Hennequin, M. Wendy

English

Iowa Research Online

162 162
Stacy S. Klein. Ruling 
Women: Queenship and 
Gender in Anglo-Saxon 
Literature. University of 
Notre Dame Press, 2006. 
pp. xiii + 282.
A
s the title leads us to expect, 
Stacy S. Klein’s book analyzes 
the roles of literary queens 
in Anglo-Saxon texts. The subtitle 
might also lead us to expect a book 
entirely dependent on gender theory, 
but Klein refuses to restrict her 
critical point of view to one school 
of thought. Instead, Ruling Queens 
uses a wide variety of approaches, 
including not only gender theory, 
but also historicism, cultural analysis, 
and audience reception. Klein even 
makes use of typology, on the basis 
that typology was a tool often used 
by medieval writers to compose the 
works (pp. 7-8). The result is an 
eclectic but effective and interesting 
analysis of literary queens.
Klein argues, overall, “Anglo-Saxon 
writers used legendary royal wives to 
model cultural ideals of queenship 
during a historical period in which 
queenship was itself undergoing 
profound changes and to participate 
in the creation of ideologies of 
gender, family, spirituality, and 
politics which were both instantiated 
in and extended far beyond the 
rarified realm of the royal palace” 
(4). Chapter 1 explores Bede’s use of 
queens–or rather, disuse of queens–in 
conversion narratives of the Historia 
Ecclesiastica. Klein here demonstrates 
the role of queen as peaceweaver 
between the clergy and the king, 
and the king and God. But Klein’s 
work here also shows convincingly 
the marginalization of queens as 
agents of conversion in the Historia 
by comparing it to lesser-known 
contemporary documents. Chapter 2 
examines Cynewulf ’s Elene in light of 
Anglo-Saxon ideologies of queenship, 
and considers Elene herself as a model 
of queenship, a part of overall Anglo-
Saxon social structure, and a part of 
gender hierarchy. Elene, in Klein’s 
analysis, becomes a link in a complex 
social system; she serves Constantine 
but rules others, and she acts as the 
center of the Christian community. 
Chapter 3 posits that Beowulf uses 
various queens (including Grendel’s 
mother) to question the masculine 
heroic code dependent on strength 
and deeds and to explore prescribed 
gender roles. This chapter explores 
the heroic code in depth and also 
considers the relationship of Hrothgar 
and Beowulf to the heroic code and 
to feminine behavior. Chapter 4 
analyzes Jezebel (in his translation 
of Kings) as a social critique not 
only of queens and their increased 
influence in political affairs, but also 
of the counselors at the court of 
Æthelræd the Unready. Chapter 5 
continues with another of Ælfric’s 
translations, Esther, and explores 
Esther’s depictions of queens Esther 
and Vashti as an attempt to define 
queenship and as a commentary 
on the problems of divorce and 
concubinage during the cultural 
flux of the Danish invasions and 
Benedictine reform. The chapters, 
while referring to others on occasion, 
Stacy S. Klein. Ruling 
Women: Queenship and 
Gender in Anglo-Saxon 
Literature. University of 
Notre Dame Press, 2006. 
pp. xiii + 282.
A
s the title leads us to expect, 
Stacy S. Klein’s book analyzes 
the roles of literary queens 
in Anglo-Saxon texts. The subtitle 
might also lead us to expect a book 
entirely dependent on gender theory, 
but Klein refuses to restrict her 
critical point of view to one school 
of thought. Instead, Ruling Queens 
uses a wide variety of approaches, 
including not only gender theory, 
but also historicism, cultural analysis, 
and audience reception. Klein even 
makes use of typology, on the basis 
that typology was a tool often used 
by medieval writers to compose the 
works (pp. 7-8). The result is an 
eclectic but effective and interesting 
analysis of literary queens.
