Doe
1
Jane Doe
ENG 513
Dr. Ann Scott
Chaucer Bibliography
2005 November 8
Annotated Bibliography
Despres, Denise L. “Cultic anti-Judaism and Chaucer’s Litel Clergeon.” Modern Philology 91.4
(1994): 413-427.
In this article, Despres, employing social, religious, and narrative history, explores the
connection between Eucharist symbols and anti-Judaism within medieval English Christian
beliefs, a connection that attributes social impurity and pollution to the Jews. She disputes other
critics’ opinions that Chaucer’s inclusion of this anti-Judaic tale is an ironic gesture and instead
posits that the inclusion of the tale shows how Marian myths and Eucharist symbolism require a
Jewish Other to construct an English Christian identity. She argues that the historical and
symbolic presence of the Jews, even though expelled from England in 1290, had to be
continually resurrected to give definite shape to the Christian community. Representing social
impurity as a threat to the body of Christ and the Christian community, the Jews, as Host
desecrators, were vital to Marian myths to symbolize the purifying nature of both the power of
the Eucharist and the healing power of Mary, symbolic of a unified, intact church as the body of
Christ. Her article will be useful in supplying the cultural and religious context of fourteenth
century popular Marian myths and the function and representation of Jews within these texts.
---. “Immaculate Flesh and the Social Body: Mary and the Jews.” Jewish History 12.1 (1998):
47-69.
In this article, Despres, through a historical and narrative examination of the texts and
illustrations of the Carew-Poyntz Book of Hours, argues against the notion that Jews represent a
“generic alterity” in the “devotional world of the late medieval English laity.” Through an
exploration of Book of Hours manuscripts, she contends that Anti-Judaic images were
deliberately linked with the cult of the Virgin Mary in the late fourteenth century to create a
sense of anxiety about Jews desecrating and destroying the Christian sacrament and thus
symbolically destroying the sanctity and wholeness of the Christian community. Despres
explains the juxtaposition of Jews as Host desecrators with Mary’s body and the Child-as-Host,
symbolic of the sacrifice of Christ, to show that these elements are conflated within narratives of
Jews, murderers of Christian children and Host desecrators. Despres contends that these books
and their conflated symbols perpetuated notions of “Jewish literalism,” a blindness to the “spirit
of Christ,” thus disseminating anti-Judaic sentiments. She purports that Jews appear with such
frequency in Marian tales because their narratives yield a dichotomy between “corporeality and
carnality.” Marian images produce a binary opposition – spirit and flesh – promising the
ultimate transformation of the resurrection of the Christian body, the church itself, a concept
central to Marian myths. Mary promises healing of the body of the Christian community,
associated with the expulsion of the impure, tainting Jew. Despres’s article will be useful in
Doe
2
indicating how Marian symbols, Eucharist symbols, and anti-Judaic sentiments intersect in terms
of the categories of Jewishness and gender.
Fradenburg, Louise O. “Criticism, Anti-Semitism and the Prioress’s Tale.” Exemplaria 1.1
(1989): 69–115.
In this classic essay, employing contemporary theoretical developments in gender, postcolonial,
and race theory, Fradenburg calls for the application of critical theory in new interpretations of
Chaucer’s the “Prioress’s Tale” in order to open up the interpretive debate to a multitude of
voices thus ending the “monovocalism” present in the work of previous critics. She examines
early critiques of the tale to show how critical theory could expand contemporary understanding
of anti-Semitism. She begins the essay by questioning the reasoning of Prioress defenders by
contending that it is illogical to assume the Prioress is less guilty of anti-Semitism because she
merely expressed prevailing beliefs. This sentiment echoes throughout the essay as she takes a
critical edge to historicists who have “curtained off the medieval period from the modern.” She
asks whether differences between the modern and the Middle Ages might “enable” rather than
“disable” interpretation. She advocates for an exploration of Jewish voices given the silencing of
the Jews in the “Prioress Tale” and its surrounding criticism. Fradenburg identifies the centrality
of anti-Semitism in the medieval Marian legends, arguing that the Virgin Mary was consigned to
a position of opposition with the Jews. She employs Mary Douglas’s anthropological study on
pollution, social purity, and ritual which is borrowed by later critics, namely Denis Despres and
Lisa Lampert. This article will be useful in explicating how Fradenburg’s essay was pinnacle in
opening up an exploration of the intersectionality between Jews and gender in Marian legends.
