Marriage in Chaucer’s “The Wife of Bath’s Tale”

In Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, each pilgrim is given the opportunity to tell two stories. Many of the pilgrims choose to set up their stories by telling something about themselves; the Wife of Bath gives such a long-winded explanation that her Prologue is actually longer than the tale she tells. This exposition of the thoughts and views of a woman who has had five husbands gives an interesting insight into medieval views of love and marriage. The Wife of Bath views marriage as a transaction, by which each party gives up something in order to get something he/she needs.

It is, of course, dangerous and no doubt incorrect to say that the attitudes, worldview, etc. of any character or characters mirror that of the author, in Canterbury Tales or elsewhere. For all we know Chaucer viewed marriage as a primarily romantic institution, much as we do today (not that the mercantile aspect of it has disappeared). Yet, in the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance in Europe, marriage primarily was transactional: women saw it as a way to secure their futures, and men as a way to ensure the continuance of their lineages. An unmarried woman had very few ways to support herself, while an unmarried man had limited financial and social options. And of course, both parties might simply want sex and companionship. This is how the Wife of Bath seems to view marriage—as a way for two people to get what they want.

Certainly, the Wife of Bath has an active sexual appetite. She makes no apologies for this: “Tell me, for what purpose were members made so well if they weren’t meant to be used? They weren’t made for nothing, that’s for sure!” (115-117). She debates with herself at length on the worth of virginity and concludes: “When did you see at any time that God expressly defended marriage? Pray, tell me, where did he command virginity?” (59-62). She defends her right to have sex, in other words, by saying that God obviously meant for humans to enjoy what He gave them.

The Wife goes on to explain that husbands owe wives a debt, not just of affection and companionship but also sexual service: “Why else should men write in books that a man must yield his debt to his wife? And with what should he make his payment, if not with his manly instrument?” (129-132). She vows that she will make herself available to her husband as often as he desires her: “In wifehood, I will use my instrument as freely as my maker has sent it. My husband shall have its morning and night, whenever he wants to come forth and pay his debt!” (149-150; 152). At this point, the Pardoner interrupts her to say that he wouldn’t want to get married if that means that he would give up so much control over his life and body. The Wife reassures him that when her tale is done, he’ll change his mind.

The Wife draws an important distinction between the property transactions attendant to marriage and the husband’s obligation to sexually service his wife; the “debt” he owes, she makes clear, is sexual, and though this is clearly less important to her, that of love and affection. She explains: “So help me God, I laugh when I think of how hard I made them work every night. They had already given me their gold and treasure. I didn’t need to work to win their love or to do them reverence” (201-202; 204-206). She then, in the context of giving advice to the women who are listening, goes on a mock tirade against one of her husbands. She seizes the upper hand with mockery and feigned wounded pride; she shows up how to be manipulative and alternately feed and then crush a man’s ego. She advises: “Thus shall you speak and say he is in the wrong, for no man can lie half so well as a woman.” (226-228). This is amusing but also dead-on. Clearly, her success in marriage (for she has gotten exactly what she wanted, over and over again) is due to her shrewd understanding of what makes men tick. She makes no bones about what, as far as she is concerned, marriage is for. She makes it clear that she gives as good as she gets and that in her marriages, she has been the dominant one. This is somewhat eyebrow-raising in that we think of marriages in that period (and for almost all of history) as having been male-dominated. Is the Wife of Bath typical or atypical? We don’t really know, but Chaucer does present her rather matter-of-factly. Her earthy discourses on sex aren’t really out of place or improper for the time; people were quite a bit franker when talking about sex and bodily functions then than we are today. The Wife is relentlessly practical about marriage, though, as we might expect her to be. She is certainly an unusual person for having had five husbands.

