THE EAGLE’S SPEECH IN CHAUCER’SROUSE OF FAME

William S. Wilson

o reverend Chauser, ross of rethouris all,As in our toung ane flour imperiall.

—DUNBAR

BOOK II of Chaucer’s House ofFame tells how the poet is carried

aloft in the grip of an eagle, wonderingwhether he will be metamorphosed into a star. The Eagle explains to thefanciful poet that Jove has sent himto reward Geifrey with a trip to theHouse of Fame, where the loveless love-poet will hear tidings of love. The problem of how Fame can hear everythingon earth is introduced by Geifrey, andis solved in a long speech by the Eaglewhich turns out to be the central episode of Book II.Since the explanatory speech on the

transmission of sound does not advancethe narrative of a journey for love-tidings, it has been treated as a digression, just as the synopsis of the Aemieidin Book I has seemed unnecessary tothe plot, and the scene in the court ofFame in Book III is a further delay tothe narrative. When the three mainepisodes are considered digressions fromthe ostensible purpose of the poem—thejourney to hear love tidings—the poemhas no unity. As D. W. Robertson haswritten recently, “In The House ofFame the various parts all concern thesame speaker, and they appear in nar

Mr. Wilson is an Instructor in English at QueensCollege of The City University of New York. Hehas recently completed a study on “ExegeticalGrammar in Book I of the House of Fame,” tobe published by English Language Notes.

rative sequence, but otherwise theyhave little outward connection with oneanother.” The solution is to shift emphasis from the journey, treating it asa narrative framework rather than thecenter of the poem, and to examinethe three episodes for thematic unity.The three episodes can be related

to the trivium, the linguistic arts ofthe Middle Ages. The synopsis of theAeneici in Book I illustrates the techniques of medieval exegetical grammaron the ideal illustration of grammar,the Aeneid; the scene in the court ofFame in Book III illustrates the techniques of medieval dialectic on a medieval dialectician, the goddess Fame.Book H, the subject of this essay, illustrates the techniques of Ciceronian persuasive rhetoric on a relevant science,the physics of sound. In other words,if we ask how Chaucer thinks aboutthe Aeneid, the answer is, grammatically; how he thinks about Fame, dialectically; how he thinks about sound,rhetorically. The journey for tidings isa spiritual journey, the adventures ofa poet confronted with successive rivalsto poetry—grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic—and discovering that poetry issomething different.Each time scholars have argued that

Chaucer’s poems were influenced bymanuals of rhetoric, other scholars haveanswered that the example of poetswas more influential than any precepts

1 D. WT. Robertson, Jr., A Preface to Chaucer(Princeton, New Jersey, 1962), p. 284.

154 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH

of rhetoric.2 Apparently, the only casein which some kind of rhetorical analysis must be allowed is in the instanceof poems that mention rhetoric or rhetorical terms. Book II of the House ofFame qualifies for rhetorical analysissince the Eagle uses such terms as conclusion, persuasion, demonstration, andcolors of rhetoric.Aside from the vocabulary of rhet

oric, Chaucer’s familiarity with rhetoricis certain from his poetry, and probablefrom his life and times. In Londonschools, according to William Fitzstephen (d. sigo), “Sometime CertaineOratours, with Rhetoricall Orations,speake handsomly to perswade, beingcarefull to observe the precepts of Art,who omit no matter contingent.”3 Evenif Chaucer had not studied rhetoric inschool, he might have studied it as astudent at the Inner Temple.4 D. S.Bland has argued that law students didnot study rhetoric from Sir Thomas Elyot’s assertion that Law-French causeda lack of style and delivery in the speechof lawyers. But Bland is thinking ofrhetoric as verbal ornament or entertainment, not as persuasion by meansof deductive proofs such as those ofgeometry.5The techniques of rhetorical proof,

those which would be appreciated bya lawyer on one hand and by a geometrician on the other, are suggestedby the opening sentence of Aristotle’s

2 See for an example Daniel C. Boughner,“Elements of Epic Grandeur in the Troilus,”ELH, A Journal of English Literary History,VI (September igg), 200-210, which is answeredby Robert A. Pratt, “Chaucer’s Use of theTeseida,” PMLA, LXII (September 1917), 598.621.

