NOTES TO THE FIRST VOLUME.

(A.) THE LETTERS.

IN investigating the properties of our letter-sounds, I have wished to follow my own observations rather than the authority of grammarians. It is not, however, easy entirely to free oneself from the influence of preconceived notions, and they have, in one or two instances, led me into statements that require correction. Our grammarians tells us, that " r is never mute." Now, if I may trust my ear, r is not pronounced at the end of a syllable, unless the following syllable open with a vowel. It is said, that at the end of a syllable r is obscurely pronounced; but I have observed, that a very slight pronunciation of this letter has been sufficient to convict the speaker of being an Irishman, and that many who insist upon its pronunciation, drop it, immediately their attention is diverted, or their vigilance relaxed.

In ordinary speech, I believe the words burn, curb, hurt, lurk, &c. differ from bun, cub, hut, luck, &c. only in the greater length of the vowel-sound. If this be so, then instead of five (see p. 111), there are six vowel-sounds in our language, each of which furnishes us with two vowels, accordingly as the quantity is long or short.

Again; I would say that farther differs in pronunciation from father, only in the greater length of its first vowel. If so, there is one vowelsound in our language, which furnishes us with three vowels. These are found respectively in the words fathom, father, farther. There are some languages, which thus form three vowels from almost every one of their vowel-sounds. See p. 106.

In p. 9, I have considered has a letter. Our grammarians differ on this point, but I must confess that usage is against me. There is little doubt, that its old and genuine pronunciation was much like the palatal breathing of the Germans; and such is the power which some persons still give to it. But the people altogether neglect h, and others look upon it merely as the symbol of aspiration. In like manner, wh is usually treated as an aspirated w. Such, however, is the unsettled state of our language, that I have known men who prided themselves on their accuracy and refinement in the pronunciation of these letters h, wh, &c., and who nevertheless gave them three or four different properties, ere they had well uttered as many sentences.

There is a statement, too, in p. 10, which requires correction. The Latin rh and Greek were certainly aspirated letter-sounds. The accounts of

their pronunciation, handed down to us by the old grammarians, are too explicit to leave any room for doubt upon the subject.

(B.) ACCENTUATION.

The consideration of the laws, which regulate the accents of an English sentence, has occasioned the writer much difficulty. Instead of working his way gradually from results to principles, he has been obliged, owing to the nature of the materials he had to work with, first to assume principles, and then to deduce conclusions. The practice is common enough, though not the less dangerous on that account. The following notices will correct one or two mistakes, into which it has led him.

In p. 84, the definite and indefinite articles are placed upon the same footing. Now the latter originally was nothing more than the first cardinal number, and must, when placed in construction, have obeyed the same law as regards its accentuation. As the cardinal numbers were accented more strongly than the accompanying substantive (see vol, ii. p. 52. n. 5.), it follows that the examples quoted from Spenser and Jonson are instances rather of an obsolete than of a false accentuation, though such a mixture of the old with the new system is still open to objection.

The same observation will apply to the examples quoted in p. 86, from the Paradise Lost. Prepositions formerly took the accent before personal pronouns, and, indeed, still do so in some ef our provincial dialects; the accentuation therefore is not, properly speaking, false, though it takes the reader by surprise, more particularly as an emphasis falls on the pronouns, in the two cases cited.

Again, in an Anglo-Saxon sentence, an adverb generally, and a proposition occasionally, was placed before the concluding word, which, for the most part, was a verb. When so placed, the adverb or proposition seems always to have taken a predominant accent. See Vol. ii. p. 54. n. 5. This rule has been generally observed in the text, though violated in the scansion of the following verses--here scanned according to what I conceive to be their true prosody.

p. 193, 1. 30; and v. ii. p. 32, 1. 26. Sweartle swoglan sæs | up | stigon

With respect to the two last verses some doubt may be entertained whe

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

weron 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 I\ter-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: sigfore and | gewealde

(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.

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

See p. 280.

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

Ib. Worhlte man | him hit | to witle: hyra wor|uld wæs | gahwyr fed p. 284.

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

p. 38. Ne gelyfle ic | me nu . thæs leoh|tes fur❘thor: thes | the him thinc eth langle niot an. Vol. ii. p. 42. Forswap en onthas sweart|an mis tas : swa | he us | ne mæg æn❘ige syn❘ne gestæl an.

Vol. ii. p. 40. Swa mig|tigne on | his mod gethoh|te: he | let hin|e swa mic|les 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