NOTES
EPISTOLA.
This Epistle, written apparently on the occasion of sending a copy of the book to the archbishop, is found only in the All Souls MS., and it is reasonable to suppose that this was the copy in question. The statement of Mr. Coxe in the Roxburghe edition, that ‘the preface to archbishop Arundel ... is also in the original hand’ of the book (Introduction, p. lix) is a surprising one, and must have been due to some deception of memory. The hand here is quite a different one from that of the text which follows, and has a distinctly later character. The piece is full of erasures, which are indicated in this edition by spaced type, but the corrections are in the same hand as the rest. Having no other copy of it, we cannot tell what the original form of the erased passages may have been, but it is noticeable that the most important of them (ll. 26-34) has reference almost entirely to the blindness of the author, and nearly every one contains something which may be regarded as alluding to this, either some mention of light and darkness, or some allusion to the fact that his only perceptions now are those of the mind. We may perhaps conclude that the Epistle was inscribed here before the author quite lost his eyesight, and that the book then remained by him for some time before it was presented. The illuminated capital S with which this composition begins is combined with a miniature painting of the archbishop.
2.tibi scribo, ‘I dedicate to thee.’
3.Quod ... scriptum: written over erasure; perhaps originally ‘Quem ... librum,’ altered to avoid the repetition of ‘librum’ from the preceding line.
4.contempletur: apparently in a passive impersonal sense.
17.Cecus ego mere.The word ‘mere’ alone is over erasure here, but if we suppose that the original word was ‘fere,’ we may regard this as referring originally to a gradual failure of the eyesight, not to complete blindness.
19.Corpore defectus, ‘the failure in my body,’ as subject of ‘sinit.’
23.dumque: equivalent to ‘dum’ in our author’s language; cp. i. 165, 2007, &c.
33.morosa: this word has a good meaning in Gower’s language; cp. ‘O deus immense,’ l. 2, where ‘morosi’ is opposed to ‘viciosi.’
VOX CLAMANTIS
CAPITULA.
Lib. I.Cap. iii.quandam vulgi turmam.It may be noted that these headings do not always exactly correspond with those placed at the head of the chapters afterwards. For example here the actual heading of the chapter has ‘secundam vulgi turmam,’ and for the succeeding chapters ‘terciam,’ ‘quartam,’ ‘quintam,’ &c. Usually the differences are very trifling, as ‘illius terre’ for ‘terre illius’ above, but sometimes they proceed from the fact that alterations have been made in the chapter headings, which the corrector has neglected to make in this Table of Chapters. This is the case for example as regards Lib. VI. Capp. xviii. and xix. Slight variations of the kind first mentioned will be found in Lib. III. Capp. i, v, viii, xii, xvi, xix, xx.
Lib. III.Cap. iiii. The form which we have here in D corresponds to the heading of the chapter given by LTH₂ (but not by D itself) in the text later. G has the text here after ‘loquitur’ written over an erasure.
Lib. VII.Cap. xix. Here S has lost two leaves (the sixth and seventh of the first full quire) to Lib. I. Cap. i. l. 18. The verso of the former of these leaves had no doubt the four lines ‘Ad mundum mitto’ &c. with picture, as in the Cotton MS.
LIB. I.Prologus.
3 f. Cp.Conf. Amantis, iv. 2921 f.,
‘Al be it so, that som men seinThat swevenes ben of no credence.’
‘Al be it so, that som men seinThat swevenes ben of no credence.’
‘Al be it so, that som men seinThat swevenes ben of no credence.’
‘Al be it so, that som men sein
That swevenes ben of no credence.’
‘propositum credulitatis’ seems to mean ‘true ground of belief.’
12.interius mentis: cp. i. 1361.
15. That is, ‘hinc puto quod sompnia que vidi,’ &c.
21 ff. We are here told to add to ‘John’ the first letters of ‘Godfrey,’ the beginning of ‘Wales,’ and the word ‘Ter’ without its head: that is, ‘John Gower.’
23.que tali.The use of ‘que’ in this manner, standing independently at the beginning of the clause, is very common in Gower.
33 f. Taken from Ovid,Tristia, v. 1. 5 f.
36. Cp.Tristia, i. 1. 14, ‘De lacrimis factas sentiet esse meis,’ which, so far as it goes, is in favour of the reading ‘senciat’ here.
37 f. This couplet was originallyTristia, iv. 1. 95 f.,
‘Saepe etiam lacrimae me sunt scribente profusae,Humidaque est fletu litera facta meo.’
‘Saepe etiam lacrimae me sunt scribente profusae,Humidaque est fletu litera facta meo.’
‘Saepe etiam lacrimae me sunt scribente profusae,Humidaque est fletu litera facta meo.’
‘Saepe etiam lacrimae me sunt scribente profusae,
Humidaque est fletu litera facta meo.’
The first line however was altered so as to lose its grammatical construction, and the couplet was subsequently emended.
43 f. Cp. Ovid,Tristia, i. 5. 53 f.
47 f. Cp.Pont.iv. 2. 19, where the comparison to a spring choked with mud is more clearly brought out.
49. The original reading here was ‘confracto,’ but it has been altered to ‘contracto’ in C and G, while E gives ‘contracto’ from the first hand. The general meaning seems to be that as the long pilgrimage to Rome is to one with crippled knee, so is this work to the author, with his limited powers of intellect.
