The Nun's Priest's Tale 2

.
.

The Nun’s Priest’s Tale

.

Click here for the Summary and Analysis - The Nun's Priest's Tale 1

.
.


.Epilogue to The Nun's Priest's Tale

The Host, praises the tale as "myrie", and then, as he did with the Monk, suggests that the Nun's Priest would be an excellent breeding man (trede-foul) if only he were allowed to breed - for the Nun's Priest, the Host continues, is brawny, with a great neck and large chest.

Analysis

The Nun’s Priest’s Tale is one of the best-loved and best-known of all of the Tales, and one whose genre, in Chaucer’s time and now, is instantly recognizable. It is a beast fable, just like Aesop’s fable, and as one of Chaucer’s successors, the medieval Scots poet Robert Henryson, would go on to explore in great detail, its key relationship is that between human and animal. The key question of the genre is addressed at the end by the narrator himself: telling those who find a tale about animals a folly to take the moral from the tale, disregarding the tale itself. But can we take a human moral from a tale about animals? Can an animal represent – even just in a tale – a human in any useful way?

For a start, it is important to notice that the animal-human boundary is blurred even before the tale begins, when the Host mocks the Nun’s Priest (who, being a religious man, would have been celibate) and suggesting that he would have made excellent breeding stock (a “tredefowl”, or breeding-fowl, is the word he uses). The thought is an interesting one – because if we can think of the Nun’s Priest himself as potentially useful in breeding, animalistic terms, then can we think of his tale in potentially useful in human terms?

The question frames the other themes of the tale. The issue of woman’s counsel is raised again (last foregrounded in Chaucer’s tale of Melibee) explicitly – should Chaunticleer take Pertelote’s advice about how to interpret his dreams? Should he disregard his dreams, and get on with his life? He does, of course, looking among the cabbages (perhaps even to find herbs), when he sees the fox – and at that point, the tale seems to suggest, he should never have listened to his wife in the first place: his fears were valid.

That is, until we remember what the narrator tells us anyway at a crucial point, that his tale is “of a cok” – about a chicken. It is hardly as if we need a prophetic dream to tell us that foxes like eating chickens: its what we might call animal instinct. This is doubly highlighted when, after quoting Cato and discussing the various textual politics of dream interpretation, Chaunticleer calls his wives excitedly to him because he has found a grain of corn – and then has uncomplicated animal sex with Pertelote all night. It is a contradiction, Chaucer seems to imply, to expect unchicken-like behavior from a chicken: yet the contradiction is one which fuels the whole genre of beast fable. If the Nun’s Priest had too much human dignity and restraint to be a breeding fowl, Cato-quoting Chaunticleer has animal urges too strong to be a viable auctour.

Except that, of course, with the possible exception of Arviragus and Dorigen in the Franklin's Tale, there is no more stable and robust “marriage” in the Canterbury Tales than Chanticleer and Pertelote’s. The two fowl have a fulfilling sexual relationship - and the sex occurs as a pleasurable, uncomplicated end in itself, a stark contrast with the sexual transactions of the Franklin and the Wife of Bath’s tales. In one sense, then, the animals are not so bestial.

Interpreting dreams, incidentally, is a favorite theme of Middle English literature, and it frames a whole genre of poetry, known as “dream poems”, of which Chaucer himself wrote several (including the Book of the Duchess and the House of Fame). Dreams and text are closely intertwined, and – even in this tale – the way in which a dream poem juxtaposes the text of the dream with the text of the story is clear. Is a dream any more or less real than a tale? If we can take a moral from a tale, can we take one from a dream?

This tale is in many ways a return to the ground, a return to basics. We start with a poor widow, and a dusty yard - a setting far removed from the high-culture classical tragedies of the Monk. Moreover, the tale keeps emphasizing anality and bottoms - in Chaunticleer’s two examples of dreams-coming-true, a dung cart and a breaking ship’s “bottom” are the hinge of the story, and Pertelote’s advice to Chaunticleer is to take some “laxatyf” to clear out his humours. There is a good-natured sense of groundedness about this tale, a return – after the dark run of Monk (interrupted), before him the punishing Melibee (and interrupted Sir Thopas) and bitter Prioress – to the humour and warmth of the early tales. Yet its theme also darkly foreshadows the end of the tale-telling project itself.

