A History of English Versification

It is not always possible to draw a sharp distinction between regular lines with somewhat long first theses and lengthened lines. The general tone and rhythm of the passage in question help to determine whether we have the normal or the lengthened line before us. The lengthened line occurs in places where the sense demands a solemn and slow rhythm, in other cases where the movement of the passage is quicker we may assume a normal four-beat line with a long anacrusis, or a polysyllabic thesis in the middle of the hemistich. What distinguishes clearly undoubted examples of the lengthened verse is that in each hemistich we find three beats and three feet of equal and independent value. But, as in the usual two-beat hemistich of the normal line, both beats need not be equally strong, so in the three-beat hemistich the three beats do not always stand on the same footing as regards stress, nor does the position of the stronger beat require to be always the same in the two hemistichs. The beats which are accompanied by alliteration are, generally speaking, stronger than those without alliteration. In the employment of alliteration and in the structure of the hemistich the lengthened line is closely allied to the normal line.

Alliteration. 1. The first hemistich has commonly two alliterative sounds, which fall as a rule on the first and second beats:

more rarely on the second and third beats, as in

sometimes on the first and third beats, as

Now and then we find hemistichs with three alliterations:

and others with one alliteration only, in which case the alliteration falls more rarely on the first beat, as

than on the second, as

2. In the second hemistich the chief alliterative sound, the head-stave, generally falls on the second accented syllable, as in the last example, and only exceptionally on the first accented syllable, as

§ 38. The origin and structure of the lengthened verse. It is clear from the comparative infrequency and the special use to which it is put that the lengthened line must be looked upon as originating in some way from the normal four-beat line. Two explanations of its development have been given. The first, which is Sievers’s original view,[90] is that a foot or measure with the form –́... (i.e. one accented syllable plus several unaccented ones) was prefixed to one of the five normal types; hence –́× prefixed to A would give the form –́×|–́×–́×, and –× prefixed to B would give –́×|×–́×–́. The other explanation, given by Luick,[91] is that the lengthened hemistich is due to a blending of several types of the normal kind in this way. The hemistich starts with the beginning of one of the normal types A, B, C, then with the second accented syllable another type is begun and continued, as if the poet found the original beginning inadequate to express his emotion.

The manner in which the blending of two normal types results in new lengthened types of three beats will be seen in the following illustrations:

As Prof. Sievers himself[92] has accepted this theory (or, at least, has recognized it as a convenient method of exhibiting the structural varieties of the lengthened line), we shall adopt it here.

Of the fifteen different possible combinations of the original types, some do not actually occur, but with the sub-types to be taken into consideration we get no less than eighteen different types of the regular lengthened whole line, and these again admit of variations by means of resolution of accented syllables, polysyllabic theses, &c.

Only the most commonly occurring forms of the lengthened hemistich will be given here; for the others the reader may be referred to Sievers.[93].

§ 39. By far the most common type is A A (some 525 examples),

Less frequently the second foot has two unaccented syllables, and in that case the first foot has either one or sometimes two unaccented syllables, thus

(i) –́×||–́××|–́×, or (ii) –́××||–́××|–́×,

as (i) saā́ þū Ábele wū̀rde. Gen. 1019;

with resolution of the first arsis,

(ii) rínca tō rū̀ne gegángan. Jud. 54.

Type A2A, –́×̀–́×–́×, which is type AA with secondary accent on the first thesis, occurs, according to Sievers, some twenty times, and always in the first hemistich. Examples are,

with resolution of the last arsis,

with disyllabic second thesis,

Type A*A, –́.×̀×|–́×.|–́×, which is AA strengthened and with disyllabic first thesis, is nearly as common as A2A, and is always in the first hemistich, as for example,

with trisyllabic first thesis,

Type A B, –́×...–́×.–́, some thirty instances equally distributed between the first and second hemistichs. Examples are,

Type A C, –́×...–́–́×, about twenty-nine instances, of which more than the half occur in the first hemistich, as

saType A D, –́×..–́–́××̀, is rarer, occurring about twelve times, apparently only in the first hemistich, as

Type A E, –́×..–́×̀×.–́, somewhat more common than the last, and in both hemistichs, as

Type B A, ×.–́×...–́×.–́×, about 120 instances, has as its simplest form, ×–́×–́×–́×, as

with disyllabic thesis after the first arsis, ×–́××–́×–́×, as

with trisyllabic thesis, ×–́×××–́×–́×, as

the initial thesis or anacrusis is rarely disyllabic.

