What do you think?
Rate this book
Papežka Jana: Fantastická legenda nebo historická skutečnost
Kniha se zabývá legendou o papežce Janě, která měla usednout na papežský stolec v 9. století. Sleduje historické záznamy tohoto příběhu a snaží se nalézt odpověď na otázku, do jaké míry jde o smyšlenku a kolik je v něm pravdy. Zahrnuje také reflexy této legendy v beletrii a dramatu. Autor čtenáři poskytne přehled historického vývoje postavení a role žen v církvi.
205 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1998
9 people are currently reading
282 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews
March 27, 2015
Almost a three star effort; it is written well enough, and covers both the evidence for the legend and the ongoing controversy over its veracity exhaustively. Its main problem is that hard evidence either for or against the legend is scant, and most of what can be said about Pope Joan relies on nothing more substantial than circumstantial evidence. While this book checked in at under 200 pages, the relevant facts could have been easily dealt with in half of that. What remains feels like filler, attempting to flesh the idea out to appropriate book length. The author manages to make his filler interesting in the early going, but at about the half way mark it started to become increasingly tedious, to the point that I mainly skimmed the last third rather than reading it. I would still recommend the book as being useful to aficionados of the Pope Joan legend, but if you lack a burning interest, take a pass on reading this one.
October 3, 2012
I read this book as a companion volume of sorts to Pope Joan by Donna Woolfolk Cross. Stanford is not a historian, but he is a Catholic writer/journalist and in the case of this book, unlike Cross's Pope Joan, his approach and credentials as a writer stand him in good stead. This is not fiction, but rather his search for the truth, or as much of the truth as can be found these days, about the possibly real/possibly legendary character Pope Joan. He didn't convince me, but he got a lot closer than "Pope Joan" ever did. He actually visited the places and got as close as he could to the events which appear in the various versions of the story handed down through centuries of chroniclers. He also explored the writing and lives of those who "documented" Joan or whatever her name was. In short, he is something of a literary historian, delving into the writings themselves, rather than trying to craft more drivel that succeeds only in convincing readers there couldn't possibly have been a Pope Joan, at least not one as Cross portrayed her. This book succeeds in its aim which is to explore the legend as much as possible from the perspective of this century. For a "non-historian" he did an excellent job of digging for the facts and bringing a breath of fresh air to a subject that has been gasping for something enlivening for quite some time. Additionally he had just the right touch of humor which kept it a light read rather than something that required slogging to the finish.
September 8, 2009
This was a fascinating book. It examines the historical evidence supporting the existence of Pope Joan, who, according to legend, was elected pope in the ninth century, reigned as a highly respected pontiff for about two years, until her true gender was discovered. She was then, the story usually runs, subsequently murdered and her entire existence covered up.
In addition to shedding light on Pope Joan herself, and whether or not she truly existed, (which the author does not firmly confirm or deny), it lends considerable insight into the process of history and historical research. We read history books and tend to take for granted that we know what happened in the past, that it's all just there for us to read about. The truth is that history is a science, and that assembling the truth about the past is a matter of painstaking work, and in the end, ultimate truth often eludes us. We cannot know "what really happened" and we must instead consider bodies of evidence supporting or refuting various versions of what might have happened.
Finally, the reader can hardly help but reflect on the history of sexism within the Catholic Church, and, by extension, most organized religion. Joan's genuine existence is almost immaterial. Her legend tells us something about ourselves, something ugly and shameful. Even today, a millenium later, women are still persecuted and treated as second class citizens. The Catholic Church still does not allow women as priests (let alone popes!) Fundamentalist Islam treats women as the property of men and requires that they cover themselves head to toe. Why is the oppression of women so dramatic in the two most popular religions of the world?
I wish I had an answer.
In addition to shedding light on Pope Joan herself, and whether or not she truly existed, (which the author does not firmly confirm or deny), it lends considerable insight into the process of history and historical research. We read history books and tend to take for granted that we know what happened in the past, that it's all just there for us to read about. The truth is that history is a science, and that assembling the truth about the past is a matter of painstaking work, and in the end, ultimate truth often eludes us. We cannot know "what really happened" and we must instead consider bodies of evidence supporting or refuting various versions of what might have happened.
