphilosophyneedsarulingpowerwhichitsvirtuousstatebefits”.

“Thepleasurepertainingtotheartofthepriestiswellenoughknown”.

Thepleasuresofthesoldier

(2a) pertaining to his art“istoimaginedefeatinghisenemies,whichresultsinthedefenceofthepeopleandtheintoleranceofinjustice”.

(2b)which pertains to himself“istoimaginevictoryinthegameofinstrumentsofwar[i.e.chess]andinarms(or:evenwhenun-armed)”.

Thepleasuresoftheking

(3a) pertaining to his ruling“istoimaginethathiscommandisaffectinghisflockaccordingtohisintention,andthatheislovedandfearedbyhispeopleandhisneighboursasfaraspossible”.

(3b)pertaining to himself“isthekindsofhunting according to their diversity, of which the noblest part is to hunt with birds”(hereandelsewhereinthistableemphasismine).

Aswecansee,inallcasesexceptthefirstandthelast,pleasureisgeneratedbytheactof“imaginare”:aprojectionofthemind,whichintervenesupontheactivationoftheimagination,oneoftheinternalsensesaccordingtoAvicenna.Inotherwords:pleasuredependsonplayfulnessinanutterlyabstract,speculativesense(anAristotelianconcept,seeNicomachean EthicsX).Asforthefirstofthephiloso-pher’spleasures(1a),thetermemployedtodefineitis“comprehendere”,whileforthesecondoftheking’spleasures(3b)noverbisused.

WenowneedtolookmorecloselyatthedefinitionofpleasureTheodoregivesjustbeforeheproceedstoillustrateitwiththehelpoftheabove-mentionedspecificexamples:“Thedefinitionofpleasureis‘thegraspingholdoftheperfectionappropriatetothevirtuewhichisdoingthegrasping’”(“Diffinitiodelectationisestcomprehensioperfectionisconvenientisvirtuticomprehendenti”,afterburnett1995,279,283).Thekeytermishereobviously“comprehension”–thesamewordusedimmediatelyafterwardstointroducethepleasureofthephilosopherpertainingtohisart(1a).IsthisdefinitionofpleasureTheodore’sown,orishefollowinganestablishedauthority?AsIhavealreadymentioned,Theodore’stheoryofthe“double”pleasuresisentirelydependentuponaclosereadingofAristotle’stenthbookoftheNicomachean Ethics,aswellasotherAristoteliantreatises,whichasfarasweknowwerenotavailableinLatintranslationinthe1240s.27Andyet,thedefinitionofpleasureclosesttoTheodore’sisnottobefoundinAristotle’swritings,butratherinthoseofAristotle’smostauthoritativeEasterncommentator:IbnSīnāorAvicenna,withwhosewritingsTheodorehadbecomeacquaintedduringhisyearsofstudyinMosul(modernIraq),undertheguidanceofthegreatteacherKamālal-DīnibnYūnus.28

AmajordefinitionofpleasureistobefoundinAvicenna’sKitab al-ishārāt wat-Tanbihāt(Book of the Remarks and Admonitions),a“late,comprehensiveandmature”treatiseonultimatehappiness

27 ThisseemstoprovethatTheodorehadfamiliarizedhimselfwiththeseconceptsduringhisyearsofstudyinMosulandBaghdad.ButknowledgeofAristotle’sNicomachean EthicsatthecourtofFrederickIIwasnotexclusivelyTheodore’s;MichaelScot,comingfromToledo,wasalsoabsorbedbythecontentsofthisandotherAristoteliantreatises.HenceBurnett’senticinghypothesisthat“Theodoreattheveryleastwaspartofateamwhich,asidefromtranslatingAverroes’works,wasengagedincompletingatranslationoftheNichomachean EthicsandtheRhetorica”(burnett1995,242–245).

28 “Kamālal-DīnibnYūnus(1156–1242)was,byallaccounts,themostlearnedandsought-afterteacherintheIslamicworldofhisgeneration.[…]ItwasnotonlymathematicsthatTheodorelearntfromhim;healsostudiedtheworksofthephilosophersal-Fārābīandibn-Sīnā”(burnett 1995,231).

