Introduction: Conceptual Personae 1

NOTES

Introduction: Conceptual Personae 1. Duc De La Rochefoucauld, Moral Maxims and Reflections in Four Parts: Written in French by the Duke of Rochefoucault, Now Made in English (London: M. Gillyflower, 1694), no. CCCLXXX. 2. Odo Marquard, In Defense of the Accidental: Philosophical Studies, trans. Robert M. Wallace (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991). 3. Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy: Verse Translation and Commentary, Vol. 1: Inferno, ed. and trans. Mark Musa (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1996), 7.84 [p. 65]. 4. Francesco Petrarch, “Preface: To the Noble and Distinguished Azzo Da Correggio,” Remedies for Fortune Fair and Foul: A Modern English Translation, vol. 1, ed. and trans. Conrad H. Rawski (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991), p. 1. An early fifteenth-century English translation of a small part of the work survives in Cambridge University Library MS Ii. VI.39; see F. N. M. Diekstra, ed., A Dialogue between Reason and Adversity: A Late Middle English Version of Petrarch’s De Remediis (Assen: Royal Vangorcum, 1968). 5. Giovanni Boccaccio, The Decameron, trans. G. H. McWilliam (London: Penguin, 1972), p. 127. 6. John Gower, Confessio Amantis, VI.1569–70, in The English Works of John Gower, 2 vols., ed. G. C. Macaulay, EETS e.s. 81–82 (London: Oxford University Press, 1900; reprinted 1979). 7. John Lydgate, Fall of Princes, ed. Henry Bergen, EETS e.s. 121–24 (London: Oxford University Press, 1924–27; reprinted 1967), 1.54; Thomas Malory, The Works of Sir Thomas Malory, vol. 3, ed. Eugene Vinaver, rev. P. J. C. Field (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 1233. 8. François Dastur, “Phenomenology of the Event: Waiting and Surprise,” Hypatia 15.4 (2000), p. 182. 9. The standard works to consult are Pierre Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire (Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1967); Howard R. Patch, The Goddess Fortuna in Medieval Literature (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927); and Jerold C. Frakes’s The Fate of Fortune in the Early Middle Ages: The Boethian Tradition (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1987). See also the special issue edited by Catherine Attwood on “Fortune 132 NOTES

and Women in Medieval Literature” in Nottingham French Studies 38.2 (1999). An exhibition showing artifactual materials held at the Folger Shakespeare Library has resulted in a sumptuous illustrated book edited by Leslie Thomas, Fortune: “All Is but Fortune” (Washington: University of Washington Press, 2000), suggesting that the iconography has wider public appeal. 10. Jeffrey J. Cohen, Medieval Identity Machines (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), p. 3. 11. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, What Is Philosophy? trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994), p. 73. 12. Deleuze and Guattari, What Is Philosophy? pp. 75–76. 13. Jacques Derrida, “My Chances/Mes Chances: A Rendezvous with Some Epicurean Stereophonies,” in Taking Chances: Derrida, Psychoanalysis, and Literature, ed. Joseph H. Smith and William Kerrigan (London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984), pp. 1–32. The paradox is one Derrida addresses in the punning neologism destinerrance, the letter addressed but not guaranteed to reach its destination. For some commentary on this area of Derrida’s thought, see J. Hillis Miller, “Derrida’s Destinerrance,” MLN 121.4 (2006), pp. 893–910. 14. François Lyotard, The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, trans. Georges Van Den Abbeele (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), p. 75. 15. Paris, B. N. lat. 6765, fol. 58v, a codex containing verses thought to have been authored by Serlo of Wilton. Excerpted and translated in Peter Dronke, Medieval Latin and the Rise of the European Love-Lyric, vol. 2, 2nd edn. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), pp. 496–97. 16. Vox Clamantis II.69–70, in The Complete Works of John Gower, Vol. 4, The Latin Works, ed. G. C. Macaulay (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902). Eric W. Stockton, trans., The Major Latin Works of John Gower (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962), pp. 99–100. 17. These poets echo the paradoxes of Matthew 16:25 (“For he that will save his life shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for my sake shall find it”) and 25:29 (“For to every one that hath shall be given, and he shall abound; but from him that hath not, that also which he seemeth to have shall be taken away”), in The Holy Bible: Douay Version Translated from the Latin Vulgate, ed. Richard Challoner (London: William Clowes and Sons, 1956). 18. Dante, Divine Comedy: Verse Translation and Commentary, Vol. 1: Inferno, 7.84 and 94 [pp. 64–67]. 19. James Joyce, Finnegans Wake (London: Penguin, 1992), 1.6 [p. 149]. 20. Love is one of four instances of fidelity to the event discussed in Alain Badiou’s Being and Event, trans. Oliver Feltham (New York: Continuum, 2005): “it is the amorous relationship which refers, at the most sensitive point of individual experience, to the dialectic of being and event, the dialectic whose temporal ordination is proposed by fidelity” (232). NOTES 133

21. See Friedrich Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy and Other Writings, ed. Raymond Geuss and trans. Ronald Speirs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 54–72; and Derrida, “Mes Chances,” pp. 20–22, 22. Hanna F. Pitkin, Fortune Is a Woman: Gender and Politics in the Thought of Niccolo Machiavelli (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999). 23. Gerda Reith, The Age of Chance: Gambling in Western Culture (London: Routledge, 1999). 24. Most recently, Michael Witmore’s Culture of Accidents: Unexpected Knowledges in Early Modern England (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001) has given an adroit treatment of the supposed watershed. While he observes that the earliest recorded instance of accident in English is found in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde (III.918), Witmore’s purpose is to show that it becomes a powerful sign of the times in the Renaissance stage and study. A much more important recent book is Jacques Lezra’s Unspeakable Subjects: The Genealogy of the Event in Early Modern Europe (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997). In his brilliant but mercurial exposition Lezra pursues a cluster of textual events transmitted through the works of Lucretius, Descartes, Cervantes, and Shakespeare among many others, tracing a line of descent within which textual events (e.g., translations and adaptations) introduce something accidental into the system, generating early modern history. Other examples include Frederick Kiefer’s Fortune and Elizabethan Tragedy (San Marino: Huntington Library, 1983), and as mentioned already Pitkin’s Fortune Is a Woman, both of which indi- cate again where the privileged site of analysis lies. 25. John Bowlin, Contingency and Fortune in Aquinas’s Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999). 26. Paul Strohm, Politique: Languages of Statecraft between Chaucer and Shakespeare (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005), p. 1. 27. Daniel Heller-Roazen, Fortune’s Faces: The Roman de la Rose and the Poetics of Contingency (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003).

1 On Fortune, Philosophy, and Fidelity to the Event 1. Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, trans. Richard Green (New York: Macmillan, 1962), IV.pr.7. All subsequent references will be to this edition. 2. James Joyce, Finnegans Wake (London: Penguin, 1992), 2.9 [p. 269]. 3. Augustine, City of God, trans. Henry Bettenson (London: Penguin, 1984), IV.33 [p. 176]. 4. Augustine, The Retractations, trans. Sister Mary Inez Bogan (Washington, DC: Catholic University of American Press, 1968), p. 7 [I.i.2]. 5. Augustine, City of God, p. 176 [IV.33]. 134 NOTES

6. Cicero, De Divinatione II.7, as translated by William Armistead Falconer, The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1923). Cited in Daniel Heller-Roazen, Fortune’s Faces: The Roman de la Rose and the Poetics of Contingency (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003), p. 68. 7. The distinction comes down to which causes escape human foresight. See Aquinas, Summa Theologiae: Latin Text and English Translation, Dominican Editors, vol. 5 (New York: Blackfriars, 1964), 1a Q. 22 art. 2: “The universal cause is one thing, a particular cause another. An effect can be haphazard with respect to the plan of the second, but not of the first.” 8. Alberti Magna Opera omnia, 1:423. Translated in Heller-Roazen, Fortune’s Faces, p. 25. 9. Badiou, Being and Event, trans. Oliver Feltham (London: Continuum, 2005), p. 181. See also, for a considerably reduced version of his doctrines, Alain Badiou’s Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil, trans. Peter Hallward (New York: Verso, 2002). 10. Jorge J. E. Gracia, Introduction to the Problem of Individuation in the Early Middle Ages (München: Philosophia Verlag, 1984), p. 108. 11. Cited in Gracia, Introduction to the Problem of Individuation, p. 75. Gracia is translating Boethius’s second edition from Samuel Brandt, ed., In “Isagogen” Porphyrii commenta, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, vol. 48 (Vienna: F. Tempsky, 1906). 12. Cited in Gracia, Introduction to the Problem of Individuation, p. 77. 13. Boethius, De Trinitate 1.24–31 in H. F. Stewart, E. K. Rand, and S. J. Tester, eds. and trans., Boethius: The Theological Tractates, The Consolation of Philosophy, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973), pp. 6–8. See Gracia, Introduction to the Problem of Individua- tion, p. 98. 14. There are several circumstantial details that make the work richly ambiguous (and perhaps flawed). Henry Chadwick, in Boethius: The Consolations of Music, Logic, Theology, and Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), argues that the work progresses from stoic moralism to platonic metaphysics. Seth Lerer, in Boethius and Dialogue: Literary Method in The Consolation of Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985), speaks of the movement from “extrinsic” rhetorical to “intrinsic” philosophical demonstrations keyed to the gradual understanding of the prisoner. Boethius’s rhetorical handbook De topicis differentiis shows how important producing arguments to suit occasions was to his rhetorical theory. Yet arguably the Consolation of Philosophy does not hang together. Scholars increasingly suggest that the dialogue dramatizes its own failure. See John Marenbon’s Boethius (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), and Joel C. Relihan’s Ancient Menippean Satire (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993). 15. For Aristotle happiness conduces to those who are fortunate enough to possess such external goods as “good birth, good children, good looks. For no one will be entirely blessed if he is entirely disgusting to look at, NOTES 135

or basely born, or both solitary and childless . . . it seems to require this sort of fortunate climate” (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, trans. Terence Irwin [Indianapolis: Hacket, 1985], 1099a31–b8. See John M. Cooper, “Aristotle on the Goods of Fortune,” Philosophical Review 94.2 [1985]: 173–96). Neither is the good soul immune from the unexpected reversals of fortune: “Some maintain, on the contrary, that we are happy when we are broken on the wheel, or fall into terrible misfortunes, provided that we are good . . . . [T]hese people are talking nonsense” (Nicomachean Ethics 1153b17). 16. See Bernard G. Dod’s “Aristoteles latinus” and C. H. Lohr’s “The medieval interpretation of Aristotle” in The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982); and Jean Dunbabin, “Robert Grosseteste as Translator, Transmitter, and Commentator: The ‘Nicomachean Ethics,’ ” Traditio 28 (1972), pp. 460–72. 17. See Alastair Minnis and Lodi Nauta, “More Platonico loquitur: What Nicholas Trevet Really Did to William of Conches,” in Chaucer’s Boece and the Medieval Tradition of Boethius, ed. Alastair Minnis (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1993), pp. 1–33; Lodi Nauta, “ ‘Magis sit Platonicus quam Aristotelicus’: Interpretations of Boethius’s Platonism in the Consolatio Philosophiae From the Twelfth to the Seventeenth Century,” in The Platonic Tradition in the Middle Ages: A Doxographic Approach, ed. S. Gersh and Maarten J. F. M. Hoenen (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2002), pp. 165–204; Mark Gleason, “Clearing the Fields: Towards a Reassessment of Chaucer’s Use of Trevet in the ‘Boece,’ ” in The Medieval Boethius: Studies in the Vernacular Translations of De consolatione philosophiae, ed. Alastair Minnis (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1987), pp. 89–105; and Pierre Courcelle, La Consolation de philosophie dans la tradition littéraire, Antécédents et postérité de Boèce (Paris: Études augustiniennes, 1967), pp. 318–19. 18. See Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, trans. C. I. Litzinger, Library of Living Catholic Thought (Chicago: Regnery, 1964). On Aquinas’s reception of the new Aristotle see H. V. Jaffa, Thomism and Aristotelianism: A Study of the Commentary by Thomas Aquinas on the Nicomachean Ethics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952), p. 187; P. Mercken, “Transformations of the Ethics of Aristotle in the Moral Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas,” Tommaso d’Aquino nel suo settimo centenario: Atti del Congresso Internaziononale (Naples: Edizioni Domenicane Italiane, 1977), pp. 160–61; and R. A. Gauthier and J. Y. Jolif, Aristote: L’Éthique à Nicomaque (Louvain: Publicationes Universitaires, 1970). 19. Where the Nicomachean Ethics gets cited more than any other of Aristotle’s works, according to Mark D. Jordan, “Aquinas Reading Aristotle’s Ethics,” in Ad Litteram: Authoritative Texts and Their Medieval Readers, ed. Mark D. Jordan and Kent Emery, Jr. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992), pp. 229–49. 20. Summa Theologiae, vol. 42, 2a2ae Q. 129 art. 8. Cf. Nicomachean Ethics 1124a15–25. 136 NOTES

21. This composite text is a peculiar medieval synthesis of Aristotle’s writings, surviving today in fifty-six manuscript copies. Found as early as the thirteenth century in Vaticana MS Vat. lat. 2083 (dated 1283) and, later, in fourteenth- and fifteenth-century school texts such as British Library Add 18377 and Yale Beineke MS 225. As yet unedited, Liber de bona fortuna is described in the catalogue of Aristoteles Latinus, codices descripsit Georgius Lacombe . . . Pars prior (Rome: La libreria dello stato, 1939–), pp. 72 and 160, and in John M. Rist’s “The End of Aristotle’s On Prayer,” American Journal of Philology 106.1 (1985), pp. 110–13. Remarks on the text and its influence can be found in C. Fabro, “Le Liber de bona fortuna de l’Éthique à Eudème d’Aristote et la dialectique de la divine Providence chez saint Thomas,” Revue Thomiste 88 (1988), pp. 556–72, and T. Deman, “Le Liber de bona fortuna dans la théologie de St Thomas d’Aquin,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 17 (1928), pp. 38–58. 22. Rist, “The End of Aristotle’s On Prayer,” p. 111–12. He supposes the work may have been translated directly from a Greek original. 23. Fabro, “Le Liber de bona fortuna,” pp. 556–57. 24. See Summa Theologiae, vol. 24, Appendix 6, “St Thomas’s Use of the De Bona Fortuna,” pp. 142–47; Von Gordon Anthony Wilson, “Henry of Ghent’s Critique of Aristotle’s Conception of Good Fortune,” Franziskanische Studien 65 (1983), pp. 241–51, and also his “Good Fortune and the Eternity of the World: Henry of Ghent and John Duns Scotus,” Recherches de Théologie e Philosophie Médiévale 45.1 (1998), pp. 40–51. 25. John Duns Scotus, Ordinatio (Opus Oxoniense), II, dist. 3, part 1 in Opera omnia, ed. C. Balic (Rome, 1950–), 7.458ff. Translated in Paul Vincent Spade, ed., Five Texts on the Medieval Problem of Universals: Porphyry, Boethius, Abelard, Duns Scotus, Ockham (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994), pp. 57–113, and excerpts translated in Arthur Hyman and James J. Walsh, eds., Philosophy in the Middle Ages: The Christian, Islamic, and Jewish Traditions, 2nd edn. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1973), pp. 624–32. For detailed treatment see Peter King’s “Duns Scotus on the Common Nature,” Philosophical Topics 20 (1992), pp. 50–76, and for comparative analysis see Gracia’s Introduction to the Problem of Individuation. 26. Ordinatio, II, dist. 3, part 1, q. 4.106 [p. 85], as translated in Spade, Five Texts. 27. Ordinatio, II, dist. 3, part 1, q. 6.170 [pp. 101–2], as translated in Spade, Five Texts. 28. Ordinatio, II, dist. 3, part 1, q. 6.188 [p. 107], as translated in Spade, Five Texts. 29. As cited in King, “The Problem of Individuation,” p. 9, and discussed in Gracia, Introduction to the Problem of Individuation, pp. 90ff. 30. Cited in Jeffrey R. DiLeo, “Pierce’s Haecceitism,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 27.1 (1991), p. 91. 31. Ordinatio, II, dist. 3, part 1, q. 6.185 [p. 106], as translated in Spade, Five Texts. NOTES 137

32. Ordinatio, II, dist. 3, part 1, q. 6.186 [p. 106], as translated in Spade, Five Texts. 33. Ordinatio, II, dist. 3, part 1, q. 6.194 [p. 109], as translated in Spade, Five Texts. Cf. King, “The Problem of Individuation,” p. 19, who observes that “a given individual differentia is that which produces a given from an uncontracted nature, and no more can be said about it.” 34. King, “The Problem of Individuation,” p. 20. 35. See S. J. McGrath’s The Early Heidegger and Medieval Philosophy: Phenomenology for the Godforsaken (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2006); John Caputo’s Heidegger and Aquinas: An Essay in Overcoming Metaphysics (New York: Fordham University Press, 1982); and Sonya Sikka’s Forms of Transcendence: Heidegger and Medieval Mystical Theology (Albany: SUNY Press, 1997). As Bruce Holisinger says in The Premodern Condition: Medievalism and the Making of Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), p. 6, “Had he not been denied a vacant chair in the history of Catholic philosophy at the University of Freiburg, it is likely we would know Heidegger today as one of the great twentieth-century exponents of medieval thought.” Quotations from Heidegger’s Habilitationsschrift come from the English translation of Harold Robbins, “Duns Scotus’ Theory of the Categories and of Meaning” (Ph.D. diss. De Paul University, 1978), sometimes modi- fied in view of the German original printed in Martin Heidegger, Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre- des Duns Scotus (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1916). 36. “This investigation into the history of problems ultimately has a systematic goal . . .”: see the “Author’s Book Notice (1917),” translated by John van Buren in Martin Heidegger, Supplements: From the Earliest Essays to Being and Time and Beyond, ed. John van Buren (Albany: SUNY Press, 2002), pp. 61–62. 37. Heidegger, “Duns Scotus’ Theory of the Categories,” p. 14; Heidegger, Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre- des Duns Scotus, p. 11. 38. Heidegger, “Duns Scotus’ Theory of the Categories,” p. 15; Heidegger, Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre- des Duns Scotus, p. 12. 39. Heidegger, “Duns Scotus’ Theory of the Categories,” p. 184; Heidegger, Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre- des Duns Scotus, p. 177. Such is the problem of abstraction that Heidegger opines. Here Heidegger cites Duns Scotus on the irreducibly manifold nature of objects in the world: Tota entitas singularis non continetur sub universale, the totality of being singular is not contained in the universal (citing Ordinatio, II dist. 3). 40. Compare McGrath, The Early Heidegger and Medieval Philosophy, pp. 81–83. See also Sean J. McGrath, “Heidegger and Duns Scotus on Truth and Language,” Review of Metaphysics 57.2 (2003), p. 356: “Scotus’s view that the singular thing is intelligible in itself yet never fully grasped in abstract cognition confirmed Heidegger’s conviction that something of the thing is always left out of categorical or theoretical knowing.” 138 NOTES