If the tale, taken simplistically, does endorse prophetic dreams (though, as mentioned above, a look at the animal nature of its characters might be seen as parodying the whole concept!) then what is the “moral” that the narrator wants us to take away at the end? As ever, this isn’t totally clear. Yet one thing it might be is the importance of speaking or not speaking.

One of the things that makes Chaunticleer the morally-representative chicken a problem is the fact that he can speak and argue with his wife on the one hand, yet cry “cok! Cok!” when he sees a grain on the floor. He is both chicken and human, rather like Chaucer writes as both himself and as Nun’s Priest. The tale, however, is structured by people knowing when to speak and not knowing when to speak: Pertelote speaks out to wake Chaunticleer from his dream, Chaunticleer foolishly opens his mouth to sing for the fox when he is captured, and it is Chaunticleer’s final visitation of the trap that he himself fell into on the fox which causes him in turn to open his mouth – and let Chaunticleer go. Know when you should “jangle” (chatter) and know when to hold your peace.

It is a theme of course which points a sharp finger at the whole idea of a beast fable - the whole genre, we might argue, resting on the writer precisely ignoring the correct moments to have a character speak or not speak; and it also is a dangerous moral for the Tales as a whole. In a work of literature that constantly apes orality, the injunction to shut up is a serious one – and, as a comparison of the Nun’s Priest’s Tale to the Manciple’s Tale reveals – one very much in Chaucer’s mind at the very end of the Canterbury project.

.
.
.

Click here for the Summary and Analysis of The Nun's Prist's Tale - 

The Nun's Priest's Tale 1

.

Read More

The Nun's Priest's Tale

.
.
.

The Nun’s Priest’s Tale

.

The Nun’s Priest’s Tale, one of the 24 stories in The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, “The Nun’s Priest’s Tale” is based on the medieval tale of Reynard the Fox, common to French, Flemish, and German literature.

The protagonist of this mock-heroic story is Chanticleer, a rooster with seven wives, foremost among them the hen Pertelote. Pertelote dismisses Chanticleer’s dream of being attacked and tells him to go about his business. A fox soon approaches and flatters him, recalling the exquisite song of Chanticleer’s father. The vain rooster is thus tricked into closing his eyes and crowing, only to be seized by the fox and carried off. As Chanticleer’s owners and the animals of the barnyard run after them, Chanticleer suggests that his captor yell to tell them to turn back. When the fox opens his mouth, the rooster escapes. The tale ends with a warning against flattery.

.
.
.

Summary

A poor widow, rather advanced in age, had a small cottage beside a grove, standing in a dale. This widow led a very simple life, providing for herself and her daughters from a small farm. In a yard which she kept, enclosed all around with palings and with a ditch outside it, she had a cock called Chaunticleer, who was peerless in his crowing. Chaunticleer was beautifully coloured, with a comb redder than coral, and a beak as black as jet, and he had under his government seven chickens, who were his paramours, of which his favourite was Dame Pertelote.

One morning, Chaunticleer began to groan in his throat, as a man who was troubled in his dreams does, and Pertelote, aghast, asked him what the matter was. Chaunticleer replied that he had had a bad dream, and prayed to God to help him to correctly interpret it. He had dreamt that he, roaming around the yard, saw an animal “lyk an hound” which tried to seize his body and have him dead. The “hound’s” colour was somewhere between yellow and red, and his tail and both his ears were tipped with black.

Pertelote mocked him, telling him that he was a coward. Pertelore then argues that dreams are meaningless visions, caused simply by ill humors (bad substances in the body) – and quotes Cato at length to demonstrate her point. Her solution is that she will pick herbs from the yard in order to bring his humors back to normal.

