How Does Chaucer Portray the Physician and Medieval Medical Practices in The Canterbury Tales?
Author: MARTIN MUNYAO MUINDE
Email: Ephantusmartin@gmail.com
Geoffrey Chaucer portrays the Physician in “The Canterbury Tales” as a highly educated and professionally competent medical practitioner who nonetheless embodies the moral corruption and materialism that characterized some medieval doctors. The Physician’s characterization reveals medieval medical practices rooted in ancient theories of humorism, astrology, and classical authorities, while simultaneously critiquing the profession’s focus on financial gain over patient welfare. Chaucer presents the Physician as knowledgeable in astronomy, natural magic, and the medical texts of Hippocrates, Galen, and other authorities, yet motivated primarily by love of gold rather than compassion for the sick. Through this complex portrait, Chaucer acknowledges the genuine learning and sophistication of medieval medicine while satirizing physicians who exploited their specialized knowledge for profit, particularly during plague outbreaks. The characterization serves as both a documentary of fourteenth-century medical practice and a moral critique of professional ethics in an era when medicine was becoming increasingly commercialized.
What Was the Physician’s Professional Role in Medieval Society?
Understanding Chaucer’s portrayal of the Physician requires examining the social position and professional function of doctors in fourteenth-century England. Physicians occupied an elevated status within medieval society, distinguished from surgeons and barbers who performed manual procedures like bloodletting and wound treatment (Rawcliffe, 1995). University-educated physicians studied theoretical medicine based on classical texts, focusing on diagnosis, prognosis, and prescribing treatments rather than performing surgical interventions themselves. This division between learned physicians and practical surgeons reflected the medieval hierarchy that valued intellectual work over manual labor. The Physician in Chaucer’s General Prologue clearly belongs to this elite category, as Chaucer emphasizes his extensive learning and theoretical knowledge. Medieval physicians typically served wealthy clients who could afford their fees, as medical care for the poor generally came from religious institutions, folk healers, or local wise women with traditional herbal knowledge.
The professional standing of physicians derived largely from their education in medical theory transmitted through classical authorities. Medical education in medieval universities centered on reading and interpreting ancient texts rather than empirical observation or clinical practice (Getz, 1998). Students studied the works of Hippocrates, Galen, Avicenna, and other authorities, learning theoretical frameworks like the doctrine of the four humors (blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile) that supposedly governed health and disease. Chaucer’s Physician exemplifies this learned tradition, as the General Prologue lists his familiarity with medical authorities spanning from ancient Greece to medieval Islam and Christian Europe. However, this emphasis on textual authority rather than direct observation meant that medieval medicine sometimes perpetuated ancient errors and resisted innovation. The social prestige of physicians rested on their mastery of this learned tradition, which separated them from empirical practitioners and positioned them as part of the educated elite alongside clerics and lawyers (Siraisi, 1990).
How Does Chaucer Describe the Physician’s Medical Knowledge and Education?
Chaucer provides extensive detail about the Physician’s education and theoretical knowledge, presenting him as exceptionally well-versed in the medical learning of his time. The General Prologue states that “In al this world ne was ther noon hym lik / To speke of phisik and of surgerye” (Chaucer, 1987, lines 412-413). This assertion establishes the Physician’s professional excellence before detailing the sources of his expertise. Chaucer then catalogs the medical authorities the Physician has studied, creating an impressive list that includes ancient Greek physicians (Hippocrates, Galen, Dioscorides), Roman writers (Rufus), early medieval authorities (Haly and Rhazes from the Islamic tradition), and more recent European figures including Avicenna, Averroes, Bernard Gordon, and John of Gaddesden (Chaucer, 1987, lines 429-434). This comprehensive education demonstrates the international and transhistorical nature of medieval medical learning, which synthesized Greek, Roman, Islamic, and Christian sources into a unified theoretical framework. The catalog also suggests Chaucer’s own familiarity with medical literature, as he accurately represents the authoritative texts that would comprise a physician’s education.
