IMITATIONS OF CLASSICAL FORMS OF VERSE AND STANZA
§ 209. The English hexameter 262
210. Structure of the hexameter 263
211. Elegiac verse; the minor Asclepiad; the six-foot
iambic line; Phaleuciac verse; Hendecasyllabics;
rhymed Choriambics 264
212. Classical stanzas:--the Sapphic metre; the Alcaic
metre; Anacreontic stanzas 266
213. Other imitations of classical verses and stanzas
without rhyme 267
BOOK II
THE STRUCTURE OF STANZAS
PART I
CHAPTER I. DEFINITIONS
STANZA, RHYME, VARIETIES OF RHYME
§ 214. Structure of the stanza 270
215. Influence of lyrical forms of Provence and of Northern
France on Middle English poetry 271
216. Classification of rhyme according to the number of the
rhyming syllables: (1) the monosyllabic or masculine
rhyme; (2) the disyllabic or feminine rhyme; (3) the
trisyllabic, triple, or tumbling rhyme 272
217. Classification according to the quality of the rhyming
syllables: (1) the rich rhyme; (2) the identical
rhyme; (3) the broken rhyme; (4) the double rhyme;
(5) the extended rhyme; (6) the unaccented rhyme 273
218. Classification according to the position of the rhyming
syllables: (1) the sectional rhyme; (2) the inverse
rhyme; (3) the Leonine rhyme or middle rhyme; (4) the
interlaced rhyme; (5) the intermittent rhyme; (6) the
enclosing rhyme; (7) the tail-rhyme 276
219. Imperfect or 'eye-rhymes' 278
CHAPTER II
THE RHYME AS A STRUCTURAL ELEMENT OF
THE STANZA
§ 220. Formation of the stanza in Middle English and Romanic
poetry 279
221. Rhyme-linking or 'concatenation' in Middle English 280
222. The refrain or burthen; the wheel and the bob-wheel 280
223. Divisible and indivisible stanzas 281
224. Bipartite equal-membered stanzas 282
225. Bipartite unequal-membered stanzas 282
226. Tripartite stanzas 283
227. Specimens illustrating tripartition 284
228. The envoi 286
229. Real envois and concluding stanzas 286
=PART II. STANZAS COMMON TO MIDDLE AND
MODERN ENGLISH, AND OTHERS FORMED
ON THE ANALOGY OF THESE=
CHAPTER III
BIPARTITE EQUAL-MEMBERED STANZAS
I. ISOMETRICAL STANZAS.
§ 230. Two-line stanzas 288
231. Four-line stanzas, consisting of couplets 288
232. The double stanza (eight lines of the same structure) 289
233. Stanzas of four isometrical lines with intermittent
rhyme 290
234. Stanzas of eight lines resulting from this stanza by
doubling 290
235. Stanzas developed from long-lined couplets by inserted
rhyme 291
236. Stanzas of eight lines resulting from the four-lined,
cross-rhyming stanza and by other modes of doubling 292
237. Other examples of doubling four-lined stanzas 293
238. Six-lined isometrical stanzas 294
239. Modifications of the six-lined stanza; twelve-lined
and sixteen-lined stanzas 295
II. ANISOMETRICAL STANZAS.
240. Chief species of the tail-rhyme stanza 296
241. Enlargement of this stanza to twelve lines 297
242. Further development of the tail-rhyme stanza 298
243. Variant forms of enlarged eight and ten-lined
tail-rhyme stanzas 298
244. Tail-rhyme stanzas with principal verses shorter than
tail-verses 299
245. Other varieties of the tail-rhyme stanza 300
246. Stanzas modelled on the tail-rhyme stanza 300
247. Stanzas formed of two septenary verses 301
248. Analogical developments from this type 302
249. Eight-lined (doubled) forms of the different
four-lined stanzas 302
250. Other stanzas of similar structure 303
CHAPTER IV
ONE-RHYMED INDIVISIBLE AND BIPARTITE UNEQUAL-MEMBERED
STANZAS
I. ONE-RHYMED AND INDIVISIBLE STANZAS.
§ 251. Three-lined stanzas of one rhyme 305
252. Four-lined stanzas of one rhyme 306
253. Other stanzas connected with the above 307
II. BIPARTITE UNEQUAL-MEMBERED ISOMETRICAL STANZAS.
254. Four-lined stanzas 308
255. Five-lined stanzas 308
256. Four-lined stanzas of one rhyme extended by the
addition of a couplet 310
III. BIPARTITE UNEQUAL-MEMBERED ANISOMETRICAL STANZAS.
§ 257-8. Four-lined stanzas; Poulter's measure and other
stanzas 311
259. Five-lined stanzas 314
260. Shortened tail-rhyme stanzas 316
261. Six-lined stanzas 317
262. Seven-lined stanzas 319
263. Eight-, nine-, and ten-lined stanzas 320
264. The bob-wheel stanzas in the Middle English period 321
265. Bob-wheel stanzas of four-stressed rhyming verses 322
266. Modern English bob-wheel stanzas 323
CHAPTER V
TRIPARTITE STANZAS
I. ISOMETRICAL STANZAS.
§ 267. Six-lined stanzas 326
268. Seven-lined stanzas; the Rhyme Royal stanza 327
269. Eight-lined stanzas 329
270. Nine-lined stanzas 330
271. Ten-lined stanzas 331
272. Eleven-, twelve-, and thirteen-lined stanzas 332
II. ANISOMETRICAL STANZAS.
273-4. Six-lined stanzas 333
275. Seven-lined stanzas 335
276-8. Eight-lined stanzas 337
279. Nine-lined stanzas 339
280-1. Ten-lined stanzas 341
282. Eleven-lined stanzas 343
283. Twelve-lined stanzas 344
284. Thirteen-lined stanzas 345
285. Fourteen-lined stanzas 346
286. Stanzas of fifteen to twenty lines 347
=PART III. MODERN STANZAS AND METRES OF
FIXED FORM ORIGINATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
OF THE RENASCENCE, OR INTRODUCED LATER=
CHAPTER VI
STANZAS OF THREE AND MORE PARTS CONSISTING OF
UNEQUAL PARTS ONLY
§ 287. Introductory remark 348
288. Six-lined stanzas 349
289. Seven-lined stanzas 351
290-2. Eight-lined stanzas; the Italian _ottava rima_ 352
293. Nine-lined stanzas 355
294. Ten-lined stanzas 355
295. Eleven-lined stanzas 356
296. Twelve-lined stanzas 356
CHAPTER VII
THE SPENSERIAN STANZA AND THE FORMS DERIVED FROM IT
§ 297. First used in the _Faerie Queene_ 358
298-300. Imitations and analogous forms 359
CHAPTER VIII
THE EPITHALAMIUM STANZA AND OTHER ODIC STANZAS
§ 301. The Epithalamium stanza 363
302. Imitations of the Epithalamium stanza 365
303-5. Pindaric Odes, regular and irregular 366
CHAPTER IX
THE SONNET
§ 306. Origin of the English sonnet 371
307. The Italian sonnet 371
308. Structure of the Italian form illustrated by
Watts-Dunton 373
309. The first English sonnet-writers, Surrey and Wyatt 373
310. Surrey's transformation of the Italian sonnet, and
the form adopted by Shakespeare 374
311. Another form used by Spenser in _Amoretti_ 375
312. The form adopted by Milton 375
313. Revival of sonnet writing in the latter half of the
eighteenth century 376
314. The sonnets of Wordsworth 377
315. The sonnet in the nineteenth century 379
CHAPTER X
OTHER ITALIAN AND FRENCH POETICAL FORMS OF A
FIXED CHARACTER
316-7. The madrigal 380
318-9. The terza-rima 381
320-1. The sextain 383
322. The virelay 385
323. The roundel 385
324. The rondeau 387
325. The triolet 388
326. The villanelle 388
327. The ballade 389
328. The Chant Royal 390
LIST OF EDITIONS REFERRED TO
The quotations of Old English poetry are taken from Grein-Wülker,
_Bibliothek der Angelsächsischen Poesie_, Strassburg, 1883-94. For the
Middle English poets the editions used have been specified in the text.
Most of the poets of the Modern English period down to the eighteenth
century are quoted from the collection of R. Anderson, _The Works of
the British Poets_, Edinburgh, 1795 (15 vols.), which is cited (under
the title _Poets_) by volume and page. The remaining Modern English
poets are quoted (except when some other edition is specified) from the
editions mentioned in the following list.
=Arnold=, Matthew. _Poetical Works_, London, Macmillan & Co.,
1890. 8vo.
=Beaumont=, Francis, and =Fletcher=, John. _Dramatick Works_,
London, 1778. 10 vols. 8vo.
=Bowles=, W. L. _Sonnets and other Poems_. London, 1802-3.
2 vols. 8vo.
=Browning=, Elizabeth Barrett. _Poetical Works_. London, Chapman
& Hall, 1866. 5 vols. 8vo.
=Browning=, Robert. _Poetical Works_. London, Smith, Elder & Co.,
1868. 6 vols. 8vo.
=Bulwer Lytton=, Sir E. (afterwards Lord Lytton). _The Lost
Tales of Miletus_. London, John Murray, 1866. 8vo.
=Burns=, Robert. _Complete Works_, ed. Alexander Smith. London,
Macmillan & Co., 1870. (Globe Edition.)
=Byron=, Lord. _Poetical Works_. London, H. Frowde, 1896. 8vo.
(Oxford Edition.)
=Campbell=, Thomas. _Poetical Works_, ed. W.A. Hill. London,
G. Bell & Sons, 1875.
=Coleridge=, Samuel Taylor. _Poems_, ed. Derwent and Sara Coleridge.
London, E. Moxon & Co., 1863.
=Cowper=, William. _Poetical Works_, ed. W. Benham. London,
Macmillan & Co., 1870. (Globe Edition.)
=Dryden=, John. _Comedies, Tragedies, and Operas_. London, 1701.
fol.
---- ---- _Poetical Works_, ed. W. D. Christie. London, Macmillan
& Co., 1870. (Globe Edition.)
=Fletcher=, John. See Beaumont.
=Goldsmith=, Oliver. _Miscellaneous Works_, ed. Prof. Masson.
London, Macmillan & Co., 1871. 8vo. (Globe Edition.)
_Gorboduc_, or _Ferrex and Porrex, a Tragedy_, by Thomas Norton and
Thomas Sackville, ed. L. Toulmin Smith. (_Englische Sprach-
und Litteraturdenkmale des 16., 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts_,
herausgegeben von K. Vollmöller, I.) Heilbronn, Gebr. Henninger
1883. 8vo.
=Hemans=, Felicia. _The Works of Mrs. Hemans, with a Memoir of
her life by her sister_. Edinburgh, W. Blackwood & Sons, 1839.
7 vols.
=Herbert=, George. _Works_, ed. R. A. Willmott. London, G. Routledge
& Co., 1854. 8vo.
=Hood=, Thomas. _Poetical Works_, ed. Thornton Hunt. London,
Routledge, Warne, and Routledge, 1860. 8vo.
_Hymns, Ancient and Modern, for Use in the Services of the Church_.
Revised and Enlarged Edition. London, n.d.
=Jonson=, Ben. Chiefly cited from the edition in _Poets_ iv. 532-618
(see the note prefixed to this list); less frequently (after Wilke,
_Metr. Unters. zu B. J._, Halle, 1884) from the folio edition,
London, 1816 (vol. i), or from the edition by Barry Cornwall,
London, 1842. A few of the references are to the edition of
F. Cunningham, London, J.C. Hotten, n.d. (3 vols.)
=Keats=, John. _Poetical Works_. London, F. Warne & Co.
(Chandos Classics.)
=Longfellow=, Henry Wadsworth. _Poetical Works_. Edinburgh,
W. P. Nimmo. 8vo. (Crown Edition.)
=Lytton.= See Bulwer Lytton.
=Marlowe=, Christopher. _Works_, ed. A. Dyce. London, 1850.
3 vols. 8vo.
---- ---- _Works_, ed. F. Cunningham. London, F. Warne & Co.,
1870. 8vo.
=Massinger=, Philip. _Plays_, ed. F. Cunningham. London, F.
Warne & Co., 1870. 8vo.
=Milton=, John. _Poetical Works_, ed. D. Masson. London, Macmillan
& Co., 1874. 3 vols. 8vo.
---- ---- _English Poems_, ed. R.C. Browne. Second Edition.
Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1872. 3 vols. 8vo.
=Moore=, Thomas. _Poetical Works_. London, Longmans, 1867. 8vo.
=Morris=, William. _Love is Enough_. Third Edition. London,
Ellis & White, 1873. 8vo.
=Norton=, Thomas. See _Gorboduc_.
=Percy=, Thomas. _Reliques of Ancient Poetry_. London, H. Washbourne,
1847. 3 vols. 8vo.
=Poe=, Edgar Allan. _Poetical Works_. London, Sampson Low, Son
& Co., 1858. 8vo.
=Pope=, Alexander. _Poetical Works_, ed. A. W. Ward. London,
Macmillan & Co., 1870. 8vo. (Globe Edition.)
=Rossetti=, Dante Gabriel. _Poems_. London, F. S. Ellis, 1870.
=Sackville=, Thomas, and Norton, Thomas. See _Gorboduc_.
=Scott=, Sir Walter. _Poetical Works_, ed. F. T. Palgrave. London,
Macmillan & Co., 1869. 8vo. (Globe Edition.)
=Shakespeare=, William. _Works_, ed. W. G. Clark and W. Aldis
Wright. London and Cambridge, Macmillan & Co., 1866.
8vo. (Globe Edition.)
=Shelley=, Percy Bysshe. _Poetical Works_. London, Chatto &
Windus, 1873-1875. 3 vols. 8vo. (Golden Library.)
=Sidney=, Sir Philip. _Arcadia_. London, 1633. fol.
---- ---- _Complete Poems_, ed. A. B. Grosart. 1873. 2 vols.
=Southey=, Robert. _Poetical Works_. London, Longman, Orme,
Brown, Green & Longmans, 1837. 10 vols. 8vo.
=Spenser=, Edmund. _Complete Works_, ed. R. Morris. London,
Macmillan & Co., 1869. 8vo. (Globe Edition.)
=Surrey=, Henry Howard, Earl of. _Poems_. London, Bell & Daldy.
8vo. (Aldine Edition.)
=Swinburne=, Algernon Charles. _Poems and Ballads_. Third Edition.
London, J. C. Hotten, 1868. 8vo.
---- ---- _Poems and Ballads, Second Series_. Fourth Edition.
London, Chatto & Windus, 1884. 8vo.
---- ---- _A Century of Roundels_. London, Chatto & Windus,
1883. 8vo.
---- ---- _A Midsummer Holiday and other Poems_. London,
Chatto & Windus, 1884. 8vo.
=Tennyson=, Alfred. _Works_. London, Kegan Paul & Co., 1880.
8vo.
=Thackeray=, William Makepeace. _Ballads and The Rose and the
Ring_. London, Smith, Elder & Co., 1879. 8vo.
=Tusser=, Thomas. _Five Hundred Pointes of Good Husbandrie_, ed.
W. Payne and S.J. Herrtage, English Dialect Soc., 1878.
=Wordsworth=, William. _Poetical Works_, ed. W. Knight. Edinburgh,
W. Paterson, 1886. 8 vols. 8vo.
=Wyatt=, Sir Thomas. _Poetical Works_. London, Bell & Daldy.
(Aldine Edition.) The references marked N. are to vol. ii. of
_The Works of Surrey and Wyatt_, ed. Nott, London, 1815.
2 vols. 4to.
ERRATA
P. 268. In the references to Bulwer, _for_ p. 227 _read_ p. 147; _for_
p. 217 _read_ p. 140; _for_ p. 71 _read_ p. 45; _for_ p. 115
_read_ p. 73.
P. 315, l. 14. _For_ p. 123 _read_ p. 78.
P. 340, l. 34. _For_ p. 273 _read_ p. 72.
P. 353, l. 15. _For_ 89 _read_ 5.
P. 381, l. 12. _For_ ii. 137-40 _read Poetical Works_, London, 1891,
pp. 330-32.
BOOK I. THE LINE
PART I. THE NATIVE METRE
CHAPTER I
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE SCIENCE OF
METRE AND THE STRUCTURE OF VERSE
§ =1.= The study of English Metre is an integral part of English
Philology. It is indispensable to the investigator of the history of
the language, since it supplies sometimes the only (or at all events
the surest) means of restoring the older pronunciation of word-stems,
and of inflexional terminations. In many cases, indeed, the very
existence of such terminations can be proved only by the ascertained
requirements of metre. As an aid to the study of English literature
in its aesthetic aspects the science of metre is no less important.
