Hacer clic sobre la imagen para saber más.

 

 

 

Resumen:

The present article considers several variable elements within the regular versification of two major vehicles of cuaderna vía poetry: the Libro de Alexandre and the corpus of works ascribed to Gonzalo de Berceo. The use and scansion of Latin is first discussed, a discussion which then broadens into the much wider field of the use of dieresis as both a Latinate inflexion of the vernacular and as a representation of contemporary pronunciation. The shortenting of word-endings, oftenseen as characteristic of the thirteenth century, is approached through a division of such shortening into ecthlipsis (or the losss of one of two contiguous vowels in different words, such as "todo'l mundo", as repeatedly found in the Alexandre), and apocopation (where the vowel is lost before a word beginning with a consonant, such as "est' conseio"). Rather than immediately taking an occurrence of individual words is studied and their frequency analysed, with words grouped according to their dominant use as a part of speech. The results show a trend of gradual change within the Alexandre, thus arguing for a single author over a long period of time; and some significant variation in the Bercean corpus, which would suggest a multiplicity of authors.

 

 

A Juan Casas Rigall, rëy de los editores

 

      This article does not propose to enter into the debate over the counting of syllables in thirteenth-century poetry. I accept the truism, which has existed at least from the time of Fitz-Gerald, that thirteenth-century cuaderna vía verse is characterised by monorhymed stanzas of (almost always) four lines, each one of which is divided by a central caesura after the sixth stressed syllable (whether or not this is followed by any further unstressed syllables); the second half of the line is composed of five syllables (in any order of stress, as in the first half of the line), a stressed sixth syllable, which may, or may not, be followed by an unstressed syllable.[1] Rhymes are usually full, although some tolerance was extended to rare occasions of assonance. Later poets’ generosity towards synalaepha and elision is not witnessed, although the verse abounds in examples of ecthlipsis, apocopation and apheresis. One may summarise the art by observing that it is a rhyming syllable-count verse with an obligatory stress falling on the sixth syllable within every half-line. I will use this formulation as the unquestioned basis for my following analysis.

     Our present subject regards how poets constructed their lines through dieresis and ecthlipsis/apocopation, and takes as its raw material the texts of the Alexandre and of those poems associated with Gonzalo de Berceo, together with the manuscript traditions thereof. For the latter, I have used my own edition as the base text; for the former, that of Juan Casas Rigall.[2] The degree of admiration I have for his edition may be seen most clearly by the very few times I find it necessary to disagree with his solutions to textual cruxes. The Bercean texts and the Alexandre have both been prepared with a fundamental principle in mind: that where the manuscript tradition authorizes a metrical solution to a line, this is adopted; where the tradition does not provide the material to arrive at a metrical solution, the text has not been emended to produce metricality. These unmetrical lines (defined as either: hypometric and marked at the hemistich devider as either –| or |–; or hypermetric and marked +| or |+) have always been emended in Bercean textual criticism and generally are in Alexandrine; however, the emendations themselves may falsify the evidence itself.[3] In my discussion of the metrical solutions obtained by the thirteenth-century poets, those lines which can be established as metrical from manuscript witnesses are distinguished from those that must be regularized metri causa. Some lines, of course, will offer more than one solution to the problem of hypo- or hypermetry, and these may therefore be fully discussed, which premature emendation would prevent.[4] The texts have been prepared for use by a concordance programme, and show notable differences from other editions of the same texts in matters of orthography.[5]

 

I.i Citations of Latin

      Given the close relation that is often claimed between the vernacular verse of the thirteenth century and contemporary Latin verse,[6] it would be as well to begin our journey through the problems of versification by considering how Latin itself is versified in the examples of cuaderna vía that we are discussing. I will make no reference to treatises on metrics from the time, since my interest is in discovering what it is possible to see from the use made by the vernacular poets themselves. In stress-positions, Latin is construed in precisely the manner one would expect, that is, as if it were vernacular: MNS 163c ‘nin priso corpus dómini | nin fizo confessión’ or VSD 71a ‘Diçié el páter nóster | sobre muchas uegadas/et el credo in déum | con todas sus posadas’. It might, however, be argued that these words (Corpus Domini, Pater Noster, Credo in Deum —the Eucharist, the Our Father and the Apostles’ Creed) cannot be claimed precisely as Latin phrases or as examples of code-switching, and may just be domestications within a clerical argot, such as the clearer examples at DV 173a ‘los unos iube dompne | los otros bendiciones’ and VSD 79d ‘diçié el omne bono | páter nostres doblados’.[7] However, at least one line does give pause for thought: MNS 262d ‘beati inmaculati +| bien bueno de rezar’, where one must scan be|a|ti_in|ma|cu|lá|ti through elision of the contiguous –i–s. This, of course, is normal within Classical Latin prosody, although was usually avoided by contemporary Latin poets.[8] Words ending in –m, although eliding in Classical Latin verse, did not usually do so in medieval, thus MNS 20c ‘post pártum et in partu | fue uirgin de uerdat’ is uncontroversial; and the elision of dipthongs was rare, thus VSD 482d ‘dezir tú áutem dómine | la lección acabar’ (and, further, VSD 752d ‘| tú áutem non diriemos’). Another feature of the Latin used is the maintenance of diaresis, such as at Alex 1995d ‘que dixiesse el otro | Non est in dïe festo’ (and, further, SM 163ab ‘En el sexto capítulo | que es de conmezar/qui pridïe comiença | qui lo quiere rezar’; MNS 99e ‘requïéscant in paze | cun diuina clemencia’), or in the title of the antiphon at MNS 114c ‘transladaron el cuerpo | cantando specïosa’. Te déüm laudamus is always counted as hexasyllabic: Alex 2601d, MNS 460d, 847a, VSD 210d, 568d, VSM 359d; in a similar fashion, one notes the construal of Alex 1011d ‘| con la ira de dëus’ (rhymes in –os and –us), and the distinctly macaronic MNS 702b ‘disso laudetur dëus | e la Uirgo gloriosa’. Dieresis is found in the angelic salutation, ‘Aue gracïa plena’ (MNS 227d, 277b).[9] Dieresis and elision are also probably to be observed at SM 38a ‘La gloria in excelsis | que el preste leuanta’ (scanned glo|rï|a_in|ex|cél|sis) and certainly at VSM 87b ‘en santa deï ecclesia | to officio complieres’—the first hemistich probably being scanned en sán|ta dé|ï_ec|clé|sï|a.[10] One should also, therefore, understand SM 56a as ‘Esto es sine dúbïo |’.

The evidence by which we may construe citations of Latin within the constraints of the verse is by no means conclusive; but it does suggest that the versification being essayed when it came to the vernacular was not exactly that applied to Latin words when directly cited as Latin. Or, rather, any claim that poets applied Latin metrical measures to the vernacular should also allow that they metre was governed by the poetic and metrical necessity of ‘fit’, and that the metre is an example of verse successfully domesticated to the linguistic conditions of the early- to mid-thirteenth century.[11] We may now move from Latin to the Latinate vocabulary used by the poets, and which is marked by dieresis.

 

 

I.ii       Dieresis in polysyllabic words

 

I.ii.1    Latinisms

Various forms taken directly from Latin are also characterized by diaeresis. These may be categorized a

(a) liturgical Latinisms:

ascensïón (LV 124b, MNS 794a),

lesïón ( LV 7d, 208b, VSD 24c, 305d, 541b, VSM 136d) – lisïón (Alex 1229b, 1618b, LV 202b, MNS 367a, 454a, PSL 60b, VSD 706d, VSM 119d, 160d; but lisionad–: VSD 549a, 639d; which should be compared with the equally always trisyllabic uisïón: 5x Alex, 42x in the Bercean corpus),[12]

mençïón (Alex 1193d; LV 207a ‘Madre la tu memoria | e la tu mencïón’—probably itself a liturgical echo—, SM 140b),

reconcilïada/o (LV 210b; MNS 520c),

responsïón (Alex 798c, 1291d; MNS 546d, SM 214b; the form responso is also witnessed: SM 42c, 45a, VSD 240d),

uénïe (DV 68c),

unçïón (HI 2d, LV 15b),

tridüano (MNS 307c, 810a, 824d, VSD 579b, VSM 198d);

 

(b) technical ascetic and theological terms, again from Latin:

aflictïón (MNS 56a, 765a, 812b, VSD 68d, 397d, 414a, VSM 189d),

cïencia (MNS 225a, 707d, VSM 23a),

condiçïón (where it means ‘way of life’/‘grade of sanctity’—from conditio, status: SM 116d),[13]

deuoçïón (Alex 333c, 1183a; LV 73d, MNS 164c, 269b, 305b, 618c, 667a, 807a, SM 290b, VSM 136a, VSO 14d, 23d, 26b),

deïdad and the related deïficada (MNS 792d, VSD 534ad; and SM 186c),

dilectïón (VSD 503c, a rare word used otherwise from the late fourteenth century onwards),

discreçïón (JF 75c ‘poral dïablo sean | tales discrecïones’, PSL 23a ‘Omne era perfecto | de grand discrezïón’),[14]

ne(s)cïedat (MNS 224b, SM 213d—although nescia at MNS 92a),

materïal (MNS 610b),

perfectïón (VSM 21d, VSD 118d),

regeneracïón (MNS 794c),

sacïedad (DV 76c),

specïal(es) (SM 50c, 187b, VSM 483b),[15]

senïores (LV 219a—a rank of angelic beings),

unïón (SM 257d);

 

(c) straightforwardly ecclesiastical terms or biblical nomenclature:

arcïagnados (PSL 4c),

Baláäm (LV 31b),

Belëem (DV 199c),

bestïario (VSD 220c),

breuïario (Alex 653d, 1957a), Danïel (Alex 1145a, 1339a, 1800b, LV 15a, SM 24b),

Cassïán (a monastery: MNS 330d ‘dicién Sant Cassïán | ond’ él canonge era’),

dïác(h)ono(s) (PSL 16b, 34c, 91d, VSD 269c),

Eçechïel (LV 12a),

Gabrïel (DV 3d, 88b, HII 2a, LV 12d, 21a, MNS 52d, 53a),

genuflecçïón (Alex 1142c) – genuflexïón (MNS 301b),

Iosüe (Alex 1245b),

medïanita (2236d),

Moïsés (Alex 1243c, 1245a, 1554ab, 2106d, LV 17a, MNS 455b),

pacïencia (LV 69a, MNS 573d, PSL 77c, VSD 119a, 224a, 256c, 326b, 277d),

parroquïal (MNS 312a),

prouincïales (VSD 269a),

religïoso (MNS 218b) and religïón (MNS 308a, 350b, 561d, 886d, VSM 312b),[16]

reliquïario (SM 14a),[17]

Sïón (MNS 37a, Alex 991c), [18]

täú: «tau» is always bisyllabic in SM—once its form is clearly täú (151a ‘Blago es el täú |’) at other times, it is used mid-line (149c, 151c), as it also is at Alex 1242d ‘el täu (leg. täú?) en las puertas |’.

 

(d) Legalisms are also found:

abusïones (Alex 2373c),[19]

audïencia (MNS 93b, 208d),

constitucïones (VSM 203c),

dissensïón (Alex 2107c ‘mas boluieron en cabo | con Dios dissensïón’; MNS 308c ‘| en tal dissenssïón’, 574b ‘amató la contienda | e la dissessïón’),[20]

familïares (VSD 228a, 276c—familia can only be found in SM 132b, 140d, 141a, 165d, always at the end of the first hemistich and thus possibly famílïa, although note the trisyllabic theological vice, acçidia, at Alex 2387b),

priuilegïado (LV 104b, 162a, VSM 432d),[21]

proprïedad (Alex 359d, 2488b, 2586d, SM 161d),

qüestïones (DV 67b, SM 214d) – qüistïones (Alex 2083c),

tractïones (VSM 216d),

uïolencia (probably MNS 782d, although muy could be müy, but cp. uïolenta at VSD 262c, and uïolar etc., Alex 2368c, MNS 384b, 387d, VSM 166d);

furçïón is not strictly speaking a direct Latinism, but rather a deturpation of functio (according to the RAE’s dictionary), and yet is always trisyllabic: MNS 132b, VSM 397d, 429c.

 

(e) Scientific terms:

astrïón (Alex 1487c, from astrio, cp. Isidorus Hispalensis, Etymologiarium, xvi.xiii.7, PL 82, 578B; the word can be compared with the names of two warriors: Astrio 2056a, and Astrión 2238c),

dïamantas (Alex 287b),

meridïana (VSD 37c, VSO 161c) – meredïana (Alex 939b, 2041c, 2157c; MNS 113c),

defecçïón (Alex 1224d),

dïonisia (Alex 1485a),

düodena (Alex 1874b),

lectüario (Alex 906b, 2401a, MNS 162b, SM 35d);

 

(f) specific military vocabulary:

çenturïones: (Alex 1551b),

decurïones (Alex 1551c: officers commanding cavalry squadrons),

defensïón (MNS 37b),

destruçïón (Alex 122c),

legïón and legïonarios (Alex 1551d),

subiecçïón (Alex 2430d).[22]

The insult, idïota (MNS 221b), is thrown but once–and perhaps not uttered again until Nebrija’s dictionary. There is, finally, the single witness of prosiçïón (Alex 2139d), whose meaning or origin is not clear (perhaps <prosa?). Such dieretic pronunciation is not particularly troubling, since it is consistent to the word, or at least the specific sense (as in the case of SM 116d ‘condiçïón’, above).

Other classes of words are subject to a certain amount of variation. Let us begin with those whose roots lie in ecclesiastical Latin, and more precisely with God and Satan. Crïador is the normal form in all works,[23] although bisyllabic criador is found in Alex 192a, 193a, 575d (and possibly 235d: see below, § II.ii.5). Similarly, dïablo(s) is the default form (10x Alex 427d … 2404a; DV 83c, 87b; JF 75c; 9x LV; 30x MNS; SM 210b; 8x VSD; 5x VSM; VSO 12c, 17d), once dïabla (describing Venus: Alex 544b) and dïablería (2619a) and the derived adjective dïablad– (MNS 361c, 467a, 727c, 827c). Alex 637d ‘dixieron este diablo |’ and 2355d ‘por onde ouo ’l diablo |’ may indeed offer diablo, but in these cases it is more likely that este and onde should be assumed; however, diablessa (2367a ‘Pare esta diablessa | un fiio traïdor’) seems certain; JF 73c Mq «en derredor de diablos» is to be contrasted with the hypometric If version «derredor dïablos», from which one should probably extract en derredor dïablos (cp. MNS 490b).[24] So far, so relatively consistent. Yet dios may be found bisyllabically a number of times: with bendiga (Alex 591b, 1730ad, 1841d, DV 133d —which may be a contraction of benediga, as found at Alex 2522a ‘| que dios lo benediga’ (P] bendiga O); or VSO 120d ‘| ’sí dios te benediga’) or with an apocopated pronoun (Alex 164c, 1698a, 2159d) or by another apocopation; some others may be explained by the postposition of dios: 497c ‘Quando dïos non quier’ |’ (OP), 600c ‘e si dïos me dexa |’ (P, O def.), 1566b ‘dixo dïos lo sabe |’ (OP), 2051b ‘dixo dïos lo sabe |’ (cp. Alex 1518c ‘Quando lo quiso Dios |’—the word-order lo sabe dios is not found, although the interjection ‘Sabe dios (que)’ is found at 1319d, 1862a, 2468c, VSD 64c). Nevertheless, one line confirms the dieresis of dïos (1534c ‘| Dïos grant caridat’), and in others it is likelier than transposition 2289b ‘| que Dïos ouo dado’, 2302c ‘Fizo Dïos grant cosa |’, 2328a ‘Auiéle Dïos dado |’. There are three possibilities in the Bercean corpus: MNS 315a ‘| dïos nuestro sennor’; Q’s reading of MNS 257a ‘| dïos nuestro sennor’ (although F offers dios el nuestro sennor); and VSM 484d ‘luego da dïos pluia |’. There is one certainty, in Eya uelar (DV 178c), where dïos rhymes with iudíos.

Further words drawn from the stock of ecclesiastical Latin are passïón compassïon, which occur in the Alexandre (2382b and 1618c respectively) but not in the Bercean corpus (passión occurs 19x, of which 5x in PSL and 8x in SM; compassión at MNS 164a). Obedïençia/obediencia is quite unruly: obediençia at Alex 1606b, VSM 79d (VSD 215a F][abbadia S); but obedïençia at Alex 1307c, 2516d, VSD 81c, 101a, 119b, 211d, 224b, 240c, 256a, 497a, 765c, VSM 76d); but the adjective obedïent’ is only found with dieresis: SM 219a, VSM 90a). The parallel with pacïencia (above) is striking. Patrïarc(h)a(s) are usually treated in Latinate fashion (Alex 1241a, PSL 74c, SM 197a, 204a, VSD 27a, 523a, VSM 304a), and rarely as patriarc(h)a(s): Alex 285a, LV 5a (the adjective, patrïarchales, is found only at SM 109c). Petiçïón(es) (Alex 1882d, DV 4c, MNS 779a, SM 223b, VSD 620d), are only slightly less common than petiçión(es) (Alex 1183c, DV 80d, 209b, MNS 181c, SM 37d, 257a, 265a, 258a, VSD 198d, 604d VSM 59b). Eleccïon is resolutely quadrisyllabic (Alex 1825a, MNS 308d, 716b, 717b) apart from MNS 715d ‘en fer tal electión |’—since the speaker is Teófilo, the failure to pronounce the word ‘correctly’ or ‘Latinately’ with dieresis may be a sign of his humility. In contrast, leccïones is only found at DV 173a, whereas lección is used in hagiographical works (VSD 567a, 645c, 752d, VSM 482d). Regïón/regïones is almost always used (Alex 2490d, MNS 660d, 870b/Alex 852a, VSO 48c), apart from the plural regiones at Alex 2459c. Bendicïón occurs at least twice, at MNS 499a ‘Ella nos dé su gracia | e su bendicïón’ (F), and SM 40d ‘| la bendicïón pida’; it may further be hypothesised for SM 41d, where one could read ‘semnar bendicïón’ following B, rejecting I’s variant, ‘semnar la bendición’.[25] Dicïón (meaning ‘sin’ or ‘guilt’, from dictio, one of whose meanings is ‘judgement’) is found once at MNS 228a; its other occurrence is in a line whose structure is difficult to establish: MNS 181b ‘es plena de gracia –| e quita de dición’.[26] Promissïón is similarly found only once (VSM 429b ‘querría que ficiéssemos | otra promissïón’ – where it rhymes with furcïón); but is probably promissión at Alex 1949c ‘quiso complir a Dario | la fecha promissión’, and 2107a ‘Dixo·l cómo entraron |+ en Tierra de Promissión’ (om. ‘en’?). The word for rent, benefice or allowance, raçión, appears once in trisyllabic form, raçïón (Alex 2359b ‘| la raçïón doblada’), as does redençïón (Alex 1291c ‘| prender redençïón’  where P «rredepnçion», O def); but redención at Alex 1277b (P «redepnçion», O def. .; for P’s spelling, cf. VSD 358b ‘| la media redenpción’), MNS 793b, and SM 93c, 98a, 117c, 178c, 192d, ‘redemción’ (although I —reproducing Q— at 98a «redencion»). Missïón is definitely found twice: Alex 1277c ‘| sobra grant missïón’ and MNS 627b ‘| fazié grand missïón’; it is often registered by editors at MNS 301d, VSD 503b, VSM 219a ‘| a muy grant missïón’; but that, as we shall see below (§ I.iii.4), is to beg an important question. Missión is found 11x in the Alex (48b, 404d, 437b, 578d, 650c, 1118b, 1183b, 1275b, 2102b, 2543d, 2552b) and at MNS 660c, PSL 5a, VSD 358a, VSM 21a, 225a, 397c. Further dieresis may be found in the etymological gloss to Babylon, which is always quadrisyllabic: confusïón (e.g., Alex 1511cd ‘Por la confusïón | que fue entr’ ellos dada/es toda essa tierra | Babilonna clamada’, 1522cd ‘por tanto es de nombre | de confusïón dada/ca Babilón confúsïo | es en latín clamada’, and further 2552c and VSM 219d). But other occurrences of confusion are trisyllabic: Alex 1508a, MNS 870c, VSM 160b. The legalism seruiçïales (Alex 1714d; JF 36d, SM 47d, VSD 553a) is contrasted by seruicial at MNS 651c. Notable too is cutïan– (Alex 2566d ‘| ella muy cutïana’, VSM 172c ‘| prendiénlos cutïano’); there are numerous examples of cutian–; the dieresis may be explained by its root in the Latin quotidiano. Glorïos–, too, is witnessed 20x (only once in the Alex, at 1950a; but frequently in the Bercean corpus: DV 109ab, MNS 19c, 25b, 63a, 73a, 130a, 149a, 228a, 669a, 822c, 831b, 865a, SM 253a, VSD 529a, VSM 359b, VSO 28c, 129b, 134a, 198a; only DV 109b is not at hemistich end). Of the 152x that glorios– appears in the corpus, only four times is it also not at hemistich end (MNS 45c, 514d, 600d, SM 62d). The explanation for this dieresis may be found in the Latinate usage of glorïa (e.g., SM 38c) and the verb glorïar (Alex 2401d, VSD 721a).[27] Cambïad– (Alex 1628b, MNS 338a, SM 77a) may owe its dieresis from the medieval Latin cambiare; but cambiar and cambiad– are found throughout the corpora. However, not all examples of dieresis can be ascribed to Latinate pronunciation. The spur may from the possibilities offered by a learned, rather than narrowly ecclesiastical, pronunciation of certain words. So the Latin sanguineus may be linked to the formation of sangrïenta (Alex 816b ‘| con tinta sangrïenta’; sangrient– Alex 177c, 543c, VSM 220b). Yet not all the occurrences of dieresis can be explained in this way, or as characterizing the versification as an application of Latinate conceptions upon a differing Romance. Rather it would be better to consider that the early-thirteenth century Romance spoken by the poets maintained diereses against competing forms in which continguos vowels were being reduced to dipthongs.

