PRELIMINARY ESSAY,

BY THE REV. W. W. SKEAT, MA.

In preparing a reprint of the edition of Chaucer's works, usually known as Bell's edition, and originally included in the series of Bell's annotated editions of the English Poets, it seemed advisable to consider what improvements could best be made in order to add to the convenience and value of the work. I have ventured to suggest, in particular, that many of the poems might be re-arranged, so as to show more clearly which are the genuine works of the poet, and which are the poems that are probably, and in most cases decidedly, spurious. The Advertisement to the former issue contained the following notice:-" This edition of Chaucer's works includes all the poems which appear entitled, from internal or external evidence, to be considered genuine;" but it includes, as a fact, a considerable number which are now positively known to be spurious. It did not seem advisable, however, to omit these, because several of them are of considerable interest and value, and are worth having in an accessible form; besides which, they have so frequently been cited as Chaucer's, that their absence would be a practical inconvenience. Indeed, a little consideration will show that many of them crept into the old editions of Chaucer's works because they seemed to be worth preserving, and because to include them in those editions was the easiest way of doing so. To such

VOL. I.

B

an extent was this principle carried, that poems were even included in the old editions that were positively known, at the time, to be by other authors. Thus in the edition of 1561, now before me, the title runs'Chaucer's Woorkes, with diuers Addicions. Newlie Prynted by Ihon Kyngston, 1561.' Amongst these "divers additions," we find, at fol. cccxxx., back, a poem entitled 'Ihon Gower, vnto the noble King Henry the iiij.' At fol. cccxxxii., back, is A saiyng of dan Ihon,' i.e., of Dan John Lydgate. At fol. cccxxxiv., back, is 'Scogan vuto the Lordes and Gentilmen of the Kinges house,' in which he speaks of "my maister Chaucer, God his soule saue;" and in the course of the poem he quotes the three excellent stanzas which compose Chaucer's poem of 'Gentilesse.' At fol. cccxxxvij, is 'A balade of good counseile, translated out of Latin verses in-to Englishe, by dan Ihon lidgat cleped the monke of Buri.' But the most remarkable addition is the whole of the long poem known as Lydgate's Storie of Thebes,' in three books. Similar remarks apply to other editions, and it is well to bear in mind that many of them include pieces which not only are not Chaucer's, but were never supposed to be so at any time whatever. The practical conclusion to be drawn is, of course, that the occurrence of a poem in an old edition of Chaucer is no certain proof that it was considered genuine even at the time of its first insertion; and if critics would but understand this, it would considerably clear the way, and render the consideration of the genuineness of the various poems an easy task. Indeed, when once prejudices and preconceptions are put aside, the task becomes, as I have said, an easy one; and we arrive at the right results readily enough, with but small chance of error. It is easy to go right in a matter when we have not first been taught wrongly; and I suppose that few readers will find any difficulty in accepting the

results I shall give below, excepting such as have imbibed wrong notions from various text-books, and prefer to cling to them instead of looking at the questions for themselves.

By way of convenience, I first give here the brief list of the early editions of Chaucer, which I have already printed once before, in my edition of Chaucer's • Treatise on the Astrolabe,' p. xxvi.

1. Edition by Wm. Thynne, London, 1532. Folio.

2. Reprinted, with additional matter, London, 1542. Folio. 3. Reprinted, with the matter re-arranged, London, no date, about 1551. Folio.

4. Reprinted, with large additions by John Stowe, London, 1561. Folio.

5. Reprinted, with additions and alterations by Thomas Speght, London, 1598. Folio.

6. Reprinted, with further additions and alterations by Thomas Speght, London, 1602. Folio.

7. Reprinted, with slight additions, London, 1687. Folio. 8. Reprinted, with additions and great alterations in spelling, &c., by John Urry, London, 1721. Folio.

The above list shows, at a glance, how Chaucer has grown, and suggests, at the same time, that the simplest way of ascertaining which poems are really Chaucer's is to consider cach poem separately (1) by the external evidence other than the fact of its appearance in an old edition; and (2) by the internal evidence critically applied; one qualification for the critic being an intimate knowledge of Middle-English grammar.

There is one piece which I shall dispose of at once, viz., the long prose piece known as 'The Testament of Love,' from which "a tissue of romantic adventure has been drafted into the life of the poet." The fact is, simply, that it is, on the face of it, not Chaucer's, and, consequently, that the various particulars in his biography, which are founded upon it, are really particulars in the biography of somebody else; if, indeed, they be not purposely fictitious.

It is easy to see how this piece was inserted into Chaucer's works, and we may even be thankful to the old editors who thus preserved it for us. It was worth printing, and had a certain connection with the poet; as thus. Chaucer made a prose

translation of Boethius on the Consolation of Philo sophy,' which has lately been edited anew for the Early English Text Society, with great care and skill, by Dr. Morris. This piece relates how the author (i.e., Boethius in the original) was pining in prison, but was consoled by Philosophy, who appeared to him in the form of a beautiful and gentle woman, and reasoned with him on the dispensations of divine providence. Now The Testament of Love' is a direct imitation of this, probably by one of Chaucer's pupils. The author likewise describes himself as pining in prison, but as consoled by a goodly lady, named Love, who alternately reproves and comforts him, exactly as Philosophy reproved and comforted Boethius. A good account of the general contents of the piece will be found in Prof. Morley's English Writers,' ii. 268. Prof. Morley does, indeed, speak of the work as "Chaucer's," but he is reduced, at p. 274, to reject all previous interpretations of the "piece of autobiography." But, surely, on the face of it, it is an odd thing that a man should take to parodying his own work after this fashion; and it is, moreover, extremely difficult to see how any person can read a certain passage in the Testament (unless he has unconquerable preposseszions), without seeing its incompatibility with the supposition that Chaucer wrote in such terms about himself. In the Third Book, Love talks thus to the prisoner; I modernise the spelling. "Quoth Love, I shall tell thee, this lesson to learn; mine own true servant, the noble philosophical* poet in English,

ke, the translator of Boethius on the Consolation of ilosophy!

which evermore him busieth and travaileth right sore, my name to increase, wherefore all that will [i.e. wish] me good owe [i.e. ought] to do him worship and reverence both, truly his better nor his peer in school of my rules could I never find: He, quoth she, in a treatise that he made of my servant Troilus, hath this matter touched, and at the full this question assoiled [resolved, explained]. Certainly his noble sayings can I not amend: in goodness of gentle manly speech, without any manner of nicety of 'starieres' (sic) imagination, in wit and in good reason of sentence, he passeth all other makers," &c. This is plain English; the author says that, not being able to write on a certain topic as well as Chaucer, who is the greatest of all poets, he thinks he had better let that matter alone.

The really interesting point is to observe that the author seems to speak of Chaucer as if he were still living, a consideration which helps us to date the composition at a little before A.D. 1400, a conclusion which exactly agrees with the internal evidence. If we were asked to believe that it was written by Occleve, there would be nothing much to urge against such a theory; but to attribute it to Chaucer himself is manifestly preposterous. I can only suppose that the wording of the above quotation has not been previously sufficiently considered. We are thus clear of The Testament of Love,' and of all the difficulties in which its supposed references to Chaucer's own life and circumstances would involve us.

Passing on to the consideration of other pieces, we have really quite sufficient, and indeed almost superfluous evidence as to most of them. We find at the outset that such poems as The Canterbury Tales,' Troilus and Criseyde,' 'The House of Fame,' The Death of Blanche the Duchesse,' 'The Parliament of Foules,' and 'The Legend of Good Women,'