EMENDATIONS, ETC.

He gretenand gouledenand gouenhem ille, 164.A still more striking peculiarity is thatthe same rule often holdsfor the ending-es. We find it, of course, forming a distinct syllable in plurals; as, limes, 86; and in adverbs, as, liues, 509. But observe such instances as maydnes, 2, prestes, 33, vtlawes, 41, siþes, 213, &c.In the same way, when rapid final syllables such as-el,-er,-ere, &c., are slurred over, it willgenerallybe foundthat a vowel orhfollows them. Examples: litel, 6, woneth, 105, bedels, 266, bodi, 345, deuel, 446, hunger, 449. Compare oueral, 38, 54. There are many other peculiarities which it would take long to enumerate, such as, thatswornis pronouncedsworen, 204; that the final-eis sometimes preserved before a vowel, as indedë am, 167; that the wordneis very frequently not counted, as it were, in the scansion, as in 57, 113, 220, 419, the secondnein l. 547, and in several other places. But it must suffice to state merely, that when the above rules (with allowance of a few exceptions)are carefully observed, it will be found that the metre of Havelok isvery regular, andvaluable on account of its regularity.It would therefore be easy to correct the text in many places by help of an exact analysis of the rhythm. But this, except in a very few places, has not been attempted, because the imperfect, but unique, MS. copy is more instructive as it stands. In l. 19, e.g.witshould bewite; in l. 47,redshould berede; in l. 74,his souleshould beof his soule, &c. The importance of attending to the final-emay be exemplified by the lines—Allë greten swiþë sore, 236;But sonë dedë hirë fetë, 317;þinë cherlës, þinë hinë, 620;Grimës sonës allë þre, 1399;Hisë sistres herë lif, 2395.Mr Ellis writes— “These final examples suggested to me to compose the following German epitaph, which contains just as many finale’s, and which I think no German would find to have anything peculiar in the versification:GRABSCHRIFT.Diese alte reiche FrauHasste jede eitle Schau,Preiste Gottes gute Gabe,Mehrte stets die eig’ne Habe,Liegt hier unbeweint im Grabe.I think Havelok may be well compared with Goethe’s ballad,Es war ein König in Thule,Gar treu bis an das Grab,Dem, sterbend, seine BuhleEinen goldenen Becher gab.Es ging ihm nichts darüber,Er leert’ ihn jeden Schmaus,Die Augen gingen ihm überSo oft er trank daraus.Und als er kam zu sterben,Zählt’ erseine Städt’im Reich,Gönnt’ alles seinem Erben,Den Becher nicht zugleich:—and the end:—Die Augen thäten ihm sinken,Trank nieeinen Tropfen mehr.Theitalicisedtrisyllabic measures are fine. Observe also the elisions of final-ebefore a following vowel (Städt’being very unusual), and the omission of the dative-einim Reich, to rhyme withzugleich.”I have only to add that my special thanks are due to Sir F. Madden for his permission to make use of his valuable notes, glossary, and preface, and for his assistance; as also to Mr Ellis for his notes, which, however, reached me only at the last moment, when much alteration of the proofs was troublesome. There are many things probably which Mr Ellis does not much approve of in this short popular sketch of the metre, in which attention is drawn only to some of theprincipalpoints. In particular, he disapproves of the termslurring over, though I believe that I mean precisely the same thing aa he does, viz. that these light syllables are reallyfully pronounced, and not in any way forcibly suppressed; but that, owing to their being light syllables, and occurring before vowel sounds, the full pronunciation of them does not cause the verse to halt, but merely imparts to it an agreeable vivacity. As I have already said elsewhere46— “A poet’s business is, in fact, to take care that the syllables whichareto be rapidly pronounced are such as easilycanbe so; and that the syllables which are to be heavily accented are naturally those thatoughtto be. If he gives attention to this, it does not much matter whether each foot hastwoorthreesyllablesin it.”Footnotes to IntroductionSkip toEmendations1.In particular, we find there a complete proof, supported by some fifty examples, that,ascan be traced, through the formsase,als,alse,also, to the A.S.eall-swa; a proof, that in the difficult phraselond and lithe, the wordlithe[also speltlede,lude] is equivalent to the Frenchtenement,rente, orfe; and, thirdly, a complete refutation of Mr Singer’s extraordinary notion that the adverbswithemeansa sword!2.In the same way,William of Palernewas prepared by me for the press, subject to his advice; seeWilliam of Palerne, Introduction, p. ii.3.I saynearly, because I have not been able to verifyeveryreference toeverypoem quoted. I have verified and critically examined all the citations from thepoem itself, from Ritson’s Romances, Weber’s Romances, Laȝamon, Beowulf, Chaucer, Langland, and Sir Walter Scott’s edition of Sir Tristrem (3rd edition, 1811).4.To this, the reader is referred for fuller information.5.“The word Breton, which some critics refer to Armorica, is here applied to a story of mere English birth.” Hallam; Lit. of Europe, 6th ed. 1860; vol. i. p. 36. See the whole passage.6.“The Chronicler writes of him, f. 6. ‘Il feu le plus beau bacheleir qevnqes reigna en Engleterre,ceo dit le Bruit, par quoy ly lays ly apelleruntKing Adelstane with gilden kroket, pour ce q’il feu si beaus.’ We have here notice of another of those curious historical poems, the loss of which can never be sufficiently deplored. The termcrocket(derived by Skinner from the Fr.crochet, uncinulus) points out the period of the poem’s composition, since the fashion alluded to of wearing those large rolls of hair so called, only arose at the latter end of Hen. III. reign, and continued through the reign of Edw. I. and part of his successor’s.”7.See below, § 16.8.The poems in MSS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Ff. 5. 48 and Dd. 14. 2 resemble this Chronicle, but do not mention Havelok’s name.9.This proof is rendered unnecessary by the citations from it by Rauf de Boun in 1310, and by the age of our MS. itself.10.Hanelokin Hearne, throughout, but undoubtedlycontra fidemMSS.11.The writing in the earlier portion (concerning Havelok) is hardly later thanA.D.1400.12.Sir F. Madden adds— “collated with another of the same age, MS. Cott. Dom. A. x, and a third, of the 15th century, MS. Harl. 200.” I omit the collations; the words within square brackets are supplied from these other copies.13.I omit the collations with MSS. Harl. 24 and 753. Sir F. Madden proves that this English version was madeA.D.1435, byJohn Maundevile, rector of Burnham Thorp in Norfolk.14.Colbrande is the giant defeated by Guy in the Ballad of “Guy and Colebrande.” SeePercy Folio MS.; ed. Hales and Furnivall, vol. ii. p. 528, whereAuelockemeansAnlaf.15.Quoted in a note in Sir F. Madden’s preface, p. xxiii.16.So then ought Hamlet; but the editor of Saxo Grammaticus says, “in antiquioribus regum Daniæ genealogiis Amlethus non occurrit.” See Saxo Gram. ed. Müller, Havniæ, 1839; end of lib. iii. and beginning of lib. iv.; also the note on p. 132 of the Notæ Uberiores. The idea that Havelock is Amlet is to be found in Grundtvig, North. Myth. 1832, p. 565.17.Havelok [orHanelock, as it is sometimes read] is quite as like Anlaf, whence the blunder noticed in note 1, p. xviii. In the form Hablok, it is not unlikeBlecca, who was a great man inLindeseysoon after the days ofÆthelberhtof Kent; see Saxon Chronicle, An.DCXXVII.18.His account has been printed in theTopographer, V. i. p. 241. sq. 8vo, 1789. We follow, as usual, the MS. itself, p. 1.19.Quoted in Brock’s Biography of Sir H. Havelock, 1858; p. 9.20.Æthelberht of Kent reigned fromA.D.560-616 (56 years).21.For this latter portion of the Preface I am entirely responsible.22.Nicoleis a French inversion of Lincoln. It is not uncommon.23.The northern part of Lincolnshire is calledLindsey.24.Hence the obvious origin of the legend of “Havelok’s stone,” and the local tradition about Grim’s casting down stones from the tower of Grimsby church.25.Possibly Saltfleet, suggests Mr Haigh. Such, at least, is the position required by the circumstances.26.In the Durham MS. it is Tiedfort, i.e. Tetford, not far from Horncastle, in Lincolnshire.27.A name given to the S.E. part of Lincolnshire.28.Here again is an allusion to “Havelok’s stone.”29.Hence, by confusion, the placing of Havelok’s father in the time ofÆlfred.30.Or, as I should prefer to say, earlier than those times. The two kings spoken of in the Lay may have had names somewhat similar to these, which may have been replaced by the more familiar names here mentioned.31.Cf. Lappenberg’s History of England, tr. by Thorpe, vol. i. pp. 145-154.32.See the same statement in Fabyan’s Chronicles, p. 112; ed. Ellis, 1811.33.“Cf. K. Horn, 1005, wherehauerhymes with plawe.” —M. Mr A. J. Ellis would considerslawen,knaue, &c., as assonances— “Do not think of the pronunciation of moderndrawen. Readsla-wen,kna-ue, an assonance.Beþedoesnotrhyme toreden; it is only an assonance.” —Ellis. On the other hand, we find the spellingsrathe,rotheinstead ofredein ll. 1335 and 2817.34.“Qual=quhal, the aspirate being omitted; andquhal=whal.” —Ellis.35.The use ofthfortis not uncommon. In theRomans of Partenay, we havethown,thaken,thouchyng, &c., fortown,taken,touching; see Preface, p. xvi. In the copy of Piers Plowman in MS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Dd l. 17, I have observed several similar examples. Cf. Eng.tea, Ital.tè, Span.té, with Fr.thé, Swed.the, G. Du. Dan.thee.36.“Iseforoa mistake, or may it be compared withpreueforprove, &c.?” —Ellis. I would observe thatgretingis the spelling of thesubstantivein l. 166.37.“Thisfour accentsI consider to be a wrong way of stating the fact. . . The metre consists of four measures, each generally, not always, oftwosyllables, the first oftenonesyllable, the others often ofthreesyllables, and each measure has generally more stress on the last than on any other, but the accents or principal stresses in the verse are usually 2, sometimes 3, perhaps never 4.” —A. J. Ellis. I need hardly add that such a statement is more exact, and that I here merely use the wordaccentin the loose sense it often bears, viz. as denoting the “stress,” more or less heavy, and sometimes imperceptible, which is popularly supposed to belong to the last syllable in a measure. I must request the reader to remember that this present sketch of the metre is very slight and imperfect, and worded in the usual not very correct popular language. For more strict and careful statements the reader is referred to Mr A. J. Ellis’s work on Early English Pronunciation. Until readers have made themselves acquainted with that work, they will readily understand what Iheremean by “accents;” afterwards, they can easily adopt a stricter idea of its meaning.38.