While glaring at the Summoner, the Friar counsels The Wife of Bath to leave all questions of authority to the schools and the Church.  He, however, will now tell his tale of the a summoner, the profession being evil and their actions vile. The Host asks him to moderate his comments and encourages temperance, but the Summoner himself gives the Friar leave to tell his tale, promising to pay him in kind and more when his turn comes.  The Host allows the Friar to continue.

The Friar’s Tale

In the country where the Friar lived, there was an Archdeacon who was continually monitoring the community for signs of vices and sin.  To enforce his power, he had a summoner whose job it was to deliver the summons to the church members, outlining their offenses.  Now, this summoner was himself a morass of vice, taking bribes from the parishioners to line his pocket.

One day, in his travels, the summoner meets a yeoman from another country. They both find that they are equally as unscrupulous and corrupt, and pledge an alliance to each other.  The yeomen then reveals that he is, in fact, a demon who has taken the form of a man.  The summoner is not taken aback by this disclosure, and they continue on, finding a man who has his cart and horse stuck in the mud.  Consigning his horses to the devil, it appears the man has sealed their fate, yet the summoner must remind the demon that the man himself has allowed him to take them.  However, surprisingly the demon refuses, claiming that the man did not mean his words, and sure enough, the man is soon praising God when he gets them free.

Next on their journey, they come across a respectable old woman, whom the summoner proceeds to bully, demanding twelve pence or he will accuse her of a number of misdemeanours.  She consigns him to the devil, and when the demon confirms that she is in earnest, he takes the summoner, complete with a frying pan, to the fiery depths of hell, and so ends his reign of terror.

The Friar ends with a benediction:

” ….. The innocent.  Be ready to oppose
The fiend who would enslave you; thus dispose
Your hearts.  He cannot tempt you past your might,
For Christ will be your champion and your knight.
And pray that all these summoners repent
Before the devil takes them off hell bent!”

Middle English:

Of hir mysdedes, er that the feend hem hente

The Summoner, the Devil & the Old Woman (1787) John Mortimer

The Friar does a masterful job of abusing the Summoner with this story.  He portrays the summoner in the story as one who takes bribes, practices extortion and highlights his absolute corruption, yet he also depicts the demon has having more integrity when he refuses to take the man’s horses in spite of his words.  The summoner is relegated to a level almost lower than the devil himself, and in this characterization, the grossest insult imaginable is delivered to the “pious” Summoner.

It was somewhat pleasing to see the summoner tangled in his own web of deceit.  One wonders how the Summoner will repay the Friar for this highly imaginative, yet disparaging tale.

The Wife of Bath’s Prologue is by far the longest prologue in The Canterbury Tales.  From The General Prologue, we learned that she has a fabulous skill in weaving cloth and exceeds abilities of the weavers in the well-known Belgium clothing-making centres of Ypres and Ghent.  Her fashion is rather flamboyant, as she is clad in nearly ten pounds of cloth, rounding out her ostentation with scarlet stockings.  And while she’s somewhat deaf, she certainly has no aversion to talking.  Love is her specialty.

This “good” Wife immediately tells us that she has been married five times since she was twelve years old.  Yikes!  And in spite of some Biblical references that perhaps discourage this practice, there are a good number of examples of men with many wives, so why not she?  The fact that she’s been often married, qualifies her to speak on the subject as an expert, or so she believes.  She argues for marriage, using many extraordinary arguments.  The organs of men and women cannot simply be for eliminating urine and determining male from female.  No!  The Wife of Bath claims experience teaches otherwise.

She uses many Biblical references and those from ancient writings with impunity, agreeing or disagreeing to suit her philosophy and purpose.  While illustrating the difference between wives and virgins, she describes virgins as white bread and wives as barley bread; since Jesus himself used barley bread to feed the five thousand, therefore wives are of much more value.

The Wife passes over most of her husbands, only sharing that most of them were rich and old, yet she stays to describe the marriage to her fifth husband whom, despite his ill-treatment of her, she appears to have loved.  Jenkin is his name and he spends much of his time reading from a book that portrays the exploits of wicked wives.  In frustration, the Wife tears out pages from the book, and in enraged retaliation, her husband strikes her:

“And when I saw that he would never stop
Reading all night from his accursed book,
Suddenly, in the midst of it, I took
Three leaves and tore them out in a great pique,
And with my fist I caught him on the cheek
So hard I tumbled backward in the fire.
And up he jumped, he was as mad for ire
As a mad lion, and caught me on the head
With such a blow I fell down dead.”

Middle English:

source

The Wife of Bath’s Tale

Set in the gloriously noble times of King Arthur, the wife tells the story of a young knight who is accused of the rape of a maiden.  He is taken to Queen Guinevere, who proclaims that he will gain a reprieve if, within the space of one year, he can discover what women most desire.

