9 Nichodeme. The Gospel of Nicodemus, one of the major sources for the poem. The Middle English version of GN has been dated to the early to mid-fourteenth century, and it was also an influence on the York Cycle Plays (p. xxi).↩back to note source

11 gestes of emperours. The word gestes comes from Latin gestae, as in res gestae (things done) a Latin phrase meaning “history” (the manuscripts of the fourth-century CE historian Ammianus Marcellinus are entitled Res Gestae, for example). From Augustus on, emperors inevitably became the focal point of histories, such as Tacitus’s Annales and Histories. Tacitus would have covered the Jewish war in the fifth book of the Histories, now largely lost. In Middle English, the term refers to stories, songs, and poems (MED geste).↩back to note source

32 no leve. Compare Matthew 21:23–27, Mark 11:27–33, and Luke 20:1–8, in which Jewish officials ask by whose authority Jesus is preaching. This matter would have particular resonance in medieval England: though canon law dictated that ordained priests could (and indeed were obliged to) preach, there was debate about this point. At the Blackfriars Council of 1382, it was declared incorrect that priests and deacons had authority to preach simply on the authority of their holy orders (Spencer, English Preaching, pp. 50–51). Canon law gave parish priests the right to preach in their own churches, but friars had to be given consent to preach in parish churches, and bishops were often required to adjudicate disagreements between friars and other clergy (Spencer, English Preaching, pp. 59–60).↩back to note source

40 That thei ypocrites were. Compare, for example, Matthew 23:14.↩back to note source

61–86 As Nichodemus hath witnessed . . . And prively held. The story of Nicodemus’s conversation with Jesus appears in the canonical Gospels in John 3:1–17. Much of Nicodemus’s role in this poem, however, expands on that account using GN as its primary source.↩back to note source

94 unbynt and byndeth agayn. Compare Matthew 16:19.↩back to note source

108 kyng Cesar. The first Roman emperor, born Gaius Octavius, was adopted by Julius Caesar to become Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus (better known as Augustus). This phrase appears in all the synoptic gospels (Matthew 22:15–22; Mark 12:13–17; and Luke 20:20–26).↩back to note source

97–110 Ones thei asked . . . to God almight. This episode appears in three of the Gospels: Matthew 22:15–21; Mark 12:13-17; and Luke 20:19–26.↩back to note source

113–36 By a womman . . . kep thee forthward fro syn. The story of the woman taken in adultery occurs in John 8:2–11, but is also common in medieval cycle drama, with the episode appearing in the York (Play 24), N-Town (Play 24), and Chester (Play 12) plays. It is often paired (as in York and N-Town) with the raising of Lazarus, an episode to which Destruction refers. Thus, this episode was likely a familiar one for Destruction’s audience.↩back to note source

158 Moises and Abraham I seigh also. Compare John 8:57–58, in which Jesus claims to have existed before Moses and Abraham.↩back to note source

181 I com the lawghe to fulfille. Compare Matthew 5:17.↩back to note source

186–87 Youre michel temple I may felle / And areisen agein the thrid day. Compare John 2:19–22.↩back to note source

209 he held noght her Sabath day. Sabbath-breaking episodes appear in all four Gospels; compare Matthew 12:1–14; Mark 2:23–27; Mark 3:1–6; Luke 6:1–11; and John 5:16–18.↩back to note source

247–49 He hight to fordon . . . stronge and heighe. Compare Luke 21:20–26.↩back to note source

286 Forgeven hem that it scholde be. Compare Luke 23:34.↩back to note source

309 Romeins and other schull comen us on. Roman foreign policy in the empire was predicated on maintenance, not expansion. The optimal state was for peace in the provinces and the flow of taxes to Rome. Given the extent of the imperial borders and the urgency of the northern borders in particular, it would take a spectacular offense against the empire, such as the ambush of Gallus’s men in the Beit-Horon pass, to earn Roman attention.↩back to note source

305–16 Whan schull we us wreke . . . have hym schent. This episode in which Jewish leaders plot against Jesus most closely follows John 11:47–53. This conspiracy appears frequently in cycle plays as well: see Chester Play 14, York Play 26, Towneley Play 20, and N-Town Play 26.↩back to note source

331–32 atte Flum Jurdon . . . baptized Seint Jon. Jesus is baptized by John in three of the canonical gospels (Matthew 3:13–17; Mark 1:9–11; Luke 3:21–22); the language of this Middle English construction seems to imply that Jesus baptized John, but that is not the case.↩back to note source

351 Caiphas prophecied there. Compare John 11:49–51. Caiaphas, in his role as high priest, will oversee Jesus’s trial later in the Gospels, particularly as recounted in Matthew 26 and John 18; he is a frequently-occurring character in Cycle plays (see N-Town Passion Play 1 and 2; York Play 29). Caiaphas was appointed in 18 CE by Pontius Pilate’s predecessor, Valerius Gratus, according to Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, 18.36.↩back to note source

377–78 Whan men hem seen the more thai synne; / Tif thai ben fer the more thai blynne. Though not a direct reference, the sentiment here seems to echo that of Whiting S333, that one sin leads to another. See also Whiting S340 and M591.↩back to note source

383 Effroem. This location appears as Ephraim in John 11:54, while Eusebius calls it Ephron. This is likely the same site as Ophrah (Josue [Joshua] 18:23), possibly modern al-Tayyiba (Avi-Yonan, “Ophrah,” Encyclopedia Judaica, 15:439).↩back to note source

404 wrighttes son. Matthew 13:55 is the only place where Joseph’s trade as a carpenter is mentioned in the Gospels, though Jesus is also identified as the son of a wright in GN (lines 25–28).↩back to note source

407–16 The tuelve namis . . . Jewes weren wrothe. These figures are challenging whether or not Jesus is legitimate, born to married parents. In GN, a group of Jews swear before Pilate and Caiaphas that Mary and Joseph were indeed married (lines 243–48); they are not named in the Middle English account. However, a group of ten Jews assert some lines earlier that Jesus is the son of Mary and Joseph rather than the son of God; conflation of these two moments of GN may be the source for the list of names here. They are identified in GN as Simon, Zayrus, Caiphas, Datan, Gamaliel, Neptalim, Levi, Judas, Alexander, and Annas (lines 14–16).↩back to note source

445–46 Centurio biheld . . . Goddus son Jesus. Compare Mark 15:39 and Matthew 27:54, where the centurion identifies Jesus as God’s son. In Luke 23:47, in contrast, Jesus is called simply “a just man.” See also GN, lines 673–76, and York Play 36, lines 322–25 and Chester Play 16, lines 360–67.↩back to note source

447 Longens the knyght. Longinus is Biblical; at least, there is a figure who pierces Jesus in John 19:34. (He is often conflated with the centurion who identifies Jesus as the son of God: see Luke 23:47, Matthew 27:54, and Mark 15:39.) This figure is unnamed in the Gospels, though named as Longinus in GN, lines 625–28; he also appears in York Play 36, lines 691–99 and in Chester Play 16, where he is presented as distinct from the centurion (pp. 322–23). LA provides a description of the piercing of Jesus’s side by Longinus that extends to include Longinus’s conversion, twenty-eight years of monastic life, and eventual martyrdom (1:184).↩back to note source

449–54 The gret temple atwo aclef . . . of her kyn. Matthew 27:50–53 similarly recounts that tombs open and dead people are resurrected at the moment of Jesus’s death. The temple curtain tears in two at Jesus’s death in three of the canonical Gospels: Matthew 27:51, Mark 15:38, and Luke 23:45.↩back to note source

469 Adam bigan first the game. This is a reference to the “original sin” in Genesis; Adam is often juxtaposed to Jesus in particular by theologians; see for example Augustine, City of God, book 14 on original sin; and book 13, chapter 23, trans. Walsh and Monahan, pp. 335–38, on the juxtaposition of Adam and Jesus.↩back to note source

474 thai hadden sought his mercy. The theological point that Jesus’s mercy applies even to Judas, his betrayer, likely originates in Augustine, who discusses Judas in City of God (book 1, chapter 17, trans. Zema and Walsh, pp. 46–47). As Leydon notes in his reading of Augustine, “Augustine isolates despair — the failure to believe in (or pray for) God’s mercy — as the reason that the remorseful Judas was unable to be fully repentant, and consequently the cause of his suicide” (“Insular Iscariot,” p. 14).↩back to note source

483–84 Aggeus, Phinees, and Escandas . . . hou it was. These witnesses are not named either in Biblical accounts or in GN.↩back to note source

487 Carianus and Elyntheus. Munro identifies this material as referring to GN (p. 350). In that account, the two men are raised from the dead at Jesus’s resurrection and recount the Harrowing of Hell (GN, lines 1095–1636).↩back to note source

492 Seynt Mighel. Saint Michael, whose feast is observed on September 29, was an archangel often associated with intercession for the souls of the dead. He appears in both the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelation. See Farmer, Dictionary of Saints, pp. 348–49.↩back to note source

497 Tho spak Nichodemus onon. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea both condemn the Jews for the death of Jesus; this material draws on GN, lines 739–768.↩back to note source

508 That he was to Jhesu sworne. Joseph of Arimathea denounces his Jewish identity and claims to be Christian. This is a moment when the poem diverges from GN, in which Joseph is arrested for burying Jesus and not directly accused of following Jesus.↩back to note source

519–20 He is nought my frende, ye han herd told, / That seith as myne hert wold. Though this is not directly attested in Whiting, it seems to be functioning proverbially; see for example Whiting F664.↩back to note source

523 in a strong prisoun. The imprisonment of Joseph of Arimathea draws heavily on GN, lines 769–92.↩back to note source

539 Body for body. That is, they guaranteed Joseph’s imprisonment at the cost of their own lives.↩back to note source

555 wymmen there comen thre. Though accounts of women coming to the tomb appear in all four gospels, only Mark’s identifies three women (Mark 16:1). The so-called “three Maries” — Mary Magdalene, Mary Salome, and Mary Jacobi — also feature in cycle drama, for example N-Town Play 36 and Chester Play 18.↩back to note source

559 blake. In using color symbolism, the poem engages in discourses of whiteness developing during this period; that is, the poem uses “black” here as a shorthand for sin and wickedness. For a careful detailing of the use of blackness as signifying foreignness — though not always unequivocal evil — see Heng, Invention of Race, chapter 4.↩back to note source

565 Pilate. The historical Pontius Pilate was prefect of Judea under Tiberius from 26/27 CE to 36/37 CE. The Roman gens Pontii is well attested in inscriptions, as is Pilate himself in an inscription on the so-called “Pilate stone” discovered in 1961 in Caesarea Maritima, as well as accounts of Josephus and Philo. This is all we know about the man beyond what is in the New Testament.↩back to note source

583 Al halp nought that thai ne tolde. Compare GN, lines 853–64, in which the knights are bribed to lie and claim that Jesus was stolen by his disciples, which the people believe.↩back to note source

590 Letres of pes. That is, letters granting the bearer safe passage through the territory they control. These letters have literary analogues in a variety of texts, especially medieval travel texts: compare, for example, Marco Polo’s Divisement du Monde, in which Polo’s father and uncle (Niccolo and Maffeo) are given “a golden tablet on which was contained that the . . . envoys, in all the places they might go, should be given all the lodgings they needed and horses and men to escort them from one land to another” (ed. Kinoshita, p. 6), or several pages later where Marco is given similar privileges (p. 13). Similarly, in the Book of John Mandeville, while the Muslims of Jerusalem limit Jewish and Christian access to the Dome of the Rock, a major holy site, the Mandeville narrator is given access to this and other holy sites “on the strength of letters from the Sultan” (ed. Higgins, p. 50); the narrator then describes a system of seals and letters that grant their bearers access to controlled spaces.↩back to note source

629 Mount of Olyvete. The Mount of Olives, located east of Jerusalem on the road from Jericho to Jerusalem, is mentioned in all four Gospels and identified in Acts 1:12 as the site of the Ascension. Shrines existed on the site from before 400 CE, when the early pilgrim traveler Egeria mentions their presence. See Musholt, “Mount of Olives,” New Catholic Encyclopedia, 10:33–34. The site is mentioned as the site of the Ascension in LA, as well, which calculates its distance from the city (1:291, 293).↩back to note source

639 And summe that arisen thoo he aroos. The poem here refers not only to the Gospel of Matthew, but to the events that occur previously in the text, at lines 449–54. These references to events that have occurred or will occur are very frequent in the poem, creating a network of inter- and intratextual references.↩back to note source

649 drede for no Jew. This adjustment from GN emphasizes Joseph of Arimathea’s Christian status and reinforces the strong Jewish/Christian binary present in the poem.↩back to note source

597–656 “Sires,” he seide . . . yee hadden sente. The rescue of Joseph of Arimathea, and the circumstances in which he explains it to the assembled Jews, follows GN, lines 1033–80.↩back to note source

671 In her toun wal thai shetten hym. Joseph of Arimathea is imprisoned inside the town wall as a punishment for his preaching; he stays there for seven years, until he is freed by Titus (lines 4090–4114). There does not seem to be an analogue for this second imprisonment, which extends the Joseph of Arimathea story even from its expansion in GN. For more on early expansions of Joseph of Arimathea, see William John Lyons, Joseph of Arimathea, especially chapter 3.↩back to note source

681 Listneth you, ich wil you rede. Formulae like this one appear frequently in Middle English romance, invoking some sense of oral reception, but this instance is particularly interesting in the context of L. In this manuscript, the first 680 lines have been bound at the end of the book, and thus this formula appears at the start of the codex’s opening folio. Thus, though it is meant to indicate a transition in the poem, it seems to have indicated a beginning to some reader.↩back to note source

700 And spaak thus toward the citee. Many passages in the Gospels were imagined as prefiguring the destruction of Jerusalem by medieval Christian theologians; passages of particular interest included Luke 13:34; Luke 19:41–44; Luke 21:5–6; Luke 23:27–31; Mark 13:5–37; Matthew 23:37–39; and Matthew 24:1–36. This material was of interest in preaching and performance well into the early modern period, as Beatrice Groves attests; see Groves, Destruction of Jerusalem in Early Modern English Literature, especially pp. 18–20.↩back to note source

716 Hosie and Jeremye. References to violence and destruction in Jerusalem are frequent in these books of the Bible; see for example Jeremias 9:11, Jeremias 19, Osee [Hosea] 3:4, Isaias 1, and Isaias 2. Many of these verses are used in present-day theological defenses of Christian Zionism.↩back to note source

724 And seide to hem. For this description of sufferings at the end of time (or at the destruction of Jerusalem), compare especially Luke 21:20–26.↩back to note source