Beyond his knowledge of medical authorities, the Physician demonstrates expertise in related disciplines essential to medieval medical practice. Chaucer emphasizes that the Physician “kepte his pacient a ful greet deel / In houres by his magyk natureel” (Chaucer, 1987, lines 415-416), referring to the practice of medical astrology that determined optimal times for treatment based on planetary positions and astrological influences. Medieval medicine considered astrology scientifically legitimate, as physicians believed celestial bodies affected the balance of humors in the body and influenced the efficacy of medical interventions (Jacquart, 1990). The Physician’s knowledge extends to “practising the beste” in determining “the cause of everich maladye / Were it of hoot, or cold, or moyste, or drye” (Chaucer, 1987, lines 419-421). This reference to hot, cold, moist, and dry qualities reflects the fundamental principles of humoral medicine, which categorized diseases, treatments, foods, and medicines according to these paired opposites. The Physician’s ability to diagnose the humoral cause of illness and prescribe appropriate remedies demonstrates genuine professional competence according to medieval medical theory, even if that theory appears flawed by modern standards (Talbot, 1967).
What Role Did Astrology Play in the Physician’s Medical Practice?
Astrology constituted an integral component of medieval medical practice, and Chaucer emphasizes this dimension of the Physician’s expertise through references to “houres,” “magyk natureel,” and astronomical knowledge. Medieval physicians routinely consulted astrological charts to determine propitious times for treatments, understanding the cosmos as a unified system where celestial movements directly influenced earthly bodies and health (French, 2003). The phrase “magyk natureel” does not refer to supernatural or demonic magic but rather to natural philosophy’s understanding of hidden correspondences between celestial and terrestrial realms. This “natural magic” represented scientifically respectable knowledge in the medieval worldview, distinct from prohibited necromancy or diabolical conjuration. The Physician’s practice of keeping patients “in houres” demonstrates his attention to astrological timing, as medieval medical theory held that administering medicines or performing procedures under favorable planetary alignments would enhance effectiveness while unfavorable timing could prove harmful or fatal.
The relationship between medicine and astronomy in medieval thought reflected broader assumptions about cosmic harmony and the interconnection of all created things. The doctrine of microcosm and macrocosm suggested that the human body mirrored the universe’s structure, with planetary influences corresponding to specific organs, humors, and diseases (Curry, 1989). For instance, physicians associated the moon with the brain and phlegmatic humor, Mars with choler and inflammatory conditions, and Saturn with melancholy and cold diseases. Consequently, effective medical treatment required not only correct diagnosis of the humoral imbalance but also proper timing according to relevant astrological factors. Chaucer’s presentation of these astrological elements in the Physician’s practice reflects historical accuracy rather than satirical invention, documenting how medieval medicine genuinely incorporated astronomical observations into clinical decision-making. However, the General Prologue’s matter-of-fact mention of these practices also allows space for readers to recognize the limitations of medical theory that relied as much on celestial observation as on patient examination (Jones, 1989).
How Does the Physician’s Relationship with Apothecaries Reveal Medieval Medical Commerce?
Chaucer includes a significant detail about the Physician’s professional relationships that illuminates the commercial dimensions of medieval medical practice. The General Prologue notes that “Ful redy hadde he his apothecaries / To sende hym drogges and his letuaries / For ech of hem made oother for to wynne” (Chaucer, 1987, lines 425-427). This passage describes a mutually profitable arrangement between the Physician and his apothecary suppliers, suggesting that each party benefits financially from their collaboration. Apothecaries, who prepared and sold medicines, drugs, and remedies, occupied an important position in the medieval medical marketplace, though they ranked below university-educated physicians in the professional hierarchy (Rawcliffe, 1995). The phrase “ech of hem made oother for to wynne” implies more than simple business relationships; it suggests coordinated profit-seeking that might not always prioritize patient welfare. This critique resonates with historical complaints about physicians who prescribed expensive, unnecessary medications from which they received commissions or kickbacks.
This detail about pharmaceutical partnerships reveals Chaucer’s awareness of ethical concerns surrounding medical practice in his era. Medieval moralists and civic authorities frequently complained about physicians who exploited patient anxiety and medical ignorance to prescribe costly treatments of questionable necessity or efficacy (Getz, 1998). The cozy relationship between physicians and apothecaries created obvious conflicts of interest, as doctors might recommend expensive compound medicines not because they offered superior therapeutic value but because they generated greater profit for both parties. Chaucer’s inclusion of this detail, presented with characteristic understatement, invites readers to question whether the Physician’s professional decisions serve patients’ health or his own financial interests. The passage contributes to the portrait’s overall ambiguity, balancing acknowledgment of genuine medical learning against critique of commercial motivations. By connecting the Physician’s extensive theoretical knowledge with his profitable apothecary relationships, Chaucer suggests that medieval medicine functioned simultaneously as learned profession and lucrative business, with these dimensions sometimes creating ethical tensions (Siraisi, 1990).
What Does the Physician’s Clothing and Appearance Reveal About His Character?