It exhibits the gradual development of the artistic forms of poetical
composition, explains the conditions under which they took their rise,
and by formulating the laws of their structure affords valuable help in
the textual criticism of poems which have been transmitted in a corrupt
or imperfect condition.
§ =2.= The object of the science of metre is to describe and analyse the
various rhythmical forms of speech that are characteristic of poetry in
contradistinction to prose.
Poetry is one of the fine arts, and the fine arts admit of a division
into Plastic and Rhythmic; the Plastic arts comprehending Sculpture,
Architecture, and Painting, the Rhythmic arts, on the other hand,
comprehending Dancing, Music, and Poetry. The chief points of difference
between these classes are as follows. In the first place, the
productions of the Plastic arts can be enjoyed by the beholder directly
on their completion by the artist without the interposition of any help,
while those of the Rhythmic arts demand, after the original creative
artist has done his work, the services of a second or executive artist,
who is usually termed the performer, in order that these productions may
be fully enjoyed by the spectator or hearer. A piece of music requires
a singer or player, a pantomime a dancer, and poetry a reciter or actor.
In early times the function of executive artist was commonly discharged
by the creative artist himself. In the second place, the Plastic arts
have no concern with the relations of time; a work of painting or
sculpture presents to the beholder an unchanging object or represents a
single moment of action. The Rhythmic arts, on the other hand, are, in
their very essence, connected with temporal succession. Dancing implies
a succession of movements of the human body, Music a succession of
inarticulate sounds, Poetry a succession of articulate sounds or words
and syllables. The Plastic arts, therefore, may be called the arts of
space and rest, and the Rhythmic arts the arts of time and movement. In
this definition, it must be remembered, the intrinsic quality of the
movements in each of these rhythmical arts is left out of account; in
the case of poetry, for instance, it does not take into consideration
the choice and position of the words, nor the thought expressed by them;
it is restricted to the external characteristic which these arts have in
common.
§ =3.= This common characteristic, however, requires to be defined
somewhat more precisely. It is not merely succession of movements, but
succession of different kinds of movement in a definite and recurring
order. In the dance, the measure, or succession and alternation of quick
and slow movements in regular and fixed order, is the essential point.
This is also the foundation of music and poetry. But another elementary
principle enters into these two arts. They are not founded, as dancing
is, upon mere silent movements, but on movements of audible sounds,
whether inarticulate, as in music, or articulate, as in poetry. These
sounds are not all on a level in respect of their audibility, but vary
in intensity: broadly speaking, they may be said to be either loud or
soft. There is, it is true, something analogous to this in the movements
of the dance; the steps differ in degree of intensity or force. Dancing
indeed may be looked upon as the typical form and source of all rhythmic
movement. Scherer brings this point out very well.[1] He says: 'Rhythm
is produced by regular movements of the body. Walking becomes dancing by
a definite relation of the steps to one another--of long and short in
time or fast and slow in motion. A regular rhythm has never been reached
by races among which irregular jumping, instead of walking, has been
the original form of the dance. Each pair of steps forms a unity, and a
repetition begins with the third step. This unity is the bar or measure.
The physical difference between the comparative strength of the right
foot and the weakness of the left foot is the origin of the distinction
between elevation and depression, i.e. between relatively loud and
soft, the "good" and the "bad" part of the measure.'
Westphal[2] gives a similar explanation: 'That the stamp of the foot or
the clap of the hands in beating time coincides with the strong part
of the measure, and the raising of the foot or hand coincides with the
weak part of it, originates, without doubt, in the ancient orchestic.'
At the strong part of the bar the dancer puts his foot to the ground and
raises it at the weak part. This is the meaning and original Greek usage
of the terms 'arsis' and 'thesis', which are nowadays used in an exactly
opposite sense. _Arsis_ in its ancient signification meant the raising
of the foot or hand, to indicate the weak part of the measure; _thesis_
was the putting down of the foot, or the stamp, to mark the strong part
of the measure. Now, however, it is almost the universal custom to use
_arsis_ to indicate the syllable uttered with a raised or loud voice,
and _thesis_ to indicate the syllable uttered with lower or soft voice.
From the practice of beating time the term _ictus_ is also borrowed; it
is commonly used to designate the increase of voice which occurs at the
strong, or so-called rhythmical accent.
All rhythm therefore in our dancing, poetry, and music, comes to us from
ancient times, and is of the same nature in these three arts: it is
regular order in the succession of different kinds of motion.
§ =4.= The distinction between prose and poetry in their external
aspects may be stated thus: in prose the words follow each other in an
order determined entirely, or almost entirely, by the sense, while in
poetry the order is largely determined by fixed and regular rhythmic
schemes.
Even in prose a certain influence of rhythmical order may be sometimes
observable, and where this is marked we have what is called rhythmical
or artistic prose. But in such prose the rhythmic order must be so
loosely constructed that it does not at once obtrude itself on the ear,
or recur regularly as it does in poetry. Wherever we have intelligible
words following each other in groups marked by a rhythmical order
which is at once recognizable as intentionally chosen with a view to
symmetry, there we may be said to have poetry, at least on its formal
side. Poetical rhythm may accordingly be defined as a special symmetry,
easily recognizable as such, in the succession of syllables of differing
phonetic quality, which convey a sense, and are so arranged as to be
uttered in divisions of time which are symmetrical in their relation to
one another.
§ =5.= At this point we have to note that there are two kinds of
phonetic difference between syllables, either of which may serve as a
foundation for rhythm. In the first place, syllables differ in respect
of their _quantity_; they are either 'long' or 'short', according to the
length of time required to pronounce them. In the second place, they
differ in respect of the greater or less degree of force or stress with
which they are uttered; or, as it is commonly expressed, in respect of
their _accent_.
All the poetic rhythms of the Indogermanic or Aryan languages are
based on one or other of these phonetic qualities of syllables, one
group observing mainly the quantitative, and the other the accentual
principle. Sanskrit, Greek, and Roman poetry is regulated by the
principle of the quantity of the syllable, while the Teutonic nations
follow the principle of stress or accent.[3] With the Greeks, Romans,
and Hindoos the natural quantity of the syllables is made the basis of
the rhythmic measures, the rhythmical ictus being fixed without regard
to the word-accent. Among the Teutonic nations, on the other hand, the
rhythmical ictus coincides normally with the word-accent, and the order
in which long and short syllables succeed each other is (with certain
exceptions in the early stages of the language) left to be determined by
the poet's sense of harmony or euphony.
§ =6.= Before going further it will be well to define exactly the
meaning of the word _accent_, and to give an account of its different
uses. Accent is generally defined as 'the stronger emphasis put on
a syllable, the stress laid on it', or, as Sweet[4] puts it, 'the
comparative force with which the separate syllables of a sound-group
are pronounced.' According to Brücke[5] it is produced by increasing
the pressure of the breath. The stronger the pressure with which the
air passes from the lungs through the glottis, the louder will be the
tone of voice, the louder will be the sound of the consonants which
the stream of air produces in the cavity of the mouth. This increase of
tone and sound is what is called 'accent'. Brücke seems to use tone and
sound as almost synonymous, but in metric we must distinguish between
them. Sound (_sonus_) is the more general, tone ([Greek: tonos])
the more specific expression. Sound, in this general sense, may have
a stronger or weaker tone. This strengthening of the tone is usually,
not invariably, accompanied by a rise in the pitch of the voice, just
as the weakening of the tone is accompanied by a lowering of the pitch.
In the Teutonic languages these variations of stress or accent serve to
bring into prominence the relative importance logically of the various
syllables of which words are composed. As an almost invariable rule, the
accent falls in these languages on the root-syllable, which determines
the sense of the word, and not on the formative elements which modify
that sense. This accent is an expiratory or stress accent.
It must be noted that we cannot, using the term in this sense, speak
of the accent of a monosyllabic word when isolated, but only of its
sound; nor can we use the word _accent_ with reference to two or more
syllables in juxtaposition, when they are all uttered with precisely
the same force of voice. The term is significant only in relation
to a _variation_ in the audible stress with which the different
syllables of a word or a sentence are spoken. This variation of stress
affects monosyllables only in connected speech, where they receive an
accentuation relative to the other words of the sentence. An absolute
uniformity of stress in a sentence is unnatural, though the amount
of variation in stress differs greatly in different languages. 'The
distinctions of stress in some languages are less marked than in others.
Thus in French the syllables are all pronounced with a nearly uniform
stress, the strong syllables rising only a little above the general
level, its occurrence being also uncertain and fluctuating. This makes
Frenchmen unable without systematic training to master the accentuation
of foreign languages.'[6] English and the other Teutonic languages, on
the other hand, show a marked tendency to alternate weak and strong
stress.
§ =7.= With regard to the function which it discharges in connected
speech, we may classify accent or stress under four different
categories. First comes what may be called the syntactical accent,
which marks the logical importance of a word in relation to other
words of the sentence. In a sentence like 'the birds are singing', the
substantive 'birds' has, as denoting the subject of the sentence, the
strongest accent; next in logical or syntactical importance comes the
word 'singing', denoting an activity of the subject, and this has a
comparatively strong accent; the auxiliary 'are' being a word of minor
importance is uttered with very little force of voice; the article
'the', being the least emphatic or significant, is uttered accordingly
with the slightest perceptible stress of all.
Secondly, we have the rhetorical accent, or as it might be called, the
subjective accent, inasmuch as it depends upon the emphasis which the
speaker wishes to give to that particular word of the sentence which he
desires to bring prominently before the hearer. Thus in the sentence,
'you have done this,' the rhetorical accent may fall on any of the four
words which the speaker desires to bring into prominence, e.g. '_yóu_
(and no one else) have done this,' or 'you _háve_ done this (though you
deny it), or you have _dóne_ this' (you have not left it undone), or,
finally, 'you have done _thís_' (and not what you were told). This kind
of accent could also be termed the emphatic accent.
Thirdly, we have the rhythmical accent, which properly speaking belongs
to poetry only, and often gives a word or syllable an amount of stress
which it would not naturally have in prose, as, for instance, in the
following line of _Hamlet_ (III. iii. 27)--
_My lord, he's going to his mother's closet_,
the unimportant word 'to' receives a stronger accent, due to the
influence of the rhythm, than it would have in prose. Similarly in the
following line of Chaucer's _Troilus and Cryseide_, l. 1816--
_For thóusandés his hóndes máden dýe_,
the inflexional syllable _es_ was certainly not ordinarily pronounced
with so much stress as it must have here under the influence of the
accent as determined by the rhythm of the line. Or again the word
'writyng', in the following couplet of Chaucer's _Canterbury Tales_
(Prol. 325-6)--
_Therto he couthe endite and make a thing,
Ther couthe no wight pynche at his writyng_,
was certainly not pronounced in ordinary speech with the same stress on
the last syllable as is here demanded both by the rhythm and rhyme.
As a rule, however, the rhythmical accent in English coincides with the
fourth kind of accent, the etymological or word-accent, which we now
have to deal with, and in greater detail.
Just as the different words of a sentence are pronounced, as we have
seen, with varying degrees of stress, so similarly the different
syllables of a single word are uttered with a varying intensity of
the force of the breath. One of the syllables of the individual word
is always marked off from the rest by a greater force of tone, and
these others are again differentiated from each other by subordinate
gradations of intensity of utterance, which may sometimes be so weak as
to lead to a certain amount of indistinctness, especially in English.
In the Teutonic languages, the root-syllable, as the most important
element of the word, and that which conveys the meaning, always bears
the chief accent, the other syllables bearing accents which are
subordinate to this chief accent. As the etymology of a word is always
closely associated with the form of the root-syllable, this syllabic
accent may be called the etymological accent. It naturally happens that
this syllabic accent coincides very often with the syntactical accent,
as the syntactical stress must be laid on the syllable which has the
etymological accent.
The degrees of stress on the various syllables may be as many in
number as the number of the syllables of the word in question. It is
sufficient, however, for purposes of metre and historical grammar, to
distinguish only four degrees of accent in polysyllabic words. These
four degrees of syllabic and etymological accent are as follows: 1.
the chief accent (_Hochton_, _Hauptton_); 2. the subsidiary accent
(_Tiefton_, _Nebenton_); 3. the absence of accent, or the unaccented
degree (_Tonlosigkeit_); 4. the mute degree, or absence of sound
(_Stummheit_). These last three varieties of accent arise from the
nature of the Teutonic accent, which is, it must always be remembered,
a stress-accent in which the volume of breath is expended mainly on the
first or chief syllable. The full meaning of these terms can most easily
be explained and understood by means of examples chosen either from
English or German, whose accentual basis is essentially the same. In the
word, _wonderful_, the first syllable has the chief accent (1), the last
has the subsidiary accent (2), and the middle syllable is unaccented
(3). The fourth or mute degree may be seen in such a word as _wondrous_,
shortened from _wonderous_. This fuller form may still be used, for
metrical purposes, as a trisyllable in which the first syllable has the
chief accent, the last the subsidiary accent, and the middle syllable
is unaccented, though audible. The usual pronunciation is, however, in
agreement with the usual spelling, disyllabic, and is _wondrous_; in
other words, the vowel _e_ which originally formed the middle syllable,
has been dropped altogether in speech as in writing. From the point of
view of the accent, it has passed from the unaccented state to the state
of muteness; but may be restored to the unaccented, though audible,
state, wherever emphasis or metre requires the full syllable. We have
the line: 'And it grew wondrous cold,' for which we might have 'The cold
grew wonderous'. In other cases the vowel is retained in writing but is
often dropped in colloquial pronunciation, or for metrical convenience.
Thus, in Shakespeare, we find sometimes the full form--
_why the sepulchre
Has oped his ponderous and marble jaws._
Hamlet, I. iv. 50.
and sometimes the curtailed form--
_To draw with idle spiders' strings
Most ponderous and substantial things._
Measure for Measure, III. ii. 290.
This passing of an unaccented syllable into complete muteness is very
frequent in English, as compared with other cognate languages. It
has led, in the historical development of the language, to a gradual
weakening, and finally, in many instances, to a total loss of the
inflexional endings. Very frequently, an inflexional vowel that has
become mute is retained in the current spelling; thus in the verbal
forms _gives_, _lives_, the _e_ of the termination, though no longer
pronounced, is still retained in writing. Sometimes, in poetical texts,
it is omitted, but its position is indicated by an apostrophe, as in the
spellings _robb'd_, _belov'd_. In many words, on the other hand, the
silent vowel has ceased to be written, as in _grown_, _sworn_, of which
the original forms were _growen_, _sworen_.
§ =8.= Written marks to indicate the position of the accent were
employed in early German poetry as early as the first half of the
ninth century, when they were introduced, it is supposed, by Hrabanus
Maurus of Fulda and his pupil Otfrid. The similar marks that are found
in certain Early English MSS., as the _Ormulum_, are usually signs of
vowel-quantity. They may possibly have sometimes been intended to denote
stress, but their use for this purpose is so irregular and uncertain
that they give little help towards determining the varying degrees of
accent in words during the earliest stages of the language. For this
purpose we must look for other and less ambiguous means, and these
are found (in the case of Old English words and forms) first, in the
alliteration, secondly, in comparison with related words of the other
Teutonic languages, and, thirdly, in the development in the later stages
of English itself. After the Norman Conquest, the introduction of rhyme,
and of new forms of metre imitated from the French and mediaeval Latin
poetry, affords further help in investigating the different degrees of
syllabic accent in Middle English words. None of these means, however,
can be considered as yielding results of absolute certainty, chiefly
because during this period the accentuation of the language was passing
through a stage of transition or compromise between the radically
different principles which characterize the Romanic and Teutonic
families of languages. This will be explained more fully in a subsequent
chapter.
Notwithstanding this period of fluctuation the fundamental law of
accentuation remained unaltered, namely, that the chief accent falls on
the root of the word, which is in most cases the first syllable. For
purposes of notation the acute (´) will be used in this work to denote
the chief accent, the grave (`) the subsidiary accent of the single
word; to indicate the rhythmical or metrical accent the acute alone will
be sufficient.