Thus contarïo (Alex 2393c ‘| un contrarïo mot’’), desfüello (Alex 226d ‘si yo no·l desfüello | otrament’ la pelleia’), nouns and adjectives in –ïent–: çinïentes (1532c ‘| espadas çinïentes’), combatïentes (1532b); mugïer(es) (Alex 968b and LV 110a); diminutives: 283b ‘aún un poquïello |’; 1954b ‘son los passarïellos |’; 2239d ‘ouo ya quantïello |’. The humble sparrow (Passer domesticus) is dieretic the two times it is spotted: gorrïón (Alex 669d), gurrïones (DV 172a); as are escorpïones (JF 39a); but so is the proud adjective emperïal (Alex 290b).[28] This feature is undoubtedly linked to popular speech: fiel (wormwood: Alex 2418a, DV 40b, JF 40c, MNS 36c) is distinct from fïel (faithful, Alex 638d, 2116b, HII 2c, LV 12b) which co-exists with fidel (Alex 441d); and the following are only ever found in dieretic form: crüel (Alex 1242c, SM 149d, VSDf 353d), pïel (Alex 2418c), ençïente (Alex 1919d) – esçïent (Alex 1265d, 2509a), esfrïada (Alex 1484c), süeras (Alex 2088d), rucïada and rucïaua (MNS 249c, SM 87d). It is difficult to know whether pïe (Alex 1608b ‘| el pïe o la mano’) and pïes (2672d, 1394c) are modernization of piede (witnessed in apocopated form at DV 202b, 203c pied’ and as piedes elsewhere) or a maintenance of bisyllabic pronunciation after lenitition—although pie is found (Alex 267a, 268b, etc., VSD 291b, VSM 3b), but not pies.[29] Uïola was always sounded trisyllabically (Alex 232c, 1545d; cp. uïolero, MNS 9a).[30]

A small set of nouns are used with or without dieresis: agua/agüa (Alex 1914d ‘Agüa es cabdal |’ and potentially 2627d ‘| del agüa del río’; for 1914d, one may cite in support 1435b ‘agua era cabdal |’ against Nelson’s emendation to Un agua es cabdal; with regards to 2627d, however, one should note a consistent vacillation between el/la a– (see below, § II.ii.1), which does make de la agua del río (Nelson’s emendation) attractive), cirio/cirïo (VSD 553c ‘| de cirïos cabdales’—and see further below, lirïo), cuer/cüer (Alex 18d ‘sabet que en las paias | el cüer non tenié’, 1676c ‘| con un cüer andamos’; and further 339d ‘yo·l metré en coraçón +|+ auerte ha a querer’, cp. 912b en cuer), diestra/dïestra (2055c ‘Poro a la dïestra |’ and cp. VSO 58c ‘cáliçes en diestras –|’, although the latter line is generally emended to cáliçes en las diestras, and indeed the omission of the definite article seems unknown in the middle ages when referring to the hand), espuelas/espüelas (Alex 661c ‘calçó·s las espüelas |’ where calçós’ O] calcaronli P; similar hemistichs are found, however, at 1968b ‘calçóse las espuelas |’, where calçose las P] calço sus O—here O’s reading would give again espüelas—and 1773c ‘calçáronle espuelas |’ (OP), which echoes P’s variant for 661c; furthermore, calçar is not necessarily reflexive: cp. Alex 456a/661a ‘calçó sus/las brafoneras’), fazienda/fazïenda (1964c ‘todas las fazïendas |’, and possibly, if one does not use füe, 1232c ‘Fue por la fazïenda |’), fiesta/fïesta (Alex 1133d ‘dar·l ié mala fïesta |’), fuerça/füerça (Alex 1836d ‘de la mi grant füerça |’—one might suggest the emendation to grande, but grande is not found before a noun in the Alexandre, although it may be in the Bercean corpus),[31] lirio/lirïo (Alex 2602d ‘| que lirïo nin rosa’; lirio only occurs elsewhere at hemistich end at Alex 2530d1*, and lirios at Alex 568c2*, where it rhymes with çirios, çiliçios and quirios: although çirios and quirios are bisyllabic at Alex 1183b, MNS 734b, and MNS 697c, SM 34c respectively, cirïos is found at VSD 553c; the only occurrence of çiliçios is in rhyme position in stanza 568), maysón/maÿsón (VSM 189c ‘| los d’ essa maÿsón’ and VSD 444c (S) ‘| en essa mäysón’; maysón at VSD 444c (F), 686d), miedo/mïedo (Alex 589b ‘Áyaz con el mïedo |’ P; O def.),[32] puercos/püercos (Alex 2566a ‘Mataua los püercos | Diziembre por mannana’ OP; perhaps, as Nelson suggests, the hemistich offers a case of haplography, and one should read Mataua a los puercos), tiendas/tïendas (Alex 1330b ‘eran de las tïendas |’ P; O def.; Nelson, Ya eran…in order to to follow 1330a which begins with Ya, cp. 87ab, 251d–252a, where this technique is used), traspuesto/traspüesto (1574b),[33] and possibly priessa/prïessa, although all examples occur in hemistichs where another dipthong may well undergo dieresis: 267b1* ‘subién a grant prïessa |’ (P; O sobian …, which would also produce a metrical hemistich), 750a1* ‘Diéronles grant prïessa |’ (O; P def.; possibly Dïéronles grant priessa), 2233c1* ‘mas tan fiera prïessa |’ (OP; but possibly fïera; 26x priessa Alex, of which 17x 1*); a related problem is found with aprïessa: Alex 1569b ‘| aprïessa corriendo’ (which could be apriessa corrïendo).

Cadaün–: 25x Alex 253b, 296d, 329cd, 333c, 342d, 415a, 435d, 474c, 750c, 840d, 976c, 1183cd, 1246c, 1325c, 1412b, 1508c, 1553c, 1582c, 2136b, 2459c, 2518b, 2607d, 2664d; JF 37d ‘que cadaüna d’ ellas |’, DV 149a ‘| cadaüno ploraua’, SM 148c ‘en cadaüna casa |’, VSD 637d ‘destas tres cadaüna |’, VSO 60b ‘| cadaüno consigo’. The trisyllabic form, cadauno, is rare in the Bercean corpus: it occurs in metrically acceptable hemistichs only at LV 160b, 229d, VSO 86b, 137c. Both of these works only survive in F, and the scribe of that manuscript at VSD 503d did substitute cadauno for cascuno (as witnessed by S). Thus the details of the presence of cadauno (rather than cadaüno or cada uno) are probably falsified. Nevertheless, the metrical occurrence of cadauno in the Alexandre is much higher (only when one manuscript is deficient or differs do I signal it in the following list: 78b, 99b, 265c (P cascunos), 1302c (P; O def.), 1498b, 1537c, 1823b, 1959d, 2170c, 2554d, 2592c (P cascuno), 2609b. Cadauno is found in hypermetric conditions at 338a, 484c, 691a (P Salleron), 971a (P cascuno), 1241c (P; O def.), 1317cd (P, O def.), 1510d, 1711d, 1746c, 2198c, 2199a, 2202a, 2536a; and, further, LV 32a, 38a, SM 295a, VSO 12b; cadauna at Alex 2114c, 2133d. Cadaunos is always metrical: Alex 656b (P cascunos), 764b (P cascunos), LV 56d. The bisyllabic quisque has only survived once in the Alexandre, 1246d ‘quisque en su escripto |+ de dó era natural’ (P; O def.), but it is better represented in the Bercean corpus: JF 17b, 22cd, PSL 84c, SM 8c, 67c, VSD 604a, VSM 78c, 214c, 253a. Thus varying forms, depending upon the syllabic count, suggest themselves, similar to adjectives describing nationality (as discussed below): quisque, cadauno/cascuno, cadaüno. It is not possible to say that, in all occurrences of cadauno, the scribes are substituting cascuno, but this would seem to be the case in at least part of the Bercean corpus.

Proper names show a marked tendency towards dieresis: Aüsón (1075a), Dïago (VSD 626c; Santïago, similarly: MNS 202a, 203a, 207b, VSM 420c), Dïana (Alex 373b, 2478d), Eubeüs (Alex 445b; or Eübeüs), Eügenia (VSO 25b) Eügenio (VSM 169b),[34] Eütiçio (Alex 1614a, 1625a; but Eurípilo, 526c; Eumelenus, 444a), Iulïano (LV 202d), Licrïano (with perhaps a hint coming from the poet on how to pronounce the word, VSD 191b ‘como diz’ el escripto | diçiénle Licrïano’), Mónïo (VSO 84b; a name distinct from Munno, VSO 5a etc), Nïobé (Alex 2390b), Peücostes (Alex 2238b), Sïagrio (MNS 70a, 72b), Thánäis (Alex 1913c1*, 1914ab1i), Timeüs (Alex 2238a), Ualerïano (PSL 88d and 6x more). Yet some names evidence a degree of variation. The most varied is probably Tolomeo (9x) who also appears as the equally quadrisyllabic Tolomeüs (1011c2*, rhymes in –eüs and –eos), but trisyllabically at 2486d ‘| Toloméus el terçero’ (O, P def.). Furthermore, trisyllabic Diomedes is found at Alex 325c1*, 515a1*, 529a1*, 539a1*, and 536c1i, but Dïomedes at 70a1*, 238b1i, 440c1i, 518b1*, 519c1i, 527c1*, 541a1*, 542b1*, 544a1i, 563a1*, 573b1*, 574a1i, 604a1*, 616a1i, 623b1*, 626b2*; Eüménides (1027a, 1411a) is syneresised at 318a ‘El sesto fue Euménides |’). Bisyllabic Rodius (444a P) is later found in a longer form with an orthographic alteration: Rodeüs (525a O).[35] The most important name to change its form, however, is Dario; the latter is by far the most usual form of the Persian emperor’s name (198x); but trisyllabic Darío, or possibly Dárïo where the word does not end a hemistich, are also found (903b2i, 1087a1*, 1235a1*, 1348d1*, 1420a1*, 1593c1i, 1747c1*, 1783a1i, 2590a2ii). These examples amounts to roughly 4.5% of the occurrences of the Persian emperor’s name.[36] There are few other possibilities: 1777b ‘diziendo Aÿ Dario |’, since aÿ (24c, 1203c, 2456a, 2651a) is as frequent as ay (431c, 1088a, 1378b, 2558b); 1771b ‘cüemo era Dario |’—for which, see below, § I.ii.3; the various lines in which reÿ is found, 802d ‘fueron al reÿ Dario |’, 809b ‘Subió el reÿ Dario |’, 824a ‘Diole el reÿ Dario |’, 874b ‘iua el reÿ Dario |’, 1051c ‘no·l ualïó a Dario |’, 1335b ‘quando al reÿ Dario |’, 1709d ‘Reÿ mató a Dario |’ (it is notable the rarity of the title, rey Dario after trisyllabic Darío is first used at 903b (only 1335b); before this line, reÿ Dario is used 5x. Other possibilities are generated by suggesting an omission (776b ‘fasta que ouo Dario |’) or apocopation: 820a ‘Quando entendió Dario |’ 844a ‘Sópolo luego Dario |’ (P Supolo, O om. lo), 1033d ‘Querrié que fuesse Dario |’, 1194a ‘Assí lo mandó Dario |’, 1250c ‘Dario quando lo uío |’, 1262a ‘Dario quiere contigo |’, 1364a ‘De la parte de Dario |’, 1406a ‘Prometiérale Dario |’, 1359a 1404a 1409d ‘Los de parte de Dario |’, 1723b ‘que sopiesse que Dario |’, 2286b ‘quando Dario uençiestes |’, 2532d ‘lo que uiste en Dario |’.

A regards toponymy, there are some consistencies. Of note are Carrïón (VSD 130b, VSM 389b, 462b), Sorïa (Alex 2581b), Genüa (VSO 118d) and Uïana (Alex 2583b). Further, Uilladïago is a different place to Uilladiago (VSM 471c and 470b, respectively; perhaps here we see, as with the initial resolution of pl– in Hlantada, VSD 700a, 704a, the possibility of regional differences in the treatment of dipthongs).

Nationalities, where appropriate, are usually defined as –ïan–: thus asturïana (VSD 572a), egipcïana (MNS 783c),[37] greçïana(s) (Alex 1967a, 2041d), greçïano (Alex 2023c, 2089d, 2229d), indïan– (Alex 13b, 2007a, 2020d, 2073a, 2078a), libïanos (Alex 1515d), medïanos (1515b), persïan– (259c, 915d, 1948a, 2073b).[38] The unchanging length of these words is amply compensated by a range of other words for nationalities composed of three syllables: greçisca(s) (Alex 321d, 407c, 546c, 859b, 2245c), greçisco (1052d), and grïeg– (only ever used as a noun: Alex 272a, 888a, 1380a, 1734c, 1794a, 2085b);[39] indïos (1195d); and of two: grieg– (136x Alex), indios (2076a), medos (30c, 919d, 1013d, 1374a, 2073b), persiantes (1409c). The names of regions are subject to dieresis: Asia (265d, 281a, 289a, 1145b, and possibly 1786b) but Ásïa (279a2i, 284a2i, 2467a2ii, 2509a1i, 2578b1i;[40] the majority of the occurrences of the word are at hemistich end, 15x Alex, 25c–2586c); Europa (279bc) but Eüropa (25b, 286c, 306c, 1157b, 1503a, 1914c, 2462b, 2511a, 2516c, 2578c, 2650b); Çiçia (Alex 1912d, 1914a, 1916a) but Çiçïa (1942a); Greçia (17x Alex and MNS 446d1ii), but Greçïa (1796c, 2635b; and at hemistich end, 35x Alex and PSL 6c1*); Frigia (1923b, 2590b) but Frigïa (289b; at the end of a hemistich, 321a, 1515d, 2639b); India (287c, 778d, 1169a, 1350a, 1973a, 2000c, 2217b) but Indïa (88b, 256d; end-hemistich 11x, 145b, 239b, 1640b, 1795d, 1945d, 1946a, 1968c, 1974a, 2303c, 2430c, 2179b); Libia (1795a) but Libïa (2639a; end-hemistich, 1168b, 1169b, 1923b, 2639d); Media (1190c, 1643d, 2430d) but Medïa (1923a; end-hemistich, 298c, 823a, 1340c); Persia (289c, 802d, 1961c) but Persïa (1340c; end-hemistich: 16x[41]). Panfilia is found thrice at the end of a hemistich (289b, 1515c, 2639a), Çiliçia once mid-hemistich (882c), once at hemistich-end (2639c). Finally the river Euphrates is once Eüfrates (1075d), once Eüfraten (1199a), but overflows in two lines which are evidently corrupt: 821a ‘Sobre Eufrates el río +|’ (O; P om. el río), 840b ‘que en Eufrates yazién +|’). Certain toponyms, however, are not subject to diaresis: Alexandria (2467d, 2644a, 2666c, 2667a), Arabia (291a, 1026c, 1398d), Armenia (160c, 165a, 191b, 291c, 1241b), Asiria (289a), Babilonia (290a, 2531c, 2641c), Galizia (1787b), Siria (1356b, 2640c). We may conclude our study of toponomy by saying that bisyllabic terms (e.g., Asia, Frigia, Greçia, India, Libia, Media, Persia) are prone to dieresis to make them trisyllabic (and Siria, the exception in this, is related to the trisyllabic Asiria). But in only two cases are the proportions between dieretic/non-dieretic forms equal (Asia/Ásïa and Libia/Líbïa). Toponyms that are already tri-syllabic, unless they begin Eu–, do not undergo dieresis.[42] Of note is the vacillation between orïent(e) and orient(e): the dieresised form is most popular in the Alexandre (278a, 942d, 1218c, 1226b, 1405a, 1919a, 2102c—against 1229d, 2509b, and possibly 869a), and is found in PSL 1b, VSM 90d, whereas possibly oriente at LV 31a and orient’ at VSM 3a.[43]

 

I.ii.2    Dieresis in Verbs

Verbs also suffer dieresis; the group is not large, however, and dieresis affects the present, preterite and subjunctive tenses.[44] The infinitive is found variably only with regard to one word, lidïar (Alex 217c; against lidiar 34x Alex (25c … 2471b), and VSM 290a, 291a; but see below, lidïaron, 9d);[45] in a gerund perhaps once: 2171c ‘| las bestias mordïendo’ (although one could construe the line as las béstïas mordiendo (other rhymes in –iendo). To take the present tense, querer is the most common: quïero (1291b1* P, O def., 1460ab (OP), 2305d1* (OP); quïérome 1709b1i P] quierom O) and quïere (204d1*, 2002b1* 2369b1i)[46] quïer’ (2319b1*) – doquïere (1223c). Alex 1926c ‘lo que más te cüidas | entre manos tener’ and 1795c ‘rïégala Egipto |’ seem secure.[47] At 2367b OP ‘Odio el que uieda |’, the hemistich may be construed Ódïo el que uieda or Odio el que uïeda.[48]

Preterites are more varied, and tend to be placed first, rather than last, in the hemistich. The most significant group within preterites are the inflections of the verb seer: füi at MNS 12b ‘| füi luego folgado’, 360b ‘| füi grand madurgada’, 759c ‘mas füi demandar |’, 759d ‘| füi mi enemigo’, 760c ‘füi pora mercado |’, 766b ‘que füi engannado |’, VSD 567cd (end hemistich: Alex 694d, 1071d; MNS 12a, VSO 154c); monosyllabic fui, in contrast, is less used: Alex 1058b,[49] DV 78bc, MNS 96b, VSD 716d, VSM 19b; one example is uncertain: VSO 150a ‘| quando yo fui entrado’ (read: quando yo füi entrado?). Füiste is found at Alex 1595d ‘| o füiste a Seres’—although here the establishment of the line in question is very difficult. Füe is found in both the Alexandre and the Bercean corpus: Alex 145d ‘de quál füe quien dixo |’ (O, P def.), 175c ‘| füe tan segurado’ (O] f.t. alegrado P), 176b ‘füe pora la uilla |’ (füe O] adelinno P), 187a ‘Quando füe liurado |’ (füe O] esto fue P), 381a ‘| füe yo engendrada’ (P), 1232c ‘Füe por la fazienda |’ (P), 1394b ‘füe grant marauilla |’, 1435c ‘| deque füe passado’, 1760b ‘| non füe peor trecho’, 1834b ‘| non füe más cuitado’, 2627b ‘füe el mundo todo |’, VSM 125b ‘que füe de los pueblos |’; and füeron: Alex 22a ‘Füeron los de Greçia |’, 268d ‘e füéronse todos |’ (O).

