I denye that therefore in the Knightes Tale yt must be oke serriall. for yt may well bee, that such meane persons as trompettes might be crowned with so base one oke as the serriall ys, whiche I call base in respecte of the oke Quercus (dedicate to the godd Jupiter) wherewithe Heccate was crowned, and whereof Garlands were gyven to the Romans for their nooble desarts in the warres, as apperethe in the Quernall crowne gyven to those whiche had saved a cytyzen. Wherefore Chaucer dothe rightly (and of purpose with great iudgment in my conceyte) make a difference in the chaplettes of the Trompettes and the garlands of Emelye, in that the trompetts chapletts were of oke seriall newly spronge; and not come to perfectione, whiche yet yf they had byn perfecte wolde not haue byn soo oryente and Greene one bothe sydes as ys the oke Quercus, wherewithe he wolde haue this Emelye crowned, as was her goddesse Heccate Diana (to whom she dyd sacryfyce) accustomed to bee. for so in tymes past (as I sayed before) the sacryfycer sholde be adorned with garlandes of suche thinges, as were consecrate to the goddes to whome they sacryfyced. for whiche cause also I ame not moved, thoughe Caxtone in his seconde editione do call yt one oke serriall. for I knowe (notwith­standinge his fayre prologe of printing that by a true copye) there be manye imperfections in that Booke.

Eyther for euerye, an overnice correction. Fo: 9. pa: 1. For euerye) you will us to reade eyther. But the sence ys good, as well that they dyd ryde one euerye syde of hym, as of eyther syde of him. for they boothe colde not ryde of euerye syde of hym, no moore then they both colde ryde of eyther syde of him; and therefore they two ryding one euerye side of hym, canne haue noone other constructione then that the one did ryde of the one syde and the other one the other side, aud therefore an ouernice correctione, thoughe some coppies do warrant yt:

The intellect of Arcite had not wholly gone, or he would not have known Emelye. Fo: 10. pa: 1. for save only the intellecte,) you wolde haue us to reade “and also the intellecte.” But yf you well consider the woordes of Chaucer, (as  I have donne in all the written copyes whiche I haue yet seene,) his meaninge ys not that the intellecte was wholye goonne, as yt wolde bee yf you sholde reade, “and also the intellecte” for “save only the intellecte.” for Chaucers meanynge ys, that all his streng[t]he and vitall Sprites aboute his outewarde partes were gonne, save onlye the intellecte or vnder­standinge, whiche remayned sounde and good, as apperethe after by the followinge woordes, for when deathe approched, and that all outwarde senses fayled, he (Arcite) yet cast eye vppon Emelye, remembringe her, thoughe the cheifest vitall sprite of his harte and his streng[th]e were gonne from hym. but he colde not haue cast his eye vppon Emelye, yf his intellecte had fayled hym. Yet yf you liste to reade, “and also the intellecte,” for saue only the intellecte, yt may after a sorte somewhat be borne withall, notwith­standinge that a pointe at streng[t]he is looste; and a parenthesis includynge (Save only the intellecte, without moore,) will make the sence good in this sort as I have here pointed yt:

Straught, a better word than haughte. Fo: 10. pa: 2. For armes straughte you wolde reade yt haughte, when straughte is moore significant (and moore answerable to Chaucers woordes whiche followethe) than haughte ys. for he speakethe of the Bredthe and spredinge of the boughes or armes or branches of the tree, whiche this woorde straughte doth signyfye, and is moore aptlye sett downe for stretched, then this woorde haughte, whiche signyfyethe catchinge holde, or holdinge faste, or (yf  you will streyne yt againste his nature) stretching on heigh, whiche agreethe not well with Chaucers meanynge. for these be his words:

Visage for vassalage, an impertinent correction. Fo: 11. pa: 1. For all forgotten in his vassalage, yow wolde haue vs reade, “for all forgotten is then his visage;” a thinge mere impertinente. for the forgettinge of his visage and personage is not materiall, nor regarded of anye to haue his face forgotten, but yt is muche materiall (and so ys Chaucers meanynge) that his vassalage, and the good service donne in his youthe, shold be forgotten when he waxethe olde. And therefore yt must bee “his vassalage forgotten;” as presently after Chaucer sayeth, better for a manne to dye when he is yonge, and his honor in price, than when he is olde, and the service of his youthe forgotten; whiche I coulde dilate and prove by manye examples; but I cannott stande longe vppon euerye pointe, as well for that I wolde not be tedious vnto you, as for that leysure serveth me not thereunto.

