CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 ENGLISH COLLECTION 
 
 TIIK GIFT OK 
 
 JAMES MORGAN HART 
 
 PROFKSSOH OF ENGUSH 
 
%l? ? "^ 
 
 Ipf the Compliments of the Author. 
 
 OUAVERUY, H^LL, 
 ! ' HARVARD UNIVERSITY, 
 
 ,' OAMBRID(^e, MAB8. 
 
 
 ', DHOFIELD 
 
 TKriftft-a-ifi-rirT 
 
 ^c/J 
 
 [Beprinted from the PuhlicatioTis of the Modem Language 
 of America, Yol. XVI, 'So. 3.^ 
 
 baltimore 
 
 The Modebn Languaqb Association op America 
 
 1901 
 
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 ENGUSH COLLECTION 
 
 TIIH GIFT OK 
 
 JAMES MORGAN HART 
 
 PROFESSOR OF KNGUSH 
 
CHAUCER'S 
 
 FRANKLIN'S Tale 
 
 BY 
 
 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD 
 
 tBeprinted from the Publications of the Modem Langmge Assomiion 
 - 0/ ^menca, Vol. XVI, No. 3.] ' ' 
 
 BALTIMORE 
 
 The Modebn LAJsteuAGB Association of America 
 1901 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924013109925 
 
CHAUCER'S 
 
 FRANKLIN'S Tale 
 
 BY 
 
 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD 
 
 [Reprinted from the PMicatiom of the Modern Language Aasoeiaiion 
 of America, Vol. XVI, No. 3.] 
 
 baltimore 
 The Modern Language Association op America 
 
A^'S'^SCa.L^ 
 
 JOHN MUKPHr COMPANY, PRINTERS, 
 BALTIMORE. 
 
CHAUCEE'8 FKANKLIN'S TALE. 
 
 I. 
 
 The Canterbury pilgrims, more fortunate tiian we, had 
 heard to the end the Squire's Tale, and were busy exchanging 
 with one another looks of approval and satisfaction. Now 
 was the Franklin's opportunity. He determined to be the 
 one to break the significiant silence and become the spokes- 
 man of the praise of his companions, not only by reason of 
 his very genuine enjoyment of the narrative just concluded, 
 but also because of the chance he thus seciired to bring 
 himself into honorable association with the gentles on Ihe 
 
 pilgrimage. 
 
 ' In feith, Squier, thou hast thee wel y-qult, 
 And gentilly I preise wel thy wit,' 
 Quod the Frankeleyn. 
 
 And, indeed, the Franklin was right : the Squire had 
 acquitted himself uncommonly well and deserved the praise 
 the " worthy vavasour " so freely bestowed upon him. This 
 young chevalier, strong but graceful, high in station but 
 "lowly" of demeanor, though passionate in love still "servis- 
 able" to his father, filled the ambitious householder with 
 unqualified admiration. If only his son were like that of 
 the Knight. If only he, instead of being a common gambler, 
 associating by preference with servants and ordinary folk, 
 would take pattern after this courteous youth, and "lerne 
 gentilesse aright." Yes, the Franklin certainly had aspira- 
 tions above the common. He plainly respected the qualities 
 of manner and disposition that the Squire exhibited, and 
 longed for the distinction of superior bearing and inherited 
 dignity. When, then, the host exclaims, "Straw for your 
 gentillesse," and abruptly calls on him to fulfil his behest 
 by telling a tale, he responds gladly. Though he is careful 
 
 405 
 
406 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 to explain in advance, with a deferential bow to his betters, 
 that he is only a " burel " man and his speech rude, he is 
 nevertheless eager to show his acquaintance with stories of 
 gentle folk, in which he would gladly have his son also take 
 delight. 
 
 That his tale was happily chosen from this point of view 
 will appear later. Let us first strive to get a clear idea of 
 its source, nature, and mode of composition. 
 
 Chaucer says explicitly that the Franklin's Tale is based on 
 a " Breton lay." But no lay dealing with this subject is 
 extant, and although the poet's statement has usually been 
 accepted by scholars as likely to be true, no evidence (except 
 'the vague remark that in general it resembles the lays of 
 Marie de France) has as yet been offered in confirmation 
 of this view. To be sure, it has been frequently noted that 
 the story is localized in Brittany and that the names of the 
 persons mentioned are Breton ; but, on the other hand, so 
 large a number of Oriental and other parallels to part of the 
 tale have been pointed out, that the impression is almost 
 inevitably left upon the student that if ever embodied in a 
 lay called Breton, it was not by virtue of its origin, and that 
 there could have been little that was Breton about it except 
 the name and perhaps the style of presentation. Further 
 study shows him that the poem is so obviously different in 
 tone and spirit in different parts that it cannot all come 
 originally from one source. If we can discover, then, the 
 nature of its foundation, and the quarries from which the 
 stones of the substructure have been obtained, we shall have 
 solved a puzzling problem. 
 
 A careful analysis of the Franklin's lale reveals the fact 
 that at bottom it is a simple story of an unusually happy 
 marriage between the British lord Arveragus and his beauti- 
 ful wife Dorigen. She, we learn, was " oon the faireste under 
 Sonne," and of a very high kindred. With her husband she 
 lived for a time after their marriage in great prosperity " a 
 ful blisful lyf ; " but he, being a " man of armes," soon felt 
 
Chaucer's feanklin's tale. 407 
 
 edupon to leave her, to carry on war ii} England. Dur- 
 ing his absence she pined constantly for him, as was indeed 
 not unnatural, for Chaucer tells us that she loved her 
 husband "as hir hertes lyf,'" and that he also on his side 
 loved her " as his owene hertes lyf." 
 
 The difficulty of her lonely position was, however, increased 
 by the fact that while Arveragus was away she had to resist 
 the importunate wooing of a passionate lover, whom she could 
 only dismiss, without unnecessary offence, by promising to 
 grant him her love, on condition that he performed a seem- 
 ingly impossible task. But this matter affected her, in reality, 
 so little that she did not think it worth while to tell her 
 husband. 
 
 Kothing list him to been imaginatyf 
 
 If any wight had spol^e, whyl he was owte, 
 
 To hire of love ; he hadde of it no doute, 
 
 He noght entendeth to no swich matere, 
 
 But daunceth, justeth, maketh hir good chere. (3% ff. ) 
 
 Nothing mars their exceedingly happy life together until 
 one day the wife learns from her sometime lover that he has 
 performed the task she thought impossible, and that he 
 awaits the fulfillment of her promise. When she in great 
 anxiety tells Arveragus of her sad predicament, instead of 
 reproaching her, " this housbond with glad chere, in freendly 
 wyse," gave her comfort and counsel. He will not let his 
 personal feelings interfere with the performance of what she 
 thinks her duty. 
 
 ' Ye shul your trouthe holden, by my fay ! 
 For god so wisly have mercy on me, 
 I hadde wel lever y-stiked for to be, 
 For verray love which that I to yow have, 
 But if ye sholde your trouthe kepe and save, 
 Trouthe is the hyeste thing that man may kepe.' (746 ff.) 
 
 'A not uncommon phrase in Middle English poems: — see, e. g.. Sir 
 Orfeo, 11. 121, 175; Erl of Tolaui (ed. Ludtke), 481-82; Ywain and Oawaine, 
 4011; Seven Sagea, 270, 2566; Sir Degarre (Abbotsford Club), 21; also 
 Chaucer's Miller's Tale, 36, and Manciples Tale, 36; of. Zielke, Sir Orfeo, 
 Breslau, 1880, p. 16. 
 
408 WILLIAM HENBY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 His heart is wrung with anguish at the unexpected misfortune 
 that has befallen her; but his only request is that she say 
 nothing of it to others. "As I may best," he says, 
 
 ' I wol my wo endure, 
 Ne make no contenance of hevinesse, 
 That folk of yow may demen harm or gesse.' (756 ff.) 
 
 He considerately arranges for her escort to the garden where 
 she is to meet her lover, eager that no one else shall know 
 of her trouble. As for her, she goes simply because he wishes 
 her to do so. When with a heavy heart she explains the 
 situation to Aurelius, he is sincerely touched, and thus 
 addresses her: 
 
 ' Madame, seyth to your lord Arveragus, 
 That sith I see his grete gentillesse 
 To yow, and eek I see wel your distresse, 
 That him were lever han shame (and that were routhe) 
 Than ye to me sholde breke thus your trouthe, 
 I have wel lever ever to suflfre wo 
 Than I departe the love bitwix yow two. 
 
 and here I take my leve, 
 As of the treweste and the beste wyf 
 That ever yet I knew in al my lyf.' (799 ffi ) 
 
 Here, then, we have the picture of a supremely happy 
 marriage, a portrayal of the ideal relations between man and 
 wife. On the one side, a wife of extraordinary beauty and 
 high kindred, and on the other, a husband distinguished as 
 a warrior, with " many worthy men " to follow him — both 
 willing to sacrifice themselves for their honorable love. No 
 wonder we read : 
 
 Arveragus and Dorigene his wyf 
 
 In sovereyn blisse leden forth hir lyf. 
 
 Never eft ne was ther angre hem bitwene ; 
 
 He cherisseth hir as though she were a quene ; 
 
 And she was to him trewe for evermore. (823 ff. ) 
 
409 
 
 II. 
 
 It has not, I believe, been hitherto observed that we have 
 evidence in the Historia Begum Britanniae of Geoffrey of 
 Monmouth, finished in 1136, that this charming story was 
 current among the Celts at an early period, before the time 
 of Marie de France and the period of production of the 
 so-called Breton lays in their metrical French formT^Tn Bk. 
 rv, ch. 13-16, Geoffrey gives us a very interesting account 
 of the life of the ancient British chieftain Arviragus^ the son 
 of Cymbeline, who after his elder brother's death, is said to 
 have ruled in Britain. Geoffrey informs us that " in war 
 none was more fierce than he, in peace none more mild, none 
 more pleasing, or in his presents more magnificent." After 
 warring successfully against the Roman general Claudius, he 
 made peace with him and was given Claudius's daughter in 
 marriage. The historian's chief solicitude is to exalt the 
 happiness of this supposed marriage. He writes as follows : 
 " The damsel's name was Genuissa, and so great was her 
 beauty that it raised the admiration of all that saw her. 
 After her marriage with the king, she gained so great an 
 ascendant over his affections, that he in a manner valued 
 nothing but her alone : insomuch that he was desirous to 
 have the place honoured where the nuptials were solemnized, 
 and moved Claudius to build a city [namely, Gloucester] 
 upon it, for a monument to posterity of so great and happy 
 a marriage." ^ ■ ' 
 
 No one will question the statement that Geoffrey's narra- 
 tive of the reign of Arviragus is not authentic history. Bede 
 and Nennius make no mention of such a person, though they 
 both deal with the expedition of Claudius to Britain and his 
 subduing of the Orkneys. In fact, it is practically certain 
 that Geoffrey here only elaborated a hint he got from a 
 
 * Giles's translation, Six 0. E. Chronicles, p. 151 ; cf. San Marte's edition, 
 p. 66. 
 
 4 
 
410 WILLIAM HENKY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 passage in the fourth satire of Juvenal, which he quotes. 
 This satire is directed against Domitian. A big fish having 
 been sent the Emperor, all the courtiers take the oppor- 
 tunity to flatter him when they offer suggestions as to what 
 it foretells. One of them says : 
 
 Begem aliquem capies, aut de temone Brittano 
 Decidet Arviragus. 
 
 which indicated that there was some British chieftain called 
 by the Romans Arviragus, who had made himself trouble- 
 some to Domitian — quite sufficient justification for Geoffrey 
 to introduce him into his line of British kings, though he 
 may have been assisted in so doing by the scholium in a 
 Juvenal manuscript : "Arviragus Britannorum rex." ^ But 
 a misunderstanding of Juvenal's words led him to put 
 Arviragus in the wrong place. The satirist, instead of nam- 
 ing Domitian by name, designated him as "a bald-headed 
 Nero."^ Geoffrey took this literally,' and so represented 
 Arviragus as living in the time of Nero, a generation too 
 
 'See Mayor, Thirteen Satires of Juvenal, 4th ed., 1886, i, 238, who 
 remarks : " It was in the year 84, the fourth of Domitian, that Agricola 
 was recalled from Britain, where the work of subjugation remained 
 unfinished." For references in classical writers to the use of chariots 
 (esseda) by the Celtic warriors see Ludwig Friedlaender, D. Junii Juvenalis 
 Satirarum Libri V, Leipzig, 1895, 1, 253, note. 
 
