X>

Br (ca. 1390)

X>

(A-L. Rom. ca. 1100) >

(Alfred) (ca. 1150) >

(x) > RM (147-) > S (1475)>(Machault)>C (1484) RTr (1175) > GM (1270) > ME (1400)

COCK AND FOX

A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE HISTORY AND SOURCES

OF THE MEDIEVAL FABLE

The story of the Cock and the Fox has long had a wide range and popularity. It is known, in one form or another, as extending from oriental antiquity down to our own days. It is known in the different genres of animal epic, clerkly fable, and folklore tale. It is known and celebrated in the varying versions of Chaucer, the Roman de Renart, Marie de France-and Uncle Remus.

The fable proper seems in its entirety a special mediæval growth. Its oriental' forms are too remote for purposes of derivation or of discussion. It has not been discovered in Greek antiquity or in classical Latinity. A kindred form, however, is found in Apuleius, and there seems, as will be noted, even some reason to suppose that it may have constituted part of the original Phædrus collection which has not come down to us.

The known and accessible mediæval versions, strictly of this fable, are about fifteen in number, and they extend apparently from the Rheims MS of the Appendix to Phædrus (ca. 750) down to the publication of Caxton in 1484. In the following list these orthodox versions alone are enumerated. There are in addition some twelve allied stories and fables which will be reserved for later treatment."

1 See Benfey, Pantschatantra, I, 610; Vartan, 12, 13; Jacobs is mistaken in his reference to the Katha-Sarit-Sagara; but see especially Benfey, I, 310, with which cf. Miss Petersen, Sources of the Nonne Prestes Tale (Boston, 1898, pp. 40-42). This is the story of the "kiss" theme, which is closely related to the "decree" theme of the Fox and Dove (Warnke's Marie, LXI). There are also the jackal story and the sparrow story (references in Miss Petersen, pp. 16, 27, 37). These may possibly be allowed an influence of the oral tradition sort. But until the Fox and Cock fable is found entire in some collection-oriental, classical, or pre-medieval-the a priori hypothesis later advocated may be considered as tenable.

2I am indebted to Dr. A. Marshall Elliott, head of the Romance seminary of Johns Hopkins University; to Dr. George C. Keidel, associate in the department, for much assistance in arranging the material; and to various members of the seminary-especially to Mr. D. B. Easter-for help in collecting versions. The paper, in so far as concerns the main method of motifs, proceeds along the regular lines followed in this seminary. It may 39]

(These are arranged chronologically.)

1. "Appendix Fabularum Æsopiarum, ex MS Divionensi, Rimicio, Romulo et aliis," part of Phaedri Aug. Liberti, Fabularum Æsopiarum, etc., curante Petro Burmanno (editio quarta) (Lugduni Batavorum, 1778), Fab. XIII, p. 382. Rheims MS(?) Date ca. 750(?) Phaedr. Burm. App.

=

= PhB.'

2. "B. Flacci Albini seu Alcuini, Abbatis, etc., Opera Omnia, Tomus Secundus," part of Migne, Patrologia Latina, Vol. CI (Lutetia Parisiorum, 1863), Carmen CCLXXVIII, col. 805. Date ca. 800. Alcuin = Al.' 3. Grimm and Schmeller, Lateinische Gedichte des X. und XI. Jh. (Göttingen, 1838), pp. 345-54. Date probably eleventh century. =GS.' 4. Ademar de Chabannes, "Fabulae Antiquae," in Hervieux, Les fabulistes latins (Paris, 1893), Vol. II, second ed., Fab. XXX, p. 142. Date before 1029. = = Ad.

2

5. "(Alter) Esopus de Baldo," in Du Méril, Poésies inédites du moyen âge (Paris, 1854), Fab. XXIII, p. 253. Date not known-probably twelfth century. Ba.

3

=

6. Warnke, Fabeln der Marie de France (Halle, 1898), Fab. LX p. 198. Date ca. 1175. = M. (Roquefort, Poésies de Marie de France, Vol. II, Fab. LI, p. 240, has variants which affect only the subordinate motifs.)

7. "Romulus Trevirensis," Hervieux, op. cit., Vol. II, Fab. L, p. 598. Date ca. 1175. =RTr. ("L. B. G." is a misnomer for this collection.) 8. Leitzmann, Gerhard von Minden (Halle, 1898), Fab. 112, p. 165. Date ca. 1270. = GM.

9. "Romulus Bernensis," Hervieux, Vol. II, Fab. XXI, p. 308. Date ca. 1275. = BR.

10. Bromiardus, Summa Praedicantium (Nuremberg, 1518), h. XIII, 28. Date ca. 1390.

- Br.

11. Magdebürger Æsop, also known as Gerhard von Minden (Seelmann, Bremen, 1878; Niederdeutsche Denkmäler, Book II), Fab. XLVI, p. 65. Date ca. 1400. = ME.

