never mind this link: it's obligatory if I want to view my statistics...

THE BATTLE OF MALDON

CHAUCER’S WIFE OF BATH

SHAKESPEARE’S SONNET 20

 

>If I violate any right by placing this on the internet, let me know and I will remove it at once.<

>If you like to use this, you are free to do so, but please let me know: I have put a lot of work in this.<

>If you have any comment, you can mail me too.<

>Klaas.calcoen@student.kulak.ac.be<

 

Part 1: The Battle of Maldon

 

In General

The original manuscript of The Battle of Maldon was lost in the Cottonian fire of 1731 (the same that destroyed Beowulf), but fortunately a copy had been made of it.  The beginning and the end were already missing before it was copied, but it is believed that no important part has been lost.

On August 10th (or 11th), 991, on the southern bank of the River Blackwater, below Maldon[1], Essex (see map p.5), the Anglo-Saxon leader Byrhtnoth[2] fought and lost a battle against Anlaf and his Vikings.  The Danes had sailed up the estuary of the River Blackwater and were encamped on Northey Island, which is linked to the mainland by a causeway in the middle of the salt marshes. This causeway - no more than eight feet wide at most - is only accessible at low tide (see photographs p.4).  The Vikings demanded tribute in exchange for their leaving but Byrhtnoth refused.  Then the Vikings tried to come across the narrow causeway, which could be defended by only a few men.  Realising that their attempt was bound to fail, the Vikings tried to convince Byrhtnoth to allow them safe passage so that the armies might fight fairly.  It is at this point that Byrhtnoth is often criticised (cf. infra: ‘Ofermode’?), as he allows them to cross (and thus allows them to slaughter the Anglo-Saxon army).  Soon after the battle started, Byrhtnoth was killed, while attacking the heathen.  Some men fled cowardly and a lot of the Anglo-Saxon warriors, believing their leader had fled, lost morale and the battle would soon end in the slaughter of the Anglo-Saxon army.  Nevertheless Byrhtnoth’s personal men fought to the bitter end and avenged the death of their leader (cf. infra: The Heroic Code).

 

 

‘Ofermode’?

Was Byrhtnoth suffering of too much pride or impetuousness? Some people think he was, and the poet seems to be one of them, for he gives Byrhtnoth the quality of ‘ofermode’.  Not only did he fight against an army that was according to some sources much bigger[3] or much better organised[4] than the Anglo-Saxon party – this cannot be found in the text itself – but he also allows the Danes to cross.

The latter act was not only made in the interest of fair play: if Byrhtnoth had not allowed the Danes to cross, they might have sailed away and ravaged another part of Essex as it is very unlikely that the Vikings would have held the battle on the causeway in such a vulnerable position.  So Byrhtnoth fulfilled his duty as a defender of the kingdom (cf. infra The Heroic Code).

 

 

Glorified vs. Historical

There is no doubt that the battle actually took place, but it is doubted whether or not the poem truly represents the events of that day. 

Some sources[5] claim that the poem was written shortly after the battle by one who knew the men of Maldon and that he may have been a participant in the battle but other sources[6] claim that the poem was written years after the battle took place. The evidence given is not only concerned with the language used – the usage of the term eorl (used from the reign of Cnut 1016-35) instead of the earlier Old English ealdorman - but it is also put forward that the Vita Oswaldi[7] – in which the events of August 10^th, 991 also occur - served as a source for the poet.  All major details except one occur in the poem: some people see in this an indication that the author of The Battle of Maldon used the Vita Oswaldi as a source but in fact this does not furnish any proof.  The fact that more details are given in The Vita Oswaldi doesn’t exclude the possibility that The Battle of Maldon was written before The Vita Oswaldi and even that the author of The Vita Oswaldi may or may not[8] have used The Battle of Maldon (or another text with the same or a common source) as a source.  Since no sound arguments can be given and since there is nothing in the language or style at odds with composition within a few years after the battle, the poem is regarded as contemporary, until safe evidence of a later date is produced.

All sources agree that The Battle of Maldon is not historically reliable. The poet had to abide by to the expectations of his time and thus portray Byrhtnoth as one who fights bravely, is killed by the heathen Danes and avenged by his retainers who die beside their lord.

The critique on Byrhtnoth (cf. supra: ‘Ofermode’?) is no counterargument: the poet seems to think that the battle ended in disaster because of Birhtnoth’s pride, but such a failure remains heroic and thus acceptable in a poem like this.

Maybe The Battle of Maldon was intended to be an inspirational work for an oppressed people.  We may not forget that the battle of Maldon was only one minor event in a series of attacks.  The poem may have been meant as a message to raise the people’s spirits and giving them an example of how they should behave.  In this interpretation we can see Godric and his brothers, who cowardly fled from the battle, as the representation of the Anglo-Saxons who preferred to pay tribute rather than to fight.

Historically the battle was of no major importance (some people believe that it might have been[9]) but it surely was a typical one. The major value of the text is thus that it shows us, next to the report of the death of a distinguished leader, the heroic code of the Anglo-Saxons.

 

The Heroic Code

The strongest motive in a Germanic society was the absolute loyalty to one’s lord. The Anglo-Saxon warriors fulfil their boast, avenge their dead lord and die beside him.  Love of their land and king reinforces their sense of duty to their lord.  But the latter is still the most important.  This sense of loyalty also applies to Byrhtnoth: he does not only fulfil his duty to his people, but also to his lord, King Aethelred.

