Early English Alliterative Poems 5

Early English Alliterative Poems 5

Inasmuch as the poems in the present volume exhibit the systematic use

of these forms, we cannot but believe that they were originally composed

in one of those counties where these verbal inflexions were well known

and extensively used. We have to choose between several localities, but

if we assign the poems to Lancashire we are enabled to account for the

large number of Norse terms employed. It is true that the ancient

examples of the Lancashire dialect contained in Mr. Robson’s Metrical

Romances,[31] the Boke of Curtasye,[32] and Liber Cure Cocorum,[33]

present us with much broader forms, as _-us_ for _-es_ in the plural

number and possessive case of nouns, _-un_ for _-en_ in the plural

present indicative mood, in passive participles of irregular (or strong)

verbs, _-ud_ (_-ut_) for _-ed_ in the past tense and passive participle

of regular (or weak) verbs, and the pronominal forms _hor_ (their),

_hom_ (them), for _her_ and _hem_.[34]

 

These forms are evidence of a broad pronunciation which, at the present

time, is said to be a characteristic of the northwestern division of

Lancashire, but I think that there is good evidence for asserting that

this strong provincialism was not confined, formerly, to the

West-Midland dialect, much less to a division of any particular county.

We find traces of it in Audelay’s Poems (Shropshire), the Romance of

William and the Werwolf,[35] and even in the Wickliffite version of the

scriptures.

 

Formerly, being influenced by these broad forms, I was led to select

Cheshire or Staffordshire as the probable locality where the poems were

written; but I do not, now, think that either of these counties ever

employed a vocabulary containing so many Norse terms as are to be found

in the Lancashire dialect. But although we may not be able to fix, with

certainty, upon any one county in particular, the fact of the present

poems being composed in the West-Midland dialect cannot be denied. Much

may be said in favour of their Lancashire origin, and there are one or

two points of resemblance between our poems, the Lancashire Romances,

and Liber Cure Cocorum, that deserve especial notice.

 

I. In Sir Amadace,[36] lxviii. 9, there occurs the curious form _miȝtus_

= _miȝtes_ = _mightst_.[37] As it appears only once throughout the

Romances we might conclude that it is an error of the scribe for

_miȝtest_, but when we find in the poems before us not only _myȝteȝ_ =

_myȝtes_ (mightst), but _woldeȝ_ = _woldes_ (wouldst), _coutheȝ_ =

_couthes_ (couldst), _dippteȝ_ (dippedest), _travayledeȝ_ (travelledst),

etc., we are bound to consider _miȝtus_ as a genuine form.[38] In no

other Early English works of the fourteenth century have I been able to

find this peculiarity. It is very common in _the Wohunge of Ure Lauerd_

(xiiith cent.). See O.E. Homilies, p. 51. The Northumbrian dialect at

this period rejected the inflexion in the second person preterite

singular, of regular verbs,[39] and in our poems we find the _-es_ often

dropped, so that we get two conjugations, which may be called the

inflected and the uninflected form.

 

Inflected. Uninflected.

1st pers. hopede hoped (I) hoped.

2nd „ hoped_es_ hoped (thou) hopedest.

3rd „ hopede hoped (he) hoped.

 

Originally the inflected form may have prevailed over the whole of the

North of England, but have gradually become confined to the West-Midland

dialect.

 

II. The next point of resemblance is the use of the verb SCHIN or SCHUN

= schal = shall. It is still preserved in the modern dialect of

Lancashire in combination with the adverb _not_, as schunnot[40] = shall

not. The following examples will serve to illustrate the use of this

curious form:--

 

“---- þay _schin_ knawe sone,

Þere is no bounté in burne lyk Baltaȝar þewes.”[41] --(B. l. 1435.)

 

“& þose þat seme arn & swete _schyn_ se his face.”[42]

--(_Ibid._ l. 1810.)

 

“Pekokys and pertrikys perboylyd _schyn_ be.”[43]

--(Liber Cure Cocorum, p. 29.)

 

“For þer bene bestes þat _schyn_ be rost.”[44] --(_Ibid._ p. 34.)

 

“Alle _schun_ be draȝun, Syr, at þo syde.”[45] --(_Ibid._ p. 35.)

 

“Seche ferlies _schyn_ falle.”[46]

--(Robson’s Met. Rom. p. 12, l. 4.)

 

III. Nothing is more common in the present poems than the use of _hit_

as a genitive = its, which is also found in the Lancashire romances.

 

“Forþy þe derk dede see hit is demed ever more,

For _hit_ dedeȝ of deþe duren þere ȝet.”[47] --(Patience, l. 1021.)

