Chaucer murdered ?

This blog is dedicated to questioning the usual opinions regarding things Chaucerian. Mr. Terry Jones' questions and opinions belong here. You may recognize his name as part of the comic genius of Monty Python, but his attitude turns deadly serious when it comes to dealing with the death of Geoffrey Chaucer.
     Are  you aware that, in addition to comedy, Jones has a reputation as a presenter of history in both books and TV documentaries? He provides a "challenge [to] popular views of history." Terry Jones' Medieval Lives (2004) received an Emmy nomination for "Outstanding Writing for Nonfiction Programming." When he proposes the possibility that Chaucer was murdered, we should be attentive! Yes, his questions and opinions belong here.

He had the idea about Chaucer's death for thirty years, without finding the time to research and write it. But serendipity stepped in when he was invited to create an entertainment for the closing session of The Chaucer Society, an international literary group. With a twist of genius, the piece was staged as an inquest into the death of Chaucer! It was well received.
     So much time, energy and enthusiasm had already been invested that these friends were eager to help turn the project into a book. Each would contribute an essay in the area of their expertise or their area of interest.

The book (Who Murdered Chaucer?) boldly questions currently held historical details and interpretations. For example, how had Chaucer survived the political upheaval during the reign of King Richard, though many friends had not?

In 1400--the year of Chaucer's death--the poet leased a house for 53 years. Does that sound like the action of a man who expected to die soon? But Henry had usurped the throne; Richard was confined to the Tower and died (perhaps by starvation) in February. The rented house was on the grounds of Westminster Abbey. Could there be thoughts of "sanctuary"?
     Why do we know so little about the death of Chaucer who was revered by his contemporaries? Why does no one allude to illness, or details of a funeral? What happened to his estate? If renting his house is officially recorded, why is there no mention of his demise in an official document? How could he just vanish without a word?
     And what became of his manuscripts? None are listed in wills or inventories of the day. Jones wonders whether they could have been deliberately destroyed for political reasons.
     Terry Jones and his cohorts (and I) hope Who Murdered Chaucer? will stimulate further investigation into overlooked possibilities.

Pilgrim Chaucer's Clique

At the close of the previous entry, I said we would face challenges with this new topic. If you're familiar with the General Prologue, you know that acquainting us with the pilgrims goes on for many pages--the Knight, the Wife, the Friar, the Monk, the Physician, Sir Thopas and more. Then, an apparently random cluster, like five left-overs, are presented all at once, as if Chaucer is in a rush to have done with the introductions. But that's not it at all. Immediately after citing the five, the individuals are singled out and given as detailed and unique a description as all those who came before. Finding a reason for this tactic is the first challenge.
     Here is how Chaucer begins:
           There was also a Reeve, and a Miller,
           A Summoner, and a Pardoner also,
           A Manciple, and myself--there were no more.
This is what their occupations amounted to: A reeve kept the records of what was produced on a manor, and the work done. A miller needs no special explanation. A summoner was a petty clerical officer who cited people to appear before the ecclesiastical court. A pardoner was a minor churchman, who had the reputation of selling "little pardons" in lieu of other penances. A manciple was an employee of an institution and functioned mainly in the purchasing of provisions.
     Because I understood that the pilgrims were signs of the zodiac, my first thought had to do with astrology. Were these signs significant to Chaucer's birth date? That may be true, but it is well nigh impossible to discover facts to support this notion because birth dates of commoners--such as Chaucer--were rarely recorded.
      So why set them in a group? At first glance it might seem pointless, but Pilgrim Chaucer is made a member of this clique. That is surely a signal to gain our attention. These characters must have some sort of affinity with one another and some sort of relationship with the author/pilgrim.
      I'd worked with the five for quite a while, first this one, then that one, when a recognizable traditional influence came into focus for each! The five did portray pilgrims and signs of the zodiac--but now, clearly, each had a third role to play. These were not incidental associates. The poet had reserved this handful to construct the ultimate image of his own pilgrimage. That answers the first challenge.
     We will deal separately with the members of his clique, to illustrate what it is that connects each one to the others and to Chaucer's pilgrimage--his life. Our search will acquaint us with Scorpio, Taurus, Aquarius, Pisces, and Libra.
     We'll begin next time with Libra, the Manciple because its significance will be obvious after very little evidence.