Finally, the reader can hardly help but reflect on the history of sexism within the Catholic Church, and, by extension, most organized religion. Joan's genuine existence is almost immaterial. Her legend tells us something about ourselves, something ugly and shameful. Even today, a millenium later, women are still persecuted and treated as second class citizens. The Catholic Church still does not allow women as priests (let alone popes!) Fundamentalist Islam treats women as the property of men and requires that they cover themselves head to toe. Why is the oppression of women so dramatic in the two most popular religions of the world?
I wish I had an answer.
November 5, 2009
Although I am not yet entirely convinced that Pope Joan existed, as Mr. Stanford argues, having read this book I now believe it's by no means impossible for her to have been real. I also learned a great deal about women in the church, then and now, and much of it was interesting. I applaud Mr. Stanford's research and his writing was superb also. Both the general reader and students of religious history would enjoy this book.
November 17, 2017
Having read one history and two novels about the legendary female pope of the 9th century I was pleased to find this book at the book sale sponsored by the Friends of the Evanston Library.
Author Stanford traces the documentary and archaeological evidence for the existence of Pope Joan, demonstrating that her historical role was recognized by notable Catholic sources long before the Reformation, putting to rest the false claim that she was merely the invention of Protestants seeking to discredit Rome. Although he fails to conclusively 'prove' anything about such a person, he does provide a plausible reconstruction of how such a woman might have become the bishop of Rome--a view which, in the end, he personally endorses.
The book, however, is much more than an historical argument. It is also an investigation of the role of women in the church and in Western society in general as illuminated by a consideration of the role of the Pope Joan legend in historiography, literature, theatre and the arts. Here, as might be expected, Stanford stands forthrightly with those demanding an equal role for women in the church.
Author Stanford traces the documentary and archaeological evidence for the existence of Pope Joan, demonstrating that her historical role was recognized by notable Catholic sources long before the Reformation, putting to rest the false claim that she was merely the invention of Protestants seeking to discredit Rome. Although he fails to conclusively 'prove' anything about such a person, he does provide a plausible reconstruction of how such a woman might have become the bishop of Rome--a view which, in the end, he personally endorses.
The book, however, is much more than an historical argument. It is also an investigation of the role of women in the church and in Western society in general as illuminated by a consideration of the role of the Pope Joan legend in historiography, literature, theatre and the arts. Here, as might be expected, Stanford stands forthrightly with those demanding an equal role for women in the church.
May 15, 2025
The subtitle should be warning 'Quest For the Truth Behind the Mystery of Pope Joan' and this is a sort of quest but the reality is that Pope Joan is almost certainly a myth. Peter Stanford is good at exploring the offbeat, I liked his book on Judas, but he isn't a deep or persistent researcher. There were too many times when I kept being frustrated by his acceptance of legend, rumour or urban legend and failure to talk or read other historians or academics who might know. But for Stanford the legend of Pope Joan is as interesting as the reality. And legends have much to teach but so does our clinging on to them in the face of evidence, or lack of it. The titbits of speculation based on tenuous fact no more prove pope Joan then Heinrich Schliemann discoveries at Hissarlik 'proved' the existence of Troy, the trojan war or the veracity of Homer.
Ultimately a well written but frustrating book.
Ultimately a well written but frustrating book.
March 2, 2024
Wasn’t that bad of a book considering I usually wouldn’t read about this sort of history in particular. I originally thought that it was probably not likely that the Pope Joan story existed, but the author makes a convincing argument given the circumstances of the 800s AD and what little historical writing on the period has provided for us. However, the book starts to somewhat trail off into points that I feel didn’t need to be made and felt like fluff or semantics (specifically when it gets to talking about novels made about Joan or the psychology of committing fraud). Otherwise, it was a fine book.
May 14, 2023
No matter which way you slice it, this is a great story. Intriguing, dark and unsolvable. My favourite. I've read a novelisation of Pope Joan but didn't know much about the evidence (or not). A good read and given me some things to follow up on.
November 17, 2016
I always thought the story of Pope Joan was a myth, largely because it seemed too impossible to be true - that a woman could fool the entire Vatican hierarchy, even back in the ninth century, and become Pope, only to be discovered when she became pregnant and gave birth. The story seems so incredible that the Vatican's staunch denial has always seemed reasonable; the argument that it was a legend concocted by Protestants to discredit and embarrass the Catholic Church eminently plausible.
