390. In Essays on Chaucer, p. 510, Dr. Eilers gives a detailed and careful
comparison of the English with the French text from which it is partly
derived. The result, through no fault of his, is more bewildering than
useful; for the numerous alterations in the arrangement of the parts of the
subject are altogether too tedious to explain. The reader will gain the
best idea of the state of the case, if I here quote Dr. Eilers' summary of
his comparison of the two texts, as to their treatment of 'Pride.' Similar
numberless alterations of detail occur in the treatment of the other
'Sins.' (Fr. = French text).
'From the above [comparison] it will appear that a well-ordered scheme
underlies the French text. _Orguel_ is divided into 7 branches, and each of
these again into a similar number of _reinselez_ (_branchettes_). Let us
examine the English text (Chaucer's) more closely. After first pointing out
(substantially in agreement with Fr.) the impossibility of naming all the
parts (_twigges_) into which Pride may be divided, 16 _twigges_ are
enumerated, but without that logical coherence apparent in Fr. Next follow
short definitions of the twigs, in which, however, the 11th twig (_Strif_)
is omitted from the list, and is added instead at the end, under
_janglinge_, which had never been mentioned before. These 16 twigs
correspond partly to the branches, partly to the _reinselez_ of Fr., whilst
some of them are not found in Fr. at all, or at least not under the same
heading.
'The definitions correspond only in their general sense with Fr. [Here
instances are given.]
'Throughout this part there is in Ch. much confusion of particulars. The
definition of "swelling of herte" is incorrect. "Arrogaunce" and
"Presumpcion," which in Fr. are identical, appear in Ch. as distinct
conceptions. On the other hand, the definitions of some of the words
resemble each other closely.... The next section, on "a privee spece of
Pryde" (§ 25), has nothing corresponding to it in Fr.; &c.... In the
section "whennes Pride sourdeth and springeth" (§ 29), Ch. is in tolerably
exact accordance with Fr.... The correspondence in this [457] first Deadly
Sin is confined to isolated expressions, points of arrangement common to
both,' &c.
On account, then, of the complicated differences in the treatment of
details, I do not think it advisable to give the full and exact results. I
confine myself to passages in which the Fr. throws real light on the
English text, and to the points of chief interest only.
I think it worth while to continue here the quotation from Gregory
commenced in the note to l. 388 above:--'Nam de inani gloria inobedientia,
jactantia, hypocrisis, contentiones, pertinaciae, discordiae, et novitatum
praesumptiones oriuntur.' Here is the outline of the division of Pride into
branches. He gives similar 'branches' of _Inuidia_, _Ira_, and the rest.
In the Ayenbite of Inwyt, p. 17, the first bough of Pride has three twigs,
as in Fr.; in fact, it follows Fr. _very closely_, and gives a very good
idea of its general contents and treatment.
In the Ancren Riwle, p. 199, 'the Lion of Pride' has 9 whelps, such as Vain
Glory, Indignation, Hypocrisy, Presumption, &c.
392. _Inobedient_, disobedient. Cf. P. Plowman, C. vii. 19; Ayenb. (i. e.
Ayenbite of Inwyt), p. 20, ll. 7. 8.