UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS. Note. The University of California Publications are offered in exchange for the publications of learned societies and institutions, universities, and libraries. Complete lists of all the publications of the University will be sent upon request. For sample copies, lista of publications or other information, address the MANAGER OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA, U. S. A. All matter sent in exchange should be addressed to THE EXCHANGE DEPARTMENT, UNIVERSITY LIBRARY, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA, U. S. A. Cited as Univ. Calif. Publ. Class. Philol. MODERN PHILOLOGY.-Charles M. Gayley, Hugo K. Schilling and Rudolph Schevill, Vol. 1. 1. Der Junge Goethe und das Publikum, von W. R, R. Pinger. Pp. 1-67. $0.50 2. Studies in the Marvellous, by Benjamin P. Kurtz. Pp. 69-244. March, 2.00 3. Introduction to the Philosophy of Art, by Arthur Weiss. Pp. 245-302. 4. The Old English Christian Epic: a Study in the Plot-technique of the Vol. 2. 1. Wilhelm Busch als Dichter, Künstler, Psychologe, und Philosoph, von 2. The Critics of Edmund Spenser, by Herbert E. Cory. Pp. 81-182. 3. Some Forms of the Riddle Question and the Exercise of the Wits in .50 1.00 .75 1.00 .50 4. Histrionics in the Dramas of Franz Grillparzer, by Elizabeth A. Herr- .75 5. Spenser, the School of the Fletchers, and Milton, by Herbert E. Cory. Vol. 3. 1. Rousseaus Einfluss auf Klinger, von Fredrich A. Wyneken. Pp. 1-85. .75 1.00 2. Das Gerettete Venedig, Eine vergleichende Studie, von Fritz Winther. 1.50 3. A Neglected Aspect of the English Romantic Revolt, by G. F. Richard- 1.00 4. Layamon's Brut: A Comparative Study in Narrative Art, by Frances 1.50 Vol. 4. 1. Ovid and the Renascence in Spain, by Rudolph Schevill. Pp. 1-268. 2. Notes sur le Voyage de Chateaubriand en Amérique (Juillet-Décembre, 2.50 .80 1.50 3. Du Transcendantalisme considéré dans sa Définition et dans ses Origines Françaises, par William Girard. Pp. 351-498. October, 1916. CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY.-Edward B. Clapp, William A. Merrill, Herbert C. Nutting, Editors. Price per volume $2.50. Vol. 1. 1. Hiatus in Greek Melic Poetry, by Edward Bull Clapp. Pp. 1-34. June, 1904 $0.50 2. Studies in the Si-Clause. I. Concessive Si-Clauses in Plautus. II. Sub- 3. The Whence and Whither of the Modern Science of Language, by Benj. 4. On the Relation of Horace to Lucretius, by William A. Merrill. Pp. 6. The Priests of Asklepios, a New Method of Dating Athenian Archons, 6. Horace's Alcaic Strophe, by Leon Josiah Richardson. Pp. 175-201. 7. Some Phases of the Relation of Thought to Verse in Plautus, by Henry Index, pp. 263-270. .60 25 50 Chapter III. The Narrative Art of Layamon's Brut and a Comparison I. The Relations to Wace-The Old French Element 492 II. The Germanic Element 498 Chapter V. Conclusion 507 PREFACE The primary purpose of the following discussion is to present an analysis of the narrative art of Layamon as it is revealed in the Brut. To attain this end an independent study of the work itself was first made, without reference to origins or influence; an equally independent study of Wace's Brut followed, and finally a comparison was drawn between the two works. It was partly in a spirit of fairness to the French writer that wholly independent studies were made of the two works instead of the more obvious line-by-line comparison. When the narratives are placed side by side, the temptation merely to note additions which reveal the excellence of the English writer is great, and one is likely to forget that Wace may present matter of the same nature and of equal merit in another part of his poem. The examination of Layamon's technique was made, therefore, entirely without reference to whether a passage had any equivalent in Wace or not. This independent method of examination makes all the more significant the fact that when the comparison with the work of the French writer was made it was found that a large number of the passages that had been cited as indicative of excellence in method and richness of material in Layamon's work could be labeled "no equivalent in Wace." The studies of the two narratives, then, were entirely separate but in putting the discussion into its final form the independent analyses and the comparison were compressed into a single section in the interests of brevity and clearness. The method and scope of the comparison, as well as the careful examination of the narrative features of the English Brut are, I think, original. In the analysis certain new features are brought out that throw light on the subject of Old English versus Old French influence. Certain new suggestions are also made concerning the question of origins, though source determination is not a specific purpose of the study. For help in the work grateful acknowledgments are due to the obliging staff of the Library of the University of California and to many members of the faculty. Professor Faucheux of the French Department proved himself of unfailing kindness in assistance and suggestions in the Old French field. Professor Wells introduced me to the study of English in college and has shown himself always an inspiring guide. It is difficult to express one's appreciation for the gracious and friendly attitude of the head of the English Department, Professor Charles Mills Gayley. Those who have studied under him know how valuable association with him is. Thanks are due most of all to Professor Walter Morris Hart, at whose suggestion the work was commenced and without whose constant aid and encouragement it could never have been completed. CHAPTER I CRITICAL OPINION Critical opinion has virtually nothing to offer that bears directly on the most important part of the present discussion, which is to be a study of the narrative art of Layamon as it is revealed in the Brut. Acknowledgment here, as elsewhere, must be made to Sir Frederick Madden, the editor, whose remarks are constantly suggestive and helpful, although he is looking at the poem from other points of view than that of its narrative features. Neither he nor any later critic has presented any analysis of the elements of technique as they appear in the Brut. The idea of comparison with Wace's Brut' is not new, but the purpose and scope of the comparison which forms the second part of this discussion are different from anything that has been attempted before. The tendency has been to start from Wace as a source and to emphasize only the additions made by the English writer (and even such comparisons have been restricted for the most part to a very narrow field). For my reversal of the usual order I offer no apology. To work from the less to the greater, 1 The only edition of Layamon's Brut is that of Madden, 3 vols., 1847. The edition presents two texts, of which the earlier (text A) has been used throughout, except in a few cases where the reading of the later text seemed significant. Such citations have been marked text B. 2 The only edition is that of Le Roux de Lincy, 2 vols., Rouen, 1836– 1838. In a very few cases manuscript readings have been given, where the meaning was made clearer by the change. 3 Such comparisons are the articles by H. Krautwald, Layamon's Brut verglichen mit Wace's Roman de Brut in Bezug auf die Darstellung der Culturverhältnisse (Breslau, 1887) which deals with matters of eating and drinking; and that by Regel, "Spruch und Bild," Anglia I, 197 ff. The difference in method and scope is such as to make these articles of no use for the present discussion. A work which is both interesting and accurate is that of Robert H. Fletcher on "The Arthurian Material in the Chronicles," Harvard Studies in Philology, X. To him I should be glad to make fuller acknowledgment of indebtedness, were it not for the fact that our methods and purposes are so widely different that it has been impossible to use his results. Moreover my own work was virtually completed before I consulted his. To him, then, I owe added confidence rather than special help, for it has been gratifying to find that in the few cases where our purposes were the same, our results also tallied. |