Type B B, ×.–́×...–́×.–́, about nine times and mostly in the first hemistichs, as

with resolution of two of the accented syllables,

Type B C, × . . –́× . . . –́–́ ×, nearly as common as the last and nearly always in the first hemistich, as

Type B D, ×.–́×..–́–́×̀×, about sixteen times, and in either hemistich, as

Type C A, ×–́–́×.–́×, with some fifteen examples, of which eight are in the first hemistich, as

Type C C, ×....–́–́–̆́×, occurs only nine times, of which six are in the second hemistich, as

with resolution of the first accented syllable,

Other combinations are given by Sievers, Altgermanische Metrik, § 95, but these occur so rarely or are so doubtful that they need not be mentioned here. A few lengthened hemistichs have four beats, as

and others in Sievers’s Altgermanische Metrik, § 96.

Formation of Stanzas and Rhyme.

§ 40. OE. poetry is mainly narrative, and does not run into any kind of recurring stanza or strophe, but is entirely stichic. Traces of an arrangement of lines so as to form a stanza are found in Dēor, the Runic Poem, the Psalms and Hymns, the so-called First Riddle, and in the Gnomic verses of the Exeter Book, which may be compared to the Old French ‘tirades’.[94]

On the other hand, end-rhyme of the two hemistichs, combined with alliteration, is not very uncommon, though in most cases it seems only an incidental ornament, as

In the Rhyming Poem of the Exeter Book we have eighty-seven lines in which the first and second hemistichs rhyme throughout, and in some passages of other poems, noticeably in the Elene, vv. 114–115, and vv. 1237–1251, in which Cynewulf speaks in his own person, or Crist 591–595, And. 869–871, 890, Gūthl. 801, Phoen. 15–16, 54–55; assonance is found not unfrequently alongside of perfect rhyme, as in Gūthl. 802, Phoen. 53. These places are sufficient to prove a systematic and deliberate use of rhyme, which serves to accentuate the lyrical tone of the passages.

Monosyllabic rhymes such as nān: tān (Rhym. Poem 78), rād: gebā́d (ib. 16), onlā́h: onwrā́h (ib. 1) are called masculine, and disyllabic rhymes like wóngum: góngum (ib. 7), géngdon: méngdon (ib. 11), or trisyllabic hlýnede: dýnede (ib. 28), swínsade: mínsade (ib. 29), bífade: hlífade (ib. 30), are called feminine.

According to their position in the hemistich, rhymes fall into two classes (a) interior rhymes like hónd rónd gefḕng Beow. 2609, stī́ðmṑd gestṓd Beow. 2567, in compounds wórd-hòrd ontḗac Beow. 259, in co-ordinate formulae like þā wæs sǣ́l and mǣ́l Beow. 1008, wórdum and bórdum El. 24, grund ond sund And. 747, and as so-called grammatical rhymes lāð wið lāðum Beow. 440, béarn æfter béarne, Gen. 1070; (b) sectional rhymes joining the two halves of one line, as

not unfrequently, very often in the Rhyming Poem, two, three, four or more alliterative lines are connected in this fashion.

The OE. end rhymes are either (a) complete rhymes as hond: rond, gefǣ́gon: geþǣ́gon, or (b) assonances, in which only the vowels correspond, as wæf: læs El. 1238; wrā́ðum: ā́rum Crist. 595; lúfodon: wúnedon And. 870; that the assonances are not accidental is clear from the fact that they occur alongside of perfect rhymes.[95]

CHAPTER III
THE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE FREER
FORM OF THE ALLITERATIVE LINE IN LATE
OLD ENGLISH AND EARLY MIDDLE ENGLISH

A. Transitional Forms.

§ 41. Increasing frequency of Rhyme. The alliterative line was, as we have seen, the only kind of verse known in English poetry down to the end of the Old English period. In the eleventh century, however, the strict conventions which governed the use of alliteration began to be relaxed and, at the same time, end-rhyme began to invade the alliterative line, and by this means it was resolved in the course of time into two separate lines. The process by which this came about is of great importance in enabling us to follow the further development of English versification. It has two varieties:—

The rhythm of the verse is mostly descending, Type A being the prevalent form, while Types D and E occur more rarely. The Types B and C, however, are also found. Possibly this kind of verse was formed on the model of certain Mediaeval Latin rhymed verses, or, somewhat more probably, on that of the Old Norse ‘runhenda’, as this poetic form may have been made known in England by the Old Norse poet, Egil Skallagrimsson, who in the tenth century had lived in England and twice stayed at the court of King Æõelstan.

