In His Own Hands: Autonomy in the Legend of Theophilus

Looking at stories that embodied medieval values, there are none that do it so well as the "Legend of Theophilus," the story of a man who, after making a contract with the Devil to regain his lost status in his community, prays to Mary to save him from his sins. After Theophilus's extended repentance, Mary agrees to retrieve his contract and ultimately saves him from damnation. While the Virgin is the one who retrieves the contract from the Devil, seemingly saving Theophilus, it is actually Theophilus who is the most present in his salvation. By comparing two different scenes that mirror one another, those of homage and prayer, one theme in particular pervades into every version of the legend: the autonomy of Theophilus when returning to Christianity, and God. Autonomy, an idea that became increasingly pronounced in medieval texts, requires the sinner to set in motion his or her own salvation. In the legend, Theophilus first "saw the error of this ways [that had] cast him for the future into everlasting fires" and then chooses to return to the church to repent (Malmesbury 17). Theophilus's salvation is not driven by repentance, which can be perceived as the physical presence before the Virgin accompanied by sobbing and fasting, but the realization of sins and the following decision to repent for them. The emphasis on self-determination can be observed in the legend of Theophilus by comparing Theophilus's interaction with the Devil to interactions with Mary. These scenes, in both written and visual media, are rich with information and insight. They offer the viewer an idea of the battle between good and evil, not only from the Devil and the Virgin, but also within Theophilus. While the contract with the Devil in the legend of Theophilus can be accomplished through coercion, Theophilus's choice, or a mix of the two - this is not the case when Theophilus prays to the Virgin Mary. When Theophilus prays to Mary, he is not pushed nor compelled by the divine to return to Godliness. It is his own reflection of his past that guides him to Mary. Theophilus chooses his fate, he chooses repentance and this is why he is revered. Analyzing each version of every homage and prayer scene would be overwhelming. Luckily, by narrowing the focus and looking exclusively at the hands of the characters in the legend, we can see our theme of self-determination develop. Therefore, through the depiction of hands, to a medieval society, Theophilus is the perfect example of how, regardless of our sins and how they occurred, the choice to return to Christianity is a portal to eternal salvation if only we set our mind and, as it turns out, our hands on it.

ABSTRACT Looking at stories that embodied medieval values, there are none that do it so well as the “Legend of Theophilus,” the story of a man who, after making a contract with the Devil to regain his lost status in his community, prays to Mary to save him from his sins. After Theophilus’s extended repentance, Mary agrees to retrieve his contract and ultimately saves him from damnation. While the Virgin is the one who retrieves the contract from the Devil, seemingly saving Theophilus, it is actually Theophilus who is the most present in his salvation. By comparing two different scenes that mirror one another, those of homage and prayer, one theme in particular pervades into every version of the legend: the autonomy of Theophilus when returning to Christianity, and God. Autonomy, an idea that became increasingly pronounced in medieval texts, requires the sinner to set in motion his or her own salvation. In the legend, Theophilus first “saw the error of this ways [that had] cast him for the future into everlasting fires” and then chooses to return to the church to repent (Malmesbury 17). Theophilus’s salvation is not driven by repentance, which can be perceived as the physical presence before the Virgin accompanied by sobbing and fasting, but the realization of sins and the following decision to repent for them. The emphasis on self-determination can be observed in the legend of Theophilus by comparing Theophilus’s interaction with the Devil to interactions with Mary. These scenes, in both written and visual media, are rich with information and insight. They offer the viewer an idea of the battle between good and evil, not only from the Devil and the Virgin, but also within Theophilus. While the contract with the Devil in the legend of ii Theophilus can be accomplished through coercion, Theophilus’s choice, or a mix of the two – this is not the case when Theophilus prays to the Virgin Mary. When Theophilus prays to Mary, he is not pushed nor compelled by the divine to return to Godliness. It is his own reflection of his past that guides him to Mary. Theophilus chooses his fate, he chooses repentance and this is why he is revered. Analyzing each version of every homage and prayer scene would be overwhelming. Luckily, by narrowing the focus and looking exclusively at the hands of the characters in the legend, we can see our theme of self-determination develop. Therefore, through the depiction of hands, to a medieval society, Theophilus is the perfect example of how, regardless of our sins and how they occurred, the choice to return to Christianity is a portal to eternal salvation if only we set our mind and, as it turns out, our hands on it. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS page TITLE PAGE i ABSTRACT ii – iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv INTRODUCTION 1–6 NO DEVILRY 7 – 10 HIS HANDS ARE TIED 11 – 16 HANDING OVER THE CONTRACT 17 – 24 GETTING THE UPPER HAND 25 – 30 DISCUSSION OF CONTRADICTIONS 31 – 35 CONCLUSION 36 – 37 SOURCES 38 – 40 CANDIDATE INFO 41 iv INTRODUCTION (1251 words) “The Legend of Theophilus” first appeared in Greek by Eutychianus in the sixth century (Root 3). This version of the legend established the timeframe and location, with it taking place in Adana around approximately 537 AD. However, this text lacked many of the elements for which it was known throughout the Middle Ages and for which the story is known today. The model of most popular versions that placed emphasis on emerging values in Christian society was translated into Latin from the Greek by Paul the Deacon, who lived from 720 to 799. This version of the legend, and the elements within the story, inspired at least a handful of notable written texts, some sculptures, many images, and countless stained glass panels in cathedrals; many of which are discussed here. In the story, there are five significant characters: Theophilus, the Jewish magician, the Devil, the Virgin Mary, and God. Theophilus is the protagonist of the story, a man who starts as well-regarded in his village. The Jew, the magician, is introduced when Theophilus is dismissed from his position and needs an intermediary to connect him to the Devil. The Devil is the negative force and the antagonist. The Virgin enters the scene when Theophilus repents, an intermediary, recovering the contract on behalf of Theophilus. God is occasionally addressed in the story and is the ultimate positive force. The legend in most texts begins with Theophilus, typically represented as a noble “vidame,” similar to a Church accountant. As he is seen as a good man in his village, he is offered the position of bishop but he refuses it out of humility. This decision normally leads to a second scene: Theophilus is dismissed from his post and is thrown into poverty. 1 Theophilus then seeks out a magician, normally a Jew, to put him in contact with the Devil. He meets with the Devil and agrees to renounce Jesus and Mary in exchange for riches. After enjoying his regained status, Theophilus sees the error of his ways and decides to repent in the church. With extended prayer and fasting before the statue of the Virgin Mary, she comes to him and eventually agrees to help recover his contract. The Virgin fights the Devil and returns the contract to Theophilus. In versions where the story continues, Theophilus gives the contract to the archbishop as proof of divine benevolence and his soul is brought to heaven by the Virgin at his death. Looking at the two most important scenes, the homage to the Devil and the prayer to the Virgin Mary, a distinct theme shines through: autonomy. In the legend, the idea of Theophilus’s autonomy in his salvation is the driving force for the ability of the Virgin to intervene on his behalf. It is present in every version of the legend from the written texts of Rutebeuf, Gautier de Coinci and Paul, to the manuscripts of Besançon, the stained glass of the Cathédrale de Beauvais, or the sculptures of Notre Dame de Paris. Even more interestingly, the hands in these scenes of the legend, both textually and visually, reflect the importance of autonomy. This can be observed when Theophilus’s hands are represented in the same manner in virtually every version of the legend. It is justifiable to use hands as a source of understanding for the story as they play a significant role in the legend. This can be easily observed in both the homage scenes, and non-homage scenes alike. For example, we can see the important role hands can play in a scene from the manuscript of Besançon. 2 For the sake of organization, I will analyze the following four separate ideas, and their corresponding images of Theophilus’s turn to evil through his homage to the Devil: a missing homage scene, the hands encircled by the Devil, the contract exchange from Theophilus to the Devil, and both hands and contract. Following the commentary of each scene with the Devil, I will then compare the scenes with the Virgin to demonstrate how Theophilus is able to reach evil many ways, but there is only one way to gain redemption: choosing to repent. When the scene of homage to the Devil is missing from the legend, the story puts all the emphasis on Theophilus’s prayer and the resulting actions of the Virgin. Even without familiarity of the legend, Theophilus in a position of prayer in the first section and the Virgin returning the contract in the following section demonstrate that it is Theophilus’s actions that invoke the Virgin. Therefore, even without the homage, Theophilus must use self-determination to choose repentance to the Virgin before he is saved. The Pierpont Morgan Psalter of Hours (1370) manuscript images will be addressed as an example of the missing homage scenes. When the hands of Theophilus are bound, seen in the sculptures at the North Transept Portal in the Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Paris (circa 1250), it signifies that the Devil is responsible for Theophilus’s downfall. With the clasping of hands and a lowered position, it is inferred that Theophilus has been pressured by the Devil to submit, giving the Devil a more active role in Theophilus's sin. The homage with encircled hands contrasts with the scenes of prayer to the Virgin, where Theophilus’s autonomy is clear. Theophilus's self-determination gives him power, something he lacked it in the scenes of homage, and is what allows the story to progress. 