1. The story is told by Livy, lib. iii.; and, of course, his narrative is the source of all the rest. But Tyrwhitt well remarks, in a note to l. 12074 (i. e. C. 140):—'In the Discourse, &c., I forgot to mention the Roman de la Rose as one of the sources of this tale; though, upon examination, I find that our author has drawn more from thence, than from either Gower or Livy.' It is absurd to argue, as in Bell's Chaucer, that our poet must necessarily have known Livy 'in the original,' and then to draw the conclusion that we must look to Livy only as the true source of the Tale. For it is perfectly obvious that Tyrwhitt is right as regards the Roman de la Rose; and the belief that Chaucer may have read the tale 'in the original' does not alter the fact that he trusted much more to the French text. In this very first line, he is merely quoting Le Roman, ll. 5617, 8:—
'Qui fu fille Virginius,
Si cum dist Titus Livius.'
The story in the French text occupies 70 lines (5613-5682, ed. Méon); the chief points of resemblance are noted below.
Gower has the same story, Conf. Amant. iii. 264-270; but I see no reason why Chaucer should be considered as indebted to him. It is, however, clear that, if Chaucer and Gower be here compared, the latter suffers considerably by the comparison.
Gower gives the names of Icilius, to whom Virginia was betrothed, and of Marcus Claudius. But Chaucer omits the name Marcus, and ignores the existence of Icilius. The French text does the same.
11. This is the 'noble goddesse Nature' mentioned in the Parl. of Foules, ll. 368, 379. Cf. note to l. 16.
14. Pigmalion, Pygmalion; alluding to Ovid, Met. x. 247, where it is said of him:—
'Interea niueum mira feliciter arte
Sculpit ebur, formamque dedit, qua femina nasci