00001.tif

PDF

Download

Open document

Transcript (if available)

Content THE GAWAIN-PQET AND THE LATIN RHETORICAL TRADITION by Ellis Gale Shields A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (English) January 1956 UMI Number: DP23010 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. D issertation Publishing UMI DP23010 Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 'Ph. D £ 'SC, SSr* This dissertation, written by ...... ....Ellis. S.hije^ds............... under the direction o / . . f e i . s . _ Faculty Committee, on Studies, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Council on Graduate Study and Research, in partial fu l fillm en t of requirements fo r the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y ........................Dean Date... I-P.ve mber. . 15 j , . . 1955.. Committee on Studies A, Chawman Cl/Xjrr*-^ (% l t CONTENTS i I j CHAPTER PAGE I I. RHETORIC AND THE GAWAIN-POET.............. 1 II. THE TROPES ......................... 27 Nominatio ................... 28 Pronominatio ............................ 33 Denoralnatio ............................. 37 Intellectio ................ 39 Circumitlo ........... 1+2 Transgressio .......... 1+6 Superlatio .......... 1+9 Abusio .................. 51 Translatio ............................ 51+ III. THE FIGURAE VERBORUM....................... 61 Repetitio ............ 6l Conversio........................... 63 Coraplexio ............................... 6>1+ Traduetio ........................ 61+ Contentio .......................... 66 Exclamatio .............. 69 Interrogatio ................ JO Ratioclnatio .................... 72 Sententia............................... 73 Contrariura ............................ 75 Merabrum................................. 77 Articulus ....................... 80 Continuatio ................ 80 Conpar.......... 82 Similiter cadens ....................... 81+ Similiter desinens ............ 85 Adnominatio ......................... 86 Sub jeetio........ 90 Gradatio................... 93 Definitio ............................... 95 Transitio ................... 97 Correetio...... 101 Occultatio .................... 101 Disjunctio ......................... 103 Conjunctio......... 101+ CHAPTER III. THE FICHJRAE VERBORUM (continued) ........... j Adjunctio ............................ 107 i Conduplicatio ............................ 108 Interpretatio .................. 110 Commutatlo ..... Ill Permissio ....................... 113 Dubltatio ........ 115 Expeditio ................................ 11? Dissolutio ......... 119 Praeeisio ................... 120 Conclusio ...................... 122 IV. THE FICHJRAE SENTENTIARUM................... 128 Distributio .............................. 130 Licentia....... 132 Dimlnutio............... 135 Descriptio ................. 138 Divisio ....... lipl Frequent at io ............................. lij.3 Expolitic........................ lij.5 Commoratio ...... 163 Contentio .......... 169 Similitudo .......... 174 Exemplum................................. 18 3 Imago...... 190 Effictio ........... 193 Notatio ............................. 198 Serraocinatio............................. 20 if Conrormatio......... 211 Significatio ............................ 213 Brevitas ...... 21I 4. Demonstratio.............. 216 V. CONCLUSION ....... 225 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....... 238 APPENDIX.................... 265 RHETORIC AND THE GAWAIN-POET Among the most perplexing problems of Middle English ■ ' literature are those connected with the poet or poets i responsible for the four poems in a unique manuscript in the British Museum, the Cotton Nero A. x. They are now ■ generally entitled Purity (earlier, Clannesse), Patience, j Pearl, and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Nothing, j ! ! : jnot even his name, is known of the poet. Where and when > i i | he lived is uncertain, although on the basis of linguistic i I i • > studies most scholars accept as fact that he was a West I i Midland contemporary of Chaucer. His canon is not j iestablished: did one man write all four poems, or not? t ^-The poems are unnamed in the manuscript. Except for Purity, these titles are those chosen by the first editors,; Sir Frederic Madden in his collection Syr Gawayne (London, 1839) for Gawain and Richard Morris in his edition of Early J English Alliterative Poems (London, I86I4 .) for the others. Purity, which Morris had entitled Clannesse, was so named j by R. J. Menner in his edition of that poem (New Haven, 1920). 2cailed herein the Gawain-poet. Although there is no proof that the same man wrote all four poems, most 'scholars accept the theory of common authorship. Since the present study has no direct concern with this problem, I have adopted this title--as a convenience rather than as a fact-- to designate the poet of the four poems. Did he also write other anonymous poems, such as St. hrkenwald?3 At present the only facts with which to solve these problems are drawn from internal evidence. As a result, scholars have generally concentrated on linguistic and interpretative investigations, on which some have conjectured biographical data.^+ This, in turn, has led to denial and refutation, in the process of which much i ;interesting information has come to light, but the i fundamental problems still remain, few conclusions standirg I I i i unchallenged. Most of the problems have, however, received I i S extensive investigation. j j One problem to receive only casual attention, however,j c r i is that of the poetic of the-poems.^ Because Purity, j Patience, and Gawain have an alliterative meter and Pearl, ' l_ 1 1 1 t in spite of its shorter verse and rhyming stanza, has a \ ^The evidence for attributing St. Erkenwald to the I Gawain-poet is even less conclusive than that for the j common authorship of the other poems. To avoid additional \ problems, the present study therefore considers only those poems joined together in the manuscript. i ^-Notably C. G. Osgood, Jr. in his edition of Pearl (Boston, 1906), B. ten Brink in History of English Literature, I, 336-351 (New York,'. 1869), Sir I. Gollancz The Cambridge History of English Literature, I, 320-I4.72 (Cambridge, 190?) and in his separate editions of the various poems. ^See Coolidge Otis Chapman, "Virgil and the Gawain- poet," PMLA, 60:16-23# March 1945» Chapman notes a number of the better known classical figures in his attempt to demonstrate Vergilian influence. !large number of alliterative lines, these poems have been considered chiefly as a part of the late and not completely explained manifestation of the Germanic tradition known as f i the Alliterative Revival. Scholars have analyzed these ;poems to determine their prosody and have compared this prosody with that of the older, purer Germanic specimens of Old English poetry. After studying the vocabulary, they have localized its sources in Old English, Old Norse, and Old French. Although a French source has been postulated for Gawain, and both it and Pearl rhyme in an un-Germanic way, only incidental consideration has been given to the possibility that the poetic of these poems might be indebted to other than the Germanic tradition. Yet it seems very possible that, on the basis of the sources, vocabulary, and rhyme, their poetic shows the definite influence of the poetic theory of the Latin ;tradition. i This neglect of the possible influence of the Latin poetic on the Gawain-poet is understandable. His ; 6gee Gawain & the Green Knight, ed. J. R. R. 'Tolkien and E. V. Gordon (Oxford, 1952), p. xvii: Though the story is taken from a French source, in ! style the poem is a culmination of Middle English j alliterative tradition; the poet draws freely on the j traditional stock of words and phrases. He does not ! appear to be indebted to any particular alliterative poem which is still extant. The parallels with the work of other poets are merely conventional or fortuitious. _ contemporaries, and particularly Chaucer, knew and used the poetic of the Latin tradition, a fact well established.^ Of course, Chaucer wrote in the French (i.e.. Latin) tradition, and his poetic theory was naturally of that tradition. Yet until the present century studies of his poetic chiefly considered prosody even .though Chaucer himself refers to Geoffroi de Vinsauf by |name and speaks of the “colours of rethoryk."® Recent l studies have shown that Geoffroi and these “colours” were an important influence on Chaucer.^ If the investigation of such influence on a poet recognizably of the Latin jtradition has been so belated, delay in investigating any jsimilar influence on the leading poet of the “rum, ram, ,ruf“ school is understandable. Yet a study of the influence of the Latin tradition of poetic on the Gawain-poet is important. Although he j wrote in the alliterative verse form of the Germanic i :tradition, stylistic influence from another tradition is \ possible, and the extent and manner of any such influence * ?See John M. Manly, "Chaucer and the Rhetoricians," Proceedings of the British Academy, 7:95-113 (London, 1926). ®The Franklin*s Prologue, 726. The Poetical Works of Chaucer, ed. F. N. Robinson. Cambridge, Mass., 1933. All citations from Chaucer are from this edition. ^See Helge Kokeritz, "Rhetorical Word-Play in Chaucer,"1 PMLA, 69:937# September 1951+# for bibliographic criticism. i should be assessed and defined. If there is evidence of influence, a study of the poet’s use of Latin poetic may prove useful in understanding his art. But if there is no evidence, that fact, too, is significant. For a proper understanding of any poet, and particularly of one remote from the present, knowledge of his theory of poetry is essential. Since the Gawain-poet has not specifically indicated his poetic theory, we must establish his theory from his practice by critical methods. One such method is the comparison of his practice with the poetic theory of the Latin tradition current in his period, the late fourteenth century. The late fourteenth century theory of poetry consisted almost entirely of the application of rhetorical theory to poetry, and the various upoetriaeu were actually rhetorics, their authors, rhetoricians.^ Chaucer’s "Gaufred” was one of these and “Gaufred's” Poetria Nova is among the iimportant texts. So were Matthieu de Vendome’s Ars | Versificatoria and John of Garland’s Exempla honestae !vitae. The latter author remained important enough in the j ififteenth century for Lydgate to speak admiringly of i I 10See Charles Sears Baldwin, Medieval Rhetoric and j Poetic (New York, 1928), pp. 185“196* and J. W. H. Atkins, | English Literary Criticism: The Medieval Phase (London, {19q-3), P. 96f. 6 him.Gower as well as Chaucer seems to have known and used Geoffroi.- * - 2 Moreover, Chaucer’s reference to “lerned Marcus Tullius Scithero" (Franklins -Prologue, 722) is apparently to Cicero as a rhetorician, as the author of either the De Inventione or Rhetorica ad Herennium, that textbook still attributed to Cicero in the fourteenth icentury.!3 Since Chaucer goes on to speak of the "colours i !of rethoryk," it seems likely that he refers to the ad Herennium, much of which defines and illustrates the figures of rhetoric, 1]-In his Court of Sapyence, quoted in D. L. Clark, Rhetoric and Poetry in the Renaissance (New York, 1922), p p T T r e s : ----------------- ; 12gee B. Balfour Daniels, "Rhetoric in Gower’s To j King Henry the Fourth, In fraise of Peace," Studies in j Philology, 32:62-73a January 193f?« 13The attribution of this work to Cicero continued until the middle of the following century when Lorenzo Valla first questioned it. See (Cicero), Ad C. Herennium De Ratione Dicendi (Rhetorica ad Herennium,), ed. and trans. Harry Caplan, Loeb Classical .Library ( ’ Cambridge, Mass., 195k-), P* ix* Hereafter cited as ad Herennium; all Latin references are to this edition, but the translations,unless otherwise noted, are my own. ' i ■^•%’ hat the poet should know rhetoric is implied by ; Deschamps; according to W. L. Wiley, In the fourteenth century, Mustache Deschamps wrote his famous Balade sur la mort de Guillaume de Machaut (1377)> his master and predecessor. The first stanza of this poem is as follows: Armes, Amours, Dames, Chevalerie Clercs, musleans, faititues en francois Tous sophistes, toute poeterie Tous ceuls qui ont melodieuse voix 7 The relationship between these pre-Christian studies of rhetoric and the twelfth and thirteenth century poetriae is an intimate one despite their more than a thousand years* separation and their divergent aims. The classical statements of rhetoric are the chief sources of the later treatises. The metamorphosis of rhetoric into poetic has ,an interesting history, told by Baldwin, Curtius, Faral, I Atkins, and others.^ Originally a study of the art of persuasion, rhetoric traditionally had three separate fields— the deliberative, the judicial, and the epideictic •or occasional speech. It would seem that rhetoric and I Ipoetry have always been connected, for the rhetoricians j Ceulx qui chantant en orgue aucun fois : tit qui on chier le do'ulz art de musique Demenez dueil, plourez, car c*est bien drois La mort Machaut le noble rethorique. In calling Machaut le noble rethorique, Deschamps clearly means that he is a very noble poet, and, in addition, the quintessence of all rhetorique. The editor of this standard edition of the works of Des champs, Le Marquis de Q,ueux de Saint-Hilaire, says in a note at the end of the above poem that rethorique means "rhetorician, c’est-a-dire poete.u Desehamps, however, does not always think of rhetorique as being synonymous for poetry or the poet--"Who Named them Rhetoriqueurs?" Medieval Studies in Honor of J. D. M. Ford (Cambridge, Mass., 19I4B ), pp. 336-337. ■^JbJrnst Robert Curtius, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans. Willard Trask (New York, 19j?4 j and Ldmond Faral, Les Arts Poetiques du Alle et du Xllle Si&cle (Paris, 1923). All citations from Matthien and Geoffroi are from this edition of Faral. 8 frequently drew upon the poets for illustrative material. : Rhetoric, however, had as its primary aim persuading men to act— by means of skillful speech— a point that Cicero makes abundantly clear in the opening paragraphs of the De Inventione. Deprived of its natural sphere in the forum and the courtroom first by the hmpire and then by the 'feudal system, rhetoric became epideictic only and found I 'new uses in ecclesiastical oratory (ars praedicandi) and t in letter writing (ars dictandi) as well as in the formulation of poetic theory (ars versificandij during the centuries of the Christian era.^ Moreover, the decline of i Seducation during the barbarization of the Roman Jimpire japparently caused the neglect of the mature work of Cicero i 'and of Quintilian. More useful to the Middle Ages than .these philosophical studies were those textbooks of rhetoric, the De Inventione and the ad Herennium, which gave simple directions, generally accompanied by illustrations, and were thus easily adapted to the needs of ' ■^Cicero, De Inventione, ed. and trans. H. M. Hubbell, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass., 191+9) • All citations from the De Inventione are from this edition. ^Curtius comments, '*. . . rhetoric lost its original meaning and purpose. Hence it penetrated into all literary genres. Its elaborately developed system became the denominator of literature in general. This is the most influential development in the history of antique rhetoric' 1 (p. 70). 9 schoolboys. The aforementioned works on rhetoric were familiar to Matthieu, Geoffroi, and John, who derived their theory of poetic from them.^ Geoffroi, when his exposition of one figure became extensive, merely said, "for more of this, see Cicero” (Poetria Nova, 1251). Since he follows the ad Herennium figure by figure in this Section of the Poetria Nova, obviously he refers to that .....................- T B i n - r - - ' I ii r i 1 textbook. Since these two textbooks are important for this :study, perhaps a brief resume of their contents will not be , ? t • ; j I amiss. Cicero!s De Inventione, which was known in the 1 ----------------- i - s \ jMiddle Ages as the rhetorica vetus, in contrast to the ad | i Herennium as the rhetorica nova, consists of two books 1 / | dealing with the first of the five parts of oratory: ■ ’! invention, disposition, expression, memory, and delivery. : j In the first book Cicero defends rhetoric, defines its ■ ! functions and ends, treats'of the four issues: conjectural^ definitive, general, translative, and then discusses the ; divisions of an oration, of which he says there are six: introduction, narrative, partition, confirmation, refutation, peroration. In his discussion he gives the topics (loci, genus, res) suitable for each part, and notes l®See Faral, pp. 99-103. 10 under what circumstances each topic Is most useful. • Although these topics are of invention, they are so closely : allied to style (eloquentia, expression) that Cicero felt obliged to keep repeating that there would be more discussion in the section on expression, as in "quo de genere dicendum est in praeceptis elocutionis” (I, xx).^^ iUnfortunately, this section was never written, i In Book II of De Inventione Cicero sketches briefly I |the history of rhetoric and stresses the eclectic nature of jhis own study. He then treats of invented arguments j I i jsuitable to each issue of the three types of oratory. The first issue is conjectural or issue of fact in judicial oratory: did or did not the accused commit the crime? i -^Perhaps the distinction between the topics or places > of invention and the figures of expression was not entirely j clear to the youthful Cicero. Perhaps the twelfth century j theorists of poetry may not have "perverted” rhetoric; rhetoric chiefly as style seems implicit in the system. Richard McKeon comments upon the uses of the commonplaces: Finally, the art of poetry came to be considered after , the twelfth century, not as a branch of grammar, but alternately a kind of argumentation or persuasion (and as such subordinate to logic or morals) and a form of composition (and as such to be treated in terms of style, organization, and figures borrowed from rhetoric). In common, these three tendencies continue the terms and so some points of the organization of the ad Herennium and of Cicero’s De Inventione, but the commonplaces which have been put to so many uses are no longer devices for discovering arguments of things and their traits, but devices for remembering, for amplifying, for describing, . and for constructing figures— "Rhetoric in the Middle Ages,1 1 Speculum, 17:28-29, January 191+2. 1 11 Cicero presents the arguments for both sides, concluding with the commonplaces for this issue. He follows a similar plan for each of the other three issues, the definitive, 'the general, and the translative, confining his attention to judicial oratory. He then turns to cases involving !written documents. This section concluded, he discusses i |deliberative oratory and, very briefly, epideictic. i iAlthough there is considerable narrative in the book, which i iadds to its interest, much of it reads like a lawbook. Book I of the De Inventione apparently contains material both of interest to, and with influence upon, mediaeval rhetoricians. Matthieu de Vendome, for example, takes from chapters xxiv-xxv his techniques for describing a person (Ars Versificatoria I, 38-92), from chapters xxvii-xxviii his techniques for describing action (Ars Versificatoria I, 93-112). The first.three books of the ad Herennium are so similar to the De Inventione that it would be repetitious to discuss them. Although these two treatises are not now generally considered interdependent, they derive from common sources and, according to Hubbell, the Loeb Classics editor and translator of the De Inventione, probably from the same source. The main difference between the two treatises comes in book four of the ad Herennium (which is 12 almost half the volume), where the author treats of expression or style. This treatment is largely (chapters xiii-lvi) confined to the definition and illustration of forty-five figures of speech (figurae verborum), which include the ten tropes as figures, and nineteen figures of thought (figurae sententiarum), of which more will be said ;later. : It is this part of ancient rhetoric which chiefly influenced Geoffroi de Vinsauf and John of Garland. If Matthieu derived his description from Cicero, these jrhetoricians took their list of tropes and figures, in the I foetria Nova and the Kxempla honestae vitae, respectively, (directly from the ad Herennium.Geoffroi here does I llittle more than versify his source, when indeed he does thatj and in his prose Documentum de Arte Versificandi he leans heavily upon the ad Herennium. rj There were other sources for these rhetoricians. One was the Ars Foetica of Horace and another the Etymologicas of Isidore of Seville. Both, but particularly the latter, were sources for Matthieu. He names and defines the following 1 1 schemata" or figurae from Isidore: zeuma, ypozeusis, anaphora, epynalensis, anadiplosis, epyzeusis, paranomasia, paranomeon, scesisonometon, 20See Faral, pp. 52-59. 13 omoetholeuton, polipteton, polissinteton, dlallton sive assinteton.2- 1 - He then lists and defines the following tropes: metaphora, antithesis, metonymy, synecdoche, periphrases, epithet, climax, allegory, enigma (Ars Versificatoria, III, 1 9 in Faral, pp. 172-177)J these he takes from the tradition of Donatus, according to Faral (p. 89). Matthieu collates his t p-ist with that of the ad Herennium to show that they are the same: Videntur enim quaedam scemata et quidam tropi quibusdam coloribus rhetoricis respondere, quorum facienda est collatio. Sunt autem haec, quae combinata socialem habere videntur convientiam: antithetum et contentio, anaphora et duplieatlo, paranomasia et annominatio, i epenalempsis et repetitio, scesisonomaton et membrum orationis, sive articuius, dialiton et dissolutum, polissyntheton et conjunctum, methalempsis sive clemax et gradatio .... (Ill, kS) Later (III, I}-7) he merely lists the figures of speech from \ I the ad Herennium. with a few omissions. Thus, although i Matthieu is dependent on sources other than the De Inventione and the ad Herennium. he does not modify their rhetorical system significantly. P I Ars Versificatoria, III, 3» i» Faral, p. 168. Quotations are taken from the best available editions. Peculiarities in English, Latin or Greek spellings are presumably those of mediaeval scribes. Since the editors accepted these, I feel it improper to alter established texts. It should be noted that scribal peculiarities are inconsistent even within a single work. To note these divergent spellings by the use of the conventional sic would be more irritating than helpful. 34 Geoffroi de Vinsauf was more dependent upon the ad Herennium, particularly in his section on style, as I have ' noted above. He takes the figures in the order of that text and gives examples of the figurae verborura and defines and Illustrates the figurae sententiarum. Both his j examples and his definitions are rather obscure, a fact I j which gives point to his suggestion: ’ *quos oranes lege plenius In Cicerone’ * (Poetria Nova, 12$1). The only important difference between Geoffroi*s list and that of his source is that, whereas the tropes are included with j i l the figurae verborum in the ad Herennium, Geoffroi places the tropes in a separate group which he calls the ornatus difflcllis. He devotes more space to this group proportionately than to the figures, the ornatus facilis. Essentially Geoffroi, Matthieu, and John do not diverge in their doctrine of style from the ancient teaching found in the ad Herennium. And it was style (eloquentia) which interested these rhetoricians. Invention was of little use to them and neither was memory or delivery. The only useful divisions of rhetoric were disposition and expression. Since disposition concerned only the methods of beginning and ending a poem, the rhetoricians devoted little time to it. They gave their major attention to expression, in both its 15 aspects: amplification and ornament. Amplification was important in ancient rhetoric, where it was intended to promote clarity of expression. !In the late Middle Ages its purpose was in theory to 22 develop and expand a subject; in practice it added bulk ;to the narrative. Geoffroi in the Poetria Nova lists eight methods of amplification: (1) expolitio and interpretatio, (2) circuito, (3) eollatio, ( I j . ) exclamatio, l (5) conformatio, (6) digressio, (7) effictio, notatio, demonstratio, (8) oppositio. Nearly all of these are •figures for which full treatment may be reserved. i Oppositio, an affirmation with a negation as in "sad and unhappy," is in essence interpretatio and is so treated in |the present study; the digression is too familiar to need elucidation. Condensation was much less important. Geoffroi lists seven methods, however: Concurrant ergo, sed apte, Emphasis, articulus, casus sine remige liber, Unius in reliquo nota callida, vincula dempta Clausarum, sens us multarum clausas in una, Ejusdem verbi repetitio nulla. Vel ista Omnia, vel saltern quod res desiderat ipsa. (Poetria Nova, 706-711) jThat is, the devices of condensation include such methods ■as the ablative absolute, no repetition, and the insertion., ■ 22 See Faral, p. 61. 16 of many ideas into one sentence in addition to some of the usual rhetorical devices. It is significant that some methods of condensation are without name, quite unlike the devices of amplification. The rhetoricians, like the poets, seem more interested in bulk than in terse statement. The rhetorical figures used for condensation will be 1 discussed later. I j Although these late mediaeval rhetoricians, following ithe ad Herennium, paid heed to the three styles: attenuata I — _ I '.(humilis), medlocris, gravis, their principles of I classification for poetry was based rather upon the social i jstatus of the characters in the narrative of the poem than upon that of simple, temperate, or exalted expression. Diction should be in accordance with people rather than iwith subject matter.23 But the great stylistic concern of the rhetoricians was ornament, and ornament meant the tropes and figures, which dignified as well as amplified or condensed. The rhetorical devices, then, were extremely important as, to the mediaeval rhetorician, they were nearly all of the ancient art. 23see Faral, pp. 86-87. Faral quotes John of Garland: "Item sunt tres styli secundum tres status hominum: pastorall vitae convenit stylus humilis, agricolis mediocrls, gravis gravibus personis quae praesunt pastoribus et agricolis? (p. 87). For the most part, the mediaeval rhetoricians derived : these tropes and figures from the ad Herennium, Even when they rely upon other sources, as does Matthieu, their ' figures correspond to those of that textbook. Consequently, • in the subsequent discussion I shall take Geoffroi*s : excellent advice and go directly to the source of the 1 doctrine, the Rhetorica ad Herennium, for the list of figures and their definitions* nike Geoffroi, however, I shall treat the tropes separately, and first. Otherwise, the list of tropes and figures will follow the order of the ad Herennium, with one exception, duly noted. To attempt a composite rhetoric from the mediaeval rhetoricians |themselves would be not only confusing but useless: these theorists seldom depart very far from their chief source,2^ Moreover, the ad Herennium, as a textbook, gives better definitions generally and is therefore a more useful tool than the books derived from it,2^ 2%ee Manly, p. 99. 2$I have also retained the terminology of the ad Herennium, without giving modern equivalents, a procedure which should avoid confusion, Similitudo, for example, means more than simile, at least as the latter word is generally employed. Expolitio means amplification, but even withaall its ten subdivisions, it is by no means the only method of amplification* The terms, although natin, are used as English words and are not underlined. ’ In addition, there is an excellent chance that the I Gawain-poet knew this work himself, nike all other biographical facts about this poet, his education is not known and must be adduced from internal evidence or from our knowledge of the education of his time.^ That he was an educated man is obvious: he.knew the Bible and the I Romance of the Rose, both of which he quotes. That in I Pearl he demonstrates interest in theological problems jdoes not prove that he was a priest, but may indicate that he had theological training of some type. The questions are where, when, and how much. Where could a West Midland poet of the latter half of the fourteenth century have been educated? Perhaps he went jto one of the .English universities. The most remote parts of the West Midland dialect area lie little more than a hundred miles from Oxford and not much farther from Cambridge. Since Oxford was both older and larger, as well as somewhat closer to the probable home of the poet in the Northwest Midlands, he more likely attended lectures there than at Cambridge, at Oxford, he could have been a fellow of University, Balliol, Merton, P;xeter, oriel, Queen*s, or, if a religious, could have lived at one of the mendicant 2^See C. 0. Chapman, BThe Musical Training of the Pearl Poet," PMLA, 1+6:177-181, March 1931. or monastic colleges.2^ If he was a fellow at one of the colleges, he would probably have aimed at a theology degree, rather than at one in canon or civil law, the latter disciplines not being favored by founders, whatever his eventual aim, he would almost certainly have studied the seven liberal arts, which were preparatory to the higher faculties.2^ Such study would Include three terms !of rhetoric. Rashdall gives an interesting list of jpossible choices of text for this reading: the Rhetorica of jAristotle, the Toplca of Boethius, Cicero!s Nova Rhetorica, j |ovid*s Metamorphoses, or nPoetria Virgill.n2® The Cicero | text would presumably be the Rhetorica ad Herennium, X1 have become acquainted with the ad Herennium itself, 2?Hastings Rashdall, The Universities of hurope in the Middle Ages, ed. F. M. Powicke and A. B.hmden(oxford, 1936), III, 17$-210. If he was an Oxford man, he must have been a clerk, but he need not ever have been a priest or even In orders to study or to take a degree there. See III, 393-396. 28III, 151-156. 29Rashdall‘s suggestion (III, 155) that the Nova Rhetorica is perhaps a recent addition in 14.09 seems unlikely. Geoffroi and John, two centuries before, employed that text rather than Aristotle. Although ad Herennium was important during the Renaissance, its influence would seem more vital earlier than later. jcalled, as noted above, the Rhetorica Nova in the Middle i !Ages.2<^ So If the Gawain-poet went to Oxford, he could 20 without recourse to the poetriae. The alternate texts indicate that rhetoric was considered a literary study. If the Gawain-poet was an Oxford man, he might he supposed to exhibit the influence of that literary training when he wrote. i But of course he could have been an educated man with out ever going to a university. Where else could a West Midlander have been educated? One probable place was at a ;grammar school maintained by a church or cathedral, of which there were many by the fourteenth century. A. F. Leach speaks of the "ubiquity of grammar schools at this time1 1 --15 June, 1327* There were, In the West Midlands, schools at Hereford, Worcester, Cirencester, Chesterfield, Warwick, Manchester; there were no doubt others, so that the poet could presumably have received an education not far from his home. If the poet went to such a grammar school, he would probably have taken part in some activity like this: Every fortnight the boys were to be set verses to make, and letters to compose "in fitting terms, not in six- i feet-long words and swelling phrases, but in succinct J clauses, apt metaphors, clear sentences, and as far as i may be full of good sense." These verses and letters | the boys were to write on parchment on the next j holiday, and on the next schoolday to recite them by ! 30 I The Schools of Medieval England (New York, 1915), ip. 192. — — — — — — 21 heart to the master and give him what they had written. The masters were also to make them observe the rule in Latin or in French according to their statutes, i. e., to talk either in Latin or French according to their age and advancement.31 Such activity seems intended to give the boys a good Latin style. Their master, who could not teach without the !Chancellor's licence, had to demonstrate his own ability i to make verses and to write prose (de modo versiflcandl et dictandi) and to display his knowledge of books (auctorlbus) before obtaining that licence.31 Such 'requirements apparently presume a mastery of rhetoric, for the textbooks of the ars versificandi and ars dictandi of the preceding century were, as noted above, rhetorics, iiiiven if the Gawain-poet received no education beyond the elementary study of grammar, teachers so trained in rhetoric might be supposed to let their more advanced knowledge influence their more elementary teaching, so that he eould have had some acquaintance with the tropes and figures even if he never studied Cicero, Matthieu, Geoffroi, or John directly. Thus if he was formally educated in the Latin schools of the fourteenth century, he was almost certainly trained in the rhetoric of the Latin tradition. 3lLeach, pp. 180-181. 22 It Is more certain, however, that he received training1 in the Germanic tradition of poetry. Possibly this was informal, an education acquired by his hearing and learning the traditional poetry of his forbears, kept alive by the folk for two and a half centuries,"There is no question : of the popularity of alliteration among the lower classes 1 even as early as the reign of Edward I," according to J, P. Oakden.^ In addition, it seems probable that he would 1 have known literary poems in alliterative verse written in Kiddle English, such as La3amon’s Brut. This poem, according to Oakden, "is the one work in early Middle Bnglish which above all others recalls the Old English f ! ( ! heroic poetry” (p, 20). La3amon uses the language of the 1 | j old poetry, including the ancient poetic compounds, and demonstrates an Interest in English scenery and history, j \ both traits which show his relation to the native i tradition. As Oakden further comments: It was most fitting that La3amon should employ the traditional alliterative metre rather than the French couplet of wace. The form known to La3aEion may have been somewhat corrupt, but it remains essentially English, and one has but to read La3amon for a long 32t m . s Is not to imply that he or the folk themselves actually knew Old English, but merely that alliterative verse was kept alive orally during this time. ^^Alliterative Poetry in Middle English: A Survey of the Traditions (Manchester, 1935)> P« 11» ” 23 time before perceiving how suitable this metrical form is to his matter and spirit. Prom a mere external ! point of view, it emphasizes for us the traditional ! nature of the work, but not unfairly so, because the spirit of the past breathes through the diction, through the poetic treatment of the landscape and warfare, and through the lofty tone and dignity with which the poet never fails to treat his material. (p. 20) I ; Although there is no proof that the Gawain-poet knew | — . La3amon, he must have been acquainted with alliterative 'poetry of a similar literary finish to be inspired to I I write alliterative verse himself. Before going further, it might be well to establish briefly the chief characteristics of the native, Germanic tradition. The problems of the alliterative line itself are both too diverse and too well-treated to need discussion here. Basically this line is a four-stress line with a varying number of syllables, with three of the four stressed syllables alliterating. The main stylistic features of this verse were.the kenning and variation, which, taken together, E. E. Wardale calls ”the most striking features of the diction"^ of Old English poetry. The kenning frequently took the form of a word-compound, which itself is characteristic of Old English poetry. Still another characteristic seems to be a poetic I ^ Chapters on Old English Literature (London, 1935), ;P. U*. **’ " vocabulary, much of it drawn from archaic sources.35 Although there are other characteristics, such as the infrequency of end-stopped lines, set phrases and tags, and verse patterns larger than the single line,-^ the most obvious stylistic devices are the alliterating line, the kenning, variation, word-compounding, and poetic |vocabulary. 1 The most obvious thing about the Gawain-poet is that he employed the alliterative line, but he used it with a difference. Uakden observes three distinct departures: the use of a stanzaic form, alliteration for the eye as ■ well as the ear, so that alliteration often fell on ;unstressed syllables, and excessive or superabundant !alliteration, so that the device became more purely ornamental.^7 The kenning is but doubtfully present in these poems, of which more will be said later. There are examples of poetic compounds, although oakden lists only a few: in Purity, agayntote, boklered, demerlayk, dayraw, hevenglem, ladismon, luflowe, schroude-hous, warla3es; 35gee Beowulf, ed. Pr. Klaeber, 3rd ed. (Boston, 19ij-l) p. lxv. 3^See A. C. Bartlett, The Larger Rhetorical Patterns in Anglo-Saxon Jb'oetry (New York, 1935)* * 37Alllterative Poetry in Middle hnglish: The Dialectal and Metrical Survey (Manchester. 1930). p p . 177-1B1. 25 1 in Patience. ladismon. wo-stund; in Gawain, myst-hakel. winnehalle. wodwose; and in Pearl, dayglem.3& The large vocabulary of these poems has many words rarely found elsewhere. These words (many of them of frequent occurrence) show that a distinctive alliterative vocabulary has come into being, derived largely from traditional sources, but not exclusively so. In particular, older poetic senses of i native words and specialized senses of French words are ' markedly present, as are words of obscure origin. These words circulated among the various alliterative writers, partly through a common tradition and partly through imitation, but they never gained the same popularity among non-alliterative writers, except occasionally in the north. 39 | whether such a vocabulary may be said to derive from | tradition rather than need is doubtful. The alliterative ! meter is possibly more restrictive than most rhyme schemes :and poets writing in this meter naturally employed a vocabulary that would satisfy its rigorous requirements. Hence the form as well as the tradition dictated a poetic vocabulary. Variation is present in considerable quantity, I as will be noted later, but the Old English tradition may not be entirely or at all responsible for it. Thus to assume that the Gawain-poet acquired his poetic theory from the native tradition to the exclusion of 2^Survey of the Traditions, pp. 167-168. 2%urvey of the Traditions, pp. l80-l8l. 26 other sources seems to rely overmuch on appearances. .Another possible source is the poetic of the Latin tradition exemplified In the various poetriae mentioned by contemporaneous poets who wrote in that tradition. As this poetic derives from the rhetoric of antiquity, a fact |already established, it would seem almost matter-of-course to investigate these four poems to discover any use of Latin rhetoric in them. Since this rhetoric was primarily concerned with style and style was for the most part ; ! ornament and amplification by tropes and figures, this j j investigation should determine the existence and (employment of these devices In the poems. Since the r ipoetriae lean leavily upon the ad Herennium, a work which ! I the Gawain-poet may have known directly, this Investigation will employ that list of tropes and figures for a basic statement of the rhetoric-poetic of the Latin tradition, noting divergences from, and additions to, that list In appropriate places. Some of these stylistic devices closely resemble certain traits of the native tradition. Consequently, consideration of the native poetic cannot be neglected where technical devices might derive from either tradition. Implicit in these statements are the questions which this study will attempt to answer. II THE TROPES The medieval rhetoricians laid much more stress on the tropes than did the author of the ad Herennium, who considered them with the figurae verborum. Both Matthieu, who took his list from Isidore, and Geoffroi, who otherwise follows the ad Herennium. place them in a separate section, which Geoffroi calls the ornatus diffidles. In addition to this emphasis by separation, they are further emphasized by discussion and exemplification much more extensive than !in theeease of the figures. All these tropes except transgressio are more or less metaphorical, appealing to the sensory imagination. Since each in its way is a substitute for a usual or customary way of speaking, their detection and exegesis are frequently difficult. Possibly because of this difficulty the rhetoricians considered these devices an important part of poetry. In this concentration on tropes they differ from the ;practicing poets of the Middle Ages. Much medieval poetry, if compared with verse written in later periods, seems to 2 8 I [be less vivid, less imaginative, less profound, more like prose written in verse. There are, of course, many exceptions to this generalized impression, but these exceptions do not seriously prove the rule. The Gawain- poet, for example, had a story to'tell, a point to make, or a situation to investigate and explain. His poetry is ;by no means barren, for he used many ornaments, but he did ■not rely heavily on all the metaphorical devices to expand and deepen his thought. Possibly he avoided some tropes because of his desire for simplicity or because he was influenced by the oral tradition where the difficult or veiled metaphor was without much value. Possibly he was influenced by the native tradition— not necessarily oral-- both in his selection and in his rejection of some of the tropes. In any case, these devices are not as important in his poems as one would expect from the expansive treatment of the poetic theorists. He did, however, employ each of the ten tropes, NOMINATIO This trope, the first in Geoffroi«s list, is the Latin term for onomatopoeia. James De Mille, in The l Elements of Rhetoric, - * - says that this device fl. . . i ! 1(Hew York, 1878), p. 266. 29 consists in the use of words the sound of which suggests the thing signified, as ’hum,' 'hiss,* ’buzz,’ 'crash,* 'roar,' 'boom,* 'smash.'" By his choice of examples illustrating the device, De Mille indicates that onomatopoeia is not confined to a single word, however, but rather includes whole lines or larger sections of a poem which suggest sound by such methods as assonance and consonance. This is the meaning generally given the word today. The Latin rhetoricians, on the other hand, seem to restrict it to the use of a single word suggested by the sound of the noise or action described: . . . nominatio. . . nos admonet ut cuius rei nomen aut non sit aut satis idoneum non sit, earn nosmet idoneo verbo nominemus aut imitationis aut significationis causa. (ad Herennium, IV, xxxi) (Nominatio suggests that, for the purpose either of imitation or of inner meaning, we call by a suitable name that thing for which the name is either non existent or not fully appropriate.) As examples of imitation the writer gives sibllare ('to hiss') and mugire ('to low*) and for nominatio by meaning, fragor ('breaking in pieces, a loud noise'). Geoffroi de VInsauf, defining nominatio, likewise uses fragor as an example, In the phrase "Populi fragor Impulit urbem," of which he says, "by the sound which results from the breaking of boughs, we express the sound which results 30 , f rom the clamor and tumult of m e n . Obviously, then, to the Latin rhetoricians nominatio was the creation of a word by an echoic method when an appropriate word did not already exist, or a rhetorical ornament whereby the sound echoes the sense either by words of echoic origin or by |words otherwise suggesting sound, as in fragor. ' It is interesting to note that in Gawain and Purity a translation of fragor is used in the description of ■sound: n$>en |>e first cors come with crakkyng of trumpes” (Gawain 116) j3 , , Huntre3 wyth hy3e home hasted hem after / ,Wyth such a crakkande kry as klyffes haden brusten” 1(Gawain 1165-6); "Gler claryoun crak cryed on lofte” (Purity 1210). The underlined words derive, according to Gollancz and Menner,3 and to the N. E. D., which notes Rper sonurn qui provenit ex factura ramororum damus intelligi sonum qui provenit ex clamore vel ex tumultu hominum (Documentum de Arte Yersificandi, II, 3, 5, Paral, P. 285). — — Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, ed. Sir Israel Gollancz, Mabel Day, 'and' M. "S. Serjeant son (Oxford, 19i|-0), glossary; Purity, ed. Robert J. Menner (New Haven, 1920), glossary. AiT'c"!tations from Purity are from the edition of Menner, from Patience from the edition of Sir Israel Gollancz, Select Parly English Poems (London, 1913), from Pearl from~*the editTorf of’ E~ Y. GorcTon (Oxford, 1953), ■and' from Gawain from the edition of J. R. R. Tolkien and ;E. Y. Gordon (Oxfordf 1951}.). The & of Gollancz*a edition 'is silently expanded to and to accord with the practice of ^Tolkien and Gordon, The z of Menner*s edition is likewise restored to the 3 of the manuscript to accord with the more usual practice. Otherwise editoral emendation has been accepted. All underlined words in quotations from Middle ithe word as of echoic origin, from OE. cracian ('to crack, quake *; according to Bosworth-Toller). In Gawain 1186 the poet points up the fact that crakkande is onomatopoetic by adding a simile whose idea is closely related to the basic meaning of the word.^- Moreover, in Gawain 116 the poet, although the alliteration demanded that he use a iword beginning with k, could otherwise have employed a 'colorless word for crakkyng, such as ‘sound1 or 'noise** 'Therefore the use of crakien in its various forms seems to follow the rhetorical example, even to the use of an English equivalent for the Latin word. An example of descriptive words similar to the sound, of the action mentioned is the description in Gawain of the Green Knight's grinding his ax. (Gawain only hears the noisej he has not yet seen the Green Knight.) “What! hit wharred and whette, as water at a mulne; / What* hit i rusched and ronge t rawjpe to here” (Gawain 2203-lj.). The modem derivation of wharred, 'whirred, ' is still felt to be onomatopoetic. Whette is glossed by Gollancz in his 1914-0 edition as ’ ‘ made a sound like whetting,” rusched as English poems indicate the instance or part of the instance of the device being discussed and are intended as a convenience for the reader. ^•See N. E. D., crack, v.2; Bosworth-Toller, cracian. 32 :T r made a pushing, whirring noise.” Ronge, derived from OE. I hringan, would seem to he a use more like that of signification, a transfer of the noise made by one object to the noise made by another. Although I find only doubtful use of this device in Patience, in Pearl these lines describe water; j”Swangeande swete be water con swepe, / Wyth a rownande jrourde raykande ary3t” (111-2). These lines seem to follow jthe modem prescription for onomatopoeia; that is, as a whole its consonants in sw, n, and r may well suggest the sound of water moving past. Only rownande ( OE. runian, •to whisper1; N. E. B., round, v.2) and rourde ( OE. reord, ’voice1; N. E. P., rerd(e), sb.) have any close connection with words expressing sound and neither is noted as echoic in the H. E. D. Other examples of this rhetorical devibe appear in the appendix; some are doubtful and dependent partly on the reader’s reaction. There may be other examples not noted, but even the inclusion of all doubtful and debatable examples of nominatio does not make the number large or indicate that the poet made much use of the device. The scarcity of this device would seem to show that the writer was following classical precept. The author 33 of the ad Herennium warns against the overuse of nominatio, ; ~ I since it may offend, but states that if used rarely and properly it will adorn discourse.^ The examples cited appear in those sections of the poems in which the reader’s attention should be drawn to the sound of the action. Haminatio, therefore, has here a functional as well as an ornamental use. PRON OMINATIO If nominatio seldom appears in these poems, the next I trope, pronominatio or antonomasia, has many examples. The j (term is thus defined in the ad Herennium; Pronominatio est quae sicuti cognomine quodam extraneo demonstrat id quod suo nomine non potest appellari. (IV, xxxi) (Pronominatio is that device whieh designates by a certain characterizing epithet, as it were, that which cannot be expressed by the use of its own name.) A modem definition, that of the K. E. D., is in partial agreement with this: antonomasia is the substitution of an epithet or appellative, or the name of an office or dignity, for a person’s proper name, as the Iron Duke for Wellington. . . . Also, conversely, the use of a proper name to express a general idea, as in calling an orator a Cicero, a wise judge a Daniel. t q I Hoc gene re raro est utendum, sic ut ne novi verbi ^adsiduatas odium pariat; sed si commode quis eo utatur et 'raro, non modo non offendet novitate, sed etiam exornat orationem1 (IV, xxxi). 3k i Geoffroi in the Documentum explains the device in | agreement with the latter part of this definition. In the poems of the manuscript, however, I find no examples of a proper name used in place of a thing, although the reference to Hestor (Hector) in Gawain 2102 is much like pronominatio, but is actually a figure, imago, a comparison of form with form. » i But there are many examples of the substitution of an attribute for a proper name. Most of them take the place of *God,* 'Christ,* and 'Mary.' In his edition of Purity ; (p. xvii), Menner lists eighteen Instances of paraphrases j • s i substituted for 'God* by means of a relative clause, as in i : “he bat on hy3e syttes” (Gawain 256), or "be Wy3 bat i jwro3t alle i>ingesn (Purity 5)* Menner notes these :examples from Gawain. Purity, and Patience as partial > proof of common authorship. The validity of his conclusion i |is not the point here, but rather that the poet was using , j I ;an established convention of rhetoric. ! Other phrases for *God* like that of Purity 5 are i ”i>e Tolke J>at tyned hem berinne" (Purity I 4.98), "bat syre | j Ibat syttes so hy3e" (Patience 261,), and "he bat spede3 l ~... vche spech" (Gawain 1291). I find only two examples of this type In Pearl, perhaps because the shorter line restricts the number of words before the end-stop: "Bot 1 35 my Lady of quom Jesu con spryng" (lj.53) and "My makele3 Lambe J>at al may bete" (757). Pronominatio appears in forms other than a noun or pronoun with a relative clause. Che form entails the use of a single word, as In ”}>y Savior' 1 (Purity 176), "$>e Creator" (Purity 39k-, 917), "|>at Lambe" (Pearl 771), and "!