56. The reading ‘conturbant’ in all the best MSS. seems to be a mistake.
57 f. The author is about to denounce the evils of the world and proclaim the woes which are to follow, like the writer of the Apocalypse, whose name he bears. Perhaps he may also have some thought of the formula ‘seint John to borwe’ by which travellers committed themselves to the protection of the saint on their setting forth: cp.Conf. Amantis, v. 3416.
LIB. I.
1. The fourth year of Richard II is from June 22, 1380 to the same date of 1381. The writer here speaks of the last month of that regnal year, during which the Peasants’ rising occurred.
4. Cp. Ovid,Her.xvii. 112, ‘Praevius Aurorae Lucifer ortus erat.’
7 f. Godfrey of Viterbo,Pantheon, p. 24 (ed. 1584), has
‘Luce diem reparat, mirandaque lumina praestat,Sic fuga dat noctem, luxque reversa diem.’
‘Luce diem reparat, mirandaque lumina praestat,Sic fuga dat noctem, luxque reversa diem.’
‘Luce diem reparat, mirandaque lumina praestat,Sic fuga dat noctem, luxque reversa diem.’
‘Luce diem reparat, mirandaque lumina praestat,
Sic fuga dat noctem, luxque reversa diem.’
He is speaking of the Sun generally, and the second line means ‘Thus his departure produces the night and his returning light the day.’ As introduced here this line is meaningless.
9. Adapted from Ovid,Metam.ii. 110.
11. Cp.Metam.vii. 703, but here ‘mane’ is made into the object of the verb instead of an adverb.
13. Cp.Metam.ii. 113.
15. Cp.Metam.ii. 24.
17 f. From Godfrey of Viterbo,Pantheon, p. 24 (ed. 1584).
21 ff. Cp.Metam.ii. 107 ff.,
‘Aureus axis erat, temo aureus, aurea summaeCurvatura rotae, radiorum argenteus ordo.Per iuga chrysolithi positaeque ex ordine gemmaeClara repercusso reddebant lumina Phoebo.’
‘Aureus axis erat, temo aureus, aurea summaeCurvatura rotae, radiorum argenteus ordo.Per iuga chrysolithi positaeque ex ordine gemmaeClara repercusso reddebant lumina Phoebo.’
‘Aureus axis erat, temo aureus, aurea summaeCurvatura rotae, radiorum argenteus ordo.Per iuga chrysolithi positaeque ex ordine gemmaeClara repercusso reddebant lumina Phoebo.’
‘Aureus axis erat, temo aureus, aurea summae
Curvatura rotae, radiorum argenteus ordo.
Per iuga chrysolithi positaeque ex ordine gemmae
Clara repercusso reddebant lumina Phoebo.’
‘alter ab auro’ seems to mean ‘different from gold.’
27. Cp.Metam.ii. 23.
33-60. This passage is largely from Ovid: see especiallyFasti, i. 151 ff. and iii. 235-242, iv. 429 f., v. 213 f.,Metam.ii. 30,Tristia, iii. 12. 5-8.
40. In Ovid (Fasti, iii. 240) it is ‘Fertilis occultas invenit herba vias.’The metrical fault produced by reading ‘occultam ... viam’ seems to have been corrected by the author, and in G the alteration has been made by erasure, apparently in the first hand.
44.redditus: apparently a substantive and practically equivalent to ‘reditus.’
59. Ovid,Fasti, v. 213 f., where however we have ‘Saepeque digestos.’ It is difficult to say exactly what our author meant by ‘O quia.’
67. Cp.Metam.xiii. 395.
79 f.Speculum Stultorum, p. 47, ll. 9 f. (ed. Wright, Rolls Series, 59, vol. i.).
81.irriguis.Perhaps rather ‘Fontibus irriguus, fecundus,’ as given by most of the MSS.
131.ad ymum, ‘to that low place,’ i.e. his bed.
135.Non ita ... Quin magis: cp. ll. 264 ff., 351 ff., 442 ff., 499 ff, &c. This form of sentence is a very common one with our author and appears also in his French and English: cp.Mirour, 18589,Balades, vii. 4, xviii. 2, xxx. 2,Conf. Amantis, i. 718, 1259, 1319, &c.
For example,Bal.xviii. 2,
‘Tiel esperver crieis unqes ne fu,Qe jeo ne crie plus en ma maniere.’
‘Tiel esperver crieis unqes ne fu,Qe jeo ne crie plus en ma maniere.’
‘Tiel esperver crieis unqes ne fu,Qe jeo ne crie plus en ma maniere.’
‘Tiel esperver crieis unqes ne fu,
Qe jeo ne crie plus en ma maniere.’
Conf. Amantis, i. 718 ff.,
‘So lowe cowthe I nevere boweTo feigne humilite withoute,That me ne leste betre louteWith alle the thoghtes of myn herte.’
‘So lowe cowthe I nevere boweTo feigne humilite withoute,That me ne leste betre louteWith alle the thoghtes of myn herte.’
‘So lowe cowthe I nevere boweTo feigne humilite withoute,That me ne leste betre louteWith alle the thoghtes of myn herte.’
‘So lowe cowthe I nevere bowe
To feigne humilite withoute,
That me ne leste betre loute
With alle the thoghtes of myn herte.’
