The parlament of foules, by Geoffrey Chaucer. Ed., with introduction, notes, and glossary, by T. R. Lounsbury.

6

INTROD UC TIO.

accordingly referred by Godwin to the year 1358. In this he
has been followed by several modern writers.
This date is now almost contemptuously rejected by those
students of Chaucer, forming, perhaps, a majority of the whole
number, who have given up the traditional date of 1328 as the
year of the poet's birth, and have substituted for it a conjectural
one of I340, or thereabouts. Still their views as to its time of
composition cannot be looked upon as resting upon any firmer
basis than that of Godwin's. The only conspicuous theory,
indeed the only one deserving of any attention, is that of Prof.
Ten Brink of the University of Strasbourg. In I870 he published a valuable treatise on Chaucer, in which he divided his
works into three periods; the first embracing those written
exclusively under French influence; the second, those written
specially under Italian influence; and the third period, from 1385
to I400. The second period he began with the poet's return, in
1373, from his first Italian journey of which we have any
record; for we know from official documents, that shortly after
the Ist of December, 1372, Chaucer left England on a diplomatic mission to Genoa, and came back to England some time
before the 22d of November, I373. To this second period,
extending from this time to 1385, Prof. Ten Brink assigned
the composition of " Palamon and Arcite," of " The Hous of
Fame," of " Troylus and Cryseyde," 'of "The Life of Seint
Cecile," and of "The Parlament of Foules." All of these
exhibit traces of Italian influence; all of them are more or less
indebted to Italian originals, and are, therefore, supposed to have
been written after the return of the poet from a journey, in which
he had come into personal contact with Italian speakers, perhaps with Italian authors, and had had, in consequence, special
facilities for the study of the language. Mr. Furnivall, the
director of the Chaucer Society, has adopted this theory, and is
inclined to assign the composition of this particular poem to the
year I374. There is nothing impossible about any of these
statements; ancfthey certainly cannot be disproved, for the very
good reason, that, in the present state of our knowledge, they
cannot be proved. There are, however, two weak points in the