4 The overwhelming number of visuals present Theophilus and the Devil sharing responsibility for the contract, and simultaneously show Theophilus's submission with the Devil clasping his hands, such as in the stained glass images in the Cathédrale de Beauvais. The contract shows Theophilus’s culpability in his downfall while the hands being bound demonstrate that he has been compelled to submit as well. In some depictions, Theophilus appears to be a more willing participant, as when he writes the contract himself, than in others, where the contract is simply exchanged. However, despite the small differences, when comparing the homage scenes to the Virgin, the prayer is similar to past prayer scenes where Theophilus is not pressured into repenting. While Theophilus may either be compelled or guilty choosing the devil, it is only his autonomy that can invoke the Virgin and lead to his salvation. Finally, the exchange of the contract functions to show that Theophilus is responsible for his own demise. He is willing and engaged enough to realize the wrong of his actions but chooses to proceed. For these images, Theophilus’s turn to the Devil is his decision and in response, he must also choose to return to the Virgin. The scenes with the Virgin equally demonstrate autonomy in Theophilus’s choices, as seen in the St. Petersburg Miracles of the Virgin. For the sake of accuracy, multiple texts of the Theophilus legend will be used to establish the context in the visuals. In this paper, the primary sources are: Missing Scene: New York, Pierpont Morgan MS M.183, Psalter Hours, fol. 285v (1280s) 5 Hands Only: Paris, Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Paris, North Transept Portal: Sculpture in Stone of the Legend of Theophilus, (circa 1250) Hands and Contract: Beauvais, Cathédrale de Beauvais, East Right Window: “The Story of Theophilus,” (circa 1240) Contract Only: St. Petersburg, MS Fr F.v.XIV.9, Miracles de Nostre Dame, fol. 45v, (circa 1260–70) 6 Garnier, in Le langage de l’image au Moyen Age, "those who lift their hands show their strength of will” (Garnier 212). This combined with the more traditional significance of Theophilus’s joined hands, “prayer, adoration, a request, or an action of grace,” demonstrate Theophilus as the agent of his own salvation. The secondary depiction of hands is that of the Virgin as she places a hand on her heart in 2-B. In this second instance, the Virgin places her hand on her chest, indicating “sincerity, interiority, and acceptance” (Garnier 184). This is consistent with the depiction of the Virgin in the legend as she accepts Theophilus’s requests for pardon. This is supported by textual evidence found in Adgar, “they come to my church and plead to me, when they make their prayer to me from the heart, with complete faith, when they fast well, to all these I grant their prayers” (Adgar 556 – 560). Finally, in 2-C, the Virgin’s hand is extended above Theophilus while she returns his contract. This action has two significant meanings within the context of Theophilus’s story. She first returns the contract, reaching down towards Theophilus with the contract in hand. There appears to be moving action towards Theophilus, suggesting an offering or a warmer approach by the Virgin. Simultaneously, the position of a hand being held horizontally above someone signifies “protection” (Garnier 214). This reflects the Virgin’s benevolence and protection of one of her own, meaning Theophilus has been granted salvation. This image, and the hands within it, place particular focus on the Virgin as a reactionary component of Theophilus’s story. Theophilus is on his knees, hands forward to show his strength of will in his faith and a return to Christianity. She is touched by 8 Theophilus’s repentance which is exemplified by the hand on her chest and with the other hand, she offers the contract, and her protection, to Theophilus. It should be noted that there are additional images that line the side of the manuscript that do show the Devil. However, these images do stay consistent to the topic of this section. It is not Theophilus who interacts with the Devil or demons, but the Virgin. These supplementary images reinforce the themes found in the primary image that the Virgin reacts once Theophilus requests her assistance. A: B: C: 3: Pierpont Morgan Psalter (1280s), The Morgan Library & Museum. Purchased by J. Pierpont Morgan (1837–1913) in 1902, MS 183, fol. 285v In the margin images 3-A and 3-C, we see the Devil's minions surrounding the middle margin image, 3-B, where the Devil and the Virgin interact. These two images suggest that the Virgin is surrounded by evil forces, with demon heads reaching down in 3-A and marching demons below in 3-C. However, the demons are not a threat to the Virgin, as she places a noose around the Devil’s neck. These scenes instead point out the Virgin’s power. In 3-B, there are two significant images of hands. In the first, the Virgin stands over the Devil and holds him by a noose, a sign of his submission to the Virgin. In the 9 second, the Virgin and the Devil both have a hand on the contract. While the Virgin pulls the contract towards her, the Devil appears to be pushing it away, a sign of “submission to the decisions [of a superior] and the obedience of another’s orders” (Garnier 174). The two hands work together to give us an idea of the power struggle between them: the Devil has no strength against the Virgin. It is this emphasis on the interaction between Theophilus, with his prayer, and the Virgin that lets us understand that the Virgin Mary still needs a repenting Theophilus to react. While the Virgin is exceptionally