382

(inati1996,1),whichhadnotbeentranslatedintoLatinduringthe12th–13thcenturies,butwaswell-knownamongSufisandphilosophersoftheIslamicworld.HereAvicennastatesthat:

“Pleasureistheapprehension(idrāk)of,andfullarrivalat[attainmentof],thatwhich,accordingtotheapprehender,isaperfectionandagoodinasmuchasitissuch[…]Whateverisgoodinrelationtoacertainthingistheperfectionpropertothatthingandtowardwhichthatthingisinclinedduetoitsprimary[scil.natural]preparation.Everypleasuredependsontwothings:attainmentofaper-fectionthatisgoodandanapprehensionofthisperfectioninasmuchasitissuch”(inati1996,71).29

AsAvicenna’smoderntranslatorhasremarked,“Itisclearfromtheabovethatpleasurerequirestwonecessaryconditions:theapprehensionorawareness[knowledge]ofsomethingviewedbytheapprehenderasgood,andtheacquisitionorattainment[throughexperienceandeventuallyhabitus]ofthisgoodbytheapprehender”(inati1996,11,13).Consequently,itisequallyclearthatTheodorefocuseshisattentionontheapprehension(idrāk)factor(theonlycomponenthumanbeingscanstrivetoachieve),whilefleetinglyreferringtotheattainment,whichdependsontheinterventionoftheActiveIntellect,asTheodorehimselfstates,againinaccordancewithAvicenna’sviews.30

Withregardtoidrāk,Avicennagivesverycircumstantialinformationaboutthisactivity,whichfostersperceptionandapprehensionbothattheexternallevelofthesenses,andattheinternallevelofrationalorintellectualunderstanding.Themechanismworksbywayofaninnerrepresentationoftheobjectorperfectiontobeapprehended,asittakesplaceattheleveloftheimaginativefaculty.Whatismore,fortheapprehensiontointervene,theinnerimageoftheobjectorperfectionisnotonlysufficientbut,asweshallseeinamoment,absolutelydecisive,while“thepresenceoftheexternalobjectisnotnecessaryforproducingtheperfection”(inati 199613;emphasismine).

Now,TheodorebuildshisentireargumenttodemonstratethenobilityoffalconrypreciselyontheAvicenniantheoryoftheworkingsoftheimagination.Tounderstandandtoimagineare,inhisview,virtuallysynonymous:oneunderstandsthroughimagining,andtheimaginativeactivityisinturnthepleasurableandplayfulprocessthathelpstherealizationoftheperfectionoroftheactintheindividual.“Comprehendere”maybedeemedasslightlynoblerthan“imaginare”inthatitallowsforahigherdegreeofabstractionandclosenesstopureintellectionassuch–henceTheodoreusesitonlyinrelationtothepleasureofthephilosopherpertainingtotheartofphilosophizing.ButAvicennahadalreadyclarifiedthereasonwhyaplayfulactivityfulfillsthepurposeofinvolvingtheimagina-tioninawaythatdirectlyrelatestoandsomehowsimulates(or,wewouldsay,“projects”)theobjecttobeapprehendedinanintermediatedimension–theimaginalrealm–whichisthereforeofcardinalimportancefortheattainmentofperfectiontointervene:

“Whenwewanttoknowsomethingandthesoulreadiesitselftoreceivesuchknowledgefromtheagentintellectbyputtinganendtothehindrancesthatareofimpedimenttoitssearch,theprepara-

29 Tr.inati 1996,71.Inthe9thBookofhisMetaphysics (whichsoonbecamewell-knownintheWestaswell) Avicennadiscussespleasureintermsthatarequiteclosetothese,butIcouldnotfindthereanequallystraightforwarddefinitionofpleasure.ItisofcourseentirelypossiblethatAvicennamayhavegivenvarioussimilardefinitionsofpleasure(“delectatio”)inotherworksofhis.Thiswouldrequirefurtherresearch.

