Prologue

20/01/23

Recap:
What: Expresses that she doesn’t regret her marriage, however she immediately
attempts to justify her 5 husbands, before anyone else can judge her. Defensive
attitude and subconsciously recognises there is an issue, also perhaps sensitive.
She also believes she has no authority over the approval of her marriage, as it was a
Priest who approved her marriage, and so she is not entirely to blame.
How:
Why: Criticism/Condemning of sexual nature of women.
Or: Defending women/supporting women- early signs of feminism.
OR: Uses her to question the hypocrisy of the church- she is judged by religious
figureheads who themselves have no knowledge (“Why should men then speak of it
villainy?”)
Capitalises on the chance to speak to the men.

Lines 1-34
Summary:
Since she was 12, the WOB has had 5 husbands- however, she was told by men and the church that
she should only be wedded once, as Christ only attended one wedding. She says that she was never
given a reason for this, and that the Bible never mentions a limit of husbands a woman can have- so
she is not in the wrong.

 “Experience, though no authority

To speak of woe that is in marriage.” (1-3)
Immediately acknowledges her lack of power, but rebels against this as her experience is
sufficient.
Straight away, it is suggested she will rebel against those in power (religious/political figures
who are with her on the journey)

 “That Christ went never but once to wedding,

That I should be wedded but once.” (10-14)
Biblical reference- Christ only attended one wedding in his life, and so the Wife of Bath
should be married only once.
Shows her religious knowledge- she truly is a devout Christan.
Critical of religion/politics.
Satirically pokes fun at the strange connection made between Jesus going to one wedding and
thus a Christian can only marry once.
Suggests the religious figures of power at the time distort religion to assert control.
Can be viewed as a political stance being shown from Chaucer.

 “But that I ask, why that the fifth man,

Was not husband to the Samaritan?
Heard I never in my life a definition of this number.” (21-25)
Challenging/questioning the church- challenging the hierarchy of Medieval England.
 Rebellious/feminist
Blasphemous- she doesn’t blindly accept what the Bible (or distorted version) tells her as was
expected of people at the time.
Chooses to ignore that the 5th husband cannot be a husband- similar to what the church does,
when they pick and choose what people must follow.
Nobody has ever said why 5 is the specific limit- therefore she has no obligation to follow it.

 “God bade for us to multiply.” (27)

Reference to “Be fruitful and multiply.”
Criticises the hypocrisy of the church- if she is required by God to have many children, why
is it that she cannot marry multiple times, which would allow her to have more children.
Gives her own biblical justification for why she should marry multiple times- she is fulfilling
the mission God gives her.

 “But of no number mention made he,

Of bigamie, or octogamie;
Why should men then speak of it villainously?” (32-34)
Strong rhetoric question- defiance, rebellion against religion, feminism
Octogamie- suggesting she would/will marry again after her 5 th husband.

24/01/23

Lines 35-76
Summary:
First, she talks about religious figures in the Bible- Solomon, Lameth, Abraham, Jacob, etc.-
who all had multiple wives- something the WOB is envious of. When her fifth husband dies,
she will marry a sixth.
She then talks about virginity- it was never commanded by God to be a virgin, but it is
advised to be one by men. She points out the paradoxical nature of this- if nobody gets
married, and has children, how will there be new/more virgins?

Biblical Allusions:

 “Salomon, he had wives more than one.” (35)

King who had 700 wives.
He was actually rejected by God due to this, and seen as irreligious.
The WOB chooses to omit this, as it doesn’t align with her argument.

 “Lamech and his bigamie,

Abraham…and Jacob…
Each of them had wives more than two
And many another holy man also.” (52-58)
Showcases biblical knowledge- able to recall the number of wives each religious man has.
Again, criticises the hypocrisy of the patriarchal society- the man is not shamed for the
number of wives he has, but the woman is.

 “Where does it say, that God forbid marriage in any express word?”
 Rhetoric, challenging religious figures- she is allowed to marry multiple times.

 “I pray you, tell me, where he commanded virginity?” (64)

Another rhetoric- strong/relentless/bold

 “If there were no seeds sown,

Then where should virginity grow?”
Sexual euphemism.
Virginity cannot exist without procreation.
Shuns celibacy and rebels against it.

Marriage vs Virginity
Argument:
 Marriage is normalised even in the Bible- religious figures like Salomon, Lameth, Abraham
and Jacob had multiple wives, and nobody said “villainy” but she is labelled as a whore and is
judged for it- she criticises the fact that she is judged for the same thing men do in the bible.
 “The first had many a myrie fit” openly discussing sexual acts in front of the priests- however
they cannot dispute this as it is said in the Bible itself.