 'Calvo Neroni, IV, 38 ; cf. Mayor's note, I, 223 f. 
 
 ' I am indebted to my friend. Dr. E. H. Fletcher, for this suggestion. 
 It is interesting to observe how Qeofirey's reference to Juvenal was mis- 
 understood by Kobert of Brunne : 
 
 Gode kyng he was, we find in boke ; 
 A boke men calle it Juuenal ; 
 Of stories it spekes alle ; 
 At Gloucester it sais he lies, 
 And the queue, dame Genuys. 
 
 Thus the whole of the developed fictitious narrative of Arviragus's life 
 is definitely attributed to the " stories " in the book called Juvenal. Fable 
 certainly ever clothes itself anew. Citation of authorities evidently does 
 not prove acquaintance with them. 
 
chattcee's franklin's tale. 411 
 
 soon. Thus it was natural to bring him into connection with 
 Claudius, whose expedition to Britain had taken place just 
 before (a. d. 43). It was natural also to make him the son 
 of Cymbeline, who held sway in Britain at that time. It was 
 natural further, in the light of Juvenal's reference, to say 
 that "his fame spread over all Europe, and he was both 
 loved and feared by the Romans, and became the subject of 
 their discourse more than any king in his time." 
 
 But what about Geoffrey's account of the marriage of 
 Arviragus with the daughter of Claudius? This, of course, is 
 not historical. Even Holinshed went out of his way to 
 warn his readers from belief in such a fabrication, writing 
 thus prudently : 
 
 " But Suetonius maie seeme to reprove this part of the 
 British historic, which in the life of Claudius witnesseth, that 
 he had by three wives only three daughters, that is to say, 
 Claudia, Antonia, and Octauia : and further, that reputing 
 Claudia not to be his, caused her to be cast downe at the dore 
 of his wife Herculanilla, whom he had forsaken by waie of 
 diuorcement : and that he bestowed his daughter Antonia 
 first on C. Pompeius Magnus, and after on Faustus Silla, 
 verie noble yong gentlemen ; and Ocfauia he matched with 
 Nero his wiues son. Whereby it should appeere, that this 
 supposed marriage betwixt Aruiragus and the daughter of 
 Claudius is but a feined tale." ^ 
 
 ' Holinshed adds these interesting remarks (Bk. iv, ch. 3) : 
 "And heere to speeke my fansie also what I thinke of this Aruiragus, 
 and other kings (whome Galfrid and such as have followed him do register 
 in order, to succeed one after another). I will not denie but such persons 
 there were, and the same happilie bearing verie great rule in the land, 
 but that they reigned as absolute kings over the whole, or that they 
 succeeded one after another in manner as it is auouched by the same 
 writers, it seemeth most unlike to be true : for rather it maie be gessed by 
 that, which as well Gyldas as the old approved Eomaue writers haue 
 written that diuerse of these kings lined about one time, or in times 
 greatlie differing from those times which in our writers we find noted. 
 As for example, Juuenal maketh this Aruiragus of whom we now intreat, 
 to reign about Domitians time. For my part, therefore, sith this order 
 
412 WILLIAM HENEY SCHOFIELB. 
 
 "A feiued tale" it certainly is, if by that is meant that 
 Geoffrey had no historical foundation for his assertions, but 
 not if it is further implied that he had no foundation of any 
 kind for what he says, the account being not simply a new 
 combination but a wholly original fabric of his imagination. 
 On the contrary, Geoffrey would not, I feel confident, have 
 singled out this particular chieftain as the only one whose 
 happy marriage deserved special mention, had he not had in 
 mind some traditional story of a hero with the same name 
 in which this fact was made especially prominent.^ 
 
 That in this place Geoffrey should work current tradition 
 into his narrative, is not in the least surprising to any one 
 familiar with his methods. He was, we know, a shrewd 
 , fabricator, who, in his effort to enliven the dull pages of 
 chronicle history, drew material boldly from current fables, 
 land pictured historical characters in colors too dazzlingly vivid 
 |to be true, though all the while protesting that what he wrote 
 was an authentic record of actual events. By the splendor 
 of his rhetoric, however, he dulled the vision of most of his 
 
 of the British kinglie succession in this place is more easie to be flatlie 
 denied and utterlie reproved, than either wiselie defended or trulie 
 amended, I will referre the reforming therof unto those that haue perhaps 
 scene more than I have, or more deepelie considered the thing, to trie out 
 an undoubted truth : in the meane time I have thought good, both to 
 shew what I find in our histories, and likewise in forren writers, to the 
 which We think (namelie in this behalfe, whilest the Romans gouerned 
 there) we maie safelie giue most credit, do we 'otherwise neuer so much 
 content ourselves with other vaine and fond conceits." 
 
 ^ It was a regular thing for Latin writers to utilize popular songs and 
 stories in their accounts of historical personages. Compare, for example, 
 the way in which Geoffrey's contemporary, William of Malmesbury, wrote 
 (ca. 1142) of Gunhild, daughter of Cnut the Great, who married King 
 Henry, afterwards the Emperor Henry III, in 1036. The particular 
 ballad used by William is moreover of especial interest to us in this con- 
 nection because it is closely allied to the " Breton lay " of The EH of Tolous 
 (only preserved in English) which is strikingly like the Franklin's Tate in 
 fundamental theme (see below, p. 437). On the Gunhild story in romantic 
 literature see Child, Eng. and Scottish Pop. Ballads, ii, 37 ff., " Sir Aldingar." 
 This story was also attached to Matilda, daughter of Henry I of England. 
 
413 
 
 contemporaries, and by his calm assurance confounded their 
 incredulity. /j Both British and Normans wished to believe 
 his statements and they therefore found it easy to lull their 
 suspicions to rest. His "history," bewildering though it was, 
 was accepted as trustworthy, and his stupendous fabrications 
 were read with delight. Had I space I could point out that 
 much of the Arthurian saga in Geoffrey was concocted, even 
 as his life of Arviragus, by the bold transformation of simple 
 popular tales, which, when dignified by his high-sounding 
 phrases, were credited as real historical events. In his 
 chapters on Arthur he carried his unblushing effrontery 
 farthest, and with infinite sang-froid decked out our ancient 
 British hero, the dux hellorum of a rude epoch, in the gorgeous 
 habiliments of an Anglo-Norman king. No one nowadays 
 feels inclined to reproach him on this account. We have 
 gained too much by the impulse he gave Arthurian fiction. 
 But our gratitude to him for his work need not blind us to 
 his methods. In the problem before us an understanding 
 of his regular mode of procedure is necessary if we are to 
 arrive at the truth. 
 
 The truth then is, I believe, that Geoffrey knew a story 
 of Arviragus and his wife Dorigen, which portrayed them 
 as exceedingly happy in marriage. Their union was one of 
 perfect accord, and though their love was put to the test, it 
 suffered no break, but was rather increased by the strain. 
 Thus, Chaucer's tale, in helping us to an explanation of 
 Geoffrey's account, receives an external confirmation of its , 
 own claim to antiquity. Inasmuch as in Geoffrey's time 
 there was clearly current in Britain, or Armorica, a story 
 which exalted the happy marriage of Arviragus, it is most 
 probable that it was that very Celtic story which formed the 
 ultimate basis of the Franklin's Tale} 
 
 ' With Chaucer's lines quoted above (p. 408), it is not without interest to 
 compare the following from Lajamon : 
 
 ];is lond heold Arviragus 
 & Genuis his quene, 
 
414 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOPIELD. 
 
 It may be wise to say here that the situation cannot 
 well be the reverse of what I have said : Geoffrey's brief 
 statements about Arviragus and his wife cannot reasonably be 
 regarded as the source or foundation of this Breton tale. In 
 the first place, they are too summary and general to form the 
 basis of any narrative such as the one before us; and, in 
 the second, none of Geoffrey's peculiar combinations (such as 
 his connecting Arviragus with Claudius and the founding of 
 Gloucester) are even vaguely alluded to in the poem, nor is 
 there in it a single detail that points particularly to his 
 history. The Breton tale of Arviragus was, it appears, quite 
 independent of Geoffrey. It was, I repeat, almost certainly 
 from some version of it that the historical romancer got the 
 suggestions for the life of his British king of the same name. 
 
 In this Celtic tale, there is no reason to doubt that the 
 wife's name, if she had any, was Dorigen, in older form 
 Dorguen, or Droguen (the name, it may be observed, of the 
 wife of Alain I), though of course there is no certainty to be 
 attained in such a case. Genuissa, the name given her by 
 Geoffrey, is clearly a free Latinization of the Celtic name she 
 originally bore, or a fanciful appellation. Roberts says ^ that 
 the name is "the Welsh reading" of Venusia, and I suppose 
 one might think that the rhetorical Geoffrey fashioned it 
 from some form with Gen, or Gwen, as one element because 
 of the suggestion it contained of the beautiful goddess of love.^ 
 
 i>e wifmon wel idone. 
 
 J>a isseh hisses ledes king 
 
 )>at him ne derede nalSing. 
 
 )>us he wunede here 
 
 mid blisse twenti jere. (9653 ff.) 
 
 'Arviragus and his queen Genuis, the very fair woman, held this land. 
 Then the king of this people saw that nothing troubled him. Thus he 
 dwelt here with bliss twenty years.' 
 
 In the life of Arviragus the English historian, as usual, greatly expands 
 W'ace, his original, (chaps, xii-xvi occupy about 800 lines, 9186 ff.) but 
 here without adding anything really significant. 
 
 • Ohron. of the Kings of Britain, London, 1811, p. 86, n. 2. 
 
 ^ Dorigen's lover is called in Chaucer a " servant of Venus.'' 
 
chatjcbr's franklin's tale. 415 
 
 But I would hazard what seems to me a much more likely 
 guess. Geoffrey tells us that the city of Gloucester^ was 
 founded " for a monument to posterity of so great and happy J 
 a marriage," and thus definitely associates Arviragus and his 
 wife with the people of the old kingdom of Gwent, in which 
 he himself lived. Now the Welsh name of an inhabitant of 
 Gwent was G{w)enhwyss. May not Geoffrey have simply 
 given this word the Latin feminine ending -a and coined his 
 Genuissa,^ thereby making that beautiful and virtuous woman 
 not only the leading but the representative lady of the king- 
 dom? Such a procedure, it should be said, was quite, 
 characteristic of Geoffrey, for anyone who has read his book 
 must have seen how systematically he accounts by eponym 
 for the names of the cities, rivers, and districts that he has 
 
 ' Geoffi-ey says that the city Claudius founded was called after Mm 
 Kaerglon, that is, Gloucester. In the following sentence, however, he adds 
 another explanation of the name; "But some say that it derived its name 
 from Duke Gloius, a son that was born to Claudius there, and to whom, 
 after the death of Arviragus, fell the kingdom of Dimetia." He doubtless 
 felt forced to offer this alternative eponymous founder, because of the state- 
 ment in the Hisloria Britmum (§ 49), at the end of the genealogy of 
 Vortigem. Guitolion of Gloui is there said to have been one of four 
 brothers "who built Gloiuda, a great city upon the banks of the river 
 Severn, and in British is called Cair Gloui, in Saxon Gloucester." 
 
