Chapter III: Introduction (1)

§ 1. The following pieces are selected, as being the most important, from among the very numerous ones which have been appended to Chaucer's works in various editions.

I use the word 'appended' advisedly. It is not true that these works were all attributed to Chaucer in the black-letter editions. The Praise of Peace was marked as Gower's in Thynne's first edition of 1532. Another piece in that edition is attributed to Scogan. The Letter of Cupid is expressly dated 1402, though Chaucer died in 1400. The Flower of Curtesye contains the words 'Chaucer is dede'; and The Testament of Cresseid contains a remark which, in modern English, would run thus--'Who knows if all that Chaucer wrote is true?'

Those who, through ignorance or negligence, regard Thynne's edition of Chaucer as containing 'Works attributed to Chaucer' make a great mistake; and even if the mistake be excused on the ground that it has been very generally and very frequently made, this does not lessen its magnitude. The title of Thynne's book is very instructive, and really runs thus:--'The Workes of Geffray Chaucer newly printed, with dyuers workes which were neuer in print before, &c.' This is strictly and literally true; for it contains such works of Chaucer's as had previously been printed by Caxton, Wynkyn de Worde, and Julian Notary (see vol. i. p. 28), together with 'dyuers workes [_of various authors_] which were neuer in print before.' Which is the simple solution of the whole matter, as far as this edition is concerned. The same remarks apply to the second edition in 1542, and the third, printed about 1550. But Stowe, in 1561, altered the title so as to give it a new meaning. The title-page of his edition runs thus:--'The Woorkes of Geffrey Chaucer, newly printed with diuers Addicions which were neuer in printe before.' Here the authorship of Chaucer was, _for the first time_, practically claimed for the whole of Thynne's volume. At the same time, Stowe did not really mean what he seems to say, for it was he who first added the words--'made by Ihon lidgate'--to the title of 'The Flower of Curtesie,' and who first assigned a title (ascribing the poem to _dan Ihon lidgat_) to the poem beginning 'Consider wel'; see no. 40 (vol. i. p. 33).

§ 2. It is clear that Thynne's intention was to print a collection of poems, including all he could find of Chaucer and anything else of a similar character that he could lay his hands on[1]. In other words, the collection was, from the beginning, a collection of the Works of Chaucer _and other writers_; and this fact was in no way modified by the adoption by Stowe and Speght of misleading titles that actually assigned to Chaucer all the poems in the volume! See further, as to this subject, in the discussion of The Court of Love below.

The number of pieces appended, at various times, to Chaucer's Works are so numerous that I have been obliged to restrict myself to giving a selection of them only.

Of the non-Chaucerian pieces printed by Thynne in 1532, I have included all but three. The rejected pieces are those numbered 18, 21, and 22 in the list given at p. 32 of vol. i. They are all poor and uninteresting, but I add a few words of description.

18. _A Praise of Women._ Noticed in vol. i. p. 37. Though decisively rejected by Tyrwhitt, and excluded from Moxon's reprint, it was revived (for no good reason) by Bell, and consequently appeared in the Aldine edition, which was founded on Bell's. It enumerates the merits of womankind, and condemns the slanders of men concerning them. We ought to worship all women out of reverence for the Queen of heaven, and we shall do well to pray to Our Lady to bring us to the heaven in which she and all good women will be found. Thynne is not the sole authority for this poem, as it occurs also (in a Scottish dress) in the Bannatyne MS., fol. 275. The whole of this MS. (written in 1568) was printed for the Hunterian Club in 1873-9; see p. 799 of that edition.

21. _The Lamentation of Mary Magdalen._ Noticed in vol. i. p. 37. This lugubrious piece was probably the wail of a nun, who had no book but a Vulgate version of the Bible, from which all her quotations are taken. It bears no resemblance to any work by Chaucer, nor to any of the pieces in the present volume. It consists of 102 seven-line stanzas. The metre resembles Lydgate's, but the final _-e_ is hardly ever used. Bell's text is not taken from Thynne, but from some later and inferior reprint of it. For this poem, Thynne's first edition is the sole authority.

22. _The Remedy of Love._ Noticed in vol. i. p. 38. It appears that the 'remedy of love' is to be found in a consideration of the wicked ways of women. Twelve whole stanzas are taken up with a metrical translation of one of the chapters in the book of Proverbs. The author refers us to 'the fifth chapter,' but he is wrong. He means chapter vii, verses 6-27. He also quotes from Ecclesiasticus, ix. 9, and xxv. 25.

Nos. 28, 29, 30 (vol. i. p. 32) are not found in Thynne, but were first printed by Stowe. I give them below, at p. 297. The first two stanzas are Lydgate's; and probably the third is his also. It is no great matter.

No. 41 (vol. i. p. 33) was also first printed by Stowe. To save words, I have printed it below, at p. 450, from the original MS.

§ 3. I now consider the non-Chaucerian pieces in Part II. of Stowe's Edition (see vol. i. p. 33). Of these, nos. 45, 50, 56, and 59 are here reprinted.

Nos. 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55 were all taken by Stowe from MS. Trin. R. 3. 19. Perhaps they are sufficiently noticed in vol. i. p. 41, as they present few points of interest. However, I enumerate them, adding a few remarks.

No. 46. _The Craft of Lovers._ In 23 seven-line stanzas; 161 lines. Besides the copy in the Trin. MS., there are copies (almost duplicates) in MSS. Addit. 34360, fol. 73, back (p. 142), and Harl. 2251, fol. 53 (now called 52). Dated 1448 in the Trin. MS., but 1459 in the other two. The first line ought to run:--'To moralise, who list these ballets sewe'; but it is clear that some one added the words 'A similitude' in the margin, and that this remark was afterwards incorporated in the text. Hence the first line, in the latter MSS., stands:--'To moralise a similitude who list these balettis sewe'; which is more than enough for a line of five accents. After two introductory stanzas, the poem becomes a dialogue, in alternate stanzas, between a wooer, named _Cupido_, and a lass, named _Diana_[2]; the result of which is successful. This may be compared with La Belle Dame sans Merci, and with the Nut-brown Maid. The twenty-third stanza forms the author's _Conclusio_, which is followed by an Envoy in the Addit. MS., and in the Harl. MS. only. The same MSS. _seem_ to superadd two more stanzas; but they really belong to another piece.