Klein argues, overall, “Anglo-Saxon 
writers used legendary royal wives to 
model cultural ideals of queenship 
during a historical period in which 
queenship was itself undergoing 
profound changes and to participate 
in the creation of ideologies of 
gender, family, spirituality, and 
politics which were both instantiated 
in and extended far beyond the 
rarified realm of the royal palace” 
(4). Chapter 1 explores Bede’s use of 
queens–or rather, disuse of queens–in 
conversion narratives of the Historia 
Ecclesiastica. Klein here demonstrates 
the role of queen as peaceweaver 
between the clergy and the king, 
and the king and God. But Klein’s 
work here also shows convincingly 
the marginalization of queens as 
agents of conversion in the Historia 
by comparing it to lesser-known 
contemporary documents. Chapter 2 
examines Cynewulf ’s Elene in light of 
Anglo-Saxon ideologies of queenship, 
and considers Elene herself as a model 
of queenship, a part of overall Anglo-
Saxon social structure, and a part of 
gender hierarchy. Elene, in Klein’s 
analysis, becomes a link in a complex 
social system; she serves Constantine 
but rules others, and she acts as the 
center of the Christian community. 
Chapter 3 posits that Beowulf uses 
various queens (including Grendel’s 
mother) to question the masculine 
heroic code dependent on strength 
and deeds and to explore prescribed 
gender roles. This chapter explores 
the heroic code in depth and also 
considers the relationship of Hrothgar 
and Beowulf to the heroic code and 
to feminine behavior. Chapter 4 
analyzes Jezebel (in his translation 
of Kings) as a social critique not 
only of queens and their increased 
influence in political affairs, but also 
of the counselors at the court of 
Æthelræd the Unready. Chapter 5 
continues with another of Ælfric’s 
translations, Esther, and explores 
Esther’s depictions of queens Esther 
and Vashti as an attempt to define 
queenship and as a commentary 
on the problems of divorce and 
concubinage during the cultural 
flux of the Danish invasions and 
Benedictine reform. The chapters, 
while referring to others on occasion, 
163 163
are not interdependent and could 
be read separately by scholars doing 
focused research or could be assigned 
to graduate students working on a 
particular text.
Klein’s arguments are generally 
sensible, solidly grounded, and well 
aware of recent scholarship and 
contemporary primary texts. When 
possible, Klein makes good use of 
historical and cultural evidence, but 
such evidence is not always easily 
available. Klein openly and frankly 
discusses in Chapter 2 the limitations 
of historical and cultural approaches 
to many Anglo-Saxon texts–in 
this case, Cynewulf ’s Elene–whose 
composition cannot be reliably 
dated or located: “If we are unable 
to locate the text either temporally 
or geographically, how, then are we 
to historicize and understand the 
cultural work performed by Elene, 
or indeed any character within the 
poem?” (57). Such work, as Klein 
notes, is often easier with prose texts, 
which we can more reliably date and 
place (p. 57). Although Anglo-Saxon 
scholars generally are aware of this 
problem, I had not heard or read a 
formal discussion of it before. Klein’s 
thorough and concise comments 
on the issue will hopefully lead to 
a wider and more open discussion 
of the problems and perhaps of 
how to innovate or adjust historical 
approaches when exact dating is 
impossible. Klein’s elegant solution, 
in the case of Elene, is to explore 
differences between the text and its 
source, reasoning that Cynewulf ’s 
changes may indicate some cultural 
tensions of his time.
Klein’s eclectic theoretical approach 
to the Anglo-Saxon texts prevents 
two problems which often bedevil 
modern critical works. The first is 
the tendency to wrench texts to fit 
a theory, instead of using theory 
to explicate the texts, a problem 
often vexing literary studies too 
enamored of one methodology. 
Klein sidesteps this problem with 
her use of various theories; when 
one theory will not or cannot help 
explain the representation of queens 
in a text, she moves to another. 
