NOTES (continued 2)

2139. To helpe with: cp. i. 452, 2172, ii. 283, &c.

2194. holden up his oil: cp. l. 2584, ‘To bere up oil.’ The only other instance which I can quote of this expression is from Trevisa’s translation of the Polychronicon (Rolls’ Series, vol. iii. p. 447, a reference which I owe to Dr. Murray), ‘There Alisaundre gan to boste ... and a greet deel of hem that were at the feste hilde up the kynges oyl.’ (In the Latin, magna convivantium parte assentiente.’) In all these cases it is used of flatterers, and ‘oil’ seems to stand in this phrase for ‘pride’ or ‘vainglory.’ I am disposed to think it is simply the French ‘oil,’ meaning ‘eye,’ and getting its present sense from such Biblical expressions as ‘oculi sublimium deprimentur,’ ‘oculos superborum humiliabis,’ ‘oculos sublimes, linguam mendacem’; but I can quote no examples of this meaning in French.

2217 ff. This story is based originally on an anecdote told by Valerius Maximus: ‘Idem Syracusis, cum holera ei lavanti Aristippus dixisset, Si Dionysium adulari velles, ista non esses, Immo, inquit, si tu ista esse velles, non adularere Dionysium’ (Mem. iv. 3). It has been repeated often in a short form.

2268. the worldes crok, that is, the crooked way of the world. See the quotations in the New Engl. Dictionary under ‘crook,’ 12.

2279. joutes: see Godefroy’s Dictionary, where an instance is quoted of the use of this word in a French version of this very story.

2302. F punctuates after ‘pyke,’ and no doubt rightly so. The word ‘trewely’ corresponds to the Latin ‘certe’ in the margin above.

2355 ff. The Roman Triumph as here related was a commonplace of preachers and moralists, cp. Bromyard, Summa Praedicantium, T. v. 36, ‘Triumphus enim secundum Isidorum dicitur a tribus: quia triumphator Romanus cum victoria versus civitatem veniens tres honores habere debuit,’ &c. So l. 2366, ‘Of treble honour he was certein.’ It is also in the Gesta Romanorum, 30 (ed. Oesterley), but from neither of these could Gower have got his ‘Notheos’ (for Γνῶθι σεαυτόν).

2416 ff. This custom is spoken of in Hoccleve’s Regement of Princes with a marginal reference to the Vita Iohannis Eleemosynarii, where it is in fact mentioned (Migne, Patrol., vol. 73, p. 354).

2527 ff. From 1 Kings xxii. It will be seen that the story is told rather freely as regards order of events, as if from memory.

2531 (margin). organizate, used in a musical sense.

2553. Godelie: the person meant is Athaliah.

2584. bere up oil: see note on l. 2194.

2660. astraied. See New Engl. Dict., under ‘astray,’ verb and adv.

2698 (margin). No manuscript here gives the reading ‘regiminis,’ so far as I know; but it is required by the sense, and the reading ‘regis’ might easily arise from the abbreviation of ‘regiminis,’ as we find it in some MSS. at l. 3106 (margin). Note that S is defective here, and J, Ad, K omit the Latin margin. Δ attempts an emendation.

2726 f. lete Of wrong to don, i. e. ‘abstain from doing wrong.’

2765 ff. From Godfrey of Viterbo (in Monum. Germ. Hist. xxii. p. 169), ‘Quando voluit rectores dare provinciis ... nomina eorum examinabat in populo, dicens: Si quis habet crimen contra eos, dicat et probet,’ &c. This passage is not contained in the earlier redactions of the Pantheon, and consequently we may conclude that Gower’s copy was one which contained the later additions: cp. notes on 4181 ff. and viii. 271 ff.

2771. his name, that is, his reputation: cp. 2774.

2780. stod ... upon, ‘rested upon,’ ‘was guided by.’

2783 ff. The saying by which this story is characterized, ‘malle locupletibus imperare quam ipsum fieri locupletem,’ is more properly attributed to M’. Curius Dentatus (Valerius Maximus, Mem. iv. 3. 5): but Fabricius also rejected gifts sent him by the Samnites.

2810. bothe: apparently both the men and their possessions.

2833 ff. This is probably Conrad II, of whom Godfrey of Viterbo says ‘nulli violatori pacis parcebat.’

2845 ff. Originally taken from Valerius Maximus, who tells it, however, with reference to Charondas, the supposed legislator of Thurii (Mem. vi. 5).

2864. sete: apparently a strong past participle formed from ‘sette’ by confusion with ‘sitte ‘: cp. ‘upsete’ rhyming with ‘misgete,’ viii. 244.

2883. of dawe: equivalent to ‘of this lif,’ iv. 3414.

2889 ff. This is a story which we find very often repeated (originally from Herodotus), e. g. Valerius Maximus, Mem. vi. 3, Gesta Romanorum, 29 (without mention of Cambyses by name), Hoccleve’s Regement of Princes, &c. In Δ we find added to the marginal Latin,

It would seem that the last line should stand as the second.

2902. Avise him, ‘Let him consider.’

flitte, ‘turn aside,’ cp. iv. 214; but also intransitive, v. 7076.

2917 ff. Another often repeated story. The Gesta Romanorum has it (169) with a reference to Trogus Pompeius (that is Justin, Epit. iii. 3). Gower makes the city Athens instead of Sparta (cp. 3089), and the god Mercury instead of Apollo.

3054 ff. This list of legislators is from the Trésor, p. 24, but the text which our author used seems to have been corrupt. The passage runs thus in the printed edition: ‘Moyses fu li premiers qui bailla la loi as Hebreus; et li rois Foroneus fu li premiers qui la bailla as Grezois; Mercures as Egypciens, et Solon à cels de Athenes; Ligurgus as Troyens; Numa Pompilius, qui regna après Romulus en Rome, et puis ses filz, bailla et fist lois as Romains premierement,’ &c. If we suppose ‘Solon’ to have been omitted in the MS., the passage might read (with changes of punctuation) nearly as we have it in Gower.

3092. on the beste Above alle other: cp. iv. 2606, &c.

3137 ff. Cp. Mirour de l’Omme, 13921, and see also ii. 3204 ff. (margin).

3144. Troian: so given in all MSS. for ‘Traian.’ So also in the Mirour, 22168, and in Godfrey of Viterbo, Spec. Reg. ii. 14 (Mon. Germ. Hist. xxii. p. 74).

3181 ff. Valerius Maximus, Mem. v. 6: but he does not mention the Dorians as the enemy against whom Codrus fought. However, the story was a common one: cp. Gesta Romanorum, 41.

3201. lemes: cp. Chaucer, Cant. Tales, A 3886.

3149* f. The reference is to the Epistle of St. James ii. 13, ‘Iudicium enim sine misericordia illi qui non fecit misericordiam.’

3157*. That is, ‘Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.’

3161* f. Cp. Mirour de l’Omme, 13918 ff., where the same is quoted.

3163* ff. Quoted also in the Mirour, 13925 ff.,and there also attributed to Tullius, but I cannot give the reference.

3210. drawe: the change to subjunctive marks this sentence as really conditional.

3215 ff. Valerius Maximus, Mem. v. 1. 9.

3217. in jeupartie, i. e. equally balanced, the result uncertain.

3267 ff. Justinian II is described by Gibbon as a cruel tyrant, whose deposition by Leontius was fully deserved, and who, when restored by the help of Terbelis, took a ferocious vengeance on his opponents: ‘during the six years of his new reign, he considered the axe, the cord, and the rack as the only instruments of royalty.’ Nothing apparently could be less appropriate than the epithet ‘pietous,’ which Gower bestows upon him.

3295 ff. This again was a very common story: cp. Gesta Romanorum, 48 (ed. Oesterley). Hoccleve tells it with a reference to Orosius, Regement of Princes, 3004 ff. Gower probably had it from Godfrey of Viterbo, Pantheon, p. 181 (ed. 1584), where Berillus is given for Perillus, as in our text. He takes ‘Phalaris Siculus’ as the tyrant’s name, and shortens it to Siculus.

