56 pages • 1 hour read
A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
The Host likes the tale of Melibee much better than the tale of Sir Topaz, and remarks that he wishes his own wife were as patient with him as Prudence is with her husband. Instead, his wife eggs him on when he’s bouncing ne’er-do-wells from his pub and berates him for insufficient violence when he gets home.
Changing the subject, he invites the Monk to speak, first giving him a few back-handed compliments on how well he seems to be fed at the monastery where he’s supposedly living in holy poverty, and how many children such a well-favored man would have fathered if he hadn’t taken a vow of chastity. The Monk, unflappable, agrees: He’ll tell a tragedy of fallen kings.
He starts at the very beginning, with the falls of Lucifer, Adam, and Samson—briefly telling the familiar first two tales, but lavishing detail on Samson’s rise (as a blessed and mighty warrior) and fall (betrayed by his lover Delilah and imprisoned by his enemies until, with his God-given strength, he pulled their own temple down around them with the very pillars to which he was tied).
He moves into the classical world with the tale of Hercules, who performed mighty mythological labors and held the very heavens on his shoulders. But like Samson, Hercules was betrayed by a lover, who gave him a poisoned shirt that rotted the flesh off his bones. There’s a moral here, the Monk says: “When Fortune would elect/To trick a man, she plots his overthrow/By such a means as he would least expect” (194).
Nebuchadnezzar is next: another powerful Biblical figure, a mighty but tyrannical king whose sadistic rule ended when he went mad and crawled around the wilderness like an animal. At last, God made him sane again and he repented.
His son, Belshazzar, seemed to have learned nothing from his dad. At a party, he used holy vessels taken from the Temple in Jerusalem to serve drinks—whereupon a spectral hand appeared and wrote the strange words “Mene, Tekel, Peres” on the wall. Only the prophet Daniel could interpret that writing and told the king it was bad news: Belshazzar’s kingdom would be conquered. The Monk draws another moral: “there’s no lordship but is insecure [...] For if good fortune makes your friends for you/Ill fortune makes them enemies for sure,/A proverb very trite and very true” (197).
Next comes Zenobia, the Persian warrior queen who preferred hunting to love and only agreed to have sex with her husband until she was pregnant. Nonetheless, the couple and their twin sons made a good team, feared by all their enemies—until the Roman emperor Aurelian laid their empire low.
Then there are two Kings Peter—one of Spain, one of Cyprus—who likewise built mighty kingdoms only to fall. Two ill-fated Italian noblemen come next: Bernabo Visconti, betrayed by a kinsman, and Ugolino of Pisa, starved to death in a bricked-up tower. The Monk acknowledges that he’s cribbing from Dante’s telling of the Ugolino story here.
Next comes the gruesome story of Nero, whose many crimes included torture, incest, dissecting his own mother (to see the womb he came from), and murdering his wise tutor Seneca. Inevitably, Nero’s citizens rose up against him, and he committed a shameful suicide to avoid capture.
The last stories all follow in the established pattern. The mighty general Holofernes’s power couldn’t save him from having his head chopped off by Judith; the proud King Antiochus was eaten alive by worms for his cruelty; the glorious Alexander the Great met a lowly death by poisoning; Julius Caesar’s reign ended in assassination; and the wealthy, prideful Croesus could not correctly interpret the dream that foretold his hanging.
Here, the Knight interrupts the Monk, telling him everyone gets the point by now and adding that, while some love to hear stories of how the mighty are fallen, he prefers stories of how the lowly may unexpectedly rise. The Host agrees: It’s no fun to hear endless tales of tragedy. He entreats the Monk to change tack, but the Monk sourly says he’s tired of talking. The Host invites the Priest who accompanies the Nun to tell a tale.
The Nun’s Priest starts by telling of a virtuous widow woman who keeps a fabulous rooster—one Chanticleer, whose favorite wife among seven is the hen Pertelote.
