See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/343524913

TRABAJO DE FIN DE GRADO «The Canterbury Tales and their Historical

Context »

Thesis · June 2020

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31402.85445

CITATIONS READS

0 14

1 author:

Lissy Werner
Universidad de Cádiz
2 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Lissy Werner on 08 August 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 TRABAJO DE FIN DE GRADO

«The Canterbury Tales and their

Historical Context »

Autora: Lissy Werner

Tutora: María Isabel Calderón López

GRADO EN ESTUDIOS INGLESES

Curso Académico 2019-2020

Fecha de presentación 01/06/2020

FACULTAD DE FILOSOFÍA Y LETRAS

Contents:

1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...3

2. The historical context of the Canterbury Tales………………………………………………….………5

3. The author in context…………………………………………………………………………………………….11

4. The Knight and his Tale…………………………………………………………………………………………15

5. The Miller and his Tale and a comparison with the “Knight’s Tale”………………………….22

6. Conclusions………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…30

7. Works cited…..………………………………………………………………………………………………………33

1
Abstract

Medieval literature presents the modern reader with an insight into social structures and
historical notions of life in the medieval period. This work draws a connection between
the protagonists and themes of Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales and the historical
background in which the Tales were written. It is investigated how the author’s
upbringing and his life in a period full of social conflict and change are reflected in the text.
For this purpose, the historical events of the 14th century in England are reviewed. After
that, a close look is taken at the “General Prologue” and the first two tales in the
Canterbury Tales, with a special focus on the narrators, their descriptions by the host, and
the themes they include in their stories. This analysis shows that, even though the Tales
are a work of fiction and do not describe any specific historical events or characters, there
is nevertheless a close connection between the text and its context.

Key words: The Canterbury Tales, Medieval history, The Knight’s Tale, The Miller’s Tale,
Geoffrey Chaucer

Resumen

La literatura medieval proporciona al lector moderno un modo de acercamiento y

comprensión de las estructuras sociales y modos de vida de este periodo histórico. Este
estudio traza una conexión entre los protagonistas y temas presentes en los Cuentos de
Canterbury de Geoffrey Chaucer y el contexto histórico en que estas historias fueron
escritas. En él, investigamos cómo la vida del autor y su crecimiento en un periodo
marcado por el cambio y el conflicto social quedan reflejados en el texto. Para ello,
proporcionamos un resumen de los acontecimientos históricos de la Inglaterra del siglo
XIV. Tras esto, examinamos el Prólogo General y los dos primeros cuentos, poniendo
especial énfasis en sus narradores, sus descripciones y los temas que incluyen en sus
historias. Este análisis muestra que, siendo estos cuentos una obra de ficción en la cual no
se describe de forma explícita ningún acontecimiento o personaje histórico, existe una
estrecha relación entre esta obra y el contexto en el que fue elaborada.

Palabras claves: Los Cuentos de Canterbury, historia medieval, “el cuento del caballero”,
“el cuento del molinero”, Geoffrey Chaucer

2
1. Introduction

English literature is one of the oldest subjects of study. English authors, narratives, tales,
poems and plays have been studied for centuries and are still, nowadays, considered an
important aspect of culture, taught and studied all over the world. Literary studies today
are often focused on more recent works because they seem to have more importance in
our current times. Many critics focus on works where social issues of gender, race or
inequality can be analysed and defended, since these are topics that modern society has
mostly engaged with recently. Medieval literature, on the other hand, is generally seen by
many as a historical artifact that can be enjoyed as such, but that does not add much
scientific or cultural value to the modern society.

Nevertheless, a big part of medievalists’ work is based on literary sources that

endured the passing of time and are available to us now. From as early as the 7th century,
texts in Old English have been found and studied by historians and linguists as these texts
depict important aspects of the life and worldview of the people who lived back then. In a
similar manner, Middle English literature does in fact have a big value because it brings
us, in modern times, closer to constructing an image of what life in the medieval period
would have looked like. The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer are no exception. When
read and analysed closely, they can certainly tell modern readers quite a lot about what it
must have been like to live in 14th century England. Chaucer is often called the “father of
English literature” not only because he was one of the first to publish literary works
written in English after a long period of French dominance, but also because of his ability
to portray variations in the language according to the range of his social surroundings,
and therefore he was giving a literary voice to members of all classes.

The aim of this work is to explain, primarily, the historical context in which the Tales were
written and in addition, how the stories and protagonists of the Tales directly reflect this
context. The Canterbury Tales have been studied many times, but in most critics’ works,
there seems to be a lack of direct connection to the historical context of the writing. For
the reader, who is not a medievalist or expert in the developments of medieval English,
some research may provide reduced value in the sense that he may struggle to associate
the findings inside the text to the circumstances that it was written in. For this reason, this
work intends to provide an overview of the history of England during Chaucer’s lifetime
3
as well as to analyse the first two tales and their narrators. This is achieved by closely
analysing not only the plot and characters of those two tales, but also examining the
language used and the information conveyed.

The first chapter describes various historical events of the 14th century and the
connection between them will be outlined. In addition, the different aspects of the social
circumstances will be portrayed, the division of the society into classes will be analysed
and the conflict and social grievances caused by this system will be pointed out. Chapter
two is focused on a description of the life of the author Geoffrey Chaucer with a special
focus on his upbringing and his life-long service in courtly or governmental environments,
which allowed him to illustrate a wide range of perspectives in his literary works. The
third and fourth chapters are a close analysis of the first two tales in the Canterbury Tales,
the “Knight’s Tale” and the “Miller’s Tale”. The narrators and their stories will be
described and it will be shown how their images fit into the bigger picture of medieval
society. In the fourth chapter, concentrating mainly on the “Miller’s Tale”, the two stories
are further compared to emphasise the contrast between the two protagonists, the way
they narrate their tales and the themes portrayed in them. Nevertheless, it will also be
displayed how the two tales have quite a lot in common and how said combination of
similarities and differences helps to portray the nature of the social conflict existing in
Chaucer’s lifetime. By analysing all these individual aspects, an overall illustration is given
not only of the first two protagonists in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales but also of the
historical context in which they were created and which they are therefore inevitably
representing.

4
2. The historical context of the Canterbury Tales

The time in which Geoffrey Chaucer wrote his influential Canterbury Tales was a time of
social unrest and change. As he grew up in a medieval England after the Norman conquest,
he saw first-hand how society and the people kept changing while his country was going
through various crises at once. Gail Ashton states that “if the literary context of Chaucer’s
writing was a rich and varied one, the historical context was no less dramatic. It was a
time of political upheaval with three successive kings” (151). From this we understand
that to be able to look closely at Chaucer as an author and his Canterbury Tales it is
necessary to have a broad understanding of medieval England and the circumstances in
which this literary piece was written. It is especially important to have a closer look at the
organisation of society and the influence it had on the people, depending on which class
they belonged to. Those changes in all parts of civilization marked the years of the High
Middle Ages and can give readers of the Canterbury Tales nowadays a lot of clues and
information about certain characters in the Tales, their connection with and importance
in society and even about the author himself.

To begin with, one of the most influential institutions in medieval England and Europe in
general was the Church. It is no surprise that religion and all matters connected to it were
so present in literature because they affected the everyday life of probably every person
that lived in that time. The Catholic Church was without a doubt one of the pillars of
society and extremely influential not just as a religion but also politically and in relation
to the King and the court. In the Canterbury Tales, religion is manifest throughout the
whole story not just because of religious figures like the Pardoner or the Nun, but because
it underlies the entire plot. The tales all emerge out of the base, which is the story of
various protagonists meeting up for the pilgrimage. This was popular in the time Chaucer
wrote the stories and therefore serves as a logical framework for the collection of tales.
As Rigby explains, “[e]ven when . . . Chaucer does not directly discuss historical events,
his works still confront the broader social, political and religious questions raised by the
events of his day” (16). Religion is thus an underlying, sometimes more present and
directly targeted subject in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales because in the same way, it was
always present in people’s lives back then.