§ =9.= In English poetry, as in the poetry of the other Teutonic
nations, the rhythmical accent coincides normally with the syllabic or
etymological accent, and this, therefore, determines and regulates the
rhythm. In the oldest form of Teutonic poetry, the original alliterative
line, the rhythm is indicated by a definite number of strongly accented
syllables, accompanied by a less definite number of syllables which
do not bear the same emphatic stress. This principle of versification
prevails not only in Old English and Old and Middle High German poetry,
but also, to a certain extent, in the period of Middle English, where,
in the same manner, the number of beats or accented syllables indicates
the number of 'feet' or metrical units, and a single strongly accented
syllable can by itself constitute a 'foot'. This practice is a feature
which distinguishes early English and German poetry, not only from
the classical poetry, in which a foot or measure must consist of at
least two syllables, but also from that of the Romanic, modern German,
and modern English languages, which has been influenced by classical
example, and in which, accordingly, a foot must contain one accented and
at least one unaccented syllable following one another in a regular
order. The classical terms 'foot' and 'measure' have, in their strict
sense, relation to the quantity of the syllables, and can therefore
be applied to the modern metres only by analogy. In poetry which is
based on the principle of accent or stress, the proper term is _bar_
(in German _Takt_). The general resemblances between modern accentual
and ancient quantitative metres are, however, so strong, that it is
hardly desirable to discontinue the application of old and generally
understood technical terms of the classical versification to modern
metres, provided the fundamental distinction between quantity and accent
is always borne in mind.
Setting aside for the present the old Teutonic alliterative line, in
which a 'bar' might permissibly consist of a single syllable, we may
retain the names of the feet of the classical quantitative versification
for the 'bars' of modern versification, using them in modified senses. A
group consisting of one unaccented followed by an accented syllable may
be called an _iambus_; one accented followed by an unaccented syllable a
_trochee_; two unaccented syllables followed by an accented syllable an
_anapaest_; one accented syllable followed by two unaccented syllables
a _dactyl_. These four measures might also be described according to
the length of the intervals separating the accents, and according as
the rhythm is _ascending_ (passing from an unaccented to an accented
syllable) or _descending_ (passing from an accented to an unaccented
syllable). We should then have the terms, (1) _ascending disyllabic_
(iambus), (2) _descending disyllabic_ (trochee), (3) _ascending
trisyllabic_ (anapaest), and (4) _descending trisyllabic_ (dactyl).[7]
But we may agree with Prof. Mayor that 'it is certainly more convenient
to speak of iambic than of ascending disyllabic'.[8] It is, however,
only in the case of these four feet or measures that it is desirable to
adhere to the terminology of the ancient metres, and as a matter of fact
iambus, trochee, anapaest, and dactyl are the only names of classical
feet that are commonly recognized in English prosody.[9] As to the
employment in the treatment of English metre of less familiar technical
terms derived from classical prosody, we agree with Prof. Mayor, when
he says: 'I can sympathize with Mr. Ellis in his objection to the
classicists who would force upon us such terms as _choriambic_ and
_proceleusmatic_ to explain the rhythm of Milton. I do not deny that
the effect of his rhythm might sometimes be represented by such terms;
but if we seriously adopt them to explain his metre, we are attempting
an impossibility, to express in technical language the infinite variety
of measured sound which a genius like Milton could draw out of the
little five-stringed instrument on which he chose to play.' The use of
these and other classical terms is justifiable only when we have to deal
with professed imitations of ancient forms of verse in English.
Whatever names may be chosen to denote the metrical forms, the _measure_
or _foot_ always remains the unity which is the basis of all modern
metrical systems, and of all investigation into metre. For a line or
verse is built up by the succession of a limited number of feet or
measures, equal or unequal. With regard to the limit of the number of
feet permissible in a line or verse, no fixed rule can be laid down.
In no case must a line contain more feet than the ear may without
difficulty apprehend as a rhythmic whole; or, if the number of feet is
too great for this, the line must be divided by a _pause_ or _break_
(caesura) into two or more parts which we may then call rhythmical
_sections_. This break is a characteristic mark of the typical Old
English alliterative line, which is made up of two rhythmical sections.
The structure of this verse was at one time obscured through the
practice of printing each of these sections by itself as a short line;
but Grimm's example is now universally followed, and the two sections
are printed as parts of one long line.[10] Before entering into a
detailed consideration of the alliterative long line, it will be needful
to make a few general remarks on rhyme and its different species.
§ =10.= Modern metre is not only differentiated from metre of the
classical languages by the principle of _accent_ as opposed to
_quantity_; it has added a new metrical principle foreign to the ancient
systems. This principle is Rhyme. Instances of what looks like rhyme are
found in the classical poets from Homer onwards, but they are sporadic,
and are probably due to accident.[11]
Rhyme was not in use as an accessory to metre in Latin till the
quantitative principle had given way to the accentual principle in the
later hymns of the Church, and it has passed thence into all European
systems of metre.
In our poetry it serves a twofold purpose: it is used either simply
as an ornament, or as a tie to connect single lines into the larger
metrical unity of stanza or stave, by the recurrence of similar sounds
at various intervals.
In its widest sense rhyme is an agreement or consonance of sounds in
syllables or words, and falls into several subdivisions, according to
the extent and position of this agreement. As to its position, this
consonance may occur in the beginning of a syllable or word, or in the
middle, or in both middle and end at the same time. As to its extent,
it may comprehend one or two or more syllables. Out of these various
possibilities of likeness or consonance there arise three chief kinds
of rhyme in this wide sense, alliteration, assonance, and end-rhyme, or
rhyme simply in the more limited and usual acceptation of the word.
§ =11.= This last, end-rhyme, or full-rhyme, or rhyme proper, consists
in a perfect agreement or consonance of syllables or words except in
their initial sounds, which as a rule are different. Generally speaking,
the agreement of sounds falls on the last accented syllable of a word,
or on the last accented syllable and a following unaccented syllable or
syllables. End-rhyme or full-rhyme seems to have arisen independently
and without historical connexion in several nations, but as far as
our present purpose goes we may confine ourselves to its development
in Europe among the nations of Romanic speech at the beginning of the
Middle Ages. Its adoption into all modern literature is due to the
extensive use made of it in the hymns of the Church. Full-rhyme or
end-rhyme therefore is a characteristic of modern European poetry, and
though it cannot be denied that unrhymed verse, or blank verse, is much
used in English poetry, the fact remains that this metre is an exotic
product of the Renaissance, and has never become thoroughly popular. Its
use is limited to certain kinds of poetic composition, whereas rhyme
prevails over the wider part of the realm of modern poetry.
§ =12.= The second kind of rhyme (taking the word in its broader sense),
namely, vocalic assonance, is of minor importance in the treatment of
English metre. It consists in a similarity between the vowel-sounds
only of different words; the surrounding consonants do not count. The
following groups of words are assonant together: _give_, _thick_,
_fish_, _win_; _sell_, _step_, _net_; _thorn_, _storm_, _horse_. This
kind of rhyme was very popular among the Romanic nations, and among them
alone. Its first beginnings are found in the Latin ecclesiastical hymns,
and these soon developed into real or full-rhyme.[12] It passed thence
into Provençal, Old French, and Spanish poetry, and has continued in use
in the last named. It is very rarely found in English verse, it has in
fact never been used deliberately, as far as we know, except in certain
recent experiments in metre. Where it does seem to occur it is safest to
look upon it as imperfect rhyme only. Instances are found in the Early
English metrical romances, Lives of Saints, and popular ballad poetry,
where the technique of the metre is not of a high order; examples such
as _flete_, _wepe_; _brake_, _gate_; _slepe_, _ymete_ from _King Horn_
might be looked on as assonances, but were probably intended for real
rhymes. The consistent use of the full-rhyme being difficult, the poets,
in such instances as these, contented themselves with the simpler
harmony between the vowels alone, which represents a transition stage
between the older rhymeless alliterative verse, and the newer Romanic
metres with real and complete rhyme. Another possible form of assonance,
in which the consonants alone agree while the vowels may differ, might
be called _consonantal assonance_ as distinguished from _vocalic
assonance_, or assonance simply. This form of assonance is not found in
English poetry, though it is employed in Celtic and Icelandic metres.[13]
§ =13.= The third species of rhyme, to use the word still in its widest
sense, is known as alliteration (German _Stabreim_ or _Anreim_). It is
common to all Teutonic nations, and is found fully developed in the
oldest poetical monuments of Old Norse, Old High German, Old Saxon, and
Old English. Even in classical poetry, especially in the remains of
archaic Latin, it is not unfrequently met with, but serves only as a
means for giving to combinations of words a rhetorical emphasis, and is
not a formal principle of the metre bound by strict rules, as it is in
Teutonic poetry. Alliteration consists in a consonance or agreement of
the sounds at the beginning of a word or syllable, as in _love_ and
_liking_, _house_ and _home_, _woe_ and _weal_. The alliteration of
vowels and diphthongs has this peculiarity that the agreement need
not be exact as in 'apt alliteration's artful aid', but can exist, at
least in the oldest stages of the language, between all vowels
indiscriminately. Thus in the oldest English not only were _ellen_ and
_ende_, _ǣnig_ and _ǣr_, _ēac_ and _ēage_ alliterations, but _age_ and
_īdel_, _ǣnig_ and _ellen_, _eallum_ and _æðelingum_ were employed in
the strictest forms of verse as words which perfectly alliterated with
each other.
This apparent confusion of vowel-sounds so different in their quantity
and quality is probably to be explained by the fact that originally in
English, as now in German, all the vowels were preceded by a 'glottal
catch' which is the real alliterating sound.[14] The harmony or
consonance of the unlike vowels is hardly perceptible in Modern English
and does not count as alliteration.
The most general law of the normal alliterative line is that three or at
least two of the four strongly accented syllables which occur in every
long line (two in each section) must begin with an alliterative letter,
for example, in the following Old English lines:
_=w=ereda =w=uldorcining | wordum hērigen._ Gen. 2.
_=m=ōdum lufien | he is =m=ægna spēd._ Gen. 3.
_=æ=sc bið =o=ferhēah | =e=ldum dȳre._ Run. 26.
_on =a=ndsware | and on =e=lne strong._ Gū. 264.
or in early Modern English:
_For =m=yschefe will =m=ayster us | yf =m=easure us forsake._
Skelton, Magnif. 156.
_How sodenly =w=orldly | =w=elth doth dekay._ ib. 1518.
_I am your =e=ldest son | =E=sau by name._ Dodsl. Coll. ii. 249.
The history of the primitive alliterative line follows very different
lines of development in the various Teutonic nations. In Old High
German, after a period in which the strict laws of the verse were
largely neglected, it was abandoned in favour of rhyme by Otfrid (circa
868). In Old English it kept its place as the only form of verse
for all classes of poetical composition, and continued in use, even
after the introduction of Romanic forms of metre, during the Middle
English period, and did not totally die out till the beginning of the
seventeenth century. The partial revival of it is due to the increased
interest in Old English studies, but has been confined largely to
translations. As an occasional rhetorical or stylistic ornament of both
rhymed and unrhymed verse, alliteration has always been made use of by
English poets.
NOTES:
[1] _Zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache_, zweite Ausgabe, p.
624, Berlin, 1868.
[2] _Metrik der Griechen_, 1ª, 500.
[3] It should be remarked that in Sanskrit, as in the classical
languages, that prominence of one of the syllables of a word,
which is denoted by the term 'accent', was originally marked
by pitch or elevation of tone, and that in the Teutonic
languages the word-accent is one of stress or emphasis.
[4] _Handbook of Phonetics_, § 263.
[5] _Die physiologischen Grundlagen der neuhochdeutschen Verskunst_,
1871, p. 2.
[6] Sweet, _Handbook of Phonetics_, Oxford, 1877, p. 92.
[7] Cf. _Transactions of the Philological Society_, 1875-6, London,
1877, pp. 397 ff.; _Chapters on English Metre_, by Prof. J. B.
Mayor, 2nd ed., pp. 5 ff.
[8] _Transact._, p. 398.
[9] They are used by Puttenham, _The Arte of English Poesy_, 1589,
Arber's reprint, p. 141.
[10] J. Grimm's ed. of _Andreas and Elene_, 1840, pp. lv ff.
[11] Cf. Lehrs, _de Aristarchi studiis Homericis_, 1865, p. 475.
[12] Cf. J. Huemer, _Untersuchungen über die ältesten
lateinisch-christlichen Rhythmen_, Vienna, 1879, p. 60.
[13] In the Icelandic terminology this is _skothending_, Möbius,
_Háttatal_, ii, p. 2.
[14] Cf. Sievers, _Altgermanische Metrik_, § 18. 2.
CHAPTER II
THE ALLITERATIVE VERSE IN OLD ENGLISH
§ =14. General remarks.= It is highly probable that alliteration
was the earliest kind of poetic form employed by the English people.
There is no trace in the extant monuments of the language of any
more primitive or simpler system. A predilection for alliteration
existed even in prose, as in the names of heroes and families like
Scyld and Sceaf, Hengist and Horsa, Finn and Folcwald, pairs that
alliterate in the same way as the family names of other Teutonic
nations: the names of the three sons of Mannus, Ingo, Isto, Irmino,
conform to this type.[15] The earliest monuments of Old English
poetry, as the fragmentary hymn of Cædmon in the More MS. (Cambridge)
and the inscription on the Ruthwell Cross, are composed in the long
alliterative line. The great body of Old English verse is in this
metre, the only exceptions being the 'Rhyming Poem' (in the _Exeter
Book_),[16] and a few other late pieces, in which alliteration and
rhyme are combined. This Old English poetry, therefore, together with
the Old Norse and Old Saxon remains (the _Heliand_ with 5,985 lines,
and the recently discovered fragment of the Old Saxon _Genesis_, edited
by Zangemeister and Braune, 1894, with 335 lines), affords ample and
trustworthy material for determining the laws of the alliterative verse
as used by the Teutonic nations. In comparison with these the remains
of Old High German alliterative verse are both scanty and lax in
structure.
§ =15. Theories on the metrical form of the alliterative line.=
Notwithstanding their comparative scantiness, the Old High German
fragments (_Hildebrandslied_, _Wessobrunner Gebet_, _Muspilli_ and two
magical formulae, with a total of some 110 lines) formed the basis
of the earliest theories of the laws of the accentuation and general
character of the original alliterative line. They were assumed to have
preserved the features of the primitive metre, and conclusions were
drawn from them as to the typical form of the verse. When examined
closely, the Old High German remains (and this is true also of the
longer monuments in Old Saxon) are found to differ widely from Old
Norse and Old English verse in one respect. While the general and
dominating features of the line remain the same, the Old High German
and Old Saxon lines are much longer than the Old Norse or Old English
lines. In Old Norse or Old English the half line frequently contains no
more than four syllables, in marked contrast to Old High German and Old
Saxon, where the half line or section is considerably longer.
The first attempt at a theory of the metrical structure of the
alliterative line was made by Lachmann. He based his theory on the
form of verse created by Otfrid, in imitation of Latin models, which
consists of a long line of eight accents, separated by leonine rhyme
into two sections each of four accents alternately strong and weak.[17]
The laws of the rhyming and strophic verse of Otfrid were applied by
Lachmann to the purely alliterative verses of the Old High German
_Hildebrandslied_, and this system of scanning was further applied by
his followers to the alliterative verse of Old English, the true nature
of which was long misunderstood on the Continent. In England itself a
sounder view of the native alliterative verse was propounded by Bishop
Percy as early as 1765, in his _Essay on the Metre of Pierce Plowman_
published along with his well-known _Reliques of Ancient English
Poetry_, not to speak of the earlier writings of G. Gascoigne (1575)
and James VI (1585). But the number and authority of some of Lachmann's
followers are such that some detailed account of their theories must be
given.[18]
§ =16. The four-beat theory= of the alliterative verse, based on
the assumption that each of the two sections must have had four
accented syllables to bring out a regular rhythm, was applied by
Lachmann himself only to the Old High German _Hildebrandslied_,[19]
while on the other hand he recognized a freer variety with two chief
accents only in each section, for the Old Norse, Old Saxon, and Old
English. The four-beat theory was further applied to the Old High
German _Muspilli_ by Bartsch,[20] and to the rest of the smaller
relics of Old High German verse by Müllenhoff.[21] The next step was
to bring the Old Saxon _Heliand_ and the Old English _Beowulf_ under
this system of scansion; and this was taken by M. Heyne in 1866 and
1867. But the metre of _Beowulf_ does not differ from that of the
other alliterative poems in Old English, and these in their turn
were claimed for the four-beat theory by Schubert,[22] but with this
important modification, made before by Bartsch, that side by side with
the usual four-beat sections there were also to be found sections of
three beats only. One obvious difficulty in applying the theory of
four strongly marked beats to the Old English half-lines or hemistichs
is this, that in Old English these hemistichs consist in very many
cases of not more than four syllables altogether, each one of which
would on this theory have an accent to itself. To meet these cases E.
