Chaucer and Scriptural Tradition

Margaret McGrath was a research librarian at St. Michael's College, University of Toronto.

The place of scripture in the poetry of Geoffrey Chaucer has come under increasing scholarly scrutiny since a pioneering article by Grace Landrum in 1924. This collection of a dozen articles edited by a member of the English Department at the University of Ottawa is evidence of the refinement of the study these 60 years later.

The contents are arranged in five sections, the first describing the fourteenth century society that produced the poet. The next discusses questions arising directly from Chaucer’s texts, including his use of biblical allusions both as straightforward typology, and as what is referred to as “parody.” The third section is concerned with the extent to which Chaucer was influenced by acknowledged interpreters of the Bible, both earlier and those more contemporary with him. The fourth revolves around The Canterbury Tales, and the last consists of one essay on The House of Fame.

Although the introductory background by the esteemed D.W. Robertson, Jr., is indispensable, the third and fourth sections, containing four essays each, overshadow the rest of the volume. Much attention is paid in both sections to the scriptural commentators who might have influenced the poet. Were they patristic or later? Russell Peck finds St. Paul a “pivotal authority.” The editor, in one of the longest, makes a masterful case for that forerunner of the Reformation, John Wyclif. Repeatedly, authors find the Pauline “the letter killeth but the spirit quiekeneth” a key phrase.

The running textual commentaries that are scriptural glosses, and their authors, are explored for evidence to support the various hypotheses. At least equally useful is Graham Caies’ contribution on the marginal glosses in the earliest manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales, some of which may be by Chaucer himself.

Several of the authors, including Prof. Jeffrey in his introduction, question what scriptural commentaries would have been easily available to the poet. And assuming they were, as he was educated, would his allusions carry out his intent if his audience was not so schooled?

For researchers at an advanced level, this is a worthwhile resource. Unlike many collections, the volume is well indexed and has an additional index of the Chaucerian scriptural references cited.