5
The Church was, as previously mentioned, extremely popular at the time. Especially the
free churches enjoyed a special status in society and had support from the King. It can be
said that the “King's clerks were in an excellent position to discover and exploit for their
own benefit the patronage” (Jones 21) and until the reign of Edward III in the 14th century,
there were constant disputes about the free Church profiting too much from their
outstanding status. The mingling between the Church and the court caused some
confusion and conflict. In his essay “Chaucer and Religious Reform” Ezra Maxfield even
goes as far as to say that “[c]hurch affairs were simply in a chaotic condition. There was
no unanimity either of belief or action” (71). Nevertheless, religion was still well known
for affecting every aspect of people’s life in the Middle Ages. There was a “network of
vested interests which flourished within and between Church and state, which reinforced
professional relationships and loyalty” (Jones 22) but even outside the court, they had a
lot of power. The Catholic Church was mostly involved with the ruling classes. They were
taking part in activities of the government, making of laws, passing legislation and even
the collection of taxes and fees. These examples serve the readers interested in the
historical context of the Canterbury Tales to see how the Catholic Church in medieval
times had influence over politics, economics and the public welfare of England.

Nonetheless, it is also important to mention that the Church, as all other aspects of life in
the Middle Ages, was undergoing major changes. Its authority was no longer as
unquestioned as it used to be before. In society, anti-clerical thoughts and ideas were
peaking. They were probably not the norm, but criticism of the Church became more
prominent and Chaucer also had a representation for that in his Tales. He portrays
different types of clerical figures, some more typical like the Nun and others, that do not
seem as likeable. The author describes the regular clergy in general in a humorous way.
Nevertheless, he does not hold back on criticism of the Church and the clergy. Referring
to what has been described earlier, Ashton mentions that in the Canterbury Tales “the
power of the Church is examined and dissected too. Chaucer explores and criticises its
internal wranglings, its political and economic strength and its stifling sphere of influence
over the way people lived their lives” (146-147). So, when considering the religious
aspects of the tales, readers should keep in mind that the Church was highly influential on
society back then, but it was not as untouchable and uncriticised anymore and those
changes are reflected in Chaucer’s stories.
6
Apart from the Church, the main power was undoubtedly the King and the court. The two
institutions were collaborating, as mentioned before, but also constantly competing for
power. The society in which Chaucer lived “was an aristocratic society in which kings,
nobles, prelates and knights all received particular expressions of deference” (Du Boulay
475), but like the other aspects of medieval life, the courts suffered from lots of unrest.
Due to the long conflict with France and the Hundred Years’ War there were problems of
succession and in Chaucer’s lifetime, three different kings were reigning. Nevertheless,
their rank in society was still unaltered and the court had an immense influence on
Chaucer, his life and his literary works. It was especially Richard II and his court though,
that had an impact on the literary culture in general. They were endorsing writers and
poetry in the English language, which was completely new. Before that, Norman-French
had been the official language of England’s higher society and there was no existing
literature in Middle English. Barbara Hanawalt explains that “Richard II, after all, presided
over a court in which a remarkable cluster of poets found inspiration, and his sponsorship
beginning in the mid-1380s might well have been crucial in firmly establishing the status
of English as a language in high literary endeavour” (16). It can be seen that the language
of the King and the court did definitely influence the literary world significantly and also
had an impact in terms of establishing English as the language of literature as opposed to
French.

Yet another very defining aspect in the medieval society of England was the social order
and the hierarchical separation into different ranks. Clergy, Nobility and Peasantry were
the three levels of estate and they were for most parts clearly separated and secured a
stable order of society. England was still very set in this class system and the old
structures meant that peasants were still bound to their landlords, had minimal rights and
in general, there was a big inequality in the society. Farmers were not only very low in
rank but also had a lot of pressure resting on them as the population was growing
tremendously for a while, and at the same time people were moving away from the land
and agriculture to pursue a better life in the cities, which was mostly not fulfilled. Du
Boulay describes this shift by saying that “the world of Chaucer was mobile. War,
diplomacy, trade, administration and the impulse of religion shifted men and women of
even humble station about the country and far beyond its shores” (473). In addition,

7
people were still suffering from a high mortality rate for children and an overall very short
life expectancy due to the lack of proper sanitary systems.

During the 13th century, many changes started to manifest themselves in society which
were brought up by big events and crises. The long going conflict with France and the
resulting Hundred Years’ War was just one of them. After the war, social unrest became
more prominent. Poverty and sudden homelessness were a big issue among a large part
of medieval society. Ashton explains that: “[m]any soldiers, retainers and mercenaries
were left penniless sometimes homeless, after an uneasy truce with France, [and they]
were forced to beg or become vagrants” (151-152). So, the situation in the lower ranks
and middle classes was already changing. In addition to that came what was undoubtedly
one of the biggest crises of the time, the Black Death. It was not the only plague tormenting
the medieval population, there were actually many more, but it was by far the one that
most affected England and Europe in general. With those plagues came a great loss of
population and the society shrank to much smaller size than before. Some sources speak
of a reduction of more than half the population, but historical sources are contradictory
and not clear. What is for sure is that after the plagues where so many people died, the
demand for working men in the country was suddenly considerably higher. More land
was available and needed to be cultivated, so now that farmers were more needed, they
had the opportunity to earn more which is why lords and knights feared an uprising from
the lower classes and therefore attempted to control their wages and personal
possessions. This loss of population did not just affect the lower classes and farmers but
in fact, the whole scope of society: “The Black Death and subsequent epidemics opened
up new opportunities at all levels” (Hanawalt 6). In urban areas, many positions in
administration were unoccupied and needed to be filled all of a sudden. All of this led to a
demographical change as well as to the emergence of a new type of economy where lower
ranks also had a say. To sum up, it can be said that the crises like the war with France and
the plagues caused a development in society which “placed great strain upon [the
medieval] concept of order, a theme particularly reflected in the Canterbury Tales”
(Ashton 152).

8
This development not only caused changes in society but also brought general social
unrest with it. One aspect that came hand-in-hand with the demographical change that
was just mentioned was a new issue with land laws and problems with inheritance. There
were lots of variations and uncertainty regarding the feudal system and for the reasons
previously explained, peasants started to protest and demand more rights and higher
payments. Due to them being more needed than before and a general conflict of inequality
between the landlords and the serfs, the latter got more and more frustrated with their
situation. Their services were requested to a greater extent but landlords and employers
did not pay their servants properly which is why “[a] good deal of their dissatisfaction
may have derived from the lack of fit between their commercial activities on the one hand
and their seigneurial subordination on the other” (Eiden 28). While trying to prevent the
rise and growing wealth of the lower classes, the parliament, in cooperation with the
lords, made new laws that prevented the peasants from consuming certain goods and
charged more taxes. This resulted in an even further loss of confidence towards the
landlords and ultimately caused, together with other factors mentioned earlier, the
Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. It is clear that, as Herbert Eiden says, “[u]prisings on such a scale
do not happen simply by accident. At the very least they reveal a fundamental weakness
in the social structure, if not a widespread sense of personal injustice” (6). Some critics
tend to call the Peasants’ Revolt the ‘English Rising’, but this expression takes away its
rural character and does not fully reflect the motives of the uprising. It is true that the
conflict not only involved peasants, but people of middle classes, artisans and officials
joined them during the course of the events. Nevertheless, the impulse for the revolt came
from the suffering and problems of the lower class.

