379 «et seq.»
[46] «Histoire Poétique», p. 251; cf. also «Revue critique d’Histoire
et de Littérature», ii. 1869, p. 121 «et seq.»
[47] Cf. Mr. Shelley’s Paper in Warton, «Hist. of Eng. Poetry», ii.
197–8.
[48] pp. 17 «et seq.»
[49] «Dissertation», p. 18.
[50] «Introduction to Sir Ferumbras», p. xiv.
[51] The French text will be found in the «Notes», which see.
[52] For these names, the «Index of Names» may be referred to.
[53] In some passages the «Destruction» shows also the spelling
«Balan», but «Laban» is more common.
[54] See note to l. 1000.
[55] See note to l. 2842.
[56] «Dissertation», p. 20.
[57] See note to l. 1663.
[58] Cf. note to l. 1723.
[59] Mr. Herrtage, in his note to the Ashmol. MS., l. 259,
reproduces—from the Roxburghe Club edition, «Introd.» p. vi.—the list
of the twelve peers in the French version of the Grenville copy, 10531,
which he erroneously takes for that of the «Sowdan».
[60] But there is one “Alorys þe erld of Brye,” mentioned in the Ashm.
MS., ll. 935, 2842, 4076, &c.
[61] There is one «Templer» mentioned in the Ashm. MS., l. 2673. But he
is not identical with «Tamper» of the «Sowdan», ll. 2641, 2667.
[62] Greek σινδων. Cf. «Dissertation», pp. 45–46.
[63] See note to l. 2535.
[64] There being only a small fragment printed of the Didot MS.
(«Epopées Fr.» ii. 307), a comparison of the «Sowdan» with this version
is impossible at present. But as the Didot MS. belongs to the same
group as «E», what results from a comparison of «S» with «E» may be
assumed for the Didot MS.
[65] See «Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie», iv. pp. 164, 170.
[66] «Jahrbuch für romanische und englische Sprache und Literatur»,
xiii. p. 111.
[67] This example is not very striking, as the spelling «Ferumbras» may
simply have been retained from the first part of the poem; see above,
p. xxxi.
[68] «Syr Ferumbras», «Introduction», p. xiv, footnote.
[69] See «Handschriftliche Gestaltungen», p. 14, and «Dissert.», p. 29.
[70] «Histoire Poétique», p. 157.
[71] And to which only a few very insignificant additions were made by
the author; see «Hist. Poét.», p. 99, bottom.
[72] See Morris’s Preface to «Genesis and Exodus», Skeat’s Introduction
to «Havelock the Dane», and Mall’s edition of «Harrowing of Hell»
(Breslau, 1871).
[73] See Sweet, «Anglia», iii. 152.
[74] Cf. Mall, «Harrowing of Hell», p. 18.
[75] Cf. Schipper, «Alexiuslegenden», 98/121.
[76] See note to l. 939.
[77] “This elision of a final «d» in such words as «hond», «lond»,
«sheld», «held», &c., is by no means uncommon in ancient poetry,
and arises simply from pronunciation.”—Morris, «Specimens of Early
English», 320/261.
[78] Cf. Mr. Nicol’s «Paper in the Academy» of June 23, 1877, vol. xi.
p. 564, col. 1, and «Seventh Annual Address of the President to the
Philol. Soc.», p. 2.
[79] See the note.
[80] Although l. 25 says that the story of the «Sowdan» “is written
in Romance,” this cannot induce us to consider our poem as a mere
translation. It is, on the contrary, a free reproduction of a French
original.
[81] Cf. also Lindsay’s «History of Squyer Meldrum», l. 390:
“Like Mars the God Armypotent.”
[82] Cf. «Prioress’s Tale», ed. Skeat (Clarendon Press Series), p. xx;
and Furnivall’s «Trial Forewords», p. 111.
[83] Cf. «Chaucer», ed. Morris, i. 205, footnote.
[84] «Bibliotheca Heberiana», Part xi. p. 162. MSS. Lot 1533.
[85] Ed. Halliwell, p. 379 «et seq.»
[86] For instances, see the following words:—«Atame», «alayned»,
«ameved», «assorte», «avente», «forcer», &c.
[87] London. Printed by William Nicol, Shakspere Press, MDCCCLIV.
[p-xlix]
ADDITIONS.
Since the «Introduction» was written, I have had an opportunity of
seeing the Hanover MS. of the French «Fierabras». The kind offices of
Professor Koner exerted on my behalf secured me the consent of the
Administration of the Royal Hanoverian Library to have the MS. sent to
Berlin, and their most generous permission to consult it freely in the
Reading Room of the University Library.