Jessen[23] started the theory that in certain cases pauses had to be
substituted for 'beats not realized'. A further modification of the
four-beat doctrine was introduced by Amelung,[24] who maintained that
in the metre of the _Heliand_ each hemistich had two primary or chief
accents and two secondary or subordinate accents. In order to bring the
verse under this scansion he assumes that certain syllables admitted
of being lengthened. He further regarded the _Heliand_ verse as a
metre regulated by strict time, and not as a measure intended for free
recitation and depending only on the number of accented syllables.
A few other more recent attempts at solving the problem must be
mentioned before we pass on to explain and discuss Sievers's system in
the next paragraph. The views of Prof. Möller of Copenhagen[25] have
found an adherent in Lawrence, from whose book[26] we may quote the
following summary of Möller's theory. According to Prof. Möller the
hemistich consists theoretically of two measures (_Takte_), each of four
_morae_ ×́ × ×̀ × (a _mora_, ×, being the time required for one short
syllable), and therefore the whole verse of four measures, thus:
×́ × ×̀ × | ×́ × ×̀ × || ×́ × ×̀ × | ×́ × ×̀ × ||.
Where, in a verse, the _morae_ are not filled by actual syllables, their
time must be occupied by rests (represented by r*) in reciting, by
holding on the note in singing.[27] A long syllable, ——, is equivalent
to two _morae_. Thus v. 208 of _Beowulf_
_súnd-wùdu. sṓhtè. sécg. wī́sàde_.
would be symbolically represented as follows:
–́ ×̀ × | –́ ×̀ r || –́ rr | –́ ×̀ ×.
According to this system the pause at _secg_ will be twice as long as
that at _sōhte_, whilst at _wudu_ there will be no real pause and the
point will merely indicate the end of the measure.
Others reverted to the view of Bartsch and Schubert that there could
be hemistichs with only three accents alongside of the hemistichs with
the normal number of four. Among these may be mentioned H. Hirt,[28]
whose view is that three beats to a hemistich is the normal number,
four being less usual, the long line having thus mostly six beats,
against the eight of Lachmann's theory; K. Fuhr,[29] who holds that
every hemistich, whether it stands first or second in the verse, has
four beats if the last syllable is unaccented (_klingend_; in that case
the final unaccented syllable receives a secondary rhythmical accent,
for example, _fḗond máncýnnès_) and has three beats if it is accented
(_stumpf_, for example, _fýrst fórð gewā́t_, or _múrnénde mṓd_, &c.);
and B. ten Brink,[30] who calls the hemistichs with four beats full or
'complete' (e.g. _hȳ́ràn scóldè_, but admits hemistichs with three beats
only, calling them 'incomplete' from the want of a secondary accent
(e.g. _twélf wíntra tī́d, hā́m gesṓhte_, &c.). The four-beat theory
was reverted to by M. Kaluza, who endeavours to reconcile it with the
results of Sievers and others.[31] A somewhat similar view is taken by
R. Kögel.[32] Trautmann[33] takes Amelung's view that certain words and
syllables must be lengthened in order to get the four accented syllables
necessary for each hemistich. Thus, according to Trautmann's scansion,
_sprécað fǽgeré befóran_
would run ×́ × | ×́ × | ×́ × | ⏑́ × and
_ónd þú him méte sýlest_
would also have the formula ×́ × | ×́ × | ×́ × | ⏑́ ×,
_ond_ being protracted to two units. Another instance of this
lengthening would, on this theory, occur in the final syllable of
the word _radores_ in the hemistich _únder rádorès rýne_, while in
a section like _gūð-rinc monig_, or _of fold-grǽfe_, the words
_rinc_ and _of_ would be extended to two, and _gūð_ and _fold_ would
each be extended to four units, in order to fit in with the scansion
×́ × | ×́ × | ×́ × | ⏑́ ×. Most of the partisans of the four-beat
theory for the hemistich agree in making two of these beats primary,
and two secondary; Trautmann, however, does not seem to recognize any
such difference in the force of the four accents. All the supporters
of the four-beat theory have this in common, that the rhythm of the
verse is assumed to be based on time (_taktierend_), but in other
respects differ widely from each other; Hirt, for example, in his
last discussion of the subject,[34] claiming that his own view is
fundamentally different from that of Kaluza, which again he looks on as
at variance with those of Möller and Heusler.
§ =17. The two-beat theory=, on the other hand, is that each of the
two hemistichs of the alliterative line need have only two accented
syllables. In England this view was taken by two sixteenth-century
writers on verse, George Gascoigne[35] who quotes the line,
_No wight in this world, that wealth can attain_,
giving as the accentual scheme ` ´ ` ` ´ ` ´ ` ` ´; and by King James
VI, whose example is--
_Fetching fude for to feid it fast furth of the Farie._[36]
In 1765, Percy, in his _Essay on Pierce Plowman's Visions_, pointed
out 'that the author of this poem will not be found to have invented
any new mode of versification, as some have supposed, but only to have
retained that of the old Saxon and Gothick poets, which was probably
never wholly laid aside, but occasionally used at different intervals'.
After quoting[37] two Old Norse, he gives two Old English verses:--
_Sceop þa and scyrede scyppend ure_ (Gen. 65),
_ham and heahsetl heofena rices_ (ib. 33);
he continues: 'Now if we examine the versification of Pierce Plowman's
Visions' (from which he quotes the beginning--
_In a somer season | when softe was the sonne
I schop me into a schroud | a scheep as I were, &c._)
'we shall find it constructed exactly by these rules', which are, in
his own words, 'that every distich [i.e. complete long line] should
contain at least three words beginning with the same letter or sound;
two of these correspondent sounds might be placed either in the first or
second line of the distich, and one in the other, but all three were not
regularly to be crowded into one line.' He then goes on to quote further
specimens of alliterative verse from _Pierce the Ploughman's Crede_,
_The Sege of Jerusalem_, _The Chevalere Assigne_, _Death and Liffe_ and
_Scottish Fielde_, which latter ends with a rhyming couplet:
_And his ancestors of old time | have yearded theire longe
Before William conquerour | this cuntry did inhabitt.
Jesus bring them to blisse | that brought us forth of bale,
That hath hearkened me heare | or heard my tale._
Taken as a whole his dissertation on the history of alliterative verse
is remarkably correct, and his final remarks are noteworthy:
Thus we have traced the alliterative measure so low as the
sixteenth century. It is remarkable that all such poets as used this
kind of metre, retained along with it many peculiar Saxon idioms,
particularly such as were appropriated to poetry: _this deserves the
attention of those who are desirous to recover the laws of the ancient
Saxon poesy, usually given up as inexplicable:_ I am of opinion that
they will find what they seek in the metre of Pierce Plowman. About
the beginning of the sixteenth century this kind of versification
began to change its form; the author of _Scottish Field_, we
see, concludes his poem with a couplet of rhymes; this was an
innovation[38] that did but prepare the way for the general admission
of that more modish ornament. When rhyme began to be superadded,
all the niceties of alliteration were at first retained with it: the
song of Little John Nobody exhibits this union very closely.... To
proceed; the old uncouth verse of the ancient writers would no longer
go down without the more fashionable ornament of rhyme, and therefore
rhyme was superadded. This correspondence of final sounds engrossing
the whole attention of the poet and fully satisfying the reader, the
internal imbellishment of alliteration was no longer studied, and thus
was this kind of metre at length swallowed up and lost in our common
burlesque alexandrine, now never used but in songs and pieces of low
humour, as in the following ballad; and that well-known doggrel:
'A cobler there was and he lived in a stall'.
Now it is clear that this verse is of exactly the same structure as the
verses quoted by Gascoigne:
_No wight in this world that wealth can attayne,
Ùnléss hè bèléue, thàt áll ìs bùt vaýne_,
where the scheme of accents is Gascoigne's own, showing that he read
them as verses of four accents in all, two in each hemistich. They show
the same rhythmical structure as the 'tumbling' or alliterative line
given by James VI[39] (1585):
_Fetching fude for to feid it fast furth of the Farie_,
and described by him as having 'twa [feit, i.e. syllables] short,
and ane lang throuch all the lyne', in other words with four accented
syllables in the verse.
Percy detected very acutely that the Middle English alliterative line
stood in close connexion with the Old English alliterative line, and
suggested as highly probable that the metre of _Pierce Plowman_ would
give a key to the rhythm of that older form of verse, which would have
to be read with two accented syllables in the hemistich, and therefore
four in the whole line.
Had this essay of Percy's been known to Lachmann's followers, many
of the forced attempts at reconciling the Old English verse with a
scheme that involved a fixed number of syllables in the line would not
have been made. Lachmann himself, it must be remembered, admitted the
two-beat scansion for Old Norse, Old Saxon, and Old English. Meanwhile
other investigators were at work on independent lines. In 1844 A.
Schmeller, the editor of the _Heliand_, formulated the law that, in
the Teutonic languages, it is the force with which the different
syllables are uttered that regulates the rhythm of the verse, and not
the number or length of the syllables (which are of minor importance),
and established the fact that this alliterative verse was not meant to
be sung but to be recited.[40] He does not enter into the details of
the rhythm of the verse, except by pointing out the two-beat cadence
of each section. Somewhat later, W. Wackernagel[41] declared himself
in favour of the two-beat theory for all Teutonic alliterative verse.
In every hemistich of the verse there are according to Wackernagel two
syllables with a grammatical or logical emphasis, and consequently a
strong accent, the number of less strongly accented syllables not being
fixed. The two-beat theory was again ably supported by F. Vetter[42]
and by K. Hildebrand, who approached the subject by a study of the Old
Norse alliterative verse,[43] and by M. Rieger in his instructive essay
on Old Saxon and Old English versification.[44] In this essay Rieger
pointed out the rules prevailing in the poetry of those two closely
related Teutonic nations, dealt with the distribution and quality of the
alliteration, the relation of the alliteration to the noun, adjective,
and verb, and to the order of words, with the caesura and the close of
the verse, and, finally, with the question of the accented syllables and
the limits of the use of unaccented syllables.[45] Other scholars, as
Horn, Ries, and Sievers, contributed further elucidations of the details
of this metre on the basis of Rieger's researches.[46]
Next to Rieger's short essay the most important contribution made to
the accurate and scientific study of alliterative verse was that made
by Sievers in his article on the rhythm of the Germanic alliterative
verse.[47] In this he shows, to use his own words, 'that a statistical
classification of groups of words with their natural accentuation in
both sections of the alliterative line makes it clear that this metre,
in spite of its variety, is not so irregular as to the unaccented
syllables at the beginning or in the middle of the verse as has been
commonly thought, but that it has a range of a limited number of
definite forms which may be all reduced to five primary types.' These
five types or chief variations in the relative position of the accented
and unaccented syllables are, as Sievers points out, of such a nature
and so arbitrarily combined in the verse, that they cannot possibly be
regarded as symmetrical feet of a line evenly measured and counted by
the number of syllables. 'The fundamental principle, therefore, of the
structure of the alliterative line, as we find it in historical times,
is that of a free change of rhythm which can only be understood if the
verse was meant to be recited, not to be sung.'[48] Soon after the
publication of Sievers's essay on the rhythm of the Germanic verse, the
first part of which contained a complete classification of all the forms
of the line occurring in _Beowulf_, other scholars applied his method
and confirmed his results by examining in detail the other important
Old English texts; Luick dealt with _Judith_,[49] Frucht with the poems
of Cynewulf,[50] and Cremer with _Andreas_, &c.[51] Sievers himself,
after contributing to the pages of Paul's _Grundriss der germanischen
Philologie_ a concise account of his theories and results, expounded
them in greater detail in his work on Old Germanic Metre[52] in which
he emphasizes the fact that his five-type theory cannot properly be
called a theory at all, but is simply an expression of the rules of the
alliterative verse obtained by a statistical method of observation. In
spite of the criticisms of his opponents, Möller, Heusler, Hirt, Fuhr,
and others, he maintained his former views. In principle these views are
in conformity with the manner of reading or scanning the alliterative
verse explained by English writers on the subject from the sixteenth
century downwards, though their terminology naturally is not the same as
Sievers's. We may, therefore, accept them on the whole as sound.
It would be out of place here to enter into the question of prehistoric
forms of Teutonic poetry. It will be enough to say that in Sievers's
opinion a primitive form of this poetry was composed in strophes or
stanzas, intended to be sung and not merely to be recited; that at
a very early period this sung strophic poetry gave way to a recited
stichic form suitable to epic narrations; and that his five-type forms
are the result of this development. As all the attempts to show that
certain Old English poems were originally composed in strophic form[53]
have proved failures, we may confidently assent to Sievers's conclusion
that the alliterative lines (as a rule) followed one upon another in
unbroken succession, and that in historic times they were not composed
in even and symmetrical measures (_taktierend_), and were not meant to
be sung to fixed tunes.
The impossibility of assuming such symmetrical measures for the Old
English poetry is evident from the mere fact that the end of the line
does not as a rule coincide with the end of the sentence, as would
certainly be the case had the lines been arranged in staves or stanzas
meant for singing. The structure of the alliterative line obeys only the
requirements of free recitation and is built up of two hemistichs which
have a rhythmical likeness to one another resulting from the presence
in each of two accented syllables, but which need not have, and as a
matter of fact very rarely have, complete identity of rhythm, because
the number and situation of the unaccented syllables may vary greatly in
the two sections.
§ =18. Accentuation of Old English.= As the versification of Old
English is based on the natural accentuation of the language, it will
be necessary to state the laws of this accentuation before giving an
account of the five types to which the structure of the hemistich has
been reduced.
In simple polysyllables the chief or primary accent, in this work marked
by an acute (´), is as a rule on the root-syllable, and the inflexional
and other elements of the word have a less marked accent varying from
a secondary accent, here marked by a grave (`), to the weakest grade
of accent, which is generally left unmarked: thus _wúldor_, _héofon_,
_wī́tig_, _wúnode_, _ǽðelingas_, &c.
In the alliterative line, as a general rule, only syllables with the
chief accent carry either the alliterating sounds or the four rhythmical
accents of the verse. All other syllables, even those with secondary
accent, count ordinarily as the 'theses' (_Senkungen_) of the verse[54]:
_síndon þā =b=éarwas =b=lḗdum gehóngene
=w=lítigum =w=ǽstmum: þǣr nō wániað ṓ
=h=ā́lge under =h=éofonum =h=óltes frǽtwe_.
Phoenix 71-73.
In compound words (certain combinations with unaccented prefixes
excepted) the first element of the compound (which modifies or
determines the meaning of the second element) has the primary
accent, the second element having only a secondary accent, e.g.
_wúldor-cỳning_, _hḗah-sètl_, _sṓð-fæ̀st_.[55] If therefore
the compound has, as is mostly the case, only one alliterative sound,
that alliteration must necessarily fall on the first part of the
compound:
_=w=ī́tig =w=úldorcyning =w=órlde and héofona._ Dan. 427.
Sometimes it happens that in hemistichs of no great length the second
part of the compound carries one of the two rhythmical accents of the
hemistich, e.g.
_on =h=ḗah-sétle =h=éofones wáldend._ Cri. 555.
and in a particular form of alliteration[56] it may even contain one of
the alliterating sounds, as in the verse:
_hwæt! we =G=ā́r=d=éna in =g=ēar=d=águm._ Beow. 1.
The less strongly accented derivational and inflexional suffixes, though
they are not allowed to alliterate, may occasionally have the rhythmical
accent, on condition that they immediately follow upon a long accented
syllable, e.g.
_mid =W=ýlfíngum, þā hine =W=ára cýn._ Beow. 461.
_ne méahte ic æt =h=ílde mid =H=rúntínge._ ib. 1659.
The rhythmical value of syllables with a secondary accent will be
considered more fully later on.
These general rules for the accent of compound words formed of noun
+ noun or adjective + noun require modification for the cases where
a prefix (adverb or preposition) stands in close juxtaposition with
a verb or noun. The preposition standing before and depending on a
noun coalesces so closely with it that the two words express a single
notion, the noun having the chief accent, e.g. _onwég_, _āwég_
(away), _ætsómne_ (together), _ofdū́ne_ (down), _toníhte_ (to-night),
_onmíddum_ (amid); examples in verse are:
_gebād =w=íntra =w=órn ǣr he on=w=ég hwúrfe._ Beow. 264.
