TROILUS AND CRISEYDE

byGeoffrey Chaucer

(ca. 1385)

Troilus and Criseydeis Geoffrey CHAUCER’s longest complete poem, at 8,239 lines of RHYME ROYAL stanzas, divided into five books. Written in the mid- to late-1380s, soon afterThe KNIGHT’S TALEand his translation of BOETHIUS’sCONSOLATION OF PHILOSOPHY(theBoece) and immediately prior to hisLEGEND OF GOOD WOMEN, Troilusis Chaucer’s most polished composition, much more so than the unfinishedCANTERBURY TALES, and is the mature and serious poetic work on which Chaucer probably thought his reputation would ultimately rest. The work tells the unhappy story of Troilus, prince of Troy, and his failed love for the beautiful young widow Criseyde, presented against the background of the Trojan War.

The kernel of the story ofTroilus and Criseydewas included in BENOÎT DE SAINTE-MAURE’s 12thcentury poem, theRoman de Troie. Benoît’s ROMANCE was translated into a Latin prose version calledHistoria destructionis Troiaeby Guido della Colonne (1287), a text that inspired BOCCACCIO to turn the Troilus story into a complete tale of its own. Chaucer’s immediate source for the tale was Boccaccio’s youthful poem calledIl FILOSTRATO(The love-struck, ca. 1338). Boccaccio’s story is shorter and less complex than Chaucer’s: In it Troilo falls in love with Criseida, and the lady’s cousin, Troilo’s friend Pandaro, easily convinces Criseida to become the prince’s lover. Forced to leave Troy in the end to join her father, who has defected to the Greek camp, Criseida betrays Troilo, falling in love with the Greek warrior Diomede. Chaucer deepens and fleshes out the story, partly by including serious philosophical reflections drawn from Boethius, and partly by creating much more complex characters for Criseyde and for Pandarus in particular, but also for the Narrator himself, who appears as a fourth major character in the poem.Criseyde is an intelligent, articulate, and independent woman, but one whose fears for her own safety compel her to choose the easiest path; she is one whose love is real, but who chooses self-preservation over unflinching fidelity. Pandarus, still Troilus’s friend but made by Chaucer into the uncle and guardian of Criseyde, has more complex responsibilities and loyalties than Boccaccio’s Pandaro. Pandarus is a master of persuasive sophistry, of self-deprecation and good humor, who seems to want the best for both lovers. His banter is the chief source of humor in the poem, but his motives are complex and ambiguous. The Narrator presents himself as an unsuccessful lover who tells this story to help other lovers. Constrained to follow the story as told by his imaginary source called Lollius, the Narrator is enamored of his own creation in Criseyde, and labors to put everything she does in the best light.As for Troilus himself, he is the character that Chaucer changes the least: He is a noble and scrupulously true lover, the servant of his lady in the manner of a COURTLY LOVER, but he is indecisive, fatalistic, passive, and self-pitying, and hence easily manipulated by others. One of the most admired aspects of Chaucer’s poem is what critics have, somewhat anachronistically, considered the psychological realism of its characters. For many scholars, Chaucer’s poem is one of the important forerunners of the modern novel.

Book I of the poem begins as the astrologer Calchas, Criseyde’s father, foresees the doom of Troy, and in fear leaves the city. Left alone and the daughter of a traitor, Criseyde begs Prince Hector for his protection, which he grants. Later, at a festival, the younger prince Troilus scoffs at all lovers, until, catching sight of Criseyde, he is instantly overcome by love of her. Suffering from the pains of love, he goes to bed, where he remains frozen by lovesickness. Pandarus visits him and discovers the truth, promising to visit Criseyde himself. Book 2 is perhaps the most admired section of the poem. It begins with Pandarus’s visit and conversation with Criseyde, a brilliant dialogue in which we see each trying to outwit and outguess the other in a dazzling verbal sparring match. This is followed by a remarkable interior monologue in which Criseyde weighs her options, trying to decide whether to accept Troilus’s attentions.When she inclines toward acceptance, Pandarus creates an elaborate ruse by which, playing on her fears, he convinces Criseyde that she is in danger and needs the protection of some powerful nobles of the town, including Troilus. When she meets with Troilus in Book 3, she agrees to accept his service. After some time, through another of Pandarus’s machinations, the lovers are finally brought to bed together in Pandarus’s own house—Troilus, swooning at the critical moment, must be picked up and placed in Criseyde’s bed by Pandarus. Book 3 ends with Troilus on top of Fortune’s Wheel; in Book 4, the wheel begins its downward turn. During a prisoner exchange, the Greeks, in gratitude for Calchas’s encouraging support and at his request, demand Criseyde in exchange for the Trojan Antenor. Devastated, the lovers meet one last time. Rejecting Pandarus’s ignoble plan to run away with Criseyde, Troilus is hesitant to accept Criseyde’s alternative—her promise that she will find a way to escape her father and return to Troy within 10 days. As Book 5 opens, Troilus is present at the formal exchange of prisoners, and the Greek Diomede acts as Criseyde’s escort to the enemy camp. Diomede immediately begins to woo Criseyde. While Troilus pathetically awaits his beloved at the gates of the city through the 10th day, Criseyde has essentially determined not to try to escape: Her fears and her instinct for self-preservation above all have overcome her love and good intentions, and she eventually accepts Diomede as her new lover—though the Narrator will not go so far as to say she gave him her heart. When Troilus sees a broach on Diomede’s armor that had been his gift to Criseyde, he realizes her betrayal. He enters battle ferociously, hoping to either kill Diomede or die himself to end his misery. But Achilles quickly puts an end to his life.

