 |
 |
I thought of this, too, Steve, but the game would probably be Grand Hazard. Hazard has only two dice involved, Grand Hazard, three. Lumiansky and Mills' gloss would make sense in this case, Matthew, because, as I understand the game, the totals of the three dice would be important to winning--6, 12, and 15. Gloria > What about the dice games (hazard?) in the Jean Bodel's "Jeu de St Nicolas"? Teresa Coletti has a good article on it as well. It might shed some light. > > > ________________________________ > > From: REED-L: Records of Early English Drama Discussion on behalf of Matthew Sergi > Sent: Wed 12/2/2009 2:00 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: One about Chester > > > > Dear REED list, > > I've been caught up on a minor point in the current EETS Edition of the > Chester cycle, and thought I'd open it up to the list. > > For the Chester Passion, Mills and Lumiansky gloss the torturers' dice > rolls of "dubletts," "cator-traye," and "synnce" as three twos, three > fours, and three fives, respectively. I've been scanning various medieval > and early modern sources and cannot figure out the source of those glosses > -- all of my sources point to "a pair," "a three and a four," and "five" > for the rolls (even though the rolls were on three dice -- I've found > other cases in which a three-die roll is referred to by a functional pair > within it, regardless of the value of the third die). > > However, my instinct is still to trust Mills and Lumiansky's reading; can > anyone point me in the right direction to find further textual support for > their gloss? > > Gratefully, > > Matthew Sergi > Ph.D. Candidate, English and Medieval Studies > University of California, Berkeley >