No. 47. Taken by Stowe from MS. Trin. R. 3. 19, fol. 156, back. _A Balade._ In 4 seven-line stanzas; 28 lines. Begins--'Of their nature they greatly them delite'; i.e. Women are by nature hypocrites; they like kissing live images rather than shrines. So I advise young men to take warning: 'Beware alwaye, the blind eateth many [a] flye'; a line which is quoted from Lydgate's ballad printed at p. 295. The author then prays God to keep the fly out of his dish; and ends by congratulating himself on being anonymous, because women would else blame him.

No. 48. _The Ten Commandments of Love_; from Trin. MS., fol. 109. Also in MS. Fairfax 16. Begins:--'Certes, ferre extendeth yet my reason.' In 14 stanzas of seven-lines; the last two form the Envoy. After two introductory stanzas, the author gives the ladies their ten commandments. They are, it appears, to exhibit Faith, Entencion, Discrecion, Patience, Secretnesse, Prudence, Perseverance, Pity, Measure [Moderation], and Mercy. In the Envoy, the author says, truly enough, that he is devoid of cunning, experience, manner of enditing, reason, and eloquence; and that he is 'a man unknown.'

No. 49. _The Nine Ladies Worthy._ In 9 seven-line stanzas, one stanza for each lady. Begins: 'Profulgent in preciousnes, O Sinope the quene.' Only remarkable for the curious selection made. The Nine Ladies are: (1) Sinope, daughter of Marsepia, queen of the Amazons; see Orosius, Hist. i. 10; (2) Hippolyta, the Amazon, wife of Theseus; (3) Deipyle, daughter of Adrastus, wife of Tydeus; (4) Teuta, queen of the Illyrians; see note to C. T., F 1453 (vol. v. p. 398); (5) Penthesilea the Amazon, slain by Achilles before Troy; (6) queen Tomyris, who slew Cyrus in battle, B.C. 529; (7) Lampeto the Amazon, sister of Marsepia, and aunt of Sinope; (8) Semiramis of Babylon; (9) Menalippe or Melanippe, sister of Antiope, queen of the Amazons, taken captive by Hercules, according to Justinus, ii. 4. 23. Most of these queens are mentioned by Orosius, i. 10, ii. 1, ii. 4; see also Higden's Polychronicon, bk. ii. chapters 9, 21, 24, and bk. iii. c. 7. From the Trin. MS., fol. 113, back.

[No. 50. _Virelai._ Printed below, at p. 448.]

No. 51. _A Ballade._ Begins:--'In the season of Feuerere when it was full colde.' In 7 seven-line stanzas. In praise of the daisy. Very poor. From the Trin. MS., fol. 160.

No. 52. _A Ballade._ Begins--'O Mercifull and o merciable.' In 12 seven-line stanzas. The Trin. MS. has 13 stanzas; but Stowe omitted the tenth, because it coincides with st. 19 of the Craft of Lovers. It is made up of scraps from other poems. Stanzas 1-4 form part of a poem on the fall of man, from Lydgate's _Court of Sapience_ (see vol. i. p. 57). In st. 8 occurs the assonance of _hote_ (hot) and _stroke_; and in st. 9, that of _cureth_ and _renueth_. From the Trin. MS., fol. 161.

No. 53. _The Judgement of Paris._ In 4 seven-line stanzas; the first is allotted to Pallas, who tells Paris to take the apple, and give it to the fairest of the three goddesses. After this, he is addressed in succession by Juno, Venus, and Minerva (as she is now called). Then the poem ends. Trin. MS., fol. 161, back.

No. 54. _A Balade pleasaunte._ Begins--'I haue a Ladie where so she bee.' In 7 seven-line stanzas. Meant to be facetious; e.g. 'Her skin is smothe as any oxes tong.' The author says that when he was fifteen years old, he saw the wedding of queen Jane; and that was so long ago that there cannot be many such alive. As Joan of Navarre was married to Henry IV in 1403, he was born in 1388, and would have been sixty-two in 1450. It is an imitation of Lydgate's poem entitled A Satirical Description of his Lady; see Minor Poems, ed. Halliwell, p. 199. Trin. MS., fol. 205.

No. 55. _Another Balade._ Begins--'O mossie Quince, hangyng by your stalke.' In 4 seven-line stanzas, of which Stowe omits the second. A scurrilous performance. Trin. MS., fol. 205, back.

[No. 56. A Ballad by Lydgate; printed below, at p. 295.]

No. 58 is a Balade in 9 seven-line stanzas, of no merit, on the theme of the impossibility of restoring a woman's chastity.

No. 59. _The Court of Love._ Printed below, at p. 409.

No. 60 is a genuine poem; and no. 61 is Lydgate's Story of Thebes. And here Stowe's performance ceases.

§ 4. The subsequent additions made by Speght are discussed in vol. i. pp. 43-46. Of these, The Flower and the Leaf, Jack Upland, and Hoccleve's poem to Henry V, are here reprinted; and Chaucer's ABC is genuine. He also reprinted the Sayings at p. 450. The pieces not reprinted here are Chaucer's Dream and Eight Goodly Questions.

