{lvi}
§ 33. Literature of the subject.
Editions. (1) By Sir F. Madden, 1828; see § 1. (2) By Rev. W. W. Skeat (E.E.T.S.), (a) 1868; (b) 1889; see § 1. (3) By F. Holthausen, in the Series of Old and Middle English Texts edited by L. Morsbach and F. Holthausen, London, 1901; pp. xii, 101.
Extracts. Extracts from the Lay have been printed in the following—(1) R. P. Wulcker, Altenglisches Lesebuch, Halle a. S., 1874; contains ll. 2052–2265; Part I. p. 81, with notes at p. 161. (2) Specimens of Early English, by R. Morris, Part I, (a) Oxford, 1882; (b) Oxford, 1885; contains ll. 339–748, at pp. 222–236, with notes (a) at p. 352, (b) at p. 356. (3) An Old and Middle English Reader, by G. E. Maclean, New York, 1893; contains ll. 1–183 at {lvii} pp. 85–90, with notes at p. lvi. (4) J. Zupitza, Alt- and mittelenglisches Uebungsbuch; 3rd ed., Wien, 1884; 5th ed., Wien and Leipzig, 1897; contains ll. 1–183.
A modern English version of the Lay, by Miss E. Hickey, has just been published (1902) in London; for the Catholic Truth Society.
The results of a collation of the E.E.T.S. edition are given by Hupe, in Anglia, vol. xiii. p. 194. I regret that I overlooked this, as it suggests a few corrections which I have missed. In particular, Hupe notes that the MS. has ‘þ’ where I have printed ‘th’ in the following instances, viz. þat, 104; þoucte, 197; wrþe, 434; þenkeste, 578; þan, 627; þoucte, 691; þouthe, 790; þe, 1131, 1201; þer offe, 1377. At l. 912, for yow read you. The only variations of importance between his reading of the MS. and my own are that he reads ‘troud’ instead of ‘ croud’ in l. 2338, in which case, troud might mean ‘trowed, believed’; but it gives a very bad rhyme, and I believe the right reading to be crod. Again, in l. 2862, he thinks there is an abbreviation which is to be read as ‘trou’; but it is plainly ‘tro.’
Emendations and Notes. The text is frequently corrupt; so that it has been necessary to make emendations in several places. The following critics have contributed to their number, and there is a danger that such conjectures may be endlessly increased.
J. Zupitza; in the Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum, vol. xix. 124, also in Anglia, vol. i. 468; further, in Anglia, vii. 145.
F. Stratmann; in Englische Studien, vol. i. 423; vol. v. 377.
H. Hupe; in Anglia, vol. xiii. 197; and see the preceding remarks in the same, beginning at p. 186.
{lviii} E. Kölbing; in Eng. Studien, vol. xvi. 299; vol. xvii. 297; vol. xix. 146.
W. Heuser; in Eng. Studien, vol. xxvii. 391.
F. Holthausen; in Anglia, vol. xv. 499; vol. xvii. 441; and in An English Miscellany, Oxford, 1900; p. 176.
L. Morsbach; in Eng. Studien, vol. xxix. 368.
§ 34. French Versions. The known French versions are that of Gaimar and Le Lai d’Havelok.
Editions of Gaimar. (1) By Sir F. Madden, 1828; see § 1. (2) By Petrie, in Monumenta Historica Britannica; London, 1848; i. 764. (3) By T. Wright (Caxton Society), London, 1850. (4) By Sir T. Duffus Hardy and C. F. Martin; in Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, vol. i; London, 1888. See § 23.
Editions of Le Lai d’Haveloc. (1) By Sir F. Madden, 1828; see § 1. (2) By F. Michel, Paris, 1833. (3) By T. Wright (as above). (4) By Sir T. Duffus Hardy and C. F. Martin (as above); i. 290. See § 24.
§ 35. Discussions and Criticisms. The following are the chief references, in chronological order.
