vol. iv. He then changed his mind, rejected this stanza, and wrote (instead of it) the late addition to the Clerkes Tale given on pp. 424-5, lines 1163-1212. The last line (l. 1212) ends with care, and wepe, and wringe, and waille.' Then, with reference to this line, he makes the Merchant's Prologue begin with the words Weping, and wayling, care,' &c. In this way, the Clerkes Tale and that of the Marchant are indissolubly connected, as in the Ellesmere MS. and most others. There is, however, one set of MSS. which disconnects these Tales, as explained in the Introduction to vol. iv. p. xxiii. This is the set there marked D. Unfortunately, Thynne followed a MS. of this class, in which the worst arrangement of the Tales occurs. Hence in all the black-letter editions, the Tales are sadly out of order, and the Clerkes Tale is wrongly followed by that of the Frankeleyn. This causes a breaking up of Group F as well as of Group E, the Squieres Tale being followed by that of the Marchant, as noted in § 69 below.

The close connexion between this Prologue and the preceding Tale is further seen in the whole tenor of ll. 1213-39; note particularly the express mention of Grisildis in l. 1224.

In consequence of their dislocation of the order of the Tales, the black-letter editions substitute the word Marchant for Frankeleyn in F 675 and 696, and even alter the ending of F 699, viz. 'quod the frankeleyn,' into 'quod the marchant certeyn,' a forced alteration which is obviously spurious. They then place F 673708 before E 1213; which is an extremely clumsy arrangement. Tyrwhitt put this matter right in his edition, being here guided by the authority of the majority of the MSS.

2

§ 66. THE MARCHANTES TALE. This Tale is certainly a late addition. Dr. Köppel has shewn that several lines in this Tale are imitated from Albertano of Brescia, so that it becomes clear that the Tale of Melibeus (which is little else than a translation from that author) had already been written before the

1 It occurs also in the black-letter editions, and in MSS. Harl. 1758 and 7333, Barlow 20, and Royal 18 C. ii; as well as in E., Hn., Cm., and Dd. Several MSS. follow it up by various scraps, taken from E. 2419-40 and F 1-8, with the false substitution of Sire Frankeleyn for Squier in F 1, which makes the line too long. See Part 1 of the Six-text edition, pp. xvii*-xx*.

2 Chaucer und Albertanus Brixiensis; in Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen; vol. 86, p. 29.

Marchantes Tale was begun. This easily appears by comparing the following passages: (a) E 1362-1374 with B 2287-91, where Jacob, Judith, Abigail, and Hester are mentioned, in both passages, in the same order: (6) E 1483-6 with B 2193: (c) E 2246-8 with B 2247, and E 2250 with B 2249: (d) E 2277–81 and 2286-90 with B 2266-70: (e) E 2365 with B 2167. Moreover, in two instances at least, Chaucer follows the Latin text of Albertano even where there is no corresponding passage in the Tale of Melibeus. Thus, in E 1373, there is mention of Mardochee; but he is not named in B 2291. However, the Latin text has: 'Simili modo et Hester Iudaeos per suum bonum consilium simul cum Mardochaeo, in regno Assueri regis, sublimauit'; cap. v. (ed. T. Sundby, p. 17). Again, the lines E 1375-6 do not appear after B 2298 (their proper place), but only occur in the Latin text: 'Quartam uero rationem ad hoc inducit Seneca, commendans super omnia benignas coniuges; ait enim: Sicut nihil est superius benigna coniuge, ita nihil est crudelius infesta muliere'; (p. 18).

Dr. Köppel has further pointed out, in the same article, that Chaucer has also introduced into this Tale some quotations from another work by Albertano, entitled Liber de amore et dilectione Dei; for examples, see the Notes. Moreover, this Tale also exhibits quotations from Boethius, as, e. g. in E 2021-2, for which see Boethius, bk. iii. pr. 2. 55; and, in one passage, E 1582, we find a reminiscence both of Boethius, bk. v. met. 4. 8, and of Troilus, i. 365. But, beyond all this, there is the somewhat extraordinary reference to the Wife of Bath's Prologue in E 1685, where we are told that she had already discussed the question of marriage 'in litel space.' This shews at once, past all doubt, that the Marchantes Tale was not only written later than Melibeus, Boethius, and Troilus; but even later than the highly mature performance written in the Wife's name, as the result of her wide experience.

The Tale practically consists of three parts. The first part (E 1245-1688) is a discourse upon marriage, somewhat in the style of the Wife of Bath's Prologue, but treating it from a more favourable point of view, with the addition of some hints from Albertano of Brescia. The second part describes the wedding of January and May, and the love-languor of Damian (E 1689-2056). The third part describes how January became blind, and the

means whereby he was restored to sight (E 2057-2418). The last part has several analogues, and is, in fact, founded on a story once widely current. For a full account of this story, see Originals and Analogues, Chaucer Society, pp. 177 and 341. Chaucer probably took the outline of his story from some French or Latin source. Tyrwhitt says:-'The scene of the Marchantes Tale is laid in Italy, but none of the names, except Damian and Justin, seem to be Italian, but rather made at pleasure; so that I doubt whether the story be really of Italian growth. The adventure of the Pear-tree I find in a small collection of Latin fables, written by one Adolphus, in elegiac verses of his fashion, in the year 1315. The same story is inserted among the Fables of Alphonse, printed by Caxton in English, with those of Æsop, Avian, and Pogge, without date; but I do not find it in the original Latin of Alphonsus (MS. Bibl. Reg. 10 B xii), or in any of the French translations of his work that I have examined.'

