And smā | lě fow | lěs mã | kěn mẽ | lodye, The hō | lý blis | fùl mār | tir fōr | to sēkě, That hem hǎth hõlp | ĕn whãn | that they | wĕre sēkě.' 1. The final e in Aprille, melodye, is sounded; but is elided in Marche, veyne, nature; because in these cases it is followed by a word commencing with a vowel or with the letter h. 2. The final e in soote, smale, straunge, ferne, seke (1. 18), is sounded, as the sign of the plural number. 3. The final e in roote is sounded, as the sign of the dative case. 4. The final e in swete, yonge, halfe, is sounded, as the sign of the definitive form of the adjective. 5. The final e in sonne, y-e, ende, is sounded, and represents an older A. S. vowel-ending (A. S. sunne, éage, ende). 6. The final e in yronne is sounded, as the sign of the past participle, yronne representing the older yronnen (A.S.gerunnen). 7. The final e in to seke is sounded, as the sign of the gerund representing the fuller form to sekene (A. S. tó sécanne). 8. The final en in holpen is sounded, as being the sign of the p.p. of a strong verb. 9. The final en is sounded in maken, slepen, longen, as the sign of the present plural indicative. 10. The final en is sounded in to seken, as the sign of the gerund; see above. 11. The final es in shoures, croppes, fowles, strondes, halwes, londes, is sounded, as the inflexion of the plural number. 12. The final es is sounded in shires, as the inflexion of the genitive case. d 13. Licour, vertu, nature, and corages, are accented on the second syllable, as in Old French. I gladly take the present opportunity of thanking my kind friends the Rev. W. W. Skeat and Mr. Furnivall for many valuable notes and suggestions. KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON, R. M. POSTSCRIPT TO THE REVISED EDITION OF 1888. (BY THE REV. PROFESSOR SKEAT.) THE text of former editions of this selection from the Canterbury Tales was at first taken from the well-known MS. Harl. 7334 (in the British Museum), which, however, is by no means free from clerical errors. It was afterwards revised throughout by a careful collation with the Ellesmere, Hengwrt, and Corpus MSS. printed in Dr. Furnivall's Six-Text edition of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales h. The Cambridge, Lansdowne, and Petworth MSS. in the same edition were also consulted in cases of difficulty, but did not prove of much service in correcting the blunders of the Harleian MS. The present text, as revised in 1888, is entirely new, having been reprinted throughout. The differences thus introduced, though extremely numerous, are almost all of a minute character, and may not appear, at first sight, of any particular value or importance. They are, in fact, due to taking the Ellesmere MS. as the basis of the text, instead of the Harleian MS. This produces very little change in the wording, but the result is more satisfactory from a phonetic point of view, as the spelling in the Ellesmere MS. is remarkable for clearness and intelligibility, and is fairly uniform in character. There is also a great ad h This work, which is itself a great tribute to the memory of Chaucer, should be in the hands of every Chaucerian scholar. vantage in conforming the spelling in the present selection to that in the other two books of selections published in the same series i; for in both of these books the Ellesmere MS. was taken as the chief authority for the text. A few modifications have been made in the spelling in order to render the text more exactly phonetic. Of these, one is a more regular use of i and y, symbols which are needlessly confused in the MS. The short vowel is here usually printed as i, as in the words his, swich, is, Zephirus, &c.; whilst the long vowel is usually denoted by y, as melodye, nyne, ryde, wyde. This distinction is frequently made in the MS., and occurs in all the words here cited. The MS. is also followed in words like inspired, shires, where there can hardly be any mistake; the modern sound is here a sure guide to the length of the vowel, though we now substitute the sound of the ei in height for the Chaucerian i (as in Mod. E. machine). It must suffice to say that the text is now much more exactly phonetic than before, whilst at the same time the readings of the Ellesmere MS. are usually better than those of any other MS. The student who wishes to understand the pronunciation of Chaucer's English, which is a very important matter, is referred to the clear and full account of it by Mr. Ellis, as printed in the Preface to The Tale of the Man of Lawe, pp. ix-xix, where the spelling of the MS. is fully explained. In the present edition, the opportunity has also been taken of giving all the variations from the Ellesmere MS. that are of any importance in the form of footnotes at the bottom of every page. The abbreviations here used are the same as in the other selections from Chaucer, and are there explained. Briefly, the symbols, E., Hn., Cm., Cp., Pt., Ln., Hl., denote respectively the Ellesmere MS., the Hengwrt MS., the Cambridge MS. (marked Gg. 4. 