Dio is occasionally found as dïo: 182b ‘dïo a Alexandre |’ (OP), 266c ‘dïo salto de piedes’ (P][dïo salto ent’ ellos O), 397c ‘| no·s dïo a uagar’ (O] penso luego de dar P),[50] and 1727a ‘Dïo una grant boz |’ (OP). The Bercean corpus offers some examples of the same: certainly at MNS 77c ‘| dïo·l sacristanía’, VSD 211a ‘| dïo·l ministramiento’, SM 178d ‘quando·l dïo el colpe’, and possibly at LV 130c ‘él amólos como hermanos ‡|– diolis grant ualía’.[51] In the examples from MNS, VSD and SM, F provides a non-dieresised reading through «dioli» and «quando li» respectively. The frequency with which diole P][dïo·l O or dïo O is found (525c, 824a, 1073d, 1075c, 1897b, 2216b, 2318b) is contrasted by 1066d ‘dïole tal ferida |’ (dïole P] diol O).[52] Nevertheless, at 1710d ‘dio grandes apellidos |’ (P][dïo grant apellido O), the latter’s version is persuasive (and is, moreover, close to the only secure example of this form in the second half of the poem, 1727a). Her the variance between O and P may point to an increasing excision of the form through the years.

Other examples of dieresis in the preterite may be identified: second person singular: 2211c ‘fasta que uinïeste |’; third person singular: Alex 143d ‘| morïó la gallina’, 172a ‘Uoluïó con él guerra |’, 508d ‘firïó en Culcón |’, 579a ‘Entendïólo Éctor |’, 621b ‘| mas no·l ualïó nada’,[53] 1604a ‘Dende sallïó Sersis |’, 1693a ‘Respondïó con esto |’, MNS 591a ‘Mouïóse la tempesta |’; first person plural: 1629c ‘| por mal que fizïemos’, 1837d ‘de lo que prisïemos |’ (O] d. l. q. auemos conquerido P); second person plural: 1856a ‘Uós nunca ouïestes |’ (but Uós P][Los que O); third person plural: 9d ‘lidïaron un día |’ (P] l. u. dia todo O), 272b ‘touïeron que era |’ (O), 292c ‘| annos estouïeron’, 356c ‘mintïeron a Écuba |’ (P, O def.; but note 355d ‘mintiéronli a Écuba |’ P] mintieron a la reyna O), 1080a ‘| que más non pudïeron’ (P, O def.; rhymes with –ieron), 1715b ‘fizïéronlo ellos |’, 1095b ‘bastïeron las torres |’ (] bastiron OP), 2666b ‘fasta que ouïeron |’ (P] ouioron O).

The future has one example: 1844c ‘lo que uós querrïedes | faría yo de grado’ (P] fazedes O; cp. 1841c ‘querriédesuos tornar |’).

The imperative is found predominantly with sëy/sëi (HI 5c, HII 6b, LV 198c, 215c, MNS 310a, 570c, 729c, 866a, VSD 762c, VSO 121c), but sey at Alex 58b and VSD 732a. Alex 1727b ‘Crïador tú uïeda |’ (uïeda in the present tense may be witnessed at 2367b, but uieda at VSM 375d). The forms of the subjunctive are also represented: auer: 1996a ‘Si ouïessen ellos |’; dar: 1779c ‘yo a ti lo dïera |’ (diera(–) 1650d, 1986c, VSD 590c); mouer: 1638a ‘| quiso que·s mouïessen’ (mouiesse(n): Alex 124a, 434c, 820d, 822a, 2188c; but possibly a falsely apocopated ·s); poder: 1622b ‘quanto más pudïesse |’; querer: 1611d ‘Lo que uós quisïerdes’ (uós only ends a hemistich following a preposition; the same goes for nós apart from imperative use at MNS 430a; this applies also to yo/ and /ti; therefore the inversion of the line to Lo que quisierdes uós is highly unlikely; 10x quisierdes), 2411c ‘Quiero si quisïerdes |’; ueer: 973a ‘Lo que a mí uïerdes |’ (no other examples), 1297b ‘| que se uïeran antes’ (P, O def.; uieran: Alex 766b, 1046d), 1525d ‘de qui las non uïesse |’ (uiesse: Alex 659a, VSD 296c); uençer: 2434c ‘si ésti uençïere |’ (P, O def.; no other examples).

A considerable problem for versification is provided by the possible forms füer’ and fües’, at the following locations in the Alexandre:

72d ‘ualdrié más que fues’ muerto | o fües’ por naçer’ (P; O def.)  

731c ‘Más ualdrié que la cosa | fües’ por empeçar’ (O; P’s reading confirms fues but offers a different order (‘la cosa que fues’, a reading rejected by all editors).

1044d ‘non era tan donzel | que non fües’ cansado’ (although fües’ O] era P)

1062cd ‘non lo querrién los dios | que esta mi espada/en tan santa cabeça | fües’ ensangrentada’ (although fües’ O] sea P)

1674c ‘Si füer’ por uentura |’ (O fuer P fue; but Si fue is not found in these conditions elsewhere)

It would be tempting to assume that fuesse or fuera has been wrongly transmitted in apocopated form, and, indeed, at 72d, there is only one manuscript witness, P. Twice P offers metrical alternatives to O’s use of the past subjunctive: 1044d, where P offers era (incorrectly, since the preceding hemistich would normally demand the subjunctive), and 1062d, where P offers sea.[54] The vacillation between indicative and subjunctive is found at 48b, where fuera O] era P and at 1774b, 2315b, where fura O] fue P, or where the past subjunctive is paired with the future conditional (fu(e)ra O] serie/seria P 104d, 256b, 1712c, 2409c). The opposite also happens: fuera P] fue O (93b, 329d; and cp. 644a fue O] fuera P); fuera P] era O (95d, 323d, 610a, 831d). The confusion thus described, then, in which neither manuscript shows a preference in one direction or the other, does not provide a guide for adopting P’s reading at 1044d. The alternation of fuera/sea at 1062d, however, is not otherwise witnessed, and therefore P may well provide the correct reading.

     Three of these occurrences of fües’/füer’ preceed por; in two other cases, fuesse por P]  finds a variant in O: at 771d, O offers ‘|– que ouies por naçer’ (P: ‘| que fuesse por naçer’; therefore read que ouiesse por naçer?); at 566d, O offers a transposition: se por esso non fuesse, rather than P’s ‘si no fuesse por esso |’. However, four other examples are present in both manuscripts without variation (1173b, 1559b, 1596c, 2184a—fuera por). The two examples at 566d and 771d may indicate a certain difficulty regarding the formation of fuesse por; in a similar vein, P’s fues’ por at 1038d ‘si non fues’ por Amitas |’ and  2409a ‘| que si non fues’ por ella’, is not reproduced in O, which at 1038d offers ‘si non fuera Iuneas’ (i.e., om. por and misread ami– as iun–, –t– as –e–; Iuneas appears never again, and Amitas becomes Aluotas in O when he next appears: 1039d), and at 2409a, O offers ‘si non fusse por ella’ (i.e., om. que).

     This cautious essay into the jungle of textual variance provides little solace in the way of providing an easy emendation. Fues’/Fuer’ por is not always well supported in the textual tradition. But similarly, it is relatively rare for either manuscript to apocopate incorrectly fuera/fuesse. Incorrect variation within one manuscript represents just below 2/7 of the total occurrences of fuesse. Apart from 1038d above, 546c, 1188b, 1485c, 1489d, 1727d and 1844b fuesse P] fues O, and 1835a fuera P] fur O, 1887d fuere P] fur O; the opposite is only slightly more common: 82a fuer’ O] fuera P; 119b, 173a, 189c, 270b1*, 661d, 1175d, 1355d, 1955d fues’ O] fuese P; 878d, 1400c fues’ P] fuesse O; 1038d fues’ P] fuera O.[55] Nevertheless, there are no occasions when P mistakenly shortens fuesse to fues’; on the contrary, it errs hypermetrically by lengthening apocopated forms.

     Analysis of manuscript variation allows us to establish that the forms fuer’ and fues’, if witnessed by both manuscripts, are probably correct, even where they must be scanned füer’ or fües’. One can only conclude that the poet chose a dieretic form in preference to a non-apocopated, full form of the word, since the dieretic was also, or had also become, ‘normal’, and a reasonable deduction to make when scanning the line.

     To speak of a deduction, however, implies a reader concerned to interact with the text, prepared to count the syllables in the fashion established by the poet, and remedy any shortfall. As one might comment regarding the instability of stress and syllable count regarding various lines (and since there are no surviving scribal marks to indicate dieretical pronunciation, even in Gonzalo de Berceo’s surviving thirteenth century manuscripts), medieval readers must have reconstructed the text as part of the act of reading the poetry.

     Yet some lines will offer more than one possible example of dieresis. Here the poet, although there may at times be a greater frequency of one type of word appearing with dieresis than another, would seem to leave the choice up to the reader; if this is the case, it is impossible to produce a definitive text, since even within the poet’s own manner of metrical construction, discretion and discernment is left for the reader. Thus, to take examples solely from füe (but in which füe, even without these examples, is more common than the other possible dieresis):

Alex 145d ‘de quál füe quien dixo |’                               qüál

Alex 1232c ‘Füe por la fazienda |’                                 fazïenda (thus Casas)

Alex 1567a ‘Uxión füe çercada |’                                  Uxïón (thus Cañas and Casas), but Uxión at 1563b, 1573d, 1581a)

Alex 1834b ‘| non füe más cuitado’                              cüitado

VSM 125b ‘que füe de los pueblos |’                            püeblos

 

The problems of choosing a dipthong to dieresise are further witnessed at 1744b ‘por doquier’ que fuerdes |’. This is a composite line, reflecting P «por do nunca fuerdes», and O «per doquier que furdes». Cañas removes the problem by turning the apocopated form doquier’ to its full extent: por doquiere que fuerdes; Nelson is rather more intrusive, por do quiere que fuéredes. Casas opts for doquïer’ (since doquïere certainly at 1223c). Yet füerdes is equally attractive, and avoids the slightly uncomfortable element of dieresis on an apocopated verb. But what of Cañas’s and Nelson’s solution, expanding doquier’ to doquiere? The two occasions on which doquiere occurs metrically in P are represented by the unmetrical apocopated form in O (310b, 1724b), and doquïere (1223c) by do s quier in O. More generally, metrical quiere in P is represented by hypometric quier’ in O at 1448a, 1476a, 1637d, 1718b, 1758a, 1835b, 1778a, 2351b, 2366a, 2388d, 2400d, 2440b (and, further, 1721d quiere] quier O querie P; 1957c quiere] quier O qujero P; 2347c querié P] quier O). Compounds with –quiere are also lengthened (837b, 1755a, 1998c, 2159c, 2157d, 2256a, 2443ac, 2455b).[56] Indicative is 2120b, where siquiere (P) is rendered as sequier τ in O. In support for doquïer’, however, one should note quequïer’ in Alex 154c ‘mas quequïer’ que diga |’, where both OP support the apocopation: quequïer’ O] quisquier P.

 

I.ii.3     Dieresis in Adverbs and Conjunctions

(a) Bïen is found at Alex 1266a ‘Si por esso non fuesse | bïen somos çerteros’, 2052a ‘Touiéronse los griegos | por bïen estrenados’, DV 101b ‘bïen .v. mil annos |’, VSO 198b ‘| bïen me lo guardó’. Another possibility exists, depending upon the choice of dieresis in the line: Alex 2177b‘alçauan e primién | bïen como falcones’ (see immediately below, cüemo).[57] There are a few other possible examples of dieresis, but none of them probable.[58]

(b) Cuemo, offered by O occasionally where P provides «como», is marked by a splitting of its middle vowels first at Alex 495a ‘Mas cüemo yo fío |’. Other examples are 921c ‘| cüemo son estrannas’, 1673c ‘Cüemo en dios fío |’, 1806a ‘Anda cüemo rueda |’[59] 1913b ‘cüemo aguaducho |’ (P: commo aguaducho; O: cuemo l agua aducho), 2028a ‘Cüemo de grant seso |’ (Cüemo O] Commo era P). Some of these examples might be dismissed as being due to inversion (495a Mas cuemo fío yo, 921c cuemo estrannas son, 1673c Cuemo fío en dios, 2028a Cuemo de seso grand) but two cannot be explained away in this fashion: 1806a, 1913b. The other emendations are doubtful: fío is sometimes preceeded by yo, but never followed by the first person pronoun in either the Alexandre or the Bercean corpus; grant seso is found at Alex 428a, 1885b, 2028a, 2270c, but seso grant or seso grande never; nor are como/cuemo+adj.+son/es witnessed in that sequence.[60] The only example to truly merit emendation is 1673c, since fïar en dios is found at 2024c ‘ca fïaua en dios | e en la su espada’. Nevertheless, 1673c’s order is found at 1284c ‘ca como en dios fío |’; VSD 365d ‘como en dios fïamos |’ and 448c ‘si en dios bien fïades |’. Three further examples are dependent upon the construal of other words in the line: 1771b ‘cüemo era Dario |’ (Darío is also found up to this point at: Alex 903b, 1097a, 1235a, 1348d, 1420a, 1593c, 1747c, and subsequently at 1783a, 2590a; given the frequency of Darío up to this point (7x) against the frequency of cüemo (twice), it is more likely that one should read cuemo era Darío, but, as we have commented above, it is not obligatory that one should); 1793d ‘cüémo han d’ andar |+’ (O; P def.); 2002b ‘e cuemo se quïere |’ may be understood as e cüemo se quiere: (–)quïer(–) has eight secure examples up to this point, cüemo also a maximum of eight (see, for futher examples, in the paragraphs below). Alex 991c ‘cuémo priso Sïón | Trípol e Tabarea’ is another possible, but not probable, example.

Cuemo is present over two hundred times in the Alexandre. However, since cuemo is preserved solely in O, and, since cuemo itself is an unusual form to be preserved in a Leonese manuscript, it is probable that there was a more frequent use of cuemo in the archetype. This cannot be recovered; however, it is possible to identify hemistichs in which cüemo may have occurred where a hemistich that now contains como is hypometric. These are the following:

1290c ‘Mas si Dios lo quisiere |– como en Él fío’ (cp. 1673c),

2374a ‘Como son los uiçios –| de diuersas maneras’,

2486a ‘Priso·l rey pannos uiles |– como de romero’

There are also a series of lines in which como (were it understood as cuemo) could have been understood as dieresisable:

588c ‘como diz’ que cüita |’ (P, O def.)

2489d ‘cómo era püesto | cómo auié d’ estar’ (O, Pdef)

2177b‘alçauan e primién | bïen como falcones’ (O; P a veces como falcones+; resolution of the line might take the form, then, bien cüemo falcones, following O, or a veces como falcones, following P)

                2591d ‘cómo desuoluïó | la lazada real’

Cüemo, then, occured at the following lines: 495a, 588c, 921c, 1290c, 1673c, 1771b, 1793d, 1806a, 1913b, 2028a, 2177b, 2374a, 2486a, 2489d; and note 588c, 1793d.[61]

(c) Lüego is witnessed at Alex, at 217c ‘empeçóla lüego |’, 701c ‘| lüego el troyano’, 1043d ‘| lüego a fincar’, 1225a ‘Es lüego el Sol |’, 1743a ‘| lüego a çegar’, 2185c ‘lüego que en Bracta |’; VSM 257d ‘mas partiélas lüego |’, VSO 15a ‘Lüego que oyó |’. Some occurrences again depend on where the dieresis is deemed to fall: 2043b ‘| luego muÿ priuado’ (or lüego muy …), 2506c ‘luego uío por Siria |’ (or lüego uio…); MNS 12b ‘| füi luego folgado’ (or lüego fui…), VSM 484d ‘luego da dïos pluia |’ (or lüego da dios pluia).

(d) Qüando is witnessed in four lines from the Alexandre, always in initial position in the first hemistich (1709a, 1808a, 1828a, 2137d),[62] a placing mirrored at SM 182b ‘qüando en nós mismos |’, and 264a ‘Qüando nós pedimos |’, but in no other works.[63] The similar word, qüanto, is registered thrice in the Alexandre, always as the first word in the second hemistich: 18b (P), 2358c (OP), 2483c (O; P def.).

(e) Sïempre occurs at 1705cd ‘sïempre amé paz | e escusé entençia/ sïempre desuié guerra | e amé auenençia’, and 1977a ‘Sïempre ha sin grado | derecho a estar’, LV 183a ‘| por sïempre yazrán’.[64] Two further possibilities, depending on where the dieresis in the line falls, are Alex 239d ‘| fue sïempre dubdado’ (one should perhaps understand füe), and 1714d ‘dios cofonda sïempre |’ (dïos c…).

 

I.ii.4    Numerals and Adjectives

Numerals: qüatro (2134c ‘de todos auié ý | tres o qüatro pares’), dïez (2467a ‘Dïez annos auié |’). Yet Trëinta at Alex 440b ‘trayén trëinta naues |’ (P; O estos trayen mannas) is unlikely as an original reading. Nelson takes advantage of his knowledge of the Latin source (‘bis vicenas’—twice twenty each) to emend to quarenta, an emendation followed by Cañas. However, if one were to really follow the source, the men in question would be bringing eighty, not forty boats—it says bis vicenas not bis viginta. Ochenta would still be metrical, and has the advantage of, in its roman form, being easily confused with thirty: LXXX; and, furthermore, it occurs within a section where most of the numerals have been transmitted in a corrupt state (cp. 437d, 438d).

Certain common adjectives are also subject to dieresis. Büen at Alex 1448c ‘| büen preçio ganar’, 2095a ‘Mientre el büen reÿ |’, 2160c ‘era büen filósofo |’, ; büena: 1836b ‘| dar büena finada’ (P; O: … bona …), 1853d ‘que la que es büena |’ (P; O: … es sana–), 1857a ‘Por lealtat büena |’, VSD 204d ‘‘por un logar bono –| si es esperdeçido’ (where one should read … logar büeno), and possibly VSD 70c ‘mas el büen christiano |’, VSM 245a ‘bebrién de büen grado |’.[65]

Lüengo would seem to be found at 1349a ‘| lüengo plazo dar’. Its presence in other lines would be due to a choice over which element to apply dieresis to: 1234d ‘que de lüengo tiempo |’, MNS 660d ‘| a luenga regïón’, and VSM 78b ‘la barba müi luenga |’ together with Alex 149c ‘los braços muÿ luengos | las presas muÿ duras’.

Müertos is found once: Alex 592b ‘| maguer müertos son’ (P; O def.). Although Cañas and Nelson both opt to emend the line (maguer que muertos son), I am not convinced that this is licit. P, in the rest of the manuscript, does not err in reproducing maguer or maguer que according to the necessity of the metre. It is therefore unlikely to have commited a mistake here.[66]

Süaue is found at HI 2b ‘uierbo dulç’ e süaue |’, and Alex 298d ‘| cantos müy süaues’, 2138c ‘| fazién cantos süaues’; but the word is possibly found as suaue at LV 9b ‘que resucita los muertos +| con su suaue odor’.[67]

     I have excluded from my description a small group of words given a dieresis in Casas’s edition on the grounds that these readings are not as secure as the others. They are given below, with my reasons for rejecting the reading.

acüerdo: Alex 1319a ‘Non aurán acüerdo | nin nul cabdellamiento’ (P; O def.): more likely here is that nul has been omitted, as surmised by Nelson and Cañas: cp. e.g. VSD 399c ‘non auié nul acuerdo | nin entendié razón’, and Alex 2493c ‘| non aurié nul ualor’, VSM 369d ‘non auién nul conseio |’, although note the formation of 1732b ‘non auién de comer | nin de dormir ardura’.

atenençïa: 2639b ‘dó·l en atenençïa | encara toda Frigia’: for the reasons to reject this line, see above, petafïo. P: dol en atenencia encara a toda Frigia; O: dol en tenencia toda tierra de Frigia’. Cañas and Nelson both elect to expand the indirect pronoun: dole en atenencia.

büeltas: Alex 1953a ‘| büeltas en amores’, where bueltas P][cobiertas O. O’s variant is metrical, and, as Nelson comments, ‘No es del todo imposible que O cobiertas haga eco a cubiertos (1950c)’ (‘son cubiertos los prados | de vestido fermoso’. Nelson, however, offers a bueltas with support from 1828b a buelta (O; P: en buelta); Cañas ‘embueltos’.