And yet, maybe not. Most people, like me, have dismissed it as legend and never explored it much further, but as Peter Stanford demonstrates, incredibly, the story may just hold up to historical investigation. After all, the tale is found in literally dozens of historical chronicles, hundreds of references, all of which take her existence for granted. There is more evidence for the existence of Joan as pope than there is for many other early popes, some of whom exist in the historical record as just a name on a single bequest. And yet there is no dispute about their existence. There are records of statutes of Joan, again with no doubt that they depicted a real woman. There is the fact that popes on procession avoided a certain road because of its association with Joan; there is eye-witness testimony of the curious ritual of, to put it bluntly, fondling the pope's testicles just to be sure; the very chair used in the ritual is even in the Vatican museum, although they deny this is its purpose. Why would such a ritual, such a chair, even exist, if there was never any history or even possibility that anyone other than a man could become pope?
It's certainly persuasive, but a case-closed investigation? Hardly. After all, simply because chroniclers believed something to be true doesn't make it so. The concepts of independent verification, analysis of sources, fact-checking and cross-referencing weren't quite so rigorous in the middle ages. You could probably find an equal amount of evidence for the existence of Robin Hood or King Arthur, but these days we're fairly confident those too are mythical figures, that whatever real-life individual may have inspired the story has long-since been irretrievably obscured by the accretions of legend. I suspect so too is the legend of Pope Joan, all Stanford's evidence notwithstanding.
That said, is it possible? Why not? I recently read a biography of Dr James Miranda Barry, who was born Margaret, and spent her entire life masquerading as a man in order to pursue her chosen career as a medical doctor in the army. If Dr Barry could fool the entire medical establishment, whom one might expect to be slightly more capable of identifying a woman than the celibate Vatican priesthood of the ninth century, why couldn't Joan? And if she did, wouldn't the Vatican just try and discredit the story...?
And yet, maybe not. Most people, like me, have dismissed it as legend and never explored it much further, but as Peter Stanford demonstrates, incredibly, the story may just hold up to historical investigation. After all, the tale is found in literally dozens of historical chronicles, hundreds of references, all of which take her existence for granted. There is more evidence for the existence of Joan as pope than there is for many other early popes, some of whom exist in the historical record as just a name on a single bequest. And yet there is no dispute about their existence. There are records of statutes of Joan, again with no doubt that they depicted a real woman. There is the fact that popes on procession avoided a certain road because of its association with Joan; there is eye-witness testimony of the curious ritual of, to put it bluntly, fondling the pope's testicles just to be sure; the very chair used in the ritual is even in the Vatican museum, although they deny this is its purpose. Why would such a ritual, such a chair, even exist, if there was never any history or even possibility that anyone other than a man could become pope?
It's certainly persuasive, but a case-closed investigation? Hardly. After all, simply because chroniclers believed something to be true doesn't make it so. The concepts of independent verification, analysis of sources, fact-checking and cross-referencing weren't quite so rigorous in the middle ages. You could probably find an equal amount of evidence for the existence of Robin Hood or King Arthur, but these days we're fairly confident those too are mythical figures, that whatever real-life individual may have inspired the story has long-since been irretrievably obscured by the accretions of legend. I suspect so too is the legend of Pope Joan, all Stanford's evidence notwithstanding.
That said, is it possible? Why not? I recently read a biography of Dr James Miranda Barry, who was born Margaret, and spent her entire life masquerading as a man in order to pursue her chosen career as a medical doctor in the army. If Dr Barry could fool the entire medical establishment, whom one might expect to be slightly more capable of identifying a woman than the celibate Vatican priesthood of the ninth century, why couldn't Joan? And if she did, wouldn't the Vatican just try and discredit the story...?
August 30, 2018
I think that most people would be intrigued by the possibility of there having been a female Pope in the past, and to see whether there was any truth to the story.
There is no denying that the author has put a lot of time and effort into researching the historical basis for the stories, but I am not an academic and would really appreciate the author sticking to the topic.
This seems to be a book that has been padded out to turn an interesting subject that would fill 2 or 3 concise chapters into a full book of 205+ pages (at least in my edition).
To that extent I have been frustrated by it.
Aside from the author describing (in detail) his growing awareness of the issue and his many efforts in detective work, there is a lot of repetition in the book, plus many tangent explorations of subjects that may be associated with Pope Joan if one or other story about her turned out to be true… which all seems like overkill to me. To my taste it would have been better to place the minutiae of peripheral possibilities in an appendix, rather than bore the average reader with it up front.
The main conclusion of the book seems to be that the official Catholic denial of the story, (that it was a false story created during the reformation), has been disproved. The author acknowledges that this does not mean that the core of the story is proven.