Leefe for lothe, a nedeless correction. Fo: 13. pa: 1. For lothe you bidde vs reade leefe, which annotacione neded not to haue byn there sett downe, because the verye woorde in the texte is lefe.

It is more likely that Absolon knocked than that he coughed at the window. Fo: 14. pa: 1. for knocked you reade coughed, but, the circumstance considered, (althoughe they may both stande,) yt is moore probable that he9 knocked at her10 windowe, to make her the better to heare than that he coughed. for although those woordes “with a semely sownde” may haue relatione to the voyce, yet they may as well and with as much consonancye haue reference to a semely and gentle kynde of knockinge at the windowe as to the voyce, and so his meanynge was by that sounde to wake her, whiche wolde rather be by the noyse of a knocke than of a coughe. for so he determyned before to knocke, as apperethe in these verses, when he sayed,

And so apperethe by the tale afterwarde that he knocked, as he did before, although he coughed also at the latter tyme, for he knocked twyce.

Surrye or Russye, indifferent which. Fo: 23. pa: 2. For Surrye you read Russye. true yt is, that some written copies haue Russye, and some Surrye. And therefore indifferent after the written copies, and some auncient printed copies before my fathers editione. But yf I shall interpone my opynione, I wolde more willingly (for this tyme) receve Surrey, because yt is most lykelye that the tartarians whiche dwelt at Sara (a place yet well knowen, and bordering vppon the lake Mare Caspium,) are nerer to Sorria or the countryes adioynynge called Syria, than to Russya. For as Hato the Armeniane, in his Tartariane Historye, sayeth, The cyttye of Sara was auncyently the famous cyttye of the countrye of Cumania; and the Tartarians obteyned the kingdome of Syria in the yere 1240, whiche must be in the tyme of the fyrst Tartariane emperor called Caius canne, Cambuscan is Caius canne. beinge (as I suppose) he whome Chaucer namethe Cambiuscan, for so ys the written copies, such affynytye is there betwene those two names. And, as I gather, yt was after that tyme that the Tartarians had warres in Russia. But I leave yt indifferent at this tyme, as meanynge further to consider of yt.

“That may not saye naye,” better than “there may no wighte say naye.” Fo: 31. pa: 2. for these woordes, “that may not saye naye,” you reade “there may no wighte say naye.” bothe whiche are good, and boothe founde in written coppyes; and yet the firste will better stande, in my conceyte, because [the king of Faerie] there speakinge to his wyfe, he urgethe her that she cannott denye yt; when he sayeth, my wyfe that cannott say naye, as who sholde saye you cannot denye yt because you knowe yt; and experience teacheth yt, so that these woordes, “that cannott say naye,” must be taken as spoken of his wyfes knowledge, and so as good or rather better than “there may no wighte saye naye,” consideringe that these wordes “that cannott saye naye,” dothe signyfye, “whoe cannott saye naye,” in such sorte that this relatyve (that) meanynge (whoe) must haue reference to his antecedente, i. e. this worde wyfe.

Theophraste, not Paraphraste. Fo: 35. pa: 2. For “He cleped yt valerye and theophraste,” you saye some wolde haue vs reade “Valery and his Paraphraste.” But as you haue left yt at libertee to the reader to iudge, so I thinke yt must nedes be Theophraste; as the author [of] Policraticon in his eighte Booke, ca. 11. The wife of Bath’s Prologue taken from the author of Policraticon. (from whome Chaucer borrowethe almost worde for worde a great parte of the Wyfe of Bathes Prologe,) doth vouche yt, for the author of that booke, Johannes Sarisburi­ensis, lyvinge in the tyme of Henrye the seconde, sayethe, Fertur authore Hieronimo Aureolus Theophrasti liber, de nuptiis, in quo quæritur an vir sapiens ducat vxorem, etc. And the frenche molinet, moralizinge the Romant of the roose in frenche, and turnynge it oute of verse into proese, writeth, Ha si i’eusse creu Theophraste, &c. Oh, yf I had beleved Theophraste, I had never maried womanne, for he doth not holde hym wise that marieth anye womanne, be she fayre, foule, poore, or riche; as he sayeth in his Booke Aureolle; whiche verye wordes chaucer doth recyte.

