Murderous Intersections continued

ruler

Edith Pargeter, aka Ellis Peters, was a versatile author. Her works include historical novels - in particular the Heaven Tree Trilogy and the Brothers of Gwynedd Quartet, both of which thematize tensions between, and within, thirteenth-century Wales and England -, the Inspector Felse detective stories, as well as a number of translations from the Czech. However, she is without doubt best known for her Brother Cadfael mysteries, revolving around a twelfth-century Benedictine monk of Shrewsbury who is in the habit of stumbling across crimes. In this essay, we shall examine the interplay of different factors in the first three novels of the Cadfael series, collected in The First Cadfael Omnibus: A Morbid Taste for Bones (1977), One Corpse Too Many (1979) and Monk's-Hood (1980). These three can be regarded as representative in terms of plot, setting and characterization. We shall attempt to show the typical pattern which underlies the intersection and interplay of genre, period, place and gender in the series. This will involve discussing a number of - inevitably fluid - boundaries: between the classical detective story and other genres and subgenres, between the twelfth and the twentieth centuries, between England and Wales, between masculinity and femininity. We aim to make a contribution to the sparse critical literature on a popular woman writer, as well as to the debate on what Stephen Knight has called "location and dislocation in the British mystery" (27).

After the Second World War, the mainstream of British detective fiction continued to be inspired by the "Golden Age" tradition, the patterns of the 1920s and 1930s. As these patterns became exhausted, it was inevitable that new elements should be introduced. In Peters's case, rather than drawing on recent developments in the United States or on the Continent, this meant moving her mysteries to a medieval context: on the one hand a natural step, in view of her familiarity with the period, which had already figured in her historical novels; on the other hand a step with problematical implications, since it has been argued that the detective story is a quintessentially modern genre, whose form and ideology clash with preindustrial settings. Agatha Christie's Death Comes as the End (1945), set in ancient Egypt, epitomizes the problem, telling as it does a story of crime and detection which follows precisely the same scheme as the Hercule Poirot novels.

With the creation of the Cadfael mysteries, Peters played a central role in establishing a new sub-genre of the detective story. A historical dimension had of course been experimented with before, not only by Christie but also for instance by Robert van Gulik, whose Judge Dee series, set in ancient China, began to be published in 1949. Peters is sometimes seen as belonging to the Eco tradition, but the invention of Brother Cadfael predates Il nome della rosa. Moreover, similarities between Peters and Eco are superficial at best. It is not on Eco's novel, classed as historiographic metafiction by Linda Hutcheon, but on Peters's series that most of the historical mysteries published recently, such as Paul Harding's Brother Athelstan stories, seem to be modelled. The fact that the cult status of Il nome della rosa has been exploited for the marketing of Peters and her ilk - as well as for the marketing of Peters criticism (e. g. Greeley) - glosses over substantial differences of approach.

The crime plot of Peters's novels largely follows the classical, Golden Age pattern. A mysterious murder occurs in all three novels in the First Omnibus: one of the victims is found with an arrow in his heart but later turns out to have been stabbed; another, who has been strangled, is hidden among the bodies of men hanged by order of the king; the third is poisoned with an unguent made by Brother Cadfael himself. In two of the three novels, the victim has quarrelled with several persons, who are then suspected of his murder - a suspicion which Cadfael (and, with him, the experienced reader of mysteries) is quick to reject. In line with what Marty Roth has called "the paradox of the obvious", the amateur detective questions the evidence against the assorted suspects precisely because it is bursting with a seemingly plain meaning, because it points too aggressively in the direction of the apparent solution (Roth 180). The representatives of the law, on the other hand, true to the "police paradox", accept the evidence at its face value (or are forced to accept it by bureaucratic procedure) and therefore fail in their investigations. As for the real solution, clues are shared with, and at the same time hidden from, the reader according to the "fair play" principle. They tend to be given at an early stage, but sparingly. The reader is enabled to identify the criminal at least as much by genre conventions, according to which the murderer is one of the main characters but not one of the obvious suspects, as by genuine clues like a reference to the murderer's presumed ambition in A Morbid Taste for Bones (12). The detective himself, having ruled out the obvious suspects mostly on the strength of intuition, in many cases comes across the main clue by sheer luck, and the power of observation and deduction which helps him to interpret it correctly is downplayed rather than emphasized. For example, in A Morbid Taste for Bones, Cadfael decides that the man publicly accused of murder would have been incapable of killing by stealth, but fails to discover the real perpetrator until, accidentally, a woman's hysterical fit provides him with a clue: noticing that the poppy syrup which he uses to calm her down has been depleted, he concludes that the murderer, who has the syrup in his possession but has obviously not consumed it himself, has established an alibi by dosing a fellow monk. The conclusion is drawn immediately on sight of the clue, in a single paragraph of free indirect speech which gives the reader access to Cadfael's thoughts. The process of ratiocination is thus accorded less importance in Peters than for example in Conan Doyle or Agatha Christie. Correspondingly, the ending of the Cadfael mysteries is not the standard closing scene, in which the detective reveals the murderer to an astonished audience composed mostly of ex-suspects. The fate of the murderer, excluded in many traditional detective stories, is presented in every case. The novels close with an account of how those affected by the crime rearrange their lives and live happily ever after. The detective himself, finally, resembles many of his famous colleagues in being characterized as eccentric, as "different"; but while Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot are absolutely, radically so, Cadfael's difference involves similarity: a monk with a secular, adventurous past, a Welshman in an English religious order, he has links with all (male) communities, and for this very reason properly belongs to none.