761–92 In the temple . . . ne lenge to duelle. This episode of Jesus overturning tables in the temple originates, of course, in the Gospel, particularly Matthew 21:12–13; Mark 11:15–18; Luke 19:45–46; and John 2:13–22. The whip of cords referenced here is unique to John’s version. The description here is nonetheless noteworthy for its references to “Fraunce” and “pilgrimes”. The poem engages in temporal blurring; “France” would not be a useful geographical designation for the historical Jesus. This blurring emphasizes the extent to which the poem is more closely aligned with Crusades romance than with the historical events of the Temple’s destruction by Roman forces.↩back to note source

804–06 For his word so sore thai quook . . . As ded men oither men in swoughne. Compare John 18:6, where those who have come to capture Jesus fall to the ground when he identifies himself.↩back to note source

831 Dispersioun. That is, the Diaspora, or the displacement of Jewish communities after the 587 BCE capture of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, led by Nebuchadnezzar. As Denise Eileen McCoskey notes, historians differ in identifying the Babylonian or the Roman capture of Jerusalem as primarily central to ideas of diaspora and dispersal (“Diaspora in the Reading of Jewish History,” p. 390). For a rich and complex study of diaspora’s impact on Jewish identity and community, see also Erich Gruen, Diaspora: Jews amid Greeks and Romans. See also lines 867–78, where diaspora in the aftermath of the Temple’s fall is further described.↩back to note source

833 pilrynage. Pilgrimage is here associated with the book of Exodus, in which the Jewish people traveled through the wilderness after escaping captivity in Egypt.↩back to note source

855 servage. While this seems to refer to the Babylonian diaspora and captivity (see note to line 831, above), it also invokes the recurrent emphasis on the lack of a sovereign Jewish homeland in medieval texts. Compare, for example, the Book of John Mandeville, where the Jews living enclosed in the mountains pay rent to the Queen of the Amazons (ed. Higgins, pp. 158–59). See also Akbari, Idols in the East, pp. 115–16.↩back to note source

866 yer of gret perdoun. This seems to refer to a Jubilee year, or a year in which special indulgences were granted to pilgrims to Rome. As Gary Dixon describes the Jubilee in the year 1300, “the Jubilee was unlike any other pilgrimage. First of all, it was authorized solely by the Pope. Secondly, the only acceptable destination was Rome. Thirdly, the Jubilee was limited to a prescribed calendrical period . . . Finally, as a supreme inducement,the Pope granted a religious reward to Jubilee pilgrims which was unprecedented for non-crusaders, a plenary indulgence” (“The Crowd at the Feet,” p. 285). He further notes that crusades and jubilees were closely linked (p. 285), so the invocation of jubilee here adds to the crusading ethos of the poem. It is worth noting that the idea of the Jubilee is Biblical in origin and comes from Jewish tradition: see Leviticus 25:10–16. Further, the tradition of the Jubilee year continues: 2000 was also a Jubilee year.↩back to note source

888 Amonge the Jewes seide thus. This appears to be a reference to the so-called “Testimonium Flavium,” a passage in Jewish Antiquities 18.63–64, where Josephus appears to offer testimony about the divinity of Jesus. In addition, there is also the scene in JW (3.399–408) where Josephus, captured by the Romans, prophesizes to Vespasian that he will soon become emperor. It appears to be some combination of Christian witness and oracular reputation.↩back to note source

938 bisshop of the toun. According to Eusebius (EH 2.23), James was bishop of Jerusalem after Peter left the region; this claim originates in James’s role in the book of Acts (Acts 12, 15). LA identifies him as bishop, claiming to follow Hegesippus (1:271). See also Jerome, On Illustrious Men, chapter 2 (trans. Halton, pp. 7–10).↩back to note source

950 As chamailes knees that ben of horne. See MED kne (n.), sense 2a which cites this line. The implication here is that James’s knees have become hard, like horn, due to consistent prayer and kneeling on unforgiving surfaces.↩back to note source

955 Paske Day. The MED lists “Paske” as both Passover and Easter. This potential confusion indicates the extent to which supersessionist thought is at work here; it also creates confusion in terms of when, precisely, these events are happening. LA claims this martyrdom occurred on Passover in the thirtieth year of James’s tenure as bishop (1:272), and Siege likewise sets the events at “Paske-tyme” (SJ, line 320).↩back to note source

977 fullyng staf. Fulling is the process of beating wool cloth; thus, a fulling staff is a heavy stick one would use to beat the damp cloth. According to LA, this detail of James’s death by fulling staff originates in Hegesippus (1:272).↩back to note source

913–82 Sithen thai slough the yonge Seint Jame . . . his good dede. This account of St. James the Less draws heavily on LA (1:269–77). A short version of the account also appears in the South English Legendary (ed. D’Evelyn and Mills, 1:165–67). The LA account, which in turn draws on Josephus, Hegesippus, and Jerome, sets James’s martyrdom in the temple for his outspoken support of Jesus. Munro suggests Eusebius as the ultimate source for this anecdote (pp. 351–52): Eusebius also describes James’s devotion and martrydom, attributing to Hegesippus the details that James did not bathe; did not drink wine or eat meat; wore linen; and had knees hardened like camel’s horn due to constant prayer (EH 2.23).↩back to note source

1049 Witsoneeday. Whitsunday, or Pentecost, is the day the Christian church celebrates the Holy Spirit descending on Jesus’s apostles after his death, causing them to speak in tongues and preach the Gospel. See Acts 2 for the Biblical account. Pentecost remains a liturgical season in many Christian traditions.↩back to note source

1001–1122 Listneth now . . . meynted forth her fals lawghe. The poem lists ten signs given as warnings of the city’s looming destruction. The first is the witness of James before his martyrdom (lines 999–1000); the second is a feast at which the Jews spontaneously begin to attack and kill each other (lines 1005–18); the third is when a cow meant for sacrifice gives birth to a lamb in the temple (lines 1019–28); the fourth is a bright light that appears in the middle of the night at the temple, as though it were 3 PM (lines 1029–35); the fifth is when the gates of Jerusalem are blown open by a great wind (lines 1036–44); the sixth is when a mysterious voice is heard by the Jewish priests in the temple (lines 1045–56); the seventh is when stars appear in the sky above the city in the shape of a sword (lines 1057–64); the eighth is when stars in the shape of armed men fighting on horseback appear (lines 1065–76); the ninth is when chariots appear in the air (lines 1077–82); and the tenth is when James, Ananias’s son, has a vision of the city’s destruction (lines 1083–1114).

These warnings of the pending fall of Jerusalem seem to come from Eusebius, who attributes them to Josephus. Eusebius lists them as follows: first, the appearance of the star hanging over the city like a sword; second, a comet; third, a light on the altar for an hour during Passover (which he calls the “Feast of Unleavened Bread”); fourth, the cow giving birth to the lamb; fifth, the gate of the city having opened itself (rather than being blown open by a great wind, as in Destruction); sixth, the chariots in the air; seventh, the priests who hear the cry “we go hence”; and lastly, the prophet named Jesus son of Ananias, who laments the fate of Jerusalem despite being beaten and punished (EH 3.8). Many of these warnings also appear in LA, which likewise attributes them to Josephus. LA includes the death of James, the sword in the sky, the bright light in the Temple (there at the ninth hour of the night), the heifer giving birth to a lamb, the chariots and armed men in the sky, the mysterious voice in the temple, and the prophesy of Jesus son of Ananias. However, it omits the comet and the gates opening on their own (1:273). The signs of Jerusalem’s impending fall occur considerably later in Siege, and they are less extensive: Siege mentions a sword hanging over the town, as well as armed men in the air, a calf giving birth to a lamb, and the prophet (nameless in Siege) who is killed by a slung rock (SJ, lines 1221–36). Though Siege recounts them, it does not make much of these signs, perhaps because they appear so late in the poem; by placing them much earlier, they become another means by which Destruction can cast blame on the Jews for their failure to repent the death of Jesus.

1127–28 Natheles her lawghe gan blynne / And the niwe lawghe to bigynne. The distinction made here between the Old Law and the New Law follows a distinction in Christian theology between Judaism and Christianity; that is, after Jesus’s death and resurrection, Christianity posits that Jesus’s teachings as reflected in the canonical Gospels serve as a new law that supercedes Jewish teaching. The distinction is made in Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae, ed. Gilby, particularly questions 90–97.↩back to note source

1130 And “consummatum est” seide. Jesus’s words from the cross, “It is finished”, appear in John 19:30.↩back to note source

1135 Her owen bokes. This is likely a reference to the works of Josephus.↩back to note source

1141 Whan Seint Eleyne the croice fonde. Helen’s discovery of the true cross appears in LA, 1:278–83. Helen, the mother of Constantine, comes to Jerusalem and orders the Jews of the region to tell her where the cross is hidden, locates it, and brings it to Rome along with the nails that held Jesus to the wood. The story, which claims the Jews themselves hid the cross, is often used as justification for antisemitism; compare the episode’s appearance twice in the Book of John Mandeville (ed. Higgins, pp. 10, 47).↩back to note source

1153–54 The erthen vessel . . . of metal is wroughth. Proverbial: compare Whiting P319; Munro notes this reference (p. 353).↩back to note source

1157 Lete we now the Jewes duelle. This type of formula is typical of Middle English romances, appearing, for example, in Bevis of Hampton (“Let we now ben is em Saber / And speke of Beves, the maseger!”, ed. Herzman, Drake, and Salisbury, lines 1345–46) or in Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale (“Lete I this noble duc to Atthenes ryde,” CT I [A] 873). On these romance tags more generally, see Susan Wittig, Stylistic and Narrative Structures. This line also marks the end of the preliminary material in Destruction, after which the poem moves into Vespasian’s healing and the siege of the city.↩back to note source

1161 kyng, Sir Vaspasian. The text has Vespasian as king in Gaul, which is unhistorical. Before his appointment to replace Cestus in Judea, Vespasian had a fairly standard, if not illustrious, career in the government, achieving the consulate in 51 CE. His retirement subsequently may be due to earning the emnity of Claudius’s last and fatal wife, Agrippina. For a comprehensive account of Vespasian’s life, see Barbara Levick’s biography, Vespasian.↩back to note source

1163 meselrie. “Meselrie,” or leprosy, was understood in the Middle Ages as a mark of sinfulness or uncleanness. As R. I. Moore notes, in England, lepers could not inherit property (p. 59); for Christians, leprosy was often associated with sexual misconduct or even heresy. As Moore further suggests, “For all imaginative purposes heretics, Jews and lepers were interchangeable” (p. 65). (See Moore, Formation, pp. 45–65 for an overview of the view and treatment of lepers.) In literary representations, leprosy as punishment is central to Amis and Amiloun, where Amiloun is struck with leprosy for prioritizing his sworn oath to Amis over upholding truth (ed. Foster, lines 1255–82). In Vespasian’s case, then, his leprosy may be interpreted as a sign of his status outside Christian doctrine, though Pope Clement will suggest later in the poem that Vespasian’s suffering, which comes from God, is designed to give God a chance to show his power.↩back to note source

1174 righth name Vaspasianus. According to Suetonius (Divine Vespasian 1, trans. Rolfe), Vespasian derived his name from his mother’s (Vespasia Pollio) family. The Vespasii were a family of some standing at Nursia (modern Norcia) in Umbria.↩back to note source

1177 Of thise waspes his name he took. This passage seeks to explain Vespasian’s name, which purportedly comes from the “waspes” (Latin vespa) living in his nose. In LA, Vespasian suffers from worms, rather than wasps, living in his nose (1:274).↩back to note source

1215 With a viis. Vespasian’s men use a winch, a mechanical device using a pulley system, to deliver his meals. This allows them to feed him without touching him or indeed coming too close to him, emphasizing the smell of his body as well as the fear of contagion that was especially strong where leprosy was concerned. For more on leprosy, see note to line 1163, above.↩back to note source

1221–22 Alle yvels comen of Goddes sonde . . . ich understonde. The implication here is that illnesses come from God and thus can be alleviated by God. See MED ivel (n.), sense 5a.↩back to note source

1223 sept sages. This is the first of two references in the text to the “Seven Sages,” likely a reference to Seven Sages of Rome, a popular frame tale. These references are particularly notable because neither this story nor the later reference to Herod (line 4367) appears in the Seven Sages of Rome. As Moe notes, “The only similarity found between Titus and Vespasian and any version of the Seven Sages is in the Old French Romans des Sept Sages, which has the leprous Vaspasianus, emperor of Rome, healed by Cilofida” (“A Study of Two Manuscripts,” p. 35).↩back to note source

1226 Sir Thiberius. Tiberus was emperor from 14–37 CE. He was the natural son of Augustus’s third wife, Livia, and her first husband, T. Claudius Nero, and he was adopted as Augustus’s last choice heir in 4 CE. This merger of the Julian gens (represented by Augustus, via adoption by Julius Caesar) and the Claudian gens (represented by Tiberius via Livia) led to what modern historians refer to as the Julio-Claudian dynasty, beginning around 30 BCE with Augustus and concluding in 68 CE with the death of Nero.↩back to note source

1231 the tyme of his eighttende yere. That is, the eighteenth year of Tiberius’s reign, putting the crucifixion around 35 CE.↩back to note source

1236 A lettre endited by on assent. This letter is referenced in LA (1:213), which cites Peter Comestor’s Historia Scholastica as its source. However, Comestor reports that Pilate was exiled for the actions described here, which contradicts the narrative provided earlier in LA and in this poem (PL 198.1053–1722, especially columns 1585 and 1680). Eusebius likewise claims that Pilate tormented the Jews after the death of Jesus: “in Judaea Pilate, under whom the crime against the Saviour was perpetrated, made an attempt on the temple, still standing in Jerusalem, contrary to the privileges granted to the Jews, and harassed them to the utmost” (EH 2.5).↩back to note source

1244 To slen the childer giltles. This seems to attribute the Slaughter of the Innocents to Pilate rather than Herod, which contradicts line 2445 later in the poem, where Herod is blamed. However, LA notes that in the Historia Scholastica, the Jews accuse Pilate of the Slaughter of the Innocents as well as the abuse of temple funds (1:213–14).↩back to note source

1246 Of fals goddes set up ymages. While we have no evidence Pilate himself did this, Caligula (reigned 37–41 CE) attempted towards the end of his reign to have a statue of himself set up in the temple in Jerusalem and to have the temple rededicated to the Roman imperial cult. The Roman legate in Syria, P. Petronius, was able to delay the execution of this plan, and it became moot once Caligula was assassinated. See JW 2.184–203 and Jewish Antiquities 18.261–309.↩back to note source

1251 conduyt merveillous. Eusebius describes Pilate’s use of temple money to build an aqueduct (EH 2.6).↩back to note source

1265–67 After hym regned Sir Gayus . . . And sithen Nero. This lineage is not quite accurate — or, rather, it is incomplete. Tiberius was emperor from 14–37, followed by Caligula (37–41 CE); Claudius (41–54 CE); Nero (54–68 CE); and finally Vespasian (69–79 CE) and his son Titus (79–81 CE). Eusebius includes Galba and Otho (both of whom were involved in the Roman civil war) after Nero’s reign (EH 3.5). In addition, Vitellius also made a claim to the throne after Otho, though his forces were defeated by Vespasian’s in 69 CE (the infamous “year of the four emperors”).↩back to note source

