What do you think?
Rate this book
The Murder of William of Norwich: The Origins of the Blood Libel in Medieval Europe
In 1144, the mutilated body of William of Norwich, a young apprentice leatherworker, was found abandoned outside the city's walls. The boy bore disturbing signs of torture, and a story soon spread that it was a ritual murder, performed by Jews in imitation of the Crucifixion as a mockery of Christianity. The outline of William's tale swiftly gained currency far beyond Norwich, and the idea that Jews engaged in ritual murder became firmly rooted in the European imagination.
Emily Rose's engaging book delves into the story of William's murder and the notorious trial that followed to uncover the origin of the ritual murder accusation--known as the "blood libel"--in western Europe in the Middle Ages. Focusing on the specific historical context-the 12th--century reform of the Church, the position of Jews in England, and the Second Crusade--and suspensefully unraveling the facts of the case, Rose makes a powerful argument for why the Norwich Jews (and particularly one Jewish banker) were accused of killing the youth, and how the malevolent blood libel accusation managed to take hold. She also considers four "copycat" cases, in which Jews were similarly blamed for the death of young Christians, and traces the adaptations of the story over time.
In the centuries after its appearance, the ritual murder accusation provoked instances of torture, death and expulsion of thousands of Jews and the extermination of hundreds of communities. Although no charge of ritual murder has withstood historical scrutiny, the concept of the blood libel is so emotionally charged and deeply rooted in cultural memory that it endures even today. Rose's groundbreaking work, driven by fascinating characters, a gripping narrative, and impressive scholarship, provides clear answers as to why the blood libel emerged when it did and how it was able to gain such widespread acceptance, laying the foundations for enduring anti-Semitic myths that continue to the present.
Emily Rose's engaging book delves into the story of William's murder and the notorious trial that followed to uncover the origin of the ritual murder accusation--known as the "blood libel"--in western Europe in the Middle Ages. Focusing on the specific historical context-the 12th--century reform of the Church, the position of Jews in England, and the Second Crusade--and suspensefully unraveling the facts of the case, Rose makes a powerful argument for why the Norwich Jews (and particularly one Jewish banker) were accused of killing the youth, and how the malevolent blood libel accusation managed to take hold. She also considers four "copycat" cases, in which Jews were similarly blamed for the death of young Christians, and traces the adaptations of the story over time.
In the centuries after its appearance, the ritual murder accusation provoked instances of torture, death and expulsion of thousands of Jews and the extermination of hundreds of communities. Although no charge of ritual murder has withstood historical scrutiny, the concept of the blood libel is so emotionally charged and deeply rooted in cultural memory that it endures even today. Rose's groundbreaking work, driven by fascinating characters, a gripping narrative, and impressive scholarship, provides clear answers as to why the blood libel emerged when it did and how it was able to gain such widespread acceptance, laying the foundations for enduring anti-Semitic myths that continue to the present.
416 pages, Hardcover
First published May 13, 2015
24 people are currently reading
378 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
July 27, 2015
Slightly dry, but an enlightening account of Jewish/Christian relations in this time period.
EM Rose has produced a well researched and well written book covering the first known accusation of ritual murder slighted to Jews in medieval times.
Recommended for anyone interested in the origins of the blood libel and medieval Jewish/Christian history.
EM Rose has produced a well researched and well written book covering the first known accusation of ritual murder slighted to Jews in medieval times.
Recommended for anyone interested in the origins of the blood libel and medieval Jewish/Christian history.
June 30, 2015
Pros: fascinating interpretation, lots of endnotes and explanation
Cons: highly academic
The accusation that the Jews of the city of Norwich murdered the apprentice William in a mockery of the crucifixion, and the Life of St William that was later written, set the stage for similar accusations in the future, accusations that eventually saw Jews burned at the stake and expelled from the cities they called home.
This is a highly academic book that goes over a wide variety of background information (family trees, identities of various players - and their relations to others who may have had influence, the second crusade, the civil war between Stephen and Matilda, etc.). As Rose is using very limited sources with regards to the actual blood libel cases, there’s a sometimes circuitous route from the background information to how it ties into the cases. It’s quite a fascinating piece of deductive reasoning, putting minor clues together to form a cohesive and intelligent narrative, - even if it’s admittedly based on numerous suppositions.
Rose is obviously aware of all of the scholarship that’s been done on this topic and refutes a lot of theories. For example, there’s the idea that all blood libel cases involved rioting and executions or expulsions, which may be the case for later centuries, but when the cases first appeared any negative consequences generally followed years later, and tended to have political and/or economic reasons behind them (from forcing the Jews to ransom themselves so their captor could pay bills to acquiring their land and assets). While a lot of Rose’s conclusions are based on thin information, there’s enough supporting evidence to show that - though they can’t be proved conclusively -they are plausible.
Rose proves that the murdered children themselves (assuming there’s even a body) are secondary to the economic and political concerns of those citing the accusation. Though nominated for sainthood the boys hardly ever appear in liturgical calendars, prayers, artwork, etc.
I found the earlier chapters very intense, and had to pay close attention in order to not get lost in the various strings being woven into the narrative. Later chapters (particularly the ones in part 2), were much more linear and easier to follow.