§ 42. Of greater interest than this systematic combination of alliteration and rhyme is the irregular and more or less unintentional occurrence of rhyme which in the eleventh century is found frequently in the native metre.

But can this influence explain the gradually increasing use of end-rhyme in some OE. poems written shortly before the Norman Conquest (as e.g. Byrhtnoth, Be Dōmes dæge, the poetical passage in the Saxon Chronicle of the year 1036), or are we to attribute it to the influence of mediaeval hymn poetry, or, lastly, to the lingering influence of the above-mentioned Old Norse ‘runhenda’? It is not easy to give a decided answer to these questions.

In any case it would appear that towards the end of the Old English period combined Mediaeval Latin and French influence on English metre became of considerable importance on account of the constantly growing intercourse between the British isles and the continent. This may be seen in the more frequent use of rhyme, as indeed was only to be expected in consequence of the increasing popularity of Norman-French and Mediaeval-Latin poetry in England and the reception of Norman-French words into the language.

This combination of alliteration and rhyme, however, only becomes conspicuous to a considerable extent for the first time in the above-mentioned passage of the Saxon Chronicle, and in another passage of the year 1087.[96]

The chief difference between these verses and those of the Rhyming Poem is this, that the former have not such a symmetrical structure as the latter, and that rhyme and alliteration are not combined in all of them, but that regular alliterative lines, rhyming-alliterative lines, and lines with rhyme only occur promiscuously, as e.g. in the following lines (4–7) of the above-mentioned passage of the Chronicle of the year 1036:

The verses of the year 1087 of the Saxon Chronicle have a similar but on the whole less rhythmical structure. In some of the lines the hemistichs are neither joined by alliteration, nor by end-rhyme, but merely by the two-beat rhythm of each of them; cf. 11. 1–5:

On the other hand, the poetical piece of the Saxon Chronicle on Eadweard of the year 1065 is written in perfectly regular alliterative lines.

These two ways of treating the old alliterative line which occur in the latter part of the Saxon Chronicle, and which we will call the progressive and the conservative treatment, indicate the course which this metre was to take in its further development. Out of the long alliterative line, separated by the caesura into two hemistichs, again connected by rhyme, there sprang into existence a short rhyming couplet. This was by no means identical with the three-beat couplet evolved from two rhyming hemistichs of a line on the model of the French Alexandrine, nor with the short four-beat couplets modelled on the French vers octosyllabe, but had points of similarity enough to both, especially to the former one, to be easily used in conjunction with them, as several Early English poems show.

The conservative treatment of the old alliterative line, which probably at no time was altogether discontinued, was revived in the thirteenth and especially in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, when it degenerated again in the same way as the progressive line had done several centuries before.

B. The ‘Proverbs of Alfred’ and Layamon’s ‘Brut’.

§ 43. The first subject which we have to consider here is the further development of the progressive form of the alliterative line, the representatives of which[98] are closely connected in their rhythmic form with the two specimens of the poetical parts of the Saxon Chronicle quoted above. From Alfred’s Proverbs we take No. xv (ll. 247–66):

The metre of Layamon’s Brut may be illustrated by the following passage (ll. 13841–13882):

These extracts illustrate only the general metrical character of the two literary monuments, the versification of which in many passages considerably deviates from the type here exhibited. It frequently shows a still more arbitrary mixture of the different kinds of verse, or a decided preference for some of them over the others. But the examples given will suffice to show that here, as in the two passages from the Saxon Chronicle quoted above, we have four different kinds of verse distinguished by the different use of rhyme and alliteration, viz.:

1. Regular alliterative lines, which are very numerous, and at least in the first half of Layamon’s Brut, possibly throughout the poem, form the bulk, e.g. Prov. xv. 247–8, Layamon, 13847–8, 13851–2, 13855–6, 13859–60, 13867–8, 13881–2, or

2. Rhyme (or assonance) and alliteration combined; equally numerous, e.g. Prov. xv. 253–4, Lay. 13841–2, 13845–6, 13869–70, &c., or

3. Verses with rhyme (or assonance) only, without alliteration, also not unfrequent, e.g. Prov. xv. 249–50 ff., or Lay. 13853–4, &c.

4. Four-beat verses without either rhyme or alliteration, occurring comparatively rarely, and in most cases probably to be attributed to corruption of the text. Examples:

It is certain that these four different forms of verse cannot have been felt by the poets themselves as rhythmically unlike; their rhythmic movement must have been apprehended as essentially one and the same.

