Grand Valley State University
ScholarWorks@GVSU
Masters Theses
Graduate Research and Creative Practice
2008
The Circle and the Cross: The Self-Destructive
Nature of Evil in Edmund Spenser's Faerie Queene
Scott De Young
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/theses
Recommended Citation
De Young, Scott, "The Circle and the Cross: The Self-Destructive Nature of Evil in Edmund Spenser's Faerie Queene" (2008). Masters
Theses. 675.
http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/theses/675
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research and Creative Practice at ScholarWorks@GVSU. It has been accepted
for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@GVSU. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
T h e C ircle and th e Cross:
T h e S elf-D estru ctiv e N a tu re o f E v il in
E d m u n d S p e n se r ’s F a e rie Q u e e n e
S co tt D e Y ou n g
2008
A T h esis
Su b m itted in P a r tia l F u lfillm en t o f the
R eq u irem en ts for the D egree o f
M aster o f A rts in E n glish
at
G ran d V a lley S tate U n iversity
© Scott De Y oung
2008
A b stract
T he th em e o f good and evil is at the forefro n t o f E dm und S p en ser’s F aerie Queene', can
v irtu e survive and overcom e vice? B ecause th is them e is w idely prev alen t in The F aerie
Q ueene, it is fittingly prev alen t in the ex istin g scholarship on The F aerie Q ueene. W hen
c o m m e n tin g on the w orkings o f evil in The F a erie Q ueene, m ost scholars ten d to focus
on eith er the historical or literary in fluences on S p en ser’s evil characters, o r th ey focus on
the m an n e r in w hich evil poses a threat to good. I am in no w ay arguing ag a in st th ese
scholars. M y contention, though, is to also ex p ress the m anner in w hich evil p o se s a
th re a t to itself. B efore offering a close rea d in g o f books one and tw o reg a rd in g e v il’s
self-d estru ctiv e tendency (and a b rie f o v e rv ie w o f this them e in the su b seq u en t b o o k s), I
first e sta b lish the nature o f evil by looking at the B ook o f P salm s (“ H e w ho is p reg n a n t
w ith evil / and conceives trouble gives birth to disillusionm ent. / He w ho digs a h o le and
sco o p s it out / falls into the p it he has m ade. / T he trouble he causes reco ils on h im self; /
h is v io len ce com es dow n on his ow n h e a d .” ), St. A ugustine (“Just in the sam e w ay, w hat
are c alled vices in the soul are n o thing b u t p riv atio n s o f natural go o d .” ), C .S. L ew is
(“E vil req u ires the good on w hich it is p a rasitic in order to continue its p a rasitic
e x iste n c e .”), and A ristotle (“ I do not m ean, how ever, that [defect and excess] are
c o m b in e d in any one person: that w ould be im possible, because the evil d estro y s i ts e lf ” ).
A fter lay in g a p h ilosophical base reg ard in g the self-destructive nature o f evil, the bulk o f
this essay show s the m an n er in w hich evil b rin g s fru stration and d e stru ctio n to its e lf in
The F a eire Q ueene. F or instance, in 1.1, a fter R edcrosse beheads E rrour, her evil
o ffsp rin g tu rn in on their m other and d rin k up h er blood until their bellies b urst an d
b o w els gu sh forth. Spenser th en co m m en ts in reg ard s to R edcrosse: “N o w n e e d eth him
no len g er labour spend, / H is foes have slaine th em selv es w ith w hom he sh o u ld c o n te n d .”
A n o th e r ex am p le can be found in 2.5. E ven th o u g h Sir G uyon has ju s t bound O ccasio n
an d F uror, P yrochles rashly asks for their release. O nce released, they v io le n tly tu rn on
P y ro ch les u n til he is covered in dirt and b lo o d a n d burning brands. T he P alm er
c o m m e n ts on the natural course o f evil, no tin g , “E[e that his sorrow so ught th ro u g h
w ilfu ln esse, / A nd his foe fettred w ould release agayne, / D eserues to taste his fo llies
fruit, rep e n ted p a y n e .” In both o f these ex am p les, and in several m ore th at can be found
th ro u g h o u t The F aerie Q ueene, w e begin to see S p e n se r’s portrayal o f th e se lf­
d estru ctiv e w ay o f the w icked.
Table o f C ontents
A n In troduction to E v il’s B ro o d ....................................
1
S penserian C riticism on E v il................................................................................................................. 6
T he W ay o f the W ic k e d .........................................................................................................................12
The P rivation o f G o o d ............................................................................................................................17
Book One: T he C ircle and the C ro ss.................................................................................................21
B ook Tw o: H aving O n e ’s O w n H oggish M in d e ........................................................................... 50
C onclusion: The C ircle R e v isited .......................................................................................................62
B ib lio g rap h y .............................................................................................................................................68
Strange pow ers have our enem ies, and strange w eaknesses!
B ut it has long been said; oft evil will shall evil mar.
—The L o rd o f the R ings J.R.R. T olkien
H e w ho is pregnant w ith evil and conceives trouble gives birth to disillusionm ent. He
w ho digs a hole and scoops it out falls into the pit he has m ade. T he trouble he causes
recoils on him self; his violence com es dow n on his ow n head.
—Psalm 7:14-17
“ W hy th is,” cried L ucifer, sm iting the ball again, “ here is the only sym bol, m y boy. So
fat. So satisfied. N ot like that scraggy individual, stretching his arm s in stark
w eariness.” A nd he pointed up to the cross, his face dark w ith a grin.
—The B a ll a n d the C ross G.K. C hesterton
H ere we go round the prickly pear
Prickly pear prickly pear
Here we go round the prickly pear
At five o ’clock in the m orning.
B ecause I do not hope to turn again
B ecause 1 do not hope
B ecause I do not hope to turn
— “The H ollow M en” and “A sh-W ednesday” T.S. Eliot
A n Introd uction to E vil’s Brood
T hat vertue therefore w hich is but a youngling in the contem plation o f
evill, and know s not the utm ost that vice p rom ises to her follow ers, and
rejects it, is but a blank vertue, not a pure; her w hitenesse is but an
excrem entall w hiteness; W hich w as the reason w hy our sage and serious
Poet Spencer, w hom 1 dare be know n to think a better teacher then Scotus
and A quinas, describing true tem perance under the person o f G uion,
brings him in w ith his palm er through the cave o f M am m on, and the bow r
o f earthly blisse that he m ight see and know , and yet abstain. '
This passage from John M ilto n ’s A reo p a g itica serves as a w itness to S p e n se r’s po w er as
a m oralistic w riter, elevating him above Scotus and A quinas.^ M ilton testifies to
S p en ser’s ability to bring his characters into a fuller understanding o f evil; and in doing
so, he is able to m ove their hearts to a higher form o f righteousness. W hen M ilton
com m ents on those things that “vice prom ises to her follow ers,” he seem s to have in
m ind the alluring things o f tem ptation. T his can be seen in M a m m o n ’s C ave, the B ow er
o f B liss, and in other literary form s such as John B u n y a n ’s “ V anity F a ir” and the gospel
account o f S a tan ’s tem ptation o f C hrist in the desert (M t. 4). W hen Spenser depicts evil,
how ever, he expresses m ore than ju st the glorious virtue that com es from seeing and
know ing, and yet abstaining. W hen Spenser illustrates those things that “ vice prom ises
to her fo llo w ers,” he not only show s the alluring things o f tem ptation but also the harvest
o f self-destruction.
' J o h n M ilton, A re o p a g itic a , in The P rin ce o f P oets: E ssa ys on E d m u n d S p e n se r, ed. Joh n Elliott (N ew
Y ork: U n iv ers ity Press, 1968), 9-10.
’ M i lt o n ’s tribute to th e p oet S p en ser as a hig her m oral te a c h e r than Scotus and A q u in as recalls a few lines
from Sir Philip S i d n e y ’s “ A p o lo g y for P o e try ” : F o r su p p o se it be g ra n te d ... th at the ph ilo so p h er, in
resp ect o f his m e th o d ic al p ro ceedin gs, doth teach m o re perfectly than the poet, yet do 1 th in k th a t no m an is
so m u c h p h ilo p h ilo so p h o s as to c o m p a re the philo so ph er, in m ov ing , w ith th e p o e t.... For, as A risto tle
saith, it n ot g n o sis bu t p r a x is m u st be the fruit. A nd h o w p r a x is can n o t be, w ith o u t bein g m o v e d to
practice, it is no hard m atter to c o n sid e r.”
It is m y intention in this essay to explore the m anner in w hich these p rom ises o f
vice— these natural results o f evil— express them selves in E dm und S p e n se r’s F aerie
Q ueene. M y prim ary focus w ill be on the nature o f evil, paying close atten tio n to e v il’s
reflexively self-destructive tendency— w hereby evil has the tendency to bring harm not
only to good but also to itself. T hough alm ost all Spenserian criticism attem pts to w restle
w ith the overw helm ing conflict betw een good and evil in The Faerie Q ueene to one
extent or another, no one has yet, to m y know ledge, directly w orked out the them e o f
e v il’s self-destructive nature. M y contention that this them e w as in the forefront o f
S p en ser’s m ind w hile developing The F aerie Q ueene is supported by the p leth o ra o f
exam ples he gives o f e v il’s self-destructive nature throughout the work. I w ill briefly
point out S p en ser’s use o f this them e in B ooks 111-VI and M utability. M y m ain focus,
how ever, w ill be on B ooks 1 and 11 because they lay a foundation for a m oral reading o f
the entire poem : B ook 1 offering a theological understanding o f evil and B ook II an
A ristotelian understanding.
“ It is generally agreed that B ook 1 o f E dm und S penser’s The F aerie Q ueene acts
as a kind o f prelude to the entire poem , raising issues that will be im portant in all the
follow ing books, w hile placing those issues in the explicitly religious context o f the quest
for h o lin e ss.”'’ In B ook 1 we m eet the R ed C ross K night, the patron o f true holiness, who
has b een com m issioned by G loriana, the great and glorious queen o f F airy Land, to
em bark upon a great adventure to accom pany U na and rescue her royal parents from the
infernal dragon that has forwasted all o f their land. Shortly after setting forth on their
quest, the knight and his com pany are forced to seek shelter from a hideous storm o f rain.
■’ In an a tte m p t to c rack m y w rite r’s block, 1 cop ied this line, w hich w as m y first w ritten line for this p aper,
from B e n ja m in L o c k e r d ’s book. The S a c r e d M a rria g e. M y first g rad u ate cou rse w as on E d m u n d S p e n se r
u n d er P ro fesso r L ockerd, so too m y thesis; in m y b e g in n in g is m y end — in m y end is m y beginning.
A fter errantly w andering to and fro through an unknow n w ood, they finally find a hollow
cave am ongst the thickest trees, E rro u r's cave. A lthough U na w arns R edcrosse against
his rashness, asserting, “ O ft fire is w ithout sm oke, / A nd peril w ithout show : therefore
your stroke / Sir knight w ith-hold, till further triall m ade,” R edcrosse foolishly asserts,
“ V ertue gives her seife light, through darkenesse for to w ade” (1.1.12).
W hen view ing this first passage o f The F aerie Queene, w e quickly see the
allegorically dangerous im agery in the storm y rain, w inding paths, dark w oods, and
errant cave. Yet, W illiam Oram notes the very natural progression (or digression) in the
actions o f R edcrosse:
W h at’s significant about R ed cro sse’s encounter w ith Errour is how
im perceptibly he finds h im se lf at her doorstep. His desperate battle is
sim ultaneously culpable, the product o f pride, and unavoidable, resulting
as it does from a series o f com paratively innocent actions. T he decision to
enter the W ood o f E rrour com es from a com m onplace desire to get o ut o f
the rain and, once inside, Redcrosse starts to w ander, enjoying the b ird s’
harm ony and failing to notice w here he is g o in g .... The gradual
progression suggests how hard it is not to lose the right path: o n e ’s “ b est”
im pulses insensibly betray o n e /
A s w e w atch Redcrosse at his knightly best— chivalrously leading his lady tow ard shelter
from the storm , and bravely advancing upon the dangerous m onster— we discover that
there seem s to be som ething about R edcrosse h im self w hich quickens his ow n
engagem ent w ith evil. Shortly after Redcrosse enters the cave, we see that his trust in his
ow n pow er is erring as it leaves him endlessly fettered in a w eb o f error. It is im portant
to note that a close reading o f the encounter betw een R edcrosse and E rrour not only
reveals the m anner in w hich R edcrosse is bound but also discovers the m an n er in w hich
E rrour, in her effort to bind R edcrosse, also binds herself:
M uch daunted w ith that dint, her sence w as dazd,
W illiam O ra m , “ S p enserian Paralysis,” S E L 4 1, no. 1 (2001): 52-3.
Y et kindling rage her seife she gathered round,
And all attonce her beastly bodie raizd
W ith doubled forces high aboue the ground:
Tho w rapping vp her w rethed sterne arow nd,
Lept fierce vpon his shield, and her huge traîne
All suddenly about his body w ound.
That hand or foot to stir he stroue in vaine:
G od helpe the m an so w rapt in Errours endlesse traine.
( L T 18)
A .C . H am ilton notes in the gloss to line five that “T h o ” m eans “T h en ,” im plying that
“ She w raps her coiled tail around herself, ready to w rap it around the k n ig h t.” H ere, in
the sam e subtle m anner in w hich we saw that R edcrosse’s “ im pulses Insensibly [betrayed
h im ,]” we see that Spenser very subtly expresses that E rro u r's Im pulses insensibly betray
her as w ell; before she binds R edcrosse, she first binds herself.
For m any scholars, the beheading o f E rrour com pletes the allegorical m eaning o f
the first canto; as E rro u r’s head falls, rea d e rs’ m inds w ander ahead to the in tro d u ctio n o f
A rchim ago in stanza 29. H ow ever, once E rro u r’s head is severed, S penser turns our
attention to E rro u r’s scattered brood, and in so doing, prepares us for one o f The F aerie
Q ueene \s central them es. As we study Errour and her brood, we see that evil in som e
sense does reproduce itself. H ow ever, E rrour feeds her offspring only poison, and so the
line o f E rrour soon com es to its end:
Her scattred brood, soone as their Parent deare
T hey saw so rudely falling to the ground,
G roning full deadly, all w ith troublous feare,
G athered them selves about her body round.
W eening their w onted entrance to have found
A t her w ide m outh: but being there w ithstood
T hey flocked all about her bleeding w ound.
A nd sucked up their dying m others blood.
M aking her death their life, and eke her hurt their good.
T hat detestable sight him m uch am azed.
To see th ’ unkindly Im pes o f heaven accurst.
D evoure their dam; on w hom w hile so he gazd.
H aving all satisfied their bloudy thurst.
T heir bellies sw olne he saw w ith fulnesse burst,
A nd bow els gushing forth; well w orthy end
O f such as drunke her life, the w hich them nurst;
N ow needeth him no lenger labour spend,
His foes have slaine them selves, w ith w hom he should contend.
(1.1.25-26)
T he few scholars who com m ent on this passage too often attribute the destruction o f
ErrourN offspring to R edcrosse. V irgil W hitaker represents this cam p well:
The “ spaw ne o f serpents sm all” is the lusts o f the flesh that still hinder and
m ust also be overcom e; they derive their being and their nourishm ent from
original sin, and in her death they die. B ut their inability to harm R ed
C ross, w hich is artistically ineffective and at first sight puzzles the reader,
is in accord w ith the Protestant em phasis upon faith rather than works.^
E ven if we allow for the hypothesis that Errour represents original sin, W h itak er’s
conclusion that it is R ed cro sse’s faith w hich brings about the end o f the evil im ps breaks
dow n quickly. First, even in these few lines, we notice a contradiction in the proposal
that the “ lusts o f the flesh” m ust also be “o vercom e.” yet “ in her death they d ie.” Second,
we are forced to ask the follow ing question: “T hen w hy does R edcrosse need a sw ord to
destroy E rrour?” If anything, it w ould be R e d c ro sse ’s faith w hich destroys Errour, and
his sw ord w hich destroys “the lusts o f the flesh that still hinder.” It w ould be
Redcrosse's faith (and the actions o f his “ dying L ord”) w hich ju stifies him from the
E rrour o f original sin, and it w ould be his sw ord (or w orks) w hich advances the process
o f sanctification w hereby “the lusts o f the flesh that still h in d er” are destroyed. N o, this
narrow em phasis only on R edcrosse in this scene is sim ply inadequate.
S penser could have had E rro u r’s offspring do any num ber o f fitting things once
Errour w as beheaded. T hey could have turned on R edcrosse all at once in a vengeful
’ Virgil K. W hitaker, “ T he T h eo lo g ic al Structure o f The F a e rie Q u eene, B oo k I,” in E sseniicil A rtic lex fo r
the S tu d y o f E d m u n d S p e n ser, ed. A.C. H am ilton (H a m d e n : A rcho n B ooks, 1972), 105.
rage, either w earing him dow n to the point o f defeat, or forcing him to destroy every
single errant imp. T hey could have scattered from the cave into the w orld like a nest o f
cockroaches w hose dark hom e has been overturned. (One can im agine the im plication
here: E ven though the large heresy has been defeated, die sm all untruths from the original
heresy continue to infect the w orld w ith their pernicious subtleties.) Yet Spenser has
E rrour’s scattered brood circle about her dead body as they “ sucked up their dying
m others blood, / M aking her death their life, and eke her hurt their g o o d .” O nce the little
im ps, w hose eyes are too big for their stom achs, get their fill o f their m o th e r’s entrails,
their ow n bellies burst and bow els gush forth. And so, R edcrosse “n eedeth him no lenger
labour spend, / H is foes have slaine them selves, w ith w hom he should co n ten d .” W e can
im agine R edcrosse filled w ith a conflicted m ixture o f fear and confidence after beh ead in g
E rrour and then turning his attention to her hissing brood. H is sw ord is in his hand; he is
ready for a fight, one against m any. And yet as he stands firm , com e w hat m ay, “T hat
detestable sight him m uch am azde.” The evil im ps, the foes w ith w hom R edcrosse
should contend, have destroyed them selves. In this scene, S penser draw s our attention
aw ay from Redcrosse and directs it tow ard the action o f evil. It is in this self-destructive
scene, w here the blood o f evil bursts the stom ach o f evil and destroys its ow n livelihood,
that w e see one o f the c h ie f them es o f The F aerie Q ueene— E v il’s reflexive destruction
o f itself.
