I found it interesting how Gower and Chaucer converted some of the social structures in the ancient tale to fit in with a more modern sensibility. In Gower’s version, Phebus’ “love” cuckolds him with a “yonge kniht”(790); in Chaucer’s version, Phoebus is the “flour of bachilrie” (125) whose “wyf” (139)sleeps with a man of inferior degree. Both medieval authors insert kinds of relationships into the story which make them fit in better within a context of courtly romances and medieval knights and their ladies but which is totally incongruous with the tale’s ancient origins. Yet, does a myth really belong to a certain time and age? Maybe Chaucer and Gower have done exactly what one ought to do with the myth, which is take the story template and give it a context and background that is more meaningful to its audience.
Yet the message of the tale changes as well with these slight changes. In Ovid’s version, the main message was simply that one ought not to convey information that the hearer will not like. In Chaucer, it becomes “A wikked tonge is worse than a feend,” (320) perhaps, because, after all, women cannot be expected to control their appetites. In Gower, the lesson is to “Be war therfore and sei the beste” (815). These slightly different morals seem to point to the way the authors apportion blame differently among Phoebus, Coronis, and the raven variously. Chaucer’s tale seems to place most of the blame on the raven; for him to tell Phoebus of the affair was “wikked.” Ovid, meanwhile, seems to depict Phoebus hasty action and mercurial nature as the cause for both the raven’s and Coronis’ unfortunate fates.