A VERSE TRANSLATION BY JOHN WALTON.
96 lines✦
ull wonder _blisseful was_ that rather _age_,When mortal men couthe _holde hem_-selven[22] _payed_To fede hem-selve[23] with-oute suche _outerage_,_With mete that trewe feeldes_[24] have arrayed;_With acorne[s] thaire hunger_ was alayed,And so thei couthe sese thaire talent;Thei had[den] yit no queynt[e] craft assayed,As _clarry_ for to _make_ ne _pyment_[25]. _To de[y]en purpure couthe thei noght_ be-thynke,_The white flees, with venym Tyryen_;_The rennyng_ ryver yaf hem lusty drynke,And _holsom sleep the[y]_ took _vpon the_ grene._The pynes_, that so full of braunches been,That was thaire hous, to kepe[n] _vnder schade_._The see[26] to kerve_ no _schippes_ were there seen;Ther was no man that _marchaundise_ made. They liked not to sailen vp and doun,But kepe hem-selven[27] where thei weren bred;_Tho was ful huscht the cruel clarioun_,For _eger hate_ ther was _no blood I-sched_,Ne therwith was non _armour_ yet be-bled;_For_ in that tyme who durst have be so _wood_Suche bitter _woundes_ that he nold have dred,With-outen réward, for to lese his _blood_. _I wold oure tyme_ myght _turne_ certanly,And wise[28] _maneres_ alwey with vs dwelle;_But love of hauyng brenneth_ feruently,_More_ fersere _than the_ verray _fuyre_ of helle._Allas!_ who _was_ that man _that_ wold him melleWith[29] _gold and_ gemmes that were _kevered_ thus[30],_That first_ began to myne; I can not telle,But that he fond _a perel[31] precious_. § 16. MS. Auct. F. 3. 5, in the Bodleian Library, contains a _prose_translation, different from Chaucer's. After this, the next translationseems to be one by George Colvile; the title is thus given by Lowndes:'Boetius de Consolatione Philosophiæ, translated by George Coluile, aliasColdewel. London: by John Cawoode; 1556. 4to.' This work was dedicated toQueen Mary, and reprinted in 1561; and again, without date. There is an unprinted translation, in hexameters and other metres, in theBritish Museum (MS. Addit. 11401), by Bracegirdle, temp. Elizabeth. SeeWarton, ed. Hazlitt, iii. 39, note 6. Lowndes next mentions a translation by J. T., printed at London in 1609,12mo. A translation 'Anglo-Latine expressus per S. E. M.' was printed at Londonin quarto, in 1654, according to Hazlitt's Hand-book to Popular Literature. Next, a translation into English verse by H. Conningesbye, in 1664, 12mo. The next is thus described: 'Of the Consolation of Philosophy, made Englishand illustrated with Notes by the Right Hon. Richard (Graham) Lord ViscountPreston. London; 1695, 8vo. Second edition, corrected; London; 1712, 8vo.' A translation by W. Causton was printed in London in 1730; 8vo. A translation by the Rev. Philip Ridpath, printed in London in 1785, 8vo.,is described by Lowndes as 'an excellent translation with very usefulnotes, and a life of Boethius, drawn up with great accuracy and fidelity.' A translation by R. Duncan was printed at Edinburgh in 1789, 8vo.; and ananonymous translation, described by Lowndes as 'a pitiful performance,' wasprinted in London in 1792, 8vo. In a list of works which the Early English Text Society proposes shortly toprint, we are told that 'Miss Pemberton has sent to press her edition ofthe fragments of Queen Elizabeth's Englishings (in the Record Office) fromBoethius, Plutarch, &c.' § 17. I now return to the consideration of Chaucer's translation, asprinted in the present volume. I do not think the question as to the probable date of its composition needdetain us long. It is so obviously connected with 'Troilus' and the 'Houseof Fame,' which it probably did not long precede, that we can hardly bewrong in dating it, as said above, about 1377-1380; or, in round numbers,about 1380 or a little earlier. I quite agree with Mr. Stewart (Essay, p.226), that, 'it is surely most reasonable to connect its composition withthose poems which contain the greatest number of recollections andimitations of his original;' and I see no reason for ascribing it, withProfessor Morley (English Writers, v. 144), to Chaucer's youth. Even Mr.Stewart is so incautious as to suggest that Chaucer's 'acquaintance withthe works of the Roman philosopher ... would seem to date from about theyear 1369, when he wrote the Deth of Blaunche.' When we ask for sometangible evidence of this statement, we are simply referred to thefollowing passages in that poem, viz. the mention of 'Tityus (588); ofFortune the debonaire (623); Fortune the monster (627); Fortune'scapriciousness and her rolling wheel (634, 642); Tantalus (708); the mindcompared to a clean parchment (778); and Alcibiades (1055-6);' see Essay,p. 267. In every one of these instances, I believe the inference to befallacious, and that Chaucer got all these illustrations, _at second hand_,from Le Roman de la Rose. As a matter of fact, they are all to be foundthere; and I find, on reference, that I have, in most instances, alreadygiven the parallel passages in my notes. However, to make the matterclearer, I repeat them here. Book Duch. 588. Cf. Comment li juisier _Ticius_S'efforcent ostoir de mangier;Rom. Rose, 19506.Si cum tu fez, las _Sisifus_, &c.;R. R. 19499. Book Duch. 623. The dispitouse debonaire,That scorneth many a creature. I cannot give the exact reference, because Jean de Meun's description ofthe various moods of Fortune extends to a portentous length. Chaucerreproduces the general impression which a perusal of the poem leaves on themind. However, take ll. 4860-62 of Le Roman:--
✦