Having now compared the «Sowdan» more closely with the Hanover MS.,
I must state that the final result arrived at in my investigation
concerning the original of the «Sowdan» (cf. p. xxxii) is in no way
altered.
As already stated above (p. xxxii), and as the subsequent examination
and the passages of «H» quoted below will serve to confirm, the Hanover
version is, generally speaking, the same as the printed version of the
«Fierabras», differing only in slight variations of readings.
The names in which «S» differs from «F», but agrees with «H», are
already spoken of on p. xxxi. But there are several others in the
spelling of which «H» agrees with «F», but differs from «S». Thus we
find «Balans» or «Balant» in «H» for «Laban» in «S»; «Guarin», «H»,
leaf 80, back, «F» 438 = «Generyse», «S» 1135; «Agolafres», «H», leaf
81 = «Alagolofer», «S» 2135; «Amiotte», «H» leaf 83, back = «Barrokk»,
«S» 2939, etc.
As to the subject-matter, there are no instances where «S», differing
from «F», agrees with «H». In all points in which «S» differs from «F»
we find it also differing from «H».
Thus the game of blowing a burning coal, in the description of [p-l]
which «S» slightly differs from «F», is related in «H» with nearly the
same words as in «F». As, besides the small fragment printed by Grœber
in the «Jahrbuch», xiii, and some few remarks in the «Zeitschrift
für rom. Phil.», nothing is known of the Hanover MS., the following
passages printed here may serve to show how little «H» differs from
«F». The game of the coal («S» 1996–2016, «F» 2907–2934) is thus
described in «H», leaf 58:—
“Veillard, dist Lucafer, vo«us» ni savez juer,
Vo«us» ne savez en F«ra»nce le g«ra»nt charboun soffler.
Certes, ceo dist li dus, mais n’en oie soffler.
Et respont li payen: Mais te feray mostrer.
Ly payen vait le duc au g«ra»nt fowel mener.
Q«ua»nt Rollant l’ad veu, a Berard l’ad mostre
Ore p«or»res boue jeu ver «et» esgarder.
Dahait qui ne laira ly «et» Naimes juer.
Lucafer se beysa pur un tison combrer,
Trestote le plus ardant quil i poet trover,
Par tiel air soffla le fu qil li fist voler.
Puis ad dist a Names ‘Ore vo«us» cove«nt» soffler.’
Names prist le tison qui bien se sout aider,
Vers le payen s’en va pur le tison sofler,
Pur ceo le fist ly dus qa ly se volt meller,
Si suffla le tison qe le fist allumer,
Le barbe «et» le menton fist au payen bruler,
Tres p«ar»my le visaie en fist la flame virer,
Qe par un sule petite qe nel fist souuiler.
Q«ua»nt le voit ly payen, le sanc quida deueher.
Il jette a .ij. ses maines, qi le quide frapper,
Mais ly dus le ferry tres p«ar»my le costes,
Qe les oilz de la teste ly fist en fu voler.
Puys l’ad pris par le flank, s’il voit en le fu ruer.
Lichiers, dist dus Names, Dex te poet mal doner,
Tu me quidoies ore come fole cy trover.”
The distribution of the relics, in which «S» (cf. note to l. 3238)
differs from «F» 6195 «et seq.» is related as follows in «H», leaf 100:—
“Au baron seint Dynis fu mult g«ra»nt l’assemble«e»
Au perron au londy fu la messe chante«e»,
Illok fu la corone p«ar»tie «et» dessevere«e»,
L’un moite fu a saint Dynis done«e»
Et un clow ansiem«ent», cest v«er»ite prove«e»,
De la Corone fu un p«ar»tie a Ais porte«e»,
A Compaign«e» est l’ensigne en l’eglise honore«e»,
Et les altres .ij. clowes a Orliens fu enveie«e»,
Maint p«re»sant fist Charls de France la loi«e»
Des saintisme reliqes, Jh«es»u de maiestes.
En l’onur de Deu est mainte eglise fonde«e»,
La feste de lendit fu pur iceo estore«e».
Jaiaz videront cens ne taille donee. [p-li]
Ne tardoit q«ue» .iiij. ans k’Espaign«e» fu gaste«e».
La fu la treison de Rollant p«or»pense«e»,
Qe Ganes le vendist a la gent diffaee,
Puys fu as chiuals sa chars destreine«e»,
Pinables en fu mortz de suz Lyons en la pre«e»,
La le vengea Terris au trenchant del espee,
Puys fu pendu armes par gule«e» pare«e»,
Toutz iours vegnent traitors a mal destine«e»
Ou aloignee ou apres ia ni aueront duree.