Some of the background information was fascinating in its own right, like the extreme financial cost of going on crusade, the raids done by both sides during the civil war and how knights forced churches and civilians to ransom themselves to pay the costs of war (and/or for booty). It also brought out the financial problems some nobles and churches had, and how unpalatable some of the clients were from the point of view of the moneylenders (both Christian and Jewish).
Though the book is highly academic, Rose gave enough background information to allow me - a relative newcomer to the case - to follow along easily. Not only that, the book revealed a lot about the state of research on these cases and how previous historians have interpreted the data. It’s a fascinating history that examines numerous sides of the origins of the blood libel and how the story may have originally spread.
Cons: highly academic
The accusation that the Jews of the city of Norwich murdered the apprentice William in a mockery of the crucifixion, and the Life of St William that was later written, set the stage for similar accusations in the future, accusations that eventually saw Jews burned at the stake and expelled from the cities they called home.
This is a highly academic book that goes over a wide variety of background information (family trees, identities of various players - and their relations to others who may have had influence, the second crusade, the civil war between Stephen and Matilda, etc.). As Rose is using very limited sources with regards to the actual blood libel cases, there’s a sometimes circuitous route from the background information to how it ties into the cases. It’s quite a fascinating piece of deductive reasoning, putting minor clues together to form a cohesive and intelligent narrative, - even if it’s admittedly based on numerous suppositions.
Rose is obviously aware of all of the scholarship that’s been done on this topic and refutes a lot of theories. For example, there’s the idea that all blood libel cases involved rioting and executions or expulsions, which may be the case for later centuries, but when the cases first appeared any negative consequences generally followed years later, and tended to have political and/or economic reasons behind them (from forcing the Jews to ransom themselves so their captor could pay bills to acquiring their land and assets). While a lot of Rose’s conclusions are based on thin information, there’s enough supporting evidence to show that - though they can’t be proved conclusively -they are plausible.
Rose proves that the murdered children themselves (assuming there’s even a body) are secondary to the economic and political concerns of those citing the accusation. Though nominated for sainthood the boys hardly ever appear in liturgical calendars, prayers, artwork, etc.
I found the earlier chapters very intense, and had to pay close attention in order to not get lost in the various strings being woven into the narrative. Later chapters (particularly the ones in part 2), were much more linear and easier to follow.
Some of the background information was fascinating in its own right, like the extreme financial cost of going on crusade, the raids done by both sides during the civil war and how knights forced churches and civilians to ransom themselves to pay the costs of war (and/or for booty). It also brought out the financial problems some nobles and churches had, and how unpalatable some of the clients were from the point of view of the moneylenders (both Christian and Jewish).
Though the book is highly academic, Rose gave enough background information to allow me - a relative newcomer to the case - to follow along easily. Not only that, the book revealed a lot about the state of research on these cases and how previous historians have interpreted the data. It’s a fascinating history that examines numerous sides of the origins of the blood libel and how the story may have originally spread.
July 19, 2023
The Murder of William of Norwich: The Origins of the Blood Libel in Medieval Europe is quite a heavy read in more ways than one. As the subtitle suggests, it deals with the origins of a particularly gruesome antisemitic myth - the accusation/belief that Jews ritually murdered Christian children. It is also a rigorously researched, at times dense, and academic work, which can make it a struggle to get through.
The book is divided into two parts, the first focuses on William of Norwich - the events pertaining to his murder and its investigation, as well as the development of his cult, best known for Thomas of Monmouth's The Life and Passion of William of Norwich. The second part then turns to the development of the blood libel myth with E. M. Rose exploring how William of Norwich's supposed martyrdom grew until it became a "master narrative" through the study of four other cases in 12th century France and England.
This is quite a detailed work; the notes are voluminous (the book proper, with appendices, closes out at 47%, leaving the remaining 53% for notes, bibliography, photo credits and the index), and Rose painstakingly takes the reader through many wide-ranging subjects that bring context: the changes in the cult of the Holy Innocents, local political circumstances, the struggles of the monks of Norwich to establish themselves, a bishop trying to avoid antagonising a king he disapproves of, the effects of the Anarchy on Norwich, financial troubles, the disappointments of the Second Crusade, Philippe II Auguste's efforts to establish himself as king. As Rose notes, the evidence of the lives and cults of the boy-martyrs are often limited, and in some cases her arguments are speculative, though they are labelled as such and carefully and convincingly argued. This isn't a period of the Middle Ages or a subject I'm very familiar with so I cannot say I noticed any faults in her arguments or handling of evidence. The appendices also underpin her strong theoretical work, discussing and defining the terms used and noting various debates about the terms, as well as a note on her chronology.
Rose's main argument is that blood libel did not begin or spread as an act of religious hysteria, but was a rational but cynical and vicious act of calculation, using outrageous accusations to serve their own ends. I tend towards feeling that this feels a bit too rational a read of the situation, negating the possibility that those who spearheaded the accusations could have genuinely believed in them or the role of emotive xenophobic or antisemitic aggression. As Jeffrey Cohen's (Journal of Interdisciplinary History (vol 47, no. 3) review notes:
Yet it seems as though blood libel has been seen as an emotional and superstitious phenomenon, irrational in the extreme, and perhaps Rose's new interpretation is more corrective than not. It also makes the facts of the case plain. Blood libel did not begin with a remarkable event (as far as the actuality of William of Norwich's death, Rose suggests he may have been the casualty of local political tensions during the Anarchy) but the banal evil of self-interest that has continued to haunt western culture.