It is most frequent in Latin, however, and the French and English forms seem to be translations of this idiom with ‘quin.’
152. ‘Dreams cast the soul into wanderings’: ‘ruunt’ is transitive, as very commonly, and apparently we must take ‘vaga nonnulla’ together.
155.grauis et palpebra, &c., ‘and my heavy eyelid unclosed pondered over troubles, but no help came.’ This is the best translation I can give, but the explanation of ‘ex oculis’ as ‘away from the eyes’ must be regarded as doubtful.
168. That is, on a Tuesday. It would be apparently Tuesday, June 11, 1381. The festival of Corpus Christi referred to afterwards (see l. 919), when the insurgents entered London, fell on June 13.
201.Burnellus: a reference to theSpeculum Stultorum, p. 13 (Rolls Series, 59, vol. i).
205 ff. Cp.Speculum Stultorum, p. 13, whence several of these lines are taken.
211 f. ‘They care not for the tail which He who gave them their ears implanted in them, but think it a vile thing.’ The former line of the couplet is fromSpeculum Stultorum, p. 15, l. 17.
213 f.Speculum Stultorum, p. 15, ll. 23 f.
255.caudas similesque draconum, ‘and tails like those of dragons.’
267.Minos taurus, ‘the bull of Minos,’ sent from the sea in answer to his prayer.
271. There is some confusion here in the author’s mind between different stories, and it is difficult to say exactly what he was thinking of.
277 f. Cp. Ovid,Metam.xi. 34 ff.
280.crapulus.I do not know what this is, unless it is equivalent to ‘capulus,’ which is rather doubtfully given by D. That would mean the ‘handle’ of the plough, but we have ‘ansa’ in l. 282.
289 f. Cp.Pont.i. 3. 55 f.
291.Metam.viii. 293.
325 ff. For this passage compareMetam.viii. 284 ff.
335.Metam.viii. 285. The Digby MS. has a rubricator’s note here in the margin, ‘sete. a bristell.’
341.quod: consecutive, ‘so that’; cp. ‘sic ... quod,’ ll. 223, 311, &c. In the next line ‘pascua’ seems to be singular.
351 ff. See note on l. 135.
381.Fasti, ii. 767.
395.Cutte que Curre, ‘Cut and Cur,’ names for mongrel dogs.
396. As a note on ‘casas’ the Digby MS. has ‘i.e. kenell’ in the margin.
402. ‘Neither does he of the mill remain at home.’
405. The rubricator of the Digby MS. has written in the margin, ‘i.e. threefoted dog commyng after halting.’
407. Digby MS. rubric, ‘i.e. Rig þe Teydog.’ Note the position of ‘que,’ which should properly be attached to the first word of the line: cp. l. 847.
455. As a note on ‘thalia’ here (for ‘talia’) the Digby MS. has ‘Thelea i.e. dea belli’ written by the rubricator. It is difficult to conjecture what he was thinking of.
457. The Digby MS. rubricator, as a note on ‘Cephali canis’ has in the margin, ‘i.e. stella in firmamento.’
465. ‘super est’ is the reading of the Glasgow MS. also.
474.artes.This seems to be the reading of all the MSS., though in S the word might possibly be ‘arces.’ I take it to mean ‘devices,’ in the way of traps, or ingenious hiding-places.
479. ‘The grey foxes determine to leave the caverns of the wood’: ‘vulpes’ (or rather ‘vulpis’) is masculine in Gower.
483. ‘Henceforth neither the sheep nor the poor sheepfold are anything to them.’ For this use of ‘quid’ with a negative cp. l. 184.
492.solet.The present of this verb seems often to be used by our author as equivalent to the imperfect: cp. l. 541, iii. 705, 740, &c. Also ‘solebat,’ i. 699, iii. 1485; cp. v. 333, where ‘solebant’ seems to stand for ‘solent.’ In other cases also the present is sometimes used for the imperfect, e.g. l. 585 ‘quas nuper abhorret Egiptus.’
499 ff. See 1 Sam. v. The plague of mice is distinctly mentioned in the Vulgate version, while in our translation from the Hebrew it is implied in ch. vi. 5. ‘Accharon’ is Ekron.
541.solent: see note on l. 492.
545.Coppa: used as a familiar name for a hen in theSpeculum Stultorum, pp. 55, 58, and evidently connected with ‘Coppen’ or ‘Coppe,’ which is the name of one of Chantecleer’s daughters in the Low-German and EnglishReynard.
557 f. ‘They determine that days are lawful for those things for which the dark form of night had often given furtive ways.’
568.quod: equivalent to ‘vt’; cp. ll. 600, 1610.
576. G reads ‘perstimulant’ with CED.
579 f. See Ovid,Metam.vi. 366 ff. Apparently ‘colonum’ is for ‘colonorum.’
603.Toruus oester: cp.Speculum Stultorum, p. 25.
615 f. Cp.Speculum Stultorum, p. 24, l. 21 f.
635. Cp.Speculum Stultorum, p. 25, l. 15.
637 f.Speculum Stultorum, p. 26,
‘Haec est illa dies qua nil nisi cauda iuvabit,Vel loca quae musca tangere nulla potest.’
‘Haec est illa dies qua nil nisi cauda iuvabit,Vel loca quae musca tangere nulla potest.’
