Deus.”
‘_De regimine principum_, “O deus immense, sub quo dominatur.”
‘_Epigrammata quaedam_, Lib. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat
alitque.”
‘_De amoris varietate_, Lib. 1, “Est amor in glosa pax bellica.”
‘_Carmina diuersa_, Lib. 1, et alia plura.’
In regard to this list it may be observed first that in the two cases
where the beginning of the book or piece in question is not cited,
we may safely assume that Bale had not seen it. This applies to the
_Speculum Meditantis_ and the supposed piece _De compunctione cordis_,
of which I can give no account. It will be observed that he makes the
short prose preface to the _Cronica Tripertita_, ‘Opus humanum est
inquirere’ &c., into a separate work in three books. The other items
are all recognizable, except ‘Epigrammata quaedam, Lib. 1, “Alta petens
aquila volat alitque.”’ Here we may observe that the quotation is from
_Vox Clamantis_ vi. 985, ‘Alta petens aquila volat alite celsius omni,’
&c. (a passage taken from the _Aurora_); and on referring to Bale’s
unpublished papers[72] we find the description of this supposed book of
epigrams in the following form, ‘Ex suo libro et sanctifidensi chron.
Epigrammata edidit, li. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alite,”’ whence we
should gather that the book referred to was a collection of quotations.
It is probable that Bale may have seen in some Gower MS. a selection
of sententious passages from the _Vox Clamantis_ and other places, such
as we actually have on one of the blank leaves of the Digby MS. (f.
160), beginning ‘Vulturis est hominum natura cadauera velle,’ again one
of those allegories of bird nature which were borrowed by Gower from
the _Aurora_.
It may be noted here that in the same passage of Bale’s unpublished
papers we have the following statement:
‘De triplici opere hoc carmen est super eius tumbam editum,
Quos viuens legi libro nunc offero regi,
Cuius habent legi secula cuncta regi.’
Also the following is given as the epitaph of his wife,
‘Quam bonitas, pietas, elemosina, casta voluntas,
Sobrietas que fides coluerunt, hic iacet Agnes.
Vxor amans, humilis Gower fuit illa Ioannis:
Donet ei summus celica regna Deus.’
These statements seem to be given by Bale on the authority of Nicholas
Brigham, to whom we owe the tomb of Chaucer in Westminster Abbey.
THE TEXT AND THE MANUSCRIPTS.
Gower’s principal Latin work, the _Vox Clamantis_, is found in ten
manuscripts altogether. Of these four are evidently contemporary with
the author and contain also the _Cronica Tripertita_ and most of the
other Latin poems printed in this volume. Some of these last are
found also in other MSS. of the _Vox Clamantis_, some Latin pieces
are contained in the Trentham MS. of the _Praise of Peace_ and the
_Cinkante Balades_ (described in vol. i. p. lxxix), and the _Cronica
Tripertita_ occurs separately in the Bodleian MS. Hatton 92. Copies of
the _Carmen de multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia_ are contained in some
MSS. of the _Confessio Amantis_, viz. TBAP₂ of the second recension,
and FH₂K of the third, and with regard to these the reader is referred
to the account given of the manuscripts in the Introduction to the
second volume of this edition.
Of the four manuscripts of the _Vox Clamantis_ with other Latin poems,
which have been referred to as contemporary with the author, one is
at Oxford, in the library of All Souls College, one at Glasgow in the
Hunterian Museum, and two in London. They are proved to be original
copies, not only by the handwriting of the text, which in each case is
distinctly of the fourteenth century, but also by the fact that they
all have author’s corrections written over erasure, and in several
cases the same hand is recognizable throughout. The original text of
the _Vox Clamantis_ seems to be written in one and the same hand in
the All Souls and Glasgow MSS. and this hand is also that of the lines
supplied occasionally in the margin of the Harleian: the hand in which
the text of the _Cronica Tripertita_ is written in the All Souls MS.
appears also in all the other three, and the same is the case with some
of the correctors’ hands, as will be seen in the detailed accounts
which follow. Of the other manuscripts of the _Vox Clamantis_ two,
which are not themselves original copies, give the text in its first
(unrevised) form, the rest are more or less in agreement with the
revised text, but give it at second or third hand, with no alterations
made over erasure.
