§ 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 (τόνος)
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:
wereda wuldorcining | wordum hērigen. Gen. 2.
mōdum lufien | he is mægna spēd. Gen. 3.
æsc bið oferhēah | eldum dȳre.Run. 26.
on andsware | and on elne strong. Gū. 264.
or in early Modern English:
For myschefe will mayster us | yf measure us forsake.Skelton, Magnif. 156.
How sodenly worldly| welth doth dekay.ib. 1518.
I am your eldest son| Esau 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.
§ 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,
would run ×́×|×́×|×́×|⏑́× and
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 béarwas blḗdum gehóngene
wlítigum wǽstmum: þǣr nō wániað ṓ
hā́lge under héofonum hóltes 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:
wī́tig wúldorcyning wórlde 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 hḗah-sétle héofones 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 Gā́rdéna in gēardágum.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 Wýlfíngum, þā hine Wára cýn. Beow. 461.
ne méahte ic æt hílde mid Hrúntínge. 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 wíntra wórn ǣr he onwég hwúrfe. Beow. 264.
sī́d ætsómne þā gesúndrod 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 ándswáre and on élne stróng. Gū. 264.
ǽðelīc íngong éal wæs gebúnden. Cri. 308.
and ḗac þāra ýfela órsorh wúnað. Met. vii. 43.
ú plang gestṓd wið Ísrahḗlum.Ex. 303.
Prefixes which do not take the alliteration are: ā, ge, for,
geond, oð, e.g.
āhōn and āhébban on hḗahne bḗam. Jul. 228.
hǽfde þā gefóhten fóremǣrne blǣ́d. Jud. 122.
brónde forbǽrnan ne on bǣ́l 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 óferhȳ́d úpāstī́geð. Dan. 495.
átol is þīn ónsēon hábbað we éalle swā́. Satan 61.
ýmbe-síttendra ǣ́nig þā́ra. Beow. 2734.
(b) prefixes which do not alliterate:
oððæt he þā býsgu oferbíden hæfde. Gū. 518.
ne wíllað ēow ondrǣ́dan dḗade fḗðan. Exod. 266.
sýmbel ymb
sǣ́ton
sǣ́grunde 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 fḗāra súm befóran géngde. Beow. 1412.
ne þe behíndan lǣ́t þonne þu héonan 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 þǣrínne ándlangne dǽg.Beow. 2115.
þe þǣrón síndon ḗce drýhten.Hy. iv. 3.
(iii) weard, as in æfterweard, foreweard, hindanweard,
niðerweard, ufeweard, &c., is not accented:
hwít híndanweard and se háls grḗne. Ph. 298.
níodoweard and úfeweard and þæt nebb líxeð. ib. 299.
fḗðe-géstum flét 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
Hrṓðgā̀res (–́|–́×̀×) or fýrst fórð gewā̀t (–́|–́××̀).
(ii) In proper names like Hrṓðgā̀r, Bḗowùlf, Hýgelā̀c,
this secondary accent may sometimes count as one of the four chief
metrical accents of the line, as in
béornas on bláncum þǣr wæs Béowúlfes.Beow. 857.
contrasted with
éorl Béowùlfes éalde 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 Héardrḗde hlā́ford wǣ́re. Beow. 2375.
lúfsum and lī́ðe lḗofum 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 ǣ́réstan ǣ́lda cýnnes.Gū. 948.
sígefolca swḗg oð þæt sémnínga.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 wí̄sfæ̀st 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 wéorðmỳndum 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]
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 A2al and
–́×̀|⏑́× by A2ash, or, for brevity, A2l, A2sh. Examples
of A2l 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 A2sh 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) A2b, 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 lḗodbỳrig 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) A2ab, with both theses strengthened –́×̀|–́×̀,
bā́nhū̀s blṓdfā̀g 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 A3b.
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 þḗoden 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 fǽder mīn El.
528, íc þæt hógode Beow. 633; with disyllabic thesis, hḗht
þā on úhtan El. 105, hǽfde se gṓda Beow. 205; with
resolution of the first arsis, þánon he gesṓhte Beow. 463;
with resolution of the second arsis, wéarð him on Héorote Beow.
1331; with strengthened second thesis, éart þū sē Bḗowùlf
Beow. 506; with trisyllabic thesis, gíf þē þæt gelímpe El. 441,
fúndon þā on sánde Beow. 3034; with resolution of the first
arsis, hwǽðere mē gesǣ́lde Beow. 574, of the second
arsis, sýððan ic for dúgeðum Beow. 2502; with strengthened second
thesis, nṓ hē þone gífstṑl Beow. 168; with thesis of
four syllables, swýlce hī mē gebléndon Cri. 1438, hábbað
wē tō þǣm mǣ́ran Beow. 270; with resolution of the
first arsis, útan ūs tō þǣre hȳ́ðe Cri. 865; with
resolution of the first and second arsis, þóne þe him on swéofote
Beow. 2296; with strengthened second thesis, nṓ þȳ ǣr þone
héaðorìnc Beow. 2466; with thesis of five syllables, sýððan hē
hine to gū̀ðe Beow. 1473; with thesis of six syllables, hȳ́rde
ic þæt hē þone héalsbḕah Beow. 2173. These forms are also
varied by monosyllabic anacrusis combined with monosyllabic thesis,
þe ḗow of wérgðe El. 295, þæt híne on ýlde Beow. 22; with
strengthened second thesis, þæt híne sēo brímwỳlf Beow. 1600;
with disyllabic thesis, ne þéarft þū swā swī́ðe El. 940,
gesprǽc þā sē gṓda Beow. 676; the same with resolution
of the first arsis, gewítan him þā góngan Cri. 533; disyllabic
anacrusis and disyllabic thesis, ne gefrǽgn ic þā mǣ́gðe
Beow. 1012; with resolution of the second arsis, geséah hē in
récede Beow. 728; with strengthened second thesis, ge swýlce sēo
hérepà̄d Beow. 2259; monosyllabic anacrusis with trisyllabic
thesis, on hwýlcum þāra bḗama El. 851; with four-syllable
thesis, gewī́teð þonne on sealman Beow. 2461; with resolution of
the first arsis, ne mā́gon hī þonne gehȳ́nan Cri. 1525; with
resolution of the second arsis, gesā́won þā æfter wǽtere
Beow. 1426. The last measure may be shortened exceptionally to ⏑́×, as
wǽs mīn fǽder 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 wá̄st 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 Héremṑd 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) C1, 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) C3 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) D1 is the normal form,
–́|–́×̀×, as hélm ǽlwìhta An. 118, fḗond máncỳnnes
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 D2, or wíht unhǣ́lo
according to type A, –́×|–́× (Sievers, Paul-Braune’s Beiträge,
x. 251, and Kluge in Paul’s Grundriss, i2, p. 1051). (ii) D2 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
lṑod 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, wéorðmỳndum
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,
wínedrỳhten 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, glǽdmṑd on gesíhðe
Cri. 911, fǽstrǽdne geþṓht Beow. 611; with final thesis
strengthened by secondary accent, gā́stlī̀cne góddrḕam Gū.
602, gámolfèax ond gū́ðrṑf 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
léoðosỳrcan 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 cỳn Beow. 421; with resolution of the secondarily accented
syllable, wī́n of wúndorfàtum Beow. 1163; this type is varied
by anacrusis, ongínneð gḗomormṑd 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.
§ 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
ǣ́fre his fýrde þam
hǣ́lende betǣ́hte.
Ælfr. Judges[81] 417.and h before consonants (viz. r, l, w) is disregarded as
and hē hig āhrédde of þām rḗðan þḗowte.Ælfr. Judges 16.
on hwám his stréngð wæs and his wúndorlī̀ce 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 strḗamfare stíllan, stórmas réstan. An. 1578.
he scḗaf þā mid þam scýlde, þæt se scéatt tōbǽrst
and þæt spére spréngde, þæt hit spráng 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 sámnuncga scéarpum strḗlum. Ps. lxiii. 4.
on þī́ne þā swī́ðran, ond þe ne scéaðeð 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 beswī́ce Sámson þone strángan.Ælfr. Judges 308.
Sometimes in Ælfric the alliterating letter does not stand at the
beginning of the word,
and hē hæfde héora gewéald ealles twéntig gḗara. ibid. 85.
and the alliteration may even fall on an unaccented particle as in
frám his gelēafan and his ǣ forsāwon. 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:
séolfa he gesétte súnnan ond mṓnan. Sat. 4.
úfan ond ū̀tan him wæs ǣ́ghwǣr 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:
hḗafod éalra hḗahgescéafta. Gen. 4.
hī hýne þā ætbǣ́ron to brímes 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 flṓdes ǣ́ht féor 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 búrgum Bḗowulf 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 Gā́rdéna in gḗardágum. Beow. 1.
Scýldes éaferan Scédelandum ín. Beow. 19.
híldewǣ́þnum ond héaðowǣ́dum. Beow. 39;
less commonly by the formula a b | b a:
þā wǣ́ron mónige þe his mǣ́g wríðon. Beow. 2982.
hwī́lum for dúguðe dóhtor Hrṓðgà̄res.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,
lā́stas légde oððǽt hē gelǣ́dde. Gen. 2536.
(ii) Both accented syllables of the second hemistich alliterate with one
accented syllable of the first hemistich,[84]
me séndon tṓ þē sǣ́men snélle. Byrhtnoth 29.
(iii) The four accented syllables of the line all alliterate together,
Gódwine ond Gódwīg gū̀de ne gȳ́mdon. Byrhtn. 192.
In the majority of cases the same alliterative letter is not employed in
two successive lines, but we find cases like
þā tōbrǣ́d Sámson bḗgen his éarmas
þæt þā rā́pas tobúrston þe he mid gebúnden 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 āfḗdde of fíxum twā́m
ond of fī́f hlā́fum fī́ra cýnnes
fī́f þū̀sendo; fḗðan 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 héofona hélm hérian 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 hā́m gefrǣ́gn Hígelāces 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 céastre becúman méahte. An. 931.
híre þā Ádam andswárode. Gen. 827.
If two nouns occur in the same hemistich it is always the first which
alliterates,
hū̀sa sḗlest. Wæs sēo hwī́l micel. Beow. 146.
lánge hwī́le. Him wæs lī́ffrḗa.Beow. 16.
géongum ond éaldum, swylc him gód séalde.Beow. 72.
The only exceptions are when a special rhetorical emphasis is given to
the second word.
When a noun and two adjectives or two nouns and an adjective occur in
the same hemistich, one of these is always subordinated to the other,
and the two together are treated as a combination. In such cases, where
there is double alliteration in the hemistich, the position of the
alliterating words may be either a a x, or a x a, the subordinate
element (x) standing either in the last or the second place in the
hemistich,
béorht bḗacen Gódes brímu swáðredon. Beow. 570.
twélf wintra tī́d tórn geþólode. Beow. 147.
In the case of single alliteration, it is always the first of the nouns
or adjectives which alliterates.
The verb (excluding the infinitive and participles) is usually less
strongly accented than the noun. It may therefore precede or follow the
noun or adjective without alliteration, either in the arsis or thesis,
as
lḗt se héarda Hígelāces þégn.Beow. 2977.
him þā Scýld gewā́t tō gescǽp-hwī́le.Beow. 26.
gewāt þā twélfa súm tórne gebólhen.Beow. 2401.
On the other hand, when a hemistich consists only of one noun and one
verb, the verb may alliterate, as
gṓdne gegýrwan cwæð hē gū̀ð-cýning. Beow. 199.
hwḗtton hígerōfne hǣ́l scḗawedon. Beow. 204.
When a substantive and an adjective are closely combined, a verb in the
same hemistich may alliterate, as
býreð blṓdig wæl, býrgean þénceð. Beow. 448.
séofon niht swúncon; hē þē æt súnde oferflā́t. Beow. 517.
In formulas consisting of noun + verb the noun predominates over the verb
and takes the alliteration, as
wérodes wī́sa wórdhord onlḗac.Beow. 259.
But if the verb is emphatic it may alliterate though there is a noun in
the same hemistich; this occurs chiefly in the second hemistich, as
ond be héalse genám; hrúron him tḗaras.Beow. 1872.
grýrelī̀cne gíst. Gýrede hine Beowulf.ib. 1441,
but a few instances are found in the first hemistich, as
gemúnde þā se gṓda mǣ́g Hígelā́ces.Beow. 758.
When one of two verbs in the hemistich is subordinate to the other the
verb in the subordinate clause alliterates, having a stronger accent
than the verb in the main clause,
mýnte þæt hē gedǣ́lde ǣr þon dǽg cwṓme.Beow. 731.
If the two verbs are co-ordinate the first alliterates,
wórolde lī́fes: wýrce sē þe mṓte.Beow. 1387;
in the first hemistich both verbs commonly alliterate,
séomade ond sýrede sínnìhte hḗold.Beow. 161.
The adverb. Adverbs of degree like micle, swīðe, ful, &c., are
commonly found in the thesis, and even if they stand in the arsis they
usually do not alliterate, as
óftor mícle þonne on ǣ́nne sī́ð.Beow. 1580.
When adverbs of this kind have a special rhetorical emphasis they may of
course alliterate, as
éfne swā mícle swā bið mǣ́gða cræft. Beow. 1284.
ac hē is snél and swíft and swī́ðe lḗoht.Phoen. 317.
Adverbs which modify the meaning of the word which they precede
alliterate, as
ǣ́scholt úfan grǣ̀g: wæs sē ī́renþrḗat.Beow. 330.
Adverbial prepositions preceding the verb also alliterate,
hēt þā ū́p béran ǣ́ðelìnga gestrḗon.Beow. 1920,
but not when they follow the verb,
Gḗat wæs glǽdmōd, géong sṑna tṓ.Beow. 1785.
Adverbs derived from nouns are more strongly accented than the verb
which they modify and therefore alliterate,
ālégdon þā tōmíddes mǣ́rne þḗoden.
Beow. 3141.
Pronouns (and pronominal adjectives like monig, eall, fela) are
usually enclitic, and precede or follow the noun without alliterating,
as
manigu
ṓðru
gescéaft éfnswī̀ðe hím.
Metr. xi. 44.ealne míddangéard ōð mérestrḗamas.Dan. 503.
fela ic mónna gefrǽgn mǣ́gðum wéaldan.Wid. 10.
With a special rhetorical accent they may alliterate even if they
precede the noun,
on þǣ́m dǽge þýsses lī́fes.Beow. 197.
The pronoun selfand the pronouns compounded with the prefix ǣ
(ǣghwā, ǣghwylc, &c.) are usually accented, and alliterate
if they form the first arsis of the hemistich, as
sḗlran gesṓhte þǣm be him selfa dḗah.Beow. 1840.
hǽfde ǣ́ghwæðer énde gefḗred.Beow. 2845.
Prepositions, conjunctions, and particles are not as a rule accented,
but prepositions if followed by an enclitic pronoun take the accent and
alliterate, as
éaldum éarne and ǣ́fter þón. Phoen. 238.
nis únder mḗ ǣ́nig ṓðer. Riddle xli. 86.
Whether words of these classes, standing in the first arsis of the first
hemistich along with another alliterating word, were intended also to
alliterate is somewhat uncertain, but it is probable that they were so,
as in
mid þȳ mǣ́stan mǽgenþrỳmme cýmeð.Crist 1009.
These laws of accentuation are strictly observed only in the older
poetry; by the end of the tenth century, in Byrhtnoth, the Metres of
Boethius and the Psalms, they are frequently neglected.
§ 36. Arrangement and relationship of verse and sentence. The
following rules hold good in general for the distribution of the
sentence or parts of the sentence between the hemistichs of the verse.
Two distinct pauses occur in every alliterative line, one (commonly
called the caesura) between the first and second hemistichs, the
other at the end of the line, and these pauses are determined by the
syntactical construction; that is to say, they coincide with the end
of a clause or lesser member of the sentence. The hemistich must
contain such parts of the sentence as belong closely together; and such
coherent parts, as, for example, a pronoun and noun to which it refers
or adverb with adjective, must not be separated from one another by the
caesura, unless the pronoun or adverb is placed in the second arsis of
the hemistich, as
wýrd æfter þíssum wórdgeméarcum.Gen. 2355.
gif ge wíllað mī́nre míhte gelḗfan.Sat. 251.
In Beowulf this separation of closely connected words is permitted only
if the word standing in the arsis alliterates at the same time. Longer
parts of a sentence may be separated both by the caesura and the pause
at the end of the line. The syntactical connexion between the parts of a
sentence thus broken up makes the unity of the parts clear, and when the
division occurs in the caesura between the two halves of the verse, the
alliteration common to both hemistichs serves further to emphasize this
unity.
The single alliterative lines are connected with one another by the
prevailing usage of ending the sentence not at the end of the completed
line, but at the end of the first hemistich or in the middle of the
line, and of beginning a new sentence with the second hemistich. The
great variety of expression, and the predilection for paraphrase by
means of synonyms which is so characteristic of OE. poetry, contribute
to make such breaks in the line easy. Whatever may be the explanation,
it is certainly the fact that in the OE. poetry the metrical and
syntactical members do sometimes coincide, but at other times overlap in
a way which does not admit of being reduced to rule.[86]
§ 37. Besides the normal four-beat line (with two beats to
each hemistich) there is in OE. and Old Saxon another variety,
the lengthened line (Schwellvers) with three beats in each
hemistich.[87] These verses occur in almost all OE. poems, either
isolated or more commonly in groups, and occasionally we find lines with
one hemistich of two beats and the second hemistich of three, like.
gā́stes dúgeðum þǣ́ra þe mid gā́res órde. Gen. 1522,
and Jud.96, Crist1461, &c., or with a lengthened hemistich of
three beats and a normal hemistich of two beats, like
bǣ́ron brándas on brýne blā́can fȳ́res. Dan. 246,
and Sat.605, Gnom. Ex.200, &c.
In the Psalms and in Cynewulf’s Juliana they are wanting entirely,
in Cynewulf’s Elene out of 1321 verses there are only fourteen
lengthened whole lines, and three lengthened hemistichs. Examples
of groups of these lengthened verses will be found in Gen. 44–46,
1015–1019, 2167–2169, 2854–2858; Exodus 569–573, Dan. 59–106,
203–205, 226–228, 238–246, 262–271, 435–438, 441, 448, 452–458;
Judith 2–12, 16–21, 30–34, 54–61, 63–68, 88–99, 272–274, 289–291,
338–349; Satan 202, 232, 237, 605, Crist 621, 889, 922, 1050,
1382–1386, &c., and in many of the smaller poems.[88]
Lengthened verses of a looser type occur in Salomon and Saturn, and
Genesis B; they have unusually long theses of four or five unaccented
syllables after the first accented syllable, as
ǣ́nne hæfde hē swā swī́ðne gewórhtne. Gen. 252,
or have equally long anacruses before the first accented syllable, as
þæt wē him on þām lánde lā́ð gefrémedon.
Gen. 392.[89]It is not always possible to draw a sharp distinction between regular
lines with somewhat long first theses and lengthened lines. The general
tone and rhythm of the passage in question help to determine whether we
have the normal or the lengthened line before us. The lengthened line
occurs in places where the sense demands a solemn and slow rhythm, in
other cases where the movement of the passage is quicker we may assume
a normal four-beat line with a long anacrusis, or a polysyllabic thesis
in the middle of the hemistich. What distinguishes clearly undoubted
examples of the lengthened verse is that in each hemistich we find
three beats and three feet of equal and independent value. But, as in
the usual two-beat hemistich of the normal line, both beats need not
be equally strong, so in the three-beat hemistich the three beats do
not always stand on the same footing as regards stress, nor does the
position of the stronger beat require to be always the same in the
two hemistichs. The beats which are accompanied by alliteration are,
generally speaking, stronger than those without alliteration. In the
employment of alliteration and in the structure of the hemistich the
lengthened line is closely allied to the normal line.