12. "Romulus Monacensis," Hervieux, Vol. II, Fab. XXVIII, p. 274. Date ca. 147-. = RM. (Misnomer Fabulae Extravagantes.)

13. Stainhowels Esop (Oesterley, Tübingen, 1873), Book V, Fab. LXXXIII (Fab. Extr., III), p. 196. Date 1475. =S.

interest fable specialists to know that some fifty fables have been in such fashion worked out, from Marie de France as a basis; and that the quantity of material thus accumulated probably surpasses any similar collection in the country.

1 Abbreviations used in the tables.

2 Courtesy of the library of Columbia University.

3 See Du Méril, op. cit., pp. 215, 216.

14. The Poems and Fables of Robert Henryson (D. Laing, Edinburgh, 1865), “Tail of Schir Chantecleir and the Foxe," pp. 118-26. Date 1476. =H.

15. The Fables of Esop as First Printed by William Caxton (Jacobs, London, 1889), Vol. II, Book V, Fab. III, p. 132. Date 1484. = C.

II. PLOT OF THE FABLE

I will give the oldest and one of the baldest versions, which is that of the Appendix to Phædrus; then one of the latest and best, which is that of Marie. Attention is called to the principal divergences:

PHB-Perdix et Vulpis

A partridge once sat in a high tree. A fox came up. Then he began to talk thus: "Oh, how great is the beauty of your face, partridge! Your beak surpasses coral, your legs the splendor of purple. But if you would sleep, how much prettier you would be!" So the foolish thing shut her eyes; the fox immediately carried off the credulous creature. She uttered supplicatingly these words mingled with grievous weeping: "By the dignity [decus] of your arts, fox, I beg you to speak my name first, [and] then you will eat." When the fox wanted to talk, he opened his mouth; but the partridge slipped away from the fool. The deluded fox [says]: "What use [was there] in my talking?" Replies the partridge: "And what use in my sleeping? Was it necessary for one to whom sleep came not?" This is for those people who talk when there is no need, and who sleep when they ought to watch.

MARIE, De Vulpe et Gallo

I tell of a cock who stood on a dung-hill and sang. Near him came a fox and addressed him in very fine words. "Sir," he says, "I see you are very beautiful; I never saw such a nice bird. Your voice is clear beyond everything: except your father, whom I saw,' never did a bird sing better; but he did better, because he shut his eyes." "So can I," said the cock. He flapped his wings, he shut his eyes; he thought he would sing more clearly. The fox jumps forward and takes him; and withal away he goes toward the forest. All the shepherds ran after, through a field where he passed; the dogs bark at him all around. "See the fox who holds the cock. In an evil hour he deceived him, if he comes this way!" "Come," says the cock, "cry to them that I am yours and do not let me go!" The fox wants to talk aloud, and the cock leaps out of his mouth; he mounted on a high tree. When the fox came to his senses, he considered himself very much fooled, since the cock tricked him so. With indignation and with full anger he commences to curse 1 Conui (Roquefort).

his mouth, which talks when it ought to keep quiet. The cock replies: "So ought I to do: [I ought] to curse my eye which wants to close, when it ought to watch and ward lest evil come to its master."

Fools do this: a great many people talk when they ought to stop, and keep quiet when they ought to talk.

The additions and improvements are readily seen. In Marie, the cock is singing; the fox flatters his voice and stimulates him to surpass his father; there is a pursuit of shepherds and dogs; the cock escapes by telling the fox to cry, "I am yours;" and the fox abuses his mouth.

Such is the story. It is now our task to trace this story from its earliest to its latest appearance in mediæval fable literature, and to discover what are the relations of the versions among themselves.

In order to do this, we must have resort to one or more of the three methods usually allowed for determining such data: i. e., (1) by external evidence; (2) by external-internal evidence; (3) by internal evidence. Of these three, the first will concern us only for verification or refutation;' the second will be of but slight service; while the third is the standard adopted in this paper, because of its far-reaching applications, as well as of the accurate and unimpeachable character of its inferences when deduced with care. The procedure within this class is usually that of the tabulation of motifs; and an exhaustive list of the words and ideas in each fable, with their repetitions, imitations, parallels, or substitutions in other fables, is held to furnish a sufficiently plausible basis for the erection of a genealogical tree.

The justness of the method needs in general no defense. But in practical application, when one has a hundred or more motifs to consider, when each motif has a given number, and each is numerically equal to any other, the bewildering cloud of details tends to obscure the main facts and figures in the story, and we find it difficult to see the wood for the trees-or the underbrush. It has occurred to me, therefore, that it might be well to distin

1There is little enough in this class concentrating on the individual fable-though data for whole collections are more abundant. We will include here general opinions of authorities (see Division VIII).