{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028199566160520606, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0021691973969631237, 'mean_word_length': 4.7907949790794975, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
“Lovers’ Consolations of Philosophy” in Boccaccio, Machaut, and Chaucer

CRITICS HAVE long debated Chaucer's purpose in putting into the mouth of Troilus the long, and rather comical, Boethian soliloquy on predestination and free will, in which he concludes that "'the bifallyng / Of thynges that ben wist bifore the tyde, / They mowe nat ben eschued on no syde' " and prays to ''.Jove" -the only one who knows what the outcome will be-to "'bryng Criseyde and me fro this destresse."' 1 Whereas some older critics took Troilus at his word and described the poem as a tragedy of predestination, there is now general agreement that the soliloquy is a deliberate perversion of the Boethian argument, which goes on to dis­ tinguish simple and conditional necessity. 2 It would seem that Troilus's own conclusion is unsatisfactory, not because he is a pagan -for there is nothing explicitly Christian about the Consolationbut because he is caught up in irrational pursuit of the false felicity rejected by Boethius, and would rather consider himself fated than acknowledge his own responsibility for his decision to serve Fortune. As far as I know, however, it has not been remarked that parodies of The Consolation of Philosophy are conventional in medieval love poetry from the time of the Roman de la Rose. 3 Michael Cherniss has correctly described the dialogue between Reason and the