‘Haec est illa dies qua nil nisi cauda iuvabit,Vel loca quae musca tangere nulla potest.’
‘Haec est illa dies qua nil nisi cauda iuvabit,
Vel loca quae musca tangere nulla potest.’
652.stramine: probably an allusion to the name of Jack Strawe, as ‘tegula’ in the next couplet to Wat Tyler.
Cap. ix.Heading, l. 3. It seems to be implied that the jay, which must often have been kept as a cage-bird and taught to talk, was commonly called ‘Wat,’ as the daw was called ‘Jack,’ and this name together with the bird’s faculty of speech has suggested the transformation adopted for Wat Tyler.
716. There is no punctuation in S, but those MSS. which have stops, as CD, punctuate after ‘nephas’ and ‘soluit.’ The line is suggested by Ovid,Fasti, ii. 44, ‘Solve nefas, dixit; solvit et ille nefas.’ There it is quite intelligible, but here it is without any clear meaning.
It may be observed here that the passage of Ovid in which this line occurs,Fasti, ii. 35-46, is evidently one of the sources ofConfessio Amantis, v. 2547 ff.
749.Sicut arena maris: cp. Rev. xx. 8, to which reference is made below, ll. 765 ff.
762. ‘All that they lay upon us, they equally bear themselves.’ Apparently this is the meaning, referring to the universal ruin which is likely to ensue.
765-776. These twelve lines are taken with some alterations of wording and order from Godfrey of Viterbo,Pantheon, p. 228 (ed. 1584). In l. 765 the reference to the Apocalypse is to Rev. xx.
774.forum: apparently ‘law.’
783 ff: This well-known chapter was very incorrectly printed in the Roxburghe edition, owing to the fact that a leaf has here been cut out of S, and the editor followed D. Fuller, whose translation of the opening lines has often been quoted, had a better text before him, probably that of the Cotton MS.
810. It is difficult to see how this line is to be translated, unless we suppose that ‘fossa’ is a grammatical oversight.
821. Cp. Ovid,Metam.i. 211, ‘Contigerat nostras infamia temporis aures.’
849 f. Adapted fromAmores, iii. 9. 7 f., but not very happily.
855 ff. With this passage we may compare the description in Walsingham, vol. i. p. 454, ‘quorum quidam tantum baculos, quidam rubigine obductos gladios, quidam bipennes solummodo, nonnulli arcus prae vetustate factos a fumo rubicundiores ebore antiquo, cum singulis sagittis, quorum plures contentae erant una pluma, ad regnum conquaerendum convenere.’
868. The reading ‘de leuitate’ is given also by G.
869.limpidiores.The epithet is evidently derived from 1 Sam. xvii. 40, where the Vulgate has ‘et elegit sibi quinque limpidissimos lapides de torrente.’
876. ‘These fools boast that the earth has been wetted,’ &c.
871 ff. Cp.Metam.xi. 29 f.
879 f. Cp.Conf. Amantis, Prol. 37*. One of the charges against Sir Nicholas Brembre in 1388 was that he had designed to change the name of London to ‘New Troy.’
891.siluis que palustribus, ‘from the woods and marshes.’
904. Cp. Ovid,Ars Amat.iii. 577 f.
909. Cp.Metam.viii. 421.
919. Corpus Christi day, that is Thursday, June 13.
929 f.via salua: apparently meaning ‘Savoye,’ the palace of the duke of Lancaster in the Strand. In the next line ‘longum castrum’ looks like ‘Lancaster,’ but it is difficult to say exactly what the meaning is.
931.Baptisteque domus.This is the Priory of St. John of Jerusalem at Clerkenwell, which was burnt by the insurgents because of their hostility to Robert Hales, the Master of the Hospital, then Treasurer of the kingdom. Walsingham says that the fire continued here for seven days.
933-936. Ovid,Fasti, vi. 439 ff., where the reference is to the burning of the temple of Vesta. Hence the mention of sacred fires, which is not appropriate here.
937.Metam.ii. 61.
939 f.Metam.i. 288 f.
941 ff. This accusation, which Gower brings apparently without thinking it necessary to examine into its truth (‘Est nichil vt queram,’ &c.), is in direct contradiction to the statements of the chroniclers, e.g. Walsingham, i. 456 f., Knighton, ii. 135; but it is certain that dishonest persons must have taken advantage of the disorder to some extent for their own private ends, however strict the commands of the leaders may have been, and it is probable that the control which was exercised at first did not long continue. The chroniclers agree with Gower as to the drunkenness.
943 f. Ovid,Trist.v. 6. 39 f.
951. Ovid,Fasti, vi. 673.
953.Metam.xv. 665.
955 f. That is, the deeds of Friday (dies Veneris) were more atrocious than those of Thursday.
961 f. The construction of accusative with infinitive is here used after ‘Ecce,’ as if it were a verb, and ‘Calcas’ is evidently meant for an accusative case. It is probable that the names here given, Calchas, Antenor, Thersites, Diomede, Ulysses, as well as those which follow in ll. 985 ff., are meant to stand for general types, rather than for particular persons connected with the government. In any case we could hardly identify them.
