The Canterbury Tales, and Other Poems
literary world — not to speak of “Troilus and Cressida,” which,
as Lydgate mentions it first among Chaucer’s works, some have
supposed to be a youthful production — we find a third and not
less powerful recommendation to the favour of the great co-
operating with his learning and his gallant bearing. Elsewhere
<2> reasons have been shown for doubt whether “Troilus and
Cressida” should not be assigned to a later period of Chaucer’s
life; but very little is positively known about the dates and
sequence of his various works. In the year 1386, being called as
witness with regard to a contest on a point of heraldry between
Lord Scrope and Sir Robert Grosvenor, Chaucer deposed that
he entered on his military career in 1359. In that year Edward
III invaded France, for the third time, in pursuit of his claim to
the French crown; and we may fancy that, in describing the
embarkation of the knights in “Chaucer’s Dream”, the poet
gained some of the vividness and stir of his picture from his
recollections of the embarkation of the splendid and well-
appointed royal host at Sandwich, on board the eleven hundred
transports provided for the enterprise. In this expedition the
laurels of Poitiers were flung on the ground; after vainly
attempting Rheims and Paris, Edward was constrained, by cruel
weather and lack of provisions, to retreat toward his ships; the
fury of the elements made the retreat more disastrous than an
overthrow in pitched battle; horses and men perished by
thousands, or fell into the hands of the pursuing French.
Chaucer, who had been made prisoner at the siege of Retters,
was among the captives in the possession of France when the
treaty of Bretigny — the “great peace” — was concluded, in
May, 1360. Returning to England, as we may suppose, at the
peace, the poet, ere long, fell into another and a pleasanter
captivity; for his marriage is generally believed to have taken
place shortly after his release from foreign durance. He had
already gained the personal friendship and favour of John of
Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, the King’s son; the Duke, while Earl
of Richmond, had courted, and won to wife after a certain
delay, Blanche, daughter and co-heiress of Henry Duke of
Lancaster; and Chaucer is by some believed to have written
“The Assembly of Fowls” to celebrate the wooing, as he wrote
“Chaucer’s Dream” to celebrate the wedding, of his patron. The
marriage took place in 1359, the year of Chaucer’s expedition to
France; and as, in “The Assembly of Fowls,” the formel or
female eagle, who is supposed to represent the Lady Blanche,
begs that her choice of a mate may be deferred for a year, 1358
and 1359 have been assigned as the respective dates of the two
poems already mentioned. In the “Dream,” Chaucer
prominently introduces his own lady-love, to whom, after the
happy union of his patron with the Lady Blanche, he is wedded
amid great rejoicing; and various expressions in the same poem
show that not only was the poet high in favour with the
illustrious pair, but that his future wife had also peculiar claims
on their regard. She was the younger daughter of Sir Payne
Roet, a native of Hainault, who had, like many of his
countrymen, been attracted to England by the example and
patronage of Queen Philippa. The favourite attendant on the
Lady Blanche was her elder sister Katherine: subsequently
married to Sir Hugh Swynford, a gentleman of Lincolnshire;
and destined, after the death of Blanche, to be in succession
governess of her children, mistress of John of Gaunt, and
lawfully-wedded Duchess of Lancaster. It is quite sufficient
proof that Chaucer’s position at Court was of no mean
consequence, to find that his wife, the sister of the future
Duchess of Lancaster, was one of the royal maids of honour,
and even, as Sir Harris Nicolas conjectures, a god-daughter of
the Queen — for her name also was Philippa.
Between 1359, when the poet himself testifies that he was made
prisoner while bearing arms in France, and September 1366,
when Queen Philippa granted to her former maid of honour, by
the name of Philippa Chaucer, a yearly pension of ten marks, or
L6, 13s. 4d., we have no authentic mention of Chaucer, express
or indirect. It is plain from this grant that the poet’s marriage
with Sir Payne Roet’s daughter was not celebrated later than
1366; the probability is, that it closely followed his return from
the wars. In 1367, Edward III. settled upon Chaucer a life-
pension of twenty marks, “for the good service which our
beloved Valet — ‘dilectus Valettus noster’ — Geoffrey Chaucer
has rendered, and will render in time to come.” Camden
explains ‘Valettus hospitii’ to signify a Gentleman of the Privy
Chamber; Selden says that the designation was bestowed “upon
young heirs designed to he knighted, or young gentlemen of
great descent and quality.” Whatever the strict meaning of the
word, it is plain that the poet’s position was honourable and
near to the King’s person, and also that his worldly
circumstances were easy, if not affluent — for it need not be said
that twenty marks in those days represented twelve or twenty
times the sum in these. It is believed that he found powerful
patronage, not merely from the Duke of Lancaster and his wife,
but from Margaret Countess of Pembroke, the King’s daughter.
To her Chaucer is supposed to have addressed the “Goodly
Ballad”, in which the lady is celebrated under the image of the
daisy; her he is by some understood to have represented under
the title of Queen Alcestis, in the “Court of Love” and the
Prologue to “The Legend of Good Women;” and in her praise
we may read his charming descriptions and eulogies of the daisy
— French, “Marguerite,” the name of his Royal patroness. To
this period of Chaucer’s career we may probably attribute the
elegant and courtly, if somewhat conventional, poems of “The
Flower and the Leaf,” “The Cuckoo and the Nightingale,” &c.