Because Klein does not indulge 
in long theoretical discussions or 
excessive use of jargon, the move 
from one theory does not distract 
from her explications. Instead, the 
use of theory follows the needs of the 
explications, rather than dictating 
them. Klein also consciously avoids 
the trap of attributing unflattering 
representations of women to medieval 
misogyny alone. Instead of falling 
into this mindset, one that often 
and understandably plagues medieval 
feminist scholarship, Klein looks 
into other causes of derogatory 
depictions: politics, culture, history, 
source material, audience reception, 
and adaptation and translations 
issues. For instance, Klein’s analysis 
of Ælfric’s Jezebel concludes that 
Ælfric’s depiction, more vilified 
than the original Biblical account 
calls for, is more a critique of evil 
counsel–a pressing issue in the time 
of King Æthelræd–than of queens or 
of women or of women’s speech or 
intellect (p. 128).
The apparatus of the book is adequate 
to its task and includes bibliography, 
are not interdependent and could 
be read separately by scholars doing 
focused research or could be assigned 
to graduate students working on a 
particular text.
Klein’s arguments are generally 
sensible, solidly grounded, and well 
aware of recent scholarship and 
contemporary primary texts. When 
possible, Klein makes good use of 
historical and cultural evidence, but 
such evidence is not always easily 
available. Klein openly and frankly 
discusses in Chapter 2 the limitations 
of historical and cultural approaches 
to many Anglo-Saxon texts–in 
this case, Cynewulf ’s Elene–whose 
composition cannot be reliably 
dated or located: “If we are unable 
to locate the text either temporally 
or geographically, how, then are we 
to historicize and understand the 
cultural work performed by Elene, 
or indeed any character within the 
poem?” (57). Such work, as Klein 
notes, is often easier with prose texts, 
which we can more reliably date and 
place (p. 57). Although Anglo-Saxon 
scholars generally are aware of this 
problem, I had not heard or read a 
formal discussion of it before. Klein’s 
thorough and concise comments 
on the issue will hopefully lead to 
a wider and more open discussion 
of the problems and perhaps of 
how to innovate or adjust historical 
approaches when exact dating is 
impossible. Klein’s elegant solution, 
in the case of Elene, is to explore 
differences between the text and its 
source, reasoning that Cynewulf ’s 
changes may indicate some cultural 
tensions of his time.
Klein’s eclectic theoretical approach 
to the Anglo-Saxon texts prevents 
two problems which often bedevil 
modern critical works. The first is 
the tendency to wrench texts to fit 
a theory, instead of using theory 
to explicate the texts, a problem 
often vexing literary studies too 
enamored of one methodology. 
Klein sidesteps this problem with 
her use of various theories; when 
one theory will not or cannot help 
explain the representation of queens 
in a text, she moves to another. 
Because Klein does not indulge 
in long theoretical discussions or 
excessive use of jargon, the move 
from one theory does not distract 
from her explications. Instead, the 
use of theory follows the needs of the 
explications, rather than dictating 
them. Klein also consciously avoids 
the trap of attributing unflattering 
representations of women to medieval 
misogyny alone. Instead of falling 
into this mindset, one that often 
and understandably plagues medieval 
feminist scholarship, Klein looks 
into other causes of derogatory 
depictions: politics, culture, history, 
source material, audience reception, 
and adaptation and translations 
issues. For instance, Klein’s analysis 
of Ælfric’s Jezebel concludes that 
Ælfric’s depiction, more vilified 
than the original Biblical account 
calls for, is more a critique of evil 
counsel–a pressing issue in the time 
of King Æthelræd–than of queens or 
of women or of women’s speech or 
intellect (p. 128).
The apparatus of the book is adequate 
to its task and includes bibliography, 
164 164
notes, and index. The notes are quite 
extensive, and while they occur after 
the text (instead of as footnotes), the 
notes are handily labeled by page. The 
book has but one plate, an illustration 
of King Cnut and Queen Ælgyfu, 
which Klein analyzes to establish her 
topic in her introduction. Similar 
plates with similar analyses in other 
chapters would have been highly 
interesting and relevant, but, of 
course, appropriate illustrations may 
not have been extant or available.