§ 44. Nature and origin of this metre. Theories of Trautmann and Luick. We need not here discuss the theory of Prof. Trautmann, who endeavours to show that the hemistichs of Layamon’s verse were composed in imitation of the four-beat short-lined metre in which the Old High German poet Otfrid had written his religious poem Krist, a form which, according to Trautmann and his followers, had been frequently employed in late Old English and early Middle English poetry. References to the criticisms of this hypothesis, by the present writer and others, are given by G. Körting in his Encyklopädie der Englischen Philologie, p. 388, and by K. Luick in Paul’s Grundriss der Germanischen Philologie, ed. 2, II. ii. 152. The author of this book, in his larger work on the subject (Englische Metrik, i. §§ 67–73), has shown, as English and German scholars had done before him, that Layamon’s verse has its roots in the Old English alliterative line. Twelve years after the publication of that work this theory received further confirmation at the hands of Prof. Luick, who has shown in Paul’s Grundriss (l.c.) that the five types of the Old English alliterative line, discovered by Prof. Sievers, reappear (although in a modified form) in the lines of Layamon’s Brut. But we are unable wholly to agree with Prof. Luick’s view on the origin and nature of this metre.

In order to explain the origin of Layamon’s verse he starts from the hypothesis of Prof. Sievers[99] that the Old Germanic alliterative verse, as historically known, which was intended to be recited, and therefore not restricted to uniformity of rhythm, originated from a primitive Old Germanic verse meant to be sung, and therefore characterized by rhythmic regularity. According to Prof. Luick this primitive metre, although not represented by any extant example in Old English, had never quite died out, and forms the basis of the metre of Layamon and his predecessors in early Middle English. For this ingenious hypothesis, however, no real evidence exists. On the contrary, the fact that the beginnings of the peculiar kind of metre used by Layamon can be traced back to purely alliterative Old English poems, where they occur amongst regular alliterative lines, and therefore undoubtedly must be of the same rhythmical structure, seems to be decisive against Prof. Luick’s theory.

For the same reason it is impossible to follow Prof. Luick in regarding Layamon’s line as having an even-beat rhythm, and containing not only two primary accents, but two secondary accents as well. A further strong objection to this view is to be found in the circumstance, that in the early part of Layamon’s Brut, although rhyme already occurs not unfrequently, alliterative lines decidedly predominate; in the passage consisting of forty long lines (ll. 106–185, quoted in our Altenglische Metrik, pp. 152–3), we have thirty-three regular alliterative lines and only five rhymed lines, two of which are alliterative at the same time. Even in the middle portion of Layamon’s Chronicle, where the poet, as Prof. Luick thinks, must have attained to a certain skill in handling his metre, alliterative lines are in some passages quite as numerous as rhymed ones. In the passage quoted above (p. 68), for example, which consists of twenty-one long lines, eleven of them are alliterative and ten are rhymed. On the other hand, in the continuation of this passage (quoted Altengl. Metrik, p. 156), containing twenty-nine long lines, the reverse is the case, the number of alliterative lines being only seven, and that of rhymed and assonant lines twenty-two in all; of the latter, however, eleven are alliterative at the same time.

While then it might be admissible to speak of progressive neglect of alliteration and of increasing predilection for end-rhyme on the part of the poet, as he advances with his work, it is not in accordance with the facts to assert that ‘alliteration had ceased to play its former part, and had been reduced to the level of a mere ornament of the verse’. On the contrary, in the first part of the Chronicle alliteration is the predominant form, and, as the work advances, it is still used to a considerable extent as a means to connect the two hemistichs or short lines so as to form one long line. The strict laws formerly observed in the use of alliteration, it is true, are not unfrequently disregarded, chiefly with respect to the head-stave, which often falls on the fourth accented syllable of the long line; and other licences (first occurring in Ælfric’s Metrical Homilies) may be met with. Nevertheless both Alfred’s Proverbs and Layamon’s Brut (as is sufficiently shown by the many specimens quoted in our Altenglische Metrik, pp. 150 ff.), contain a great number of perfectly regular alliterative lines. The fact that, in the second half of Layamon’s Chronicle, end-rhyme is used more and more frequently as a means to connect the two hemistichs, is with much more probability to be explained by the continual occupation of the poet with the Norman-French original poem, and by the increasing influence which its short octosyllabic couplets must naturally have exercised upon his own rhythms, than by a supposed intention of the poet to write in ‘primitive Germanic four-beat song-metre’, the very existence of which is hypothetical. Furthermore, the fact that in some (not all or even most) of the passages, where end-rhyme is used almost exclusively, e.g. in the passage quoted above (ll. 13883–940), an even-beat rhythm is distinctly noticeable, can be explained quite naturally by the influence of the Norman-French original, the even-measured verses of which the poet was translating.

