Cry God for Emma, England, and Mr. George (Knightley): The New St. George in Jane Austen’s Emma
Over the course of history, England and France have been repeatedly set at odds against each other, whether in the Norman Conquest of 1066, the Battle of Agincourt, or the Battle of Waterloo. As a woman who lived through the rise and fall of Napoleon Bonaparte, Jane Austen’s novels reflect a variety of tensions from the period, particularly through her use of characters engaged in the British military. Yet what is a reader to think about 1815’s Emma, in which military characters are all but non-existent and foreign influence of any kind shunted to the periphery? Instead of referencing national tensions between England and France through the armed forces, Austen’s patriotic novel sets the eponymous heroine’s love interests against each other in a non-violent, but still aggressive, battle of Englishness versus Frenchness. Mr. George Knightley, the epitome of English gentlemanliness, and Frank Churchill, the dandified intruder, are positioned to do battle for Emma’s hand, and it is Austen’s treatment of Mr. Knightley’s Englishness which acts as her peacetime promotion of England over France.
Before analyzing Emma’s leading men, it must be noted that the patriotism of Emma arises from Englishness itself, with Englishness here not being limited to citizenship. Indeed, there are no characters of foreign temperaments mentioned in the novel (with the possible exception of the gypsies), and so Frank Churchill’s foreign nature comes about because he is not of Highbury. Frank’s very name, “a version of François,” calls to mind England’s ancient adversary through its association with the Germanic tribe, the Franks, who became ancestors of the French, and “his deceptively patriotic-sounding surname Churchill […] is only adoptive” (Gay 59). In contrast to the Frenchified Frank, George Knightley’s name, recalling as it does St. George the knight, England’s patron saint, grows stronger in its connection to his Englishness. Furthermore, Frank’s foreignness is highlighted by the fact that he is “one of the boasts of Highbury,” despite having “never been there in his life” (Austen 14). Frank endangers Highbury life because his presence, desired by nearly everyone, is an unknown entity and, as a foreigner, he could bring detrimental changes to town. Consider, for example, his suggestion of inviting all of Highbury to the ball — how revolutionary and potentially dangerous to social structure! Once again, compared to Mr. Knightley, whose established position in Highbury society is as unshakeable as his residence of Donwell Abbey, Frank seems pointedly un-English.
Attempts to take on a role as the prodigal Highburian seem to fall flat with Frank, as he continues to behave in an un-English manner. Even when he visits Donwell, Frank’s mood is irritable, and he declares to Emma, “I want a change. I am serious, Miss Woodhouse, whatever your penetrating eyes may fancy—I am sick of England—and would leave it to-morrow, if I could” (Austen 252). For Emma, England (Highbury in particular) is all she has ever known, and to desire to leave England, to be sick of England, is incomprehensible. Frank, of course, cannot be happy until he has either escaped England or has been tamed by an English heart; luckily for him, Jane Fairfax, the meek and subtle English beauty, promises herself to him, and one can only hope that the young woman Emma herself declares “the best young woman in England” can help him adjust to life among the English (Austen 276). A union with Jane, who is herself associated with Ireland via the Campbells, may not make Frank himself more English, but perhaps will entice him to become more British — but that is a torch for another critic to take up. Instead, let us turn to the first conflict between Frank and Mr. Knightley, which occurs before Frank has even set foot in town.
Acts of union are vital to Emma, which largely concerns itself with courtship and the marriage plot, and it is the union of Miss Taylor and Mr. Weston that should prompt Frank’s return to Highbury. When the young man still has not visited his new stepmother, Mr. Knightley argues against Emma’s defense of Frank: “No, Emma, your amiable young man can be amiable only in French, not in English. He may be very ‘aimable,’ have very good manners, and be very agreeable; but he can have no English delicacy towards the feelings of other people: nothing really amiable about him” (Austen 105). According to Mr. Knightley’s explicit connection between Frank and the French, Frank, for all his physical location within the borders of the United Kingdom, can only be amiable in French because his manners are unsuitable for English taste. What makes Frank agreeable is his ability to please rather than to do what is right, a direct contrast to Mr. Knightley. Donwell’s resident is known for his upstanding qualities, and his “most outstanding trait is that he is never concerned to please. He is as honest and truthful morally as he is physically ‘firm’ and ‘upright’” (Cohen 326). Where Mr. Knightley insists that, were Frank determined to see his new stepmother, he could strike out and do so as a man, he points out the distinctions between French pleasantries and English action — Frank writes his letters well, but he does not act to do what is right. As Mr. Knightley says, “There is one thing, Emma, which a man can always do, if he chuses, and that is, his duty; not by manoeuvring and finessing, but by vigour and resolution” (Austen 103). The fact that Emma secretly agrees with Mr. Knightley and is in fact using Mrs. Weston’s arguments rather than her own further aligns the heroine with her old friend — and Englishness.