S p en serian C ritieism on E vil
O ne w ould have to have the skew ed sight o f M albecco not to see a them e o f good
and evil in The F aerie Queene', fittingly, m ost o f the scholarship on S p e n se r’s great w ork
takes up this them e to som e extent. H ow ever, m ost o f the criticism o f The F aerie Q ueene
that grapples w ith evil either traces S penser’s literary or philosophical source, or it
expresses the m anner In w hich evil (or vice) m ust be overcom e before it brings
d estruction to good (or virtue).*" C onsidering that Spenser is a m aster o f allusions, and
considering that he is fashioning a gentlem an in “ virtuous and gentle discip lin e,”^ the
existing scholarship on evil is fitting to S penser’s purpose. Yet as w e take a closer look
at the evil in The Faerie Q ueene, we note that Spenser is doing nrore than giving
m arvelously poetic and didactic pictures o f the m anner In w hich evil brings frustration to
good; he is also revealing the m anner in w hich evil recoils upon itself.
N u m erous scholars work at teasing out the literary and philosophical allusions
w hich S penser m akes use of, but I w ill refer to John E. Elanklns and Jam es N ohrnberg as
two o f the c h ie f voices in this camp.^ C ertainly, H ankins’s contribution to Spenserian
scholarship is m ore expansive than source-hunting. H ow ever, even from the title o f his
article, “ Spenser and the R evelation o f St. Jo h n ,” and his book. Source a n d M ea n in g in
S p e n s e r ’s A llegory, one can see that S penser’s allusions are at the forefront o f E lankins’s
m ind. A selection from “ Spenser and the R evelation o f St. Jo h n ” w ill convey the m anner
in w hich H ankins often points out S penser’s allusions both to the B ible and to other
theological works in order to express the m anner in w hich S p en ser’s layered Im ages add
theological w eight to his characters. H ere H ankins notes that not only can D uessa
represent the B abylonian whore, but L ucifera is able to don that role as w ell. A ccording
to H ankins, the B abylonian harlot undergoes a transform ation in S p en ser’s procession o f
I will p ro v id e e x a m p le s presently.
^ See S p e n s e r ’s L etter to R aleigh
O thers include Virgil W h ita k e r and C arol V, K aske (theology), K athleen W illiam s (V e n u s and D iana
m y ths), A .S.P. W o o d h o u se and R obert H o o p es (theological grace and A ristotelian p h ilo so p h y )
the deadly sins, w hereby L ucifera representing pride, plays the role o f the harlot as she
jo in s the other deadly sins:
Perhaps [Spenser] m ay also have recalled D a n te ’s transform ation o f the
h a rlo t’s beast in canto 32 o f the P urgatorio, w here the chariot w hich
represents the church puts forth seven beastly heads, usually interpreted to
m ean the seven deadly s in s.... Forgetting D an te’s political allegory, we
m ay note his rem arkable transform ation o f the im agery o f Rev. 17. The
harlot is the sam e, but her beast is the m onstrous perversion o f a chariot.
It is still a chariot, but from it grow the seven heads o f the biblical beast,
representing the seven deadly sins."^
N ohrnberg too does a great deal o f tracing the allusions o f evil in Spenser. 1 do no I m ean
to im ply that source-hunting is all that N ohrnberg does, for w hat d o e sn ’t he do in that
grand w ork. The A n a lo g y o fT h e F aerie Queene'? However, m uch o f the tim e w hen
N ohrnberg discusses evil in The F aerie Q ueene, he is expressing S p en ser’s inspiration
for that p articular m anifestation o f evil: A rchim ago “closely resem b les” the “ sophist in
P lato ’s dialo g u e.”
He also functions in the classical role o f Proteus, “the patron o f
evasion th rough shape-changing.” " L ucifera’s nam e “com es from the doom -song in
Isaiah over the king o f B abylon.” '" A nd, as O rgoglio is “ reduced by A rthur to a ‘trunked
sto c k e ,” ’ w e hear echoes o f “the hum iliation o f the idol o f the Philistine god D agon in the
presence o f the ark: it was reduced to a ‘stu m p ’ (I Sam. 5:4).” ''’ T easing out these
literary and philosophical allusions in Spenser is at the forefront for H ankins and
N ohrnberg in their scholarship on evil. We m ust give them thanks for laying this crucial
foundation o f the study o f evil in The F aerie Q ueene w hich allow s us to pursue the study
o f the subtler w orkings o f evil.
,lohn E. H ankins, “ S p e n se r and T h e R evelation o f St. .lohn,” in E sse n tia l A rtic le s f o r th e S tu d y o f E d m u n d
S p e n se r, ed. A.C . H am ilto n (H a m d e n : A rch o n B ooks, 1972), 44.
•lames N o h rn b erg , The A n a lo g y o f The F a erie Q u e en e (N ew Jersey: P rinceton U n iversity Press, 1976),
06.
N o h rn b e rg , 110.
N o h rn m b e r g , 205.
' ' N o h rn b e rg , 207.
9
E v il’s danger to good and g o o d ’s need to overcom e evil is often expressed in
Spenserian criticism . O ut o f the m any expressions o f this position, 1 have selected two in
order to give voice to this position.''* In his chapter entitled, “ C onstructing E v il,’’ D arryl
G less states, “ [Readers] will have found in the knight’s and U n a’s sequence o f opponents
a frightening com posite vision o f the reprobate, alm ost terrifying ‘O th e r’ w hose
ch aracteristics good subjects o f the Q ueen w ill earnestly seek to purge from their ow n
l i v e s . F o r G less, the relentless sequence o f evil agents w hich oppose Red C ross and
Una becom es a cultural lesson on the perils o f evil to right living. In his article “The
Struggle betw een G ood and Evil in the First B ook o f ‘The Faerie Q u e e n e ,’’’ Lyle G lazier
w rites.
T he first book o f The Faerie Q ueene is an exam ple o f p sy ch o m a c h ia , or
the struggle betw een good and evil for possession o f the so u l.... S penser is
thus a C hristian teacher, w hose purpose it is to w ork upon us at the
em otional level w here w e are m ost vulnerable, leaving us attracted tow ard
Good and repelled from Evil, w herever they appear in his stanzas, and
providing us w ith a protective arm or to w ard o ff the tem ptations o f life.'*’
For G lazier, the m any representations o f evil w hich oppose Red C ross and U na becom e
m oral lessons on the perils o f evil to goodly living. Both G less and G lazier recognize in
evil only its attem pt to frustrate good, and both find e v il’s defeat only in the choices and
actions o f good. This, o f course, is a tine and natural reading o f The Faerie Q ueene.
H ow ever, focusing only on e v il’s interactions w ith good does not offer a com plete
understanding o f the pow er o f evil.
i selected G less b ecause he is characteristic o f th e theo log ical position, and i selected G la z ie r b eca u se he
is ch aracteristic o f the m oralistic position.
D arryl ,1. G less, In ie rp re la lio n a n d T h eo lo g y in S p e n se r ( N e w York: C a m b rid g e U n iv e rs ity Press, 1994),
72.
i.yie G lazier, “ T h e S truggle b etw een G o o d and Evil in the First B o o k o f ' T h e Faerie Q u e e n e . " ' C o lleg e
Eng/As/; 11, no. 7 (1950): 5^5, 387.
10
The archetypal critic N orthrop Frye is one o f the few Spenserian scholars who
give evil som e attention in its ow n right, and his focus on the structure and im agery o f
evil form s a stepping stone from G less and G lazier to C.S. Lew is, w ho is to follow . O ur
first point o f interest in F rye’s essay, “The Structure o f Im agery in The F aerie Q iteeneF
is his em phasis on e v il’s role in the structure o f The Faerie Queene. Frye w rites, “ In
[S p en ser’s] m oral allegory there is already a good deal o f inorganic repetition, especially
in the sym bols o f evil (for exam ple, the O ccasion-A te-S claunder sequence and the
reduplicative foul m onsters).” '^ Even in this b rie f statem ent, Frye expands our view o f
evil in The F aerie Q ueene. Evil is no longer ju st the antagonist to good; it is an
im portant com ponent in its ow n right (though for Frye, an overused and flawed
com ponent) to the structure and m eaning o f The Faerie Q ueene. Beyond briefly pointing
out e v il’s role in the structure o f the poem , Frye exposes the nature o f evil w ithin that
structure, noting that throughout The Faerie Q ueen evil functions as a sym bolic or
dem onic parody:
V irtues are contrasted not only w ith their vicious opposites, but w ith vices
that have sim ilar names and appearances. Thus the golden m ean o f
tem perance is parodied by the golden m eans provided by M am m on; “That
part o f Justice, w hich is eq u ity ” in B ook V is parodied by the anarchistic
equality preached by the giant in the second canto, and so on. A s the m ain
them e o f B ook 1 is really faith, or spiritual fidelity, the sharpest parody o f
this sort is betw een Fidelia, or true faith, and D uessa, who calls h e rse lf
Fidessa. F idelia holds a golden cup o f w ine and w a te r... ; D uessa holds
the golden cup o f the W hore o f B abylon. F idelia’s cup also contains a
serpent (the redeem ing brazen serpent o f M oses typifying the
C rucifixion); D uessa sits on the dragon o f the A pocalypse who is
m etaphorically the sam e beast as the serpent o f Eden. F idelia’s pow er to
raise the dead is stressed; D uessa raises Sansjoy from the dead by the
pow er o f A esculapius, w hose em blem Is the serpent.'^
17
N o rth r o p Frye, “T h e S tru cture o f Im ag ery in The F a erie Q ueene.'" in E sse n tia ! A rlic ie s f o r the S tu d y o f
E d m u n d S p e n se r, ed. A.C. H am ilto n (H a m d en : A rcho n B ooks, 1972), 154.
IS
Frye, 162-63.
W ith this understanding o f e v il’s role in The Faerie Queene, Frye is able to tip his critical
cap to both the critics w ho em phasize e v il’s antagonistic role w ith good and to the critics
w ho focus on S penser’s use o f allusions in developing his evil characters. A lthough Frye
does not articulate a theological point o f e v il’s w orkings, he does offer a new insight into
the practice o f evil in The F aerie Q ueene. Frye explains that evil often takes the form o f
a p aro d y o f real good. It is because o f this that he notes that “ No m onster, how ever
loathsom e, can really be evil: for evil there m ust a perversion o f intelligence.” ''^ We will
further explore e v il’s perversions and privations in m y subsequent chapter, “The
P rivation o f G o o d .”
T he e h ie f critic on evil in The F aerie Q ueene is C.S. Lewis, in his work
S p e n se r's Im ages o f Life, edited by A lastair Fow ler, Lew is com pares S p e n se r’s evil w ith
M a rlo w e ’s, S h ak esp eare’s, and M ilto n ’s, In M arlowe, Shakespeare, and M ilton, Lew is
notes that “evil is portrayed as involving im m ense concentrations o f w ill.... In all three
p oets evil appears as energy— law less and rebellious energy, no doubt, but nevertheless
energy, abounding and upsurging.”’^' W hen we turn to the im age o f evil in Spenser,
how ever, we note a differenee; according to Lew is, “evil does not usually appear as
en erg y .”' ' Instead, evil takes five different form s.
First, and least im portant, are the various paynim knights w ho appear as
m om entary e n e m ies.... N ext, there are im ages o f disease and d e fe c t....
T hirdly, evil m ay take the form o f the d isg u stin g .... A fourth and quite
different class o f im ages are those in w hich evil takes the form o f a
tem ptation to relax, or to fall asleep, or to d ie .... Fifthly and finally, there
is the W aste H o u s e ...
S urveying all five form s, we notice a distinction observed by Spenser that
seem s in part to have governed his choice o f the form evil takes in any
19
Frye, 162.
C.S. L ew is, S p e n s e r ’s Im a g e s o f L ife (C a m b ridg e: C a m b rid g e U niv ersity Press, 1967), 65-66
’ ’ Lewis, 66.
12
particular instance. W hen figures representing evils speak to hum an
characters— that is, tem pt them — they m ay express either the sleep-w ish
(the lighter form ) or the death w ish (the heavier). But in the narrative
parts o f the poem , w hen we ourselves are looking at the evils from outside
their w orld, they appear either as filth, defect, disease (the lighter form ) or
as life-in-death, a silent, em pty im prisonm ent, ‘dust and old decay" (the
heavier). In no instance, how ever, is evil ever represented as upsurging
energy.
For S penser, evil is not a m enacing thing in-an d -o f itself, filled w ith upsurging energy
and alw ays engaged in an active affront against good. Instead, it is a sicker and quieter
substance that reduces vitality and suffocates life. Evil, though a form idable opponent o f
good, is a w eak opponent. Evil is a transitory adversary, filled w ith disease and defect,
w hich takes on disgusting form s w hile residing in im potence and w aste. P ainted in this
light (or darkness if you w ill), we see e v il’s potential danger to good; it calls one from an
abundant life to a futile death: we will presently look at D espair as the ultim ate instance
o f this.
Both Frye and Lewis offer keen insights into the nature and danger o f evil. Evil is
a parody, a false im itation, w hich beguiles, perverts, and reduces the livelihood o f good.
V iew ed from the shoulders o f these giants, w e can see even beyond e v il’s potential
danger to good; as we look at the w ays and the w orkings o f evil, we can see the danger
that evil is to itself.
T h e W ay o f the W icked
T he great num ber o f B iblical references w hich Spenser utilizes in The F aerie
Q ueene is m ade abundantly clear in any w ell-annotated edition. A nd it seem s that in
particular, the book o f Psalm s had for S penser a special m agnetism . Indeed, Carol V.
- Lewis, 64-73.
K aske notes that “ S penser borrow s from Psalm s m ore than from any book other than
R evelation.”"'^ K aske continues to note that the frequency and range o f S p e n se r’s use o f
the P salm s reflects the status o f the Psalm s in the period, stating that “The Book o f
Psalm s w as arguably the best-know n book o f the Bible. T hey w ere drum m ed into
e v e ry o n e ’s consciousness in alm ost every church service.”""^ In addition to being
attracted to the poetry o f the Psalm s, as w ere m any other R enaissance w riters who w ere
translating the P salm s (and often setting them to m usic), Spenser was certainly attracted
to the teachings and the doctrine o f the Psalm s. It has often been noted that S p e n se r’s
gleaning o f the Psalm s for im agery and phrasing can be seen throughout The Faerie
Queene', som e exam ples include the im age o f A rch im ago’s sharp tongue: “And well
could file his tongue as sm ooth as glass” (1.1.35) from Psalm 140:3, “T hey m ake their
tongues as sharp as a serp en t’s” ;"'’ and the royal description o f the sky: “ and to her seife
to have gained / The kingdom e o f the N ight” (7.6.10) from Psalm 136:9, “T he m oon and
stars to govern the n ig h t.” One thing that has not been so noted in Spenser, how ever, is
the reflexive nature o f evil w hich pervades both the Psalm s and The Faerie Q ueene.
Psalm 1 begins the lengthy (and often com plicated) discussion on retrib u tio n o f
good and evil that can be traced throughout the Psalm s. V erse one states, “ B lessed is the
m an / w ho does not w alk in the counsel o f the w icked / or stand in the w ay o f sinners / or
sit in the seat o f m o ck ers.” For the Psalm ist here, there seem s to be som ething built into
the system w hereby certain actions bring about blessings. Indeed, as the Psalm
continues, the virtuous m an will be “ like a tree planted by stream s o f w ater, / w hich
yields its fruit in the season / and w hose leaf does not w ither. / W hatever he does
C aro l V. K aske, S p e n se r a n d B ib lic a l P o etics (Ithaca: C ornell U niv ersity Press, 1999), 13.
K aske, 12.
N.I.V.
14
p ro sp ers.” C onversely, “N ot so the wicked! T hey are like c h a ff that the w ind blow s
aw ay .” A gain, there seem s to be particular natural consequences built into the actions
them selves. This leads the P salm ist to his conclusion in the final verse: “ For the Lord
w atches over the w ay o f the righteous, / but the w ay o f the w icked w ill p erish.” It is
interesting to note the presence o f the Lord w ith the righteous and the absence o f the Lord
from the w icked. O ther than being unknow n to the Lord (w hich is its ow n kind o f hell),
the w icked are not being punished by any higher power. A nd yet, the w icked have a
certain w ay about them that brings about their ow n dem ise: “ but the w ay o f the w icked
w ill p erish.”
T his them e o f reflexivity pervades the Psalm s and lays a foundation for our
understanding o f good and evil in The F aerie Q ueene. In order to ensure our
understanding o f the reflexivity o f evil, I will list several exam ples from the Psalm s in
order to prepare us to see these sim ilar actions in Spenser.
D eclare them guilty, O God!
Let their intrigues be their dow nfall
(Ps. 5:10)
Fie w ho is pregnant w ith evil
and conceives trouble gives birth to disillusionm ent.
H e w ho digs a hole and scoops it out
falls into the pit he has made.
T he trouble he causes recoils on him self;
his violence com es dow n on his ow n head.
(Ps. 7:14-16)
The nations have fallen into the pit they have dug;
their feet are caught in the net they have hidden.
The Lord is know n by his ju stice;
the w icked are ensnared by the w ork o f their hands.
(Ps. 9:15-16)
Evil will slay the w icked;
the foes o f the righteous w ill be condem ned.
(Ps. 34:21)
Since they hid their net Ibr me w ithout cause
and w ithout cause dug a pit for me,
m ay ruin overtake them by surprise—
m ay the net they hid entangle them
m ay they fall into the pit, to their ruin.