>at emperise" (Pearl ipl^l) for the enthroned Mother of God. Except perhaps for the last trope, all these are i ’conventional Christian substitutions. On one occasion the poet has built two lines of verse by a series of pronominationes, reminiscent of similar usage in Old i jEnglish verse and in the Latin mystical writers: "My i • Lombe, my Lorde, my dere juelle, / My joy, my blys, my leraman fre" (Pearl 795-6). Another foim has a single noun modified by a prepositional phrase, as in "J>e Kyng of heven" (Purity 393), "|>ou make r of man" (Patience ij.82), "$>e Fader of folde and flode" (Pearl 736), "J>e prynce of paradise" (Gawain 21^.73). Another form has a noun with an adjective as in "cortayse Quen" (Pearl L33), "Makele3 Moder and myreyest May" (Pearl 1|35), "be hy3e Kyng" (Purity 50), but this form is rare. Although most of the pronominationes in the poems are .used of deity, there are a few instances of such substitu ition for the names of men. Noah, for example, is "jje bume 36 bynne borde" (Purity i +52), and "hym. . . fcat %>e kyst 3emed" 1 ; (Purity I 4- 6I 4.). Adam is "oure forme fader" (Pearl 639). In Gawain is the line, "$>e tulk J>at J>e trammes of tresoun J>er wro3t" (3), of which Gollancz says in his edition, "the reference is surely to Antenor, who was banished for ihis perfidy" (p. 95). This is, of course, a matter of ' ;interpretation, as the reference could be to Aeneas, ! I !mentioned in line five. Pronominatio, like the other I !tropes, ean lead to confusion. Many of the pronominationes have little poetic value and some, such as Purity 5: Wy3 t>at wro3t alle Jjinges," may appear because they have the right initial |consonant for alliteration. Sometimes the poet seems to j use the device for no other reason than to fill out a i line, as in Purity 552: "£e Soverayn £at sytte3 so hy3e" a relative clause gave him additional words. Purity \ I presents the clearest examples of this practice. j Pronominatio is much like the Old English kenning in | I that it substitutes a word or phrase for a name. As James ; i Walter Rankin has shown, for every Old English kenning for j deity there Is an earlier Latin expression.6 Admittedly ! ^"A Study of the Kennings in Anglo-Saxon Poetry," Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 8:357-U22, j 1909; 9 :ip9-t5lp; 1910. ! . G~awain-poet may have been influenced in using the device of pronominato by the tradition of the kenning. Definite ascription to one or the other of the traditions is virtually impossible since the poet apparently knew both. Possibly he recognized the similarity of the two devices and was unconscious of their source; he could :hardly have been unaware that he was substituting a number :of words for one. The generally obvious quality of his pronominationes does not indicate that he gave them much thought, however. Rather, the device seems more nearly an alliterative or rhythmic convenience than a conscious method of poetic imagery. DENOMINATIO The third trope is denominatio, now called metonymy. B. P. defines metonymy as "a figure of speech which consists in substituting for the name of a thing the name of an attribute of it or of something closely related." This is sufficiently close to a translation of the Latin of the ad Herennium: "Denominatio est quae ab rebus propinquis et finitimis trahit orationem qua posset intellegi res, quae non suo vocabulo sit appellata" (IV, xxxii). One form of metonymy is effect for cause; as an 38 example, for "heavenly salvation" the poet has "the myrpe pat much is to prayse" (Purity l89)j that is, the fact of salvation gives myrpe. The same idea is used of living; that is, being alive makes a man joyful, in the phrase "ioyful jueller" (Pearl 300). Still other examples are the use of fenny and myre for sin; that is, the effect !of sin is filth: "pa3 pou be man fenny / And al tomarred in myre" (Purity 1113-^). The basic idea of this imetonymy is repeated in "pou may schyne pur3 schryfte" i mr" r (Purity 1115) and "pure pe with penaunce" (Purity 1116). Another type of metonymy is substitution of the abstract for the concrete, according to the Poetria Nova (968-72), as in "And robbed pe relygioun of relykes alle" (Purity 1156). Only by extension of meaning did Nebuchadnezzar rob religion; actually he looted the Temple. Still another form appears in the Green Knight*s scornful question; "*Nhat, is pis Arpure3 hous,* quob pe hapel penne, / *pat al the rous rennes of pur3 ryalmes so mony?*" (Gawain 309-10). Actually, it is the knights who dwell in Arthur's house who are famous, who have sourquydrye and conquestss. The house may be said to be their container, another form of denominatio listed in the Poetria Nova (1001-12). In a similar manner, the Statement that "pe bor3 wat3 al up" (Purity 8314-), really 39 means that all the men in town were up, not the bor3 Itself, which is merely the place containing them. Still another method of denominatio is the use of the material from which a thing is made for the name of the thing itself ("materiara pro materiato”) as in the sentence ”'Res induit aurum,1 id est, 'vestes ex auro'” (Docomentum, II, 2). This type of metonyny appears in Patience 101: "Then he tron on }>o tres," on which Gollancz comments in his edition of Patience, "tres, boards, he tron on jbo t., he went aboard, 101; prob. used technically for the deck, cp, *rough-tree'; OE. treow.”? Other examples of this type are brasse for 'horns1 in "Blastes out of bry3t brasse brestes so hy3e” (Purity 1783); yrnes for 'armor* ! in "Her slayn wyth |>e slete he sleped in his yrnes1 1 ; (Gawain 729); and hayre for 'hairshirt' in "He aske3 hetely a hayre and hasped hym vrabe" (Patience 381). INTELLECTIO ! i I J J Since it may be objected that these latter examples of denominatio are synecdoche, I shall take that trope out of the order in the ad Herennium to make comparison easier. The N. E. D. defines synecdoche as 1 1 a figure by which a more ^Select Early English Poems (London, 1913)* glossary, tres. k- 0 |comprehensive term is used for a less comprehensive or J i vice versa; as whole for part or part for whole, genus for species or species for genus, etc.” This is identical I in meaning with the definition of intellectio in the ad j Herennium; "Intellectio est cum res tota parva de parte ; ; cognoscitur aut de toto pars1 1 (IV, xxxiii). The jdistinction between the two tropes seems to be clearly j drawn and so it is in theory. In practice, however, the | distinction is often difficult and allows considerable i g latitude for disagreement. * ^Even in theory, however, the distinction is not., entirely clear. In the Documentum, Geoffroi cites these examples for denominatio! M’Dies est laetus’ id est ’causa quae facit laetum'; ’Tempus est flebile1 id est ’causa quae facit flentem vel flebilem1 1 (II, 27, Faral, p. 290). But | !under intellectio he says, some fifty lines after the j examples of denominatio: j ’Iste dies est laetus, tempus istud est triste.’ In ; his enim exemplis duo possunt notari. Potest enim notari ut causa ponatur pro causato, sicut praediximus. i Et tunc sic debent exponi ’Dies este est laetus,’ scilicet quando serenus est, id est causa quae facit laetum. ’Tempus istud est triste,’ id est causa quae facit tristem, quando scilicet turpe vel carum est. Alio modo intelligi potest ut continens ponatur pro contento et secundum hoc debet exponi sic: ’Dies iste est laetus,’ id est ’illi qui sunt in hac die sunt laeti,' quod contingit Inter commessantes et combibenjbes, etiam si dies sit turpissimus. 'Tempus iste est triste,’ id est ’Illi qui sunt in hoc tempore sunt tristes': quod contingit quando quis tristatur super aegritudinem vel mortem socii vel amici, etiam si tempus sit serenissimum vel pulcherrimum. i (II, 38i Faral, p. 291f.) ! kl In choosing examples of intellectio, I have included only those which name the part from the whole, and so on, to accord with both the classic and contemporary definitions of the term. Whether the poet made a sharp distinction between the two tropes is not of immediate concern. The point is that he did use synecdoche in the classical..sense of the. -term, I ! As a part for the whole, there are these examples: "bat pe scharp of pe achalk schyndered be bones" (Gawain 1 4 - 21} . ) ; "Set sadly J>® bit of £>© scharp in be slot euen" (Gawain 1^93); "bat £>© bit of b® broun stel bot on be grounds" (Gawain li.26) ; and "on coolde" (Gawain 2L4 . 7I 4 .) . I find no clear examples of the whole for the part. . I find these examples of species for the genus: "And alle woned in be whiehche, be wylde and be tame" (Purity 362) and ". . . quaked be wylde" (Gawain ll50). The following instances are examples of genus for species. In Pearl sight is referred to as a skill, when the maiden rebukes fiven if we puzzle out this distinction, we are still faced j with the fact that In the ad Herennium, the source of J Geoffroi’s doctrine, the container for the contained or ; the contained for the container is one of the forms .of j denominatio (IV, xxxli), which is Geoffroi's "continems pro contento, vel contentum pro continente," which he here calls intellectio. Whether or not we keep the distinction between the two tropes, it may be questioned whether a | poet of the fourteenth century would have done so, if the i theorists who could create their examples with little regprdj for content, line, and meter can be so confusing. 1*2 the poet for believing only what he sees : n$>at vche god mon may euel byseme, / To leue no tale be true to try3e, / Bot jpat hys one skyl may demH (310-2). And of course the genus iuel is used for the species perle in Pearl 2ij.9, 253, 277, when the poet is speaking of the maiden. Actually the poet has made but little use of this trope, possibly because he seems to try to make everything as clear as he can, especially in Purity and Patience. 1 I We may note, in addition, that intellectio is one of the 1 ;devices which Geoffroi lists as methods of abbreviation. If so, the poet seems generally more interested in amplifying his poem than in making it terse or abbreviated. This interest may explain the relative infrequency of intellectio in these poems. CIRCIJMITIO But another of the tropes, circumitio or periphrasis, is, according to Geoffroi, a method of amplification. The poet's Interest in amplification would naturally make this device appear useful to him. The definition of circumitio given by the author of the ad Herennium, nCircumitio est oratio rern simplicem adsumpta circumscribens elocutione" (IV, xxxii), agrees ;with that of the H. E. D. for periphrasis: Ihat figure of speech which consists in expressing the meaning of a word, phrase, etc, by many or several words instead of by few or one; a roundabout way of speaking; circumlocution. Ihis trope is much like interpretatio, a figura verborum, but with interpretatio the idea itself is expressed in a reasonably simple way, and then expanded by circumlocution. jCircumitio expresses the idea by a substitution of the icircumlocution for the simple word or phrase. It is I jtherefore a trope rather than figure. In order to explain the examples of this trope, I shall give the word or phrase for which the circumitio \ \substitutes. In Purity ’sinful man’ Is paraphrased as ; I ... i ."he. . . bat any unclannesse hat3 on, auwhere abowte" (30); i :’go to heaven sinless, not unprepared* as "Porby hy3 not 1 f to heven in hate re 3 totome, / He in be harlote3 had and hande3 unwashen" (33-4)• In recounting the Parable of the Wedding Feast, the poet, instead of saying ’the lord greeted his guests,’ says that he went to "cherish him alle wyth his cher and chaufen her joye" (Purity 128). Instead of saying ’God dislikes sin,’ the poet combines pronominatio with circumitio and gets two lines: "bat bat ilk proper Prynce bat paradys welde3 / Is displesed at uch a point bat plyes to scabe" (Purity 195-6). In Patience, Instead of saying that Jonah, pleased with the woodbine, is that day ’at peace x-*rith G-od,’ the poet has : njbat of no diete $>at day J>e deuel haf he ro3t" I (Ij.60). Instead of* Jonah saying ’I wish I were dead,1 he says, "I wolde I were of J>is worlds wrapped in molde" (I|.9i+). In Pearl the poet has combined circumitio with the central ; J metaphor of the poem, that Is the pearl which represents the maiden, whatever both may symbolize. Instead of ’to think her dead,’ he has "To $>enke hir color so clad in clot" (22); instead of 'I was .disturbed but tried to be calm,’ "For care ful colde J>at to me ca3t; / A deuely dele In ray hert denned,/ J>a3 resoun sette rayseluen sa3t" (50-52). One circumlocution of the poet has led to endless debate. In stating the relationship of the Pearl-maiden j to himself, he says: "Ho wat3 me nerre {>en aunte or nece" i (233)* This line has been interpreted as meaning ’she was my daughter,but it does not necessarily mean that. Here is a case where circumlocution, even as a poetic device, has led to confusion. j There is rather less circumitio in Gawain. but there ' are a number of fairly clear examples of its use. Instead j of saying that Arthur ’reddened’ or ’blushed,’ the poet has "i>e blod schot for scham in-to his schyre face" (317)* Instead of ’Many wept when Gawain left,' there is "wel much ^Pearl, ed. E. V. Gordon (Oxford, 195)+)» P* xiii. j kS wat3 £>« waime water £>at waltered or y3en / When bat semly syre so3t fro b° wone3f I (681].-5); instead of 'when it rained, * "When b© colde cler water fro be cloude3 schadde" (727). That there is a generous use of this device in the poems is obvious, although I have restricted the examples ;cited here to those in the first two hundred lines of |Purity, and except for Pearl 233, the first fifty-two lines !of Pearl. Other examples are given in the appendix. In F . . Ineither Patience nor Gawain, however, does the device appear so often. In the examples given, it is clear that circumitio has much more value than mere augmentation. The analogy between sin and dirty clothes in Purity 30 and 33-ii- supports the theme of the entire poem. It has a concreteness that makes the reader understand clearly the poet’s attitude toward sin. "bat of no diete ba-f c day b© deuel haf he ro3t" (Patience I 4 . 6O) indicates that Jonah’s usual reactions to misfortune were more palatable to the devil than to God. Gawain 317- suggests more than the mere fact that 'Arthur blushed1; since Arthur was growing angry, it prepares for the simile, "He wex as wroth as wynde" (319). In such ways the poet generally uses the device functionally and so enhances his poetry. His generous use kJb of it, however, suggests that he was not unaware that it supplied additional alliterative and rhythmic syllables. t Cireumitio appears in Old English as the kenning, as in the phrase "monegum maegj>um meodosetla of teah" (Beowulf 5) in place of 'conquering,*-^ This resembles the usage of the G-awain-poet. Thus here again is a dual source for the poet's practice. Either is possible, but the more iprobable explanation is that the poet combined the two i ;traditions. Like pronominatio, cireumitio is sometimes so 'similar to the kenning that the only difference is ,terminology. Still another possibility is that both the i :Beowulf- and the Gawain-poet derived their use of cireumitio from the same tradition, that of the rhetoricians.-^- In any case, this device was one of amplification in both traditions; so the Gawain-poet was doubly assured in making a generous use of it. TRANSGRESS10 Another of the tropes Is transgressio or hyperbaton. I Unlike the others it makes no special appeal to the senses or to the understanding. It is, as a matter of fact, •^Noted by Klaeber, p. Ixiv. See Rankin. .merely the substitution of an unusual word order for the normal order. As the N. E. D. puts it, hyperbaton is 1 1 a ; figure of speech in which the customary or logical order of words or phrases is inverted.1 ’ This is the essential imeaning of the definition given in the ad Herennium: i i ! HTransgressio est quae verborum perturbat ordinera : i perversione aut transiectione" (IV, xxxii). This trope should be extremely useful to a poet i ■ ^ writing in either alliterative lines or iambic tetrameter; he has in both forms to place his important words where the accent should fall. In a highly inflected language, such as Anglo-Saxon for alliterative verse and Latin for accentual, such an arrangement was relatively easy. By the fourteenth century, however, Middle English had lost | its inflections., with the result that its syntax, as Margaret M. Roseborough says, had "to develop a logical i word order and to bind the modifiers as closely as possible to the words which they modified."^ Word order in these « poems is surprisingly like that of modern English, I | particularly when we consider that the poet had to fit his ' words to the accent of his line. Therefore instances of this trope are fairly easily detected when present. I 120utline of Middle English Grammar (Toronto, 1937)* ip. 80. i -46' ! One insignificant way in which the poet employs this I i ! trope is by a simple reversing of the subject and verb as in "thus comparisune3 Kryst" (Parity l6l) and "}>en comaunded i>e Kyng" (G-a wain 366). Another method is to ! place the object first and then the subject and verb in j I normal order, as in "Clannesse who so kyndely cow|>e i Jcomende" (Purity 1); "A blysful lyf j?ou says I lede" (Pearl ,409); "his ax he strokes" (Gawain 416); and "j>e bly|>e brejse iat her bak J>e bosum he fyndes" (Patience 107). Still another method of transgressio is the placing i of some other member of the sentence first, as' in "to f>at |sy3t seche schal he never" (Purity 29); "Of Jerusalem I I in speche spelle" (Pearl 793); and "Mel gay wat3 £>is gome 1 gered" (Gawain 179). These examples show that the poet made use of the convention, but it is rather to be wondered at that he did not use it more often. I have given only those examples j which are relatively short and fairly obvious, believing j that often the poet in shifting his clauses and adverbs ! was within the limits of normal usage and therefore could not be using the tropes other than fortuitously. As a ! iclosing example, however, I should like to show that the i ipoet could use this device more ingeniously— so ingeniously, :and in this case elliptically— that his meaning is 49 i jdifficult. (I give the entire sentence, but the last two lines contain the transgressio.) Now he £>at stod pe long day stable And $>ou to payment com hym byfore, jbenne £>e lasse in werke to take more able, And euer {>e lenger $>e lasse, fce more. (Pearl 597-600) i i !s x j p e r l a t io j The next trope listed by G-eoffroi is superlatio or jhyperbole. This, says the N. E. D., is i a figure of speech consisting in exaggerated or extravagant statement, used to express strong feeling or produce a strong impression, and not to be taken literally. The Latin definition of the ad Herennium is essentially the s ame: Superlatio est oratio superans veritatem alicuius augendi rainuendive causa. Haec sumitur separatira aut cum comparatione. (IV, xxxii) (Superlatio is speech exaggerating the truth of something for the purpose of increasing or decreasing it. It is employed separately or with a comparison.) There is not much use of this trope in the four poems. In Purity I find two clear examples, one used to describe the unpleasantness of the speech of the men outside Lot's jhouse. It was so bad ”$>at 3©t J>e wynd, and J>e weder, and ; |>e worlde stynkes / Of f>e brych $>at upbrade3 |>ose broJ>elych |worde3" (847-848). The revolting enormity and the ( climatic effect of this trope heightens the interest of the 50 situation. But this one of Christ*s ability to break bread is in the nature of a digression, as it really adds little to our understanding of the clannesse of God, even though it is as such that the poet used it: So clene wat3 his hondelyng uche ordure hit schonied, And pe gropyny so goud of God and man bope, pat for fetys of his fyngeres fonded he never Nawper to cout ne to kerve wyth knyf ne wyth eggej Forpy brek he pe bred blades wythouten, For hit ferde freloker in fete in his fayre honde, Displayed more pryvyly when he hit part schulde, penne alle pe toles of Tolowse mo3t hit to kerve. (1101-8) In Patience, however, the poet uses hyperbole to suggest the force and horror of the storm which almost overwhelms the ship in which Jonah has taken flight. The water was so rough that it liefte blusched to pe abyme, pat breed fysches / Durst nowhere for ro3 arest at pe bothem*' (1143-ij.). In a similar manner, in Pearl the poet has used the trope to describe the great brightness of heaven: "pe sunnebeme3 bot bio and blynde / In respect of pat adubbement*1 {83—U-) - In Qawaln the Green Knight expresses his contempt for the knights present by saying, **Hlt arn aboute on pis bench bot berdle3 chylder1 8 (280). Since this contempt is at this moment in the story a rather important device intended to arouse the anger of the king, the use of hyperbole is functional as, with the exception of Purity 1101-8 on the ability of Christ*s fingers to break bread, are all the examples 51 ABUS10 The next trope is no longer generally considered a figure of speech. The N. E. D. defines catachresis (abusio) as Improper use of words; application of a term to a thing which it does not properly denote; abuse or perversion ! of a trope or metaphor. |But De Mille, who says that "a better definition is that |it is a word turned from its literal signification," calls i I it "a peculiar kind of metaphor" (p. 120). The author of ; I . ! I the ad Herennium agrees with the latter definition; ! Abusio est quae verbo simili et propinquo per certo 1 et proprio abutitur. (IV, xxxili) (Abusio is a figure which uses a similar or related word instead of the regular and accustomed word.) He gives examples of its use, as ‘little height* (parva btatura), ’large speech’ (oratio magna), and "to use small talk" (uti pauco sermone). Adjectives ordinarily applied to physical objects whether animate or inanimate are here 'applied to non-physical things. Geoffroi in the Poetria i Nova says the same thing and gives the same examples. The examples all involve the use of adjectives, but this usage is not a necessary condition of the trope, De Mille cites "the music of her face" as catachresis. ' 52 - * - n "b7gge a boffet" (Purity i+3), f l byge wrache" (Purity 229), and "much be bigger 3et wat3 my mon" (Pearl 371}-) , bygge has its modem meaning, but also the sense of strong or ,violent. Although the etymology of the word . big is uncertain, the first recorded use of it was about 1300 when in Havelok (1771}-) it was applied to living things with i j the meaning of strong or powerful. The first recorded uses of the word in the sense of Purity Ip3 and 229 and Pearl 37U- are these instances (H. E. P., big). A more !interesting example is "wyld wrakful worde3" (Purity 302) in Tdiich wylde means "savage, violent, cruel," and was applied in this sense to animals and men as early as 1297 jin Robert of Gloucester (Rolls, 1322), although its imeaning of "not tame or domesticated" dates from about the year 725. But its first recorded use applied to words is given as "These are but wild and wherling words, my lord" (Hamlet I, v, 133? N. E. D.. wild). In Shakespeare I the meaning is somewhat different: "unrestrained, unreasonable," although these ideas are present also in ;Patience. Similarly, the phrase "proud worde," according to the N. E, D. (proud) first appeared in Gower’s Confessio Amantis (1390), but I find "proud worde3" in Gawain 2269, xdaich of course might not be earlier than 1390 but is certainly not much lateh. In "he bik&QP * ' 53 he sufferes" (Patience 6), in the sense that 'he suffers more' deeply* is the only recorded use of this word in this figurative sense (N. E. P., thick). Another type of abusio is the use of verbals, as in "crabbed lentoun" (Gawain 502) and "flesche crabbed" (Gawain 2i|.35), in which the form if not the use is i - " . - |participial. Grabbed <0E. crabba, a noun meaning 'a crab,' i |here means 'harsh to taste or feelings, or perverse'; the i !word in its original sense of 'perverse like a crab* i appeared in the Cursor Mundi (1300) used of a person; these examples are the first record of its application to things (N. E. P., crab). Of the use of vnbynde in "Jae bak-bon to ,vnbynde" (Gawain 1352) in the sense of 'to cut up,' I find j " . . . . . . . . . . .1 , 1 • ~ T* ' no example in the N. E. B. Abusio also appears in verbs as in "vnlace f>is bor" (Gawain 1606), another word for 'to cut up.' This is I • i |apparently another first usage for the poet; the next one I given is of II 4. 6O (N. E. P. , unlace). Still another first usage is that of slode in "in slomeryng he slode" (Gawain j — „ 1 : 1182), according to the M. E. D. (slide). The same trope . f appears in "I slode vpon a slepyng-sla3te" (Pearl 59). The latter part of the compoLind slenvng-slalte. whose basic ' meaning is 'slaying, slaughter,' here means 'a stroke or , spell.* 'The same word appears in "such sla3tes of sor3e" ! i (Patience 192). Uh.ese are the only recorded uses of this 1 i word in this figurative sense (N. E. P., slaught). | First recorded usages are not necessarily abusio, of ! course, since these words with these meanings may have been; i J orally current in the fourteenth century, but first j ■ recorded usages indicate the probability that they are ! I I instances of the trope. Abusio, then, is a rhetorical device which the G-awain-poet found useful, possibly because ; it gave him additional alliteration, but also because with ; ! it he has enriched his poetry. He could have used other, | more usual words, such as felle, 'cruel, dreadful,' in ! ( place of wylde, for example, but to do so would have cost ! i him both an alliterative syllable and metaphorical j 1 strength. j i TRANSLATIO I j A better known trope is metaphor or translatio. This is i the figure of speech in which a name or descriptive : term is transferred to some object different from, ; but analogous to, that to which it is properly , applicable. (N. E. D., metaphor) i This definition is more accurate than the simple, customary J'implied comparison1 in contrast to the 'stated comparison' 1 ! of the simile, herein treated as a figura sententiarum. 55 , i The Latin definition of the ad Herennium explains the j ■" ' i trope similarly but may provide a better understanding of I ! ■this difficult term: i ; I j Translatio est cum. verbum in quandam rem transferetur! i ex alia re, quod propter similitudenem recte videbtur posse transferri. (IV, xxxiv) (Translatio occurs when a word that has seemed transferable on account of its similarity of idea is changed from its use in one sense to use in another sense.) , The author then lists six purposes of translatio: to place ; t before the eyes (rei ante oculos ponendae causa), for ’ i brevity (brevitatis causa), to avoid obscenity (obscenitatisi vitandae causa), to amplify (augendi causa), to diminish ( minuend! causa), and to ornament (ornandi causa). j i Although there are other systems of classification, I shall j ? ! employ this one. j i Examples of metaphor used to give a mental picture are the lines : nvch hilie hade a hatte, a myst-hakel huge” (Gawain 2081); "rote and grounde of alle my blysse" (Pearl 1 4. 20); "pe wyndes on pe wonne water so wrastel to-geder" (Patience II4.I); and "over pe hy3est hill pat hurkled on erpe" (Purity I 4.O6). The following metaphors appear to be used for brevity, since the literal statement of the condition would not only lessen the poetic quality but i Iwould also take more words: "bredful my brayne3t l (Pearl fl26) and "py prayer may his pite byte" (Pearl 355). 56 'Translatio may be used euphemistically in Purity 702: j "when two true togeder had ty3ed hemselven." The best example of* translatio used to amplify is the pearl which takes the place of the maiden until she appears. Although it is not my intention to discuss the :vexed problem of the interpretation of this poem, some Recognition of the differing interpretations i3 unavoidable! i here, for to call the pearl a metaphor or symbol is to I accept the traditional interpretation that the poem is elegiac, perhaps with a second, allegorical level of , meaning in which the pearl-maiden represents something else. A strictly allegorical interpretation such as !Sister Madeleva presents in The Pearl, a Study in Spiritual ' iDryness*^ would make the pearl an extended metaphor and |completely allegorical. To illustrate the metaphor used ,for amplification I have here accepted the traditional, Jelegiac interpretation. I Translatio may also diminish, as in "I am bot erj>e ful evel and usle so blake" (Purity 7^7)j "I am bot mol and. !manere3 myse" (Pearl 382); "For J>at J>ou leste3 wat3 bot a rose / £>at flowred and fay led as kynde hit gef" (Pearl " u ‘ n " _ r i ' ;269-70). Occasionally translatio is only ornament, when a | j - * - 8(uew York and London, 1925). ! figurative word is substituted for another, literal one: i in place of * ark* is kyst in Purity 3I 4.6: ! , Hat3 £>ou closed p j kyst . . . . 11 Similarly, "I were a ioyful jueler" (Pearl 288) and "]?en sayde I to |3at lufly flor" (Pearl 962), are primarily valuable for their adornment. Although there is a great deal of metaphor in the four poems and all the types catalogued in the ad Herennium are represented, the poet has employed the trope with discretion and only occasionally seems to go out of his way to find one. |Possibly this discretion indicates lack of originality. PERMUTATIO | j ■ I j The last trope listed by Geoffroi is permutatio, J which Gaplan translates "allegory" (p. 3U-5>). : Permutatio est oratio aliud verbis aliud sententia ' demonstrans. Ea dividitur in tres partes: similitudinem, argumentum, contrarium. (ad Herennium, 17, xxxiv) • * 1 I (Permutatio is speech indicating one meaning in ; words, and another in sense. It is divided into | j three types: similitudo, argumentum, contrarium.) Similitudo is a form of permutatio in which an accumulation of metaphors is drawn from a similar source, as in the ‘ aphorism, "When dogs discharge the duties of wolves, for | iwhom are the cattle guarded?" Argumentum is a comparison i .for the purpose of increasing or decreasing something or : somebody, as, for example, when a general is called a 58 Wellington on the one hand or a McClellan on the other. Contrarium occurs when, for example, a parsimonious man is called generous, a spendthrift, a skinflint, or a weakling, a veritable Hercules.^ Contrarium is verbal irony and similitudo is allegory. Allegory is generally considered * a prolonged 'metaphor,* as by De Mille (p. 120). This definition j explains the form but is rather vague about the application of the device. The aphorism given above is meaningless unless it really means "When the men in public office are self-seeking, for whom do you think they will manage public affairs?" The key word to make the connection is duties (officiis), which lets the reader see > ' | ' ;the point. Another method of letting the reader understand allegory is allowing a gradual comprehension as he reads on, by giving him specific and literal information. There is an example of the latter type in the first stanza of Pearl, when the poet says of the pearl, not yet i associated with the maiden, "AllasI I leste hyr in on erbere / £ur3 gresse to grounde hit from me yot” (Pearl 9-10). Here the metaphor of the pearl becomes allegorical and means that she whom the pearl symbolizes is dead. It , i l%»reely translated from the ad Herennium, IV, xxxiv. 59 should be noted that permutatio in all its forms is a verbal trope. Hone of the examples from the ad Herennium indicates that this trope includes situations which may be ironic or allegorical. This may explain the comparative unimportance Of the trope in the poems, for I find no clear example of verbal irony, although Patience I 4.6O: , f J>at of no diete }>at day J>e deuel ha'f he ro3tn approaches it. There is, hox^ever, much irony of situation in Gawain and Jonahhs flight to safety is definitely in this class. Possibly the poet did not feel a need for permutatio; jpossibly he avoided it for the sake of clarity. In any case, his uses are neither many nor particularly note worthy. Prom this discussion it is obvious that the poet has employed each of the ten tropes listed in the ad Herennium and by Geoffroi. Some, notably pronominatio and cireumitio, :he used more than others. Very possibly the prevalence of ; the kenning in the alliterative tradition predisposed him i to favor these ornamental devices. In fact, both devices 1 ■ma.j be considered only weakened forms of the kenning. Very \ ^possibly both the Latin rhetorical devices and the kenning jhad come in actual practice to be the same thing. Prom Iwhatever source the poet derived his practice, he used | pronominatio and cireumitio chiefly as a method of 60 expanding his lines and of gaining additional alliterative syllables. Many of his instances are of little value otherwise. He also made considerable use of transgressio, which, like pronominatio and cireumitio, he employed chiefly because it aided in placing the alliterating syllables where his meter needed them. Occasionally instances emphasize words or ideas and therefore have a function beyond convenience. For the most part, however, his transgressiones make a virtue of necessity. In general, the Gawain-poet*s use of the tropes is not impressive. Possibly he lacked metaphorical imagination. More likely, his interest in narration repressed desires for vivid adornment, supposedly a characteristic of the tropes. I III THE FIGURAE VERBORUM In this chapter I shall define the figurae verborum and give some examples from the work of the Gawain-poet. Enough has been said In the previous chapters concerning the distinction between the tropes and figures and between the figurae verborum and the figurae sententiarum to make unnecessary a further distinction here except to 'add that it is the figurae which are properly the "flowers 2 1 of rhetoric." The reader Is frequently very much aware of ! their presence, particularly if much use is made of any one of them. ■REPETITIO Repetitio, or*, anaphora, is according to the N. E. D. , "the repetition of the same word or phrase in several i 'successive clauses.*' The definition of the ad Herennium I ,is essentially the same: "Repetitio est cum continenter 'ab uno atque eodem verbo in rebus similibus et diversis I jprlnclpia sumuntur" (IV, xiii). There Is much use of !this device in the four poems, but the clearest and most 62i ntsmerous examples are in Purity, as in lines 101-102: "Be pay fers, be pay feble, forlote3 none, / Be pay bol, be pay holt, be pay on-y3©d.” Many more examples appear in the appendix, some of which may be fortuitous, but some of them, as in the lines quoted, are certainly intentional. The poet has here employed the device to produce climax as well as to emphasize the parallelism of ideas; he achieves only parallelism in Pearl 1005-1007 and 1010-1017, i (when he lists the precious stones in the foundation of the New Jerusalem. The device is appropriate but adds little except to emphasize the catalogue of gems.- i According to S, 0. Andrew, in his Postscript to » |Beowulf, "In all examples of true anaphora in a principal ! (sentence there is a sense of climax,Having made this distinction, he concludes that the repetition of headwords in- Beowulf is for correlation, not climax, and therefore : the ’ ’anaphora was not a real figure of speech in Beowulf1 . 1 (p. 98). Although I find nothing in the definition of the ad Herennium that insists that repetitio must be climactic, ;the illustrations given indicate that Andrew is correct. jPurity 101-102 has this sense of climax, as does Purity *200-201: s 1 (r 0xfo'rd^gEngland.,.- ‘ 19l+®9i*■ p* -97.v 63 Ne venged for no vilte of vice ne synne, Ne so hastyfly wat3 hot for hatel of his wylle, Ne never so sodenly so3t unsoundely to wenge. Since the poet has used repetitio for climax, as well as for correlation, he obviously knew the convention. 'Because the convention is not climactic in Beowulf, it would not seem to be a part of the native tradition. Therefore the Gawain-poet, in employing repetitio, is following the rhetorical tradition. ‘CONVERSIO j uConversio est per quam non, ut ante, primum repetimus i jverbum, sed ad postremum continentur revertimur’ * (IV, xxii), 1 jwhich says the same thing as De Mille’s definition of epistrophe: MEpistrophe is the repetition of the same word at the end of successive clauses or sentences” (p. 176). I find no examples of this device in Gawain or Pearl and one doubtful, possibly fortuitous, example In each of 2 the other poems: And quat if faurty be fre, and fauty £>yse o£>er, Schalt Jdou schortly al schende and schape non oj>er? (Purity 7k±-7k2) Bot al schet in a scha3e £>at schaded ful cole ! J>e gome gly3t on $>e grene gracious leues, 2&11 the figures of the ad Herennitmi are given, for the sake of completeness, even when novinstance occurs in the poems. 61* . i>at euer wayded a wynde so wy£e and so cole. (Patience' U52-14-514-) If these were intentional, the poet added little by using them, unless in Purity, where he has attempted variety in Abraham's series of questions to the Lord about the number of righteous in Sodom necessary to save the city, he has ;added a decorative note for the sake of variety. 1 COMPLEX10 Of this figure, treated both by Geoffroi and in ad Herennium, I find no example in the poems. The figure is a combination of repetitio and conversio.3 TRADUCTIO This is another type of repetition. Traductio est quae facit uti, cum idem verbum crebrius ponatur, non modo non offendat animum, sed etiam concinniorem orationem reddat. (ad Herennium, IV, xiv) 3a figure related to these is epanalensis, which neither Geoffroi nor the ad Herennium mentions, but Matthieu, following Donatus, defines the terra: "Epanalensis est vocabuli in principio verse positi in ejusdem j terminatione replicatio" (Ars Versificandi, III, 3S Paral, I p. 168). De Mille's definition of antistrophe as "that ! figure by which the same word is placed both at the { beginning and at the end of a clause or sentence" {p. 177) ,has the same meaning, but in plainer language than jMatthieu's Latin. It is strange if, in over six thousand ;lines of verse, the Gawain-poet never used this figure, Jeven fortuitously, but I find no instance of it. (Traductio is a figure which, brings it about that the repeated use of the same word not only fails to produce a distasteful effect, but even makes the speech more artistic.) Prom the Latin definition and from the examples in the ad Herennium and the Poetria Hova, it is apparent that it is the repetition of the word that is important, whatever case or tense the word may take. Moreover, the meaning may change : Ex eodem genere est exornatio.. • cum idem verbum ponitur modo in hac, modo in altera re. (ad Herennium, IV, xiv.) (Prom this same genus is the adornment In which the ( same word is used sometimes in this sense, sometimes I in another.) s !Traductio, then, is any kind of repetition of the same |word except immediate repetition, which is conduplicatio, 'a figure to arouse emotion. There are examples in which the same word is repeated [without change in each of the four poems, but only a few in ; 'all of them, 2h Purity I find three: "and used hem ■ i t iunfcryftyly uch on on ofoer / and als with ober" (267-268); |"Luf loke3 to lufn (Ij.01) ; "for no manne3 synne3 / . . . j | I j3?at alle manne3 wytt3" (5li{*-5l5). In Patience 38-I4.O, the j , "on forme on mede / , . . on kynde," in ■ 1 i ;which on means "one," is significant; but the phrase "on j I 1 forme, £>e forme and |>e laste 1 is little more than word- i 'play, although it seems to be intentional, as the poet 66 could easily have used fyrst in place of forme. with the same alliteration. In Pearl 161]., ! I _I knew hyr wel, J . hade sen hyr ere" suggests the poet’s disturbed feeling on seeing the maiden, but achieves its effect from extreme simplicity and from the coordination of two short sentences in one short line (membrum). The double traductio merely ;heightens the simplicity. A widely separated traductio on ry3twys appears at ten line intervals in Pearl 675, 685, j695 and also at 690. In Gawain there are three effective uses of the device: "Lede lif for lyf" (98); "Vche rrion tented hys / and J>ay two tented J>ayres" (1018-1019); and "I may bot moume vpon mblde, as may £>at much louyes" ■'(1795). The first emphasizes the danger in iustyng; the I second the fact that Gawain and the lady "have eyes only I ifor each other," and the third is a particularly clever i .word-play. i i CONTENTIO This is the verbal figure; contentio Is also one of the figurae sententiarum. "Contentio est cum ex contrariis j !rebus oratio conficitur" (ad Herennium, IV, xv). .(Contentio is speech fabricated from contrary things.) Although the Gawain-poet has not used the figure |abundantly, he has used It effectively in several passages. Probably because he has written poems, except for Pearl, which are primarily narrative, in content if not in form, he has less use for a figure as forceful and arresting as contentio. One of the best passages in the poems contrasts the beauty of the Nativity with the squalor of its surroundings Wat3 never so blysful a bour as wat3 a bos |>enne, Ne no schroude-hous so schene as a shepon J>are, Ne non so glad under God as ho f>at grone schulde. For per wat3 seknesse al sounde £>at sarrest is halden, And $>er wat3 rose reflayr where rote hat3 ben ever, And $>er wat3 solace and songe wher sor3 hat3 ay cryed. (Purity 1075-1080) Here the poet has varied his alliteration most effectively; he has employed repetition, adjunctio, and conpar to heighten the effect of the contentio. Much of its excellence is due to the skillful handling of the alliterative line from the native tradition, but much also comes from an equally deft manipulation of rhetorical figures. A much shorter contentio of this same type appears in Patience 123-12ij.: "Hope 3e £at he heres not, J>at eres alle made, / Hit may not be fcat he is blynde, i>at bigged vche y3e." In Purity 583-586 Is the same thought, expanded to four lines. In Pearl one of the more striking of the contentiones of the New Testament is retained, somewhat expanded: 68 , £e laste schal be £>e fyrst J>at stryke3, | And J>e fyrst J>e laste, be he neuer so swyft; For mony ben called, J>a3 few be myke3. (570-572) In Patience 279-280 is a double contentio in which the Idea of the first stands against the second, so that the second appears in sharp relief: "Ne rest ne recouerer, bot raraelande myre, / In wyeh gut so euer he got3; bot euer, is God swete.r T In Gaxmin the figure is less important, probably I because the poet Is more Intent upon his narrative than 1 upon verbal adornment, and possibly because in this poem ' i he was not influenced to such an extent by Biblical style I 'as in the other poems. Uiere are, however, a few fairly j i j. ; clear, short examples: "For hat durst I not do, lest I [ i Idenayed were" (lip93}; "He cared for his cortaysey, lest j i cra£>ayn he were" (1773). One type of antithesis not 'mentioned in the ad Herennium is oxymoron; there is a i ! I • ! idoubtful U3e of the figure when Gawain calls the Green j I I jChapel "he eorsedest kyrk" (2196). j From these examples, it seems that the poet uses more, ! v jas well as more elaborate, contentiones in the poems which i jare influenced directly by the Bible. Several of the [contentiones come from that source, but not all of them are } ‘ paraphrases of Biblical passages in the same form. Whether the poet derived his use of the device from the Bible or 69 ' from the rhetoricians is problematical; but, if it were notj i for other types of rhetorical devices in the poems, the Biblical source would seem the more likely. EXCLAMATIO Exclamatio est quae conficit significationem doloris aut indignationis alicuius per hominis aut urbis aut loci aut rei cuiuspiam conpellationem. (ad Herennium, IV, xv) (Exclamatio is an expression of grief or indignation by reprimanding a man or a city or something else.) ;tlsed in oratory to attack the opposing speaker, this ! ! ifigure is effective in poetry when the poet comments on j I I his story or when a character expresses strong emotion. j j There is no small use of this device in the four poems.j Sometimes only a single word like "What•" (Purity 1583), ! .the device seems somewhat like Hwaet in Beowulf 1, but is basically different, since What comments on the action, i ! whereas Hwaet has no connection with the action. Generally, I " ' , r " 1 _ r jhowever, the exclamationes are longer than a single word. Sometimes one is combined with the single-word exclamatio as in "AvoyJ hit is yor vylaynye, 3e vylan yorselven" |(Purity 863); "horde, colde wat3 his cumfort and his care hugej" (Patience 261}.); "Alas, po3t I, who did J>at spyt?" j '(Pearl 1138). | 1 Sometimes these exclamationes, combined with other j ! I I 70 devices, become elaborate, as in u0 moul, pou marre3 a myry iuele, / My priuy perle wythouten spot©1 1 (Pearl 23-2l|.) in which, intellectio, permutatio, and conformatio are present, Gawain 2378-238L{. has conclusio as well as exclamatio: Loi per pe falssyng, foule mot hit falle J For care of by knokke cowardyse me .ta3t To aeorde me wyth couetyse, my kynde to forsake, pat is larges and lewt<£ pat longe3 to kny3te3. How I am fawty and falce, and ferde haf ben euer Of trecherye and vntrawpe; bope bityde sor3e and care I This passage is particularly appropriate, for it makes clear Gawain?s feelings about his defection, in the strongest language. Although there is humor in the situation, as the poet recognized, since Arthur and his icourt laughed at the story, there is properly no humor in Gawain's immediate reaction. But appropriate usage of this figure is characteristic of the poet, ! INTERRDGATIO 1 This figure is similar to exclamatio, but may be used without strong emotion. Basically it is a question addressed to some one, for which an answer may or may not be expected. It often has the force of a challenge. The meaning of the term is clear from the examples in the ad ! Herennium and the Poetria Hova; since neither author 71 adequately defines the term, I give no Latin definition. There are a number of questions in the poems addressed to persons for which the speaker expects an answer, but they are natural to the conversation— as when the Green Knight asks Gawaln‘s name--and are therefore more a part of sermocinatio (or speech by a character of the poem) than examples of this rhetorical figure. I have therefore excluded them from this classification although there might be reason to include them. Purity 139-lil-8 is a good example of interrogatio for its challenge. Significantly, none of the questions i j {receives an answer: i 1 \ ; I ‘Say me, frende,’ quod pe freke wyth a felle.chere, j j 'Hou wan peu into pis won in wede3 so fowle? i 1 pe abyt pat pou hat3 on, no halyday hit menske3; pou, bume, for no brydale art busked in wede3J ; How wat3 pou hardy pis hous for pyn unhap to ne3©, In on so ratted a robe and rend at the syde3? pow art a gome ungoderly in pat goun febele; j pou praysed me and my place ful pover and ful gnede, ; pat wat3 so prest to aproche my presens hereinne. Hope3 pou I be a harlot pi erigaut to prayse?* 'There are a number of these figures in a series, given in j ! ! jthe appendix, but in addition there are single-question j lexamples of this device. In Patience 123 is a highly j .rhetorical Instance: "Hope 3e so pat he heres not, pat eres all© made?” This line employs other devices— i ladnominatio, contentio, commutatio as well as interrogatio— j 1 ! jand is, in addition, basically a sententia. This line ! alone might be an argument for the rhetorical training of poet. Other, not so rhetorical, examples are Pearl 290: "Wy borde 3® men? So madde 3® be’" and G-awain 311-312: "Where is now your sourquydrye and your conquestes, / Your gryndellak and your greme, and your grete words?" The poet has made frequent tise of this device, as the examples both here and in the appendix testify. He has used it primarily for emphasis, when he wishes to call the 1 reader’s attention to some point that might otherwise be overlooked, as in Purity 169-170, and when one speaker wishes to arouse other characters in the story. He makes effective use of it in Pearl I{.7S-i+80, where the device clarifies the point of argument: 1 What more honour mo3te he acheue : J>at made endured in worlde stronge, : And lyued in penaunce hys lyue3 longe j Wyth bodyly bale hym blysse to byye? j What more worschyp mo3t he fonge I |)en corounde by kyng by cortayse? * ! i i RATIOCINATIO i ‘ This figure differs from interrogatio in that, instead | !of demanding an answer from someone else, the speaker f i ■demands an explanation from himself, as the ad Berennium Imakes clear: f | Ratiocinatio est per quam ipsi a nobis rationem j poscimus quare quidque dieamus, et crebro nosmet a 73 nobis petimus unius cuiusque proposition© explanationem. (T V , xvi}* (Ratiocinatio is that figure by which we demand, an account from ourselves, repeatedly begging of ourselves an explanation of something.) I do not find that the Gawain-poet made any use of this figure. To do so in his own person, a technique used sparingly in the homilies, would not have been in keeping with his usual style, which is objective, almost self- effacing. Kor do the characters of his poems have any occasion to use so emphatic and mannered a device. Consequently there was apparently neither desire nor occasion to employ it. 'SEFTENTIA | t ! It is not surprising that the poet did not employ ■ ;ratiocinatio, but it seems strange that he used sententia I ' jrather sparingly, at least in some poems. | Sententia est oratio sumpta de vita quae aut quid sit ! aut quid esse oporteat in vita breviter ostendit. I 1 (ad Herennium, IV, xvii) (Sententia is a saying applied to life which declares briefly either what is or what ought to be in life.) 'This is the English apothegm or moral reflection. Although [brief, it need not be. epigrammatic. It takes several forms:' ’la simple statement, a simple statement xcLth proof, or a ! !double statement, both with and without proof. All four ‘ I 7 k ■ ( ; types appear in these poems. | 'Che simple statement sententia appears in Patience 523: "for malyse is no3t to mayntyne boute mercy withinne," and, with conformatio as additional adornment, in Patience : £[_£: "Thus Pouerte and Pacyence arn nedes play-feres. " Pearl 31-32: "For vch gresse mot grow of grayne'3 dede; / Ho whete were elle3 to wone3 wonne" takes the form of a simple statement with proof. A double form in Patience 5-6: "For quo-so suffer cowh© syt, sele solde fol3e, / , And quo for J>ro may no3t $>ole, £>e Jqikker he sufferes," | and a double form with reasons in Patience ij.l-[)J2: "For j | J jfcer as Pouert hir proferes, ho nyl be put utter, / Bot ! jlenge where-so euer hir lyst, lyke oJ>er greme." | I Although all forms are represented, the poet did not 1 use the device extensively. I find no clear example in | I Purity, generally the most rhetorical of the poems, and | jonly three in G-awaln. . Since each of these poems is longer |than both the others together, this is an interesting fact. Moreover, Pearl has few examples compared to Patience, jthe shortest poem of all. In Patience all the sententiae joccur in the first fifty and in the last ten lines of the Ipoem. This arrangement in Patience follows a rhetorical f i i ■ r urn ur . r - ■ i r f precept for disposition: begin and end with a sententia.5 -%ee Faral, p. 58. r j ^ la' t G-a wain is not sententious is understandable, since the | poem is a romance, but the lack of the figure in Purity is difficult to explain. CONTRARIUM Closely allied to sententia is the figure contrarium, which should also be brief and to the point. The difference between these two figures is that, whereas sententia states a truth, contrarium arrives at a truth by contrasting one idea with another. Contrarium est quod ex rebus diversis duabus alteram breviter et facile contraria confirmat. (ad Herennlum,- IV, xviii). (Contrarium is that figure which, from two contrasting ! things, establishes one quickly and easily.) i i | This definition can be clarified best by examples. MIf he ! 