‘De historia gigantum’: Theological Anthropology before Rabelais

Nowadays we define Giants as persons suffering from scientifically defined physiological disorders. Since Western culture has a short memory for obsolete scientific discourse, however, the simplicity of our contemporary understanding of gigantism makes it difficult for us to understand previous attitudes toward Giants, especially as expressed in literature. As Donald Frame has remarked, ‘When most Western readers think of giants in literature, they think of Rabelais and Swift; when they think of Rabelais and Swift, they think of giants.’ However, the actual importance of Rabelais and Swift would be seriously misrepresented were we to imagine them as exponents of the traditional Western attitude toward Giants and gigantism. What is more, Rabelais, who is the source of most early modern speculation about Giants, is a particularly problematic case. His combination of agile parodic wit and extreme philosophical and theological literacy is only beginning to be satisfactorily understood. Thus his treatment of gigantological themes has until now been almost completely misrepresented because of an insufficient understanding of the cultural significance of gigantism before his time. In fact, he is at least two removes from a coherent tradition of gigantological discourse running from the Old Testament through Judaic and patristic commentary and historiography, straight into the era of humanism. While the scope of this article will not permit an intensive analysis of Rabelais' own gigantology, an analysis of the two traditions upon which he depended will implicitly demonstrate the inadequacy of the conventional wisdom which sees Pantagruel and Gargantua as a direct outgrowth of medieval French folklore, the Grandes chronicques, and the literary romances of Pulci and Folengo.