Charles voit a Orliens, la chancheon est fine«e»
Au deu vo«us» commande, tote j’ai ma chancon fine.
De cels romance est bone la fine «et» l’entre«e»,
Et en mileue «et» p«ar»tote qi b«ie»n l’ad escoute«e»
La beneiceon aez de Deu «et» del v«ir»gine honore. Amen.”
The miracle («F» 6101–6123)[88] of the glove, in which Charles had
placed fragments of the thorns, remaining suspended in the air for
over an hour, the description of which is omitted in the «Sowdan» (cf.
«Dissert.», p. 29), is related as follows in «H», leaf 99:—
“L’emp«er»ers de France fist forem«ent» a loier
Il a fait un table sur .ij. trestes lever.
Et par de sur un paille q«ui» fu fait outre mer.
Illok fist Charlm̄ la corone aporter,
Puis ad fait l’arcevesqe p«ar»tir «et» deviser,
Si ad fait les reliqes m«u»lt b«ie»n envoluper,
Dedens son mestre coffres les a fait deffermer,
Et les altres reliqes qe il voudra aporter.
Les petites espignons qil vist esgruner,
De la saint corone qil fist demenbrer,
Trestote les acoillye n«os»tre emp«er»er ber,
Et les mist en son gant qanqil pout trover.
Un chivaler le tent qil vist lez ly ester,
Mais al ne l’ap«er»ceut my qe nele oit parler.
Charlemayn retiret sa mayne, si lesse le gant aler.
Et dex a fait le gant enmy l’air arester
Tant q«ue» d .j. leue en pout home b«ie»n aler;
Kar la presse fu grant, ne l’en puis remenbrer.
Charlemayn comande l’ewe apporter.
De son gant ly sovengre si «quant» il dust laver,
Mais ne seet a ky le comanda abailier,
Par desur la gent le vist en l’air esteer,
L’arcevesqe la monstre «et» tuit l’altre barne.
Ceo fu mult g«ra»nt m«er»veille, ho«m»e en doit b«ie»n p«ar»ler,
Charls a pris son gant, s’est assis au soper.”
«H», leaf 37, agrees with «F», l. 1043, in making Oliver drink of the
bottles of balm, which is not mentioned in the «Sowdan», l. 1190 (cf.
p. xxix). [p-lii]
Similarly we find «S» 2604 differing from «H», leaf 62, where we read
«Basyns» (= «Basin», «F» 3313) instead of «Bryer».
Again «H», l. 40, agreeing exactly with «F», l. 1329 «et seq.», differs
from «S» 1279–82 (cf. p. xxix).
Instead of Floripas, «S» 1515, it is Brulans, «H», l. 49, and «F» 1949,
who advises the Soudan not to slay the prisoners.
The names of the twelve peers are the same in «H» as in «F» (cf. p.
xxvii); and the whole scene of the peers being sent one after the
other on a mission to Laban (cf. note to l. 1665 of the «Sowdan») is
described exactly alike in «F» 2263–2282 and in «H», leaf 51, back,
with the only difference that the names of the peers are given in a
different order in both versions, Richard of Normandy, who is sent off
as the sixth in «F», being the second in «H».
These variations of «S» from «H» clearly exemplify the impossibility of
regarding the Hanover MS. as the original of the «Sowdan». But as on
the whole these differences are not of a very significant nature, and
as, moreover, part of these variations may perhaps be attributed to the
favourite habit of the author of going his own way in the arrangement
of the subject-matter and in some minor points, whereas in the
essential course of the events he strictly adhered to his source (see
above p. xxxviii, and cf. note to l. 2535); and as besides there are
several names, the spelling of which differs in «F», agreeing in «S»
and «H», I think there can be no doubt that the original of the second
part of the «Sowdan» was a version similar to the Hanover MS.
If now we compare the Hanover version with the Ashmole «Ferumbras» more
closely than has been possible on page xx, there are some instances
where «A», whilst differing from «F», agrees with «H».
H. A.
lf. 27. Ha «Glout», dist 163. A «glotoun», saide þe Emperer
Karlemaines,
lf. 27. Que puis «vivre» que cest 175. Ke «lyve» he noȝt þys day to
jours fu passes be evene
lf. 25, bk. Ses chiuals ad reine 91. Þarto ys stede þan tyeþe he
à un arbre rasmee
Et garda les leges tote
contreval li pree
Nevertheless, the following passage in which «A» agrees with «F», but
differs from «H», will at once show the impossibility of regarding «H»
as the original of «A». [p-liii]
A. H.
302. Þanne þer come bifore lf. 28, bk. Atant se sunt drecie
Charloun, Gweneloun and Guinelons et «Alores»
«Hardree»
In other instances «A» is found differing from «H» as well as from «F».
