I may remark here that the metre is sometimes difficult to follow; chiefly owing to the fact that the line sometimes begins with an accented syllable, just as, in Milton’s L’Allegro, we meet with lines like ‘Zéphyr, with Aurora playing.’ The accented syllables are sometimes indistinctly marked, and hence arises a difficulty in immediately detecting the right flow of a line. A clear instance of a line beginning with an accented syllable is seen in l. 23—‘Slép’, and thús meláncolýë.’
For general remarks on this poem, see p. 64, above.
By consulting ll. 13 and 14, we see that the whole of this poem is supposed to be uttered by a bird on the 14th of February, before sunrise. Lines 1-28 form the proem; the rest give the story of Mars and Venus, followed by the Complaint of Mars at l. 155. The first 22 stanzas are in the ordinary 7-line stanza. The Complaint is very artificial, consisting of an Introductory Stanza, and five Terns, or sets of three stanzas, making sixteen stanzas of nine lines each, or 144 lines Thus the whole poem has 298 lines.
Each tern is occupied with a distinct subject, which I indicate by headings, viz. Devotion to his Love; Description of a Lady in an anxiety of fear and woe; the Instability of Happiness; the story of the Brooch of Thebes; and An Appeal for Sympathy. A correct appreciation of these various ‘movements’ of the Complaint makes the poem much more intelligible.
Title. Gg. has Here begynyth the p ar lement of Foulys; Harl. has The Parlament of Foules; Tn. has The Parlement of Briddis; Trin. has Here foloweth the parlement of Byrdes reducyd to loue, c. We also find, at the end of the poem, such notes as these: Gg. Explicit parliamentum Auium in die sancti Valentini tentum secundum Galfridum Chaucer; Ff. Explicit parliamentum Auium; Tn. Explicit tractatus de Congregacione volucrum die Sancti Valentini; and in MS. Arch. Seld. B. 24—Here endis the parliament of foulis Quod Galfride Chaucere.
In the two MSS., this poem is written as if it were a continuation of the Compleint unto Pity. The printed edition of 1651 has this heading—‘These verses next folowing were compiled by Geffray Chauser, and in the writen copies foloweth at the ende of the complainte of petee.’ This implies that Stowe had seen more than one MS. containing these lines.
However, the poem has nothing to do with the Complaint of Pity; for which reason the lines are here numbered separately, and the title ‘A Compleint to his Lady’ is supplied, for want of a better.
The poem is so badly spelt in Shirley’s MS. (Harl. 78) as quite to obscure its diction, which is that of the fourteenth century. I have therefore re-spelt it throughout, so as to shew the right pronunciation. The Phillipps MS. is merely a copy of the other, but preserves the last stanza.
The printed copy resembles Shirley’s MS. so closely, that both seem to have been derived from a common source. But there is a strange and unaccountable variation in l. 100. The MS. here has—‘For I am sette on yowe in suche manere’; whilst ed. 1561 has—‘For I am set so hy vpon your whele.’ The latter reading does not suit the right order of the rimes; but it points to a lost MS.
The poem evidently consists of several fragments, all upon the same subject, of hopeless, but true love.
It should be compared with the Complaint of Pity, the first forty lines of the Book of the Duchess, the Parliament of Foules (ll. 416-441), and the Complaint of Anelida. Indeed, the last of these is more or less founded upon it, and some of the expressions (including one complete line) occur there again.
This Poem consists of several distinct portions. It begins with a Proem, of three stanzas, followed by a part of the story, in twenty-seven stanzas, all in seven-line stanzas. Next follows the Complaint of Anelida, skilfully and artificially constructed; it consists of a Proem in a single stanza of nine lines; next, what may be called a Strophe, in six stanzas, of which the first four consist of nine lines, the fifth consists of sixteen lines (with only two rimes), and the sixth, of nine lines (with internal rimes). Next follows what may be called an Antistrophe, in six stanzas arranged precisely as before; wound up by a single concluding stanza corresponding to the Proem at the beginning of the Complaint. After this, the story begins again; but the poet had only written one stanza when he suddenly broke off, and left the poem unfinished; see note to l. 357.