3302. I take the preceding three lines as a parenthesis, and this as following l. 3298.

3341. ‘Dionys’ is a mistake for Diomede, or rather Diomedes is confused with the tyrant Dionysius.

3355 ff. Cp. Ovid, Metam. i. 221 ff.

3359. With othre men, i. e. ‘by other men’: cp. viii. 2553.

3387 ff. This characteristic of the lion is mentioned by Brunetto Latini, Trésor, p. 224.

3417 ff. This story is told much as it appears in Justin, Epit. i. 8, and Orosius, Hist. ii. 7, but the name Spertachus (Spartachus) is apparently from Peter Comestor (Migne, Patrol.. vol. 198, p. 1471), who gives this as the name of Cyrus in his boyhood. The same authority may have supplied the name ‘Marsagete,’ for the histories named above call Thamyris only ‘queen of the Scythians’; but Comestor omits the details of the story.

3207* ff. The tale of the Jew and the Pagan is from the Secretum Secretorum, where it is told as a warning against trusting those who are not of our faith. The differences are mainly as follows. No names of places are mentioned in the original; the ‘pagan’ is called ‘magus orientalis,’ and he rides a mule: the Jew is without provisions, and the Magian feeds him as well as allowing him to ride: the Jew is found not dead but thrown from the mule, with a broken leg and other injuries—there is no mention of a lion except in the entreaties of the Magian, ‘noli me derelinquere in deserto, ne forte interficiar a leonibus.’ The Magian is about to leave him to die, but the Jew pleads that he has acted only in accordance with his own law, and again appeals to the Magian to show him the mercy which his religion enjoins. Finally the Magian carries him away and delivers him safely to his own people. Probably our author thought that this form of the story unduly sacrificed justice to mercy, and therefore he killed his Jew outright.

3342* ff. Note the subjunctive after ‘who (that)’ here and in ll. 3349, 3355: see note on Prol. 460.

3418. The name ‘Spertachus’ is given in full by F in the Latin summary, l. 3426 (margin). In the English text the first syllable is abbreviated in most copies, but A has ‘Spartachus’ and H₃ ‘Spertachus.’

3539. Pite feigned: cp. l. 3835.

3581. The reference should be to Juvenal, Sat. viii. 269 ff.,

Gower has here taken the point out of the quotation to a great extent, but it occurs in the Mirour, 23371 ff., in its proper form, though with the same false reference.

3627 ff. From the Book of Judges, ch. vii.

3632. For the anacoluthon cp. iv. 3201, vi. 1798, and note on i. 98.

3639. The reading of the second recension, ‘hem,’ seems clearly to be right here: ‘against those who would assail them.’

3640 ff. The meaning apparently is that each single division of the three which the enemy had was twice as large as Gideon’s whole army. The original text says nothing of the kind.

3752. per compaignie, ‘together.’

3820 ff. 1 Samuel xv.

3860 ff. 1 Kings ii.

3877. natheles, ‘moreover’: cp. 4242 and note on Prol. 39.

3884. that, for ‘to that’: cp. Prol. 122.

3891 ff. 1 Kings iii.

4011. propre, i. e. ‘in himself.’

4027 ff. 1 Kings xii.

4144. can ... mai, used in their original senses, the one implying knowledge and the other active power.

4181 ff. The person meant is Antoninus Pius, of whom his biographer Capitolinus says that he loved peace ‘eousque ut Scipionis sententiam frequentarit, qua ille dicebat, malle se unum civem servare quam mille hostes occidere’ (Hist. August. ed. 1620, p. 20). Godfrey of Viterbo, in the text given by Waitz (Mon. Germ. Hist. xxii. pp. 75, 163), regularly calls him Antonius, and probably Gower had the saying from this source. It is one of the later additions to the Pantheon: cp. note on 2765 ff.

4195. is due To Pite. This seems to mean ‘is bound by duty’ to show mercy.

4228. His trouthe plight, ‘the engagement of his faith.’ Here we have the word ‘plight’ from OE. ‘pliht,’ to be distinguished from ‘plit.’

4242. natheles: cp. l. 3877.

4245. hihe: note the definite form after the possessive genitive, as after a possessive pronoun.

4284. ‘And even if it should chance that he obtained any friendliness from her.’ For the use of ‘compainie’ cp. v. 4558.

4335. Barbarus: more properly Arbaces, but ‘Barbatus’ in the Pantheon (p. 165, ed. 1584).

4361 ff. Cp. Justin, Epit. i. 7, where however the expedient is said to have been used (as related by Herodotus) after Cyrus had put down a revolt.

4406 ff. Numbers xxv.

4408. Amalech: Balak is meant.

4464 ff. This means apparently that the later time of life will be as a dark night which is not illuminated by any sunshine of dawn; but it is not very clearly expressed.

4469 ff. 1 Kings xi.

4515. That is, ‘Ahijah the Shilonite,’ called ‘Ahias Silonites’ in the Latin version.

4559 ff. (margin). The quotation is from the Secretum Secretorum: ‘O summe rex, studeas modis omnibus custodire et retinere calorem naturalem’ (ed. 1520, f. 25 v^o).

4574 f. Caracalla, son of Severus, is here meant. His name was Aurelius Antoninus, and he is called Aurelius Antonius in the Pantheon (Mon. Germ. Hist. xxii. p. 166). Caracalla is called by Orosius ‘omnibus hominibus libidine intemperantior, qui etiam novercam suam Iuliam uxorem duxerit’ (Hist. vii. 18), and this character of him is repeated in the Pantheon.

4593 ff. This story is from Ovid, Fasti, ii. 687-720. Gower’s rendering of it is remarkable for ease and simplicity of style: see especially ll. 4667-4685, 4701-4717.

4598. Neither Aruns nor Sextus is mentioned by name in Ovid, who speaks only of ‘Tarquinius iuvenis.’ Gower gives to Aruns the place of Sextus throughout this and the following story.

4623. schette, intransitive, equivalent to ‘were shut’: cp. iii. 1453.

4701 ff. The sacrifice at which this portent occurred is here brought into connexion with the capture of Gabii, a construction which is not unnaturally suggested by Ovid’s abrupt transition, l. 711.

4718 ff.

Ovid means that a message was sent to Delphi; but our author understands it differently.

4739 f. ‘Creditus offenso procubuisse pede’ (720).

4754 ff. This again is from Ovid, where it occurs as a continuation of the last story, Fasti, 721-852. Chaucer, who tells this story in the Legend of G. Women, 1680 ff., also follows Ovid, and more closely than Gower, e. g. 1761 ff., 1805 ff., 1830f.

4757. unskilfully, that is, ‘unjustly,’ without due ‘skile’ or reason.

4778 ff. ‘Non opus est verbis, credite rebus, ait’ (734).

4805 f. This is derived from a misunderstanding of Fasti, ii. 785,

Cp. l. 4911 below. Both Chaucer and Gower make the tragedy occur at Rome, though Chaucer professes to have Livy before him.

4902. ‘audentes forsve deusve iuvat.’

4937. To hire: cp. v. 5724. It means here much the same as ‘by her.’

5062. sche myhte it noght, ‘sche could not help it.’

5088 ff.

5093 ff. This latter part is added from other sources, perhaps from Livy.

5131 ff. Chaucer tells the story of Virginia as the Tale of the Doctor of Physic, professing to follow Livy, but actually taking his materials chiefly from the Roman de la Rose, 5613 ff., from which he transcribes also the reference to ‘Titus Livius.’ His story differs from that of Livy in many respects, and the changes are not at all for the better. For example, Chaucer does not mention the absence of Virginius in the camp, and he makes him kill his daughter at home and carry her head to Appius. Gower follows Livy, or some account drawn from Livy, without material alteration. It may be observed that Chaucer (following the Rom. de la Rose) uses the name ‘Apius’ alone for the judge, and ‘Claudius’ for the dependent, while Gower names them more correctly ‘Apius Claudius’ and ‘Marchus Claudius.’ On the subject generally reference may be made to Rumbaur’s dissertation, Geschichte von Appius und Virginia in der engl. Litteratur, Breslau, 1890.

