The complete works of John Gower, volume 4

by John Gower

CONTENTS

	PAGE
Introduction	[vii]
Epistola	[1]
Vox Clamantis	[3]
Cronica Tripertita	[314]
Rex celi deus etc.	[343]
H. aquile pullus etc.	[344]
O recolende etc.	[345]
Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia	[346]
Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio	[355]
Ecce patet tensus etc.	[358]
Est amor etc.	[359]
Quia vnusquisque etc.	[360]
Eneidos Bucolis etc.	[361]
O deus immense etc.	[362]
Last Poems	[365]
Notes	[369]
Glossary	[421]
Index to the Notes	[428]

INTRODUCTION
LIFE OF GOWER.

To write anything like a biography of Gower, with the materials that exist, is an impossibility. Almost the only authentic records of him, apart from his writings, are his marriage-licence, his will, and his tomb in St. Saviour’s Church; and it was this last which furnished most of the material out of which the early accounts of the poet were composed. A succession of writers from Leland down to Todd contribute hardly anything except guesswork, and this is copied by each from his predecessors with little or no pretence of criticism. Some of them, as Berthelette and Stow, describe from their own observation the tomb with its effigy and inscriptions, as it actually was in their time, and these descriptions supply us with positive information of some value, but the rest is almost entirely worthless.

Gower’s will was printed in Gough’s Sepulchral Monuments (1796), and in 1828 Sir Harris Nicolas, roused by the uncritical spirit of Todd, published the article in the Retrospective Review[1] which has ever since been regarded as the one source of authentic information on the subject. It does not appear that Nicolas undertook any very extensive searching of records, indeed he seems to have practically confined his attention to the British Museum; for wherever he cites the Close Rolls or other documents now in the Record Office, it is either from the abstract of the Close Rolls given in MS. Harl. 1176 or as communicated to him by some other person: but he was able to produce several more or less interesting documents connected either with the poet or with somebody who bore the same name and belonged to the same family, and he placed the discussion for the first time upon a sound critical basis. Pauli simply recapitulated the results arrived at by Nicolas with some slight elucidations from the Close Rolls of 6 Ric. II on a matter which had been already mentioned by Nicolas on the authority of Mr. Petrie. As the result of a further examination of the Close Rolls and other records I am able to place some of the transactions referred to in a clearer light, while at the same time I find myself obliged to cast serious doubt on the theory that all the documents in question relate to the poet. In short, the conclusions at which I arrive, so far as regards the records, are mostly of a negative character.

It may be taken as proved that the family to which John Gower the poet belonged was of Kent. Caxton indeed says of him that he was born in Wales, but this remark was probably suggested by the name of the ‘land of Gower’ in Wales, and is as little to be trusted as the further statement that his birth was in the reign of Richard II. There was a natural tendency in the sixteenth century to connect him with the well-known Gowers of Stitenham in Yorkshire, whence the present noble family of Gower derives its origin, and Leland says definitely that the poet was of Stitenham[2]. It is probable, however, that Leland had no very certain information; for when we examine his autograph manuscript, we find that he first wrote, following Caxton, ‘ex Cambria, ut ego accepi, originem duxit,’ and afterwards altered this to ‘ex Stitenhamo, villa Eboracensis prouinciae, originem ducens.’ It is probable that the credit of connexion with the poet had been claimed by the Yorkshire family, whose ‘proud tradition,’ as Todd says, ‘has been and still is that he was of Stitenham,’ and we find reason to think that they had identified him with a certain distinguished lawyer of their house. This family tradition appears in Leland’s Itinerarium, vi. 13, ‘The house of Gower the poete sumtyme chief iuge of the commune place’ (i.e. Common Pleas) ‘yet remaineth at Stitenham yn Yorkshire, and diuerse of them syns have been knights.’ He adds that there are Gowers also in Richmondshire and Worcestershire (‘Wicestreshire,’ MS.). The statement that this supposed judge was identical with the poet is afterwards withdrawn; for on a later page Leland inserts a note, ‘Mr. Ferrares told me that Gower the iuge could not be the man that write the booke yn Englisch, for he said that Gower the iuge was about Edward the secundes tyme.’[3]

All this seems to suggest that Leland had no very trustworthy evidence on the matter. He continued to assert, however, as we have seen, that the poet derived his origin from Stitenham, and to this he adds that he was brought up and practised as a lawyer, ‘Coluit forum et patrias leges lucri causa[4].’ It has not been noticed that the author’s manuscript has here in the margin what is probably a reference to authority for this statement: we find there a note in a contemporary hand, ‘Goverus seruiens ad legem 30 Ed. 3.’ From this it is probable that Leland is relying on the Year-book of 30 Ed. III, where we find the name Gower, apparently as that of a serjeant-at-law who took part in the proceedings. It is not likely that Leland had any good reasons for identifying this Gower, who was in a fairly high position at the bar in the year 1356, with John Gower the poet, who died in 1408[5].

Leland’s statements were copied by Bale and so became public property. They did not, however, long pass unchallenged. Thynne in his Animadversions acutely criticises the suggestion of Yorkshire origin, on the ground of the difference of arms:—‘Bale hath much mistaken it, as he hath done infinite things in that book, being for the most part the collections of Leland. For in truth the arms of Sir John Gower being argent, on a cheveron azure three leopards’ heads or, do prove that he came of a contrary house to the Gowers of Stytenham in Yorkshire, who bare barruly of argent and gules, a cross paty flory sable. Which difference of arms seemeth a difference of families, unless you can prove that being of one family they altered their arms upon some just occasion.’ The arms to which Thynne refers as those of Gower the poet are those which are to be seen upon his tomb[6]; and the argument is undoubtedly sound. Thynne proceeds to criticise Speght’s statement that Chaucer and Gower were both lawyers of the Inner Temple: ‘You say, It seemeth that these learned men were of the Inner Temple, for that many years since Master Buckley did see a record in the same house, where Geffrey Chaucer was fined two shillings for beating a Franciscan Friar in Fleet Street. This is a hard collection to prove Gower of the Inner Temple, although he studied the law, for thus you frame your argument: Mr. Buckley found a record in the Temple that Chaucer was fined for beating the friar; ergo Gower and Chaucer were of the Temple.’

A ‘hard collection’ it may be, but no harder than many others that have been made by biographers, and Leland’s ‘vir equestris ordinis[7]’ must certainly go the way of his other statements, being sufficiently refuted, as Stow remarks, by the ‘Armiger’ of Gower’s epitaph. Leland in calling him a knight was probably misled by the gilt collar of SS upon his recumbent effigy, and Fuller afterwards, on the strength of the same decoration, fancifully revives the old theory that he was a judge, and is copied of course by succeeding writers[8]. On the whole it may be doubted whether there is anything but guesswork in the statements made by Leland about our author, except so far as they are derived from his writings or from his tomb.

That John Gower the poet was of a Kentish family is proved by definite and positive evidence. The presumption raised by the fact that his English writings certainly have some traces of the Kentish dialect, is confirmed, first by the identity of the arms upon his tomb with those of Sir Robert Gower, who had a tomb in Brabourne Church in Kent, and with reference to whom Weever, writing in 1631, says, ‘From this family John Gower the poet was descended[9],’ secondly, by the fact that in the year 1382 a manor which we know to have been eventually in the possession of the poet was granted to John Gower, who is expressly called ‘Esquier de Kent,’ and thirdly, by the names of the executors of the poet’s will, who are of Kentish families. It may be added that several other persons of the name of Gower are mentioned in the records of the time in connexion with the county of Kent. Referring only to cases in which the Christian name also is the same as that of the poet, we may note a John Gower among those complained of by the Earl of Arundel in 1377, as having broken his closes at High Rothing and elsewhere, fished in his fishery and assaulted his servants[10]; John Gower mentioned in connexion with the parishes of Throwley and Stalesfield, Kent, in 1381-2[11]; John Gower who was killed by Elias Taillour, apparently in 1385[12]; John Gower who was appointed with others in 1386 to receive and distribute the stores at Dover Castle[13]; none of whom can reasonably be identified with the poet. Therefore it cannot be truly said, as it is said by Pauli, that the surname Gower, or even the combination John Gower, is a very uncommon one in the records of the county of Kent[14].

Before proceeding further, it may be well to set forth in order certain business transactions recorded in the reign of Edward III, in which a certain John Gower was concerned, who is identified by Nicolas with the poet[15].

They are as follows:—

39 Ed. III (1365). An inquiry whether it will be to the prejudice of the king to put John Gower in possession of half the manor of Aldyngton in Kent, acquired by him without licence of the king from William de Septvans, and if so, ‘ad quod damnum.’ This half of Aldyngton is held of the king by the service of paying fourteen shillings a year to the Warden of Rochester Castle on St. Andrew’s day[16].

Under date Feb. 15 of the same year it was reported that this would not be to the prejudice of the king, and accordingly on March 9 John Gower pays 53 shillings, which appears to be the annual value of the property, and is pardoned for the offence committed by acquiring it without licence[17].

39 Ed. III (June 23). William Sepvanus, son of William Sepvanus knight, grants to John Gower ten pounds rent from the manor of Wygebergh (Wigborough) in Essex and from other lands held by him in the county of Essex[18].

By another deed, acknowledged in Chancery on June 25 of the same year, the same William Sepvanus makes over to John Gower all his claims upon the manor of Aldyngton, and also a rent of 14s. 6d., with one cock, thirteen hens and 140 eggs from Maplecomb[19].

42 Ed. III (1368). Thomas Syward, pewterer and citizen of London, and Joanna his wife, daughter of Sir Robert Gower, grant to John Gower and his heirs the manor of Kentwell. Dated at Melford, Wednesday before the Nativity of St. John Baptist[20].

43 Ed. III. Fine between John Gower on the one hand, and John Spenythorn with Joan his wife on the other, by which they give up all right to the Manor of Kentwell, Suffolk, except £10 rent, John Gower paying 200 marks[21].

This was confirmed in the king’s court, 3 Ric. II.

By documents of previous date[22] it may be shown that the manor of Kentwell had been held by Sir Rob. Gower, doubtless the same who is buried in Brabourne Church, who died apparently in 1349; that it was ultimately divided, with other property, between his heirs, two daughters named Katherine and Joanna, of whom one, Katherine, died in 1366. Her moiety was then combined with the other in the possession of her sister Joanna, ‘23 years old and upwards,’ then married to William Neve of Wetyng, but apparently soon afterwards to Thomas Syward. As to the transaction between John Gower and John Spenythorn with Joanna his wife, we must be content to remain rather in the dark. John Gower had in the year before acquired Kentwell in full possession for himself and his heirs, and he must in the mean time have alienated it, and now apparently acquired it again. It is hardly likely that the Joan who is here mentioned is the same as Joan daughter of Sir Robert Gower, who was married successively to William Neve and Thomas Syward. On the other hand it must be regarded as probable that the John Gower of this document is identical with the John Gower who acquired Kentwell from Thomas Syward and his wife in 1368. The confirmation in the king’s court, 3 Ric. II, was perhaps by way of verifying the title before the grant of Kentwell by Sir J. Cobham to Sir T. Clopton, 4 Ric. II.

47 Ed. III (1373). John Gower grants his manor of Kentwell in Suffolk to Sir John Cobham and his heirs; a deed executed at Otford in Kent, Thurs. Sept. 29[23].

48 Ed. III (1374). Payment of 12 marks by Sir J. Cobham on acquisition of Kentwell and half of Aldyngton from John Gower[24].

By this last document it seems pretty certain that the John Gower from whom Sir J. Cobham received Kentwell was the same person as the John Gower who acquired Aldyngton from William Septvans; and he is proved to be a relation of the poet, as well as of Sir Robert Gower, by the fact that the arms on the seal of John Gower, attached to the deed by which Kentwell was alienated, are apparently the same as those which were placed upon Sir Rob. Gower’s tomb at Brabourne, and those which we see on the poet’s tomb in Southwark[25]. These persons, then, belonged to the same family, so far as we can judge; but evidently it is not proved merely by this fact that the John Gower mentioned in the above document was identical with the poet. We have seen already that the name was not uncommon in Kent, and there are some further considerations which may lead us to hesitate before we identify John Gower the poet with the John Gower who acquired land from William Septvans. This latter transaction in fact had another side, to which attention has not hitherto been called, though Sir H. Nicolas must have been to some extent aware of it, since he has given a reference to the Rolls of Parliament, where the affair is recorded.

It must be noted then in connexion with the deeds of 39 Ed. III, by which John Gower acquired Aldyngton from William Septvans, son of Sir William Septvans, that in the next year, 40 Ed. III, there is record of a commission issued to Sir J. Cobham and others to inquire into the circumstances of this alienation, it having been alleged that William Septvans was not yet of age, and that he had obtained release of his father’s property from the king’s hands by fraudulent misrepresentation. The commission, having sat at Canterbury on the Tuesday before St. George’s day, 1366, reported that this was so, that William Septvans was in fact under twenty years old, and would not attain the age of twenty till the feast of St. Augustine the Doctor next to come (i.e. Aug. 28); that the alienations to John Gower and others had been improperly made by means of a fraudulent proof of age, and that his property ought to be reseized into the king’s hands till he was of age. Moreover the report stated that John Gower had given 24 marks only for property worth £12 a year, with a wood of the value of £100, that after his enfeoffment the said John Gower was in the company of William Septvans at Canterbury and elsewhere, until Sept. 29, inducing him to part with land and other property to various persons[26].

The property remained in the king’s hands till the year 1369, when an order was issued to the escheator of the county of Essex to put William Septvans in possession of his father’s lands, which had been confiscated to the Crown, ‘since two years and more have elapsed from the festival of St. Augustine, when he was twenty years old’ (Westm. 21 Feb.)[27]. Presumably John Gower then entered into possession of the property which he had irregularly acquired in 1365, and possibly with this may be connected a payment by John Gower of £20 at Michaelmas in the year 1368 to Richard de Ravensere[28], who seems to have been keeper of the hanaper in Chancery.

It is impossible without further proof to assume that the villainous misleader of youth who is described to us in the report of the above commission, as encouraging a young man to defraud the Crown by means of perjury, in order that he may purchase his lands from him at a nominal price, can be identical with the grave moralist of the Speculum Hominis and the Vox Clamantis. Gower humbly confesses that he has been a great sinner, but he does not speak in the tone of a converted libertine: we cannot reconcile our idea of him with the proceedings of the disreputable character who for his own ends encouraged the young William Septvans in his dishonesty and extravagance. The two men apparently bore the same arms, and therefore they belonged to the same family, but beyond this we cannot go. It may be observed moreover that the picture suggested to Prof. Morley by the deed of 1373, executed at Otford, of the poet’s residence in the pleasant valley of the Darent, which he describes at some length[29], must in any case be dismissed as baseless. Otford was a manor held by Sir John Cobham[30], and whether the John Gower of this deed be the poet or no, it is pretty clear that the deed in question was executed there principally for this reason, and not because it was the residence of John Gower.

Dismissing all the above records as of doubtful relevancy to our subject[31], we proceed to take note of some which seem actually to refer to the poet. Of these none are earlier than the reign of Richard II. They are as follows:

1 Ric. II. (May, 1378). A record that Geoffrey Chaucer has given general power of attorney to John Gower and Richard Forester, to be used during his absence abroad by licence of the king.[32] Considering that Chaucer and Gower are known to have been personally acquainted with one another, we may fairly suppose that this appointment relates to John Gower the poet.[33]

6 Ric. II (Aug. 1382). Grant of the manors of Feltwell in Norfolk and Multon in Suffolk to John Gower, Esquire, of Kent, and to his heirs, by Guy de Rouclyf, clerk (Aug. 1), and release of warranty on the above (Aug. 3)[34].

6 Ric. II (Aug. 1382). Grant of the manors of Feltwell and Multon by John Gower to Thomas Blakelake, parson of St. Nicholas, Feltwell, and others, for his life, at a rent of £40, to be paid quarterly in the Abbey Church of Westminster[35]. This grant was repeated 7 Ric. II (Feb. 1384)[36].

The mention of Multon in the will of John Gower the poet makes it practically certain that the above documents have to do with him.

17 Ric. II (1393). Henry of Lancaster presented John Gower, Esquire, with a collar. This was mentioned by Nicolas as communicated to him by Mr. G. F. Beltz from a record in the Duchy of Lancaster Office. No further reference was given, and I have had some difficulty in finding the record. It is, however, among the accounts of the wardrobe of Henry of Lancaster for the year mentioned[37], and though not dated, it probably belongs to some time in the autumn of 1393, the neighbouring documents in the same bundle being dated October or November. It proves to be in fact an order, directed no doubt to William Loveney, clerk of the Wardrobe to the earl of Derby, for delivery of 26s. 8d. to one Richard Dancaster, for a collar, on account of another collar given by the earl of Derby to ‘an Esquire John Gower’[38]. So elsewhere in the household accounts of the earl of Derby we find a charge of 56s. 8d. for a silver collar for John Payne, butler, ‘because my lord had given his collar to another esquire beyond sea’[39]. This particular collar given to John Gower was a comparatively cheap one, worth apparently only 26s. 8d., while the silver collar to be given to John Payne is valued at 56s. 8d., and a gold collar of SS for Henry himself costs no less than £26 8s. 11d. The fact that Gower wears a collar of SS on his tomb makes it probable enough that he is the esquire mentioned in this document. It will afterwards be seen that we cannot base any argument upon the fact that the collar upon the effigy is now gilt, and apparently was so also in Leland’s time.

25 Jan. 1397-8. A licence from the bishop of Winchester for solemnizing the marriage between John Gower and Agnes Groundolf, both parishioners of St. Mary Magdalene, Southwark, without further publication of banns and in a place outside their parish church, that is to say, in the oratory of the said John Gower, within his lodging in the Priory of Saint Mary Overey in Southwark. Dated at Highclere, 25 Jan. 1397[40]. At this time then Gower was living in the Priory of St. Mary Overey, and no doubt he continued to do so until his death.

Finally, Aug. 15, 1408, the Will of John Gower, which was proved Oct. 24 of the same year[41]. His death therefore may be presumed to have taken place in October, 1408.

This will has been printed more than once, in Gough’s Sepulchral Monuments, by Todd in his Illustrations of Gower and Chaucer and in the Retrospective Review.

The testator bequeathes his soul to the Creator, and his body to be buried in the church of the Canons of St. Mary Overes, in the place specially appointed for this purpose (‘in loco ad hoc specialiter deputato’). To the Prior of the said church he bequeathes 40s., to the subprior 20s., to each Canon who is a priest 13s. 4d., and to each of the other Canons 6s. 8d., that they may all severally pray for him the more devoutly at his funeral. To the servants of the Priory 2s. or 1s. each according to their position; to the church of St. Mary Magdalene 40s. for lights and ornaments, to the parish priest of that church 10s., ‘vt oret et orari faciat pro me’; to the chief clerk of the same church 3s. and to the sub-clerk 2s. To the following four parish churches of Southwark, viz. St. Margaret’s, St. George’s, St. Olave’s, and St. Mary Magdalene’s near Bermondsey, 13s. 4d. each for ornaments and lights, and to each parish priest or rector in charge of those churches 6s. 8d., ‘vt orent et orari pro me in suis parochiis faciant et procurent.’ To the master of the hospital of St. Thomas in Southwark 40s., to each priest serving there 6s. 8d. for their prayers; to each sister professed in the said hospital 3s. 4d., to each attendant on the sick 20d., and to each sick person in the hospital 12d., and the same to the sisters (where there are sisters), nurses and patients in the hospitals of St. Anthony, Elsingspitell, Bedlem without Bishopsgate, and St. Maryspitell near Westminster; to every house for lepers in the suburbs of London 10s., to be distributed amongst the lepers, for their prayers: to the Prior of Elsingspitell 40s., and to each Canon priest there 6s. 8d.

