Joshua Malang – The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale Blog

         The Norton Anthology states, in the Introduction to The Wife of Bath’s Prologue and Tale, “in her polemical wars with medieval clerks of Oxenford, the Wife of Bath seems ironically to confirm the accusations of the clerks, but at the same time she succeeds in satirizing the shallowness of the stereotypes of women and marriage in antifeminist writings and in demonstrating how much the largeness and complexity of her own character rise above the stereotype” (282). I agree with the statement because what I got from the text is that she is openly admitting that even though she is not a virgin, much like the prime example Christ, she is still playing her stereotypical role of being a wife.

God clepeth (calls) folk to him in sondry wise,

And everich hath of God a propre yifte,

Som this, som that, as him liketh shifte (ordain).

Virginitee is greet perfeccuioun,

And continence eek with devocioun,

But Christ, that of perfeccion is welle,

Bad nat every wight he sholde go selle (108-14)

 

 Its like she is saying that ironically wife’s exist in the holy text too, so women aren’t necessarily virgins to be Godly, but to be a good wife like others before her, she is fulfilling her role too. I would characterize The Wife of Bath as an early feminist because in my opinion she is expressing to the readers that she struggles with the concept of equality. She mentions:

Of shrewed Lamech (the first man whom the Bible mentions as having two wives…he is cursed, however, not for his marriages but for murder) and his bigamye?

I woot wel Abraham was an holy man,

And Jacob eek, as fer as evere I can,

And eech of hem hadde wives mo than two,

And many another holy man also. (60-64)

 

I’m thinking she is letting us know how it is unfair that men can have more than wives but it is not alright for women to have multiple husbands. To support my answer, The Wife of Bath quotes:

                I wol persevere: I nam nat precious (fastidious).

                In wifhood wol I use myn instrument

                As freely (generously) as my Makere hath it sent.

                If I be daungerous, God yive me sorwe:

                Myn housbande shal it han both eve and morwe (morning),

                                Whan that him list (when he wishes to) come forth and paye his dette.

                An housbonde wol I have, I wol nat lette ( I will not leave off)

                Which shal be bothe my dettour (debtor) and my thral (slave)

                And have his tribulacion withal (as well)

                Upon his flesh whil that I am his wif.

                I have the power during al my lif

                Upon his propre (own) body, and nat he:

                Right thus th’Apostle tolde it unto me,

                And bad oure housbondes for to love us weel.

                Al this sentence (sense) me liketh everydeel (entirely). (154-168)

 

                Which in my opinion, she is mentioning how God called women to be either virgins or in her case be married and use her “flower” to procreate. So I see her thinking that her having plenty of husbands is alright, in which she does it in her opinion justly. She also mentions that Godly men before had multiple wives so why does that differ from her with husbands. So she is showing her feminist ways in such, that why are men allowed, so why not women. Like how I mentioned above, I like how she chooses Biblical texts as her reference. One in particular as I interpret my own paraphrase, “in wifehood will I use my instrument as freely as my Maker has it sent, if I am dangerous with it God will be done, my husband shall have it both in the evening and morning, to pay his debt which he owes-which he is both my debtor and my slave…” (155-61).  She is confident saying that the Apostle stated that she has the power over her husband’s body, in which he is instructed to love her, pay his debt by giving himself to her, and she is pleased to have this in her favor “everydeel”.