Fytte I]
om. LDCW
1:2. fre bore]
freborne C free borne W
2:2:1–2:3:4. Whyles … outlawe]
om. L 2:2. Whyles]
whilst W grounde]
the ground, W 2:4. never]
ueuer L founde]
y founde D yfounde C yfound, W
3:1. in]
ln C 3:2. hym]
om. CW to]
v pon C vpon W 3:3. stode]
om. CW
4:1. goode]
gooe L Scarlok]
Scathelock D Scathelocke C Scathlock, W 4:2. milners]
milsers L myllers D 4:3. non]
no DCW ynch]
yuch L
5:1. bespake]
be spake hym D b‸espak e hym C bespake him W 5:3. and]
yf D if CW ye]
you W
6:1. hym]
om. DCW Robyn]
Robin hood, W 6:2. have I]
J haue DCW 6:3. that]
om. DCW 6:4. som]
sone C unkouth]
vnkoutg L
1:1. Lythe]
LJthe D listin]
lysten DC listen W gentilmen]
gētilmen L gentylmen D gentyll men C Gentlemen, W 1:2. that]
þͭ L That DC that W of]
of‸ LDW fre bore]
frebore D blode]
blood : W 1:3. I]
J LDCW shalle]
shaỻ L shall DCW tel]
tell DW a]
a⁁ D gode]
good DCW yeman]
yemā L yeman DC yeoman W 1:4. his]
His D Hys C Robyn]
Robȳ L Robyn DC Robin W hode]
Hood. W
2:1. Robyn]
Robȳ L Robyn DC Robin W proude]
ꝓude‸ L proude DC proud W outlaw]
out|law L outlawe DC out⸗law W 2:2. grounde]
groūde D grounde C 2:3. curteyse]
courteise W outlawe]
out⸗law W one]
one, W 2:4. was]
Was DC never]
neuer DCW non]
none W founde]
foūde L
3:1. Robyn]
Ro|bȳ L Robyn DC Robin W stode]
stod e C stood W in]
ī L in DW bernesdale]
bernysdale D Bernisdale C Bernsdale W 3:2. and]
⁊ L And DC and W lenyd]
lened DC leaned W hym]
hȳ L hym D tre]
tree DC tree, W 3:3. and]
⁊ L And DCW bi]
by DCW hym]
hȳ L hym D him CW Litelle]
liteỻ L lytell D lytle C little W Johan]
John̄ L Johan D John CW 3:4. a]
A DC gode]
good DCW yeman]
yeoman W he]
hee C he. W
4:1. and]
⁊ L And DW and C alsoo]
also DW a‸lso C dyd]
dyde D did W goode]
good DCW 4:2. and]
And D Much]
muche C the]
þͤ L the DCW milners]
mylners C milners W son]
sō L sone D sonne C sonne, W 4:3. There]
The|re L there DCW ynch]
ynche D enche C inch W his]
hys C bodi]
body DCW 4:4. but]
But DC worth]
wor|th L worthe DC grome]
grome. LW
5:1. Than]
Then DW Lytelle]
lyteỻ L lytell D l‸ytel C little W Johan]
John̄ L Johan D John CW 5:2. all]
All D untoo]
vn/|too L vnto DCW Robyn]
R‸obyn C Robin W hode]
hood‸: W 5:3. Maister]
Mayster DC wolde]
would CW dyne]
dene C dine W betyme]
betime W 5:4. it]
Jt D wolde]
would CW doo]
do DC doe W moche]
moch D muche C much W gode]
gode. L good DC good. W
6:1. Than]
Thā L Then DW Than C bespake]
be/|spake L be spake D hym]
hȳ L gode]
good DCW 6:2. to]
To DC dyne]
d‸yne C dine W have I]
haue J L noo]
no DCW 6:3. Tille]
tiỻ L Tyll DC till W I]
J LDW J⁁ C have]
haue LDCW som]
sō‸ L some DCW bolde]
bould W baron]
barō L baron DC Baron W 6:4. or]
Or DC som]
some DW unkouth]
vnketh DCW gest]
g est C
Front matter. D: Sig. [A.i.r.]: title-page with incipit: '⸿Here begynneth a lytell geste of Ro⸗ | byn
hode'; hyphen followed by very
narrow ornament;
second
line of title followed by space c. two ms wide, followed by ornamental ribbon extending almost to end of
preceding line. This incipit followed by three blank lines and a woodcut. No
signature on page. C: Sig [A.i.r.]: title-page with pyramid heading title: '❧ A mery geste of | Robyn H oode and of‸hys lyfe,⁁wyth | a newe playe for
to be played | in Maye games very ple⸗ | saunte and
full of pastyme. | ⸿(⸫)⸿', the first line in
two-line type, subsequent lines in normal type size, fleuron with stem on the
left, as in '❧', but with left-pointing stem tip, as in
'☙'; oblique hyphen, a drop-shaped
blob of ink, after 'ple' being perhaps single-line rather than double-line.