Country, not Couentry. Fo: 38. pa: 2. for this worde Countrye you will vs to reade Couentrye. But in my writtene copies yt is, “in my Countrye,” whiche I holde the truer and for the sence as good yf not better.

Maketh, not waketh. Fo: 41. pa: 1. This woorde makethe is corrected by you, who for the same do place wakethe; whiche cannott well stande, for Chaucers woordes being, “this maketh the fende,” dothe signyfye (by a true conuersione after the dialecte of our tonge, whiche with beawtye vsethe suche transmutacione as I coulde gyve you manye pretye instances,) that the sence thereof ys, “the fende makethe this,” for whiche Chaucer vseth these wordes by Transpositione, (accordinge to the rhethoricall figure Hiperbatone) “This makethe the fende:” Whiche this? Anger: for that comethe, ys made, or occasioned, by the deuell. But yf yt sholde be wakethe, then must the sence bee, that this (whiche is the anger he speakethe of before) wakethe the fende; whiche oure offences cannot do, because he cannott be waked, in that he neyther slumbrethe nor slepethe, but alwayes watcheth and howrely seekethe occasione to destroye us, lyke a roringe lyone. But yf you will nedes saye “this wakethe the fende,” that is, by conuersione after this manner, “the fende waketh this,” whiche signyfyeth the fende waketh or styrreth this in manne, yt may, after a harde and over-streyned sorte, beare some sence, whiche yet hath not that energye, sprite or lyfe, whiche haue Chaucers woordes, “this maketh the fende.” Whiche woordes are in my written copies, and in all written and auncient printed copies whiche I have yet seene.

Hugh of Lincoln. Fo: 96. pa: 2. vppon these woordes, “O hughe of Lincolne sleyne also, &c.” You saye, that in the 29. H. 3. eightene Jewes were broughte [to London] from Lincolne, and hanged for crucyfyinge a childe of eight yeres olde. Whiche facte was [in] the 39. H. 3. so that you mighte verye well haue sayed, that the same childe of eighte yeres olde was the same hughe of Lincolne; of whiche name there were twoe, viz. thys younger Seinte Hughe, and Seinte Hughe bishoppe of Lincolne, whiche dyed in the yere 1200, long before this litle seinte hughe. And to prove [that] this childe of eighte yeres olde and that yonge hughe of Lincolne were but one; I will sett downe two auctoryties out of Mathewe Paris and Walsinghame, whereof the fyrste wryteth, that in the yere of Christe 1255, beinge the 39. of Henrye the 3, a childe called Hughe was sleyne by the Jewes at Lyncolne, whose lamentable historye he delyvereth at large; and further, in the yere 1256, being 40. Hen. 3, he sayeth, Dimissi sunt quieti 24 Judei à Turri London, qui ibidem infames tenebantur compediti pro crucifixione sancti Hugonis Lincolniæ: All whiche Thomas Walsingham, in Hypodigma Neustriæ, confirmeth; sayinge, A^o. 1255. Puer quidam Christianus, nomine Hugo, à Judeis captus, in opprobrium Christiani nominis crudelitèr est crucifixus.

“Where the sunne is in his ascensione,” a good reading. Fo: 86. pa: 8. (Where the sunne is in his ascensione, &c.) You will us to reade for the same,

But, savinge correctione, the former sence is good: for these woordes: Where the sonne is in his ascensione, must haue relatione to the woordes of the verse before,

Ye be righte colericke of complexione,

and then is the sence, that she [the fair Pertelote] willed hym to purge, for that he was righte (that is, extremelye and in the highest degree) collericke of complexione, where (whiche signyfyeth when) the sonne is in his ascentione. Wherefore he must take heede, that he did not fynde hym repleate (at that tyme of the sonnes being in his ascentione) of hoote humors, for yf he did, he sholde surelye haue one ague. And this will stand with the woordes Where the sonne is in his ascentione, taking where for when, as yt is often vsed. But yf you mislyke that gloosse, and will begyn one new sence, as yt is in some written copyes, and saye, Ware the sonne in his ascentione ne fynde you not repleate, &c. yet yt cannott bee that the other wordes, (for yf yt doo,) canne answer the same, because this pronoune relative (yt) cannot haue relatione to this worde (you) which wente before in this lyne, Ne fynde you not repleate of humors hotte. So that yf you nowe will nedes reade ware for where, yet the other parte of the followinge verse must nedes be, “for yf you doe,” and not “for yf yt dooe;” vnleste you will saye that this woorde (yt) must haue relatione to these woordes, (the sonne in his ascentione,) whiche yt cannott have, those woordes goinge two lynes before, and the pronowne (you) interposed betwene the same and that his correlative (yt.) Wherefore these woordes, (for yf yt doe,) must nedes stande as they did before, though you will correcte “Where the sonne &c.” and saye “Ware the sonne &c.” Whiche yf you will nedes haue, you must correcte the rest in this sorte:

But this correctione (savinge, as I sayed, correctione) semeth not so good as the former texte.

