In the Sowdan as well as in the Ashmole MS. there is no mention of Oliver’s drinking of the balm before throwing it into the water, which both the Provençal and the French versions tell us he did. Cf. Fierabras, ll. 1031–1048, and the Provençal version, ll. 1335, et seq.
p. 35, l. [1210]. fille, “fel.”
p. 35, ll. [1221]. dere spoils the rhyme. Read “free.”
p. 36, l. [1250]. Cousyn to King Charles, cf. l. 1117. In ll. 1499 and 1671 Oliver is said to be nephew to Charlemagne. He was the son of Renier de Gennes, who according to Sir Ferumbras, l. 652: “Y am Charlis emys sone”—was the uncle of Charlemagne. In the poem Girar de Viane we find Oliver among the enemies of the [‹p117›] Emperor and fighting with Roland in close combat; they are at length stopped by divine interposition. Then began a close friendship which lasted till their death at Roncesvaux. Oliver’s sister Aude was betrothed to Roland. See, besides, Syr Ferumbras, ll. 422, 1297, 1305, 1354.
p. 36, l. [1258]. harde grace, “misfortune,” cf. l. 2790.
p. 36, l. [1259]. Persagyn. This name does not occur in any other version again, except in the Destruction, where one Persagon appears in the list of the Saracen barons. But it is not stated there that he is uncle to Ferumbras; cf. besides Fierabras, ll. 2614, 2784.
p. 37, l. [1263]. Observe the four consecutive feminine rhymes.
p. 37, l. [1277]. The scene as related here widely differs from that described in the Ashmolean version. In the Sowdone, Oliver gets hold of the sword which is “trussed on Ferumbras’s stede.” In the Ashmolean poem it is not Oliver who is disarmed, but Ferumbras, and Oliver allows him to pick up his weapon again. This in itself furnishes us an argument for conjecturing that the author of the Sowdon did not follow, or even know of, the Ashmolean version. In the French poem, as well as in the Provençal, it is likewise Oliver who is disarmed. If in those poems we find mentioned besides that Ferumbras offered his enemy to take up his sword again—an incident not related in the Sowdan—we do not consider this to disprove our supposition that the French version was the source of the Sowdan, as we may consider our author in this case simply to have adhered to his favourite practice of shortening his original as much as possible, so far as no essential point is concerned. Cf. the French Fierabras, ll. 1289–1346.
p. 37, l. [1286]. saught is a misprint for raught.
p. 37, l. [1289]. He thought he quyte. quyte may be explained as standing for quyted, or else he must be changed into to: He thought to quyte, the latter reading is perhaps preferable. We find in l. 3110 a passage agreeing almost exactly with this.