Alliteration. 1. The first hemistich has commonly two alliterative
sounds, which fall as a rule on the first and second beats:
gesēoð sórga mǣ́ste. Crist 1209;
more rarely on the second and third beats, as in
wǣ́ron hyra rǣ́das rī́ce.Dan. 497;
sometimes on the first and third beats, as
lī́f hēr mén forlḗosað.Rhyming Poem 56.
Now and then we find hemistichs with three alliterations:
dól bið sē þe him dríhten ne ondrǣ́deð.Seafarer 106,
þȳ́ sceal on þḗode geþḗon.Gnom. Ex. 50;
and others with one alliteration only, in which case the alliteration
falls more rarely on the first beat, as
cýning sceal rī́ce héaldan céastra bēoð féorran gesȳ́ne.
Gnom. Ex. 1,
than on the second, as
þæt sē wǣ́re míhta wáldend sē þe hī́e of þām mírce
genérede. Dan. 448.
2. In the second hemistich the chief alliterative sound, the head-stave,
generally falls on the second accented syllable, as in the last example,
and only exceptionally on the first accented syllable, as
Stȳ́ran sceal mon stróngum mṓde. Stórm oft hólm gebríngeð.
Gnom. Ex. 51.
§ 38. The origin and structure of the lengthened verse. It is clear
from the comparative infrequency and the special use to which it is put
that the lengthened line must be looked upon as originating in some way
from the normal four-beat line. Two explanations of its development have
been given. The first, which is Sievers’s original view,[90] is that a
foot or measure with the form –́... (i.e. one accented syllable plus
several unaccented ones) was prefixed to one of the five normal types;
hence –́× prefixed to A would give the form –́×|–́×–́×, and –×
prefixed to B would give –́×|×–́×–́. The other explanation, given
by Luick,[91] is that the lengthened hemistich is due to a blending of
several types of the normal kind in this way. The hemistich starts with
the beginning of one of the normal types A, B, C, then with the second
accented syllable another type is begun and continued, as if the poet
found the original beginning inadequate to express his emotion.
The manner in which the blending of two normal types results in new
lengthened types of three beats will be seen in the following
illustrations:
| A | –́×–́× |
| +C | ×–́–́× |
| gives AC, | –́×–́–́×; |
| A | –́×–́× |
| +D | –́–́×̀× |
| gives AD, | –×–́–́×̀×; |
| B | ×–́×–́ |
| +C | ×–́–́× |
| gives BC, | ×–́×–́–́×; |
| B | ×–́×–́ |
| +A | –́×–́× |
| gives BA, | ×–́×–́×–́×; |
| C | ×–́–́× |
| +A | –́×–́× |
| gives CA, | ×–́–́×–́× |
| A | –́×–́× |
| +A | –́×–́× |
| gives AA, | –́×–́×–́× |
As Prof. Sievers himself[92] has accepted this theory (or, at least,
has recognized it as a convenient method of exhibiting the structural
varieties of the lengthened line), we shall adopt it here.
Of the fifteen different possible combinations of the original types,
some do not actually occur, but with the sub-types to be taken into
consideration we get no less than eighteen different types of the
regular lengthened whole line, and these again admit of variations by
means of resolution of accented syllables, polysyllabic theses, &c.
Only the most commonly occurring forms of the lengthened hemistich will
be given here; for the others the reader may be referred to Sievers.[93].
§ 39. By far the most common type is A A (some 525 examples),
–́×...–́×.–́×,
as in
wéaxan wī́tebrṓgan. (Hǽfden hīe wrṓhtgetḗme).
Gen. 45;
or with resolution of the first accented syllable in the first
hemistich,
súnu mid swéordes écge. Gen. 2857,
and in the second hemistich,
féla bið fýrwet-géornra. Gnom. Ex. 102;
with resolution of the second accented syllable in the second hemistich,
þǣ́r þū þólades síððan. Crist 1410;
or of each of the three accented syllables in the second hemistich,
hýre þæs fǣ́der on róderum. Jud. 5.
The chief variation of this type arises from the prolongation of
the first thesis, which may run from one to six syllables. At the
same time the usual resolutions may be introduced, as in the
following examples: Ordinary type, –́××||–́×|–́×, very common,
grímme wið gód gesómnod. Gen. 46;
with resolution of the first accented syllable,
réced ofer rḗadum gólde. Gen. 2404;
with resolution of the last two accented syllables,
snū̀de þā snóteran ídese. Jud. 55;
type with trisyllabic thesis, –́×××||–́×|–́×,
mḗda syndon mícla þī́na. Gen. 2167;
with resolution of the first accented syllable,
wíton hyra hýht mid drýhten. Gū. 61;
thesis of four to six syllables, (–́×.....||–́×|–́×),
ǣ́leð hȳ mid þȳ éaldan lī́ge. Crist 1547,
síððan hē hæfde his gā́st on sénded. Cross 49,
bétre him wǣre þæt hē brṓðor ā́hte. Gnom. Ex. 175.
Less frequently the second foot has two unaccented syllables, and in
that case the first foot has either one or sometimes two unaccented
syllables, thus
(i) –́×||–́××|–́×, or (ii) –́××||–́××|–́×,
as (i) saā́ þū Ábele wū̀rde. Gen. 1019;
with resolution of the first arsis,
sígor and sṓðne gelḗafan. Jud. 89.
(ii) rínca tō rū̀ne gegángan. Jud. 54.
Type A2A, –́×̀–́×–́×, which is type AA with secondary accent on
the first thesis, occurs, according to Sievers, some twenty times, and
always in the first hemistich. Examples are,
wǣ́rfæ̀st wíllan mī́nes. Gen. 2168;
with resolution of the last arsis,
þéarlmṑd þḗoden gúmena. Jud. 66;
with disyllabic second thesis,
frḗobèarn fǽðmum beþéahte. Gen. 2867.
Type A*A, –́.×̀×|–́×.|–́×, which is AA strengthened and with
disyllabic first thesis, is nearly as common as A2A, and is always in
the first hemistich, as for example,
ā́rlḕas of ḗarde þī́num. Gen. 1019,
béalofùl his béddes nḗosan. Jud. 63;
with trisyllabic first thesis,
hrḗohmṑd wæs sē hǣ́ðena þḗoden.Dan. 242.
Type A B, –́×...–́×.–́, some thirty instances equally
distributed between the first and second hemistichs. Examples are,
éorðan ȳ́ðum þéaht. Riddle xvii. 3,
wǽsceð his wā́rig hrǽgl.Gnom. Ex. 99.
Type A C, –́×...–́–́×, about twenty-nine instances, of which
more than the half occur in the first hemistich, as
hríncg þæs hḗan lándes.Gen. 2854,
wlítige tō wóruldnýtte.Gen. 1016.
saType A D, –́×..–́–́××̀, is rarer, occurring about twelve times,
apparently only in the first hemistich, as
béalde býrnwíggènde. Jud. 17,
Jū̀das hire ongḗn þíngòde. El. 609.
Type A E, –́×..–́×̀×.–́, somewhat more common than the last,
and in both hemistichs, as
swéord and swā́tigne hélm. Jud. 338,
sǽgde him únlȳ̀tel spéll. Gen. 2405.
Type B A, ×.–́×...–́×.–́×, about 120 instances, has as its
simplest form, ×–́×–́×–́×, as
ālǣ́ton lī́ges gánga. Dan. 263;
with disyllabic thesis after the first arsis, ×–́××–́×–́×, as
āwýrged tō wī́dan áldre. Gen. 1015;
with trisyllabic thesis, ×–́×××–́×–́×, as
hȳ twḗgen sceolon tǣ́fle ymbsíttan. Gnom. Ex. 182;
the initial thesis or anacrusis is rarely disyllabic.
Type B B, ×.–́×...–́×.–́, about nine times and mostly in the
first hemistichs, as
gebī́dan þæs hē gebǣ́dan ne mǣ́g. Gnom. Ex. 105;
with resolution of two of the accented syllables,
ofercúmen bið hē ǣ́r hē ācwéle. Gnom. Ex. 114.
Type B C, × . . –́× . . . –́–́ ×, nearly as common as the last and
nearly always in the first hemistich, as
and nā́hte éaldfḗondum.Dan. 454,
begóten of þæs gúman sī́dan.Cross 49.
Type B D, ×.–́×..–́–́×̀×, about sixteen times, and in either
hemistich, as
on éorðan únswǣ́slī̀cne.Jud. 65,
alḗdon hīe þǣr límwḗrìgne.Cross 63.
Type C A, ×–́–́×.–́×, with some fifteen examples, of which eight
are in the first hemistich, as
gesḗoð sórga mǣ́ste.Crist 1209,
tō cwále cníhta fḗorum.Dan. 226.
Type C C, ×....–́–́–̆́×, occurs only nine times, of which
six are in the second hemistich, as
þæt wæs gód ǽlmíhtig. Cross 396;
with resolution of the first accented syllable,
ne sē brýne bḗtmǽcgum.Dan. 265,
þē þæt wéorc stáðoláde.And. 800.
Other combinations are given by Sievers, Altgermanische Metrik,
§ 95, but these occur so rarely or are so doubtful that they need not
be mentioned here. A few lengthened hemistichs have four beats, as
engel in þone ófn ínnan becwṓm.Dan. 238,
and others in Sievers’s Altgermanische Metrik, § 96.
§ 40. OE. poetry is mainly narrative, and does not run into any kind
of recurring stanza or strophe, but is entirely stichic. Traces of an
arrangement of lines so as to form a stanza are found in Dēor, the
Runic Poem, the Psalms and Hymns, the so-called First Riddle, and in
the Gnomic verses of the Exeter Book, which may be compared to the Old
French ‘tirades’.[94]
On the other hand, end-rhyme of the two hemistichs, combined with
alliteration, is not very uncommon, though in most cases it seems only
an incidental ornament, as
fýlle gefǣ́gon; fǽgere geþǣ́gon.Beow. 1014.
wórd-gyd wrécan ond ymb wér sprécan.Beow. 3172.
In the Rhyming Poem of the Exeter Book we have eighty-seven lines in
which the first and second hemistichs rhyme throughout, and in some
passages of other poems, noticeably in the Elene, vv. 114–115, and
vv. 1237–1251, in which Cynewulf speaks in his own person, or Crist
591–595, And. 869–871, 890, Gūthl. 801, Phoen. 15–16, 54–55;
assonance is found not unfrequently alongside of perfect rhyme, as in
Gūthl. 802, Phoen. 53. These places are sufficient to prove a
systematic and deliberate use of rhyme, which serves to accentuate
the lyrical tone of the passages.
Monosyllabic rhymes such as nān: tān (Rhym. Poem 78), rād:
gebā́d (ib. 16), onlā́h: onwrā́h (ib. 1) are called masculine,
and disyllabic rhymes like wóngum: góngum (ib. 7), géngdon:
méngdon (ib. 11), or trisyllabic hlýnede: dýnede (ib. 28), swínsade:
mínsade (ib. 29), bífade: hlífade (ib. 30), are called feminine.
According to their position in the hemistich, rhymes fall into two
classes (a) interior rhymes like hónd rónd gefḕng Beow. 2609,
stī́ðmṑd gestṓd Beow. 2567, in compounds wórd-hòrd ontḗac
Beow. 259, in co-ordinate formulae like þā wæs sǣ́l and mǣ́l
Beow. 1008, wórdum and bórdum El. 24, grund ond sund And. 747, and
as so-called grammatical rhymes lāð wið lāðum Beow. 440, béarn
æfter béarne, Gen. 1070; (b) sectional rhymes joining the two halves
of one line, as
sécgas mec sǣ́gon sýmbel ne ālǣ́gon. Rhym. P. 5;
not unfrequently, very often in the Rhyming Poem, two, three, four or
more alliterative lines are connected in this fashion.
The OE. end rhymes are either (a) complete rhymes as hond: rond,
gefǣ́gon: geþǣ́gon, or (b) assonances, in which only the
vowels correspond, as wæf: læs El. 1238; wrā́ðum: ā́rum Crist.
595; lúfodon: wúnedon And. 870; that the assonances are not
accidental is clear from the fact that they occur alongside of perfect
rhymes.[95]
§ 41. Increasing frequency of Rhyme. The alliterative line was, as
we have seen, the only kind of verse known in English poetry down to
the end of the Old English period. In the eleventh century, however,
the strict conventions which governed the use of alliteration began
to be relaxed and, at the same time, end-rhyme began to invade the
alliterative line, and by this means it was resolved in the course of
time into two separate lines. The process by which this came about is
of great importance in enabling us to follow the further development of
English versification. It has two varieties:—
1. Systematic combination of end-rhyme and alliteration.
2. Unintentional or accidental combination of rhyme and alliteration.
The former—the intentional combination of rhyme with
alliteration—never became popular in Old English; indeed, the few
examples previously quoted are all that have been preserved. In these
examples the hemistichs of each line conform to the ancient rules with
regard to their rhythmic and alliterative structure, but are more
uniform in type than was usual in the older poetry, and are more closely
paired together by the use of final rhyme, which occurs in all its three
varieties, monosyllabic, disyllabic, and trisyllabic.
wúniende wǣ́r wílbec biscǣ́r.
scéalcas wǣron scéarpe, scýl wæs héarpe,
hlū̀de hlýnede; hléoðor dýnede.
Rhyming Poem 26–28.
The rhythm of the verse is mostly descending, Type A being the prevalent
form, while Types D and E occur more rarely. The Types B and C, however,
are also found. Possibly this kind of verse was formed on the model of
certain Mediaeval Latin rhymed verses, or, somewhat more probably, on
that of the Old Norse ‘runhenda’, as this poetic form may have been
made known in England by the Old Norse poet, Egil Skallagrimsson, who in
the tenth century had lived in England and twice stayed at the court of
King Æõelstan.
§ 42. Of greater interest than this systematic combination of
alliteration and rhyme is the irregular and more or less unintentional
occurrence of rhyme which in the eleventh century is found frequently in
the native metre.
Isolated instances of rhyme or assonance may be met with even in the
oldest Old English poems. For certain standing expressions linked by
such a similarity of sound, mostly causing interior rhyme (i.e. rhyme
within a hemistich), were admitted now and then in alliterative poetry,
e.g.
siþþan ic hónd and rónd | hébban míhte. Beow. 656.
sǣ́la and mǣ́la; | þat is sṓd métod. ib. 1611.
In other cases such rhymes are to be found at the end of two hemistichs,
Hrṓðgār máðelode, | hílt scḗawode. Beow. 1687.
Wýrmum bewúnden, | wítum gebúnden. Judith 115.
Examples of this kind occur not unfrequently in several early OE.
poems, but their number increases decidedly in the course of time from
Beowulf, Andreas, Judith, up to Byrhtnoth and Be Dōmes
dæge.
From the two last-mentioned poems, still written in pure alliterative
verse, a few examples of rhyming-alliterative verses, or of simply
rhymed verses occurring accidentally among the normal alliterative
lines, may also be quoted here:
Býrhtnōð máðelode, | bórd háfenode.Byrhtn. 42.
ǣ́fre embe stúnde | he séalde sume wúnde.ib. 271.
þǣr þā wǽterbúrnan | swḗgdon and úrnon.Dom. 3.
innon þam gemónge | on ǣ́nlicum wónge.ib. 6.
nū̀ þū scealt grḗotan, | tḗaras gḗotan.ib. 82.
Thus it may be taken for granted that end-rhyme would have come into
use in England, even if Norman-French poetry had never been introduced,
although it is certainly not to be denied that it only became popular in
England owing to French influence.
But can this influence explain the gradually increasing use of
end-rhyme in some OE. poems written shortly before the Norman Conquest
(as e.g. Byrhtnoth, Be Dōmes dæge, the poetical passage in the
Saxon Chronicle of the year 1036), or are we to attribute it to
the influence of mediaeval hymn poetry, or, lastly, to the lingering
influence of the above-mentioned Old Norse ‘runhenda’? It is not easy to
give a decided answer to these questions.
In any case it would appear that towards the end of the Old English
period combined Mediaeval Latin and French influence on English metre
became of considerable importance on account of the constantly growing
intercourse between the British isles and the continent. This may
be seen in the more frequent use of rhyme, as indeed was only to be
expected in consequence of the increasing popularity of Norman-French
and Mediaeval-Latin poetry in England and the reception of Norman-French
words into the language.
This combination of alliteration and rhyme, however, only becomes
conspicuous to a considerable extent for the first time in the
above-mentioned passage of the Saxon Chronicle, and in another passage
of the year 1087.[96]
The chief difference between these verses and those of the Rhyming
Poem is this, that the former have not such a symmetrical structure as
the latter, and that rhyme and alliteration are not combined in all of
them, but that regular alliterative lines, rhyming-alliterative lines,
and lines with rhyme only occur promiscuously, as e.g. in the following
lines (4–7) of the above-mentioned passage of the Chronicle of the
year 1036:
súme hī man bénde, | súme hī man blénde,
súme man hámelode | and súme hḗanlīce hǽttode;
ne wearþ drḗorlīcre dǣ́d | gedṓn on þisan éarde,
siððan Déne cṓmon | and hēr frýð nā́mon.
The verses of the year 1087 of the Saxon Chronicle have a similar
but on the whole less rhythmical structure. In some of the lines the
hemistichs are neither joined by alliteration, nor by end-rhyme, but
merely by the two-beat rhythm of each of them; cf. 11. 1–5:
Castelas he let wyrcean | and earme men swiðe swencean.
Se cyng wes swa swiðe stearc | and benam of his under-þeoddan
manig marc goldes | and ma hundred punda seolfres;
þat he nam be wihte | and mid mycelan unrihte
of his
land
leode | for
litelre neode.
[97]
On the other hand, the poetical piece of the Saxon Chronicle on
Eadweard of the year 1065 is written in perfectly regular alliterative
lines.
These two ways of treating the old alliterative line which occur in
the latter part of the Saxon Chronicle, and which we will call the
progressive and the conservative treatment, indicate the course which
this metre was to take in its further development. Out of the long
alliterative line, separated by the caesura into two hemistichs, again
connected by rhyme, there sprang into existence a short rhyming couplet.
This was by no means identical with the three-beat couplet evolved from
two rhyming hemistichs of a line on the model of the French Alexandrine,
nor with the short four-beat couplets modelled on the French vers
octosyllabe, but had points of similarity enough to both, especially to
the former one, to be easily used in conjunction with them, as several
Early English poems show.
The conservative treatment of the old alliterative line, which probably
at no time was altogether discontinued, was revived in the thirteenth
and especially in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, when it
degenerated again in the same way as the progressive line had done
several centuries before.
§ 43. The first subject which we have to consider here is the further
development of the progressive form of the alliterative line, the
representatives of which[98] are closely connected in their rhythmic
form with the two specimens of the poetical parts of the Saxon
Chronicle quoted above. From Alfred’s Proverbs we take No. xv (ll.