The targets and aim of the revolt were clear from the beginning. The people who were
killed by the rebels were members of the nobility and administration. The anger of the
lower class was mostly directed at those responsible for the injustice and the fixed nature
of the social structures. As a result, the rebels “intended to kill certain of the king's
officials, to overthrow lordship and to replace the law which maintained the social
structure of feudal lordship with new provisions of their own devising” (Eiden 13).
Workers for the court or the government were attacked and even the clergy did not get
spared. For the rioters, the Church had the same responsibility for their suppression as
the crown, even though they were not necessarily against the King but rather against the
9
laws coming from his government. When they reached the Tower of London after two
days in the city, they even beheaded the Archbishop of Canterbury. In addition to their
political aims, the rebels also went after Flemish immigrants. Without a doubt, the revolt
was a very violent part of medieval history in England but what makes it so important,
especially when looking at Chaucer and the social aspects represented in the Canterbury
Tales, is the individuality that can be found in the rising, even though it was a mass
movement. The members of the revolt were, as mentioned, extremely varied and so were
their targets. In addition, various levels of risings started all over the country, motivated
by each other. This shows that “social grievances and tensions in [England] before 1381
must have been both wide-ranging and deep-seated” (Eiden 16). If the sense of inequality
and frustration had not been this strong, the revolt would have never had the magnitude
and strength it did. What can be shown from looking at this part of English history is that
many lords of the time still treated their servants unfairly, despite the social reforms and
economic changes. Times were changing but they had not realised it yet. Harold Bloom
resumes this by saying that “The pilgrims’ stories reflect the values and conflicts that
animated Chaucer’s century . . . The Peasant’s Revolution of 1381 was partially triggered
by the growing disparity among the classes” (21). It is essential to remember this when
analysing the Canterbury Tales and their historical context.

By working through those different historical events and features it can be concluded that
knowing the context in which Chaucer grew up and in which he wrote the tales can give
readers many clues about why he wrote the way he did and why he chose certain
characteristics and structures to reflect medieval society. Even though some critics like
Stephen Rigby claim that Chaucer should not be read as a ‘mirror’ of actual historical
events in society, it cannot be denied that “The Canterbury pilgrims are classic estate
types who are defined in terms of their social rank and occupation (Rigby 12). Critics also
claim there are issues with assigning a date to the events in the tales, they question the
discrepancy between the actual events in England and when the tales were written, but it
is likely that in those claims they are referring more to Chaucer’s literary inspirations
from Italian and French writing, where the difference between reality and tales seems
bigger. Nevertheless, the pilgrims and their tales described in the Canterbury Tales are not
replications of realistic persons or situations. They are distanced from real life, so the
attempt to assign the pilgrims to actual historical figures and connect them to concrete
10
events seems too much of an interpretation from the reader’s side. Maurice Keen states
that “even if a good many of Chaucer’s figures are hard to fit into a three-estates scheme,
he is still trying to relate each to a specific place and a specific function in the social
hierarchy” (511). Therefore, it is clear again, that readers should keep in mind that the
tales were written over a long period of time and, as a result they reflect the drastic
changes occurring in society, as well as Chaucer’s first-hand experience with them. Even
the main topic of the tales, pilgrimage itself is “a social as well as religious event, with
individuals interacting according to their social perspectives as expressed by their class
(or rank) and vocation” (Strohm 15). Consequently, it is evident that Chaucer expressed
shift in society through the Tales by speaking through the voices of various characters
coming from different social classes.

3. The author in context

When studying the social context of the Canterbury Tales, it is not only important to be
aware of the historical background in which they were written, but it is also very
interesting to look at the author directly and the background he grew up in. This can give
readers further information of how to interpret certain aspects of the tales and what is
behind the characters, the way they were written and the environment of the different
stories. First of all, it has to be said that biographies of people who lived in the Middle Ages
are difficult to find and moreover, have to be judged with care because nowadays we do
not have clear records of most events back then. Especially when it comes to a single
person, it is very rare to have any contemporary information at all if they were not a
member of the King’s court. Chaucer definitely was a public person and appreciated as a
writer even in his lifetime, but he got even more attention later, which makes
reconstructing exact data about his life complicated for critics. Luckily, because he was
working for courts and the King and later spent all his life in public service, there is at
least some knowledge about how he spent his life, where he worked and the places he
travelled to.

11
The first date which remains a current object of discussion is Chaucer’s date of birth. Some
critics date it back to 1328, but others claim that he would have been born at the beginning
of the 1340s, because there are sources contradicting the earlier date. What can be said
with more certainty is that he lived until the end of 1400. Most people believe his date of
death to be the 25th October because that date was engraved on his tombstone, but it is
again, not proven because said stone was not engraved when Chaucer actually died, but a
couple hundred years later. Even though it is problematic to speak of certain dates in his
life, there is a lot of knowledge about how he grew up and the different positions he
occupied during his lifetime. Chaucer grew up in a middle-class family. His father was a
wine merchant and as they lived in London, which at that time, was the most important
city for any kind of merchantry, the business probably went quite well, which guaranteed
Chaucer an “unusually secure and settled childhood” (Rudd 4). Growing up in this
environment, he had a series of advantages, many other children at the time did not have:
“this included connections to well-established families and an immediate background in
well-regarded, even prestigious, trade and a tradition of valued royal service” (Rudd 4).
In addition, it gave Chaucer and his family the opportunity to survive the Great Plague
because they could afford to live away from London for a while. Due to it being much more
densely populated and as a consequence, dirtier, they would have been more likely to
catch the plague there. Due to his father’s job and the environment Chaucer lived in as a
child, he came into contact with foreign cultures from a very young age. As he was
constantly observing life in an international city like London, he probably “would have
been accustomed to seeing and hearing people from the many countries who traded with
England at this time” (Rudd 4). Later, this contact with international communities got
further enhanced and helped Chaucer when he started writing to have a wider view of
society and the variety of cultures represented in it.

When he was older, Chaucer most likely received education from a school in London.
What is more noteworthy and influential to his later career though, is the fact that he
started working in the household of the Countess of Ulster as a page. This job was
presumably given to him due to his father’s business and connections mentioned earlier.
Pages were “servants and personal assistants, sometimes given specific responsibilities”
(Rudd 6). Chaucer, as part of the Countess’ household, travelled around with her and the
rest of the servants and while doing that, he was exposed to literature and art in general
12
and he was also educated in a courtly background. Therefore, it is true that the duties of a
page were “mundane – making beds, waiting on the tables and whims of the noble family
– but the job was also an opportunity to learn manners and be exposed to people from a
variety of backgrounds” (Bloom 16). Hence, from early on he came into contact with
different cultures and behaviour and was in addition, always hearing gossip from around
the court. These experiences, together with his upbringing in London where he saw
masses of people on a daily basis, had a significant influence on him and later, his writing.
He was able to observe crowds in detail – from farmers, fishers, merchants, steel workers
and additionally, lots of religious people – he got an insight into all different kinds of
classes. This served him later as “he was developing into a poet famous for his amazing
characters and their fabulous stories. The material for an inventive person was at hand”
(Bloom 17). All of this is particularly important because even though Chaucer had his
origins in merchantry, he had a courtly upbringing and from a modern perspective, he can
be seen as a gentleman because he “worked, behaved and wrote like one” (Du Boulay
476).