“You cannot scan this line in any way. This method of doing it is quite impossible; it is a mere chopping to make a verse like this. The line is corrupt. Omitþat, and you haveOf | a tal’ | ich you | wile telleor better,Of | a tal’ | ich wil|e telle.”Ellis.39.The number is that of thefirstline of the pair.40.“You have omitted the curiousharde, krakede, 567, here; it is only an assonance, not a mistake, I believe.” —Ellis. But seenote to l. 567.41.“Oni, erhymes, see p. 271, last line and following, of my Chap. IV. Theo, adepend on a provincialism, and this applies tosawe,wowe;beþe,rede;knaue,plawe;sawe,hawe; &c.Bouth, oftis a case of assonance,bouthbeingbought, where properly theughis the voiced sound of Scotchquh, and easily passes intof. The assonance is therefore nearly a rhyme.Plattinde, gangandeis probably a scribal error.Eir, toþeris certainly a mistake; readSwanborow, helfled, his sistres fair.”Ellis.We may then perhaps altergangandetoganginde. I do not quite like writing the modern formfairinstead of the old pluralfayrein order to gain a rime toeir. Cf. ll. 1095, 2300, 2538, 2768.42.“Hon, londmay arise from a Danism, or from an English custom at that time of not pronouncingdafterninndfinal; DanishMandand GermanMannare identical.” —Ellis. I prefer to call it Danish; we English, now at least, oftenaddad, as insound, gownd, fromsoun, gown.43.“Johanis almostJonin Chaucer, however written, but l. 177 wants a measure; read—Bi [Jhesu] crist, and bi seint ion.In l. 1720 also the verse is defective; omital, and read—In denemark nis wimman [non]So fayr so sche, biseintJohan,whereseintis a dissyllable; see p. 264 of my Early English Pronunciation.Hey, fri, 1071, is an error; readhy, and see p. 285 of my book. The other instances ofei,aiare all regular, the confusion ofei,aibeing perfect in the thirteenth century.Shame, l. 88, is dative, and would prove nothing, butshamein Orrmin is conclusive. Hence insham’, 56, we have aneomitted; compare p. 323 of my book, and the GermanRuh’.” —Ellis. In other places, the spellingheyeoccurs, rather thanhy: see ll. 719, 987, 1071, 1083, 1289,1685, 2431, 2471, 2544, 2724, 2750, 2945, &c.44.“The instances ofoare all regular, exceptcroud, god, 2338, which is a false rhyme altogether;ou= modernoo.” —Ellis.45.Richebeing bothA.S.and French, has theeeven when indefinite; a riche king, 841; a riche man, 373.46.Preface to Mr Morris’s Genesis and Exodus, p. xxxviii.EMENDATIONS, ETC.This section is shown as printed. The editor’s corrections were variously handled. Minor changes to the primary text are shown in brackets and marked withmouse-hover popups. The more complicated or tentative emendations are given as supplementary footnotes, separatelyoutlined. Additions to the Glossary are marked in the same way. The following paragraph is part of the original text.Someemendations have been made in the text by inserting letters and words within square brackets. A few more may be noticed here.p. 2, l. 47. The MS. hasred; but it should berede.p. 3, l. 66. For the MS. readinghereMr Garnett proposed to readothere, which is clearly right.p. 3, l. 74. Forhis soule(as in the MS.) we should probably readof his soule.p. 3, l. 79. Forwo diden(as in the MS.) we should readwo so dide.p. 6, l. 177.Read— “Bi [ihesu] crist,” &c, to fill up; but this is doubtful; see l. 1112.p. 18, l. 560. Forwith, Mr Garnett proposed to readwilt.p. 20, l.640. Forney(as in MS.) readneye, the adverbial form.p. 21, l. 660. Perhaps there should be a comma afterSlep, making the sense to besleep, son, notsleep soon.p. 23, l. 746. Foralle, Mr Garnett proposed to readshalle.p. 24, l. 784. Perhaps we should, however, readse-weren, and the note on the line (p. 93) may be wrong. SeeWerenin the Glossary.SeeEndnote.p. 32, l. 1037. Forstaredenwe should perhaps readstradden; see the Glossary.p. 33, l. 1080. Forhextewe should rather readhexte[man]; cf. l. 199.p. 38, l. 1233. Mr Garnett suggested thatcloþenmay meanclothes. If so, dele the comma after it.p. 43, l. 1420. Forwoldewe should rather read [he]wolde.p. 46, l. 1687.þarnedis an error of the scribe forþoled; see the Glossary.p. 47, l. 1720. Perhaps we should rather read—is womman[non].p. 47, l. 1733.Biddemust meanoffer, rather thanbid(as in the Glossary); unless it be miswritten forbide= tarry.p. 47, l. 1736. The MS. readingdeledshould bedeyled; cf. l. 2099.p. 76, l. 2670. The MS. readingblinneshould clearly beblunne. A few other suggestions of emendations will be found in the Glossarial Index. See the wordsArwe,Birþe,Felde,Sor,Tauhte,Þenne,Thit,Werewed,Wreken, &c. See also the suggestions in the preface, pp. xxxix, xli, xlvi, xlvii.p. 132, s.v.Loken. The reference to the Ancren Riwle is to MS. Titus D 18, fol. 17; cf. the edition by Morton (Camd. Soc. 1853), p. 56.In the Glossary,Duntenis wrongly placed afterDint.SeeEndnotefor following items.Also,Gretingis wrongly placed beforeGres.Hal, more probably, is shortened fromhalf, liketwelfromtwelue.Shoten, in l. 1838, meansrushed,darted,flew.Teytemay meanlively. My explanation is not generally accepted.Biseoccurs in l. 724.

