'I say what I think and I do what I say', these words we know today mainly from populist politicians such as Pim Fortuyn. Proclaiming a political message of simplicity and sincerity, however, was already an important ideal in the early Middle Ages, which deserved to be followed.
The cradle of free speech lies in classical Greek antiquity. Until now, it was believed that the practice and ideology of speaking freely disappeared after the fall of the Roman Empire. Within the oppressive political climate of the 'dark ages' there would have been no room for criticism.
From the dissertation ‘Licence to speak. The rhetoric of free speech in late Antiquity and early Middle Ages' by Irene van Renswoude shows that this is incorrect. The ideals of speaking freely lived on unabated in the early Middle Ages. Values that we now associate with freedom of expression such as sincerity, authenticity and integrity were linked to free speech precisely at that time.
After the collapse of the Roman Empire, the chaotic age of population migration began. Christianity also made its appearance in Western Europe. With this new doctrine of salvation, the ideals of classical antiquity – including the freedom to practice politics – were lost for a long time only to reappear in the Renaissance, or so is often thought.
Christian kingdoms arose on the remnants of the Roman Empire, including the empire of Charlemagne. The early Christian rulers installed a feudal system, a strict division of society into ranks and classes.
The feudal system, the rise of Christianity and the loss of classical ideals would have created oppressive political conditions.
Particularly within the monastic orders, which arose all over Europe at that time, free speech was seen as a source of evil and annoyance. Silence and contemplation had to give way to the old ideals of eloquence.
Free speech could therefore hardly be a part of this climate, historians have thought until now.
Dissident bishops
However, Van Renswoude's study shows that there was more room for criticism in this period than is generally assumed. For her PhD research, Van Renswoude studied letters and speeches by late antique and early medieval dissidents, contrarian thinkers.
In the early Middle Ages, bishops in particular took over the role that had been reserved for philosophers in classical antiquity:to criticize the ruling order of kings and emperors. Women were implicitly excluded from the political debate as a result of this development. After all, they could not become bishops.
Early medieval sources tell stories of holy men, such as the ascetic Frankish bishop Leodegar. He regularly visited the court of a king, told him the plain truth and then withdrew into solitude.
These holy men were represented as paragons of courage and controlled passion; they cared nothing for power, property and prestige, and for that reason were not prone to corruption.
In the period 300 to 1000 AD. ch. the idea of freedom of expression underwent a decisive development. At that time, among contrarian thinkers, free speech became closely associated with ideals of martyrdom and sincerity. For example, the influential Bishop Ambrose of Milan (c. 338-337 AD) was an important 'truth-teller'. Bishops and critics tried to follow his example after his death.