Title is followed by blank line, followed by two factotums side by side, the left
evidently
representing Robin Hood, the right below a scroll with legend 'Lytel John';
below these a woodcut
ornament. W: Sig. [A 1.r.]: title-page with pyramid title: '☙ A merry Iest of | Robin Hood‸, and
of his life. | VVith a newe play
for to be plaied in | May-games.⁁Very pleasant | and full of pastime.', with
first line in double font height, second line in italic type, fleuron-like '☙' symbol,
but
with leaf rotated 180° and right-pointing stem
tip.
Title followed by blank line, followed by two factotums side by side, the left
evidently representing Robin Hood, the right below legend 'Litle John.', followed
by
blank line, followed by 'LONDON. | Printed for Edward White.'.
Fytte I. I insert the fytte number. As was common practice, the witnesses omit the first fytte
number.
1:1–83:3. L: The first preserved text range of this witness. Also see n. to 83:3. 1:1–81:4. Fytte I. 1:1–12:4. L: Run together as prose. 1:1–8:2. W: Sig. [A 1.v.]. Drop-title in pyramid layout and Roman font: '¶ Heere beginneth a little
iest of Robin | Hood and
his merry men and of the | proud Sheriffe of⁁Noting‸- | ham.', followed by
blank line before the text. 1:1–7:4. C: Sig. [A.i.v.]. Drop-title pyramid layout and first line aligned to rigth of text:
'⸿Here begynneth a lyt‸t‸ell
geste | of Robyn hoode and his mery | men,⁁and of the proude | Shyryfe of No.
| tyngham.', followed by first verse of text (with four-line initial) on next
line. 1:1:1–7:3:4. L: Sig [A.i.r.]: centred drop-title at top of page: '⸿Here begynneth a gest | of Robyn
Hode', below it a woodcut of a
mounted archer, followed by body text arranged as prose. 1:1–6:1. D: Sig. [A.i.v.]. Text of poem begins below six-line centred drop-title: '⸿Here | begynneth
| a lytell geste of Ro⸗ |
byn hode.and his meyne' | And of the proude Sheryfe of | Notyngham.' and a
blank line. The last line of the drop-title is padded with an ornamental border so
that the
total width exceeds that of the preceding line as much as required for a pyramid
layout of the title. 1:1. Lythe … gentilmen] The same introductory tag occurs at the openings of fyttes III (144:1), V (282:1, the second stanza of the fytte), and VI (317:1). Lythe] L: Two-line initial followed by word space. D: Six-line inhabited initial followed by word space and capital. C: Five-line inhabited initial. W: 2.25-line initial. gentilmen] Timeline feature No. 1, gentleman (n.): used in the plur. as a polite form of address to a group of men (⇤1578–2017⇥). 1:2 suggests that the notion of social standing is quite prominent
in 1:1, but this does not seem to be the case with similar opening tags in subsequent fyttes
(see 144:1, 282:1, 317:1). 1:2. that] DCW: Follows large initial at 1:1. fre bore] L: Change of line after this. W: 'free borne'. Last 'e' in 'ee' ligature weakly inked. blode] L: Follows large initial at 1:1. 1:3. I] LDCW: 'J'. Follows large initial at 1:1. As is well known, early fonts did not have separate sorts
for 'I' and 'J'. However, in opting for a capital letter, the printers were
following ME practices, for sometimes in ME MSS and frequently in those of the 15th
cent.,
a separate or detached 'i', whether the first person singular pronoun or the
past participial i– prefix (see n. to 2:4), was represented by a 'j' which 'almost looked the same as the uppercase
I'. shalle] L: 'shaỻ'. When applicable, witness L generally employs a double letter with abbreviation which consists of two consecutive
instances of small 'l' with a horizontal stroke (bar) approximately one-third