As Christianity had become important in the Anglo-Saxon society at that time, they also have the ideal of fighting (to the death) against the pagan Vikings.

Next to these big and important motives we find another quality: the fair play, which was the honourable flaw of Byrhtnoth…

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>If I violate any right by placing this on the internet, let me know and I will remove it at once.<

>If you like to use this, you are free to do so, but please let me know: I have put a lot of work in this.<

>If you have any comment, you can mail me too.<

>Klaas.calcoen@student.kulak.ac.be<

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Part 2: Chaucer’s The Wife of Bath

1. Geoffrey Chaucer

His Life

“Chaucer's forebears for at least four generations were middle-class English people whose connection with London and the court had steadily increased.  John Chaucer, his father, was an important London vintner and a deputy to the king's butler; in 1338 he was a member of Edward III's expedition to Antwerp, and he owned property in Ipswich, in the county of Suffolk, and in London.  He died in 1366 or 1367 at the age of 53.  The name Chaucer is derived from the French word chaussier, meaning a maker of footwear.  The family's financial success derived from wine and leather.

Although c. 1340 is customarily given as Chaucer's birth date, 1342 or 1343 is probably a closer guess.  No information exists concerning his early education, although doubtless he would have been as fluent in French as in the Middle English of his time.  He also became competent in Latin and Italian.  His writings show his close familiarity with many important books of his time and of earlier times.” (E. Br.)[10]

Chaucer’s first employment was that of a page in service of Elizabeth, countess of Ulster and daughter-in-law of King Edward III[11];.  It is in this occupation that he first appears in the records.  In 1359, he joined an expeditionary army to France, was taken prisoner during the unsuccessful siege of Reims and he was ransomed by the king himself.  In 1366 Chaucer went to Spain on a diplomatic mission. By the same year he had married lady Philippa Pan, who was linked with the court as her sister was the third wife of John of Gaunt[12].  He kept on rising in the favour of the king.  In 1367 he received a royal pension for life.  In 1369 he was on military service in France, in 1372-1373 he was on a diplomatic mission in Italy and in 1376-1377 he was sent on secret service to Flanders.  In 1374 he became controller in the Port of London.

In 1378 he was a member of embassies in France and Lombardy.  He continued to work at the Customs House until 1386. In August of the same year he became knight of the shire of Kent to attend Parliament in October.  At that time Richard II[13] was in power and although he continued showing favours to Chaucer, as did Edward III, it was John of Gaunt who was his patron.  When in 1386 a group led by Thomas of Woodstock[14] had taken over power from both Richard II and John of Gaunt, a lot of officeholders appointed by the king were dismissed and the same thing may have  happened to Chaucer[15]. Chaucer’s wife died in 1386 or in 1387.  In 1389 Richard II regained control and Chaucer was favoured again: he became Clerk of the King’s Works[16]. This appointment lasted only two years and he was robbed several times and beaten once.  In 1391 he became subforester of the king’s park in North Petherton, Somerset and he kept the job until he died.

He received a small pension from Richard II, which was increased by Henry IV[17] when he became king.  Chaucer died on October 25, 1400 in Westminster and he was buried in what was to become Poet’s Corner in Westminster Abbey.

Chaucer probably had two sons and two daughters but he does not seem to have descendants living after the 15^th century.

 

His Works

Chaucer’s first poem was on the death of Blanche, wife of John of Gaunt: Book of the Duchess (in dream-vision form).  From that time on, he kept on writing.  In the 1380s he wrote Hous of Fame which is also in dream-vision form and remained unfinished.  It has no unity but it shows us the advancing skills of Chaucer as a poet.  The next long poem is Parlement of Foules, which is a dream-vision for St. Valentine’s Day in which the narrator searches for the values of various kinds of love.  Also during the 1380s he wrote Troilus and Criseyde which is sometimes considered as his best work.  It is about love but also - under the influence of Boethius – about free will vs. determinism. His last poem was Legend of Good Women, which exists in two versions.  It contains a prologue and nine stories.  The god of love is angry because Chaucer had earlier written about so many women who betrayed men.  As a kind of punishment Chaucer must now write about good women. 

In 1385 he was allowed a deputy and thus he had more time for writing.  It is significant that in 1386 he began to work seriously on The Canterbury Tales, although some of the stories in it had already been written.

His shorter poems were: Anelida and Arcite (unfinished); Complaint of Chaucer to his Empty Purse, Lines to Adam Scriven (his clerck),  Truth, Fortune and Gentilesse and letters in verse to Henry Scogan and to Buxton. 

Chaucer has also written prose: The Consolation of Philosophy (translation from Boethius' De consolatione philosophiae) and Treatise on the Astrolabe.

 

His age

The age of Chaucer was dominated by two events: The Hundred Years’ War and the Black Death, but also by religion.

The Hundred Years’ War[18] was the first war for England that was a national one.  Before the fourteenth century, wars were usually family affairs.  Lords collected Knights and other men bound to them by feudality.  The Hundred Years’ War was a much bigger one with a large number of soldiers that were paid to fight.  This meant in fact the end of chivalry.

