This is the second in a series of posts about Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales (1390s).
PLOT/THEME/RHETORIC
Plot: The knight tells a classic chivalric romance about the battle two cousins (Arcite and Palomon) have for the same woman: the Duke’s sister-in-law Emily. Because the two cousins were political exiles, neither can fulfill their desire of wooing Emily. To make matters worse, they turn on each other because they are rivals for Emily’s love. Eventually, the two fight with the victor getting Emily’s hand in marriage. Arcite wins but soon after dies. The tale ends with Palamon marrying Emily.
Theme: The Duke Theseus provides a long speech at the end with a possible theme: the existence of divine providence over human affairs. Given the heartache and woe that occupies most of the poem, this feels like either a redemptive or pollyannish reading. Because the tale is set in Ancient Greece (though with Roman gods), the tale could also offer an assessment of that society. The three gods that receive prayers are Mars (war), Venus (love), and Diana (chastity). Only Diana rejects the prayer, importantly the one offered by Emily. Love and War each answer their supplicants prayers.
Rhetoric: The story is a chivalric romance. This genre features an aristocratic character embarking on a journey of trial, exile, and return. The two knights here–the royally-born Arcite and Palamon–undergo significant trials and exiles. Arcite gets the “return” of martial victory before succumbing to his battle wounds. Palamon gets the “return” of requited love when he marries Emily.
Chaucer’s tale comes from Boccaccio’s The Decameron. In fact, the tale is largely an English translation of that Italian tale. A hilarious rhetorical gesture made by the knight deserves a small comment. The knight’s tale is very long in comparison to Chaucer’s other tales, yet the knight keeps saying things like, “if it nere to long to heere” (if it were not too long to hear) or “it were al to longe for to devyse” (it would be too long to describe). My initial reaction was: “Wasn’t this thing long enough NOW?” But in comparison with Boccaccio’s version of the story, the knight’s tale IS significantly shorter.
INTERPRETATION: The Covenant
Sovereignty: The god Jupiter appears to be the most powerful god in this tale. He appears front-and-center in Theseus’s final interpretation of the tale’s meaning. “What maketh this but Juppiter, the kyng, / That is prince and cause of alle thyng?” says Theseus asking and answering his own question. Theseus himself asserts royal sovereignty. He is a conquering warrior who wins every battle he fights and dispenses justice with grace and mercy as he sees fit. However, he claims that he is merely carrying out divine orders.
Hierarchy: Theseus’s final speech articulates a great chain of being. The best we can, Theseus claims, is “to make virtue of necessity.” The knight shares this tale. By rank, he is the pilgrimage’s most aristocratic character. His tale is populated by Dukes and Queens and Princesses. The reason Arcite and Palamon get to fight to the death for Emily’s is that (a) someone must be punished for their failure to follow Theseus’s orders and (b) someone is worthy, by dint of birth, to be Emily’s husband.
Ethics: The tale is about what’s fair in love and war. The kinship between Arcite and Palamon matters little in comparison to their affection for Emily. It also doesn’t seem to matter what she wants (which is chastity). Each man breaks rules in order to have a chance at love. Arcite sneaks back into the town he’s been banned from. Palamon escapes from prison. Arcite follows the dictates of Mars, Palamon the dictates of Venus.
Sanctions: As a devotee of war, Arcite gets to win the duel with his cousin but loses his love in the end. As a devotee of chastity, Emily gets the privilege of removing herself from the company of men for longer than most women below her social standing. Ultimately, though she must acquiesce. Chastity? Yes. Celibacy? No. As the devotee of love, Palamon loses the battle but wins the war. Overall, fortune determines one’s sanctions. It’s best to die when you’re on top because you can be certain that everyone will experience misfortune.
Succession: The tale is comedic so it must end with a marriage, not simply the victory of one of the cousins. As the remaining royal member of the Theban aristocracy, Palamon will now be in a position to make sure Thebes lives on.
Conclusion: if the comedic “master story” is the marriage between Christ and his church, then this tale is ultimately one of rival saviors competing for the bride’s hand. Which is pagan? Which is Christian? Allegorically, the tale could say that the pagan world chooses war over love, a physical strength over a binding emotional one. I’m not sure if I buy this. I’d have to see if the knight’s rendering of this classical world is typical or atypical.
Experiments in Criticism 