Reading Notes: Canterbury Tales, Part B

The Prioress's Tale: Little Hugh

Background:

• This is an anti-Semitic "blood libel"
• "Blood libel, also called blood accusation, the superstitious accusation that Jews ritually sacrifice Christian children at Passover to obtain blood for unleavened bread." -Britannica
• This is literally something I have never heard of, and it is surprising that I haven't
• These stories were apparently extremely common among Christian communities, though I would argue that these were not true Christians
• According to Britannica, in "1144 an English boy, William of Norwich, was found brutally murdered with strange wounds to his head, arms, and torso. His uncle, a priest, blamed local Jews, and a rumour spread that Jews crucified a Christian child every year at Passover. A century later an investigation into the death of another boy, Hugh of Lincoln (died 1255), sparked anti-Jewish fervour that resulted in the execution of 19 English Jews." 
• The death of Hugh of Lincoln is what this story is based on

This is the real shrine to Little St. Hugh

(image from wikimedia commons)

Story Notes:

• This story starts of problematic and stays problematic
• The writer wants to draw the reader into the Christian narrative and create a deep attachment to Hugh
• does this with his description and the interactions with the older boy
• Almost every line is singing the praises of the little boy, and I understand that he is innocent in all of this, but the way the writer portrays him feels a bit odd
• Okay. So the writer is insinuating that Jews are in cahoots with the literal devil. Got it. 
• So the Jews killed Hugh by "cutting his little throat" and now they are disregarding the grief of the mother. Sounds reasonable (please hear my sarcasm)
• I know this is supposed to be great imagery and convince me to hate Jews, but it is really just making me hate the writer
• So because one man killed the little boy, all of the Jewish people are to be hanged for it? Seems sketchy.
• It also seems sketchy that the little boy had his throat sliced but was still singing. I understand that it is because of the power of "Christ's mother," but did people really believe this?
• He was laid to rest in a solid white temple. Okay.

Overall thoughts:

    I hated this. It is deeply troublesome to me that people would have actually bought in to this anti-Semitism, even though I know it was so prevalent. I think reading stories like these is really important to understanding the historical eras you are dealing with when you are studying any text, but it also is important to remind us of ways of thinking we cannot go back to. As problematic as this story was and as gross as I felt reading it, I think it was good that I read it. I understand better how the writing was so skewed to one school of thought, and I now know exactly what I would never want to emulate in my own writing. 

Bibliography:

Britannica on Blood Libels

The Prioress's Tale: Little Hugh

The Chaucer Story Book by Eva March Tappan (1908).