powerful, seem in 3-B, Theophilus’s damnation is only reversed by his hands placed together before him, showing his autonomy in his prayer and repentance. Similar depictions of the legend, without the Devil’s contract exchange or Theophilus’s fall, can be found in the Baltimore Walters Book of Hours (1346) of Theophilus and the Virgin, the Paris Miracles of Notre Dame BNF Fr 22928, and the Theophilus Window in the Cathédrale de Chartres. In all of these versions, the images are missing Theophilus’s homage to the Devil but always include Theophilus’s prayer, on his knees with his hands before him to the Virgin Mary. These versions rely on Theophilus's prayer as a prerequisite to the actions of the Virgin, while Theophilus’s fall is left to the imagination. In all of these images, the salvation by the Virgin can only happen one way and the manuscript images of the Pierpont Morgan Psalter Hours clearly point this out: a sinner’s decision to repent is required before the Virgin can act to save. 10 HIS HANDS ARE TIED Some depictions of the Theophilus legend show interactions with the Devil, and occasionally with the “Jew,” that imply Theophilus has been pushed into his submission to the Devil. This can be shown through a lack of reciprocity with the contract, the Devil clasping Theophilus's hands while he is on his knees, and the Jew pushing Theophilus towards the Devil. While scenes of homage can leave Theophilus as a victim, the prayer to the Virgin always emphasizes the importance of Theophilus’s choice to repent. One of the scenes of the Theophilus legend that show Theophilus as a victim in his interactions with the Devil is found at the Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Paris. 4: Paris, Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Paris, North Transept Portal: Sculpture in Stone of the Legend of Theophilus, Panel 2 (1163-1268) At the North Transept Portal of the Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Paris (circa 1250), there is a stone carving of the Legend of Theophilus. These depictions show the legend where the Devil is clasping Theophilus's hands as they make their agreement. We also see the Jew pushing him forward with one hand and holding the contract with the other. This dominant body language with the Jew and the Devil show Theophilus is helpless in his interactions and is therefore, more a victim of the Devil’s manipulations 11 rather than a participant with free will. However, compared to the images of prayer to the Virgin, Theophilus’s autonomy in his repentance is what allows the Virgin to react on his behalf and leads to his salvation. The stone depictions have four distinct scenes from Theophilus's submission to the Devil to his prayer to the Virgin. The first places Theophilus before the Devil, on his knees, and being held into submission by the Jew who places a hand on Theophilus's back. The second shows Theophilus being funded by the Devil in his interactions with his community, with Theophilus offering money to another villager while he is still held by the Devil. The third is of Theophilus praying to the statue in the church, an image of his autonomy in repentance. The final display shows Theophilus continuing his prayers while the Virgin strikes down the Devil to retrieve the contract. The idea of Theophilus being compelled into acts of devilry is supported in the written versions of the legend. In Rutebeuf, the Devil requests Theophilus to: “Joins donc tes mains (join your hands), et deviens mon vassal (become my servant): Je t’aiderai plus que de raison (I will help you).” Theophilus agrees, saying “Voici, je vous prête hommage, à condition d’obtenir réparation. Dorénavant, cher seigneur,” (Rutebeuf 240244). This translates roughly to “If you help me, I will give you homage from now on, my lord.” The joined hands, then clasped by the Devil, and the request for submission in exchange for riches demonstrate that the devil is manipulative of Theophilus, offering wealth for submission to compel Theophilus. 12 The continued prayer of Theophilus, from 7-A to 7-B, combined with smiting from the Virgin Mary makes his prayer appear to be the force that triggers the Virgin’s ability to fight for him. The repenting Theophilus is combined with the Virgin with her arm held high in perfect smiting form in 7-C. She stands in front of Theophilus as a protector and strikes downward toward the Devil with a lance in hand. She acts as an agent for Theophilus, but his prayer is a prerequisite. In 7-D, the Devil mirrors Theophilus, on his knees and his hands together in typical prayer position, only more shrunken. However, the Devil cannot win as it is not the prayer that invokes the Virgin's power but rather the choice to return to Christianity and the self-determination to repent, something the Devil cannot do. Therefore, through the analysis of the sculptures, it is evident that Theophilus’s choice to pray to the Virgin is what leads to his salvation. From the images found at Notre Dame de Paris, Theophilus is not completely responsible for his downfall, he must turn to the Virgin for penance. In his homage to the Devil, Theophilus’s hands show that he is pulled down into sin. He is a victim of the Devil and the Jew’s manipulation. He must choose, showing his self-determination, to repent and only then can the Virgin react. In the final panel with the Devil, Theophilus is shown choosing Christianity, leading to his elevation, power, and salvation. 