'neglected his own interests, how can you expect him to look after the interests of another?"^ "If so powerful and j i | courageous a man did not withstand the enemy, how will we j weaklings resist?"? The figure, then, is a comparison by ; contrast in which one or both of the Ideas is negative either by statement or by implication. • ^"Nara qui suis rationibus Inimicus fuerit semper, eum jquomodo alienis rebus amicum fore speres?" (ad Herennium, jIV, xviii). ^"Si tanta virtute potens non restitit hosti, / Unde 1 resistimus fragiles" (Poetria Uova 1119-1120). • I find several clear examples of this device. In Purity 17-22 is a convincing argument for purity express in this form: Pie is so clene in his courte, |>e kyng J>at al welde3, And honeste In his housholde and hagherlych served, With angele3 enorled in all© $at is clene, Bo£>e wythinne and wythouten, in wede3 ful bry3t. Hif ne nere scopius and skyg and non scaj>e lovied, Hit were a mervayl to much, hit most not falle. Again in 1109-1110 the same idea appears in this form, this time with a more personal application: "J>us is he ■kyryous and clene J>at ]?ou his cort askesj / Hou schulde |J)OU com to his kyth hot if £>ou clene were?” In Purity I |383-586 the poet has put into this form the same ideas 1 j Jexpressed in Patience by interrogatio; i i Whe|>er he J>at stykked uche a stare in uche steppe y3e j 3If hymself be bore blynde,' hit Is a brode wonder; And he J>at fetly in face fettled alle eres, If he hat3 losed £© lysten hit lyft©3 mervayle. • ^ • n Patience ij.95-503 the poet has God use the device !to convince Jonah of his foolish anger: | I £>en byj>enk J>e, mon, if £>e for-Jjynk sore, j If I wolde help my honde-werk, haf J>ou no wonder. J>ou art waxen so wroth, for $>y wod-bynde, ' And trauayled©3 neuer to tent hit $>e tyme of an howre Bot at a wap hit here wax and away at an o|>er, And 3et lyke3 £>e so lu£>er, Jji lyf wolde3 i>ou tyne. $>enne wyte not me for J>e werk J?at I hit wolde help, ; And rwe on £>o redles £>at remen for synne. !ln Pearl 29-36 the poet sets up a series of maxims from i which he is able to draw a consoling conclusion: 77 Flor and fryte may not be fede |>er bit doun drof in molde3 dunne; For vch gresse mot grow of grayneS dede; No whete were ell©3 to trone3 wonne. Of goud vche goude is ay bygonne; So semly a sede mo3t fayly not, J)at spryngande spyce3 vp ne sponne Of £>at precious perle wytbouten spotte. The examples from Purity and Patience seem to follow the pattern fairly well: the first statement in each instance establishes an idea, the second draws a conclusion with an implied negative; the contrast stands between two things. In Pearl the case is less certain. A series of positive statements is followed by a contrasting negative statement, i-ihich is, in turn, elaborated. Both the number of statements and the length of the passage would seemingly |indicate that it’ is not contrarium. But perhaps the proper analysis is that the first four lines (29-32) establish line 33s n0f goud vche goude is ay bygonnen which contrasts with "So semly a sede mo3t fayly not," which is then elaborated to finish out the stanza. The figure is not continuatio, but whether or not this passage is an instance of contrarium, the poet made relatively little use of the figure. MEMBHUM This figure is an emphatic device whereby the writer gives strength to expression by abrupt statement. 78 ; Membrum orationis appellatur res breviter absoluta sine totius sententiae demonstratione, quae denuo alio raembro orationis excipitur. (ad Herennium, IV, xix) ! (Tbe membrum of a speech, is defined as an idea concisely : stated without discussion of the whole thought, which, in turn, is followed by another idea.) Prom the examples, however, it is clear that a clause standing alone is also membrum. The figure is effective because it is brief and because it is unattached to any larger clause. The ideal of the rhetoricians was a triple series ("sed commodissima et absolutissima est quae ex tribus constat," ad Herenniura, I,V, xix), but the Gawain- poet seldom tries for this perfection. The device could be useful in alliterative verse, with iits strongly marked caesura making a short statement : i , ' jeffective, particularly in the second hemistich since few l j ilines were end-stopped In Old English verse like Beowulf : 11: "J>at waes gidd cyning." In the poems of the Gawain : i . i |poet, however, the alliterative tradition had weakened and j j , nearly all lines were end-stopped. As a result of this, ! jperhaps, membrum does not appear often in these poems. j J A vivid example of a single clause membrum is in J i Gawain I 4.I6 : "his ax he strokes," This sentence completes : I ,the wheel and the figure shares the line with "QuoJ) Gawan"; jas a result, its brevity, combined with transgressio, is Iforceful, especially as it follows a long passage of 79 ; i courtly conversation between Gawain and the Green Knight. . * The unexcited, casual attitude of both characters produces sardonic humor, somewhat like the litotes of Old English verse, made obvious when the last terse statement accents the true grimness of the situation. Possibly the poet ; , i learned this manner of handling his material from the native tradition, but he could have learned the effectiveness of membrum from the rhetoricians. Because of the short line in the wheel of Gawain, it is surprising that the poet did not find occasion to j employ this device more frequently, but he seems more i ;interested in producing smoothly flowing verse so that he I minimizes the natural abruptness of these short lines. His ' occasional use of membrum is therefore the more effective as in "Vche mon tented hys, / And £>ay two tented jpayres" (1019), in which traductio adds to the strength of the lines. The other poems offer few additional examples. In Pearl l6Ij-: "I knew hyr wel, I had sen hyr ere," the ' device affords a stark simplicity in keeping with the poet*s wonder at first sight of the maiden. In Patience 201-202, "Of what londe art Jjou lent, what laytes Jjou here, / Whyder j sin worlde £>at J>ou wylt, and what is J>y arnde?" the device j Emphasizes the terrified anger of the seamen. In Purity i 69-70: "‘And I haf wedded a wyf, ‘ so wer hym £>e f>yrd, / ‘Excuse me at £e cort, I may not com |>ere, *" the reply of the third guest invited to the feast is expressed by membrum. This answer is so abrupt that it is more than merely impolite; it is almost contemptuous and fittingly closes the series of "Regrets" to the Wedding Peast. The poet knew the device and employed it effectively but rarely; its abruptness hindered the music of his line. ARTICULUS Very similar to membrum, articules employs a series of jshort words rather than short clauses. 1 | Articulus dicitur cum singula verba intervallis | distinguentur caesg. oratione. (ad Herennium, IV, xix) (Articulus is a figure in which individual words are set apart at intervals by a break in the speech.) I find no clear use of this figure by the Gawain-poet. :Probably he avoided it because, even more definitely than jmembrum, it would disturb the easy flow of his line. i : CONTINUATIO s f i Continuatio est densa et continens frequentatio j verborum cum absolutione sententiarum. (ad Herennium, i IV, xix) i (Continuatio is a close and unbroken flow of words I constituting a complete thought.) ;Obviously, from his choice of words, the writer indicates 81 ; that this figure is the opposite of membrum. His examples j show that the figure is what is now called a periodic sentence. The number of words and completeness of expression are also important. The device takes the form of three other figures: sententia, contrarium, and I conclusio. i i The poet’s infrequent use of this figure indicates !that he was rather avoiding its formality, but its occasional appearance shows that he knew its effect. The ' i device appears as a sententia in Pearl 129-132: As fortune fares $>er as ho frayne3, • Whefcer solace ho sende of>er elle3 sore, f>e wy3 to wham her wylle ho wayne3 Hytte3 to haue ay more and more. Here conformatio adds to the formality of the expression, as does the skillful use of the refrain to conclude the sententia. i As I have indicated above, contrarium should be brief, ; I but in Purity 17-22 is an argument for purity to which this j rule does not apply: He is so clene in his corte, $>e kyng J>at al welde3, | And honeste in his housholde and hagherlych served, j With angele3 enorled in alle i>at is clene, Boi>e wythinne and wythouten, in wede3 ful bry3t, Nif he nere scoymus and skyg and non sca$>e lovied, Hit were a mervayl to much, hit mo3t not falle. iHere contrarium takes the form of continuatio and, instead | iof a brief, pithy comparison, the poet presents a more 62 exhaustive treatment of an idea in which the use of membrum somewhat weakens the effect. I find no use of continuatio as conclusio, nor do I find much use of the device in any poem except Purity, where it appears in the expository passages between the narrative exempla. It would seem that the poet, who used sententia in similar passages in Patience, is in Purity attempting another type of formal style, so that Purity is heavier, and, at least in the expository passages, moves rather ponderously. CONPAR I i t i This heaviness of Purity is also increased by some use of conpar, a balanced sentence. Conpar appellatur quod habet in se membra orationis . . . quae constent exrpari fere numero syllaborum. (ad Herennium, IV, xx) (That figure is called conpar which contains in itself j several divisions of a speech, each of which consists j of a nearly equal number of syllables.) j i Like continuatio, conpar is characteristic of formal style, a style not customarily employed by Middle English writers. It is, therefore, the more significant to find some slight use of the device in Purity, even though it is less obvious, less perfect, and less frequent than In the Neo- ! Classic Period. Although I find only three passages in 1 83 i Purity which contain this device, all of them are fairly ' long. As Purity 529-539 affords perhaps the clearest example, I give it here, leaving the other two for the appendix: i>en wat3 a skylly skyvalde, quen scaped alle J>e wylde: Uche foule to $>e fly3t hat fy|>ere3 niy3t serve, Uche fysch to pe flod t>at fynne couJ>e nayte Uche beste to |>e bent $>at bytes on erbe3j Wylde worme3 to her won wryf>e3 in pe erpe, t>e fox and £>e folmarde to |>e fryth wynde3* Herttes to hy3e hejje, hare3 to gorste3, And lyoune3 and lep>arde3 to £>e lake-ryftes j Herne3 and haveke3 to J>e hy3e roche3, J>e hole-foted fowle to {>e flod hy3e3, And uche best at a brayde J>er hym best lyke3. The lines and clauses which balance are fairly obvious, but! \ i 3 the poet has employed repetitio to point up three ■ parallels. The presence of this second device for ; parallelism is additional proof that the poet considered the passage conpar. The advantage he gained is doubtful. That in Purity i |he used continuatio as well as conpar suggests that he was i aiming at a solemn style. Purity is certainly heavier than I ■ Patience, where the single narrative moves rapidly and the t expository section is almost aphoristic. Significantly, continuatio appears little in the other poems and conpar |not at all. A solemn style in Purity is appropriate to i !its theme. That the poet arrived at a heavy rather than a | formal style suggests that he erred in his attempt, but 'whether the poem is truly solemn or merely heavy is a matter of taste. SIMILITER CADENS This figure is a type of repetition. Similiter cadens exornatio appellatur exam in eadem constructions verborum duo aut plura sunt verba quae similiter isdem casibus efferantur. (ad Herennium, IV, xx) (Similiter cadens is an embellishment of speech in which there are two or more words in the same x^ord group that have the same inflectional endings.) Obviously, this figure is a type of rhyme. A condition for Its successful use is a language with a number of stressed inflexional forms. Latin is relatively rich in such inflexions, but Middle English has few inflexions, nearly all of which are unstressed. As a result, the Ifigure had little value for the poet. In the rhymed ; sections of G-awain and Pearl, he never depends on the Inflected part of the word for his rhyme, although when he 'uses feminine rhyme, naturally these Inflexions rhyme, but such instances hardly represent a use of the figure. In the alliterative poems that are a number of lines, groups of two or three, which end with the same inflexions, as in Purity 891-892: "Bot f>ay wern wakned al wrank £>at J>er In won lenged, / Of on J>e uglokest unhap £>at ever on erd suffred. w Althouigh there may be some value In 8 5 , such a repetition, it is so slight as to he negligible. The reader is not likely to observe such casual repetition. , It therefore seems likely that the poet was also unconscious of it, and that instances like the one quoted above were purely fortuitous. SIMILITER DESINENS This figure, on the other hand, is useful in English verse. It appears to be nothing more than rhyme.® Similiter desinens est cum tametsi casus non insunt in verbis, tamen similes exitus sunt. (ad Herennium IV, xx) (Similiter desinens is employed when words ending successive clauses, though not in the same case, have similar sounds,) i 'Pearl, of course, Is a rhymed poem and Gawain has rhyme in the bob and wheel. That the poet took the practice of irhyming verse from the rhetoricians is unlikely, because jtradition of rhyme had been long established by the jfourteenth century, both in Latin and in vernacular verse, i !including English. i I j £ 3 | The examples given in the ad Herennium and the jPoetria Nova are all perfect rhyme'sV 'sometimes formed by ;adnomlnatId (by the use of a prefix, as in nasci, renasci |in Poetria Nova, 1133). Possibly the figure included assonance and consonan'ce, but mediaeval Latin poetry uses rhyme and nothing in the ad Herennium or the Poetria Nova I indicates that similes meant anything other than rhyme. ’ ■I follow these authorities, 86 ( But in addition to the structural rhymes, there is 1 occasional rhyme or near rhyme in the homilies and in the alliterative lines of Gawain, as in Purity 776-777: "As pj mersy may malte $>y meke to spare / J>en he wende3 his way, wepande for care.n But such instances of rhyme are i infrequent; in fact, Purity 776-777 has the only perfect end rhyme I have found in the alliterative staves.9 It seems almost as if the poet xjere consciously avoiding a device that belonged to the rhyming tradition and felt it a blemish in regular alliterative verse. That he could, and did, use rhyme elsewhere elaborately and consistently 'would be likely to heighten this feeling. His intentional « I use of rhyme would make him more conscious of accidental | ■ rhyme. In any case, he has not employed similiter desinens i 'often enough to suggest that its appearance can be other ; ( than fortuitous. ADNOMINATIO | Sometimes spelled agnominatio or annominatio by other : ! ! -writers, ’ < Adnominatio est cum ad idem verbum et nomen acceditur I commutations vocum aut litterarum, ut ad res dissimiles ' 1 I | 1 9 ! In the appendix are listed some other possible j jexamples. They are few and all are near-rhymes. Both j I their number and casual quality suggest that they are imerely fortuitous. ' i 87 similia verba acommodentur. (ad Herennium. IV, xxi) ' (Adnominatio is employed when, by a change of sounds or letters, there is an addition to the same word and name so that similar words are applied to dissimilar things.) The figure takes several forms, in which the repetition is altered slightly but not to the extent that the feeling of I repetition is lost: (l) by changing the quantity of the vowel, (2) by adding a prefix, (3) by changing a letter within a word, (ij.) by deleting a letter from a word, (5>) by changing several letters, (6) by using words formed from the same roots, and (7) by changing case forms of proper names. This figure includes several forms which De Mille i ; jincluded with ploce, such as paregmenon, !,the use of : i : jseveral words of the same originn and polyptoton "a ! t | repetition with change of cases or tenses'* (p. 179) when the change is made by internal vowel change. Since vowel lengthening in English is relatively j unimportant as a means of distinguishing one form of a word | | from another, it is surprising to find a possible example j of the first type of adnominatio; but in Purity 1231, "To jCalde wer alle calde," Galde must have been pronormced ICald.ee since it is spelled that \^ay in Purity 1339, 1362. Although this does not follow the Latin example exactly, in that two different words are used, it is sufficiently :like it that the poet must have produced his effect 'consciously. I t * Although I rind, no example of adnominatio in which the wond is changed by adding a prefix, probably because the device was unsuited to alliteration, I find a number of lines in which a single letter within a word is changed. • 3 - n Purity: ! , Bot nyteled i>er alle |>e ny3t for no3t at £>e last” (888); ”]penne he loved |>at horde and leved in traw£>e” (1703) ; in Patience; ”And of J?at soumme J>et arn summe such sotte3 for madde" (509) ; in Gawain; "J>at dar stifly strike a strok for an ojper” (287); ”j>at fc>e bit of i>e broun stel bot on J>e grounds” (1 4 . 26); all these are jadnominationes whether the poet chanced upon them in his j |search for alliteration, as he may have done, or whether 'he consciously sought them for their own sake. 1 ( Although I find no significant example of adnominatio : by changing several letters of a word, in Patience 123 the .appears by means of dropping a letter: ”Hope 3e J>at he 1 i ■ heres not, £at eres alle made?” There are also several i 'clear examples of the device with words formed from the [same roots: ”Hove3 hy3e vpon hy3t” (Purity I 4. 58); ”. . . jder adubbement / So al wat3 dubbet . . . ” (Pearl 96-97)5 i ' ,as harp ore 3 harpen in her harp e1 1 (Pearl 88l); ”1 schal I gif hyrti of my gyf t” (G-awain 288); ” Dubbed in a dub let of ja dere tars” (G-awain 571); ”Chaplayne3 to i?e chapeles 89 chosen f>e gate” (Gawain 930). I find no clear example of adnominatio by changing the case of a proper name, probably because English case forms were insufficient for proper development of the figure. Although the author of the ad Herennium does not list variation by suffix as a type of adnominatio, there is some justification for considering the addition of a suffix a type.of this device. The Latin language used a number of prefixes whereas English uses suffixes instead. I have therefore noted possible uses of this device by this method, but because I have no authority for doing so, I have placed them in the appendix. What the poet may have gained by using this figure is 'doubtful. One thing, of course, was a fairly simple method of writing an alliterative line. In Pearl he found the device useful to tie one stanza to another, as in lines 96-97# by way of a pleasing variation from mere repetition of the same word, to which he was otherwise committed by his pattern. If the variation by means of a suffix be allowed, he used the device frequently. He never seems to 1 use adnominatio for his humorous effect, but admittedly "To Calde were alle caldeT T is clever word-play. Here he I ■may have punned to watch an eyebrow lift, but humor was not J *in keeping with the narrative of the captivity of the Jews, !which was his subject. SUBJECTIO This figure is a device for emphasis. When the speaker has asked, a question, which of course emphasizes the point he is making, he employs subjectio and answers his own question. Subjectio est cum interrogamus adversarios aut quaerimus ipsi a nobis quid ab illis aut quid contra nos dici possit; dein subicimus id quod oportet dici aut non oportet, aut nobis adiumento futurum sit aut illis offuturum sit idem eontrario. (ad Herennium. IV, xxxii) (Subjectio is a figure in which we ask our opponents, and we ourselves search for, what can be said by them or against us; then we suggest what ought, or ought not, to be said, or what will assist our case or will ; be prejudicial to that of our opponents.) i Useful in the courtroom to discomfit the opponent, the device in the pulpit was an admirable instrument by which j , the preacher could, emphasize an" idea. Subjectio, therefore, i Jis less contentious in the poems than the Latin definition i ■would suggest. ! Rather significantly, the poet apparently did not use subjectio in G-awain, although the device could have been effective in the temptation passages. In Pearl the only instance is a quotation from the Psalter (677-683).^ ■^See appendix. 1 Apparently the poet considered the figure a homiletic device, although he does not use it excessively in the two homilies, for I find but two instances in Patience and three in Purity. But the infrequency of his use is more apparent than real, especially in Purity, for most of these poems are narrative exempla. In Patience he uses the device to Introduce the exemplum. After his introductory comments on patience, he asks, nDid not Jonas in Jude suche jape sum-whyle?n (57), and answers his own. question: "To sette hym to sewte, vnsounde he hym feches" (58) and then proceeds to the story of Jonah. In a way, the whole exemplum is a type of :subjectio. In this poem the poet also employs subjectio in the narration: taking the question from the Vulgate, he produces an answer which is not scriptual: Wot wote t>t>er wyte may, 3if ]pe wy3e lykes, i £>at is hende in ]pe hy3t of his gentryse? j I wot his my3t is so much, pa.3 he be mysse-payed, J>at in his mylde amesyng he mercy may fynde. (297^1 4 - 00) He then proceeds to amplify' this:' idea. In Purity the poet confines his use of subjectio to the expository passages. After the short exemplum of the 'Wedding Feast, with the poet’s tropological comment, he ( jasks, "Wich arn ferine J>y wede3 3?ou wrappe3 J>e inne, / f>at ! jschal schewe him so schene schrowde of fce best?" (169-170). I 92 , ;The answer is : i ; i Hit arn py wreke3, wyterly, pat pou wro3t have3, And lyved wyth pe lykyng pat hy3e in pyn hert, pat po be frely and freseh fonde in py lyve, And fetyse of a fayr forme, to fote and to honde, And sypen alle pyn oper lyme3 lapped ful olene; penne may pou se pj Savior and his sete ryche. (171-176), E Again, after the story of the destruction of Sodom and 1 Gormorah, he asks two questions: How will you be saved if unclean? Since we are "sore and synful and souly," how can we see God? He answers his own question: 3is, pat Mayster is me:reyable, pa3 pou be man fenny. And al tomarred in myre, whyl pou on molde lyvyes, pou may sehyne pur3 schryfte, pa3 pou haf schome served ; And pure pe with penaunce tyl pou a peri® worpe. j (1113-1116) ! ! j !The long permutatio of the pearl which may be washed in j wine to renew its lustre, with the comment which follows, ; is really a part of this subjectio, following the poetfs 1 usual custom of expanding his material by some rhetorical ; device. In these passages the poet has employed subjectio as a teaching device, a use not entirely foreign to the intention suggested in the ad He re nnium. He employs it effectively to emphasize his message. That he has not used jit abundantly may be attributed to his good taste. i 93 GRADAT10 I find no Instance of this figure in either Sawain^^ or Pearl but several examples of varying effectiveness in the homilies. The definition of the ad Herennium is not clear and is difficult to translate: Gradatio est in quo non ante ad consequens verbum descenditur quam ad superius ascensum est. (IV, xxi) (Gradatio Is that figure In which the thought does not go over to the following word until it has risen to the preceding one.) This hardly defines the figure, but the examples indicate that It Is a repetition of the last word of one clause as the first word of the following; each repetition becomes imore intense and so leads to a climax. As Middle English ! Idid not have the freedom of word order of Latin, it has been necessary to interpret "first and last word" rather freely. ! If this interpretation be accepted, I find two ! examples of the device in Purity. At 1052-1053» "jaenne uch wy3e may wel syt |>at he J>e wlonk lovies, / And if he ■^There is some evidence of gradatio in Gawain, as perhaps In "And oueral enker grene, / and al grayjaed In grene. . (l50-l5l); "Here fayle3 i>ou not to fy3t J. / Hay, frayst I no fy3t. . (27o-9); "He sayned hym. . > • . / Nade he sayned hymself (761-763)- There is a sense 'of climax here, but the figure seems to be reduplicatio rather than gradatio. See footnote 12. 9 1 4 * ' | jlovyes clen© layk f»at is our lorde ryche," is rhetorical: ! he in line 1052 refers to God, whose destruction of the wicked in Sodom the poet has just told, hut he in line 1053 refers to "uch wy3©" whose life must he kept clean; lovyes is the connecting idea on which the poet huilds his climactic order. A simpler gradatio, in a single verse, is 1 "Who so wolde we 1 do, wel hym betyde" (l6i|-7), perhaps the most effective gradatio in Purity. In Patience 159-160 "Her kysttes, and her coferes, her caraldes alle, / And al_ to ly3ten J>at lome, 3if lefc© wolde schape" is the single instance I find in this poem. These lines conclude the list of gear jettisoned to lighten ; ship, and the alle which modifies caraldes is picked up , I ! !again in a more inclusive pronominal meaning, to achieve i climax. This figure is the most successful example in the I poem. 1 i 1 Altogether, the poet has made a limited use of ! : 1 igradatio. Employing the device only in the homilies has .naturally limited the number of possible examples and t ,some of these are not particularly effective. Possibly I jthe alliterative line was an inhibition, since gradatio I ‘ might force the poet to take--an alliterating letter other- i wise unsatisfactory. Possibly he felt little need for it. i i 95 1 P ! In any case, he has not used it often. DEFINITIO This figure defines a terra, or a thing. Definitio est quae rei alicuius proprias amplectitur potestates breviter et absolute, (ad Herennium, IV, xxv) (Definitio is that figure which considers briefly and thoroughly the characteristic properties of something.) IP Somewhat like gradatio is reduplicatio or ! anadiplosis, a figure which likewise repeats the last word of one clause as the opening word of the next. Although not discussed either in the ad Herennium or the Poetria . Nova, reduplicatio is a stanza-linking device in Pearl. | j Occasionally he uses adnominatio instead, as I noted above,] j but the basic pattern is reduplicatio. (The editors of j j Pearl call this device concatenatio. See Osgood, p. xlv.) j There is some evidence that the poet used the device ? Gawain also. This poem is divided into paragraphs by the rhyming wheel and bob. A few more than a third of these paragraphs are linked to the preceding one by means of repetition in the first line of an important word in the wheel or bob. Occasionally an important word of the last full line in the paragraph appears In the first line of the next paragraph, although this is rare. For example,, the first paragraph has "Bretayn" (II4 -) In the full line and “And quen $>is Bretayn" (20) begins the first line of the next. Similar arrangement occurs with "burne" (779*785) and "leude" (2lf99,2505) • Even more widely separated are “his hede by $>e here in his honde" O4. 36) and "$>e hede In j his honde1 " (l4i-4). This is traductio, but a linking effect j is apparent also. ! More frequently the repeated word, sometimes adnominatio as in Pearl, first appears in the wheel or bob: ! "In stalle" (IOI4 . , 107),"grene" (l50,l5l), "gayn, gay" (178,179), ttfy3t" (278,279), "Gawain, Wawan" (339,35-3), nt>e kyng1 1 (k89,5-91), "ryche" (5-86,591), "kyng" (5-63,5-67), "auenture" (709,713), Tfryde, rvdes" (738,75-°)> "sayned" (761,763), “ernd, ernde" (809,811), "Gawayn" (838,032), "lyk, loked" (968,970), "tyrne" (991,995), “penne" (a rhyme and a first word in 1076,1079), "ful" (1121,1129), "lorde" r 96 I The poet has made only a limited use of this figure in the 'homilies and in Pearl and no use of it in Gawain. Instances vary in length from the short, reproachful definitio of the maiden by the poet: "My blysse, my bale, 3e han ben bo^e" (Pearl 373)» in. which verbal contentio adds to the effectiveness, to the six line definitio of a .Christian soul, explained symbolically: Of courtaysye, as sayt3 Saynt Poule, A1 arn we membre3 of Jesu Kryst: As heued and arme and legg and naule Temen to hys body ful trwe and tryste, Ry3t so is vch a Krysten sawle A longande lym to £>e Mays ter of myste^ (Pearl 157-162) In Patience 206-208 is the only instance of this device I find in that poem; Jonah defines his G-od: (li7l 4-,II78) , 'lenn, Jpenne (1288,1290), "game, gamne3'f : (1311,1319), "hewe, hwen" (1351,1353), lorde" (1369, 1 1371), "ho" (114. 71,1176), "bremely, breme" (1598, 1601), . "drowping, droupyng (1718,1750), "he” (1869,1870), "hym" : .(1890,1893), "wlonk, Wlonkest" (2022,2025), "Gawayn" (2235, j 12239), "ho" (2155,2156), a total of thirty-eight instances : jout of a hundred and one opportunities. Some of course I are of slight value as reduplication, hym, ho, he, ful, I ;but others are more important and more unusual. Even the ; ; pronouns and adverbs appear in positions of importance and j iso are emphasized. For example, ful (1121) is one of the 1 :two words in the wheel, while f u l (1129) begins the line. i Possibly some of these figures were fortuitous, but some, 1 like auenture (289,191), seem intentional. But whether ifortuitous or intentional, the existence of concatenatio in j G-awain is interesting. To suggest, however, that the jpresence of the device in both Pearl and Gawain indicates I common authorship would be as hazardous as using the fact |that both poems have a hundred and one sections (stanzas |or paragraphs) for such an indication. 97 J?at wy3e I worchyp, i-wysse, pat wro3t alle Jjynges, Alle f>e worlde wyt ]?e welkyn, £>e wynde and |>e sternes, And alle J>at wone3 wyth-inne, at a worde one. ■ There Is also only one example In Purity, in which God identifies the worst fault of the flesh: £>ay han lerned a lyst J>at lyke3 me ille ]?at J>ay han founden in her flesch of faute3 pe werst: TJch male mat3 his mach a man as hymselven, And fylter folyly in fere on femmale3 wyse. (693-696) The poet employs the device most often in Pearl, where the maiden is at pains to explain things to the poet, so that there Is more occasion for its use. In Patience the figure comes in the exemplum and is rather a part of the Biblical narrative than a mere desire to inform the reader. This situation obtains in Purity, also, although here the passage is not Biblical. The poet is more interested in telling a story than in making explanations, except in Pearl, where the explanation is the story or at least a large part of it. \ I trapsitio i ! Transitio Is a part of present-day rhetoric, a remnant of a once-important part of education. That transitio is the same as transition is clear: Transitio vocatur quae cum ostendat breviter quid | dictum est, proponit item brevi quid consequatur. (ad [ Herennium, IV, xxvi) I (That figure is named transitio which, while it considers briefly what has been said, likewise sets forth concisely what Is to follow.) L - J 98 It Is, then, a linking device between two passages of differing content. Because the poet in Purity tells a number of different stories and In Gawain passes from one situation to another, he naturally makes no small use of the device. Even in Patience there are a number of examples. Only Pearl is relatively poor In them, because here there was little need for them, but even here the poet uses transitio to pass from one section to the next. Some transitiones are very bald and artless, as in Purity [{.9-51, when, after suggesting a modern instance of a lout at a great feast, he says: And if unwelcom he were to a wordlych prynce 3et hym to J>e hy3e Kyng harder in heven, As Ma|>eu mele3 . . . and then he tells the parable of the Wedding Feast. In Patience he sums up his earlier remarks on sufferance with an interrogatio which also announces the subject of his i iexemplum; he follows this with a statement that he is going |to tell the story: Did not Jonas in Jude suehe jape sum-whyle? To sette hym to sewrte, vnsounde he hym feches. Wyl 3© tary a lyttel tyme, and tent me a whyle, I schal wysse you £>er-wyth, so holy wryt telles. (57-60) Even the more carefully wrought Gawain has transitiones of this type: "And an outtrage awenture of Arthur©3 wondere3. / If 3e wyl'lysten £>is laye bot on litel quile, / I schal telle hit astit . . (29-31)* This type of transitio j 99 'probably derives rather from the popular pulpit and the tradition of the scop than from. the rhetoricians, who were more artful. If today such transitiones are admired, admiration stems from antiquarian Interest, not from delight in technical facility. But most of the transitiones are less bald and are of a higher order than these. In Purity, after Abraham has pleaded for Lot, he and God part and the scene shifts to Sodom. The transitio is simple, almost imperceptible, and so is effective: "And here in longyng al ny3t he lenge3 in wones, / Why! J>e Soverayn to Sodamas sende to spye" (779- j i 780). Particularly important transitiones occur in ; Gawain while the hero is entertained. In the castle of the Green Knight. Each day the lord goes hunting and Gawain stays home in bed, to be tempted by the lady. As the poet jdescribes both scenes, he must pass from one to the other . I as simply as possible and yet avoid repetition or an ! .awkward break in his narrative. Generally he manages it in •two lines. To show the finesse of the poet I give all these transitiones: |>us layke3 3?is lorde by lynde-wode3 eue3, And Gawayn }pe god mon in gay bed lyge3. (1178-1179) i>is day wyth J>is Ilk dede |>ay dryuen on ]?is wyse, Whyle our luflych lede lys in his bedde. (H4. 68-H169) t i : £>e lede with ladye3 layked alle day j ' Bot ]?e lorde ouer £>e londe3. launced ful ofte. (15>60-l56l)j 100 And 3e he lad hem bi lagmon, {>e lorde and his meyny On $>is raaner bi jbe mountes quyle rayd-ouer-vnder, Whyle J>e hende kny3t at home holsumly slepe3 WIthinne |>e comly cortynes, on |>e eolde morne. (1729-1732) Non hym lenge in J>at lee, |>er luf hym bitydej 3et is $>e lorde on |>e launde ledande his goranes, (1893-I89i;) These transitiones are so varied that the reader is hardly conscious of them, yet they follow the rhetorical precept: they sum up what has gone before and suggest what is to come after. This technique indicates a mature art and one that came as a result of study, probably of the rhetoricians, but also of other poets. This concentration upon transitiones in G-awain is not to imply that its use in the other poems was noticeably inferior. In Pearl 153-158, the transition from the description of Paradise to the description of the maiden on the other bank Is especially fine: And euer me £o3t I schulde not wonde For wo J>er wele3 so wynne wore. J>enne nwe note me com on honde i>at meued my mynde ay more and more. :So simple, yet sufficient to take the reader from one 1 jthing to another, this could only have come from a skilful jpoet. 101 iC0RRECTI0 Tills is a highly artificial device and the Gawain- poet was right in avoiding it. Gorrectio est quae tollit id quod dictum est, et pro eo id quod magis idoneum videtur, reponit. (ad Herennium, IV, xxvi) (Correctio is that figure which annuls what has been said and replaces it with what seems more appropriate.) This device was popular- in the Renaissance, when style was more artificial; It was ill-suited to the Gawain-poet. To his credit, I find no example of its use in his work. OCCULTATIO He also makes only a limited use of occultatio. Occultatio est cum dicimus nos praeterire aut non scire aut nolle dicere id quod nunc raaxime dicimus. (ad Herennium, IV, xxvi) (Occultatio is employed when we state that we are passing over, or do not know, or are unwilling to say that which, in reality, we are discussing fully.) This device, like the previous one, is more suited to 'oratory than to poetry, but It has some value In i description, where It is a convention: the poet says that i ■he is unable to tell of the beauties or richness of I ■ 1 | some thing as, at the same time, he tells them. It Is thus j |that the Gawain-poet uses the device in Gawain and Pearl; i II find no instance of it in either Purity and Patience. I 102 ; I In G-awain 165, n|)at were to tor for to telle of j tryfles ]ee halue,” the poet complains that it would he too . tedious to mention all the adornment of the Green Knight, after he has already given fourteen lines to such description, but he then devotes fifty-five more lines to enumeration and description of the trappings of the Green Knight and his horse. In Gawain 1008-1009, ni3at for to tell £>erof hit me tene were, / And to poynte hit 3et I pyned me parauenture,n the poet says that it would be too much trouble to describe all the joys of the Christmas feast at the Green Knight’s castle. This passage is doubtfully occultatio, because the poet devotes almost his entire attention to Gawain and the lady in the next ten lines of description of the feast. In Pearl 99-100 t ! |>e der£>e £>erof to deuyse / His no wy3 worjpe £>at tonge bere3n seems likel3r enough, since man i ihas always felt himself incapable of describing heaven. j But what indicates the poet is here using a conventional J :figure rather than making a literal statement is' that he spends the next twenty lines describing what could not be 1 .described. The advantage he de-rived from using occultatio, iboth here and in Gawain, Is doubtful. Used In each case I t— r-,-nr-r,n- I I : to suggest surpassing beauty and richness, the device jlacks energy enough to accomplish the desired effect. ^Fortunately the poet seldom employed it. i DISJUNCTIO 103 This is a device Tor parallelism, by which expression becomes more pleasing. It is more nearly a mere verbal adornment than the immediately preceding figures. Disiunctio est cum eorum de quibus dicimus, aut utrumque aut unum quodque certo eoneluditur verbo. (ad Herennium, IV, xxvii) (Disjunctio is that figure in which we connect the first and last parts of the sentence by the interpolation of the verb.) A n example from the ad Herennium clarifies the definition: "Pormae dignitas aut raorbo deflorescit aut vetustate exstinguitur” (IV, xxvii). While retaining the same ! subject, the device employs different verbs to say related things about the subject. The verb comes at the end of each clause, the customary place for it in a Latin ; sentence. j j In Middle English, however, the verb does not come at * ! the end of a clause. In fact, in only a few cases does the I ■verb conclude a clause unless the normal word order is jaltered, as in the passive construction. Therefore the poet writing in Middle English must adapt disjunctio to i his own language if he is to use it. This the Gawain-poet ?did by using the same subject for successive clauses, as ; 101*. jdid the Latin rhetoricians, hut letting the verb come \ t ;wherever the sense and his meter needed it, as in Puri'ty ■ lp2 -I4.6: • . . he schulde be halden utter With raony blame, ful bygge a boffet, be raunter, Hurled to J>e halle-dore and harde Reroute schowved, Sd’ d " ’ be" forboden |>at bor3e to bowe J>ider never, On payne of enprysonment and puttyng in stokk©3. With this modification of disjunctio, the Gawain-poet affords a number of examples of this figure. At times, however, he seems to attempt an exact use, as in Gawain 250-252: "penn Ardour bifore p>e hi3 dec© £>at auenture byholde3 / And rekenly hym reuerenced, for rad was he never, / And sayde . . . .n Because the device adds little except verbal adornment, I leave other examples for the appendix. As usual, I find the device more often in the homilies, generally much more rhetorical than the other poems. Pearl has only one doubtful instance and Gawain has only a few clear ones. In the latter poems, the poet seems to concentrate more upon telling his stories than on adorning them. t coiiJim cTio I This figure Is another type of verbal adornment. Coniunctio est cum Interpositlone verbi et superiores partes orationis comprehenditur et inferiores. (ad j Herennium, Iv, xxxvii) (Conjunctio is that figure in which we place, in the middle of a clause, a verb which agrees both with what precedes and what follows it.) The definition itself illustrates the device, but it is clearer in a variation of the illustration for disjunctio: "Pormae dignitas aut morbo deflorescit aut vetustate” (ad Herennium, IV, xxvii). This figure required only a single verb in Latin, as the complicated inflection made the verb self-cont ained. In Middle English, however, to use the device the poet had to modify it to suit the language, since the verb must not be too far separated from its subject. Consequently, instead of the verb alone, the poet used both the subject and the verb in the midst of the construction, generally with additional modification, as in Purity i 4 J4. 6-i4. i 4-7 • 1 1 On a rasse of a rok, hit rest at be laste, / On pe raounte of Mararach of Armene Hilles." Here the main part of the sentence goes with what precedes and with what follows, and therefore accords with the rhetorical precept about as ; closely as Middle English allows. j I There are not many examples of this device in the poems. I find none in Gawain and only this doubtful one j . I 3-n Patience 306: Out of J>e hole boa me herde of hellen j wombe"; here the adverbial phrases modify the verb. In Pearl 969-970: HVtwyth to se pa.t clene cloyster / bou may, : i o 6 , i ; ■bot inwyth not a fote," the last part of the clause is ; elliptical. The contentio between vtwyth and inwyth, however, strongly suggests that the poet intended conjunctio here. There can be little doubt that conjunctio exists in these passages: LoJ such a wrakful wo for wlatsum dede3 Far formed he hy3 Fader on folk f>at he made. (Purity 541-5^2) In J>e palays pryncipale upon |>e playn wo we, In contrary of |>e candelstik J>at clerest hit schyned, her apered a paume, with poyntel in fyngeres, i>at wat3 grysly and gret. . . . (Purity 1531-1531}-) To spot J>at I in speche expound I entered in hat erber grene, In Augoste in a hy3 seysoun, Quen corne is coruen wyth croke3 kene. (Pearl 37—1 4 - 0) j i There may be considerable doubt, however, whether the ! figure was intentional. That there are few examples seems to augment this doubt, especially as there are no instances In Gawain, the longest of the poems. But Gawain is in many respects the least rhetorical of the poems. Moreover, the I J device is rather hard to achieve in English, even in prose, i i i where the writer is not bound to a meter, as was the poet. I It therefore seems likely that the poet was using the ifigure intentionally, for adornment. In Purity 1531-153)4- its use is certainly effective, as the reader is kept in 'suspense, which heightens the horror of the scene. That l in the ad Herennium conjunctio is considered useful for 107 | ■brevity may have inclined the poet against it, since he ( generally prefers to amplify rather than to condense. ADJUNCTJO This is the third and last of this type of adornment. Adiunctio est cum verbum quo res comprehenditur non interponimus, sed aut primum aut postremum conlocamus. (ad Herennium, IV, xxvii) (Adjunctio is that figure in which we do not insert the verb by which the idea is expressed in the middle of the clause but place it either at the beginning or at the end.) The example used for disjhnctio and conjunctio appears as adjunctio in MX)eflorescit formae dignitas aut morbo aut venustate” (ad Herennium, IV, xxvii). Again, to make use of the device xvithout violating the nature of the language, the English poet has to modify the figure: an expressed subject must remain with the verb. Consequently it is a isubject-verb group that must appear at the beginning or end |of the clause, although ito. at least one instance the Oawain- ipoet reverses the sub ject-verb group s.nd so more nearly approaches the classic form. Once he produces the figure by writing an expletive clause without using the expletive: j Wat3 never so blysful a bour as wat3 a bos ferine, j Ne no schroude-hous so schene as a shepon £>ara, j Ne non so glad under God as ho J>at grone schulde. I (Purity 1075>-1077) i I 1 Purity 132-1-0-I3l}-1 is an example wherein the poet has ! 108 , I 1 1 reversed the subject and verb: r , Bot honored he not hym : i 1 - — $>at In heven wonies, / Bot fals fantumnes of fendes, formed with handes." An example of the subject-verb group in regular order is Purity 253-256: Hit wern ]?e fayrest of forme and of face als, i>e most and pe myriest pat maked wern euer, £>e styfest, £>e stalworbest pat stod euer on fete, And lengest lyf In hem lent to lede 3 alle ojjer. ! Here the poet has adapted the device by using an expletive. Although I list more examples of the last type in the appendix, the poet did not employ the device often, and, except possibly in Purity 1075-1077 and I3J 4.O-31I 4-I, for no I observable effect. In these passages he gains emphasis. ! Since I find no Instance of a clause of this type ! concluding xvith a verb, and since the examples cited, both ; here and in the appendix, are at best doubtful, the 1 obvious conclusion is that the poet made little use of the (figure. Because it is a figure which condenses "By reducing j |the number of verbs, it is not a figure to commend itself ! jto the Gawain-poet. j COHDUPLICATIO j This Is another figure which repeats. Sometimes 1 confused with ploce, it is rather a more emphatic form of itraductio. i I Conduplicatio est cum ratione amplificationis aut 109 | coramiserationis eiusdem unius aut plurimum verborum ■ iteratio. (ad Herennium, IV, xxviii). (Conduplicatio is the repetition of one or more words to amplify or to arouse pity.) I find only two examples of this device in the works of the poet, both in Purity: Be £>ay fers, be i>ay feble, forlote3 none, Be i>ay hoi, be J>ay holt, be £>ay one-y3ed. (101-102) For J>er wat3 sekness al sound £>at sarrest. is halden And J>er wat3 rose reflayr where rote hat3 ben ever, And 3per wat3 solace and. songe wher sor3 hat3 ay cryed. (1078-1080) In both instances the poet has used the device to amplify. Both examples are appropriate and effective, the latter, part of a short lyric passage on the birth of Christ, particularly so. That the poet used the device so seldom is hard to explain, since it is a figure to amplify and one that he uses well. That Geoffroi de Vinsauf does not list it as a figure of amplification in the Foetria Nova, although he does in the Documentum, suggests that the poet may have known the former but not the latter book. That is, however, too hypothetical to admit of proof, but the fact remains that the Gawain-poet made little use of this figure of amplification. 110 :INTERPRETATI0 This Is another device for amplification, of which the Gawain-poet took advantage. The manner of application is clearly stated in the definition of the ad Herennium: Interpretatio est quae non iterans idem redintegrat verbum, sed Id commutat quod positum est alio verbo quod idem valeat. (IV, xxviii) (Interpretatio is that figure which repeats an already expressed idea in different words.) Because of the many examples of this device, which after all serves but for two things: to make the matter clearer and more definite and to give the poet more words, I shall ' give here only one passage, quoting both the original ideas and the interpretationes: And J>ere he fynde3 al fayre a freke wythinne, bat hert honest and hoi, b&t haj>el he honored, Sende3 hym a sad sy3t to se his auen face. * (Purity 593-595) These instances adequately demonstrate the poet’s technique. Many more examples appear in the appendix but all follow j ^ I ’ the same pattern. The device is so frequent in the homilies and in Pearl that it may be said to be characteristic of the poet. Gawain on the other hand offers comparatively |few examples. In this poem the poet was telling a story i land therefore uses other methods of amplification and ! j 'development. In the homilies and in Pearl he was j explaining, making his matter as clear as he could. Nearly j ! Ill 'always the poet adds something to his meaning by the devicej, seldom does he descend to "a calf . . . / jeat wat3 tender and not to3e" (Parity 629-630). Ihis aberration may be forgiven for his many excellent interpretations s. COMiUTATIO Hiis figure is another word pattern. Conmutatio est cum duae sententiae inter se discrepantes ex traiectione ita efferuntur ut a priore posterior contraria priori proficiscatur. (ad Herennium, IV, xxviii) (Commutatio is when, in balanced clauses, the order of j words in the first clause is reversed in the second.) j This is a technical and difficult device, even without allowing for the problems of alliterative verse. Ihere should be therefore no surprise that the poet has employed it seldom. I find no clear examples in either Patience or Pearl. In neither Purity nor Gawain is there an absolutely perfect example, but there are several that are j so good that they must have been intentional. In Purity lip, .the poet points up this device by contentio: "As be ihonest utwyth and inwyth alle fyl£>e3.t ! In Purity 299, the \ iclauses have proper names to indicate the reverse order: |! l Sem solely ]?at on, ]?at ojper hy3t Gam". Had the poet used ja verb In place of solely, this would have been a perfect I example. As it stands, the first clause is elliptical, ; 1 1 2 , ! , : ! with imperfect alliteration. In G-awain 2276, the poet uses traductio in addition to commutatio: "My hede fla3 to my fote, and 3et fla3 I neuer.” If it were not for the traductio, this instance would lose most of its effective- j ness. As. it is, the line is far better than either Gawain 2317: "Hent heterly his helme, and on his hed cast," or Gawain 2332: "Sette £>e schaft vpon shore, and to fce scharp lened," which are otherwise more nearly perfect commutatio. I Commutatio is a formal device and does not seem | entirely appropriate to the Cawain-poet, whose sentences j generally flow in a natural word order. Although I list a j i S few more examples in the appendix, all of them are at best | doubtful and possibly fortuitous. Of the examples cited, above, only those in which other devices also appear seem 1 to add anything beyond verbal cleverness. Although the 1 poet may occasionally indulge in word-play, It seems rather : ;out of place. Rather significantly, in the one place where .word-play would be most appropriate, the scenes in the » ^Green Knight’s castle, I find little evidence of it. Bie one example of commutatio is these passages, "He kysses hir s j jcomlyly, and kny3tly he mele3" (97^ 4-), seems fortuitous, a j jresult of the poet’s proper arrangement of alliterating I istresses. PERMISSIO 113 This is a rhetorical device in which the orator allowed or seemed to allow some point in his opponent's case. Used with caution, it was intended to provoke pity. Permissio est cum ostendemus in dicendo nos aliquam rem totam tradere et concedere alicuius voluntati. (ad Herennium, IV, xxix) (Permissio is that figure in which we indicate in words- that we xdnolly yield and concede something to the wish of s ome one.) Although there is some slight use of this device in Purity .when Ifoah and Abraham acknowledge their insignificance and i ;their reliance upon God, the clearest examples come in 8 !Patience. Wien the ship's crew accuses Jonah of impiety tox-J’ ard his God and of being the cause of the storm, he freely confesses: Alle £>is mischef for me is made at J>is tyme, For I haf greued my god and gulty am foundenj For-J>y be re 3 me to be brode and baj>es me J>er-oute Er gete je no happe, I hope forsobe. (209-212) This confession saves him for the moment, not for pity for him but for fear of his God. But eventually the crew cast jhim overboard where the whale conveniently swallows him. SFrom the bowels of the whale Jonah confesses his fault to ? i | God: ' Uou, Prynce, of p j prophete pite Jpou haueJ i 3?a3 I be fol and fykel, and falce of my hert, ; De-woyde now £>y vengaunce, ]?ur3 vertu of rauthe; lllj. 1 i Tha3 I be gulty of gyle, as gaule of prophetes, ! pou art God and alle gowde3 ar grayjpely pjn owen; ; Haf now mercy of £>y man and his mys-dede3, And preue be ly3tly a lorde in londe and in water, (282-288) This instance is a variation of the device: the guilty man confesses and throws himself on the mercy of his judge,! whom he flatters by praise of his great mercy. , | In Pearl the poet confesses his intemperate language, ;but explains it in a long passage, which I quote here only I 1 in part: He worjpe no wrathbe vnto my Lorde, If rapely I raue, spomande in spelle, i My herte wat3 al wyth mysse remorde, I j As wallande water got3 out of welle. S 1 'I do me ay in hys myserecorde. | ’ Rebuke' me neuer wyth worde3 felle, i b&3 I forloyne, me dere endorde, ’ Bot kype3 me kyndely your coumforde, Pytosly benicande vpon bysse : 1 Of care and me 3© made acorde, : bat er wat3 grounde of alle my blysse. (362-372) The permissio has the desired effect, for the maiden answers in part ”now by speche is to me dere" (kOO). i Although there are other instances of the poet's apology | i for possible error, generally they are metaphors, as in "I am bot mokke and mul among" (Pearl 905>); their Intent is to I propitiate the maiden. | ! In Gawain, the hero, In his replies to the lady, uses the device cautiously; the mercy of the lady Is obviously untrustworthy. So when "be freke ferde with defence" 115 j (1282), he never admits to more than a desire ’ ’ To he your ; ; trwe seruaunt" (l8Lj.5). The lady, on the other hand, finally uses the device to appeal to G-awainVs pity: "I may bot mourne vpon molde, as may hat much louyes" (1795). 