Chaucer employs physical description and attention to clothing as characterization tools, and the Physician’s appearance provides significant insight into his values and priorities. The General Prologue describes the Physician as clothed “in sangwyn and in pers / Of taffata, and sendal” (Chaucer, 1987, lines 439-440), indicating expensive fabrics in blood-red and blue-gray colors. Taffeta and sendal represented luxury textiles that only wealthy individuals could afford, suggesting the Physician’s financial success and his investment in displays of status and prosperity (Rowland, 1968). The color sangwyn (blood-red) carries particular significance for a physician, as it might reference the blood associated with medical practice or symbolically represent the sanguine humor in medieval physiology. However, the ostentatious display of wealth through expensive clothing contrasts with ideals of professional humility and service, hinting at materialism and vanity beneath the veneer of learned respectability.
Chaucer further develops this characterization by noting that the Physician “kepte that he wan in pestilence” (Chaucer, 1987, line 442), revealing that he accumulated wealth during plague outbreaks. This detail carries significant moral weight in the context of fourteenth-century England, which experienced repeated visitations of bubonic plague following the Black Death of 1348-1349 (Ziegler, 1969). Physicians who profited from plague epidemics, charging desperate patients exorbitant fees during times of mass mortality, attracted particular criticism and resentment. The phrase suggests the Physician carefully saved his plague earnings rather than spending them generously or charitably, emphasizing his financial prudence and accumulation of wealth. Chaucer then delivers his most pointed critique: “For gold in phisik is a cordial / Therefore he lovede gold in special” (Chaucer, 1987, lines 443-444). This wordplay connects the medical use of gold as a supposed heart medication (cordial) with the Physician’s personal love of money, suggesting that his primary interest lies in financial gain rather than healing. The couplet’s wit softens the critique’s harshness while ensuring readers recognize the satirical point about medical avarice (Howard, 1976).
How Did Medieval Humoral Theory Influence the Physician’s Practice?
The Physician’s medical practice rests fundamentally on humoral theory, the dominant explanatory framework for health and disease throughout the medieval period. Chaucer references this system when noting the Physician’s expertise in determining “the cause of everich maladye / Were it of hoot, or cold, or moyste, or drye” (Chaucer, 1987, lines 420-421). Humoral medicine held that four bodily fluids—blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile—corresponded to combinations of the four qualities (hot, cold, moist, dry) and needed to remain in proper balance for health (García-Ballester, 1994). Disease resulted from humoral imbalance caused by factors including diet, climate, air quality, exercise, sleep, emotional states, and celestial influences. Each humor possessed characteristic qualities: blood was hot and moist, phlegm cold and moist, yellow bile hot and dry, and black bile cold and dry. Physicians diagnosed illness by identifying which humor existed in excess or deficiency, then prescribed treatments with opposite qualities to restore balance.
Treatment according to humoral principles involved various interventions designed to adjust the body’s humoral composition. Dietary modifications represented a primary therapeutic approach, as medieval medicine categorized all foods according to their humoral qualities and prescribed or prohibited specific foods to counteract imbalances (Adamson, 2004). For instance, a patient suffering from an excess of cold, moist phlegm might receive hot, dry foods like ginger or pepper, while someone with too much hot, dry choler would benefit from cold, moist foods like lettuce or fish. Beyond diet, physicians employed bloodletting to reduce excess blood, purgatives to eliminate problematic humors through evacuation, and various compound medicines prepared from plant, animal, and mineral ingredients chosen for their supposed humoral properties. The Physician’s expertise in determining whether diseases arose from hot, cold, moist, or dry causes demonstrates his mastery of this theoretical system and his ability to prescribe appropriate humoral remedies. While modern medicine has abandoned humoral theory as scientifically incorrect, the system represented genuine medical science in its time, based on careful observation and logical reasoning from accepted premises about bodily function (Siraisi, 1990).
What Biblical and Religious Knowledge Does the Physician Possess?
Chaucer includes a striking detail about the Physician’s relationship with religious texts and practice: “His studie was but litel on the Bible” (Chaucer, 1987, line 438). This statement reveals significant information about the Physician’s character and priorities within the medieval context where religious observance and biblical knowledge were expected from educated individuals, especially professionals whose work involved life-and-death matters. The phrasing “but litel” suggests not complete ignorance of scripture but rather minimal engagement, indicating the Physician dedicates his study time primarily to medical authorities rather than religious texts (Curry, 1960). This prioritization of secular learning over religious study distinguishes the Physician from clerical characters and suggests a worldview focused on earthly, material concerns rather than spiritual matters. In an era when many believed disease could result from divine punishment for sin and when religious faith offered psychological comfort to the sick, a physician’s neglect of biblical study might be seen as a professional and spiritual failing.
