STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER for interpretation.Her commentary on these scenes hits this limit.En ders anticipated this; she fends off the criticism that she has chosen to "decontextualize them... divorc{ing} them from the religiosity that inspired such a genre" (p. 6).Still, her work would have been enriched by some consideration of the legitimizing model of sacrifice, however modest. The Medieval Theater ofCruelty is a hard, provocative read in the best sense.It risks large strokes of an argument that explains our fascination with pain in the world.It delivers wonderfully.I count on Enders to show us why the groundwork of intellectual history still matters today. HELEN SOLTERER Duke University LOUISE FRADENBURG and CARLA FRECCERO, eds., with the assistance of Kathy Lavezzo.Premodern Sexualities. New York and London: Routledge, 1996.Pp.xxiv, 276.$70.0 0 cloth, $19 .95 paper. One of the most exciting and productive movements in recent medieval and early modern scholarship has been a historicist rethinking of culture in relation to queer sexuality.Louise Fradenburg and Carla Freccero's collection of essays, Premodern Sexualities, takes an important place in this emerging field of study. Originating as a special issue of GLQ (1 :4 (1995}), the collection appears here in expanded form, with seven new essays and with the original introduction and five essays, at times sig nificantly revised and expanded. Fradenburg and Freccero's "Preface" and "Introduction: Caxton, Fou cault, and the Pleasures of History" constitute the volume's strongest contribution. Defining the "chief purpose" of Premodern Sexualities as "help{ing} us think further about what we mean when we say that sex has a history and that we need to know more about it" (p.vii), they emphasize especially the ways in which queer theory has pointed us to ward a recognition of the activepleasure we might take in doing histori cal work (p.viii): We do not ... pursue the history of sexuality just because we must; we study it because we know that what we must or ought to do is intimately related to 478 REVIEWS what we want to do.And we want history; the joy of finding counterparts in the past, for example, problematic though it may be, is not simply to be dis missed as anachronism....History ...is an erogenous zone, and knowing this helps us understand sexuality itself a lot better.It might also help us better understand the kinds of ethical strucrures at stake in historical thinking.For example, the argument that modern desires and perspectives can and must be set aside ifwe are to read the past properly is itselfrevealing, for it suggests that historical knowledge is often founded on the renunciation, the ascesis, of "self' Fradenburg and Freccero consider how history might be done other wise-and not just by "traditional" historians but also by those working with models indebted to queer theory, especially the first volume ofMi chel Foucault's History ofSexuality. Following a dominant understanding of Foucault, many have insisted on a clear line of demarcation between an era of modern sexuality and a time "before sexuality," when sexual "acts, rather than identities, are targeted for cultural attention" (p.xx). Fradenburg and Freccero call for a fuller analysis of whether such a dis tinction best characterizes the difference between "modern" and "pre modern" sexualities.More radically, they interrogate the dependence of both traditional and queer historicism on an "alteritism" that makes the past essentially different from the present. Calling attention to the otherness of different times, places, and cultures, such alteritism treats the recognition of similarities or continuities as a "transhistorical" im position ofourselves on others.Fradenburg and Freccero insist, however, that forging common cause with the past might be not an imposition of self on other but an identification, charged with "dangers and plea sures," that is also potentially a "subversive reinscription" of our under standing of both past and present (p.xviii). The essays collected in Premodern Sexualities address the issues raised by this introduction with varying degrees of success.Most disappoint ing in the collection as a whole is the failure-despite the bringing together of essays by scholars of both the early modern and the medi...