Knights And Merchants The Peasants Rebellion

[Tommie]

On John Gower is the third collection of essays to result fromthe annual sessions sponsored by the John Gower Society at theInternational Congress on Medieval Studies (at Kalamazoo). While thebook's subtitle, Essays at the Millenium may sound somewhatbelated (given the 2007 publication date), the essays in fact began assession papers offered between 1999 and 2003. In their revised andexpanded form they present a diverse series of new perspectives onGower, and together they demonstrate, as the editor, R. F. Yeager,rightly points out, "the vibrancy of the field today" (vii).

The opening essay is Steven Kruger's "Gower's Mediterranean." Krugersuggests that Gower uses the geopolitical space of the Mediterraneanto "think through questions of mercantilism and religious identity"(8). The Tale of Constance, for instance, opens with an account ofConstance converting foreign merchants, an exchange which demonstratesthat mercantile activity furthers, rather than blocks, spiritualprogress. However, this fantasy of a perfect Christian mercantilismis undercut by the violent exchanges between Roman Christianity andits Barbar other. Kruger thus demonstrates the clear connectionbetween mercantilism and religion, although this reviewer was somewhatunderwhelmed by the actual application of this thesis to theConfessio Amantis, particularly after the initial lengthy (andextremely interesting) introduction to the medieval debate of whethera Christian betrays his faith if he is a merchant.

From the Mediterranean, it is a logical next step to WinthropWetherbee's "Rome, Troy, and Culture in the Confessio Amantis."Wetherbee posits that Gower's "primary theme in the ConfessioAmantis is culture" (20), a concept Gower understood in socialrather than religious terms. In Gower's cultural landscape the two"landmarks" (22) that bring his ideals into focus are Troy and Rome.Whereas Troy symbolizes the world of chivalry, and all its materialismand individualism, Rome "is associated with wise government...andstable institutions" (24). In support of this thesis, Wetherbeeprovides a masterful close reading of Gower's Roman and Trojan tales(such as The Tale of the False Bachelor, The Tale ofOrestes, and the Tale of Jason and Medea).

At the same time, it may be questioned whether there is not a dangerof occasional stereotyping. For instance, when Menestheus intervenesat the trial of Orestes he is said to cut off the judicialproceedings, so that "chivalric prerogative has triumphed over civiljustice" (28). Actually, the situation is slightly more complicated,for Menestheus tells parliament, "'I wole it with my bodi prove' [thatOrestes acted rightfully]/And therupon he caste his glove" (2153-54).Contemporary use of the appeal's process shows that such an action atthe very least has a judicial ring. [1]

In other words, even in a tale about Troy there is a concern to redeemchivalry by supporting it with at least a quasi-legal justification (astrand that runs throughout the tale, as Kobayashi's later essaydemonstrates). The same complication arises in a Roman story like theTale of the False Bachelor, where perhaps we should not be so quick asto separate "Roman" and "Knight" without seeing how a chivalricexploit and a concern for justice can coalesce. Ultimately, whileWetherbee's binary reading will hold-and for good reason--it may bewondered whether the paradigm creates a slightly simplified picture ofthe humanist Gower who abhors war and the abuses of chivalry.

Craig E. Bertolet's essay, "Fraud, Division, and Lies: John Gower andLondon" is in many ways a companion piece to Steven Kruger's "Gower'sMediterranean." Bertolet brings a wide array of cultural documents(such as the London Letter-Books and various guild documents)to bear on Gower's references to civic life. Bertolet covers a greatdeal of territory in a surprising amount of detail. In the process,we learn about Gower's thoughts on deceptive trading, usury, foreignmerchants, mob unrest, dangerous speech, and other related topics.

Bertolet does not straight-jacket his material into a single thesis,but sometimes he does push the historical reading a little hard.Particularly the account of the Brembre-Northampton episode (aconflict between two London mayors that created a fair amount of civicunrest in the 1380s) seems too specific for the general referencesthat Bertolet finds in the Confessio and the VoxClamantis, references relating to the effects of the mob and thedangers of divisive speech and false rhetoric. Bertolet's conclusion,on the other hand, lacks some of the nuances of his detailed readings.For instance, whereas in the body of the essay he calls Gower"reactionary and xenophobic" (53) on the subject of foreign traders,in the conclusion we read that throughout his career Gower"demonstrates a sympathetic understanding of the people with whom heshares his city" (62). Minor inconsistencies aside, this is a veryfine piece of scholarship, and will certainly be essential backgroundreading for anyone interested in Gower's urban culture, a subject thatappears to be drawing an increasing amount of attention in recentyears. [2]

It is a feature of all these essays that they move comfortably throughall of Gower's major works, and here Yoshiko Kobayashi's "PrincipisUmbra: Kingship, Justice, and Pity in John Gower's Poetry" is noexception. Kobayashi demonstrates that Gower's understanding ofjustice and pity becomes "increasingly complex and ambiguous in hislater poems" (72). The problem is that there is both a good kind ofpity (clementia, or rationally justifiable gentleness) and abad form (misericordia, or the emotional and irrationalreaction to others' suffering). The result of this Senecandistinction is that Pity often comes to mean a zeal for justice ratherthan a concern for mercy.