_Chaucer's Dream_ is a false title, assigned to it by Speght; its proper name is _The Isle of Ladies_. Begins--'Whan Flora, the quene of pleasaunce.' The MS. at Longleat is said to have been written about 1550. A second MS. has been acquired by the British Museum, named MS. Addit. 10303; this is also in a hand of the sixteenth century, and presents frequent variations in the text. It is very accessible, in the texts by Moxon, Bell, and Morris; but how Tyrwhitt ever came to dream that it could be genuine, must remain a mystery. I originally hoped to include this poem in the present selection, but its inordinate length compelled me to abandon my intention. In a prologue of seventy lines, the author truthfully states, at l. 60, that he is 'a slepy[3] writer.' There are many assonances, such as _undertakes_, _scapes_ (337); _named_, _attained_ (597); _tender_, _remember_ (1115, 1415); _rome_, _towne_ (1567). Note also such rimes as _destroied_, _conclude_ (735); _queen_, _kneen_, pl. of _knee_ (1779); _nine_, _greene_ (1861); _vertuous_, _use_ (1889). Some rimes exhibit the Northern dialect; as _paines_, _straines_, pr. s., 909; _wawe_, _overthrawe_, pp., 1153; _servand_, _livand_, pres. pt., 1629; _greene_, _eene_ (pl. of _e_, eye), 1719; _hand_, _avisand_, pres. pt., 1883; &c. Yet the writer is not particular; if he wants a rime to _wroth_, he uses the Southern form _goth_, 785; but if he wants a rime to _rose_, he uses the Northern form _gose_ (goes), 1287, 1523. But before any critic can associate this poem with Chaucer, he has first to prove that it was written before 1450. Moreover, it belongs to the cycle of metrical romances, being connected (as Tyrwhitt says) with the _Eliduc_ of Marie de France; and, perhaps, with her _Lanval_.

To the _Isle of Ladies_ Speght appended two other poems, of which the former contains a single stanza of 6 lines, and the latter is a ballad in 3 seven-line stanzas.

No. 66. _Eight Goodly Questions_; in Bell's Chaucer, iv. 421. In 9 seven-line stanzas. First printed in 1542. There are at least two manuscript copies; one in the Trinity MS., marked R. 3. 15; and another in the Bannatyne MS., printed at p. 123 of the print of the Bannatyne MS., issued by the Hunterian Club in 1873. In l. 19, the latter MS. corrects _tree_ to _coffour_, the Scottish form of _cofre_. It is merely expanded from the first seven lines of a poem by Ausonius, printed in Walker's _Corpus Poetarum Latinorum_, with the title Eorundem Septem Sapientum Sententiae. This English version is quite in Lydgate's style.

§ 5. EDITIONS AND MSS. CONSULTED.

I have repeatedly explained that there were but four black-letter editions of Collected Works before Speght's; and these I call Thynne's first edition (1532), Thynne's second edition (1542), the undated edition (about 1550, which I call 1550 for brevity), and Stowe's edition (1561) respectively. I shall denote these editions below by the symbols 'Th.,' ed. 1542, ed. 1550, and 'S.' respectively. Of these editions, the first is the best; the second is derived from the first; the third is derived from the second; and the fourth from the third[4]. In every case it is useless to consult a later edition when an earlier one can be found.

The following is the list of the pieces which depend on the editions _only_, or for which the editions have been collated. I always cite the earliest; that the later ones _also_ contain the piece in question must, once for all, be understood.

Caxton.--XXVIII. No. VII. was also collated with a print by Caxton.

Wynkyn de Worde.--XXIII.

Wynkyn de Worde.--VIII.

Chepman and Miller (1508).--VIII.

Th.--I. IX. XI. XXII. Also collated for IV. V. VII. VIII. X. XII. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. XXI. XXIII.

Thynne had access to excellent MSS., and is always worth consulting.

Ed. 1542.--II. XXVIII. Collated for VI.

An early printed edition of Jack Upland.--III.

S. (1561).--XV. Collated for XIII. XIV. XXIV. XXV. XXIX.

A printed edition of the Testament of Cresseid (1593).--XVII.

Speght (1598).--XX. Collated for III.

The following twenty MSS. have been collated or consulted.

Trentham MS.--IV. (See Introduction.)

Fairfax 16.-V. VIII. XIII. XVI. XVIII. XIX. (See vol. i. p. 51.)

Bodley 638.--V. VIII. XVIII. (See vol. i. p. 53.)

Tanner 346.--V. VIII. XVIII. XIX. (See vol. i. p. 54.)

Ashmole 59.--VII. X. XIII. (See vol. i. p. 53.)

Arch. Selden B. 24.--V. VIII. XVIII. XXVI. XXVII. (See vol. i. p. 54.)

Digby 181.--V. VIII. (See vol. i. p. 54.)

Camb. Univ. Lib. Ff. 1. 6.--V. XII. XVI. XVIII. (See vol. i. p. 55.)

Pepys 2006.--VIII. (See vol. i. p. 55.)

Trin. Coll. R. 3. 19.--XIV. XVI. XXI. XXIV. XXV. XXIX. (See vol. i. p. 56.)

Trin. Coll. R. 3. 20.--V. (One of Shirley's MSS.)

Trin. Coll. O. 9. 38.--XIV.

Addit. 16165, B. M.--XIII. (See vol. i. p. 56.)

Addit. 34360, B. M.--XXI.

Harl. 372, B. M.--XVI. (See vol. i. p. 58.)

Harl. 2251, B. M.--VII. XII. XIV. (See vol. i. p. 57.)

Harl. 7578, B. M.--XIII. (See vol. i. p. 58.)

Sloane 1212, B. M.--X. (A fair copy.)

Phillipps 8151.--VI. (See Hoccleve's Poems, ed. Furnivall, p. 1.)

Ashburnham 133.--V. (See the same, p. xxvii.)

§ 6. Conversely, I here give the authorities from which each piece is derived. For further comments on some of them, see the separate introductions to each piece below.

I. _The Testament of Love_ (prose).--Th. (Thynne, 1532).

II. _The Plowmans Tale_ (1380 lines).--Th. (Thynne, 1542).

III. _Jack Upland_ (prose).--Early edition, Caius College library; Speght (1598).

IV. _Praise of Peace_ (385 lines).--Th. (1532); Trentham MS.

V. _Letter of Cupid_ (476 lines).--Th. (1532); Fairfax, Bodley, Tanner, Selden, Ashburnham, Digby MSS.; Trin. Coll. R. 3. 20; Camb. Ff. 1. 6; also in the Bannatyne MS.

VI. _To the King's Grace_ (64).--Th. (1542); Phillipps 8151.

VII. _A Moral Balade_ (189).--Th. (1532); Caxton; Ashmole 59, Harl. 2251. (I also find a reference to Harl. 367, fol. 85, back.)