The effect of the Black Death was even bigger.  There were at least three outbreaks of the plague between 1347 and 1350 and at least one third of the population died.  Because of the shortage of labourers, people could demand higher wages and this ended in the Peasants’ Revolt[19] of 1381.  The rarity value of the labourers also implied changes in the feudal system and even the end of it, as lords leased their land to tenant-farmers to avoid difficulties with their labourers.  Another change was that of culture: landlords began to breed sheep for wool and meat.  More profit could be made out of lands and fewer labourers were needed.  Wool was sold and even exported and thus a new class of people appeared: merchants and middlemen.  Of course merchants and shipmen etc. existed already before, but now they became important to the social and economic life.

Another important element is the Church.  Since King John in the 13^th century, there had been a strong feeling against the Roman Catholic Church.  The settlement of the Pope in France, the schism and the excessive richness of the friars brought down the standing of the Church.  Chaucer, in opposition to Wycliff and his Lollards, did not write openly about this matter, but his opinions are revealed through his usage of irony when describing clergypeople; Chaucer was a poet and not a reformer.

The changing of social, moral and religious standards in the age of Chaucer provided the poet with interesting material for his Canterbury Tales: a lot of his pilgrims were rascals and/or belonged to a new social group.

 

Posthumous reputation

Chaucer’s contemporaries praised his artistry and in the 15^th century a school of epigones imitated his poetry.  In the succeeding centuries, The Canterbury Tales but also his other poems, have been widely read, translated and since the 19^th century more and more studied.

 

2. The Canterbury Tales

The tradition

Eighty-five manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales have survived, of which fifty-five contain a reasonably complete version of the work.  This is a clear indication of its popularity in late medieval England.  It was, in 1478, one of the first works in English that was printed; it was printed twice by William Caxton[20] and often reprinted by his successors.  Many of the versions differ radically in the order of the tales, but the order of the Ellesmere manuscript (p17-18) is considered as the most nearly satisfactory.

 

The Greatness

The Canterbury Tales is Chaucer’s masterpiece, but why is it of such greatness?  It was not because of his idea to write a series of stories related by different members of a group.  In England the poet Gower[21] was doing the same in his Confessio Amantis and although it is not sure that Chaucer read Boccaccio’s[22] Il Decamerone and Serambi’s Novelle, he must have heard of it.  But Chaucer used the technique of the frame story in a different way: Gower’s and Serambi’s stories were all told by the same narrator and Boccaccio’s characters belonged to the same social class and were of the same age. 

Chaucer stressed mobility more than Boccaccio, whose characters stayed in the same place, and more than Scerambi, whose characters wander, but only tell stories at night when they have stopped; the on-the-road telling of stories, as was Chaucer’s frame, is in fact less realistic.  Mobility, both geographic and social, is a key motif in The Canterbury Tales, just as it was in the changing social and economic standards of Chaucer’s age.

Chaucer collected men and women of different ages and social classes, whom he made tell a story.  He intended to give each pilgrim a story which was typical for him or her, but this is not always the case: he had written several stories before he started writing The Canterbury Tales and he wanted to use them anyway.  Chaucer did not only give us a collection of stories and a collection of people, but he linked the stories by having the characters argue and insult each other.  By doing so, Chaucer makes the frame story grow in relation to the tales themselves. The tales of the Reeve and the Miller are a well-known example of this relation between tales and between the frame story and the tales.

The use of a frame story also allowed Chaucer to use a lot of literary genres: courtly romance, fabliau, saint’s life, allegorical tale, beast fable, sermon,… and mixtures of these genres.

The next element of greatness lies in Chaucer’s observation and description, especially in the prologues.  Chaucer recorded all the possible details of his characters, from warts over ears to hair and teeth.

Another element of greatness lies in Chaucer’s use of irony and sarcasm.  The Prologue of The Wife of Bath can be seen as one large joke, but in fact it is anything but to laugh at.  (For more irony in The Wife of Bath cf. infra 5. The Wife of Bath’s Tale, Dramatic Irony.)

Chaucer used the French rhymed ten-syllable couplets in an outstanding way.  He added musicality to the rhymescheme by avoiding monotony by occasionally using a spondee (two equal syllables) instead of a iambus (long-short), by adding a syllable or by shifting the caesura to a different position. 

 

The Structure

The Canterbury Tales starts with the General Prologue.  A group of around 30 pilgrims gather at the Tabard Inn in Southwark.  They hold a storytelling contest as they are travelling on horseback to the shrine of Thomas Beckett[23] in Canterbury, Kent.  Harry Bailly, host of the Tabard, serves as master of ceremonies for the contest.  The pilgrims are introduced by vivid descriptions in this General Prologue. 

Then follow The Knight's Tale, The Miller's Tale, The Reeve's Tale, The Cook's Tale, The Man of Law's Tale, The Wife of Bath's Tale, The Friar's Tale, The Summoner's Tale, The Clerk's Tale, The Merchant's Tale, The Squire's Tale, The Franklin's Tale, The Second Nun's Tale, The Canon's Yeoman's Tale, The Physician's Tale, The Pardoner's Tale, The Shipman's Tale, The Prioress's Tale, The Tale of Sir Thopas and The Tale of Melibeus (Chaucer's contributions to the tales told by his fellow-pilgrims, the latter in prose), The Monk's Tale, The Nun's Priest's Tale, The Manciple's Tale and The Parson's Tale (in prose).  Between the 24 stories we find short dramatic scenes (links), wich usually involve the host and one or more pilgims. The Canterbury Tales ends with Chaucer's Retraction, in which he ask forgiveness for his writings that concern ‘wordly vanities’, and remembrance for his translation of the Consolation and his other moral and religious works. 

