Kuhl — Chaucer's Burgesses. 
657 
With the Carpenters, however, it is entirely different. 
Curiously enough there was no guild by that name. There 
are, however, contemporary references to carpenters. For 
instance, there are extant three wills of persons who pur¬ 
sued this rather obscure calling. 1 The City records, how¬ 
ever, reveal nothing which can throw any light, for they ap¬ 
pear to have been “carpenters” and nothing more. 2 Nor is 
it possible to associate them with the joiners who had a 
guild. Old Mother Hubbard, of course, employed the serv¬ 
ices of a joiner where we to-day should consult a carpenter. 
It is probable, therefore, that the “Carpenter” was a later 
and hasty addition. 3 
This list of twelve from which the poet might choose is 
still formidable enough. But, Chaucer tells us that 
“Ech was worthy for to ben an alderman.” 
We are now in a position to ask what guilds in the reign 
of Richard II had representatives in the aldermancy. The 
following occur: Mercers, Grocers, Fishmongers, Drapers, 
Goldsmiths, Vintners, Skinners, Stockfishmongers, Pepperers, 
Ironmongers, Wax-chandlers, Tailors, Armourers, ‘Broder- 
ers’, Woolmongers, and Girdlers. 4 Now, what remains of 
this once formidable list has dwindled down to six,—Fullers, 
Masons, and Haberdashers, Dyers, Weavers, and Tapicers. 
To apply this method of elimination to Chaucer’s selec¬ 
tion may seem like subjecting the poet to a method which he 
never dreamed of. It can hardly appear thus, however, 
when one recalls that he chose no representative from the 
victualling classes, none from the ten companies who op- 
1 Thomas Oxenford (Cal. Wills, Court of Hustings. Ed. R. R. Sharpe, 
London, 1889-1890, II. p. 374), John Wolfey (Ibid., p. 385), John Men- 
deham (Ibid., p. 388). There are scattering but minor references in 
Letter-Books, G, H, and I, to these people, but nothing that will help us. 
On one occasion one of them was associated with a “timbermonger.” 
2 The editor of the Letter-Books, to whom I have written, has not been 
able to give me the desired information. 
3 Professor Frederick Tupper informs me that he has good evidence 
that the “Carpenter” is an afterthought. W. C. Hazlitt (The Livery 
Companies , etc., p. 405) says that Carpenters were contractors on their 
own account. Hazlitt, however, is very unreliable, in this respect like 
Herbert. 
4 Beaven, The Aldermen of the City of London, Part I. London, 1908, 
pp. 392 ff. For a further discussion of “Aldermen” see infra pp. 665ff. The 
Girdlers had their first representative in 1397, however (Ibid., I. p. 351). 
They joined with the Ironmongers in 1399 (Ibid., p. 403). These two had 
probably been in sympathy for some years. 