“The Lady Margaret,” says Urry, “. . . would frequently
compliment him upon his poems. But this is not to be meant of
his Canterbury Tales, they being written in the latter part of his
life, when the courtier and the fine gentleman gave way to solid
sense and plain descriptions. In his love-pieces he was obliged
to have the strictest regard to modesty and decency; the ladies
at that time insisting so much upon the nicest punctilios of
honour, that it was highly criminal to depreciate their sex, or do
anything that might offend virtue.” Chaucer, in their estimation,
had sinned against the dignity and honour of womankind by his
translation of the French “Roman de la Rose,” and by his
“Troilus and Cressida” — assuming it to have been among his
less mature works; and to atone for those offences the Lady
Margaret (though other and older accounts say that it was the
first Queen of Richard II., Anne of Bohemia), prescribed to him
the task of writing “The Legend of Good Women” (see
introductory note to that poem). About this period, too, we
may place the composition of Chaucer’s A. B. C., or The Prayer
of Our Lady, made at the request of the Duchess Blanche, a
lady of great devoutness in her private life. She died in 1369;
and Chaucer, as he had allegorised her wooing, celebrated her
marriage, and aided her devotions, now lamented her death, in a
poem entitled “The Book of the Duchess; or, the Death of
Blanche.<3>
In 1370, Chaucer was employed on the King’s service abroad;
and in November 1372, by the title of “Scutifer noster” — our
Esquire or Shield-bearer — he was associated with “Jacobus
Pronan,” and “Johannes de Mari civis Januensis,” in a royal
commission, bestowing full powers to treat with the Duke of
Genoa, his Council, and State. The object of the embassy was
to negotiate upon the choice of an English port at which the
Genoese might form a commercial establishment; and Chaucer,
having quitted England in December, visited Genoa and
Florence, and returned to England before the end of November
1373 — for on that day he drew his pension from the Exchequer
in person. The most interesting point connected with this Italian
mission is the question, whether Chaucer visited Petrarch at
Padua. That he did, is unhesitatingly affirmed by the old
biographers; but the authentic notices of Chaucer during the
years 1372-1373, as shown by the researches of Sir Harris
Nicolas, are confined to the facts already stated; and we are left
to answer the question by the probabilities of the case, and by
the aid of what faint light the poet himself affords. We can
scarcely fancy that Chaucer, visiting Italy for the first time, in a
capacity which opened for him easy access to the great and the
famous, did not embrace the chance of meeting a poet whose
works he evidently knew in their native tongue, and highly
esteemed. With Mr Wright, we are strongly disinclined to
believe “that Chaucer did not profit by the opportunity . . . of
improving his acquaintance with the poetry, if not the poets, of
the country he thus visited, whose influence was now being felt
on the literature of most countries of Western Europe.” That
Chaucer was familiar with the Italian language appears not
merely from his repeated selection as Envoy to Italian States,
but by many passages in his poetry, from “The Assembly of
Fowls” to “The Canterbury Tales.” In the opening of the first
poem there is a striking parallel to Dante’s inscription on the
gate of Hell. The first Song of Troilus, in “Troilus and
Cressida”, is a nearly literal translation of Petrarch’s 88th
Sonnet. In the Prologue to “The Legend of Good Women”,
there is a reference to Dante which can hardly have reached the
poet at second- hand. And in Chaucer’s great work — as in The
Wife of Bath’s Tale, and The Monk’s Tale — direct reference by
name is made to Dante, “the wise poet of Florence,” “the great
poet of Italy,” as the source whence the author has quoted.
When we consider the poet’s high place in literature and at
Court, which could not fail to make him free of the hospitalities
of the brilliant little Lombard States; his familiarity with the
tongue and the works of Italy’s greatest bards, dead and living;
the reverential regard which he paid to the memory of great
poets, of which we have examples in “The House of Fame,” and
at the close of “Troilus and Cressida” <4>; along with his own
testimony in the Prologue to The Clerk’s Tale, we cannot fail to
construe that testimony as a declaration that the Tale was
actually told to Chaucer by the lips of Petrarch, in 1373, the
very year in which Petrarch translated it into Latin, from
Boccaccio’s “Decameron.”<5> Mr Bell notes the objection to
this interpretation, that the words are put into the mouth, not of
the poet, but of the Clerk; and meets it by the counter-
objection, that the Clerk, being a purely imaginary personage,
could not have learned the story at Padua from Petrarch — and
therefore that Chaucer must have departed from the dramatic
assumption maintained in the rest of the dialogue. Instances
could be adduced from Chaucer’s writings to show that such a
sudden “departure from the dramatic assumption” would not be
unexampled: witness the “aside” in The Wife of Bath’s
Prologue, where, after the jolly Dame has asserted that “half so
boldly there can no man swear and lie as a woman can”, the
poet hastens to interpose, in his own person, these two lines:
“I say not this by wives that be wise,
But if it be when they them misadvise.”
And again, in the Prologue to the “Legend of Good Women,”
from a description of the daisy —
“She is the clearness and the very light,
That in this darke world me guides and leads,”
the poet, in the very next lines, slides into an address to his lady:
“The heart within my sorrowful heart you dreads
And loves so sore, that ye be, verily,
The mistress of my wit, and nothing I,” &c.