çïerta mente: 1688d ‘sepas çïerta mente | non puedas escapar’ (P; O ‘sepas ciertamientre –|+ que no puedas escapar’); O’s reading may provide a solution in the transposition of words: sepas que cierta mientre | non puedas escapar. For the separation of sepas que and verb over hemistichs, cp. Alex 389d ‘mas sepas que en el mundo +| non sé yo tan uellida’. In this context, note VSD 655b ‘sepas certera miente | eres de dios oýdo’ and VSM 403a ‘Sabet certera mientre | en esto non dubdedes’ (cp. 1559c ‘| por çerteras seer’, where çerteras P] mas çiertos O; and 1530d2 por çerteras sennales P] entre las sinales O).

despüés: Alex 2106c ‘| despüés a Arón’. Although SM 268a ‘Después el uicario –|’ would make one think of the suitability of dieresis here, it is likely that SM 268a F is a modernization, as occurs elsewhere in the poem, of dessende; and, with regards to 2106c, one should note the hypometric hemistich at 1243b ‘cómo pidién los pueblos |– reÿ a Arón’. The problem here would seem to be the transmission of Arón (it is Aarón in SM, for example), rather than the need for dieresis.

fïerro:    Alex 106c ‘no·l passarié fïerro | non serié tan agudo’ (no·l O] nunca lo P, which offers the possibility of reconstructing the line as non lo passaríe fierro or nunca·l passarié fierro, without recourse to dieresis).

iüega:    Alex 697b ‘ir e reuenir cuemo | qui iüega azar’; in fact, P «ir τ reuenir como qui iuega aσar», O «ir τ uenir a las uezes : cuemo quien iuega l azar». Nelson opted for ir e uenir a † uezes | com qui iuega azar; Cañas ir e reuenir como | qui iuega al azar (assuming haplography). The problem with both Cañas’s and Casas’s solutions are that como/cuemo is never found at the end of a hemistich; thus Nelson’s reconstruction is the more convincing, a suspicion enhanced by the fact that reuenir occurs only here in the Alexandre, and, in CORDE, appears only in texts from the late fourteenth century. Although Nelson’s emendation to a uezes uses a form of words not witnessed in the corpora, but nevertheless a uezes (i.e., ‘alternadamente’, as he glosses it) is common in medieval texts of the period. I would therefore have rendered the critical text ‘ir e uenir a las uezes +|+ cuemo qui iuega ’l azar’.

liuïanos: Alex 815c ‘Dulçes son diz’ e muelles | de comer liuïanos’ where de comer P] τ de comer O, in which O’s reading dispenses with the need to include the dieresis (liuian– otherwise at Alex 102b, 545a, 620b, 701b, 989d, 2298c, 2229c, 2380b, as well as frequently in the Bercean corpus). Although liuïanos provides a full rhyme with granos (815a) and persïanos (815d), line b is marked by the assonantal rhyme mascarlos.

luxurïa:    Alex 2372b ‘pobló a Luxurïa |’ and 2378c ‘Han con la Luxurïa |’: for reasons for rejection, see above, petafïo. The lines, although both are witnessed in OP, may be corrupt; 2372b may be missing a definite article (pobló a la Luxuria), the second hiding a long form of auer in the present tense (Auen con la Luxuria), for which, see above, pléïto.

müeuen: Alex 2077d ‘son desque se müeuen |’ O son desque se mouen; P son desque mueuen (i.e., P om. se). Cañas also offers müeven, but Nelson suggests the inversion of the line: desque se mueuen son. This is persuasive, since desque in the Alexandre is never in second position after a verb in a hemistich, and is only found mid-hemistich in five cases (712a, 777c, 795b, 969c, 1832b), against 20x at the beginning of the hemistich (deque occurs 12x at hemistich-initial position and never mid-line). In the Bercean corpus, de(s)que is never found mid-hemistich.

müy | büenos: Alex 347d ‘Eran entrambos müy | büenos por uerdat’. Put simply, müy/muy is never found in hemistich-final position: one must therefore deduce that it did not considered as bearing enough stress for that position. Alex 347d would be better represented as as Eran entr’ ambos =| muy buenos por uerdat (as O «eran entrambos : muy buenos por uerdat» against P «eran muy buenos anbos por uerdat»).

parïas:   Alex 2520b, 2521d, 2522b, all with the same phrasing, ‘enuïó·l por parïas |’ (although O offers ‘enuïaronle parias |’ for 2520b (which is the same hemistich as found at 2518a OP), and ‘enuïo·l parias |’ for the subsequent two. The phrase, por parias, does not occur outside these three lines in adjoining stanzas —although it is witnessed in the General estoria (ed. Sánchez Prieto-Borja, fol. 316v). In the Alexandre, parias: 2517d, 2597b, 2625d, 2653d; end-hemistich: 2517d, 2518a, 2524b, 2525a, 2527d, 2539a, 2596c, VSM 406d, 459c.

petafïo: Alex 1800a ‘Fizo un petafïo |’, where Fizo P] Fizol O. This apheretic form, evidenced in the thirteenth century, is rare until the late fifteenth. However, with Bayo, I am unconvinced that the accent can shift within a word through dieresis. The line, I suggest, would originally have read Fízole un petafio.

pléïto:    Alex 2456b ‘has mal plëito fecho |’ (has] as OP): has should be read as aues, with Nelson, particularly in the light of the following, which shows how aue(–) is removed through the manuscript tradition: 785b aues P] as de O; 2494a aues (Nelson)] avedes OP–1451a auen (Nelson)] auien P han O–2349a auen (Nelson)] Auien O Uienen P–2350a Auen (Nelson)] An O Ovo P; 282b aue P] a O; 294a ý aue P] ay O; 471d aues judgado P] as dado O; 791a ave P] a O; 881b; 921d ave P] an O; 1828d; 2580c; but 2430b, 2432b, 2450b ha O] aue P and 1462c ‘|+ non la áue tremolienta’ (P, O om. — where one should perhaps read non la ha tremolienta). Cañas, like Casas, scanned 2456b as mal pleïto fecho.

processïones: Alex 1790c ‘Rogauan sobr’ el cuerpo | muchas proçessïones’ (with rhymes in –ones); all other occurrences are processiones, but, more importantly, the line seems somewhat corrupt (rogar is never used in this sense (almost always rogar a a heavenly being, or rogar que followed by the request; rezar (O’s offering: ‘Rezauan sobrel cuerpo : grandes proçessiones’) also does not fit very well; it may be that con is missing: rezauan sobr’el cuerpo | con grandes/muchas proçessiones. Nelson’s emendation, ‘muchas de proçessiones’, does not solve the linguistic/semantic difficulties; Cañas combined Nelson’s emendation with dieresis to produce a hypermetric hemistich, ‘muchas de proçessïones’.

püeblo: Alex 433b ‘qu’ el feruor del püeblo |’. Again a composite resolution from O qu el feruor malo and P el feruor del pueblo. There is some evidence to suggest that O tended to contract que el to qu’el (at 552d que él P] qu el O, 988d que él P] q̃l O; and further 37c, que le P] que l O, 879d que non le P] que l non O, 2184b que un... que un P] qu el... qu el O). Thus the line may have been originally que el feruor del pueblo |, although qu’el mal feruor del pueblo would be a respectable reconstruction.

püeden: Alex 1477c ‘de beldat no·l püeden |’ (OP) may be due to a corruption in the archetype; Nelson emended to de beldat non le pueden, although a transposition might also be considered (no·l pueden de beldat).

tïene:      Alex 283a ‘tanto tïene Asia |’, 1282d ‘| él non tïene nada’ (tiene 20x Alex); the first reading is probably the result of transposition (tanto Ásïa tiene) and the second due to the suppression of elli.

tïerras:   Alex 302b ‘començó las tïerras |’, a composite drawn from P començó de allí las tierras and O enpeçó las tierras. Nelson was drawn to propose començó dend’ las tierras; Cañas, començo d’ý las tierras: considering the tendency for ý O] alli P (eg. at 171d, 197d, 284a, 409c, etc), Cañas’s solution is probably the right one; the critical reading should therefore have been based solely upon P: començo de allí las tierras +|

uïeio:     Alex 1794b ‘e Säul el uïeio | con todos sus uezinos’ O (P def.). The line is almost certainly corrupt. The presence of Saul in the line is implicitly defended by Cañas (p. 442) in his gloss, ‘Saül el vïejo: el célebre rey que inauguró la institución monárquica entre los judíos, cuyos hechos se narran en el primer libro de Samuel.’ The implicit defence was offered against Nelson’s refusal to countenance the genuineness of Säul in the line. I have some sympathy with Nelson’s diffidence. Given that, in the section from which 1794b is being taken, the various peoples or races of the Middle East are being detailed, the line may have originally read Esau e iacob, which would refer to the inhabitants of Palestine, the Jews and the Edomites, together with their neighbours. Säul is garbled by P (not O) at 2355d en Säul O] eravl P.

 

 

I.iii Monosyllabic Words made Bisyllabic through Dieresis

 

The most immediately striking element of the use of dieresis in the corpora is that applied to monosyllabic words, in particular muy, rey, ley and grey, oy. The vacillation between monosyllabic and bisyllabic forms of preterites (e.g., dio/dïo, fui/füi, are discussed above (§ I.ii.2); but uío/uio below, at § I.iii.7.

 

I.iii.1   ay and äy

The exclamation ay is found at Alex 431c, 1088a, 1378b, 2658b, DV 139a, MNS 602a, VSD 301a, 405d, 121b, 151c. Äy is witnessed in both the Alexandre and the Bercean corpus: Alex 24c, 1203c, 1777b, 2456a, 2651a, DV 73a, 152d, MNS 753a, VSD 51a, 340c, 360c, 518c, VSM 103a, 159b, 393c.

 

I.iii.2   grey and grëy

Grey is witnessed twice as grey (DV 16b, SM 216b) and as grëy (VSD 266d, 494c). It is probably represented as grëy at Alex 1055b (see discussion over elli at § II.i.1). Grey is present at MNS 49b, 314c, SM 218c, VSD 25c, 34b, 125b, VSM 6a.

 

I.iii.3   ley and lëy

Ley is seen thrice in the Alexandre (865b, 1132b, 1143c), but rather more frequently in the Bercean corpus (LV 30b, 142b, 160c, MNS 185c, 335b, 852b, SM 14c, 22a, 28b, 28c, 50b, 76d, 88c, 93b, 215b, 220b, 277d, 297b, VSD 36a, 773d, VSM 442c). Lëy is more common in the Alexandre and in early mss. of the VSD and VSM (Alex 292b, 1057a, 1144b, 1884c, 2242a, 2326b; DV 155c, LV 87a, 145a, 151b, MNS 899b, 905c, PSL 91c, SM 58c, 73a, 73b, 93a, 95a, 106d, 108a, 123d, 135c, 146a, 279b, VSD 27b, 107a, 472d, 473d, VSM 4c, 6b, 455d). A fifth of these lines offer another possibility of dieresis.[68] There are no such possibilities in MNS, VSD or VSM. The plural form, lëys, is found only in the Alexandre (320b, 1560b, 2436d1*, 2583d), whereas the plural form, leyes, is found at LV 34c, VSD 144c, VSO 34b. The table below indicates the occurrences of lëy and ley and occurrences of the word at hemistich-final position.

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

lëy

6

2

3

2

11

4

3

ley

3

3

5

1

12

2

1

*

8

2

6

1

2

 

In the Bercean corpus, the use of ley to lëy forms a ratio of more than 2:1, apart from DV, where only lëy is found; in contrast, LV and SM offer monosyllables and bisyllables are used in roughly the same proportion. Hemistich-final position is generally avoided, apart from VSM (2x), PSL (2x) and SM (6x). The figures for the Alexandre are the opposite: the ratio of ley to lëy is 1:2; there are more occurrences of the word in hemistich final position than either as definitively ley or lëy mid-line—the only similar example in the Bercean corpus is PSL.

 

I.iii.4   muy and müy

Muy is used 168x in the Alexandre.[69] In bisyllabic form, it is found 45x (roughly a fifth of the total occurrences).[70] In the Bercean corpus, muy is used with a general frequency of one per ten stanzas; the VSD is slightly above this figure, but SM and DV approach the frequency of muy in the Alexandre; LV hardly uses muy at all.[71] Müy is used very rarely in two works: the LV and VSM, and not at all in the SM (when one would expect, in comparison to other works, between three and five examples). It is relatively frequent in PSL, nearly twice as frequent as in the VSD.[72] The use of the bisyllabic form compared to the monosyllabic form is notably lower for JF, MNS, VSD, VSM and VSO than for DV, LV and PSL, the latter approaching the percentage of the Alexandre. The frequency of usage in the Alexandre, however, is similar at the beginning and end of the poem (up to c. stanza 500, and from c. stanza 2000 on), with müy used less frequently in between. The use of muy is, however, relatively constant throughout the Alexandre.

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

müy

45

3

1

1

10

3

12

5

2

freq.

59.4

70

77

233

91.1

35

64.75

97.8

102.5

muy

168

10

10

4

97

10

17

62

53

28

freq.

15.9

21

7.7

58.25

9.4

10.5

17.5

12.5

9.2

7.3

21%

23%

9%

20%

9%

23%

16%

9%

7%

 

Figure 000: Frequency of müy (straight line) and muy (dotted line) in the Alexandre

Alternative possibilities for dieresis form roughly a third of the examples from Alex (49d buen, 149c luengos, 153c fue, 160b puesto, 402d buen, 1834a fue, 1873a buen cuerpo, 2132c gruesso, 2149d buen, 2180b ualiente, 2271a cuitada, 2490a fiera, 2606b taliento). Roughly two-fifths of the Bercean corpus offer an alternative to the dieresis on müy (DV 28c duelo, 64d buen, 127d isiestes, JF 15b fuert’, MNS 123a fuert’, 484d buen, VSD 137c fariemos, 439d iaçién, 520a façién, 615c buen taliento, 747d miedo, VSM 78b luenga, 90b buena mient’, 450b buen, 451b pueblo), although some of these would seem to be set phrases (DV 64d, JF 15b, MNS 123a, 484d, VSD 615c, VSM 90b, 450b), and, in general, the frequency of müy against other possibilities of dieresis leads one to prefer the former against the numerous possibilities of the latter—as, no doubt, contemporary readers would also have tended to do.

 

I.iii.5   oy and öy

Oy is found 13x in the Alexandre (Alex 64b, 239b, 520d, 700d, 766d, 963c, 1245d, 1417d, 1511a, 1688b, 1708b, 2283c, 2650c) and 15x in the Bercean corpus (DV 107a, JF 35d, MNS 62d, 349b, 454d, 475b, 477b, 479d, 619d, SM 93d, 94a, 152d, VSM 49c, 57a, VSO 191c); öy is found 14x in the Alexandre (Alex 52d, 70b, 688b, 699d, 707d, 962d, 984b, 1061b, 1367d, 1707d, 2080d, 2432d, 2654d, 2668b) and 9x in the Bercean corpus (DV 33d, 59d, MNS 655d, 656b, PSL 86d, 94c, VSD 97a, 511a, 515b). The word is found in hemistich-final position at Alex 64b1*, 166d1*, 374d1*, DV 140c, LV 87b, MNS 477b1*, VSM 119c, and in the metrically puzzling Eya velar, DV 190b.[73] The frequency of oy/öy in the DV is notable.

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

öy

14

2

2

2

3

freq.

191

106

455.5

52.5

259

oy

13

1

1

7

3

2

1

freq.

205

210

77

130

99

244.5

205

% öy

52%

66%

22%

*

3

2

1

1

1

tot.fr.

134

42

77

233

91

52.5

99

259

168

205

 

I.iii.6   qual and qüal

Qüal is found at Alex 130b ‘| o de qüál manera’, 985c ‘| a qüál parte ir’, 1553d ‘| qüal lo entendiesse’. In the Bercean corpus, LV 140d ‘que qüal él mandasse |’ (although Dutton, Oc III, 96, emended to ‘que qual elli mandasse’). It may also be found at Alex 21d ‘entendió sus auuelos | qüál cueita passauan’ (although cüeita would also be a possible construal of the line, as at 2447c ‘Nunca essa cüeita | uós nada non ayades’ (cueita appears 43x in the Alex; qual 107x).

 

I.iii.7   rey and rëy

rey: due to the subject-matter of the Libro de Alexandre, rey and rëy are very common. El rëy Alexandre, too, makes a perfect heptasyllabic hemistich, and thus rëy Alexandre is used 50x alone.[74] Rëy is used a further 129x.[75] In comparison, rey is used 130x.[76] And the word is found in hemistich-final position 169x.[77] The frequency through the poem changes, however, between just after stanzas 450 and 760, where the frequency of rey (the long dotted line) and rëy (the unbroken line) swap; the hemistich-final examples at first follow closely the line of rey, then, at just before stanza 1000, follow the more frequent rëy. After stanza 1500, rëy is remarkably regular in its use, whereas rey’s appearances fluctuate strongly.

 

Figure 000: frequency of rëy and rey in the Alexandre (rey: long dotted line; rëy: unbroken line; end-hemistich: short dotted line)

The Bercean corpus shows a wide variety of frequency in the use of rëy, with the VSD, VSM and JF the most frequent, since they deal with various types of kings. The more womanly MNS, VSO, LV and DV fall a long way behind.[78] Rey offers a different picture, with the surprising frequency in H (HI 3c, HII 1b, 4b, 7d, HIII 3c) and SM (SM 62c, 64d, 101b, 127c, 190d, 195b, 219d, 223c, 224a) contrasting with the paucity of the dieresised form in these two works.[79] Examples in hemistich-final position are few, and limited to LV, MNS, SM and VSD.[80]

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

rëy

179

1

2

2

4

4

30

23

3

freq.

16.1

210

38.5

116.5

227.8

74.3

25.9

21.3

68.3

rey

130

1

5

2

2

12

1

9

24

6

4

freq.

20.6

210

4.2

38.5

116.5

75.9

105

33

32.4

81.5

51.3

%rëy

58%

50%

50%

50%

67%

30%

56%

82%

43%

*

169

3

2

2

25

tot.fr.

5.6

105

4.2

19.3

33.3

50.6

19.8

9.8

 

29.3

 

The plural form, rëys, is found 11x in the Alexandre, and at LV 20b, MNS 319c, 614d, but reys is witnessed at Alex 990b, 1425c, 2188a, 2200a, MNS 24b, VSM 436a. The word occupies a place at hemistich-end a further 11x in the Alexandre (similar to the proportion of rëy to hemistich-end occurrences of the word), and at three times in the VSM.[81] Reyes is found at Alex 366b, 918a (although on both occasions, O avoids using the word, and a number of occasions rëys O] reyes P 12x[82]—the form reyes in the Alexandre, then, is not wholly to be trusted); but it is witnessed in the Bercean corpus: JF 41c, 49a, LV 35b, VSD 225a, 462c, 511c, 603d, VSM 90d, VSO 113a.

 

I.iii.7   uío and uio

The lenited form of uido (SM 253b, VSD 226c, 398d, 654a, 692a, 709a, VSO 8d, 25c, etc., and, in F’s copy of VSM: 46a, 159a, 162c, 222c, 438bd), uío is found in rhyme position twice (Alex 304a, MNS 85b: rhymes río, fío, mío; río, gentío, uazío). In initial- and mid-hemistich position, uío is found 46x in the Alexandre.[83] Unlike other forms with dipthongs, uio in the Alexandre is notable for appearing up to line 1880b almost exclusively in hemistichs with quando; for example,

 

      35a                                                                   Quando uio al diçiplo |

      129c                                                                 Quando uio estas gentes |

      162a, 1096a, 1142a, 1195a,                                Quando uio Alexandre |

                1341a, 1355a

      201c, 215a                                                        Quando los uio el reÿ |

      429c                                                                 | quando uio el roído

      580c                                                                 Quando esto uio Éctor |

      638b                                                                 quando uio sus parientes |

      669a                                                                 Quando los uio Aquiles |

      (and 690c, 1233b, 1350b, 1353b, 1687a, 1880b, followed by 2331a ‘Quando uio la Natura |’).

      Uío is also found with quando or quand’ in this part of the poem.

