Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works Vol. 5) [1899]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Online Library of Liberty A Project Of Liberty Fund, Inc. Geoffrey Chaucer, Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works vol. 5) [1899] The Online Library Of Liberty This E-Book (PDF format) is published by Liberty Fund, Inc., a private, non-profit, educational foundation established in 1960 to encourage study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals. 2010 was the 50th anniversary year of the founding of Liberty Fund. It is part of the Online Library of Liberty web site http://oll.libertyfund.org, which was established in 2004 in order to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. To find out more about the author or title, to use the site's powerful search engine, to see other titles in other formats (HTML, facsimile PDF), or to make use of the hundreds of essays, educational aids, and study guides, please visit the OLL web site. This title is also part of the Portable Library of Liberty DVD which contains over 1,000 books and quotes about liberty and power, and is available free of charge upon request. The cuneiform inscription that appears in the logo and serves as a design element in all Liberty Fund books and web sites is the earliest-known written appearance of the word “freedom” (amagi), or “liberty.” It is taken from a clay document written about 2300 B.C. in the Sumerian city-state of Lagash, in present day Iraq. To find out more about Liberty Fund, Inc., or the Online Library of Liberty Project, please contact the Director at [email protected]. LIBERTY FUND, INC. 8335 Allison Pointe Trail, Suite 300 Indianapolis, Indiana 46250-1684 Online Library of Liberty: Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works vol. 5) Edition Used: The Complete Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, edited from numerous manuscripts by the Rev. Walter W. Skeat (2nd ed.) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899). 7 vols. Vol. 5. Author: Geoffrey Chaucer Editor: Walter W. Skeat About This Title: Skeat’s copious scholarly notes to his edition of The Canterbury Tales make up all of vol. 5 of The Works of Chaucer. PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011) 2 http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1228 Online Library of Liberty: Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works vol. 5) About Liberty Fund: Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals. Copyright Information: The text is in the public domain. Fair Use Statement: This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit. PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011) 3 http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1228 Online Library of Liberty: Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works vol. 5) Table Of Contents Introduction to the Notes. Errata In Vol IV. Vol. V. Addenda, Etc. Notes to the Canterbury Tales. The General Prologue The Knightes Tale. The Miller’s Prologue. The Milleres Tale. The Reve’s Prologue. The Reves Tale. The Cook’s Prologue. The Cokes Tale. Notes to Group B. Introduction to the Man of Lawes Tale. Prologue to the Man of Lawes Tale. The Tale of the Man of Lawe. The Shipman’s Prologue. The Shipmannes Tale. The Prioress’s Prologue. The Prioresses Tale. Prologue to Sir Thopas. The Tale of Sir Thopas. Prologue to Melibeus. The Tale of Melibeus. The Monk’s Prologue. The Monkes Tale. The Nonne Prestes Prologue. The Nonne Preestes Tale. Epilogue to the Nonne Preestes Tale. Notes to Group C. The Phisiciens Tale. Words of the Host. The Pardoneres Prologue. The Pardoneres Tale. Notes to Group D. The Wife of Bath’s Prologue. The Tale of the Wyf of Bathe. The Friar’s Prologue. The Freres Tale. The Sompnour’s Prologue. The Somnours Tale. Notes to Group E. The Clerkes Prologue. The Clerkes Tale. PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011) 4 http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1228 Online Library of Liberty: Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works vol. 5) The Marchauntes Prologue. The Marchantes Tale. Notes to Group F. The Squieres Tale. The Words of the Franklin. The Prologue of the Franklin’s Tale. The Frankeleyns Tale. Notes to Group G. The Second Nonnes Tale. The Canon’s Yeoman’s Prologue. The Chanouns Yemannes Tale. Notes to Group H. The Manciple’s Prologue. The Maunciples Tale. Notes to Group I. The Parson’s Prologue. The Persones Tale. Notes to the Tale of Gamelyn. Addenda. PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011) 5 http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1228 Online Library of Liberty: Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works vol. 5) [Back to Table of Contents] INTRODUCTION