Chapter IX: Introduction (8)

MANUSCRIPTS. The following account of the MSS. is given on my own authority in every detail. I have been able to see them all, and I wish here to express my thanks to the possessors of them, and to the librarians who have them in their charge, for the readiness with which they have given me the use of them. I am indebted especially to the Councils of Trinity College and St. John’s College, Cambridge, and to Corpus Christi, Wadham, Magdalen, and New College, Oxford, for allowing their MSS. to be sent to the Bodleian Library for my use, and to remain there for considerable periods. Except in the case of one or two, to which my access was limited, I have examined every one carefully, so that I am able to say (for example) to what extent, if at all, they are imperfect. They are arranged as far as possible in accordance with the classes and groups to which they belong, as follows:

1st Recension (_a_) AJMP₁ChN₂E₂ (_b_) H₁YXGOAd₂CathQ (_c_) ECRLB₂SnDArHdAsh 2nd Recension (_a_) SΔ (_b_) AdTBΛP₂ 3rd Recension FH₂NKH₃MagdWP₃ Hn

FIRST RECENSION.

(_a_) _Revised._

A. BODLEY 902, Bodleian Library (formerly Arch. D. 33, not in Bernard’s Catalogue, 1697). Contains _Confessio Amantis_ followed by ‘Explicit iste liber’ (four lines), ‘Quam cinxere freta,’ and ‘Quia vnusquisque.’ Parchment, ff. 184, measuring 13⅜ × 9⅛ in., in quires of 8 with catchwords. Well written in double column of 46 lines in three different hands of early fifteenth cent., of which the first extends to the end of the second quire (ff. 2-16), the second from thence to the end of the tenth quire (ff. 17-80), and the third from f. 81 to the end. The columns nearly correspond with those of the Fairfax MS. up to f. 81, after which point some attempt is made to save space by writing the Latin verses in the margin. Latin summaries in the margin, except very occasionally, as on ff. 10 and 11 v^o. Floreated half border in fairly good style at the beginning of each book except the fifth, and one miniature on f. 8, of the Confession, remarkable for the fact that the figure of the Lover is evidently intended as a portrait of the author, being that of an old man and with some resemblance in features to the effigy on Gower’s tomb. The Confessor has a red stole, which with his right hand he is laying on the penitent’s head, much as in the miniatures which we have in C and L. The note for the miniaturist still stands in the margin, ‘Hic fiat confessor sedens _et_ confes_sus_ cora_m_ se genuflectendo.’

The first leaf of the book is lost, and has been supplied in the sixteenth cent. from Berthelette’s second edition. It should be noted that this is not the form of commencement which belongs properly to the MS., being that of the third recension, taken by Berthelette from Caxton. The first line of f. 2 is Prol. 144.

As to former possessors, we find written on the last leaf ‘Anniballis Admiralis dominicalis,’ on f. 80 ‘Be me Anne Russell’ (?), and on f. 115 ‘Elyzebeth Gardnar my troust ys in god,’ all apparently sixteenth cent. The first name is evidently that of Claude d’Annebaut (also called d’Hannybal), who was Admiral of France, and died in 1552. He was in England about the year 1547. The book came to the Bodleian from Gilbert Dolben, Esq., of Finedon, in Northamptonshire, in the year 1697, and not being in the Catalogue of 1697, it has to some extent escaped notice.

The text is a very good one of the revised type. It should be
noted, however, that while in the earlier books AJM &c. stand
very frequently together on the side of F as against the rest
of the first recension, in the later, and especially in the
seventh and eighth, AM &c. have an increasing tendency to stand
with the first recension generally, leaving J alone in support
of the corrected text. In the earlier books A sometimes stands
alone in this manner, as i. 1960, ii. 961, 1356.

The orthography (especially that of the second hand) is nearly
that of F. As regards final _e_, the tendency is rather to
insert wrongly than to omit. Punctuation agrees generally with
that of F.

J. ST. JOHN’S COLL., CAMB. B 12. Contains the same as A. Parchment, ff. 214, 12 × 9½ in., in quires of 8 with catchwords: double column of 39 lines, written in a very neat hand of the first quarter of fifteenth century. Latin summaries usually omitted, but most of them inserted up to f. 5 (Prol. 606), and a few here and there in the fifth and seventh books.

The first page has a complete border, but there are no other decorations except red and blue capitals. Old wooden binding.

The seventh leaf of quire 12 (v. 57-213) and the first of quire 14 (v. 1615-1770) are cut out, and a passage of 184 lines is omitted in the first book (i. 631-814) without loss of leaf, which shows that the manuscript from which it was copied, and which here must have lost a leaf, had the normal number of 46 lines to the column.

Various names, as Thomas Browne, Nicolas Helifax, J. Baynorde, are written in the book, and also ‘John Nicholas oweth this book,’ with the date 1576. At the beginning we find ‘Tho. C. S.’, which stands for ‘Thomas Comes Southampton.’ The book was in fact bought with others by Thomas Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton, from William Crashaw, Fellow of St. John’s College, and presented by him to the College Library in the year 1635.

This MS. gives a text which is nearer to the type of F than
that of any other first recension copy. In the later books
especially it seems often to stand alone of its class in
agreement with F, as v. 649, 1112, 1339, 1578, 3340, 4351,
4643, 5242, 6059, 6461, 6771, vi. 162, 442, 784, 973, 2089,
vii. 445, 1027, 1666, 2424, 3235, 4336, 5348, viii. 13, 239,
747, 845, 1076, 1415, 1456 ff., 2195, 2220, 2228, 2442,
2670 ff., and it is noteworthy that this is the only first
recension copy which supplies the accidental omission of ‘eorum
disciplina--materia’ in the author’s Latin account of the
_Conf. Amantis_ at the end. As regards individual correctness
it is rather unequal. In some places it has many mistakes, as
vi. 1509 ff., while in others it is very correct. The spelling
is in most points like that of F, and it is usually good as
regards terminations; but the scribe has some peculiarities of
his own, which he introduces more or less freely, as ‘ho’ for
‘who,’ ‘heo’ for ‘sche’ (pretty regularly), ‘heor’ for ‘her,’
‘whech’ for ‘which.’ It must also be an individual fancy which
leads him regularly to substitute ‘som tyme’ for ‘whilom’
wherever it occurs. Punctuation usually agrees with that of F.