For to tell you of his aray; A. 73.
In hope to stande in his ladyes grace; A. 88.
And Frenche she spake ful fetously; A. 124.
Her mouth smale, and therto softe and reed; A. 153.
It was almost a span brode, I trowe; A. 155.
Another None with her had she; A. 163.
And in harping, whan he had song; A. 266.
Of hem that helpen him to scholay; A. 302.
Not a worde spake more than nede; A. 304.
Was very felicite perfite; A. 338.
His barge was called the Maudelain; A. 410.
It is needless to proceed; it is obvious that Stowe was not the man who
would care to eke out a line by filling it up with convenient
monosyllables. And it is just because these old editors usually let the
text alone, that the old black-letter editions still retain a certain
value, and represent some lost manuscript.
§ 18. One editor, apparently Speght, actually had an inkling of the truth;
but he was promptly put down by Dryden (Pref. to the Fables). 'The verse of
Chaucer, I confess, is not harmonious to us; ... there is the rude
sweetness of a Scotch tune in it, which is natural and pleasing, though not
perfect. It is true, I cannot go so far as he who published the last
edition of him; for he would make us believe the fault is in our ears, and
that there were really ten syllables in a verse where we find but nine; but
this error is not worth confuting; it is so gross and obvious an error[19],
that common sense (which is a rule in everything but matters of faith and
revelation) must convince the reader, that equality of numbers in every
verse which we call Heroic, was either not known, or not always practised
in Chaucer's age. It were an easy matter to produce some thousands of
verses, which are lame for want of half a foot, and sometimes a whole one,
and which no pronunciation can make otherwise.' We cannot doubt that such
was the prevalent opinion at that time. [xxiii]
§ 19. For such readers as do not wish to study the language or the grammar
of Chaucer, but merely wish to read the text with some degree of comfort,
and to come by the stories and their general literary expression with the
least possible trouble, the Ellesmere MS. furnishes quite an ideal text.
Such a reader has only to observe the following empirical rules[20].
1. Pronounce every final _e_ like the final _a_ in _China_, except in a few
very common words like _wolde_, _sholde_, _were_, and the like, which may
be read as _wold'_, _shold'_, _wer'_, unless the metre seems to demand that
they should be fully pronounced. The commonest clipped words of this
character are _have_, _hadde_ (when a mere auxiliary), _were_, _nere_ (were
not), _wolde_, _nolde_ (would not), _thise_ (like mod. E. _these_),
_othere_, and a few others, that are easily picked up by observation.
2. Always pronounce final _-ed_, _-es_, _-en_, as distinct syllables,
unless it is particularly convenient to clip them. Such extra syllables,
like the final _-e_, are especially to be preserved at the end of the line;
a large number of the rimes being double (or feminine).
3. But the final _-e_ is almost invariably elided, and other light
syllables, especially _-en_, _-er_, _-el_, are frequently treated as being
redundant, whenever the next word following begins with a vowel or is one
of the words (beginning with _h_) in the following list, viz. _he_, _his_,
_him_, _her_, _hir_ (their), _hem_ (them), _hath_, _hadde_, _have_, _how_,
_heer_.
These three simple rules will go a long way. An attentive reader will thus
catch the swing of the metre, and will be carried along almost
mechanically. The chief obstacle to a succession of smooth lines is the
jerk caused by the occasional occurrence of a line defective in the first
foot, as explained above. Perhaps it may be further noted that an _e_
sometimes occurs, as a distinct syllable, in the middle of a word as well
as at the end of it. Exx.: _Eng-e-lond_ (A. 16); _wod-e-craft_ (A. 110);
_sem-e-ly_ (A. 136).
§ 20. We must also remember that the accentuation of many words, especially
of such as are of French origin, was quite different then from what it is
now. A word like 'reason' was then properly pronounced _resóun_ (rezuun),
i. e. somewhat like a modern _ray-zóon_; but even in Chaucer's day the
habit of throwing back the accent was beginning to prevail, and there was a
tendency to [xxiv] say _réson_ (reezun), somewhat like a modern _ráy-zun_.
Chaucer avails himself of this variable accent, and adopts the sound which
comes in more conveniently at the moment[21]. Thus while we find _resóun_
(rezuun) in l. 37, in l. 274 we find résons (reezunz).
§ 21. I give a few examples of the three rules stated above.
The following words are properly dissyllabic, in the Prologue to the
Canterbury Tales:--(l. 1) _shou-res_, _so-te_; (2) _drogh-te_, _Mar-che_,
_per-ced_, _ro-te_; (3) _ba-thed_, _vey-ne_; (5) _swe-te_; (7) _crop-pes_,
_yon-ge_, _son-ne_; (8) _half-e_; (9) _sma-le_, _fow-les_, _ma-ken_; (10)
_sle-pen_, _o-pen_, _y-ë_; (13) _straun-ge_, _strond-es_; (14) _fer-ne_,
_hal-wes_, _lon-des_; (15) _shi-res_, _end-e_; and so on.
In the same way, there are three syllables in (1) _A-pril-le_; (4)
_en-gend-red_; (5) _Zéph-i-rús_; (6) _In-spi-red_; (8) _y-ron-ne_; &c. And
there are four syllables in (9) _mél-o-dý-ë_; (12) _pil-grim-á-ges_.
Elision takes place of the _e_ in _drogh-te_ and of the _e_ in _couth-e_ in
l. 14; of the _e_ in _nyn-e_ in l. 24; &c. In such cases, the words may be
read as if spelt _droght_, _couth_, _nyn_, for convenience. There are some
cases in which the scribe actually fails to write a final _e_, owing to
such elision; but they are not common. I have noted a few in the Glossarial
Index.
The final _e_ is ignored, before a consonant, in _were_ (59, 68, 74, 81);
and even, which is not common, in _hope_ (88) and _nose_ (152).
As examples of accents to which we are no longer accustomed, we may notice
_A-príl-le_ (1); _ver-tú_ (4); _cor-á-ges_ (11); _á-ven-túre_ (25);
_tó-ward_ (27); _re-sóun_ (37); _hon-óur_ (46); _hon-óur-ed_ (50);
_a-ry´-ve_ (60); _sta-tú-re_ (83); _Cur-téys_ (99).
The lines were recited deliberately, with a distinct pause near the middle
of each, at which no elision could take place. At this medial pause there
is often a redundant syllable (as is more fully explained in vol. vi).
Thus, in l. 3, the _-e_ in _veyn-e_ should be preserved, though modern
readers are sure to ignore it. Cf. _carie_ in l. 130; _studie_ in l. 184;
&c.
§ 22. By help of the above hints, some notion of the melody of Chaucer may
be gained, even by such as adopt the modern English pronunciation. It is
right, however, to bear in mind that most of the vowels had, at that time,
much the same powers as in modern French and Italian; and it sometimes
makes a [xxv] considerable difference. Thus the word _charitable_ in l. 143
was really pronounced more like the modern French _charitable_; only that
the initial sound was that of the O. F. and E. _ch_, as in _church_, not
that of the modern French _ch_ in _cher_. For further remarks on the
pronunciation, see vol. vi.
§ 23. The feeble suggestion is sometimes made that Chaucer's spelling ought
to be modernised, like that of Shakespeare. This betrays a total ignorance
of the history of English spelling. It is not strictly the case, that
Shakespeare's spelling has been modernised; for the fact is the other way,
viz. that in all that is most essential, it is the spelling of
Shakespeare's time that has been adopted in modern English. The so-called
'modern' spelling is really a survival, and is sadly unfit, as we all know
to our cost, for representing modern English sounds. By 'modernising,' such
critics usually mean the cutting off of final _e_ in places where it was
just as little required in Elizabethan English as it is now; the freër use
of 'v' and of 'j'; and so forth; nearly all of the alterations referring to
unessential details. Such alterations would have been useful even in
Shakespeare's time, and would not have touched the character of the
spelling. But the spelling of Chaucer's time refers to quite a different
age, when a large number of inflections were still in use that have since
been discarded; so that it involves changes in essential and vital points.
As it happens, the spelling of the Ellesmere MS. is phonetic in a very high
degree. Pronounce the words _as they are spelt_, but with the Italian
vowel-sounds and the German final _e_, and you come very near the truth. If
this is too much trouble, pronounce the words _as they are spelt_, with
modern English vowels (usually adding a final _e_, pronounced like _a_ in
_China_, when it is visibly present); and, even so, it is easy to follow.
The alteration of a word like _quene_ to _queene_ does not make it any
easier; and the further alteration to _queen_ destroys its dissyllabic
nature. Besides, those who want the spelling modernised can get it in
Gilfillan's edition.
Surely, it is better to stick to the true old phonetic spelling. Boys at
school, who have learnt Attic Greek, are supposed to be able to face the
spelling of Homer without wincing, though it is not their native language;
and the number of Englishwomen who are fairly familiar with Middle-English
is becoming considerable.
§ 24. As regards the Notes in the present volume, it will be [xxvi] readily
understood that I have copied them or collected them from many sources.
Many of those on the Prologue and Knightes Tale were really written by Dr.
Morris; but, owing to the great kindness he shewed me in allowing me to
work in conjunction with him on terms of equality, I should often be hard
put to it to say which they are. A large number are taken from the editions
by Tyrwhitt, Wright, and Bell; but these are usually acknowledged. Others I
have adopted from the various works published by the Chaucer Society; from
the excellent notes by Dr. Köppell, Dr. Kölbing, and Dr. Koch that have
appeared in Anglia, and in similar publications; and from Professor
Lounsbury's excellent work entitled Studies in Chaucer. I have usually
endeavoured to point out the sources of my information; and, if I have in
several cases failed to do this, I hope it will be understood that, as
Chaucer's fox said, 'I dide it in no wikke entente.' Perhaps this may seem
an unlucky reference, for the fox was not speaking the strict truth, as we
all know that he ought to have done. If I may take any credit for any part
of the Notes, I think it may be for my endeavour to hunt up, as far as I
could, a large number of the very frequent allusions to Le Roman de la
Rose[22], and to such authors as Ovid and Statius; besides undertaking the
more difficult task involved in tracing out some of the mysterious
references which occur in the margins of the manuscripts. For the Tale of
Melibeus, I naturally derived much help and comfort from the admirable
edition of Albertano's Liber Consolationis by Thor Sundby, and the careful
notes made by Mätzner. As for the references in the Persones Tale, I should
never have found out so many of them, but for the kind assistance of the
Rev. E. Marshall. To all my predecessors in the task of annotation, and to
all helpers, I beg leave to express my hearty thanks. For further remarks
on this and some other subjects, see vol. vi.
As it frequently happens that it is highly desirable to be able to recover
speedily the whereabouts of a note on some particular word or subject, an
Index to the Notes is appended to this volume. [xxvii]