Thus the name of «Enfachoun», «A» 4652, which is «Effraons» in «F»
4900, does not occur at all in «H», which in the passage corresponding
to «F» 4900, as well as in that corresponding to «F» 4913, reads
«Affricons li Geans».
Again, in the story of Myloun, in which «A», l. 2008 «et seq.», differs
from «F», we find «H» disagreeing from «F», 2734 «et seq.», and from
«A»:—
“Volez vo«us» queor de feme essaier «et» esprover
Del riche duc Milon vo«us» deverez remenbrer,
Qe tant nori Galans qe ly fist adouber,
Puys ly tolly sa feile Gabaen au vis cler,
L’enfes Marsilion en fist desherriter.—
Qu«an»t l’entent Floripas, du sens quida deueer.”—(«H», leaf 56.)
But in most cases in which «F» differs from «A», «H» agrees with «F».
Thus we find Ferumbras challenging only «six» French knights in «H»,
lf. 26, as in «F», 84, 105, instead of «twelve» in «A», l. 102.
In «A», l. 5204, Floripas, swooning away, is upheld by Oliver, whereas
in «F», 5373, and in «H», lf. 90, it is Guy who keeps her from falling.
For «Howel of saint Miloun», «A» 5574, we read «Huon de saint Lis» in
«F» 5792, and «Hugon de saint Lis» in «H», lf. 95, bk.
As in «F» 2912 it is to Berard that Roland speaks in «H», lf 57, bk.,
and not to Olyver, as in «A» 2234.
That Maubyn scales the walls by means of a ladder of leather («A» 2406)
is not mentioned in «F» 3061, nor in «H», lf. 59, bk.
In «A» 1386 Floripas gives Oliver, who is wounded, a warm draught,
which heals every wound; in «F» 2209, as well as in «H», lf. 51, it is
by a bit of the mandrake plant that he is healed.
The maid-attendant mentioned in «A» 1238 («chamberere») is a
man-attendant in «F» 2083 («chamberlenc») and in «H», lf. 49, bk.
(«chamberlayn»).
There is no trace of the additional lines of «A», ll. 4867–4875, to be
found in «H», lf. 86 bk., nor in «F», 5094.
Among the relics spoken of in «A», there is nowhere a mention made
of the «signe». In «H» we find the «signe» always mentioned [p-liv]
together with the crown and the nails, just as in «F». In the passage
quoted above from «H», lf. 100, and in the line which corresponds to
«F» 6094, we find «ensigne» instead of «signe»; but «ensigne» certainly
must be looked upon as a clerical blunder. In the other passages in
which we find “the winding sheet, or shroud, of the Lord” mentioned in
«H» it is also called «signe»:—
“Et rendrai la corone et le «signe» honore.”
«H», lf. 42 = «F», 1498; and «H», lf. 45, bk. = «F», 1805.
“Et les saintismes clowes et le «signe» honores.”—«H»,
lf. 57 = «F», 2829.
That the «signe» cannot be the “inscription of the cross” (cf.
«Introduction», p. xxx) is proved by an additional line of the Hanover
MS., in which the Archbishop is said to have covered the heads of the
French with the «signe»:—
“Puys a trait l’ensigne qui bien estoit ovres
Engenolant l’ad ly Rois tote oue lermes baises,
Plus flairoit ducement que basine enbasines.
Quant Franceis l’ont veu, ele vous effraes,
De pite et de ioy fu chescous enplores.
L’ercevesqe le prist, mult fu bien purpenses,
«Et nos Franceis en a les chefs envolupes»,
Puis le mist sur le paille qest a or ornes,
Od les altres relikes dont illi out asses.”
«H», lf. 98, corresponding to «F», 6094 «et seq.»
Abstaining now from citing any more passages where «H» agrees with «F»,
but differs from «A», I think the few quotations above will suffice to
show the impossibility of regarding the Hanover MS. as the original
of the Ashmole «Ferumbras», notwithstanding that there are some
resemblances of «A» to «H» (cf. p. xx). Therefore the result arrived
at on p. xxi as to the original of the Ashmolean version is in no way
altered by the detailed comparison of «A» with «H».
FOOTNOTES:
[88] Cf. «Sir Ferumbras», 185/5988.
SKETCH OF THE STORY.