<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267657">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Pericles&#039; Pilgrimage]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Assesses the genre, fictional self-consciousness, and religious elements of &quot;Pericles,&quot; suggesting that Chaucer influenced Shakespeare&#039;s decision to include the character Gower onstage throughout the play, an aspect of its literary self-consciousness.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267656">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Spenser and Chaucer : The Knight&#039;s Tale and Artegall&#039;s Response to the Giant with the Scales (Faerie Queene, V, ii, 41-42)]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[The passage in Spenser echoes KnT 1.2987-3074, Theseus&#039;s &quot;Firste Moevere&quot; speech.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267655">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Chaucer&#039;s and Faulkner&#039;s Pear Trees: An Arboreal Discussion]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Chaucer&#039;s MerT may have influenced William Faulkner&#039;s &quot;The Sound and the Fury.&quot; Each work presents the pear tree as a central symbol in a plot focused on greed and deception, one comic and the other tragic. Chaucer&#039;s and Faulkner&#039;s narratives also share common themes: &quot;inappropriate love relationships,&quot; physical and spiritual blindness, and tainted sexuality.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267654">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Gender and Politics in Osbern Bokenham&#039;s Legendary]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Bokenham &quot;strategically utilizes feminine piety&quot; and his own &quot;dullness&quot; to express political dissent in a style that differs from the high rhetorical style of Gower, Chaucer, and Lydgate. He rejects their &quot;classicizing, aureate&quot; tradition, initiating a tradition that affiliates York with the power of women through discourse that the &quot;Yorkists would develop throughout the ensuing decades.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267653">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Leigh Hunt&#039;s &#039;Canterbury Tale.&#039;]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Leigh Hunt&#039;s &quot;The Tapiser&#039;s Tale&quot; amplifies our understanding of Hunt as a nineteenth-century Chaucerian. The poem both imitates Chaucer&#039;s language and verse and utilizes the setting, plot, and key motifs from Charles MacFarlane&#039;s account of Mandeville&#039;s &quot;Travels.&quot; Hunt heightens the pathos of his poem and frames it within CT by focusing on the perspective of a Chaucerian pilgrim, the Tapiser.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267652">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Walter W. Skeat&#039;s Canterbury Tale]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Skeat wrote a &quot;Canterbury tale&quot; in Middle English that admonishes the sin of covetousness, is thoroughly grounded in the Middle Ages, and fits into the scheme of CT. It reveals one of the more &quot;relaxed moments&quot; of this great Chaucer scholar, about whom so few personal records survive.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267651">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[&#039;Grounded, Finely Framed, and Strongly Trussed Up Together&#039; : The &#039;Medieval&#039; Structure of The Faerie Queene]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Spenser calls attention to his sources and models in &quot;The Faerie Queene.&quot; SqT, &quot;Orlando Furioso,&quot; and English medieval romances are specific sources, while narrative collections such as CT, anthologies of romances, or perhaps Malory&#039;s &quot;Morte Darthur&quot; inspired the structure of Spenser&#039;s work.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267650">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Bookburning in Chaucer and Austen]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Identifies WBP as the inspiration for Harriet Byron&#039;s burning of a prayer book in the second act of Jane Austen&#039;s play, &quot;Sir Charles Grandison,&quot; noting in both works the importance of hyperbole, the manipulation of language, and ironic commentary on masculine and literary authority.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267649">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[&#039;What is me?&#039; : Self and Society in the Poetry of Thomas Hoccleve]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Examines the &quot;uncomfortable sense of selfhood&quot; recorded in Hoccleve&#039;s works, a sense of an individual lost within the press of responsibilities. Patterson remarks on Chaucer&#039;s influence and suggests that the older poet was beyond conventional praise for Hoccleve, who regarded Chaucer as &quot;an instance of a particular person&quot; with an &quot;inimitable appearance and manner.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267648">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Un-editing and Non-editions : The Death of Distance, the Notion of Navigation, and New Acts of Editing in the Electronic Medium]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Mentions the electronic edition of Chaucer&#039;s Wife of Bath&#039;s Prologue, edited by Peter Robinson and others.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267647">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Hengwrt Chaucer Digital Facsimile]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Full-color complete facsimile of the Hengwrt manuscript (Hg) and the Merthyr fragment (Me) of CT. Includes transcriptions of Hg and the Ellesmere manuscript by Michael Pidd and Estelle Stubbs, arranged for comparison; transcription of Me by Paul Thomas and Peter Robinson; codicological descriptions of Hg and Me by Daniel W. Mosser; transcription of Hg glosses by Stephen Partridge; and an edition of the Welsh marginalia in Me, with an introduction by Ceridwen Lloyd-Morgan. Also includes a general introduction by Stubbs, a description of the &quot;digital capture&quot; by Gareth Lloyd Hughes and Simon Evans, and two critical articles (for these articles, search for Hengwrt Chaucer Digital Facsimile under Alternative Title). The information is fully searchable in normal language and SGML.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267646">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing Chaucer: John Koch and the Forgotten Tradition]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Argues that John Koch ought to be considered one of the great editors of Chaucer&#039;s works, even though he is largely forgotten by Anglophone Chaucerians who downplay German contributions to the field.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267645">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Canterbury Tales and Cladistics]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Cladistics-the use of large-scale computer analysis of data, including variant readings-promises the possibility of identifying patterns of textual transmission. However, the inevitability of interpretive disagreement in selecting evidence or in assessing conclusions means that present cladistic techniques cannot guarantee objective or incontestable results.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267644">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Caxton&#039;s Chaucer and Lydgate Quartos : Miscellanies from Manuscript to Print]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Considers 11 Caxton quarto editions of English verse (STC 17019, 17009, 17030, 1450, 17008, 17018, 17032, 4851, 5091, 5090, and 3303) that include works by Lydgate and Caxton, assessing the economy of their production and their provenances and comparing them with related manuscripts, Sammelbände, and booklets. Caxton sought to provide inexpensive poetry, and he printed the &quot;component parts&quot; of the first English poetic miscellanies. English manuscript trade and continental models influenced his decisions to produce these quartos.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267643">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Linguistic Problems of Editing]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Görlach surveys a selection of textual cruxes (Old English to Modern) that reflect the importance of linguistic evidence in editorial decisions, including two from Chaucer (&quot;armee,&quot; GP 1.60; &quot;Aueryll,&quot; GP 1.1) and one &quot;quasi-Chaucerian&quot; example (from &quot;Mak &amp; Morris&quot;). Also refers to RvT in surmising whether &quot;Kingis Quair&quot; was dialectically &quot;improved&quot; by a Scots scribe.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267642">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Application of Thought to Textual Criticism in All Modes-With Apologies to A. E. Housman]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Examines variants in WBP 3.115-17 (especially &quot;wight&quot; versus &quot;wright&quot;) to identify flaws in applying cladistic theory to manuscript stemmatics. Cladistic analysis underlies the Canterbury Tales Project.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267641">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Humphrey Newton and Bodleian Library, MS Lat. Misc. C.66]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Discusses the &quot;household book&quot; of Humphrey Newton and its relation to &quot;central literary culture.&quot; MS Lat. Misc. C.66 includes a section of ParsT (10.601-29), a section of KnT (1.3047-56), and a letter imitating Troilus upon seeing Criseyde.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267640">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Framing the Canterbury Pilgrims for the Aristocratic Readers of the Ellesmere Manuscript]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[The Ellesmere miniatures are evidence of the process of text production--the shaping and preparation of the manuscript for aristocratic viewing--and a visual guide to the reading process. The illustrations foster the aristocracy&#039;s sense of superiority and provide evidence for surmising the possible patron of the manuscript.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267639">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Properties of a Stemma: Relating the Manuscripts in Two Texts from The Canterbury Tales]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Scholars continue to reflect on whether particular readings of CT are authorial revisions or scribal editing and on what Chaucer&#039;s plans for the work might have been. Understanding manuscript relationships for any particular tale can help set the limits for such an enquiry. Jones constructs the stemmata that best describe manuscript relationships for GP and WBP.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267638">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Medieval Professional Reader at Work: Evidence from Manuscripts of Chaucer, Langland, Kempe, and Gower]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[An introduction and four essays suggest some methods and approaches for the recovery of medieval reader response from manuscript evidence. For two essays that pertain to Chaucer, search for Medieval Professional Reader at Work under Alternative Title.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267637">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Scribe D and the Marketing of Ricardian Literature]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Codicological analysis of the &quot;Taylor Gower,&quot; produced by scribe D, who also produced two manuscripts of CT. This scribe and his &quot;shadow&quot; scribe (Scribe Delta) indicate possible entrepreneurial activity among English vernacular copyists.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267636">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Chaucer&#039;s Meter and the Myth of the Ellesmere Editor of The Canterbury Tales]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Recent editors have privileged the Hengwrt (Hg) manuscript by attributing metrical and morphosyntactic features of Ellesmere (El) to editorial intervention rather than to scribal error. Mann traces the development of the &quot;myth of the El editor,&quot; especially in Manly-Rickert and Norman Blake, and shows where editorial policy has depended on this myth. Mann argues for attention to stress (rather than syllable counting) in assessing Chaucer&#039;s meter and tabulates instances in which El/Hg variants reflect common patterns of scribal variation. Mann also comments on tale order in Hg and El.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267635">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Worlds Made Flesh: Chronicle Histories and Medieval Manuscript Culture]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Studies the manuscript transmission (&quot;more akin to gene splicing than copying&quot;) of Old English poetry and prose, chronicle histories, and Chaucer. To establish Chaucer as a forerunner of later poetry, printers deliberately modify his works.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267634">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Scribes and Booklets of Trinity College, Cambridge, Manuscripts R.3.19 and R.3.21]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Codicological analysis of the two manuscripts, which include works by Chaucer and Lydgate, Chaucerian apocrypha, and related works. Assessment of the booklets in the manuscripts and the habits of the two scribes (&quot;scribe A&quot; and the &quot;Hammond scribe&quot;) indicates that the works were produced in something like a &quot;publishing business&quot; and perhaps compiled in their present form by John Stow.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267633">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Chaucer&#039;s &#039;Canterbury Tales&#039;]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Surveys the sales performance of various editions of Chaucerian texts, concentrating on recent sales and auctions and on market values. Includes a brief survey of Chaucer&#039;s works and editions and responds to the auction of Caxton&#039;s first edition for 4.6 million pounds.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>