Chapter II: Introduction: , Glossary, and Indexes (2)

s. 24. The above example also shews the mode of scanning the lines, as will be more particularly explained hereafter. It will be seen that the normal number of accents in the line is five, though the fifth line, quite exceptionally, has six, with an additional accent at the caesural pause. It may also be noted here, by the way, that accents are by no means of equal strength. The accents on _with_ in lines 1 and 5, on _to_ in line 2, and on _is_ in l. 4, are but slight; whilst those on the former syllables of _straunge_ and _strondes_ in line 13 are of unusual force.

s. 25. RIMES ILLUSTRATING THE PRONUNCIATION OF LONG O AND LONG E.

It has been said that the values of the M.E. vowels are intermediate between those of the Anglo-Saxon and the modern vowels. The best and surest guide to them is afforded by the A.S. sounds, and it is worth while to illustrate this by special instances.

Let us consider the case of the open and close _o_. These are distinguished by their origin. Thus open long _o_ (ao) arises (1) from A.S. _[=a]_; or (2) from the lengthening of A.S. short _o_ at the end of an open syllable. I have observed that Chaucer frequently makes a difference between the open _o_ that arises from these two sources.

The M.E. (ao) from A.S. _[=a]_ was doubtless wholly long. Examples occur in _lore_ (lao.r[*e]), lore, from A.S. _l[=a]r_; and in _more_ (mao.re), more, from A.S. _m[=a]ra_.

But the M.E. (ao) from the lengthening of A.S. short _o_ was probably somewhat less full, or only half-long, or perhaps, as Dr. Sweet suggests, was somewhat closer. At any rate, Chaucer usually makes a difference between this sound and the former. To keep up the distinction, I shall now write ([`o][`o]) for the former open _o_, and ([`o]) for the latter; so that _lore_ and _more_ will be denoted by (l[`o][`o].r[*e]), (m[`o][`o].r[*e]). Examples of the other (ao) occur in _forlore_ (forl[`o].r[*e]), from A.S. _forloren_, forlorn; _to-fore_ (t['o]['o]-f[`o].r[*e]), from A.S. _t[=o]-foran_; and in the curious word _more_ (m[`o].r[*e]), a root, from the A.S. _mora_. In the fourth stanza of Troilus, Book V, Chaucer distinguishes between ([`o][`o]) and ([`o]) in a very marked manner, since the riming formula of the stanza is _ababbcc_, i.e. the first line rimes with the third, and the second with the fourth and fifth. Observe, that Chaucer emphasizes this variation by making a similar distinction between open and close _e_ in the preceding stanza. I here give the pronunciation of the whole stanza; and, in order not to confuse the marks over the (o) with those of accentuation, the accent is here denoted by (.) placed _after_ the accented vowel or syllable.

dhis-Troo.ilus. widhuu.ten r[`e][`e]d. or-l[`o][`o].r[*e],
az-man. dhat-hath. iz-joi.ez aek. forl[`o].r[*e],
waz-wei.tingg' on. iz-laa.di ev.erm[`o][`o].r[*e],
az-shee. dhat-waz. dh[*e]-sooth.fast krop. [*e]nd-m[`o].r[*e]
ov-al. iz-lust., or-joi.ez heer.toof[`o].r[*e].
but-Troo.ilus., nuu-far.wel al. dhii-joi.[*e],
for-shal.tuu nev.er seen.-ir eft. in-Troi.[*e].

The same distinction is preserved throughout the whole of the poem of Troilus, as may be seen by the following references, where the numbers refer, _not_ to the _lines_, but to the stanzas.

_lore_, _more_; I. 93. _sore_, _more_, _sore_; I. 96; where the former _sore_ is from A.S. _s[=a]re_, adv., and the latter _sore_ is of French origin[26], _sore_, _more_, _lore_; I. 108, 156; II. 81, 192; III. 35. _more_, _sore_; III. 139, 151; IV. 19, 129, 161; V. 97, 106, 171. _rore_ (A.S. _r[=a]rian_), _sore_, _more_; IV. 54. _yore_ (A.S. _ge[=a]ra_), _more_; IV. 214; V. 8. _yore_, _more_, _lore_, V. 47. _evermore_, _more_; V. 117. _more_, _sore_, _evermore_, V. 194. _more_, _evermore_, _yore_, V. 248. Also: _more_, _Antenore_; IV. 95; where _Antenore_, being a proper name, may be treated much as the author pleases. And further: _more_, _restore_, IV. 193; V. 239; where the _o_ in _restore_ is due to Lat. _au_. And lastly, _pore_, _rore_, V. 7: where the _o_ in _pore_ is of variable quality, from O.F. _povre_ (Lat. _pauperem_).

On the other hand, we find another set of words in Troilus, in which the open _o_ was originally short. Examples are: _tofore_, _wherfore_, _bore_, i.e. born; II. 202: from A.S. _t[=o]foran_; from A.S. _hw[=ae]r_ combined with _fore_; and A.S. _boren_. _y-shore_, _bifore_, _therfore_; IV. 143; where _y-shore_, shorn, is from A.S. _gescoren_. _therfore_, _bifore_; IV. 149. _forlore_, _m[)o]re_, _heretofore_, V. 4; already noticed above.

In all the above examples, the open _o_ occurs before _r_; the only other examples of open _o_ from original short _o_ are seen in Book I. stanzas 13 and 30. In both these stanzas we find the riming words _spoken_, _wroken_, _broken_, which obviously belong to the same set. _Broken_ is from A.S. _br[)o]cen_; but _spoken_ and _wroken_ are new forms, altered from the A.S. _sprecen_ and _wrecen_ by analogy with the very word _broken_ here used. Chaucer never rimes these words with _t[=o]ken_, from A.S. _t[=a]cen_.

s. 26. An analysis of the rimes in the Minor Poems reveals an exceptional use of but one word ending in _-ore_, viz. the word _more_. On account, probably, of its frequency and utility, we find it used to rime with _heretofore_ and _heerbefore_; both examples occurring in the Book of the Duchesse, 189, 1127. This shews that the rime was permissible, and the difference extremely slight. Nevertheless we find, with the exception of these two instances only, that the Minor Poems again present two distinct sets of rimes: (1) from A.S. _[=a]_, the words _evermore_, _namore_, _more_, _sore_, _lore_, _rore_, _yore_, together with _tresore_ (of F. origin, from Lat. _thesaurum_); and (2) from A.S. _o_, the words _before_, _bore_, _wherfore_, _lore_ (A.S. _loren_), _herebefore_, _tofore_.

s. 27. In the Legend of Good Women, the result is just the same. The exceptional rimes are shewn by _m[=o]re_ riming with _before_, 540, 1516; with _y-swore_, 1284; and with _therfore_, 443. But with these exceptions, we find, as before: (1) the set of words _more_, _yore_, _sore_, with the French words _store_ and _radevore_[27]; and (2) the set _bore_, _forswore_, _swore_ (all past participles), and _therfore_.

s. 28. In the Canterbury Tales, we find from Mr. Cromie's Rime-Index, pp. 185, 189, that the word _m[=o]re_ is again used exceptionally, riming once with the pp. _bore_, A 1542, and frequently with _before_; but we find, further, that _before_ is also used exceptionally, riming once with _more_ and _lore_, E 789; once with _sore_, D 631; once with _more_ and _yore_, E 65; and once with _gore_, A 3237, from A.S. _g[=a]r_. Similarly, _therfore_ rimes with _yore_, E 1140. But, with these exceptions, we again find the two sets kept distinct, viz. (1) _evermore_, _namore_, _more_, _lore_, _hore_ (from A.S. _h[=a]r_), _gore_, _ore_ (from A.S. _[=a]r_), _rore_, _sore_; together with the French _restore_; and (2) _before_, _bore_, _y-bore_, _forlore_, _swore_, _therfore_, _wherfore_[28].