Chaucer did not complete the full plan of the book: the return journey from Canterbury is not included and some of the pilgrims do not tell their stories.

 

3. The General Prologue (447-478) about the wife of Bath

The Wife of Bath has been married five times and is looking for a sixth husband (see her prologue).  The Church is never simply a place of worship for her.  It’s an opportunity to display her standing and to watch men (see her prologue).  Pilgrimage provided her with the opportunity for travelling and meeting people.  She has been three times to Jerusalem, once to Rome, Boulogne-sur-mer, Cologne and Compostella.  The Church knew very well that excessive travelling kept people away from the essence of a pilgrimage.  The wife is clearly a robust and adventurous women because such journeys were hard and dangerous.  The wife is deaf (why she is, is explained in her prologue).

Clothing is a way of characterising that is used a lot. In literature, as in our daily life, we judge people by the way they dress.  The description of the clothes gives us concrete details and comment on those wearing them.  The Wife of Bath’s personality is mainly defined through her clothes and their colour.  “She is of the sort that to achieve distinction outdoes the fashions.”[24]  “Her scarlet stockings, huge hat and cascade of wimples suggest (…) her extrovert and sensuous character, (…) [and] her class.  [She’s] rich, passionate and worldly. “[25]

Physical details also reveal a great deal about the characters.  The wife of Bath is vividly characterized through her body.  In her prologue, she herself calls the gaps between her teeth a sign of her amorous nature.  She has broad hips and a rubicund face.  When Chaucer emphasises these details, it tells us a lot about how he wishes us to evaluate her.  Chaucer clearly loved her vigorous, extrovert and sociable nature.

The Wife of Bath is not characterised through her profession, because it is of no importance in her case, although it is mentioned that she is a weaver.  More important is the fact that she has had five husbands.  This tells us more about her than her profession could.

 

4. The Wife of Bath’s Prologue

Summary

“The Wife of Bath believes in experience over authority, and since she has been married five times, she certainly considers herself an authority”[26] on marriage and sex.

She (ab)uses several biblical passages that cite marriage - and thus also sex - as the right thing to do.  If virginity is commanded, she believes, then why do we have genitals?

The Wife goes on to talk about her five husbands. The first three were old and died before she could gain control over them.  The fourth one also died, but she gained control over him.  She met her fifth husband, Jankyn, while burying the fourth. He was a clerk, who appeared more interested in his books than his wife, and this upset her. During one of their arguments, the wife and Jankyn fought, and she pretended to be dead. Upset over her death, he promised anything to bring her back to life.  This is how she took control over her fifth husband.

 

Characterisation

“The Wife of Bath's Prologue is in the genre (…) of the apologia, an explanation and defence of one's occupation and life (…) [- in her case, love life.] (…) [The wife of Bath] explains the tricks of her trade and defends a life style that might be shocking if it were not presented with such energy and (…) good humour.  ”[27] Modern psychology would say the wife of Bath is not only trying to convince the others but also herself.

The wife is a fully credible figure.  She emerges as a real person drawn from life, not as a type of person, like most of the pilgrims in The Canterbury Tales are.  She is attributed with common English which supports her appearance as a real character.

Chaucer clearly found her fascinating.  It is significant that he gives her a lot more lines to tell about herself than he allowed the other pilgrims: her prologue is twice as long as her tale.  Chaucer also gave her his knowledge of the scriptures and other literatures[28].  Such a woman as she is could not have had the education nor the time to read and understand everything she quotes.  Even if she believes experience to be of greater value and rejects the value of textual authorities, she uses these textual authorities if it suits her, and she even uses antifeminist authorities, which are in contrast with her mentality.  She uses authorities and turns them upside down, but this does never effect blasphemy as for example the pardoner embodies. 

The wife of Bath is clearly a rebel: she does not wait for the host to introduce her and invite her to tell a tale and she says that marriage is misery.  Her obsession is ‘maistrie’, not only over husbands but in fact over all authorities. 

 

5. The Wife of Bath’s Tale

Summary

The wife of Bath tells the tale of a young knight who, after the rape of a maiden, must search the answer to the question, "what is it that women most desire?" The knight has one year to find the answer and return to King Arthur's court, or else he will be sentenced to death.

The knight's journey does not go well. No matter where he goes or who he asks, he does not get a good answer.  Desperate, he starts his return to Arthur's court, when he sees a group of young maidens. As he approaches, they disappear leaving an old woman. She says that she has the answer to his question, but will only state it before the queen, and on the condition that he does whatever she asks of him. The knight agrees.

In the presence of the queen, the old woman says that what women desire most is sovereignty over their husbands. Nobody disagrees with her answer, and the old woman asks the knight to marry her.  The knight agrees, albeit reluctantly.

On their wedding night, the knight is despondent over what he has gotten himself into.  The old woman lectures him on the trivial nature of appearances, then gives the knight a choice: ugly and faithful or beautiful but unfaithful. The knight leaves the decision up to her. The old woman rewards him by giving him both.

