1165. The host here refers to the Man of Lawes Tale, which had just been
told, and uses the expression '_thrifty_ tale' with reference to the same
expression above, B. 46. Most MSS. separate this end-link widely from the
Tale, but MS. Hl. and MS. Arch. Seld. B. 14 have it in the right place. See
vol. iii. pp. 417-9.
_for the nones_, for the nonce, for the occasion; see note to the Prologue,
A. 379. The A.S. _[=a]nes_ (= once) is an adverb with a genitive
case-ending; and, being an adverb, becomes indeclinable, and can
accordingly be used as a _dative_ case after the preposition _for_, which
properly governs the dative.
1166. The Host here turns to the Parson (see Prol. A. 477), and adjures him
to tell a tale, according to the agreement.
1167. _yore_, put for _of yore_, formerly, already.--M.
1169. _Can moche good_, know (or are acquainted with) much good; i. e. with
many good things, Cf. B. 47. [166]
1170. _Benedicite_, bless ye; i. e. bless ye the Lord; the first word of
the Song of the Three Children, and a more suitable exclamation than most
of those in common use at the time. In the Knightes Tale, A. 1785, where
Theseus is _pondering_ over the strange event he had just witnessed, the
word is pronounced _in full_, as five syllables. But in A. 2115, it is
pronounced, as here, as a mere trisyllable. The syllables to be dropped are
the second and third, so that we must say _ben'cite_. This is verified by a
passage in the Townley Mysteries, p. 85, where it is actually spelt
_benste_, and reduced to two syllables only. Cf. notes to B. 1974, and
Troil. i. 780.
1171. _man_; dat. case after _eyleth_. Swearing is alluded to as a
prevalent vice amongst Englishmen in Robert of Brunne, in the Persones Tale
of Chaucer, and elsewhere.--M.
1172. _O Iankin_, &c.; 'O Johnny, you are there, are you?' That is, 'so it
is you whom I hear, is it, Mr. Johnny?' A derisive interruption. It was
common to call a priest _Sir John_, by way of mild derision; see Monkes
Prol. (B. 3119) and Nonne Prestes Prol. (B. 4000). The Host carries the
derision a little further by using the diminutive form. See note to B.
4000.
1173. _a loller_, a term of reproach, equivalent to a canting fellow.
Tyrwhitt aptly cites a passage from a treatise of the period, referring to
the Harleian Catalogue, no. 1666:--'Now in Engelond it is a comun
protectioun ayens persecutioun, if a man is customable to swere nedeles and
fals and unavised, by the bones, nailes, and sides, and other membres of
Christ. And to absteyne fro othes nedeles and unleful, and repreve sinne by
way of charite, is mater and cause now, why Prelates and sum Lordes
sclaundren men, and clepen hem _Lollardes_, Eretikes,' &c.
The reader will not clearly understand this word till he distinguishes
between the Latin _lollardus_ and the English _loller_, two words of
different origin which were _purposely_ confounded in the time of Wyclif.
The Latin _Lollardus_ had been in use before Wyclif. Ducange quotes from
Johannes Hocsemius, who says, under the date 1309---'Eodem anno quidam
hypocritae gyrovagi, qui _Lollardi_, sive Deum laudantes, vocabantur, per
Hannoniam et Brabantiam quasdam mulieres nobiles deceperunt.' He adds that
Trithemius says in his Chronicle, under the year 1315--'ita appellatos a
Gualtero _Lolhard_, Germano quodam.' Kilian, in his Dictionary of Mid.
Dutch, says--'_Lollaerd_, mussitator, mussitabundus'; i. e. a mumbler of
prayers. This gives two etymologies for _Lollardus_. Being thus already in
use as a term of reproach, it was applied to the followers of Wyclif, as we
learn from Thomas Walsingham, who says, under the year 1377--'Hi uocabantur
a uulgo _Lollardi_, incedentes nudis pedibus'; and again--'_Lollardi_
sequaces Joannis Wiclif.' But the Old English _loller_ (from the verb to
_loll_) meant simply a lounger, an idle vagabond, as is abundantly clear
from a notable passage in Piers the Plowman, C-text (ed. Skeat), x.
188-218; where William tells us plainly-- [167]
'Now kyndeliche, by crist · beþ suche callyd _lolleres_,
As by englisch of oure eldres · of olde menne techynge.
He that _lolleþ_ is lame · oþer his leg out of ioynte,' &c.
Here were already two (if not three) words confused, but this was not all.
By a bad pun, the Latin _lolium_, tares, was connected with _Lollard_, so
that we find in Political Poems, i. 232, the following--
'Lollardi sunt zizania,
Spinae, uepres, ac _lollia_,
Quae uastant hortum uineae.'
This obviously led to allusions to the Parable of the Tares, and fully
accounts for the punning allusion to _cockle_, i. e. tares, in l. 1183. Mr.
Jephson observes that _lolium_ is used in the Vulgate Version, Matt. xii.
25; but this is a mistake, as the word there used is _zizania_. Gower,
Prol. to Conf. Amant., ed. Pauli, i. 15, speaks of--
'This newe secte of _lollardie_,
And also many an heresie.'