VIII. _Complaint of the Black Knight_ (681).--Th. (1532); Fairfax, Bodley, Tanner, Digby, Selden, Pepys; Addit. 16165. Also printed, separately, by Wynkyn de Worde (n. d.); and at Edinburgh, by Chepman and Miller, in 1508.

IX. _The Flour of Curtesye_ (270).--Th. (1532).

X. _In Commendation of our Lady_ (140).--Th.; Ashmole 59; Sloane 1212.

XI. _To my Soverain Lady_ (112).--Th.

XII. _Ballad of Good Counsel_ (133).--Th.; Camb. Ff. 1. 6; Harl. 2251.

XIII. _Beware of Doubleness_ (104).--Stowe (1561); Fairfax 16, Ashmole 59, Harl. 7578, Addit. 16165.

XIV. _A Balade: Warning Men_ (49).--Stowe (1561); Harl. 2251, fol. 149, back; Trin. R. 3. 19; Trin. O. 9. 38.

XV. _Three Sayings_ (21).--Stowe (1561).

XVI. _La Belle Dame sans Mercy_ (856).--Th.; Fairfax, Harl. 372; Camb. Ff. 1. 6; Trin. R. 3. 19, fol. 98.

XVII. _Testament of Cresseid_ (616).--Th.; Edinburgh edition (1593).

XVIII. _The Cuckoo and the Nightingale_ (290).--Th.; Fairfax, Bodley, Tanner, Selden; Camb. Ff. 1. 6.

XIX. _Envoy to Alison_ (27).--Th.; Fairfax, Tanner.

XX. _The Flower and the Leaf_ (595).--Speght (1598).

XXI. _The Assembly of Ladies_ (756).--Th.; Addit. 34360; Trin. R. 3. 19.

XXII. _A goodly Balade_ (71).--Th.

XXIII. _Go forth, King_ (14).--Wynkyn de Worde; Th.

XXIV. _The Court of Love_ (1442).--Stowe (1561); Trin. R. 3. 19.

XXV. _Virelai_ (20).--Stowe (1561); Trin. R. 3. 19.

XXVI. _Prosperity_ (8); XXVII. _Loyalty_ (7).--Selden MS.

XXVIII. _Sayings_ (14).--Caxton; reprinted, Th. (1542).

XXIX. _In Praise of Chaucer_ (7).--Stowe (1561); Trin. R. 3. 19.

* * * * *

§ 7. I. THE TESTAMENT OF LOVE; BY THOMAS USK.

Of this piece no MS. copy has been discovered. The only authority is Thynne's edition of 1532, whence all later editions have been copied more or less incorrectly. The reprints will be found to grow steadily worse, so that the first edition is the only one worth consulting.

The present edition is printed from a transcript of Thynne (1532), made by myself; the proof-sheets being carefully read with the original. In making the transcript, I have altered the symbol _u_ to _v_, when used as a consonant; and (in the few places where it occurs) the consonantal _i_ to _j_. I have also substituted _i_ for _y_ when the vowel is short, chiefly in the case of the suffix _-yng_ or _-ynge_, here printed _-ing_ or _-inge_. In nearly all other cases, the original spellings are given in the footnotes. Thynne's chief errors of printing occur in places where he has persistently altered the spelling of the MS. to suit the spelling in fashion in the days of Henry VIII. His chief alterations are as follows. He prints _ea_ for open _ee_, written _ee_ or _e_ at the beginning of the fifteenth century; thus, he has _ease_ for _ese_, and _please_ for _plese_. He most perversely adds a useless final _e_ to the words _howe_, _nowe_, and some others; and he commits the anachronism of printing _father_, _mother_, _together_, _wether_, _gather_, in place of _fader_, _moder_, _togeder_, _weder_, _gader_; whereas the termination in these words invariably appears as _-der_ till shortly before 1500. Further, he prints _catche_ for _cacche_, _perfection_ for _perfeccion_, and the like; and in several other ways has much impaired the spelling of his original. Many of these things I have attempted to set right; and the scholar who compares the text with the footnotes will easily see why each alteration has been made, if he happens to be at all conversant with MSS. written in the fourteenth century.

I believe that this piece is almost unparalleled as regards the shameful corruption of its text. It cannot be supposed that Thynne or any one else ever read it over with the view of seeing whether the result presented any sense. Originally written in an obscure style, every form of carelessness seems to have been employed in order to render it more obscure than before. In a great number of places, it is easy to restore the sense by the insertion of such necessary words as _of_, or _but_, or _by_. In other places, non-existent words can be replaced by real ones; or some correction can be made that is more or less obvious. I have marked all inserted words by placing them within square brackets, as, e.g., _am_ in l. 46 on p. 6. Corrections of readings are marked by the use of a dagger (+); thus 'I +wot wel' in l. 78 on p. 7 is my emendation of Thynne's phrase 'I wol wel,' which is duly recorded in the footnote. But some sentences remain in which the sense is not obvious; and one is almost tempted to think that the author did not clearly know what he intended to say. That he was remarkable for a high degree of inaccuracy will appear presently.

A strange misprint occurs in Book III. ch. 4, ll. 30, 31 (p. 117), where nearly two whole lines occur twice over; but the worst confusion is due to an extraordinary dislocation of the text in Book III. (c. iv. l. 56--c. ix. l. 46), as recently discovered by the sagacity of Mr. H. Bradley, and explained more fully below.

I have also, for the first time, revised the punctuation, which in Thynne is only denoted by frequent sloping strokes and full stops, which are not always inserted in the right places. And I have broken up the chapters into convenient paragraphs.

§ 8. A very curious point about this piece is the fact which I was the first to observe, viz. that the initial letters of the various chapters were certainly intended to form an acrostic. Unfortunately, Thynne did not perceive this design, and has certainly begun some of the chapters either with the wrong letter or at a wrong place. The sense shews that the first letter of Book I. ch. viii. should be E, not O (see the note); and, with this correction, the initial letters of the First Book yield the words--MARGARETE OF.

In Book II, Thynne begins Chapters XI and XII at wrong places, viz. with the word 'Certayn' (p. 86, l. 133), and the word 'Trewly' (p. 89, l. 82). He thus produces the words--VIRTW HAVE MCTRCI. It is obvious that the last word ought to be MERCI, which can be obtained by beginning Chapter XI with the word 'Every,' which suits the sense quite as well.

