1

Feminist Analysis of the Prologue for the Wife of Bath (Canterbury Tales)

Posted by Nicole Smith, Dec 6, 2011

In her Prologue as part of “The Canterbury Tales” by Geoffrey Chaucer, The Wife of Bath offers

readers a complex portrait of a medieval woman. On the one hand, The Wife of Bath is

shameless about her sexual exploits and the way she uses sexual power to obtain what she

wishes. On the other hand, by doing exactly these things she is confirming negative stereotypes

about women and proving that women are manipulative and deceitful. Even though her actions

might at first seem to be rebellion against the male-dominated society in The Canterbury Tales,

and more generally, the medieval period for women, there is very little that she does that is truly

revolutionary or empowering for women of her time.

Based even just on her introduction in “The Canterbury Tales" via the Prologue to the Wife of

Bath’s Tale, it appears from the onset that The Wife of Bath from “The Canterbury Tales"

simply uses her sexual attributes for personal gain instead of trying to prove her equal status. In

general, this female character stereotype is meant to be seen as a parody of sorts since she

embodies a number of negative female characteristics including stupidity and arrogance;

deceitfulness, and lewdness. Although she is striking back at men it is not for any deeper reason

other than personal profit. It appears that in this section of the prologue to the Wife of Bath’s

tale, Chaucer wants his readers to laugh at this character rather than admire her for her proto-

feminist stances on life and marriage.

If the Wife of Bath is a character that is meant to shatter a misogynistic stereotype of women,

one could imagine that she would engage in intelligent and informed conversation with some of

the members of her party. As it stands, however, the closest she comes to this is by offering her
 2

twisted understanding of the Bible. Rather arrogantly she states in one of the important quotes

from The Canterbury Tales (and The Wife of Bath’s Tale specifically), “Men may divine and

glosen up and down / But wel woot I express withouten lie / God bad us for to wexe and

multiplye / That gentil text can I wel understone" (lines 26-30). While it can be found in the

Bible that humans should procreate, it is worth noting that she prefaces this statement with a few

words about how men sit and interpret the Bible. In her Prologue in the “Canterbury Tales” by

Chaucer, the Wife of Bath is claiming that she too is capable of doing this and that the text is not

beyond her reach. Still, the problem with this is that she is not proving anything about her

intelligence, she is merely trying to confirm or justify her loose behavior with the word of God.

Throughout her prologue in “Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer, the Wife of Bath confirms

misogynistic stereotypes of women since she presents herself as little more than what can quite

technically be called a whore. Instead of being a revolutionary female figure with feminist

intentions, she merely seeks husbands who will provide for her in exchange for sexual favors.

For her, a “good" husband is, as she states in one of the important quotes from the Wife of Bath’s

Prologue in “The Canterbury Tales by Chaucer “goode, and riche, and olde" (line 203) and is

easy prey when she decides to pull tricks such as make them think she is out at night looking for

his women while she is having a good time, only to turn this around later for monetary benefit.

As she willingly states to her audience, “An housbonde wol I have I wol nat lette / Which shal be

both my detour and my thrall" (lines 160-161). For the Wife of Bath, money, sex, and marriage

are all interlinked and none can exist without the other.

Furthermore, to support this idea about the way the Wife of Bath perpetuates negative

stereotypes of women during the time of Chaucer, it is important to note that in the Wife of

Bath’s prologue, if she finds that a particular man is not giving her enough money, she simply
 3

withholds sexual favors from him. While this may at first seem to be a case of a medieval

woman exerting her independence, the only true power she possesses is that of her sexuality—

something that she has realizes is fading with her youth. With her views on money, sex, and

marriage, the only thing that seems to separate her from her from a “woman of the night" is the

fact that there is a legally binding contract behind it all. This is far from a feminist ideal of a

solid marriage and is much more closely aligned with ages-old misogynistic stereotypes of bad

women.

When the Wife of Bath states in her prologue in “The Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer, “I would

no lenger in bed abide / If that I felte his arm over my side/ Til he hadde made his ransom unto

me" (lines 415-418) she is not only confirming the stereotype of women as being obsessed with

money and using their sexual power to obtain it, she is also proving to her audience (both in the

text and to the modern reader) that love is not something that an “empowered" woman is prone

to. However, this impression of her is turned on its head and she shows herself to be a

contradiction when she speaks of her last husband. He was a much younger man and beat her,

but she loved this and loved this man because of it. This is an even more perplexing image of

woman.

Along these lines, it becomes apparent in even a cursory analysis of “The Wife of Bath’s

Prologue” in “The Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer how, when one On the one hand, the reader

understands that this woman has a complex understanding of marriage, but this is not enough to

compensate for the fact that she allows herself to be beaten up. Even though she does fight back

on occasion, in the end she has proven herself not to be at all revolutionary or proto-feminist,

instead she is simply the same version of female that occurs frequently throughout medieval and
 4

other literature. She tries to present herself as strong and independent, but in the end she is even

more a part of the negative stereotype than a normal woman might be.

While it can be argued that the Wife of Bath could be an early feminist character, there are too

many aspects to her that indicate how she is working within the system rather than outside of it.

For a medieval woman to be truly feminist or revolutionary, she must find a way to prove herself

in a manner both on part with and independent of men. The Wife of Bath chooses to use the

patriarchal systems of religion (especially through her “discourses" on the Bible) and marriage to

her own benefit rather than seeking more sweeping or meaningful changes.

*************************