254/20. Dr. Bradley’s restoration ...
the reference is to the note for l. 20, i.e. line 16 of the printed page
[NOTES]
Abbreviations: AR Ancren Riwle, ed. Morton; Archiv [für das Studium der neueren Sprachen]; BH Blickling Homilies, ed. Morris; CM Cursor Mundi, ed. Morris; ES Englische Studien; GE Genesis and Exodus, ed. Morris; HM Hali Meidenhad, ed. Cockayne; KH King Horn, ed. Hall; L Layamon, ed. Madden; NED New English Dictionary; OEH i Old English Homilies, ed. Morris First Series; OEH ii Second Series; OEM Old English Miscellany, ed. Morris; ON Owl and Nightingale, ed. Wells; PRL Political, Religious, and Love Poems, ed. Furnivall, second edition; SJ St. Juliana, ed. Cockayne; SK St. Katherine, ed. Einenkel; SM St. Marherete, ed. Cockayne; VV Vices and Virtues, ed. Holthausen.
SM St. Marherete, ed. Cockayne
text unchanged: apparent error for “Margerete”
[I. WORCESTER FRAGMENTS]
[A]
[Manuscript:] Worcester Cathedral Library, 174. It consists of sixty-six leaves of vellum, ‘which had been cut and pasted together to form covers for a book in the Cathedral archives’ (Catalogue of the Chapter Library, ed. Floyer and Hamilton, Oxford, 1906). Its contents are (1) an incomplete copy of Ælfric’s Grammar and Glossary, used by Zupitza for his edition of the text (Berlin, 1880); (2) the scrap here marked A; (3) the pieces B and C with five more fragments of the same poem. A completes the page on which the glossary ends, and B is on the verso of the leaf. The leaves have been slightly shorn at one side and reduced at top and bottom, but probably to no great extent: the conjectural complement, which is here printed within square brackets, is for the most part fairly obvious, the more so as portions of the lost letters often remain. The whole MS. is in the same large square hand, but the pieces in verse, which are written continuously, like prose, are less carefully executed. The handwriting is of the second half of the twelfth century, perhaps about 1180 A.D. The Latin headings are not in the MS.
[Editions:] Phillipps, Sir T., Fragment of Ælfric’s Grammar, &c., London, 1838; Wright, T., Biographia Britannica Literaria, AS. Period, p. 59, 60, London, 1842 (omits the last four lines); Varnhagen, H., Anglia, iii. pp. 423-25.
[Phonology:] The scribe is mainly faithful to the orthography of his original, which was in Anglo-Saxon script (as is shown by Sipum for Ripum) and older language. He still uses the rune for w. His spelling wavers between old and new, ǣ survives in ilærde, lærden, læreþ, beside e in ilerde, weren; ea persists in wireceastre, but wincæstre, rofecæstre; the inflection is not levelled in leodan, but leoden, hoteþ, losiæþ (æ = e). Drihten represents an OE. form in i; ie is e in derne; ā is o in hoteþ, eo (= o) in leore. OE. æ + g is æi in fæire, fæier, sæiþ; e + g is ei in lorþeines; ēo + h is i in liht; ēa + h, eih in unwreih. Bocare goes back to late OE. bōcre; c is written ch in wisliche; sć [š] is still sc in sceolen.