down from the top of the letters. In the absence of a suitable combining Unicode
character capable of overlaying two immediately preceding characters, I use
the Unicode symbol 'ỻ', namely 'LATIN SMALL LETTER MIDDLE-WELSH LL' (U+1EFB) in these notes and in the variants list. This character is very similar to, and
probably
visually indistinguishable from, that employed in L. However, my use of this Unicode character to represent the latter does not imply
the
identity in essence or origin of the two. In the body of the text, I render
this character as 'lle'. It is a notable fact that those major editions of
the Gest that have availed themselves of L all simply transcribe this feature as 'll' without even
mentioning the fact that the letters are struck through. F. J. Child did not
know L at first hand; it was transcribed for him by William
Macmath. It is uncertain if Child would have recognized 'ỻ' as a possibly significant
feature in L, had he been aware of it, for he seems to have mistaken a crossed double 'l' in Robin Hood and the Monk (MS)
for a scribal change or deletion. Ohlgren
& Matheson claim to 'have retained all of the original spellings because of
what they reveal about spelling and typesetting practices' yet must have failed to even notice the very frequent use of 'ỻ', since they neither
discuss it nor let it be reflected in their transcription
of the text. It is reassuring to find that the several editions and transcriptions
of L prepared by philologists for the Scottish Text
Society and published in print, on DVD-ROM, or on the web, all recognize this
feature of the text and render it as 'lle', as I
do. Single or double 'l' crossed with a bar or tilde is a well-known feature
of ME texts in MS, and it is often not easy to decide whether to append an italicized
e when transcribing it, for by the mid-15th century at the latest, the rules historically
governing the use of the ME –e ending had ceased being active in the language, with the result that where final
–e was
retained, this was increasingly for other reasons and final e was freely added where there was no historical justification for it. However, it can be said at least that the printer of L was very
consistent in reserving the use of 'ỻ' for word-final position. Out of 177
uses, only one or two occur word-medially (see 208:3 and n., 133:2 and n.). Crossed double 'l' occurs in two other witnesses, once only in each. D: 360:3 (and see n.), C: 173:1
(and see n.). Robert Proctor notes that 'the use of a cross stroke through ll is not confined
to J. van Doesborgh,
though commonly used by him'. Lest this be taken as slightly
supporting Doesborch's claim to being the printer of L I must note that this feature is also found in at least one book in English printed
by another Dutch printer, Gerard Leeu's edition of The Cronycles of the Reame of Englond (Antwerp, 1493), and among English printers of the incunable
period we need look no further than Caxton for a printer who made use of crossed
double 'l'. His Eneydos (1490) is peppered with them. Crossed double 'l' is a
small part of early printing's large inheritance from manuscript production, of which it partially and
gradually divested itself. Perhaps, therefore, with further research this feature
may serve to constrain the likely date of printing of L. C: 'shall'. Lower half of last 'l' weakly printed. yeman] For
this term, also see 3:4, 20:2, 26:3, 37:4, 80:3, 81:3, 129:3, 139:1, 139:3, 212:2, 222:3, 229:3, 255:3, 268:4, 269:3, 406:3. 1:4. his] L: Change of line after this. DC: Follows large initial at 1:1.