Chaunticleer disagreed, arguing that while Cato is certainly an authority, there are many more authorities available to be read who argue that dreams are significations – of good things and bad things to come. He stated the example of one man who, lying in his bed, dreamt that his friend was being murdered for his gold in an ox’s stall, and that his body was hidden in a dung cart. Remembering his dream, this man went to a dung cart at the west gate of the town, and found the murdered body of his friend. Chaunticleer then described the story of two men, who were preparing to cross the sea. One of them dreamed that, if he crossed the sea the next day, he would be drowned - he told his companion, who laughed at him, and resolved to go anyway. The ship’s bottom tore, and his companion was drowned. Chaunticleer also cited the examples of Macrobius, Croesus and Andromache, who each had prophecies in their dreams.

Then, however, Chaunticleer praised Pertelote, asking her to speak of “mirth”, and stop all this talk of prophecy - the beauty of her face, he says, makes him feel fearless. He then quoted the proverb “Mulier est hominis confusio”, translating it as “Woman is man’s joy and all his bliss”, when it actually translates “Woman is man’s ruin”. Chaunticleer then flew down from his beam, called all of his hens to him, and revealed that he’d found a grain lying in the yard. He then clasped Pertelote to him with his wings, and copulated with her until morning.

When the month of March was over, Chaunticleer was walking in full pride, all of his wives around him, when a coal fox (a fox with black-tipped feet, ears and tail) broke through the hedges and into the yard. He bode his time for a while. The narrator then goes off into an aside, addressing Chaunticleer, and wishing that he had taken “wommennes conseils” (woman’s counsel) – before he moves back into the tale, reminding us that his tale “is of a cok”.

Chaunticleer sang merrily in the yard, and, casting his eyes among the cabbages, caught sight of the fox – and would have fled, but the fox addressed him, asking where he was going, and claiming to be his friend. The fox claimed to have met Chaunticleer’s mother and father, and talked of his father’s excellent singing voice, and the way his father used to stretch out his neck and stand on his tiptoes before singing. The fox then asked whether Chaunticleer can sing like his father – and Chaunticleer stood on his tiptoes, stretched out his neck, closed his eyes, and, as he began to sing, the fox grabbed him by the throat and ran off to the wood with him.

The poor widow and her two daughters, hearing the cry of the chickens, ran after the fox toward the crove, and many other men and animals ran after them. Chaunticleer managed to speak to the fox, and encouraged him to turn to his pursuers and curse them, telling him that he was going to eat the cock. The fox agreed – but as he opened his mouth to agree, the cock broke from his mouth suddenly and flew high up into a tree. The fox tried to persuade him down, saying that he had been misinterpreted, and that Chaunticleer should fly down in order that he might “seye sooth” (tell the truth) about what he had meant, but Chaunticleer knew better this time. The fox finally cursed all those who “jangleth whan he sholde holde his pees”.

The narrator then addresses everyone who thinks the tale is mere foolery, asking them to take the moral of the tale, rather than the tale itself: taking the fruit, and letting the chaff remain. Thus ends the Nun’s Priest’s Tale.

.
.
.

Analysis

The Nun's Priest's Tale is one of Chaucer's most brilliant tales, and it functions on several levels. The tale is an outstanding example of the literary style known as a bestiary (or a beast fable) in which animals behave like human beings. Consequently, this type of fable is often an insult to man or a commentary on man's foibles. To suggest that animals behave like humans is to suggest that humans often behave like animals.

This tale is told using the technique of the mock-heroic, which takes a trivial event and elevates it into something of great universal import. Alexander Pope's poem The Rape of the Lock is an excellent example a mock-heroic composition; it treats a trivial event (the theft of a lock of hair, in this case) as if it were sublime. Thus when Don Russel, the fox, runs off with Chaunticleer in his jaws, the chase that ensues involves every creature on the premises, and the entire scene is narrated in the elevated language found in the great epics where such language was used to enhance the splendid deeds of epic heroes. Chaucer uses elevated language to describe a fox catching a rooster in a barnyard — a far cry from the classic epics. The chase itself reminds one of Achilles' chasing Hector around the battlements in the Iliad. To compare the plight of Chaunticleer to that of Homer's Hector and to suggest that the chase of the fox is an epic chase similar to classical epics indicates the comic absurdity of the situation.