3 Quoted by J. E. G. de Montrnorency, StateIntervention in English Education (Cambridge,England, 1902), p. 44.

4 R. J. Schoeck, “Rhetoric and Law in Sixteenth-Century England,” Studies in Phiiolog’,L (April 1953), 110-127.

1 D. S. Bland, ‘Rhetoric and the Law Student in Sixteenth-Century England,” Studies inPhilology, LIV (October 1957), 498-508.

Rhetoric: “Rhetoric is the counterpartof Dialectic.”° Aristotle and otherGreek and Roman rhetoricians emphasized logic and proof to an extent usually overlooked in studies of rhetoricas an influence on poetry, perhaps because the invention and arrangementof arguments seem foreign to poetry.7To understand Chaucer’s use of rhetoric, we must remember Aristotle’s partial definition of rhetoric as “the faculty of discovering in the particularcase what are the available means ofpersuasion” (i.i.2). The usual means ofpersuasion are the example, called rhetorical induction, and the enthymeme,called rhetoric syllogism. Such proofsare the only things that really comewithin the province of the art of rhetoric; style, delivery, memory, even theprologue and epilogue, are concessionsto the audience, “. . . mere outwardshow for pleasing the hearer; whereforeno one teaches geometry in this way”(iii. 1.6).According to Aristotle, a speech re

quires only two parts, the narration ofthe case and the proof (iii.i3.4-5).Quintilian’s Institutio lists four parts (iv.6),but the Ad Herenniu.m and Cicero inthe Dc inventione divides a speech intosix parts: exordium, statement of facts,division of topics, proof, refutation, andepilogue. The consensus of classicalrhetoricians is that a speech can havefrom two to six parts, depending on thecircumstances, but that the usual speechhas four parts: exordium, narration,proof, and epilogue.According to Cicero in the De in

ventione the exordium or prologue orproem “. . . brings the mind of the auditor into a proper condition to receivethe rest of the speech. This will be

6 Trans. Lane Cooper (New York, 1932), Ii.7 See Wilbur Samuel Howell, “Renaissance

Rhetoric and Modern Rhetoric,” in The Rhetorical Idiom, ed. Donald C. Bryant (Ithaca, NewYork, 1958), pp. 53-70.

EAGLE’S SPEECH IN CHAUCER’S HOUSE OF FAME 155

accomplished if he becomes well-disposed, attentive, and receptive” (i.15.2O). When the auditor is slow-witted,or the material is difficult to grasp, thespeaker obtains good will by referringto his own acts and services withoutarrogance (i.15.2o-22). This precept isillustrated by the Eagle’s tact, in BookII of the House of Fame, when he introduces himself to Geifrey:“First, I, that in my fet have the,Of which thou hast a fere and wonder,Am dwellynge with the god of thonder,Which that men callen Jupiter,That dooth me flee ful ofte ferTo do al hys comaundement.” (6o6-6is)

Good will is also obtained if thespeaker gives an account of acts whichhis listeners have performed with “courage, wisdom, and mercy; but so as notto show excessive flattery: and if it isshown in what honourable esteem theyare held” (i.16.22). The Eagle sympathizes with Geifrey, and tells himhow Jupiter feels sorry for him because he has served Cupid so long without reward. Not to show excessive flattery, the Eagle says that Geifrey doesnot have much wit—”Although that inthy hed ful lyte is”—but then he continues to praise Geifrey’s generosity inpraising love and his servants when henever takes part in love himself. Ostensibly the Eagle is explaining the purposeof the journey, the flight to hear tidings as a reward for unselfish service,but this elaborate introduction servesthe additional purpose of making GeE-frey well-disposed toward the Eagle, andtherefore receptive to a speech. TheEagle is prompted to deliver a speechby Geifrey’s inability to understand how

8 Trans. H. M. Hubbell (Cambridge, rlass.,1949).

This and subsequent quotations are fromThe Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, ed. Fred N.Robinson (Cambridge, Mass., 1957).

