The Parliament of Fowls is certainly a love-vision, as Dr. Sypherd has shown. It is also a love-debate, and as such has been well compared by Koeppel with the Old French Florance et Blancheflor. In this the birds are the barons of the god of Love, and take part in discussing a question submitted by Florance and Blancheflor to him. No doubt Chaucer was writing under the general influence of this genre. But he has cleverly complicated the usual scheme, for the Parliament is in fact a double debate. The primary question at issue is, which of the three tercelets shall win the formel? This might have been decided by Nature on the basis of their several pleas, in which case the simplest form of love-debate would have been followed. But the intervention of the goose precipitates a general discussion, which quickly introduces a new question, whether a lover. should be loyal to his lady under all circumstances. This second problem had been treated by Machaut in two poems, Le Jugement dou Roy de Behaigne and Le Jugement dou Roy de Navarre; and it was elaborately discussed by the authors of Les Cent Balades not so very long after the date of the Parliament of Fowls. In the Parliament, however, the contest is not between two classes of courtly lovers, as in the French poems, but between cortois" and "vilain." Here the birds line up on two sides: the seed fowls, holding with the courtly group represented by the "foules of ravyne," and the wormeating birds with the "vilains," represented by the waterfowl. " 1 Studies in the "Hous of Fame," pp. 20 ff. 2 In Herrig's Archiv, XC, 149-150. Courthope (History of English Poetry, I, 270) says the idea of a council of birds is taken from the Old French Hueline and Eglantine. 8 Cf. pp. 34 ff., above. TROILUS ANd Criseyde AND THE Legend of Good Women Troilus and Criseyde For a correct appreciation of Chaucer's genius, as exhibited in his great love-poem, the Troilus and Criseyde, a knowledge of the nature of the love therein treated and of the limitations within which the poet, voluntarily or involuntarily, worked, is particularly necessary. Only with such a knowledge can the characters and actions of the personages of the poem be understood. It is perfectly obvious that neither Chaucer nor Boccaccio was attempting to reproduce the life of the Trojans in the heroic age. It is equally obvious, although perhaps it is not always so regarded, that our opinion of the lovers should not be formed entirely on the basis of present-day ideas. To both Boccaccio and Chaucer, Troilus and his lady were contemporary young people, and their love affair is related in terms of contemporary life. Since they belong to the appropriate rank in society, they are treated as courtly lovers. The most casual reading of the poem shows this. Yet the fact is often forgotten by critics and commentators, and it is worth while to examine, somewhat in detail, the courtly elements which appear in the Troilus, and which agree with the principles of the system as they have been already expounded. One of the commonest sentiments in the love-poetry of the troubadours, in that of Chrétien, and in the book of Andreas, was that love is not only good in itself, but is the cause and origin of all good. This idea appears in Pandarus's words to the love-stricken Troilus: And for-thy loke of good comfort thou be; .. for nought but good it is To loven wel, and in a worthy place; Thee ought not to clepe it hap, but grace (i, 128).1 1 The references are to the Books and Stanzas of the Troilus. The ennobling nature of love finds many expressions in the Troilus; the most important are perhaps the following. Chaucer himself speaks in the lines: And ofte it [Love] hath the cruel herte apesed And worthy folk maad worthier of name And causeth most to dreden vyce and shame (i, 36). Elsewhere, in the proem to Book III, he imputes this power of abstract love to Venus, the goddess of Love: Algates hem that ye wol sette afyre, They dreden shame, and vices they resigne, Ye do hem corteys be, fresshe and benigne (iii, 4). Antigone, to the same effect, sings in praise of the lover's life: To flemen alle manere vyce and sinne: That day by day I in my wil amende (ii, 122). And the hero of the poem himself furnishes a concrete example of the ennoblement of one's nature by love: Thus wolde Love, yheried be his grace, That pryde, envye, ire, and avaryce He gan to flee, and every other vyce (iii, 258). Another principle which seems to have been commonly accepted, was that to be in love is the normal condition for suitable young people. We have seen this idea expressed in the Book of the Duchess,1 and also in the Confessio Amantis. Pandarus teaches the same doctrine in the lines: Was never man ne woman yet bigete Celestial, or elles love of kinde (i, 140). It is a natural inference that love ought not to be resisted. The god of Love is often represented as punishing those who attempt to stand out against his power. This sentiment is voiced by Criseyde, speaking to Troilus : Lo herte myn, as wolde the excellence Of love, ayeins the which that no man may Ne oughte eek goodly maken resistence . . This droof me for to rewe upon your peyne (iii, 142). A doctrine prominent in Andreas's work is that a woman is responsible for the love her beauty arouses, and she cannot therefore justifiably refuse to grant her favor. This, in Andreas, has a sensual connotation. It got to be a convention in later times, with the sensual element minimized or absent altogether. Pandarus expresses the idea when endeavoring to comfort Troilus. Since everybody, he says, is apt (in the old sense of the word) to experience love, Celestial or elles love of kinde, and since Criseyde is far too young and beautiful to go into a monastery, ... it sete hir wel right nouthe A worthy knight to loven and cheryce, And but she do, I holde it for a vyce (i, 141). Later he argues the point at length with Criseyde herself, when he tries to prove her responsibility in the matter of granting Troilus her love (ii, 46–50). The dialectic skill of this passage is Pandarus's own; but the basic principle of his argument was well established, and Criseyde seems to have recognized it. Another familiar principle of the courtly system was that love obtained too easily is not prized. Pandarus advances this argument to reassure Troilus, when he despairs of gaining the favor of Criseyde. "Think," he says, "of the oak; under the repeated stroke of the woodman's axe, it must eventually fall. Remember also that a slender reed, when the wind blows on it, will bend to the ground and then become erect. Not so the oak. When it is blown to the ground, it is down for good and all. It nedeth me nought thee longe to forbyse. Acheved wel, and stant with-outen doute, Al han men been the lenger ther-aboute" (ii, 199). Most of these doctrines are put into the mouth of Pandarus. The same authority on love matters also reminds Criseyde of the importance of constancy, which was another cardinal principle. He says: "If a woman pretend to love a man and calls him 'leef' and 'dere herte,' and at the same time loves another, She doth hirself a shame, and him a gyle" (iii, 111). We have seen that according to the conventional teaching, jealousy in husbands was to be deprecated; but in lovers paramours, it was natural and even requisite. The former idea Criseyde expresses in the lines: Or maisterful, or loven novelrye (ii, 108). She refers to the latter in that tender, pathetic scene where she speaks to Troilus of his jealousy: Eek al my wo is this, that folk now usen For that o greyn of love is on it shove! (iii, 147). Here she has in mind the courtly doctrine, and it is noteworthy that she shows little patience with such ideas. She calls Troilus's jealousy "swich folye," though she attributes it to his love for her. And she takes Jove to task for allowing such an evil spirit to exist. But that wot heighe god that sit above, And after that, it oughte bere his name (iii, 147). Once more, the courtly love ideas appear in the numerous passages dealing with the relation of the lover to his lady. |