Throughout my reading on Medieval Graffiti, I was confronted by the question of who was producing the markings that went up within these sacred spaces. In Jones-Baker’s essay we examine the signatures left in the stone within the churches. Some of the most prominent markings are those by the Clergy. These markings are now some of the only historical record we have of names during this time period. Less noticeable, but of equal historical importance are the signatures of the lay people left in some of the foundational stones. Through this reading I kept asking myself, why is it that names are the most common form of graffiti? Why do we feel the need to write our name over everything? Is it out of vain, out of fear of being forgotten?
I absolutely loved the essay on pilgrimage graffiti. Maybe this is because it is something I never realized I did, but I loved thinking about the idea of movement and motion as described through graffiti. The idea of sacred places being continually used as a means of maintaining its significance. Pilgrims will often leave marks on the walls of these sacred sites and as Professor Plesch states “a holy site similarly must remain in use, and such marks are indeed proof of a site’s continuing importance” (79).
It is also important to note the importance of studying graffiti as a means of closer looking at places of worship. Much of the focus throughout this reading was on graffiti found in churches and temples. Graffiti is often overlooked as a subject, but it can be a very personal and a very intimate look into how an individual interacted with a space. We know churches are spaces that exist outside of their identity as a place of worship. In the end it is a physical space people can interact with in any way that they choose. By looking at graffiti we are able to observe these interactions without a veil.