Analyzing The Prioresses Masks Chaucer English Literature Essay

The Prioress in The Canterbury Tales written by Geoffrey Chaucer embodies two opposite personas. Initially introduced in the General Prologue as an aristocratic nun, the prioress is later shown to represent anti-Semitic attitudes as well. Chaucer describes her as an unworldly, un-Christian, and childish character. These characteristics reveal three major reasoning points. An examination of her attributes in the General Prologue relating to her character, the innocent characters in “The Prioress’s tale”, the small boy and his mother, thus the prioress’s connection to motherhood, and the prioress’s tale of violence display Chaucer’s intent in the depiction of the prioress and his own social values, making a negative statement about the clergy of his time.

The prioress’ appearance is recognized multiple times throughout the book in ways that contradict the stereotypical nun. One particular instance of this is when the prologue describes her forheads as “fair of spread/ Almost a span across the brows” (Chaucer 6). According to Maureen Hourigan, this contradicts the fact that nuns were supposed to tightly pin their veils to cover their eyebrows and forehead. Also, her bare forehead is a sign of fertility and contradicts the fact that nuns were expected to adhere to their vows of chastity. Here, Chaucer criticizes the Prioress’s interest in being the stereotype of female nobility, loving jewelry and expensive clothes. In addition, “she had little dogs she would be feeding/ With roasted flesh, or milk, or fine white bread” (Chaucer 7). When food was scarce and limited, feeding dogs what many humans were unable to get for themselves indicates a well-bred upper-class woman’s tenderhearted feelings towards pets. The Prioress’s benevolence contrasts against her vindictiveness and unmerciful attitude towards the Jews in the end. Moreover, as a scholar, Condren states, “the Prioress’s tender care for her hounds argues the gentleness of her nature, but raises questions about her perspective, we are startled by the kind of food she feeds her animals, since [books of the time recommend] soft meats and bread softened with milk as ideal foods for weaning infants, we wonder if frustration has not perhaps directed the Prioress’s maternal instincts toward her pets” (Condren 194).

Along with her off-track aspirations, the Prioress’s empty innocence carries over to “The Prioress’s Tale”. When it was her turn to speak, the Prioress decides to speak about her rampant anti-Semitism and later refuses to bestow mercy on the villains, showing a different woman than that introduced in the General Prologue.

The Prioress compares herself to the Virgin Mary and describes herself as innocent, unworldly, and immature. These are the exact qualities that Chaucer intends the readers to pick up on as they attempt to understand the message in the tale of the Prioress. As a further indication of the Prioress’s connection with innocence and childhood, in her prologue, “[i]n praise of God and his Blessed Mother, [she] will labor to tell a story – [in the tale,] In praise of the Blessed Mother the clergeon struggles to learn, and finally sings the Alma redemptoris mater” (Condren 201). This indicates another connection that the Prioress has towards a child. The Prioress’s tale is designed to draw sympathy for the young Christian boy who was murdered by the evil Jews. She uses powerful emotionally-charged language.

As Friedman says, “one may reasonably argue that her sentimental sympathy with the little clergeon lacks mature detachment, that she enters too completely into the child’s world, indeed that she identifies with him” (Friedman 125). This is the key to understanding of her tale, the way that she tricks the readers by using pathetic language to gain sympathy from her listeners. While this kind of storytelling trick was common in telling of religious tales, the Prioress fails to connect the mercy and compassion that are usually shown in religious tales to her own, failing to copy the benevolent nun portrayed to be like the Virgin Mary. Furthermore, the Prioress’s usage of doleful language is one factor that enhances the effectiveness of her tale. It is crucial, however, to also examine Chaucer’s intent. Her tale is highly religious, and therefore Chaucer’s own religious views are highly relevant in any examination of her character being Christian. The increased violence of the tale and anti-Semitism demonstrates Chaucer’s intents of the tale. On one hand the Prioress praises and values innocence, while she also expresses her evident craving for blood and vengeance, shown through the emphasis on the virginity of the slain boy and the parallel pointing out her innocence.

