Why did medieval criticism often neglect questions about literary form?

In the context of medieval literary criticism, questions regarding literary form were often neglected due to the prevailing theological and philosophical framework of the era.1

Medieval thought was characterized by a highly coherent, theologically explained universe in which nature was viewed as being purposefully and endlessly symbolic of revealed truth. Because the world was interpreted as a symbolic system—often through the fourfold theory of interpretation—the primary objective of reading was to uncover literal, moral, and spiritual meanings rather than to analyze the structural or aesthetic properties of a text.12

Consequently, while there were rhetoricians who dictated the use of literary figures, there was little effort to derive critical principles from specific literary genres, such as the chivalric romance or the fabliau. Even prominent poets like Dante expected their works to be interpreted through the lens of scriptural exegesis, further subordinating literary form to the search for theological significance. This focus on symbolic content and the "Great Chain of Being" meant that specifically literary problems of form and meaning remained largely unexamined.12