FOOTNOTES:

OXFORDPRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESSBY HORACE HART, M.A.PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

FOOTNOTES:AIn some unpublished papers kindly communicated to me by Miss Bateson.BFroissart,Chron., ed. K. de Lettenhove, vol. xv. p. 167.CB. ten Brink,Geschichte der Engl. Litt.ii. 141.DThis date has hitherto been omitted from the text of the printed editions.EThe last two lines, which contain the mention of the earl of Derby, are omitted in some MSS. of the first recension, and this may be an indication that the author circulated some copies without them. A full account of the various recensions of the poem is given later, under the head of ‘Text.’FThe term ‘epilogue’ is used for convenience to designate the conclusion of the poem after viii. 2940, but no such designation is used by the author: similarly ‘preface’ means here the opening passage of the Prologue (ll. 1-92).G‘Minoris etatis causa inde excusabilem pronuncians.’HDr. Karl Meyer, in his dissertationJohn Gower’s Beziehungen zu Chaucer und König Richard II(1889), takes account of these various notes of time, having made himself to some extent acquainted with the MSS., but his conclusions are in my opinion untenable.IThis has been equally the procedure of Prof. Hales on the one hand, who endeavours to throw back the composition of the first recension to an extravagantly early period, and of Dr. Karl Meyer on the other, who wishes to bring down the final form of the book to a time later than the deposition of Richard II. The theory of the latter, that the sixteenth year of King Richard is given as the date of the original completion of the poem, and not of the revised preface, is sufficiently refuted by the date ‘fourteenth year’ attached to the rewritten epilogue.JFor the connexion between this and theConfessio Amantissee L. Bech inAnglia, v. 313 ff.KLydgate apparently did not take Chaucer’s censure very seriously, for he quite needlessly introduced the tale of Canace into hisFalls of Princes, following Gower’s rendering of it.LSee for example the picture of Nebuchadnezzar transformed into an ox, ‘Tho thoghte him colde grases goode,’ &c. (i. 2976 ff.), the account of the jealous husband, who after charging his wife quite unreasonably with wishing she had another there in his stead, turns away from her in bed and leaves her to weep all the night, while he sleeps (v. 545 ff.), and the description of the man who entertains his wife so cheerfully on his return home with tales of the good sport that he has had, but carefully avoids all reference to the occurrence which would have interested her most (v. 6119 ff.).MThe reading in the Latin note at the beginning of ‘quarto ’ for ‘sexto decimo’ is probably due to a mistake, for we find ‘sextenthe’ in the text of l. 25. It may be noted that the MS. mentioned by Pauli as containing the rewritten preface and also the Chaucer verses (New Coll. 326) is a hybrid, copied from two different manuscripts.Nfor King Richard’s sake, to whom my allegiance belongs and for whom I pray. It chanced that as I rowed in a boat on the flowing Thames under the town of New Troy, I met my liege lord, and he bad me come from my boat into his barge, and there he laid upon me a charge to write some new thing which he himself might read. Thus I am the more glad to write, and I have the less fear of envious blame. A gentle heart praises without malice, but the world is full of evil tongues and my king’s command shall nevertheless be fulfilled. Though I have long been sick, yet I will endeavour to write a book which may be wisdom to the wise and play to those who desire to play. But the proverb says that a good beginning makes a good end: therefore I will here begin the prologue of my book, speaking partly of the former state of the world and partly of the present.OAdieu, for I must go from thee. And greet Chaucer well, as my disciple and my poet, who has filled the land with the songs which he made for my sake. And bid him in his later age make his testament of love, as thou hast made thy shrift.’And so enveloped in a starry cloud, Venus was taken to her place above, and I turned homeward with my beads in hand. (2940*-2970*.)To God, the Creator of all things, I pray for my worthy king Richard the Second, in whom has always been found Justice mingled with Pity. In his person it may be shown what a king should be, especially in that he sought no vengeance through cruelty. Though evil came upon the land, yet his estate was kept safe by the high God, as the sun is ever bright in himself, though the air be troubled. He sought love and peace and accord, not only here at home, but abroad also, following Christ’s way, and therefore are we bound to serve him, and his name shall be ever remembered. (2971*-3035*.)I, his subject, helpless with old age and sickness, desire to do him some pleasure, and therefore I present to him this poor book, made both for profit and for sport, and I ask that I may be excused for lack of curious skill. I have written, as I best might, in rude plain words.And now that I am feeble and old, my Muse bids me rest and write no more of love. He who has achieved what he desired may fitly do his service to love in songs and sayings; but if a man fail, it is otherwise: therefore I take now my final leave of love. But that love which stands confirmed by charity, which brings no repentance and charges not the conscience, this may God send us, that in heaven our joy may be without end. (3036*-3114*.)PThe difference in the MS. usually consists only in the line drawn over the finalon. So also often in the case of the words discussed below,chaunce,daunce,enchaunte, &c.QVery seldomshin F, as Prol. 938, i. 2171, i. 1458.RM. Konrath