After his services as a page, Chaucer worked as a public servant for the rest of his life. He
fought in the Hundred Years’ War, later he travelled through Europe as the King’s
emissary and went on diplomatic missions mostly in France and Italy. He even served as
a member of parliament for a year. This active engagement in the military, government
and court as a soldier, diplomat and civil servant added to his broad view of the world and
“gained him the knowledge of men and affairs which made it possible for him to write The
Canterbury Tales” (Cawley vii). As he had no possession of land, Chaucer depended on his
career, but he still had, without a doubt, a high status in society. He was a part of this new,
fluid group between middle and higher classes. All the travelling he did was a major
reason for his knowledge of other cultures, languages and the literary history of different
countries. At the beginning of his career as a writer, he got a lot of influence from French
writers which he picked up during his time there at war, but later he got particularly
impacted by Italian writers, especially Dante. Bowden states that “the skill of Chaucer was
strengthened, and perhaps enriched, by his reading of the Italian poet” (12). This new
impact on his writing caused him to work with an “increasingly naturalistic, ironic and
philosophical flavour in his poetry” (12) which can be seen in the Canterbury Tales. Some
of the stories he wrote sometimes are seen as condensed versions of books from Italian
13
writers. “The Knight’s Tale”, for example, serves as a perfect example of this, as it is a
version of Boccaccio’s Teseida in which Chaucer changed some of the plot but he conveys
the same philosophy and also makes direct allusions to the original.

With this being said, it is important to keep in mind that “Chaucer’s influence was
not solely literary” (Ashton 149). His social standing and experience must have had an
effect on his development as a writer and the perception of his work among the readers.
Earlier, a description was given of how Chaucer grew up in an extremely varied and
constantly moving background. From a young age, he had the chance to observe the
society he lived in in detail and got to see all parts of it. He saw representations of every
class and also how the classes started to become more fluid. As he served in the war and
at court as well as in parliament, he got an even further developed image of people in
England during the Middle Ages. Moreover, living in London, he probably witnessed the
Peasants’ Revolt right outside his window. All these mixed influences are represented in
the Canterbury Tales; they seem to be a compilation of all aspects of society which Chaucer
watched in his lifetime. As an author, he therefore does not give any clear representation
of higher or lower classes in the Tales, but rather uses many different voices to embody a
variety of members of society. In addition, he never judges one particular class or voices
any preference, he takes on each character individually and independently of their class.
Still, many characters obviously impersonate typical values of their professions or classes.
This double criticism is one of the most interesting aspects in the Canterbury Tales and
can be observed well when analysing the first two stories in the collection.

14
4. The Knight and his tale

In the last two chapters, the historical context of the Canterbury Tales has been described
and the author’s role in medieval society has been established. It has become clear that
the Middle Ages were a time of social unrest when especially the lower classes were
suffering and trying to change the fixed social structures. The upper parts of society, on
the other hand, had different concerns and problems, which Chaucer manages to describe,
comment on and criticise in the Tales without taking one side or the other, at least not
clearly. Both classes and the tension between them are directly represented in the text
and this can clearly be seen when looking at the different parts of the Tales. To begin with,
it is interesting to see that the first two tales contain very contrasting protagonists and
subjects. This is why, for the rest of this paper, the focus will lie on these two tales and the
connection between them.

The Knight is the first of the pilgrims to tell his story, which matches well with the narrator
and his profession, as it is a tale of fighting knights, courtly battles and desperate love. The
tale starts with a description of Theseus, the ruler of Athens returning home from a
successful battle with his wife Hippolyta and her sister Emelye. Right outside Athens, he
encounters four crying women who tell him their husbands have been murdered and
dishonoured by the tyrant Creon. As a reaction, Theseus goes and fights Creon’s armies in
Theban, once again, successfully. Two soldiers, Arcite and Palomon, of the Theban army
are found that are almost dead. Instead of killing them, Theseus imprisons them in a tower
in Athens. After many years, the two soldiers spot Emelye outside the tower in the garden
and both fall in love with her, which turns their friendship into rivalry, even though they
both know they can never conquest her while being prisoners in the tower. One day, a
friend of both Theseus and Arcite, comes to visit Athens and pleads for Arcite to be freed.
Theseus agrees but bans Arcite from ever coming back to Athens. Now both knights envy
the other. Arcite is jealous of Palomon because he can still see Emelye, Palomon on the
other hand, thinks about how Arcite could build an army and conquer her.

Many years later, Arcite, who has completely changed his physical appearance
because he is so lovesick, comes back to Athens and works in Emeley’s service under the
name of Philostrate. No one recognises him until one day, Palomon escapes his prison and
by chance, finds Arcite reciting his sad story in the woods. The two knights start to argue
15
and agree to meet up the next day to fight in the fields. While the two of them duel in a
violent manner, Theseus finds them and wants to sentence them to death. Hippolyta and
Emelye beg him to show mercy on the knights once again and he agrees to arrange a
formal tournament a year later.

The night before the tournament, the knights and Emelye all pray to different gods.
Arcite prays to Mars and wishes to win the battle while Palomon prays to Venus and asks
for Emely’s love. Emelye prays to Diana, wishing to keep her chastity, but she is the only
one not granted her wish. On the day of the tournament, Arcite does indeed win the battle
but is later seriously wounded because his horse shies and crushes him under it. On his
death bed, he acknowledges that he knows no better and more honest a man than
Palomon and says he would be the best choice for Emelye. After a long period of mourning,
Palomon and Emelye marry and live a happy life full of love.

First of all, it is quite obvious that the Knight and his tale serve as a representation of the
higher ranks. In the Middle Ages, knighthood for most people “was an ideal of military
prowess. For some it was the embodiment of courtesy and noble needs” (Jones 4).
Interestingly, knights originally were not necessarily of high standard but on the contrary.
This can be observed when looking at the origin of the word ‘knight’ from the Anglo-Saxon
word ‘cniht’ meaning ‘a youth’. In addition, it carries the meanings of ‘a servant, man,
follower’. The German word ‘Knecht’ still, nowadays, means ‘servant’ (Jones 4). However,
over time, knighthood started to change and became more highly viewed in society. It only
added to the fact that the knight was seen as an aristocratic figure that it had become
extremely expensive to be one. The equipment and horses had to be paid for by the
knights themselves so only the wealthy could afford to be this. Being able to pay those
expenses and serve their country became consequently a status symbol which caused a
bigger gap between the knights and lower classes. Terry Jones explains that “[t]he gulf
between the ‘gentil’ knight and the ordinary man-at-arms widened visibly during the
fourteenth century, so that, by the time Chaucer was writing, ‘gentil’ knighthood had
become a jealousy-guarded privilege” (7). This privilege and status are constantly
represented in the “Knight’s Prologue” and “Tale”. The fact that the Knight is the first to
tell his story expresses a lot about Chaucer’s view of society and classes. “Luck” or
“Chance” is the reason given in the tale, because the Knight is the one to draw the shortest

16
straw. Nevertheless, his selection shows that the author has the intention of reserving the
privileged position for the Knight “the chivalrous figure carried the most authority in
medieval society and served both secular and religious ideals” (Bloom 23).

One of the first things that emerges from looking at the Knight and his tale is the fact that
there is some contrast between the description of the Knight himself and the values
presented in his tale, but also a lot of similarities. In the “General Prologue” to the
Canterbury Tales the Knight’s appearance is described as “His horse were goode, but he
was not gay. Of fustian he wered a gipoun” (ll. 74-75). This description of his clothes as
rather simple and dirty shows that in Chaucer’s time, the image of a knight in shining
armour seems to be quite far from reality. On the contrary, it was more typical for them
not to be brightly dressed - as it says in the text. Earlier on, the knight is described as
having “loved chivalry, / trouth and honour, freedom and curteisye (GP ll. 45-46), which
shows him as a typical representative of the chivalric values of the Middle Ages.

Furthermore, the reader is given a glimpse of the military activities of the

protagonist when it is said that “at many a noble armee had he be. / At mortal battails had
he been fifteen” (GP ll. 60-61) followed by a description of the different battles the knight
had fought in. In addition, Chaucer describes the Knight as a “veray, parfit gentil knight”
(GP l. 72) who had never said anything rude to anyone. He seems to be educated and kind
but humble at the same time, so the Knight as a character serves to create “a portrait of
the life of his estate, those who fight and rule, from the point of view of that estate” (Knapp
15). With this picture of the Knight, Chaucer intends to represent “what everyone in the
fourteenth century would recognize as a good servant of the lord” (Bowden 23). This
means that even though he is creating a fictive protagonist for his Tales, Chaucer is
aligning this portrayal with the common image of a knight in medieval society; he is
describing what he has observed in his environment. To sum up, it can be said that in the
“General Prologue”, the reader is given an image of the Knight as an exemplary
representative of courtly and chivalric values which would have been popular at the time
when Chaucer wrote the Canterbury Tales.