This detail contributes to Chaucer’s broader satirical critique of the Physician’s materialism and spiritual shortcomings. Medieval Christianity emphasized the connection between physical health and spiritual state, often interpreting illness as opportunity for moral reflection, repentance, and spiritual growth (Amundsen, 1996). Physicians ideally should attend to patients’ souls as well as bodies, encouraging confession and religious consolation alongside medical treatment. The Physician’s minimal biblical study suggests he approaches medicine as a purely technical and commercial enterprise rather than a holistic practice integrating physical and spiritual care. This characterization connects with the earlier critique of his love for gold, suggesting a character whose professional excellence in secular learning coexists with spiritual poverty and materialistic values. However, Chaucer’s treatment remains more nuanced than simple condemnation; by acknowledging the Physician’s genuine medical expertise while critiquing his spiritual and ethical limitations, Chaucer presents a complex portrait of professional accomplishment compromised by moral failings (Patterson, 1991).
How Does the Physician Compare to Other Medieval Medical Practitioners?
The Physician’s characterization gains additional meaning when considered within the broader context of medieval medical practice, which encompassed diverse practitioners with varying training, social status, and approaches to healing. University-educated physicians like Chaucer’s character represented the elite tier of medical professionals, distinguished by their theoretical knowledge and higher social standing (Rawcliffe, 1995). Below them existed surgeons and barber-surgeons who performed manual procedures, apothecaries who prepared medicines, midwives who attended childbirth, and numerous folk healers, herbalists, and empirics who treated common ailments without formal education. This hierarchy reflected medieval society’s broader distinction between intellectual and manual labor, with university training in theoretical medicine conferring greater prestige than practical healing skills. The Physician’s extensive learning and prosperity mark him as belonging to this privileged professional elite, serving wealthy clients who could afford expensive consultations and medicines.
However, the reality of medieval medical care involved considerable overlap and competition between these categories of practitioners. Many patients, particularly those of modest means, relied primarily on folk remedies, herbal treatments from local wise women, or care from monastic infirmaries rather than consulting expensive physicians (Getz, 1998). Even wealthy clients might consult multiple types of healers for different conditions or seek second opinions when physicians’ treatments proved ineffective. The Physician’s professional excellence, as presented by Chaucer, must be understood within this competitive medical marketplace where theoretical learning and social status did not always guarantee superior therapeutic outcomes. Medieval sources document numerous complaints about physicians whose elaborate theoretical diagnoses and expensive treatments failed to cure patients, while simpler remedies from empirical practitioners sometimes proved more effective. Chaucer’s portrait acknowledges the Physician’s genuine learning while hinting at the gap between professional pretension and actual healing power, a tension that characterized medieval medicine’s relationship between theoretical sophistication and practical results (French, 2003).
What Historical Context of Plague Influenced Chaucer’s Portrayal?
The reference to the Physician keeping “that he wan in pestilence” carries particular resonance in the historical context of fourteenth-century England, which experienced devastating plague epidemics. The Black Death of 1348-1349 killed approximately one-third to one-half of England’s population, fundamentally transforming medieval society (Ziegler, 1969). Subsequent plague outbreaks occurred repeatedly throughout the later fourteenth century, including major epidemics in 1361-1362, 1369, and 1375. Chaucer, born around 1343, lived through all these outbreaks and would have witnessed their social, economic, and psychological impacts firsthand. Physicians faced unprecedented challenges during plague epidemics, as their theoretical frameworks provided no effective understanding of the disease’s causes or transmission, and their traditional treatments proved useless against bubonic plague’s rapid progression and high mortality. Many physicians fled cities during outbreaks, while those who remained could charge desperate patients extraordinary fees, knowing their services were in high demand and their own lives were at risk.
The Physician’s accumulation of wealth during plague times would have resonated with Chaucer’s contemporary audience, many of whom harbored resentment toward medical professionals who profited from mass tragedy. Historical records document complaints about physicians demanding payment in advance, refusing to treat poor patients, and charging inflated fees during epidemics (Carmichael, 1986). The moral economy of medieval society expected professionals, especially those in helping roles like physicians and clergy, to prioritize service over profit and demonstrate charitable concern for the suffering. Physicians who conspicuously enriched themselves during plagues violated these expectations, attracting criticism for avarice and lack of compassion. Chaucer’s detail about the Physician keeping his plague earnings connects with this historical resentment while adding irony, as it suggests the Physician’s medical knowledge, for all its theoretical sophistication, could not actually cure plague victims but could nonetheless generate substantial income. This critique illuminates the broader theme of professional expertise being deployed for personal enrichment rather than genuine service to humanity (Gottfried, 1978).
