Authorial or Scribal? : spelling variation in the Hengwrt and Ellesmere manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales

Authorial or Scribal? : spelling variation in the Hengwrt and Ellesmere manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales

Caon, L.M.D.

Citation

Caon, L. M. D. (2009, January 14). Authorial or Scribal? : spelling variation in the Hengwrt and Ellesmere manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales. LOT, Utrecht. Retrieved from

https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13402

Version: Corrected Publisher’s Version

License: Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the Institutional Repository of the University of Leiden

Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13402

Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable).

Authorial or Scribal?

Spelling Variation in the Hengwrt and Ellesmere

Manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales

Published by LOT Janskerkof 13 3512 BL Utrecht The Netherlands

phone: +31 30 253 6006 fax: +31 30 253 6406 e-mail: lot@let.uu.nl http://www.lotschool.nl

Cover illustration: detail from folio 229r of Aberystwyth, National Library of Wales, Peniarth 392D, the Hengwrt manuscript. It is taken from The Hengwrt Chaucer:

Digital Facsimile (Stubbs, Estelle ed. 2000, Leicester: Scholarly Digital Editions)

ISBN: 978– 90–78328 –72 –8 NUR 616

Copyright © 2008: Luigina Caon. All rights reserved.

Authorial or Scribal?

Spelling Variation in the Hengwrt and Ellesmere Manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales

P

ter verkrijging van

de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden,

op gezag van Rector Magnificus prof. mr. P.F. van der Heijden, volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties

te verdedigen op woensdag 14 januari 2009 klokke 16.15 uur

door

Luigina Marina Domenica Caon geboren te Torino, Italië

in 1963

Promotiecommissie

Promotores: Prof. dr. C.J. Ewen

Prof. dr. I.M. Tieken-Boon van Ostade

Referent: Dr. P.M. Robinson (University of Birmingham, UK)

Overige leden: Prof. dr.W. van Anrooij Prof. dr. R.H. Bremmer

Dr. C. Dekker (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen)

To Mariola, my example of somebody who never gives up

Contents

Acknowledgements ... v

Abbreviations ... vii

Chapter 1. Introduction ... 1

1. Chaucer and his language ... 1

2. The Canterbury Tales Project ... 3

3. Varieties of English and Chaucer’s London English ... 5

4. Aims and methodology ... 6

Chapter 2. Scribe B and his manuscripts ... 15

1. Scribe B ... 15

2. The manuscripts ... 27

2.1. Aberystwyth, National Library of Wales, Peniarth 392D, the Hengwrt MS ... 27

2.2. San Marino, California, Huntington Library, MS EL 26.C.9, the Ellesmere MS ... 33

2.3. Cambridge, Trinity College Library, MS R.3.2, folios 9–32 ... 35

2.4. The Hatfield House fragment (Marquess of Salisbury), Cecil Papers, Box S/1 ... 38

2.5. Cambridge, University Library, MS Kk 1.3, Part 20 ... 38

3. Concluding remarks

Chapter 3. Variation in the spelling of long vowels ... 41

1. Introduction ... 41

2. The alternation between single and double graphs for long vowels 45 2.1. A single graph for long vowels ... 46

2.1.1. One graph in Hengwrt and Ellesmere; variants with two graphs in Hengwrt only ... 48

2.1.2. One graph in Hengwrt and Ellesmere; more variants with two graphs in Hengwrt than in Ellesmere ... 50

2.1.3. One graph in Hengwrt and Ellesmere; alternative variants with two graphs in both manuscripts ... 52

2.1.4. One graph in Hengwrt and Ellesmere; most variants with two graphs in Ellesmere ... 55

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

2.2. Double graph for the representation of long vowels ... 57

3. The shift from single to double graphs for the representation of long vowels ... 66

3.1. The shift from one graph in Hengwrt to two graphs in Ellesmere for long vowels ... 67

3.2. Partial shift from one graph in Hengwrt to two graphs in Ellesmere for long vowels ... 68

3.3. Preference for one graph in Hengwrt vs. two graphs in Ellesmere for long vowels ... 75

3.4. Summary ... 85

4. Concluding remarks ... 86

Chapter 4. Variation between -

1. Introduction ... 89

2. Words ending in -(i)on and -(i)oun in Hengwrt and Ellesmere ... 92

2.1. Total shift from Hengwrt -(i)on to Ellesmere -(i)oun ... 94

2.2. The shift from Hengwrt -(i)on to Ellesmere -(i)oun and other spelling changes ... 95

2.3. Partial shift from Hengwrt -(i)on to Ellesmere -(i)oun ... 97

3. Words in which Hengwrt -or- and -ur- become Ellesmere -our- .... 102

4. Words mostly spelled with -ow- in Hengwrt and with -ou- in Ellesmere ... 103

4.1. Words that are never spelled with -ow- in Ellesmere ... 104

4.2. Words in which the use of -ow- usually decreases in Ellesmere . 108 4.3. Words in which -ow- occurs alongside -ou- and -o(u)gh in both manuscripts ... 116