5 : That the appeal is lightly made, not to be taken seriously, ! ■ is indicated by the word-play in may, may. G-awain is ’courtly romance, not high tragedy. 1 I ] Fatience and Fearl are more serious poems, however, 1 and there the poet employs no words or figures that might impair his appeal for mercy. The possible permissiones of ' Purity are likewise entirely serious. The poet, although he employs the device only occasionally, employs it with tact and skill and suits his technique to his intention. DUBITATIO By this figure the orator laments that he does not know which of two courses to pursue. In so doing, he pursues both. Dubitatio est cum quaerere videatur oratur utrum de duobus potius aut quid de pluribus potissimum dicat. (ad Herennium, IY, xxix) (Dubitatio is when the orator seems to question which of two things he may preferably say or what of many things he should above all talk about.} ; Hie device does not seem particularly well suited to poetry,! and the G-awain-poet shows only slight use of it. In I 116 1 Patience Jonah debates with himself whether to obey God's will or to flee: If I bo we to his bode and bring hem |>is tale And I be nummen in Nuniue, my nyes begynes. At alle perles,' quoJ> $>e prophete, 'I aproche hit no nerre; I wyl me sum ofcer wave, |>at he ne wayte after. (75>“86) Since this passage is not Biblical, the poet has amplified his material by means of dubitatio, somewhat modified from i its use in oratory. In Gawain lij.O-lij.1, "Half etayn in erde I hope J>at he werej / Bot mon most I algate mynn hym to bene," the poet uses the device as though he did not know i jthe species of the Green Knight. The device here suggests j the Knight's otherworld character as well as his size; but ! this idea the poet rejects so that -the reader will consider him mortal until his head is cut off, an idea which heightens the ghastliness of the scene. As I find no more examples of dubitatio in the poems, and the examples cited represent considerable modification of form, it seems unlikely that the poet considered the J device appropriate to his style. As he seldom speaks for j i ! 'himself, except in Pearl, his chief use for the device j iwould be in the speech of a character, as he uses It in j Patience, and there was seldom occasion for him to use it I i I 117 !in dialogue. i i ,EXPEDITIO ^ Thi3 is one of the devices of enumeration whereby the I I 'orator chooses a subject for discussion. ; \ ; Expeditio est cum rationibus compluribus enumeratis : j quibus aliqua res confieri potuerit, ceterae tolluntur, 1 una re1inquitur, quarn nos intendimus. (ad Herennium, IV, xxix) (Expeditio is that figure in which, after enumerating | various methods whereby something could have been accomplished, and after discarding the rest, one way 1 alone Is left to which we direct our thoughts.) ! Although I find no absolutely clear example of this figure .in the poems, Purity 197-202 performs this function; these j lines isolate the type of sin that will be considered, I because it is most heinous in God*s sight: Bot never 3©t In no boke breved X herde hat ever he wrek so wyherly on werk £>at he made, Ne venged for no vilte of vice ne synne, He so hastyfly wat3 hot for hatel of his wylle, < He never so sodenly so3t unsoundely to wenge, As for fyl]pe of pe flesch £>at foies han used. Prom this point the poet proceeds to the telling of the Illustrative exempla. The same device appears in conjunction with | 13por example, since it would be bad technique for jGawain to use dubitatio just before he reached the Green : Chapel, the poet has the guide suggest that he flee, advice jwhich Gawain scornfully rejects, in keeping with his icharacter as a goodly knight. 118 1 conformatio in Patience 30-36: If we pyse ladyes wolde lof in lyknyng of pewes— Dame Pouert, Dame Fitee, Dame: Penaunce pe prydee, Dame Mekenesse, Dame Mercy, and Miry Clannesse, And penne Dame Pes, and Pacyence, put in perafter. He were happen"" pat hade one, alle were pe better* Bot syn I am put to a poynt pat Pouerte hatte, I schal me poruay Pacyence, and play me wyth bope. By the use of this figure the poet has isolated his subject. That the poet has not made an extensive use of this device is understandable. In the homilies, both of which afford a single example, he had only one subject to isolate ,and so had no further use for it. In G-awain 2ij.30-2lj.33 is c ? u |a different use; Gawain explains why he will keep the I girdle: pat wyl I welde wyth good wylle, not for pe wynne golde, He pe saynt, ne pe sylk, ne pe syde pendaundes, For wele ne for worshyp, ne for pe wlonk werkke3* Bot in syngne bf my surfet I schal se hit ofte. He then develops the last reason at considerable length. I find no example in Pearl. Although expeditio is a useful device to isolate a |topic for further discussion, once the poet has arrived at i i jhis theme in the homilies, there was no more need for it. Both Gawain and Pearl have a narrative framework and so [offer little opportunity to employ the device. That the I i poet did use the device appropriately in Gawain to permit jthe hero to explain his acceptance of a gift with ampleasing , 119 , !associations for him indicates the rhetorical nature of the i I acceptance speech. The poet has employed expeditio with ' tact and discretion. ’DISSOLUTIO Dissolutio is of doubtful value in showing the influence of rhetoric on the poet. Although it is a classical figure, the native tradition also frequently : omitted conjunctions. Dissolutiro est quod, coniunctionibus verborum e medio sublatis,, separatis partibus effertur. (ad Herennium, IV, xxx) i (Dissolutio is the omission of connective w o r d s . ! The poet has used the figure a number of times, sometimes 1 effectively, as in Purity 101-102; "Be pay fers, be pay feble, forlote3 none, / Be pay hoi, be pay halte, be pay on-y3©d." To write this out with connectives would destroy the sharpness of the command. In Purity 1315, "Such god, i such gomes, such gay vesselles,1 '^ the poet omits oper, an le contrasting figure, polysyndeton, which is the use of a conjunction between each separate part, is not treated in the ad Herennium or by Geoffroi. Matthieu, ■however, defines and illustrates it. The device appears in the Gawain-poet1s works at least as often as dissolutio. :An example of this figure is Purity LiD-ip.: "Wyth rent iCOkr©3 at pe kne, and his cluite trasche3, / And his itabarde totome, and his tote3 oute." ^Noted by Chapman, "Virgil and4the Gawain-poet," p. 18. ; 120 'omission which both strengthens his line and suggests the wunderment of the people on seeing the treasure of the Temple. In G-awain 1007, "per wat3 mete, per wat3 myrpe, per wat3 much ioye,” the omission of and has much the same effect. Other examples appear in the appendix, Put they do not differ essentially from those cited here. Although the poet employs the figure sufficiently to make its presence inotable, he does not employ it so often that it is a .characteristic of his style, which is full and leisurely. PRAECISIO This figure indicates a sharp or emotional break in the thought. Praecisio est cum dictis quibus reliquum quod coeptum est dici relinquitur inehoatum. (ad Herennium, IV, xxx) (Praecisio is a figure in which, something having been said, the rest that has begun to be said is left incomplete.) This figure appears only twice in Purity and once in each of the other poems. In Purity it emphasizes the point of the poet: For is no segge under sunne so seme of his crafte3 ; If he pe sulped in synne pat sytte3 unclene— On spec of a spotte may spede to mysse Of pe sy3te of pe Soverayn pat sytte3 so hy3e. ($l\.9-552) | Bot of pe dome of pe doupe for dide3 of schame— i He is so skoymous of pat schape, he scarre3 bylyve. (597-598) 121 , I jAfter a sharp break of one thought, the poet has moved to a! more forceful statement of the same idea that he has already ;expressed in his weaker, partial statement. Therefore the device here is a type of interpretation ’ In the other poems the device serves differently. In Patience 117, "3ise, he blusched ful brode,— pat burde hym, ! by sure," the poet interrupts his thought to comment upon ‘it, a most unusual thing for him. Generally he lets an 1 i ' : incident in narrative pass without comment. The exception , here is not to be commended. "Bot a quene J Hit Is to dere a date" (Pearl lj.92), concludes the poet’s comment that the i I maiden ought at most to be a countess or a lady of less ; rank in heaven and shows the poet’s indignation at her J unmerited reward. In Gawaln 12l|.5-12Lj.7, Bi God, I were glad, and you god po3t At sajb oper at seruyc© pat I sette my3t To pe plesaunce of your prys— hit were a pure ioye, the device has a comic effect. Gawain begins by a fulsome i courtly speech to the lady, seems to' see that he is putting himself into an awkward position for subsequent defence, breaks his sentence, and weakly concludes "hit were a pure ioye." Whether the poet intended the double entendre in [ pure is not certain, but the word receives the alliterative [accent and, under the circumstances, certainly is fitting. ! ; The poet, then, employs praecisio to emphasize a point, L - J 122 .to comment on action, and to show the attitudes and feelings :of his characters. Although he has made but slight use of the device, he demonstrates mastery of It, particularly in G-awain. It seems likely that he used it rarely because it stops the even flow of his verse. It Is the more effective .when it appears, i j !CONOLUSIO ! One of the methods of persuasion was logical reasoning; the rhetorical figure for the ornament was conclusio. ! j Conclusio est quae brevi argumentations ex iis quae j | ante dicta sunt aut facta conficit quid necessario j : consequatur, (ad Herennium, IV, xxx) j (Conclusio is that figure which, from a brief argument based on what has been said or done previously* has produced the result which necessarily follotvs.; Although the figure takes the form of the syllogism, considerably modified f r o m its simplest form, conclusio is rhetorical rather than logical, an embellishment rather i than a method of arriving at truth, Cicero points out the difference between fact and embellishment of fact by ! I ! [conclusio: ’ ’ nos autem de expolitione partibus loquimur” | ; I i(De Inventions, I, xl). i | Rather surprisingly, the poet has made very little use i !of this figure In the homilies. In Purity 1052-1068 Is a | I ‘ long and elaborate example which reasons how men should be | 123 ielene, tout I find no other example in the poem. Patience ( i - n > r - 1 i I :affords more examples, as in For quo-so suffer cow£>e syt, sele wolde fol3e, And quo for |>ro may no3t J>ole, |>e pikker he sufferes; : ben is better to atoyde f>e bur vmbe-stoundes, hen ay £>row forth my $>ro, £>a3 me jjynk ylle. (5-8) j In 37-14-5, the poet proves that "thus Pouerte and Pacyence ! >arn nedes play-feres" (l|-5), and in I 4 .i3-I4.28 Jonah’s speech 1 'takes the form of conclusio, in a specious bit of reasoning, jBecause Patience is brief, these three instances here to one in Purity may account partially for the greater unity in the shorter poem. j | i Pearl shows a greater use of the device. Hae maiden j | - - | 1 i |reasons why she holds "hat iueler lyttel to prayse" (301) , I who only believes what he sees (301-312). The poet’s objection to her heavenly reward appears as conclusio (I 4 . 8I- , I 4 . 92), as does his argument that heavenly reward should be on merit (590-600). Hie maiden’s rebuttal includes the , figure (616-621 4 . , 625-636, and 667-672). Since these are ! not logical but rhetorical figures, the poet does not ■hesitate to introduce extraneous matter. For example, a Icontentio is introduced into the middle of this conclusio: : Hit is a dom t>at neuer God gaue, £>at euer £>e gyltl©3 schulde be schente £>e gyltyf may contryssyoun hente And be $>ur3 mercy to grace J?ry3t; j Bot he to gyle £>at neuer glente, j At inoscente is saf and ry3te. (Pearl 667-672) 12k Thus he has to some extent disguised his conclusio, but analysis will discover that he has made an important use of this device in Pearl. 3-n Oawain he has employed the device most often. Although that poem is entirely narrative, the poet has been at pains to explain and justify the actions of his characters. For example, when the Green Knight first appears in Arthur’s court, the knights are struck dumb with wonder; this is explained by conclusio: For fele sellye3 had pay sen, bot such neuer are; Forpi for fantoum and fayry3e pe folk pere hit demed. perfore to answare wat3 ar3e mony af>el freke, And al stouned at his steuen and stonstil seten j In a swoghe sylence pur 3 pe sale riche. (239-214. 3) j The lady in tempting Gawain puts forth a convincing j } argument: “pe prys and pe prowes pat plese3 al oper, / If 1 I hit lakked oper set at ly3t, hit were littel daynten (12i 4 . 9-1250). She employs conclusio to persuade Gawain to 1 kiss her: ; So god as Gawayn gaynly is halden, ; And cortaysye is closed so clene in hymseluen, Couth not ly3tly haf lenged so long with a lady, Bot he had craued a cosse, bi his courtaysye, Bi sum towch of surame tryfle at sum tale3 ende. (1297-1301) The premises are not entirely clear, but no lady under these circumstances should be held to a strict form of the syllogism. She uses the same argument later (Il4 . 87-ll4 . 9i). 125 t Additional examples appear in the appendix and in the j . .following chapter. Conclusio is a species of expolitio and! ’it is primarily as that figure that the poet has employed 'the device, particularly in Gawain and Pearl. Conclusio ’is therefore a device of amplification and belongs more ;properly with the figurae ^ententiarum to be considered in jthe following chapter. \ Prom the foregoing discussion of the figurae verborum, lit is apparent that the Gawain-poet has employed these devices of rhetoric. Of the thirty-five figures in the ad Herennium he has used all except three. Although he did : T i r r r u « r - r n n u n w i r i r ( not find occasion for each device in every poem and not many occasions for some devices, the fact that he did use ; 'so many different figures is significant evidence that he : was influenced by rhetoric. Hone of the works are so filled with any one type of figurae verborum that a definite or significant pattern of his usage emerges. it is true that the poet has used the sententia more often in Patience, while continuatio and corapar are more frequent in Purity. Similiter desinens is of course a part of the verse form of Pearl and Gawain, but this influence would hardly have come from the rhetoricians; the obvious source was earlier poetry. iGawain and Pearl both exhibit the conclusio with some 126 ifrequency whereas Purity, whieh nearly always offers several :examples of each type, has only one. AdnOminatio frequently appears, but many instances may be only fortuitous, as the alliterative line would seemingly produce them naturally, iOn the other hand, the constant need for alliterating words would make the device attractive to the poet. !Ehat he has i not overused the device is, an added indication of his I artistry. Interpretatio occurs again and again, so often that of all the devices it is most persistently present. Prom these scattered facts one significant conclusion may be reached: the poet has used the figurae verborum when their use would enhance his poetry, choosing now this, now that device as it suited his purpose. He thus demonstrates his mastery of these rhetorical tools, like the mature poet that he was, with a reasonable consistency. • Only occasionally did he employ an infelicitous figure and rarely did he use a figure without reason. He could have learned such technique from his study of poets, particularly the French poets--we know that he had read Jean de Meun-- but his mastery of rhetoric indicates that his study was systematic. In the late Middle Ages, such study would presumably have included the rhetoricians, who provided the rules for poetic technique. But from whatever source he derived the practice, the G-awain-poet certainly used many 127 of the devices of rhetoric and so was indebted to the rhetorical tradition. IV THE FIGURAE SENTENTIARUM ! Although the figurae sententiarum are thought patterns, some are very similar to certain of the figurae i jverborum; for example, the subtle distinction between Iinterpretatio and some forms of expolitio is hard to make; and when is contrarium merely a figura verbor urn and when |is it contrarium, a form of expolitio, a figura i $ I ! sententiarum? Then, too, there Is contentio of words and I j contentio of ideas. Even some of the tropes are closely i related; for example, at what point does translatio, used to diminish, cease to be a trope and become diminutio? The truth, of course, is that in actual practice the poet did not always use one figure at a time nor did he j apparently give much attention to academic distinctions | j I between them. Poems are not generally constructed by I I ! i analysis. And certainly the Gawain-poet, who had a point j to make or a story to tell, seems more interested in accomplishing these things than in producing a text easily analyzed into tropes and figures. j ' If this problem was difficult in analyzing the tropes 129 ; and the figurae verborum, it becomes even more complex | 1 in discussing the figurae sententiarum. For these figures, being thought patterns, are the poem. They are not the story, which may be reduced to a synopsis, a skeleton of a < plot, nor yet the point or theme of a discourse, which may ! . ! ibe reduced to a single sentence, a eell of an idea. s l Without the figures the poem could not exist. And being !thought patterns, naturally they may contain other, j I : smaller patterns, may in fact be made of them. So if an ; example, qxioted elsewhere fully or in part, appears here ; ;again under another label, there is no need for wonder; |such is the nature of things. | But the figurae sententiarum, or some of them at : least, present a new problem. Since they are the poem, to give many examples of each type would be to reproduce the poems in a disconnected series of passages. Wor is the i appendix of much value in this case; putting a number of ' examples there would have the same effect. Most readers ; I would, I believe, prefer reading the poems in one of the standard editions. But even to quote one example of each figure completely would, in some cases, mean the (reproduction of very long passages. For example, the poet devotes fifty lines to describing Gawain1s accoutrements (effictio), not including the digression on his shield, and 130 ; eighty-four lines to the exterior portrait of the Green Knight. The account of the hunting scenes in Gawain, which illustrate both distributio and demonstratio, vary from forty to sixty lines each. One figure, commoratio, it is impossible to separate from the text as a whole. It has been necessary, therefore, in some cases, to give, not the best or clearest example, but the shortest appropriate one. In some cases, even this expedient was impossible. Here I have merely summarized and given line references. DISTRIBUTIO This figure is the device which separates an affair into its component parts so that the reader understands or can visualize the larger act. Distributio est cum in plures res aut personas negotia quaedara certa dispertiuntur. (ad Herennium, IV, xxxv) J (Distributio is employed when certain matters are made to extend over several situations or are apportioned among several Individuals.) ; In addition to analyzing the act, the poet must then ; specify who did or who should do the deed, or Its i chronological order, or both together. A number of good !examples of this device appear intthe poems. A famous | (passage in Gawain, called the "breaking of the deer" (1323- j 11358), of which I quote only a part, may serve as an example 131 j Syben |>ay slyt b© slot, sesed b© erber, i Sehaued wyth a scharp knyf , and pe schyre knitten; Syb©n rytte |>ay b© foure lyrames, and rent of b© hyde, Jjen brek J>ay be bale, h© baule3 out token, | Lystily forlancyng, and lore of pe knot; bay gryped to b© gargulun, and gravely departed |>e wesaunt fro h© wynt-hole, and wait out b© gutt©3. (1330-1336) The butchering continues until finished; these lines are sufficient to show the device and the poet’s use of it. | Here the act is merely broken up into parts, not assigned j separately to agents. In Purity 529-5l}.0, the poet describes the departure from the Ark, telling what each class of animal does. Again-I quote only a part of the whole distributio. Wylde woraie3 to her won wryb©3 in b© erbe, b© fox and b© folmarde to b© fryth wynde3 Herttes to hy3e heb©, hare3 to gorste3, And lyoun©3 and leparde3 to b© lake-ryftes. (£33-536) The extent to which the poet employs this device, often combined with demonstratio, may be indicated by summary. In Purity 878-892, the threatening of Lot and his rescue; 12ij.5-1260, the sack of Jerusalem; 17£|-1-1766, Daniel*s reward and the end’ of the Belshazzar*s feast; in Patience 97-108, Jonah's departure by ship; 153-160, the lightening of the ship; in Pearl 1110-1121}., the heavenly pageant; in Gawain 5-l5, legendary history; l|l”^-7, Arthur’s Christmas festival; i^XS —I 4I4 . 3, the beheading of the Green Knight— and these are not all. Except in Pearl, the poet 132 |used the device often. I J In Fearl the device was not so useful* Primarily lyrical, that poem has very little action, which in the other poems was one of the poet's chief interests. Each of the Biblical exempla in the homilies is full of movement and the poet frequently gives a detailed account. In Gawain, only two actions— the beheading first of the Green Knight and then of Gawain— are absolutely necessary. To give movement and interest to his narrative, however, the poet has added actions, such as the hunting scenes, which contain technical analyses. Even the passage which describes Gawain*s accoutrements (5>68-6l8), which is in Intent effectio, takes the form of distributio, because Gawain is not described dressed but being dressed. If the poet was not original In stressing action (which after all was characteristic both of the native tradition, as in Beowulf or Maldon, and of romance), he was more original in his choice of actions, at least in Gawain. From whatever source he may have taken the device, distributio was important to his narrative art. E-ICENTIA This device is merely the rebuke of an equal or superior. 133 liicentia est cum apud eos quos ant vererl aut metuere [ debemus taraen aliquid pro lure nostro dicimus, quod eos quos ii diligunt allquo in errato vere reprehendere videamur, (ad Herennium, IV, xxxvi) ' (Licentia is employed when, in the presence of those J whom we ought to esteem or to fear, we nevertheless say something on our own authority wherein we seem actually to reproach them or those whom they love.) ! Here, a method whereby the orator could attack the judge or' i ithe Roman citizenry, licentia has survived Into our own day, |generally prefaced by some phrase like ’frankly speaking* ! i or ’candidly.’ Seoffroi Interprets the figure: ""When h e blames masters or friends honorably and allowably, with no i one being offended by the words."-*- i Although in the homilies the poet occasionally ■ ; t ;addresses his congregation directly and covild have used the j figure to them, he does not. The Instances of licentia occur between characters in his narrative. In Purity 715- ! 720, Abraham rebukes God: Sir, wyth yor leve 1 Schal synful and sakl@3 suffer al on payne? HheJ>er ever hit lyke my I*orde to lyfte such dome3, hat he wykked and he worhy schal on wrake suffer, And weye upon he worre half hat wrathed he never? hat wat3 never hy won h&t wro3te3 uus alle. ; The passage is Biblical, but a more diplomatic rebuke would ’ be hard to Imagine. As licentia, it improves upon its 'source. In Patience 24 .8 2 —I 4.Q2 4 ., Jonah rebukes God: i | -ij ! Gum culpat honeste / Et licite dominos vel amicos, Jnemine verbis / offense," (Poetria Bova, 123ij.~1236) . 13k , AJ j>ou maker of man, what maystery J>e |>ynke3 I jbus i>y freke to forfare forbi alle o£erJ Wyth all meschef i>at J>ou may, neuer J>ou me spere3? The Intent here Is different, for Jonah is angry and is certainly not diplomatic. That God is not angered is not to the credit of Jonah; therefore these lines are | exclamatio and interrogatio, but not licentia. Whether the maiden's rebukes of the poet in Pearl j '257“276, 289-32^, 337-360 are licentiae depends on the j i j ■theological interpretation. As a saved soul, one of the | li|i4-,000 virgin brides of Christ, she would be superior to f the poet, regardless of what their earthly relationship may I I I ‘ have been* Although the rebukes are quiet and inoffensive, j , { this seems more characteristic of the maiden and the poem j than a desire to be diplomatic. For these reasons these ' passages doubtfully illustrate licentia. In Gawain, however, there are a number of passages characterized by licentia. The lady, in the bedroom | > scenes, repeatedly reproaches Gawain, as when she accuses him of not being Gawain: "Now he t>at spede3 vehe spech ;fc>is disport 3elde yowJ / Bot J>at 3e he Gawan, hit got3 in Jraynde.1’ 1 (1292-1293). Gawain's reaction is to wonder what ,he has done wrong. Considering their equally high estate, • their courtly manners, and the situation, the lady, j |although not exactly diplomatic, obviously does not intend 135 ; | to anger him. In lij.8l-lL|.86 she reproaches him for having ^forgotten her earlier lesson and in l508-l53U. for not !teaching her of love. In the passages between Gawain and the Green Knight ■there are several reproachful speeches. In 2270-2279, 5 r j the Green Knight chides Gawain for flinching at the first ' l !blow and in 2300-2301, Gawain says, after the second blow i jhas been stopped: nWy* $>resh on, |>ou J>ro mon, 3?ou |>rete3 jto longe; / I hope £>at $>i hert ar3e wyth J>yn awen seluen?” j Ihat these passages, and particularly Gawain*s speech, are i licentiae Is doubtful, under the circumstances; but surely ; in 2338-2368, after the last blow, the Knight *s reproaching Gawain for threatening him and for keeping the girdle contrary to their pact, Is licentia. Although Gawain is j angered, his anger is toward his own default, which after ; 1 i all is the reason for the figure. Whether a poet in the process of literary creation would have been aware of the ; distinction I have made is questionable. More probably, i he felt the dramatic need for the device in all these j » j Instances and used the figure without such nice consider- i ation. j 1 DIMINUTIO i ! Biminutio est cum aliquid inesse in nobis aut in iis ! quos defendimus aut natura aut fortuna aut Industria 136 dicimus egregium, quod, ne, qua significetur adrogans ostentatio, diminuitur et adtenuatur oratione. (ad Herennium, IV, xxxviii). (Diminutio is that figure in which we shall say that there is in us or in those whom we defend something excellent, either by reason of character, good fortune, or assiduity, which, lest any overweening display be evident, is weakened and diminished by our words.) I Some of the translationes which diminish, or rather, ;denigrate ax^e similar to this figure, as when Abraham, i !expostulating x-irith God on the approaching destruction of iSodom, says in Purity 7^1-T —i+TQs "I am bot ei^e ful evel and ,usle so blake, / For to mele wyth such a Mays ter as my3te3 hat3 alle." In Pearl the poet says of himself: r 'I am bot i ! mol and manere3 mysse" (382). These are apologies and take i the strong statement of a trope. In each case, the speaker seems to believe it of himself. He is not disclosing his excellence in a deprecating speech but merely admitting inferiority. Therefore these translationes are doubtfully diminutions s. Except in Gawain I find no certain examples of this figure. In that poem, however, the poet uses the device generously. Gawain Is the bravest, most courtly, most handsome of knights. Since modesty is one of the knightly ; virtues, Gawain, of course, has a superabundance of it, as jhe demonstrates when he asks Arthur to let him have the i igame with the Green Knight: ; 137 I | I am wakkest, I wot, and of wyt feblest, And lest lur of ray lyf, quo laytes J>e isojje, Bot for as much as 3© ray era I am only to prayse No bounty bot your blod I In my bod^ knowe. (35)+-357) ■In the castle of the Green Knight, the lady, when she tempts Gawain, praises him, possibly not beyond his just ;due, but so excessively that he must defend his modesty. This he does with diminutio, as in 121+1-121+7: i I ’In god fayth,1 quofc Gawayn, ’gayn hit me J>ynkke3* J>a3 I be not now he jjaat 3e of speken; j To reche to such reuerence as 3® reherce here I am wy3 vmwor|>y, I wot wel wyseluen. Bi God, I were glad, and yow god J>o3t, At sa3© ojber at seruyce $>at I sette ray3t To |>e plesaunce of your prys— hit were a pure ioye. 1 Not only does he defend his modesty, but also his purity. The lady is most outspoken about her^intentions and desires; her bold praise of him is part of the attack, l i t>e freke ferde wyth defense0 by a modest disclaimer: 0 ’I wysse, worjoy, ’ quo£> J>e wy3es '3© haf waled wel better; / Bot I am proude of i>e prys J>at 3e put on me.1 * (1276-1277)* The poet has emphasized the comic aspect of the situation by Gawain*s diminutio. j It is hard to Imagine that Gawain believed these things i jof himself; certainly he tried to be the most perfect of jknights, and when finally caught in error was most unhappy. I jThus he is using a figure from the rhetorical tradition, / |and one that was most alien to the native tradition, where heroes recognized their own excellence without false 138 modesty. DESCRIPTIO Descriptio norainatur quae rerum consequentium continet perspicuam et dilucidam cum gravitate expositionem, (ad Herennlum, XW, xxxix) (That figure is named descriptio which constitutes a clear, plain, yet dignified setting forth of certain i suitable matters.) From the illustrations and further statement in the text, I it is apparent that descriptio is that figure which describes for the purpose of evoking pity or indignation. As such, it has much in common with imago and demonstratio, and the line of demarcation between them is somewhat indistinct. Descriptio sets forth the scene to arouse pity or indignation, whereas imago indicates praise or vituperation. JDemonstratio is primarily the figure of narratio and concerns an action, of which the scene may be an integral or a necessary part. An example of this device is Purity 121^.7-1260: bay slowen of swettest semlych burdes, Bab©d bames in blod, and her brayn spylled; Prestes and prelates J>ay presed to debe, Wyves and wenches her xrombes tocorven, bat her boweles outborst about be diches, And al wat3 carfully kylde bat bay each my3t. | And alle b&fc swypped unswol3ed of be sworde kene, j bay wer cagged and ka3t on capeles al bare, ! ^The first example in the ad Herennium has the same form as s imilitudo: sicut .... 139 Festned fettres to her fete vnder foie wombes, ; And broJ>ely bro3t to Babyloyn |>er bale to suffer; To sytte in servage and syte J>at suratyme wer gentyle; Now ar chaunged to ehorles and charged wyth werkkes, BoJ>e to cayre at i>e kart and £e kuy mylke, |>at suratyme sete in her sale syres and burdes. These lines merely amplify nNabi3ardan no3t forjjy nolde not spare, / Bot bede al to pe bronde under bare eggeM (12l|5*“ 12l}.6), which was in itself a full statement of the action. They could be deleted without impairing the continuity; they are mere ornament. There are other examples of the device in Purity, as <;in 114.39-1592, where the treasures of the Temple are i | jdescribed, theoretically at least to provoke indignation: ' i : iui>at hade ben blessed bifore wyth bischopes hondes / / Now ,is sette for to serve Satanas i>e blake” ( llfJ+Sj II+J 4. 9) - Actually, the poet has seized the opportunity for glittering description. In a similar manner, IOO9-IOI4 . 8 describe the site of the four cities after their destruction. Such passages are detachable and stop the forward movement of the narrative. Although censurable by modern critical jstandards, such instances of the device demonstrate the J [influence of rhetoric on the poet.^ I | | ^See Baldwin, p. 295• “A rhetorical poetic, though in ;other mouths than Geoffrey’s it has often a fairer sound, is always a perversion. The confusion of poetic with j 'rhetoric has always tended to obscure the imaginative value j to narrative forward movement.n ! l i j . 0 | There is much less of this device in the other poems. 1 In Patience the action of the exeraplum moves forward almost continuously. When the poet delays the action, it is not to introduce long descriptions. There is such a dilation, however, in God*s explanation of his not j fulfilling the prophecy of destruction (510-517)* j Obviously the intent here is to arouse pity, but the poet » | has employed the device economically and functionally so I ! that the passage seems an integral part of the action , rather than mere ornament. I i In Pearl he has made even less use of the device: S _ _ _ j I ttAs a schep to J»e sla3t J>er lad wat3 he; / And, as lombe j I | | J>at clypper in hande nem, / So closed he hys mouth fro vch : 1 query1 ' (801-803); 1 1 As meke as lomp }>at no playnt tolde" (8l5). In describing Paradise, the poet says of Christ: "Bot a wounde ful wyde and weete con wyse / Anende hys ! j hert, J>ur3 hyde torente. / Of his quyte syde his blod joutsprent" (1135-1137)* Such descriptions are so casual that they pass almost unnoticed, in contrast to the long dilations in Purity. In Gawain. although there is much dilation, there is |relatively little descriptio. The difficulties of Gawain*s j journey to the castle (720-732) are Itemized, presumably i | to arouse sympathy. The descriptive note, "mony brydde3 1 1 + 1 I 'vnblyfce vpon bare twyges / $>at pitosly jper piped for pyne of £>e coldew (71+6-71+7) > is obviously descriptio. There is, of course, little in the poem that demands pity of indignation. Although there is much description, it is primarily demonstratio and effictio rather than descriptio, , ■in keeping with the tenor and intent of the romance. t ;DIVISIO i Divisio est quae rem semovens ab re utramque absolvit, : ratione subiecta. (ad Herennium, IV, xl). (Divisio is that figure which, by separating one idea j from another, completes both by appending a reason.) j ! An illustration from the text clarifies this definition: "Why should I reproach you? If you are good, you have not merited it; If evil, you will be unmoved.114- In other words, the figure states a dilemma and explains both parts. In neither Purity nor Pearl is a dilemma stated by divisio. In Patience 7$-QQ, Jonah states his dilemma and elaborates upon it by interpretatio. I quote only those lines which are divisio: j If I bo we to his bode and bryng him J>is tale, I j And I be nummen in Nuniue, ray nyes begynes. ! At alle peryles,1 quo£> J>e prophete, 'I aproche hit no nerre; I wyl me sum oJ>er waye, £>at he ne wayte after. (75>“86) Cur ego nunc tibi quicquam obleiara? Si probus es, non meruisti; si inprobus, non cornmovebere " (IV, xl). 1 k 2 . |This dilemma, whether to obey God and be killed or to disobey and flee to safety, is not too clearly expressed; the figure is therefore not a good example. In Gawain ; 1770-1775 the two choices are clearly stated and the 1 1 reasons appended: For }>a.t pryncece of pris depresed hym so bik^e* j Named hym so ne3e be b^ed, bat nede hym bihoued I Ober lach ber ki-r laf, ober lodly refuse. I He cared for his cortaysye, lest crabayn he were, ! And more for his meschef, 3if he schulde make synne, j And be traytor to bat tolke bat bat telde a3t. Since either course he takes will be dishonor or worse, this is a tragic dilemma, a situation of both the classical |and the native tradition, as In the Finnsburg fragment. It jis the statement of the situation, however, rather than the [ jsituation itself that is divisio; this belongs to the rhetorical tradition. As the tragic dilemma is not a customary motif of romance, the author is right in making it as clear as possible to the reader. And since Gawain manages to escape both horns, the poet emphasizes his hero’s adroit speech, his courtly manner. He does not, however, attempt to imagine what Gawain said to accomplish jthis feat, for he turns to that convenient brevitas to go to the conclusion of the scene: wWith luf-la3yng a lyt he ilayd hym bysyde / Alle b© speche3 of specialte bat sprange of her mouthe” (1777-1778)• FREQUENTATIO Frequentatio est cum res tota causa dispersae coguntur in unum locum, quo gravior aut acrior aut criminosior oratio sit. Cud Herennium, IV, xl) (Frequentatio is employed when the facts scattered throughout the whole case are brought together in one passage so that the speech may be more weighty, sharp, or censorious.) i |At least one example appears in each of the four poems, nearly all of them long. Although Purity 55-60 Is not the best, it is short enough to quote: For my boles and my bore3 a m bayted and slayne, And my fedde foule3 fatted wyth scla3t, My polyle pat is penne-fed and partryk©3 bope, Wyth schede3 of wylde swyn, swane3 and erone3-- Al is ropeled and rosted ry3t to J>e sete; Cone 3 cof to my coste, er hit colde worpe. !Purity 181-188 lists the sins for which man is damned; in j Purity 1709-173U- Baniel lists the faults of Belshazzar. In Patience 501-519, God gives Jonah the reasons why he did ■not destroy Nineveh, In Pearl the device is least noticeable, partly because the stanza pattern tends to break up passages whose main strength Is length and abundance of fact and partly ! | because the poemr is perhaps too heavy even without the 1 i device. Some of the descriptive passages are frequentative,! although their main Intent seems to be that of demonstratio.j They give weight and vividness to the poem, however, and j I therefore must be noted as frequentatio. In the long HA ! passages of* dialogue there are occasional frequentationes, j 1 as in 291-300: pre word©3 hat3 pou spoken at.ene: ¥navysed, for sope, wem alle pre. pou ne woste in worlde quat on dot3 mene; py worde byfore py witte con fie. pou says pou trawe3 me in pis dene, 1 i Bycawse pou may wyth y3en. ms se; ; ; Anoper pou says, in pys countre i pyself schal won ryth me wy3t here; j pe prydde, to passe pys water fre— j pat may no ioyful jueler. t In Gawain 2338-2368, the Green Knight sums up the entire istory, explaining parts of It. Mainly, this passage tells the faults of Gawain. Thus It is frequentatio, hut ; ! |disguised somewhat in the figure of licentia. ! ! Although the device thus appears in all the poems, it j f , \ Is not characteristic either of Pearl or of Gawain. I have j , r ' t suggested that the poet may have avoided it In Pearl j because of its heavy effect; the same thing is true of i Gawain. In the homilies the longest, and therefore heaviest, frequentatio comes near the end. Hear the end, too, is the Green Knight's indictment of Gawain. This is the natural place for the device, admittedly, but this disposition also suggests that the poet felt that the device slowed the even flow of his verse and left a sharp break at its close. Certainly he used the device j |effestively. i EXPOLITIO This figure is a device for the iteration of ideas and hence for amplification. It is a generic term and takes a number of forms. Expolitio est cum In eodem loco manemus et aliud atque aliud dicere videmur. (ad Herennium, IV, xlii). i (Expolitio is employed when we center on one point and seem to say now one thing, now another.) .The succeeding discussion, however, Indicates the complexity i of the figure. Its intent is to be redundant without ■ seeming to be so; it has two methods. In the first method f ! ! | the speaker says the same thing over again by altering the j i ' [expression (eamdem rem dicere), this he may do In three ways: (l) by changing the words, (2) by using a different method of speaking (strictly a method for oral delivery; ; there is no example in the ad Herennium nor in the Poetria Nova), and (3) by discussing the matter which appears | either as (a) dialogue (sermocinatio) or (b) an arousing j . I speech (exsuscitio). In the second method (de eadem re j i ;dicere), the speaker says, not the same thing, but some- j thing about the same thing. This he may do in seven j different.modes: (1) he can say it simply, (2) he can say j it simply but add proof, (3) he can alter his simple j statement, either with or without proof, and he can use one J i of the following devices (ij.) contrarium, (5) similitudo, llj .6 (6) exemplum, and (7) conelusio, which, have been, or will ,be, discussed more fully elsewhere, The distinction between sortie foiras of expolitio and interpretatio is extremely difficult to make. Signifi cantly, the mediaeval rhetoricians listed both devices ! :together as one of the eight methods of amplification,^ : ■ i ! Although I here make an attempt to distinguish between them,, i |if the rhetoricians themselves confused them, it is doubtful; ’ whether a poet would trouble to distinguish, * i Purity 32ij--32Jp demonstrates the method of saying the i | same thing by altering the words: j | And quelle alle feat,is quik wyth quavende flode3; | I Alle bat glycfe3 and"gotjand gost of lyf habbe3, j j I schal wast With my wrath, pat wons upon urpe. | The underlined words are mere variations of the idea of ; IT "living things," In Patience 69-70: "For her malys is so much , , is another example. In Pearl the device is i less noticeable, probably because the shorter line and j stanza pattern discouraged this type of verbosity; the poet j repeats the idea of ij-75, "What more honour" in Ij-79, "What i more worschipp." Such separation of repeated elements is not characteristic of the homilies. Nor does this form of expolitio appear often in Gawain, lines like "Of sum auenturus pyng- an vncoupe tale, / Of sum mayn mervayle" I : ^See Faral, pp. 62-67. ; (93-9ij.) being the exception and not the rule. Here the use : of repetitio serves rather to disguise than to emphasize the expolitio. There are no examples of the second type in the poems. The third type of expolitio which says the same thing, ]takes two forms, sermocinatio and exsuscitatio. As the latter form is more suited to oratory, it is not surprising . ! j that I find no example of it in the poems. Moreover, I 'find no example of sermocinatio as expolitio in Pearl and only one doubtful one in Patience. Pearl is, for the most : part, either description or dialogue, and the two are not ■ j often intermingled, a condition necessary for expolitio by j sermocinatio. In Purity and Gawain, however, there are , several instances of this type. For example, Purity lip33 - "Bryng hem now to my borde” . merely says again that Belshazzar ordered the sacred ; vessels to be brought out. Purity 1562: "Call© hem alle I . i to my cort, £0 Cfalce clerkkes" repeats what has already ; been said in indirect statement. The angels' instructions to Lot appear in Purity 9l4-3-9lfl|-: nLest 3© be taken in J>e teche of tyraunte3 here, / Loke 3© bowe now bi bot, bowe3 fast hence 1" In Gawain, the Green Slight makes Gawain i » repeat the terms of the game (378-385) and repeats them j | himself, after Gawain has cut off his head, at J 4i4 . 8-I4 . 53. I li+8 I Again at 5^4-5“5^9 Gawain, in asking permission to leave the 1 ; i ■court, restates these terms. These are not all the examples in these two poems, hut they are sufficient to show clearly that the poet was acquainted with this form of expolitio and used it effectively. Not only does the device amplify his poem, but it also adds emphasis, verisimilitude, and vividness to the narrative. The seven modes of the other method of expolitio, saying something about the same thing, are all represented. The simple form of saying something about the same thing appears in Gawain 2131• HI were a kny3t kowarde, I my3t not be excused,1 1 in which the second clause comments upon the idea of the first. The poet has used membrum here to 'help conceal the fact that the second clause adds little to the reader’s knowledge, however useful it may be to point 'out the obvious. Similarly in Pearl 613-616: - ! Bot now fsou mote3» me for to mate, I ■ J>at I my peny haf wrang tan here; ■ I i>ou say 3 i>at I £>at com to late Am not worthy so gret fere. ! I I By saying something about the thought of the first two i lines, the poet amplifies it in the last two, still employing the Biblical figure. i Obviously, this form of expolitio de eadem re is the jsimplest and briefest mode. It also adds least to the reader’s comprehension of the subject compared with other 349 inodes, such, as the second, which not only says something about the same thing but appends reasons. This second type the G-awain-poet used more often, particularly in Gawain, although, he also employed it in Pearl. For example, in expressing the regret of Arthur’s Court at Gawain*s departure, in the words of an unidentified speaker, the poet quote s: ! Bi Kryst, hit is scape pat pou, leude, schal be lost, pat art of lyf noble’ To finde his fere vpon folde, in fayth, is not epe. - Warloker to haf wro3t had more wyt bene, And haf dy3t 3onder dere a duk to haue worked; A lowande leder of lede3 in londe hym wel seme3, And so had better haf ben pen britned to no3t, Hadet wyth an aluisch mon, for angarde3 pryde. (67I 4--681). Since the poet has already told of the sorrow of the court ’ that "so worthe as Wawan schulde wende on pat ernde, / To dry3e a delful dynt, and dele no more/ wyth bronde" (559- ■ 561), the whole speech is expolitio by sermocinatio. It is the structure of the speech itself that is the point here. Line 676 says something about the same subject as j lines 67^-675; the subsequent lines merely give reasons t for the statement in line 676. In this way the poet has amplified a rather obvious thought by appending a reason f that adds not only to the length of his poem but also to. j the stature of his hero. ! ! In a similar construction, also In sermocinatio, ! Gawain refused the gift of the ladyj uBot the renk hit renayed, and redyly lie sayde, * I wil no gifte3 for gode, my gay, at fis tyrae; / I haf none you to no m e , ne no3t wyl X take" ( . 1821-1823). Here the expolitio de eadem re is more important, since Gawain subsequently did accept a gift., than the original refusal which it amplifies. 3ja fact, the j seeming intent of the original gift offered was to get (Gawain to make some such abatement, in order to emphasize his fault when he does accept a gift, even to save his life, Thus the poet has used expolitio in the structure of his 1 inarrative, rather than for mere amplification.. In Pearl lj.01-lj.0ij., the idea of Pearl J 4.OO, "For now fy jspeche is to me dere," is amplified and explained: i Maysterful mod and hy3e pryde, ; I hete $>e, arn heterly hated here. < My Lorde ne loue3 not for to chyde, For meke a m alle fat wone3 hym nere. In this way the poet has employed the second mode of expolitio de eadem re to amplify his material. He does not make as much use of this as of the first mode. X find four examples in Gawain and Pearl and none In either of the homilies. The poet may have avoided these modes of expolitio because they are less effective than some of the following, at least for his purpose; moreover, they are 4 relatively brief and do not add much to the volume of his verse. The next mode Is merely a doubling of the first type. i5i with an optional combination with the second mode. It is, therefore, something of a distinction without a difference (except in quantity), yet the distinction belongs to the tradition and must be considered, especially since the poet , has made use of the device in Pearl, where several stanzas are constructed by this mode. An example of this type is stanza 21 (21^1-252) : 1 *0 perle,1 quod I, ’In perl©3 py3t, Art pou my perle pat I; haf playned, Regretted by myn one on ny3te? j Much longeyng haf I for pe layned, ; Sypen into gresse pou me agly3te. Pensyf, payred, I am forpayned, j And pou in a lyf of lykyng ly3te, I j In Paradys erde, of stryf unstrayned. \ What wyrde hat3 hyder my iuel vayned, j ! And don me in pys del and gret daunger? I j Fro we in twynne we m towen and twayned, I haf ben a joyle3 juelere.