For the chapters of Book III, we are again dependent on Thynne. If we accept his arrangement as it stands, the letters yielded are--ON THSKNVI; and the three books combined give us the sentence:--MARGARETE OF VIRTW, HAVE MERCI ON THSKNVI. Here 'Margarete of virtw' means 'Margaret endued with divine virtue'; and the author appeals either to the Grace of God, or to the Church. The last word ought to give us the author's name; but in that case the letters require rearrangement before the riddle can be read with certainty.

After advancing so far towards the solution of the mystery, I was here landed in a difficulty which I was unable to solve. But Mr. H. Bradley, by a happy inspiration, hit upon the idea that the text might have suffered dislocation; and was soon in a position to prove that no less than six leaves of the MS. must have been out of place, to the great detriment of the sense and confusion of the argument. He very happily restored the right order, and most obligingly communicated to me the result. I at once cancelled the latter part of the treatise (from p. 113 to the end), and reprinted this portion in the right order, according to the sense. With this correction, the unmeaning THSKNVI is resolved into the two words THIN USK, i.e. 'thine Usk'; a result the more remarkable because Mr. Bradley had _previously_ hit upon Usk as being the probable author. For the autobiographical details exactly coincide, in every particular, with all that is known of the career of Thomas Usk, according to Walsingham, the Rolls of Parliament, and the continuation of Higden's Polychronicon by John Malverne (ed. Lumby, vol. ix. pp. 45-6, 134, 150, 169); cf. Lingard, ed. 1874, iii. 163-7.

The date of the composition of this piece can now be determined without much error. Usk was executed on March 4, 1388, and we find him referring to past events that happened towards the end of 1384 or later. The most likely date is about 1387. I here append an exact account of the order of the text _as it appears in Thynne_; every break in the text being denoted, in the present volume, by a dark asterisk.

Thynne's text is in a correct order from p. 1 to p. 118, l. 56:--any mouable tyme there (Th. fol. 354, col. 2, l. 11)[5].

(1) Next comes, in Thynne, the passage beginning at p. 135, l. 94:--Fole, haue I not seyd--and ending at p. 143, l. 46:--syth god is the greatest loue and the (Th. fol. 356, back, col. 1, l. 5).

(2) Next, in Thynne, the passage beginning at p. 131, l. 97:--ne ought to loke thynges with resonnyng--and ending at p. 132, l. 161, at the end of a chapter (Th. fol. 356, back, col. 2, last line).

(3) Next, in Thynne, the passage beginning at p. 124, l. 8:--Now trewly, lady--and ending at p. 128, at the end of the chapter (Th. fol. 357, last line).

(4) Next, in Thynne, the passage beginning at p. 132, new chapter:--Uery trouth (quod she)--and ending at p. 135, l. 94:--that shal bringe out frute that (Th. fol. 358, back, col. 1, l. 25).

(5) Next, in Thynne, the passage beginning at p. 118, l. 56:--is nothyng preterit ne passed--and ending at p. 124, l. 7:--euer to onbyde (Th. fol. 360, col. 1, l. 24).

(6) Next, in Thynne, the passage beginning at p. 128, new chapter:--Nowe, lady (quod I) that tree to set--and ending at p. 131, l. 97:--vse ye (Th. fol. 360, back, col. 2, l. 9).

(7) Lastly, the text reverts to the true order, at p. 143, l. 46, with the words:--greatest wisdom (Th. fol. 360, back, col. 2, l. 9. as before). See The Athenæum, no. 3615, Feb. 6, 1897.

It is not difficult to account for this somewhat confusing dislocation. It is clear that the original MS. was written on quires of the usual size, containing 8 folios apiece. The first 10 quires, which we may call _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_, _e_, _f_, _g_, _h_, _i_, and _k_, were in the right order. The rest of the MS. occupied quire _l_ (of 8 folios), and quire _m_ (of only 2); the last page being blank. The seventh folio of _l_ was torn up the back, so that the two leaves parted company; and the same happened to both the folios in quire _m_, leaving six leaves loose. What then happened was this:--first of all, folios _l__1--_l__4, were reversed and turned inside out; then came the former halves of _m__1, and _m__2, and the latter half of _l__7; next _l__5 and _l__6 (undetached), with the former half of _l__7 thrust in the middle; so that the order in this extraordinary quire was as follows: _l__4, _l__3, _l__2, _l__1, all inside out, half of _m__1, half of _m__2, the latter half of _l__7, _l__5, _l__6, and the former half of _l__7, followed by the six undetached leaves. The last quire simply consisted of _l__8 (entire), followed by the latter halves of _m__2 and _m__1, which were kept in the right order by the fact that the last page was blank.

It has thus become possible for us to make some progress towards the right understanding of the work, which has hitherto been much misunderstood. Warton (Hist. E. Poetry, 1840, ii. 218) dismisses it in two lines:--'It is a lover's parody of Boethius's book De Consolatione mentioned above'; whereas the author was not a lover at all, except in a spiritual sense. Even the fuller account in Morley's English Writers (1890), v. 261, is not wholly correct. The statement is there made, that 'it professes to be written, and probably was written, by a prisoner in danger of his life'; but the prison[6] may have been _at first_ metaphorical, as he could hardly have written the whole work in two or three months. In Book iii. ch. 9, ll. 131, 132, he prays that 'God's hand, which has scourged him in mercy, may hereafter mercifully keep and defend him in good plight.' The whole tone of the treatise shews that he is writing to justify himself, and thinks that he has succeeded. But a stern doom was close at hand.

§ 9. The truth is that the attempts of Godwin and others to make the autobiographical statements of the author fit into the life of Chaucer, have quite led the critics out of the right track. That the author was _not_ Chaucer is perfectly obvious to every one who reads the passage in the lower half of p. 140 with moderate attention; for the author there refers to Chaucer as Love's 'noble philosophical poet in English,' who wrote a treatise of Love's servant Troilus, and who 'passeth all other makers in wit and in good reason of sentence'; praise which, however true it may be of Chaucer, the writer was certainly not entitled to claim for himself. The sole point in which the circumstances of the author agree with those of Chaucer is this--that they were both born in London; which is, obviously, too slight a coincidence to build upon. Now that we know the author's name to have been Thomas Usk, the matter assumes quite another complexion. Usk was much inclined, in his early days, to a belief in Lollard opinions; but when he found that persistence in such belief was likely to lead to trouble and danger, he deemed it prudent to recant as completely as he could[7], and contemplates his consequent security with some complacency.

