Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zkb6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T18:57:05.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Who Stole Robertson?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Steven Justice
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

I answer the invitation to consider “medieval studies in the twenty-first century” by considering one of its mysteries in the twentieth. Thirty years ago, the work of D. W. Robertson, Jr. (who retired from Princeton in 1980 and died in 1992), polarized the field: it was the stuff of midnight debates and broken friendships; it gave his department a fearsome notoriety; it made and unmade careers. In a celebrated 1987 stocktaking, Robertson was the problem the field could not shake (Patterson 3–9, 26–39). But from this prominence, he did not dwindle; he vanished. Just as medieval literary studies steered hard into the cultural turn, he disappeared from its stage except for straw-man cameos; by 1999, The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature could spare no breath to mention him. So who stole Robertson?

Information

Type
Theories and Methodologies
Information
PMLA , Volume 124 , Issue 2 , March 2009, pp. 609 - 615
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 2009

References

Works Cited

David, Aers. Community, Gender, and Individual Identity: English Writing, 1360–1430. London: Routledge, 1988. Print.Google Scholar
David, Aers. Piers Plowman and Christian Allegory. New York: St. Martin's, 1975. Print.Google Scholar
David, Aers. “A Whisper in the Ear of Early Modernists; or, Reflections on Literary Critics Writing the ‘History of the Subject.‘” Culture and History, 1350–1600: Essays on English Communities, Identities, and Writing. Ed. Aers, . Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1992. 177–202. Print.Google Scholar
Erich, Auerbach. “Philology and Weltliteratur.” Trans. Said, Edward and Said, Maire. Centennial Review 13.1 (1969): 1–17. Print.Google Scholar
Augustine. De Doctrina Christiana. Ed. Martin, Joseph. Turnhout: Brepols, 1982. Print. Corpus Christianorum, Ser. Latina 32.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Morton W. “Symbolism in Medieval Literature.” Modern Philology 56.2 (1958): 73–81. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature. Ed. Wallace, David. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1999. Print.Google Scholar
Crane, R. S. “On Hypotheses in ‘Historical Criticism’: Apropos of Certain Contemporary Medievalists.” “The Idea of the Humanities” and Other Essays Critical and Historical. Vol. 2. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1967. 236–60. Print. 2 vols.Google Scholar
Sheila, Delany. “Substructure and Superstructure: The Politics of Allegory in the Fourteenth Century.” Science and Society 38.2 (1974): 257–80. Print.Google Scholar
Donaldson, E. Talbot. “Patristic Exegesis in the Criticism of Medieval Literature: The Opposition.” Critical Approaches to Medieval Literature: Selected Papers from the English Institute, 1958–1959. Ed. Bethurum, Dorothy. New York: Columbia UP, 1960. 1–26. Print.Google Scholar
Ralph, Hanna. “Donaldson and Robertson: An Obligatory Conjunction.” Chaucer Review 41.3 (2007): 240–49. Print.Google Scholar
Steven, Justice. “Did the Middle Ages Believe in Their Miracles?” Representations 103 (2008): 1–29. Print.Google Scholar
Kernan, Alvin B. In Plato's Cave. New Haven: Yale UP, 1999. Print.Google Scholar
David, Lawton. “Sacrilege and Theatricality: The Croxton Play of the Sacrament.” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 33.2 (2003): 281–309. Print.Google Scholar
Lees, Clare A. Tradition and Belief: Religious Writing in Late Anglo-Saxon England. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1999. Print.Google Scholar
Leicester, H. Marshall. The Disenchanted Self: Representing the Subject in the Canterbury Tales. Berkeley: U of California P, 1990. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Patterson. “Historical Criticism and the Development of Chaucer Studies.” Negotiating the Past: The Historical Understanding of Medieval Literature. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1987. 3–39. Print.Google Scholar
Derek, Pearsall. “Chaucer's Poetry and Its Modern Commentators: The Necessity of History.” Medieval Literature: Criticism, Ideology, and History. Ed. Aers, David. Brighton: Harvester, 1986. 123–47. Print.Google Scholar
Robertson, D. W. Jr. Abelard and Heloise. New York: Dial, 1972. Print. Crosscurrents in World Hist.Google Scholar
Robertson, D. W. Jr. Chaucer's London. New York: Wiley, 1968. Print.Google Scholar
Robertson, D. W. Jr. Essays in Medieval Culture. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1980. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, D. W. Jr. “Historical Criticism.” English Institute Essays, 1950. Ed. Downer, A. S. New York: Columbia UP, 1951. 3–31. Print.Google Scholar
Robertson, D. W. Jr. A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspectives. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1962. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, D. W. Jr. “Some Medieval Literary Terminology, with Special Reference to Chrétien de Troyes.” Studies in Philology 48.3 (1951): 669–92. Print.Google Scholar
Robertson, D. W. Jr. “Some Observations on Method in Literary Studies.” New Literary History 1.1 (1969): 21–33. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, William E. “The Raven and the Writing Desk: The Theoretical Limits of Patristic Criticism.” Chaucer Review 14.3 (1980): 260–77. Print.Google Scholar
Larry, Scanlon. Narrative, Authority, and Power: The Medieval Exemplum and the Chaucerian Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994. Print.Google Scholar
Spearing, A. C. Medieval to Renaissance in English Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1985. Print.Google Scholar
Tinkle, Theresa Lynn. Medieval Venuses and Cupids: Sexuality, Hermeneutics, and English Poetry. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1996. Print.Google Scholar
Marion, Turner. Chaucerian Conflict: Languages of Antagonism in Late Fourteenth-Century London. Oxford: Clarendon, 2007. Print.Google Scholar
Utley, Francis Lee. “Robertsonianism Redivivus.” Romance Philology 19.2 (1965): 250–60. Print.Google Scholar
David, Wallace. Chaucerian Polity: Absolutist Lineages and Associational Forms in England and Italy. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1997. Print.Google Scholar