41. Heidegger, “Duns Scotus’ Theory of the Categories,” pp. 88–89; Heidegger, Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre- des Duns Scotus, pp. 86–87. 42. The concept Ereignis has mundane and highly technical senses within Heidegger’s corpus, and senses are known to change over the course of his writing. For the evolution of the term in early and later Heidegger, see Richard Polt, “Ereignis,” A Companion to Heidegger, ed. Hubert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall (Oxford: Blackwell, 2005), pp. 375–91; and see the entry on Appropriation (Ereignis) in the Historical Dictionary of Heidegger’s Philosophy, ed. Alfred Denker (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2000). The condensation of meanings of the term is noted in Michael Roth’s The Poetics of Resistance: Heidegger’s Line (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1996), p. 38: besides “own,” “proper,” “property,” and “demonstration,” “Ereignis must also be thought as ‘event’ and it is usu- ally translated as ‘event of appropriation’ so as to reflect some of these relationships. In the event of Ereignis, entities are brought forth into their own, becoming what they are.” 43. Martin Heidegger, Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning), trans. P. Emad and K. Maly (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999), p. 13. 44. For Heidegger, to borrow the words of Nietzsche, the “doing is everything.” Ethics is on Heidegger’s understanding something akin to Nietzsche’s idea of popular morality: just the sort of superstitious think- ing in which the pure manifestation of “doing, acting, becoming” is anthropomorphised and imagined to derive from a pregiven being. See Friedrich Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy and the Genealogy of Morals, trans. Francis Golffing (New York: Doubleday, 1956), p. 179. Joanna Hodge, in Heidegger and Ethics (London: Routledge, 1995), pp. 2–3, observes that Heidegger only rejects a “restricted conception of ethics” that is about rules of conduct because it “takes the question of human flourishing in isolation from the wider context in which human beings find themselves.” What she discovers in his work is the possibility of an “unrestricted conception” of ethics that supplies the very grounds of possibility for being human, prior to the distinctions, divisions, and identities human beings apply to the world. Ethical inquiries in this case would start from the sup- position that “identity is a continuing project of renegotiation between scarcely definable forces.” 45. Robert Bernasconi, Heidegger in Question: The Art of Existing (New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1993), pp. 202–23. See also François Dastur, “Language and Ereignis,” in Reading Heidegger: Commemorations, ed. John Sallis (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993), p. 364, on the way the event witnesses us into being. 46. Giorgio Agamben, The Coming Community, trans. Michael Hardt (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), p. 97; Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Brian Massumi (London: Continuum, 1987), pp. 260–72. 47. Thomas Docherty, Alterities: Criticism, History, Representation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 12. NOTES 139

48. For Derrida this is true of democracy l’a venir, arrivant, perhaps, and destinerrance, all concepts that instantiate something of the futurity of ethics. On friendship as a paradigm case of being able to identify contingent conditions of possibility only when it is too late to generate or regulate them, see Jacques Derrida’s Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, & the New International, trans. Peggy Kamuf (New York: Routledge, 1994), and his Politics of Friendship, trans. George Collins (New York: Verso 1997), p. 182. 49. Art sets truth to work rather than predicating truth. Martin Heidegger, “The Origin of the Work of Art,” in Poetry, Language, Thought, trans. Albert Hofstadter (New York: Harper & Row, 2001), pp. 35. See Jean-Luc Marion, Being Given: Towards a Phenomenology of Givenness, trans. Jeffrey L. Kosky (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002), pp. 44–53, for a lucid elabora- tion of the difference between the ready-to-hand object and its appearance in painting. The effect of painting is to make appearing appear. And appearing by definition happens, comes about, imposing itself on the viewer. It is this condition of appearance that we should not rush to occlude in attaching definitions to objects. In his In Excess: Studies of Saturated Phenomena, trans. Robyn Horner and Vincent Berraud (New York: Fordham University Press, 2004), pp. 30–34, Marion gives the example of the lecture hall rising in appearance, the “eventmental” nature of which would be impossible to describe after the event of the lecture itself. 50. Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method (London: Continuum, 2004), p. 85. Compare p. 458. 51. Gadamer, Truth and Method, pp. 144–45, 159, 378. 52. Gadamer, Truth and Method, pp. 332–36. His example is the text of an injunction: only the historical persons to whom it is addressed will obey or disobey the order, while the historian’s task is simply to describe the order. In literary experience, however, insofar as the form of texts as injunction is respected rather than neglected, the critic indeed occupies the role of the addressee of the text and thereby a potentially “historically effected consciousness.” 53. Michael Foucault, “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History,” in Language, Counter- Memory, Practice: Selected Interviews, ed. D. F. Bouchard (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1977), pp. 139 and 154. Advocating an “effective” history—laying the stress on effects rather than causes—that “deals with events in their most unique characteristics, their most acute manifesta- tions,” Foucault would like to inaugurate a new sort of history writing. For him the “event . . . is not a decision, a treaty, a reign, or a battle, but the reversal of relationship of forces, the usurpation of power, the appropriation of a vocabulary turned against those who had once used it . . . . The forces operating in history are not controlled by destiny or regulative mechanisms, but respond to haphazard conflicts.” Marion offers a lesser known but more philosophically sophisticated account of history as an event as effected rather than caused, particularly as related to the work of the historian; see Being Given, pp. 165–70 and 228–29. 140 NOTES

2 Love and Ethics to Come in Troilus and Criseyde 1. H. D., Collected Poems, 1912–1944, ed. Louis L. Martz (New York: New Directions, 1983), p. 292. 2. All citations of Chaucer’s works are taken from The Riverside Chaucer, gen. ed. Larry D. Benson (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987). References here- after appear within parentheses. 3. Zygmunt Bauman, Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds (Cambridge: Polity, 2003), p. 3. 4. Line 4753 as cited in Daniel Heller-Roazen, Fortune’s Faces: The Roman de la Rose and the Poetics of Contingency (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003), p. 66. 5. Guillaume de Machaut, “Le jugement du roy de Behaigne” and “Remede de fortune,” ed. and trans. James I. Wimsatt, William W. Kibler, Rebecca A. Baltzer (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1988), l. 2695. 6. John Gower, The English Works of John Gower, 2 vols., ed. G. C. Macaulay, EETS e.s. 81–82 (London: Oxford University Press, 1900; reprinted 1979), 1.50–54. 7. L. O. Aranye Fradenburg, Sacrifice Your Love: Psychoanalysis, Historicism, Chaucer (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002), p. 123. 8. Studies include Alan Gaylord, “Uncle Pandarus as Lady Philosophy,” Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 46 (1961), pp. 571–95, who argues that the philosophy of Pandarus is a sad “par- ody of the philosophical counsel offered to Boethius” (p. 572); D. W. Robertson, A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspectives (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962), who posits a “backdrop of Boethian philosophy” (p. 68) against which idealizations of erotic love are judged inadequate; John P. McCall, “Five-Book Structure in Chaucer’s Troilus,” MLQ 23 (1962), pp. 297–308, who sees the five book structure of Troilus and Criseyde as leading to a repudiation of Fortune in a way paralleling the Consolation of Philosophy; Monica E. McAlpine, The Genre of Troilus and Criseyde (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1978), who describes the lovers’ careers as comic or tragic according to a standard set by Boethius; Katherine Heinrichs, “ ‘Lovers’ Consolation of Philosophy’ in Boccaccio, Machaut, and Chaucer,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 11 (1989), pp. 93–115 and Martin Camargo, “The Consolation of Pandarus,” Chaucer Review 25.3 (1991), pp. 214–28, both of whom refine but restate the conclusion of Gaylord that a knowledge of Boethius serves to correct misunderstand- ings and complete the meaning of the text. However, Camargo does not think Chaucer shows an unqualified acceptance of Boethius. Others who argue for a qualified Boethianism include B. L. Jefferson, Chaucer and the “Consolation of Philosophy” of Boethius (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1917), who long ago made the claim that “Chaucer never expresses complete acceptance of the Boethian doctrine . . .” (p. 79); and Jill Mann in “Chance and Destiny in Troilus and Criseyde and the Knight’s Tale,” The NOTES 141

Cambridge Chaucer Companion, ed. Piero Boitani and Jill Mann (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 75–92, who shows that Chaucer’s moral psychology is more complex than that of Boethius. 9. Cf. Barry Windeatt, Oxford Guides to Chaucer: Troilus and Criseyde (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), p. 181; John Ganim, Style and Consciousness in Middle English Narrative (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), pp. 79–102. 10. H. A. Kelly, Chaucerian Tragedy (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997), pp. 99 and 134–35; and McAlpine, The Genre of Troilus and Criseyde, pp. 177–80. 11. I take my cue from Mark Lambert, “Troilus, Books I-III: A Criseydan Reading,” in Essays on Troilus and Criseyde, ed. Mary Salu (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1979), pp. 105–25. 12. Medievalists have long considered the nineteenth-century term “courtly love” problematic. Theory nevertheless persists in enlisting the concept to its cause (witness Lacan, Žižek, Deleuze and Guattari), and it is ever a mark of the modernity of any theory that it takes the medieval to be so monolithic and aprioristic. While there are recognizable features of the medieval courtly romance in such treatments of the phenomenon, the theorists are generalizing about what was really an aggregate of practices, discourses, and narratives. For the historical perspective one could start with Roger Boase, The Origin and Meaning of Courtly Love (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1977). Although Levinas does not to my knowledge use the term, still he evokes the generalized concept. Yet readings of courtly love need not be discarded when they are insuffi- ciently historical, a point that links up with what I argued in the previous chapter: anachronism sometimes produces a necessary anamorphosis. As Žižek says, “sometimes, the aberrant view which misreads a situation from its limited perspective, can, on account of this very limitation, per- ceive the ‘repressed’ potentials of the observed constellation”; see Slavoj Žižek, “History Against Historicism,” European Journal of English Studies 4.2 (2000), p. 110. 13. Despite the importance of autonomous reason and self-reflection in Chaucer’s works, eros retains a countervailing critical and ethical function. Mark Miller, in Philosophical Chaucer: Love, Sex, and Agency in the Canterbury Tales (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 108, accordingly sees that in the Knight’s Tale, “Erotic desire creates for Palamon and Arcite an ordering of the will that could never be the product of deliberation, and that might well not stand up to any process of reflective consideration . . . . Palamon and Arcite are subject to a kind of necessity that violates the Knight’s conditions of autonomous action . . . . But nonetheless the Knight also makes it clear that such loving opens up a space of exhila- rating freedom, a space in which these lovers confront a perfection that calls them out of the identities they had once seen as theirs, a space in which they care about something so deeply that it now serves as an organizing principle for everything in them and in the world they inhabit.” 142 NOTES

14. Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy: Verse Translation and Commentary, Vol. 3: Purgatory, ed. and trans. Mark Musa (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1996), 18.43–75 [pp. 174–77]. 15. Emmanuel Levinas, Otherwise Than Being, or Beyond Essence, trans. Alphonso Lingis (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1998), p. 11. 16. Emmanuel Levinas, “Diachrony and Representation,” in Time and the Other, trans. Richard A. Cohen (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1987), p. 111. 17. On Levinas’s many debts to and departures from Heidegger see, for example, Robert John Sheffler Manning’s Interpreting Otherwise Than Heidegger: Emmanuel Levinas’s Ethics as First Philosophy (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1993). 18. John Caputo, Against Ethics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993), p. 7. 19. Jacques Derrida, Politics of Friendship, trans. George Collins (London: Verso, 1997), p. 38. 20. Levinas, Time and the Other, p. 86. 21. The kabbalistic parable of the divine feminine as a “lovely princess, beau- tiful in every way,” who “opens a little window in her hidden palace and reveals her face to her lover, then swiftly withdraws, concealing herself,” as described in the thirteenth-century Jewish mystical work Zohar is matched by the Christian allegory of God “as noble wooer” attempting to win the love of a high-born maiden in a besieged castle in the roughly contemporary Ancrene Wisse. See Ancrene Wisse: Parts Six and Seven, ed. Geoffrey Shepherd (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1991), pp. 20–22; and Zohar: The Book of Enlightenment, trans. Daniel C. Matt (London: Paulist Press, 1983), pp. 123–24. In addition to adapting the amatory discourse of the Song of Songs, both texts adopt something of the chivalric values current in the late medieval period. I am grateful to Marla Segol for drawing my attention to the medieval kabbalistic text in her paper, “Levinas and the Mystics,” delivered at the 2004 International Medieval Congress. 22. See Jaroslav Pelikan, Eternal Feminines: Three Theological Allegories in Dante’s Paradiso (New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press, 1990), especially the third chapter in which he discusses Beatrice’s smile that seems to transport Dante to mio paradiso. 23. Levinas, Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority, trans. Alphonso Lingis (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1969), p. 254. Levinas seems to have become increasingly circumspect about the transcendence of love over self, dropping the romantic model from his account in Otherwise Than Being or Beyond Essence. However, Levinas indicates the centrality of erotic experience even there when he redescribes philosophy as the “wisdom of love,” inverting the usual etymological priority. 24. See, for example, John Finlayson, “Definitions of Courtly Romance,” Chaucer Review 15 (1980–81), pp. 44–62. Note the classic discussions of Erich Auerbach, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, NOTES 143

trans. Willard R. Trask (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953), pp. 123–42; and the related discussion of Morton Bloomfield, “Episodic Motivation and Marvels in Epic and Romance,” in Essays and Explorations (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970), p. 123. 25. Cf. Simon Gaunt, Gender and Genre in Medieval French Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 96–97, who observes some burlesque elements in the presentation of Lancelot’s infatuation with Guinevere in Chrétien de Troyes’ Le Chevalier de la Charrette. Gaunt argues that the comical elements of the lover’s infatuation signal the poet’s ironical attitude toward fin’ amor, but I suggest that that archness is so common as to be constitutive of the discourse. 26. Levinas, Totality and Infinity, p. 270. 27. See Catherine S. Cox, Gender and Language in Chaucer (Gainseville: University Press of Florida, 1997), p. 48. 28. Cf. David Aers, Chaucer, Langland and the Creative Imagination (London: Routledge, 1980), pp. 129–31. 29. Cf. Carolyn Dinshaw, Chaucer’s Sexual Poetics (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989), p. 57. 30. Priscilla Martin, Chaucer’s Women: Nuns Wives, and Amazons (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1990), p. 188. 31. Aers, Chaucer, Langland and the Creative Imagination, p. 129. 32. Larry Scanlon, Narrative, Authority, and Power: The Medieval Exemplum and the Chaucerian Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 123–24. 33. Scanlon, Narrative, Authority, and Power, p. 126. 34. As was made explicit in Practicing New Historicism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), p. 452, in which Catherine Gallagher and Stephen Greenblatt urge “a wholly integrated and sequential account, a history of causes and effects.” 35. Slavoj Žižek in For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment as a Political Factor (London: Verso, 1991), pp. lii–lvii, profitably resists the presump- tion that political critique is only possible and powerful when analyzing effects into their respective causes: he urges that “true materialism” does not explicate historical change but rather “consists in precisely accept- ing the chanciness without the implication of the horizon of hidden meaning—the name of this chance is contingency” (italics in original) Political critique will regain its relevance only when it humbly acknowledges that there is no deeper meaning to human history, no redeemable sense to suffering and violence. Therefore, Žižek urges what he calls the “ethical struggle to sustain the meaninglessness of the catastrophe.” It is a painful but recognizable post-Holocaust consciousness of the inadequacy of historical explanation to our singularity as ethical subjects (for on what grounds is it defensible to say we now understand such suffering?), and it can go to inform a new materialist historiography, something several theorists besides Žižek are attempting to inaugurate. Levinas in Totality and Infinity, p. 55, speaks of the way the interiority or secrecy of the 144 NOTES

subject (glimpsed, for instance, in the suffering in the camps) cannot be totalized: “Totalization is accomplished only in history—in the history of the historiographers, that is, among the survivors.” François Lyotard devotes much energy in The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, trans. Georges Van Den Abbeele (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), pp. 56–58, to describing how “Auschwitz” is a name that “marks the confines wherein historical knowledge sees its competence impugned.” Maurice Blanchot in The Writing of the Disaster, trans. Ann Smock (Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 1986), p. 143, is also preoccupied with the impossibility of history: “How is it possible to say: Auschwitz has happened?” How can one write the disaster? In a similar spirit Thomas Docherty in After Theory (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1996), p. 253, calls for a radical ethical and epistemological reorientation toward the singularity of historical events, promoting a post-Marxist position that “accepts the fundamental unknowability of the world and its history.” “The mere opposition advanced by Marxism is not enough for a radical criticism; it must be fully implicated in the much more radical pursuit of the unknown rather than the always-already-known-but- merely-forgotten; and it must be fully implicated in the ethics of alterity” (p. 253). Disasters, catastrophe, alterities, differends—we do justice to history and its subjects sometimes only by recognizing that such untimely events are inassimilable. 36. See Monica E. McAlpine, “Criseyde’s Prudence,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 25 (2003), p. 215. She is adopting a phrase originally used by Derek Pearsall, but not his ironical conclusions as set out in “Criseyde’s Choices,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer, Proceedings No. 2 (1986), pp. 17–29. Whereas Pearsall argues that Criseyde is evading responsibility by representing herself as moved inexorably by forces outside herself, McAlpine locates responsibility itself within agency under duress. 37. See The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, ed. and trans. James Stratchey (London: Hogarth Press, 1961), 21.101–3. 38. See Jacques Lacan’s The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: Book VII: The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959–1960, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller and trans. Dennis Porter (New York: W. W. Norton, 1992), especially pp. 146–52; and The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge: Book XX, Encore 1972–1973, trans. Bruce Fink (New York: W. W. Norton, 2000), p. 69. For a clear exegesis see Slavoj Žižek’s chapter, “Courtly Love, or, Woman as Thing,” in The Metastases of Enjoyment: Six Essays on Woman and Causality (London: Verso, 1994), pp. 89–112. 39. Lacan, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, p. 146. 40. Lacan, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, pp. 149–50. 41. Lacan, On Feminine Sexuality, p. 69. 42. Lacan, On Feminine Sexuality, p. 7. 43. Lacan, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, p. 152. 44. Lacan, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, p. 128. NOTES 145

