<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf8'?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/1.1/JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article dtd-version="1.1" article-type="book-review">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id>TMR</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>The Medieval Review</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">1096-746X</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Indiana University</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">11.06.23</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>11.06.23, Jenkins, Holy, Holier, Holiest (Lisa Bitel)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Bitel</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
          <aff>University of Southern California</aff>
          <address>
            <email>bitel@usc.edu</email>
          </address>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2011">
        <year>2011</year>
      </pub-date>
      <product product-type="book">
        <person-group>
          <name>
            <surname>Jenkins, David</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
        </person-group>
        <source>'Holy, Holier, Holiest': The Sacred Topography of the Early Medieval Irish Church, Studia Traditionis Theologiae, STT 4</source>
        <year iso-8601-date="2010">2010</year>
        <publisher-loc>Turnhout</publisher-loc>
        <publisher-name>Brepols</publisher-name>
        <page-range>Pp. xvi, 216</page-range>
        <price>60.00 EUR</price>
        <isbn>978-2-503-53316-2</isbn>
      </product>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright 2011 Trustees of Indiana University. Indiana University provides the information contained in this file for non-commercial, personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.</copyright-statement>
      </permissions>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <p>In this eagerly written book, David Jenkins proposes a theology of
religious settlement in early medieval Ireland.  Jenkins' thesis is
quite simple: Irish Christians modeled their holy places after the
biblical Temple of the Israelites, as described in the history of
Solomon.  The author's tone is exegetical; Jenkins spends many
unnecessary pages laying out the many possible meanings of a
particular bit of evidence before dismissing all but the correct
meaning.  His argument and instincts are sound, but the book is at
times over-argued and, at other times, poorly supported by mere
inference.  Jenkins' thesis is neither as innovative nor as broadly
pertinent as he suggests.  Still, it is a sturdy little book suitable
for some classrooms.</p>
    <p>Jenkins' most useful chapter is his first, in which he thoroughly and
critically reviews classic and recent works on churches and
monasticism in pre-Norman Ireland.  He ably traces developments in the
historiography, beginning with the works of 19th- and 20th-century
pioneers who struggled to explain the seeming uniqueness of Irish
church organization and the diversity of its idiosyncratic
architecture.  Jenkins discusses the rise and fall of the "monastic
hegemony" thesis promoted by mid-20th-century scholars such as D. A.
Binchy and Kathleen Hughes.  Hughes <italic>et al</italic>. argued that bishops
and dioceses of Ireland's conversion period quickly gave way to a
rural Christian landscape dominated by monasteries and ruled by abbots
and abbesses, along with an occasional bishop.  Jenkins rehearses
several enduring debates in the field of early Irish history,
finishing the chapter with a list of "revisionist" scholars who have
rejected the old model of ecclesiastical development.  Richard Sharpe
and Colmán Etchingham, among others, have drawn upon both material and
textual evidence to reveal the fluid dynamic of religious organization
and settlements in Ireland as well as the many similarities of Irish,
British, and Continental monasticism.</p>
    <p>Jenkins admits that other academics, such as Charles Doherty and Aidan
MacDonald, have already proposed the bases of his own argument.  They
and others have argued that most Irish religious settlements had
common architectural features (enclosing walls, internal subdivisions,
a saint's tomb or oratory at the center, peripheral spaces for mundane
activities and guests), and adhered to the same basic layout.