Sexual Allusions:
 “To be refreshed half so oft as he!”
 “The first night had many a merry fit.”

Lines 61-76
Argument made about virginity:

 It is not compulsory to remain a virgin, it wasn’t commanded by God.

How does she make the argument:

 Use of sexual euphemisms: “if there were no seed should sow, virginity, than whereof should
it grow?”
Implies that celibacy and procreation must coexist.

61-70: “Where He commanded virginity? He put it in our own judgement.”

 “Commanded” imperative: direct order, allusion to Ten Commandments.

 Rhetoric.
 Entertainment: her boldness in front of pilgrims is comedic.
 Free will: humans have the right to choose.
 Men and the Church are not going to dictate the way she acts.
 Challenging the patriarchal norms.
“Counselling is no commandment”.

 Men do not have power over women.

71-76: “If there were no seed sown, then whereof should virginity grow?”
  Sexual argument.
 Virginity cannot exist without procreation.
 Shuns celibacy and rebels against it.
 Paradoxical: sex and virginity are polar opposites:
 Logical argument presented, pre-renaissance.
“The dart is set up for virginity, catch who so may, who runs best let’s see.”

 Implies virgin women are targets that will be captured.

 Rather than allowing herself to be a target, she runs from the dart, suggesting she has no
desire to be a virgin.

31/01/23

Lines 77-104
Summary:
She repeats that although the apostle was a virgin, and advises it himself, she is allowed (with explicit
permission) to be wedded. She then says it would be better (socially) to never marry than to marry
multiple time. Despite this, she is still a good servant of God- she doesn’t have to be pure/virgin or
‘gold’ to be of use.

 “All is but council to virginity.”

Men can only advise virginity, not command it.
Reminds the religious men around her that they don’t have full control over her/other women.
She is enabled, by God, to decide to be wedded- and the men/church cannot force her to obey
them, only suggest she listens, meaning she is not entirely powerless.

 “For peril is both fire and tow to assemble.”

Refers to sex before marriage vs virginity.

 “He held virginity more perfect than wedding in frailty.”

St. Paul believes those who are unable to remain a virgin are weak.

 “It likes them to be clean, body and ghost.”

Connotation of virginity with purity/cleanliness- sex taints a person/corrupts them.

 “He hath not every vessel all of gold;

Some been of tree, and do their Lord service;
Some this, some that, as He likes shift.”
Analogy/metaphor or women being utensils- objectification, shows that it was the norm to
view women as lesser beings. Cups- vessels, used for a purpose, shows that women did not
have freedom, sole purpose was to reproduce/spread Christian message.
Compares virgins to golden cups, and the WOB to a cup of wood- implying she is of less
value/worth because of her lack of virginity.
In spite of this lesser value, she is still ‘useful’ to God- she is still a good Servant/worshipper.
Being wedded does not interfere with her ability to be a good follower of God.

Recap of 27/01/23:
How does the WOB justify her position on marriage?
There is also nowhere in the Bible where it says a “number definition,” referring to how many
husbands she may have. She references Biblical figures- Solomon, Lameth, Abraham, Jacob- and the
numerous wives each had, and uses it to advocate her own right to marry multiple people.
How does she argue against virginity?
She says: “If there were seeds not sown, where would virginity grow?” If nobody gets married and
has sex, meaning they can have children, then there would be no new virgins, because nobody will be
born. She says that nowhere in the Bible is it commanded that she stay a virgin, it is only
advised/counselled by men to do so. She also says that by marrying she is able to “be fruitful and
multiply,” which is required by Christians to do so.

Virginity Continued (105-162)

Summary:

Lines 105-114:
Summary:
Virginity is perfection, and requires utmost devotion, however she is not perfect (she is not a virgin)
and she is fine with that. Jesus said to his people that although it is good to be a virgin, not everyone
should follow in his footsteps because that is illogical, similar to how illogical it would be to copy
Jesus in selling everything you own- you don’t have to follow Jesus exactly to be a good Christian.

 “But Christ, that of perfection is well;

Bade not everyone he should go sell
All that he had, and give it to the poor,
And in such ways follow him and his footsteps.”
Jesus lived in poverty/modesty- he sold everything he had. However, Christians aren’t
required to do that, just because Jesus did it. Similarly, just because Jesus was a virgin,
doesn’t mean every Christian is required to be one- it is illogical.