This is an important, albeit dense, book.
The book is divided into two parts, the first focuses on William of Norwich - the events pertaining to his murder and its investigation, as well as the development of his cult, best known for Thomas of Monmouth's The Life and Passion of William of Norwich. The second part then turns to the development of the blood libel myth with E. M. Rose exploring how William of Norwich's supposed martyrdom grew until it became a "master narrative" through the study of four other cases in 12th century France and England.
This is quite a detailed work; the notes are voluminous (the book proper, with appendices, closes out at 47%, leaving the remaining 53% for notes, bibliography, photo credits and the index), and Rose painstakingly takes the reader through many wide-ranging subjects that bring context: the changes in the cult of the Holy Innocents, local political circumstances, the struggles of the monks of Norwich to establish themselves, a bishop trying to avoid antagonising a king he disapproves of, the effects of the Anarchy on Norwich, financial troubles, the disappointments of the Second Crusade, Philippe II Auguste's efforts to establish himself as king. As Rose notes, the evidence of the lives and cults of the boy-martyrs are often limited, and in some cases her arguments are speculative, though they are labelled as such and carefully and convincingly argued. This isn't a period of the Middle Ages or a subject I'm very familiar with so I cannot say I noticed any faults in her arguments or handling of evidence. The appendices also underpin her strong theoretical work, discussing and defining the terms used and noting various debates about the terms, as well as a note on her chronology.
Rose's main argument is that blood libel did not begin or spread as an act of religious hysteria, but was a rational but cynical and vicious act of calculation, using outrageous accusations to serve their own ends. I tend towards feeling that this feels a bit too rational a read of the situation, negating the possibility that those who spearheaded the accusations could have genuinely believed in them or the role of emotive xenophobic or antisemitic aggression. As Jeffrey Cohen's (Journal of Interdisciplinary History (vol 47, no. 3) review notes:
Yet the question remains whether faith, passion, and hate are not more a part of the story than she allows. To explain the origin of the blood libel as the result of an unfailingly rational economic calculus that strove to maximize monetary considerations without regard to the victims removes emotion (specifically, hate) as a catalyst to human violence. Only the common people—who do not make much of an appearance in this book—are motivated by affect. The elite actors whom Rose describes are shrewd and pragmatic manipulators, coldly indifferent to Jews, rather than people who might take irrational pleasure in the destruction of non-Christians. Readers may well be left wondering why the notion of a blood libel persisted so passionately, long after the Jews had been expelled from England.
Yet it seems as though blood libel has been seen as an emotional and superstitious phenomenon, irrational in the extreme, and perhaps Rose's new interpretation is more corrective than not. It also makes the facts of the case plain. Blood libel did not begin with a remarkable event (as far as the actuality of William of Norwich's death, Rose suggests he may have been the casualty of local political tensions during the Anarchy) but the banal evil of self-interest that has continued to haunt western culture.
This is an important, albeit dense, book.
September 22, 2025
"In 1149 the followers of a down-at-heel knight named Simon de Novers relieved him of a substantial debt by murdering the man to whom he owed it, Eleazer, a leading member of Norwich’s small and recently arrived community of Jews. Faced with the impossible task of defending him in the royal court, Simon’s lord, Bishop William Turbe, contrived a diversion by arguing that another charge – that some five years earlier Eleazer had led a conspiracy among the Jews to murder a twelve-year-old skinner’s apprentice, also called William – should be heard first. King Stephen prudently postponed the matter and both charges remained unresolved, but they made William of Norwich the prototype of the child ritually murdered by Jews, which became one of the ugliest fables in the repertoire of European anti-Semitism. (A different claim, that Jews drank children’s blood or used it for ritual purposes, first surfaced at Fulda in Germany in 1236.) Such tales were repeated in every subsequent century and in every part of Europe, and probably still are." From a review by R.I. Moore in the UK 'Literary Review' but as it is behind a paywall I am not providing a link.
An excellent and fascinating book which reveals the long, deep, dark, roots of antisemitism within the Catholic Church and it will no doubt come as a shock that its origins lie so firmly England. That the reemergence of William of Norwich from nearly half a millennium of obscurity owes so much to M.R. James, the author of the ghost stories, is one of many wonderful tangential bits of information you will find in this book (please see my footnote *1 below). The 'creation' of saints and their cults is also explored in great detail and reveals the Medieval Church to be far removed from the post counter-reformation church that emerged after the Council of Trent.
But it is an academic book, not an impenetrable one, Ms. Rose writes well, but this is not piopular history so you have been be warned about what to expect.
