Part 2

The _subjunctive_ mood has no inflexions: 70 _+sped+ -- stede_, 3rd pers. 87 _+blynd+ -- wynde_, 3rd pers. 213 _fyld -- +schyld+_, 3rd pers. 416 _sey -- +may+_, 2nd pers. sg. 584 _feld -- +schyld+_, 3rd pers. sg. 1978 _+saue+ -- haue_; but observe 139 _+slone+ -- none_ and 1839 _+sene+ -- grene_.

The _present participle_ ends usually in _-ande_ (_onde_): 13 _londe -- +wonande+_. 127 _fonde -- +growonde+_. 315 _+levand+ -- bond_. 352 _stand -- +lygand+_. 358 _vndyrstond -- +levand+_. 1128 _stond -- +shynand+_. 1280 _+fayland+ -- lond_. 1445 _+fleand+ -- waraunt_. 1452 _ffand -- +goand+_. 1821 _lond -- +wepand+_. 1899 _lond -- +pleyand+_. 2104 _hond -- +levand+_. Thrice _-yng_ is found: 268 _kyng -- +dwellyng+_, 1638 and 2568.

The _gerund_ terminates always in _ing_ (_yng_): 1479 _kyng -- +ryding+_. 1503 _+comyng+ -- kyng_. 1933 _ryng -- +lettyng+_. 2509 _kyng -- +lesyng+_.

Observe the 2nd pers. sing. of a past tense, 1589 _+thou cam~+ -- slan~_, of a praeterito-praesens, 410 _they -- sey, +thow may+_. 1543 _away -- aye, +may+_. 2001 _+may+ -- welaway_.

The _past participle_ of strong verbs terminates in _n_: 482 _+syne+ -- schene, wene -- clene_. 675 _+slayne+ -- rayne_. 800 _+slayne+ -- trayne_. 1292 _fayn~ -- +slayn~+_. 1562 _+sene+ -- wene_. 2323 _alone -- +slone+_. We don’t find one certain instance for the dropping of this _n_, besides 1678 and 2063 _be_.

The _past tense plural_ of strong verbs has the same vowel as the singular: 1452 They _+ffound+_ (r. _ffand_) -- _goand_. 1458 _+began+ -- gentilman_. 1753 _tong -- +dong+_.

The 3rd pers. of the present indic. of _to be_ = _ys_ or _es_: cf. 738 _blyse -- +ys+_. 2413 _+ys+ -- Raynes_. Once _+ys+_ is found as plural: 2524 _+ys+ -- iwys_. The _present subjunctive_ is _be_ through all persons: 208 _+be+ -- me_, 2nd pers. 614 _+be+ -- se_, 3rd pers. 884 _the -- +bee+_, 3rd pers. 2017 _+be+ -- me_, 2nd pers. plr. The infinitive _+be+_ and _bene_: 49 _the -- +bee+_. 483 _+be+ -- see_. 1643 _+be+ -- charite_. 903 _the -- +bee+_. 1833 _clene -- +bene+_. 2161 _quene -- +bene+_. 2613 _+bene+ -- kene_. The _past tense singular number_ is _was_ or _wes_: 247 _alas -- +wase+_. 426 _glase -- +was+_. 771 _pase -- +wase+_. 1873 _wyldernes -- +was+_ (=Â _wes_). The plural _were_, _ware_, _wore_, as well as _was_, _wes_: (1) l. 402 _+wer~+ -- cher_. 1047 _+were+ -- chere_. 1845 _+were+ -- ffere_. 2586 _squiere -- +were+, here -- clere_. (2) 603 _fare -- +were+_. 2494 _+ware+ -- bare_. 1384 _beffore -- there, +were+_ (=Â _wore_). (3) 384 _pase -- +wase+_. 1388 _passe -- +was+_. (4) 2026 _wildernes -- +was+_ (=Â _wes_). 2545 _wildernes -- +was+_; cf. l. 2584. The subjunctive mood of the past tense is _were_ and _ware_, in sgl. and plr.: 225 _+were+ -- clere_. 235 _here -- +were+_. 1696 _chere -- +were+_. 2476 _+were+ -- bere_. 154 _+were+_ (=Â _ware_) -- _fare_. 1020 _+wer+_ (=Â _ware_) -- _fare_. 2074 _care -- +ware+_. The past participle: 7Â _bedene -- +ben+_. 172 _+byne+ -- seyn_. 2344 _+ibene+ -- kene_. 1678 _+be+ -- crystiaunte_.

From this inquiry into the sounds and inflexions, the following conclusions can be drawn:

The development of _ă_ is of no use in fixing the dialect. Nor is _ea_, which has become _a_, _o_, and _e_, to be deemed a characteristic either of the Midland or Northern dialect. Ags. _ea_ occurs as _o_ as early as 1250 in the _Northumbrian Psalter_, and 50 years afterwards in _Sir Tristrem_ and _Sir Perceval_; even Richard Rolle in his _Pricke of Conscience_ offers one instance of this change (cf. _Sir Tristrem_, p. lxix f.).

The development of the ags. _â_, which we find in 26 passages as _a_, in 22 as _o_, is remarkable. There are only a very few instances of this change in _Sir Tristrem_, p. lxxi, and in the _Psalter_; and this almost equal number of _a_- and _o_-rhymes proves evidently that the poem cannot belong to a Northern country. At the same time, a proportion like that would be impossible in a text of Southern origin. The same negative result is to be derived from the fact that Ags. _y_ is always written _y_.

As to the inflexions, the plurals of the substantives are formed by adding _-s_ or _-n_ (_en_), or by vowel change, or they have no inflexions at all. As for the inflexion _-n_, it only occurs in _slon_ and _shon_, and of this very word the plural in _n_ is to be met with even in Northern writers.

The infinitives both preserve or drop the final _n_, as is the rule with the Midland dialect; the form of the past participle with _n_ accords with the use of the Northern writers.

The present partic. ending in _-and_ and the past tense plurals of strong verbs having adopted the vowel of the singular, agree with the North as well as with the northern districts of the Midland, in the same way as some forms of _to be_: plr. prs. _ys_ and plr. prt. _was_, besides the usual forms _be_ and _are_, resp. _were_ and _ware_, and the contracted forms of _take_: 758 _name -- +tane+_. 1095 _gane -- +itane+_. 1825 _+ta+ -- twa_ (cf. 231, 286, 859, 1333, 1475, 1722, 1733, 2617).

The forms _thou has_ and _thou may_ point to the West.

The inflexions of the 3rd pers. prs. sg. are _-th_ and _-s_. In the western part of the Midland we never meet with the ending _th_, but only with _s_. In _Amis and Amiloun_, the Eastern origin of which seems to be sure, only the inflexion _-eþ_ is found in the rhyme (_Amis_, p. xxx ff.).

The romance of _Sir Torrent_ seems to be the first document hitherto considered where both these forms occur, one by the side of the other. Perhaps this fact justifies us in concluding that this poem was composed in the east, but on the borders of the west, Midland.

§ 4. THE CONTENTS OF THE ROMANCE.

Before entering on an inquiry into the sources of the romance, it may be expedient to give a short account of its contents.

In Portugal once reigned a mighty king, whose name was Calamond. He had an only daughter, the fair and gentle Desonelle, who was loved by a young knight called Torrent, son of a Portuguese count. As he could not win her, save by distinguishing himself by valiant exploits, he undertook several adventurous expeditions. First he set out, by the order of the king, against a mischievous and dangerous giant, whom he found lying fast asleep on a hill. He roused the giant by sounding his bugle, and challenged him to fight. Instantly a fierce combat ensued, in which the awkward giant lost his life. In the giant’s castle the young hero delivered a maiden, Eleonore, daughter of the king of Gales, from captivity, and rescued at the same time four princes, whom the giant had taken some time before and imprisoned in an iron cage.

After a short rest Torrent returned into Portugal. He was kindly received by King Calamond, and splendid festivities were celebrated in his honour. The kings of Gales and of Provence showed their gratitude by bestowing on him rich presents, among them a precious sword wrought by Wayland Smith. Desonelle gave him one of her fine palfreys. Calamond, however, shrewd as he was, and envious of the hero’s fame, plotted his ruin. He caused him, by a counterfeit letter of Desonelle, to catch her a falcon in the forest of Maudlen, which was the haunt of a dangerous giant, Rochense, and of many wild beasts. Torrent and his squire set out immediately, but separated on entering the forest, to hunt in the thicket each by himself. Torrent soon encountered a huge dragon, and killed it by vehement strokes. The squire, having meanwhile fallen in with the giant, had been slain by him. The hero, called to the place by the tumult of battle, attacked the giant, and overcame him after a hard struggle. He cut off his head to bear with him as a trophy. He then went into the giant’s castle, where he found a great many jewels, and a bright sword called Mownpolyard. Having returned to the royal court, he ordered five priests to say masses for his squire’s soul. At this very time it happened that the king of Arragon sent messengers to the king of Portugal, in order to bring about a marriage between Desonelle and his youngest son. Calamond would not listen to the advice of his spouse, that he should no longer refuse Desonelle to Torrent, but he promised her to the prince of Arragon, and at the same time sent the hero once more against a giant, Slogus of Foulles in Calabre.

Torrent departed well armed, and after a prosperous voyage arrived in Calabre. There he soon met the giant, who was one-eyed like the Cyclops, and bore a huge cudgel as his only weapon. Torrent threw his spear into the fiend’s eye, and thus overcame him without any long struggle. The king of Calabre graciously welcomed the hero, and largely rewarded him for the service he had rendered his country. Having returned into Portugal, Torrent heard that in a few weeks Desonelle was to be married to the prince of Arragon. Arrayed in knightly dress, he rode right off to Calamond’s court, and challenged his rival to fight. After a short struggle he completely vanquished his antagonist, stretching him on the ground. The next day, as the king, surrounded by his noble guests, banqueted in the great hall of the castle, Torrent entered with the giant’s head in his hand, and harshly demanded the king’s daughter; he called all the lords to witness of Calamond’s perfidy.

The Emperor of Rome now interceded, and it was agreed at his suggestion that Torrent should fight once more against a giant named Cate; if he vanquished that adversary, he should obtain Desonelle and half Arragon. On an isle near the sea-shore the struggle began in presence of the assembled knights. Torrent struck the club out of the giant’s hand, put him to flight, and killed him as he ran away, casting stones at him. Then the Emperor decided, with the approbation of all his knights, that the hero had won both the land and the maiden.

Torrent obtained Desonelle, and rejoiced in the possession of her, but no solemn marriage was performed.

Twelve weeks after, he left his spouse, impelled by his venturous and ambitious mind; for the king of Norway asked him to fight against a wild giant who had carried off his daughter and was destroying his castles. Torrent bade his mistress farewell, leaving her two golden rings as talismans, and set off with fifty companions. Arrived at the coast of Norway, he and his companions entered a dense forest, in which a great many wild beasts lived. His companions, seized with fear, parted from him, and continued their voyage at sea. They told the king of Norway the false tale that Torrent had perished on shore. The king then set out himself to rescue his daughter. Torrent meanwhile encountered a giant named Weraunt, Cate’s brother, and slew him in a hard struggle, but was himself wounded. In the giant’s castle he saved Gendres, daughter of the Norwegian king, and conducted her to her father. On the road they were met by a large train of gallant knights, and were then convoyed in triumph to the king’s court. There Torrent soon recovered from his wounds, and was amply rewarded with honours and presents. He stayed above twelve months at the Norwegian court. The false companions of Torrent were drowned in the sea by the king’s command, but one squire escaped to Portugal, and reported the tidings that Torrent yet remained in Norway. Soon after, as Desonelle was delivered of twins, the hatred of Calamond suddenly broke out against her. By his order, Desonelle and her two children were put to sea in a small boat; but a favourable wind saved them from ruin, and drove the boat upon the coast of Palestine. As she, helpless, wandered about the downs, a huge dragon (griffin or gripe) appeared, and seized one of her children, and immediately after a wild leopard dragged away the other. With submission she suffered her miserable fate, relying on the help of the Holy Virgin.

The king of Jerusalem, just returning from a voyage, happened to find the leopard with the child, which he ordered to be saved and delivered to him. Seeing from the foundling’s golden ring that the child was of noble descent, and pitying its helpless state, he took it into his palace, and brought him up as his own son (as it were) at his court. The child was named Leobertus.

The dragon or gripe with the other child was seen by a pious hermit, St. Antony, who, though son of the king of Greece, had in his youth forsaken the world. Through his prayer St. Mary made the dragon put down the infant; Antony carried him to his father, who adopted him and ordered him to be baptized. He was named Antony fice Greffoun (Antony, son of the griffin or gripe).

Desonelle wandered up and down, after the loss of her children, till she happened to meet the king of Nazareth hunting. He, recognizing her as the king of Portugal’s daughter, gave her a kind welcome and assistance. At his court she lived several years in happy retirement. Torrent returned at length into Portugal, notwithstanding all the entreaties of the Norwegian king that he would dwell in Norway somewhat longer. At his arrival, King Calamond took refuge in his stronghold, and greeted him from thence with scornful words. Torrent, after having summoned his friends from Arragon, Provence, and Calabre, conquered the castle, and took Calamond prisoner. The traitor was sent out to sea in a leaky boat, and perished.

In his stead, Torrent was elected king by all the noblemen of the empire, and took the crown. But forty days after this, he quitted his realm, having intrusted two knights with its government, and passed to the Holy Land at the head of a large force. There he fought fifteen years against the infidels, conquered several towns, and got immeasurable treasures as booty. The king of Jerusalem, hearing about Torrent’s deeds, and anxious for his own security, sent his son Leobertus, with an army of 50,000 men, against Torrent. A pitched battle began, but it was for a long time doubtful to which side victory would incline, till at last the two chiefs encountered. The son vanquishing his father decided the fate of the battle. Torrent was conveyed as a prisoner to Jerusalem, and thrown into a dungeon. There he lay above a year, till he was once overheard complaining his misfortunes by his son, who, touched with pity, prevailed upon the king to set Torrent at liberty. In this new state Torrent soon found an opportunity to show his valour and skill in arms, when a grand tournament was held at Jerusalem. There he proved sole victor over all the knights, and got the chief prize. The king of Nazareth, who had assisted at this joust, telling his folk at home who had won the prize, described the arms and escutcheon of the valiant knight. By these Desonelle recognized her beloved spouse. At her request the king called princes and knights from all parts of the world to a great tournament. The kings of Jerusalem, Greece, Leobertus, Antony fice Greffoun, and Torrent answered the call. Before an illustrious assembly of mighty princes and noble ladies, all of whom were surpassed by Desonelle in beauty and grace, the tournament began. Leobertus and Antony excelled in it, but the chief was Torrent, who performed wonders in the joust, vanquishing all valiant adversaries. The next morning Desonelle could no longer brook reserve, and was about to discover herself to Torrent; but overwhelmed with joy she fainted, when she had scarcely uttered the first words of greeting. It was not till midday that she was able to tell Torrent and the other knights her fates and those of her children. Then parents and children passionately embraced on recognizing each other. At Torrent’s request, all of them, with the kings of Nazareth, Jerusalem, and Greece, and many attendants, sailed for Portugal. There the nuptials of Torrent with Desonelle were celebrated with a great round of splendid festivities. Torrent was finally elected Emperor of Rome, and reigned a long time gloriously. He lies there buried in a fair abbey.

A benediction finishes the romance.

If we take a survey of the poem, we shall recognize in its conception a harmonious plan and a certain unity of action, which, as in most of the romances, is founded on the hero and the interest he affects us with (See Ten Brink, _Engl. Literat._, I. p. 317). In the centre of the action is placed Torrent’s love of Desonelle; for all the various combats that he undertakes against dragons and giants, against the prince of Arragon and King Calamond, are undertaken solely to gain him Desonelle. Even his expedition against the infidels and the fighting with his son are designed by Providence to make him find again his lost love. Halliwell (Preface, p. vii), therefore, is not right in deeming the romance ‘a rambling poem of adventures without much plot.’ The length and tediousness of the episodes may have prevented him from recognizing the unity of the whole. At the same time, however, it must be admitted that the poem cannot rank with the masterpieces of romantic poetry written in the same metre, like _Amis and Amiloun_, _Ipomadon_, _Kyng of Tars_, _Octavian_, either in the invention of plot or in the dissection of passions. The diction is so swelled with stereotyped phrases, and so surfeited with trivialities, that we may justly suppose the poem to have been composed at a period when romantic poetry had passed its best time, and had begun to decay. As to the authorship of the poem, it was probably composed by a monk. It is an easy thing to show peculiarities in the course of the story which are essentially monkish. As the romance begins and ends with a benediction, in the same way each deed and each adventure of the hero is introduced and finished by long prayers. Moreover, the poet points frequently to a direct interposition of Heaven (ll. 675, 1568, 1948); he describes the anguish and sorrow that Desonelle feels about her children’s baptism (ll. 1892-1896 and 2074-76); he mentions emphatically Communion and Confession (1272 and 2139), Masses (756 and 813); he finally praises the Emperor for founding churches and abbeys (l. 2658). On the other side, we find very few of those marks which characterize the works of minstrels: the poet seldom predicts the fates of his heroes to excite the attention of his auditors; he mentions only by the way the performances of the gleemen, and nowhere speaks of the rewards that they get.

Passing to a special inquiry into the origin of the story of Torrent, I cannot persuade myself that it is of the poet’s own invention, as that would be the only instance of a Middle-English romance not being taken from foreign originals (except, of course, Chaucer’s _Sir Thopas_, which was written to ridicule this whole branch of poetry), whilst slight alterations or additions were frequently introduced by the translators. A French original of the romance is supposed by Halliwell to have existed (Preface, vi). He says, ‘It is probably, like the second copy of the romance of Horn, a modernized version of an older English romance, which was itself translated from the French. I have not been able to discover any traces of the French original, but there are some singular allusions to its origin in the poem itself. I allude to the frequent references to the _Book of Rome_.[3] This term was applied to the French language, in which most of the old romances were originally written.’ As for me, I don’t think that we can much rely upon references of this kind, because they are common to all of these Middle-English romances. Of a somewhat greater weight is perhaps the fact that one or two of the proper names are French; and even the oath, ‘par l’amour de dieu,’ is worth mentioning. After all, there is no evident proof as to the French origin. But there is no doubt that the story of Torrent in its principal features--the adversities of a family separated by misfortunes, the mother robbed of her children by wild beasts, at last united again--proceeded from the old Eustache legend.[4-5] Therewith another motive is combined, that of the woman innocently condemned, on which motive a large stock of legends is founded; for instance, those of Crescentia, Sibilla, Oliva, Genovefa, Griseldis and Octavian legends. Upon this motive and its old origin from India, see Streve, ‘The Octavian legend,’ _Erlangen Dissert._, 84.

[Footnote 3: On this term see _Octavian_, ed. Sarrazin, p. xxxviii.]

[Footnote 4: See Warton’s opinion upon the legendary origin of many romances, _History of Engl. Poetry_, London, 1824, I. p. ccxliv: ‘Many romances were at first little more than legends of devotion, containing the pilgrimage of an old warrior. At length, as chivalry came into vogue, the youthful and active part of the pilgrim’s life was also written. The penitent changed into the knight-errant.’ Sometimes, of course, the opposite change may have taken place, as for instance is probably the case with the story of the two faithful friends, Amis and Amiloun (cf. Koelbing, _Amis_, p. lxxxi), and with the story of Robert the Devil (cf. _Sir Gowther_, ed. Breul, p. 74).]

[Footnote 5: See the edition of _The worthie Hystorie of Plasidas_, 1566, by H. H. Gibbs, for the Roxburghe Club, 1873.]

I will consider first the legend of Eustache in its original version. According to the Greek Martyr Acts, which were probably composed in the eighth century, this saint was before his baptism a captain of Trajan, named Placidus. As he one day hunted in the forest, the Saviour appeared to him between the antlers of a hart, and converted him. Placidus changed his name into Eustache, when he was baptized with his wife and sons. God announced to him by an angel his future martyrdom. Eustache was afflicted by dreadful calamities, lost all his estate, and was compelled to go abroad as a beggar with his wife and his children. As he went on board a ship bound for Egypt, his wife was seized by the shipmaster and carried off. Soon after, when Eustache was travelling along the shore, his two children were borne away by a lion and a leopard. Eustache then worked for a long time as a journeyman, till he was discovered by the Emperor Trajan, who had sent out messengers for him, and called him to his court. Reappointed captain, Eustache undertook an expedition against the Dacians. During this war he found his wife in a cottage as a gardener,--the shipmaster had fallen dead to the ground as he ventured to touch her,--and in the same cottage he found again his two sons as soldiers: herdsmen had rescued them from the wild beasts, and brought them up. Glad was their meeting again! But as they returned to Rome, they were all burnt in a glowing bull of brass by the Emperor’s order, because they refused to sacrifice to the heathen gods.

This legend, which reminds us at once of the story of Job, has been incorporated in almost all mediæval collections of legends, and upon it are founded some mediæval poems, which are enumerated by H. Knust in his splendid work _Dos Obras Didácticas y dos Leyendas_, Madrid, 1878; cf. R. Köhler, _Zeitschrift für rom. phil._ III, p. 272 ff., Varnhagen, _Anglia_, III, p. 399 ff.; two latin versions are edited by the same, _Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum_ XXIV, p. 241 ff., and XXV, p. 1 ff.

English legends of Eustache are to be found

(1) In Ælfric’s _Passiones Martyrum_; see Horstmann, _Altenglische Legenden_, Second series, Heilbronn, 1881, p. xli.

(2) In the South-English collection, _l.c._ p. xlviii.

(3) In the Northern collection, pp. lxi and lxiv. Herrig’s _Archiv_ 57, p. 262 ff.