 It should be noted that Geoffrey had no more foundation for his state- 
 ment that this Gloui was a son of Claudius, than for his statements about 
 the marriage of that emperor's daughter to Arviragus. He would have 
 asserted dogmatically that Gloucester got its name from Claudius, whom 
 he chose to represent as his founder, with the assurance that his assertion 
 could not be disproved (for was he not simply translating Archdeacon 
 Walter's British book ?), had he not been well aware that his contempo- 
 raries knew of the totally different and much more probable explanation 
 in Nennius. So he decided to give both, albeit they were inconsistent; 
 and, to bring them into some sort of harmony, he remarked that if the city 
 was really called after a Gloui, this person was at any rate " a son that was 
 bom to Claudius there." Alas ! for the genealogy of Vortigern, thus put 
 to shame. Alas I for historic truth in the hands of a jesting prelate. 
 
 'The form Juveniasa {luvenissa) in the abbreviation of Geoffrey by 
 Ponticus Virunnius (p. 105) is of course a corruption. The JBrut Oruffyd 
 ap Arthur has OennyVes. The Brut Tydlio has no name. See San Marte's 
 Geoffrey, p. 264. 
 
416 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 occasion to mention. It is particularly interesting in this 
 connection to compare his remark, near the end of his book 
 (xii, 19), that the Gualenses (Welshmen) were so called 
 " either from Gualo their leader, or Ouales their queen." If 
 he could make up a queen Guales to account for the Gfualenses 
 why not a queen Geriuissa to account for the Genhwysson? 
 Whatever be the case, it is clear that Geoffrey's form of the 
 wife's name is either transformed or invented, and cannot be 
 regarded as that of the wife in the original Breton story, 
 though it may have been suggested by it — and, further, that 
 it affords us another reason for rejecting the idea that the tale 
 may have been a development of Geoffrey's meagre hint, else 
 why should not the heroine bear the name he gave her. 
 
 We have found, then, good reasons for believing that there 
 existed an early Celtic story about Arviragus and Dorigen, 
 telling of their love-making, marriage, and happy life together. 
 In order to show the devotion of each to the other, the com- 
 plete confidence of the husband in his wife's fidelity and her 
 unwavering loyalty to him, there was probably in this early 
 , story a severe test to which each was subjected, but in which 
 each showed so high-minded a nature that their love was 
 only made stronger by having been obliged to undergo an 
 ordeal of fear. There is every reason to believe, moreover, 
 that this, their trouble, was due to the wooing of the wife by 
 an importunate suitor, whom she dismissed, as she thought 
 finally, though because of her kind-heartedness without un- 
 necessary offence, by requiring him to achieve a marvel 
 before he could enjoy her love. 
 
 This theme, of establishing an apparently impossible con- 
 dition as a barrier to a lover's success in winning a lady, it is 
 important to observe, is paralleled in at least tv/o extant 
 Breton lays. In the lay of Doon^ a lady, in order to free 
 herself from her suitors, established the condition that only 
 he should win her who succeeded in travelling from Edin- 
 
 ' Romania, viii, 61 ff. 
 
417 
 
 burgh to Southampton ip one day. In the lay of Dous 
 Amanz^ a king, in order to keep his daughter unmarried, 
 issued an edict that no one should be permitted to marry her 
 who had not previously carried her in his arms to the top 
 of a very high mountain in the neighborhood of his castle. ' 
 In both these cases, aid was given the lover by supernatural 
 agencies. Doon succeeded in going as fast as the swan could 
 fly because he had in his possession the marvellous horse 
 Bayard.^ In Dous Amanz, the lover travelled at the sugges- 
 tion of his beloved to Salerno to her aged relative, who gave 
 him a magic potion by which he might win his suit. In this 
 latter case, we come near the situation in the Franklin's Tale, 
 where the lover travels south to Orleans to an old comrade 
 of his brother who has become wise in magic, and gets from 
 him the aid he requires to remove the rocks from the 
 Breton coast. 
 
 But not only is this general theme thus twice paralleled in 
 Breton lays, it should further be noted that the particular 
 condition imposed on the lover in our tale has also an inter- 
 esting parallel in Celtic tradition. I refer to the story at the 
 bottom of Geoffrey's rationalized account (Bk. x, chaps. 
 10-12) of how the magician Merlin transported the great 
 rocks from Mt. Killaraus in Ireland to build the celebrated 
 Giant's Dance at Stonehenge, an undertaking so seemingly 
 impossible of execution that the British king, we read, "burst 
 into laughter" at the mere suggestion of attempting it. 
 When, however, he finally urged Merlin to bring it about, 
 the magician set his agencies to work and soon achieved the 
 wonder, giving thereby, as Geoffrey words it, "a manifest 
 proof of the prevalence of art above strength." ] It is easy 
 to see how Geoffrey could have rationalized a story of the 
 
 ^ Warnke, Lais des Marie de Framce, pp. 113 ff. 
 
 ' In the oldest Danish version of " Sir Olaf and the Elf," the latter makes 
 Olaf great offers if he will pledge his troth to her, among other things a 
 horse that would go to Rome and back in an hour ; see Child, Ballads^ 
 I, 375. 
 
418 WILLIAM HENEY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 seeming removal of rocks by magic and used it to explain 
 the origin of that remarkable monument whose construction 
 antedates any of our historical records — an ancient landmark 
 which our forefathers' were quite as anxious as we to have 
 explained, and much more ready to regard as the product of 
 „2LIsterious forces. 
 
 If Let me add in this connection a remark which is perhaps 
 ^ not without significance. The British king I have referred 
 to, who follows the counsel of his friends and sends a long 
 distance for the magician to help him in his difficulty — a 
 difficulty solved by the removal of enormous rocks by magic — 
 is named Aurelius ; and, as we remember, the Breton knight 
 in our Tale, who accepts the counsel of his brother and goes a 
 long distance to get the aid of the magician in removing the 
 enormous rocks from the Breton coast, is also called Aurelius. 
 There seems to be connection between these, two situations! 
 I do not think it necessary to postulate a borrowing from, or 
 even the influence of Geoffi-ey in the case of Aurelius any 
 more than in that of Arviragus. Geoffirey's stories of Merlin 
 are neither historical nor wholly of his own invention, but 
 rather adapted from popular tradition. In writing the lives 
 ©nhe two British kings mentioned in our poem, he mani- 
 festly drew material from popular sources — and the Franklin's 
 Tale in a very unexpected but very interesting manner seems 
 to establish this important fact. 
 
 It may be remarked that in our Tale the removal of the 
 rocks is only an illusion, while Merlin is represented as 
 actually transporting the Giant's Dance across the sea. This 
 circumstance, far from militating against the parallel, rather 
 serves to strengthen it. Illusion, as is well known, plays a 
 very large part in Celtic stories. There we find countless 
 illusory creations and illusory transformations — so that we 
 may safely assert that this feature of the rock episode is 
 truly primitive. Even in Geoffrey's rationalized account, 
 Merlin effects what he does by magic. 
 
419 
 
 If, moreover, we push the comparison of Merlin's exploits 
 with those of the Breton magician still further, wt observe 
 that all the marvels performed by the latter are closely 
 paralleled by achievements ascribed to the more celebrated 
 enchanter of Arthurian roTnance. With the exhibition he 
 gives Aurelius of his magic art (461 ff.), we may, for ex- 
 ample, compare that of Merlin to Vivian (Ninian) in the 
 forest of Briosque.^ At Merlin's bidding, a beautiful castle 
 appears before them, filled with knights now carolling and 
 dancing with their ladies hand in hand, now jousting with 
 one another on a lovely green. At the mage's command, they 
 all disappear as mysteriously as they come. It was, indeed, 
 no unusual thing for a magician in a Celtic story to reveal to 
 others splendid scenes where everything was superlative in 
 excellence (" the gretteste that ever were seyn with ye," 464), 
 " Marvellous sights " of hunters and jousters in their revel 
 by a fair river or on a pleasant plain, knights and ladies in 
 merry dance, or at the festive board, where " hem lakked no 
 vitaille that mighte hem plese" (458). The Celtic fancy 
 delighted in such visions of an otherworld of perpetual joy. 
 Castles which appear in all their mysterious glory at the will 
 of a fairy or magician, and vanish again in the twinkling of 
 an eye, are a commonplace of Breton romance. Apart, then, 
 from its value in helping us to establish Chaucer's statement 
 that his tale was originally told by the Bretons, the evident 
 
 ^ Roman de Merlin, ed. Sommer, pp. 222 ff.; English Prose Merlin, ed. 
 Wheatley (E. E.T.S.), I, 361 ff. (cf. Mead's Introduction, pp. ccxxvif.); 
 Merlin, Paris, 1528, I, folio 145; P. Paris, Romans de la TablelRonde, u, 
 174-180. — With Merlin's exhibition of magic, compare that by Guyne- 
 bans. See Merlin, ed. Sommer, pp. 261 ff.; English Merlin (E. E. T. S.), 
 1, 361 ff.; Merlin, Paris, 1528, i, folio 168; P. Paris, iJ. T. B., ii, 196; 
 Livre d'Artus, P (Zt. f. franz. Sp. u. Lit, xvii, J 24). Also the illusions 
 produced by Auberon before Huon, viz. a river created by enchantment 
 (JHwm de Bordeaux, ed. Guessard, Paris, 1860, vv. 3275-3284), a tower with 
 battlements {id., vv. 3295-3299), a palace with viands prepared therein 
 {id., vv. 3525-3529; 3592-3605). Cf. further the magic house built by 
 Merlin (Huth Merlin, i, 149).— See also Tristan, ed. Michel,'i, 222 ; ii, 
 102. I am indebted to Miss Lucy A. Paton for these references. 
 
420 WILLiIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 likeness between Merlin and his fellow magician may perhaps 
 be thought to throw additional light on Geoffrey's methods. 
 It suggests that the Merlin legend is a composite picture, 
 and that to Merlin have been simply transferred feats previr 
 ously performed by other magicians less known to fame. 
 If this , be true, we have an obvious explanation of the fact 
 that genuine early Welsh tradition nowhere connects with 
 the historical bard Myrddhin any such performances as those 
 ascribed to the romantic enchanter Merlin by that arch-com- 
 biner Geoffrey of Monmouth. 
 
 It is, of course, well known that Eastern magicians are 
 famous for similar achievements. No one would argue that 
 stories of illusion are confined to any one country. It is 
 important to recognize, however, that they were popularly 
 current among the Celts, and that there is therefore no need 
 of seeking their immediate source in foreign lands. 
 
 In a consideration of the immediate provenience of any 
 tale the proper names are matters of great importance ; for 
 they very frequently indicate the district in which the mate- 
 rial, whatever its ultimate origin may be, took the shape it 
 assumed in the particular version under discussion. Fortu- 
 nately, the names in the Franklin's Tale corroborate entirely 
 the conclusions • we have already reached with regard to the 
 Celtic foundation of the story it embodies. Arviragus is 
 known nowhere outside of the Tale except as an ancient 
 British chieftain.'' The name Aurelius was borne by at 
 
 ^In the ballad of William the Conqueror, "written by Deloney, the 
 ballading silk-weaver," who died in or before 1600 {Pera/ Folio MS., ed. 
 Hales and Furniyall, i, 151 ff.), we read :. 
 
 To Dover then he tooke the way, 
 
 the castle downe for to flinge 
 which Aueragus had builded there, 
 
 the noble Brittaiue kinge. (11. 17 ff.) 
 
 iThe building of Dover was usually attributed to Julius Caesar (cf. 
 Shakspere, Richard II, v, 1, 2) ; but Camden speaks of a chart formerly 
 hung up there which stated that Arviragus afterwards fortified it and shut 
 up the harbor. Arviragus plays a part in Gymbdine. 
 
421 
 
 least two British kings. And Dorigen is plainly Celtic. 
 The localization is without exception in Great Britain or 
 Armorica. We read that "nat fer fro Penmark" was the 
 dwelling of him "that of Kayrud was'cleped Arveragus" 
 (73, 80), and these places are said to have been "in Armorik, 
 that called is Britayng" (1). Thence the hero travels to 
 " Engelond that cleped was eek Briteyne " (82), The ma- 
 gician, finally, is required to remove all the rocks on the, 
 Breton coast from the Gironde to the Seine. Clearly the 
 scene of the tale is laid in Brittany, where the name Penmarch 
 is well known as that of a headland near Quimper in the 
 Department of Finisterre, a little to the south of Brest. 
 There can then be no doubt that the Breton lay which 
 Chaucer says he utilized — and it would require a great deal 
 of negative proof to make us disbelieve his statement on this 
 point, for he nowhere else refers a tale to such a source — 
 took shape in Brittany, like many other poems of the 
 same kind. 
 