 

Characterisation

The wife of Bath desires only a few simple things in life.  She likes to mirror herself, through her stories, which in some way reflect the person who she really is. This is all proven through the many ways she portrays her characters.

The wife of Bath desires the obvious in life, but what she desires most is being more powerful than her husband.  In a relationship, she wants to be the dominant of the two, the one who is in control and takes the decisions in the relationship.  This is shown in her tale when no women in the assembly disagreed with the knights reply (and certainly not the old hag).  There is another example of the desire for power of the women in a relationship.  The old hag, after marrying the knight, gives him a choice: that she stays ugly and faithful or to become beautiful and unfaithful. The knight leaves the decision to her and the hag becomes both beautiful and faithful.  The knight thus gives her power and he is rewarded for this. 

The wife of Bath desires to have a husband that is meek, young and fresh in bed. This desire also leads her to become envious of her characters in her tale.

When we compare the wife of Bath's prologue to her tale we see that she is jealous of the old hag in her story because the hag was given the power and dominance over her husband. In the wife's true life it was not like that: her fifth husband was in charge in the beginning.

The way The Wife of Bath's Tale is written shows some similarities between the wife's prologue and her story. The major one is the appearance of the two: both the wife and the hag are ugly and old.

In conclusion, the wife wants power in a relationship.  Because of this desire for power she becomes jealous of the hag, whom she identifies with.  She wishes that even although she is as ugly as the hag, she can have the power that the hag has, and that she may be given from her partner the power to make decisions and choices.

 

Is it an appropriate choice to give this tale to the wife of Bath?

It is difficult to deny that the Wife of Bath's Prologue is robust. There is a certain energy to the whole of her prologue. The wife, as speaker of her prologue, has an earthy vitality that dominates the entire prologue.

In contrast, her tale lacks a similar robust vitality.  The general tone is not earthy as was the prologue but it is elegant, learned and it lacks the energy of the prologue.  We could speak of an anticlimax, for the tale she tells is not congruent with her personality (The original story assigned by Chaucer to the wife was probably The Shipman's Tale, a much racier, earthier fabliau). The discourse on gentillesse and poverty is also incongruent with her personality.

However, if we look closer, the tale has the same energy as the prologue. If the discourse on gentillesse and poverty is uncharacteristic and even in contrast to the wife’s character, there is, on the other hand, the story of Midas to show that women cannot keep a secret and the emphasis on the sovereignty of women (the knight's case is transferred to a jurisdiction presided over by ladies, and it is also a woman who tells him the answer).  Whenever these topics arise, the vitality of the prologue returns.

If the fairy-tale ending is an anticlimax, there is a sudden revival of the prologue when the wife asks for husbands that are meek, young and fresh in bed and when she talks about the "olde and angry nygardes of dispence".

As such, it would be wrong to see the tale as an anticlimax.  There are some incongruences in the tale with the wife’s character, but Chaucer has weakened them.  While gentillesse may be found somewhat colourless after the prologue, it nevertheless reinforces the Wife's ideas of female maistrie and the end summarises many of the themes of the wife’s philosophy.  We cannot conclude that the choice of the tale is an inappropriate one, but it surely is not an obvious one.

 

Dramatic irony in The Wife of Bath’s Tale

There are three Middle English analogues to the Wife of Bath’s Tale: Gower’s Tale of Knight Florent, The Weddynge of Sir Gawen and Dame Ragnell (a romance), and The marriage of Sir Gawain (a ballad). Three differences from those three versions can be seen as  instances of dramatic irony.

The first instance of ironical difference is the nature of the knight’s crime: the rape of a maid[29].  The change from violent behaviour to meekness is a subtle touch of irony, surely inserted by Chaucer and not taken from lost analogues, since such texts only contain dramatic irony of a much simpler and more obvious kind. 

The feeling of relief and the assurance with which the knight states a truth he will soon experience creates a light irony.  Chaucer reinforces this irony by having the knight ignorant of the hag’s request[30]. This creates an ironic contrast with what is to happen.  Did Chaucer introduce this ignorance motif?  He had surely met it in many folk tales and maybe he himself mixed it with the question motif, but it is also possible that Chaucer had found the two elements combined and thus that it was not Chaucer’s invention.

The transformation of the old hag is of course another instance of dramatic irony.  This motif is surely not Chaucer’s invention since it can be found in the other three versions and in many folk-tales, but Chaucer is clearly superior in the expression of the motif: by a better choice of details, he creates a tenser and more interesting situation while he uses less space.

We can conclude that Chaucer has brought out three different instances of dramatic irony in The Wife of Bath’s Tale.  The first can be attributed to Chaucer, the second he developed from his source and the third he took over as a part of the story.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>If I violate any right by placing this on the internet, let me know and I will remove it at once.<

>If you like to use this, you are free to do so, but please let me know: I have put a lot of work in this.<

>If you have any comment, you can mail me too.<

>Klaas.calcoen@student.kulak.ac.be<

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Part 3: Shakespeare’s Sonnet 20

 

Rhymes

Throughout sonnet 20 feminine rhymes are used.  All the other sonnets in this cycle are written in masculine rhymes. There are only two exceptions: sonnet 20 and sonnet 87  but in the latter these double rhymes are not used throughout.

The rhyme scheme is ABAB CDCD EFEF GG.