2:1. Robyn] DC: Follows large initial at 1:1. outlaw] L: 'out | law'. Change of line after 'out' (no hyphen). 2:2:1–2:3:4. Whyles … outlawe] L: Omission due to eyeskip (saut du même au même); supplied from D. 2:2–4. Whyles … founde] Taken literally, this statement is self-contradictory; 'other' must be understood
to precede the last word. 2:2. Whyles] D: Follows large initial at 1:1. 2:4. never] L: 'ueuer'. First 'u' is a turned 'n'. I correct. founde] DCW: 'y founde', 'yfounde', 'yfound,'. Past. parts. prefixed with reflexes of OE ge- such as i- and
y- (often detached: 'I_', 'i_', 'y_', see n. to 1:3)
were especially common in southern dialects of ME, and are also found later
in archaic use; 'yfounde': ME, and 1500s archaic; 'yfound': 1500s, and later archaic. Three clusters of i-prefixed past. parts.
are
notable: 1) 131:2, 132:2, 132:3, 138:4; 2) 275:2, 281:1, 288:1, 290:3; 3) 327:1, 332:4, 337:2, 337:3, 338:3, 342:1, 343:4. Scattered occ.: 72:2, 102:1, 170:4, 204:1, 238:1, 392:1. Where a capital form of the detached past participial prefix occurs in a chief witness,
I print a lowercase italic 'i', attached to the main word, listing the
unaltered reading ('J') among the variants. W: 'yfound'. Letter 'f' very weakly printed.
3:1. Robyn] L: 'Ro | bȳ'. Change of line after 'Ro' (no hyphen). bernesdale] Barnsdale, an area lying athwart the A1, north of Doncaster and south of Pontefract, in West
Yorkshire, formerly the West Riding of
Yorkshire. [ToDo]. Barnsdale is also mentioned at 21:1, 82:3, 83:1, 134:4, 213:1, 262:1, 440:1, 442:1. 3:3. hym] L: 'hȳ'. Change of line after this. Litelle Johan] [ToDo.]. Litelle] D: 'lytell'. Slight horizontal stroke on left of second 'l', probably an imperfection rather than
an 'lle' ligature ('ỻ'), which does not occur
elsewhere in this witness. Johan] A Biblical name, 'John' entered the English language along a tortuous path from Hebrew
via Hellenistic Greek, post-classical Latin, and OF and Middle French to
EME. The OED and MED between them list the following forms as current in ME: Johan, John, Jon, Iohan,
and Iohn, and these as being in
use in the 16th cent. and later: John, Iohan, Iohne, Ihon, Iohn. The form 'Iohan' can be found as late as the mid to late 1560s albeit in a reprint
of a text that may have
been written a few decades earlier. L: 'John̄'. This is the standard form of the name in L. Most major editions replace the n–macron with
'nn', Child alone indicating the fact by italicizing the last n. One less widely used but
significant scholarly edition renders it simply as 'Iohn', while another avoids interpretation by retaining the
n–macron. Among major editions, only that of Ohlgren & Matheson renders 'John̄' as 'Johan'. They find that
'such an expansion might have seemed quite natural to a Dutch printer'. This is doubtful. As in ME, the standard function of the tilde or macron above a
single letter, word-final or otherwise, in Middle and Early
Modern Dutch MSS is to indicate that a letter representing a nasal sound is
to be appended. If it was ever used above an n to indicate that an
a must be prepended, this cannot have been common practice.
However, the question seems rather to be the reverse: whether the Dutch-speaking
printer with little command of English posed by Ohlgren could and would have abbreviated 'Johan' by printing n-macron for 'an'. Yet this is of scant
consequence, for as these editors themselves note, 'John̄' is also the form
used in the older (fragmentary) P, which was not printed by a
Dutch printer (see n. to 220:1). Ignoring occasional irregularity of spacing,
'John̄' is the most common form in L, but 'John' also occurs frequently. 'Johū' occurs at 190:1 (see n.) and 206:1. It hardly
needs saying that the macron can also be found in other books printed by van
Doesborch, thus for instance the drop-title of the pamphlet Of the newe
lādes (Antwerp, [c1510]). In what survives of G, only the form
'Johan' occurs (see n. to 38:3). So also for N
(see n. to 293:1). Forms in later witnesses, discussed at the end of this
note, include five instances of 'Johā'. In addition to leaving it as it is,
I see four possible ways to render 'John̄': 1) 'John', 2) 'Johnn', 3)
'Johan', and 4) 'Johne'. It is my impression that early printers were less prone than ME scribes to using
meaningless abbreviation marks. This would weigh at least slightly against
the first option. The second has the obvious advantage of making no
unusual assumptions about the macron above the n: it would stand, as it most often does, for a subsequent letter representing a nasal
sound.
