Chapter IV: Introduction: , Glossary, and Indexes (4)

So also: _awake_ (pt. s. also _awaked_), _bake_, _drawe_ (pt. s. _drow_), _fare_, _forsake_, _gnawe_ (pt. s. _gnow_), _grave_, _laughe_ (pt. s. _lough_), _shape_, _shave_, _stande_ (pt. s. _stood_, pp. _stonden_), _stapen_ (pp. _stapen_ in MS. E., which is more correct than _stopen_ in other MSS.), _take_, _wake_, _wasshe_ (pt. s. _wessh_, _wissh_), _waxe_ (pt. s. _wex_, pp. _woxen_ instead of _waxen_). Here also belong _heve_ (pt. s. _heef_, _haf_); _sleen_ or _slee_, slay (pt. s. _slow_, _slough_, pp. _slawe_, _slayn_); _swere_ (pt. s. _swoor_, pp. _sworen_, _sworn_). Also _quake_, originally a weak verb, of which Chaucer has the pt. s. _qu['o]['o]k_. Conversely, the pt. s. of _fare_ is weak, viz. _ferde_.

7. Infin. _fallen_; Pt. s. _fel_ (also _fil_); Pt. pl. _fellen_ (also _fillen_); Pp. _fallen_. This conjugation originally made the pt. t. by duplication, and the root-vowel varies. But the vowel of the pp. agrees with that of the infinitive, and the vowel of the pt. t. is the same in the singular and plural. Here belong _biholde_, pt. s. _bih[=e]ld_; _holde_, pt. s. _heeld_; _honge_, _hange_, pt. s. _heeng_, _heng_; _bete_, pt. s. _beet_; _hewe_; _lete_, _late_, pt. s. _leet_, pp. _leten_, _laten_; _slepe_, pt. s. _sleep_; _blowe_, pt. s. _blew_; _crowe_, pt. s. _crew_; _growe_, pt. s. _grew_; _knowe_, pt. s. _knew_; _sowe_; _throwe_, pt. s. _threw_; _lepe_ (laep[*e], l[`e][`e]p[*e]), pt. s. _leep_ (l['e]['e]p); _wepe_ (w['e]['e]p[*e]), pt. s. _weep_ (w['e]['e]p).

Besides _holde_, _biholde_, we also find the curious infinitives _helde_, _behelde_.

Here belongs _hote_, to command, promise, pt. s. _heet_, _hight_ (from A.S. _h[=e]ht_), pp. _hoten_. Closely connected with this is the form _hatte_ (A.S. _h[=a]tte_, Gothic _haitada_), with the passive sense 'is named,' or 'is called'; variant forms being _hette_, _highte_, the latter due to some confusion with the strong pt. s. _hight_, mentioned above. Hence _hatte_, _hette_, _highte_ were also used with the past sense 'was named' or 'was called.' In Chaucer's time these forms and senses were much confused, so that we actually find _hight_ with the sense 'was named'; and conversely, _highte_ with the sense 'promised.' And further, we find the pp. _hoten_ with the sense 'called,' and the pp. _hight_ with the sense 'promised.' See, in the Glossary, _Hote_, _Bihote_, _Bihete_, _Bihighte_.

Here also belongs _goon_, _gon_, _go_, to go; pp. _goon_, _gon_. The pt. t. is supplied by _wente_ or _yede_.

s. 91. FORMATION OF WEAK VERBS.

In the case of weak verbs, which include a large number of verbs of Anglo-French origin, much depends upon the form and even upon the length of the stem. The standard suffix for the pt. t. is _-de_, and for the pp., _-d_; but this necessarily becomes _-te_ (pp. _-t_) after a voiceless consonant and in some other cases, especially after _l_ and _gh_. A third variety of form is caused by the frequent occurrence of _-e-_ before the final _-de_ or _-d_, due, usually, to the form of the infinitive mood; and, in long words especially, the form _-ede_ is frequently reduced to _-ed_. This short explanation applies, practically, to all weak verbs.

INFINITIVES IN _-ien_, _-ie_. The A.S. infin. in _-ian_ became _-ien_, _-ie_ in M.E., and was frequently reduced to _-e_. Ex. A.S. _lufian_, later _lovien_; in Chaucer only _loven_, _love_, though a trace of the _i_ remains in the derived word _lovyere_, A 80. These are the verbs which make the pt. t. in _-e-de_, the _-e-_ being due to the formative suffix _-i-_, which is actually preserved in the pp. _ber-i-ed_, _her-i-ed_[69]. Hence Chaucer uses the pt. t. _dwell-ed_, short for _dwell-e-de_; but he also uses the syncopated form _dwel-te_, where _d_ has become _t_ after _l_. We can only understand these weak verbs by help of the etymology, so that it is unnecessary to enlarge upon the subject.

A form such as _lovede_ was liable to syncope, which means, practically, that the word was frequently pronounced (luv.d[*e]) or (luv.ed); it mattered little which was chosen. Before a vowel, the final _-e_ could suffer elision, which reduced the form to _lov'd'_ (luvd).

This explains the scansion of many lines. Thus, in A 1196, it does not matter whether we say (luv.d[*e]) or (luv.ed); but in A 1197, 1198, the only possible form is (luv.d).

s. 92. THREE CLASSES OF WEAK VERBS. We may distribute the weak verbs into three classes; the types being, respectively, _loven_, _heren_, to hear, and _tellen_.

1. Infin. _lov-en_, _lov-e_; pt. t. _lov-[:e]de_, _lov-[:e]d_, _lov-(e)de_; pp. _lov[:e]d_, _lov(e)d_. The pt. t. pl. sometimes adds _-n_. Past tenses in which the full form in _-ede_ occurs are not common, on account of the tendency to shorten the word. We find _lakk-ede_, _wedd-ede_, _ned-ede_, in full, and the plurals _lok-eden_, _knokk-eden_, _yell-eden_; and even _aqueynt-eden_, from a word of French origin. _Liv-eden_ in D 1877 is really _liv'den_. The second _e_ is dropped in _ax-ed_, _folw-ed_, _lok-ed_, _long-ed_, &c. As an example of the convenience of a double form, observe the pt. s. _espy-ed_ riming with the pp. _all-yed_, B 3718; and the pt. pl. subj. _espy-de_ riming with _tyde_, L. 771.

Here belong _answere_, pt. t. _answer-de_; _make_, pt. t. _mak-ed_, _ma-de_ (for _mak-e-de_), an extreme example of syncope, pp. _mak-ed_, _maad_, _m[=a]d_; _clepe_, pt. t. _clep-ed_, _clep-te_; _pley-en_, pt. t. _pley-de_, &c. Also some in which the stem has suffered some alteration, as _twicche_, pt. t. _twigh-te_; _picche_, pt. t. _pigh-te_; _prike_, pt. t. _prigh-te_; _reve_, pt. t. _ref-te_, _raf-te_, pp. _raf-t_; _clothe_, pt. t. _cladde_, _cledde_, pp. _cloth-ed_, _clad_, and even _cled_; _syke_, to sigh, pt. s. _syk-ed_, _sigh-te_.

NOTE. The second person of the past tense takes the suffix _-st_, as in _lovedest_, contrary to the habit of the strong verbs. An anomalous form occurs in _thou made_, instead of _thou madest_.

