Compariing Three Versions of Chaucer's Pardoner's Tale

  • :: 3 Works Cited
  • Length: 1360 words (3.9 double-spaced pages)
  • Rating: Excellent
Open Document

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Text Preview

More ↓

Continue reading...

Open Document

Compariing Three Versions of Chaucer's Pardoner's Tale

One of the interesting things about the works of Chaucer is the amount of difference one can find between the different manuscripts of his work. I thought it would be interesting to look at the difference between two manuscripts, using the transcriptions available in the Chaucer Society Specimens of all the Accessible Unprinted Manuscripts of the Canterbury Tales. I found a copy that has comparative versions of the manuscripts assigned to us, taking a look at the Pardoner's Tale. While we have not looked at that tale in class, and given that it was the only sample I could find in the scattered volumes of the Specimens, I felt it would be interesting to look at them, especially compared to the Riverside edition we are reading in class.

Beginning with the Riverside edition, the introduction to the Pardoner?s tale begins with ?Heere endeth the Phisiciens Tale? and ?The woordes of the Hoost to the Phisicien and the Pardoner.? (Benson, 193) These introductory words, as well as the closing words for the previous tale, are not present in the Bodleian text. One could surmise that the transcriber of the text felt these to be perfunctory and unecessary, and though the reproduction I have does not reproduce it, it?s possible that there could be some other dividing point to break off one tale and begin another. The Additional MS has a conjunctive phrase, though it is different than that presented in the Riverside edition. ?here ende the Maister of phisikes tales? and ?Here bigynneth the prologe of the reheytyng of our hoost.? (Specimens 91, 2) It is interesting to not the difference of terminology here. The physician is ?Phisicien? in the Riverside text, yet the ?Master of phisikes? in the Additional MS. One wonders why one is preferred over the other, and which is the more authoritative version. With only these three texts assigned, it is not for this author to speculate, and again, with a small sample, there can easily be isolated differences.

One of the most interesting things to note in these differing manuscripts, I?ve found, is the variance and change that even identical passages can take, separated into various edition. Much like modern English, when you ask several different people to write the same thing, you can get many different variations base on how they?re transcribed.

Need Writing Help?

Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.

Check your paper »