To turn to Mr. Knightley and his Englishness first requires a return to his name. Addressing George Knightley, most scholars agree that the name was chosen with the distinct purpose of recalling England’s history. Claudia Johnson writes, “It is the work of Emma to make Mr. Knightley seem traditional. Combining as it does the patron saint of England with the knight of chivalry, his name itself conduces to his traditional-seeming status” (“‘Not at all’” 201) and Ward Hellstrom states, “Knightley is clearly the English knight, whose real appreciation for the English yeoman Robert Martin reminds us of the knight and the yeoman in the Canterbury Tales. But more particularly he is associated with a specific knight - Saint George, the patron saint of England” (611). Mr. Knightley’s chivalric predecessor has a history of his own, the enduring English connection to St. George famously tracing its roots to Richard the Lionheart, who allegedly adopted St. George’s cross in the 12th century as the English emblem (Collins). William Shakespeare’s Henry V even features King Henry calling on the saint during the siege of Harfleur: “Follow your spirit; and, upon this charge / Cry God for Harry, England, and St. George!” (Shakespeare 3.1.31). As the patron saint of England and of warriors, St. George is perhaps most known for the tale of his battle with the dragon, and the most famous literary example of St. George and the dragon is in Edmund Spenser’s epic The Faerie Queene. In the poem, St. George (the Redcrosse Knight) is sent to fight the dragon attacking the kingdom of Una, a beautiful and virtuous princess. After a long battle, Redcrosse defeats the dragon, wins Una’s hand, and quests across the world under the order of the Faerie Queene. If Frank Churchill is a dragon, and a French one at that, George Knightley’s duty seems to be defending Highbury against the dragon’s invasion. Yet how can Mr. Knightley, landowning gentleman, gain a knight’s victory? The answer is deceptively simple: Mr. Knightley will defeat Frank simply by being English.
Emma, as all but unassailable queen of Highbury, has no need of a knight on a white charger — she is practically the head of her household, all of Highbury looks up to her, and she is independently wealthy enough to not fear spinsterhood. With such independence, Emma can hardly be expected to take on Una’s role, and so Mr. Knightley does not attempt to fulfill the chivalric role of St. George. Instead, he treats Emma as his equal, being “one of the few people who could see faults in Emma Woodhouse, and the only one who ever told her of them” (Austen 9). Calling attention to Emma’s flaws is not ungentlemanly behavior because he does not act for his own benefit, but is attempting to help her mature as she retains her position in Highbury. Perhaps Mr. Knightley’s ability to discuss Emma’s flaws does not make him a very chivalric knight, but the world, changing as it is, no longer adheres to the old idea of chivalry. “Mr. Knightley is not a chivalric knight,” writes Michèle Cohen, “because that is not what revived chivalry produced. His supreme virtues are neatly summarized by Emma: he is neither a gallant nor a polite gentleman. He is a ‘very humane’ man” (Cohen 328). Turning away from the chivalric tradition means that George Knightley, with all his name’s association with England’s knight, must evolve as a new St. George, a new English emblem.
As Cohen notes, it is Emma herself who most accurately summarizes Mr. Knightley’s personality and, simultaneously, his Englishness. Upon finding herself in conversation with Mrs. Weston about Jane Fairfax’s transportation to a party, Emma agrees that sending his carriage to the Bateses was a kindness. She then adds, “I know no man more likely than Mr. Knightley to do the sort of thing — to do any thing really good-natured, useful, considerate, or benevolent. He is not a gallant man, but he is a very humane one” (Austen 155). By Emma’s statement, Mr. Knightley is a good man who does his best to be good to all his acquaintances, and the reader, having seen his behavior around other Highburians, must agree. Additionally, Emma’s separation of Mr. Knightley from gallant behaviors further separates him from Frank Churchill. Gallantry and politeness, traits associated with Frank, are not always sincere and can be performed in order to please. Instead, Mr. Knightley is concerned with being “humane,” caring for those around him, be they his tenants and friends (the Martins), his less-fortunate neighbors (the Bateses), or his dearest friend (Emma herself). Tending to these concerns, Mr. Knightley marks himself with the knightly virtues of “love of truth, sensitivity to those weaker than oneself, and protection of women,” and he does so by continuing to live as a landowning Englishman (Cohen 327). He will speak the truth to Emma, he will care for her father despite his ill-humors, and he will do his best to protect dearest Emma from the dangers of Frank Churchill.
