Miracle et Karama: Hagiographies medievales comaprees.

• Author: Melchert, Christopher
• Position: Book Review

Miracle et Karama: Hagiographies medievales comparees, 2. Edited by DENISE AIGLE. Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes sciences religieuses, vol. 109. Turnhout, Belgium: BREPOLS, 2000. Pp. 690. E 78.

This thick volume presents twenty-five papers from a CNRS colloquium, "Le saints et leurs miracles a travers I'hagiogra-phie chretienne et islamique, [IV.sup.[subset]]--[XV.sup.[subset]] siecles," held at Ivrysur-Seine, 23-25 November 1995. Presumably, there was some opportunity for revision before publication, as bibliographic references run to 1998. The distribution among Latin, Byzantine, and Middle Eastern is roughly 8:4:12.

Andre Vauchez, "Le miracle dans la chretiente occidentale au Moyen Age entre vie sociale et experience religieuse," observes that healing and the revival of children are by far the most common category of miracles in Latin lives of saints (confirmed by Auzefy and Krotzl, among others; also in Byzantine, according to Deroche). Most were posthumous, too. This seems a surprising contrast with the Islamic side, where the miraculous provision of food and water or other material goods, alongside hearing voices and seeing visions, seem the most common miracles. Sofia Boesch Gajano, "Experiences, temoignages, recits: Le miracle entre l'antiquite tardive et le haut Moyen Age," is a slight survey based on secondary sources that does helpfully identify some aspects of increasing ecclesiastical control over miracle literature, particularly the identification of elements required to authenticate miracles.

Marc Van Uytfanghe, "Pertinence et statut du miracle dans I'hagiographie merovingienne (600-750)" is three times longer than average at 78 pages, but it is easy to read, close to the primary sources, and historical. Van Uytfanghe observes that there is only one posthumous miracle in the Bible (the revival at Elisha's tomb, 2 Kings 19), suggesting that the predominance of posthumous miracles was not an effect of Christian writers' most obvious literary model. That miracle literature exploded only in the period 600-750 likewise suggests that biblical models were not crucial, inasmuch as they had been around from the first century. An odd theme of much Merovingian literature is disbelief in miracles and its punishment. For a time, Muslims, too, debated over the miracles of the saints, the [Mu.sup.[subset]]'tazilah doubting while the [Asha.sup.[subset]]irah upheld them; yet such stories of saints as I recall seldom treat skepticism (as distinct from theological heresy).

Vincent Deroche, "Tensions et contradictions dans les recueils de miracles de la premiere epoque byzantine," begins with a seventh-century saint's refusing orders from two angels. Sometimes, Byzantine saints might successfully negotiate with God--startling presumption, one thinks at first, but recall the Prophet's reported prayer before the battle of Badr...