The mock-heroic tone is also used in other instances: when the Nun's Priest describes the capture of the Don Russel and refers to the event in terms of other prominent traitors (referring to the fox as "a new Iscariot, a second Ganelon and a false hypocrite, Greek Sinon") and when the barnyard animals discuss high philosophical and theological questions. For Lady Pertelote and Chaunticleer to discuss divine foreknowledge in a high intellectual and moral tone in the context of barnyard chickens is the height of comic irony. We must also remember the cause of the discussion of divine foreknowledge: Lady Pertelote thinks that Chaunticleer's dream or nightmare was the result of his constipation, and she recommends a laxative. Chaunticleer's rebuttal is a brilliant use of classical sources that comment on dreams and is a marvelously comic means of proving that he is not constipated and does not need a laxative. Throughout the mock-heroic, mankind loses much of its human dignity and is reduced to animal values.

The Nun's Priest's ideas and positions are set up in his genially ironic attitude toward both the simple life of the widow and the life of the rich and the great as represented by the cock, Chaunticleer (in Chaucer's English, the name means "clear singing"). The Nun's Priest's opening lines set up the contrast. A poor old widow with little property and small income leads a sparse life, and it does not cost much for her to get along. The implication is that living the humble Christian life is easier for the poor than for the rich, who have, like Chaunticleer, many obligations and great responsibilities (after all, if Chaunticleer does not crow at dawn, the sun cannot rise).

The Nun's Priest contrasts the two human worlds of the poor and the rich in the description of the poor widow and the elegant Chaunticleer. The widow's "bour and halle" (bedroom) was "ful sooty," that is black from the hearth-flame where she had eaten many a slim or slender meal. Notice the contrast: The term "bour and halle" comes from courtly verse of the time and conjures up the image of a castle. The idea of a "sooty bower" or hall is absurd: The rich would never allow such a thing. Yet soot is inevitable in a peasant's hut, and from the peasant's point of view, the cleanliness fetish of the rich may also be absurd. A slender meal ("sklendre meel") would of course be unthinkable among the rich, but it is all the poor widow has. Likewise, the widow has no great need of any "poynaunt sauce" because she has no gamey food (deer, swan, ducks, and do on) nor meats preserved past their season, and no aristocratic recipes. She has "No dayntee morsel" to pass through her "throte," but then, when Chaucer substitutes the word "throat" ("throte) for the expected "lips," the dainty morsel that the image calls up is no longer very dainty. The aristocratic disease gout does not keep the widow from dancing, but it's unlikely that she dances anyway. Dancing is for the young or rich. As a pious lower-class Christian, she scorns dancing of all kinds. In short, the whole description of the widow looks ironically at both the rich and the poor.

When the Nun's Priest turns to Chaunticleer, he begins to comment on the life of the rich in other ironic ways. Chaunticleer has great talents and grave responsibilities, but the cock's talent (crowing) is a slightly absurd one, however proud he may be of it. (In middle English. as in modern, "crowing" can also mean boasting or bragging.) And Chaunticleer's responsibility, making sure the sun does not go back down in the morning, is ludicrous. His other responsibilities — taking care of his wives — are equally silly. Part of the Nun's Priest's method in his light-hearted analysis of human pride is an ironic identification of Chaunticleer with everything noble that he can think of. His physical description, which uses many of the adjectives that would be used to describe the warrior/knight (words such as "crenelated," "castle Wall," "fine coral," "polished jet," "azure," "lilies," and "burnished gold," for example) reminds one of an elegant knight in shining armor.

The reader should be constantly aware of the ironic contrast between the barnyard and the real world, which might be another type of barnyard. That is, the "humanity" and "nobility" of the animals is ironically juxtaposed against their barnyard life. This contrast is an oblique comment on human pretensions and aspirations in view of the background, made clear when Don Russel challenges Chaunticleer to sing, and the flattery blinds Chaunticleer to the treachery. Here, the tale refers to human beings and the treachery found in the court through flattery. Chaunticleer's escape is also effected by the use of flattery. Don Russel learns that he should not babble or listen to flattery when it is better to keep quiet. And Chaunticleer has learned that flattery and pride go before a fall.

.
.

.

Click here for Epilogue to The Nun's Priest's Tale - 

The Nun's Priest's Tale 2

.
.
.