2. Pt. t. _h[=e]r-en_, _h[=e]r-e,_ to hear; Pt. s. _h[)e]r-de_, Pp. _h[)e]r-d_. The vowel is shortened in the pt. s. and pp. before the two consonants. Here belong verbs ending in _-an_ in A.S., which almost invariably exhibit a mutated vowel in the infinitive mood; cf. A.S. _sendan_, Goth, _sandjan_.

Here belong: _blende_, pt. _blente_; _f[=e]de_, pt. _fedde_; _f[=e]le_, pt. _felte_; _fille_, pt. _filde_; _gr[=e]te_, to greet, pt. _grette_; _hente_, pt. _hente_; _hyde_, pt. _hidde_, pp. _hid_, Kentish _hed_; _kepe_, pt. _kepte_; _kisse_, pt. _kiste_, Kentish _keste_; _lede_, pt. _ledde_, _ladde_; _mene_, to mean, pt. _mente_, _m[=e]te_, to meet, pt. _mette_; _rende_, pt. _rente_; _sende_, pt. _sende_, _sente_; _sette_, pt. _sette_; _spr[=e]de_, pt. _spradde_; _swete_, pt. _swatte_; _wende_, to go, pt. _wente_; _w[=e]ne_, to imagine, pt. _wende_. So also, _d[=e]men_, to deem, _s[=e]men_, to seem, which should make the pt. tenses _demde_, _semde_; but, as these forms seemed awkward, they became _demed_, _semed_.

So also _l[=e]ve_, to leave, pt. _lefte_, _lafte_; _kythe_, to make known, pt. _kid-de_, pp. _kid_ or _kythed_.

The old combinations _enct_, _engd_, became M.E. _eynt_, _eynd_. Hence we have _blenche_, pt. _bleynte_; _drenche_, pt. _dreynte_; _quenche_, pt. _queynte_; also the pp. forms _y-meynd_, _seynd_, _y-spreynd_, as if from the infin. _menge_, _senge_, _sprenge_.

3. Infin. _tell-en_, _tell-e_; Pt. s. _tol-de_; Pp. _tol-d_.

Here _tol-de_ is for an O. Mercian _tal-de_ (A.S. _teal-de_), from a stem TAL. The infin. shews mutation. The chief key to verbs of this class is to remember that the pt. t. depends upon the original form of the stem, whilst the infin. exhibits mutation; i.e. the pt. t. stem is more original than the present. An old _ct_ becomes _ht_ in A.S., and _ght_ in M.E.

Here belong: _leye_, also _leggen_, to lay, pt. _layde_, _leyde_; _recche_, to reck, pt. _roghte_, _roughte_; _seye_, pt. _seide_, _saide_; _s[=e]ke_, pt. _soghte_, _soughte_; _selle_, pt. _solde_; _strecche_, pt. _straughte_. Also _bye_, Kentish _begge_ (in the comp. _abegge_), to buy, pt. _boghte_, _boughte_; _werche_, to work, pt. _wroghte_, _wroughte_ (by metathesis for _worghte_). In a few words a radical _n_ has disappeared before _h_ (M.E. _gh_) in the past tense: as in _bringe_, pt. _broghte_, _broughte_; _thinke_, to seem, pt. _thoughte_ (thuuht[*e]); _thenke_, to think, pt. _thoghte_, _thoughte_ (thaoht[*e], th[`o]uht[*e]).

_R[=e]che_, to reach, _t[=e]che_, to teach, properly belong to conj. 2; but their past tenses became _raughte_, _taughte_, so that they seem to belong here.

The preceding examples give most of the more important weak verbs; others can be found in the Glossary.

Verbs of French origin seldom take _-ede_ in the pt. t., as in the case of _aqueyntede_; the usual suffix is _-ed_ or _-de_, or both; as _crye_, to cry, pt. _cry-ed_, _cry-de_; _espye_, pt. _espy-ed_, _espy-de_.

The pp. results from the pt. t. by omitting final _-e_; if the pt. t. ends in _-ed_, the pp. coincides with it.

NOTE. Some verbs have both strong and weak forms; thus _abreyde_ has the str. pt. t. _abrayd_, and the weak pt. t. _abrayde_. More striking examples occur in _cr[=e]pe_, to creep, pt. _creep_, _crepte_, pp. _cropen_; _sl[=e]pe_, to sleep, pt. t. _sleep_ and _slepte_; _wepe_, to weep, pt. t. _weep_ and _wepte_. _Drede_, _rede_, once strong verbs, are weak in Chaucer; pt. t. _dredde_, _dradde_, _redde_, _radde_. _Cleve_, to cleave, has the weak pt. t. _clefte_, and the strong pp. _cloven_. _Broided_ is a curious substitution for _broiden_, the true pp. of _breyde_ (A.S. _bregdan_). _Werien_, to wear, is a weak verb of the 1st class; hence the true pt. t. is _werede_, _wered_, as in Chaucer. The mod. E. _wore_ is a new formation.

s. 93. SOME OTHER VERBS. _Haven_, _have_, _han_, to have; pt. t. _hadde_, also _hade_; pp. _had_. A weak verb; often used as auxiliary.

_Doon_, _don_, to do. Pres. indic. 1. _do_, 2. _doost_, 3. _dooth_ or _doth_; pl. _doon_, _don_. Pres. subj. _do_; pl. _doon_, _don_. Imper. _do_; pl. _dooth_, _doth_. Pp. _doon_, _don_. Pt. t. _dide_ (weak). Gerund, _to done_.

_Goon_, _gon_, _go_, to go. Pres. indic. 1. _go_, 2. _goost_ or _g[=o]st_, 3. _gooth_ or _g[=o]th_, also _geeth_ and _gas_ (Northern); pl. _goon_, _gon_, _go_. Imper. _go_; pl. _gooth_. Pp. _goon_, _gon_, _go_; also _geen_ (Northern). The pt. t. is supplied by _yede_ or _wente_.

_Wol_, I will. Pres. indic. 1. _wol_ (_wil_, also written _wole_); 2. _wolt_, _wilt_; 3. _wol_ (also written _wole_), _wil_; pl. _wollen_, _woln_, _wole_, _wol_. Pt. _wolde_. Pp. _wold_.

THE VERB SUBSTANTIVE. Infin. _been_, _ben_, _be_. Pres. indic. 1. _am_[70], 2. _art_, 3. _is_; pl. _been_, _ben_, _be_, _beth_, rarely _aren_, _are_. Pres. subj. _be_; pl. _been_, _be_. Imp. _be_; pl. _beeth_, _beth_. Pp. _been_, _ben_, _be_. Gerund, _to bene_. Pt. t. 1. _was_, 2. _were_, 3. _was_; pl. _weren_, _were_, _wer_. Pt. t. subj.; _were_; pl. _weren_, _were_.

ANOMALOUS VERBS (Praeterito-praesentia).

CAN. Pres. indic. 1. _can_, 2. _canst_, 3. _can_; pl. _connen_, _conne_, sometimes _can_. Pres. subj. _conne_; pl. _connen_, _conne_. Infin. _conne_. Pt. t. _coude_, _couthe_, could, knew. Pp. _coud_, _couth_.