1268 That slough bothe Peter and Poule. The legend of Nero’s slaughter of Peter and Paul on the same day appears in LA, 1:344–48. Orosius also recounts this detail (Seven Books of History, ed. Fear, 7.7.10, pp. 334–35).↩back to note source

1273 Galice and Gascoyne. “Galice” here is somewhat confusing. It may refer to Galicia, in northwestern Spain, a region that was under Roman control from 411 to 585. The area gained prominence as part of the pilgrimage route to Santiago de Compostela after the twelfth century (D’Emilio, “Galicia,” Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages, p. 683). However, both Siege and LA give Galatia, which is a region of Asia Minor. Galatia would be a particularly interesting choice since Paul’s letters to the Galatians emphasize correct faith and works over the law (Brooks, “Galatia, Galatians,” Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, p. 447). “Gascoyne” is somewhat more straightforward, presumably suggesting Gascony: Munro, however, suggests that it may be a term for Aquitaine (p. 31). We have no records that Vespasian had any service in these areas (though he did participate in the invasion of Britain under Claudius). See Levick, Vespasian, pp. 4–27.↩back to note source

1276 a son that highth Titus. Titus Flavius Vespasianus was born in 39, and reigned from 79–81 CE. He was the elder son of his father; his younger brother Domitian reigned from 81–96 CE. For more on his life, see Brian Jones, The Emperor Titus.↩back to note source

1277 cité of Burdeux. Bordeaux, a trading port on the Garonne River in France, had links to both Spain (perhaps explaining “Galice” in line 1273) and to Britain (Hsy, “Bordeaux,” Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages, p. 279). The city was also a port of call for English Christian pilgrims traveling to Rome or Jerusalem: see Nicholson, “Haunted Itineraries,” p. 453. A. Boyarin notes that the route from Jerusalem to Bordeaux was a known crusader route (Siege of Jerusalem, p. 34n1).↩back to note source

1285 The maister com bifore his kne. These events unfold differently in Siege. In that version, Nathan departs for Nero, bringing word that the tribute from the Jews is behind, considerably earlier in Siege (SJ, lines 45–54). After being blown off-course, he is similarly questioned by Titus, king of Bordeaux, who suffers from a cancer (that is, a growth) on his face. Nathan provides a description of the Trinity and the life of Jesus in which he explicitly mentions the Vernicle of Veronica and its healing powers (lines 57–172). Most importantly, Nathan’s account leads to Titus’s immediate baptism: he is healed through his belief in Nathan’s words. He cries out in anger at Rome’s complicity in Jesus’s death and is immediately healed, after which he declares that he will avenge Christ’s death (lines 185–88). The poem claims Titus’s baptism, immediately after this vow, “[m]ade hym Cristen kyng that for Crist werred” (line 194).↩back to note source

1300 A wynde me hath dryven another gate. Nathan is blown off course by a storm. Storms at sea that redirect travelers are often taken as a sign of God’s providence in medieval romance, as the popularity of Constance cycle romances like Chaucer’s Man of Law’s Tale and others can attest; see Cooper, The English Romance in Time, especially chapter 2. This is also a common feature of hagiography, particularly notable in narratives of St. Brendan.↩back to note source

1329 arered Lazar the knighth. The raising of Lazarus occurs in John 11:1–45 and features in many medieval dramatic works: see the Digby Magdalen play (lines 869–924); Towneley Play 31; York Play 24; N-Town Play 25; and Chester Play 13.↩back to note source

1337–38 Ten and sexty langages I herd / That thai of her maister lerd. Acts 2 recounts the coming of the Holy Spirit and the disciples’ ability to speak in tongues, commemorated in the feast of Pentecost. The number of languages, however, is not referenced in the account in Acts.↩back to note source

1340 To prechen his name thorough his sonde. The roots of Jesus sending out the disciples are Biblical: compare Matthew 28:18–19 and Mark 16:14–18.↩back to note source

1357–58 Sir Nero . . . slough hymselven sone than. Nero, when it was clear his reign was over, did prepare himself for suicide, but couldn’t go through with it, getting a slave Epaphroditus to strike the killing blow. “What an artist dies with me!” the fatuous prince exclaimed. See Suetonius, Nero 49, trans. Rolfe.↩back to note source

1361 Onon thai chosen Vaspasian. When Vitellius’s forces were defeated by Vespasian’s forces at Cremona, Vespasian himself was still in Egypt. At the defeat of Vitellius, the Senate acclaimed Vespasian emperor on December 21, 69 CE. He had left Titus in command at Judea as he tried for the throne.↩back to note source

1378 Pilates letter. References to a letter from Pilate to Tiberius that recounts the events of Jesus’s death and resurrection also appears in Eusebius (EH 2.2), Orosius (Seven Books of History, ed. Fear, 7.4.5, p. 325), and Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, where, according to Arnold Williams, it is “Christian in tone” (Characterization, p. 2).↩back to note source

1407 I sat as justise in domes sted. Pilate’s insistence here that he is not guilty of Jesus’s death parallels line 1434 and note, below. While this has its origins in Matthew 27:24, in which Pilate washes his hands and disavows guilt in Jesus’s death, this moment is strongly reflected in cycle plays: see for example Chester Play 16, lines 235–44 (p. 308). Pilate, as a procurator, was more of a bureaucrat than a military governor; the real military power in the region lay with the governor of Syria who commanded legions.↩back to note source

1434 It was her dede and her thoughth. Continued blaming of Jews for Christ’s death was, of course, a common problem in the theology of the Middle Ages and indeed to the present day; the emphasis on Jewish culpability is especially noteworthy in the Gospel of John. Rubin notes this imagined guilt for the crucifixion became increasingly more central to Christian theology alongside the proliferation of host desecration narratives: “Jews were increasingly being associated with vicious and wilful attacks against the host, just as the theological interpretation of their culpability in the crucifixion was being rethought by mendicant theologians” (Corpus Christi, p. 122). See also Rubin, Gentile Tales, p. 141.↩back to note source

1444 To saien that he was stolen hem froo. This order given to the knights repeats Matthew 28:11–15, in which the chief priests pay the guards to report that Jesus’s body was stolen by his disciples. The guards also spread this false information in GN (lines 853–64).↩back to note source

1471 He was warned also by his wyf. In Matthew 27:19, on the basis of a dream, Pilate’s wife warns him that he should not condemn Jesus. Pilate receives a similar warning in GN, lines 193–200.↩back to note source

1484 Hou Pilate com into this word. This is the beginning of a lengthy digression on the life of Pilate, one of two major episodes not present in the short version of Destruction. On the surface level, it seems to echo Cain’s fratricide of Abel, though in Pilate’s case it is only his half-brother. LA recounts essentially this narrative (1:211). A similar version appears in the South English Legendary, where the poem also recounts Vespasian’s victory and the imprisonment and death of Pilate (ed. D’Evelyn and Mills, 2:697–706). This account of Pilate’s origins also has clear echoes with the poem’s later, longer digression about the life of Judas Iscariot.↩back to note source

1485–88 It was a kyng that highth Tyrus . . . He knouleched, ich understonde. This history — and life — of Pilate was a common legend in the medieval period. Arnold Williams identifies similar accounts in the Stanzaic Life of Christ, LA, Higden’s Polychronicon, and Mirk’s Festial (Characterization, p. 9). For more on the historical Pilate, see note to line 565, above.↩back to note source

1512 for trowage the kyng of Fraunce. It is unclear why Pilate would owe Vespasian tribute. Even when Vespasian is emperor, it is the procurator’s role to ensure that tax revenue flows to the imperial purse from the provincials; that is, the people of Judea would owe tribute to Rome, not the procurator himself.↩back to note source

1533 Pounthes. Nothing is known of Pilate’s geographical origins from before his arrival in Judea in 26 CE, and “Pontius” is in fact a family name. See note to line 565, above.↩back to note source

1551 Heroudes. Herod the Great was an Idumaean, the son of Antipater the Idumean, a high ranking official under Hyrcanus II. While Herod and his father were Jewish, they were converts (Jews had conquered Idumaea first in 163 BCE, and around 125 BCE they forcibly converted the population). Herod owed his position to the skill he and his father possessed in gaining power and authority by dealing with the Romans (in this case, Julius Caesar). His nearly 40 year rule of Judea found the region stable, but Herod’s undermining of the high priesthood as a rival power base, as well as his murderous failure to ensure a stable succession, resulted in intermittent tensions between Rome and the Jews culminating in the first Jewish war, due to the lack of a stable client ruler (frequently necessitating direct Roman management in the form of procurators like Pilate), as well as a class of elites who could be intermediaries for Roman rule with the people of Judea. On these issues, see Martin Goodman, Ruling Class of Judea. Josephus records the rise and fall of Herod in JW 1.203–673 and Jewish Antiquities 14.158–17.192.↩back to note source

1570 As yee mowen in the Passioun here. Pilate sends Jesus to Herod in Luke 23:4–12. Whereas Luke’s Gospel suggests that the two have been enemies, Destruction details their early friendship (lines 1551–70). Pilate’s sending of Jesus to Herod is another moment popular in cycle plays (Chester Play 16, lines 151–57, p. 291; N-Town Play 30; York Play 30).↩back to note source

1581 A floure of blood cometh hem on. The idea that male Jews experienced menstruation is a common and troubling stereotype of the period, one that served to promote notions of Jewish uncleanliness. (Menstruating women were also considered unclean.) This myth was part of a larger trend of systematically imagining Jewish bodies as animal-like and physically inferior to Christian bodies. See Kruger, “Bodies of Jews,” pp. 303–04.↩back to note source

1595 Sir Pilate. In reality, Pilate’s tenure in Judea ended in 36/37 CE. According to Josephus (Jewish Antiquities 18.85–89), Pilate had soldiers slaughter a number of Samaritans in the village of Tirathana near Mt. Gerizim. Pilate claimed the Samaritans were armed, although the Samaritans themselves (complaining to L. Vitellius, the governor of Syria and father of Vespasian’s rival for the throne) claimed they were unarmed. Vitellius sent Pilate to Rome to be judged by Tiberius, who passed away while Pilate was en route. We hear no more of Pilate in the ancient sources.↩back to note source

1601 Lucifer first. Lucifer’s position as a fallen angel was well-established in Biblical drama (Chester Play 1, York Play 1, Towneley Play 1). This idea has its origins in the Apocalypse of St. John (12:7–10), and developed considerably from the brief link there.↩back to note source

1615–16 helle brast / And his owen out he cast. A reference to the “harrowing of hell” (compare Dante, trans. Singleton, Inferno 4.52–63), where Christ (between his death and resurrection) descended into hell and rescued his Hebrew ancestors. While it is only hinted at in the canonical gospels, the event forms a major part of the GN, a major source for our text, and appears frequently in English cycle drama.↩back to note source

1620 And thai that duden hym to dede. In this poem’s context, “thai” are literally Jews.↩back to note source

1656 Cesars tyme bifelle. Since Jesus’s death took place during the reign of Tiberius, the use here shows how Caesar quickly shifted from personal family name to a title.↩back to note source

1663 His oo deciple his traitour was. This is the start of the first account of Judas’s life and death, a theme that will later be expanded considerably.↩back to note source

1666 thritty pens. Matthew 27:1–8 recounts Judas returning the pieces of silver and hanging himself. The thirty pieces of silver are strongly picked up in the Judas plays of the York Cycle; see in particular Play 32, “The Remorse of Judas.”↩back to note source

1687 me met a drem. Velosian dreams of going to Jerusalem, arriving at the temple of King David, where he finds a solution to Vespasian’s suffering. This dream and Velosian’s plan are a key difference between Destruction and Siege. In Siege, Velosian does not appear as a named character, nor does this dream scene happen; rather, Vespasian is inspired by Titus’s miraculous healing to send for Peter, currently Pope, who tells him about the vernicle; the knights of Rome then go to Jerusalem in search of Veronica and the vernicle specifically (SJ, lines 213–220). Here, the dream functions instead as a prophetic revelation.↩back to note source

1701 For he is shirreve and longe hath ybe. Eusebius claims that Pilate was given the administration of Judaea in twelfth year of Tiberius’s reign and governed for 10 years (EH 1.9).↩back to note source

1705–06 Vaspasyan that hath power . . . is Neroes viker. In fact, Vespasian was out of favor with Nero: while accompanying the emperor on a tour of Greece, Vespasian had dozed off during one of Nero’s theatrical performances (Suetonius, Divine Vespasian 4, trans. Rolfe). His appointment in 66 to suppress the Jewish revolt was precisely because of his political exile. Even if he won a signal victory against the rebels, it would hardly make him a threat to Nero’s power.↩back to note source

1718 he dooth you no profiit. This argument would be more properly aimed at Nero rather than Vespasian, but in a Roman context, it is an effective one; if no revenue reaches Rome from the province, then the procurator (Pilate) is failing to do his job.↩back to note source

1749 He was a pryvé Cristen man. Jacob is one of several secret Christians living in and around Jerusalem in the poem; the presence of Jacob and figures like him is a key part of how Destruction in particular erases Jewish identity and amplifies the antisemitic elements of its counterpart text Siege.↩back to note source

1770 Yif any thing be left of his. Velosian explicitly asks for objects belonging to Jesus, invoking the practice of contact relics for healing. Bodily relics were pieces of the saints — fingers, bones, blood, or other body parts — while contact relics, or objects that had been touched by the saints during their lives, were also believed to have healing power. As Carolyn Walker Bynum notes, “The faithful revered not only bodies and body parts but also pieces of cloth, dust, water, flowers, or herbs that had touched the saints or their tombs” (Christian Materiality, p. 136). These relics were especially important in the cases of Jesus and Mary since their bodies had been taken directly to heaven according to theology, making bodily relics incredibly rare (p. 137).↩back to note source

1797 Als I seigh it with myne eighen. Jacob identifies himself as a witness at the death of Christ and links himself to one of the three Marys in Mark 16:1 who went to Jesus’s tomb and discovered he was not there. (It is likely that Mary Jacobi is interpreted as the daughter of Jacob; see note to line 555, above.) Jacob’s first-hand witness has a similar kind of “proximity power” as the object Velosian asks for; Jacob’s closeness to Jesus thus authenticates his account for Velosian.↩back to note source

1838 To fecchen of hym Neroes rent. Tribute from the provinces could be paid in coin or in kind (e.g. grain).↩back to note source

1847–48 Sir Pilate thai founden there . . . for to here. Finding Pilate in a synagogue is perhaps surprising, as he identifies himself as markedly not Jewish in the Gospels (see John 18:35); the poem’s interest in making him a Jew fits into its attempts to create a strong binary, much as the figures who help Titus and Vespasian are often secret Christians. Standing to hear a service occurs in many Middle English romances; compare, for example, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, in which Gawain hears mass while armed before setting off in search of the Green Knight (ed. Andrew and Waldron, Fitt 2, line 592).↩back to note source

