582. 'For all good fortune and I are foes,' lit. angry (with each other).
Hence _wroth-e_ is a plural form.
589. _S_ and _C_ were so constantly interchanged before _e_ that _Sesiphus_
could be written _Cesiphus_; and _C_ and _T_ were so often mistaken that
_Cesiphus_ easily became _Tesiphus_, the form in the Tanner MS. Further,
initial _T_ was sometimes replaced by _Th_; and this would give the
_Thesiphus_ of MS. F.
_Sesiphus_, i. e. Sisyphus, is of course intended; it was in the author's
mind in connection with the story of Orpheus just above; see note to l.
569. In the Roman de la Rose, we have the usual allusions to _Yxion_ (l.
19479), _Tentalus_, i. e. Tantalus (l. 19482), _Ticius_, i. e. Tityus (l.
19506), and _Sisifus_ (l. 19499).
But whilst I thus hold that Chaucer probably wrote _Sesiphus_, I have no
doubt that he really meant _Tityus_, as is shewn by the expression _lyth_,
i. e. lies extended. See Troil. i. 786, where Bell's edition has
_Siciphus_, but the Campsall MS. has _Ticyus_; whilst in ed. 1532 we find
_Tesiphus_.
599. With this string of contrarieties compare the Eng. version of the
Roman de la Rose, 4706-4753. See p. 212, above.