at the beginning of the MancTale, and Troilus II : 1028-43. To these Skeat adds a passage in Melibeus, see his V: 219, another in the MancTale, see his V : 443, and another in Troilus II:22, see Skeat II: 468. In citing these Skeat remarks II: 468 that this was probably borrowed at secondhand, remarks V:443 that Chaucer got the line through Albertano or from the Roman de la Rose, says V: 439 that the passage reached Chaucer through the Roman de la Rose, and refers simply to Horace in II : 472. In VI: ci he says that we may be sure Chaucer's quotations from Horace and Juvenal were taken at secondhand. See II lii-liii.

On the subject of secondhand quotations see under Florilegia above. On Horace in the Middle Ages see M. Manitius, Analekten zur Geschichte des Horaz im Mittelalter bis 1300, Göttingen, 1893. See Moore, Studies in Dante, vol. I, 1896, pp. 29, 197-206. See Sandys, History of Classical Scholarship, pp. 612-14.

The best ed. of Horace for students of literary history is that of Keller and Holder, Leipzig 1864, 2 vols., second ed. vol. I, 1899. At the foot of each page are given testimonia, or notes on the citation of Horatian passages by medieval writers and compilers of anthologies.

Hyginus :-Died 17 A. D. His Fabulae were perhaps known to Chaucer, see Skeat I:464, III: 333-4; Lounsbury, Studies II: 287.

Pope Innocent III:-1161-1216. One of the greatest and most influential of the Popes, a writer as well as an administrator. His prose treatise De Contemptu Mundi sive de Miseria Conditionis Humanae, was known to Chaucer; and in the A-version of the prologue LGW, lines 414-5, it is said that the poet has translated "of the Wrecched Engendryng of mankinde As men may in pope Innocent yfynde.” Of a complete independent translation of this work by Chaucer we have no copy; and Prof. Lounsbury, who first pointed out Chaucer's debt to Innocent, Nation 1889 II: 10-11, thinks that possibly no more was ever done than is to be found in the Man of Law's Tale and its prologue, and in the Pardoner's prologue. See also Lounsbury, Studies II: 329-336, I: 426, and Skeat's notes V: 141-2, 154, 160-1, 165. See in detail Koeppel in Archiv 84: 405 ff. Cp. Lowes in Publ. Mod. Lang. Assn. 20:795-6.

The Latin passages used by Chaucer are printed by Skeat, by Lounsbury II : 332-3, and by Koeppel passim. Innocent's treatise is accessible in the works as ed. Migne, Patrologia vols. 214217, and the De Contemptu has been translated into German by F. Rudolf, Arnsberg 1888.

Isidor of Seville:-Died 636. Referred to in the Parson's Tale, see Skeat V: 448. On him see Ebert I: 588-602, Sandys 442-4.

Jacobus a Voragine, see Legende Aurea.

Saint Jerome:-331-420. Called the most learned and eloquent of the Latin Fathers of the Church, and a voluminous polemical writer. Chaucer knew especially Jerome's treatise against Jovinian, a contemporary monk who doubted the excellence of celibacy; he used its Part I in the WBprol., the FrankTale, and the A-prol. LGW, where lists of loyal or disloyal women are found. Jerome, while denouncing marriage and women, cites noble examples from antiquity to show the degeneracy of his own time; hence the treatise yielded Chaucer material of both sorts. Part II of the treatise, which is on fasting, was but little used by Chaucer; see Skeat I: 541, 545, V : 278-9; see Lounsbury, Studies II : 292-97.

Jerome's works are contained in Migne's (Latin) Patrologia, vols. 22-30. The Adversus Jovinianum is in vol. 2 of the Works. The passages used in the WBprol. were translated by Woollcombe, Ch. Soc. Essays pp. 293 ff.; Koeppel adds a little in Archiv 84: 414 note; and see his paper Anglia 13 : 174-181. On Jerome see Ebert, Gesch. Lat. Litt. I : 184 ff., Sandys 219222. The influence of Jerome's treatise has not yet been discussed. Note e. g. that Héloise's objections to marrying Abelard are avowedly taken from it, see above under Héloise; and cp. de Bury's Philobiblon, ed. Thomas, chap. IV.