997.Vix Hecube thalami, &c. This looks like an allusion to the princess of Wales, the king’s mother, whose apartments in the Tower were in fact invaded by the mob. Similarly in the lines that follow ‘Helenus’ stands for the archbishop of Canterbury.
1019 ff. The text of these five lines, as we find it in DTH₂, that is in its earlier form, was taken for the most part from theAuroraof Petrus (de) Riga, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 88 vo,
‘Non rannus pungens, set oliua uirens, set odoraFicus, set blanda uitis abhorret eos.Anticristus enim regit hos, nam spiritus almus,Nam lex, nam Cristus, non dominatur eis.’
‘Non rannus pungens, set oliua uirens, set odoraFicus, set blanda uitis abhorret eos.Anticristus enim regit hos, nam spiritus almus,Nam lex, nam Cristus, non dominatur eis.’
‘Non rannus pungens, set oliua uirens, set odoraFicus, set blanda uitis abhorret eos.Anticristus enim regit hos, nam spiritus almus,Nam lex, nam Cristus, non dominatur eis.’
‘Non rannus pungens, set oliua uirens, set odora
Ficus, set blanda uitis abhorret eos.
Anticristus enim regit hos, nam spiritus almus,
Nam lex, nam Cristus, non dominatur eis.’
He is speaking of the parable of Jotham in the Book of Judges.
1046.Fasti, ii. 228.
1073.medioque: written apparently for ‘mediaque.’
1076.posse caret, ‘is without effect.’
1081. Cp.Tristia, iv. 2. 5 f.
1094. Cp.Fasti, i. 122.
1141.Metam.vi. 559.
1143. Cp.Metam.vii. 603.
1161.Metam.vii. 602. Considering that the line is borrowed from Ovid, we cannot attach much importance to it as indicating what was done with the body of the archbishop.
1173.ostia iuris: cp. Walsingham, i. 457, ‘locum qui vocatur “Temple Barre,” in quo apprenticii iuris morabantur nobiliores, diruerunt.’
1188. Cp. Ovid,Her.iii. 4.
1189.Metam.v. 41.
1193 f. Cp.Ars Amat.ii. 373 f., where, however, we have ‘cum rotat,’ not ‘conrotat.’
1206.Quam periturus erat, ‘rather than that he should perish,’ apparently.
1209. Cp.Metam.v. 40.
1211.Metam.xiv. 408.
1215 f. A reference probably to the massacre of the Flemings.
1219 f.Fasti, iii. 509 f.
1221 f. Ovid,Amores, iii. 9. 11 f.
1224. Cp.Her.v. 68.
1253. Cp.Metam.vii. 599, ‘Exiguo tinxit subiectos sanguine cultros.’
1271. Perhaps ‘cessit’ is right, as in l. 1265, but the reading of C is the result of a correction, and the corrections of this manuscript are usually sound.
1279 f. If there is any construction here, it must be ‘Erumpunt lacrimae luminibus, que lumina,’ &c. For this kind of ellipse cp. l. 1501.
1283. Cp.Her.viii. 77.
1289.Metam.ix. 775.
Cap. xvi.Heading, l. 1.quasi in propria persona: cf.Conf. Amantis, i. 60,margin, ‘Hic quasi in persona aliorum quos amor alligat, fingens se auctor esse Amantem,’ &c. The author takes care to guard his readers against a too personal application of his descriptions.
1359. Cp. Ovid,Metam.xiv. 198. In the lines that follow our author has rather ingeniously appropriated several other expressions from the same story of Ulysses and Polyphemus.
1363 f.Ars Amat.iii. 723 f.
1365.Metam.xiv. 206.
1369.Metam.xiv. 200.
1379 f. Cp.Tristia, v. 4. 33 f.
1385 f.Her.xx. 91 f.
1387. Cp.Metam.xiv. 120.
1395. Cp.Metam.iv. 723.
1397 f. Cp.Tristia, i. 3. 53 f.
1401 f. Cp.Fasti, v. 315 f.
1403. Cp.Metam.xv. 27.
1413 f.Pont.i. 3. 57 f.
1420. Cp.Her.iii. 24, used here with a change of meaning.
1424. Cp.Ars Amat.ii. 88, ‘Nox oculis pavido venit oborta metu.’
1425 f.Pont.i. 2. 45 f.
1429 f. Cp.Pont.i. 2. 49 f.
1433.Metam.iii. 709.
1442. Cp.Her.v. 14, where we have ‘Mixtaque’ instead of ‘Copula.’
1445 ff. Cp.Metam.xiv. 214-216.
1453. Adapted fromMetam.iv. 263, ‘Rore mero lacrimisque suis ieiunia pavit.’ The change of ‘mero’ to ‘meo’ involves a tasteless alteration of the sense, while the sound is preserved.
1459. Cp.Rem. Amoris, 581.
1465.Metam.ii. 656. Our author has borrowed the line without supplying an appropriate context, and the result is nonsense. Ovid has
‘Suspirat ab imisPectoribus, lacrimaeque genis labuntur obortae.’
‘Suspirat ab imisPectoribus, lacrimaeque genis labuntur obortae.’
‘Suspirat ab imisPectoribus, lacrimaeque genis labuntur obortae.’
‘Suspirat ab imis
Pectoribus, lacrimaeque genis labuntur obortae.’
1467 f.Pont.i. 2. 29 f.