One night, Chanticleer wakes up screaming from a terrible dream of a pursuing fox. Pertelote scolds him, telling him he’s being a coward: Dreams are mere imbalances in the humors, and she’ll cure his nightmares with a laxative. Chanticleer counters that history provides plenty of examples of prophetic dreams and tells of a host of the: from folklore, the life of St. Kenelm, the story of Scipio Africanus, and the Old Testament prophets Daniel and Joseph, among many other classical and religious examples. Thus, he concludes, his dream certainly bodes ill—though his love for Pertelote comforts him. The next day, he seems quite recovered, and lords over his hens as usual.
But all is not well. On a May morning, a fox indeed appears in the widow’s garden. The Nun’s Priest takes this opportunity to discourse on scholarly debates about predestination, referring to St. Augustine and Boethius before returning to the farmyard drama—and then goes on another roundabout excursion to discuss the unreliability of women (blaming Chanticleer for the sentiment).
Chanticleer spies the fox hiding in the cabbages, and crows in alarm. But the fox greets and flatters him, saying he sings just as beautifully as his late father and requesting a command performance. Chanticleer, deceived, obliges, and the fox nabs him while he’s preparing to crow.
The hens’ lament, the Nun’s Priest says, is like the wailing of the conquered women after the fall of Troy. The widow and her daughters, hearing the racket, see the fox carrying Chanticleer off, and rush after him, hollering. Chanticleer, still alive, plays the same trick on the fox that the fox played on him, telling him he should boldly defy his pursuers. When the fox turns to do so, Chanticleer slips free and flies into a tree. The fox tries to flatter him down again, but Chanticleer learned his lesson.
The Nun’s Priest concludes: This may sound like a mere goofy animal tale, but there’s a lesson here.
The Host roundly congratulates him on this story, and notes if the Nun’s Priest weren’t celibate, he’d have his choice of the hens.
The Physician tells a tale taken from the Roman writer Livy. In this story, a man named Virginius has a beautiful, virtuous daughter, Virginia. She’s the picture of perfection—and this, the Physician says, is how she got into trouble. He pauses to warn that those who are put in charge of young people should meet one of two conditions: “Either that you were chaste and did not fail/To guard your honour, or that you were frail,/And therefore, knowing well the ancient dance,/You have forsaken your intemperance/For ever” (234).
A corrupt judge, Appius, lusts after Virginia and hatches a nefarious plan with a local schemer named Claudius. Claudius will bring a case to court claiming Virginia was in fact his servant, stolen from his house when she was a baby. The judge will then award her to Claudius and have his way with her.
Their plot goes just as they intended. Despairing, Virginius calls his daughter and explains he’ll have to kill her to save her from rape. Virginia balks, but accepts her fate and allows her father to behead her. Virginius delivers her severed head to her persecutors. The townspeople throw Appius into prison, where he commits suicide, and are about to hang Claudius when the merciful Virginius begs them to exile him instead.
The Host violently reacts to the sad tale of Virginia, cursing the legal profession up and down for hosting blackguards like Appius. He needs the Physician’s treatment even to recover from this story, he says—or perhaps just a stiff drink, or a more cheerful story. The Pardoner offers to tell a funny one, but his fellow-travelers shout him down, warning that he’s just going to tell a dirty joke and demanding a moral tale instead. The Pardoner says he’ll need to have a snack and a think before he begins.
He starts with a prologue, explaining his own profession. He boasts he’s a snake-oil salesman: He sells relics with wild promises of the magical benefits they confer. He also sells pardons to people too embarrassed by their sins to go to confession—a lucrative scam! And it doesn’t matter to him what happens to their souls after death. He knows he’s a hypocrite as he preaches against the very avarice that controls him, but he seems to take this as a point of pride. The “moral tale” he’s about to tell is one of his insincere sermons.
