We learn from himself, in his Treatise on the Astrolabe, that he had a son, called Lowis, who was ten years of age in 1391. It is the only circumstance, as I recollect, relating to his family, of which he has informed us. A few other historical particulars relating to himself, which may be collected from his writings, have been taken notice of already; and perhaps a more attentive examination of his works might furnish a few more. We As to the other point, it is not impossible that the father, and the eldest sister, who was his heiress [See Pat. 13 H. IV. p. l.m.35. ap. Rymer.], might bear the name of de Rouet, (or de Roelt, as it is in the Pat. 13 H. IV. just quoted,) from some estate in their possession, and yet the younger Sister might be called by the family-name of Pykard. If the records of payments at the Exchequer for the eleven years preceding 1381 are still in being, they may enable us to clear up these doubts, and also, perhaps, to ascertain very nearly the time of Chaucer's marriage, as they will probably shew when he began to receive his wife's annuity. If this last point were ascertained, we should know better what to think of the relation of Thomas Chaucer to our author. Mr. Speght informs us, "that some held opinion, that Thomas C. was not the sonne of Geffrey," and there are certainly many circumstances which might incline us to that opinion. I was in hopes of meeting with some light upon this subject in a Poem which Lydgate is said to have written, entitled, "A Complaint upon the departure of Thomas Chaucer into France, upon the Kynges Ambassate." A Poem, with this title, is extant in Ms. Harl. 367. 33. in the hand-writing of J. Stowe ; but upon inspection I found it to be a mere love-ballad, without the least imaginable reference to Thomas Chaucer. must be cautious however, in such an examination, of supposing allusions which Chaucer never intended, or of arguing from pieces which he never wrote, as if they were his. We must not infer from his repeated commendations of the Daysie-flower, that he was specially favoured by Margaret, Countess of Pembroke (m); and still less should we set (m) I can find no other foundation for this notion. Mr. Speght, who first started it, says, that "it may appeare in divers treatises by him written as in the Prologue of the Legend of good Women under the name of the Daysie; and likewise in a Ballad, beginning, In the season of Feverier." The Ballad is among the additions made by John Stowe to Chaucer's works in 1561, and, like the greatest part of those additions, is of very dubious authority, to use the gentlest terms. But supposing it genuine, there is nothing in it to make us believe that it had any reference to the Countess of Pembroke. That its commendations of the Daysie ought not to weigh with us is very plain from the other piece cited by Mr. Speght: for the Legende of good Women, in which he imagines "the Lady Margaret to be honoured under the name of the Daysie," was certainly not written till at least twelve years after that Lady's death. [See the Discourse, &c. n. 3. for the date of the Legende. The Countess Margaret must have died not later than 1370, as the Earl's son, by his second wife Anne, was about nineteen years of age, when he was killed in a tournament in 1391, Hollinshed, p. 471.] It is possible that le dit de la fleur de lis et de la Marguerite by Guillaume de Machaut [Acad. des. Insc. t. xx. p. 381.] and the Dittié de la flour de la Margherite by Froissart [Ibid. t. x. p. 669.], (neither of which had the least relation to the Countess of Pembroke,) might furnish us with the true key to those mystical compliments, which our poet has paid to the Daysie-flower. him down as a follower of Alain Chartier (n), because his Editors have falsely ascribed to him a translation of one of Alain's poems. (n) Leland was the first author of this story, which is totally inconsistent with Chronology. The time of Alain's birth has not been settled with precision; but he was certainly living near 50 years after Chaucer's death; which makes it morally impossible that the latter should have followed him, in his attempts to polish his native language. Instead therefore of supposing from the translation of La belle dame sans mercie that Chaucer imitated Alain Chartier, we should rather conclude, that he was not the author of that translation; which indeed in Ms. Harl. 372. is expressly attributed to a Sir Richard Ros. I will just take notice of another opinion, (which has been propagated upon as little foundation,) that Chaucer imitated the Provencal poets. Mr. Rymer, who, I believe, first made the discovery, speaks only of his having borrowed from their language [View of Trag. p. 78.], but Mr. Dryden found out, that he composed after their manner, particularly his tale of the Flower and the Leaf. [Pref. to Fables]. Mr. Warton also thinks, that the House of Fame "was originally a Provencial composition." [Hist. of English Poetry, p. 389. 458.] How far Chaucer's language was borrowed, has been considered in the Essay, &c. Part i. will only add, that I have not observed in any of his writings a single phrase or word, which has the least appearance of having been fetched by him from the South of the Loire. With respect to the manner and matter of his compositions, till some clear instance of imitation be produced, I shall be slow to believe that in either he ever copied the poets of Provence, with whose works, I apprehend, he had very little, if any, acquaintance. |