of their shared concern for their sick child or when the family was separated due to travel,120 as when
someone departed from the city where his father and mother dwell, if his journey is considered dangerous—and his father and mother are worried about his welfare, whether or not they have elected to fast on his behalf—it is his duty to hire a messenger as soon as possible to send a letter notifying his father and mother that he is out of danger, having arrived safely to his destination, and that they should neither worry nor fast any longer.121
What motivated these parents to fast? They were clearly moved by a desire to petition for their child’s welfare, yet they also were working from a belief that their own suffering would help secure his safe transit. Thus fasting could convey piety and supplication simultaneously. The parallel mention of the mother and father in this source signals its depiction of a standard practice.
In the rulings attributed to Peretz b. Elijah (Rabbenu Peretz, d. 1297), one source discusses whether it is permissible to commit oneself to a fast and then postpone it. This sage was asked: “About a woman who said, ‘I will fast today.’ Can she delay it to the morrow for her sister?”122 He responded that although one may defer a fast, it was unwarranted in this situation. Notwithstanding the vagueness of this case—it is not clear whether the woman sought to postpone her fast because of her sister or if she was in fact fasting on her sister’s behalf—this text offers no indication that a woman fasting was considered exceptional. The relationship between accepted practice and exceptional piety is imprecise in these cases, for these fasts were part of the established routine, yet I would suggest that frequency and intensity rather than the observance of fasting per se was what had social and religious significance.
The writings of Meir b. Barukh of Rothenburg are replete with references to fasting, including men and women who committed themselves to Monday and Thursday fasts and then wished to delay or cancel their vows.123 Meir of Rothenburg tells of a woman who planned to fast on Mondays and Thursdays, but she was unsure of the procedures involved.124 His response too was gender neutral.
Mordekhai b. Hillel (1250–1298) relates the case of a woman who was allowed to pause between two fast days rather than fast consecutively. She had fasted on the Sabbath on account of a bad dream. Typically she would have been expected to fast on the following day (Sunday) to atone for fasting on the Sabbath; however, she could not. Thus Asher recalled precedents from similar cases: “Samuel of Bamberg allowed a woman to fast on the Sabbath on account of a dream. But she was not able to fast for two days in a row, so he allowed her to fast on two separate days of the week, neither being the Sabbath. And Eliezer of Metz also ruled the same way.”125
Gender plays no apparent role in this case. This woman could not fast as planned, so she sought rabbinic guidance to resolve her dilemma, no more and no less.126 In other instances, fasting among women became a subject of halakhic discussion when conditions unique to women—be they biological or social—were at the heart of the queries being raised. From the Talmud onward, halakhic texts exempt pregnant, post-partum, and nursing women from fasting on Yom Kippur.127 This explicit release implies that women were otherwise expected to fast as members of the community. A responsum by Haim Paltiel (thirteenth century) illustrates the nexus of the quotidian nature of women’s fasts and the exceptions that may arise. Here a woman took on the obligation to fast, then immediately discovered that she was pregnant. Haim was asked how she could annul her vow and he detailed the procedure for her.128 Like other medieval texts, this opinion provides a common explanation for the prohibition against fasting during pregnancy—as a potential cause of miscarriages that must be avoided.129 Unfortunately, it offers no background for the motivation behind this woman’s fast.
Fasting, Repentance, and Atonement
The evidence of these Jewish men and women who fasted and their motivations for fasting presented up to this point has been varied. Although fasting was commonly attributed to conspicuously pious individuals,130 I suggested the qualities that determined piety were often the degree and frequency of practice, rather than the deed being performed. Thus the stringently pious fasted alongside community members who followed more conventional approaches in accordance with the calendar cycle and personal circumstances.
Much as fasting on Yom Kippur was seen as a form of self-denial on the path to atonement, individual fasts were also understood as a means for repentance. Numerous sources describe fasting as a substitute for the sacrifice that would have been offered during the Temple period to atone for a given sin.131 Penitential fasting was certainly not unique to medieval or Jewish culture. As noted above, fasting had already been linked to atonement in biblical and rabbinical literature. For example, a talmudic interpretation of “When Adam had lived one hundred and thirty years” (Gen. 5:3) in Tractate Eruvin describes Adam fasting after being exiled from Eden: “Meir said, ‘Adam was a hasid.132 When he recognized that death was ordained as a punishment on his account, [Adam responded by] fasting, avoiding sexual relations with his wife,133 and wearing fig leaves for one hundred thirty years. That statement134 was made to offset semen that he accidentally emitted.’ ”135
According to this passage, Adam tried to atone for having sinned—whether defined as the actions that led to his exile from Eden or the emission of semen—by fasting.136 In fact, it could be argued that repentance has been a consistent motif in Jewish fasting throughout history, in terms of individual practice and communal observance. For example, on communal fast days such as Yom Kippur, confession is a component of the public prayer service that is understood as a fulfillment of the biblical injunction to recite a personal confession (vidui). However, the concept and practice of repentance were dramatically transformed among the Jews of medieval Ashkenaz, much as they were among their Christian neighbors. Before turning to these medieval Jewish developments, I survey medieval Christian approaches to penance.
Penance in Medieval Christian Culture
Fasting was an essential component of Christian penance, along with prayer and almsgiving, as described above,137 and medieval penance was a subject of scholarly investigation among theologians and legal historians. These scholars defined the thirteenth-century institution of mandatory confession for every Christian by the Fourth Lateran Council as a landmark for Christian society and also examined the founding of schools and universities that developed common curricula and methods for conceptualizing and teaching about penance.138 Some of these researchers have interpreted this systematization of penance as a battle over doctrine.139 Over the past decade, scholars have begun to uncover the social contexts where penitential books were used and how penance was practiced. Their examination of liturgies and records of public penance suggest a lack of congruence between doctrinal divisions and contemporaneous religious practice.140 As a result, some scholars have forged a new approach that interprets debates about penance as attempts by university teachers to provide an overview of this rich tradition for their students, not as efforts to reconcile doctrinal distinctions.141
Two key aspects of penance that have received current scholarly attention are its origins among laity (as compared with its history in monastic communities) and the differences between private and public penance.142 As the older of the two forms, public penance was reserved for grave sins. This once-in-a-lifetime ritual and would take place during Lent, in response to the call for confession and penance issued to all Christians at that time each year. Driven by penitential piety, individuals would dress in special (often white) garments and perform penance publicly.143 Starting in the Carolingian era, some sins, if known to the public, required stricter discipline. In such instances, this ritual was presided over by a bishop rather than a local priest and the penitent was formally separated from the community on Ash Wednesday until being reintroduced on Holy Thursday.
In contrast with the singular nature of public penance, private penance could be practiced
