Part 142

The term ‘epilogue’ is used for convenience to designate the conclusion of the poem after viii. 2940, but no such designation is used by the author: similarly ‘preface’ means here the opening passage of the Prologue (ll. 1-92).

‘Minoris etatis causa inde excusabilem pronuncians.’

Dr. Karl Meyer, in his dissertation John Gower’s Beziehungen zu Chaucer und König Richard II (1889), takes account of these various notes of time, having made himself to some extent acquainted with the MSS., but his conclusions are in my opinion untenable.

This has been equally the procedure of Prof. Hales on the one hand, who endeavours to throw back the composition of the first recension to an extravagantly early period, and of Dr. Karl Meyer on the other, who wishes to bring down the final form of the book to a time later than the deposition of Richard II. The theory of the latter, that the sixteenth year of King Richard is given as the date of the original completion of the poem, and not of the revised preface, is sufficiently refuted by the date ‘fourteenth year’ attached to the rewritten epilogue.

For the connexion between this and the Confessio Amantis see L. Bech in Anglia, v. 313 ff.

Lydgate apparently did not take Chaucer’s censure very seriously, for he quite needlessly introduced the tale of Canace into his Falls of Princes, following Gower’s rendering of it.

See for example the picture of Nebuchadnezzar transformed into an ox, ‘Tho thoghte him colde grases goode,’ &c. (i. 2976 ff.), the account of the jealous husband, who after charging his wife quite unreasonably with wishing she had another there in his stead, turns away from her in bed and leaves her to weep all the night, while he sleeps (v. 545 ff.), and the description of the man who entertains his wife so cheerfully on his return home with tales of the good sport that he has had, but carefully avoids all reference to the occurrence which would have interested her most (v. 6119 ff.).

The reading in the Latin note at the beginning of ‘quarto <decimo>’ for ‘sexto decimo’ is probably due to a mistake, for we find ‘sextenthe’ in the text of l. 25. It may be noted that the MS. mentioned by Pauli as containing the rewritten preface and also the Chaucer verses (New Coll. 326) is a hybrid, copied from two different manuscripts.

for King Richard’s sake, to whom my allegiance belongs and for whom I pray. It chanced that as I rowed in a boat on the flowing Thames under the town of New Troy, I met my liege lord, and he bad me come from my boat into his barge, and there he laid upon me a charge to write some new thing which he himself might read. Thus I am the more glad to write, and I have the less fear of envious blame. A gentle heart praises without malice, but the world is full of evil tongues and my king’s command shall nevertheless be fulfilled. Though I have long been sick, yet I will endeavour to write a book which may be wisdom to the wise and play to those who desire to play. But the proverb says that a good beginning makes a good end: therefore I will here begin the prologue of my book, speaking partly of the former state of the world and partly of the present.

Adieu, for I must go from thee. And greet Chaucer well, as my disciple and my poet, who has filled the land with the songs which he made for my sake. And bid him in his later age make his testament of love, as thou hast made thy shrift.’

And so enveloped in a starry cloud, Venus was taken to her place above, and I turned homeward with my beads in hand. (2940*-2970*.)

To God, the Creator of all things, I pray for my worthy king Richard the Second, in whom has always been found Justice mingled with Pity. In his person it may be shown what a king should be, especially in that he sought no vengeance through cruelty. Though evil came upon the land, yet his estate was kept safe by the high God, as the sun is ever bright in himself, though the air be troubled. He sought love and peace and accord, not only here at home, but abroad also, following Christ’s way, and therefore are we bound to serve him, and his name shall be ever remembered. (2971*-3035*.)

I, his subject, helpless with old age and sickness, desire to do him some pleasure, and therefore I present to him this poor book, made both for profit and for sport, and I ask that I may be excused for lack of curious skill. I have written, as I best might, in rude plain words.

And now that I am feeble and old, my Muse bids me rest and write no more of love. He who has achieved what he desired may fitly do his service to love in songs and sayings; but if a man fail, it is otherwise: therefore I take now my final leave of love. But that love which stands confirmed by charity, which brings no repentance and charges not the conscience, this may God send us, that in heaven our joy may be without end. (3036*-3114*.)

The difference in the MS. usually consists only in the line drawn over the final on. So also often in the case of the words discussed below, chaunce, daunce, enchaunte, &c.

Very seldom sh in F, as Prol. 938, i. 2171, i. 1458.

M. Konrath in Archiv für die neueren Sprachen, 89, p. 153 ff.

In other cases, as with the group broke, loke, spoke, wroke (past participles), and ȝoke (subst.), there are no rhyme-words with ǭ from ā by which a distinction can be established.

Archiv für n. Sprachen, 89, p. 392. As I sometimes have occasion to criticize statements in this paper, I take the opportunity here of acknowledging its merit, as the only careful study lately attempted of Gower’s language.

According to ten Brink, nede ought to be regarded as an uncertain rhyme because of the O. E. nēades beside nīedes, but Gower never rhymes it with open ē.

This latter rule explains Chaucer’s use of the inflected forms faire, fresshe, &c., in ‘fresshe Beaute,’ ‘gode, faire White,’ ‘fresshe May,’ &c.

This is a regular use in Chaucer also, e.g. Cant. Tales, E 1749:

‘Fulfild of alle beautee and plesaunce,’

but it has not always been clearly recognized.

In the Praise of Peace however the MS. has here for hire, ll. 108, 329, cp. 254. F has hire for here once accidentally, iii. 901.

In a few cases, as Prol. 543, i. 183, 1280, v. 3393, vi. 2062, the grammatically correct form has been printed in the text from less good MSS. and against the combined authority of F and S. On a review of the whole subject this does not now seem to me satisfactory.

Prof. Lounsbury’s criticism on the rhyme of vii. 5103 f., as given in Pauli’s edition, is quite sound, and Prof. Skeat’s defence of it will not do. Gower never rhymes a past participle in -ed with a weak preterite, though he sometimes drops the -e of the preterite before a vowel. The rhyme was good enough for Chaucer, however, as Prof. Lounsbury’s examples abundantly prove.

Except in the case of these imperative forms the 2nd pers. plur. is quite consistently used by the Lover in his shrift, and the 2nd pers. sing. by the Confessor in reply.