there has been an assumption that the poem was written
for an engagement (perhaps that of Richard II and Anne
of Bohemia), but no consensus has been achieved
regarding which betrothal, if any, the poem seeks to
comment on. The action of the Parliament takes place on
Saint Valentine’s Day; the poem may, in fact, have inau-
gurated the tradition of Valentine’s Day love poems.
Chaucer wrote the Parliament in RHYME ROYAL, a STANZA
form consisting of an ababbcc rhyme scheme in iambic
pentameter.
The Parliament of Fowls can be broken into three pri-
mary divisions: (1) the narrator’s comments on himself
and his reading; (2) the fi rst part of the dream, in
which the narrator enters a seductive but also sinister
garden; and (3) the second part of the dream, in which
the narrator witnesses a bird debate regarding which
male eagle should be chosen as a mate for a female
eagle. While none of these sections is particularly long,
each is quite complex in itself, and the attempt to
determine the signifi cance of the relationship between
the three has been a major focus of scholarship.
The poem’s narrator introduces himself as a typical
Chaucerian persona: self-deprecating, bookish, and
inexperienced in love. He tells of reading Cicero’s
Dream of Scipio (really Macrobius’s Commentary on the
Dream of Scipio), in which the deceased Roman gen-
eral, Scipio the Elder, appears to his grandson so that
he may show him the cosmos and charge him to live
for “commune profyt” (“the common good,” ll. 47, 75).
While reading the book, the narrator falls asleep; Scipio
then appears in a dream and promises to reward him
for his labor.
Transitioning to the second part, the dreaming nar-
rator fi nds himself before a gate modeled after Hell’s
gate in Dante’s Inferno. Unlike Dante’s gate, though,
which promises only eternal sorrow, the gate in the
Parliament offers two possibilities, bliss or pain. Scipio
pushes the narrator through the entrance with the
assurance that the gate’s terms apply only to those who
are servants of Love. Once inside, the narrator fi nds
himself in a beautiful forest with a garden, streams,
and singing birds. He sees Cupid and a host of alle-
gorical fi gures (such as “Delyt” and “Desyr”) that sug-
gest both the wonderful and terrible nature of Love.
The narrator enters a temple of Venus, which is fi lled
with sighs of desire and adorned with images of famous
fi gures who suffered for love. He sees Venus there,
scantily clothed, but leaves her alone and exits the
temple.
In the poem’s fi nal section, the narrator sees Nature
herself surrounded by birds “of every kinde that men
thynke may” (“of every kind one could imagine,” l.
311). Under Nature’s governance, the birds are having
a debate to decide which eagle deserves to marry the
formel (female) eagle. Three tercels (males) present their
suits, after which the other species of birds begin to
chatter and dispute over which eagle is most worthy.
Ultimately, the decision is left with the female eagle,
who decides to defer selection for a year. The remain-
ing birds take their mates and then sing a song to wel-
come the spring season. The narrator awakes at this
point and begins to read more books.
One major problem in understanding The Parliament
of Fowls involves its main theme. On one hand, the
poem would seem to be an examination of love. The
introduction presents love as the narrator’s central con-
cern—indeed, as his crisis, since he is inexperienced
and only knows about amorous affairs through books.
Certainly the erotic garden and the temple of Venus
deepen this theme, as does the birds’ squabbling over
mating selection. On the other hand, within the discus-
sion of the Dream of Scipio, the narrator emphasizes the
importance of “commune profyt” (common good), and
so it is has been typical to see the Parliament as a social
commentary. Pursuing this track, the class hierarchy of
the bird debate is of especial importance.
Taking love as the Parliament’s primary concern, we
encounter a highly contradictory presentation. Given
the cosmic perspective of the Dream of Scipio in the
opening, Nature’s attempt to preserve order during the
spring mating can be linked to an overall order under
divine governance—the earthly world refl ecting in
microcosm what is orchestrated on the much larger
universal level. The birds’ concluding song would thus
serve as a celebration of the harmony that permeates
creation. Several elements of the poem, however, work
against such an interpretation, including the bickering
during the birds’ deliberation, the lack of any decision
regarding the formel eagle’s mate, and the return at the
end of the poem to the narrator, who does not devote308 PARLIAMENT OF FOWLS, THE