1863 Al the trowage is byhynde. While this is a failure for a procurator, properly this would be an issue with Nero, not Vespasian. It is characteristic of the poem’s incuriosity about temporal order to treat Vespasian as if he has already become emperor.↩back to note source

1888 Failen his visage for to knowe. Velosian makes the journey to be sure he recognizes Pilate’s face. This allows Velosian to be the first of Vespasian’s men to recognize Pilate upon their arrival in Jerusalem; see lines 3038–46. The implication here is that Velosian, at least, is already planning vengeance against those responsible for the death of Jesus, as he told Vespasian in lines 1713–16.↩back to note source

1899 a knighth that highth Barabas. Barabbas is the figure released from prison by Pilate instead of Jesus in the Gospels (named in Mark 15:7–15, Luke 23:17–25, and John 18:39–40). He receives an upgrade here to knightly status, while he is often described as a thief. Robert Eisenman notes that the Greek word used to describe Barabbas, lēstēs, often translated as “bandit,” is the word that Josephus uses to refer to those involved in uprisings and to revolutionaries (James, p. 178).↩back to note source

1977 With a flixa I was ysmyten. By tradition, Veronica is healed of dysentery by Jesus; she has come to be conflated with the woman healed of a blood issue in Matthew 9:20–22. In LA, she tells Volusian (here Velosian) that she sought to have Jesus’s picture painted while he was going about and preaching; when Jesus heard her request, he pressed the cloth to his face and left an image of his face there (1:212). The account in Destruction places Veronica and the cloth much closer to the moment of Jesus’s crucifixion, following after Mary and Jesus on his way to be crucified. LA is likely the source of the episode as recounted here. Veronica’s role is considerably larger in Destruction than in Siege. In Siege, Nathan and Peter both describe the vernicle, which is directly sent for (SJ, lines 165–72, 215), and Veronica relinquishes it to Peter, the Pope, on her return to Rome. She speaks only one line in Siege, committing herself and the vernicle to Peter’s keeping (SJ, line 224). Her much more central role in Destruction suggests a different understanding of the role of holy women is at work in the poem. Eusebius likewise describes the woman with an issue of blood found in the Gospels, identifying her home as a site with memorials of her healing (EH 7.18).↩back to note source

2019 In my cofre I have it sperd. Veronica keeps the vernicle in a “cofre,” a term for a trunk or chest for storing valuables that can also refer to a shrine (MED cofre [n.]). This treatment is very much in keeping with the actual treatment of relics in the later Middle Ages; they were often kept in reliquaries that obscured the objects themselves, and access to these holy objects was highly mediated for pilgrims and others who traveled to visit them. For more on relic discourse, see Malo, Relics and Writing, pp. 3–6.↩back to note source

2054 That was at Jhesuses Passioun. Velosian asks for witnesses of the passion, a request in line with his earlier request for contact relics that conveys his desire for material connections and proximity to Jesus. However, he also seems to be asking for the culprits, those responsible for putting Christ to death, given that these people come and boast of their role in the deed when Jacob invites them to the inn.↩back to note source

2094–95 he mighth oure temple felle / And raisen it on the thridde day. These lines reference John 2:19–21, but they also refer back to lines 189–94 of the poem itself.↩back to note source

2133–34 Whan tyme cometh thou art in nede, / Than oweth men fruschipp shewen in dede. Proverbial: compare Whiting F634, which identifies variants of this sentiment as early as 1025. The modern equivalent, “a friend in need is a friend indeed,” remains in use.↩back to note source

2167 And kissed hym often mouthe to mothe. This is an enthusiastic, warm greeting, meant to emphasize Vespasian’s gratitude to Velosian for his travels. Kisses between men are not necessarily unusual as a greeting or goodbye in medieval romance; see Carolyn Dinshaw, “A Kiss is Just a Kiss,” for an extensive analysis.↩back to note source

2183–84 I shal hem brynge to confusioun / Alle that hym duden swiche passioun. Vespasian’s first instinct is revenge, much as Titus’s is in Siege (SJ, lines 185–88).↩back to note source

2191–92 To coroune his son / For of his liif thai weren in doute. Vespasian’s move to crown Titus before he is healed may be taken as a sign of Vespasian’s responsible kingship, ensuring continuity and stability in the event of his death; this trend occurs in medieval romances such as Sir Orfeo, where Orfeo entrusts his kingdom to his steward before departing in search of his wife, designing a method of choosing a successor in the case of his death (ed. Laskaya and Salisbury, lines 201–18). Concern about continuity of rulership is also key to the crisis and plot in other narratives, such as Chaucer’s Clerk’s Tale (CT IV [E] 85–140). Vespasian’s other son, Domitian, seems to play no role in the poem (as he was a teenager at the time of the events).↩back to note source

2204 Seint Clement. Clement, a first century pope, was reportedly martyred “for the skill and extent of his apostolic activities in Rome” (Farmer, Dictionary of Saints, p. 105). Interestingly for this narrative, his miracles and death are both associated with water: this makes the miracle of his blessing the sea (lines 2721–28), so none are lost on the oversea journey, particularly appropriate. Clement’s presence and papacy is also a key difference from Siege, where Peter is Pope when Vespasian is healed (SJ, line 205).↩back to note source

2209–10 For wise men drawen to the wyse, / And foles unto the foles gyse. Proverbial: see Whiting, M344, which cites only this reference. However, Whiting links this phrase to the more general “like to like,” L272, which is very frequently attested.↩back to note source

2227 He slough hem bothe upon a day. See note to line 1268, above. Tacitus, Annales 15.44 (trans. Jackson) records Nero’s persecutions of Christians (without specifically naming Peter or Paul) in the context of finding scapegoats for the great fire of 64 CE.↩back to note source

2238 For Vaspasian is next of blood. Nero left no issue upon his demise, ending the Julio-Claudian dynasty. Vespasian may have initially found an “in” at court via his relationship with Antonia Caenis, a freedwoman of Antonia Minor, great-grandmother of Nero (Suetonius, Divine Vespasian 3, trans. Rolfe).↩back to note source

2240–41 For God is ny there thre or tweye / Ben gadred or speken in his name. These lines echo Matthew 18:20.↩back to note source

2287–88 For he hath power . . . that I ne may. By deferring authority to Clement, Veronica reinforces gendered religious hierarchies regarding who may convert and preach. The moment echoes similar instances where holy women can only convert others to a particular point; while they may be the source of healing power or authority, they often send or bring clerics with them to do the actual converting. Compare Digby Mary Magdalene, lines 1675–83, in which Mary Magdalene sends the newly converted King of Marseilles to Peter in Jerusalem for baptism and further Christian instruction. Likewise, Cecilia of Chaucer’s Second Nun’s Tale sends her husband Valerian to be converted by Urban (CT VIII [G] 169–89).↩back to note source

2337 Fyve wittes. The five senses were imagined as key tools in humanity’s ability to perceive God’s presence in the world. See for example Bonaventure, The Mind’s Road to God, in which he describes the senses as doors through which the world enters the soul (ed. Boas, pp. 14–15).↩back to note source

2368 He migth noughth dyen verrement. The notion of Jesus as fully human and fully divine — thus both God and able to die as sacrifice for humankind — preoccupied many early Christian theologians. See especially Augustine, The Trinity, book 4, chapter 2 (trans. McKenna, pp. 133–34). For an explanation of this theory in the work of Athanasius, see Khaled Anatolios, “Athanasius’s Christology Today,” especially pp. 45–46.↩back to note source

2397 Man is hym nexte of every kynde. On the theology of humankind’s proximity to God, see for example St. Bonaventure, The Mind’s Road to God: “the soul itself is the image of God and His likeness” (ed. Boas, p. 23).↩back to note source

2410 For oo peny. This is the first reference to this inversion, which will be repeated throughout: Vespasian proposes to sell Jews thirty for a penny, in retaliation for their purchase of Jesus for thirty pieces of silver. Selling slaves was a typical way Romans got rich from war and imperial expansion.↩back to note source

2419 To wreken hym. In Clement’s view, Vespasian’s illness is a sign of God’s hand; that is, Vespasian is ill entirely so he can be cured and then wreak vengeance on the Jews.↩back to note source

2445 The first Heroudes that the children slough. This line references Herod’s Slaughter of the Innocents, a narrative that appears in Matthew 2:16 as well as in medieval drama (Chester Play 10, York Play 19, N-Town Play 20). There are two Herods referred to in this poem, though LA identifies three: Herod of Ascalon, who was king at the time of Jesus’s birth and ordered the Slaughter of the Innocents; Herod Antipas, who killed John the Baptist; and Herod Agrippa, who killed St. James and imprisoned St. Peter (1:56).↩back to note source

2462 Lazar he highth. This is not the first reference in the poem to Lazarus: see note to line 1329, above.↩back to note source

2504 the vernycle. The word “vernicle” describes the cloth used to wipe Jesus’s face on the cross that, according to legend, carried the imprint of Jesus’s face. See MED vernicle (n.). For the retelling of this episode in the poem, see lines 1986–2024.↩back to note source

2507 Seint Clement was thoo revest. Clement puts on vestments, markers of his clerical office, before accepting the vernicle. The moment emphasizes concern about the proper treatment of relics as well as the special authority of the ordained to handle and control access to them. Relics here thus engage in sacramentality that is deeply imbricated with clerical authority; as Miri Rubin has demonstrated, medieval Christianity functioned as a cultural system: “The whole structure of the church, the approval of secular authorities, the very naturalness of the only place of worship and of a comprehensive worldview preached and taught frequently, was empowered in the claim of sacramentality and in the practice of an exclusive right of mediation” (Corpus Christi, pp. 8–9). This mediating power is especially noteworthy in the case of relics; by the fourteenth century, access to relics was incredibly mediated spatially, through both reliquaries and church spaces; see Malo, Relics and Writing, p. 31. In Siege, the vernicle is given a procession through a Roman temple, and idols crumble as the cloth is carried through the space (SJ, lines 235–40).↩back to note source

2528 a slough fro hym gan falle. MED slough (n.2) refers to this line in sense 1b. The idea here is that the skin falls from Vespasian like a snakeskin — an appropriate remedy for someone experiencing leprosy, a disease primarily of the skin.↩back to note source

2569–70 I schal fighth / For swiche a lorde and for his righth. Questions of just warfare and the idea of the just war circulated throughout the later Middle Ages. Writers such as Honoré Bovet’s and Christine de Pisan’s works drew on codes established by Vegetius’s De re militari, which itself survived in over 260 Latin manuscripts; as Yeager notes, “it was ‘just war’ theory which authorized Christians to undertake crusading on all of its fronts; condoning wars which satisfied such requirements as just cause, right intention, and right authority or divine sanction” (“Captivity and Execution,” p. 86). These debates extended beyond guidelines for warfare, influencing literary production of the period; John Gower includes a passage that advocates against crusading in book 3 of the Confessio Amantis (CA 3.2485–2638), while many medieval romances, such as Richard Coer de Lion, champion holy war. For a more detailed account of just war theory at work in medieval England, see SJ, pp. 24–30.↩back to note source

2581–82 Whan we have don and comen agein, / We shullen ben cristned. This insistence upon completing deeds before baptism also occurs in Malory’s Morte d’Arthur in the famous case of Palomides, who believes in Jesus and Mary but vows not to be baptized until he has achieved the Questing Beast and completed seven battles (Works, ed. Vinaver, p. 436). This is also a major deviation from Siege, in which Titus is baptized immediately upon hearing the story of Jesus’s death and resurrection.↩back to note source

2597 Londes and rentes he gaf hem wyde. Vespasian in effect enfeoffs Clement and Veronica, rewarding them with land in his kingdom. The episode thus reads as a precursor of sorts to the Donation of Constantine, the (apocryphal) document that gave the Bishop of Rome property and worldly wealth in Rome (Montero, “Donation of Constantine,” Encyclopedia of Ancient Christianity). Here, though, the land is meant to secure Clement and Veronica’s immediate welfare, and giving land to the Church is presented as uncontroversial throughout this poem. These grants also reflect similar ones given to Josephus after the war (see Josephus, Life, ed. Mason, 422–23).↩back to note source

2602 I rede that yee ycristned bee. Clement’s concern is that baptism will protect them in the fight to come. Medieval Christian theology considered baptism the point of entry into Christian community, as baptism purged the newly baptized of their pre-existing sins; thus, baptism played a crucial role in marking conversion. As Siobhan Bly Calkin puts it, “For late medieval theologians, what makes a Christian is the pronunciation of a specific verbal formula over the body of the candidate as that body is washed with water . . . The words of baptism translate the candidate from a state of sin into one of grace, and from outsider to Christian insider and member of the body of Christ” (“Romance Baptisms,” pp. 106–07). Eamon Duffy notes that the baptismal liturgy included some of the same readings as those used at exorcisms (Stripping of the Altars, pp. 280–81). Vespasian’s response, that he wants to avenge Jesus first, seems to echo that of knights such as Palomides, who set tasks for themselves in order to “earn” baptism; see note to lines 2581–82, above. Vespasian’s reluctance here might mirror that of Constantine, who was not baptized until his deathbed (Eusebius, Life of Constantine, trans. Cameron and Hall, 4.61–63).↩back to note source

2620 that kynde. When used to refer to a group of people, kynde in Middle English tends to mean tribe or even race, as in a class of people. See MED, kinde (n.), sense 10a. In imagining Jews as a race, the poem engages in the same biopolitical and theological race-making that the Church developed throughout the period; England was particularly notable for the earliness of its racialized thinking against Jews. See most recently Heng, Invention of Race, chapters 1 and 2.↩back to note source

2644 To Sir Nero to leten us gon. Vespasian writes for leave, since Nero has jurisdiction over Jerusalem at this point. Since Vespasian technically holds his lands through Nero’s authority, he seeks permission to wage war on another part of the empire. While in Destruction, Nero is oblivious until Vespasian and Titus send for leave, in Siege, he is already angry that his tribute has been withheld. As a result, it is the senators of Rome, not Nero alone, who collectively determine that Titus and Vespasian are the appropriate parties to go and punish the Jews, though Titus and Vespasian are motivated by keeping the vows they made upon being healed rather than by Rome’s economic concerns (SJ, lines 265–80). In reality it was Gallus’s shocking defeat at Beth Horon that led Nero to appoint Vespasian (at the time out of favor with the emperor) to suppress the revolt (Josephus JW 3.1–8). According to Orosius, Vespasian was sent by Nero to quell Jewish rebellions in the regions (Seven Books of History, ed. Fear, 7.9.2–3, pp. 337–38).↩back to note source