 It is likely, however, that the story Geoffrey made use of, 
 (not the French lay) was current in South Wales where the 
 historian lived. The name Arveragus^ -seems to be but 
 another form of Arverus (Arverius), even as Aureliacus of 
 Aurelius, Auriacus of Aurius, Aquiniacus of Aquinius, etc. 
 Now, this name Arverus (Arverius) ^ is fortunately preserved 
 in a Latin inscription. It occurs only once, but then, it is 
 important to observe, in the ruins of a building in Gloucester- 
 
 'Arviragii^ seems to be composed of a prefix Ar-, a, root -tot--, and a 
 suffix -agiis. The suffix appears also as -agos, -ocms, -akos. Holder identi- 
 fies the name (Altceltiseher SprachschMs, Leipzig, 1891, p. 243; of. pp. 69, 
 423, 1007) with Biracos, Biragos, Pirakos. According to D'Arbois de 
 Jubainville, the form Biracos is a derivative of Bwus, Birrus (see Mevue de 
 la nwmismatiqv^ frangmse, 1860, p. 173, pi. 8, 11 ; 1861, p. 62 ; 1868, p. 414 ; 
 cf. Bevue Cdtique, XI, 156 ffi). Likewise, Arviragus is a derivative of 
 Arvirus {Arvirius). 
 
 'In the genitive, Arveri; see Hubner, Inscriptiones Britarmiae Lcdinae, 
 1873, nos. 1236, 1237 {Corpus Inscrvptiommi Laiinarum, vii) = Ephemeris 
 epigraphwa, 7, p. 343, n. 1130 (cited Holder, p. 231). 
 
422 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 shire (Lestercome Bottom, uear Chedworth). It is therefore 
 likely that tradition connected an Arverus (Arverius) for 
 some reason with that locality. There existed in earliest 
 times, as now, in South Wales (Glamorgan), near the mouth 
 of the Severn, a town Penmarch ; and we have also indica- 
 tions of a place "not far from Penmatk" with which Kayrud 
 may be identified. I refer to the mythical place Kaeroedd 
 (Caeroeth) in which various people, including Gweir, son of 
 Gweiroedd, were imprisoned, and which was located at 
 Gloucester.^ The localization in Brittany may not, then, 
 have been original. Traditions of "Arveragus of Kayrud " 
 apparently lingered about Gloucester. There was the place 
 from which came the name of his dwelling (a name that is 
 not to be found in Armorica). Near by has been discovered 
 the Latin inscription bearing his name. It was Geoffrey 
 from the neighboring town of Monmouth who is the first 
 witness to the tradition, and he makes the heroine receive her 
 name from that of the ancient kingdom of Gwent in which 
 that place was. It is hard therefore to resist the natural 
 conclusion that some story of the romantic Arveragus (Arve- 
 rius) was current in Geoffrey's time in South Wales, and that 
 it was the traditional association of the hero with the region 
 of Gloucester that made Geoffrey bring the King Arviragus 
 of Juvenal into special connection with that city. The 
 love-story of Arveragus (Arverius) had evidently been carried 
 over sometime earlier to Armorica, where it was again local- 
 ized, the existence of Penmarch, the headland in Brittany, 
 serving particularly well to establish it in its new abode. 
 
 The form of the story in Brittany was doubtless considera- 
 bly different from that in South Wales. It was combined 
 with foreign elements and permeated with a new chivalrous 
 spirit. It was lengthened^and elaborated. But nevertheless 
 it remained at bottom a %ale of the happy marriage of 
 
 ^See Rhys, Arthuricm Legend, Oxford, 1891, p. 365, note 1 ; cf. Loth Les 
 Mabinoffion, i, 197, note; li, 293, 294, note 1. 
 
chaucee's fkakklin's tale. 423 
 
 Arveragus and his devoted wife, in which was exalted the 
 principle of inviolable truth. 
 
 It may not be out of place here to call attention to the 
 fact that we have other instances of the double development 
 of one and the same story. The Breton- lay of Lanval is 
 localized at Kardoil (Carlisle), while its pendant Graelent 
 is localized in Brittany. Graelent contains new incidents and 
 discussions of courtly sentiment not in Lanval, which is on 
 the whole the more primitive form of the story. Moreover, 
 Graelent also presents the significant situation of a romantic 
 love-story attached to an ancient king. Gradlon Mor (Grae- 
 len-Mor) appears to have usurped the place of Lanval because 
 he was traditionally famous in the land where the story 
 circulated. Even so Arviragus may have had attracted to 
 himself the only extant story about him, simply because of 
 his traditional renown.-^ So far, then, my chief object has 
 
 ' Who was the original hero of the story, we cannot say. The Welsh 
 Bruts, when translating Geoffrey, substitute for Armrague the name 
 Gweirydd. This is clearly not a phonetic equivalent of the name it 
 supplanted; but it may well be the late Welsh form of an earlier 
 Chiierid(th), which would correspond to all but the prefix of Arverius. 
 There may then have been a person of this or similar name of whom the 
 story was originally told, and it was Geoffrey who perhaps first identified 
 him (Arverius, Gwerydd) with the chieftain whom Juvenal mentions as 
 Arviragus. On Geoffirey's authority this became the established form of 
 the chieftain's name, and it was used afterwards whenever stories were told 
 oi that prince. 
 
 Prof. Bhys, as the result of an ingenious series of conjectures (Arthurian 
 Legend, pp. 365 ff.), suggested that Geoffrey's story of the marriage of 
 Arviragus with Genuissa is " only another version of the story of Pryderi 
 marrying a grand-daughter of Gloyw Wallt-lydan," as told in the mabinogi 
 of Pwyll. Oloyw is evidently what suggested the combination to Prof/ 
 Ehys. But he is wrong in asserting that " Geoffrey of Monmouth has 
 identified a Gloyw with Claudius Caesar." Geoffrey knew from Nennius 
 (see above, p. 415, n.) that the foundation of Gloucester was attributed to 
 a OUmi {Oloyvi), but he discarded the notion, and identified this traditional 
 founder of the place not with Claudius, but with a son of that emperor, a 
 personage of the historian's own creation, whom he represents as born 
 there — and all this obviously, not because he had any story of Gloyw in 
 mind, but merely to avert criticism by providing for the conflicting hypo- 
 
424 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 been to show that the Franklin's Tale is not only told of 
 Celtic people, and localized in Celtic lands, but also closely 
 connected with Celtic tradition. I have suggested also that 
 it was first current in South Wales, where Geoflfrey of Mon- 
 mouth became familiar with it, that thence it was carried to 
 Armorica, and that on the continent it got into the hands 
 of a French poet who fashioned it in rhyme after the style of 
 the extant Breton lays. Because in this elaborate form it 
 contains elements that are not Celtic, does not, as we shall 
 see, invalidate my contention with regard to its British origin. 
 
 thesis. Thus, even if we accept as sure Prof. Ehys's observations that 
 ArviraguB is correctly rendered in Welsh by Gweirydd, and that Gweirydd 
 is "probably" another form of Gwri, and that Gwri is an occasional name 
 of Pryderi, it is nevertheless unnecessary to combine this Pryderi with 
 Arviragus simply because the former married a granddaughter of a certain 
 Gloyw, while the latter married a sister (fictitious moreover) of another 
 person of the same name, unless some similarity between the marriage of 
 Arviragus and Genuissa on the one hand, and Pryderi and Kigva on the 
 other can be shown to exist. 
 
 We should observe in this connection that nearly all of what is peculiar 
 to Geoffrey in his account of the marriage of Arviragus, the emphasis he 
 lays on its unusual felicity, the statement that Gloucester was founded as a 
 monument of it, the explanation that the Gloui after whom Geoffrey 
 admits it may have been called was a son of Claudius born there, the 
 remark that Arviragus was feared by . the Romans more than any king of 
 the time, the quotation from Juvenal in support of all this, etc., is not 
 only not in the most remote manner suggested by the tale of Pryderi, but 
 is even not to be found in the Welsh Brvi attributed to Tysilio (translated 
 San Marte, in his edition of Geoffrey, 1854, p. 517 f.). 
 
 Prof. Rhys's remark, moreover, — "The mythic element still further 
 betrays itself in his narrative, when it describes Gweirydd helping to bring 
 Orkney and the other islands into subjection to Gloyw (Claudius) " — is of 
 little consequence when we remember that Nennius, from whom Geoffrey 
 borrowed, although he never mentions Arviragus, says of Claudius (§ 21) : 
 "He next sailed to the Orkneys, which he likewise conquered, and after- 
 wards rendered tributary." 
 
 The following triad (translated by Loth, Les Mabinogion, n, 283) evi- 
 dently does not antedate Geoffrey ; " 122 (Myv. 403. 24). Trois principaux 
 rois de combat de I'lle de Prydein : Caswallawn, fils de Beli ; Ovieirydd, JUs 
 de Cyrimelyji Wlwlig ; Caradawc, fils de Bran ab Lly r Llediaith." 
 
Chaucer's pb4.kklin's tale. 425 
 
 Prof. Skeat is surely not justified in making^ the unqualified 
 assertion that " The ultimate source of the IFranMin's'] Tale 
 is certainly Eastern." 
 
 III. 
 
 We must now pass from this study of what seem to be the 
 foundations of the Franklin's Tale in early Celtic tradition to 
 a more minute examination of its phraseology, incidents and 
 expressions of sentiment, in order, if possible, to discover 
 what features in the English poem are likely to have belonged 
 to the Breton lay of Arviragus, Aurelius, and Dorigen, which, 
 according to Chaucer's explicit statement and inherent proba- 
 bility, formerly existed. 
 
 I have already spoken of the lay of the Two Lovers as 
 presenting a situation very similar to that in our tale — the 
 secret love of a knight for a beautiful lady, her willingness 
 to marry him if one necessary condition be fulfilled, its 
 impossibility recognized unless magic aid can be secured, the 
 journey to a wise friend in a southern city, from whom 
 the necessary assistance is readily obtained — all of which 
 justifies us in asserting that the two lays embody themes 
 of the same general class. Let me now bring into com- 
 parison the passage in each case in which the young knight 
 is first introduced to us. 
 
 El pais ot un damisel, In Armorik, that called is Britayne,* 
 
 &z a un conte, gent e bel. Ther was a knight that loved and dide 
 
 De bien faire pur aveir pris his payne 
 
 ' Works of Chancer, m, 481. 
 
 • Note that the French lay begins in like manner : 
 
 Veritez est qu'en Neiistrie, 
 
 Que nus apelum Normendie (7-8.) 
 
 It was the regular way to begin a Breton lay, after the conventional 
 short, prologue, which is also in Chaucer; cf. "En Bretaigne jadis maneit" 
 {Le Fraisne, 3; Yonec, 11) ; "En Bretaigne maneit uns ber" (^Bisclavret, 
 15); "En Seint Mallo en la cuntree" {Lauaiic, 7); "En Bretaigne a 
 Nantes maneit (Chailivet, 9) ; "En Bretaigne ot un chevalier" {Midue, 5). 
 5 
 
426 WILLIAM HENKY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 sur tuz altres s'est entremis. To serve a lady in his beste wyse ; 
 
 En la curt le rei converaot, And many a labour, many a greet empryse 
 
 asez sovent i surj urnot ; He for his lady wroghte,er she were wonne. 
 
 e la fille le rei ama, For she was oon, the faireste under sonne. 
 
 e meintes feiz I'araisuna And eek therto come of so heigh kinrede, 
 
 qu'ele s'amur li otriast That wel unnethes dorste this knight, for 
 
 e par draerie I'amast. drede. 
 