17
Apart from the Knight himself, it is his tale that represents the higher classes in society
during Chaucer’s time. His story is only concerned with higher-ranking people and does
not even mention lower class issues. It has been said before that the story resembles a lot
of the Knight’s characteristics. Many actions of typical, knightly, chivalry can be observed
in the tale. One of the most outstanding moments is after Arcite and Palomon fight on the
field and are found by Theseus. Palomon demands for both of them to be killed as he says:

We have the deeth deserved bothe two.

Two woeful wretches been we, two caitives,
That been encumbred of our owne lives;
And as thou art a rightful lord and judge,
Ne yive us neither mercy ne refuge; (KT ll. 858-862)

This demonstrates his willingness to live and die by the chivalric code. It is important to
remember that during Chaucer’s lifetime, a moral system like “the chivalric code, both in
its religious and in its heroic aspects, continued to exert significant influence on […]
England’s ruling class” (Bisson 134). This went beyond rules of combat. Medieval knights
idealised character traits such as bravery, courtesy, honour and gallantry towards
women. Knowledge of the mentioned background information about knighthood is
crucial for readers that want to understand how the texts reflect social values of medieval
society. It furthermore gives the reader more information about the author because “in
the Knight’s Tale, Chaucer provides positive evidence of his own interest in and approval
of royal tournaments” (Bowden 27). Especially the scenes describing the tournament in
part four of the “Knight’s Tale” which serve as a perfect example of how the author must
have been accustomed to royal traditions due to his courtly upbringing.

Not only does the tale represent many of the chivalric values; one might even go as far as
to say that Theseus serves as an image of the Knight himself in the story. In the same
manner as the Knight in the General Prologue, Theseus is described at the beginning of
the tale as returning from battle: “And in his time swich a conqueror/ that greeter was
there none under the sunne./ Full many a riche contree had he wonne: What with his
wisdom and his chivalry” (T ll. 4-6). Straight after that, he goes into another battle to
defend the honour of his people against Creon. This description resembles the crusades
in which the teller of the tale has fought. Moreover, later in the tale, when Theseus finds
18
the two knights fighting for Emelye’s love, he stops them and decides to hold a formal,
knightly tournament. This represents a sense of justice in the tale where Theseus, as the
voice of reason and authority, intervenes any emotional or misguided behaviour. The
Knight probably wants to embody his own status and how he would like to be seen in
society with this characterisation of Theseus.

Additionally, the tale raises philosophical questions that show the teller’s higher
education and knowledge of the world. The Knight, in his tale, drafts a contrast between
chance and fate or destiny and includes notions of the roman gods. This is not only another
demonstration of Chaucer’s world view, but on the other hand, it portrays the Knight as a
cultured person. He seems to be very aware of his status among the other pilgrims, which
again, speaks for a higher education. Peggy Knapp states that “the Knight’s linguistic
tactics mark his effort to connect his authoritative account of noble life with the ordinary
life of his fellows on the pilgrimage . . . a rhetorical ploy rather than a lapse in judgement
or education” (20). The fact that Chaucer represents the Knight as an educated and well-
worded character further demonstrates his respect for the court and higher classes.

After regarding all these aspects one might assume that the world of fiction portrayed in
the “Knight’s Tale” with its aristocratic and patriarchal notions “may be read as a
straightforward idealization of chivalry” (Knapp 18) but that is not true. Chaucer also
expresses some criticism in the “Knight’s Tale” that becomes quite visible when
considering certain parts of the story. The chivalric code that seems to be so present in
the Knight’s description and his tale is openly violated a few times during the course of
the tale. The clearest example is once more the scene where Arcite and Palomon are
fighting after they meet again. Their behaviour is described as unknightly and animalistic:

Thou mightest weene that this Palamoun

In his fighting were a leoun,
And as a cruel tiger was Arcite:
As wilde bores gonnen they to smite,
that frothen white as foom, for ire wood –
Up to the ankle fought they in hir blood. (KT ll. 797-802)

19
Whereas earlier all the nice, courtly conduct was praised, here, this obvious flouting of the
chivalric code shows that Chaucer “reflects and participates in the culture’s dialogue
about the viability of chivalric values” (Bisson 141).

Similarly, the tale is often seen as to be praising tyranny because of Theseus’s orders and
cruel fighting. It results in being logical for the Knight to tell a tale of obedience and loyalty
because a soldier at the time would serve his ruler without questioning him. However,
Theseus is portrayed as a very violent ruler and his actions are not always justified,
especially when looking at the fact that he conquered and defeated the Amazons and
forced his wife Hippolyta into a marriage that is not equal and he is doing the same to
Emelye, she is not asked if she wants to marry but is forced to. He also seems to compare
himself and his powers to God, which does not correspond to the values of a faithful
Christian. His sense of authority and power are expressed as he states for example: “The
listes shall I maken in this place, /and God so wisely on my soule rewe, /as I shall even
judge been and trewe” (KT ll. 1004-1006). These various points of criticism show that
Chaucer was not just praising knighthood and the values of higher classes, but also
reflecting upon them and in some instances, even criticising them.

His action of relating the protagonists of his tales to a specific status in society and
hierarchy has the effect that when first reading through the Tales, the reader might see a
clear social order within the characters and their stories. But Chaucer, as he was a member
of the middle class, was subtly criticising many aspects of the three-class system he
experienced in his daily life. Especially when looking at the “Knight’s Tale” again, his
intentions of double criticism get more visible and it is shown how it can be interpreted
in different ways. The “Knight’s Tale” is often seen “as a celebration of chivalric lifestyle
and values” (Bisson 139) because it shows the intelligence and philosophical knowledge
of an aristocratic figure and is very nicely organised, as opposed to the “Miller’s Tale”
which often seems to be more chaotic. This will be explored in the next chapter. Moreover,
it deals with idealised courtly life and focuses on justice and order. In the tale, Theseus is
represented as a “noble ruler, doing his best to minimize violence, maintain order and
achieve justice tempered by mercy” (Bisson 140). But on the other hand, he can be
criticised for the frequent use of violence that helps him to establish that mentioned order
and therefore, he could easily be seen as a tyrant.

20
 Even when looking at the Knight himself, it is not clear if Chaucer is praising him
or rather mocking his ideals. As mentioned earlier, his many good traits are emphasised
in the “General Prologue” and overall, he seems to be a likeable character with high
standards and a successful military career. But some critics challenge this view, pointing
out that “Chaucer’s apparently positive portrait of the Knight masks an ironic depiction of
a mercenary soldier who fought in some of the least palatable engagements of his day”
(Bisson 139). So, the battles the Knight fought in might not be that impressive but rather
serve as an example of disapproval of his figure from the poet.

This portrayal, open to multiple interpretations, suggests that Chaucer shows how
chivalric standards were not that adequate and perfect in the end and were often not
compatible with Christianity. The “Knight’s Tale” serves as a good example of how the
appearance of his texts is often not completely equivalent with possible interpretations.
In addition, it shows how important it is to know as a reader about the events and
circumstances previously described. The text does go beyond the actual words and refers
to external occurrences and therefore “we cannot understand Chaucer’s text simply by
offering a close reading of the interplay of its internal elements” (Rigby 88-89). The Knight
is not a clearly defined character but does serve to represent the higher classes and a
courtly environment in the Tales. The tale that immediately follows his, presents a
contrasting vision in class and literary tone but the theme is very similar. This might show
even further how the historical context is important to be considered when reading and
analysing the tales.