45. Simon Gaunt, Gender and Genre in Medieval French Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 146; see also Sarah Kay, Subjectivity in Troubadour Poetry (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 84–85. 46. Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, trans. and ed. H. M. Parshley (New York: Vintage, 1989), p. xxii. For relevant essays, critical and commen- datory, see Feminist Interpretations of Emmanuel Levinas, ed. Tina Chanter (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania University Press, 2001). Simon Critchley, in The Ethics of Deconstruction: Derrida and Levinas (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), p. 136, speaks of sexual politics as Levinas’s “blind spot.” See also Claire E. Katz, Levinas, Judaism, and the Feminine: The Silent Footsteps of Rebecca (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003). 47. Luce Irigaray, An Ethics of Sexual Difference, trans. Carolyn Burke and Gillian Gill (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993): “Beloved woman. Not female lover. Necessarily an object, not a subject with a relation, like his, to time. She drags the male lover into the abyss so that, from these nocturnal depths, he may be carried off into an absolute future” (p. 194). 48. Levinas, Time and the Other, p. 86. 49. Martin Heidegger’s Mitsein (Being-with) as defined in Being and Time, trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson (Oxford: Blackwell, 1962), pp. 149–68, stands behind my discussion of sociality here. Heidegger’s influence on the thought of Levinas is considered by Robert John Sheffler Manning, Interpreting Otherwise than Heidegger: Emmanuel Levinas’s Ethics as First Philosophy (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1993). See Levinas discussing “sociality” in Ethics and Infinity: Conversations with Philippe Nemo, trans. Richard A. Cohen (Duquesne University Press: Pittsburgh, 1985), pp. 79–81. 50. Levinas, Otherwise Than Being, p. 59. 51. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Brian Massumi (London: Continuum, 1987), pp. 154–57. 52. The distinction between desire and need is crucial to understanding the novelty of Levinas’s approach. He defines desire in one place: “Desire ‘measures’ the infinity of the infinite . . . . This desire without satisfaction hence takes cognizance of the alterity of the other,” as Levinas says in “Philosophy and the Idea of the Infinite,” in Collected Philosophical Papers, trans. Alphonso Lingis (Dordecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993), p. 56. The other side of human longing is “need,” which satisfies itself by assimilating the other to the same, whereas “desire” is ever future- tending; see Totality and Infinity, p. 117. Ultimately, Levinas acknowledges the “ambiguity of love” in Totality and Infinity, pp. 254–55. But even here the “need” of love attests to the ethical relation lying beyond the self. 53. See McAlpine, “Criseyde’s Prudence,” p. 215, and Mann’s arguments in Feminizing Chaucer (D. S. Brewer: Woodbridge, 1992), pp. 18–25, 80–88, and 129–32. 146 NOTES

54. But we should also bear in mind that the “courtly experience” of the love lyric is not restricted to late medieval court society: a lover’s willingness to suffer and submit to the superior other has been discovered in many cultures and over a much longer period of time; see the first chapter of Peter Dronke’s Medieval Latin and the Rise of European Love-Lyric, Vol. 1: Problems and Interpretations (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965). 55. Just think what little difference it would make to redefine the situation in which the courtly lover makes his or her choices, say by removing her from the medieval to any modern society. It will always be possible to redescribe ethics as politically determined by forces that are beyond the control of individual moral agents. Ethics—if it exists at all—is a given feature of intersubjective and political affairs; it is a gift of being. 56. Simon Critchley, “The Other’s Decision in Me (What Are the Politics of Friendship?),” in Ethics—Politics—Subjectivity: Essays on Derrida, Levinas and Contemporary French Thought (London: Verso, 1999), p. 263. 57. Derrida, Politics of Friendship, pp. 68–69. I allude to Derrida’s coy phrase, “as if it were possible to think a responsibility without freedom” (p. 231), epitomizing the contingency of the ethics and politics of the perhaps he describes in this book. 58. Mann, “Chance and Destiny,” p. 82. 59. The sense is the same as Christine de Pisan’s reference to a virgin who once “was yolden in to” the Temple of Venus, in The Middle English Translation of Christine de Pisan’s Livre du Corps de Policie, ed. from MS C. U. L. Kk.1.5, ed. Diane Bornstein (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1977), p. 53. 60. For these alternative views, see Fradenburg’s discussion of Criseyde’s consent as a form of traumatism and compensation in Sacrifice Your Love, pp. 225–26; E. T. Hansen on Criseyde’s consent as a means of saving face and surviving in Chaucer and the Fictions of Gender (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), p. 170; and Pearsall who argues in “Criseyde’s Choices,” p. 20, that Criseyde effectively masquerades as passive in such moments only to preserve her freedom from responsibility: “She has discovered the great principle of survival, and the solace of the survivor: true freedom is the ability to convince yourself that you have no choice but to do what you want to do.” 61. Mann, Feminizing Chaucer, p. 87. 62. Levinas, Time and the Other, p. 86. 63. Levinas, Time and the Other, p. 86. 64. Levinas, Totality and Infinity, p. 266. 65. Max Scheler, The Nature of Sympathy, trans. Peter Heath (Connecticut: Archon Books, 1970), p. 5. 66. Levinas, Ethics and Infinity, p. 68. 67. Levinas, Totality and Infinity, p. 256; emphasis added. However, Levinas may be said to perpetuate a medieval eroticism wherein genders are sometimes inverted: according to an influential reading of troubadour poetry, the domna has always been defeminized and attributed a “semi-masculine identity” as an enabling condition of male power. See Kay, Subjectivity in Troubadour Poetry, pp. 84ff., on the “three genders.” NOTES 147

68. Mann, Feminizing Chaucer, p. 83. 69. Levinas, Time and the Other, p. 106.

3 Consolations of Pandarus: The Testament of Love and The Chaunce of the Dyse

1. Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, trans. Richard Green (New York: Macmillan, 1962), III.m.12. 2. Guillaume de Machaut, “Le Jugement du roy de Behaigne” and “Remede de Fortune,” ed. James I. Wimsatt and William W. Kibler (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1989), line 2695. 3. See Julia Boffey and A. S. G. Edwards, eds., The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer and the Kingis Quair: A Facsimile of Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Arch. Selden. B. 24 (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997); on the annotations see p. 18. They are transcribed in C. David Benson and Barry A. Windeatt, “The Manuscript Glosses to Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde,” Chaucer Review 25.1 (1990), pp. 33–53. See the discussion by Julia Boffey, “Annotation in Some Manuscripts of Troilus and Criseyde,” English Manuscript Studies 5 (1995), pp. 1–17, who thinks the annotations are those of the main scribe who was working in Scotland. 4. See, for example, Alan Gaylord, “Uncle Pandarus as Lady Philosophy,” Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 46 (1961), pp. 571–95; Katherine Heinrichs, “ ‘Lovers’ Consolation of Philosophy’ in Boccaccio, Machaut, and Chaucer,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 11 (1989), pp. 93–115; Martin Camargo, “The Consolation of Pandarus,” Chaucer Review 25.3 (1991), pp. 214–28; and Ann W. Astell, “Visualizing Boethius’s Consolation as Romance,” in New Directions in Boethian Studies, ed. Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr. and Philip Edward Phillips (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2007), pp. 111–24. 5. Two surviving manuscripts of Ennodius’s full corpus circulated in Chaucer’s England, and selected works also made their way into contemporary anthologies; see Richard H. Rouse and Mary A. Rouse, “Ennodius in the Middle Ages: Adonics, Pseudo-Isidore, Cistercians, and the Schools,” in Popes, Teachers, and Canon Law in the Middle Ages, ed. James Ross Sweeney and Stanley Chodorow (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), pp. 91–113; and for a survey of manuscripts see Christian Rohr, Der Theoderich-Panegyricus des Ennodius (Hannover: Hahnsche Buchh, 1995), pp. 64–178. On the personal and political circumstances of Boethius’s relationship with Ennodius see Stefanie Kennell, Magnus Felix Ennodius: A Gentleman of the Church (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000), pp. 108–9, 121–22, 186–97. The poem De Boetio spatha cincto is edited in Wilhelm von Hartel, Magni Felicis Ennodii Opera omnia, Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum 6 (Vienna, 1882), carm. 2, 132 [p. 602]. It is translated in Danuta Shanzer, “Ennodius, Boethius, and the Date and Interpretation of Maximianus’s Elegia III,” Rivista di Filologia 111 (1983), p. 183. 148 NOTES

6. All citations of Chaucer’s works are taken from The Riverside Chaucer, gen. ed. Larry D. Benson (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987). 7. Vincent Gillespie, “From the Twelfth Century to c. 1450,” The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, Vol. II: The Middle Ages, ed. Alastair Minnis and Ian Johnson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 156. 8. Maximianus’s “Boethius” shares the verbal dexterity, the mocking sense of humour, and general sense of vitality that is characteristic of the English Pandarus (not Boccacio’s Pandaro). More generally, like Pandarus in the first book of Troilus, Maximianus has his procurer emulate the opening sequence of Boethius’s Consolation. Maximianus’s elegy and Chaucer’s romance arguably also express ambivalence if not outright embarrassment over the lover’s transcendence over sexual desire. See J. Allan Mitchell, “Boethius and Pandarus: A Source in Maximian’s Elegies,” Notes & Queries 50.4 (December 2003), pp. 377–80. The Latin text is edited by Aemilius Baehrens, Poetae latini minores, vol. 5 (Leipzig, 1883), pp. 332–36. 9. Derek Pearsall, The Life of Geoffrey Chaucer (Cambridge: Blackwell, 1992), p. 161. 10. Chaucer’s debt to the French poem is well known; the importance of Machaut’s to Gower’s Confessio Amantis is discussed at length by Peter Nicholson in the first chapter of his Love and Ethics in Gower’s Confessio Amantis (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005). 11. Latin quotations are taken from the edition of H. F. Stewart, E. K. Rand, and S. J. Tester, eds. and trans., Boethius: The Theological Tractates, The Consolation of Philosophy, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973). For Boece I use the edition in the Riverside Chaucer. 12. Cf. Winthrop Wetherbee, Platonism and Poetry in the Twelfth Century: The Literary Influence of the School of Chartres (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972), p. 79. 13. Phillipa Hardman, “Narrative Typology: Chaucer’s Use of the Story of Orpheus,” Modern Language Review 85.3 (1990), p. 549. 14. Hardman, “Narrative Typology,” p. 552. 15. Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy: Verse Translation and Commentary, Vol. 3: Purgatory, ed. and trans. Mark Musa (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1996), 17.103–5 [p. 169]. 16. Martha C. Nussbaum, The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 1–2. 17. Once attributed to Chaucer, the Testament comes down to us in William Thynne’s 1532 printed edition. Recent editions include R. Allen Shoaf, ed., The Testament of Love (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1998), and Gary Shawver, ed., Testament of Love: A Critical Edition (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002). Parenthetical references to the text in Shoaf’s edition will appear throughout. 18. On the factionalism into which Usk was swallowed and the prag- matic petitionary function of his Testament, see especially Paul Strohm, NOTES 149

“Politics and Poetics: Usk and Chaucer in the 1380s,” in Literary Practice and Social Change in Britain, 1380–1530, ed. Lee Patterson (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), pp. 83–112, and the seventh chapter of Hochon’s Arrow: The Social Imagination of Fourteenth-Century Texts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), pp. 145–60; Marion Turner, “ ‘Certaynly His Noble Sayenges Can I Not Amende’: Thomas Usk and Troilus and Criseyde,” Chaucer Review 37.1 (2002), pp. 27–39; and Michael Hanrahan, “The Seduction of The Testament of Love,” Literature and History 7 (1998), pp. 1–15. For another approach, see David R. Carlson, “Chaucer’s Boethius and Thomas Usk’s Testament of Love: Politics and Love in the Chaucerian Tradition,” in The Centre and Its Compass: Studies in Medieval Literature in Honor of Professor John Leyerle, ed. Robert A. Taylor, James F. Burke, Patricia J. Eberle, Ian Lancashire, and Brian S. Merrilees (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1993), pp. 29–70, who argues that Usk’s work is not reducible to factional politics. 19. In the second chapter of Writing Masculinity in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 38–44, Isabel Davis makes a strong case for considering Usk alongside other examples of life writing (e.g., The Book of Margery Kempe), since we do not have indepen- dent access to Usk’s intentions or traumas (besides those “facts” given in his writing). Moreover, Usk tends to intellectualize his experiences to such a degree that no single political purpose is ultimately discern- able. This may be explained compositionally: Stephen Medcalf, in “The World and Heart of Thomas Usk,” in Essays on Ricardian Literature: In Honour of J. A. Burrow, ed. A. J. Minnis, Charlotte C. Morse, and Thorlac Turville-Petre (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 222–51, accounts for the “deepening and intensifying of [Usk’s] thought” by pro- posing two separate writing stints. The primary motive of the first half of the Testament was to repossess his lost fortunes; by the time he came to the second half he may have obtained the favor of the king and been able to turn his mind to other things; he may also have written the second half when imprisoned by the Lords Appellant, providing a different stimulus. 20. Strohm, Hochon’s Arrow, p. 145. 21. A fair amount of scholarly debate has been generated on the question of whether Usk’s tree bears any relation to William Langland’s tree in Piers Plowman B.XVI, but there is—to borrow Peter Dronke’s phrase—a “ver- itable forest of trees” that may have informed such a construction. Besides trees that represent Christian doctrine (including Langland’s), there are analogous trees of courtly love (la plante d’amours), and also Ramon Lull’s Arbre de Filosofia d’Amor that bears comparison with Usk’s Tree of Love in its blending of sexual and spiritual allegoresis. See Peter Dronke, “Arbor Caritatis,” in Medieval Studies for J. A. W. Bennett, ed. P. L. Heyworth (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), pp. 207–53. 22. The book gradually works up to this conclusion. Early on Love repudi- ates Fortune (109, 127, 201), but it turns out that she relies on fortuitous 150 NOTES

events in a manner that will be familiar from our earlier analysis of the “event” in Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy. Medcalf, in “The World and Heart of Thomas Usk,” p. 244, associates Usk’s Tree of Love with Pindar’s vine tree as discussed by Nussbaum as a sign of the fragility of goodness. 23. When Love asserts that Chaucer’s teachings are conveyed “without any maner of nycite of starieres ymagynacion” (3.565), we must stand amused at her disingenuousness. One could hardly find a more fitting description of the poet than as one who employs such stratagems. As a compet- ing philosophical “treatise” in the Boethian tradition, Troilus and Criseyde is notable for introducing ambiguities and difficulties that may be too swiftly passed over in the Consolation of Philosophy. 24. Cf. Medcalf, “The World and Heart of Thomas Usk,” pp. 239–42. 25. On precise borrowings from Pandarus see Turner, “Certaynly,” pp. 27–39. Verbal parallels between Troilus and Criseyde and Usks’ Testament are noted in R. Allen Shoaf’s edition of The Testament of Love, pp. 15–16. 26. Marion Turner, “Certaynly,” p. 30, argues that “the moral platitudes of the Testament are subverted because they are often taken from the lips of Pandarus, a character who undoubtedly lacks moral authority” (p. 30). I think Usk’s Testament is more robust and daring than Turner assumes, because it sees in Pandarus’s amorality the very challenge for moral philosophy. 27. Stephen Medcalf, “Transposition: Thomas Usk’s Testament of Love,” in The Medieval Translator: The Theory and Practice of Translation in the Middle Ages, ed. Roger Ellis (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1989), pp. 181–95. 28. A. J. Minnis, Medieval Theory of Authorship: Scholastic Literary Attitudes in the Later Middle Ages, 2nd edn. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988), p. 164. 29. The third book of Usk’s Testament is as George Sanderlin discovered, “modeled on, and in large measure translated from, this treatise of St. Anselm,” although there are critical changes as we will see. See George Sanderlin, “Usk’s Testament of Love and St. Anselm,” Speculum 17 (1942), pp. 69–73; Medcalf, “Transposition: Thomas Usk’s Testament of Love,” pp. 187–95; Shawver, Testament of Love, pp. 31–32; and Shaof, The Testament of Love, Appendix 3. 30. As mentioned in the first chapter, the work remains unedited, and I make use of modern translations of passages corresponding to Aristotle’s Eudemian Ethics and Magna Moralia as given in The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, vols. 1 and 2, ed. Jonathan Barnes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984). 31. Aristotle, The Complete Works of Aristotle, p. 1977. 32. Aristotle, The Complete Works of Aristotle, pp. 1910–11. 33. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae: Latin Text and English Translation, Dominican Editors, vol. 24 (New York: Blackfriars, 1964), Appendix 6, “St Thomas’s Use of the De Bona Fortuna,” pp. 142–47. See also C. Fabro, “Le Liber de bona fortuna de l’Éthique à Eudème d’Aristote et la dialectique de la NOTES 151

divine Providence chez saint Thomas,” Revue Thomiste 88 (1988), pp. 556–72, and T. Deman, “Le Liber de bona fortuna dans la théologie de St Thomas d’Aquin,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 17 (1928), pp. 38–58. 34. Aquinas cites Aristotle approvingly in the responsio at Summa Theologiae, vol. 24, 1a2ae Q. 68, art. 1: “Aristotle [in cap. De Bona Fortuna] says that it is not good for those who are moved by divine promptings to take counsel according to human reason; but that they should follow their inner promptings, because they are moved by a better principle than human reason.” 35. We can see him finessing a solution: “Man is master of his acts, including those of willing and not willing, because of the deliberative activity of reason, which can be turned to one side or the other. But that he should deliberate or not deliberate, supposing that we were master of this too, would have to come about by a preceding deliberation. And since this may not proceed to infinity, one would finally have to reach the point at which man’s free decision is moved by some external principle superior to the human mind, namely by God, as Aristotle himself demonstrated [citing Liber de bona fortuna]” (Summa Theologiae, vol. 30, 1a2ae Q. 109, art. 2). 36. Good fortune is only natural to individual natures, because if it arose from human nature uniformly, everyone would be fortunate; see Von Gordon Anthony Wilson, “Henry of Ghent’s Critique of Aristotle’s Conception of Good Fortune,” Franziskanische Studien 65 (1983), p. 243. 37. Wilson, “Henry of Ghent’s Critique,” p. 250. 38. John Duns Scotus, God and Creatures: The Quodlibetal Questions, trans. Felix Alluntis and Allan B. Wolter (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975), p. 477. 39. Duns Scotus, God and Creatures, pp. 477–78. 40. See John Boler, “Transcending the Natural: Duns Scotus on the Two Affections of the Will,” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 67.1 (1993), pp. 109–26, and Mary Elizabeth Ingham, “Scotus and the Moral Order,” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 67.1 (1993), pp. 127–50. 41. Duns Scotus, God and Creatures, p. 480. 42. Duns Scotus, God and Creatures, p. 481. 43. Not everyone could tolerate such accounts of natural philosophy. Salutati’s De fato et fortuna (1396) expressly opposes Aristotle’s Liber de bona fortuna, denying that fortune should be analyzed independently of providence: “nothing can be done except what was in the will of the first cause, not even to make human thoughts, impulses, and actions fortunate, since the favorer of these and happiness is the benevolence and grace of God alone.” His is only a more extreme version of the view of Aquinas and Henry, which Duns Scotus does not share. As cited in Charles Trinkaus, “Coluccio Salutati’s Critique of Astrology in the Context of His Natural Philosophy,” Speculum 64.1 (1989), p. 65. 44. Duns Scotus as cited by Ingham, “Scotus and the Moral Order,” p. 132. 152 NOTES

