How does Geoffrey Chaucer use rhetorical devices and medieval rhetoric in The Canterbury Tales*, and what is their significance in shaping the poem’s themes, characters, and moral vision?*
Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales employs a rich array of rhetorical devices and medieval rhetorical principles—such as ethos, pathos, logos, irony, exemplum, and amplification—to deepen characterization, convey moral insight, and engage his audience. Drawing from the traditions of medieval rhetoric rooted in classical sources like Cicero and Augustine, Chaucer uses these techniques to craft persuasive narratives that both entertain and instruct. Through his characters’ speeches, moral arguments, and ironic juxtapositions, Chaucer reveals the art of persuasion as a central theme of his work. His mastery of rhetoric not only reflects the intellectual culture of the Middle Ages but also exposes the moral ambiguities of human communication, transforming The Canterbury Tales into a timeless study of speech, truth, and persuasion.
Introduction: The Role of Rhetoric in Chaucer’s Artistic Vision
Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales (c.1387–1400) stands as a masterpiece of medieval literature that reflects both moral inquiry and rhetorical sophistication. During Chaucer’s time, rhetoric was not merely ornamental but a core intellectual discipline—a means of persuasion, moral reasoning, and public discourse (Robertson, 2010). In The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer integrates classical and medieval rhetorical techniques to enhance narrative depth, thematic coherence, and moral complexity.
Rhetoric in Chaucer’s work serves dual purposes: it functions as an artistic tool that enhances narrative pleasure and as a philosophical instrument that reveals human motives. The pilgrims’ stories showcase a spectrum of rhetorical skill, from the Knight’s noble eloquence to the Pardoner’s deceitful sermon. This diversity of rhetorical expression reflects Chaucer’s awareness of speech as a moral act, situating rhetoric at the heart of his exploration of truth and hypocrisy (Kolve & Olson, 2006).
Subtopic 1: Medieval Rhetoric as Chaucer’s Intellectual Foundation
To understand Chaucer’s rhetorical artistry, it is essential to recognize the intellectual climate of the Middle Ages, which placed great emphasis on classical rhetorical education. Medieval students were trained in the artes liberales, with rhetoric forming a crucial component alongside grammar and logic (Pearsall, 1992). Chaucer, influenced by Cicero’s De Inventione and Augustine’s De Doctrina Christiana, adopted rhetoric as a means to instruct and delight—an ideal known as docere et delectare.
In The Canterbury Tales, this classical heritage is evident in Chaucer’s structure and delivery. The “General Prologue,” for instance, follows the rhetorical principle of inventio (invention), introducing a range of social types who will later serve as moral exempla. Each pilgrim’s tale employs rhetorical devices tailored to their personality, thereby demonstrating Chaucer’s awareness of audience, persuasion, and moral argument (Robertson, 2010). The Knight’s dignified diction contrasts sharply with the bawdy tone of the Miller’s speech, illustrating how rhetorical decorum mirrors social and ethical hierarchy.
Subtopic 2: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in Character Speech and Storytelling
One of Chaucer’s most effective uses of rhetoric lies in his application of Aristotle’s three modes of persuasion—ethos (credibility), pathos (emotional appeal), and logos (logical argument). These modes allow Chaucer to create distinct narrative voices and moral perspectives.
The Pardoner’s Tale exemplifies this triadic rhetorical structure. The Pardoner establishes ethos through his clerical authority but subverts it by admitting his hypocrisy: “I preche of no thyng but for coveitise” (Chaucer, VI.425). His pathos emerges in his vivid depiction of death and greed, while his logos is expressed through his moral exemplum against avarice. The irony lies in his self-condemnation—his rhetorical skill serves both truth and deception (Kolve & Olson, 2006). Similarly, the Wife of Bath’s Prologue demonstrates emotional persuasion (pathos) intertwined with rational justification (logos), as she defends her experience-based authority on marriage. Through such speeches, Chaucer reveals the power and peril of rhetoric: it can both enlighten and manipulate.
Subtopic 3: The Use of Irony and Satire as Rhetorical Strategies
Irony is perhaps Chaucer’s most distinctive rhetorical device, serving as both a literary technique and a form of moral commentary. His ironic tone allows him to expose human folly without overt moralizing. By presenting characters who unwittingly condemn themselves through speech, Chaucer transforms irony into a vehicle of truth (Benson, 2003).
For instance, the Prioress’s genteel manners—“she was so charitable and so pitous”—are described with exaggerated reverence, masking vanity beneath piety (Chaucer, I.143–150). Similarly, the Monk’s worldly indulgence and the Friar’s flirtatiousness reveal rhetorical self-deception. Chaucer’s irony, rooted in medieval sermonic rhetoric, functions as a mirror for readers to examine their own contradictions. It fulfills Augustine’s rhetorical aim of using irony to lead sinners toward self-awareness (Robertson, 2010). Thus, Chaucer’s satire operates as moral persuasion disguised as humor.