In spite of all the exceptional uses of the two words _more_ and _before_, we cannot but see, in the above examples, a most remarkable tendency to keep asunder two vowel-sounds which it must have required a delicate ear to distinguish. This is interesting, as proving exceptional care on the part of the author.

We find, accordingly, that later writers did not take the same pains. Thus, in Lydgate's Complaint of the Black Knight, 218, we find _sore_ (from A.S. _s[=a]r_) riming with _tore_, pp. (from A.S. _toren_). In Fragment B of the Romaunt of the Rose, it is startling to find _more_ actually altered to _mar_ or _mare_ (the Northern form) in order to rime with _thar_ (for _there_), 1854; with _fare_, 2710; and with _ar_, 2215.

s. 29. OPEN AND CLOSE [=O]. After making the above investigation, we shall naturally expect to find that Chaucer takes care to distinguish between the open _[=o]_ and the close one; and such is really the case.

The chief source of long close _o_ is the A.S. and Icel. _[=o]_. Ex. _b['o]['o]k_, _fors['o]['o]k_, _d['o]m_, _b['o]ne_ (a boon); from A.S. _b[=o]c_, _fors[=o]c_, _d[=o]m_, and Icel. _b[=o]n_. The distinction between the two kinds of _o_ is perfectly easy to follow, because the sounds are still kept apart in modern English, in which the old open long _o_ is now a close _[=o]_, whilst the old close _[=o]_ is lowered to the sound of _[=u]_ (uu).

Easy examples occur in A.S. _b[=a]n_, M.E. _boon_ (baon, b[`o][`o]n), mod. E. _bone_; as contrasted with Icel. _b[=o]n_, M.E. _boon_ (boon, b['o]['o]n), mod. E. _boon_ (buun). In other words, the mod. E. _bone_ was pronounced in M.E. so as to rime with _lawn_; whilst the mod. E. _boon_ was then pronounced so as to rime with _lone_.

A few exceptions occur, shewing occasional relaxations of the general rule. They are doubtless due, as Ten Brink suggests, to a paucity of rimes in some particular ending. Thus, when the long _o_ is absolutely final, as in _go_ (gao), _do_ (doo), Chaucer considers these as _permissible_ rimes, and pairs them together freely; and owing to such usage, we even find _agoon_ (agaon) riming with _doon_ (doon) in Troilus, ii. l. 410. But this is the only instance in Troilus of this character; in all other places, the ending _-oon_ relates to the open _o_; the riming words being _alloon_, _anoon_, _atoon_, _boon_ (bone), _foon_ (foes, A.S. _fan_), _goon_, _noon_, _stoon_; to which add _roon_, it rained, _woon_, quantity. In the Cant. Tales, B 3127, we find the rime _d[=o]m_, doom, _h[=o]m_, home; but words in _-[=o]m_ are, of course, extremely scarce, so that there was little else to be done. For a like reason, _sooth_ (sooth) sometimes rimes with _wrooth_ (wraoth), Bk. of the Duchesse, 513, 519, 1189; and _sothe_ (soo.dh[*e]) with _bothe_ (bao.dh[*e]), Sec. Nonnes Tale, G 167; Troil. iv. 1035.

With these few exceptions, the rule of distinguishing the two qualities of _o_ is rigorously observed. Thus we find in Troilus, rimes in _-[`o][`o]t_, viz. _hoot_, _noot_, _woot_, _wroot_, A.S. _h[=a]t_, _n[=a]t_, _w[=a]t_, _wr[=a]t_, ii. 890, 1196, iv. 1261. And we find, on the other hand, rimes in _-['o]['o]t_, viz. _foot_, _moot_, _soot_, A.S. _f[=o]t_, _m[=o]t_, _s[=o]t_, iii. 1192. Once more, we find, in the same poem, rimes in _-[`o]te_, viz. _hote_, _note_, _grote_; cf. A.S. _h[=a]te_, adv., A.F. _note_ (Lat. _n[)o]ta_), O. Friesic _gr[=a]ta_; iv. 583. And yet again, there are rimes in _-['o]te_, viz. _bote_, _fote_, _rote_, _sote_, from A.S. _b[=o]t_, _f[=o]t_, Icel. _r[=o]t_, A.S. _sw[=o]te_, adv.; ii. 345, 1378, v. 671, 1245. Every one knows the first rime in the Cant. Tales, that of _sote_, _rote_, (pronounced as mod. E. _soata_, _roata_)[29].

s. 30. OPEN AND CLOSE [=E]. In like manner, Chaucer distinguishes to some extent, and with certain rather more numerous exceptions, between the open and close long e. This is a somewhat more intricate matter, so that it is best to give the results succinctly. It is also a little more difficult to follow, because modern English has confused the sounds; though they are frequently distinguished by a different mode of spelling, the old open _e_ being represented by _ea_, and the old close _e_ by _ee_. A good example occurs in the case of the words _sea_ and _see_. The former, in Chaucer, is (sae) or (s[`e][`e]), with long open _e_; whilst the latter is (s['e]['e]), with long close e. Both were written _see_ in M.E.; with the result, that the words were spelt alike at that time, though pronounced differently; but are spelt differently now, though pronounced alike. The difference in spelling is due to an Elizabethan habit, when the two sounds were purposely distinguished; and it may be remarked that such words as are spelt with _ea_ are precisely those which still have a peculiar pronunciation in Ireland. Some writers try to denote this by using such spellings as _say_, _tay_, _baste_, _mate_, and the like, instead of the standard English _sea_, _tea_, _beast_, _meat_.

s. 31. STABLE AND UNSTABLE [=E]. The two kinds of _[=e]_ are best understood by observing their sources.

Before we can shew these clearly, it is necessary to observe that the A.S. [=AE] has two values, which must be carefully distinguished. The first, which I shall call 'stable [=AE],' because it regularly produces an open _[=e]_ in M.E., answers to Germanic and Gothic _ai_, and is generally due to mutation. Thus _h[=ae]lan_, to heal, answers to Goth. _hailjan_, and is mutated from _h[=a]l_, whole, Goth. _hails_. This produced M.E. _h[=e]len_ (hael[*e]n), with open _[=e]_. Again, M.E. _spr[=e]de_, to _spread_ (note _ea_ in the modern form), answers to a Gothic _*spraidjan_[30]; for, although no such Gothic form actually occurs, we can infer it from comparison with the G. _spreiten_; cf. G. _heilen_ with Goth. _hailjan_ above.