Fame can hear everything that is saidon earth:

that kan I preveBe reson worthy for to leve,So that thou yeve thyn advertenceTo understonde my sentence.” (707-710)

The Eagle’s concern lest he be misunderstood follows Aristotle’s advice totell the audience to pay attention, notjust at the beginning, but throughoutthe speech whenever attention mightlag (iii.i4.9). Each time the Eagle comesto a transition in his speech, he warnsGeifrey to listen closely and to do hisbest to understand. The frequency ofthese admonitions indicates little respect for Geffrey’s intelligence.The prologue which warms up the

audience is followed by the narrationor statement of the facts, in which theaudience is informed of the allegationswhich are to be proved (De inventione1.19.27). Thus the Eagle explains whathe is going to prove:“First shalt thou here where she duelleth,And so thyn oune bok hyt tellith;fir paleys stant, as I shal seye,Ryght even in myddes of the weyeBetwixen hevene, erthe, and see;That what so ever in al these threeIs spoken, either privy or apert,The way thereto ys so overt,And stant eke in so juste a placeThat every soun mot to hyt pace,Or what so conseth fsoin any tonge,Be hyt rouned, red, or songe,Or spoke in suerte or in cirecle,Certeyn, hyt moste thider nede.” (711-724)

This statement of the case is followedby a transition to the proof or demon-stration:Now herkene wel, for-why I willeTellen the a propre skilleAnd a worthy demonstracionIn inyn ymagynacion.” (725-728)

The demonstration, according to Cicero, usually has five parts when it isdeductive: the major premise; the proofof the major premise; the minor

156

premise; the proof of the minor premise;and the conclusion of the proof (i.37.67). The Eagle first states the majorpremise, “. . . which sets forth brieflythe principle from which springs thewhole force and meaning of tile syllogism”:“That every kyndely thyng that isHath a kyndely stede ther heMay hest in hyt conserved be;Unto which place every thyng,Thorgh his kyndely enclynyng,Moveth for to come to,Whan that hyt is away therfro;” (730-736)

This major premise is followed bythe proof of the major premise, “.by which the brief statement of themajor premise is supported by reasonand made plainer and more plausible”:“As thns: loo, thou maist alday seThat any thing that hevy be,As stoon, or led, or thyng of wighte,And here hyt never so hye on highte,Lat goo thyn hand, hit falleth doun.Ryght so seye I be fyr or soun,Or smoke, or other thynges lyghte;Alwcy they seke upward on lughte.While ech of hem is at his large,Lyght thing upward, and dounward charge.”

(737-746)

At the end of the proof of the majorpremise, that premise is repeated:“Thus every thing, by thys reson,Hath his propre mansyon,To which hit seketh to repaire,Ther-as hit shulde not apaire.’ (753-756)

This proof of the major premise issupported by reference to authorities, arhetorical device sanctioned by Quintilian (v.11.36) and Cicero (De inventione i.53.ioi):“Loo, this sentence ys knowen kouthOf every philosophres mouth,As Aristotle and daun Platon,And other clerkys many oon;” (757-760)

There is another transition as theEagle turns from the major to the minorpremise:

“And to cunfirme my resoun,Thou ivost wel this, that spcch is soun,Or dies no man myghte hyt here;Now herkc what y svol the lere.” (761-764)

There follows the minor premise,in which is premised the point

which on the basis of the major premiseis pertinent to proving the case”:“Soun ys noght but eyr ybroken,And every speche that ys spoken,Lowd or pryvee, foul or fair,In his substaunce ys but air;” (765-768)

The proof of the minor premise follows, by which “. . . what has beenpremised is established by reasons.”This long proof consists of analogieswhich show that sound is “broken” airwhich travels in enlarging concentriccircles. The proof can be summarizedby quoting Vitruvius: “Voice is a flowing breath of air, perceptible to thehearing by contact. It moves in anendless number of circular rounds, likethe innumerably increasing circularwaves which appear when a stone isthrown into smooth water.”5° Throughthe multiplication of these circles soundreaches the House of Fame.With the completion of the premises

and their proofs, the Eagle can givethe conclusion “in which there is statedbriefly what is proved by the whole deduction”:“Now have I told, yf thou have mynde,How speche or soun, of pure kynde,Enclyned ys upward to meve;This, mayst thou fele, wel I preve.”

