Charisma of Ascetic Saints in the Hagiography of the 12th Century
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
The conclusion is based on what Vauchez has already written and there is no historiographical discussion, but otherwise it is interesting
Author Response
In my Epilogue, I've added a passage about the prospects for studying the subject.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
I send the attach with the commments. Thank you
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
I've added a few lines to my introduction on the concept of charisma. But the theoretical discussion of terminology is developed in the Introduction and Conclusion of the special issue "Charisma in the Middle Ages".
I'm familiar with the works Faire croire (ed. A. Vauchez and Hagiographie, cultures et sociétés, but I didn't find anything in them that I thought would be important to cite in my article.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The topic is interesting and the author seems competent. However, the brevity of the article, which also deals with three cases, seems to me to leave the analysis very much on the surface. A large part of the text is devoted to the discussion of facts, and the conclusion is so brief that it does not add much to the facts themselves. I think it is necessary to implement the conclusion by demonstrating, rather than simply stating, the assumption already stated at the outset.
Reviewer 2 Report
No bibliography, sloppily done footnotes, poor source base and subject literature, stylistic errors. In this form, it is unfit for print.
Reviewer 3 Report
The core of the reviewed article is compelling and valuable. All information on the three ascetic saints of the 12th century is well presented and is a good source for other scholars interested in the religious culture of the Middle Ages. The problem is with the context of their earthly and afterlife presence. The reader isn't offer contextual information and almost no background of their activity. Why did so many people like them appear in 11-12th centuries? What was the reason? Apart from mortification practices etc.: did these ascetic saints differ from other non-ascetic saints? Were they more effective in healing people? Were they more popular? And did they really have something in common with the anachorites and hermits of Syria?
The main idea of the article can be summarized in two sentences: "You know, dear reader, there were anachorites and hermits in Syria, and there were ascetic saints in 11-12th c. Europe. They are so similar to each other!" It is only a general, loose comparison. Unacceptable in the text presented to an academic journal.
There is no proof of any direct similarities between them in the text. Do people of the 11-12th c. were interested in Syrian asceticism? Did they really want to follow and imitate the Syrian hermits? Did they, I mean, ascetic saints and people around them, really know anything about them? A simple statement like "Ascetic saints of the 11-12th c. resemble Syrian monks/hermits, etc." is too little for the article for "Religions".
