quasi secum disputans comprobat.' [This is an excellent illustration of Chaucer's epithet, though the proof that contents the observant and reflecting bird would scarcely satisfy a judicial mind, unless ravens are communistic in respect of their mates.]

'The crow with voice of care.'

'Illic cornix ventura prognosticans, nugatorio concitabatur garritu.'

A careful comparison of these two catalogues raisonnés— the lists are by no means identical any more than the descriptions-certainly casts light on Chaucer's genius. One can scarcely doubt that his taste appreciated duly the affected and far-fetched style of the older writer. And certainly one may see how he was not content to behold Nature merely through the spectacles of books, but loved to gaze on her face to face. Dear as his old books were to him-'totorn' with faithful use (see 1. 110 of the P. of F)-dearer yet was Nature. Sweet were the old songs on the daisy; but the daisy itself was still sweeter. Entertaining and learned were the accounts to be found in literature of his fellowcreatures the birds; but better than hearing of them he enjoyed hearing them and watching their humours-for they, too, have their humours-with an eye at once merry and kindly. Birds, no less than men, he observed keenly, portrayed wittily, and with all the gentleness of a most gentle heart.

(8.) THE DATE OF THE CANTERBURY TALES

(From The Athenæum for April 8th, 1893)

S a really satisfactory study of Chaucer's art and mind cannot be made till the chronological order of his works is to some considerable extent discovered and estab

lished, it is a matter of congratulation that in the last few years so much has been done in this latter direction, and that as to the date of many poems, though by no means of all, there is now a fairly general agreement amongst really competent scholars. Of course the most interesting and important of all such questions is the date of the Prologue to The Canterbury Tales. It has been, and is by some still placed as late as 1393. But the evidence for placing it so late is extremely slight, if, indeed, there is any at all that bears investigation; whereas assuredly many things point to the year 1387 or thereabouts, as the year of the pilgrimage and of Chaucer's immortal description of it. I do not now propose to discuss this matter at large, but only to call attention to an argument in favour of the earlier date which has, I think, not yet been noticed, and which, if it has not a decisive, has certainly a corroborative value.

We are told of the merchant that

He wolde the sea were kept for anything
Bitwixe Middelburgh and Orewelle,

that he thought it of prime moment that the passage from Harwich to Middelburgh should be swept clear of pirates. Why Middelburgh? The answer to this query gives a curious confirmation of the date 1387 or thereabouts; it proves that the Prologue must have been written not before 1384 and not later than 1388. In the year 1384 the woolstaple was removed from Calais and established at Middelburgh; in 1388 it was fixed once more at Calais (see Craik's History of British Commerce, 1. 123.) The said woolstaple led a somewhat nomad life in the fourteenth century; it was at different times established at Bruges, and Antwerp, not to mention various towns in England. But its only sojourn at Middelburgh was that in the years 1384-8; and so only

just at that time could the merchant's words have their full significance have a special pointedness.

A careful examination of the case makes it highly improbable that the Prologue was written early in those four or five years. We know it was not till February 1385 that Chaucer was released from the drudgery of daily personal attendance at the Custom House, where he held two appointments, being (since 1374) the Comptroller of the Wool Customs, and also (since 1382) the Comptroller of the Petty Customs -appointments, by the way, that must have made him very familiar with the merchants of the day. There is good reason for believing that the first literary product of his days of comparative leisure was the 'Legend of Good Women.' That work, doomed never to be finished, was still in hand (and probably becoming somewhat burdensome to him. through the monotony of the subject matter) when the larger and happier and more congenial idea of the Canterbury pilgrimage occurred to him. Thus it was probably after 1386-probably immediately after that he composed the Prologue.

One convenience of his new and admirable design, was that it permitted him to use up much old material-to slightly revise and to bring into a series, sundry tales he had composed many years before-as those of Griselda, of Constance, of St Cecily, and of the Christian Boy, whom the Jews were said to have murdered, and possibly other pieces. But except, perhaps, 'The Tale of Melibeus,' and the 'Parson's Tale,' all the new tales--the tales that were written in the first instance for a place in the Canterbury sequence -were probably produced very shortly after the Prologue, i.e., in the latter part of 1387, and in the four or five following years. Certainly in 1393, if that date is accepted for the Compleynt of Venus,

and it is probable enough

(see Prof. Skeat's excellent edition of the Minor Poems) Chaucer felt or seemed to feel, his right hand losing its cunning. Possibly later on he recovered health and spirits, for 1393 he was only some fifty-three years old, and he was to live to near the end of the century. But it is scarcely likely his admirable comic vein ever again flowed so freely as in 1387, and the three or four following years. That is the supreme period of his humorous and his dramatic power. At all events in 1393—just five hundred years ago -in presenting his Compleynt of Venus to a princess, probably the Duchess of York, he speaks of his 'litel suffisame.'

For eld that in my spirit dulleth me,

Hath of endyting al the soteltie

Wel ny bereft out of my remembraunce.

(9.) THE PRIORESS'S 'GREATEST OATH' (From The Athenæum for Jan. 10, 1891)

N his description of the Prioress in the Prologue to the Canterbury Tales, Chaucer informs us that 'Her greatest oath was but by St Loy' ('Hir gretteste ooth was but by Seynt Loy.') And there has been much discussion as to why this good lady should swear by St Loy of all the saints in the calendar, inasmuch as St Loy or Eloy-for Loy appears to be a clipped and more familiar form of the name Eloy, which is the French form of Eligius-is commonly known as the patron of 'goldsmiths, blacksmiths, and all workers in metals, also of farriers and horses' (Mrs Jameson's Sacred and Legendary Art, vol. ii. 728-32, ed. 1863.) It is natural enough, then, that the carter in 'The

Friar's Tale' should invoke God and St Loy when his horse is struggling to pull his cart out of the slough. But what is his saintship to the Prioress, or she to his saintship? An attempt has been made to get out of the difficulty by suggesting that by St Loy is meant St Louis; but such a solution creates other difficulties not less formidable than the one it aims at solving, as, e.g., why should the carter swear by St Louis of France? 'Warton's notion that Loy was a form of Louis,' observes Dr Skeat, 'only shows how utterly unknown in his time were the phonetic laws of Old French.' Again, it has been suggested that Loy is simply the French loi = law, and that what Chaucer means is that the Prioress never used a stronger expletive than 'par sa loi,' which Roquefort, we are reminded, interprets as equivalent to 'par sa foi, en bonne foi, en honnête homme.' And this would give good sense enough-gives, I think, the real sense; but such a phrase as 'Seynt loi' or 'Seynte loi' (for which there is the authority of one MS.) seems scarcely plausible; at all events, it cannot be accepted without further support than has yet been furnished for it. Moreover, the form Loy undoubtedly occurs elsewhere as a variant of Eloy. Thus there is a half-ruined chapel near Exeter dedicated to St Eligius or St Eloy, which is commonly known as St Loy's. Again, Barnaby Googe writes, 'And Loye the Smith doth look to horse, and smithes of all degree,' etc.; and many other proofs of this identity could be quoted if necessary. In this connection it should be remembered that, however strange his name to us, St Eloy was extremely well known in the Middle Ages. According to Sir Thomas More, his day (December 1st) came to be more thought of than Easter Day itself. A correspondent in the pages of a contemporary journal remarks that St Loy or Eloy was almost as popular in France in the Middle Ages as either