Spellings with double consonants tend to indicate a short preceding vowel, but if this was the reason for adding a second n to 'John', why not do so after all
other words with short vowels? We find this only in a single reading in the
entire text tradition: C: 327:3: 'Robynn', spelt with two ns, not n-macron. The two last options make the macron stand for
something more unusual than an n or m. Yet this is not in principle a problem. Early printing in many respects followed
scribal practices, and manuals on palaeography and MS abbreviations tell us
that the macron, though most often standing for a letter representing a nasal, was
in fact
a general mark of abbreviation/signal of omission. 'Johan' and 'Iohan' being very common ME forms of the name, early printers may well
have felt that an 'a' was left out
when they printed 'John' tout court, hence the need for a macron. In MSS and apparently rather less frequently in print,
one comes
across forms such as 'Ioħn', in which the crossed
'h' could represent 'ha' or 'hn', though we must also note forms such as 'ħumylyacyon'
where it is hard to see any justification for the bar through the
'h'.
However, the horizontal stroke through the ascender of the 'h' being the equivalent
of a macron (or tilde) above a letter without an ascender, printers who had 'n̄'
but not 'ħ' in their font may, if they took crossed 'h' to stand for 'ha',
have chosen to 'shift' the macron to the following 'n'. I follow Ohlgren & Matheson
in
adopting the expansion 'Johan' but note that it is uncertain if this is the best solution. The fourth option,
'Johne' is arguably less
surprising. By the time the early editions were being printed, the rules governing
the use of the ME –e ending were long lost and the letter
'e' could be appended to words more or less as printers saw fit. In an edition of Chaucer's Loue and Complayntes bytwene Mars and Venus ([?1500]) printed for Julian Notary, the printer of N, a vowel with a macron usually stands for vowel and 'n' (or 'm'), but
two uses of the macron are rather more interesting: 'sermon̄' and 'doun̄'. It is hard to see why the noun 'sermon' and the adverb 'down' should have an extra
n appended to them, and much the
most reasonable assumption is that the macrons here mean "add an 'e' after
this letter", though of course we cannot entirely rule out the possibility that they
meant
nothing. Further research may show whether 'Johan' or 'Johne' is the best way to expand
'John̄'. D: 'Johan'. Ignoring occasional irregularity of spacing, the form 'Johan' is nearly universal
in this witness. However, 'Johā' occurs on four occasions
(see n. to 78:1), 'Jhoan' (16:1,
and see n.) and 'Joha' ( 222:1, and see n.) once each. CW: 'John'. This is the universal form of the name in W and practically so in C, 'Johu' at
C: 236:1 (see n.) probably having a turned
u. 3:4. a] C: 'A'. A speck of ink resembling a raised point occupies part of the space between this word
and the following. It is almost certainly a typographical
accident. gode yeman] [ToDo] yeman] For this term, see n. to 1:1.
4. and … grome] This stanza has imperfect abcb rhyme: 'son'/'grome'.