247–66):
Þus queþ Alured:
Ne schal-tu néuere þi wíf | by hire wlýte chéose, 247–8
for néuer none þínge | þat heo tó þe brýngeþ;
ac leorne hire cúste, | heo cúþeþ hi wel sóne;
for móny mon for
áyhte |
úvele i
áuhteþ,
and ófte mon of fáyre | frákele ichéoseþ. 255–6
Wó is him þat úvel wìf | brýngeþ to his cótlýf;
só is him alýve | þat úvele ywýueþ.
For hé schal uppen éorþe | dréori i-wúrþe.
Mónymon síngeþ | þat wíf hom brýngeþ
Wíste he hwat he bróuhte | wépen he mýhte. 265–6
The metre of Layamon’s Brut may be illustrated by the following
passage (ll. 13841–13882):
Þa ánswerede þe óðer | þat was þe áldeste bróðer
’Lust me nú, lauerd kíng | and ích þe wullen cúðen
what cníhtes we béoð, | and whanene we icúmen séoð.
Ich hátte Héngest, | Hórs is mi bróðer;
we beoð of Álemáinne, | áðelest alre lónde; 13849–50
of þat ílken ǽnde | þe Ángles is iháten.
Béoð in ure lónde | sélcùðe tíðènde:
vmbe fíftène ȝér | þat fólc is isómned,
al ure lédene fólc, | and heore lóten wérpeð;
uppen þán þe hit fáleð, | he scal uáren of lónde;13859–60
bilǽuen scullen þa fíue, | þa séxte scal fórð-lìðe
út of þan léode | to úncùðe lónde;
ne beo he ná swa leof mon | vorð he scal líðen.
For þer is fólc swiðe múchel, | mǽre þene heo wálden;
ba wíf fareð mid chílde | swa þe déor wílde;13869–70
ǽueralche ȝére | heo béreð chíld þère.
þat beoð an us féole | þat we fǽren scólden;
ne míhte we bilǽue | for líue ne for dǽðe,
ne for náuer nane þínge, | for þan fólc-kìnge.
þús we uerden þére | and for þí beoð nu hére,13879–80
to séchen vnder lúfte | lónd and godne láuerd.
These extracts illustrate only the general metrical character of the
two literary monuments, the versification of which in many passages
considerably deviates from the type here exhibited. It frequently shows
a still more arbitrary mixture of the different kinds of verse, or a
decided preference for some of them over the others. But the examples
given will suffice to show that here, as in the two passages from the
Saxon Chronicle quoted above, we have four different kinds of verse
distinguished by the different use of rhyme and alliteration, viz.:
1. Regular alliterative lines, which are very numerous, and at least in
the first half of Layamon’s Brut, possibly throughout the poem, form
the bulk, e.g. Prov. xv. 247–8, Layamon, 13847–8, 13851–2, 13855–6,
13859–60, 13867–8, 13881–2, or
Búte if he béo | in bóke iléred.Prov. iii. 65–6.
þat his blód and his brain | bá weoren todáscte.Lay. 1468–9.
2. Rhyme (or assonance) and alliteration combined; equally numerous,
e.g. Prov. xv. 253–4, Lay. 13841–2, 13845–6, 13869–70, &c., or
Þat þe chíriche habbe grýþ | and the chéorl beo in frýþ.Prov. v. 93.
his sédes to sówen, | his médes to mówen.ib. 95.
biuóren wende Héngest, | and Hórs him alre hǽndest.Lay. 13973–4.
Heo cómen into hálle | hǽndeliche álle.ib. 13981–2.
3. Verses with rhyme (or assonance) only, without alliteration, also not
unfrequent, e.g. Prov. xv. 249–50 ff., or Lay. 13853–4, &c.
And his plóuh beo idrýue | to ure álre bihóue. Prov. v. 97–8.
þe póure and þe ríche | démen ilýche. ib. iv. 80–1.
On Itálȝe heo comen to lónde, | þer Róme nou on stóndeþ. Lay. 106–7.
fele ȝér under súnnan | nas ȝet Róme biwónnen. ib. 108–9.
4. Four-beat verses without either rhyme or alliteration, occurring
comparatively rarely, and in most cases probably to be attributed to
corruption of the text. Examples:
he may béon on élde | wénliche lórþeu.Prov. vi. 101–2.
we habbeð séoue þúsund | of góde cníhten.Lay. 365–6.
It is certain that these four different forms of verse cannot have been
felt by the poets themselves as rhythmically unlike; their rhythmic
movement must have been apprehended as essentially one and the same.
§ 44. Nature and origin of this metre. Theories of Trautmann and
Luick. We need not here discuss the theory of Prof. Trautmann, who
endeavours to show that the hemistichs of Layamon’s verse were composed
in imitation of the four-beat short-lined metre in which the Old High
German poet Otfrid had written his religious poem Krist, a form which,
according to Trautmann and his followers, had been frequently employed
in late Old English and early Middle English poetry. References to the
criticisms of this hypothesis, by the present writer and others, are
given by G. Körting in his Encyklopädie der Englischen Philologie, p.
388, and by K. Luick in Paul’s Grundriss der Germanischen Philologie,
ed. 2, II. ii. 152. The author of this book, in his larger work on the
subject (Englische Metrik, i. §§ 67–73), has shown, as English and
German scholars had done before him, that Layamon’s verse has its roots
in the Old English alliterative line. Twelve years after the publication
of that work this theory received further confirmation at the hands of
Prof. Luick, who has shown in Paul’s Grundriss (l.c.) that the five
types of the Old English alliterative line, discovered by Prof. Sievers,
reappear (although in a modified form) in the lines of Layamon’s Brut.
But we are unable wholly to agree with Prof. Luick’s view on the origin
and nature of this metre.
In order to explain the origin of Layamon’s verse he starts from the
hypothesis of Prof. Sievers[99] that the Old Germanic alliterative
verse, as historically known, which was intended to be recited,
and therefore not restricted to uniformity of rhythm, originated
from a primitive Old Germanic verse meant to be sung, and therefore
characterized by rhythmic regularity. According to Prof. Luick this
primitive metre, although not represented by any extant example in Old
English, had never quite died out, and forms the basis of the metre of
Layamon and his predecessors in early Middle English. For this ingenious
hypothesis, however, no real evidence exists. On the contrary, the fact
that the beginnings of the peculiar kind of metre used by Layamon can be
traced back to purely alliterative Old English poems, where they occur
amongst regular alliterative lines, and therefore undoubtedly must be
of the same rhythmical structure, seems to be decisive against Prof.
Luick’s theory.
For the same reason it is impossible to follow Prof. Luick in regarding
Layamon’s line as having an even-beat rhythm, and containing not only
two primary accents, but two secondary accents as well. A further strong
objection to this view is to be found in the circumstance, that in
the early part of Layamon’s Brut, although rhyme already occurs not
unfrequently, alliterative lines decidedly predominate; in the passage
consisting of forty long lines (ll. 106–185, quoted in our Altenglische
Metrik, pp. 152–3), we have thirty-three regular alliterative lines and
only five rhymed lines, two of which are alliterative at the same time.
Even in the middle portion of Layamon’s Chronicle, where the poet, as
Prof. Luick thinks, must have attained to a certain skill in handling
his metre, alliterative lines are in some passages quite as numerous as
rhymed ones. In the passage quoted above (p. 68), for example, which
consists of twenty-one long lines, eleven of them are alliterative and
ten are rhymed. On the other hand, in the continuation of this passage
(quoted Altengl. Metrik, p. 156), containing twenty-nine long lines,
the reverse is the case, the number of alliterative lines being only
seven, and that of rhymed and assonant lines twenty-two in all; of the
latter, however, eleven are alliterative at the same time.
While then it might be admissible to speak of progressive neglect of
alliteration and of increasing predilection for end-rhyme on the part of
the poet, as he advances with his work, it is not in accordance with the
facts to assert that ‘alliteration had ceased to play its former part,
and had been reduced to the level of a mere ornament of the verse’.
On the contrary, in the first part of the Chronicle alliteration is
the predominant form, and, as the work advances, it is still used to a
considerable extent as a means to connect the two hemistichs or short
lines so as to form one long line. The strict laws formerly observed in
the use of alliteration, it is true, are not unfrequently disregarded,
chiefly with respect to the head-stave, which often falls on the fourth
accented syllable of the long line; and other licences (first occurring
in Ælfric’s Metrical Homilies) may be met with. Nevertheless both
Alfred’s Proverbs and Layamon’s Brut (as is sufficiently shown by
the many specimens quoted in our Altenglische Metrik, pp. 150 ff.),
contain a great number of perfectly regular alliterative lines. The fact
that, in the second half of Layamon’s Chronicle, end-rhyme is used
more and more frequently as a means to connect the two hemistichs, is
with much more probability to be explained by the continual occupation
of the poet with the Norman-French original poem, and by the increasing
influence which its short octosyllabic couplets must naturally have
exercised upon his own rhythms, than by a supposed intention of the
poet to write in ‘primitive Germanic four-beat song-metre’, the very
existence of which is hypothetical. Furthermore, the fact that in
some (not all or even most) of the passages, where end-rhyme is used
almost exclusively, e.g. in the passage quoted above (ll. 13883–940),
an even-beat rhythm is distinctly noticeable, can be explained quite
naturally by the influence of the Norman-French original, the
even-measured verses of which the poet was translating.
But even supposing that Layamon intended to use the primitive Germanic
four-beat song-metre in his translation of Wace’s Chronicle, although
it certainly was not intended for singing, what can have been his reason
for composing the first half of his work, and a very considerable
portion of the rest, in a rhythmical form which only to a small extent
shows the peculiarities of a rhyming even-beat metre, whereas the main
part of it consists of the native unevenly stressed alliterative verse?
It is quite incorrect to say that the author in the course of his work
not unfrequently fell back into the alliterative verse. The fact is
just the opposite: the author started by using the native alliterative
verse to which he was accustomed, and gradually came to adopt the
rhymed verse of the Norman-French chronicle which he was translating,
without, however, entirely giving up the former metre. Alliteration
and end-rhyme, which he used sometimes separately and sometimes in
combination, were evidently looked upon by Layamon as equally legitimate
means for connecting his hemistichs or short lines.
§ 45. Number of stresses. Quite as unfounded as the assertion that
Layamon’s verse is of an even-beat nature is the other assertion that it
contains two primary and two secondary accents, and that the second of
these secondary accents in verses with disyllabic endings may fall on a
syllable which by its etymology ought to have no accent.
This statement is refuted by the treatment of rhyme in Layamon’s Brut
and in some earlier poems of a similar form or containing the same kind
of verse.
Not only in the Brut, but also in several Old English and earlier
Middle English poems, we meet both with regular rhymes and with simple
assonances and other still more imperfect correspondences in sound
intended to serve as rhymes.
Examples of actual rhyme in the Brut are the monosyllabic pairs:
seon: beon 13837–8, king: þing 13883–4, cniht: riht 13887–8;
besides inexact rhymes like mon: anān 13605–6, 13615–16, mon:
dōn 13665–6, 13677–8, wīn: in 14349–50, 14998–9, chin:
wīn 14994–5; disyllabic rhymes: icúmen: gúmen 13787–8, gṓde:
flṓde 13791–2, sṓhten: rṓhten 13803–4, ṓðer:
brṓðer 13841–2, chī̀lde: wī́lde 13870–1, pḗre:
hḗre 13871–2, hálle: álle 13981–2. We see no reason to accent
these last-mentioned rhymes differently from similar rhymes occurring
in Old English poems, as e.g. wédde: aspḗdde Andr. 1633, wúnne:
blúnne ib. 1382, bewúnden: gebúnden Jud. 115, stúnde: wúnde
Byrhtn. 271, &c.
Examples of the more numerous group formed by assonances are tō :
idōn 13801–2, lond: gold 13959–60, strong: lond 13969–70, and
disyllabic assonances like cníhten: kínges 13793–4, wólden: londe
13821–2, &c.
These are strictly parallel with instances like wæf: læs El. 1238,
onlā́g: hād ib. 1246, or like wrā́ðum: ā́rum Crist 595,
lýre: cýme Phoen. 53, rǣ́dde: tǣ́hte By. 18, flā́nes:
genāme ib. 71, hlḗorum: tḗarum Be Dōmes dæge 28,
&c., and must, in our opinion, be metrically interpreted in exactly
the same way. That is to say, the root-syllable must, not only in
real assonances like cníhten: kínges, lónde: strónge, but also in
consonances like Péohtes: cníhtes, mónnen: ínnen, be looked upon
as the chief part of the rhyme, and the flexional endings, whether
rhyming correctly or incorrectly, must be regarded as forming only an
unessential, unaccented, indistinctly heard part of the rhyme, just as
they admittedly do in the similar Old English assonances quoted above.
Now, as it is inconsistent with the two-beat rhythm of the hemistich in
Old English verse, to attribute a secondary accent to those endings,
although they were in some cases more distinctly pronounced than the
Middle English endings, it is impossible to suppose that the Middle
English endings bore a secondary accent. A further objection is that
although the syllables which, according to Luick’s theory, are supposed
to bear a secondary accent are of course usually preceded by a long
root-syllable, it not unfrequently happens that a disyllabic word with
long root-syllable rhymes with one having a short root-syllable, in
which case the ending is not suited to bear a secondary accent at all,
e.g. flúȝen: únnifṓge 14043–4, to-fóren: grḗten 14071–2,
sǣ́res: wólde 14215–16, fáreð: iuḗren 14335–6, icúmen:
Þréoien 14337–8, lágen (=laws): lónde 14339–40, húnden: lúuien
14480–1, scóme: sṓne 14604–5, cúmen: hálden 14612–13, scípe:
brṓhte 14862–3, fáder: unrǣ́des 14832–3, fáder: rǣ́des
14910–11, fṓten: biscópen 14821–2, iwī́ten: scipen 14251–2,
wī́ten: wenden 15060–1, gúme: bisī́den 15224–5, fréondscìpe:
séoluen 15226–7, wúde: wéien-lǣ́len 15508–9, ibóren: béarne
15670–1, biȝáte: wéorlde-rī́che 15732–3, scáðe: fólke
15784–5, biswíken (pret. pl.): cráften 29016–17, aȝíuen:
ȝélden 29052–3, biuóren: fū̀sen 29114–15, súne: pḗode
29175–6, idríuen: kínerī́chen 29177–18, grúpen (pret. pl.):
mū̀ȝen 29279–80, stúden (=places): bérnen 29285–6, &c.
The only cases in which a secondary accent seems to be required for an
unaccented final syllable are such rhymes as the following:—hálì: forþí 13915–16 (cf. Altengl. Metrik, p. 160); men: cómèn
13997–8 (MS. B: men: here), men: dédèn 13975–6, isómned wés: lóndès
25390–1, and so forth.[100] But rhymes of this kind are in
comparison to the ordinary disyllabic or feminine endings so very rare
(occurring, for the most part, in lines which admit of a purely
alliterative scansion, or which have come down to us in an incorrect
state), that they have no bearing on the general rhythmic accentuation
of those final syllables, or on the rhythmic character of Layamon’s
verses in general (cf. p. 78, end of § 47).
§ 46. Analysis of verse-types. In turning now to a closer examination
of the rhythmic structure of the metre in Layamon’s Brut and in the
somewhat earlier Proverbs of Alfred, we are glad to find ourselves
more nearly than hitherto (though still not altogether) in agreement
with the views of Prof. Luick.
It is no small merit of his to have shown for the first time that the
five types of rhythmic forms pointed out by Sievers as existing in the
alliterative line are met with also in each of the four forms of verse
of Layamon’s Brut and of the Proverbs. And here it is of interest
to note that not only are the normal types of frequent occurrence
(chiefly in the Proverbs), but the extended types also, especially
in Layamon’s Brut, are met with even more frequently.
On account of our limited space only a few examples of each of the five
types can be given in this handbook.
Instead of quoting hemistichs or isolated short lines as examples of
each of the single types A, B, C, D, E, we prefer always to cite two
connected short lines, and to designate the rhythmic character of the
long line thus originating by the types of the two hemistichs, as
follows: A + A, A* + B, B* + C, C* + E, &c., where A*, B*, C* signify
the extended types, to be discussed more fully below, and A, B, C, &c.,
the normal types. This mode of treatment is necessary in order that our
examples may adequately represent the structure of the verse. The short
lines are always connected—either by alliteration, by rhyme (or
assonance), or by both combined, or sometimes merely by identity of
rhythm—into pairs. These pairs of short lines are regarded by Luick as
even-measured couplets, while we regard them as alliterative long lines;
but on either view each of them forms a coherent unity. We believe that
an examination of the couplet or long line as an undivided whole will
show unmistakably that the assumption of the even-measured character
of Layamon’s verse is erroneous, or at least that it applies only in
certain cases, when the metre is strongly influenced by Romanic
principles of versification. The examples are for the most part the same
as those which Prof. Luick has quoted,[101] but we have in all cases
added the complementary hemistichs, which are generally of somewhat
greater length:
A + A: Ich hátte Héngest, | Hórs is my bróðer.
Lay. 13847–8.
A*+ A: and ích be wulle rǽchen | déorne rúnen.
ib. 14079–80.
B + A: þær þa sǽxisce mén | þæ sǽ isóhten. ib. 14738-9.
B(E?) + A: hw hi héore líf | léde schólde. Prov. i. 15–16.
A + B: lónges lýves, | ac him lýeþ þe wrénch. ib. x. 161–2.
B*+ A: vmbe fíftene ȝér | þat fólc is isómned.
Lay. 13855–6.
B + C: and eoure léofue gódd | be ȝe tó lúteð.
ib. 13891–2.
B + C: ne wurð þu néver so wód, | ne so wýn-drúnke.
Prov. xi. 269–70.
A + C: mi gást hine iwdárðeð | and wírð stílle. Lay. 17136–7.
C + C: for þat wéorc stóndeð | inne Írlónde. ib. 17176–7.
A*+ D: kómen to þan kínge | wíl-tíþende. ib. 17089–90.
D + A*: vólc únimete | of móni ane lónde. ib. 16188–9.
E + E: fíf þusend mén | wúrcheð þer ón. ib. 15816–17.
B*+ E: þæt he héfde to iwíten | séouen hundred scíþen.
ib. 15102–3.
D + *A: for nys no wrt uéxynde | a wúde ne a wélde.
Prov. x. 168–9.
A*+ D: þat éuer mvwe þas féye | fúrþ ýp-holde. ib. 170–1.
It is easy to observe that it is only when two identical types, like
A + A, C + C, E + E, are combined, that an even-beat rhythm (to some
extent at least) can be recognized; in all the other combinations this
character is entirely absent.
§ 47. Extended types. We now turn to the more numerous class of such
couplets or long lines which in both their component hemistichs exhibit
extended variations of the five types, resulting from anacrusis or from
the insertion of unstressed syllables in the interior of the line. These
verses, it is true, are somewhat more homogeneous, and have a certain
resemblance to an even-beat rhythm in consequence of the greater number
of unaccented syllables, one of which (rarely two or more) may, under
the influence of the even-beat metre of the Norman-French original, have
been meant by the poet to be read with a somewhat stronger accentuation.
We are convinced, however, that in feminine endings, in so far as these
are formed, which is usually the case, by the unaccented endings -e,
-en, -es, -eþ, &c., these final syllables never, or at most only in
isolated cases, which do not affect the general character of the rhythm,
have a stronger accent or, as Prof. Luick thinks, form a secondary
arsis. As little do we admit the likelihood of such a rhythmic
accentuation of these syllables when they occur in the middle of the
line, generally of such lines as belong to the normal types mentioned
above.