*1 I am not suggesting that M.R. James was antisemitic. Let me quote from the introduction to the published manuscript:
"The long-lost manuscript of Thomas of Monmouth's twelfth-century Life of St William of Norwich was discovered by M.R. James in 1890 ("one of the few lucky finds of MSS which fell to my share"), in "a small dank building in the churchyard" at Brent Eleigh, between Bury St Edmunds and Ipswich, Suffolk...It was part of a library donated to the parish in around 1700. MRJ was instrumental in acquiring it for Cambridge University Library. Over the next few years, he and his elderly antiquarian associate, Augustus Jessopp, worked together to produce an edition for publication. The resulting book, which saw print in 1896, contains the text of the manuscript in Latin and in translation, prefaced by seven introductory chapters. Jessopp and MRJ shared the translating and the writing of the introductory material, with MRJ contributing three chapters on "The Manuscript, The Text, The History of the Book", "The Legend" and "The Cult and Iconography of St William".
It is a perfect example of what M.R. James did, and also what many of the 'heroes' of his ghost stories did, as 'antiquarians'.
That Frederik Rolfe, Baron Corvo, of Hadrian VII fame, was equally enamoured of William of Norwich, is of note because his interest predates M.R. James's discoveries. Needless to say Rolfe's interest/obsession with the boy saint had nothing to do antisemitism but alot to do with William being a boy.
An excellent and fascinating book which reveals the long, deep, dark, roots of antisemitism within the Catholic Church and it will no doubt come as a shock that its origins lie so firmly England. That the reemergence of William of Norwich from nearly half a millennium of obscurity owes so much to M.R. James, the author of the ghost stories, is one of many wonderful tangential bits of information you will find in this book (please see my footnote *1 below). The 'creation' of saints and their cults is also explored in great detail and reveals the Medieval Church to be far removed from the post counter-reformation church that emerged after the Council of Trent.
But it is an academic book, not an impenetrable one, Ms. Rose writes well, but this is not piopular history so you have been be warned about what to expect.
*1 I am not suggesting that M.R. James was antisemitic. Let me quote from the introduction to the published manuscript:
"The long-lost manuscript of Thomas of Monmouth's twelfth-century Life of St William of Norwich was discovered by M.R. James in 1890 ("one of the few lucky finds of MSS which fell to my share"), in "a small dank building in the churchyard" at Brent Eleigh, between Bury St Edmunds and Ipswich, Suffolk...It was part of a library donated to the parish in around 1700. MRJ was instrumental in acquiring it for Cambridge University Library. Over the next few years, he and his elderly antiquarian associate, Augustus Jessopp, worked together to produce an edition for publication. The resulting book, which saw print in 1896, contains the text of the manuscript in Latin and in translation, prefaced by seven introductory chapters. Jessopp and MRJ shared the translating and the writing of the introductory material, with MRJ contributing three chapters on "The Manuscript, The Text, The History of the Book", "The Legend" and "The Cult and Iconography of St William".
It is a perfect example of what M.R. James did, and also what many of the 'heroes' of his ghost stories did, as 'antiquarians'.
That Frederik Rolfe, Baron Corvo, of Hadrian VII fame, was equally enamoured of William of Norwich, is of note because his interest predates M.R. James's discoveries. Needless to say Rolfe's interest/obsession with the boy saint had nothing to do antisemitism but alot to do with William being a boy.
April 21, 2015
Disclaimer: ARC via Netgalley.
Recently, I was talking about the arrival of Islam in West Africa, and I used the term clash. Someone asked if this meant battle as with swords, and I replied no, pointing out that way back then Christianity was responsible in a larger degree for killing because of religion than Islam or Judaism – look at the Crusades.
It’s funny how things change, and depressing because they don’t really change that much.
Blood Libel, or the belief (fictional story) that Jews killed a Christian (usually a child) to fulfill a rite or bake bread has been around for a long time. Today, even the passing literature student can get a taste of it in Chaucer. One could argue that it has been around since the phrase “the Jews killed Jesus” – something that disregards the fact that Jesus was Jewish and the Romans nailed him to the cross.
Today, blood libel is less in the Christian world (though you can still find people who do the whole killed Jesus thing) and more in the Muslim world, not all that surprising. Perhaps what is more surprising is that it really hasn’t adapted to Blood Libel accusations against Christians or Muslims.
And that is outside the scope of this book.
Emily M. Rose’s history looks at the earliest Blood Libel story –that of William of Norwich, tracing its impact in England and then crossing the Channel to look at its impact in France. The English section looks at the murder and the story about the murder in light of the war between Stephen and Matilda as well as the role of the Church in everyday life as well as the role of the Church in the lives of William’s family. It then moves to the murder of a Jewish man who was killed by a knight who owed him money. This murder is seen not only in the light of William’s but also in terms of the crusades. It puts a slightly more sinister look on the use of the rumor. Combine that section with the one about Paris and the Jewish bones found in that well in Norwich become representative of even more horror.
The writing at time is a little dry at times, but it is a worth a read.
June 15, 2015
In 1144 the body of young William of Norwich was found. He had been tortured and then murdered by a person or persons unknown but for a variety of reasons blame was unfairly placed on the entire Jewish community.
This incredibly well researched and well written book details the history of what is the first known accusation of ritual murder attributed to Jews in medieval times. It is an enlightening account of Jewish/Christian relations in this time period. I found it to be a fascinating read although some may find it a bit dry. Highly recommended for anyone interested in learning more not only about the origins of the blood libel but also a not so well known part of Jewish/Christian history.
