FOOTNOTES:

[A]I prefer the term ‘Anglo-Norman’ to ‘Anglo-French,’ partly because it is the established and well-understood name for the language in question, and partly for the reasons given in Paul’sGrundriss der germ. Philologie, vol. i. p. 807. It must however be remembered that the term indicates not a dialect popularly spoken and with a true organic development, but a courtly and literary form of speech, confined to the more educated class of Society, and therefore especially liable to be influenced by continental French and to receive an influx of learned words taken directly from Latin. The name implies that in spite of such influences it retained to a great extent its individuality, and that its development was generally on the lines of the Norman speech from which it arose.[B]The references to theBaladesandTraitiéare by stanza, unless otherwise indicated.[C]But the same word in other connexions is a monosyllable, asq’ils lées en soiont28132, and rhymes withmagesté,degré, &c., 27575, 28093, 28199.[D]We have inMir.6115Oseë dist en prophecie, and so tooOseë11018,Judeë20067, andGalileë29239, butGaliléein rhyme withretrové28387.[E]Cp.Romania, xii. 194. I am much indebted to M. Paul Meyer’s notes on theVie de S. Grégoire, as well as to his other writings.[F]See Sturmfels inAnglia, viii. 220, and Behrens,Franz. Studien, v. 84. I take this opportunity of saying that I am indebted both to the former’sAltfranz. Vokalismus im Mittelenglischenand to the latter’sBeiträge zur Geschichte der französischen Sprache in England.[G]Those who quoteeschiue,siue, as from Gower, e.g. Sturmfels, inAnglia, ix, are misled by Ellis.[H]Tanner remarks, ‘est tamen nescio quid in nominibus mysterii et, ut ita dicam, conspiratio, utpote unius ab altero pendentis.’Biblioth.p. 336.[I]A list of poems in which this stanza is used is given inRomania, ix. 231, by M. Gaston Raynaud.[J]Under this head I do not include the termination (-ontor-ent) of the 3 pers. pl. pres. tense, which was apparently to some extent accented, see ll. 1265, 1803, 1820, &c., and in one stanza even bears the rhyme (20294 ff.).[K]Perhaps, however,damewas in these cases really a monosyllable, as apparently inMir.6733, 13514, 16579.[L]It must not be assumed however that the text of the Roxburghe Club edition accurately represents that of the MS. If such variations as autre (forlautre), ii. l. 21, En qui iv. 17, De vii. 6, Nest pas vii. 13, xiv. 7, &c., prendre x. 20, et uns xv. 15, El fait xvi. 18, and so on, are unnoticed in this edition, that is not owing to the negligence of the present editor, but because they are not in fact readings of the MS.[M]For example B gives us the following variations in the first two balades:Trait.i. l. 4 gouernance 6 discret 13 bon 20 et (fora) ii. l. 1. la spirit qui ert 2 Est 4 Qui ertom.dont 5 de (forle) 7 bone.There are more bad mistakes here in two balades than in the whole text of theTraitiéas given by any one of the four best MSS. On the other hand, ‘creatoris’ in the heading of the first balade, and ‘homme’ (for ‘lomme’) in ii. 11, are mistakes of the German editor.[N]MS. Camb. Univ. Add. 3035[O]Owing to the loss of a part of the leaf(f.12)on which the Latin occurs, the text ofll. 9-12and of the first prose quotation which follows is imperfect. It runs thus:. . . . . pullus quo nunquam gracior vllus. . . . regit que tirannica colla subegit. . . ile cepit oleum quo regna recepit. . . ri iuncta stipiti noua stirps redit vncta.. . il proficiet inimicus in eo et filius iniqui. . . non apponet nocere ei.The missing words are supplied from other copies of the same lines, which are found in a somewhat different arrangement in the All Souls’ and Glasgow MSS. of the ‘Vox Clamantis’ (the prose quotations in the latter only).[P]faciatGlasg.facietTrent.

[B]The references to theBaladesandTraitiéare by stanza, unless otherwise indicated.

[C]But the same word in other connexions is a monosyllable, asq’ils lées en soiont28132, and rhymes withmagesté,degré, &c., 27575, 28093, 28199.

[D]We have inMir.6115Oseë dist en prophecie, and so tooOseë11018,Judeë20067, andGalileë29239, butGaliléein rhyme withretrové28387.

[E]Cp.Romania, xii. 194. I am much indebted to M. Paul Meyer’s notes on theVie de S. Grégoire, as well as to his other writings.

[F]See Sturmfels inAnglia, viii. 220, and Behrens,Franz. Studien, v. 84. I take this opportunity of saying that I am indebted both to the former’sAltfranz. Vokalismus im Mittelenglischenand to the latter’sBeiträge zur Geschichte der französischen Sprache in England.

[G]Those who quoteeschiue,siue, as from Gower, e.g. Sturmfels, inAnglia, ix, are misled by Ellis.

[H]Tanner remarks, ‘est tamen nescio quid in nominibus mysterii et, ut ita dicam, conspiratio, utpote unius ab altero pendentis.’Biblioth.p. 336.

[I]A list of poems in which this stanza is used is given inRomania, ix. 231, by M. Gaston Raynaud.

[J]Under this head I do not include the termination (-ontor-ent) of the 3 pers. pl. pres. tense, which was apparently to some extent accented, see ll. 1265, 1803, 1820, &c., and in one stanza even bears the rhyme (20294 ff.).

[K]Perhaps, however,damewas in these cases really a monosyllable, as apparently inMir.6733, 13514, 16579.

[L]It must not be assumed however that the text of the Roxburghe Club edition accurately represents that of the MS. If such variations as autre (forlautre), ii. l. 21, En qui iv. 17, De vii. 6, Nest pas vii. 13, xiv. 7, &c., prendre x. 20, et uns xv. 15, El fait xvi. 18, and so on, are unnoticed in this edition, that is not owing to the negligence of the present editor, but because they are not in fact readings of the MS.

[M]For example B gives us the following variations in the first two balades:Trait.i. l. 4 gouernance 6 discret 13 bon 20 et (fora) ii. l. 1. la spirit qui ert 2 Est 4 Qui ertom.dont 5 de (forle) 7 bone.There are more bad mistakes here in two balades than in the whole text of theTraitiéas given by any one of the four best MSS. On the other hand, ‘creatoris’ in the heading of the first balade, and ‘homme’ (for ‘lomme’) in ii. 11, are mistakes of the German editor.

Trait.i. l. 4 gouernance 6 discret 13 bon 20 et (fora) ii. l. 1. la spirit qui ert 2 Est 4 Qui ertom.dont 5 de (forle) 7 bone.

There are more bad mistakes here in two balades than in the whole text of theTraitiéas given by any one of the four best MSS. On the other hand, ‘creatoris’ in the heading of the first balade, and ‘homme’ (for ‘lomme’) in ii. 11, are mistakes of the German editor.

[N]MS. Camb. Univ. Add. 3035

[O]Owing to the loss of a part of the leaf(f.12)on which the Latin occurs, the text ofll. 9-12and of the first prose quotation which follows is imperfect. It runs thus:. . . . . pullus quo nunquam gracior vllus. . . . regit que tirannica colla subegit. . . ile cepit oleum quo regna recepit. . . ri iuncta stipiti noua stirps redit vncta.. . il proficiet inimicus in eo et filius iniqui. . . non apponet nocere ei.The missing words are supplied from other copies of the same lines, which are found in a somewhat different arrangement in the All Souls’ and Glasgow MSS. of the ‘Vox Clamantis’ (the prose quotations in the latter only).

. . . . . pullus quo nunquam gracior vllus. . . . regit que tirannica colla subegit. . . ile cepit oleum quo regna recepit. . . ri iuncta stipiti noua stirps redit vncta.. . il proficiet inimicus in eo et filius iniqui. . . non apponet nocere ei.

. . . . . pullus quo nunquam gracior vllus

. . . . regit que tirannica colla subegit

. . . ile cepit oleum quo regna recepit

. . . ri iuncta stipiti noua stirps redit vncta.

. . il proficiet inimicus in eo et filius iniqui

. . . non apponet nocere ei.

The missing words are supplied from other copies of the same lines, which are found in a somewhat different arrangement in the All Souls’ and Glasgow MSS. of the ‘Vox Clamantis’ (the prose quotations in the latter only).

[P]faciatGlasg.facietTrent.

Back to Index Next