The second kind of _[=ae]_, which I shall call the A.S. 'unstable [=AE],' because it occurs in forms which are treated both ways in Chaucer, answers to an original Germanic _[=ae]_, Goth, _[=e]_, and does not arise from mutation, though it may arise from gradation. Thus the M.E. _d[=e]de_, deed, A.S. _d[=ae]d_, answers to Goth. _gad[=e]ds_, a deed, G. _That_; and the contrast between the vowel in G. _That_ and that in G. _heilen_, to heal, is very clearly marked. It is from words of this class that some trouble arises.

s. 32. If we inquire further, why there should have been any difference of development in such cases, and how the same form could, apparently, yield both an open _[=e]_ and a close one, I believe that a clear answer can be given. For it is precisely in such cases that we find different forms in the Old Mercian (or Midland) dialect and in the A.S. (or Southern). Thus, whilst the A.S. (Southern) form of 'deed' was _d[=ae]d_, the Mercian form was _d[=e]d_. In fact, the mod. E. _deed_ is clearly Mercian, and that is why it is not spelt with _ea_ in Elizabethan English. Hence Chaucer had, ready to his use, two forms of this word. One was the Southern _d[`e][`e]d_, with open _[=e]_, from A.S. _d[=ae]d_; the other was the Midland _d['e]['e]d_, with close _[=e]_; and, as the Midland dialect was then rapidly gaining the ascendency, he could hardly go wrong if he sometimes used the more popular form. Chaucer knew nothing of etymology, but he knew how words were pronounced by his cotemporaries; a fact which sufficiently explains his habits.

In order to complete this part of the case, it is necessary to add that the M.E. _[=e]_ which results from A.S. _[=e]a_ is ALWAYS open[31].

s. 33. A similar ambiguity occurs in the case of a long _e_ which we should expect to be close. Here again we must distinguish between two kinds. The A.S. _[=e]o_ yields an M.E. _[=e]_ which is ALWAYS close; as in _d[=e]op_, deep, M.E. _d['e]['e]p_. Again, there is an A.S. _[=e]_ which results from mutation, as in A.S. _bl[=e]dan_, to bleed, from _bl[=o]d_, blood; and the resulting M.E. _[=e]_ is ALWAYS close, as in _bl[=e]den_ (bl['e]['e]d[*e]n), to bleed.

But there is also the UNSTABLE vowel in the M.E. _y-s[=e]ne_, visible. Of this word the A.S. forms are various; we find _ges[=i]ene_, _ges[=y]ne_, _ges[=e]ne_, all three. Of these, _ges[=i]ene_ is the earlier spelling of _ges[=y]ne_, and may be neglected; but _ges[=y]ne_ and _ges[=e]ne_ still remain. _Ges[=y]ne_ is the usual A.S. (Southern) form, whilst _ges[=e]ne_ is Midland and Northern. From the Midland _ges[=e]ne_ came M.E. _ys[=e]ne_ (is['e]['e]n[*e]), with close _e_, regularly; and this is the form which Chaucer usually adopts. The A.S. _ges[=y]ne_ would have developed regularly into M.E. _ys[=y]ne_ (isiin[*e]), just as the A.S. _m[=y]s_ answers to M.E. _m[=y]s_, mod. E. _mice_. But the _y_-sound was difficult of treatment, as the true sound (yy) was lost; and Ten Brink has observed a corresponding variation in the development of A.S. short _y_, which became sometimes short _i_ and sometimes short open _e_ in M.E. In the same way, I should suppose that this A.S. long _y_ corresponded to a Kentish long open _e_; thus producing M.E. _ys[=e]ne_ (is[`e][`e]n[*e]), in which the _e_ was open. There is a remarkable example of such a variety in the development of the A.S. _f[=y]r_, fire. This usually became M.E. _fyr_ (fiir), with long _i_; but in Troilus, i. 229[32], we have the remarkable form _afere_ (af[`e][`e]r[*e]), on fire, riming quite regularly with _were_ (w[`e][`e]r[*e]), were (from A.S. _w[=ae]ron_), and with _stere_, to stir (from A.S. _styrian_). Indeed _stere_, to stir, is really another example of the like development, since the _e_ in it is merely lengthened from an A.S. short _y_.

s. 34. SUMMARY. As this investigation has run to some length, I here give a summary of all the above results.

OPEN AND CLOSE [=O]. 1. The M.E. open and close _[=o]_ have resulted in mod. E. sounds which are still kept apart; cf. M.E. _st[`o][`o]n_ and M.E. _d['o]['o]m_ with the mod. E. _stone_ and _doom_.

2. A.S. _[=a]_ produced M.E. open _[=o]_. A.S. _o_, when lengthened, also produced M.E. open _[=o]_. But the two M.E. sounds somewhat differed, and Chaucer avoids riming them together. The few exceptions are noted above; the commonest of these being due to the variable treatment of the words _m[=o]re_ and _before_.

3. A.S. and Icel. _[=o]_ produced M.E. close _[=o]_. Chaucer avoids riming the close _[=o]_ with the open one; the chief exceptions being when the vowel-sound is final, and in other cases where rimes are scarce.

4. The different spellings of the mod. E. _sea_ and _see_, now pronounced alike, answer to the different sounds of the M.E. form _see_. If the _ee_ was open, it meant the _sea_; if it was close, it was part of the verb to _see_.

5. The A.S. _[=e]a_ produced M.E. open _[=e]_.

6. The A.S. _[=ae]_, if answering to Gothic _ai_, produced M.E. open _[=e]_. But if answering to Goth. _[=e]_, the M.E. _[=e]_ was close in the Midland dialect, but was allowed to rime with open _[=e]_ in Southern; giving Chaucer a choice of forms.

7. The A.S. _[=e]o_ and _[=e]_ (if arising from mutation of _[=o]_) produced M.E. close _[=e]_.

8. In words such as A.S. _ges[=y]ne_, Mercian _ges[=e]ne_, visible, the M.E. _y-s[=e]ne_ had an _[=e]_ which rimed with open _[=e]_ in Kentish, and a close _[=e]_ in Midland, giving Chaucer a choice of forms.

s. 35. It will be now easily understood, that Chaucer's general rule, of avoiding the riming of close _[=e]_ with open _[=e]_, admits of a considerable number of exceptions, in which the _[=e]_ is really of a doubtful or unstable character.

It is clear that, in considering Chaucer's forms, we must set aside, as UNSTABLE, all words in which long _e_ corresponds either to a Germanic _[=ae]_ (Gothic _[=e]_, German _[=a]_), or otherwise to A.S. unstable _[=y]_ (Mercian _[=e]_). I proceed to enumerate the chief of these, as occurring, first of all, in TROILUS.

Words ending in -ECHE. The verb _[=e]che_, to eke, answers to A.S. _[=y]can_. _Leche_, a leech, is allied to Goth. _l[=e]keis_, a physician. _Speche_, speech, is from the stem seen in _spr[=ae]c-on_, they spoke, with the same vowel, originally, as in Goth. _br[=e]kun_, they broke. All these words have unstable e.

-EDE. _Dede_, deed; A.S. _d[=ae]d_, Goth. _gad[=e]ds_. _Drede_, to dread, A.S. _on-dr[=ae]dan_, O.H.G. _tr[=a]tan_. From V. 1654-7, it is difficult to draw any clear inference; _brede_ should have open _[=e]_ (cf. A.S. _br[=a]d_, Goth. _braids_); _hede_, heed, goes with A.S. _h[=y]dan_, and its vowel is unstable; and _Diomede_, though the _e_ should be close, is at proper name, and needs no exact treatment.

-EKE. Besides the correct form _[`e][`e]k_ (A.S. _[=e]ac_), Chaucer has a form _eke_, with unoriginal final _e_; he probably connected it with the verb _eche_, to eke, in which the _e_ is unstable, as it arose from mutation.