.
.

Read More

Norman Conquest 1066

.

.Norman Conquest 1066

The Norman conquest of 1066 ended Anglo-Saxon rule of England and installed a new king. The stage was set for the invasion when King Edward the Confessor died on January 5, 1066. He did not have any children so he had no heirs to take his place on the English throne.

.

Invasion of England

The conquest was the final act of a complicated drama that had begun years earlier, in the reign of Edward the Confessor, last king of the Anglo-Saxon royal line. Edward, who had almost certainly designated William as his successor in 1051, was involved in a childless marriage and used his lack of an heir as a diplomatic tool, promising the throne to different parties throughout his reign, including Harold Godwineson, later Harold II, the powerful earl of Wessex. The exiled Tostig, who was Harold’s brother, and Harald III Hardraade, king of Norway, also had designs on the throne and threatened invasion. Amid this welter of conflicting claims, Edward from his deathbed named Harold his successor on January 5, 1066, and Harold was crowned king the following day. However, Harold’s position was compromised, according to the Bayeux Tapestry and other Norman sources, because in 1064 he had sworn an oath, in William’s presence, to defend William’s right to the throne.

From almost the beginning of his reign, Harold faced challenges to his authority. Tostig began raiding the southern and eastern coasts of England in May, eventually joining forces with Harald III. Harold was able to keep his militia on guard throughout the summer but dismissed it early in September, when he ran out of supplies and his peasant soldiers needed to return to their fields for the harvest. This left the south without defenses, exposing it to invasion by William. Before William arrived, however, Harald III and Tostig invaded in the north; Harold hastened to Yorkshire, where at Stamford Bridge (September 25) he won a smashing victory in which both Harald III and Tostig perished.

Meanwhile, on the Continent, William had secured support for his invasion from both the Norman aristocracy and the papacy. By August 1066 he had assembled a force of 4,000–7,000 knights and foot soldiers, but unfavourable winds detained his transports for eight weeks. Finally, on September 27, while Harold was occupied in the north, the winds changed, and William crossed the Channel immediately. Landing in Pevensey on September 28, he moved directly to Hastings. Harold, hurrying southward with about 7,000 men, approached Hastings on October 13. Surprised by William at dawn on October 14, Harold drew up his army on a ridge 10 miles (16 km) to the northwest.

Harold’s wall of highly trained infantry held firm in the face of William’s mounted assault; failing to breach the English lines and panicked by the rumour of William’s death, the Norman cavalry fled in disorder. But William, removing his helmet to show he was alive, rallied his troops, who turned and killed many English soldiers. As the battle continued, the English were gradually worn down; late in the afternoon, Harold was killed (by an arrow in the eye, according to the Bayeux Tapestry), and by nightfall the remaining English had scattered and fled. William then made a sweeping advance to isolate London, and at Berkhamstead the major English leaders submitted to him. He was crowned in Westminster Abbey on Christmas Day, 1066. Sporadic indigenous revolts continued until 1071; the most serious, in Northumbria (1069–70), was suppressed by William himself, who then devastated vast tracts of the north. The subjection of the country was completed by the rapid building of a great number of castles.

Consequences of the Conquest

The extent and desirability of the changes brought about by the conquest have long been disputed by historians. Certainly, in political terms, William’s victory destroyed England’s links with Scandinavia, bringing the country instead into close contact with the Continent, especially France. Inside England the most radical change was the introduction of land tenure and military service. While tenure of land in return for services had existed in England before the conquest, William revolutionized the upper ranks of English society by dividing the country among about 180 Norman tenants-in-chief and innumerable mesne (intermediate) tenants, all holding their fiefs by knight service. The result, the almost total replacement of the English aristocracy with a Norman one, was paralleled by similar changes of personnel among the upper clergy and administrative officers.

