Ellesmere Chaucer - Scribe and Its Relation To Other Manuscripts

Scribe and Its Relation To Other Manuscripts

The Ellesmere manuscript is thought to be very early in date, being written shortly after Chaucer's death. It has therefore been seen as an important source for efforts to reconstruct Chaucer's original text and intentions, though John M. Manly and Edith Rickert in their Text of the Canterbury Tales (1940) noted that whoever edited the manuscript probably made substantial revisions, tried to regularise spelling, and put the individual Tales into a smoothly running order. Up until this point the Ellesmere manuscript had been used as the 'base text' by several editions, such as that of W. W. Skeat, with variants checked against Harley MS. 7334.

The manuscript's scribe has now been tentatively identified as Adam Pinkhurst, a man employed by Chaucer himself. Pinkhurst also appears to be responsible for the Hengwrt Manuscript of the Tales, now considered the earliest, most authoritative, and closest to Chaucer's holograph. This would also imply, however, that the revisions seen in the Ellesmere manuscript would have been carried out by someone who had worked with Chaucer, knew his intentions for the Tales, and had access to draft materials.

The Ellesmere manuscript is conventionally referred to as El in most discussions of the Tales and their textual history. A facsimile edition is available.

• Geoffrey Chaucer from the Ellesmere Manusctipt
• The beginning of The Knight's Tale from the Ellesmere manuscript
• Robin the Miller from folio 34v of the Ellesmere Manuscript of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales.
• Roger the Cook from Ellesmere manuscript
• The opening page of The Wife of Bath's Tale from the Ellesmere manuscript of The Canterbury Tales, circa 1405-1410.
• The Friar from the Ellesmere Manuscript