But even supposing that Layamon intended to use the primitive Germanic four-beat song-metre in his translation of Wace’s Chronicle, although it certainly was not intended for singing, what can have been his reason for composing the first half of his work, and a very considerable portion of the rest, in a rhythmical form which only to a small extent shows the peculiarities of a rhyming even-beat metre, whereas the main part of it consists of the native unevenly stressed alliterative verse? It is quite incorrect to say that the author in the course of his work not unfrequently fell back into the alliterative verse. The fact is just the opposite: the author started by using the native alliterative verse to which he was accustomed, and gradually came to adopt the rhymed verse of the Norman-French chronicle which he was translating, without, however, entirely giving up the former metre. Alliteration and end-rhyme, which he used sometimes separately and sometimes in combination, were evidently looked upon by Layamon as equally legitimate means for connecting his hemistichs or short lines.

§ 45. Number of stresses. Quite as unfounded as the assertion that Layamon’s verse is of an even-beat nature is the other assertion that it contains two primary and two secondary accents, and that the second of these secondary accents in verses with disyllabic endings may fall on a syllable which by its etymology ought to have no accent.

Examples of the more numerous group formed by assonances are tō : idōn 13801–2, lond: gold 13959–60, strong: lond 13969–70, and disyllabic assonances like cníhten: kínges 13793–4, wólden: londe 13821–2, &c.

These are strictly parallel with instances like wæf: læs El. 1238, onlā́g: hād ib. 1246, or like wrā́ðum: ā́rum Crist 595, lýre: cýme Phoen. 53, rǣ́dde: tǣ́hte By. 18, flā́nes: genāme ib. 71, hlḗorum: tḗarum Be Dōmes dæge 28, &c., and must, in our opinion, be metrically interpreted in exactly the same way. That is to say, the root-syllable must, not only in real assonances like cníhten: kínges, lónde: strónge, but also in consonances like Péohtes: cníhtes, mónnen: ínnen, be looked upon as the chief part of the rhyme, and the flexional endings, whether rhyming correctly or incorrectly, must be regarded as forming only an unessential, unaccented, indistinctly heard part of the rhyme, just as they admittedly do in the similar Old English assonances quoted above.

Now, as it is inconsistent with the two-beat rhythm of the hemistich in Old English verse, to attribute a secondary accent to those endings, although they were in some cases more distinctly pronounced than the Middle English endings, it is impossible to suppose that the Middle English endings bore a secondary accent. A further objection is that although the syllables which, according to Luick’s theory, are supposed to bear a secondary accent are of course usually preceded by a long root-syllable, it not unfrequently happens that a disyllabic word with long root-syllable rhymes with one having a short root-syllable, in which case the ending is not suited to bear a secondary accent at all, e.g. flúȝen: únnifṓge 14043–4, to-fóren: grḗten 14071–2, sǣ́res: wólde 14215–16, fáreð: iuḗren 14335–6, icúmen: Þréoien 14337–8, lágen (=laws): lónde 14339–40, húnden: lúuien 14480–1, scóme: sṓne 14604–5, cúmen: hálden 14612–13, scípe: brṓhte 14862–3, fáder: unrǣ́des 14832–3, fáder: rǣ́des 14910–11, fṓten: biscópen 14821–2, iwī́ten: scipen 14251–2, wī́ten: wenden 15060–1, gúme: bisī́den 15224–5, fréondscìpe: séoluen 15226–7, wúde: wéien-lǣ́len 15508–9, ibóren: béarne 15670–1, biȝáte: wéorlde-rī́che 15732–3, scáðe: fólke 15784–5, biswíken (pret. pl.): cráften 29016–17, aȝíuen: ȝélden 29052–3, biuóren: fū̀sen 29114–15, súne: pḗode 29175–6, idríuen: kínerī́chen 29177–18, grúpen (pret. pl.): mū̀ȝen 29279–80, stúden (=places): bérnen 29285–6, &c.