DAR. Pres. indic. 1. _dar_, 2. _darst_, 3. _dar_; pl. _dar_. Pt. t. _dorste_, _durste_. Gerund, _to durre_.

MAY. Pres. indic. 1. _may_, 2. _mayst_, 3. _may_; pl. _mowen_, _mowe_. Pres. subj. _mowe_, _mow_. Pt. t. _mighte_. Infin. _mowen_.

MOOT. Pres. indic. 1. _moot_ (_m[=o]t_), 2. _most_, 3. _moot_ (_m[=o]t_); pl. _moten_, _mote_. Pres. subj. _mote_ (but often written _moot_ or _mot_). Pt. t. _moste_.

OW. Pres. indic. 1. _ow_ (?), 2. _owest_, 3. _oweth_; pl. _owen_. Pt. t. _oghte_, _oughte_.

SHAL. Pres. indic. 1. _shal_, 2. _shalt_, 3. _shal_; pl. _shullen_, _shuln_, _shul_ (or _shal_). Pt. t. _sholde_, _shulde_.

THAR. Pres. indic. _thar_, impersonal. Pt. t. _thurfte_, _hurte_, impersonal.

WOOT. Pres. indic. 1. _w[`o][`o]t_ (_wot_), 2. _w[`o][`o]st_ (_wost_), 3. _w[`o][`o]t_ (_wot_); pl. _witen_, _wite_, also _woot_ (incorrectly). Pres. subj. _wite_. Infin. _witen_, _wite_; also _weten_. Pt. t. _wiste_. Pp. _wist_.

s. 94. NEGATIVE FORMS. _Ne_, not, is prefixed to some verbal forms, and coalesces with them.

Ex. _nam_, for _ne am_; _nart_, for _ne art_; _nis_, for _ne is_; _nas_, for _ne was_; _nere_, for _ne were_. _Nadde_, ne hadde; _nadstow_, ne haddest thou; _nath_, ne hath. _Nil_, ne wil; _niltow_, ne wilt thou; _nolde_, ne wolde. _Noot_, ne woot; _niste_, ne wiste. We even find _nacheveth_ written for _ne acheveth_; &c. Cf. _nof_, for _ne of_; _nin_ for _ne in_.

s. 95. ADVERBS.

Some adverbs are formed by adding _-e_ to the adjectival form; as _d[=e]p-e_, deeply, from _deep_, A 129; _loud-e_, loudly, from _loud_, A 714. Hence, beside the usual forms _heer_, here, _ther_, there, _wher_, where, _eek_, eke, we find the anomalous forms _her-e_, _ther-e_, _wher-e_, _ek-e_; which we should hardly expect. So also _moste_, E 1714, F 1622, as well as _most_; probably because the word _the_ precedes, which suggested the definite adjectival form, though the word is really used adverbially. Other double forms are _thanne_, _than_, then; _whanne_, _whan_, when. Amongst other forms in _-e_ may be mentioned: _asyde_, _atwinne_, _bihinde_, _bisyde_, _bothe_, _nouthe_, _ofte_, _selde_, _sone_. Remarkable forms are _ther-fore_, _wher-fore_ (see Stratmann). Some forms result from loss of _n_, as _aboute_ from _abouten_; so also _above_, _bifore_ (also _biforn_), _henne_, _inne_, _withoute_; cf. _binethen_, _sithen_.

Many adverbs are characterised by the suffix _-es_; as _agates_, _amiddes_, _amonges_, _bisydes_, _bitymes_, _elles_, _nedes_, _togidres_, _unnethes_. So also _hennes_, _thennes_, _whennes_; _ones_, _twyes_, _thryes_. The gen. suffix _-es_ appears clearly in _his thankes_, A 1626.

Some adverbs have an internal _-e-_, which is not found in A.S., as in _bold-e-ly_, A.S. _bealdl[=i]ce_; and this _-e-_ counts as a syllable. So also _nedely_, D 968 (but _n[=e]d(e)l['y]_ in B 4434); _softely_, E 323; _trewely_, A 773. So also _semely_, _rudeliche_.

Other noteworthy adverbs are: _bet_, better; _fer_, far, comparative _ferre_; _negh_, nigh, _neer_, _ner_, nearer; _leng_, _lenger_, longer; _mo_, more; _more_, more; _uppe_, up.

s. 96. PREPOSITIONS AND CONJUNCTIONS.

These are given in the Glossary. We may note the occasional use of the form _til_ (usually Northern) for _to_, chiefly before a vowel. Also the use of _ne ... ne_ for neither ... nor; _other ... other_, either ... or; _what ... what_, partly ... partly; _what for ... and_, both for ... and; _what with ... and_, both by ... and.

s. 97. CONSTRUCTIONS. Amongst unusual constructions we may particularly note the position of _with_, when used adverbially. In such a case, it is immediately subjoined to the verb, instead of being separated from it as in mod. E. Ex. 'to _shorte with_ your weye,' to shorten your way with, A 791; 'to helen with this hauk,' to heal this hawk with, F 641.

Another remarkable construction is seen in such a phrase as 'The kinges meting Pharao,' the dream of king Pharaoh; see note to F 209.

At the beginning of a sentence _ther_ frequently means 'where'; it makes all the difference to the sense.

s. 98. VERSIFICATION.

The structure of English versification has been much obscured by the use of classical terms in senses for which they are ill-adapted, and by artificial and wooden systems of prosody which obscure the natural pronunciation of sentences. In order to prevent all obscurity, the terms employed shall be carefully defined.

STRONG AND WEAK SYLLABLES. An accented syllable is _strong_, An unaccented syllable is _weak_. A syllable that bears a secondary or a slight emphasis is _half-strong_. A very weak or slightly pronounced syllable is _light_.

Examples. In the words _light_, _alight_, _lighter_, the syllable _light_ is, in each case, 'strong'; the syllables _a-_ and _-er_ are 'weak.' Chaucer sometimes uses such a word as _light-e_, in which the final _-e_ may constitute a syllable of the verse, in which case it is 'weak'; or it may be elided or nearly elided before a vowel, in which case it may conveniently be described as being 'light.' In such a word as _c['o]nquer[`o]r_, there are really two accents. The true 'strong' accent is now on the first syllable; the 'half-strong' or secondary accent is on the third syllable; and it is not unusual to denote this by the use of an acute accent for the strong, and grave accent for the half-strong syllable.

s. 99. THREE LATIN TERMS. A word such as _alight_ is often described as constituting an 'iambus' or 'iamb'; and I shall sometimes here use this term, but under protest. An iambus is properly a short syllable followed by a long one; whereas the English iamb is a weak syllable followed by a strong one, which is a very different thing. The confusion between _length_ in Latin verses and _strength_ in English verses is pernicious, and has greatly misled many writers on metre; for the difference between them is fundamental.

In the same way, such a word as _lighter_ may be called a 'trochee'; but it must never be forgotten that, in English poetry, it means a strong syllable followed by a weak one, and is independent of the notion of 'length.'

Similarly, such a word as _alighted_, in which a strong syllable is situated between two weak ones, may be called an 'amphibrach.' The amphibrach plays a highly important part in English verse, though it is usual not to mention it at all. I shall use these three terms, _iamb_, _trochee_, and _amphibrach_, only occasionally, and for the convenience of the names; it being now well understood that I merely mean such groups of strong and weak syllables as occur in the English words _alight_, _lighter_, and _alighted_.