 

“And, as hit is corsed of kynde & _hit_ coosteȝ als,

Þe clay þat clenges þer-by arn corsyes strong.”[48]

--(_Ibid._ l. 1033.)

 

“For I wille speke with the sprete,

And of _hit_ woe wille I wete,

Gif that I may _hit_ bales bete.”[49]

--(Robson’s Met. Romances, p. 5, ll. 3, 4.)

 

The present dialect of Lancashire still retains the uninflected

genitive:--

 

“So I geet up be strike o’ dey, on seet eawt; on went ogreath tilly

welly coom within two mile oth’ teawn; when, os tha dule woud

height, o tit wur stonning ot an ale heawse dur; on me kawve (the

dule bore eawt _it_ een for me) took th’ tit for _it_ mother, on

woud seawk her.”[50] (Tummus and Meary).

 

Thus much for the dialectical peculiarities of our author. The scanty

material at our disposal must be a sufficient excuse for the very meagre

outline which is here presented to the reader. As our materials

increase, the whole question of Early English dialects will no doubt

receive that attention from English philologists which the subject

really demands, and editors of old English works will then be enabled to

speak with greater confidence as to the language and peculiarities of

their authors. Something might surely be done to help the student by a

proper classification of our manuscripts both as to date and place of

composition. We are sadly in want of unadulterated specimens of the

Northumbrian and East-Midland idioms during the twelfth and thirteenth

centuries. There must surely be some records of these dialects in our

university libraries which would well repay editing.[51]

 

[Footnote 25: Polychronicon R. Higdeni, ap. Gale, p. 210, 211. See

Garnett’s Philological Essays, p. 43, and Specimens of Early

English, p. 338.]

 

[Footnote 26: It is to be regretted that Garnett did not enter

upon details, and give his readers some tests by which to

distinguish the “five distinctly marked forms.”]

 

[Footnote 27: In English works of the fourteenth century the _-en_

of the Midland, and the _-es_ of the Northumbrian is frequently

dropped, thus gradually approximating to our modern conjugation.]

 

[Footnote 28: We are here speaking of works written in the

thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.]

 

[Footnote 29: Robert of Brunne, in his “Handlyng Synne,” often

employs it instead of _-en_, but only for the sake of the rhyme.]

 

[Footnote 30: The Midland dialect is a very difficult one to deal

with, as it presents us with no uniform type; and, moreover, works

written in this idiom are marked by Northern or Southern

peculiarities, which have led many of our editors altogether

astray in determining the locality of their composition.]

 

[Footnote 31: Published by the Camden Society, 1842.]

 

[Footnote 32: Edited by Mr. Halliwell for the Percy Society.]

 

[Footnote 33: Edited by me for the Philological Society, 1862.]

 

[Footnote 34: _-us_ and _-ud_ for _-es_ and _-ed_, as well as

_hom_, _hor_, do occasionally occur in the MS. containing our

poems.]

 

[Footnote 35: The Romance of William and the Werwolf is written in

the West-Midland dialect as spoken probably in Shropshire.]

 

[Footnote 36: Robson’s Metrical Romances, p. 54, l. 9.]

 

[Footnote 37: _Woldus_ = _woldes_ = _wouldst_, appears in

Audelay’s poems (in the Shropshire dialect of the fifteenth

century), p. 32, l. 6.]

 

[Footnote 38: The so-called Northumbrian records of the ninth and

tenth centuries frequently use _-es_ instead of _-est_, in the 2nd

pers. preterite of regular verbs, _e.g._,

 

_ðu forcerdes usic on-bec_ = Thou turnedst us hindward.

--(Ps. xliii. 11.)

_ðu saldes usic_ = Thou gavest us. --(Ps. xliii. 12.)

_ðu bi-bohtes folc ðin butan weorðe_ = Thou soldest thy folk

without price. --(Ps. xliii. 12.)

ðu _ge-hiowades_ me & _settes_ ofer me hond ðine = Thou madest me

and settest over me thy hand. --(Ps. cxxxviii. 5.)

ðu _ðreades ða_ ofer-hygdan = Thou hast rebuked the proud.

--(Ps. cxviii. 21.)

 

Ic ondeto ðe fader drihten heofnes forðon ðu _gedeigeldes_ ðas

ilco from snotrum & hogum & _ædeaudes_ ða ðæm lytlum = I thank

thee, O father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid

these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them

unto babes. --(Matt. xi. 25).]

 

[Footnote 39: Þou _torned_ us hindward. --(Early English Nn. Psalter, xliii. 11.)