How to Cite this Page

MLA Citation:
"Compariing Three Versions of Chaucer's Pardoner's Tale." 22 Jun 2018
Title Length Color Rating  
The Rich Diversity of Meanings of the Pardoner's Tale Essay - The Rich Diversity of Meanings of the Pardoner's Tale Chaucer’s innovation in the Pardoner’s performance tests our concept of dramatic irony by suggesting information regarding the Pardoner’s sexuality, gender identity, and spirituality, major categories in the politics of identity, without confirming that information. Our presumed understanding of the Pardoner as a character lacks substantiation. As we learn about the Pardoner through the narrator’s eyes and ears, we look to fit the "noble ecclesiaste" (l....   [tags: Pardoner's Tale Essays]
:: 15 Works Cited
5601 words
(16 pages)
Powerful Essays [preview]
The Tale of the Pardoner in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales Essay - A Look at the Pardoner: the Genius of Chaucer The Canterbury Tales is a literary masterpiece in which the brilliant author Geoffrey Chaucer sought out to accomplish various goals. Chaucer wrote his tales during the late 1300’s. This puts him right at the beginning of the decline of the Middle Ages. Historically, we know that a middle class was just starting to take shape at this time, due to the emerging commerce industry. Chaucer was able to see the importance and future success of the middle class, and wrote his work with them in mind....   [tags: Pardoner's Tale] 1940 words
(5.5 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay about The Pardoner’s Tale vs. The Chaucer’s Prologue - Geoffrey Chaucer introduces numerous characters in the prologue of The Canterbury Tales; each character possessing a distinct personality and lifestyle. Chaucer gives insight into the lives of the characters on their pilgrimage to Canterbury. The Pardoner unfurls his thoughts and feelings giving us extended insight into his own character, by providing us with a tale of his own. In doing so, he contrasts other pious figures who are introduced in the prologue, with character traits consisting of an effeminate lifestyle, avariciousness, as well as hypocrisy....   [tags: Pardoner’s Tale, Geoffrey Chaucer, characters, rel] 603 words
(1.7 pages)
Good Essays [preview]
Summary and Analysis of The Pardoner's Tale Essay example - Summary and Analysis of The Pardoner's Tale (The Canterbury Tales) Prologue to the Pardoner's Tale: The Host thinks that the cause of Virginia's death in the previous tale was her beauty. To counter the sadness of the tale, the Host suggests that the Pardoner tell a lighter tale. The Pardoner delays, for he wants to finish his meal, but says that he shall tell a moral tale. He says that he will tell a tale with this moral: the love of money is the root of all evil. He claims that during his sermons he shows useless trifles that he passes off as saints' relics....   [tags: Canterbury Tales The Pardoner's Tale Essays] 1337 words
(3.8 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay on The Pardoner’s Tale of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - The Canterbury Tales - The Pardoner’s Tale  One might assume that the person telling the story has a lot to do with the story they're telling.  This is the case in the Geoffrey Chaucer's "The Canterbury Tales." In the tale of "The Pardoner's", the voice tells a tale dealing with his famous preach; "Radix malorum est Cupiditas."  In English, "The root of all evil is Greed." An ironic distinction can be made with what a "Pardoner" is known to be, the character (the voice/Pardoner), and the tale that he tells....   [tags: Pardoner's Tale] 449 words
(1.3 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - Sin in The Pardoner's Tale - Importance of Sin in The Pardoner's Tale There are seven deadly sins that, once committed, diminish the prospect of eternal life and happiness in heaven. They are referred to as deadly because each sin is closely linked to another, leading to other greater sins. The seven deadly sins are pride, envy, anger, sloth, gluttony, avarice, and lechery. Geoffrey Chaucer's masterpiece, The Canterbury Tales, provided an excellent story about the deadly sins. Focusing mainly on the sins of pride, gluttony and greed, the characters found in The Canterbury Tales, particularly The Pardoner's Tale, were so overwhelmed by their earthly desires and ambitions that they failed to see the effe...   [tags: Pardoner's Tale] 774 words
(2.2 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - Power of the Pardoner's Tale - The Power of the Pardoner's Tale       Geoffrey Chaucer was a author of the 12th century.  Chaucer is known as the father of English poetry.  He wrote Canterbury Tales which is a collection of narrative short stories written in verse.  "The Pardoners Tale" is among the more popular of these varied tales.  It is told by a pardoner who uses the story to preach against those who are blastfamous and gluttonous.  In an odd twist, after he tells the story he trys to sell others counterfiet relics.  In this short story about greed, disrespect and death Chaucer utilizes three important literary tools personification, irony, and symbolism....   [tags: Pardoner's Tale]
:: 2 Works Cited
945 words
(2.7 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay on Verbal and Situational Irony in The Pardoner’s Tale of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - The Pardoner’s Tale: Use of Verbal and Situational Irony In “The Pardoner’s Tale,” Geoffrey Chaucer masterfully frames an informal homily. Through the use of verbal and situational irony, Chaucer is able to accentuate the moral characteristics of the Pardoner. The essence of the story is exemplified by the blatant discrepancy between the character of the storyteller and the message of his story. By analyzing this contrast, the reader can place himself in the mind of the Pardoner in order to account for his psychology....   [tags: Pardoner's Tale] 752 words
(2.1 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Essay on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - Evil Exposed in The Pardoner's Tale - The Root of Evil Exposed in The Pardoner's Tale   "The root of all evil is money."  Because this phrase has been repeated so many times throughout history, one can fail to realize the truth in this timeless statement.  Whether applied to the corrupt clergy of Geoffrey Chaucer's time, selling indulgences, or the corrupt televangelists of today, auctioning off salvation to those who can afford it, this truth never seems to lose its validity.  In Chaucer's famous work The Canterbury Tales, he points out many inherent flaws of human nature, all of which still apply today.  Many things have changed since the fourteenth century, but humanity's ability to act foolish is not...   [tags: Pardoner's Tale]
:: 2 Works Cited
1099 words
(3.1 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - Greed in the Pardoner’s Tale - The Pardoner’s Greed   The pardoner, in Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Pardoner’s Tale, is a devious character.  He is a man with a great knowledge of the Catholic Church and a great love of God. However, despite the fact that he is someone whom is looked at with respect at the time, the pardoner is nothing more than an imposter who makes his living by fooling people into thinking he forgives their sins, and in exchange for pardons, he takes their money.  His sermon-like stories and false relics fool the people of the towns he visits and make him seem as a plausible man, which is exactly what the pardoner wants.  In fact, the pardoner is an avaricious and deceitful character whose driving force...   [tags: Pardoner's Tale Essays]
:: 4 Works Cited
1305 words
(3.7 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]

Related Searches

I take now the first few lines of the Pardoner?s prologue for an example.