The poem ends with a long passage called the Palinode, in which Troilus ascends to the eighth sphere, from which he looks back upon the earth and laughs at his own attachment to the vain things of the physical world. The Narrator advises his readers to learn from Troilus’s lesson, and to place their faith not in the fickle Fortune that governs this world, but in the stability of God. Critical discussions of Chaucer’s poem have often centered on the appropriateness of this ending to the rest of the poem, since it seems to contradict much of the poem’s emphasis on the value of earthly love. Scholars have also discussed the nature of love in the story, and Chaucer’s apparent attitude toward the medieval idea of courtly love:Most would hold that Chaucer was more interested in the reality of the psychological complexities of love than in the artificial “codes” of conventional courtly love poetry. Of course, the characters of Criseyde and Pandarus have also excited a good deal of critical commentary. Another important question raised by many critics concerns the pervasiveness of Fortune, fate, and predestination in the poem. This concern is reinforced by many of the Boethian passages in the text, most notably a long soliloquy by Troilus in Book 4 in which he concludes that “all that comes comes by necessity.” Even the Narrator feels the pressure of this determinism, as he bemoans the fact that he is forced to follow his source and present Criseyde’s unfaithfulness. And all is set against the backdrop of a Troy the reader knows to be doomed to fall. The question of how much free will was involved in Troilus and Criseyde’s love may itself be answered in the controversial Palinode, which does imply that human beings have the freedom to turn from worldly vanity.Troilus and Criseydewas popular in its own time, surviving in 16 manuscripts and a number of fragments, plus three early printed editions. One of the manuscripts (Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 61) contains a remarkable miniature frontispiece of Chaucer reading the poem to the court of RICHARD II and ANNE OF BOHEMIA. The poem remains the most widely read and admired of Chaucer’s poems afterThe Canterbury Tales.

■ Barney, Stephen A., ed.Chaucer’s Troilus: Essays in Criticism. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, 1980.

■ Bloomfield, Morton W. “Distance and Predestination in Troilus and Criseyde,”PMLA72 (1957): 14–26.

■ Grady, Frank. “The Boethian Reader ofTroilus and Criseyde,”Chaucer Review33 (1999): 230–251.

■ Huppe, Bernard F. “The Unlikely Narrator: The Narrative Strategy of theTroilus.” InSigns and Symbols in Chaucer’s Poetry, edited by John P. Hermann and John J. Burke, Jr., 174–191. Tuscaloosa: Alabama University Press, 1981.

■ Kellogg, Laura D.Boccaccio’s and Chaucer’s Cressida. New York: P. Lang, 1995.

■ Kirby, Thomas.Chaucer’s Troilus: A Study in Courtly Love. Louisiana State University Studies 40. University, La.: Louisiana State University Press, 1940.

■ Mann, Jill. “Troilus’ Swoon,”Chaucer Review14 (1980): 319–345.

■ McAlpine, Monica E.The Genre of“Troilus and Criseyde.” Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1978.

■ Meech, Sanford B.Design in Chaucer’s Troilus. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1959.

■ Pearcy, Roy J.“ ‘And Nysus doughter song with fresshe entrente’: Tragedy and Romance inTroilus and Criseyde,”Studies in the Age of Chaucer24 (2002): 269–297.

■ Salu, Mary, ed.Essays on“Troilus and Criseyde.” Chaucer Studies, 3. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer: 1979.

■ Shoaf, R. A., and Catherine S. Cox, eds.Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde: Subgit to Alle Poesye: Essays in Criticism. Binghamton, N.Y.: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1992.

■ Steadman, John M.Disembodied Laughter: “Troilus”and the Apotheosis Tradition, A Reexamination of Narrative and Thematic Concerns. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972.

■ Vitto, Cindy L., and Marcia Smith Marzec, eds.New Perspectives on Criseyde. Fairview, N.C.: Pegasus Press, 2003.

■ Wetherbee,Winthrop.Chaucer and the Poets: A Essay on“Troilus and Criseyde.” Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1984.

■ Windeatt, Barry. “Chaucer and theFilostrato.” InChaucer and the Italian Trecento, edited by Piero Boitani, 163–183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.