(Ps. 35:7-8).
T herefore pride is their necklace;
they clothe them selves w ith violence.
(Ps. 73:6)
He loved to pronounce a curse—
m ay it com e on him ;
he found no pleasure in blessinginay it be far from him.
(Ps. 109:17)
L et the heads o f those w ho surround me
be covered w ith the trouble their lips have caused.
(Ps. 140:9)
Let the w icked fall into their ow n nets,
w hile 1 pass by in safety.
(Ps. 141:10)
T hese passages from the Psalm s are pleas and beliefs declaring that evil should and does
reap w hat it sows. They begin to sketch pictures for the reader o f the futile and self­
destructive m ovem ent o f evil. T hough the P salm ist’s principal concern in these P salm s is
probably the im m ediate consequences o f good and evil actions in the physical life, these
P salm s certainly teach to the spiritual w orld as w ell. This com bination o f earthly action
and both earthly and spiritual consequence are fitting for S penser’s allegory.
Saint A ugustine was one o f the first theologians to note and develop the doctrine
o f reflexivity in the P salm s, taking special note o f the spiritual consequences to evil
actions. In his E xpositions on the B ook o f P salm s. A ugustine com m ents on P salm 7:
16
“H e hath opened a ditch, and digged it” (ver. 15). To open a ditch is, in
earthly m atters, that is, as it w ere in the earth, to prepare deceit, that
another fall therin, w hom the unrighteous m an w ishes to deceive. N ow
this ditch is opened w hen consent is given to the evil suggestion o f earthly
lusts: but it is digged w hen after consent w e press on to actual w ork o f
deceit. B ut how can it be, that iniquity should rather hurt the righteous
m an against w hom it proceeds, than the unrighteous heart w hence it
proceeds? Accordingly, the stealer o f m oney, for instance, w hile he
desires to inflict painful harm upon another, is h im se lf m aim ed by the
w ound o f avarice. N o w w ho, even out o f his right m ind, sees not how
great is the difference betw een these m en, w hen one suffers the loss o f
m oney, the other o f innocence? “He will fall” then “ into the pit w hich he
hath m ade.”“^'
For A ugustine, the gravity o f the inherent consequences to evil are both great and
obvious— “N ow w ho, even out o f his right m ind, sees not how great is the difference
betw een these m en ? ” N ot only are the consequences great and obvious, but the
ju d g m e n ts are as w ell. And yet again, these seem to be natural and self-im posed
ju d g m en ts. C om m enting on Psalm 9, A ugustine writes,
“The L ord is know n executing ju d g m e n ts” (ver. 16). T hese are G o d ’s
judgm ents. N ot from that tranquility o f H is blessedness, nor from the
secret places o f w isdom , w herein blessed souls are received, is the sw ord,
or fire, or wild beast, or any such thing brought forth, w hereby sinners
m ay be torm ented: but how are they torm ented, and how does the Lord do
ju d g m en t? “In the w orks,” he says, “o f his ow n hands hath the sinner
been caught.””^
These lines are rem iniscent o f Psalm 1 w here the blessedness o f the Lord is near the
righteous, but the w icked perish by their ow n doing. For A ugustine, there seem s to be a
natural law at w ork as the sin n er’s action brings about its ow n dire consequence. T he
sinner, then, is not in the hands o f an angry G od, but instead, he is in his ow n angry
hands.
St. A u g u stin e , E x p o sitio n s on the B o o k o f P sa lm s, vol. 8 o f N iceno a n d P o sl-N ic e n e F a lh ers o f The
C h ris tia n C h u rc h (G rand Rapids: E erdm a ns, 1956), 26.
St. A u g u stin e , 37.
17
T h e P rivation o f G ood
O ne m ore level o f groundw ork m ust be laid before we return to The F aerie
Q ueene. E vil is, o f course, one o f the great problem s o f C hristianity, i.e., “ W hy w ould a
good G od create ev il?” Saint A ugustine addresses this problem w hen he defines evil as
being a privation o f good. Hints o f this idea can be seen in Arisl;otle, and it is certainly
carried on by A quinas before entering the E nglish R enaissance. In The E n ch irid io n on
Faith, Hope, a n d Love, A ugustine w rites.
For w hat is that w hich we call evil but the absence o f good? In the bodies
o f anim als, disease and w ounds m ean nothing but the absence o f health;
for w hen a cure is effected, that does not m ean that the evils w hich were
present— nam ely the diseases and w ounds— go aw ay from the body and
dw ell elsew here: they altogether cease to exist; for the w ound or disease is
not a substance— the flesh itse lf being a substance, and therefore is good,
o f w hich those evils— that is, privations o f the good w hich w e call
health— are accidents. Just in the sam e w ay, w hat are called vices in the
soul are nothing but privations o f natural good. A nd w hen they are cured,
they are not transferred elsew here: w hen they cease to exist in the health y
soul, they cannot exist anyw here else.“^
By defining evil as a privation o f good, A ugustine not only allow s for a G od w ho creates
only good, but he also highlights the im m aterial nature o f evil, and in doing so, he sets
the stage for one o f his principal tenets, the self-destructive reflexivity o f evil. A ugustine
furthers this idea w hen he w rites.
W herefore corruption can consum e the good only by consum ing the being.
E very being, therefore, is a good; a great good, if it cannot be corrupted; a
little good, if it can: but in any case, only the foolish or ignorant will deny
that it is a good. A nd if it be w holly consum ed by corruption, then the
corruption itse lf m ust cease to exist, as there is no being left in w h ich it
can dw ell.
St. A u g u stin e , T he E n c h irid io n on F aith, H o p e a n d Love, ed. H enry Paolucci (Illinois: R e g n e ry G a tew ay ,
1961), 11-12
St. A u g u stin e , E n c h irid io n , 13.
18
B ecause good is substantial and evil accidental, evil m ust w ork w ithin the structure o f
good. If evil com pletely succeeds in its corruption o f good, it not only destroys the
structure o f good, but also it destroys the only structure in w hich evil can exist.
C.S. L ew is is one o f the key Spenserian critics on evil in The F aerie Q ueene.
And though L ew is is no doubt aw are that his view derives from A ugustine and scripture,
he does not identify these sources.
W e shall see, how ever, that Lewis is a solid bridge
b etw een A ugustine and the scriptures, and The F aerie Q ueene. In his book Spen.ser ’.v
[m ages o f L ife, Lewis contrasts the im ages o f good and evil as found in The Faerie
E vil is solem n, good is gay. Evil m eans starvation, good glow s w ith w hat
B lake calls ‘the lineam ents o f gratified d e sire .’ Evil im prisons, good sets
free. Evil is tired, good is full o f vigour. The one says. Let go, he dow n,
sleep, die; the other. A ll aboard! kill the dragon, m arry the girl, blow the
pipes and beat the drum , let the danee begin.'’*’
Evil is solem n, starved, and tired because it is a privation o f good; the good o f the being
has been reduced, and its livelihood is the le ss.’* V erdant, the new est lover o f A crasia,
poses an excellent exam ple o f the m anner in w hich evil reduces the good verdancy o f
life. O nce a knight enters the B ow er o f Bliss, A crasia seduces him and then saps the
good from him :
And all that w hile, right over him she hong.
W ith her false eyes fast fixed in his sight.
A s seeking m edicine, w hence she was stong.
O r greedily depasturing delight:
And oft inclining downe with kisses light.
For feare o f w aking him , his lips bedew d.
C.S. L ew is, S p e n .se r’.s Imape.s, 95.
O f the m o re c o n te m p o ra r y sch olarsh ip on The F a erie Q u een e, W illiam O ram is ne arest to L e w i s ’s
reading. In “ S p en serian P araly sis,” O ra m notes: “ T h e S penserian d esire for rest, an end to the m ise ry o f
w o rld ly instability, is ub iqu itou s in T he F a erie Q u een e, and this desire is intensilled if, as D espa ire argues,
w o rld ly effort is only in tolerably p rolo ng ed and u ltim ately useless effort. S u icide s e e m s an ea sy sh o rt cu t”
(54-55).
19
A nd through his hum id eyes did sucke his spright,
Q uite m olten into lust and pleasure lewd;
W herew ith she sighed soft, as if his case she rew d.
(2.12.73)
A fter A crasia has had her w ay w ith her lovers, enervating their good, they are reduced to
the bestial lusts o f their ow n m inds. T hey have becom e privations o f the once good
knights w hich they had been:
T hese seem ing beasts are m en indeed.
W hom this E nchauntresse hath transform ed thus,
W hylom e her lovers, w hich her lusts did feed.
N ow turned into figures hideous,
A ccording to their m indes like m onstruous.
(2.12.85)
A nother literary exam ple o f the privation o f good, and a helpful exam ple for us
here, can be seen in D a n te 's Inferno. In the depths o f hell, we find Satan, not active and
lively like M ilto n ’s Satan, but nearly devoid o f life because he is nearly devoid o f good.
Like the slow -m oving m olecules in the ice that im prisons him , D a n te ’s Satan is slow m oving as w ell, able only to gnaw on the heads o f the betrayers and slow ly flap his bat­
like w ings. The flapping o f his w ings seem s to som ehow em phasize his inability to take
action, and, ironically, it is the flapping o f his w ings w hich cools the ice that confines
him — thus Satan perpetuates his ow n captivity.
O ne n o tion o f evil that is closely related to A u g u stin e’s is the notion that evil is
sim ply spoiled goodness. In his m ore apologetic m ode, C.S. Lew is gives voice to this
view:
I f evil has the sam e kind o f reality as good, the sam e autonom y and
com pleteness, our allegiance to good becom es arbitrarily chosen loyalty o f
a partisan. A sound theory o f value dem ands som ething different. It
dem ands that good should be original and evil a m ere perversion; that
good should be the tree and evil the ivy; that good should be able to see all
round evil (as w hen sane m en understand lunacy) w hile evil cannot
20
retaliate in kind; that good should be able to exist on its ow n while evil
requires the good on which it is parasitic in order to continue its parasitic
existence.'’"
.lust as the sucked spirit o f Verdant offers an exam ple o f A u gustine's privation o f good,
the arch images o f Archim ago express an archetype o f the m anner in which evil is a
perversion o f and a parasite on good. An early exam ple can be seen in the first canto.
After A rc h im a g o ’s false U n a failed in her seduction, Redcrosse is duped by the false
image o f the perverted U na in the lusty em brace o f the squire. It is the perversion o f Una,
that is, it is the false-image o f Una, that parasitically gnaws at Redcrosse and separates
him from the truth.
In The F aerie Qiieene. Spenser expresses both o f these views o f evil: we see that
evil is both the privation o f good and the perversion o f good. Because evil is not a thing
in-and-of itself, but simply a privation o f good, it needs good in order to survive. As evil
enervates good, it functions as a parasite, and thus good functions as a (regrettable) host.
C ornelius Plantinga, in his book N ot the Way I t's S u p p o sed to Be: A B reviary o f Sin,
gives voice to the m anner in which evil is both a privation and parasite o f good:
Sin is always a departure from the norm and is assessed accordingly. Sin
is deviant and perverse, an /^justice or iniquity or ingratitude. Sin in the
Exodus literature is (/Border and r/i.vobedience. Sin is faithlessness,
lawlessness, g o d lessn e ss.... Sin is what culpably disiurhs shaloin. Sinful
hum an life is a caricature o f proper h um an life .... [Sin carries no solid
achievements] because sin is a parasite, an uninvited guest that keeps
tapping its host for sustenance. N othing about sin is its own; all its power,
persistence, and plausibility are stolen goods. Sin is not really an entity
but a spoiler o f entities, not an organism but a leech on organisms. Sin
does not build shalom; it vandalizes it. ’ ’
C.S. L ew is, G o d in th e D ock, ed. W alter H o o p e r (G ran d Rapids: E erd m a n s, 1070), 23.
” C o rn eliu s Plantinga, N o t th e W ay It's S u p p o s e d lo Be: A B rev ia ry o f S in (G ra n d Rapids: W illiam B.
E e rd m a n s P u b lish in g C o m p a n y , 1995), 88-89.
21
Even though evil Is simply spoiled goodness, it still has power: pow er to harm both good
and evil itself. E v il’s pow er to harm itself is twofold. Because evil is a privation and
parasite o f good, it needs good for its survival.
If good, the host, becom es holy and pure,
i f it becom es healthy and uncorrupted, by definition o f holy and pure, the evil parasite
ceases to exist. W h a f s more, even if the evil parasite fully consum es the good, it still
ceases to exist by destroying its ow n host; even in evil’s triumph, it is destroyed. That is
because evil is nothing but a privation o f good, until at last a thing ceases altogether to
be. Hence, evil, w hich is not a thing in-and-of itself, finds itself In a tough position.
W hen evil is defeated by good, evil is destroyed. W hen evil trium phs over good, its ow n
destruction recoils upon itself, and it is itself destroyed. So then, with the phrase “the
trium ph o f evil,” one could paradoxically and sim ultaneously be referring to ev il’s
victory and e v il’s defeat.
B ook One: T he C ircle and the Cross
In his book The E verlasting M an. G.K. Chesterton juxtaposes the images o f the
circle and the cross. The following passage from Chesterton serves as an excellent
introduction to the im ages and m ovem ents o f good and evil In Book 1 o f The F aerie
It will appear only a jest to say that all religious history has really been a
pattern o f noughts and crosses. But 1 do not by noughts m ean nothings,
but only things that are negative com pared with the positive shape or
pattern o f the other. A nd though the sym bol is o f course only a
coincidence, it is a coincidence that really does coincide. The m ind o f
A sia can really be represented by a round O, if not in the sense o f a cypher
at least o f a circle. The great Asiatic symbol o f a serpent with its tail in its
m outh is really a very perfect image o f a certain idea o f unity and
recurrence that does indeed belong to the Eastern philosophies and
religions. It really is a curve that in one sense includes everything, and in
22
another sense comes to nothing. In that sense it does confess, or rather
boast, that ail argum ent is an argum ent in a circle. A nd though the figure
is but a symbol, we can see how sound is the sym bolic sense that produces
it, the parallel symbol o f the Wheel o f B uddha generally called the
Swastika. The cross is a thing at right angles pointing boldly in opposite
directions; but the Swastika is the same thing in the very act o f returning
to the recurrent curve. That crooked cross is in fact a cross turning into a
wheel. Before we dismiss even these symbols as if they were arbitrary
symbols, we must rem em ber how intense was the imaginative instinct that
produced them or selected them both in the east and the west. The cross
has become something more than a historical mem ory: it does convey,
alm ost as by a mathematical diagram, the truth about the real point at
issue; the idea o f a conflict stretching outwards into eternity. It is true, and
even tautological, to say that the cross is the crux o f the whole matter. In
other words the cross, in fact as well as figure, does really stand for the
idea o f breaking out o f a circle that is everything and nothing. It does
escape from the circular argum ent by which everything begins and ends in
the m in d .... In a m ore popular allegory, we m ight say that when St.
George thrust his spear into the m o n ste r’s jaw s, he broke in upon the
solitude o f the self-devouring serpent and gave it som ething to bite besides
its ow n tail.’''
C hesterton’s com parison o f eastern and western religion has little relevance for
our current discussion (although Spenser does seem to capture som ething o f the east in
the Sarazin brothers o f Book 1). In his juxtaposing o f the circle and the cross, and the
corresponding m ovem ents o f each, however, Chesterton strikes at the heart o f one o f
Spe n se r’s c h ie f themes; Chesterton, indeed, even goes so far as to use the Saint George
legend as an illustration. For Chesterton and for Spenser, the circle and the cross become
pow erful and antagonistic symbols that serve as testaments to the order o f the world.
A nd for Spenser, the circle and the cross serve as powerful and antagonistic sym bols o f
the natural w orking o f evil and good respectively. Evil, a privation and distortion o f
good, is in fact a cross that has turned in on itself, altering its shape from cross to
sw astika to circle. Because o f Its original shape, the circle has great potential, but the
potential is never actualized because the m o v em e n t o f a circle, though so m ew hat grand.
G.K . C h e ste rto n , The E v e rla stin g M a n (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993), 133-34.
is ultim ately futile as the energy never extends outside o f its own reach. Conversely, the
cross, the sym bol o f good, breaks out; it is fixed at one perm anent point, and from there it
breaks out, dow n to the depths o f the earth, up to the heights o f the heavens, and side to
side through all times and places. The cross is o f course the costly sym bol o f free grace
that allows one to extend beyond o n e ’s own height and reach. In Book 1 o f The Faerie
Q ueene, Spenser uses these two images, the circle and the cross, and particularly the
m ovem ents o f each, the turning in o f evil and the breaking out o f good, as his
philosophical foundation for the adventures (and m isadventures) o f the Redcrosse
Knight.
After being duped by Archim ago and separated from Una, doubt begins to turn in
the m ind o f Redcrosse and is projected out as his ow n enem y in the form o f the first
Sarazin brother. Sans Foy, "w ho cared not for Cod or m an a point’" (1.2.12). in the
ensuing battle, the doubt in R edcrosse’s m ind takes form as he and Sans Foy are locked
in a roundabout pattern as they “quyteth cu ff with cuff: / Each others equall pulssaunce
envies, / A nd through their iron sides with cruell spies / Does seek to perce” (1.2.17). As
they turn on each other in battle, they both becom e self-destructive by limiting their own
advancem ent: “Astonled with the stroke o f their owne hand, / Do backe rebut, and each
to other yeeldeth land” (1.2.15).
It is only w hen the cross is rem em bered, given voice by
the Sarazin, that Redcrosse is able to break out o f the circle o f doubt in his m ind that is
everything and nothing.
“ Curse on that Crosse,” quoth then the Sarazin,
“That keepes thy body from the bitter fit;
Dead long ygoe I wote thou haddest bin.
H ad not that charm e from thee forw arned it.’"