_Cheke_ answers to A.S. _c[=e]ace_, Anglian _c[=e]ce_, mod. E. _cheek_; but here the _[=e]a_ is not the usual A.S. _[=e]a_, being merely due to the initial _c_, and the West-Germanic type is _*k[=a]k[=a]_ (New E. Dict.), answering to Germanic _*k[=ae]k[=a]_; whence the A.S. original form _*c[=ae]ce_; so that the _e_ is unstable, by the rule above given.

-ELE; -ENE. Rimes in _-[=e]le_ and _-[=e]ne_ are all regular. So also in -EME, -EMETH. The rimes in _[=e]men_ are imperfect.

-EPE. _Slepe_ has unstable _e_; cf. Goth. _sl[=e]pan_.

-ERE. Unstable _e_ occurs in _fere_, fire, as explained above; also in _here_, to hear, A.S. _h[=y]ran_, _h[=e]ran_; and again, in _dere_, dear, A.S. _d[=y]re_ (as well as _d[=e]ore_). Also in _yere_, year, because the _[=e]a_ in A.S. _g[=e]ar_ is not the usual diphthong _[=e]a_, but due to the preceding _g_; the Goth. form is _j[=e]r_, so that the M.E. is unstable, by the rule. _Bere_, a bier, is from the verbal stem _b[=ae]r-on_, corresponding to Goth, _b[=e]run_; hence the _e_ is unstable.

But a real exception occurs in the riming of _lere_, to teach, with _here_, here (T. ii. 97, iv. 440). _Lere_, A.S. _l[=ae]ran_, Goth. _laisjan_, should have the open _e_; but it here rimes with a word in which the _e_ is close. This is one of the exceptional words noted by Ten Brink (_Chaucers Sprache_, s. 25). No explanation is offered, and I know of none, unless it be that it was confused with _l['e]re_, cheek, from A.S. _hl[=e]or_. But we must note the fact.

-ETE. The exceptional words are _bihete_, _mete_ (to dream), _strete_, street. _Bihete_ is really a false form for _bihote_ (A.S. _bih[=a]tan_); the _e_ is due to confusion with the pt. t. _bih[=e]t_, where _h[=e]t_ is for A.S. _h[=e]ht_, the result of contraction; hence the _e_ is doubtful and unstable. _Mete_, to dream, is from A.S. _m[=ae]tan_, of unknown origin; hence we may regard the _e_ as doubtful. _Strete_, a street, answers to A.S. _str[=ae]t_, Mercian _str[=e]t_, mod. E. _street_; hence the _e_ is unstable, as explained above.

-EVE. Ten Brink (_Ch. Studien_, ss. 25, 23) thinks that _leve_, sb., leave, was treated as if with close _e_ by confusion with _bil[=e]ven_, to believe, which, he says, has close e. Whatever be the right explanation, we must set aside _leve_, leave, as an exceptional word. So also _eve_, eve, A.S. _[=ae]fen_, Mercian _[=e]fen_, has a variable vowel; see Sweet, O.E. Texts, p. 602.

s. 36. Having now considered the doubtful cases, which may be altogether set aside, it remains to draw up the list of words in which the quality of the long _e_, at least in Troilus, admits of no doubt. The result gives us a valuable set of test-rimes, by which the genuineness of a poem attributed to Chaucer may be investigated. Of course, a _few_ divergences may admit of explanation; but the presence of a large number of them should make us extremely suspicious.

The list is as follows.

(A) The following words (in Troilus) have _open e_ only. (I omit some
doubtful cases, in addition to those discussed above; and only give
those which ought certainly to have the open vowel.)

_teche_, to teach.

_dede_, dead; _lede_, lead (the metal); _rede_, red. Also _lede_, to
lead; _sprede_, to spread. Other words in _-ede_ are doubtful.

_breke_, to break, _speke_, to speak, _wreke_, to wreak, have open _e_;
but it was originally short, and these words are kept apart from
others.

_bene_, bean; _clene_, clean; _lene_, lean; _mene_, to mean.

_hepe_, heap; _lepe_, to leap.

_there_, there; _were_, were; _where_, where. Also _ere_, ear; _gere_,
gear; _tere_, a tear. (_Fere_, fear, has unstable _e_; cf. G.
_Gefahr_.)

_bere_, to bear, _dere_, to harm, _swere_, to swear, _tere_, to tear,
besides _bere_, a bear, _spere_, a spear[33], _were_, a weir, _here_,
her, _stere_, to stir, likewise have open _e_; but the _e_ was
originally short, and these words are kept apart from those in the
preceding set.

_bete_, to beat; _grete_, great; _hete_, heat; _spete_, to spit;
_swete_, to sweat; _threte_, to threat. Also _[)e]te_, to eat,
_fory[)e]te_, to forget. (I omit doubtful cases.)

_reve_, to reave; _greve_, a grove. (But _leve_, to leave, is
doubtful.)

(B) The following (in Troilus) have close long _e_ only.

_seche_, to seek; _biseche_, to beseech.

_forbede_, to forbid; _nede_, need; _yede_, went. Also _bede_, to
offer, _blede_, to bleed; _brede_, to breed; _fede_, to feed; _glede_,
a glowing coal; _spede_, to speed; _stede_, a steed.

_meke_, meek; _seke_, to seek.

_bitwene_, between; _grene_, green; _kene_, keen; _quene_, queen;
_tene_, vexation; _wene_, to ween.

_kepe_, to keep; _wepe_, to weep; also _depe_, deep.

_fere_, companion; _yfere_, together; _here_, here.

_bete_, _flete_, _grete_, _mete_, to mend, float, greet, meet; _swete_,
sweet.

_leve_, dear.

s. 37. Of course, the rime-tests consist in this, that not one of the words in class A can possibly rime with one of those in class B, either in Troilus or in any genuine work of Chaucer.

To test this, we must first refer to Cromie's Rime-Index to the Canterbury Tales, under the headings, _-eche_, _-ede_ (_-eede_), _-eke_, _-ene_, _-epe_, _-ere_, _-ete_, _-eve_.

The only apparent exceptions that I can find are two; and they are worth notice.

Under _-eepe_, we are told that _leepe_, 3 s. perf., rimes with _keepe_, n. obj. The reference is to Group A, 2688. When we look, we find that the Ellesmere MS. has wrong spellings; the words should be _leep_, _keep_. Or rather, we find that the final _e_ is not real, but only represents a meaningless flourish in the MS. Now it is a neat point of grammar that, although _lepen_, to leap (A.S. _hl[=e]apan_), has an open _e_, its past tense (A.S. _hl[=e]op_) has a close _e_; so that the rime is quite correct. In both words, the _e_ is close.

The other case (A 1422) is worth citing. Mr. Cromie says, at p. 108, that _here_, adv., rimes with the inf. _bere_, to bear; which is, in my view, impossible.

The lines run thus:--

'He fil in office with a chamberleyn,
The which that dwelling was with Emelye.
For he was wys, and coude sone aspye
Of every servaunt, which that serveth _here_.
Wel coude he hewen wode, and water bere.'

This is a case where the sound decides the sense. The _e_ in _bere_ is properly short; hence the same is true of _here_. Accordingly, _here_ is not an adverb, nor does it mean 'here'; it is the personal pronoun, A.S. _hire_, and it means 'her'; precisely as it does in Troilus, ii. 1662.

s. 38. In the Minor Poems, the following passages are the only ones that I can find that present any difficulty.

