Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-54qdv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T19:47:23.700Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chaucer's Changing Conceptions of the Humble Lover

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Agnes K. Getty
Agnes K. Getty*
Affiliation:
University of Montana
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is evident that Chaucer's depiction of and attitude toward the lover were not always the same. In some of his works, notably his earlier, shorter poems, the conception of the lover conforms apparently in all particulars to the conventional pattern of the romantic lover of chivalry. In other works he shows a definite deviation from this concept. What the character of these deviations is, where they occur, and what deductions may be drawn from them, it is the purpose of this paper to indicate. At the outset of our inquiry two possible explanations of this change may be noted: first, the possibility that Chaucer's attitude changed as he grew older either in revolt against or in conformity to the standard ideal; secondly, the possibility that the changes in his attitude were the result of shifting moods instead of modifications produced by age and experience.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 44 , Issue 1: American Bibliography for 1928 , March 1929 , pp. 202 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1929

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Note 1 in page 202 Eleanor of Aquitaine (Alienor of Guienne) was the chief instrument in the introduction of the French love ideals into England. She had been one of the ladies presiding over the Cour d'Amour of Paris prior to her marriage to Henry Plan-tagenet of England.

Note 2 in page 202 It must be borne in mind that these rules, however stereotyped in the fourteenth century, had their genesis in the sincere and ardent, though frequently exaggerated, love expressions of the earlier French poets. Cf. William G. Dodd, Courtly Love in Chaucer and Gower, p. 21.

Note 3 in page 202 LaRousse, La Grande Dictionnaire Universal du XIX Siècle. See “L'Amour dans l'histoire et dans la litterature.”

Note 4 in page 203 Ibid.

Note 5 in page 203 For the chronology followed throughout this study, see Robert Dudley French, A Chaucer Handbook, pp. 75-132 and 384-5.

Note 6 in page 203 Writtten before 1370. See French, A Chancer Handbook, p. 384.

Note 7 in page 203 The three fragments are considered here, although there is considerable doubt as to the authenticity of Fragments B and C.

Note 8 in page 203 Romaunt of the Rose, Fg. A, ll. 1045-47; 1496-7.

Note 9 in page 204 Dated “1367-70?” It “cannot be dated with any certainty, but it may confidently be assigned to the earlier years of Chaucer's career as a poet.” French, A Chaucer Handbook, p. 85.

Note 10 in page 204 Known date, 1369-70. See French, op. cit., p. 384.

Note 12 in page 204 La Rousse, La Grande Dictionnaire, loc. cit.

Note 13 in page 204 Book of the Duchesse, ll. 1262-65.

Note 13 in page 204 Dated respectively ca. 1374 and “1374, or soon after.” French, op. cit., pp. 90 and 97.

Note 14 in page 205 Compleynt of Mars, l. 189; Compleint to His Lady, ll. 34-5; ll. 72-3.

Note 15 in page 205 Time of writing uncertain, but a “date between 1374-82 may be accepted with some confidence” French, p. 123.

Note 16 in page 205 The Hous of Fame, Bk. II, ll. 615-18, 633-4, 625.

Note 17 in page 205 Written in 1382. See French, p. 384.

Note 18 in page 206 Parlement of Foules, ll. 584-5, 567, 590-2, 595, 607-8.

Note 19 in page 206 Written 1382-5. See French, p. 385.

Note 20 in page 207 Troilus and Criseyde, Bk. I, ll. 15-6, 461-2; Bk. II, ll. 607-9.

Note 21 in page 207 Ibid., IV, ll. 1093-1100.

Note 22 in page 207 1385-95. Prologue, B-text, written probably in 1385–6—French, p. 385.

Note 23 in page 208 Legend of Good Women, VI, ll. 1552-3, 1557-8.

Note 24 in page 208 French, p. 130.

Note 25 in page 208 1390-1393? French, p. 104.

Note 26 in page 209 Kittredge, Chaucer and His Poetry, p. 124.

Note 27 in page 209 1390-1393? “This poem, like the Merciles Beaute, must belong to a period when Chaucer had become thoroughly emancipated from the school of love-poetry represented by his more conventional ‘compleynts’ ”. French, p. 105, 106.

Note 28 in page 209 Dated respectively 1393? and 1399. See French, pp. 109 and 113.

Note 29 in page 210 Written before 1387. French, p. 385.

Note 30 in page 210 Knyghtes Tale, ll. 1143-4.

Note 33 in page 211 Previous two quotations, Knyghtes Tale, ll. 1380-2, 1753-4.

Note 34 in page 211 LaRousse, loc. cit.

Note 35 in page 211 Knyghtes Tale, ll. 1796-1817.

Note 36 in page 212 Ibid., ll. 2767-9, ll. 3077-9.

Note 37 in page 212 1392-4. See French, p. 386.

Note 38 in page 212 Squieres Tale, ll. 544-6.

Note 39 in page 213 1392-4. See French, p. 386

Note 40 in page 213 In the Nonne Preestes Tale Pertelote and her “sustres” are repeatedly referred to as the “wyves” of Chauntecler, thus precluding Dodd's supposition that the tale is a case of Chaucer's employing the conventions of courtly love poetry for humorous purposes. Cf. Dodd, “Courtly Love in Chaucer and Gower,” Nonnes Preestes Tale.

Note 41 in page 213 Frankeleyns Tale, ll. 729-33.

Note 42 in page 214 Previous two quotations, Frankeleyns Tale, ll. 1020-2, 1084-6.

Note 43 in page 214 Ibid., ll. 1256-60, 1303, 1330.

Note 44 in page 214 Considered as being probably genuine, but, with the possible exception of the first named, lacking in external evidence.

Note 45 in page 215 Hammond, Chaucer, A Biographical Manual, p. 70.

Note 46 in page 215 Ibid.