Despite its strengths, Ruling Queens 
may disappoint readers on two counts, 
however.  Firstly, Klein confines 
historical Anglo-Saxon queens, 
such as Æthelflæd of Mercia, to 
passing references. Such figures may 
be beyond the scope of her study, 
which focuses on literary queens; 
however, both the title Ruling Queens 
and the promise to consider cultural 
and historical influences raise the 
expectation of longer discussions 
of historical figures. It was in fact 
surprising not to find a chapter on 
queens in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. 
Secondly, the very eclectic theoretical 
approach inevitably necessitates long 
discussions of other textual and 
historical issues: conversion, politics, 
heroics, peaceweaving, hagiography, 
counsel, and translation, to name a 
few. Klein even admits this problem 
in her final chapter (pp. 191-92). 
These discussions are, however, 
necessary to understanding Klein’s 
analysis, and are not digressions so 
much as pathways to her conclusions.
M. Wendy Hennequin
Tennessee State University
Katharina M. Wilson 
and Nadia Margolis, eds. 
Women in the Middle 
Ages: An Encyclopedia. 
Greenwood Press, 2004. 2 
vols. pp. xxxii + 510 (v. 1); 
xviii + 486 (v.2), continuous 
pagination; illus.  
R
eference books, by their nature, 
are not meant for cover-to-cover 
reading. They are consulted for 
basic information about a subject. 
Their designation as reference books 
implies that the information they 
contain is credible. It is unlikely that 
the people who turn to reference 
works read the editorial information 
that sets out the work’s aims, criteria 
for the selection of the content, and 
arrangement of the material, but 
it is that material that provides a 
reviewer with a standard by which to 
measure how well the work meets its 
objectives.
The editors and contributors of 
Women in the Middle Ages have 
produced an excellent reference 
source in terms of both content and 
presentation. As Nadia Margolis’ 
introduction clearly and concisely 
explains, Women in the Middle Ages 
is intended to situate the history of 
women in the European Middle Ages 
in a global context and to do so in 
terms that make the information 
both accessible to undergraduates and 
general readers and useful to upper-
level students and faculty.
The tradeoff for providing this 
global contextualization and setting a 
notes, and index. The notes are quite 
extensive, and while they occur after 
the text (instead of as footnotes), the 
notes are handily labeled by page. The 
book has but one plate, an illustration 
of King Cnut and Queen Ælgyfu, 
which Klein analyzes to establish her 
topic in her introduction. Similar 
plates with similar analyses in other 
chapters would have been highly 
interesting and relevant, but, of 
course, appropriate illustrations may 
not have been extant or available.
Despite its strengths, Ruling Queens 
may disappoint readers on two counts, 
however.  Firstly, Klein confines 
historical Anglo-Saxon queens, 
such as Æthelflæd of Mercia, to 
passing references. Such figures may 
be beyond the scope of her study, 
which focuses on literary queens; 
however, both the title Ruling Queens 
and the promise to consider cultural 
and historical influences raise the 
expectation of longer discussions 
of historical figures. It was in fact 
surprising not to find a chapter on 
queens in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. 
Secondly, the very eclectic theoretical 
approach inevitably necessitates long 
discussions of other textual and 
historical issues: conversion, politics, 
heroics, peaceweaving, hagiography, 
counsel, and translation, to name a 
few. Klein even admits this problem 
in her final chapter (pp. 191-92). 
These discussions are, however, 
necessary to understanding Klein’s 
analysis, and are not digressions so 
much as pathways to her conclusions.
M. Wendy Hennequin
Tennessee State University
Katharina M. Wilson 
and Nadia Margolis, eds. 
Women in the Middle 
Ages: An Encyclopedia. 