In contrast to the somewhat surprising and even mildly transgressive Prologue to her tale, the tale she tells is somewhat formulaic. We have a knight who happens upon a beautiful woman and can’t help but rape her. He is brought up before the royal court as a result and while under sentence of death, is given a chance by the queen to redeem himself by finding the answer to the question: What do women want? Given a year and a day to do his research, he obtains many answers, such as “A man can win us best with flattery” (108) and “Freedom to do exactly as we please” (112), but none of them seem to be the one right answer. Dejected as the deadline approaches, he encounters a hideous old woman who, after exacting a pledge that he should do whatever she wishes should her answer be deemed correct by the court, tells him that what women desire most is that “A woman wants the self-same sovereignty/ Over her husband as over her lover/ And master him; he must not be above her” (214-216). This does, in fact, prove to be the “right” answer, at least as far as the royal court is concerned. The knight’s relief turns to horror when the old woman appears and says she will hold him to his promise: he must marry her. He begs her to take everything he has instead: “I know indeed that such was my behest/ But for God’s love think of a new request/ Take all my goods but leave my body free” (235-237). For not only is she old, she is hideous—he cannot contemplate marrying her. However, he has just reported, and it has been generally agreed, that what women want most is power over men!—so good luck getting the old woman to give up the power he has given her by making his pledge. She does, in fact, force her to marry him, and the court agrees that this is just.

The knight may be a convicted rapist, but he is an honorable man and keeps his word; he marries the “foul” old woman. The wedding ceremony takes place in secret and there is no attendant celebration. The knight now has to pay his debt, as the Wife of Bath would say. Yet, he dreads consummating the marriage: “Great was the anguish churning in his head/ When he and she were piloted to bed” (259-260). She chides him and says that first of all, she is his wife and has saved him from execution; he owes her his love and affection (and per the Wife, he has a sexual duty to perform). She reminds him that she will be, despite her ugliness and poverty, “But still a loyal, true, and humble wife/ That will never displease you all her life” (397-398). Her new husband surrenders to her will: “My lady and my love, my dearest wife/ I leave the matter to your wise decision/ You make the choice yourself” (405-407). She then transforms into a beautiful woman and the knight is overjoyed. They embrace and live happily ever after.

The significant moment is not, however when she changes into a beautiful woman; it is when he surrenders to her will. What seems formulaic and clichéd is that the knight is ultimately rewarded for his deeds. Of course, there is a measure of redemption when he agrees to honor his marriage pledge and submits to his new wife’s will, but he does so unhappily. In interpreting the Wife of Bath’s attitudes toward marriage, one wonders if she really would have preferred that the wife remained ugly and that the knight would be forced to honor his marriage vows. But then, this is Chaucer’s tale, not the Wife’s (though she is the speaker).

To return to the question of to what extent Chaucer’s own views of marriage were expressed in either the Wife’s Prologue or her Tale, it is interesting to compare the two. The Wife’s Prologue is a bit jarring, as she describes with utter frankness the transactional nature of marriage as she sees it and her views on sex and love. She is certainly an odd character, as she would be today: very few people have had five spouses. Also, she is eloquent enough to get the Pardoner to reconsider his views on marriage. If one were to extrapolate, the Pardoner could be seen as a marriage traditionalist and the Wife of Bath a modernist. If—if—Chaucer was truly speaking through the Wife of Bath, then he was expressing marriage not only as a mercantile transaction but as a struggle for power and dominance. The Wife has perfected the art of gaining power over her husbands, while the old woman in the Wife’s Tale has captured the knight and bent him to her will. That the knight is rewarded by his ugly wife’s transformation is a rather standard plot device (even for Chaucer’s time), but there is an interesting way to look at it: love and cherish your wife (and obey her!), and no matter what her actual appearance may be, she will transform into (you will regard her as) a beautiful woman! That could be Chaucer’s message, the Wife’s, or both.

Regardless of whether Chaucer was expressing his own views or illustrating the spirit of the times, the Wife’s Prologue and to a lesser extent, her Tale illustrate a view of marriage as a transaction and as a struggle for power and dominance. If what women wanted was power in their marriages, it follows that they usually didn’t have it. The Wife would seem to agree, though she has perfected the art.

Work Cited

Chaucer, Geoffrey. Canterbury Tales. Trans. by Neville Coghill.