A year passes and the knight, despondent at not discovering an answer, returns to Camelot.  On his way, he meets an old grizzled hag who promises to reveal the answer if he will grant her whatever she asks.  She whispers in his ear, and the knight returns to Queen Guinevere professing that “women desire to have the sovereignty and sit in rule and government above their husbands, and to have their way in love.”  The knight is pardoned, but his joy is short-lived, as he discovers that the old woman wishes to be his wife.

His lack of enthusiasm in bed displeases his new wife and she lectures him on virtue;  it is not attained by wealth, appearance or status, but rather is cultivated by character.  She could transform herself to correct the issues that disgust him, but does he want an old, virtuous, faithful wife, or a beautiful young wife who could easily make him a cuckhold?  The knight allows her to choose, and because he has given her this power, she makes herself both faithful and beautiful.  The knight is overjoyed and all ends happily.

The Wife of Bath must have the final say though and ends with almost a benediction that God would send women young, lusty, submissive husbands, and the plague to those who are irascible and parsimonious.

The Overthrowing of the Rusty Knight (1894) Arthur Hughes source Wikiart

The Wife of Bath weaves cloth but is also adept at weaving words.  Her deafness also seems a rather important point.  Not only is she physically deaf, she is deaf to the needs of others, deaf to Biblical precepts, deaf to social convention and even deaf to the consequences of her actions; even though her marriages don’t necessarily bring marital bliss, her troubles do not seem to deviate her from her set course.  This Wife means to make war on and conquer her husbands.  Yet the mastery she seeks is not a forced control; she means to coerce a yielded power, in that the man willingly gives all control to her, domestically, economically and personally.  This “good” woman shows no discomposure in depicting herself as a wife who uses accusations for torment, withholds sexual favours for payment and gains mastery over her husbands by force, nagging and trickery.  In fact, she glorifies in it.

The Host becomes aware of the passage of time through various observations of nature and it causes him to reflect on what some great sages have had to say about lost time.  He compels the Man of Law to relate his tale to discharge his duty.  The Man assents, but then starts a long monologue referring to the manner in which Chaucer tells his stories, and giving him some acclaim, and then begins to tell of stories that are so foul, about which Chaucer would never write.  However, there is some reference to a real character of the time, a Mr. John Gower, who would write about such offensive topics, such as incest, and one wonders if the author is chastizing this man or attempting to antagonize him into a response.  In any case, the Man of Law claims his tale will not follow such abomination, and that he will relate it in prose.

The Man of Law

Well, even though the Man of Law claimed his plan was to chronicle his tale in prose, he recounts it in complex seven-line rhyme-royal stanzas.  The prologue of the tale appears to begin almost as a lament against poverty, its detriments and adversities, but then the narrative merges into a commentary on the prosperity of wealthy men.  The Man of Law tells of a merchant who told him the story which he will now recount.

There is a problem, however.  The Sultan is a Muslim, and Custance is a Christian, and what good Roman Christian would give his daughter to a Muslim?  So the Sultan and all his vassalage, agree to convert, so he can take Cunstance in marriage.

The Silk Merchants Edwin Lord Weeks source Wikiart

When it comes time for Lady Custance to depart for her new home and husband, she is filled with sadness and regret:

Alas, what wonder is it though she wept,

She who shall be sent to a foreign nation

From friends who so tenderly cared for her,

And to be bound under subjection

By one, (of whom) she knows not his character?

Husbands are all good, and have been for years;

Wives know that; I dare say you no more.

Allas, what wonder is it thogh she wepte,

That shal be sent to strange nacioun

Fro freendes that so tendrely hire kepte,

And to be bounden under subjeccioun

Of oon, she knoweth nat his condicioun?

Housbondes been alle goode, and han ben yoore;
That knowen wyves; I dar sey yow na moore.

Yet even though she dreads her fate, she will gladly go because of obedience to her parents and for her love of God.  She claims though, that Mars has slain her marriage, which is interesting as Mars is the god of war.  I wonder if this allusion will play into the story later on?

So while the Sultain awaits his bride, the Sultan’s mother is irate that her son is going to forsake his beliefs.  She acquires the support of the council to pretend to accept Christianity before slaying all the Christians at the wedding banquet. The narrator compares the Sultaness with Satan, in her quest to destroy what is pure and virtuous.

The Sultan of Morocco (1845) Eugene Delacroix source Wikiart

The Second Part:

The Muslims massacre all the Christians, including both the ones from Rome, the Sultan, and those of his party who were planning to convert.  However Lady Custance is left alive, to be set afloat on a ship, to survive with minimal provisions, if she is able.  She is afloat for many years and we are told that God kept her alive to show his works in her, and so follows a list of historical people whom God has kept from harm.  Finally, she is tossed onto the coast of Northumberland near a castle and, disoriented and pitiful, is found by the constable of the castle, who takes her to his wife, Hermengild.

