Fowler, JohnSimms, NormanDay, PaulPickford, T.E.2025-09-262025-09-261972https://hdl.handle.net/10289/17669My purpose in preparing this work has been to draw attention to the way in which John Gower uses the Apollonius story, and to look at his telling of the tale, not as a mere source of Shakespeare’s Pericles, but as a version in its own right: one version in an ancient tradition which was already more than a thousand years old when Gower drew on it, and which, in the twentieth century, is still alive. In order to give some idea of how Gower fitted into the tradition, it was necessary to establish which of the earlier versions of the story he used. He names as his authority, the twelfth century work of Godrey of Viterbo, a book known as the Pantheon. It is clear, however, that he was equally familiar with another version which is thought to have been the anonymous prose work usually known as the Historia Apollonii Regis Tyri. Another possibility is that he knew the somewhat briefer version of the Historia that found its way into the Gesta Romanorum, a medieval collection of ‘moral’ tales. Nevertheless, it needs to be borne in mind that the Historia had been translated into Old English as early as the eleventh century, and that a fragment of an early fourteenth century Middle English verse-version survives, as well as numerous other versions in various European vernaculars, including French, all of which may suggest the possibility of an oral tradition running parallel to the written tradition, and that Gower had heard the Apollonius story related many times “On ember-eves and holy-ales”. The search for a second manuscript ‘source’, then, may prove futile. Nevertheless, the manuscripts of the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries point to the type of versions most likely to have been in current use. Although many printed editions of these works have been made in the past, they are not generally readily available. I have been unable, for instance, to see the most important work of S. Singer, Apollonius von Tyrus (Halle, 1895), which includes a version of Godfrey of Viterbo’s Cronica de Apollonio; and the only complete editions of the Pantheon were printed in 1559 and 1726; neither of them is common. Of the more recent editions of the Historia, none suited my purpose exactly as both Goolden’s and Raith’s are given as ‘parallel’ texts to the Old English translation of the Historia, and their ‘readings’ are preferred accordingly. Rises’s edition of 1893 is useful, but I have traced only one copy in New Zealand. I therefore decided to edit two manuscripts, one recording Godfrey of Viterbo’s Cronica de Apollonio and the other recording the Historia Apollonii Regis Tyri, and these were to act as a kind of introduction to Gower’s version of the story. Owing to the limited time and money at my disposal, I have been unable to compare all the surviving manuscripts, and was therefore unable to select those versions which most nearly correspond with Gower’s text. The two manuscripts included in this work, therefore, are presented as being no more than probably similar to the versions familiar to Gower. Neither has been previously edited. The Cronica de Apollonio (MS Cotton Titus D iii) is a fourteenth century manuscript which includes additions not found in the twelfth and thirteenth century editions of the Pantheon, but as the same additions are found in at least two other fourteenth century versions, they may have been known to Gower. The Historia Apollonii Regis Tyri manuscript dates from the early fifteenth century and represents one among some thirteen manuscripts in England of the so-called ‘C’ group. This latter manuscript represents the kind of version in circulation in England during Gower’s day; it also stands as a direct descendant of the supposed second-century original, the line from which all the various lyrics, epics, dramas and histories of Apollonius have sprung. I present the texts with all their fourteenth or fifteenth century ‘corruptions’. However, reference to earlier versions is made from time to time in order to give some idea of the extent of the variations that exist between the manuscripts. I have also attempted a translation of both pieces, but these translations are not intended to be used independently of the Latin. In the “Introduction to the Historia”, I outline the history of the story and suggest some of the reasons why it has proved so continuously popular. In Appendix B, with the examination of some of the Greek myths, especially of Apollo and Orpheus (together with Judeo-Christian myths that parallel these), I point towards the underlying archetypal structures of the Apollonius story as well as to its possible prehistory. In other words, I suggest -- without attempting to prove it -- that Apollonius is descended from Apollo, or a combination of Apollo and his chief disciple, Orpheus. In the “Introduction to the Cronica”, I look at the way in which Godfrey used the Apollonius story, trying, to determine why he included this piece of romance in what amounts to an historical text book. I also draw attention to some of the strengths of Godfrey’s style in order to counteract the generally hostile criticism that he has so far received. It is hoped that the reasons for Gower’s respect for Godfrey as an authority will become apparent. With something of the Apollonius-tradition established, I now turn to Gower’s version of the story. I use manuscript Fairfax 3 as my text, this being generally accepted as the best manuscript. I differ from Macaulay mainly in the interpretation of the punctuation; my reasons are given in Appendix A. The “Introduction to Gower’s Apollonius” suggests the role of the story within the Confessio Amantis as a whole, whilst the notes which follow the text attempt to elucidate all difficulties, and to draw attention to the fifteenth century Spanish translation of the Confessio as a useful ‘reading’ of the original. In the sections on Grammar, Syntax, Orthography, and Prosody, I attempt to use the Apollonius story as a basis for demonstrating the ‘rules’ of Gower's English. I do not attempt to define his English in terms of its provenance or peculiarities -- though such observations that Gower never rhymes open with close ‘e’ (whereas Chaucer does) are not thereby excluded. These sections, then, are to be seen as nothing more than extensions to the Notes, aimed at helping the reader understand the poem.enAll items in Research Commons are provided for private study and research purposes and are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.Thesis