2657 that is us ydo. Vespasian adopts the death of Jesus as a trespass done against him and Titus, making the vengeance both holy and personal and identifying himself as Christian despite his pre-baptismal state. Nero’s identification of those in Jerusalem as Vespasian and Titus’s enemies at line 2665 reinforces their association with Christianity, since it makes the wrong done to Jesus into a wrong done to them.↩back to note source

2674 Graunteth youre pes to Cristen menne. Clement and Veronica ask Vespasian to put the Christians in his land under his protection while he is away, reversing their status as persecuted earlier in the poem. (Compare Clement’s claims at lines 2261–62 that no Christians dare show themselves for fear of being chopped to pieces.) Vespasian agrees, but also gives Clement authority over all the Christians in his land in his absence.↩back to note source

2714 An hundreth thousande men. The exact numbers of men in a Roman legion varied, but a Roman legion on paper had about 5,400 men, subdivided into cohorts. Vespasian began his campaign with four legions, the legio V Macedonica, X Fretensis, XII Fulminata (already in Syria, weakened after fighting at Beth Horon), and XV Apollinaris. Even including auxiliaries, this would give Vespasian and Titus about 25,000 men (representing about 1/7 of the total military strength of the empire — 28 legions — at the time). Even with allied contributions, at most Vespasian could count on half of this number, and likely far less. See Mason, HJW, pp. 139–53, for a good primer on the Roman army. As Susanne Yeager notes in her “Captivity and Execution,” many late medieval English readers would have no sense of the scale of such a number of people or the size of such a group, as “the population of London alone numbered less than 20,000 people” (p. 93).↩back to note source

2732 Acres. Acre (or Akko) was a major target for Crusaders; Boas identifies it as “the most important port city on the Palestinian coast” (Crusader Archaeology, p. 32). A central administrative center during the thirteenth century while under Christian control, it was a walled city in the fourteenth century, with several gates of entry on land as well as a substantial harbor (Boas, Crusader Archaeology, pp. 32–35). The city was known in antiquity (and to Josephus) as Ptolemais. While here it is given up without a fight, battles for control of Acre feature in many Crusades romances; see for example Richard Coer de Lyon, ed. Larkin, lines 2891–2956, in which Richard burst through chains designed to limit access to the harbor using bees as a form of biological warfare.↩back to note source

2740 slough and brent alle that he fonde. Vespasian is enacting what would come to be known as a scorched-earth policy, destroying the area around the city despite their surrender. This is an occasional ancient strategy, but not always wise because it was more efficient for the invading army to use the produce of the land for themselves, which both aided them and hurt the enemy. Josephus records (JW 3.29ff.) in his account of Vespasian’s early offensive that he torched the first several towns in his methodical march around Galilee.↩back to note source

2744 Japh. Jaffa “was the main port of the kingdom south of Acre and served as the port of Jerusalem” (Boas, Crusader Archaeology, p. 49). As a result, the city was the site of considerable violence from 1099 onward (Boas, Crusader Archaeology, pp. 49–51).↩back to note source

2751–52 Rayn and hayl, frost and snowe, / And styf wynde that loude gan blowe. Bad weather is a common feature of Crusades romances; in Richard Coer de Lyon (ed. Larkin, lines 2837–46), for example, it impairs Richard’s forces and kills a considerable number of soldiers. Here, in contrast, the weather serves as a type of divine intervention that gives Vespasian the advantage, as this weather only impacts Jaffa; his own host enjoys good weather throughout their journey (lines 2755–60).↩back to note source

2779 Sir Japhel. Japhel is not an historical figure. He functions as a kind of native guide to the area, positioned to give Vespasian crucial information about the terrain. Japhel is related to Caesar, which makes him (in this poem’s genealogy) also related to Vespasian, who is “next of blood” to inherit the empire.↩back to note source

2808 Pellam. Eusebius explains that the Christians in Jerusalem were commanded by revelation “to depart and dwell in one of the cities of Perea which they called Pella” (EH 3.5). LA likewise gives Pella (1:274) — which is a city in the upper Jordan valley where the early Christian church of Jerusalem did indeed settle after the fall of the city (MacCulloch, Christianity, p. 107).↩back to note source

2826 kyng of Galilé. Archelaus, referenced here, is identified as one of Herod’s six sons in the LA (1:56); according to this account, which cites Macrobius as its source, Herod lost two sons to treason, fell ill at age 70 with itching, pain, a horrible smell, and worms in his testicles. He was seized by a coughing fit while peeling an apple and moved to stab himself. Herod was unpopular with his subjects, who were pleased at his close brush with death, though Herod was stopped from stabbing himself. His son Antipater tried to bribe the guards to free him from prison to assume Herod’s place. In a rage, Herod named Archelaus his heir and died five days later (LA, 1:58–59). Archelaus plays a minor role in Josephus. One of Herod’s many sons by several different wives, Archelaus was not much involved in the lethal intrigues between Herod’s eldest sons that takes up so much of the first book of the Jewish War. After coming to the throne, Archelaus quickly faced a small popular uprising, and worried that it would spread, authorized a lethal suppression, which led to the deaths of a few thousand people within Jerusalem (JW 2.5–15). This augured ill for Archelaus’s reign, and made Augustus reluctant to confirm him as Herod’s full heir. Instead, Archelaus became ethnarch of Judea, Samaritis and Idumaea. In fact, his full brother, Antipas, was appointed by Augustus as Tetrarch of Galilee, when Antipas was disputing the succession with his brother (JW 2.20–38). Archelaus failed in the main task of a Roman client ruler, regional stability, and so was removed in 6 CE and banished to Vienne, in Gaul (JW 2.111–17). It is interesting to note that this is where, according to the present poem, Pilate will be exiled.↩back to note source

2828 slough the children alle. See note to line 2445, above.↩back to note source

2834 And alle to Jerusalem thai come. The people of the country here come to Jerusalem for safety as Vespasian’s armies approach, seeking refuge behind the city walls, in a moment parallel to events in Siege (SJ, lines 313–14). This is, indeed, the point of city walls, which were designed to withstand sieges. Medieval fortifications were incredibly thick: Boas notes most substantial castles had three or four meter-thick walls (Crusader Archaeology, p. 120).↩back to note source

2851–52 For loos is better, als it is founde, / In wood than in toun bounde. See Whiting W558, which cites only this instance of this proverb. Munro also notes this in her commentary (p. 355).↩back to note source

2858 Fourty yer to amendement. Eusebius claims that the inhabitants of Jerusalem had forty years to repent their deeds after the death of Jesus (EH 3.7), and the poem uses this same number elsewhere (see line 5118). This math, however, does not quite work historically: while forty years after the death of Jesus would have been roughly 74 CE, the historical war began in 66 CE, as Mason notes (HJW, p. 3).↩back to note source

2870 And hereof borowe dar I be. The borowe, or guarantor, is a common figure in both financial transactions and knightly duels: the idea here is that Archilaus is vouching for the truth of Pilate’s statement. The term is used both literally, in legal situations or to refer to a sponsor or witness, and more figuratively, as here. See MED borgh (n.), especially senses 2a and 2b.↩back to note source

2875–78 For water fresh . . . thai mosten have. Archelaus’s plan is for them to shut themselves up inside Jerusalem, since there is no source of fresh water for Vespasian’s armies near the city. Thus, he expects that they will be able to easily outlast Vespasian’s armies inside Jerusalem by providing themselves with ample food and other supplies. Adrian Boas notes that Jerusalem had four major methods of supplying itself with water, including aqueducts that carried water from Bethlehem, its own spring, public and private cisterns, and “large open reservoirs both within and outside the city walls” (Crusader Archaeology, p. 31).↩back to note source

2907 Pask day. The siege of Jerusalem begins on Passover, though this term is also used occasionally in Middle English to designate Easter. See also the note to line 955, above.↩back to note source

2927 engynes. That is, siege engines, or large military weaponry. These could include catapults, ballistae, large circumvallations, earthworks, and sapping operations. Modern sites (like Masada) can provide archaeological remains from the level of earthworks, like the enormous ramp at Masada, or ammunition and traps, like on the fields of Gaul.↩back to note source

2931 With terbardels and wylde fyre. The barrel of tar here is being used as an incendiary material, in conjunction with Greek fire. Greek fire, an oil-based mixture, is similarly notable for burning easily. In effect, these are flaming projectiles being hurled at and over the walls of Jerusalem by Vespasian’s army. It is still not entirely clear how Greek fire was produced; it was in use well before the First Crusade, when it was likely brought to Europe by the French, though it was not commonly used there (Norris, Siege Warfare, pp. 172–73).↩back to note source

2933–34 Sowes to mynen men maden sleighe, / And borfreys to reysen on heighe. Sow was another name for a battering ram, used to pound against walls and gates (Norris, Siege Warfare, figure 118 and p. 215). Borfreys, or towers, were crucial to siege warfare, as they provided a platform from which soldiers could fight soldiers on the walls (Norris, Siege Warfare, p. 211).↩back to note source

2949 so large withinne. The city of Jerusalem during the second temple period was built up surrounding the enormous Temple plaza on the mount. (The archaeological remains are most often from Herod’s reign, unsurprising given his dedication to public works.) A series of three city walls of increasing size protected the city within, and separated the Temple precinct from the residential districts (JW 5.142–59).↩back to note source

2959 seven yere. The war has historically been dated from 66 to 73 or 74 CE, for a total of seven or eight years; however, Mason notes that from the Roman perspective, the war lasted from 67–70 CE (HJW, p. 3). The idea of a seven-year siege has symbolic significance from the Christian perspective, however, as seven is a powerful number in Christian imagination: consider, for example, the seven deadly sins or seven Acts of Corporal Mercy. For further consideration of the numerology of seven, see Peck, “Number as Cosmic Language”, pp. 18–19.↩back to note source

2974 Hou we shullen oure water lede. Japhel’s plan is for an aqueduct made from the skins of animals, stitched together to transport water from the Jordan river to Jerusalem, a distance of roughly 21 miles east. Aqueducts, of course, were commonly built and used by Romans. Inhabitants of medieval England would be well aware of them, as remains of Roman aqueducts at sites like Bath and Dorchester make clear. Maintenance of water supplies was a key element in withstanding a siege by an enemy force.↩back to note source

2990 Josephath. The Valley of Josaphat is Biblical in origin, mentioned in Joel 3:2 and 3:12, identified by early Christian writers such as Eusebius and Jerome as a part of the Kidron Valley. As Jerome Murphy-O’Connor describes, “The prophets speculated on where God would finally judge the world. Joel declared for a valley called Jehoshaphat (3:2, 12), whereas Zechariah opted for the Mount of Olives (14:4). The Bordeaux pilgrim (333 [CE]) recorded the obvious harmonizing solution as a well-established identification; the Kidron valley is the Valley of Jehoshaphat (‘Yahweh judges’)” (The Holy Land, p. 133).↩back to note source

2989–96 And overcasten al the vale . . . with oure watere fulfilde. The plan here is to pipe in water and literally fill in the valley, so that it is covered in water: in essence, to create an artificial lake that will allow Vespasian’s army to have water even though there is none in the immediate region. This is done through the “pepes” or pipes in line 2999.↩back to note source

3019 maister Josephus. Appropriately, since he is a character in his own history that is the ultimate source of this account, Josephus appears as a character here in the narrative. (This is true in other adaptations as well, like Pseudo-Hegesippus). The historical Josephus was one of the commanders of the rebellion in its early days, responsible for the defense of Galilee. This put him directly in the path of Vespasian’s initial offensive, and he was captured after the fall of Jotapata in 67 CE. Josephus is somewhat cagey about the exact circumstances that led to his acceptance by the Romans — his account of surviving a suicide pact (JW 3.340–91), and his timely prophecy of Vespasian’s imperial accession (JW 3.399–408) are too obviously self-serving in his narrative to be entirely true.↩back to note source

3073 “Beaw sire,” he seide, “thou art forsworne.” Archelaus had failed in his basic role of keeping the peace, since according to Josephus (JW 2.111–13) he had antagonized the Jews and Samaritans equally so that both groups had sent embassies to Rome to complain. The failures of Herod’s heirs to fulfill the role of Roman client ruler had led to the imposition of direct Roman rule and the attendant cross-cultural tensions that came along with it. Vespasian’s taunt here, in its own oblique way, recognizes local failures that contributed to the war. See Goodman, Ruling Class of Judea, pp. 27–134.↩back to note source

3095 He was of Cesar kynde. Vespasian’s familial relationship to Nero is well known in the world of the poem, and here his ferocity is attributed in part to it. Nero’s reputation is blackened by both Roman sources and Christian ones. Nevertheless, Nero’s reputation amongst the common people was such that prophecies of his return were current for centuries after his death. Suetonius (Nero 40, trans. Rolfe) records a prophecy that Nero’s return would start in the east, from Jerusalem!↩back to note source

3100 Michel is bitwene word and dede. Proverbial: compare Whiting W642. For other literary uses, see Gower CA Prol.450–51: “Betwen the word and that thei werche / There is a full gret difference.”↩back to note source

3110 Bataile, sir, I wage thee. Archilaus is encouraging Pilate to issue Vespasian a challenge — essentially, to egg Vespasian on. The insult will anger Vespasian several lines later.↩back to note source

3149 It was withinne the fifte yere. This is another example of the poem’s loose relationship with time. The Jewish War properly began in 66; Vespasian arrived in 67; and the siege began on April 14, 70 CE (three days before Passover, JW 5.99). Vespasian had left for Egypt before Titus invested Jerusalem with siege works.↩back to note source

3159–60 For thai han alle chosen thee / For to beren the dignité. Vespasian became emperor with his decisive victory in the Roman Civil War, late in 69 CE, at the battles of Cremona. See Mason, HJW, pp. 7, 13–14.↩back to note source

3166 cardiake. Titus “becomes ill with joy.” This illness in LA is paralysis in the leg, caused by an imbalance in humors that Josephus later heals (1:275). The episode also appears in Siege (SJ, 1027–36), where the illness more closely matches that described in LA. The “cardiake” referred to here suggests pain not in the leg, but in the heart: see MED cardiake (n.1): “a malady characterized by pain in the heart and palpitation,” which cites this appearance of the word.↩back to note source

3169–70 With overdon joye com that woo, / And with overdon sorough it most goo. These lines foreshadow Titus’s later healing by Josephus; see note to line 3980, below.↩back to note source

3172 There Josephus sithen was yfounde. At this point, Josephus had become a de facto advisor to Titus. In his own text, this is likely meant to echo the role of Croesus as a captured de facto advisor to Cyrus of Persia in Herodotus’s Histories, book 1.↩back to note source

