The notes here brought together have grown out of repeated readings of certain texts as printed by Professor Carleton Brown in his useful volume, English Lyrics of the XIIIth Century (Oxford, 1932). The texts discussed below are numbered as in Mr. Brown's edition, and all references not otherwise explained are to that edition. No. 2. The wisie of line 2 is from OE wisian (not wissian); similarly the wiset of 26. 5. The fundie of line 7 is from OE fundian 'wish for, strive after, go forward ' (not from OE fandian); similarly fonden 'go' 22.17. In founde 82.27 we find the same verb used for fandian, a usage met with now and then in OE. No. 3. The were of line 21 is from OE were (not werod) see J. R. C. Hall, ASDict.3 under wer IV. The funde of line 170 is from OE findan, in the sense 'devise, invent, compose.' This form, instead of the regular fand, was occasionally used in OE in the 1st and 3d persons of the preterit indicative; see, e. g., Beowulf 1415 and 1486. No. 4. It is not clear to me why Mr. Brown glosses the wo of line 210 separately from such forms as woh 73. 1, wou 24. 30, etc. The Purch of line 36 means ' tomb ' rather than ' coffin'; OE Purh has the meaning ' sepulchre ' on occasion. No. 5. The biliue of line 28 is from OE belifan, a strong verb of the first class, not from OE belcekfan; similarly the preterit bilof 47. 54. No. 9. In view of OE words like (ge) lome, gek6mlcecing, gelormlic, etc., it seems needless to derive the lomful of line 4 from Old Norse. No. 11. The his of line 2 is not glossed. It seems to be the acc. pl. of the 3d pers. pronoun, and the line means ' one can believe them full well.' No. 18. The reading tuet of line 58 is surely corrupt. Perhaps one should read cuet, i. e. cwep ' declare ' (imperative of OE cwepan). If Mr. Brown is right in connecting tuet with OE tyhtan, then tust or tuct would be a suitable reading. No. 19. In this poem the neuter nom. sg. pat of the definite
Read full abstract
Jan 1, 1952
Thomas Pyles + 1
Open Access