This incredibly well researched and well written book details the history of what is the first known accusation of ritual murder attributed to Jews in medieval times. It is an enlightening account of Jewish/Christian relations in this time period. I found it to be a fascinating read although some may find it a bit dry. Highly recommended for anyone interested in learning more not only about the origins of the blood libel but also a not so well known part of Jewish/Christian history.
August 3, 2015
On July, I had a lot of time to read all the books I had to read for NetGalley, and there weren't a lot of them I really fully liked, but this was one of them.
We're in the first half of 1100, when the mutilated body of William of Norwich is found abandoned out of the city's walls. He had some signs of torture on his body, so stories started to spread about a new ritual in imitation of the Crucifixion.
I loved this book! All the history background, the characters development, the story itself. The author did a really great job with this book, and I feel like I will read more of her stories, if she'll ever write down something else.
Thank you NetGalley!
We're in the first half of 1100, when the mutilated body of William of Norwich is found abandoned out of the city's walls. He had some signs of torture on his body, so stories started to spread about a new ritual in imitation of the Crucifixion.
I loved this book! All the history background, the characters development, the story itself. The author did a really great job with this book, and I feel like I will read more of her stories, if she'll ever write down something else.
Thank you NetGalley!
June 4, 2018
Very good academic book on the genesis of an anti-Jewish trope that I had not heard of before, but apparently started in the 12th century. I think this book would be a 5 star for someone more interested in the subject matter. I found it informative, and well written, but alas not really my forte. Not the author's fault, if this is your jam, please regard my review as 5 stars.
March 11, 2017
The book was interesting at first but it is extremely packed with facts, and I decided to leave it at about 2/3 of the way through.
July 11, 2021
This book is a series of essays addressing some of the earliest blood libel charges against Jews. It seems to me that Rose's goal is to explain why Christians made up this idea. The general theme of the book seems to be that in the 12th century, accusing Jews of murder was very profitable.
The best part of the book is the beginning: her discussion of the case of William of Norwich, which apparently was the very first blood libel case. William died under mysterious circumstances in 1144; it is still not clear whether he was in fact murdered. A few years later, an impoverished nobleman murdered a jewish moneylender in Norwich- an attack that was apparently motivated not by religious fanaticism but by a desire to avoid paying debts to said moneylender. A clergyman, acting as the nobleman's attorney, claimed that the attack was revenge for the Jews' murder of William. Another Norwich monk wrote a book about the case.
What caused the Norwich clergy to make up this story? Rose explains that cults built around local saints were common in England; a town's clergy would create a shrine devoted to some deceased local holy man, people would go to the local church and (occasionally) be cured of their illnesses, and they would then credit the holy man, causing them to make donations to the church to show their gratitude. Rose suggests that the Norwich clergy thought that it would be profitable to make William their holy man, and that their dramatic story about his death made the shrine more appealing and profitable. Unlike later blood libel cases, the Norwich story led to no riots or massacres.
A second instance of blood libel was in nearby Gloucester; a child was found dead in a river in 1168, and the local clergy again blamed Jews. By an odd coincidence, a local nobleman soon got enough money to finance a war-making expedition into Ireland. Rose suggests that the money for this came from Jewish lenders, and that the charge of ritual murder was a tool to extort money out of the Jews. Perhaps someone suggested that if funds were not forthcoming, someone would provoke a riot. (Here, as in other parts of the book,, Rose speculates a lot).
Once rulers discovered the blood libel idea, they graduated from extortion to explusions and massacres. For example, when French king Phillip Augustus expelled Paris Jews based on a blood libel charge, he was not only able to get their money, but also able to get their land, which he used to build public works.
I found a couple of essays to be less persuasive than others; for example, one essay discusses a local ruler's massacre of most of a Jewish community in Blois; there was no obvious profit for the count in massacring women and children. Rose seems to think that the count was trying to demonstrate his piety, which I guess could be true but is hard to prove.
The best part of the book is the beginning: her discussion of the case of William of Norwich, which apparently was the very first blood libel case. William died under mysterious circumstances in 1144; it is still not clear whether he was in fact murdered. A few years later, an impoverished nobleman murdered a jewish moneylender in Norwich- an attack that was apparently motivated not by religious fanaticism but by a desire to avoid paying debts to said moneylender. A clergyman, acting as the nobleman's attorney, claimed that the attack was revenge for the Jews' murder of William. Another Norwich monk wrote a book about the case.
What caused the Norwich clergy to make up this story? Rose explains that cults built around local saints were common in England; a town's clergy would create a shrine devoted to some deceased local holy man, people would go to the local church and (occasionally) be cured of their illnesses, and they would then credit the holy man, causing them to make donations to the church to show their gratitude. Rose suggests that the Norwich clergy thought that it would be profitable to make William their holy man, and that their dramatic story about his death made the shrine more appealing and profitable. Unlike later blood libel cases, the Norwich story led to no riots or massacres.
A second instance of blood libel was in nearby Gloucester; a child was found dead in a river in 1168, and the local clergy again blamed Jews. By an odd coincidence, a local nobleman soon got enough money to finance a war-making expedition into Ireland. Rose suggests that the money for this came from Jewish lenders, and that the charge of ritual murder was a tool to extort money out of the Jews. Perhaps someone suggested that if funds were not forthcoming, someone would provoke a riot. (Here, as in other parts of the book,, Rose speculates a lot).