Riverside Edition
?Lordynges?, quod he, ?in chirches whan I preche,?
I peyne me to han an hauteyn speche,
And rynge it out as round as gooth a belle,
For I kan a by rote that I telle. (Benson, 194)

Bodleian MS
Orlinges coth he in church when I. preche.
I peyne me to haue an haute speche.
Ryng it out as rounde a goth A. Belle.
ffor I. can alle by rote that I. telle. (Specimens 90, 14)

Additional MS
Lordynges quod he in chirce whan I preche
I peyne me to haue an hauntin speche
And rynge it out as round as goth a belle
For I can al bi rote that I telle (Specimens 91, 6)

The most obvious difference between these is the use of quotations in the Riverside edition, though I believe this to be an editorial choice for better comprehension by a modern audience. If there is note of this in the text, I cannot find it, yet it does bear mentioning as the most obvious change. The punctuation differs in each text as well, though it does not seem to be truly important, either. I cannot begin to presume what the periods after the capital letters stand for in the Bodleian text, but the other periods seem clearly to denote the ends of the lines, a simple editorial choice, it appears.

The differences between the two texts stand out here in two sections in particular. In the Riverside text, the Pardoner talks about ?chirches,? yet this noun is singular in both of the selections that I was assigned. This perhaps implies that he doesn?t get around much, or it could simply be another editorial choice. However, even a small change like this could make the Pardoner appear in a different light.

Another thing to note is the ease at which a modern English reader can confuse things that are different. The word hauteyne in the Riverside text, translated in its footnotes as impressive or loud, is rendered as haute in the Bodleian text, but hauntin in the Additional text. This last rendering is confusing, at the very least, as it appears to be closer to the modern term haunting, which gives a decidedly different tone to the kind of speech that the Pardoner is describing. This small difference in appearance also shows the importance of having these multiple texts. The meaning of something can drastically change over the differences presented here, especially to modern readers, and without the benefit of written work in the author?s own hand, there is no single authoritative edition to work from to resolve these incongruities in the text.

Another example of these incongruities arises from actual differences in the texts themselves. Here is again a selection from each version of the Canterbury Tales, a few more lines from the Pardoner?s prologue.

Riverside Edition
If that this boon be wasshe in any welle,
If cow, or calf, or sheep, or oxe swelle,
That any worme hate ete, or worm ystonge,
Task water of that welle and wassh his tonge, (Benson, 194-195)

Bodleian MS
If that this bone be wassshen in a. welle
If Cow or Calf Shepe or Oxe swelle.
That eny worme hath eten or stunge
About the herte or ellis the lunge (Specimens 90, 20)

Additional MS
If that this bon be wasshe in any welle
If kow or calfe or sheep or oxe swelle
That any worm hate ete or worm y-stonge
Take water of that welle and wasshe his tonge (Specimens 91, 6)

With this, it can be easily seen that the Bodliean text contains a significant difference from both the Additional MS and the Riverside edition. Again, of course, are the differences in spell and punctuation that were pointed out in the earlier sample, but there is a new, more striking difference. Whereas in Additional and Riverside the ailments listed end at worms eating and stinging, the Bodleian text removes the direction to take water from the well and wash the tongue, replacing it with an extension of the description of the sting, and adding what appears to be a lung ailment.

It is this kind of difference that stands out the most when looking at these manuscripts, though they take searching to locate. One must speculate why the Bodleian text is so drastically different here than the others, and which one is the correct rendering of the phrase, if any are exactly as Chaucer would have preferred it. Again, we are left to the editors to decide for us. In this case, the changing of the line does not significantly alter the point of the prologue, but it is a definite difference in the texts, and easily stands out above the smaller matters.

I find the exploration of these texts in this sense to be interesting, at the very least, but also frustrating. While the texts have differences in each manuscript, the slight changes are mostly to spelling and punctuation. Close examination on this level does reveal differences that can be significant if not carefully studied, however, they pale in light of the more noticeable differences of story order and omission. A true study of the differences in the texts, however, cannot be done without a look at both aspects of the texts, and though this is but a glimpse from one tale, the differences therein are significant enough to gain mention.

Works Cited:

Benson, Larry, ed. The Riverside Chaucer. Illinois: Houghton Mifflin, 1987.

Zupzita, Julius, ed. Bodleian MS. 414. Specimens of all the Accessible Unprinted Manuscripts of the Canterbury Tales. 90 (1897): 5-21.

Zupzita, Julius, ed. Additional MS. 35,286, Brit. Mus. Specimens of all the Accessible Unprinted Manuscripts of the Canterbury Tales. 91 (1898): 3-10.

Return to