For the service of the altar in the chapel of St. John the Baptist, ‘in qua corpus meum sepeliendum est,’ two vestments of silk, one of blue and white baudkin and the other of white silk, also a large new missal and a new chalice, all which are to be kept for ever for the service of the said altar. Moreover to the Prior and Convent the testator leaves a large book, ‘sumptibus meis nouiter compositum,’ called Martilogium, on the understanding that the testator shall have a special mention of himself recorded in it every day (‘sic quod in eodem specialem memoriam scriptam secundum eorum promissa cotidie habere debeo,’ not ‘debes,’ as printed).

He leaves to his wife Agnes, £100 of lawful money, also three cups, one ‘cooperculum,’ two salt-cellars and twelve spoons of silver, all the testator’s beds and chests, with the furniture of hall, pantry and kitchen and all their vessels and utensils. One chalice and one vestment are left to the altar of the oratory belonging to his apartments (‘pro altare quod est infra oratorium hospicii mei’). He desires also that his wife Agnes, if she survive him, shall have all rents due for his manors of Southwell in the county of Northampton (?) and of Multoun in the county of Suffolk, as he has more fully determined in certain other writings given under his seal.

The executors of this will are to be as follows:—Agnes his wife, Arnold Savage, knight, Roger, esquire, William Denne, Canon of the king’s chapel, and John Burton, clerk. Dated in the Priory of St. Mary Overes in Southwark, on the feast of the Assumption of the Virgin, Mccccviii.

The will was proved, Oct. 24, 1408, at Lambeth before the Archbishop of Canterbury (because the testator had property in more than one diocese of the province of Canterbury), by Agnes the testator’s wife, and administration of the property was granted to her on Nov. 7 of the same year.

It may be observed with reference to this will that the testator evidently stands already in the position of a considerable benefactor to the Priory of St. Mary Overey, in virtue of which position he has his apartments in the Priory and a place of honour assigned for his tomb in the church. He must also have established by previous arrangement the daily mass and the yearly obituary service which Berthelette speaks of as still celebrated in his time. It is evident that his benefactions were made chiefly in his life-time. There is some slight difficulty as regards the manors which are mentioned in the will. Multon in Suffolk we know already to have been in the poet’s possession; but what is this ‘Southwell’? Certainly not the well-known Southwell in Nottinghamshire, which cannot possibly have been in the possession of a private person, belonging, as it did, to the archiepiscopal see of York. Moreover, though ‘in Comitatu Nott.’ has been hitherto printed as the reading of the will, the manuscript has not this, but either ‘Notth.’ or ‘North.,’ more probably the latter. There were apparently other manors of Southwell or Suthwell in the county of Nottingham, and a manor of Suwell in Northamptonshire, but there seems to be no connexion with the name of Gower in the case of any of these. It is possible, but not very readily to be assumed, that the scribe who made the copy of the will in the register carelessly wrote ‘Southwell in Com. North.’ (or ‘Com. Notth.’) for ‘Feltwell in Com. Norff.,’ the name which is found coupled with Multon in the other records[42].

The one remaining record is the tomb in St. Saviour’s church. This originally stood in the chapel of St. John the Baptist, on the north side of the church, but in 1832, the nave and north aisle being in ruins, the monument was removed to the south transept and restored at the expense of Earl Gower. After the restoration of the church this tomb was moved back to the north aisle in October 1894, and was placed on the supposed site of the chapel of St. John the Baptist, where it now stands[43].

In the course of nearly five centuries the tomb has undergone many changes, and the present colouring and inscription are not original. What we have now is a canopy of three arches over an altar tomb, on which lies an effigy of the poet, habited in a long dark-coloured gown, with a standing cape and buttoned down to his feet, wearing a gold collar of SS, fastened in front with a device of a chained swan between two portcullises. His head rests on a pile of three folio volumes marked with the names of his three principal works, Vox Clamantis, Speculum Meditantis, Confessio Amantis. He has a rather round face with high cheek-bones, a moustache and a slightly forked beard, hair long and curling upwards[44], and round his head a chaplet of four red roses at intervals upon a band[45], with the words ‘merci ihs[46]’ (repeated) in the intervals between the roses: the hands are put together and raised in prayer: at the feet there is a lion or mastiff lying. The upper ledge of the tomb has this inscription, ‘Hic iacet I. Gower Arm. Angl. poeta celeberrimus ac huic sacro edificio benefac. insignis. Vixit temporibus Edw. III et Ric. II et Henr. IV.’ In front of the tomb there are seven arched niches. Against the wall at the end of the recess, above the feet of the figure, a shield is suspended bearing arms, argent, on a chevron azure three leopards’ faces or, crest a talbot (or lion) upon a chapeau. The wall behind the tomb under the canopy is at present blank; the original painting of female figures with scrolls has disappeared and has not been renewed, nor has the inscription ‘Armigeri scutum,’ &c., been replaced.

This tomb has attracted much attention, and descriptions of it exist from early times. Leland’s account may be thus translated: ‘He was honourably buried in London in the church of the Marian canons on the bank of the Thames, and his wife also is buried in the same place, but in a lower tomb. He has here an effigy adorned with a gold chain and a chaplet of ivy interspersed with roses, the first marking him as a knight and the second as a poet. The reason why he established his place of burial here, was, I believe, as follows. A large part of the suburb adjacent to London Bridge was burnt down in the year 1212[47], in the reign of King John. The monastery of the Marian canons was much damaged in this fire and was not fully restored till the first year of Richard II. At that time Gower, moved by the calamity, partly through his friends, who were numerous and powerful, and partly at his own expense, repaired the church and restored its ornaments, and the Marian canons even now acknowledge the liberality of Gower towards them, though not to such an extent as I declare it to have been. For this reason it was, in my judgement, that he left his body for burial to the canons of this house[48].’ Berthelette in the Preface to his edition of the Confessio Amantis, 1532, gives an interesting account of the tomb: ‘John Gower prepared for his bones a resting-place in the monastery of St. Mary Overes, where somewhat after the old fashion he lieth right sumptuously buried, with a garland on his head in token that he in his life days flourished freshly in literature and science. And the same moniment, in remembrance of him erected, is on the North side of the foresaid church, in the chapel of St. John, where he hath of his own foundation a mass daily sung: and moreover he hath an obit yearly done for him within the same church on the Friday after the feast of the blessed pope St. Gregory.

‘Beside on the wall, whereas he lieth, there be painted three virgins with crowns on their heads, one of the which is written Charitie, and she holdeth this device in her hand,

En toy qui es fitz de dieu le pere[49]

Sauvé soit que gist souz cest piere.

‘The second is written Mercye, which holdeth in her hand this device,

O bone Jesu, fait ta mercy

Al alme dont le corps gist icy[50].

‘The third of them is written Pite, which holdeth in her hand this device following,

Pur ta pité, Jesu, regarde,

Et met cest alme in sauve garde.

‘And thereby hangeth a table, wherein appeareth that who so ever prayeth for the soul of John Gower, he shall, so oft as he so doth, have a thousand and five hundred days of pardon.’

Stow, writing about 1598, says, ‘This church was again newly rebuilt in the reign of Richard II and king Henry IV. John Gower, a learned gentleman and a famous poet, but no knight, as some have mistaken it, was then an especial benefactor to that work, and was there buried in the north side of the said church, in the chapel of St. John, where he founded a chantry. He lieth under a tomb of stone with his image also of stone being over him. The hair of his head brown, long to his shoulders but curling up, collar of esses of gold about his neck; under his head,’ &c.[51] The tomb is then further described as by Berthelette, with addition of the epitaph in four Latin hexameters, ‘Armigeri scutum,’ &c. (see p. 367 of this volume).

In the Annals of England (date about 1600) he again describes the tomb, adding to his description of the painting of the three virgins the important note, ‘All which is now washed out and the image defaced by cutting off the nose and striking off the hands[52],’ from which it would appear that we cannot depend even upon the features of the effigy which now exists, as original.

The figures of the virgins were repainted in the course of the seventeenth century apparently, for in Hatton’s New View of London (date 1708) they are described as appearing with ‘ducal coronets[53].’ In Rawlinson’s Natural History and Antiquities of Surrey (published 1719) the effigy is spoken of as having a ‘scarlet gown,’ the older descriptions, e.g. Stow, giving it as ‘an habit of purple damasked,’ and it is said that there is upon the head ‘a chaplet or diadem of gold about an inch broad, on which are set at equal distances four white quaterfoyles.’[54] The writer argues also that the chain should be of silver rather than of gold[55]. The arms are said to be ‘supported by two angels,’ and ‘underneath is this inscription, “Hic iacet Iohannes Gower Armiger Anglorum poeta celeberrimus ac huic sacro Edificio Benefactor insignis temporibus Edw. III et Ric. II. Armigeri scutum,”’ &c. The following remark is added: ‘Our author Mr. John Aubrey gives us an inscription which he says he saw on a limb of this monument, something different from the foregoing, and therefore not unworthy a place here, viz.

Johannes Gower, Princeps

Poetarum Angliae, vixit

temporibus Edwardi tertii

et Richardi secundi.’

Later, in 1765, Tyler describes the gown as purple and the arms as pendent by the dexter corner. The figures of women have ducal coronets and scrolls of gold, and below them is the epitaph ‘Armigeri scutum.’ Under the statue the inscription ‘Hic iacet,’ &c.[56] The monument, as here described, is engraved in Gough’s Sepulchral Monuments (date 1796), where there is a full description of it[57]. Blore, under whose direction the position of the monument was changed, says in 1826 that the inscription on the ledge of the tomb ‘Hic iacet,’ &c., was then entirely gone.

Dollman says that there was a fire which injured the nave of the church in the reign of Richard II, and that the windows of the nave and aisles, which were finally removed in 1833, were of the time of Richard II and Henry IV[58]. It is certain, however, that the church remained long in an unfinished state during the period between 1207 (or 1212), the date of the early fire, and the latter part of the fourteenth century. Dollman observes that the remains which may have been contained in the tomb ‘disappeared when the tomb was removed from the north aisle in 1832.’[59] From what has been said it will be perceived that the tomb has undergone a series of alterations and renovations which have to some extent at least destroyed its original character.

A word must be said finally about Prof. Morley’s theory that Gower was in holy orders and held the living of Great Braxted in Essex from 1390-7. This is founded on the fact that the parson of Great Braxted for the period named was one John Gower, as Professor Morley learns from Newcourt’s Repertorium Parochiale[60]. The original record referred to by Newcourt is to be found in the Registry of the diocese of London[61], and is to the effect that on February 23, 1390-1, the bishop of London admitted and instituted John Gower, clerk, to the parochial church of Great Braksted, vacant by the resignation of John Broun, the late rector, the said John Gower having been duly presented by the king, who at this time was patron of the living, the heir of the late earl of Pembroke being under his wardship. Then later, under date March 31, 1397, there is record of a new institution to the benefice, which is vacant by the resignation of John Gower, late rector[62].

Professor Morley thought that the expression ‘John Gower, clerk’ might indicate that the person referred to was in minor orders only, some of the rectors inducted being called ‘priest’ (while others have no title at all). He conceived that this John Gower held the rectory for six or seven years without being admitted to priest’s orders at all, and that he then resigned on his marriage[63], and he found confirmation of the theory that this was Gower the poet from the fact that Great Braxted is near to Wigborough, where, as we have seen, a person of this name, supposed by Professor Morley to be the poet, had some claim to rent. We have already seen reason to think that the John Gower who had a rent of £10 from Wigborough was not the poet, and in any case it is evident that the fact could have nothing to do with a presentation by the king five and twenty years afterwards to the rectory of Great Braxted. As to resignation with a view to marriage, it is very unlikely, if not altogether out of the question, that a clergyman who had held an important rectory for six or seven years should not only have been permitted to marry, but should have had his marriage celebrated in the Priory of St. Mary Overy and with the particular sanction of the bishop of Winchester. Add to this the fact that John Gower the poet was undoubtedly ‘Esquire,’ being called so not only on his tomb but also in the documents of 1382 and 1393, the latter belonging to the period when, according to this theory, he was holding the living of Great Braxted. On the whole, the ‘minor orders’ theory must be dismissed as entirely baseless, and the John Gower who was rector of Great Braxted must be set down as another of the rather numerous persons of this name who were to be found in Kent and Essex at this time. There is nothing in Gower’s writings to suggest the idea that he was an ecclesiastic. He distinctly calls himself a layman in the Mirour de l’Omme, and the expression ‘borel clerk’ in the Prologue of the Confessio Amantis must be taken to mean the same thing. The language which in the Vox Clamantis he uses about rectors who fail to perform the duties of their office, makes it almost inconceivable that he should himself have held a rectory without qualifying himself for the performance of the service of the Church even by taking priest’s orders. Evidently Professor Morley’s idea of the poet as an Essex rector must go the way of his previous attempt to establish him as a country gentleman at Otford. It is probable that he passed a considerable part of his literary life in those lodgings within the Priory of St. Mary Overey which are mentioned in his marriage licence and in his will[64].

To the information which we derive from records must be added that which is to be drawn from the poet’s own writings. From the Speculum Meditantis we learn that in early life he composed love poems, which he calls ‘fols ditz d’ amour’ (27340), and from two other passages (ll. 8794 and 17649) we may perhaps assume that he was already married at the time when this work was composed. In the former, speaking of those who tell tales to husbands about their wives’ misconduct, he says in effect, ‘I for my part declare (‘Je di pour moi’) that I wish to hear no such tales of my wife:’ in the second he speaks of those wives who dislike servants and other persons simply because their husbands like them, and he adds, ‘I do not say that mine does so’ (‘Ne di pas q’ensi fait la moie’). If the inference be correct, his union with Agnes Groundolf in his old age was a second marriage. We cannot come to any definite conclusion from this poem about any profession or occupation which he may have had besides literature. The statement of Leland that he practised as a lawyer seems rather improbable, in view of the way in which he here speaks of lawyers and their profession. Of all the secular estates that of the law seems to him to be the worst (24085 ff.), and he condemns both advocates and judges in a more unqualified manner than the members of any other calling. Especially the suggestion of a special tax to be levied on lawyers’ gains (24337 ff.) is one that could hardly have come from one who was himself a lawyer[65].

Again the way in which he speaks of physicians (24301, 25621 ff.) seems almost equally to exclude him from the profession of medicine.

Of all the various ranks of society which he reviews, that of which he speaks with most respect is the estate of Merchants. He takes pains to point out, both in this poem and in the Vox Clamantis, the utility of their occupation, and the justice of their claim to reasonably large profits on successful ventures in consideration of the risks they run (Mirour, 25177 ff.; Vox Clam. Lib. v. Cap. xi, Heading). He makes a special apology to the honest members of the class for exposing the abuses to which the occupation is liable, pleading that to blame the bad is in effect to praise the good (25213 ff., 25975 ff.), and he is more careful here than elsewhere to point out the fact that honest members of the class exist. He speaks of ‘our City,’ and has strong feelings about the interests of the city of London, and about the proceedings of a certain bad citizen who stirs up strife and aims at giving privileges in trade to strangers (Mirour, 26380 ff.; cp. Vox Clamantis, v. 835 ff.): moreover, the jealousy of Lombards which he expresses has every appearance of being a prejudice connected with rivalry in commerce (25429 ff.). He has a special enthusiasm about the wool-trade, as a national concern of the first importance, and he has very definite opinions about the abuses of the staple (25360 ff.). At the same time there is no definite evidence that Gower was a merchant, and his interest in trade and in the affairs of the city of London may well have arisen from his residence in or near the city and his personal acquaintance with merchants (cp. Mir. 25915 ff.). His references to the dearness of labour and the unreasonable demands of the labourer (24625 ff.) are what we might expect from a man who had property in land; but again we have no sufficient evidence that Gower was a land-owner in the ordinary sense of the word, for, though he acquired the manors of Feltwell and Multon, he did not reside upon either of them, but gave a lease of them at once.

He tells us that he is a man of simple tastes (26293 ff.), and we know from the whole tone of his writings that he is a just and upright man, who believes in the subordination of the various members of society to one another, and who will not allow himself to be ruled in his own household either by his wife or his servants. But, though a thorough believer in the principle of gradation in human society, he constantly emphasizes the equality of all men before God, and refuses absolutely to admit the accident of birth as constituting any claim to ‘gentilesce.’ The common descent of all from Adam is as conclusive on this point for him as it was for John Ball. Considering that his views on society are essentially the same as those of Wycliff, and considering also his strong opinions about the corruption of the Church and the misdeeds of the friars, it is curious to find how strongly he denounces the Lollards in his later writings.

He has a just abhorrence of war, and draws a very clear distinction between the debased chivalry of his own day and the true ideal of knighthood. Above all he has a deep sense of religion, and is very familiar with the Bible. He strongly believes in the moral government of the world by Providence, and he feels sure, as others of his age did also, that the final stage of corruption has almost come. Whatever others may do, he at least intends to repent of his sins and prepare himself to render a good account of his stewardship. In both his French and his Latin work he shows himself a fearless rebuker of evil, even in the highest places. The charge of time-serving timidity has been sufficiently dealt with in the Introduction to the English Works.

From the Vox Clamantis it is evident that the rising of the Peasants produced a very powerful, indeed almost an overwhelming, impression upon his mind. He describes the terror inspired by it among those of his social standing in the most impressive manner. The progress of his political development during the reign of Richard II is clearly seen in his Latin works, with their successive revisions. He began, it is evident, with full hope and confidence that the youthful king would be a worthy representative of his father the Black Prince, both in war and in peace. As time goes on, and the boy develops into an ill-regulated young man, under evil influences of various kinds, the poet begins to have doubts, and these gradually increase until they amount to certainty, and rebuke and denunciation take the place of the former favourable anticipations. In the latest version of the Confessio Amantis, which is, no doubt, contemporary with some of these changes in the text of the Vox Clamantis, we see the author’s confidence transferred from the king to his cousin, not as yet regarded as a successor to the throne, but thought of as representing a fair ideal of chivalry and honesty. Finally, in the Cronica Tripertita, he accepts the fall of Richard as the fatal consequence of a course of evil government and treachery, and rejoices in the prospect of a new order of things under his predestined hero.