3180 Sarsyneys. This is the first reference to the Romans as “Saracens,” here seemingly used as a catch-all term for non-Christians. However, it has strong associations with Muslims during this period; see Tolan, Saracens, p. xv and Akbari, Idols in the East, pp. 2–5 for a brief discussion of this terminology. (Both studies are foundational for understanding medieval Latin Christian representations of Islam.) In identifying Romans as Saracens, the poem simultaneously invokes the idea of Muslims/Saracens as pagan idol worshippers and identifies the Romans as firmly non-Christian. As Tolan observes, “Ecclesiastical writers schooled in the Latin classics had a vivid image of pagan worship, an image they transposed to create a portrait of the religious error of the ‘pagan’ Saracens. The chroniclers of the first Crusade used this image to glorify and justify the crusaders’ exploits” (p. xx).↩back to note source

3181–82 Bot afterward Seint Clement / Confermed his corounement. Vespasian is essentially crowned twice. The “Sarsyneys” here seem to be Roman pagans, who crown Vespasian first according to their rituals; but he will later be crowned by the Christian Pope Clement. See note to line 3180, above. Such a scene recalls more the coronation of Holy Roman Emperors, like Charlemagne.↩back to note source

3191 of the knave, the prophete. This is the man mentioned in lines 3140–41.↩back to note source

3199 That this cité shulde be lorne. This prophesy appears at lines 1085–1117 as the last of the ten signs warning of the fall of Jerusalem.↩back to note source

3227 Marie his doughter. Jacob’s daughter Mary is identified earlier as one of the three Marys who goes to the tomb to anoint Jesus’s body (lines 1805–10); her prayer here invokes that service to Jesus as she seeks help for her father. Mary’s role here, like Veronica’s enhanced role from Siege, creates another moment where women are central to the poem’s action.↩back to note source

3306 a diche. The ditch here will serve to make it impossible for those in the city to escape unnoticed, creating an obstacle something like a reverse moat. The ditch here also parallels the mass graves that will be used to bury the dead; see note to line 3328, below.↩back to note source

3322–23 Foure penyes upon the day / Every maister tweie shillynges had. For comparison’s sake, unskilled labor by the 1390s in England received a daily rate of about three pence, with skilled building workers receiving about five pence (Penn and Dyer, “ Wages and Earnings,”p. 356). Penn and Dyer also cite an example from Essex in 1380, in which a man was paid two shillings and six pence for ten days of digging and collecting stones (p. 357). See Simon A. C. Penn and Christopher Dyer, “Wages and earnings.” The wages Vespasian offers for most workers, then, are on par with those they might receive in England, but the master builders are here given an excessively high rate, presumably to encourage diligent work.↩back to note source

3328 Two charnels. Channels, or mass graves, are made to bury the dead as a means to protect the living against contagion. Eusebius, citing Josephus on this detail, declares that “At first orders were given to bury the dead at the public expense because of the unbearable stench; then afterwards when this was impracticable they were thrown from the walls into the trenches. When Titus, going round the trenches, saw them full of the dead and the thick gore oozing from the rotting bodies, he groaned, and raising his hands called God to witness that this was not his doing” (EH 3.6). A similar detail occurs in Siege, where the citizens throw corpses into ditches when the death toll overwhelms the ability of the citizens to bury the dead (SJ, lines 1151–54). The recounting of massive death tolls and the complete lack of normal social mechanisms to handle corpses — namely, religious burials — is reminiscent of accounts of the carnage left by the Black Death. See in particular Boccaccio’s Decameron, the introduction to the First Day of which describes Florence in eerily similar terms, from the abandonment of family members to the eventual disposal of plague victims in large trenches (trans. McWilliam, pp. 9–12, especially p. 12). A similar moment in crusades romance occurs in Richard Coer de Lyon, where Richard and his men behead their enemies and throw them into a ditch on an angel’s orders (ed. Larkin, lines 3745–56).↩back to note source

3342 Barabas and Josephus. Though Josephus was helping the Romans by the time Titus’s army besieged Jerusalem, here the poem recalls Josephus’s initial allegiance on the rebels’ side. The fullest account of Josephus’s activities (though with curious differences from his account in the JW) in Galilee in support of his people is Life, 17–417.↩back to note source

3360 God lengthed the day. This miracle seems to parallel that in the book of Josue (10:12–15), in which God lengthens a day at Joshua’s request until the Israelites have defeated their enemies.↩back to note source

3366 That he was pryvé Cristen man. In the poem, Josephus’s eventual allegiance to Titus and Vespasian is foreshadowed by his secret Christian identity. The “Testimonium Flavium,” where Josephus appears to offer testimony about the divinity of Jesus, offered evidence to medieval readers of Josephus’s possible Christian identity. However, the origin of this passage remains controversial today. Eusebius is the first author to quote this in his Proof of the Gospel and On Divine Manifestation. It is probably via Eusebius, or Pseudo-Hegesippus, that the author of our poem came across the Testimonium. For more on this curious text, see Alice Whealey, “The Testimonium Falvianum,” and the note to line 888, above.↩back to note source

3380 uche by lott other ches. Drawing lots is a means of using chance to quickly make a random decision: for example, drawing straws (one means of drawing lots) involves everyone involved selecting a straw, and the person who winds up with the shortest straw being selected for a particular fate — in this case, being eaten. Casting lots occurs with some frequency in the Bible; see for example Acts 1:26, where Matthias is selected as an apostle, or famously, the soldiers who crucify Jesus casting lots for his clothing as in Matthew 27:35 and John 19:24.↩back to note source

3374–88 hunger gan hem dere . . . And uche ete othere. Cannibalism in the Vengeance of Our Lord tradition has been extensively discussed, and this famine is recounted in a range of materials: most of these, however, focus on the famine and the abuse of power, the strong stealing resources from those weaker, rather than describing mass, indiscriminate cannibalism, as these lines suggest. See also the note to line 3391–3462.↩back to note source

3424 It may stonde us to Purgatory. Purgatory, which developed as a concept through the twelfth century, was a place of suffering where punishments were similar to those in hell; however, it was a temporary, transitional space in which one was purified and prepared for salvation. The living might facilitate the movement of dead loved ones through this time of suffering through prayer and intercession. See Eileen Gardiner, “Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven.” Mary’s hope here, then, is that their time of suffering in Jerusalem will reduce the time she and Clarice will spend in purgatory after death.↩back to note source

3436 For to fulfille the prophecye. Mothers consuming their children is a frequent image in prophecy in the Hebrew Testament. See, for example, Leviticus 26:28–29: “I will also go against you with opposite fury, and I will chastise you with seven plagues for your sins, so that you shall eat the flesh of your sons and of your daughters.” Similar images appear in Deuteronomy 28:54–57; Jeremias 19.8–9; Lamentations 2:20; and Ezechiel 5:9–10.↩back to note source

3391–3462 Marie she highth . . . that wicked dede. This episode is what A. Boyarin calls a “set-piece” in this version of events, though there are considerable variations in its presentation across works (Siege of Jerusalem, p. 23). The episode is most similar in Siege and Eusebius, as well as LA: in those three versions, a woman named Mary kills her child, a son, in a fit of madness, hunger, and/or rage: she roasts the child and eats a portion. When she is discovered, she offers a portion of the cooked child to those who have found her, and they react with horror and sorrow. See SJ, lines 1069–1100; LA, 1:276; and Eusebius, EH 3.6: versions also appear in Josephus’s JW and Higden’s Polychronicon. As A. Boyarin (among others) notes, a Jewish Mary who consumes her son has clear Eucharistic overtones (Siege of Jerusalem, p. 26). However, the version which appears here in Destruction is distinct in several critical ways: to begin with, Mary’s child is a daughter, already dead from the famine in the city. Likewise, it is the idea of her friend Clarice — a new addition to the account — to eat the child, and Mary resists until persuaded by an angel. These variations serve to approve of this episode of maternal cannibalism as divinely ordained, a horrifying act that is nonetheless necessary as part of the city’s fall. As a result, the horror of the Jews who discover Mary and carry away the cooked child suggests another failure of Jewish understanding from the poem’s point of view, somewhat shifting the valences of the episode’s potential eucharistic overtones. Josephus probably adopted the bare form of this story from 4 Kings 6:24 ff., where the consumption of a child occurs during the siege of Samaria. Josephus retells this very story in Jewish Antiquities 9.66–68 — though JA is composed after JW. For the most comprehensive reading of this episode and its sources, see Merrall Llewelyn Price, “Imperial Violence.” For a reading of the original passage in Josephus, see Honora Chapman, “Josephus and the Cannibalism of Mary.”↩back to note source

3467 the noble stones. “Noble stones,” or gems and rocks with healing or magical properties, are common in medieval English lore; collected descriptions of such stones, known as lapidaries, are extant. (Indeed, parts of Hildegard von Bingen’s Physica read much like a lapidary.) However, while lapidaries include cures for drunkenness, childbirth pains, and other ailments, no particular stone is identified as preventing hunger and thirst.↩back to note source

3477 Bot golde and silver eten he bad. As here, the Jews in Siege eat their gold (SJ, lines 1167–68) as a means of staving off hunger; this has devastating repercussions once the city falls to Vespasian (see lines 4195–4200). This scene derives from an episode in Josephus (JW 5.550–52), where Arabs and Syrians discover that Jewish deserters swallowed gold before they left the city (after they see one deserter picking the coins out of his excrement), and begin tearing apart the Jews to discover their swallowed treasure. Eating gold and silver is used as a punishment in several medieval travel texts: both the Book of John Mandeville (ed. Higgins, pp. 138–39) and Polo’s Divisement du Monde (ed. Kinoshita, pp. 20–21) retell the account of the Mongolian lord Mongke Chan who, upon capturing the Caliph of Baghdad, imprisoned him with only his gold and silver to eat, as a punishment for the Caliph’s failure to spend his money attempting to protect the city from capture.↩back to note source

3515–16 For thorough us lyen thai noughth thus ded, / Bot for her owen feble red. Titus denies responsibility, blaming instead a sense of fate and perhaps even the Jewish law for the death of Jerusalem’s inhabitants. At the same time, his moment of pity suggests the extent to which Titus is moved by compassion. Thus, it is in keeping with Maija Birenbaum’s reading of the poem as using pity and Christ’s love for the Jews as a means to present their suffering and destruction as their own fault (“Affective Vengeance,” pp. 338–39). This detail is also present in Eusebius (EH 3.7).↩back to note source

3520 Bitande hosen and shone. The detail of citizens gnawing on shoes seems to come from LA (1:276) and is also in Siege (SJ, line 1075).↩back to note source

3542 That we mowen duellen stille and lyve. Pilate is essentially asking for terms for a truce, that is, a ransom that the city can pay to end the siege and continue to occupy Jerusalem.↩back to note source

3566 Quoth Josephus. Josephus’s presence in Jerusalem here reflects his participation as a military leader earlier in the revolt. See Josephus, Life for exhaustive details of his activities, in addition to JW book 3.↩back to note source

3569 artou Cristen. Josephus the historical figure remained Jewish and not Christian. However, as Yeager notes, Josephus’s writings were considered incredibly authoritative by Christian thinkers: “Writings about Josephus from the later medieval period suggest that his work had become fully integrated into the fabric of western Christianity. For instance, Guy N. Deutsch has shown that Peter Comestor, author of the Historia scholastica, considered Josephus to be ‘on par with the highest religious authority.’ Josephus contributed to the writing about the fall of Jerusalem in medieval biblical commentary by providing information not offered by the Bible, and which was received as the exegetical counterpart to the Old Testament: just as the New Testament was thought to complement the Old, the Josephan account was received as part of the new covenant in biblical history” (“Biblical Exegesis,” p. 79). It is possible, then, that Josephus himself is made Christian in Destruction partly to validate his work, which was highly regarded. In addition, several manuscripts (Eusebius is the earliest testimony to this), contain the “Testimonium Flavium” in Jewish Antiquities 18.63, where “Josephus” claims that Jesus was in fact the messiah. See notes to lines 888 and 3366, above.↩back to note source

3672 Than yelden us to a Sarasynne. Josephus’s objection to yielding the city originates in Vespasian’s lack of baptism; despite Vespasian’s avowed belief in Jesus, he has not undergone the Christian sacrament of baptism. Thus, Josephus claims, the city will not yield to him. This is a problematic view for the Jews to hold, as it suggests that they are deeply concerned about the religious state of their besiegers, seeing themselves as superior to a “Saracen” but apparently not to a Christian. The use of the term “Saracen” to describe a first-century Roman is unusual: the term normally refers to Muslims by the late-fourteenth and early-fifteenth centuries. On this last point, see Akbari, Idols in the East, p. 2 and Rajabzadeh, “The Depoliticized Saracen,” pp. 2–3. This “Freudian slip” shows how various siege stories involving Jerusalem (Roman, crusade, etc.) have common themes and features that begin to merge together.↩back to note source

3687 Josephus com the Jewes unto. Though at this point in the poem Josephus is still on the side of the Jews in Jerusalem, this speech advising the surrender of the city likely adapts JW 5.362–419, where Josephus (as an official envoy of Titus) allows himself a lengthy, historically minded speech before the walls of Jerusalem to convince the inhabitants to surrender to the Romans.↩back to note source

3713–20 we duden Messias to dye . . . thys gode man. In these lines, the Jewish community claims their overthrow is justified because of their role in Jesus’s death. This unquestionably antisemitic statement is aligned with medieval Christian theology, even that of figures such as Augustine who preached what some scholars have called a doctrine of toleration; that is, Augustine thought living Jews provided an important witness to the truth of Christian doctrine, despite their clear guilt, which in his view justifies their punishment. See Jeremy Cohen, Living Letters, Part 1, especially pp. 20–47, for a detailed account of Augustine’s theology on Jews and its impact on later medieval Christian thinkers.↩back to note source

3737 Ellevene thousande there leten her lyf. This bloodletting resembles the mass suicides at Masada in 73–74 CE, where the Romans found a deserted fortress once they had scaled the heights. This siege closes Josephus’s account in the JW (7.252ff.).↩back to note source

3739 for the stynk that of hem came. Non-Christians are notable on several occasions in Middle English literature for their posthumous odors. Compare, for example, Palomides’s killing of the pagan Sir Corsabryne in Malory’s Morte; when Corsabryne is killed, “therewithall cam a stynke of his body, whan the soule departed, that there myght nobody abyde the savoure” (Works, ed. Vinaver, p. 407).↩back to note source

3752 That the erthe wolde us hillen. Compare both Apocalypse 6:16 and Osee [Hosea] 10:8, in which the people ask that the mountains will cover them.↩back to note source

3782 Of seven yer this is the last day. Though sometimes dated from 66 to 73 CE, Mason suggests that from the Roman perspective, the siege truly ended in September 70 with the fall of the temple. See Mason, HJW, p. 3.↩back to note source

3809–11 He gan to renden . . . onon his swerd out drough. In these lines, Archilaus rips his clothing to draw out a sword, presumably one he has concealed, and kills himself with it before falling into the ditch around the city walls.↩back to note source