Once rulers discovered the blood libel idea, they graduated from extortion to explusions and massacres. For example, when French king Phillip Augustus expelled Paris Jews based on a blood libel charge, he was not only able to get their money, but also able to get their land, which he used to build public works.
I found a couple of essays to be less persuasive than others; for example, one essay discusses a local ruler's massacre of most of a Jewish community in Blois; there was no obvious profit for the count in massacring women and children. Rose seems to think that the count was trying to demonstrate his piety, which I guess could be true but is hard to prove.
April 16, 2022
The length of this book is slightly deceptive. It is almost half endnotes and bibliography, which is why I found myself a little surprised when it came to an end.
Emily M Rose tells the story of the origin of the 'blood libel' and its early development. I'm not a Medieval historian and, as Rose herself shows, Medieval history is notoriously filled with gaps so it is hard to not have to take imaginative steps with the evidence you do have and sometimes it feels like Emily M Rose is as much a detective as a historian. But the two things are not that different when you think about it.
She analyses the motivations that led to the creation of the blood libel stripping it of a lot of its religious veneer - which is still part of what's involved - and pointing out the political and economic motivations that religion gives cover to. That the blood libel's origins were an attempt by a Bishop to protect a knight from being found guilty of the murder of a Jew in Norwich. That this Bishops sophistry laid the foundations for something that worse things were built upon - murder and expulsion - was probably never the intention. This was a pawn in a game about wealth and influence.
The stories spread. Other places found their murdered children and blamed them on the Jews. It spread outwards. Rose writes in detail about Blois and Paris, where we first see fire and expulsion. Respectively. The Blois story is horrific and I knew nothing about it before reading this book. It would be worth reading for that alone.
She also does a great job of tying the Blood Libel in with the Holy Innocents - mostly in the chapter on events in France under Louis VII.
It seems shocking that a thousand years later some of these libels - and others that have been added since - are still used to attack Jewish people. A thousand years of fire and expulsion.
This books leans to the academic so it isn't the easiest of reads but it isn't boring or overloaded with jargon either. It's a good solid read on a subject worth knowing about.
Emily M Rose tells the story of the origin of the 'blood libel' and its early development. I'm not a Medieval historian and, as Rose herself shows, Medieval history is notoriously filled with gaps so it is hard to not have to take imaginative steps with the evidence you do have and sometimes it feels like Emily M Rose is as much a detective as a historian. But the two things are not that different when you think about it.
She analyses the motivations that led to the creation of the blood libel stripping it of a lot of its religious veneer - which is still part of what's involved - and pointing out the political and economic motivations that religion gives cover to. That the blood libel's origins were an attempt by a Bishop to protect a knight from being found guilty of the murder of a Jew in Norwich. That this Bishops sophistry laid the foundations for something that worse things were built upon - murder and expulsion - was probably never the intention. This was a pawn in a game about wealth and influence.
The stories spread. Other places found their murdered children and blamed them on the Jews. It spread outwards. Rose writes in detail about Blois and Paris, where we first see fire and expulsion. Respectively. The Blois story is horrific and I knew nothing about it before reading this book. It would be worth reading for that alone.
She also does a great job of tying the Blood Libel in with the Holy Innocents - mostly in the chapter on events in France under Louis VII.
It seems shocking that a thousand years later some of these libels - and others that have been added since - are still used to attack Jewish people. A thousand years of fire and expulsion.
This books leans to the academic so it isn't the easiest of reads but it isn't boring or overloaded with jargon either. It's a good solid read on a subject worth knowing about.
April 19, 2025
If you swallowed the poison of Thomas of Monmouth this is the antidote. In the opening chapter Rose looks at the murder itself. It’s rather a knotty problem as she has just a few scattered records and one major source written by a liar. We can never know what really happened but she does a thorough job of unravelling everything.
In the second chapter she examines why things like this happen. She places it in the context of the failure of the Second Crusade. This makes perfect sense to me. ‘Crisis mentality’, Rose calls it. I’d call it millenarianism. Very well referenced argument – as is the whole book. Well referenced, honestly argued and with plenty of original thought.
I found this in the local interest section at the library, but it’s not hard to see why it’s popular internationally.
In the second chapter she examines why things like this happen. She places it in the context of the failure of the Second Crusade. This makes perfect sense to me. ‘Crisis mentality’, Rose calls it. I’d call it millenarianism. Very well referenced argument – as is the whole book. Well referenced, honestly argued and with plenty of original thought.
I found this in the local interest section at the library, but it’s not hard to see why it’s popular internationally.
September 4, 2025
Continuing my research into blood libel with one of the more interesting and readable works of academic nonfiction I've read. Emily M Rose expertly crafts the narrative of the first blood libel in medieval Europe, the "trope codifier" if you will, and its spread over the second half of the 12th century from Norwich to other parts of England and continental Europe, the reasons it was employed beyond base antisemitism (a word that Rose chooses not to directly employ, even though it is very evident in her explanations). The argument is sound and based directly on the medieval texts. Would recommend.
March 19, 2022
An absolutely tremendous work of scholarship - Rose interrogates an incredibly wide range of sources and contexts in exploring the origins (and uses) of ritual murder accusations against Jews in the Middle Ages. Essential reading for all medievalists and historiographers; recommended reading for those with an interest in the history of conspiracy theories.