The name of Arcite naturally reminds us of the Knightes Tale; but the ‘false Arcite’ of the present poem has nothing beyond the name in common with the ‘true Arcite’ of the Tale. However, there are other connecting links, to be pointed out in their due places, which tend to shew that this poem was written before the Knightes Tale, and was never finished; it is also probable that Chaucer actually wrote an earlier draught of the Knightes Tale, with the title of Palamon and Arcite, which he afterwards partially rejected; for he mentions ‘The Love of Palamon and Arcite’ in the prologue to the Legend of Good Women as if it were an independent work. However this may be, it is clear that, in constructing or rewriting the Knightes Tale, he did not lose sight of ‘Anelida,’ for he has used some of the lines over again; moreover, it is not a little remarkable that the very lines from Statius which are quoted at the beginning of the fourth stanza of Anelida are also quoted, in some of the MSS., at the beginning of the Knightes Tale.
But this is not all. For Dr. Koch has pointed out the close agreement between the opening stanzas of this poem, and those of Boccaccio’s Teseide, which is the very work from which Palamon and Arcite was, of course, derived, as it is the chief source of the Knightes Tale also. Besides this, there are several stanzas from the Teseide in the Parliament of Foules; and even three near the end of Troilus, viz. the seventh, eighth, and ninth from the end of the last book. Hence we should be inclined to suppose that Chaucer originally translated the Teseide rather closely, substituting a seven-line stanza for the ottava rima of the original; this formed the original Palamon and Arcite, a poem which he probably never finished (as his manner was). Not wishing, however, to abandon it altogether, he probably used some of the lines in this present poem, and introduced others into his Parliament of Foules. At a later period, he rewrote, in a complete form, the whole story in his own fashion, which has come down to us as The Knightes Tale. Whatever the right explanation may be, we are at any rate certain that the Teseide is the source of (1) sixteen stanzas in the Parliament of Foules; (2) of part of the first ten stanzas in the present poem; (3) of the original Palamon and Arcite; (4) of the Knightes Tale; and (5) of three stanzas near the end of Troilus, bk. v. 1807-27 (Tes. xi. 1-3).
Only extant in MS. T., written by Shirley, and in Stowe’s edition of 1561. Dr. Koch says—‘It seems that Stowe has taken his text from Shirley, with a few modifications in spelling, and altered Shirley’s Scriveyn into scrivener, apparently because that word was out of use in his time. Scriveyn is O. Fr. escrivain, F. écrivain. Lines 3 and 4 are too long [in MS. T. and Stowe], but long and more are unnecessary for the sense, wherefore I have omitted them.’ Dr. Sweet omits long, but retains more, though it sadly clogs the line. Again, in l. 2, we find for to, where for is superfluous.
‘ The former Age’ is a title taken from l. 2 of the poem. In MS. Hh., at the end, are the words—‘Finit Etas prima: Chaucers.’
Both MSS. are poor, and omit a whole line (l. 56), which has to be supplied by conjecture; as we have no other authority. The spelling requires more emendation than usual.
The poem is partly a verse translation of Boethius, De Consolatione Philosophiæ, lib. ii. met. 5. We possess a prose translation by Chaucer of the entire work (see vol. II. p. 40). This therefore contains the same passage in prose; and the prose translation is, of course, a much closer rendering of the original. Indeed there is nothing in the original which corresponds to the last four stanzas of the present poem, excepting a hint for l. 62.
The work of Boethius, in Latin, consists of five books. Each book contains several sections, written in prose and verse alternately. Hence it is usual to refer to bk. ii. prose 5 (liber ii. prosa 5); bk. ii. metre 5 (liber ii. metrum 5); and the like. These divisions are very useful in finding one’s place.
Chaucer was also indebted to Ovid, Metam. i. 89-112, for part of this description of the Golden Age; of which see Dryden’s fine translation. See also Le Roman de la Rose, ll. 8395-8492: and compare the Complaint of Scotland, ed. Murray, p. 144; and Dante, Purg. xxii. 148. For further remarks, see the Introduction.
This poem consists of three Ballads and an Envoy. Each Ballad contains three stanzas of eight lines, with the rimes a b a b b c b c, and the rimes of the second and third stanzas are precisely the same as those of the first. Thus the rime a recurs six times, the rime b twelve times, and the rime c likewise six times. Moreover, each stanza ends with the same line, recurring as a refrain. Hence the metrical difficulties are very great, and afford a convincing proof of Chaucer’s skill. The Envoy is of seven lines, rimed a b a b b a b.