Freedman, Paul. “The Medieval Other: The Middle Ages as Other.” Marvels, Monsters, and
Miracles: Studies in the Medieval and Early Modern Imaginations. Ed. T. Jones and D.
Sprunger. Kalamazoo: Kalamazoo Press, 2002. 1-24.
Through the lens of historicism, Freedman questions current new historicism practices that deny
that contemporary readers can perceive the medieval period in its own terms. He suggests that
the very idea of the medieval becomes the Other. Within the medieval period, he identifies
periods of intolerance and irrationality which he sees correlating with rising rationalism and
bureaucratization. He warns against the dangers of an undifferentiated other and explains how
various groups served different roles and functions in relation to ruling powers. Suggesting that
for the Jews Othering had deadly consequences, Freedman identifies dangers in applying the
term Other to medieval studies because he sees the term Other as unstable. Freedman
differentiates between three types of Others within the period: distinguishable insiders, inferior
insiders, and dangerous outsiders. Ultimately he contends that new historicists tend toward an
over-simplified view of the medieval ages itself within medieval studies. This article will be
useful in showing that various types of Others, not only Jews, existed in medieval England, and
each served unique functions in maintaining and/or disrupting the status quo.
Doe
3
Glick, Leonard B. Glick. “Our Property: Jews in Twelfth and Thirteenth Century England.”
Abraham’s Heirs: Jews and Christians in Medieval Europe. Syracuse: Syracuse University
Press, 1999. 211– 233.
Leonard Glick, professor of anthropology at Hampshire College in Amherst, MA, using the
lenses of a social historian and cultural anthropologist, argues that the social experience of Jews
living among Christians in Medieval Europe required “adaptive strategies” that have had a
lasting impact on contemporary Ashkenaziac thought and culture. In this chapter, he offers a
short overview of the history of the Jews’ arrival in England and their subsequent expulsion in
1290. He emphasizes how the 1141 murder of William of Norwich was blamed on Jews via a
thorough investigation prompted by Thomas of Manmouth, leading to William’s sainthood and
burial in the Norwich cathedral. Glick recounts the rise of subsequent tales of Jewish ritual
murders following the William of Norwich case, citing the example of Hugh of Lincoln and its
inclusion in contemporary literary narratives, including Chaucer’s reference to the case in the
“Prioress’s Tale,” possibly to “authenticate” reputed Jewish ritual murders of Christians. This
chapter will be useful in providing the historical context of the arrival of the Jews in England and
their economic exploitation by English kings, who use the Jews to fund their military agendas.
Additionally, it will be useful in showing how historical cases were used in literary fictional texts,
mingling history and nefarious myths.
Heffernan, Carol F. “Praying Before the Image of Mary: Chaucer’s Prioress’s Tale, VII 502-12.”
Chaucer Review 39.1 (2004): 103-116.
Heffernan argues that the Prioress’s Tale draws attention to the visual text, in particular Marian
icons, thus expanding Marian miracle legends as “popular narrative forms.” The Prioress “reads
images” because presumably she doesn’t know Latin, thus comparing herself to the litel clergeon.
In her article, Heffernan contextualizes the clergeon’s devotion to Marian images by providing
historical background information on medieval religious images and their migration from eastern
to western Europe on account of iconoclasm. She argues that Chaucer would have been exposed
to examples of Marian devotion symbols in his travels, positing that the “Asyia” in the tale might
refer to Constantinople, where Jews and Christians historically co-existed. She contends that the
“unlearned” used art and the words of the song to express piety. In terms of Jews, she discusses
the possible places where Jews might be found living among Christians. Additionally she uses
geographical history and the history of iconoclasm within the Byzantine Empire to situate
Marian images and their intersection with Jewish communities. She discusses how Marian
images were popular narrative forms among the illiterate. Ultimately, Heffernan argues that the
Prioress probably doesn’t know Latin and thus the Prioress compares herself with the child, who
learns the Hail Mary song by rote and in the end is rewarded with a miracle and martyrdom. This
article will be used to show how the Prioress attempts to align herself with the crucified child as
well as the Virgin Mary and thus needs the Jews to contrast not only the purity of the child and
the Christian community but to justify her position within the cloistered community.
