CHAUCER'S T-ROILUS AND CRISEYDE A DRAMATIC INTERPRETATION OF THE "DOUBLE TRUTH" THEORY FRANCIS CUTHBERT PARKINSON B.A., University of British Columbia, I960 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of ENGLISH We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1962 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed v/ithout my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia, Vancouver 8, Canada. Date iii ABSTRACT The contention of the thesis is that Chaucer's approach to the story of Troilus and Criseyde was deter• mined by a wish to examine pragmatically the essential value of courtly love as a way of life and that he used the Troilus as a poetic vehicle for this examination. Furthermore it is maintained that his view of courtly love would be conditioned by the current philosophical theory of the "double truth"—that a thing may be true according to reason but false according to religion. The code of courtly love had been condemned by the Church as being opposed to Christian morality, but extolled by many writers, especially Andreas Capellanus, as being not only in harmony with natural morality but even the summum bonum of life. In Troilus and Criseyde Chaucer is speculating on the validity of the latter position, which constituted a commonly recognized example of one aspect of a double truth. If this hypothesis can be substantiated it is reasonable to hope that it may shed light on the major critical problems of the Troilus, specifically the rele• vancy of Troilus's speech on free will, the apparent inconsistency in Criseyde's actions and the artistic iv value of the epilogue. To establish the hypothesis the thesis presents evidence of the prevalence of the Averroistic system of thought from which sprang the theory of the two truths and of Chaucer's undoubted awareness of this philosophical position. Textual evidence is then introduced to show that Chaucer intended to deal specifically with courtly love as a rational and complete way of life and examine its conse• quences in the dramatic unfolding of the story. He deve• loped courtly love into a way of life by making it a quasi-religion. From this arises the relevancy of Troilus's speech on free will: it is a commentary on the determinism implicit in this religion. The major characters in the poem are then considered. Taken together the dramatic roles of the male protagonists are seen to exemplify a comprehensive, tri-partite view of courtly love—idealistic, sensual and light-hearted—none of which proves eventually productive of lasting happiness. Criseyde*s character, flawed by her fear of scandal, is a crux in the tragedy. Her insistence that the courtly commandment of secrecy be kept is responsible for the lovers' separation. Hence the demands of the code of love are responsible for the tragedy, and Criseyde's betrayal is consistent with the timidity of character she continually displays. Finally the epilogue is seen as a summary of the V findings of Chaucer's philosophical experiment in fiction. Troilus's final enlightenment expresses the conclusion of the author: that courtly love is a false happiness not only on religious grounds hut also on rational and prag• matic ones. The theory of double truth has thus been dramatically shown to be inapplicable to the defense of courtly love as a way of life. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introductory: The Scope of the Thesis 1 II. The Philosophical Problem: The Doctrine of the "Double Truth" a. Its Currency 11 b. Its Influence on Chaucer 15 III. The Poem as a Philosophical Quest a. Chaucer Expresses his Intentions 25 b. Courtly Love as One Side of a "Double Truth" 30 c. Courtly Love as a Rational Way of Life 37 d. Philosophic and Poetic Aspects of Troilus's Free Will Speech 52 IV. The Dramatic Representation of Courtly Love as a Rational Way of Life a. Troilus, Diomede and Pandarus Personify Three Complementary Aspects of Courtly Love 58 b. Criseyde Personifies the Rational Approach to Courtly Love 71 c. Criseyde's Actions Reflect a Consistent Approach to Courtly Love 74- V. The Epilogue, The Conclusion of the Quest: The Repudiation of the Truth of Courtly Love 92 I INTRODUCTORY: THE SCOPE OF THE THESIS "That thow be understonde, God I bisechei" Chaucer's plea at the close of his "litel tragedye" seems to have gone largely unheard. Of all his works Troilus and Criseyde seems to be the one which calls forth the greatest diversity of opinion. This thesis is an attempt to resolve some of the major differences in inter• pretation by examining the text in the light of the philo• sophical problems which we may reasonably assume Chaucer was concerned with. Some defence must be given for this approach, for there seem to be two conflicting opinions as to its validity. Paul Baum, for instance, considers that the search for "profound, latent philosophical meanings"^ is a critical aberration, that the critic should confine himself to a detailed examination and exposition of the text. While this limitation of criticism may perhaps appear desirably scientific in that it provides a salutary check on the imagination, it also has the drawback that to ignore Chaucer: A Critical Appreciation (Durham, N. C: Duke University Press, 1958), p. viii. 2 the "latent philosophical meanings" of a piece of literature is to run, if that piece has such meanings, a grave risk of misunderstanding its essential message. To give but one example, it would in many works totally destroy our appreci• ation of their very raison d'etre, since without any speculation based on evidence outside of the text we would have to interpret them on the simplest factual level. Thus Gulliver's Travels would be merely an interesting and ingenious fantasy instead of the bitter commentary on society that Swift intended it to be. In apparent opposition to this strictly textual approach is one advocated by Professor Patch: Surely it is a safe principle in criticizing a great work of art to assume that the interpretation in harmony with all the parts of the poem is the one nearest to the intention of the author. Another good principle to assume is that a great artist knows what he is about, and that he has a right to be understood on his own terms.2 This Occam's Razor of literary criticism is the underlying assumption of this paper and its justification, for if we accept the fact, nowhere stated by Chaucer, that he was aware of and concerned with the philosophical theory of the "double truth," the major critical problems created by the Troilus may have a new light shed upon them. These problems may be appropriately mentioned here. First, as regards the epilogue, is it artistically relevant "Troilus on Determinism," Speculum. VI (1931), 225-43. 3 or intellectually sincere? Is it "a clashing discord"^ which "does not illumine or modify" hut contradicts?^ Is it true to say that it is the "grossest instance of the failure on the part of Chaucer to comply with the require• ments of his art", that it "utterly interferes with the movement of the story" that it is "tacked to it "by the flimsiest of fastenings"?- Or is Kittredge correct when he says, "At the end of the poem the great sympathetic ironist drops his mask and we find that he has once more heen studying human life from the point of view of a ruling passion and that he has no solution except to repudiate the unmoral and unsocial system which he has pretended to up- hold."? Or, as is quite possible, is neither view either wholly or partially correct? The second major area of disagreement is Troilus's speech on the existence of free choice (IV, 958-1078). At a moment highly charged with the anguish and fear of the impending separation of the lovers Troilus gives a long, intellectual and tightly organized speech on predetermination. PJ. S. P. Tatlock, "The People in Chaucer's Troilus." PMLA. LVI (194-1), p. 86. 4J. S. P. Tatlock, "The Epilogue of Chaucer's Troilus." MP, 18 (1921), p. 146. ^T. R. Lounsbury, Studies in Chaucer (3 vols.; New York: Harper, 1892), Vol. 3, p. W. G. L. Kittredge, Chaucer and His Poetry (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955), P» 14-3• 4 Representing probably the majority opinion, Baum thinks it 7 is "artistically a blemish,"' while Patch defends it on the grounds that it is a perfectly normal emotional outburst from a young man who feels that fate has conspired to rob him of his beloved and in circumstances in which he feels 8 powerless to act. Is there a third interpretation that may resolve these contradictory solutions: A third problem is whether Chaucer intended Criseyde*s character to be static or developing, whether the tragedy is due in large part to her character or whether the author had to change her character to make it consonant with the tragedy. C. S. Lewis sees her character as consis• tent, maintaining that the dominant and subsisting quality in Criseyde's make-up is fear, and that it is fear of loneliness which leads first of all to her loving Troilus Q and then to her rejecting him for Diomede.