The three ballads are called, collectively, Balades de visage sanz peinture, a title which is correctly given in MS. I., with the unlucky exception that visage has been turned into vilage. This curious blunder occurs in all the MSS. and old editions, and evidently arose from mistaking a long s (f) for an l. Vilage, of course, makes no sense; and we are enabled to correct it by help of Chaucer’s translation of Boethius, bk. ii. pr. 1; l. 39. ‘Right swich was she [Fortune] whan she flatered thee, and deceived thee with unleveful lykinges of fals welefulnesse. Thou hast now knowen and ataynt the doutous or double visage of thilke blinde goddesse Fortune. She, that yit covereth hir and wimpleth hir to other folk, hath shewed hir everydel to thee.’ Or the Ballads may refer to the unmasking of false friends: ‘ Fortune hath departed and uncovered to thee bothe the certein visages and eek the doutous visages of thy felawes’; id. bk. ii. pr. 8; l. 25. The whole poem is more or less founded on the descriptions of Fortune in Boethius; and we thus see that the visage meant is the face of Fortune, or else the face of a supposed friend, which is clearly revealed to the man of experience, in the day of adversity, without any covering or wimpling, and even without any painting or false colouring.
In MS. T. we are told that ‘here filoweþe [ followeth ] a balade made by Chaucier of þe louer and of Dame Fortune.’ In MS. A. we are told that ‘here foloweþe nowe a compleynte of þe Pleintyff agenst fortune translated oute of Frenshe into Englisshe by þat famous Rethorissyen Geffrey Chaucier.’ This hint, that it is translated out of French, can scarcely be right, unless Shirley (whose note this is) means that it partially resembles passages in Le Roman de la Rose; for Chaucer’s work seems to contain some reminiscences of that poem as well as of the treatise of Boethius, though of course Le Roman is indebted to Boethius also.
Le Pleintif is the complainant, the man who brings a charge against Fortune, or rather, who exclaims against her as false, and defies her power. The first Ballad, then, consists of this complaint and defiance.
The close connection between this poem and Boethius is shewn by the fact that (like the preceding poem called The Former Age) it occurs in an excellent MS. of Chaucer’s translation of Boethius, viz. MS. I. (Ii. 3. 21, in the Cambridge University Library). I may also remark here, that there is a somewhat similar dialogue between Nobilitas and Fortuna in the Anticlaudianus of Alanus de Insulis, lib. viii. c. 2; see Anglo-Latin Satirists, ed. T. Wright, ii. 401.
In Morley’s English Writers, ii. 283, is the following description. ‘The argument of the first part [or Ballad] is: I have learnt by adversity to know who are my true friends; and he can defy Fortune who is master of himself. The argument of the next part [second Ballad], that Fortune speaks, is: Man makes his own wretchedness. What may come you know not; you were born under my rule of change; your anchor holds. Of the third part of the poem [third Ballad], in which the Poet and Fortune each speak, the sum of the argument is, that what blind men call fortune is the righteous will of God. Heaven is firm, this world is mutable. The piece closes with Fortune’s call upon the Princes to relieve this man of his pain, or pray his best friend “of his noblesse” that he may attain to some better estate.’
The real foundation of these three Ballads is (1) Boethius, bk. ii. proses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and met. 1; and (2) a long passage in Le Roman de la Rose, ll. 4853-4994 (Eng. version, 5403-5584). More particular references are given below.
The title ‘Mercilesse Beaute’ is given in the Index to the Pepys MS. As it is a fitting title, and no other has been suggested, it is best to use it.
I think this Roundel was suggested by one written in French, in the thirteenth century, by Willamme d’Amiens, and printed in Bartsch, Chrestomathie de l’ancien Français. It begins—
i. e. I shall never be sated with gazing on the gray soft eyes which have slain me.
This graceful Balade is a happy specimen of Chaucer’s skill in riming. The metre is precisely that of ‘Fortune,’ resembling that of the Monkes Tale with the addition of a refrain; only the same rimes are used throughout. The formula is a b a b b c b c.