* In this stanza the second line, after an exclamatio In the first, states the subject matter, which the third line merely repeats by expolitio in its simplest form (eamdem I rem dieere). The remainder of the stanza is expolitio de ; eadem re, in t'fhich the fourth, seventh, and. ninth lines add ! jdiffering material about the same subject, but do not i 'actually advance the argument. In the next two stanzas the maiden refutes these three Ideas one at a time, and thus the poet further amplifies the same ideas by employing the same figure. Although he gains precision and thus adds to j the clarity of his poem, he also slows down .the development 152 ■of his argument. The slow advance of the argument in other sections of Pearl is due to the presence of this mode, which the poet employed again in stanzas 27, 5l, 56, and 65* Significantly;' he made little use of the device in the other poems and in ! them such expolitio is seldom lengthy. In Gawain, for I example, I find only one example: He wat3 so joly of his joyfnes, and suraquat ehildgered: * His lif like hym ly3t, he louied £>e lasse, AuJ>er to longe lye or to longe sitte, ; So bisied him his 3onge blod and his brayn wylde. (86-89) :I find no instance of this mode in Patience and only two in ! I jPurity, one of which (587-599) is fairly long (see j |appendix); but the amplification of the idea that man must ! t , * j beware of the f , fylJ>e of $>e flesch" is short enoxigh to quote i here: , Tyl any water in J>e worlds to wasche i>e fayly. For is no segge under sunne so seme of his crafte3 ; If he be sulped in synne, J>at sytte3 unclene— On spec of a spot may spede to mysse Of $>e sy3te of £>e Soverayn |>at sytte3 so hy3e. (5^1-8-552) As this idea is the central theme of Purity, this expolitio is really a part of the coramoratio and therefore differs from such figures in Pearl, which generally add little ! except verses, which are, it is true, often lovely. But in the other poems movement, generally narrative movement, is j more important; and the poet rightly avoids this mode of i .expolitio which impairs the development of his story. : i The remaining four modes of expolitio de eadem re are ! t |adaptations of other figures: contrarium, similitudo, jexemplum, conclusio. Although all four devices retain the { |same form whether appearing independently or as a species i jof expolitio, in the latter they expand ideas already * jexpressed. As contrarium and conclusio have already been i jdefined in the previous chapter and similitude and exemplum (will be discussed below, it is unnecessary to define them ‘ fully here. [ ; Contrarium, it will be remembered, is a figure which establishes briefly and easily one or two alternatives. IAs a figura verborum the poet made little use of the device i ■as a species of expolitio de eadem re, I find no example. J to explain the poetTs neglect of this device is difficult. i .In the narrative parts of the poems (and Gawain and the ! homilies are largely narrative), failure to employ the device is understandable, for the intention of the device is to make the auditor agree with the speaker by analogous reasoning. Consequently an audience is necessary for its proper use, a situation that is not compatible with the impersonal narration of the poet. In Pearl, however, In I ■the long argument between the poet and the maiden, as well ■as in the expository passages of the homilies, the device i jwould have been appropriate. No explanation of the poet*s 1514 - neglect of contrarium seems satisfactory. Similitudo, on the other hand, appears more frequently In the poems, both in its own right as a figura sententlarum and as a species of expolitio. As the figure, generally called the simile, is well known, it is j unnecessary to define it here; complete discussion may be reserved until later in the chapter. As expolitio, similitudo compares an unknown or an abstract situation to one that is known or concrete. Pearl 3l|-5“3l4-8 is a good example. The maiden has explained that man must suffer his fate and that It is useless to cry out against It. She adds, to make the matter clear and vivid: nFor fcott daunce as any do, / Braundyseh and bray i>y braj>e3 breme, / When $>ou no fyrre may, to ne fro, / $>ou moste abyde J>at he schal deme." Although the figure adds much to the beauty of the poem, and so is valuable merely as ornament, its primary purpose is to cause the reader to recall a visual .and auditory experience and hence to understand an Idea t that is too big for him to visualize directly. I j ! The poet employed expolitio by similitudo, although j : - i Jnot frequently, at least sufficiently to show that he was (conscious of the convention. One example in Purity jamplifies the idea that "one spec of a spotte’ * win lose iraan salvation: 155 As ]?e beryl bornyst byhove3 be clene, $>at is sound© on uche a syde and no sem babes, Wythouten maskle oper mote as marge rye-perle. (554-556') hater in the poem, a similitudo comparing man to a pearl again appears (1117-1128), this time preceding tbe material ■which it amplifies, I find no instance of tbe device in Patience, which relies chiefly on exemplum and conclusio for simplification. In Pearl, on the other hand, which I relies less on exemplum, I find several clear examples. In ' 1 , addition to tbe one already given, tbe device appears again (607-608), amplifying Christ's largess: "He laue3 hys gyfte3 as water of dycbe, / Oper got©3 of golf pat neuer ■eharde." : The examples from Pearl, although they appeal to the understanding, are primarily appeals to the visual imagination. The examples I find in Gawain are of this type, as when Gawain awaits tbe second blow calmly and "glent with no membre, / Bot stode sty lie as pe ston, oper ! a stubbe auper / pat raveled is in roche ground© with ; rot©3 a hundreth" (2292-2291}.), or when tbe Green Knight j i and his horse are said to be "as grow© grene as pe gres 1 and grener hit semed, / pen grene aumayl on gold© glowande 1 i bry3ter" (235-236). Such similitudines add little to the j I reader1 s comprehension and not a great deal to his j j } pleasure. The poet has attempted, by being exceedingly ! 156 concrete, to redeem these figures from ordinary comment, hut he hardly succeeds* As a matter of fact, the ideas which he amplifies hy similitudo do not need amplification; he errs in gilding the lily. Although the similitudines of ■Purity and Pearl are perhaps no more original, they perform I 'the real service of expolitio de eadem re, and so are ; i •superior to those in Gawain. | The exemplum, of which Gawain offers only one instance, is the chief type of expolitio in the homilies and is important in Pearl. This device, a figura sententiarum, , will receive further treatment later in this chapter; as a j j mode of expolitio de eadem re, it employs a story, incident, or saying of the past to amplify the subject matter of a passage. In Pearl, the poet has used the device a number of times in this manner. In 676-681}. he refers to the j ! Psalter to amplify the idea that "J>e innosent is ay saf by ry3t,n and in 689-700 to Wisdom and the Psalter for i i authority that on the contrary 5 1 the ry3twys man" must labor i i for salvation. In 709-7214. he takes from the Gospels the ! j story of Jesus and the children, and in 729-739 that of the J merchant who sold all his goods to purchase the pearl of ! i great price. The longest exemplum in Pearl, the Parable of • the Vineyard (l{.96-5?72), amplifies the idea that, since there is no limit to heavenly reward, the reward of the : x57 - imaiden that "lyfed not two 3er in oar jbede" is just and right. Because of its length this exemplars overshadows the idea that it amplifies. Moreover, the poet interposes the exemplum between the generalization and its application to the maiden. He then lets the maiden explain her heavenly glory by referring to the exemplum: "In euentyde into $>e ,vyne I come" (£82) rather than to the generalization which | I the exemplum illustrates and confirms. As a result the reader tends to forget the idea; possibly the poet did i I also. Certainly there is reason to consider this exemplum I » a blemish rather than an ornament, however well it is i * I narrated. j i In general, the exempla in the homilies share this fault. Purity has three long exempla: the Flood (2$3-5kk)> the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (560-101^8), and the destruction of Belshazzar ( IILj . 9-1796 ). All these are expolitio de eadem re: the first amplifies the idea that God hated filth, that is, sins of the flesh; the second the idea that he held "dede3 of shame'1 in particular abhorrence; land the third the idea that, once a man is shriven, God is angered by his sinning again. Such lengthy exempla cause jthe reader to forget the ideas so fully amplified, ! i particularly since the poet has enlivened his narratives j ! with interesting detail. This in turn has caused the poem 158 i to seem a telling of three disparate and unrelated stories, j although the author*s expressed intent was a sermon against the sins of the flesh. That these exempla could he excellent illustrations with Biblical authority is obvious; but, as they are lengthy and full of interesting material unrelated to the ideas they amplify, they defeat their Ipurpose. The same thing may be said of Patience also, I where the poet retells the entire story of Jonah although .only a part of it really illustrates and confirms his idea. iSuch uses of amplification indicate either that the poet misunderstood the use of the exemplum or that the sermon • ; 1 .existed for the sake of the exemplum, as in The Pardoner1s j .'Tale. ! I i i There are, however, other exempla in Purity which j amplify properly. In Purity 35-160 the poet first compares : i , the court of God with that of a nobleman and then recounts ' the Parable of the Wedding Peast. Even here the exempla are long, but they make vivid the idea they amplify. In Purity 1056-106L}. the reference to the Romance of the Rose clarifies the way a man should conform to God’s wishes. Such Instances, together with the exempla in Pearl (aside from the Parable of the Yineyard), indicate that the poet understood expolitio by the exemplum. That he did not j i always apply his knowledge is perhaps not regrettable, since! 159 the exempla contain some or the finest lines in the homilies. But his lengthy exempla in these poems show that the poet had here a poor sense of proportion and that his chief interest in the homilies, as in Gawain,was narrative. The last mode of expolitio de eadem re is conclusio, :a figur© verborum, discussed in the preceding chapter. As A it is a reasoning device which employs a syllogism, to find it used in Gawain is unexpected, yet the poet has employed it in Gawain more often than any other of the |species of expolitio de eadem re. To demonstrate the j Imethod by which conclusio amplifies, I quote the idea j | ; :amplified as well as the amplification. In Gawain 237-211.3 the first two lines state the subject; the remainder is expolitio: A1 studied pat per stod, and stalked hyrn nerre Wyth al pe wonder of pe wo ride what he worch schulde. For fele selle3 had pay sen, bot such neuer are; Forpi for fantoun and fayrySe pe folk pere hit denied, perfore to answers wat3 ar3e mony apel freke, And al stouned at his steuen and stonstil seten In a swoghe sylence pur3 pe sale riche. |By means of conclusio the Green Enight explains why he has t | ^This syllogism is not the formal syllogism of logic; it Is rather a rhetorical type of reasoning. See H. M. j Hubbell, Cicero^ De Inventions, p. 92 note, and Be^ j Inventions"^ I, xxxiv-xli. TEe device is a method of i embellishment rather than a method of arriving at truth, as I Cicero definitely states: "nos autem de expolitionis | partibus loquimur" (De Inventione, I, xl). 160 . not come to joust at Arthur*s court. The reasoning is somewhat jumbled, but the thought— and the insult— are dear enough: Hay, frayst I no fy3t, in fayth I pe telle, Hit a m about on pis bench bot berdle3 chylder. If I were hasped in armes on a he3e stede, Here is no mon me to mach, for my3te3 so wayke. ! Forpy I crave in pis court a Grystemas gomen, i For hit is 3ol and Hwe 3er, and here are 3®P mony. i (279-2%) These examples are sufficient to illustrate the device and the manner of the poet's use of it, but not to indicate the , * ;extent nor the variety of his use. 2h the temptation scenes 1 ■there are several examples, although here the poet does not j i ! juse words like forpy to indicate their presence. j ! !Appropriate to the witty dialogue, such conclusiones are i ' ;more subtle and less easily recognized, as in I2l|,9-1250: "pe prys and pe prowes pat plese3 al oper, / If I hit lakked: oper set at ly3t, hit were littel daynte." As these lines amplify an idea in an earlier passage, they fit naturally into a conversational pattern and do not seem pedantic or artificial. In the scene at the Green Chapel, however, the conclusiones are more obvious, with words like Mherfore < i |(2279), perfore (2330), and pus (21j . 37) to mark them. Here the conversation is more direct, as if in a fight there was S no need for subtlety and dissimulation, quite unlike the delicate maneuvers of adultery. 161 I j Rather surprisingly, there are fewer instances of | I I conclusio in Pearl and the homilies than in Gawain, although the Pearl-maiden could well have employed it. In 'fact, the poet has given conclusio to himself as often as to the maiden. Her ideas have other forms of expolitio, [ . » [particularly the exemplum. Even in the conclusio there may I be a type of exemplum where the poet refers to the Bible for proof, as in 590-600: : Me pynk py tale vnresounable. Godde3 ry3t is redy and euermore rert, Oper Holy Wryt< is bot a fable. J In Sauter is sayd a verce ouerte i pat speke3 a poynt determynable: i "pou quyte3 vchon as hys desserte, j ; Now he pat stod pe long day stable, j And pou to payment com hym byfore, j penne pe lasse in werke to take more able, ; And euer pe lenger pe lasse, pe more. Except for the addition of proof by authority, this conclusio is essentially the same as those In Gawain; other instances in Pearl generally lack this proof. Both homilies also afford examples of the device, but do not alter the form significantly. It is interesting, however, that j Patience, only a third as long as Purity, has a larger number of conclusiones, although the infrequent use of the jdevice in either poem makes the fact unimportant. There !are, however, sufficient instances in both Pearl and the 111 I jhomilies to demonstrate that the poet knew and employed Jconclusio.for amplification. His more frequent use of it 162 in Gawain, a narrative poem, in even weightier evidence. j Thus the Gawain-poet has used every species of* expolitio, both eamdem rein and de eadem re, that is adaptable to poetry. Of the first method he used sermocinatio principally, except in Pearl. Of the second f he relied chiefly on exemplum in Pearl and the homilies, jand on conclusio for Gawain. He has employed all of the 'seven modes, although I do not find examples of each type i i in every poem. In the homilies his great reliance upon , • 1 Biblical exempla obviated both the necessity and the opportunity for other types of amplification. He has naturally used many figures in recounting these stories, but has made no particular effort to use other types of , •expolitio. In Pearl and Gawain, on the other hand, since | he does not rely on long exempla to give body to his poems, i he must employ other devices for amplification. Thus in these poems there are Instances of nearly every type of expolitio, the lack of sermocinatio (as expolitio) in Pearl and of exempla in Gawain being the notable exceptions. I In view of this evidence, It seems very likely that the poet; was indebted to the tradition of classical rhetoric. j But still to be considered is the possibility that his j i use of the device comes, not from a classical system of rhetoric, but from the native Germanic tradition. The first; 163 .type of expolitio (eadem rem dicere) is so much like i ;interpretatio that any distinction between them is essentially without a difference. And like interpretatio, it appears in Old English verse, there known as variation, which is, says Klaeber, t T by far the most important rhetorical figure, in fact the very soul of the Old English |poetical style.’ 1^ It is therefore entirely possible that t [the Gawain-poet used variation instead of the first type I of the first method of expolitio. It Is a difficult f .problem, practically Incapable of solution. This much is I certain, however: the Gawain-poet relied more heavily on « 'other types of amplification than on simple verbal variation; it would be wrong to say that variation is the i ,very soul of his poetical style. Since he employed practically every form of expolitio, in addition to Ivariation, it seems more likely that he derived his i jrhetoric from the classical rather than from the Germanic ! |tradition. COMMORATIO ] By this figure the orator insisted upon the importance j i i 1 !of his best topic (place) by returning to it again and j ! I i again, a type of emphasis by repetition. ^Beowulf, p. lxv. 161* . Conmoratio est cum in loco firmissimo quo tota causa eontinetur manetur diutius et eodem saepius reditur. (ad He rennlum , I¥, xlv) (Commoratio is employed when one dwells longer on the focal point, upon which the entire case hinges, and reverts to that same point again and again.) In poetry the device stresses the central theme of the poem,. both by direct statement and by various other rhetorical i ;devices, primarily expolitio. Thus it is to be found i | I ! throughout the entire poem, is, indeed, indissolubly united j i jwith the poem. As the author of the ad Herennium puts it, icommoratio is like blood which Is spread through the whole I body of the speech (tamquam sanguis perfusus est per totum t corpus orationis). To find instances that allow quotation ■ is difficult. For this reason, the author of the ad : i ! iHerennium gives no example, nor does Geoffroi de Yinsauf, j The device occurs in the poems of the Gawain-poe t. In j Purity the central idea is that man should be clene; this point the poet stresses by dwelling upon what happens to the filthy. As the very beginning he states his subject: Clannesse who so kyndly cowpe coraende And rekken up alle pe resoun3 pat ho by ri3t aske3, Fayre forme3 my3t he fynde in forpering his speche, ; And in the contrare, kark and combraunce huge. (1—ip) Except in the long exempla, where he occasionally grows more interested in his narrative than in his theme, he defines, explains, applies this central thought. He employs most of the devices of rhetoric to amplify this idea, but j 165 i ! [especially the exemplum. At the close of the poem he t restates the theme directly, in the form of conclusio. Patience has a similar construction, although there i is but one long exemplum. In the exordium the subject is i stated: Paeience is a poynt, pa.3 hit displese ofte, For ho quelles vche a qued and quenches malyce” (l-ij.) IThen the Beatitudes are rehearsed and then personified; by conclusio, the poet shows their relation to his theme. This leads to the exemplum, in which patience is twice enjoined upon Jonah. The exemplum closes with the gnomic < , | comment: ‘ ‘ For he jpat is to rakel to renden his clofce, / j f Mot efte sitte with more vn-sounde to sewe hem togeder” (526-527). The poem closes with a more formal conclusio, which restates the original proposition. Thus the poet employs commoratio in the homilies. f | Pearl and Gawain, on the other hand, the problem of j commoratio is more difficult, a fact evident from the many j 1 and diverse interpretations of critics. No one idea seems to dominate all others in these poems, nor does the poet begin and end with a definite theme. In the Pearl there is at first the expressed admiration and longing for the pearl, i jrepeated again in the first speech of the poet on beholding ! ! the maiden. His speech furnishes the material for her 166 first admonition; this is essentially the pattern for the entire section of argument. After this section comes the vision of the Holy City and then the poet ’s rude awakening. If there is a central theme or a moral lesson involved, and I believe there is, the poet might be expected to employ commoratio, not only in the long argument, but also at the beginning and end. Now among the many ideas in the Argument, the one which receives most attention is that man I must be patient, content with what God gives, if he is to k understand the ways of God to man. j 5 I First the poet complains, "What wyrde hat3 hider my iuel vayned, / And don me in pjs del and gret daunger?" i(2!4.9-2f>0). The maiden rebukes, "i>ou hat3 called J>y wyrde | i i a J>ef, pat o3t of no3t hat3 mad J>e cler" (273-27)+). She , 'objects to his mourning: "Thou deme3 no3t bot doe.1- dystresse, / . . . Why aot3 $>ou so?" (337-338); "J>ou most I abyde J>at he schal deme" (3I+8). The poet declares himself 'satisfied on seeing her (392). On finding her a queen, he is disturbed, thinking her reward too much (stanzas 1+0-i+l). This introduces the exemplum of the Parable of the Vineyard, ! which concludes with the lord’s question, "More, wejper jlouyly is ray gyfte, / To do wyth myn quat-so my lyke3?" (565-566), When the poet is still unconvinced, the maiden points out that even the holiest forfeit heaven, "And, ay J>e 167 often, he alder J>ay were'1 (621) and ”Mercy and grace moste hem $>en stere" (623), A righteous man, though sinning, may ' he saved by grace, ”Bot wyth sor3 and wyt he mot hit craue, / And byde he payne J>erto is bent” (663-661}.), Christ himself ”Wythouten any sake of felony” (800) suffered for men ”as meke as a lomp |>at no playnt tolde" (8l5). The blessed maidens of heaven are happy, ”Al|>a3 oure corses in i 1 clotte3 clynge, / And 3© remen for rau|>e wythouten reste, / ' I [We J>ni?3outly hauen cnawyng" (857-859)* The succeeding passages describe the heavenly city, both by sermocinatio ! j |and by ‘ demonstratio, This vision so overcomes the poet : | jthat he tries to cross the stream and wakes. How he is jcontent with his lot: "low al be to pat Prynce3 paye” 1 ! (1176). If hit be ueray, and soth sermoun hat $>eu so stryke3 in garlande gay, So wel is me in J>ys doel-doungoun ; J>at hem art to hat Prynce3 paye. (1185-1188) Since the original cause of his distress was the loss of the pearl: ”1 dewyne, fordoIked of luf-daungere / Of hat i jpryuy perle wythouten spot” (11-12), the poet has now come to the realization that he should be happy because she is saved, that the only way to understand God is to be patient: To hat Prynce3 pay hade I ay bente, j ; And 3emed no more hen wat3 me gyuen, 1 ; And halden me her in trwe entent, j As he perle me prayed hat wat3 so hryuen, ! As helde, drawen to Godde3 present, 168 To mo or his mysterys I hade ben dryuen; Bot ay wolde man of happe more hente }>en mo3te by ry3t vpon hem clyuen. herfore my ioye wat3 sone toriuen, And I kaste of kythe3 hat laste3 aye, Lorde, mad hit arn hat agayn f>e stryuen, Oher proferen he o3t agayn hy paye. (1189-1200) I Thus the poet has developed one theme in Pearl. Whether or not it is the central theme, that man must be content with I iwhat God gives if he is to understand the ways of God Jtoward man, may be debatable. But that the poet has 'returned to this theme again and again is certain; it seems i jclear that he was employing commoratio much more subtly S than in the homilies. j j i The theme of Gawain is even more subtle, if indeed it I ■ i has one in the sense that Pearl and homilies have. The ! ] one thing insisted upon is that Gawain is the perfect i knight— courageous, courteous, loyal, handsome, intelligent,' l indeed a "fyne fader of nurture” (919), who represents the ideal of the chivalric code. To each of these qualities the poet refers many times. That the hero failed once, when he kept the girdle, seems to add rather than to detract from his stature. Although he considered his fault enormous, the Green Knight obviously thought it a small thing: "Bot here yow lakked a lyttel, sir” (2366), and Arthur’s court "La3en loude fc>erat" (25H+). Whether a J i ! moral theme should be sought for in romance is doubtful; I 169 i !after all, to prodace a narrative in which an ideal man is . i ^ severely tried and found to be only slightly wanting I should be sufficient, but critics insist on seeking for | j | moral teaching. Perhaps it would be better to consider ; Gawain a Christmas "gomen," the mediaeval equivalent of J ; Twelfth Night. But whatever the interpretation, the only i I use of commoratio which I find is the recurrent insistence upon Gawain’s knightly perfection. :CONTENT10 The corresponding figura verborum of this device j i l ! shows an antithesis by contrasting words, which engenders j t i ! i j a more formal style, like "As be honest utwyth, and inwyth | ; alle fylpe3” (Purity lij.) in whieh coramutatio emphasizes { the antithesis. Contentio, as a figura sententiarum, does D not demand this formality. Its function is to point out larger contrasts, as the definition in ad Herennium ®The verbal figure should also be brief, with its j sense counterpart more ample. "Inter haec duo contentionlsj genera hoc interest: illud ex verbis celeriter relatis j constat; hie sententiae contrariae ex comparatione j referantur oportet" (ad Herennium, IV, xlv). The first, j a figura verborum, the second, a figura sententiarum: j "Inimicis te placabilem, amlcis inexorabilera praebes." j "Vos huius incommodis lugetis, iste rei publlcae calamitatei laetatur. Vos vostris fortunis diffiditis, iste solus suisj , eo magis confidit." Thus at extremes the distinction is clear enough, but the point of distinction is both hard to , place and to observe. There may be legitimate disagreement ! about the classification of a given figure. 170 , : indicates : "Oontentio est per quam contraria referuhturu ! (LV, xlv) (Contentio is that figure through which contraries are noted). The formality of the verbal figure possibly inhibited its use by the poet, for he has not employed it often. Even though the figura sententiarum is not so formal, the poet makes only a limited use of it. He has, ;however, employed it in every poem except Patience, where ! .1 find no example.9 Purity begins with such a contentio: ! Clannesse who so kyndly cowpe comende And rekken up alle pe resoun3 pat ho by ri3t aske3, i Payre forme3 my3t he fynde in fordering his speche, , And in the contrare, kark and combraunce huge. (1-4) j .[Phis is almost immediately followed by another, which j ^contains the verbal figure as the central part of the j ilarger device: I | | ( Adam inobedyent, ordaynt to blysse, per pryvely in paradys his place wat3 devised, To lyve per in lykyng pe lenpe of a terme, j And penne enherit© pat home pat aungele3 forgart; | Bot pur3 pe eggyng of Eve. he ete of an apple 1 « pat enpoysened alle peple3 pat parted fro him bope. (237-242) ;By so doing, he has emphasized the point of the exemplum and, even more important, has a little reduced the jnarrative content and thus made a step toward a unified t ^There is a contentio in Patience 279-280, which I have classified as a figura verboruml SucK classification is a admittedly debatable. See footnote 8. In any case, there !is little use of contentio in Patience. 1 171 !poem. Unfortunately his interest in narration generally ! 0 exceeded his interest in unity— not an unusual failing in the Middle Ages— and Purity is therefore a misshapen homily, little more than three stories loosely tied together. He might well have employed contentio in this manner more often. In Pearl, although he is much more adroit in employing the exemplum, he makes no such use of contentio. In fact he makes little use of the device at all. The clearest example Is stanza 56: Grace innogh f>e mon may haue J>at synne3 jbenne new, 3if hym repente, Bot wyth sor3 and syt he mot hit eraue, And byde J>e payne J>erto is bent. Bot resoun of ry3t j>at con no3t raue Saue3 euermore |>e innossent; Hit is a dom J>at neuer God gaue, £>at euer J>e gyltle3 schulde be schente. £>e gyltyf may contryssyoun hente And be f>ur3 mercy to grace J>ry3t; Bot he to gyle $>at neuer glente And inoscente is saf and ry3te. (661-672) Here the first eight lines establish the contentio and add ’ some proof; the last four merely repeat the first contentio ; ,in somewhat different words (interpretatio). Because this i jstanza is a central one in the passage (stanzas 52-62) in i ; ^which the maiden establishes her right to her state of jbliss, it Is extremely important. That the poet used the ,device so appropriately at this point indicates that he was iWell aware of its value, even though he rarely employs It. 172 Gawain, on the other hand, rather frequently presents contrasts. As part of the transitio between the beheading of the Green Enight and Gawain's quest, the poet reflects: "Tha3 hym worde3 were wane when jpay to sete wenten, / How ar pa.j stoken of stume werk, stafful her hond" (I 4 . 93 —Ip9l4-). The idea receives further development by expolitio. In 950-969, the description (effictio) of the two ladies in the Green Knight's castle takes the form of contentio, !since the poet contrasts their appearance point by point, beginning with commutatio: "For if pe 3onge wat3 3©P» 3ol3e wat3 £>at oJ>er" (95l). In the temptation scenes are iother examples: while Gawain sleeps wholesomely on the cold mom, "Bot J>e lady for luf let not to slepe" (1733); ' The Lady blames him for discourtesy, unless he is bound to 1 another (1779-1781{.) ; Gawain would like to give her a gift, but has nothing worthy of her (l801-l809). Again, in the iscene at the Green Chapel, the poet employs the device: Gawain declines to take his guide's advice, but will go on (2128-2135); the Green Knight "homered heterly," but iWounds Gawain only slightly (2311-2312); "Bot here yow i : lakked a lyttel, sir, and lewte you wonted." (2366). Thus 1 ■contentio appears rather frequently in Gawain. i ’ This fact may seem strange since Gawain is a narrative poem. Actually, the contentiones emphasize the development 173 , I of the narrative. For example, by contrasting the < carelessness with which Gawain beheaded the Green Knight with the "atarne work1 * which now faces the hero, the poet i both advances his plot and deepens the sense of approaching ; tragedy. Again, he increases the importance of the < “ auncian" by contrasting her with the lady of the castle. This elderly dame plays a small role in the story as it i unrolls; her importance is revealed only by the Green j i Knight at the Green Chapel. Although her part in the game ; comes as a surprise to the reader, the poet has prepared I for its revelation, so that it seems natural and j artistically right. The other instances are equally I justifiable. The poet, then, indicates in three of the four poems ! that he knows the device and how to use it effectively. The brevity of Patience as well as its dependence on other methods of adornment may account for his not l .using the device (as a figura sententiarum) in that poem. i As the length of a poem naturally affects the number of ;figures, the greater number of contentiones in Gawain and i Purity is not significant. That the poet employed the jdevice as often as he did is the important thing, for this jfact again shows his indebtedness to the rhetorical (tradition. He could have found the device in Old English H b poetry, it is true, for Beowulf contains antithesis. In view of his use of other figures, however, and especially of the following one, to believe that the Gawain-poet derived contentio from the native tradition seems to place overmuch stress on that tradition. SIMILITUDE One of the more obvious features in Beowulf is the infrequent use of similes; the few which do appear are short formula-like comparisons such as fugle gelicost (727)> , style geTSeost (1608). If this fairly represents the native t |tradition, then the Gawain-poet derived his use of the similitudo elsewhere, presumably from the Latin tradition |of rhetoric, for he certainly employed the device, if not always with distinction, at least distinctly. Distinctiveness was a characteristic of the similitudo,' ; which has a function to perform. j ; Similitudo est oratio traducens ad rem quampiam aliquid ; ex re dispari simile. Ea swmitur aut omandi causa aut ; probandi aut apertius dicendi aut ante oculos ponendi. j Et quomodo quattuor de causis sumitur, item quattuor modis dicitur: per contrarium, per negationem, per j conlationem, per brevitatem. (ad Herennium, IV, xlv) ; (Similitudo is that form of speech which carries over to ; anything whatever some modicum of similarity from | dissimilarity. It is employed to ornament, to furnish ! proof, to speak more openly, or to paint a clearer i picture. As there are four reasons for its use, so also are there four modes of construction: contrarium, negatio, collatlo, brevitas.) Prom this definition and partition, it is apparent that, to. the rhetoricians at any rate, the similitudo is much more than mere "stated comparison*'10 In fact, not all modes of similitudo demand the "stated" comparison, such as as i (sicut). For example, negatio employs: the neither . . . nor (neque . . . neque) formula. Contrarium as similitudo has the same form as contrarium as a figura verborum» or as expolitio; the difference is only in its use. The distinction between conlatio and brevitas Is merely a matter of arrangement. A comparison in which both members 11 are part of the same construction is brevitas, conlatio has its members in separate sentences. As there are both four reasons for and four methods of ; using similitudo, theoretically It is possible to make 12 sixteen classes of the device. It is unlikely that any "^Although comparison is the basis of similitudo, j similitudo is not the only type of comparison. It compares j dissimilar things only. Another figure, imago, compares like things. The fine point at which two things become so j similar that their comparison becomes imago rather than ! similitudo is sometimes difficult to distinguish, perhaps, j but the principle is clear enough. ^The author of the ad Herennium adds this note on brevitas: "non enim ita ut in ceteris rebus res ab re separata est, sed utraeque re coniuncte et confuse pronuntiatae" (IV, xlvii). (For it is not the same as in other modes, where an idea is separated from an idea, but both ideas are presented in a joined and mingled manner.) -^Indeed, even more classes could be made, for some instances satisfy more than one reason for their presence, so that there might be 116 classes of similitudines. - . . . 176 poet would have used every method Tor every reason. To do so would be ridiculous, except in a very large corpus. The , Gawain-poet made only a limited use of contrarium and no use of it as similitudo. X find only one exemple each of negatio and conlatio. For the most part, the poet employed , brevitas. Hor do I find that he ever used the device for proof. Most of the examples either add vividness (ante oculos ponendi) or clarity (apertius dicendi) or both; relatively few are merely ornamental (ornandi causa). As a , result, there are only five classes of elmilitudines in ; jthese poems. ! ! ! i The lone example of negatio is Pearl 69-72: j | I | |>e ly3t of hem ray3t no mon leuen, ! I £>e glemende glory i>at of hem glent; , ' For wern neuer %>jebbe3 i>at wy3e3 weuen i Of half so dere adubbement. As these lines represent an attempt to indicate the wonders of Paradise in terms of earthly values, the reason,: for :this similitudo is to speak more openly.1^ As stich, it is I n •^Xhere is of course room for disagreement on the function (catisa) of any given similitudo, but in general the principle is clear enough. If the figure clarifies, it is apertius dicendi; if it visualizes vividly a physical object, it Is ante oculos ponendi; if it merely complements an expressed idea, It Is ornandi .causa. Haturally any good similitudo should add to the understanding and will be vivid and ornamental. An example from Pearl may clarify: ,fRy3t as $>e maynful mone con ryse / Er J>erme £>e day-glem dryue al doun, / So sodanly . . . (1093-1095). This justly admired I simile may add something to the understanding; it is ! certainly vivid, both by reason of its acute observation 177 I jnot revealing and indeed has little value except to make i the necessary last line, which concludes a stanza, logically connected with what precedes it. Thus the poet has brought rhetoric to the aid of rhetoric. The only example of similitudo per collationem which I ! jfind in the poems occurs in Purity. For longer comparisons |the poet prefers the exemplum, which performs the same ;functions as the similitudo. But in Purity 111^-1132 is a , i long and involved comparison: ; bou may schyne fmr3 schryfte, b©3 i>ou haf schorae served, And pure $>e with penaunce tyl $>ou a perle wor|>e. Perle praysed is prys jber perre is schewed, i J>a3 hym not derrest be demed to dele for penies, Quat may $>e cause be called bot for hlr clene hwes, bat Wynnes worschyp abof alle whyte stones? For ho schynes so schyr $>at is of schap rounde, Wythouten faut oJ>er fyli>e, 3if ho fyn were And wax ever in the worlde in weryng so olde, 3et pe perle payres no whyle ho in pyese lasttes And if hit cheve fse chaunce uncheryst ho worJ>e, bat ho blyndes of ble in bour J>er ho lygges, No-bot wasch hir wyth worchyp in wyn, as ho askes, Ho by kynde schal becom clerer |>en are, So if folk be defowled by unfre chaunce, bat he be sulped in sawle, seche to schryfte, And he may polyce hym at jbe prest, by penaunce taken, Wei bry3ter b®n b© beryl ob©r browden perles. Although the figure apparently arises out of the symbolic ! and of its originality. But it is primarily ornamental, ifor it only serves to explain sodanly, which is quite ^sufficient to indicate the abrupt change of subjeet matter. iThat the pattern forces the poet to use mone in 1093» the Ifirst verse of the stanza, is additional evidence that the isiraile is ornamental. 178 use of the pearl as an object of purity, the poet first uses it as a symbol of great value (the pearl of great price?), but halfway through the figure he shifts back to the idea of purity, to explain how to clean the pearl. Admittedly the figure is interesting and perhaps even beautiful, but it does not clarify the idea of schryfte. As confession and penance were presumably familiar to a mediaeval audience, the only function of the similitudo is ornament, a reason sufficiently acceptable perhaps, but not customary in the G-awain-poet. In the form, of brevitas, however, he uses the device for ornament: "Ry3t as pe maynful none con rys / Er jpenne ; j ; pe day-glera dryue al doun" (Pearl 1093-10914-) and "Bot stode Istylle as J>e ston, o£>er a stubbe au£>er / J>at raveled is in roche grounde with rote3 a hundre th" (Gawain 2293-22914-) are j the two best examples. Both are interesting but I superfluous, unnecessary to the 'understanding of the subject; i discussed. For the most part, this species of brevitas ! i represents merely tags, which fill out a line or add an j alliterative word with a usual comparison, like (the raven) i I j " colored as £>e cole” (Purity I 4 . 5 6 ) , "Salt as ani se" (Purity j 98I 4 .) ; "bitter as ]pe galle" (Purity 1022) ; "as helle pa.t ’ sty^Od*^" (Purity 577) "stank as the deuel" (Patience 27I 4.) |"sauoured as helle" (Patience 275); "wroth as }pe x<jynde" 179 (Patience I 4 .IO), "wroth as wynde” (Gawain 319), "felle face j ^ — j as pe fyre” (Gawain 8I 4. 7), "whyt as play yuore" (Pearl 178), "as trwe as ston" (Pearl 822). Although these figures add little except words, they do not descend to the ridiculous as does (the sun) "brenne as a candel" (Patience I 4. 72). These are all the examples I find of this species of the figure, enough to indicate that the poet was aware of the convention, but still an inconsiderable number of all the , similitudines. For the most part, the poet used similitudo per brevitatem either for clarity or for vividness. As these examples are superior in poetic value to the majority of j |those already quoted, it would seem that the poet i ; considered these reasons for the device more important than j ■ that of ornament. An example of the device for clarity ! (causa apertius dicendi) is Purity : "As pe beryl ! . ■ ! forayst byhoue3 be clene, / hat is sounde on uche a syde I land no sem habes, / Wythoiiten maskle oper mote as margerye- perle." Although referring to Jewels as does Purity 1119- 1 1132, quoted above, this figure compares an abstract idea ! (clannesse) with a concrete one, the strange with the more familiar, whereas the other compares the familiar with the I strange. Another figure referring to the pearl is Purity j ,1068: (Christ) "pat ever is polyeed als playn as pe perle 180 selven.1 1 Although the figure is not especially successful in achieving clarity, it is apparent that the poet so intended it. A more interesting figure, because it is one of the few homely comparisons in the poems, passes judgment on the Median seers: "alle £>at loked on J>at letter as lewed J>ay were, / As fcay had loked in the lej>er of my lyft boten (Purity l580-l58l). As similitudo causa apertius dicendi the figure is successful, but the abrupt shift from gravis stylus to humilis stylus is not commendable.^ The examples in Pearl are superior to those of the homilies. "For J>o3 |>ou daunce as any do, / Braundysch and , i ,bray pj braj>e3 breme" (3ll5-3i-J-6) compares man’s helplessness I J 'to a familiar situation, vividly realized. 1 1 As wallande water got3 out of welle" (365) indicates the extent of the j poet’s remorse. Similarly, "He lau©3 hys gyfte3 as water j i of dyche, / Ojper got3 of golf |>at neuer charde" (607-608) I makes clear Christ’s liberality. Although these comparisons i are not strikingly original, they do have the merit of clarifying abstract ideas by concrete analogy, and so have I |an importance in a poem like Pearl beyond what originality might provide. i ] \ ^However amusing the comparison may seem to modern jreaders, who are inclined to look on any instance of bad jtaste in mediaeval literature with forbearance well mixed iwith contempt, it is a stylistic error and recognizable as such in the fourteenth century. See Faral, pp. 86-89. l8l " j i Gawain has relatively fewer examples of this type than : i has Fearl, in keeping with its differing intent. Gawain is “as perle hi fee quite pese is of prys more" (236I 4 , . ) . The Green Knight appears to Arthur *s court “as layt so ly3t“ (199) and the ax he carries is "As wel schapen to schere as scharp rasores" (213). These similes, if not more original than those in Pearl, are rather more vivid, but do not clarify as accurately. This again is due to the differing j intent of the two poems. , The poet has employed similitudo per brevltatem most joften for the purpose of writing more vividly (ante oculos j jponendi), except in Patience, where I find no example. In j I ■ \ 1 Purity the rebel angels fall from heaven “as pe snaw feikke" j I j ‘(222), “as fee hyve swarme3" (223), "as smylt mele under smalj i sive smoke3 forfeikke" (226). The angels in Sodom have hair, "to raw sylk lyke" (790) and complexions "as pe brere-flor" ’ 1 j(791). The mad Nebuchadnezzar has brows "as breres" (1698). 1 iThose of Pearl are even better: the banks of the stream of 'paradise are "As fyldor fyn" (106); the stones in the strean t shine "As glente feur3 glass feat glowed and gly3t / As stremande sterne3, quen strofee men slepe, / Staren in •welkyn in wynter ny3t" (HI4.-II6). A brief but effective 'simile is "I stod as hende as hawk in halle" (lSJp). A more elaborate one appeals to the ear rather than to the eye: ! 182 A hue fro heuen I herde £>oo, Lyke flode3 fele laden runnen on resse; And as J>under prowe3 in torre3 "bio, pat lote, I leue, wat3 neuer pe les. (873-876) Still more examples, less interesting perhaps, are in the appendix to this paper. gawain has several such instances in which the similitudo appeals to the ear in "Wyth such a crakkande kry as klyffes haden brusten" (1166); "pe borne blubred perirxne as hit boyled hade” (217il) ; and "hit wharred and whette, as .water at a mulle" (2203). Twice the figure intensifies jcolor: the green Knight and his horse are "As growe grene las pe gres and grener hit semed, / pen grene aumayl on | | . s igolde glowande bry3ter" (235-236); and the breast and throat' iof the lady "Schon schyrer pen snawe pat schede3 on hill©3n ! i (956). Although the poet does not use much similitudo for visualization in gawain, these examples are sufficient to ' i i ishow that he did use the figure capably. I ! | i Thus the gawain-poet employed similitudo, once per I J inegationem, once per collationem, and a number of times per brevitatem. He used it for ornament, for speaking more clearly, and for visualization. Patience affords few jexamples of any type and none of much value. Both Purity ; and gawain have a number of instances, some of which are [excellent; Pearl, considering its length, has many more t ~ .T ..... than either, but Of little better quality. Many of the 183 , similitudines are iirithout much, value and are little more j than tags, but the excellence of "As stremende steme3, quen strode men slepe, / Staren in welkyn in wynter ny3t" (Pearl lllp-116) indicates that the poet could produce similitudines of great beauty. If Beowulf truly represents the native tradition, one thing is certain: the Gawain-poet got the inspiration for this figure, and for a number of others, ; from a different tradition. That of the rhetoricians seems most likely. EXEMPLTM ; I | | j I The exemplum has the same reasons for existence as the j 1 | similitudo. t ; I Exemplum est alicuius facti aut dicti praeteriti cum ; eerti auctoris nomine propositio. Id sumitur isdem de j causis quibus similitudo. Rem omationem facit cum nullius rei nisi dignitatis causa sumitur; apertiorem, cum id quod sit obscurius magis dilucidum reddit; I probabiliorem, cum magis veri similem facit; ante oculos j ! ponit, cum exprimit omnia perspicue ut res prope dicam manu temp tar i possit. (ad Herennium. IV, xlix) I (Exemplum is the setting forth of a past deed or word together with the name of the definite source. It is i employed for the same reason as similitudo: it makes j a thing more ornate even though it is used for no other j purpose than elevation of style; more intelligible, I since it renders clearer than which is obscure; more ! probable since It makes It more the semblance of truth; It paints a true picture since it portrays everything with such verisimilitude that the thing can almost, so to speak, be touched by the hand.) Except In Gawain, the device was most useful to the poet. Purity relies so heavily upon this device that its first editor called it Tla collection of Biblical stories, in which the writer endeavours to enforce Purity of Life .• . . Such a characterization is inaccurate since the poet is obviously writing a homily, but it is not unjust since most of the poem is Biblical narrative, less than one-sixth being devoted to the ideas exemplified. Still, it is these ideas which unify the poem and which the poet tries to inculcate in his readers. To call Purity a collection of stories is to miss the point; the narratives are exempla and so do not make up a collection. Hor does the poet rely entirely on the Bible as a source. In lines 35-^i-Q he develops a worldly analogy to make clear that God will not welcome a sinful man: j For what urply hap el pat hy3 honour halde3 Wolde lyke if a ladde com lyperly attyred, : Mien he were sette solempnely in a sete ryche, Abof duke3 on dece, with dyntys served— i pen pe harlot with haste helded to pe table j With rent cokre3 at pe kne and his clutte trasche3, ! And his tabarde totome, and his tote 3 oute, Oper ani on of alle pyse, he sehulde be halden utter, Hurled to pe halle-dore and harde peroute schowved, And be forboden pat bor3© to bowe pider never. On payne of enprysonment and puttyng in stokke3; And pus schal he be schent for his schrowde feble, pa3 never in talle ne in tuch he trespas more. (35-i-|.8) The poet makes his point clear by using a modem instance which his reader can understand either from personal ■^R. Morris, p. xiii. 185 i * ■ experience or from imagination, hater in the poem he uses j ■ the device for the same reason when he goes to the Romance , of the Rose to explain how a man should love Christ: For Clopyngel in pe cornpas of his clene Rose, per he expoune3 a speche, to hym pat spede wolde, Of a lady to be loved: 1 Loke to hir sone, Of wich beryng pat ho be, and wych ho best lovyes, And be ry3t such, in uch a bor3e, of body and of dedes, And fol3 pe fet of pat fere pat pou fre haldes; And if pou wyrkkes on pis wyse, pa3 ho wyk were, Hir schal lyke pat layk pat lyknes hir tylle. (105>7-10&£ ' i The analogy is plain: if you love Christ, you will conform ! to Him, and this means you will be clene. Thus the poet has used the exemplum for clarification. For the most part, however, he used it for proof. For ; I these narratives he went directly to the source of all truth. Immediately after the modern instance quoted above, he tells a parallel story, the Parable of the Hedding Feast. His transitio makes his intention clear: ; And if unwelcum he were to a wordlych prynce ! 3©t hym to pe hy3e Kyng harder in heven, As Mapew mele3 in his masse of pat man ryche. (lj-9-51) i As Mapew mele3— there is no appeal beyond that: God has j spoken. This Is proof. Although less explicit In his ! statement of intention, there can be little doubt that the ; i } story of the Flood was told for the same reason. There can j be no doubt about the reason for the story of the cities of j the plain, for the poet plainly states : j 186 . Bot of J>e dome of be doube for dede3 of scharne— He is so skoymous of J>at skabe, he searre3 bylyve; He may not dry3© to draw allyt, bot drepe3 in hast, And £at wat3 schewed schortly by a scape one3. (597-600) Likewise for the exemplum. of Daniel and Belshazzar there is definite evidence that the poet intended proof; "And J>at wat3 bared on Babyloyn in Balta3ar tyme" (III4 . 9). To a pious mediaeval audience, these instances would be definite proof. The exempla in Patience are also Biblical, but their purpose is different. The Beatitudes (9-28) do not prove, clarify, or visualize; they merely add dignity to the poem ■and are therefore ornament. The story of Jonah, on the iother hand, illustrates the theme and gives it a concrete i j !instance, attested by Biblical authority; its purpose is : [clarification (apertius dicendi). Because of the length of the story, the. exemplum very nearly becomes the poem. Morris considered Patience "a paraphrase of the book of I Jonah" (p. xviii), prefaced by "a few remarks” of the poet. ' i ■As in his analysis of Purity, I believe that Morris missed j I » 1 !the point. The poem is a homily and those first feu j 1 remarks" are vital. That the poet erred in expanding his amplification to such an extent— I J . 6I 4. lines being devoted to |the exemplum out of a total of 531--is all too apparent. < j-fr1 Patience as in Purity he has allowed his interest in * .i jnarration, with a concomitant interest in vivid description,j •to weaken his theme. Thus he shows that he has not 187 mastered the exemplum as a rhetorical device. That the j poems have interest chiefly because of their narratives strengthens rather than weakens this thesis. Proper use of the device would have emphasized his point so that not even ; a first editor would have missed it. To find a proper use of the exemplum it is unnecessary to extend the search beyond the poems of this study. Pearl has more instances than both the homilies together, but j t so adroitly have they been introduced that, except for the j Parable of the Vineyard, they have generally passed without comment. The Parable is a fairly long narrative and some- j i jwhat disturbs the development of the poem. It therefore j ! ‘ j |is open to the same criticism as are the exempla in the j i ' homilies. But the Parable is the exception rather than i . t I 'the rule. At other times the device does not obtrude. ' The majority of the exempla In Pearl appear as proof. : 'The Parable of the Vineyard (1 4 . 