30 OntheactivityoftheAgentIntellectinrelationtothesoulthatismoreorlesspreparedtoreceiveitsflux,Avicennastates:“theAgentIntellectiseternallyagentanditsactionisunwaveringwhenthereceivingmatterisappropriatelypreparedtoreceiveitsflux.Andthat,inanyhumanbeingwhatsoever.Itisthereforenecessarythathumansstrivetoattainthatpreparationinthislife”(Kitāb al-Ta’līqāt[Livre desGloses] asquotedinmichot1986,107n.;mytranslationfromFrenchtoEnglish).HereiswhereProvidentialNaturehasintroducedpleasureasamoreproductivewaytoachievethatstateofhigherrealization,asopposedtoeffortonly,whichwouldweardownthesoulandcauseittodespairofattainingitsgoal–suchagoalbeingthepreparation of the groundinviewofatransmissionwhichcomesfromtheactionoftheAgentIntellect.AllofthisisquiteremotefromAristotle’sviewsoftheworkingsofpleasure,giventhatthetheoryoftheAgentIntellectisspecificallyAvicennian.SeealsoIshārāt(Admonitions)8.10:“ifyouareinthebodywithitspreoccupationsandattachments,andyoudonotdesireyourproperperfectionandarenotpainedbythepresenceoftheoppositeofthisperfection,youmustknowthatthisisduetoyouandnottothisperfection,andthatinyoutherearecausesofthis”(inati1996,75).

383

tionbecomesbefittingtothereception.Thisiswhy,insuchcases,westrivetobusytheimaginativefaculty(khayāliyya)soastopreventitfromhamperingtheprocess.So,forexample,whenwewishtoinvestigateaquestionpertainingtogeometry,webusytheimaginativefacultywiththefiguresofsaidquestion,whichwetraceoutforit,sothatitdoesnotturntowardsomethingelseandbe-comeahindrance.[…]Thelearningprocessisaccomplishedbyoccupyingtheimaginationandthesenseswithsomethingsimilartothatwhichconcernsthethought,soasnottohinderthesoulinitssearch.Cogitationconsistsinthis:thesoulbusiesitsfaculties[vegetative,sensitive,rational]withsomethingakintowhatitislookingfor,soastocarryoutthegroundworknecessaryforittoreceivetheformitislookingforfromthegiverofforms[theAgentIntellect]”(Kitāb al-Ta’līqāt [NotesonAristotle’sDe anima],astranslatedfromArabicintoFrenchbymichot1986,106–107n.;mytranslationintoEnglish).

FalconryasthenoblestofallhuntingartsisthusunderstoodbyTheodoreasoneofthepleasurableactivitieswhichabsorbtheimaginationandoccupyitwithanintermediatetemplate(neitherwhollyphysicalnorentirelyabstract,yetpartakingofbothdimensions)oftheperfectionthemindisstrivingtoachieve(or,rather,toreceivefromthe“giverofforms”).

IneachandallofthecasesdiscussedbyTheodore(thephilosopher,thewarrior,theruler)thedelectatioorpleasurableactivityisanimaginative,playfulpursuitwhichsucceedsinrestingthemind(asAdelardhadstated)andinproductivelyentertainingtheimagination(asAvicennahadobserved)byfollowingitsownrulesandprinciples,thusfacilitatingtheindividuationprocess,theenactmentoftheparticularkindofperfectioneachindividualisengagedin.31Yetatthesametimethe“imagin-ing”specifictotheartoffalconryalsosimulates,projectsandenactstheprocessofintellectionitself.Thisistheveryprocesswhereby,accordingtoancientphilosophy,thehumanmindreachesitsownsummum bonumandultimateperfection,andindoingsocomestoexperienceaninexpressibledelectatioorvoluptas intellectualis:thefelicityofunionwiththeAgentIntellect,ortheworldoftheintelligibles.VirtuallyalloftheAristotelianswhoinEuropeduringthe13thandearly14thcenturiescametoconsiderthemselvesphilosopherselaboratedonthetheoryofthesummum bonum,eventotheriskoftheirlifeinviewoftheChurch’sradicalcondemnationoftheirpositions(corti1983;De libera1991).InthewordsofEgidiusofOrleans,oneoftheParisso-called“radicalAverroists”,orupholdersofthepre-eminenceofphilosophyasthetrueaccomplishmentofthehumanexperienceonearth:“happinessconsistsintheoperationorcontemplationaccordingtowisdomormetaphys-ics,pertainingtothesupremeobjects,suchasgodandtheother[entities]separate[frommatter]”(“felicitasconsistitinoperationevelcontemplationesecundumsapientiamvelmetaphysicam,queestdeoptimisobiectis,sicutdedeoetaliisseparatis”(Q. in Ethic.I,11[ms.Paris,BNlat.16089,f.197rb],quotedfrombianchi1990,182).ThiswasinfacttheultimatequarryinwhosepursuitEmperorFrederickIIandhisphilosophers,asWesternheirsandtransmittersoftheancientidealtheyhadreceivedfromtheIslamicworld,weresingle-mindedlyengaged.But,asAvicennahadwarned,thesuccessofsuchapursuitwasdependentonone’sownrigorousinnertrainingmuchmorethanontheillusionofouterchasing–alessonhardtolearnforhumanbeingsingeneral,andforrulersinparticular.