45. Cf. Medcalf, in “Transposition,” pp. 188–89, and “The World and Heart of Thomas Usk,” pp. 237–28, on the alterations Usk makes to Anselm in this passage on the spontaneous will. Medcalf thinks Usk as more Platonic than Aristotelian. 46. As Sanderlin notes in “Usk’s Testament,” p. 70, Usk takes every opportunity to substitute “love” for terms that do not have the same semantic field in Anselm’s De Concordia. The Anselm passage can be found in Shoaf’s edition of The Testament of Love, Appendix 3, p. 443. 47. Medcalf, “Transposition,” p. 191. 48. The only printed edition is that of E. P. Hammond, “The Chance of the Dice,” Englische Studien 59 (1925), pp. 1–16; line references to the text will be given in parentheses. For more on medieval divination and dice games including this one see both Rhiannon Purdie, “Dice-Games and the Blasphemy of Prediction,” in Medieval Futures: Attitudes to the Future in the Middle Ages, ed. J. A. Burrow and Ian P. Wei (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2000), pp. 167–84; and W. L. Braekman, “Fortune-Telling by the Casting of Dice: A Middle English Poem and Its Background,” Studia Neophilologica 52 (1980), pp. 3–29. 49. The game is mentioned in passing in a chapter on “the game of love” in John Stevens, Music and Poetry in the Early Tudor Court (London: Methuen, 1961), pp. 154–202. Cf. Gower’s description of love as the result of ran- dom lot in Confessio Amantis 1.47–54 and 8.2377–90, in The English Works of John Gower, vols. 1 and 2, ed. G. C. Macaulay, EETS e.s. 81–82 (London: Oxford University Press, 1900; reprinted 1979). 50. John Stow, in A Survey of London, Reprinted from the Text of 1603, ed. Charles Lethbridge Kingsford, vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908; reprinted 1971), p. 143, quotes the satirical ninth stanza and remarks “Chaucer, chance of dice” in the margin next to it. Walter W. Skeat, The Chaucer Canon (New York: Haskell House, 1965), p. 126, says a more likely candidate is John Lydgate. Ethel Seaton, in Richard Roos, c. 1410– 1482 (London: Hart-Davis, 1961), pp. 308ff., proposes that Richard Roos composed the The Chaunce of the Dyse, littering the text with improbable anagrammatic allusions to people in the royal household. 51. See Manuscript Bodley 638: A Facsimile, intro. Pamela Robinson (Norman, OK: Pilgrim Books, 1982), ff.195r–203v; and Bodleian Library MS Fairfax 16, intro. John Norton-Smith (London: Scolar Press, 1979), ff.148v–54r. 52. As noted by A. S. G. Edwards, “The Chaunce of Dice and The Legend of Good Women,” Notes & Queries 34 (1987), p. 295. Several references to Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales are indicated in Caroline F. E. Spurgeon, Five Hundred Years of Chaucer Criticism and Allusion, 1357–1900, vol. 1 (New York: Russell & Russell, 1960), pp. 44–45. Seaton in Sir Richard Roos, p. 309, notices resemblances between The Chaunce of the Dyse and Ragman Roll. 53. Ragman Roll makes only very oblique references to literature (alluding to Danger, Venus, and Mercury). Another fortune-telling dice game extant in four manuscripts has none; see Braekman, “Fortune-Telling.” NOTES 153

54. One could explain this as a carnivalesque suspension of prescribed gender roles, or perhaps simply “equal opportunity” satire and seduction; the inclusivity of the game deserves further scrutiny. In contrast, the above-mentioned game Ragman Roll, which survives in the same witnesses, is directed exclusively to women: “My ladyes and my maistresses echone . . .” An excellent discussion of the issues involved in female read- ership and role-play in The Chaunce of the Dyse can be found in Nicola McDonald’s “Games Medieval Women Play,” in The Legends of Good Women: Contexts and Receptions, ed. Carolyn Collette (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2006), pp. 176–97, an essay I did not encounter early enough to incorporate into this chapter. 55. Those who see The Chaunce of the Dyse as evidence of probability theory include D. R. Bellhouse and J. Franklin, “The Language of Chance,” International Statistical Review 65 (1997), pp. 73–85; Donald Ervin Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol. 4: Generating All Trees: History of Combinatorial Generation (New Jersey: Addison-Wesley, 1976); and Edna E. Kramer, “From Dice to Quantum Theory to Quality Control,” The Nature and Growth of Modern Mathematics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), pp. 291–315. 56. M. G. Kendall, “Studies in the History of Probability and Statistics II,” Biometric 43 (1956), pp. 1–14; and Kramer, “From Dice to Quantum Theory,” pp. 55–56. 57. Three six-sided dice have a total of 216 possible combinations and 56 sets of combinations. The Chaunce of the Dyse calls for specific sets of numbers, not sums or sequences: e.g., casting 2-2-3 or 3-2-2 will do just as well as 2-3-2. Now one cubic die has a 1/6 chance of ending up giving a specific number; the probability for three dice is calculated as 1/6 3 3 5 0.46%. But some sets have a higher probability because, of all the possible sums or permutations, the numbers required for the game need not come up in a specific order: so while the combinations 1-1-1 or 6-6-6 represent only one possible set of rolls, 2–2-1 has three possible sets of rolls (1-2-2, 2-1-2, 2–2-1), and 3-2-1 has six possible sets of rolls (1-2-3, 1-3-2, 2-1-3, 2-3-1, 3-1-2, 3-2-1). Accordingly, probability alternates between ~0.5% (the chances of six different stanzas), ~1.5% (thirty stanzas), and ~3% (twenty stanzas). 58. Cf. Cicero, De Divinatione, trans. William Armistead Falconer, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1923), II.lviii.121: “Nothing is so uncertain as a cast of dice and yet there is no one who plays often who does not sometimes make a Venus-throw and occasionally twice or thrice in succession. Then are we, like fools, to prefer to say that it happened by the direction of Venus rather than by chance?” Isidore of Seville, Etymologies, trans. Stephen A. Barney, W. J. Lewis, J. A. Beach, and Oliver Berghof (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), XVIII.65–66, observes that a six is lucky, one unlucky. And a triple six has been considered a fortunate cast at least since Aeschylus’ Agamemnon 33 and Plato’s Laws 986e. For these and related 154 NOTES

references see David M. Robinson, “The Wheel of Fortune,” Classical Philology 41.4 (1946), p. 209, and T. J. Buckton, “Dice,” Notes & Queries s4–I (1868), pp. 179–80. 59. The thwarted desire of Amans is described as a such a loss in Gower’s Confessio Amantis 8.2377–90; Beryn has bad luck with dice in “The Canterbury Interlude and Merchant’s Tale of Beryn,” in The Canterbury Tales: Fifteenth-Century Continuations and Additions, ed. John M. Bowers (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1992), lines 923–30. 60. See Susan Noakes, “The Double Misreading of Paolo and Francesca,” Philological Quarterly 62 (1983), pp. 221–39. Their misreading comes about, Noakes argues, because the lovers invest so much meaning in a particular passage (solo un punto), failing to read on in the romance that should have served as a cautionary tale against adultery. 61. As edited by Braekman in “Fortune-Telling,” pp. 18–29. 62. Purdie, “Dice-games,” p. 182. Assuming some importance in the social life of the later medieval English gentry, such games were perhaps considered somewhat classy—whereas dicing was condemned as a mere “tavern sin” when practiced among the lower orders.

4 Gower’s Confessio Amantis and the Nature of Vernacular Ethics 1. John Gower, The English Works of John Gower, 2 vols., ed. G. C. Macaulay, EETS e.s. 81–82 (London: Oxford University Press, 1900; reprinted 1979), Prologue. All subsequent references will be given parenthetically in the text. 2. One only has to think of the important studies of Étienne Gilson or Frederick Copleston, but I also have in mind recent and quite popular histories of moral philosophy such as Alisdair MacIntyre’s After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, 2nd edn. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984), and Whose Justice? Whose Rationality? (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988); Charles Taylor’s Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989); John Marenbon’s Later Medieval Philosophy (1150–1350): An Introduction (London: Routledge, 1992); and J. B. Schneewind’s The Invention of Autonomy: A History of Modern Moral Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). 3. See, for example, Charles Runacres, “Art and Ethics in the ‘Exempla’ of Confessio Amantis,” in Gower’s “Confessio Amantis”: Responses and Reassess- ments, ed. A. J. Minnis (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1983), pp. 106–34; William Robins, “Romance, Exemplum, and the Subject of the Confessio Amantis,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 19 (1997), pp. 157–81. And see my Ethics and Exemplary Narrative in Chaucer and Gower (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2004). 4. For brief surveys of the medieval reception of Aristotle see Bernard G. Dod’s “Aristoteles latinus” and C. H. Lohr’s “The medieval interpretation NOTES 155

of Aristotle,” in The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982). Thomist philosophy is representa- tive for having introduced what H. V. Jaffa calls “divinely implanted” natural law into the ethical theory of Aristotle. For discussions of the signal differences see Harry V. Jaffa, Thomism and Aristotelianism: A Study of the Commentary by Thomas Aquinas on the Nicomachean Ethics (Chicago: Universit y of Chicago Press, 1952), p. 187; P. Mercken, “Transfor mations of the Ethics of Aristotle in the Moral Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas,” Tommaso d’Aquino nel suo settimo centenario. Atti del Congresso Internazionale (Napoli: Edizioni Domenicane Italiane, 1977), pp. 160–61; and R.-A. Gauthier and J. Y. Jolif, Aristote: L”Éthique à Nicomaque (Louvain: Publi- cations Universitaires de Louvain, 1970). Daniel Westberg’s Right Practical Reason: Aristotle, Action, and Prudence in Aquinas (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), pp. 26–30, surveys the critical opinion that was popular- ized by Alisdair MacIntyre in After Virtue, p. 278. Oscar J. Brown in Natural Rectitude and Divine Law in Aquinas (Toronto: Pontifical Institute, 1981), p. 63, describes Aristotelian ethics as a “ ‘socialization’ of moral science” that Aquinas had to modify. On Augustine’s “eternal law” and his own firming up of moral principles see John M. Rist, Augustine: Ancient Thought Baptized (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 191–99. On the Thomist synthesis Westberg asks: “How is it that Aquinas can seem so Aristotelian in his description of human action and yet be so Augustinian in his insistence on the need for conformity to the eternal law?” (p. 34); see further pp. 95–100 for discussion of the stimulus to neo-Plantonize Aristotle in Augustine, Albert the Great, and Bonaventure. 5. For example, D. J. M. Bradley’s Aquinas and the Twofold Human Good: Reason and Human Happiness in Aquinas’s Moral Science (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1997) argues that the philosopher developed natural law theory to “stabilize the foundations of Aristotelian practical wisdom” (p. xii). 6. On Thomism and Ockhamist ethics in the fourteenth century see F. Copleston’s A History of Philosophy, vol. 3 (London: Search Press, 1953), especially pp. 96–110. 7. Mitchell, Ethics and Exemplary Narrative, especially pp. 36–78. 8. Andrew Galloway, “The Making of a Social Ethic in Late-Medieval England: From Gratitudo to ‘Kyndenesse,’ ” Journal of the History of Ideas 55.3 (1994), p. 374. 9. Kurt Olsson, “Natural Law and John Gower’s Confessio Amantis,” Medievalia et Humanistica n.s. 11 (1982), pp. 229–61. For a wider discussion of medieval kyndes see Peggy A. Knapp, Time-Bound Words: Semantic and Social Economies from Chaucer’s England to Shakespeare’s (London: Macmillan, 2000), pp. 80–89. 10. Hugh White, Nature, Sex, and Goodness in a Medieval Literary Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). 156 NOTES

11. Biblica Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Clementinam, ed. Alberto Colunga and Laurentio Turrado, 4th edn., Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos 14.1 (Madrid: La Editorial Catolica, 1965); with translations from The Holy Bible: Douay Version Translated from the Latin Vulgate, ed. Richard Challoner (London: William Clowes and Sons, 1956). 12. For a historical survey see D. E. Luscombe’s “Natural morality and natural law,” The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, pp. 705–19. The following examples are drawn from White, Nature, Sex, and Goodness, pp. 8–20. 13. Westberg, Right Practical Reason, p. 101. 14. Russell A. Peck, ed., John Gower: Confessio Amantis, vol. 2, TEAMS (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2003), p. 14. Nor is Genius related as closely as he has been in previous literary incarnations to Nature. As Winthrop Wetherbee observes Genius has “become a spokesman for cultural, as well as natural, values”; see his “John Gower,” in The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature, ed. David Wallace (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. 601. On the background see George D. Economou, “The Character Genius in Alan de Lille, Jean de Meun, and John Gower,” Chaucer Review 4 (1970), pp. 203–10. 15. See Chapter 7 of Rita Copeland’s Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages: Academic Traditions and Vernacular Texts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). 16. Larry Scanlon, Narrative, Authority, and Power: The Medieval Exemplum and the Chaucerian Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 251–52. 17. See Copeland’s Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation, pp. 202–5, for the view that the Latin apparatus exists to perform an “auto-exegesis.” See also the relevant discussions of Richard K. Emmerson, “Reading Gower in a Manuscript Culture: Latin and English in Illustrated Manuscripts of the Confessio Amantis,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 21 (1999), pp. 143–86; Siân Echard, “With Carmen’s Help: Latin Authorities in the Confessio Amantis,” Studies in Philology 95 (1998), p. 7; Joyce Coleman, “Lay Readers and Hard Latin: How Gower May Have Intended the Confessio Amantis to Be Read,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 24 (2002), pp. 216–17, 227, 234–35. 18. Wetherbee, “John Gower,” pp. 591 and 599. See also his “Latin Structure and Vernacular Space: Gower, Chaucer and the Boethian Tradition,” in Chaucer and Gower: Difference, Mutuality, Exchange, ed. Robert F. Yeager (Victoria: University of Victoria, 1991), pp. 7–35. 19. Diane Watt, Amoral Gower: Language, Sex, and Politics (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), p. 29. 20. White, Nature, Sex, and Goodness, p. 180. 21. Headverse at VII.i of the Confessio Amantis. 22. Marginal notation at 6.664ff., as translated in Peck and Galloway, Confessio Amantis, vol. 3, p. 426, acting as an authorizing gloss to the line “Usage is the seconde kinde.” The best account of the intersection of rhetorical and NOTES 157

memorial culture in medieval texts remains Mary J. Carruthers’ The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), especially her fifth chapter, “Memory and the Ethics of Reading.” It would be easy enough to redescribe all this endoxa—as Roland Barthes would when he notes that in the literary context Aristotle’s probable opinions amount to a middling, self-censoring “esthetic of the public”—as only another form of orthodoxy or ideology. See Barthes’ The Semiotic Challenge, trans. Richard Howard (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988), pp. 22–23. Janet Coleman takes this dour, antipopulist approach to the ethical eclecticism of Gower’s Confessio when she calls it “an encyclopedia of current prejudices and ideals”; see Medieval Readers and Writers, 1350–1400 (New York: Columbia University Press), p. 129. 23. On the distinction and for the following examples I owe much to Timothy C. Potts’ Conscience in Medieval Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), and Bradley’s Aquinas and the Twofold Human Good: Reason and Human Happiness in Aquinas’s Moral Science (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1997). 24. White, Nature, Sex, and Goodness, p. 14. 25. Potts, Conscience in Medieval Philosophy, p. 128. 26. Westberg, Right Practical Reason, p. 101. 27. See the discussion of Ockham’s thought in Copleston’s A History of Philosophy, vol. 3, pp. 103–10; Luscombe’s “Natural Morality and Natural Law,” pp. 713–15; and Marilyn McCord Adams’s “The Structure of Ockham’s Moral Theory,” in The Contexts of Casuistry, ed. James F. Keenan and Thomas A. Shannon (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1995). 28. As Potts observes in his Conscience in Medieval Philosophy, p. 19, “the idea of conscience being formed by training was a blind spot” in medieval philosophy. Confessio gives the lie to this notion of premodern morals, making Gower an indispensable historical source. 29. Translated by Andrew Galloway in, John Gower: Confessio Amantis, vol. 2, ed. Russell Peck. TEAMS (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2000), p. 349. 30. See Derek Pearsall, “Gower’s Latin in the Confessio Amantis,” Latin and Vernacular: Studies in Late-Medieval Texts and Manuscripts (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1989), pp. 13–25, and n. 17 above. Often the arrangement on the manuscript page of the synoptic commentary suggests as much, that is, when the Latin is found transcribed into the text-columns of the English poem; see both Siân Echard, “With Carmen’s Help,” pp. 1–40, and Derek Pearsall, “Manuscripts and Illustrations of Gower’s Works,” in A Companion to Gower, ed. Siân Echard (Woodbridge, Suffolk: D. S. Brewer, 2004), pp. 73–97. But my point stands whether or not this is so in individual copies of the poem: the Latin summaries occlude the temporality of reading and impose a relatively static synopsis on events. 31. See Scanlon, Narrative, Authority, and Power, pp. 248–62. Scanlon seems ultimately to agree with the Latin exegesis when he argues that Boniface’s final ruin is proof of divine retribution, suggesting that the only real 158 NOTES