Five 'Pear-tree' stories are printed in the Originals and Analogues. The first is the fable of Adolphus, above mentioned. It is the first fable in Adolphi Fabulae, printed in Polycarpi Leyseri Historia Poetarum et Poematum Medii Ævi: Halae Magdelburgiae, 1721, p. 2008. It consists of thirty-six elegiac lines, and tells how a blind man's wife ascended a pear-tree in which her lover was hidden; whereupon the blind man's sight was suddenly restored, and she explains that the cure was due to her contrivance. Another very similar story occurs in an Appendix to the Latin editions of Æsop's Fables printed in the fifteenth century, and was reprinted by Wright in his 'Latin Stories,' for the Percy Society, 1842, p. 78. This is the same story, or nearly so, as the fable of Alphonsus which Tyrwhitt failed to find, and is written in prose. The English version (as Tyrwhitt says) was printed by Caxton in 1483, in The Book of the subtyl hystoryes and Fables of Esope', at leaf 132. The title runs, 'The xii fable is of a blynd man and of hys wyf.'

A third Latin Pear-tree' story occurs in the Comoedia Lydiae, by Matthieu de Vendôme, and was printed from a MS. at Vienna, in Anecdota Poetica, &c.: Poésies Inédites du moyen âge; par Edélestand du Méril; 1854, p. 370. This is in seventy-two

1 To which are appended fables by Avian (leaf 106); by Alfonce (leaf 120, back); and by Poge the Florentyn (leaf 134).

elegiac lines, and gives names to the personages mentioned. The husband and wife are Duke Decius and Lydia; her lover is Pyrrhus, and her maid is Lusca. Hence it is evidently the source of the similar story in Boccaccio's Decamerone, Day 7, Nov. 9, in which the husband and wife are Nicostratus and Lydia, and the lover is Pyrrhus, as before. In this third version of the story the husband is not blind, but the pear-tree is supposed to be enchanted, and to cause false illusions to appear.

In the same Originals and Analogues, at p. 343, Mr. Clouston has collected several Asiatic stories of a similar character, including one in the Bahár-i Dánush, or Spring of Knowledge; a Turkish Version in the romance of The Forty Vazírs, about an enchanted tree which is supposed to cause illusions; and an Arabian Version found in the Breslau printed text of the Arabian Nights, ed. Habicht and Fleischer, and printed in English in Tales from the Arabic, by John Payne (London, printed for the Villon Society, 1884), vol. i. p. 270. Of a similar type is the story of The Officious Father-in-Law, occurring in the Persian Sindibád Náma (second tale of the Fifth Vazír), in the Túti Náma (eighth night, story of the Fifth Vazír), and in the Sanskrit Suka Saptati (fifteenth night). A similar story to that in the Bahár-i Dánush is current in Ceylon; and a translation of it is given in the Orientalist, vol. ii. (1885), p. 148, reprinted by Mr. Clouston. Other examples are added, which, however, bear but a remote resemblance to the Tale in Chaucer.

I may add that I find a French variant of the story in the Poésies de Marie de France, ed. Roquefort, Paris, 1820; 2 vols. It is the fortieth Fable in that work, and is headed, 'Dou vileins qui vit un autre Hom od sa femme.' But this version omits the husband's blindness and the pear-tree, and merely says that a thing is not necessarily true because you see it. In conclusion, Mr. Clouston says:-'The model of both Boccaccio's and Chaucer's tales seems to have been the version found in the Comoedia Lydiae, or one similar to it. The story may perhaps exist in some of the great medieval monkish collections of sermons, or of exempla designed for the use of preachers, such as the Sermones of Jacques de Vitry; the Liber de Donis of Étienne de Bourbon; the Promptuarium Exemplorum of John Herolt; the Summa Praedicantium of John Bromyard. In the absence of any Eastern version representing the cuckolded husband as being

blind and having his sight miraculously restored to discover himself dishonoured, we must conclude that this form of the story is of European invention. It is needless to add that Chaucer's tale of January and May is incomparably the best-told of all the versions, whether Asiatic or European.'

One peculiarity of this Tale requires further notice, viz. the mention of Pluto. As to this, Tyrwhitt well remarks-'The machinery of the Faeries, which Chaucer has used so happily, was probably added by himself; and indeed I cannot help thinking, that his Pluto and Proserpina were the true progenitors of Oberon and Titania.... In the rest of his Faery system, Shakespeare seems to have followed the popular superstitions of his own time.'

GROUP F.

§ 67. THE SQUIRE'S PROLOGUE. Ten Brink assumes that Groups E and F constitute but one Group; for which there is no certain evidence. Many MSS., including Pt., make the Wife's Tale follow the Marchantes Tale; and there is nothing in the text itself to shew that the Epilogue to the Marchantes Tale is inseparably connected with the Squire's Prologue. Nevertheless, many good MSS., including E., write that Epilogue and the Squire's Prologue continuously, and E. prefixes to the Epilogue a rubric— The Prologe of the Squieres Tale'; see vol. iv. p. 460, footnote. The easiest way out of the difficulty is to adopt the arrangement in the Six-text edition, which separates Group E from Group F as to the numbering of the lines, but makes F follow E immediately.

The black-letter editions omit E 2419-2440 and F 1-8 altogether; so that Tyrwhitt was the first to print these lines. He says: 'The Prologue to the Squieres Tale [by which he means E 2419-40 and F 1-8] appears now for the first time in print. Why it has been omitted by all former editors I cannot guess, except, perhaps, because it did not suit with the place which, for reasons best known to themselves, they were determined to assign to the Squieres Tale, that is, after the Man of Lawes and before the Marchantes'. I have chosen rather to follow the MSS. of the

'The 'reasons' are not recondite; for fifteen MSS., at the least, have this arrangement.