Chaucer's Works, Volume 1 — Romaunt of the Rose; Minor Poems — John Shaqi
Chaucer's Works, Volume 1 — Romaunt of the Rose; Minor PoemsChaucer, Geoffrey
General
Chaucer's Works, Volume 1 — Romaunt of the Rose; Minor Poems
Chaucer, Geoffrey
English poetry -- Middle English, 1100-1500
This is clearly the occasion to which Froissart refers in the following
passage. 'About Shrovetide[89], a secret treaty was formed between the two
kings for their ambassadors to meet at Montreuil-sur-Mer; and the king of
England sent to Calais sir Guiscard d'Angle, Sir Richard Sturey, and sir
Geoffrey Chaucer. On the part of the French were the lords de Coucy and de
la Rivieres, sir Nicholas Bragues and Nicholas Bracier. They for a long
time discussed the subject of the above marriage [the marriage of the
French princess with Richard, prince of Wales]; and the French, _as I was
informed_, made some offers, but the others demanded different terms, or
refused treating. These lords returned therefore, with their treaties, to
their sovereigns; and the truces were prolonged to the first of
May.'--Johnes, tr. of Froissart, bk. i. c. 326.
I think Sir H. Nicolas has not given Froissart's meaning correctly.
According to him, 'Froissart states that, in Feb. 1377, Chaucer was joined
with Sir Guichard d'Angle, &c., to negociate a secret treaty for the
marriage of Richard, prince of Wales, with Mary, daughter of the king of
France,' &c.; and that the truce was prolonged till the first of May. And
he concludes that Froissart has confused two occasions, because there
really was an attempt at a treaty about this marriage in 1378 (see below).
It does not appear that Froissart is wrong. He merely gives the date of
about Shrovetide (Feb. 10) as the time when 'a secret treaty was formed';
and this must refer to the ineffectual commission of Feb. 20, 1377. After
this 'the king of England' really sent 'Sir Guiscard d'Angle' in April; and
Chaucer either went with the rest or joined them at Montreuil. Neither does
it appear that discussion of the subject of the marriage arose on the
English side; it was the French who proposed it, but the English who
declined it, for the reason that they had received no instructions to that
effect. On the other hand, the English ambassadors, having been instructed
to treat for peace, procured, at any rate, a short truce. This explanation
seems to me sufficient, especially as Froissart merely wrote what he had
been informed; he was not present himself. The very fact that the marriage
was proposed by the French on this occasion explains how the English came
to consider this proposal seriously in the following year.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account