31 Theodore,andAvicennabeforehim,elaborateatheoryofplayfulnessaspleasureleadingtoapsychologicalstatethatmakestheindividualreceptivetotheteachingsoftheAgentIntellect,orinanycase,closertoreachingtheperfectionoftheirfunction.IamawarethattheseissuesdeservetobeanalyzedinafardeepermannerthanIcandohere.TheperspectiveofplayasafunctionofcultureisoutlinedbyHuizingathroughthehomo ludenstheory(huizinga1955).

384

falconry, inner training, anD courtly love: recovering the feminine through the imagination

HavingfollowedTheodore’sreasoningthisfar,onelastsurpriseawaitsus:hisprologuestatesthatfalconry,asthenoblestformofhunting,istheimaginativeactivitypertainingnottothewarrior,asthemajorityoftheEuropeanaristocratsofthetimewouldlikelyhavethought(andpossiblymostofuswiththem),butrathertotheruler,whoseroleinsocietyTheodoreseversfromthatofthemanofarms.Falconry,inotherwords,isintendedtoprojectinthepsychicdimensionnotthedynamicsinherenttotheartofwarring(pursuitandaggression),butratherthosebelongingtotheartofruling(reciprocalacceptanceandtraining,ifnottaming)–whichinturn,accordingtoTheodore’sviews,aredeeplyrelatedtotheartofrightfullyjudgingandlegislating,befittingthephilosopherinhiscapacityasadvisortotheruler.Asburnettrightlypointedout,here«wehaveanechoofthePlatonicidealofthePhilosopher-King»(1995,274).WhileintheWesternworldofthetimethispairingremaineduniquetothecourtofFrederickII,alreadyinthe12thcenturyapoetlikeChrétiendeTroyeshadsuggestedtohisreaders,aswehaveseen,thedeepconnectionbetweenfalconryandsovereigntyasacourtlyandsapientialalternativetothetraditional,stillpredominantcouplingofrulingandhuntingasvenery.32

Toconclude,letusbrieflylookintotheprinciplespertainingtofalconryunderstoodastheroyalartoftrainingandtaming,andtoitsfar-reachingculturalimplications.AsFrederickIIstatedinhisowntreatise,onedoesnotundertakefalconryforthepurposeofcapturinggame;rather,thisoughttoberegardedasanalmostaccidentaloutcomeofaprocesscenteredontheartof“manning”theraptor.Itisinthisperspectivethatfalconryrevealsitselfakintotheartofrulingasintrinsicallydifferentfromtheartofwarring:whatfalconryandrulingshareistheprojectoftransformingtheinstinctualpredatoryresponseofawildcreaturebysubmittingittoaneducation,toasetofpreceptsandbehavioralpracticesaimedatachievingahighercontrolofone’sownnature.Thisistheessenceoftheartof(self-)training,whichheedlesshumanbeingsdeludethemselvesinbelievingtobeaone-wayprocess,fromhumantoraptor.Accomplishedtrainers(andrulers),however,knowbetter.Basedontheirdirectexperienceevenmorethanontheprinciplesofthearttheyhavecometoidentifywith,theyseethatthesubtleartoftrainingawildbirdisnothingbutamirror,inwhichtheimageoftheirownbeingisconstantlyreflectedalongwiththatoftheraptor.Asisthecaseinalltraditionalarts,asuccessfulmasteryoftheprinciplesbelongingtofalconryinvolvesaconstantdoubleprocess:thetransformationaffectsthetraineraswellasthetrained,andiseffectedonthetrainerbythetrainedjustasmuchasthereverse.Norulercanhopetoachievetruemasteryoverhis(wild)fellowcreaturesandhopetoennobletheirbehavior,untilheorshehasachievedfullknowledgeof,andmasteryover,themechanismswhichgovernhisorherowninstinctualbehaviour.WhileFrederickIIhadbecomewellawareofthisuniversaltruththroughhispracticeoffalconry,mostWesternrulersofhistimeneverdid.

