OWL AND THE NIGHTINGALE, THE

(ca. 1189–1216)

The Owl and the Nightingaleis a DEBATE POEM in early MIDDLE ENGLISH, written in a southeastern dialect in 1,794 lines of octosyllabic (eight-syllable) couplets. The poem survives in two late 13thcentury manuscripts, but was probably composed in the late 12th or very early 13th century. In the poem, the narrator overhears a comic debate between a serious Owl and a lively Nightingale over the relative benefits each brings to mankind. The date of the poem has been a matter of some scholarly dispute. It appears, from a reference to the late “King Henry” in the text, that the poem was written sometime between 1189, when HENRY II died, and 1216, when Henry III succeeded to the throne—since had the poem been written after 1216 it would have been necessary to specify which King Henry was being referenced. The authorship of the poem has also been debated. Because the poem ends with the argument unresolved, and the two birds flying off to present their case to one “Nicholas of Guildford” to judge, some scholars have suggested that Nicholas was himself the author. Nicholas is praised as an accomplished man in the poem, and it is possible that he was a learned priest capable of writing a poem such asThe Owl and the Nightingale, full of wit and learning. Other scholars suggest that Nicholas was the poet’s patron, or that the poem was presented to Nicholas by an anonymous clerical friend or, according to one author, by the nuns of Shaftesbury Abbey. The question of the poem’s authorship remains unsolved. Many scholars have interpreted the poem as ALLEGORY: The Owl and the Nightingale have been seen as representing the worldly vs. the ascetic life, or the minstrel vs. the preacher, or art vs. philosophy. Most often the birds have been seen as spokespersons for love poetry and religious poetry. In the end such interpretations are unsatisfactory, since the birds’ argument extends to a wide variety of topics that make all of these suggestions possible, but never focuses seriously on any one of them.The birds discuss the characteristics of their respective species, they argue about music, about papal missions, and about theological and philosophical questions like the necessity for confession, and man’s free will vs. God’s foreknowledge. But what is ultimately most memorable in the poem is the characterization of the two protagonists.

The Owl is presented as self-important, melancholy, ascetic, and irascible; the Nightingale as optimistic, jovial, unreflective, and a bit shallow. The two of them harangue one another about a variety of topics in a haphazard manner, dealing with them in a rather superficial way. They are more interested in either attacking one another (with name-calling, innuendo, and lampoon) or exaggerated self-aggrandizement. Thus the Nightingale berates the Owl for her ugliness, and the Owl retaliates by criticizing the Nightingale’s scrawniness. The Nightingale compares the Owl to a lunatic, and the Owl complains of the Nightingale’s “crazy cacklings” in the forest. They accuse one another of being unclean. The Owl denounces the Nightingale for having only one talent—singing—while the Owl herself has many talents, including doing the practical work of ridding barns of mice. This last argument seems to impress the Nightingale. The poet-narrator appears to favor the Owl’s case, though that support is never explicit. However, since the tone of the poem is mildly satiric, it may well be that the poet is simply, like the Nightingale, comically impressed by the selfimportance of the Owl, who is herself a ludicrous character because of her egotism and her blackand-white certainty of her own views. Ultimately the poem seems chiefly a send-up of the very human tendency to become contentious.The Owl and the Nightingaleis the first of what became a popular subgenre in Middle English literature, the bird-debate. Later poems likeThe THRUSH AND THE NIGHTINGALEand John CLANVOWE’sCuckoo and the Nightingale, and perhaps even CHAUCER’sPARLIAMENT OF FOWLS, may owe their inspiration largely toThe Owl and the Nightingale.

■ Barratt, Alexandra. “Flying in the Face of Tradition: A New View ofThe Owl and the Nightingale,”University of Toronto Quarterly56 (1987): 471–485.

■ Cartlidge, Neil, “The Date ofThe Owl and the Nightingale,”Medium Aevum65 (1996): 230–247.

■ ———, ed.The Owl and the Nightingale. Exeter, U.K.: University of Exeter Press, 2001.

■ Cawley, A. C. “Astrology inThe Owl and the Nightingale,”Modern Language Review46 (1951): 161–174.

■ Coleman, Janet. “The Owl and the Nightingaleand Papal Theories of Marriage,”Journal of Ecclesiastical History38 (1987): 517–567.

■ Holsinger, Bruce. “Vernacular Legality: The English Jurisdictions ofThe Owl and the Nightingale.” InThe Letter of the Law: Legal Practice and Literary Production in Medieval England, edited by Emily Steiner and Candace Barrington, 154–184. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2002.

■ Hume, Kathryn.The Owl and the Nightingale: The Poem and Its Critics. Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1975.

■ Jacobs,Nicolas. “The Owl and the Nightingaleand the Bishops.” InMedieval Literature and Antiquities: Studies in Honour of Basil Cottle, edited by Myra Stokes and T. L. Burton, 91–98. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1987.

■ Stone, Brian, trans.The Owl and the Nightingale, Cleanness, St Erkenwald. 2nd ed. London: Penguin Classics, 1988.