John of Salisbury:-?1120-1180. The most remarkable intellectual figure of the early Middle Ages. Already Tyrwhitt, in a note on CT 12537, pointed out that Chaucer there apparently used John of Salisbury's Polycraticus sive De Nugis Curialium, although other similar passages (see his notes on lines 5817, 9172) were not from John but from John's original. This firstmentioned passage, in the Pardoner's prologue, is annotated Skeat V: 282-3; and Lounsbury, Studies II : 362-4, sees no further evidence that Chaucer used the Polycraticus. In N. and Q. 1899 I: 224 it is pointed out that the "maxime Lolli” passage of Horace may have reached Chaucer through the Polycraticus (vii, chap. ix). See under Lollius below; Woollcombe, Ch. Soc. Essays 295 ff., argues that Chaucer did not borrow from John of Salisbury.

John of Salisbury's works are accessible in the Patrologia vol. 199; on him see Schaarschmidt, Joannes Saresberiensis, Leipzig 1862; see chap. VII of R. L. Poole's Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought, London 1884, and Sandys, History of Classical Scholarship pp. 517-522.

Juvenal:-Died 140. Mentioned and cited in Troilus IV : 197, WBTale 336. Skeat on these passages says "from Juvénal”; VI: 387 he says "probably taken at secondhand." Lounsbury, Studies II: 260, thinks Chaucer was familiar with at least a part of Juvenal's writings. See Sandys, Hist. of Class. Scholarship, pp. 619-20.

Legenda Aurea :-A compilation of the lives of the Saints by Jacobus a Voragine, who flourished in the latter half of the 13th century. This was used by Chaucer for part of the Second Nun's Tale, as Tyrwhitt pointed out. See Skeat III: 486-8; Lounsbury, Studies II: 320-1. Jehan de Vignay's French translation of the life of St. Cecilia is reprinted Ch. Soc. Orig. and Anal. pp. 190 ff. See Kölbing, Engl. Stud. 1 :215.

The Legenda Aurea is edited by Graesse, Leipzig 1850.

Lives of the Saints:-Saints' names frequently occur in Chaucer, but often as interjections or in slight allusions, cp. the use of Christopher, Frideswide, James, Julian, Leonard, Loy, Madrian, Maur, Peter, Ronyan etc.; and some mentions of saints' names apply to their literary work as known to Chaucer,-Augustine, Bernard, Gregory, or Isidor. Of anecdote or illustration from saints' lives the amount is not very great; and whether the poet cites from oral tradition or written work we do not know. See Lounsbury, Studies II : 321-9, and Skeat's list VI: 359 ff. under Ambrose, Antony, Dunstan, Edward, Hugh, Kenelm, Mary of Egypt, Thomas of India.

Livy:-B. C. 59—A. D. 17. Author of a history of Rome. Mentioned by Chaucer in connection with the stories of Lucretia and of Virginia; see LGW prol. 280 and lines 1683, 1873; Doctor's Tale line 1; Book of Duch. line 1084. See Lounsbury, Studies II: 279-84. Skeat VI: 387 says Livy is almost certainly quoted at secondhand; see III : 330, 435.

Lollius:-This name, apparently that of an earlier writer, is mentioned by Chaucer as follows:-In Troilus and Cressida I: 394 he professes to quote "myn auctour called Lollius", when he gives the song of Troilus, translated from a sonnet by Petrarch; he introduces it into a poem in which he is evidently following Boccaccio's Il Filostrato. In the same poem V: 1653 he speaks of Diomed's coat and its fate "as telleth Lollius"; the incident is in the Filostrato. Again in the House of Fame line 1468, he mentions Dares, Tytus (read Dictys), Lollius, and others as writers on the history of Troy. The question is additionally complicated by the fact that Chaucer nowhere alludes to Boccaccio, even when translating from him; he

alludes to Petrarch only in the Clerk's headlink and Tale, when he assigns to him the Griselda story, translating it from his Latin, and in the Monk's Tale, where also he refers to Boccaccio's Latin as by Petrarch. He does not credit Petrarch with the sonnet which he renders in the Troilus; nor does he anywhere mention Boccaccio. An explanation of "Lollius" should cover a Trojan historiographer, Boccaccio, and Petrarch. Dryden, in the preface to his "Troilus and Cressida”, said that "the original story was written by one Lollius, in Lombard verse, and translated by Chaucer into English." This he derived, it is probable, from the note in Speght's glossary— "Lollius, an Italian Historiographer borne in the citie of Urbine"; and Speght's comment probably came ultimately from the only source of information which we have regarding Lollius, the single sentence in the Life of Antoninus Diadumenos, written by Aelius Lampridius about 400 A. D. This Life is one of those collected under the title Scriptores Historiae Augustae, and esteemed by the Middle Ages as of equal value with Suetonius' Lives of the Caesars, to which they formed a continuation. Lampridius mentioned Lollius as if he were a wellknown writer,-"Lollius Urbicus in historia temporis sui dicit"; and as the Augustan history was written during the reigns of Diocletian and Constantine, Lollius has been considered as of the third century. Warton (Warton-Hazlitt II : 327-8) remarked that he had never seen the history of Lollius, though noting that the Troilus is "said to be founded on an old history written by Lollius"; he cites also the statement of Lydgate (see Section II A here), that the Troilus was called "Trophe in Lumbard tongue." Theobald, in his notes on Shakspere's Troilus and Cressida, referred to Lollius without query. Tyrwhitt, in a note on the Recantation, said "How Boccace should have acquired the name of Lollius, and the Filostrato the title of Trophe, are points which I confess myself unable to explain." Godwin, in a note in his chap. 37, said "Considering that the stories of Troilus and Creseide, and of Palamon and Arcite, were both translated by Boccaccio and by Chaucer; that the original author of the latter is wholly unknown; that they were the work of the same age; and that Lollius is placed so familiarly by Chaucer upon a footing with the greatest writers; it is not very improbable that they were both the production of this author, and that Chaucer translated the one and the other from the Latin in which he had composed them." Douce, in his Illustrations of Shakespere, under Troilus and Cressida, begins thus:-"Of Lollius, the supposed inventor of this story, it will become every one to speak with diffidence. Until something decisive relating to him shall occur, it is better to conclude, with Mr. Tyrwhitt, that Chaucer

borrowed the greater part of his admirable story from Boccaccio's Philostrato; and that he either invented the rest altogether, or obtained it from some completer copy of the Philostrato than that which we now possess. What Dryden has said of Lollius is entirely destitute of proof, and appears to be nothing more than inference from Chaucer's own expressions." Isaac Disraeli, in his Amenities of Literature, chap. On Gothic Romances, alludes to this passage of Douce. Both Douce and Disraeli are cited N. and Q. 1849-50 I: 418, where E. F. Rimbault says positively, "Lollius was the real or fictitious name of the author or translator of many of our Gothic prose romances." Sandras (1859), Étude pp. 45, 127, and Henry Bradshaw, were the first to assert that in citing "Lollius" Chaucer was merely indulging himself in a deliberate mystification of his readers, "carrying out his habitual practice of concealing his real authority and substituting the name of some other author, often, as in this case, one whose works were entirely lost." (Memoir of Bradshaw by Prothero, p. 216.) This view has since been advocated by Macaulay, Acad. 1895 I:297; Courthope, Hist. Eng. Poetry I: 261; Schofield, Hist. Eng. Lit., p. 293.

In the Athen, 1868 II : 433 Latham suggested that the appearance of Lollius as a historian of Troy was due to Chaucer's misunderstanding the lines of Horace "Troiani belli scriptorem, maxime Lolli, Dum tu declamas Romae, Praeneste relegi", from the epistle to Lollius; in N. and Q. 1899 I: 224 it was pointed out that Chaucer (who probably knew nothing of Horace) could have seen this passage in John of Salisbury's Polycraticus, vii, chap. ix. Chaucer then, according to Latham, believed Lollius to be a writer on the Trojan war. (Note that this explains only the House of Fame allusion, not those in the Troilus.) Latham was followed by Rossetti, Athen. 1868 II : 465, Rossetti retracting his suggestion already made ibid. p. 401 that by Lollius was meant Laelius, a name belonging to Petrarch, whom Chaucer believed to be the author of the Filostrato. Ten Brink, Studien pp. 87-88, adopted Latham's view, with some additions; Skeat III: 278 considers the suggestion "quite reasonable"; Macaulay loc. cit. objects. Note that already Bradshaw (see Prothero's Memoir p. 216) had made the same suggestion as did Latham.

Hertzberg p. 44 note 71 said that "no one knows" Lollius. Peiper, in Fleckeisen's Jahrbuch für Philologie und Paedagogik 97:65 (1868), would read Sollius. Kissner, op. cit. p. 9, maintains that Lollius is a pseudonym for Boccaccio, invented by Chaucer to give the dignity of a Latin original to his work. Kissner instances other cases of pretended authorities referred to by Chaucer; but see Toynbee on “Agaton” in Mod. Lang. Quart.