Fiehn 1

Allegory and the Supernatural in “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”

Various critics recognize Coleridge’s use of allegory in his poetry and prose

(Christensen 640-41) and point to a relationship between his “romantic dialectic”

Christensen 641) and the shift from “poetic construction to world

construction…[yielding] not only a metaphysics but also a metascience, a vitalistic

natural philosophy intended to supplant the mechanistic natural philosophy of the

preceding age” (641). Among his poetic works, Coleridge’s “The Rime of the Ancient

Mariner” has sometimes received attention as an allegory (Guthrie 200) and sometimes

even as an overwhelmingly Christian and religious piece (200). Guthrie’s study of the

poem’s allegory concentrates on the notion that the poem itself is a “prophecy”

introducing the basis for a “new and happier age” (200) that reconciled principles of

“science, political liberty, and the “Truth in Christ”” (200). The extent to which the poem

is truly allegorical, however, and the extent to which it does, in fact, celebrate the

potential or even seek to welcome in a new age of reconciliation, is yet undefined.

Considering the nature of allegory and seeking to apply it to the “Mariner,” Guthrie

declares first, that the form “gains by discreet introduction of meaningless details” (201)

and that it serves as “a vehicle for doctrines” (201). Second, he proposes that “never was

allegory more artistically fashioned by its poet to satisfy first and foremost the demands

made of a thrilling tale” (201). In other words, Coleridge, in so far as he applies allegory

within the poem, does so only after he has addressed a more pressing concern manifest in

the narrative itself. The concern is more, Guthrie suggests, with the telling of a “weird

tale of wondrous incident” (202) than with the structuring of an allegorical value system.
 Fiehn 2

Nonetheless, there is some scope for considering the poem as rendering an allegorical

perspective and that scope aligns quite readily with the supernatural aspects of the poem

as well.

On the one hand, the principle problem of the poem surrounds the rather reckless

but nonetheless arbitrarily executed killing of the albatross. As Grow suggests, the poem

is not readily identifiable as a “parable about the wages of sin” (23). It is no parable but

nor is it a malicious crime that the Mariner commits. He is “thoughtless and negligent”

(Grow 23) but “[h]is act cannot be construed as rebellion against God’s order, because he

does it unknowingly” (Grow 23). The comparison that Grow offers to Adam and his

decision to eat from the tree of knowledge makes the case that much more compelling.

Coleridge’s language, too, implies an unthinking, even unintentional act by the Mariner.

When the speaker describes the act, in fact, it is in such terms that the event almost seems

arbitrary, insignificant, and inconsequential.

One of the ways of reconciling the punishment of the Mariner, however, to this

lack of malice and the unintentional nature of whatever sin he commits, is to think of the

issue as being about perspective and scope of understanding. Though not a sin against

God – certainly not comparable to the sin of Adam and Eve – the Marnier kills a creature,

the Albatross, that not only has not only received welcome on the ship as a guest, the

creature has potentially brought good omen to the ship. The Albatross is also symbolic of

the spirit of nature that subsequently punishes the Mariner and his crewmates. Though the

Mariner is not aware of this last detail, he is at least conscious that the bird was received

on the ship in the fashion of a fellow Christian. Rules pertaining to Christian charity thus

have a bearing upon the relationship between the crewmen and the bird; clearly, the
 Fiehn 3

Mariner breaks those rules and violates what may stand as a sacred relationship when he

shoots the bird (Coleridge 82). Likewise the crewmen violate similar rules of Christian

charity when they go from first censuring the Mariner (93-4) and then assuming that the

Mariner “kill’d the bird/ That made the breeze to blow” (99-100).

The Mariner’s punishment perhaps depends on the idea that he and his crewmates

had an awareness of the Albatross in the context of the Christian relationship delineated

in the poem. If, recognizing that the crew welcomes the bird as a fellow Christian, the

Mariner then nonetheless kills the bird, the nature of the Mariner’s punishment has

bearing on the principles of Christian charity that he has violated. The crime is not so

much the killing but the killing in context of previously having received the bird

according to the principles of Christian charity and fellowship. Likewise, the crime of the

crewmen is not only to criticize the Mariner (indeed, their initial reaction is the right

reaction) but to subsequently hail his actions in the face of what prove to be decidedly

temporary changes in circumstances.

