Kontiani to be derived from Kóuns (Conte), an Italian title introduced by the Venetians who then held Crete, and have believed that the writer therefore belonged to the Western Catholic Church. But this supposition is confuted by Koraes, in his Atacta, Vol. ii, prolegomena, p. 13, where he shows that "Gabriel" clearly points to the Oriental Church. RUSSIAN VERSIONS. In Russian literature the story of Apollonius is derived from the Russian translation of the Gesta Romanorum, which in turn rests upon the Polish rendering of the Gesta. G. Polivka, of all the Russian scholars, has studied the subject most closely. In the Listy filologicke, 1889, 353-358 and 416-435, he demonstrated the relations of the Russian and Polish versions of the Gesta, and discussed the curious Bohemian version of the Apollonius. In the Drobné prispevky literárne historické (brief literary notes), Prague, 1891, he compared the Gesta Romanorum and the Tichonravov texts, but came to no positive conclusions. Dr. Murko, of Vienna, was of the opinion that the Tichonravov text was only a careful treatment by a Moscow scholar of the White Russian Rimskija Dejanija. In 1892 he contributed to the Archiv für Slavische Philologie (14: 405), a careful paper entitled, "Die russische Uebersetzung des Apollonius von Tyrus und der Gesta Romanorum." For the Tichonravov text, see Letopisi russkoj literatury (chronology of Russian literature), 1859, and Russkij folol Vestnik (1891, Part ii, p. 314); for the Rimskija Dejanija, see Obscestvo ljubitelej drevnej pismennosti (St. Petersburg, No. 117). A selection of stories from the Rimskija Dejanija was made and published at Cracow by Siekielowicz in 1663, and this collection was translated from Polish into Russian "in the summer of 7199" (that is, of the Byzantine era = 1691 A.D.). The Bohemian folk-book, to a description of which we shall arrive later, is entitled Kronyka o Apollonwi Krali Tyrskem, W. Gindrichowe Hradcy, 1733. It was reprinted, Olomanci, 1769, and Praze, 1761. See Dobrowsky, Geschichte d. Böhm. Sprache, p. 303. It is also printed direct from the MSS. by A. J. Vrt'atko, Casopis Musea Ceskeho, 1863. THE STORY IN ENGLISH. We have now spoken of the story as it appears in Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Holland, Italy, Spain, France, Hungary, Greece, Russia and Bohemia. It remains for us to consider its course in English literature. Most curious is the form it takes in AngloSaxon, where it exists as the only romance in that literature. The historian must take notice of eight versions of the story in English literature. 1. The Anglo-Saxon romance (a MS. in C. C. C., Cambridge). 2. An early English metrical translation (Wimborne, Dorset). 3. Gower's Confessio Amantis, 1483. 4. Copland's translation from the French. Pr. by Wynkyn de Worde, 1510. 5. Twine's Patterne of Paineful Adventures, 1576. 6. Shakespeare's Pericles, 1609. 7. Geo. Wilkins' Pericles Prince of Tyre, a novel, 1608. 8. Lillo's Marina. The old English or Anglo-Saxon version is believed by Wülker to belong to the second third of the eleventh century. Ebert prefers to date it from the beginning of the century. It exists in a unique MS. in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. Thus before the Norman conquest brought the chivalry and rcmance of southern Europe into England, some unknown but not unskillful hand, as if presaging the time when the new ideas of courtliness and chivalry should embody themselves in the romantic forms of the Elizabethan age, had translated this universal favorite. The MS. was first studied by Benjamin Thorpe, F. S. A., who published it with a literal translation in 1834. It is referred to by Wülker, Grundriss, p. 504; H. Leo, Altsächsische und Angelsächsische Sprachproben, 32-34; B. Thorpe, Analecta Anglo-Saxonica, 108 (1846); Müller Angelsächsisches Lesebuch, 56-62, and by Zupitza, Anglia, Bd. i, 463–467. The MS. has now been thoroughly edited by Zupitza.1 It is but a fragment. Thorpe fills the lacunæ in his translation with quotations from Swan's rendering of the narrative in the Gesta Romanorum. Prof. A. S. Cook, in his First Book in Old English (Ginn & Co., 1894), has also reëdited bits of the old text. 1 1 Zupitza discusses carefully and learnedly the question "Welcher Text liegt der Altenglischen Bearbeitung der Erzählung von Apollonius von Tyrus zu Grunde ?" in Romanische Forschungen, Vol. iii, pp. 269–279. The article should be read for the interesting parallelism between the A.-S. and the Latin MSS. of Riese's third class. Zupitza's edition of the A.-S. is in Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen u. Litteraturen, 1896, Vol. xcvii, pp. 17-34; intro. note by A. Napier. In 1850 J. O. Halliwell (Halliwell-Phillipps) printed for private circulation: A new boke about Shakespeare and Stratfordupon-Avon. He introduced into it a "curious and interesting fragment of a very early English metrical translation of the story of Apollonius, King of Tyre." It is copied from a MS. on vellum which had formerly belonged to Dr. Farmer. The MS. had but two leaves and had been converted into the cover of a book, the edges were cut off, and some words were altogether lost in consequence. Steevens had quoted a few lines from it (cf. Malone's Shakespeare, ed. 1821, Vol. xxi, p. 221). "The author," says Halliwell, "appears to have resided at Wimborne Minster in Dorsetshire," and the MS. would appear from the language to be anterior to the appearance of Gower's Confessio Amantis. The fragment is of considerable philological importance, and as it was printed in a limited edition of seventy-five copies, of which I believe fifty were destroyed,' I have ventured to reprint it here as a singular and interesting fragment of early English literature." 1 Halliwell-Phillipps was provokingly fond of printing his pamphlets and brochures in very limited editions. A wag said of him that he only printed two copies of his books—one he burned and the other he put in his private library. 2 I have normalized the orthography of the MS. only in one particular, substituting for the so-called Anglo-Saxon g symbol (which had in ME. the value of a spirant) its later ME. representatives gh, and y according to the phonetic value of the symbol in each instance; following in this the orthographic usage of the later ME. MSS., which put gh for the guttural or back spirant, y for the palatal, and g for the stop. In Ags. up to the twelfth century only one character was used for the various sounds of g, viz., the Anglo-Saxon g. In ME. the socalled Frankish g (our modern g sign) was introduced to denote the stopped sound as in go, and the French sound of g in rouge; the Anglo-Saxon letter was retained for awhile to denote the spirant sounds of g, but in Chaucer's time it had been dropped and gh or y substituted. Appolyn the ... wit mine ofryng; As sone as upon my letterure, The . . . . ing. . . . hedde was ful suyre; I scholde him . . thulke cure, Therfore he did . . . . ... he gaf gret huyre; A scheef of whete he helde an honde, Uppon a buschel they dyde hym stonde; To Appolyn this hys y-do, To have hym ever in memorye, Ffor sche deyde amydde the see; Goude goddesse, be to hire myld! Tho tok y the doughter in Tarse to kepe, To Strangulion and Dame Denyse, Y couthe no. . . . reed but ever wepe, .... Sorwe me tok in ech wyse. I held me in the see ten and four yeer Wit sorwe, care and wo; I cam aye and fond hire nought ther, Tho nyst y what was best to do. Wit sorwe and stedfast thought, He tolde hit to hys awene wyf; Sche knew him wel, and he hire nought, Heo caught him to hire armes two, The kynges doughter y was bore, Heo clipte hym, and efter gan to kysse, Sche clipt and keuste with wouten lysse My maister thot taughte me al my goud. |