The Titles are: Gg. Balade de bone conseyl; Lansd. 699, La bon Counseil de le Auttour; Caxton, The good counceyl of Chawcer; Harl. Moral balade of Chaucyre. Shirley calls it—Balade that Chaucier made on his deeth-bedde; a note that has been frequently repeated, and is probably no better than a bad guess.
For remarks upon Scogan’s quotation of this Ballad in full, see the Introduction.
The titles are: Harl. Moral balade of Chaucier; T. Balade by Chaucier.
Caxton’s text is unusually good, and is often superior to that in the existing MSS.
The general idea of the poem is that Christ was the true pattern of ‘gentleness’ or gentility, i. e. of noble behaviour. Cf. Dekker’s noble line, in which he speaks of Christ as ‘The first true gentleman that ever breathed.’
But the finest poetical essay upon this subject is that by Chaucer himself, in the Wife of Bath’s Tale; C. T. 6691-6758 (D 1109); which see. And cf. Tale of Melibeus, B 2831-2.
Another passage on this subject occurs in the Eng. version of the Romance of the Rose, ll. 2188-2202, which, curiously enough, is in neither Michel’s nor Méon’s edition of the French Poem (in which l. 2184 of the E. version is immediately succeeded by l. 2203 of the same). Again, in Le Roman de la Rose, ll. 6603-6616, there is a definition of Gentillesce; but this passage is not in the Eng. version.
The original passage, to which both Chaucer and Jean de Meun were indebted, is one in Boethius, bk. iii. pr. 6; which Chaucer thus translates:—‘For yif the name of gentilesse be referred to renoun and cleernesse of linage, than is gentil name but a foreine thing, that is to seyn, to hem that glorifyen hem of hir linage. For it semeth that gentilesse be a maner preysinge that comth of deserte of ancestres . . yif thou ne have no gentilesse of thy-self—that is to seyn, preyse that comth of thy deserte—foreine gentilesse ne maketh thee nat gentil.’ And again, just below, in metre 6:—‘On allone is fader of thinges . . Thanne comen alle mortal folk of noble sede; why noisen ye or bosten of youre eldres?’ But we must not overlook a long passage near the end of Le Roman de la Rose, ll. 18807-19096, which Chaucer certainly also consulted. I quote some of these lines below.
In MS. Harl. 7333 is the following note, probably correct:—‘This balade made Geffrey Chauuciers the Laureall Poete of Albion, and sent it to his souerain lorde kynge Rycharde the secounde, thane being in his Castell of Windesore.’ In MS. T. is the heading:—‘Balade Royal made by oure laureal poete of Albyon in hees laste yeeres’; and above l. 22 is:—‘Lenvoye to Kyng Richard.’ In MS. F. it is simply headed ‘Balade.’ For another allusion to King Richard at Windsor, see note to Lenvoy to Scogan, l. 43.
The general idea is taken from Boethius, bk. ii. met. 8, which Chaucer thus translates:—‘That the world with stable feith varieth acordable chaunginges, that the contrarious qualitee of elements holden among hem-self aliaunce perdurable, . . . al this acordaunce of thinges is bounden with love, that governeth erthe and see, and hath also commaundements to the hevenes. And yif this love slakede the brydeles, alle thinges that now loven hem to-gederes wolden maken a bataile continuely, and stryven to fordoon the fasoun of this worlde, the whiche they now leden in acordable feith by faire moevinges . . . O weleful were mankinde, yif thilke love that governeth hevene governed youre corages!’
There are but three MSS., all much alike. As to Scogan, see the Introduction. MSS. F. and P. have the heading—‘Lenvoy de Chaucer a Scogan’; Gg. has—‘Litera directa de Scogon per G. C.’
This poem has frequently been printed as if it formed a part of The Compleynt of Mars; but it is a separate poem, and belongs to a later period.
The Compleynt of Mars is an original poem; but the present poem is a translation, being partly adapted, and partly translated from three Balades by Sir Otes de Graunson (l. 82). The original Balades have been lately recovered by Dr. Piaget, and are printed below the text. See the Introduction.