_=s=ī́d æt=s=ómne þā ge=s=úndrod wǽs._ Gen. 162.
But while the prepositional prefix thus does not carry the alliteration
owing to its want of accent, some of the adverbs used in composition are
accented, others are unaccented, and others again may be treated either
way. When the adverbial prefix originally stood by itself side by side
with the verb, and may in certain cases still be disjoined from it, it
has then the primary accent, because it is felt as a modifying element
of the compound. When, however, the prefix and the verb have become so
intimately united as to express one single notion, the verb takes the
accent and the prefix is treated as proclitic, and there is a third
class of these compounds which are used indifferently with accent on the
prefix or on the verb.
Some of the commonest prefixes used in alliteration are[57]: _and_,
_æfter_, _eft_, _ed_, _fore_, _forð_, _from_, _hider_, _in_, _hin_,
_mid_, _mis_, _niðer_, _ongēan_, _or_, _up_, _ūt_, _efne_, as in
compounds like _ándswarian_, _íngong_, _ǽfterweard_, &c.:
_on =á=ndswáre and on =é=lne stróng._ Gū. 264.
_=ǽ=ðelīc =í=ngong =é=al wæs gebúnden._ Cri. 308.
_and =ḗ=ac þāra =ý=fela =ó=rsorh wúnað._ Met. vii. 43.
_=ú=plang gestṓd wið =Í=srahḗlum._ Ex. 303.
Prefixes which do not take the alliteration are: _ā_, _ge_, _for_,
_geond_, _oð_, e.g.
_ā=h=ōn and ā=h=ébban on =h=ḗahne bḗam._ Jul. 228.
_hǽfde þā ge=f=óhten =f=óremǣrne blǣ́d._ Jud. 122.
_=b=rónde for=b=ǽrnan ne on =b=ǣ́l hládan._ Beow. 2126.
The following fluctuate: _æt_, _an_, _bī_ (_big_), _bi_ (_be_), _of_,
_ofer_, _on_, _tō_, _under_, _þurh_, _wið_, _wiðer_, _ymb_. These are
generally accented and alliterate, if compounded with substantives or
adjectives, but are not accented and do not alliterate if compounded
with verbs or other particles,[58] e.g. _óferhēah_, _óferhȳd_, but
_ofercúman_, _oferbī́dan_. The following lines will illustrate this:
(_a_) prefixes which alliterate:
_þāra þe þurh =ó=ferhȳ́d =ú=p āstī́geð._ Dan. 495.
_=á=tol is þīn =ó=nsēon hábbað we =é=alle swā́._ Satan 61.
_=ý=mbe-síttendra =ǣ́=nig þā́ra._ Beow. 2734.
(_b_) prefixes which do not alliterate:
_oððæt he þā =b=ýsgu ofer=b=íden hæfde._ Gū. 518.
_ne wíllað ēow on=d=rǣ́dan =d=ḗade fḗðan._ Exod. 266.
_=s=ýmbel ymb=s=ǣ́ton =s=ǣ́grunde nḗah._ Beow. 564.[59]
When prepositions precede other prepositions or adverbs in composition,
the accent rests on that part of the whole compound which is felt to be
the most important. Such compounds fall into three classes: (i) if a
preposition or adverb is preceded by the prepositions _be_, _on_, _tō_,
_þurh_, _wið_, these latter are not accented, since they only slightly
modify the sense of the following adverb. Compounds of this kind
are: _beǣ́ftan_, _befóran_, _begéondan_, _behíndan_, _beínnan_,
_benéoðan_, _búfan_, _bútan_, _onúfan_, _onúppan_, _tōfóran_,
_wiðínnan_, wiðū́tan, _undernéoðan_.[60] Only the second part of the
compound is allowed to alliterate in these words:
_he =f=ḗāra súm be=f=óran géngde._ Beow. 1412.
_ne þe be=h=índan lǣ́t þonne þu =h=éonan cýrre._ Cri. 155.
Most of these words do not seem to occur in the poetry.
(ii) In compounds of _þǣr_ + preposition the preposition is accented
and takes the alliteration:
_swā́ he þǣr=í=nne =á=ndlangne dǽg._ Beow. 2115.
_þe þǣr=ó=n síndon =ḗ=ce drýhten._ Hy. iv. 3.
(iii) _weard_, as in _æfterweard_, _foreweard_, _hindanweard_,
_niðerweard_, _ufeweard_, &c., is not accented:
_=h=wít =h=índanweard and se =h=áls grḗne._ Ph. 298.
_=n=íodoweard and úfeweard and þæt =n=ebb líxeð._ ib. 299.
_=f=ḗðe-géstum =f=lét ínnanweard._ Beow. 1977.
§ =19. The secondary accent.= The secondary or subordinate accent is of
as great importance as the chief or primary accent in determining the
rhythmical character of the alliterative line. It is found in the
following classes of words:
(i) In all compounds of noun + noun, or adjective + noun, or adjective
+ adjective, the second element of the compound has the subordinate
accent, e.g. _hēah-sètl, gū́ð-rinc, hríng-nèt, sṓð-fæ̀st_.
Syllables with this secondary accent are necessary in certain cases
as links between the arsis and thesis, as in forms like _þégn
Hrṓðgà̄res_ (–́ | –́ ×̀ ×) or _fýrst fórð gewà̄t_ (–́ | –́ × ̀).
(ii) In proper names like _Hrṓðg[`=a]r_, _Bḗowùlf_, _Hýgel[`=a]c_,
this secondary accent may sometimes count as one of the four chief
metrical accents of the line, as in
_=b=éornas on =b=láncum þǣr wæs =B=éowúlfes._ Beow. 857.
contrasted with
_=é=orl Béowùlfes =é=alde lā́fe._ Beow. 797.
(iii) When the second element has ceased to be felt as a distinct
part of the compound, and is little more than a suffix, it loses the
secondary accent altogether; as _hlā́ford_, _ǣ́ghwylc_, _ínwit_, and
the large class of words compounded with -_līc_ and _sum_.
_þæt he =H=éardrḗde =h=lā́ford wǣ́́re._ Beow. 2375.
wǣ́re.
_=l=úfsum and =l=ī́ðe =l=ḗofum monnum._ Cri. 914.
(iv) In words of three syllables, the second syllable when long and
following a long root-syllable with the chief accent, has, especially
in the early stage of Old English, a well-marked secondary accent:
thus, _ǣ́rèsta_, _ṓðèrra_, _sémnìnga_, _éhtènde_; the third syllable in
words of the form _ǽðelìnga_ gets the same secondary accent. This
secondary accent can count as one of the four rhythmic accents of the
line, e.g.
_þā =ǣ́=réstan =ǣ́=lda cýnnes._ Gū. 948.
_=s=ígefolca =s=wḗg oð þæt =s=émnínga._ Beow. 644.
Words of this class, not compounded, are comparatively rare, but
compounds with secondary accent are frequent.
These second syllables with a marked secondary accent in the best
examples of Old English verse mostly form by themselves a member of the
verse, i.e. are not treated as simple theses as in certain compositions
of later date, e.g.
_dȳ́gelra gescéafta._ Creat. 18.
_ā́genne brðor._ Metr. ix. 28.
(v) After a long root-syllable of a trisyllabic word a short second
syllable (whether its vowel was originally short or long) may bear one
of the chief accents of the line, e.g. _bōcère_, _bíscòpe_:
_þǣr bíscéopas and bṓcéras._ An. 607.
or may stand in the thesis and be unaccented, as
_gódes bísceope þā spræc gū́ðcýning._ Gen. 2123.
This shows that in common speech these syllables had only a slight
secondary accent.
(vi) Final syllables (whether long or short) are as a rule not accented
even though a long root-syllable precede them.
§ =20. Division and metrical value of syllables.= Some other points
must be noticed with reference to the division and metrical value of the
syllables of some classes of words.
The formative element _i_ in the present stem of the second class
of weak verbs always counts as a syllable when it follows a long
root-syllable, thus _fund-i-an_, _fund-i-ende_ not _fund-yan_, &c. In
verbs with a short root-syllable it is metrically indifferent whether
this _i_ is treated as forming a syllable by itself or coalescing as
a consonant with the following vowel, so that we may divide either
_ner-i-an_, or _ner-yan_; in verbs of the first and third class the
consonantal pronunciation was according to Sievers probably the usual
one, hence _neryan_ (_nerian_), _lifyan_ (_lifᵹan_)_, but for verbs of
the second class the syllable remained vocalic, thus _þolian_.[61]
In foreign names like _Assyria_, _Eusebius_, the _i_ is generally
treated as a vowel, but in longer words possibly as a consonant, as
_Macedonya_ (_Macedonia_). As to the epenthetic vowels developed from a
_w_, the question whether we are to pronounce _gearowe_ or _gearwe_,
_bealowes_ or _bealwes_ cannot be decided by metre. Syllabic _l, m, n_
_([l̥, m̥, n̥)_ following a short root-vowel lose their syllabic
character, thus _sĕtl_, _hræ̆gl_, _swĕfn_ are monosyllables,
but _er_ coming from original _r_ as in _wæter_, _leger_ may be
either consonantal or vocalic. After a long root-syllable vocalic
pronunciation is the rule, but occasionally words of this kind, as
_túngl_, _bṓsm_, _tā́cn_, are used as monosyllables, and the
_l_, _m_, and _n_ are consonants. Hiatus is allowed; but in many
cases elision of an unaccented syllable takes place, though no fixed
rule can be laid down owing to the fluctuating number of unaccented
syllables permissible in the hemistich or whole line. In some cases
the metre requires us to expunge vowels which have crept into the
texts by the carelessness of copyists, e.g. we must write _ḗðles_
instead of _ḗðeles_, _éngles_ instead of _éngeles_, _dḗofles_
instead of _dḗofeles_, and in other cases we must restore the older
and fuller forms such as _ṓðerra_ for _ṓðrā_, _eṓwere_
for _ḗowre_.[62] The resolution of long syllables with the chief
accent in the arsis, and of long syllables with the secondary accent
in the thesis, affects very greatly the number of syllables in the
line. Instead of the one long syllable which as a rule bears one of the
four chief accents of the verse, we not unfrequently meet with a short
accented syllable plus an unaccented syllable either long or short
( ⏑́ ×́). This is what is termed the resolution of an accented syllable.
A word accordingly like _fároðe_ with one short accented syllable and
two unaccented syllables has the same rhythmical value as _fṓron_
with one long accented and one unaccented syllable, or a combination
like _se þe wæs_ is rhythmically equivalent to _sécg wæs_.
§ =21.= We now come to =the structure of the whole alliterative line=.
The regular alliterative line or verse is made up of two hemistichs
or sections. These two sections are separated from each other by a
pause or break, but united by means of alliteration so that they form
a rhythmical unity. Each hemistich must have two syllables which
predominate over the rest in virtue of their logical and syntactical
importance and have on this account a stronger stress. These stressed
syllables, four in number for the whole line, count as the rhythmical
accents of the verse. The force given to these accented syllables is
more marked when they carry at the same time the alliteration, which
happens at least once in each hemistich, frequently twice in the first
and once in the second hemistich, and in a number of instances twice in
both hemistichs. The effect of the emphasis given to these four words or
syllables by the syntax, etymology, rhythm, and sometimes alliteration,
is that the other words and syllables may for metrical purposes be
looked upon as in comparison unaccented, even though they may have a
main or secondary word-accent.
In certain cases, in consequence of the particular structure of the
hemistich, there is found a rhythmical secondary accent, generally
coinciding with an etymological secondary accent, or with a
monosyllable, or with the root-syllable of a disyllabic word. Sievers
looks on these syllables as having in the rhythm of the verse the nature
of a minor arsis (_Nebenhebung_); they rather belong to the class
of syllables standing in thesis but with a slight degree of accent
(_tieftonige Senkung_).
The two sections of the alliterative line rarely exhibit a strict
symmetry as to the number of the unaccented syllables and their position
with regard to the accented syllables. In the great majority of cases
their similarity consists merely in their having each two accented
syllables, their divergence in other respects being very considerable.
It is to be noted that certain combinations of accented and unaccented
syllables occur with more frequency in one hemistich than in the other,
or are even limited to one of the two hemistichs only.
Besides the ordinary or normal alliterative line with four accents,
there exists in Old English and in other West-Germanic poetry a variety
of the alliterative line called the _lengthened line_ (_Schwellvers_ or
_Streckvers_). In this line each hemistich has three accented syllables,
the unaccented syllables standing in the same relation to the accented
ones as they do in the normal two-beat hemistich.
§ =22. The structure of the hemistich in the normal alliterative
line.= The normal hemistich consists of four, seldom of five members[63]
(_Glieder_), two of which are strongly accented (arses), the others
unaccented or less strongly accented (theses). Each arsis is formed,
as a rule, of a long accented syllable (-), but the second part of a
compound, and (less frequently) the second syllable with a secondary
accent of a trisyllabic or disyllabic word, is allowed to stand as an
arsis. By resolution a long accented syllable may be replaced by two
short syllables, the first of which is accented. This is denoted by the
symbol ⏑́ ×. The less strongly accented members of the hemistich fall
into two classes according as they are unaccented or have the secondary
accent. This division depends ultimately on the logical or etymological
importance of the syllables. Unaccented syllables (marked in Sievers's
notation by ×) whether long or short by etymology, are mostly
inflexional endings, formative elements, or proclitic and enclitic words.
Secondarily accented verse-members, mostly monosyllabic and
long (denoted by ×̀, and occasionally, when short, by ⏑̀), are
root-syllables in the second part of compounds, long second syllables
of trisyllabic words whose root-syllable is long, and other syllables
where in ordinary speech the presence of a secondary accent is
unmistakable. The rhythmical value of these syllables with secondary
accent is not always the same. When they stand in a foot or measure
of two members and are preceded by an accented syllable they count
as simply unaccented, and the foot is practically identical with the
normal type represented by the notation –́ × (as in the hemistich
_wī́sra wórda_), but these half-accented syllables may be called
_heavy_ theses, and the feet which contain them may be denoted by the
formula –́ ×̀, as in _wī́sfæ̀st wórdum_ (–́ ×̀ | –́ ×). A hemistich
like the last is called by Sievers strengthened (_gesteigert_),
or if it has two heavy unaccented syllables in both feet, doubly
strengthened, as in the section _gū́ðrìnc góldwlànc_ (–́ ×̀ | –́
×̀). In these examples the occurrence of a heavy unaccented syllable
is permissible but not necessary; but in feet or measures of three
members they are obligatory, being required as an intermediate degree
between the arsis and thesis, or strongly accented and unaccented
member, as in _þégn Hrṓðgā́res_ (–́| –́ × ×̀), or _fýrst fórð
gewà̄t_ (–́ | –́ × ×̀), or _hḗalǣ̀rna mǣ́st_ (–́× ×̀ | –́).
In these cases Sievers gives the verse-member with this secondary
accent the character of a subordinate arsis, or beat (_Nebenhebung_).
But it is better, in view of the strongly marked two-beat swing of the
hemistich, to look on such members with a secondary accent as having
only the rhythmical value of unaccented syllables, and to call them
_theses_ with a slight accent. The two-beat rhythm of the hemistich
is its main characteristic, for though the two beats are not always
of exactly equal force[64] they are always prominently distinguished
from the unaccented members of the hemistich, the rhythm of which would
be marred by the introduction of an additional beat however slightly
marked.
Cases in which the two chief beats of the hemistich are not of exactly
the same force occur when two accented syllables, either both with
chief accent or one with chief and the other with secondary accent,
stand in immediate juxtaposition, not separated by an unaccented
syllable. The second of these two accented syllables may be a short
syllable with chief accent, instead of a long syllable as is the rule.
But in either case, whether long or short, this second beat following
at once on the first beat is usually uttered with somewhat less force
than the first, as can be seen from examples like _gebū́n hǽfdon_,
Beow. 117; _tō hā́m fáran_, 121; _mid ǣ́rdǽge_, 126. The
second beat rarely predominates over the first. The cause of this
variation in the force of the two beats is to be sought in the laws of
the syntactical accent.
In other respects verse-members with a secondary accent obey the same
laws as those with a primary accent. They usually consist of one long
syllable, but if a member which has the arsis immediately precedes, a
short syllable with a secondary accent may be substituted. Resolution
of such verse members is rare, which shows that they are more closely
related to the thesis than to the arsis of the hemistich. One unaccented
syllable is sufficient to form the thesis (×), but the thesis may also
have two or more unaccented syllables (× ×, × × × ..), their number
increasing in proportion to their shortness and the ease with which they
can be pronounced, provided always that no secondary accent intervenes.