5136. Livius Virginius, a mistake for ‘Lucius Virginius.’

5151. Ilicius, that is, Icilius.

5209. til that he come, ‘till he should come,’ the verb being pret. subjunctive.

5254 ff. The sentence is irregular in construction, but intelligible and vigorous: ‘but as to that command, like the hunted wild boar, who when he feels the hounds hard upon him, throws them off on both sides and goes his way, so (we may say) this knight,’ &c. The simile is due to Gower.

5261. kepte, ‘waited for.’

5307 ff. From the Book of Tobit, ch. vi-viii. The moral of the story is given by vi. 17, where Raphael says to Tobias, ‘Hi namque qui coniugium ita suscipiunt, ut Deum a se et a sua mente excludant, et suae libidini ita vacent sicut equus et mulus, quibus non est intellectus, habet potestatem daemonium super eos.’ This, however, is absent from the English version (which follows the LXX), as are also the precepts which follow, about nights to be spent in prayer by the newly married couple. The same is the case with the five precepts given to Sara by her parents, which are mentioned in the Mirour, 17701 ff.

5390. This line, written in F as follows,

is enough to show that v and u are used indifferently in this kind of position: cp. movþe: couþe, 5285 f.

5408. Do wey, ‘Have done’: see New English Dictionary, ‘do,’ 52.

LIB. VIII.

We may suppose that our author had some embarrassment as regards the subject of his eighth book. It should properly have dealt with the seventh Deadly Sin and its various branches, that is, as the Mirour de l’Omme gives them, ‘Fornicacioun,’ ‘Stupre,’ ‘Avolterie,’ ‘Incest,’ ‘Foldelit.’ Nearly all of these subjects, however, have already been treated of more or less fully, either in the fifth book, where branches of Avarice are spoken of with reference to the case of love, or in the seventh, under the head of Chastity as a point of Policy. Even the author’s commendation of Virginity, which might well have been reserved for this place, and which would have been rather less incongruous at the end than in the middle of the shrift, has already been set forth in the fifth book. There remained only Incest, and of this unpromising subject he has made the best he could, first tracing out the gradual development of the moral (or rather the ecclesiastical) law with regard to it, and then making it an excuse for the Tale of Apollonius (or Appolinus) of Tyre, which extends over the larger half of the book. The last thousand lines or so are occupied with the conclusion of the whole poem.

36. upon his grace, that is, free for him to bestow on whom he would.

44. Raphael is not named in Genesis.

48. Metodre, that is, Methodius, in whose Revelationes it is written, ‘Sciendum namque est, exeuntes Adam et Evam de Paradiso virgines fuisse,’ so that ‘Into the world’ in l. 53 must mean from Paradise into the outer world.

62 ff. This is not found in Genesis, only ‘genuitque filios et filias,’ but Methodius says that the sisters of Cain and Abel were Calmana and Debora.

110. For the hiatus cp. Mirour, 12241,

158. ne yit religion. The seduction of one who was a professed member of a religious order was usually accounted to be incest: cp. Mirour, 9085 ff. and l. 175 below.

170. ‘I keep no such booth (or stall) at the fair,’ that is, ‘I do no such trade.’

244. upsete: see Introduction, p. cxix, and cp. vii. 2864.

271 ff. Gower tells us here that he finds the story in the Pantheon. That is true, no doubt: it is told there in the peculiar kind of verse with which Godfrey of Viterbo diversified his chronicle, and a most useful text of this particular story, showing the differences of three redactions, is given by S. Singer in his Apollonius von Tyrus, Halle, 1895, pp. 153-177. There is ample evidence that Gower was acquainted with the Pantheon, but it is not the case that he followed it in this story, as has been too readily assumed. Godfrey tells the tale in a much abbreviated form, and Gower unquestionably followed mainly the Latin prose narrative which was commonly current, though he thought the Pantheon, as a grave historical authority, more fit to be cited. The very first sentence, with its reference, ‘as seith the bok,’ is enough to indicate this, but a few more points may be mentioned here in which the story of the Pantheon differs from Gower and from the prose Historia Apollonii Tyrii. (1) Godfrey of Viterbo does not say what was the problem proposed by Antiochus, nor does he mention the period of thirty days. (2) He gives no details of the flight of Apollonius or of the mourning of his people, and he does not mention the incident of Taliart (or Thaliarchus). (3) The name Pentapolim is not introduced. (4) There is no mention in the Pantheon of the wooing of the daughter of Archistrates by three princes (or nobles) or of the bills which they wrote. (5) There is no mention of the nurse Lichorida being taken with Apollonius and his wife on shipboard, of the master of the ship insisting that the corpse should be thrown into the sea, or of the name of the physician, Cerimon. (6) The Pantheon says nothing of the vow of Apollonius in ll. 1301-1306. (7) The name Theophilus is not given. (8) There is no mention of the tomb of Thaise (or Tharsia) being shown to Apollonius. (9) In the Pantheon the punishment of Strangulio and Dionysia precedes the visit to Ephesus, and there is no mention of the dream which caused Apollonius to sail to Ephesus.

There are indeed some points in which Gower agrees with the Pantheon against the Historia, for example in making the princess ask for Apollonius as her teacher on the very night of the banquet instead of the next morning, and in representing that Apollonius went to his kingdom after leaving his daughter at Tharsis (cp. E. Klebs, Die Erzählung von Apollonius aus Tyrus, Berlin, 1899). Perhaps however the most marked correspondence is where Gower makes the wife of Apollonius ‘Abbesse’ of Diana’s temple (l. 1849), which is evidently from Godfrey’s line, ‘Sic apud Ephesios velut abbatissa moratur’: cp. also l. 1194 ‘warmed ofte.’ These are both among the later additions to the Pantheon, and apparently were overlooked by Singer and Klebs when they pronounced that Gower probably knew only the earlier redaction: cp. notes on vii. 2765, 4181.

The Latin prose narrative has been printed in Welseri Opera, ed. 1682, pp. 681-704, and also in the Teubner series (ed. Riese, 1871, 1893). It is a translation from a Greek original, as is sufficiently indicated by the Greek words that occur in it, and by the Greek customs which it refers to or presupposes. Gower agrees with it pretty closely, but the story is not improved in his hands. It loses, of course, the Greek characteristics of which we have spoken, and several of the incidents are related by Gower in a less effective manner than in the original. For example, in the scene near the beginning between Antiochus and Apollonius, the king asks, ‘Nosti nuptiarum conditionem?’ and the young man replies, ‘Novi et ad portam vidi,’ to which there is nothing corresponding in Gower. Again, at a later stage of the story, when the three young nobles send in their proposals to the daughter of Archistrates, the original story makes her reply in a note which declares that she will marry only ‘the ship-wrecked man.’ The king innocently inquires of the three young men which of them has suffered shipwreck, and finally hands the note to Apollonius to see if he can make anything of it. This is much better managed than by Gower. On the other hand our author has done well in dispensing with the rudeness and boastfulness of Apollonius on the occasion when the king’s daughter plays the harp at the feast, and also in modifying the scenes at the brothel and excluding Athenagoras from taking part in them. The quotations given in the following notes are made from the Bodleian MS. Laud 247, a good copy of the twelfth century, which has a form of text more nearly corresponding to that which Gower used than that of any of the printed editions, and by means of which we can account for the names Thaise and Philotenne.

It can hardly be necessary to observe that the play of Pericles, Prince of Tyre, had another source besides Gower, and especially as regards its fourth and fifth acts. Marina is waylaid while going to visit the tomb of her old nurse, as in the original story, the scene of the pirates agrees more nearly with the original than with Gower, Lysimachus plays a part very like that which Gower took away from Athenagoras, and the scene between Cleon and Dionyza (iv. 4) seems to be suggested by the original. The story was current in English prose, as is well known.