16 homage. In the first, he is shown with a contract in hand as he gives it to the Devil. The presence of a contract already implies Theophilus’s culpability. However, we also see the Jew with his hand on Theophilus’s back, perhaps pushing Theophilus to submit to the Devil. The final hands are those of Theophilus, clasped together by the Devil in the second section of the panel. In the first scene, we see Theophilus negotiating the terms of the contract with the Devil. The Jew is a witness, a necessary part of the homage according to Le Goff (Le Goff 398). In this part, there are three significant hand positions: the Jew’s on Theophilus’s back, Theophilus’s holding the contract out, and the Devil taking the contract from Theophilus. The hands in 8-A, belonging to Theophilus, and those in 8-B, belonging to the Devil, demonstrate an exchange. With the Jew as an intermediary and witness, the terms of the contract have been set and Theophilus offers it to the Devil. In the exchange, they are on equal footing, and Theophilus seems to enter the agreement willingly. However, Theophilus also faces pressure to commit an act of devilry. In 8-C, the Jew places his hand on Theophilus's back which, in Garnier’s guide, is a symbol for compulsion, pushing Theophilus to make an accord with the Devil. The second part of the panel shows Theophilus on his knees, hands clasped by the Devil, in a typical position of an “inferior to superior” relationship or a “relationship of dependence” (Garnier 208). The Devil encircles Theophilus's hands and he is pushed into submission. Therefore, Theophilus in this image is both agreeing to the arrangement in the contract while also pushed into sin by the Devil and his accomplice, the Jew. These images establish Theophilus’s sin as both his own and also the result of 18 The other hand position, 9-B, shows Theophilus’s hand is open and his palm is faced upwards. In Garnier’s guide, an open hand with the palm directed upward and out means “acceptance” (Garnier 174). This meaning reinforces the idea that Theophilus is returning to righteousness through his own autonomy, driving his own salvation. 10: Beauvais, Cathédrale de Beauvais, East Right Window: “The Story of Theophilus,” Panel 10: Prayer to the Statue (circa 1240) Once he has accepted his need to ask for repentance, Theophilus begins praying to the statue of the Virgin in the church. In Image 10, where the Virgin has yet to appear, there is only one significant hand position. Theophilus has shifted from Image 9, the scene where he has acknowledged his sins, to where he is now devoted to repenting. He prays to the statue of the Virgin in the church with a hand position we see many times with the Virgin, meaning “prayer, adoration, request, or action of repentance” (Garnier 212). This goes well with this part of Theophilus’s story where the single pair of hands moves from the choice to repent to placing emphasis on the importance of the prayer and 20 final hand position, 12-C, is that of the Virgin handing over the contract to Theophilus. Hands in 12-A and 12-B heavily interact with one another, a position that implies, according to Garnier, “the inability to act and distress or weakness” (Garnier 217). This would correctly follow the legend as Theophilus is not free from the Devil until the contract is returned. The final position, in C, is one of offering and outreach. The Virgin extends the contract to Theophilus and therefore, simultaneously extends an offer of salvation. By image 12, Theophilus has sinned, repented, and is now saved. Therefore, in the first scene of prayer, Theophilus is depicted deciding to enter the Church which is followed by the image of Theophilus praying to the statue of the Virgin. At no point is he compelled by outside forces to repent. It is exclusively through Theophilus’s change of heart and strength of will that he triggers the Virgin to react on his behalf and she obtains his salvation. When the homage to the Devil is juxtaposed with the prayer scenes that feature the Virgin Mother, Mary, the importance of Theophilus’s autonomy is developed. Even in versions where the Theophilus and the Devil are equally responsible for Theophilus’s damnation, the path to salvation is identical. Theophilus must use his free will to call upon the benevolence of the Virgin, requesting her help, getting the contract returned, and receiving salvation. As it was noted, this version of the legend, where the contract and the clasping of Theophilus’s hands are present, is the most common. However, there is one slight variation between versions that contain both the contract and the clasping of Theophilus’s 23 hands. In some versions of the legend, Theophilus is a willing participant in his own demise and other times, he is more resistant, requiring more force from the Jew, demons, or the Devil to agree to the vassalage. However, even with the range from a less willing to a more willing Theophilus, the repentance to the Virgin remains consistent. Theophilus can be more compelled into his culpability or he can be a more willing participant with the Devil, but he must always have a change of heart and the strength of will, or autonomy, to repent his actions to receive aid from the Virgin. Similar images that reinforce the universality of the thesis can be found is many other manuscripts, stained glass windows, sculptures. Both the hands and contract are present in the Manuscript of Besançon, the East Right Window in the Cathédrale featuring the Theophilus Legend, the Ingeborg Psalter, Window 6 in the Cathédrale de Le Mans showing the legend of Theophilus, the Souillac sculptures in the Abbey of SainteMarie, the Stowe 17 Psalter, Lambeth Apocalypse, and the De Brailes Book of Hours. 