Having thus explained that an 'iamb' has nothing to do with long and short syllables, I shall nevertheless use, to denote it, the ordinary symbol v -. Similarly, the symbol - v means a trochee; and the symbol v - v means an amphibrach. It follows that v here means, not a _short_, but a _weak_ syllable; and - here means, not a _long_, but a _strong_ one. If this be remembered, all will be clear; but not otherwise.

s. 100. I shall attempt, first, to describe the versification of the lines in the Canterbury Tales; it will be easy to explain the shorter lines (of four accents) afterwards.

SPEECH-WAVES. In English, accent plays a very important part; and for this reason, we may consider English speech as consisting of a succession of utterances which form, as it were, speech-waves, in which each wave or jet of breath contains a strong syllable; and this strong syllable may either stand alone, or may be preceded or followed by a weak syllable, or may even be both preceded and followed by a weak syllable during the emission of the same jet of breath[71].

Thus each jet of breath, due to a slight impulse emitting inhaled air, may be denoted by -, or by v -, or by - v, or by v - v. That is, the words _light_, _alight_, _lighted_, _alighted_ can all be produced in a single speech-wave. But if a word has _two_ accents, it requires two impulses to utter it, and really contains two speech-waves. Such words are extremely common; as _c['o]nque-r[`o]r_, _am['a]l-gam[`a]te_, &c.; and many English words require _three_ speech-waves, as _ins[`o]l-ub['i]li-t[`y]_; or even _four_, as _[`i]n-comb[`u]sti-b['i]li-t[`y]_.

s. 101. Here comes in the distinction between prose and verse. It is equally easy to describe the accentual structure of either; and it is readily perceived that, in prose, the speech-waves succeed each other so that there is, usually, no perceptible regularity in the distribution of strong and weak syllables; but, in verse, we expect them to be distributed in a manner sufficiently regular for the ear to recognise some law of recurrence, and to expect it.

An extremely regular line occurs in Goldsmith's Deserted Village:--

And-f['o]ols, who-c['a]me to-sc['o]ff, rem['a]ined to-pr['a]y.

This obviously consists of five consecutive iambs, and may be denoted by: v - . v - . v - . v - . v -. Here the dot (.) is introduced to shew precisely where the natural pause in the voice, or the separation of the speech-waves, occurs.

It is usual, in books of prosody, to introduce a bar instead of a dot, and thus to break up the line into bits of equal length, and to exhibit the result as the Procrustean formula to which all lines of five accents should be reduced. There is little to be learnt from this wooden method, which amounts to little more than leaving the reader to find out the scansion for himself as he best may; for few lines really conform to it.

If, bidding adieu to this artificial system, we inquire into the way in which a good reader really articulates the lines, we find that he, following the poet, is so far from conforming to this uniform type of line, that he usually does his best to avoid it; and the more skilfully he does this, the more he is appreciated for his variety. Indeed, the number of possible variations is considerable, as Goldsmith may again teach us, if, instead of using a bar to denote the _artificial_ pause, we use a dot to denote the _natural_ and the _actual_ one. Good examples occur in the following lines, all different in their effect. Observe that the hyphen is used to bring together words that are pronounced in a single speech-wave; for just as _c['o]nque.r['o]r_ requires _two_ jets of breath, it often happens that two words (one of them enclitic) can be uttered in _one_.

How-['o]ften . h['a]ve-I . pa['u]s'd . on-['e]v'ry . ch['a]rm,
The-sh['e]lter'd . cot . the-c['u]lti.v[`a]ted . f['a]rm,
The-n['e]ver . fa['i]ling . br['o]ok . the-b['u]sy . m['i]ll.

These may be analysed as below.

v - v . - v . - . v - v . -
v - v . - . v - v . - v . -
v - v . - v . - . v - v . -

These three lines are obviously different, and all differ from the line already quoted.

If, however, we now remove the dots, all four lines can be included in the same formula: v - v - v - v - v -. And this is what is really meant (or ought to be meant) by saying that Goldsmith's line consists of five iambic feet; the general type v - being called an iambic foot.

s. 102. As the use of dots, as above, is rather confusing, we might employ the usual bars instead; assigning to them natural instead of artificial positions. But it will be better, under the circumstances, to employ special types. I shall use ¯¯ to denote a strong syllable, and ¯ to denote a half-strong syllable. Then, if the weak syllable be denoted by a thin up-stroke or down-stroke, we have |¯ to denote an iamb; ¯| for a trochee; and |¯| for an amphibrach; and the four lines from Goldsmith may be thus scanned[72]:--

And-fools, who-came to-scoff, remained to-pray. |¯ |¯ |¯ |¯ |¯
How-often have-I paused on-every charm, |¯| ¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯¯
The-sheltered cot, the culti.vated farm, |¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯| ¯¯
The never . failing brook, the-busy mill. |¯| ¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯¯

In every case an upstroke is followed by a horizontal one, i.e. a weak syllable by a strong one, but the general effect is variable, and is easily caught by the eye. This method at once detects a real recurrence of a line cast in precisely the same mould. Thus the line--'For-talking age and-whispering lovers made' is to be scanned: |¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯| ¯¯ and thus closely resembles the _third_ of the above lines, being denoted by the same formula.

s. 103. When we come to apply a similar system of scansion to Chaucer, we find that he differs from Goldsmith in FOUR important particulars. This is because he followed, more immediately, the rules of verse as exhibited in the Old French metres. I quote the following from P. Toynbee's Specimens of Old French, p. liii:--

'In ten-syllabled lines [i.e. in lines of five accents] the pause or caesura is after the fourth syllable:--

Mors est Rollanz, | Deus en ad Panme es cielz.

At the caesura, and also at the end of the line, a feminine syllable [i.e. a weak or light additional syllable] is admissible, which does not count, even if it is not elided. It is thus possible to have no less than four different forms of ten-syllabled epic lines, all equally correct; viz.

(_a_) Plurent lur filz | lur frer[:e]s, lur nevulz.

(_b_) Encuntre ter_re_ | se pasment li plusur.

(_c_) A lur chevals | unt toleit[:e]s les sel_[:e]s_.

(_d_) Cons fut de Ro_m[:e]_ | del mielz qui donc i er_[:e]t_.'

Here, in (_b_) and (_d_), there is an _additional_ syllable at the caesura or _middle pause_; and, in (_c_) and (_d_) there is an additional syllable at the end of the line. Hence the number of syllables is, in (_a_), _ten_; in (_b_) and (_c_), _eleven_; and in (_d_) _twelve_. But the number of accents is the same in all, viz. _five_. It is therefore better to speak of these lines as containing _five accents_ than to call them _ten-syllabled_ lines.

All the above varieties are found in Chaucer; and we thus see TWO of the particulars in which he differs from Goldsmith, viz. (1) that he sometimes introduces an additional syllable at the end of the line; and (2) that he does the same after the caesura, or at what may (roughly) be called the end of the half-line.

s. 104. But the fact is that Old French verse admits of more licences than the above. It was also permissible for the poet (besides _adding_ to the line at the _end_) to _subtract_ from it at the _beginning_, viz. by omitting the first weak syllable at the beginning, or the first weak syllable in the second half-line; i.e. after the caesura. This accounts for TWO MORE particulars of variation from the modern line of Goldsmith.