In the Death of Blaunche, 1253, we find _need_ riming with _heed_ (head); so that _need_ has here, apparently, an open e. Ten Brink has noted this exception (at p. 20), and explains it by remarking that there is a double form of the word in A.S., viz. _n[=e]ad_ as well as _n[=e]od_. At any rate, we see that the word _nede_ cannot be relied on as a test-word, and must be struck out; though there is only this one example of its use with open e.

In the Death of Blaunche, 773, we find _dere_ (dear) riming with _were_, were. And once more, viz. in Clk. Ta., E 882, we find _were_ riming with _dere_; but, after all, _dere_ (see s. 35) has unstable e. The Death of Blaunche presents many difficulties, and the text of it is far more uncertain and unsatisfactory than that of any other genuine poem.

In the House of Fame, 1885, we find the rime _here_ (here), _lere_ (to teach). This only shews that _lere_ is here once more used with the close _e_; I have already said (s. 35) that it is no sure test-word.

I just note the rime of _here_ (here) with _were_ (perplexity); H. Fame, 980. _Were_ is of F. origin; and several such words have the close _e_; see Ten Brink, p. 48.

In the Legend of Good Women, 1870, we have the unusual rime _there_ (there) with _dere_ (dear). Ten Brink has noted this (p. 20). He remarks that it is the only example in which _there_ seems to have close _e_; but it is rather one of three cases in which _dere_ has open _e_ (from A.S. _d[=y]re_).

These are all the difficulties which I could find, after a search through the Index to the Minor Poems. The only modifications they suggest are these: the word _need_ is once found riming with _heed_ (head); and the word _dere_ (though it usually has a close _e_) really has unstable _e_ (A.S. _d[=e]ore_, _d[=y]re_).

It is interesting to apply the results to other Poems.

The beautiful Roundels entitled Merciless Beauty answer the test surprisingly (s. 4). In the first stanza, the author uses the rimes _sustene_, _kene_, _grene_, _quene_, _sene_, where all the vowels are close, if we include _sene_, which has the variable _e_ (close in Midland). In the second stanza, the rimes are _pleyne_, _cheyne_, _feyne_, _atteyne_, _pleyne_, all of French origin, in which the sound is slightly varied to that of the nearest diphthong. And in the third stanza, we find _lene_, _bene_, _mene_, v., _clene_, _mene_, s., in which the _e_ is now open.

In the poem called A Compleint to his Lady, the final stanza of which, with Chaucer's name appended, was discovered by Dr. Furnivall after I had claimed it for Chaucer, every rime is entirely perfect, and many of them are highly characteristic of him, being used elsewhere very freely.

The poem which I have called An Amorous Complaint has every rime perfect, except in l. 16, where the author rimes _do_ (with close _o_) with _wo_, _go_ (with open _o_). It has already been shown that Chaucer frequently does this very thing (s. 29).

s. 39. This shews one side of the argument. It is instructive to turn to a piece like The Complaint of the Black Knight, which we now know to be Lydgate's, as printed in the Aldine Chaucer, vi. 235. In the very first stanza we find _white_ riming with _brighte_ and _nighte_, which, to the student of Chaucer, is sufficiently astonishing. Other non-Chaucerian rimes are seen in _pitously_, _malady_ (st. 20), where the form should be _maladye_, and the same error occurs in st. 27; in _ageyn_, _tweyn_, _peyn_ (34), where the latter forms should be _tweyne_, _peyne_; in _forjuged_, _excused_ (40), which is not a true rime at all; in _ywreke_, _clepe_ (41), a mere assonance; in _feithfully_, _cry_ (65), where _I cry_ should rather be _I cry-e_; in _wrecche_, with short _e_, riming with _leche_, _seche_ (68); _seyn_, _peyn_ (for _peyn-e_, 82); _went_ (for _went-e_), pt. t., _shent_, pp. (93); _peyn_ (for _peyn-e_), _ayeyn_ (93); _quen-e_, dissyllabic, _seen_ (miswritten _sene_), monosyllabic, (97). Here are twelve difficulties in the course of ninety-seven stanzas; but there are more behind. For the test-words already given above would alone suffice. The riming of _s[=o]re_ with _tore_ (A.S. _toren_) has already been noticed, in s. 28. In st. 4, we find _sw['e]te_, sweet, paired off with _h[`e]te_, heat; in st. 18, we find _gr['e]ne_ paired off with _cl[`e]ne_; and in st. 86, we have _r[`e]de_, red, paired off with _sp['e]de_, to speed. That is, we have here four exceptions in the course of 97 stanzas, being more than can be found in the whole of Chaucer's genuine works put together. In fact, the indiscriminate riming of close and open _e_ is a capital test for Lydgate and for work of the fifteenth century. Using this test alone, we should see cause to suspect The Flower and the Leaf, which has three false rimes of this class, viz. _[`e]te_, to eat, _sw['e]te_, sweet (st. 13); _b[`e]te_, pp. beaten, actually riming with the pp. _set_ (31); and _gr['e]ne_ riming with _cl[`e]ne_ (42); not to mention that the author makes the dissyllabic words _wene_, _grene_, rime with the pp. _seen_ (36); and again, _grene_, _tene_ rime with the pp. _been_ (56); and yet again, _grene_ rime with the pp. _seen_ (57), and with _been_ (77). ON THIS POINT ALONE, the author differs from Chaucer SEVEN times[34]!

The Court of Love differs from Chaucer in instances too many to enumerate; but, as to this particular point, I only observe the riming of _gr['e]ne_ with _cl[`e]ne_, l. 816; and of _d['e]re_ with _require_, l. 851; but we may alter _require_ to the Chaucerian form _requere_. At l. 79, we find the dissyllabic _grene_; it rimes with the monosyllable _been_.

s. 40. Similar tests apply to open and close _o_. We might arrange these, similarly, into two classes, viz. (A) with the open sound, and (B) with the close sound; and we should find that they do not rime together; i.e., if we first eliminate those words which are observed to be of a variable character. For a few exceptions, see s. 29. I give the list below.

It is also curious to observe that, in Troilus, the words _wolde_, _nolde_, _sholde_, usually rime together. _Wolde_ rimes with _biholde_ once only, iii. 115; but _sholde_ never rimes with any words but _wolde_ and _nolde_. In the Cant. Tales, _wolde_ rimes with several words, but _sholde_ only with _wolde_ and _nolde_. The only exception is in the Book of the Duchess, 1200, where _sholde_ rimes with _tolde_. It would greatly improve the sense as well as the metre to substitute _wolde_ for _sholde_ in this passage.

s. 41. Now that I have exemplified the mode of using these test-words, I give fuller lists, slightly augmented by help of Mr. Cromie's Rime-Index, and adding a third class (C) of words which have a variable vowel, and are therefore _not_ available as test-words; for it is useful to know the character of these also.

The following is THE KEY to the meaning of the lists.

1. (A) contains words with open long _e_ and open long _o_. The _chief_ sources of open long _e_ are (1) A.S. _[=e]a_ and (2) the stable A.S. _[=ae]_ answering to Goth. _ai_ (O.H.G. _ei_) and usually due to mutation of A.S. _[=a]_. We may include words with A.S. short _e_, though these often keep the vowel somewhat short; perhaps it was only half-long.