Greenwood Press, 2004. 2 
vols. pp. xxxii + 510 (v. 1); 
xviii + 486 (v.2), continuous 
pagination; illus.  
R
eference books, by their nature, 
are not meant for cover-to-cover 
reading. They are consulted for 
basic information about a subject. 
Their designation as reference books 
implies that the information they 
contain is credible. It is unlikely that 
the people who turn to reference 
works read the editorial information 
that sets out the work’s aims, criteria 
for the selection of the content, and 
arrangement of the material, but 
it is that material that provides a 
reviewer with a standard by which to 
measure how well the work meets its 
objectives.
The editors and contributors of 
Women in the Middle Ages have 
produced an excellent reference 
source in terms of both content and 
presentation. As Nadia Margolis’ 
introduction clearly and concisely 
explains, Women in the Middle Ages 
is intended to situate the history of 
women in the European Middle Ages 
in a global context and to do so in 
terms that make the information 
both accessible to undergraduates and 
general readers and useful to upper-
level students and faculty.
The tradeoff for providing this 
global contextualization and setting a 


Stacy S. Klein, Ruling Women: Queenship and Gender in Anglo-Saxon Literature. University of Notre Dame Press, 2006

ScholarWorks at WMU

162 162Stacy S. Klein. Ruling Women: Queenship and Gender in Anglo-Saxon Literature. University of Notre Dame Press, 2006. pp. xiii + 282.As the title leads us to expect, Stacy S. Klein’s book analyzes the roles of literary queens in Anglo-Saxon texts. The subtitle might also lead us to expect a book entirely dependent on gender theory, but Klein refuses to restrict her critical point of view to one school of thought. Instead, Ruling Queens uses a wide variety of approaches, including not only gender theory, but also historicism, cultural analysis, and audience reception. Klein even makes use of typology, on the basis that typology was a tool often used by medieval writers to compose the works (pp. 7-8). The result is an eclectic but effective and interesting analysis of literary queens.Klein argues, overall, “Anglo-Saxon writers used legendary royal wives to model cultural ideals of queenship during a historical period in which queenship was itself undergoing profound changes and to participate in the creation of ideologies of gender, family, spirituality, and politics which were both instantiated in and extended far beyond the rarified realm of the royal palace” (4). Chapter 1 explores Bede’s use of queens–or rather, disuse of queens–in conversion narratives of the Historia Ecclesiastica. Klein here demonstrates the role of queen as peaceweaver between the clergy and the king, and the king and God. But Klein’s work here also shows convincingly the marginalization of queens as agents of conversion in the Historia by comparing it to lesser-known contemporary documents. Chapter 2 examines Cynewulf ’s Elene in light of Anglo-Saxon ideologies of queenship, and considers Elene herself as a model of queenship, a part of overall Anglo-Saxon social structure, and a part of gender hierarchy. Elene, in Klein’s analysis, becomes a link in a complex social system; she serves Constantine but rules others, and she acts as the center of the Christian community. Chapter 3 posits that Beowulf uses various queens (including Grendel’s mother) to question the masculine heroic code dependent on strength and deeds and to explore prescribed gender roles. This chapter explores the heroic code in depth and also considers the relationship of Hrothgar and Beowulf to the heroic code and to feminine behavior. Chapter 4 analyzes Jezebel (in his translation of Kings) as a social critique not only of queens and their increased influence in political affairs, but also of the counselors at the court of Æthelræd the Unready. Chapter 5 continues with another of Ælfric’s translations, Esther, and explores Esther’s depictions of queens Esther and Vashti as an attempt to define queenship and as a commentary on the problems of divorce and concubinage during the cultural flux of the Danish invasions and Benedictine reform. The chapters, while referring to others on occasion, Stacy S. Klein. Ruling Women: Queenship and Gender in Anglo-Saxon Literature. University of Notre Dame Press, 2006. pp. xiii + 282.As the title leads us to expect, Stacy S. Klein’s book analyzes the roles of literary queens in Anglo-Saxon texts. The subtitle might also lead us to expect a book entirely dependent on gender theory, but Klein refuses to restrict her critical point of view to one school of thought. Instead, Ruling Queens uses a wide variety of approaches, including not only gender