 Pur ceo que pruz fu e curteis Telle her his wo, his peyne, and his dis- 
 
 e que mult le preisot li reis, tresse. 
 
 li otria sa druerie. But atte laste, she, for his worthinesse, 
 
 e cil humblement I'en mercie. .... prively . . fil of his accord 
 
 (57 ff.) To take him for hir housbonde and her 
 
 lord. (1-14) 
 She thanked him and with ful greet 
 
 hnmblesse. (25.) 
 
 The general likeness between these passages surely indi- 
 cates that Chaucer had a definite Breton lay before him and 
 not simply a floating story, or a sophisticated tale like 
 Boccaccio's on the same subject — and that it was furthermore 
 very similar in style to the lays of Marie. This is, however, 
 but one of many parallel passages which go to demonstrate 
 this fact. 
 
 In the Franklin's Tale are two lovers, Arviragus and 
 Aurelius. It is the innocent love of the former which we 
 have found paralleled in the lay just mentioned. In the 
 lay of Equita.n, on the other hand, we have an instance of 
 the love of a Breton lord for a married woman, who had 
 long known him as a friend of the household and little 
 suspected his passion. Like Aurelius, Equitan, who also 
 dwelt in Brittany, suffered for a long period because of his 
 love-longing, before he finally revealed his affection to his 
 friend's wife. 
 
 This lay shows interesting parallels to our tale, not only 
 in situations, but also in sentiment and general phraseology. 
 As an instance of the last, I would cite first the opening 
 lines of this lay to show that Chaucer's words in the pro- 
 logue to his tale are simply imitated, if not translated, from 
 the French, every lay having a prologue of this kind. 
 
qHATTCEE'S FEANKLIN'S TALE. 
 
 427 
 
 Mult unt est6 noble barun 
 cil de Bretaigne, li Bretun. 
 Jadis snleient par pruesce 
 par curteisie e par noblesce 
 des aventures que oeient, 
 ki a plusure genz aveneient, 
 faire les lais pur remembrance, 
 qu'am nes meist en ubliance. 
 Ud en firent p'oi cunter, 
 ki ne fet mie a ublier. 
 
 Thise olde gentil Britons in hir dayes 
 Of diverse aventures maden layes, 
 Rymeyed in hir firste Briton tonge ; 
 Which layes with hir instruments they 
 
 songe, 
 Or elles redden him for hir plesaunce ; 
 And oon of hem have I in remembraunce 
 Which I shal seyn with good'wil as I can. 
 
 ^ut what is chiefly interesting to us now in the lay of 
 Equitan, is the remarkable similarity it shows to the well- 
 /known discussion of love and the condition of its happy 
 /continuance, at the opening of Chaucer's poem. Observe, 
 for example, the likeness between the following passages. In 
 the French, the king is pleading for the love of his seneschal's 
 wife ; in the English, Arveragus for Dorigen's. 
 
 ' Ma chiere dame, a vus m'otrei ! 
 Ne me tenez mie pur rei, 
 mes puf vostre hume e vostre ami ! 
 Seiirement vus jur e di 
 que ieo ferai vostre plaisir. 
 Ne me laissiez pur vus murir ! 
 Vus seiez dame e ieo servanz, 
 vus orguilluse e ieo preianz.' 
 
 (Eq., 173ff.) 
 
 And for to lede more in blisse hir 
 
 lyves, 
 Of his free wil he swoor hir as a 
 
 knight, 
 . That never in al his lyf, he, day ne 
 
 night, 
 Ne sholde upon him take no maistrye 
 Agayn hir wil,ne kythe hir lalousye, 
 But hir obeye, and folwe hir in al 
 As any lovere to his lady shal. 
 
 (F-.T., 17ff.) 
 
 If now we examine the French passage carefully and 
 consider that if such sentiments are expressed in the lay 
 of Equitan by Marie de France, they might very well have 
 been in the lay of Arviragus, whether written by her or by 
 another poet in the same style, we see at once that there is no 
 necessity of going, as scholars now do,^ to the Roman de la 
 
 > See Skeat, Wm-ks of Chaucer, v, 388 ; cf. Koeppel, " Chanceriana," Anglia, 
 XIV, 258. 
 
428 WILLIAM HENEY SCHOPIELD. 
 
 Hose for the foundation of the sentiment that Chaucer 
 expresses in the following lines : 
 
 Heer may men seen an humble wys accord. 
 
 Thus hath she take hir servant and hir lord, 
 
 Servant in love, and lord in mariage ; 
 
 Than was he bothe in lordshipe and servage ; 
 
 Servage ? nay, but in lordshipe above, 
 
 Sith he hath bothe his lady and his love ; 
 
 His lady, certes, and his wyf also, 
 
 The which that lawe of love acordeth to. (63 ff.) 
 
 Chaucer doubtless had the discussions of the Roman de la 
 Hose in mind when he was telling his tale ; but it is not 
 necessary to believe that his discussions of love and mastery ' 
 were foisted in by him without any hint in his original. 
 Surely, if any Breton lay should have arguments of this 
 nature it was one that was specially intended to exalt a 
 marriage where husband and wife dwelt together in perfect 
 sympathy and love. 
 
 Aurelius and Equitan resemble each other and act simi- 
 larly under like conditions. Of the former, we read that he 
 was " wel biloved, and holden in gret prys (206) ; " of the 
 latter, that he was " mult de grant pris e mult amez (13-14)." 
 Each falls deeply in love with the wife of another, and suffers 
 agonies before he dares reveal his passion. The wife is 
 completely unconscious of the love she has awakened, and 
 her husband unsuspicious of his friend's attachment to her. 
 The lover pleads with the beautiful wife to grant him her 
 love, else he shall surely die. 
 
 ■^ Further, in the lay of Lanval, we find an excellent parallel 
 to the scene in the garden, where the avowal of love takes 
 place — with the difference, however, that the r6les are re- 
 versed ; it is the lady who seeks the love of the knight. In 
 
 ^In Eq., 141 ff., is an interesting passage beginning "Amwz n'estpruz, se 
 West egcds," in which is shown the unwisdom of him who "Vudt amer par 
 seignwie," — with which should be compared the passage in Chaucer 
 beginning "Love wol uat be constreyned by maistrye" {36ff. ). 
 
429 
 
 one case, Dorigen is in sorrow because of the absence of her 
 lord ; in the other, Lanval because he is not with his amie. 
 In both cases, they are the object of the solicitude of their 
 friends, who are eager to bring back to them their previous 
 good cheer. Dorigen is induced to join a large gathering 
 of merry-makers in a garden beside " hir castel faste by the 
 sea" (119) ; but she holds aloof from the rest. 
 
 At-after diner gonne they to daunce, 
 
 And singe also, save Dorigen allone, 
 
 Which made alwey hir compleint and hir mone ; 
 
 For she ne saugh him on the daunce go, 
 
 That was hir houshonde and hir love also. (191 ff.) 
 
 Aurelius seizes this opportunity to make a confession of his 
 love ; but Dorigen refuses to accept it, declaring earnestly : 
 
 Ne shal I never been untrewe wyf 
 
 in word ne werk, as far as I have wyt ; 
 
 I wol ben his to whom that I am knit. (256 ff.) 
 
 Likewise in Lanval, we read that on a certain day a large 
 gathering of knights 
 
 s'erent al6 esbaneier 
 
 en un vergier desuz la tur 
 
 u la reine ert a surjur. (224-6.) 
 
 They urge Lanval specially to join them (" Lanval ameinent 
 par preiere," 238). When, however, the dance begins : 
 
 Lanval s'en vait de I'altre part 
 
 luin des altres. Mult li est tart 
 
 que s'amie puisse tenir, 
 
 baisier, acoler e sentir ; 
 
 I'altrui joie prise petit, 
 
 si il nen a le suen delit. (255 ff.) 
 
 While the revelry is going on, the queen confesses her love 
 to him ; but he too refuses to accept it, because, he declares, 
 she has already a husband to whom she should be faithful. 
 
 Ja pur vns ne pur vostre amur 
 
 ne mesferai a mun seignur I (275-6.) 
 
430 WILLIAM HENEY SCHOFIBLD. 
 
 When Lanval, after this interview, realizes that he has 
 lost his amie, he bitterly laments his fate. ("A sun ostel 
 fu revenuz," 335.) 
 
 En une chambre fu tuz suls, 
 pensis esteit e auguissus. 
 S'amie apele mult sovent 
 mes ceo ne li valut nient. 
 II se plaigneit e suspirot, 
 d'ures en altres se pasmot 
 
 c'est merveille qu'il ne s'ocit. 
 
 II ne set tant crier ne braire 
 
 ne debatre ne eei detraire, 
 
 qn'ele en voille merci aveir, 
 
 sul tant qu'il la puisse veeir. 
 
 A las, cument se cuntendra I (339-353.) 
 
 Aurelius, likewise, after his interview with Dorigen, realizes 
 the hopelessness of his case. ("Aurelius ful ofte sore syketh " 
 278). All the company go home 
 
 in Joye and in solaB, 
 Save only wrecche Aurelius, alias I 
 He to his hous is goon with sorweful herte. 
 He seeth he may nat fro his deeth asterte. 
 Him semed that he felte his herte colde ; 
 Up to the hevene his handes he gan holde, 
 And on his knowes bare he sette him doun, 
 And in his raving seyde his orisoun 
 For verray wo out of his wit he brayde. 
 He niste what he spak, but thus he seyde ; 
 With pitous herte his pleyut hath he bigonne. 
 
 And with that word in swowne he fil adoun 
 
 And longe tyme he lay forth in a traunce. (291 S.) 
 
 The brother of Aurelius looks after him " despeyred in this 
 torment and this thought " (356), and cares for him while he 
 lies in bed " in languor and in torment furious." 
 
 In like manner, when Lanval returns with sorrowful heart 
 to his dwelling (" En sun lit malade culcha," 309), his friends 
 care for him. 
 
chaucee's fkanklin's tale. 431, 
 
 Li chevalier I'unt conveid; 
 
 mult I'unt blasm^ e chastei^ 
 
 qu'il ne face si grant dolur, 
 
 e maldient si fole amur. 
 
 Chescun jur I'aloent veeir, 
 
 pur ceo qu'il voleient saveir 
 
 u il beiist, u il manjast; 
 
 mult dotouent qu'il s'afolast. (409 ff.) 
 
 With this may also be compared the attitude of Dorigen's 
 friends, who try to comfort her in her husband's absence. 
 
 She moorneth, waketh, wayleth, fasteth, pleyneth ; 
 
 Desyr of his presence hir so distreyneth, 
 
 That al this wyde world she sette at noght. 
 
 Hir frendes, whiche that Ijnewe hir hevy thoght, 
 
 Conforten hir in al that ever they may ; 
 
 They prechen hir, they telle hir night and day, 
 
 That causelees she sleeth hirself, alias ! 
 
 And every confort possible in this cas 
 
 They doon to hir with al hir bisinesse, 
 
 Al for to make hir leVe hir hevinesse. (91 ff.) 
 
 In the lay of Arviragus and Dorigen the necessity in a 
 happy marriage of mutual loyalty on the part of husband 
 and wife was, it seems, especially emphasized. Strangely 
 enough, we have in an extant Breton lay Guildelueo and 
 Gfuilliadun (commonly called Eliduc) a Curious counterpart 
 to this poem — an exacnple of the unhappiness that results 
 when loyalty in marriage is shattered by guilty love. In 
 this the longest and most carefully written of all Marie's 
 lays, we have striking parallels in phraseology to parts of 
 our tale ; but I wish here only to dwell on the similarity in 
 the general situation. In both stories a handsome and dis- 
 tinguished knight of Brittany is very happily married to a 
 beautiful woman of high rank. After a while he goes to 
 England to take service there and carry on warfare. His 
 faithful wife in both cases 
 
 Ferment demeine grant dolur 
 
 al departir de sun seignur 
 
 mes 11 I'aseiira de sei 
 
 qu'il li portera bone fei. (81 ff.) 
 