The Pardoner begins by moralizing against gluttony, avarice, and swearing—using sound effects to drive home his point. He tells the story of three lecherous, gambling, greedy Dutchmen who learn that a shady figure called Death has been killing everyone in town. They decide to deal with this Death guy themselves: “If we can only catch him, Death is dead!” (251).
Before they can carry out their plot, they encounter a mysterious old man, so wizened he looks like he’s dead already—as they rudely tell him. He explains he’s wandered the world looking for someone who will trade him their youth for his age, and since he hasn’t found a taker, he’s doomed to wander still. He does, however, have a tip on where they can find Death: under a tree, just up the road.
The young men find the tree, and a pile of gleaming golden florins beneath it. They rejoice over the treasure and agree that two of them should guard it while one goes back to town for provisions. They draw lots, and the youngest of them has to run the errand. While he’s away, the other two conspire to kill him and divide the treasure between themselves. But he has his own plan, buying potent poison with which to kill them both.
When the youngest man returns, his friends kill him—but then refresh themselves with his poisoned wine and die as well.
The Pardoner concludes his tale with more hypocritical sermonizing, and at last invites his fellow pilgrims to repent and buy indulgences and relics from him to save themselves from a similar terrible fate. The Host is unimpressed: “You’ll have me kissing your old breeches too/And swear they were the relic of a saint/Although your fundament supplied the paint!” (257). The Pardoner is furious at this insult, but the thoughtful Knight steps between Pardoner and Host, persuading them to kiss and make up.
One of the major features of this span of The Canterbury Tales is its interest not just in storytelling, but in how a story should be told. This sequence of stories, all dealing in different ways with morality and deceit, widely vary in their style—and the listeners comment on that variation.
Consider, for instance, the way the Knight and the Host finally get fed up with the Monk’s interminable story of how the mighty are fallen. The Knight objects to this story on thematic grounds, saying that stories about disaster are all well and good, but aren’t there also plenty of stories about how things change for the better? The Host agrees, but his protest is founded on entertainment value: It’s just no fun to listen to eight hundred variations on the same gloomy theme.
The Nun’s Priest immediately provides an antidote to the Monk’s grim catalogue. His story—an animal fable about the legendary rooster Chanticleer, his wife, Dame Pertelote, and the inevitable tricksy fox—certainly has a clear moral. But the Nun’s Priest only winks at that moral, saying it’s there to winkle out—and he sugars the pill with plenty of humor.
The Nun’s Priest also provides, at length, some medieval philosophy on how to read. To him, stories contain both wheat and chaff: the substantive food of morality and the throwaway refuse of style. While that image might seem dismissive of the fun parts of listening to a story, a closer read suggests style and substance, in fact, grow together. This fits with the flavor of the Tales, in which how a story is told indicates much about its teller—and perhaps provides its own kind of substance.
But it also looks forward to some of the book’s final ideas. When, in the end, the Parson refuses to tell a story, saying he’ll provide only the wheat of truth without the chaff of fiction, the sermon he tells recapitulates the Tales in its interest in sin and virtue alike. Furthermore, the reader is reminded that the Parson is himself an instance of the fiction he derides as so morally empty.
These stories, then, take in some of The Canterbury Tales’ foundational thoughts about the interaction of storytelling, morality, and reality. The content of these particular stories is also very often to do with trickery: the flattered Chanticleer; the treacherous Dutchmen who, seeking to kill Death, kill each other; the Pardoner’s whole hypocritical schtick. Falsity, these stories suggest, is integral to human experience—both as a danger and as a state of being. Stories more willing to gesture to their own falsity are perhaps the ones that come closest to telling the truth.
Plus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.
Including features:
By Geoffrey Chaucer
British Literature
View Collection
Historical Fiction
View Collection
Marriage
View Collection
Medieval Literature / Middle Ages
View Collection
Novels & Books in Verse
View Collection
Pride Month Reads
View Collection
Required Reading Lists
View Collection
Satire
View Collection
Valentine's Day Reads: The Theme of Love
View Collection