TO THE NOTES. § 1. In the brief Introduction to vol. iv. I have given a list of the MSS. of the Canterbury Tales; some account of the early printed editions; and some explanation of the methods employed in preparing the present edition. I propose here to discuss further certain important points of general interest. And first, I would say a few words as to the Canon of Chaucer’s Works, whereby the genuine works are separated from others that have been attributed to him, at various times, by mistake or inadvertence. § 2. Canon Of Chaucer’S Works. This has already been considered, at considerable length, in vol. i. pp. 20–90. But it is necessary to say a few words on the whole subject, owing to the extremely erroneous opinions that are so widely prevalent. Sometimes a poem is claimed for Chaucer because it occurs ‘in a Chaucer MS.’ There is a certain force in this plea in a few cases, as I have already pointed out. But it commonly happens that such MSS. (as, for example, MS. Fairfax 16, MS. Bodley 638, and others) are mere collections of poetry of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, from which nothing can safely be inferred as to the authorship of the poems which they contain, unless the scribe distinctly gives the author’s name1 . As a rule, however, the scribes not only omit to mention names, but they frequently omit the very title of the poem, and thus withhold such help as, in many cases, they might easily have afforded. The celebrated first edition of ‘Chaucer’s Works,’ edited by William Thynne in 1532, made no attempt to establish any canon. Thynne simply put together such a book as he believed would be generally acceptable; and deliberately inserted poems which he knew to be by other authors. Some of these poems bear the name of Lydgate; one has the name of Gower; and another, by Hoccleve, is dated 1402, or two years after Chaucer’s death. They were tossed together without much attempt at order; so that even the eleventh poem in the volume is ‘The Floure of Curtesie, made by Ihon lidgate.’ The edition, in fact, is a mere collection of poems by Chaucer, Lydgate, Gower, Hoccleve, Robert Henrysoun, Sir Richard Ros, and various anonymous authors; and the number of poems by other authors almost equals the number of Chaucer’s. The mere accident of the inclusion of a given piece in this volume practically tells us nothing, unless it happens to be distinctly marked; though we can, of course, often tell the authorship from some remark made by Chaucer himself, or by others. And the net result is this; that Thynne neither attempted to draw up a list of Chaucer’s genuine works, nor to exclude such works as were not his. He merely PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011) 6 http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1228 Online Library of Liberty: Notes to the Canterbury Tales (Works vol. 5) printed such things as came to hand, without any attempt at selection or observance of order, or regard to authorship. All that we can say is, that he did not knowingly exclude any of the genuine pieces. Nevertheless, he omitted Chaucer’s A.B.C., of which there must have been many copies in existence, for we have twelve still extant. § 3. The mere repetition of this collection, in various reprints, did not confer on it any fresh authority. Stowe indeed, in 1561, added more pieces to the collection, but he suppressed nothing. Neither did he himself exercise much principle of selection; see vol. i. p. 56. He even added The Storie of Thebes, which he must have known to be Lydgate’s. Later reprints were all edited after the same bewildering fashion. § 4. The first person to exercise any discrimination in this matter was Thomas Tyrwhitt, who published a new edition of the Canterbury Tales in five volumes, 8vo., in 1775–8; being the first edition in which some critical care was exercised. After Tyrwhitt had printed the Canterbury Tales, accompanied by a most valuable commentary in the shape of Notes, it occurred to him to make a Glossary. He had not proceeded far before he decided that such a Glossary ought to be founded upon the whole of Chaucer’s Works, instead of referring to the Tales only; since this would alone suffice to shew clearly the nature of Chaucer’s vocabulary. He at once began to draw up something in the nature of a canon. He rejected the works that were marked with the names of other poets, and remorselessly swept away a large number of Stowe’s very casual additions. And, considering that he was unable, at that date, to apply any linguistic tests of any value—that he had no means of distinguishing Chaucer’s rimes from those of other poets—that he had, in fact, nothing to guide him but his literary instinct and a few notes found in the MSS.—his attempt was a fairly good one.