It is convenient, however, to adopt Luick’s formulas for these common
forms of Layamon’s verse, with this necessary modification, that we
discard the secondary accent attributed by him to the last syllable of
the types A, C, D, accepting only his types B and E without any change.
We therefore regard the normally constructed short lines of Layamon’s
metre—so far as they are not purely alliterative lines of two accents,
but coupled together by rhyme or assonance, or by alliteration and rhyme
combined—as belonging to one or other of the following two classes:
(1) lines with four accents and masculine or monosyllabic endings (types
B and E); and (2) lines of three accents and feminine or disyllabic
endings (types A, C, D). In this classification those unaccented
syllables which receive a secondary stress are, for the sake of brevity,
treated as full stresses—which, indeed, they actually came to be in the
later development of the metre, and possibly to some extent even in
Layamon’s own verse.
Assuming the correctness of this view, the chief types of Layamon’s
verse may be expressed by the following formulas, in which the bracketed
theses are to be considered optional:
Type A: (×)–́(×)×̀×–́×.
Type C: (×)×̀×–́–́×.
Type E: ×–́(×)×̀××̀×–́.
Type B: (×)×̀×–́(×)×̀× –́.
Type D: (×)–́×–́×̀×.
As these types may be varied by resolutions in the same way as the
primary types, there arise various additional formulas such as the
following:
A: (×)⏑́×(×)×–́×.
C: (×)×̀×⏑́×–́×, &c.
Other variations may be effected by disyllabic or even polysyllabic
theses in the beginning (‘anacruses’) or in the middle of the verse
instead of monosyllabic theses.
Apart from these another frequently occurring variation of type C must
be mentioned which corresponds to the formula (×)×̀×–́×–́×, and may
be designated (with Professors Paul and Luick) as type Ca, because the
position of its accented syllables points to type C, while on the other
hand it bears a certain resemblance to type A.
The following examples, many of which have been quoted before by Luick,
may serve to illustrate these types of short lines or rather hemistichs
and their combination in couplets or long lines, in which a normal
hemistich is often followed by a lengthened one and vice versa:
| A* + A*: |
Stróng hit ìs to rówe | ayèyn þe sée þat flóweþ.
Prov. x. 145–6. |
| A* + A*: |
And swá heo gùnnen wénden | fórð tò þan kínge.
Lay. 13811–12. |
| A* + A*: |
ne míhte wè bilǽue | for líue nè for dǽþe.
Lay. ib. 13875–6. |
| B + A*: |
ùmbe fíftène ȝer | þat fólc is isómned.
ib. 13855–6. |
| A* + C*: |
ǽveràlche ȝére | heo bèreð chíld þére.
ib. 13871–2. |
| B* + B*: |
þèr com Héngest, þèr com Hórs, | þèr com míni mòn ful óht.
ib. 14009–10. |
| B* + B*: |
ànd þe clérek ànd þe knýht, | he schùlle démen èuelyche ríht.
Prov. iv. 78–9. |
| Ca+ C*: |
þèr þes cníhtes cómen | bifòren þan fólc-kínge.
Lay. 13817–18. |
| C* + A*: |
ȝìf heo gríð sóhten, | and of his fréondscipe róhten?
ib. 13803–4. |
| C* + Ca: |
hìt beoð tíðénde | ìnne Sǽxe lónde.
ib. 14325–6. |
| A* + C*: |
for he wólde wìð þan kínge | hòlden rúnínge.
ib. 14069–70. |
| A* + D*: |
heo sǽden tò þan kínge | néowe tíðènden.
ib. 13996–7. |
| A* + D*: |
and míd him bròuhte hére | an húndred rídǣ̀ren.
ib. 15088–9. |
| E* + B*: |
Hǽngest wès þan kìnge léof | ànd him Líndesàȝe géf.
ib. 14049–50. |
Types with resolutions:
| A* + A*: |
and þús þìne dúȝeþe | stílle hè fordémeð.
ib. 14123–4. |
| A* + B*: |
Wóden hèhde þa hǽhste làȝe | an ùre ǽldèrne dǽȝen.
ib. 13921–2. |
The first hemistich of the last line offers a specimen of a variation
of the ordinary types with feminine endings (chiefly of A, C, and
Ca), designated by Prof. Luick as A1, C1, Ca1, and showing the
peculiarity that instead of the ending –́× somewhat fuller forms occur,
consisting either of two separate words or of a compound word, and
thus corresponding either to the formula –́×̀, or, if there are three
syllables, to the formula –́××̀, or in case of a resolution (as in the
above example) to the formula –́×⏑́×. We differ from Prof. Luick,
however, in admitting also endings corresponding to the formula ⏑́×̀×.
As a rule, if not always, such forms of verse are occasioned by the
requirements of rhyme. This is not the case, it is true, in the
following purely alliterative line:
A1* + A*: þe kíng sòne úp stòd | and sétte hine bì him séoluen.
Lay. 14073–4.
but in other verses it is so, e.g.:
B* + A1*: Ah of éou ich wùlle iwíten | þurh sóðen èouwer wúrðscìpen.
ib. 13835–6.
and similarly (not corresponding to –́××̀, as Prof. Luick thinks):
A1* + B*: bìdden us to fúltúme | þàt is Críst gòdes súne.
ib. 14618–19.
but the formula –́××̀is represented by the following verses:
A1* + A1*: þe þúnre heo ȝìven þúnresdǽi | forþí þat
hèo heom helpen mæ̀i.
ib. 13929–30.
A1* + A1*: þe éorl ànd þe éþelỳng | ibúreþ ùnder gódne
kìng.
Prov. iv. 74–5.
C1* + Ca1*: nès þer nán crístindòm, | þèr þe kíng þat máide nòm.
Lay. 14387–8.
In the last but one of these examples this accentuation is corroborated
in the Jesus College MS. by the written accent on the word gódne,
whereby not only the rhyme -lyng: king is shown to be an unaccented
one, but at the same time the two-beat rhythm of the hemistich is proved
as well as that of the preceding hemistich. Moreover, the alliteration
in all these examples is a further proof of the two-beat character of
their rhythm.
§ 48. It was owing to the use of these two more strongly accented
syllables in each verse which predominate over the other syllables,
whether with secondary accents or unaccented, that the poets, who wrote
in this metre, found it possible to regard the different kinds of verse
they employed as rhythmically equivalent. These were as follows: (1)
purely alliterative lines with hemistichs of two stresses, (2) extended
lines of this kind with secondary accents in the middle of the
hemistich, (3) rhyming-alliterative or merely rhyming lines with a
feminine ending and a secondary accent in the middle of the verse, or
with a masculine ending and two secondary accents, one on the last
syllable, as is also the case with the corresponding verses mentioned
under the second heading. These two last-mentioned verse-forms are very
similar to two popular metres formed on the model of Romanic metres. The
former of them—the hemistich with three stresses (one of which is
secondary) and feminine ending, together with the much rarer variety
that has a masculine ending—resembles the sections of the Alexandrine;
and the hemistich with a masculine ending (more rarely a feminine) and
four stresses (two of which have secondary accents only) is similar to
the short four-beat couplet, and also to the first section of the
Septenary line (the second section being similar to the former
three-beat group). It is, therefore, not to be wondered at that this
metre of Layamon in its different forms (that of the purely alliterative
line included) is in several Middle English poems, chiefly in The
Bestiary, employed concurrently (both in separate passages and in the
same passage) with the above-mentioned foreign metres formed on Romanic
or mediaeval-Latin models. By this fact the influence of the Romanic
versification on the origin and development of this form of the native
verse gains increased probability.[102]
The limits of our space do not permit of further discussion of this
peculiar metre, which, as presented in the extant examples, appears
rather as in process of development than as a finished product, and of
which a complete understanding can be attained only by elaborate
statistical investigation.
§ 49. The further development of the Layamon-verse is very simple and
such as might naturally be expected from its previous history.
The use of final rhyme becomes constant, and consequently alliteration,
although remnants of it still are noticeable even in short lines
connected together, becomes more and more scarce.[103]
The unaccented syllables are interposed between the accented ones with
greater regularity; and among the unaccented syllables the one (or,
in some sub-species of the verse, more than one) which is relatively
stronger than the rest receives full metrical stress, or at least nearly
approaches the fully-stressed syllables in rhythmical value.
This form of the metre is represented by a short poem[104] consisting
of only twelve lines, belonging to the first half of the thirteenth
century, and by the well-known poem King Horn[105] (1530 lines) which
belongs to the middle of the same century.
The prevailing rhythmical form of this poem is exemplified by the
following verses, which for the sake of convenience we print here, not
in the form of couplets (as the editors, quite justifiably, have done),
but in that of long lines as they are written in the Harleian MS.:
Hórn þu àrt wel kéne | and þat is wèl iséne. 91–2.
Þe sé bigàn to flówe | and Hórn chìld to rówe. 117–18.
This form occurs in more than 1300 out of the 1530 short lines of which
the poem consists. It is evident that the rhythm of these lines is
nearly the same as in the following taken from earlier poems:
ǣ́fre embe stúnde | he séalde sume wúnde. Byrhtn. 271.
ínnon þām gemónge | on ǣ́nlicum wónge. Dom. 6.
súme hi man bénde | súme hi man blénde. Chron. 1036. 4.
þát he nam be wíhte | and mid mýcelan unríhte. ib. 1087. 4.
wiþ póuere and wiþ ríche | wiþ álle monne ilýche. Prov. 375–6.
ne míhte we bilǽve | for líve ne for dǽþe. Lay. 13875–6.
If those syllables which have the strongest accent in the unaccented
parts of these verses are uttered a little more loudly than was usual
in the alliterative line the rhythm becomes exactly the same as in the
corresponding verses of King Horn, where the three-beat rhythm already
has become the rule.
This rule, however, is by no means without exceptions, and even the old
two-beat rhythm (which may have been the original rhythm) is, in the
oldest form of the poem, sometimes clearly perceptible, rarely, it is
true, in both hemistichs, as e.g. in the following line:
Hi slóȝen and fúȝten | þe níȝt and þe úȝten. 1375–6,
but somewhat oftener in one of them, as in the following:
Hi wénden to wísse | of hère líf to mísse. 121–2.
So schál þi náme sprínge | from kínge to kínge. 211–12.
In Hórnes ilíke | þú schalt hùre beswíke. 289–90.
Hi rúnge þe bélle | þe wédlak fòr to felle. 1253–4.
Of this type of verse a great many examples are of course to be met
with in the earlier alliterative poems:
wúldres wédde | wī́tum āspḗdde. An. 1633.
wýrmum bewúnden, | wī́tum gebúnden. Jud. 115.
rā́d and rǣ́dde | ríncum tǣ́hte. Byrhtn. 18.
on míddan gehǣ́ge | éal swā ic sécge. Dom. 4.
þat lónd to léden | mid láweliche déden. Prov. 75–6.
þe póure and þe ríche | démen ilíche. ib. 80–1.
bivóren þan kínge | fáirest àlre þínge. Lay. 14303–4.
The third type (three beats with masculine ending), which is of rarer
occurrence, is represented by the following lines:
Þú art grèt and stróng, | fáir and èuene lóng. 93–4.
Þu schàlt be dúbbed kníght | are còme séue níȝt. 447–8.
Léue at hìre he nám | and into hálle cám. 585–6.
As corresponding lines of earlier poems may be quoted:
éarn ǣ́ses gèorn, | wæs on éorþan cýrm. Byrhtn. 107.
þat þe chírche hàbbe grýð | and þe chéorl bèo in frýð. Prov. 93–4.
lóuerd kìng wæs hæil! | for þine kíme ìch æm vǽin. Lay. 14309–10.
The fourth type (four beats with masculine ending), which occurs
somewhat oftener, has the following form:
Ófte hàdde Hòrn beo wó, | ac nèure wúrs þan hìm was þó. 115–16.
Þe stúard wàs in hèrte wó, | fòr he núste whàt to dó. 275–6.
The corresponding rhythm of the earlier poems occurs in verses like:
and his gefḗran he fordrā́f, | and sume míslice of slṓh. Chr. 1036. 2.
þe éorl ànd þe éþelìng | ibúreþ ùnder gódne kìng. Prov. 74–5.
and sélde wùrþ he blýþe and glèd | þe món þat ìs his wíves quèd. ib. 304–5.
þe þúnre heo ȝìven þúnres dæ̀i, | forþí þat hèo heom hélpen mæ̀i. Lay. 13931–2.
The fifth type (four beats with feminine endings) is represented
by the following verses:
To déþe hè hem álle bròȝte, | his fáder dèþ wel dére hi bòȝte. 883–4.
Tomóreȝe bè þe fíȝtinge, | whàne þe líȝt of dáye sprìnge. 817–18.
As corresponding verses of earlier poems we quote:
súme hi man wiþ fḗo séalde, | súme hrēowlice ācwéalde. Chron. 1036. 3.
and sóttes bòlt is sóne iscòte, | forþí ich hòlde híne for dòte. Prov. 421–2.
in þæ̀re sǽ heo fùnden utláwen, | þa kénneste þa wèoren ò þon dáwen. Lay. 1283–4.
The circumstance that these different types of verse occur in different
poems promiscuously makes it evident that they must all have been
developed from one original rhythmical form. It is clear that this
fundamental type can only be found in the old two-beat alliterative
hemistich, the more so as this kind of verse is the very metre in which
the earlier poems Byrhtnoth and Be Dōmes Dæge for the greatest part
are written, and which is exemplified in about a third part of the
poetical piece of the Saxon Chronicle of 1036 and a fifth part of the
later-piece of 1087, and again very frequently in Alfred’s Proverbs
and in Layamon’s Brut, and which still can be traced as the original
rhythm of King Horn
§ 50. The evidence of the metre of this poem, showing its affinity to
the alliterative line and its historical origin from it, is so cogent
that it is unnecessary to discuss the theories of Prof. Trautmann and
the late Dr. Wissmann, both of whom, although from different points of
view, agree in ascribing a four-beat rhythm to this metre.[106]
The frequent use again in this poem of the types of line occurring in
Layamon’s Brut, as pointed out by Prof. Luick (l. c.), puts the close
connexion of the metre of King Horn with that form of the alliterative
line beyond doubt. We cannot, however, in conformity with the view we
have taken of Layamon’s verse, agree with Prof. Luick in assigning a
secondary accent to the last syllable of the feminine ending of the
ordinary three-beat verse, in which the greater part of King Horn is
written. Prof. Luick himself does not insist upon that particular point
so strongly for this poem as he did for the earlier poems written in a
similar metre.
The following examples serve to show that the same extended types of
line which were found to be the commonest in Layamon’s Brut (cp.
p. 77) recur as the most usual types also in this poem:
A + C: Álle bèon he blíþe | þat tò my sóng lýþe! 1–2.
A + A: A sáng ihc schàl ȝou sínge | of Múrrȳ̀ þè kínge. 2–3.
A + A: He fónd bì þe strónde, | aríued òn his lónde, 35–6.
B + C: Àll þe dáy and àl þe nī́ȝt, | tìl hit spráng dái lìȝt. 123–4.
B + B: Fàirer nis nón þàne he wás, | hè was bríȝt sò þe glás. 13–14.
C + C: Bì þe sé síde, | ase hè was, wóned (⏑́×) ríde. 33–4.
C + A: Of þìne méstére, | of wúde and òf rivére. 229–30.
D + A: Schípes fíftène | with sárazìn[e]s kéne. 37–8.
C + A: Þe chìld him ánswérde, | sóne so hè hit hérde. 199–200.
B + E: Hè was whít sò þe flúr, | róse-rèd was hìs colúr. 15–16.
In most cases we see that identical or similar types of verse are
connected here so as to form a couplet (printed by us as one long line).
Even where this is not so, however, the two chief accents in each short
line serve to make all the different forms and types of verse occurring
in this poem sound homogeneous. This admits of a ready explanation,
as the poem, in which no stanzaic arrangement can be detected, although
styled a ‘song’ (line 2), was certainly never meant to be sung to a
regular tune. On the contrary, it was undoubtedly recited like the
‘Song’ of Beowulf—probably not without a proper musical
accompaniment—by the minstrels.
At all events the treatment of the words with regard to their rhythmic
use in this poem does not deviate from that of Layamon.
§ 51. The two poems are of the same period, and in both the
etymological and syntactical accentuation of natural speech forms the
basis of the rhythmic accentuation. Monosyllabic words and the accented
syllables of polysyllabic words having a strong syntactical accent are
placed in the arsis; unaccented inflectional syllables as a rule form
the theses of a verse; second parts of compounds and fully sounding
derivative syllables are commonly used for theses with a somewhat
stronger accent, and may, if placed in the arsis, even bear the
alliteration, or, if they are less strongly accented, the rhyme:
Þèr þas cníhtes cómen | bifòren þan fólc-kínge. Lay. 13818–19.
Ah of éou ich wùlle iwíten | þurh sóðen èouwer wúrðscìpen.
ib. 13835–6.
A móreȝe bò þe dáy gan sprìnge, | þe kíng him ròd an húntìnge.
Horn 645–6.
He wàs þe faíréste, | ànd of wít þe béste. ib. 173–4.
Unaccented inflexional syllables as a rule stand in the thesis of a
verse. Only in exceptional cases, which admit of a different explanation
(see above, pp. 74 and 76), they may bear the rhythmical accent if the
rhyme demands it.
That a thesis in Layamon’s Brut and in Alfred’s Proverbs may be
disyllabic or even trisyllabic both in the beginning and the middle of a
line is evident from the many examples quoted above.
In King Horn, where the division of the original long lines into two
short ones has been carried out completely, and where the rhythm of the
verse has consequently become more regular, the thesis, if not wanting
entirely, as usually the case, in the types C, D, E, is generally
monosyllabic. But, as the following examples, faírer ne mìȝte 8, þe
paíns còme to lónde 58, þanne schólde withùten óþe 347, will show,
disyllabic theses do also occur, both after the first and second arsis,
and in the beginning of the line.
§ 52. The progressive or free form of the alliterative line came to an
end as early as the middle of the thirteenth century, when it broke up
into short rhyming couplets. The stricter form was for nearly three
centuries longer a very popular metre in English poetry, especially in
the North-Western and Northern districts of England and in the adjacent
lowlands of Scotland. The first traces, however, of its existence after
the Norman Conquest are to be found in the South of England, where some
poetical homilies and lives of saints were written at the end of the
twelfth and in the beginning of the thirteenth century which are of the
same character, both as to their subjects and to their metre, as the
poetical paraphrases and homilies written by Ælfric. These poems are
Hali Meidenhad (a poetical homily), the legends of St. Marharete,
St. Juliana, and St. Katherine. These poems have been edited for
the Early English Text Society, Nos. 18, 13, 51, 80; the first three
by Cockayne as prose-texts, the last by Dr. Einenkel, who printed it in
short couplets regarded by him as having the same four-beat rhythm
(Otfrid’s metre) which he and his teacher, Prof. Trautmann, suppose to
exist in Layamon and King Horn.[107] The Homilies have no rhymes.
The form of these homilies and legends occasionally exhibits real
alliterative lines, but for the most part is nothing but rhythmical
prose, altogether too irregular to call for an investigation here.
Some remarks on passages written in a form more or less resembling
alliterative verse may be found in our Englische Metrik, vol. i, § 94.