Through Lady Custance’s prayers and sweet character, the good lady is converted in this land full of pagans, from where Christians had already fled, and hence, her husband also.  But Satan, ever up to his mischief, makes a knight fall in love with Custance and want his way with her, but Cunstance guards her virtue and will not be swayed by his amorous advances.  The knight, enraged at her resistance, kills Hermengild by slitting her throat and places the knife by the sleeping Cunstance.  The constable and King Alla return and see the murdered woman.  Everyone is shocked that the virtuous lady Cunstance could commit such a horrible deed yet the knight testifies against her, so what can be done?  But lo, as he swears the truth on the Bible, a hand smites him on the neck and his eyes burst out of his head, while a voice is heard condemning the slander and praising Cunstance.  Because of this miracle, many were saved, including the king, who married Cunstance and made her a queen.

This king’s mother too, is against the marriage to a “foreigner”.   When the king is away and Custance is delivered of a son, through some macchinations, a letter is delivered to the king telling him his wife has delivered a monstrous infant and that no one wanted to go near the castle.  The king, with his new Christian charity, claims that he will accept the child whether fair or foul. Again, the king’s mother, with her evil servant, Donegild, intercepts the king’s letter and instead, it is said that he banishes Cunstance from the kingdom. Custance accepts her fate, secure in her faith, but prays for protection for her innocent babe.

Young Mother With Child Lucas Cranach the Elder source Wikiart

The Third Part:

When king Alla returns, he learns of the wretched deed done to his wife and son, and he has his mother slain for her troubles.  But he is left to mourn for Cunstance, who sails for five years, reaches another heathen land, has her virtue once again targeted by a lecherous male, and is protected by God as the man falls into the sea and drowns.  Finally, she is picked up by a Roman ship returning from a battle with the Syrians over the slaying of the Christians, and when she reaches Rome, she abides with a senator and his wife.

Now King Alla is remorseful for the slaying of his mother and decides to make a pilgrimage to Rome to receive his penance.  He is befriended by the senator, first sees his child then his wife there, and is moved to tears of joy.  Lady Cunstance is at first wary, as she remembers his treachery, but when the truth is known to her, she rejoices at their reunion.  She makes peace with her father and returns to England, where she lives in bliss with her husband until he dies a year later.  To Rome she then goes to live with her father happily, and her son, Maurice, eventually becomes a respected Emperor.

Bamburgh Castle, Northmberland (1874) James Webb source Wikiart

I absolutely loved this story.  Lady Cunstance is painted in saintly form, and I suppose that people could criticize that she’s too perfect.  But I always believe that the purpose of these types of stories were to teach, and while Cunstance is “perfect,” there is often nothing but turmoil happening around her, so in these cases, the storytellers are instructing us in the right responses in times of trouble and strife, while also illustrating the benefits that can come from our right actions during these times.  Conversely, they also can illustrate the outcomes of wrong actions and their consequences.

Yet, even amid Cunstance’s perfection, the life lessons are realistically presented:

“….. But little while it lasts, I you promise
Joy of this world, because time will not stand still;

From day to night it changes like the tide.

Who lived ever in such delight one day
That he was not moved by either conscience, 
Or anger, or desire, or some kind of fear,

Envy, or pride, or passion, or offence? ……”

Middle English:

…..But litel while it lasteth, I yow heete,
Joye of this world, for tyme wol nat abyde;

Fro day to nyght it changeth as the tyde.

Who lyved euere in swich delit o day

That hym ne moeved outher conscience,
Or ire, or talent, or som kynnes affray,
Envye, or pride, or passion, or offence? …..

A few commentaries on this tale surmise that the Lady Cunstance symbolizes “crusading fever” (or perhaps it was fervour 😉  )  but I didn’t read that supposition into the tale at all.  For me, the focus was on Cunstance, her virtue and her faithfulness to God no matter what her circumstances, and what comes out of that perseverance and faith.  It is basically the story of a saint, and I believe Chaucer meant it to be so.  But as for the narrator, that is a different story.  In the General Prologue, the Man of Law was obviously an astute and respected character, yet there was some cunning and wiliness behind his demeanour.  The story itself stands, but did he have another purpose for telling it?

The Forum, as seen from the Farnese Gardens, Rome (1826) Camille Corot source Wikiart

Chaucer finishes the tale in a flourishing style:

And fare now well! my tale is at an end.
Now Jesus Christ, that of his might may send
Joy after woe, govern us in his grace,
keep us all that are in this place! Amen

  

Middle English:

” … And fareth now weel! my tale is at an ende.

