A Chaucerian View: Age & Its Implications

The Canterbury Tales, written by Geoffrey Chaucer is a collection of varied tales told and experiences shared by an eclectic group of young and older pilgrims en route to Canterbury from London. Chaucer’s description of age reveals thematic implications regarding the problem and trickery that accompanies old age, the hostility or attack on people who are old by the young, and the exploitation of old age for the purpose of gain. This essay is concerned with the way old age is described in the CT, specifically the Miller’s Tale, Pardoner’s Tale, as well as a close analysis of the portrait descriptions of these pilgrims found in the General Prologue. Combined, these tales and prologue suggest what Chaucer, an aged author himself, may have felt concerning the treatment of age as it exists in both the young and in the old.

Arguably, age is susceptible to betrayal and the older the person seems to be the greater the chance for trickery. Chaucer’s fabliau of an old carpenter and his young wife as told in the MilT begins with a severely contrasted marriage. Chaucer begins with “This carpenter hadde wedded newe a wyf, / Which that he lovede moore than his lyf; / Of eighteen yeer she was of age” (MilT 3221-23). The wife is a young woman of eighteen years married to an older man who the Miller describes as simply “he was old” (MilT 3225). By profession the old husband holds the position of a carpenter, a member of the bourgeois class who makes the choice of marrying a considerably younger “maid.” We are not told either by the narrator or by Chaucer if the wife is still a virgin by this marriage, however, for this essay it is sufficient to note that she is simply younger than her husband, and at eighteen may still be in the flower of her youth. Moreover, the wife is once again contrasted to her husband’s age, existing as “Fair was this young wyf, and therewithal / As any wezele hir body gent and small” (MilT 3234). Again, the wife is pictured as both young and fair; both vibrant and wild; both petite and possibly lithe in frame. Perhaps, she can be considered the epitome of beauty. This would of course suggest the husband’s fear and desire to keep a closer eye on his wife. It is not difficult to perceive that the level of trust is missing, resulting in a carpenter who is “Jalous he was, and heeld hire narwe in cage” (MilT 3224). What fears could an aged man have? Could he have the fear of death, loneliness, betrayal? Possibly, but the Miller mentions, “For she was wylde and yong, and he was old / And demed hymself been lik a cokewold” (MilT 3225-26). This self-fulfilling prophecy by the carpenter does come true, but at the expense of both adultery and ridicule. Chaucer, in contrasting youth against old age, positions Alisoun and “hende Nicholas,” to conspire against the carpenter, “Whil that hir housbonde was at Oseneye” (MilT 3274). This treachery is a betrayal that then leads to sex and ridicule. At the end of the play it is the old carpenter that cuts the rope sending down the tubs in hope of salvation from the flood. The carpenter is the butt of a joke when Nicholas, himself tricked and burnt on the ass by Absalom, shouts “Help! Water! Water! Help, for Goddes herte” (MilT 3815). Upon hearing these screams it is the carpenter who interprets a destroying Noadic flood on the move. His interpretation is given without much thought. Instead, he is reactive, jumping to the conclusion that the end of the world is at hand. Furthermore, the carpenter, in thinking the jest was up and that he could rely on both his tenant clerk and wife to explain to the gathering crowd, experiences additional ridicule and betrayal. The narrator states that “They tolden every man that he was wood; / He was agast so of Nowelis flood/ Thurgh fantasie that of his vanytee” (MilT 3833-35). This betrayal by two trusted individuals and their conspiracy against a “sely” carpenter points toward the reiteration of ridicule in the public sphere. The carpenter, with a “brosten…arm” was in the midst of a crowd where “The folk gan laughen at his fantasye; / Into the roofthey kiken and they cape, / And turned al his harm unto a jape” (MilT 3840-42). What can be said about a society that does not respect its elders? Most likely, it is a society that supports the word and story of two young lovers instead of aiding an old man. Age in this tale is susceptible to ridicule and it is the older person who is seen as false and finally the foolish outcast. The latter presents a point of reference to the old man in the PardT. Again, old age is seemingly fit for ridicule.

Where greed is the root of all evils, or as the Pardoner states, “Radix malorum es Cupiditas,” the greater the disparity between youth and old age. Moreover, old age in exchange for youth does not seem to be an attractive choice for the three young men in this tale. Once more, youth is pitted against old age. In the PardT three young men encounter an old man and behave in a hostile manner toward him. These youth express a disgust toward old age that is somewhat fueled by their drinking. The Pardoner mentions that “Thise riotoures thre of which I telle, / Long erst er prime rong of any belle, / Were hem in a tavern to drynke,” (PardT 661-63). Drunk and obviously influenced by the alcohol they foolishly take up the plan to “sleen this false traytour Deeth” (PardT 699). What strikes a chord of irony is the false bravado of slaying death, which in itself is an oxymoron; to slay death would mean that death would kill itself. Again, Chaucer knew the implications. He may possibly been alluding toward the Biblical concept that Death has no sting. This sting suggests power of some kind and Chaucer in the PardT links it together with old age existing as a precursor (or messenger) for death itself.

The value of youth pitted against the value of old age is an unequal exchange in the PardT. The old man suggests “For I ne kan nat fynde / A man, though that I walked into Ynde, / Neither in cite ne in no village, / That wolde change his youth for myn age;” (PardT 721-24). The implication is then that old age perhaps has nothing of value to exchange. Old age is, according to the three youth, an accomplice of sorts. They collectively agree that the old man is “By God and by the hooly sacrament! / For soothly thou art oon of his ascent / To sleen us young folk, thou false theef!” (PardT 758-9) They agree to scorn this old man because he stands at the door of death and must know where to find him. Chaucer utilizes the PardT to establish a valid separation of age between those that are young and those that are old. He points toward the old man being scorned and the youth having the power to scorn; He points to old age as a useless exchange regarding youthfulness; He ultimately points to what drives the youthful versus what causes the old to wander. Together, these dual attributes representing age display Chaucer’s possible reflections on age and utility; age and limitation; age and respect. Again, what kind of society does not respect their aged; their seers; their wise men? It is a society where youthful exuberance and caprice are driven by their greed for improper gain. In the MilT it was a combination two young agents, Nicholas and Alisoun, who scorned and ridiculed an old carpenter for the lust and gain of sex. Comparatively, the PardT also contains elements of scorn and ridicule toward the aged. Chaucer uses the MilT and PardT, one fabliau and the other folktale, to present a case that age is susceptible to these thematic considerations of scorn, ridicule, hostility, lust and greed. The final result of the three, youthful rioters is that they did meet death, and death killed them. Why? Because, the three youth participated in “speken to an old man vileynye” and he, as the messenger of and for Death, points them in the right direction.

The MilT differs slightly in the treatment of an old man versus the PardT. The main difference being that the old man in the PardT arguably sends the three youth to die, thereby retaining some semblance of dignity, honor, and power. In contrast, the MilT presents an old man who breaks his arm, is cuckolded, and ridiculed in the public sphere as he is taken for a madman. These two tales collectively put forward Chaucer’s range of ideas concerning the representation and treatment of age existing in both the young and in the old. Chaucer utilized both youth and old age, existing in the dialectic tone of the MilT and the panegyric rhetoric of the PardT, to once more suggest possible thematic elements regarding the problem and foolishness that accompanies old age, the hostility or attack on people who are old, and the exploitation of old age for the purpose of gain.