Kenelm slain by Queen Drida. Fol: 86. pa: 2. Vppon these woordes, (Lo, in the lyfe of Kenelme we reade,) you saye that Kenelme was sleyne by his sister Quenda, whiche sholde be Quendrida; as Williame of Malmsberye and Ingulphus have. Whiche Quendrida dothe signyfye Quene Drida; as the author of the Antiquyties of Seint Albons and of the Abbottes thereof (supposed to be Mathewe Paris) dothe expounde yt. for that auctor, speakinge of the wyfe of Offa the greate kinge of Mercia, (a wicked and proude womanne because she was of the stocke of Charles the greate,) dothe saye, that she was called Drida, and being the kings wyfe was termed Quendrida, id est, Regina Drida.

Master Speight mistaketh his almanack. Fo: 87. p: 1. Vppon these woordes of “Taurus was fortye degrees and one,” you saye that this place ys misprinted, as well in not namynge of the sygne, as of the misreckonynge of the degrees, that the two and twentye of Marche the sunne is in Aries, and that but eleven degrees or thereaboutes, and hathe in all but thirtye degrees. In whiche, in semynge to correcte the former printe (whiche in truthe deseruethe amendement, but not in that order,) you seme to mee to erre, as farre as heauen and yerthe, in mistakinge Chaucers meanynge and his woordes, as well for the daye of the monthe, as for the signe. for where you suppose that Chaucere meanethe the two and twentithe daye of Marche, you mistake yt. for although yt should be the 22 of the monthe, as the printed booke hathe; yet canne yt not be the 22 daye of Marche, but must of necessytye be the two and twentythe of Aprille: and so the signe Taurus trulye named. But first I must saye, the number of the dayes are misprinted, for where yt is twentye dayes and two, yt must be (and so are my written copies) thirtye dayes and two, whiche must be the seconde of Maye, as you shall well see by the woordes of Chaucer, for whether yowe recken thirtye two dayes, withe the truthe, as hathe the written copye, or xxii dayes, withe the printe: yet must you begynne to recken them from after the last of Marche. for so dothe Chaucer, sayinge Marche was compleate, in these woordes:

Wherebye you see, that you must begynne to recken the nomber of dayes from the tyme of marche complete; and then woulde the signe fall out to be in Taurus. Yf you holde you to the printe (for the 22 daye after Marche, which is the 22 daye of Aprill in which the sonne is aboute xi degrees in Taurus;) or to the written copye of thirtye two dayes, (whiche is the seconde of maye at what tyme the sonne ys also aboute some xxi degrees in Taurus;) the signe is not misreckoned or misnamed, as you suppose. nether canne these woordes, since Marche beganne, helpe you to recken them from the begynnynge of Marche, (as you seme to doo;) because they muste answere and be agreable to the former wordes of Chaucer, whiche sayethe Marche was complete, and, for that we shoulde not dobte thereof, he addethe also farther, And passed were also since Marche beganne; where the worde beganne ys mysprinted for begonne, that is, since marche be gonne, this word begonne being put for is gonne, or gonne bye, or departed. so that the genuyniell sence hereof is, When march was complete, and also were passed, since march is gonne, or gonne by, or departed. for, in many olde inglishe woordes, this syllable (be) is sett before to make yt moore signyficante and of force, as for moone we saye bemone, for sprincled, besprincled; for dewed, bedewed, &c. as in this case for gonne ys sett downe begonne. But although there be no misnaminge of the The degrees of the signe are misreckoned, not the signe itself. signe; yet yt is true the degrees of the signes are misreckoned, the error whereof grewe, because the degree of the signe, is made equall with the degree of the sonne ascended above the Horizon, beinge at that tyme xli degrees in heighte from the Horizon. But to remedye all this, and to correcte yt accordinge as Chaucer sett yt downe in myne and other written copies; and that yt may stande with all mathematicall proportione, whiche Chaucer knewe and observed there, the print must be corrected after those written copies (whiche I yet holde for sounde till I maye disprove them) having these woordes:

And that this shoulde be mente xxxij dayes after Marche, and the seconde of Maye, there be manye reasons, besides those that Chaucer nameth; which are, that the sonne was not farre from the middle of his ascentione, and in the signe of Taurus. ffurther, since I am now in Chantecler’s discourse, I must speake of one woorde in the same, deservinge correctione, whiche I see you overslipped; and because I thinke you knewe not what to make of yt, (as indede by the printinge few menne canne vnderstande yt,) I will sett downe the correctione of the same; Mereturicke is a corruption of Merecenrycke, or the kingdom of Mercia. being the worde Mereturicke, farr corrupted for Mercenricke, in saxonA Meþecenþÿke which is the kingdome of Mercia, for so was Kenelme the sonne, and Kenulphus the father, both kinges of Mercia; the one reignynge 36 yeres, and the other murdred by his sister Quendrida, as ys before noted. And that yt is the kingdome of Mercia, the etymon of the woorde doth teache; for þÿk in the saxon tonge signyfyethe a kingdome; meþcen signyfyethe markes or boundes or marches of Countryes. So that Mercenricke is regnum Merciæ, or the kingdome of Mercia, or of the boundes so called, because almost all the other kingdoms of the saxons bounded vppon the same, and that lykewise vppon them, since that kingdome did lye in the middle of England, and conteyned most of the shires thereof.

Pilloures of silver borne before Cardinalls. Fo: 90. pa: 2. for pilloure you will vs to reade Pellure, signifyinge furres. but althoughe the Clergye ware furres, and some of them had their outwarde ornamentes thereof when they came to their service, as the Chanons had their Grey amises; yet in this place, to shewe the proude and stately ensignes of the Clergye, he there nameth the popes crowne, and the Cardinalls pilloures, yf I be not deceved. for euery cardinall had, for parte of his honorable ensignes borne before hym, certein silver pillers; as had Cardinall Wolsey, in the tyme of kinge Henrye the eighte, and Cardinall Poole, in my memory. So that pilloure in that place is better than pellure, because pilloures were a note of more pride and maiestye (againste whiche the Plowmanne dothe enveye in those woordes,) than in the weringe of furres.

Liketh best the old reading of “change of many manner of meates.” Fo: 90. pa: 2. for these wordes, with change of many manner of meates, you wolde have vs reade, They eate of many manner of meates. Touchinge whiche, althoughe the sence stande well, yet sure Chaucer followeth this matter in many staues together with this prepositione (cum, with,) and this coniunctione (et, and;)—as, “With pride misledd the poore, and with money filled manye a male, &c.” so he contynuethe yt still with that prepositione, “with change of many meates;” whiche is as good as the other, for euery one knoweth Chaucers meanynge to be that they eate of many meates, when they haue change of many meates; for why sholde they haue change of meates, but for varyetye to please the palates taste in eatynge. And also the old reading of “myters” more than one or two for the sake of the meter. In the next staffe, (for myters moe then one or two) you teache vs to reade, “myters they weare mo then one or two;” whiche, methinkethe, nedeth not. For the wearinge of their myters is included in these woordes, And myters more then one or two. Whiche wordes are curteyled for the verse his cause, that the same mighte kepe an equall proportione and decorum in the verse, whiche would be lengthened one foote or sillable moore than the other verses, yf your readinge shoulde stande. But yf you saye, that in this and other thinges I am overstreyghte laced and to obstinatlye bente to defende the former printed editione, in that I woulde rather allowe one imperfecte sence, and suche as must be vnderstoode, when yt ys not fully expressed, than a playne style, I will answere withe a grounde of the lawe, quod frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora, and quod subintel­ligitur non deest. Wherefore yt is nedelesse to make that playner by additione of woordes, when yt maye be as well conceyved in any reasonable mens vnder­standinge without such additione. But on these and suche petit matters, I will not nowe longe insiste, (being things of no greate momente,) vntill I haue further examyned more written copyes to trye, whether wee shall reade the olde texte or your newe correctione.