It consists of three Ballads and an Envoy, and bears a strong resemblance, in metrical form, to the poem on Fortune, each Ballad having three stanzas of eight lines each, with a refrain. It differs from ‘Fortune’ only in the arrangement of the rimes, which occur in the order a b a b b c c b, instead of (as in Fortune) in the order a b a b b c b c. One rime (in - aunce ) occurs in the second Ballad as well as in the first; but this is quite an accidental detail, of no importance. It must be remembered that the metre was not chosen by Chaucer, but by Graunson. The Envoy, which alone is original, consists of ten lines, rimed a a b a a b b a a b. This arrangement is very unusual. See further in the note to l. 82.
In the MSS. T. and A. we have notes of some importance, written by Shirley. T. has:—‘The Compleynt of Venus. And filowing begynnethe a balade translated out of frenshe in-to englisshe by Chaucier, Geffrey; the frenshe made sir Otes de Grauntsome, knight Savosyen.’ A. has:—‘Here begynnethe a balade made by that worthy Knight of Savoye in frenshe, calde sir Otes Graunson; translated by Chauciers.’ At the end of the copy in T. is:—‘Hit is sayde that Graunsome made this last balade for Venus, resembled to my lady of york; aunswering the complaynt of Mars.’ We certainly find that Chaucer has materially altered the first of the three Balades; so perhaps he wished to please his patron. But the title (probably not Chaucer’s) is a bad one. See the Introduction. Cf. note to l. 73.
The date of the Envoy to this Poem can be determined almost to a day. Henry IV. was received as king by the parliament, Sept. 30, 1399. Chaucer received his answer, in the shape of an additional grant of forty marks yearly, on Oct. 3 of the same year. Consequently, the date of the Envoy is Sept. 30 or Oct. 1 or 2 in that year. It is obvious that the poem itself had been written (perhaps some time) beforehand; see note to l. 17. As far as we know, the Envoy is Chaucer’s last work.
A somewhat similar complaint was addressed to the French king John II. by G. de Machault in 1351-6; but it is in short rimed lines; see his works, ed. Tarbé, p. 78. But the real model which Chaucer had in view was, in my opinion, the Ballade by Eustache Deschamps, written in 1381, and printed in Tarbé’s edition, at p. 55.
This Ballade is of a similar character, having three stanzas of eight lines each, with a somewhat similar refrain, viz. ‘Mais de paier n’y sçay voie ne tour,’ i.e. but how to pay I know therein no way nor method. It was written on a similar occasion, viz. after the death of Charles V. of France, and the accession of Charles VI., who had promised Deschamps a pension, but had not paid it. Hence the opening lines:—
The Envoy has but six lines, though the stanzas have eight; similarly, Chaucer’s Envoy has but five lines (rimed a a b b a ), though the stanzas have seven. Chaucer’s Envoy is in a very unusual metre, which was copied by the author of the Cuckoo and the Nightingale.
The Title, in MS. F. is—‘The Complaynt of Chaucer to his Purse.’ In Caxton’s print, it is—‘The compleint of Chaucer vnto his empty purse.’ In MS. P.—‘La Compleint de Chaucer a sa Bourse voide.’ MS. Harl. has—‘A supplicacion to Kyng Richard by chaucier.’ The last of these, written by Shirley, is curious. If not a mere mistake, it seems to imply that the Complaint was first prepared before king Richard was deposed, though, by means of the Envoy, it was addressed to his successor. However, this copy of Shirley’s gives the Envoy; so it may have been a mere mistake. Line 23 is decisive; see note below.
I remark here, for completeness’ sake, that this poem has sometimes been ascribed to Hoccleve; but, apparently, without any reason.
The titles in the MSS. are: Ad. Prouerbe; F. Proverbe of Chaucer; Ha. Prouerbe of Chaucers.
Each proverb takes the form of a question or objection, in two lines, followed by an answer in two lines more.
There is a fair copy of them (but not well spelt) in the black-letter edition of 1561, fol. cccxl. They there appear without the addition of fourteen unconnected lines (not by Chaucer) which have been recklessly appended to them in modern editions. The title in ed. 1561 is—‘A Prouerbe agaynst couitise and negligence.’
For the metre, compare the Envoy to a Ballad by Deschamps, ed. Tarbé, pp. 23, 24.
There are three MS. copies of this poem, viz. in MSS. F., B., and Harl. 7333. See remarks upon these in the Introduction, p. 89.