libel, loyalty, satire, independence, royal, patriotism, Marston, Weever, Robert Gaguin, Henry VII, 1489
<< previous
next >>
89
flyting from libel most clearly is its self-conscious and fervent display of patriotism and loyalty to the royal household.
159
This element of flyting also informs its relationship with satire. Whereas satirists, when at their most recalcitrant, demonstrate independence from external authority, flyters present themselves emphatically as agents of the crown. Such rampant patriotism is expressed by Weever when he presents himself as a royally-appointed spokesman against his fellow satirists and he attempts to execute a transition between satire and flyting, and this sets him apart from Marston who asserts his personal autonomy in his role as satirist. The distinction is less clear in Skelton’s work since he fits into the category of both occupational satirist and patriotic flyter, and demonstrates an independence of attitude combined with staunch patriotism and loyalty to the king. Whereas satire is preoccupied with the curative effects of invective, moreover, flyting boasts of its capacity to inflict harm upon its recipients, and rather than purporting to scourge them of vice in order to make them decent members of society, seeks to expel them from civilised society.
Flytings are ubiquitous and have a long history in the British Isles and on the continent. They transcend distinctions between popular and elite culture, enjoying both courtly credentials and popular appeal. The sheer volume of poems that might be involved in any single flyting is remarkable. Around two hundred pieces are recorded as having been produced in a flyting between the French ambassador, Robert Gaguin, and the courtiers of Henry VII in 1489, although the dispute essentially remains a two-player game between Henry and Gaguin since Henry’s voice proliferates and reverberates through the mouths of his courtiers. There are also sixteen extant contributions in a flyting between Thomas
159 The contrast is perhaps evident in that some duel theorists went so far as to recommend ways of managing personal quarrels that circumvented royal injunctions against duelling and that therefore flouted royal authority (see Peltonen (2003), pp.75-8).
<< previous
next >>
Stumble It!