35d ‘| quando·l uío pauor’,

116b ‘Buçifal quando lo uío +|’,

180a ‘El infant’ quando los uío +|’,

213a ‘Fue quand’ uío la senna |’,

465a, 669b ‘Quando lo uío Éctor |’ vs. 478a ‘Quando·l uío el griego |’,

604b ‘ouo quand’ esto uío |’,

908c ‘Felipo quando la uío +|’;

The tendency is for quand’ or quando·l to produce metrical hemistichs, and full forms to produce hypermetry (116b, 180a, 908c); if, for example, line 908c appeared transposed in the manuscript, one would scan it Quando la uio Felipo, thus producing a metrical hemistich; it is only because uío occurs at the end of the hemistich that the hypermetry cannot be hidden. It would therefore seem that, in roughly the first two thirds of the Alexandre, the presence of uio is but a feature of scribal error manifested through copying quando or quando lo instead of quand’ or quando·l etc. In a manner similar to the Alexandre, but with far fewer examples, the VSM offers examples of uio only with quando: 129b ‘quando uio en est’ omne |’, 296a ‘| quando se uio coitado’—but note 196a ‘| quant’ se uío cueitado’. The ease with which an original line containing uío could be corrupted is seen in the manuscript variance where uío is preserved in one manuscript, but the other has added a syllable. Thus 35d is a composite line: quando·l uío pauor] quando lo uio pauor O quandol uio grant pauor P (which, like 35a before it, could have been reconstructed with uio—the hemistichs in O and P are metrical as they stand; grant pauor is found at 244a, 2182a); 478a Quando·l uío O] Quando lo uio P; 814c Quién uío P] τ quien uio O; 2507a uío O] que vio P).[84] This is not simply the fault of uío; the orthographically similar uïó (the third-person preterite of uuiar) also suffers a similar fate: 206a uïó O] el vio P, 213a quand’ uïó] quando uio O quant uio P.[85]

     The exceptions to hemistichs containing quando are few, and all contain apocopatable words. Alex 464a ‘Uiolo por auentura |’ follows P; O, however, offers the correct reading, Uío·l. Line 532a ‘Fincó oio a Pándarus | uiolo en un corral’ has no variation between the manuscripts, although the similarity to 464a does render it rather suspicious; and 540a ‘Uio cabo un ribaço |’, which, although it has no significant manuscript variation, is most probably to be understood as covering cab’ un ribaço (see below, § II.v.3).[86]

     The last third of the Alexandre has four examples of uio: Alex 2092d ‘fasta que uio al reÿ | en sus piedes tener’, 2095b ‘Poro tomó conseio | ca uio que mal estaua’, 2313a ‘Estonçes uio el reÿ | en aquellas andadas’, 2648b ‘Sennor dizién los unos | quién uio atal quebranto’. Similarly, the MNS and VSD offer examples of uio: MNS 734a ‘Uio a poca de ora |’, 854c ‘| do uio la uisïón’, VSD 233c ‘| omne non uio tan bonas’. MNS 734a in F, however, offers Uío a poca hora, although the phrase is usually a poca d(e) (but cp. Alex 1833c ‘fueron a poca hora |’). Uio at Alex 854c depends upon the trisyllabic uisïón, but this would seem quite regular.[87] VSD 233c is also acceptable, since it is the only occurrence in which both manuscripts offer «uo»; usually, uío S][uido F, and uido is offered by both S and F at 226c, 398d, 654a.

     Now, the presence of uido in the Bercean manuscripts is particularly interesting. It is present in the one occurrence of the word in SM, line 253b, where only I’s transcription of F survives. It is present throughout the VSD in F, with the exception mentioned above. It is present throughout the VSO–to the exclusion of uío. It was present in F’s text of the VSM: where F is extant, 46a; M’s transcription of F provides a sprinkling of uido at 159a, 162c, 222c, 438bd (against uío from the other manuscripts), although, perhaps due to M’s notorious carelessness, the usage is not as thoroughgoing as with VSO and VSD (uio at VSM 129b, 135b, 149a, 196a, 229c, 255a, 266a, 334c, 335c). It is notable, however, that F’s text of the MNS never provides uido, always reproducing uio (apart from 63b, 169a and 198b, where F def., and 700c where F has Bio; otherwise: 173b, 242a, 247a, 357c, 358a, 528c, 563a, 586d, 610a, 894c). Uido is also absent from the LV (44a, 115a), even though F provides the sole text for this poem. The variation between uido and uio across works, rather than within the same work, indicates that we are not discussing a purely scribal preference for one form or the other.[88]

            The separation of MNS and LV from VSD, VSM and VSO is particularly interesting considering VSO’s status as a late work. I am led to conclude that F has preserved revisions to the texts of these latter works whose aim was to preserve the metrical structure of lines, presumably against a tendency to pronounce uio rather than uío. With regards to the Alexandre, uío O] uido P is found 116b, 204d, 515a, 521a, 554b, 580c, 588b, 1195a, 2361c. Nevertheless, the variations at 1096a vío] vido P oyo O, 878a Oyó O] Vio P, and 1132b vío P] oyo O, would suggest that the underlying form was indeed «udo», since the confusions between oyo and uio point to a misreading of «udo» as «udo» and viceversa, forms which were then translated into the more amenable «uo» and «oyo». The same holds for «ueye», which is a credible mistake if the original form was «udo», misread as «ude».[89]

            To conclude our discussion of uío and uio. The latter is rare, but, in the last third of the Alexandre, it represents one quarter of all uses of the word. It is thus an example of the development of the poet’s language as he composed the work. Usage of the monosyllabic form is, if anything, even more limited in the Bercean corpus; but, perhaps in response to uio’s increasing use, the spelling uido would seem to have been adopted for some works at least—and probably as part of a orthography designed to improve the metrics of the poems. This spelling without lenition is not wholly observed in the Bercean corpus, however. The preservation of uío in the mss. of the Alexandre is certainly not constant, and although the majority of occurrences finds both manuscripts agreed on the hemistich in question,[90] the manuscript transmission tended to obscure the scansion uío in favour of uio.

 

I.iv      General Considerations

     The evolution of the spelling of uio/uido is a detail of a much wider picture. It is clear that, particularly with regard to mono-/disyllabic words, there is a tendency to remove the occasion for dieresis. This is most clearly seen in the difference between thirteenth-century readings in the Bercean corpus (mss. Q, S, B) and the perhaps fifteenth-century F. Such variation is often dismissed as scribal interference; this is unlikely to be the case, since the alterations maintain metricality—and, whatever his many virtues, the scribe of F was not overly concerned with maintaining the metrical structure of lines. The simplest indication of his metrical insouciance is the failure to preserve metrically crucial imperfect endings in –ié in favour of modernized –ía endings. Thus, through the addition of words, grëy at VSD 494c S becomes grey in F; lëy (S) becomes ley (F) at VSD 107a, 144c, 473d, VSM 4c, 6b; rëy > rey is even more common in F, at SM 153d, VSD 31d, 120a, 142b, 147a, 153b, 154a, 165a, 174a, 175a, 178a, 182c, 201a, 225a, 271c, 345b, 401c, VSM 59b, 69a; rëys > reys in F at MNS 319c; mäysón > maysón at VSD 444c.[91] There is not the space to defend each of these alterations, but VSD 107a is indicative: lëy in S is represented by ley bien; however, F only tends to substitute bien in Q and S for muy (MNS 135b, 183b, VSD 175a), rather than insert it, so it is unlikely to be an accretion by the scribe of the later manuscript.[92]

     Looking at the general distribution of dieresis, it is preferred in the Alexandre as the poem progresses. Within the Bercean corpus, however, the manuscript evidence points towards a later retrenchment of monosyllabic over disyllabic forms—particularly in those works which evidence the substition of «uio» by «uido». Through manuscript variation, therefore, one may glimpse an evolving attitude toward the manner in which contemporary language was used within the metrical structure, which was, unlike the Alexandre, away from dieresis.

     It is difficult to identify any particular cues for dieresis in the recitation of the works. Evidently, words in hemistich final position would be prime candidates for dieresis if otherwise the line would fall syllabically short (a clear example is glorïos–); but many words that show dieresis are not found in this position. A mere suggestion within the limitations of our evidence is that dieretic forms in –ïón were written with «–ton» to indicate their Latinate pronunciation, a distinction which was lost on later copyists (cp. «perfection» at VSM 21d, where F gives «perfeccion» at the same point; and afliction(es) which is consistently found with medial –t–). However, this orthographical marker is most definitely an exception.[93] We may surmise, then, that the manuscripts of cuaderna vía poetry were specially ‘scored’ for reading to indicate where dieresis should occur; they were destined only to be read by their authors; or they were designed for memorization, in which each half-line would be remembered as a fixed sequence of seven syllables. Memorizing the Alexandre would be a tall order, but it would certainly not be impossible. Manuscript variation in cuaderna vía texts, thus, may well be as much a record of variant dictations as the immediate transfer of words from parchment to parchment. Through such a mode of transmission, it is likely that cuaderna vía poems would be assimilated to other, more familiar, metrical forms, particularly during recitation, thus giving rise to the what Duffell has identified as ‘epic’ metres found frequently in later copies of poems.[94]

 

 

II. Apocopation and Ecthlipsis

     Apocopation and ecthlipsis are fundamental features of thirteenth-century poetic language (as it was of both prose and, we may assume, the spoken language). I shall refer to the loss of a final vowel as apocopation where this loss occurs seemingly irrespective of the beginning of the preceeding word; ecthlipsis where the loss of the vowel is linked to a contiguous vowel. I shall begin with the apocopation of personal pronouns and then pass to other classes of words. This form of study has been carried out before, but without analysing each word or class of words individually, as it is proposed to do here.[95] My interest is not so much to provide an estimate of dating (as has been the focus of interest of other scholars), but rather to produce clear evidence for the attribution of works, following on from my recent article on the attribution of the works in the Bercean corpus.[96]

 

II.i Pronouns

II.i.1    él and elli

Elli has ben almost completely erased from the manuscript tradition of the Alexandre. The exceptions are 185b and 2232d, and these are merely variants: ‘| quantos que él trayé’ (where que él P][ele O) and ‘| a él ad acostar’ (where él ad P][elle O; cp. VSD 296c ‘elle quando la uiesse |’).[97] It is, then, extremely difficult to restore with any hope of certainty the occurrences of elli that have been lost. The easiest is perhaps one occurrence in rhyme position: 1055d ‘| … él’ (él O] eley P), where the rhymes are in –ëy (contrasting with ‘| … él’ at 561bd, 638ad, 1242a where rhymes are in –el). Those examples that may have occurred mid-line are more uncertain, although examples of hypometry and dieresis may suggest eighteen further examples: 81d ‘él mesmo se quïere |’ (P] el despues mismo G, O def.), 114a ‘| ant’ él más yazïén’ (yazïén P] yazian O), 139b ‘|– con él a fallar’, 172a ‘Uoluïó con él guerra |’, 441c ‘|– él solo sennero’ (identical hemistich at 616d), 534d ‘| ante él se parar’ (where ante él se] añt se el P ant el se O), 558c ‘Él e don Eneas –|’ (El τ don Eneas P] El cond don Eneas O), 1135d ‘él les mostrarïé |’ (OP), 1156d ‘Acuçïó·s él ante |’ (P] antuuios el O), 1186d ‘de aquí a que se ouo +|– con él a fallar’ (de aquí a P] fasta O; although here transposition around the hemisitich divider is a possibility: ... a que con él | se ouo a …), 1282d ‘| él non tïene nada’ (P, O def.), 1290c ‘|– como en Él fío’ (although this is perchance cüemo en Él fío), 1348c ‘Guïólos él mismo –|’ (OP), 1382c ‘él e don Filotas –|’ (e P][con O), 1596a ‘Él con sus uarones –|’ (OP), 1648b ‘|– él fecho sennores’ (P] son fecho sennores O), 1770d ‘él yazíe en medio |’ (OP), 2222c ‘|– él mismo tener’ (tener P][prender O), 2358c ‘| qüanto qu’ él pidiesse’ (qu’él O, P om.), 2450b ‘| por él ha enuïado’ (but ha O] aue P), 2470b ‘|– él con sus uarones’ (OP). Other examples may have been hidden by the expansion of apocopated words through the process of copying.[98] This fundamental and wide-reaching uncertainty makes calculations of frequency otiose.

            In contrast, elli is well-preserved in the Bercean corpus, with few lines containing él or elli requiring correction metri causa: LV 140d ‘que qual él mandasse –|’ (although possibly que qual que él m…or que qüal él m…), 141b ‘|– él bien los oyó’ (or e él bien…), MNS 355d ‘auién con él todos –|’, PSL 48a ‘auién con él todos –|’, SM 269b ‘auién con él todos –|’, VSD 369d ‘façiése él mismo –|’. But the opposite (elli being written for él) is also true, but only once: VSM 129c ‘como era pïadoso +|+ ouo d’ elli pïedad’.[99] All manuscripts, with the exception of B’s copy of the SM, transmit the distinct forms of él and elli more-or-less correctly: B consistently suppresses the unapocopated form, elli. In the Bercean corpus, however, there are divergences of frequency and use between the works. Nevertheless, a general rule might be observed, and this is that elli predominates at first-hemistich end over él: the figures are given in the table below.

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

él

1

1 – 3

3

2

elli

3

7

10

3

0 – 2

16

7

2

 

SM in B offers three occurences as 1* of él; twice these were rendered as elli by Q (20b, 126a). MNS offers él once in rhyme position (the only example in the corpus) at stanza 718 where rhymes are in –el.

            The frequency of elli at hemistich end would not be so remarkable if elli were not otherwise so relatively infrequent mid-line, as can be seen from the following table:

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

él

18

1

6

30

51

13

25

92

40

10

elli

9

7

13

3

6

20

2

­­–

 

The relative percentages for the use of elli over total usage of él + elli indicate DV as using elli most frequently (33%). Where both forms are used mid-line in a work, the percentage is remarkably consistent: between 18% (VSD) and 20% (MNS). The exception is VSM, at 5%, although two works (H, JF) do not use the form elli at all, and the VSO only at hemistich end.[100]

            The faith that one may have in the fidelity of the transmission allows the average number of stanzas per occurrence of word to be calculated using both mid-line and end-line occurrences.

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

él

11.7

21

12.8

7.5

17.5

8.1

11.4

8.2

11.6

20.5

elli

17.5

16.6

39.6

18.2

37.1

21.6

54.3

102.5

 

Both él and elli are used most frequently in LV.

 

II.i.2    li, le, lo and ·l.           

In the Alexandre, ·l is found 324x, [101] together with a further 56x which can be restored through corrections metri causa.[102] Apocopation does not occur when the verb to which the object pronoun is attached ends in –n or –r, unless this is part of the future tense (and therefore has a vowel following and should more correctly be viewed as a form of ecthlipsis). The first element, rather than the second, of pronoun groups such as –seli and –teli apocopates (to ·sli and ·tli, for example; for ·sli, see below, § II.i.3).

     The Alexandre witnesses a varying frequency of the use of ·l and li/le. This variation is particularly noticeable when plotted against lo, whose frequency is constant: ·l becomes rarer after roughly stanza 1500 (although this frequency is the same as earlier frequencies, such as between 225 and 500, and 725 and 1000).

 

Frequency of lo (straight line) plotted with ·l (small dots) and li/le (short lines) in the Alexandre.

 

A smaller sample, of no·l, is shown below: it shows the barrier between around 1500 to be less acute than the general picture would show, although there is a change, and a more subtle one, and frequency returns to the earlier level between 2000–2250.

In the Bercean corpus, generally, the frequency of ·l is lower than in the Alexandre. The exceptions are LV and PSL, which are much closer to the norm of the Alexandre than to the other Bercean works. Given the curtailed nature of the PSL and the difficulty of extracting evidence bearing on authorship, this is an important element in any evaluation of the same.

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

·l

380

6

30

84

14

12

25

28

10

freq.

7

35

7.8

10.9

7.5

24.8

31.1

17.5

20.5

 

Infrequency is marked in both the VSD and the DV; but the latter is marked by a very high frequency of li (45x, and once le): an ocurrence every 4.6 stanzas and a proportion of ·l to li/le of 0.13; this can be compared with a frequency of 5.4 and proportion of 0.26 for the VSO (similar to VSD: 8.3 and 0.27). Still close are VSM (6.2; 0.35) and SM (9.6; 0.36), within sight of the MNS (4.8; 0.42). However, PSL (5.8; 0.78) is again close to the overall figures for the Alexandre (7.8; 1.09), and LV offers wholly anomalous figures (13.7; 1.76): a good 50% less frequent in the use of li/le than either the Alex or the VSD, and showing a much greater prediliction for the use of ·l.

     The frequency of lo is marked by little variation: rare in JF and VSO (with a frequency of 5.5 and 5.13 respectively), most common in MNS and VSD (2.59 and 2.33, respectively). The overall use of li, le and lo shows them to be most common in MNS, DV, VSD and PSL (1.69, 1.81, 1.82, 1.87); that there is a middling group of Alex, VSM, VSO, SM (2.21, 2.40, 2.62, 2.70) and then the LV (3.03); and finally the extreme JF (5.13): the relative absence of third person singular pronouns is striking in this latter work. H gives no examples at all.

 

II.i.3    se and ·s

The apocopated form occurs 168x in the ms. tradition, with another 27 examples that it is possible to deduce. In the Bercean corpus, the apocopated form is found once in the DV (& 195c); once in JF; once in LV (but twenty times through emendations metri causa);[103] thrice in the MNS (& 539a, 595d); twice in SM; twice in VSD (& 219d, 493b, 548c); twice in VSM (& 82c, 246c); once in VSO.

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

·s

195

2

1

21

5

­–

2

5

4

1

freq

13.7

105

77

11.1

182

148.5

155.4

122.3

205

 

The LV has a frequency just slightly higher than that of the Alexandre; none of the other works in the corpus comes close, with an average around one occurrence per 150 stanzas. The infrequency of the apocopated form in the Bercean corpus makes it very difficult to draw any other evidence from the figures that we have.

     The combination ·sli/·sle(s) is found exclusively in the Alexandre and, in that poem, predominantly in the first seven hundred stanzas (14x, against 3x for the rest of the work).[104] Correspondingly, –seli/le(s) is found 4x in the first seven hundred stanzas, and 23x afterwards (the frequency is doubled, from 175 to 85.9 respectively).[105] There is only one possibility of the form ·sle in Gonzalo de Berceo’s works: VSD 518a ‘aplegósele al lecho +|’, although the line would be better construed through the apheresis of aplegar to ’plegar (as used, for example, at VSD 229c).

    

II.i.4    me and ·m

The manuscript tradition of the Alex preserved 18 occurrences of metrical ·m, and a further nine may be deduced.[106] The graph below shows how the frequency of ·m (dotted line) is roughly constant throughout the Alex. The frequency of me, however, becomes more irregular just after stanza 1300.

In the table below, I have chosen to represent the percentage of occurrences of ·m against the total of ·m and me, since the frequency depends upon the amount of direct speech or direct address to the audience/reader, which may vary between works, depending upon their sources.[107]

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

·m

27

6

(1)

8

5

1

1

1

3

me

181

66

11

14

110

22

8

101

21

36

%

13

8.3

(9)

36.3

4.3

11

1

4.5

7.7

 

Whilst the picture is complicated by the infrequency of the use of ·m, there is no doubt that it is very rare in the Bercean works. JF, for example, offers only one apocopation of me, and that only in an alternate line carried only by F (63d: ‘bien de agora me espanto ‡|’).[108] The frequency of ·m in the DV and LV, however, sets them apart from other works.

 

II.i.5    que and qu’

The fortunes of qu’ in manuscript transmission have been poor. Qu’ is witnessed in the Alexandre at 235d ‘| qu’ el Crïador te guía’, 1459b ‘qu’ el rëy Alexandre |’, 2310a ‘| en qu’ el rëy yazié’, where qu’el O] que el P, and 2358c ‘| qüanto qu’ él pidiesse’ (O] quanto pidiese P). The first three of these lines are metrical in P as well, since one may also read rey at 1459b and 2310a and criador at 235d (as at 192a, 193a, 575d). In comparison, O offers qu’ erroneously at 180d, 310b, 417a, 552d, 667a, 988d, 1215b, 1225a, 1202c, 1365c, 2184b, 2366b (via the abbreviation «ql»; and «qu el» for que·l 683b). It may be possible to deduce the presence of qu’ from variants; the most convincing are 653b ‘| qu’ Aquiles mandó far’, which is constructed from P «q Archiles mãdo far»+ and O «ql mando far»≡ (although Cañas adopts the hypermetric reading from P and Nelson emends: que elli mandó far); 833a ‘| qu’ en escripto yazié’: qu’en] q en P ca en O (Cañas omits que, Nelson leaves the line hypermetric —qua en escripto yazié— but suggests omitting en; ca O] que P is found a large number of times: 2b, 26c, 50c, 55c … 2668d, 2671c, but que P] ca O at 2d and 1631b).

