Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1971 The rT adition of Theriophily in Cowper, Crabbe, and Burns. Rosemary Moody Canfield Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Canfield, Rosemary Moody, "The rT adition of Theriophily in Cowper, Crabbe, and Burns." (1971). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 2034. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/2034 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 72-3470 CANFIELD, Rosemary Moody, 1927- THE TRADITION OF THERIOPHILY IN COWPER, CRABBE, AND BURNS. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Ph.D., 1971 Language and Literature, general University Microfilms, A \ERQX Company , Ann Arbor, Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED The Tradition of Theriophily in Cowper, Crabbe, and Burns A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of English by Rosemary Moody Canfield B.A., University of Minnesota, 1949 M.A., University of Minnesota, 1952 August, 1971 PLEASE NOTE: Some Pages have indistinct print. Filmed as received. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TITLE P A G E .............................................. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT........................................ ii ABSTRACT ............................................... iv I. INTRODUCTION....................................... 1 II. THERIOPHILY IN THE WORK OFWILLIAM COWPER . 3A III. THERIOPHILY IN THE WORK OF GEORGE CRABBE . BO IV. THERIOPHILY IN THE WORK OF ROBERT BURNS . .126 V. CONCLUSION ................................... 171 LIST OF WORKS CITED...................................177 VITA ...................................................1B2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author wishes to express her gratitude to those without whose efforts this study would not have been possi­ ble, particularly to Dr. Percy Adams, who has provided a constant source of intellectual stimulus and personal en­ couragement throughout the years of graduate study; to Dr. Jim S. Borck, whose teaching suggested the topic and whose continuing interest in the work has been a major source of encouragement, and above all to Dr. Annette McCormick, who as director of the dissertation has been a painstaking critic, a reliable guide, and an understanding friend. Appreciation is also due to the graduate faculties in English and French, whose dedicated teaching and personal interest have made graduate work a joy rather than a trial. Special thanks should go to her parents, Dr. and Mrs. V. A. Moody, for their never-failing encouragement and help, and to her friends, especially Dr. and Mrs. James R. Upp, for their continuing concern and kindness. Finally, the author wishes to express her gratitude to her children, Michael, who assumed adult responsibilities during difficult years, John and Christopher, who helped with bibliographical work, and Celia, who cheerfully devoted many hours to the tedious work of checking texts and preparing the final manuscript. ABSTRACT In The Happy Beast in French Thought of the Seven­ teenth Century. George Boas used the word ,!theriophilyn to describe an aspect of primitivistic thought which stresses the superiority of animals to human beings and suggests that man should model his life more closely on that of the animals. The present study proceeds from an analysis of the elements involved :.n theriophily to a survey of the work of three late eighteenth century poets, William Cowper, George Crabbe, and Robert Burns, in order to discover the importance of the tradition of theriophily as an influence on their thought and in their poetry. The study focused not only on explicit statements of the principles of theriophily in the poems and in the correspondence of Cowper, Crabbe, and Burns, but also on a careful analysis of animal imagery in their works, which revealed implicit meanings related to theriophily. As a result of the study, two principles were estab­ lished: first, the tradition of theriophily was a major influence upon the thought of three significant British writers of the late eighteenth century; second, the importance of that influence could not have been ascer­ tained without the analysis of animal imagery. The second principle was demonstrated in the chapters which dealt individually with the three writers, where the explicit statements of theriophily were minimal in compari­ son with the imagistic evidence. The first principle was evidenced in that concepts associated with theriophily provided a new approach to the work of Cowper, Crabbe and Burns,whose common search for a lost Paradise involved a consideration of the differenti­ ation between man and beast. In William Cowper, explicit statements of the traditional superiority of man, which coincide with his Christian professions, were modified by personal obsession, so that Cowperfs imagery revealed his identification of himself with animals and his attempt to place them, and therefore himself, in a flimsy Eden of his own imaginative creation. George Crabbe's conventional Christian position was denied by imagery which consistently suggested that man was like the animals around him. But Crabbe refused to construct an Eden based on bestial conduc Instead, like earlier moralists, he used theriophily to suggest that man improve his conduct. Finally, in the work of Robert Burns, theriophily was seen to be the basis of an ideal social and moral order in which man would live in harmony with nature. Clearly, then, the study of therio­ phily could help to explain apparent contradictions in the thought of writers who are preoccupied with the problem of man's relationship to nature. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Since he first began to assess his own position in the world, man has tended to assume that there is a dis­ tinct differentiation between his species and the "lower creatures,n and that they are in a position of subservience to him. The account of the creation in Genesis presents man as the culmination of God’s creative process. Because man is created in God*a image, he shall "have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth” (Gen. 1.26), But his original dominion does not include the power of life or death; in the Garden of Eden there are only herbs for food. Every creature "wherein there is life” (Gen.1.30), including man, is to be a vegetarian. Following the account in Genesis, Milton, too, emphasizes the fact that man’s dominion is limited. He does not have permission to kill fish, fowl, beast, or even reptile. Admittedly, man is superior in the creation, 2 the Master work, the end Of all yet don; a Creature who not prone And Brute as other Creatures, but endu'd With Sanctitie of Reason, might erect His Stature, and upright with Front serene Govern the rest, ael -knowing, and from thence Magnanimous to correspond with Heav'n. But although he governs other creatures, for food man is given only the fruits of the Garden, "Delectable both to behold and t a s t e , "2 ana not its living creatures. When man falls, all of nature suffers along with him, Adam and Eve attempt to clothe themselves in leaves; God makes "coats of skins" for them. Milton leaves the source of the skins uncertain, as possibly animals who have been killed, possibly the cast-off coats of creatures who slough them off periodically fP.L.x,217-1#), Because it is Christ who clothes man in Paradise Lost. Milton clearly xvants to avoid the concept of Christ as destroyer. But God's ap­ proval of man's new role as killer is evidenced by Abel's sacrifice of his first-born lambs and their fat to his God (Gen.4.4). Milton shows the new dominion of Death and Discord not only by turning beasts, fowls and fish against each other fP.L.x.707-14)■ but also by causing other living things either to flee man or to pursue him, and in turn by using man as a sinful agent for the de­ struction of animals. Furthermore, man's power over "Beast, Fish, Fowl" becomes a similarly sinful desire to tyrannize over his own kind (P.L.xii.63-90). It is this contempt for life which characterizes the savage kings in Pope's "Windsor Forest." To them, neither the killing of 3 beasts nor that of subjects is important. Men have become Nimrods, who pursue their own kind for sport.3 But despite manTs fall, in orthodox Christian thought he retains the right to dominate the earth. Often he thinks of himself as God's representative. Thus Marsilio Ficino, the fifteenth century Italian Platonist, asserts that as the vicar of God, man uses not only the elements, but also all the ani­ mals which belong to the elements, the animals of the earth, of the water, and of the air, for food, convenience, and pleasure, and the higher, celes­ tial beings for knowledge and the miracles of magic. Not only does he make use of the animals, he also rules them. Man not only rules the animals by force, he also governs, keeps, and teaches them. Hence man who provides gen­ erally for all things, both living and lifeless, is a kind of god. Certainly he is the god of the animals, for he makes use of them all, rules them all, and instructs many of them.* In Hooker, the doctrine of plenitude somewhat modifies the idea of the preeminence of man. If the creation was not made for God's use but as a reflection of his glory, "all things for him to shew beneficence and grace in them,"5 v/e might suppose that the animal world was not created merely as a source of "food, convenience, and pleasure” for man.