theory, but also historicism, cultural analysis, and audience reception. Klein even makes use of typology, on the basis that typology was a tool often used by medieval writers to compose the works (pp. 7-8). The result is an eclectic but effective and interesting analysis of literary queens.Klein argues, overall, “Anglo-Saxon writers used legendary royal wives to model cultural ideals of queenship during a historical period in which queenship was itself undergoing profound changes and to participate in the creation of ideologies of gender, family, spirituality, and politics which were both instantiated in and extended far beyond the rarified realm of the royal palace” (4). Chapter 1 explores Bede’s use of queens–or rather, disuse of queens–in conversion narratives of the Historia Ecclesiastica. Klein here demonstrates the role of queen as peaceweaver between the clergy and the king, and the king and God. But Klein’s work here also shows convincingly the marginalization of queens as agents of conversion in the Historia by comparing it to lesser-known contemporary documents. Chapter 2 examines Cynewulf ’s Elene in light of Anglo-Saxon ideologies of queenship, and considers Elene herself as a model of queenship, a part of overall Anglo-Saxon social structure, and a part of gender hierarchy. Elene, in Klein’s analysis, becomes a link in a complex social system; she serves Constantine but rules others, and she acts as the center of the Christian community. Chapter 3 posits that Beowulf uses various queens (including Grendel’s mother) to question the masculine heroic code dependent on strength and deeds and to explore prescribed gender roles. This chapter explores the heroic code in depth and also considers the relationship of Hrothgar and Beowulf to the heroic code and to feminine behavior. Chapter 4 analyzes Jezebel (in his translation of Kings) as a social critique not only of queens and their increased influence in political affairs, but also of the counselors at the court of Æthelræd the Unready. Chapter 5 continues with another of Ælfric’s translations, Esther, and explores Esther’s depictions of queens Esther and Vashti as an attempt to define queenship and as a commentary on the problems of divorce and concubinage during the cultural flux of the Danish invasions and Benedictine reform. The chapters, while referring to others on occasion, 163 163are not interdependent and could be read separately by scholars doing focused research or could be assigned to graduate students working on a particular text.Klein’s arguments are generally sensible, solidly grounded, and well aware of recent scholarship and contemporary primary texts. When possible, Klein makes good use of historical and cultural evidence, but such evidence is not always easily available. Klein openly and frankly discusses in Chapter 2 the limitations of historical and cultural approaches to many Anglo-Saxon texts–in this case, Cynewulf ’s Elene–whose composition cannot be reliably dated or located: “If we are unable to locate the text either temporally or geographically, how, then are we to historicize and understand the cultural work performed by Elene, or indeed any character within the poem?” (57). Such work, as Klein notes, is often easier with prose texts, which we can more reliably date and place (p. 57). Although Anglo-Saxon scholars generally are aware of this problem, I had not heard or read a formal discussion of it before. Klein’s thorough and concise comments on the issue will hopefully lead to a wider and more open discussion of the problems and perhaps of how to innovate or adjust historical approaches when exact dating is impossible. Klein’s elegant solution, in the case of Elene, is to explore differences between the text and its source, reasoning that Cynewulf ’s changes may indicate some cultural tensions of his time.Klein’s eclectic theoretical approach to the Anglo-Saxon texts prevents two problems which often bedevil modern critical works. The first is the tendency to wrench texts to fit a theory, instead of using theory to explicate the texts, a problem often vexing literary studies too enamored of one methodology. Klein sidesteps this problem with her use of various theories; when one theory will not or cannot help explain the representation of queens in a text, she moves to another. Because Klein does not indulge in long theoretical discussions or excessive use of jargon, the move from one theory does not distract from her explications. Instead, the use of theory follows the needs of the explications, rather than dictating them. Klein also consciously avoids the trap of attributing unflattering representations of women to medieval misogyny alone. Instead of falling into this mindset, one that