S. ALL SOULS COLLEGE, OXF. 98. Contains, f. 1 v^o, Epistle to
Archbishop Arundel, ff. 2-116, _Vox Clamantis_, ff. 116-126 v^o,
_Cronica Tripertita_, ff. 126 v^o-127 v^o, ‘Rex celi deus,’ ‘H.
aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende bone,’ ff. 127 v^o-131, _Carmen super
multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia_, f. 131, _Tractatus de Lucis
Scrutinio_ (imperfect at the end owing to the loss of a leaf), ff.
132-135, _Traitié pour ensampler les Amantz marietz_, (imperfect at
the beginning), f. 135 v^o, ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ ff. 136, 137, ‘Eneidos
Bucolis,’ ‘O deus immense,’ ‘Quicquid homo scribat’ (f. 137 v^o blank).
Parchment, ff. 137 as numbered (and in addition several blank at the
beginning and end) measuring 12½ x 8¼ in. Well and regularly written
in single column, the _Vox Clamantis_ 48 lines on a page and the
succeeding poems 52. The original first quire begins with f. 2, but
before this a quire of four leaves (probably) was inserted, of which
the first two are blank, the third is cut away, and the fourth has on
its verso the Epistle to the Archbishop. The quire which ends with f.
116 has seven leaves only, and that ending with f. 137 six. After this
several leaves have been inserted, which remain blank. The book has on
f. 1 an ornamental initial S containing a miniature of Abp. Arundel in
his robes and mitre, and there are large coloured and gilt capitals
at the beginning of each book of the _Vox Clamantis_, and coloured
initials of various sizes for chapters and paragraphs. Original oak
binding.
Five leaves are lost (apart from blanks at the beginning and end), as
follows.
After f. 2 one leaf containing chapter-headings of _Vox Clamantis_ Lib.
ii. cap. ii-Lib. iii. cap. xxii. After f. 5 two leaves, containing
chapter-headings Lib. vii. cap. xix to the end, the lines ‘Ad mundum
mitto,’ probably with a picture of the author, and _Vox Clamantis_
Lib. i. Prologus, ll. 1-18. After f. 13 one leaf (_Vox Clamantis_ i.
766-856). After f. 131 one leaf (_De Lucis Scrutinio_ 93-103; probably
some other short piece, and the French _Traitié_, to iii. 3).
This MS. was certainly written and corrected under the direction
of the author, and remained for some time in his hands, receiving
addition from time to time. From the _Epistola_ at the beginning, which
occurs here only and seems to relate to this volume in particular, we
may gather that it was eventually presented to Abp. Arundel. It is
possible that it passed from him to his successor Chichele, and so to
the College of All Souls, where it now is, but there seems to be no
definite evidence to confirm this suggestion.
The text of S in the _Vox Clamantis_ agrees in the main as
regards revised passages with that of the other original
manuscripts C, H and G, but in some respects it is peculiar. In
Lib. iii. cap. i. S has a rewritten version which differs from
that of the other revised copies, and the same is the case with
regard to the lines ‘Quicquid homo scribat’ (p. 365). There are
also some places, as iv. 1072, 1197-1232, v. 450, where S retains
the original text in company with TH₂ or even with H₂ alone.
A few possibly right readings are peculiar to S, as in i. 1788,
2073, ii. 300, iii. 380 (margin), 1642, v. 325, vi. 555, while
some others are common to S with G alone, some few small mistakes
remain uncorrected, as in i. 106, 953, 1212, 1591, 1662, iii.
176, 989, 1214, 1541, 1695, iv. 273, 336 &c., and in some cases,
where the headings of chapters have been rewritten, as vi. cap.
xviii, xix, the original headings are left standing in the Table
of Chapters at the beginning.
At least five hands are distinguishable, as follows:
(1) the original text of the _Vox Clamantis_.
(2) the original text of the succeeding poems, French and Latin,
and the rewritten text or corrections on ff. 15 v^o (i. 1019), 90
v^o (vi. 545), 97 (vi. 1159), 115 v^o (vii. 1454 f., 1469 f.),
116 (last lines of _Vox Clamantis_).