32 InFranceinparticular,venerywastoremaintheformofhuntsymbolicofroyalpowerandsupremacyuntiltheendofthe16thcentury.ThehumanistGuillaumeBudéevenattemptedaLatinrenderingofthetechnicaltermsandpracticesofveneryinhisDe philologiaforthebenefitofhispupil,theyoungkingFrancisI.Whilethiswritingwasintendedasaculturalexperiment,thereisnotraceinitofpreciselythekindofconversionthroughacculturationthatwastheaimoffalconryasimportedandpracticedbyFrederickII.“SoastoconvinceFrancisI,andwithhimtheFrencharistocracy,ofthelegitimacyofanantiquarianapproachtoknowledge(understoodasanessentialaspectofpower),BudéfindshimselfforcedtoprovethatLatinisalinguistictoolthatcanbeadaptedtofitthehabitsoftheFrenchnobility,andmostspecificallyitspreferredsport.WecangaugeherethepricethatHumanismhadtopaytothearistocracyandtheirtraditionalvalues:inordertofulfillthedreamofliteracy,BudéhadtoshowthekinghowLatinitycouldconversewithhuntersandspeakelegantlyandappropriatelyintheirgatherings”(boccassini 2009,212,heretranslatedinEnglish).Aswecanseefromthisrevealingexample,thereisnoquestionthatforcenturiesWesternsovereignsremainedfaithfultothetraditionalconnectionruling-warring-huntingsoharshlycriticizedbyJohnofSalisburyandloathedbyFrederickII.

385

KingGallacianushadsaidtokingDancusthatthekernelofhiswisdomresidedintheartofknowinghowtohaveabirdcatchanotherone(“facitisunamavemcaperealiam”).Man’sdesiretopursueandcaptureaflyingcreature–maybe,atadeeperlevel,asameanstoidentifywithit–cannotbesatis-fiedbyemployingthehumanphysicalorgansastheyare.Therehastointerveneadifferentprocess,theestablishmentofarelationshipwithintermediarybirdsthroughwhoseinnateabilitiesmanmaybecomeablevicariouslytoappropriatethatelusivealterity.Huntinginthiswaybecomesessentiallyanactoftheimagination:aspeculativeprocess,whichmirrorsman’sdesiretoattainthecelestialdimensionor,inAristotelianlanguage,theperfection,ofeverythingthatmanifestsattheearthlylevel.Aboveall,itisthedesiretoreunitewiththemostelusivepartofoneself,thewingedmysteryofone’sownsoul.Initsclaimtogenerate“sapientiam”,falconryisintrinsicallyacontemplative“scientia”,andapowerfullytransformativeoneatthat;itssubtlewisdomandarcaneproceduresaremoreakintothe“magical”esotericarts(suchasalchemy,geomancyandtheartsofthequadrivium)thantoanyessoterictechniquedirectedatthemanipulationofmatterinviewofachievingman’sutilitarianmasteryoverit.Falconry,inotherwords,isaninitiatoryart,whichteachesthevoluntarysideoftheselfhowtorelatetothepowersofitswild,unconsciousside.Elusiveandrapacious,yetnobleandexpansive,thosepowersaretrainableinviewofachievingatrulyrevelatoryresult:bylearninghowtoreachouttoandintothewild,thehumanmindopensitselftotheawarenessofitsownuntamedandultimatelyuntamable,yetutterlytrainable,innermostself.