often and understandably plagues medieval feminist scholarship, Klein looks into other causes of derogatory depictions: politics, culture, history, source material, audience reception, and adaptation and translations issues. For instance, Klein’s analysis of Ælfric’s Jezebel concludes that Ælfric’s depiction, more vilified than the original Biblical account calls for, is more a critique of evil counsel–a pressing issue in the time of King Æthelræd–than of queens or of women or of women’s speech or intellect (p. 128).The apparatus of the book is adequate to its task and includes bibliography, are not interdependent and could be read separately by scholars doing focused research or could be assigned to graduate students working on a particular text.Klein’s arguments are generally sensible, solidly grounded, and well aware of recent scholarship and contemporary primary texts. When possible, Klein makes good use of historical and cultural evidence, but such evidence is not always easily available. Klein openly and frankly discusses in Chapter 2 the limitations of historical and cultural approaches to many Anglo-Saxon texts–in this case, Cynewulf ’s Elene–whose composition cannot be reliably dated or located: “If we are unable to locate the text either temporally or geographically, how, then are we to historicize and understand the cultural work performed by Elene, or indeed any character within the poem?” (57). Such work, as Klein notes, is often easier with prose texts, which we can more reliably date and place (p. 57). Although Anglo-Saxon scholars generally are aware of this problem, I had not heard or read a formal discussion of it before. Klein’s thorough and concise comments on the issue will hopefully lead to a wider and more open discussion of the problems and perhaps of how to innovate or adjust historical approaches when exact dating is impossible. Klein’s elegant solution, in the case of Elene, is to explore differences between the text and its source, reasoning that Cynewulf ’s changes may indicate some cultural tensions of his time.Klein’s eclectic theoretical approach to the Anglo-Saxon texts prevents two problems which often bedevil modern critical works. The first is the tendency to wrench texts to fit a theory, instead of using theory to explicate the texts, a problem often vexing literary studies too enamored of one methodology. Klein sidesteps this problem with her use of various theories; when one theory will not or cannot help explain the representation of queens in a text, she moves to another. Because Klein does not indulge in long theoretical discussions or excessive use of jargon, the move from one theory does not distract from her explications. Instead, the use of theory follows the needs of the explications, rather than dictating them. Klein also consciously avoids the trap of attributing unflattering representations of women to medieval misogyny alone. Instead of falling into this mindset, one that often and understandably plagues medieval feminist scholarship, Klein looks into other causes of derogatory depictions: politics, culture, history, source material, audience reception, and adaptation and translations issues. For instance, Klein’s analysis of Ælfric’s Jezebel concludes that Ælfric’s depiction, more vilified than the original Biblical account calls for, is more a critique of evil counsel–a pressing issue in the time of King Æthelræd–than of queens or of women or of women’s speech or intellect (p. 128).The apparatus of the book is adequate to its task and includes bibliography, 164 164notes, and index. The notes are quite extensive, and while they occur after the text (instead of as footnotes), the notes are handily labeled by page. The book has but one plate, an illustration of King Cnut and Queen Ælgyfu, which Klein analyzes to establish her topic in her introduction. Similar plates with similar analyses in other chapters would have been highly interesting and relevant, but, of course, appropriate illustrations may not have been extant or available.Despite its strengths, Ruling Queens may disappoint readers on two counts, however.  Firstly, Klein confines historical Anglo-Saxon queens, such as Æthelflæd of Mercia, to passing references. Such figures may be beyond the scope of her study, which focuses on literary queens; however, both the title Ruling Queens and the promise to consider cultural and historical influences raise the expectation of longer discussions of historical figures. It was in fact surprising not to find a chapter on queens in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Secondly, the very eclectic theoretical approach inevitably necessitates long discussions of other textual and historical issues: conversion, politics, heroics, peaceweaving, hagiography, counsel, and translation, to name a few. Klein even admits this problem in her final chapter (pp. 191-92). These discussions are, however, necessary to understanding Klein’s analysis, and are not digressions so much as pathways to her conclusions.M. Wendy HennequinTennessee State UniversityKatharina M. Wilson and Nadia Margolis, eds. Women in the Middle Ages: An Encyclopedia. Greenwood Press, 2004. 