432 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 In one case, during their separation, the wife is tempted by 
 a handsome knight, but is loyal to her husband — and so the 
 two live the rest of their lives in sovereign bliss. In the 
 other, the husband is tempted by a beautiful lady, and yields 
 to her seductions, with the result that his wife's happiness is 
 destroyed and she has to betake herself to an abbey and 
 become a nun. 
 
 We surely need no more evidence from the poems of 
 Marie de France, which have already served our purpose 
 sufficiently well. It must now be clear that the Franklin's 
 Tale, not only in fundamental theme, but also in the accre- 
 tions of sentiment, not only in general features, but also in 
 minute detail, shows so great similarity to the extant Breton 
 lays that there can be no doubt that Chaucer's assertion 
 regarding the source of his narrative is to be unhesitatingly 
 accepted.^ Even as Marie says of the three characters of 
 the last lay I have mentioned, Eliduc, Guildeluec, and Guil- 
 liadun, so we may safely say of the three characters of the 
 Franklin's Tale, Arveragus, Aurelius, and Dorigen : 
 
 De I'aventure de cez treis 
 li ancien Bretun curteis 
 firent le lai pur remembrer 
 qu'um nel deust pas oblier. 
 
 ' Some one, indeed, after observing its great similarity in particular 
 passages to parts of several of Marie's lays, might possibly suggest that 
 this only evinced Chaucer's familiarity with Marie, and that he deliber- 
 ately put together a new story of which the various parts are simple echoes 
 of her poems, and for this reason termed a " Breton lay " what was really 
 his own invention. But such an hypothesis is manifestly untenable. It 
 not only runs counter to all that we know of Chaucer's methods, but 
 violates every probability based on other studies in literary history. 
 Inasmuch, however, as the Breton lay of Arveragus and Dorigen does 
 show such striking likeness to Marie's lays, it is not impossible that she 
 was the author of the poem Chaucer had before him ; but on this point 
 we have no evidence, and such purely conjectural matters are perhaps 
 hardly worth consideration. 
 
Chaucer's franklin's tale. 433 
 
 IV. 
 
 A serious problem of another kind now demands considera- 
 tion — a problem of interest and importance because it concerns 
 the vexed question of the composition of popular tales in 
 general, and of the lays and " matter of Britain " in particu- 
 lar. If it is true, " one naturally inquires, that Chaucer 
 actually followed a Breton lay in all the essentials of his 
 narrative, a Breton lay, moreover, which in large part was 
 closely connected with Celtic tradition, how does it happen 
 that there are so many Oriental parallels to part of the story? 
 
 Clouston ^ has shown that a tale of the same general nature 
 as Chaucer's is found in numerous Eastern versions, the 
 oldest in Sanskrit, but others in Burmese, Persian, Indo- 
 Persian, Hebrew, Germ ano- Jewish, Siberian, and Turkish — 
 as well as in two Italian versions by the great writers 
 Boccaccio and Bojardo, and one in modern Gaelic, in a form 
 which shows close kinship with these above mentioned, but 
 not with that in English. The existence of so many versions 
 of the same story may seem to argue against my contention 
 that Chaucer followed a particular Breton lay, which was 
 very similar to the Breton lays now extant. But in reality 
 it is not so. The Franklin's Tale stands in a group alone, 
 quite apart from all the other stories given by Clouston by 
 reason particularly of the Celtic elements that I have pointed 
 out, which are found in it and in no other version. And the 
 existence in combination with them of features which can lay 
 no claim to such origin need not disturb us ; for Breton lays 
 were, as scholars are now beginning to recognize, a very 
 mixed product. There is, indeed, a good deal of misconcep- 
 tion with regard to this so-called "matter of Britain." 
 Students unaware of the universality of popular tales and 
 beliefs, unacquainted with the fact that the majority of 
 popular themes have been shown to be world wide in their 
 
 '^Originals and Analogues of some of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, No. 16, 
 pp. 289 ff. 
 
434 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD, 
 
 distribution, unfamiliar, in a word, with the results of the 
 •modern comparative study of folklore, are apt to make 
 the mistake of demanding of any tale that is claimed as Breton 
 its exclusive production among the Celts. This is, however, 
 quite unreasonable. A lay is a Breton lay if it embodies a 
 tale told in the Breton language in the form such tales 
 usually had before they were turned into the particular sort 
 of French poem we know by that name. All our so-called 
 Breton lays, as is well known, are preserved to us in French, 
 and have undergone very grave alterations in passing through 
 the hands of people of unlike temperament, training, and 
 tradition. There are, it should be observed, French poems 
 (e. g. Pyramus and Thisbe, Narcissus) that have absolutely 
 nothing Breton about them, but still were called lays and 
 included in collections of "Lais de Bretaigne" simply to 
 ensure popularity at a time when the lays were in supreme 
 vogue. There are others (e. g. Orfeo) based on narratives 
 clearly taken from foreign sources, which yet appear to have 
 been current among Celtic peoples and, having been stamped 
 by their peculiar impress, may therefore justly, though to a 
 limited degree, be called Breton. There are others (e. g. 
 Fraisne) that embody stories which are genuinely Breton, 
 although they are used in their fundamental features in all 
 parts of the world, for they were localized in Celtic lands, 
 and, what is most important, were regarded by the Bretons 
 themselves as native. And, finally, there is still another 
 class preserving stories, like Lanval and Gfuingamor, which 
 record traditions or conceptions generally acknowledged by 
 scholars as particularly Breton, inasmuch as they are the 
 product of conditions that appear to have existed only on 
 Celtic soil. But, I repeat, a lay is a " Breton " lay, whether 
 it embodies foreign or native material, so long as that material 
 was popularly current among the Celts and not regarded by 
 them as essentially different from their other traditions. Now, 
 we may be confident that the Breton peasants, or warriors for 
 that matter, did not trouble any more about the origin of the 
 
chaucee's feanklin's tale. 435 
 
 stories that appealed to them and that they were wont to 
 narrate than does the ordinary English speaking person 
 to-day, albeit this is an infinitely more reflective age, about 
 the origin of the common words which he uses to express 
 his ideas. Any story was readily accepted if it was to the 
 popular liking, and it thereupon became an unquestioned 
 Breton possession. If such a story, thus adopted by them, 
 and popularly current in their language, was put into lay 
 form, it was justly called a "Breton lay;" and it was also 
 entitled to that name after it was re-written in French verse. 
 
 Granted, then, that Chaucer's Tale is in part paralleled in 
 the Orient and elsewhere, his original may still have been 
 an Old French " lay." Are not the Old French poems 
 i' Oiselel, Aristote, L'Espermer, all called " lays," though the 
 stories they embody are of pure Oriental origin ? Inasmuch 
 as they have little or no intermixture of Celtic elements, 
 they hardly deserve the epithet "Breton," though it has 
 sometimes been applied to them ; but there is certainly no 
 reason for withholding it from the Lay of Arviragus, which, 
 as I have endeavored to show, is evidently based on Celtic 
 tradition. 
 
 The combination of Celtic and foreign material in our 
 story may possibly have been brought about by the Bretons 
 themselves. Yet, much more probably we may regard it as 
 the work of the French redactor of the old Celtic story. 
 From what source, it may now be asked, did he get the 
 wherewithal to embellish his tale, and what was his motive 
 in its transformation ? 
 
 In order to answer these questions, however, we must first 
 decide what relation, if any, the Breton Lay of Arviragus, 
 Aurelius, and Dorigen bore to the parallel tale which Boc- 
 caccio has embodied in his novel of Gilberto, Ansaldo, and 
 Dianora, in the Decameron (x, 5).^ Formerly, most anno- 
 tators of Chaucer asserted that this was the direct source of 
 
 1 Previously told by him in his youthful work Filocopo (Bk. v). 
 
436 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 the Franklin's Tale; but the best critics no longer hold that 
 view.* Professor Skeat doubtless expresses the opinion of 
 most scholars nowadays when he writes : " We may be sure 
 that Boccaccio and Chaucer drew their versions from very 
 similar sources, as shown by the introduction of the magician. 
 At the same time we not only notice how Boccaccio has given 
 Italian names to his characters, but has even altered the chief 
 circumstance on which the story depends, by substituting a 
 flower-garden in January for the removal of the rocks." 
 Professor Skeat is thus clearly of opinion that Boccaccio had 
 some version of Chaucer's original before him, which he 
 deliberately altered in very important features, " in order," as 
 he ^ays, " to render the story more congruous to an Italian 
 location and scenery." ^ 
 
 These remarks indicate, I believe, a mistaken idea of the 
 relation of the Breton lay to the Italian novel. There seems 
 to me to be no evidence that Boccaccio altered the material 
 at his disposal in any fundamental feature. That he based 
 his narrative on a story current in Italy is made probable by 
 the fact that Bojardo independently records a parallel tale. 
 Neither of them, apparently, knew even of the existence of a 
 form of the story in which Arviragus, Aurelius, and Dorigen 
 were the chief figures, where the events were localized in 
 Brittany, where the removal of the rocks from the Breton 
 coast was the condition of the lady's love, and where the 
 tempted wife was earnestly devoted to a loving husband 
 who tenderly reciprocated her affection. On the contrary, 
 Boccaccio's novel must be regarded as quite independent of 
 the Breton lay. The very obvious agreement between them 
 is easily explained if we suppose that the French author 
 of that lay, when he was fashioning the old Celtic story of 
 Arviragus to accord with the taste of the time, made use 
 of some accessible version of the Oriental tale, current in the 
 
 ^ Yet Landau says (QueUen dea Dekameron, 1884, p. 94): " Chaucer hat 
 wahrscheinlich auch Boccacio's Novelle benutzt." 
 ♦Op., cit., ra, 480-81, 484. 
 
chaucee's franklin's tale. 437 
 
 West, on which Boccaccio based his novel. In this tale it 
 was not the devotion to each other of a happily married pair, 
 that was the chief theme, but rather the discussion of com- 
 parative generosity on the part of a husband who found that 
 his wife had made a foolish promise to an ardent suitor, a 
 lover who renounced his claim to his lady's love, when it was 
 freely accorded him, and a magician who refused all reward 
 for his services to the lover when he saw that no advantage 
 had accrued therefrom to his disappointed but magnanimous 
 associate. 
 
 It is therefore in the highest degree probable that in the 
 French lay for the first time the d^bat-motive, and all that 
 it entails, was connected with the Arviragus story. Now for 
 the first time, it was asked concerning Arviragus, Aurelius, 
 and the magician : " Whiche was the moste fre, as thynketh 
 you ? " In the hands of a French courtly poet the primitive 
 Celtic tale was thus transformed, that it might appeal more 
 effectively to readers under the sway of chivalrous conven- 
 tion, fond of finespun discussions of the theory and practise 
 of love. 
 
 It may seem idle to speculate regarding the original end- 
 ing of this tale ; for, of course, no positive results can be 
 obtained. But the inquiry is nevertheless instructive, inas- 
 much as it seems to throw light on the chief conceptions the 
 story embodies. 
 
 If the Franklin's Tale has any definite moral, it is summed 
 up in the words of Arviragus : "Trouthe is the hyeste thing 
 that man may kepe" (751).^ Apparently, however, it was 
 not Chaucer who introduced this idea. The virtue of keeping 
 one's plighted troth was no doubt already emphasized in the 
 Breton lay he had before him. It is interesting to observe 
 that it appears prominently in another Middle English poem 
 which also claims to be based on a lay of Britain. In The 
 Erl of Tolous is portrayed a beautiful lady resembling 
 
 ' See the last quotation, p. 407, above, and the second, p. 408. 
 