What Literary Techniques Does Chaucer Use in Portraying the Physician?
Chaucer demonstrates sophisticated literary craftsmanship in his characterization of the Physician, employing techniques that create a complex, multifaceted portrait. One primary method involves the catalog of medical authorities, which serves multiple functions simultaneously. On the surface level, this extensive list establishes the Physician’s genuine learning and professional credentials, demonstrating Chaucer’s own knowledge of medical literature. However, the sheer length of the catalog also creates subtle satirical effect, suggesting perhaps an excessive emphasis on bookish authority at the expense of practical healing wisdom or compassionate patient care (Leicester, 1990). The catalog format itself, mechanically listing names without elaboration, might hint at rote learning and reliance on received authority rather than independent medical judgment or clinical observation. This ambiguity exemplifies Chaucer’s characteristic narrative technique of presenting information without explicit moral commentary, allowing readers to interpret the significance.
Another crucial technique involves Chaucer’s use of ironic juxtaposition and wordplay, particularly in the portrait’s concluding couplets. The connection between gold as medicine (“cordial”) and the Physician’s love of gold creates a witty play on words that encapsulates the satirical critique in memorable form (Bowden, 1948). Similarly, the juxtaposition of the Physician’s extensive medical learning with his minimal biblical study creates implicit moral judgment through contrasting emphases rather than direct condemnation. Chaucer also employs precise, concrete details—the specific fabric colors, the apothecary relationships, the plague earnings—that ground the characterization in realistic particularity while simultaneously carrying symbolic significance. The Physician’s blood-red and gray-blue clothing, for instance, functions both as realistic description of expensive dress and as potential symbolic reference to medical practice and melancholic humors. This layering of realistic detail with symbolic meaning and moral critique creates a rich, complex characterization that rewards careful reading and supports multiple interpretations (Rudd, 2001).
How Does the Physician’s Portrait Reflect Medieval Attitudes Toward Medical Authority?
The Physician’s characterization illuminates complex and sometimes contradictory medieval attitudes toward medical authority and the medical profession. On one hand, Chaucer acknowledges the genuine respect accorded to learned physicians whose expertise derived from mastery of classical authorities and theoretical frameworks. The emphasis on the Physician’s extensive education and his ability to speak authoritatively about “phisik and of surgerye” reflects the prestige that medical learning commanded in medieval society (García-Ballester, 1994). University-educated physicians enjoyed social status comparable to lawyers and clerics, and their services were sought by aristocrats and wealthy merchants who valued their sophisticated diagnostic skills and access to rare, expensive medicines. This respect for medical authority reflected broader medieval reverence for learning, particularly knowledge transmitted through authoritative texts from classical antiquity and translated from Arabic sources representing the height of medical sophistication.
However, medieval attitudes toward physicians also included skepticism, suspicion, and resentment, particularly regarding their fees, effectiveness, and motivations. Popular literature and moral writings frequently satirized doctors as greedy charlatans who confused patients with incomprehensible Latin terminology, prescribed expensive but useless treatments, and cared more about payment than healing (Rawcliffe, 1995). The gap between physicians’ theoretical pretensions and their actual ability to cure diseases generated cynicism, especially when elaborate diagnoses and costly medicines failed to produce better outcomes than simpler folk remedies. The Physician’s love of gold and his profitable relationship with apothecaries tap into these skeptical attitudes, suggesting that behind the impressive façade of medical learning lurked ordinary human avarice and self-interest. Chaucer’s portrait thus captures the tension in medieval responses to medical authority, acknowledging legitimate expertise while questioning whether that expertise serves patients’ welfare or physicians’ financial interests. This ambivalence reflects enduring questions about professional ethics that transcend the medieval context (Siraisi, 1990).
What Modern Relevance Does the Physician’s Characterization Hold?
