Chaucer's Works, Volume 5 — Notes to the Canterbury Tales — John Shaqi
Chaucer's Works, Volume 5 — Notes to the Canterbury TalesChaucer, Geoffrey
General
Chaucer's Works, Volume 5 — Notes to the Canterbury Tales
Chaucer, Geoffrey
Chaucer, Geoffrey, -1400. Canterbury tales -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
Tyrwhitt alters _Al_ to _Alle_, meaning no doubt _Al-le_ (dissyllabic),
which would be ungrammatical. For _That_, he has _Thatte_, as if for
_That-te_; whereas _That_ is invariably a monosyllable. For _Gingling_, he
has _Gingeling_, evidently meant to be lengthened out to a trisyllable. For
_For_, he prints _As for_. For _Twenty_, he has _A twenty_. The next line
is untouched; he clearly took _Everich_ to be thoroughly trisyllabic; which
may be doubted. For _In_, he has _All in_. And the same system is applied,
throughout all the Tales. The point is, of course, that the MSS. do not
countenance such corrections, but are almost unanimously obstinate in
asserting the 'imperfection' of the lines[13].
The natural result of altering _twenty_ to _A twenty_ (not only here, but
again in D. 1695), was to induce the belief in students that _A twenty
bookes_ is a Chaucerian idiom. I can speak feelingly, for I believed it for
some years; and I have met with many who have done the same[14]. And the
unfortunate part of the business is, that the restoration of the true
reading shocks the reader's sense of propriety. This is to be regretted,
certainly; but the truth must be told; especially as the true readings of
the MSS. are now, thanks to the Chaucer Society, accessible to many. The
student, in fact, has something to unlearn; and he who is most familiar
with the old texts has to unlearn the most. The restoration of the text to
the form of it given in the seven best MSS. is, consequently, in a few
instances, of an almost revolutionary character; and it is best that this
should be said plainly[15]. [xix]
The editions by Wright and Morris do not repeat the above amendments by
Tyrwhitt; but strictly conform to the Harleian MS. Even so, they are not
wholly correct; for this MS. blunders over two lines out of the seven. It
gives l. 247 in this extraordinary form:--'For to delen with such poraile';
where the omission of _no_ renders all scansion hopeless. And again, it
gives l. 371 in the form:--'Euery man for the wisdom that he can'; which is
hardly pleasing. And in a great many places, the faithful following of this
treacherous MS. has led the editors into sad trouble.
§ 14. THE HARLEIAN MS. The printing of this MS. for the Chaucer Society
enables us to see that Mr. Wright did not adhere so closely to the text of
the MS. as he would have us believe. As many readers may not have the
opportunity of testing this statement for themselves, I here subjoin a few
specimens of lines from this MS., to shew the nature of its errors.
Bet than a lazer or a beggere; A. 242.
So in Wright; for _beggere_ read _beggestére_.
But al that he might gete and his frendes sende; A. 299.
Corrected by Wright.
For eche of hem made othur to Wynne; A. 427.
Wright has 'othur _for_ to wynne.' This is correct; but the word _for_ is
silently supplied, without comment; and so in other cases.
Of his visage children weren aferd; A. 628.
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