The historical mystery as a sub-genre is produced at the intersection of two parameters, genre (the detective story) and period (the -- or a -- past). However, as in the case of the historical romance, which superimposes a historical element on the love story, interaction between the two factors is slight - pace Edwin Ernest Christian and Blake Lindsay, who have argued that

Peters does a superb job of matching setting to crime. [...] The crimes are often not only specifically medieval but specific to the month and day. For example, in A Morbid Taste for Bones [...], two murders [sic] occur in the attempt to remove a Welsh saint from her rural resting place to Shrewsbury Abbey in order to increase abbey income and glory by encouraging pilgrims. This occurs in 1138, the actual historical date of the supposed removal of Saint Winifred's remains to Shrewsbury Abbey. The murder in One Corpse Too Many occurs during the documented hanging of ninety-four soldiers on King Stephen's order following the Siege of Shrewsbury that same year. Monk's Hood concerns a poisoning by a half-Welsh bastard son who would be a legitimate heir in his own country. (279)

To argue thus is to confuse trappings with substance. Making a crime "specific to the month and day" does not automatically make it "specifically medieval", unless specificity is taken to lie in any link with twelfth-century events. The crimes listed do not spring from any recognizably medieval discourses or practices. The murderer in A Morbid Taste for Bones feigns visions in order to further his ecclesiastical career through the cult of Saint Winifred; but his crime is only connected with the cult in so far as he sees that career threatened by the victim. The story woven around the crime may be called medieval; but the crime itself is not. The hanging in One Corpse Too Many merely provides a cover-up for a murder planned independently of it. Monk's-Hood, as Christian and Lindsay indicate and as we shall attempt to demonstrate in more detail below, has its roots in the interplay of place and time rather than in time alone, and the medieval context as such is incidental to the crime. In contrast to the explicitly ideological approach of Il nome della rosa, for instance, the motives of the three murderers in The First Cadfael Omnibus, desire for fame, money and land respectively, conform to the Golden Age pattern in being represented as strictly personal. In other words, crime in Peters results from supposed universals of human nature rather than from specifically historical conditions. Correspondingly, detection follows the line taken by Cadfael's twentieth-century counterparts. There is nothing medieval about the above-mentioned mixture of observation, rational argument, luck and intuition which invariably leads Cadfael to the identification of the murderer. The historical dimension does affect the crime plot, but only in minor points. For instance, a trap laid by Cadfael in A Morbid Taste for Bones is based on the popular belief, significantly enough not shared by Cadfael himself, that the murdered will bleed when the murderer touches them. The murderer in One Corpse Too Many is publicly convicted through trial by combat; but Cadfael's private judgement is expressly said to be independent of the outcome of the duel (352). Cadfael thus functions as an intermediary between his contemporaries and Peters's twentieth-century readers. In One Corpse Too Many, he even turns into an advertiser of history. His reflection that the murderer Adam Courcelle is "merely a sign of the times" (341) suggests a close link between a murder committed for personal greed and the backdrop of the crime plot, the turmoil of the civil war between King Stephen and the Empress Maud. However, the narrative fails to make clear why, if Courcelle is a sign of the times, Brother Columbanus in A Morbid Taste for Bones, who becomes a murderer for the sake of fame and power, is not. If there is a difference between the two stories, it does not lie in the murderer's motivation but in the construction of the mystery element. In contrast to A Morbid Taste for Bones, One Corpse Too Many does not offer the reader a clearly defined group of (innocent) suspects, and Courcelle is first identified as the murderer on the strength of nothing more than a highly ambiguous exclamation (338). To the extent that this identification is arbitrary - motive and means would fit an indefinite number of characters besides Courcelle - the narrative does represent the crime as enabled by society. However, the fact that the society in question is a twelfth-century one seems accidental.

ruler
back

continue