Western Attitudes Toward Death from the Middle Ages to the Present
Author | Philippe Ariès |
---|---|
Translator | Patricia M. Ranum |
Country | United States |
Language | English |
Genre | History |
Publisher | Johns Hopkins University Press |
Publication date | 1974 |
Pages | 111 (paperback) |
Preceded by | Centuries of Childhood |
Followed by | L'homme Devant la Mort |
Published in 1974, Western Attitudes Toward Death from the Middle Ages to the Present was French historian
Tamed Death
In his first chapter, he discusses the first period, "Tamed Death", using a number of ancient texts and medieval romances. He argues that prior to the seventeenth century, people were acutely aware of their own imminent death, prepared for it, and accepted it. True to his roots as a medieval historian, he cites examples such as of King Ban, Tristan, and Lancelot—these characters are shown facing death while knowing that 'their time has come' and prepare themselves by following prescribed rituals. These rituals were often religious such as Lancelot positioning the body to be facing Jerusalem.[2] The dying man readied his body and soul for death and waited.
There were four general characteristics: first, the dying person would usually be lying in bed, or at least in a recumbent position. In the
In this early medieval period people were not concerned with what would happen to their bodies after death. For superstitious reasons they did not want the dead to be buried in cities or near the houses of the living, but if the body was buried in a
One's Own Death
Subtle changes in western people's attitudes toward death occurred around the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Ariès titled this mentality shift: "One's Own Death". The defining feature of this era was a new personalization of death, in which the individual rather than the act of death itself came to the forefront. Ariès notes four major indicators that signify this change.
He explains that in the previous era, the Christian tradition of
Finally, in this era, depictions of
Thy Death
By the early eighteenth century, Ariès observed an abrupt change in the western person's attitude toward death. Death was dramatized, exalted, feared, and in some cases worshipped.[11] Looking to themes in artwork from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, Ariès argues that death became categorically similar to sex, and was seen as a break from the ordinary. Although the erotic associations with death did not last beyond that short period, he maintains that death was no longer normalized. People did not look at death as a familiar occasion that was part of life, as they had in the past. Although people continued to participate socially and ritualistically in death, and crowds still flocked to the bedside of a dying person, their purpose had changed. Instead of witnessing death, they mourned it.[12]
Although
There was also a renewed interest in
Forbidden Death
The final period Ariès demarcates in the evolution of western attitudes toward death is the era of "forbidden death". Beginning in the very late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Ariès argues that a "brutal revolution" occurred in western attitudes toward death, in which death became both shameful and forbidden. While this trend began in the United States – spreading to Britain, Northwestern Europe, and eventually the whole of the continent – the bulk of his analysis in this section deals primarily with Britain and Europe. Growing out of the sentimental era of "thy death" in which survivors mourned the death of loved ones openly, spontaneously, and with heightened displays of emotion, it soon became common practice to shield the people actually dying from the reality of their condition. The mourner, so moved by the gravity of death, wished to spare their dying loved one any emotional turmoil. Thus in the era of "forbidden death" the dying man no longer presided over his own death. Soon the extreme emotions that survivors expressed in the previous period were replaced with an equally extreme avoidance of death and suppression of emotion that became dominant in the twentieth century. Ariès names two societal trends that he believes were very influential on shifting attitudes toward death: the advent of the hospital as a place of dying, and a growing sentiment that life should be, above all, happy.
Citing trends in
Ariès's second observation regarding social changes over the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries was that happiness became the expected dominant emotion. He states that people began to believe "life is always happy or should always seem so."[17] Death, being sorrowful and ugly, was therefore denied. Expressing sadness or emotional turmoil, Ariès argues, is likely to be equated with bad manners, mental instability, and unnecessary morbidity. Referencing anthropologist Geoffrey Gorer, Ariès states that death has replaced sex as western society's greatest taboo. Children are less likely to be shielded from the notion of sex in the modern era, but they are not taught about death. When death occurs a child is told the deceased are "resting" and every effort is made to distract them from the truth.[18] Ariès also argues that the prevalence of cremation in Britain and parts of Europe reflects the western world's denial of death. He states that the act of cremation, with its usual lack of formality, associated rituals, and permanent location for remains, is the ultimate expression of "forbidden death".[19]
Although Ariès states that many of the recent trends regarding death originated in the United States, he argues that Americans have a unique death culture that is an amalgamation of the two extreme periods "thy death" and "forbidden death". He maintains that Americans do deny death as a part of life, and they are equally likely to die alone in hospital, but once death actually occurs Americans have rituals that are all their own.