The lordes sonne of Windsore is in the French Romant of the rose, but is there spelled Guindesores. Fo: 122. pa: 2. The lordes sonne of Windsore.) Vppon these woordes you saye, this maye seme strange bothe in respecte that yt is not in the frenche, as also for that there was no lorde Windsore at those dayes. But yt semeth to me moore strange that these woordes shoulde seme strange to you, not to bee in the frenche, where you shall fynde them. For thus hathe the frenche written Romante, as maye appere in the old frenche vsed at the tyme when the Romante was composed, in this sorte:

Whiche is thus englished: Next to Franchise went a young bacheler, I knowe not howe he was called, he was fayre and gentle, as yf he had byn sonne to the lorde of Windsore. Where in olde frenche this word fuiz (vsed here as in manye places of that Booke) is placed for that whiche we wryte and pronounce at this daye for filz or fitz, in Englishe sonne. and that it is here so mente, you shall see in the Romante of the Roose turned into proese, moralized, by the french Molinet, and printed at Paris in the yere 1521, who hathe the same verses in these woordes in proese. A Franchise s’estoit prins vn ieune Bacheler de qui ne scay le nome, fors bell, en son temps filz du seigneure de Guindesore. Whiche you mighte have well seene, had you but remembered their orthographie, and that the latyne, Italiane, frenche, and spanyshe have no doble w, as the Dutche, the Englishe, and such as haue affynytye with the Dutche, since they vse for doble w (a letter comone to vs) these two letters Gu, as in Gulielmus, which we wryte Willielmus; in guerra, which we call and writte warre, in Gualterus, which we write Walter; in guardeine, which we pronounce and write wardeyne; and suche lyke; accordinge to whiche in the frenche yt is Guindesore for Windesore. Master Thynne knoweth not clearly why the Baron should be called of Windsor. for your other coniectures, whye that Chaucer sholde inserte the loordes sonne of Windesore, they are of [no?] great momente, neque adhuc constat that Chaucer translated the Romante, whene Windsore Castle was in buildinge. for then I suppose that Chaucer was but yonge; whereof I will not stande at this tyme, no moore than I will that there was no lord Windsore in those dayes; althoughe I suppose that sir William Windsore, being then a worthye knighte and of great auctorytye in Englande and in the partes beyond the seas under the kinge of Englande, mighte be lord Windsore, of whom the Frenche tooke notice, being in those partes, and by them called seigneure de Windesore, as euery gouernor was called seigneure emongst them. But whether he were a Baron or no in Englande, I cannott yet saye, because I haue not my booke of Somons of Barons to parliamente in my handes at this instante.

The ordeal was not tryall by fier only, but also by water, nor for chastity only, but for many other matters. Fo: 171. pa: 2. by ordall, &c. Vppone whiche you write thus. “Ordalia is a tryall of chastytye, throughe the fyre, as did Emma, mother of the Confessor, or ells over hoote burnynge culters of yrone barefotte, as did Cunegunde, &c.” But in this describinge definitione, you have commytted manye imperfections. first, that ordell was a tryall by fyre, whiche is but a species of the ordell; for ordalium was a tryall by fyre and water: secondlye, that yt was a tryall of Chastitye whiche was but parcell thereof; for the ordale was a tryall for manye other matters. The fyery ordeal was by going on hote shares and cultors, not going through the fyre. The mother of Edward confessor passed over nine burnynge shares. Thirdlye, you saye yt was by goinge throughe the fyre. when the fyery ordale was onlye by goinge one hoote shares or cultores, or by holdinge a hoote pece of yrone in the hande, and not going through the fyre. fourthlye, that Emma, mother to Edwarde the confessor, receued this tryall by goinge through the fyre: But she passed not through the fyre as you bringe her for one example of your ordale but passed barefotte vppone nyne burnynge shares, fowr for her selfe, and fyve for Alwyne Bishoppe of Winchester, with whome she was suspected with incontynencye, whiche historye you maye see at large in Ranulphus Higden, in his policronicone li: 6. ca: 23, and in other auctors; of whiche ordale I colde make a longe and no commone discourse; of the manner of consecrating the fyre and water, how yt was vsed emongst the saxons before, and the normans since, the Conqueste, and of many other thinges belonging vnto yt. but I will passe them ouer, and only deliuer to you a thinge knowen to fewe, The ordeal taken away by the court of Rome, and after by Henry III. how this ordale was contynued in Englande in the tyme of kinge Johne, as appereth in Claus. 17. Johīs, m. 25, vntill yt was taken awaye by the courte of Rome; and after that, in Englande, by the auctorytye of kinge Henrye the thirde, whereof you shall fynde this recorde in the towre Patente. 3. H. 3. mem. 5, where yt speakethe of iudgmente and tryall by fyer and water to be forbydden by the Churche of Roome, and that yt sholde not be vsed here in Englande; as apperethe in the woordes of that record: Illis vero qui mediis criminibus vectati sunt, et quibus competeret iudicium ignis vel aquæ si non esset prohibitum, et de quibus si regnum nostrum abiurarent, nulla fieret postea, maleficiendi suspitio, regnum nostrum abiurent &c.