3830 Joneperham. This seems to refer to the historical Jotapata: see Josephus, JW 3.158–408, which describes the siege, Josephus’s escape, his parley with Vespasian and his well timed imperial prophecy. While in Josephus, Vespasian’s siege of Jotapata occurred a few years before the siege of Jerusalem (for the latter part of which Titus was in charge, as Vespasian had already gone to Alexandria to begin making his moves for the imperial throne), here our poet makes it a side story, adapting Josephus’s rather unbelievable tale of survival at JW 3.340–91 and his prophecy at 3.399–408.↩back to note source

3840 For he was nougth a Cristene man. There may be a reflection here on cultural differences between observant Jews and Gentiles, like Romans. For more, see note to line 3672, above.↩back to note source

3844 with ellevene felawes he gan flee. Josephus did indeed flee the city after it was clear Jotapata was lost; see JW 3.340ff. This group of twelve (including Josephus) echoes Jesus’s twelve disciples.↩back to note source

3851 Uche of us shal other ete. This comment is thematically appropriate to the poem, since at this point cannibalism has become a default response of Jews under siege. However, in Josephus (JW 3.340–91), the men undertake a suicide pact. Josephus suggested the men draw lots and begin killing each other to avoid capture. Somehow, Josephus ended up being one of the last two left, and was able to talk the other man out of finishing the suicide pact. This later became an example story in mathematics — the Josephus problem — where one needs to figure out the best place to stand in a circle to avoid execution. Like in JW, the character Josephus here has the other men cast lots to see who gets eaten first. Unlike in JW, God himself is the agent of the secret Christian’s salvation, for, as the poet says, “his wytt halpe many a man” (line 3870).↩back to note source

3886 That wroot the storye amonges us. That is, Josephus is the author of The Jewish War, making this comment an interesting meta-poetic and meta-historical moment.↩back to note source

3909 righth onon he was unbounde. Christianity was still nascent when Josephus wrote the JW and so plays no role in it. In fact, it was Josephus’s imperial prophecy that later secured his release, after Vespasian had ascended to the throne (which was still in the future when Josephus was captured in Jotapata). (Though, with Eusebius — see note to line 3915, below — modern readers of the poem and of JW are right to show skepticism of this prophecy and Josephus’s escape from the cave.) In other words, Josephus spent significant time in chains before his eventual release and acceptance by Titus as a useful ally. As often, the poet has changed and altered the narrative chronology of JW to suit his own needs.↩back to note source

3915 Fourty dayes er it fel. Josephus does recount Vespasian’s ascent to the imperial seat. Eusebius mentions the prophetic element to this with some skepticism: “The same writer has a still more remarkable account in which he alleges that an oracle was found in ‘sacred script’ to the effect that at that time one from their country should rule the world and he himself considered that this was fulfilled by Vespasian” (EH 3.8). Orosius likewise recounts this prophetic claim of Josephus’s (Seven Books of History, ed. Fear, 7.9.3, p. 338). The “fourty dayes” may also reference the fact that Josephus predicted the fall of Jotapata would take 47 days (JW 3.406), a secondary prophecy he offers to bolster his credibility concerning the more important imperial prophecy.↩back to note source

3980 And sithen an hete com in his blood. Josephus’s healing of Titus appears in many other versions of the story; see Siege (SJ, lines 1039–60) and LA (1:275). As A. Boyarin notes, Josephus’s cure relies on his ability to balance the humors: “the four chief bodily fluids that, in medieval medical theories, determine physical and mental health. Titus’s joy caused too much phlegm, or cold . . . and Josephus manipulates Titus’s anger to produce a hot, or choleric, response” (Siege of Jerusalem, p. 76n4). While frequently told in contexts like Siege or LA, this account does not appear in Josephus’s own texts.↩back to note source

3997 Thou shalt be me dere while I lyve. In his Life, Josephus exhaustively lists the honors granted him by the Flavians, though all these combined still put him closer to the fringes of imperial favor than the center (he was certainly not “next the kynges” as our text has it). At Life 363, Josephus notes Titus’s particular approval and publication of the JW, while Life 423–29 details the grants of land, a house in Rome, and other honors given to him by Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian.↩back to note source

4018–19 sparehaukes . . . faukons. Hawks and falcons are both hunting birds; Pilate is offering courtly animals to Vespasian in an attempt to preserve his own status.↩back to note source

4023 leopardes and lyons. The leopards and lions here invoke both exotic and extreme wealth. Pilate’s offer is meant to appeal to Vespasian’s status and nobility. Lions in particular had religious symbolism in medieval bestiaries, where they are described as having associations with Jesus (Physiologus, trans. Curley, pp. 3–4); in courtly romance, they often serve as judges of chivalric character, responding innately to nobility, as in Chrétien de Troyes’s Knight With the Lion.↩back to note source

4073–74 He comaunded his men als blyve / To kepen that thai token alyve. Josephus is cagey about this — those refugees from the city that are not outright killed (that is, most of them) are sequestered away separately from the others by Titus. Josephus gives no further information — the Jews of Jerusalem would not all have been as fortunate as him! There is plenty of epigraphical evidence in the form of tombstones around Rome testifying to the enslavement of Jews.↩back to note source

4079 The Jewes weren leide on hepes grete. This moment parallels the description earlier in the poem when Jewish corpses lie in massive piles inside the city, but here the Jews are alive — and bound. In its focus on piles of bodies, the poem draws on discourses of crusades warfare and also the suffering at times of plague. (See note to line 3328, above.)↩back to note source

4082 felde the walls of the toune. It took the Romans a significant amount of time to break through the three walls of the city, a process that takes up the bulk of JW 5 and 6.↩back to note source

4090 an olde hore man. Joseph of Arimathea was secured in the wall at lines 669–80; upon his reappearance, his happy and well-fed state emphasizes that he is protected by God. This account of Joseph of Arimathea seems to follow LA (1:276).↩back to note source

4139–50 Of the Jewes thai hym tolde . . . her bityd. The Christians here detail what wealth the Jews have, the material possessions. Though Vespasian claims material wealth does not motivate him, this depiction of the Jewish community as uniformly wealthy plays into stereotypes associating Jews with financial success that were present in medieval Europe, especially England. Geraldine Heng notes that Jews were closely associated with wealth in the context of England, where they were essential to the credit market; this endangered them due to Christian views on wealth as dangerous (Invention of Race, pp. 58–59). In Siege as in Destruction, the Jews eat their gold (SJ, lines 1167–68); however, while this is Vespasian’s idea in Destruction, Siege makes it clear that this was done without Titus’s leave (SJ, lines 1168–72). Siege spends considerable time describing the wealth found in the Jewish temple and its extravagance, and how the Romans tear down the temple and bring this considerable wealth with them to Rome (SJ, lines 1265–80).↩back to note source

4157 For now shal I fulfillen my sale. Vespasian had earlier threatened to sell the Jews at the rate of thirty for a penny (lines 2409–10). Sale of slaves after conquest was the easiest way for Roman generals and their men to realize profit. Though clearly meant to invert Judas’s betrayal of Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, this could also be a form of sacrifice on Vespasian’s part to forgo the profit (as he had said he was not warring for profit, line 4153), while still taking vengeance upon the Jews.↩back to note source

4195 Whan thai ben opened everychon. See note to line 3477, above.↩back to note source

4205–12 Honge hem . . . tyl Domesday. Vespasian’s lengthy list of possible tortures, ending with the reference that doing these deeds will “bless” Christians, reads as justification for continued and continuous abuse of the Jews. While many accounts of the violence enacted on Jews after the capture of the city suggests that Titus and Vespasian did not know what was happening, Destruction instead makes this torture Vespasian’s direct order (compare, for example the Book of John Mandeville, ed. Higgins, p. 50 and SJ, lines 1317–21, where Titus leads the Roman forces at this point in the war). Mason argues that Josephus’s description of Titus’s helplessness before his own soldiers’ atrocities may be a subtly damning portrait of Titus’s would-be imperial patron (HJW, pp. 402–65). The emphasis on dismembering and wounding Jewish bodies is itself not unusual among antisemitic works in Middle English; as Steven Kruger notes in his reading of Chaucer’s Prioress’s Tale and the Croxton Play of the Sacrament, the injured Jewish body makes a direct point of contrast with notions of the ecumenically and physically whole Christian body: “The Christian body resists disintegration, and Jewish violence is finally visited back upon the Jews themselves, demonstrating simultaneously the corruptibility of their unholy bodies and the miraculous vitality of the sanctified body of Christ . . . Corruption of body attends disbelief, attacking those who presume to attack the fabric of Christianity; wholeness of body, on the other hand, comes with true belief” (“Bodies of Jews,” p. 312, p. 317). As Akbari puts it, “The dismemberment of Jewish bodies . . . symbolically represents the fragmentary, partial nature of Judaism itself” (Idols in the East, p. 123).↩back to note source

4225 mattok. A mattock is, according to the MED, “an agricultural tool used for breaking up hard ground, gravel, etc.”↩back to note source

4231 Bot the temple Salamon. The temple was not left standing: see Goldhill, Temple, pp. 1–3. The temple on this site was not Solomon’s original temple, but one reconstructed first by Zerubbabel and then by Herod (Goldhill, Temple, p. 9). Orosius similarly notes that Titus destroyed the temple (Seven Books of History, ed. Fear, 7.9.5–6, pp. 338–39). Compare also SJ, lines 1265–80. There is some controversy about whether the destruction of the temple was deliberately ordered or was accidental. T.D. Barnes provides a great discussion of the evidence; see Barnes, “The Sack of the Temple.”↩back to note source

4235–36 There schal no ston on othere dwelle, / Bot men shullen it doune felle. Compare Matthew 24:2 and Mark 13:2.↩back to note source

4243–50 The summe of Jewes . . . Was foure hundreth and seventene thousande. This is an unlikely number, particularly given that Paris and Cairo, numbering about 300,000, were two of the world’s largest cities (Nichols, “Paris,” 1:21). LA claims that 97,000 people were sold and another 110,000 died in the destruction, numbers it draws from Josephus (1:276). As Yeager notes, between 2700 and 3000 were killed at Acre by Richard I’s crusading forces, and this was considered a brutal slaughter by contemporary chroniclers (“Captivity and Execution,” p. 92). Eusebius’s estimates do not match these, but they are likewise extreme: he claims that 1,100,000 perished by famine and war; those under seventeen were enslaved, and he estimates their numbers at 90,000 (EH 3.7). Siege gives 110,000 Jews killed (SJ, line 1175). As Mason notes, not all the Jews were killed: “After Jerusalem’s fall, Titus allowed his soldiers to kill and plunder for several days. Only when they were ‘tired of slaughtering’ did he order thousands of enemy survivors to be corralled in the temple’s Court of Women. The soldiers were now instructed to kill only those who resisted, while carefully preserving the youngest and fittest for Roman use” (HJW, pp. 26–27). Orosius attributes a total count of 600,000 Jews killed to Cornelius and Suetonius, while his own estimate of 111,000 is closer to that of Josephus (Seven Books of History, ed. Fear, 7.9.7, p. 339).↩back to note source

4258 Bot for raunsoun. The Jews without homeland and paying tribute to others is also a feature of the Book of John Mandeville, where the narrator explains that “the Jews do not have their own land . . . in the whole world except this land between the mountains [Gog and Magog]; and in addition, they pay tribute from this land to the Queen of the Amazonia” (ed. Higgins, p. 158). The Jews are imagined as elsewhere, in the mythical enclave of Gog and Magog, but also wandering and without home. (On Gog and Magog, see Scott D. Westrem, “Against Gog and Magog”). See also the note to line 831, above, on Jewish diaspora.↩back to note source

4286 a kirtel that had no sem. This item of Jesus’s clothing is referenced in John 19:23–24, where the soldiers at the crucifixion cast lots for the seamless garment. Pilate is similarly captured while wearing this kirtle in LA (1:212–13), the likely source for its appearance here; the kirtle is also referenced in cycle plays (Chester Play 16, line 133).↩back to note source

4326 A barel of steel. A version of these posthumous adventures of Pilate appears in LA; in that account, Pilate’s corpse is weighed down and thrown into the Tiber, where it is tossed around by demons; it is then removed from the river and sent to Vienne, where it is tossed in the Rhone and the spirits reappear. It is only when the body is sent to Lausanne that the residents are able to sink it into a pit (1:213). In the initial impulse to toss the barrel into the sea (line 4329), there is some resemblance here to the Roman method of execution for parricide — being sown up in a sack with animals (typically a dog, snake, monkey, and a rooster) and tossed into the Tiber.↩back to note source

4332 Vyenne. Vienne was an “[e]arly centre of Gallo-Roman Christianity on the Rhone south of Lyons. After the Carolingian decline it became part of the kingdom of Provence before being absorbed into the empire. The Council of Vienne (1311–12) resulted in the condemnation of the Knights Templar. Vienne was not included in the sale of the Dauphiné to France in 1349, but was ceded to the crown in 1449” (Johnson, “Vienne,” Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages, p. 1697). Eusebius mentions Vienne, claiming that Herodias, wife of Herod, was “condemned to live in Vienne, a city of Gaul” (EH 1.11). Josephus too says that Archelaus, one of Herod’s sons, was exiled to Vienne in 6 CE (JW 2.111–17).↩back to note source

4349 on every heighe day. A “heighe day” here is, essentially, a holy day. Pilate is fed good food only on these days as a sort of Christian charity.↩back to note source

4355 hethen hounde. This epithet is often applied to Muslims in crusades romance. King of Tars, for example, is especially noteworthy for the repetition of this comparison (ed. Chandler, lines 93, 169, 740, 1170), where it serves to dehumanize non-Christian characters throughout. Likewise, Muslim characters are called “dogges” in Richard Coer de Lyon (ed. Larkin, line 3721).↩back to note source

4365 to paren a pere. Pilate kills himself using a knife he has borrowed to cut a pear. Siege similarly includes his suicide by paring knife (SJ, lines 1329–34), while Eusebius comments only that Pilate “was forced to become his own slayer” (EH 2.7).↩back to note source

4367 sept sages. On the Seven Sages, see note to line 1223, above. This account, like the previous one, does not appear in Seven Sages of Rome.↩back to note source

4372–73 To fouler deth mighth he nougth gon / Than slee hymself with his owen honde. The implication here is that since no person is more morally depraved or worse than Pilate, it is appropriate that he kills himself. However, this might be read also as a reference to the damnation of those who commit suicide in Christian theology. For a comprehensive treatment of this theological matter, see Alexander Murray, Suicide in the Middle Ages.↩back to note source

4391–92 For stynk and cry thai hadden doute / Of fendes that walked hym aboute. The stench from Pilate’s body is mark of his sinfulness and of the presence of the fiends, and it also parallels the earlier stink of the dead in Jerusalem. Julian of Norwich associates stink with the presence of the devil in her visions (ed. Crampton, lines 2781–86). See also the note to line 3739, above, on the stink of non-Christian corpses.↩back to note source