(1 .2 .18)
24
In his book S p e n s e r ’s 'Fierce W arres a n d F ailhfull L o ves,’ M ichael Leslie notes that “In
locating the source o f the K night’s strength in his armour. Sans foy becom es the first
interpreter o f martial sym bolism in the poem: his curse brings the arm our to the forefront
o f our attention by alluding to its non-physical attributes.” ’ ' It is more than simply the
arm or o f Redcrosse that protects him; it is the insignia o f the cross, the ultimate symbol
o f grace and holiness, w hich revives R e d crosse’s faith and allows him to break out o f the
circles o f doubt in his ow n mind. Under the protection o f the cross, and the faith that
brings the dear rem em brance o f his dying Lord, Redcrosse is able to quickly cleave the
head o f the Sarazin.
Shortly alter this scene betw een Redcrosse and Sans Foy, Spenser turns our
attention back to forsaken truth, Una, who is “ Still seeking him, that from her still did
Hie” (1.3.21). Una is beguiled by the false image o f Archim ago into believing that she is
indeed reunited with Redcrosse himself. This bogus reunion between U na and her
knight, and the following scene betw een Archim ago and Sans Loy, offer further insight
into the ways in which good breaks out and evil turns in. T hough the reunion o f U na and
Redcrosse is here a sham, U n a ’s emotions are true. Spenser universalizes U n a ’s feelings
by expressing the m anner in w hich love breaks out from the circle o f sin and regret and
pain. Here Spenser elevates U n a ’s emotions by not only offering a picture o f the power
o f grace, but also by offering a brief glimpse o f the origin o f grace:
One loving howre
For m any yeares o f sorrow can dispence:
A dram o f sweet is w orth a pound o f sowre:
She has forgot, how m any a wofull stowre
For h im she late endured; she speaks no more
O f past: true is, that true love hath no pow er
M ich ael Leslie, S p e n s e r ’s ‘F ierce W arres a n d F a ilh fu ll L oves
Faerie Q u e e n e (C a m b rid g e: Boydell & B rew er, 1983), I 19,
M a rlia i a n d C h iv a lric S y m b o lism in T h e
25
To looken backe; his eyes be llxt before.
(1.3.3(f)
The universal language o f this passage elevates the meaning o f it to extend beyond Una
and Redcrosse. The elevated language o f the opening line o f this passage, “One loving
howre / For m any yeares o f sowre can dispence,” moves the mind o f the reader from the
grace that Una is offering to Redcrosse to the grace that Christ offers from the cross to all
peoples— where “one loving h o w re ” dispenses the sorrows o f m any years o f
w ayw ardness, it is grace from the cross that breaks out o f the cyclical m ovem ent o f sin
and sorrow that ultimately leads to death; it is the loving sacrifice from the cross that
causes God h im s e lf to see not what is behind, but what is before in Christ. This brilliant
picture o f freedom is juxtaposed with the entanglem ents o f evil in the following stanzas.
Where the cross breaks out, evil turns in on itself, frustrating its own plans.
W hen Sans Loy sees A rchim ago, in the false form o f the Redcrosse Knight, he is
filled with wrath and a desire to avenge the death o f his brother. Sans F o y .’^’ Sans T o y 's
spear pierces through the “ vainely crossed shield” o f Archim ago and enters into his body,
throw ing A rchim ago from his horse and goring a w ound from which a well o f blood did
gush. Sans Loy then proudly states, “ Lo there the worthie meed / o f him, that slew Sans
Foy w ith bloudie k n ife ... / Life from Sans foy thou tookst. Sans loy shall from thee take”
( 1.3.36). Here Sans Loy perpetuates an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, destructive and
cyclical m ovem ent. It is a m ovem ent without grace that looks only behind and never
ahead. It is a m ovem ent that leads only to destruction; it is a m ovem ent that leads only to
blindness and mush. The lawlessness o f Sans Loy frustrates not only good, but also evil.
W ithout regard to a higher law, evil turns back in on itself as quickly as, if not m ore
It is interesting to note the privation o f good. T he Sarazin b ro th e rs’ o nly identity is in th eir lack o f good;
i.e., th ey are n a m e d Sans Foy (w ith ou t faith). Sans Loy (w itho ut law), and Sans Jo y (w ith o u t joy ).
26
quickly, than it turns on good. And so Sans Loy leaves the bloody body o f Arehim ago,
whose own hypocrisy has been show n to backfire on him, in the field, but not before he
acknow ledges, though without regret, the innate outcom e o f his vengeful way;
W hy Archim ago, lucklesse syre.
W hat doe 1 see? what hard mishap is this.
That hath thee hither brought to taste mine y re?
Or thine the fault, or m ine the error is.
In stead o f foe to w ound m y friend amiss?
(lfiL 39)
E vil’s confusion o f friend and foe, an idea rem iniscent o f Psalm 34, “ Evil will
slay the w icked,” is reinforced in the House o f Pride. As Redcrosse is guided by Duessa
into the House o f Pride, and the pageant o f the seven deadly sins begins, it is helpful to
recall Psalm 141:10, “Let the wicked fall into their own nets, while I pass by in safety.”
In one o f the eh ie f allegorical m om ents o f Book 1, the Redcrosse Knight is faced with the
great opponents o f holiness. Instead o f a battle scene, however, Spenser turns the ITouse
o f Pride into m ore o f a parade. In The A lleg o ry o f Love, C.S. Lewis notes that
“ [S penser’s] evils are all dead or dying things. Each o f his deadly sins has a mortal
disease.” ’^ As the reader and Redcrosse h im se lf become observers o f the pageant o f evil,
we also becom e educated oh the destructive reflexivity o f evil.
Lucifera, the em bodim ent o f pride, rides in on her dreadful dragon as her vision is
turned back in on h erself and herself alone.
And in her hand she held a m irrhour bright.
W herein her face she often vewed fayne,
And in her se Ife-loved sem blance tooke delight;
For she was w ondrous faire, as any living wight.
(1.4.10)
C.S. L ew is, The A lle g o ry o f L o ve ( N e w Y ork: O x fo rd U n iversity Press, 1958), 3 15.
27
Pride, the greatest evil and greatest threat to holiness, always circles back on itself. This
is shown directly in L ucifera’s narrow vision o f her own reflected face. It is also shown
as Lucifera and the other pride-filled creatures o f her court look about at each o th er’s
pride, and “ each others greater pride does s p ig h f ’ (1.4.14). Not only is pride destructive
to itself because it is distracting, but also because it allows for no allies or superiors.
Ultimately, ultimate pride leaves one all alone, and as we shall see, alone in a “dunghill
o f dead carkases" (1.5.53).
Lucifera and the assem bly o f the other deadly sins are led by Idleness, the perfect
em bodim ent o f the futile circle o f evil.
Scarse could [Idleness] once uphold his heavie hed.
To looken, whether it were night or day:
M ay seem e the wayne was very evil led.
W hen such an one had guiding o f the way.
That knew not, whether right he went, or else astray.
(L 4 .1 9 )
H ow often m ust this crew have turned in circles with its front m an. Idleness, too lazy to
lift his head (even in his posture there is som ething circular instead o f upright), and the
chief, Lucifera, in back, distracted by her ow n face.
N ex t is Gluttony, who can offer no direction. Not only is his belly “ up-blowne
with luxury,” but also with “ fatnessc swollen were his eyes” (1.4.21 ). As his crew m oves
in futile circles, so Gluttony, himself, does as well. Continuously and fruitlessly, he
“ sw allow d up excessive feast” and “ spued up his gorge” (1.4.21). Instead o f digesting
food that is then turned into constructive energy, he vainly vom its it back out from the
orifice from w hich it came. Like other form s o f evil. G luttony is destructive not only to
him se lf— “ Full o f diseases was his Caracas blew ”— but also to evil itself— “ W hose mind
in m eat and drinke w as drow ned so, / That from his friend he seldom e knew his foe”
28
(1.4.23). W ith this confusion o f friend and foe, we recall the interactions betw een Sans
Loy and A rehim ago, and we look ahead to the self-im posed frustration in the Castle o f
Medina.
N ext rides in lustful Lechery on his bearded goat, fie is an inconstant man,
running from w om an to w om an, stuck in the cycle o f distorted desire; he “ loved all he
saw, / And lusted after all, that he did love” (1.4.26). This cyclical m ovem ent o f
lo v in g ... lu s tin g ... and loving brings destruction to him and all those caught in his circle:
“W hich lewdnesse fdd him with reproachfull paine / O f that fowle evill, which all m en
reprove, / That rots the marrow, and consum es the braine” (1.4.26). Sexual sins have
alw ays seem ed to carry extra weight in Christendom. A nd yet here Spenser, as he does
with all o f the deadly sins, does not bring in an outside punishm ent from God alone, but
expresses the m anner in which L e c h ery ’s own action brings about his punishm ent;
instead o f receiving the burn o f hell (though that may be coming), he receives the burn o f
syphilis.
Avarice, who is next in the assem bly, is caught in a circular pattern o f his own.
The more he has, the m ore he wants; and the m ore he wants, the more he gets. This
selfish m ov em e n t leads not only to a wretched life, but also to the destruction o f his line.
Avarice is so w rapped up in the hoarding o f his own w ealth that his line o f greed ends
with his ow n death:
Yet chylde ne kinsm an living had he none
To leave them to; but thorough daily care
To get, and nightly feare to lose his owne,
fde led a w retched life unto him selfe unknowne.
(1 .4228)
29
These lines recall Shakespeare's first sonnet which warns o f the dangers and selfdestruction which com es w hen one is only concerned for oneself; “ But thou, contracted
to thine own bright eyes, / Feed’st thy light’s flame with self-substantial fuel / M aking a
fam ine w here abundance lies, / T hyself thy foe, to thy sweet self too cruel.” T hough
certainly the receiver o f Shakespeare’s sonnet is m uch fairer a person and spirit than
Avarice, his self-love and thus his self-destruction is the same. Where good creates; evil
is sterile.
After Avarice com es Envie, in whose “ bosome secretly there lay / An hatefull
Snake, the which his taile uptyes in many folds” (1.4.31). As E n v ie ’s stom ach and tail
turn in knots (m uch like Errour), his eyes turn from all around him and then back to
h im self with an envious and cynical glare. A s this cycle continues, the evil o f envy eats
aw ay at itself: “That all poison ran about his chaw; / But inwardly he chaw ed his ow ne
m aw / At neighbours wealth, that m ade him ever sad; / For death it was, w h e n any good
he sa w ” ( 1.4.30). Plantinga notes that “ Envy is pure evil, as toxic and sickening to the
envier as to everybody else. For, as Edm und Spenser says in nine o f the m ost fam ous
lines in the English language on this topic, w hat eats away at the envier is his ow n s i n . ...
Envy poisons the envier, introducing gangrene into his ow n soul.” ’^
Finally comes Wrath, w ho is covered in blood, insignia o f his rash ways, as he
w aves his sword above his head. W rath too is caught in the reflexivity o f evil. However,
he is a bit different from the others who cam e before.
T hrough unadvised rashnesse woxen wood,
For o f his hands he had no governm ent.
Ne cared for bloud in his avengement:
But w hen the furious fit was overpast.
H is cruell facts he often would repent;
P lantin ga, 170.
Yet wilful 1 m an he never w ould forecast.
How m any mischieves should ensue his heedlesse hast.
(1.4.34)
W rath is caught in the circle o f rash cruelty followed by guilt and then repentance.
T hough the introduction o f repentance here seems profitable, it becom es simply a
distortion o f good. The only whips that Wrath receives are from the hand o f Satan; “And
after all, upon the w agon beame / Rode Sathan, with a smarting whip in hand, / With
which he forward lasht the laesie tem e” (1.4.36). Here, Satan is not spurring Wrath on to
Repentance but to m ore wrath. Com pared to the “ yron w hip” (1.10.27) that Redcrosse
receives from Penance— a discipline that brings about true rem orse and repentance— the
smart whip o f Satan functions as a beguiling justification for Wrath. It spurs him on to
go round and round— feeling good through his (feigned) repentance while continuing to
do evil to others and, by extension, to himself.
In the H ouse o f Pride, Spenser offers a picture o f the reflexive nature o f the seven
deadly sins; it is here that he offers a glimpse into the natural order o f evil. This is sim ply
an educational allegory; Redcrosse does not actually engage with any o f the vices in the
House o f Pride, though he has been subject to a few o f them already. In fact, soon after
the pageant, he is able to m ake a hum ble escape. However, because the front door is
locked, he is not able to turn back and escape out through it; he m ust go d o w n and out to
be free. E ven though we do not see Redcrosse interact with the vices at the House o f
Pride, we are prepared to meet them as they com e back tim e and time again throughout
The F aerie Q ueene, often in m ore intense and com bative forms. It is in the House o f
Pride that Spenser introduces us to the seven deadly sins and prepares us to notice their
destructive reflexivity w hen next we meet them.
Soon after his escape from the House o f Pride, Redcrosse finds h im self bound by
a more com bative representation o f pride, Orgoglio. Unable to rescue himself,
R edcrosse’s freedom needs to be achieved by the dwarf, Una, Arthur, and his squire.
R osem ary Freem an notes that “L ucifera’s pride was decorative in itself and its m ethod
was the method o f seduction. The pride o f Orgoglio captures and destroys by brute
f o r c e . In a similar vein, C.S. Lewis notes that “ Pride and Orgoglio are both pride, but
the one is pride within us, the other pride attacking us from without, w hether in the form
o f persecution, oppression, or ridicule. The one seduces us, the other brow beats us.’’"^"
W hat neither F reem an nor Lewis notes is that O rgoglio’s prideful brute force is perilous
not only to Redcrosse (and Arthur), but it is also perilous to O rgoglio himself. In their
first encounter, we see that it is the giant’s great force that ultimately leads to his own
disarming:
Ne shame he thought to shunne so hideous might:
The idel stroke, enforcing furious way.
M issing the m arke o f his m isaim ed sight
Did fall to ground, and with his heavie sway
So deeply dinted in the driven clay.
That three yards deepe a furrow up did throw:
The sad earth w ounded with so sore assay.
Did grone lull grievous underneath the blow.
And trem bling with strange feare, did like an earthquake show.
His boystrous club, so buried in the ground,
He could not rearen up again so light.
But that the knight him at avantage found,
And whiles he strove his com bred clubbe to quight
Out o f the earth, with blade all burning bright
He smote o ff his left arme, which like a blocke
Did fall to ground, deprived o f native might;
Large streams o f bloud out o f the truncked stocke
Forth gushed, like fresh water streame from riven rocke.
( 1.8 .8 , !())
R o s e m a r y Freem an. The F a erie O u e e n e (L on do n: C h atto & W indus, 1970), 100.
C.S. Lewis, A lle g o ry , 335.
The great m onster, Orgoglio, is puffed up and grand, yet it is his own strength and w eight
that makes him vulnérable to attack and hastens his own demise, in this and the
subsequent round o f battle between Orgoglio and Arthur, one can hear the echoes o f
Psalm 7:14-16:
He who is pregnant with evil
and conceives trouble gives birth to disillusionment.
He who digs a hole and scoops it out
falls into the pit he has made.
The trouble he causes recoils on himself;
his violence comes down on his own head.
As the battle continues, A rthur is knocked down by the giant’s great stroke, but gains the
upper hand again w hen his shield is unveiled by the stroke o f Orgoglio. W hile O rgoglio
is stunned by A rth u r’s shield, Arthur is able to hew the m onster’s leg o f f before finally
beheading the m onster, but not before Spenser points out one more time O rg o g lio ’s
culpability in his ow n demise. After com paring the giant’s fall to a great tree, Spenser
com pares it to a high castle:
Or as a Castle reared high and round.
By subtile engines and malitious slight
Is underm ined from the lowest ground.
A nd her foundation forst, and feebled quight,
At last dow ne falles, and w ith her heaped hight
Her hastie m ine does more heavie make.
And yields it selfe unto the vie tours might;
Such was this Gyaunts fall, that seem ed to shake
The stedfast globe or earth, as it for feare did quake.
(ldS.23)
A rth u r’s beheading o f Orgoglio is not a complete enough picture o f the battle between
good and evil for Spenser. He m ust first make elear that it is the g ian t’s ow n stature that
brings about his destruction and yields h im se lf to his ow n defeat. Orgoglio and an old
33
castle alike fall harder because o f their own size and weight;
and with her heaped
hight / H er hastie ruine does more heavie m ake.” .lames N ohrnberg notes that
All giants are subject to this critique o f size, since their bulk m akes them
naturally liable to a reduction or mortification or fall. It is this potential
for diminution that draws them into a hubris m yth in the first place.
O rg o g lio ’s overw eeningness cannot be dissociated from his vulnerability:
pride, in the sense o f loftiness or hauteur (Latin, altus), always goes before
the fall."^'
A nd so, it is O rgoglio’s ow n puffed up pride— represented by his grand stature— which
hastens his fall. Also, it seems fitting to note that his puffed up stature is fake. Orgoglio
looks big, but he is em pty and filled only with air— a deprivation o f good. And w hen his
prideful body is pricked for the final time, O rgoglio’s emptiness is exposed:
But soone as breath out o f his brest did pas,
That huge great body, which the G yaunt bore.
Was vanisht quite, and o f that m onstrous mas
Was nothing left, but like an emptie blader was.
(1.8.24)
Soon after the defeat o f Orgoglio, Redcrosse finds him self in m ore danger—
danger o f his ow n hand in the name o f Despair. Despair is, o f course, inside the m ind o f
Redcrosse— that is w hy he knows all that Redcrosse has been through. And so, while
Redcrosse is in despair, he is locked within his own thoughts; instead o f looking out, he
looks only within, m ulling on his own failures. The sweet, beguiling words o f D espair
entrap the m ind o f Redcrosse in despondency as his thoughts turn from transgression to
j udgment.
The lenger life, I wote the greater sin.
The greater sin, the greater punishment:
All those great battles, which thou boasts to win.
Through strife, and blood-shed, and auengem ent.
N o w praysd, hereafter deare thou shalt repent:
For life must life, and blood must blood repay.