21
5. The Miller and his Tale and a comparison with the “Knight’s Tale”

It has been established before that the first two of the Canterbury Tales contain opposing
protagonists and subjects. So, when the Miller is introduced, it is made clear from the
start that a social conflict is portrayed. The Knight finishes his tale and next in line to tell
his story would be the Monk. This is clearly the Host’s intention because in this way, the
order of the tellers would correspond with their social ranks. But this order is disrupted
by the drunk Miller who demands his right to tell the next tale as he says “For I wol speke
or elles go my way” (MP l. 25). This act of the Miller interrupting the Host and therefore
also disturbing the original order of speakers shows one extreme of Chaucer’s portrayal
of peasants. In this case, members of the lower class are portrayed as “a noisy rabble
upsetting social order by their contentious behaviour” (Bisson 158). It will be shown later
that the Miller is portrayed in a way which can be associated with stereotypes of lower
class and lack of education. Nevertheless, Chaucer does not describe the Miller only in
terms of a drunk troublemaker but rather introduces a settled critique of the fixed view
of the different social classes. The Miller’s attempt to “quit the Knightes tale” (MP l. 19)
and his “eruption into the Tales after the Knight ends his story is a ‘literary peasants’
revolt’” (Wadiak 174). Readers of the Tales should have this in mind when reading and
analysing the “Miller’s Tale” because even though it stands out for its comedic aspects and
specific language, it contains important components of social critique that can be seen
when looking closer at certain aspects.

The Miller, similarly to the Knight, tells a tale that fits with his upbringing and profession
because it is mostly concerned with working class people living in a small town. The
protagonist John, is a jealous old carpenter who is married to a beautiful young girl,
Alisoun. He rents a room to a young astrology student, Nicholas, who falls in love with her.
One day, he grabs her and confesses his love. Even though she is hesitant at first, she later
agrees to sleep with him and they come up with a dubious plan to deceive John. Alisoun
has another admirer, a clerk named Absolon, who serenades her every night and buys her
gifts, but she does not fancy him.

22
 One day, pretending to be worried sick, Nicholas tells John he had a vision from
God about a flood coming to the town and advises him to prepare three tubs with
provisions and fasten them to the roof so they could save themselves from the flood. When
the night comes, they all climb up to the tubs, but as soon as John is asleep, Nicholas and
Alisoun climb back down and sleep together in the carpenter’s bed. Absolon comes by as
every night and sings to Alisoun and climbs up to her window. She tells him to leave but
then agrees to one kiss, because she is worried, he might wake the neighbours. Instead of
kissing him though, she hangs her behind out the window and laughs as he cannot see
anything in the dark night and kisses her bottom “full savourly” (MT l. 549). Absolon
promises to get revenge and returns to her window later with a red-hot poker from the
blacksmith. This time, it is Nicholas that hangs his behind out the window. As he gets
branded with the poker he starts crying “Help! Water! Water!” (MT l. 629). John wakes up
and thinks the flood has come, cuts lose the rope on his tub and falls to the ground.
Attracted by all the noise, the neighbours come around and as they hear about the
carpenter’s preparations for the flood, they laugh at him.

In similar manner as in the “Knight’s Tale”, the first impression that is given of the Miller
in the “General Prologue” seems to perfectly represent his social class and status. In
contrast to the elegant, courtly educated Knight, the Miller is described as a thick,
muscular man and apparently “There was no door that he nold heve off harre, /Or breke
it at renning with his heed” (GP ll. 550-551). Neither is he described as a particularly
attractive man as he has a wart on his nose and “His nosethirles black were and wide / . .
. His mouth as greet was as a greet furnais” (GP ll. 557-559). In addition, he is said to be a
dishonest man who steals wheat and charges his customers way too much. But one of the
descriptions given in the “General Prologue” serves as a first hint that the Miller and his
tale should not be taken as simple and offensive as it first seems. He is characterised as “a
jangler and a goliardais” (GP l. 560). Alfie Bown explains that:

A ‘jangler’ can be an idle or excessive talker, a talebearer or gossiper, making the

Miller a fabliau-like anti-elitist and unrefined tale-teller. But ‘jangler’ can also mean
an eloquent person or a talented speech maker, suggesting, … that we are dealing
with a skilled and gifted humourist. (468)

23
Likewise, as the “Knight’s Tale” fits his honourable and virtuous personality, the “Miller’s
Tale” also corresponds to his stereotypically bawdy character and low social rank. The
humour used could be described as bold and offensive at some points and, whereas the
Knight never describes any kind of intimate actions, the Miller does not mince matters at
all. But the earlier description of the Miller “hints at his tale’s ambiguous status as both a
bawdy fabliau and an intelligent and refined narrative of skilled literary wit” (Bown 467).
He is described as liking tales of “sin and harlotries” (GP l. 561), so the reader would
expect him to be a very common and vulgar character and a basic storyteller (Bown 537).
At first glance, he seems to be similar to the protagonist of his tale, the carpenter. This
would resemble the Knight’s way of creating a main character who is comparable to
himself. But the Miller describes John as “he knew not Caton, for his wit was rude” (MT l.
41). ‘Rude’ in this sense would mean uneducated rather than offensive and to be able to
make this judgment about his character, the Miller cannot be too uneducated himself.
Therefore, he seems to separate himself from his protagonist and cannot be seen as
comparable as Theseus is to the Knight.

This unclear portrayal of the Miller, as it was also the case for the Knight, shows once more
that Chaucer, in the Tales, criticises all parts of society, not just a single group. Another
incongruence in the tale is the clash between wit and sexual imagery on one hand, which
is described in a very direct way, and, on the other side, the sometimes elegant verses and
beautiful metaphors the Miller uses to describe the carpenter’s wife: “She was full more
blissful on to see, /Than is the newe perejotte tree, /And softer than the wool is of a
wether” (MT ll. 61-63). Similarly, Nicholas’ actions, which are direct, bold and vulgar do
not correspond to the way in which he speaks. On many occasions his verses seem to be
those of a refined courtly lover who is nobly trying to convince his love to be with him.
Furthermore, while the climax of the story initially seems like a rude prank and nothing
more, it is later revealed to be part of a complex script because the Miller is using a
“retrospective transformation of the language that has gone before” (Bown 467). The
Miller’s description in the “General Prologue”, especially that of his mouth, reoccurs later
in the tale and connects with the confusion between mouths and behinds which seems to
be the comedic highlight. The use of such complex techniques indicates that there is
definitely more to the Miller as a storyteller than meets the eye. This demonstrates that
Chaucer does not match his protagonists to standard stereotypes, but prefers to show
24
various aspects of them, some being good and others not so much. No clear image of the
Miller is created and therefore, the reader cannot easily interpret him as a simple
character, which was also the case with the Knight and his tale.

When looking at the general form and content of the “Miller’s Tale”, it is easily noticeable
that the Miller takes several of the themes from the “Knight’s Tale” and alters them to fit
his own story and humour better. This ties in with his announcement to “quit” the Knight’s
story, as he seems to show that he can tell a similar tale, but in a better way. Critics agree
that “the Miller's tale requites the Knight's by replicating its formula—a woman under the
guardianship of an older man sought by two young lovers—but debasing its tone and
direction” (Knapp 33). When comparing both tales, the most outstandingly similar feature
is the theme of two men seeking the love of the same woman. In both the “Knight’s Tale”
and the “Miller’s Tale”, what is recognisably portrayed is “competition and disorder
among young men” (35). Palomon and Arcite in the “Knight’s Tale”, and Nicholas and
Absolon in the “Miller’s Tale” fight more or less actively for the possession of a woman,
who in both cases remains a passive bystander with little to decide herself. Nevertheless,
Emelye is much more passive than Alisoun and does not participate in the men’s rivalry,
the only thing she does is pray. Alisoun is in a sense a bystander in her marriage, but she
is actively involved in tricking John and Absolon. This is one of the aspects in which the
“Miller’s Tale” is more liberal and less rule-governed. However, they have another
reoccurring theme in common which is justice or rather injustice and how every character
in the tale seems to get what he deserves.