1469. Cp.Metam.xiii. 539.
1473. Ovid,Metam.viii. 469.
1475.Metam.iv. 135, borrowed without much regard to the context.
1485. From Ovid,Her.xiv. 37, where however we have ‘calor,’ not ‘color,’ a material difference.
1496.Her.v. 46.
1497. The expression ‘verbis solabar amicis’ is from Ovid (Fasti, v. 237), but here ‘solabar’ seems to be made passive in sense.
1501 f. i.e. ‘cessat amor eius qui prius,’ &c., with a rather harsh ellipse of the antecedent. The couplet is a parody of Ovid,Pont.iv. 6. 23 f.,
‘Nam cum praestiteris verum mihi semper amorem,Hic tamen adverso tempore crevit amor.’
‘Nam cum praestiteris verum mihi semper amorem,Hic tamen adverso tempore crevit amor.’
‘Nam cum praestiteris verum mihi semper amorem,Hic tamen adverso tempore crevit amor.’
‘Nam cum praestiteris verum mihi semper amorem,
Hic tamen adverso tempore crevit amor.’
1503 f. Cp.Tristia, iii. i. 65 f.,
‘Quaerebam fratres, exceptis scilicet illis,Quos suus optaret non genuisse pater.’
‘Quaerebam fratres, exceptis scilicet illis,Quos suus optaret non genuisse pater.’
‘Quaerebam fratres, exceptis scilicet illis,Quos suus optaret non genuisse pater.’
‘Quaerebam fratres, exceptis scilicet illis,
Quos suus optaret non genuisse pater.’
1506.Fasti, i. 148, not very appropriate here.
1512.Her.xi. 82.
1514. Cp.Her.xiii. 86, ‘Substitit auspicii lingua timore mali.’
1517 f. Cp.Her.iii. 43 f.
1519. Cp.Pont.iii. 4. 75.
1521. Cp.Tristia, i. 11. 23.
1534. Cp.Tristia, v. 4. 4, ‘Heu quanto melior sors tua sorte mea est.’
1535 ff. Cp.Tristia, iii. 3. 39 ff.
1539 f.Tristia, iii. 3. 29 f.
1541.scis quia: ‘quia’ for ‘quod,’ cp. l. 1593; ‘puto quod,’ i. Prol. 15, &c.
1549. Cp.Fasti, i. 483.
1564.Her.xiv. 52.
1565 f. Cp.Her.x. 113 f. The lines are not very appropriate here.
1568. See note on l. 1420.
1569. Cp.Metam.iii. 396.
1571. Cp.Metam.xiv. 210.
1573. Cp.Metam.vii. 614.
1575. Cp.Metam.ix. 583.
1581.Obice singultu, that is, ‘Impediente singultu’: cp.Cronica Tripertita, ii. 3.
1585.Metam.xiv. 217.
1589.Tristia, i. 5. 45.
1593.vidi quia: cp. l. 1541.
1609.quid agant alii, ‘whatever others may do.’
1612. Cp.Her.xix. 52.
1615 f. It seems probable that this is a prayer to the Virgin Mary, whose name ‘Star of the Sea’ was used long before the fourteenth century, e.g.
‘Praevia stella maris de mundo redde procellaTutos: succurre, praevia stella maris,’
‘Praevia stella maris de mundo redde procellaTutos: succurre, praevia stella maris,’
‘Praevia stella maris de mundo redde procellaTutos: succurre, praevia stella maris,’
‘Praevia stella maris de mundo redde procella
Tutos: succurre, praevia stella maris,’
in an address to the Virgin by Eberhard (date 1212) in Leyser,Poet. Med. Aevi, p. 834, and the name occurs also in Peter Damian’s hymns (xi. cent.). For Gower’s use of the expression cp.Mirour de l’Omme, 29925, ‘O de la mer estoille pure,’ and later in this book, l. 2033, ‘Stella, Maria, maris.’ Here, however, we might translate, ‘Be thou a star of the sea going before me,’ taking it as a prayer to Christ.
1623.Metam.i. 265.
1627.Extra se positus, ‘beside himself.’
1630.Fasti, iv. 386.
1631. Cp.Metam.i. 282.
1635. Cp.Metam.i. 269.
1637. Cp.Metam.i. 270.
1653 ff. From this point to the end of the chapter the description is mostly taken from Ovid,Metam.xi. 480-523, many hexameters being appropriated without material change, e.g. ll. 480, 482, 484, 486, 488, 491, 492, 495, 499, 501, 516, 517, 519 f.
1689. The line is taken away from its context, and consequently gives no sense. In Ovid it is,
‘Ipse pavet, nec se qui sit status ipse fateturScire ratis rector.’—Metam.xi. 492.
‘Ipse pavet, nec se qui sit status ipse fateturScire ratis rector.’—Metam.xi. 492.
‘Ipse pavet, nec se qui sit status ipse fateturScire ratis rector.’—Metam.xi. 492.
‘Ipse pavet, nec se qui sit status ipse fatetur
Scire ratis rector.’—Metam.xi. 492.
1693.Metam.i. 292.
1695. From Peter Riga,Aurora, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 16 vo.
1697-1700. Cp.Aurora, f. 15 vo,
‘Fontes ingresso Noe corrumpuntur abyssi,Et de uisceribus terra fluenta uomit.Effundunt nubes pluuias, deciesque quaternisSustinet inmensas archa diebus aquas.’
