Why has it seemed necessary to assume some other source than the Renart that we know for Chaucer's version of the Cock and Fox story? The answer is simple. Chaucer does not slavishly follow Branch II. (Of course that is the last thing that a student of Chaucer should expect him to do, but we mention that only by the way, with no intention of insisting upon it here.) He makes changes in the story. Some of these changes bear a certain resemblance to variations from the Renart story that appear in the Reinhart Fuchs. Hence there must have been an earlier version to account for this agreement between Chaucer and the Reinhart Fuchs against the Renart version. ... But this solution is not imposed upon us if we once refuse to admit the application of the consecrated method to Chaucer and Heinrich der Glîchezâre. There is still the alternative that Chaucer and Heinrich, both working as independent men of letters with the same material - the existing Branch II - reached results that have a remote resemblance at certain points. - [Author]

Language: English

DOI: 10.1086/387102