When telling his tale, the Knight focuses generally more on creating an overall epic story
that corresponds with his values and includes morals. The Miller, on the other hand,
focuses more on the individual description of his characters and goes more into detail.
Peggy Knapp states that:

The protagonists of the Knight's Tale enact a thinly plotted, thickly decorated,
fiction. They act, but their actions do not count for very much. . . the center of the
tale is not the individual men, but the ordered, and order-replicating, world in

25
 which their story moves. In the Miller's Tale the opposite is true. The plot is
intricate and careful, yet surprising. (37)

This presents the Miller’s linguistic skills to tell a well-structured story and clashes with
his portrayal as a rowdy person. Moreover, in his tale, he responds to the “Knight’s Tale”
by ridiculing his antecedent’s presentation of courtly love. The Miller’s lovers and their
conspiracy are placed in a lower-class context. As mentioned before, he describes
Nicholas and Alisoun as well as their actions in a sexually graphic manner, while the
Knight settles on constructing pretensions of courtly lovers that suffer in fights and
anticipate unrealistic concepts of love for a long time before finally resolving the situation.

Those descriptions of sexual actions are a representation of lower-class language

but also a mockery of the Knight’s careful avoidance of the subject. In his tale, for instance,
the Knight does not only make sure Emely’s sexual nature is completely banished, but
“[h]e also hides it in the description of the temple of Venus, through his allegorized
paintings and iconic statue of Venus herself” (Knapp 41). In comparison, the Miller seems
to bring this physically explicit language to the centre which catches the reader’s attention
even more since the two tales follow each other directly. One of the most noteworthy
instances of graphic description would be when Nicholas and Alisoun’s interaction is
introduced in the tale and it is said that he “caught hir by the queinte. . . / And held hir
harde by the haunche-bones” (MT ll. 89-93). The Miller constructs the humour of his tale
around this idea of “embracing the bodily against such idealist constructions” (Bown 464).
By doing so, he emphasises the concept of sexual freedom against the restrictions of
courtly nobility. The idea of love and relationships and the language used to describe
them is one of the most prominent aspects that can be compared in the two tales.

In his tale, the Miller not only uses certain expressions for entertaining reasons but he
also “rejects and ridicules the chivalrous patriarchal stance of the Knight toward women
and the aura of noble birth which surrounds his tale” (Knapp 34). Generally, the
characters and plot present in his story are closer to real life and probably more authentic
for a big part of medieval society. All the protagonists have common professions and their
life seems to evolve around only one place, Oxford. Lower class members would at the
26
time not be able to travel far. It has been established that in the “Knight’s Tale”, the focus
lies on creating an epic story. Therefore, the locations change various times throughout
the tale and in addition, “time expands to create a sense of epic scope, years—not always
specified as to how many—pass between one event and the next” (Knapp 37). Yet, in the
“Miller’s Tale” the whole plot expands only over few days. Consequently, the Miller gives
the impression of concentrating on creating an authentic image of life for the lower-class
people in towns in the fourteenth century.

Another aspect that is mentioned in both tales but in different manners is religion. It has
been mentioned many times that faith played an important role in the medieval society,
so for it to be present in the tales makes sense. Even though the bible is mentioned in the
“Miller’s Tale”, most prominently through the story of Noah’s Ark which Nicholas uses to
plan their trickery, the form of faith that is characteristic for the tale is Astrology. Through
this, the social hierarchies of the “Miller’s Tale” are displayed because the access to this
form of faith is established through the poor, not the higher classes or the Church. John
clearly has more money than Nicholas but without him he would not be exposed to the
astrologic predictions. The tale nevertheless, seems to make fun of the clergy on some
level. Peggy Knapp explains that the teller of the story “depicts clerical learning as a
cynical exploitation of the Word with which the religious estate is entrusted” (40),
because he supports Nicholas’s mischievous trick even though it clearly goes against
Christian values and he uses a bible story to fool John. Just as it was the case before, where
he ridiculed the Knight’s portrayal of courtly love, The Miller mocks the overwhelming
power of the Gods illustrated in the “Knight’s Tale”.

Through those various comparisons with the “Knight’s Tale”, it is emphasised that “The
Miller's tale is a second, a reactive, rather than a founding gesture. Its structure,
characterization, and language have their fullest force in point by point contrast to the
Knight's” (Knapp 32). Regardless, it is important to note that, while the Miller is in fact
orienting his tale towards the Knight’s, he is changing the genre quite drastically. It has

27
been shown various times now that the Knight creates an epic story, but the Miller turns
his own tale into a fabliau. These are comedic tales that build up their storyline into a
ridiculous and elaborate climax which often contains a trick or joke, as in the case of the
“Miller’s Tale”. The tale not only presents elaborate forms of humour and amplifies
“intricacies of fabliau plotting” (Knapp 33) which heavily depend on linguistic effects like
the repetition of certain themes.

One of those themes is the subject of laughter. It can be found repeatedly within
the tale and also outside, among the pilgrims. In the case of the latter, laughter plays “a
role in this political process of grouping and ostracizing” (Bown 464). Before, it has been
stated that the tale can be seen as celebrating sexual freedom and scoffing at the strict
rules of the court. In the same way, laughter can be a symbol for and celebration of
freedom (465). Comedy and laughter in the tale are not only expressions of amusement,
but they also establish a relation of power among the characters, laughter serves as
evidence for the suspected hierarchical order of the protagonists. In the story, for
example, when the carpenter believes that the flood is arriving and he falls down to the
floor in his boat, he is laughed at by the town’s people. More importantly though, it is
Nicholas and Alisoun that stand in opposition to Absolon because they “suffer no aversion
to bodily contact and seem in no danger of suffering from sexual repression” (Bown 471).
This is another show of superiority and a clear hint at the Knight and his story: the two
characters that laugh and trick the others are the ones that are not holding back on
intimate practice. Likewise, outside the tale, the Miller makes the other pilgrims laugh
about his tale, which shows his intention to get back at the Knight, tell a better tale and
therefore establish a dominance over him which does not correspond to his lower status.

This shows that the theme of laughter is not randomly used. Chaucer clearly wants to
catch the reader’s attention and highlight those expressions of superiority whenever
laughter occurs in the tale. The Knight clearly takes the contest proposed by the host very
seriously and tries to provide the pilgrims with a tale “of best sentence and most solas”
(GP l. 798). Other indicators of his desire to tell the best story are his “frequent narratorial
intrusions throughout his tale [which] reveal an ever-present anxiety about the reception

28
of his performance by his audience” (Arner 152). The Miller does not do that, yet he gets
his confirmation later through the laughter from his audience. Peggy Knapp explains:

In the aftermath of the universally admired Knight's Tale, the Miller's story
becomes instead a campaign in a philosophical and social struggle to establish a
common understanding about life within the company. When the pilgrims laugh,
Robyn has won at least tolerance, and perhaps a measure of acceptance. (42)

The Miller therefore manages to on the one hand, make his company laugh and gain their
approval and on the other hand, his comedic play masks his criticism of the Knight’s
courtly traditionalism. Another critic, Timothy Arner, states:

Recognized as a masterful parody of the Knight’s Tale, the story told by the Miller
succeeds in “quiting” that of the Knight by recasting the characters and themes of
the Knight’s courtly romance into the comedic genre of fabliau, thus making
“ernest” into “game”. (143)

The recurring themes of laughter, sexual freedom and comedy tie in with the Miller’s
attempt to demonstrate superiority through his tale, regardless of actual social orders.
This starts with his demand to tell the next tale and continues with him asserting his right
to interpret: “through his tale he subverts the stories, both courtly and clerical, through
which the ruling classes maintain their control” (Bisson 162).