            Further possibilities would be 433b ‘qu’ el feruor del püeblo |’, derived from P «el ferbor d’l pueblo» and O «qu el feruor malo» — the qu’ here improves the sense (but Nelson, Cañas: que el feruor del pueblo); 494b ‘qu’ él nunca me uençiera |’: qu’ el nunca] que el nunca P qu el non O, which would also suggest the possible resolution que el non me uençiera (the reading adopted by Nelson and Cañas); 1947c ‘| el qu’ él auié crïado’ in which P offers «el q auje c’ado», O «lo q l auie iurado» (and both Nelson and Cañas opt for el que avié criadoO’s variant here is acceptable, but should be read as lo que·l auié iurado; as the hemistich is independent of P’s version, I do not think it can be merged with the latter). Furthermore, O provides metrically correct variants at 311b qu’ él touies’ por büenas |, 479d qu’ él me dará derecho | (where P «que me daredes derecho»+); 1005c más irado qu’ el rayo | más brauo qu’ el león (where P has «mas yrado q rrayo mas brauo qleon»: in support of P’s version, cp. 1469b ‘más claro que espeio |’ (OP), but, in support of O: 586d ‘| más negro que la pez’, 869d ‘| más negra que la graia’, 2418b ‘más dulces que la miel |’ and 1725c ‘| más duro que un maio’); 2144a Mïentre qu’ él estaua (P: ‘Mientre que él’); 2612a | qu’ el rey querié dormir (P ‘| que queríen dormir’).

The manuscript tradition, then, is at best disappointing. Most readings from O are paralleled by perfectly acceptable readings from P which do not require ecthlipsis; and, given the number of times that O’s enthusiasm for qu’el results in hypometry, one’s confidence in the manuscript’s fidelity to its model is severely shaken. Looking further than mss. variants, hypermetric hemistichs may be examined.[109] A small number may be identified as being probable witnesses to the ecthlipsis of que. Qu’él is to be suspected at 1289a, qu’ es at 801a, qu’ era at 1320b, qu’ en 840b, and possibly qu’ est– at 1676a; and further, qu’ auié(n) at 305d, 1232d, and qu’ an– at 1317b, qu’ ass– at 1694c, qu’ ar– at 63c; qu’ or– at 1542c; qu’ i– at 1549d. A number of these have only one manuscript witness (P), and so must again be held with a certain degree of disbelief. Although the ecthlipsis of que is found throughout the poem, it is more common in the first third (8x) and second third (10x) than in the last (1x); and all but three examples are found before stanza 1550.

The probable examples that can be deduced from hypermetry are the following:

63c ‘el dar le uale más |+ que armas nin fortalez’’ (P; O def.; all editors reproduce the line; only Nelson suggests más que | armas etc., but there is no evidence that this is legitimate: for ‘más | que’, cp. Alex 682d, 771d, MNS 625d).

305d ‘por mostrar a los griegos |+ que auién entrada bona’ (OP; Nelson wonders ‘Para efectos de prosodía, ¿incluyó el poeta que al final de [el primer hemistiquio], delante de la cesura? Sería simplemente otro caso de encabalgamiento extremo’. The answer to Nelson’s question is undoubtedly No.

801a ‘la pella que es redonda +| todo ’l mundo figura’ (pella P] pellota O, hence Nelson la pellota † redonda, but this is not wholly convincing)

840b ‘que en Éufrates yazién +| çerca de la ribera’ (en Eufrates O] en Frates P, haplography; Nelson notes (at 674b ‘A veces, el poeta omitía la conj. que después de verbos intelectivos, de comunicación y expresiones afines: demandar (130a), dezir (143b), saber (11d, 246cd), firme seré en esto (674ab), vino lengua certera (840b), jurar (1046d), temer (1532d)’, but demandar at 130a would not normally take que; dezir introduces direct speech, saber is provided with que at 11d and 246d; firme seré en esto is part of a series of exclamations at 674a, and therefore does not need que to articulate anything; vino lengua çertera is given by Nelson as salió lengua certera in his edition of the text and is part of the present problem, although one might observe that, if the que is omitted, the line becomes direct speech, and therefore the tense (yazién) is wrong; jurar (1046d) is equipped with que; but ‘temó dirá alguno’ (1532d) is similar to ‘temo seré culpado’ (VSD 52b): both have verbs in the future tense. The facile omission of que should not be contemplated.

1232d ‘creçióles grant esfuerço |+ por lo que auién oído’ (P, O def.; Nelson emends to por que·l avién oído, although this is not followed by Cañas).

1289a ‘De lo que él me promete +| yo non ge lo gradesco’ (P, O def.; Nelson omits él, and suggests the alternative omission of De; however, qu’ él is well attested in O)

1317b ‘de dar salto en ellos |+ luego que anocheçiesse’ (P, O def.; Nelson substitutes Deque for ‘luego que’, although deque is usually maintained in P (][desque O at 407a, 613d … 2243c; and cp. 635a después P][luego O and 2015a luego que P] quando O; anocheçer is only otherwise witnessed at VSO 10c ‘anochezrá’)

1320b ‘todos touieron que era +| conseio aguisado’ (P, O def.; Nelson emends touieron to tenién on the basis of VSD 417c ‘todos tenién que era |’)

1542c ‘el reÿ çerca ellos |+ que ordenaron las fadas’ (que ordenaron P] a que ordenan O; Nelson suggests emending ordenaron to alçaron, on the basis of MNS 307d, VSD 40a, 496b, but the use of alçar in these lines is as a technical term to refer to ecclesiastical election or promotion)

1549d ‘fazién bien a su guisa |+ de lo que iuan fallando’ (OP; Nelson emends to del que ivan…)

1676a ‘Sennor dixo Artábatus |+ al tiempo en que estamos’ (OP; Nelson preferred the omission of en, on the model of PSL 3a to apheresis of estamos—which is how Cañas emends the text; this is perhaps also the solution to 1569c ‘dixieron Rey sennor |+ en qué estás contendiendo’ (contendiendo O] entendiendo P; Nelson suggest the apheresis of estás)

1694c ‘Si de dios es iudgado |+ que assí ha de seer’ (Si de dios es iudgado] Se dios lo a iulgado O Si de dios es tornado e iudgado P; Nelson suggest the omission of que or the contraction of seer to ser)

There is a more numerous set of hypermetric hemistichs which are, however, unlikely to contain qu’.

10b ‘| que era el día nado’ (Casas argues for syneresis: ‘el dia’; however, el dia P] reziente O, which would suggest que era rezient’ nado, with Nelson and Cañas; further examples of ‘dia’ at 472d ‘| e el dia ataiado’ (P), but O offers «el dia destaiado»: the variation of ataiado and destaiado is taken by Nelson and Cañas as evidence of an underlying form, taiado (which is found at 1286b P (O def.) and MNS 658b, 694b, 835c; note, further the variation at 2466a estaiada P][destaiada O[110]); 1986b ‘que de dia nin de noche |’ (OP; Nelson que de día nin † noche; Cañas † de día nin de noche), but apart from this example, the corpus contains only the sequence noch(e)–día, not día–noche: 32d1, 1110b1, 1733a1, and MNS 23d2, VSM 264b2, VSO 3d2, 131d2, and further VSD 378a, VSM 384a), and so one is inclined to assume that this is the result of a transposition in the archetype; 1247d ‘en es’ día fue su obra | Aquiles ençerrando’ (P; O def.)—there is no real evidence to suggest ’n es’ día, but the possibility of a transposition is quite real: en es’ día Aquiles | fue su obra ençerrando (ençerrar as ‘to finish’ at Alex 1722d, 2422c but cerrar as the same at VSM 482c ‘nuestra obra cerrar’); 1994a ‘Fueron en una hora | e en un dia naçidos’ (OP; cp. 1362a ‘Ya lo tenién en cueta |+ e en una grant pressura’, where una P] om. O: Nelson e en muy grant p. …, Cañas e en un grant …; 191a ‘|+ e en grant …’, 1213b P (O def.) ‘en tornos e en retornos +| en todas sus andadas’, 2031b ‘en andar e en estar +| e en caualgadura’, and further for hypermetrical e en … DV 153d, 584d, PSL 21b (‘y en’), SM 162a (‘y en’), VSM 372b); 2171a ‘El mediodiá passado |’ (P, followed by Cañas; O «En medio de la passada», which may well suggest the apocopation of día to , although Nelson emends to meidía, found at VSD 454a F] mediodia S).

220cd ‘mostráuales afirme | que era con rencura

de la onta que auién +| fecha en su natura’ (P; O def.; ecthlipsis of la before onta is more likely)

380d ‘falsaron de la regla |+ que adonar·t prometieron’ (que adonart’] que adonat P quanto amas O—the line is possibly too corrupt to take anything from it; one may also understand que a donar·t prometieron, but donar is only found at LV 86c)

389d ‘mas sepas que en el mundo +| non sé yo tan uellida’ (mundo P][sieglo O; the most likely emendation is ’nel mundo/sieglo)

522c ‘Assí estaua Idus |+ que andaua esmarrido’ (P; O def.; Nelson om. que although elsewhere suggests that one should construe esmarrido with apheresis; Cañas follows Alarcos, que era esmarrido; but note also 103b estarié] estaria O andaria P and 711b, 1396b, 1419a andaua(n) P][estaua(n) O; 1454d andarién O] serién P

696d ‘Diz’ semeiamos moços |+ que andamos trebeiando’ (OP; Nelson, Cañas, que andan)

921d ‘bien creo que en el sieglo +| non aue sus calannas’ (aue P] an O; ’nel sieglo)

951d ‘que alguno non dixiés’ +| que quería bafar’ (alguno P] ninguno O: the phrase is anomolous since neither alguno nor ninguno otherwise follows que; there may have been a transposition, and the text originally have read que non dixiés’ alguno/ninguno)

973a ‘Lo que a mí uïerdes |+ non quiero que ál fagades’ (non quiero que ál P] quiero que esso fagades O, which has the same problems of hypermetry; Nelson, quiero que lo fagades, and Cañas, more sensibly, quiero que es fagades)

1014b ‘que ellos con sus cauallos +| amortidos cayeron’ (OP; Nelson suggests the omission of que on the basis of his omission at 1522b, since both follow tal(es); but this certainty is unsupported by any manuscript variation or example)

1064b ‘retroxo·l que era fiio +|– de mala putanna’ (putanna Casas] P def., nana O, hence Nelson’s construal, retraxo le que era | fijo de mala nana, followed by Cañas; O, unusually, does not include the hemistich divider; the original reading may well be retróxole que era | fiio de mala putanna)

1080b ‘más aueres trobaron |+ que a dios nunca pidieron’ (P, O def.; Nelson suggests reading non for ‘nunca’)

1630a ‘El omne que en fazienda +| e en lid uay cutiano’ (OP; or L’omne…; Nelson om. el)

1800b ‘de Danïel lo priso |+ que era allí notado’ (allí P] om. O; given the predilection of P for allí against ý, it is likely the line originally read que era ý notado —the route followed by Nelson and Cañas).

1927c ‘ca ya ueen que han preso +|– de ti muchos males’ (ca P][que O; Nelson, Cañas: ca † veen que han preso | de ti muchos de males, although a more sensible rearrangement would be ca ueen que han preso | ya de ti muchos males)

2113d ‘que obra de mano fecha +| non podié firm’ estar’ (man’ fecha is most likely)

2520c ‘que auié esta manera +| el rey de grant coraie’ (esta manera el rey de P][desta manera el rëy O; whichever of the variants one chooses, que is superfluous; Nelson, followed by Cañas, emends to que auié esta maña, in the light of 1514c maña P] manera O, although note 539b, 1057d guisa P] manera O).

 

The picture within the Bercean corpus is altogether simpler. Two examples of qu’ are found within the manuscript tradition:

 

LV 114a ‘Las guardas qu’el sepulcro | en comienda ouieron’;

F’s version of VSM 333d ‘pesáuali qu’ el túmulo | non era alumnado’, although Q ‘pesaua·l que el túmulo |’

 

Given the variant readings in the manuscript tradition between F and the copies of Q, it is probably unwise to accept F’s reading for 333d; LV 114a, however, does not allow any change to remove the necessity of ecthlipsis of que. We may further inquire into hypermetry, and the results are as follows:

 

LV 5d ‘que cobrarían por ti (+)|+ los que en Adán cayeron’ (adopted by Dutton, Oc III,  74)

LV 31c ‘sopieron que era signo +| del rey omnipotente’ (Dutton, Oc III,  78)

LV 32c ‘a dios dauan encienso |+ que assí es derechura’ (Dutton, Oc III,  79, ‘c’assí’, although que could here be omitted, although note Alex 1694c)

LV 83a ‘Los omnes que auía fechos +(+)| púsolos en su huerto’ (although Dutton, Oc III, 87, supresses Los; but cp. Alex 305d ‘que auién’)

LV 123d ‘todos nós lo cobramos |+ el bien que ellos perdieron’ (Dutton, Oc III,  93)

LV 126b ‘la quarta ad Emáus |+ a los que yuan carrera’ (Dutton, Oc III,  93)

LV 133c ‘dixieron en qué estades +| uarones entendidos’ (Dutton, Oc III,  95, ‘¿En qué ’stades’ (no comment); or, perhaps, ‘en que sodes’?; since qué has a tonic vowel, it is unlikely to be ecthlipthised, as is probably also the case with Alex 1569c.

LV 179d ‘non me membró que en esto +|+ me auía de ueer’ (Dutton, Oc III,  102; no·m membró would also be possible, but unlikely due to the difficulty of pronunciation)

LV 186d ‘agora recebit |+ lo que estonçe ganastes’ (also possible, and perhaps more probable, would be apocopation to estonz’)

LV 211b ‘probar lo que dezimos |+ que es cosa uerdadera’ (Dutton, Oc III,  107).

 

The number of examples of qu’ in LV is thus close to ten; it is not possible to identify any occurrence in H, JF, PSL or VSO. There are three possible cases in SM and two in VSD, and one each in DV, MNS and VSM, but few of these are ultimately persuasive:

 

DV 137b ‘lo qe ellos reuoluién +| io todo lo uedía’ (Dutton, Oc III, 37, ‘lo que revolvién ellos’, and comments ‘invierto el orden para corregir el metro’);

MNS 91a ‘Escripto es qe el omne +| allí do es fallado’ (Dutton, Oc II, 55; García Turza, pp.134–35; Baños, p. 205, om. ‘el’, since omne without the article is used elsewhere to indicate ‘any human being’: DV 64a, JF 7c, PSL 39c, MNS 613a, SM 286c, VSD 398d, VSM 438d, VSO 157b. Cp. MNS 793d.)

SM 169d ‘la sentencia que él dixo +| en esso la quebranta’ (Dutton, Oc  V, 38, om. él: ‘porque sobra una sílaba’, followed by Cátedra, ed., p. 1002). Given that both mss. agree, it is desirable to construe this hemistich as la sentencia qu’él dixo (as in the Alexandre). 

SM 268b ‘desuuelue la patena |+ que estaua uolopada’ (Dutton, Oc V, 51, and Cátedra, ed., 1027 ‘que sedié’ (cp. in particular SM 178c, where I’s copy of F offers the unmetrical estouo against the metrical souo of B. See, for further examples of this type of substitution, MNS 151d, 184a, 247b, 279c, etc.), although the difference between «qu estaua» and «que staua» is perhaps a tenth of an inch.

SM 270a ‘El cáliz en que está +| el uino consagrado’ (Dutton, Oc V, 52, ‘en que siede’; Cátedra, ed., 1027, as ms.; although see 268b, above)

VSD 473a ‘Mandamos a los fiios |+ que onrren a los parientes’ (Dutton, Oc IV, 109; Ruffinatto, ed., 194: que onrren † los parientes)

VSD 525b ‘que aburrieron el sieglo +| uisquieron encerrados’ (Fitz-gerald, ed., p. xxxvi ‘que obrrieron el sieglo’, obrrieron taken from a form generated by ‘obrricido’ (for ‘aborrecido’) in two mss. of the Fuero juzgo. Fitz-gerald’s suggestion was adopted by Ruffinatto, ed., p. 207. Of itself, this resolution does not inspire confidence. Dutton, Oc IV, 117, ‘q aburrieron el sieglo’, but with no discussion. To maintain the hypothesis of qu’, one might decide that a transposition might have occurred, quel sieglo aburrieron. Another possibility would be to assume that ‘aburrieron’ was a misreading of an imperfect tense (see the discussion at VSD 403a): que aburrién el sieglo, but this sits unhappily with the following hemistich’s ‘uisquieron’.[111] A much simpler solution would be to supress the que altogether: Sennor San Beneýto | con los escapulados/ † aburrieron el sieglo | uisquieron encerrados.

VSM 234b ‘por ueer qué menguaua |+ o qué auié de complir’: here, again, the inherent unlikliness of the omission of the tonic vowel before a vowel other than initial e– leaves one with the sole solution of the suppression of o (for the articulation of two questions without o, see VSO 59ab, Alex 961c; Koberstein, ed., p. 158 and Dutton, Oc I, 128, † qué auié de complir).

 

In conclusion, then, we have an almost complete absence of qu’ from the Bercean corpus other than in LV and, perhaps, SM.

 

II.i.6    Demonstrative pronouns and adjectives

     II.i.6.a        éste/ésti, este/esti and est’

The apocopated form is not well preserved in the manuscript tradition of the Alexandre. It can be found at 8a est’ infant’ and 693c est’ omne (for both: est’ O] este P); it has also been deduced at 1050a est’ comedio, where Nelson arrived at the form from ste (P) and este (O; although note 65b este O] ste P), and should also probably be adopted for 1160c esti obispo (where P sti, O este).[112] Further examples may be extrapolated from hypermetry, although three words bulk large: este/i comedio (573c, 651d, 803a, 1124a, 1292a, 1641a, 1270b, 1889a, 2037a)[113] and este mundo/siglo (984d, 1652a, 1812d, 2261d); the other examples are este ninno (13b), este adobo (93a), este omne (627d), este dïablo (637d), este mandado (1771d), este lugar (2435c), este monte (2482a–este monte is unlikely),[114] and finally este/i ditado (2675a). The distribution is roughly constant throughout the work (1st third: 9x; 2nd, 7x; 3rd, 7x; overall frequency: once per 116 stanzas). Este/esti, the full form of the adjective, is regularly present throughout the poem (1st third, 16x; 2nd, 19x; 3rd, 14x). The demonstrative pronoun, éste/ésti is found in apocopatable conditions only twice, at 69c ‘Éste es nuestro mester +|’ (Éste P] ca este O) and 1161a ‘Yo a ésti non adoro +|’ (esti P][este O). Éste/ésti is also regularly present throughout (21x: 1st third, 8x; 2nd, 4x; 3rd, 6x).[115] In the graph below, est’ is indicated by the circles, este/esti by the dark line of diamonds, and ésti/éste by light grey squares; noteworthy is the relative scarcity of the apocopated form between 13 to 573, 1124 and 1161, and 2037 to 2435; the tendency of ésti/éste to be grouped closely together (four occurrences, 374–447, nothing between 448–1257; three between 1538–1683; 1684–1720, a gap; two at 1721, 1805; the next group at 2367–2442).