N o h rn b e r" , 264,
34
Is not enough thy euill life forespent?
For he, that once hath missed the right way.
The further he doth goe, the further he doth stray.
(1.9.43)
Is not he just, that all this doth behold
From highest heuen, and beares an equall eie?
Shall he thy sins vp in his knowledge fold.
And guilty be o f thine impietie?
Is not his lawe. Let eu cry sinner die:
Die shall all flesh? what then must needs be donne.
Is it not better to doe willinglie.
Then linger, till the glass be all out ronne?
D eath is the end o f woes: die soone, 0 fa ries sonne.
(L 9 .4 7 )
The circular reasoning o f Despair in the m ind o f Redcrosse is the voice o f the circle,
ignorant o f the cross on his chest and shield, the ‘deare rem em brance o f his dying L o rd .’
D espair’s voice is convincing because it is true, or at least, it is a portion and a distortion
o f the truth. By ending his reading o f the law with “ Let euery sinner die,” Despair
truncates R om ans 6:23: “For the w ages o f sin is death, but the gift o f God is eternal life
in Christ Jesus our Lord.” By omitting grace, D espair leaves Redcrosse only with the
option o f turning on h im self in destruction.
Richard M allette notes that not only does Despair distort scripture but also he
distorts the structure o f the Reformation sermon:
The Reform ation serm on had two functions o f equal importance: on the
one hand to preach repentance, on the other to teach the forgiveness o f
sins. One sermon m anual stresses the parity o f the two functions by
noting that the congregation must be convinced not only o f their
wickedness but also that God will pardon and forgive their sins and that he
will withdraw his anger and punishment.'^"
Despair certainly convinces Redcrosse o f his wickedness; however, by failing to offer
G o d ’s pardoning grace, Despair leaves Redcrosse unable to break out o f his dire plight.
'*■ R ichard M allette, “T h e Protestant A rt o f P re ach in g in B o o k O ne o f The F a erie Queene,"" S p e n se r S lu d ie s
VII (1987): 15-16.
35
Beyond truncating the truth, Despair beguilingly imitates the truth, or, in Northrop F rye’s
language, he sets forth a demonic parody: “ For life must life, and blood m ust blood
repay.” Here D espair sets the stage, w hereby sin in the flesh and blood requires
atonem ent o f flesh and blood. However, this circular voice o f Despair— life for life,
blood for blood— is blind to the power o f the cross which breaks out o f the circle o f
Despair. For it is on the cross that the law o f the circle is fulfilled— the life and blood o f
Christ is sacrificed so that even though Redcrosse has m issed the right way, he can again
return to the path o f holiness. This scene recalls a stanza from S pe n se r’s “ Heavenly
Love” :
In flesh at first the guilt comm itted was.
Therefore in flesh it m ust be satisfyde:
N o r spirit, nor Angel 1, though they m an surpass.
Could m ake am ends to G od for m ans misguyde.
But onely man himselfe, who selfe did slyde.
So taking flesh o f sacred virgins wombe.
For mans deare sake [Christ] did a m an become."^’
Again, the w ages o f sin are death, but the gift o f God is eternal life in Christ Jesus. Life
calls for life, and blood for blood; however, D espair distorts the m arvelous m ovem ent o f
grace, where it is C hrist’s life and blood on the cross which fulfill the law, into cold
circles o f self-slaughter, where R edcrosse’s own life and blood are given for no purpose
beyond his ow n end. A ccenting the reflexive nature o f this evil. Despair sim ply provides
Redcrosse with the m eans to his own end:
Then gan the villain him to ouercraw.
And brought vnto him swords, ropes, poison, fire.
And all that might him to perdition draw;
A nd bad him choose, w hat death he would desire.
(1.9.50)
E d m u n d S pen ser, “ An H y m n e o f H e av en ly L o v e,” stanza 2 I .
56
The chiding truth o f Una, however, rem inds Redcrosse o f the grace w hich sets him free
from the reflexive dangers o f the despairing mind. Una, here, crosses Redcrosse, stating.
Com e, com e away, fraile, feeble, fleshly wight.
N e let vaine words bewitch thy manly hart,
Ne dinelish thoughts dism ay thy constant spright.
In heauenly mercies hast thou not a parf.^
W hy shouldst thou then despeire, that chosen art?
W here justice growes, there grows eke greter grace.
The which doth quench the brond o f hellish smart.
And that accurst hand-w riting doth deface.
Arise, Sir knight arise, and leaue this cursed place.
(1.9.53)
Redcrosse m ust arise and break out o f the circles o f Despair by the pow er o f grace, the
heavenly m ercies that grow greater than the justice required for his past sins. As
Redcrosse and Una quickly and safely depart from Despair, Spenser draw s our attention
to the futility o f evil as D espair turns on himself.
He chose an halter from am ong the rest.
And with it hong him selfe, vnbid vnblest.
But death he could not worke himselfe thereby;
For thousand times he so him selfe had drest.
Yet nathelesse it could not doe him die
Till he should die his last, that is eternally.
(1.9.54)
In The A n a lo g y o fT h e Faerie O ueene, .lames Nohrnberg notes that
There is a special appropriateness in D e sp a ir’s choosing to hang h im s e lf in
a “ cursed place,” am ong “old stockes and stubs o f trees” (F ix .52,34). The
“accurst hand-w riting” includes the “curse o f the L a w ” that Christ in his
death assumes; in the Law it is written, “ Cursed is euerie one that hangeth
on tre” (Gal. 3:13). In other words. Despair is cursed in the very form o f
the death through which the sinner is redeemed."^"*
N o h rn b erg , A n a lo g y, 155.
37
T hough he is too impotent to succeed in his own demise, D e sp a ir's natural im pulse is
indeed actualized. For although D espair cannot kill him self on the tree, it is by the tree,
the cross o f Christ, that despair finds Its death, and grace and jo y a b o u n d /^
M oving beyond Despair, Redcrosse is brought by Una to the House o f Holiness
where he is taught repentance and the way to heavenly bliss. It has been noted that many
aspects o f the H ouse o f Holiness oppose their counterparts in the House o f Pride. It is m y
intention to Juxtapose a few elements o f each in order to show the m anner in w hich evil
turns in and good breaks out. In com parison to the “ broad high w a y ” (1.4.2) which leads
to the House o f Pride, w hen entering the House o f Holiness, Redcrosse m ust “passe in
stoLiping low; / For straight and narrow was the w a y ” (1.10.5). Spenser notes that those
few who enter here do not turn their steps, but instead walk the straight and narrow path
w hich leads unto life. Conversely, those who follow the broad h ighw ay o f evil, those
who circle back and turn astray— those who jo in in their ow n evil plight— become
partakers o f evil; evil that leads only to self-destruction.
Strange thing it is an errant knight to see
Here in this place, or any other wight.
That hither turns his steps. So few there bee.
That chose the narrow path, or seeke the right:
All keep the broad high way, and take delight
W ith m any rather for to go astray.
A nd be partakers o f their evil plight.
Then with a few to walke the rightest way;
O foolish men, w hy haste ye to your owne decay?
(IHOTO)
For an interesting read on the D espair episode, see A n d re w E sco bed o, “ D espair and the P ro p o rtio n o f
S elf,” and Beth Q uitsiu nd , “ D espair and the C o m p o sitio n o f the Self,” S p e n se r S tu d ie s X V i i (2003): 75i 06. E sc o b ed o fo cuses on the influence o f P rotestant literature on S p e n s e r 's D e sp a ir e p is o d e , and
Q u its iu n d fo cu ses on the overlap o f medical and devotional dis course. E s c o b e d o ’s piece is s o m e w h a t
helpful to the u n d ers ta n d in g o f our to pic as he d escribes K ie rk e g a a r d ’s idea o f e x ce ss iv e finitud e—
w h e r e b y w e identify o urselv es on ly with the m aterial things around us; thus, d e sp a ir m an ifests itself in a
redu ctio n o f s e l f to world.
In the foreground o f the House o f Holiness, Spenser notes that no errant knight who
w anders and turns his steps will find his way to the House o f Holiness. The circling
m o vem ent o f those who follow the broad high w ay is juxtaposed w ith the m ovem ent o f
those who chose the narrow path, those who “seek the right” and “ w alk the rightest w a y .”
Here, Spenser plays on the word, “ right,” m eaning both “ correct” and “ straight,” as in a
right angle. Before fully entering the House o f Holiness and offering a fuller depletion o f
the m o vem ent o f good, Spenser pauses to remind us o f the self-destructive reflexivity o f
evil in his rhetorical question, “O foolish men, why haste ye to your ow ne d ecay?”
In addition to the paths o f each house which illumine the natures o f good and evil,
the allegorical figures o f each house express the m anner in which evil turns in while good
breaks out. In the House o f Pride, Lucifera, who, “ in her hand she held a m irrhour bright,
/ W herein her face she often vewed fayne,” turns her attention and her vision back in on
herse lf only. In the House o f Holiness, Fidelia's countenance em bodies the breaking out
o f good: “ Like sunny beames threw from her Christall face, / That could have dazed the
rash beholders sight, / And round about her head did shine like heavens light” (1.10.12).
As the light from Fidelia's face extends, we see that she is putting her faith not in her
ow n strength but instead in G o d ’s strength. Unlike Lucifera who turns her ow n face back
in on itself, Fidelia’s “ Christall faee” (expressed through the wonderful word play o f
Spenser) prism s the light o f C hrist’s face through her ow n crystal face for the entire
w orld to see.
In the House o f Pride, Idlenesse and Gluttony express the wayw ard futility and
the s e lf danger o f the reflexivity o f evil. Too lazy to hold up his own head. Idleness
“ knew not, w hether right he went, or else astray.” Because G lu tto n y ’s eyes were so filled
39
with fat, “ from his friend he seldom kn e w his foe.” In the House o f Holiness, we meet
the direct eyes o f Speranza.
Upon her arme a sliver anchor lay.
W hereon she leaned ever, as befell;
And ever up to heaven, as she did pray.
H er steadfast eyes were bent, ne swarved other way,
(U10.14)
While Idlenesse and Gluttony harm them selves as their wayward eyes turn back in
circles, S p e ranza's vision, anchored in truth and spurred on by her hope, breaks out—
further up and further into the heavens.
In the House o f Pride, Lechery and A varice turn in self-destructive circles. Filled
with lust, Lechery begets only syphilis which “ rots the m arrow, and consum es the brain.”
Filled w ith greed. Avarice begets nothing at all: “ Yet chylde ne kinsm an living had he
none.” In the House o f Holiness, we are privileged to see the love o f Charissa and the
fruit that she bears: “ For she o f late is lightned o f her w om be, /A nd hath encreast the
world w ith one sonne m o r e ... / But thankt be God, that her encrease so ev e rm o re ”
(1.10.16). in Charissa, we see agape love, a fertile love that ever extends out without
ever turning back on oneself. Charissa expands her love infinitely forw ard through the
creation o f her sons and daughters. C harissa's agape love is seen beyond the begetting as
“ Her necke and breasts were ever open bare, / That ay thereof her babes m ight sucke their
fill” ( 1.10.30). The love o f Charissa continues to extend as she gives o f herself in order
to nourish her beloved ones.
A com parison o f Charissa and Errour and their respective offspring offers further
insights into the natures o f good and evil. The breaking out o f good is seen not only in
C h a rissa's giving to her children, but also in her children’s extension from Charissa.
40
A m ultitude o f babes about her hong,
Playing their sports, that joyd her to behold,
W h o m still she fed, whiles they were weake and young.
But thrust them forth still, as they wexed old.
(L 1 0 .3 1 )
Instructed in the ways o f love and brought up in the House o f Holiness, the offspring o f
C harissa learn to extend beyond their m o th e r’s teat; they are w eaned and transition from
one who only takes to one who can learn to give. This idea recalls a passage in the Letter
to the Hebrews:
In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need som eone to
teach you the elem entary truths o f G o d ’s word all over again. You need
milk, not solid food! A nyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is
not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for
the mature, who by constant use have trained them selves to distinguish
good from evil (Heb. 5:12-14).
The offspring o f Charissa m oves beyond milk into solid food, and we can imagine them
breaking out from their m other trained to distinguish good and evil, and filled with the .
righteous virtues o f faith, hope, and love.
Errour’s brood, conversely, takes the form o f the spiritually im m ature w ho are
unable to extend beyond their mother. Instead, they are only able to turn in on her.
S penser’s word play with “w eening” (thinking/being w eaned) expresses the b ro o d ’s
confusion and im potence w ith the loss o f their mother. The following passage also
serves as an exam ple o f a dem onic parody o f the crucifixion; instead o f a sacrifice that
brings life, this sacrifice brings poison and death:
W eening their w onted entrance to have found
At her wide mouth: but being there withstood
They flocked all about her bleeding wound.
And sucked up their dying m others blood.
M aking her death their life, and eke her hurt their good.
( l . 1 .25)
41
As the good o f C harissa’s offspring extends beyond their mother, the evil o f E rro u r’s
brood turns back on their mother with a self-destructive reflexivity as their bellies burst
and bow els gush forth.
H ankins notes that
In observing the pattern o f S penser’s knightly quest, we may notice that
each tem ple o f Virtue is preceded by one or more houses o f non-Virtue or
anti-V irtue.... After the most severe o f these he goes to his place o f
perfecting, or tem ple o f Virtue, for strength and instruction. He then goes
on to the m ost severe and fundam ental test o f all, in which victory
com pletes the task o f perfecting his virtue."*^’
The Redcrosse Knight, donning the virtue o f holiness, is tested in the cave o f Errour, the
H ouse o f Lucifera, the Elouse o f Orgoglio, and the cave o f Despair. He then is led by
Una into the House o f Caelia for his perfecting before his final test in his battle with the
Dragon. In each o f the places o f early testing and in the place o f perfecting, Spenser has
highlighted the natures o f good and evil in order to express the m anner in which holiness
can be achieved. It is important to note the level o f involvement that R edcrosse plays in
his ow n path to holiness. There are instances in which Redcrosse takes an active role in
the expurgation o f evil. For example, he “ raft [Errour’s | hatefull head without rem orse.”
Often, however, he plays a much more passive role in this endeavor, either because he is
rescued or led in a new direction by Arthur, Una, or the grace o f God, or because the evil
in him and around him falls prey to its own destructive nature. In his final place o f
testing, the Battle with the Dragon, Redcrosse m ust indeed play an active role in the
slaying, for it is his quest to do so. However, through the places o f testing and perfecting
that have com e before, Spenser prepares us to see the active energy o f evil and its self­
destructive tendencies.
Joh n H ank ins, S o u rc e a n d M e a n in g in S p e n s e r ’s A lle g o ry (L o nd on : O x fo rd U niv ersity Press, 197 1), 44.
42
R. E. Neil Dodge summ arizes well the general sphere o f interpretation in which
analysis o f R edcrosseN battle with the D ragon occurs;
The general significance o f the combat betw een the Redcross K night and
the Dragon has never needed discussion, because it is unm istakable. After
his various minor spiritual contests, now success and now failures, in the
com pany first with Heavenly Truth and then with Falsehood, and after the
spiritual regimen o f the House o f Holiness, the cham pion o f Holiness, the
hum an soul in quest o f salvation, m ust fight the crow ning fight with the
enem y o f mankind, the Devil.
And yet, even this generalization has not held its course over time. Som e critics have
argued that S penser’s D ragon is not representative o f the Devil at all, but simply is what
it is, a dragon, and Spenser is merely following the form o f any traditional Rom ance.
Others have argued that the Dragon represents sin or original sin. Carol Kaske, though
her argum ent is more com prehensive than ju st this one point, is o f this cam p as she
focuses prim arily on the D ragon’s spark— noting that “'The whole incident o f the spark
seem s to be a developm ent o f the universal m etaphor o f sin as fire.”"^^ Still others have
argued that S penser’s Dragon represents death. Linw ood Orange writes.
The details o f B ook 1 distinctly indicate that the dragon is Death, an
identification which, I further believe, is more acceptable from the
standpoint o f structure than that o f either Sin or Satan. Since throughout
the book the R ed Cross Knight constantly confronts various form s o f sin,
including the seven deadly ones, and since he is show n to be thoroughly
cleansed in the House o f Holiness, it seems superfluous and anticlimactic
to m atch him against Sin again at the end. That battle has already been
R. E. Neil D o dg e, “T h e Well o f Life and the T ree o f L ife,” M o d ern P h ilo lo g y 6, no. 2 ( 1908): 191.
For this p erspectiv e and a refutation o f it, see W h itn e y Wells, “ S p e n s e r ’s D ra g o n ,” M o d e rn L a n g u a g e
/ V u l g . s X L I n o . 3 ( l 9 2 6 ) : 143-157.
C a r o l K a s k e , “ T h e D r a g o n ' s S p a r k a n d S t i n g a n d t he Sli' iiclure o f R e d C r o s s ' s D r a g o n - F l g h t , ’’ in
E sse n tia l A rtic le s f o r the S tu d y o f E d m u n d S p en se r, ed. A.C. H am ilton (H a m d e n : A rch on B ooks, 1972),
352. For an interesting rebuttal to Kaske, see .lohn W. C raw fo rd , “ T h e Fire from S p e n s e r ’s Dragon: The
F a e rie Q u ee n e, I.xi,” The S o u th C e n tra l B u lle tin 30, no. 4 (1970): 176-178. C ra w fo rd a rg u es ag ain st
K aske by no ting the tw o ty pes o f fire, c o n d e m n in g fire and p u rify ing Fire. C ra w fo rd w rites, “ Red C ro ss
m u st e x p e rie n c e c lea n sin g — pu rging — alo ng the w ay, and there is a strong indication th a t this is ex ac tly
w h a t h a p p e n s to him w h en the D ragon issues his ‘s p a r k .’” C raw fo rd m a k e s m a n y in trigu ing arg u m en ts,
but n ev er ad d res ses the fact th at it is an e v il drag o n th at issues the spark, not a holy G od . H ad the D r a g o n ’s
spark been fo un d in the Flouse o f Holiness, C r a w f o r d ’s case w ould hold m ore heat.