438 WILLIAM HENEY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 Dorigen in nature and spirit. Of her husband, the Emperor 
 of Almayn, we read : 
 
 Thys emperour had a wyfe, 
 
 The fayrest oon, that evyr bare lyfe, 
 
 Of hyr body sche was trew, 
 
 As evyr was lady, that men knew. (37 S. ) 
 
 The handsome Earl of Tolouse, though the emperor's enemy, 
 falls desperately in love with her and at last gets one of her 
 followers to plight his. troth tp bring him safely to her 
 presence. This knight, however, divulges the plan to the 
 empress and traitorously suggests that they seize the favorable 
 opportunity to rid themselves of a dreaded foe. But the 
 empress is too highminded to entertain such a thought. She 
 insists that he " fulfill his covenant " and even does what 
 she can to make his task easy. 
 
 The lady seyd : ' So mot y goo, 
 ' Thy soul ys lost, yf thou do so, 
 
 Thy Iroulh i>ou sckalt fidlfyll.' 
 
 Y red, >o« hold thy trouth ! 
 Certys, yf thou hym begyle. 
 Thy eoule ys in gret paryl, 
 
 Syn thou hast made hym oth. (280 ff. ) 
 
 Her faithfulness to her "troth" once plighted' is also shown 
 in the fact that she does not betray two knights who in her 
 husband's absence confess their love (having first obtained 
 her promise not to disclose their interview) although under 
 the greatest provocation. Fearing betrayal, they accuse her 
 of infidelity, and connive so evilly that she is condemned to 
 die unless some one is able successfully to champion her 
 cause. The Earl of Tolouse, respecting her purity, comes 
 
 i"True" and "troth" echo throughout the poem. The phrase "To 
 plight one's troth," occurs in 11. 210, 219, 276, 504, 550, 583; "troth," with 
 another verb, in 282, 294, 635; "true" in 43, 53, 216, 226, 236, 313, 506, 
 568, 592, 917, 928, 936, 985, 1023, 1037, ]056.^(Ed. Ludtke, Berlin, 1881). 
 
Chaucer's franklin's tale. 439 
 
 to her rescue. His generous act dispels the Emperor's pre- 
 vious hostility towards him, and the , two warriors become 
 good friends. After the Emperor's death, the Earl marries 
 the beautiful lady he has loved so truly, and rules over 
 the land. 
 
 Fidelity to one's plighted word as an underlying motive 
 is, indeed, very frequently met with in the early tales of the 
 Celts. Their heroes made promises rashly and got them- 
 selves into sore trouble on this account ; but they never 
 denied their word. A knight's promise once given was 
 regarded as sacred and must be fulfilled, even though it 
 meant the handing over of his loving wife to another's 
 embrace. 
 
 In the genuine old Mabinogi of Pwyll,^ for example, a 
 petitioner was rashly promised by the hero whatever boon 
 he should ask. He thereupon asked for Pwyll's beloved, the 
 beautiful fay Rhiannon. The petitioner turned out to be her 
 unsuccessful suitor Gwawl, who by magic had shifted his 
 shape and thus obtained the promise by deceit. Nevertheless, 
 Pwyll felt himself bound by his word and yielded Rhiannon 
 to the man she had refused for his sake. Here also, how- 
 ever, the affair ended happily. A respite was secured, at the 
 end of which Gwawl was so placed that he voluntarily 
 released Pwyll from his covenant, and the hero remained 
 undisturbed in his love. 
 
 In the beautiful Irish story of the Wooing of Etain, at 
 the latest from the eleventh century, we have a similar 
 situation. The fairy King Mider, one fine summer's day, 
 appeared at the court of Eochaid Airem, overlord of Ireland, 
 saying he had come to play chess with him. First he let the 
 king win in order to give him confidence. Then the two 
 made a covenant that the victor in the next game should 
 name his own prize. Mider won, and at once claimed the 
 right to embrace and kiss Etain, the king's wife. The king, 
 
 ^Lady Guest's translation, 1849, vol. Ill; Loth, Let Mahimgion, 1889, i. 
 
440 WILLIAM HEJS'EY SCHOPIBLD. 
 
 though sorely troubled, did not think of refusing. He only 
 asked for a postponement. Mider at the time appointed 
 carried the lady off; but later the king won her back. 
 
 We may have an echo of this story in the English lay of 
 Orfeo,^ of which a French original unquestionably existed. 
 The harper in disguise made his way to fairyland whither his 
 wife had been borne. There he pleased the king so much by 
 his music that the latter bade him make any request he liked 
 and it should be granted. When he asked for Eurydice, the 
 king began to object, but was silenced by Orfeo's words : 
 
 "O Sir," he seyd, "gentil king, 
 jete were it a vrele fouler >ing 
 To here a lesing of H mouj'e, 
 So, Sir, as je seyd nouJ>e, 
 What i wold aski, have y schold. 
 And nedes I'ou most H word hold." 
 pe king seyd : " Selj^en it is so, 
 Take hir bi t>e hond and go. 
 Of hir ichil batow be bli^e."* 
 
 In Arthurian romance the statement that "a king must 
 not lie " is of frequent occurrence, and is regularly used to 
 force him to keep a promise rashly made and unexpectedly 
 embarrassing in its fuliillment. So, for example, the young 
 Libeaus Desconus ' declares that Arthur will let him under- 
 take the freeing of the lady of Sinadoun or else prove that 
 he is not " trewe of word ; " a,ud Arthur must needs consent, 
 despite the indignant protests of the messenger who will none 
 of the lad. As Renaud de Beaujeu puts it : * 
 
 " Par le covent que tu m'en as, 
 Te quier le don que m'as promis. 
 Baison feras, ce m'est avis; , 
 
 ' This lay presents the classical story of Orpheus completely transformed. 
 AH the changes made are in the direction of Celtic tradition. See 
 Kittredge, " Sir Orfeo," Amer. Journal of PhUohyy, vol. vii. 
 
 »Ed. Zielke, 46Iff. 
 
 ' Libeaus Desconus, ed. Kaluza, 171 ff. 
 
 * Le Bel Inconnu, ed. Hippean, 214 ff. 
 
chatjcee's franklin's tale. 441 
 
 Rois es, si ne dois paB nientir 
 Ne covent a nului faillir." 
 Ce dit li rois : " Dont i ales, 
 Puisqu' estes si entalentes." 
 
 This idea is phrased forcibly in the late Scottish metrical 
 romance, Lancelot of the Laik : ^ 
 
 O kingis word sliuld be a kingis bonde, 
 And eaid It is, a kingis wurd shuld stond ; 
 O kingis word, among our faderis old, 
 Al-out more precious and more sur was hold 
 Than was the oth or seel of any wight; 
 O king of trouth suld be the werray lyght, 
 So treuth and lustice to o king accordyth. 
 
 In Gottfried's Tristan ^ we have a very interesting parallel 
 to the situation in our Tale. Gandln, a noble Irish knight, 
 who has long loved Ysolde in Ireland, journeys to Cornwall 
 in the hope of winning her from Kiug Mark. He comes as 
 a minstrel to the court, but will not play until the king 
 promises him whatever boon he may ask. After finishing 
 his lay, he demands the queen and will take nothing else 
 instead. Rather than be forsworn, Mark finally abandons 
 his wife, and Gandln leads her, weeping bitterly, to the sea- 
 shore, where his boat lies ready to conduct her away. By a 
 skilful ruse, however, Tristan manages to outwit Gandln 
 and restores Ysolde to her lord. Gandln, sorrowful and 
 ashamed, makes no further effort to regain her. 
 
 Gottfried's account, as is well known, is based on that of the 
 Anglo Norman poet Thomas, who wrote not far from the middle 
 of the twelfth century. The episode was doubtless earlier a 
 separate Breton lay. The story was re-told in the English 
 Sir IHstrem,^ also based on Thomas's work. The king let 
 Ysolde go, rather than be called "false." There was no 
 
 • Ed. Skeat, E. E. T. 8., 1866, U. 1673 ff. 
 
 ' Ed. Bechstein, 1869, vv. 13108 ff.; of Miss Weston's translation, ii, 33 ff. 
 
 »Ed. Kolbing, 1882, 11. 1805 ff. 
 
442 WILLIAM HENEY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 question of losing what he regarded as his " manhood " even 
 to keep his wife.^ 
 
 Malory preserves an echo of the same story ^ in which the 
 similarity to the Franklin's Tale is even more striking, for 
 now the queen makes the fash promise without Mark's 
 knowledge. Sir Palamides meets Isoud alone in the forest 
 making great moan because of the absence of Brangwaine 
 who has been carried off. He promises to recover her if she 
 will grant whatever boon he asks. He does as he agrees and 
 later appears before the king and demands the fulfillment of 
 the lady's promise. " Sir, said Palamides, I promised your 
 queen Isoud to bring again dame Brangwaine that she had 
 lost, upon this covenant, that she should grant me a boon 
 that I would ask, and without grudging other advisement 
 she granted me. What say ye, my lady ? said the king. It 
 is truly as he saith, said the queen, to say the sooth I 
 promised him his asking for love and joy that I had to see 
 her. Well madam, said the king, and if ye were hasty to 
 grant him what boon he would ask, I will well that ye per- 
 form your promise. Then said Sir Palamides, I will that ye 
 wit that I will have your queen to lead her and govern her 
 where as me list." The king does not refuse and Palamides 
 puts Ysoud on his horse behind him and rides away. Later 
 Tristrem comes up with Palamides and recovers the queen 
 after a hard battle, " fqr both they fought for love of one 
 
 '^The abduction of Guinevere is but another variant of this theme. 
 The version of the story recorded by Hartmann von Aue in his Ywein 
 is the nearest like the episode in which Tristan figures. Arthur, having 
 promised an unknown knight (Slilianz, Meleagant) an indefinite boon, felt 
 obliged to give up' Guinevere when she was demanded of him. She was, 
 however, rescued by one of the king's followers specially devoted to her, 
 here possibly Gawain. — Other more or less divergent accounts of the adven- 
 ture are given by Chretien, Dlrich von Zatzikhoven, the author of Diu 
 Krdne, M&lory, etc.; see G. Paris, Rom,, xii; Wend. Foerster, Introd. to 
 Der Karrenrilter ; Weston, Legend of Sir Gawain, pp. 67 ff. ; Legend of Sir 
 Lancelot du Lac, 46 ff. Naturally, the king should never be the rescuer. 
 
 " Bk. VIII, ch. 29 ff. Of. Loseth, Roman en Prose de XHstan, § 43. 
 
chauceh's franklin's tale. 443 
 
 lady." Sir Palamicles must renounce his claim ip Ysoud 
 and leave the country. 
 
 Thus it appears that the idea of faithfulness in keeping a 
 promise, no matter what sorrow it occasions, which is funda- 
 mental in the FranhUn's Tale, is also prominent in early 
 Celtic stories, in Breton lays, and in romances based on the 
 " matter of Britain." ^ The precise form of the story at 
 the basis of the Lay of Arviragus, we shall probably never 
 discover. But one thing is,. as we have seen, almost certain r 
 it had a difiFerent ending. The account of Pwyll, Gwawl 
 and Rhiannon suggests what may possibly have been the 
 general features of the original conclusion. Dorigen's troth 
 once plighted, both she and her husband recognized when the 
 condition she had established was unexpectedly fulfilled 
 that the result was inevitable. Arviragus handed his wife 
 over to Aurelius. But in some way a respite was secured 
 and before it was ended the lover found himself in such a 
 position that he voluntarily released Dorigen from her 
 unhappy promise. 
 
 It is probable that the magician is an importation from 
 the foreign tale. The lovers Gwawl and Gaudin relied on 
 their own arts to win the lady of whom they were enamoured. 
 Doubtless it was so in the beginning with Aurelius. The 
 magician, however, was a very prominent figure in the 
 Oriental tale, and when its ending was adopted the magician 
 appears to have been taken along with the rest. The lover 
 was made over in the likeness of conventional mediaeval 
 characters of the same sort and the illusions he brought 
 
 ' It is even as Sir Walter Scott long since remarked in his edition of 
 Sir Tristrem (p. 322) : 
 
 "Good faith was the very corner-stone of chivalry. Whenever a. 
 knight's word was pledged, it mattered not how rashly, it was to be 
 redeemed at any price. Hence the sacred obligation of the don oclroyle, 
 or boon granted by a knight to his suppliant. Instances without number 
 occur in romance, in which a knight, by rashly granting an indefinite boon, 
 was obliged to do, or suffer, something extremely to his prejudice." 
 