24 GETTING THE UPPER HAND In a select few depictions of the legend, Theophilus is entirely responsible for his own descent. In these versions, Theophilus is an active participant in his sin. He will sometimes expressly seek out the Jew to lead him to the Devil or he sometimes writes the contract himself, as we see below in the Smithfield Decretals. These scenes reinforce Theophilus's responsibility in his own downfall. In analyzing the St. Petersburg Miracles of Notre Dame, there are indications of Theophilus’s complicity but even these images do not change Theophilus’s interactions with the Virgin. Theophilus is depicted exerting his free will, or his autonomy, against the Devil and in favor of the Virgin in the scenes of prayer. 13: “Smithfield Decretals” (1300–40), The British Library Board Royal MS 10. E. IV, fol. 166v In the St. Petersburg Miracles of Notre Dame manuscript images (1260-1270), the homage to the Devil depicts Theophilus as an active agent in forging the relationship. In image 14, he holds out the contract for the Devil who writes down the terms. This scene is based on Gautier de Coinci's literary work, where Theophilus imagines paying 25 contract, and the Jew, pointing to the Devil. With the hands in 14-A and 14-B, there is a sense of reciprocity and equality established between the Devil and Theophilus. Their hands mirror, insisting that Theophilus and the Devil have mutual interest in this contract. Theophilus will receive riches and his position restored and the Devil gains a servant. Ultimately, the reflective placement of the hands furthers the idea that Theophilus and the Devil are equally culpable in their accord. The hands of the Jew emphasize the idea that Theophilus is responsible in his downfall. With the Jew’s hand in 14-C, he is pointing towards the Devil for Theophilus, indicating and helping Theophilus. Garnier insists, beyond literal showing of direction and “showing Theophilus someone,” pointing can also mean “affirmation of ideas” and “teaching” (Garnier 165, 170). As the Jew is only teaching and showing Theophilus rather than pushing him to the Devil, it is for Theophilus to decide the type of relationship he wishes to establish with the Devil. The fact that the Jew does not need to push Theophilus makes it clear that Theophilus is entering the agreement with a clear head and it therefore responsible for his demise. 27 The choice to repent and demonstrate renewed devotion to God, represented by Theophilus’s joined hands, triggers the Virgin’s ability to step in for Theophilus against the Devil found in the following panel. In 15-B and 15-C, the Virgin is retrieving the contract from the Devil. In 15-B, she pulls the contract from the Devil, showing physical strength above that of the Devil. In conjunction with 15-C, where she uses the staff to intimidate demons, this scene emphasizes the strength of the Virgin against forces of evil. However, Theophilus’s prayer is required prior to action by the Virgin. The final image contains three significant hand positions from 15-D to 15-F. In the first two of this section of the image, in 15-D and 15-E, it mimics the prior scene where the Virgin holds her staff and the contract. However, here, she bends to offer the contract to Theophilus, mirroring the bent Theophilus. This demonstrates not only her benevolence, protecting Theophilus, but also that her devotion to Theophilus is related to his devotion to prayer. In addition to the Virgin’s hands in 15-D and 15-E, we also see Theophilus’s continued prayer, his hands remaining the same as in 15-A. Theophilus is bent forward with his eyes closed, sleeping before the statue. According to Garnier, this position in combination with the position of his hands is a form of prostration, a symbol of “religious devotion, humility and transcendence” (Garnier 117). This reinforces the idea that repentance is the path to salvation as it is what invokes the Virgin’s benevolence. These scenes demonstrate that while Theophilus can be entirely guilty of his fall by working with the Devil to create a contract in the homage scene, the path to salvation with the Virgin is unchanged. He can always repent before the Virgin, earn her 29 benevolence and, be saved, shown through the devotion to prayer in Image 15. Theophilus bends forward and the Virgin mirrors him, reflecting Theophilus’s devotion to prayer to her devotion to Theophilus. As it is first Theophilus’s tilted prayer that the Virgin then follows, it shows that Theophilus is clearly responsible for his own salvation. Similar versions, where only the contract is included, can be found in the Smithfield Decretals, the Manuscript of Brussels of Bibliothèque Royale, MS 9411–26, and the Cantigas of Santa Maria. These other manuscripts have similar themes, where Theophilus is more responsible in his sins and he returns to Christianity through prayer to the Virgin. 