Note 1 — PREFACE.

In particular, we find there a complete proof, supported by some fifty examples, that, as can be traced, through the forms ase, als, alse, also, to the A.S. eall-swa; a proof, that in the difficult phrase lond and lithe, the word lithe [also spelt lede, lude] is equivalent to the French tenement, rente, or fe; and, thirdly, a complete refutation of Mr Singer’s extraordinary notion that the adverb swithe means a sword!

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

3. I say nearly, because I have not been able to verify every reference to every poem quoted. I have verified and critically examined all the citations from the poem 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 qe vnqes reigna en Engleterre, ceo dit le Bruit, par quoy ly lays ly apellerunt King 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 term crocket (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. Hanelok in Hearne, throughout, but undoubtedly contra fidem MSS.

11. The writing in the earlier portion (concerning Havelok) is hardly later than A.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 made A.D. 1435, by John Maundevile, rector of Burnham Thorp in Norfolk.

14. Colbrande is the giant defeated by Guy in the Ballad of “Guy and Colebrande.” See Percy Folio MS.; ed. Hales and Furnivall, vol. ii. p. 528, where Auelocke means Anlaf.

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 [or Hanelock, 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 unlike Blecca, who was a great man in Lindesey soon after the days of Æthelberht of Kent; see Saxon Chronicle, An. DCXXVII.

18. His account has been printed in the Topographer, 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 from A.D. 560-616 (56 years).

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

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

23. The northern part of Lincolnshire is called Lindsey.

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 of Ælfred.

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, where haue rhymes with plawe.” —M. Mr A. J. Ellis would consider slawen, knaue, &c., as assonances— “Do not think of the pronunciation of modern drawen. Read sla-wen, kna-ue, an assonance. Beþe does not rhyme to reden; it is only an assonance.” —Ellis. On the other hand, we find the spellings rathe, rothe instead of rede in ll. 1335 and 2817.

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

35. The use of th for t is not uncommon. In the Romans of Partenay, we have thown, thaken, thouchyng, &c., for town, 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. “Is e for o a mistake, or may it be compared with preue for prove, &c.?” —Ellis. I would observe that greting is the spelling of the substantive in l. 166.

37. “This four accents I consider to be a wrong way of stating the fact. . . The metre consists of four measures, each generally, not always, of two syllables, the first often one syllable, the others often of three syllables, 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 word accent in 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 I here mean 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. Omit þat, and you have

or better,

Ellis.

39. The number is that of the first line of the pair.

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

41. “On i, e rhymes, see p. 271, last line and following, of my Chap. IV. The o, a depend on a provincialism, and this applies to sawe, wowe; beþe, rede; knaue, plawe; sawe, hawe; &c. Bouth, oft is a case of assonance, bouth being bought, where properly the ugh is the voiced sound of Scotch quh, and easily passes into f. The assonance is therefore nearly a rhyme. Plattinde, gangande is probably a scribal error. Eir, toþer is certainly a mistake; read

Ellis.

We may then perhaps alter gangande to ganginde. I do not quite like writing the modern form fair instead of the old plural fayre in order to gain a rime to eir. Cf. ll. 1095, 2300, 2538, 2768.

42. “Hon, lond may arise from a Danism, or from an English custom at that time of not pronouncing d after n in nd final; Danish Mand and German Mann are identical.” —Ellis. I prefer to call it Danish; we English, now at least, often add a d, as in sound, gownd, from soun, gown.

43. “Johan is almost Jon in Chaucer, however written, but l. 177 wants a measure; read—

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

where seint is a dissyllable; see p. 264 of my Early English Pronunciation. Hey, fri, 1071, is an error; read hy, and see p. 285 of my book. The other instances of ei, ai are all regular, the confusion of ei, ai being perfect in the thirteenth century. Shame, l. 88, is dative, and would prove nothing, but shame in Orrmin is conclusive. Hence in sham’, 56, we have an e omitted; compare p. 323 of my book, and the German Ruh’.” —Ellis. In other places, the spelling heye occurs, rather than hy: see ll. 719, 987, 1071, 1083, 1289, 1685, 2431, 2471, 2544, 2724, 2750, 2945, &c.

44. “The instances of o are all regular, except croud, god, 2338, which is a false rhyme altogether; ou = modern oo.” —Ellis.

45. Riche being both A.S. and French, has the e even when indefinite; a riche king, 841; a riche man, 373.

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