 “That am not I.”

Acknowledgment that she is not perfect/a virgin. She doesn’t follow Jesus’ footsteps.

 “I will bestow the flower of my age.

In the acts and fruit of marriage.”
Openly admitting that she marries for her own sexual pleasure and gratification.
Chaucer’s method of rebelling against the church.
Outrages/horrifies/disgusts his audience.

Lines 115-128:
Summary:
Genitals have the function of procreation- they aren’t just for ‘purgation of urine’ or differentiation
between a female and male. She questions if they are denying the fact that they are also for
procreation.

02/02/23

Recap: 115-128
 What:
The WOB says that she is not a virgin/perfect, and that is fine because she does not need to
be- just because Jesus was a virgin, does not mean she must follow in his footsteps.
Her second point is that genitals don’t only exist for urination and to differentiate between
sexes- they also serve a purpose to allow recreation.
 How:
Biblical allusions: “Christ, that of perfection is well…”
Sexual euphemism: “fruit of marriage.”
Scientific arguments: “For purgation of urine, were also to know a female from a male.”
 Why:

Lines 128-134
 “Why should men also in her books set;
That man shall yield to his wife her debt?”
Biblical reference: Men and women in a marriage belong to each other, and so each are
entitled to the others body for sex. However, the WOB only mentions men being required to
give their body to women- this is another example of her omitting part of the Bible to suit her
own cause.
 “Sely instrument.?”
Modern interpretation of “silly”: used to ridicule men and diminish their power they wield as
a man.
Old meaning of “sely”: happy or blessed/simple.
Trivialising sex- downplays the severity of it- it is a simple/easy act.

Lines 135-153
Summary:
Point One: Contradictory to what she said previously, you don’t have to get married: you can
stay a perfect virgin, much like Christ did, however she does not want to do that, nor does she
envy those who do stay chaste.
Point Two: Biblical allusion of bread being Jesus’ body: her body is not pure like his. He used
the bread to “refresh many a man” and she will use her body in a similar manner, whenever
her husband desires it.
 03/02/23

Lines 154-162
“Who shall be both my debtor and my slave.”

 Biblical Allusion: equal power over each other bodies.

 Debtor- he can take from her whatever he wants.
 Slave- she can take from him whatever she wants.
 “Slave” implication that he is forced, she is in control, she wields power over him.
“Have his tribulation withal; upon his flesh, while that I am his wife.”

 Tribulation- suffering.
One interpretation: suffering in the sense that she will nag him, talk too much, argumentative.
Second interpretation: “upon his flesh,” suggests it is sexual.
“I have the power during all my life upon his proper body, and not he.”

 Openly admitting she owns his body.

 Gender role-reversal: objectifying her husband as her commodity in a patriarchal society,
whilst on a pilgrimage surrounded by men.
“Right thus the Apostle told it unto me.”

 Mocking/satirical: St. Paul is known for advocating virginity.

 Links back to Christianity to justify her words: she is allowed to say this.
She fails to mention that the same applies for women: her husband is in control over her. She does this
willingly: she purposefully omits the full words of the Bible as she does not want equality- she wants
power.
“All this sentence me liketh every deel.”

 “This sentence, every bit.” She likes only the part that she mentions about men belonging to
women.
 Selective.

“In wifehood I will use mine instrument, as freely as my Maker has it sent.”

 “Instrument” Baudy, sexual humour/euphemism.

Medieval response:

 Nobility: Outraged, disgusted, horrified.

 Alternative viewpoint: humorous, outlandish, entertainment, titillation (sexual content to
entertain themselves).
 Lower Class: Also outraged as they too are religious, but likely to be more lenient/agreeing as
they aren’t in power of the church.
  Seen as her being blasphemous, irreligious.
Modern response:

 In agreement with her, views her words as a sign of early feminism.

 Seen as progressive and defiant against religious patriarchal society.
 Some may consider her to be wrong, as she omits parts of her Biblical allusions, to suit her
argument better- could be argued that she is a hypocrite, and is doing the same thing she
condemns/criticises the church for doing.
 Could be seen as her ‘asking for it’: her open sexual nature is dangerous to herself and the
people around her.
Radical Feminist: Would appreciate that she believes she is entitled to power over her husband,
would consider an equal relationship oppressive as it means she has dependency on a man.
Liberal Feminist: Would consider it progressive and see her as liberating herself sexually and
breaking free from the confines and restrictions of a patriarchal society.