In just the same way, it appears that he had changed sides in politics. We first find him in the position of confidential clerk to John of Northampton, mayor of London in 1381-2 and 1382-3. In July, 1384, Usk was arrested and imprisoned in order to induce him to reveal certain secrets implicating Northampton. This he consented to do, and accused Northampton before the king at Reading, on the 18th of August. Northampton strenuously denied the charges against him, but was condemned as guilty, and sent to Corfe castle[8]. After this, Usk joined the party of Sir Nicholas Brembre, mayor of London in 1383-4, 1384-5, and 1385-6, and Collector of Customs in 1381-3, when Chaucer was Comptroller of the same. Brembre had been active in procuring the condemnation of Northampton, and was, at the close of 1386, one of the few personal adherents who remained faithful to the king. In 1387, Richard was busily devising means for the overthrow of the duke of Gloucester's regency, Brembre and Usk being on the king's side; but his attempts were unsuccessful, and, in November of the same year, the duke of Gloucester and his partisans, who were called the 'appellants,' became masters of the situation; they accused the king's councillors of treason, and imprisoned or banished their opponents. On Feb. 3, 1388, the appellants produced their charges against their victims, Brembre and Usk being among the number. Both were condemned and executed, Brembre on Feb. 20, and Usk on the 4th of March. Usk's offence was that he had been appointed sub-sheriff of Middlesex by Brembre's influence[9], with a view to the arrest of the duke of Gloucester and others of his party. His defence was that all that he had done was by the king's orders, a defence on which he doubtless relied. Unfortunately for him, it was an aggravation of his crime. It was declared that he ought to have known that the king was not at the time his own master, but was acting according to the counsel of false advisers; and this sealed his fate. He was sentenced to be drawn, hung, and beheaded, and that his head should be set up over Newgate. The sentence was barbarously carried out; he was hung but immediately cut down, and clumsily beheaded by nearly thirty strokes of a sword. 'Post triginta mucronis ictus fere decapitatus semper usque ad mortem nunquam fatebatur se deliquisse contra Johannem Northampton, sed erant omnia vera quae de eo praedicaverat coram rege in quodam consilio habito apud Radyngum anno elapso.'--Higden, App. 169. John of Malverne speaks as if he had some personal recollection of Usk, of whom he says--'Satagebat namque astu et arte illorum amicitiam sibi attrahere quos procul dubio ante capitales hostes sibi fuisse cognovit,'--Ib. p. 45.

We can now readily understand that Usk's praise of Chaucer must have been more embarrassing than acceptable; and perhaps it was not altogether without design that the poet, in his House of Fame, took occasion to let the world know how he devoted his leisure time to other than political subjects.

§ 10. Some of the events of his life are alluded to by Usk in the present treatise. He justifies his betrayal of Northampton (p. 26, ll. 53-103, p. 28, ll. 116-201), and is grateful for the king's pardon (p. 60, ll. 120-4). He refers to his first imprisonment (p. 60, l. 104), and tells us that he offered wager of battle against all who disputed his statements (p. 60, l, 116; p. 31, l. 10); but no one accepted the wager.

He further tells us how he endeavoured to make his peace with the Church. Taking his cue from the parable of the merchantman seeking goodly pearls (p. 16, l. 84), he likens the visible Church of Christ to the pearl of great price (p. 145, l. 103; p. 94, l. 121), and piteously implores her mercy (p. 8, l. 135); and the whole tone of the piece shews his confidence that he is reasonably safe (p. 144, l. 120). He sees clearly that lollardy is unacceptable, and indulges in the usual spiteful fling against the cockle (_lolia_) which the Lollards were reproached with sowing (p. 48, l. 93). He had once been a heretic (p. 99, l. 29), and in danger of 'never returning' to the true Church (p. 99, l. 38); but he secured his safety by a full submission (p. 105, l. 133).

At the same time, there is much about the piece that is vague, shifty, and unsatisfactory. He is too full of excuses, and too plausible; in a word, too selfish. Hence he has no real message for others, but only wishes to display his skill, which he does by help of the most barefaced and deliberate plagiarism. It was not from the Consolatio Philosophiae of Boethius, but from the English translation of that work by Chaucer, that he really drew his materials; and he often takes occasion to lift lines or ideas from the poem of Troilus whenever he can find any that come in handy. In one place he turns a long passage from the House of Fame into very inferior prose. There are one or two passages that remind us of the Legend of Good Women (i. pr. 100, ii. 3. 38, iii. 7. 38); but they are remarkably few. But he keeps a copy of Chaucer's Boethius always open before him, and takes from it passage after passage, usually with many alterations, abbreviations, expansions, and other disfigurements; but sometimes without any alteration at all. A few examples will suffice, as a large number of parallel passages are duly pointed out in the Notes.

§ 11. In Chaucer's Boethius (bk. i. pr. 3. 10), when Philosophy, the heavenly visitant, comes to comfort the writer, her first words are:--'_O my norry_, sholde I forsaken thee now?' In the Testament (p. 10, l. 37), Heavenly Love commences her consolations with the same exclamation:--'_O my nory_, wenest thou that my maner be, to foryete my frendes or my servaunts?' The Latin text--'An te, _alumne_, desererem?'--does not suggest this remarkable mode of address.

