Talk:The Nun's Priest's Tale

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Middle Ages Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Poetry: The Canterbury Tales Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by The Canterbury Tales task force.

I've always wondered if the Nun's Priest's Tale was the origin of the phrase, or if it already existed and Chaucer was referring to it. Anyone know? Daibhid C 20:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've been expanding the Caldecott Medal recipients and went ahead and made a new Chanticleer and the Fox page before reading the discussion about moving it here. :( Oh well. I think new new page is unique to the children's book and cross links back to this page well. If anyone has any concerns, please post here before a new redirect is made. Thanks!--Knulclunk 01:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, after all, it's the actual title of that actual book. Plus you've linked here in your stub, so there's

no child left behind. --Wetman 02:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks! --Knulclunk 02:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the original entry on Chanticleer and the Fox seemed only to be about Chaucer's Nun's Priest's Tale, it made sense to move it here under the work's proper title. However, as someone interested in Fables, I'm well aware that there is a long Mediaeval pedigree to the story that deserves attention and that is best done by giving it an article of its own. I have accordingly started expanding Knulclunk's stub, since that title is the most obvious. I am open to persuasion to change it to something else, however.

One reason I decided on this was that the Chanticleer and the Fox page has not been modified since 2007 (apart from a vandalistic attack). As it stood, it looked like a piece of spam, although I realise that really it is part of Knulclunk's Caldecott medal project. There is no reason why the stub information should not be incorporated into my larger project of looking at the story's development over a millennium and so giving the title a more dynamic life.

Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 23:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

As there also seemed to be a place for an article on the Barbara Cooney book, I've created one called Chanticleer and the Fox (book) that incorporates the original material and links to both this article and the Chanticleer and the Fox article (other links fixed too). There's also a little more background to the book so it's not quite as stubbish as it was. You can see my discussion with Mzilikasi1939 on this on my talk page.--Annielogue (talk) 22:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the Composition section there were unsupported claims about Chaucer's primary sources that must have citation and comment to back them in an encyclopaedic article. They may exist, I'm not a Chaucerian scholar, but if they do they should be quoted and interpreted. As of now I have deleted the claim about Old French sources and referred people back to the

article. I have also asked for citations to back the claim that there are 'echoes of several of Aesop's fables'. Which are they, and in what way are they 'echoed'?

In fact that whole section looks like speculation and original research. There is no proper discussion of the theory that a murder six years after the suggested date of composition is alluded to, merely citation of a 1924 article that may never have been accepted by the author's peers. There are no sources given at all of the discussion concerning what genre Chaucer's tale belongs to or how he may be subverting it. Unless this whole section is properly referenced within a reasonable time, I suggest it is deleted.

]

Top image

Wouldn't an illustration of some later tale of Chanticleer and the Fox be better as a top image? With a caption explaining that it draws on the tradition of this tale. Cicero seems utterly tangential, not to mention that it isn't a very engaging image in and of itself. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:25, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't there be an explanation of what a nun's priest is? 100.34.46.136 (talk) 14:18, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, since the teller does not appear in his tale. There's an explanation at List of The Canterbury Tales characters. Sweetpool50 (talk) 15:10, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a very clear one. Presumably some sort of chaplain to the nuns at the priory. If sourced this could be added. Johnbod (talk) 15:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At least in scholarship on the Poetria nova, Young is often cited as an example of its influence in popular culture.

This shows the scholastic, rhetorical, or grammarians' influence on Chaucer (depending on which author for which category). Wyrdwritere (talk) 05:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]