He gretenand gouledenand gouenhem ille, 164.

A still more striking peculiarity is thatthe same rule often holdsfor the ending-es. We find it, of course, forming a distinct syllable in plurals; as, limes, 86; and in adverbs, as, liues, 509. But observe such instances as maydnes, 2, prestes, 33, vtlawes, 41, siþes, 213, &c.

In the same way, when rapid final syllables such as-el,-er,-ere, &c., are slurred over, it willgenerallybe foundthat a vowel orhfollows them. Examples: litel, 6, woneth, 105, bedels, 266, bodi, 345, deuel, 446, hunger, 449. Compare oueral, 38, 54. There are many other peculiarities which it would take long to enumerate, such as, thatswornis pronouncedsworen, 204; that the final-eis sometimes preserved before a vowel, as indedë am, 167; that the wordneis very frequently not counted, as it were, in the scansion, as in 57, 113, 220, 419, the secondnein l. 547, and in several other places. But it must suffice to state merely, that when the above rules (with allowance of a few exceptions)are carefully observed, it will be found that the metre of Havelok isvery regular, andvaluable on account of its regularity.

It would therefore be easy to correct the text in many places by help of an exact analysis of the rhythm. But this, except in a very few places, has not been attempted, because the imperfect, but unique, MS. copy is more instructive as it stands. In l. 19, e.g.witshould bewite; in l. 47,redshould berede; in l. 74,his souleshould beof his soule, &c. The importance of attending to the final-emay be exemplified by the lines—

Allë greten swiþë sore, 236;But sonë dedë hirë fetë, 317;þinë cherlës, þinë hinë, 620;Grimës sonës allë þre, 1399;Hisë sistres herë lif, 2395.

Allë greten swiþë sore, 236;

But sonë dedë hirë fetë, 317;

þinë cherlës, þinë hinë, 620;

Grimës sonës allë þre, 1399;

Hisë sistres herë lif, 2395.

Mr Ellis writes— “These final examples suggested to me to compose the following German epitaph, which contains just as many finale’s, and which I think no German would find to have anything peculiar in the versification:

Diese alte reiche FrauHasste jede eitle Schau,Preiste Gottes gute Gabe,Mehrte stets die eig’ne Habe,Liegt hier unbeweint im Grabe.

Diese alte reiche Frau

Hasste jede eitle Schau,

Preiste Gottes gute Gabe,

Mehrte stets die eig’ne Habe,

Liegt hier unbeweint im Grabe.

I think Havelok may be well compared with Goethe’s ballad,

Es war ein König in Thule,Gar treu bis an das Grab,Dem, sterbend, seine BuhleEinen goldenen Becher gab.Es ging ihm nichts darüber,Er leert’ ihn jeden Schmaus,Die Augen gingen ihm überSo oft er trank daraus.Und als er kam zu sterben,Zählt’ erseine Städt’im Reich,Gönnt’ alles seinem Erben,Den Becher nicht zugleich:—

Es war ein König in Thule,

Gar treu bis an das Grab,

Dem, sterbend, seine Buhle

Einen goldenen Becher gab.

Es ging ihm nichts darüber,

Er leert’ ihn jeden Schmaus,

Die Augen gingen ihm über

So oft er trank daraus.

Und als er kam zu sterben,

Zählt’ erseine Städt’im Reich,

Gönnt’ alles seinem Erben,

Den Becher nicht zugleich:—

and the end:—

Die Augen thäten ihm sinken,Trank nieeinen Tropfen mehr.

Die Augen thäten ihm sinken,

Trank nieeinen Tropfen mehr.

Theitalicisedtrisyllabic measures are fine. Observe also the elisions of final-ebefore a following vowel (Städt’being very unusual), and the omission of the dative-einim Reich, to rhyme withzugleich.”

I have only to add that my special thanks are due to Sir F. Madden for his permission to make use of his valuable notes, glossary, and preface, and for his assistance; as also to Mr Ellis for his notes, which, however, reached me only at the last moment, when much alteration of the proofs was troublesome. There are many things probably which Mr Ellis does not much approve of in this short popular sketch of the metre, in which attention is drawn only to some of theprincipalpoints. In particular, he disapproves of the termslurring over, though I believe that I mean precisely the same thing aa he does, viz. that these light syllables are reallyfully pronounced, and not in any way forcibly suppressed; but that, owing to their being light syllables, and occurring before vowel sounds, the full pronunciation of them does not cause the verse to halt, but merely imparts to it an agreeable vivacity. As I have already said elsewhere46— “A poet’s business is, in fact, to take care that the syllables whichareto be rapidly pronounced are such as easilycanbe so; and that the syllables which are to be heavily accented are naturally those thatoughtto be. If he gives attention to this, it does not much matter whether each foot hastwoorthreesyllablesin it.”