43
won. As for Satan, he actually appears in canto 4; stanza 36, sitting on a
w agon and lashing his team o f deadly sins with a whip. It seem s unlikely,
despite Revelation 20:2 and Milton, that Spenser w ould have been so
inconsistent as to present Satan later in the form o f a dragon without
offering some explanation. A more plausible explication is that the
m onster is what he appears to be, Death.
My intention here is not to quarrel with any o f these critics about the interpretation o f this
climatic battle scene but simply to point out something that none o f them has. If the
dragon is an evil m onster o f Rom ance, then he is an evil m onster who quickens his ow n
end, m uch like Orgoglio. If the dragon is an em blem o f sin, then he is sin o f the self­
destructive sort, m uch like the seven deadly sins in the House o f Pride. If the dragon is a
symbol o f death, then he is a death that seeks his ow n death, m uch like D e s p a ir .'' A nd if
the D ragon is the Devil in dangerous flesh, then it is indeed the same Devil that so hastily
put Christ on the cross, and in so doing, quickened his ow n eternal defeat.
W hen Redcrosse first encounters the Dragon, we are rem inded o f R edcrosse A
low ly beginning; we hear echoes o f his original pride in his own power— " V ertue gives
her selfe light, through darkenesse for to w ade,”— as he hastily, and unsuccessfully,
charges at the Dragon:
The knight gan fairely couch his steadie speare.
And fiercely ran at him with rigorous might:
The pointed sleele arriving rudely Iheare,
His harder hide would neither perce, nor bight.
But glauncing forth passed forward right.
(TH T16)
In this first failed attempt, Spenser em phasizes that victory will not be achieved by the
knight’s active puissance alone. As the battle between Redcrosse and the D ragon
L in w o o d E. O ran ge, “ S p e n s e r ’s O ld D ra g o n ,” h4odern L a n g u a g e N o tes 74, no. 8 (1959): 680.
For an o th e r literary e x a m p le o f death brin gin g a b o u t the death o f death, see John D o n n e ’s “ H oly S o n n e t
10” : “ A n d death shall be no more; Death, thou shalt d ie .”
44
continues, we see that it is often the d rag o n ’s activity, not R e d c ro sse ’s, w hich brings
about the D ra g o n ’s defeat.
In addition to R edcrosse’s action, the description o f the Dragon recalls the Errour
episode. In the same m anner as Errour, the D ragon’s tail is lirst described as w rapped
around the dragon himself, before it ever is wrapped around Redcrosse: “ His huge long
tayle w ow nd vp in hundred foldes, / Does ow erspred his long bras-scaly back” (1.11.1 1).
The Dragon, however. Is certainly a m ore form idable opponent than Errour; Redcrosse
will not be able to “ raft [his] hateful 1 heade" (1.1.24) with one mighty w haek— his sealy
arm or is too tough:
A nd over, all w ith brazen scales was armd,
Like plated cote o f steele, so couched neare.
That nought m ote perce, ne m ight his corse bee harm d
With dint o f swerd, nor push o f pointed spearc.
(1 .1 L9)
Yet, Spenser does tip the shrewd reader o f f to the D ra g o n ’s w eakness in the early part o f
canto 11 :
But his m ost hideous head my tongue to tell.
D oes tremble: for his deepe deuouring iawes
W yde gaped, like the grisly m outh o f hell,
T hrough w hich into his darke abysse all rauin fell.
(LIIT2)
Because Spenser juxtaposes the D ragon’s impenetrable body with his gaping hellish
mouth, the reader who has noticed ev il’s self-destructive tendencies is not surprised w hen
Spenser flips this m eaning on its head at the end o f the canto— The D ra g o n ’s gaping
hellish m outh does not bring destruction to Redcrosse; instead, it opens itself up to the
D ra g o n ’s ow n end.
45
Even before the D ragon’s death though, Spenser takes great care to express the
D ra g o n ’s culpability in his ow n dem ise— noting that w henever R edcrosse is on the
attack, the D ragon is sale, but w henever the Dragon is on the attack, the Dragon is the
one who bears the pains o f his own actions. After the earlier m entioned interaction
betw een Redcrosse and the D ragon in stanza 11, Redcrosse again takes a run at the
Dragon;
But glauncing by foorth passed forward right;
Yet sore amoued with so puissaunt push.
The wrathfull beast about him turned light,
And him so rudely passing by, did brush
W ith his long tayle, that horse and m an to ground did rush.
(1.11.16)
T hough the expression might seem a bit flippant for the seriousness o f the battle, one can
imagine the D ragon yelling out, “ 0 - l e , ” as Redcrosse passes by and then tum bles to the
ground at the D ra g o n ’s nudge, m ueh like w hen a m atador side steps a bull. (A lthough
here, R edcrosse is the bull and the Dragon is the relatively safe matador.) Quickly
dusting h im se lf off, Redcrosse turns and attacks again, “But t h ’ydle Stroke yet backe
recoyld in vaine” (1.11.17). It is only w hen the Dragon begins to expend his own energy
that he begins to spend himself; the Dragon “ H im se lf vp high he lifted from the ground,”
grabbing R edcrosse and his horse. How ever, it is this action which fatigues the Dragon,
and he is forced to return Redcrosse to the ground— the D ragon more tired because o f it:
“ His wearie pounces all in vaine doth spend, / To trusse the pray too heauy for his flight”
(1.11.19). It Is only because the Dragon frittered away his ow n strength that R edcrosse is
able to run his spear into the D ra g o n ’s side in stanza 20. And yet, in his footnote,
Ham ilton notes that “ It is evident from 36.8-9 that the d ra g o n ’s body is not w o u n d e d .”
He is not hurt, but he is storm ing mad:
46
He cryde, as raging seas are wont to rore.
W hen wintry storme his wrathful wreck does threat,
The rolling billowes beat the ragged shore,
As they the earth would shoulder from her seat.
(HI 1.21)
Ham ilton, again in his footnote, points out that “w reck” or “ ruin” adds “ the com ic (and
apocalyptic note) that the raging seas bring their own ruin.” This is played out in a literal
sense in stanza 23:
His hideous tayle then hurled he about,
And therewith all enwrapt the nimble thyes
O f his froth-fomy steed, whose courage stout
Striuing to loose the knott, that fast him tyes.
H im self in straighter bandes too rash implyes.
That to the ground he is perforce constraynd
To throw his ryder: who can quickly ryse
From o f f the earth, with durty blood distaynd.
For that reprochfull fall right fowly he disdaynd.
(1.11.23)
It is unclear w hether the am biguous pronoun “H i m s e l f ’ refers to the horse or the Dragon.
Thus, as Ham ilton points out in the footnote, “too rash” could m ean, “ all too quickly” ; or
“too hasty,
referring to the horse.” Either way, the Dragon eooperates in his own fall.
This allows Redcrosse another opportunity to strike at the Dragon; again however,
R edcrosse’s attempt is in vain: “ But baeke againe the sparcling steele recoyld, / A nd left
not any m arke, where it did light” (1.11.25).
This attack from Redcrosse gets the Dragon flaming mad, and he issues forth a
spark:
Then full o f grief and anguish vehement.
He lowdly brayd, that like was neuer heard,
A nd from his wide deuouring ow en sent
A flake o f fire, that flashing in his beard.
H im all amazd, and alm ost m ade afeard:
The scorching flame sore swinged all his face.
And through his arm our all his body seard,
47
That he could not endure so cruel! cace,
But thought his armes to leaue, and helmet to vnlace.
(T1T26)
It is important to note that this pernicious flame comes from the D ra g o n ’s wide and
devouring oven— the same gaping hellish mouth that Spenser introduced us to earlier in
contrast to the D ra g o n ’s impenetrable scales. Here, what appears to be a strong m ove on
the D ra g o n ’s part turns out to be an action which gives Redcrosse m ore strength than
ever before. The flame o f the Dragon burned Redcrosse with such an intensity “That
neuer m an such m ischiefes did torm ent” (1.11.28). This forces Redcrosse to strip o f f his
arm or— an action which m akes him not only m ore vulnerable to the violence o f the
D ragon but also more exposed to the grace which follows. Stripped o f his arm or and
badly burned, Redcrosse desires death, and the Dragon is eager to oblige:
Death better were, death did he oft desire.
But death will neuer come, w hen needes require.
W hom so dism ayd w hen that his foe beheld,
He cast to suffer him no m ore respire.
But gan his sturdy sterne about to weld.
And him so strongly stroke, that to the ground him feld.
(T 1H 28)
The strong stroke o f the Dragon, however, turns out to be the first strike against h im self
as Redcrosse is driven down into the well o f life. Beyond the fortuitousness o f this as
expressed in stanza 29, Spenser em phasizes the D ragon’s active role in the renew ing o f
Redcrosse in the D ra g o n ’s prideful victory dance:
When that infernal! M onster, hauing kest
His wearie foe into that lining well.
Can high aduaunce his broad discoloured brest,
A boue his w onted pitch, with countenance fell.
And clapt his yron wings, as victor he did dwell.
(1.1 1.31)
48
This sam e action, and thus strike two, is seen in the subsequent encounter betw een
Redcrosse and the D ragon, as the D ra g o n ’s ow n energy and his open and heiiish m outh
perpetuates his ow n demise. Again, the Dragon sends out scorching fire from his “ heiiish
entraiies,” this time causing Redcrosse to recoii into the tree o f hie ( i . i i .45-48).
In the fmai scene between Redcrosse and the Dragon, and thus the D ra g o n ’s third
strike against himseif, the Dragon is defeated by the spear o f Redcrosse. Here Redcrosse
does indeed take a more active roie in the slaying o f evii. However, the action o f g o o d ’s
trium ph over evii is not so one-sided as it m ight first appear. Tiic weapon o f Redcrosse
does indeed run “deepe em perst [the D ragon’s] darksom e hoiiow m aw” ( i . i i .53). Yet,
instead o f rushing forth in the same mighty attack that we see in the opening o f this canto,
Redcrosse is simply standing firm, com e what may. it is reaiiy the D ra g o n ’s pride and
power w hich undoes him:
And in his first encounter, gaping wide.
He thought attonce him to have sw allow ed quight.
And rusht upon him with outragions pride;
W ho him r ’encountring fierce, as hauke in flight.
Perforce rebutted backe. The weapon bright
Taking advantage o f his open Jaw,
Ran through his m outh with so importune might.
That deepe em perst his darksom e hoiiow maw,
And back retyrde, his bioud forth with aii did draw.
(1HH53)
Spenser highlights the D ra g o n ’s cuipabiiity in his ow n dem ise with the aiiusion to the
wise and foolish builders: “ So downe he feii, as an huge rockie chit, / W hose false
foundation waves have washt aw ay” ( i . i 1.54). These hues recaii J e su s ’ parable about
the foolish m an in M atthew 7, who “ buiit his house on sand. The rain cam e down, the
streams rose, and the w inds blew and beat against the house, and it feii w ith a great
crash.” W here the way o f this wise m an prospers, the w ay o f the fooi perishes. So too
49
the w ay o f the wicked. It is the D ragon’s own pride and quick action which com pletes
his ow n destruction. The Dragon, blinkered by his own pride and ire, rushes upon
Redcrosse with his violent, pernicious m outh open and raging about. And as he sw allow s
R edcrosse’s spear we see evil finally fall at the feet o f holiness.
It is notew orthy that the action o f this great allegorical scene between good and
evil covers the span o f three days. Certainly, in the three-day battle between the Dragon
and Redcrosse, who falls but rises on the third day to defeat the evil force that has
plagued the land, Spenser is alluding to the crucifixion and resurrection o f Christ. In this
allusion, Spenser gives the theological precedent for the reflexive and self-destructive
nature o f evil. It is at the cross where Satan, blinkered by his ow n pride and ire, believes
in the trium ph o f evil— that is, the trium ph o f evil over good. However, in the words o f
the Psalmist, the trouble that he causes recoils on himself; his violence com es dow n on
his ow n head. It is difficult not to read Psalm 69 through the light o f the cross: “T h e y put
gall in m y food and gave me vinegar for my thirst. May the table set before them become
a snare; m ay it become retribution and a trap" (Ps. 69:21-22). Putting Christ on the cross
is ultimately a self-destructive m ove that becomes its ow n trap and retribution. At the
death o f Christ on the cross, we can imagine Satan exalting in his victory m u ch like the
D ragon after the fall o f Redcrosse:
W hen that infernah Monster, having kest
His wearie foe into that living well.
Can high advaunce his broad discoloured brest,
Above his w onted pitch, with countenance fell.
And clapt his yron wings, as victor he did dwell.
(1.11.31)
How ever, in the holiness o f Christ, in his standing firm on the cross, in the breaking out
and extending o f his grace, we see the trium ph o f evil— that is, the trium ph o f good over
50
evil. By putting Christ on the cross, Satan hastens his own end and brings about the fate
which was prom ised him in Genesis 3:1 5, “ He will crush your head, and you will strike
his heal.” It Is in the death and resurrection o f Christ that we see the reflexive nature o f
evil becom e the conduit which allows grace to break out o f the circle o f sin and death,
enabling holiness to reign supreme.
B ook Two: H aving O n e’s O w n H oggish M inde
The appearance o f the Red Crosse Knight in the first canto provides one o f the
few character links betw een Books 1 and 11. Yet as we follow Sir G uyon in his practice
o f tem perance, we discover that S penser’s them e o f evil’s reflexivity Is again prevalent.
S how ing a counter exam ple to the circles o f evil In book one, the tem perate G uyon is
unable to fight against his fellow virtuous traveler, Redcrosse. Even though he is spurred
on to attack Redcrosse by the great deceiver. A rchim ago, G uyon restrains his beguiled
em otions, refusing to turn against the cross, “The sacred badge o f [his] Redeem ers d e a th ”
(2.1.27). This scene recalls the violent exchange betw een A rchhnago and Sans Loy,
where A rchhnago, dressed as Redcrosse, is unhorsed and injured by the enraged Saracen
(1.3). There is a certain confusion in evil that brings about its ow n frustration.
Conversely, good. In Its very nature, properly aligns its loves and hates, so that it
instinctively know s what to cling to and what to attack.
Spenser reinforces g o o d ’s inability to betray itself in the later scene betw een
A rthur and Pyrochles. Here too A rchim ago is stirring up trouble; he is attem pting to
assist Pyrochles in his fight with Arthur. A rehim ago is in possession o f A rth u r’s m agic
sword, yet he know s that the sword will never betray Arthur. A rchim ago, speaking to
Pyrocles, notes that, “this weapons power 1 well haue kend, / To be contrary to the worke,
which ye intend” (2.8.19). This is because A rth u r’s sword “N e euer m ay be vsed by his
tone, / Ne forst his rightful owner to offend” (2.8.21). Insensible o f this, Pyrochles takes
A rth u r’s sw ord into battle against him;
A ssem bling all his force and vtmost might.
W ith his [A rthur’s] owne swerd he fierce at him did 11ye,
A nd stroke, and foynd, and lasht outrageously,
WithoLiten reason or regard.
(2.8.47)
Connecting Pyrochles’s tem peram ent with his battle prowess, N ohrnberg notes that
“ Pyrochles cannot control the sword, because he cannot control him self.” ^^ While
Pyrochles angrily tlays around in fight “as w hen a w indy tem pest bloweth hye,” A rthur
stands firm as he “ suffred rash Pyrochles waste his ydle m ight” (2.8.48). H aving spent
himself, and realizing the impotence o f A rth u r’s w eapon in his hand, Pyrochles tosses
aside A rth u r’s sword before he is overthrown. Arthur then offers Pyrochles m ercy if he
will forgo his evil ways. Pyrochles, however, rashly blows his ow n top and refuses
A rth u r’s grace, leaving Arthur no choice but to cleave P yro c h le s’ head:
W roth was the Prince, and sory yet withal,
That he so willfully refused grace;
Yet sith his fate so cruelly did fall,
His shining H elm et he gan soone vnlace.
A nd left his headlesse body bleeding all the place.
(2.8.52)
T hough good refuses to betray itself, expressed both through the tem perance o f Sir
G uyon and the m agic o f A rthur’s sword, the mind o f evil, pricked by pride, insists on its
N o h rn b e rg , 302.
52
ow n way; and as we have seen and will continue to see, the way o f the w icked will
perish.
After Spenser expresses the tem perance o f good in the scene betw een Sir G uyon
and Redcrosse, he expresses the intemperate mind o f evil and the reflexive frustration
that it brings. W hen Sir G uyon and the Palm er arrive, now on foot, at the Castle o f
M edina, they m eet the three sisters o f the house: Medina, Elissa, and Perissa. In this
allegorical episode, Spenser is expressing A ristotle’s theory o f virtue, the golden mean.
Medina, representing the golden m ean, is to hold her two evil stepsisters, the defective
Elissa and the excessive Perissa, in check. Elissa stymies the faculty o f Joy in her ow n
life by insisting on her w ayw ard asceticism:
Elissa (so the eldes hight) did deeme
Such entertainment base, ne ought would eat.
N e ought w ould speake, but euerm ore did seeme
As discontent for want o f mirth or meat;
N o solace could her Param our intreat
Pier once to show, ne court, nor dalliaunce.
But with bent lowering browes, as she would threat.
She scould, and frownd with forward counternaunce,
Vnw orthly o f faire Ladies com ely gouernaunce.
(2.2.35)
.lust as E lissa’s deficiency wrecks herself, so Perissa’s excessiveness exhausts herself.
Perissa’s extravagance seems m uch m ore beneficent than the actions o f her cheerless
sister as it produces a certain gaiety in Perissa; that excessive gaiety, however, com es at
an excessive cost to herself:
But young Perissa was o f other mynd.
Full o f disport, still laughing, loosely light,
And quite contrary to her sisters kind;
N o m easure in her mood, no rule o f right.
But poured out in pleasure and delight;
In wine and m eats she flowd aboue the banck.
