The Art of Courtly Love

The Eighth Dialogue is between a higher nobleman and a woman of the same class. Andreas advises using “soft and gentle words” to avoid being scolded since higher noblewomen are “very ready and bold in censuring” a higher nobleman’s words and deeds and enjoy opportunities “to ridicule him” (107).

The man begins with deferential flattery, emphasizing love as “the cause and origin of everything good” (108). He urges the woman not to reject love since through it women provide an essential service to humanity. The woman retorts that she knows women’s responsibilities but argues that love creates torment and offends God. Citing the Christian gospels, the man counters that since love leads to so many positive outcomes, it cannot be a sin. Citing the Proverbs, the woman tells the man to let his deeds speak for him instead of his tongue and insults his clothing. The man cautions the woman that she seems shallow, which impugns her character. Nevertheless, he “demand[s] urgently” (114) for her love.

The woman agrees that loving wisely is praiseworthy, but her “hidden griefs” (114) prevent her from loving him. Unclear of what her specific griefs are, the man debunks her excuse on the basis that love purges grief and restores joy. He adds that he believes she has never “felt the arrow of any love” (115). The woman is insulted, then suggests that another man has already asked for her love. The man says that she should pick the worthiest suitor rather than the first. The woman reminds the man of his wife, but he dismisses his wife as an obstacle, citing the Countess of Champagne’s decision in the Seventh Dialogue. The woman replies that young people may find love useful but claims that she is a widow who is too sad to find solace in love. The man replies that she should mourn for the appropriate time but not longer, as this would be harmful. The woman counters that the longer she mourns the greater reward she deserves. The man reiterates that women can seek a new love after the “legal period” (117) of mourning has expired.

Switching tactics, the woman argues that love affairs ruin maidens’ reputations through gossip. The man counters that a maiden must be careful to choose a discrete lover who will keep their love affair secret. This includes ensuring the man is over the age of 18 since men and woman have different physiologies that impact their maturation process. The woman refuses to engage in debate about physiology but remains unconvinced of his argument since she has neither the age nor the experience to select a discrete lover. The man advises her how to test a lover to determine how much wisdom and character he has. The woman replies that men use argument to get what they want. She accuses him of misguiding her since love affairs could disgrace a maiden if, after marrying, her husband discovered his wife had been previously seduced. Citing literary sources, the man refutes the woman, claiming that husbands want worthy wives who have learned about love. He differentiates between pure love, which does not include sexual consummation, and mixed love, which does. The former is virtuous, does not cause injury, “and God sees very little offense in it” (122). The latter lasts only a short time and often leads to regret and injury.

The woman again switches tactics, rebuking the man for involving himself with love when he should, as a clergyman, be concerned only with serving the church. Instead of demanding her love, he should be encouraging her to avoid love. Citing biblical evidence, the man argues that clergy are as subject to temptations of the flesh as laymen are. Further, clergymen make better lovers because they are more restrained and understand love’s importance. The argument continues with both providing biblical sources to support their points. They debate the role of Eve, with the man suggesting that Eve was more gluttonous than Adam and the woman arguing that Eve was more trusting. They arrive at no conclusions, and the woman switches tracks again.

She rebukes the man for using his “fluency of speech” (129) to make demands and contrasts his forwardness with the other man seeking her love, who silently trusts her judgment. The man draws on biblical evidence to defend asking for what he wants with wisdom and beautiful language. Further, he argues this makes him more deserving of the woman’s love. She refutes with her own biblical examples, arguing that love cannot and should not be bought and cannot be demanded as payment. The man disagrees that the silent man “deserves more honor” (132). The woman tells him he should be patient since gaining love too quickly and easily cheapens it. The man responds that wise women should put off their suitors for a short time though this will cause men pain. The woman replies that the man should endure his torments patiently so that he will better appreciate love when he receives it. In her case, she will not be able to love him because she is in love with another man.

The man tells her that he does not believe her, but even if he did, he would feel justified in breaking up her love affair if he believed she and her lover were not right for each other. The woman tells him she will not trouble herself to convince him, then asks his advice about which part of the body is more praiseworthy, the upper or the lower. The man responds that he is determined to love her and praises the upper part since it is unique to humanity and provides more lasting solace than the lower. The woman disagrees since, if this were true, it would be permissible for two men to love each other, which would be “criminal to practice” (136). Further, a frigid woman or impotent man would be considered lacking. The lower part fulfills “the whole effect of love” (137). The man worries that the woman is “suffering from a deranged mind” since it would clearly be disgraceful for a woman to practice the lower without the upper, which is “most proper and refined and can be indulged in without any violation of modesty” (137). The woman believes that she could present counter arguments but decides to accept his position.

She raises another dilemma: A woman’s lover is presumed dead. After the proper mourning period, she takes a second lover, but the first one returns. The woman and man both agree that the woman should go where “the spirit of love” (139) leads her. Pleased, the woman suggests ending the discussion. The man poses one final question: Should a man who already has a lover be punished by losing that lover because he approaches a second woman? The woman replies that a man should be “chaste for his beloved” (141) but leaves it to the discretion of the first woman whether to pardon him or not.