Skip toEmendations

1.In particular, we find there a complete proof, supported by some fifty examples, that,ascan be traced, through the formsase,als,alse,also, to the A.S.eall-swa; a proof, that in the difficult phraselond and lithe, the wordlithe[also speltlede,lude] is equivalent to the Frenchtenement,rente, orfe; and, thirdly, a complete refutation of Mr Singer’s extraordinary notion that the adverbswithemeansa sword!2.In the same way,William of Palernewas prepared by me for the press, subject to his advice; seeWilliam of Palerne, Introduction, p. ii.3.I saynearly, because I have not been able to verifyeveryreference toeverypoem quoted. I have verified and critically examined all the citations from thepoem itself, from Ritson’s Romances, Weber’s Romances, Laȝamon, Beowulf, Chaucer, Langland, and Sir Walter Scott’s edition of Sir Tristrem (3rd edition, 1811).4.To this, the reader is referred for fuller information.5.“The word Breton, which some critics refer to Armorica, is here applied to a story of mere English birth.” Hallam; Lit. of Europe, 6th ed. 1860; vol. i. p. 36. See the whole passage.6.“The Chronicler writes of him, f. 6. ‘Il feu le plus beau bacheleir qevnqes reigna en Engleterre,ceo dit le Bruit, par quoy ly lays ly apelleruntKing Adelstane with gilden kroket, pour ce q’il feu si beaus.’ We have here notice of another of those curious historical poems, the loss of which can never be sufficiently deplored. The termcrocket(derived by Skinner from the Fr.crochet, uncinulus) points out the period of the poem’s composition, since the fashion alluded to of wearing those large rolls of hair so called, only arose at the latter end of Hen. III. reign, and continued through the reign of Edw. I. and part of his successor’s.”7.See below, § 16.8.The poems in MSS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Ff. 5. 48 and Dd. 14. 2 resemble this Chronicle, but do not mention Havelok’s name.9.This proof is rendered unnecessary by the citations from it by Rauf de Boun in 1310, and by the age of our MS. itself.10.Hanelokin Hearne, throughout, but undoubtedlycontra fidemMSS.11.The writing in the earlier portion (concerning Havelok) is hardly later thanA.D.1400.12.Sir F. Madden adds— “collated with another of the same age, MS. Cott. Dom. A. x, and a third, of the 15th century, MS. Harl. 200.” I omit the collations; the words within square brackets are supplied from these other copies.13.I omit the collations with MSS. Harl. 24 and 753. Sir F. Madden proves that this English version was madeA.D.1435, byJohn Maundevile, rector of Burnham Thorp in Norfolk.14.Colbrande is the giant defeated by Guy in the Ballad of “Guy and Colebrande.” SeePercy Folio MS.; ed. Hales and Furnivall, vol. ii. p. 528, whereAuelockemeansAnlaf.15.Quoted in a note in Sir F. Madden’s preface, p. xxiii.16.So then ought Hamlet; but the editor of Saxo Grammaticus says, “in antiquioribus regum Daniæ genealogiis Amlethus non occurrit.” See Saxo Gram. ed. Müller, Havniæ, 1839; end of lib. iii. and beginning of lib. iv.; also the note on p. 132 of the Notæ Uberiores. The idea that Havelock is Amlet is to be found in Grundtvig, North. Myth. 1832, p. 565.17.Havelok [orHanelock, as it is sometimes read] is quite as like Anlaf, whence the blunder noticed in note 1, p. xviii. In the form Hablok, it is not unlikeBlecca, who was a great man inLindeseysoon after the days ofÆthelberhtof Kent; see Saxon Chronicle, An.DCXXVII.18.His account has been printed in theTopographer, V. i. p. 241. sq. 8vo, 1789. We follow, as usual, the MS. itself, p. 1.19.Quoted in Brock’s Biography of Sir H. Havelock, 1858; p. 9.20.Æthelberht of Kent reigned fromA.D.560-616 (56 years).21.For this latter portion of the Preface I am entirely responsible.22.Nicoleis a French inversion of Lincoln. It is not uncommon.23.The northern part of Lincolnshire is calledLindsey.24.Hence the obvious origin of the legend of “Havelok’s stone,” and the local tradition about Grim’s casting down stones from the tower of Grimsby church.25.Possibly Saltfleet, suggests Mr Haigh. Such, at least, is the position required by the circumstances.26.In the Durham MS. it is Tiedfort, i.e. Tetford, not far from Horncastle, in Lincolnshire.27.A name given to the S.E. part of Lincolnshire.28.Here again is an allusion to “Havelok’s stone.”29.Hence, by confusion, the placing of Havelok’s father in the time ofÆlfred.30.Or, as I should prefer to say, earlier than those times. The two kings spoken of in the Lay may have had names somewhat similar to these, which may have been replaced by the more familiar names here mentioned.31.Cf. Lappenberg’s History of England, tr. by Thorpe, vol. i. pp. 145-154.32.See the same statement in Fabyan’s Chronicles, p. 112; ed. Ellis, 1811.33.“Cf. K. Horn, 1005, wherehauerhymes with plawe.” —M. Mr A. J. Ellis would considerslawen,knaue, &c., as assonances— “Do not think of the pronunciation of moderndrawen. Readsla-wen,kna-ue, an assonance.Beþedoesnotrhyme toreden; it is only an assonance.” —Ellis. On the other hand, we find the spellingsrathe,rotheinstead ofredein ll. 1335 and 2817.34.“Qual=quhal, the aspirate being omitted; andquhal=whal.” —Ellis.35.The use ofthfortis not uncommon. In theRomans of Partenay, we havethown,thaken,thouchyng, &c., fortown,taken,touching; see Preface, p. xvi. In the copy of Piers Plowman in MS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Dd l. 17, I have observed several similar examples. Cf. Eng.tea, Ital.tè, Span.té, with Fr.thé, Swed.the, G. Du. Dan.thee.36.“Iseforoa mistake, or may it be compared withpreueforprove, &c.?” —Ellis. I would observe thatgretingis the spelling of thesubstantivein l. 166.37.“Thisfour accentsI consider to be a wrong way of stating the fact. . . The metre consists of four measures, each generally, not always, oftwosyllables, the first oftenonesyllable, the others often ofthreesyllables, and each measure has generally more stress on the last than on any other, but the accents or principal stresses in the verse are usually 2, sometimes 3, perhaps never 4.” —A. J. Ellis. I need hardly add that such a statement is more exact, and that I here merely use the wordaccentin the loose sense it often bears, viz. as denoting the “stress,” more or less heavy, and sometimes imperceptible, which is popularly supposed to belong to the last syllable in a measure. I must request the reader to remember that this present sketch of the metre is very slight and imperfect, and worded in the usual not very correct popular language. For more strict and careful statements the reader is referred to Mr A. J. Ellis’s work on Early English Pronunciation. Until readers have made themselves acquainted with that work, they will readily understand what Iheremean by “accents;” afterwards, they can easily adopt a stricter idea of its meaning.38.“You cannot scan this line in any way. This method of doing it is quite impossible; it is a mere chopping to make a verse like this. The line is corrupt. Omitþat, and you haveOf | a tal’ | ich you | wile telleor better,Of | a tal’ | ich wil|e telle.”Ellis.39.The number is that of thefirstline of the pair.40.“You have omitted the curiousharde, krakede, 567, here; it is only an assonance, not a mistake, I believe.” —Ellis. But seenote to l. 567.41.“Oni, erhymes, see p. 271, last line and following, of my Chap. IV. Theo, adepend on a provincialism, and this applies tosawe,wowe;beþe,rede;knaue,plawe;sawe,hawe; &c.Bouth, oftis a case of assonance,bouthbeingbought, where properly theughis the voiced sound of Scotchquh, and easily passes intof. The assonance is therefore nearly a rhyme.Plattinde, gangandeis probably a scribal error.Eir, toþeris certainly a mistake; readSwanborow, helfled, his sistres fair.”Ellis.We may then perhaps altergangandetoganginde. I do not quite like writing the modern formfairinstead of the old pluralfayrein order to gain a rime toeir. Cf. ll. 1095, 2300, 2538, 2768.42.“Hon, londmay arise from a Danism, or from an English custom at that time of not pronouncingdafterninndfinal; DanishMandand GermanMannare identical.” —Ellis. I prefer to call it Danish; we English, now at least, oftenaddad, as insound, gownd, fromsoun, gown.43.“Johanis almostJonin Chaucer, however written, but l. 177 wants a measure; read—Bi [Jhesu] crist, and bi seint ion.In l. 1720 also the verse is defective; omital, and read—In denemark nis wimman [non]So fayr so sche, biseintJohan,whereseintis a dissyllable; see p. 264 of my Early English Pronunciation.Hey, fri, 1071, is an error; readhy, and see p. 285 of my book. The other instances ofei,aiare all regular, the confusion ofei,aibeing perfect in the thirteenth century.Shame, l. 88, is dative, and would prove nothing, butshamein Orrmin is conclusive. Hence insham’, 56, we have aneomitted; compare p. 323 of my book, and the GermanRuh’.” —Ellis. In other places, the spellingheyeoccurs, rather thanhy: see ll. 719, 987, 1071, 1083, 1289,1685, 2431, 2471, 2544, 2724, 2750, 2945, &c.44.“The instances ofoare all regular, exceptcroud, god, 2338, which is a false rhyme altogether;ou= modernoo.” —Ellis.45.Richebeing bothA.S.and French, has theeeven when indefinite; a riche king, 841; a riche man, 373.46.Preface to Mr Morris’s Genesis and Exodus, p. xxxviii.

2.In the same way,William of Palernewas prepared by me for the press, subject to his advice; seeWilliam of Palerne, Introduction, p. ii.

3.I saynearly, because I have not been able to verifyeveryreference toeverypoem quoted. I have verified and critically examined all the citations from thepoem itself, from Ritson’s Romances, Weber’s Romances, Laȝamon, Beowulf, Chaucer, Langland, and Sir Walter Scott’s edition of Sir Tristrem (3rd edition, 1811).

4.To this, the reader is referred for fuller information.

5.“The word Breton, which some critics refer to Armorica, is here applied to a story of mere English birth.” Hallam; Lit. of Europe, 6th ed. 1860; vol. i. p. 36. See the whole passage.

6.“The Chronicler writes of him, f. 6. ‘Il feu le plus beau bacheleir qevnqes reigna en Engleterre,ceo dit le Bruit, par quoy ly lays ly apelleruntKing Adelstane with gilden kroket, pour ce q’il feu si beaus.’ We have here notice of another of those curious historical poems, the loss of which can never be sufficiently deplored. The termcrocket(derived by Skinner from the Fr.crochet, uncinulus) points out the period of the poem’s composition, since the fashion alluded to of wearing those large rolls of hair so called, only arose at the latter end of Hen. III. reign, and continued through the reign of Edw. I. and part of his successor’s.”

7.See below, § 16.

8.The poems in MSS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Ff. 5. 48 and Dd. 14. 2 resemble this Chronicle, but do not mention Havelok’s name.

9.This proof is rendered unnecessary by the citations from it by Rauf de Boun in 1310, and by the age of our MS. itself.

10.Hanelokin Hearne, throughout, but undoubtedlycontra fidemMSS.

11.The writing in the earlier portion (concerning Havelok) is hardly later thanA.D.1400.

12.Sir F. Madden adds— “collated with another of the same age, MS. Cott. Dom. A. x, and a third, of the 15th century, MS. Harl. 200.” I omit the collations; the words within square brackets are supplied from these other copies.

13.I omit the collations with MSS. Harl. 24 and 753. Sir F. Madden proves that this English version was madeA.D.1435, byJohn Maundevile, rector of Burnham Thorp in Norfolk.

14.Colbrande is the giant defeated by Guy in the Ballad of “Guy and Colebrande.” SeePercy Folio MS.; ed. Hales and Furnivall, vol. ii. p. 528, whereAuelockemeansAnlaf.

15.Quoted in a note in Sir F. Madden’s preface, p. xxiii.

16.So then ought Hamlet; but the editor of Saxo Grammaticus says, “in antiquioribus regum Daniæ genealogiis Amlethus non occurrit.” See Saxo Gram. ed. Müller, Havniæ, 1839; end of lib. iii. and beginning of lib. iv.; also the note on p. 132 of the Notæ Uberiores. The idea that Havelock is Amlet is to be found in Grundtvig, North. Myth. 1832, p. 565.

17.Havelok [orHanelock, as it is sometimes read] is quite as like Anlaf, whence the blunder noticed in note 1, p. xviii. In the form Hablok, it is not unlikeBlecca, who was a great man inLindeseysoon after the days ofÆthelberhtof Kent; see Saxon Chronicle, An.DCXXVII.

18.His account has been printed in theTopographer, V. i. p. 241. sq. 8vo, 1789. We follow, as usual, the MS. itself, p. 1.

19.Quoted in Brock’s Biography of Sir H. Havelock, 1858; p. 9.

20.Æthelberht of Kent reigned fromA.D.560-616 (56 years).

21.For this latter portion of the Preface I am entirely responsible.

22.Nicoleis a French inversion of Lincoln. It is not uncommon.

23.The northern part of Lincolnshire is calledLindsey.

24.Hence the obvious origin of the legend of “Havelok’s stone,” and the local tradition about Grim’s casting down stones from the tower of Grimsby church.

25.Possibly Saltfleet, suggests Mr Haigh. Such, at least, is the position required by the circumstances.

26.In the Durham MS. it is Tiedfort, i.e. Tetford, not far from Horncastle, in Lincolnshire.

27.A name given to the S.E. part of Lincolnshire.

28.Here again is an allusion to “Havelok’s stone.”

29.Hence, by confusion, the placing of Havelok’s father in the time ofÆlfred.

30.Or, as I should prefer to say, earlier than those times. The two kings spoken of in the Lay may have had names somewhat similar to these, which may have been replaced by the more familiar names here mentioned.

31.Cf. Lappenberg’s History of England, tr. by Thorpe, vol. i. pp. 145-154.

32.See the same statement in Fabyan’s Chronicles, p. 112; ed. Ellis, 1811.

33.“Cf. K. Horn, 1005, wherehauerhymes with plawe.” —M. Mr A. J. Ellis would considerslawen,knaue, &c., as assonances— “Do not think of the pronunciation of moderndrawen. Readsla-wen,kna-ue, an assonance.Beþedoesnotrhyme toreden; it is only an assonance.” —Ellis. On the other hand, we find the spellingsrathe,rotheinstead ofredein ll. 1335 and 2817.

34.“Qual=quhal, the aspirate being omitted; andquhal=whal.” —Ellis.

35.The use ofthfortis not uncommon. In theRomans of Partenay, we havethown,thaken,thouchyng, &c., fortown,taken,touching; see Preface, p. xvi. In the copy of Piers Plowman in MS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Dd l. 17, I have observed several similar examples. Cf. Eng.tea, Ital.tè, Span.té, with Fr.thé, Swed.the, G. Du. Dan.thee.

36.“Iseforoa mistake, or may it be compared withpreueforprove, &c.?” —Ellis. I would observe thatgretingis the spelling of thesubstantivein l. 166.

37.“Thisfour accentsI consider to be a wrong way of stating the fact. . . The metre consists of four measures, each generally, not always, oftwosyllables, the first oftenonesyllable, the others often ofthreesyllables, and each measure has generally more stress on the last than on any other, but the accents or principal stresses in the verse are usually 2, sometimes 3, perhaps never 4.” —A. J. Ellis. I need hardly add that such a statement is more exact, and that I here merely use the wordaccentin the loose sense it often bears, viz. as denoting the “stress,” more or less heavy, and sometimes imperceptible, which is popularly supposed to belong to the last syllable in a measure. I must request the reader to remember that this present sketch of the metre is very slight and imperfect, and worded in the usual not very correct popular language. For more strict and careful statements the reader is referred to Mr A. J. Ellis’s work on Early English Pronunciation. Until readers have made themselves acquainted with that work, they will readily understand what Iheremean by “accents;” afterwards, they can easily adopt a stricter idea of its meaning.

38.“You cannot scan this line in any way. This method of doing it is quite impossible; it is a mere chopping to make a verse like this. The line is corrupt. Omitþat, and you have

Of | a tal’ | ich you | wile telle

or better,

Of | a tal’ | ich wil|e telle.”

Ellis.

39.The number is that of thefirstline of the pair.

40.“You have omitted the curiousharde, krakede, 567, here; it is only an assonance, not a mistake, I believe.” —Ellis. But seenote to l. 567.

41.“Oni, erhymes, see p. 271, last line and following, of my Chap. IV. Theo, adepend on a provincialism, and this applies tosawe,wowe;beþe,rede;knaue,plawe;sawe,hawe; &c.Bouth, oftis a case of assonance,bouthbeingbought, where properly theughis the voiced sound of Scotchquh, and easily passes intof. The assonance is therefore nearly a rhyme.Plattinde, gangandeis probably a scribal error.Eir, toþeris certainly a mistake; read

Swanborow, helfled, his sistres fair.”

Ellis.

We may then perhaps altergangandetoganginde. I do not quite like writing the modern formfairinstead of the old pluralfayrein order to gain a rime toeir. Cf. ll. 1095, 2300, 2538, 2768.

42.“Hon, londmay arise from a Danism, or from an English custom at that time of not pronouncingdafterninndfinal; DanishMandand GermanMannare identical.” —Ellis. I prefer to call it Danish; we English, now at least, oftenaddad, as insound, gownd, fromsoun, gown.

43.“Johanis almostJonin Chaucer, however written, but l. 177 wants a measure; read—

Bi [Jhesu] crist, and bi seint ion.

In l. 1720 also the verse is defective; omital, and read—

In denemark nis wimman [non]So fayr so sche, biseintJohan,

In denemark nis wimman [non]

So fayr so sche, biseintJohan,

whereseintis a dissyllable; see p. 264 of my Early English Pronunciation.Hey, fri, 1071, is an error; readhy, and see p. 285 of my book. The other instances ofei,aiare all regular, the confusion ofei,aibeing perfect in the thirteenth century.Shame, l. 88, is dative, and would prove nothing, butshamein Orrmin is conclusive. Hence insham’, 56, we have aneomitted; compare p. 323 of my book, and the GermanRuh’.” —Ellis. In other places, the spellingheyeoccurs, rather thanhy: see ll. 719, 987, 1071, 1083, 1289,1685, 2431, 2471, 2544, 2724, 2750, 2945, &c.

44.“The instances ofoare all regular, exceptcroud, god, 2338, which is a false rhyme altogether;ou= modernoo.” —Ellis.

45.Richebeing bothA.S.and French, has theeeven when indefinite; a riche king, 841; a riche man, 373.

46.Preface to Mr Morris’s Genesis and Exodus, p. xxxviii.

This section is shown as printed. The editor’s corrections were variously handled. Minor changes to the primary text are shown in brackets and marked withmouse-hover popups. The more complicated or tentative emendations are given as supplementary footnotes, separatelyoutlined. Additions to the Glossary are marked in the same way. The following paragraph is part of the original text.

Someemendations have been made in the text by inserting letters and words within square brackets. A few more may be noticed here.

p. 2, l. 47. The MS. hasred; but it should berede.

p. 3, l. 66. For the MS. readinghereMr Garnett proposed to readothere, which is clearly right.

p. 3, l. 74. Forhis soule(as in the MS.) we should probably readof his soule.

p. 3, l. 79. Forwo diden(as in the MS.) we should readwo so dide.

p. 6, l. 177.Read— “Bi [ihesu] crist,” &c, to fill up; but this is doubtful; see l. 1112.

p. 18, l. 560. Forwith, Mr Garnett proposed to readwilt.

p. 20, l.640. Forney(as in MS.) readneye, the adverbial form.

p. 21, l. 660. Perhaps there should be a comma afterSlep, making the sense to besleep, son, notsleep soon.

p. 23, l. 746. Foralle, Mr Garnett proposed to readshalle.

p. 24, l. 784. Perhaps we should, however, readse-weren, and the note on the line (p. 93) may be wrong. SeeWerenin the Glossary.SeeEndnote.

p. 32, l. 1037. Forstaredenwe should perhaps readstradden; see the Glossary.

p. 33, l. 1080. Forhextewe should rather readhexte[man]; cf. l. 199.

p. 38, l. 1233. Mr Garnett suggested thatcloþenmay meanclothes. If so, dele the comma after it.

p. 43, l. 1420. Forwoldewe should rather read [he]wolde.

p. 46, l. 1687.þarnedis an error of the scribe forþoled; see the Glossary.

p. 47, l. 1720. Perhaps we should rather read—is womman[non].

p. 47, l. 1733.Biddemust meanoffer, rather thanbid(as in the Glossary); unless it be miswritten forbide= tarry.

p. 47, l. 1736. The MS. readingdeledshould bedeyled; cf. l. 2099.

p. 76, l. 2670. The MS. readingblinneshould clearly beblunne. A few other suggestions of emendations will be found in the Glossarial Index. See the wordsArwe,Birþe,Felde,Sor,Tauhte,Þenne,Thit,Werewed,Wreken, &c. See also the suggestions in the preface, pp. xxxix, xli, xlvi, xlvii.

p. 132, s.v.Loken. The reference to the Ancren Riwle is to MS. Titus D 18, fol. 17; cf. the edition by Morton (Camd. Soc. 1853), p. 56.

In the Glossary,Duntenis wrongly placed afterDint.

SeeEndnotefor following items.

Also,Gretingis wrongly placed beforeGres.

Hal, more probably, is shortened fromhalf, liketwelfromtwelue.

Shoten, in l. 1838, meansrushed,darted,flew.

Teytemay meanlively. My explanation is not generally accepted.

Biseoccurs in l. 724.

Back to Index Next