Hourigan, Maureen. “There Was Also a Nonne, a Prioress.” Chaucer’s Pilgrims: An Historical
Guide to the Pilgrims in the Canterbury Tales. Ed. Laura C. Lambdin and Robert Lambdin.
Westport: Greenwood Press, 1996. 38–54.
Doe
4
Using historical analysis in this book chapter, Hourigan points out how the majority of critics
have addressed the tale by largely focusing on analogues, the Prioress’s personality, her courtly
manners, anti-Semitism, or its Marian allusions but tend to ignore the Prioress as a “professional
woman of the late fourteenth century.” Hourigan outlines the rise of the profession beginning in
A.D. 512 and explains how abbots or abbesses led the monastery but that the Prioress was often
appointed to assist in the regimentation and coordination of daily monastic life. In her article, she
explains, “The main work of monastic communities was prayer, including the Little Office of the
Virgin Mary.” Hourigan reports that monastic life was an option available to women of upper
classes and that some families chose this path for their daughters. She describes the importance,
social power and prestige allocated to the head of a monastery, comparing the prestige to the
prestige of the lords of neighboring manors. Some prioresses broke the cloister to attend
weddings and dances, dressing in fine clothes and jewelry. Hourigan describes the business side
of a prioress’s duties resulting in their connections with the secular world. Increased interplay
between the cloister and the secular world led to reforms that discouraged nuns from partaking in
pilgrimages as well as keeping pets. This article will be useful in describing the historical duties
of prioresses and the expectations and limitations foisted upon women assuming such positions.
Krummel, Miriamne Ara. "The Semitisms of Middle English Literature ."
Literature Compass 1 (2003): 1-14. 24 October 2005
<http://www.Literature-compass.com/viewpoint.asp?section=1&ref=358 .
Aligning her own position with Sylvia Tomasch’s thesis in “Postcolonial Chaucer and
the Virtual Jews,” Krummel asserts that a colonial program was underway in Medieval England
that required the presence of a Jewish Other. Her article reviews the criticism published, through
2003, on Semitisms in Medieval English literature. She identifies the work of Denise Despres
and Louise Fradenburg as crucial to ushering in a new era of criticism on the “Prioress’s Tale.”
She additionally draws attention to Sheila Delany’s book length study Chaucer and the Jews,
positing Delany’s book as a political move similar to the one made by Fradenburg, in that both
try to “disrupt the nominal Christian and Eurocentric interpretations” of the “Prioress’s Tale” and
Chaucer’s work in general. She draws attention to Lisa Lampert’s 2004 text, Gender and Jewish
Difference from Paul to Shakespeare, applauding Lampert’s use of a multidisciplinary approach
in constructing the argument that the unstable categories of gender and Jew intersect and
strengthen an English, Christian, and male universalism. Finally, Krummel’s article questions
whether “politicizing” has ghettoized critics into “a ghetto of their own making.” She reiterates
the position taken by critic Colin Richmond, who argued that Jewish history is not only for Jews
and should not be confined to Jewish study. Finally, she sums up her article by stating that the
very nature of the field demands some form of political commitment and the contribution of
varied voices to an area of English studies requiring continued exploration. This article will be
useful to indicate that although the “Prioress’s Tale” has been debated at length and from various
theoretical angles, there is still room for new and fresh perspectives.
Lampert, Lisa. “Introduction: Made, Not Born.” Introduction. Gender and Jewish Difference
from Paul to Shakespeare. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. 1-20.
