Chaucer’s Nun’s Priest’s Tale: Animals, Dreams, and Marriage
The Blurring of Human and Animal Boundaries
The Nun’s Priest’s Tale, a beast fable reminiscent of Aesop’s fables, delves into the intricate relationship between humans and animals. As the medieval Scots poet Robert Henryson, one of Chaucer’s successors, would later thoroughly examine, this genre often highlights the blurred lines between human and animal characteristics. The narrator himself addresses the core question of the genre at the end, advising those who deem a tale about animals a folly to extract the moral from the tale while disregarding the tale itself.
Even before the tale commences, the Host blurs the animal-human boundary by jesting with the Nun’s Priest, a celibate religious man, suggesting he would have made excellent breeding stock, a “tredefowl” or breeding-fowl. This thought-provoking notion prompts us to consider: if we can perceive the Nun’s Priest in animalistic breeding terms, can we interpret his tale in potentially useful human terms?
The Question of Woman’s Counsel
This question frames the other themes of the tale. The issue of a woman’s counsel, previously highlighted in Chaucer’s tale of Melibee, is explicitly raised again. Should Chaunticleer heed Pertelote’s advice on interpreting his dreams? Should he disregard his dreams and proceed with his life? He does, of course, searching among the cabbages, perhaps for herbs, when he encounters the fox. At this juncture, the tale seems to imply that he should never have listened to his wife; his fears were valid.
Animal Instinct vs. Prophetic Dreams
However, we must remember the narrator’s crucial reminder that his tale is “of a cok”—about a chicken. It is hardly surprising that we need a prophetic dream to tell us that foxes enjoy eating chickens; it is what we might term animal instinct. This is further emphasized when Chaunticleer, after quoting Cato and discussing the textual politics of dream interpretation, excitedly summons his wives upon finding a grain of corn and then engages in uncomplicated animal sex with Pertelote throughout the night. Chaucer seems to suggest that expecting unchicken-like behavior from a chicken is a contradiction, yet this contradiction fuels the entire genre of beast fable. If the Nun’s Priest possessed too much human dignity and restraint to be a breeding fowl, the Cato-quoting Chaunticleer exhibits animal urges too strong to be a credible author.
A Stable and Robust “Marriage”
Interestingly, with the possible exception of Arviragus and Dorigen in the Franklin’s Tale, there is no more stable and robust “marriage” in the *Canterbury Tales* than that of Chanticleer and Pertelote. The two fowls share a fulfilling sexual relationship, where sex is a pleasurable, uncomplicated end in itself, a stark contrast to the sexual transactions depicted in the Franklin’s and the Wife of Bath’s tales. In this sense, the animals are not so bestial.
Dreams, Texts, and Reality
Interpreting dreams, a favorite theme of Middle English literature, frames an entire genre of poetry known as “dream poems.” Chaucer himself authored several, including the *Book of the Duchess* and the *House of Fame*. Dreams and texts are closely intertwined, and even in this tale, the way a dream poem juxtaposes the text of the dream with the text of the story is evident. Is a dream any more or less real than a tale? If we can derive a moral from a tale, can we also derive one from a dream?