authority and power resides in God: “Gower disenfranchises clerical power by making it entirely spiritual” (p. 262). Yet the downfall of the supplanting prelate is not attributed to God in the tale; it is rather something that comes about contingently, specifically by means of military action, since Boniface happens to be taken captive by the forces of King Louis as the result of Boniface’s arrogating secular authority to himself. Gower removes every spiritual sanction from his vernacular tale, so that the reasons for the pope’s captivity are explicable in temporal rather than spiritual terms. 32. Runacres, “Art and Ethics,” p. 129. 33. Macaulay, The English Works of John Gower, vol. 1, Notes, pp. 490–91. 34. Origen thought the trumpet represents “the efficacy of the Word of God”; see Gustave Reese, Music in the Middle Ages (London: J. M. Dent & Sons, 1941), p. 62, citing Jacques Paul Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus: Series Graeca, XIII.319. On the sort of blasphemy involved in simulat- ing the voice of God, see Patrick Gallacher, Love, the Word, and Mercury: A Reading of John Gower’s “Confessio Amantis” (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1975), p. 123–24; and Scanlon, Narrative, Authority, and Power, pp. 258–62. 35. See “The Trump of Death,” Confessio Amantis, I.2021–53. As in the “Tale of Pope Boniface,” the trump of death in the first book sounds a false alarm and yet inspires credulity in its audience (see especially lines 2214–25). 36. Comically, Dante the pilgrim is mistaken for Boniface (who is not dead yet, but whose arrival is expected), when one damned soul says, “Is that you? Already? Here? Upright?” See Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy: Verse Translation and Commentary, Vol. 1: Inferno, ed. and trans. Mark Musa (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1996), 19.52–54 [p. 179]. Boniface is also roundly denounced by Peter in Paradise 27. 37. Vox Clamantis II.209–16. I have altered the translation of Eric W. Stockton, The Major Latin Works of John Gower (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962), pp. 102–3. 38. Paul Strohm, Politique: Languages of Statecraft between Chaucer and Shakespeare (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005), p. 1. 39. R. F. Yeager, ed. and trans., John Gower: The Minor Latin Works, TEAMS Middle English Texts Series (Kalamazoo: Western Michigan University, 2005), pp. 36–37. 40. Two notable examples in which Gower also seems alive to the dangers of a divine-command ethics are the Tale of Mundus and Paulina (1.761ff.) and the Tale of Nectanabus (6.1789ff.), both of which can be read as parodic Annunciation narratives in which women are duped when they mistake the voice of man for the vox Dei. See further the chapter on “The Annunciation Pattern in Amorous Persuasion,” in Gallacher’s Love, the Word, and Mercury, pp. 26–43. 41. Potts, in Conscience in Medieval Philosophy, p. 2, observes: “Where the prefix . . . modif[ies] the meaning of the noun, the original sense is that of knowing something (in company) with someone else.” NOTES 159

42. All references to The Riverside Chaucer, gen. ed. Larry D. Benson (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987). 43. One could also compare Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale, I.2459, which obliquely calls to mind the 1381 Rebellion; the Wife of Bath’s Prologue 406, for Alison’s treatment of her fourth husband; and the description of the vice in Parson’s Tale, X.498–513. 44. Line 18445 of John Gower’s Mirour de l’Omme in The Complete Works of John Gower, vol. 1, ed. G. C. Macaulay (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899– 1902), p. 214; William Burton Wilson, trans., The Mirror of Mankind (East Lansing: Colleagues Press, 1992), p. 253. 45. See Vox Clamantis in The Complete Works of John Gower, ed. G. C. Macaulay, vol. 4 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899–1902), p. 141. Gower identifies himself with the insular visionary John of Patmos (Prol. 57–58), while the title of the work alludes to the lone, messianic desert-dweller John the Baptist (see Isaiah 40:3 and Luke 3:1–6). On Gower’s simultaneous appropriation of and ambivalence toward the common voice see Steven Justice, Writing and Rebellion: England in 1381 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), pp. 209–10. 46. On the identity of the vox populi and vox Dei see Gower’s Mirour de l’Omme 12721–26, and Vox Clamantis III.1267; but for a rather pessimistic assess- ment of the people see Gower’s short Latin poem, “De lucis scrutinio,” in John Gower: The Minor Latin Works, ed. and trans. R. F. Yeager, TEAMS Middle English Texts (Kalamazoo: MIP, 2005), pp. 12–17.

5 Telling Fortunes in Lydgate’s Fall of Princes 1. Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, trans. Richard Green (New York: Macmillan, 1962), II.pr.2. 2. Michael Foucault, “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History,” in Language, Counter- Memory, Practice: Selected Interviews, ed. D. F. Bouchard (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1977), p. 155. 3. John Lydgate, Fall of Princes, ed. Henry Bergen, EETS e.s. 121–24 (London: Oxford University Press, 1924–27; reprinted 1967); parenthetical citations will be given in the text throughout. Lydgate fails to mention Laurent more than once, and falsely makes it appear he is translating Boccaccio (“Bochas”) directly; and whereas Boccaccio and Laurent employ the first person throughout, Lydgate speaks in third-person in reference to “Bochas book.” 4. Paul Strohm, Politique: Languages of Statecraft between Chaucer and Shakespeare (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005), pp. 95–96. A similar claim has been made about Lydgate’s Troy Book. See C. David Benson, The History of Troy in Middle English Literature: Guido delle Colonne’s “Historia desctructionis Troiae” in Medieval England (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1980), p. 123: “Lydgate seems to want to replace Guido’s pessimism with practical advice on how to win good fortune for oneself . . .” 5. Maura Nolan, “ ‘Now Wo, Now Gladnesse’: Ovidianism in the Fall of Princes,” ELH 71 (2004), p. 532. 160 NOTES

6. Nigel Mortimer, John Lydgate’s Fall of Princes: Narrative Tragedy in its Liter- ary and Political Contexts (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2005), pp. 58–60. 7. Boethius, Consolation of Philosophy II.pr.2. 8. François Lyotard, The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, trans. Georges Van Den Abbeele (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), p. xi. 9. Lyotard, The Differend, p. 128. 10. Troilus and Criseyde, 5.1541. All citations of Chaucer’s works are taken from The Riverside Chaucer, gen. ed. Larry D. Benson (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987). 11. Chaucer, The House of Fame, 1368–76 and 1547. 12. Thomas Hoccleve, “The Series: 1. My compleinte,” lines 267–68, in ‘My Compleinte’ and Other Poems, ed. Roger Ellis (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 2001). That Fortune keeps an unreliable written record is conso- nant with an earlier notion that Fame is a writer (De scriptorum fama), as we learn from Dialogue 43 in Book 1 of Francesco Petrarch’s Remedies for Fortune Fair and Foul: A Modern English Translation, vol. 1, ed. and trans. Conrad H. Rawski (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991). 13. Strohm, Politique, pp. 98–99. Eager to establish the protohumanism of Lydgate, Strohm omits intervening lines (i.e., 254–55) that refer to divine grace alongside the classical virtues. 14. A comparison can be made to Chaucer’s Legend of Good Women where the God of Love accuses the poet of heresy; taking on what James Simpson calls the “posture of a patron,” Cupid represents a tyrannical reader of the poet’s works. See James Simpson, “Ethics and Interpretation: Reading Wills in Chaucer’s Legend of Good Women,” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 20 (1998), pp. 73–100. This may be a fruitful analogy, but in the Fall of Princes I take it that Fortune represents a force that competes with the poet’s princely patron. 15. See Jacques Derrida, “Some Statements and Truisms about Neo-Logisms, Newisms, Postisms, Parasitisms, and Other Small Seismisms,” trans. Anne Tomiche, in The States of “Theory”: History, Art, and Critical Discourse, ed. David Carroll (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), p. 79; and “Passages—From Traumatism to Promise,” trans. Peggy Kamuf, in Points . . . Interviews, 1974–94, ed. Elisabeth Weber (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), pp. 386–87. 16. Michael Witmore, Culture of Accidents: Unexpected Knowledges in Early Modern England (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), pp. 1 and 39. 17. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, What Is Philosophy? trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994), p. 110. 18. Giovanni Boccaccio, The Decameron, trans. G. H. McWilliam (London: Penguin, 1972), p. 127. There are, as Elissa will say, an “infinite number” of narratives in Fortune’s store from which one could draw (p. 192). Fortune has already provided the historical Boccaccio with ample mate- rial for the second day of the Decameron, the express purpose of which is NOTES 161

to recount stories about suffering bad fortune but ending up with unexpected happiness. 19. Pandarus is found calculating whether or not to “make a proces” (2.268), and Criseyde mistrusts his “paynted proces” (2.424); Cassandra recounts the dubious history of Thebes “by processe al by lengthe” (5.1491). Proces thus refers especially to what passes in and as history (“This world that passeth soone as floures faire,” 5.1841), the exigency and impermanence of which Troilus and the poet seem happy to transcend in the moralizing conclusion to Troilus. In Troy Book Lydgate employs the term again to refer to Chaucer’s Troilus, perhaps recognizing its pertinence there: “The hoole story Chaucer kan yow telle, / . . . no man bet alyue, / Nor the processe halfe so wel discryve.” See John Lydgate, Troy Book: Selections, ed. Robert R. Edwards (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1998), 3.4234–36. 20. Derek Pearsall, John Lydgate (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970), pp. 144–46. 21. Lydgate’s “laureate poetics” receives illuminating treatment in Robert Meyer-Lee’s Poets and Power from Chaucer to Wyatt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 57–60. 22. Brunetto Latini, The Book of the Treasure (Livres dou Trésor), trans. Paul Barrette and Spurgeon Baldwin (New York: Garland, 1993), p. 5. 23. John Gower, The English Works of John Gower, 2 vols., ed. G. C. Macaulay, EETS e.s. 81–82 (London: Oxford University Press, 1900; reprinted 1979), IV.2651–52. 24. Rita Copeland, “Lydgate, Hawes, and the Science of Rhetoric in the Late Middle Ages,” Modern Language Quarterly 53.1 (1992), pp. 65–69. 25. Lydgate’s humanism is elaborated by James Simpson, The Oxford English Literary History, Volume 2, 1350–1547: Reform and Cultural Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), p. 52. See also Lois A. Ebin, Illuminator, Makar, Vates: Visions of Poetry in the Fifteenth Century (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1988), p. 38; Alain Renoir, The Poetry of John Lydgate (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967), p. 68; and Walter Schirmer, John Lydgate: A Study in the Culture of the XVth Century, trans. Ann E. Keep (London: Methuen, 1961; originally pub- lished in German in 1952), pp. 214–16. 26. Copeland, “Lydgate, Hawes, and the Science of Rhetoric,” p. 74. 27. Ebin, Illuminator, Makar, Vates, p. 32. 28. Meyer-Lee, Poets and Power, pp. 57–60. 29. Amphion likewise functions as a paragon of rhetoric in the Siege of Thebes; see John Lydgate, The Siege of Thebes, ed. Robert R. Edwards (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2001), 286ff. 30. Pearsall, John Lydgate (1970), p. 233. 31. Paul Strohm, England’s Empty Throne: Usurpation and the Language of Legi- timation, 1399–1422 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988), p. 180. 32. Brunetto Latini, Trésor, p. 298. 33. The Minor Poems of John Lydgate: Part II, Secular Poems, ed. Henry Noble MacCracken, EETS o.s. 92 (London: Oxford University Press, 1934; 162 NOTES

reprinted 1961); parenthetical citations will be given according to line numbers in the respective poems. 34. The Holy Bible: Douay Version Translated from the Latin Vulgate, ed. Richard Challoner (London: William Clowes, 1956). 35. Fourteenth-century examples include Pierre d’Ailly’s Conceptus et insolubilia (1372) and John Wyclif’s Summa insolubilium (c. 1350). See Paul V. Spade’s article on insolubilia in The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Disintegration of Scholasticism, 1100 –1600, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982), pp. 246–53. 36. Schirmer, John Lydgate, p. 37. 37. Jacques Derrida, The Truth in Painting, trans. Geoff Bennington and Ian McLeod (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), p. 56. 38. See Maura Nolan, John Lydgate and the Making of Public Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), especially pp. 33–70 and, on the later “Henry VI’s Triumphal Entry into London,” pp. 184–86. 39. Mortimer, John Lydgate’s Fall of Princes, pp. 82–86. Lydgate’s Serpent is a timely de casibus text that could have paved the way for the commis- sioning of the Fall of Princes: “when Humphrey turns to Lydgate for a translation of the Des Cas in 1430–31 it is possible that he does so because he has already received work from the same monk.” On authorship see the edition of John Lydgate, The Serpent of Division, ed. Henry Noble MacCracken (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911), pp. 4–5; and Derek Pearsall, John Lydgate (1371–1449): A Bio-Bibliography (Victoria: University of Victoria, 1997), p. 23. 40. Susanne Saygin, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester (1390–1447) and the Italian Humanists (Leiden: Brill, 2002), pp. 30–47. See Alessandra Petrina, Cultural Politics in Fifteenth-Century England: The Case of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester (Leiden: Brill, 2004), pp. 290–94, who rejects the hypothesis that Humphrey commissioned The Serpent, and casts serious doubt on Saygin’s account of the work’s topicality in particular. 41. Daniel Wakelin, Humanism, Reading, and English Literature: 1430–1530 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 29–31; K. H. Vickers, Humphrey Duke of Gloucester: A Biography (London: Archibald Constable, 1907), p. 370. 42. Wakelin, Humanism, Reading, and English Literature, pp. 49–50; Saygin, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester (1390–1447), pp. 90–93. A dedication copy of del Monte’s work survives in Cambridge, University Library MS Gg.i.34. 43. K. H. Vickers, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester: A Biography, (London: Archibald Constable, 1907), p. 403; Wakelin, Humanism, Reading, and English Literature, p. 63. 44. Jennifer Summit, “ ‘Stable in Study’: Lydgate’s Fall of Princes and Duke Humphrey’s Library,” in John Lydgate: Poetry, Culture, and Lancastrian England, ed. Larry Scanlon and James Simpson (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006), p. 212. NOTES 163

45. Lydgate, The Serpent of Division, p. 49. 46. Nolan, John Lydgate and the Making of Public Culture, p. 57. 47. Meyer-Lee, Poets and Power, pp. 79–80. 48. Ralph A. Griffiths, The Reign of King Henry VI, 2nd edn. (Gloucestershire: Sutton, 1998), p. 41. 49. This is the “failed coup” described in John Watts, Henry VI and the Politics of Kingship (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 118–20 and 155–58; and in Griffiths, The Reign of King Henry VI, pp. 41–42. 50. Cf. Mortimer, John Lydgate’s Fall of Princes, pp. 53–61. 51. Mortimer, John Lydgate’s Fall of Princes, p. 56: “Ultimately, Humphrey’s career reads much like one of the casus of the Fall: the trial of his second wife, Eleanor of Cobham, for witchcraft in 1441 when Humphrey was heir presumptive to the throne, his subsequent loss of royal favor and removal from the Privy Council in 1445, and his arrest and suspicious death in St Saviour’s Hospital during the Bury St Edmunds Parliament in February 1447 all chart his fall from influence.” 52. Petrina, Cultural Politics in Fifteenth-Century England, p. 305. 53. See B. L. Ullman, “Manuscripts of Duke Humphrey of Gloucester,” English Historical Review 52 (1937), pp. 670–72; M. R. James, “Bury St. Edmunds Manuscripts,” EHR 41 (1926), pp. 251–60; R. A. B. Mynors, “The Latin Classics Known to Boston of Bury,” in Friz Saxl: A Volume of Memorial Essays, ed. D. J. Gordon (London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1957), p. 202; and Vickers, Humphrey, pp. 351, 361, 365, 412, 436. 54. See David Wallace, Chaucerian Polity: Absolutist Lineages and Associational Forms in England and Italy (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997), p. 333, who goes on to say Humphrey “managed to keep Lydgate in a subservient role by being stingy with his largesse.” Compared with the patronage arrangements of Petrarch and Boccaccio, Lydgate was worse off than the Italians pressed into service of tyrants—for Lydgate “let the lunatic-in-chief run the asylum.” See also Seth Lerer, Chaucer and His Readers: Imagining the Author in Late-Medieval England (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), p. 37.