386. And seileth: cp. v. 3291 and note.

395. he moste, ‘that he might,’ ‘ut sibi liceret,’ a common use of the word in older English (see examples in Bosworth and Toller’s Dictionary).

405 ff. (margin). The riddle as given in the Laud MS. is, ‘Scelere uehor. Materna carne uescor. Quero patrem meum matris mee uirum uxoris mee filiam, nec inuenio.’ Most copies have ‘fratrem meum’ for ‘patrem meum,’ but Gower agrees with the Laud MS. I do not attempt a solution of it beyond that of Apollonius, which is, ‘Quod dixisti scelere uehor, non es mentitus, ad te ipsum respice. Et quod dixisti materna carne uescor, filiam tuam intuere.’

484. the Stwes. For the spelling cp. ‘Jwes,’ v. 1713, 1808.

536. This is by no means in accordance with the original. Antiochus exclaims on hearing of the flight of Apollonius, ‘Fugere modo quidem potest, effugere autem quandoque me minime poterit,’ and at once issues an edict, ‘Quicunque mihi Apollonium contemptorem regni mei uiuum adduxerit, quinquaginta talenta auri a me dabuntur ei: qui uero caput eius mihi optulerit, talentorum c. receptor erit’ (f. 205 v^o), and he causes search to be made after him both by land and sea. The change made by Gower is not a happy one, for it takes away the motive for the flight from Tarsus, where Apollonius heard of this proscription.

542 ff. In the original Apollonius meets ‘Hellanicus’ at once on landing, and is informed by him of the proscription. He makes an offer to Strangulio to sell his wheat at cost price to the citizens, if they will conceal his presence among them. The money which he receives as the price of the wheat is expended by him in public benefits to the state, and the citizens set up a statue of him standing in a two-horse chariot (biga), his right hand holding forth corn and his left foot resting upon a bushel measure.

603. ferketh, ‘conveys,’ from OE. ‘fercian’: cp. Anglo-Saxon Chron. 1009, Hī fercodon ða scipo eft to Lundenne’ (quoted in Bosworth and Toller’s Dictionary).

624. ‘But with cable and cord broken asunder ... the ship’ &c., past participle absolute, as ii. 791, viii. 1830.

640. forto mote To gete ayein. Apparently this means ‘to wish to get again,’ a meaning derived from the phrase ‘so mot I,’ &c., expressing a wish. The infinitive is very unusual. For the gerund with ‘to’ which follows it cp. ii. 510, vii. 437, where we have this construction with ‘mai,’ ‘mihte.’

679. The account in the original story is here considerably different. Gower did not understand the Greek customs. ‘Et dum cogitaret unde uite peteret auxilium, uidit puerum nudum per plateam currentem, oleo unctum, precinctum sabana, ferentem ludos iuueniles ad gymnasium pertinentes, maxima uoce dicentem: Audite ciues, audite peregrini, liberi et ingenui, gymnasium patet. Apollonius hoc audito exuens se tribunario ingreditur lauacrum, utitur liquore palladio; et dum exercentes singulos intueretur, parem sibi querit et non inuenit. Subito Arcestrates rex totius illius regionis cum turba famulorum ingressus est: dumque cum suis ad pile lusum exerceretur, uolente deo miscuit se Apollonius regi, et dum currenti sustulit pilam, subtili ueiocitate percussam ludenti regi remisit’ &c. (f. 207 v^o).

The story proceeds to say that the king, pleased with the skill of Apollonius in the game of ball, accepted his services at the bath, and was rubbed down by him in a very pleasing manner. The result was an invitation to supper.

Gower agrees here with the Pantheon in making the king a spectator only.

691. Artestrathes. The name is Arcestrates in the Laud MS.

706. lefte it noght, ‘did not neglect it.’

720 f. ‘Ingressus Apollonius in triclinium, contra regem adsignato loco discubuit.’ Gower apparently sets him at the head of the second table. For ‘beginne’ cp. Cant. Tales, Prol. 52, with Skeat’s note.

767 ff. In the original all applaud the performance of the king’s daughter except Apollonius, who being asked by the king why he alone kept silence, replied, ‘Bone rex, si permittis, dicam quod sentio: filia enim tua in artem musicam incidit, nam non didicit. Denique iube mihi tradi liram, et scies quod nescit’ (f. 208 v^o). Gower has toned this down to courtesy.

782. ‘ita stetit ut omnes discumbentes una cum rege non Apollonium sed Apollinem estimarent.’

866 ff. In the original this incident takes place when the king is in company with Apollonius. The king replies that his daughter has fallen ill from too much study, but he bids them each write his name and the sum of money which he is prepared to offer as dowry, and he sends the bills at once to the princess by the hand of Apollonius. She reads them, and then asks whether he is not sorry that she is going to be married. He says, ‘Immo gratulor,’ and she replies, ‘Si amares, doleres.’ Then she writes a note, saying that she wishes to have ‘the shipwrecked man’ as her husband, adding ‘Si miraris, pater, quod pudica uirgo tam inprudenter scripserim, scitote quia quod pudore indicare non potui, per ceram mandaui, que ruborem non habet.’ The king having read the note asks the young men which of them has been shipwrecked. One claims the distinction, but is promptly exposed by his companions, and the king hands the note to Apollonius, saying that he can make nothing of it. Apollonius reads and blushes, and the king asks, ‘Inuenisti naufragum?’ To which he replies discreetly, ‘Bone rex, si permittis, inueni.’ The king at last understood, and dismissed the three young men, promising to send for them when they were wanted.

901 ff. ‘cui si me non tradideris, amittis filiam tuam,’ but this is afterwards, in a personal interview.

930 ff. There is no mention of the queen in the original. The king calls his friends together and announces the marriage. The description of the wedding, &c., ll. 952-974, is due to Gower.

1003 ff. In the original story it is here announced to Apollonius that he has been elected king in succession to Antiochus; but this was regarded by our author as an unnecessary complication.

1037 ff. The details of the description are due to our author.

1054 ff. So far as the original can be understood, it seems to say that the birth of the child was brought about by the storm and that the appearance of death in the mother took place afterwards, owing to a coagulation of the blood caused by the return of fair weather.

1059-1083. This is all Gower, except 1076 f.

1089 ff. Apparently the meaning is that the sea will necessarily cast a dead body up on the shore, and therefore they must throw it out of the ship, otherwise the ship itself will be cast ashore with it. The Latin says only, ‘nauis mortuum non suffert: iube ergo corpus in pelago mitti’ (f. 211 v^o).

1101. The punctuation is that of F.

1128. tak in his mynde, ‘let him take thought’: cp. v. 3573, and l. 1420 below.

1165. the wisest: cp. Introduction, p. cxi.

1184 ff. In the original it is not Cerimon himself, but a young disciple of his, who discovers the signs of life and takes measures for restoring her. She has already been laid upon the pyre, and he by carefully lighting the four corners of it (cp. l. 1192) succeeds in liquefying the coagulated blood. Then he takes her in and warms her with wool steeped in hot oil.

1195. ‘began’ is singular, and the verbs ‘hete,’ ‘flacke,’ ‘bete’ are used intransitively: ‘to flacke’ means to flutter.

1219. ‘In short, they speak of nothing’: ‘as for an ende’ seems to mean the same as ‘for end’ or ‘for an end’ in later English: cp. New English Dictionary, ‘end.’

1248. This daughter is apparently an invention of Gower’s, who perhaps misread the original, ‘adhibitis amicis filiam sibi adoptauit,’ that is, he adopted her as his daughter.

1285. his In, ‘his lodging,’ in this case the house of Strangulio. Note the distinction made here by the capital letter between the substantive and the adverb: see Introduction, p. clix.

1293. whiche: note the plural, referring to Strangulio and his wife.

1295. The name here in the original is ‘Tharsia,’ given to her by her father’s suggestion from the name of the city, Tharsus, where she was left; but the Laud MS. afterwards regularly calls her Thasia.