Using race and gender theory, in her introduction, Lisa Lampert argues for the intersectionality
between the categories of gender and Jewishness. Their intersectionality exposes the fact that the
Doe
5
categories of Christian and Christianity are constructed through the binary opposition between
woman and Jew, which are particulars housed beneath a “normative, Christian universalism.” In
her book length study, she uses feminist and race theory to reveal how representations of the Jew
and women in the Middle Ages expose that fact that Christian identity is neither stable nor
monolithic, moreover it is a construct based on the opposition between male English Christians
and women and Jews. By using the bodies of Jews as well as Mary’s body as symbol, Marian
legends represented the rift between Judaism and Christianity and thus marked the parameters of
an English male Christian identity. Her introduction will be useful in explaining how the rise of
the cult of the Virgin Mary and its attending symbols of the Eucharist and the child-as-Host
intersected with negative stereotypes of Jews as the crucifiers of Christ to solidify a Christian
identity.
Lampert, Lisa. “Reprioritizing the Prioress’s Tale.” Gender and Jewish Difference
from Paul to Shakespeare. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. 58-100.
In this chapter, Lampert attempts to free the Prioress’s Tale from ghettoization by relating the
Jewish question to the Canterbury Tales project as a whole. She argues that the category of Jew
is “inflected” in other tales. By considering the Bradshaw shift, she posits that if the Prioress’s
Tale follows the Shipman’s Tale, the “ambiguities regarding the morality of money lending,
church corruption, and the commodification of women’s bodies leaves the Prioress in a position
to tell a tale that provides clear boundaries.” She argues that the corrupt and unhealthy obsession
of Peter focusing on money alludes to Jewish usury and this serves to “erase moral ambiguities.”
She argues that the identity of the Christian is not a stable entity among the pilgrims but is rather
continually being debated through diverse identities, such as the Lollard, pagan, Jew, and woman.
In the Prioress’s Tale, the hermeneutical Jew is employed to strengthen Christian community and
hierarchy but also to expose the inner struggles within Christianity. Lampert asserts that the
Virgin Mary and Prioress are diametrically opposed to the wife in the Shipman’s Tale. Mary’s
intact body is contrasted with impure Jewish bodies who throw the child into the privy, mingling
the pure virgin boy with the excrement and pollution of their own bodies. Ultimately Lampert
argues that representations of the Jews in the “Prioress Tale” cannot be reduced to the mere
ironic. Rather, the representations add to the shape of the Canterbury Project as a whole because
it is in “relations to Jews and Judaism that Christians continually negotiate what it means to be
Christian.” I will use this article to show that within the Canterbury Tales as a whole, the Jewish
question could possibly be read against monolithic, inviolable notions of a Christian identity.
Oliver, Kathleen M. “Singing Bread, Manna, and the Clergeon’s ‘Greyn’.” Chaucer Review 31.4
(1997): 357–364.
Oliver reports her research on analogues to the Prioress’s Tale and adds to the ongoing debate
about the ambiguity of the “greyn” placed in the litel clurgeon’s mouth. She traces the objects
placed in the little clurgeon’s mouth in other analogues of the Prioress’s Tales, claiming that only
four other analogues refer to an object placed in the boy’s mouth. Answering previous critics’
queries over the meaning of the “greyn,” she contends, through an inductive process, that in the
Prioress’s Tale, the “greyn” refers to the Host. Employing an etymology investigation, she
argues that Chaucer’s contemporaneous audience would immediately understand the symbolic
meaning of the “greyn” on account of their exposure to prevailing ecclesiastical literature and
Doe
6
symbolism. She makes a further linguistic connection by contending that the Host was known in
Chaucer’s time as “singing bread” or “singing host.” Through this assertion, she claims to dispel
the previous ambiguities of the word “greyn’s” meaning and consequently arguing that the greyn
as Host works with the metaphor of singing, given the tale’ plot, namely that the boy is martyred
because of his devotional hymn sung to Virgin Mary, who serves as a mediator between her son
and humans. This article will be useful in showing the rise of Eucharist symbols and their
connection with Marian legends.
Pigg, Daniel F. “Refiguring Martyrdom: Chaucer’s Prioress and Her Tale.” Chaucer Review
29.4 (1994): 64–73.