Three possibilities remain: 1- there has been a massive Vatican cover-up; 2 – there has been a blending of stories about different historical figures; 3 – the story is completely false, but very old and long lasting.
Given the evidence available, (primarily found in the first 3 chapters), I am tempted to think that there’s some truth in it.
There is no denying that the author has put a lot of time and effort into researching the historical basis for the stories, but I am not an academic and would really appreciate the author sticking to the topic.
This seems to be a book that has been padded out to turn an interesting subject that would fill 2 or 3 concise chapters into a full book of 205+ pages (at least in my edition).
To that extent I have been frustrated by it.
Aside from the author describing (in detail) his growing awareness of the issue and his many efforts in detective work, there is a lot of repetition in the book, plus many tangent explorations of subjects that may be associated with Pope Joan if one or other story about her turned out to be true… which all seems like overkill to me. To my taste it would have been better to place the minutiae of peripheral possibilities in an appendix, rather than bore the average reader with it up front.
The main conclusion of the book seems to be that the official Catholic denial of the story, (that it was a false story created during the reformation), has been disproved. The author acknowledges that this does not mean that the core of the story is proven.
Three possibilities remain: 1- there has been a massive Vatican cover-up; 2 – there has been a blending of stories about different historical figures; 3 – the story is completely false, but very old and long lasting.
Given the evidence available, (primarily found in the first 3 chapters), I am tempted to think that there’s some truth in it.
July 27, 2015
This is my third book on Pope Joan and definitely my favorite. I appreciate Stanford's more scholarly approach than the novel "Pope Joan" by Donna Woolfolk Cross, and I appreciate the more journalistic searching than I saw in Emmanuel Rhoides book. Stanford explores ancient libraries and talks to Catholic historians and priests in the Vatican. He makes an argument for Joan as a truth and also for her story as legend. I loved his cross-referencing of historical documents from around Europe that mention Joan and I also loved that in his writing he also inserted some of his own personal search, as a Catholic journalist and religious writer his grappling with facts and myth and legend was interesting and did not take away from the story.
September 23, 2024
AN EXCELLENT MODERN SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE REGARDING THE PURPORTED 9TH CENTURY FEMALE POPE
Author Peter Stanford wrote in the first chapter of this 1998 book, "A woman pope in an organisation that prides itself, in its clerical reaches at least, on being an all-male club would be a sensation with profound implications for the ongoing debate on women priests. The Catholic church's objection to female ordination is based not on scripture but on tradition... That argument might be difficult to sustain if once a woman had sat on Saint Peter's throne.
"What is more, one of Catholicism's proudest boasts concerning the papacy---that there is apostolic succession down from Christ to Saint Peter and thence on to his successors, all of them by this token divinely ordained---would be subject to some revision if a woman had been part of that unbroken line. For even if Joan had fooled the men around her, she could not have tricked God. He would have known her real identity and gender. Did God want a female pope? And if he did, where does that leave the current Catholic ban on women at the altar?" (Pg. 7)
He recalls his visit to the 'pierced chair,' which "was the object used to test the sex of newly installed popes before they were handed the keys of Saint Peter. Any candidate chosen by his peers to occupy the papal throne was required, before his election could be verified, to sit on this elaborate seat while a young cardinal took advantage of its design to touch his testicles. There was only one way of testing this theory against the object before my eyes. My attendant] had wandered off, leaving me all alone... I plonked myself down. It felt like a desecration... the keyhole shape, I noticed as I brought my spine vertical, was in precisely the right place for the test... [when] the attendant returned... I was studiously buried in scribbling. With a smile, I hurried off..." (Pg. 11-12)
He observes, "The She-Pope's story is recorded by some 500 chroniclers of the papacy and matters Catholic, writing from early medieval times until the end of the seventeenth century. Among the phalanx of authors who testify unambiguously to her existence are papal servants, several bishops and some of the most distinguished and respected medieval chroniclers..." (Pg. 16)
He notes, "If we take the date most often quoted---AD 853 to 855---as the span of Joan's pontificate, then the first written record which comes in the eleventh century ... follows after a silence of two centuries... [and this record] is un an unimpeachable source. If we wait for one who unambiguously deserves the accolade... then there is a time slip of some 400 years." (Pg. 35)