All of these unaccented syllables are reckoned together as one thesis,
as against the accented syllable or arsis. The single components of such
a longer thesis may exhibit a certain gradation of force when compared
with one another, but this degree of force must never equal the force
with which the arsis is pronounced, though we sometimes find that,
owing to the varying character of the syntactical or sentence accent,
a monosyllable which in one case stands in the thesis, may in another
connexion bear the secondary or even the primary accent.
§ =23.= The number of the unaccented syllables of the thesis was
formerly believed to depend entirely on the choice of the individual
poet.[65] Sievers first put this matter in its right light by the
statistics of the metre.[66] He showed that the hemistich of the Old
English alliterative line is similar to the Old Norse four-syllable
verse, and is as a rule of a trochaic rhythm (–́ × –́ ×). The proof of
this is that in _Beowulf_, for instance, there are 592 hemistichs of
the type –́ × | –́ × (as _hȳ́ran scólde_, 10), and that in the same
text there are 238 of the type –́ × × | –́ × (as _gṓde gewýrcean_,
20; _hḗold þenden lī́fde_, 57), making 830 hemistichs with
trochaic or dactylic rhythm, as against eleven hemistichs of similar
structure but with an unaccented syllable at the beginning, × | –́
× (×) | –́ ×, and even four or five of these eleven are of doubtful
correctness. From these figures it seems almost beyond doubt that in
the type –́ × (×) | –́ × the licence of letting the hemistich begin
with an unaccented syllable before the first accented syllable was,
generally speaking, avoided. On the other hand, when the first accented
syllable is short with only one unaccented syllable as thesis (⏑́ ×),
we find this initial unaccented syllable to be the rule, as _genúmen
hǽfdon_ Beow. 3167 (× | ⏑́ × | –́ ×), of which form there are 130
examples, while, as Rieger noticed, ⏑́ × | –́ × is rare, as in _cýning
mǣ́nan_ Beow. 3173. It is perhaps still more remarkable that while
the form –́ × × | –́ × occurs some 238 times, a verse of the form × |
⏑́ × × | –́ × is never found at all. The numerical proportion of the
form –́ × | –́ × (592 cases) to –́ × × | –́ × (238 cases) is roughly
5 to 2, and that of × | ⏑́ × | –́ × (130 cases) to × | ⏑́ × × | –́ ×
(no cases) is 130 to nothing. The quantity of the second arsis is, as
bearing on the prefixing of unaccented syllables to the hemistich, much
less important than the quantity of the first arsis. Hemistichs of the
type –́ × | ⏑́ × occur 34 times, and in 29 cases the last unaccented
syllable is a full word, either a monosyllable or a part of a compound.
The same type, with an initial unaccented syllable × | –́ × | ⏑́ × also
occurs 34 times, but then the last syllable is quite unaccented. The
proportion of the form –́ × | –́ × to the form × | –́ × | –́ × is 592
to 11, and that of the form –́ × | ⏑́ × to × –́ × | ⏑́ × is 34 to 34, a
noticeable difference.
Further, it was formerly supposed that the number of unaccented
syllables following the accented syllable was indifferent. This is not
the case. The form –́ × × |–́ × is found 238 times, and the form –́ ×
| –́ × × only 22 times. Many of the examples of the latter form are
doubtful, but even counting all these the proportion of the two forms
is 11 to 1.
If the two accented syllables are not separated by an unaccented
syllable, that is to say, if the two beats are in immediate
juxtaposition, then either two unaccented syllables must stand after
the second arsis, thus –́ | –́ × × (a form that occurs 120 times in
_Beowulf_), or an unaccented syllable must precede the first arsis and
one unaccented syllable must follow the second arsis, thus × –́ | –́ ×
(127 times in _Beowulf_), or with the second arsis short × –́ | ⏑́ ×
(257 times); the form –́ | –́ × does not occur.
From these statistics it results that hemistichs of the form –́ × |–́
× are met with about 17 times to one occurrence of the form –́ × | ⏑́
×, and that on the other hand, the form × –́ | ⏑́ × is about twice as
frequent as × –́ | –́ ×.
§ =24. The order of the verse-members in the hemistich.= Every
hemistich consists of two feet or measures, each containing an accented
syllable. Usually these two feet or measures together contain four
verse members, seldom five. In the hemistich of four members, which
first falls to be considered, the measures may consist of two members
each (2+2), or one may contain one member and the other three (1+3 or
3+1). A measure of one member has a single accented syllable only (–́);
a measure of two members has an accented and an unaccented syllable,
which may stand either in the order –́ × or × –́; a measure of three
members has one accented and two unaccented syllables, one of which has
a secondary accent, and the order may be either –́ × ×̀ or –́ × ×̀.
Measures of two members may be grouped in three different ways so as to
form a hemistich: i. –́ × | –́ × (descending rhythm); ii. × –́ | × –́
(ascending); iii. × –́ | –́ × (ascending-descending)[67]; i. and ii.
are symmetrical, iii. is unsymmetrical, but as the number of members in
the feet of these three types (2+2 members) is the same, we may call
them, as Sievers does, types with equal feet (_gleichfüssige Typen_),
while the others (1+3 members or 3+1 members) may be called types with
unequal feet, or measures.
The normal hemistich, then, which consists of four verse-members, will
fall, according to the relative position of these measures or feet, into
the following five chief types:
=a.= Types with equal feet (2+2 members)
1. A. –́ × | –́ × double descending.
2. B. × –́ | × –́ double ascending.
3. C. × –́ | –́ × ascending-descending.
=b=. Types with unequal feet
4. D. {–́ | –́ ×̀ ×}
{–́ | –́ × ×̀} (1+3 members).
5. E. {–́ ×̀ × | –́}
{–́ × ×̀ | –́} (3+1 members).
Theoretically type E might be looked on as a type with equal feet, if
divided thus, –́ × | × –́, but by far the greatest number of instances
of this type show at the beginning of the hemistich one trisyllabic
word which forbids such a division of feet, as _wéorðm[`y]ndum þā́h_,
Beow. 8.[68] Types like × × –́ - and ×̀ × –́ –́, which we might
expect to find, do not occur in Old English poetry. In addition to
these ordinary four-membered hemistichs there are others lengthened
by the addition of one syllable, which may be unaccented, or have the
secondary accent. These extended forms (_erweiterte Formen_)[69] may
be composed either of 2+3 members or of 3+2 members. These extended
hemistichs must be carefully distinguished from the hemistichs which
have one or more unaccented syllables _before_ the first accented
syllable, in types A, D, and E; such a prefix of one or more syllables
is called an _anacrusis_ (Auftakt).[70]
The simple five types of the hemistich admit of variation: i. by
extension (as above); ii. by resolution (⏑́ × for –́) and shortening
of the long accented syllable (⏑́); iii. by strengthening of thesis
by means of a secondary accent (_Steigerung_); iv. by increase in
the number of unaccented syllables forming the thesis; also (less
frequently) v. by variation in the position of the alliteration, and
vi. by the admission of anacruses; the varieties produced by the
last-mentioned means are not sub-types but parallel forms to those
without anacruses.
In describing and analysing the different combinations which arise
out of these means of variation, and especially the peculiar forms of
the sub-types, the arrangement and nomenclature of Sievers will be
followed.[71]
Analysis of the verse types.
I. _Hemistichs of four members_.
§ =25. Type A= has three sub-types, A1, A2, A3.
=The sub-type A1= (–́ × | –́ ×) is the normal form with alliteration
of the first arsis in each hemistich, or with alliteration of both
arses in the first hemistich and one in the second, and with syllables
in the thesis which are unaccented according to the usual practice
of the language; examples are, _þḗodnes þêgnas_ An. 3, _hȳ́ran
scólde_ Beow. 106, _gómban gýldan_ Beow. 11. This is the commonest of
all the types; it occurs in Beowulf, according to Sievers, 471 times
in the first and 575 times in the second hemistich, and with the like
frequency in the other poems.
The simplest modification of this type arises from the resolution of
one or two long accented syllables. Examples of resolution of the first
arsis are very numerous, _cýninga wúldor_ El. 5, _scéaðena þrḗatum_
Beow. 4, _séofon niht swúncon_ Beow. 517,[72] _níðer gewī́teð_ Beow.
1361. Examples of the resolution of the second arsis are less numerous,
as _wúldor cýninge_ El. 291, _éllen frémedon_ Beow. 3, _Scýldes
éaferan_ Beow. 19, _óft gefrémede_ Beow. 165; resolution of both in the
same hemistich is rare, but is found, as _gúmena géogoðe_ An. 1617,
_mǽgenes Déniga_ Beow. 155, _gúmum ætgǽdere_ Beow. 1321.
The chief type is further modified by making the thesis after the first
arsis disyllabic (rarely trisyllabic); the formula is then –́ × × | - ×.
This modification is frequent, as _ríhta gehwýlces_ El. 910, _gṓde
gewýrcean_ Beow. 20, _swéordum āswébban_ An. 72, _súnnan ond
mṓnan_ Beow. 94, _fṓlce tō frṓfre_ Beow. 14, _wḗox under
wólcnum_ Beow. 8.
Resolution of the arsis may be combined with this disyllabic thesis, as
(in the first arsis) _wérum on þām wónge_ An. 22, _éotenas ond ýlfe_
Beow. 112, or (in the second arsis) _hā́lig of héofenum_ An. 89,
_hélpe gefrémede_ Beow. 551, or (in both) _dúguðe ond géoguðe_ Beow.
160, _hǽleð under héofenum_ Beow. 52.
The first thesis rarely exceeds two syllables; a thesis of three
syllables is occasionally found, as _sǽgde se þe cū́ðe_ Beow. 90,
_hwī́lum hie gehḗton_ Beow. 175, and this can be combined with
resolution of the first arsis, as _swéotulra ond gesȳ́nra_ An. 565,
_bítere ond gebólgne_ Beow. 1431; or with resolution of the second
arsis, as _ū́tan ymbe ǽðelne_ An. 873, _wī́ge under wǽtere_
Beow. 1657; or with resolution of both, as _réceda under róderum_ Beow.
310. Examples of thesis of four syllables are (in the first thesis)
_séalde þām þe hē wólde_ Beow. 3056, _sécge ic þē tō
sṓðe_ Beow. 591. A thesis with five syllables is still less common,
as _lǣ́ddon hine þā of lýfte_ Gū. 398, _stṓpon þā tō
þǣre stṓwe_ El. 716.
The cases in which the second thesis has two syllables are rare and to
some extent doubtful, as _wúndor scḗawian_ Beow. 841 and 3033.[73]
The anacrusis before the type –́ × (×) | –́ × is also of rare
occurrence: examples are _swā sǣ́ bebū́geð_ Beow. 1224, or,
with resolution of the first arsis, _swā wǽter bebū́geð_
Beow. 93. Most of the instances occur in the first hemistich; in
this position the anacrusis may be polysyllabic (extending sometimes
to four syllables), sometimes with resolution of the arsis, or with
polysyllabic thesis. Examples: _forcṓm æt cámpe_ An. 1327, _gewāt
æt wī́ge_ Beow. 2630; with resolution, _ābóden in búrgum_ An.
78; _genéred wið nī́ðe_ Beow. 828; disyllabic anacrusis _ic wæs
éndesǣ́ta_ Beow. 241; with resolution, _þǣr wæs hǽleða
hléahtor_ Beow. 612; trisyllabic anacrusis, _oððe him Óngenþḗowes_
Beow. 2475; four-syllable anacrusis, _þæt we him þā gū́ðgeatwa_
Beow. 2637; monosyllabic anacrusis with disyllabic thesis, as _in
mǣ́gðe gehwǣ́re_ Beow. 25, _āblénded in búrgum_ An. 78;
disyllabic anacrusis with disyllabic thesis, _ge æt hā́m ge on
hérge_ Beow. 1249; trisyllabic anacrusis with disyllabic thesis, _þū
scealt þā fṓre gefḗran_ An. 216; monosyllabic anacrusis
with trisyllabic thesis, _gemúnde þā sē gṓda_ Beow. 759;
monosyllabic anacrusis with resolution of first arsis and trisyllabic
thesis, _ne mágon hie ond ne mṓton_ An. 1217; with resolution of
second arsis, _gewā́t him þā tō wároðe_ Beow. 234; disyllabic
anacrusis, _ne geféah he þǣre fǣ́hðe_ Beow. 109; combined with
thesis of four syllables, _ofslṓh þā æt þǣre sǽcce_ Beow.
1666.
=The sub-type A2= is type A with strengthened thesis (i.e. a thesis
with secondary accent) and with alliteration on the first arsis only.
This sub-type has several varieties:
(i) A2a, with the _first_ thesis strengthened (–́ ×̀ | –́ ×); frequent
in the second hemistich. The second arsis may be either long or short
(–́ ×̀ | –́ ×, or –́ ×̀ | ⏑́ ×). We denote –́ ×̀ | –́ × by A2_a l_ and
–́ ×̀ | ⏑́ × by A2_a sh_, or, for brevity, A2 _l_, A2 _sh_. Examples
of A2_l_ are, _gódspèl ǣ́rest_ An. 12, _wī́sfæ̀st wórdum_ Beow.
626, _hríngnèt bǣ́ron_ Beow. 1890; with resolution of the first
arsis, _médusèld bū́an_ Beow. 3066; with resolution of the second
arsis, _gā́rsècg hlýnede_ An. 238, _hórdbùrh hǽleða_ Beow. 467;
with resolution of both, _fréoðobùrh fǽgere_ Beow. 522; with
resolution of the strengthened thesis, _súndwùdu sṓhte_ Beow. 208;
resolution of the first arsis and thesis, _mǽgenwùdu múndum_ Beow.
236; resolution of the first thesis and the second arsis, _gū́ðsèaro
gúmena_ Beow. 328.
Examples of A2 _sh_ are numerous, as _wǣ́rfæ̀st cýning_ An. 416,
_gū́ðrìnc mónig_ Beow. 839, _þrḗanȳ̀d þólað_ Beow. 284; it
is exceptional to find the second arsis short when the thesis which
precedes has no secondary accent, as _Hrḗðel cýning_ Beow. 2436,
_Hrúnting náma_ Beow. 1458, _ǽðeling bóren_ Beow. 2431; with
resolution of the first arsis, _séaronèt séowað_ An. 64, _snótor cèorl
mónig_ Beow. 909, _sígerṑf cyning_ Beow. 619, _mágodrìht micel_ Beow.
67, &c. Most of the hemistichs which fall under this head have double
alliteration.
(ii) A2 _b_, with the _second_ thesis strengthened (–́ × | –́ ×̀).
Most of the cases of this type occur in the first hemistich; when they
occur in the second hemistich the measure –́ ×̀ is usually a proper
name, not a real compound. Examples: _Gréndles gū́ðcræ̀ft_ Beow. 127,
_lḗofa Bḗowùlf_ Beow. 855; with resolution of the first arsis,
_gámol ond gūðrḕow_ Beow. 58; with resolution of the second arsis,
_béorna béaducræ̀ft_ An. 219; with resolution of both, _séfa swā
séarogrìm_ Beow. 595; with resolution of the strengthened thesis, _lónd
ond lḗodb[`y]rig_ Beow. 2472; with resolution of both the second arsis
and thesis _mǣ́g ond mágoþègn_ Beow. 408.[74]
This type may still further be varied by a first thesis of two or more
syllables, _ū́t on þæt ī́glànd_ An. 15, _fólc oððe frḗobùrh_
Beow. 694, _réste hine þā rū́mhèort_ Beow. 1800; by resolution of
the first arsis, _glídon ofer gārsècg_ Beow. 515, of the second,
_lā́d ofer lágustrḕam_ An. 423, _sýmbel on sélefùl_ Beow. 620; by
resolution of the thesis with secondary accent, _éahtodon éorlscìpe_
Beow. 3173; the anacrusis is rarely found, as _gesā́won séledrḕam_
Beow. 2253, and double alliteration (in the first hemistich) is the
rule in this form of type A.