The Miller consequently stands for the first contrast and counterpoint between the
various classes and their voices in the Canterbury Tales. He immediately precedes the
Knight and his tale filled with courtly ideals, with a story that echoes the Knight’s structure
but subtly criticises the values presented in his story. Even though the Tales cannot be
seen as a direct representation of the world in the Medieval times, they do serve as “an
image of fourteenth-century languages, each associated with a social and philosophical
view of that world” (Knapp 32). Those different world views are represented in the
aspects mentioned before: the courtly settings and epic character of the “Knight’s Tale” in
contrast to the common, peasantry comedy the Miller creates. In conclusion, by giving the
Miller the chance to directly counter the Knight and his tale, Chaucer is able to introduce
29
his double criticism which is present throughout the Tales. He gives members of all classes
a voice. He makes them relatable and authentic by describing them quite stereotypically
of their social status, yet criticises them through the voices of the other pilgrims. This
double criticism and contrast are best recognised when comparing the first two tales and
their contents.

6. Conclusions

By pointing out a variety of themes and characteristics inside the Tales, this work has
shown how knowledge of the historical background is very important to fully understand
certain features of medieval texts. After reviewing the main events and social issues of the
14th century, many aspects in the Canterbury Tales stand out as testimonies of the
historical context in which this literary work was composed. Chaucer, as an author, was
undoubtedly shaped by his surroundings and inspired to illustrate those issues
mentioned before through the voices of the pilgrims in the Tales.

It has been described how the Catholic Church in the 14th century had a big impact on
society, the government, the courts and everyday life in general. Yet, their power and
impact were no longer undoubted and uncriticised as they had previously been. This can
clearly be seen in the Canterbury Tales as Chaucer is involving aspects of religion and faith
within vulgar stories and practical jokes. Especially, when using the bible story of Noah’s
Arc to deceive the carpenter in the “Miller’s Tale”, a subtle criticism of the high status of
the Church can be retrieved.

It has also been shown how much of an impact the court had on Chaucer and his literary
works. His courtly upbringing and his life-long service to different members of the ruling
class are directly reflected in the Tales, especially in the “Knight’s Tale”. The Knight serves
as a representation of nobility and his story includes various aspects of courtly life and
chivalric ideas. By presenting Theseus as a noble but dominant ruler and, likewise,
30
characterising the Knight and his strong values in an almost satiric manner, Chaucer
demonstrates his knowledge and respect for the court and the King, but also introduces
the idea that not all courtly representatives are immaculate and that their actions and
ideals may be open to judgment, too. This image of the Knight as a rather imperfect
character can be directly connected to the organisation of the society in different estates
and the beginning of an uprising of the lower class. Lowering the barriers between the
classes allowed in return more freedom for writers like Chaucer to criticise the higher
class and spread satirical portrayals of social orders in general.

It has been pointed out before how this social mobility was, to a great extent, caused by
crises like the Hundred Years’ War or the Great Plague, where large parts of the
population died and therefore, the economic and social system automatically had to
change. The Knight is not the only figure where this change can be identified through the
way in which he is portrayed in the Tales. The Miller also serves as a good example for
this change. This is because firstly, the portrayal of the protagonists in his tale as
stereotypical lower-class members contrasts with the poetic language and expressions
used at times in the story. Moreover, the approval of his tale by the other pilgrims and his
attempt to get back at the Knight shows that the boundaries between lower and higher
classes were no longer high as they used to be.

The research presented here clearly illustrates how the protagonists and themes of
Chaucer’s literary works and medieval literature in general are representative of a
historical period defined by conflict, issues of power and the loosening of a social class
system. But it also raises the question of whether Chaucer was in favour of those changes.
Himself being a member of a fluid, middle class, that worked for the court and later on the
government, he would have probably approved of the chance to raise one’s own social
status. Given that in the Tales, he seems to respect, but also criticise the members of higher
classes, and in the same manner mocks, but also empowers lower class representatives,
he maintains himself as a neutral author. One possible reason for this is the fact that not
choosing sides would have guaranteed him a bigger audience, at least during his lifetime.
Without offending any certain professions or classes, but neither praising the clergy or
ruling class, his Canterbury Tales were received well by members of all classes of society.
31
Further research would be needed to analyse the other pilgrims’ stories in the Tales in a
similar manner to that in this study. This way, it could be determined whether or not the
findings actually apply to all the tales and their narrators or if there might be one that
stands out for not being as representative of the historical context in which it was written.
Referring back to the questions raised at the beginning of this work, it has been shown
that by analysing the first two parts of the Canterbury Tales, a lot of connections can be
made between the relevant events and issues of 14th century England and the themes
described in this literary work. Readers of medieval literature can therefore clearly gain
an insight into the structures of the middle ages and get an idea of the relationship
between members of different classes and their perspectives on life, the authority of the
ruling class and the way in which they would have expressed themselves back then.

32
7. Works cited:
Arner, Timothy D., “No Joke: Transcendent Laughter in the Teseida and the Miller's
Tale”, Studies in Philology, 102.2, 2005, pp. 143-158.
Ashton, Gail. Chaucer: the Canterbury tales. Macmillan International Higher Education,
1998.
Bisson, Lillian M. Chaucer and the Late Medieval World, Martin’s Press, 1998.

Bloom, Harold, ed. The Canterbury Tales. Infobase Publishing, 2008.

Bowden, Muriel. A Reader's Guide to Geoffrey Chaucer. Syracuse University Press, 2001.

Bown, Alfie. "Apes and Japes: Laughter and Animality in the Miller’s Tale." Postmedieval,
8.4, 2017, pp. 463-478.

Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales, Penguin Books, 1996.

Chaucer, Geoffrey. Canterbury Tales, edited by A. C. Cawley, JM Dent, 1958.

Du Boulay, F. R. H. "The Historical Chaucer." The Canterbury Tales, edited by V. A. Kolve
and Glending Olson, Norton & Company, 1974, pp. 473-92.
Eiden, Herbert. "Joint Action against ‘Bad’Lordship: The Peasants' Revolt in Essex and
Norfolk." History, vol. 83, no. 269, 1998, pp. 5-30.
Hanawalt, Barbara. Chaucer's England: Literature in Historical Context. University of
Minnesota Press, 1992.
Jones, Terry. Chaucer’s Knight – A Portrait of a Medieval Mercenary, Methuen London,
1994.

Jones, William R. "Patronage and Administration: The King's Free Chapels in Medieval
England." Journal of British Studies, vol 9, no. 1, 1969, pp. 1-23.
Keen, Maurice. “From Social Hierarchy and Social Change.” The Canterbury Tales- Seven
Tales and the General Prologue, edited by V. A. Kolve and Glending Olson, W.W.
Norton & Company, 2018, pp. 507-513.
Knapp, Peggy. Chaucer and the Social Contest (Routledge Revivals). Routledge Ltd. United
States, 1990.

Maxfield, Ezra Kempton. "Chaucer and Religious Reform." Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America, 1924, pp. 64-74.
Rigby, Stephen Henry. Chaucer in Context: Society, Allegory and Gender. Manchester
University Press, 2020.
Rudd, Gillian A. Geoffrey Chaucer. Routledge, 2005.

33
 Strohm, Paul. "The Social and Literary Scene in England." The Cambridge Chaucer
Companion, edited by Piero Boitani and Jill Mann, Cambridge University Press,
1986, pp. 1-18.
Wadiak, Walter. "Chaucer's Knight's Tale and the Politics of Distinction." Philological
Quarterly, 89.2/3, 2010, pp. 159-184.

34

View publication stats