While medieval medical theory has been superseded by modern scientific understanding, Chaucer’s characterization of the Physician retains significant relevance for contemporary readers, particularly regarding professional ethics, healthcare commercialization, and the relationship between expertise and compassion. The Physician’s love of gold and his profitable arrangements with apothecaries parallel modern concerns about pharmaceutical industry influence on medical practice, conflicts of interest in healthcare, and the tension between medicine as healing profession and as lucrative business (Kassirer, 2005). Contemporary debates about prescription drug costs, pharmaceutical marketing to physicians, and healthcare profiteering echo medieval complaints about doctors who prioritized financial gain over patient welfare. The Physician’s accumulation of wealth during plague times resonates with modern concerns about price gouging during health crises, such as debates over vaccine pricing or essential medicine costs during pandemics.
Furthermore, the Physician’s extensive theoretical knowledge combined with questionable practical effectiveness raises enduring questions about the relationship between professional expertise and actual outcomes. Modern healthcare faces ongoing challenges in translating specialized medical knowledge into improved patient health, managing situations where sophisticated treatments may not outperform simpler interventions, and ensuring that professional authority serves rather than intimidates patients (Porter, 1997). The Physician’s minimal biblical study, representing neglect of spiritual and ethical dimensions of care, connects with contemporary discussions about holistic medicine, the importance of addressing patients’ psychological and social needs alongside physical symptoms, and the potential dehumanization of healthcare when reduced to purely technical procedures. Chaucer’s fourteenth-century portrait thus continues to illuminate persistent tensions within medical practice between expertise and compassion, professional prestige and ethical responsibility, and the competing demands of scientific knowledge and human care. These timeless themes ensure the Physician’s relevance extends far beyond his specific historical context (Bynum, 2001).
References
Adamson, M. W. (2004). Food in Medieval Times. Greenwood Press.
Amundsen, D. W. (1996). Medicine, Society, and Faith in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Bowden, M. (1948). A Commentary on the General Prologue to the Canterbury Tales. Macmillan.
Bynum, W. F. (2001). Reflections on the history of human experimentation. In S. M. Reverby (Ed.), Tuskegee’s Truths: Rethinking the Tuskegee Syphilis Study (pp. 262-278). University of North Carolina Press.
Carmichael, A. G. (1986). Plague and the Poor in Renaissance Florence. Cambridge University Press.
Chaucer, G. (1987). The Canterbury Tales. In L. D. Benson (Ed.), The Riverside Chaucer (3rd ed.). Houghton Mifflin.
Curry, W. C. (1960). Chaucer and the Medieval Sciences (2nd ed.). Barnes & Noble.
Curry, P. (Ed.). (1989). Astrology, Science and Society: Historical Essays. Boydell Press.
French, R. (2003). Medicine Before Science: The Business of Medicine from the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment. Cambridge University Press.
García-Ballester, L. (1994). Medical ethics in transition in the Latin medicine of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries: New perspectives on the physician-patient relationship and the doctor’s fee. In A. Wear, J. Geyer-Kordesch, & R. French (Eds.), Doctors and Ethics: The Earlier Historical Setting of Professional Ethics (pp. 38-71). Rodopi.
Getz, F. M. (1998). Medicine in the English Middle Ages. Princeton University Press.
Gottfried, R. S. (1978). Epidemic Disease in Fifteenth Century England: The Medical Response and the Demographic Consequences. Rutgers University Press.
Howard, D. R. (1976). The Idea of the Canterbury Tales. University of California Press.
Jacquart, D. (1990). Theory, everyday practice, and three fifteenth-century physicians. Osiris, 2nd Series, 6, 140-160.
Jones, P. M. (1989). Medicine and science. In N. Orme (Ed.), Medieval Children (pp. 179-202). Yale University Press.
Kassirer, J. P. (2005). On the Take: How Medicine’s Complicity with Big Business Can Endanger Your Health. Oxford University Press.
Leicester, H. M., Jr. (1990). The Disenchanted Self: Representing the Subject in the Canterbury Tales. University of California Press.
Patterson, L. (1991). Chaucer and the Subject of History. University of Wisconsin Press.
Porter, R. (1997). The Greatest Benefit to Mankind: A Medical History of Humanity. W. W. Norton.
Rawcliffe, C. (1995). Medicine and Society in Later Medieval England. Alan Sutton.
Rowland, B. (1968). The Physician’s “historical” in the Canterbury Tales. English Language Notes, 5, 251-255.
Rudd, G. (2001). The Complete Critical Guide to Geoffrey Chaucer. Routledge.
Siraisi, N. G. (1990). Medieval and Early Renaissance Medicine: An Introduction to Knowledge and Practice. University of Chicago Press.
Talbot, C. H. (1967). Medicine in Medieval England. Oldbourne.
Ziegler, P. (1969). The Black Death. John Day Company.