Critical reception and influence
Ariès's Western Attitudes Toward Death has been applauded in both the field of
One reviewer stated that prior to Ariès's study of death, scholars almost universally projected their own fear of death onto the historical record, believing revulsion toward death was a static mainstay of western history.[22] Another reviewer congratulated Ariès for his masterful application of the “history of mentalities,” to a shockingly overlooked subject.[23] Although not everyone agreed with the Ariès's exact methods and conclusions, reviewers acknowledged the history of death as deserving of further study. Philippe Ariès published frequently on the subject for the remainder of his career, including a revision of Western Attitudes Toward Death, titled The Hour of Our Death, which further separated the period he called “One’s Own Death,” into two separate categories: “The Death of Self,” and “Remote and Imminent Death.” This was done to take into consideration certain economic disparities in the period as well as the impact of the Reformation.[24] Ariès's works on the history of death are now considered seminal and current historians of death rely heavily on his frameworks.[25]
Although Ariès is credited with opening the history of death up to further inquiry, many critics found that his short book spanning over a millennium of subject matter treated the subject too lightly, leaving more questions than answers.
Since the publication of Western Attitudes Toward Death, Ariès, even by his critics, has been hailed “the
American historians, in the years that followed the publication of Western Attitudes Toward Death, became particularly interested in the deviation Ariès noted between Americans and Europeans.
References
- ^ Philippe Ariès, Western Attitudes Toward Death from the Middle Ages to the Present (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974), x.
- ^ Ariès, 8.
- ^ Ariès, 13.
- ^ Ariès, 14.
- ^ Ariès, 22.
- ^ Ariès, 23.
- ^ Ariès, 31.
- ^ Ariès, 37.
- ^ Ariès, 45.
- ^ Ariès, 46–49.
- ^ Ariès, 56.
- ^ Ariès, 59.
- ^ Ariès, 67–68.
- ^ Ariès, 70–75.
- ^ Ariès, 81.
- ^ a b Ariès, 88.
- ^ Ariès, 87.
- ^ Ariès, 92–93.
- ^ Ariès, 91.
- ^ Ariès, 106.
- ^ David Stannard, review of Western Attitudes Toward Death from the Middle Ages to the Present, by Philippe Ariès, The American Historical Review 80, no. 5 (1975): 1297.
- ^ Andre Mathe, review of Western Attitudes Toward Death from the Middle Ages to the Present, by Philippe Ariès, Social Science and Medicine 10, no. 5 (1976): 253.
- ^ Bruce Mazlish, review of Western Attitudes Toward Death from the Middle Ages to the Present, by Philippe Ariès, Journal of Interdisciplinary History 5, no. 4 (1975): 751.
- ^ Philippe Ariès, The Hour of Our Death, New York: Knopf, 1981.
- ^ Roy Porter, “Classics Revisited: The Hour of Philippe Ariès,” Mortality 4, no. 1 (1999): 83.
- ^ Porter, 84.
- ^ a b Mazlish, 752.
- ^ a b Porter, 88.
- ^ Mazlish, 751.
- ^ Jessica Mitford, The American Way of Death (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1963).
- ^ Ivan Illich, Limits to Medicine, Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health (New York: Marion Boyars, 1976).
- ^ Gary Laderman, The Sacred Remains: American Attitudes Toward Death, 1799-1883 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996), 7.
- ^ David Charles Sloane, The Last Great Necessity: Cemeteries in American History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), 173.