Daniel Pigg traces the historical changes in the ecclesiastical-dictated criteria for martyrdom
from the fourth century A.D. through the fourteenth century to support his argument that the tale
centers on martyrdom and thus relegates anti-Semitism to a peripheral role in the tale. Pigg
contends that during Chaucer’s time, spiritual martyrdom replaced physical martyrdom, and that
through this re-figuration, the Prioress is able to identify herself as a martyr through the voice of
the little clurgeon. Pigg contends that previous critics read the anti-Semitism out of cultural
context and with disregard for the fictive nature of the tale. He does however admit that
Chaucer’s reference to the actual historical case of Hugh Lincoln, a Jew accused of committing
ritual sacrifice of a Christian child may be an attempt by the Prioress to further legitimate her
identity as a martyr based on her commitment to a monastic life. This article might be useful in
showing how some critics have interpreted the tale outside of the lens of anti-Semitism and how
the Prioress uses stereotypes of Jews to highlight her own virginal, martyred state.
Philips, Helen. “Chaucer and the Canterbury Tales.” An Introduction to the Canterbury Tales:
Reading, Fiction, Context. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. 1-18.
Philips provides an overview of the Canterbury Tales’ narration and the rhyme schemes used in
the various tales. She provides historical information pertaining to Chaucer’s life as well as
historical information about London’s growing importance in terms of economic growth and
trade. She explains his family’s connection to the court life, Chaucer’s role as courtier, and how
his various professions afforded his exposure to people of varying class status. Philips explains
the role of the church and its authority over the proceedings of everyday life. Historically
contextualizing illiteracy, she explains that it didn’t necessarily equate ignorance. Education was
in the hands of the church. She describes the call for religious reforms, especially among leading
reformers such as John Wycliffe and his followers, the Lollards, who called for a return to Biblebased Christian doctrines and a reduction in the church’s financial, judicial, and administrative
power. This article will be useful in supporting Lisa Lambert’s position that Christianity within
the Canterbury project was not a monolithic construct but was rather subject to debate among a
chorus of diverse voices.
Philips, Helen. “The Prioress’s Tale.” An Introduction to the Canterbury Tales: Reading, Fiction,
Context. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. 163-172.
This article provides an overview of the critical stances historically taken toward the tale. Philips
identifies the tale as a miracle genre, a popular medieval genre, and one consumed at all levels,
Doe
7
whether read, copied, or heard – from lay to ecclesiastical. This genre was performed as plays
and corresponded with the Cult of the Virgin Mary and Anti-Semitism, often situated within
Marian tales. Critically, the tale has been “treated as either a parody or an expose of the “naiveté
of the miracle genre.” Philips explains that some critics characterize the Prioress as cruel and
shallow and merely reflective of the bigotry of her age, which showcases her courtly religious
attitudes. She asserts her own personal opinion that Chaucer’s images are too carefully targeted
to not be making some kind of negative statement about the image of Jews in English society.
Philips suggests that Chaucer might see the Jew’s expulsion from England as a punishment
befitting their rejection of the “true religion” and thus reflecting his personal devotion to Mary
and his courtly religious tastes. Ultimately, Philips leaves the readers to question why the tale is
included at all if it is not indeed a parody of the Prioress and her station. This article will be
useful in showing the historical debate surrounding the tale’s purported Anti-Semitism.
Richmond, Colin. “Englishness and Medieval Anglo-Jewry.” Chaucer and the Jews: Sources,
Contexts, Meanings. New York: Routledge: 2002. 213-227.
Using a new historicist approach, Richmond opens this book chapter with a discussion of
English history and the English heritage, explaining that the “anti-heritage,” the fact that Jews
were erased from English history, must be remembered because Jewish history is an integral part
of English history. Richmond recounts that Edward King I was the first “to make a state
Jewless,” choosing the Jewish Holy Day to expel Jews in 1290, as well as taking part in the
construction of the shrine dedicated to St. Hugh of Lincoln, deliberately associating the crown
with the shrine, but Richmond highlights the fact that texts on Edward I omit information on
both the expulsion and the largest Jewish massacre and liquidation of Jewish property. Richmond
argues that it was the very political authorities responsible for the protection of the Jews that
brought about their destruction, as opposed to anti-Semitic monks and friars. He asserts that the
governing elite were the ones to first “connect Englishness with non-Jewishness” by imposing
high taxes on Jews who did not convert. Richmond examines various historical texts to show
how Jews were written out of history to create an English identity, based on the very absence of
the Jews. Ultimately he suggests that the cause of the expulsion and execution of Jews stem from
the anti-Semitism of the top ruling elite who exploited the Jews for the monetary subsidy of their
military and political campaigns rather than anti-Semitic friars, monks, and laity. By showing
how biographers of the kings, like Edward I, failed to mention or to go into any great depth about
the connection between the king and the expulsion of the Jews, traditional historical texts are
complicit in the erasure of Jewish history in England and thus continue to participate in an AntiJudaic tradition. This book chapter will be useful in showing how texts can, through acts of
omission, participate in the perpetuation of anti-Judaic traditions.
