this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
34 points (100.0% liked)

History

23103 readers
58 users here now

Welcome to c/history! History is written by the posters.

c/history is a comm for discussion about history so feel free to talk and post about articles, books, videos, events or historical figures you find interesting

Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.

Do not post reactionary or imperialist takes (criticism is fine, but don't pull nonsense from whatever chud author is out there).

When sharing historical facts, remember to provide credible souces or citations.

Historical Disinformation will be removed

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
WhoaSlowDownMaurice@hexbear.net
thelastaxolotl@hexbear.net
ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net
InsidiousTrackers@hexbear.net
34
The social role of gossip, and its perception in the middle ages of Europe. (going-medieval.com)
submitted 2 months ago by NaevaTheRat@vegantheoryclub.org to c/history@hexbear.net
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I'm a fan of this historian, and this blog post tickled my brain. Hopefully you find it interesting.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] vertexarray@hexbear.net 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Judaism, in text, takes up a similar position where gossip, even true gossip, is prohibited unless someone's immediate life or livelihood are at stake.

As this article makes clear, Christianity already had the prohibition against sins of the tongue, it took the Fourth Lateran Council for the church to get serious about it. I'm curious about the comparative social/structural history of prohibitions on gossip compared between different religious communities, when and why they're emphasized, that sort of thing — was there a specific pattern of behaviour reported to Innocent III that led him to get serious about confession, was he specifically running down gossipmongers or was it just that the list of what should be confessed comported to what's in the text?

[–] NaevaTheRat@vegantheoryclub.org 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

you seem a lot more knowledgeable than I. For the ignorant but curious: could you clarify what you're musing about in that last part re fourth Lateran council and getting serious about sins of the tongue/gossipmongers?

[–] vertexarray@hexbear.net 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I'm mostly just inferring from the article. From the fifth paragraph:

At least in Europe people started to get way more thingy about what the Church called the “sins of the tongue” in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

For the church to get thingy about sins of the tongue, the bible probably must be able to be interpreted in such a way as to prohibit them:

The north wind brings forth rain;

And a backbiting tongue, an angry countenance.

Proverbs 25:23

He who goes about as a gossip reveals secrets;

Therefore do not associate with a gossip

Proverbs 20:19

There's also room for such interpretations in the Qur'an:

O you who have believed, avoid much [negative] assumption. Indeed, some assumption is sin. And do not spy or backbite each other. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his brother when dead? You would detest it. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is Accepting of repentance and Merciful.

Surah Hujurat Ayat 12

It reminds me of usury — the texts of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam can be read to prohibit it, but whether it's read that way and whether the prohibition is enforced is a matter for religious officials.