4405 the devels gonnen hym posse and bere. This line begins an account of the posthumous travels of Pilate’s corpse, which has been returned to its barrel and tossed in the water, where it is tormented by devils. Though the South English Legendary includes the storms and tempests where Pilate’s corpse sits, the barrel is absent (ed. D’Evelyn and Mills, 2:706). The moral, that Pilate is denied rest after death due to his part in the death of Jesus, is present in source texts: see for example LA 1:213, a likely source for the South English Legendary. Williams notes that a similar ending appears in the Stanzaic Life of Christ (Characterization, p. 9).↩back to note source

4462 Of Judas. This account of the life of Judas Iscariot is the second major digression unique to the long version of Destruction. Versions of this narrative appear in a wide range of languages, though the most likely source for this version is LA. The LA version includes Cyborea’s dream, Judas’s discovery by the queen of Scariot, the murders of his adopted sibling and his father, and the death of Judas with this interpretation of its meaning (1:168–69); it attributes this life of Judas to “an apocryphal history” (1:168). For more discussion of the medieval Judas legend, see Paull Franklin Baum, “Mediæval Legend of Judas Iscariot” and Mariah Junglan Min, “Damned If You Do: Judas Iscariot and the Invention of Medieval Literary Character.” The South English Legendary gives a similar account to the one here (ed. D’Evelyn and Mills, 2:692–97).↩back to note source

4490 Sweven nys bot a foles spelle. Proverbial: see Whiting S952.↩back to note source

4502 nywe boot. Setting the newborn Judas in a new boat and setting him adrift parallels Exodus 2, where Moses is put into a basket, set adrift, and eventually discovered and saved. The South English Legendary gives “barel” (ed. D’Evelyn and Mills, 2:693, line 23).↩back to note source

4553 Sone croketh that wil be wrong. Munro identifies Whiting T470 as the proverbial referent (p. 359), and the Whiting entry does indeed list this quotation as an example.↩back to note source

4554 In eelde mote biten that yonge stong. Proverbial: see Whiting E62, which links it to T222.↩back to note source

4557 The nettle greveth the swete rose. Munro connects this line to Whiting G478 (p. 359); the entry cites Trevisa’s translation of Higden’s Polychronicon as a similar variant, which is suggestive since Polychronicon has been cited as one potential source for the poem’s content. On Higden as a possible source for Siege and for Destruction, see Millar, Siege and Contexts, p. 104. Millar sees Siege as drawing more strongly on Polychronicon than Destruction does.↩back to note source

4601–02 That gode men togedres drawe, / And everyche fole to his felawe. Whiting M93 cites this quotation as proverbial, also referring to L272 (“like to like”), as at lines 2209–10.↩back to note source

4620 fairest appels. The use of an apple as the fruit that here tempts Pilate may have its origins in the legend that the forbidden fruit consumed by Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden was an apple. Robert Appelbaum notes that tradition comes from a translational pun in Jerome’s Vulgate Bible: while the Hebrew Bible refers to the fruit as simply a fruit, the Vulgate uses the Latin word malus. Appelbaum explains that “A malum in Latin was any of three things: either it was any fleshy tree-born fruit, and thus close in meaning to tappuach [the word in the Hebrew Bible]; or it was the genus of a variety of fleshy tree-born fruits, including the Pyrus malus or pomum (the ‘apple’ in the usual modern sense of the word, growing from the rosaceous tree), the malum Punicum — the ‘apple of Punic,’ or pomegranate—and the malum Persicum, that is, the ‘Persian apple,’ or peach; or, finally, the malum was simply the apple in our sense, the Pyrus malus” (p. 194). See Appelbaum, Aguecheek’s Beef, Belch’s Hiccup, and Other Gastronomic Interjections, pp. 192–200. The South English Legendary also gives “applen” (ed. D’Evelyn and Mills, 2:694, line 71).↩back to note source

4734 For he shal be thine housebonde. The Oedipal overtones of this episode are a common part of the lore of Judas’s early life; they are present in Latin materials from the twelfth century and were disseminated “in almost every language and country of mediæval Europe” (Baum, “Mediæval Legend of Judas Iscariot,” p. 481). These overtones most likely entered narratives about Judas via Statius’s Thebaid and its vernacularizations like the Roman de Thebes, rather than through Sophocles, who was unknown to medieval audiences; for a more comprehensive discussion of its origins, see Leydon, “Insular Iscariot,” pp. 30–40.↩back to note source

4783 To beren the purs. It is generally tradition that Judas was the one who kept the purse (John 12:1–8), and his stealing from the common purse is also a feature of cycle plays (particularly the York cycle, Play 26). Indeed, as scholars have noted, Judas’s concern with and about money, though present throughout Judas legends, is especially marked in the York Cycle; see Mariah Junglan Min, “Damned If You Do” and Margaret Aziza Pappano, “Judas in York.”↩back to note source

4788 As telleth in the Passioun. The narrative that follows, of the woman anointing Jesus’s feet and the disciples’ response, is found in all four Gospel accounts (Matthew 26:6–13; Mark 14:3–10; Luke 7:37–50; John 12:3–8). Judas is only specifically mentioned in John’s account.↩back to note source

4800 Thritty pens, it wolde ben told. This emphasis on the precise cost in the Judas digression parallels its appearance throughout the poem; see for example lines 1666 and 2409–10.↩back to note source

4813 to the Jewes agein he cam. Judas returns to the chief priests in Matthew 27:3–5. The moment is greatly expanded in the York: see Play 32, “The Remorse of Judas.”↩back to note source

4825 an hildre tree. In Matthew’s Gospel, the only one that recounts Judas’s hanging, the variety of tree is not identified, nor is it in the South English Legendary. However, the tree is identified as an elder tree in Piers Plowman’s C-Text (Langland, ed. Schmidt, 1.64), suggesting that the association was already well-established by the fourteenth century in England.↩back to note source

4835 oure aller frende. “Aller” here seems to be derived from MED allen (v.): to recognize God as “the one and all,” but the word is very infrequently attested.↩back to note source

4854 Seynt Mathy. Matthias’s selection by casting lots is retold in Acts 1:15–26. LA recounts multiple legends of Matthias’s origins and eventual death (1:170–77).↩back to note source

4873 And hem that wolden noughth, thai slough. Conversion at swordpoint, though not uncommon, was theologically suspect. It was repudiated as a practice both in the Fourth Council of Toledo in 633 and in the Decretum of Gratian; by the thirteenth century, Jews could be required to listen to evangelizing sermons, but forcible conversion was still not permitted (Weed, “Forced Conversion,” pp. 129–30). Thomas Aquinas in particular spoke against forced conversion, even as he insisted that Jews who did convert must keep to that conversion (Weed, “Forced Conversion,” p. 131). Accounts of conversion (or refusal to convert) on pain of death are also present in Hebrew chronicles of the First and Second Crusades; see Eidelberg, The Jews and the Crusaders, especially pp. 60, 67. Examples also abound in other Middle English romances; see for example King of Tars, ed. Chandler, lines 1045–50.↩back to note source

4878 Sweren hem feuté. In requiring oaths of loyalty from those they have conquered, Vespasian and Titus are securing their control of the region. This process imagines a Christianized kingdom that swears loyalty to Rome and operates politically in ways recognizable to the poem’s readership.↩back to note source

4899–4904 The riche he gaf . . . loos catel. Vespasian’s acts of rewarding those who have helped him conquer fulfill a model of good kingship familiar from Middle English romance: compare, for example, Bevis of Hampton (ed. Herzman, Drake, and Salisbury, lines 4575–76) or King Horn (ed. Herzman, Drake, and Salisbury, lines 1507–10). For a brief discussion of gift-giving as idealized kingship, see the Introduction to Havelok the Dane (ed. Herzman, Drake, and Salisbury, pp. 75–76). In Vespasian’s case, of course, his deeds also completely redistribute the land and resources of the Holy Land, placing them in Christian hands. Historically, Vespasian would have advanced his leading men and others into imperial administrative positions, replacing previous bureaucrats and administrators of the earlier regime’s and brief juntas of 69 CE.↩back to note source

4909 Than took he leve of the londe. Though Titus and Vespasian depart from Jerusalem back to Rome at this point, the war was not entirely over. Pockets of resistance still endured, most notably at Masada, and Josephus details the “mopping up” operations in JW 7.163–453.↩back to note source

4922 The belles rongen thorough the toun. These bells ring as an announcement and public celebration at Vespasian’s homecoming, a civic celebration. This ringing of bells may also mark a public procession, an imperial triumph of the sort that was indeed a Roman custom upon the return of conquerors to the city; see Mason, HJW, pp. 10–13. It was a way to reintegrate a victorious army and general back into the body politic, by allowing them to cross Rome’s pomerium, a sacred religious boundary designed to keep military matters out and governmental or civilian matters within. Only Roman generals who had successfully expanded Roman territories were allowed within the pomerium, ritually expanding its boundaries. In the Republic at least, it was height of glory for a man’s career (and for this very reason, highly restricted in the empire to the ruling family alone). Our poet has replaced one ancient religious ceremony (the triumph), with a Christian one (baptismal mass). Josephus’s account of the triumph at JW 7.123–57 is, in fact, our best ancient account of this Roman ceremony. For more on the Roman triumph, see Mary Beard, The Roman Triumph. For such public use of bells in Middle English, compare St. Erkenwald, ed. Morse, lines 351–52.↩back to note source

4961 in white wede. White clothing serves as an outward sign of purity. Margery Kempe, for example, reports a vision from God in which she was told to wear white clothing (ed. Staley, book 1, lines 732–33); likewise, white armor suggesting spiritual improvement or excellence appears in a range of romances, including Richard Coer de Lyon (ed. Larkin, lines 386–96) and Sir Gowther (ed. Laskaya and Salisbury, lines 563–64). Further, this white clothing that Clement makes the converts wear parallels the white garments given to Jerusalem’s Christians by Vespasian at lines 4135–36.↩back to note source

4979–80 The emperour made many a kyrke / Of the temples that weren derk. The building of churches is a common activity for romance heroes; King Horn’s title character builds churches (ed. Herzman, Drake, and Salisbury, lines 1393–94), and Sir Gowther builds an abbey as recompense for his earlier habit of burning them down (ed. Laskaya and Salisbury, Sir Gowther, lines 703–08). Vespasian’s work is slightly different, as he transitions pagan temples into churches, but it is not unique in Middle English romance; for example, this transition is the impetus for the narrative in Saint Erkenwald. While this does reflect a historical process in Rome (where today the best preserved temples are the ones that became churches, such as the Pantheon), it was accomplished over centuries and not truly begun until the reign of Constantine, the first historically attested emperor to favor Christianity (as opposed to the legendary attestations of Marcus Aurelius, or as here, Titus and Vespasian).↩back to note source

4987 riche fee. On giving property to the Church, see note to line 2597, above.↩back to note source

4992–94 In golde and cristal . . . noughth to touche. This is where the vernicle officially becomes a relic, secured in recognizable context as one. Its placement in St. Peter’s Church (line 4995) further confirms its sacred position. See Chaganti, Poetics of the Reliquary and Malo, Relics and Writing on the status and positions of relics more broadly.↩back to note source

4997–5017 Seint Clement took the coroune . . . Oure gostly fader I holde thee. In an interesting twist on the concept of Caesaro-Papism, though Vespasian is already the crowned emperor (see lines 3179–82), here Clement re-crowns him as a Christian king. In turn, Vespasian confirms Clement as pope. The poem thus neatly circumvents ongoing struggles in the fourteenth century about papal supremacy: evidenced by Adam Easton’s 1376 writings in support of papal supremacy against John Wyclif (Gibson and Coletti, “Lynn, Walsingham, Norwich,” 1:313) and earlier writings by Dante and Jean de Jandun in support of limiting the pope’s temporal power (Nichols, “Paris,” 1:14).↩back to note source

5030 There heled the croked and the blynde. These miracles associated with Vespasian’s tomb are signs of his holiness, common in hagiographical texts. However, these signs of holiness are not unique to saints: Bynum describes the tomb of Isabelle of France, sister of Louis IX of France and the founder of an abbey at Longchamp; while Isabelle was not canonized, she was venerated after her death, and “[e]arth from around her tomb was said to heal; not only her hair but also her pillow, a goblet she drank from, and even a nightcap she knitted were treated as relics” (Christian Materiality, p. 136). These healings at Vespasian’s tomb, then, authenticate his holiness and religious devotion.↩back to note source

5049 A merveile I may you telle. After wrapping up Vespasian and Titus’s lives, the poem ends with a miracle story that keeps the Jews as the focus of the poem’s conclusion. This is a marked difference between Destruction and Siege. The three attempts the Jews make to rebuild the city here draw on LA (1:276–77); however, Vespasian and Titus’s Christian deeds seem to be unique to the Destruction poet (Munro, pp. 105–06).↩back to note source

5067–68 For God wolde ther kynde no more / Shulde lyven to dwellen thore. This removal of Jews from Jerusalem is typical of much Middle English literature. As Suzanne Conklin Akbari notes, Jews are uniquely conceptualized as being without a homeland in much literature of the period: see Idols in the East, pp. 115–35.↩back to note source

5070–71 Croices . . . Of dew blood red. The appearance of these crosses is the most explicit connection the poem makes to the Crusades. As Giles Constable notes, evidence suggests that crusaders were told by Pope Urban II to wear crosses (Crusaders and Crusading, p. 63), and red crosses in particular were associated with the Knights Templar: “On banners, a red cross on a white ground was generally accepted in the thirteenth century” (Crusaders and Crusading, p. 77). The appearance of these crosses on the clothing of the returning Jews seems to mark them for God’s vengeance, which occurs quickly — in the following lines.↩back to note source

5095–98 spronge a fer . . . askes were. Upon their third return to the site of the city, the Jews are burned when fire suddenly springs up. This last sign serves as the ultimate destruction of the Jewish community in the poem. In Nicholson’s reading of Siege, he suggests that the end is crucial in presenting Jerusalem as a blank slate, a necessary precursor to Christian endeavors there (“Haunted Itineraries,” p. 471).↩back to note source

5121–44 Josephus the gode clerk . . . it is broughth. The poem gives one last list of its sources that echoes the opening list at lines 7–14. While many of these sources do seem to have influenced the poem, these are not likely the sources that the poet most heavily or directly used, as Munro has observed (p. 12). For more on the actual sources, see the Introduction, pp. 12–18.↩back to note source

5151–54 I hope that . . . par charité. This ending prayer is typical of the ends of medieval English romances as a way of wrapping up the work: compare, for example, King Horn, lines 1539–44, ed. Herzman, Drake, and Salisbury, or Havelok the Dane, lines 2994–3001, ed. Herzman, Drake, and Salisbury, in which the scribe asks for prayer for himself as part of this closing.↩back to note source