“The Pardoner's Tale” is a tale in The Canterbury Tales. It is a tale of death, greed, and stupidity. The three protagonists’--aptly named Cut, Grab, and Dip– greed and stupidity led to their deaths. As a result, “Money is the root of all evil,” appears to be the moral of the story. However, it is not money that causes the evil in “The Pardoner's Tale,” but rather the love of cash that is the root of all the kinds of evil in the tale.
“The Pardoner's Tale” shows readers how the desire for money can lead to a variety of evils. The moment the three protagonists find a pot of gold, they explode with joy and abandon their more noble but absurd quest to kill death. The line “There's little enough to share out between two, let alone three” (Chaucer
…show more content…
Though it is possible that Geoffrey Chaucer, the author of The Canterbury Tales, intended for the Pardoner story to demonstrate this axiom, it more aptly applies to the more specific axiom “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (American Standard Version, 1 Tim. 6.10). Though “money as the root of all evil” and “the love of money as the root of all evil” are more commonly quoted, the axiom in the Holy Bible makes more sense. The difference is huge. For example, if I say that money or the love of money is the root of all evil, then I’m saying money is at the root of all the evil in the world. However, if I say that the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil, I'm only saying that an affection for money produces multiple types of evil, but not all evil. With this difference in mind, one can see how “The Pardoner's Tale” fails to showcase “money as the root of all evil.” Firstly, to demonstrate that all evil comes from money, one would need to do more than focus on three greedy criminals and their exploits. After all, the story only shows that money causes some evil, not all evil. Secondly, they engage in sinful behavior not out of a desire for wealth but rather because of the immense joy it brings them. Dip's intentions for his money show that he desired the pleasure money could provide more than he desired more money. The crimes wouldn't have been