(823-82 6)

In twenty more lines the Eagle repeatshis argument, thus concluding theproof, but not concluding the speech,which has a separate brief conclusionas tidy as a geometric QED:“Than ys this the conclusyoun,That every speche of every man,

15 The Ten Books of Architecture, trans. Morris Hicky Morgan (Cambridge, Mass., ‘y’fl’p. 139.

THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH N

EAGLE’S SPEECH IN CHAUCER’S ROUSE OF FAME 157

As y the telle first beganMoveth up on high to paceKyndely to Fames place.” (848-852)

The Eagle has now completed thefour-part oration, and he fishes forcompliments in words which show theself-consciousness of the rhetorical invention and arrangement, thus makingrhetoric part of the meaning of thepoem:Telle me this now feythfully,Have y not preyed thus symply,‘.Vithoute any subtiliteOf speche, or gret prolixiteOf termes of philosophie,Of figures of poetrie,Or colours of rethorike?” (853-859)

The Eagle plumes himself on the clarity he brings to a complex scientific diemonstration:“Pardee, hit oughte the to lyke!For hard langage and hard matereEs encombrous for to hereAttones; wost thou not wel this?”And y answered and seyde, “Yis,” (860-864)

And he is proud that he has adaptedhis style to his audience, just as theHost asks the Clerk to do, “That wemay unclerstonde what ye seye” (lyE.20):

‘A ha!” quod he, “10, so I canLewedly to a lewed manSpeke, and shewe hym swyche skilesThat he may shake hem be the biles,So palpable they shulden be.” (86-86g)

Having established the excellence ofhis style, the Eagle asks for praise ofhis content:‘But telle me this, now praye y the,How thinketh the my conclusyon?” (870.871)

Geifrey, not to be outdone, replies withequally technical rhetorical language:“A good persuasion,”Quod I, ‘hyt is; and lyk to beRyght so as thou hast preyed me.”1’ (872-874)

11 Compare A AIidsusnmer.Night’s Dream,where “A good persuasion” (I.i.156) is the replyto another argumentative and deductive speech.

The Eagle, as he is well aware, hasperfectly illustrated the five-part rhetorical syllogism or epicheireme. Nowhe illustrates the other means of persuasion, rhetorical induction, or theexample. When rhetoric is associatedwith law, it concerns governing bothoneself and others; the Eagle tells anappropriate anecdote of Phaeton, whowas unable to govern himself or thehorses, and he points the moral:Loo, ys it not a gret myschaunceTo lete a fool han governaunceOf thing that he can not demeyne?” (957-959)

This example which proves a moral isin the tradition of the preacher’sexeinpia and the illustrator’s emblems,a rhetorical tradition. The rhetoricalqualities of the Eagle’s speech on Phaeton are unobtrusive because Phaeton ispart of the local color in the sky, sothat mention of him arises naturallyout of the scene.‘iT need not be surprised to find

Ciceronian rhetoric in the fourteenthcentury. In his essay, “Rhetoric in theMiddle Ages,” Richard McKeon defines four historical periods of rhetoric;the fourth one is “the fourteenth century and the Renaissance in whichAristotle and the Greek rhetoricians,Cicero, Quintilian, and Boethius all hadincreasing influence.”lZ In this periodthe dominant rhetorical tradition subordinates rhetoric to logic since rhetoricbegins with hypotheses such as theEagle’s premises, while logic or dialectic begins with theses, universal questions such as the nature of fame. TheEagle emerges as a quasi-Ciceronianrhetorician, and can be said to represent Ciceronian rhetoric in virtue ofresemblances between an aquiline and arhetorical flight. The name of a late

12 Richard McKeon, “Rhetoric in the MiddleAges,” Speculum, XVII (January 1942), i.

as a test of Ciceronian rhetoric in apoem written when that rhetoricemerged as a claimant of poetry as partof its province. Apparently Chaucer wasaware of the forceful persuasive rhetoric, whether of law, geometry, or Aristotelian deductive science, and as ayoung poet tested it in his poem as partof the characterization of the Eagle.The effect of this test is to separatepoetry and persuasive rhetoric as intellectual methods.

THE QtJARTERLV JOURNAL OF SPEECH158

Roman rhetorician—Aquila Romanus13—explains the Eagle as a symbol ofrhetoric. The comparison of an oratorto an eagle (Bossuet was called theEagle of Meaux) is turned around tomake the Eagle an orator who carriesGeifrey away on a rhetorical flight offancy.The Eagle’s speech may be interpreted

13 Rhetores Latini Minores, ed. Karl Felixvon Halm (Leipzig, 1863).