97-572) demonstrates that the reward is not based upon length of labor. The purpose t of the Parable in Its Biblical context is to clarify, but i 'In the poem it is to prove. But if the maiden can quote Scripture in support of her case, so can the poet. He appeals to the Psalter (592-596) to show that God , f quyte3 jvchon as hys desserte" (595). After a careful analysis, i the maiden too goes to the Psalter for proof (676-683) that 188 r , J>e innosent is ay saf by ry3t" (68I4.), but the "ry3twys" man must labor Tor salvation, as "sa3 Salamon playn1 ' (689). Even so, man shall be saved by grace, for, according to "Bauid in Sauter" (698), "non lyuyande to £>e is justyfyet" (700). That the innocent are safe is clearly demonstrated in Christa own actions and words (709-7214-) when "hym we Ike in are£ede" (711), when He let the children come to Him, "And sayde his ryche no wy3 my3t wynne / Bot he com J>yder as a chylde” (722-723). So much evidence convinces the poet* Twice again the poet employs the exemplum for proof. The maiden identifies herself as one of.the brides of Christ ,and, in 787-792, refers to St. John for support of the i existence in Heaven of these brides. Por further author- ! itative proof of the brides, she again quotes St., John (867-898), "Lest les pou leue my tale farande, / In ■ Appocalyppece is wryten in wro" (865-866). The reference to the ‘pearl without price1 and the merchant who sold all his goods to purchase it (729-739) ^may be intended to clarify, as it is in the Bible, but it accomplishes little more than ornament. The quotations frcm t ! Isaiah (799-801}., 822-828) and another reference to St.John j ; 1 (833-8I 4 .O) also provide mere ornamentation. On the other j 1 ,hand, the reference to St. Paul (I4 . 56-I4 . 62), to say that f , Al iam we membre3 of Jesu Kryst" (lj.58), clarifies the relation 'of man to God. Thus in Pearl the poet has used the device ^ * » for clarity, ornament, and proof, but more subtly than in the homilies, as though the exempla exist for the sake of the argument, and not the argument for the sake of the story. This represents the correct technique for the use of the device. In Gawain there was little reason to use the device. The poet is telling a story and trying neither to prove nor to clarify ideas. For vividness and ornament he relies on other methods. In Gawain*s last speech to the Green Knight, however, he finds consolation in remembering that \ Biblical heroes were made fools "]?ur3 wyles of wymmen” (2I 4 . 15). This is a brief exemplum for proof, as Gawain’s .conclusion indicates: "And alle £ay were biwyled / With wymmen £at pay vsed. / J>a3 I be now bigyled, / Me J>ink me 'burde be excused” (2ljj25-2i|.28). Whether this is good logic I I is extremely doubtful, but, since small consolation is better than none, the introduction of a moral exemplum, causa rem probabiliorem facit, adds to the humor of the situation. The poet had little need for the device in Gawain, but his one use of it demonstrates his mastery of the figure. \ 190 IMAGO Hie distinction between imago and similitudo seems obvious enough: similitudo is an analogy between two unlike things; imago is a comparison between two like things. As the ad Herennium states simply: "Imago est fomae cum forma cum quadam similitudine conlatio" (IV, xlix). (Imago is a comparison of a form with a form having a certain resemblance thereto.) But in the examples given In the ad Herennium the distinction is not so obvious: "He went Into battle with a body like that of a bull, in force like that of the bravest lion." "That one, who vainglorious of his own riches, like a dunghill cock from Phrygia or any t soothsayer, cries aloud and swears that he is oppressed and iweighed down by gold. Such comparisons seem much like 1 similitudines; the distinction lies in the fact that I whereas similitudo brings together two ideas, imago brings ! together two living things. ^ A further distinction occurs in their use. Similitudo ornaments, clarifies, proves, T_6 1 Inibat in proelium corpore tauri validissumi, impetu jleonis acerrumi simili." "Iste qui divitias suas iac-tat jsicut Gallus © Phrygia aut hariolus quispiam, depressus et oneratus auro, clamat et delirat" (ad Herennium, IV, xlix). Geoffrey de Vinsauf exemplifies the figure with; "Abstulit ilium / Ille pugil noster, mira virtute leonis, / Astu .serpentis et simplicitate columbae" (Poetria Kova, 1356- 8 ^ s i •*-7gee Paral, p. 69. j lor places before the eyes; imago either praises or blames ; ("haec sumitur aut laudis aut vituperation!s causa”— ad * T f t Herennium, IY, xlix). For a figure to be imago, it must compare living things either for praise of blame. To compare living things for vividness, as in ”1 stod as hende - » as hawk in halle" (Pearl I8I 4 .) is thus similitudo, because ■ 1 its purpose is to make clear. I find no examples in Patience; the poet makes a limited use of the figure in Purity and in Pearl. Four times he uses it for praise. In Purity 639, "As a sewer in a god assye he served hem fayre* 1 praises Abrahams *s humble hospitality to his God. Pearl 1115, "mylde as ; I maydene3 seme as mas,” comments favorably on the actions of I ! i'the virgins in heaven. Although this comparison has a ! .certain visual power, the fact that the poet prefaces It • iwith "ba.3 bay wera fele, no pres In plyt" (IIIJ4 .) seems to I Vindicate that he Intended it as a favorable comment. The iconventional comparisons of Christ in Pearl 801-802: "As a schep to b© sla3t per lad wat3 he; / And, as lombe bat clypper in hande nem" hardly call for comment. In Gawain 18 Imago vituperationis causa has three further 'divisions: for hate (in odium), for jealousy or ill-will | (in invidiam), and for contempt (in contemptionem). Such division, however valuable in a textbook, is relatively unimportant. Detailed classification of the imagines in the Gawain-poet would be superfluous. -iin-r r-T 192 ■2102, the guide's comparing the Green Enight to "Hector" is praise, although the remark is intended to frighten Gawain. The imagines which blame fit their classification more certainly. Of Satan's rebellion against God, the poet says "And he unkindely as a karle kydde a reward" (208). The mob of Sodomites around Lot's house, howling for the two angels, were "as a scowte-wach scarred, so J>e asscry rysed" (838). Moreover, they were as "blynde as bayard wat3 ever" (886). Belshazzar, drinking from the sacred vessels, jbecame "as dronkken as £e devel" (lf?00). In Pearl 911, the ipoet apologizes for the request he is about to make: "And J>a3 I be bustwys as a blose." These are all the examples I have found. Thus the poet has employed the figure sparingly and in only three of the four poems. The figures which he does employ are not very effective and, in general, do not seem strongly imagined. The best examples come in Purity and are vituperative. This is natural, since the theme of i j clannesse demands some definite condemnation of the guilty. J imago satisfies this requirement. In the other poems there |Was less occasion for such condemnation. And in Gawain, 1 where praise of the hero is an important motif, it is to the I poet's credit that he does not praise Gawain by means of this device. Imago, like all criticism, seems more forceful; when destructive, EFFICTIO An important method of amplification was description, of which effictio is one type. ! Effictio est cum exprimitur atque effingitur verbis corporis cuiuspiam forma quod satis sit ad intellegendum.; (ad Herennium, IV, xlix) (Effictio is that figure In which the outward appearance of any person is described In words which produce a satisfactory recognition of him.) f Other figures describe other things: notatio the character : :of the person, demonstratio the appearance of the physical \ world. This figure is concerned only with the features, ; the physique, the clothes of a person. ’ In Purity I find but two instances of the device. The , s ■hypothetical lad comes to the feast ”Wyth rent cokre3 at pe , i ! ! / * ;khe, and his clutte trasche3, / And his tabarde totorne, ; i .and his tote3 oute” (IpO —ipl) • The angels who visit Lot in j Sodom receive more attention (788-795). Otherwise, the outward appearance of the characters receives no attention. . Patience offers no examples at all. 3h the homilies, the jpoet paid little attention to physical portraiture. ■Possibly the Biblical origin of his characters inhibited 191+ Pearl, too, has few instances, but for a different reason. Whereas there are a number of characters in the homilies, there are essentially only two in Pearl, of whom one is the narrator. The Pearl-maiden, however, has a detailed portrait: Blysnande whyt wat3 hyr bleaunt. I knew hyr wel, I hade sen hyr ere. As glysnande golde £at man con schere, So schon |>at schene an-vnder schore. (163-166) | benne vere3 ho vp her fayre frount, 1 Hyr vysayge whyt as playn yuore. (177-178) So smojae, so smal, so seme sly3t .... (190) A1 blysnande whyt wat3 hir beau biys, ; Vpon al syde3 and bounden bene J 1 Wyth b© myryest margarys, at my deuyse, bat euer I se3 with myn ene; Wyth lappe3 large, I wot and I wene, : Dubbed with double perle and dy3te; Her cortel of self sute schene, Wyth precious perle3 al vnbepy3te. (197-201+) The portrait continues for two more stanzas, primarily concerned with the pearls in her crown and on her costume I and, in the last stanza (221-228), particularly with the ! "wonder perle wythouten wemme, / Inmydde3 hyr breste wat3 i ; sette so sure" (221-222). Thus the poet, although without 1 giving details, follows the usual order of the figure in 18 ^ mediaeval literature: head, figure, clothing. That he j 18 i 1 "Souvent preee'de'e d*un ^loge du soin donne par Dieu ou par Nature a la confection de sa creature, elle porte d'abord sur la physionomie, puis sur le corps, puis sur le j v&tement; et dans chacune de ces parties, chaque trait a sa place prevue" (Faral, p. 80). 195 ; .devotes so much, attention to her costume and so little to | < 1 her person leaves her indistinct hut makes her glory manifest. Although the homilies lack examples of effictio and 'i- , Pearl presents only one opportunity for its use, Gawain has ; a number of instances, some of them long* Arthur and Guinivere receive slight attention, although seven lines (7!+-80) are devoted to the queen*s costume. But with the entrance of the Green Knight, the poet gives ninety-four lines (136-220) to description. He begins by calling him "an aghlich maystern and then comments on his huge size and his good proportions: For of bak and of brest al were his bodi stume, Both his wombe and his wast were worthily smale, And alle his fetures fol3ande, in forme pat he made, ful clene. (II4 . 3-II4 . 6) Then comes the mention of "grene" (15>0) and the description ! of his clothing and his horse, also great and green. Only 1 .then is his physiognomy noted: | Payre fannand fax vmbefoldes his schulderes; A much berd as a busk ouer his brest henges, pat wyth his hi31ich here pat of his hed reches Wat3 euesed al vmbetorne abof his elbowes, pat half his armes per-vnder were halched in pe wyse Of a kynge3 capados pat closes his swyre. (l8l-l86) The remainder of the passage describes his horse, the holly branch, and the ax, "a hoge and vnmete" (208), which he ;carries. Although the effictio does not follow the pattern 1 196 ;noted above, all the elements of the pattern are present. Gawain himself is nowhere fully described, as far as his face and body are concerned. As he is , f kny3t comlokest kyd of . . . his eldet t (1520), according to the lady, it may be that the poet purposely left it to the reader to supply his own ideal. But his clothing receives due attention. In 566-623 Gawain dresses for his quest, each piece of clothing or armor being described as he puts it on. In 877-881 and again in 1928-1931* the poet describes his clothing while a guest in the castle of the Green Knight. Before going to the Green Chapel, Gawain dons his armor again, a detail to which the poet devotes twenty-two lines (2015-2136). For these longer descriptions of 'Gawain’s dress the poet adopts a chronological arrangement whereby the hero appears in the act of dressing. By doing this, he achieves the effect of effictio without i ;interrupting the flow of his narrative. I Two other persons are important in the romance, one ,an important actor in it, the other the motivating, power of all the action, the lady and the "aunclan,n Morgan le Fay. j I The poet describes these two ladies simultaneously, on Gawain*s first sight of them. As this is a good example of |effictio and still short enough to quote, I give it in its 1 | entirety: 197 Bot vnlyke on to lok© po ladyes were, ! For if pe 3onge wat3 3ep, 3ol3e wat3 pat oper; Riche red on pat on rayled ayauere, Hugh ronkled chek©3 pat oper on rolled; Kerchofes of pat on, wyth mony cler perle3, Hir brest and hir bry3t prote bare displayed, Schon schyrer pen snawe pat schede3 on hille3; pat oper wyth a gorger wat3 gered oner pe swyre, Ghymbled oner hir blake chyn with chalkqnyte vayles, Hir froun-t folden in sylk, enfoubled ayquere, Toret and treieted with tryfle3 aboute, pat no3t wat3 bare of pat burde bot pe blake bro3es, pe tweyne y3en and pe nase, pe naked lyppe3, And pose were sonre to se and sellyly blered; A mensk lady on molde won may hir call©, for Godel Hir body wat3 schort and pik, Hir buttoke3 bal3 and brode, More lykkerys on to lyk Wat3 pat scho hade on lode. (950-969) The ugliness of the one serves to set off the beauty of the |other. This contrast in description was fairly common, and pn therefore not an original idea of the Gawain-poet. The device appears in the Ars Versificatoria (I, 57) of Matthieu de Vendome. Thus it would seem that the Gawain-poet felt the influence of the rhetorical tradition in his use of ef fectio, ,at least in Pearl and Gawain. In Pearl he maintains the f I items in the order of the rhetoricians. In Gawain all 1 the items are described, except for Gawain himself, and in ; ( the first description of the lady, her beauty is contrasted ■ with the ugliness of her companion. That such influence is i less perceptible in the homilies may be due to difference 2GSee Faral, p. 77. 198 of purpose as well as to a natural hesitation to portray : Biblical personages. The poet may have thought there was little need for portraiture of such familiar people. Even in Gawain and Pearl the familiar characters, such as 1 Arthur, Guinevere, Gawain himself, and, in the vision of Heaven, Christ, are not pictured completely. The poet devoted care and lines to those who were strange and important, like the Green Knight and his lady, a fact iwhich demonstrates his adroit use of effictio. NOTATIO ! | The counterpart of effictio, which describes the jphysical, is notatio, which describes the inner essential I character portrait of a man. ! Notatio est cum alicuius natura certis describitur i signis, quae, sicuti notae quae, naturae sunt adtributa. j (ad Herennium, IV, 1) (Notatio is that figure by which the character of an individual is described in terms of certain traits, which like a brand have become imprinted upon his nature.) Thus notatio was a set portrait of someone connected with a case or problem. The device Included all the methods by which a modern novelist might Indicate character, including action, speech, reaction of other persons, and direct analysis. Physical characteristics, which may also indicate character, apparently were peculiar to effictio. As the 199 two devices were probably mingled in actual use, the orator had the Tull panoply at his command. That he could charac terize by notatio is abundantly evident in the orations against Gataline. When the orator employed the device, his audience would have had little trouble recognizing it, in a literary form (the oration) which was not primarily narrative. To isolate specific instances of notatio in literary 0*1 forms which are primarily narrative, in xwhole or in part, , is more difficult. The skillful narrative writer, unlike the orator,^ does not put his characterization in one place, but introduces it throughout his work as his story ; ' i develops. In this respect the Gawain-poe t is certainly skillful. If his interest in character is perhaps not as great as that of his contemporary Chaucer, it certainly com pares with that of the fifteenth century Malory. Although t i I his characterizations lack the fullness of Chaucer’s, they Include sufficient detail to make the reader accept their reality. | s 21 j By uin part," I refer to a homily like Purity. in ’ which large sections are narrative exempla, but whose basic structure is not narrative. ! 22 The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales is a prime example of the combined use of effictio and notatio; not placed within a narrative, these portraits are as easily recognizable as figures as those of Cicero. The orator | could, of course, develop a portrait throughout an oration. ; 200 , I Even the pearl-maiden is not an abstraction, although : j .her blessed state is a naturally inhibiting factor in making a thorough analysis. She speaks “soberly” (256); she shows ; a usual piety (in her apostrophe to the Virgin, l-j-33-l4-36) J ( ! she is happy: 1 pen sa3 I per my lyttel quene pat I wende had standen by me in sclade. Lorde, much of mirpe wat3 pat ho made, Among her fere3 pat wat3 so quyti (ll!|.7-ll50) The poet himself— or a character he has created and identi fied himself with— is full enough for Osgood to create a biography for this anonymous poet largely on the basis of i OO ! it. Even Osgood overlooked a facet of his character: he ‘ i was impatient, as he plainly tells: “Delyt me drof in y3e j £ and ere; / My mane3 mynde to maddyng malte; / Quen I se3 my j frely, I wolde be pere” (1153-1155). This most ethereal of ! the poems has much warm humanity in it. j j Although less ethereal, the narrative exempla of the ihomilies actually have little more characterization than ! k-as Pearl. In Patience, Jonah shows that he is a coward by his analysis of his assigned mission to Nineveh (7I 4.-88), ;and he is Intemperate and impatient, first when he is 1 jangered by God’s not destroying the city . (i|.09-1^28) and then i by the destruction of the woodbind (i4 . 8O-lj.88). Such an ^ I n his edition of Pearl (Boston, 1906). See ; especially pp. lxxx-liv. 201 , ; action as the latter* shows him to he petty also, as his original pleasure in the woodbind (Ij.£7-)f6i4-) indicates his simplicity. Purity presents a similar condition, but, as the poem is much longer, with many more exempla, there is more characterization. Even the unidentified fellow who came ill-attired to the wedding feast, receives a slight one: "He wat3 so scoumfit of his scylle, lest he ska£>e hent, / £>at he ne wyst on worde what he warp schulde" (l^l- 152). Satan, Noah, Abraham, Lot, Nebuchadnezzar, and Belshazzar are more carefully portrayed. Belshazzar’s worship tells a great deal about his character: When J>ay are glide al with golde and gered wyth sylver, And £>ere he kneles and calle3, and clepes after help. And i>ay re den him ry3t, rewarde he hem hetes, And if £>ay gruchen him his grace to gremen his hert, He eleches to a gret klubbe and knokkes him to peces. (131i 4 - 132{.8 ) Didacticism made such characterizations valuable in the •homilies, but it seems unlikely that the poet was unaware •of their artistic value also. ; Gawain presents similar use of characterization, jArthur I 5 ...wat3 so joly of his joyfnes, and sumquat childgered: His lif liked hym ly3t, he louied £>e lasse Aujper to longe lye or to longe sitte, j So bisied him his 3onge blod and his brayn wylde. (86-89) I 1 jAlthough "rad was he neuer" (25l), he is sensitive about I his honor (317) and "wex as wroth as wynde" (319). The 202 i I : iGreen Knight gets more attention. His courage before i I decapitation is clear: Wyth stume schere per he stod he stroked his berde, And wyth a countenaunce dry3e he dro3e doun his cote, i No more mate ne dismayed for hys raayn dinte3 i pen any bume vpon bench hade bro3t hym to drynk of wyne. (33ip-338) In his alter ego as the lord of the castle, he shows his , courage by killing the wild boar with a Hbry3t bront’ * ' ' • i (158I 4 .) while on foot. Although merely a part of the narra- | tive of the hunt, a mediaeval audience would presumably have recognized the act as courageous.2^ In such casual . manner the poet indicates the character of the Green Knight.j 1 Gawain’s character manifests itself In much the same manner,; but he receives as well a set portrait, stiff and formal, •outside the narrative development, so that it is a digres sion, as the poet himself recognizes; "And quy pe pentangel apende3 to pat prynce noble, / I am intent you to telle, .pof tary hyt me schulde" (623-621}.). After a brief identi fication of the pentangle which "Englych hit callen / Oueral, as I here, pe endeles knot" (629-630), the poet declares, "Forpy hit acoude3 to pis kny3t and to his clere 1 1 j ^Compare this passage from Aelfric *s Colloquium: M: Ha wsjSre pu drystig ofstician bar? V: Hundas bedrifon hine tT5 m§, and ic paer tageanes standende faerlice ofsticode hine. M: Swipe prTste pu waere p5. In Samuel Moore and Thomas A. Knott, The Elements of Old English (Ann Arbor, Michigan, 19l{-2), p~. 261 }. . 203 .arroeS" (631). In the following stanza he develops the quintuple excellence of Gawain*s character: Fyrst he wat3 funden fautle3 in his fyue wytte3, And efte fayled neuer J)e freke in his fyue fyngres, And alle his afyaunce vpon folde wat3 In i>e fyue wounde3 i>at Cryst ka3t on £>e croys, as pe crede telle3; And quere-so-euer bys mon in melly wat3 s tad, His £>ro |>o3t wat3 in £at, £>ur3 all o$>er £>ynge3, £>at alle his fersnes he feng at J>e fyue joye3 3?at fce hende heuen quene had of hir chylde; At 3?is cause $>e kny3t comlyche hade In |>e more half of his schelde hir ymage depaynted, ]?at quen he blusched Jserto his belde neuer payred. t>e fyft fyue £>at I finde $>at J>e frek vsed Wat3 fraunchyse and fela3schyp forbe al jpyng, His clannes and his cortaysye croked were neuer, And pit^, |>at passe3 alle poynte3, J>yse pure fyue Were harder happed on {>at ha£>el J>en on any oJ>er. (6I].0-655) Although such a portrait hardly shows Gawain*s inner char acter, it is designed to make clear that he was the !"gentylest kny3t of lote" (639), and is therefore notatio. By an analysis of his acts and speech, a reader can char acterize a man even though the author merely recounts events |in simple narration, without the rhetorical adornment of S ! I notatio. But when the author himself performs the analysis, I jor goes into such detail that a conclusion is inevitable, ihe has gone beyond the strict requirements of narration and I S jhas employed the figure. For example, in the Parable of j i (the Wedding Feast, the meanly dressed fellow, when reproached, looked at the ground without answering. That ;is the simple narrative fact. The poet was not content with 20k this bare statement; instead, nHe was so scoumflt of his seylle, lest he sca|>e hent / £>at he ne wyst on worde what i he warp schulde" (Parity 151-152). The Gawain-poet frequently so elaborates his narrative. That he did not use notatio mechanically is evidence rather of his mature ' |art than of his failure to employ the figure. j I j : SERMOCINATIO i I i I | ; Sermoeinatio est cum alicui personae serrao adtribuitur ' et is exponitur cum ratione dignitatis. (ad Herennium, IV, xli) (Sermoeinatio is that figure by which a discourse is ! assigned to some person and is set forth in conformity ! with the character.) jAs I observed under notatio, speech and conversation appear : in the illustration of that figure in the ad Herennium. Obviously, if the orator carefully abides by the rule implied in the definition of sermoeinatio, the figure will ! i indicate the character of the assigned speaker. Again, ! like notatio, the presence of sermoeinatio in the oration ! is easily recognized. Prom the example in the ad Herennium ' it is apparent that the figure is direct quotation, either ! of one man’s speech or of several men’s conversation. Since, the orator spoke in his own person throughout most of his j discourse, his quotation of another’s speech would be out j of the ordinary and hence noticeable. Like notatio, 205 I sermoeinatio is more naturally a part or.narrative; hence | the reader may fail to recognize it as figurative.^5 Sermoeinatio is also a species of expolitio, a fact already noted and illustrated from Purity and Gawain. Comparatively few such uses occur; for the most part, the figure is ornamental in its own right. It remains to indicate the nature and extent of the poet's use of it. In the homilies, such use of the device is confined to the exempla. Two exempla in Purity illustrate the use of the figure in contrast to statement of fact. These exempla tell essentially the same story: one describes a situation at a contemporary feast, the other retells the Parable of the Wedding Feast. In the modern instance the poet merely says that the "harlot” "schulde he halden utter, / Wyth mony blame, ful bygge a boffet, Jjeraunter, / Hurled to pe halledore," etc. (I4 . 2-I4. 8), but in the Biblical tale he uses idirect quotation: j ben b© lorde wonder loude laled and cryed And talke3 to his tormenttore3: "Take3 hym,” he bidde3, , "Bynde3 byhynde, at his bak, bob© two his hande3, j And felle fettere3 to his fete festene3 bylyve; j Stik hym stifly in stoke3, and steke3 him berafter j Depe In my doungoun ber> doel ever dwelle3 ! i | 2 S S o accustomed have we become to dialogue in fiction, j jthat its presence seems inevitable. We forget that dialogue fused functionally advances the narrative, that it discloses ia fact that might be stated simply and directly. Dialogue iis therefore ornament. In the rhetorical system of the ad Herennium, dialogue Is sermoeinatio. j 206 ! G-reving and gretyng and gryspyng hard© ! Of* tej>e tenfully togeder, to teche hym be quoynt.*’ (153-160) ,In this practice the poet followed his source, but that he 1 did not use sermoeinatio in his modern instance, saving it i for the parable which follows, is significant. He recog- j nized that direct quotation is more vivid than simple j statement of fact and therefore employed the figure only in i the second to achieve a climax. This fact demonstrates both his ability and the influence of rhetorical practice. In the homilies the poet generally follows his Biblical sources: where they have sermoeinatio, he also employs it, ; although in an expanded form. j In Pearl and Gawain, where no direct source exists, the originality of his sermoeinatio cannot be checked. Much of the Pearl is an argument between the poet and the maiden (stanzas 21-71) and this is naturally in sermoeinatio. To i ' i ;say that such use is natural is not to imply that it is I ! artless. On the contrary, the natural quality Is proof of j 1 j the highest art. The poet could have written "I said that !. . .to which she replied that . . . ," but to have done j sso would not have made a poem, as a comparison of the original with any of its many summaries will demonstrate. Aside from the long passage of continuous sermoeinatio, there Is little other use of the figure in Pearl. 207 , Gawain, although, it contains fairly long passages of sermoeinatio, presents no such sustained example. Unlike its use in Pearl, where it is the essential method of developing the narrative, the figure in Gawain appears with other devices. The effect of this is to emphasize what is said by the characters, because the poet never uses the device except to report an important statement. For example, Gawain1s request for peiraission to go on his search for the Green Chapel is given, but the consolatory counsel given Gawain by Arthur’s knights is merely reported. Gawain’s reply to this, however, appears directly, "Quat schuld I itfonde? / Of destenes derf and dere / What may mon ! do bot fonde?'1 (562-56!?). On the other hand, the collective sentiment both of Arthur's court on Gawain’s departure and of the Green Knight’s nmeynyf ' on his arrival appears in sermoeinatio. Otherwise, except for the two-line speech of the porter- who answers Gawain’s direct question, five persons— the ( | Green Knight, Arthur, Gawain, the lady, and the guide— speak all the quoted lines in the poem. Because there are 1 I jother characters who take some part in the action yet do j inot speak--*particularly Guinevere and Morgan le Fay— it appears that the poet does not use sermoeinatio for (verisimilitude. By restricting the use to the chief i 208 i Characters, he employs the device economically, saving it J for the scenes in which it most effectively heightens the drama. ^ 6 i This is apparant from those scenes in which he makes 1 most abundant use of the device. After the Green Knight comes into Arthur's Court, he and the king converse to establish the "gomen" and Gawain asks for and receives the game, then he and the Green Knight establish the details. t ■In the castle of the Green Knight, he tells Gawain the loca tion of the Green Chapel and together they agree upon their activities for the next three days. The most interesting j passages, largely in sermoeinatio, relate the visits of the lady to Gawain*s bedchamber on those three days. Closely allied with these passages are those In which the lord and Gawain exchange their winnings for each day. Gawain1s guide to the Green Chapel tests the knight's Courage and further prepares the reader for the climactic iepisode there, much of which is sermoeinatio. Although 'other scenes contain some use of the device, the poet in these scenes employed sermoeinatio so persistently that the I ,practice seems characteristic of his style. j | Sermoeinatio served another function, that of I ! ^Occasionally he apparently uses it for variety, as in lines 986-987, but such use is rare. i 209 | j i {presenting witty speech.. The poet not only tells the reader i that Gawain has “teccheles termes of talkyng noble1 1 (91.7), ;but he presents the actual speeches to demonstrate that fact to the reader. In a similar manner the wit of both the lady and her lord is manifest. j Although the evidence is slight, the poet seems to have fitted his speeches to his characters as well as to i I the situations. Arthur speaks to the Green Knight in a ; dignified, gracious manner until he becomes angry, and then,, humanly, he swears a little: “by heuen” (323)* “vpon Gode3 : halue" (326), and refers to the Green Knight’s “foly" (321+)J Gawain is even more gracious in his speech, under all cir- j cumstances, allowing himself only a violent exclamatio (addressed to the girdle, not to the Green Knight) when the denouement comes. The Green Knight seems more direct in his speech as the Green Knight than as the lord of the [castle. His lady is always direct and to the point, as 'when she tells Gawain, "3© ar welcum to my cors" (1237). , But all of these noblemen speak with the dignity be- i fitting their class, no matter what the circumstances. Hie speech of those lower In the social scale seems more I jcolloquial. This difference appears in the following lines: ! ! ’Gode sir, ’ quo]? Gawan, ’wolde3 i>ou go my emde ] To J>e he3 lorde of £>is hous, herber to craue? 1 1 ’3e, Peter,’ quo|> £>e porter, ’and purely I trowee l?at 3© be, wy3©, welcum to won quyle you lyke3. 1 (8Xl—8 3 l | _ ) j 210 I 'The porter's oath, which is peculiar to him, seems less j 'dignified than Arthur's "by heuen" or Gawain's "Be sayn Jon" (1?88). More subtly, the porter manages to seem garrulous in only two lines of verse. Likewise, equally 1 difficult to analyse, the speech of Gawain*s guide to the ; i Green Chapel lacks the polish of a noble's language: , 1 Forhy, goude Sir Gawayn, let £>e gome one, And got3 away sum o|>er gate, vpon Godde3 haluej : Cayre3 bi sum o£>er kyth, J>er Kryst mot you spede, 1 And I schal hy3 me horn agayn, and hete you fyrre J>at I schal swere bi God and all his gode hal3e3» As help me God and £>e halydam, and o$>e3 innoghe, J>at I schal lelly you layne, and lance neuer tale, 3?at euer 3© fondet to fie for freke t>at I wyst. (2118-2125) Like the porter, the guide manages to seem garrulous, chiefly by his repetitious oaths. Such distinctions are slight, admittedly, but distinctions between speech habits of different social classes are extremely subtle, even in prose uncomplicated by an alliterative pattern. Thus the Gawain-poet has employed sermoeinatio, ; adapting his dialogue to situation and to character. He j i ihas used it often, but appropriately. In the homilies, he j 1 follows the practice of his source, employing the device where it has dialogue. Two-thirds of Pearl is almost entirely dialogue and all the scenes in Gawain vital to the 1 ' n 1 narrative contain sermoeinatio. The poet obviously knew 1 ;both the convention and its proper use. CONFORMATIO 211 One of the figures which modern readers still recognize as a figure is personification, a species of conformatio. Conformatio est cum aliqua quae non adest persona confingitur quasi adsit, aut cum res muta aut informis fit eloquens, et forma ei et oratio adtribuitur ad dignitatem adeommodata aut actio quaedam. (ad Herennium, IV, liii) (Conformatio is a figure that represents some absent ' person as being present; or something mute or abstract ; as becoming eloquent, and to such a personified object are attributed some speech or action suited to its general character.) Thus conformatio has three types: the imagined presence of' |an absent person, the attribution of human qualities to ! I J * | imute things, the transformation of an abstract idea into a ' iperson. Of the three types, the Gawaln-poet employs only the last two and those sparingly. I find no example of the l (figure in Purity and only a doubtful one of the second type ! in Gawain: “Quen 3eferus syfle3 hymself on sede3 and j erb_e3n (517). Two others of this same type occur in j Patience: j Ewrus and Aquiloun, J>at on est sittes, ! Blowes bo£e at my bode vpon bio watteres. (133-13)4-) i i And syhen he warne3 t>e West to waken ful softe ! And saye3 vnte 3®fe*’ us i>at he syfle warme. (I4. 69-I4. 70) | 1 t jSuch instances represent “poetical*' language and add little 212 j :except an archaic note to the poem. Their value is i que s t i onab1e. There are also two instances of* the third type of .conformatio in the poems. In Patience the poet personifies the virtues of the Beatitudes: These a m pe happes alle a3t pat vus bihy3t weren, If we pyse ladyes wolde lof in lyknyng of pewes- Dame Pouert, Dame Pitee, Dame Penaunce pe prydde, Dame Mekenesse, Dame Mercy, and Miry Clarmesse, And penne Dame Pes and Pacyence, put in per-after. He were happen pat hade one, alle were pe better.1 Bot syn I am put to a poynt pat Pouerte hatte, I schal me poruay Pacyence, and play me wyth bope; For in pe texte, pere pyse two arn in teme layde, Hit arn fettled in on forme, pe forme and pe laste, And by quest of her quoyntyse enquylen on mede, j And als, in myn vpynyoun, hit a m of on kynde; \ For per as Pouert hir proferes, ho nyl be put vtter, j Bot lenge wher©-so-euer hir lyst, lyke oper greme, j And per as Pouert enpresses, pa3 men pyne pynk, j Much, maugre his raun, he mot nede suffer. Thus Pouerte and Pacyence are nedes play-feres. (29-14-5) | This long conformatio, combined with conclusio, perhaps has j i more force than the simple statement would have, but the advantage is small. Primarily the figure is merely ornament; and adds little to the poem. • \ ! : The other instance of this type, from Pearl, has rather i As fortune fares per as ho frayne3, j I ’ Jheper solace ho sende oper elle3 sore, pe wy3 to wham her wylle ho wayne3 Hytte3 to haue ay more and more. (129-132) Jin the first place, because it is a conventional figure, ; the re is a certain economy in stating the matter thus. ;Moreover, the idea is introduced in explanation of the ' poet’s situation (he is wandering in the wonderful wood) as the concluding verses of the stanza, so that they have the effect of the sestet of the sonnet. Thus the figure is more than mere ornament. Otherwise his use of conformatio ;is not impressive, either in value or in extent. Since the; jhomilies are largely exempla, Pearl an argument, and Gawain i a narrative, there was little occasion for the device. i ■SIGNIFICATIO j . Significatio est res quae plus in suspicions relinquit j ' quam positura est in oratione. Ea fit per exuperationem,j j ambiguum, consequentiam, abscissionem, similitudinem. j (ad Herennium. IV, liii)i (Significatio is that figure which leaves more unsaid : than is stated in the speech. It is done through hyperbole, ambiguity, consequence, reticence, and ; analogy.) ‘ l Since the purpose of this figure is to suggest rather than I to say, to imply rather than state clearly, it is not j surprising that I find no instance of its use in the ! I homilies or in Pearl. In the homilies the poet tries for clarity almost to the point of being prosaic. In Pearl, although much of the poem is obscure, the obscurity arises primarily from the subjects discussed, not from the use of this figure. The poet, although he may arouse the imagination, actually leaves it little to do. 2 1 1 ) . I ' - ^ n Q~awa^n-» however, there was opportunity for the device, especially in the speeches of the lord and lady of the castle, but I find that both, and particularly the lady, speak in a straightforward manner: 3© ar welcom to my cors, Yowre awen won to wale, Me behoue3 of fyne force Your S'eruant be, and schale. (1237-1214.0) Although a reader’s knowledge of narrative technique might i ;suggest that the lord and the Green Knight were the same i jman, I find nothing in the conversation which hints at this denouement. It seems characteristic of this poet to avoid obscurity when he can. j BREVITAS } j "Brevitas est res ipsis tantummodo verbis necessariis expedita" (ad Herennium, IV, liv); (Brevitas is expressing ,a matter in necessary words, only). To consider brevitas a figure seems contradictory, since, according to Cicero, the bald statement is not a figure.^7 The author of the ad Herennium. however, so includes it, and the mediaeval j 1 I ;rhetoricians follow. For completeness, therefore, it is j ^necessary to discuss brevitas as a figura sententiarum. Actually, however, there is some reason so to consider Inventions, I, xl. ! I i ) I 215 lit. The examples in the ad Herennium list a series of i ;acts, not just one, stated in their simplest form. It :includes many things by mentioning only a few.2^ By using ; this device, an author could suggest action, without i devoting time or space to the enumeration of details unimportant to the narrative. That it is a device for ^presenting a case or telling a story is justification for 'calling it a figure. I ; In Pearl and the homilies I find no examples. In i ! i ■these poems it was unnecessary to sum up the actions of any 1 considerable period into a brief compass, since the basic structure of these poems is not narrative.29 In Gawain, however, there are three long periods to account for:(1) the eleven months between the beheading of the Green Knight 1 and Gawain*s departure on his quest, which the poet accounts; for by describing the passing seasons (500-535); (2) the , journey of Gawain to the castle of the Green Knight (691- : ?25) ; (3) and Gawain’s journey home (21^.79-2) 4 . 83). Most of the poet's indications that a day has passed I ; jare little more than a statement of usual events in a t l * p O ! <i0nHabet paucis comprehensa brevitas multarum rerum expeditionem" (ad Herennium, IV, liv). ^The period of the Flood, in Purity lfi-3-k- 2 1 } . , is stated and also Indicated by demonstratio, rather than by brevitas. 216 I ; ! castle--dress, mass, food, talk.30 The longest of these , '(1872-1686) Is of interest because it describes Gawain’s last day at the castle, but otherwise these instances of ! brevitas merely account for time. ; More interesting because they show how the poet i i avoided a difficult, perhaps an impossible, task are the ! brevitates which sum up the speeches of Gawain and the lady,; as nScho made hym so gret chere, / p&t vmt3 so fayr of face, / J>e kny3t with speches skere / Answared to vche a i cace” (1259-1262), and tT$>us Joay raeled of muchquat til ( mydmorn paste, / And ay {>e lady let lyk as hym loued rnych;/ j J>e freke ferde with defence, and feted ful fayre” (1280- j i I 1282). To have written this in sermoeinatio would not ; only have been difficult; the result would have been tedious.31 The Gawain-poet demonstrates his artistry when he alternates sermoeinatio and brevitas. 1 iDEMONSTRATIO Ttie G-awain-poet is perhaps most famous for his I — —— - \ descriptive power. As I have indicated, his descriptions 30see 1020-1028; 117l*.-1177; 1558-1560; 1872-1888. 3lNote also Gawain l5i(-9-l557- Much of the tedium of Pearl is due to the essentially unbroken sermoeinatio. This the poet could hardly avoid since the poem has little narrative to carry it forward. And, being a dream, it is ;by nature timeless. 217 ; i of people (effictio and notatio) are adequate and sometimes J 1 1 excellent, but his descriptions of scenes and actions are ! superior. These passages represent demonstratio. : Demonstratio est cum ita verba res exprimitur ut geri negotium et res ante oculos esse videatur. Id fieri poterit si quae ante et post et in ipsa re facta erunt conprehendimus, aut a rebus consequentibus aut circura stantibus non recedemus. (ad Herennium, IV, Iv) (Demonstratio is employed when an action is so expressed in words that the task seems to be carried on and the action take place before our eyes. This can be done if we grasp what has been done previously, what shall be done hereafter, and what shall have been done with regard to the action itself, and if we shall not fail to take into consideration what circumstances follow the action or are concurrent with it.) 1 i "Ante et post et in ipsa re" separates the parts of an act ! chronologically into situation, deed, and conclusion. ; rtCircumstantibus, T gives time, place, and means; ,Tconsequentibus” indicates the quality of the deed. Of course, not all these invariably appear together. The orator or poet may indeed separate one element from another by other devices."^ 3^Geoffroi de Vinsauf follows this system exactly, except that he separates the figure into five modes: ; ndemonstro quid ante, quid in re / Quid post et quae rem jcircumstent, quaeve sequantur" (Poetria Nova, 121\\.-121$) |and gives a long but not particularly lucid example (124. 3^ 4- — il527T. Mattieu de Vendome follows Cicero's De Inventione (I, 26-27)! ttSunt autem attributa negotio novem, scilicit haec: surama facti, causa facti, ante rem, cum re, post J rem, facultas faciendi, qualitas facti, tempus, locas" (Ars j | Versificatoria, I, 9ii). Cicero’s system is actually even more elaborate: | J 218 | There are many examples of this device in the poems, 1 most of them too long for quotation. Narrative action being an important interest of the poet, it is to be expected that he should make use of demonstratio. In Purity he describes the Flood (36l”434)* He begins with a statement of the time— here relative--wThenne sone come Negotiis autem quae sunt attributa, partim sunt I continentia cum ipso negotio, partim ipso negotio, 1 partim in gestione negoti considerantur, partim adiuneta ; negotio sunt, partim gestum negotium consequuntur. (De Inventione, I, xxvi) Cicero then discusses each of these parts individually and at length. Those things coherent with the action include ; the summary of the action, the reason, means, and purpose of the action, and what happened before, during, and after the action. Those things in connection with the action are place, time, occasion, manner, and facilities. By adjunct of an action we mean something that is greater or less than the action in question, or of equal magnitude or similar to it, also its contrary and negative, or anything bearing the relation of genus or ; species, or result. (I, xxxiii. Hubbell’s translation.) j Consequence, the fourth part, includes the name of jthe act, the agents and originators, the laws concerning .the act, the nature of the act, its approval by men, and Jits subsequent results. ; This partition of Cicero's makes more definite the ■figure given in the ad Herennium without adding anything iexcept adjunct and some species of consequence. Because of the elimination of excessive detail, Matthieu's ■adaptation seems more useful for the analysis of literature jother than oratory. The correspondence between his list land that of the ad Herennium is obvious, "faeultas Ifaciendi, qualitas facti, tempus, locus" being summed up |under "rebus consequentibus et circurastantibus." ■Geoffroi's changing partitions into modes is unnecessary, |a fact evident in the example in the ad Herennium and the ;Poetria Nova, but not without justification, as all five iparts of the figure are not always necessary. i 219 : [pe sevenpe day" (36l). Then his description of the rising : waters precedes the touching picture of fleeing humanity: "Pyrst feng to pe fly3t alle pat fie my3t, / Uuche burde ■ with her barne pe byggyng pay leve3" (377-378). Animals flee also; all beg for mercy; all drown; all rot. Only the ! I Ark remains above the waters which toss it about. "Nyf oure Lorde hade ben her hode3man, hem had lumpen harde" . ;Here, then, are all the elements of cause for the action i > 1 indicated (but in an earlier passage given more completely), 1 the situation, the deed, and the conclusion set forth, and ; i ;the importance of the action made clear: "A1 wat3 wasted j ' t pat per wonyed pe worlde wythinne, / per ever flote, oper j flwe, oper on fote 3©de" (I4. 3i-I4 . 32). The poet has carefully [described "ante et post et in ipsa re" and has not lost sight of "res consequentis et circurastantes." He has i followed the precepts of the rhetoricians. | ' ! Many of the exempla in the homilies are directly con cerned with action. Besides the Flood, already discussed, and its accompanying actions of Noah’s sending forth the j jraven and then the dove, and the departure from the Ark, i I jAbraham’s reception of God and the angels, the scene in 1 \ Sodom, the destruction of the four cities, Belshazzar’s feast, and destruction of Babylon are all vividly described [ |in Purity. Patience, In the excellence of this figure, ;surpasses the other homily, particularly in the account of ! the storm at sea, with its wealth of detail: pe bur her to hit baft pat braste alle her gere J>en hurled on a hepe pe helme and pe sterne; Purst to-murte mony rop and pe mast after; he sayl sweyed on he see; penne suppe bihoued ; h© coge of pe colde water; and penne pe ©^y ryses* ; 3et coruen hay Pe cordes and kest al per-oute; Hony ladde her forth lep to laue and to kest; Scopen out he scahel water hat fayn scape wolde; I Por be monnes lode neuer so luper, pe lyf is ay swete. I per wat3 busy ouer-borde bale to kest, j Her bagges, and her feper-beddes, and her bry3t wedes, Her kysttes, and her coferes, her caraldes alle, I And al to ly3ten pat lome, 3if lepe wolde schape, i Bot euer wat3 ilyche loud he lot of he wyndes, 1 And euer wroper pe water, and wodder pe stremes. (II4. 