It is quite out of the question to suppose these Southern works, with
their very irregular use of alliteration and metre, to have had any
influence on the metrical form of the very numerous alliterative poems
written in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in the Midland and
Northern districts of England. It is, however, not at all likely that
alliterative poetry should have sprung up there without any medium of
tradition, and that it should have returned to the strict forms of the
Old English models. Nor can we assume that it was handed down by means
of oral tradition only on the part of the minstrels from Old English
times down to the fourteenth century. The channel of tradition of the
genuine alliterative line must be sought for in documents which for the
most part have been lost.
A few small remnants, however, have been preserved, viz. a charm in a
MS. of the twelfth century (cf. Zupitza, Zeitschrift für deutsches
Altertum, xxxi. 49), a short poem, entitled ‘Ten Abuses’, belonging
to the same period (E. E. T. S. 49, p. 184), a prophecy of five lines
contained in the chronicle of Benedict of Peterborough (Rerum
Britannicarum Scriptores, 49, ii. 139), finally a prophecy ascribed
to Thomas of Erceldoune (E.E. T. S., vol. 61, xviii, Thom. of Erc.,
ed. by A. Brandl, p. 26). But these pieces, treated by Prof. Luick in
Paul’s Grundriss, ed. 2, II. ii, p. 160, are either too short or
are too uncertain in text to admit of our making definite conclusions
from them.
But from the middle of the fourteenth century onward we have a large
number of poems composed in regular alliterative verse, e.g. King
Alisaunder (Als.) and William of Palerne (W.), both in E. E. T. S.,
Extra-Ser. No. 1; Joseph of Arimathie (J.A.), E. E.T. S. 44; Sir
Gawain and the Green Knight (Gr.), E.E. T. S. 4; Piers Plowman
(P. P.), by W. Langland, E. E. T. S., Nos. 17, 28, 30, 38, 54; Pierce
the Plowman’s Crede (P. P. Cr.), E. E. T. S. 30; Richard the Redeles
(R. R.), E. E. T. S. 54; The Crowned King (Cr. K.), ibid.; The
Destruction of Troy, E. E.T. S. 39, 56; Morte Arthure, E. E. T. S. 8;
Cleanness and Patience, E. E. T. S. 1; The Chevalere Assigne,
E. E.T. S., Extra-Ser. 6; and others of the end of the fifteenth and the
beginning of the sixteenth centuries: see Prof. W. W. Skeat’s list in
‘Bishop Percy’s Folio MS.’, London, 1867 (ed. Furnivall and Hales), vol.
iii, p. xi, and many recent publications of the Early English Text
Society.
On the structure of this metre the opinions of scholars differ a good
deal less than on that of the progressive or free form of the
alliterative line. Yet there are a few adherents of the four-beat theory
who apply it to the alliterative line of this epoch, amongst others
Rosenthal (‘Die alliterierende englische Langzeile im 14. Jahrhundert,’
Anglia, i. 414 ff.). The two-beat theory, on the other hand, has been
upheld also for this form of the alliterative line by Prof. W. W. Skeat,
Essay on Alliterative Poetry, Percy Folio MS. 1867 (ed. Furnivall and
Hales), by the present writer in Englische Metrik, i, pp. 195–212, and
by Prof. Luick, Anglia, xi, pp. 392–443 and 553–618, and subsequently
in Paul’s Grundriss, ed. 2, II. ii, pp. 161–3.
§ 53. The use and treatment of the words in the verse is on the
whole the same as in the Old English period. The chief divergence is,
that in this period of the language the difference between long and
short syllables was lost, in consequence of the lengthening of short
vowels in open syllables which had taken place in the interval, and
that consequently the substitution of a short accented syllable and
an unaccented one for a long accented syllable (the so-called
resolution) was no longer admissible. Otherwise syllables with a primary
accent, syllables with a secondary accent, and unaccented syllables are
treated just as in the Old English poetry. Accented syllables are as
a rule placed in the arsis, as are also second parts of compounds. Other
syllables with secondary accent (derivative and inflectional syllables)
are only in exceptional cases placed in the arsis of a verse.
It is of special interest, however, to notice that words of Romanic
origin which in the course of time had been introduced into the language
are in many cases accented according to Germanic usage. Words of which
the last syllable was accented in French have in their Middle-English
form the chief accent thrown on a preceding, frequently on the first,
syllable, and in consequence of this the originally fully accented
syllable in trisyllabic words receives the secondary accent and is
treated in the rhythm of the verse in the same way as syllables with
a secondary accent in English words. The laws, too, which in Old English
affect the subordination and position of the parts of speech in their
relationship to the rhythm of the verse and to the alliteration, remain,
generally speaking, in force. It is remarkable that ‘if an attributive
adjective is joined to a substantive, and a verb to a prepositional
adverb, the first part of these groups of words still has the chief
accent’ (Luick). The relationship, on the other hand, of verse and
sentence is changed. While in Old English poetry run-on-lines were
very popular and new sentences therefore frequently began in the
middle of a line, after the caesura, we find that in Middle English, as
a rule, the end of the sentence coincides with the end of the line.
Hence every line forms a unity by itself, and the chief pause falls at
the end, not, as was frequently the case in Old English times, after the
caesura.
§ 54. Alliteration. On the whole, the same laws regarding the
position of the alliterative sounds are still in force as before; it is
indeed remarkable that they are sometimes even more strictly observed.
In the Destruction of Troy, e.g. triple alliteration according to the
formula a a a x is employed throughout.
Now of Tróy forto télle | is myn entént euyn,
Of the stóure and þe strýfe, | when it distróyet wás.
Prol. 27–8.
Alongside of this order of alliteration we find in most of the other
poems the other schemes of alliteration popular in Old English times,
e.g. a x a x, x a a x, a b a b, a b b a:
In þe fórmest yére, | that he fírst réigned. Als. 40.
Þénne gonne I méeten | a mérvelous svévene.P. P. Prol. 11.
I had mínde on my slépe | by méting of swéuen.Als. 969.
And fónd as þe méssageres | hade múnged befóre.W. 4847.
Irregularities, however, in the position of the alliteration are
frequently met with, e.g. parallel alliteration: a a, b b:
What þis móuntein beméneþ | and þis dérke dále. P. P. i. 1;
or the chief alliterative sound (the ‘head-stave’) may be placed in the
last accented syllable (a a x a):
‘Now be Críst,’ quod the kíng, | ‘ȝif I míhte chácche. ib. ii. 167;
or it may be wanting entirely, especially in William of Palerne:
Sche kólled it ful kíndly | and áskes is náme. W. 69;
and there are even found a certain number of verses without any
alliteration at all in Joseph of Arimathie:
Whan Jóseph hérde þer-of, | he bád hem not demáyȝen.
J. A. 31.
In such cases it may sometimes be noticed that a line which has no
internal alliteration is linked by alliteration with a preceding or with
a following line, in the same way as was to be observed already in the
last century of the Old English period (cf. p. 50):
Bot on the Cristynmes dáye, | whene they were álle sémblyde,
That cómliche cónquerour | cómmaundez hym selvyne.
Morte Arth. 70–1.
Again an excess of alliteration is found, which happens in different
ways, either by admitting four alliterative sounds in one line
(a a a a) as was sometimes done even in Old English:
In a sómer séson | when sófte was þe sónne. P. P. Prol. 1;
or by retaining the same alliterative sound in several consecutive
lines, e.g. :
þenne was Cónscience icléþet | to cómen and apéeren
tofore the kýng and his cóunsel, | clérkes and óþure.
knéolynge Cónscience | to the kýng lóutede.
ib. iii. 109–11;
or, finally, by allowing the somewhat more strongly accented syllables
of the theses to participate in the alliteration:
and was a bíg bold bárn | and bréme of his áge. W. 18.
By the increasing use of this kind of alliteration it ultimately
degenerated so much that the real nature of it was completely forgotten.
This is evident from the general advice which King James VI gives in his
Revlis and Cavtelis to be observit and eschewit in Scottis Poesie
(Arber’s Reprint, p. 63):
Let all your verse be Literall, sa far as may be, quhatsumeuer kynde
they be of, but speciallie Tumbling verse [evidently the
alliterative line] for flyting. Be Literall I meane, that the maist
pairt of your lyne sall rynne vpon a letter, as this tumbling lyne
rynnis vpon F.
Fetching fade for to feid it fast furth of the Farie.[108]
He then gives a description of this kind of verse which makes it evident
that he looked upon ‘tumbling verse’ as a rhythm of two beats in each
hemistich or four beats in the full line, for he says:
Ȝe man observe that thir Tumbling verse flowis not on that fassoun
as vtheris dois. For all vtheris keipis the reule quhilk I gave
before, to wit the first fute short the secound lang and sa furth.
Quhair as thir hes twa short and are lang throuch all the lyne quhen
they keip ordour, albeit the maist pairt of thame be out of ordour
and keipis na kynde nor reule of Flowing and for that cause are
callit Tumbling verse.
King James VI was a contemporary of the last poets who wrote in
alliterative lines in the North and therefore undoubtedly had heard such
poems read by reciters who had kept up the true tradition of their
scansion. We have here then the very best proof we can desire not only
of the four-beat rhythm of the line, but also of the fact that
unaccented words, although they may alliterate intentionally, as they
do often in poems of the fifteenth century, or unintentionally, as
earlier, do not get a full accent in consequence of the alliteration, as
some scholars have thought, but remain unaccented.[109]
As to the quality of the alliteration the same laws on the whole still
prevail as in Old English poetry, but are less strictly observed. Thus
frequently voiced and unvoiced sounds alliterate together, and the
aspiration is neglected; f alliterates with v, v with w, w
with wh, s with sh or with combinations of s and other
consonants, g with k, h with ch:
hértes and híndes | and óþer bestes mánye. W. 389.
of fálsnesse and fásting | and vóuwes ibróken. P. P. Prol. 68.
bat he wíst wíterly | it was the vóis of a childe. W. 40.
to acórde wiþ þe kíng | and gráunte his wílle. ib. 3657.
I sáyle now in þe sée | as schíp boute mást. ib. 567.
such chástite withouten chárite | worþ cláymed in hélle! P. P. i. 168.
On the other hand, sometimes (as e.g. in the Alisaunder fragments)
greater strictness may be noticed in regard to alliteration of vowels,
as only the same vowels[110] are allowed to alliterate:
wiþ þé érldam of Énuye | éuer forto láste.P. P. ii. 63.
Later on, in the fifteenth century, vocalic alliteration in general
falls into disuse more and more.
§ 55. Comparison of Middle English and Old English alliterative
verse. With regard to the rhythmic structure of the verse the Middle
English alliterative line is not very different from the corresponding
Old English metre. Two beats in each hemistich are, of course, the
rule, and it has been shown by Dr. K. Luick, in a very valuable
paper on the English alliterative line in the fourteenth, fifteenth,
and sixteenth centuries,[111] that all the different types which
Prof. Sievers has discovered for the two sections of the Old English
alliterative line occur here again, but with certain modifications.
The modifications which the five chief types have undergone originated
in the tendency to simplify their many varieties exactly in the same way
as the Old English inflexional forms of the language were simplified and
generalized in the Middle English period.
Only three of the five old types, viz. those with an even number of
members (A, B, C), are preserved in the second section of the verse,
and those not in their original forms. They show further a certain
tendency to assimilate to each other.
In types B and C the variations with disyllabic anacrusis occurred most
frequently, as was also the case in type A, and verses of this kind now
become predominant. Furthermore, in the Old English alliterative line,
endings consisting of an accented and an unaccented syllable (feminine
endings) prevailed; and type B was the only one of the symmetrical
types ending with an accented syllable. In Middle English the use of
feminine endings goes so far that the original type B has disappeared
altogether and given place to a new type with an unaccented last
syllable corresponding to the form ××–́×–́×.
Prof. Luick very properly calls this type BC, holding that it
originated from the variations ××–́×⏑́͜× and ××⏑́͜×–́× of
the old types B and C in consequence of the lengthening of the
originally short accented syllable. Verse-ends with two unaccented
syllables, which might have arisen in the same way from –́× = ⏑́͜××,
did not become popular; and verse-ends with one unaccented syllable
predominated. Lastly, an important feature of the later verse-technique
deserves notice, that a monosyllabic anacrusis (an initial unaccented
syllable) is generally allowed in types where it was not permitted in
the Old English alliterative line. The consequence of these changes
is that the rhythm of the verse which was in Old English a descending
rhythm, becomes in Middle English ascending, and is brought into line
with the rhythm of the contemporary even-beat metres.
This is the state of development presented by the Middle English
alliterative line in one of the earliest poems of this group, viz. in
the fragments of King Alisaunder, the versification of which, as a
rule, is very correct.
Here the three types only which we have mentioned occur in the second
hemistich.
Type A is most common, corresponding to the formula (×)–́××–́×:
lórdes and óoþer 1, déedes of ármes 5, kíd in his tíme
11, térme of his lífe 16,
or with anacrusis:
or stérne was hólden 10, and sóne beráfter 25.
More than two unaccented syllables may occur after the first accented
syllable. These two peculiarities seldom occur together in one and the
same second hemistich (though frequently in the first hemistich); but
there are some examples:
is túrned too him álse 165, and príkeden abóute 382, hee
fáred òn in háste 79;
in this last example with a secondary accent on the word òn as
also in the verse: þe méssengères þei cámme 1126.
Type C, (×)××–́–́×:
was þe mán hóten 13, þat his kíth ásketh 65, as a kíng
shólde 17, withoute míscháunce 1179.
Type BC, (×)××–́×–́×:
or it týme wére 30, in his fáders life 46, of þis méry
tále 45, þat þei no cómme þáre 507.
The same types occur in the first hemistich; but type C disappears almost
entirely, and in the other two the last syllable not unfrequently is
accented, especially if a considerable number of unaccented syllables
occur in the middle of the hemistich; such verses may be looked upon as
remnants of types B and E:
þo was cróuned kíng 28, hee made a uéry uów 281, and
wédded þat wíght 225, þe bérn couth þerbý 632, &c.
Type D also seems to occur sometimes:
móuth méete þertò 184, what déath drý[e] thou shàlt 1067.
Besides these types the first hemistich has, as in Old English times,
some forms of its own. The succession of syllables –́××–́× (type A)
is extended either by several unaccented syllables before the first
accented one (polysyllabic anacrusis) or by the insertion of a
secondary accent between the two main accented syllables, or after the
second accented syllable, with a considerable number of medial
unaccented syllables.
(a) That ever stéede bestróde 10,
Hee brought his ménne to þe bórowe 259.
(b) And chéued fòrthe with þe chílde 78,
Þe cómpanìe was cárefull 359.
(c) α. Glísiande as góldwìre 180,
Þei craked þe cournales 295.
β. Hue lóued so lécherìe 35,
And Phílip þe férse kìng 276.
γ. Stónes stírred þei þò 293,
Þe fólke too fáre with hìm 158.
The examples under (a) show the tendency noticeable already in the
first hemistich of the Old English alliterative line to admit anacrusis.
The examples under (b) and (c) may be looked upon as extended forms
of types E and D.
§ 56. Several poems of somewhat later date deviate more frequently
from these types than the Alisaunder fragments, chiefly in the
following points:
The end of the hemistich sometimes consists of an accented syllable
instead of an unaccented one; the thesis is sometimes monosyllabic
instead of polysyllabic, especially in A, or the anacrusis may be
polysyllabic instead of monosyllabic. Secondary accents are introduced
more frequently into the second hemistich also, but by poets whose
technique is careful they are admitted only between the two accented
syllables. Owing to these licences, and to the introduction of
polysyllabic theses, the rhythm of the verse sometimes becomes very
heavy.
Belonging to this group are William of Palerne, Joseph of Arimathie,
both belonging to the middle of the fourteenth century, the three
editions of William Langland’s Vision concerning Piers Plowman, of
somewhat later date, and a few minor poems. The Romance of the
Chevelere Assigne, written in the East Midland district, at the end of
the fourteenth century, and the works of the Gawain-poet, viz. Sir
Gawain and the Green Knight, Cleanness, Patience, and the Legend
of St. Erkenwald (Horstmann, Altengl. Legenden, 1881, p. 265), form
the transition to another group of poems belonging to the North of
England, but differing somewhat from the preceding with regard to their
metre.
The most important amongst these is Langland’s great work, but it is at
the same time most unequal in respect to its versification. In many
passages, especially in the beginning of the several Passus, as they are
called, the flow of the verses is very regular; in other passages the
theses are frequently of such great length, and the arsis stands out so
indistinctly, that the rhythm of the verse can only be made out with
difficulty. Some examples taken from the B-text (c. 1377) may serve to
illustrate this:
Extended second hemistich (Type A):
To bóres and to bróckes | þat bréketh adòwn myne hégges. vi. 31.
And so I trówe tréwly | by þat men télleth of chárite. xv. 158.
Ac ȝut in mány mo máneres | mén offènden þe hóligòste. xvii. 280.
Extended first hemistich (Type A):
Léue him nòuȝt, for he is lécherous | and líkerous of tónge.
vi. 268.
Láboreres þat haue no lánde | to lýue on but her hándes.
ib. 309.
‘Now, by þe péril of my soúle!’ quod Pieres, | ‘I shal apéyre
ȝou álle!’
vi. 173.
Such verses obviously contain only two beats in each hemistich,
although at the same time some of the syllables forming the thesis may
have a somewhat stronger accent than others. For as a rule such extended
verses are succeeded by a normal line, clearly bringing out again the
general four-beat rhythm, as is the case with the line (A + A) following
immediately upon the last-mentioned example:
And hóuped after húnger | þat hérd hym atte fírste.
vi. 174.
Type A is in Piers Plowman the usual one, but the types C and BC
frequently occur. In the following examples we have type C in the second
hemistich:
And hadden léue to lye | al here lýf áfter. Prol. 49.
I seigh sómme that séiden | þei had ysóuȝt séyntes.
ib. 50;
in the first hemistich it occurs rarely:
Ac on a Máy mórnynge | on Máluerne húlles. ib. 5.
Type B C is frequently to be met with in both hemistichs; e.g. in the
first:
In a sómer séson, | whan sóft was the sónne. ib. 1.
And as I láy and léned | and lóked in þe wáteres. ib. 9;
in the second:
Bídders and béggeres | fast abóute ȝéde. ib. 40.
Wénten to Wálsyngham, | and here wénches áfter. ib. 54.
Masculine endings, however (originating from the dropping of the final
-e in the last words of the types A and C, as e.g. in and drédful
of síght Prol. 16, cristened þe kýnge xv. 437, as þe kýng híght
iii. 9), occur very rarely here. They are, on the other hand,
characteristic forms in another group of alliterative poems.
§ 57. These belong to the North of England and the adjacent parts
of the Midlands.
In these districts the final e had by this time become silent, or was
in the course of becoming so. Thus many verses of West-Midland poems
were shortened in the North by omitting the final -e, and then these
forms were imitated there. Hence the middle of the line was much less
modified than the end of it.
Types A, C, B C, therefore, occur not only in the ordinary forms with
unaccented syllables at the end, but also, although more rarely, with
accented ones, viz. corresponding to the schemes:
A1, (×)–́××–́, C1, (×)××–́–́, BC1, (×)××–́×–́.