 

A  womans face, with natures owne hand painted,                (line 1)

Hast thou,                                                                                                 (line 2a)

You have the face of a woman,

which nature made[31], or

which nature coloured[32].  It was nature who did this and not art[33]: you are natural and not artificial.

which has a naturalness as if it was painted by nature herself[34].  (Is Shakespeare addressing an actor who plays the role of a woman?[35])

 

the Master Mistress of my passion;                       (line 2b)

Master Mistress can have several meanings:

supreme mistress[36],

man-mistress, male mistress[37],

both master and mistress[38]. 

When we use meaning (1) the line becomes: you are the greatest mistress of my passion.

(2) gives us: you are the mistress of my passion and/but you are a man (in contrast with what is usual in sonnets).

Meaning (3) reads:

you are both the master and the mistress of my passion or

you are the subject and the object of my passion. 

Mistress does not mean ‘concubine’, but ‘lady’ in the context of courtly love[39].

Passion can also have three meanings:

sexual desire[40],

strong feeling[41] or

love poem or passionate speech[42].

(1) and (2) divide the two camps of the discussion on Shakespeare’s homosexuality (in my opinion there is nothing at odds with Shakespeare being heterosexual so I prefer reading (2) and ruling out (1)). 

(3) means you are the master mistress (subject and/or object) of this poem, sonnet 20. 

The combination of meaning (2) and (3) gives: you are the master mistress of my (strong) feelings (for you) and of this love poem.

 (1) and (3) can be combined to: you are the master mistress of my sexual desire and of this love poem (this meaning is ruled out by me).

Meaning (2) can even enforce meaning (1): you are the master mistress of my strong sexual desire. These two meanings taken together can also be combined with meaning (3), giving: your are the master mistress of my strong sexual desire and of this poem (These readings are not considered correct by me).

 

A womans gentle hart, but not acquainted                               (line 3)

With shifting change, as is false womens fashion;                 (line 4)

[you have (line 2)] the gentleness of a woman, but your gentleness is/you are not as changeable as that of women/as women are.

False may be used

(1) non-restrictively ([all] woman are false)[43] and

(2) restrictively (there are woman that are false). 

The former interpretation seems the correct one: Shakespeare portrays the man as having all the good qualities of women and none of the bad. 

False can mean either

deceitful[44] or

fickle[45]

artificial, i.e. artificially beautified[46] and contrastive to nature as in interpretation (2) of line 1.

To shift also means to change one’s underwear because of menstruation[47], which is often said to be combined with a change of mood (fickleness, meaning (2)).

 

An eye more bright than theirs, less false in rolling,             (line 5)

[you have (line 2)] an eye brighter than that of women and it is less false when it wanders. 

 

Gilding the object where-upon it gazeth;                                   (line 6)

[Your eye (line 6)] lights up the object it perceives. 

Gilding means either

making bright[48] or

making beautiful, covering imperfections[49]: it only sees the good/beautiful characteristics of the object it perceives.  When the man sees Shakespeare, the poet feels good and even better than he is/normally thinks of himself.  Even the connotation of ‘blessing’ can be attributed to this.

 

A man in hew all Hews in his controlling,                                 (line 7)

[you are] needs to be added here. 

The word hew is the most discussed word in the poem and so is this line.  Hew/hue can have the meanings

form/shape/species[50],

complexion[51],

colour[52], and

(4) apparition[53]. 

In his controlling can also have several meanings, either as noun or adjective:

[are] in his power[54],

[are] held in his [hew][55],

dominating by means of his [hew][56],

challenging by means of his [hew][57]. 

The numerous interpretations (4 x 4 x 4 or 4³ = 64) that become possible with this double ambiguity together with the possibilities of the repetition of hew are written out on the following two pages.  They serve as an illustration of the ambiguity that Shakespeare has created. 

I prefer possibilities 1, 2 and 5 - which are printed in blue – because the other interpretations seem unnatural, far-fetched and sometimes almost meaningless.

It is also argued that man in is the misprint of ‘maiden’ or ‘native’, due to “the scribe’s habit not dotting his i’s and of giving final n’s and m’s an upward and backward turn.” The former prepares the way for line 9, the latter repeats line 1. Hew(s) is seen by some people as a misprint of ‘hearts’ or another word[58]. 

Hews can also be seen as a pun on Henry Wriothesley[59], Earl of Southampton; on William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke; on W. Hughes, the boy actor[60]; or seen as “double U” a pun on the first letter of his name, William Shakespeare[61].  It can also be a pun on ‘[sexual] use’ as in line 14; or on ‘you’ and perhaps controlling is a pun on ‘cunt rolling’[62].

 

(1)+(1)+(a):              a man in form, all forms are in his power,

meaning he is a man and he controls both sexes.

(1)+(1)+(b):              a man in form, all forms are held in his form,

meaning he can present any appearance (man or woman) he wishes. (Willie Hughes?)

(1)+(1)+(c):              a man in form, dominating by means of his form.

(1)+(1)+(d):              a man in form, challenging by means of his form.

 

(1)+(2)+(a):              a man in form, all complexions are in his power,

meaning he is a man that can make people flush or grow pale.

(1)+(2)+(b):              a man in form, all complexions are held in his complexion.

(1)+(2)+(c):              a man in form, dominating by means of his complexion.

(1)+(2)+(d):              a man in form, challenging by means of his complexion.

 

(1)+(3)+(a):              a man in form, all colours are in his power.