May 14, 2018
This narrative bounces around too much for my taste. There are many tenuous conclusions in here. The murders themselves are not clearly defined and the detail on one is in the end notes. Very interesting discussion on the plight of European Jewry in the 12th century.
July 20, 2018
Gift from my father after he read it. Loads of history that helped me understand how things developed over time in England and France in the middle ages
I especially enjoyed reading about our neighborhood here in Paris
I especially enjoyed reading about our neighborhood here in Paris
December 19, 2017
Nice introduction to the treatment of Jews in Medieval times.
February 7, 2018
The first couple of chapters were a little dry. I found the second part of the book very interesting and informative. I give it 3.5 stars
September 6, 2021
Прекрасное расследование истоков кровавого навета!
November 25, 2024
Very thick, can be dry at times. Glad I had background knowledge and interest. Made some very good points, and got me thinking while informing me!
August 31, 2025
I found what was going on with this book to be so incredibly fascinating. I had not come across these accounts in any prior reading.
November 5, 2024
Chilling account of antisemitism in medieval Europe and how it was largely driven by money - the desire to attract pilgrims and therefore compete with other churches for income fuelled the concoction of these blood libel stories. We don't definitively find out who killed William of Norwich although the author does put forward a theory. It's a very memorable book, and incredibly well researched although there are graphic descriptions of violence which some readers will find upsetting in later chapters. It is a shocking account of antisemitism and pure greed, and well worth a read for an insight into the class relations of the time too - most of those concocting these stories were among the most privileged members of society.
December 27, 2015
In the 12th century Norwich was the second largest city in England but it did not have a patron saint to draw pilgrims to it. Across Europe the ruling classes were in need of money to fund their expeditions on crusade and the only place to borrow money was from the Jews. When the time came to repay the money the nobility looked for a way out and a Europe-wide programme of anti-semiticism began. In Norwich a youth was found dead in the woods and his death was attributed to a ritual murder committed but the jewish population of the city. When a knight, reneging on his debt, murdered a jewish money-lender, his defence was revenge for the murder of the youth William. Seizing upon the opportunity the leaders of Norwich's priesthood began attributing miracles to murdered youth in order to provide themselves with a 'home-grown' saint to rival St Edmund of nearby Bury. The ripples were felt across in France as retribution was taken for similar 'ritual murders'.
Before reading this book I had some knowledge of the anti-semiticism that took place in medieval Europe but this book filled in some of the detail and the motivation. The idea of ritual murder was promulgated to cover for a need to ensure that debts weren't paid in full and money was forfeit to the Crown, the Jews being both rich and ostracised from society. Whilst the murder of William of Norwich is used as a scenario to focus this book the actual details are sketchy and the real details comes from descriptions of atrocities elsewhere. The level of research is meticulous, nearly half the length of the book is taken up with details of source material, and the writing is really engaging. This is a fascinating story.
Before reading this book I had some knowledge of the anti-semiticism that took place in medieval Europe but this book filled in some of the detail and the motivation. The idea of ritual murder was promulgated to cover for a need to ensure that debts weren't paid in full and money was forfeit to the Crown, the Jews being both rich and ostracised from society. Whilst the murder of William of Norwich is used as a scenario to focus this book the actual details are sketchy and the real details comes from descriptions of atrocities elsewhere. The level of research is meticulous, nearly half the length of the book is taken up with details of source material, and the writing is really engaging. This is a fascinating story.
December 31, 2015
In the mid-1100s in England, the body of a young boy named William was found. Despite the lack of evidence for exactly how he died (caught up in the violence of the current civil war, suicide, or indeed murdered by someone in town?), the local Jewish community was eventually accused of ritually sacrificing him, and the local monks declared William a martyr and a saint, and tried to create a famous and profitable cult around him. This was the earliest instance of the 'blood libel' accusation that would eventually become widespread and hugely influential. Rose argues that the accusation didn't grow out of some sort of timeless antagonism between Jewish and Christian communities, but very local, contemporary, and specific problems: the accusation was actually first made years later during the trial of a knight who had murdered the Jewish banker he was in debt to.
This was a pretty interesting book about the politics and religious trends of England (and nearby France and Germany) in the Middle Ages. However, the author often assumes that the reader is already quite familiar with the topic; I would have liked some more background information, especially in regards to how the blood libel idea spread and was used after the 1100s. Overall, though, I still recommend it as worth reading, if you have any interest in the topics it touches on.
I read this as an ARC via NetGalley.
This was a pretty interesting book about the politics and religious trends of England (and nearby France and Germany) in the Middle Ages. However, the author often assumes that the reader is already quite familiar with the topic; I would have liked some more background information, especially in regards to how the blood libel idea spread and was used after the 1100s. Overall, though, I still recommend it as worth reading, if you have any interest in the topics it touches on.
I read this as an ARC via NetGalley.
November 17, 2016
This book presents convincing evidence that the blood libel originated from very different sources than I had expected, given the later medieval (and, alas, modern) manifestations as a case of unreasoning mass religious hysteria against Jews. Emily Rose makes a strong case that the blood libel's first cases may have fallen on fertile ground because of underlying suspicion of Jews, but that the seeds of the libel were planted because of reasons having very little to do with anything distinctively Jewish: the desire to dodge a murder charge, to invade Ireland, pay off debts, or consolidate political and ecclesiastical power.