Itiscertainlynotbychancethat,throughpathsentirelyindependentofFrederickII’sethico-politicalproject,falconrybecameassociatedwith,andiconicof,therefinementsofcourtlyloveandofalloftheethicalandpsychologicalsubtletiessucha“game”implied.Inthatimaginalplayofprojectionsandintrojectionsthelover,apparentlyengagedinthetamingofabelovedseeminglydistantandaloof,infactaccededtothesacredinnerspacewheretherecoveryofarelationshipwithhisownsoulandtheanima mundi(ortheAgentIntellect,the“giverofforms”)becamepossibleinawayotherthanthatcodifiedbytheestablishednormsofChristianspirituality.The(re)discoveryoftheancient/newknowledgecontainedinthevastcorpusoftheso-calledAristotelianphilosophywasoccurringatthesametime,andmoreoftenthannotinthesamesocialspacesandgeographicalareas,wheretheeducationofthelovertoandthroughfalconry-liketrainingprocesseswastakingplace.Thepassionwithwhichitwasmetincultivatedmilieusimmenselyfacilitatedthisprocessofpsychicrediscoveryandgrowth,inwhichtheindividualandthecollectivefacesoftheWesternidentitysoonbecameequallyengaged.

Thesubjectistoovastandcomplextobediscussedhereasfullyasitdeserves,soIwilllimitmyselftoafew,sketchyremarks,harkingbacktoChrétien’snarrativeofErecandEnide’sadventures.Aswesawearlier,the“falconryprinciple”whichErecintrojectsviahisfortuitous(butalsofatedandhencefatal)discoveryofthelandwhereYder’spursuittookhim,andviahissubsequentmarriagewithEnide,inescapablyleadstoanarduousethicaltrainingofbothspouses,basedonaself-sacrificialdynamicandthetestingoftheirmutuallove.Farfrombeingasterilegoalinitself,thisdoubletrainingrevealsitselfasapowerful,fecundeducationaltool,wherebytheold(masculine)axiomofaggressionandcoerciontransmutesintothenew(feminine)principleofbondingbothattheinnerandattheouterlevel.ItispreciselytheaccomplishmentofsuchaprocessofinnertransmutationwhicheventuallyleadsErecandEnideasacoupletoembodyfortheirlandandtheirpeoplethemanifestationofanewsovereignty,anewrule,anewwisdom.

WhileKingArthur’sdevotiontovenery(intheformofthetraditionalhuntforthewhitestag)standsfortheactive,conqueringandmasculineaspectsofman’srelationshiptotheworld,Erec’ssubmissiontothecontemplative,unarmedpresencetotheworldofQueenGuinevrealreadyan-nounceshisfatefuldevotiontothefeminine,transformative,wisdom-seekingprincipleembodiedbythefalconpeacefullyperchedonthefalconer’sfist.WhatErecandEnidewerepoeticallyofferingtotheWesternsovereignswasthatsame(re)integrationofthefeminineaspectoftheworld-soulwithin

386

thesphereofhumanawarenesswhichEmperorFrederickIItriedtoachieveby(re)integratingtheartoffalconryaswellastheruleoflaw.

Intheearly14thcenturyDanteAlighieriwastoachieveyetanotherlevelofinnerexpansionbyconsciouslyidentifyingthecosmicwayfarerofhisCommediawiththefigureofthefalconjoyouslysubmittingtothehandofthedivinely-sentfalconer:

“Quale’lfalcon,cheprimaa’pièsimira,|indisivolgealgridoesiprotende|perlodisiodelpastochelàiltira,|talmifec’io;etal,quantosifende|larocciaperdarviaachivasuso,|n’andaiinfindove’lcerchiarsiprende”(alighieri,Pg19,64–69).“Justlikeafalcon,whoatfirstlooksdown,|then,whenthefalconerhascalled,bendsforward,|cravingthefoodthat’sreadyforhimthere,|SoIbecame,andsoremaineduntil|Throughthecleftrockthatletsoneclimbabove,|Ireachedthepointatwhichthecirclestarts”(TranslationA.Mandelbaum).

AsIhaveextensivelyargued(boccassini2003,335–388;2007;2010),theprincipalobjectiveoftheCommediaistosavehumankindfromitsself-imposedandultimatelyself-defeatingrapaciousness.DantecametoespousesuchanobjectivenotleastthroughhisrepeatedcontactswiththeGhibellinecourtsofNorthernItaly,whosefalconersweretheonlyheirs,howeverresidual,toFrederickII’shighaccomplishmentsintheart.Inotherwords,Dantecametoseeinfalconrythesymbolmostapttoexpressthatprocessofinnertraining,surrenderandultimatetamingofanindividual’sownnaturewhichculminatesinthewilful,knowingreturnofthewingedcreature(andhenceofthesoul)tothatvery“hand”onwhoseuniversalfistthewholeworldisunknowinglyperched.ForDante,noartbetterthanfalconrycouldconveythesenseofthatsacrificialinnertransmutationnecessaryforhumanconsciousnesstoawakentothevisionofitselfasapurereflectionofthetranscendentalsourceofall-encompassinglove.Nootherartcouldaspowerfullyexpressthepotentialforuniversalsalvationinscribedwithinaprocessmeanttomakehumanconsciousnesscognizantofitsowndivineorigin–ofitsownparticipationin,andbelongingto,theverysubstanceofferedbythefalconertothefalconasitsonlyrightfulmeal,asthat“breadofangels”DantehadalreadyevokedintheopeningpagesoftheConvivio:purelycelestialfood,onwhichlifeitselfunsuspectinglykeepsfeeding(boccassini2007,171).

Seventoeighthundredyearslater,ourWesternpsycheisstillcaughtinthedilemmaofwhethertofollowKingArthur’sleadinarecklesspursuitofthewhitestag,orwhethertolisten,likeErecandDante,totheenigmaofthatinnervastnesswhichiscallingustotrainsoastolearnhowtobetrained;totamesoastobecometamed;toaccepttobeknownsoastolearnwhererealknowledgetrulyabides.

literature

alighieri: D. alighieri, DivinaCommedia.BoththeItalianoriginalandtheMandelbaumtranslationcanbeaccessedathttp://dante.ilt.columbia.edu/comedy/index.html

aDelarD: aDelarD of bath, ConversationswithhisNephew.OntheSameandtheDifferent.QuestionsonNaturalScienceandOnBirds.Ed.Ch.BurnettandI.Ronca,P.MantasEspaña,B.VandenAbeele(Cambridge1998).

aristotle, NichomacheanEthics:Englishtranslationavail-ableathttp://catalog.perseus.org/catalog/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg010,andW.D.Ross’stranslation:http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.10.x.html.

aristotle, Metaphysics:EnglishtranslationbyHughTre-dennickavailableathttp://catalog.perseus.org/catalog/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg025.

benoist 2007:A.debenoist, Spiritualauthorityandtem-poralpower.In:TYR. Myth,Culture,Tradition.3vols(Atlanta2007–2008).Digitalversionaccessibleat:https://ia601602.us.archive.org/6/items/SpiritualAuthorityTem-poralPower/SpiritualAuthorityTemporalPower.pdf)

bianchi 1990: l. bianchi,Ilvescovoeifilosofi.Lacon-dannapariginadel1277el’evoluzionedell’aristotelismoscolastico(Bergamo1990).

boccassini 2003:D.boccassini,Ilvolodellamente.Fal-coneriaesofianelmondomediterraneo:Islam,FedericoII,Dante(Ravenna2003).

boccassini2007:D.boccassini,FalconryasaTransmuta-tiveArt:Dante,FrederickIIandIslam.DanteStudies125,2007(2009),157–182.

387

boccassini 2009: D. boccassini, ChasseetfauconnerieduMoyenAgeàlaRenaissance:lesrecueilscynégétiquesfrançais.In:J.McClelland/B.Merrilees(eds.),SportandCultureinEarlyModernEurope(Toronto2009)199–226.

boccassini2010:D.boccassini,L’orachevolgeildisio:ComparativeHermeneuticsofDesireinDanteand‘Attār.In:M.Gragnolati/T.Kay/E.Lombardi(eds.),DesireinDanteandtheMiddleAges(Oxford2012)29–44.

burnett 1995:Ch.burnett,MasterTheodore,FrederickII’sPhilosopher.In:FedericoIIelenuoveculture.Spoleto:CISAM,vol.3,225–285.

chrétien De troyes: Romans(Paris1994).Englishtransla-tionbyW.W.Comfort,accessibleathttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/831/831-h/831-h.htm#linknoteref-11

corti 1983: m. corti, Lafelicitàmentale.NuoveprospettiveperCavalcantieDante(Torino1983).

