New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-02-24

the latter guilty OF one Of the most INDUSTRIOUS
crimes possible to be committed by a poet III HAY
ing n word representing the modern thgnsh ~"
rhyming with word representing the i"o'1'"
English bride Consequently he fixed as the prop
or form here the word brodc. meaning roas'
meat" This. tn be sure. Is not found eiSe"heie
IN Chaucer. but occurs as he tells u.s. in othei
authors The scribe of Ms. F." he writes. turns
Jrcdc into bridc regardless of the rhine.
Had Chaucer been n cook the explanation just
given of the passage might be commended as
slngularly happy But he is generally con-
s;dered p,et. and on the whole It seems ex-
Incident to interpret him with that idea in mind
Roast beef Is undoubtedly noble and dignihed
article Of diet from the culinary point of view
but SO far as I am aware. Professor Skeat mas
been the first to make its literary distinction
prominent | am disposed to believe-l do MOI
profess absolute confdence-that had Wfdc
meant ham and eggs" veal outlet or
''becfsteak" even Professor Skeats metri-
cal courage heroic II is would hare
nlnched at the word. and the faith ne
manifests fin his rhyme would have been
shaken II may indeed be the opinion OF some
that there Is close bond Of sympathy between
music and roast beef; much closer certainly than
between It and other solid meats. Still there are
-
ever be induced To believe that the introduction
of this particular kind Of food in this particular
passage is highly conducive 10 poetical effect
1t is una voldable that this concentration of the
attention upon the rhymes and metre Of the
poet should operate to distract Il from the due
consideration of the meaning or Of its proper ex-
preston. Several examples Of this inattention
could he given. prefer here. however. to select
,ho hac not hQp
alone in finding a difficulty where none exists,
although he has been the only deliberately to
select. after full examination. an inferior and al
most impossible reading 1t is indeed the same
as that adopted by Wright. but Wright rarely
deliberated. and seems never to have examined
anything fully In the description Of the Monk In
the general prologue 10 the Canterbury Tales, F."
the following lines give expression to the indier-
ence Of this ecclesiastc to the rules of his order
and 10 his fondness for out-of-door sports:
He vaf nat Of that text a pulled hen.
That seth that hunters been nat holy men;
Ne that A monk. whan he is recchelees
Is lykned Ill fish that Is waterlees.
This is 10 scyn. n monk GU; Of his cloistre;
But thilke text held he nat worth an 0stre.
All the seven texts printed agree essentially in
the reading Of these lines save that for
rccchcIccs that is reckless" the Harleian
manuscript has cioisfcrIccs. The former
word seems to have troubled the com
mentators Tyrwhitt suspected that IT ought
do be rghcIcS. that is. without rule"
Ten Brink proposed to read IcccHtSs. that
IL "without a resting place. or place Of retreat
Professor Skcat quotes with apparent approval
that scholars statement that A reckless or care
less monk is not necessarily a monk out Of his
cloistcr lie has. however. a different remedy Of
his own The reading cioisfCrlcss lin Ms.
HarlJ." he says. solves the difficulty; being a
coined word Chaucer goes on To explain II.
The difficulty found In this passage IL purely
one u the Imagination. There can he scarcely
the slightest question that ,'crheiccs. which has
far the best and most authority in It's favor. IL
here the correct word and has it, regular sense
Il careless. Indifferent" II is employed in a
somewhat similar way in the House Of Fame.
where the god ~ love - spoken u az "cupidO the
rcccheccs a. $685." He Is there - termed be-
cause he has shown himself Indifferent; q the
labor and devotion which the poet has displayed
in his service A. the same time the epthet
"rccklcss.' 50 employed. was somewhat unusual
As n s found In the passage Just quoted from
the Canterbury Tales" the context Itself would
not fix with positive precision it, meaning. az II
does In the 'iiou.o u Fame" Chaucer therefore
felt called upon io explain exactly what he meant
by H. There H. really ~ Justification for the in
scr,ion ~ The verse
This is - sewn a monk out ~ his cpi-tre.
save fr the purpose ~ fixing the Specification OF
the word rccchci,cH II T. an imputation upon
Chau..r's literary ski 10 suppose that h" would
eiy, up a whole Lne t. defining a self-cXplain.ng
compound which under the circumstances could
have but one possible meaning. Tyrwhitt. whose
marvellous literary sagacty FOR once failed him
slmewhai IN his comment upon this place. point
81 ON however the fundamental objection -
cioisffric,s that II 1t had been the true reading
There would have been no occasion To explain or
paraphra-c ID in the second line following. lie
neglected to- 20 and draw the further and al
most inevitable inference that tn" very reason
tb,, the second line below was added was because
rccch,i,cy did need an explanation or paraphrase
II We feel obliged to account for the presence OF
closforIccS in the Harleian or any other manu-
script In which IL appears. the ordinary reason
for cmcnding texts serves satisfactorily mere.
PrcclcIc,s with its somewhat unusual sense was
CLOSED "a cIoisf,rir,s and as not unfrequenty
happened. the marginal word replaced the orig
inaI i'm the text Of a few manuscripts.
While other examples might be furnished whore
the meaning ~ the poet has not received suff-
Gent consideration. enough have been given 10
make clear that the literary duality or ms verse
has been made To suffer. either In consequence
Of iuattention to II. or perhaps more frequently
as a result of sacrificing II 10 the editors views
ON Language and metre. For the sake OF secur-
inc Chaucor from the commission Of insignificant
minor faults II they be faults at all, ne is Will
,r, IN make him responsible for grave ones affect
ing both the sense and the expression. This
may be a point for which the purely linguistic
student may care but little. II Is. however, a
matter Of serious importance To those who read
a great author for what ne says and not merely
for instruction In tests Of rhyme and metre.
Valuable these latter undoubtedly are. But To
elevate them into objects OF supreme attention
reacts injurously upon the man who falls into
the habit, In this case upon the editor himself.
He Is not thinking 81 much Of the thoughts Of his
author rs OF his rhymes and whether they are
I'm accord with certain theories Of his own and II