A nd in excesse exceeded her owne might;
In sum ptuous tire she ioyd her selfe to pranck.
But o f her loue too lauish (little haue she thanck.)
(2.2.36)
.lames Carscallen notes that “ [Perissa’s] looseness represents one o f the two aspects o f
discourtesy: it bespeaks a character that has no tirmness, no frame; one that will not
husband its strength or dignity, but squanders itself recklessly in pleasures and favours."^ '
Not only do these two sisters bring frustration to them selves as individuals but also they
bring frustration on their own family:
But stryfull mind, and diuerese qualitee
D re w them in partes, and each m ade others foe:
Still did they striue, and daily disagree;
The eldest d id against the youngest goe.
And both against the rniddest meant to worken woe.
(2.2.13)
This internal frustration is em phasized when we meet Huddibras and Sans Loy, the lovers
o f Elissa and Perissa:
These two gay Imights, vow ed to so diuerse loues.
Each other does enuy with deadly hate.
A nd daily warre against his foem an moues,
In hope to win m ore fauour w ith his mate,
And th'others pleasing seruiee to abate.
(2.2.19)
In fact, even at the arrival o f Sir Guyon, w hom Huddibras and Sans Loy take to be a
c o m m o n threat and enemy, they are barely able to seek out an attack on Sir Guyon
w ithout killing each other first:
But ere they could proceede vnto the place.
W here he abode, them selues at discord fell.
And crue 11 com bat ioynd in m iddle space:
W ith horrible assault, and fury fell.
J a m e s C a rsc allen , “T h e G o o d ly F ram e o f T e m p e ra n c e: T h e M e ta p h o r o f C o s m o s in The. F a e rie Q u een e,
B o o k II,” in E sse n tia l A rtic le s fo r the S tu d y o f E d m u n d S p en ser, ed. A.C. H am ilto n (H a m d e n : A rc h o n
Books, 1972), 352.
54
They heapt huge strokes, the scorned life to quell.
( 2 . 2 . 20 )
In both the interactions am ong the three sisters and the interactions betw een Huddibras
and Sans Loy, Spenser shows the reflexive nature o f evil. Because the intem perance o f
evil refuses to submit to some m ean or law, evil cannot even be in concord with itself.
This discord is further expressed as Lluddibras Jealously watches the boldness o f Sans
Loy as he takes his place next to his lover, Perissa. As Huddibras com pares the audacity
o f Sans Loy with his own “ folle-hardize” in fighting (2.2.17), we witness not only the
dissension w hich gnaws away the “com radeship” o f H uddibras and Sans Loy, but also
the gnaw ing o f H u d d ib rasT ow n intestines as his insidious thoughts toward Huddibras
burn his ow n core: “ Hardly could [Huddibras] endure [Sans L oy’s] hardim ent, / Yett still
he satt, and inly did him selfe torm ent” (2.2.37).
Carscallen astutely com pares the evil natures o f Huddibras and Pyrochles, noting
their relation to other self-destructive characters such as Envy:
H uddibras is one o f S penser’s m orbidly grave characters. He is alw ays at
war, but even if he were to attack as unremittingly and violently as
Pyrochles, it would be as true o f him as G uyon know s it to be o f Pyrochles
(v,l 6) that outer war is only a shadow o f inner war. The fro ward m an is
really a figure o f w eakness, devoured by a resentm ent and suspicion that
explode outward because they have first drawn defensively inward: for
like M albecco, the froward m an always locks his doors. Such characters
in Spenser have a high suicide rate, and those w ho rem ain alive do so by
feeding on their own vitals, like Envy in Book
Carscallen calls our attention to how dangerous Pyrochles is to h im se lf w hen he is
attacking “ unrem ittingly and violently.” However, it seems notew orthy to also express
the self-destructive nature o f Pyrochles even in his non-m ilitant m oments.
C arscalle n , 353.
55
I have already m entioned the m anner in which P yrochles’ angry choice brings
about his ow n demise. In Pyrochles. however, Spenser expresses additional ways in
which the m ind o f evil brings about its own frustration, in canto five, Sir Guyon, who
has bound Occasion and Furor, warns Pyrochles to be wise and, for P yrochles’ ow n sake,
not to undo the good that has been done:
Loose is no shame, nor to bee lesse then foe.
But to bee lesser, then himselfe, doth nrarre
Both loosers lott, and victours prayse aisoe.
Vaine others ouerthrowes, who selfe doth ouerthrow.
(2.5.15)
W ith these words Sir G uyon warns Pyrochles to be wise in the ways o f tem perance:
rashly undoing the binds on O ccasion and Furor not only undoes the good work o f Sir
G uyon, but also it will undo Pyrochles himself. In their essay, “The Iconography o f
S penser’s O ccasion,” Alastair Fow ler and John M anning contrast S penser’s Occasion
w ith the traditional Occasio. In so doing, they note that
The bald occiput o f S penser’s O ccasion b e c o m e s ... a sym bol either o f the
rem orse that follows succum bing to an evil occasion, an inducem ent to
wrath, or else the frustration o f not grasping the opportunity (in w hich
case the wrathful passions turn back upon the selt).^^
The heart o f Fowler and M a n n in g ’s argum ent lies in O ccasion’s interactions with Sir
Guyon. It should be noted, however, that for Pyrochles, the wrathful passions turn back
upon the self only when he does grasp at the opportunity. It is his own intemperate and
im pulsive wrath w hich turns on himself. The intemperance o f Pyrochles refuses to allow
him to fly from this place o f self-entrapment. Sir Guyon once m ore warns Pyrochles o f
the dangers that he is about to bring on h im se lf by unbinding Occasion and Furur:
Great m ercy sure, for to enlarge a thrall.
A la sta ir F o w le r and .lohn M an nin g, “T he ico n o g ra p h y o f S p e n s e r ’s O c c a s io n ,” J o u r n a l o f th e W a rb u rg
a n d C o u r la u ld In stitu te s 39 (1976): 263-64.
56
W hose freedom shaJl thee turne to greatest scath.
N ath l e s s e now quench thy whott e m b oyhng wrath.
(2 .5 . 18)
As soon as O ccasion and Furor (ultimately allegorical symbols o f Pyrochles himself) are
freed, they turn on Pyrochles in attack, beating him m ore and m ore until he is covered in
dirt and blood and burning brands. Pyrochles calls out to Sir G uyon for aid; the Palmer,
however, advises against it, stating that
He that his sorrow sought through wilfulnesse.
And his foe fettred w ould release agayne,
Deserues to taste his follies fruit, repented payne.
(2.5.24)
A llow ing evil to run out its own self-destructive course becomes characteristic o f Sir
G uyon and the Palmer, whose motto later becom es, "Let Gryll be G ryll.”
In canto six, we meet Pyrochles once more, and we see the w ay in w hich
“ freedom shall thee turne to greatest scath.” The insignia on his shield reads, “ Burnt 1
doe burne,” and we see the way in w hich the outer fire caused by O ccasion and Furor
runs parallel with P yrochles’ ow n inner ire. Pyrochles’ own fiery rage has become so
great that he seeks his own death:
I burne, I burne, I burne, then lowd he cryde,
O h o w 1 burn with implacable lyre.
Yet nought can quench m ine inly flaming side.
Nor sea o f licour cold, nor lake o f myre.
Nothing but death can doe m e to respyre.
(2.6.44)
Like D espair in B ook One, however, Pyrochles is unable to bring about his own end. He
is pulled up on the bank by Atin, only to be burnt and burn again another day.
Spenser reinforces this image o f a fiery mind seeking its ow n death in A rth u r’s
fight w ith M aleger and his two hags. Impatience and Impotence. After A rthur defeats
57
Maleger, w hose “ow ne paynes did m a k e ” (2.11.46), the hot-headed Im patience and the
lam e-footed Impotence flee like mad dogs. They flee, however, not unto safety but
death:
Throw ing away her broken e haines and bands.
And hauing quencht her burning tier brands,
Hedlong her selfe did cast into that lake;
But Impotence with her owne wilfull hands.
One o f M alegers cursed darts did take.
So ry u ’d her trem bling hart, and wicked end did make.
( 2 . 11 . 47 )
Here Spenser em phasizes that both the excess and the deficiency o f the golden m ean—
both the impatient and the impotent m ind— lead to destruction. The rash m ind o f
Impatience foolishly follows her m aster into his watery grave. The feeble m in d o f
Impotence, conversely, though it desires to follow its master, is too weak to pursue
M aleger's path. Instead, Im potence obtains one o f M aleger's cursed darts, and pursues
her ow n end there on the earth. C om m enting on the ethical necessity to control the will,
Philip R ollinson expresses the misrule o f Impatience and Impotence:
The two are perfectly balanced aspects o f misrule, one the concupiscible,
the other its irascible counterpart.... Impotence is the aspect o f misrule
which cannot control the concupiscible part o f the passions (love/hate,
attraction/aversion. Joy/sorrow). Impatience, on the other hand, [is related
to and cannot control] the irascible passions (hope/despair, fear/audacity,
and anger).
For a proper ruling o f the will, one m ust have a proper control o f o n e 's passions. That is,
one m u st love what is good and hate what is evil; one must be attracted to what is
beautiful and have an aversion to what is ugly; one m ust rejoice with those w ho have jo y
and weep with those in sorrow. A ny im balance in this rule o f the will, either on the fault
o f im potence or impatience, can cause harm not only to others but also to o n e 's ow n self.
Philip R ollinson, “ A rthur, M aleger, and the Interpretation o f The F a erie Q u e e n e ” S p e n se r S tu d ie s VII
( 1987 ): 110 - 11.
58
There has been much criticism on S penser’s B ow er o f Bliss considering that Sir
G u y o n ’s actions seem anything but temperate as he destroys the B ow er “ with rigour
pittlilesse” (2.12.83). In his essay, “M oral A m bivalence in the Legend o f T e m p era n ce ,”
Paul SLittle notes that Guyon is really betw een a rock and a hard place as he enters the
Bower. Suttie explains that for Guyon, the danger o f the Bower is not to let go o f his
quest, like Verdant, with Sensual sell-abandon. For Guyon, the danger lies in fulfilling
his quest to destroy the Bower; that is, to
carry [his quest] through in terms that will reveal in his very success
som ething potentially as culpable as his failure would have b e e n .... In
sum, he looks dam ned if he d o e sn ’t, and also dam ned if he does.'’^
Granted, there does seem to be som ething in G u y o n ’s destruction o f the Bow er o f Bliss
that is intemperate. How ever, in the characters o f Impatience and Impotence, Spenser
reminds us that Book Tw o is rooted in the ethics o f Aristotle. And as we m ove from
canto eleven to canto twelve, we are prepared to find the golden m ean in the B ow er o f
Bliss. In A c ra sia ’s Bower, Sir G uyon is neither impatient nor impotent. Instead, he is, it
appears to me, quite temperate; he has his loves and hates properly aligned. In his Ethics,
Aristotle expresses the evils o f intemperance, the defect and excess o f the golden m ean o f
meekness:
The defect, call it Angerlessness or what you will, is blamed: I m ean, they
who are not angry at things at w hich they ought to be angry are thought to
be foolish, and they w ho are angry not in right m anner, nor in right time,
nor w ith w hom they ought; for a m an who labours under this defect is
thought to have no perception, nor to be pained, and to have no tendency
to avenge himself, inasmuch as he feels no anger: now to bear with
scurrility in o n e ’s ow n person, and patiently see o n e ’s ow n friends suffer
it, is a slavish thing.
As for the excess, it occurs in all forms; men are angry with those with
whom , and at things with which, they ought not to be, and m ore than they
Paul Suttie, “ M oral A m b iv a le n c e in the L egend o f T e m p e r a n c e ,” S p e n se r Sluclies XIX (2004): 130-3 I
59
ought, and too hastily, and for too great a length o f time. I do not mean,
however, that these are eom bined in any one person: that w ould in fact be
impossible, because the evil destroys itself, and if it is developed in its full
force it becom es unbearable.
W here the preceding cantos focus on the dangers o f excess and the self-destruction that
brings— Both Pyrochles and Impatience are angry more than they ought, and too hastily,
and for too great a length o f time which eventually leads to their ow n self-destruction—
the B ow er o f Bliss focuses m ore on the defect, Angerlessness. In A c ra sia ’s Bower, we
find foolish creatures who are not angry at things at which they ought to be angry, and
thus enervate their ow n lives. The only danger in the B ow er o f Bliss is the self-defeating
A ngerlessness o f o n e ’s ow n heart.
As Sir G uyon and the Palmer enter the Bower, Spenser notes that “ Instead o f
fraying, they them selues did feare’’ (2.12.40). The ambiguity o f the p ro n o u n them selves,
w hether it is intensive or reflexive, is a trademark o f S penser’s throughout The F aerie
Q ueene. This line can be read, “ Instead o f frightening others. Sir G uyon and the Palm er
were frightened by others (or the Bower). Or, the line can be read, “ Instead o f
frightening others. Sir G uyon and the Palmer frightened them selves.” It seem s as if Sir
G uyon and the Palm er know that the danger is not in the Bower itself but in their own
reactions tow ard the Bower. This is em phasized w hen Spenser describes the B o w e r’s
enclosure:
Goodly it was enclosed row nd about,
Aswell their entred guestes to keep within.
As those vnruly beasts to hold without;
Yet was the fence th ere o f but weake and thin;
Nought feard theyr force, that fortilage to win.
But w isedom es power, and tem peraunces might.
By which the m ightest things efforced bin:
Aristotle, E th ics, trans. D.P. C hase. ( N e w York: E.P. D utton and C o m p a n y , 1950), 96-97. T h e passag e
is fo un d in B o o k 4 C h a p te r 5 o f E thics.
60
And eke the gate was wrought o f substance light,
Rather for pleasure, then for battery or fight.
(2.12.43)
The B o w e r ’s enclosure is m erely aesthetic; it is the anger or angerlessness o f the m e n 's
own hearts which encloses them within the Bower o f Bliss. Only m eekness, the golden
mean, only “ w isedom es power, and tem peraunces m ight” has enough holy force to break
out o f A c ra sia ’s trap.
Entering the Bower, Sir Guyon exhibits his tem perance as he “ passed forth, and
lookt still forw ard right, / Brydling his will, and m aystering his m ight” (2.12.53). Sir
G uyon m ust indeed bind his own will and master his own might. He m ust becom e
neither im patient (attacking hastily and in anger) nor impotent (succum bing to the
tem ptation o f the place like the poor and pitiful Verdant). As he progresses through the
Bow er, Sir G uyon must bind his will and m aster his m ight against an onslaught o f
temptations. In nearly all o f these images o f temptation, Spenser poetically writes with
overtones w hich highlight the m anner in w hich these images provide a m edium for self­
entrapment. 1 will use Sir G u y o n ’s first tem ptation, the grapes, as a c h ie f exam ple. As
Sir G uyon enters the Bower, he notices the grapes,
W hose bounches hanging downe, seem d to entice
All passers by, to taste their lushious wine,
A nd did them selues into their hands incline.
(2.12.54)
As the enticing grapes seem to slope toward the hands o f the passersby, the passersby
seem to incline them selves to the evil way o f their own hands by reaching tow ard the
grapes and bringing upon them selves the deceit o f that fruit. It has been noted that this
passage from Spenser is similar to passages from Tasso and Ariosto, yet Spenser offers a
61
new twist. Robert Durling notes that ' ‘[Spenser] is not describing like Tasso, and Ariosto
before him, the illusions o f b e a u ty ... but rather the way in which the mind shapes actual
objects in order to corrupt the a p p e t i t e . T h e real danger o f the B ow er lies within
G uyon himself, not without. T hough the grapes have an alluring tem ptation, they are not
dangerous in and o f themselves. The real danger lies within Guyon and his ability to
bring the grapes into the action o f corrupting his own appetite and altering his tem perate
demeanor.
After Sir G uyon passes by all o f the ‘‘tests" o f the Bow er o f Bliss, the golden
m ean o f his tem perance is juxtaposed with the deficiency o f Verdant, as Sir Guyon
destroys the B ow er “with rigour pittilesse” (2.12.83). After he gives V erdant a lesson in
proper tem perance. Sir Guyon, along with the Palmer, offers a golden life to the
excessive or deficient beasts. Before Sir G uyon and the Palm er depart, Spenser rem inds
the reader once again o f one o f his central themes: evil’s tendency to bring this
destructive evil upon itself. T hough the hoggish creature, Gryll, is offered the grace o f
new and abundant life, he chooses instead his own beastly way.^" Sir G uyon and the
Palm er conclude with the following:
Saide Guyon, See the m ind o f beastly man,
That hath so soone forgot the excellence
O f his creation, w hen he life began,
T hat now he chooseth, with vile difference.
To be a beast, and lacke intelligence.
To w hom the Palmer thus. The dunghill kinde
Delightes in filth and fowle incontinence:
R o b e rt D urling, “ T h e B o w e r o f Bliss and A r m i d a T P ala ce ,” in E ssen tia ! A rtic le s f o r th e S tu d y o f
E d m u n d S p e n se r, ed. A.C. H am ilto n (H a m d e n : A rch on B ooks, 1972), 123.
T h o u g h recen t articles on the Gryll ep iso d e fail to c o m m e n t on the m oral n ature o f G r y l l ’s self­
destructive choice, th e y do offer a m u ch richer u n d ers tan d in g to this m in o r yet intriguing character. For a
helpful o v e rv ie w o f the literary an teced ents to the character, Gryll, see R aphael Lyne, “ G r il le ’s M oral
D ialo gu e: S p e n s e r and P lutarch,” S p e n se r S tu d ie s X IX (2004): 159-176. For a fuller u n d e rs ta n d in g o f
S p e n s e r ’s use o f an im als, see Jo seph L ow enstein , “ G r y l l ’s H o ggish M in d ,” S p e n se r S tu d ie s XXII (2007):
243 ^ ^ ^ .
62
Let G ryll be G ryll, and haue his hoggish minde.