30 DISCUSSION OF CONTRADICTIONS One idea that seems to put the thesis in question is whether the Virgin is an apparition or simply a vision in manuscript, stained glass, or sculpted versions of the story. In the legend of Theophilus, the Devil normally appears in a physical sense, appearing in a circus, outside the city, or in a tent. Alternatively, the Virgin Mary is generally confined to presence in visions in most textual versions. Therefore, it may seem that the divergence in interactions for Theophilus between the Devil and the Virgin could be simply explained through this difference. However, this question is answered as the authors do use a physical form for the divine, seen in Image 1 from Besançon. It is evident that the physical presence of the Virgin in visual versions of the legend is less about ignoring elements of the story and more about staying true to the message of the story by allowing her to interact with the environment. While most versions follow this simple structure of homage to the Devil and the Virgin, there are versions that do not directly follow the expected outline. These supposed contradictions in images can be found in the manuscript of Besançon, where the Virgin appears to touch Theophilus, the Cantigas of Santa Maria and the Smithfield Decretals, where Theophilus does not take the traditional prayer pose of the “Joined Hands.” I will clarify why these images are not exceptions and actually support the idea that Theophilus’s self-determination is an important theme in the legend. One contradiction that may be found would be the slight variance in images of repentance with the Virgin found in the Cantigas of Santa Maria and the Smithfield Decretals. In most versions, Theophilus is found on his knees praying to an image of the 31 Virgin when she appears to help him. However, in both of these manuscripts, Theophilus lays on his stomach with his hands under his chin, inferring he is asleep or dream state. A: B: 16: “Smithfield Decretals” (1300–40), The British Library Board, Royal MS 10. E. IV fol. 170r, 170v In 16-A, Theophilus is on his knees, placing himself in a state of inferiority. It is often associated with “humility and submission, inspired from the adoration of God, the request for help, penitence, or giving respect” (Garnier 113). His hands also play a role, signaling openness to divine will. He continues to submit before the Virgin’s statue, using an alternative traditional image of prayer (Garnier 176). In the Smithfield Decretals, Theophilus does not take the traditional prayer pose, seen in 16-B, on one’s knees and hands together. Instead, he is lying on his stomach, in the position Garnier calls “Position Couchée, sur le ventre” (Garnier 117). This pose can have two meanings in the context of the story. This can be a symbol for religious devotion, humility and transcendence, not unlike the meaning of typical position of prayer we see from Theophilus. Alternatively, it can indicate sleep, where the Virgin 32 appears in a vision after the long vigil before the statue. The purpose of these positions is to demonstrate Theophilus in a state of repentance and devotion to God. Both images indicate strength of will and autonomy in his own salvation, maintaining the autonomy in Theophilus’s choice to repent. This selfdetermination is maintained by the lack of compulsion when praying before the statue of the Virgin to the point of exhaustion. Not unlike the previous images of Theophilus’s prayer that were analyzed, Theophilus is the cause of his own salvation when his choice to pray is what allows the Virgin to help him. 17: Cantigas de Santa Maria, Real Biblioteca de El Escorial (1283) Patrimonia National, MST.I.1, Middle Panels 2,3 With the Cantigas de Santa Maria, we see a similar image to that in the Smithfield Decretals, lacking the typical position of prayer to the Virgin and having a scene where Theophilus is on his stomach. However, here Theophilus lays on his stomach in both parts of the image before the statue of the Virgin Mary. In the images, it is clear that Theophilus is sleeping as we can see the angels and the Virgin herself behind Theophilus, 33 meaning the Virgin is an apparition. In the first part, she chases away the Devil, and the second, where she returns the contract. Theophilus maintains the same position: laying on his stomach with his hands under his head. This signifies Theophilus’s submission and prostration, and affirms his renewed devotion to God. In addition, as the image of Theophilus is repeated, the viewer can understand that this is a way of showing extended repentance. Therefore, even when the images in the Cantigas de Santa Maria do not show the typical prayer and the hands play a lesser role, the same meaning is still present: Theophilus’s autonomy leads to his salvation. A: B: C: 18: Gautier de Coinci, Miracles of Notre Dame (late 13th), Bibliothèque municipale de Besançon, MS 551, fol. 11, 11v, 14 In addition, there is an image in the manuscript of Besancon that appears to contradict some of the points I had addressed in the paper when the Virgin touches Theophilus’s hands in 18-C, that may imply that Theophilus has been manipulated into return to Christianity. By addressing the sequence of images through 18-A and 18-B, the position of the Virgin’s hand when touching Theophilus in 18-C, and the Virgin’s second that is raised above Theophilus is 18-C, it becomes clear that these actually further the 34 idea of Theophilus’s autonomy. Image 18-A to 18-C show that Theophilus has not been compelled to return to Christianity. It is Theophilus’s choice to enter the church in 18-A, shown by the rotation of his body towards the church. In 18-B, Theophilus has gone from choosing to repent to actually repenting and engaging in prayer. He has used his autonomy to reach repentance before the statue, without any pressure from outside forces. These two images negate any compulsion that Theophilus may have faced by the Virgin touching Theophilus’s hand in 18-C as he has already decided to return to God. The second reason for the difference is the fact that the Virgin does not hold Theophilus’s hands in a clasp even if she does touch them. According to Garnier, a touch conveys “benediction” or “protection” rather than “submission” or “superior-inferior relations” (Garnier 199, 206). Finally, Virgin's second hand that reinforces that the idea that autonomy is what leads to Theophilus’s salvation is not uprooted. Her hand position signifies, as an imposition of hands, the “transmission of power” (Garnier 196). Theophilus then uses this benediction by the Virgin to preach to the congregation about his salvation. Therefore, in these images, Theophilus has already chosen to repent, allowing the Virgin to act whereas this would not have been possible prior to Theophilus’s prayer. . 