Book I
, 517-8:--
'Now, thonked be god, he may goon in the daunce Of hem that Love list febly for to avaunce.'
These lines, jestingly applied to Troilus by Pandarus, are in the House of Fame, 639, 640, applied by Chaucer to himself:--
'Although thou mayst go in the daunce Of hem that him list not avaunce.'
Again, the House of Fame preceded the Legend of Good Women, because he here complains of the hardship of his official duties (652-660); whereas, in the Prologue to the Legend, he rejoices at obtaining some release from them. We may also note the quotation from Boethius (note to l. 972). As Boethius and Troilus seem to have been written together, somewhere about 1380, and took up a considerable time, and the apparent date of the Legend is 1385, the probable date of the House of Fame is about 1383 or 1384. Ten Brink further remarks that the references to Jupiter suggest to the reader that the 10th of December was a Thursday (see note to 111). This would give 1383 for beginning the poem; and perhaps no fitter date than the end of 1383 and the spring of 1384 can be found.
§ 6. METRE. Many of Chaucer's metres were introduced by him from the French; but the four-accent metre, with rime as here employed, was commonly known before Chaucer's time. It was used by Robert of Brunne in 1303, in the Cursor Mundi, and in Havelok. It is, however, of French origin, and occurs in the very lengthy poem of Le Roman de la Rose. Chaucer only employed it thrice: (1) in translating the Roman de la Rose; (2) in the Book of the Duchesse; and (3) in the present poem.
For normal lines, with masculine rimes, see 7, 8, 13, 14, 29, 33, &c. For normal lines, with feminine rimes, see 1, 2, 9, 15, 18, &c. Elision is common, as of _e_ in _turne_ (1), in _somme_ (6), in _Devyne_ (14); &c. Sometimes there is a middle pause, where a final syllable need not always be elided. Thus we may read:--
'By abstinencë--or by seknesse' (25): 'In studie--or melancolious' (30): 'And fro unhappë--and ech disese' (89): 'In his substáuncë--is but air' (768).
Two short syllables, rapidly pronounced, may take the place of one:--
'I noot; but who-_so of_ these mirácles' (12): '_By a_visiouns, or bý figúres' (47).
The first foot frequently consists of a single syllable; see 26, 35, 40, 44; so also in l. 3, where, in modern English, we should prefer _Unto_.
The final _e_, followed by a consonant, is usually sounded, and has its usual grammatical values. Thus we have _think-e_, infin. (15); _bot-e_, old accus. of a fem. sb. (32); _swich-e_, plural (35); _oft-e_, adverbial (35); _soft-e_, with essential final _e_ (A.S. _s[=o]fte_); _find-e_, pres. pl. indic. (43); _com-e_, gerund (45): _gret-e_, pl. (53); _mak-e_, infin. (56); _rod-e_, dat. form used as a new nom., of which there are many examples in Chaucer (57); _blind-e_, def. adj. (138). The endings _-ed_, _-en_, _-es_, usually form a distinct syllable; so also _-eth_, which, however, occasionally becomes _'th_; cf. _comth_ (71). A few common words, written with final _e_, are monosyllabic; as _thise_ (these); also _shulde_ (should), and the like, occasionally. Remember that the old accent is frequently different from the modern; as in _orácles_, _mirácles_ (11, 12): _distaúnc-e_ (18), _aventúres_, _figúres_ (47, 48): _povért_ (88): _málicióus_ (93): &c. The endings _-i-al_, _-i-oun_, _-i-ous_, usually form two distinct syllables.
For further remarks on Metre and Grammar, see vol. v.
§ 7. IMITATIONS. The chief imitations of the House of Fame are The Temple of Glas, by Lydgate[6]; The Palice of Honour, by Gawain Douglas; The Garland of Laurell, by John Skelton; and The Temple of Fame, by Pope. Pope's poem should not be compared with Chaucer's; it is very different in character, and is best appreciated by forgetting its origin.
§ 8. AUTHORITIES. The authorities for the text are few and poor; hence it is hardly possible to produce a thoroughly satisfactory text. There are three MSS. of the fifteenth century, viz. F. (Fairfax MS. 16, in the Bodleian Library); B. (MS. Bodley, 638, in the same); P. (MS. Pepys 2006, in Magdalene College, Cambridge). The last of these is imperfect, ending at l. 1843. There are two early printed editions of some value, viz. Cx. (Caxton's edition, undated); and Th. (Thynne's edition, 1532). None of the later editions are of much value, except the critical edition by Hans Willert (Berlin, 1883). Of these, F. and B., which are much alike, form a first group; P. and Cx. form a second group; whilst Th. partly agrees with Cx., and partly with F. The text is chiefly from F., with collations of the other sources, as given in the footnotes, which record only the more important variations.
§ 9. SOME EMENDATIONS. In constructing the text, a good deal of emendation has been necessary; and I have adopted many hints from Willert's edition above mentioned; though perhaps I may be allowed to add that, in many cases, I had arrived at the same emendations independently, especially where they were obvious. Among the emendations in spelling, I may
## particularise _misdemen_ (92), where all the authorities have _mysdeme_ or
_misdeme_; _Dispyt_, in place of _Dispyte_ (96); _barfoot_, for _barefoot_ or _barefote_ (98); _proces_ (as in P.) for _processe_, as in the rest (251); _delyt_, _profyt_, for _delyte_, _profyte_ (309, 310); _sleighte_ for _sleight_ (462); _brighte_[7], _sighte_, for _bright_, _sight_ (503, 504); _wighte_, _highte_, for _wight_, _hight_ (739, 740); _fyn_, _Delphyn_ (as in Cx.), for _fyne_, _Delphyne_ (1005, 1006); _magyk_, _syk_, for _magyke_, _syke_ (1269, 1270); _losenges_, for _losynges_ (1317), and _frenges_ (as in F.) for _frynges_, as in the rest (1318); _dispyt_ for _dispite_ (1716); _laughe_ for _laugh_ (Cx. _lawhe_, 1809); _delyt_ for _delyte_ (P. _delit_, 1831); _thengyn_ (as in Th.) for _thengyne_ (1934); _othere_ for _other_ (2151, footnote). These are only a few of the instances where nearly all the authorities are at fault.
The above instances merely relate to questions of spelling. Still more serious are the defects in the MSS. and printed texts as regards the sense; but all instances of emendation are duly specified in the footnotes, and are frequently further discussed in the Notes at the end. Thus, in l. 329, it is necessary to supply _I_. In 370, _allas_ should be _Eneas_. In 513, Willert rightly puts _selly_, i.e. wonderful, for _sely_, blessed. In 557, the metre is easily restored, by reading _so agast_ for _agast so_. In 621, we must read _lyte is_, not _lytel is_, if we want a rime to _dytees_. In 827, I restore the word _mansioun_; the usual readings are tautological. In 911, I restore _toun_ for _token_, and adopt the only reading of l. 912 that gives any sense. In 1007, the only possible reading is _Atlantes_. In 1044, Morris's edition has _biten_, correctly; though MS. F. has _beten_, and there is no indication that a correction has been made. In 1114, the right word is _site_; cf. the Treatise on the Astrolabe (see Note). In 1135, read _bilt_ (i.e. buildeth); _bilte_ gives neither sense nor rhythm. In 1173, supply _be_. Ll. 1177, 1178 have been set right by Willert. In 1189, the right word is _Babewinnes_[8]. In 1208, read _Bret_ (as in B.). In 1233, read _famous_. In 1236, read _Reyes_[9]. In 1303, read _hatte_, i.e. are named. In 1351, read _Fulle_, not _Fyne_. In 1372, adopt the reading of Cx. Th. P., or there is no nominative to _streighte_; and in 1373, read _wonderliche_. In 1411, read _tharmes_ (= _the armes_). In 1425, I supply _and hy_, to fill out the line. In 1483, I supply _dan_; if, however, _poete_ is made trisyllabic, then l. 1499 should not contain _daun_. In 1494, for _high the_, read _highte_ (as in l. 744). In 1527, for _into_ read _in_. In 1570, read _Up peyne_. In 1666, 1701, and 1720, for _werkes_ read _werk_. In 1702, read _clew_ (see note)[10]. In 1717, _lyen_ is an error for _lyuen_, i.e. live. In 1750, read _To_, not _The_. In 1775, supply _ye_; or there is no sense. In 1793, supply _they_ for a like reason. In 1804, 5, supply _the_, and _al_; for the scansion. In 1897, read _wiste_, not _wot_. In 1940, _hattes_ should be _hottes_; this emendation has been accepted by several scholars. In 1936, the right word is _falwe_, not _salwe_ (as in Morris). In 1960, there should be no comma at the end of the line, as in most editions; and in 1961, 2 read _werre_, _reste_ (not _werres_, _restes_). In 1975, _mis_ and _governement_ are distinct words. In 2017, _frot_[11] is an error for _froyt_; it is better to read _fruit_ at once; this correction is due to Koch. In 2021, suppress _in_ after _yaf_. In 2049, for _he_ read _the other_ (Willert). In 2059, _wondermost_ is all one word. In 2076, I read _word_; Morris reads _mothe_, but does not explain it, and it gives no sense. In 2156, I supply _nevene_.
I mention these as examples of necessary emendations of which the usual editions take no notice.
I also take occasion to draw attention to the careful articles on this poem by Dr. J. Koch, in Anglia, vol. vii. App. 24-30, and Englische Studien, xv. 409-415; and the remarks by Willert in Anglia, vii. App. 203-7. The best general account of the poem is that in Ten Brink's History of English Literature.
In conclusion, I add a few 'last words.'
L. 399. We learn, from Troil. i. 654, that Chaucer actually supposed 'Oënone' to have four syllables. This restores the metre. Read:--And Paris to Oënone.
503. Read 'brighte,' with final _e_; 'bright' is a misprint.
859. Compare Cant. Tales, F 726.
1119. 'To climbe hit,' i.e. to climb the rock; still a common idiom.
2115. Compare Cant. Tales, A 2078. Perhaps read 'wanie.'
INTRODUCTION TO THE LEGEND OF GOOD WOMEN.
§ 1. DATE OF THE POEM: A.D. 1385. The Legend of Good Women presents several points of peculiar, I might almost say of unique interest. It is the immediate precursor of the Canterbury Tales, and enables us to see how the poet was led on towards the composition of that immortal poem. This is easily seen, upon consideration of the date at which it was composed.
The question of the date has been well investigated by Ten Brink; but it may be observed beforehand that the allusion to the 'queen' in l. 496 has long ago been noticed, and it has been thence inferred, by Tyrwhitt, that the Prologue must have been written _after_ 1382, the year when Richard II. married his first wife, the 'good queen Anne.' But Ten Brink's remarks enable us to look at the question much more closely.
He shows that Chaucer's work can be clearly divided into three chief periods, the chronology of which he presents in the following form[12].
FIRST PERIOD.
1366 (at latest). The Romaunt of the Rose. 1369. The Book of the Duchesse. 1372. (end of the period).
SECOND PERIOD.
1373. The Lyf of Seint Cecile. The Assembly of Foules. Palamon and Arcite. Translation of Boethius. Troilus and Creseide. 1384. The House of Fame.
THIRD PERIOD.
1385. Legend of Good Women. Canterbury Tales. 1391. Treatise on the Astrolabe.
It is unnecessary for our present purpose to insert the conjectured dates of the Minor Poems not here mentioned.
According to Ten Brink, the poems of the First Period were composed before Chaucer set out on his Italian travels, i.e. before December, 1372, and contain no allusions to writings by Italian authors. In them, the influence of French authors is very strongly marked.
The poems of the Second Period (he tells us) were composed after that date. The Life of Seint Cecile already marks the author's acquaintance with Dante's Divina Commedia; lines 36-51 are, in fact, a free translation from the Paradiso, canto xxxiii. ll. 1-21. See my note to this passage, and the remarks on the 'Second Nun's Tale' in vol. v. The Parlement of Foules contains references to Dante and a long passage translated from Boccaccio's Teseide; see my notes to that poem in vol. i. The original Palamon and Arcite was also taken from the Teseide; for even the revised version of it (now known as the Knightes Tale, and containing, doubtless, much more of Chaucer's own work) is founded upon that poem, and occasionally presents verbal imitations of it. Troilus is similarly dependent upon Boccaccio's Filostrato. The close connexion between Troilus and the translation of Boethius is seen from several considerations, of which it may suffice here to mention two. The former is the association of these two works in Chaucer's lines to Adam--
'Adam scriveyn, if ever it thee befalle _Boece_ or _Troilus_ to wryten newe.' Minor Poems; see vol. i. p. 379.
And the latter is, the fact that Chaucer inserts in Troilus ( book iv . stanzas 140-154) a long passage on predestination and free-will, taken from Boethius,