Dancus: Dancusrex,Guillelmusfalconarius,Gerardusfalconarius.Lesplusancienstraitésdefauconneriedel’Occidentpubliésd’aprèstouslesmanuscritsconnus:Ed.G.Tilander(Lund1963).

De libera 1991: a. De libera, PenserauMoyenAge(Paris1991).

Dobiat 2013:C.Dobiat, EarlyfalconryincentralEuropeonthebasisofgravefinds,withadiscussionoftheoriginsoffalconry.In:grimm/schmölcke 2013,343–356.

eliaDe 1965:M.eliaDe, Lesacréetleprofane(Paris1965).

fassò 2003:A.fassò, Ilsognodelcavaliere.ChrétiendeTroyeselaregalità(Roma2003).

fischer 2013: t. fischer, HuntingintheRomanperiod.In:grimm/schmölcke 2013,259–266.

galloni 1993: P. galloni, Ilcervoeillupo.CacciaeculturanobiliarenelMedioevo(Bari1993).

giese 2013: m. giese, Legal regulationsonhunting inthebarbarianlawcodesoftheEarlyMiddleAges.In:grimm/schmölcke 2013,485–504.

grimm/schmölcke 2013: o. grimm/u. schmölcke(eds.),HuntinginNorthernEuropeuntil1500AD.Oldtradi-tionsandregionaldevelopments,continentalsourcesandcontinentalinfluences.Schr.Arch.Landesmus.Ergbd.7(Neumünster2013).

hasse 2008:D.N.hasse, TheEarlyAlbertusMagnusandhisArabicSourcesontheTheoryoftheSoul.Vivarium46,2008,232–252.

huizinga,1955: J. huizinga, Homoludens.Astudyoftheplay-elementinculture (Boston1955).

inati 1996:S.inati, IbnSīnāandMysticism.RemarksandAdmonitionsPartFour(London,NewYork1996).

John of salisbury: IoannisSaresberiensisEpiscopiCarnoten-sisPolicraticisiveDenugiscurialiumetvestigiisphiloso-phorumlibriVIII. Ed.C.I.Webb.,2vols(Oxford;rpt.Frankfurt1965).Englishtransl.byJ.B.Pikeavailableathttp://www.constitution.org/salisbury/policrat123.htm

maDDox 1978:D.maDDox, StructureandSacring:theSys-tematicKingdominChrétien’s“ErecetEnide”(Lex-ington1978).

manDalà 2011: g. manDalà, IlfalconierediOgödey,igi-ardinidelMinseelecolombediFedericoII.Frammentidistoriaaviariasiciliana.In:Memoria,storiaidentità(Palermo2011)437–457.

michot 1986:J.R.michot, Ladestinéedel’hommeselonAvicenne.LeretouràDieu(ma’ad)etl’imagination(Lou-vain1986).

Prummel 2013: w. Prummel, Falconryincontinentalset-tlementsasreflectedbyanimalbonesfromthe6thtothe12thcenturiesAD.In:grimm/schmölcke 2013,357–377.

rooney1993:A.rooney, HuntinginMiddleEnglishLit-erature (Cambridge1993).

schmölcke 2013: u. schmölcke,TheevidenceforhuntingdogsfromMesolithictimesuptotheVikingAgefromazoologicalpointofview–asurvey.In: grimm/schmölke 2013, 175–183.

servier 1994:J.servier, L’hommeetl’invisible(vol.1);Lestechniquesdel’invisible (vol.2)(Monaco1994).

van Den abeele 1994: b. van Den abeele, LafauconnerieauMoyenAge(Paris1994).

vretemark 2013:M.vretemark,TheVendelPeriodroyalfollower’sgraveatSwedishRickebyasstartingpointforreflectionsaboutfalconryinNorthernEurope.In:grimm/schmölcke 2013,379–386.

zug tucci1983:H.zug tucci, Lacaccia,dabenecommuneaprivilegio.In:Storiad’ItaliaAnnali,vol.6.Economianaturaleeeconomiamonetaria(Torino1983)397–445.

Prof.Dr.DanielaBoccassiniFrench,HispanicandItalianStudiesUniversityofBritishColumbia,[email protected]

isbn 978-3-529-01490-1 · 9 783529 014901 isbn 978-3-529-01490-1 raptor and human – falconry and...

Documents