Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

Chaucer and War

Rate this book
In Chaucer and War, John Pratt studies Chaucer's attitude toward the warfare of his age and how his major poetry reflects this attitude. Using biographical information, reliable fourteenth-century sources, and Chaucer's own writings, Pratt explores Chaucer's use of war through such works as the Knight's Tale, the Squire's Tale, and Troilus and Criseyde. Pratt gives an overview of the military picture during Chaucer's time, examines Chaucer's knowledge of military weapons and his use of this knowledge in his poetry, and evaluates the poetry based on references, word usage, and historical context among others. Pratt concludes that Chaucer, despite his English-Christian perspective, was a writer who knew a good deal about warfare on a global scale, and supported warfare when he felt the cause was just. A strikingly unique perspective from the current evaluations of Chaucer's work, Chaucer and War will be of value to students and scholars of Chaucer and medieval history and literature, as well as those with an interest in the Middle Ages.

280 pages, Hardcover

First published March 29, 2000

About the author

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
0 (0%)
4 stars
0 (0%)
3 stars
0 (0%)
2 stars
1 (100%)
1 star
0 (0%)
Displaying 1 of 1 review
Profile Image for Trevor.
65 reviews16 followers
May 8, 2014
Just like Jones' work, regurgitates previous scholarship on Chaucer. Has a poor understanding of chivalry and martial culture. Spends too much time describing campaigns 'objectively' without discussing how they were represented, or understood, which is what the whole Knight's Tale debate centers upon. Far too firm in his insistence that Chaucer was 'scientifically' applying military terms in his writings, without looking at contemporary usage in Middle English texts. Fully of typographical and layout errors, and misspells chevauchée throughout.

Overall: too forcefully argued, without possibility of common ground, not enough cultural or textual contextual study, and poorly presented. Provides useful bibliography, however, through 2000.
Displaying 1 of 1 review

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.