 

 

The relative paucity in the Alexandre is contrasted with the abundance of est’ in the manuscript tradition of the Bercean corpus, and the wider number of words in front of which the apocopated form is used (although this holds only for the MNS, VSD and VSM which have est’ before [b], p–, r–; these works and PSL have est’ before s–):

DV 91b c–, 103b m–;

MNS 103c [b]–, 105a e–, 110c r–, 134a p–, m–, 146b l–, 161c c–, 167c o–, 211d o–, 218c m–, 221a m–, 252a [b]–, 286a p–, 288b m–, 315c s–, 351b o–, 410a m–, 459c c–, 500b l–, 624c m–, 645b m–, 674d e–, 747a [b]–, 748c e–, 818a p–, 820d s–, 857d l–, 906b b–, & 370d ‘methieron esti miráculo +|’, 562d ‘|+ echadas d’ esti logar’

PSL 74c e–, 75c s–, 84d o–,

SM 122c m–, 153a c–, 158a c–, 170b l–, 200c m–, 207c o–;[116]

VSD 28d s–, 42a b–, 69d l–, 80d c–, 83d e–, 94c o–, 108d c–, 124b p–, 137a s–, 195c m–, 219d fe–, 281a d–, 301d d–, 302d e–, 313d m–, 335b c–, 341c l–, 345c m–, 351a p–, 372d c–, 375a c–, 390a c–, 409c o–, 417c m–, 453c c–, 537a s–, 575c c–, 741d fe–, 757c t–, 758b p–,

VSM 9b m–, 33d l–, 34d e–, 59c l–, 64a s–, 85d s–, 111b p–, 114a l–, 125d b–, 129b o–, 139b fr–, 144a c–, 162a e–, 190c r–, 203d s–, 205c s–, 237c fu–, 305c huésped, 395a c–, 415a c–, 430d p–, 470d s–, 489a t–, & 159c ‘empïada esti clérigo +|’,[117] 127c ‘disso·l d’ esti omne sancto +|’, 299d ‘|+ quiero d’ esti sieglo ir’,

The LV and VSO, both preserved only in F, only have hypermetrical hemistichs which may be resolved by est’ or ést’: LV 64a ‘Pilato d’ esti captiuo +|’, 105c ‘éste fue ante dellos otro ‡|’, 128a ‘|+ en este medio corrieron’, 144a ‘|+ dios este cuento sagrar’, 156d ‘nunca fue en esti mundo +|’; and possibly 16c ‘a Iacob ésti le fiço +|’ (ésti le/ésti·l), 17d ‘qui a ésti non oyer’ +|’ (the elements may have been transposed), 71c ‘|+ a éste te comendó’ (éste te or éste·t), 85c ‘éste compuso el archo +|’ (or ’l archo), 104c ‘éste sólo es del nombre +|’ (possibly sólo), and 232b ‘qui este romançe fizo +|’;[118] VSO 37a ‘Resçibe este conseio +|’, 38a ‘Oyendo este conseio +|’,  45b ‘obieron con este árbol +|’, 78c ‘non podrié en este mundo +|’. There are only two occasions when F offers este in the VSO that the line is not hypermetric (63a, 151a); all other occurrences are esti in the ms., and metrically correct (72c, 94c, 96a, 97c, 121b, 122b, 170a, 179a). The equation is not quite as neat in LV, but still within the same lines (este/éste hypermetric 6–7x: 71c, 85c, 91a, 104c, 105c, 128a, 144a; este metrical 2x: 18b, 190d; esti/ésti hypermetric 2–4x: 16c?, 17d?, 64a, 156d; esti metrical 8–10x: 35a, 53c, 79c, 90a, 91c, 92a, 102a, 149c and further 16c?, 17d?). These results would suggest that the errors in F are not all due to that scribe, but were already present in the model of LV.

Ést’ is found only at SM 200c and LV 105c (and possibly 16c, 17d, 71c, 85c, 104c), but not in other works; éste/i is found at JF 5a, 10a, 58d, LV 79c, 80a, 91ac, 92a, 190d, MNS 110c, 331c, 569b, 650b, 736c, 737b, PSL 25b, VSD 114c, 712c, 732b, VSM 396a, 480c. The frequency of ésti/e in JF and LV is noteworthy. Furthermore, the proportion of apocopated forms when taken together with full forms is similar for a wide spread of works (VSO 25%, SM 29%, Alex 33%, MNS 34%, PSL 38%); the extremes are marked by the smallest proportion of the apocopated form (DV 16%) and its greatest proportion (LV 46%, VSM 59%). The lowest frequency of est(i/e) is found in DV (17.5 stanzas per occurrence) and JF (19.25); other works fall between LV and VSM (9.7, 10.6) and VSO and SM (13.6, 14.1). Poets would seem to have avoided este/esti + vowel, since there are only five examples in the corpus: este abbad (VSD 223b), esti adobo (VSO 96a), esti aniuersario (Alex 142d), esti apellido (PSL 67d), esti espanto (DV 120d), d’este omne (Alex 903d);[119] est’ e– is found at MNS 105a, 674d, 748c, PSL 74c, VSD 83d, VSM 162a, est’ i– at Alex 8a, est’ o– at Alex 693c, MNS 167c, 211d, 351b, PSL 84d, VSD 28d, 94c, VSM 127c, 129b, 430d.

 

     II.i.6.b        ésse/éssi, esse/essi and es’

Es’ is better preserved in the Alexandre than est’: Alex 32d, 123d, 136c, 1180c (es’ día), 273b (es’ derecho), 851c (es’ conuento), 933a, 1434a (es’ conseio), 1123c, 2458b (es’ comedio), 1007d, 1434a, 2098c, 2422a, 2551a (es’ logar/lugar).[120] The curious reading of «se» in P at 1160b and 1247d suggested to Nelson that one should read es’ (1160b es’ omne santo] esse sancto ombre O se omne sancto P; 1247d es’ día] se dia P, O def.; see above, § II.i.6.a for «ste» > est’). Hypermetry also indicates the possibilities of five further examples: 32b ‘seyé en esse comedio +|’ (P ese, O este), 389c ‘tiénenla por esse miedo +|’ (P ese, O esse),[121] 1160a ‘|+ e esse mismo uestido’ (P),[122] 2034d ‘con esse mismo adobo +|’ (P ese, O esse). There is little variation in the words that follow es’: día (5x), logar/lugar (5x), comedio (3x), conseio and mismo (2x; further, once: conuento, miedo, omne).

     Ésse/éssi, as the full form, is found at most 10x: 470d (ésse O] ese P), 1162c (ésse] ese P esso O), 1448a (éssi] esy P esse O), 1665d (ésse O] ese P), 2358c (ésse] ese P es O), 2630b (ésse O] ese P), and once ésse is deduced by Nelson at 988c(followed by Cañas and Casas) from O «ess», P «asy» and éssi at 850c from O es, P asy; once, further 1448b éssi non P][et nunca O, and 131b (aquel P][ésse O). There is one occasion on which one should understand és’: 64c ‘|+ ésse tienen por cortés’ (P a se, O a esse); as Nelson understood at 1160b and 1247d, «se» should be reversed to give es’.

     The full form of the adjective is much rarer than the apocopated (5x vs.21x: 317c (esse mismo] P ese m–, O es m–), 1213d (esse curso] P ese c–, O es c–), 2053c (esse día O] esti dia P), 2566d (essi tiempo] eσy t– P es t– O), and 1280d in which the apocopated form results in hypometry: ‘si en es’ conseio –|’ (P, O def.). There is one example in which variation and transposition produces equipollent variants: 1053b que auié esse día | en la lit a finar P][que auié en la lid | es’ día a finar O (Nelson, Cañas and Casas follow P, although, given the clear preference of the poet for es’ día, O’s reading seems preferable). The frequency, then, of es’ is roughly constant through the poem (1st third, 8x; 2nd, 8x; 3rd, 5x).

     In the Bercean corpus, the spread of es’ is by no means uniform. Those offered by the hagiographies are limited, although they do demonstrate a wider spread of initial letters following es’ than in the Alexandre ([b], l–, s– as well as c–, d– and m–): MNS 262b (es’ conseio), 472c (es’ cuerpo), 532b (es’ lazo), PSL 80c (es’ sancto uarón), SM 211a (es’ sancto uarón), VSD 189a (es’ menoscabo), 407b (es’ menoscabo), VSM 115d (es’ conuiento), 477c (es’ uoto). There are no examples in DV, H, JF, VSO. Corrections to LV’s hypermetry, however, produce results that are closer to the Alexandre: there is one example of és’ (LV 11c ‘en éssi uíno la pluuia +|’),[123] and two examples of es’ día, the most popular use of es’ in the Alexandre but otherwise absent from the Bercean corpus (176a ‘|+ peccador en esse día’, 182c ‘los que fueren esse día +|’). Éssi is found 4x in MNS, SM, VSD, and VSM, twice in LV and once in VSO.[124]

     The proportion of apocopated es’ to esse/essi is not constant either between works or between the proportion of est’ to este/esti of the same works; esse/essi apocopates much less than este/esti (other than in the VSM where the percentage of apocopation in the use of esse is 50%, in that of este 59%; this is similar to the MNS 27% for es’ and 35% for est’). In the VSO and DV, no examples of es’ are to be found (contrasting with 25% and 17% respectively for est’); SM 6% (29% for est’), VSD 12% (43% for est’), PSL 16% (38%). The percentage of apocopation in the Alexandre is markedly different for es’: 81% (31% for est’). This is perhaps the same level as the scribe of B, who routinely reduced essi in his model to es’ (cp. essi] es B at 35a, 41a, 50d, 114d, 119d, 149d, 164a, 235c; the only correct reproductions are essi 86a and esse 74d. As with este in the VSO, the two occasions that esse is found in LV (176a, 182c) the hemistich is hypermetric; essi (64d) is, however, correct.

     The overall frequency of este/esse, est’, éste etc. in the corpus has one irregularity: in DV, these words occur once every 14 stanzas; this contrasts with 8 for LV, PSL and SM; 9 for VSD, VSM; 10 for MNS, VSO; and 11 for JF. DV is, however, closer to the Alexandre, at 20 stanzas per occurrence. LV, on the other hand, is noteworthy for the frequency of ést(e)/ést(i)/éssi (16.6 stanzas per occurrence), which contrasts most strongly with MNS 91.1 stanzas per occurrence, VSD 111. Indeed, stylistically, the LV prefers éste etc. to the use of the adjective.

 

     II.i.6.c        excursus on esto

Esto has been kept separate from this discussion. In the manuscript tradition of the Alexandre, it is never found in opposition to est’, but is to éste, and occasionally to esso as well as aquesto.[125] In the graph below, which plots the usage of esto, one may see a slight change in frequency after stanza 1332.

In the Bercean corpus, the frequency of use varies: DV and JF use esto least of all (once per 26 and per 39 stanzas respectively), whereas the other major works oscillate between 11 (SM) and 17 (VSM).

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

esto

8

1

2

20

69

7

27

58

29

16

freq.

26

21

39

12

13

15

11

13

17

13

 

The MNS offers two differing rates of frequency, as can be seen in the graph below (left), whereas the VSD offers a more constant parabola (right).

 

 

 

     II.i.6.d        aquél, aquelli, aquéllo and aquel

The presence of aquél in the Alexandre is much rarer than éste/ésti, and is generally supported equally throughout the ms. tradition: 131b (P][ésse O), 415d (OP), 971b (OP), 1938b (OP). Further to this is aquel que (Alex 910a, 988c), which may be compared to the sole occurrence of este que (Alex 626c OP). Aquél is also rare in the Bercean corpus: JF 67a (‘Aquél será el día |’), VSD 356a (‘Aquél es bien mesquino |’), and aquel que at VSD 329a. Aquelli is found only in LV 152c ‘doncas aquelli era | el día sennalado’ (doncas is a nonce word in the corpus) and VSO 84d ‘aquelli que non quiso |’.

     Adjectival aquel is much more frequent than aquél in the Alexandre, giving a maximum of 19x for the Alexandre (1st third: 6–11; 2nd: 6; 3rd: 2; 1st half: 10–17; 2nd half: 2).[126] The upper figures for occurrences of aquel are perhaps an exaggeration, since there are several readings which involve a metrically unacceptable insertion of aquel, manifested in both parts of the ms. tradition, affecting particularly the first and last thirds of the poem: 111d que·l] aquel P que le O, 353d lo que vos me O] aquello que vos P, 402c del O] de aquel P, 512d al P] aquel O, 1721 éste P] aquel O, 1932c el] al P aquel O, 1963b pora qui non O] synon aquel que P, 2089d del P] d aquel O, 2551a enchir ess’ O] sallir aquel P.

     In the Bercean corpus, adjectival aquel is used with varying frequencies in different works, with the most use being found in LV. DV 167a (galeador), JF 23d (día), LV 20a (tan grand secreto), 44c (cordero), 66a (día), 107b (día), 145d (anno), 173d (día), 174a (día), 176d (día), MNS 613a (panno), 836a (dictado), SM 91b (rancón), VSD 165a (aquel rey F][el rëy S), 748d (aquel sennero F, S def.), VSM 360c (día). Certainly some of the frequency of aquel día is due to the words being a calque on the Latin ‘dies illa’.

 

     II.i.6.e        Aquello

Aquello is generally maintained by P in the ms. tradition of the Alexandre, with only one potentially acceptable variant, perhaps significantly towards the end of the poem: 203d (P] ello O), 350d (P] esso O), 677d (OP), 2175d (OP), 2618c (aquello O][tal cosa P). The limitation of occurrences to the very beginning and end of the Alexandre is not matched by aquellos: 333d OP, 753c P] fasta que ellos O, 918c OP, 1417a OP, 1584a OP, 1953d OP, 2136a OP (where aquellos que: 333d, 918c, 1584a; aquellos del cauallo 753c; aquellos más tiernos 1953d and aquellos cannones 2136a); aquéllos is at Alex 854a, 870c, 1902b.

     Within the Bercean corpus, aquello is equally rare: LV 142d, SM 213d, 274c, VSM 338b (and aquellos: LV 181b (twice), MNS 5d, VSD 5d, VSO 48b; and aquéllos: VSM 217cd ‘cuidáuanse aquéllos | que éstos los quemauan/ e éstos ad aquéllos | otrosí los danpnauan’).[127] The line, in its alternation of aquéllos/éstos recalls Alex 1526cd where éssas, aquéstas and aquéssas alternate.

 

     II.i.6.f        Aqués’, aquessi/aquesse, aquessa

Although there is no survival of aqués’ in the manuscript tradition of the Alexandre, there is one example where aquessa might possibly apocopate: Alex 1176d ‘|+ d’ aquessa agua beuido’, where the line is constructed from P «de aquesa agua beuido» and O «d aquella agua beuido». Nelson’s only comment, on emending to d’essa agua, is ‘El metro desautoriza P aquesa – O aquella’; but Cañas does indeed adopt the apocopation, d’aqués’ agua. (‘Essa agua’ is only found in the Bercean corpus, not elsewhere in the Alexandre, and, in identical hemistichs, ‘| essa agua cabdal’ at MNS 48b and VSD 48b, referring to the Rivers Tagus and Duero respectively; the form ‘esta agua’ is witnessed at VSM 193b, referring to a rather smaller quantity of holy water). Aquéssas is found at Alex 1526cd ‘mas éstas con aquéssas | son assí aferradas/ que sean a aquéstas | aquéssas sobiudgadas’, and in Nelson’s emendation to 1197d, where he surmises semeia que es esto | aquessas nueuas mesmas (in this followed by Casas) from P «semella que es esto esas nueuas mesmas» and O «semeian : estas nueuas a essas». Cañas, however, emends to semeia que es esto | las nueuas mesmas essas (the rhymes in befas – cabeças – espessas offer little assistance). Yet it is clear that the scribe of O is trying to make sense of a corrupt line, and so P’s variant may also be garbled. Aquesso is only present in one line, and there only preserved in P (Alex 384c ‘| ellas aquesso temen’) since O offers the hypermetrical esso.

     The presence of aquessa(s) in the Bercean corpus is limited to SM and VSD, although only in certain manuscripts: SM 31c (a essas I (here reproducing F)][aquessas B),[128] 116b (B][aquellas I), 216b (aquessa grey B] aquesse grey I (=F)but grey is always feminine), and VSD 444c (essa mäysón S][aquessa maysón F). Thus 216b and proably 116b from SM are genuine, and 444c F is most likely a later revision to remove the dieresis (see above). Aquessos is found only in JF 46a F — although Q bore the equally acceptable essos son.

 

     II.i.6.f        aquest’, aqueste/aquesti and aquesto

There is only one example of the apocopated form, aquest’, in the corpora: SM 201a ‘El sancto sacrificio |– d’ aquest’ buen uarón’, which is hypermetrical, and should probably be resolved as d’aqueste buen uarón.[129] Aqueste is found at most 5x in the Alexandre: 160c (P, O def.), 771b (el bien d’ aqueste O][sy el bien d’este P), 1624b (P] este O), 2206c (OP), and, perhaps, furthermore, 2002a este riuiello P][aqueste río O. The ms. evidence shows that only P inserted aqueste unmetrically: este O] aqueste P at 28a, 236c, 1061b; therefore O’s version at 2002a is to be supported. Aquéste is only found at 117d ‘Todos dizién Aquéste | será emperador’, aquestos only at 1206c OP.

            Aquesto is, nevertheless, relatively frequent in the Alexandre: 17x (1st third: 8x; 2nd, 6x; 3rd, 3x).[130] This number may be added to by the following variants: 80d déveslos toda vía | meter más delanteros P][aquestos echarás | siempre por delanteros G (as Nelson comments, ‘La versión que ofrece G […] puede ser auténtica’), 838a esto fue P][aquesto O, 910c Esto que yo te P][Aquesto que yo O, 1215a Cueido a esto dar P][Puédouos dar d’aquesto O, and 2419b con esto P][d’ aquesto O. Given that O tends to err by shortening the form (58d?, 257a, 788d?, 963a?, 1089a, 1724a), rather than inserting the longer form for the shorter —as does P (373d and 674a esto O] aquesto P; 710a esto] esso O aquesto P), one is led to prefer O’s readings of aquesto over P’s without the word. O’s tendency to shorten the form is also shown in aquesta, which is witnessed thrice in the Alexandre (1673b aquesta gent’ P][esta yente O,[131] 1691c P] esta O, but 2274d OP; aquésta is witnessed in both mss. at 584d ‘Dixo Éctor Aquésta | te será bien uertida’ (leg. ‘aquesta [sangre]’). Aquesto is much more common in the first half of the poem (18x) than in the second (5x); it is absent between stanzas 1236–1723.

            It remains to be asked whether any further examples of aquest– have been lost through manuscript transmission. There are several possibilities:

Alex

444d ‘non trayé más de doze | éstas bïen cabdales’ (discussed above, n. 48).

 927c ‘con una grant partida |– d’ esta mançebía’ (P, O def.),

1119a ‘El buen reÿ Irán |– d’ esta Tiro era’ (d’ esta P] d’ ella O),

1276c ‘Creo que en esto –| grant amor les buscamos’ (P, O def.),

1321a ‘Dixo Non me semeia |– d’ esta tal razón’ (P, O def.),

1572d ‘que uayas con éstos –| recabdar un mandado’

Three are readings of one manuscript; three also involve d’, but these, together with Alex 209a ‘|– d’ essa red ixir’, are among the very few occurrences in which d’ produces hypometry in P. Furthermore, there are few occasions when P offers unmetrical d’: 106b d’una costilla P [de costiella O, perhaps due to partial transposition or eyeskip, since d’un is in the following hemistich, reproduced in P as de un;[132] 504a E ella τ d’ella parte P [De cada parte O, where the line has been wholly garbled in P; 1751a P «D compañas de Dario», an evident mistake; and perhaps, but not necesssarily, 2504b d’él P [so sí O.[133] Only once P offers a correct ecthlipsis of de against an error in O: 2474a d’ellos a P] de los O. Nevertheless, P is more likely to expand d’ to de (46x),[134] to maintain de where O omits it[135] and, correspondingly, omission of de by P is relatively rare.[136] There are no further occasions, other than 1119a, that hypometry is produced through both P and O agreeing on the ecthlipsis of de. None of the four mistakes involve est–, and so the possibility of a mistake on the part of P is relatively small (Nelson, Cañas, emend to de at 927c, 1119a, 1321a). However, as shown above, P is not always faithful in retaining forms in aques–, and O often does not, so that we are forced to assume an error in the archetype in transmitting est– for aquest–. Nelson adopts aquesto for both 1276c and 1572d; Cañas follows Nelson for the first, but prefers que uayas con éstos for 1572d, probably correctly.[137] In the light of this discussion, then, I would suggest that aquest– was originally present in 927b (possibly), 1119a (probably), 1276c (definitely); 1321a (possibly, although here the text may also be garbled beyond any hope of repair).