8-I62) 1 But the exempla of these homilies are not identical with demonstratio. First of all, there is frequently more than one example of the device in a single exemplum. In the story of Jonah, for example, there Is the action of the storm which culminates in Jonah1s being thrown overboard; | ;and in the salvation and conversion of the mariners; Jonah's' being swallowed by the whale; the reaction in Nineveh to : Jonah’s prophecy. Thus there are three major but separate jactions in the exemplum. And in the second place, there jare other devices, particularly sermoeinatio (as Jonah’s ! ' . prayer and his conversation with God at the conclusion of the exemplum), which do not place an action or scene before the eyes. Although the very nature of Pearl, two-thirds of which 221 j is sermocinatio, precludes its being largely demonstratio, | I J I there is use of this device in the poem. Time and place |are vaguely indicated: ! To J>at spot £>at I in speche expoun j I entred in bat erber grene, , In Augoste in a hy3 seysoun, i J Quen come is coruen wyth croke3 kene. (37-1 4 - 0) j iThere the poet rislode vpon a slepyng-sla3tel f (59); iri a ! dream he wanders through a marvelous forest which is j described (67-120). There is no more description of scene until the celestial vision (985-1150). There is almost no ; t •action in the poem; and the description of scene, although ifilled with the marvelous, is rather cold and formal, in j 1 i ! keeping with the matter described. The vigor of the poem j I ( is due rather to its ideas than to narrative action. I | G-awain, on the other hand, is full of action and J 1 description. There is movement and bustle in Arthur's Hew j i (Year's feast, even before the arrival of the Green Knight, j ‘ , ! iwhose beheading is the chief and most vivid thing in the * i ! jfirst fitt. In the second fitt Gawain rides through a < (forest until he sees the strange castle; both the forest l land the castle are described. The three hunts of the lord j jrecelve considerable attention and, although most of the bedchamber scenes are sermocinatio, there is still much description of action. The final scene at the Green Chapel shows the greatest attention to setting, time, the three 222 I I parts of the action, and the relation of that action to the ' rest of the story. If each example of this device does not have all the parts of demonstratio, enough is always present to relate each example to the whole poem. Gawain, being jalraost entirely narrative, might be considered one long ]demonstratio, but in the sense that Cicero uses narratio, I .a related but larger term, not in the sense of the ad I Herennium. The Gawain-poet has employed all the figurae sententiarum, but not all of them in every poem. He has selected the devices which suit his purpose. For example, j *the exemplum is the primary rhetorical device In the homilies; the poet has indeed placed so heavy a reliance lupon it that the narrative outweighs the moral interest. Pearl presents a better example of the correct use of the device, although even here the poet devotes too many lines I |to the Parable of the Vineyard, an exemplum which disrupts the forward movement of his argument. Fortunately this exemplum Is an exception to his general practice in Pearl, where the exempla are subordinated to their purpose. In i ■ Gawain, where the device was useless, there is only one [instance of it, when Gawain excuses his fault, a rather ; I * 1 J jhumorous adaptation of the device, but a use within the i i I ’ province of the figure. The exemplum Is useful for proof, j 223 i and it is chiefly fox* this reason that the poet employed it,: appealing to the final authority, Holy Writ. Although there is action in the exempla of the homilies and a little in Pearl, it is Gawain that is eminently narra tive in movement. Thus though there are demonstratio and distributio in all the poems, to Gawain they are essential. |Even when physical action is not necessary to the advance jof the narrative, the poet invented the three hunts of the lord, which amplify situations that might easily have been stated rather than shown. But the poet chose rather to j ! develop the hunts at considerable length by demonstratio andj distributio, which by their vivid realization, add to, I I rather than detract from, his poem. , ; ! Two other figures important in the poems are expolitio and similitudo. The poet has employed nearly every type of expolitio to develop his ideas. For this purpose, similitudo is not important, but he has employed the device for clarity and vividness, even if many of his figures are not of great value. Not all types of expolitio and similitudo appear in all poems; but some type of each device appears in every poem. The poet selected the type of the device to fit his need. ' Sermocinatio is another device which appears in all the poems. In Pearl it contains the main ideas and their 2 2 ij. i amplification. In the homilies and Gawain it is less extensive, but invariably the poet employs it in the climac tic scenes, which are of course developed more fully than other sections. By doing this, he has achieved a dramatic immediacy. Because Pearl has continuous sermocinatio, he is unable to employ the device for this effect here. In i the homilies and particularly in Purity, his use lacks ‘ effectiveness because the climaxes of his exempla and the moral reasons for his employing them seldom coincide. Only i in Gawain does he achieve a nearly perfect combination of j jthe figurae sententiarum and his ideas. For this reason [Gawain, with all its forgotten customs and lore and its i ' well-nigh forgotten system of rhetoric, seems the most modem of the four poems. V CONCLUSION | On the basis of the number and variety of the tropes i and figures found in the four poems, there can be little ; doubt that the Gawain-poet shows the influence of the Latin rhetorical tradition. That he should have been so influ enced should not be cause for surprise, even though he in?ote primarily in the verse form of the native Germanic tradition. Educated as he probably was in the schools of his day, he could hardly have avoided instruction in the techniques of Latin literature while he was learning the Latin language. Moreover, he knew something of French literature— one of the few facts for which there is excellent internal evidence— and French literature was rhetorical, as Faral has shown. The Vulgate itself offered many examples of rhetorical practice. With the rhetorical reading which he must have done, it is unlikely that he could have avoided 1 contamination1 even had he wanted to. But it seems unlikely that he should have had any such desire, or that he tried to keep to the ’pure' native , tradition, 1 Even though he wrote in the alliterative meter and thus; 226 (preserved the form of older English poetry, he was by no means hostile to ideas foreigh to that poetry. Pearl has many links with contemporary mystical works, as Sister Madeleva demonstrated. Purity and Patience, like certain J Old English poems, retell Biblical legends, but with a [difference: the older poetry is narrative, epic in inten- t (tion, while these poems are homilies, their narratives i [existing as exempla in support of expressed ideas. Gawain [has its sources ultimately in Celtic myths, but its immedi ate source was apparently French romance; in any ease, it I [was not drawn from the Germanic storehouse of traditional i i t I legend. “ Thus the poet was receptive to alien traditions in the matter of his poems. Even though he chose to use the meter of his people, his almost eager reception of alien [source material does not indicate a man hostile on principle to poetic devices found in the same alien sources. The ! appearance of rhyme in Gawain and the elaborate and demand ing use of it in Pearl serve to confirm that his natural inclination was to take his technique, like his material, from whatever source seemed good. There was good reason for augmenting alliterative verse with alien poetic devices. The poet apparently had only an imperfect knowledge of the native tradition. That ; he could read genuine Old Ehglish poetry is unlikely, so j much had the language changed since the Normans came. Thus , for models of alliterative verse he would depend upon Middle, not ©Id English poetry, and these models represented a modification of the native tradition. Alliteration had become more nearly ornamental and therefore less structural and necessary. In a poem like Pearl, where rhyme determines ;the structure, the poet dispenses with alliteration in a ;third of his lines. Even in Gawain, where alliteration is basic, rhyme concludes each paragraph unit of the poem. Basic to this weakening of the alliteration is the prevalence of the end-stopped line in Middle English verse. In the old poetry the common alliteration of the two hemistichs continued the forward poetic movement. When this fundamental need for alliteration disappeared with the i employment of the end-stopped line, the native technique j for forward poetic movement also disappeared. These two | i deficiencies, in structure and in movement, had to be made | good. What more likely source for substitutes existed than the rhetoric-poetic of the Latin tradition? Another departure from the native tradition was the partial disappearance of the word-compound. This departure represents a change perhaps even more basic than the weakened alliteration, for it derives from a changed language habit. The English language was no longer purely ■ 22 8 . Germanic, exposed as it had been to the attack of languages politically and socially more powerful. The Gawain-poet is himself a prime example of a writer who takes his vocabulary from almost any source--native English, Norse, French, and |Latin. Apparently no longer could the poet freely create a new word by combination from native materials; if he i ■could, he seldom did. Borrowing was easier, and probably I ,more useful, because such imported words were understood by { his audience. As the many picturesque word-compounds in an ; ! Old English poem like Beowulf account for much of its poetic effectiveness, their rarity and paleness in these |four poems represent a poetic loss for which the changed | slanguage was itself responsible. Borrowing supplied a 1 i llarge and interesting vocabulary, but could not replace the 1 ! picturesque quality of the lost compound. The kenning J | survives doubtfully in an indistinct and colorless form, if , indeed it survives at all. Thus the language itself, as well as the alliterative form, had lost much of the native vigor of Old English poetry. For the production of poetry something had to be added.. To supply the deficiency of vocabulary, the poet went to other languages. To aid the weakened native form he brought structural rhyme. To fill out and ornament his poem, he found useful the tropes and figures. What could 229 • i be more natural? I But to assume that the Gawain-poet took his essential technique entirely from the rhetoric-poetic tradition would be erroneous. The alliterative line, for all its weakened condition, is still the basic meter of his poems and must i inot be discounted. Even Pearl, with its elaborate rhyme scheme, has an alliterative line, even when the allitera tion, difficult to use with a demanding rhyme scheme, is left out: four stresses in each verse, with a varying number of syllables, make a line differing considerably from those of poets in the Latin tradition. The use of this line alone establishes his relationship to the native tradi tion. i After observing the number of rhetorical devices in these poems, one is likely to conclude that the alliterative meter is about all that the poet really took from the native tradition. Although this may be the case, it is also possible that the Gawain-poet was either predisposed toward a certain type of rhetorical device because he found it like certain devices in the native tradition or that in the course of the oral development of alliterative poetry sub sequent to the Conquest, certain devices in both traditions became indistinguishable. The two pairs of devices where \ t either explanation would fit are pronominatio and circumitio' 230 and the kenning, and interpretatio and a simple form of j expolitio and variation. Both pairs are frequently identical, so that little will be gained by trying to distinguish whether these figures derive from the native or the rhetorical tradition. The important thing is that both pronominatio (or a loose form of the kenning) and interpretatio (or variation) are present in considerable 'amount, whether English or Latin in derivation. Equally important, however, is the fact that instances of most of the other figures of the rhetorical tradition are present in these poems and are not present (or conceded to be iderived from the classical tradition when they are) in Old ■English poetry. Consequently the original statement gains in probability; if the poet used fifty-five figures from the rhetorical tradition, it seems unlikely that he should have derived three, present in both traditions, only from I ithe second (and recessive) tradition. I Before concluding that the' Gawain-poet was supremely indebted to the rhetorical tradition, we must consider the possibility that his use of rhetoric was fortuitous. The jrhetoricians seem to have a name for everything. If they are to describe the technique of expression as a grammarian describes language, they should. Actually, ! Cicero, the author of the ad Herennium. and their mediaeval i 231 successors did not classify figures as such unless the devices amplify or ornament. Cicero is very definite about this; the rhetoricians are often confusing in their discussions, but they knew a figure when they saw one and presumably when they composed one. Still, there Is always a chance that a poet (or any writer, for that matter) may accidentally use a figure or i |perhaps any number of them. A certain French comic j !character discovered that he unknowingly had been speaking prose all his life. By analogy, one might suppose that the poet similarly knew so little of his craft that he practiced I It completely unconscious of what he did. This may have ! occasionally been the case. Some figures, particularly some of the figurae verborum like traductio and adnominatio, could easily appear by chance or even by carelessness; but others, particularly some of the figurae sententiarum like the exemplum, sermocinatio, and demonstratio the poet could hardly have used unaware of what he did. They are too big, too definite, and too jfinished for unconscious application. Even if some of the (figures were used unconsciously, the poet let them stand. In so doing he tacitly admitted that he thought them right. Still another possibility is that he did not know the system of rhetoric as such at all, that his usage represents 232 t I ja borrowing from other poets. Since the dream technique of i Pearl does not come from the rhetoricians, there is evidence : that he was influenced by poetic practice rather than by poetic theor:/. Specific rather than general influence 'cannot be determined until more is known about the poet from .other than internal sources. But If he took his rhetorical i jpractice from the poets rather than from the theorists, he I still practiced rhetorical theory and in the manner that the I Itheorists prescribed, although not slavishly. In a way, his very originality is evidence that he knew the rhetoricians. These poems differ so much from other poems of the same school that only a great poet who knew his craft could have produced them. A poet»s craft in the ■fourteenth century, if the evidence of Chaucer and Gower j Is accepted, included a knowledge of the rhetoricians; and, in spite of his originality, the Gawain-poet was a man of his age. But in either case the answer is the same. On the basis of observed evidence, discounting somewhat for a residual Old English technique and for possible fortuitous usages, we can safely say that the Gawain-poet was influ enced by the rhetorical tradition of poetic. The manner and extent of his use of rhetorical devices have been indicated with the discussion of the individual tropes and figures. Here it remains to summarize this 233 material. In the first place, his use of the tropes, most of which are metaphorical, Is not distinguished either in number or value. The exceptions to this, pronominatio and circuit©, of which there are many Instances, are unfor tunately no exception as far as artistic value is concerned. Most of them are merely roundabout ways of saying something I ; that would have been equally interesting if said plainly; i i jthey seldom appeal powerfully to the imagination. There i are, of course, exceptional instances which have recog nizable imaginative value. But these exceptions are too infrequent to try the generalization that the poet*s use of the tropes is undistinguished. His use of the figura verborum is somewhat more 1 impressive. The large number of adnominationes in the poems is doubtless due to the usefulness of that figure for finding alliterative words; many of them may be fortuitous. In Pearl and possibly in Gawain the poet used the device for poetic movement, since anticipation of the link-word carries the attention onward. In the homilies he was less interested in poetic movement because he could rely on logical or narrative movement for progression; hence he found use for transitio. In Patience the sententia adds dignity to his exordium, while in Purity he uses eontinuatio and conpar for an elevated style, although not with the 234 iprecision of an eighteenth, century poet. Gawain, rather surprisingly for a narrative poem, affords a number of conclusiones; most of them appear in speeches. But inter pretatio is the figura verborum that is all-pervasive. Although it is a type of emphasis by redundancy, the poet i more often used it for full expression, sometimes using it i jmerely to complete a line. Some of the more difficult figures, like complexio, he did not use at all, and some, like contentio and coramutatio, he used sparingly. Generally: his employment of the figurae verborum is appropriate, although not inevitably. | But the figurae sententiarum provided the Gawain-poet iwith most of his narrative devices. Some of the nineteen 'figures he seldom employed: distributio, licentia, divisio,' descriptio, imago, conformatio, significatio, and brevitas i all appear somewhere in the poems, but general use of them is not characteristic of the poet. For example, the chief use of conformatio occurs in Patience and insignificantly elsewhere. The poet did use these figures, however, when T with them he could most successfully develop his narrative, as when he uses licentia to let the Green Knight reproach Gawain. The other figurae sententiarum he used more : generously. Expolitio, with its subdivisions, is pervasive; : so is commoratio, except in Gawain. Similitudo appears 235 frequently but seldom with imaginative power. The exemplum is vital in Pearl and dominating in the homilies. Gawain affords the best examples of demonstratio. Sermocinatio is perhaps the poet’s best device, best in the sense that he uses it often and well; by so doing he has gained a dramatic intensity that simple narration could not have accomplished. Altogether, the Gawain-poet made excellent ^use of the figurae sententiarum.1 | A comparison of the list of figures which the poet used most persistently with Geoffroi’s list of amplifying imethods reveals that the poet primarily depended upon i ! |rhetorical figures for amplification. Interpretatio and 1 expolitio (of which the exemplum and sermocinatio are subtypes), circumitio, collatio (similitudo), and various descriptive forms permeate all these poems. Little use is made of exclamatio or conformatio. Fortunately, the digression seldom appears; for the one lone example in Gawain, the allegorical description of the hero’s shield, the poet apologizes. That he has not employed all eight methods of expansion may be attributed to his good judgment ^At this point it would be satisfying to say that rhetorical practice in the four poems indicates something about the canon of the poet. Unfortunately it offers no evidence either for or against the proposition of common authorship which could not be easily and successfully challenged. 236 |rather than to his neglect of rhetoric. After all, he did i use five of the eight methods of amplification and those 'abundantly. It is one of the ironies of literary history that the author of Gawain should be one of the greatest poets of the , , f rum, ram, ruff t school. Other poets represent the native tradition as t^ell or perhaps better. Mary Macleod Banks says of the alliterative Morte Arthure: I the measure is in many respects more artistically successful than in some other poems of the same class; j it finds a kindred theme in war and the achievements of a national hero, and regains something of the old swing < and resonance; it moves more freely here than when j weighted with the moral illustration as in Piers Plowman, ; or tipped with the fairy quills of romance as in Sir j Gawayn and the Green Knight; it vibrates with the tramp of fighting legions.^ Even without allowing for the pardonable enthusiasm of an I editor for her poem, this evaluation seems fair and just. , i Why then should the G-awain-poet he one of the greatest j ' i poets of the Alliterative Revival? Still assuming him to be the author of all four poems, we may minimize Patience and Purity as a basis for his fame. Although both are excellent examples of their type, neither j Is read except by specialists. I know of no translation of either poem and the West Midland dialect is not casually read. Both Pearl and Gawain have often appeared in Modern ^Morte Arthure (New York, 1900), p. 12L|_f. 237 :English; on these works the poet’s reputation rests. Pearl i 1 |is popular partly because of its difficult and ingenious form combined with the fascinating mysteries of its meaning. Its fame may reside more on its critics1 curiosity than on 1 !their understanding. That its meter is alliterative is actually a minor point for their' consideration. Gawain. :on the other hand, is read for its excellent narrative. So skillful was its author that the poem seems modern despite its age and its mediaeval setting. Pearl is a little masterpiece; evaluation of Gawain needs no such qualifying adjective. Because the poetic form of this excellent 1 [narrative is the alliterative meter of the native tradition, t \ jits poet is one of the greatest authors of the Alliterative t 1 Revival. i Thus Gawain’s excellence depends rather upon its j narrative art than upon its alliterative line. The tech:- 1 nique of this narrative the poet learned from the rhetorical1 i tradition, a technique which he employed with intelligence and taste. It is therefore ironic that he produced what is ■ perhaps the masterpiece of the Alliterative Revival chiefly because he knew and used the technique of the alien, Latin tradition of rhetoric. BIBLIOGRAPHY1 I Abelson, Paul. The Seven Liberal Arts: A Study in I Medieval Cult are. New York, 1966. ! Akkatral, T. "A Point of Syntax In Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” Notea and Queries 196:322, August 1 195>3. I i Amours, P. J. "Capados,** Notes and Queries, Ninth Series,! 4:308, October I**., 1909. i Andrew, S. 0. Postcrlpt on IBeowalf♦* Cambridge, 1948. | _____________ , trans. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, A Modern Version of the XIV Century Alliterative Poem in the Original Metre! New York, 1929.* Syntax and Style In Old English. Oxford, 194® . ________________ The Old English Alliterative Measure. Croyden, 1931. ! Arbusow, Leonid. Colores rhetoric!» Bine Auswahl rhetorlscher !)frigaren und Gemelnpl&tze als Hilfsmlttel flir akademlsche ubungen anmittelalterlichen Texten. i Gottingen, 194^• * Atkins, J. W. H. English Literary Criticism, The Medieval ' : Phase. Cambridge, 1943. j ■^This bibliography represents an attempt to include ; all studies of the poems of the Cotton-Nero Manuscript A. x. of the British Museum, with selected sources and studies 'of the Latin and Germanic rhetorical traditions which have proved useful in the investigation of rhetorical influence on the Gawain-poet. Starred items were not available to me. 239 ; i 'Baldwin, C. S. "Cicero on Parnassus," PMLA, 14.2:106-112, j ; March 1927. __________________ . Ancient Rhetoric and Poetic. New York, 19257" Medieval Rhetoric and Poetic. New York, 1926. " Baldwin, Thomas ¥. On the Literary Genetics of Shakespearefe Poems and Sonnets. Urbana, Illinois, 1950. ” * _. William Shakespeare1s Small Latine and Lesse Greeke. Urbana, 19ijij-^ Banks, Jr., Theodore H., trans. Sir G-awain and the Green Knight. New York, 1929. Barrow, Sarah P. Medieval Society Romances. New York, 192k- ; 'Bartlett, A. C. The Larger Rhetorical Patterns in Anglo- j | Saxon Poetry" New York, 1935. j i ■ ‘ Bateson, Hartley. "The Text of •Cleanness,1" Modern \ | Language Review, 13i377“386, October 1918. i j _________________ . "Three Notes on the Middle-English \ 1 Cleanness" Modern Language Review, 1 9 : 9 5 - 1 0 1 , j ! January 19214-. ; Baughn, Denver Ewing. "The Role of Morgan le Pay in ’Sir j Gawain and the Green Knight,1" ELH, 17:2l|l-25l, j December 1950. * Bazire, Joyce. "ME. 5 and ^ in the rhymes of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Journal of English and Germanic j "Philology, 5l:23li-235* April 1952. j Bennett, R. E. "The Sources of The Jeaste of Syr Gawayne," : Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 33i5>7-o3, | January 193^. ! Beowulf, ed. Pr. Klaeber. Boston, I9I 4-I. i Billings, Anna Hunt. A Guide to the Middle English ! Metrical Romances. New York, 1901. Bland, D. S. "Chaueer and the Art of Narrative Verse," English. 7:216-220, Sommer 1949. Bodtker, A. Trarape. "Covacle, not conaele," Modern Language Notes. 26:127# April 1911. Bolgar, R. R. The Classical Heritage and Its Beneficiaries. Cambridge, 1954* i Boskoff, Priscilla S. "Quintilian in the Late Middle Ages," Speculum. 27:71-78, January 1952. Bowen, E. 6., and Gwyn Jones. "A Review of Gollanczts Gawain (191+0) ," Medium Aevum, 13:58-65# 1944* Braddy, Haldeen. "Sir Gawain and Ralph Holmes the Green Knight," Modem Language Notes. 67:240-242, April 1952. Brandi, Alois, and 0. ZIppel. Middle English Literature. New York, 1949. Brett, Cyril. "Notes on *Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight,*" Modern Language Review. 8:160-164# April 1913. ________ "Notes on * Cleanness* and *Sir Gawayne,*" Modern ’ Language Review, 10:188-195# April 1915* . "Notes on Passages of Old and Middle English," Modern Language Review, 14:1-9# January 1919. Brewer, D. S. "Gawain.and the Green Chapel," Notes and Queries, 193:13# January 10, 1948♦ Brown, Arthur C. L. "Origin of Stanza-Linking in English Alliterative Verse," The Romanic Review, 7:271-283# July-September 1916. Brown, A. R. "Pearl: More Marvels did my purpose daunt," Poet Lore, 5:434-438# August 1893. Brown, Carleton P. "Note on the Dependence of Cleanness on the Book of Mandevllle." PMLA. 19:149-153# 1904. _______________. "Note on the Question of Strode*s Authorshipof The Pearl, PMLA. 19:148-148# 1904. ! Brown, Carleton P. "The Author of The Pearl, Considered In the Light of his Theological Opinions,” PMLA, 19: 115-153, 1901* . . , Bruce, J. Douglas. ”The Breaking of the Deer in Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight,” Engllsche Studlen, 52:23-36, 1903. I ___________________• Evolution of Arthurian Romance to ' 1300J 2 vols. Gottingen, 1923-21*.. Buchanan, A. ”The Irish Framework," PMLA, i*.7:315-33©, June 1932. 1 Butler, H. M., trans. The Institutio Qratoria of Quintilian. New York, 1921. I ; Capian, Harry. Mediaeval *Artes Praedlcandi*: A Handlist. , Ithaca, New York, l931i* ' . j Cargill, 0. and Margaret Schlauch. ”The Pearl and Its ! | Jeweler,” PMLA, 1*3:105-123, March 1926. | i j ! Casson, Leslie P. "Studies in the Diction of the j | Confessio Amantis,” Englisehe Studlen, 69:l81*.-*207, November 195i£* Cebesoy, Ayfte, trans. Sir Gawain ve Yes 11 So valve. I Istanbul, 19J4.7** Chambers, Raymond Wilson. On the Continuity of English I Prose from Alfred to More and His School. London, I 19327- --------------- ' ! . _____ . " * Sir Gawayne and the Green ; knight,* Lines 697-702," Modern Language Review. 2: 167, January 1907* ! ; Chapman, Cooledge Otis. An Index of Names in Pearl, Purity, Patience, and Gawalru Ithaca, kew York, 1951* _ . "Chaucer and the Gawain-poet: A Conjecture,w Modern Language Notes, feb: 521-52li, j December 1953* i » "The Authorship of the Pearl,” I PMLA, k7:3U6-353, June 1932. 22*2 Chapman, Cooledge Otis. "The PardonerTa gale; A Medieval Sermon," Modern Language Notes. 14.1:506-509, December 1926 ■ * "Virgil and the Gawain-ooet." PMLA, 60: i6-23 « March 192*5.---------------- ----- ♦ "The Musical Training of the ! -Pearl Poet,” PMLA, 2*6:177-181, March 1931. ------ --- _______• "Numerical Symbolism in Dante and tiie Pearl, Modem Language Notes. 52**256-259, April 1939. - "Tielus to Tuakan, GGK, Line 11," Modem Language Notes, 63*59-60, JanuaryHfel*8. Charland, T. M. Artes Praedleandl, Contribution a 1'Hlstolre de la Rhdtorloue aa Moyen 'fee. Ottawa, Chase, Stanley P., trans. The Pearl. New York, 1932. jCiceronis, M. Tulli. Rhetorici Libri Duo (qui vocantur De Inventlone), ed. fiduardus stroebel. Leipzig, 1915.“" M . . . - > De Inventlone. ed. and trans. H. M. Hubbell.Cambridge, Mass., 192*9. (The Loeb Classical Library.) Clark, A. C. Prose Rhythm in English. Oxford, 1913. Clark, Donald L. Rhetoric and Poetry in the Renaissance. New York, 1922. Clark, John Williams. "Observations on Certain Differences in Vocabulary between Cleanness and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight." Philological Quarterly, 28:261-273, April 192*9. _ _ _ _ _ ______ "The Authorship of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Pearl, Cleanness, Patience, and Erkenwald in the Lightof the Vocabulary. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota, 192*1. _ 2 i ^ - ■ ■ Clark, John Williams. "The Authorship of Sir Gawain and j i the Green Knight, Pearl. Cleanness. Patience, and Erke.nty.al4 in the Light of the Vocabulary." Summaries of Ph.D. Theses. University of Minnesota, IV, 102-112, 191+9. ___________________ . nThe Gawain-poet and the Substantival AdiectiveT^ Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 1+9:60-66, January 195>0. ______________________ . "Paraphrases for 'God' in the Poems Attributed to T;he Gawain-poet, 1 1 Modern Language Notes, 65:232-236, April 1950. Cleanness, ed. Sir Israel Gollancz. London, 1921. Colgrave, B. "Sir Gawayne’s Green Chapel," Antiquity, 7:351-353, 1938. Cook, A. S. "Pearl 212ff," Modern Philology, 6:197-200. October 190S7~ j Coomaraswarn!, Ananda K. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight: j Indra and larauci," Speculum, 19:10l+-125, January 191+1+.! Cornifici Hhetoricorum ad C. Herennium, Libri IIII, ed. C. [ L. Kayser. Leipzig, l851+. ; f Coulton, G. G. "In Defense of ’Pearl,1" Modern Language ■ Review, 2:39-1+3, October 1906. j ; ______________ , trans. Pearl. London, 1906 and 1921. 'Curtius, Ernst Robert. European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans. Willard Trask!! New York, 1954- .Daniels, R. B. "Rhetoric in Gower’s To King Henry the ■ Fourth, In Praise of Peace," Studies in Philology, 32:62-73, January 1935• Davies, R. T. "Gawayn and the Green Chapel," Notes and Queries, 193:191+, May 1, 191+8. Day, Mabel. Cleanness, Glossary and Illustrative Texts. Oxford, 1933. 244 Day, Mabel. "The Weak Verb In the Works of the 1Gawain *- Poet,*1 Modern Language Review. 14* 413-415» October 1919. : . "Strophic Division in Middle English Alliterative Verse,” Englische Studlen, 66:245-248, i 1931. I , ■ **Two Notes on •Pearl,*" Medium Aevam, 3*241, i . I9357 j „ I Degginger, Stuart H. L. "»Awayle Whyt ase Whalles Bon* — R e c o n s t r u c t e d , " J o u r n a l o f E n g l i s h a n d G e r m a n i c P h i l o l o g y . 5 3 i 85 . - 9 0 , J a n u a r y 195 % * * De Mille, James. Elements of Rhetoric. New York. l@7d. Deutschbein, M. Zur Entwicklung des englischen Alliterationsverses. Halle, 1902.5- ! Dowdey, P. J. "Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight, 1. 620, j 1. 625," M o d e r n L a n g u a g e R e v i e w . 54*229, A p r i l 195-9* 1 ! „ ! Eagan, Joseph P. "The Import of Color Symbolism in Sir j Gawain and the Green Knight," St. Louis University j Studies. I, 11-86, 195-9* Ekwall, Eilert. "Another Note on the Poem Patience,” Englische Studlen. 5-7*313-316, 1913-15- . "Klelnigkeiten zur englischen Wortforschung, II," Archiv fur das Stadium der neoren Sprachen and Literaturen. 119*442-443, 1907. j _____ . "Some Notes on the Text of the | Alliterative Poem Patience," Englische Studlen, 54* 165-173, 1911-12. "Zu Patience 143." Englische Studlen, i :-----49V4B3-P4. ------------- ' . "Zur Geschiehte der altenglischen j gutturalen Spirans 3 im Mittelenglischen," Englische . i Studlen, 40:161-174, 1909. ; J i I Ellis, L. H. "Pearl," English Journal, 8:183, March ! 1919. 2k$ ; Emerson, 0. P. *A.Note on the M.E. *Cleanness,*" Modern , Language Review, 10:373-375, July 1915* . "A Note on the Poem Patience,” Englische ! Studlen, 1 4 . 7:125-131, 1913- 11*. ! ;__________ . "A Parallel Between the Middle English ” ?oem Patience and an Early Latin Poem Attributed to Tertullian,1 * PMLA, 10:21*2-21*8, 1895. "Imperfect Lines in Pearl and the Rimed ^arts of Sir Gawayn and the Green Knight,” Modern Philology, 19:131-lkl7; November 1921, . "Middle English Clannesse," PMLA, 3i|-Sl|-9l|.- i : ' 5^2, 1919., ‘ ‘ j "More Notes on Patience," Modern Language Notes, 31*1-10, 1916. I_______________. "More Notes on Pearl,” PMLA, 1*2:807-821, j December 1921, |_____ "Notes on Sir Gawain and the Green ! Knight, * ’ Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 21:363-1*10, 1922, "Purity, A Middle English Poem, Edited I with Introduction and frotes by Robert J.Menner, i Yale Studies in English LXI. Yale University Press, | 1920," Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 20:229-21*1, 1921. r— — ,_________■ "Some Notes on the Pearl," PMLA, 37:52-93, | March 1922. 1 " ~ j "Two Notes on Sir Gawain and the Green ' Knight Modern Language Notes, 36:2l£-£i5, 1921, I jEverett, Dorothy, and Naomi D. Hurnand* "Legal i Phraseology in a Passage in Pearl," Medium Aevam, 1 I 16:9-15, 191*7. i i ■ " ' :Faral, Edmond, ed. Les Arts Poetiques da %IIe et du Xllle j Sjfecle. Paris, 192i*. < ■Pick, W. Zum mittelenglischen Gedicht von der Perle: elne : Laut ant ers achung. Kiel, 1085.-* i 21+6 Fischer, J. Die stabende Langzelle in den Werken des | Gawalndichters. Bonn, 1901.*- “ ! Fisher, Fay* Narrative Art in Medieval Romances, Cleveland, 19jS9. { Fletcher, Jefferson B, "The Allegory of the Pearl," Journal of English and Germanic Philology. 20:1-21, i 19^1. j Forster, M. "Name des Green Knight," Archlv fur das Stadium der nearen Sprachen and. Literal aren' t lii7:19lu ! Frank, Jr., Robert Worth. "The Art of Reading Medieval Personification-Allegory," ELH, 20:237-250, December 1953. , Fuhrmann, J. Die alllterierenden Sprachformeln in Morris1 i Early English Alliterative Poems und lm Sir Oawayiae | and the Green KhigL66 Hamburg, l886.*- Gabriel, A. L. "The Preparatory Teaching in the Parisian Colleges daring the Fourteenth Century," Revae d* Uhiversite d* Ottawa, 21:2Q9-23lu October-December, 19511 ' i Garrett, Robert Max. The Pearl, an Interpretation. | Seattle, 191©. Gerould, G. H. Old English and Medieval Literature. New York, 1929. 1 . _______________. "The Gawain Poet and Dante: A Conjecture," PfrltA. 51:31-36. March 1936. :________________. Saint*a Legends. Boston, 1916. ! • 1 Gollancz, Sir I. "Chapter XV," Cambridge History of English Literature, I, 357-3YTt Cambridge, 190?. i - __________ , ed. Facsimile of Cotton. Nero A x / li. London, i'923. (Early English Text Society) i _________ . "The Text of * Cleanness, *" Modern i Language Sevlew, llj.: 152-162, April 1919. i ‘ ! i 21+7 Gordon, E. V. , and C. T. Onions. “Notes on the Text and Interpretation of ’Pearl,1" Medium Aevum, 1:126, 1932, and 2:165, 1933. Greg, W. ¥. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Times Literary Supplement, February 8, 191+1, p. 67. Green, Walter Kirkland. "The Pearl--A New Interpretation," PMLA, 1+0":811+-827, December 1925- Guest, Edwin. A History of English Rhythms, ed. W. W. Skeat. London, l6o2. Haessly, Mary Gonzaga. Rhetoric in the Sunday Collects of the Roman Missal. Cleveland, 1938. Halm, Karl Felix von, ed. Rhetores Latini Minores. Leipzig, 1863. Hamilton, George L. "’Capados’, and the Date of Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight," Modern Philology. 5: 365-376, January 1908. Hamilton, Marie. "Chaucer’s ’Marcia Catoun,’" Modern Philology, 30:361-361+, May 1933. . "Notes on Chaucer and the Rhetoricians," PMLA, 1+7:1+03-1+09, June 1932. . "The Orthodoxy of Pearl 603-1+," Modern Language Notes, 58:370-373, May 19i+3. Hare, Kenneth, trans. Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight. With an introduction, notes and bibliography by R. M. Wilson. London, 191+8. ______________ . "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Times Literary Supplement, September 6, 1923, p. 588. Harrison, B. S. "The Rhetorical Inconsistency of Chaucer’s Franklin," Studies in Philology, 32:55-61, January 1935. _______________ . "The Colors of Rhetoric in Chaucer," Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Yale University, 1932. Hart, Elizabeth. "The Heaven of Virgins," Modern Language Notes, 1+2:113-116, February-192?. Haskins, C. H. Studies in Mediaeval Culture. Oxford, ! 1929. ; _____________ The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century. j Cambridge, Mass., 1927. Heuser, W. "Offenes and geschlossenes EE im westmittellandisehen Dialekt." AngTia, 19:1l51-1l99. 1897. Hibbard, L. A. Medieval Romance in England. New York, 1921+. Hill, Laurita L. "Madden's Divisions of Sir Gawain and the 'Large Initial Capitals* of Cotton Nero A. x." i Speculum, 21:6 7-71» J anuary 191+6 • Hillmann, Sister Mary Vincent. "Pearl: 'inlyehe' and •rewards, '” Modern Language Motes, 56:Ii57-li58. June 191+1. ______ . "The Pearl: west ernays (307)X Fasor (k32)," Modern Language Notes. 55:52- 1+1+, January 191+3. I ; - _______ . "Pearl: lere leke. 210," j Modern Liejaguage Motes, 59:1+17-1+18, June 191+1+. | 1_____ . "Some Debatable Words in Pearl and Its Theme,f * Modem Language Notes. 60:21l1- SPTApril 191+S. --- ------- --- ---- . "Pearl 382: mare re? mysse?" Modern Language Notes, 58:528-5>3i, December 195>3. Holman, G. H. "*Marere3 mysse* in The Pearl," Modern Language Notes. 66:33-36, January 195>1* Holthausen F. "Zu dem mittelenglisehen Gedicht Cleanness." Archiv fur das St&dimn der neuren BprachenTund Xlteraturen, 106:31+9. 1901. . Holthausen P. "Zum me. Gedlcht The Pearl.” Archlv for das Studium der nearen Sprachen and Llterataren, 123: 2k.l-2k$, 1909. Hoskins, John. Directions for Speech and Style, ed. Hoyt H. Hudson. Princeton, 1935 • Halbert, J. R. "Beowulf and the Classical Epic," Modern i Philology. 1 ^ : 6 5 - November 19l*.6. , ____ "Syr Gawayn and the (Irene Kny3t,® Modern Philology, 13*533-lj-62, December 1915• ; "Syr Gawayn and the Grene Kny3t," Modern "Philology, 13:689-730, April 1916. ______________ . "The ’West Midland* of the Romances," Mode rn Thllology. , 19:1-16, August 1921. "A Hypothesis Concerning the Alliterative Revival," Modem Philology, 28:^05-i^22, May 1931. . "Quatrains In Middle English Alliterative Poems ,1 1 Modern Philology, 48:73-81, November 1950. _____________. "The Name of the Green Knight," In Manly Anniversary Studies. Chicago, 1923. Hultzen, Lee S. "Aristotle’s ’Rhetoric* in England before 1600." Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Cornell University, 1932. Humbert, Sister Agnes M. Verbal Repetition in the ’Ancrene Riwle, * Washington, D.C., 19i+l|.. Huppe, B. P. "’Petrus, id est Christas’: Word-play in ’Piers Plowman,’ B-Text," ELH, 17:163-190, September 1950. Jackson, Isaac. "Gawain and the Green Knight," Notes and Queries, 195*2l|., January 21, 1950. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight Considered as a Garter Poem," Anglia. 37*391-1^23» 1913. "Sir Gawain’s Goat of Arms," Modern Language Review, 15*77-79, January 1920. Jewett, S. 0,, trans. Pearl* Hew York, 1908. John of Garland. Exempla honestae vitae, ed. Edwin Habel. Romanis chie Forsehungenr 29:131-l$li.« 1911. 1 i _____________ Poetrla. ed. Giovanni Mari. Romanische Forschungen, 13:503-96$, 1902. , Johnson, Osear E. "Was Chaucer's Merchant in Debt? A j Study in Chaucerian Syntax and Rhetoric,” Journal of i English and Germanic Philology. 52:$0-$7» January 1953. Johnson, Wendell Stacy. ”The Imagery and Diction of *The Pearl*: Toward an Interpretation,” ELH. 20:161-180, September 1953. Jones, Gwyn, trans. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. London, 19$2. i Jordan, Richard, and H. Ch. Matthes. Handbueh der | mlttelenglischen Grammatik. Heidelberg, 193^4-.* \ I I Kaluza, M. Engllsche Metrlk in hlstorlscher Entwicklung. j Berlin, 1909 • * I [ . __________. ”Strophische Gliederung in der I mittelenglischen rein alliterirenden Dichtung,” ! Englische Studlen. 16:169-180, 1892. J ! . _______. Studlen zur germanlschen Alliteratlonsvers, 1 TTT~ Weimar, 1900.* Kane, George. Middle English Literature: A Critical Study of the Romances, the Religious Lyrics and 1 Piers j I’ lowmanT* London, 19$1. King, R. W. ”A Note on ‘Sir Gawayn and the Green Knight,* : 2i 4 .lJ4 .ff,” Modern Language Review, 29 *tj-35-436, October, l$3l*.» : 1 , ___________• ”Notes on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” ! Review of English Studies. 5:liii9-li52. October 1929. Kirtlan, E., trans. Pearl. London, 1918.* ^ .. trans. Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight. London, 1912 and 1913.* 251 I f Kittredge, G. L. Gawain and the Green Knight. Cambridge, j Mass., 1916. j ,Knott, Thomas A. "The Text of Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight," Modern Language ftotes. ' 30:102-108, April l915« jKnigge, P. Die Sprache des Dlchters von Sir Gawain and j the Green Knight, der sogenannten Early English Alliterative Poems and De Erkenwalde. Marburg, 1885.*| Kock, Ernest A, "Interpretations and Emendations of Early ; English Texts," Anglia, 26:36i|.-376, 1903. ; [ . ; i Kokeritz, Helge. "Rhetorical Word-Play in Chaucer," ! PMLA, 69:937-952, September 195k. j . "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, 195k*1 * ' i Modern Language Notes, 56:373-3714-, May 19k3. \ ( j !Koziol, Herbert. "Zur Prage der Verfassersehaft einiger i ! mlttelenglischen Stabreimdichtungen," Englisehe I Studlen, 67:165-173, 1932. i Krappe, Alexander Haggerty. "Who Was the Green Knight?" Speculum, 13:206-215, April 1935. iKohnke, B. Die alliterierende Langzelle in der mlttelenglischen Romanze Sir Gawayn and the Green j j Knight. Berlin, 1900** Kullnick, M. Studlen uber den Wortschatz in *Slr Gawayne ! and the Grene Kny3t Berlin, 1902.* Kurvinen, Anvo. Sir Gawain and the Carl of Carlisle. Helsinki, 1951 •’ “ * j L., 0. E. "The Inner Side of the Shield," Rotes and l Queries. 170:8, 1936. j Lawrence, J. Chapters on Alliterative Verse. London, 1893. i ; Lawrence, W. W. Medieval Story. Hew York, 1931. ! I • Beowulf and the Epic Tradition. 1 ; Cambridge, Mass., 1930. ! 252 Lawrenee, W. W. Selected Bibliography of Mediaeval Literature In"England from the Beginnings to the Dea~bh of Chaucer7 New York, 19307 ! Leach, A. P. The Schools of Medieval England. New York, 1915. 1 Leonard, ¥. E. The Scansion of Middle English 1 Alliterative Verse. Madison, Wisconsin, 1920. Lewis, Charlton M. The Foreign Sources of Modern English Versification. Halle, lo9><tf. Lewis, C. S. The Allegory of Love. London, 1938* Leyser, Polycarp. Historla Poetarum et Poematam Medii Aevi. Halle, 1721.* “ Lilgegren, S. B. nHas the Poet of Patience read De Jona?” Englische Studlen, 1+8:337-31+1, 19ll+-l5* Lohmann, Otto. Die Sage von Oawaln and dem Grtinen Ritter. Konlgsberg, 1938.* ................. Loomis, H. S. Celtic Myth and Arthurian Romance. New York, 1927. _. Introduction to Medieval Literature, ' Chiefly in England. New York, 1939. _____________ . "More Celtic Elements in Gawain and the i Qreen knight," Journal of English and Germanic I Philology, 1+2: 11+9-18I+, April 191+3. Luick, K. “Die englische Stabreimzeile im XIV., XV. and XVI. Jahrhundert," Anglia, 11:553-618, 1889. ■ Lyly, John. Euphues, ed* M. W. Croll and H. Clemens. i New York, 1916. MaeCracken, H. N. “Concerning Huchown," VPMLA, 25:507- 53J+, 1910. < ; MacDonald, A. “A Note on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," English Studies, 35Vl5, February 1951+. 1 I McKeon, Eichard. "Rhetoric in the Middle Ages,” ; Speculum, 17:1-32, January 191+2. 253 Madden, Sir Frederic. Syr Gawayne: A Collection of Ancient Romanee-Poems, by Scottish and" fengllsfa Authors, relating to that Celebrated Knight of the Round Table. London, 1639. “ Madeleva, Sister Mary. The Pearl: A Study In Spiritual Dryness. Hew York and London, 1925- i . . i Magoun, Jr., F. P. "Chaucer*s Sir Gawain and the OFr. Roman de la Bose.” Modern Language Notes, 67*183- lS5, March 1952. ___________________. "Anmerkungen zom Glossar des Tolkien- Gordonschen *Slr Gawain and the Green Knight,*” Anglia. 52:79-82, March 1928. I ___________________. ’ ’Kleine Beltrage zu Sir Gawain,” l Anglia. 617129-135. 1937. ; Manly, J. M. "Chaaeer and the Rhetoricians, Proceedings ■ ! of the British Academy. 12:95-113, 1926. ~ | I \ Marl, G. I tratti Medlevall dl Ritmia Latina. Milan, j 1 8 9 9 . ^ | ! Marquardt, Hertha. Die altengllschen Kennlnger: eln i Beltrag zur Stllkunide altgerraanlscher Dlchtung. j Halle, 1938> j | Matthews, J. C. "Sir Gawain, Line 133! sun Emendation,” { Philological Quarterly, 9:215-216, April 1930. I J Medary, Margaret P. "Stanza-Linking In Middle English Verse,” The Romanic Review, 7*243-270, July- September 1916. : Menner, R. J. "Four Notes on the West Midland Dialect," Modern Language Notes, 4l:45>4~458, November 1926. _____________ . "Middle English *Lagmon* (Gawain 1729) j and Modern English *Lag*," Philological Quarterly, 10:163-168, April 1931. j _______. "Notes on Middle English Lyrics," Modern 1 Language Notes, 55*243-249, April 1940. Menner, R. J. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and the West Midland',** PMLA, 37:£03-526, September 1922. Mitchell, S. W., trans. Pearl. Hew York, 1906. Morris, Richard, ed. Early English Alliterative Poems. London, 1869. (Early Englisli Text Society) Napier, Arthur S. "Hotes on Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight, " Modern Language Hotes,17:l70--17k, March 1902. Haunin, Traugott. Per Elnfluss der mittelalterllehen Rhetorik auf Chaucers Dlchbong. Bonn, 1929.** Heilson, W. A., and K. G. T. Webster. Chief British Poets of Ikth and 15th Centuries. Boston^ 1916. Heilson, G. "Crosslinks between Pearl and the Awntyrs," Scottish Antiquary, 16:67, 1902.-* __________. ♦Huchown of the Awle Ryale,1 the Alliterative Poet. Glasgow, 1902.-* Horden, E* Die antike Konstprosa vom VI. Jahrhundert vor Christo bis in die Zeit der Renaissance. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1923. Horthrup, C. S. **A Study of the Metrical Structure of the Middle English Poem The Pearl,” PMLA, 12:326- 314-0, 1897. Oakden, J. P. Alliterative Poetry in Middle English. 2 vols. Manchester, 1930, 1935* _____________• The Poetry of the Alliterative Revival. Manchester, 1937. _____________ . MThe Scribal Errors of MS. Cotton Hero A. x.v * UTbrary, lij.:3£>3“358, December 1933. Olivero, Federico, ed. and trans. La Perla. Bologna, 1936.* Ong, W. J. "The Green Knights Harts and Bucks," Modern Language Motes, 65*£>36-539, December 1950. 25£ Onions, C. T. 1 1 ’Fade1 in 'Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,1" Times Literary Supplement, January 20, 1927, P. kh. _. "'Fade1 in 'Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,*" Times Literary Supplement, February 3, 1927, P. 76. _____________ . "No Fage," Times Literary Supplement, February 11, 1926, p. 99. . "No Page,n Times Literary Supplement, February 5, 1931, p. 99. "Note on Patienee--Correction," Englische Studien, 1^8:172, 19 lip-19l£. _. "Professor Emerson's Note on Patience,1 1 Englische Studien, I 4 . 7:316-317, 1913-19lli^ _____________ . "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” Times Literary Supplement, September 20, 1923, p. 620. _____________ . "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” Times Literary Supplement, August 16, 1923, p. Osgood, G. G., Jr., trans. Pearl. Boston, 1907. Owst, Gerald Robert. Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England: A Neglected Chapter in the History of English Letters and of the English People. Cambridge, 1933* _________________ - Preaching in Medieval England, An Introduction to Sermon Manuscripts of the Period c. 1350-1^0. Cambridge, 1926'. Paetow, Louis John. The Arts Course at Medieval Universities with Special Reference to Grammar and Rhetoric. Champaign, 1910. Patience, ed. Hartley Bateson, Manchester, 1912, 1918. ______ , ed. Sir Israel Gollancz. London, 1913, 1921}.. Pearl, ed. C. G. Osgood, Jr. Boston, 1906. 256 Pearl, ed. E. V. Gordon. Oxford* 1953* _____ , ed. S. P. Chase and students of Bowdoin College. Boston, 1932. , ed. Sir Israel Gollancz, 1891, 1897, 1921. Perry, L. M. "’Sir Gawain and the Green Knight’, Line 2511," Modern Language Review, 32:80-81, January 1937. Plimpton, George A. The Education of Chaucer, Illustrated from the School Books In Use in His Time. New York, 193% z Purity, ed. Robert J. Menner. New Haven, 1920. Puttenham, George. Arte of English Poesie, ed. Gladys D. Willcoek and Alice Walker. Cambridge, 1936. Rand, E. K. Founders of the Middle Ages. Cambridge, Mass., 1929. Rashdall, H. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, ed. F. M. Powicke and A. B. Emden. 3 vols. Oxford, 1936. Reicke, C. Untersuchungen uber den Stil der mlttelenglischen. Alliterierenden Gedichte Morte Arthure, The Destruction of Troy, The Wars of Alexander, The Selge of Jerusalem, Sir Gawayn and the Green Knight: ein Beitrag zur Losung der Huchown- Frage. Konigsberg i. Pr7 1906.3;- Rhetorica ad Herennium, ed. and trans. Harry Capian. Cambridge, Mass., 195^+* (The Loeb Classical Library) __________________, ed. F. Marx. Leipzig, 1923. ______ _____________, ed. and trans. M. Nisard in Oeuvres Completes d~e Ciceron, I. Paris, 1875. Rh^jtorique \ Herennius, ouvrage longtemps attribu£ % ' Cicdron, ed. Henri Bornicque. Paris, n. d. 257 I Richardson, M. E. "A Hot© on Sir Gawain and the green Knight 1. 877»n Notes and Queries, l80:96-97, February 8, 19J+1* j Ridley, M. R. The Story of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, in Modern Engiiah. Leicester, I Rix, Herbert D. Rhetoric in Spenser*s Poetry* j Pittsburgh, Penn., 19I 4 -O. I Robbins, R. H. "Popular Prayers in Middle English Verse," | Modem Philology, 36:337-350, May 1939. | "Private Prayers in Middle English Verse," ; S t u d i e s " * * i n P h i l o l o g y . 3 o : ij.66-l4.75» J u l y 1 9 3 9 . i Robertson, D. W. "The ’Heresy* of the Pearl,” Modern Language Notes, 65:152-155» March 1950. ! 1 ________________ . "The Pearl as a Symbol," Modem j Language Notes, 65:155-161, March 1950. I Rosenthal, F. "Die alliterierende englische Langzeile im 111— Jahrhundert," Anglia, l:ij.li4.-i^59, 1878. t | Rubel, Vere L, Poetic Diction in the English Renaissance | from Skelton"*through SpenserT New York, 19I 4 XI i 1 Saint Erkenwald, ed, C, Horstman in Altenglische j Legenden. Heilbronn, l88l.** ;_________________, ed, H. L. Savage* New Haven, 1926, , ed. Sir I. Gollancz, London, 1922. * “ — ——— ——— | ; Saintsbury, George, The Flourishing of Romance. | Edinburgh, 1897* I __________________. A History of Criticism. 3 vols. Edinburgh, 193l£ Sandys, J. E. History of Classical Scholarship. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1906-1908. * 1 • 1 Savage, H. L. "A Note on Correction of ’scrape* from *scraf>e,’ vide Sept. 26," Times Literary Supplement, ! I October 31* 1936, p. 887. ! 258 Savage, H. L. "A Note on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight 700-2,° Modern Language Notes, 1+6:1+55-1+57? November 1931. _____________ . "A Note on Sir Gawain 1795/’ Modern Language Notes, 55:&01+ , December 191+0. _____________ . ,fA Note on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight 2035/' Modern Language Notes, 1+9:232-23l+, April 1931+ ______. "Brow or Brawn?" Modern Language Notes, 52 36-38* January 1937. . "Fnasted in Sir Gawain, 1702," Philological Quarterly 9:209-210, April 1930. __________. "Hunting Terms in Middle English," Modern Language Notes, 66:216, March 1951. ________ . 1 1 Lote, lote3 in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Modern Language Notes, 60:1+92-1+93? November 191+5* _____________. "Methles in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, 2106,n Modern Language Notes , 58:1+6—i|_7»1 January 191+3. _________ . "Notes on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," PMLA, " 1+6:169-176, March 1931. _____________. 1 1 iScrape' in Sir Gawain," Times Literary Supplement, September, 26, 193&? p. 768. _____________. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Lines 206- 7," Exp lie at or, l+:6, April 191+6". _____. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Lines 675-71" Explicator, 3:8, June 191+5. __________ . "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, 1. 1701+," Modern Language Notes, 1+1+:21+9-250* April 1929. "Sir Gawain and the Order of the Garter," ELH, 5:11+6-11+9, June 1938. 259 Savage, H. L. "The Significance of the Hunting Scenes in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 27:1-15, January 1928 Schipper, J. Grundriss der englischen Metrik. Vienna, 1895.*“ ' ____________. Englische Metrik, I. Bonn, l88l Schmittbetz, K. Das Ad.jektiv. Bonn, 1908.-* "Das Ad.iektiv in ’Syr Gawayn and the Green Kny3t’," Anglia. 32:1-60, 163-189, 359-383, 1901. ' Schlauch, Margaret, "Chaucer’s Prose Rhythms," PMLA, 65* 568-589, June 1950. Schofield, W. H. "The Nature and Fabric of Pearl," PMLA, 19:1514.-215, 19014.. "Symbolism, Allegory, and Autobiography in The Pearl," PMLA, 2l4.:585-675, 1909. Schumacher, K. Studien uber den Stabreim in der Mlttelenglischen Alliterationsdichtung. Bonn, 19II4 -.** Schwahn, F. Die Conjugation in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight und den sogenannten Early English Alliterative Poems . Strasburg, I88I 4. . Sedgwick, W. B. "Notes and Emendations on Faral’s Les Arts Poetiques du Xlle et du XHIe Siecle," Speculum 2:331-314-3, July 1927. Serjeantson, Mary S. "The Dialects of the West Midlands in Middle English," Review of English Studies, 3* 51+-67, January 1927. _. "The Dialects of the West Midlands In Middle English," Review of English Studies, 3*186- 203, April 1927. _. "The Dialects of the West Midlands in Middle English." Review of English Studies, 3* 319-331, July 1927. 260 i j Serjeantson, Mary S. "Middle English -ong/ -ung," Review of English Studies, 7iij.50-i4.52, October 1931. ; Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, ed. J. R. R. Tolkien and E. V. Gordon. Oxford, 1925, 1930, 1936. :_____________________________. _____ , ed. Richard Morris. ; London, 1697. (Early English Text Society.) Revised ; by Sir Israel Gollencz, 1897, 1912. 