Anglo-Saxon England had developed a highly organized central and local government and an effective judicial system (see Anglo-Saxon law). All these were retained and utilized by William, whose coronation oath showed his intention of continuing in the English royal tradition. The old administrative divisions were not superseded by the new fiefs, nor did feudal justice normally usurp the customary jurisdiction of shire and hundred courts. In them and in the king’s court, the common law of England continued to be administered. Innovations included the new but restricted body of “forest law” and the introduction in criminal cases of the Norman trial by combat alongside the old Saxon ordeals. Increasing use was made of the inquest procedure—the sworn testimony of neighbours, both for administrative purposes and in judicial cases. A major change was William’s removal of ecclesiastical cases from the secular courts, which allowed the subsequent introduction into England of the then rapidly growing canon law.

William also transformed the structure and character of the church in England. He replaced all the Anglo-Saxon bishops, except Wulfstan of Dorchester, with Norman bishops. Most notably, he secured the deposition of Stigand, the archbishop of Canterbury—who held his see irregularly and had probably been excommunicated by Pope Leo IX—and appointed in his place Lanfranc of Bec, a respected scholar and one of William’s close advisers. Seeking to impose a more orderly structure on the English episcopacy, the king supported Lanfranc’s claims for the primacy of Canterbury in the English church. William also presided over a number of church councils, which were held far more frequently than under his predecessors, and introduced legislation against simony (the selling of clerical offices) and clerical marriage. A supporter of monastic reform while duke of Normandy, William introduced the latest reforming trends to England by replacing Anglo-Saxon abbots with Norman ones and by importing numerous monks. Although he founded only a small number of monasteries, including Battle Abbey (in honour of his victory at Hastings), William’s other measures contributed to the quickening of monastic life in England.

Probably the most regrettable effect of the conquest was the total eclipse of the English vernacular as the language of literature, law, and administration. Superseded in official documents and other records by Latin and then increasingly in all areas by Anglo-Norman, written English hardly reappeared until the 13th century.

..
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.

Read More

Ages of British English Literature

From the beginning to the Twenty first century, the British English literature can be divided into some periods or ages based on the time of writing, writing style, different nature and attitude. Of these, the important Periods are described below-

AGES OF ENGLISH LITERATURE

• The old English [450AD -1066AD] 
• The Middle English [1066AD-1500AD] 
• The Renaissance period [1500-1600] 
• The Elizabethan period [1558-1603] 
• The Jacobean period [1603-1625] 
• The Caroline period [1625-1649] 
• The Puritan period [1649-1660] 
• The Restoration period [1660-1700] 
• The Augustan period [1700-1785] 
• The Romantic period [1785-1830] 
• The Victorian period [1830-1901] 
• The Modern period [1890-1918] 
• The Inter- war period [1918-1939] 
• The Mid 20th century [1939 onwards]

?   THE  OLD  ENGLISH  PERIOD  [450-1066] 

             According to British traditions the English from the continent came first as mercenaries to help in the defense against the Picts and Scots.

• Then followed the Christianization of the pagan English tribes
• The establishment of the Dane law in English
• The accession of a Danish king
• The Norman influence on the English court when began before the conquest in 1066 

Beowulf: The theme of the poem is continental Germanic. The poem can be considered as the pagan origin. Work is anonymous.

Anglo- Saxon Chronicle: Inspired by King Alfred. Description of the horrors of Stephen's reign. Description of William the conqueror.

Authors

Ø  Caedmon (poet): The Genesis, Exodus, Daniel. Three shorter poems often considered as one under the title ‘Christ and Satan’.

Ø  Cynewulf (poet): Four poems contain the signature of Cynewulf in runic. Characters: Juliana, Elena, Christ, and the Fates of Apostles.

?   THE  MIDDLE  ENGLISH  PERIOD [1066AD-1500] 

• Period of transition and of experiment
• The transition
• The anonymous nature Works are entirely without known authors
• Internal struggle between king, clergy, noble and people General movements of the times:-the rise of the religious orders, the blossoming of chivalry, the spirit of romance, bringing new sympathy for women and poor, the crusades, widening European outlook, The Renaissance.
• Establishment of Norman and Angevin dynasties.
• The domination of poetry surviving works of the period is poetry.

