Writing Russia in the Age of Shakespeare (review)
modeled on “homosexual,” but refers to generally favored, often intellectual, relationships among men. Not many readers will share her conviction that Chaucer’s Prioress’s Tale, of the little boy who goes on singing Alma redemptoris mater after his throat has been cut by a Jew and his body thrown into a cesspit, makes the pilgrims “sobre” only because they resent her unsuccessfully Frenchified ways. Sometimes the author spoils her argument by far-reached theorizing. What does she mean by saying “the Angevin King Richard Coeur-de-Lion: a name that, when pronounced with an English accent, sounds a lot like Cordelia” (211)? The principal source of Lear has “Cordella.” Spenser has “Cordeill” once and “Cordelia” twice (FQ II. x. 28–31), apparently for metrical reasons, and that is where Shakespeare is supposed to have found the name. Williams is very well-informed (and knows it). She gives good reasons for the use of “fetish” in her title, but one reader suspects that resemblance to ME “fetis” played a large part in her choice. Skelton published Philip Sparrow before 1529. Shakespeare probably wrote King John in 1595/6. In it, the Bastard, just after someone has called him “Philip,” mutters “Philip sparrow” at 1.231 because his name is not Philip: by his mother’s testimony he was begotten by Richard Coeur de Lion during her husband’s absence, so that the Bastard should be called by another name. Williams, however, takes this to be a reminiscence of Skelton. She is apparently unaware of John Bartlet’s sixteenth-century madrigal praising “Philip my sparrow.” Anyone who has lived in England as long as Williams and I have done knows, unless she is extremely bookish, that the common British sparrow (unlike the North American kind) chirrups “Phip.” E. A. J. Honigmann, in his edition of King John, punctuates this speech as “Philip?sparrow.” The notes are all at the end, with the usual advantages and disadvantages, mitigated by running heads giving the page-numbers corresponding to the notes. But the system breaks down on page 15, where “Homi Bhabha” is named, without a note showing the source. Another page-number, referring to the same source, appears only in parentheses in the text. A. KENT HIEATT The University of Western Ontario