1311 ff. This is not in accordance with the Latin prose story. He is there represented as telling Strangulio that he does not care, now that he has lost his wife, either to accept the offered kingdom or to return to his father-in-law, but intends to lead the life of a merchant. Here the expression is ‘ignotas et longinquas petens Egypti regiones.’ On the other hand the Pantheon makes him proceed to his kingdom, apparently Antioch.

1337. Philotenne: the name in the Laud MS. is ‘Philothemia,’ but it is not distinguishable in writing from Philothenna. There is much variation as to this name in other copies.

1349 ff. Much is made in the original story of the death of this nurse and of the revelation which she made to Tharsia of her real parentage. Up to this time she had supposed herself to be the daughter of Strangulio. The nurse suspected some evil, and advised Tharsia, if her supposed parents dealt ill with her, to go and take hold of the statue of her father in the market-place and appeal to the citizens for help. After her death Tharsia visited her tomb by the sea-shore every day, ‘et ibi manes parentum suorum inuocabat.’ Here Theophilus lay in wait for her by order of Dionysiades.

1374. cherles. This is the reading of the best copies of each recension: cp. ‘lyves’ for ‘livissh’ i. e. living, ‘worldes’ for ‘worldly,’ ‘dethes’ for ‘dedly,’ iii. 2657, iv. 382, &c.

1376. what sche scholde, that is, what should become of her.

1391. Scomerfare. The first part of this word must be the French ‘escumerie,’ meaning piracy: see Du Cange under ‘escumator,’ e. g. ‘des compaignons du pays de Bretaigne, qui étaient venuz d’Escumerie.’

1393. and he to go, that is, ‘and he proceeded to go,’ a kind of historic infinitive: cp. Chaucer, Troilus, ii. 1108, ‘And she to laughe,’ Leg. of Good Women, 653 ‘And al his folk to go.’ (In Piers Plowman, A. Prol. 33, ‘And somme murthes to make,’ quoted by Mätzner, it is more probable that ‘to make’ is dependent on ‘chosen.’) In addition to these instances we have the repeated use of ‘to ga’ in Barbour’s Bruce, e. g. viii. 251, ix. 263, which is much more probably to be explained in this way than as a compound verb. Cp. Skeat’s Chaucer, vol. vi. p. 403, with C. Stoffel’s note on Troilus, ii. 1108, which is there quoted.

1410. The Laud MS. has ‘leno leoninus nomine,’ but many copies give no name.

1420. Lei doun, ‘let him lay down’: cp. l. 1128.

1423. There is an interesting touch in the original here which would not be intelligible to Gower. When Tharsia is led into the house, the character of which she does not know, she is bidden to do reverence to a statue of Priapus which stands in the entrance hall. She asks her master whether he is a native of Lampsacus, and he explains to her that his interest in this matter is not local but professional.

1424 ff. There is much in the original about the visit of Athenagoras and of other persons, who are successively so far overcome by the tears and entreaties of Tarsia, as not only to spare her but to give her large sums of money, while at the same time they make a jest both of themselves and of one another for doing so.

1451 f. The rhyme is saved from being an identical one by the adverbial use of ‘weie’ in the second line, ‘mi weie’ being equivalent to ‘aweie.’

1513. In the original she is reproached by her husband for the deed, and this is the case in the play of Pericles also.

1518. of record, ‘of good repute.’

1534 f. Cp. Pericles, iv. 4, ‘The fairest, sweetest, best lies here,’ but the rest of the epitaph compares unfavourably with Gower’s.

1567 ff. Here we have a curious lapse on the part of our author. He represents that the king had no sooner held his parliament and celebrated the sacrifice in memory of his wife, than he began to prepare for his voyage to Tharsis. The story requires however that at least fourteen years should elapse, and this, according to the original narrative, has been spent by Apollonius in travelling about as a merchant, a matter of which Gower says nothing. Probably the Pantheon, which is not very clear on the matter, is responsible for the oversight.

1587. ‘For she is continually changing with regard to him.’

1617. besihe, ‘attended to.’ The use of this verb was not very common in Gower’s time except in the participle ‘beseie,’ ‘besein.’ The verb means (1) look, see, (2) look to, attend to, (3) provide, arrange: hence the participle is quite naturally used in the sense of ‘furnished,’ ‘provided,’ and we have ‘unbesein of,’ l. 153, for ‘unprovided with.’ It is usually explained by reference to its first sense, as having regard necessarily to appearance. ‘Appearing in respect of dress, &c.,’ ‘Appearing as to accomplishments, furnished’ (so New English Dictionary), but it is more natural to take these meanings of the participle as from senses (2) (3) of the verb. It is doubtful whether even the phrase ‘well besein’ used of personal appearance means anything but ‘well furnished.’

1636. fordrive, ‘driven about’ by storms, actually and metaphorically.

1670 ff. Her song is given in the original; it is rather pretty, but very much corrupted in the manuscripts. It begins thus,

1681 ff. Several of her riddles are given in the original story and he succeeds in answering them all at once. One is this,

The answer is ‘Nauis.’

She finally falls on his neck and embraces him, upon which he kicks her severely. She begins to lament, and incidentally lets him know her story. The suggestion contained in ll. 1702 ff., of the mysterious influence of kinship, is Gower’s own, and we find the same idea in the tale of Constance, ii. 1381 f.,

1830. ‘And all other business having been left’: cp. ii. 791.

1890. With topseilcole: cp. v. 3119,

The word ‘topseilcole’ (written as one word in the best copies of each recension) does not seem to occur except in these two passages. It is evidently a technical term of the sea, and in both these passages it is used in connexion with a favourable wind. Morley quotes from Godefroy a use of the word ‘cole’ in French in a nautical sense, ‘Se mistrent en barges et alerent aux salandres, et en prisrent les xvii, et l’une eschapa, qui estoit a la cole.’ Unfortunately, however, it is uncertain what this means. The vessels in question were in port when they were attacked, and therefore ‘a la cole’ might reasonably mean with sails (or topsails) set, and so ready to start. A topsail breeze would be one which was fairly strong, but not too strong to allow of sailing under topsails, and this is rather the idea suggested by the two passages in Gower.

It should be noted that in F and in some other MSS. there is a stop after the word ‘topseilcole.’

1948. forto honge and drawe: the verbs are transitive, ‘that men should hang and draw them’ (i. e. pluck out their bowels).

1983. This must mean apparently ‘They had no need to take in a reef.’ The use of ‘slake’ with this meaning does not seem quite appropriate, but a sail or part of a sail is slackened in a certain sense when it is taken in, seeing that it is no longer subject to the pressure of the wind.

2055. leng the lasse: cp. iii. 71, ‘the leng the ferre.’ This form of the comparative is usual in such phrases, as Chaucer, Cant. Tales, A 3872, ‘That ilke fruit is ever leng the wers,’ and perhaps also E 687, F 404, Compl. unto Pite, 95, where the MSS. gives ‘lenger.’ The form ‘leng’ is the original comparative adverb of ‘long.’

2077. toward Venus: cp. v. 6757. Here it means ‘on the side of Venus.’

2095. sett, imperative, like ‘set case,’ i. e. ‘suppose that.’ The reading ‘sith’ is certainly wrong.

2113. his oghne dom. The word ‘dom’ is used here in special reference to ‘kingdom’ in the line above. ‘Every man has a royal rule to exercise, that is the rule over himself.’

2124 f. ‘When he has not kept possession for himself of his own heart.’

2165. And felt it: we have here the elision-apocope in the case of a preterite subjunctive.

2194. hath nothing set therby, ‘accounted it as nothing.’

2198. withholde, ‘kept’ (in service).

2212 f. Cp. iii. 298, Vox Clam. ii. 1.

2217 ff. This ‘Supplication’ is a finished and successful composition in its way, and it may make us desire that our author had written more of the same kind. The poem In Praise of Peace, which is written in the same metre and stanza, is too much on a political subject to give scope for poetical fancy. The nearest parallel in style is to be found in some of the author’s French Balades.

2245. Whom nedeth help, ‘He to whom help is needful’: cp. Prol. 800, i. 2446.

2253 ff. Cp. vi. 330 ff.

2259 ff. Cp. Balades, xx.

2265. Danger: see note on i. 2443.

2288. Cp. i. 143 ff.

2312. a Mile: cp. iv. 689. It means apparently the time that it takes to go a mile: cp. Chaucer, Astrol. i. 16, ‘five of these degres maken a milewey and thre mileweie maken an houre.’

2319. a game, for ‘agame’: cp. Chaucer, Troilus, iii. 636, 648. More usually ‘in game,’ as l. 2871.

2341. fulofte hath pleigned: as for example in the Planctus Naturae of Alanus de Insulis.

2365. ‘And I will consider the matter’: practically equivalent to a refusal of the petition, as in the form ‘Le Roy s’avisera.’

2367. is noght to sieke, ‘is not wanting’: cp. i. 924, ii. 44, &c.

2378. ‘In no security, but as men draw the chances of Ragman.’ To understand this it is necessary to refer to compositions such as we find in the Bodleian MSS., Fairfax 16, and Bodley 638, under the name of ‘Ragman (or Ragmans) Rolle.’ The particular specimen contained in these MSS. begins thus:

After two more stanzas about the uncertainty of Fortune and the chances of drawing well or ill, there follows a disconnected series of twenty-two more, each giving a description of the personal appearance and character of a woman, in some cases complimentary and in others very much the reverse, usually in the form of an address to the lady herself, e. g.

Apparently these stanzas are to be drawn for and then read out in order as they come, for the game ends with the last,

Evidently the same kind of game might be played by men with a view to their mistresses. It is much the same thing as the ‘Chaunces of the Dyse,’ where each stanza is connected with a certain throw made with three dice: cp. note on iv. 2792. The name ‘Ragman Rolle’ seems to be due to the disconnected character of the composition.

2407. olde grisel: cp. Chaucer, To Scogan, 35: ‘grisel’ means grey horse.

2415. upon the fet, that is, when the time comes for action. The rhyme with ‘retret’ shows that this is not the plural of ‘fot’: moreover, that is elsewhere regularly spelt ‘feet’ by Gower.

2428. sitte for ‘sit’: cp. Introduction, p. cxiv.

2435. torned into was: the verb used as a substantive, cp. vi. 923.

2450 ff. The situation here has some resemblance to that in the Prologue of the Legend of Good Women, where the author has a vision of the god of Love coming to him in a meadow, as he lies worshipping the daisy, accompanied by queen Alcestis, and followed first by the nineteen ladies of the Legend, and then by a vast multitude of other women who had been true in love. The differences, however, are considerable. Here we have Venus and Cupid, the latter armed with a bow and blind (whereas Chaucer gives him two fiery darts and his eyesight), with two companies of lovers, both men and women, marshalled by Youth and Eld as leaders; and the colloquy with the poet has for its result to dismiss him with wounds healed from Love’s service, as one who has earned his discharge, while in the case of Chaucer it is a question of imposing penance for transgressions in the past and of enlisting him for the future as the servant of Love. The conception of the god of Love appearing with a company of true lovers in attendance may be regarded as the common property of the poets of the time, and so also was the controversy between the flower and the leaf (l. 2468), which Chaucer introduces as a thing familiar already to his readers. If our author had any particular model before him, it may quite as well have been the description in Froissart’s Paradys d’Amours (ed. Scheler, i. 29 f.):

and she proceeds to enumerate the rest, including Tristram and Yseult, Percival, Galehaus, Meliador and Gawain, Helen, Hero, Polyxena, and Medea with Jason.

I do not doubt that Gower may have seen the Legend of Good Women, but it was not much his practice to borrow from contemporary poets of his own country, however free he might make with the literature of former times or of foreign lands.

2461. who was who: cp. vii. 2001.

2468. Cp. Chaucer, Leg. of G. Women, 72, 188, &c.

2470. the newe guise of Beawme, that is, the new fashions of dress, &c., introduced from Bohemia by the marriage of Richard II in 1382.

2500 f. which was believed With bele Ysolde, ‘who was accepted as a lover by Belle Isolde.’ Apparently ‘believed’ is here used in the primary sense of the verb, from which we have ‘lief.’ For the use of ‘with’ cp. l. 2553. We may note here that the spelling ‘believe’ is regular in Gower, ‘ie’ representing ‘̄ẹ.’

2502. Galahot, i. e. Galahalt, called by Mallory ‘the haut prince.’

2504 ff. It may be noted that several of the lovers in the company of Youth are impenitent in their former faithlessness, as Jason, Hercules and Theseus, while Medea, Deianira and Ariadne are left to complain by themselves. Troilus has recovered Cressida, if only for a time. It is hard to say why Pyramus failed of Thisbe’s company, unless indeed she were unable to pardon his lateness (cp. 2582).

2515 ff. Cp. v. 7213 ff.

2553. with Enee: cp. vii. 3359 and l. 2501.

2573 ff. It is likely enough that this idea of Cleopatra’s death may have been a reminiscence of the Legend of Good Women, 696 ff. Chaucer apparently got it from some such account as that quoted by Vincent of Beauvais from Hugh of Fleury, ‘in mausoleum odoribus refertum iuxta suum se collocavit Antonium. Deinde admotis sibi serpentibus morte sopita est.’ From this to the idea of a grave full of serpents would not be a difficult step.

2582. Wo worthe: cp. l. 1334.

2663. I take ‘lay’ to mean ‘law,’ i. e. the arrangement of his company.

2687. Cp. iv. 2314.

2705 ff. An allusion to some such story as we have in the ‘Lay d’Aristote’ (Méon et Barbazan, iii. p. 96).

2713. The punctuation follows F.

2714 ff. This refers to the well-known story of Virgil and the daughter of the Emperor, who left him suspended in a box from her window.

2718. Sortes. It is impossible that this can be for ‘Socrates,’ with whose name Gower was quite well acquainted. Perhaps it stands for the well-known ‘Sortes Sanctorum’ (Virgilianae, &c.), personified here as a magician, and even figuring, in company with Virgil and the rest, as an elderly lover.

2799. Cp. i. 143 ff.

2823. syhe, subj., ‘should see.’

2828. deface: apparently intransitive, ‘suffer defacement’: cp. iv. 2844.

2833. Outwith, ‘outwardly’: so ‘inwith’ often for ‘within,’ ‘inwardly.’ Dr. Murray refers me to Orm. i. 165, ‘utenn wiþþ,’ and Hampole, Prick of Conscience, 6669, ‘outwith.’ The best MSS. have a stop after ‘Outwith.’

2904. A Peire of Bedes: the usual expression for a rosary: cp. Cant. Tales, Prol. 158 f.,

2926 f. That is the Speculum Hominis and the Vox Clamantis.

2931. pernable. The best MSS. have this, and it is obviously suitable to the sense: ‘Do not pursue when the game cannot be caught.’ From ‘prendre’ Gower uses ‘pernons,’ ‘pernetz,’ &c., in the Mirour.

2938. At this point begins a new hand in F, and for the rest of this leaf (f. 184) the text is written over an erasure (ll. 2938-2966). A note is written opposite l. 2938 for the guidance of the scribe, ‘now haue &c.’ It may be noted that l. 2940 has a coloured initial A as for the beginning of a paragraph, and this apparently belongs to the original writing, whereas in the first recension MSS. the paragraph begins at l. 2941. The next leaf (f. 185) is a substituted one, and the text is written still in the same hand.

The orthography of the new hand, in which ll. 2938-3146 are written, differs in some respects from the standard spelling which we have in the rest of the manuscript. The chief points of difference are as follows:

(1) -id (-yd) termination almost always in the past participle, as enclosid, turnyd, bewhapid, blessid (but sterred), iþ frequently in the 3rd pers. sing. of verbs, belongiþ, seruiþ, causiþ (but secheþ, suieþ), and -in (-yn) in 3rd pers. pl., as takyn, sechin, hierin, schuldyn (also to lokyn). (2) -is (-ys) in the genit. sing, and in the plural of substantives, as londis, mannys, bedis, lawis, wordis (but þinges, myghtes). (3) -ir (-yr) termination, as aftir, ouyr, wondir (but siker). (4)y for i (I) in many cases, especially as the pronoun of the first person (once I), also ys (sometimes), hym, wiþynne. (5) gh for h in such words as sigh, sighte, myghte, knyghthode. (6) ou for o in nought, brought, þoughte, &c. (7) consonants doubled in vppon and vowels in maad (also mad), book, goon. (8) separation of words, as in to, un to, hym self, þer fore, þer vpon, wher of, wiþ outen.

It may be observed that something of the same tendency is observable at this point in the Stafford MS., but the differences appear in a much less marked manner, and chiefly in the terminations -id, -iþ, -is, -ir. S does not give y for I, ys for is, nor myghte, sigh, nought, oughte, vppon, þer fore, &c.

2974 (margin). orat pro statu regni. This marks exactly the stage reached in the second of the three versions which we have of Gower’s account of his own works (p. 480,) ‘vbi pro statu regni compositor deuocius exorat.’ The first completely excuses and the third utterly condemns the king, but the second makes no mention of him either for praise or blame, and that is the line taken in this form of the epilogue.

3012. maintenue, that is, ‘maintenance’ of quarrels by the lords on behalf of their followers: cp. Mirour, 23732 ff., where the same subject is dealt with.

3081. beth: see Introd. p. cxiv: but it is the reading of F only.

3114. curiosite, ‘artful workmanship’: cp. Chaucer, Compleinte of Venus, 81.

3147. Here, at the beginning of f. 186, the hand in F changes again and the rest of the manuscript, including the Traitié, the Latin poems and the author’s account of his books, is written in the hand which we have in the first leaf of the Prologue.

2955*. his testament of love. There is no reason to suppose that this is a reference to any particular work which Gower may have known that Chaucer had in hand. It may be a general suggestion that Chaucer should before his death compose some further work on love, which should serve as his last testimony (or last will and testament) on the subject, as the shrift of the present poem was our author’s leave-taking. To assume that the poem referred to must be the Legend of Good Women, and to argue from this that the Confessio Amantis was written before the Legend was given to the public, would be very rash. It is not likely that Usk’s Testament of Love was known to Gower when he wrote this.

2991*. This quality of mercy, for which Richard is especially praised, seems to have been precisely the point in which he was afterwards most found wanting by our author, so that he finally earns the title of ‘crudelissimus rex.’ Matters had not gone so far as this when the second form of epilogue was substituted, in which these praises were simply omitted. Gower was then (in the fourteenth year of the reign) in a state of suspended judgement, expressed by the ‘orat pro statu regni’ of 2974 (margin). The subsequent events, and especially the treatment of the duke of Gloucester and his friends, finally decided his opinions and his allegiance, as we may see in the Cronica Tripertita.

3054* ff. See Prol. 83* ff.

3102*. no contretaile, ‘no retribution’ afterwards: cp. Traitié, vii. 3, ‘De son mesfait porta le contretaille.’

3104*. That is, it tends rather to set us free from evil consequences than to bring them upon us.

Explicit, 5 f. The following copies of the first recension contain these last two lines, XERB₂Cath. Of the rest MH₁YGODAr.Ash. are imperfect at the end, N₂ omits the Explicit altogether, and I have no note as regards this point about Ad₂P₁Q. Of the seven which I note as having the ‘Explicit’ in four lines only, three are of the revised and four of the unrevised group. All copies of the second and third recensions have the last two lines, except of course those that are imperfect here.

Quam cinxere freta, &c. The ‘philosopher’ who was the author of this epistle is no doubt responsible also for the lines ‘Eneidos, Bucolis,’ &c. (printed in the Roxb. ed. of the Vox Clamantis, p. 427), in which our author is compared to Virgil, the chief difference being that whereas Virgil had achieved fame in one language only, Gower had distinguished himself in three. The writer in that case also is ‘quidam philosophus’ (not ‘quidam Philippus,’ as he is called in the printed copy), and I suspect that he was the ‘philosophical Strode’ who is coupled with Gower in the dedication of Troilus.

3. ‘tibi’ belongs to the next line, ‘siue satirus Poeta’ being taken together.

Quia vnusquisque, &c. The form here given is found in no manuscript of the Confessio Amantis except F and H₂ (copied from F), though some other third recension copies, as W and K, may probably have contained it. We have it, however, also in two manuscripts of the Vox Clamantis, the All Souls copy and that in the Hunterian Library at Glasgow.

It should be noted that whereas the first recension manuscripts regularly contain the Latin account of the author’s three books in immediate connexion with the Confessio Amantis, in the second recension it is made to follow the Traitié, and SΔ, which do not contain the Traitié, omit this also, while in F it comes later still, following the Latin Carmen de multiplici viciorum pestilencia. Thus the form which we have in F must be regarded as later than the accompanying text of the Confessio Amantis, from which it is separated in the MS. both by position and handwriting, and the words ‘ab alto corruens in foueam quam fecit finaliter proiectus est’ seem to indicate that it was written after the deposition of Richard II.

11 f. ‘Speculum hominis’ in all copies of the first recension. ‘Speculum meditantis’ over an erasure in the Glasgow MS. of the Vox Clamantis.

25 ff. Note the omission here (of nine words which are necessary to the sense) in every first recension copy except J. Similarly below all except J have ‘finem’ for ‘sentencie,’ obviously from a mistaken reading of a contraction (‘ſiē’). These must be original errors, only removed by later revision, the first no doubt due to dropping a line.

IN PRAISE OF PEACE.

The text of this poem is taken from the manuscript at Trentham Hall belonging to the Duke of Sutherland, which contains also the Cinkante Balades. Of this book a full description has been given in the Introduction to Gower’s French Works, pp. lxxix ff. The present poem is the first piece in the book (ff. 5-10 v^o), and is written in the same hand as the Balades and Traitié, a hand which resembles that which appears in ff. 184, 185 of the Fairfax MS., though I should hesitate to say positively that it is the same. Evidently, however, the manuscript is contemporary with the author, and it gives us an excellent text of the poem. The date of its composition is doubtless the first year of king Henry IV, for the manuscript which contains it ends with some Latin lines (added in a different hand), in which the author speaks of himself as having become blind in the first year of king Henry IV and having entirely ceased to write in consequence of this.

As a composition it is not without some merit. The style is dignified, and the author handles his verse in a craftsmanlike manner, combining a straightforward simplicity of language with a smooth flow of metre and a well-balanced stanza, the verse being preserved from monotony by variety of pause and caesura. Some stanzas are really impressive, as those which begin with ll. 99, 127, 148. The divisions of the poem, indicated in the MS. by larger coloured initials, have hitherto escaped the notice of editors.

The poem was printed first in the collected edition of Chaucer’s Works, 1532, commonly called Thynne’s edition (ff. 375 v^o-378), and reprinted from this in the succeeding folio editions of Chaucer (e. g. 1561, f. 330 v^o, 1598, f. 330 v^o, 1602, f. 314). There was no attempt made in any of these to ascribe its authorship to Chaucer, Gower’s name being always given as the author. It has been published also by J. Wright in his Political Poems and Songs (Rolls’ Series), the text being taken from the Trentham MS., and it has been included by Prof. Skeat in his interesting collection of poems which have been printed with Chaucer’s works (Chaucerian and other Pieces, pp. 205-216).

Thynne followed a manuscript which gave a fair text, but one much inferior to that of the Trentham copy, both in material correctness and in spelling, e. g.

