In keeping with my previous post discussing the influence of Augustinian philosophy on early literature, I have decided to dedicate this post to discussing the theme of predestination in Geoffrey Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde. Predestination, a topic Augustine himself discussed in his writings, was a major biblical concept that consumed the medieval mind to the extent that medieval literature would become littered with themes of fate and fortune. The famous image of fortunes wheel originated in antiquity, but became a common motif in the medieval period and is both referenced and explored in several medieval works, particularly those of the romance genre. The image of fortunes wheel depicts a wheel on which several people are placed. Some reside at the top of the wheel, whilst others can be seen falling to the bottom. The concept is straightforward in principle. Fortune by nature is unstable and unpredictable. You are never guaranteed a place at the top of fortunes wheel.
The biblical concept of predestination adds a layer of complication to the concept of fortune however. It was understood, due to the teachings of the likes of Augustine, that God in His sovereignty elected those who would be saved before the beginning of time. The concept is drawn from passages such as Romans 8:
28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
Romans 8: 28-30
.jpg)
Troilus and Criseyde, known to some critics to be Chaucer’s finest work, recounts the tragic romance of the title characters within the framework of the epic tale of the fall of Troy, a narrative which would have been especially familiar to the British audience who understood the legend to be part of their mythologized genesis. Chaucer drew on several sources when writing the Troilus, namely using Il Filostrato of the Italian poet Giovanni Boccaccio as the source for the narrative framework. Chaucer, however, had a broad range of interests, including philosophy, and drew heavily on the works of Boethius in his philosophical inquiry. It was through his study of Boethius, that Chaucer would encounter the philosophical response to the concept of predestination and fortune. The Boethian text Consolidation of Philosophy grapples with the subject, and Chaucer dedicates a segment of his text in response to this.
The Troilus engages with the concept of predestination in what has been labeled the “Boethian Soliloquy” which is spoken by Troilus in book four (lines 958 – 1078). In this soliloquy, Chaucer, like Boethius, draws upon the anxiety caused by the implications of the concept of predestination. Troilus, dismayed that Criseyde has not yet returned to Troy to be with him, becomes overtaken with this anxiety stating “For al that comth, comth by necessity: Thus to be lorn, it is my destinee” (Chaucer, 550). Here, Chaucer through Troilus argues that the implications of predestination means that people have no free will. This exact argument was put forth by Boethius in Consolidation. However, Chaucer does not approach the question of predestination as a philosopher, but as a writer, and therefore has no need to bring the issue to a cathartic resolve, as Boethius does. Chaucer makes no attempt to solve the puzzle of how predestination and free will can coexist, meaning Troilus comes to the conclusion that nothing can be done to change his fate, other that to pray to God that it may be changed, but even his prayer contains a tone of defeat: “Almyghty Jove in trone, That woost of al thys thyng the sothfastnesse, Rewe on my sorwe: or do me deyen sone, Or bryng Criseyde and me fro this destresse” (Chaucer, 552).
It is not likely that Chaucer failed to reconcile the concepts of fate and free will due to a lack of understanding of his Boethian source. This is because Chaucer’s intention is not to contribute to the philosophical discussion surrounding the concepts, nor is it to prove one over the other. Chaucer’s interest lies entirely in the human element of these philosophy’s. Therefore, Chaucer’s aim is to explore the impact that the implications of predestination can have on a person. Chaucer, through his depiction of Troilus, takes a disapproving view of those who adhere to the concept of a predetermined fate. Troilus’ failure to recognize that is fate is in his own hands leads him to a lack of action, which ultimately leads to his demise, wasting his potential to become a heroic figure of chivalry.
In conclusion, Chaucer believed the concept of predestination had worrying implications to those who failed to philosophically reconcile it with the concept of free will. Troilus is Chaucer’s portrait of an individual with great potential that fails due to his unwillingness to take action, dogmatically holding to the philosophy that all is predetermined by divine providence. Chaucer, is therefore critical of those who, like Troilus, refuse to see the necessity of free will.
Works Cited
Chaucer, Geoffrey, et al. The Riverside Chaucer: Based on the Works of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford University Press, 2008.
Romans 8 NIV – – Bible Gateway, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2B8&version=NIV.