(3) the original text and (probably) the corrections of the
_Epistola_, f. i, and the corrections or rewritten text on ff. 36
v^o (iii. 2 ff.), 39 (iii. cap. iv. heading), 97 v^o (vi. 1189),
98 (vi. 1219 ff.), 115 r^o (vii. 1409 ff.), 116 (first lines of
_Cron. Trip._), 126 v^o, 127 v^o, and the text of ‘Quicquid homo
scribat.’
(4) marginal note on f. 40 v^o, ‘Nota de bello Cleri’ &c. (iii.
375).
(5) marginal note on f. 66, ‘Nota quod Genius’ &c. (iv. 587).
In addition there are some marginal notes which are not quite
contemporary, as those on ff. 51 v^o, 52, 76 v^o, 77 (‘Contra
rectores Oxon.’ &c., ‘Nota de muliere bona’ &c.), and the heading
of the last piece on f. 137 seems to have been rewritten over a
hand different from any of the above, of which some words remain.
A few corrections are in doubtful hands, as vi. 1208.
Of the above hands the first, very regularly written in a
fourteenth century character, in brown ink, probably the same as
that of the _Vox Clamantis_ in G, and the same scribe apparently
wrote the lines which are supplied sometimes in the margin of
H, having been dropped out of the text by the first copyist.
The second (2) is also a very neat and regular hand, but of a
somewhat later type. It appears in the French and Latin poems
of MS. Fairfax 3, as well as in the substituted leaf at the
beginning of the _Confessio Amantis_ in that manuscript. It is
also used for the _Cronica Tripertita_, _Traitié_ and other
pieces in the Glasgow MS. (G), for the _Cron. Tripertita_ and
other Latin pieces in H, and for some of the rewritten passages
of the _Vox Clamantis_ in G, H, and C. The third (3) is a rather
rough hand, found also occasionally in corrections of G and H.
The fourth (4) is that in which the same marginal note is written
also in C, H and G.
G. GLASGOW HUNTERIAN MUSEUM T. 2, 17. Contains, ff. 1-108, _Vox
Clamantis_ preceded by the Table of Chapters, ff. 109-119, _Cronica
Tripertita_, ff. 119, 120, ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende,’ ‘Quia
vnusquisque,’ ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ff. 120 v^o-122, _Carmen super
multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia_, ff. 123, 124, _Tractatus de Lucis
Scrutinio_, f. 124 v^o, _Traitié pour ensampler les Amantz marietz_
followed by _Carmen de variis in amore passionibus_, f. 129, ‘Orantibus
pro anima,’ with shield of arms and the lines ‘Armigeri scutum,’
and below this a bier with candle at head and foot, f. 129 v^o,
‘Epistola quam Iohannes Gower in laudem ... Henrici quarti statim post
coronacionem ... deuote composuit,’ f. 130 v^o, ‘O deus immense,’ f.
131 v^o, ‘Henrici regis,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ f. 132, ‘Presul, ouile
regis,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Dicunt scripture,’ f. 132 v^o blank.
Parchment, ff. 132 in quires of eight leaves (except the first, which
has six) with catchwords, measuring 11¾ x 7¾ in., 53 lines to the page
in the _Vox Clamantis_, then 52 or 51, regularly and well written with
passages erased and rewritten as in CH. On f. 6 v^o is a painting
like that in the Cotton MS. of a man in a brown hat, a blue coat with
brown lining, and with three arrows in his belt, shooting an arrow at
the globe (which has a threefold division corresponding to the three
elements of air, earth, and water), with the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto
mea iacula’ &c. There is a floreated page at the beginning of Lib. i.
(after the Prologue) and illuminated initials with decoration at the
beginning of the other books; large and small coloured capitals for
chapters and paragraphs.
I have to thank Dr. Young the Librarian of the Hunterian Museum, for
facilities given to me in using this MS. and for his kind help in
collating and describing it.
The text of G has, as might be expected, a close affinity with
that of S, but the peculiarities of S as regards revision in
certain passages, e.g. iii. 1 ff., iv. 1197 ff., are not shared
by this MS., which goes here with the other revised copies, C and
H. In one place at least G has a further touch of revision, viz.
in the heading of vi. cap. vii., where its reading is shared by
D. In a good many instances, however, G stands with S (sometimes
in company with D or L) in support of a probably true reading
which is not given by other MSS., as i. 465, 468, 979, 1454,
iv. 72, v. 789, vii. 684, 1342, or of an error, as i. 1525,
1870, iii. 1863, iv. 799. It may be noted that sometimes in G an
erasure has been made without the correction being supplied.
The following are some of the hands that may be distinguished in
this manuscript:
(1) Text of the _Vox Clamantis_. This seems to be the same as S
(1), H (2).
(2) Text of the _Cronica Tripertita_ and succeeding pieces to f.
131 r^o., passages rewritten over erasure in vi. 545 ff., 1159
ff. and in the conclusion of the _Vox Clamantis_. This is the
same as S (2), C (3), H (3).
(3) Corrections in vi. cap. xix., vii. cap. iii. and xxiv,
rewritten lines at the beginning and near the end of the _Cronica
Tripertita_, text of the poem ‘Henrici Regis’ with its heading,
f. 131. Perhaps the same as S (3).
(4) The marginal note at iii. 375: the same as S (4), C (6), H
(6).
(5) The text of ‘Vnanimes esse’ and the succeeding poems on ff.
131 v^o, 132.
C. COTTON. TIB. A. iv, British Museum. Contains, ff. 2-152 v^o, _Vox
Clamantis_, ff. 153-167 r^o, ‘Explicit libellus’ &c. and _Cronica
Tripertita_, f. 167, ‘Rex celi deus,’ ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende
bone,’ ff. 168-172, _Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia_, ff.
172 v^o-174, _Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio_, ff. 174 v^o, 175, ‘Quia
vnusquisque,’ ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ‘Orate pro anima,’ ‘O deus immense,’
ff. 176, 177, ‘Henrici regis,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ ‘Presul, ouile regis,’
‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Dicunt scripture.’ Ends on 177 r^o. Parchment,
ff. 178, that is, 176 leaves of original text, preceded by two blanks,
on the second of which is Sir Robert Cotton’s Table of Contents, ending
‘Liber vt videtur ipsius autoris,’ the first leaf of the text being now
numbered f. 2. In quires of eight with catchwords, signed _a_, _b_,
_c_, &c. from f. 10 (where the text of the _Vox Clamantis_ begins) the
first quire, containing the chapter-headings &c., written in a hand
different from that of the main part of the text. Leaves measure about
10 x 6½ in. Written in single column, 38 lines to the page in the _Vox
Clamantis_, 40 or more in the _Cronica Tripertita_. The MS. has been
carefully corrected, and revised passages appear written over erasure
as in SGH. Capitals coloured and gilded at the beginning of the books,
coloured blue and red at the beginning of chapters and paragraphs. On
f. 9, the last of the first quire, a picture like that in the Glasgow
MS., of the author shooting at the world, as shown in the frontispiece
of this volume.
On f. 2 is written ‘Roberti Cotton liber ex dono doctissimi Patricii
Youngi generosi.’ The book suffered somewhat in the fire of 1731, but
it has been carefully and skilfully repaired, and though the writing
at the top of each page shows traces of the heat, no part of it is
illegible. The effect produced is clearly visible on the page of which
a facsimile is given.
The text of C is a very good one and unquestionably independent.
In regard to spelling it may be observed that the copyist of the
_Vox Clamantis_ frequently gives ‘u’ for ‘v’ at the beginning
of words, he writes ‘sed’ almost always for ‘set,’ and often
‘ti’ for ‘ci’ in words like ‘etiam,’ ‘ratio,’ ‘patiens’ and even
‘fatie’ (ii. 57), but also ‘eciam,’ ‘ambicio,’ ‘precium,’ &c.
The following are the hands, so far as they can be distinguished:
(1) Text of the _Vox Clamantis_, a small and somewhat irregular
but clear hand, of the fourteenth century.
(2) The eight leaves preceding this (containing the
chapter-headings), and also ff. 96, 97 and part of 140. This hand
has made corrections throughout, not revising the text, as the
author might, but setting right the mistakes of the scribe.
The (3) following passages as rewritten over erasure: i. 1019
ff., vi. 545-554, and also the prose heading of the first part
of the _Cronica Tripertita_. This is the ‘second hand’ of the
Fairfax MS., the same as S (2), G (2), H (3).
(4) The passage rewritten over erasure in iii. 1 ff., also the
heading of iii, cap. iv., corrections in iv. 1198 ff., and iv.
1221*-1232* rewritten over erasure. This is a neat round hand
used also in the same places of the Harleian MS.
(5) The passage ‘Rex puer,’ &c., vi. 555-580, and vi. cap.
xviii, with the heading of cap. xix., over erasure, a hand which
resembles (3), but does not seem to be identical with it.
(6) The marginal note at iii. 375 and perhaps also iv. 587, and
the marginal note at the end of the _Cronica Tripertita_; also f.
176 ‘Nota hic in fine--intendo,’ and the lines ‘Henrici regis,’
&c. This is the same as S (4), G (4), H (6).
(7) Corrections in vi. 1208, 1210: the same as H (7), and the
correction of vi. 1210 in S.
(8) Corrections in vi. 1219 ff., and vii. 187 ff.
(9) Text of _Cronica Tripertita_ and the succeeding pieces to f.
168: a rather rough and irregular hand in faded ink.
(10) Marginal notes of _Cronica Tripertita_ and text of _Carmen
super multiplici_ &c. from f. 169, ‘Ad fidei dampnum’ to the end
of ‘O deus immense,’ f. 176.
(11) The four smaller poems at the end (possibly with the
exception of ‘Cultor in ecclesia’). The same as H (9).
(12) The lines at the beginning and near the end of the _Cronica
Tripertita_ (over erasure).
Some other corrections are doubtful, as the concluding lines of
the _Vox Clamantis_.
H. HARLEIAN 6291, British Museum. Contains the same as C, except where
deficient from loss of leaves, with the addition of a second copy of
the last three poems. Parchment ff. 164, measuring 9 x 6 in., in quires
of eight with catchwords, 37 lines to the page, regularly and neatly
written. No decoration except coloured initials. Has lost probably
two whole quires, 16 leaves, at the beginning, and begins with _Vox
Clamantis_, i. 502. The first existing quire is lettered ‘b,’ and this
is also the lettering of the third quire of the Cotton MS., the first,
which has the Table of Chapters, not being counted in the lettering.
In addition to these, one leaf is lost after f. 1 (containing _Vox
Clamantis_, i. 571-644), two after f. 58 (iii. 1716-1854), one after f.
108 (vi. 951-1021), one after f. 133 (vii. 1399-1466). This last leaf
formed part of a quire of 12, which followed f. 124, at the end of the
_Vox Clamantis_. Of these the last three have been cut away, but only
one leaf of text is lost, f. 134 continuing at 1467, and the concluding
lines of the _Vox Clamantis_ being here given in the hand which copied
the _Cronica Tripertita_, &c. The last quire of that book, ff. 158-164
(one leaf lost at the end), has several blanks (162, 163, 164 v^o).
In a good many instances passages of from two to six lines are omitted
in the text and inserted in the margin, either across or at the bottom
of the page, in a hand which seems not to be that of the text, though
very similar, and is probably identical with S (1). This occurs on ff.
41, 74, 76, 78, &c.
The text of H is very correct, and in forms of spelling, &c.
it closely resembles that of S. There is little punctuation at
first, but more afterwards. In form of text it agrees nearly
with C, but (1) the marginal note at iv. 587 is omitted, (2) as
regards revision H parts company with C at vi. 1219, from which
point H has the unrevised text in agreement with EDTH₂ except in
the concluding lines of the _Vox Clamantis_ on f. 134, which, as
already remarked, are rewritten in a new hand.
The hands of H may be thus distinguished:
(1) Text of the _Vox Clamantis_, a good and regular
fourteenth-century hand.
(2) Passages added in the margin, probably the same as S (1).
(3) Rewritten text of i. 1019 ff., vi. 545-580, vi. cap. xviii
and heading of xix, last lines of _Vox Clamantis_, text of
_Cronica Tripertita_ and succeeding pieces to the end of ‘O deus
immense’ f. 159 v^o. This is the same as S (2), G (2), C (3).
(4) Rewritten text of iii. 1 ff., corrections of iv. 1212, 1214,
and rewritten text of 1221*-1232*; also f. 160, ‘Nota hic in
fine’ &c. to end of f. 161 r^o. This is the same as C (4).
(5) Correction of the heading of iii. cap. iv, the same as S (3).
(6) Marginal note at iii. 375, the same as S (4), G (4), C (6).
(7) Corrections of vi. 1208, 1210, and of _Cronica Tripertita_ i.
55 f. and some other places: the same as C (7).
(8) Rewritten passages at the beginning and near the end of the
_Cronica Tripertita_, the same as C (12).
(9) Second copy of the last poems (on f. 164), the same hand as C
(11).
E. At ECTON, near Northampton, in the possession of General Sotheby,
who very kindly sent it to the Bodleian Library for my use. Contains
_Vox Clamantis_, _Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia_,
_Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio_, ‘O deus immense,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’
‘Vnanimes esse,’ ‘Dicunt scripture.’ Parchment, ff. 191, measuring
about 9 x 6¼ in., in quires of eight with catch-words, the last quire
of seven leaves only (two blank). Neatly written in a good hand of the
end of the fourteenth century, in single column, 32 lines to a page.
On f. 10 a brightly coloured picture of an archer drawing a bow to
shoot at the world, with the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ &c., as in the
Cotton and Glasgow MSS., but the figure and features are different,
and evidently the picture has less claim to be considered an authentic
portrait than those of the two MSS. above named. The headings of pages
and chapters are in red, and there are coloured initials and other
decorations throughout. The whole is written in one hand, and there are
no corrections or erasures such as might indicate that the book had
been in the hands of the author.
The manuscript seems to have been in the possession of the Sotheby
family since 1702, when it was ‘bought at Lord Burgley’s sale for £1
2_s._ 0_d._’ No leaves are lost, but two are transposed at the end of
the fourth and beginning of the fifth books.
The text is very fairly correct, and the MS. is closely related
to C both in text and spelling (for which see i. Prol. 37 f., i.
21, 95, 447, 1706, 1776, 2017, ii. 174, 311 &c.), but not derived
from it (see i. 41, 1626, 2094, iii. 1760 f., v. 785 f.). The
passages which in C and the other original copies are rewritten
over erasure, as iii. 1 ff., vi. 1161 ff., are usually given by
E in the revised form, but the marginal notes at iii. 375 and
iv. 587 are omitted. Occasionally too, where C has a correction,
E gives the original reading in company with H, as iii. 840, v.
785 f., and especially in the passages vi. 1219 ff. and vii. 182
ff., where H no longer agrees with SCG in corrections, we find
that E goes with H. In the final poems E shows some independence
as regards marginal notes, e.g. in the last piece, where instead
of ‘Nota contra mortuorum executores,’ we find the much more
pointed, though doubtfully grammatical, remark, ‘Nota quod bonum
est vnicuique esse executor sui ipsius.’ This is the only MS.
except CHG which contains the short pieces at the end, and the
omission from these of ‘Presul, ouile regis’ may be an indication
that the MS. was written before 1402.
As regards the picture in this MS., the features of the archer
are quite different from those represented in the Cotton MS. He
has a prominent pointed nose and a light-coloured moustache and
beard; the arrow, held between the fore-finger and the second and
aimed upwards, covers the mouth. The dress consists of a grey
fur cap with a hood under it of light crimson, covering also the
upper part of the body: below this a blue surcoat with brown
lining and wide sleeves thrown back so as to leave the arms bare:
a red belt with buckle and pendant, and red hose. The globe is
at a higher level and smaller in proportion than in the other
pictures. Like them it is divided into three, the left hand upper
division having a crescent moon and four stars: a red cross with
a banner stands at the summit of the globe.