The Man of
Law’s Tale (from Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales), with its introduction and
epilogue, has been preserved on a fragment of manuscript separate from any
other tale. It cannot therefore be certain that Chaucer intended this to be the
fifth tale, which is where many modern editions place it. Indeed, it would
appear from its epilogue that the Shipman is about to tell the next tale,
whereas what we usually get next is the amazing prologue of the Wife of Bath,
followed by her tale. This is simply evidence that Chaucer was never able to
edit the work as a whole, but it is unfortunate that we cannot relate this tale
to its neighbours with any certainty.
The Prologue
The
introduction to the Man of Law’s Tale (which includes the prologue proper) is
somewhat puzzling. We are given a precise date and time, namely ten o’clock in
the morning of the 18th of April, which the apparently well-educated
host has worked out from the angle of the Sun to the horizon and the length of
shadows cast by nearby trees. At all events, it is time for another tale, and
the host quotes Seneca in his lyrical exhortation to the Man of Law to be the
next teller.
However, the
Man of Law now declares that he is unworthy of the task, because the best
stories have already been told by none other than the poet Chaucer! He then
proceeds to mention by name several tales in “The Book of the Duchess” and “The
Legend of Good Women”. We therefore have the remarkable instance of Chaucer the
poet writing praise of himself through the mouth of one of his characters.
Could this be a form of advertising perhaps? Are the readers of the manuscript
intended to turn to Chaucer’s earlier writings for more of the same? At all
events, there is wonderful comedy here, in that the Man of Law is clearly
unaware that one of his fellow pilgrims is the very poet in comparison to whom
he declares himself unworthy. We, the readers, can appreciate the further joke
that the writer of the Man of Law’s Tale is, of course, the very same Chaucer!
The Man of Law,
not being up to composing such wonderful poetry as Chaucer’s, states that his
tale will be in prose. What then follows is a tale in rhyme royal, namely
seven-line stanzas with an ABABBCC rhyme scheme. Another joke? Or did Chaucer
write the introduction with one intention in mind, but forget this when it came
to writing the actual tale? We know from the other tales that use this verse
form, namely those of the Clerk, Prioress and the Second Nun, that this was a
scheme that suited the more refined tellers, and there is also a link in that
the four stories contain little humour and deal with classical or moral themes.
The introduction may have led us to expect self-mockery, but this is not what
we get.
The Tale
After a short
disquisition on poverty, which comprises the “prologue” by name, the story
begins. A group of Syrian merchants visit Rome ,
where they first hear about, and then see, Constance, the beautiful daughter of
the Emperor (a Christian). On returning to Syria , they tell the Sultan about
her, and he determines that he wants her for his wife. However, in order to do
this he realises that he will need to convert to Christianity, which he does
along with his whole court.
The marriage
is arranged, although it is not to the liking of Constance, who laments her
fate before setting sail for the Sultan’s court. Also unhappy is the Sultan’s
mother, who sees no reason why she, and everyone else, should be forced to
abandon their religion. She therefore determines to hatch a plot that will thwart
her son’s plans. This takes the form of engineering the slaughter of the entire
company at the pre-wedding feast, including the Sultan but excluding Constance,
whose fate is to be set adrift in a rudderless ship, with adequate provisions,
to make her own way home as best she can.
Being a pious
Christian, she prays to be saved, but seems not to have thought it worth
praying to be washed up quickly on a friendly shore, as she drifts for “yeres
and dayes” the whole length of the Mediterranean Sea and beyond. The Man of Law
is keen to point out that her preservation is miraculous, but we might wonder
at her partial deliverance, eventually leading to her arrival in Northumberland
(north-east England ), three
years after leaving Syria .
Her ship runs
aground close to a castle, the constable of which takes her ashore and, with
his wife Dame Hermengild, looks after her. She will not tell them who she is,
but is eventually able to convert Hermengild to Christianity and the two become
firm friends.
We are told
that there are only a handful of Christians living in the area, the rest having
fled to Wales. When the constable, Hermengild and Constance are out walking on
the beach, a blind man, who is a Christian, calls on Hermengild to restore his
sight. She cannot respond without betraying her new faith to her pagan husband,
but Constance uses the opportunity to convert
him as well.
A young
knight in the town has fallen in love with Constance, but she rejects him and
he plots revenge on her. When the constable is away, he breaks into the
bedchamber where the two women are asleep and cuts the throat of Dame
Hermengild, leaving the knife next to Constance .
When the
constable returns, accompanied by King Alla, he finds the body of his wife, next
to Constance and the blood-stained knife. The constable tells King Alla about
how Constance was found in the wrecked ship,
and neither of them can believe that she has committed the murder. The actual
murderer accuses her of the crime, but everyone in the castle bears witness to
her goodness and to how much she loved Hermengild.
