A LONG CASTEL with walles WHYTE,
By seynt IOHAN! on a RICHE HIL.
There can be no doubt that (as has been suggested by the Bishop of Oxford)
these apparently otiose lines contain punning allusions to the whole
subject of the poem. LONG-CASTELL (put for _Lon-castell_, or the castle on
the Lune) was another name for Lancaster; compare the modern _Lonsdale_ as
a name for the valley of the Lune, and see Barbour's Bruce, xvii. 285, 582.
WHYTE alludes to Blanche. Thus the former line expresses Blanche, Duchess
of Lancaster.
In the second line, the RICHE HIL refers to Richmond in Yorkshire; and the
whole line expresses John, Earl of Richmond. John of Gaunt had been created
Earl of Richmond (vol. i. p. xviii).
BOETHIUS. For some corrections, see vol. ii. p. lxxix.
TROILUS. For some corrections and additions, see vol. ii. pp. lxxix, lxxx.
For an Additional Note to Bk. iii. 674, see vol. ii. p. 506.
LEGEND OF GOOD WOMEN. For an Additional Note to ll. 1896-8, see vol. iii.
p. lvi. [491]
VOL. III. pp. 421, 422. SOURCES OF THE PRIORESSES TALE. It is tolerably
clear that Chaucer really got the former part of this story from one of the
Miracles of our Lady, by Gautier de Coinci or Coincy[31]. And I have now
little doubt that he adapted the latter part of it from another story in
the same collection (and therefore in the same MS.), by the same author. It
so happens that the latter story is printed in Bartsch and Horning's
collection in 'La Langue et la Littérature Françaises'; Paris, 1887; col.
367. It is there entitled 'De Clerico Sancte Virgini devoto, in cuius iam
mortui ore flos inuentus est.' It is rather a stupid and pointless story,
to the following effect. There was a wicked cleric at Chartres, who gave
himself up to all kinds of debauchery; but he had one merit. He never
passed an image of Our Lady without kneeling down and saying a prayer. Some
enemies killed him; and it was at once resolved to bury him in a ditch, as
an outcast; and this was done. But Our Lady appeared to one of the chief
clergy, and commanded that he should be buried again, in the holiest spot
in the cemetery. When the body was recovered, it was found that the tongue
of the corpse remained uncorrupted, being as red as a rose, and a
miraculous flower was blossoming in his mouth. He was reburied in holy
ground, with many tears from the pious. It was also observed that his
tongue still slowly moved, _as if_ endeavouring to sing the Virgin's
praises.
This is rather a clumsy assumption; for the tongue might have been trying
to swear. Hence Chaucer gives it a real voice; and substitutes a small
grain in place of the flower; probably because there was a well-known
legend about the three grains found by Seth under Adam's tongue (above, p.
180, note to l. 1852). Chaucer's tale is really made up, with great skill,
from a combination of these two poems by Gautier de Coinci; and it is
highly remarkable that, in the Vernon MS., there is a version of the story
which says that _five roses_ were found in the child's head; one _in his
mouth_, two in his eyes, and two in his ears. In the Legend of Alphonsus of
Lincoln (see vol. iii. p. 421), the child has a precious stone in place of
a tongue; but this legend was composed in 1459, and was probably copied
from Chaucer. I think it highly probable that Chaucer combined the two
'Miracles' himself; though of course some one else may have done it before
him. In any case, it is worth while pointing out that we must combine the
two stories by de Coinci, before we obtain the whole of Chaucer's poem.
VOL. III. pp. 502, 503. The statement that the French treatise by Frère
Lorens, entitled La Somme des Vices et des Vertus, 'has never been
printed,' is incorrect. However, the book is scarce. Mr. Bradley tells me
that there is a copy of it in the British Museum, printed by Anthoine
Verard 'sus le pont notre dame,' Paris. It is undated, but it is said to
have been printed in 1495. [492]