He says, "Yet at the same time as rejecting Joan, many questionable and historically tenuous figures from the Dark Ages are given official blessing as having held the Petrine office. Do they not equally besmirch the good name of the successors of Saint Peter? Those who illegally seized the office---now deemed 'anti-popes'----are welcome. So long as they are men. No matter how venial, corrupt or unsaintly." (Pg. 94)
He says about the reported statue and memorial of Pope Joan, "Martin Luther mentioned seeing the memorial to Joan---in his description a woman in a heavy papal-style cloak, holding a child and sceptre---but expressed surprise that the popes allowed it to remain. Later writers echo his description." (Pg. 104) Later, he adds, "There was a statue and it celebrated Pope Joan. The cult surrounding her could no longer be in doubt. Nor could the fact that many high-born and high-minded people, clerical or not, believed in the historical truth of the story it celebrated." (Pg. 109)
He admits that Edward Gibbon, in his The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire "dismissed contemptuously talk of a woman pope... For Gibbon, Pope Joan was a coded reference to the power that two women and their descendants exerted over the papacy from the end of the ninth century to half-way through the eleventh. Gibbons' confidence that he had answered the riddle of Joan is weakened, perhaps fatally, by the fact that he got the most basic detail wrong, Marioza and Theodora were mother and daughter, not sisters." (Pg. 138)
He acknowledges, "There are three major obstacles to endorsing Pope Joan as an historical reality. The first and least important concerns the extraordinary nature of her demise. The story as told by her chroniclers has... the instinctive feel of pure invention, the ninth-century equivalent of a 1980s urban myth... The second and more significant obstacle ... concerns the theories of such distinguished historians as Edward Gibbon that mention of an imaginary Pope Joan as some sort of code for damning other disreputable but real popes... The third and most serious objection ... is the gap of 400 years between her pontificate and Martin Polonus's landmark account." (Pg. 179-181)
He concludes, "These substantial testaments to Joan's life are, of course, circumstantial. They do not prove her existence, only that of her cult." (Pg. 182) Finally, "Weighing all this evidence, I am convinced that Pope Joan was an historical figure, though perhaps not all the details about her that have been passed on down the centuries are true." (Pg. 184)
This is an excellent "popular-level" survey of the Pope Joan legend; it will be of interest to all (except perhaps detailed scholars) interested in knowing more about her.
Author Peter Stanford wrote in the first chapter of this 1998 book, "A woman pope in an organisation that prides itself, in its clerical reaches at least, on being an all-male club would be a sensation with profound implications for the ongoing debate on women priests. The Catholic church's objection to female ordination is based not on scripture but on tradition... That argument might be difficult to sustain if once a woman had sat on Saint Peter's throne.
"What is more, one of Catholicism's proudest boasts concerning the papacy---that there is apostolic succession down from Christ to Saint Peter and thence on to his successors, all of them by this token divinely ordained---would be subject to some revision if a woman had been part of that unbroken line. For even if Joan had fooled the men around her, she could not have tricked God. He would have known her real identity and gender. Did God want a female pope? And if he did, where does that leave the current Catholic ban on women at the altar?" (Pg. 7)
He recalls his visit to the 'pierced chair,' which "was the object used to test the sex of newly installed popes before they were handed the keys of Saint Peter. Any candidate chosen by his peers to occupy the papal throne was required, before his election could be verified, to sit on this elaborate seat while a young cardinal took advantage of its design to touch his testicles. There was only one way of testing this theory against the object before my eyes. My attendant] had wandered off, leaving me all alone... I plonked myself down. It felt like a desecration... the keyhole shape, I noticed as I brought my spine vertical, was in precisely the right place for the test... [when] the attendant returned... I was studiously buried in scribbling. With a smile, I hurried off..." (Pg. 11-12)
He observes, "The She-Pope's story is recorded by some 500 chroniclers of the papacy and matters Catholic, writing from early medieval times until the end of the seventeenth century. Among the phalanx of authors who testify unambiguously to her existence are papal servants, several bishops and some of the most distinguished and respected medieval chroniclers..." (Pg. 16)
He notes, "If we take the date most often quoted---AD 853 to 855---as the span of Joan's pontificate, then the first written record which comes in the eleventh century ... follows after a silence of two centuries... [and this record] is un an unimpeachable source. If we wait for one who unambiguously deserves the accolade... then there is a time slip of some 400 years." (Pg. 35)