Reading the poem as allegorical, though, it may serve to consider the bird as

symbolic of any creature that might receive welcome. The significance could well be the

identification of the creature as a fellow Christian, having little to do with any innate

sanctity of the bird or what it represents. It may achieve its symbolism, its allegorical

value, within the poem, at the point that Coleridge identifies it coming “[t]hrough the fog/

As if it had been a Christian soul” (Coleridge 64-5). Indeed, Coleridge’s intriguing choice

of the Wedding Guest as the audience for the Mariner’s tale could also play to this idea of

hospitality and the ceremonial aspects of it in particular. The Wedding celebrations, to

which the Guest is bound, represent not only of a social and communal event that offers
 Fiehn 4

opportunities for hospitality among community members, but also the joining together of

two people, the binding together of two souls in a solemn fashion.

The scenario of the Wedding emphasizes, of course, the contrast between the

condition of the Wedding Guest and the Mariner. The Wedding Guest is “next of kin” (6)

to the Bridegroom, whose “doors are open wide” (5), ready to meet guests, a feast

prepared and a “merry din” (8) stressing the happiness surrounding the wedding event,

the sense of joy and the conscious emphasis on hospitality. The Wedding Guest, too,

finds the approach of the Mariner entirely surprising. He questions it, “Now wherefore

stopp’st thou me?” (4), confused that the Mariner should pick him from “three” (2).

The contrast between the Mariner and the Wedding Guest is also relevant, too.

The Mariner has a “long beard” (Coleridge 3) and “glittering eye” (3); features that

Coleridge emphasizes. The “skinny hand” (9), too, draws attention to the unusual and

particularly unkempt condition of the Mariner. The details Coelridge emphasizes about

the Mariner seem to stress that he appears disheveled but also touched by something

unnatural; the key unnatural element being his “glittering eye” (3), which perhaps

suggests the state of the Mariner’s soul, touched by a supernatural state. The allegorical

aspect of this, though, would seem to position the Mariner as a kind of death creature. In

works such as The Pardoner’s Tale within The Canterbury Tales, an old man features as

representative of death, and likewise the creature tends to approach a young person,

drawing them away from their path.

The allegorical function of the Wedding Guest may well link, however, not only

to a sense of hospitality, but also to a sense of youth and vibrancy, connected to the

vision of the marriage. The Wedding Guest contrasts so dramatically to the Mariner,
 Fiehn 5

apparently young, simply by connection to the Bridegroom, and likewise associated with

the “merry” (8), acting “merrily” (22). Indeed, that the Wedding Guest also “stood still/

And listens like a three years’ child” (14-5), which implies his relative youth. That the

Wedding Guest sits on a “stone” (17) seems to suggest the concrete and fundamental

nature of the tale that the Mariner is about to tell, too; assuming allegorical values might

apply to all of the poem’s details.

The rising of the sun, “[o]ut of the sea” (26), arguably suggests the Christian

aspect of the poem with an allusion to Christ and the resurrection. Coleridge’s use of

pronouns in the stanza beginning at line 25 certainly create some sense that his allusion is

to Christian symbolism. Notably, the rising of the sun juxtaposes the preparations for the

wedding, too, with the Wedding Guest hearing that the “bride hath paced into the hall/

Red as a rose…” (33-4), as he learns of the sun rising higher, “[t]il over the past at noon”

(30). Inevitably, Coleridge suggests something unnatural in the movement of the sun in

Part I, and the contrast to the Wedding only serve to enhance those suggestions.