In addition to the Prioress’s seeming connection to innocence and the helpless is her apparent desire for motherhood. The Prioress seems to feel a connection with in her tale to the mother of the slain boy. Although the Prioress would obviously not have any children, being a member of the clergy, she shows her mothering instincts in the General Prologue when she treats her small dogs as children, as previously seen, and by her protectiveness towards the child in the tale. It is only when the widow seeks the assistance of the justice that the Jews cooperate with the search for the boy. This is significant in that the Prioress relates to the widow in the story, and the fact that the widow is unable to do anything but cry and beg, says something about the Prioress’s own helplessness and weakness of character. Also, “[t]he widow’s inability to locate her son parallels, both thematically and structurally, the Prologue’s claim that no tongue can express Mary’s attributes” (Condren 201). This is another connection to the Prioress, who in the prologue is most concerned with her own inability to correctly praise the Virgin. The way that the Prioress refers to the Virgin Mary in her tale also shows her connection to earthly motherhood; she refers to Mary as “Cristes moder,” and mentions the earthly concept of birth in connection to Mary. However, there is a difference between the Prioress’s maternal feelings, and the gentle nurturing nature of a nun.

At the end of her tale, the Prioress prays, “Pray mercy on our faltering steps, that thus/ Merciful God may multiply on us/ His mercy, though we be unstable and vary/ In love and reverence of His mother Mary. Amen” (Chaucer 176). When the Prioress asks for mercy for herself and all the sinners listening to her tale, she is not aware that she is contradicting herself. By asking for mercy for her and other Christians, while ignoring the idea of giving that selfsame mercy to the Jews, her bigotry becomes obvious. One of the Chaucer scholars, Ames says, “the Prioress does not see that her prayer for mercy on ‘us sinners’ is inconsistent with this zeal for ‘justice’ against the Jews” (Ames 200). Chaucer has the Prioress use the word ‘mercy,’ three times in her final prayer. In this way Chaucer is making a bold statement about how he himself feels about the Prioress, and how he wants his readers to see her: as a hypocritical, shallow, and sad figure of a woman.

The ignorance of the world as the Prioress was telling her tale is another key element. This is represented as a fear of the world in characters like the Prioress. The final statement drawn would be that the faith is dangerous and assuming. There are those who assert that Chaucer was deeply religious and portrayed that side of himself in his Prioress. Robert Frank asserts that “there is no reason to doubt that [Chaucer] shared the religious faith of his time. Such evidence as we have suggests that he was directly, devoutly religious, with a special love for the Virgin Mary” (Frank 146). There are those critics who clearly see irony in Chaucer’s depiction of the Prioress. Other critics argue that the Prioress’s tale far exceeds the level of anti-Semitism in much of the other literature during that time, and that her levels of violence in the tale show a penchant to be harsher to the Jews than was the custom of the period. To the modern readers, anti-Semitism is an obvious part of the Tale. However, whether the Prioress is simply reflecting anti-Semitic views of the time or she is more opinionated than the average peasant of the Middle Ages is not as significant as the revelations about the Prioress’s character that come out during her tale, aided by her prejudice and the observations that the reader is able to make by the words and phrases that she uses to tell the tale.

All of these factors combine to show the dual nature of the Prioress. It is shown that the Prioress described in the General Prologue is a very dissimilar woman whose true character comes out in the telling of her tale. Also addressed is the most important factor in determining the Prioress’s true motivations: her association with childhood, innocence, and motherhood, which show her lack of piety aspirations. The next factor that has been analyzed is Chaucer’s intent in his depiction of the Prioress. Chaucer’s use of irony in other tales strongly suggests a propensity to do the same in his description of the Prioress. Finally, the tale itself has been carefully studied, and analogues have also been examined in order to show the violent nature of the Prioress’s version, and how that expresses her character. A close look at the possible motivations for the Prioress’s tale being so gory, when compared to other versions of the story, shows her un-Christian character and unmerciful attitude. 

The Prioress of “The Prioress’s Tale” illustrates the dual nature of the Prioress and, finally, a bit about Chaucer’s intent in his depiction of the Prioress. Vital to her character are his own religious values and satirical voice in his characterizations of other pilgrims in the Canterbury Tales. Moreover, the Prioress is the antithesis of a pious nun during the Middle Ages. Chaucer uses this characterization of her to show his own religious trepidations, and to make a statement about the clergy of his time. His portrayal of the Prioress as a woman and a nun of many contradictions is the true reason for her presence as a pilgrim in The Canterbury Tales.