^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: THE MILLER
The Miller certainly is vivid: he’s brawny, big-boned, a good wrestler, thick-set. He can rip a door off its hinges. His red beard matches the red bristles that stick out of the wart on his nose. There’s no subtle irony here. Chaucer tells us point-blank, “Wel coude he stelen [steal] corn,” and charge three times the price. This matches the medieval conception of a miller as the most important, and the most dishonest, tenant on a manor farm. His physical description shows him as shameless, easily angered, and lecherous, according to medieval standards. He leads the group out of town with a bagpipe–which probably has a sexual reference–and uses his big lungs to play it. Later, in his prologue to his raunchy tale about a cuckolded (cheated-on) husband, he cries in “pilate’s voice,” loud and ranting.
^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: THE MANCIPLE
He buys provisions for the “temple,” the courts of law, and is shrewd in his buying. Chaucer asks innocently, Isn’t it wonderful that such a simple man can outsmart all the learned ones? This idea shows up again and again throughout the Tales, with varying results. The Manciple’s tale deals with a crow’s black feathers (like his own evil ways?) and the necessity for keeping one’s mouth shut, which we can therefore assume he is very good at doing!
^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: THE REEVE
There’s obviously long-standing enmity between the Miller and the Reeve, an official on a farm who would be responsible for keeping tabs on the dishonest Miller. He does well at guarding his lord’s seed, poultry, dairy, etc. No one can “bring him in arrerage” (arrears); in fact, sheriffs, shepherds, and workers are scared to death of him–not a sign of goodness in Chaucer’s book. The satire is that he gets rich by “lending” his master the master’s own money and goods, a common charge against reeves. His description shows him “choleric” in humor, with calfless legs indicating sexual desire. He’s trained as a carpenter, which is who the Miller’s Tale makes fun of. The fact that he and the Miller ride so far apart, with the Reeve last, shows how badly they get along. We might wonder why they are even on the same pilgrimage. Maybe it’s to keep an eye on each other. The Reeve’s Tale, to get his own back, is about a miller who tricks a pair of students who then sleep with his wife and daughter.
^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: THE SUMMONER
The Reeve is a model of virtue compared to the Summoner and the Pardoner. Chaucer has saved the worst for last. We can instantly tell that the Summoner is grossly debauched: he has a “fyr-red” face, he is “sawce-fleem” (pimply), and loves garlic, onions, leeks, and wine “red as blood.”
NOTE: His skin disease has been shown to be a kind of leprosy, which could come from unclean women or strong foods. Of course, as a church official, he should be avoiding both.
He’s stupid, knowing only how to parrot the Latin he’s learned from the decrees he hands out. He has all the young girls in the diocese under his control, and is a “good fellow” because he would lend you his mistress for a year for a quart of wine. He can find his own “finch” (quite literally, a chick) in the meantime. The Summoner even wears a “garland,” like Bacchus, the god of wine.
He tells good people not to be afraid of the “arch-deacon’s curse” (excommunication); like a gangster, he can offer “protection” against it if people pay enough. This is a low-down trick that even Chaucer the narrator can’t stomach, and he warns that this is the sort of thing that can get you a writ of “significavit” (thrown in jail).
The profession of summoner had reached such depths by Chaucer’s day that Chaucer doesn’t even need to go into detail on the abuses. A summoner is supposed to deliver a summons to the person charged. But many collected money under the table for extortion and some were even convicted. Not surprising for his personality, the Summoner tells a vulgar tale to get back at the Friar’s nasty tale about a summoner. The Summoner tells of a corrupt friar who tricks a rich man and is in turn paid back.
^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: THE PARDONER
Pardoners were supposed to issue papal indulgences (forgivenesses of sins) in exchange for alms money, which was to be given to the sick, poor, or another worthy cause. But many pardoners were out-and-out frauds, selling worthless pieces of paper, and even legitimate ones often kept more than their share of the proceeds. This Pardoner is from Rouncivalle, a London hospital well known for the number of illegal pardons connected with it. Most pardoners, like this one, claimed to have come “straight from the court of Rome,” with a bagful of pardons “al hoot” off the presses, though of course our Pardoner hasn’t set foot outside England.