inArchiv für die neueren Sprachen, 89, p. 153 ff.SIn other cases, as with the groupbroke,loke,spoke,wroke(past participles), andȝoke(subst.), there are no rhyme-words withǭfromāby which a distinction can be established.TArchiv für n. Sprachen, 89, p. 392. As I sometimes have occasion to criticize statements in this paper, I take the opportunity here of acknowledging its merit, as the only careful study lately attempted of Gower’s language.UAccording to ten Brink,nedeought to be regarded as an uncertain rhyme because of the O. E.nēadesbesidenīedes, but Gower never rhymes it with openē.VThis latter rule explains Chaucer’s use of the inflected formsfaire,fresshe, &c., in ‘fresshe Beaute,’ ‘gode, faire White,’ ‘fresshe May,’ &c.WThis is a regular use in Chaucer also, e.g.Cant. Tales, E 1749:‘Fulfild of alle beautee and plesaunce,’but it has not always been clearly recognized.XIn thePraise of Peacehowever the MS. hashereforhire, ll. 108, 329, cp. 254. F hashireforhereonce accidentally, iii. 901.YIn a few cases, as Prol. 543, i. 183, 1280, v. 3393, vi. 2062, the grammatically correct form has been printed in the text from less good MSS. and against the combined authority of F and S. On a review of the whole subject this does not now seem to me satisfactory.ZProf. Lounsbury’s criticism on the rhyme of vii. 5103 f., as given in Pauli’s edition, is quite sound, and Prof. Skeat’s defence of it will not do. Gower never rhymes a past participle in-edwith a weak preterite, though he sometimes drops the-eof the preterite before a vowel. The rhyme was good enough for Chaucer, however, as Prof. Lounsbury’s examples abundantly prove.AAExcept in the case of these imperative forms the 2nd pers. plur. is quite consistently used by the Lover in his shrift, and the 2nd pers. sing. by the Confessor in reply.ABThe copies which have this conclusion have also the preface in which Richard is mentioned as the occasion of the author’s undertaking, but this preface is found also in combination with the other conclusion.ACBerthelette used a manuscript (not now existing) which in this respect, as in many others, resembled B.ADIt may be noted that the four second recension MSS. which contain the author’s Latin note about his books (‘Quia vnusquisque,’ &c.), viz. BTΛP₂, agree in a form of it which is different both from that which is given by first recension copies and that which we find in F, and is clearly intermediate between the other two, the first form fully excusing Richard II for the troubles of his reign and the third entirely condemning him, while this makes no mention of his merits or demerits, but simply prays for the state of the kingdom. It is noticeable that the second recension form definitely substitutes Henry for Richard as the patron of theConfessio Amantis, though in one at least of the copies to which it is attached this substitution has not been made in the text of the poem.AEe.g. ii. 193, 365 ff., iii. 168, 1241, iv. 283, 1321, v. 1252, &c.AFFor the explanation of the use of letters to designate MSS. the reader is referred to the list of MSS. given later. It should be noted that AJM and FWH₃ represent in each case a group of about seven MSS., and H₁ ... B₂ one of nearly twenty. We observe in the examples given that B and A are sometimes found either separately or together on the side of the H₁ ... B₂ group, and that the same is true occasionally of W, while on the other hand some MSS. of the H₁ ... B₂ group are apt to pass over to the other side in a certain part of the text and support what we call the revised reading.AGS is defective in one of these places and Ad in another, but a reckoning of the lines contained in the missing leaves proves that the facts were as stated.AHThey do not, however, contain the additions above mentioned, at Prol. 495, 579, i. 1403, 2267, &c.AIIt is doubtful, however, whether the special connexion between B and T extended over the whole book. It seems rather to begin about iii. 1500. The question about the relative position of these two MSS. would be easier of solution if it were not that T is defective up to ii. 2687, that is as regards the part where the connexion of B with the first recension is most apparent. The fact is that until about the middle of the third book B is found usually in accord with the ERCLB₂ group, and though it sometimes in these first books presents the characteristic second recension reading, as ii. 193, 365 ff., iii. 168, at other times it departs from it, as i. 1881, 2017.AJK belongs to the beginning and H₃ to the middle of the fifteenth century.AKIn the case of most of these passages the text proves them to be taken from Caxton’s edition. Thus in Prol. 497 both editions omit ‘to,’ Prol. 583 both omit ‘propre,’ i. 2248 both have ‘Vnder graue’ for ‘Vnder the grene,’ in 2354 ‘other’ for ‘thilke,’ and in 2372 ‘in me’ for ‘I me.’ALThese lines have never been printed in any edition before the present, though published separately by K. Meyer in hisJohn Gower’s Beziehungen, &c., 1889, and by Prof. Easton of the University of Pennsylvania in hisReadings in Gower, 1895. There are a large number of sound emendations from the Brit. Museum MSS. suggested in this latter book, but the author had no clear idea of the principles on which the text should be constructed.AMThe following will serve as examples of those omitted:iii. 367 tawh B422 vngood lieste A618 is (forit) A652 softe softe B658 sely sely B739marg.litigabant B864 artow B923 he (forhem) Biv. 635 f. betake ... þurghsott A650 wedde A1105 no wol no B1229 herte B1239 þo (forþou) A, &c.ANOn inquiry in the locality I find that Terranova, which has always had a column for its emblem, claims Guido as a native: seeMemorie Gelesiby Sign. S. D. Navarra, Terranova 1896, pp. 72 f.