5. Concluding remarks ... 123

Chapter 5. Degrees of spelling variation in Hengwrt and Ellesmere ... 125

1. Introduction ... 125

2. One default spelling alongside one or more spelling variants ... 126

2.1. Similar spelling variants in Hengwrt and Ellesmere ... 126

2.2. Similar default spellings in Hengwrt and Ellesmere but different alternative variants ... 142

2.3. Different default spellings in Hengwrt and Ellesmere ... 155

2.4. Summary ... 161

3. Two or more spelling variants used in free variation ... 161

4. Lexical items affected by word division ... 182

4.1. Similar use of word division in Hengwrt and Ellesmere ... 183

4.2. From two-word spellings in Hengwrt to one-word spellings in Ellesmere ... 184

TABLE OF CONTENTS iii

4.3. Two-word spellings in Hengwrt vs. one-word and two-word

spellings in Ellesmere ... 187

5. Concluding remarks ... 193

Chapter 6. Other aspects of spelling variation in Hengwrt and Ellesmere ... 195

Chapter 7. Conclusion ... 217

Appendix 1.Fifteenth-century witnesses of

Appendix 2. Abbreviations in

Appendix 3. Structural Sections in Hengwrt ... 227

Appendix 4. Tale order in Hengwrt and Ellesmere ... 229

References ... 231

Samenvatting (Summary in Dutch)... 239

Curriculum Vitae... 245

Acknowledgements

My love for manuscripts started at the age of eight and my passion for the English language at eleven. The project that has led to this dissertation is the classic dream that has come true, as it has allowed me to do research on my two favourite subjects.

In spite of my enthusiasm, however, I could never have carried out this project without the help of those people who have provided me with the right tools and information, and who have supported me in many ways during the years that I have worked on this book. I want to thank them here, and I apologise to anyone whom I may accidentally have left out.

First of all I want to thank the researchers of the Canterbury Tales Project. They supplied me with the electronic transcriptions of the Hengwrt and Ellesmere manuscripts, the Hengwrt Digital Facsimile, the digital images of Scribe B’s stint of the Trinity Gower manuscript, the images that I used in this book and on the cover, and a great deal of information on how to work with these tools. This study would have not been possible without these materials and the kind of expertise offered by them.

Dr. Jacob Thaisen (formerly of the Canterbury Tales Project, now of the Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland) also deserves thanks for his support from a distance, especially for his useful suggestions about Chaucerian again and the ‘O manuscripts’.

I also want to express my gratitude to Adriaan van der Weel for his help and invaluable suggestions concerning technical details on Apple McIntosh computers and, at the very beginning, about how to use my new iBook.

Professor Sherry Reames (University of Wisconsin at Madison) introduced me to the study of palaeography and Middle English dialects during my stay at Madison in 1997–98. I am very grateful for this, and for all the hours she made me spend localising manuscripts in the Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English with coloured pencils and tracing paper. Everything I learnt from her has proved very useful in my own research.

My interest in palaeography and codicology increased tremendously under the guidance and teaching of Professor J.P. Gumbert; I had the privilege of being one of his last students and I wish he had not retired so early.

Erik Kwakkel kindly supported me when, at the beginning of this project, I was hesitant about the best way of approaching my research. I am grateful for the many valuable tips on palaeographical and codicological subjects he gave me. I will never forget the interesting discussions about medieval manuscripts and scribes we had while eating our sandwiches.

vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am very much indebted to my teacher and colleague Bart Veldhoen, who either kindly took over some of my lectures in order to allow me finish my book, or helped me patiently when I was preparing lectures. Thank you for all this.

Evert van Leeuwen has been an extremely good colleague throughout the years, and not only because he has brought me litres of my diluted ‘academic coffee’. I want to express my gratitude to him for all the times in which he helped me find solutions to my problems, especially when I was very doubtful about the scientific value of my findings.

Among my friends, I want to express my gratitude to Christine, Claudia, Patrizia, Paola and Anne, to whom I am greatly indebted for all the times they took care of my children when I had to be at a meeting or a conference, teach a class or simply work at home on my project. Even though I realise that words are not enough to express my appreciation for everything you have done for me, thanking all of you here is the least I can do.

My last words of gratitude are for my family. Thank you Marc, as you bore my unbearable temper for so long and yet you patiently helped me right up to the very last minute with the Dutch summary. Thank you so much Matthias and Marella, as from your birth you had to put up with a mother who was constantly divided between her duties as a parent and those as a researcher, and always in a hurry.

There is good news for you: bimbi, questa volta il libro di mamma è davvero finito!!

Luisella Caon Leiden, November 2008

Abbreviations

ACE Fisher, John H., Malcolm Richardson, Jane L. Fisher (1984), An Anthology of Chancery English, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.

CTP The Canterbury Tales Project

El The Ellesmere manuscript of The Canterbury Tales, San Marino, California, Henry E. Huntington Library, MS EL 26.C.9

Fol. Folio

Hatfield The fragment of Troilus and Criseyde (Hatfield House fragment, Cecil Papers, Box S/1)

Hg The Hengwrt manuscript of The Canterbury Tales, Aberystwyth, National Library of Wales, Peniarth 392D

Kk The Kk fragment of The Prioress’s Prologue and Prioress’s Tale, Cambridge, University Library, Kk.1.3, Part 20

l(l). line(s)

L link

LALME McIntosh, Angus, M.L. Samuels, M. Benskin (eds) (1986), A Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English, Aberdeen: Aberdeen UP.

LP Linguistic Profile MS(S) manuscript(s) ME Middle English

MED McSparran, Frances et al. (last update 18 December 2001), The Electronic Middle English Dictionary, Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press

n. note

OE Old English

OED Simpson, John (ed.), Online Oxford English Dictionary (last update 2008), Oxford: OUP.

Par.(s) paragraph(s) s.v. sub voce

Tr Cambridge, Trinity College, MS R.3.2 (James 581), Gower’s Confessio Amantis

v. verb