27 in the Cambridge University Library), the MS. in Corpus Christi College, Oxford, the Petworth MS. (belonging to Lord Leconfield), the Lansdowne MS. 851 (in the British iSee The Prioresses Tale,' &c.; and 'The Tale of the Man of Lawe,' &c.; edited by the Rev. W. W. Skeat. Museum), and the Harleian MS. 7334 (in the same). The text follows E., except where notice is given to the contrary. The numbering of the lines in the Six-Text edition is noted throughout. In the Prologue, there is no variation. In the Knightes Tale, 1. 2 corresponds to 1. 860 of Group A in that edition, which is denoted by printing (860) within marks of parenthesis; and so on. In the Nonne Preestes Tale, 1. 1 corresponds to 1. 4011 of Group B in that edition, denoted by printing (4011); and so on. In the Index of Proper Names, the references are given to the Six-Text edition only; but can easily be found by help of the numbers within marks of parenthesis. The Introduction to The Prioresses Tale, &c., contains, amongst other things; (1) the method of grouping the Tales, according to the right dates ; (2) remarks on Chaucer's varieties of rhythm; (3) further remarks on grammatical forms; (4) further remarks on metre and versification; (5) an analysis of the metre of the Squire's Tale; (6) hints as to books useful for understanding Chaucer; (7) a list of Chaucer's works, with notes on some that have been falsely attributed to him; and (8) a discussion of the Romaunt of the Rose. Some of this information is almost indispensable, but is too full of detail to be here repeated. The Introduction to the Man of Lawes Tale, &c., contains the account, by Mr. Ellis, of the pronunciation of Chaucer's English, as already stated. The Introduction to the Clarendon Press Edition of Chaucer's Minor Poems discusses the genuineness of the numerous pieces at various times attributed to Chaucer, and gives some account of the editions of the poet's works. Some of the remarks upon the poems of 'Anelida and Arcite' and 'The Parlement of Foules' are so important for the right understanding of the Knightes Tale that the substance of them is here repeated. It appears, from internal evidence, that 'Anelida and Arcite' was written before the Knightes Tale, and was never finished. It is probable that Chaucer actually wrote an earlier draught of the Knightes Tale, with the title of Palamon and Arcite, which he afterwards partially rejected; for he mentions 'The Love of Palamon and Arcite' in the Prologue to the Legend of Good Women as if it were an independent work. We must suppose that Chaucer originally translated the Teseide of Boccaccio rather closely, substituting a seven-line stanza for the ottava rima of the Italian poet; this formed the original 'Palamon and Arcite,' a poem which was perhaps never finished. Not wishing, however, to abandon it altogether, Chaucer probably used some of the lines over again in 'Anelida,' and introduced others into the Parlement of Foules and elsewhere. At a later period, he rewrote the whole story in rimed pairs of five-accent lines, which is now known to us as The Knightes Tale. Whatever the right explanation may be, we are at any rate certain that the Teseide is the source of (1) sixteen stanzas in the Parlement of Foules k; (2) of part of the first ten stanzas of Anelida and Arcite1; (3) of three stanzas near the end of Troilus and Creseidam; (4) of the original Palamon and Arcite; (5) of the Knightes Tale. For further information, see Ten Brink, Chaucer-Studien, Münster, 1870; and Essays on Chaucer, published by the Chaucer Society. It must be added that Professor Ten Brink has written another valuable work on Chaucer, entitled Chaucers Sprache und Verskunst, Leipzig, 1884; from which much may be learnt. With regard to the Nonne Preestes Tale, it has already been remarked (at p. xxviii) that the germ of it is to be found in a short fable by Marie de France, afterwards amplified in the old French Roman du Renart. The fable by Marie de France consists of 38 short lines, and is printed in Dr. Furnivall's Originals and Analogues (Chaucer Society), p. 116, from MS. Harl. 978, leaf 56 (formerly 76). The corresponding portion of Le Roman du Rénart, as edited by Méon in 1826, vol. i. p. 49, is also printed in the same, p. 117; it comprises 454 lines (ll. 12671720). Professor Ten Brink shews that Marie's fable closely Ll. 183-294; from the Teseide, bk. vii. st. 51-66. 1 From the Teseide, bk. i. st. 1-3; bk. ii. st. 10-12. m Viz. st. 7, 8, 9 from the end of bk. v. ; translated from the Teseide, xi. 1-3. Boccaccio here follows Lucan's Pharsalia, bk. ix. |