NOTE: Fake pardoners claimed they could do almost anything for the right sum of money, even remove an excommunication. Despite widespread abuses, though, there still were plenty of people gullible enough to believe in a pardoner’s “powers.”
There’s something suspect in the fact that the Pardoner sings “Come hither, love, to me,” to the Summoner, who accompanies him in a strong bass voice. Some see more than a hint of sexual perversion in this young man who has thin locks of yellow hair that he wears without a hood because he thinks it’s the latest style. His small voice and the fact that he has no beard, “ne never sholde [would] have,” leads Chaucer to suspect “he were a gelding or a mare”–a eunuch or effeminate man.
NOTE: Scientific opinion of the day believed that thin hair represented poor blood, effeminacy, and deception, while glaring eyes like the Pardoner’s indicated folly, gluttony, and drunkenness. Chaucer’s audience would catch the references just as we would instantly see the significance of a villain in a black cape and with a black moustache.
As if the description weren’t bad enough, the Pardoner tricks people into buying phony relics of saints, such as a pillowcase that he says was “Our Lady’s veil,” or a piece of sail allegedly belonging to St. Peter. No wonder he makes more money in a day than the poor Parson does in two months. Ironically, Chaucer calls him “a noble eccesiaste,” since he can sing a church lesson beautifully–for money, of course. His tale is right in character: he tells what the pilgrims say they want to hear. He says he bases his sermons on money being the root of all evil (he ought to know). But he admits he’s not a moral man, although he can tell a moral tale. In his tale about three rowdies, he ironically delivers a sermon against gluttony and other sins. Afterwards, the Host lights into the Pardoner’s hypocrisy with such force that the Pardoner is speechless with anger.
^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: THE HOST
Finally we meet the Host (which is another name for Christ). He is a large man, very masculine (in contrast to the Pardoner), with bright eyes that miss nothing. He’s fit to be a “marshall in a hall,” a master of ceremonies, which he indeed becomes for the pilgrims. He has the commanding presence to get his plan accepted before it’s even told, as long as the pilgrims stand by his judgment–another Christlike reference. The group accepts him as the guide, “governour,” judge, and counter of the tales. Tidbits of his personality appear throughout the Tales: he’s boisterous, well educated, annoyed by his shrewish wife, a jokester, a philosopher; in other words, a full-blooded, complex man. He’s a fair leader and promises a free dinner to the best tale-teller, which some see as a moral or parody of a celestial reward. Chaucer carefully mixes religious and worldly references throughout the Tales.
^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: SETTING
Setting is more important in some tales than in others. We’re told that the Miner’s Tale takes place in Oxford, but it could just as well be New Jersey. It’s the joke that counts. It’s pretty much the same case in the Pardoner’s Tale which, because there the moral is important, could take place in England just as easily as Flanders, where the tale is set.
But in the Knight’s Tale, the Wife of Bath’s Tale, and the Nun’s Priest’s Tale, settings make moral or ironic points. The Knight’s Tale draws connections between the medieval chivalry of England and the society of ancient Greece; the Wife of Bath intentionally places her tale in the days of King Arthur (read her tale and see why); the Nun’s Priest’s Tale really takes place in a larger setting than a barnyard. You can decide for yourself which settings are important to a tale and why, based on what you think Chaucer is trying to say through the narrator’s mouth.
^^^^^^^^^^CANTERBURY TALES: STYLE
As we’ve already noticed, each tale has a unique personality, which is determined by the character of the tale’s narrator. No two are alike. Some are quiet and unassuming, some are loud and carry a punch. Some tales make their point partly through the writing style that Chaucer chooses, such as the Miner’s Tale, which is based on a popular raunchy French story form called a fabliau. (See the section on “Form and Structure.”) Other tales use a different kind of style altogether, like the forthright speaking style of the Wife of Bath.