We see here the picture of one who is not devoted to a particular party, but looks to what he conceives as the common good, deeply impressed with the sense that things are out of joint, and hoping against hope that a saviour of society may arise, either in the person of the young king, or of his vigorous and chivalrous cousin. There is no sign of any liking for John of Gaunt or of any attachment to the Lancastrian party generally; but he is stirred to very genuine indignation at the unfair treatment of men whom he regards as honest patriots, such as Gloucester, the Arundels, and Cobham. He himself was evidently a most patriotic Englishman, loving his country and proud of its former greatness. For this we may refer especially to Vox Clamantis, vii. 1289 ff., but the same feeling is visible also in many other passages. He is a citizen of the world no doubt, but an Englishman first, and he cares intensely for the prosperity of his native land. Even when he writes in French it is for England’s sake,

‘O gentile Engleterre, a toi j’escrits.’

When he decides that the Confessio Amantis could no longer go forth with Richard as its patron, it is to England that he dedicates his poem, and for his country that he offers up the prayers which he can no longer utter with sincerity on behalf of the worthless king (Conf. Am. Prol. 24 and viii. 2987).

From the Confessio Amantis we learn the circumstances under which that work was undertaken, owing in part at least to a suggestion from the king himself, who, meeting Gower upon the river, made him come into his own barge and conversed with him familiarly on his literary projects, urging him apparently to the composition of a poem in English, and perhaps suggesting Love as the subject. We gather also that in the year 1390 the author considered himself already an old man, and that he had then suffered for some time from ill-health (Prol. 79*, viii. 3042*), and from the Epistle to Archbishop Arundel prefixed later to the Vox Clamantis, as well as from the Latin lines beginning ‘Henrici Regis’ (or ‘Henrici quarti’) we learn that he was blind during the last years of his life, probably from the year 1400. We may reasonably suppose that he was born about the year 1330, or possibly somewhat later. From the Latin statement about his books we learn, what is tolerably obvious from their tenour, that his chief aim in writing was edification, while at the same time we gather from the opening of the first book of the Confessio Amantis that he then despaired of effecting anything by direct admonition, and preferred finally to mingle amusement with instruction. The Latin lines at the end of this volume, beginning ‘Dicunt scripture,’ express a principle which he seems to have followed himself, namely that a man should give away money for good purposes during his own life, rather than leave such business to be attended to by his executors.

The literary side of his activity is sufficiently dealt with in the introductions to his several works, and there also it is noted what were the books with which he was acquainted. It is enough to say here that he was a man of fairly wide general reading, and thoroughly familiar with certain particular books, especially the Bible, all the works of Ovid, and the Aurora of Peter de Riga.

THE LATIN WORKS.

Of the works which are included in the present volume the Vox Clamantis is the most important. It is written in elegiac verse, more or less after the model of Ovid, and consists of 10,265 lines, arranged in seven books, of which the first, second and third have separate prologues, and each is divided into a series of chapters with prose headings. As to the date of composition, all that we can say is that the work in its present form is later than the Peasants’ rising in the summer of 1381, and yet it was evidently composed while the memory of that event was fresh, and also before the young king had grown beyond boyhood. The advice to the king with regard to fidelity in marriage need not be taken to have special reference to the king’s actual marriage at the end of the year 1382, but perhaps it is more natural to suppose that it was written after that event than before.

The general plan of the author is to describe the condition of society and of the various degrees of men, much as in the latter portion of the Speculum Meditantis. This, however, is made subordinate to the detailed account, given at the beginning, of the Peasants’ rising, and that is in fact set down as the main subject of the work in the Latin account of it given by the author: ‘Secundus enim liber sermone Latino versibus exametri et pentametri compositus tractat super illo mirabili euentu, qui in Anglia tempore domini Regis Ricardi secundi anno regni sui quarto contigit, quando seruiles rustici impetuose contra nobiles et ingenuos regni insurrexerunt. Innocenciam tamen dicti domini Regis tunc minoris etatis causa inde excusabilem pronuncians, culpas aliunde, ex quibus et non a fortuna talia inter homines contingunt enormia, euidencius declarat. Titulusque voluminis huius, cuius ordo septem continet paginas, Vox Clamantis nominatur.’

So the statement of contents ran in its earlier form. Afterwards the excuses made for the king on the ground of his youth were withdrawn, and in the final form of the statement the events of the Cronica Tripertita are brought into the reckoning, and the fall of Richard seems to be represented as a moral consequence of the earlier misfortunes of his reign.

Evidently what is quoted above is a very insufficient summary of the Vox Clamantis, which in fact deals with the Peasants’ rising only in its first book; and notwithstanding the fact that this event so much overshadows the other subjects of the poem that the author in describing his work afterwards treated it as the only theme, there is some reason to question whether what we have is really the original form of the poem, and even to conclude that the work may have been originally composed altogether without this detailed narrative of the insurrection. For this idea there is some manuscript authority. It has not hitherto been noted that in one copy (MS. Laud 719) the Vox Clamantis appears with the omission of the whole of the first book after the Prologue and first chapter[66]. At the same time the text of this manuscript seems to be complete in itself, and the books are numbered in accordance with the omission, so that there are six books only, our second book being numbered as the first[67]. There is really something to be said for this arrangement, apart from the fact that it occurs in a single manuscript. The first book, with its detailed account of the Peasants’ revolt, though in itself the most interesting part of the work, has certainly something of the character of an insertion. The plan of the remainder seems to be independent of it, though the date, June, 1381, which is found also in the Laud MS.,

‘Contigit vt quarto Ricardi regis in anno,

Dum clamat mensem Iunius esse suum,’

was doubtless intended to suggest that portentous event as the occasion of the review of society which the work contains. The prologue of the second book, which introduces the teachings of the vision with an invocation of God’s assistance, an apology for the deficiencies of the work, and an appeal to the goodwill of the reader, and concludes with a first announcement of the name of the succeeding poem, Vox Clamantis, would certainly be much more in place at the beginning of the whole work than here, after more than two thousand lines, and there is no difficulty in supposing that the author may have introduced his account of the Peasants’ revolt as an afterthought. The chief reason for hesitating to accept the Laud MS. as representing an authentic form of the poem, lies in the fact that the text of this MS. is rather closely related to that of another copy, MS. Digby 138, which contains the first book in its usual place; and it is perhaps more likely that the original archetype of these two MSS. was one which included the first book, and that this was omitted for some reason by the scribe of the Laud MS., than that the copyist of the Digby MS. perceived the absence of this book and supplied it from some other quarter.

One other matter affecting our estimate of the style of the composition generally has perhaps been sufficiently illustrated in the Notes of this edition, that is to say, the extent to which the author borrows in the Vox Clamantis from other writers. It is sufficiently obvious to a casual reader that he has appropriated a good many lines from Ovid, though the extent of this schoolboy plagiarism is hardly to be realised without careful examination; but his very extensive obligations to other writers have not hitherto been pointed out. He repeatedly takes not lines or couplets only, but passages of eight, ten or even twenty lines from the Aurora of Peter Riga, from the poem of Alexander Neckam De Vita Monachorum, from the Speculum Stultorum, or from the Pantheon, so that in many places the composition is entirely made up of such borrowed matter variously arranged and combined. This is evidently a thing to be noted, because if the author, when describing (for example) the vices of monasteries, is found to be merely quoting from Alexander Neckam, we cannot attach much value to his account as a picture of the manners of his own time. His knowledge of Ovid seems to have been pretty complete, for he borrows from almost every section of his works with the air of one who knows perfectly well where to turn for what he wants; quite a large portion of Neckam’s poem is appropriated without the smallest acknowledgement, and many long passages are taken from the Aurora, with only one slight mention of this source (iii. 1853). Most of the good Latin lines for which Gower has got credit with critics are plagiarisms of this kind, and if Professor Morley had realized to what extent the Vox Clamantis is a compilation, he would hardly have estimated the work so highly as he has done. The extracts from medieval authors are to some extent tolerable, because they are usually given in a connected and intelligible shape, but the perpetual borrowing of isolated lines or couplets from Ovid, often without regard to their appropriateness or their original meaning, often makes the style, of the first book especially, nearly as bad as it can be. I have taken the pains to point out a considerable number of plagiarisms, but it is certain that there must be many instances which have escaped my notice. In his later Latin verse the author is very much less dependent upon others, and the Cronica Tripertita, from the nature of the subject, is necessarily original.

Gower’s own style of versification in Latin is somewhat less elegant than that of Alexander Neckam or Peter Riga, but it stands upon much the same level of correctness. If we take into account the fact that the Latin is not classical but medieval, and that certain licences of prosody were regularly admitted by medieval writers of Latin verse, we shall not find the performance very bad. Such licences are, for example, the lengthening of a short syllable at the caesura, the position of final short vowels before ‘st,’ ‘sp,’ ‘sc’ at the beginning of the succeeding word, and the use of polysyllabic words, or of two dissyllables, at the end of the hexameter, so that lines such as these are not to be taken as irregular:

‘Omnis et inde gradus a presule sanctificatus;’

‘Quo minor est culpa, si cadat inde rea;’

‘Et quia preuisa sic vota facit, puto culpa;’

‘Si bene conseruet ordinis ipse statum.’

In any case it is certain that Gower expressed himself in Latin with great facility and with tolerable correctness. He may have imitated the style of Ovid ‘studiosius quam felicius,’ as Leland observes, but the comparison with other Latin verse-writers of his time sets his performance in a fairly favourable light.

Vox Clamantis. Analysis.

Prologus Libri Primi.

From the records of the past we derive examples; and though credit be not commonly given to dreams, yet the writers of past time instruct us otherwise. Daniel and Joseph were taught by visions, and a man’s guardian angel often warns him in his sleep. Hence, as it seems to me, my dreams should be recorded as signs of the times; and what my vision was and at what time it came, ye may learn from this book.

If ye desire to know the writer’s name, add to John the beginning of Godfrey, the first letter of Wales and the word ter without its head. But give no praise to the author, for I write not with a view to fame. I shall write of strange things which my country has experienced, and as my matter is woful, so also shall be my song. My pen is wet with tears, and both my heart and my hand tremble; nor am I sufficient to write all the troubles that belong to the time. I ask for indulgence rather than praise: my will is good, though my powers fall short. I pray that while I sing of those true visions which disturb my heart with terror, he whose name I bear, to whom visions were revealed in Patmos, may control my work.

Liber Primus.

Cap. I. It was in the fourth year of king Richard, when the month was June: the moon had set and the morning-star had risen, when from the West a strange light sprang, the dawn came from the region of the setting sun and brought forth the day. The sun shone and all the earth was bright; Phebus went forth in his glorious car, attended by the four Seasons, Summer being nearest to him then and honoured by all creatures. The meadows were bright with flowers and the flocks sported in the fields, a perfect paradise of flowers and fruits was there, with the songs of multitudinous birds. Such was the day on which I wandered forth for my pleasure.

All things have an end, and at length that calm day had completed its appointed hours; evening came and I lay down to rest. The night came on, dark and gloomy as the day had been bright, and sleep did not visit my eyes. My hair stood on end, my flesh and my heart trembled and my senses were disturbed like water. I reflected what the cause might be of my sudden terror, and my mind wandered by various paths. The night went on, yet no sleep came, and terror of a coming evil oppressed me. Thus I spent the hours of darkness, not knowing what was approaching, seeing the past and fearing for the future; but at length, towards dawn, sleep came upon my weary eyes, and I began to dream.

Cap. II. Methought I went out upon a Tuesday to gather flowers, and I saw people in bands going abroad over the fields. Suddenly the curse of God fell like lightning upon them, and they were changed into the forms of beasts, various bands into various forms.

One band was changed into asses rebellious against the halter and the burden, careering over the fields and demanding to be as horses; and these had also horns in the middle of their foreheads, which were stained with blood; they were swift as leopards in their leap, and had tails like that of a lion, yet the stolid asinine mind was in them still. I stood in terror and could advance no further.

Cap. III. With them came oxen, who refused any longer to be subject to the yoke and who would no longer eat straw. These too were in monstrous shape with feet like those of a bear and with the tails of dragons; they breathed forth fire and smoke like the bulls of Colchos. They devastated the fields and slew men: the plough, the rake and the mattock lay idle. ‘Ah me!’ I said, ‘the cultivation of the fields will cease and famine will come upon us.’

Cap. IV. A third band I saw transformed into swine, furious and possessed by the devil. They followed one another, hog and hogling, boar and little pig, the sow and her companion, and there was no swine-herd to keep them away from the corn-fields. They wandered where they would, and the pig ravaged like a wolf.

One boar there was, whom Kent produced, such as the whole earth might not match. Flame came from his mouth and eyes, his tusks were like those of an elephant; foam mixed with human blood flowed over his flanks. He strikes down all those whom he meets and none can prevail against him: no place except heaven is safe from his rage. From the North comes another boar to meet him and to plan destruction.

These boars were greater and more furious than that of Tegea or that which Meleager hunted. They are not content with acorns for their food or water for their drink; they devour rich food in the city and drink good wine, so that they lie in drunkenness as dead. They despise the pig-stye and defile kings’ palaces with their filth: their grunting is like the roaring of a lion.

Cap. V. A fourth band was turned into dogs, who are not content with the food from their master’s table, but range in search of better, who do not hunt hares or stags, but bark at the heels of men. Here are Cut and Cur from their wretched kennels, the sheep-dog and the watch-dog, the baker’s, the butcher’s, and the miller’s dog. The one-eyed is there and the three-legged dog limps behind barking. These cannot be soothed by stroking, but bare their teeth in anger against you. They tear all whom they meet, and the more they devour the less they are satisfied. Cerberus in hell hears their howl, and breaking away from his chains he joins himself to their company and becomes their leader. More savage were these than the hounds which tore Acteon or the beast which Diana sent to destroy the Athenians. All trembled before them.

Cap. VI. Another band took the form of foxes and cats. They ran about and searched every cavern and every hiding-place, and made their way into secret chambers. There was venom in their bite. The caves of the wood send forth the foxes, who rob by day without fear, and have a treaty of peace with the dogs. The cats leave the barns and cease to catch mice, and these do damage more than ever did the mice of Ekron.

Cap. VII. A sixth took the form of domestic fowls, but they claimed to be birds of prey. The cock had the beak and claws of a falcon, and the goose soared up to the heaven. Suddenly the cock becomes a carrion-crow and the goose a kite, and they prey upon the carcasses of men. The cock crows horribly and the hen follows him and moves him to evil. The goose which formerly frightened only children with its hissing, now terrifies grown men and threatens to tear them to pieces.

Owls join themselves to these and do by day the deeds of darkness, sharpening their feathers with iron, in order that they may slay men.

Cap. VIII. The dream continued, and I saw another band in the form of flies and of frogs. These were like those that plagued Egypt: the frogs came into houses and shed their poison everywhere; the flies pursued with their stings all those of gentle blood, and nothing could keep them out. Their prince Belzebub was the leader of the host. The heat of the summer produced them suddenly in swarms: the fly was more rapacious than the hawk and prouder than the peacock; he contended with the lark, the crane and the eagle in flight.

This was a day on which horses were overcome by asses, and lions by oxen, a day in which the dog was stronger than the bear and the cat than the leopard, a day in which the weak confounded the strong, a day in which slaves were raised on high and nobles brought to the ground, a day in which the terror of God’s wrath came upon all, such a day as no chronicle records in time past. May such a day never come again in our age!

Cap. IX. When all this multitude was gathered together like the sand of the sea, one, a Jay skilled in speech, took the first place among them and addressed them thus: ‘O wretched slaves, now comes the day in which the peasant shall drive out the lord; let honour, law and virtue perish, and let our court rule.’ They listen and approve, and though they know not what ‘our court’ means, what he says has for them the force of law: if he says ‘strike,’ they strike, if he says ‘kill,’ they kill. Their sound was as the sound of the sea, and from terror I could scarcely move my feet. They strike a mutual compact and declare that all those of gentle blood who remain in the world shall be overthrown.

Then they advance all together; a dark cloud mingled with the furies of hell rains down evil into their hearts; the earth is wetted with the dew of the pit, so that no virtue can grow, but every vice increases. Satan is loose and among them, the princes of Erebus draw the world after them, and the more I gaze, the more I am terrified, not knowing what the end will be.

Cap. X. Furious rage there was, they were greedy for slaughter like hungry wolves. The seven races derived from Cain were added to them. The prophets spoke of them, Gog and Magog is their name, they neither fear man nor worship God. Moreover those companions of Ulysses, whom Circe transformed, are associated with them: some have the heads of men and others of brute beasts.

Cap. XI. There is Wat, Tom and Sim, Bet and Gib followed by Hick; Coll, Geff and Will, Grigge, Dawe, Hobbe and Lorkin, Hudd, Judd, Tebb and Jack, such are their names;[68] and Ball teaches them as a prophet, himself having been taught by the devil.

Some bray like asses, others bellow like bulls, they grunt, they bark, they howl, the geese cackle, the wasps buzz; the earth is terrified with their sound and trembles at the name of the Jay.

Cap. XII. They appoint heralds and leaders, and they order that all who do not favour them shall suffer death. They are armed with stakes and poles, old bows and arrows, rusty sickles, mattocks and forks; some have only clods and stones and branches of trees. They wet the earth with the blood of their betters.

Cap. XIII. These come in their fury to the city of new Troy, which opens its gates to them, and they surge in and invade the streets and houses. It was Thursday, the festival of Corpus Christi, when this fury attacked the city on all sides; they burnt the houses and slew the citizens. The Savoy burns, and the house of the Baptist falls to ruin in the flames. They rob and carry away the spoil, and that day is closed with drunkenness everywhere.

The next day, Friday, is yet worse; no wisdom or courage avails against them, they rage like a lioness robbed of her young. O, how degenerate is the city which allows this, how disgraceful that armed knights should give place to an unarmed mob! There is no Capaneus or Tydeus, no Ajax or Agamemnon, no Hector or Achilles, to make defence or attack. Ilion with its towers cannot keep men safe from the furies.

Cap. XIV. Helenus the chief priest, who kept the palladium of Troy, was slain in spite of his exhortations. These were deeds worthy rather of demons than of men. Piety and virtue perished and vice ran riot. They said ‘Let his blood be upon our heads,’ and slew him without pity: the curse of Christ shall fall upon them for this deed.

Simon had the same death as Thomas, but at the hands of greater numbers and for a different cause. Vengeance came for the death of Thomas; for Simon it daily threatens. It was midday when this blood was shed, the shepherd was slain by his flock, the father by his children. He died untimely; but though taken away from us, he lives in heaven. This is the foulest of all the deeds done: these men are worse than Cain, who only slew his brother. O cursed hand that struck the severed head! Wail for this, all ye old and young, the evils prophesied by Cassandra come down on this city. The king could not rescue Helenus, but he mourned for him in his heart.

Cap. XV. The chief citizens also perished, there was death and sorrow everywhere. If a son pleaded for his father, both were slain. No place of safety can be found by those of gentle condition; they flee to the forests in vain, and move vaguely hither and thither, neither city nor field affords them protection. Death is everywhere, and spares not even the women and the children. There is no remedy, and neither lamentation nor prayers are of any avail.

Cap. XVI. When I saw all this, horror seized me and I fled. I left my own house and wandered over the fields, I went from place to place in search of safety; the enemy pressed after me; I hid in caves of the woods, and was without hope at evening of what the morrow might bring. My dreams terrified me and my heart melted like wax in the fire. I lay hid during the day and trembled at every sound, the tears that I shed were my sole subsistence. I was alone and in terror of the wrath of God, my mind was sick and my body was wasted. Hardly ever did I meet a companion, and those friends whom I had trusted in prosperity failed me now. I dared scarcely speak a word, lest I should betray myself to an enemy.

Then, when I saw nothing but death about me, I desired to die, and yet I was unwilling to perish in so desolate a state. While I wept, lo, Wisdom came to me and bade me stop my tears, for grief would at some time cease. I stood amazed and in doubt; death was life to me and life was death, and wondrous visions passed before me.

Cap. XVII. I saw not far off a Ship, and I ran towards it and climbed up its side. In it were almost all those of gentle birth, crowded together and terrified, seeking refuge from the furies. I prayed that we might have a favourable voyage. The ship left the shore, but my hopes were vain: the sky grew dark and the winds lashed the waves into storm, the ship was driven before them amid thunder and rain. There was confusion among the sailors, and the captain in vain endeavoured to direct the ship’s course.

Cap. XVIII. At length the storm so increased that all were in despair of safety. A huge monster of the sea, Scylla and Charybdis both in one, appeared as if to destroy the ship and all who were in it. We prayed to heaven for help.

(The Tower of London was like this ship, shaken by the storm, its walls giving way to the fury of the mob. In vain it offered hopes of safety; it was stained with foul parricide, and the den of the leopard was captured by assault.)

When I saw these things I was terrified in my sleep, and I prayed to God for help. ‘Thou Creator and Redeemer of the human race, thou who didst save Paul from the sea, Peter from prison and Jonah from the whale’s belly, hear my prayer, I entreat thee. Help me and grant that I may be cast up on a favourable shore!’

As I prayed, the monster struck the ship, and it was almost swallowed up by the fury of Scylla.

Cap. XIX. Yet our cries and tears were not unheard. When the storm raged most furiously, there was one William, a Mayor, who was moved to high deeds: he struck down that proud Jay, and with his death the storm abated, Scylla restored its prey, and the ship once more rode upright upon the water. The sailors regained their courage and hoisted a little sail, peace returned and the sky became clear. I then with all the rest gave thanks to Christ.

Cap. XX. Still my dream went on, and still I seemed to see that ship, which now with broken oars was drifting in search of a landing-place. It was driven to that port where all this evil raged; it had escaped Scylla, but it came to an Island more dangerous than Scylla. I landed, and asked one of those whom I met, ‘What island is this, and why is there so great a concourse of people here?’ He replied: ‘This is called the Island of Brute, and the men who dwell here are of fair form but of savage condition. This people lays law and justice low by violence; strife and bloodshed reign here ever. Yet if they could love one another, no better people would there be from the rising to the setting of the sun.’

I was saddened and terrified by his answer, I knew not whether sea or land were more to be feared. The heavenly voice which I had heard before said to me, ‘Lament not, but take heed to thyself. Thou hast come to a place where wars abound, but do thou seek peace within by God’s assistance. Be cautious and silent; but when thou hast leisure, record these dreams of thine, for dreams often give a presage of the future.’ The voice was heard no more, and at that moment the cock crew and I awoke from my sleep, scarce knowing whether what I had seen was within me or without.

Cap. XXI. Then I returned thanks to God for having preserved me upon the sea and from the jaws of Scylla. The rustic goes back to his labours, but in his heart there remains hatred of his lords; therefore let us be forewarned and provide against future evils. As for me, God has set me free from the danger, and for this I thank him; and I would that my country, preserved from destruction, might render due thanks to God. While the memory of these things is fresh in me, I will write that which I experienced in my sleep, that waking slumber which brought to me no mere vision but a dream of reality.

Prologus Libri Secundi.

Many things did I see and note, which my pen shall write, but first I invoke, not the Muses, but the true Spirit of God, and I will let down my nets in the name of Christ and for his glory. The style and the verses are poor, but the meaning is good. I will give that which my poor faculties can attain to; and may he be my helper who produced speech from the mouth of an ass. I prefer to do a little good than none.

The words which follow are not spoken from myself; they are gathered from various sources, as honey from various flowers or bright shells from various shores. The name of the book is Vox Clamantis, because it is the utterance of a fresh sorrow.

Liber Secundus.

Cap. I. Tears shall be the ink with which I write. All is vanity except the love of God, and man has cause for lamentation from his birth.

Yet if any people in the world could be happy, God granted this boon to us; we were blessed above all other nations. Now our former glory is extinguished and our prosperity is destroyed.

Why is our condition thus changed? Nothing on earth happens without a cause, yet all deny that they are the cause of this and find fault with Fortune, who turns all things upside down.

Cap. II. O thou who art called Fortune, why dost thou thus depress those whom thou didst once exalt? Once our country was everywhere honoured, all desired to be at peace with it: now our glory has departed and enemies attack us from all quarters. Reply, Fortune, and say if thou art the cause of this change. I think not, for I believe in God and not in Fortune; yet I will describe thee, as men think that thou art.

Cap. III. Fortune, hear what men say of thee, that thou hast a double face, and goest by double paths, that nothing in thee is stable or secure. No gifts may keep thee faithful, thou art lighter than the dead leaves which fly before the wind: now thou art bright and fair, now dark and lowering; thy love is more treacherous than that of a harlot, the prosperity which thou givest is very near to disaster.

Cap. IV. Fortune gives no honey without gall, she changes like the sphere of the moon. Her wheel is ever turning, and no tears or prayers will move her. Citizen and husbandman, king and rustic, rich and poor, all are alike to her. Ah! why was so much power given to such a one as she is?

Thus men say, believing that Fortune can overthrow the decrees of God, but in fact she is nothing, fate is nothing, chance has nothing to do with the affairs of men. Each one makes for himself his own lot: if the will is good, good fortune follows, if evil, it makes the fortune bad. Virtue will lead you to the summit of the wheel, and vice will bring you and your fortune down to the bottom.

Cap. V. God has said that the man who obeys his commands shall prosper in wealth and peace: the very elements are subject to the righteous man. Joshua caused the sun to stand still, Gregory stayed the plague, Moses divided the sea, Elisha caused iron to swim, the three children were unhurt by the fire, the earth rose to give a seat to Hilarius. Wild animals, too, serve the just man, witness Daniel, Silvester, Moses and Jonah.

Cap. VI. Again, the elements war against sinners: so it was in the case of the plague caused by David’s sin, in the case of the Sodomites, Korah, Dathan and Abiram, Lysias and others. The wicked man cannot enjoy good fortune, nor can the good man be deprived of it. It was guilt that caused the fall of Pharaoh and of Saul, the death of Ahab and of Eli with his sons. The Jews always conquered while they were obedient to God’s law, and were overcome when they transgressed it.

Cap. VII. It is God Omnipotent, the Three in One, who governs all things here. As fire, heat and motion are three things combined in one, so the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three persons but one Godhead.

Cap. VIII. Christ, the Son of the Father, became incarnate in man, and yet remained what he was before, being less than the Father and yet equal to him, perfect Man and perfect God. As the frailty of the first Adam brought evil upon us all, so the strength of the second Adam healed our wound and restored our fallen state.

Cap. IX. We must submit our mind to the faith, for man cannot understand the things of God, and we must not examine too closely the mystery which we cannot penetrate. This we know, that life is given to all through the name of Jesus Christ.

Cap. X. The heathen bows down to figures of wood and stone, asking help from that which his hands have made. Was not the world made for man and all things placed in subjection to him? How then can these idols be of any avail?

As for us, we use images differently, not giving to them the worship that belongs to God, but by them assisting devotion; especially the sign of the Cross is to be adored, by means of which we conquer the powers of evil. Great is the virtue of the Cross, by which Christ despoiled hell of its prey and ascended into heaven.

Cap. XI. God created the heaven and the earth, and all created things ought to serve him. As he creates all things, so also he rules them continually, and he gives his gifts according to men’s merit. Whatever comes to pass in the world, whether it be good or evil, we are the cause of it.

Prologus Libri Tercii.

Since good and bad fortune are due to the merits and demerits of men, I shall examine the various conditions of men and find out where the fault lies. I shall utter not so much my own words as the common report of others, and it must be remembered that he who finds fault with the bad is in effect praising the good. May God assist me to carry out my task! My abilities are small, and I do not affect high themes, but I speak of the evils which the common voice of humanity bewails. Let no envy or calumny attack my work; and do thou, O Christ, grant that I may avoid falsehood and flattery. With this prayer I enter on my voyage.

Liber Tercius.

Cap. I. The order of the world is in three degrees,—Clergy, Knighthood and Peasantry. I shall deal first with the prelates of the Church, whose practice is very far removed from the example of Christ. Riches alone are valued by them, and the poor man is despised, whatever may be his merits.

Cap. II. Prelates of the Church are now hirelings, whose desire is to live in luxury and to indulge their appetites. Gluttony and lust everywhere prevail.

Cap. III. The prelates of the Church aim at earthly honours instead of heavenly: they desire rather to have the pre-eminence than to do good. Powerful men escape without rebuke for their sins, and penance is avoided by payment.

Cap. IV. As regards the ‘positive law,’ for breach of which dispensations are granted, I ask first whether Christ gives indulgence beforehand for sin, or prohibits that which is not sin. If these things are sins, how can I be free to commit them on consideration of a money payment; if not, why does the Church forbid them? This is merely a device for bringing in money to the clergy.

Cap. V. The poison of temporal possessions is still working in the Church. They no longer war on the pagan, but turn their swords against their own brother Christians.

Cap. VI. Christ left peace with his disciples, but in our time avarice and ambition cause prelates to take part in intestine strife, with swords in their hands and the cross as their ensign. It is not the part of a soldier to offer incense at the altar or of a priest to bear arms in war.

Cap. VII. The priest should fight with other than material arms. David was not permitted to build a house for the Lord, because he had been a shedder of blood; and those who are stained with the slaughter of their brethren cannot be the true servants of the altar. Brotherly love should prevail, and this is opposed to strife and self-seeking ambition.

Cap. VIII. Worldly men may make wars, but the clergy should not take part in them; their strength is in their words and prayers, and they have no need of material arms. Too great prosperity and wealth is the cause of these evils: they do not see what the end will be.

Cap. IX. The ring and the pastoral staff belong to the Pope, the sceptre to the Emperor; the one must not usurp the rights of the other. The Emperor should not claim spiritual power, nor the Pope temporal. Christ is a lover of peace and his ministers must not appeal to the sword, but must keep the command, ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ Let Christ himself lay claim to what is his. Pride is the root of all evil.

The apostles conquered by prayers and by patience; Peter had neither silver nor gold, but he healed the lame man; our clergy abound in wealth, but do no works of healing, either spiritual or bodily. O thou who art head of the Church, remember that forgiveness should be until seventy times seven, and that Peter was commanded by Christ to put up his sword.

Cap. X. The teaching and the writings of the clergy are in favour of peace and love, and when I wondered why they waged wars, one answered me in the person of the supreme pontiff and said: ‘Rule on earth is given to us by divine decree and it pleases us to enjoy all the good things of this world. Our way is different from that of Christ and his apostles; we set up the cross as a sign of hatred and vengeance, we put to death those who will not acknowledge our rule; the pastoral staff is turned into a spear and the mitre into a helmet, we can slay with sword as well as with word, and whereas Peter cut off the ears, we cut off the head.’

Cap. XI. These claim the worship and honour which belong to God alone, and the goods which they unjustly seize are never restored. The shepherd preys like a wolf upon his own sheep.

Cap. XII. He who is promoted to dignity in the Church by simony is like the thief who enters not by the door into the sheepfold. The Church is a congregation of faithful men, and the clergy are no better than the laity, except so far as they lead better lives. Yet they lay burdens upon us which they will not bear themselves, and do not follow their own precepts. They bear the keys of heaven, but they neither enter themselves nor allow us to enter: they set no good example to their flocks.

Cap. XIII. A prelate should be a light to guide his people by example, and he should encourage them by his voice, and also reprove and restrain. The oil with which he is anointed is a type of the qualities that he ought to display.

Cap. XIV. At the Court of Rome nothing can be done without gifts: the poor man is everywhere rejected. The spirit of Antichrist is opposite to that of Christ, and there are many signs that he has already come.

Cap. XV. Our prelates aim at the mere outward show of sanctity and refuse to bear the burden of Christ. O God, in thy mercy restore them to the state which they have lost!

Cap. XVI. Rectors of parishes, too, err after the example of the prelates. They are luxurious in their lives, and many desert their spiritual cures, in order to frequent courts and great households, with a view to promotion.

Cap. XVII. Another gets leave from the bishop to leave his parish on the plea of study at the universities; but there he learns and teaches only lessons of unchastity. The Church, which is his true bride, is neglected, and harlots receive the tithe which belongs to God.

Cap. XVIII. A third rector resides in his parish, but spends his time in sports, keeps well-fed horses and dogs, while the poor are not relieved or the sick visited, makes his voice heard more in the fields and woods than in the church. He lays snares too for the women of his parish, and if their bodies be fair, he cares not how their souls are defiled.

Cap. XIX. Another neglects his cure of souls and makes money by buying and selling. He is liberal of his wealth to none but women; and if benefices were inherited by the children of those who hold them, the succession would seldom fail.

Cap. XX. The priests without benefices, who get their living by ‘annuals,’ are equally bad: the harlot and the tavern consume their gains. Let none admit these to his house, who desires to keep his wife chaste, anymore than he would admit pigeons to his bed-chamber, if he wished to keep it clean.

Cap. XXI. These infect the laity by their bad example. The bishop ought not to ordain such men; and he who might prevent an evil and does not, is equally guilty with him who causes it.

Cap. XXII. The clergy deny the right of laymen to judge and punish them; yet the sins of the clergy deeply affect the laity. We are all brethren in Christ and we are bidden to rebuke our brethren, if they do wrong, and to cast them out of the Church, if they will not amend.

Cap. XXIII. Priests say that in committing fornication they do not sin more than other men who are guilty of this vice. But their sacred condition and their vow of chastity makes the evil worse in them than in a cobbler or a shepherd.

Cap. XXIV. If we consider the office of the priesthood, we shall find that the vestments and ornaments of priests are all symbolical of the virtues which they ought to possess.

Cap. XXV. The ceremonies of sacrifices under the old law were symbols of the virtues required in priests under the new, and as under the old dispensation the ministers of the altar ought to be without defect and deformity of body, so the priests of the new law should be spiritually free from blemish. Uzzah touched the ark with unclean hands and was punished with death: so he who comes polluted to the service of the altar is worthy of punishment.

Cap. XXVI. A man must be of mature age before he assumes the priesthood; for youth is apt to yield to the temptations of the flesh. The evil impulses cannot be wholly expelled, but they may be kept in check, as is symbolized by the tonsure of the priest. Let the priest avoid idleness, whence so many vices spring.

Cap. XXVII. The honour of priests is great, if they live worthily. They administer to us the sacraments during our lives, they give us burial when we are dead, they are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. So much the worse is it when they are ignorant and bad; the distinction between the good and the bad priest is like that between the dove and the raven sent out of the ark.

Cap. XXVIII. The young scholars who are being trained for the priesthood are in these days too often indolent and vicious. If they are so in youth, they will hardly be good in their later age.

Cap. XXIX. They are induced to undertake the priesthood by desire to escape from the control of the ordinary law, by dislike of labour, and by love of good living, seldom by the higher motive, which once prevailed, of contempt for worldly things and longing after the highest good. Thus, since the clergy is without the light of virtue, we laymen wander in the dark.

Liber Quartus.

Cap. I. Men of Religious Orders are also of various conditions, some good and others bad. Let each bear his own burden of blame: I write only what common report tells me.

There are first those who hold temporal possessions, and some of these live in gluttony and luxury.

Cap. II. Those who leave the world should give up worldly things; but in these days the monk is known only by his garb. He indulges himself with the richest food and the choicest drink, he makes haste when the bell rings for a meal, but he rises very slowly and reluctantly for midnight prayer. The monks of old were different; they dwelt in caves and had no luxurious halls or kitchens, they were clothed in skins, fed on herbs and drank water, and abstained from fleshly lusts. These men truly renounced the world, but that blessed state has now perished.

Cap. III. The old monastic rule has given place to gluttony and drunkenness, and those who live so can hardly be chaste. Pride, anger and envy prevail among these men, in spite of the restrictions of their rule.

Cap. IV. There is no brotherly love among them, and the vow of individual poverty is also broken. They make money in various ways and spend it on their pleasures and in enriching their children, whom they call their nephews.

Cap. V. A monk wandering abroad from his cloister is like a fish out of water; nor are those much better who stay within the walls and allow their minds to dwell on worldly things.

Cap. VI. Some seek honour and dignity under the cover of the monastic profession, even though they be of poor and low birth.

Cap. VII. Patience, Chastity and the rest who were once brothers of religious orders, are now dead or departed, and their contrary vices have taken their places.

Cap. VIII. So also the regular Canons for the most part neglect their monastic rule and have only a show of sanctity.

Cap. IX. Monks who are untrue to their profession are of all men the most unhappy. They have no real enjoyment of this world and they lose also the joys of heaven.

Cap. X. Let all members of religious orders perform their vows and repent of their past sins, of their pride, luxury, avarice, ambition, gluttony, wrath, envy and strife.

Cap. XI. Above all let them avoid intercourse with women, who bring death to their souls. Let them labour and study; for idleness is the great incentive to evil.

Cap. XII. The monk who sets himself to observe his rule will live hardly and fast often, praying continually and doing penance for sin. He will submit himself humbly to his prior, and he will not grudge to perform duties that are irksome. The prior should be gentle with his younger brethren and not make the yoke too heavy for them.

Cap. XIII. As regards nuns, they too are under the rule of chastity; but as women are more frail by nature than men, they must not be so severely punished if they break it. They require meat often on Fridays for their stomachs’ sake, and this is prepared for them by Genius the priest of Venus.

Cap. XIV. Where Genius is the confessor of a convent, the laws of the flesh prevail. The priest who visits nuns too often corrupts them, and the woman very easily yields to temptation. A wife may deceive her husband, but the bride of Christ cannot conceal her unfaithfulness from him: therefore she above all others should be chaste.

Cap. XV. True virginity is above all praise, and this surpasses every other condition, as a rose surpasses the thorns from which it springs. The best kind of virginity is that which is vowed to God.

Cap. XVI. Not all whom Christ chose were faithful, and everywhere bad and good are mingled together; but the fault of the bad is not a reason for condemning the good. So when I speak of the evil deeds of Friars, I condemn the bad only and absolve the good.

The number of mendicant friars is too great and their primitive rule has been forgotten. They pretend to be poor, but in fact they possess all things, and have power over the pope himself. Both life and death bring in gains to them.

Cap. XVII. They preach hypocritically against sin in public, but in private they encourage it by flattery and indulgence. They know that their gains depend upon the sins which their penitents commit. Friars do not often visit places where gain is not to be got. They have an outward appearance of poverty and sanctity, without the reality. I do not desire that they should be altogether suppressed, but that they should be kept under due discipline.

Cap. XVIII. Some friars aim at dignity as masters in the schools, and then they are exempted from their rule and obtain entry into great houses. The influence of the friar is everywhere felt, and often he supplies the place of the absent husband and is the father of his children. Bees, when they wound, lose their stings and are afterwards helpless: would it were so with the adulterous friar!

Cap. XIX. The order of friars is not necessary to the Church. Friars appropriate spiritual rights which belong to others; and though this may be by dispensation of the pope, yet we know that the pope does not grant such dispensations of his own motion, and he may be deceived. They ask for the cure of souls, but in fact they are demanding worldly wealth: not so did Francis make petition, but he left all and endured poverty.

Cap. XX. This multitude of friars is not necessary for the good of society. David says of them that they neither take part in the labours of men nor endure the rule of the law: they toil not, neither do they spin, and yet the world feeds them. It is vain for them to plead the merits of Francis, when they do not follow his example. All honour to those who do as he did.

Cap. XXI. They draw into their order not grown men but mere boys. Francis was not a boy when he assumed his work; but in these days mere children are enrolled, caught like birds in a snare: and as they are deceived themselves, so afterwards they deceive others.

Cap. XXII. The friar who transgresses the rule of his order is an apostate and a follower of the apostate fiend. He finds entrance everywhere, and everywhere he lays snares, encourages hatred, and fosters impurity. Under a veil of virtuous simplicity he conceals a treacherous heart. These are ministers of the Synagogue rather than of the Church, children of Hagar, not of Sara.

Cap. XXIII. They are dispersed over the world like the Jews, and everywhere they find ease and abundance. Their churches and their houses are built in the most costly style and adorned with the richest ornaments. No king has chambers more magnificent than theirs, and their buildings are a mark of their worldly pride. Unless their souls are fair within, this outward pomp of religion is of no avail.

Cap. XXIV. Friars differ from one another in the garb of their order, but all equally neglect their rule. Only the order founded by brother Burnel still maintains its former state. Two rules of this order I will set forth, which are almost everywhere received. The first is that what the flesh desires, that you may have; and the second that whatever the flesh shrinks from, that you should avoid. So the new order of Burnel is thought better than those of Benedict or Bernard.

Thus, if bad times come, I shall hold that the error of the Clergy is the cause. The body is nothing without the spirit: we have darkness instead of light, death instead of life, and the flock is scattered abroad without a shepherd.

Liber Quintus.

Cap. I. I will speak in the second place of the order of Knighthood. This was established first to defend the Church, then for the good of the community, and thirdly to support the cause of the widow and orphan. If a knight performs these duties, he should have praise, but not if he makes war merely for the sake of glory.

If a knight overcomes his enemies, but is overcome by the love of a woman, he has no true glory, for he makes himself a slave instead of free.

Cap. II. If the knight would reflect on the variety and uncertainty of love, he would not allow himself so easily to be made captive.

Cap. III. But when he sees beauty in woman decked out with all its charms, he thinks it divine and marvellous, and he can offer no effectual resistance. Lovers are blind and are driven by every kind of unreasonable impulse. Women deceive men, and men also deceive and betray women.

Cap. IV. The knight has little need to fear bodily wounds, which may easily be healed; but love is not to be cured by physicians, and this deprives him both of reason and of honour.

Cap. V. Those who seek fame and worldly honours only, are hardly better than those who are conquered by women.

Cap. VI. The good woman is one whose praise is above all things. The bad is a subtle snare for the destruction of men. She paints her face and uses every art to deceive. The world is treacherous, but woman is more treacherous still.

Cap. VII. The good knight, who labours neither for gain nor for glory, and is not conquered by love, obtains the victory over the enemies of the Church and of his country, and gives us the blessing of peace.

Cap. VIII. The bad knight is the causer of many evils in the other orders of society. He deserves to have Leah, not Rachel, as his bride. Those who follow wars for the sake of the spoils are like vultures that prey upon the corpses of the dead. Alas, in these days gold is preferred to honour and the world to God.

Cap. IX. Another estate remains, that of the cultivators of the soil, who provide sustenance for the human race in accordance with the divine ordinance laid down for Adam. These at the present time are lazy and grasping, as well as few in number; one peasant now asks more wages than two did in past time, and one formerly did as much work as three do now. We know from recent experience what evil the peasant is capable of doing. God has ordained, however, that nothing is to be had without toil; therefore the peasant must labour, and if he will not, he must be compelled.

Cap. X. There are also the casual labourers, who go from one employment to another and always find fault with the food that they get from their masters. These are irrational like beasts, and they should be disciplined by fear of punishment.

Cap XI. In cities there are chiefly two classes, the merchants and the craftsmen. The former sin by not regarding festivals and holy days.

Cap. XII. Usury and Fraud are two sisters, daughters of Avarice, to whom the dwellers in cities pay honour. Usury is forbidden of old, but by a gloss on the text it is now approved.

Cap. XIII. Fraud is worse, because it is common to all places. From the young apprentice to the master all practise it in selling.

Cap. XIV. Craftsmen, who make things, follow the laws of Fraud, and so do those who sell articles of food, as meat, fish, bread, beer and so on.

Cap. XV. It is an ill bird that fouls its own nest, and it is shameful for a citizen to benefit strangers at the expense of his fellow-citizens. It is an evil thing when one of low condition is exalted to the highest place in the city. The evil man is a common scourge; but though he be mounted on high, he shall fall and perish.

Cap. XVI. The man whose tongue is unrestrained is as a pestilence among the people. The tongue causes strife and many evils; it breaks through every guard and devours like a flame. None can say how many evils the tongue of the talkative man brings about in the city: it causes discord and hatred instead of peace and love; and where peace and love are not, there God is not. The citizen who thus plagues his fellows should be put to death or banished: it is expedient that one should die, lest the whole people should perish.

Thou ruler of the city, labour to bring about harmony and peace, and above all deal prudently. Great consequences often follow from small things, and the fire which seems to be extinguished may blaze up again. Justice and peace, which formerly reigned, must be restored, so that the ruin which overtook Rome and Athens may be averted from our city.

Liber Sextus.

Cap. I. Besides the three degrees of society above described, there are those who are called ministers of the Law. Of these some labour for true law and justice, and these I praise; but most practise an art under the name of law which perverts justice. The advocate will plead the cause of any man who pays him, and compels his rich neighbours to give him gifts, for fear that evil should befall them. He has a thousand ways of making his gains; the great and powerful break through his snares, but the weak and defenceless are caught in them. Like the bat or the owl he loves darkness rather than light: yet sometimes the biter is bitten.

Cap. II. The advocate oppresses and plunders the poor, and rejoices in discord as a physician in disease. He contrives every device to enrich himself and his offspring; he joins house to house and field to field. But his heir dissipates that which he has gathered together, and a curse comes upon him at the last.

Cap. III. The land is ruined by the excessive number of lawyers. As a straight stick appears crooked when plunged in water, so does straightforward and simple law become distorted in the mind of the lawyer. As clouds conceal the sun, so do advocates obscure the clear light of the law. Conspiracy, they say, is unlawful, but they themselves conspire to protect one another, and the law has no power over these.

Cap. IV. They ascend by degrees from the rank of apprentice to that of serjeant and so to the office of judge. The administration of justice is disturbed chiefly by three things, gifts, favour, and fear. Those who make friends with the judge will hardly lose their case.

Cap. V. O ye who sell justice for gain, learn what end awaits you. The higher you rise, the greater will be your fall: the more wealth you gather, the greater will be your misery. O thou judge who seekest after wealth, why dost thou attend to all things else and neglect thyself? Thou wilt gain the world, but lose heaven. All worldly power comes to an end, and so, be sure, will thine.

Cap. VI. As regards the sheriffs, the bailiffs, and the jurymen at assizes, they are ready to accept bribes and pervert justice. As the toad cursed the harrow, so I curse these many masters, who are all unjust.

Cap. VII. Laws, nevertheless, there must be, to punish the transgressor; and if there are laws there must also be judges. The worst of evils is when justice is not to be had, and this causes a land to be divided against itself. Much depends upon the ruler: for the sins of a bad king the people are punished as well as the king himself. The higher a man’s place is, the worse is the effect of his evil-doing. A law is nothing without people, or people without a king, or a king without good counsel. [69] Complaints are everywhere heard now of the injustice of the high court, and the limbs suffer because the head is diseased. The king is an undisciplined youth, who neglects all good habits, and chooses unworthy companions, by whose influence he is made worse. At the same time older men give way to him for gain and pervert the justice of the king’s court. None can tell what the end will be: I can only mourn over these evils and offer my counsel to the youthful king.

Cap. VIII. Every subject is bound to serve his king, and the king to govern his people justly. Hence I shall endeavour to set forth a rule of conduct for the honour of my king.

First then, I say, govern thyself according to the law, and enforce on thyself the precepts that are fitting for others. A king is above all others; he should endeavour to overcome and rise above himself. If thou art above the laws, live the more justly. Be gentle in thy acts, for thy wrath is death. Endeavour to practise virtue in thy youth and to avoid evil communications.

Cap. IX. Avoid false friends and those who stir up war for the sake of their own profit. Resist those who will tempt thee to evil, O king. Take vengeance on wrong, and let justice be done without fear or favour.

Cap. X. Show mercy also, where mercy is fitting, and listen to the prayer of the poor and helpless. Let fit men of proper age and sufficient wisdom be appointed to administer justice.

Cap. XI. Be not exalted with vain glory, O king, or moved by sudden wrath to violence. Be liberal to those who need thy help, and give alms to the poor of that which God has given thee. Avoid gluttony and sloth.

Cap. XII. Above all things, O king, flee from the enticements of fleshly lusts. Take example by the sin of David, and by that of the Hebrews who were tempted by the counsel of Balaam. One consort is sufficient for thee: be faithful to her.

Cap. XIII. O king, thou art the defender in arms of thy people. Remember the deeds of thy father, whose praise is sounded everywhere and whose prowess was above that of Hector. He was just and liberal; he made prey of foreign lands, but he protected his own. France and Spain both felt his might, and he broke through the ranks of his enemies like a lion. The land was at rest under that great prince: the nation was secure from its enemies. O king, endeavour to deserve the praise which thy father won. Peace is the best of all things, but it must sometimes give way to war.

Cap. XIV. A king must not prey upon his people; their love is his chief glory. He should remember that true nobility does not come from noble descent but from virtue. Study to know thyself and to love God.

Cap. XV. O young king, remember how Solomon in his youth asked for wisdom to rule well, rather than wealth or long life, and how God granted his prayer and added also the other blessings. Wisdom is above everything for a king, and this makes him acceptable to God.

Cap. XVI. Whatever thou hast, O king, comes from God. He has given thee beauty of body, and thou must see to it that there be virtue of the soul corresponding to this. Worship and fear God, for earthly kingdoms are as nothing compared with his.

Cap. XVII. Death makes all equal; rich and poor, king and subject, all go one way. Prepare thyself, therefore, for thy journey, and adorn thyself betimes with virtue. May God direct thee in the right way.

Cap. XVIII. [70]The king is honoured above all, so long as his acts are good, but if the king be avaricious and proud, the people is grieved. Not all that a king desires is expedient for him: he has a charge laid upon him and must maintain law and do justice.

O king, do away the evils of thy reign, restore the laws and banish crime: let thy people be subject to thee for love and not for fear.

Cap. XIX. All things change and die, the gems that were bright are now dimmed, the Church herself has lost her virtue, and the Synagogue becomes the spouse of Christ. The good men of old have passed away, and the bad of old live again. Noah, Japhet, Abraham, Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Elijah, Micaiah, Elisha are gone; Nimrod, Ham, Belus, Ishmael, Abiram, Korah, Dathan, Zedekiah, and Gehazi survive. Peter is dead, but Tiberius lives; Paul is reconverted into Saul; the examples of Gregory, Martin, Tobit, and Job are neglected. Benedict is dead, but Julian lives: there is a new Arius, a new Jovinian, who spread their heresy.

Cap. XX. As the good men in the Church of God have passed away, so also the men who were famed for prowess in the world are gone, as Trajan, Justinian, Alexander, Constantine, Theodosius, Julius, Hannibal, while the bad still survive, as Nero, Dionysius, Tarquin, Leo, and Constantius. Solomon is dead and Rehoboam survives. The love of David and Jonathan is gone, but the hatred of Saul still lives; the counsel of Achitophel is followed and that of Hushai rejected; Cato is banished and Pilate is made judge in his stead; Mordecai is hanged and Haman is delivered; Christ is crucified and Barabbas is let go free.

Cap. XXI. Temperance and chastity also have disappeared. Socrates and Diogenes are dead, Epicurus and Aristippus still live; Phirinus is dead and Agladius survives; Troilus and Medea are dead, while Jason and Criseida remain; Penelope and Lucretia have passed away, Circe and Calipso still live. The laws of marriage are no longer kept in these days, chaste love is all but unknown, and adultery everywhere prevails. Women have no modesty, no chastity, and no patience: vice blooms and flourishes, while the flower of virtue is trodden under foot.

Liber Septimus.

Cap. I. Now the golden head of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue is gone, and the feet of iron and clay remain: the world is in its final stage of deterioration. There are principally two causes, lechery, which leads to sloth, and avarice, which is ever unsatisfied.

Cap. II. The avaricious are merciless to the poor, and their hard hearts are typified by the iron of the statue. He is wretched who is ever desiring more, not he who has little and is content.

Cap. III. The fragile clay signifies the frailty of our flesh, which shows itself in fornication and adultery. There is also hypocrisy everywhere, which conceals the foulness within by a fair show without. Yet it will not escape detection.

Cap. IV. Things that were good are now changed into the opposite forms, truth into falsehood, wisdom into folly, love into lust, learned into ignorant; servants are become masters and masters servants. Nothing pleases now but flattery. Courts do not keep their former honour: knights there are in plenty, but little valour. Weakness grows and strength is depressed, there is much talk but little action, the burdens of war without the advantages. Justice has departed and fraud has taken its place; even those of one family feel envy and hatred one against another. Friendship is treacherous and seeks gain like a harlot: hatred is everywhere common, but love is as the phenix. There is no faith anywhere, and the right hand cannot trust the left. All cry out against the world and say that it is growing worse and worse.

Cap. V. The world is indeed full of evil and impurity, and this life is a perpetual warfare, in which all that is good perishes and all that is evil prevails. Even the elements of the world change and pass away, and much more human things. No degree is exempted: the hearts of kings are disturbed by fear of change, and terrors prevail in spite of royal banquets and bodyguards.

Cap. VI. Man was created for the service of God, and the world was given for his use. He was made in the image of God, and he learnt gradually the purpose of his creation and to love his Creator.

Cap. VII. All things were put under his feet, and were made to minister to him. He ought therefore to remember whence he is and who gave him these things. Again, when by man’s sin the race of man was corrupted, the Creator himself restored and redeemed it, taking the form of a servant. Man ought therefore to confess him as Lord and follow his precepts with a devout mind.

Cap. VIII. Man is a microcosm or lesser world, and according as he does ill or well, the greater world is good or bad. Man ought therefore to aim at high things, and not to submit himself to the rule of sin.

Cap. IX. When death comes, when the throat is dry and the face bloodless, when the eyes are fixed and the tongue silent, when the pulse beats no more and the feet can no longer move, what then will the proud man say? The body in which he prided himself is now food for worms, his strength is less than that of a fly, and his beauty is turned into loathing. His wealth and his pomp avail him no longer, the serpent is his attendant and the charnel-house is his bed-chamber.

Cap. X. The envious man, who once gnawed upon others, is now himself devoured: he who laughed at the misfortunes of others, laughs now no more; the heart that so much murmured now suffers putrefaction; the sting of envy can pierce no more.

Cap. XI. He who was full of anger, now cannot move his head; he who uttered furious words, now cannot make a sound; he who terrified others by his threats, now does not scare away the worm which eats his heart.

Cap. XII. What can avarice do for him who has served her? He has no chest but his coffin, no land but the seven feet of earth in which he lies. He who preyed upon others, is himself the prey of death; he who closed his purse against the poor, is now himself in want.

Cap. XIII. The slothful man who was given to sleep, has now abundance of it, with the cold earth instead of his soft bed-coverings. He who seldom came to the church, now never leaves it, but his time for prayer is past.

Cap. XIV. Gluttony is no longer a pleasure; the body which delighted in choice food and drink is now full of vileness and horror, the abode of foul reptiles.

Cap. XV. The man who took pleasure in lechery, delights in it now no more. His members are preyed upon by the serpent, and he can no longer use his hands, his eyes, or his tongue in the service of lust. No longer can he commit incest or violate the honour of virginity.

Cap. XVI. Answer, thou sinful man, what will thy pride do for thee then, thy envy, thy anger, thy sloth, thy gluttony, thy lechery, or thy avarice? All the glory of this world perishes and passes away.

Cap. XVII. Everything passes away, wealth, honour, beauty, power, learning, and pleasure. Our flesh grows old as a garment and we perish. He is happy and a true king who rules himself, he is a slave (though called a king) who is subject to his own vices. Our life is so short and death comes so soon, that we ought all to prepare for our journey hence. Death comes when we least expect it, and takes away our wealth and strength, nor can any man redeem himself with gold, or move with gifts the Judge who judges all things justly.

Cap. XVIII. Death is common to all, but to the good it is a cause of joy, to the evil of sorrow. The good will pass by means of death to a place of perfect peace and perfect joy, such as cannot be described or imagined.

Cap. XIX. The evil-doer has a twofold death, the death of the body and the death of the soul. No words can tell the torment of that second death, which is eternal. How terrible will the Judgement be and how direful the sentence! Happy are they who shall escape such punishment.

Cap. XX. Let each man remember what his condition is, and let him repent in time, turning himself to the service of his Creator. Let him submit to punishment in this life, that he may escape that which is eternal: for it is the property of God to forgive and to have mercy.

Cap. XXI. Almost everyone, however, follows the lusts of his flesh and neglects the cause of his soul. The unrighteous have power everywhere, and all vices flourish.

Cap. XXII. The days are coming which Christ foretold, and the signs which he predicted are visible now. God’s sentence is still delayed, in order that the sinner may have room for repentance. Hardly even a few just men are found to save the world from destruction.

Cap. XXIII. Each one of the various degrees of society has departed from its true virtue, and the deadly vices have rule over the whole. Prelates are worldly, priests unchaste, scholars lazy, monks envious and self-indulgent, knights are evil livers, merchants defraud, peasants are disobedient and proud. The enticements of the world have overcome them all.

Cap. XXIV. I love all the realms of Christendom, but most of all I love this land in which I was born. From other lands I stand apart and am not involved in their calamities; but this country of mine, which brought me up from childhood and in which I dwell, cannot suffer evil without affecting me: by its burdens I am weighed down; if it stands, I stand, if it falls, I fall. Therefore it is that I bewail its present divisions.

One thing above all things is needful, and that is justice, with which is associated peace. If in other lands the sins of the flesh prevail, yet there they are to some extent compensated; for there justice prevails and all are equal before the law. Among us, however, not only is there carnal vice, but justice is absent; so that a terrible vengeance is being prepared for us by God.

We, who have always been favoured by fortune, are now brought low; this land, which was once reputed so wealthy, is now poor both in virtue and in possessions; my country, which was so strong, is made feeble by unjust judgements; she who was so fertile, is now sown with salt; she who had Fame for her sister, is now infamous, all her praise is taken away and her glory is departed. Her lords are sunk in sloth, her clergy is dissolute, her cities full of discord, her laws oppressive and without justice, her people discontented.

O land barren of virtue, where is thy past fortune? omens appear which presage thy fate, and all point to thee as an example. It is not by fortune or by chance that this comes about, but by our sins; and the grace of God even now may be found by repentance. I pray that God may show us his mercy and accept our tears. We know that thou, O God, art alone to be worshipped, that thou art the ruler of all things, and not fortune. Show pity therefore, O God!

Cap. XXV. Such were the verses which came to me by inspiration in my sleep. It is not I who speak them, but the common voice of all. Let him who feels himself in fault amend his ways, and he who feels himself free from fault may pass untouched. I accuse no man; let each examine his own conscience.

The world is neither evil nor good: each man may make of it what he will by his own life. [71]But this I say, that sin committed and not purged by repentance receives at length its due reward.

The conclusion of the Vox Clamantis, as altered from the first version, is doubtless intended as a fitting form of introduction for the Cronica Tripertita, which comes in as an appendix added in later years. It will be noted as regards the prose which forms a transition to this, that Gower has in the end brought himself to think that the misfortunes of the earlier part of Richard’s reign were intended as a special warning to the youthful king, whom he formerly relieved from responsibility on account of his tender age, and that the tyranny of his later time sprang naturally out of his disregard of this preliminary chastisement. This change of view is also to be traced in the successive forms assumed by the paragraph relating to the Vox Clamantis in the author’s account of his books (‘Quia vnusquisque,’ &c.).

Of the contents of the Cronica Tripertita it is unnecessary that more should be said than is contained in the Notes to this edition. Of the remaining pieces the Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia is dated by the author as belonging to the twentieth year of Richard II. The Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio is probably somewhat later, and the poem ‘O deus immense,’ &c., is said in one of the titles prefixed to have been composed near the end of Richard’s reign. Besides these there is a group of Latin poems referring to the accession of Henry IV, ‘Rex celi, deus,’ &c. adapted from the Vox Clamantis, ‘H. aquile pullus,’ and ‘O recolende, bone,’ with several short occasional pieces belonging to the last years of the author’s life. One of these has reference to his blindness and to the end of his activity as an author which was caused by it, and in connexion with this we have also the epistle to Archbishop Arundel prefixed to the All Souls MS. of the Vox Clamantis and other Latin poems, and apparently meant to accompany the presentation of this particular copy. To Arundel also is addressed the short piece referring to the comet of March 1402, and finally we have the lines in which allusion is made to the short-comings of executors. It is probable also that the four lines which afterwards appeared upon the poet’s tomb, ‘Armigeri scutum,’ &c., and which are given by the Glasgow MS., were written by Gower himself.

Some reference ought perhaps to be made in conclusion to the list of Gower’s works given by Bale and copied by others, with a view to the question whether he was acquainted with any works of Gower which are not known to us. In his Scriptorum Illustrium Catalogus, p. 524 (ed. 1559) he says that Gower wrote

‘Speculum Meditantis, Gallice, Lib. 10.

‘Confessionem Amantis, Anglice, Lib. 8, “Eorum qui ante nos scripserunt.”

‘Vocem Clamantis, Latine, Lib. 7, “Scripture veteris capiunt exempla.”

‘De compunctione cordis, Lib. 1.

‘Chronicon Ricardi Secundi, Lib. 3, “Opus humanum est inquirere.”

‘Chronicon tripertitum, Lib. 3, “Tolle caput mundi C. ter et sex.”

‘Ad Henricum quartum, Lib. 1, “Nobilis ac digne rex Henrice.”

‘De eodem rege Henrico, Lib. 1, “Rex celi deus et dominus.”

‘De peste vitiorum, Lib. 1, “Non excusatur qui verum non fateatur.”

‘Scrutinium lucis, Lib. 1, “Heu quia per crebras humus est.”

‘De coniugii dignitate, Lib. 1, “Qualiter creator omnium rerum Deus.”

‘De regimine principum, “O deus immense, sub quo dominatur.”

‘Epigrammata quaedam, Lib. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alitque.”

‘De amoris varietate, Lib. 1, “Est amor in glosa pax bellica.”

‘Carmina diuersa, Lib. 1, et alia plura.’

In regard to this list it may be observed first that in the two cases where the beginning of the book or piece in question is not cited, we may safely assume that Bale had not seen it. This applies to the Speculum Meditantis and the supposed piece De compunctione cordis, of which I can give no account. It will be observed that he makes the short prose preface to the Cronica Tripertita, ‘Opus humanum est inquirere’ &c., into a separate work in three books. The other items are all recognizable, except ‘Epigrammata quaedam, Lib. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alitque.”’ Here we may observe that the quotation is from Vox Clamantis vi. 985, ‘Alta petens aquila volat alite celsius omni,’ &c. (a passage taken from the Aurora); and on referring to Bale’s unpublished papers[72] we find the description of this supposed book of epigrams in the following form, ‘Ex suo libro et sanctifidensi chron. Epigrammata edidit, li. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alite,”’ whence we should gather that the book referred to was a collection of quotations. It is probable that Bale may have seen in some Gower MS. a selection of sententious passages from the Vox Clamantis and other places, such as we actually have on one of the blank leaves of the Digby MS. (f. 160), beginning ‘Vulturis est hominum natura cadauera velle,’ again one of those allegories of bird nature which were borrowed by Gower from the Aurora.

It may be noted here that in the same passage of Bale’s unpublished papers we have the following statement:

‘De triplici opere hoc carmen est super eius tumbam editum,

Quos viuens legi libro nunc offero regi,

Cuius habent legi secula cuncta regi.’

Also the following is given as the epitaph of his wife,

‘Quam bonitas, pietas, elemosina, casta voluntas,

Sobrietas que fides coluerunt, hic iacet Agnes.

Vxor amans, humilis Gower fuit illa Ioannis:

Donet ei summus celica regna Deus.’

These statements seem to be given by Bale on the authority of Nicholas Brigham, to whom we owe the tomb of Chaucer in Westminster Abbey.

The Text and the Manuscripts.

Gower’s principal Latin work, the Vox Clamantis, is found in ten manuscripts altogether. Of these four are evidently contemporary with the author and contain also the Cronica Tripertita and most of the other Latin poems printed in this volume. Some of these last are found also in other MSS. of the Vox Clamantis, some Latin pieces are contained in the Trentham MS. of the Praise of Peace and the Cinkante Balades (described in vol. i. p. lxxix), and the Cronica Tripertita occurs separately in the Bodleian MS. Hatton 92. Copies of the Carmen de multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia are contained in some MSS. of the Confessio Amantis, viz. TBAP₂ of the second recension, and FH₂K of the third, and with regard to these the reader is referred to the account given of the manuscripts in the Introduction to the second volume of this edition.

Of the four manuscripts of the Vox Clamantis with other Latin poems, which have been referred to as contemporary with the author, one is at Oxford, in the library of All Souls College, one at Glasgow in the Hunterian Museum, and two in London. They are proved to be original copies, not only by the handwriting of the text, which in each case is distinctly of the fourteenth century, but also by the fact that they all have author’s corrections written over erasure, and in several cases the same hand is recognizable throughout. The original text of the Vox Clamantis seems to be written in one and the same hand in the All Souls and Glasgow MSS. and this hand is also that of the lines supplied occasionally in the margin of the Harleian: the hand in which the text of the Cronica Tripertita is written in the All Souls MS. appears also in all the other three, and the same is the case with some of the correctors’ hands, as will be seen in the detailed accounts which follow. Of the other manuscripts of the Vox Clamantis two, which are not themselves original copies, give the text in its first (unrevised) form, the rest are more or less in agreement with the revised text, but give it at second or third hand, with no alterations made over erasure.

S. All Souls College, Oxf. 98. Contains, f. 1 v^o, Epistle to Archbishop Arundel, ff. 2-116, Vox Clamantis, ff. 116-126 v^o, Cronica Tripertita, ff. 126 v^o-127 v^o, ‘Rex celi deus,’ ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende bone,’ ff. 127 v^o-131, Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, f. 131, Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio (imperfect at the end owing to the loss of a leaf), ff. 132-135, Traitié pour ensampler les Amantz marietz, (imperfect at the beginning), f. 135 v^o, ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ ff. 136, 137, ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ‘O deus immense,’ ‘Quicquid homo scribat’ (f. 137 v^o blank). Parchment, ff. 137 as numbered (and in addition several blank at the beginning and end) measuring 12½ x 8¼ in. Well and regularly written in single column, the Vox Clamantis 48 lines on a page and the succeeding poems 52. The original first quire begins with f. 2, but before this a quire of four leaves (probably) was inserted, of which the first two are blank, the third is cut away, and the fourth has on its verso the Epistle to the Archbishop. The quire which ends with f. 116 has seven leaves only, and that ending with f. 137 six. After this several leaves have been inserted, which remain blank. The book has on f. 1 an ornamental initial S containing a miniature of Abp. Arundel in his robes and mitre, and there are large coloured and gilt capitals at the beginning of each book of the Vox Clamantis, and coloured initials of various sizes for chapters and paragraphs. Original oak binding.

Five leaves are lost (apart from blanks at the beginning and end), as follows.

After f. 2 one leaf containing chapter-headings of Vox Clamantis Lib. ii. cap. ii-Lib. iii. cap. xxii. After f. 5 two leaves, containing chapter-headings Lib. vii. cap. xix to the end, the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ probably with a picture of the author, and Vox Clamantis Lib. i. Prologus, ll. 1-18. After f. 13 one leaf (Vox Clamantis i. 766-856). After f. 131 one leaf (De Lucis Scrutinio 93-103; probably some other short piece, and the French Traitié, to iii. 3).

This MS. was certainly written and corrected under the direction of the author, and remained for some time in his hands, receiving addition from time to time. From the Epistola at the beginning, which occurs here only and seems to relate to this volume in particular, we may gather that it was eventually presented to Abp. Arundel. It is possible that it passed from him to his successor Chichele, and so to the College of All Souls, where it now is, but there seems to be no definite evidence to confirm this suggestion.

The text of S in the Vox Clamantis agrees in the main as regards revised passages with that of the other original manuscripts C, H and G, but in some respects it is peculiar. In Lib. iii. cap. i. S has a rewritten version which differs from that of the other revised copies, and the same is the case with regard to the lines ‘Quicquid homo scribat’ (p. 365). There are also some places, as iv. 1072, 1197-1232, v. 450, where S retains the original text in company with TH_2 or even with H_2 alone. A few possibly right readings are peculiar to S, as in i. 1788, 2073, ii. 300, iii. 380 (margin), 1642, v. 325, vi. 555, while some others are common to S with G alone, some few small mistakes remain uncorrected, as in i. 106, 953, 1212, 1591, 1662, iii. 176, 989, 1214, 1541, 1695, iv. 273, 336 &c., and in some cases, where the headings of chapters have been rewritten, as vi. cap. xviii, xix, the original headings are left standing in the Table of Chapters at the beginning.

At least five hands are distinguishable, as follows:

(1) the original text of the Vox Clamantis.

(2) the original text of the succeeding poems, French and Latin, and the rewritten text or corrections on ff. 15 v^o (i. 1019), 90 v^o (vi. 545), 97 (vi. 1159), 115 v^o (vii. 1454 f., 1469 f.), 116 (last lines of Vox Clamantis).

(3) the original text and (probably) the corrections of the Epistola, f. i, and the corrections or rewritten text on ff. 36 v^o (iii. 2 ff.), 39 (iii. cap. iv. heading), 97 v^o (vi. 1189), 98 (vi. 1219 ff.), 115 r^o (vii. 1409 ff.), 116 (first lines of Cron. Trip.), 126 v^o, 127 v^o, and the text of ‘Quicquid homo scribat.’

(4) marginal note on f. 40 v^o, ‘Nota de bello Cleri’ &c. (iii. 375).

(5) marginal note on f. 66, ‘Nota quod Genius’ &c. (iv. 587).

In addition there are some marginal notes which are not quite contemporary, as those on ff. 51 v^o, 52, 76 v^o, 77 (‘Contra rectores Oxon.’ &c., ‘Nota de muliere bona’ &c.), and the heading of the last piece on f. 137 seems to have been rewritten over a hand different from any of the above, of which some words remain. A few corrections are in doubtful hands, as vi. 1208.

Of the above hands the first, very regularly written in a fourteenth century character, in brown ink, probably the same as that of the Vox Clamantis in G, and the same scribe apparently wrote the lines which are supplied sometimes in the margin of H, having been dropped out of the text by the first copyist. The second (2) is also a very neat and regular hand, but of a somewhat later type. It appears in the French and Latin poems of MS. Fairfax 3, as well as in the substituted leaf at the beginning of the Confessio Amantis in that manuscript. It is also used for the Cronica Tripertita, Traitié and other pieces in the Glasgow MS. (G), for the Cron. Tripertita and other Latin pieces in H, and for some of the rewritten passages of the Vox Clamantis in G, H, and C. The third (3) is a rather rough hand, found also occasionally in corrections of G and H. The fourth (4) is that in which the same marginal note is written also in C, H and G.

G. Glasgow Hunterian Museum T. 2, 17. Contains, ff. 1-108, Vox Clamantis preceded by the Table of Chapters, ff. 109-119, Cronica Tripertita, ff. 119, 120, ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende,’ ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ff. 120 v^o-122, Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, ff. 123, 124, Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio, f. 124 v^o, Traitié pour ensampler les Amantz marietz followed by Carmen de variis in amore passionibus, f. 129, ‘Orantibus pro anima,’ with shield of arms and the lines ‘Armigeri scutum,’ and below this a bier with candle at head and foot, f. 129 v^o, ‘Epistola quam Iohannes Gower in laudem ... Henrici quarti statim post coronacionem ... deuote composuit,’ f. 130 v^o, ‘O deus immense,’ f. 131 v^o, ‘Henrici regis,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ f. 132, ‘Presul, ouile regis,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Dicunt scripture,’ f. 132 v^o blank.

Parchment, ff. 132 in quires of eight leaves (except the first, which has six) with catchwords, measuring 11¾ x 7¾ in., 53 lines to the page in the Vox Clamantis, then 52 or 51, regularly and well written with passages erased and rewritten as in CH. On f. 6 v^o is a painting like that in the Cotton MS. of a man in a brown hat, a blue coat with brown lining, and with three arrows in his belt, shooting an arrow at the globe (which has a threefold division corresponding to the three elements of air, earth, and water), with the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto mea iacula’ &c. There is a floreated page at the beginning of Lib. i. (after the Prologue) and illuminated initials with decoration at the beginning of the other books; large and small coloured capitals for chapters and paragraphs.

I have to thank Dr. Young the Librarian of the Hunterian Museum, for facilities given to me in using this MS. and for his kind help in collating and describing it.

The text of G has, as might be expected, a close affinity with that of S, but the peculiarities of S as regards revision in certain passages, e.g. iii. 1 ff., iv. 1197 ff., are not shared by this MS., which goes here with the other revised copies, C and H. In one place at least G has a further touch of revision, viz. in the heading of vi. cap. vii., where its reading is shared by D. In a good many instances, however, G stands with S (sometimes in company with D or L) in support of a probably true reading which is not given by other MSS., as i. 465, 468, 979, 1454, iv. 72, v. 789, vii. 684, 1342, or of an error, as i. 1525, 1870, iii. 1863, iv. 799. It may be noted that sometimes in G an erasure has been made without the correction being supplied.

The following are some of the hands that may be distinguished in this manuscript:

(1) Text of the Vox Clamantis. This seems to be the same as S (1), H (2).

(2) Text of the Cronica Tripertita and succeeding pieces to f. 131 r^o., passages rewritten over erasure in vi. 545 ff., 1159 ff. and in the conclusion of the Vox Clamantis. This is the same as S (2), C (3), H (3).

(3) Corrections in vi. cap. xix., vii. cap. iii. and xxiv, rewritten lines at the beginning and near the end of the Cronica Tripertita, text of the poem ‘Henrici Regis’ with its heading, f. 131. Perhaps the same as S (3).

(4) The marginal note at iii. 375: the same as S (4), C (6), H (6).

(5) The text of ‘Vnanimes esse’ and the succeeding poems on ff. 131 v^o, 132.

C.Cotton. Tib. A. iv, British Museum. Contains, ff. 2-152v^o, Vox Clamantis, ff. 153-167 r^o, ‘Explicit libellus’ &c. and Cronica Tripertita, f. 167, ‘Rex celi deus,’ ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende bone,’ ff. 168-172, Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, ff. 172 v^o-174, Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio, ff. 174 v^o, 175, ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ‘Orate pro anima,’ ‘O deus immense,’ ff. 176, 177, ‘Henrici regis,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ ‘Presul, ouile regis,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Dicunt scripture.’ Ends on 177 r^o. Parchment, ff. 178, that is, 176 leaves of original text, preceded by two blanks, on the second of which is Sir Robert Cotton’s Table of Contents, ending ‘Liber vt videtur ipsius autoris,’ the first leaf of the text being now numbered f. 2. In quires of eight with catchwords, signed a, b, c, &c. from f. 10 (where the text of the Vox Clamantis begins) the first quire, containing the chapter-headings &c., written in a hand different from that of the main part of the text. Leaves measure about 10 x 6½ in. Written in single column, 38 lines to the page in the Vox Clamantis, 40 or more in the Cronica Tripertita. The MS. has been carefully corrected, and revised passages appear written over erasure as in SGH. Capitals coloured and gilded at the beginning of the books, coloured blue and red at the beginning of chapters and paragraphs. On f. 9, the last of the first quire, a picture like that in the Glasgow MS., of the author shooting at the world, as shown in the frontispiece of this volume.

On f. 2 is written ‘Roberti Cotton liber ex dono doctissimi Patricii Youngi generosi.’ The book suffered somewhat in the fire of 1731, but it has been carefully and skilfully repaired, and though the writing at the top of each page shows traces of the heat, no part of it is illegible. The effect produced is clearly visible on the page of which a facsimile is given.

The text of C is a very good one and unquestionably independent. In regard to spelling it may be observed that the copyist of the Vox Clamantis frequently gives ‘u’ for ‘v’ at the beginning of words, he writes ‘sed’ almost always for ‘set,’ and often ‘ti’ for ‘ci’ in words like ‘etiam,’ ‘ratio,’ ‘patiens’ and even ‘fatie’ (ii. 57), but also ‘eciam,’ ‘ambicio,’ ‘precium,’ &c.

The following are the hands, so far as they can be distinguished:

(1) Text of the Vox Clamantis, a small and somewhat irregular but clear hand, of the fourteenth century.

(2) The eight leaves preceding this (containing the chapter-headings), and also ff. 96, 97 and part of 140. This hand has made corrections throughout, not revising the text, as the author might, but setting right the mistakes of the scribe.

The (3) following passages as rewritten over erasure: i. 1019 ff., vi. 545-554, and also the prose heading of the first part of the Cronica Tripertita. This is the ‘second hand’ of the Fairfax MS., the same as S (2), G (2), H (3).

(4) The passage rewritten over erasure in iii. 1 ff., also the heading of iii, cap. iv., corrections in iv. 1198 ff., and iv. 1221*-1232* rewritten over erasure. This is a neat round hand used also in the same places of the Harleian MS.

(5) The passage ‘Rex puer,’ &c., vi. 555-580, and vi. cap. xviii, with the heading of cap. xix., over erasure, a hand which resembles (3), but does not seem to be identical with it.

(6) The marginal note at iii. 375 and perhaps also iv. 587, and the marginal note at the end of the Cronica Tripertita; also f. 176 ‘Nota hic in fine—intendo,’ and the lines ‘Henrici regis,’ &c. This is the same as S (4), G (4), H (6).

(7) Corrections in vi. 1208, 1210: the same as H (7), and the correction of vi. 1210 in S.

(8) Corrections in vi. 1219 ff., and vii. 187 ff.

(9) Text of Cronica Tripertita and the succeeding pieces to f. 168: a rather rough and irregular hand in faded ink.

(10) Marginal notes of Cronica Tripertita and text of Carmen super multiplici &c. from f. 169, ‘Ad fidei dampnum’ to the end of ‘O deus immense,’ f. 176.

(11) The four smaller poems at the end (possibly with the exception of ‘Cultor in ecclesia’). The same as H (9).

(12) The lines at the beginning and near the end of the Cronica Tripertita (over erasure).

Some other corrections are doubtful, as the concluding lines of the Vox Clamantis.

H. Harleian 6291, British Museum. Contains the same as C, except where deficient from loss of leaves, with the addition of a second copy of the last three poems. Parchment ff. 164, measuring 9 x 6 in., in quires of eight with catchwords, 37 lines to the page, regularly and neatly written. No decoration except coloured initials. Has lost probably two whole quires, 16 leaves, at the beginning, and begins with Vox Clamantis, i. 502. The first existing quire is lettered ‘b,’ and this is also the lettering of the third quire of the Cotton MS., the first, which has the Table of Chapters, not being counted in the lettering. In addition to these, one leaf is lost after f. 1 (containing Vox Clamantis, i. 571-644), two after f. 58 (iii. 1716-1854), one after f. 108 (vi. 951-1021), one after f. 133 (vii. 1399-1466). This last leaf formed part of a quire of 12, which followed f. 124, at the end of the Vox Clamantis. Of these the last three have been cut away, but only one leaf of text is lost, f. 134 continuing at 1467, and the concluding lines of the Vox Clamantis being here given in the hand which copied the Cronica Tripertita, &c. The last quire of that book, ff. 158-164 (one leaf lost at the end), has several blanks (162, 163, 164 v^o).

In a good many instances passages of from two to six lines are omitted in the text and inserted in the margin, either across or at the bottom of the page, in a hand which seems not to be that of the text, though very similar, and is probably identical with S (1). This occurs on ff. 41, 74, 76, 78, &c.

The text of H is very correct, and in forms of spelling, &c. it closely resembles that of S. There is little punctuation at first, but more afterwards. In form of text it agrees nearly with C, but (1) the marginal note at iv. 587 is omitted, (2) as regards revision H parts company with C at vi. 1219, from which point H has the unrevised text in agreement with EDTH₂ except in the concluding lines of the Vox Clamantis on f. 134, which, as already remarked, are rewritten in a new hand.

The hands of H may be thus distinguished:

(1) Text of the Vox Clamantis, a good and regular fourteenth-century hand.

(2) Passages added in the margin, probably the same as S (1).

(3) Rewritten text of i. 1019 ff., vi. 545-580, vi. cap. xviii and heading of xix, last lines of Vox Clamantis, text of Cronica Tripertita and succeeding pieces to the end of ‘O deus immense’ f. 159 v^o. This is the same as S (2), G (2), C (3).

(4) Rewritten text of iii. 1 ff., corrections of iv. 1212, 1214, and rewritten text of 1221*-1232*; also f. 160, ‘Nota hic in fine’ &c. to end of f. 161 r^o. This is the same as C (4).

(5) Correction of the heading of iii. cap. iv, the same as S (3).

(6) Marginal note at iii. 375, the same as S (4), G (4), C (6).

(7) Corrections of vi. 1208, 1210, and of Cronica Tripertita i. 55 f. and some other places: the same as C (7).

(8) Rewritten passages at the beginning and near the end of the Cronica Tripertita, the same as C (12).

(9) Second copy of the last poems (on f. 164), the same hand as C (11).

E. At Ecton, near Northampton, in the possession of General Sotheby, who very kindly sent it to the Bodleian Library for my use. Contains Vox Clamantis, Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio, ‘O deus immense,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ ‘Dicunt scripture.’ Parchment, ff. 191, measuring about 9 x 6¼ in., in quires of eight with catch-words, the last quire of seven leaves only (two blank). Neatly written in a good hand of the end of the fourteenth century, in single column, 32 lines to a page. On f. 10 a brightly coloured picture of an archer drawing a bow to shoot at the world, with the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ &c., as in the Cotton and Glasgow MSS., but the figure and features are different, and evidently the picture has less claim to be considered an authentic portrait than those of the two MSS. above named. The headings of pages and chapters are in red, and there are coloured initials and other decorations throughout. The whole is written in one hand, and there are no corrections or erasures such as might indicate that the book had been in the hands of the author.

The manuscript seems to have been in the possession of the Sotheby family since 1702, when it was ‘bought at Lord Burgley’s sale for £1 2s. 0d.’ No leaves are lost, but two are transposed at the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth books.

The text is very fairly correct, and the MS. is closely related to C both in text and spelling (for which see i. Prol. 37 f., i. 21, 95, 447, 1706, 1776, 2017, ii. 174, 311 &c.), but not derived from it (see i. 41, 1626, 2094, iii. 1760 f., v. 785 f.). The passages which in C and the other original copies are rewritten over erasure, as iii. 1 ff., vi. 1161 ff., are usually given by E in the revised form, but the marginal notes at iii. 375 and iv. 587 are omitted. Occasionally too, where C has a correction, E gives the original reading in company with H, as iii. 840, v. 785 f., and especially in the passages vi. 1219 ff. and vii. 182 ff., where H no longer agrees with SCG in corrections, we find that E goes with H. In the final poems E shows some independence as regards marginal notes, e.g. in the last piece, where instead of ‘Nota contra mortuorum executores,’ we find the much more pointed, though doubtfully grammatical, remark, ‘Nota quod bonum est vnicuique esse executor sui ipsius.’ This is the only MS. except CHG which contains the short pieces at the end, and the omission from these of ‘Presul, ouile regis’ may be an indication that the MS. was written before 1402.

As regards the picture in this MS., the features of the archer are quite different from those represented in the Cotton MS. He has a prominent pointed nose and a light-coloured moustache and beard; the arrow, held between the fore-finger and the second and aimed upwards, covers the mouth. The dress consists of a grey fur cap with a hood under it of light crimson, covering also the upper part of the body: below this a blue surcoat with brown lining and wide sleeves thrown back so as to leave the arms bare: a red belt with buckle and pendant, and red hose. The globe is at a higher level and smaller in proportion than in the other pictures. Like them it is divided into three, the left hand upper division having a crescent moon and four stars: a red cross with a banner stands at the summit of the globe.

D. Digby 138, Bodleian Library, Oxford. Contains Vox Clamantis only, preceded by the Table of Chapter-headings. Parchment and paper, ff. 158 originally, with other leaves inserted at the beginning and end in the sixteenth century; about 10½ x 7¼ in., in quires of eight with catchwords; neat writing of the second quarter of the fifteenth century, about 37 lines to the page. No decoration except red and blue initials, numbering of chapters in red, &c. The rubricator has introduced some corrections here and there, but there are no passages rewritten over erasure. There is some transposition of leaves in the fourteenth quire, dating from before the rubricator’s numbering of chapters. The name of a sixteenth-century owner, Roger Waller, occurs on f. 158 v^o. and Kenelm Digby’s device, ‘Vindica te tibi, Kenelme Digby,’ on f. 1.

The text of D is of a mixed character. Sometimes, in company with TH₂ it reproduces the original form of a passage, as i. 1029 ff., vi. cap. xviii and xix, vii. 189 f., 1409 ff., 1454 ff., 1479 ff. In other places, as iii. 1 ff., vi. 545, and elsewhere, the readings of D are those of the revised MSS. It is peculiar in the addition after vi. 522, where eight lines are introduced from the original text of the altered passage which follows at the end of the chapter. The text of D generally is much less correct than that of the older copies, and it is derived from a MS. which had lines missing here and there, as indicated by the ‘deficit versus in copia,’ which occurs sometimes in the margin. In the numbering of the chapters the Prologues of Libb. ii. and iii. are reckoned as cap. i. in each case. The corrections and notes of the rubricator are not always sound, and sometimes we find in the margin attempts to improve the author’s metre, in a seventeenth-century hand, as ‘Et qui pauca tenet’ for ‘Qui tenet et pauca’ (ii. 70), ‘Causa tamen credo’ for ‘Credo tamen causa’ (ii. 84). Some of these late alterations have been admitted (strange to say) into Mr. Coxe’s text (e.g. ii. 70).

The book is made up of parchment and paper in equal proportions, the outer and inner leaves of each quire being of parchment. Sixteen leaves of paper have been inserted at the beginning and twelve at the end of the book, easily distinguished by the water-mark and chain-lines from the paper originally used in the book itself. Most of these are blank, but some have writing, mostly in sixteenth-century hands. There are medical prescriptions and cooking recipes in English, selections of gnomic and other passages from the Vox Clamantis, among which are the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ &c., which do not occur in the Digby text, four Latin lines on the merits of the papal court beginning ‘Pauperibus sua dat gratis,’ which when read backwards convey an opposite sense, the stanzas by Queen Elizabeth ‘The dowte of future force (corr. foes) Exiles my presente ioye, And wytt me warnes to shonne suche snares As threten myne annoye’ (eight four-line stanzas).

With regard to the connexion between D and L see below on the Laud MS.

L. Laud 719, Bodleian Library, Oxford. Contains Vox Clamantis (without Table of Chapters and with omission of Lib. i. 165-2150), Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio, Carmen de variis in amore passionibus, ‘Lex docet auctorum,’ ‘Quis sit vel qualis,’ ‘H. aquile pullus,’ and seven more Latin lines of obscure meaning (‘Inter saxosum montem,’ &c.), which are not found in other Gower MSS. Parchment and paper, ff. 170 (not including four original blank leaves at the beginning and several miscellaneous leaves at the end), in quires usually of fourteen leaves, but the first of twelve and the second of six, measuring about 8½ x 5¾ in., about 27 lines to the page, moderately well written with a good many contractions, in the same hand throughout with no corrections, of the second quarter of the fifteenth century. There is a roughly drawn picture of an archer aiming at the globe on f. 21, and the chapters have red initial letters. Original oak binding.

The names ‘Thomas Eymis’ and ‘William Turner’ occur as those of sixteenth-century owners. The note on the inside of the binding, ‘Henry Beauchamp lyeing in St. John strete at the iii. Cuppes,’ can hardly be taken to indicate ownership.

The most noticeable fact about the text of this MS. is one to which no attention has hitherto been called, viz. the omission of the whole history of the Peasants’ Revolt. After Lib. i. cap. i. the whole of the remainder of the first book (nearly 2,000 lines) is omitted without any note of deficiency, and we pass on to the Prologue of Lib. ii, not so named here, but standing as the second chapter of Lib. i. (the chapters not being numbered however in this MS.). After what we commonly call the second book follows the heading of the Prologue of Lib. iii, but without any indication that a new book is begun. Lib. iv. is marked by the rubricator as ‘liber iii^us,’ Lib. v. as ‘liber iiii^us,’ and so on to the end, making six books instead of seven; but there are traces of another numbering, apparently by the scribe who wrote the text, according to which Lib. v. was reckoned as ‘liber iii^us,’ Lib. iv. as ‘liber iiii^us,’ and Lib. vii. as ‘liber v^us.’ It has been already observed that there is internal evidence to show that this arrangement in five (or six) books may have been the original form of the text of the Vox Clamantis. At the same time it must be noted that this form is given by no other MS. except the Lincoln book, which is certainly copied from L, and that the nature of the connexion between L and D seems to indicate that these two MSS. are ultimately derived from the same source. This connexion, established by a complete collation of the two MSS., extends apparently throughout the whole of the text of L. We have, for example, in both, i. Prol. 27, laudes, 58 Huius ergo, ii. 94 et ibi, 312 causat, 614 Ingenuitque, iii. 4 mundus, 296 ei, 407 amor (for maior), 536 Hec, 750 timidus, 758 curremus, 882 iuris, 1026 Nil, 1223 mundus, 1228 bona, 1491 egras, 1584 racio, 1655 Inde vola, 1777 ibi, 1868 timet, 1906 seruet, 2075, 2080 qui, iv. 52 vrbe, 99 tegit, and so on. The common source was not an immediate one, for words omitted by D with a blank or ‘deficit’ as iii. 641, vii. 487 are found in L, and the words ‘nescit,’ ‘deus,’ which are omitted with a blank left in L at iii. 1574 and vi. 349 are found in D. If we suppose a common source, we must assume either that the first book was found in it entire and deliberately omitted, with alteration of the numbering of the books, by the copyist of the MS. from which L is more immediately derived, or that it was not found, and that the copyist of the original of D supplied it from another source.

It should be noted that the MS. from which L is ultimately derived must have had alternative versions of some of the revised passages, for in vi. cap. xviii. and also vi. l. 1208 L gives both the revised and the unrevised form. As a rule in the matter of revision L agrees with D, but not in the corrections of vi. 1208-1226, where D has the uncorrected form and L the other. We may note especially the reading of L in vi. 1224.

The following are the Latin lines which occur on f. 170 after ‘[H.] Aquile pullus,’ &c.

‘Inter saxosum montem campumque nodosum

Periit Anglica gens fraude sua propria.

Homo dicitur, Cristus, virgo, Sathan, non iniustus fragilisque,

Est peccator homo simpliciterque notat.

Vlcio, mandatum, cetus, tutela, potestas,

Pars incarnatus, presencia, vis memorandi,

Ista manus seruat infallax voce sub vna.’

The second of the parchment blanks at the beginning has a note in the original hand of the MS. on the marriage of the devil and the birth of his nine daughters, who were assigned to various classes of human society, Simony to the prelates, Hypocrisy to the religious orders, and so on. At the end of the book there are two leaves with theological and other notes in the same hand, and two cut for purposes of binding from leaves of an older MS. of Latin hymns, &c. with music.

L₂. Lincoln Cathedral Library, A. 72, very obligingly placed at my disposal in the Bodleian by the Librarian, with authority from the Dean and Chapter. Contains the same as L, including the enigmatical lines above quoted. Paper, ff. 184, measuring about 8 x 6 in. neatly written in an early sixteenth-century hand, about 26 lines to the page. No coloured initials, but space left for them and on f. 21 for a picture corresponding to that on f. 21 of the Laud MS. Neither books nor chapters numbered. Marked in pencil as ‘one of Dean Honywood’s, No. 53.’

Certainly copied from L, giving a precisely similar form of text and agreeing almost always in the minutest details.

T. Trinity College, Dublin, D. 4, 6, kindly sent to the Bodleian for my use by the Librarian, with the authority of the Provost and Fellows. Contains Vox Clamantis without Table of Chapters, followed by the account of the author’s books, ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ &c. Parchment, ff. 144 (two blank) in seventeen quires, usually of eight leaves, but the first and sixteenth of ten and the last of twelve; written in an early fifteenth-century hand, 36-39 lines to the page, no passages erased or rewritten. Coloured initials.

This, in agreement with the Hatfield book (H₂), gives the original form of all the passages which were revised or rewritten. It is apparently a careless copy of a good text, with many mistakes, some of which are corrected. The scribe either did not understand what he was writing or did not attend to the meaning, and a good many lines and couplets have been carelessly dropped out, as i. 873, 1360, 1749, 1800, ii. Prol. 24 f., ii. 561 f., iii. 281, 394 f., 943 f., 1154, 1767-1770, 1830, iv. 516 f., 684, v. 142-145, 528-530, vi. 829 f., vii. 688 f., 1099 f.

The blank leaf at the beginning, which is partly cut away, has in an early hand the lines

‘In Kent alle car by gan, ibi pauci sunt sapientes,

In a Route thise Rebaudis ran sua trepida arma gerentes,’

for which cp. Wright’s Political Poems, Rolls Series, 14, vol. i. p. 225.

H₂. Hatfield Hall, in the possession of the Marquess of Salisbury, by whose kind permission I was allowed to examine it. Contains the Vox Clamantis, preceded by the Table of Chapters. Parchment, ff. 144 (not counting blanks), about 9½ x 6¼ in., in eighteen quires of eight with catchwords; neatly written in a hand of the first half of the fifteenth century, 40 lines to the page. There is a richly illuminated border round three sides of the page where the Prologue of the Vox Clamantis begins, and also on the next, at the beginning of the first book, and floreated decorations at the beginning of each succeeding book, with illuminated capitals throughout. The catchwords are sometimes ornamented with neat drawings.

The book has a certain additional interest derived from the fact that it belonged to the celebrated Lord Burleigh, and was evidently read by him with some interest, as is indicated by various notes.

This MS., of which the text is fairly correct, is written in one hand throughout, and with T it represents, so far as we can judge, the original form of the text in all the revised passages. In some few cases, as iv. 1073, v. 450, H₂ seems to give the original reading, where T agrees with the revised MSS.

On the last leaf we find an interesting note about the decoration of the book and the parchment used, written small in red below the ‘Explicit,’ which I read as follows: ‘100 and li. 51 blew letteris, 4 co. smale letteris and more, gold letteris 8: 18 quayers. price velom v s. vi d.’ There are in fact about 150 of the larger blue initials with red lines round them, the smaller letters, of which I understand the account reckons 400 and more, being those at the beginning of paragraphs, blue and red alternately. The eight gold letters are those at the beginning of the first prologue and the seven books.

The following notes are in the hand of Lord Burleigh, as I am informed by Mr. R. T. Gunton: ‘Vox Clamantis’ on the first page, ‘nomine Authoris’ and ‘Anno 4 Regis Ricardi’ in the margin of the prologue to the first book, ‘Thomas arch., Simon arch.,’ opposite i. 1055 f., ‘Amoris effectus’ near the beginning of Lib. v, ‘Laus Edw. princ. patris Ricardi 2’ at Lib. vi. cap. xiii, and a few more.

C₂. Cotton, Titus, A, 13, British Museum. Contains on ff. 105-137 a part of the Vox Clamantis, beginning with the Prologue of Lib. i. and continuing to Lib. iii. l. 116, where it is left unfinished. Paper, leaves measuring 8¼ x 6 in. written in a current sixteenth-century hand with an irregular number of lines (about 38-70) to the page. Headed, ‘De populari tumultu et rebellione. Anno quarto Ricardi secundi.’

Text copied from D, as is shown by minute agreement in almost every particular.