(iii) A2 _ab_, with both theses strengthened –́ ×̀ | –́ ×̀,
_bā́nhū̀s blṓdf[`=a]g_ An. 1407, _gū́ðrìnc góldwlànc_
Beow. 1882, _ǣ́nlī̀c ánsȳ̀n_ Beow. 251; with resolution of
first arsis, _wlítesḕon wrǽtlī̀c_ Beow. 1651, and of the
second arsis, _glḗawmṑd góde lḕof_ An. 1581, _gū̀ðswèord
géatolī̀c_ Beow. 2155, and of both first and second arsis,
_héorowèarh hételī̀c_ Beow. 1268; with resolution of the first
(strengthened) thesis, _nȳ́dwràcu nī́ðgrìm_ Beow. 193; with
resolution of both the first arsis and the first thesis, _býrelàde
brȳ́d gèong_ Gū. 842; with resolution of the second strengthened
thesis, _égeslī̀c éorðdràca_ Beow. 2826; with resolution of the first
and second thesis, _fýrdsèaru fūslìcu_ Beow. 232. This form of the
type has also as a rule double alliteration.
=The sub-type A3= is type A with alliteration on the second arsis only
and is limited almost entirely to the first hemistich. A strengthened
thesis occurs only after the second arsis; this sub-type might
therefore be designated A3 _b_.
Verses falling under this head, with their alliteration always on the
last syllable but one, or (in the case of resolution) on the last
syllable but two, are distinguished by the frequent occurrence of
polysyllabic theses extending to five syllables, in marked contrast
to types A1 and A2 where theses of one or two syllables are the
rule, longer theses the exception. In A3, however, shorter theses
are met with along with the usual resolutions: a monosyllabic thesis
in _hwǣ́r se =þ=ḗoden_ El. 563, _ḗow hēt sécgan_ Beow.
391; with resolution of first arsis, _wúton nū éfstan_ Beow. 3102;
with resolution of the second arsis, _þús me =f=ǽder mīn_ El.
528, _íc þæt =h=ógode_ Beow. 633; with disyllabic thesis, _hḗht
þā on =ú=htan_ El. 105, _hǽfde se =g=ṓda_ Beow. 205; with
resolution of the first arsis, _þánon he ge=s=ṓhte_ Beow. 463;
with resolution of the second arsis, _wéarð him on =H=éorote_ Beow.
1331; with strengthened second thesis, _éart þū sē =B=ḗowùlf_
Beow. 506; with trisyllabic thesis, _gíf þē þæt ge=l=ímpe_ El. 441,
_fúndon þā on =s=ánde_ Beow. 3034; with resolution of the first
arsis, _hwǽðere mē ge=s=ǣ́lde_ Beow. 574, of the second
arsis, _sýððan ic for =d=úgeðum_ Beow. 2502; with strengthened second
thesis, _nṓ hē þone =g=ífstò̄l_ Beow. 168; with thesis of
four syllables, _swýlce hī mē ge=b=léndon_ Cri. 1438, _hábbað
wē tō þǣm =m=ǣ́ran_ Beow. 270; with resolution of the
first arsis, _útan ūs tō þǣre =h=ȳ́ðe_ Cri. 865; with
resolution of the first and second arsis, _þóne þe him on =s=wéofote_
Beow. 2296; with strengthened second thesis, _nṓ þȳ ǣr þone
=h=éaðorìnc_ Beow. 2466; with thesis of five syllables, _sýððan hē
hine to =g=ū̀ðe_ Beow. 1473; with thesis of six syllables, _hȳ́rde
ic þæt hē þone =h=éalsbḕah_ Beow. 2173. These forms are also
varied by monosyllabic anacrusis combined with monosyllabic thesis,
_þe ḗow of =w=érgðe_ El. 295, _þæt híne on =ý=lde_ Beow. 22; with
strengthened second thesis, _þæt híne sēo =b=rímw[`y]lf_ Beow. 1600;
with disyllabic thesis, _ne þéarft þū swā =s=wī́ðe_ El. 940,
_gesprǽc þā sē =g=ṓda_ Beow. 676; the same with resolution
of the first arsis, _gewítan him þā =g=óngan_ Cri. 533; disyllabic
anacrusis and disyllabic thesis, _ne gefrǽgn ic þā =m=ǣ́gðe_
Beow. 1012; with resolution of the second arsis, _geséah hē in
=r=écede_ Beow. 728; with strengthened second thesis, _ge swýlce sēo
=h=érepà̄d_ Beow. 2259; monosyllabic anacrusis with trisyllabic
thesis, _on hwýlcum þāra =b=ḗama_ El. 851; with four-syllable
thesis, _gewī́teð þonne on =s=ealman_ Beow. 2461; with resolution of
the first arsis, _ne mā́gon hī þonne ge=h=ȳ́nan_ Cri. 1525; with
resolution of the second arsis, _gesā́won þā æfter =w=ǽtere_
Beow. 1426. The last measure may be shortened exceptionally to ⏑́ ×, as
_wǽs mīn =f=ǽder_ Beow. 262.
On the whole type A seems to occur more frequently in the first than in
the second hemistich; in Beowulf out of the 6366 hemistichs of which the
poem consists, 2819 fall under this type, and of these 1701 are first
and 1118 second hemistichs.[75]
§ =26. The chief type B=, × –́ | × –́, has apart from resolutions
only one form. But as the second thesis may consist of either one or
two syllables, we may distinguish between two sub-types, B1 (with
monosyllabic second thesis) and B2 (with disyllabic second thesis). The
commonest variation of the type occurs in the first thesis, which may
be polysyllabic.
(i) The simplest form, sub-type B1, × –́ | × –́, is not very common;
according to Sievers there are only 59 instances in the whole of
Beowulf, as _ond Hā́lga tíl_ Beow. 61, _þām hā́lig gód_ An.
14; with resolution of the first arsis _in séle þām hḗan_ Beow.
714, and of the second arsis, _þurh rū̀mne séfan_ Beow. 278, and of
both, _ǣr súmeres cýme_ El. 1228. Hemistichs of this type, on the
other hand, with a disyllabic first thesis are not uncommon, _syððan
fúrðum wḗox_ Beow. 914, _him pā Scýld gewā́t_ Beow. 26; with
resolution of the first arsis, _under Héorotes hrṓf_ Beow. 403; with
resolution of the second, _þæt sēo céaster híder_ An. 207, and of
both, _æfter hǽleða hrýre_ Beow. 2053; a trisyllabic first thesis
is also common, _þēah þe hē ā́tres drýnc_ An. 53, _oð þæt him
éft onwṓc_ Beow. 56, _sē þe on hánda bǽr_ Beow. 495; with
resolution of the first arsis, _forðan hīe mǽgenes crǽft_
Beow. 418; of the second arsis, _ond hū þȳ þríddan dǽge_ El.
185; of both, _þæt hē þā géoguðe wíle_ Beow. 1182; with first
thesis of four syllables, _ne hȳrde ic sī́ð ne ǣ́r_ El. 240,
_swylce hīe æt Fínnes hā́m_ Beow. 1157; with first thesis of five
syllables (rare) _siððan hē hire fólmum hrā́n_ Beow. 723, and with
resolution of second arsis _þonne hȳ him þurh mī́nne nóman_ Cri.
1351.
(ii) The sub-type B2, or B with disyllabic second thesis, is rarely
found when the first thesis has only one syllable, _þe drýhtnes bibṓd_
Cri. 1159, _þū wā́st gif hit is_ Beow. 272, _þām wī́fe þā wórd_ Beow.
640; with resolution of the first arsis, _þurh dároða gedrép_ An. 1446,
and of the second, _þurh níhta genípu_ Gū. 321; it is commoner with a
disyllabic first thesis, _þā of wéalle geséah_ Beow. 229, _hē þæs frṓfre
gebā́d_ Beow. 76; with resolution of the first arsis, _mid his hǽleða
gedríht_ Beow. 663, _ofer wároða gewéorp_ An. 306; with trisyllabic
first thesis, _þonne hē ǣ́r oððe sī́ð_ El. 74, _wes þū ūs lā́rena gṓd_
Beow. 269; with resolution of the first arsis, _þēah hē þǣr mónige
geséah_ Beow. 1614, and of the second arsis, _þæt nǣfre Gréndel swā
féla_ Beow. 592; with first thesis of four and five syllables, _hwæðre
hē in brḗostum þā gít_ An. 51, _þæs be hire sē wílla gelámp_ Beow. 627.
Verses with trisyllabic second thesis are extremely rare and
doubtful.[76] It should be noticed that, in this second type too, the
thesis seldom consists of a second part of a compound, as _hine fýrwìt
brǽc_ Beow. 232, the exceptions are proper names, as _nū ic Bḗowùlf þéc_
Beow. 947, _ne wearð Héremò̄d swā́_ Beow. 1710.
Type B, according to Sievers, occurs 1014 times in Beowulf,
of which 293 are in the first hemistich and 721 in the second.
§ =27. The Type C= has three sub-types: (i) C 1, the normal type
× –́ | –́ ×, without resolution, as _oft Scýld Scḗfing_ Beow. 4,
_gebū̀n hǽfdon_ 117. Here too the first thesis may consist of two,
three, four, or five syllables, _þæt hīe ǣ́ghwýlcne_ An. 26,
_þone gód sénde_ Beow. 13, _ofer hrónrā́de_ Beow. 10, _ǣr hē
onwég hwúrfe_ Beow. 264, _mid þǣre wǽlfýlle_ Beow. 125, _þe ic
him tṓ sḗce_ El. 319 _þāra þe mid Bḗowúlfe_ Beow. 1052,
_oð þæt hine sémnínga_ An. 821, _þāra þe hē him míd hǽfde_
Beow. 1625, _swylce hīe ofer sǣ́e cṓmon_, An. 247. (ii) C 2
is the normal type C with resolution of the first arsis, and is of
such frequent occurrence that it may be looked on as a special type,
_on hérefélda_ An. 10, _forscrífen hǽfde_ Beow. 106, _in wórold
wṓcun_ Beow. 60; a less common form is that with resolution of the
first and second arsis, _tō brímes fároðe_ Beow. 28, _swā féla
fýrena_ Beow. 164; sometimes with resolution of the second arsis only,
_tō sǣ́es fároðe_ An. 236 and 1660, _for frḗan égesan_ An.
457, but not in Beowulf. The first thesis may have two, three, or four
syllables, _þā wið góde wúnnon_ Beow. 113, _ofer lágustrǣ́te_;
with two resolutions, _ic þæs wíne Déniga_ Beow. 350, _hū sē
mága frémede_ An. 639, _þæt him his wínemā́gas_ Beow. 65, _ne hīe
hūru wínedríhten_ Beow. 863. (iii) C 3 is type C with short second
arsis, × –́ | ⏑́ ×, and is pretty common, _in gḗardágum_ Beow.
1, _of fḗorwégum_ Beow. 37; the first thesis may have from two
to five syllables, _þæt wæs gṓd cýning_ Beow. 11, _þæt hīe in
bḗorséle_ Beow. 482, _sē þe hine dḗað nímeð_ Beow. 441, _ne
meaht þū þæs sī́ðfǽtes_ An. 211, _þonne hē on þæt sínc
stárað_ Beow. 1486. Resolution seems to be avoided, though it occurs
here and there, _of hlíðes nósan_ Beow. 1892, _on þǣm méðelstéde_
Beow. 1083. Thesis with secondary accent is not found. The number of
hemistichs of type C in Beowulf is, according to Sievers, 564.
§ =28. The type D= always ends with a disyllabic thesis, of which
the first is generally the second syllable of a compound and has the
secondary accent. There are four sub-types. (i) D 1 is the normal form,
–́ | –́ ×̀ ×, as _hélm ǽlwìhta_ An. 118, _fḗond mánc[`y]nnes_
Beow. 164, _wī́gwéorðùnga_ Beow. 176, _wéard Scýldìnga_ Beow. 95,
_lándbúèndum_ Beow. 95, _hríng gýldènne_, Beow. 2810, _hóf mṓdìgra_
Beow. 312, _frḗan ū̀sèrne_ Beow. 3003. The chief variations arise
from resolution of the first arsis, _cýning ǽlmìhtig_ El. 145,
_fǽder álwàlda_ Beow. 316, _mérelī́ðènde_ Beow. 255, _flótan
ḗowèrne_ Beow. 294, _cýning ǣ́nìgne_ Beow. 1851, or of the
second arsis, _hḗan hýgegḕomor_ An. 1089, _mǣ́g Hígelà̄ces_
Beow. 738 and 759; resolution of first and second arsis, _hláden
hérewǣ̀dum_ Beow. 1898, _néfan Hérerī̀ces_ Beow. 2207. Hemistichs
like _wiht unhǣlo_ Beow. 120, which have compounds with _un_, may
be read _wíht únhǽlo_ according to type D 2, or _wíht unhǣ́lo_
according to type A, –́ × | –́ × (Sievers, _Paul-Braune's Beiträge_,
x. 251, and Kluge in _Paul's Grundriss_, i², p. 1051). (ii) D 2 is
the same form, but with the thesis short and with secondary accent,
–́ | –́ ⏑̀ × _béorht blǽdgìfa_ An. 84, _lḗof lándfrùma_ Beow.
31, _strḗam ū́t þònan_ Beow. 2546, _rǣ́d éahtèdon_ Beow. 172;
with resolution of the first arsis, _mǽgen sámnòde_ El. 55, _mága
Héalfdènes_ Beow. 189; with resolution of the second arsis, _hórd
ópenìan_ Beow. 3057, the only example. (iii) D 3 is the normal type,
but with short second arsis (rare), –́ | ⏑́ ×̀ ×, _éorðcýnìnga_ El.
1174; with resolution of the first arsis, _rádorcýnìnges_ El. 624.
(iv) D 4 has the form –́ | –́ × ×̀, and is closely allied to the type
E (–́ ×̀ × | –́), as it has the secondary accent on the last syllable
of the thesis (Sievers, _Paul-Braune's Beiträge_, x. 256), _brḗost
ínnanwèard_ An. 649, _hólm ū̀p ætbæ̀r_ Beow. 519, _fýrst fórð
gewā́t_ ib. 210; varied by resolution of the first arsis, _géaro
gū̀ðe fràm_ An. 234, _flóta fā́mighèals_ Beow. 218, _súnu dḗað
fornàm_ Beow. 2120; by resolution of the second arsis, _wlánc Wédera
lò̄od_ 341, and of both first and second arsis, _wlítig wéoruda
hḕap_ An. 872; and resolution of the last thesis with secondary
accent, _wṓp úp āhàfen_ Beow. 128, _wúnað wíntra fèla_ Ph. 580.
Certain hemistichs which may belong to this sub-type admit of an
alternative accentuation, and may belong to the following type; for
example, _scop hwlum sang_ Beow. 496 may be read –́ | –́ × ×̀, or as E
–́ ×̀ × | –́, so _werod eall ārās_ Beow. 652.
§ =29. The type E= has two sub-types, distinguished by the position of
the syllable bearing the secondary accent; this syllable is generally
the second syllable of a compound or the heavy middle syllable of a
trisyllabic word with a long root-syllable.
E1 has the form –́ ×̀ × | –́, the syllable with secondary accent
standing first in the thesis, _mṓdsòrge wǽg_ El. 61, _wéorðm[`y]ndum
þā́h_ Beow. 8, _Sū̀ðdèna fólc_ Beow. 463, _ḗhtènde wǽs_
Beow. 159, _hǣ́ðènra hýht_ Beow. 179, _ǣ́nìgne þónc_ Cri. 1498,
_wórdhòrd onléac_ Beow. 259, _úplàng āstṓd_ Beow. 760, _scóp
hwī̀lum sáng_ Beow. 496 (cf. above, § 29); varied by resolution of
the first arsis, _héofonrī̀ces weárd_ El. 445, _Scédelàndum ín_
Beow. 19, _wlítebèorhtne wáng_ Beow. 93, _lífigènde cwṓm_ Beow.
1974, _ǽðelìnges wḗox_ El. 12, _médofùl ætbǽr_ Beow. 625,
_dúguð èall ārā́s_ Beow. 1791; resolution of the second arsis
is rare, _tī́rḕadge hǽleð_ An. 2 (the MS. reading _ēadige_
must be corrected to _ēadge_, see Sievers, _Beiträge_, x. 459 on
these middle vowels after long root-syllable), _hélþègnes héte_ Beow.
142; resolution of both is rare, _sélewèard āséted_ Beow. 668,
_wínedr[`y]hten frǽgen_ An. 921; resolution of the accented thesis,
_glḗdègesa grím_ Beow. 2651.