Considering the broader philosophical or mythological aspects, Hillier attempts to

reconcile the various interpretations, the “diversity of opinion” (9). Intrigingly, Hillier

emphasizes that most of the most noted interpretations not only suggest the allegorical

nature of Coleridge’s poem, but also the way Christian aspects. He relates that Robert

Penn Warran identified the text as most “peculiar and paradoxical” (Penn Warren qtd in

Hillier 8) and James Engell suggests that the Mariner appears to attempt a “curious

salvation” (Engell qtd in Hillier 9).

Most of the suggestions about Coleridge’s supernatural schemes do appear to

align with and emphasize notions of an underlying Christian aspect. In particular, Hillier
 Fiehn 6

identifies that Thomas Dilworth suggested that the multiple revisions of The Rime

coincided with a shift in Coleridge’s position on faith, including a movement away from

a Unitarian faith over to a Broad Church Anglican and ultimately Catholic World view

(Hillier 9).

Considering that the allegorical aspects align to Christian principles and

teachings, it seems likely that Christian theology was truly underlying. The nature of the

Mariner’s crime, then, may be seen as that of inhospitality and Christian betrayal; the

crime of the seamen, the Mariner’s crew, is likewise connected to the way in which they

shift from believing that the Mariner was wrong to kill the bird, believing then the

apparent sign that the bird was a bad omen. The shift in loyalty, in opinion, demonstrated

by the crew, goes against those Christian principles of hospitality and also principles of

faith that dictate that the crew should not simply belief in a sign that the bird should have

been killed, after they have first welcomed it as a Christian guest.

It does also seem relevant, though, to a reading of the poem’s allegorical aspects,

that Coleridge demonstrated considerable uncertainty about the foundations of Christian

belief himself, the way in which he related to, for instance, “the single personality of

God…any Trinitarian model [as] licit, and dispensed with Jesus’s divine humanity by

esteeming him as an exemplary, albeit wholly human prophet and teacher” (10).

Interestingly, Hillier also combines an awareness of Coleridge’s uncertainty and his focus

on Christian doctrine with a sense that his “questioning of the moral validity of the

atonement in The Rime is a feature of the ballad that has not hither good been fully

appreciated” (10). In particular, Hillier suggests that the Albatross’s slaughter implies

dissent from the notion of redemptive sacrifice” (11) and that the Mariner seems to
 Fiehn 7

epitomize “the redemptive effect of sympathy” (11). Hillier especially argues that the

Albatross is a symbol of the “problematic implications of a atonement theory” (11) and

that the Mariner serves as a Christian theory.

Thus, it seems likely Coleridge intends The Rime to facilitate consideration of a

fundamental problem of Christianity and also a sense that the problem may well resolve

with an emphasis on the Mariner’s activities and the nature of those activities as

redemptive and right actions in the face of situations. Indeed, Hillier suggests that the

poem introduces the notion of the redemptive grotesque, making the Mariner’s actions,

even his story telling demonstrative of his mode of redemption. Symbolically, and

aligned to the notion of redemption, it may also appear that the Mariner’s storytelling

echoes of Jesus’ teachings, his work to education people about right action, to interpret

God’s law and guide people towards a particular foundation of belief. Although the

Mariner’s scope of storytelling ostensibly reaches only to the Wedding Guest, the Guest’s

connection to humanity as a broader concept seem that much more relevant in light of the

poem’s allegorical basis.

 Fiehn 8

Works Cited

Christensen, Jerome C. “The Symbol’s Errant Allegory: Coleridge and His Critics.” ELH

45.4 (1978): 640-659. JSTOR. Web. 6 Feb 2015.

Grow, L.M. “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”: Multiple Veils of Illusion,” Notre Dame

English Journal, 9.1 (1973): 23-30. JSTOR. 28 Jan 2015.

Guthrie, William N. ““The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” As Prophecy,” The Sewanee

Review, 6.2 (1898): 200-213. JSTOR. 28 Jan. 2015.

Hillier, Russell M. "Coleridge's Dilemma And The Method Of "Sacred Sympathy":

Atonement As Problem And Solution In "The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner.."

Papers On Language & Literature 45.1 (2009): 8-36. Academic Search Complete.

Web. 7 Feb. 2015.