Rhetorical Analysis Of Eve's Apology In Defense Of Women

Damaris Gutierrez
Eng 4W: D. Voronca
10/30/2014
Prompt: #6
Lanyer’s Arguments For the Defense of Women
Aemilia Lanyer, in “Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women” written in 1611, reinterpreted traditional biblical scriptures that held the idea that women were to blame for the loss of paradise and the overall decline of humanity, an idea that was very prevalent in 17th century England. Today, however, Lanyer’s evidence in favor of the equality of women is often times thought to be weak, and many go as far as to imply that Eve’s “defense of women” advocates more for women’s sub ordinance than of women’s equality. However, only by analyzing rhetorical appeals, rhetoric, and elements of form can one truly appreciate Lanyer’s radical ideas which paved the way for feminist advocates in later years.
First and foremost, the speaker, Pontius Pilate’s wife, completely embraces the biblical teachings which state that Adam was in fact superior to Eve. It is common knowledge that God first made Adam, and then from Adam’s rib, created Eve; thus, making Eve Adam’s subordinate. Therefore, Pilate’s wife appeals to logic when she points out that Adam was “lord and king of all the earth”, he was

formed “before poor Eve had either life or breath” and as such he should have had the strength to refuse Eve’s proposal to eat the fruit of the tree of all knowledge (39-40). The speaker also emphasizes Adam’s accountability by including a metonymy in her letter to Pilate. “What weakness offered, strength might have refused” (35). The word “weakness” is used as a substitute for Eve, and subsequently the word “strength” is a substitution for Adam. This appeal to logic and the use of the metonymy gives insight into another of Lanyer’s underlying claims: Adam should have refused Eve’s invitation to eat the fruit, so it is men, not women, who are ultimately to blame for the loss of Paradise and all social ills.
Furthermore, later in the poem Lanyer introduces a second claim: Not only are men to blame, they should be thankful to women for giving them the opportunity to gain knowledge. Pilot’s wife writes that Eve’s love for Adam is what motivated her to offer him the fruit of all knowledge. And yet, men do not see this. They “boast of knowledge” and oppress women, and yet it was a woman, Eve, who granted them this knowledge in the first place (63).
Pilate’s wife, again, uses an appeal to logic to build on her claim that Adam was solely to blame for the loss of Eden. She claims that if there was any trace of evil in Eve, then because she was made of him, as the biblical accounts say, then surely “he was the ground of all”, in other words he was responsible for her sin (66). Interestingly enough, later in that stanza, Pilate’s wife makes it seem as though Eve should be applauded for her obedience. It was her obedience to the serpent which failed her, but she obeyed nonetheless. Pilate, however, was deliberately disobeying God, and about to condemn Jesus to death. Pilate’s wife claims that his condemning of Jesus would be a greater sin that all the other mortal sins ever could be. In fact, the speaker attempts to use the ‘s’ sound in “This sin of yours surmounts them all as far/ As doth the sun another little star” to mimic a whisper which drags, as if to create a haunting effect, possibly to leave this thought in the mind of Pilate as he decided how to judge Jesus Christ, which doesn’t work because Jesus is executed anyway. In short, Lanyer is ultimately using Pilate’s account to summarize that men and women can both screw up. In the end, this is her ultimate claim: Men and women are equal, no one is perfect, and no one is smarter or better than anyone else.
Alternative readings of the poem can easily lead the reader to the conclusion that Aemilia Lanyer was still influenced by traditional ideas regarding women’s sub ordinance and inferiority. For example, the metonymy aforementioned, uses the word “Weakness” as a substitute for Eve, and strength a substitute for Adam. Also, the poem lacks exclamatory punctuation marks which can mean that the speaker is reading the letter in a very docile and soft manner. The addition of question marks also give the impression that Pilot’s wife refrains from sounding too blunt, by instead opting to use rhetorical questions. “If he would eat it, who had power to stay him?” “What will so foul a fault amongst you all” (56, 70) Now, at first glance, one might come to the conclusion that Pilate’s wife actually thought of Eve as weak, however, one must consider that the poem took place hundreds of years ago, where the very idea of women being equal to men was nothing more than fantasy. The strategy employed by Pilate’s wife was to opt for subtle rhetoric so as to not insult her male audience. When Pilate’s wife describes Adam as the “perfectest man that ever breathed on earth” and acknowledges that he had the “power to rule both sea and land” she is flattering the men (42, 45). Afterwards she gently blames them for “bringing us all danger and disgrace” (48). She attempts to persuade them by playing on their already established perception of superiority.
Moreover, in the 1600’s, England was going through a rebirth, where the coronation of Queen Elizabeth I, a single woman, was bringing everything into question. Lanyer in choosing Pilot’s wife as the speaker, only shows that she wanted to use an account that the wealthy and the poor would both be familiar with.
Lanyer’s position and overall goal in writing “Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women” is vague, elusive, and complex.

She seems to make every claim, and yet none at all. It is not until the last two stanzas in which Pilate’s wife suggests that if he does condemn Jesus to die, then why not “let [women] have [their] liberty again” (81). She goes as far as to suggest that there should be no sovereign then, no superior, since she establishes that this sin, the killing of Christ, is greater than any other sin committed by women and men, then are not women and men now equal? One the letter is finished, the man who read it counsels Pilate to heed her word because she speaks for everyone. Although difficult to decipher, Aemilia Lanyer, points out that men and women are equals, both imperfect

sinners.