The sources of open long _o_ are (1) A.S. _[=a]_ and (2) a lengthening of A.S. short _o_; perhaps the latter was only half-long.

2. (B) contains words with close long _e_ and close long _o_. The _chief_ sources of close long _e_ are (1) A.S. _[=e]o_ and (2) A.S. _[=e]_ (from mutation of _[=o]_). The chief source of close long _o_ is A.S. _[=o]_.

3. (C) contains words with variable long _e_ and variable long _o_. The chief source of variable long _e_ is the unstable A.S. _[=ae]_ answering to Gothic _[=e]_ (Germanic _[=a]_); this _[=ae]_ occurs in _spr[=ae]c-on_, third stem of the strong verb _sprecan_, and in its derivative _spr[=ae]ce_, whence M.E. _speche_, speech. It also appears to arise from sounds corresponding to A.S. _[=i]e_, _[=y]_, mutation of _[=e]a_, _[=e]o_.

CHAUCER'S USE. Words in (A) rime with each other, but never rime with words in (B). Words in (B) rime with each other, but never with words in (A). Words in (C) rime with words both in (A) and (B).

-ECHE. (A) _t[`e]che_, _bit[`e]che_. (B) _s['e]che_, _bis['e]che_. (C)
_eche_, to eke, _leche_, _speche_.

-EDE. (A) _dede_, dead, _hede_, head, _lede_, lead (metal), _rede_,
red, _sprede_, to spread. (B) _bede_, to offer, _blede_, v., _brede_,
v., _crede_, _fede_, _forbede_, _glede_, _nede_[35], _spede_, v.,
_stede_, a steed. (C) _dede_, deed, _drede_, s. and v., _hede_, to
heed, _rede_, to advise. Words in _-hede_ almost always shew open _e_,
but a few exceptions occur.

-EKE. (A) _br[)e]ke_, v., _sp[)e]ke_, v., _wr[)e]ke_, v., _awr[)e]ke_,
_ywr[)e]ke,_ with (original) short _e_; _leke_, leek. (B) _meke_,
_seke_, v., _seke_, sick, _biseke_.

-ENE. (A) _bene_, bean, _clene_, _lene_, adj., _mene_, to mean,
_unclene_. (B) _bitwene_, _grene_, _kene_, _quene_, _tene_, vexation,
_wene_, v. (C) _sene_, adj., visible, _y-sene_ (the same), _shene_,
bright[36].

-EPE. (A) _chepe_, to buy, _hepe_, _lepe_, v., _stepe_, bright. (B)
_crepe_, v., _depe_, _kepe_, _wepe_. (C) _slepe_.

-ERE. (A) _b[)e]re_, a bear, _b[)e]re_, to bear, _d[)e]re_, to harm,
_[)e]re_, to plough, _h[)e]re_, her, _sp[)e]re_, spear, _st[)e]re_, to
stir, _sw[)e]re_, to swear, _t[)e]re_, to tear, _w[)e]re_, a weir,
_w[)e]re_, to defend; all with (original) short e. Also _ere_, ear,
_gere_, gear, _tere_, tear; and _there_[37], _were_[38], _where_. (B)
_fere_, companion, _here_, here, _yfere_, together. (Here belong the F.
words, _chere_, _clere_, _manere_, _matere_, _spere_, sphere.) (C)
_bere_, bier, _dere_, dear[39], _fere_, fear, _here_, to hear, _lere_,
to teach, _yere_, year.

-ETE. (A) _bete_, to beat, _grete_, great, _hete_, heat, _spete_, to
spit, _swete_, to sweat, _threte_, v., _wete_, wet, _ybete_, beaten.
Also _[)e]te_, to eat, _fory[)e]te_, to forget, _m[)e]te_, meat
(originally with short _e_). (B) _bete_, to mend, _flete_, to float,
_grete_, to greet, _swete_, sweet. (C) _bihete_, to promise, _forlete_,
to let go, _lete_, to let, _mete_, to dream, _shete_, sheet, _strete_,
street.

-EVE. (A) _bireve_, _deve_, pl., deaf, _greve_, grove, _reve_, to
reave. (B) _leve_, dear, _reve_, a reeve. (C) _eve_, eve, _leve_, to
believe, _bileve_, belief, _leve_, to permit. Note that _yeve_, to
give, usually rimes with _live_, to live, as in mod. English.

-O. All words in _-o_ are allowed to rime together; of these, _to_,
_therto_, _unto_, _do_, _fordo_ should have the close sound.

-OLDE. _Nolde_, _sholde_, _wolde_, usually rime together. Occasionally
_wolde_ rimes with other words. In only one case does _sholde_ rime
with _tolde_ (B. Duch. 1200), where _wolde_ would make better sense.

-ONE. (A) _alone_, _echone_, _bone_, bone, _grone_, to groan, _lone_,
loan, _mone_, to moan, _one_, one. (B) _bone_, boon, _eftsone_, _mone_,
moon, _sone_, soon. (C) _done_, to do. [Note that _s[)o]ne_, son,
_w[)o]ne_, to dwell, are really written for _sune_, _wune_, and only
rime with each other.]

-ONGE. [Note that _songe_, pp., _spronge_, pp., _tonge_, _yonge_, are
really written for _sunge_, _sprunge_, _tunge_, _yunge_. They rime
together, but are quite distinct from _fonge_, _honge_, _longe_,
_stronge_, _wronge_; just as in mod. English.]

-OOK. (A) _ook_, _strook_. (B) _awook_, _book_, _cook_, _forsook_,
_hook_, _look_, _quook_, _shook_, _took_, _wook_.

-OOT. (A) _boot_, he bit, _goot_, goat, _hoot_, hot, _noot_, know not,
_smoot_, smote, _woot_, know, _wroot_, wrote. (B) _foot_, _moot_, must,
_soot_.

-OOTH. (A) _clooth_, _gooth_, _looth_, _ooth_, _wrooth_. (B) _dooth_,
_sooth_, _tooth_.

-ORE. _Bifore_, _bore_, pp., born, _forlore_, pp., _more_, a root,
_shore_, pp., _swore_, pp., _therfore_, _wherfore_, originally had a
short _o_, and usually rime together. _Hore_, pl., hoary, _lore_,
_more_, _rore_, _sore_, _yore_, have open long _o_, and usually rime
together. In a few cases, _bifore_ and _more_ rime with words in the
other set.

-OTE. (A) _grote_, groat, _hote_, hot, _throte_, throat (from A.S.
_throtu_). (B) _bote_, satisfaction, _fote_, _rote_, root, _swote_,
sweet.

The above lists are offered for what they are worth. I believe them to be fairly correct; but they may not be quite exhaustive. Nevertheless, they record ascertained facts; and the facts remain true and useful, even if the theories be wrong.

s. 42. SOME PECULIARITIES OF RIME.

The subject of Chaucer's rimes is fully discussed by Ten Brink; _Studien_, p. 190. As the critical reader will necessarily consult this work, it is only necessary to give here a few of the chief results.

Chaucer's rimes are usually either (1) masculine, or (2) feminine. Masculine rimes are those in which the rime is confined to _a single_ final syllable, as 'lic_our_,' 'fl_our_'; Prol. l. 3. Feminine rimes are those in which the rime extends through _two_ syllables, as 's_ote_,' 'r_ote_'; Prol. l. 1. It is necessary to remember that _every_ unaccented final _e_ at the end of a line is to be sounded, and constitutes a syllable.