6 Moral Luck and Malory’s Morte Darthur 1. Gary Saul Morson, Narrative and Freedom: The Shadows of Time (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), p. 45. 2. The Works of Sir Thomas Malory, 3 vols., ed. Eugene Vinaver, rev. P. J. C. Field (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 1175. All subsequent references are to this edition. 3. Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, trans. Richard Green (New York: Macmillan, 1962), IV.pr.7. 4. Morton Bloomfield, “Episodic Motivation and Marvels in Epic and Romance,” in Essays and Explorations: Studies in Ideas, Language, and Litera- ture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970), pp. 97–128. 164 NOTES

5. M. M. Bakhtin, “Forms of Time and of the Chronotope in the Novel,” in Michael Holquist, ed. and trans., The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays (Austin: University of Texas Press. 1981), p. 152. 6. A. J. Gurevich, Categories of Medieval Culture (London: Routledge, 1985), p. 136. 7. Erich Auerbach, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, trans. Willard R. Trask (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953), p. 135. 8. Jill Mann, “ ‘Taking the Adventure’: Malory and the Suite du Merlin,” in T. Takamiya and D. S. Brewer, eds., Aspects of Malory (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1981), pp. 71–92. By removing from his sources any assurances that what is happening in the plot is the causal result of character flaws or fate or even providence, Malory lets events unfold for themselves in all their baffling arbitrariness. There is always the possibility that something of the effect of chanciness comes by accident: not always confident in Malory’s artistic abilities and conceptual sophistication, critics have conceded that his own method of redaction is more haphazard than systematic. 9. Elizabeth Edwards, The Genesis of Narrative in Malory (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2001), p. 128. 10. Edwards, The Genesis of Narrative, p. 174. 11. Auerbach, Mimesis, p. 137. 12. Barbara Nolan, “The Tale of Sir Gareth and the Tale of Sir Lancelot,” in A Companion to Malory, ed. Elizabeth Archibald and A. S. G. Edwards (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2000), p. 155. 13. Auerbach, Mimesis, p. 138. 14. Martha Asher, trans., “The Post-Vulgate, Part I: The Merlin Continua- tion,” in The Old French Arthurian Vulgate and Post-Vulgate in Translation, Volume IV, ed. Norris Lacy (New York: Garland, 1996), pp. 232–33. Mann discusses the passage in “Taking the Adventure,” pp. 88–89. 15. For some pictorial examples, see Alison Stones, “Illustrations and the Fortunes of Arthur,” in The Fortunes of King Arthur, ed. Norris J. Lacy (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2005), pp. 116ff. 16. Nolan, “The Tale of Sir Gareth,” p. 158. 17. Howard R. Patch, The Goddess Fortuna in Medieval Literature (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927), pp. 115–16. 18. Norris J. Lacy, “The Ambiguous Fortunes of Arthur: The Lancelot- Grail and Beyond,” in The Fortunes of King Arthur, ed. Norris J. Lacy (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2005), pp. 96–97. 19. Kenneth Hodges, in Forging Chivalric Communities in Malory’s Morte Darthur (New York: Palgrave, 2005), describes multiple “chivalries” that come to the fore at different points in the text. According to his analysis (see especially pp. 80ff., 104–8, 120–23), some parts are especially preoccupied with determining intentions apart from external happenstance; other parts relish the way in which the successful performance of deeds determines self-worth. My analysis is restricted to those latter examples where what matters most is accomplishment. NOTES 165

20. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae: Latin Text and English Translation, Dominican Editors, vol. 38 (New York: Blackfriars, 1964), 2a2ae. Q. 64 art. 8. 21. The problem of moral luck was famously debated in a symposium in which Bernard Williams and Thomas Nagel participated, as recorded in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 50 (Supp. 1976), pp. 115–51. Their separate contributions were reprinted in Nagel’s Mortal Questions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979) and Williams’s Moral Luck (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981). As Nagel defines it in Mortal Questions, p. 26, “Where a significant aspect of what someone does depends on factors beyond his control, yet we continue to treat him in that respect as an object of moral judgement, it can be called moral luck. Such luck can be good or bad.” The issues involved are given lengthier treatment in the following books: Martha C. Nussbaum’s The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), and S. L. Hurley’s Justice, Luck, and Knowledge (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003). Claudia Card in her The Unnatural Lottery: Character and Moral Luck (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996) brings moral luck theory to bear on identity politics and oppression, for example, relating to gender, sexuality, disability, and ethnicity. I have also benefited from sundry shorter studies: Judith Andre, “Nagel, Williams, and Moral Luck,” Analysis 43 (1983), pp. 202–7; Michael J. Zimmerman, “Luck and Responsibility,” Ethics 97 (January 1987), pp. 374–86; and articles collected in Daniel Statman, ed. Moral Luck (Albany: SUNY, 1993). 22. Concepts analogous to moral luck are routinely applied in the courts where, as Nagel writes in Mortal Questions, p. 30, “The mens rea which would have existed in the absence of any consequences does not exhaust the grounds of moral judgment,” as in the law of torts. 23. Beverly Kennedy, Knighthood in the Morte Darthur (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1985), pp. 218 and 229–30. 24. Edwards, The Genesis of Narrative, p. 24. 25. See “The Post-Vulgate, Part I: The Merlin Continuation,” p. 186: “My lady, don’t despise me for my poverty; I was richer once. There is still no one here to whom I would refuse my shield.” 26. As noted in Raluca Radulescu, The Gentry Context for Malory’s Morte Darthur (Woodbridge: D. S. Brewer, 2003), p. 89: “The concept Balin puts forward, that virtue lies in a man’s heart, not in his garments, appealed to the early readers of the Winchester manuscript; in it there is a side note to this part of the text that reads: ‘Vertue and manhode ys hyed wythin the bodye.’ ” In her book Radulescu argues that the fifteenth- century gentry share Malory’s interest in worship, fellowship, and lord- ship. Yet these establishment concerns hardly describe the contingency and instability of worship in the tale of Balin, the rest of which Radulescu does not examine. 27. Mann, “Taking the Adventure,” p. 77. 28. “The Post-Vulgate, Part I: The Merlin Continuation,” p. 187. 166 NOTES

29. For a contrary view of moral agency in Malory’s Morte see Marilyn Corrie’s illuminating article, “Self-Determination in the Post-Vulgate Suite du Merlin and Malory’s Le Morte Darthur,” Medium Aevum 73.2 (2004), pp. 273–89. 30. “The Post-Vulgate, Part I: The Merlin Continuation,” pp. 190–91. 31. Shortly we will encounter further suppression of theology. Such revisions are consistent with Malory’s usual practice of restricting religious senti- ment and doctrine, particularly in the Grail quest and the final downfall of Arthur where—as Vinaver observes in his Introduction to The Works of Sir Thomas Malory, p. xcii—Malory violates the “letter and the spirit of the French.” 32. Williams, “Moral Luck,” pp. 43–44. 33. For an account of how plots can generate desire for narrative see Peter Brooks, Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984). 34. Kennedy, Knighthood in the Morte Darthur, p. 228. 35. “The Post-Vulgate, Part I: The Merlin Continuation,” p. 212. 36. “The Post-Vulgate, Part I: The Merlin Continuation,” p. 213. 37. Edwards, The Genesis of Narrative, p. 52. 38. Mann, “Taking the Adventure,” p. 84. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources Ancrene Wisse: Parts Six and Seven, ed. Geoffrey Shepherd. London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1959; rev. edn. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1991. Aquinas, Thomas. Commentary on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, trans. C. I. Litzinger. Library of Living Catholic Thought. Chicago: Regnery, 1964. ———. Summa Theologiae: Latin Text and English Translation, 61 vols., Dominican Editors. New York: Blackfriars, 1964. Aristotle. The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols., ed. Jonathan Barnes. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984. ———. Nicomachean Ethics, trans. Terence Irwin. Indianapolis: Hacket, 1985. Aristoteles Latinus, codices descripsit Georgius Lacombe; editioni curandae praesidet L. Minio-Paluello [deinde] G. Verbeke. Rome: La libreria dello stato. 1939–. Augustine. City of God, trans. Henry Bettenson. London: Penguin, 1984. ———. The Retractations, trans. Sister Mary Inez Bogan. Washington, DC: Catholic University of American Press, 1968. Biblica Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Clementinam, ed. Alberto Colunga and Laurentio Turrado. 4th edn., Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos 14.1. Madrid: La Editorial Catolica, 1965. Boccaccio, Giovanni. The Decameron, trans. G. H. McWilliam. London: Penguin, 1972. Bodleian Library MS Fairfax 16, ed. John Norton-Smith. London: Scolar Press, 1979. Boethius. The Consolation of Philosophy, trans. Richard Green. New York: Macmillan Publishing, 1962. ———. In “Isagogen” Porphyrii commenta, ed. Samuel Brandt, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, 86 vols. 2nd edn. Vienna: F. Tempsky, 1906. 161.14–163.6. ———. The Theological Tractates, The Consolation of Philosophy, ed. and trans. H. F. Stewart, E. K. Rand, and S. J. Tester. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973. The Canterbury Tales: Fifteenth-Century Continuations and Additions, ed. John M. Bowers. TEAMS Middle English Texts Series. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1992. 168 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Riverside Chaucer, ed. Larry D. Benson. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987. Christine de Pisan. The Middle English Translation of Christine de Pisan’s Livre du Corps de Policie, ed. from MS C. U. L. Kk.1.5, ed. Diane Bornstein. Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1977. Cicero. De Senectute, De Amicitia, De Divinatione, ed. and trans. William Armistead Falconer. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1923. Dante Alighieri. Divine Comedy: Verse Translation and Commentary, 4 vols., ed. and trans. Mark Musa. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1996. A Dialogue between Reason and Adversity: A Late Middle English Version of Petrarch’s De Remediis, ed. F. N. M. Diekstra. Assen: Royal Vangorcum, 1968. Doolittle, Hilda (H. D.). Collected Poems, 1912–1944, ed. Louis L. Martz. New York: New Directions, 1983. Duns Scotus, John. God and Creatures: The Quodlibetal Questions, trans. Felix Alluntis and Allan B. Wolter. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975. Ennodius, Magni Felicis Ennodii Opera omnia, ed. Wilhelm von Hartel. Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 6. Vienna, 1882. Gower, John. The Complete Works of John Gower, Vol. 4, The Latin Works, ed. G. C. Macaulay. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902. ———. Confessio Amantis, 3 vols., ed. Russell A. Peck with trans. by Andrew Galloway. TEAMS Middle English Text Series. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2000–2005. ———. The English Works of John Gower, 2 vols., ed. G. C. Macaulay, EETS e.s. 81–82. London: Oxford University Press, 1900; repr. 1979. ———. The Major Latin Works of John Gower, trans. Eric W. Stockton. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962. ———. The Minor Latin Works, ed. and trans. R. F. Yeager. TEAMS Middle English Texts Series. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2005. 12–17. Guillaume de Machaut. “Le Jugement du roy de Behaigne” and “Remede de Fortune,” ed. and trans. James I. Wimsatt, William W. Kibler, and Rebecca A. Baltzer. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1988. Hammond, E. P. “The Chance of the Dice.” Englische Studien 59 (1925): 1–16. Hoccleve, Thomas. “The Series: 1. My compleinte.” “My Compleinte” and Other Poems, ed. Roger Ellis. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 2001. The Holy Bible: Douay Version Translated from the Latin Vulgate, ed. Richard Challoner. London: William Clowes and Sons, 1956. Hyman, Arthur and James J. Walsh, eds. and trans. Philosophy in the Middle Ages: The Christian, Islamic, and Jewish Traditions, 2nd edn. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1973. Isidore of Seville, The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville, trans. Stephen A. Barney, W. J. Lewis, J. A. Beach, and Oliver Berghof. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Joyce, James. Finnegans Wake. London: Penguin, 1992. BIBLIOGRAPHY 169

Latini, Brunetto. The Book of the Treasure (Livres dou Trésor), trans. Paul Barrette and Spurgeon Baldwin. New York: Garland, 1993. Lydgate, John. Fall of Princes, ed. Henry Bergen. EETS e.s. 121–24. London: Oxford University Press, 1924–27; repr. 1967. ———. The Minor Poems of John Lydgate: Part II, Secular Poems, ed. Henry Noble MacCracken, EETS o.s. 92. London: Oxford University Press, 1934; repr. 1961. ———. Troy Book: Selections, ed. Robert R. Edwards. TEAMS Middle English Texts Series. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1998. ———. The Serpent of Division, ed. Henry Noble MacCracken. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. ———. The Siege of Thebes, ed. Robert R. Edwards. TEAMS Middle English Texts Series. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2001. Malory, Thomas. The Works of Sir Thomas Malory, 3 vols., ed. Eugene Vinaver, rev. P. J. C. Field. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990. Manuscript Bodley 638: A Facsimile, ed. Pamela Robinson. Norman, OK: Pilgrim Books, 1982. The Mirror of Mankind, trans. William Burton Wilson. East Lansing: Colleagues Press, 1992. The Old French Arthurian Vulgate and Post-Vulgate in Translation, Volume IV, ed. Norris Lacy. New York: Garland, 1996. 232–33. Petrarch, Francesco. Remedies for Fortune Fair and Foul: A Modern English Translation, 5 vols., ed. and trans. Conrad H. Rawski. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991. Poetae latini minors, 6 vols., ed. Aemilius Baehrens. Leipzig: Teubner, 1879–83. Rochefoucauld, Duc De La. Moral Maxims and Reflections in Four Parts: Written in French by the Duke of Rochefoucault, now made in English. London: M. Gillyflower, 1694. ———. Ordinatio (Opus Oxoniense). Opera omnia, 31 vols., ed. C. Balic et al. Vatican City: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1950–93. Spade, Paul Vincent, ed. and trans. Five Texts on the Medieval Problem of Universals: Porphyry, Boethius, Abelard, Duns Scotus, Ockham. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994. Stow, John. A Survey of London, Reprinted from the Text of 1603, 2 vols., ed. Charles Lethbridge Kingsford. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908; repr. 1971. Thynne, William. The workes of Geffray Chaucer newly printed, with dyuers workes whiche were neuer in print before: as in the table more playnly dothe appere. London: Thomas Godfray, 1532. British Library. STC 5068. Usk, Thomas. The Testament of Love, ed. Allen R. Shoaf. TEAMS Middle English Texts Series. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1998. ———. Thomas Usk’s Testament of Love: A Critical Edition, ed. Gary Shawver. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002. The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer and The Kingis Quair: A Facsimile of Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Arch. Selden. B. 24, ed. Julia Boffey and A. S. G. Edwards. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997. 170 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Zohar: The Book of Enlightenment, trans. Daniel C. Matt. London: Paulist Press, 1983.

Secondary Sources Aers, David. Chaucer, Langland and the Creative Imagination. London: Routledge, 1980. Agamben, Giorgio. The Coming Community, trans. Michael Hardt. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993. Andre, Judith. “Nagel, Williams, and Moral Luck.” Analysis 43 (1983): 202–7. Astell, Ann W. “Visualizing Boethius’s Consolation as Romance.” New Directions in Boethian Studies, ed. Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr. and Philip Edward Phillips. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 2007. 111–24. Attwood, Catherine, ed. “Fortune and Women in Medieval Literature.” Spec. issue of Nottingham French Studies 38.2 (1999): 136–49. Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, trans. Willard R. Trask. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953. Badiou, Alain. Being and Event, trans. Oliver Feltham. New York: Continuum, 2005. ———. Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil, trans. Peter Hallward. New York: Verso, 2002. Bakhtin, M. M. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. and trans. Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press. 1981. Barthes, Roland. The Semiotic Challenge, trans. Richard Howard. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988. Bauman, Zygmunt. Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds. Cambridge: Polity, 2003. de Beauvoir, Simone. The Second Sex, trans. and ed. H. M. Parshley. New York: Vintage, 1989. Bellhouse, D. R. and J. Franklin. “The Language of Chance.” International Statistical Review 65 (1997): 73–85. Benson, C. David. The History of Troy in Middle English Literature: Guido delle Colonne’s “Historia desctructionis Troiae” in Medieval England. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1980. Benson, C. David and Barry A. Windeatt. “The Manuscript Glosses to Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde.” Chaucer Review 25.1 (1990): 33–53. Bernasconi, Robert. Heidegger in Question: The Art of Existing. New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1993. Blanchot, Maurice. The Writing of the Disaster, trans. Ann Smock. Lincoln: University of Nebreska Press, 1986. Bloomfield, Morton. “Episodic Motivation and Marvels in Epic and Romance.” Essays and Explorations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970. 97–128. Boase, Roger. The Origin and Meaning of Courtly Love. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1977. BIBLIOGRAPHY 171

Boffey, Julia. “Annotation in Some Manuscripts of Troilus and Criseyde.” English Manuscript Studies 5 (1995): 1–17. Boler, John. “Transcending the Natural: Duns Scotus on the Two Affections of the Will.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 67.1 (1993): 109–26. Bowlin, John. Contingency and Fortune in Aquinas’s Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Bradley, D. J. M. Aquinas and the Twofold Human Good: Reason and Human Happiness in Aquinas’s Moral Science. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1997. Braekman, W. L. “Fortune-Telling by the Casting of Dice: A Middle English Poem and Its Background.” Studia Neophilologica 52 (1980): 3–29. Brooks, Peter. Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984. Brown, Oscar J. Natural Rectitude and Divine Law in Aquinas. Toronto: Pontifical Institute, 1981. Buckton, T. J. “Dice.” Notes & Queries s4–I (1868): 179–80. Camargo, Martin. “The Consolation of Pandarus.” Chaucer Review 25.3 (1991): 214–28. Caputo, John. Against Ethics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993. ———. Heidegger and Aquinas: An Essay in Overcoming Metaphysics. New York: Fordham University Press, 1982. Card, Claudia. The Unnatural Lottery: Character and Moral Luck. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996. Carlson, David R. “Chaucer’s Boethius and Thomas Usk’s Testament of Love: Politics and Love in the Chaucerian Tradition.” The Centre and Its Compass: Studies in Medieval Literature in Honor of Professor John Leyerle, ed. Robert A. Taylor, James F. Burke, and J. E. Patricia. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute, 1993. 29–70. Carruthers, Mary J. The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Chadwick, Henry. Boethius: The Consolations of Music, Logic, Theology, and Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981. Chanter, Tina, ed. Feminist Interpretations of Emmanuel Levinas. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania University Press, 2001. Cohen, Jeffrey J. Medieval Identity Machines. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2003. Coleman, Janet. Medieval Readers and Writers, 1350–1400. New York: Columbia University Press. Coleman, Joyce. “Lay Readers and Hard Latin: How Gower May have Intended the Confessio Amantis to Be Read.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 24 (2002): 209–35. Cooper, John M. “Aristotle on the Goods of Fortune.” Philosophical Review 94.2 (1985): 173–96. Copeland, Rita. “Lydgate, Hawes, and the Science of Rhetoric in the Late Middle Ages.” Modern Language Quarterly 53.1 (1992): 57–82. 172 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Copeland, Rita. Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages: Academic Traditions and Vernacular Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Copleston, Frederick Charles. A History of Philosophy, 11 vols. London: Search Press, 1946–75. Corrie, Marilyn. “Self-Determination in the Post-Vulgate Suite du Merlin and Malory’s Le Morte Darthur.” Medium Aevum 73.2 (2004): 273–89. Courcelle, Pierre. La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire: Antécédents et postérité de Boèce. Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1967. Cox, Catherine S. Gender and Language in Chaucer. Gainseville: University Press of Florida, 1997. Critchley, Simon. The Ethics of Deconstruction: Derrida and Levinas. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992. ———. “The Other’s Decision in Me (What Are the Politics of Friendship?).” Ethics—Politics—Subjectivity: Essays on Derrida, Levinas and Contemporary French Thought. London: Verso, 1999. 254–86. Dastur, François. “Language and Ereignis.” Reading Heidegger: Commemorations, ed. John Sallis. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993. 355–69. ———. “Phenomenology of the Event: Waiting and Surprise.” Hypatia 15.4 2000: 178–89. Davis, Isabel. Writing Masculinity in the Later Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Brian Massumi. London: Continuum, 1987. ———. What Is Philosophy? trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994. Deman. T. “Le Liber de bona fortuna dans la théologie de St Thomas d’Aquin.” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 17 (1928): 38–58. Denker, Alfred, ed. Historical Dictionary of Heidegger’s Philosophy. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2000. Derrida, Jacques. “My Chances/Mes Chances: A Rendezvous with Some Epicurean Stereophonies.” Taking Chances: Derrida, Psychoanalysis, and Literature, ed. Joseph H. Smith and William Kerrigan. London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984. ———. “Passages—From Traumatism to Promise.” Points . . . Interviews, 1974–94, ed. Elisabeth Weber and trans. Peggy Kamuf. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995. 372–95. ———. Politics of Friendship, trans. George Collins. New York: Verso, 1997. ———. “Some Statements and Truisms About Neo-Logisms, Newisms, Postisms, Parasitisms, and Other Small Seismisms.” The States of “Theory”: History, Art, and Critical Discourse, ed. David Carroll and trans. Anne Tomiche. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990. 63–95. ———. Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, The Work of Mourning, & the New International, trans. Peggy Kamuf. New York: Routledge, 1994. ———. The Truth in Painting, trans. Geoff Bennington and Ian McLeod. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. BIBLIOGRAPHY 173