These forms of the hemistich first occur in the Destruction of Troy,
a poem written in a West-Midland dialect very like to the Northern
dialect, and in the North-English poems, Morte Arthure and The Wars
of Alexander (E. E. T. S., Extra-Ser. 47). Examples of these types
(taken from the first-mentioned poem) are: of type A1 in the second
hemistich, for lérning of ús 32, þat ónest were áy 48; with a
polysyllabic thesis, and lympit of the sóthe 36; with a secondary
accent,with cléne mèn of wít 790; without anacrusis,[112] lémond
as góld 459, bléssid were Í 473; in the first hemistich, with
disyllabic anacrusis, þat ben drépit with déth 9, þat with the
Grékys was grét 40; without anacrusis, Býg y-noghe vnto béd
397, Trýed men þat were táken 258, &c.; examples for C1 (only
occurring in the second hemistich), þat he fóre with 44, into your
lond hóme 611, ye have sáid well 1122, þat ho bórne wás 1388,
of my córs hás 1865; examples for B C1, in the second hemistich
(of rare occurrence), when it destróyet wás 28, and to sórow
bróght 1497, þere þe cítie wás 1534.
The same modification of types took place later in other parts of the
Midlands, as appears from two works of the early sixteenth century,
Scottish Field and Death and Life (Bishop Percy’s Folio MS.,
edited by Furnivall and Hales, i. 199 and iii. 49). The last
North-English or rather Scottish poem, on the other hand, written in
alliterative lines without rhyme, Dunbar’s well-known Satire, The twa
mariit wemen and the wedo, has, apart from the normal types occurring
in the North-English poems, many variants, chiefly in the first
hemistich, which are characterized by lengthy unaccented parts both at
the beginning of the line, before the second arsis, and after it;
frequently too syllables forming the thesis have a secondary accent and
even take part in the alliteration, as e.g. in the following examples:
Ȝaip and ȝíng, in the ȝók | ane ȝéir for to dráw. 79.
Is bàir of blís and báilfull, | and greit bárrat wírkis. 51.
Sometimes the second hemistich participates in this cumulation of
alliterating words, which not unfrequently extends over several, even as
many as six or seven consecutive lines:
He gráythit me in gáy silk | and gúdlie arráyis,
In gównis of ingránit clayth | and greit góldin chénȝeis.
365–6.
This explains how King James VI came to formulate the metrical rule
mentioned above (p. 89) from the misuse of alliteration by the last
poets who used the alliterative line, or the alliterative rhyming
line to be discussed in the next paragraph, which shares the same
peculiarity.
§ 58. In spite of the great popularity which the regular alliterative
line enjoyed down to the beginning of the Modern English period,
numerous and important rivals had arisen in the meantime, viz. the many
even-beat rhymed kinds of verse formed on foreign models; and these
soon began to influence the alliterative line. The first mark of this
influence was that end-rhyme and strophic formation was forced upon
many alliterative poems. In a further stage the alliterative line was
compelled to accommodate its free rhythm of four accents bit by bit
to that of the even-beat metres, especially to the closely-related
four-foot iambic line, and thus to transform itself into a more or
less regular iambic-anapaestic metre. The alliterative line, on the
other hand, exercised a counter influence on the newer forms of verse,
inasmuch as alliteration, which was formerly peculiar to native
versification, took possession in course of time to a considerable
extent of the even-beat metres, especially of the four-foot iambic
verse. But by this reciprocal influence of the two forms of verse the
blending of the four-beat alliterative line with that of four equal
measures and the ultimate predominance of the even-beat metres was
brought about more easily and naturally.
Alliterative-rhymed lines, the connexion of which into stanzas or
staves will be treated of in the second part of this work under the
heading of the ‘Bob-wheel-stanza’, were used during the Middle English
period alike in lyric, epic, and dramatic poetry.
§ 59. Lyrical stanzas. The earliest stanzas written in alliterative
rhyming lines were lyrical.
We must distinguish between isometric and anisometric stanza forms.
In the former the whole stanza consists of four-beat alliterative
lines, commonly rhyming according to a very simple scheme (either a a
a a or a b a b). In the latter four-beat long lines as a rule are
combined with isolated lines of one measure only and with several of
two measures to form the stanza. The two-beat verses frequently have a
somewhat lengthened structure (to be discussed further on sections on
the epic stanzas), in consequence of which many of them having theses
with secondary accents can be read either as even-beat verses of three
measures or as three-beat verses on the model of those in King Horn.
The four-beat alliterative lines, on the other hand, are mostly of more
regular structure, the distances between the first and second arsis
not being so unequal and the theses as a rule being disyllabic. The
anacrusis too in these verses admits of a somewhat free treatment.
The difference, however, between the first and second hemistich is
less conspicuous than it was in those forms of the Middle English
alliterative line before mentioned. Alliteration, on the other hand, is
abundantly used.
The main rhythmic character of the verse is again indicated here by
the frequent occurrence of the types A and A1. The types B C, B C1,
C, C1, however, likewise occur pretty often, and the two last types
present serious obstacles to the assumption that the lines of these
poems were ever recited with an even beat. But how exactly these poems
were recited or to what sort of musical accompaniment can hardly be
definitely decided in the absence of external evidence.
The first verses of a West-Midland poem of the end of the thirteenth
century (Wright’s Political Songs, p. 149) may serve as a specimen:
Ich herde mén vpo móld | máke muche món,
Hou hé beþ iténed | of here tílýnge:
Góde ȝeres and córn | bóþe beþ agón,
Ne képeþ here no sáwe | ne no sóng sýnge.
The second hemistichs in ll. 2 and 4 belong to type C. In other poems
also, with lines of more regular rhythm (chiefly type A), this type
may be met with now and then, e.g. in a poem published in Wright’s
Specimens of Lyric Poetry, p. 25, especially in the second hemistich,
e.g. haueþ þis mái mére, line 9, and þe gýlófre, line
40, þat þe bór béde, line 44.
It is not difficult to distinguish such rhymed four-beat alliterative
lines from those of four measures which have fairly regular
alliteration, for the long line of the native metre always has a
somewhat looser fabric, not the even-beat rhythmic cadence peculiar
to the iambic verse of four measures, and, secondly, it always has a
caesura after the first hemistich, whereas the even-beat verse of four
measures may either lack distinct caesura or the caesura may occur in
other places in the verse as well as after the second arsis. This will
be evident by comparing the following four-beat verses of the last
stanza of a poem in Wright’s Spec. of Lyr. Poetry, p. 31:
Ríchard | róte of résoun rýght,
rýkeníng of rým ant rón,
Of máidnes méke þóu hast mýht,
on mólde y hólde þe múrgest món;
with the following first four-beat alliterative lines of another poem
(ibid. p. 25):
Ichot a búrde in a bóure, | ase béryl so brýght,
Ase sáphir in sélver | sémly on sýht,
Ase iáspe þe géntil, | þat lémeþ wiþ lýht,
Ase gérnet in gólde, | and rúby wel rýht.
In similar lines are written several other poems, as Mon in þe
mone (ibid. p. 110); Of ribaudz y ryme (Wright’s Pol. Songs,
p. 237); and five songs by Laurence Minot (nos. ii, v, ix, x, xi),
written in the middle of the fourteenth century.
§ 60. In other poems the four-beat long lines used in the main part
of the stanza are followed by shorter lines forming the cauda, which in
part are of a variable rhythmic cadence either of three beats (or three
measures) or of two beats, as e.g. in the well-known poem in Percy’s
Reliques, ii, p. 1.[113] The first stanza may be quoted here:
Sitteþ alle stílle | and hérkneþ to mé:
Þe kýng of Alemáigne, | bi mi léauté,
Þrítti þousent pound | áskede hé
Forte máke þe pées | in þé countré,
Ant só he dùde móre.
Ríchard,
þah þou be éuer tríchard,
Trícchen shàlt þou néuer mòre.
In the following stanzas of this poem the four-beat rhythm, although
rarely marked by regular alliteration, is (in the main part or ‘frons’)
still more distinctly recognizable, in spite of several rhythmically
incorrect lines.
Second hemistichs of the type C1 are not infrequent, e.g. opon
swývýng 9, sire Édwárd 46, o þy lýárd 47. Lines 5 and 7 are of a
two-beat rhythm, l. 8 probably as well (cf. our scansion).
There is a decided similarity in regard to structure and versification
between this stanza and that of a poem in Wright’s Pol. Songs, p.
153, although the long lines are divided in the middle by interlaced
rhyme. This may be illustrated by its second stanza:
Nou haþ
prúde þe
prís | in éuervche
pláwe,
By mony wýmmon owís | y súgge mi sáwe.
For ȝef a lády lýue ìs | léid after láwe,
Vch a strúmpet þat þer ís | such dráhtes wol dráwe.
In prúde
Vch a scréwe wol hire shrúde,
Þoh he nábbe nout a smók | hire fóule ers to húde.
There is no line here corresponding to l. 5 of the preceding poem.
Otherwise, however, the cauda of this poem is of a similar structure
to that of the preceding one, at least in this and possibly in the
following stanzas, whereas the last line of the first stanza has a
two-beat rhythm, and in the others the last lines probably are to be
scanned with three beats. The second line of the cauda of the first
stanza of this poem belongs to type C. Another poem (Wright’s Polit.
Songs, p. 155; Böddeker, P.L. no. iv) shows a very artificial form of
stanza, either corresponding to the formula a a4 b2 c c4 b2 d d4 b2 e e4 b2 f f g g g f2 (if we look upon the verses as four-beat and
two-beat lines, which the poet probably intended), or corresponding to
the formula a a4 b3 c c4 b3 d d4 b3 e e4 b3 f f g g g f2 (if we look
upon the frons as consisting of ordinary tail-rhyme-stanza lines of
four and three even-beat measures).
The four- and two-beat cadence of the verses comes out still more
clearly in the stanzas of another poem (Wright’s Pol. Songs, p. 187;
Ritson, Anc. Songs, i. 51; Böddeker, P.L. no. v), the rhymes of
which follow the scheme a a a4 b2 c c c4 b2 (extended
tail-rhyme-stanzas). Some of its long lines, it is true, admit of being
read as even-beat verses of three measures, e.g. and béo huere
chéuentéyn 20, and móni anóþer swéyn 24, but the true scansion in all
probability is and béo huere chéuenteȳ̀n (or chèuentéyn): ant
móni anòþer swéyn, in conformity with the scansion of the following
lines to cóme to parís: þourh þe flóur de lís 52–6, or wiþ éorl and
wiþ knýht: with húem forte fýht 124–8.
As a first step to the epic forms of stanza to be considered in the next
paragraph a poem of the early fourteenth century (Wright’s Pol. Songs,
p. 212; Ritson, Anc. Songs, p. 28; Böddeker, P.L. no. vi) may be
quoted:
Lýstne, Lórdinges, | a newe sóng ichulle bigýnne
Of þe tráytours of Scótland, | þat táke beþ wyþ gýnne.
Món þat loveþ fálsnesse, | and nule néuer blýnne,
Sóre may him dréde | þe lýf þat he is ýnne,
Ich vnderstónde:
Sélde wes he glád,
Þat néuer nes asád
Of nýþe ant of ónde.
The fifth line has one arsis only (as appears more clearly from that
in the second stanza: wiþ Lóue), thus corresponding to the
above-mentioned poems (pp. 99, 100); the other lines of the cauda
have two stresses.
Prof. Luick[114] looks upon the long lines of this poem and of several
others (e.g. Wright’s Pol. Songs, pp. 69 and 187) as doubled native
verses of the progressive or Layamon form, but rhyming only as long
lines. This can hardly be, as the rhythmic structure of these verses
does not differ from that of the other poems quoted above, which belong,
according to Prof. Luick himself, to the class of the normal, lyric
rhyming-alliterative lines.
§ 61. Narrative verse. Alliterative-rhyming verses occur in their
purest form in narrative poetry, especially in a number of poems
composed during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in stanzas of
thirteen lines, and republished recently in a collective edition by the
Scottish Text Society in vol. 27 under the title Scottish Alliterative
Poems (ed. by F.J. Amours, Edinburgh, 1892). The poems contained in
this collection are Golagras and Gawane (also in Anglia, ii. 395),
The Book of the Howlat by Holland, Rauf Coilȝear (also in E. E.
T. S., Extr.-Ser. vol. xxxix), The Awntyrs off Arthure at the Terne
Wathelyne, The Pistill of Susan (also in Anglia, i. 93). Douglas’s
Prologue to the Eighth Book of his translation of the Aeneid
(although written in the beginning of the sixteenth century) likewise
belongs to this group, as do also the poems of John Audelay, composed in
Shropshire in the fifteenth century (Percy Soc. xiv, p. 10 ff.), and a
poem Of Sayne John the Euaungelist (E. E. T. S. 26, p. 87) written in
stanzas of fourteen lines in the North of England. The stanzas of all
these poems—generally speaking—consist of two unequal parts, the
frons written in alliterative lines, rhyming according to the formula
a b a b a b a b, and the cauda which contains five or six lines, the
first of which may either be a long line as in the frons, or, as in
The Pistill of Susan, a short one-beat one, with four two-beat
sectional verses following. Only in the last-mentioned poem does the
cauda consist of six two-beat sectional verses.
The rhythm of this alliterative-rhyming metre may first be illustrated
by the opening lines of Golagras and Gawane:
I.
In the týme of Árthur, | as tréw men me táld,
The king túrnit on ane týde | tówart Túskane,
Hym to séik our the séy, | that sáiklese wes sáld,
The sýre that sèndis all séill, | súthly to sáne;
With bánrentes, bárounis, | and bérnis full báld,
Bìggast of báne and blúde | bréd in Brítàne.
Thei wálit out wérryouris | with wápinnis to wáld,
The gàyest grúmys on grúnd, | with géir that myght gáne;
Dúkis and dígne lòrdis, | dóuchty and déir,
Sémbillit to his súmmòvne,
Rénkis of grete rénòvne,
Cùmly kíngis with cróvne
Of góld that wes cléir.
II.
Thus the róyale can remóve, | with his Róund Tábill,
Of all ríches maist ríke, | in ríall arráy.
Wes neuer fúndun on fóld, | but fénȝeing or fábill,
Ane fàyrar flóure on ane féild | of frésche men, in fáy; &c.
Lines like the four last quoted illustrate the normal structure of the
rhyming-alliterative verse, especially the relationship of rhyme and
alliteration to each other in monosyllabic and disyllabic words. It will
be seen that the rhyming syllable, as a rule the root-syllable, or at
least the accented syllable of the word, at the same time carries the
fourth accent of the line, and in consequence the fourth alliterative
sound. In all other respects the rhymed-alliterative verse is
structurally similar to that without rhyme, and it is therefore evident
that rhyme exercises no decisive influence on the rhythm of the verse.
In this comparatively pure form—if we do not take into account the
secondary accents occurring in the first hemistichs of the stanza in the
later poem—are written the great majority of the lines in the earliest
of poems mentioned above, viz. The Awntyrs off Arthure.
§ 62. The relation, however, between rhyme and alliteration and
consequently the relation of the rhythmic accentuation of the words to
their natural accentuation is less clear in the first stanza quoted
above. The following verses rhyming together may serve to elucidate
this:
Than schir Gáwyne the gáy, | gúde and gráciùs....
Jóly and géntill, | and full chéuailrús.
Gol. 389, 391.
Ouer heor hédes gon hýng
Þe wínce and þe wéderlȳ̀ng.
Susan, 101–2;
or the verses Gol. 648, 650, 654:
Thus éndit the áuynantis | with mékil hónòur;
Thair bódeis wes béryit | báith in ane hòur,
Ane úthir heght Édmond, | that próuit páramòur.
In the first couplet the last syllable of the word gráciùs, although
bearing only a secondary accent and forming the last thesis of the
verse, rhymes with the last syllable of the word chéuailrús, which
likewise in ordinary speech has a secondary accent, but here is the
bearer of the fourth metrical accent of the verse. In the second
couplet the syllable lyng of the word wéderlỳng, which has a
secondary accent and forms part of the thesis, rhymes with the word
hyng which has the rhythmical accent. In the last group of verses the
last syllable of the words paramour, honour having secondary accents
rhymes with the word hour, the bearer of the last rhythmical accent.
Similar rhymes occur even in Modern English poetry, e.g. in the works
of Thomas Moore: Váin were its mélodỳ, Róse, without thée or Whát
would the Róse bè Únsung by thée?[115]
It also frequently happens that all the rhyming syllables, which have a
secondary accent and occur in the thesis of a verse, belong to
trisyllabic words, while the accented syllables in the arsis, whether
alliterating or not, do not take part in the rhyme, e.g.:
Þou brak gódes Comáundement,
To slé such an Ínnocent
With ény fals júggement. Susan, 321–3.
Similar unaccented rhymes are also met with in disyllabic words:
‘In fáith,’ said Schir Rólland,
‘That is fúll euill wýn land
To háue quhill thow ar léuand.’ Rauf Coilȝear, 917–19.
Other rhymes of the same kind are sémbland: léuand, conséntand :
endúrand, Gol. 428 ff., &c.
In all such cases the natural accentuation of the words is not
interfered with by the rhythm of the verse.
The kind of irregular rhyme most frequently occurring, however, is that
which is formed by the unaccented syllable of a disyllabic word (the
first syllable of which alliterates and bears the last arsis of the
verse) rhyming with a monosyllabic word which likewise bears the fourth
rhythmical accent of another alliterative line (or the second of a short
line forming part of the cauda) and takes part in the alliteration as
well, as e.g. in the rhymes Túskane: sane: Brítane: gane and
súmmovne: rénovne: crovne of the above-mentioned stanza of the
poem Golagras and Gawane.
It is not likely that a complete shifting of accent in favour of the
rhyming syllable ever took place, as the first syllables of the words
usually take part in the alliteration, and therefore have a strongly
marked accent. Sometimes, it is true, in the poems of this epoch,
unaccented syllables do participate in the alliteration, and in the case
of the words Tuskane, Britane, summovne, renovne their Romance
origin would explain the accent on the last syllable; but these words,
both as to their position and as to their treatment in the line, are
exactly on a par with the Germanic rhyme-words in ll. 870–2:
For he wes býrsit and béft,ỳ | ỳand bráithly blédand ...
And wáld that he nane hárm hyntỳ | ỳwith hárt and with hánd.
In both cases we thus have ‘accented-unaccented rhymes’ (cf. Chapter I
in Book II), which probably were uttered in oral recitation with a
certain level stress. This is probable for several reasons. First it is
to be borne in mind that Germanic words in even-beat rhythms of earlier
and contemporary poems were used in the same way, e.g.:
Quhen thái of Lórne has séne the kíng
Set ín hymsélff sa grét helpíng. Barbour, Bruce, iii. 147–8.
And bád thame wénd intó Scotlánd
And sét a sége with stálward hánd. ib. iv. 79–80.
Only in these cases the rhythmical accent supersedes the word accent
which has to accommodate itself to the former, while in the uneven-beat
rhythm of the four-beat alliterative line the word-accent still
predominates. In the even-beat lines, therefore, the rhythmical accent
rests on the last syllable of a disyllabic rhyme-word, but in the
alliterative lines it rests on the penultimate. In the case of words of
Romance origin, however, which during this period of the language could
be used either with Germanic or with Romanic accentuation, the
displacement of the word-accent by the rhythmic accent in
non-alliterative words may in these cases have been somewhat more
extensive; cf. e.g. rhymes like rage: curáge: suáge Gol. 826–8; day
: gay: journáy ib. 787–9; assáill: mettáill: battáil R.