‘Fontes ingresso Noe corrumpuntur abyssi,Et de uisceribus terra fluenta uomit.Effundunt nubes pluuias, deciesque quaternisSustinet inmensas archa diebus aquas.’
‘Fontes ingresso Noe corrumpuntur abyssi,Et de uisceribus terra fluenta uomit.Effundunt nubes pluuias, deciesque quaternisSustinet inmensas archa diebus aquas.’
‘Fontes ingresso Noe corrumpuntur abyssi,
Et de uisceribus terra fluenta uomit.
Effundunt nubes pluuias, deciesque quaternis
Sustinet inmensas archa diebus aquas.’
1717 f. Cp. Ovid,Metam.iv. 689 f.
1719. Cp.Metam.iv. 706 f. Ovid has ‘praefixo,’ which is more satisfactory.
1721. Cp.Metam.iv. 690.
1727 f.Tristia, i. 11. 21 f.
1729.Fasti, iii. 593.
1735.Metam.xi. 539.
1739. Cp.Metam.xi. 515, ‘Rima patet, praebetque viam letalibus undis.’
1774. Cp.Fasti, ii. 98.
1775 f. Cp.Amores, ii. 11. 9 f.
1779 f.Tristia, v. 12. 5 f.
1781.Metam.xiv. 213.
1825. Cp.Tristia, ii. 179.
1832.Tristia, i. 5. 36.
1847 f. Cp. Ovid,Pont.iii. 7. 27 f. In the second line Ovid has ‘tumidis,’ for which there is no authority in Gower. Our author perhaps read ‘timidis’ in his copy of Ovid, or made the change himself, taking ‘timidis’ to mean ‘fearful.’
1879. ‘Perhaps that day would have been the last of confusion, even if,’ &c. This, by the context, would seem to be the meaning.
1898. Ovid,Fasti, iv. 542.
1899 f. Cp.Pont.i. 3. 9 f.
1907 f. From Godfrey of Viterbo,Pantheon, p. 82 (ed. 1584).
1909. ‘But he who walked upon the sea,’ &c., that is, Christ.
1913. Cp.Metam.i. 328, ‘Nubila disiecit, nimbisque Aquilone remotis.’
1917.Metam.i. 329.
1919. Cp.Metam.i. 345.
1921. Cp.Metam.v. 286, where we have ‘nubila,’ as the sense requires. Here the MSS. give ‘numina’ without variation.
1923. Cp.Metam.ix. 795.
1925.Metam.i. 344.
1935.Metam.xiii. 440.
1939.Metam.xiii. 419.
1944.Quam prius: for ‘prius quam,’ as often.
1963 f. This alludes to the supposed reply made to Brutus (son of Silvius), when he consulted the oracle of Diana in the island of Leogecia, ‘Brute, sub occasum solis,’ &c., as told by Geoffrey of Monmouth.
1979 f. Ovid,Pont.iii. 8. 15 f.
1991 ff. Cp.Tristia, i. 11. 25 ff.
1997 f.Tristia, iii. 2. 25 f.
2001 f. Cp.Her.xi. 27 f.
2003 f.Her.xiv. 39 f.
2029 f. Cp.Rem. Amoris, 119 f.
2031 f. Cp.Rem. Amoris, 531 f.
2033 f. Cp.Her.ii. 123 f.
2037 f.Pont.iv. 3. 49 f.
2043. Cp.Pont.i. 4. 21. In Ovid we read ‘animus quoque pascitur illis,’ and this probably was what Gower intended to write.
2071 f. Cp.Pont.ii. 7. 9 f.
2074.Pont.ii. 7. 8.
2091. Cp.Hist. Apollonii Tyrii, xli, ‘Sicut rosa in spinis nescit compungi mucrone.’
2139. Cp.Pont.i. 5. 47.
2150. Cp.Rem. Amoris, 484.
LIB. II.Prologus.
15. Cp.Speculum Stultorum, p. 11, l. 41 (Rolls Series, 59, vol. i.).
41. Deut. xxxii. 13, ‘ut sugeret mel de petra oleumque de saxo durissimo.’
49 f. Cp.Fasti, i. 73 f.
51. The supposed mischief-maker is compared to Sinon, who gave a signal by fire which led to the destruction of Troy: cp.Conf. Amantis, i. 1172. I cannot satisfactorily explain ‘Excetra.’
57 f. From Neckam,De Vita Monachorum, p. 175 (ed. Wright, Rolls Series, 59, vol. ii.).
61.De modicis ... modicum: cp.Mirour de l’Omme, 16532.
64. Cp. Ovid,Ars Amat.ii. 166.
LIB. II.
With the general drift of what follows cp.Conf. Amantis, Prol. 529 ff.
1.Incausti specie, cp.Conf. Amantis, viii. 2212.
18.nos: meaning the people of England, as compared with those of other countries.
31 f. Cp. Ovid,Tristia, v. 8. 19 f.
33.Tristia, v. 5. 47.
41. Job v. 6, ‘Nihil in terra sine causa fit’: cp.Mirour de l’Omme, 26857.
59. This is the usual opposition of rose and nettle, based perhaps originally on Ovid,Rem. Amoris, 46: cp.Conf. Amantis, ii. 401 ff.