The stork bewrayeth not adultery but wreaketh the adultery of his owne mate. Fo: 246. pa: 1. speaking of the storke, you saye that Chaucers woordes “wreaker of adulterye” shoulde rather bee “bewrayer of Adulterye;” whiche in truth accordinge to one propryetye of his nature may be as you saye, but according to another propryetye of his nature, yt sholde be “the wreaker of Adulterye,” as Chaucer hathe; for he ys a greater wreaker of the adulterye of his owne kynde and female than the bewrayer of the adulterye of one other kynde, and of his hostesse one the toppe of whose howse he harborethe. for Aristotle sayeth & Bartholomeus de proprie­tatibus rerum li: 12. cap. 8. with many other auctors, that yf the storke by any meanes perceve that his female hath brooked spousehedde, he will no more dwell with her, but stryketh and so cruelly beateth her, that he will not surcease vntill he hathe killed her yf he maye, to wreake and revenge that adulterye.

These and suche lyke in my conceyte are worthye to be touched in your Annotacions, besides other matters whiche you haue not handled; whereof (because tyme requirethe after all this tedious treatyce to drawe to one ende) I will not now treate; but onlye speake a little moore of fyve especiall thinges, woorthye the animadversione, of which the fyrste ys, The plowman’s tale is wrong placed. that you make the Plowmans tale to go next before the persons tale, suffering the persons corrupted prologue to passe with this begynnynge, “By that the plowmanne had his tale ended,” when all written copies, (whiche I coulde yet see,) and my fathers editione, haue yt, “By that the mancyple had his tale ended.” And because my father colde not see by any Prologues of thee other tales, (whiche for the most parte shewe the dependancye of one Tale vppone one other,) where to place the plowmans tale, he putt yt after the persons tale, whiche, by Chaucers owne woordes, was the laste tale; as apperethe by the persons prologue, where the hooste sayethe, that “euery manne had tolde his Tale before.” So that the plowmans tale must be sett in some other place before the manciple and persons tale, and not as yt ys in the last editione.

Chaucer’s proper works should be distinguished from those adulterat and not his. One other thinge ys, that yt would be good that Chaucers proper woorkes were distinguyshed from the adulterat and suche as were not his, as the Testamente of Cressyde, the Letter of Cupide, and the ballade begynnynge “I have a ladye whereso she bee,” &c. whiche Chaucer never composed, as may sufficientlye be proved by the things themselves.

There were three editions of Chaucer before William Thynne dedicated his to Henry VIII. The thirde matter ys, that in youre epistle dedicatorye to Sir Roberte Cecille, you saye, “This Booke whene yt was first published in printe was dedicate to kinge Henrye the eighte.” But that is not soo. for the firste dedicatione to that kinge was by my father, when diverse of Chaucers woorkes had byn thrise printed before; whereof two editions were by William Caxtone, the firste printer of Englande, who first printed Chaucers Tales in one columne in a ragged letter, and after in one colume in a better order; and the thirde editione was printed, as farre as I remember, by Winkin de Worde or Richarde Pynson, the seconde and thirde printers of Englande, as I take them.11 The first editions being very corrupt, William Thynne augmented and corrected them. Whiche three edit[i]ons beinge verye unperfecte and corrupte occasioned my father (for the love he oughte to Chaucers learnynge) to seeke the augmente and correctione of Chaucers Woorkes, whiche he happily fynyshed; the same being, since that tyme, by often printinge much corrupted. of this matter I sholde have spooken first of all, because yt is the first imperfectione of your paynfull and comendable labors: Yet because the proverb ys better late than never, I hold yt better to speake of yt here then not at all.

Master Speight hath omytted many auctors vouched by Chaucer. The fourthe thinge ys, that, in the catalogue of the auctors, you haue omytted many auctors vouched by chaucer; and therefore did rightlye intitle yt, moost, and not all, of the auctors cited by Geffrye Chaucer.

