In 1873, a court document was discovered from the year 1380 in which a woman named Cecila Chaumpaigne "released" Geoffrey Chaucer from "all manner of actions related to my raptus". According to the Times, scholars assumed for years that Chaucer had been accused of rape by Chaumpaigne and had somehow settled the case (something they didn't teach this English major).
New research suggests that the word "raptus" used in this context did not mean rape or assault at all but that this release arose out of a labor dispute where a gentleman named Staunton had accused Ms. Chaumpaigne of leaving his employment and going to work for Chaucer unlawfully. In the ensuing litigation, it was necessary for Chaumpaigne to release Chaucer from liability.
There has been a strain of literary criticism developed over the years that labeled Chaucer a rapist (as well as being racist and anti-Semitic). Full disclosure- I found The Canterbury Tales almost incomprehensible (although I did like The Wife of Bath). One really has to think about the years of critical theory which may be premised upon a misunderstanding or faulty translation of a single word. But the case involves so much more than that; as the article explains, this work in attempting to vindicate Chaucer as an individual has been going on for decades and involved a deep dive into ancient legal documents. To me, it is amazing that these documents still survive in England and could be traced to Geoffrey Chaucer. I’ll have to think about that the next time someone asks me to dig out a contract or case file from the 1980’s.