67 f. Cp. Boethius,Consol. Phil.2 Pr. 4, ‘in omni adversitate fortunae infelicissimum genus est infortunii fuisse felicem.’ So Dante,Inf.v. 121 ff.,
‘Nessun maggior dolore,Che ricordarsi del tempo feliceNella miseria.’
‘Nessun maggior dolore,Che ricordarsi del tempo feliceNella miseria.’
‘Nessun maggior dolore,Che ricordarsi del tempo feliceNella miseria.’
‘Nessun maggior dolore,
Che ricordarsi del tempo felice
Nella miseria.’
117 ff. Cp. Ovid,Her.v. 109 ff. In l. 117 ‘siccis’ is substituted, not very happily, for ‘suci.’
138. Cp.Conf. Amantis, Latin Verses after ii. 1878,
‘Quod patet esse fides in eo fraus est, que politiPrincipium pacti finis habere negat.’
‘Quod patet esse fides in eo fraus est, que politiPrincipium pacti finis habere negat.’
‘Quod patet esse fides in eo fraus est, que politiPrincipium pacti finis habere negat.’
‘Quod patet esse fides in eo fraus est, que politi
Principium pacti finis habere negat.’
163 f. Cp. Ovid,Tristia, v. 8. 15 f.
167 ff. Cp.Tristia, i. 5. 27 ff.
199 f. There seems to be no grammatical construction here.
239 ff. With this passage cp.Mirour de l’Omme, 27013 ff., where nearly the same examples are given. The classification is according to the nature of the things affected, first the heavenly bodies, then the elements of air, water, fire and earth, and finally living creatures. This arrangement is more clearly brought out in theMirour.
259. Cp.Mirour, 27031, and note.
261. ‘And from the hard rocks of the desert,’ the conjunction being out of its proper place, as in i. 407, 847, ii. 249, &c.
267 f. Cp.Mirour, 27049 ff.
281 ff. SeeMirour de l’Omme, 27073 ff.
282.Congelat, ‘took form.’ Probably the author had in his mind the phrase ‘congelat aere tacto,’ Ovid,Metam.xv. 415.
306. ‘num’ is here for ‘nonne’; cp. l. 320.
316.Cumque, for ‘Cum’: cp. l. 545, iii. 958, &c.
353 f. Cp. Godfrey of Viterbo,Pantheon, p. 9 (ed. 1584).
‘Ante creaturam genitor deus et genitura,Primaque natura, novit statuitque futura.’
‘Ante creaturam genitor deus et genitura,Primaque natura, novit statuitque futura.’
‘Ante creaturam genitor deus et genitura,Primaque natura, novit statuitque futura.’
‘Ante creaturam genitor deus et genitura,
Primaque natura, novit statuitque futura.’
357-359. These three lines are from thePantheon, p. 9.
371-374. Taken with slight change from thePantheon, p. 10.
377 f. FromAurora, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 7 vo.
414. ‘That which the new star brings argues that he is God.’
423. That is, ‘Lux venit, vt obscurari possit tenebris,’ &c.
485. ‘Every one who thinks upon Jesus ought to resolve to lay aside,’ &c.
487. The MSS. give ‘benedicti,’ but it seems probable that ‘benedici’ was meant. The verb is commonly transitive in later Latin.
495 ff. Cp. Isaiah, xliv. 9-20.
531 f. Psalms, cxiii. 8.
619 ff. Cp. Ovid,Metam.i. 74 ff.
LIB. III.Prologus.
11 ff. The author characteristically takes care to point out that in his criticism of the Church he is expressing not his own private opinion, but the ‘commune dictum,’ the report which went abroad among the people, and the ‘vox populi’ has for him always a high authority. Cp.Mirour de l’Omme, 18445 ff., 19057 ff., and see below, l. 1267 ff, iv. 19 f., 709 f.
With what is said in this Book of the condition of the Church and the clergy we may compare the author’sMirour de l’Omme, 18421-20832.
25 f. Compare with this the author’s note onMirour de l’Omme, 21266-78.
61. Cp. Ovid,Pont.iv. 14. 41.
64. Cp.Pont.iv. 9. 10.
67 f. Cp.Tristia, ii. 301 f.
82. Cp.Pont.ii. 2. 128.
LIB. III.
1-28. The form of these lines which stood originally in S is given by the Trinity College, Dublin, and the Hatfield MSS. The passage has been rewritten over erasure in CHG, and it must be left doubtful what text they had originally. From the fact that the erasure in G begins with the second line, it may seem more probable that the original text of this manuscript agreed with that which we have now in S, rather than with TH₂: for in the latter case there would have been no need to begin the erasure before l. 4. In CH the whole passage has been recopied (the same hand appearing here in the two MSS.) so that we can draw no conclusion about the point where divergence actually began. EDL have the same text by first hand. It will be noted that the lines as given by TH₂ make no mention of the schism of the Papacy.
11 ff. With this we may compareMirour de l’Omme, 18769 ff.
22.nisi, for ‘nil nisi’: cp. l. 32.
41. Cp. Ovid,Amores, iii. 8. 55.
63.Fasti, i. 225.
65 f. Cp.Fasti, i. 249 f.
85-90. Chiefly from theAuroraof Petrus (de) Riga, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 71,