Coilȝear, 826–8, &c. (but ȝone bérne in the báttale Gol.
806).
As a rule, however, for these too the same level-stress accentuation
must be assumed as for the rhyme-words of the first stanza of Golagras
quoted above (p. 102)
§ 63. This is all the more probable because, in these
alliterative-rhyming poems, there are many sectional verses
corresponding to the old types C and C1, these answering best the
combined requirements of alliteration and of end-rhyme, for which
frequently one and the same Germanic or Romanic word had to suffice in
the second hemistich, as e.g. in the following sectional verses rhyming
together:—What is þi góod réde: for his kníȝthéde: (by crósse
and by créde) Awnt. of Arth. 93–7; (and bláke to þe bóne): as a
wómáne ib. 105–7; enclósed with a crowne: of the trésóne ib.
287–91; of ane fáir wéll: téirfull to téll: with ane cástéll
: kéne and crúèll, or, as Prof. Luick scans, kéne and cruéll (but
l. 92 crúel and kéne) Gol. 40–6; at the mýddáy: (wént thai
thar wáy) Howl. 665–7. &c.
Also in the even-beat metres the influence of this type is still
perceptible; cf. rhymes like
Súmwhat óf his clóþíng
Fór þe lóue of héuene kýng. Rob. Mannyng, Handl. Sinne, 5703–4.
which are of frequent occurrence.
For the rest both in these alliterative-rhyming poems and in the poems
with alliteration only the types A and A1, B C and B C1 are frequent.
These alliterative-rhyming lines have this feature in common with the
pure alliterative lines, that the first hemistich differs materially
from the second in having often an anacrusis of several syllables
(initial theses) and somewhat lengthened theses in the middle of the
line, and in permitting such theses with only a secondary accent to take
part in the alliteration. All this tends to give a somewhat heavy
rhythmic cadence to the whole line.
§ 64. The same difference is perceptible, as Prof. Luick was the first
to show (Anglia, xii, pp. 438 ff.), in the single two-beat lines of
the cauda, the three first (ll. 10–12 of the whole stanza) having the
looser structure of the extended first hemistichs of the long lines,
while the last two-beat line (line 13 of the whole stanza) has the
normal structure (commonly type A, A1, as e.g. Birnand thrétty
and thré Gol. 247; Of góld that wes cléir ib. 1) of second
sections of the long line, as is evident from the first stanza of
Golagras and Gawane quoted above (p. 102). In this concluding line,
however, other types of verse peculiar to the second hemistich of long
lines may also be met with, as e.g. C, C1, BC, BC1, e.g.: For thi
mánhéde Awnt. of Arth. 350; Withoutin dístánce Gol. 1362; As I am
tréw kníght Gol. 169; Couth na léid sáy ib. 920; In ony ríche réime
ib. 1258, Quhen he wes líghtit dóun ib. 130.
In other poems the group of short lines rhyming according to the scheme
a a a b and forming part of the cauda is preceded neither by a long
alliterative line nor by a one-beat half section of it (as in Susan),
but by a complete two-beat sectional verse, which then, in the same way
as the last verse rhyming with it, corresponds in its structure to that
of the second hemistich of the long line; as e.g. in The Tournament of
Tottenham (Ritson’s Ancient Songs, i. 85–94), rhyming on the scheme
A A A A b c c c b (the capitals signifying the long lines), and in
The Ballad of Kynd Kittok, possibly by W. Dunbar (Laing, ii. 35, 36;
Small, i. 52, 53; Schipper, 70).
In Sayne John the Euaungelist the ‘cauda’ has the structure of a
complete tail-rhyme-stanza, the order of rhymes of the whole stanza
being A B A B A B A B c c d c c d
§ 65. In connexion with this it is particularly interesting to note
that such two-beat sections of the alliterative line are also used by
themselves for whole poems written in tail-rhyme-stanzas (as was first
shown by Prof. Luick, Anglia, xii, pp. 440 ff.); cf. e.g. the
translation of the Disticha Catonis (E.E.T.S. 68), the two first
stanzas of which may be quoted here:
If þóu be made wíttenèsse,
For to sáy þat sóþ ìs,
Sáue þine honóur,
Als míkil, as þou may fra bláme,
Lame þi fréndis sháme,
And sáue fra dishonóur.
For-sóþ flípers,
And alle fáls fláters
I réde, sone, þou flé;
For þen sálle na gode mán,
Þat any góde lare cán,
Þár-fore blame þé.
In the same stanza The Feest (Hazlitt, Remains, iii. 93) is written.
Still more frequently such lines were used for extended
tail-rhyme-stanzas rhyming on the scheme a a a b c c c b d d d b e e e b,
as e.g. in a poem, The Enemies of Mankind, of the beginning of
the fourteenth century, published by Kölbing (Engl. Studien, ix. 440
ff.).
The first stanza runs as follows:
Þe sìker sóþe who so séys,
Wiþ dìol dréye we our dáys
And wàlk máni wil wáys
As wándrand wíȝtes.
Al our gámes ous agás,
So mani ténes on tás
Þurch fónding of fele fás,
Þat fást wiþ ous fíȝtes.
Our flèsche is fóuled wiþ þe fénd;
Þer we fínde a fals frénde:
Þei þai héuen vp her hénde,
Þai no hóld nouȝt her híȝtes.
Þis er þré, þat er þrá,
Ȝete þe férþ is our fá,
Dèþ, þat dérieþ ous swá
And díolely ous díȝtes.
Here, again, the difference between the lines on the pattern of the
first hemistich of the long line, which form the body of the stanza (a
a a, b b b, c c c, d d d), and those on the pattern of the second
hemistich used as tail-rhyme lines (b, b, b, b) is plainly
recognizable.
The same is the case in other poems written in this form of stanza, as
e.g. in the Metrical Romances, Sir Perceval, Sir Degrevant
(Halliwell, Thornton Romances, Camden Society, 1844, pp. 1, 177) and
others; cf. Luick, Anglia, xii, pp. 440ff., and Paul’s Grundriss, ii
a, p. 1016. But in these later works, one of the latest of which
probably is the poem The Droichis Part of the Play, possibly by Dunbar
(Laing, ii. 37; Small, ii. 314; Schipper, 190), the two-beat lines are
frequently intermingled and blended with even-beat lines, which from the
beginning of the fifth stanza onward completely take the place of the
two-beat lines in the last-mentioned poem. Likewise in the
‘Bob-wheel-staves’, i.e. stanzas of the structure of those
sixteenth-century stanzas quoted above (§§ 60, 61), the cauda, as is
expressly stated by King James VI in his Revlis and Cavtelis, is
written in even-beat lines of four and three measures, though the main
part of the stanza (the frons) is composed in four-beat
rhyming-alliterative lines (cf. Luick, Anglia, xii, P. 444)
§ 66. In the contemporary Dramatic Poetry this mixture of four-beat
(or two-beat) alliterative lines with lines of even measures is still
more frequent, and may be used either strophically or otherwise.
In the first place, we must note that in the earlier collections of
Mystery Plays (Towneley Mysteries, York Plays, and Ludus
Coventriae) the rhyming alliterative long line, popular, as we have
seen, in lyric and in narrative poetry, is also used in the same or
cognate forms of stanzas.
But the form of verse in these Mysteries, owing to the loss of regular
alliteration, cannot with propriety be described as the four-beat
alliterative long line, but only as the four-beat long line. In many
instances, however, the remnants of alliteration decidedly point to the
four-beat character of this rhythm, as e.g. in the following stanza of
the Towneley Mysteries (p. 140):
Moste mýghty Máhòwne | méng you with mýrthe,
Both of búrgh and of tówne | by féllys and by fýrthe;
Both kýng with crówne | and bárons of bírthe,
That rádly wylle równe, | many gréatt gríthe
Shalle be hápp;
Take ténderly intént
What sóndes ar sént,
Els hármes shall ye hént
And lóthes you to lap.
In this form of stanza the different groups of lines or even single
lines are frequently, as e.g. in the so-called Processus Noe (the
Play of the Flood), very skilfully divided between several persons
taking part in the dialogue. The interlaced rhyme in the long lines
connects it with the stanza form of the lyric poem quoted above (p.
100), and the form of the ‘cauda’ relates it to that of the lyric poem
quoted (p. 101), and in this respect is identical with that of The
Pistill of Susan.
The rhythmic treatment of the verses is, both with regard to the
relation between rhyme and the remnants of alliteration and to the use
of the Middle English types of verse, on the whole the same as was
described in §§ 62–4 treating of this form of verse in narrative poetry.
The types A and A1, B C and B C1, are chiefly met with; now and then,
however, type C1 also occurs in the second hemistich, as e.g. in the
verses that wold vówch sáyf 172, of the tént máyne 487, wille com
agáne sóne 488, of the Play of the Flood mentioned above.
But in the ‘cauda’ the difference explained in § 65 between first and
second short lines forming the close of a stanza is often very regularly
observed.
In other places of the Towneley Mysteries similar stanzas are written
in lines which have almost an alexandrine rhythm (cf. Metrik, i. 229),
while, on the other hand, in the Coventry Mysteries we not
unfrequently meet with stanzas of the same form written in lines which,
in consequence of their concise structure, approach even-beat lines of
four measures, or directly pass into this metre. The intermixture of
different kinds of line is even carried here to such a length that to a
frons of four-beat lines is joined a cauda of even-beat lines of
four or three measures corresponding to King James VI’s rule quoted
above (p. 108) for such stanzas; and on the other hand to a frons of
even-beat lines of four measures is joined a cauda of two-beat short
lines.
§ 67. The distinctly four-beat line, however, still forms the staple
of the different kinds of verse occurring in these poems, and was also
used in them for simple forms of stanza. In the further development of
dramatic poetry it remained much in use. Skelton’s Moral Play
Magnificence, and most of the Moralities and Interludes contained in
Dodsley’s Old Plays (ed. Hazlitt), vols. i-iv, are written chiefly in
this popular metre. As a rule it rhymes here in couplets, and under the
influence of the even-beat measures used in the same dramatic pieces it
gradually assumes a pretty regular iambic-anapaestic or
trochaic-dactylic rhythm. This applies for the most part to the humorous
and popular parts; allegorical and historical personages are made to
converse in even-beat verses.
Verses of an ascending (iambic-anapaestic) rhythm were especially
favoured, as might be expected from the fact that the Middle English
alliterative line in the preceding centuries usually begins with one or
two unaccented syllables before the first accented one.
Of the different types used in the Middle English alliterative line type
C (C1), which does not harmonize well with the even-beat tendency of
the rhythm, and which is only very seldom if at all to be met with even
in the Coventry Plays, becomes very rare and tends to disappear
altogether, type A (A1) and (although these are much less frequent)
type B C (B C1) alone remaining in use.
§ 68. Of the more easily accessible pieces of Bishop John Bale
(1495–1563) his Comedye Concernynge Thre Lawes, edited by A. Schröer
(Anglia, v, pp. 137 ff., also separately, Halle, Niemeyer, 1882) is
written in two-beat short lines and four-beat long lines, and his King
Johan (c. 1548) (edited by Collier, Camden Society, 1838) entirely in
this latter metre. The latter play has a peculiar interest of its own,
containing as it does lines which, as in two Old English poems (cf. pp.
123, 124), consist either half or entirely of Latin words. Now, as the
accentuation of the Latin lines or half-lines admits of no uncertainty,
the four-beat scansion of the English verses of this play and of the
long lines in The Three Lawes is put beyond doubt, though Schröer
considers the latter as eight-beat long lines on the basis of the
four-beat theory of the short line.
Some specimens may serve to illustrate the nature of these ‘macaronic’
verses, e.g.:
A péna et cúlpa | I desíre to be clére. p. 33.
In nómine pátris, | of all that éver I hárd.p. 28.
Iudicáte pupíllo, | deféndite víduam.p. 6.
Other verses of the same kind occur, pp. 5, 6, 53, 62, 78, 92.
But apart from this irrefutable proof of the four-beat scansion of the
long line, the rhythmic congruity of it with the rhyming alliterative
lines discussed in § 67 can easily be demonstrated by the reoccurrence
of the same types, although a difference between the first and the
second hemistich no longer seems to exist.
Type A, of course, is the most frequent, and occurs in many sub-types,
which are distinguished chiefly by monosyllabic, disyllabic, or
polysyllabic anacruses, disyllabic or polysyllabic theses between the
first and second arsis, and monosyllabic, disyllabic, or trisyllabic
theses after the latter. The most usual form of this type corresponds
to the scheme (×)×–́××–́×, while the form –́××–́× is rarer.
Type A1 likewise admits of polysyllabic anacruses and theses,
corresponding mostly to the formula (×)×–́××–́, less frequently to
–́××–́. Type B C (×)××–́×–́× is rare, type B C1 (×)××–́×–́,
on the other hand, very common; type C (×)××–́–́× still occurs
now and then, but type C1 (×)××–́–́ has become exceedingly scarce.
§ 69. Statistical investigations as to the frequency of occurrence,
and especially on the grouping of these different types are still
wanting, and would contribute greatly toward the more exact knowledge of
the development of the iambic-anapaestic and the trochaic-dactylic metre
out of the four-beat verse. Of course in such an investigation the use
of anacrusis in the types A and A1 should not be neglected. According
to the presence or absence of anacrusis in the two hemistichs four
different kinds of line may be distinguished:
1. Lines with anacrusis in both hemistichs. These are the most numerous
of all, and are chiefly represented by the combinations of types A(A1)
+ A(A1), A(A1) + B C1(B C):
| A + A: |
For by méasure, i wárne you, | we thýnke to be gýdyd.
Skelt. Magn. 186. |
| A + A1: |
For mýschefe wyl máyster vs, | yf méasure vs forsáke.
ib. 156.
|
| A1 + B C: |
Full gréat I do abhór | this your wícked sáying.
Lusty Juventus, Dodsl. ii. 72. |
| A1 + B C1: |
You may sáy you were síck, | and your héad did áche,
That you lústed not this níght | any súpper máke.
Jack Juggler, ib. ii. 119. |
| A1 + A1: |
And you nóthing regárd | what of mé may betíde?
Jacob and Esau, ib. ii. 216. |
| A1 + B C1: |
Our láwes are all óne, | though you do thré apére.
Bale, Laws, line 63. |
| A + A1: |
Whome dáyly the déuyll | to great sýnne doth allúre.
ib. 747. |
| A1 + B C1: |
By hým haue I góte | thys fowle dyséase of bódye, |
| A1 + A: |
And, ás ye se hére, | am now thrówne in a léprye.
ib. 749–50. |
| A1 + B C: |
Regárde not the pópe, | not yet hys whórysh kýngedom.
ib. 770. |
| A1 + A1: |
Such lúbbers, as háth | dysgysed héads in their hóodes.
Bale, Johan, p. 2. |
| A + A: |
Peccávi mea cúlpa: | I submýt me to yowr hólynes.
ib. p. 62. |
| A + A: |
With áll the ófsprynge, | of Ántichristes generácyon.
ib. p. 102. |
| A + B C1: |
Maister Ráufe Royster Dóyster | is but déad and gón.
Roister Doister, I. i. 43. |
| C + A: |
And as thré téachers, | to hým we yow dyréct.
Bale, Laws, l. 67. |
| C + B C1: |
Of their fírst frédome, | to their most hýgh decáye.
ib. 82. |
| A1 + C1: |
Such an óther is nót | in the whóle sóuth. ib. 1066. |
2. Lines with anacrusis in the first section and without it in the
second. These are almost exclusively represented by the combination
A(A1) + A(A1); rarely by B C1(B C) + A(A1):
| A + A1: |
For wélthe without méasure | sódenly wyll slýde.
Skelton, Magn. 194. |
| A + A1: |
Howe sódenly wórldly | wélth dothe dekáy, |
| A + A1: |
How wýsdom thórowe wántonnesse | ványisshyth awáy.
ib. 2579–80. |
| A + A1: |
Behóld, I práy you, | sée where they áre.
Four Elements, Dodsl. i. 10. |
| B C + A1: |
I am your éldest són, | Ésau by my náme.
Jacob and Esau, ib. ii. 249. |
3. Lines without anacrusis in the first section and with anacrusis in
the second; likewise chiefly represented by the types A (A1) + A (A1),
rarely by A (A1) + B C (B C1):
| A + A1: |
Méasure contínwyth | prospérite and wélthe.
Skelton, Magn. 142. |
| A1 + A: |
Méasure and Í | will néuer be devýdyd.
ib. 188. |
| A + A1: |
Síghing and sóbbing | they wéep and they wáil.
Gammer Gurton’s Needle, Prol. |
| A + A : |
Ésau is gíven | to lóose and lewd líving.
Jacob and Esau, Dodsl. ii. 196. |
| A1 + A1: |
Líving in this wórld | from the wést to the éast.
Roister Doister, III. iii. 28. |
| A + A1: |
Chárge and enfórce hym | in the wáyes of vs to go.
Bale, Laws, line 102. |
| A + A: |
Quáerite judícium, | subveníte opprésso.
Bale, Johan, p. 6. |
| A + B C: |
Fór by conféssion | the holy fáther knóweth.
ib. p. 11. |
| A + B C1: |
Dó they so in déde? | Well, they shall not dó so lónge.
ib. p. 97. |
4. Lines without anacrusis in either section, so that they are wholly
dactylic in rhythm, only represented by A (A1) + A1 (A):
| A + A: |
Sáncte Francísse | óra pro nóbis!
Bale, Johan, p. 25. |
| A + A: |
Péace, for with my spéctables | vádam et vidébo.
ib. p. 30. |
| A + A: |
Sýr, without ány | lónger délyaunce.
Skelton, Magn. 239. |
| A + A1: |
Wín her or lóse her, | trý you the tráp.
Appius and Virginia, Dodsl. iv. 132. |
| A + A1: |
Líkewise for a cómmonwealth | óccupied is hé.
Four Elements, ib. i. 9. |
| A + A1: |
Whát, you sáucy | málapert knáve.
Jack Juggler, ib. ii. 145. |
The numerical preponderance of types A + A1 is at once perceptible, and
usually these two types of hemistichs are combined in this order to form
a long line.
The result is that in the course of time whole passages made up of lines
of the same rhythmical structure (A + A1) are common in the dramatic
poetry of this period, as e.g. in the Prologue to Gammer Gurton’s
Needle:
As Gámmer Gúrton, with mánye a wýde stítch,
Sat pésynge and pátching of Hódg her mans bríche,
By chánce or misfórtune, as shée her gear tóst,
In Hódge lether brýches her néedle shee lóst.
Possibly this preference of the type A1 in the second half line may
go back to the influence of the difference between the rhythmical
structure of the first and the second hemistich of the alliterative line
in early Middle English poetry.
§ 70. This view derives additional probability from the manner
in which lines rhythmically identical with the alliterative hemistich
are combined into certain forms of stanza which are used
in the above-mentioned dramatic poems, especially in Bale’s
Three Lawes.
For in this play those halves of tail-rhyme stanzas, which form the
‘wheels’ of the alliterative-rhyming stanzas previously described (§§ 61
and 66) as used in narrative poetry and in the mysteries, are completed
so as to form entire tail-rhyme stanzas (of six or eight lines) similar
to those mentioned in § 65. This will be evident from the following
examples:
With holye óyle and wátter,
I can so clóyne and clátter,
That I cán at the látter
Manye súttelties contrýve.