The result is that the Old French verse absolutely exhibited no less than sixteen varieties; and the actual number of syllables varied from eight (the least) to twelve (the greatest number). Dr. Schipper gives the true scheme in his Englische Metrik, p. 440, as follows; where the number _following_ each scheme expresses the number of syllables.

I. Chief forms.

1. v - v - | v - v - v - 10.
2. v - v - v | v - v - v - 11.
3. v - v - | v - v - v - v 11.
4. v - v - v | v - v - v - v 12.

II. Without the first syllable.

5. - v - | v - v - v - 9.
6. - v - v | v - v - v - 10.
7. - v - | v - v - v - v 10.
8. - v - v | v - v - v - v 11.

III. Syllable dropped after the caesura.

9. v - v - | - v - v - 9.
10. v - v - v | - v - v - 10.
11. v - v - | - v - v - v 10.
12. v - v - v | - v - v - v 11.

IV. Two syllables dropped.

13. - v - | - v - v - 8.
14. - v - v | - v - v - 9.
15. - v - | - v - v - v 9.
16. - v - v | - v - v - v 10.

s. 105. Thus Chaucer had, unquestionably, sixteen forms of verse to choose from. It only remains to discover how many of these he actually employed.

The shortest answer is, that he freely accepted the principles of adding a syllable at the end of the line and at the end of the half-line. He also allowed himself to accept the principle of dropping the first syllable of the line[73]. But he disliked forms 9, 11, 13, and 15, which introduce a most disagreeable jerk into the middle of the line, such as he very rarely allows[74].

s. 106. The general rules for the mode of reading Chaucer's lines have been given above (s. 67); and need not be here repeated.

I now subjoin some examples. In each case the prefixed number refers to one of the sixteen forms given in s. 104; whilst the symbols following the lines give the natural method of scansion. Words joined by hyphens are pronounced in the same jet of breath. I may also note here that a trochee is sometimes substituted for an iamb, i.e. ¯| for |¯; especially at the beginning of a line, or of the latter half-line. The place of the caesura is denoted by a bar. A shorter down-stroke than usual signifies a _light_ syllable, as defined in s. 98. The following examples are from Group A of the Canterbury Tales:--

12. Wh['a]n-that Apr['i]ll[:e] | with his-sh['o]ures s['o]te (1).
¯| |¯| . ¯ |¯| ¯|
4. The-dr['o]ght' of-M['a]rch[:e] | hath-p['e]rced t['o] the-r['o]te.
|¯ |¯' . |¯| ¯ |¯|
1. Of-wh['i]ch vert['u] | eng['e]ndred ['i]s the-fl['o]ur (4).
|¯ |¯ . |¯| ¯ |¯
3. Hath-['i]n the-R['a]m | his-h['a]lfe c['o]urs y-r['o]nne (8).
|¯ |¯ . |¯| ¯¯ |¯|
10. That-fr['o] the-t['y]me | th['a]t he-f['i]rst big['a]n (44).
|¯ |¯| . ¯ |¯ |¯
2. Whan-th['e]y were-w['o]nne | and-['i]n the-Gr['e]te S['e]e.
|¯ |¯ . |¯ |¯| ¯¯
14. ['A]l bism['o]t'red | w['i]th his-h['a]ber. ge['o]un (76).
¯¯ |¯| . ¯ |¯| ¯¯
6. Th['a]t no-dr['o]pe | ne-f['i]ll' up['o]n hir-br['e]st (131).
¯ |¯' . |¯ |¯ |¯
7. G['i]nglen ['i]n | a-wh['i]stling w['i]nd as-cl['e]re[75] (170).
¯| ¯ . |¯| ¯¯ |¯|
16. F['o]r to-d['e]len | w['i]th no-sw['i]ch por['a]ille (247).
¯¯ |¯| . ¯ |¯ |¯|
5. N['o][:e]s fl['o]od | com'-w['a]lwing ['a]s the-s['e]e (3616).
¯| ¯¯ . |¯| ¯ |¯

We have here examples of many of the above forms, viz. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 14, 16; sufficient to shew Chaucer's general conformity with his French models.

s. 107. But a very superficial examination of Chaucer's verse soon shews that he continually sets aside the rigid rule of the Old French prosody that regulated the position of the medial pause. His study of Italian soon shewed him a better way; for there is a great tendency to monotony in the French mode. Dante frequently includes _three_ accents in the former part of his line, which gives much greater freedom to the verse. Thus l. 14 of the Divina Commedia is as follows:--

L[`a]-ove terminava | quella valle. |¯| ¯| ¯| . ¯| ¯|

Consequently, we must allow the bar denoting the caesura to shift its position to a later place in the line, as in A 3; though we may still use Dr. Schipper's number, as above, to denote the general type of the line. That is, A 3 becomes:--

Cf. 2. And-b['a]thed ['e]v'ry v['e]yn[:e] | in-sw['i]ch lic['o]ur.
|¯| ¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯

But this is not the only variety; for the mark denoting the caesura is actually inserted in the Ellesmere MS. with much care, and is seldom misplaced. This shews that some lines are divided much more unequally; so that, in fact, the former portion of the line may contain _one_ accent only, or it may contain _four_; in addition to the above instances in which it contains _two_ or _three_. I give examples from the Cant. Tales, Group A:--

12. And-sh['o]rtly | wh['a]n the-s['o]nne w['a]s to-r['e]ste (30).
|¯ . ¯¯ |¯| ¯¯ |¯|
10. And-['a]fter | ['a]mor u['i]ncit ['o]mni.['a] (162).
|¯| . ¯| ¯| ¯| ¯¯
3. And th['u]s | with-f['e]yned fl['a]te.r['y]' and-j['a]pes (705).
|¯ . |¯| ¯| ¯¯ |¯|
3. Arc['i]t' is-h['u]rt as-m['u]ch' as-h['e] | or-m['o]re (1116).
|¯ |¯ |¯ |¯ . |¯|

In some places the Ellesmere MS. marks _two_ pauses in a line, but we need only consider one of them as constituting the true caesura. Thus, in A 923, there is a mark after _been_ and another after _duchesse_; the latter may be considered as subsidiary.

The occurrence of initial portions of a line containing _one_ accent or _four_ is comparatively rare; but the inclusion of _three_ accents is very common.

s. 108. The addition of a weak syllable at the end of a line is easily explained. It is because, at this point, the poet is FREE; that is, the pause that naturally occurs there enables him to insert an additional syllable with ease. Shakespeare did not hesitate even to add _two_ syllables there, if he was so minded; as in Rich. III. iii. 6. 9:--'Untainted, unexamin'd, free, at liberty.'

For a like reason, the medial pause likewise gives him freedom, and enables an additional syllable to be inserted with comparative ease. We may believe that, in old times, when poetry was recited by minstrels to large assemblies, the enunciation of it was slow and deliberate, and the pauses were longer than when we now read it to a friend or to ourselves. The importance attached to suffixes denoting inflexions tends to prove this. The minstrel's first business was to be understood. Many speakers speak too fast, and make too short pauses, till experience teaches them better.

Hence there is _no need_ to elide a vowel at the caesura; it must therefore be sounded clearly. In A 2, the final _-e_ in _March-e_ should be fully pronounced.