E2 has the last syllable of the thesis with secondary accent, and
is very rare, –́ × ×̀ | –́, _mórðorbèd strḗd_ Beow. 2437; with
resolution of last arsis, _gḗomorgìdd wrécen_ An. 1550, _bǣ́ron
ū̀t hrǽðe_ An. 1223.
II. _Hemistichs of five members._
§ =30.= Hemistichs of five members (extended) occur much more rarely
than the normal types of four members. The extended types are denoted by
the letters A*, B*, C*, &c.
=Type A*= has two sub-types distinguished by the position of the
syllable with the secondary accent.
(i) A*1, –́ ×̀ × | –́ × occurs chiefly in the first hemistich,
_gódbèarn on gálgan_ El. 719; with resolution of first arsis,
_géolorànd tō gū́ðe_ Beow. 438; with thesis of two unaccented
syllables following on the secondary accent, _glǽdmò̄d on gesíhðe_
Cri. 911, _fǽstrǽdne geþṓht_ Beow. 611; with final thesis
strengthened by secondary accent, _gā́stlī̀cne góddrḕam_ Gū.
602, _gámolfèax ond gū́ðrò̄f_ Beow. 609.
(ii) A*2 –́ × ×̀ | –́ × may possibly occur in _mā́ððumfæ̀t
mǣ́re_ Beow. 2405, _wúldorlḕan wéorca_ Cri. 1080; with resolution
of the thesis with secondary accent, _mórðorbèalo mága_ Beow. 1079.
Possibly, however, the syllables _um_ in _māððum_ and _or_ in
_wuldor_ and _morðor_ are to be written _m_ and _r_, so that the
scansion of the hemistich would be A2 –́ –̀ | –́ × and –́ ⏑̀ ͜× | –́
×.[77]
=Type B*= ×̀ × –́ | × –́ does not seem to occur in O.E. poetry, though
it does in Old Norse.
=Type C*= in the forms ×̀ × –́| –́ ×, ×̀ × ⏑́ × | –́ ×, × × –́ | ⏑́ ×
are also not found in O.E.
=Type D*= on the other hand does occur, but almost exclusively in
the first hemistich. It has three sub-types: (i) D*1 –́ × | –́ × ×,
_sī́de sǣ́næ̀ssas_ Beow. 223, _áldres órwḕna_ Beow. 1002;
with resolution of the first arsis, _ǽðeling ā́nhȳ̀dig_
Beow. 2668; more commonly with resolution of the second arsis,
_mǣ́ton mérestræ̀ta_ Beow. 514; with resolution of both, _lócene
léoðos[`y]rcan_ Beow. 1506. (ii) D*2 –́ × | –́ ⏑̀ ×, _mǣ́re
méarcstàpa_ Beow. 103, _éaldor Éastdèna_ Beow. 392; with resolution of
the first arsis, _ǽðele órdfrùma_ Beow. 263; with resolution of the
second arsis, _mṓdges mérefàran_ Beow. 502, _Bḗowulf máðelòde_
Beow. 505, &c. (iii) D*3 –́ × | ⏑́ ×̀ × is not found. (iv) D*4 –́ × |
–́ × ×̀ is rare, _grḗtte Gḗata lḕod_ Beow. 625, _þrȳ́ðlīc
þégna hḕap_ Beow. 400; with resolution of first arsis, _éaforan
éllorsī̀ð_ Beow. 2452; with resolution of the second, _ȳ́ðde
éotena c[`y]n_ Beow. 421; with resolution of the secondarily accented
syllable, _wī́n of wúndorfàtum_ Beow. 1163; this type is varied
by anacrusis, _ongínneð gḗomormò̄d_ Beow. 2045, and by anacrusis
together with disyllabic thesis in the second foot, _oferswám þā
síoleða bigòng_ Beow. 2368.
=Type E*= does not occur in O.E. poetry.[78]
§ =31.= To assign the different hemistichs of a poem to these various
types we have to follow as a regulating principle the natural word
accent and syntactical accent of each sentence. In some cases the
similarity or relation with one another of the types renders it a
matter of difficulty to determine exactly to what particular type a
hemistich may belong. Systematic investigations as to the principles
which govern the combinations of the five types in pairs to form the
long line have not yet been made. From such observations as have
been made it would appear that by preference hemistichs of different
rhythmical structure (ascending and descending) were combined with
a view to avoid a monotonous likeness between the two halves of the
verse.[79]
§ =32.= The combination of two hemistichs so as to form a long line
is effected by means of alliteration, one at least of the two fully
accented syllables being the bearer of an alliterative sound. In no
case is an unaccented syllable or even a syllable with a secondary
accent allowed to take part in the alliteration. This fact, that
secondarily accented syllables are debarred from alliterating, is
another proof that it is better to look on them as belonging to the
thesis rather than to the arsis of the verse.
=The Principles of Alliteration.=
§ =33. Quality of the Alliteration.= It is an all but invariable
rule that the correspondence of sounds must be exact and not merely
approximate. A _g_ must alliterate to a _g_, not to a _c_, a _d_ to
a _d_, not to a _t_, and so on. There is, however, one remarkable
exception, namely, that no distinction is made between the guttural _c_
(as in _cūðe_) and the palatal _c_ (as in _cēosan_), nor between
the guttural _g_ (as in _god_) and the palatal _g_ (as in _gierede_),
not even when the latter represents Germanic _j_ (as in _geong_,
_gēar_). With exceptions hereafter to be noted, a consonant followed
by a vowel may alliterate with itself followed by another consonant:
thus _cūðe_ alliterates not only with words like _cyning_, but
with words like _cræft_, _cwellan_; and _hūs_ alliterates not
only with _heofon_ but with _hlēapan_, _hnǣgan_, &c. The fact
that different vowels, as _ī_, _ū_, and _æ_ in _īsig ond
ūtfūs æðelinges fær_ Beow. 33, alliterate together is only an
apparent exception to the strictness of the rule, as it is really
the glottal catch or _spiritus lenis_[80] before all vowels which
alliterates here. Wherever a vowel seems to alliterate with an _h_ we
are justified in assuming a corruption of the text, as in _óretmecgas
æfter hǽleðum frægn_ Beow. 332, where Grein improves both sense and
metre by substituting _æðelum_ for _hæleðum_; other examples are Beow.
499, 1542, 2095, 2930. In some cases where foreign names beginning with
_h_ occur we occasionally find instances of this inexact alliteration,
as _Hólofernus únlyfigendes_ Jud. 180 and 7, 21, 46, contrasted with
_Hólofernus hógedon āninga_ 250; in later works as in Ælfric's
_Metrical Homilies_ we find alliteration of _h_ with a vowel not only
in foreign names but with native words, as
_and he =ǣ́=fre his fýrde þam =hǣ́=lende betǣ́hte._
Ælfr. Judges[81] 417.
and _h_ before consonants (viz. _r, l, w_) is disregarded as
_and hē hig āhrédde of þām =r=ḗðan þḗowte._
Ælfr. Judges 16.
_on h=w=ám his stréngð wæs and his =w=úndorlī̀ce míht_.
ibid. 306.
It is important to observe that the combinations _st_, _sc_, _sp_ are
not allowed to alliterate with each other or with words beginning
with _s_ not followed by a consonant, but _st_ can alliterate only
with _st_, _sc_ only with _sc_, _sp_ only with _sp_; thus _spere_ and
_scyld_, _stillan_ and _springan_, _sǣ_ and _styrman_ do not count as
alliterations. The invariable practice is seen in the following lines:--
_hēt =st=rḗamfare =st=íllan, =st=órmas réstan._ An. 1578.
_he =sc=ḗaf þā mid þam =sc=ýlde, þæt se =sc=éatt
tōbǽrst
and þæt =sp=ére =sp=réngde, þæt hit =sp=ráng ongḗan._
Byrhtnoth 136-7.
In later times this rule was not so strictly observed. The metrical
Psalms alliterate _sc_ with _s_ and _sw_ with _s_, as
_hi hine him =s=ámnuncga =sc=éarpum strḗlum_. Ps. lxiii. 4.
_on þī́ne þā =s=wī́ðran, ond þe ne =sc=éaðeð ǣ́nig_.
Ps. xc. 7.
but _sp_ and _st_ do not alliterate with each other or with _s_. In
Ælfric all these combinations of consonants alliterate indifferently
with each other or with _s_ + another consonant or with simple _s_, as
in
_wið þā́m þe hēo be=s=wī́ce =S=ámson þone =s=trángan_.
Ælfr. Judges 308.
Sometimes in Ælfric the alliterating letter does not stand at the
beginning of the word,
_and hē hæfde héora ge=w=éald ealles t=w=éntig gḗara_.
ibid. 85.
and the alliteration may even fall on an unaccented particle as in
_=f=rám his gelēafan and his ǣ =f=orsāwon._ ibid. 51.
For a full account of Ælfric's alliteration the reader may be referred
to an interesting essay by Dr. Arthur Brandeis, _Die Alliteration in
Aelfric's metrischen Homilien_, 1897 (Programm der Staatsrealschule im
VII. Bezirk in Wien).
§ =34. Position of the alliterative words.= Out of the four accented
syllables of the line two at least, and commonly three, must begin with
an alliterative sound, and this alliteration still further increases
the stress which these syllables have in virtue of their syntactical
and rhythmical accent.
The position of these alliterative sounds in the line may vary in the
same way as their number. The general laws which govern the position
of the alliteration are the following:--(i) One alliterating sound
_must_, and two _may_ occur in the first hemistich; (ii) In the second
hemistich the alliterating sound (called the head-stave[82]) must fall
on the first of the two accented syllables of that hemistich, and the
second accented syllable in the second hemistich does not take part in
the alliteration at all; (iii) When there are three alliterating sounds
in the whole line two of them must be in the first hemistich and only
one in the second. Examples of lines with three alliterating sounds:
_=s=éolfa he ge=s=étte =s=únnan ond mṓnan._ Sat. 4.
_=ú=fan ond =ū̀=tan him wæs =ǣ́=ghwǣr wā́._ Sat. 342.
Lines with only two alliterative sounds, the first of which may coincide
with either of the accented syllables of the first hemistich (the second
of course coinciding with the first accented syllable of the second
hemistich) are very common:
_=h=ḗafod éalra =h=ḗahgescéafta._ Gen. 4.
_hī hýne þā æt=b=ǣ́ron to =b=rímes fároðe._ Beow. 28.
If the first hemistich contains only one alliterative sound this
alliteration generally falls on the more emphatic of the two accented
syllables of the hemistich which is usually the first, as
_on =f=lṓdes ǣ́ht =f=éor gewī́tan._ Beow. 42.
In the type A the single alliteration of the first hemistich not
unfrequently falls on the second accented syllable, such cases being
distinguished, as A3
_þā́ wæs on =b=úrgum =B=ḗowulf Scýldinga._ Beow. 53.
In types C and D the single alliteration of the first section must
always fall on the first accented syllable which in these types is
more emphatic than the second. In types B and E alliteration on the
second arsis would bring the alliteration too near to the end of the
hemistich, and is therefore rare.
Double alliteration in the first hemistich occurs in all of the five
types, and chiefly when the two accented syllables have equally strong
accents. It is, therefore, least common in C × –́ | –́ × where the
first arsis predominates over the second, and is most frequent in the
strengthened hemistichs, in D, E, A2, and in the five-membered D*
types, where it is the rule.[83]
A third form of alliteration, though much less important and frequent
than these two, occurs when the second accented syllable of the second
hemistich shares in alliteration, in addition to the first accented
syllable. There are then two different pairs of alliterative sounds
distributed alternately between the two hemistichs. The commonest form
of this double alliteration of the whole line is represented by the
formula a b | a b, as
_hwæt! we =G=ā́r=d=éna in =g=ḗar=d=águm._ Beow. 1.
_=Sc=ýldes =é=aferan =Sc=édelandum =í=n._ Beow. 19.
_=h=ílde=w=ǣ́þnum ond =h=éaðo=w=ǣ́dum._ Beow. 39;
less commonly by the formula a b | b a:
_þā =w=ǣ́ron =m=ónige þe his =m=ǣ́g =w=ríðon._
Beow. 2982.
_=h=wī́lum for =d=úguðe =d=óhtor =H=rṓðgà̄res._
Beow. 2020;
verses corresponding to the formula a a | b b are not found in early
poetry. No doubt certain instances of this double alliteration may be
accidental, but others seem intentional.
The foregoing rules as to alliteration are strictly observed in the
early and classic poetry, but in later times certain licences crept in.
Three of these may be noticed. (i) The second accented syllable of the
second hemistich is allowed to carry the alliteration instead of the
first accented syllable,
_=l=ā́stas =l=égde oððǽt hē ge=l=ǣ́dde._ Gen. 2536.
(ii) Both accented syllables of the second hemistich alliterate with one
accented syllable of the first hemistich,[84]
_me =s=éndon tṓ þē =s=ǣ́men =s=nélle._ Byrhtnoth 29.
(iii) The four accented syllables of the line all alliterate together,
_=G=ódwine ond =G=ódwīg =g=ū̀de ne =g=ȳ́mdon._
Byrhtn. 192.
In the majority of cases the same alliterative letter is not employed in
two successive lines, but we find cases like
_þā tō=b=rǣ́d Sámson_ =b=ḗgen his éarmas
þæt þā rā́pas to=b=_úrston þe he mid ge=b=únden wæs._
Ælf. Judges 269;
and earlier in Andreas 70, 197, 372, 796, 815, 1087, &c., or in Beowulf
403, 489, 644, 799, 865, 898, &c.
And even three lines in succession, as
_swýlce he ā=f=ḗdde of =f=íxum twā́m
ond of =f=ī́f hlā́fum =f=ī́ra cýnnes
=f=ī́f þū̀sendo; =f=ḗðan sǣ́ton._ An. 589 ff.
This usage, which in Middle English became very popular, is noticeably
frequent in the poem of Judith, probably with a view to emphasis. Many
examples of such pairs of verses are to be found collected by Dr. A.
Brandeis from Ælfric.
The unaccented words may begin with the same letter as the accented
words which bear the alliteration proper,[85] as
_ne hīe huru =h=éofona =h=élm =h=érian ne cū̀ðon._
Beow. 182,
or one of the unaccented words may begin with the same letter as an
accented word which does not alliterate, as
_þæt fram =h=ā́m gefrǣ́gn =H=ígelāces bégn._ Beow. 194;
this of course has nothing to do with alliteration, though in later
times it was often mistaken for it.
Verses without any alliteration at all, as
_he hélpeð þéarfan swýlce ēac wǣ́dlan._ Ps. lxxi. 13,
occur only in late OE. poetry like Ælfric's Homilies, and when rhyme was
beginning to creep in.
§ =35. Alliteration in relation to the parts of speech and to the order
the order of words.= Both alliteration and the whole structure of the
alliterative line depend in the first place on the natural or
etymological accent of the single words, and next on the syntactical
accent which these words bear in their relation to one another in the
sentence. Just as only the accented syllable of a single word can take
part in the alliteration, so only can those words take part in it which
are marked out in the sentence as important and therefore strongly
accented.
The relative degree of stress is influenced at times by the rhetorical
accent, but generally speaking we find a certain gradation of accent
among the accented words depending on their intrinsic and not on their
rhetorical importance in building up the sentence.
Two general principles may be laid down: (1) If the syntactical value
of the two accented syllables of the hemistich is not equal, then the
word which has the stronger accent of the two is chosen to alliterate.
In the second hemistich it is always the first accented word (the 'head
stave'), in the first hemistich it is generally the first accented
word, though the second accented word may alliterate as well. (2) If
the two accented syllables of the section are equal in syntactical
value, then the first alliterates, and when double alliteration is
allowed the second may also alliterate.
The various grammatical classes of words are treated in regard to the
alliteration in the following way:--
=Nouns=, including adjectives and the infinitives and participles of
verbs, have the strongest accent of all words in the sentence. A noun
therefore takes precedence over the other parts of speech among which
it occurs and has the alliteration, as
_nḗ in þā =c=éastre be=c=úman méahte._ An. 931.
_híre þā =Á=dam =a=ndswárode._ Gen. 827.
If two nouns occur in the same hemistich it is always the first which
alliterates,
_=h=ū̀sa sḗlest. Wæs sēo =h=wī́l micel._ Beow. 146.
_=l=ánge hwī́le. Him wæs =l=ī́ffrḗa._ Beow. 16.
_=g=éongum ond éaldum, swylc him =g=ód séalde._ Beow. 72.
The only exceptions are when a special rhetorical emphasis is given to
the second word.