(1)+(3)+(b):              a man in form, all colours are held in his colour.

(1)+(3)+(c):              a man in form, dominating by means of his colour.

(1)+(3)+(d):              a man in form, challenging by means of his colour.

 

(1)+(4)+(a):              a man in form, all apparitions are in his power,

meaning he is a human being that has control over phantasms.

(1)+(4)+(b):              a man in form, all apparitions are held in his apparition.

(1)+(4)+(c):              a man in form, dominating by means of his apparition.

(1)+(4)+(d):              a man in form, challenging by means of his apparition.

 

 

(2)+(1)+(a):              a man in complexion, all forms are in his power.

(2)+(1)+(b):              a man in complexion, all forms are held in his form.

(2)+(1)+(c):              a man in complexion, dominating by means of his form.

(2)+(1)+(d):              a man in complexion, challenging by means of his form.

 

(2)+(2)+(a):              a man in complexion, all complexions are in his power.

(2)+(2)+(b):             a man in complexion, all complexions are held in his

complexion.

(2)+(2)+(c):              a man in complexion, dominating by his complexion.

(2)+(2)+(d):             a man in complexion, challenging by his complexion.

 

(2)+(3)+(a):              a man in complexion, all colours are in his power.

(2)+(3)+(b):             a man in complexion, all colours are held in his colour.

(2)+(3)+(c):              a man in complexion, dominating by his colour.

(2)+(3)+(d):             a man in complexion, challenging by his colour.

 

(2)+(4)+(a):              a man in complexion, all apparitions are in his power.

(2)+(4)+(b):             a man in complexion, all apparitions are held in his

apparition.

(2)+(4)+(c):              a man in complexion, dominating by his apparition.

(2)+(4)+(d):             a man in complexion, challenging by his apparition.

 

(3)+(1)+(a):              a man in colour, all forms are in his power.

(3)+(1)+(b):              a man in colour, all forms are held in his form.

(3)+(1)+(c):              a man in colour, dominating by his form.

(3)+(1)+(d):              a man in colour, challenging by his form.

 

(3)+(2)+(a):              a man in colour, all complexions are in his power.

(3)+(2)+(b):             a man in colour, all complexions are held in his

complexion.

(3)+(2)+(c):              a man in colour, dominating by his complexion.

(3)+(2)+(d):             a man in colour, challenging by his complexion.

 

(3)+(3)+(a):              a man in colour, all colours are in his power.

(3)+(3)+(b):             a man in colour, all colours are held in his colour.

(3)+(3)+(c):              a man in colour, dominating by his colour.

(3)+(3)+(d):             a man in colour, challenging by his colour.

 

(3)+(4)+(a):              a man in colour, all apparitions are in his power.

(3)+(4)+(b):             a man in colour, all apparitions are held in his apparition.

(3)+(4)+(c):              a man in colour, dominating by his apparition.

(3)+(4)+(d):             a man in colour, challenging by his apparition.

 

(4)+(1)+(a):              a man in apparition, all forms are in his power.

(4)+(1)+(b):              a man in apparition, all forms are held in his form.

(4)+(1)+(c):              a man in apparition, dominating by his form.

(4)+(1)+(d):              a man in apparition, challenging by his form.

 

(4)+(2)+(a):              a man in apparition, all complexions are in his power.

(4)+(2)+(b):             a man in apparition, all complexions are held in his

complexion.

(4)+(2)+(c):              a man in apparition, dominating by his complexion.

(4)+(2)+(d):             a man in apparition, challenging by his complexion.

 

(4)+(3)+(a):              a man in apparition, all colours are in his power.

(4)+(3)+(b):             a man in apparition, all colours are held in his colour.

(4)+(3)+(c):              a man in apparition, dominating by his colour.

(4)+(3)+(d):             a man in apparition, challenging by his colour.

 

(4)+(4)+(a):              a man in apparition, all apparitions are in his power.

(4)+(4)+(b):             a man in apparition, all apparitions are held in his

apparition.

(4)+(4)+(c):              a man in apparition, dominating by his apparition.

(4)+(4)+(d):             a man in apparition, challenging by his apparition.

 

Which steals mens eyes and womens souls amazeth.          (line 8)

Which can bear on man or hew, hews, or his controlling in line 7.  Its antecedent is probably hew: the form steals and amazes. 

Amazeth can mean

astonish[63] or

overwhelm and throw in confusion[64].

 

And for a woman wert thou first created,                                  (line 9)

Till nature as she wrought thee fell a dotinge,                        (line 10)

You were intended to be a woman, until nature fell in love with you while making you. 

There may be a pun on ‘for a woman’: for women’s pleasure/use, which anticipates line 13[65], and wrought thee is sometimes seen as a pun on (Henry) Wriothesley[66].

 

And by addition me of thee defeated,                                          (line 11)

By adding one thing to my purpose nothing.                            (line 12)

And by adding one thing of no use to me, [nature] defrauded[67] me of you.

Thing and nothing can also be seen as Elizabethan slang for the male/female genitalia[68]. 

Notice that thing and nothing are interchangeable a ‘thing’ (penis) is ‘nothing’ (of use) (this is said here in line 12) and ‘a nothing’, being a vagina, would have been ‘one thing to my purpose’ - and then you could have been mine (this is thought here).