The fact is made much clearer by observing such instances as the following, all from the Cant. Tales, Group B:--

Or-['e]lles c['e]rt[:e]s | ye b['e]en to d['a]un.ger[`o]us (2129).
|¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
Which-th['a]t my-f['a]der | in-h['i]s prosp['e]r.it['e]e (3385).
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
That-g['o]d of-h['e]ven | had d['o]m.in['a].ci['o]un (3409).
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
To-M['e]des [`a]nd to-P['e]rses y['e]ven | quod-h['e] (3425).
|¯| ¯ |¯| ¯| . |¯
O['u]t-of his-d['o]r[:e]s | an['o]n he-h['a]th him-d['i]ght (3719).
¯| |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯

In the same way, the inflexional final _-e_ should be fully sounded in Group B, l. 102:--

If-th['o]u noon-['a]sk[:e] | with-n['e]d' art['o]w so-w['o]unded.
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯|

So also in B 1178:--

N['a]y-by my-f['a]der s['o]ul[:e] | that-sh['a]l he-n['a]t.
¯| |¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯

Similar examples abound. Thus we should fully pronounce _length-e_, B 8; _declar-e_, B 1672; _loud-e_, B 1803; _thought-e_, B 1852; _fynd-e_, B 3112; _raft-e_, B 3288; _hadd-e_, B 3309; _biraft-e_, B 3404; _son-e_, B 3413; _son-e_, B 3593; _shet-te_, B 3615; _wend-e_, B 3637.

Notice some examples where the caesura necessarily preserves a final _-e_ from elision, as in B 3989; where _tal-e_ occurs before _al_. So also _ensamp-le_ in B 3281. Similar instances are rather numerous.

s. 109. The student who has followed the explanation of Chaucer's scansion up to this point is now in a position to understand the whole mystery of additional syllables in other positions. According to the usual method of cutting up lines into 'feet,' such additional syllables make the line seem awkward; whereas, if properly handled, they are very acceptable.

Thus the line B 3385 used to be cut up after the following fashion--Which that | my fa | der in his | prosper | itee; and the third foot was called trisyllabic. Yet the truth is, that the syllable _-der_ in _fader_ really belongs to the former part of the line (for we cannot pause after _fa-_), and therefore belongs to the 'second foot'; and it would have been better to cut up the line accordingly. But the whole system of chopping up into imaginary equal lengths is inefficient and clumsy; and we have only to adopt a natural accentuation. Thus, in B 3368 (just below), the final _-y_ in _many_ causes no real difficulty, though it adds a syllable to the line:--

And-y['a]f him-w['i]t | and-th['a]n with-m['a]ny a-t['e]re.
|¯ |¯ . |¯ |¯' |¯|

So again, in B 3105, the final _-es_ in _ell-es_ is easily sounded:--

Or-['e]ll[:e]s I-['a]m but-l['o]st | but-['i]f that-I.
|¯' |¯ |¯ . |¯ |¯

Compare Sir Thopas, B 2097:--

And-th['e]r-in st['i]ked | a-l['i]ly fl['o]ur.
|¯| ¯| . |¯| ¯¯

The poet's chief business, in such a case, is to see to it, that the syllable thus inserted shall be a light one, in order to prevent the line from becoming clogged. Chaucer is very particular about this; and we shall find that he almost invariably employs, in such a position, such light syllables as these; viz. _-e_ before a consonant, and _-ed_, _-el_, _-en_, _-er_, _-es_, often before a vowel. This is a matter which requires a good ear and skilful care; which he certainly possessed. Even at the caesura, it will be found that he usually inserts only light syllables of this character, and the effect is extremely good. A beautiful example occurs in A 2144:--

As-['a]ny r['a]v'nes f['e]ther | it-sh['o]on for-bl['a]k.
|¯| ¯| ¯' . |¯ |¯

We may also compare B 1659:--

Thou-r['a]vi.sed[`e]st | doun-fr['o] the-d['e].it['e]e.
|¯' |¯ . |¯ |¯ |¯

Also D 334:--

A-m['a]n to-l['i]ght' his-c['a]ndle | at-h['i]s lant['e]rne.
|¯ |¯ |¯' . |¯ |¯|

s. 110. We have now to consider the possibility, that Chaucer sometimes dropped the initial syllable of the _latter_ part of a line, after the caesura; a licence of which Lydgate availed himself to a painful extent. It is clear that his ear disliked it; yet there seem to be just a few cases that cannot fairly be explained away, the MSS. being sadly unanimous. It is better to learn the truth than to suppress what we should ourselves dislike. One example occurs in E 1682:--

My-t['a]l is-d['o]on | f['o]r my-w['i]t is-th['i]nne
|¯ |¯ . ¯ |¯ |¯|

The two worst MSS. alter _doon_ to _don-e_, which is impossible. The rest agree.

Another occurs in B 2141:--

I-m['e]n' of-M['a]rk | M['a]thew, L['u]k, and-I['o]hn.
|¯ |¯ . ¯| ¯¯ |¯

Four MSS. have a tag after the _k_ in _Mark_; hence I have printed _Mark-e_. But I fear it can hardly be justified.

Lines B 3384, 3535 are unsatisfactory. Line E 2240, which is obviously incomplete, is easily mended.

s. 111. ACCENTUATION. The above sections explain most of the more difficult points in the scansion of Chaucer, and should enable the student to scan most of the lines. But it is necessary to add a few words as regards his system of accentuation, elision, contraction, and other noteworthy points.

ACCENT. Most words of native origin are to be accented as in modern English; as _f['a]der_, _wr['y]ting_, _h['o]lier_, _pl['o]wman_, _['u]pright_, _ar['y]sen_, _alm['i]ghty_, _mish['a]p_. In words like _s['e]emli[`e]ste_, _o['u]tryd[`e]re_, the secondary accent was stronger than at present, especially when the final _-e_ was sounded.

But many compound words, and some others, have a variable accent, being also used with an accent on a later syllable than in modern English; as, _answ['e]re_, _forh['e]ed_, _upr['i]ght_, _manh['o]od_, _wind['o]we_, _gladn['e]sse_, _godd['e]sse_, _wryt['i]ng_, _bod['y]_. This usage is frequent, and must always be borne in mind.

Words of French origin commonly have their accent on a later syllable than at present; as _vict['o]rie_, _hon['o]ur_, _pit['e]e_, _vert['u]_, _mir['a]cle_, _nat['u]re_, _man['e]re_, _contr['a]rie_, _[`i]mposs['i]ble_, _[`a]ccept['a]ble_, _d[`e]ceyv['a]ble_; and even _adv['o]cat_, _d[`e]sir['o]us_. Such accents are usually due to the etymology; cf. Lat. _uert['u]tem_, _nat['u]ra_.

But as the English method inclined towards throwing the accent further back, such words were peculiarly liable to receive an English accent; hence we also find _h['o]nour_, _p['i]tee_, _v['e]rtu_, _n['a]ture_, _m['a]nere_; and, in general, the English habit has so prevailed in modern speech, that the original accentuation of these words has been lost. It must evidently be restored, for the purpose of reading Chaucer aright.