It should be Harlottes, and not Haroldes. The fyfte matter ys in the Romante of the Roose, fo. 144, that the worde Haroldes in this verse,

My kinge of Haroltes shalte thou bee,

must, by a mathesis or transpositione of the letters, be Harlotes, and not Haroltes, and the verse thus,

My kinge of Harlottes shalt thou bee

And so ys yt in the editione of Chaucer’s Works, printed in anno Domini 1542, accordinge to the frenche moralizatione of Molinet, fo. 149. where he is called “Roye des Ribauldez,” The king of Ribalds or Harlottes, an officer of great accompt in times past. whiche is, the kinge of Ribaldes or Harlottes or evill or wicked persons; one officer of great accompte in tymes paste, and yet vsed in the courte of France but by one other name, in some parte beinge the office of the marshall of Englande. All whiche, because you shall not thinke I dreame, (though yt may seme strange to the ignorant to have so greate one officer intituled of suche base persons as to be called kinge or gouernor of Ribauldes,) Johannes Tyllius maketh mention of a Rex Ribaldorum. you shall here Johannes Tyllius (in his seconde booke de rebus Gallicis vnder the title de Prefecto pretorio Regis) confirme in these woordes: In domesticis regum constitu­tionibus, quos proximo capite nominavimus, fit mentio Regis Ribaldorum, officii domestici, quem semper oportet stare extra Portam pretorii, &c. and a litle after the explanynge of their office, he addeth; “sic autem appellantur, quia iam tum homines perditi Ribaldi, et Ribaldæ mulieres puellæque perditæ vocantur. Regis nomen superiori aut Iudici tribuitur, Quemadmodum magnus Cubicularius dicitur Rex Mercatorum,” &c. Where he maketh the “Regem Ribaldorum” an honorable officer for manye causes, Also Vincentius Luparius maketh him an honourable officer. as Vincentius Luparius in his fyrste booke of the Magistrates of france doth also, vnder the title of “Rex Ribaldorum et prouostus Hospitii;” makinge the Iudex pretorianus and this rex ribaldorum or provostus hospitii to seme all one, addinge further (after manye other honorable partes belonginge to this office) that “meretricibus aulicis hospitia assignare solebat.” In whiche pointe, bothe for orderinge and correctinge the harlottes and evill persons followinge the Courte of Englande, (whiche is the duty of the marshall,) the frenche and wee agree. The Rex Ribaldorum was like unto our Marshall. The Marshalls duties and his powers over Harlotts and lost men. Wherefor, touching that parte, you shall heare somewhat of the Marshalls office sett downe and founde in the Customes, whiche Thomas of Brothertonne (sonne to kinge Edwarde the fyrste) challenged to his office of Marshalcye; where, emongst other thinges, are these woordes: eorum (whiche was of the marshalls deputyes executinge that he shoulde ells do hym selfe) interest virgatam à meretricibus prohibere, et deliberare, et habet, ex consuetudine mariscallus ex quâlibet meretrice com[m]uni infra metas hospitii inventa iiij^d. primo die. Quæ, si iterum inventa in Balliuâ suâ inveniatur, capiatur; et coram seneschallo inhibeantur ei hospitia Regis et Reginæ et liberorum suorum, ne iterum ingrediatur, &c. And so afterwarde shewethe what shall be done to those women, yf they be founde agayne in the Kinges courte, in suche sorte, that, as by Tillius, this Rex Ribaldorum his auctorytye was over homines perditos, mulieres puellasque perditas. And that yt was, by Lupanus, to assigne to Ribaldes lodginge out of the courte, (for so modestye willeth vs to vnderstande, because they shoulde not offende and infecte the courte with their sighte and manners,) so ys yt our Marshalls office, to banyshe those harlottes the courte, and bestowe them in some other place, where they might be lesse annoyance. Master Thynne being a herold liketh not that false semblance should be thought one. Wherefore I conclude with the frenche, and the former editione of Chaucer in the yere of Christe 1542, that False Semblance was of righte to be made kinge of Harlottes, and not of Haroldes, who wolde mightely be offended to haue them holden of the conditions of false semblance. Nowe here be nugæ in the Romante of the Roose, I cannott (as the proverb ys) take my hand from the table, (fyndinge go manye oversightes in the two last editiones,) but must speake of one thing more, deserving correctione, in these woordes of the Romante, fo. 116 of the last impressione: