The Tale of the Man of Lawe, the Pardoneres Tale, the Second Nonnes Tale, and the Chanouns Yemannes Tale, were first edited by me, with Notes and a Glossary, in 1877; and have been several times revised in subsequent editions[[8]].
It will now be readily understood that nearly all the notes and illustrations that have appeared in these various books are here collected and reproduced (with corrections where necessary); and that many others have been added of a like kind.
Perhaps I may fairly introduce here the remark that many illustrations and explanations which are now perfectly familiar to readers of Chaucer originally appeared for the first time in these smaller editions. Thus, to mention a matter of no great importance, my note on Group C, l. 321, demonstrates the exact form and position of the ale-stake, and shews that the old
interpretation of 'may-pole' in Speght is wrong, and that Tyrwhitt's statement as to its being 'set up' is misleading; for its position was horizontal. And only a little further on, at l. 405, I explain how the peculiar construction arose which admitted of such a phrase as 'goon a-blakeberied'; an explanation which is duly quoted as mine in the New E. Dict., s.v. Begged.
Nevertheless, provided that correct explanations are given, it makes but little difference to the reader by whom they were first made. Hence notes have been included from all accessible sources, and it has not always seemed to be necessary, in minor instances, to specify whence they are derived; though this has usually been done.
[§ 11]. It remains for me to express my great obligations to the labours of others, and to acknowledge, with thankfulness, their assistance and guidance.
As regards the texts, my chief debt is to the Chaucer Society, which means, practically, Dr. Furnivall, through whose zeal and energy so many splendid and accurate prints of the MSS. have been produced, thus rendering the actual readings and spellings of the scribes accessible to students in all countries. It is obvious that, but for such work, no edition of Chaucer could have been attempted without an enormous increase of labour and a prodigal expenditure of time.
Next to the MSS., the only authorities of any value are a few of the earliest prints; viz. those by Caxton, and (in the case of the Envoy to Bukton) by Julian Notary; and the editions by Thynne and Stowe. Thynne's text of the Book of the Duchesse is, in one passage, the sole authority; and his text of the Romaunt of the Rose is, not unfrequently, correct where the Glasgow MS. is wrong. His text of the House of Fame is also valuable, and so is that of Caxton; and the same remark applies to some of the Minor Poems. Both Caxton and Thynne furnish very fair texts of Boethius. Thynne's version of Troilus follows a good MS., and is worth collation throughout; but his Legend of Good Women follows a MS. of a very poor type, and his Treatise on the Astrolabe is decidedly bad. Very little help is to be got from Thynne as regards the Canterbury Tales; indeed, it is the chief fault of Tyrwhitt's text that he trusted far too much to the old black-letter editions.
Stowe's edition of 1561 is useful in the case of A Complaint to
his Lady and Words to Adam. Otherwise, it may usually be ignored.