At her trial,
the knight swears to her guilt on a book of Gospels (a strange touch, given
that he and the king are both pagans) but he is suddenly struck down, with his
eyes falling from his head. He is soon executed, the king and many of those
present are converted, and Constance becomes
queen.
The story now
starts to take a familiar turn, because the king’s mother, Donegild, is opposed
to the marriage.
While Alla is
away fighting, Constance gives birth to a son, and the constable sends a
messenger to inform the king. However, the messenger goes first to the king’s
mother, to whom he tells the news. She gets him drunk and substitutes a
different letter which he then takes to the king. This letter says that the
child is such a horrible creature that his mother must be an elf who practices
sorcery.
The king’s
replying message, however, refuses to condemn his wife, merely hoping that her
next child will be more to his liking. The messenger makes the same mistake
again, allowing Donegild to get him drunk on the return journey and substitute
a false message to take to the constable.
This second
message is an instruction, on pain of death, to banish Constance and her son,
setting them adrift in the ship in which she first arrived. Not understanding
why this should have happened, but having no choice but to obey what appear to
be the king’s commands, the constable prepares the ship and Constance
embarks with her son, after an ardent prayer to the Virgin Mary for her
protection.
When Alla
returns the truth comes out, leading to the execution of Donegild, but by this
time Constance is well out to sea.
It is five
years before Constance once again comes to shore, again within sight of a
castle, but this time she is not so lucky with the character of the man who
discovers her. The steward of the heathen lord of the castle attempts to rape
her, but she is protected by the Virgin Mary and, as she fights the man off, he
falls overboard and drowns. The ship now drifts off once more, eventually
returning to the Mediterranean Sea .
The tale now
turns to the Emperor of Rome, Constance’s father, who takes vengeance on the
Syrians by sending a senator with an army to punish those who slew the
Christians at the feast. Having done this, they return to Rome and, on the way, come across the
drifting ship on which are Constance and her son. The senator takes them home
with him, where they are looked after for a “longe tyme”. The senator’s wife,
we are told, just happens to be Constance’s aunt, but neither of them knows
this at the time.
King Alla
repents of having had his mother executed and makes a pilgrimage to Rome as an
act of penance. The senator visits the king to pay homage, taking Constance ’s young son with him. When Alla enquires about
the boy, the senator tells him the story of how he and his mother were found.
Alla then returns with the senator and he and Constance are reunited. A second
reunion then follows, namely between Constance and her father, the Emperor.
We are told
that her son eventually becomes Emperor himself, although Alla and Constance
return to England, where Alla dies a year later, after which Constance spends
the rest of her life in Rome.
The tale is
followed by a short epilogue that has no bearing on the tale itself, in which
the Parson is invited to tell the next tale but the Shipman interrupts to say
that he wants to hear no sermon from a “Lollard” so will tell the next tale
himself. As it happens, the tales of both the Parson and the Shipman appear
much later in the sequence as it is usually put together.
Discussion
The Man of
Law’s Tale is full of unlikely coincidences, historical inaccuracies and geographical
improbabilities, so what can we make of it? It is a form of story that is known
in about 60 different versions in folklore, commonly referred to as that of the
“calumniated wife”, meaning “falsely accused”. Chaucer’s source is the
“Anglo-Norman Chronicle” of Nicholas Trivet, a writer of the early 14th
century. The elements of false accusation, unjust punishment and letters going
astray, but with virtue being triumphant in the end, are familiar elements in
the various versions, but Chaucer exercises considerable freedom with the
theme, punctuating the narrative with moral and philosophical reflections like
those of a Greek chorus.
The religious
theme is strongly emphasised in this tale, with Christianity being seen as
triumphing over Islam and paganism, in the same breath as good over evil. In
historical terms, this is one area where the story fails to hang together,
because the real-life character of Constance would have been dead a number of
years before Mohammed had the revelations that led to the founding of Islam.
Another problem is that the actual Emperor featured in the story ruled in
Byzantium rather than Rome. However, it is not surprising that Chaucer would
have been unaware of these inaccuracies.
As a story,
it is well-paced with remarkable and unexpected happenings at every turn,
although it leaves many questions unanswered, such as why people would have
acted in the way they did. For example, why would the murdering knight have
imagined that Constance , having killed her
friend, would then have gone back to sleep alongside her? As Constance
was his object of hatred, why did he not kill her at the same time? Another
thought is, why does the Emperor take so long to send an army to Syria ?
However, no doubt it is modern nit-picking to raise such objections!
The
characterizations in the tale are not particularly good, as the events of the
story take precedence in what is quite a short tale. Indeed, Constance is
almost an allegorical symbol, being the incarnation of Fortitude in a similar manner
to how Griselda in the Clerk’s Tale becomes a representation of Patience.
Nonetheless, we can imagine the pilgrims thoroughly enjoying this tale, whether
for its moral precepts or wondering how things would turn out in the end.
© John
Welford
No comments:
Post a Comment