Sometimes the rime extends, apparently, over more than two syllables; but it will be found that, in such a case, the penultimate or antepenultimate syllable can either be suppressed, or consists of the shortest possible sound. Ex. _sw['e]venis_, _sw['e]ven is_, really _sw['e]v'nis_, _sw['e]v'n is_; B 4111. _B['e]ryis_, _m['e]ry is_; B 4155. _Vict['o]ri[:e]_, _gl['o]ri[:e]_; A 2405. _Merc['u]ri[:e]_, _m['u]ry[:e]_; A 1385. _M['a]ri[:e]d_, _t['a]ri[:e]d_; B 3461. _B['e]ri[:e]d_, _a-bl['a]keb['e]ri[:e]d_; C 405. _To-sc['a]t'red_, _y-fl['a]t'red_; D 1969. _Contr['a]ri[:e]_, _Ianu['a]ri[:e]_; E 2319; &c.[40] Note that feminine rimes are extremely numerous, and are sometimes kept up through whole stanzas in such a poem as Troilus. Thus, in Troilus, iii. 407-434, we find four consecutive stanzas, or twenty-eight consecutive lines, in which every rime is feminine; and this is by no means an extreme case. Feminine rimes are extremely old in English, and are found even in Anglo-Saxon.

s. 43. The most striking examples are those in which the feminine rime is composed of two distinct words, as these prove at once the reality of the final _-e_. Thus _Ro-me_ rimes with _t['o] me_; A 671. _You-the_ rimes with _allow thee_ (aluu.dhe); F 675. _Ty-me_, with _by me_; G 1204. Similarly, the final _-es_ of the plural substantive constitutes a syllable, as shewn by such a rime as _werk-[:e]s_, _derk is_; G 64. In such a case, some scribes write _werkis_ for _werkes_, to make the rime more complete, but it is quite needless, as there is no necessity for an absolute coincidence of vowel-sound in a mere unaccented syllable. In Lenvoy a Scogan, 15, it would be quite absurd to alter _goddes_ to _goddis_(!), merely because it rimes with _forbod'is_; the really weak part of the rime is in the linking of the short _o_ in _goddes_, with the longer _o_ in _forbode_. For the same reason, the rime of _lyte is_ with _dytees_ (HF. 621) is good enough; indeed, we cannot write _dytis_ (as Ten Brink proposes to do) because the word meant is the plural of _ditee_. Unusual rimes of this sort are still in common use, especially where a slightly humorous effect is intended; and this may very well excuse the above examples, as well as such rimes as _Davit_[41] (for _David_), _eructavit_, D 1933; _saveth_, _significavit_, A 661; _wounded_, _wounde hid_, B 102; _agon is_, _onis_[42], D 9; and the like.

s. 44. There are several cases in which the rimes are rather to be considered as permissible than exact. The frequent riming of _go_ (gao) with _do_ (doo) has already been noted. Similarly, owing to the paucity of words ending in open _[=e]_, the word _s[`e][`e]_, sea, is allowed to rime with close _[=e]_. The proper M.E. form of 'beast' is _b[`e][`e]st_, which rimes, exactly, with _[`e][`e]st_, east, and with _alm[`e][`e]st_, almost; but, inexactly, with _for[`e]st_, in which the _e_ is short. Yet, in Sir Thopas, B 1944-8, we find the words _forest_, _best_, _est_, _almest_, all reduced by the scribe to the same apparent form. In G 1324, we find _br['e]['e]st_ (A.S. _br[=e]ost_), breast, riming with _pr['e]['e]st_, priest, exactly; but elsewhere _br['e]['e]st_ is treated as if the _e_ were short, so that it rimes with _lest_ (Kentish form of _lust_), A 2983; E 617. The mod. E. form suggests that the vowel was beginning to be shortened. In the rime _up[)o]n_, _g[=o]n_, G 562, the _o_ in the former word is short, but in the latter is long; both are open, and the rime is admissible. A similar variation in vowel-length is seen in the riming of _h[)a]dde_, had, with _bl[=a]de_, blade, A 617, and with _sp[=a]de_, spade, A 553; and here again, some scribes try to better the matter by using the form _hade_. The rime is really (had.d[*e]), (spaa.d[*e]); and the right lesson to be learnt from it is, that the _a_ in _spade_ was still (aa), and thus very different in sound from the _a_ in mod. E. _spade_ (speid). Long and short _u_ are rimed in _hous_ (huus), _Caucasus_ (kau.kasus.) D 1139; and elsewhere. Note _neyghebores_, _dores_[43], i.e. (nei.h[*e]buu.rez), (du.rez); in HF. 649. One of the most licentious rimes is in Troil. ii. 933, viz. _riden_, _abiden_, _yeden_, properly (rid.n), (abid.n), (y['e]['e]d.n); which suggests that _yeden_ is here (y[)e]d.n); and we are reminded of the M.E. form of the verb 'to give,' which hovers between _y[)e]ven_ and _yiven_, and rimes in Chaucer with _liven_, to live, though frequently written _yeven_. The singular form _y[=e]de_ rimes with _nede_ (n['e]['e].d[*e]) in G 1280, and with _dede_ (d['e]['e].d[*e]) in G 1140.

Chaucer certainly sometimes uses two forms of the same word; the most noticeable are _heer_ and _here_ for 'here'; _theer_ and _there_ for 'there'; _eek_ and _eke_ for 'eek.' These can be explained by the tendency to add a final _-e_ in adverbial forms. Of course the double form was highly convenient. Remarkable double forms are _chivachy[:e]_, A 85, and _chevauchee_, Mars, 144; _perry[:e]_, A 2936, and _perree_, B 3550.

s. 45. REPETITIONS. Such rimes as _aff-ecciouns_, _prot-ecciouns_, F 55, wherein the penultimate and antepenultimate syllables are repeated, are disliked by later writers. Chaucer had found many such in Le Roman de la Rose[44]. In discussing such repeated rimes as _seke_, to seek, _seke_, sick, A 17, we must remember that they are common in Old French poetry, though it was usual for the poet to take care that the repeated forms should be used _in different senses_. This rule Chaucer usually observes; cf. _s['e]['e]_, see, _s[`e][`e]_, sea, A 3615; _here_, here, _here_, to hear, A 4339; _style_, style, _style_, a stile, F 105; _fern_, fern, _fern_, long ago, F 255; &c. But he also allowed himself such repetitions as _nones_, _noon is_, A 523; _clerkes_, _clerk is_, B 4425; _places_, _place is_, D 1767; &c. We now avoid such rimes as _acordes_, _cordes_, HF. 695; _acorde_, _recorde_, Parl. Foules, 608; and still more, such rimes (all too easy) as _goodnesse_, _soothfastnesse_, E 793; _soothfastnesse_, _wrecchednesse_, I 34; _more_, _evermore_, Anelida, 240.

s. 46. MISTAKES AS TO CHAUCER'S USES. Some of the facts concerning Chaucer's rimes have been misunderstood, even by so good a scholar as Prof. Lounsbury, in his Studies of Chaucer, vol. ii[45]. It is therefore desirable to point out some of these errors.