(2.12.87)
Noting that the excellence o f hum anity consists in m a n ’s capacity to m ake choices,
N ohrnberg writes.
In giving Grylle his will, the poet dignities G ry lle 's will as free as hum an,
for he is allowed the exercise o f his power o f choice. But in m aking the
Palmer say that Grylle has forgotten the being with which he started out in
life— he surely cannot have renounced it.^’'
Here N ohrnberg strikes at the heart o f ev il’s self-destructive way. There is som ething
pitiful in G rylle’s insistence to remain a beast. However, there is som ething tragic in the
fact that G rylle’s original self has become so destroyed that he has lost the ability to
choose to be good. G rylle’s deprivation o f good is so great that he “ has forgot the
excellence / O f his creation, w hen he life began.” And, as Nohrnberg notes, in this
forgetting, he has lost his ability to renounce— or conversely, to reclaim — his form er self.
And so, because o f his deprivation, Grylle leaves him self with all that he knows, the
“ filth” and the “ fow le” o f his own “ hoggish m inde.’’
C onclusion: T he C ircle R evisited
Because there is no need to belabor the point, and because the them e o f ev il’s
self-destructive tendency, though prevalent, does not alter m uch in the subsequent books,
I have worked this theme out thoroughly only for Books I and 2. S pe n se r’s expression o f
the m anner in w hich evil brings destruction to itself, however, can be seen throughout
The F aerie Q ueene. For exam ple in B ook 3, M a lbecco’s jealousy not only causes harm
to others but also to himself:
N o h r n b e n i, 502.
63
But all his mind is set on m ucky peife.
To hoord vp heapes o f eu ill gotten masse,
For w hich he others w rongs and wreckes himselfe.
(3.9.4)
So doth he punish [Heiienore] and eke himselfe torment.
(3.10.3)
His jea lo u sy drives him mad until he is left alone with his “ selfe-m urdring thought”
(3.10.57), “ Yet can he neuer dye, but dying lines, / And doth himselfe w ith sorrow new
sustaine” (3.10.60). Like Despair, M albecco attempts to end his ow n m isery, but he is
too im potent to succeed in even this. A nd so, like Gryll, his privation o f good becomes
so great that he loses his own humanity: He “Forgot he was a man, and G elosy is hight”
(3.10.60).
In Book 4, we see a “friendship” turn on itself as Paridell and Blandam our,
spurred on by Ate, expend their own energies in the harm ing o f them selves and their
friendship:
Their firie Steedes with so vntamed forse
Did beare them both to fell auenges end.
That both their speares with pitilesse remorse.
T hrough shield and mayle, and haberieon did wend.
A nd in their flesh a grisly passage rend,
That with the furie o f their owne affret,
Each other horse and m an to ground did send;
W here lying still a while, both did forget
The perilous present stownd, in which their hues were set.
(43115)
O r in canto
7, A m oret is able to escape from being raped and eaten by the Carl only
because the C a rl’s lust is so great that he tlrst turns on h im self inm asturbation before
pursuing Am oret: “And spredding ouer all the flore alone, / G an dight h im selfe vnto his
w onted sinne; / W hich ended, then his bloudy banket should beginne” (4.7.20).
64
In B ook 5, it is M a le n g in ’s own trickery which brings about bis demise. Like
M ilto n ’s Satan, M alengin reduces him self— an artistic expression o f the privation o f good
that is taking place. First M alengin becomes a fox, then a bush, a bird, a hedgehog, and
finally a snake. It is this last transformation, however, w hich allows Talus to catch and
tram ple M alengin to death:
But when as be would to a snake again
Haue tu rn ’d himselfe, [Talus] with bis yron d a y le
Gan driue at him, with so huge might and mai ne.
That all bis bones, as small as sandy grayle
He broke, and did his bowels disentrayle;
Crying in vaine for helpe, w hen helpe was past.
So did deceipt the selfe deceiuer fay le,
There they h im left a carrion outcast;
For beasts and foules to fee de vpon for their repast.
( 5 .9 .]())
In Book 5 we also see the ways in which G erioneo brings “bell vnto him selfe with
h o n o u r great” (5.11.12), atid the m anner in which Enuie “feedes on her ow ne m aw
vnnaturall, / And o f her owne foule entrayles m akes her m eat” (5.12.31).
A nd finally in B ook 6, we notice h o w the Saluage m an turns D isdain’s whip
against D isdain himself: “A nd from him taking his owne whip, therew ith / So sore him
scourgetb, that the bloud downe follow etb” (6.8.28). We also notice that like M albecco
who caused h im se lf harm out o f jealousy, so Coridon, who is Jealous o f Calidore, w ould
“ byte his lip, and euen for gealousie / Was readie oft his ow ne hart to d e u oure” (6.9.39).
And, as we have seen so m any times before, a lawless group cannot m aintain order
within itself; thus, w hen tbe captain withholds Pastorella, the Brigants turn on each other:
Like as a sort o f hungry dogs ymet
About some carcase by the com m on way.
D oe fall together, stryuing each to get
The greatest portion o f tbe greedie pray;
All on confused beapes them selues assasy.
65
A nd snatch, and byte, and rend, and tug, and teare;
That who them sees, w ould w onder at their fray.
A nd who sees not, w ould be affrayd to heare.
Such w as the conflict o f those cruel! Brigcmts there.
(6 fl1 .1 7 )
A fter seeing the consistent m anner in which Spenser expresses the circular and
self-destructive patterns o f evil in Books 1 and 2, and briefly here in B ooks 3-6, it is hard
not to look for this same motion in the M utability Cantos. And though the expression o f
evil seem s absent from the M utability Cantos, the circular pattern which evil m anifests
itself in is very m uch prevalent, although in a som ew hat new form. M utability’s claim to
suprem acy is supported in the power o f her circle. That is, all is subject to change: Life
decays and dies, but new life arises; the sun sets and darkness occurs, but the daw n
follows; autum n ends and winter settles, yet spring w arm s the earth anew. How ever, in
response to the circular pow er o f change. N ature replies,
I well consider all that ye haue sayd.
And find that all things stedfastnes doe hate
A nd changed be: yet being rightly wayd
They are not changed from their first estate;
But by their change their being doe dilate:
A nd turning to them selues at length againe.
D oe worke their owne perfection so by fate:
T hen ouer them Change doth not rule and raigne;
But they raigne ouer change, and doe their states maintain.
(7.7.58)
Here Nature gives new m eaning to the circles o f Mutability. Because the things o f earth
still hold some elem ent o f their first estate (that is, their created goodness before the Fall),
the w orking out o f change in them can ultimately lead to perfection or a return to
perfection. In his note on this passage, A.C. Ham ilton writes that the m ovem ent o f
M utability “is not circular, then, but spiral in returning creation to its higher level.” Since
m oral evil seem s to be absent from the M utability Cantos, it is hard to know what to
66
m ake o f this new image in reiation to the circles o f destruction that we have seen in the
first six books. A nd yet, M utabiiity does seem to represent the eviis o f this unstable
world, i.e., flood, fire, decay, death. The spiral, then, represents the ways in which
lasting good can arise from these evils; it is a linear progression com ing out o f the futile
circularity o f M utability’s rule. Regardless o f whether or not Spenser had this spiral
image in his m ind as regards to the M utability Cantos, we can say that even in the
M utability Cantos, the circle has a futility and a sorrowfulness to it that causes Spenser to
desire a m ore vertical m ovem ent. In his final two stanzas, Spenser expresses first his
sorrow at the futile m ovem ents o f this earth, and then his jo y at the thought o f those
earthly circles com ing to a heavenly rest:
W hen I bethlnke m e on that speech whyleare.
O f M utability, and well it way:
Me seemes, that though she all vnworthy were
O f the H e a v ’ns Rule; yet very sooth to say.
In all things else she beares the greatest sway.
W hich m akes me loath this state o f life so tickle,
A nd loue o f things so vaine to cast aw ay ;
W hose flowring pride, so fading and so fickle.
Short Time shall soon cut down with his consum ing sickle.
T hen gin I thinke on that which N ature sayd,
O f that same time when no more Change shall be,
But stedfast rest o f all things firmly stayd
V p o n the pillours o f Eternity,
That is contrary to M iitabililie\
For, all that moueth, doth In C hange delight:
But thence-forth all shall rest eternally
With ITim that is the God o f Sabbaoth hight:
0 that great Sabbaoth God, graunt me that Sabaoths sight.
( 7 .8 d -2 )
Though, again, this is a bit distanced from our earlier discourse on the self-destructive
patterns o f evil, it still seems to offer S penser’s conclusion to all that has com e before. In
67
these lines we see a deep desire to exchange the futile and destructive m ovem ents o f this
earth for the perm anent peace o f the great “ Sabbaoth G od.”
unis.
68
B ibliography
Alpers, Paul. The P oelry c;/ The Faerie Queene. N ew Jersey: Princeton University Press,
1967.
Aptekar, Jane. Icons o fJ u slic e : Iconography Them atic Im agery in B o o k V o / T h e Faerie
Queene. N ew York: C olum bia University Press, 1969.
Aristotle. Ethics. Translated by D.P. Chase. New York: E.P. Dutton and Com pany,
1950.
A ugustine, St. The E nchiridion on Faith, H ope a n d Love. Edited by Henry Paolucci.
Illinois: Regnery Gateway, 1961.
. E xpositions on the B ook o f P salm s, vol. 8 o f N icene a n d P osl-N icene F athers o f
The C hristian Church. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956.
Bergvall, Ake. “The Theology o f the Sign: St. Augustine and S penser’s Eegend o f
Holiness.” ri/urizEv in English Literature. 1500-1900. 33. no. 1 (1993): 21-42.
Borris, Kenneth. “ Flesh, Spirit, and the Glorified Body: S pe n se r’s A nthropom orphic
H ouses o f Pride, Holiness, and T em perance.” S penser Studies X V (2001): 17-52.
Carscallen, James. “The Goodly Frame o f Tem perance: The M etaphor o f C osm os in The
Faerie Q ueene, Book 11.” In E ssential A rticles fo r the Stu d y o f E d m u n d Spenser,
edited by A.C. Hamilton. Ham den: A rchon Books, 1972.
Chang, H.C. A lle g o ry a n d Courte.sy in Spenser: A Chinese View. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press, 1955.
Chesterton, G.K. The E verlasting M an. San Franciso: Ignatius Press, 1993.
Crawford, John W. “ The Fire from S penser’s Dragon: The Faerie Q ueene, l.X l.” The
South C entral B ulletin 30, no. 4 (1970): 176-178.
69
D odge, Neil R.E. “The Well o f Life and the Tree o f Life.” M odern P hilology 6, no. 2
(1908): 191-196.
Durling, Robert. “The Bow er o f Bliss and A rm id a ’s Palace.” In E ssen tia l A rticles f o r the
S tu d y o f E dm und Spenser, edited by A.C. Hamiltoir. Hamden: Archon Books,
1972.
Escobedo, Andrew. “ Despair and the Proportion o f the Self.” Sp en ser S tudies XVII
(2003): 75-90.
Fowler, Alastair and M anning, John. “The Iconography o f Spenser's O ccasion,” Jo u rn a l
o f the W arburg a n d C o uriauld Instilules 39 (1976): 263-266.
Fowler, Alastair. “The Image o f Mortalilty: The Faerie Q ueene, II. 1-2.” In E ssen tia l
A rticles f o r the Study o f E dm und Spenser, edited by A.C. Ham ilton. Ham den:
A rchon Books, 1972.
Freem an, Rosemary. The Faerie Queene: A C om panion f o r Readers. London: Chatto &
W indus, 1970.
Frye Northrop. “The Structure o f Im agery in The F aerie Queene.'" In E ssential A rtic le s
f o r the Study o f E dm und Spenser, edited by A.C. Flamilton. Hamden: Archon
Books, 1972.
Glazier, Lyle. “The Struggle betw een Good and Evil in the First Book o f ‘The Faerie
Q u e e n e .’” C ollege E nglish 11, no. 7 (1950): 382-387.
Gless, Darryl. Interpretation a n d Theology in Spenser. N ew York: Cam bridge
University Press, 1994.
Hamilton, A.C., ed. E ssential A rticles f o r the Study o f E dm und S p e n se r. Hamden:
A rchon Books, 1972.
70
Hankins, John. Source a n d M eaning in S p e n s e r ’s A llegory. London; Oxford University
Press, ] 971.
. “ Spenser and The R evelation o f St. John.” In E ssential A rlic le s fo r the S tu d y o f
E d m u n d Spenser, edited by A.C. Hamilton. Hamden: Archon Books, 1972.
Heale. Elizabeth. The Faerie Q ueene: A R ea d er's Guide. N e w York: Cam bridge
University Press, 1999.
Heninger, S.K. “The Orgoglio Episode in The Faerie Q ueene.’" In E ssential A rtieles fo r
the Stu d y o f E d m u n d Spenser, edited by A.C. Hamilton. Hamden: A rchon Books,
1972.
Hoopes, Robert. “ God Guide Thee, Guyon: N ature and Grace Reconciled in The F aerie
Q ueene, B ook II.” In E ssential A rticles fo r the Study o f Edmund. Spenser, edited
by A.C. Hamilton. Hamden: Archon Books, 1972.
Kane, Sean. S p e n se r's M oral Allegory. Toronto: University o f Toronto Press, 1989.
Kaske, Carol. “The D ra g o n ’s Spark and Sting and the Structure o f Red C ro s s ’s DragonEight: The Faerie Q ueene, l.xi-xii.” In Essential A rticles fo r the Stu d y o f E dm und
Spenser, edited by A.C. Ham ilton. Hamden: A rchon Books, 1972.
. Sp en ser a n d B iblical P oetics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999.
K erm ode, Frank. "‘‘The Faerie Q ueene, I and V.” In E ssential A rticles f o r the S tu d y o f
E d m u n d Spenser, edited by A.C. Hamilton. Ham den: A rchon Books, 1972.
Leslie, M ichael. S p e n s e r ’s 'Fierce W arres a n d F aithfidl L o v e s ’: M artial and. C hivalric
Sym bolism in The Faerie Queene. Cam bridge: Boydell & B rew er, 1983.
Lewis, C.S. The A lleg o ry o f Love. N e w York: Oxford University Press, 1958.
. G o d in the D ock. Edited by W alter H ooper Grand Rapids: E erdm ans, 1970.
71
. S p e n s e r ’s Im ages o f Life. Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press, 1967.
. S ludles in M ed ieva l a n d R enaissance Lilerature. Cam bridge: Cam bridge
University Press, 1966.
Lockerd, Benjamin. The S a cred M arriage: P sychic Inlergration in The Faerie Queene.
N ew Jersey: Associated U niversity Presses, 1987.
Loewenstein, Joseph. “ G ryll’s Hoggish M in d .’" Spenser Studies. XXII (2007): 243-256.
Tyne, Raphael. “ G rille’s Moral Dialogue: Spenser and Plutarch.” Sp en ser Studies. X IX
(2004): 159-176.
M acC affrey, Isabel. S p e n s e r ’s Allegory: The A natom y o f Im aginalion. N e w Jersey:
Princeton University Press, 1976.
Mallette, Richard. “ The Protestant Art o f Preaching in B ook One o f The F aerie Q u een e.’'
Spenser Studies VII (1987): 3-25.
Miller, Lewis. “A Secular R eading o f The Faerie Q ueene, Book 11.” In E ssential A rlicles
f o r the Stu d y o f E d m u n d Spenser, edited by A.C. Hamilton. Ham den: A rchon
Books, 1972.
Milton, John. A reopagitica. In The P rince o f Poets: Essays on E dm und Spenser, edited
by John Elliott. N ew York: University Press, 1968.
N ohrnberg, James. The A n a lo g y p / T h e Faerie Queene. N ew Jersey: Princeton
U niversity Press, 1976.
Oram, Willliam. “ Spenserian Paralysis.” NUL 41, no. 1 (2001): 49-70.
Orange, Linw ood E. “ S penser’s Old D ragon.” ^4odern Language Motes 74, no. 8
(1959): 679-681.
72
Parker, M. Pauline. The A llegory o f the Faerie Queene. London; O xford University
Press, 1960.
Perkins, Patrick. “ S penser’s Dragon and the L aw .” Spenser Studies X X I (2006): 51-81.
Piantinga, Cornelius. N ot the Way !l's S u p p o sed to Be: A B reviary o f Sin. Grand Rapids:
W illiam B. Eerdm ans Publishing C om pany, 1995.
Potkay, A dam . “ Spenser, Donne, and the Theology o f Joy.” SWT 46, no. 1 (2006): 43-
66 .
Q uitslund, Beth. “ Despair and the C om position o f the Self.” Sp en ser S tudies XVII
(2003): 91-106.
R obinson, Benedict. “The ‘Secret Faith’ o f S penser’s Saracens.” Spenser Studies. X V ll
(2003): 37-73.
Rollinson, Philip. “Arthur, Maleger, and the Interpretation o f The Faerie Q ueene."’
Spenser Studies VII (1987): 103-121.
Spenser, Edm und. The F aerie Q veene. Edited by A.C. Hamilton. N e w York: Pearson
Education, 2001.
Suttie, Paul. “M oral A m bivalence in the Legend o f Tem perance.” Spenser Studies X IX
(2004): 125-133.
Waters, D. Douglas. “ Prince A rthur as Christian M agnanim ity in B ook O ne o f The
Faerie Q ueene.’’' Studies 'in EngTi.sh Literature, i 500-1900 9, no. 1 (1969): 53-62.
Wells, Whitney. “ S penser’s D ragon.” M odern Language N otes X L l, no. 3 (1926): 143157.
Whitaker, Virgil. The R eligious Basis o f S p e n s e r ’s Thought. N e w York: Gordian Press.
1966.
73
WoodhoLise, A.S.P. “N ature and Grace in The F aerie Q ueeneF In E ssen tia l A rtic le s f o r
the Stu d y o f E d m u n d Spenser, edited by A.C. Hamilton. Hamden: A rchon Books,
1972.