Important Works

Ø  The vision of William concerning piers the plowman- William Langland

Ø  Brut- Lazamon

?   THE  CHAUCEREAN  PERIOD (1340-1400) 

• The accession of his grandson Richard II
• The period includes the greater part of the rein of Edward III and the long French wars associated with his name.
• The age of unrest and transition.
• The revolution of 1399, the disposition of Richard, and the foundation of the Lancastrian dynasty. 

The literary movement of the age clearly reflected by five famous poets:-

– Wycliffe: giving the gospel to the people in their own tongue.

– Mandeville:  romancing about the wonders to be seen abroad.

– Chaucer:  sharing in all the stirring life of the times. The first humanist. The first novelist in verse. The father of modern English language.

– Gower: criticizing the vigorous life and plainly afraid of its consequences.

– Langland: voicing the social discontent, preaching the equality of men and the dignity of labor. 

Important works

– The Canterbury Tales

– The Book of The Duchess

– The House of Fame

– Anelida and Arcite

– The Parliament of Fowls

– Troilus and Criseyde

– The Legend of Good Women

Shorter Poems

– An ABC

– The Complaint of Mass

– The Complaint to His Lady

– The Complaint of Venus

– Fortune

– Truth.

?   THE  ELIZABETHAN  PERIOD [1558-1603] 

– The golden age of English history

– Shakespeare is considered the greatest writer of the English language

– The Elizabethan era is perhaps more famous for its theatre and the works of William Shakespeare

– Elizabethan Renaissance theatre begins with the opening of the “The Red Lion” theatre in 1567 Other famous theatres:-Curtain Theatre [1577] - Globe Theatre [1599]

– Important genres of theatre are history plays, the tragedy and the comedy.

– William Shakespeare [1564-1616]:

ü  The greatest poet and dramatist in English literature

ü  Playwright, actor and shareholder in an acting company

ü  He wrote 37 plays, 154 sonnets, 2 long narrative poem and 3 poems Works 

ü  

 Poems:  The Rape of Lucrene (1594), Venus and Adonis (1593), The Passionate Pilgrim (1599)

  Tragedies: Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth,

  Comedies: The Midsummer Night’s Dream, The Merchant of Venice , As You Like it , Twelfth Night

  Tragic comedies: Cymbeline, The Winter’s Tale , The Tempest

  Last play: The Tempest (an autobiographical play).

– Edmund Spencer [1552-1599] :

ü  ‘Poets’ poet’ and ‘Prince of poet’- called by Charles lamb and Milton

ü  Poets poet and critic’s critic - T.S Eliot

            Works: The Faerie Queen, Shepherds calendar,  Prothalamion, Epithalamion.

– Sir Philip Sydney [1554-1586]:

ü  Father of English criticism

ü  He took a brilliant in the military-literary-courtly life.

             Works: Astrophel and Stella, Arcadia, Apology for Poetry

– Francis Bacon [1561-1526]:

ü  Father of English essays

ü  Bacon’s fame rests very largely on his essays -the aphoristic style and epigrammatic brevity in his essay -the compact and condensed thought in his essay, are very important

            Works: The history of Henry VII , The new Atlantis , The advancement of learning Christopher    Marlowe , Dramatist and poet , Doctor Faustus.

– University wits :   

ü  Group of young dramatists associated with oxford and Cambridge.

ü  They introduced Romantic drama into English theatre.

ü  The University Wits are: - George Peele (1558-1598), Robert Greene (1558-1592), Thomas Nash (1567-1601), Thomas Lodge (1558-1625), Thomas Kyd (1558-1594), John Lyly , Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593).

?   JACOBEAN  PERIOD [1603-1625]

ü  James ascended the throne in 1603

ü  Court standards were lowered

ü  Development of English prose

ü  Decline of the drama after the death of Shakespeare.

ü  Important events from Jacobean to restoration period: Caroline age, Metaphysical age, Puritan revolution, Puritan age, Period of commonwealth.

The cavalier poets

– Edmund Waller:-Go Lovely Rose

– Richard Lovelace:- Lucasta , To Alter From Prison

– Robert Herrick:- Hesperides , Noble Numbers

            Metaphysical poets

– Abraham Cowley:The Mistress

– Andrew Marvell: The Rehearsal Transposed

– John Donne:

– Henry Vaughan: Silex Saintillans.