However, according to Jenkins, his predecessors never pursued the
spiritual implications of their discoveries or proposed, as he does,
that the Irish maintained a "canon of planning" for their Christian
places based on scriptural models.</p>
    <p>The rest of the book aims to substantiate this canon and identify its
origins in a particular chapter of the eighth-century <italic>Collectio
Canonum Hibernensis</italic>, a collection of decrees from Irish
ecclesiastical councils supported by biblical and theological
passages.  Canon 44 of the <italic>Hibernensis</italic> prescribes divinely
mandated measures and boundaries for a sacred place and the ordering
of its internal spaces, as exemplified in the ancient Temple of
Solomon (which the Irish, Jenkins argued, mixed up with the Tabernacle
of Exodus).  For Jenkins, this single chapter of the
<italic>Hibernensis</italic> proves that Irish church builders were thinking of
their Bibles when they built religious settlements.  Jenkins examines
the archaeological record of four sites as case studies to prove his
proposition, but argues that the best archaeological and textual
evidence for the canon of planning can be found in the Irish monastery
of Iona built by St. Columcille off the coast of Scotland in the sixth
century.</p>
    <p>It is hard to argue that Irish Christians did <italic>not</italic> think about
theology as they built their churches, but almost as hard to prove
that they did.  Some scholars have already noticed a pattern to Irish
religious sites and have made the link to the <italic>Hibernensis</italic> and
biblical exemplars.  The author freely admits that local conditions
also influenced church building and that pre-Christian enclosures may
have looked a lot like later religious sites.  He does not make a very
good case for general awareness of <italic>Hibernensis</italic> chapter 44 or
the canon's transmission to the women and men who planned and built
settlements.</p>
    <p>Jenkins does, however, prove lots of stuff that doesn't require
proving.  A footnote would be sufficient evidence that the
<italic>Hibernensis</italic> is Irish in origin.  Readers could do without the
long disquisition on the history and importance of the biblical Temple
and Tabernacle (references to Mishnah are quite unnecessary for an
argument about Irish ecclesiastical settlements).  Jenkins might have
saved himself some labor, too, by cutting the brief history of
Egyptian monasticism.  He consistently chooses the <italic>lex
difficilior</italic> of obvious evidence while so thoroughly qualifying his
more interesting suggestions that they seem tenuous, at best.</p>
    <p>Ultimately, Jenkins fails to persuade me that any articulated master
plan drove Irish builders or that Irish spatial organization
influenced the architects of monasticism elsewhere--not because his
interpretation of Irish sites is necessarily wrong, but because he
undermines his own arguments with his tangents and irrelevant proofs.
Jenkins also insists on a traditional definition of monasticism and is
far too vulnerable to claims of Benedictine dominance.  He is quite
wrong to say that we have no evidence for Merovingian layouts and
religious landscapes in the early centuries of European monasticism;
hagiography, letters, conciliar decrees, and histories offer plenty of
information, as does archaeological literature.  In fact, Jenkins
could probably use a refresher course in the diverse micro-
Christianities of the late antique and early medieval periods,
especially via the works of Mayke de Jong, Albrecht Diem, Bonnie
Effros, Kate Cooper, Felice Lifshitz, Alison Beach, and many other
historians of Christian monasticism beyond Ireland.  These scholars
and others have begun to dismantle the tidy historiographical biases
that previously relegated Irish religious settlements, as well as
Anglo-Saxon minsters, to the fringes of Christendom.  Meanwhile,
economic historians, such as Michael McCormick, and assorted
archaeologists have traced the routes by which Christian ideas, goods,
and people traveled back and forth across Europe throughout what
Jenkins still calls the "dark" ages.  Jenkins might have made a much
stronger case for Irish connections to monasticism elsewhere had he
consulted these works.</p>
    <p>Jenkins' book has plenty of unrealized potential and wasted pages.
Too often, its obviously learned author undermines his more
interesting points by over-qualifying them and over-arguing the
obvious.  It may well be true, as he suggests, that Adomnán saw his
monastery at Iona as a new Temple in a new Jerusalem and sold this
canon of planning to his ecclesiastical colleagues in Ireland.  But
must one support this hypothesis by drawing a parallel between
Columcille's faithful horse, which cried over the dying saint, and the
biblical Mary who anointed Jesus with perfume?  Adomnán may have been
thinking of Mary when he envisioned the weeping horse, but the analogy
hardly supports Jenkins' more important contentions.  "As one stands
today within the material remains of early Irish religious settlement
one is not," Jenkins writes, "struck immediately by a Temple analogy"
(154).  On that succinctly expressed point, he is absolutely right.</p>
    <p/>
  </body>
</article>
