In the writing of Murder in the Cathedral, Eliot exploited the tradition of mystery and morality plays, which has been very strong in England and also the popularity of the life-story of Thomas-a-Becket, whose name is familiar to almost every household in the country. Eliot perfected the choric verse, which he had developed in The Rock, but he infused into it the rhythm of church-liturgy. Eliot knew that it was futile to produce a mere imitation of Greek drama in modern times, as it would be futile to follow in the footsteps of Shakespeare. He fused together the best in the Aeschylus tradition with the best from the morality plays, pointing out at the same time the contemporary relevance of the situation. Eliot did not get involved in the historical details of Becket’s career as was done by Tennyson in his Becket, nor did he concern himself with the personal clash between Henry and Becket. His theme is the martyrdom to which Becket subjected himself and which made him almost a national hero.
“Part I” describes the temptations the martyr must undergo; first, the temptations to compromise and avoid martyrdom; then the temptations to accept it in the wrong spirit, “to do the right deed for the wrong reason.” The rest of Part I is constructed upon a strict, almost temptations from within (the Tempters) and the claims of humanity geometric pattern, reaching its climax in a counterpointing of the from without (the Priests and the Chorus). The exchange with the Tempters remains the local point of the play. The first three recapitulate vices to which Thomas has been drawn earlier in his life, and are rejected with comparative ease. But the fourth is much more subtle, and ironically repeats Thomas’s own words to the Women of Canterbury, urging that affairs are out of his hands, and that he must merely adapt himself to fit the pattern imposed by God’s will. The Chorus interrupts with a description of portents of disaster witnessed by them, demanding once more to be left to their spiritual apathy. So Thomas’s answer to the Fourth Tempter, to spiritual pride and an aching desire for the glory of martyrdom, is delayed until the Chorus has spoken.
The sermon follows as an interlude between the two parts, giving expression to the self-knowledge that Becket has gained in Part I and showing him beginning to ‘make perfect (his) will” in readiness for the action of Part II. So, in the sermon, he analyses what exactly the wrong reason for martyrdom is, showing his insight into the ultimate betrayal suggested to him by defining the pattern of martyrdom, “the eternal design”, in theological and emotional terms-in terms, that is, of the fulfilment of God’s will and testimony of mankind.
“Part II” begins with a device based on the liturgy as a means of rapidly and smoothly covering the passage of time from Christmas Day, on which the sermon is preached, to December 29th, the day of the martyrdom. The three Priests enter in procession and, in turn, announce the passing of the days. The banners of the appropriate saints are carried in, and the introits are heard. Through such devices, much more than the mere passage of time is suggested: the idea of martyrdom and sainthood is kept before the audience.
Thereafter, the Knights, the “sordid” instruments of “the eternal design,” burst into the scene, and the action from this point of the murder follows a comparatively realistic course. Then the murder is completed, the Knights step forward, drop into prose and complete informality of manner, and offer rationalisations for their action. Coming hard upon the agony of the martyr and the tremendous outburst of the Chorus in which tears “drown the wind”, his abrupt transition is something midway between a political meeting and a music-hall act. Yet, the Knight’s apologies remain an integral part of the play and are meant to shock the spectators out of sanctimonious complacency. Stepping out of their twelfth-century setting, the Knights seek by every means from blandishment to exhortation, skilfully using the techniques of modern political oratory, to tempt the audience into admitting the reasonableness of their action and to acknowledge that they (the audience) are involved in it, since they have benefited from it.
Then, for the Knights, the play is over, and the First Knight suggests, in tones ironically echoing the words of policemen who have quelled a disturbance, “that you now disperse quietly to your homes”(p. 83). But the impact of Thomas’s sacrifice remains: the Priests return and help to recover the mood of martyrdom in a chastened form. From a threnody for the Archbishop in minor key, the recovered verse-form modulates to the major hymn of praise and thanks giving for the new saint of Canterbury with which the play ends. Hence by cutting down the historical action to its bare essentials, Eliot has brought “the eternal design” into stark dramatic relief.
Another important structural feature of Murder in the Cathedral is Eliot’s successful integration of poetry and drama. Unlike many earlier attempts at poetic drama, the verse in the play not only decorates the action but becomes an essential dramatic medium. The rhythms of the dialogue vary according to character and situation, moving from lyrical meditation to intense dramatic confrontation. The Chorus, in particular, acts as a bridge between the audience and the action, expressing collective fears, anxieties, and spiritual awakening. Through the Chorus, Eliot revives a classical dramatic device while adapting it to the needs of modern theatre.
Critics have frequently praised Eliot’s craftsmanship in constructing the play. Murder in the Cathedral is not merely a historical drama but a ritual drama, in which the action unfolds as part of a spiritual pattern. The play is therefore less concerned with external events than with the inner struggle of a soul preparing itself for martyrdom. The structure reflects this emphasis by moving from temptation to self-realisation and finally to sacrifice.
The arrangement of the play into two parts separated by the Christmas sermon is also significant. The sermon functions as both a dramatic pause and a theological explanation. It clarifies the nature of true martyrdom and prepares the audience for the tragic events that follow. As a result, while witnessing Becket’s death, the audience understands its spiritual significance. The sermon acts as a structural hinge connecting Becket’s inward victory in Part I with his outward sacrifice in Part II.
Eliot’s use of liturgical patterns gives the drama a ceremonial structure. The progression of feast days, prayers, chants, and processions transforms the stage into a symbolic extension of the Church. This liturgical framework reinforces Eliot’s central concern with the relationship between temporal events and eternal truths.
The ending of the play also deserves special attention. Instead of concluding with the murder itself, Eliot extends the action through the Knights’ speeches and the final chorus of thanksgiving. This structural choice prevents the audience from responding merely with pity or horror. The Knights’ rationalisations introduce modern political and social arguments, while the concluding hymn restores the spiritual perspective. Thus, the play moves beyond tragedy to affirmation, presenting Becket’s death as a victory of faith rather than a defeat.
The structure of Murder in the Cathedral, therefore, represents a remarkable synthesis of Greek tragedy, medieval morality drama, Christian liturgy, and modern poetic theatre. Through this carefully designed structure, Eliot transforms a historical incident into a timeless exploration of temptation, sacrifice, and spiritual redemption.
Sources:
Varshney, R. L. Murder in the Cathedral: A Critical Study.
Murder in the Cathedral.
Eliot, T. S. Selected Essays.
You may also like V.S.Naipaul’s A House for Mr. Biswas as an autobiographical novel