DiLeo, Jeffrey R. “Pierce’s Haecceitism.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 27.1 (1991): 79–109. Dinshaw, Carolyn. Chaucer’s Sexual Poetics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989. Docherty, Thomas. After Theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1996. ———. Alterities: Criticism, History, Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. Dod, Bernard G. “Aristoteles latinus.” The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Disintegration of Scholasticism, 1100 –1600, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 45–79. Dronke, Peter. “Arbor Caritatis.” Medieval Studies for J. A. W. Bennett, ed. P. L. Heyworth. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981. 207–53. ———. Medieval Latin and the Rise of European Love-Lyric: Problems and Inter- pretations, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Dunbabin, Jean. “Robert Grosseteste as Translator, Transmitter, and Commentator: The ‘Nicomachean Ethics.’ ” Traditio 28 (1972): 460–72. Ebin, Lois. A. Illuminator, Makar, Vates: Visions of Poetry in the Fifteenth Century. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1988. Echard, Siân. “With Carmen’s Help: Latin Authorities in the Confessio Amantis.” Studies in Philology 95 (1998): 1–40. Economou, George D. “The Character Genius in Alan de Lille, Jean de Meun, and John Gower.” Chaucer Review 4 (1970): 203–10. Edwards, A. S. G. “The Chaunce of Dice and The Legend of Good Women.” Notes & Queries 34 (1987): 295. Edwards, Elizabeth. The Genesis of Narrative in Malory. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2001. Emmerson, Richard K. “Reading Gower in a Manuscript Culture: Latin and English in Illustrated Manuscripts of the Confessio Amantis.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 21 (1999): 143–86. Fabro, C. “Le Liber de bona fortuna de l’Éthique à Eudème d’Aristote et la dialectique de la divine Providence chez saint Thomas.” Revue Thomiste 88 (1988): 556–72. Finlayson, John. “Definitions of Courtly Romance.” Chaucer Review 15 (1980–81): 44–62. Foucault, Michael. “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History.” Language, Counter-Memory, Practice: Selected Interviews, ed. D. F. Bouchard. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1977. 139–64. Fradenburg, L. O. Aranye. Sacrifice Your Love: Psychoanalysis, Historicism, Chaucer. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002. Frakes, Jerold C. The Fate of Fortune in the Early Middle Ages: The Boethian Tradi- tion. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1987. Freud, Sigmund. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, ed. and trans. James Stratchey, 23 vols. London: Hogarth Press, 1961. Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. London: Continuum, 2004. 174 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gallacher, Patrick. Love, the Word, and Mercury: A Reading of John Gower’s “Confessio Amantis.” Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1975. Gallagher, Catherine and Stephen Greenblatt. Practicing New Historicism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Galloway, Andrew. “The Making of a Social Ethic in Late-Medieval England: From Gratitudo to ‘Kyndenesse.’ ” Journal of the History of Ideas 55.3 (1994): 365–83. Ganim, John. Style and Consciousness in Middle English Narrative. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983. Gaunt, Simon. Gender and Genre in Medieval French Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Gauthier, R. A. and J. Y. Jolif. Aristote: L’Éthique à Nicomaque. Louvain: Publicationes Universitaires, 1970. Gaylord, Alan. “Uncle Pandarus as Lady Philosophy.” Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 46 (1961): 571–95. Gillespie, Vincent. “From the Twelfth Century to c. 1450.” The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, Vol. II: The Middle Ages, ed. Alastair Minnis and Ian Johnson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 145–235. Gleason, Mark. “Clearing the Fields: Towards a Reassessment of Chaucer’s Use of Trevet in the ‘Boece.’ ” The Medieval Boethius: Studies in the Vernacular Translations of De consolatione philosophiae, ed. Alastair Minnis. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1987. 89–105. Gracia, Jorge J. E. Introduction to the Problem of Individuation in the Early Middle Ages. München: Philosophia Verlag, 1984. Griffiths, Ralph A. The Reign of King Henry VI. 2nd edn. Gloucestershire: Sutton, 1998. Gurevich, A. J. Categories of Medieval Culture. London: Routledge, 1985. Hanrahan, Michael. “The Seduction of The Testament of Love.” Literature and History 7 (1998): 1–15. Hansen, E. T. Chaucer and the Fictions of Gender. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992. Hardman, Phillippa. “Narrative Typology: Chaucer’s Use of the Story of Orpheus.” The Modern Language Review 85.3 (1990): 545–54. Heidegger, Martin. “Author’s Book Notice (1917).” Supplements: From the Earliest Essays to Being and Time and Beyond, ed. and trans. John van Buren. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002. 61–62. ———. Being and Time, trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. Oxford: Blackwell, 1962. ———. Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning), trans. P. Emad and K. Maly. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999. ———. Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre- des Duns Scotus. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1916. ———. “The Origin of the Work of Art.” Poetry, Language, Thought, trans. Albert Hofstadter. New York: Harper & Row, 2001. 15–88. Heinrichs, Katherine. “ ‘Lovers’ Consolation of Philosophy’ in Boccaccio, Machaut, and Chaucer.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 11 (1989): 93–115. BIBLIOGRAPHY 175

Heller-Roazen, Daniel. Fortune’s Faces: The Roman de la Rose and the Poetics of Contingency. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003. Hodge, Joanna. Heidegger and Ethics. London: Routledge, 1995. Hodges, Kenneth. Forging Chivalric Communities in Malory’s Morte Darthur. New York: Palgrave, 2005. Holisinger, Bruce. The Premodern Condition: Medievalism and the Making of Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005. Hurley, S. L. Justice, Luck, and Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003. Ingham, Elizabeth. “Scotus and the Moral Order.” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 67.1 (1993): 127–50. Irigaray, Luce. An Ethics of Sexual Difference, trans. Carolyn Burke and Gillian Gill. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993. Jaffa, H. V. Thomism and Aristotelianism: A Study of the Commentary by Thomas Aquinas on the Nicomachean Ethics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952. James, M. R. “Bury St. Edmunds Manuscripts.” English Historical Review 41 (1926): 251–60. Jefferson, B. L. Chaucer and the “Consolation of Philosophy” of Boethius. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1917. Jordan, Mark D. “Aquinas Reading Aristotle’s Ethics.” Ad Litteram: Authoritative Texts and Their Medieval Readers, ed. Mark D. Jordan and Kent Emery, Jr. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992. 229–49. Justice, Steven. Writing and Rebellion: England in 1381. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Katz, Claire E. Levinas, Judaism, and the Feminine: The Silent Footsteps of Rebecca. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003. Kay, Sarah. Subjectivity in Troubadour Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Keenan, James F. and Thomas A. Shannon, eds. The Contexts of Casuistry. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1995. Kelly, H. A. Chaucerian Tragedy. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997. Kendall, M. G. “Studies in the History of Probability and Statistics II.” Biometric 43 (1956): 1–14. Kennedy, Beverly. Knighthood in the Morte Darthur. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1985. Kennell, Stefanie. Magnus Felix Ennodius: A Gentleman of the Church. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000. Kiefer, Frederick. Fortune and Elizabethan Tragedy. San Marino: Huntington Library, 1983. King, Peter. “Duns Scotus on the Common Nature.” Philosophical Topics 20 (1992): 50–76. Knapp, Peggy A. Time-Bound Words: Semantic and Social Economies from Chaucer’s England to Shakespeare’s. London: Macmillan, 2000. Knuth, Donald Ervin. The Art of Computer Programming, Vol. 4: Generating All Trees: History of Combinatorial Generation. New Jersey: Addison-Wesley, 1976. 176 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kramer, Edna E. “From Dice to Quantum Theory to Quality Control.” The Nature and Growth of Modern Mathematics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982. 291–315. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: Book VII: The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959–1960, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller and trans. Dennis Porter. New York: W. W. Norton, 1992. ———. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge: Book XX, Encore 1972–1973, trans. Bruce Fink. New York: W. W. Norton, 2000. Lacy, Norris J. “The Ambiguous Fortunes of Arthur: The Lancelot-Grail and Beyond.” The Fortunes of King Arthur, ed. Norris J. Lacy. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2005. 92–103. Lambert, Mark. “Troilus, Books I-III: A Criseydan Reading.” Essays on Troilus and Criseyde, ed. Mary Salu. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1979. 105–25. Lerer, Seth. Boethius and Dialogue: Literary Method in The Consolation of Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985. ———. Chaucer and His Readers: Imagining the Author in Late-Medieval England. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. Levinas, Emmanuel. Collected Philosophical Papers, trans. Alphonso Lingis. Dordecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993. ———. “Diachrony and Representation.” Time and the Other, trans. Richard A. Cohen. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1987. 97–120. ———. Ethics and Infinity: Conversations with Philippe Nemo, trans. Richard A. Cohen. Duquesne University Press: Pittsburgh, 1985. ———. Otherwise Than Being, or Beyond Essence, trans. Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1998. ———. Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority, trans. Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1969. Lezra, Jacques. Unspeakable Subjects: The Genealogy of the Event in Early Modern Europe. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997. Lohr, C. H. “The medieval interpretation of Aristotle.” The Cambridge His- tory of Later Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Dis- integration of Scholasticism, 1100–1600, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 80–98. Luscombe, D. E. “Natural morality and natural law.” The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Disintegration of Scholasticism, 1100–1600, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 705–19. Lyotard, François. The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, trans. Georges Van Den Abbeele. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988. MacIntyre, Alisdair. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. 2nd edn. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984. ———. Whose Justice? Whose Rationality? Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988. BIBLIOGRAPHY 177

Mann, Jill. “Chance and Destiny in Troilus and Criseyde and the Knight’s Tale.” The Cambridge Chaucer Companion, ed. Piero Boitani and Jill Mann. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. 75–92. ———. Feminizing Chaucer. Woodbridge: D. S. Brewer, 1992. ———. “ ‘Taking the Adventure’: Malory and the Suite du Merlin.” Aspects of Malory, ed. T. Takamiya and D. S. Brewer. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1981. 71–92. Manning, Robert John Sheffler. Interpreting Otherwise than Heidegger: Emmanuel Levinas’s Ethics as First Philosophy. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1993. Marenbon, John. Boethius. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. ———. Later Medieval Philosophy (1150–1350): An Introduction. London: Routledge, 1992. Marion, Jean-Luc. Being Given: Towards a Phenomenology of Givenness, trans. Jeffrey L. Kosky. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002. ———. In Excess: Studies of Saturated Phenomena, trans. Robyn Horner and Vincent Berraud. New York: Fordham University Press, 2004. Marquard, Odo. In Defense of the Accidental: Philosophical Studies, trans. Robert M. Wallace. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. Martin, Priscilla. Chaucer’s Women: Nuns Wives, and Amazons. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1990. McAlpine, Monica E. “Criseyde’s Prudence.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 25 (2003): 199–224. ———. The Genre of Troilus and Criseyde. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1978. McCall, John P. “Five-Book Structure in Chaucer’s Troilus.” MLQ 23 (1962): 297–308. McDonald, Nicola. “Games Medieval Women Play.” The Legends of Good Women: Contexts and Receptions, ed. Carolyn Collette. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2006. 176–97. McGrath Sean. J. The Early Heidegger and Medieval Philosophy: Phenomenology for the Godforsaken. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2006. ———. “Heidegger and Duns Scotus on Truth and Language.” Review of Metaphysics 57.2 (2003): 339–59. Medcalf, Stephen. “Transposition: Thomas Usk’s Testament of Love.” The Medieval Translator: The Theory and Practice of Translation in the Middle Ages, ed. Roger Ellis. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1989. 181–95. ———. “The World and Heart of Thomas Usk.” Essays on Ricardian Literature: In Honour of J. A. Burrow, ed. A. J. Minnis, Charlotte C. Morse, and Thorlac Turville-Petre. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. 222–51. Mercken, P. “Transformations of the Ethics of Aristotle in the Moral Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas.” Tommaso d’Aquino nel suo settimo centenario: Atti del Congresso Internaziononale. Pontificia Accademia Romana di San Tommaso d’Aquino, April 1974, Naples. L’agire morale. Naples: Edizioni Domenicane Italiane, 1977. 151–62. 178 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Meyer-Lee, Robert. Poets and Power from Chaucer to Wyatt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Miller, J. Hillis. “Derrida’s Destinerrance.” MLN 121.4 (2006): 893–910. Miller, Mark. Philosophical Chaucer: Love, Sex, and Agency in the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Minnis, Alistair and Lodi Nauta. “More Platonico loquitur: What Nicholas Trevet Really Did to William of Conches.” Chaucer’s Boece and the Medieval Tradition of Boethius, ed. Alastair Minnis. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1993. 1–33. Minnis, A. J. Medieval Theory of Authorship: Scholastic Literary Attitudes in the Later Middle Ages. 2nd edn. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988. Mitchell, J. Allan. “Boethius and Pandarus: A Source in Maximian’s Elegies.” Notes & Queries 50.4 (2003): 377–80. ———. Ethics and Exemplary Narrative in Chaucer and Gower. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2004. Morson, Gary Saul. Narrative and Freedom: The Shadows of Time. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994. Mortimer, Nigel. John Lydgate’s Fall of Princes: Narrative Tragedy in its Literary and Political Contexts. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2005. Mynors, R. A. B. “The Latin Classics Known to Boston of Bury.” Friz Saxl: A Volume of Memorial Essays, ed. D. J. Gordon. London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1957. 199–217. Nagel, Thomas. “Moral Luck.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 50 (Supp. 1976): 137–52; repr. in Mortal Questions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Nauta, Lodi. “ ‘Magis sit Platonicus quam Aristotelicus’: Interpretations of Boethius’s Platonism in the Consolatio Philosophiae from the Twelfth to the Seventeenth Century.” The Platonic Tradition in the Middle: A Doxographic Approach, ed. Stephen Gersh and Maarten J. F. M. Hoenen. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2002. 165–204. Nicholson, Peter. Love and Ethics in Gower’s Confessio Amantis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy and Other Writings, ed. Raymond Geuss and trans. Ronald Speirs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. ———. The Birth of Tragedy and the Genealogy of Morals, trans. Francis Golffing. New York: Doubleday, 1956. Noakes, Susan. “The Double Misreading of Paolo and Francesca.” Philological Quarterly 62 (1983): 221–39. Nolan, Barbara. “The Tale of Sir Gareth and the Tale of Sir Lancelot.” A Companion to Malory, ed. Elizabeth Archibald and A. S. G. Edwards. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2000. 153–81. Nolan, Maura. John Lydgate and the Making of Public Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. ———. “ ‘Now Wo, Now Gladnesse’: Ovidianism in the Fall of Princes.” ELH 71 (2004): 531–58. Nussbaum, Martha C. The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986. BIBLIOGRAPHY 179

Olsson, Kurt. “Natural Law and John Gower’s Confessio Amantis.” Medievalia et Humanistica n.s. 11 (1982): 229–61. Patch, Howard R. The Goddess Fortuna in Medieval Literature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927. Pearsall, Derek. “Criseyde’s Choices.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer, Proceedings No. 2 (1986): 17–29. ———. “Gower’s Latin in the Confessio Amantis.” Latin and Vernacular: Studies in Late-Medieval Texts and Manuscripts. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1989. 13–25. ———. John Lydgate. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970. ———. John Lydgate (1371–1449): A Bio-Bibliography. Victoria: University of Victoria, 1997. ———. The Life of Geoffrey Chaucer. Cambridge: Blackwell, 1992. ———. “Manuscripts and Illustrations of Gower’s Works.” A Companion to Gower, ed. Siân Echard. Woodbridge, Suffolk: D. S. Brewer, 2004. 73–97. Pelikan, Jaroslav. Eternal Feminines: Three Theological Allegories in Dante’s Paradiso. New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press, 1990. Petrina, Alessandra. Cultural Politics in Fifteenth-Century England: The Case of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Pitkin, Hanna F. Fortune Is a Woman: Gender and Politics in the Thought of Niccolo Machiavelli. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. Polt, Richard. “Ereignis.” A Companion to Heidegger, ed. Hubert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005. 375–91. Potts, Timothy C. Conscience in Medieval Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Purdie, Rhiannon. “Dice-Games and the Blasphemy of Prediction.” Medieval Futures: Attitudes to the Future in the Middle Ages, ed. J. A. Burrow and Ian P. Wei. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2000. 167–84. Radulescu, Raluca. The Gentry Context for Malory’s Morte Darthur. Woodbridge: D. S. Brewer, 2003. Reese, Gustave. Music in the Middle Ages. London: J. M. Dent & Sons, 1941. Reith, Gerda. The Age of Chance: Gambling in Western Culture. London: Routledge, 1999. Relihan, Joel C. Ancient Menippean Satire. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993. Renoir, Alain. The Poetry of John Lydgate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967. Rist, John M. Augustine: Ancient Thought Baptized. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. ———. “The End of Aristotle’s On Prayer.” American Journal of Philology 106.1 (1985): 110–13. Robbins, Harold. “Duns Scotus’ Theory of the Categories and of Meaning.” Ph. D. Diss. De Paul University, 1978. Robertson, D. W. A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspectives. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962. Robins, William. “Romance, Exemplum, and the Subject of the Confessio Amantis.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 19 (1997): 157–81. 180 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Robinson, David M. “The Wheel of Fortune.” Classical Philology 41.4 (1946): 207–16. Rohr, Christian. Der Theoderich-Panegyricus des Ennodius. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchh, 1995. Roth, Michael. The Poetics of Resistance: Heidegger’s Line. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1996. Rouse, Richard H. and Mary A. Rouse. “Ennodius in the Middle Ages: Adonics, Pseudo-Isidore, Cistercians, and the Schools.” Popes, Teachers, and Canon Law in the Middle Ages, ed. James Ross Sweeney and Stanley Chodorow. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989. 91–113. Runacres, Charles. “Art and Ethics in the ‘Exempla’ of Confessio Amantis.” Gower’s “Confessio Amantis”: Responses and Reassessments, ed. A. J. Minnis. Cambridge: 1983. 106–34. Sanderlin, George. “Usk’s Testament of Love and St. Anselm.” Speculum 17 (1942): 69–73. Saygin, Susanne. Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester (1390–1447) and the Italian Humanists. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Scanlon, Larry. Narrative, Authority, and Power: The Medieval Exemplum and the Chaucerian Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Scheler, Max. The Nature of Sympathy, trans. Peter Heath. Connecticut: Archon Books, 1970. Schirmer, Walter. John Lydgate: A Study in the Culture of the XVth Century. London: Methuen, 1961; Tubingen: Max Niemeyer, 1952. Schneewind, J. B. The Invention of Autonomy: A History of Modern Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Seaton, Ethel. Richard Roos, c. 1410–1482. London: Hart-Davis, 1961. Shanzer, Danuta. “Ennodius, Boethius, and the Date and Interpretation of Maximianus’s Elegia III.” Rivista di Filologia 111 (1983): 183–95. Sikka, Sonya. Forms of Transcendence: Heidegger and Medieval Mystical Theology. Albany: SUNY Press, 1997. Simpson, James. “Ethics and Interpretation: Reading Wills in Chaucer’s Legend of Good Women.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 20 (1998): 73–100. ———. The Oxford English Literary History, Volume 2, 1350–1547: Reform and Cultural Revolution. Oxford English Literary History Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Skeat, Walter W. The Chaucer Canon. New York: Haskell House, 1965. Spade, Paul Vincent. “Insolubilia.” The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Disintegration of Scholasticism, 1100 –1600, ed. Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 246–53. Spurgeon, Caroline F. E. Five Hundred Years of Chaucer Criticism and Allusion, 1357–1900, 3 vols. New York: Russell & Russell, 1960. Statman, Daniel, ed. Moral Luck. Albany: SUNY, 1993. Stevens, John. “The ‘Game of Love.’ ” Music and Poetry in the Early Tudor Court. London: Methuen, 1961. 154–202. Stones, Alison. “Illustrations and the Fortunes of Arthur.” The Fortunes of King Arthur, ed. Norris J. Lacy. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2005. 116–65. BIBLIOGRAPHY 181

