Notions concerning the Jew considered as a singular being
versus a whole and the hating of Jews as a standard social convention are both
ideas we’ve discussed as a class and the latter is of particular interest to
me. In Beckwith’s article, this conventional anti-semitism is challenged by
contrasting interpretations of the bleeding of the host: The bleeding host
shrines of the late Middle Ages, which ‘usually had their basis in miracles
involving hosts which began to bleed’, were often claimed to be the site of ‘a
claimed act of profanation or ritual murder by members of Jewish communities’. Among
the many questions Fradenburg poses in the article, one asks about the nature
of this anti-semitism in the beginning of the Middle Ages since an
understanding of the Prioress’s Tale and other texts can only be gained if full
knowledge of this hate and its growth can be traced back to its origins.
It’s interesting to consider because the Jews are hated by
their fellow man while the Christians are loved by Mary, the mother of Jesus,
and consequently Jesus Christ himself. We’ve read text with the foundation of
anti-semitism built upon the premise that hate for the Jews is grounded in the
religious beliefs. It’s clear through Mary’s actions in the Prioress Tale that
a a sort of favoritism for the Christians exists while the bodies of the Jews
are literally torn apart and displayed as they hang. “My throte is kut unto my
nekke boon,” Seyde this child, “and as by wey of kynde I should have dyed, ye,
longe tyme agon. But Jesu Crist, as ye in books fynde, Wil that his glorie
laste and be in mynde, And for the worship of his Mooder deere Yet may I synge O Alma loude and cleere. The reference
to the mind and the body in the slitting of the throat, allude to an all-encompassing
devoutness to Christ and religion. It’s as if
This challenging of the norm can also be extended towards
our female protagonist as the characters of women are traditionally
characterized by their treachery against man. The contrast of fact and fantasy
becomes the primary issue in Fradenburg’s article and begs consideration for
the justification of why this fact is fact. In light of the contrasts between
the perception of the Jews we’ve encountered in multiple texts, can any be
found in the Prioress’s Tale to suggest it isn’t completely dominated by anti-Semitism? Considering contrasts, what are
people’s thoughts on this mother (a woman) and her relationship to the violence
in the text (indirectly directed towards her)?
Well, one strain I thought about might have a bearing on 'how' anti-Semitic we consider the text. It's noticeable that the Jews are often described as people forced into a given situation by external factors. The Jews do not put themselves into ghettos and act as moneylenders - "a lord of that contree" in Asia is the one who apparently created and maintains the Jewish community as a self-contained unit, to serve his own economic needs. The act of killing the boy is described, not as an example of the inherent evil impulses of Jews, but with a very direct intervention by a personal Satan who goads them into the murder - an external force exerting itself inward. And even Satan frames the murder by asking if it seems right that this boy should walk through their community, singing a Christian song, "which is agayn youre lawes reverence," as though the actual impulses of the Jews, and the actions they think to take, are again shaped by an external factor; their hand is somewhat forced by adherence to the Law. Even line 575, "what may youre evyl entente now availle?", seems more questioning than accusatory. The text literally asks, "Why would Jews act like this? How does it benefit them to be in these circumstances?"
ReplyDelete