A History of English Rhythms

ther the accent on the substantive did not eclipse that on the adverb, but I incline to think not.

In Beowulf, 1. 3637, is found the passage—

wæron her tela

Willum bewenede : thu us wel dohtest

and in the translation, just published by Mr. Kemble, is the following note, "The alliteration is upon thu, and Thorpe therefore suggests bethenede." The proposed amendment is an ingenious one, but still I think it was somewhat hastily adopted in the translation, for the chief alliterative syllable in the last verse is certainly wel not thu,

Willlum bewen ede: thu | us wel | dohtest

In the preface (which exhibits much curious research and speculation, though I cannot agree in its conclusions) certain proper names are reduced, by a variety of hypotheses, to the following series ;

"And here we have the remarkable and pleasing fact, that of all the twentyfour names, two only (Beowa and Tætwa) do not stand in alliteration with one another, from which we may reasonably assume, that in times older than even these most ancient traditions, another and equivalent adjective stood in the place of Tatwa." I have quoted this statement, respecting the alliteration, which, it will be seen, is made the ground-work of an important inference, in order to point out two oversights, that seem to have escaped the author. There is certainly no alliteration between Wolden and Bed-Wiga, nor between Ilter-Mon and He|re-Mod. In the last case, indeed, secondary accents may fall on the syllables Mon and Mod, but such accents cannot support an alliteration.

I know by experience how difficult it is altogether to avoid these oversights. In the foregoing pages, I have (at least once) been guilty of the very same blunder. In p. 229. 1. 11, the accent of a common adjectival compound (see p. 102. 1. 4,) is misplaced. The verse should have been scanned thus,

Besloh sin sceathan: siglore and | geweal|de

(C.) SECONDARY ACCENTS.

The rule, in p. 78, defining the syllables on which the secondary accent may fall, is, I have no doubt, a correct one. But it is difficult to say, under what circumstances the Anglo-Saxon poet availed himself of the privilege. I incline to think, that when a word, accented on the last syllable but two, closed an alliterative couplet, no secondary accent was made use of, unless wanted to make up the two accents, without which no English section can subsist. When such a word closed the first section, and the two necessary accents were provided for, I think there was no secondary accent, except in cases where the second section began with an unaccented syllable. These two rules have been deduced chiefly from an examination of Cadmon's rhythms. They are laid down with some degree of diffidence, but they seem to agree so well with the general character of Anglo-Saxon rhythm, that I have not hesitated to correct (in the Errata) the scansion of any verse, in which they have not been observed.

(D.) RHIME.

The vowel-rhime (see p. 117), or, as it is termed by French and Spanish critics, the assonant rhime was common in the Romance of Oc, and all the kindred Spanish dialects, and is found in one (I believe only one) of our Anglo-Norman poems. It is clearly the Irish comhardadh, though not subject, in the Romance dialects, to the nice rules which regulate its assonances in the Gaelic.

The fact of there having been two kinds of final rhime in the Celtic, both of which are found in the Romance dialects that arose out of its ruins, and only one of which was ever adopted in the Latin "rhythmus," is a strong argument in favour of the view taken in p. 120 as to the Celtic origin of final rhime. It must, however, be confessed, that one of the arguments there used is somewhat strained. The influence, which final rhime exerted over our English rhythms, is certainly overrated. See Vol. ii. p. 295.

The perfect correspondence in the unaccented syllables of the double rhime (see p. 118) was sometimes dispensed with. The authors of the Alisaunder, of Havelok, and of other romances, written in the thirteenth century, occasionally contented themselves with a rhime between the last accented syllables, and wholly neglected what King James calls the "tail." This must have been a recognised and legitimate kind of rhime, for the dullest ear would have been offended, if such correspondences as tent and deontis, carpeth and harpe, were palmed upon it as regular double rhimes. See Vol. ii. p. 142.

It has been stated, in the course of this note, that the vowel or assonant rhime is the representative of the Irish comhardadh. I believe there is another peculiarity of modern versification, which may be traced to the sister dialect; for I have little doubt that some species of the bob (see Vol. ii. p. 341) represent the Welsh cyrch. These correspondences be

tween the original and derivative tongues are valuable, and should, in all cases, be carefully investigated.

(E.) VERSIFICATION.

In p. 164. 1. 30. were given two rules, whereby to form the elementary versicle. A third should have been added.

3. No section can begin or end with more than two unaccented syllables. It was to this third rule (by some mistake omitted in transcription) that the succeeding remarks were meant chiefly to apply.

The elision of the final e is occasionally a matter of much doubt. Ormin elided it, both before a vowel, and also before the h. In Anglo-Saxon verse, it was sometimes elided, sometimes not; but whether the elision were regulated by rule, or left to the caprice or convenience of the poet, I cannot say. When quoting the verse in p. 165. 1. 3. it escaped my recollection, that this verse had already been scanned by Conybeare, and (as he elides one of the es) scanned differently from what appears in the text. The reasoning, however, is but slightly affected by this oversight.

In many compound sections, besides the regular alliteration, which binds together the couplet, there is a kind of subordinate alliteration, which is confined to the section, and may therefore be called the sectional. In the following examples, the syllables, which contain the sectional alliteration, are written in italics.

Heardles helle witles: thes | the he wan | with heof|nes walldend

See p. 280.

Migtig on modle ir|re : wearp | hine on ❘ that mor|ther in nan

p. 284.

Hearm on this se helle walla ah|te ic. min|ra han|da geweald|

Vol. ii. p. 40. Swa mig|tigne on | his mod gethohlte he | let hinle swa micles weal|dan.

p. 285.

This sectional alliteration is worthy of notice on two accounts. First, it strengthens the hypothesis, advanced in p. 270, as to the origin of the compound section; for, in most cases, the alliterative syllables are so distributed, as to give the compound section all the properties of an alliterative couplet. And, secondly, it countenances the opinion thrown out in Vol. ii. p. 278, that the solitary section, sometimes met with in Icelandic poetry, is merely the concluding portion of a compound section. If we suppose the

sectional alliteration b to fall in the latter part of a compound section, and the regular alliteration a in the first part, we might divide the whole couplet, so as to get an alliterative couplet and supernumerary section-the alliterative syllables being thus distributed;

аа: а
b b

The student may sometimes be led, owing to the sectional alliteration, to consider a compound section as a regular alliterative couplet. Perhaps the verses in Vol. ii. p. 52. 1. 4. and Vol. ii. p. 60. 1. 1. might have been better scanned, as follows,

He was Thracia-theod|a al dor: and Retie-ricles hirde

The first of these couplets is bound together by a very weak alliteration (he and hirde); but still I think such a scansion of the verse preferable to the one given in the text, inasmuch as the latter makes the middle pause fall in the midst of the compounds Thracia-thioda and Retie-rices—a mode of division, which I believe is unexampled in Anglo-Saxon poetry.

From an observation in p. 214. it might be inferred, that the French verse of five accents had no middle pause. This is incorrect; the French verse of four accents, like the rhythmus of the Iambic Dimiter, had none, but the verse of five accents always divided after the fourth syllable. See Vol. ii. p. 366. n.*

Before concluding this note it should be observed, that the stanzas inserted in p. 113 have not "the same" rhythm as the stanzas quoted in p. 112. I shall not, however, trouble the reader with a second version of them. The reasoning, though certainly weakened, is still strong enough to bear the inference it was meant to support.

END OF VOL. I.

J. B. NICHOLS AND SON,
25, Parliament Street, Westminster

« Previous Continue »

Books

A History of English Rhythms, Volume 1