A. J. Ellis: Early Eng. Pronunciation, part ii; London, 1869; p. 470.
F. Ludorff: Ueber die Sprache des alteng. Lay Havelok; Munster, 1873 (dissertation of Giessen).
G. Storm; in Eng. Studien, 1880; vol. iii. p. 533; reprinted from Christiana Videnskabsselskabs Forhandlinger, 1879. (An excellent article, identifying Havelok or Anlaf Curan with Anlaf Sihtricson.) See § 21.
M. Kupferschmidt: Die Haveloksage bei Gaimar and ihr Verhaltniss zum Lai d’Havelok; pr. in E. Bohmer’s Romanische Studien, vol. iv; Bonn, 1879–1880, p. 411. (A notice {lix} of this in Romania, ix. 480, says that, of the two French versions, neither is derived from the other; that Gaimar’s text is the older; and that their common original is also the source of the English Lay. See § 28.)
Ten Brink: Early Eng. Literature, tr. by H. M. Kennedy, vol. i; London, 1883. See bk. ii. § 5.
H. L. D. Ward: Catalogue of Romances in … the British Museum; London, 1883; vol. i. p. 423. (A very useful article.)
L. Hohmann: Ueber Sprache and Stil des altengl. Lai Havelok; Marburg, 1886. (He considers Ludorff’s dissertation inaccurate and insufficient. In Anglia, xiii. 186, Hupe shows that Hohmann also has made several mistakes.)
H. Morley: English Writers, vol. iii; London, 1888. (Contains a very full abstract of the story; pp. 267–276.)
J. W. Hales : a letter in The Athenaeum, Feb. 23, 1889; repr. in Folia Litteraria, London, 1893; p. 30.
P. Wohlfeil: The Lay of Havelok the Dane; Leipzig, 1890. (Kölbing is of opinion that this dissertation tells us nothing new; see Eng. Studien, xvi. 299, note.)
A. Brandl: in Paul’s Grundriss; vol. ii. part 1, p. 644. (Very brief.)
G. Wittenbrinck: Zur Kritik and Rhythmik des altengl. Lais von Havelok: wissenschaftliche Beigabe zum Osterprogramm 1881 des Gymnasium Arnoldinum zu Burgsteinfurt. (See the interesting and useful notice of this by E. Kölbing, in Eng. Studien, xvi. 299.)
A. Ahlström : Studier i den fornfranska lais-litteraturen; a dissertation published at Upsala, 1892. (‘See especially pp. 32 and 119; and compare Freymond in Volmöller’s {lx} Kritischer Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der roman. Phil. iii. 2; p. 163.’—Holthausen.
Twelve Facsimiles of Old English Manuscripts; edited by W. W. Skeat; Oxford, 1892. (Plate VII represents fol. 207, back; ll. 632–721. In the transcription, read ‘greypede’ in l. 706.)
R. Wülker : Geschichte der engl. Literatur; Leipzig, 1896; p. 644. (A popular account.)
I. Gollancz: Hamlet in Iceland; London, 1898. Introduction; § III. (Should be consulted.)
E. K. Putnam: The Lambeth Version of Havelok; Baltimore, 1900. Pp. 1–19. (See § 28.)
Anna H. Billings: A Guide to the Middle English Metrical Romances; New York, 19o1. Discusses ‘Havelok the Dane’; § 3, pp. 15–24. (A useful summary of results.)
Dictionary of National Biography; article on Olaf Sitricson in vol. 42.
The Geste of Kyng Horn; edited by Joseph Hall, M.A. Oxford, 1901. (Describes the MS.; pp. viii–x.) And see p. 126 of the present volume.
My thanks are due to my friend Professor Hales for various hints; to J. Hopkin, Esq. (see p. liv); and to Mr. Gollancz. I have also derived much assistance from the edition by Professor Holthausen, and from the criticisms enumerated above.
Cambridge,
August, 1902.