He says, "Yet at the same time as rejecting Joan, many questionable and historically tenuous figures from the Dark Ages are given official blessing as having held the Petrine office. Do they not equally besmirch the good name of the successors of Saint Peter? Those who illegally seized the office---now deemed 'anti-popes'----are welcome. So long as they are men. No matter how venial, corrupt or unsaintly." (Pg. 94)
He says about the reported statue and memorial of Pope Joan, "Martin Luther mentioned seeing the memorial to Joan---in his description a woman in a heavy papal-style cloak, holding a child and sceptre---but expressed surprise that the popes allowed it to remain. Later writers echo his description." (Pg. 104) Later, he adds, "There was a statue and it celebrated Pope Joan. The cult surrounding her could no longer be in doubt. Nor could the fact that many high-born and high-minded people, clerical or not, believed in the historical truth of the story it celebrated." (Pg. 109)
He admits that Edward Gibbon, in his The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire "dismissed contemptuously talk of a woman pope... For Gibbon, Pope Joan was a coded reference to the power that two women and their descendants exerted over the papacy from the end of the ninth century to half-way through the eleventh. Gibbons' confidence that he had answered the riddle of Joan is weakened, perhaps fatally, by the fact that he got the most basic detail wrong, Marioza and Theodora were mother and daughter, not sisters." (Pg. 138)
He acknowledges, "There are three major obstacles to endorsing Pope Joan as an historical reality. The first and least important concerns the extraordinary nature of her demise. The story as told by her chroniclers has... the instinctive feel of pure invention, the ninth-century equivalent of a 1980s urban myth... The second and more significant obstacle ... concerns the theories of such distinguished historians as Edward Gibbon that mention of an imaginary Pope Joan as some sort of code for damning other disreputable but real popes... The third and most serious objection ... is the gap of 400 years between her pontificate and Martin Polonus's landmark account." (Pg. 179-181)
He concludes, "These substantial testaments to Joan's life are, of course, circumstantial. They do not prove her existence, only that of her cult." (Pg. 182) Finally, "Weighing all this evidence, I am convinced that Pope Joan was an historical figure, though perhaps not all the details about her that have been passed on down the centuries are true." (Pg. 184)
This is an excellent "popular-level" survey of the Pope Joan legend; it will be of interest to all (except perhaps detailed scholars) interested in knowing more about her.
Read
January 13, 2019Really, watching Stanford struggle with things was frequently more interesting than the legend itself. This is not meant to be derogatory.
November 8, 2014
I still don't believe in the legend, but I would really like to!
May 10, 2025
The book is an interesting dive into the chaotic world of the 9th century and the many later retellings of the legend of the She-pope. I appreciated the many discussions the author had on the matter with various experts, men and women. He was considering the legend from different angles, so there's a sense of sincerity, curiosity and open-mindedness.
I learned a lot, more than just about Pope Joan!
However, I was a little annoyed by the way Stanford spins a story about Joan first as a girl growing up in a convent environment and then as a cross-dressing woman. He even mentions Joan having "fair chin and upper lip", pondering about how this isn't maybe that big of a problem during the 9th century when priests were told to shave off their beards.
The fact is we don't know ANYTHING about pope Joan's physical appearance. Stanford's take on the legend is charming, but he seems like a bit of a romantic, which gets in the way of discovering the truth.
He is not at all taking into account the possibility that, perhaps, the "notorious female pope" was simply an intersex person who lived his childhood as a boy and later on lead a successful clerical life until eventually his gender came under critical scrutiny. This version, I suppose, would explain the lack of theatrical elements in the very earliest mentions of "Pope Joannes Anglicus who turned out to be a woman".
Although Stanford briefly reflects on the non-binary nature of sex and gender, he mostly speculates how a cisgender hetero woman would have tried to disguise herself as a man in the early Middle Ages, like in a play of sorts. I think this is where he just goes along with the legend and the fantastical elements revolving around it. Stanford makes it fairly clear that a lot of the legend relies on oral history and is pretty much made up by medieval historians. But he's not able to let go of juiciest bits of the legend and he really seems to want to find evidence of a female pope giving birth in the middle of Via Papissa.
I enjoyed the book, but I don't think that Stanford was trying to find the historical person behind the legend as much as to recreate a historical person as described by the legend. It's like he didn't even want to consider the possibility that the real Joan was actually a man who was discredited for deviating from the accepted physical form. Would this theory have spoiled the entire story, somehow? Made it less interesting? Not to me personally, but I can understand how someone might feel that way.