This change of accent even affected the number of syllables. Thus _man['e]r[:e]_ is trisyllabic, but _m['a]nere_ is dissyllabic. In the latter case the scribes frequently write _maner_; but are not consistent in this. Hence the fact has to be remembered.

Words now ending in _-ion_ end, in Chaucer, in _-i-[`o]un_, which is dissyllabic, with a secondary accent on _-oun_. Cases in which the suffix _-ioun_ is melted, as it were, into one syllable, are very rare; however, we find _cond['i]cion_ for _condici-oun_ in B 99; and _religioun_ in G 427 is really _rel['i]gion_. As this agrees with the modern method, it is readily understood.

s. 112. ELISION. The general rules for elision and the slurring of light syllables are given above, in s. 67. For examples of elision of final _-e_, see _droght'_, A 2; _couth'_, A 14; _nyn'_, A 24; _['a]ventur'_, A 25; _tym'_, A 35; _Alisaundr'_, A 51; _Gernad'_, A 56; _n['o]bl'_, A 60; _mek'_, A 69; _lat'_, A 77; _whyt'_, A 90; _long'_, A 93; _sitt'_, A 94; _Iust'_, A 96; _purtr['e]y'_, A 96; _coud'_, A 106[76].

We must here particularly note the article _the_, which is very often elided before a word beginning with a vowel or mute _h_. Hence the scribes frequently write _theffect_ for _the effect_, _tharray_, _thonour_ for _the hon['o]ur_, and so on. Even if they write _the effect_ as two words, we must often read them as one. In one case, we even find _the_ thus treated before an aspirated _h_, as in _th'harneys_, A 2896; however, _harneys_ is, after all, of French origin.

Much more curious is the similar treatment of the pronoun _thee_; as in _thalighte_ for _thee alighte_, B 1660. Also, of the pronoun _me_; as in _d['o] m'endyte_, G 32; see _M'_ in the Glossary, p. 157.

_Ne_ is usually elided; cf. _nis_, _nam_, _nat_, _nin_, _nof_, &c., in the Glossary; but not in A 631, 3110.

Even unaccented _o_ can be elided; in fact, it is very common in the case of the word _to_; so that the scribes often write _tabyde_ for _to abyde_, and the like. This vowel is easily run on to another, as in Italian poetry, without counting as a syllable; as in _So est['a]tly_[77], A 281; cf. _Plac['e]bo answ['e]rde_, E 1520.

s. 113. The vowel _i_ blends so easily with a following vowel that we feel no surprise at finding _f['u]rial_ used, practically, as a dissyllable (F 448); _mer['i]dion[`a]l_ treated as if it had but four syllables (F 263); and _sp['e]ciall[`y]_ as if it had but three (A 15). A similar slurring is easily perceived with regard to the _o_ in _['a]morousl[`y]_ (E 1680) and the _u_ in _n['a]turell[`y]_ (B 298). The reader of English poetry must be quite familiar with similar usages. _V['a]l-er-y['a]n_, instead of _Val['e]rian_, in G 350, is a little forced. In many cases of difficulty, the accent is marked in the Glossary.

s. 114. SUPPRESSION OF SYLLABLES. We find, not only in Chaucer, but elsewhere, that _light_ or _very weak_ syllables do not always count for the scansion; so that, whilst, on the one hand, we can read _C['a]unterb[`u]ry_ as four syllables, with a secondary accent on _u_ (as in A 27), there is no difficulty in pronouncing it, as many do, as if it were _C['a]unterb'r[`y]_, with the secondary accent on the _y_ (as in A 16, A 22)[78]. It seems hardly necessary to enlarge upon this part of the subject; it is sufficient to say that mere counting of syllables will not explain the scansion of English poetry. Accent reigns supreme, and the strong syllables overpower the weak ones, even to the extent of suppressing them altogether.

A few common words may be noted, in which the final _-e_ is usually suppressed, and often not written. Such are _hire_, _here_, her; _oure_, _youre_, _myne_, _thyne_; _swiche_, _whiche_, _eche_; _were_; _here_, _there_; _have_, _hadde_; _wolde_, _sholde_ (less frequently); and some others. Even here accent still plays its part. If _here_, her, is emphatic, as at the end of a line, it is dissyllabic; see _Here_ in the Glossary. If _hadde_ is emphatic, meaning 'he possessed,' it is usually dissyllabic; we even find _had-d[:e] he_ (A 298, 386).

_Thise_ (dhiiz) is written as the pl. of _this_; but is always monosyllabic. Similarly, the Ellesmere MS. usually has _hise_ (hiiz) as the plural of the possessive pronoun _his_; but I have altered this to _his_, except in the prose pieces. The pl. of _som_ is written _some_ and _somme_, but is usually monosyllabic (sum).

A good example of the power of accent is in the phrase _At th['a]t tym'_, A 102; where _tym[:e]_ becomes enclitic, and loses its accent and its final _-e_.

In the endings _-ed_, _-el_, _-en_, _-er_, _-es_, as has been already noted, the _e_ may be suppressed, when the final _-l_, _-n_, _-r_ practically become vocalic.

But observe, that the _e_ is also dropped, not unfrequently, even in _-est_, _-eth_; hence _seyst_ for _seyest_, and the like. This requires care, because the final _-eth_ is usually written _in full_, though seldom sounded. In A 1641, _her-eth_ is dissyllabic, and so also is _brek-eth_ in 1642; but in 1643, we have _think'th_ for _thinketh_, and _com'th_ for _cometh_. This is the more remarkable, because it is contrary to modern usage; but note the old habit of contracting the _third person singular_; as in _rit_ for _rydeth_.

Note the dissyllabic _b['a]nish'd_ in A 1725, with the accent on the first syllable; as contrasted with the trisyllabic _des['e]rv-ed_ in A 1726, with the accent on the second.

s. 115. CONTRACTION. Certain contractions need special notice. _This is_ was pronounced as _one_ word, and often written _this_. Whether written _this_ or _this is_, the sense is the same, but the usual pronunciation was _this_ (dhis); see A 1091, E 56, &c.

_Whether_ is usually cut down to _whe'r_, and is frequently written _wher_.

_Benedicite_ once occurs as a word of five syllables, where Theseus drawls it out to express his wonder, A 1785. where else (I believe) it is _ben'cite_, in three syllables only. So also _By'r_ for _by our_, Book Duch. 544; _A godd's halfe_, id. 370.

The phrase _I ne_ at the beginning of a line was very rapidly pronounced, almost as _I n'_ (iin); as in _I n' saugh_, A 764; _I n' seye_, B 1139; so also _Me n'_ (meen) for _Me ne_, Pitee, 105 (see the note).

s. 116. For further details, see Ten Brink's work on Chaucers Sprache und Verskunst. It may be as well to say that he has remarkably failed to understand the effect of the caesura, and is much troubled by the occurrence there of extra syllables. Yet this was the necessary result of Chaucer's copying French models.

The explanation is simple. The caesura implies a pause. But elision can only take place where there is NO pause. Hence the caesural pause ALWAYS prevents elision. Hence, also, there is often a redundant syllable here, just as there is at the end of the line. This is a lesson which the student should learn at once; it is easily verified.