Mr. Knightley’s proposal lends itself to further examination of both his Englishness and his knightly behaviors. After learning of Frank’s engagement to Jane, he rushes back to Emma’s side to console her. Leaving Highbury to escape what he believes is the inevitable engagement between Frank and Emma has left Highbury untended, and when the knight is away, the French dragon, it seems, will play. Mr. Knightley’s reaction to Frank’s engagement comes as no surprise: “‘Abominable scoundrel!’ — And in a louder, steadier tone, he concluded with, ‘He will soon be gone. They will soon be in Yorkshire’” (Austen 293). Even at the most painful moment, Mr. Knightley does not react with great violence, and instead focuses his attention on Emma’s reaction to the engagement. His only comfort to offer her is that “he will soon be gone.” Frank’s removal from Highbury is the retreat of the foreigner (Jane clutched within his grasp, it would seem) after Mr. Knightley left Emma’s kingdom undefended. Luckily, Emma is herself unscathed and when she says so he responds by “looking eagerly at her,” clearly excited by the prospect that she has not turned entirely to the French side (Austen 293). Recall Emma’s shared belief of Frank’s misconduct toward Mrs. Weston early in the novel, and her agreement with Mr. Knightley’s assessment of the situation appears even more English alongside Frank’s latest behaviors. How could Mr. Knightley not be pleased with the knowledge that she has not become Frenchified herself? The only distress in this situation is that Emma could have been emotionally wounded by the man, and that Frank has escaped punishment for his misbehaving.
During his “I cannot make speeches, Emma” speech, Mr. Knightley once again draws attention to his new chivalric qualities. As Emma waits in silence, Mr. Knightley says, “If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more. But you know what I am.—You hear nothing but truth from me.—I have blamed you, and lectured you, and you have borne it as no other woman in England would have borne it” (Austen 296). Unlike Frank Churchill, who speaks and writes pleasingly, Mr. Knightley acknowledges that he is not versed in being aimable, or even amiable. His love for Emma is so great he cannot fully express himself and because Emma knows he speaks the truth to her, she can be assured his love is true. Most importantly, Mr. Knightley admits that he has treated her as an equal, acting without finesse in order to get his point across, and “this is the nub of his relationship with her: he always reproves her when he feels he must and tells her where she fails, even though truth can be unpleasant and he risks losing her” (Cohen 326). In such honesty, Mr. Knightley takes on his most English position by being exactly the man he is. Frank “manoeuvers” and “finesses” his way through society, descriptions Mr. Knightley uses that are “French words for slippery French habits,” but George Knightley will speak the truth, even when Emma’s affection is put in jeopardy (Gay 59). The fact that he believes she is the only woman in England who could have borne his criticisms only furthers his attachment to his country. In being so distinctly Mr. Knightley, the man solidifies his role as being distinctly English, and avoiding the French habits of pleasing people that Frank so enthusiastically displays.
With Emma’s acceptance of his proposal, Mr. Knightley performs his final act of gentlemanliness by choosing to abandon his beloved Donwell Abbey. Donwell is not only associated with inherited position and wealth (Emma frets repeatedly about her nephew’s future as master of Donwell), but also with England’s own history. Like the titular Northanger Abbey, Donwell is a private residence created through the dissolution of the monasteries under King Henry VIII, but unlike Northanger, Donwell is a place of life, generosity, and agricultural success. Mr. Knightley, in true knightly style, “recognizes and fulfills his responsibilities, [is] a man worthy of safeguarding an abbey’s legacy, while Donwell Abbey is a place where the social and economic functions of the old monastery continue to be ‘done well’” (Moore 74). His care for the estate is not merely because it is his house, but because he recognizes the importance of his land to others. It is also Donwell which prompts a moment of great patriotism: “It was a sweet view—sweet to the eye and the mind. English verdure, English culture, English comfort, seen under a sun bright, without being oppressive” (Austen 249). The repetition of “English” reminds the reader, were he in any doubt, that Donwell Abbey, the seat of George Knightley, is an English estate blessed with English beauty. To emphasize that the sun is “bright, without being oppressive” also indicates that England (at least, Mr. Knightley’s England) is a land with a happy medium of light, which allows appreciation of the natural (and man-influenced) beauty of the place. Yet it is this Englishness which Mr. Knightley is prepared to give up for Emma’s sake.