2 vols. pp. xxxii + 510 (v. 1); xviii + 486 (v.2), continuous pagination; illus.  Reference books, by their nature, are not meant for cover-to-cover reading. They are consulted for basic information about a subject. Their designation as reference books implies that the information they contain is credible. It is unlikely that the people who turn to reference works read the editorial information that sets out the work’s aims, criteria for the selection of the content, and arrangement of the material, but it is that material that provides a reviewer with a standard by which to measure how well the work meets its objectives.The editors and contributors of Women in the Middle Ages have produced an excellent reference source in terms of both content and presentation. As Nadia Margolis’ introduction clearly and concisely explains, Women in the Middle Ages is intended to situate the history of women in the European Middle Ages in a global context and to do so in terms that make the information both accessible to undergraduates and general readers and useful to upper-level students and faculty.The tradeoff for providing this global contextualization and setting a notes, and index. The notes are quite extensive, and while they occur after the text (instead of as footnotes), the notes are handily labeled by page. The book has but one plate, an illustration of King Cnut and Queen Ælgyfu, which Klein analyzes to establish her topic in her introduction. Similar plates with similar analyses in other chapters would have been highly interesting and relevant, but, of course, appropriate illustrations may not have been extant or available.Despite its strengths, Ruling Queens may disappoint readers on two counts, however.  Firstly, Klein confines historical Anglo-Saxon queens, such as Æthelflæd of Mercia, to passing references. Such figures may be beyond the scope of her study, which focuses on literary queens; however, both the title Ruling Queens and the promise to consider cultural and historical influences raise the expectation of longer discussions of historical figures. It was in fact surprising not to find a chapter on queens in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Secondly, the very eclectic theoretical approach inevitably necessitates long discussions of other textual and historical issues: conversion, politics, heroics, peaceweaving, hagiography, counsel, and translation, to name a few. Klein even admits this problem in her final chapter (pp. 191-92). These discussions are, however, necessary to understanding Klein’s analysis, and are not digressions so much as pathways to her conclusions.M. Wendy HennequinTennessee State UniversityKatharina M. Wilson and Nadia Margolis, eds. Women in the Middle Ages: An Encyclopedia. Greenwood Press, 2004. 2 vols. pp. xxxii + 510 (v. 1); xviii + 486 (v.2), continuous pagination; illus.  Reference books, by their nature, are not meant for cover-to-cover reading. They are consulted for basic information about a subject. Their designation as reference books implies that the information they contain is credible. It is unlikely that the people who turn to reference works read the editorial information that sets out the work’s aims, criteria for the selection of the content, and arrangement of the material, but it is that material that provides a reviewer with a standard by which to measure how well the work meets its objectives.The editors and contributors of Women in the Middle Ages have produced an excellent reference source in terms of both content and presentation. As Nadia Margolis’ introduction clearly and concisely explains, Women in the Middle Ages is intended to situate the history of women in the European Middle Ages in a global context and to do so in terms that make the information both accessible to undergraduates and general readers and useful to upper-level students and faculty.The tradeoff for providing this global contextualization and setting a 

M. Wendy Hennequin

Crossref

Medieval Feminist Newsletter

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1044&context=mff

Stacy S. Klein, Ruling Women: Queenship and Gender in Anglo-Saxon Literature. University of Notre Dame Press, 2006

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Iowa Research Online

ScholarWorks at WMU

Crossref