So yeah, when it comes to sex and gender, the book feels a little outdated when it comes to talk about "sex change" and "transvestism". But the book is also about much more than just pope Joan and now I am inspired to find more information! Stanford leaves me with many names and sites to look up. It's a "tip of the iceberg" kind of feeling.
As a hindnote, I wish that the author would have looked more into the case of antipope Joannes Octavus, who had the Holy See for just a few days in 844. Could there have be some connection to the origin of the legend of Joan? I guess I will have to start reading about antipopes next...
I learned a lot, more than just about Pope Joan!
However, I was a little annoyed by the way Stanford spins a story about Joan first as a girl growing up in a convent environment and then as a cross-dressing woman. He even mentions Joan having "fair chin and upper lip", pondering about how this isn't maybe that big of a problem during the 9th century when priests were told to shave off their beards.
The fact is we don't know ANYTHING about pope Joan's physical appearance. Stanford's take on the legend is charming, but he seems like a bit of a romantic, which gets in the way of discovering the truth.
He is not at all taking into account the possibility that, perhaps, the "notorious female pope" was simply an intersex person who lived his childhood as a boy and later on lead a successful clerical life until eventually his gender came under critical scrutiny. This version, I suppose, would explain the lack of theatrical elements in the very earliest mentions of "Pope Joannes Anglicus who turned out to be a woman".
Although Stanford briefly reflects on the non-binary nature of sex and gender, he mostly speculates how a cisgender hetero woman would have tried to disguise herself as a man in the early Middle Ages, like in a play of sorts. I think this is where he just goes along with the legend and the fantastical elements revolving around it. Stanford makes it fairly clear that a lot of the legend relies on oral history and is pretty much made up by medieval historians. But he's not able to let go of juiciest bits of the legend and he really seems to want to find evidence of a female pope giving birth in the middle of Via Papissa.
I enjoyed the book, but I don't think that Stanford was trying to find the historical person behind the legend as much as to recreate a historical person as described by the legend. It's like he didn't even want to consider the possibility that the real Joan was actually a man who was discredited for deviating from the accepted physical form. Would this theory have spoiled the entire story, somehow? Made it less interesting? Not to me personally, but I can understand how someone might feel that way.
So yeah, when it comes to sex and gender, the book feels a little outdated when it comes to talk about "sex change" and "transvestism". But the book is also about much more than just pope Joan and now I am inspired to find more information! Stanford leaves me with many names and sites to look up. It's a "tip of the iceberg" kind of feeling.
As a hindnote, I wish that the author would have looked more into the case of antipope Joannes Octavus, who had the Holy See for just a few days in 844. Could there have be some connection to the origin of the legend of Joan? I guess I will have to start reading about antipopes next...
March 25, 2024
I really enjoyed this book! stanford is clearly very passionate about joan, and his curiosity is infectious. he also leaves the interpretation up to the reader, presenting his view, but not telling it as fact. the book does drag a little in the second half- the interview with ludmilla jurova was fascinating but not wholly necessary for this book, I think. but overall, a concise yet detailed of the mystery of pope joan.
(personally, I reckon she did exist, and probably as pope- but not nearly as dramatised as the common myth. the idea she may have been related to leo is intriguing, but I'm definitely not confident about anything.)
(personally, I reckon she did exist, and probably as pope- but not nearly as dramatised as the common myth. the idea she may have been related to leo is intriguing, but I'm definitely not confident about anything.)
June 25, 2019
Very entertaining and often fascinating, but promises more than it is able to deliver. After the fourth chapter, there is no more actual evidence about Pope Joan; the rest of the book is a series of lengthy digressions, some aimed at establishing the plausibility of her story and some attempting (rather superficially) to explore her significance for women today. Much of this is interesting in its own right, but still feels like padding.
January 26, 2020
The story of Pope Joan caught my interest a few years ago when I found a book by Donna Woolfolk. I was intrigued and want to learn more about this "she-pope". The author has done a great deal of work to sort through the facts and probable data. It's worth the read after reading POPE JOAN by Donna Woolfolk
April 13, 2018
Quite in-depth, perhaps a bit too much for a casual reader. For anyone interested in this controversy and Papal history it was thorough.
August 22, 2021
Gosh this was boring! :(
October 14, 2021
Velmi zajímavé čtení :-)
January 11, 2023
An interesting and well thought out analysis of the story of Pope Joan.
May 23, 2024
Pope
February 28, 2014
I first heard about Pope Joan a couple weeks ago from some show that I was watching on Netflix. The story, and the mystery intrigued me, so the next day I checked this book out from the library.