AIn some unpublished papers kindly communicated to me by Miss Bateson.

BFroissart,Chron., ed. K. de Lettenhove, vol. xv. p. 167.

CB. ten Brink,Geschichte der Engl. Litt.ii. 141.

DThis date has hitherto been omitted from the text of the printed editions.

EThe last two lines, which contain the mention of the earl of Derby, are omitted in some MSS. of the first recension, and this may be an indication that the author circulated some copies without them. A full account of the various recensions of the poem is given later, under the head of ‘Text.’

FThe term ‘epilogue’ is used for convenience to designate the conclusion of the poem after viii. 2940, but no such designation is used by the author: similarly ‘preface’ means here the opening passage of the Prologue (ll. 1-92).

G‘Minoris etatis causa inde excusabilem pronuncians.’

HDr. Karl Meyer, in his dissertationJohn Gower’s Beziehungen zu Chaucer und König Richard II(1889), takes account of these various notes of time, having made himself to some extent acquainted with the MSS., but his conclusions are in my opinion untenable.

IThis has been equally the procedure of Prof. Hales on the one hand, who endeavours to throw back the composition of the first recension to an extravagantly early period, and of Dr. Karl Meyer on the other, who wishes to bring down the final form of the book to a time later than the deposition of Richard II. The theory of the latter, that the sixteenth year of King Richard is given as the date of the original completion of the poem, and not of the revised preface, is sufficiently refuted by the date ‘fourteenth year’ attached to the rewritten epilogue.

JFor the connexion between this and theConfessio Amantissee L. Bech inAnglia, v. 313 ff.

KLydgate apparently did not take Chaucer’s censure very seriously, for he quite needlessly introduced the tale of Canace into hisFalls of Princes, following Gower’s rendering of it.

LSee for example the picture of Nebuchadnezzar transformed into an ox, ‘Tho thoghte him colde grases goode,’ &c. (i. 2976 ff.), the account of the jealous husband, who after charging his wife quite unreasonably with wishing she had another there in his stead, turns away from her in bed and leaves her to weep all the night, while he sleeps (v. 545 ff.), and the description of the man who entertains his wife so cheerfully on his return home with tales of the good sport that he has had, but carefully avoids all reference to the occurrence which would have interested her most (v. 6119 ff.).

MThe reading in the Latin note at the beginning of ‘quarto ’ for ‘sexto decimo’ is probably due to a mistake, for we find ‘sextenthe’ in the text of l. 25. It may be noted that the MS. mentioned by Pauli as containing the rewritten preface and also the Chaucer verses (New Coll. 326) is a hybrid, copied from two different manuscripts.

Nfor King Richard’s sake, to whom my allegiance belongs and for whom I pray. It chanced that as I rowed in a boat on the flowing Thames under the town of New Troy, I met my liege lord, and he bad me come from my boat into his barge, and there he laid upon me a charge to write some new thing which he himself might read. Thus I am the more glad to write, and I have the less fear of envious blame. A gentle heart praises without malice, but the world is full of evil tongues and my king’s command shall nevertheless be fulfilled. Though I have long been sick, yet I will endeavour to write a book which may be wisdom to the wise and play to those who desire to play. But the proverb says that a good beginning makes a good end: therefore I will here begin the prologue of my book, speaking partly of the former state of the world and partly of the present.

