Geoffrey Chaucer, Canterbury Tales National Library of Wales, Peniarth 392D, fol. 2r (Hengwrt)
Language: English (Southeast Midland)
Manuscript date: ca. 1405
The Hengwrt manuscript of the Canterbury Tales is less complete than the
Ellesmere manuscript, and its tales are in a different and unique order (see
the Ellesmere image, p. 137). Its vellum manuscript is in poorer condition;
it is stained, and vermin have eaten about 9 cm from the outer corners of
leaves. However, its text, probably written in London, is very regular and is
therefore used by most modern editors. Its dialect, spelling, and paleography
are similar to Ellesmere, which has led some scholars to conjecture that the
same scribe wrote both. Only this first page of Hengwrt has a pink and
blue full vinet border, also like Ellesmere; the remainder of the pages are
undecorated.
Primary documents and further reading Blake, N. F. (ed.) (1980) The Canterbury Tales, Edited from the Hengwrt Manu- script. London: Edward Arnold.
Ramsey, R. V. (1982) “The Hengwrt and Ellesmere Manuscripts of the Canterbury Tales: Different Scribes.” Studies in Bibliography 35: 133–54.
—— (1986) “Paleography and Scribes of Shared Training.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 8: 107–44.
Ruggiers, P. G. (ed.) (1979) The Canterbury Tales: A Facsimile and Transcription of the Hengwrt Manuscript, with Variants from the Ellesmere Manuscript. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.
Smith, J. J. (ed.) (1988) The English of Chaucer and His Contemporaries: Essays by M. L. Samuels and J. J. Smith. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.
Stubbs, E. (ed.) (2000) The Hengwrt Chaucer Digital Facsimile. Leicester: Scholarly
Digital Editions.