The only cases in which a secondary accent seems to be required for an unaccented final syllable are such rhymes as the following:—hálì: forþí 13915–16 (cf. Altengl. Metrik, p. 160); men: cómèn 13997–8 (MS. B: men: here), men: dédèn 13975–6, isómned wés: lóndès 25390–1, and so forth.[100] But rhymes of this kind are in comparison to the ordinary disyllabic or feminine endings so very rare (occurring, for the most part, in lines which admit of a purely alliterative scansion, or which have come down to us in an incorrect state), that they have no bearing on the general rhythmic accentuation of those final syllables, or on the rhythmic character of Layamon’s verses in general (cf. p. 78, end of § 47).

§ 46. Analysis of verse-types. In turning now to a closer examination of the rhythmic structure of the metre in Layamon’s Brut and in the somewhat earlier Proverbs of Alfred, we are glad to find ourselves more nearly than hitherto (though still not altogether) in agreement with the views of Prof. Luick.

Instead of quoting hemistichs or isolated short lines as examples of each of the single types A, B, C, D, E, we prefer always to cite two connected short lines, and to designate the rhythmic character of the long line thus originating by the types of the two hemistichs, as follows: A + A, A* + B, B* + C, C* + E, &c., where A*, B*, C* signify the extended types, to be discussed more fully below, and A, B, C, &c., the normal types. This mode of treatment is necessary in order that our examples may adequately represent the structure of the verse. The short lines are always connected—either by alliteration, by rhyme (or assonance), or by both combined, or sometimes merely by identity of rhythm—into pairs. These pairs of short lines are regarded by Luick as even-measured couplets, while we regard them as alliterative long lines; but on either view each of them forms a coherent unity. We believe that an examination of the couplet or long line as an undivided whole will show unmistakably that the assumption of the even-measured character of Layamon’s verse is erroneous, or at least that it applies only in certain cases, when the metre is strongly influenced by Romanic principles of versification. The examples are for the most part the same as those which Prof. Luick has quoted,[101] but we have in all cases added the complementary hemistichs, which are generally of somewhat greater length:

A + A: Ich hátte Héngest, | Hórs is my bróðer. Lay. 13847–8.

A*+ A: and ích be wulle rǽchen | déorne rúnen. ib. 14079–80.

B + A: þær þa sǽxisce mén | þæ sǽ isóhten. ib. 14738-9.

B(E?) + A: hw hi héore líf | léde schólde. Prov. i. 15–16.

A + B: lónges lýves, | ac him lýeþ þe wrénch. ib. x. 161–2.

B*+ A: vmbe fíftene ȝér | þat fólc is isómned. Lay. 13855–6.

B + C: and eoure léofue gódd | be ȝe tó lúteð. ib. 13891–2.

B + C: ne wurð þu néver so wód, | ne so wýn-drúnke. Prov. xi. 269–70.

A + C: mi gást hine iwdárðeð | and wírð stílle. Lay. 17136–7.

C + C: for þat wéorc stóndeð | inne Írlónde. ib. 17176–7.

A*+ D: kómen to þan kínge | wíl-tíþende. ib. 17089–90.

D + A*: vólc únimete | of móni ane lónde. ib. 16188–9.

E + E: fíf þusend mén | wúrcheð þer ón. ib. 15816–17.

B*+ E: þæt he héfde to iwíten | séouen hundred scíþen. ib. 15102–3.

D + *A: for nys no wrt uéxynde | a wúde ne a wélde. Prov. x. 168–9.

A*+ D: þat éuer mvwe þas féye | fúrþ ýp-holde. ib. 170–1.

It is easy to observe that it is only when two identical types, like A + A, C + C, E + E, are combined, that an even-beat rhythm (to some extent at least) can be recognized; in all the other combinations this character is entirely absent.

§ 47. Extended types. We now turn to the more numerous class of such couplets or long lines which in both their component hemistichs exhibit extended variations of the five types, resulting from anacrusis or from the insertion of unstressed syllables in the interior of the line. These verses, it is true, are somewhat more homogeneous, and have a certain resemblance to an even-beat rhythm in consequence of the greater number of unaccented syllables, one of which (rarely two or more) may, under the influence of the even-beat metre of the Norman-French original, have been meant by the poet to be read with a somewhat stronger accentuation. We are convinced, however, that in feminine endings, in so far as these are formed, which is usually the case, by the unaccented endings -e, -en, -es, -eþ, &c., these final syllables never, or at most only in isolated cases, which do not affect the general character of the rhythm, have a stronger accent or, as Prof. Luick thinks, form a secondary arsis. As little do we admit the likelihood of such a rhythmic accentuation of these syllables when they occur in the middle of the line, generally of such lines as belong to the normal types mentioned above.