OAdieu, for I must go from thee. And greet Chaucer well, as my disciple and my poet, who has filled the land with the songs which he made for my sake. And bid him in his later age make his testament of love, as thou hast made thy shrift.’And so enveloped in a starry cloud, Venus was taken to her place above, and I turned homeward with my beads in hand. (2940*-2970*.)To God, the Creator of all things, I pray for my worthy king Richard the Second, in whom has always been found Justice mingled with Pity. In his person it may be shown what a king should be, especially in that he sought no vengeance through cruelty. Though evil came upon the land, yet his estate was kept safe by the high God, as the sun is ever bright in himself, though the air be troubled. He sought love and peace and accord, not only here at home, but abroad also, following Christ’s way, and therefore are we bound to serve him, and his name shall be ever remembered. (2971*-3035*.)I, his subject, helpless with old age and sickness, desire to do him some pleasure, and therefore I present to him this poor book, made both for profit and for sport, and I ask that I may be excused for lack of curious skill. I have written, as I best might, in rude plain words.And now that I am feeble and old, my Muse bids me rest and write no more of love. He who has achieved what he desired may fitly do his service to love in songs and sayings; but if a man fail, it is otherwise: therefore I take now my final leave of love. But that love which stands confirmed by charity, which brings no repentance and charges not the conscience, this may God send us, that in heaven our joy may be without end. (3036*-3114*.)

And so enveloped in a starry cloud, Venus was taken to her place above, and I turned homeward with my beads in hand. (2940*-2970*.)

To God, the Creator of all things, I pray for my worthy king Richard the Second, in whom has always been found Justice mingled with Pity. In his person it may be shown what a king should be, especially in that he sought no vengeance through cruelty. Though evil came upon the land, yet his estate was kept safe by the high God, as the sun is ever bright in himself, though the air be troubled. He sought love and peace and accord, not only here at home, but abroad also, following Christ’s way, and therefore are we bound to serve him, and his name shall be ever remembered. (2971*-3035*.)

I, his subject, helpless with old age and sickness, desire to do him some pleasure, and therefore I present to him this poor book, made both for profit and for sport, and I ask that I may be excused for lack of curious skill. I have written, as I best might, in rude plain words.

And now that I am feeble and old, my Muse bids me rest and write no more of love. He who has achieved what he desired may fitly do his service to love in songs and sayings; but if a man fail, it is otherwise: therefore I take now my final leave of love. But that love which stands confirmed by charity, which brings no repentance and charges not the conscience, this may God send us, that in heaven our joy may be without end. (3036*-3114*.)

PThe difference in the MS. usually consists only in the line drawn over the finalon. So also often in the case of the words discussed below,chaunce,daunce,enchaunte, &c.

QVery seldomshin F, as Prol. 938, i. 2171, i. 1458.

RM. Konrath inArchiv für die neueren Sprachen, 89, p. 153 ff.

SIn other cases, as with the groupbroke,loke,spoke,wroke(past participles), andȝoke(subst.), there are no rhyme-words withǭfromāby which a distinction can be established.

TArchiv für n. Sprachen, 89, p. 392. As I sometimes have occasion to criticize statements in this paper, I take the opportunity here of acknowledging its merit, as the only careful study lately attempted of Gower’s language.

UAccording to ten Brink,nedeought to be regarded as an uncertain rhyme because of the O. E.nēadesbesidenīedes, but Gower never rhymes it with openē.

VThis latter rule explains Chaucer’s use of the inflected formsfaire,fresshe, &c., in ‘fresshe Beaute,’ ‘gode, faire White,’ ‘fresshe May,’ &c.

WThis is a regular use in Chaucer also, e.g.Cant. Tales, E 1749:‘Fulfild of alle beautee and plesaunce,’but it has not always been clearly recognized.

‘Fulfild of alle beautee and plesaunce,’

but it has not always been clearly recognized.

XIn thePraise of Peacehowever the MS. hashereforhire, ll. 108, 329, cp. 254. F hashireforhereonce accidentally, iii. 901.

YIn a few cases, as Prol. 543, i. 183, 1280, v. 3393, vi. 2062, the grammatically correct form has been printed in the text from less good MSS. and against the combined authority of F and S. On a review of the whole subject this does not now seem to me satisfactory.

ZProf. Lounsbury’s criticism on the rhyme of vii. 5103 f., as given in Pauli’s edition, is quite sound, and Prof. Skeat’s defence of it will not do. Gower never rhymes a past participle in-edwith a weak preterite, though he sometimes drops the-eof the preterite before a vowel. The rhyme was good enough for Chaucer, however, as Prof. Lounsbury’s examples abundantly prove.

AAExcept in the case of these imperative forms the 2nd pers. plur. is quite consistently used by the Lover in his shrift, and the 2nd pers. sing. by the Confessor in reply.

ABThe copies which have this conclusion have also the preface in which Richard is mentioned as the occasion of the author’s undertaking, but this preface is found also in combination with the other conclusion.

ACBerthelette used a manuscript (not now existing) which in this respect, as in many others, resembled B.

ADIt may be noted that the four second recension MSS. which contain the author’s Latin note about his books (‘Quia vnusquisque,’ &c.), viz. BTΛP₂, agree in a form of it which is different both from that which is given by first recension copies and that which we find in F, and is clearly intermediate between the other two, the first form fully excusing Richard II for the troubles of his reign and the third entirely condemning him, while this makes no mention of his merits or demerits, but simply prays for the state of the kingdom. It is noticeable that the second recension form definitely substitutes Henry for Richard as the patron of theConfessio Amantis, though in one at least of the copies to which it is attached this substitution has not been made in the text of the poem.

AEe.g. ii. 193, 365 ff., iii. 168, 1241, iv. 283, 1321, v. 1252, &c.

AFFor the explanation of the use of letters to designate MSS. the reader is referred to the list of MSS. given later. It should be noted that AJM and FWH₃ represent in each case a group of about seven MSS., and H₁ ... B₂ one of nearly twenty. We observe in the examples given that B and A are sometimes found either separately or together on the side of the H₁ ... B₂ group, and that the same is true occasionally of W, while on the other hand some MSS. of the H₁ ... B₂ group are apt to pass over to the other side in a certain part of the text and support what we call the revised reading.

AGS is defective in one of these places and Ad in another, but a reckoning of the lines contained in the missing leaves proves that the facts were as stated.

AHThey do not, however, contain the additions above mentioned, at Prol. 495, 579, i. 1403, 2267, &c.

AIIt is doubtful, however, whether the special connexion between B and T extended over the whole book. It seems rather to begin about iii. 1500. The question about the relative position of these two MSS. would be easier of solution if it were not that T is defective up to ii. 2687, that is as regards the part where the connexion of B with the first recension is most apparent. The fact is that until about the middle of the third book B is found usually in accord with the ERCLB₂ group, and though it sometimes in these first books presents the characteristic second recension reading, as ii. 193, 365 ff., iii. 168, at other times it departs from it, as i. 1881, 2017.

AJK belongs to the beginning and H₃ to the middle of the fifteenth century.

AKIn the case of most of these passages the text proves them to be taken from Caxton’s edition. Thus in Prol. 497 both editions omit ‘to,’ Prol. 583 both omit ‘propre,’ i. 2248 both have ‘Vnder graue’ for ‘Vnder the grene,’ in 2354 ‘other’ for ‘thilke,’ and in 2372 ‘in me’ for ‘I me.’

ALThese lines have never been printed in any edition before the present, though published separately by K. Meyer in hisJohn Gower’s Beziehungen, &c., 1889, and by Prof. Easton of the University of Pennsylvania in hisReadings in Gower, 1895. There are a large number of sound emendations from the Brit. Museum MSS. suggested in this latter book, but the author had no clear idea of the principles on which the text should be constructed.

AMThe following will serve as examples of those omitted:iii. 367 tawh B422 vngood lieste A618 is (forit) A652 softe softe B658 sely sely B739marg.litigabant B864 artow B923 he (forhem) Biv. 635 f. betake ... þurghsott A650 wedde A1105 no wol no B1229 herte B1239 þo (forþou) A, &c.

iii. 367 tawh B

422 vngood lieste A

618 is (forit) A

652 softe softe B

658 sely sely B

739marg.litigabant B

864 artow B

923 he (forhem) B

iv. 635 f. betake ... þurghsott A

650 wedde A

1105 no wol no B

1229 herte B

1239 þo (forþou) A, &c.

ANOn inquiry in the locality I find that Terranova, which has always had a column for its emblem, claims Guido as a native: seeMemorie Gelesiby Sign. S. D. Navarra, Terranova 1896, pp. 72 f.

Back to Index Next