Peter Stanford doesn't really succeed in making a case for the historical reality of Pope Joan, nor does he succeed in making the case that she was a fictional invention of people seeking to discredit the Catholic Church, or of Catholics seeking to provide a morality tale to women seeking leadership roles in the Church. Instead, Stanford successfully makes the case that Pope Joan was possible. Possible, though, is still quite a distance from fact, and I just don't think the mystery of Pope Joan was solved in this book.
I enjoyed reading about Stanford's quest for the truth. He clearly did some very broad and deep research, and he told the story of his quest well, and with some flashes of humor. I enjoyed Stanford's research into how the story of Pope Joan resonates even today, and in what ways people have attempted to suss out and come to terms with whether or not this woman really existed.
I don't know whether or not I think she existed. All I can say is, it's possible. But then, I believe in Sasquatch, too.
Peter Stanford doesn't really succeed in making a case for the historical reality of Pope Joan, nor does he succeed in making the case that she was a fictional invention of people seeking to discredit the Catholic Church, or of Catholics seeking to provide a morality tale to women seeking leadership roles in the Church. Instead, Stanford successfully makes the case that Pope Joan was possible. Possible, though, is still quite a distance from fact, and I just don't think the mystery of Pope Joan was solved in this book.
I enjoyed reading about Stanford's quest for the truth. He clearly did some very broad and deep research, and he told the story of his quest well, and with some flashes of humor. I enjoyed Stanford's research into how the story of Pope Joan resonates even today, and in what ways people have attempted to suss out and come to terms with whether or not this woman really existed.
I don't know whether or not I think she existed. All I can say is, it's possible. But then, I believe in Sasquatch, too.
December 10, 2015
Stanford does a fairly in depth study of the legend after having rented a flat in Rome for a time and once hearing of the legend, he decided to do an in depth research to determine its veracity. Due to many factors not the least of which was that most people were not literate at this time and the fact that the Catholic Church totally denounces the very idea, extensive evidence is hard to find. However, Stanford did a good job in finding sources that do support the truth of the legend and although he presents both sides, he comes to a definite conclusion. After having read the novel and this nonfiction, I asked myself if I were convinced that Pope Joan existed and headed the Catholic Church for a time as Pope John Anglicus. My answer is that I am not unequivocally convinced but that I certainly believe it was possible and maybe even likely that she did. So in essence, I believe more than I disbelieve in the legend!
I read this nonfiction to help in my research for my local book club as I was leading the discussion for our monthly selection of the book, Pope Joan by Donna Woolfolk Cross.
I read this nonfiction to help in my research for my local book club as I was leading the discussion for our monthly selection of the book, Pope Joan by Donna Woolfolk Cross.
February 12, 2017
Interesting topic; I had not previously heard of Pope Joan. The book dragged a bit in the middle for me while the author cited and discussed all the various written references to the story of Pope Joan. It picked up after that though, and it was worth finishing if just to learn about a modern-day female Catholic bishop - another story I was unaware of.
May 5, 2016
A fascinating exploration - Stanford shows how the story of a woman who became Pope in the Eighth Century (a native of Fulda of English descent, educated in Greece) deserves more than to be dismissed out of hand. We're guided through various medieval chronicles (and later Protestant polemics), the societal context of the age in which she supposedly lived, and various literary treatments over the centuries. He also talks about Joan with women who wish to be recognised as priests within the Catholic Church, and there's a remarkable interview with Ludmilla Javorova, who was ordained as a underground priest in communist Czechoslovakia
January 15, 2009
Fascinating where a fleeting interest can take you. Because I do not a Catholic background, I found this both interesting and insightful. As he tried to find the "truth" about Pope Joan and how political maneuvering of the church leaders have obscured whatever truth may be the basis of the legend, you learn as much about the times & people through which her story has survived as you do about Pope Joan.
February 3, 2012
This book takes the "legend" of Pope Joan and investigates the truth or fiction of her existence. Despite much evidence to the contrary, the author believes that she truly did exist and was perhaps pope for a period of time in the middle of the 9th century. This is an interesting complement to the novel, Pope Joan.
June 14, 2013
just like the author, I really want to think Joan is a historical fact instead of myth. Unfortunately the author is limited (just like everybody else) to what already is. This book is informative however, don't expect too much solid evidences to proof Joan's existence. It's best to be treated as pro-Joan book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews