The Lay of Havelok the Dane Part 1

The Lay of Havelok the Dane.

by Unknown.

PREFACE.

-- 1. The English version of the Lay of Havelok, now here reprinted, is one of the few poems that have happily been recovered, after having long been given up as lost. Tyrwhitt, in his Essay on the Language and Versification of Chaucer, has a footnote (No. 51) deploring the loss of the Rime concerning Gryme the Fisher, the founder of Grymesby, Hanelok [_read_ Havelok] the Dane, and his wife Goldborough; and Ritson, in his Dissertation on Romance and Minstrelsy--(vol. i. p. lx.x.xviii. of his Metrical Romancees)--makes remarks to the same effect. It was at length, however, discovered by accident in a ma.n.u.script belonging to the Bodleian library, which had been described in the old Catalogue merely as _Vitae Sanctorum_, a large portion of it being occupied by metrical legends of the Saints. In 1828, it was edited for the Roxburghe Club by Sir F. Madden, the t.i.tle-page of the edition being as follows:-- "The Ancient English Romance of Havelok the Dane, accompanied by the French Text: with an introduction, notes, and a glossary, by Frederick Madden, Esq., F.A.S. F.R.S.L., Sub-Keeper of the MSS. in the British Museum.

Printed for the Roxburghe Club, London. W. Nicol, Shakspeare Press, MDCCCXXVIII." This volume contains a very complete Introduction, pp. i-lvi; the English version of Havelok, pp. 1-104; the French text of the Romance of Havelok, from a MS. in the Heralds' College, pp. 105-146; the French Romance of Havelok, as abridged and altered by Geffrei Gaimar, pp. 147-180; notes to the English text, pp. 181-207; notes to the French text, pp. 208-210; and a glossary, &c., pp. 211-263. But there are sometimes bound up with it two pamphlets, viz. "Remarks on the Glossary to Havelok," by S. W. Singer, and an "Examination of the Remarks, &c.," by the Editor of Havelok. In explanation of this, it may suffice to say, that the former contains some criticisms by Mr Singer (executed in a manner suggestive of an officious wish to display superior critical ac.u.men), of which a few are correct, but others are ludicrously false; whilst the latter is a vindication of the general correctness of the explanations given, and contains, incidentally, some valuable contributions to our general etymological knowledge, and various remarks which have proved of service in rendering the glossary in the present edition more exactly accurate.[1]

[Footnote 1: In particular, we find there a complete proof, supported by some fifty examples, that, _as_ can be traced, through the forms _ase_, _als_, _alse_, _also_, to the A.S.

_eall-swa_; a proof, that in the difficult phrase _lond and lithe_, the word _lithe_ [also spelt _lede_, _lude_] is equivalent to the French _tenement_, _rente_, or _fe_; and, thirdly, a complete refutation of Mr Singer's extraordinary notion that the adverb _swithe_ means _a sword_!]

-- 2. Owing to the scarcity of copies of this former edition, the committee of the Early English Text Society, having first obtained the approval of Sir Frederic Madden, resolved upon issuing a reprint of it; and Sir Frederic having expressed a wish that the duty of seeing it through the press should be entrusted to myself, I gladly undertook that responsibility. He has kindly looked over the revises of the whole work,[2] but as it has undergone several modifications, it will be the best plan to state in detail what these are.

[Footnote 2: In the same way, _William of Palerne_ was prepared by me for the press, subject to his advice; see _William of Palerne_, Introduction, p. ii.]

-- 3. With respect to the text, the greatest care has been taken to render it, as nearly as can be represented in print, an exact copy of the MS. The text of the former edition is exceedingly correct, and the alterations here made are few and of slight importance. Sir F. Madden furnished me with some, the results of a re-comparison, made by himself, of his printed copy with the original; besides this, I have myself carefully read the proof sheets with the MS. _twice_, and it may therefore be a.s.sumed that the complete correctness of the text is established. It seems to me that this is altogether the most important part of the work of a _Text_ Society, in order that the student may never be perplexed by the appearance of words having no real existence.

For a like reason the letters and ? (the latter of which I have represented by an italic _w_) have now been inserted wherever they occur, and the expansions of abbreviations are now denoted by italics.

For further remarks upon the text, see the description of the MS. below, -- 26. Sidenotes and headlines have been added, but the numbering of the lines has not been altered. The French text of the romance, the t.i.tle of which is _Le Lai de Aveloc_, and the abridgment of the story by Geffrei Gaimar, have not been here reprinted; the fact being, that the French and English versions differ very widely, and that the pa.s.sages of the French which really correspond to the English are few and short. _All_ of these will be found in the Notes, in their proper places, and it was also deemed the less necessary to print the French text, because it is tolerably accessible; for it may be found either in vol. i. of Monumenta Historica Britannica, ed. Petrie, 1848, in the reprint by M. Michel (1833) ent.i.tled "Le Lai d'Havelok," or in the edition by Mr T. Wright for the Caxton Society, 1850. An abstract of it is given at p. xxiii.

The Notes are abridged from Sir F. Madden's, with but a very few additions by myself, which are distinguished by being placed within square brackets. The Glossarial Index is, for the most part, reprinted from Sir F. Madden's Glossary, but contains a large number of _slight_ alterations, re-arrangements, and additions. The references have nearly all been verified,[3] and the few words formerly left unexplained are now either wholly or partially solved. I have now only to add that a large portion of the remainder of this preface, especially that which concerns the historical and traditional evidences of the story (-- 4 to -- 18), is abridged or copied from Sir F. Madden's long Introduction, which fairly exhausts the subject.[4] All extracts included between marks of quotation are taken from it without alteration. But I must be considered responsible for the rearrangement of the materials, and I have added a few remarks from other sources.

[Footnote 3: I say _nearly_, because I have not been able to verify _every_ reference to _every_ poem quoted. I have verified and critically examined all the citations from the _poem itself_, from Ritson's Romances, Weber's Romances, La?amon, Beowulf, Chaucer, Langland, and Sir Walter Scott's edition of Sir Tristrem (3rd edition, 1811).]

[Footnote 4: To this, the reader is referred for fuller information.]

-- 4. NOTICES OF THE STORY OF HAVELOK BY EARLY WRITERS. There can be little doubt that the tradition must have existed from Anglo-Saxon times, but the earliest mention of it is presented to us in the full account furnished by the French version of the Romance. Of this there are two copies, one of which belongs to Sir T. Phillipps; the other is known as the Arundel or Norfolk MS., and is preserved in the Heralds'

College, where it is marked E. D. N. No. 14; the various editions of the latter have been already enumerated in -- 3. This version was certainly composed within the first half of the twelfth century. From the fact that it is ent.i.tled a _Lai_, and from the a.s.sertion of the poet--"Qe vn _lai_ en firent li Breton"--"whereof the Britons made a lay"--we easily conclude that it was drawn from a British source. From the evident connection of the story with the Chronicle called the _Brut_, we may further conclude that by _Breton_ is not meant Armorican, but belonging to _Britain_. The story is in no way connected with France; the tradition is British or Welsh, and the French version was doubtless written in England by a subject of an English king. That the language is French is due merely to the accident that the Norman conquerors of England had acquired that language during their temporary sojourn in France. From every point of view, whether we regard the British tradition, the Anglo-Norman version, or the version printed in the present volume, the story is wholly English. It is not to be connected too closely with the Armorican lays of Marie _de France_.[5]

[Footnote 5: "The word Breton, which some critics refer to Armorica, is here applied to a story of mere English birth."

Hallam; Lit. of Europe, 6th ed. 1860; vol. i. p. 36. See the whole pa.s.sage.]

-- 5. We next come to the abridgment of the same as made by Geffrei Gaimar, who wrote between the years 1141 and 1151. In one place, Geffrei quotes Gildas as his authority, but no conclusion can easily be drawn from this indefinite reference. In another place, he mentions a feast given by Havelok after his defeat of Hodulf-- _si c.u.m nus dit la verai estoire_-- "as the true history tells us." As this feast is not mentioned in the fuller French version, and yet reappears in the English text, we perceive that he had some additional source of information; and this is confirmed by the fact that he mentions several additional details, also not found in the completer version. That the lay of Havelok, as found in Gaimar, is really his, and not an interpolation by a later hand, may fairly be inferred from his repeated allusions to the story in the body of his work. There are three MS. copies containing Gaimar's abridgment, of which the best is the Royal MS. (Bibl. Reg. 13 A. xxi.) in the British Museum; the two others belong respectively to the Dean and Chapter of Durham (its mark being C. iv. 27) and to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln (its mark being H. 18). It is curious that the Norfolk MS. contains not only the fuller French version of the story, but also the Brut of Wace, and the continuation of it by Gaimar.

Gaimar's abridgment, as printed in Sir F. Madden's edition, is taken from the Royal MS., supplemented by the Durham and Lincoln MSS. See also Monumenta Historica Britannica, vol. i. p. 764. It is important to mention that Gaimar speaks of the Danes as having been in Norfolk since the time that Havelok was King, after he has been relating the combats between the Britons and the Saxons under the command of Cerdic and Cynric. Another allusion makes Havelok to have lived long before the year 800, according to every system of chronology.

-- 6. The next mention of Havelok is in the French Chronicle of Peter de Langtoft, of Langtoft in Yorks.h.i.+re, who died early in the reign of Edward II., and whose Chronicle closes with the death of Edward I. Here the only trace of the story is in the mention of "Gountere le pere Hauelok, de Danays Ray clamez"--Gunter, father of Havelok, called King of the Danes. The allusion is almost valueless from its evident absurdity; for he confounds Gunter with the Danish invader defeated by Alfred, and who is variously called G.o.drum, Gudrum, Guthrum, or Gurmound. He must have been thinking, at the moment, of a very different Gurmund, viz. the King of the Africans, as he is curiously called, whose terrible devastations are described very fully in La?amon, vol. iii.

pp. 156-177, and who may fairly be supposed to have lived much nearer to the time of Havelok; and he must further have confounded this Gurmund with Gunter. For the account of Robert of Brunne's translation of Langtoft's Chronicle, see below, -- 10.

-- 7. But soon after this, we come to a most curious account. In MS.

Harl. 902 is a late copy, on paper, of a Chronicle called _Le Bruit Dengleterre_, or otherwise _Le Pet.i.t Bruit_, compiled A.D. 1310, by Meistre Rauf de Boun, at the request of Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln.

It is a most worthless compilation, put together in defiance of all chronology, but with respect to our present inquiry it is full of interest, as it soon becomes obvious that one of his sources of information is the very English version here printed, which he cites by the name of _l'estorie de Grimesby_, and which is thus proved to have been written before the year 1310. "The Chronicler," says Sir F. Madden, "commences, as usual, with Brute, B.C. 2000, and after taking us through the succeeding reigns to the time of Ca.s.sibelin, who fought with Julius Caesar, informs us, that after Ca.s.sibelin's death came Gurmound out of Denmark, who claimed the throne as the son of the eldest daughter of Belin, married to Thorand, King of Denmark. He occupies the kingdom 57 years, and is at length slain at _Hunteton_, called afterwards from him _Gurmoundcestre_. He is succeeded by his son Frederick, who hated the English, and filled his court with Danish n.o.bles, but who is at last driven out of the country, after having held it for the short s.p.a.ce of 71 years. And then, adds this miserable History-monger: 'Et si entendrez vous, que par cel primer venue de auaunt dit Roy Gormound, et puis par cele hountoux exil de son fitz Frederik, si fu le rancour de Daneis vers nous enpendaunt, et le regne par cel primere accion vers nous enchalangount plus de sept C auns apre, _iekis a la venue Haneloke, fitz le Roy Birkenebayne de Dannemarche, q~ le regne par mariage entra de sa femme_.' --f. 2 b.

"After a variety of equally credible stories, we come to Adelstan II.[6]

son of Edward [the Elder], who corresponds with the real king of that name, A.D. 925-941. He is succeeded by his son [brother] Edmund, who reigned four years [A.D. 941-946], and is said to have been _poisoned_ at Canterbury; after whom we have ADELWOLD, whose ident.i.ty with the Athelwold of the English Romance, will leave no doubt as to the source whence the writer drew great part of his materials in the following pa.s.sage:

'Apres ceo vient Adelwold son fitz q~ reigna XVJ et demie, si engendroit ij feiz et iij filis, dount trestoutz murrirent frechement fors q~ sa pune file, le out a nom _Goldburgh_, del age de VJ aunz kaunt son pere Adelwold morust. Cely Roy Adelwold quant il doit morir, comaunda sa file a garder a vn Count de Cornewayle, al houre kaunt il quidou~ie (sic) hountousment auoir deparage, quaunt fit _Haueloke_, fitz le Roy Byrkenbayne de Denmarche, esposer le, encountre sa volunte, q~ primis fuit Roy Dengleterre et de Denmarch tout a vn foitz, par quele aliaunce leis Daneis queillerunt g^{e}ndr~ (sic) mestrie en Engleterre, et long temps puise le tindrunt, _si c.u.m vous nouncie l'estorie de Grimesby_, come _Grime_ primez nurist Haueloke en Engleterre, depuis cel houre q'il feut chase de Denmarche &c. deqis al houre q'il vint au chastelle de Nichole, q~ cely auauntdit traitre _Goudriche_ out en garde, en quel chastel il auauntdit Haueloke espousa l'auauntdit Goldeburgh, q~ fuit heir Dengleterre. Et par cel reson tynt cely Haueloke la terre de Denmarche auxi comme son heritage, et Engleterre auxi par mariage de sa femme; et si entendrez vous, q~ par la reson q~ ly auauntdit Gryme ariua primez, kaunt il amena l'enfaunt Haueloke hors de Denmarche, par meyme la reson reseut cele vile son nom, de Grime, quel noun ly tint vnquore Grimisby.

'Apres ceo regna meyme cely Haueloke, q~ mult fuit prodhomme, et droiturelle, et bien demenoit son people en reson et ley. Cel Roy Haueloke reigna xlj. aunz, si engendroit ix fitz et vij filis, dount trestoutz murrerount ainz q~ furunt d'age, fors soulement iiij de ses feitz, dont l'un out a noum Gurmound, cely q~ entendy auoir son heire en Engleterre; le secound out a noun Knout, quen fitz feffoit son pere en le regne de Denmarche, quant il estoit del age de xviij aunz, et ly mesme se tynt a la coroune Dengleterre, quel terre il entendy al oeps son ainez fitz Gurmound auoir garde. Mes il debusa son col auxi comme il feu mounte vn cheval testous q~ poindre volleyt, en l'an de son regne xxiij entrant. Le tiers fitz ont a noun G.o.dard, q~ son pere feffoit de la Seneschacie Dengleterre, q~ n'auo~ut (sic) taunt come ore fait ly quart. Et le puisnez fitz de toutz out a noum Thorand, q~ espousa la Countesse de Hertouwe en Norwey. Et par la reson q~ cely Thorand feut enherite en la terre de Norwey, ly et ses successours sont enheritez iekis en sa p~ce (sic) toutdis, puis y auoit affinite de alliaunce entre ceulx de Denmarche et ceulx de Norwey, a checun venue q~ vnkes firent en ceste terre pur chalenge ou clayme mettre, iekis a taunt q~ lour accion feut enseyne destrut par vn n.o.ble chevallere _Guy de Warwike_, &c. Et tout en sy feffoit Haueloke sez quatre fitz: si gist a priorie de _Grescherche_ en Loundrez.' --f. 6 b.

"The _Estorie de Grimesby_ therefore, referred to above, is the identical English Romance before us, and it is no less worthy of remark, that the whole of the pa.s.sage just quoted, with one single variation of import, has been literally translated by Henry de Knyghton, and inserted in his Chronicle.[7] Of the sources whence the information respecting Havelok's sons is derived, we are unable to offer any account, as no trace of it occurs either in the French or English texts of the story."

[Footnote 6: "The Chronicler writes of him, f. 6. 'Il feu le plus beau bacheleir q{e} vnqes reigna en Engleterre, _ceo dit le Bruit_, par quoy ly lays ly apellerunt _King Adelstane with gilden kroket_, pour ce q'il feu si beaus.' We have here notice of another of those curious historical poems, the loss of which can never be sufficiently deplored. The term _crocket_ (derived by Skinner from the Fr. _crochet_, uncinulus) points out the period of the poem's composition, since the fas.h.i.+on alluded to of wearing those large rolls of hair so called, only arose at the latter end of Hen. III. reign, and continued through the reign of Edw. I. and part of his successor's."]

[Footnote 7: See below, -- 16.]

-- 8. "About the same time at which Rauf de Boun composed his Chronicle, was written a brief Genealogy of the British and Saxon Kings, from Brutus to Edward II., preserved in the same MS. in the Heralds' College which contains the French text of the Romance. The following curious rubric is prefixed:-- _La lignee des Bretons et des Engleis, queus il furent, et de queus nons, et coment Brut vint premerement en Engleterre, et combien de tens puis, et dont il vint. Brut et Cornelius furent chevalers chacez de la bataille de Troie, M. CCCC. XVII. anz deuant qe dieus nasquit, et vindrent en Engleterre, en Cornewaille, et riens ne fut trouee en la terre fors qe geanz, Geomagog, Hastripoldius, Ruscalbundy, et plusurs autres Geanz._ In this Genealogy no mention of Havelok occurs under the reign of Constantine, but after the names of the Saxon Kings Edbright and Edelwin, we read: 'ATHELWOLD auoit vne fille _Goldeburgh_, et il regna vi. anz. HAUELOC esposa meisme cele Goldeburgh, et regna iij. anz. ALFRED le frere le Roi Athelwold enchaca Haueloc par Hunehere, et il fut le primer Roi corone de l'apostoille, et il regna x.x.x. anz.' --fol. 148 b. By this account Athelwold is clearly identified with Ethelbald, King of Wess.e.x, who reigned from 855 to 860, whilst Havelok is subst.i.tuted in the place of Ethelbert and Ethered."

-- 9. "Not long after the same period was written a Metrical _Chronicle of England_, printed by Ritson, Metr. Rom. V. ii. p. 270. Two copies are known to exist,[8] the first concluding with the death of Piers Gavestone, in 1313 (MS. Reg. 12. C. xii.), and the other continued to the time of Edw. III. (Auchinleck MS.). The period of Havelok's descent into England is there ascribed to the reign of King Ethelred (978-1016), which will very nearly coincide with the period a.s.signed by Rauf de Boun, viz. A.D. 963-1004."

'_Haueloc_ com tho to this lond, With gret host & eke strong, Ant sloh the Kyng Achelred, At Westmustre he was ded, Ah he heuede reigned her Seuene an tuenti fulle ?er.'

MS. Reg. 12. C. xii.

"This date differs from most of the others, and appears founded on the general notion of the Danish invasions during that period."

[Footnote 8: The poems in MSS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Ff. 5. 48 and Dd. 14. 2 resemble this Chronicle, but do not mention Havelok's name.]

-- 10. Before proceeding to consider the _prose_ Chronicle of the Brute, it is better to speak first of the translation of Peter de Langtoft's Chronicle by Robert of Brunne, a translation which was completed A.D.

1338. At p. 25 of Hearne's edition is the following pa.s.sage:

'?it a nother Danes Kyng in the North gan aryue.

Alfrid it herd, thidere gan he dryue.

_Hauelok_[9] fader he was, _Gunter_ was his name.

He brent citees & tounes, ouer alle did he schame.

Saynt Cutbertes clerkes tho Danes thei dred.

The toke the holy bones, about thei tham led.

Seuen ?ere thorgh the land wer thei born aboute, It comforted the kyng mykelle, whan he was in doute -- Whan Alfrid & Gunter had werred long in ille, Thorgh the grace of G.o.d, Gunter turned his wille.

Cristend wild he be, the kyng of fonte him lift, & thritty of his knyghtes turnes, thorgh G.o.des gift.

Tho that first were foos, and com of paien lay, Of Cristen men haf los, & so thei wend away.'

"This is the whole that appears in the original, but after the above lines immediately follows, in the language of Robert of Brunne himself (as noted also by Hearne, Pref. p. lxvii.), the following curious, and to our inquiry, very important pa.s.sage:"

'Bot I haf grete ferly, that I fynd no man, That has writen in story, how Hauelok this lond wan.

Noither _Gildas_, no Bede, no Henry of Huntynton, No William of Malmesbiri, ne Pers of Bridlynton, Writes not in ther bokes of no kyng Athelwold, Ne Goldeburgh his douhtere, ne Hauelok not of told, Whilk tyme the were kynges, long or now late, Thei mak no menyng whan, no in what date.

Bot that thise _lowed men vpon Inglish tellis_, Right story can me not ken, the certeynte what spellis.

Men sais in Lyncoln castelle ligges ?it a stone, That Hauelok kast wele forbi euer ilkone & ?it the chapelle standes, ther he weddid his wife, Goldeburgh the kynges douhter, _that saw is ?it rife_.

& of Gryme a fisshere, _men redes ?it in ryme_, That he bigged Grymesby Gryme that ilk tyme.

Of alle stories of honoure, that I haf thorgh souht, I fynd that no compiloure of him tellis ouht.

Sen I fynd non redy, that tellis of Hauelok kynde Turne we to that story, that we writen fynde.'