Aristotle is considered to be on one of the greatest philosophers that ever lived. He is referred to as the teacher of metaphysics ethics and logic. One of the most famous medieval fable stories concerning this great philosopher is titled “Phyllis et Aristotle” which when translated means Aristotle and Phyllis. This story is about how the great Aristotle, at the time living at the residence of one of his greatest disciples, Alexander the Great seeks to separate the powerful ruler from his wife, Phyllis whom Aristotle considered to be absorbing all his energy and time leading him to neglecting his political duties. Alexander reluctantly agrees as Aristotle asked but later reveals this to his wife. Seeking to exact revenge, the wife manufactures a scheme that was meant to nullify the influence of Aristotle on the king to regain his attention. She seduces Aristotle and convinces him to get down on all fours and carry her on his back across the courtyard like a horse. Phyllis had already planned for her husband to witness this scene. When he confronts Aristotle, he tells him that he has also leant something from this experience. This is that if a grey, old and wise philosopher such as himself is unable to resist the power of a woman’s love, then the hot-blooded and young Alexander must be immensely more careful so as not to expose himself to such danger. This story about Aristotle and Phyllis makes one general assumption about sexuality as well as the nature and form of relationships that exist between men and women. It is assumed that sexual intercourse between a man and a woman essentially demotes or distracts a man from pursuing his main calling. The implication of this is that the sexual congress is the main and, in fact, the cause for heterosexual relations. The physical flesh of Phyllis is taken a threat to a man’s shelter of virtue and reason. The sole habitat of a woman is the bedroom and everyone man should avoid it since it deprives him of reason and logic and derails him from his main mission in life. The above assumptions of the Aristotle and Phyllis are mirrored out in the character representations of Chaucer’s “Wife of Bath” prologue from the Canterbury tales, as well as Lady Bertilak in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.
In Chaucer’s ‘Wife of Bath’ prologue, the main character is a woman who has been married five times. The prologue is a depiction of a classic antifeminist women stereotype that had been in existence for quite some time. Here, women are seen as lustful, dishonest and as greedy gold diggers. The wife of bath is made to look like an individual who has perfected the art of marriage and sex and how she can use these tools to dominate men and derail them from their goals. Having been married five times already, the wife of bath claims that she is now an expert of the art. First of all, she sees nothing wrong with the fact that she has five former husbands. She cannot, in fact, understand why Jesus would rebuke a woman in the bible who also had five husbands. She particularly challenges her audience to show the passage from the bible that states or shows that God commands virginity from all women. She claims that, unlike many cold women, she is not afraid to have sex anytime with a man’s and use it to her advantage. It is at this point that once again, the theme of sexual congress being the cause of heterosexual relations. The effect that sex has on a man is also depicted. The wife of bath goes to lengthy details about how she is bale to gain the upper hand in her marriages using sex. She states "In wifhood wol I use myn instrument as freely as my Makere hath it sent. If I be dangerous, God yive me sorwe: myn housbonder shal it han both eve and morwe whan that him list come forth and pay his dette. An housbonde wol I have, I wol nat lette, which shal be bother my dettour and mt thral, and have his tribulacion withal upon his flesh whil that I am his wif". What she means by this is willing to use her “instrument” which in this case refers to sexual organs as a form of weapon. She also claims that she owns her husband. At this juncture, this might be synonymous with what Aristotle was warning Alexander the Great against when he advised him not to lay with his woman. The underlying message is that a woman will use her sexual organs as a tool of domination against a man and consequently derail him from his main goal and mission in life. The Woman of Bath boldly admits to using her sexual prowess to her advantage. She sensationally claims that her husband essentially owes her sovereignty. However, the male ego will not allow him to do this and, therefore, the only she makes sure that she subjugates to her is by using her female sexual power. She uses her sexuality as a weapon and goes on to claim that a man is here “slave”.
The character of the Wife of Bath basically depicts the constructs of male and female relationships and is significantly at par with the issues depicted in Aristotle and Phyllis. In both cases, women in relationships are depicted as double-sided. They appear soft, tame and submissive on the outside, but behind closed doors, they are false and shameless and use their sexuality for their advantage. Phyllis does not just impose her sexuality to her husband Alexander the Great; she also uses it on another man, Aristotle to get what she wants. She seduces him and in the process makes him do what she wants.
While both the tale of Aristotle and Phyllis and the Wife of Bath are depictions of everything direct and unrelenting in male/female relationships, the exchanges that occur between Gawain and Lady Bertilak are a highlight of the male/female relationship subtleties: contentious falsehoods and the shameless deceit.
Deceit is of many forms. Lady Bertilak and husband engage on a conspiratory scheme with her husband, Lord Bertilak on their guest, Sir Gawain. The happenings of this story are almost a mirror reflection of those in Phyllis et Aristotle. The first thing to probably focus on is how the lady enters the chambers of Sir Gawain. “Her breast was exposed, and her shoulders bare./ She enters the chamber and shuts the door after her,/ throws open a window and calls to the knight/ rebuking him at once with merry words in play. The Lady enters the room because she has her mind set on something. Whether the thing that she wants is sexual or whether it is something that is plot specific is even relevant at this point. By entering the chambers in the way that she did, she simply exhibited a shameless act of committing falsehood, something quite synonymous to the adventures of Phyllis and Aristotle. This once again is a depiction of how Aristotle envisions women as using sexuality to commit senseless acts of falsehood. The text further reads “She pressed him insistently, and he declines her request,/ Swearing quickly on his word that he would never touch it,/ And she was grieved that he refused it”. The lady is simply pestering Sir Gawain to reciprocate her affections. If Sir Gawain obliges to her advances, it will essentially take away his purity and his nobility or in simple terms, his chivalry. Sir Gawain is an intelligent man who even believes in courtly love. However, the experience with Lady Bertilak causes him to question his own beliefs. This is just like Aristotle had warned Alexander the Great about the danger of woman’s charm. Lady Bertilak uses lies and her sexuality to get what she wants, just like Phyllis and the wife of bath.
Lady Bertilak and The Woman of Bath follow the same moral that Aristotle tries to Aristotle and Phyllis. In the three works, it almost appears that the members of the fairer sex has taken over their counterparts in marriage and are now the dominate figures. The women are somehow able to use their sexualities to manipulate their male counterparts and dominate them. The intense power of male and female relationships is also brought out in the three works. Perhaps what is different is the level of emphasis on the sex. While all the three books recognize the enormous power of woman sexuality in heterosexual relationships, Aristotle is simply against the cat of sex as he stipulates that engaging in the acts itself derails man form his main calling. This is the reason why he strongly advises Alexander the great to keep away from Phyllis and not able with her. Unfortunately, Aristotle is himself unable to do so.
As mentioned, the moral of male/female (heterosexual) relations depicted in Aristotle and Phyllis Chaucer's Wife of Bath's Prologue from the Canterbury Tales and Lady Bertilak in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is significantly followed, the two latter books can also be observed to differ on one issue. In Aristotle and Phyllis, the woman is in complete control of the power that she holds over her man. Aristotle considers the power that Phyllis holds over husband in terms of sexual relationships to be quite natural and that is why he advises that man should resist this natural urge. In the tow nooks, however, it almost appears that woman has been driven into a desire for power and domination by circumstances For instance; the woman of bath is a victim of her consequences. She has already lost five husbands. As an individual who has lost this large number of loved ones, how else would she be expected to behave? How about Lady Bertilka? It is her husband who forces her to enter into the treacherous scheme so as to test the loyalty of Sir Gawain. If we were to observe her form her husband’s pint of view and not from Sir Gawain’s, would she appear to be a loving, loyal wife who completely obeys her husband and not as contemptuous and cruel woman?
The above discussion leaves more questions than answers. However, one thing is clear from the three books; the sexuality of a woman plays a very significant role in male and female relationships and in many occasions dictates the nature of those relationships.
Works Cited
Chaucer, Geoffrey. “The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale.” The Broadview Anthology of British Literature. 2nd. Don LePan. Toronto. Broadview Press. 2011. 299-319. Print.
Anonymous. “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” The Broadview Anthology of British Literature. 2nd. Don LePan. Toronto. Broadview Press. 2011. 160-227. Print.
Lindsay, Karen W. Aristotle and Phyllis: Word, Image and Society in Renaissance Germany. N.p., 1978. Print.
Aristotle, D P. Chase, and J A. Smith. The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle. London: J.M. Dent, 1911. Print.
Collins, Randall. The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change. N.p., 1998. Print.
