Benjamin Thompson
ENG 421 - Kiernan
Report 2
2 April 2002
The two Trinity College manuscripts are similar in order in the beginning. However, after "The Merchants Tale" they take a different course. The tale order for Tc1 is: A B1FaEb Ea D G C B2f H B2cde B2ab Fb I. The tale order for Tc2 is as follows: A B1Fa Eb D Ea Cb Fb Ga Ca B2adef H I Retraction. Tc1 contains all the tales except the "Retraction". The "Retraction" could have originally been a part, but there are lost leaves at the end of the manuscript. It is missing lines 1569-1713 of the "Wife of Bath's Tale" due to lost leaves (V.3; 284). Tc2 does not have "The Canon's Yeoman Tale", "The Prioress Tale", and "The Tale of Sir Thopas"; however, it does include the "Retraction". Out of the tales lines 1-55 of the "General Prologue" are mutilated (V.3, 1); "The Knight's Tale" missing lines 971-1048 due to lost leaves; and "The Pardoner's Tale" missing lines 1049-1115 due to lost leaves(V.3, 268). Neither manuscripts contain the Merchant-Squire link (V.3, 417)but in Tc1 the Squire-Franklin link reads "marchaunt".
The differences in the tale order of the manuscripts offers insight on tale order in smaller sets. Manly and Rickart argue that the whole text of Tc1 and Tc2, "clearly did not owe the order of tales to Chaucer, for both groups agree with d in placing Block G before Block B2, thus bringing the allusion of G 556 to Boghton-under-Blee (less than six miles from Canterbury) near the middle of CT and leaving uncorrected the clash between the allusion to Rochester in B2 and that to Sittingbourne in D" (V.2, 476). However, looking at the smaller changes between tales and tale order creates a better sense of what is right. For example, the first change in order comes with the placement of "The Clerk's Tale" before "The Wife of Bath's Tale" in Tc1. In this particular order, lines 1170-1176 of "The Clerk's Tale", which elude to the Wife of Bath, are meant as an introduction for her to tell her tale. The six lines of "The Clerk's Tale" make more sense as an introduction to the Wife of Bath, rather than a reference to her tale after two other tales are told. It also follows "The Merchant's Tale" keeping that fragment together. Tc1
After the Clerk-Group D segment of the manuscript Tc1 goes to Group G; while Tc2 jumps to the "Pardoner's Tale". Tc2 puts "The Pardoner's Tale" after "The Clerk's Tale" and the 7-line Clerk endlink comes between "The Pardoner's Tale" and "The Franklin's Tale". "The Second Nun's Tale" follows "The Franklin's Tale". There are no links between this set of tales, with the exception of the 7-line Clerk endlink. Then "The Physicians Tale" comes with no head or endlink. There was not evidence that this particular section of the manuscript was intentionally put in this order. Manly and Rickart explain, "Tc2, the latest of the group, was apparently made from the same exemplar as Cx1 and must have been later than Caxton's first edition, in asmuch as the traditional arrangement preserved in Cx1 was badly disturbed after E 325 and had lost some parts before Tc2 was copied" (V.2, 485). This would also help to explain why "The Canon's Yeoman Tale", "The Prioress' Tale", and "The Tale of Sir Thopas are missing.
Tc1 has all the tales at the end, but in a disarranged order. For example, Group B2starts with "The Nun's Priets Tale" and is split from the rest of the group by "The Manciple's Tale". Then there is a 4-line Sir Thopas headlink, followed by "The Tale of Sir Thopas", "The Tale of Melibeus", and "The Monk's Tale". "The Shipman's Tale" and "The Prioress' Tale" come last. Group B2 maintains some its tale links, except that "The Nun's Preist Tale" comes first. "The Franklin's Tale" and "The Parson's Tale" close out the tales in this manuscript. The placement of "The Franklin Tale" is odd. There are mulitple references to the Squire-Franklin link, yet in the Tc2 manuscript the tale does not appear until the end. The Franklin's interruption of the Squire almost necesitates "The Franklin's Tale" to follow. Although it could be merely passed off as an interruption and having no consequence with tale order, the thought of Chaucer merely interjecting a character with no plan in mind is trivial at best. SInce he never put the manuscript in any order, his intent can not be known. However, there are hints he gives as to what tales should be grouped together.
Although Tc1 does not contain the 7-line Clerk endlink, it has "The Clerk's Tale" preceding "The Wife of Bath's Tale". That particular order makes more sense; however, "The Franklin's Tale" should be after "The Squire's Tale". As for the end of the manuscript, Group B2 should keep its order with "The Manciples Tale" following the group. As for Tc2, it is hard to get past the random order of the tales immediately following "The Clerk's Tale". The inclusion of the 7-line Clerk endlink is nice, but the fact that it follows "The Pardoner's Tale" makes it a random set of lines with no cause. Once again it would make more sense if "The Clerks Tale" preceded "The Wife of Bath's Tale" with the Clerk endlink attached. Tc1, through "The Summoner's Tale", comes the closest to a logical tale order, with the exception of the exclusion of "The Franklin's Tale. Tc2 from "The Shipman's Tale" to the end has a good logical order, with the exception that some tales are missing. A combination of the two manuscripts would offer a logical way to read the tales.
Manly, John M. and Edith Rickert, et al. The Text of the Canterbury Tales Studied on the Basis of All Known Manuscripts. 8 vols. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1940.