This, however, is a mere beginning; it is not till further on that plagiarisms begin to be frequent. At first, as at p. 37, the author copies the sense rather than the words; but he gradually begins to copy words and phrases also. Thus, at p. 43, l. 38, his '_chayres_ of domes' comes from Chaucer's 'heye _chayres_' in bk. i. met. 5. 27; and then, in the next line, we find '_vertue, shynende naturelly ... is hid_ under cloude,' where Chaucer has '_vertu_, cler-_shyninge naturelly is hid_ in derke derknesses'; bk. i. met. 5. 28. At p. 44, l. 66, we have: '_Whan nature brought thee forth_, come thou not _naked out of thy moders wombe_? Thou haddest no richesse'; where Chaucer has: '_Whan_ that _nature broughte thee forth out of thy moder wombe_, I receyved thee _naked_, and nedy of alle thinges'; bk. ii. pr. 2. 10. Just a few lines below (ll. 71-76) we have the sense, but not the words, of the neighbouring passage in Chaucer (ll. 23-25). Further literal imitations are pointed out in the Notes to l. 85 in the same chapter, and elsewhere. See, for example, the Notes to Book ii. ch. iv. 4, 14, 20, 61; ch. v. 15, 57, 65, 67, 79; ch. vi. 11, 30, 74, 117, 123, 129, 132, 143; ch. vii. 8, 14, 20, 23, 30, 39, 50, 74, 95, 98, 105, 109, 114, 117, 130, 135, 139, 148; &c.

Those who require conviction on this point may take such an example as this.

'O! a noble thing and clere is power, that is not founden mighty to kepe himselfe'; (p. 70, l. 20).

'O! a noble thing and a cleer thing is power, that is nat founden mighty to kepen it-self'; Ch. Boeth. bk. iii. pr. 5. 5-7.

The Latin text is: 'O praeclara potentia quae nec ad conseruationem quidem sui satis efficax inuenitur.' I see no reason for supposing that the author anywhere troubled himself to consult the Latin original. Indeed, it is possible to correct errors in the text by help of Chaucer's version; see the last note on p. 461.

§ 12. We get the clearest idea of the author's method by observing his treatment of the House of Fame, 269-359. It is worth while to quote the whole passage:--

'Lo! how a woman doth amis
_To love_ him that unknowen is!... 270
Hit _is not_ al _gold_ that glareth;...
Ther _may be under_ goodliheed
Kevered _many_ a shrewed _vyce_; 275
_Therefore_ be _no wight_ so nyce,
To take a love only for _chere_,
For _speche_, or for frendly manere;
For this shal every woman finde
That som _man_, of his pure kinde, 280
Wol _shewen outward_ the faireste
_Til he have_ caught that what him leste;
And _thanne wol_ he _causes finde_,
And swere how that she is unkinde,
_Or fals_, or prevy, or double was ... 285
Therfor I wol seye a proverbe,
That "he that fully knoweth th'erbe 290
May saufly leye hit to his yë" ...
Allas! is every man thus trewe,
That every yere wolde have a newe, ...
As thus: of _oon_ he wolde _have fame_, 305
In magnifying of his name;
Another _for frendship_, seith he;
And yet ther shal the _thri de_ be,
That shal be taken _for delyt_ ...
_Allas, that ever_ hadde routhe 332
_Any woman_ on any man!
Now see I wel, and telle can,
We wrecched _women conne_ non art ... 335
How sore that _ye men_ conne _grone_,
Anoon, as we have yow receyved,
Certeinly we _ben deceyved_;... 340
For through you is my name _lorn_,
And alle my actes _red and songe_
Over al this land on every tonge. 348
O wikke _Fame_!...
Eek, thogh I mighte _duren ever_,
_That_ I _have doon, rekever_ I _never_ ... 354
And that I shal thus juged be--
"Lo, right as she hath doon, now she
Wol do eftsones, hardily."' 359

If the reader will now turn to p. 54, l. 45, and continue down to l. 81 on the next page, he will find the whole of this passage turned into prose, with numerous cunning alterations and a few insertions, yet including all such words as are printed above in italics! That is, he will find all except the proverb in ll. 290, 291; but this also is not far off; for it occurs over the leaf, on p. 56, at l. 115, and again at p. 22, ll. 44-45! Surely, this is nothing but book-making, and the art of it does not seem to be difficult.

§ 13. The author expressly acknowledges his admiration of Troilus (p. 140, l. 292); and it is easy to see his indebtedness to that poem. He copies Chaucer's curious mistake as to Styx being a pit (p. 3, l. 80, and the note). He adopts the words _let-game_ (p. 18, l. 124) and _wiver_ (p. 129, l. 27). He quotes a whole line from Troilus at p. 27, l. 78 (see note); and spoils another one at p. 34, ch. viii. l. 5, a third at p. 80, l. 116, and a fourth at p. 128, ch. vii. l. 2. We can see whence he took his allusion to 'playing raket,' and to the dock and nettle, at p. 13, ll. 166, 167; and the phrase to 'pype with an yvè-lefe' at p. 134, l. 50.

It is further observable that he had read a later text of Piers Plowman with some care, but he seems to quote it from memory, as at p. 18, l. 153, and p. 24, l. 118. A few other passages in which he seems to have taken ideas from this popular and remarkable poem are pointed out in the Notes. It is probable that he thence adopted the words _legistres_ and _skleren_; for which see the Glossary, and consult the Notes for the references which are there given.

§ 14. The author is frequently guilty of gross inaccuracies. He seems to confuse Cain with Ham (p. 52, ll. 107, 109), but _Cayn_, says Mr. Bradley, may be Thynne's misprint for _Cam_, i.e. Ham. He certainly confuses Perdiccas with Arrhidæus (p. 52, l. 116). He speaks of the _eighth_ year, instead of the _seventh_, as being a sabbatical year, and actually declares that the ordinary week contains _seven_ working-days (p. 24, ll. 102-104)! He tells us that Sunday begins 'at the first hour after noon (!) on Saturday' (p. 82, l. 163). Hence it is not to be wondered at that some of his arguments and illustrations are quite unintelligible.

§ 15. The title of the work, viz. THE TESTAMENT OF LOVE, readily reminds us of the passage in Gower already quoted in vol. iii. p. xliii., in which the goddess Venus proposes that Chaucer should write 'his testament of love,' in order 'to sette an ende of alle his werke.' I have already explained that the real reference in this passage is to the Legend of Good Women; but I am not prepared, at present, to discuss the connection between the expression in Gower and the treatise by Usk. The fact that our author adopted the above title may have led to the notion that Chaucer wrote the treatise here discussed; but it is quite clear that he had nothing to do with it.