He calls attention, among others, to the following false rimes:--

_Desyre_, _manere_, T. iv. 817 (p. 54). But the right reading is _martyre_, which alone makes sense. For the actual use of the false rime here censured, see Rom. Rose, 2779.

_Kinde_, _binde_, _wende_, T. iii. 1437 (p. 54). Read _winde_, that thou mayst wind. 'Gower will furnish a number of similar illustrations' (p. 54)[46].

Prof. Lounsbury is extremely anxious to prove that assonances (i.e. such imperfect rimes as we see in _kepe_, _eke_, with a mere correspondence in the vowel-sound only) occur in Chaucer; and endeavours to strengthen his position by considering various difficult rimes. At p. 60, he says: 'All difficulty with _crown_ and _person_ (R.R. 3201) disappears the moment they receive the forms _coroun_ and _persoun_ (as in Gower, iii. 112, 141, 227, 234).' But Gower has no such forms; he has _cor['o]ne_, _pers['o]ne_ in every instance, emphasised by the use of _cor['o]ned_, _envir['o]ned_ (iii. 112), and by such lines as, 'If it in his pers['o]n-e be'; ii. 202. Chaucer rimes _persone_ with _allone_, D 1162; and with _done_, T. ii. 701, 1485, iv. 83; and he uses the forms _c['o]rone_ or _c['o]roune_ and _cor['o]ne_. But R.R. 3201 has, 'And on hir heed she hadde a _crown_'; and, only two lines below, has the dissyllabic _crownet_.

'Gower,' we are told, 'rymes the preterite _had_ with _bed_, _leiser_ with _desire_, and _dore_, a door, with the verb _dare_, in the form _dore_'; p. 64. Gower does none of these things; he rimes the correct preterite _hedde_[47], which means 'hid,' and which Pauli (regardless of sense) turns into _hadde_, with the form _a-bedde_ (i. 256). Further, he rimes _desir_ with _leiser_, according to Pauli (ii. 95); but there is no reason why Gower may not have meant to use the form _leisir_, since that is the true A.F. form corresponding to O.F. _loisir_ (still in use)[48]. Lastly, Gower rimes _dore_ (dur[*e]), a door, with _dore_ (dur[*e]), the 1st p. pr. subj. of the verb _durren_, to dare, corresponding to A.S. _durre_ (ii. 96). The fact that the pres. indicative is _dar_, with a different vowel, has nothing to do with the passage in question. It is the critic, not Gower, who is here at fault; even Gower must have known that _dar_ is monosyllabic, and could not possibly rime with the dissyllabic sb. _dore_.

Chaucer uses 'the pp. _smitted_ for _smitten_'; T. v. 1545; p. 65. Not so; _smitted_ and _smitten_ are totally different words.

Chaucer uses 'the form _houn_ for _hound_'; T. iv. 210; p. 65. What _howne_ means, I do not know; but, as it is dissyllabic, it cannot mean _hound_; nor has it any connection therewith.

'In HF. 959, the infin. _demeine_ is found riming with _seyen_'; p. 71. Not so; it rimes with the dative of the infinitive, _to seyne_ (A.S. _t[=o] secganne_); precisely as _to seyne_ rimes with _reyne_ in F 313. In the face of this quotation, the next remark loses all its point, viz. that 'the suggestive fact about this peculiarity of ryme is that it is not found in the Canterbury Tales'; the answer being, that it _is_ found there. So again, we find _to seyne_, _peyne_, Parl. Foules, 78.

Next we read--'if it be contended that the usage is based upon the derivation of one of the forms from the A.S. gerundial ending _-anne_, it is enough to reply that its occurrence in these cases is not borne out by the poet's practice elsewhere'; p. 71. Of course, it is _not_ enough; for we cannot divorce Chaucer's language from the general usage of Middle-English, in which very few forms of this character had survived. Even if it _were_ enough, the assertion that there is no other such case happens not to be true; for we often find _to done_; as in A 3543, 3778, B 770, D 2194, F 334, G 932, I 62.

And again, we find _to sene_, riming with _grene_, A 1035. And yet again, _to bene_, Rom. Rose, 1265. It is impossible to respect arguments which derive all their apparent force from the principle of heaping one mistake upon another.

s. 47. It is tedious to reply to special pleading of this kind. Thus, at p. 72, I am quoted, correctly, as objecting to the false rime in R. Rose, 1981, where the acc. pl. _feet_ is made to pair with the infinitive _lete_. And we are told that 'the force of this example is altogether impaired by the fact that in the Man of Lawes Tale (B 1104) the same plural rimes with the infin. _mete_.' So far from impairing my argument, the 'fact' strengthens it immensely; for, in that passage, we have no longer to do with the acc. _feet_, but with the _dative_ plural in the phrase _to fet-e_, answering to the A.S. phrase _to f[=o]tum_, which just makes all the difference. Correctly, it should be _to f[=o]te_; but the _[=e]_ was, by this time, so strongly associated with the plural use, that _to f[=e]te_ took its place.

We see that the _e_ was sounded, because there is a third riming word, in the phrase _in the strete_. Stratmann's Dictionary duly notes this very passage. It is, however, true that Chaucer is not always consistent about this; he has _under fete_, riming with _swete_, Book of the Duchess, 399; _in a strete_, riming with _on my fete_, HF. 1049; but in the Cant. Tales, we find _at his feet_, A 2047; _al about hir feet_, A 2075; _unto his beddes feet_, A 4213. The one thing which he does not do is to use _fete_ in the accusative, which is precisely what the author of Fragment B of the Romaunt does; unless, as is more likely, he drops the _-e_ of the infin. _lete_, which Chaucer invariably keeps (at any rate when final). We can easily understand the suppression of a final _e_; but it is difficult to understand why a writer should invent one.

Once more, when I argue that the rime of _entente_ with the adj. _present_ in R. Rose, 5869, does not accord with Chaucer's usage, the reply is made (p. 72) that _entent_ rimes with the pp. _shent_ in the Man of Lawes Tale (B 930). But it is clear that Chaucer here has _entente_ as usual, and rimes it with the form _shent-e_, which is the pp. treated as a _plural_ adjective; as in several other places.

Next (on p. 72), Gower is rated for riming the prep. _for_ with the pp. _forlore_; Gower, C.A. ii. 239. But Gower's phrase is 'that thou art comen fore'; and I suspect that he knew the language of his own time. The _fore_ may answer to the A.S. _fore_, on account of (Grein, i. 320); or, more probably, _that ... fore_ was taken as the equivalent of _therfore_, which constantly takes the final _e_, as in Chaucer, E 1141.

On p. 72, again, it is said that, in F 1273, Chaucer rimes the pt. t. _broght-e_ with _nought_, i.e. he uses the incorrect form _broght_. This charge, for once, is quite true, and it is as well to say at once, that Chaucer's rimes are not _quite_ immaculate; but his sins of this description are not, after all, very numerous, and not by any means so numerous as Prof. Lounsbury, for the purpose of his argument, would have us believe. The only right method is to make out a fair list, without straining to make it much worse than it should be.

s. 48. In his Studies, vol. i. pp. 402-5, Prof. Lounsbury makes another attack upon the unfortunate poet's rimes. Many of his instances are wrong; so much so, that four of Chaucer's supposed errors and two of Gower's are admitted to be no errors in vol. iii. 453. It would have been well if all the rest of the charges had been withdrawn at the same time. I here draw attention to them accordingly.