All the material variations of Thynne are given in the critical notes, but not his differences of spelling. Wright’s text is not to be trusted as a reproduction of the Trentham MS. He made several serious mistakes in copying from or collating it, and he has a good many trifling inaccuracies of spelling. The following are his worst errors:

l. 3 om. this 16 the for thi 71 To stere peace (following Thynne) 108 om. doth tofalle for to falle 136 than for that 173 But aftirwards 202 om. worthi 211 any for a 246 [good] seeming to imply that it is not in the MS. 263 Which heliples 278 reserved for deserved 289 man for king 292 [up] 306 begete for be gete 356 Resteined for Resceived 363 deleated for debated 382 sese for see. In addition to these rather gross blunders, he has about a hundred smaller deviations from the manuscript which he professes to follow, as, for example, 7 for to for forto (and so afterwards) 16 him self for himself (and so afterwards) 19 But 27 reqwest for reqweste 39 might for myht 56 shal for schal 83 lefte for left 84 not for noght 90 charitie for charite 98 Both for Bothe 102 gone for goon nygth for nyght 110 dothe 112 I 120 Crists 155 fulfilled 172 wille 194 destruied 219 made 254 Ffirst chirche her silf 260 sick 280 life 287 made an end 319 found 355 Which 382 meschiefe and a good many more. He also omits in a very misleading manner the last lines of the rubric which follows the poem, ‘Et nunc sequitur epistola’ &c., as well as the ‘epistle’ itself, ‘Rex celi deus’; and he makes it appear that the lines ‘Henrici quarti’ &c. follow at once, whereas they are at the end of the MS. and in a different hand.

I think it worth while to specify these instances because Wright’s edition has been accepted by Prof. Skeat as an accurate reproduction of a manuscript which is not generally accessible, and if no notice were taken here of the readings given by Wright, it would still remain in doubt whether he or I represented the text more correctly. Especially in the cases where Wright has bracketed a word as not occurring in the manuscript, it might be supposed that his positive testimony was to be preferred.

Prof. Skeat has based his text on Thynne, making such alterations of spelling as seemed to him suitable, and giving the variants of Wright’s edition as those of the Trentham MS. Misled by Wright, he has accepted in his text the readings ‘reserved’ in l. 278, and ‘cese’ in l. 382.

The text given by the Trentham MS. is apparently quite free from material error, except as regards the word erased in l. 71, and the points of spelling which require correction are very few in number. The orthography is not quite in accordance with the standard spelling of the Fairfax and Stafford MSS., and in some respects resembles that of the third hand of F, on which we have commented in the note on Confessio Amantis, viii. 2938. Here however there is only a slight tendency to use i for e in weak terminations. We have distourbid 153, vndefendid: amendid 223 f., handlid 321, soeffrin 222, folwiþ 23, goddis 32, 84, mannys 237, but elsewhere almost always the usual forms, as affermed, cared, gouerned, aken, ledeþ, londes, mannes. On the other hand the -ir termination is used almost regularly, as vndir, wondir, aftir, modir (but vnder 286), and there is a tendency also to substitute i for e in other places also, as first, chirche (also ferst, cherche), wirche, dide (348), proprite, but here for hire 108, 329, cp. 254. For I (pers. pronoun) we have regularly y; gh usually for h in such words as right, myghti, knyght, light, highe, stigh, but also riht, rihtwisnesse, knyht; vppon for vpon, schulde but also scholde. In addition to these points we may note the dropping of -e several times in euer, neuer, which hardly ever occurs in the Fairfax MS., and also in heuen 79, but we have also euere, neuere, heuene. The -e of the weak preterite form is dropped before a vowel in myht 39, behight 41, had 42, mad 103, 345: -e is inserted in some imperatives, as Leie 122, sette 124, Lete 129, putte 130, þenke 162, Beholde 276 (but let 158, Kep 367, 384, draugh 384). As regards the use of þ and ȝ the Trentham MS. agrees with F.

There is no title in the manuscript, and Prof. Skeat calls the poem ‘The Praise of Peace,’ a title suggested by Mr. E. W. B. Nicholson. I have adopted a modification of this, ‘To King Henry the Fourth in Praise of Peace,’ expressing also the substance of that given by Thynne.

8 ff. The threefold claim of Henry IV is given in this stanza, as in Chaucer’s well-known Envoy, but the ‘conquest’ is here represented as a divine sanction.

50. a place, ‘into place’: cp. Conf. Amantis, v. 735, ‘Hou suche goddes come aplace.’

53. in manere, ‘in due measure’: cp. Conf. Amantis, vii. 2132, 4344.

55. what aftirward betide, ‘whatever may happen afterwards.’

71. The first word of the line is erased in the manuscript, only the initial S being left, with a space for five or six letters after it. The word which is suggested in the text is perhaps as likely as any other: for the form of it cp. ‘Maintene,’ l. 385. Thynne’s reading, ‘To stere peace,’ looks like a lame attempt on the part of a copyist to fill the gap.

78 ff. Conf. Amantis, iii. 2265 ff.

89. I write regularly ‘evere’ ‘nevere’ in accordance with Gower’s practice: so 126, 127, 148, 241, 301, 350, 365.

90. alle charite. The MS. has ‘al charite,’ but the metre and the grammatical usage both require ‘alle,’ as in l. 293 and elsewhere.

94. wisemennes: cp. ‘wisemen,’ Conf. Amantis, vii. 1792.

106 ff. Cp. Conf. Amantis, iii. 2273 ff.

113. Conf. Amantis, iii. 2294 f.

115. Cp. Conf. Amantis, Prol. 444.

121. ‘Whose faith thou hast partly to guide.’

122. I correct the imperative form ‘Leie,’ and also ‘sette’ 124, ‘Lete’ 129, ‘putte’ 130, ‘thenke’ 162, ‘Beholde’ 276, as contrary to Gower’s practice and in several cases disturbing the metre.

150. Strictly speaking, we ought to have the subjunctive, ‘undirstode,’ but the rhyme will not allow.

155. So Prol. 88 f.,

157 f. ‘Peace with honour’ was a favourite thought of Gower’s, ‘pax et honor’ in the Vox Clamantis, vii. 1415.

174. ‘on earth peace, goodwill towards men.’

177 ff. ‘Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you.’

204. waited, ‘attended to.’

235. devised, ‘divided’: cp. Conf. Amantis, ii. 3264.

236 ff. ‘nevertheless the law stands so reasonably established by man’s wit, that they can stand firm without that’ (i. e. without the help of the Church).

266. Cp. Prol. 795, ‘The comun ryht hath no felawe,’ that is, none to take its part.

278 f. deserved To him. The reading is right. It means ‘earned by service rendered to him’: cp. Conf. Amantis, iv. 3577, ‘Thogh I no deth to the deserve.’

281 ff. For the nine worthies see Caxton’s Preface to Mallory’s Morte d’Arthur.

295 f. The question of winning a ‘chase’ at tennis is not one which is decided at once by the stroke that is made, but depends on later developments.

330 f. Cp. Conf. Amantis, vii. 3161*.

337 ff. Conf. Amantis, ii. 3187 ff.

345. at al, ‘altogether.’

354. the lieve of lothe, ‘they who were now loved but had before been hated’ (by God).

356. I read ‘weren’ for the metre. However the case may be with Chaucer, there is no instance elsewhere in Gower of elision prevented by caesura. The cases that have been quoted are all founded on misreadings.

365 f. Cp. Conf. Amantis, viii. 2988*.

379. of pes, ‘with regard to peace.’

382. see the werre, that is, ‘look to the war’: cp. ll. 137, 144, 281 ff. The reading ‘sese’ was invented by Wright.

Rex celi deus, &c. This piece is to a great extent an adaptation of the original version of Vox Clamantis, vi. cap. 18, as it stands in the Digby MS. The first eight lines are identically the same. Then follows in the Vox Clamantis,

Of the remainder, as we have it here, ll. 25 f., 31-33, 36-39, 41 f., 45-48 correspond with slight variations to lines in the Vox Clamantis version, but the arrangement of them is different.

10. Te que tuum regnum, ‘Thee and thy kingdom,’ a quite common position of ‘que’ in Gower’s Latin. So below, ll. 49, 50, 53, and often elsewhere.

35. So also Conf. Amantis, vii, after l. 1984.