35 CONCLUSION Theophilus, in the legend and in the images, explores many approaches when turning to the Devil, whether it’s forging a contract with the Devil, or utilizing the Jew as an intermediary. These separate ways of falling to evil are shown by the sorting of the types of images into four sections: missing scenes of homage to the Devil, hands clasped by the Devil, the contract exchange, and both the hands and the contract. Once the homage has been analyzed, it is then compared to corresponding scene from the same manuscript of the prayer scene with the Virgin. When the Virgin images are analyzed as a comparison, it becomes evident that while there are many ways to fall to evil, there is only one path that guarantees salvation. I have argued in this paper that the one thing that saves Theophilus is not his repentance, which is simply the physical submission to the Virgin, but rather his choice to repent, demonstrated through a change of heart and prayer made through strength of will, not compulsion by the divine. It is Theophilus’s decision to repent and pray that triggers the Virgin as a reacting force in favor of Theophilus. This idea is further reinforced by the visual and textual sources, placing particular emphasis on the positions of hands. The sculptures in the Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Paris demonstrate how Theophilus can be pulled to his demise by the Devil but can only reach salvation by using his autonomy to return to God. In the stained-glass images in the Cathédrale of Beauvais, Theophilus is both a participant and a victim in his downfall but it is all his decision to return to the Virgin, without any compulsion required. In the St. Petersburg Miracles of the Virgin manuscript images, Theophilus chooses to sin with the 36 Devil and then must choose again to return to the Virgin. In each example, Theophilus uses his autonomy to determine his fate. Therefore, through my analysis, I have shown that the legend of Theophilus tells sinners that it is not how you fall but rather, how you get back up that matters. The legend implores sinners from every background to learn from Theophilus, to use our autonomy to pray and repent when we have sinned. It is for us, the normal, sinning, unremarkable people, to learn from the legend of Theophilus. It is for us to identify our failures, to find how to resolve them, and then to take our fate into our own hands . 37 BIBLIOGRAPHY Manuscripts: Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery, W104, Book of Hours, fol. 1v, early 14th Besançon, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 551, Miracles de Nostre Dame, fols 6–18v, late 13th Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS 9411–26, Collection of Poetry, fol. 98, 1250–1300 Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, MS 9411–26, Collection of Poetry (1250–1300) Chantilly, Musée Conde MS 1695, Ingeborg Psalter, fols 35–36, ca. 1200 London, British Library, Add 49999, De Brailes Hours, fols 32v–44, ca. 1240 London, British Library, Royal MS 10. E. IV Smithfield Decretals, fols 161–172v, 1300– 40 London, British Library, Stowe 17, Psalter, fols 255v–256, 1310–20 London, Lambeth Palace Library 209, Lambeth Apocalypse, fols 46, 46v, 47, ca. 1260– 75 Madrid, El Escorial, Real Monasterio de San Lorenzo, MST.I.1, Cantigas de Santa Maria, fols 8 and 196, 1283 New York, Pierpont Morgan MS M.183, Psalter Hours, fol. 285v, 1280s Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Fr 22928, Miracles de Nostre Dame, fol. 42, late 13th St. Petersburg, MS Fr F.v.XIV.9, Miracles de Nostre Dame, fol. 45v, ca. 1260–70 38 Stained Glass: Auxerre, Cathédrale d’Auxerre, East Right Window: Theophilus Legend, 1225-30 Beauvais, Cathédrale de Beauvais, East Right Window: “The Story of Theophilus,” ca. 1240 Chartres, Cathédrale de Chartres, Window 38: Theophilus Window, 13th century Le Mans, Cathédrale de Le Mans, Window 6: Theophilus Legend, 1235 Sculpture: Paris, Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Paris, North Transept Portal: Sculpture in Stone of the Legend of Theophilus, 1163-1268 Souillac, Abbey de Sainte-Marie, The Theophilus Relief: Sculptures in Stone, 1120-35 Texts: Adgar. Miracle 26. Le Gracial, Ed. Pierre Kunstmann, Ottawa: Éditions de l’Université d’Ottawa (1982) Malmesbury, William. José M. Canal. El Libro De Laudibus et Miraculis Sanctae Mariae de Guillermo de Malmesbury. Estudio y Texto. Rome: Alma Roma Librería Editrice (1968): 17 Rutebeuf. Le miracle de Théophile. Ed. and Trans. Jean Dufournet. Paris: Garnier Flammarion (1987) 39 Articles and Books: Garnier, François. Le langage de l’image au Moyen Age: Signification et Symbolique. Vol. 1, Paris: Le Léopard d’Or, 1982, pg. 113 – 217 Le Goff, Jacques. “Le rituel symbolique de la vassalité.” Pour Un Autre Moyen Age: Temps, travail et culture en Occident: 18 essais. Paris: Gallimard (1977), pg. 398 Root, Jerry. The Theophilus Legend in Medieval Text and Image. Text. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer (2017), pg. 3, 143 40