 

     But since she prickt thee out for womens pleasure,         (line 13)

But since she [nature (line 10)] selected/equipped you for the pleasure of women.

Prickt means

(1) select[69],

(2) to mark with something[70], which can be seen as a pun: that ‘something’ is a penis  and moreover the word ‘prick’ means penis[71] (clearly a pun).

Women’s pleasure is

(1) delight[72] and

(2) sexual pleasure[73].

 

     Mine be thy love, and thy loves use their treasure.           (line 14)

Let them [the women] have it, as long as I can have your love.

Use can be understood as ‘employ(ment) for sexual pleasure’[74].

Treasure can be seen as[75]

the genitalia of the man or

their own, female genitalia and

in fact as both or

let them treasure your love.

Mind that thy loves  can also mean ‘my’.

 

Conclusion

The fact that Shakespeare praises a man can be found strange and can rise suspicions of homosexuality but upon closer inspection this is in fact not that strange.  

Shakespeare never alludes to ‘his homosexuality’ in his writings (and he was a very prolific author!) except in this poem.  If he had been homosexual, probably more references would have been made by him.  But why then does he have a man be the subject of a love poem? 

There is nothing wrong with calling a strong friendship love.

Neither is there anything wrong with thinking of one’s best friend that, if he had been a woman, he would have been the ideal love.

By having a man be the object of love, Shakespeare continues the tradition of the courtly love for a lady who is unattainable (which is the case with Petrarca and others) and even enlarges upon that tradition. 

If we look at the poem this way, we can only see it as a celebration of a close friendship.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>If I violate any right by placing this on the internet, let me know and I will remove it at once.<

>If you like to use this, you are free to do so, but please let me know: I have put a lot of work in this.<

>If you have any comment, you can mail me too.<

>Klaas.calcoen@student.kulak.ac.be<

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sign My Guestbook View My Guestbook

 

Bibliography

 

Introduction

Schwall, H., Literatures in English I, KULAK, Kortrijk, 1998-1999.

 

The Battle of Maldon

http://www.airflow.net/maldon

http://aix2.uottawa.ca/~s669330/Stories/maldon.html

http://www.altavista.com

Abrams, M.H., The Norton Anthology of English Literature, volume 1,            W.W. Norton & Company, New York /London, 1993.

Alexander, Michael, The Earliest English Poems, Penguin Books Ltd., Harmondsworth, 1966.

Scragg, Donald, The Battle of Maldon, AD 991, Alden Press, Oxford, 1991.

Mitchell, Bruce, The Battle of Maldon and Other Old English Poems, St. Martins Press, New York, 1966.

 

Chaucer’s The Wife of Bath

Encyclopaedia Brittanica, multimedia edition 1999,  cd-rom.

encarta.msn.com

http://cyberessays.com/English/41.htm

http://www.altavista.com (search engine)

http://www.bcconline.com/eng2/ctwbsum.htm or http://sfbox.vt.edu:10021/T/tomt220/wobt.html

http://www.corbis.com (pictures)

http://icg.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/canttales/wbpro/

http://www.web.singnet.com.sg/~yisheng/notes/chaucer/antimax.htm

Abrams, M.H., The Norton Anthology of English Literature, volume 1,            W.W. Norton & Company, New York /London, 1993.

Burton, H. M., Notes on Chaucer’s The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale, Methuen Paperbacks Ltd, London, 1978.

Coote, Stephen, Geoffrey Chaucer, The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales, Penguin Books Ltd., Harmondsworth, 1985.

Dempster, Germaine, Dramatic Irony in Chaucer, The Humanity Press, New York, 1959.

Knight, Stephen, Rereading Literature, Geoffrey Chaucer, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1986.

Patch, Howard Rolin, On Rereading Chaucer, Cambridge, Massachusetts Harvard University Press, 1959.

Pearsall, Derek, The Canterbury Tales, G. Allen & Unwin Ltd., London, 1985.

Schwall, H., Literatures in English I, KULAK, Kortrijk, 1999-2000.

 

Shakespeare’s Sonnet 20

Encyclopaedia Brittanica, multimedia edition 1999, cd-rom.

http://www.altavista.com (search engine)

http://www.corbis.com (pictures)

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/4081/20c.html

ftp://fyl.unizar.es/PUB/MISCELANEA/12/SANCHEZG.zip (file on http://fyl.unizar.es/MISCELANEA/ARTICULOS_12/ABSTRACTS_12.html).

Abrams, M.H., The Norton Anthology of English Literature, volume 1,            W.W. Norton & Company, New York /London, 1993.

Booth, S., Shakespeare’s Sonnets, Yale University Press, Newhaven & London, 1977.

Ingram, W. G. & Redpath, T, Shakespeare’s Sonnets, University of London Press Ltd., London, 1964.

Rollins, E. H., A New Variorum Edition of Shakespeare – The Sonnets, Lippincott, Philadelphia & London, 1944 (fac simile of 1981, University Microfilms International, London, 1981).

Rows, A. L., Shakespeare’s Sonnets, Macmillan&Co Ltd., London, 1964.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>If I violate any right by placing this on the internet, let me know and I will remove it at once.<

>If you like to use this, you are free to do so, but please let me know: I have put a lot of work in this.<

>If you have any comment, you can mail me too.<

>Klaas.calcoen@student.kulak.ac.be<

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------