I am aware that this lesson is difficult, being opposed to modern ideas; and it will be long before some readers will come to understand that the final _e_ should be kept in the French word _seg-e_, A 56; in the pp. _wonn-e_, A 59; in the pp. _y-com-e_, A 77; in the pl. _crull-e_, A 81; and so on. It is true that Chaucer, in such cases, usually begins the latter part of the line with a vowel, for the sake of smoothness; but he does not do this invariably; see A 77. Much clearer examples occur in the following (A 84, 130, 184, 198, 224, 343, 491):--

And-w['o]nder.l[`y] del['i]ver and-gr['e]et of-str['e]ngthe.
|¯| ¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯|
Wel-c['o]ud' she-c['a]rie | a-m['o]rsel [`a]nd wel-k['e]pe.
|¯ |¯| . |¯| ¯ |¯|
What-sh['o]ld' he-st['u]die | and m['a]k' him-s['e]lven w['o]od.
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯| ¯¯
His-h['e]ed was-b['a]ll[:e]d | that-sh['o]on as-['a]ny gl['a]s.
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯| ¯¯
Ther-['a]s he-w['i]st[:e] | to-h['a]n a-g['o]od pit['a]unc[:e].
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯|
With['o]ute b['a]k[:e] m['e]t[:e] | was-n['e]v'r his-h['o]us.
|¯| ¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯
[79]W['y]d-was his-p['a]rish' | and-h['o]uses f['e]r as['o]nder.
¯| |¯| . |¯| ¯¯ |¯|

We have noted, however, that Chaucer varied from his French models in making the place of the caesura moveable; and the result was to bring the two portions of each line into closer relationship. Hence he takes great care to make his redundant syllables as light as possible; thus preparing the way for later authors, who came to regard a redundant syllable as a thing to be sparingly used. Moreover, when they did use it, inasmuch as the original value of the caesura was little known, they inserted such a redundant syllable in other positions; in order to avoid monotony.

s. 117. A discussion of the four-accent metre, as in The House of Fame, &c., need not occupy us long. The line is shorter, so that the middle pause is less necessary and of much less account. Hence redundant syllables at the caesura are rare. On the other hand, omission of the first syllable is much commoner. In all other respects the laws are the same.

Two examples of the loss of the initial syllable may suffice.

C['a]useth sw['i]che | dr['e]mes oft[:e] (HF. 35).
¯| ¯| . ¯| ¯|
T['u]rn'-us ['e]v'ry | dr['e]em to-g['o]d[:e] (HF. 58).
¯| ¯| . ¯¯ |¯|

Examples of medial redundant syllables are these:--

I-n['o]ot, but-wh['o]so | of-th['e]se mir['a]cles (HF. 12).
|¯ |¯' . |¯ |¯|
In-st['u]die | or-m[`e]l.anc['o]l.i[`o]us (30).
|¯' . |¯ |¯ |¯
And-wh['e]n she-w['i]ste | that-h['e] was-f['a]ls (393).
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯
Til-th['a]t he-f['e]lte | that-['I] had-h['e]t[:e] (569).
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯|
J['o]y' or-s['o]row' | wher-s['o] hit-b['e] (BD. 10).
¯| |¯| . |¯ |¯
For-c['e]rtes sw['e]t[:e] | I-n['a]m but-d['e]ed (204).
|¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯
To-sl['e]p[:e] | that-r['i]ght up['o]n my-b['o]ok (273).
|¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
That-h['a]dd' y-f['o]low'd | and-c['o]ud' no-g['o]od (390).
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯

Feminine or double rimes are very common. Thus, in HF. 531-546, we have eight such rimes in succession.

s. 118. ALLITERATION. As our oldest poetry was alliterative, alliteration has always been considered a permissible, and indeed a favourite, ornament of English verse. I shall only remark here that Chaucer affords excellent examples of it, and employs it with much skill. One well-known passage in the Knightes Tale (A 2601-16) has often been admired on this account. It is needless to cite more examples. The reader may consult the dissertation on 'The Alliteration of Chaucer,' by C.F. McClumpha; Leipzig, n. d. (about 1886).

s. 119. CHAUCER'S AUTHORITIES. The question as to 'The Learning of Chaucer' is so fully discussed in the second volume of Lounsbury's Studies in Chaucer, that it is unnecessary to say much here upon this subject. The reader will find, in the 'Index of Authors Quoted or Referred to' given at p. 381 below, not only a fairly complete list of such authors, but a detailed enumeration of all the quotations which, with tolerable certainty, have been traced to their origin.

In particular, we cannot but be struck by his familiarity with the Vulgate version of the Bible. He quotes it, as may be seen, very nearly three hundred times, and his quotations refer to nearly all parts of it, including the apocryphal books of Tobit, Judith, Susannah, the Maccabees, and especially Ecclesiasticus. It is somewhat remarkable that the book of the Old Testament which is quoted most frequently is not, as we might expect, the Psalms, but the Book of Proverbs, which was a mine of sententious wealth to the medieval writers. The book of the New Testament which received most of his attention was the Gospel of St. Matthew.

As regards the languages in which Chaucer was skilled, we may first of all observe that, like his contemporaries, he was totally ignorant of Greek. There are some nine or ten quotations from Plato, three from Homer, two from Aristotle, and one from Euripides; but they are all taken at second-hand, through the medium of Boethius. The sole quotation from Herodotus in the Canterbury Tales is copied from Jerome.

On the other hand, Chaucer was remarkable for his knowledge of Italian, in which it does not appear that any other English writer of his period was at all skilled. His obligations to Boccaccio are well known; the Filostrato being the principal source of the long poem of Troilus, whilst the influence of the Teseide appears not only in the Knightes Tale, but in the Parliament of Foules, in Anelida, and (to the extent of five stanzas) in Troilus. We also find a few references, as Dr. K[:o]ppell has shewn, to Boccaccio's Amorosa Visione. With Dante's Divina Commedia he seems to have been especially familiar, as he quotes from all parts of it; we may note, however, that the greatest number of quotations is taken from the Inferno; whilst the only cantos of the Paradiso which he cites are the first, the fourteenth, the twenty-second, and the thirty-third. The poem which most bears the impress of Dante is The House of Fame; in the Canterbury Tales, the principal borrowings from that author appear in the story of Ugolino (in the Monkes Tale); in some of the stanzas of the Invocation at the beginning of the Second Nonnes Tale (one of which bears a remarkable resemblance to a stanza in the Prioresses Tale[80]); and in the very express reference which occurs in the Wife of Bath's Tale (D 1125). Chaucer's sole quotation from the Italian works of Petrarch is in Troilus, where he translates the eighty-eighth Sonnet. It must not be forgotten, at the same time, that Chaucer was further indebted to Boccaccio's Latin works, entitled De Casibus Virorum Illustrium, De Genealogia Deorum, and De Mulieribus Claris. On the other hand, Prof. Lounsbury is perfectly justified in contending that 'there is not the slightest proof that Chaucer had a knowledge of the existence' of the Decameron. Reasonable carefulness will certainly shew that he was wholly ignorant of it; and the notion that Chaucer borrowed the general plan of his Tales from that of his Italian predecessor, is wholly baseless; the plans are, in fact, more remarkable for their divergence than for their similarity. The only apparent point of contact between Chaucer and the Decameron is in the Tale of Griselda; and in this case we know clearly that it was from Petrarch's Latin version, and not from the Italian, that the story was really derived.