Most intriguing to me is the suggestion that these political and personal needs that drove the original instances of the blood libel themselves created the later mass religious hysteria against Jews and its manifestation in the cases of the blood libel that are more familiar to us. (Which, because they are so much better documented than the earlier cases, lead us to assume that the original cases were like the later cases.) Can it really be the case that centuries of the blood libel can really have their original in such particular, personal motivations as Rose describes? Rose acknowledges that all of her conclusions are necessarily tentative, but her analysis is persuasive.
Most intriguing to me is the suggestion that these political and personal needs that drove the original instances of the blood libel themselves created the later mass religious hysteria against Jews and its manifestation in the cases of the blood libel that are more familiar to us. (Which, because they are so much better documented than the earlier cases, lead us to assume that the original cases were like the later cases.) Can it really be the case that centuries of the blood libel can really have their original in such particular, personal motivations as Rose describes? Rose acknowledges that all of her conclusions are necessarily tentative, but her analysis is persuasive.
December 25, 2018
This study of the origin of the "blood libel" in Medieval Europe, specifically at Norwich, England, is as relevant in today's climate of religious paranoia and distrust as ever. The specific unsubstantiated (and frankly absurd) but widespread charge that Jews carried out ritual murders in Christian communities is explored not only as it pertains to gullible and fearful popular sentiments, but also as a tool for political and financial gain for kings, earls, bishops and abbots who all stood to gain by turning the population against the local Jews.
As we observe how potential leaders today, in supposedly more enlightened times, use similarly unfounded hate rhetoric against entire cultures instead of rooting out the few responsible for specific crimes, the relevance of such a study is still current today.
This book is well-written and engaging. The author's narrative is divided into logical segments that show the evolution and effects of the blood libel against the Jews in the Middle Ages. This study is of interest to students of medieval history, but also as a cautionary tale for those who say that such things would never happen here.
As we observe how potential leaders today, in supposedly more enlightened times, use similarly unfounded hate rhetoric against entire cultures instead of rooting out the few responsible for specific crimes, the relevance of such a study is still current today.
This book is well-written and engaging. The author's narrative is divided into logical segments that show the evolution and effects of the blood libel against the Jews in the Middle Ages. This study is of interest to students of medieval history, but also as a cautionary tale for those who say that such things would never happen here.
January 24, 2016
I read this for a History of Anti-semitism class that I'm taking. This is a brilliantly researched book that presents the political, economic, personality and religious context surrounding the first allegation of Jewish ritual murder of Christian children in 1143. Sure there's a lot of conjecture because the written record is so thin and so biased, but Rose doesn't posit anything that seems like a stretch. A man accused of killing a Jew needed to divert attention away from his guilt to the collective guilt of Jews; a cathedral needed a saint in order to get on the "pilgrimage" tourist circuit; the failure of the Second Crusade meant a lot of debt by knights and other British lords owed to Jews, close ties to Norman France made transmission of the story easy....and attractive.... and so on. So a cruel totally made-up story about a body discovered in 1143 ends up being the source of centuries of anti-semitism across Europe, murders, expulsions from European countries (France, England) and a charge that exists even to this day.
April 14, 2025
I've always thought the blood libel was stupid, and couldn't imagine how anyone could come to believe it. That it came about for economic and political reasons doesn't surprise me, but I wasn't expecting the start of it to be so petty.
I would have liked more about the long-term effects and implications, rather than the few case studies that illustrate its origins. They were interesting, especially watching the development of the idea from something localised into something with such far reaching implications, but there was more meat on those bones.
(Also, I had no idea Thibault was pronounced Tee-bo)
I would have liked more about the long-term effects and implications, rather than the few case studies that illustrate its origins. They were interesting, especially watching the development of the idea from something localised into something with such far reaching implications, but there was more meat on those bones.
(Also, I had no idea Thibault was pronounced Tee-bo)
October 16, 2021
First academic book since graduating..... So dry.
Interesting history. Rose follows the murder of William of Norwich to explore the social, political, and economic causes of the redefinition of Jewish-Catholic relations in 12th century. The accusations of “blood libel” steeped in anti-semitism progressed into a way for Christian leaders to centralize power, politically and economically, after the failures of the Crusades.
Needed a bit more background in the beginning but overall very good and structured well.
Quarantine book
Interesting history. Rose follows the murder of William of Norwich to explore the social, political, and economic causes of the redefinition of Jewish-Catholic relations in 12th century. The accusations of “blood libel” steeped in anti-semitism progressed into a way for Christian leaders to centralize power, politically and economically, after the failures of the Crusades.
Needed a bit more background in the beginning but overall very good and structured well.
Quarantine book
December 5, 2015
3.5/5 This is a detailed account of the history of the origins of the blood libel claim against Jews. I think this book is excellent for someone studying medieval Europe or Jewish/ Christian history, but it's a lot to just pick up and read without having any prior knowledge of the subject.
Another excellent thing for students is the extensive bibliography which is almost as long as the text of the book.
Another excellent thing for students is the extensive bibliography which is almost as long as the text of the book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews