and we may probably have to wait for a considerable time, before a properly qualified investigator devotes himself to the task. May this last anticipation prove incorrect! 1

3. MISCELLANIES OF THE XIII TH CENTURY FROM RELIQUIE ANTIQUÆ, EARLY ENGLISH POEMS, AND POLITICAL SONGS, WITH AN EXAMINATION OF THE NORMAN FRENCH EI, AI.

Under this heading some brief notices will be given of short rhymed pieces belonging to the XIIth or the earliest part of the XIV th century, contained in the Reliquiæ Antique, Early English Poems, and Political Songs.*

3

5

6

The most considerable poem in the Reliquiæ Antiquæ is the BESTIARY, i, 208; it is only partly in rhyme, and the rhymes are not unfrequently broken by non-rhyming couplets, or fall into mere assonances, so that no reliance is to be placed upon them for determining the pronunciation. Thus we cannot be sure that 8, which is used throughout the poem for sh, was pronounced (s), from the rhyme fis is, p. 220, v. 499, 529, for between them we have: biswiken bigripen, v. 515. Other parts are alliterative and therefore of no assistance, but they burst out occasionally in rhyme for a few lines. This poem uses u consistently for (uu), and ou, ow for (oou, ou) as in: out p. 223, v. 645 aught, nout p. 209, v. 18: nought, occasionally written nogt, p. 212, v. 187, sowles p. 211, V. 118, soule p. 213, v. 206, knowe p. 211, v. 121, knov p. 212, v. 165. There seems to be no use of u for i or e throughout the poem, thus we have: mirie p. 221, v. 570, pit p. 226, v. 761; this consorts properly with the consistent use of u for (uu). Similarly

1 Diez, Grammatik der romanischen Sprachen, 2nd ed. 1856, vol. 1, pp. 404-454, investigates the meaning of the old French letters, but leaves much to be desired. The commencement of an investigation into the values of Norman ei, ai, together with a few other casual remarks on old and modern

Norman pronunciation, will be found below, p. 453. See also the extracts from Dr. Rapp, below, p. 509, n. 1.

2 Reliquiæ Antiquæ. Scraps from Ancient Manuscripts illustrating chiefly Early English Literature and the English Languge. Edited by Thomas Wright and James Orchard Halliwell, 2 vols. 8vo. pp. 327 and 287, 18411843. The text has generally been carefully transcribed and printed, but some mistakes occur, as pointed out p. 429, note 1, p. 441, note 1, and p. 445, note 2.

3 Early English Poems and Lives of Saints (with those of the Wicked Birds Pilate and Judas). Copied and edited from manuscripts in the Library of the

=

=

British Museum by F. J. Furnivall, 1862, for the Philological Society.

4 The Political Songs of England from the reign of John to that of Edward II, edited and translated by Thomas Wright, Esq. London, 1839. 4to. pp. xviii, 408. Camden Society.

The text of this was especially read by the MS. Arundel 292, fo. 4. for the Rel. Ant. It has been reprinted with extensive notes, and a few conjectural emendations, in: Altenglische.Sprachproben nebst einem Wörterbuche, unter Mitwirkung von Karl Goldbeck herausgegeben von Eduard Mätzner. Berlin, 1867. Large 8vo. vol. i, p. 57.

• The following parts are in rhyme, the pages refer to the Rel. Ant., the number of the lines are taken from Goldbeck and Mätzner: p. 209, v. 4045; p. 210, v. 54-87 in couplets, v. 89119 alternate rhyme, p. 215, v. 307 to p. 217, v. 384, with a few short interruptions, p. 218, v. 424 to p. 219, v. 455, p. 220, v. 499 to p. 221, v. 554, p. 222, v. 588, to p. 224, v. 694, p. 225, v. 733 to p. 227 v. 802 and last.

sun, p. 209, p. 210

we rarely find o for either (uu) or (u), thus: sunne = v. 19, cunne p. 210, v. 69, come p. 209, v. 35, but: cume v. 67, sumer p. 214, v. 236, hule p. 214, v. 253, but hole p. 217 v. 394, p. 226 v. 769, and the rhyme: cul ful p. 225 v. 741 cowl full,' may be considered as establishing the value of long u as (uu) in opposition to the modern opinion that it is (ǝu) or (ou).

=

=

The spelling is generally good and consistent, but it presents certain peculiarities. Thus & is always employed both for 8 and sh, and the rhyme, as already pointed out, ought to determine that (s) was the only sound. Also g is used throughout, generally as pure 5 with the guttural effect after vowels, as in: sigte p. 211, v. 107, rigten p. 211, v. 117, drigtin p. 211, v. 119, ðurg p. 211, v. 119, inog p. 211, v. 142. Sometimes the resolution into (J) or (i) seems indicated by a prefixed i, as: leige p. 216, v. 359, maig p. 210, v. 80, p. 220, v. 516, p. 221, v. 548, but the g is then most generally omitted as in mai p. 211, v. 129, mainles : without power, main force? p. 211, v. 128, dai p. 210, v. 63, but dei p. 215, v. 305, meiden p. 209, v. 37, shewing that ai, ei were confused. Initially the g was simply (J) to judge by: ging young, p. 213, v. 214, you p. 244, v. 700, ge she p. 214, v. 243, but it have may been (gh). After i it disappears altogether as: sti p. 213, v. 198. The aspirate h is treated very irregularly, being sometimes startlingly inserted, as hac for ac p. 226, v. 792, and frequently omitted. After w it generally disappears, as: wit, wel= white, wheel, p. 225, v. 737. The form wu for whu hu how (suprà p. 429, note 1,) is frequent, as p. 209, v. 36 and v. 55, but: hu p. 210, v. 56, in the next line. The pronunciation of ch seems intended for (tsh), and such apparent rhymes as: riche ilike rich alike p. 222, v. 604, must be considered as assonances, unless we suppose -like to be an orthographical error for -liche. The use of is general, but we have bicumeth p. 210, v. 91, unless it be a misprint. After s, t, d this becomes t, as in Ormin, the instances are collected by Mätzner at v. 22.

gu

=

=

=

=

oi

=

(oi).

The diphthongs ai, ei appear to be (ai) by the cases already cited. Forbroiden p. 211, v. 124, seems to stand for forbrogden and should imply therefore oi (oi), but it is uncertain, and similar or diphthongs are unknown, so that we cannot infer generally oi In: newe p. 225, v. 724, spewed p. 211, v. 139, ewes p. 212, v. 183, reufulike p 223, v. 652, we can hardly take eu for anything but (eu). In taunede p. 226, v. 767, middle high German zounen to shew, (au) seems to be implied.

1 Wor so he wuned dis panter, he feded him al mid oder der, of do de he wile he nimed de cul and fet him wel til he is ful. =Whereso he dwelleth, this panther, he feedeth him all with other deer (beasts), of those that he wil, he taketh the cowl (skin ?) and feedeth him wel til he is full. This is Mätzner's interpretation of cul. The Latin has only:

The ags.

diversis pastus venatibus.
cufle (Elf. gl. 20), cugle (ib.), cuhle,
cowl is remarkable for the early in-
terchange of (f, gh) which has not
descended. If cul is to be thus inter-
preted, it has lost a final e. But is not
rather cul the French word meaning
rump, the prime piece?

2 The handwriting of the MS. is particularly beautiful, large, and careful.

=

On the whole this poem, though presenting some peculiarities, fully confirms the conclusions derived from the two preceding old poems. In none of the others does the orthography seem so trustworthy. The FAMILY PRAYER, PATERNOSTER, etc., vol. i, p. 22, mixes assonances with its rhymes freely, as: lif siche, bunden wndes; kingdom don; wndis bunde. Of these lif siche sickness, is useful in establishing the value of the long i as (ii) or (ii). The u is consistently used as (uu), and ou in troue as (oou), once erroneous spelled true, but au is also used in sauk, which, if correct, is an early and quite unusual transformation of suk. The rhyme to this word: bysuak seems to imply some error in the MS., which is here correctly transcribed. Another unusual form is: leyse for lese, and fleyes for flesh, compare suprà p. 265, and infrà p. 473, n. 4. Although Marie occurs fully in: Heil, Marie, ful of grace! (Hail Marii e ful of graa se!) it is abbreviated to Mari, in Moder of milce,1 and maidin Mari, Help us at ure hending, for þi merci.

=

(Moo'der of mils, and maidin Marii', Help us at uur end-iq for dhii mersii⚫.)

No doubt this was a very ancient occasional abbreviation of a name so common on the lips of all worshippers: thus in Germany (Maarii) is fully as common as (Marii'e) in addressing persons of that name. See p. 446, Ex. 3. The aspirate comes in curiously in: hart art, husus, as well as house, hending = ending, herdepe earthe, hure = our. The guttural is evidently expressed by ch in: pich, halmichtende, licht, richt, which is very unusual.

=

=

2

=

The CREED and PATERNOSTER, vol. i, p. 57, are not in the pure XII th century orthography. We have indeed: ure, wiputen, but: Pounce (written Punce Pontius, in the last example), ous, foule. This shews a period of transition, which will be especially noticed in Havelok, infrà p. 471, occasioned by the growing use of u as (yy) or (ii, i, e), compare in the Creed: y-buriid, and in the Paternoster: als we forgivet uch opir man. Other peculiarities here are: sshipper schipper, ags. scyppan, create; and: fleiss = fleisch, flesh; steich steg, ascended. The rhymes in the Paternoster are correct, except: don man.

=

Another CREED, PATERNOSTER, Ave, etc., are given in vol. i, p. 234, in which the long is perfectly preserved for (uu), and: biriedd, iche, are used. Pontius appears as Ponce, which compared with the first Punce, shews the use of o for short (u). The Paternoster is chiefly in assonances, and we cannot feel sure that: deadd sofastheedd, in the next prayer, is a rhyme or an assonance, that is, whether the first word is (deed) or (deeth), or (deead). The last little moral has some assonances :

If man him biðocte
Inderlike and ofte
Wu arde is te fore

Fro bedde te flore,

1 This is the MS. reading, the printed text has milte, ags. mildse, see suprà p. 429, note 1.

2 Imperative of peon to prosper,

(If man -im bithokh⚫te,
In'erliik and ofte,
Huu Hard is te foo're
Fro bed'e te floo⚫re,

compare peagh in a sermon of the XIII th century, from MS. Trin. Coll. Cam. B. 14, 52, in Rel. Ant. i, 129, 1. 2 and 14.

Wu reuful is te flitte

Fro flore te pitte,
Fro pitte to pine
dat neure sal fine
I wene non sinne

Sulde his herte winnen.

Huu reu ful is te flite
Fro floo're te pite,
Fro pit e te piine,
Dhat never shal fii'ne,
Ii wee'ne noon sin'e
Shuuld -is Hert win⚫en.)

But we might suppose that (bithof'te) was already occasionally pronounced, as in the West of England (suprà p. 212). The French fine, finir, end, establishes the pronunciation of pine. Fore for fare is a North-countryism, and te for the usual to, seems to indicate an indistinct utterance, perhaps (te). I have ventured to pronounce : sal, sulde, with (sh), but I do not feel quite certain, for reasons named above, p. 440.

Immediately preceding this moral is the following in which: I ne, occurs in Mr. Wright's text, but: íne, in one word, occurs in the MS, just as in the old high German quoted by Graff, (suprà p. 292, n. 2), and clearly shewing the (ine) or (iine) pronunciation. Wanne I denke dinges Ore, Ne mai hi neure blide ben; de ton is dat I sal awei, de toder is ine wot wilk dei de dridde is mi moste kare, Ine wot wider I sal faren.

(Whan i theqke thiques three,
Ne mai i never bliidh'e bee;
Dhet-oon is dhat i shal awai',
Dhet-oodh'r is in'e wot whilk dai,
Dhe thrid e, is mi most'e kaa're,
In'e wot whidh er i shal faa're.)

In this pronunciation I have taken some necessary liberties with the text, as the omission of an Infinitive n for the rhyme, rectification of the aspirate, w for wh, d for X, etc.

The three first Paternosters, Aves, and Credos, are here given for comparison with those of Dan Michel, suprà p. 413. They have been read with the original MSS.,' and are printed accordingly, with the exception of capitals, punctuation, undotted 1, and long f. Titles, where wanting, are added for convenience. The pronunciation is adapted to a slightly amended text, as the manuscripts are often very faulty, but the different provincial characters are not disturbed. The whole writing and versification is very rude and uncouth.

Amen.

Harl. MS. 3724, fo. 44. Rel. Ant. 1, 57. Camden's Remaines, p. 24. Lyttelton's

History, 4, 130.