[ToDo.] 4:1. alsoo] L: Change of line after this. goode] L: 'gooe'. I emend. Scarlok] L: 'Scarlok'; DCW: 'Scathlock' (with subvariants). Scarlock/Scathlock occurs at the following positions
attested in LDCW: 4:1, 17:3, 61:2, 68:2, 74:1, 77:3, 83:2, 208:3, in DNCW at 293:1, and in DCW at 402:1 and 435:3. L always has variants of Scarlock, DCW always
Scathlock as also N on the single surviving occurrence. The first element of the name
Scathlock is ON skaða and/or ME scaþen, 'to harm, to damage', while the
second is either OE locc, 'lock of hair', or OE loc, 'the lock of a door'. Thus the surname
could be construed as a synonym of 'burglar'
or it 'may denote a clumsy barber'. Occupational terms and nicknames are both well-known sources of British
surnames, and 'Scathlock' likely partakes of both categories. William Scathlock/Scarlock
does not commit a burglary or cut anybody's hair in any surviving Robin Hood
ballad. Scathlock is first attested as a surname in 1280–81 and is recorded at least as late as 1392. 'Scathelok' is
included in an LME list of dog names (MS ?c1460–80). Neither Scathlock nor
Scarlock is included in Reaney's Dictionary of British Surnames, which probably indicates that they are relatively
uncommon. W: 'Scathlock'. Ink smear on 'oc'. 4:2. Much] The name may be a short form of
Michael/Mitchell.
If there is perhaps also a play on the ME primary sense of the adj. much, 'great in size or dimension', especially used of a person: 'tall,
large, bulky', this may have been ironic in intent, for Much elsewhere has the epithet 'little'
added to his name (see
69:1, 73:3, 77:1, 293:3, 307:1). A play on the
common noun 'midge' might be suggested, again with reference to short stature,
but it must be noted that the dictionaries do not include ME forms of
midge spelt with 'ch'. Such forms are known in OE only. Also see n. to
4:3–4. milners] L: 'milsers'. I emend. It is not clear if the intended reading was miller (cf. D) or
milner (cf. CW). 4:3–4. there … grome] Gummere glosses: 'An inch of his body was worth an ordinary man'. Also see n. to
4:2. 4:3. There] L: 'The | re'. Change of line after 'The' (no hyphen). ynch] Timeline feature No. 2, inch (n.): trans. or fig. use, "[a] very small measure, distance, amount, or degree; the
least amount or part (of space, time, material or immaterial things); a
very little; a 'bit'" (⇤?c1280:a1350–1939⇥). L: 'yuch'. Turned 'n'. 4:4. worth] L: 'wor | th'. Change of line after 'wor' (no hyphen).
5:2. all] The adv. all, in 'mere intensive or emphatic use [...] [p]receding to or 'for to and an
infinitive', a use '[n]ow regional and nonstandard, esp. in […] ballads or
folk songs'. untoo] L: 'vn/ | too', change of line after 'vn/'. 5:3. ye] W: 'you'. Originally a plural accusative and dative form, you is first attested a1470:a1400 as a nominative singular form used in addressing a superior. For further occurrences in W, see 37:1, 90:4, 162:1, 162:3, 232:3. It is not always possible to decide with
certainty whether the person spoken to is an equal or superior, but for this
see n. to 162:1. [ToDo.].
dyne] L: Change of line after this.
6:1. bespake] [ToDo.]. L: 'be/ | spake'. Change of line after 'be/'. 6:2–13:4. D: Sig. A.ii.[r.]. 6:2. lust] L: Change of line after this. 6:4. som] C: 'sone'. Letter 'n' may be a slip or due to misinterpretation of an 'ō' in the exemplar. unkouth] L: 'vnkoutg'. I emend. Change of line after this. Thomas Ohlgren lists five typesetting errors out
of 'numerous' which he takes as evidence of this
printer's poor English. One is the reading 'unkouch' instead of which Ohlgren
expects 'vnkouth'. No reference to stanza and verse (or line) is provided, and in fact the reading
does not occur anywhere in this or any other witness.
There is, moreover, no reason to find fault with the initial 'u'. The adjective
also occurs at 18:3 and 209:3, but the reading at the former position, though erroneous, is not very like that
cited by Ohlgren and could not have been
introduced by someone who knew no English, while the latter occurs in a part
of the text not preserved in L. For other spelling mistakes
with more or less justification thus singled out by Ohlgren, see 15:4 (and n.), 143:1 (and n.), 203:4 (and
n.), 331:3 (and n.). Also see
n. to 200:3.
[ToDo.].