Stacey, Robert C. “From Ritual Crucifixion to Host Desecration: Jews and the Body of Christ.”
Jewish History 12.1 (1998): 11– 28.
In this article, Stacey examines narrative history to explain the evolutionary changes in three
primary Anti-Judaic narrative traditions: ritual crucifixion, ritual cannibalism, and host
desecration. He explains that ritual crucifixion tales began mainly in England, where they
became the most popular anti-Semitic tale, while host desecration tales stem from the Continent.
Stacey describes the evolution of Host desecration tales and their eventual merger with Marian
Doe
8
tales, contemporaneous with debates on the Eucharist, the “true nature of the body of Christ and
its relation to the symbolic order of the church and the church as the symbol of the body of the
Christ.” The changes within ritual crucifixion and host desecration tales combined with Marian
elements indicate “developing devotional significance of the body of Christ to thirteenth-century
Christians.” To illustrate his point, Stacey uses the ritual crucifixion and martyrdom story of
Adam of Bristol. By crucifying a Christian boy, symbolic of the body of Christ, the Jews
presented a threat to the body of Christ, as well as the actual Christian church itself. When the
crucified boy is interned in a shrine, he is granted the powers to heal Christian bodies. Stacey
suggests that ritual crucifixion narratives mutated as they entered the devotional world of
thirteenth-century lay piety, taking on more Eucharistic and Marian elements, with sermons by
mendicant friars playing a role in the transformation of the tales. Additionally, Stacey asserts that
books served an essential role in “shaping the piety of the late medieval laity,” of which many
were female and that the (Jewish) historical absence from England after 1290 was made felt
through words, texts, and images. This article will prove useful in illustrating how texts play a
primary role in shaping and perpetuating anti-Semitic stereotypes.
Tomasch, Sylvia. “Postcolonial Chaucer and the Virtual Jews.” The Postcolonial Middle Ages.
New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. 243–260.
Using a postcolonial lens, in this book chapter, Tomasch positions the world of Chaucer in the
postcolonial asserting that England was under the influence of the postcolonial since the Jews
were a people colonized within England. She claims that it was the English people themselves
who were under the effect of colonialism and post-colonialism because the “absent present Jew”
served to construct a Christian identity in fourteenth century England. Tomasch asserts that a
Jewish presence was perpetually recalled to highlight the binary of Christian/Jew used to
construct the identity of devout Christians and the evil nature of Jews, vital to the notion of
Englishness itself. She explains that the threat to the physical survival of Christendom helped
justify violence against the Jews and that for “the sake of security they had to be removed for the
sake of self-definition they had to remain.” Tomasch postulates that the English “shift from the
colonial to the postcolonial” is clearly identified by both the expulsion of “the actual and by the
persistence of the virtual.” Jews remained under attacked through words, texts, and images. She
ultimately sees Chaucer as participating in the continuing postcolonial construction of the “good
society” in need of a “negative exemplum,” the virtual Jew. Tomasch perceives Asia as a
symbolic representation of the loss of holy land with Jews symbolizing the victorious Saracens.
English political leaders eliminated the Jews but never fully erased them, evidenced by their
existence in images and texts, depicting Christians as the true Hebrews and the Jews as the false
Hebrews. This book chapter will be useful in the sense that it will be employed to show textual
representations continued to evoke a necessary Jewish presence in England after 1290.