H₃. Hatton 92, Bodleian Library, Oxford. This contains, among other things of a miscellaneous kind, Gower’s Cronica Tripertita, followed by ‘[H.] aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende,’ and ‘Rex celi deus,’ altogether occupying 21½ leaves of parchment, measuring 7¾ x 5½ in. Neatly written in hands of the first half of the fifteenth century about 28-30 lines to the page, the text in one hand and the margin in another.

Begins, ‘Prologus. Opus humanum est—constituit.’

Then the seven lines, ‘Ista tripertita—vincit amor,’ followed by ‘Explicit prologus.’ After this,

‘Incipit cronica iohannis Gower de tempore Regis Ricardi secundi vsque ad secundum annum Henrici quarti.

Incipit prohemium Cronice Iohannis Gower.

Postquam in quodam libello, qui vox clamantis dicitur, quem Iohannes Gower nuper versificatum composuit super hoc quod tempore Regis Ricardi secundi anno Regni sui quarto vulgaris in anglia populus contra ipsum Regem quasi ex virga dei notabiliter insurrexit manifestius tractatum existit, iam in hoc presenti Cronica, que tripertita est, super quibusdam aliis infortuniis,’ &c.

Ends (after ‘sint tibi regna poli’), ‘Expliciunt carmina Iohannis Gower, que scripta sunt vsque nunc, quod est in anno domini Regis prenotati secundo, et quia confractus ego tam senectute quam aliis infirmitatibus vlterius scribere discrete non sufficio, Scribat qui veniet post me discrecior Alter, Amodo namque manus et mea penna silent. Hoc tamen infine verborum queso meorum, prospera quod statuat regna futura deus. Amen. Ihesus esto michi ihesus.’

This conclusion seems to be made up out of the piece beginning ‘Henrici quarti’ in the Trentham MS. (see p. 365 of this volume) combined with the prose heading of the corresponding lines as given by CHG. It may be observed here that the Trentham version of this piece is also given in MS. Cotton, Julius F. vii, f. 167, with the heading ‘Epitaphium siue dictum Iohannis Gower Armigeri et per ipsum compositum.’ It is followed by the lines ‘Electus Cristi—sponte data,’ which are the heading of the Praise of Peace.

Former Editions. The Vox Clamantis was printed for the Roxburghe Club in the year 1850, edited by H. O. Coxe, Bodley’s Librarian. In the same volume were included the Cronica Tripertita, the lines ‘Quicquid homo scribat,’ &c., the complimentary verses of the ‘philosopher,’ ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ &c., and (in a note to the Introduction) the poem ‘O deus immense,’ &c. In T. Wright’s Political Poems, Rolls Series, 14, vol. i. the following pieces were printed: Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, De Lucis Scrutinio, ‘O deus immense,’ &c., Cronica Tripertita. In the Roxburghe edition of Gower’s Cinkante Balades (1818) were printed also the pieces ‘Rex celi deus,’ and ‘Ecce patet tensus,’ the lines ‘Henrici quarti,’ a variation of ‘Quicquid homo scribat,’ &c. (see p. 365 of this edition). Finally the last poems ‘Vnanimes esse,’ ‘Presul, ouile regis,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ and ‘Dicunt scripture’ were printed by Karl Meyer in his dissertation John Gower’s Beziehungen zu Chaucer &c. pp. 67, 68.

Of Coxe’s edition I wish to speak with all due respect. It has served a very useful purpose, and it was perhaps on a level with the critical requirements of the time when it was published. At the same time it cannot be regarded as satisfactory. The editor tells us that his text is that of the All Souls MS. ‘collated throughout word for word with a MS. preserved among the Digby MSS. in the Bodleian, and here and there with the Cotton MS. [Tib. A. iv.] sufficiently to show the superiority of the All Souls MS.’ The inferior and late Digby MS. was thus uncritically placed on a level with those of first authority, and even preferred to the Cotton MS. It would require a great deal of very careful collation to convince an editor that the text of the All Souls MS. is superior in correctness to that of the Cotton MS., and it is doubtful whether after all he would come to any such conclusion. As regards correctness they stand in fact very nearly on the same level: each might set the other right in a few trifling points. It is not, however, from the Cotton MS. that the Roxburghe editor takes his corrections, when he thinks that any are needed. In such cases he silently adopts readings from the Digby MS., and in a much larger number of instances he gives the text of the All Souls MS. incorrectly, from insufficient care in copying or correcting. The most serious results of the undue appreciation of the Digby MS. are seen in those passages where S is defective, as in the Prologue of the first book, and in the well-known passage i. 783 ff., where the text of D is taken as the sole authority, and accordingly errors abound, which might have been avoided by reference to C or any other good copy[73]. The editor seems not to have been acquainted with the Harleian MS., and he makes no mention even of the second copy of the Vox Clamantis which he had in his own library, MS. Laud 719.

The same uncritical spirit which we have noted in this editor’s choice of manuscripts for collation appears also in his manner of dealing with the revised passages. When he prints variations, it is only because he happens to find them in the Digby MS., and he makes only one definite statement about the differences of handwriting in his authority, which moreover is grossly incorrect. Not being acquainted with Dublin or the Hatfield MSS., he could not give the original text of such passages as Vox Clamantis, iii. 1-28 or vi. 545-80, but he might at least have indicated the lines which he found written over erasure, and in different hands from the original text, in the All Souls and Cotton MSS. Dr. Karl Meyer again, who afterwards paid some attention to the handwriting and called attention to Coxe’s misstatement on the subject, was preoccupied with the theory that the revision took place altogether after the accession of Henry IV, and failed to note the evidence afforded by the differences of handwriting for the conclusion that the revision was a gradual one, made in accordance with the development of political events.

I think it well to indicate the chief differences of text between the Roxburghe edition of the Vox Clamantis and the present. The readings in the following list are those of the Roxburghe edition. In cases where the Roxburghe editor has followed the All Souls or Digby MS. that fact is noted by the letters S or D; but the variations are for the most part mere mistakes. It should be noted also that the sense is very often obscured in the Roxburghe edition by bad punctuation, and that the medieval spelling is usually not preserved.

Epistola 37 orgine Heading to Prol. 3 somnum Prologus 21 Godefri, des atque D 25 ascribens D 27 nil ut laudes D 32 Sicque D 36 sentiat D 37 Sæpeque sunt lachrymis de D 38 Humida fit lachrymis sæpeque penna meis D 44 favent D 49 confracto D 50 At 58 Hujus ergo D

Heading to Lib. I. 1 om. eciam D 3 contingebant D 4 terræ illius D 7 etiam (for et) D Lib. I. 12. quisque 26 celsitonantes 40 Fertilis occultam invenit SD 61 Horta 88 sorte 92 et (for ex) Cap. ii. Heading dicet prima 199 geminatis 209 possint D 280 crabs 326 elephantinus 359 segistram 395 Culteque Curræ 396 Linquendo S 455 Thalia D 474 arces 479 nemora 551 pertenui 585 Hæc 603 Tormis bruchiis 743 Cumque 763 alitrixque D 771 dominos superos nec D 784 Recteque D 789 Cebbe D 797 Sæpe 799 Quidem 803 Frendet perspumans D 811 earum D 817 sonitum quoque verberat 821 Congestat D 822 Obstrepuere 824 in (for a) D 827 stupefactus 835 eorum non fortificet 837 furorum D 846 conchos D om. sibi D 855 roserat atra rubedo D 863 romphæa 873 gerunt 947 rapit (for stetit) D 953 igne S 1173 viris (for iuris) 1174 aut (for siue) 1241 et (for vt) S 1302 sibi tuta 1312 scit SD 1334 Cantus 1338 ipse 1361 internis D 1390 Reddidit 1425 mutantia 1431 fuit 1440 Poenis 1461 deprimere 1525 statim S 1531 subito D 1587 per longum 1654 in medio 1656 nimis 1662 patebit S 1695 rubens pingit gemmis 1792 dixi (for dedi) 1794 nichil (for nil vel) 1855 coniuncta 1870 imbuet S 1910 tempore 1927 et (for vt) 1941 Claudit 1974 parat 1985 om. numen 2009 tunc 2017 inde 2118 ulla

Lib. II. Prol. 10 ora 39 ore 40 fugam iste

Lib. II. 9 obstat D 65 Desuper D 70 Et qui pauca tenet 84 Causa tamen credo 175 continuo 191 migratrix 205 Et (for Atque) 253 cum 271 Jonah 303 jam (for tam) 352 ut 401 lecto 461 monent 545 morte (for monte) 570 prædicat 608 fæcundari 628 Dicit

Lib. III. Prol. 9 sed et increpo 77 oro 90 potuit (for ponit)

Lib. III. 4* exempla D mundus (for humus) D 18* ei D 27* poterint D 41 sensus 59 cum (for eum) 76 Dicunt 141 possit (for poscit) 176 onus (for ouis) S 191 magnates 207 nimium (for nummi) 209 luxuriatio D 225 expugnareque 333 capiunt 382 ad (for in) 383 teli (for tali) 469 om. est after amor 535 Quem (for Quam) 595 terram SD 701 Sublime 845 manu 891 Sic (for Sicque) 933 vertatur 954 nostra 969 portamus nomen 971 nobis data D 976 renovare 989 sic (for sit) S 1214 et 1234 attulerat 1265 fallit S 1357 mundus habet 1376 et (for vt) S 1454 om. est 1455 Est; (for Et) 1487 intendit 1538 ibi est 1541 Durius 1546 crebro 1695 sua (for si) S 1747 vovit SD 1759 et sutorem 1863 vulnere SD 1936 intrat 1960 de se 1962 Nam 2049 ese 2085 agunt

Lib. IV. 26 callidis 67 vivens (for niueus) 72 esse (for ipse) S 259 Sæpe (for Sepeque) 273 et (for vt) S 294 perdant 295 bona qui sibi D 336 non (for iam) S 435 quid tibi 451 Ac 453 cupiensque 531 at (for et) 565 ex (for hee) 567 Simplicitur 583 teneræ 588 præparat 593 ibi S 600 thalamus 610 claustra 662 patet SD 675 Credo 769 In terra 785 ut 799 putabat S 811 et (for ad) S 863 sed nec (for non set) 865 quem fur quasi 958 possit 1000 fratris (for patris) 1038 Livorem 1081 adoptio S 1127 fallat 1214 vanis 1222* Usurpet ipsa

Lib. V. 1 sic D 18 ei (for ita) D 101 cernis 104 atque 159 par est 178 fuit (for sitit) 217 senos (for seuos) 262 Carnis 281 si S 290 sonet 321 valet (for decet) 338 vanis 375 ille 420 Pretia (for Recia) 461 At 486 redemit (for redeunt) 501 non (for nos) S 508 geret 668 Si 672 Maxime 745 foras (for foris) 805 etenim (for eciam) S 928 est (for et) 936 semine 937 pacis (for piscis) 955 ubi (for sibi) S

Lib. VI. 54 renuere 132 ipsa 133 locuples 212 ocius (for cicius) 245 ibi (for sibi) 319 Sæpe (for Sepius) 405 in ‘æque’ (for ineque) 411 descendat 476 quem S 488 Cesset 530 populus, væ (for populus ve) 548 ipse D 646 ruat 679 legit S 746 Num 755 Nam (for Dum) 789 majus (for inanis) 816 Credo 971 Rex (for Pax) 1016 gemmes 1033 quid (for quod) 1041 Hæc (for Hic) 1132 fide (for fine) 1156 minuat D 1171* detangere (for te tangere) D 1172* hæc D 1182* foras D 1197 veteris (for verteris) 1210* Subditus 1224 om. carnem 1225* decens (for docens) D lega 1241 Hic (for Dic) 1251 defunctus D 1260 ab hoc 1281 est ille pius (for ille pius est) 1327 nunc moritur

Lib. VII. 9 magnatum S 93 magnates D 96 nummis (for minimis) 109 Antea 149 sic sunt 185 Virtutem 290 Aucta (for Acta) 339 honorifica 350 credit S 409 servus cap. vi. heading l. 4 sinit (for sunt) 555 vultum 562 ff. Quid (for Quod) 601 quam 602 adesse (for ad esse) 635 Præceptum (for Preceptumque) 665 agnoscit 707 enim (for eum) cap. ix. heading om. postea 736 decus (for pecus) 750 ille (for ipse) cap. xi. heading dicitur (for loquitur) 798 capit (for rapit) 828 etiam (for iam) 903 om. nil 918 est (for et) S 977 benefecit D 1043 frigor 1129 qui non jussa Dei servat 1178 eam 1278 opes S 1310 Vix (for Vis) 1369 digna 1454 hic (for hinc) 1474 bona 1479* ipsa

It will be seen that most of the above variants are due to mere oversight. It is surprising, however, that so many mistakes seriously affecting sense and metre should have escaped the correction of the editor.

In the matter of spelling the variation is considerable, but all that need be said is that the Roxburghe editor preferred the classical to the medieval forms. On the other hand it is to be regretted that no attempt is made by him to mark the paragraph divisions of the original. A minor inconvenience, which is felt by all readers who have to refer to the Roxburghe text, arises from the fact that the book-numbering is not set at the head of the page.

In the case of the Cronica Tripertita we have the text printed by Wright in the Rolls Series as well as that of the Roxburghe edition. The latter is from the All Souls MS., while the former professes to be based upon the Cotton MS., so that the two texts ought to be quite independent. As a matter of fact, however, several of the mistakes or misprints of the Roxburghe text are reproduced in the Rolls edition, which was printed probably from a copy of the Roxburghe text collated with the Cotton MS.

The following are the variations of the Roxburghe text from that of the present edition.

Introduction, margin 2 prosequi (for persequi).

I. 1 om. et per (for fer) 7 bene non 15 consilium sibi 71 fraudis 93 cum (for dum) 132 hos (for os) 161 marg. om. qui S 173 ausam S 182 Sic (for Hic) 199 clientem 204 cepit (for cessat) 209 Regem (for Legem) 219 Qui est (for est qui)

II. 9 sociatus (for associatus) 61 manu tentum 85 marg. quia (for qui) 114 de pondere 156 sepulchrum 180 maledictum 220 Transulit 223 omne scelus 237 ipsum 266 Pontifice 271 malefecit 315 marg. derisu 330 marg. Consulat 333 adeo.

III. 109 prius S 131 viles S 177 conjunctus 188 sceleris 235 mane 239 nunc S 242 freta (for fata) 250 ponere 263 Exilia 285 marg. præter (for personaliter) 287 Nec 288 stanno 333 conquescat 341 auget 372 eo (for et) 422 marg. fidelissime 428 prius S

Of the above errors several, as we have said, are reproduced by Wright with no authority from his MS.[74], but otherwise his text is a tolerably correct representation of that given by the Cotton MS., and the same may be said with regard to the other poems Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, De Lucis Scrutinio[75], &c.

The Present Edition. The text is in the main that of S, which is supplemented, where it is defective, by C. The Cotton MS. is also the leading authority for those pieces which are not contained in S, as the four last poems.

For the Vox Clamantis four manuscripts have been collated with S word for word throughout, viz. CHDL, and two more, viz. GE, have been collated generally and examined for every doubtful passage. TH₂ have been carefully examined and taken as authorities for the original text of some of the revised passages.

As regards the record of the results of these rather extensive collations, it may be stated generally that all material variations of C and H from the text of S have been recorded in the critical notes[76]. The readings of E, D and L have been printed regularly for those passages in which material variations of other MSS. are recorded, and in such cases, if they are not mentioned, it may be assumed that they agree with S; but otherwise they are mentioned only when they seem to deserve attention. The readings of G are recorded in a large number of instances, but they must not be assumed ex silentio, and those of T and H₂ are as a rule only given in passages where they have a different version of the text.

A trifling liberty has been taken with the text of the MSS. in regard to the position of the conjunction ‘que’ (and). This is frequently used by our author like ‘et,’ standing at the beginning of a clause or between the words which it combines, as

‘Sic lecto vigilans meditabar plura, que mentem

Effudi,’

or

‘Cutte que Curre simul rapidi per deuia currunt,’

but it is also very often used in the correct classical manner. The MSS. make no distinction between these two uses, but sometimes join the conjunction to the preceding word and sometimes separate it, apparently in a quite arbitrary manner. For the sake of clearness the conjunction is separated in this edition regularly when the sense requires that it should be taken independently of the preceding word, and the variations of the manuscripts with regard to this are not recorded.

Again, some freedom has been used in the matter of capital letters, which have been supplied, where they were wanting, in the case of proper names and at the beginning of sentences.

The spelling is in every particular the same as that of the MS. The practice of altering the medieval orthography, which is fairly consistent and intelligible, so as to make it accord with classical or conventional usage, has little or nothing to be said for it, and conceals the evidence which the forms of spelling might give with regard to the prevalent pronunciation.

The principal differences in our text from the classical orthography are as follows:

e regularly for the diphthongs ae, oe.

i for e in periunt, rediat, nequio, &c. (but also pereunt, &c.).

y for i in ymus, ymago, &c.

i for y, e.g. mirrha, ciclus, limpha.

v for u or v regularly as initial letter of words, elsewhere u.

vowels doubled in hii, hee, hiis (monosyllables).

u for uu after q, e.g. equs, iniqus, sequntur.

initial h omitted in ara (hăra), edus (haedus), ortus, yemps, &c.

initial h added in habundat, heremus, Herebus, &c.

ch for h in michi, nichil.

ch for c in archa, archanum, inchola, choruscat, &c. (but Cristus, when fully written, for ‘Christus’).

ci for ti regularly before a vowel e.g. accio, alcius, cercius, distinccio, gracia, sentencia, vicium.

c for s or sc, in ancer, cerpo, ceptrum, rocidus, Cilla.

s for c or sc, in secus (occasionally for ‘caecus’), sintilla, &c.

single for double consonants in apropriat, suplet, agredior, resurexit, &c. (also appropriat, &c.).

ph for f in scropha, nephas, nephandus, prophanus, &c.

p inserted in dampnum, sompnus, &c.

set usually in the best MSS. for sed (conjunction), but in the Cotton MS. usually ‘sed.’

It has been thought better to print the elegiac couplet without indentation for the pentameter, partly because that is the regular usage in the MSS. and must of course have been the practice of the author, but still more in order to mark more clearly the division into paragraphs, to which the author evidently attached some importance. Spaces of varying width are used to show the larger divisions. It is impossible that there should not be some errors in the printed text, but the editor can at least claim to have taken great pains to ensure correctness, and all the proof-sheets have been carefully compared with the text of the manuscripts.

For convenience of reference the lines are numbered as in the Roxburghe edition, though perhaps it would be more satisfactory to combine the prologues, as regards numbering, with the books to which they belong.

In regard to the Notes there are no doubt many deficiencies. The chief objects aimed at have been to explain difficulties of language, to illustrate the matter or the style by reference to the works of the author in French and in English, and to trace as far as possible the origin of those parts of his work which are borrowed. In addition to this, the historical record contained in the Cronica Tripertita has been carefully compared with the evidence given by others with regard to the events described, and possibly this part of the editor’s work, being based entirely upon the original authorities, may be thought to have some small value as a contribution to the history of a singularly perplexing political situation.