455. John of Gaunt, born in June, 1340, was 29 years old in 1369. I do not
know why a poet is _never to make a mistake_; nor why critics should lay
down such a singular law. But if we are to lay the error on the scribes,
Mr. Brock's suggestion is excellent. He remarks that _nine and twenty_ was
usually written xxviiij.; and if the _v_ were omitted, it would appear as
.xxiiij., i. e. _four and twenty_. The existing MSS. write 'foure and
twenty' at length; but such is not the usual practice of earlier scribes.
It may also be added that .xxiiij. was at that time always read as _four
and twenty_, never as _twenty-four_; so that no ambiguity could arise as to
the mode of reading it. See Richard the Redeless, iii. 260.
There is a precisely similiar confusion in Cant. Ta. Group B, l. 5, where
_eightetethe_ is denoted by 'xviijthe' in the Hengwrt MS., whilst the Harl.
MS. omits the _v_, and reads _threttenthe_, and again the Ellesmere MS.
inserts an _x_, and gives us _eighte and twentithe_. The presumption is,
that Chaucer knew his patron's age, and that we ought to read _nine_ for
_four_; but even if he inadvertently wrote _four_, there is no crime in it.
475. The knight's lay falls into two stanzas, one of five, and one of six
lines, as marked. In order to make them more alike, Thynne inserted an
additional line--And thus in sorowe lefte me alone--after l. 479. This
additional line is numbered 480 in the editions; so I omit l. 480 in the
numbering. The line is probably spurious. It is not grammatical; grammar
would require that _has_ (not _is_, as in l. 479) should be understood
before the pp. _left_; or if we take _left-e_ as a past tense, then the
line will not scan. But it is also unmetrical, as the arrangement of lines
should be the same as in ll. 481-6, if the two stanzas are to be made
alike. Chaucer says the lay consisted of 'ten verses or twelve' in l. 463,
which is a sufficiently close description of a lay of eleven lines. Had he
said _twelve_ without any mention of _ten_, the case would have been
different.
479. Lange proposes: 'Is deed, and is fro me agoon.' F. Tn. Th. agree as to
the reading given; I see nothing against it.
481. If we must needs complete the line, we must read 'Allas! o deth!'
inserting _o_; or 'Allas! the deth,' inserting _the_. The latter is
proposed by Ten Brink, Sprache, &c. § 346.
490. _Pure_, very; cf. 'pure fettres,' Kn. Tale, A 1279. And see l. 583,
below.
491. Cf. 'Why does my blood thus muster to my heart?' Meas. for Meas. ii.
4. 20.
501. The MSS. have _seet_, sat, a false form for _sat_ (A.S. _sæt_); due to
the plural form _seet-e_ or _s[=e]t-e_ (A.S. _sæt-on_). We certainly find
_seet_ for _sat_ in the Kn. Tale, A 2075. Read _sete_, as the pt. t. subj.
(A.S. _s[=æ]te_); and _fete_ as dative pl. form, as in Cant. Ta. B 1104.