Book ii

. of Boethius for poetical treatment in his 'Former Age,' because Jean de Meun had selected for similar treatment the very same passage; see Rom. de la Rose, ll. 8395-8406.

[10] There is a copy of this in the British Museum, MS. Addit. 10341.

[11] MS. Harl. 44 (Wülker); _not_ MS. Harl. 43, as in Warton, who has confused this MS. with that next mentioned.

[12] MS. Harl. 43 (Wülker); _not_ MS. Harl. 44, as in Warton.

[13] There is a better copy than either of the above in MS. Royal 18 A. xiii. The B. M. Catalogue of the Royal MSS., by Casley, erroneously attributes this translation to Lydgate. And there is yet a fourth copy, in MS. Sloane 554. The Royal MS. begins, more correctly:--'In suffisaunce of cunnyng and of wyt.'

[14] MS. i. 53.

[15] MS. B. 5. There is yet another MS. in the library of Trinity College, Oxford, no. 75; and others in the Bodleian Library (MS. Rawlinson 151), in the Cambridge University Library (Gg. iv. 18), and in the Phillipps collection (as in note 5 below).

[16] 'The Boke of Comfort, translated into Englesse tonge. Enprented in the exempt Monastery of Tavestok in Denshyre, by me, Dan Thomas Rychard, Monke; 1525. 4to.'--Lowndes.

[17] The MS. is now in the collection of Sir Thomas Phillipps; no. 1099.

[18] He here implies that Chaucer's translation was by no means the only one then in existence; a remarkable statement.

[19] MS. inserts _full_, needlessly.

[20] _Perhaps read_ In.

[21] MS. neye.

[22] MS. hy_m_self.

[23] MS. theym self.

[24] _Printed_ feldes _by_ Mr. Stewart.

[25] Observe that this line is due to Chaucer's _gloss_, not to his text.

[26] MS. Thisee (!).

[27] MS. hem self.

[28] _Printed_ thise _by_ Mr. Stewart.

[29] MS. This (giving no sense).

[30] Mr. Stewart _omits_ thus.

[31] MS. parelous (!). This shews that Walton's text can be corrected by Chaucer's.

[32] Yet we must remember that 'The Former Age' only reproduces a _part_ of this Metre; and that it also introduces a passage from Jerome, besides reminiscences of Ovid and of Le Roman de la Rose; as shewn in the notes.

[33] Mr. Stewart adds another instance, from Bk. iii. met. 5. 5:--

And that the last ile in the see That hight Tyle, be thral to thee.

I hope this was unintentional, for they are poor verses. It is higher praise to say that, especially in the Metres, Chaucer's prose often flows well, with a certain melody of its own. Mr. Stewart also gives some instances in which he supposes that Chaucer 'actually reproduces the original Latin metre;' but they are imperfect and unintended.

[34] Mr. Stewart quotes this as: 'a long unagreable dwellynges;' but 'draweth a-long' is a fair translation of 'protrahit.'

[35] 365 is the number of the line; see p. 164 below. I refer to Boethius by the letter 'B.', meaning the text as printed in the present volume, giving the _line_ of the text as well as the number of the Prose or Metre, so that every passage can easily be found.

[36] The prefixed asterisk marks a _doubtful_ or _wrong_ instance.

[37] I omit the comparison of Bk. iii. ll. 8-14 with Boethius; for the whole stanza is copied from the _Filostrato_, Bk. iii. st. 75. Also, that of l. 373 with B. iii. met. 9. 1; for l. 373 is copied from the _Filostrato_, Bk. iii. st. 15.

[38] I omit mention of l. 2839 (compared with B. ii. met. 3. 14); for it is taken from the _Teseide_, Bk. ix, 10, 11.

[39] The three points are: (1) Avarice is insatiable, l. 2321, which answers to 'finem quaerendi non inuenit,' quoted as from Seneca, but really from Palladius; see Albertani Brixiensis Liber Consolationis, ed. T. Sundby, p. 37: (2) Good and evil are two contraries, l. 2479; compare the same, p. 96: (3) Fortune the nurse, l. 2635, translated from 'fortuna usque nunc me fouit'; see the same, p. 89.

[40] I have noted a few inaccuracies, chiefly due to confusion of _c_ and _t_ (which are written alike), and to abbreviations. At p. 2, l. 13, for 'p_ro_cede' read 'p_er_cede.' At p. 9, l. 28, for 'basilicis' read 'basilius.' At p. 11, l. 32, read 'auauntede.' At p. 12, l. 10, read 'c_on_uict'; &c. Cf. note to Bk. v. pr. 6. 82.

[41] Here _recte_ is miswritten for _recta_, clearly because the scribe was still thinking of the latter syllable of the preceding _sponte_. But observe that Ch. has 'the rightes,' a translation of _recta_. This proves at once that Chaucer did not use _this particular copy_ as his original; and of course the peculiar mode in which it is written precludes such a supposition. But I believe it to be copied from Chaucer's copy, all the same.

[42] This shews how entirely wrong an editor would be who should change the forms into _Atrides_ and _Agamemnon_; unless, indeed, he were to give due notice. For it destroys the evidence. Note also, that _Agamenon_ is the usual M. E. form. It appears as _Agamenoun_ in Troil. iii. 382.

[43] Hence it is easy to see that when Chaucer's glosses agree, as they sometimes do, with those in Notker's Old High German version or in any other version, the agreement is due to the fact that both translators had similar _Latin_ glosses before them.

[44] My text has _thonder-light_, as in the MSS.; but _leyte_ or _leyt_ is better; see note to the line (p. 422), and see above, p. xlii, l. 8.

[45] There is a later edition by Peiper, said to be the best; but it is out of print, and I failed to obtain a copy. But I have also collated the Latin text in the Delphin edition, ed. Valpy, 1823, and the edition by Renatus Vallinus, 1656; both of these contain useful notes.

[46] Mr. Rossetti has a note, shewing that Prof. Morley's figures are incorrect. He himself reckons _Troilus_ as containing 8246 lines, because the number of stanzas in