Strohm, Paul. England’s Empty Throne: Usurpation and the Language of Legitimation, 1399–1422. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988. ———. “Politics and Poetics: Usk and Chaucer in the 1380s.” Literary Practice and Social Change in Britain, 1380–1530, ed. Lee Patterson. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. 83–112. ———. Politique: Languages of Statecraft between Chaucer and Shakespeare. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005. ———. “The Textual Vicissitudes of Usk’s ‘Appeal.’ ” Hochon’s Arrow: The Social Imagination of Fourteenth-Century Texts. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992. 145–60. Summit, Jennifer. “ ‘Stable in Study’: Lydgate’s Fall of Princes and Duke Humphrey’s Library.” John Lydgate: Poetry, Culture, and Lancastrian England, ed. Larry Scanlon and James Simpson. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006. 207–31. Taylor, Charles. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989. Thomson, Leslie. Fortune: “All Is but Fortune.” Washington, DC: University of Washington Press, 2000. Trinkaus, Charles. “Coluccio Salutati’s Critique of Astrology in the Context of His Natural Philosophy.” Speculum 64.1 (1989): 46–68. Turner, Marion. “ ‘Certaynly His Noble Sayenges Can I Not Amende’: Thomas Usk and Troilus and Criseyde.” Chaucer Review 37.1 (2002): 27–39 Ullman, B. L. “Manuscripts of Duke Humphrey of Gloucester.” English Historical Review 52 (1937): 670–72. Vickers, K. H. Humphrey Duke of Gloucester: A Biography. London: Archibald Constable, 1907. Wakelin, Daniel. Humanism, Reading, and English Literature: 1430–1530. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Wallace, David. Chaucerian Polity: Absolutist Lineages and Associational Forms in England and Italy. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997. Watt, Diane. Amoral Gower: Language, Sex, and Politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003. Watts, John. Henry VI and the Politics of Kingship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Westberg, Daniel. Right Practical Reason: Aristotle, Action, and Prudence in Aquinas. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994. Wetherbee, Winthrop. “John Gower.” The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature, ed. David Wallace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 589–609. ———. “Latin Structure and Vernacular Space: Gower, Chaucer and the Boethian Tradition.” Chaucer and Gower: Difference, Mutuality, Exchange, ed. Robert F. Yeager. Victoria: University of Victoria, 1991. 7–35. White, Hugh. Nature, Sex, and Goodness in a Medieval Literary Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Williams, Bernard. “Moral Luck.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 50 (Supp. 1976): 115–36; repr. in Moral Luck. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. 182 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Wilson, Von Gordon Anthony. “Good Fortune and the Eternity of the World: Henry of Ghent and John Duns Scotus,” Recherches de Théologie e Philosophie Médiévale 35.1 (1998): 40–51. ———. “Henry of Ghent’s Critique of Aristotle’s Conception of Good Fortune.” Franziskanische Studien 65 (1983): 241–51. Windeatt, Barry. Oxford Guides to Chaucer: Troilus and Criseyde. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992. Witmore, Michael. Culture of Accidents: Unexpected Knowledges in Early Modern England. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001. Zimmerman, Michael J. “Luck and Responsibility.” Ethics 97 (1987): 374–86. Žižek, Slavoj. “Courtly Love, or, Woman as Thing.” The Metastases of Enjoyment: Six Essays on Woman and Causality. London: Verso, 1994. 89–112. ———. For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment as a Political Factor. London: Verso, 1991. ———. “History Against Historicism.” European Journal of English Studies 4.2 (2000): 101–10. INDEX

accident, 5, 96, 113 Badiou, Alain, 13–14, 132 n20 and individuation, 14–16, 20–2 Bakhtin, M., 112 and intention, 119–21 Barthes, Roland, 156–7 n22 and usage, 133 n24 Bauman, Zygmunt, 27–8 see also adventure; contingency; Bible, 4–5, 72, 75, 81, 84, 102, 126, event; fortune 132 n17 adventure, 1, 8, 20, 28, 30, 32–4, 52, Blanchot, Maurice, 143–4 n35 111–14, 116, 122–4, 128–30 Bloomfield, Morton, 112 adventure-time, 112 Boccaccio, Giovanni, 1, 2, 27, 87, 96, Aers, David, 35–6 160–1 n18 affect, 6, 20–2, 31, 40, 45, 53, 55–6, Boethius, 5, 6, 12, 14–18, 22, 28, 57–61, 132 n20 47–9, 56–7, 140 n8 see also love Commentary on the “Isagoge,” 15 Agamben, Giorgio, 13, 25 Consolation of Philosophy, 14–15, agency, see under ethics 16–18, 47, 50–2, 53–4, 56, Alan of Lille, 72 87–90, 91, 93, 111–12, 124, Albertus Magnus, 13, 78 134 n14 Alliterative Morte Arthure, 114 De Trinitate, 15, 20 Amphion, 99, 161 n29 Greater Commentary on Aristotle’s anachronism, 11, 13–14, 25–6, “De interpretatione,” 21 141 n12 Bonaventure, 72, 78 Anselm, 57, 59, 60 Boniface VIII, 78–81, 84 Aquinas, Thomas, 9, 13, 19, 70, 72, Bowlin, John, 7 78, 85 Bracciolini, Poggio, 105 Commentary on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, 19 Caesar, 90, 104–8 Summa Theologiae, 19, 58, 72, 120 Caputo, John, 31–2 Aristotle, 19–20, 52, 57–9, 60, 69–70, Caxton, William, 129–30 157 n22 Chaucer, Geoffrey, 62, 63, 65, 66, Liber de bona fortuna, 19–20, 57–9, 85, 91, 96, 97, 99, 101, 104, 109, 136 n21, 151 n43 141 n13, 159 n43, 160 n14 Nicomachean Ethics, 19, 134–5 n15 Troilus and Criseyde, 5, 8, 27–46, Auerbach, Erich, 112, 113–14 47–9, 51–3, 55, 60–1, 62, 63–4, Augustine, St., 11–12, 59, 70, 120 133 n24, 161 n19 184 INDEX

Chaunce of the Dyse, The, 8–9, 61–7 ethics Chrétien de Troyes, 113, 115, and agency, 5–6, 7, 29–32, 33, 143 n25 41–2, 44, 57–61, 70, 77–8, 122–9 Cicero, 13, 90, 98–9, 104–9, 153 n58 class ethics, 114–15, 123 Cohen, Jeffrey J., 3 conscience, 77–81, 85, 127 conscience, see under ethics desire and need, 32–3, 40, 45, contingency 145 n52 and causality, 6 free will, 30, 42 and the ethical relation, 32, 45–6 and givenness, 2, 5, 15, 24, 42, 58, future contingency, 52, 53–4 60, 114, 129, 146 n55 and knowledge, 12–13, 36–7, 127, Heidegger’s ethik, 24, 138 n44 143–4 n35 intentionality, 118, 119–20, 128–9 and love, 28, 42–3, 54, 57, 60–1 involuntary homicide, 120 and plot, 112–13, 122 mens rea, 9, 121 and the political, 36, 89–90, 114 moral autonomy, 27–32 and rhetoric, 69, 88, 90, 91–6, Moralität, 24 100, 102 and morality, 24 see also accident; adventure; event; moral luck, 5, 9, 115, 120–1, 126, individuation; fortune 127, 128–9, 165 n21 Copeland, Rita, 76, 99 natural law, 70, 71–8 courtly love, 8, 29, 32–3, 37–41, and politics, 34 45–6, 141 n12, 146 n54 responsibility, 5, 28, 31, 33, 37, 43, Critchley, Simon, 42, 145 n46 65, 84, 88, 120, 125–6 and risk, 27–8, 30, 44, 46, 61, Dante, 1, 5, 31, 32, 52, 54, 67, 81, 109 111–12 Dastur, François, 2 secular ethics, 8, 70–1, 83 Davis, Isabel, 54 Sittlichkeit, 8, 24 death, 27–8, 50 and sociality, 39 de Beauvoir, Simone, 38 the third party, 45–6 Deleuze, Gilles, 3, 4, 13, 25, 29, vernacular ethics, 9, 56–7, 71–86 40, 96 virtue, 7, 19 Derrida, Jacques, 4, 6, 13, 32, 95, 103, event, 2–5, 6 139 n48 and anamorphosis, 4 differend, 90, 96, 143–4 n35 and appearance, 139 n49 Docherty, Thomas, 25, 143–4 n35 and art, 25–6 Dronke, Peter, 146 n54 das Ereignis, 24–5, 138 n42 Duns Scotus, John, 14, 20–2, 23–4, and discourse, 75, 96, 101 25, 59–60, 70 and ethics, 5–6 and history, 26, 36, 95–6, 143 n35 Ebin, Lois, 99 and love, 5–6, 27–46, 132 n20 Edwards, Elizabeth, 112–13, the perhaps, 32 121–2, 128 and temporality, 13–14, 24, 25, 54, Ennodius, 48, 147 n5 95, 112, 126 epideixis, 97, 99 theories of, 2, 4, 8, 13–14, 22, 24, eternal feminine, 32, 142 n21 25–6 INDEX 185

see also adventure; contingency; Confessio Amantis, 2, 28, 49, 67, fidelity; fortune; singularity; 69–86, 98, 99, 101, 103 probability “De lucis scrutinio,” 159 n46 exteriority, 31, 32, 54, 61, 123, 129 Mirour de l’Omme, 75, 85, 159 n46 “O deus immense,” 83 fidelity, 13–14, 22, 25, 132 n20 Vox Clamantis, 4, 75, 82, 85–6, fortune 159 n45 and n46 etymology of, 2 Gracia, Jorge, 15 and fame, 85, 91, 160 n12 Griffiths, R. A., 107 gifts of, 2, 5, 11, 14–16, 28, 87–90 Grosseteste, Robert, 19 and history, 6–7, 9, 35–6, 87, 93, Gurevich, A. J., 112 94, 95 and ideology, 6, 35–6, 112–15 haecceitas, 21–2, 23, 24, 25, 59, 115 inner promptings of, 58–9 see also Duns Scotus; individuation; and love, 27–32, 50–3, 55, 60–1 singularity and Occasio, 115 Hardman, Phillipa, 51 and periodization, 6–7 H. D., 140 personifications of, 1, 3, 4, 11–12, Heidegger, Martin, 13, 14, 22–4, 25, 14, 87–96, 115 31, 145 n49 and providence, 4–5, 7, 11–13, Heller-Roazen, Daniel, 7–8 17–18, 58–9, 93, 124 Henry IV, 83 and reason, 2, 5, 6, 20, 58–60, 89, Henry V, 105–6 114, 151 n34 Henry VI, 105, 106–8 remedies for, 92 Henry of Ghent, 58–9 and rhetoric, 88, 90, 91–6, 100, 102 Hoccleve, Thomas, 92 and vice, 79, 81–2 Hodges, Kenneth, 164 n19 Wheel of Fortune, 3, 16, 28, 36, Holsinger, Bruce, xiii 82, 92 Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, 88, and will, 82–3 89, 90, 93, 104–9, 163 n51 see also accident; adventure; contingency; event individuation, 15–16, 20–2, 23, 129 fortune-telling games, 8–9, 61–7, see also accident; haecceitas; 152 n53, 153 n54 singularity Foucault, Michel, 26, 87, 139 n53 insolubilia, 103 Fradenburg, L. O. Aranye, 28 intentionality, see under ethics Freud, Sigmund, 37 Irigaray, Luce, 38, 145 n47 Isidore of Seville, 153 n58 Gadamer, Hans-Georg, 25–6, 139 n52 Galloway, Andrew, 71, 75 Joyce, James, 5, 11 Gaunt, Simon, 38, 143 n25 gender, 7, 9, 29, 33, 35, 37–8, 45, 64, Kay, Sarah, 38, 146 n67 111–12, 113, 146 n67, 153 n54, Kennedy, Beverly, 121, 127 165 n21 Gillespie, Vincent, 48 Lacan, Jacques, 29, 37–8, 44 Gower, John, 9, 69–86 Langland, William, 55 186 INDEX

Latini, Brunetto, 98, 99–100 moral luck, see under morality Levinas, Emmanuel, 8, 29, 31–3, Morson, Gary Saul, 111 38, 39–40, 43–6, 143–4 n35, Mort Artu, 114 145 n52 Mortimer, Nigel, 89, 105, 108, Lezra, Jacques, 133 n24 163 n51 Liber de bona fortuna, see under Aristotle Lombard, Peter, 72 Nagel, Thomas, 165 n21 love, 5–6, 27–46, 48, 50–3, 53–4, New Historicism, 36, 143 n34 55–6, 60–1, 132 n20 Nietzsche, Friedrich, 6 see also affect Nolan, Barbara, 113, 115 Lydgate, John, 9 Nolan, Maura, 89, 105 Churl and the Bird, 101–3 Nussbaum, Martha, 53 Consulo Quisquis Eris, 100 Fall of Princes, 2, 87–100, 104–9 Olsson, Kurt, 72 Isopes Fabules, 100 Orpheus, 51–2, 109 Ryme Without Accord, 101 Ovid, 109 Serpent of Division, 105–6, 162 n39 Troy Book, 97, 161 n19 parergon, 103 Lyotard, François, 4, 90, 144 n35 Patch, Howard, 115, 131 n9 Paul, St., 72 Macaulay, G. C., 81 Pearsall, Derek, 49, 100, 144 n36, Machaut, Guillaume de, 28, 47, 146 n60 49, 67 Peck, Russell, 73 Machiavelli, 7 periodization, 6–7 Malory, Thomas, 2, 9, 111–30 Petrarch, Francesco, 1, 31, 97, 104, Mann, Jill, 41, 43, 45–6, 112, 109, 160 n12 123, 129 Petrina, Alessandra, 108, 162 n40 Marquard, Odo, 1, 5 Philip the Chancellor, 77–8, 85 masculinity, see gender Pierce, C. S., 22 Maximianus, 48, 148 n8 Piero del Monte, 105 McAlpine, Monica, 37, 41 Pindar, 53, 55 McGrath, S. J., 23 Pitkin, Hanna F., 7 Medcalf, Stephen, 56 plant analogy, 52–3, 54–5, 149 n21 medievalism, 22–3, 25, 29, 141 n12 Pocock, J. G. A., 7 Meyer-Lee, Robert, 97, 107 Premierfait, Laurent de, 87 Miller, Mark, 141 n13 Des Cas de nobles hommes et femmes, Minnis, A. J., 57 87, 92, 97, 159 n3 Montaigne, Michel de, 7 probability, 65–7, 153 n57 morality profanation, 39–41, 44–5 moral essentialism, 113 Moralität, 24 Ragman Roll, 62, 153 n54 moral luck, 5, 9, 115, 120–1, 126, Reith, Gerda, 7 127, 128–9, 165 n21 rhetoric, 1, 9, 16, 69, 71, 77, 98–101, moral murmur, 78, 80, 84–6 134 n14 see also ethics see also under fortune INDEX 187

Richard II, 83 time, see contingency; event; fortune Rist, John, 19 tragedy, 6, 28–9, 51, 88–9, 89–90, Rochefoucauld, Duc De La, 1 125, 127–9 Roman de la Rose, 28 Twain, Mark, 114 Runacres, Charles, 79 Usk, Thomas, 8, 53–61 Salutati, Coluccio, 151 n43 vernacular, 8, 9, 56, 69, 71, 75–7, 79, Saygin, Susanne, 105 85–6, 99 Scanlon, Larry, 36, 76, 79 see also under ethics Scheler, Max, 45 Simpson, James, 160 n14 Wallace, David, 109, 163 n54 singularity, 3, 8, 21, 23–5, 59 Watt, Diane, 76–7 see also event; haecceitas; Watts, John, 107 individuation Wetherbee, Winthrop, 76 sociality, 39, 61, 145 n49 White, Hugh, 72 sortes biblicae, 63 Williams, Bernard, 9, 165 n21 Strohm, Paul, 7, 54, 82, 89, 92, 100 Witmore, Michael, 96, 133 n24 Suite du Merlin, 114, 122–3, 125–6, 127 Summit, Jennifer, 106 Žižek, Slavoj, 141 n12, 143 n35