Already in the Vox Clamantis, Gower's "perception ofimpietas as the driving force behind the peasants'rebellion...leads him to seek a remedy...not in the form of mercifulgovernment that he expounded in the Mirour [de l'Omme],but in a strong, effective leadership capable of rendering swift andruthless justice" (81). The depiction of the peasants as savage,irrational beasts obviates the need to practice charity to sinners, astrategic move that Kobayashi insightfully links to Aquinas'spenological thought. Yet, in the Confessio Amantis--particularly in the Tale of Orestes, and in some of the stories aboutAlexander--Gower reveals his disquiet about how the king might misusehis prerogative powers. Gower (though not always Genius), shows howthe king must take into account "both positive and natural laws aswell as his obligation to respect certain legal rights of hissubjects" (97). The broad constitutional reading Kobayashi offers isgenerally persuasive, and while it is by no means exhaustive (Book 7of the Confessio, for instance, receives scant attention), itpresents a satisfying diachronic view of Gower's political commentary.

Joyce Coleman, in "'A bok for king Richardes sake': Royal Patronage,the Confessio, and the Legend of Good Women," takes theconcept of diachrony a step further and examines how the editorialchoice to divide the Confessio manuscript into threerecensions, and to privilege the last over the first, has unduly de-emphasized Richard II's patronage of Gower's work in favour of hislater support of Henry IV. Coleman rightly points out that laterrevisions to the first recension were minor and that there is noreason to question the authenticity of Gower's story of meetingRichard on the Thames.

Further support for the importance of the first recension lies in thecourtly allegory within the text itself. Coleman compares Chaucer'sdepiction of Alceste and Cupid in the Legend of Good Women(where they stand for Richard and Anne) with Gower's similar portrayalof Cupid and Venus. Along with other parallels and allusions, theimpression one gets is of Gower and Chaucer as "comrades in fulfillinga commission from Richard" (114). Coleman concludes with someproductive speculation about the possibility that Richard had the ideaof promoting a cult of the Flower and the Leaf by which he sought tocompliment his queen. She also asks a very probing question: why arehistorians and literary critics so eager to de-emphasize Richard'srole in the Confessio? Is it perhaps because of a certainanxiety that Anne's cultural authority (as Venus and as patron) wouldthreaten the poet's masculine independence?

Where Coleman aims to recuperate the first recension, Eve Salisburyattempts to exonerate the Vox Clamantis from criticism that itis exceedingly wearisome, unoriginal, and inartistic. Her essay,"Violence and the Sacrificial Poet: Gower, the Vox, and theCritics" is self-consciously styled after Tolkien's "Beowulf:The Monsters and the Critics," and she provides some ratherinteresting parallels between Beowulf and the Vox todemonstrate the critical challenges both works pose. Salisbury'sreevaluation of Gower's achievement looks at how the poet "unveils themechanisms of sacrificial violence" (125), particularly in hisdepiction of the Peasants' Revolt.

Gower's practice of writing cento--which creates a kind ofpalimpsest where the original context of a borrowed passage is stillsomewhat visible--allows him to differentiate one form of violencefrom another. Such an analysis of passages ranging from Peter Riga'sAurora to Ovid's Tristia assumes that Gower could haveexpected a well-educated audience. Salisbury anticipates thisobjection by arguing that it is precisely the well-read clergymen whomGower is attempting to reach, for he wishes to demonstrate theircomplicity in the events of 1381.

While Salisbury makes a persuasive argument for the artistry andsocial commentary that the Vox undoubtedly provides, herarguments do raise some questions. For instance, if Gower means tocriticize the Caesarian Clergy by using the Archbishop Simon Sudbury'ssacrificial death as a "negative exempl[um] of paternalresponsibility" (137), then why, to quote Kobayashi, does Gowerportray him in the text as a "paragon of virtue" (78)? SometimesSalisbury's usage of "sacrifice" also becomes somewhat nebulous. Takefor instance Gower's casting himself as John the Baptist, whichSalisbury interprets as a form of sacrifice (139). It seems difficultto speak of "sacrifice" when he is merely donning someone else'smantel, and Gower still wishes to drawn attention to his own name andidentity, fragmented though it may be. [3] These questions aside,Salisbury's analyses of (gendered) violence, punishment, andsacrifice--in this essay and elsewhere--fruitfully make one rethinkhow our own cultural paradigms affect our understanding andappreciation of Gower's work.

3a8082e126