Now Jhesu Crist, that of his myght may sende
Joye after wo, governe us in his grace,
And kepe us alle that been in this place! Amen

In the Epilogue, the Priest is called upon to tell the next tale, but the Shipman strongly protests saying that they all believe in God and that the sermonizing will only “sprinkle weeds in their clean grain”.  He states that he will tell the next tale.  This is puzzling, because in the order that we’re following, the next tale is The Wife of Bath’s Tale.  I’m sorry, but I have no idea why.

The Canterbury Tales/The Brubury Tales Project

The General Prologue

The Knight’s Tale
The Miller’s Tale

The Reeve’s Tale

The Cook’s Tale
The Man of Law’s Tale
The Wife of Bath’s Tale
The Friar’s Tale
The Summoner’s Tale
The Clerk’s Tale
The Merchant’s Tale
The Squire’s Tale
The Franklin’s Tale
The Physician’s Tale
The Pardoner’s Tale
The Shipman’s Tale 
The Prioress’s Tale
The Tale of Sir Thopas
The Tale of Melibee
The Monk’s Tale
The Nun’s Priest’s Tale

The Second Nun’s Tale
The Canon’s Yeoman’s Tale

The Manciple’s Tale
The Parson’s Tale
Chaucer’s Retraction

The Cook

Apprentice Orest Kiprensky source Wikiart

Here ends the first fragment of tales.  From now on, the order of tales can vary, depending on which manuscript your particular translator chose to rely.  Because we’re going by Thomas Tyrwitt’s ordering of the fragments (more information on the different manuscripts here), the next tale will be the The Man of Law’s Tale or The Lawyer’s Tale ……

The Reeve is still simmering over The Miller’s Tale about the Carpenter, and boasts that he would repay the Miller in kind, yet he is too old for the obscene jokes the Miller likes to employ.  The old Reeve gets carried away with his descriptions of old age and its sufferings, and the Host must interrupt to get him back on track.  The Reeve then proclaims that, as the Miller told his tale out of personal enmity for him, he will repay like for like:

“I’ll speak his low talk, just as he has spoken.
I pray to God he gets his neck broken.
In my eye he can see what mote there is,
But what he can’t see is the beam in his.”

Or in the Middle English:

“Right in his cherles termes wol I speke.
I pray to god his nekke mote breke;
He can wel in myn yë seen a stalke,
But in his owne he can nat seen a balke.”

The Reeve source Wikimedia Commons

The Reeve’s Tale

Simon, a miller, and given the nickname of Simkin, resides in Trumpington near Cambridge, his mill standing by a rippling brook.  His wife, the daughter of a clergyman, is imperious and disdainful, while Simkin is known for thievery and deception.  When he cheats the university, overcharging them for the grinding of their corn, two students Alan and John, decide he needs to learn a lesson.  They take wheat to be ground by the miller, but the miller outmaneuvers them:

“Instead of flour, I’ll give them only bran.
‘The greatest scholar is not the wisest man,’
As one time to the wolf remarked the mare.
For all their cunning a fig is what I care.”

He then looses their horse, and when the students chase after him, the miller steals their grain, giving it to his wife to bake a loaf of bread.

Finally, the students return with their horse, but it is night, and they are forced to offer the miller payment to permit them to stay overnight.  They are allowed one bed, the miller in his wife are in a second, their 20 year-old daughter in a third, and the baby boy in his cradle at the foot of the miller’s bed.

The miller and his wife have drunk so much wine that they fall asleep directly, but the students still plot revenge.  Alan decides to have his way with the miller’s daughter and, not to be outdone, John moves the cradle to the foot of his bed and, after going out to relieve herself, the miller’s wife crawls into bed with John.  In the morning, after his romp, Alan tries to crawl back into bed with John, but of course, due to the switched cradle, he ends up in bed with the miller.  He inadvertently whispers his night secrets to the miller, who is incensed at his duplicity.  They struggle, the miller is beaten up by both Alan and his own wife, who mistakes his bald head for the student’s white nightcap and gives him a good thump on the head with a staff.  And so the miller is beaten and cheated, in another romping tale by Chaucer.

The Old Mill at Sunset (1844) Thomas Cole source Wikiart

This tale exemplifies the common “cradle-trick” tale, and is a near copy of Bocaccio’s tale of the Sixth Story of the Ninth Day of his The Decameron. Chaucer gives the Reeve a type of northern dialect, which cannot be translated well, so if you don’t read the Middle English version, you will likely miss it.  It’s apparently the first example in English literature of a regional accent used in humorous imitation.

Next The Cook’s Tale, which was unfinished by Chaucer ……..