1 ______________________ , ed. Sir Israel Gollancz, Mabel Day, and M. S. Serjeantson. London, 19i|-0. (Early English Text Society,) Sire Gawvain et le Chavaller Vert, Po^me Anglais da XI¥e SiScle, ed. and trans. Emile Pons. "Parish 191+.6.-* i Sisam, Kenneth. "'Fade* In 'Gawain,' line lij.9," Times ; ; Literary Supplement, January 27, 1927, p. 60. i t S I 1 ’_______________. "'Fade* In 'Gawain, * line lij.9,, , Times j Literary Supplement, March 17, 1927, p. 193. • Fourteenth Century Verse-and Prose. I Oxford, 1921. ; I ■ __ . "Sir Gawain; lines lij.7-150," Notes and Queries, 195:239, May 27, 1950. Sledd, James. "Three Textual Notes on Fourteenth-Century Poetry," Modern Language Notes, 55*381, May 19ij-0. 1 Smalley, Beryl. The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages. - : Oxford, 19J+1. i ! Smith, J. H. "Gawain*s Leap: G. G. K. 1. 2316," Modern , I Language Notes, I 4. 9:ij-62-lj.63, November 193^-* Smith, Roland M. "Guinganbresil and the Green Knight," Journal Of English and Germanic Philology, i|5:l-25, January 19ij-5. Smithers, G. V. "A Crux in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Notes and Queries, 195:13^.-136, April 1, 1950. Speirs, John. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Scrutiny, 16:27ij--300, Winter, 19i|-9.'; : ' Sunden, K. F. Nggra Forblsedda Skand. Lanord 1 Sir Gawayne. Gotenburg, 1920*# .Taylor, Warren. A Dictionary of the Tudor Figures of Rhetoric. Chicago, 1937. T e a g u e , F l o r e n c e E . " C h a u c e r ' s E a g l e a n d t h e R h e t o r i c a l C o l o r s , " P M L A , 1 + 7 : 1 + 1 0 - 1 + 1 8 , J u n e 1 9 3 2 . ten Brink, B. History of English Literature, I. Hew York, ' 1889. Thomas, J. Die alllterterahfeLangzelle des Gawayne- ! Dlehters"! Coburg, 1908.# ! Thomas, Martha Carey. Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight, A Comparison with the"Frehcfe Perceval. Zurich, 1883. 1 Thomas, P. G. English Literature Before Chaucer. 1 London, 1921+. ;_____________ • "Notes on Cleanness,” Modern Language J 1 Review, 2 1 + : 3 2 3 - 3 2 2 + , O c t o b e r 1 9 2 9 . i j i "Notes on Cleanness," Modern Language Review, 17:62+-67* January 19^2. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ " T h e M i d d l e E n g l i s h A l l i t e r a t i v e P o e m S i r Gawayne and the Green Knight," Englische Studlen, 1+7:311-313, 1913. T h o m p s o n , J . W . T h e M e d i e v a l L i b r a r y . C h i c a g o , 1 9 3 9 . 1 . T r a u t m a n n , M . " D e r D i c h t e r H u c h o w n a n d s e i n e W e r k e , " Anglia, 1:109-11+9, 1878. I ;_______ . Uber die Verfasser and Entstehungszelt 1 e l n l g e r a l 1 1 i e r i e r e n d e r G e d i c h t e . L e i p z i g , 1876. # J 1 "Zur Kenntniss und Geschlehte der mlttelenglischen Stabzeile," Anglia, 18:83-100, 1896. i ! ; Tuttle, Edwin H. "Notes on The Pearl.” Modern Language ! Review, 15:298-300, October 1920. I 262 ;Tuve, Rosemond. "Imagery and Logic: Ramus and Metaphysical Poetics,” The Journal of the History of Ideas, 3*365-1+00, October 191+2. ; ivon Schaubert, E. "Der englische Hrsprung von Svr Gawayn i and the Grene Kny3t," Englische Studlen, 57* 330-1+1+6, ! ! 1923. j ! i Warren, P. M. "Some Features of Style in Early Freneh' i Narrative Poetry,” Modem Philology. 3s517-521, 1905-[ 1906. 1 Watson, John Selby, trans. Quintilian^ Institutes of | Oratory. London, 1856. Watson, M. R. "The Chronology of Sir Gawain and the Green j Knight.” Modem Language Notes. 6jj-t65-86, February 191+97“ Weiehardt, C. Die Entwlcklung des Natargef uhiai in der mlttelenglischen Dlchtung vor Chaucer. Kiel, 1900.* Wellek, Rene. "The Pearl. An Interpretation of the Middle-English Poem,” Studies In English by Members of the English Seminar of the Charles University^ Prague. IV. Prague, 1933. Wells, Henry W. "Style in the English Mystery Plays,” ! Journal of English and Germanic Philology. 38:360- 3bl, July 1939. Weston, Jesse L. From Ritual to Romance. New York, 191+1. _______________ Legend of Sir Gawain. London, 1897* _________________• Romance. Vision, and Satire. Boston, 1912# ________________, trans • Sir Gawayn and the Green Knight. London, 1898. Whitbread, L. "A Reading in Sir Gawayne,” Notes and Queries. 189s189-190, November 3, 191+5 • Whitehall, Harold. "A Note on a North-West Midland Spelling,” Philological Quarterly, 9s1-6, January 1930. Whiting, Bartlett Jere. Chaucer's Use of Proverbs. Cambridge, Mass., 1931+1 ________________ . Proverbs in the Earlier English Drama. Cambridge, Mass’ . ’ " , 1938. _________________________. "Proverbs in Certain Middle English Romances in Relation to Their French , Sources,1 1 Harvard Studies and Motes in Philology and | Literature, XV. Cambridge, Mass., 1933 • i I _______________ . "The Nature of the Proverb,1 1 Harvard Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature, - XIV. Cambridge, Mass., 1932. j Wiley, W. L. "Who Named Them Rhet or i q ue ur s ? " In j Medieval Studies in Honor of J. D. M. Ford. C ambridge, Mas s . , 19i+8. Wilson, R. M. Early Middle English Literatur-e. London, I 1939. I t i Wintermute, E. "The IPearl's' Author as Herbalist," j Modern Language Notes, 83— 8i+, February 191+9. j Wright, C. E. The Cultivation of Saga in Anglo-Saxon England. London, 191+63 Wright, E. M. "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 3l+s157-179, April 1935. _________ . "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 3l+: 33-350, July 1935* _____________ . "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 35•313-320, July 1935. ___________. "Additional Notes on Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 38:1-22, January 1939. _____________ . "Additional Notes on the 'Pearl,1" Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 39s315-318, July 191+0. 26 4- Wright, E. M. "Notes on ’Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight,’" Englische Studien, 36:209-227, 1906. Young, Karl. "Chaucer and Geoffrey of Vinsauf,” Modern Philology, i|.l: 172-182, February 19^. APPENDIX The following list of figures is doubtless incomplete. Some tropes and figures elude detection, particularly in the work of a skillful poet. Moreover, some figures and tropes are remarkably similar even in definition and I carefully chosen exemplification. In actual practice the i . :finer distinctions are often blurred. Some of the following listings are therefore admittedly doubtful instances of the class to which they are assigned. Others may fall into two, three, or even more classes; I have tried to list such instances in every class to which they belong. Because of the complexity of the task I know that I have not always succeeded. This list of figures includes, it will be well to j remember, those instances of tropes and figures which I have not chosen to use in the dissertation itself. The serious student need not be warned, I trust, that this list must be used with caution. Except for separating the tropes from the figurae verborum, I follow the list of the ad Berennium. For reasons stated within the text I have omitted certain of the figurae sententiarum. THE TEW TROPES 1. Nominatio Parity Greving and gretyng and gryspyng harde (159). Rwly wyth a loud rurd rored for drede (390). And wyth a schrylle scharp schout pay schewe pyse worde (8I 4 .O). Whattl pay sputen and speken of so spitoas fylpe, WhatJ pay 3e3©d and 3olped of 3estande sor3e. ( 8[ j .5-81}.6 ) 1 Gawain | i Nwe nakryn noyse with }>e noble pipes (118). pe snawe snitered ful snart, pat snayped pe wylde (2003). 2. Pronominatio Parity pe Kyng pat al welde3 (17). he pat fleraas ach fylpe fer fro his hert (31). pat Prynce of parage noble (167). pat ilk proper Prynce pat paradys welde3 (195). pat Lorde pat pe lyft made (212). a mayden pat make had never (2I 4. 8). pe Wy3 pat al wro3t (280). alle lede3 in lome (I+12)5 (for Noah and his family). 267 Purity (continued) t>e Lorde of J>e lyfte (1+-3S) - J>e burn© bynne borde (J|52), (I4. 67); (for Noah). £>e Tolke |>at tyned hem fjerinn© (J4. 98). to hym even / $>at al spede3 and spyll©3 (510-11). i>e hy3e Fader (5i^2)« £at Kyng is of blysse (546). he i>at stykked uche a stare in uehe steppe y3e (583)* he J>at fetly in face fettled alle eres (585 )• $>0 men J>at my3tes al welde3 (644) • oure Syre (661). such a Mayster as my3te3 hat3 alle (71+8). fro hem J>at hat3 his hate kynned In J>e brath of his breth Jjat brenne3 alle pink©3 (915-916). J>o luly-whit (977)j (Lot*s daughters). $>at Semly (1055) • ho J>at grone schulde (1077); (Mary). |>at Cortayse (1097)* {>e Soverayn . . • / $>at wat3 aj?el ouer alle, Israel Dry3ten (1313-1314). hym $>at in heven wronies (1340). |>e Worcher of |>ls world© (1501). hym £»at alle goudes gives (1528). he £at hy3e is in heuen (1664). *}>at wynnelych horde {>at wonyes in heven (1807)* 268 Patience bat wy3 pat al pe world planted (111), be welder of wyt, bat wro3t alle Jjynges, bat ay wakes and waytes (129-130). he $>at rules , J > e rak (176). bat wy3e I worchyp, i-wysse, bat wro3t alle J>ynges (206). J>e Prynce bat prophetes seruen (225)* bat syre J>at syttes so hi3© (261). hym bat raw|>e schal haue (396). Pearl My Lorde pe Lamb (407), (413), (74D- MCortayse Q,uen, f . . . ”Makele3 Moder and rayryest May Blessed bygynner of veh a grace I” (433~436) my Lady of quom Jesu con spryng (453) • | bat Lambe (771), (822, 841, 866, 892, 895, 9*1-5, etc.). my leraman (829); (Christ). bat maskele3 mayster (900). ] bat gay juelle (1124); (Christ). i Gawain he pat on hy3e syttes (256). worbilych lorde (343)* (Arthur). hym bat me wro3t (399). dry3tyn for oure destyn^ to de3e (996). bat ilke lorde bat pe lyfte halde3 (1256). I 269 Gawain (continued) he pat spede3 vehe spech (1292). he . . . pat 3arkkes al raenskes (21+10). J)6 wy3e • • • hat vphalde3 h® heuen and on hy3 sltte3 (2l+l|l-2l+l+2). J>at conable klerk, $>at knowes alle your kny3te3 (21+ 50) (Merlin). he prynce of paradise (21+73). 3. Denominatlo 1+. Cireumitio Purity I cherisch hem alle wyth his cher, and chaufen her joye (128). hat home hat aungele3 forgart (21+0). al hat h^yve schuld (21+9). al hat flesch were3 (287). alle hat is quik (32l+). alle hat deth mo3t dry3e (372). alle hat spryakle in-spranc (1+08). hat cofer hat wat3 clay-daubed (1+92). j on na3t ne never upon daye3 (578). | setten toward sodamas her sy3t alle atone3 (672). no myle3 from mambre mo $>©** tweyne (671+). j er any heven-glem (91+6). Ay fol3ed here face, bifore her bohe y3en (978). hat salt savor habbes (995). Purity (contin ued) send© toward Bodamas J>e sy3t of* his y3en (1005). wast wyth werre $>e wones of J>orpes (1178). Patience schomely to schort h© schote of his ame (128). J>ay in balel©3 hlod J>er blenden her hande3 (227). I wolde I were of i>is worlde wrapped in mo!de3 ( 1 + . 9 1 + . ) . Pearl Ho profered me speche (235)• What serue3 tresor, bot gare3 men grete When he hit schal efte wyth tene3 tyne (331-332). he to gyle |>at neuer glente (671). I i>at felde I naw$>er reste ne trauayle (1087). i 1 ; Gawain • By J>at any dayly3t lemed vpon erj>e (1137). 1 Bi bat |>e Coke hade crowen and cakled bot £>ryse (11+12). i>e ruful race he schulde resayue (2076). 1 I syn bat he wat3 burn© borne of his moder (2320). 5. Transgressio ; Purity 1 Fayre forme3 my3t he finde (3)» Ful manerly wyth marchal mad for to sitte (91). And f>enne f ounden |>ay f yl$>e (265). Hym wat3 jbe nome Noe (297). Jjenne wafte he upon his wyndowe (1+53). 271 I ; Parity ( continued) ! | Wende • . • uus wone3 to seche (I4 . 71). j Hym rwed pat he hem uprerde (5&1). pe Fader hem pretes {680). penne wat3 her blype barne burnyst so elene (1085)* and 31f clanly he penne com (1089). Perle praysed is prys per perre is schewed (1117). For he pe vesseles avyled (1151). telle hit I wolde (1153). Hou charged more wat3 his chaunce pat hem eheryeh , nolde (ll5il-). 3©t tok pay hit neuer (1192). Devised he pe vesselraent (1288). To rose hym in his rialty ryeh men so3tten (1371). penne towehede to pe tresor pis tale wat3 son© (114. 37). i Patience ! 3et coruen pay pe eordes (153). j Heter hayre3 pay hent pat asperly bited (373). ; When pe dawande day Dry3ten con sende (i|l4.5)* Bitwene pe stele and pe stayre disserne no3t cunen i (513). ! Pearl i | Ho proued I neuer her precios pere (I4 J. pat wont wat3 whyle deuoydemy wrange (15). i 1 j For sope per fleten to me fele (21). 1 I i 272 i i Pearl ( continued) D u b b e d w e r n a l l e | > o d o w n e 3 s y d e 3 ( 7 3 ) . Perle3 py3te of ryal prys | > e r e m o 3 t m o n b y g r a c e h a f s e n e ( 1 9 3 - 1 9 i f ) . A Py3t coroune 3et wer J)at gy^le (205)* | A X a r n w e m e m b r e 3 o f J e s u K r y s t ( l f 5 8 ) . j A n d q u e n m a d o n | > e f y r s t d a y ( i j . 8 6 ) • I . F r e n d e , n o w a n i n g I w y l | > e 3 © t e (558)* j r 1 M o r e , w e j > e r l o f t y l y i s m e m y g y f t e ( 5 6 5 ) . I M o r e h a f X o f l o y e a n d b l y s s e h e r e i n n e ( 5 7 7 ) . ! G r a c e I n n o g h f c e m o n m a y h a u e ( 6 6 1 ) . i j T h i s m a s k e l l e 3 p e r l e , J > a t b o 3 t i s d e r e , j } > e j o u e l e r g e f f o r e a l l e h y s g o d ( 7 3 3 - 7 3 i f ) . J > a t s c h y r r e r J > e n s u n n e w y t h s c h a f t e 3 s c h o n ( 9 8 2 ) . A s d e u y s e 3 h i t | > e a p o s t e l J h o n ( 9 8 i f ) . O f s u n n e n e m o n e h a d | > a y n o n e d e ( l O l f . 5 ) . D e l i t & e L o m b e f o r t o d e u i s e W y t h m u c h m e r u a y l e i n m y n d e w e n t ( 1 1 2 9 - 1 1 3 0 ) . ; m u c h o f r a i r i > e w a t 3 f > a t h o m a d e ( 1 1 1 ^ 9 ) . i !Gawaln W h e | > e r h a d h e n o h e l m e n e h a w b e r g h n a u p e r ( 2 0 3 ) . ^ e h e d e o f j b i s o s t e l A r t h o u r I h a t ( 2 5 3 ) . Here is no mon me to mach, for ray3te3 so wayke (282). pen comaunded J>e kyng j>e kny3t for to ryse (366). F o r pe h e d e i n h i s h o n d e h e h a l d e 3 v p e u e n ( i | ) | i | ) - i j jserfore com, ofjer recreaunt be calde t>© behoueus (1|56). Gawain (continued) Mony klyf he ouerclambe in contraye3 straunge (713)* Surawhyle wyth worme3 he werre3* and wyth wolues als (720). a forwards we make (1103). gayn hit me |>ynkke3 (1241) • Thenne comaunded J»e lorde In }>at sale to samen alle he meny. (1372) Thenne lachche3 ho hir leue, and leue3 hym here (l8?0). 6. Superlatio Purity So seharpe scheme to him schot, he schrank at j»e hert. (850) . For lay heron a lump of led, and hit on loft flete3* And folde heron a ly3t fyher, and hit to founs synkke3 (1025-1026) . Patience As mote in at a munster dor, so mukel wern his chawle3 (268). Gawain On he most on he molde on mesure hyghe (137)* If he hem stowned vpon fyrst, stiller were henne (301). 3If I he telle trwly, quen I he tape haue (406). For were I worth al he wone of wymmen alyue, And al he wele of he worlds were in my honde, And I schulde chepen and chose to cheue me a lorde, For he costes p&t I knowen vpon he, kny3t, here, Of bewt^ and debonert^ and blyhe serablaunt, And het I haf er herkkened and halde hit here trwee, her schulde no freke vpon folde bifore yow be chosen. (1269-1275) ; 271* . j 7- Intellectio i I Parity Syf>en pe wylde of J>e wode (387)* and pe wylde after (503)* yor fare is to strange (861), Bot bed© al to |>e bronde under bare egge (121^.6). Pearl Of $>e way a fote ne wyl he wryf>e (350). What lyf 3© led© erly and late (392). i I gawain I j f»e wylde wat3 war (1586). j hat3 fce penaonce apert of j>e poynt of myn egge (2392). i j 8. Abtisio Parity i Ne neuer see hyrn with sy3t for such soar torne3 (192). i \ styngande storme (225). t>at enpoysened alle peple (2i|2). wakened a wynde (Ij.37). To waken weder©3 so wylde (9J 4 . 8). And |>ay wropely wpwafte and wrastled togeder (9I 4 . 9). polyee hym at pe prest (1131). Patience j pe wyndes on pe wonne water so wrastel to-geder (li|JL). j j So hat3 anger on-hit his hert (I4 J.I). Pearl bredful my brayne3 (126), Suche gladande glory con to me glace (171). Bot baysraent gef my hert a brunt (171+). Such a burre my3t make myn herte blunt (176). What wryrde hat3 hyder my iuel vayned (2if9). jsy worde byfore Jjy wytte con fie (29i|J. t>y prayer may hys pyte byte (355). Of care and me 3© made acorde (371). In blysae I se $>e blyj>ely blent (3$5). Is tached oJ>er ty3ed J>y lymme3 bytwyste (I 4 .SI4. ) * delyuered vus of J»e deth secounde (652). Naufceles, J>as hit schouted scharpe (678). In p&t oper is n©3t bot pes to glene (955). Gawain With lei letteres loken (35). Blschop Bawdewyn abof bigine3 pe table (112). foch pe such wages (396). WroJ>e wynde of pe welkyn wrastele3 with pe sunn© (525). naked rokke3 (730). Lurkke3 quyl fce dayly3t lemed on f>e wowes (1180). trnlouked his y3©-lydde3 (1201). syf>en karp wyth my kny3t f>at I ka3t haue (1225). dogg©3 to dethe endite (1600). 276 Gawain (continued) jpe couenauntes jpat we knyt (I6I 4 . 2}. Wi3t wallande ioye warmed his hert (1762)* t>e rich rurd (1916). wylde wedere3 of $>e worlde wakned jperoute (2000). $>e blod in his face con melle (2^03). 9. Translatio Purity make to $>e a mancioun (309). a cofer closed of tres (310). as f>ou me wyt lante3 (3^-8). alle woned in jbe whichche (362) . Luf-lowe hem bytwene lasched so hote (707)# I . . . mul am and aske3 (736). I am bot erj>e ful evel and usle so blake (7i|-7). As $>y mersy may malt jpe meke to spare (776). By how comly a kest he wat3 olos J>ere (1070). pure |>e with penaunce tyl f>ou a perle worjpe (1116). Patience When heuy herttes ben hurt (2). in $>at cete my sa3es soghe alle aboute (67). jpe Raguel in his rakentes hym rere of his dremes (188) Out of J>e hole jbou me herde of hellen wombe (306) . i>ou dipte3 me of pe depe se in-to ipe dymme hert (308). | 277 ;Pearl i hat is in cofer so comly clente (259). Her were a forser for |>e in faye (263). For hat $>oa leste3 wat3 bot a rose (269). | To a perle of* prys hit is pat in pref (272). ] j i>ou hat3 called j>y wyrde a pet (273). | A juel to me |>en wat3 |>ys geste, j And iuele3 wern hyr gentyl sawe3 (277*278). I I were a ioyfal jueler (288). i | Bot t>eron com a bote astyt (61+5). ; Innoghe her wax oat of* hat welle (61+9). I « j I am bot mokke and mol among (905). I | And i>oa so ryche a reken rose (906). self God wat3 her lombe-ly3t (101+6). | he Lombe her lantyrne, wythouten drede (101+7). i Q a w a l n I hat fyne fader of nurture (919). , 10. Permutatio Parity He crouke3 for comfort when earayne he fynde3. (1+59) ; Til he wyst ful wel who wro3t all my3tes. (1699) Patience To sette hym in sewrte, vnsotande he hym feches (58). Hope 3e hat he heres not, hat eres alle made? Hit may not be hat he is blynde, hat bigged vohe y3e* < (123-121+) 278 Pearl J>en arne f>ay boro3t into i>e vyne (628). £y beaute com neaer of nature (749)- Pymalyon paynted neuer |>y vys (750). Ne Arys totel nawj>er by hys lettrure (751). Of on dethe ful oure hope is drest (860). Gawain Bot sum for cortayse (247). Tha3 hym worde3 were wane when J>ay to sete wenten, Now ar |>ay stoken of sturne werk, stafful her hond. (ii.93-ii.94) f V I 1 3e knowe J>e cost of J>is cace, kepe I no more. (54&) Bi vch kok J>at crue he knwe wel i>e steuen. (2008) ! i>ou art confessed so clene, beknowen of pj mysses, And hat3 pe penaunce apert of i>e poynt of myn egge. (2391-2392) THE THIRTY-FIVE FIGURAE VERBORUM 1. Repetitio Purity For covetyse, and colwarde and croked dede3* | For raon-sworne, and man sela3t, and to much drink, j For J>efte, and for jbrepyng, un^onk may mon have; For roborrye, and riboudrye, and resound3 untrwe» And dysheriete and depryve dowrie of wydoe3* For marryng of maryage3, and mayntnaunce of schrewe3, For traysoun and trichcherye, and tyrauntyre bofc>e. (181-187) Ne venged for no vllte of vice ne synne Ne so hastyfly wat3 hot for hatel of his wylle Ne never so sodenly so3t unsoundely to wenge. (199-201) Of uche best £at bere3 lyP busk }>e a eupple; i Of uche elene comly kynde enclose seven make3 I Of uche horwed in ark halde bot a payre, (333-335) Somme swymraed |>eron J>at save hems elf trawed, Summe sty3e to a stud and stared to J>e heven. (388-389) Uche fowle to £e fly3t J>at fyj>ere3 my3t serve, Uche fysch to £e flod $>at fynne couJ>e nayte Uche beste to fre bent |>at bytes on erbe3. (530-532) Moni a wor$>ly wy3e whil her worlde laste, Moni semly syre soun, and swyjpe rych maydenes. (1298-1299) Patience Jjenne is me ly3tloker hit lyke, and her lotes pravse, f>enne wyt>er wyth and be wroth, and $>e wers haue. C1 4 - 7—i - i - 8) Summe to Vernagu |>er vouched a-vowes solemne, Summe to Diana deuout and derf Neptune. (165-166) 280 Patience (continued) henne hade £>ay no3t in her honde J>at hem help my3t; henne nas no coumfort to keuer, ne counsel non ojber. (222-223) Be no3t so gryndel, god-man, bot go forth J>y wayesi Be preue and be pacient, in payne and in ioye. (5214.-525) Pearl So rounde, so reken in vche araye,1 ( So smal, so smojje her syde3 were. (5-6) pe ly3t of hem ray3t no mon leuen, he glemande glory }>at of hem glent. (69-70) he fyrre in he fryth, jbe feier con ryse he playn, h© plontte3, pe spyse, he pere3. (IO3-IOI4 . ) I stod as hende as hawk in halle. I hope J>at gostly wat3 h©t porpose; I dred onende quat schulde byfalle. (I8I 4 .-I86) Her here leke, al hyr vmbegon, Her semblaunt sade for doc oher erle, Her ble more bla3t hen whalle3 bon. (210-212) Hys lef is. I am holy hysse: Hys prese, hys prys, and hys parage. (I4 .l8-I4.i9) he ry3twys man schal se hys face, he harmle3 hahel schal com hym tylle. pe Sauter hyt sat3 J>us in a pace. (675-677) he seuenjje gerame in fundament; he a3tf?e h© beryl cler and quyt; he topasye twynne-hew h© nente endent; pe crysopase he tenhe is ty3t; he jacynght he enleunhe gent; he twelfhe, he gentylest in vch a plyt, he amatyst purpre wyth ynde blente; he wal abof he bantels bent. (1010-1017) hur3 hym blysned h© bor3 al bry3t. hur3 wo3e and won my lokyng 3ede. (IOI4 . 8-IOI4. 9) 281 Gawain Of s m auenturus pyng an vncoupe tale, Of sum mayn meruayle, pat he my3t trawe Of alderes, of armes, of ©per auenturus. (93-95) Ne no pysan ne no plate pat pented to armes Ne no sehafte ne no schelde to sehtme ne to smyte. pe hede of an ern3erde pe large lenkpe hade, pe grayn al of grene stele and of golde hewen, pe bit burnyst bry3t, with a brod egge, (210-212) Summe baken In bred, summe brad on pe glede3, Summe sopen, summe is sewe sauered with sp pat he beknew oortaysly of pe court pat he were, pat apel Arthure pe hende halde3 hym one, pat is pe ryehe ryal kyng of pe Round© Table. (903-905) 'Hit Is god,* quop pe god mon, ferant mercy perfore; Hit may be such, hit is pe better and 3© me breue wolde. (1392-1393) Bot here yow lakked a lyttel, sir, and lewte you wonted; Bot pat wat3 for no wylyde werke, ne wowyng nauper; Bot for 3© lufed your lyf; pe lasse I yow blame. ;2. Conversio |3. ComplexI© 1Traductio ■ Purity ! pe bum© bynne borde (452, 467). Pearl And to start in pe strem. • • (1159); When I schulde start in pe strem (1162). smyte. (2011.-205) (2366-2368) Gawain And ayquere hit Is endele3; and Englych hit calien Oueral, as I here, j»e endeles knot. (629-630) | Bi sum towch of summe tryfle at sum tale3 ende. (1301) ! And if mon kennes yow hom to knowe, 3© kest horn of | your mynde. (ll*Bi*.) ;5* Contentlo Purity Ne pray hym for no pite, so proud wat3 his wylle. (232) j For J>y f>a3 jbe rape were rank, £e rawpe wat3 lyttel. (233) | J>a3 he be kest Into kare, he kepes no better. (231*-) [Patience For be monnes lode neuer so lu$>er, j>e lyf is ay swete. (156) Pearl 3et t>©3t me neuer so swete a sange As stylle stounde let to me stele. (19-20) For mony ben called, £a3 fewe be myk©3* (572) i ; Gawain i ! Bot for I wolde no were, my wed©3 ar softer. (271) 6. Exclamatio Purity LoJ such a wrakful wo for wlatsum dede3 Performed J>e hy3© Fader on folk© J>at he made. (51*3.-514-2) ; WhatI he corsed his clerkes and calde hem chorles, To henge pe harlottes he he3©d ful ofte. (1583-1581*-) 283 ~ l Patience O fole3 in folk. (121) What b© deoel hat3 bou. don, doted wreehehe. (196) Herk, renk, is fcis ry3t so ronkly to wrath. (1 ^ - 31) A! |>ou maker of man, what maystery b© J>ynke3« (ij-82) ! Is J>is ry3t-wys, b©o renk, alle |>y ronk noyse. (14.90) ; Pearl 0 perle (2ip., 1182). *Cortayse Qtaen,1 t>enne sayde bat gaye, ! *Makele3 Moder and rayryest May, Blessed bygynner of vch a grace I (2433-2436)' Lorde, mad hit a m bat agayn b© stryuen, 0b©r proferen b© °3t agayn by P©y©* (1199-1200) G-a wain What, is bis Arbore3 hoos (309)* i ! Bi Kryst, hit is scab© bat b©n, leude, schal be lost, bat art of lyf noble! (672^-675) *Now bone hostel,1 cob© b© borne, *1 beseche yow 3ette!* ; (776) i A! mon, how may boo slepe. (17I 46) be mon hem maynteines, ioy mot bay haoe; 1 b© leoe lady on lyoe, lof hir bityde. (2053-20514) b© habel hem 3©lde bat halde3 b© heoen vpon hy3©> and also yow alle! ! (2056-2057) *bis kastel to Kryst I kenne* (2067). Gawain (continued} I 1 Coraed with cowarddyse and eouetyse hope I | In yow is vylany and vyse bat vertue dlsstrye3.* I (237*4.-2375) | i 7. Interrogatio i | ?-hyity ! j Se! so Sare la3es, j Not trawande be tale bat I |>e to schewed. j Hope3 ho o3t may be harde my honde3 to work? (661-663) ; ! Wost j>ou not wel bat boa wone3 here a wy3e strange? An outeomlyng, a carle, we kylle of |>yn hevedl j Who joyned be be jostyse oar jape3 to blame, J I bat com a boy to fils bor3, ba3 jboa be borne ryehe? 1 I (875-878) ( j Patience j Herk, renk, is |»is ry3t so ronkly to wrath, ! For any dede bat I haf don o|>er derated pe 3et? (I4 . 3i-I4 . 32) : Ai boa maker of man, what maystery f»oa |>ynke3 bus by freke to forfare forbi alle ©berl Wyth alle meschef bat bon may, neuer b°u me spare3! (I4.82-I4.8ij.) j Why schulde I wrath wyth hem, syben wy3e3 wyl torne, And cum and cnawe me for kyng and my carp leue? (518-519) Pearl ; Now haf I fonte bat; I forlete, 1 Schal I efte forgo hit er euer I fyne? Why schal I hit hobe mysse and mete? My precios perle dot3 me gret pyne. What serue3 tresor, bot gare3 men grete When he hit schal efte wyth tene3 tyne? Now rech I neuer for to declyne, Ne how fer of folde bat man me fleme. When I am partle3 of perle myne, Bot durande doel what may men deme? (327-336) 285 Pearl (continued) »Thow dem©3 no3t bot doel-dystresse*, j henne sayde hat wy3t. *Why dot3 t>ou so? (337-338) i i Qny bygynne3 t>ou now to |>ret@? J Wat3 not a pene jby couenaunt hore? I Fyrr© hen a couenaunde is no3t to plete. | Wy schalte }>ou henne ask more? (56l-56ij.) i I More, wefcer louyly is me my gyfte, j To do wyth myn quat-jso me lyke3? (565-586) j Why schulde he not her labour alow, j 3ys, and pay hem at f>e fyrst fyne? (63i|--635) I Qawain Why! ar 3e le3ed, hat alle |>e los weld©3? ; Of>er elles 3© demen me to dille your dalyaunce to ! herken? (1528-1529) ! 8. Ratioeinatio i i . 9. Sententia Purity How is a dogge also dere j»at in a dych lygges. (1792) 1 Patience hen is better to abyde he bur vmbe-stoundes, hen ay hnow forth my p?ot f>a3 me hynk ylle* (7-8) And here as Pouert enpresses, ha3 men pyne hynk, Much, maugre his mun, he mot nede suffer* (q3-Mj-) For he hat is to rakel to renden his clohe3, Mot efte sitte wyth more vn-sounde to sewe hem togeder. (526-527) For he penaunce and payne to preue hit in sy35*-- hat pacienee is a nobel poynt, f>a3 hit dlsplese ofte. (530-531) Pearl Of goud vche goude is ay bygonne, (33) i As fortune fares Jser as ho frayne3> Whefcer solaee ho sende oj>er elle3 sore, f»e wy3 to wham her wylle ho wayne3, | Hytte3 to haue ay more and more, (129-132) For dyne of doel of lure3 lesse Ofte mony mon forgos pe mo* (339-3J+0) For anger gayne3 |>© not a cresse Who nede3 schal fcole, be not so |>ro. Gawain Of destines derf and dere What may mon do bot fonde? (564-565>) Iche tolke mon do as he is tan, tas to non ille ne pine. (I8ll-l8l2) 10. Contrariom 11. Membram 12. Artieulus 13. Continuatio Parity Clannesse who so kyndly eowJ>e eomende And rekken up alle J>e resoon©3 t>at ho by rl3t aske3, Fayre forme3 my3t he fynde in fordering his speche. And in J>e contrare, kark and combrance huge. (I-I4 .) Bot I have herkned and herde of mony hy3e clerke3 And als in resoune3 of ry3t red hit myselven, f>at jbat ilk proper Prynce f>at paradys welde3 Is displesed at ach a poynt |>at plyes to sca&e. (193-196) 287 Purity (continued) Bot neuer 3et in no boke breved I herde J>at ever he wrek so wyherly on wrerk J>at he made, Ne venged for no vilte of vice ne synne, Ne so hastyfly wat3 hot for hatel of his wylle, Ne never so sodenly so3t unsoundely to wenge, As for fylj>e of jbe flesch }>at foies han used. (197-202) When he knew uche contre coruppte in hitselven, And uch freke forloyned for J?e ry3t waye3, Pelle temptande tene towched his hert. (281-283) And $>er he fynde3 al fayre a freke wythinne, |>at hert honest and hoi, hat hajbel he honore3, Sende3 hym a sad sy3t to se his auen face, And harde honyse3 |>is oher, and of his erde fleme3. (593-596) Gawain i ; So mony pynakle payntet wat3 poudred ayquere Among i>e castel carnele3 clambred so J>ik, hat pared out of papure purely hit settled. (800-802) t 1 lip. Conpar Purity i Of uche best J>at bere3 lyf busk he a cupple; Of uche clene comly kynde enclose seven make3> Of uche horwed in ark halde bot a payre, i For to save me $>e sede of alle ser kynde3; j And ay i>ou meng wyth i>e male3 he mete ho-beste3> Uche payre by payre to plese ayher ojier; Wyth alle he fode $>at may be founde, frette hy cofer, ] For sustnaunce to yowself and also hose oher. (333-340) ,l5« Similiter cadens Purity ( Kryst kydde hit hymself in a carp one3* i her as he hevened a3t happe3> and hy3 hem her made3, ' Me myne3 on one amonge oher, as MaJ>ew recorde3. (23-25) 288' Purity (continued) And talke3 to his tormenttore3J ’Take3 hym,* he bidde3, *Bynde3 byhynde, at his bak, bope two his hande3, And felle fettere3 to his fete festene3 .... (151+-15&) And he fonge3 to pe fly3t and fanne3 on pe wynde3, Hove3 hy3© upon hy3t to herken topynge3 He crouke3 for comfort when carayne he fynde3. (1457-1 +59) pe vyoles and pe vesselment of vertuous stones. Noa hat3 Nabu3ardan nomen all pyse noble pynges, And pyled pat precious place, and pakked pose godes. (1280-1282) Patience With hatel anger and hot, heterly he calle3s- ' AJ pou maker of man, what maystery pe pynke3 pus py freke to forfare forbi alle operl Wyth alle meschef pat pou may neuer pou me spare3? (1+ 81-1+ 81+) Pearl The dubbement dere of doun and dale3» Of wod and water and wlonk playne3, Bylde in me blys, abated my bale3, Pordidden my stresse, dystryed my payne3» ■ Doun after a strem pat dry31y hale3 ! I bowed in blys, bredful my brayne3| J ( pe fyrre I flo3ed pose floty vale3, I , pe more strenghpe of ioye my herte strayne3. j As fortune fares per as ho frayne3» : Wheper solace ho sende oper elle3 sore, pe wy3 to wham her wylle ho wayne3 Hytte3 to haue ay more and more. (121-132) ■G-awain ' pat mony hert ful hi3e hef at her towches. Daynt^s dryuen perwyth of ful dere metes, Foysoun of pe fresche, and on so fele disches. (120-122) ! After, pe sesoun of somer wyth pe soft wynde3, | Quen 3eferus syfle3 hymself on sede3 and erbe3; I Wela wynne is pe wort pat waxes peroute, When pe donkande dewe drope3 of pe leue3. (5l6-5l8) 289 Gawain (continued) Fyrst he wat3 funden fautle3 in his fyue wytte3# And efte fayled neuer $>e freke in his fyue fyngres, And alle his afyaunce vpon folde wat3 in |>e fyue wo unde3 Jjat Cryst ka3t on |>e croys, as $>e crede telle3; And quere-so-euer. jjys iaon in raelly wat3 stad, His $>ro J>o3t wat3 in i>at, J>ur3 alle o$>er J>ynge3, $>at alle his fersnes he feng at J>e fyue ioye3. (6I 4 .O-6) 4. 6) 16. Similiter desinens Purity I ' Uche payre by payre to piece ayj?er ojaer; 1 Wyth alle J>e fode fcay may be founde, frette J>y cofer, For sustnaunce to yowself and also Jsose ojper. (338-3^4-0) ' j Al in smolderande smoke smachande ful ille, i Swe aboute Sodamas and hit syde3 alle. (955-958) i Patience ? i And stylle steppen in $>e sty3© he sty3tle3 hym seluen, | ' He wyl wende of his wodschip, and his wrath leue, ■ And for-gif vus £>is ault, 3if we hym God leuen. (I|.02-if0ij.)i Par-formed alle £>e penaunce J>at pe prynce radde; And God i>ur3 his godnesse forgef as he sayde. (i4.O6-l4 .O7) 1 j $>at may not synne in no syt hem seluen to greue, ' Why schulde I wrath wyth hem, syjaen wy3e3 wyl tome, And cum and enawe me for kyng and my carpe leue? | (517-519) | ! Gawain ! Foysoun of J>e fresche, and on so fele disches. (122) 17. Adnominatio 1 ' Purity Hou wan |>ou into £is won (II4 . 0). 290 Purity (continued) Stik hym stifly in stoke3> and steke3 (156). hat ever he wrek so wyherly on werk (198). to i>e fly3t alle pat fie (377). B°t fiote forthe with he flyt (ij.20). her euer flote . . . oher on fote (L|_32). never sese of sede (523). to God |>e good mon gos (611), Bytwene a male and his make (?03)« ayfrer ofrer (705) . spare spakly of spyt, in space (755>)« fette yow a fatte yor fette (802). vylaynye. 3© vylen (863). boffet in blande (885); blustered as blynde (886). ty3t hem hat had of tayt (889). reche to a reset, rest 3© never (906). brath of his breth (916). londe schal be lorne, longe (932). flaunkes of fyr and flakes (95^-1-) - an erde of erfre (1006). lyke hat layk hat lyknes (10614.). non so clene (1088); And 3if clanly (1089). 30 of God and man (1102). perle praysed is prys her perre (1117). Purity (continued) Sfeete skarmoch skelt (1186). atrayt hat hay ne stray (1199). byden wer so biten (12ij.3) . Sancta Sanctorum (127k.), upon dece bot pe dere selven (1399). Foies in foler (liflO). his .jueles so gent wyth javeles (11^95 )• Stad in a rych stal (1506). wyt what hat wryt menes (1567). merk hat merked (1617). Wyt 6e wytte of he wryt (1630). Mo3t never my3t (1668). loved hat Lorde and leved in trawhe (1703). Mane menes (1730). To teche he of Techal (1733). Ny3t ne3ed ry3t (1751j.). Patience he blyhe brebe (107). blusched ful brode,-hat burde (117). vnderstondes vmbe-stounde (122). schort he schot (128). wyt. hat wot (129). wrobeloker, for wrobely (132). Patience (continued) con blowe vpon bio (138). a lorde in londe (288). my lore is in J>e loke (350). wote oJ>er wyte (397). Pearl , in bale bot bolne and bele (18). ■ glode3 agayn3 hem glyde 3 (79). I I speche, f>at special spyce (235). o3t of no3t (27if). perle in perle3 (7k$ )* And as hys flok is withouten flake. So is hy mote withouten moote (9I 4. 7—9I 4 . 8). { | sy3 with sy3t / I sv3e (985-986). Gawain hales in at |)e halle dor (136). j lyndes and his lvmes (139). grene (150, 15D> clene (l^if). Such a foie vpon folde (196). bolde in his blod (286). bur as bare (290). by den be bur £>at he schal bede (37^4-) • j funde vpon folde (396). ! bonk. {>at on blonk (785). 293 Gawain (continued) derue dede had hym dryuen at |>at dere tyme (IOI4 . 7). wyten, ne wyst (1087). | 18. Sub^ectio ! Pearl j w mmmmmmmmmmmmrn | fee Sauter hyt sat 3 t>us in a pace: I “Lorde, quo schal klymbe J>y hy3 hvlle, I Oper rest wythinne py holy place?" ! Myraself to onsware he is not dylle: I “ H o n d e l y n g e 3 h a r m e p a t d y t n o t i l l e , ! pat is of hert bo|>e clene and ly3S>> j |»er schal hys step stable sty lie": ! p e i n n o s e n t i s a y s a f b y r y 3 t . (677-68i 4 _ ) ; 19. Gradatio ! I2G. Definitio ,21. Transit!© 22. Correctio 23* Occultatio 21^. Dis junctio Purity When pay com to |>e corte, keppte wern pay fayre, Sty3tled wyth pe stewarde, stad in pe hallej Ful manerly wyth marehal mad for to sitte. (89-91) ne pe wrech sa3tled. Ne never wolde for wyl f nines hi worpy God knawe, Ne pray for no pite, so proud wat3 his wylle. (230-232) 291+ Purity (continued) Mony clustered clowde clef all in clowte3> Torent vch a rayn-ryfte and rus ched to J>e ur|>e. Pon never in forty daye3 . • I I (*367-369) Hit waltered on he wylde flod, went as hit lyste, Prof upon he depe dam, in daunger his semed Bot flote forthe wyth he flyt of he felle wynde3. (415-421) He hade he smelle of f>e smack and smoltes £>eder sone Falle3 on pe foule flesch and fylle3 his wombe, And sone 3e8.erly for3ete 3isterday steven. (461-463) Bot J>at i>e 3onge men, so 3ete, 3ornen peroute, Wapped upon he wyket and wonnen hem tylle, And by he honde3 hym hent and horyed hym wythinne, And stoken he 3ates s.ton-harde wyth stalworth barre3. (881-884) Now hat3 Nebu3ardan nomen all hyse noble hynges, And pyled $>at precious place, and pakked hose godes. (1281-1282) Nou he he kyng hat3 conquest and he kyth wunnen, And dreped all he do3tyest and derest in armes, And he pryce of he profecie presoners maked. (1305-1308) I Patience I hay ta me bylyue, Pyne3 me in a prysoun, put me in stokkes, Wryhe me in a worlok, wrast out my y3en. (78-80) | Fyndes he a fayr schyp to he fare redy, Maches hym wyth he maryneres, makes her paye. (98-99) hay her tramme ruchen, Cachen vppe he crossayl, cables hay fasten. (101-102) I He wat3 flowen for ferde of he flode-lotes In-to he bohem of he bot, and on a brede lyggede, | j On-helde by he hurrok, for he heuen wrache, Slypped vpon a soumbe-selepe, and sloberande he routes. j ; ■ — (I83-I86) j 295 J ; Pearl For a pene on a day, and forth hay got3, Wryfren and worchen and don gret pyne, Keruen and caggen and man hit clos. (510-512) Gawain And he ryehes hym to ryse and rapes hym sone, Clepes to his chamberlayn, choses his wede, Bo3e3 forth, quen he wat3 boon, blyjbely to masse, And he meued to his mete hat menskly hym keped, And made myry al day til he raone rysed. (1309-1313) He sprit forth spenne-fote more hen a spere lenhe, Hent heterly his helme, and on his hed cast, Schot with his schuldere3 his fayre schelde vnder, Brayde3 out a bry3t sworde, and bremely he spekeB-- (2316-2319) 25. Conjunctio 26. Adjunctio Parity Alle hyse ar teches and tokenes to trow upon 3et, And wittnesse of hat wykked werk, and he wrake after hat oure Fader forferde for fylhe of hose ledes. (lOii.9-1051) hay ca3t away hat eondelstik, and he crowne als, hat he auter hade upon, of ahel golde ryche; he gredirene and he goblotes garnyst of sylver, he bases of he bry3t postes and bassynes so schyre, Dere disches of golde and dubleres fayre, he vyoles and he vesselment of vertuous stones. (1275-1280) For her wer bassynes ful bry3t of brende golde clere, Enaumaylde wyth a3er, and eweres of sutej Covered cowpes foul clene, as casteles arayed, Enbaned uncer batelment wyth bantelles quoynt, And fyled out of fygures of ferlyche schappes. (H456-U4. 6O) Patience ber wat3 busy ouer-boude bale to kest, Her bagges and her fej>er-beddes and her bry3t wedes, Her kysttes and her coferes, her caraldes alle; And al to ly3ten bat lome . . . (157-160). Bot euer wat3 ilyche loud f>e lot of* b© wyndes, And euer wroper pe water, and wodder b© stremes. (161-162) Wei knew I £1 cortaysye, jby quoynt soffraunce, by bounte of* debonerte, andi-|>y bene grace, f>y longe abydyng wyth lur, by late' vengaunce. (I4 .i7-i4 .i9) Pearl f>ou cowf>e3 neuer God nauj>er plese ne pray, He neuer nawj>er Pater ne Crede. (I 4. 8 I 4.-I 4. 8 5 ) Gawain Whefjer hade he no helme ne hawbergh naujjer, He no pysan ne no plate pat pented to armes, Ne no schafte ne no schelde to schwue ne to smyte. (203-205) 27. Conduplieatio 28. Interpretatio Purity benne got3 forth, my gome3, to jbe gret streete3, And forsette3 on uche a syde be cete aboute; be wayferande freke3, on fote and on hors, Bobe burne3 and burde3j be better and be wers, Lab©3 hem alle luflyly to lenge at my fest, And brynge3 Hem blybely to bor3e .... (77-82) And 3©t pe symplest in bat sale wat3 served to pe fulle, Bobe with menske and wyth mete and mynstrasy noble, And alle be layke3 bat a lorde a3t in londe schewe. ^120-122j 297 Purity (continued) And henne founde hay fylh© in fleschlych dede3, And controeved agayn kynde contrare werke3i And used hem unhyftyly uch on on oher. And als with oher, wylsfully, upon a wrange wyse» “ (265-268) |>enne in worlde wat3 a wy3e wonyande on lyve, Pul redy and ful ry3twys, and rewled hym fayre; In foe drede of Dry3ten his daye3 he use3> And ay glydande wyth his God his grace wat3 he more* (293~296) Now God in nwy to Noe con speke Wylde wrakful worde3 in his wylle greved. (301-302) Alle J>at deth mo3t dry3e drowned h©rinne* jber sat3 moon for to make when meschef was cnowen, hat wo3t dowed bot he deth in he depe streme3» (372-37U-); [ Bot al wat3 nede3 her note, for never cowh© stynt ; h© ro3©' raynande ryg, he raykande wawe3» I hr uch bohom wat3 brurdful to he bondke3 egge3> And uche a dale so depe hat dernmed at he brynke3. ----------------------- ------------- (351^381).) Al wat3 wasted ha^ t>er wonyed he worlde wythinne, her ever flote, oper flwe, oher on fote 3ede, ! That ro31y wat3 remnaunt hat he rac dryve3«" hat all gendre3 so .joyst wern joyned wythinne. (i4 . 3i-i4 . 3l j . ) ’ I hroly h^ublande in $>rong©» hrowen ful hykke. (^OLj.) j I hat he schulde never, for no syt, smyte al at one3, i As to quelle alle quyke3 for qued he my3t falle, “ (566-567) And al wat3 for hi© evel, hat unhappen glette, he venym and he vylanye and he vycios fylhe hat bysulpe3 manne3 saule in unsounde hert. (373-575) Syhen he is chosen to be chef chyldren fader, hat so folk schal falle fro, to flete alle he worlde, And uche blod in hat burne blessed schal worbe. . (68)+-686) 298 i Patience 1 For i-wysse hit arn so wykke hat in hat won dwelle3> And her malys is so much I may not abide, Bot venge me on her vilanye and venym bilyue. (69-71) I wyl me sum oher waye, hat he ne wayte after I schal tee in-to Tarce, and tary here a whyle. (86-87) Dyngne Dauid on des, hat demed his speche, In a psalme hat he set he Sauter wyth-inne. (119-120) He calde on hat ilk crafte he carf wyth his hondes; hay wakened wel he wroheloker for wrohely he cleped. (13^_132) I leue here he sum losynger, sum lawles wrech, hat hat3 greued his god, and got3 her amonge vus. CI70-171) ' Slypped vpon a sloumbe-selepe, and sloberande he routes, i I (186) I ! i 1 Fyrst hay prayen to h© Prynce hat prophetes seruen, ! hat he gef hem he grace'to greuen hym neuer, i hat pay in balele3 blod her blenden her hande3» < ha3 hat hahel wer his hat hay here quelled. C225-228) ’ And stod vp in his stomak, hat stank as he deuel, ; her in saym and in sour hat sauoured as helle. (27i+-275) : ! henne schal Minive be nomen and to no3t worhe; Truly his ilk toun schal tylte to h© grounds, Vp-so-doun schal 3e dumpe depe to he abyme, To be swo!3ed swyftly wyth he swart erbe. And alle hat lyuyes here-inne lose he swete. (360-36ij.) i He wex as wroth as h© wynde towarde oure Lorde, i So hat3 anger on-hit his hert. . . . (J 4.IO-i4.il) ! Now, Lorde, lach out my lyf, hit lastes to longe, i Bed me bilyue my bale-stour, and bryng me on ende; i (1*25-1*26) 299 Pearl Ne pro tied I neuer her precios pere. Quere-so-euer I .jugged gemme3 gaye, I sette hyr sengeley In synglere. (lj.-8) For care ful colde $>at to me ca3t; A deuely dele In my hert denned, (50-51) b© ly3t of hem my3t no mon leuen, p8. glemande glory hat of hem glent. (69-70) abated my bale3> Fordidden my stresse, dystryed my payne3. (123-12i | . ) I hope no tong mo3t endure No saaerly saghe say of bat sy3t. (225-226) Art J>ou ray perle J>at I haf playned, Regretted by myn one on ny3te? ; Much longeyng haf I for be layned, Bypen into gresse |>ou me agly3te. ! Pensyf, payred, I am forpayned. (2l|.2-2lj.6) l A juel to me £>e wat3 bys geste, 1 And luele3 wern hyr gentyl sawe3. (277-278) bre worde3 hat3 £>ou spoken at ene: Vnavysed, for sobe, wern alle bre. bou ne woste in worlde quat on dot3 mene; | by worde byfore by wytte con fie. (291-29l|J j b°a lyfed not two 3er in oure b©de; ! bou cowbe3 neuer God nauper plese ne pray. 1 Ne neuer nauber Pater ne Crede. (I1 . 63-I4. 85) : b&t nwe songe bay songen ful cler; In sounande note3 a gentyl carpe; Ful fayre be naode3 bay fonge in fere. (882-8814) ■ Gawain | His lif like hym ly3t, he louied be lasse Auber to longe lye or to longe sitte, So bisied him his 3onge blod and his brayn wylde. ^ y _ 89) 300 ; Gawain (continued) Bot for |»e los of pe, lede, Is lyft vp so hy3©» And fey bor3 and tey burnes best ar holden, i Stlfest vnder stel-gere on stedes to ry&e, tee wy3test and tee worteyest on tee worldes kynde. | T2F8-261) | | And Gawain j>© god raon in gay bed lyg©3» ! Lurkke3 quyl J>© dayly3t lemed on $»e wowes, I Vnder couertour ful clere, cortyned aboute; And as in slomeryng be slode . . I .' (1179-1181) i }>er is no hajbel vnder heuen tohewe hym test my3t, ! For he my3t not be slayn for sly3t vpon ertee. ----------------------------- ti..“ V I % 3-185i4 .) tesb he ne dynge3 bym to de$>e with dynt of his honde; For he is a mon methles, and mercy non vses, Por be hit chorleoteer chaplayn teat bl tee chapel rydes, I Monk: oteer' masseprest, oteer any mon elles, j tiym teynk as queme hym to quelle as quyk so hymseluen. | (2105-2109) 29. Commutatlo ; Parity f f>&3 teste fowle be false, fre be J>ou. ever. For on ho standes a ston, and salt for teste oteer. (999) When venkkyst wat3 no vergynyte, ne vyolenee maked. (1071) t Fryst knew hit tee kyng, and alle j>© cort after. (1530) Patience How, Lorde, lach out my lyf, hit lastes to longe. (i|25) 1 teen lede lenger $>1 lore, teste teas me les make3. (lj.28) Pearl Gyue tee to passe, when teou arte tryed. (707) Gawain For if pe 3onge wat3 3ep» 3ol3e wat3 bat ober. (95>l) He kysses hir eomlyly and kny3tly he mele3. (974) For bat durst I not do, lest I denayed were. (1493) 30. Permissio Pp- r M i, ' 3e, Lorde, wyth by leve, 1 sayde J>e lede benne, 'Al Is wro3t at jbi worde, as J>ou me wyt lante3. 1 (347-348) Hende Lorde, 3if ever by mon upon molde merit disserved, Lenge a lyttel with by lede, I lo31y biseche; Passe never fro £>i povere, 3if I hit pray durst, Er $>ou haf biden with bi burne and under bo3e restted. (612-616) Come3 to yor knave3 kote, I crave at J>is one3. (801) 31. Lubitatio ,32. Expeditio j ! 1 !33- Dissolutio i r ' Purity i £>e wayferande freke3, on fot and on hors, ! Bobe burne3 and burde3, be better and be wers, | Laf>e3 hem alle luflyly .... (79-81) I | benne seten bay at b© soper, wern served bylyve, be gestes gay and ful glad, of glam debonere, Welawynnely wlonk tyl bay waschen hade, be trestes tylt to be wo3e and be table bobe. (829-932) j 302 Patience Of what londe art jbou lent, what laytes |sou here, Whyder in worlde hat hou wylt, and what is hyn arnde? (201-202) Pearl So rotmde, so reken in vche araye, So sraal, so smo$>e her syde3 were. (5-6) Kyrk J>erinne wat3 no 3©te, Chapel ne temple hat euer wat3 set; h© Almy3ty wat3 her mynster mete, J>e Lombe f>e sakerfyse he** to refet. (IQ6I-IO6I 4 .) Gawain Tyffen her takles, trussen her males, Richen hem h© rychest, to ryde alle arayde, Lepen vp ly3tly, lachen her brydeles, Vche wy3e on his way h©r hym wel lyked. (1129-1132) And he ryches hym to ryse and rapes hym sone, Clepes to his chamberlayn, choses his wede, Bo3e3 forth, quen he wat3 boun, blyhely to masse. (1309-1311) j 3J 4- . Praecisio 35. Conclusio Parity Jjenne uch wy3e may wel wyt hat he he wlonk lovies; And if he lovyes clene layk hat is oure Lorde ryche, And to be couhe in. his corte h©n coveytes h©nne, To se hat Semly in sete and his swete face, Clerrer counseyl con I non, bot hat hou clene worhe. If h°n wyl dele drwrye wyth Dry3ten, h©nne, And lelly lovy hy Lorde, and his leef worhe, henne conforme h© t© Kryst, and he clene make, hat ever is polyced als playn as h© perle selven. (1052-1068) 303 Patience For in |>e tyxte, |>ere i>yse two arn in terae layde, Hit arn fettled in on forme, J>e forme and he laste, And by quest of her quoyntyse enquylen on medej And als, in myn vpynyoun, hit arn of on kynde: For her as Pouert hir proferes, ho nyl be put vtter, Bot lenge where-so-euer hir lyst, lyke ojaer greme; And jbere as fouert enpresses, J>a3 mon pyne J?ynk, Much, maugre his mun, he mot nede suffer. Thus Pouerte and Pacyence are nedes play-feres. (37“45) I biseche J>e, Syre, now hou self jugge, Wat 3 no J)is ilk ray worde hat worsen is noujoe, hat I kest in my cunt re, when hou hy carp sende3, hat I schulde tee to |)ys toun hi talent to preche? Wel knew I hi cortaysye, hy quoynt soffraunce, hy bounte of debonerte, and hy bene grace, hy longe abydyng wyth lur, hy late vengaunce; And ay hy mercy is mete, be raysse neuer so huge. I wyst wel when I hade worded quatsoeuer I eowhe, To menace all f>ise mody men hat in his mote dowelle3, Wyth a prayer and a pyne hay my3t her pese gete; And her-fore I wolde haf flowen fer in-to Tarce. i Now, Lorde, lach out ray lyf, hit lastes to longe; ; Bed me bilyue ray bale-stour, and bryng me on ende; For me were swetter to swelt as swyhe, as me hynk, hen lede lenger hi lore, hat has me les make3. (Ip .3-lp28) ' iPearl i I halde hat iueler lyttel to prayse j hat leue3 wel hat he se3 wyth y3e, j And much to blame and vncortayse ; hat leue3 oure Lorde wolde make a ly3e, hat lelly hy3te your lyf to rayse, ha3 fortune dyd your flesch to dy3e. 3e setten hys worde3 ful westernays hat leue3 nohynk bot 3e hit sy3e. And hat is a poynt o sorquydry3e, 1 hat vche god mon may euel byseme, I To leue no tale be true to try3e Bot hat hys one skyl may dem. (301-312) ! Where wyste3 hou euer any bourne abate, Euer so holy in hys prayere*, hat he ne forfeted by sumkyn gate 301*. Pearl (continued) t>e mede sumtyme of heuene3 clere? And ay jbe of ter, be alder bay were, bay laften ry3t and wro3ten woghe. Mercy and grace moste hem pe stere, For £>e grace of God is gret inno3e. (6l7-62l|-) Bot irmoghe of grace hat3 innocent. As sone as bay arn borne, by lyne In f>© water of babtem bay dyssente: |>en arne bay boro3t into be vyne. Anon be day, wyth derk endente, be niy3t of deth dot3 to enclyne: bat wro3t neuer wrang er benne bay wente, be gentyle Lorde benne baye3 hys hyne. bay dyden hys heste, bay wern berine; Why schulde he not her labour alow, 3ys, and bay hem at be fyrst fyne? For be grace of God is gret innoghe. (625-636) Gawain Sir, 3if 3e be Wawen, wonder me bynkke3> Wy3e bat is so wel wrast alway to god, And conne3 not of compaynye be coste3 vndertake, And if raon kennes vow hom to knowe, 3e kest hom of your mynde. (Il4 . 8l-ll4 . 8i j . ) '3et I kende yow of kyssyng,* quob be clere benne, fQuere-so countenaunce is coube quikly to clayme; bat bicumes vche a kny3t bat cortaysy vses. * (II4. 89-114-91 THE NINETEEN FIGURAE SENTENTIARUM (Note: Length of example frequently makes quotation impractical. See Chapter IV.) 1. Distributio 2. Licentla 3. Diminutio 1 } . . Descriptio $. Divisio |6. Frequentatio i Purity I For covetyse, and colwarde and croked dede3* . For mon-sworne, and men-scla3t, and to much drynk, 1 For |>efte, and for fcirepyng, unfconk may mon have; [ For roborrye, and riboudrye, and resoune3 untrwe. And dysheriete and depryve dowrie of wydoe3* For marryng of maryage3» and mayntnaunce of schrewe3> For traysoun and trichcherye, and tyrauntyre boJ>e, And for fals famacions and fayned lawe3— (l8l-l88) (7. Expolitio 8. Commoratio 9. Contentio 10. Similitude* Purity As lance leve3 of he boke J>at lepes in twynne. (966) As a fornes ful of flot $>at upon fyr boyles When bry3t brennande bronde3 ar bet her anunder. (1011-1012) And al wat3 gray as $>e glede, wyth ful grymme clawres hat were croked and kene as h© kyte paune. (1696-1697) Patience As mote in at a munster dor. so mukel wern his chawle3 (268) Til he blunt in a blok as brod as a halle. (272) Pearl As glysnande golde hat man con schere (165). • Quen hat frech as flor-de-lys (195)* ! more bla3t hen whall©3 bon (212). As glemande glas burnist broun (990). as glas hat glysnande schon (1018). ; ; he strete3 of golde as glass© al bare, | he wal of jasper hat glent as glayre. (1025-1026) I stod as stylle as dased quayle (1085). On golden gat©3 hat glent as glasse (1106). Gawain A much berd as a busk (182). He wax as wroth as wynde (319). ■ glent as glem of he sunne (60i}J. i beme3 as he bry3t sunne (1819). 307 11. Exemplum 12. Imago 13. Effictio l i } . . Notatlo 15>. Sermocinatlo 16. Conformatio 17. Slgniflcatio 18. Brevifcas 19. Demonstratio (toiverslty of Southern California.

Linked assets