I can worke wýles in báttle,
If I do ónes but spáttle,
I can make córn and cáttle,
That théy shall never thrýve. ll. 439–446.
I have chármes for the plówgh,
And álso for the cówgh,
She shall geue mýlke ynówgh,
So lóng as I am pléased.
Apace the mýlle shall gó,
So shall the crédle dó,
And the músterde querne alsó
No mán therwith dyséased. ll. 463–470.
The difference in rhythm which we have previously pointed out between
the lines of the body of the stanza (corresponding to first halves of
the alliterative line) and those of the tail (corresponding to second
halves) may again be observed in most of the stanzas of this play,
although not in all of them.
In other passages the sequence of rhymes is less regular; e.g. in ll.
190–209, which rhyme according to the formulas a a a b c c b, d d b e
e b, e e e f g g f
§ 71. Lastly, we must mention another kind of verse or stave
originating in the resolution of the four-beat alliterative line into
two sections, and their combination so as to form irregular tail-rhyme
stanzas, viz. the so-called Skeltonic verse. This kind of verse,
however, was not invented (as is erroneously stated in several Histories
of English Literature) by Skelton, but existed before him, as is evident
from the preceding remarks. The name came to be given to the metre from
the fact that Skelton, poet laureate of King Henry VII, was fond of this
metre, and used it for several popular poems.
In Skelton’s metre the strict form of the alliterative four-beat line
has arrived at the same stage of development which the freer form had
reached about three hundred years earlier in Layamon’s Brut, and
afterwards in King Horn. That is to say, in Skelton’s metre the long
line is broken up by sectional rhyme into two short ones. The first
specimens of this verse which occur in the Towneley Mysteries, in the
Chester Plays, and in some of the Moralities, e.g. in The World and
the Child (Dodsl. i), resemble Layamon’s verse in so far as long lines
(without sectional rhymes) and short rhyming half-lines occur in one and
the same passage. On the other hand, they differ from it and approach
nearer to the strophic form of the alliterative line (as occurring in
the Miracle Plays) in that the short lines do not rhyme in couplets, but
in a different and varied order of rhyme, mostly a b a b; cf. the
following passage (l. c., p. 247):
Ha, há, now Lúst and Líking is my náme.
Í am frésh as flówers in Máy,
Í am sémly-shápen ín sáme,
And próudly appáreled in gárments gáy:
My lóoks been full lóvely to a lády’s eye,
And in lóve-lónging my héart is sore sét.
Might I fínd a fóode that were fáir and frée
To lie in héll till dómsday for lóve I would not lét,
My lóve for to wín,
All gáme and glée,
All mírth and mélody,
All rével and ríot,
And of bóast will I never blín, &c.
In Skelton’s Magnificence the short lines rhyme in couplets like those
of King Horn, in a passage taken from p. 257 (part of which may be
quoted here):
Nowe lét me se abóut,
In áll this rówte,
Yf I cán fynde óut
So sémely a snówte
Amónge this prése:
Éven a hole mése—
Péase, man, péase!
I réde, we séase.
So farly fáyre as it lókys,
And her bécke so comely crókys,
Her naylys shárpe as tenter hókys!
I haue not képt her yet thre wókys
And howe stýll she dothe sýt! &c., &c.
In other poems Skelton uses short lines of two beats, but rhyming in a
varied order under the influence, it would seem, of the strophic system
of the virelay, which rhymes in the order a a a b b b b c c c c d. But
the succession of rhymes is more irregular in the Skeltonic metre, as e.
g. in the passage:
What cán it auáyle
To drýue fórth a snáyle,
Or to máke a sáyle
Of an hérynges táyle;
To rýme or to ráyle,
To wrýte or to endýte,
Eyther for delýte,
Or élles for despýte;
Or bókes to compýle
Of dívers maner stýle,&c.
Colin Cloute (i. 311).
In other cases short bob-lines of one beat only interchange with
two-beat rhythms, as e.g. in Skelton’s poem Caudatos Anglos (i. 193):
Gup, Scót,
Ye blót:
Laudáte
Caudáte,
Sét in bétter
Thy péntaméter.
This Dúndás,
This Scóttishe ás,
He rýmes and ráyles
That Énglishman have táyles.
Skeltónus laureátus,
Ánglicus nátus,
Próvocat Músas
Cóntra Dúndas
Spurcíssimum Scótum
Úndique nótum,&c.
The mingling of Latin and English lines, as in this passage, is one of
the characteristic features of the Skeltonic verse.
In some passages, as e.g. in the humorous poems Phyllyp Sparowe and
Elinour Rummyng, the three-beat rhythm seems to prevail. In such cases
it probably developed out of the two-beat rhythm in the same way as in
King Horn.
Yet óne thynge ìs behýnde
That nów còmmeth to mýnde;
An épytàphe I wold háue
For Phýllỳppes gráue;
But fór I àm a máyde,
Týmorous, hàlf afráyde,
That néuer yèt asáyde
Of Elycònys wéll,
Whère the Múses dwell; &c.
Phyllyp Sparowe (i. 69).
Skelton’s verse was chiefly used by poets of the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries for satirical and burlesque poetry. One of its
chief cultivators was John Taylor, the Water-poet. A list of Skeltonic
poems is given in Dyce’s edition of Skelton’s poems, i. introduction,
pp. cxxviii-cxxix.
§ 72. If after what precedes any doubt were possible as to
the scansion of the verses quoted on p. 113 from the Prologue
to the Early Modern English comedy of Gammer Gurton’s
Needle, this doubt would be removed at once by the following
couplet and by the accents put over the second line of it by the
sixteenth-century metrician, George Gascoigne[116]:
No wight in this world | that wealth can attayne,
Unlésse hè bèléve | thàt áll ìs bùt váyne.
For the rhythm of these lines is perfectly identical with that of the
lines of the above-mentioned prologue, and also with that of the
alliterative line quoted ten years later (A. D. 1585), and called
tumbling-verse by King James VI in his Revlis and Cavtelis, viz.:
Fetching fúde for to féid it | fast fúrth of the Fárie.
This is the very same rhythm in which a good many songs and ballads of
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries are written, as e.g. the
well-known ballad of King John and the Abbot of Canterbury, which
begins with the following stanzas[117]:
An áncient stóry | I’le téll you anón
Of a nótable prínce, | that was cálled king Jóhn;
And he rúled Éngland | with máine and with míght,
For he díd great wróng, | and maintéin’d little ríght.
And I’le téll you a stóry, | a stóry so mérrye,
Concérning the Abbot | of Cánterbúrye;
How for his hóuse-kéeping, | and hígh renówne,
They rode póst for him | to faire Lóndon tówne.
This four-beat rhythm, which (as is proved by the definition King James
VI gives of it) is the direct descendant of the old alliterative line,
has continued in use in modern English poetry to the present day.
It occurs in the poem The recured Lover, by Sir Thomas Wyatt, one of
the earliest Modern English poets, where it is intermixed sometimes with
four-feet rhythms, as was the case also in several Early English poems.
The general rhythm, however, is clearly of an iambic-anapaestic nature.
Fifteen years after the death of Wyatt Thomas Tusser wrote part of his
didactic poem A hundred good points of Husbandry in the same metre. In
Tusser’s hands the metre is very regular, the first foot generally being
an iambus and the following feet anapaests:
Whom fáncy persuádeth | amóng other cróps,
To háve for his spénding, | suffícient of hóps,
Must wíllingly fóllow, | of chóices to chóose.
Such léssons appróved, | as skílful do úse.
The four beats of the rhythm and the regular occurrence of the caesura
are as marked characteristics of these verses as of the earlier
specimens of the metre.
Spenser has written several eclogues of his Shepheard’s Calendar in
this metre (February, May, September), and Shakespeare uses it in some
lyric pieces of his King Henry IV, Part II, but also for dialogues, as
e.g. Err. III. i. 11–84. In more modern times Matthew Prior
(1664–1715) wrote a ballad Down Hall to the tune, as he says, of King
John and the Abbot of Canterbury, which clearly shows that he meant to
imitate the ancient popular four-beat rhythm, which he did with perfect
success. In other poems he used it for stanzas rhyming in the order a b
a b. Swift has used the same metre, and it became very popular in
Scottish poetry through Allan Ramsay and Robert Burns, one of whose most
famous poems is written in it, viz.:
My héart’s in the Híghlands, | my héart is not hére;
My héart’s in the Híghlands, | a-chásing the déer;
Chásing the wíld deer | and fóllowing the róe,
My héart’s in the Híghlands | wheréver I gó.
Sir Walter Scott used it frequently for drinking-songs, and Thomas Moore
wrote his Letters of the Fudge Family in it.
By Coleridge and Byron this metre was used in the same way as by Wyatt,
viz. intermixed with regular four-foot verse according to the subject,
the four-beat iambic-anapaestic rhythm for livelier passages, the pure
iambic for passages of narration and reflecti—. Byron’s Prisoner of
Chillon and his Siege of Corinth are good specimens of this kind of
metre.[118] On the other hand the regular four-foot rhythm, as will be
shown below, if it is of a looser structure, develops into a kind of
verse similar to the iambic-anapaestic rhythm—an additional reason for
their existing side by side often in one poem.
A few variations of this metre remain to be mentioned, which occur as
early as Tusser. The first variety arises from interlaced rhyme, by
which the two four-beat verses are broken up into four two-beat verses
rhyming in the order a b a b.
If húsbandry brággeth
To gó with the bést,
Good húsbandry bággeth
Up góld in his chést.
On the model of these stanzas others were afterwards formed by Tusser
consisting of three-beat verses of the same rhythm. The same verse was
used for eight-line stanzas rhyming a b a b c d c d by Nicholas Rowe,
Shenstone, Cowper, and in later times by Thackeray in one of his
burlesque poems (Malony’s Lament in Ballads, the Rose and the
Ring, &c., p. 225). For examples of these variations see the sections
treating of the iambic-anapaestic verses of three and two measures.
§ 73. In modern times a few attempts have been made to revive the old
four-beat alliterative line without rhyme, but also without a regular
use of alliteration. These attempts, however, have never become
popular.
The following passage from William Morris’s dramatic poem Love is
enough may give an idea of the structure of this kind of verse:
Fáir Master Óliver, | thóu who at áll times
Mayst ópen thy héart | to our lórd and máster,
Téll us what tídings | thou hást to delíver;
For our héarts are grown héavy, | and whére shall we túrn to,
If thús the king’s glóry, | our gáin and salvátion,
Must gó down the wínd | amid glóom and despáiring.
The rhythm, together with the irregular use of alliteration, places
these four-beat alliterative lines on the same level with those of the
dramatic poems of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
The same kind of versification is found in Longfellow’s translation of
the late Old English poem on The Grave, and in James M. Garnett’s
translations of Beowulf and Cynewulf’s Elene. On the other hand,
George Stephens, in his translation of the Old English poem on The
Phoenix, published 1844, not only adheres strictly to the laws of
alliteration, but confines himself to Germanic words, sometimes even
using inflexional forms peculiar to Middle English.
§ 74. We shall conclude this survey of the development of the
four-beat alliterative line by giving a series of examples in reversed
chronological order, beginning with writers of the present day and
ending with the earliest remains of Old English poetry, in order to
illustrate the identity in rhythmic structure of this metre in all
periods of its history.
Nineteenth Century, End:
For níne days the kíng | hath slépt not an hóur
And táketh no héed | of soft wórds or beseéching.
W. Morris.
Nineteenth Century, Beginning:
So that wíldest of wáves, | in their ángriest móod,
Scarce bréak on the boúnds | of the lánd for a róod.
Byron, Siege of Corinth, 382–4.
Eighteenth Century, End:
My héart’s in the Híghlands, | my héart is not hére;
My héart’s in the Híghlands, | a-chásing the déer. Burns.
Eighteenth Century, Middle:
A cóbbler there wás, | and he líved in a stáll.
[119]Eighteenth Century, Beginning (1715):
I síng not old Jáson | who trável’d thro’ Gréece
To kíss the fair máids | and posséss the rich fléece.
Prior, Down-Hall, to the tune of King John and the Abbot.
Seventeenth Century, Beginning (or Sixteenth Century, End):
An áncient stóry | I’le téll you anón
Of a nótable prínce, | that was cálled king Jóhn.
King John and the Abbot of Canterbury.
Sixteenth Century, End (1585):
Fetching
fúde for to
féid it | fast
fúrth of the
Fárie.
[120]
Montgomery.
Sixteenth Century (1575):
No wíght in this wórld | that wéalth can attáyne
Un
lésse hè bè
léve | thàt áll ìs bùt váyne.
[121]
G. Gascoigne.
Sixteenth Century (before 1575):
As Gámmer Gúrton, | with mánye a wyde stýche,
Sat pésynge and pátching | of Hódg her mans brýche.
Gammer Gurton’s Needle.
Sixteenth Century, Middle (about 1548):
Such lúbbers as háth | dysgysed héads in their hóods.
Bale (died 1563), King Johan, p. 2.
Thýnke you a Róman | with the Rómans cannot lýe?
ibid. p. 84.
For as Chríste ded say to Péter, | Cáro et sánguis
Non revelávit tíbi | sed Páter meus celéstis.
ibid. pp. 92–3.
A péna et cúlpa | I desýre to be clére,
And thén all the dévylles | of héll I wold not fére.
ibid. p. 33.
Judicáte pupíllo, | deféndite víduam:
Defénde the wýdowe, | whan she ís in dystrésse.
ibid. p. 6.
Sáncte Domínice, | óra pro nóbis.
Sáncte pyld mónache, | I be-shrów vóbis.
Sáncte Francísse, | óra pro nóbis.
ibid. p. 25.
Sixteenth Century, Beginning:
Apón the mídsummer évin, | mírriest of níchtis.
Dunbar, Twa Mariit Wemen, 1.
Fifteenth Century, Second Half:
In the chéiftyme of Chárlis, | that chósin chíftane.
Rauf Coilȝear, 1.
Fifteenth Century, ? First Half:
In the týme of Árthour, | as tréw men me táld.
Golagras and Gawane, 1.
Fourteenth Century, End:
Moste mýghty Máhowne | méng you with mýrthe,
Both of búrgh and of tówne, | by féllys and by fýrthe.
Towneley Mysteries, p. 140.
Oute, alás, I am góne! | oute apón the, mans wónder!
ibid. p. 30.
Fourteenth Century, Second Half:
In a sómer séson, | whan sóft was the sónne.
Piers Plowman, Prol. 1.
Þen com a vóis to Jóseph | and séide him þise wórdes.
Joseph of Arimathie, 21 (about 1350).
Fourteenth Century, Beginning:
Ich herde mén vpo móld | máke much món.
Wright’s Pol. Songs.
Lýstneþ Lórdynges, | a newe sóng ichulle bigýnne.
ibid. p. 187.
Thirteenth Century, Middle:
Álle bèon he blíþe | þat tò my sóng líþe:
A sóng ihc schàl you sínge | of Múrry þe kínge.
King Horn, 1–4.
Thirteenth Century, Beginning:
And swá heo gùnnen wénden | fórð tò þan kínge.
Layamon, 13811–12.
Vmbe fíftene ȝér | þat fólc is isómned.
ibid. 13855–6.
Twelfth Century:
þat þe chíriche hàbbe grýþ | and þe chéorl bèo in frýþ
his sédes to sówen, | his médes to mówen.
Proverbs of Alfred, 91–4.
búte if he béo | in bóke iléred.
ibid. 65–6.
Eleventh Century, End:
þat he nám be wíhte | and mid mýcelan únrìhte.
Chron. an. 1087.
Eleventh Century, First Half:
súme hi man bénde, | súme hi man blénde.
Chron. an. 1037.
ne wearð dreṓrlìcre dǣ́d | gedṓn on þisan éarde.
ibid.
Eleventh Century, Beginning:
se of ǽðelre wǽs | vírginis pártū
clǣ́ne acénned, | Chrístus in órbem.
Oratio Poetica, ed. Lumby.
hwæt! ic ā́na sǽt | ínnan béarwe,
mid hélme beþéaht, | hólte tō-míddes,
þǣr þā wǽterbúrnan | swḗgdon and úrnon,
on míddan gehǽge, | éal swā ic sécge.
Be Dōmes Dæge.
þæt Sámson se stránge | swā ofslḗan míhte
ā́n þūsend mánna | mid þæs ássan cínbā́ne.
Ælfric, Judges, 282–3.
Tenth Century, End:
ǣ́fre embe stúnde | he séalde sume wúnde,
þā hwī́le þe hē wǣ́pna | wéaldan mṓste.
Byrhtnoth, 271–2.
Ninth Century:
wýrmum bewúnden, | wítum gebúnden,
héarde gehǣ́fted | in hélle brýne. Judith, 115–16.
Eighth Century:
hā́m and hḗahsètle | héofena rī́ces. Genesis, 33.
wúldre biwúnden | in þǣre wlítigan býrig.
háfað ūs ālȳ́fed | lū̀cis áuctor
þæt wē
mṓtun hḗr |
méruḗrī
[122]gṓddǣdum begíetan | gáudia in cǣ́lō. Phoenix, 666–9.
onfḗngon fúlwihte | and fréoðowǣ́re
wúldres wédde | wī́tum āspḗdde. Andreas, 1632–3.
þǣr wæs bórda gebréc | and béorna geþréc
héard hándgeswìng | and hérga gríng,
sýððan hēo éarhfære | ǣ́rest mḗtton. Elene, 114–16.
búgon Þā tō bénce | blǣ́d-ā́gènde
fýlle gefǣ́gon. | fǽgene geþǣ́gon
médofull mánig | mā́gas þā́ra. Beowulf, 1013–15.
Seventh Century:
nu scýlun hérgan | héfænrīcæs uárd,
métudæs mǽcti | end his mṓdgidanc. Cædmon’s Hymn
§ 75. The evidence contained in this chapter, with regard to the
continuous survival, in its essential rhythmical features, of the Old
English native verse down to modern times, may be briefly summed up as
follows:—
1. In the oldest remains of English poetry (Beowulf, Elene,
Andreas, Judith, Phoenix, &c.) we already find lines with combined
alliteration and rhyme intermixed with, and rhythmically equivalent to,
the purely alliterative lines, exactly as we do in late Old English and
early Middle English poems such as Byrhtnoth, Be Dōmes Dæge,
Oratio Poetica, Chronicle an. 1036, Proverbs of Alfred, and
Layamon’s Brut.
2. In some of these poems, viz. the Phoenix and the Oratio Poetica,
Latin two-beat hemistichs are combined with English hemistichs of
similar rhythm to form regular long lines, just as is done in Bale’s
play of Kinge Johan (sixteenth century).
3. The lines of this play agree in the general principle, and frequently
in the details of their rhythmical structure, with alliterative-rhyming
long lines which occur in lyric and epic poems of the same period, and
which two contemporary metrists, Gascoigne and King James VI, recognized
(independently of each other) as lines of four accents.
4. The rhythm of these sixteenth-century lines is indistinguishable from
that of a four-accent metre which is popular in English and German
poetry down to the present day.
These facts appear to leave no room for doubt that the Germanic metre
has had a continuous history in English poetry from the earliest times
down to the present, and that the long line, in Old and Middle English
as in Modern English, had four accents (two in each hemistich). The
proof acquires additional force from the fact, established by recent
investigations, that the most important of the metrical types of the Old
English hemistich are found again in Middle and Modern English poetry.