?   PURITAN  PERIOD [1649-1660]

ü Clash between Catholics and Protestants

ü Extreme fundamentalism

ü 1649-1660-Rule of commonwealth under Oliver Cromwell

ü Civil war between Charles I and Puritans for 7 years

ü Charles I ascended the throne after the death of Cromwell ; beginning of Restoration period

ü Rebellion began during the age of Charles I.

– John Milton:

ü  The first literary epic poet

ü  Poetry , mathematics and music were his main studies

Works:  Paradise Lost, Paradise Regained, Comus, On Blindness, Lycidas

?   RESTORATION  POERIOD [1660-1700]

ü  Death of Cromwell in 1660

ü  Influence of French culture Theatres came back to life

ü  Witty intellectual satirizing manners and fashions of a particular time in society

ü  Accession marked the beginning of the Restoration Age

– John Dryden:-The Rival Ladies, Tyrannick Love, All for Love

– William Wycherley:-Love in a Wood, The Gentleman Dancing, Master

– George Etherege:-The Comical Revenge , She Would If She Could.

– William Congreve:-The Old Bachelor , The Double Dealer , The Mourning Bride

?   AUGUSTAN  AGE [1700-1785] 

ü  Strong traditionalism

ü  To them poetry was an imitation of human life

ü  Rise and fall of satires

ü  Rise of novels

ü  Conceived literature primarily as an art

ü  New developments in science shattered man’s ego

– Oliver Goldsmith:-She Stoops to Conquer, The Deserted Village, The Man in Black

– Dr. Samuel Johnson:-Preface to Shakespeare, London, Rasellas

– Daniel Defoe:-A True –born English man , Robinson Crusoe, Raxona

– Henry Fielding:-Joseph Andrews, Tom Jones, Amelia

– Alexander Pope: An Essay on Criticism, The Rape of the Lock, Windsor Forest.

?   ROMANTIC  AGE [1785-1830]

ü English Romanticism came from Germany

ü  Love for external nature

ü  Interest in medievalism

ü  Inaugurated with the publication of the Lyrical Ballads(1798)

ü  Revival of lyricism

ü  The influence of French literature

ü  Give importance to subjectivity

– William Wordsworth: The Prelude, The Excursion, Immortality Ode

– Lord Byron: Child Harold’s Pilgrimage , House of Idleness Cain

– Mercy Bysshe Shelly: Ode to The West Wind ,Prometheus, Unbound

– John Keats: Isabella , Hyperion, Lamia , Ode to Nightingale

– Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice, Emma.

– Samuel Taylor Coleridge: Biographia Literaria , Kubla Khan , Scholar , Life of Nelson , Roderick

?   VICTORIAN  PERIOD [1830-1901]

ü  It extends to the death of Queen Victoria

ü  Mood of Nationalistic power

ü  Spiritual conflicts was evident

ü  Publication of Origin of Species

ü  Industrial Revolution

ü  Social stress

– Robert Browning:-The Lady of Shallot ,Fra Lippo Lippi , Men and Women

– Mathew Arnold:-Dover Beach , Scholar Gypsy , Essays on Criticism

– Charles Dickens:-David Copperfield ,Dickwide Papers, Hard times

– Thomas Hardy:-Tess of D’Umbervilles ,Far from the Madding Crowd

– Lord Tennyson: Ulysses, Lotus Eaters , Idllus of the King .

?   THE  MODERN  PERIOD [1890-1918] 

ü  Break with tradition

ü  Rejected Romantic conventions

ü  Traditional verse patterns were rejected

ü  The catastrophe of the world wars had shaken faith in moral and spiritual life

– T. S. Eliot:- Ash Wednesday, The Hollow Man, The Waste Land, Murder in the Cathedral

– W. B .Yeats:- Sailing to Bysantium, September 1913

– Ezra Pound:- Cantos

– W .H. Auden:-Age of Anxiety , Look Stranger

– D .H. Lawrence:-Sons And Lovers, Rainbow, Women in Love.

Page-1

Page-2

Page-3

Page-4

Thank you for watching. Comment for feedback or any suggestion ...

Read More