Professor Morley well says that 'the writer of this piece uses the word Testament in the old Scriptural sense of a witnessing, and means by Love the Divine Love, the Christian spirit encouraging and directing the wish for the grace of God, called Margaret, the pearl beyond all price.' To which, however, it is highly essential to add that Margaret is not used in the sense of 'grace' alone, but is also employed, in several passages, to signify 'the visible Church of Christ.' The author is, in fact, careful to warn us of the varying, the almost Protean sense of the word at p. 145, where he tells us that 'Margarite, a woman [i.e. properly a woman's name], betokeneth _grace_, _lerning_, or _wisdom of god_, or els _holy church_.' His object seems to have been to extend the meaning of the word so as to give him greater scope for ingenuity in varying his modes of reference to it. He has certainly succeeded in adding to the obscurity of his subject. That by 'holy church' he meant the visible Church of Christ of his own time, appears from the remarkable assertion that it is 'deedly,' i.e. mortal (p. 94, l. 121). Such an epithet is inapplicable to the Church in its spiritual character. It may also be observed that, however much the sense implied by Margarite may vary, it never takes the meaning which we should most readily assign to it; i.e. it never means a live woman, nor represents even an imaginary object of natural human affection. The nearest approach to such an ideal is at p. 94, l. 114, where we are told that the jewel which he hopes to attain is as precious a pearl as a woman is by nature.

§ 16. It hardly seems worth while to give a detailed analysis of the whole piece. An analysis of the First Book (which is, on the whole, the best) is given by Professor Morley; and the hints which I have already given as to the character and situation of the author will enable the reader to regard the treatise from a right point of view. But it is proper to observe that the author himself tells us how he came to divide the work into three books[10], and what are the ideas on which each book is founded. Each of the three books has an introductory chapter. That to the First Book I have called a Prologue; and perhaps it would have been strictly correct to have called the first chapters of the other books by the same name. In the introductory chapter to the Third Book, p. 101, he declares that the First Book is descriptive of Error, or Deviation (which the editions print as Demacion!); the Second, of Grace; and the Third, of Joy. In other words, the First Book is particularly devoted to recounting the errors of his youth, especially how he was led by others into a conspiracy against the state and into deviation from orthodoxy. In the Prologue, he excuses himself for writing in English, and announces the title of the work. He then assures us that he is merely going to gather up the crumbs that have fallen from the table, and to glean handfuls of corn which Boethius has dropped. 'A sly servant in his own help is often much commended'; and this being understood, he proceeds to help himself accordingly, as has already been explained.

§ 17. BOOK I: CH. I. In Chapter I, he describes his misery, and hopes that the dice will turn, and implores the help of Margaret, here used (apparently) to typify the grace of God. He represents himself as being in prison, in imitation of Boethius; but I suspect that, _in the present passage_, the prison was metaphorical. (He had been imprisoned in 1384, and in 1387 was imprisoned again; but that is another matter.)

CH. II. Heavenly Love suddenly appears to him, as Philosophy appeared to Boethius, and is ready to console and reclaim him. She is aware of his losses, and he tries to vindicate his constancy of character.

CH. III. He describes how he once wandered through the woods at the close of autumn, and was attacked by some animals who had suddenly turned wild. To save himself, he embarks on board a ship; but the reader is disappointed to find that the adventure is wholly unreal; the ship is the ship of Travail, peopled by Sight, Lust, Thought, and Will. He is driven on an island, where he catches a glimpse of Love, and finds a Margaret, a pearl of price. He appeals to Love to comfort him.

CH. IV. Love first reproves and then consoles him. She enquires further into his complaints.

CH. V. She advises him to contemn such as have spoken against him. He complains that he has served seven years for Rachel, and prays for comfort in his eighth year. She exhorts him to perseverance.

CH. VI. He here goes into several details as to his previous conduct. The authorities threatened to keep him in prison, unless he would reveal a certain secret or plot. He was afraid that the peace of his native place, London, would suffer; and to procure its peace, he 'declared certain points.' Being charged upon oath to reveal certain secret dealings, he at once did so; for which he incurred much odium.

CH. VII. To prove that he had only spoken the truth, he offered wager of battle; and was justified by the fact that no one accepted it. He had not perjured himself, because his oath in the law-court was superior to his former oath of secrecy. He only meant truth, but was sadly slandered. It is absurd to be 'a stinking martyr' in a false cause.

CH. VIII. Love tells him he has greatly erred, and must expect much correction. Earthly fame should be despised, whilst he looks for the fame that comes after death.

CH. IX. Love vindicates the greatness of God and the goodness of His providence.

CH. X. The author complains of his hard fortune; he has lost his goods and has been deprived of his office. Love explains that adversity teaches salutary lessons, and that the true riches may still be his own.

§ 18. BOOK II. In the first chapter (or Prologue) of the Second Book, he again discusses the object of his work. In Chapter II, Love sings him a Latin song, introducing complaints against the clergy such as frequently occur in Piers the Plowman. In Chapter III, we find a discourse on womankind, largely borrowed from Chaucer's House of Fame. The next eight chapters are chiefly devoted to a discussion of the way by which the repentant sinner may come to 'the knot' of Heavenly bliss; and it is here, in particular, that a large portion of Chaucer's Boethius is freely imitated or copied. The last three chapters recount the excellences of Margaret, which in many passages refers rather to the visible Church than to divine Grace.

§ 19. BOOK III. The first chapter is again introductory, explaining why the number of Books is three. 'The Margaret in virtue is likened to Philosophy, with her three kinds.' It is remarkable that this Third Book, which is dedicated to Joy, is the dullest of the three, being largely taken up with the questions of predestination and free will, with more borrowings from Chaucer's Boethius. In Chapter V, Love explains how continuance in good will produces the fruit of Grace; and, in Chapters VI and VII, shews how such grace is to be attained. Chapter IX recurs to the subject of predestination; after which the work comes to a formal conclusion, with excuses for its various imperfections.

§ 20. II. THE PLOWMANS TALE.