444 WILLIAM HENEY 8CHOFIELD, 
 
 about were explained as the achievements of another person, 
 a professional magician, to whom he applied for aid. 
 
 There remains but one other matter that invites discussion 
 in the present study^ How has Chaucer altered the Breton 
 lay he had before him? This question admits of a fairly 
 satisfactory answer. Although the poet in general seems to 
 have followed his original closely, there are still certain parts 
 of the Franklin's Tale which we can affirm with some confi- 
 dence first became connected with the story in his hands.' 
 Of these the following may be mentioned : 1, the discussion 
 of the cause of evil in the world, d propos of the existence of 
 the dangerous rocks on the Breton coast ; 2, the abundant 
 references to astrology;^ 3, the "pleynt" of Aurelius to 
 Apollo, "Lord Phebus" (303-351); and 4, Dorigen's "com- 
 pleynt " to Fortune, in which she cites " examples " of ladies 
 who slew themselves rather than be polluted-^-aTn unneces- 
 sarily long digression, of about one hundred lines (627-728) 
 taken from the treatise of Jerome against Jovinian. 
 
 These passages, which comprise about one-fourth of the 
 whole poem, are clearly additions made by the English 
 author. The first is interesting to us as perhaps throwing 
 a sidelight on the poet's personal attitude towards religion 
 and life. As to the second, we know how fond Chaucer was 
 of astrological lore, and are not surprised at its insertion 
 here. Moreover, the passage beginning, " Phebus wex old and 
 hewed lyk latoun" (517 ff.) is so good that we cannot but feel 
 grateful for that digression at leaist, whatever our attitude 
 may be towards the particulars of the magician's methods. 
 With regard to the two " complaints," I would only say that 
 they belong to a very distinct style of lyric love poetry 
 
 'Skeat points out also (v, 387 ffi) slight borrowings from Persius, 
 Dionysius Cato, Ovid, Boethius, and the Homan d,e la Rose. 
 '329-30, 401-406, 426-7, 517-527; 542-565. 
 
Chaucer's fbanklin's tale. 445 
 
 prevalent in Chaucer's day, and that their introduction in 
 this poem is conventional. Chaucer could hardly have 
 helped making his lovers " complain " in this manner, unless 
 he deliberately avoided the literary customs of his contempo- 
 raries, with which, on the contrary, he elsewhere shows much 
 sympathy. 
 
 It was thus under the influence of contemporary French 
 works that he makes Aurelius turn poet and unburden his 
 distressed soul in verse. 
 
 He was dispeyred, nothing dorste he seye, 
 
 Save in his songes somwhat wolde he wreye 
 
 His wo, as in a general compleyning ; 
 
 He seyde he lovede, and was biloved nothing. 
 
 Of swich matere made he many layes, 
 
 Songes, compleintes, roundels, virelayes. (215 flf.) 
 
 Chaucer allows him " two yeer and more " for such amuse- 
 ment, in which he surely had a decent chance to do himself 
 justice and analyze all his emotions. Now, if we turn to 
 Guillaume de Machaut's Livre du Voir-Dit,^ itself a " general 
 compleyning," we find a person similarly occupied when in a 
 like condition, though not for quite so long. 
 
 On li a dit and racont^ 
 
 Qu'un yver and pr6s d'un est^ 
 
 Avez est^ griefment malades : 
 
 Et que, toudis, faisife balades, 
 
 Eondeaus, mot& et virelais 
 
 Complaintes et amoureus lais. (11. 113 ff.) 
 
 Chaucer himself, as is well known, though never, we hope, 
 in such a pitiable plight as Aurelius, yet tried his hand at 
 the same sort of composition : 
 
 Many an ympne for your halydayes. 
 
 That highten Balades, Roundels, Virelayes.' 
 
 Indeed, it is perhaps possi'ble to trace the direct influence 
 
 1 Ed. Paulin Paris, Paris, 1875, p. 5. 
 'Legend of Good Women, 11. 422-23. 
 
446 WILLIAM HENKY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 of Machaut in the description of the garden, so like is it td 
 part of the Dit du Vergier,^ with which there can be hardly 
 any doubt that the poest was familiar. The situation in both 
 cases is very much the same. A lover, afflicted by the 
 absence of his or her loved-one, enters a beautiful garden one 
 spring morning in the hope of dismissing sorrow by watch- 
 ing the revelry of others — but without success ; for thoughts 
 of the loved-one prevent any real participation in the general 
 happiness. That neither of the gardens was to blame, is 
 evident from the following similar descriptions : 
 
 De fleurs et de feuilles si bel This garden ful of leves and of floures 
 
 Si bel, si gent, si aggr^able And craft of mannes hand so curiously, 
 
 Si tr^ plaisant, si d^litable Arrayed hadde this gardiu, trewely, 
 
 Et plein de si trSs bonne odour That neyer was ther gardin of swich 
 
 Que nulz n'en auroit la savour prys, 
 
 Tout fust ses cuers d&onfortez ' Bot if it were the verray paradys. 
 Qu'il ne fust tout r^confortez The odour of floures and the fresshe 
 
 Et tant estoit de joie plainz sighte 
 
 Wolde han maad any herte for to 
 
 Je ne scay que ce pooit estre lighte 
 
 Pors que le paradis terrestre. That ever was born, bot if to gret 
 
 (p. 12.) siknesse 
 
 Or to gret sorwe held it in distresse; 
 So ful it was of beautee with plesaunce. 
 (180 ff-.) 
 
 The Franklin's Tale is not, it is evident, an entirely har- 
 monious whole. When reading it, we do not really breathe 
 the pure atmosphere of Breton romance. Sometimes we find 
 ourselves letting our imagination wander along delightful 
 paths of illusion ; but the treat does not last long. A shrewd 
 practical remark of Chaucer's calls us suddenly back to this 
 world of common sense. The bubbles of conventional elo- 
 quence, which we half believed were sound, are pricked by a 
 sly parenthesis, and we then smile at a lover's rhetoric when 
 we were before quite disposed to let it engage us as it did 
 a reader in mediaeval times. Courtly sentiments, it is hinted, 
 
 1 G. de Machaut, Omvres [ed. Tarb^], 1849, pp. 11 ff. 
 
chattcer's franklin's tale. -447 
 
 struggle with bourgeois experience. Romantic lovemaking, 
 we are disconcertingly reminded, has a practical aftermath. 
 Illusions about one's love are apt to disappear. 
 
 Who coude telle, but he had wedded be, 
 The joje, the ese, and the prosperitee 
 That is bitwixe an housbonde and his wyf ? 
 
 Alas ! nobody, Chaucer implies, can tell beforehand, or with- 
 out personal experience. Men have lordship over their wives 
 such as it is (15). These "noble wyves" make much ado 
 about their husbands " when hem lyketh " (90). In a word, 
 Chaucer's advice to the married is : 
 
 Lerneth to suffre, or elles, so most I goon, 
 
 Ye shul it lerne, wher-so ye wole or noon. (49-50.) 
 
 These sly remarks, most humorous and entertaining though 
 they are, nevertheless are out of harmony with the spirit of a 
 Breton lay, where much o'f the charm consists in the remote- 
 ness of the scene and situation. We are not accustomed, 
 moreover, to have lay-writers become personal and laugh at 
 their own rhetoric, as Chaucer does about the fall of night : 
 
 the brighte sonne loste his hewe ; 
 For thorisonte hath reft the sonne his light ; 
 This is as muche to seye as it was night. (288 S.) 
 
 His humor throughout is delightful, yet would be judged 
 sometimes out of place by the critic who simply viewed the 
 tale as an independent artistic narrative. 
 
 But this, I would urge, no one is justified in doing. The 
 tale before us is but part of a great whole. It is a Franklin, 
 "Epicurus owne sone," we must remember, who is telling 
 this Breton lay, and telling it to people very different from 
 those for whom it was originally intended, as well as under 
 very remarkable conditions. The Franklin is a dramatic 
 figure whom Chaucer is eager to bring clearly before us, even 
 if the illusion of the particular story assigned him be some- 
 what interfered with by the way in which he could only tell 
 
448 WILLIAM HENRY SCHOFIELD. 
 
 it and be himself. And although it may justly be said that, 
 even so, Chaucer is not entirely above reproach, for he puts 
 too much learned disquisition into the mouth of this " burel " 
 man, we cannot but recognize that most of the inconsistencies 
 in his narrative are the result of his eflFprt to make the situa- 
 tion dramatic and to keep the reader always conscious of the 
 circumstances under which the story is being told. 
 
 This story, transmitted from the feudal past, the Franklin 
 knew when he made his choice would interest the young 
 man beside him, whom he had just been praising and whose 
 praise he in his turn hoped to gain. In truth, one cannot 
 fail to observe that the description of the Squire in the 
 Prologue, "a lovyere and a lusty bachelere," is strikingly 
 similar to that of the 
 
 lusty Squyer, servant to Venus, 
 Which that ycleped was Aurelius. 
 
 Of Chaucer's Squire, we read : 
 
 Embrouded was he, as it were a mede 
 Al ful of fresshe floures, whyte and rede, 
 Singinge he was, or floytinge al the day. 
 He was as fresh as is the month of May. 
 
 And of the squire who sang and danced before Dorigen : 
 
 fressher [he] was and jolyer of array 
 As to my doom, than is the monthe of May. 
 
 It might be said of Aurelius as of him : 
 
 He coude songes make and wel endyte 
 
 Juste and eek daunce, and wel portreye and write. 
 
 He too was " wonderly delivre and greet of strengthe ; " and 
 that he "loved hot," certainly Dorigen would attest. Nor 
 was the obvious similarity between the Squire and the 
 generous lover in our Tale, due to accident, but rather to 
 the poet's happy design. To have the Franklin recount this 
 Breton lay of Arviragus and Dorigen immediately after the 
 
chaucee's franklin's tale. 449 
 
 Squire had finished his romantic narrative of Canacee, was 
 the most effective compliment that he had yet paid the noble 
 youth he so much admired. Nowhere has Chaucer shown more 
 skill in making a transition from one story to another, or 
 more wisdom in choosing the teller for a tale. We can only 
 regret that he found no occasion to record how the Squire, 
 the worthy Knight, or some other of the Franklin's happy 
 company, received this charming lay, which, fortunately for 
 us, he has reseued from the greedy sea of oblivion. 
 
 William Heney Schofield. 
 
 Additional note to page 4-4^- 
 
 Attention may be called to the fact that in the legend of Mongan, the 
 Irish hero and enchanter, there is a close parallel to the story of Pwyll. 
 Mongan has rashly made an indefinite promise to the king of Leinster in 
 order to obtain some splendid kine. He and his wife Dubh-Lacha of the 
 White Hand are one day together when the king and his hosts approach. 
 "'What hast thou come to seek?' said Mongan. 'For, by my word, if 
 what thou seekest be in the province of Ulster, thou shalt have it.' 'It is, 
 then,' said the king of Leinster. ' To seek Dubh-Lacha have I come.' 
 Silence fell upon Mongan. And he said : ' I have never heard of anyone 
 giving away his wife.' ' Though thou hast not heard of it,' said Dubh- 
 Lacha, 'give her, for honour is more lasting than life.' Anger seized 
 Mongan, and he allowed the king of Leinster to take her with him." Here 
 also the captor is a suitor of the lady, and she pretends to reciprocate his 
 affection. By establishing a condition to her love, she secures a year's 
 respite before she shall grant it. In the meantime, she is won back from 
 the king's power by craft. See Meyer-Nutt, Voyage of Bran, i, 77 ff.; also 
 I, 49-52. See, further, Nutt's discussion of the age of the material (i, 
 136 ff), and of the relation of the Mongan to the Arthur legend (u, ch. 
 xiii). I am indebted to Miss Lucy A. Paton for reminding me of this 
 
 important parallel. 
 
 W. H. S.