Subtopic 4: Exemplum and Allegory as Tools of Moral Instruction
Chaucer frequently employs the medieval rhetorical form known as exemplum—a moral story used to illustrate a virtue or vice. This device, common in sermons, reflects Chaucer’s blending of religious and literary discourse (Rigby, 2014). The Pardoner’s Tale, which warns against greed, is a textbook example of an exemplum embedded within narrative performance.
However, Chaucer complicates this rhetorical form by introducing moral ambiguity. While the Pardoner’s tale condemns avarice, the teller himself embodies the sin he preaches against. This self-reflexive irony exposes the limits of rhetorical persuasion when separated from genuine virtue. Similarly, the Parson’s Tale, which concludes The Canterbury Tales, reclaims rhetoric for moral instruction, offering a direct sermon free from irony. Together, these tales demonstrate Chaucer’s mastery of rhetorical contrast—between hypocrisy and sincerity, deception and truth (Aers, 1988).
Subtopic 5: Amplification, Repetition, and Persuasive Ornamentation
Another key rhetorical strategy in The Canterbury Tales is amplification, or the elaboration of ideas through repetition, variation, and figurative language. Chaucer uses this device to build emphasis and rhythm, reflecting both oral tradition and written artistry (Pearsall, 1992).
In the Wife of Bath’s Prologue, for example, amplification reinforces her argument for female sovereignty. Her repeated invocation of biblical figures—such as Solomon and Paul—serves as both justification and exaggeration, blending logic with emotional persuasion. Similarly, the Knight’s Tale employs rhetorical ornamentation through amplificatio in its elaborate descriptions of noble deeds and cosmic order. Such techniques not only beautify the text but also reflect medieval rhetorical ideals of ornatus—the embellishment of truth to make it memorable and persuasive (Benson, 2003). Through amplification, Chaucer aligns poetic form with rhetorical philosophy, transforming his tales into acts of persuasive art.
Subtopic 6: Rhetoric as a Measure of Morality and Authenticity
In The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer often uses rhetoric not merely as a stylistic device but as a test of moral authenticity. The pilgrims’ rhetorical skill often mirrors their ethical character. The Pardoner’s eloquence conceals corruption, while the Parson’s plain speech reflects spiritual purity. Chaucer thus aligns rhetorical simplicity with moral sincerity, contrasting the deceptive beauty of words with the integrity of truth (Aers, 1988).
This theme culminates in the Parson’s Tale, which rejects rhetorical flourish in favor of spiritual plainness. Here, Chaucer returns to the Augustinian ideal that rhetoric must serve truth, not vanity (Robertson, 2010). By closing his collection with this unadorned sermon, Chaucer completes his rhetorical cycle—from persuasion as manipulation to persuasion as salvation. The transformation underscores the moral dimension of language: words possess both power and peril, depending on their use and intention.
Subtopic 7: The Meta-Rhetorical Dimension—Chaucer as Storyteller and Critic
Chaucer himself, as narrator and compiler, participates in the rhetorical performance of The Canterbury Tales. His modest persona—claiming to “report” the pilgrims’ words without bias—functions as an ironic rhetorical stance that invites readers to engage critically (Pearsall, 1992). By pretending neutrality, Chaucer heightens reader awareness of rhetorical manipulation within the text.
This meta-rhetorical layer turns The Canterbury Tales into a self-aware study of language. Chaucer’s frame narrative—where each pilgrim’s tale reflects their character—becomes a rhetorical experiment in voice, persuasion, and moral vision. In doing so, Chaucer transforms rhetoric from mere ornamentation into a mode of truth-seeking. His work becomes, in essence, a dialogue about the ethics of speech, a theme that would influence English literature for centuries (Kolve & Olson, 2006).
Conclusion: The Enduring Power of Chaucer’s Rhetorical Art
Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales stands as a testament to the enduring power of rhetoric in shaping literature and moral thought. By integrating medieval rhetorical theory with poetic invention, Chaucer demonstrates that persuasion lies at the core of human interaction. His use of ethos, pathos, logos, irony, exemplum, and amplification transforms each tale into a rhetorical performance that mirrors both the virtues and vices of speech.
Ultimately, Chaucer’s engagement with rhetoric transcends the medieval context. His tales explore the relationship between language and truth, suggesting that eloquence without integrity leads to moral decay. The Canterbury Tales thus invites readers to consider not only what is said but how and why it is said. Through this profound understanding of medieval rhetoric, Chaucer forged a timeless vision of humanity—eloquent, flawed, and perpetually in search of meaning.
References
Aers, D. (1988). Community, Gender, and Individual Identity: English Writing 1360–1430. Routledge.
Benson, L. D. (2003). The Riverside Chaucer. Oxford University Press.
Chaucer, G. (2008). The Canterbury Tales. Edited by Larry D. Benson, Riverside Edition. Oxford University Press.
Kolve, V. A., & Olson, G. (2006). The Canterbury Tales: A Norton Critical Edition. W.W. Norton & Company.
Pearsall, D. (1992). The Life of Geoffrey Chaucer: A Critical Biography. Blackwell.
Rigby, S. H. (2014). Chaucer in Context: Society, Allegory, and Gender. Manchester University Press.
Robertson, D. W. (2010). A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspectives. Princeton University Press.