If Mr. Knightley is not chivalric in the sense of romances and epics, he is at least chivalric in his actions regarding Emma’s happiness. Having secured his own in her acceptance of his proposal, Emma’s requirement to stay at Hartfield until her father does not need her (i.e., until his death) is one which the new knight happily takes on. Mr. Woodhouse’s unhappiness with the impending marriage of his daughter, even to as dear a friend as Mr. Knightley, is the only flaw in the plan, but by the novel’s conclusion, Mr. Knightley once again saves the day. Mr. Woodhouse is shocked when “Mrs. Weston’s poultry-house [is] robbed one night of all her turkies — evidently by the ingenuity of man,” and so Mr. Knightley’s presence becomes vital to Mr. Woodhouse’s comfort (Austen 333). Having defeated the French dragon of Frank Churchill simply by being his humane, English self, Mr. Knightley’s new quest is to defend the chicken coop from marauding forces. Perhaps his new enemy is not as glamorous as a dragon, but poultry pilferers at least allow Mr. Knightley to have the final victory of the novel — Emma’s hand in marriage.
Like Austen’s other novels, Emma ends with order restored through acts of union. Frank the foreign threat is neutralized by his now-public engagement to “the best young woman in England,” and his removal to Yorkshire means Highbury can be at peace once more (once the poultry thief is caught, of course). Mr. Knightley, meanwhile, has remained his English self and, in so doing, has gained fair Emma’s hand. Yet it is still unfair even now, with his victory both over Frank and in gaining Emma’s love, to say that Mr. Knightley is a chivalric knight of old. Instead, he becomes a new St. George (for it would be blasphemous to deem him a nouveau St. George), England’s defender in ballrooms and pleasant country outings. Through good, English behavior, Mr. Knightley can keep away the foppery of the French and save English roses from foreign invasion, and while he possesses traits of traditional knightly behavior, George Knightley is the best example of English gentlemanliness’s patriotic evolution.
Works Cited
Austen, Jane. Emma. 1815. Ed. George Justice. New York: Norton, 2012. Print.
Barchas, Janine. “Setting and Community.” The Cambridge Companion to Emma. Ed. Peter Sabor. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2015. ebook. 120-34. 12 Oct. 2015.
Cohen, Michèle. “‘Manners’ Make the Man: Politeness, Chivalry, and the Construction of Masculinity, 1750-1830.” Journal of British Studies 44.2 (2005). 312-29. JSTOR. Web. 14 Dec. 2015.
Collins, Michael. “St. George.” Britannia History. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.
Gay, Penny. “Emma and Persuasion.” The Cambridge Companion to Jane Austen. 2nd ed. Ed. Edward Copeland and Juliet McMaster. New York: Cambridge UP, 2011. ebook. 55-71. 12 Dec. 2015.
Hellstrom, Ward. “Francophobia in Emma.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 5.4 (1965). 607-17. JSTOR. Web. 14 Dec. 2015.
Hume, Robert D. “Money and Rank.” The Cambridge Companion to Emma. Ed. Peter Sabor. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2015. ebook. 52-67. 12 Oct. 2015.
Johnson, Claudia. “Emma: ‘Woman, Lovely Woman Reigns Alone.” Jane Austen: Women, Politics, and the Novel. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988. 121-43. Print.
Johnson, Claudia. “‘Not at all what a man should be!’: Remaking English Manhood in Emma.” Equivocal Beings: Politics, Gender, and Sentimentality in the 1790s. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. Rpt. in English 240I Reader. Jonas Cope. Print.
Kaplan, Laurie. “Emma and ‘the children in Brunswick Square.’” Persuasions 31. 236-47. Web. 20 Nov. 2015.
Knox-Shaw, Peter. “Emma, and the Flaws of Sovereignty.” Jane Austen and the Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. 197-219. Rpt. in English 240I Reader. Jonas Cope. Print.
Miles, Robert. “Character.” The Cambridge Companion to Pride and Prejudice. Ed. Janet Todd. New York: Cambridge UP, 2013. ebook. 15-26. 14 Dec. 2015.
Moore, Roger E. “The Hidden History of Northanger Abbey: Jane Austen and the Dissolution of the Monasteries.” Religion and Literature 43.1 (2011). 55-80. JSTOR. Web. 31 Oct. 2015.
Sachs, Jonathan. “The Historical Context.” The Cambridge Companion to Emma. Ed. Peter Sabor. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2015. ebook. 36-51. 12 Oct. 2015.
Shakespeare, William. Henry V. Ed. Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine. New York: Washington Square Press, 1995. Print.
Wiltshire, John. “Mansfield Park, Emma, Persuasion.” The Cambridge Companion to Jane Austen. 1st ed. Ed. Edward Copeland and Juliet McMaster. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1997. ebook. 58-83. 14 Dec. 2015.