     The use of aquest– is limited in the Bercean corpus to LV, MNS, SM, VSD and VSO. Aquesta is found only in the two longest narrations in the MNS (526c, 527b, 848c), in F at VSD 473d (aquesta ley F][esta lëy S) and VSO 52d ‘| d’aquesta su calanna’. Aquestas is found twice, in almost identical phrases: VSD 638a ‘Todas aquestas femnas |’ and 678a ‘Anbas aquestas femnas |’, where aquestas F] estas S (cp. 642b SF ‘por dolor d’ estas femnas |’). Aquesti/aquesse is limited to the LV and SM (LV 34a, SM 94a, 191d, & 201a; aquesti: LV 16b), aquestos: LV 166b. Nevertheless, Q offered öy en este día for SM 94a (B: oy en aqueste día), but it is likely due to chance that Q’s hemistich is not hypometrical.[138] The word aquesto is limited to LV 113c, 116a, 117a, 136a and at VSD 178a (Rey aquesto F][Rëy esto S) and 239b ‘porque uiene aquesto |’ (F] esto S).

     Some use of aquest– may have been lost through ms. transmission:

SM 195c ‘d’ esti sacrificio –|’ (F esti] est’ B)

SM 285d ‘esto cadadía –|’ (IF)

VSD 238a ‘Estas que tú uedes –|’,

VSO 68b ‘esto en que somos –|’,

With hypometry, even more than hypermetry, solutions multiply. SM 195c was emended by Dutton to de esti (although B’s reading may be maintained, and the omission of nuestro or sancto be supposed);[139] for 285d, Dutton added a syllable: e esto. The emendation of VSD 238a to Aquéstas is found in Fitz-Gerald, ed., p. xxxiii, and followed by all editors since. The VSO does have d’aquesta, and so an emendation to aquesto en que somos would be legitimate, although Dutton suggested en que sedemos (Dutton, Oc V, 104, for which cp. VSD 152d, ‘quantos aquí sedemos | iacemos en mal baño’, where sedemos S] somos F). A particular problem is given by VSD 470c, ‘más lis uale aquesto | que chistas e locuras’, a line whose reading is assembled from a composite of S, Scorr. and F. S reads «mas uale esso», and Scorr. emended esso to ‘aquesto’; F «mas lis ualdrá esso» (the aquesto/esso refers to the Pater noster). Vergara, p. 277, amended the text to ‘más vale digan esso’ (found in the line above this, ‘castigad que lo digan’), which was followed by Fitz-gerald, Orduna, and Ruffinatto. Dutton, Oc IV, 109, chose to combine F with Scorr. to produce ‘más lis valdrá aquesso’ (a procedure Ruffinatto (loc. cit., ad v. 1879) had described as ‘una reconstrucción a salto de mata, por llamarla de algún modo’; Dutton read ‘aquesso’ where Ruffinatto saw ‘aquesto’). The reading of F may serve as the basis for other rejiggings of the hemistich such as esso más lis ualdrá. But the archetype would seem to have been faulty, and reconstruction is therefore wholly hypothetical.

     As with the other demonstratives, the Alexandre shows a difference in its use of forms beginning aquest–; aquesto, for example, has a frequency of 134 stanzas per occurrence; but the LV has a frequency of 58, exceeding that of the Alexandre; it is hardly worth calculating for any forms in the rest of the Bercean corpus.

 

II.ii Definite articles

II.ii.1   el and ’l

This form of ecthlipsis is almost always linked to the preceeding vowel, and is independent of the following vowel or consonant, although certain words, such as rey/rëy and coraçón, are more frequent in this position; el may also be combined with que, todo and sobre, and these forms of ecthlipsis are discussed in the sections dedicated to those words.

 

(a) ’l + vowel, however, does occur at the beginning of hemistichs, such as at 712d ‘’l escudo embraçado | las çeruizes en tuerto’ (’l O] el P). As in this example, the phenomenon is mainly preserved in O, and only rarely does P represent the loss of intial e–.

 

(b) Ecthlipsis occurs after certain prepositions:

çerca ’l: 50b ‘posó çerca ’l maestro | a los pies de la siella’ (O][púsola al maestro |– a pies de la siella P)

fasta ’l: 136a ‘Treguas te dó agora | fasta ’l otro mercado’ (O, P def.),

                733d ‘sólo que fasta ’l plazo | de Calcas atendamos’ (’l O] el P),

                2639d ‘A Iobas e Cassánder | fasta ’l río de Libia’ (’l O] entroa el P);

por/en medio ’l: 376b ‘paró·s ante Paris –| en medio ’l consistorio’ (’l O] del P),

                507b ‘trauessóli la lança | por medio ’l coraçón’ (’l O] del P),

                532c ‘dio·l una espadada | por medio ’l çeruigal’ (’l O] del P);

o ’l:         1608c ‘o ’l oio o ’l nariz | o el labro susano’ (’l oio o ’l O][o oio o nariz P),

pora ’l: 357b ‘Luego que andar sopo | uíno·s pora ’l poblado’ (’l O] lo P),

                1127b ‘cuémo era uenido | pora ’l reÿ matar’ (pora’l O] por Alixandre P),

                1349d ‘tan mal pora ’l primero | que podiés’ alcançar’ (OP),

                2037c ‘Pora ’l rey Alexandre | fue muy buenauentura’ (O] el P),

                2130c ‘la torrontés umorosa +| buena pora ’l lagar’ (’l O] por alagar P),

                2231d ‘d’ éssa lo embïaua | pora ’l sieglo mayor’ (’l O] el P),

                2333d ‘pora ’l rey Alexandre | mala carrera dar’ (OP);  

quanto ’l: 2080d ‘en quanto ’l mundo dure | oÿ uos honraredes’ (en quanto ’l mundo dure O] por quanto en el mundo sea P),

si ’l: 2255d ‘si ’l mio poder perdiesse | sola una uegada’

 

(c) The ecthlipsis is also seen after verbs; it does not seem to matter if the final vowel of the verb bears stress or not —although, as at (ii), below, the stressed vowel at the end of weak preterite third person singular forms may have repercussions on whether el ecthlipsises or quando apocopates.

                               (i) after the present tense

                294d ‘Mas tornemos al curso | mientra nos dura ’l día’ (’l O] el P)

                               (ii) after weak preterites

                170c ‘mas por su ocasión | enloqueçió ’l astroso’ (’l O] el P)

     1086a ‘Quando entendió ’l pueblo | que eran engannados’ (entendió ’l pueblo O] syntieron los pueblos P)

                2359c ‘Quando entendió ’l otro | esta mala çelada’ (’l O] el P)

                               (iii) after strong preterites

                177a ‘O uíno en las nuues | o lo aduxo ’l uiento’ (’l O] el P)

                1772a ‘Fizo ’l rëy grant duelo | por el emperador’ (’l O] el P)

                1804a ‘Fizo ’l rëy demientre | el cuerpo balsamar’ (’l O] el P)

                2492a ‘Dixo ’l rëy al áruol | si me quieres pagar’       

                2355d ‘por onde ouo ’l dïablo +| en Säul a uenir’ (’l O] el P)

                               (iv) after a future tense

                171d ‘e non osarié ’l fiio | nunca ý assomar’ (’l O] el P)

 

(d) Following a pronoun

29d ‘|+ e bátele ’l coraçón’ (bátele ’l Cañas, Casas] bateie l O, P def.; but Nelson, bate·l el—again, the difference is a millimetre’s width)

666c ‘Uíolo ’l atalaya | que sedié en otero’ (’l P] la O).

(e) After an adjective

 

                151b ‘la uoz cuemo tronido | quexoso ’l coraçón’(’l O] P om.)

 

(f) After conjunctions

 

                Alex 1608c ‘o ’l oio o ’l nariz | o el labro susano’.

 

There are two errors in O: 1009a ‘Firme souo el reÿ | non dio por ello nada’ (el P] l O); 2493a ‘Reÿ dixo ’l áruol –|’ (O, P def.; the mistake may perhaps be due to the first line of the preceeding stanza, 2492a ‘Dixo ’l rëy …’). Hypermetry may allow us to identify further examples that have been obscured by the carelessness, or the unfamiliarity with the form, of the copyists.

            (a) The ecthlipsis at the beginning of a line may well have been present at 162d ‘yo faré que non les ualga +|+ el escudo nin la rienda’ (P, O def.). A further example may be provided by 2425d ‘|+ el Infierno enconado’: ’l Infierno enconado (the initial in– may have assisted this, since ’l infant’ is found several times).[140] At 1813a ‘El omne deue asmar +| lo que es por uenir’ (OP) and 1630a ‘El omne que en fazienda +| e en lid uay cutiano’ (OP) may well be ’l omne deue asmar and ’l omne que en fazienda, since although Nelson opts for † Omne …, there are no occurrences in the ms. tradition where El omne is provided as a variant for omne.[141] Cañas, clearly aware of the difficulty, suggested El omne deve asmar for the first example, although dev’ is an apocopation wholly absent from the ms. tradition.[142] For the second, he reproduced the reading of the manuscripts[143]qu’en fazienda would also be possible (see above, § II.i.5). Omn’ would not seem to be possible (opportunities for construing this form metri causa, rather than through manuscript transmission, are limited to two and both very early in the poem: 26d ‘por’ el rey Alexandre |+ a omne obedeçer’ (OP) and 72c ‘si omne non gana prez +|’ (P, O def.); Nelson and Cañas emend 26d by omitting a, and 72c by transposing the words to si prez non gana omne).

Alex 1809c ‘es la carne sennora |+ el espíritu uençido’: although spíritu is common in the Bercean corpus (HI 7b, HII 7b, HIII 7c, LV 1b, 5b, 8d, etc., MNS 792d, VSD 1c, VSO 1c, 31c) and specïal(es) is also found there (SM 50c, 187b, VSM 483b), espíritu is found only twice in Alex: the present, and 2647a ‘Non pudo el espíritu | de la hora passar’ (and no occurrences of sp–: espaçio always thus, at 654a, 1533a, 1847c, 1858d, 2239d). The evidence, for what it is worth, would incline one towards ’l espíritu (Nelson, el spíritu …, Cañas, † espíritu …).

(b) After prepositions.

con:        2032d ‘aguardáualo Poro |+ con el oio remellado’: con ’l oio is attractive, and con el is witnessed in both manuscripts, as at 2613d ‘presentóla al reÿ |+ con el inoio enclino’ and also 971d ‘e con la espada bota +|’ (e con la O] el que con el P). This series of hypermetries makes it unlikely that con has been added (as assumed by Nelson and Cañas); and cp. 471ab ‘Uinié de mala guisa | los dientes regannados/en ceio muÿ turbio | los oios remellados’. These verses may appear to be a counter example to the proposed emendation, but, crucially, dientes and inioios are in the plural.[144]

encara: 359d ‘camió·l encara el nombre +| con grant proprïedat’ (encara O] P om.), which is a puzzling verse; Nelson changed the hemistich to camió·l encar’ el nomne, justifying the apocopation of encara by the Provençal encar, but there are no other examples of apocopied encara in either the Alexandre or the Bercean corpus; Cañas cambió·l encara ’l nombre. Nombre can be used without an article, but only, it would seem, with auer, e.g., Alex 423c ‘Tersites auié nombre |’.

pora:      2628c ‘assí quiere que uaya |+ pora el sieglo mayor’ (sic P; O ‘|+ pora la corte maor’)

quanto:  760c ‘que quanto el mundo dure +| quantos que lo oyessen’ (OP; Cañas quanto’l; Nelson suggests †quanto el, but refrains from emending the text);

It would be possible to generate other examples of ecthlipsis through hypermetry at, for example, 1179a ‘Quando el sol escalienta +|+ cuemo es todo arena’ (OP), 2095d ‘quando el otro cató +| él bien lexos estaua’ (OP), 2575a ‘Quando el rey Alexandre +| estas gestas ueyé’ (OP), or 1665c ‘faziendo como el bueno +| que muere aguisado’ (P][el bono que müere | faziendo aguisado O), 1861a ‘cuemo el fierro el fuego +| fizo·l amolleçer’ (como … P] cuemo el fierro suele en el fuego amolleçer O), 1918b ‘cuemo el coraçón has +| e fazes pareçer’ (OP). Nevertheless, the absence of *como ’l or quando ’l in the ms. tradition makes emendations such as Quando ’l sol escalienta unlikely, and it is more probable to assume that the original reading was «Quand el», «Cuem el»/«Com el». The presence of Quanto ’l (2080d) is presumably motivated to avoid the homonym of the apocopated forms quand’ and quant’ which, as Casas points out, were probably both pronounced as quan (ed., p. 125—although these apocopations may still have been pronounced with final –d/–t before vowels, as in the orthography preserved by O: see below, § II.iv.5–6). This sophistication was not always followed, certainly, and initial Quand’ is often found; but the stylistic variation is possible within hemistichs containing a singular masculine noun. The same problem of homonymy would not hold with tanto, and therefore 126a ‘Tanto corrié el cauallo +| que dizién que uolaua’ should be construed Tant’… (as Nelson, Cañas), just as como/cuemo should be construed as com’/cuem’ (886a ‘Como estaua el cuerpo +|+ caliente e sudoriento’ (Nelson, Cañas, Com’…); 992a ‘Cuémo destruyó el templo +| en la Santa Çibdat’ —992bc also begin with cuemo; Cañas offers Cómo destruyó ’l templo but Nelson, Cóm’ destruxó el templo).

            The potential for ecthlipsis at 161d ‘irié por allí el regno +|’ (P; O def.) is lessened by the tendency of P to offer hypermetrical allí against O’s metrical ý (184b, 409c, 503d, 1399d). A related hemistich, 172d ‘|+ leuolo ý el pecado’ is most probably to be resolved by leuó·l ý el, since there are no comparable examples of ý ’l.

            (c) After verbs. On the model of (ii), 300a, 602b ‘Quando apuntó el Sol +|’ (OP and P, O def. respectively), and 773a ‘Quando entendió el reÿ +|’; of (iii), 177d ‘sobr’ él uíno el infant’ +|’;[145] of (iv), 600a ‘|+ non perderé el dormir’, 1956d ‘descobriruos he el testo +| empeçaruos la glosa’; and as an extension of (iv), after the imperfect at 959b ‘ca auié el atalaya +| echado apellido’, or 222d ‘ençendido era el rëy ‡| mas más lo ençendién’ (era el rëy P] el real O).[146] Furthermore, the hypermetrical line 1807a ‘Quando ha el omne puesto +| en algún buen logar’ might suggest Quando ha ’l omne puesto, but the order in O is «Qndo al ome ha puesto». O’s order, of course, not only avoids the question of ecthlipsis, but there is, furthermore, no other example in the Alexandre of ha+noun+past participle, but always ha+past participle; the only vaguely similar structure is 2432b ‘el secreto del mar |+ ha todo escodrinnado’ (ha O] ave P); O’s order, therefore, should probably be adopted for the critical reading of 1807a (Nelson, Quando ha † omne puesto; Cañas, Quand’ ha el omne puesto).

            (d) Ecthlipsis following a pronoun is found at 29a ‘Auié en sí el infant’ +|’; and possibly at the identical hemistichs at 464a2 and 722d1 ‘mostrógelo el pecado +|’.[147] Generally, –lo does not produce ecthlipsis.[148] The one example of –le ’l suggests an emendation for 2490a ‘Respúsole el un áruol +| müy fiera razón’, although the more normal manner of reproducing the ecthlipsis of (–)e(–) in these circumstances is as –·l el.[149]

            Another similar hypermetry is found at 1780a ‘Tú feziste el enxemplo +| que diz’ de la cordera’, where the apocopation of the second person singular preterite is preferable; of faze at 1247b ‘Salamón faze el templo +| iustos iudizios dando’ (P, O def.; the likelihood of faz’ is very high here, since faz’ O] faςe P at 814d, 1423c, 1461a, 1473c, 1813c, 2531a). Similar verbal apocopation should be applied at 589d ‘mandaron las iustiçias |+ que quedasse el lidiar’, and, in 889a, apocopation of grande (‘Fueron en fiera cueita |+ e fue grande el espanto’). Juxtaposition of –e el does not always imply that one must cede: 700b ‘anda por lo fer manna |+ sólo que passe el día’ is an example where, although Cañas emends to passe ’l día, Nelson provides sól’ que, which is, I think, more likely.

            (f) After conjunctions: 137c ‘las azes fueron fechas |+ e el torneo mezclado’ (O, P def.), 436a ‘|+ e el uarón Laeretes’ (Laeretes P] Abetes O), 651c ‘|+ e el clamor acabado’ (OP); Nelson, Cañas, om. ‘e’ for 137c, 651c; syneresis is assumed in Laeretes), although LV 66d ‘| del un e ’l otro lado’ should at least give pause for thought.

A final possibility is given by an epithet: 436b ‘Arquesilao el fuerte +|’: one should read the proper name as having four, rather than five, syllables (the name occurs but once); other names ending in –ao occasionally end in a dipthong: Menaláo (457d, 466b, 483b, 498d, 527a; but Menaläo: 488a, 496a); Nicoláo (trisyllabic: 191b, 2588d).[150] Most occurrences of both of these names, however, fall at the end of the first hemistich, and therefore the presence or absence of the dipthong is impossible to establish.

            In the Bercean corpus, ecthlipsis is found after the prepositions

fasta:

MNS 575c ‘| hasta ’l seteno anno’,

VSD 514d ‘| fasta ’l tercero día’,

VSM 60b ‘| parece fasta ’l mar’, 462c ‘fasta ’l río de Arga |’

(This ecthlipsis was something living for the scribes: PSL 95d ‘|– fasta ’l peor grano’, VSD 36d ‘priso fasta ’l títol’ –|’;

of unecthlipsised forms, there is only, significantly, SM 139b ‘| fasta el sol entrado’, and the hypermetric MNS 231c ‘|+ hasta el trenteno día’.)[151]

pora:

JF 75c ‘pora ’l dïablo sean | tales discrecïones’

MNS 373d ‘pora ’l dïablo sea | tan maleíta renda’,

and after the conjunction e:

LV 66d ‘cerca dél dos ladrones | del un e ’l otro lado’.

Hypometry certainly provides further examples: there are no examples of pora el in the Bercean corpus,[152] but there are of para el (‘para’ is a clear modernization by the scribe). Thus MNS 515b ‘la que fue para el mundo +| salut e medicina’ and VSO 14c ‘que para el su seruicio +|+ fuesse que para ál non’. LV is rather more problematic; at LV 153a ‘Para el spíritu sancto +| tal cosa conuenía’ one may read pora ’l, but spíritu sancto is often used without the article in LV: 1b, 5b, 8d, 129c, 150b, and probably 155d ‘uinía el spíritu sancto ‡|’ (leg. uinié spíritu sancto?). The use of spíritu without the definite article is only found otherwise, and in rather different circumstances, in the invocation of the Trinity at MNS 792d ‘padre fiio e spíritu | unos son de uerdat’. After the conjunction e, VSM 469c offers ‘|+ el un e el otro ual’.[153] This relatively small harvest may be swelled with the consideration of ecthlipsis after verbs, on the model of the Alexandre.

LV 50c ‘cambió el nombre a Simón ‡| et fiço·l maioral’: this would seem a good candidate for the eclthipsis of el. Dutton, Oc III,  82, omits el, but the evidence, as at Alex 359d (above), points to the omission of the definite article after auer (e.g. MNS 705b ‘auié nomne Teófilo |’).

LV 89c ‘al sexto quita el forniçio ‡|‡+ el séptimo uieda el furtar’: Dutton, Oc III,  88, om. ‘quita’ and ‘uieda’, ‘este verso cojea horriblemente—la única manera de ajustarlo es hacer que el sexto y el séptimo dependan como sujetos y el fornicio y furtar como objetos de viédanos en el verso b’. The first hemistich may well be construed as †sexto quita ’l forniçio, but this solution would not work for the second hemistich.

MNS 793c ‘predicó el euangelio +| dessent’ priso pasión’: all editors omit el; García Turza, pp. 147–48, points to the use of euangelio without an article at SM 51c ‘[the gentiles] oyeron euangelio | que non solién oýr’; other uses (unless referring to a grade of holy orders, VSM 157c) always have the article. Predicó ’l euangelio is not, then, unthinkable.

VSD 731d ‘denuesta el bon conféssor +|+ reçibrá mal galardón’ (F, S def.; Ruffinatto, ed., p. 259, ‘denuesta’l bon conféssor | prendrá mal galardón’; Dutton, Oc IV, 149, ‘denuesta el † conféssor | prendrá mal galardón’.[154] The preferred reading, then, is denuesta ’l. The original understanding of the line may well have been denuesta_al buen conféssor, cp. Alex 790d ‘| a sí mismo denuesta’.[155]

VSD 519d ‘qui prendié el tu conseio +| sobra bien se fallaua’: although equally, one might omit el.

VSM 215a ‘Quando ouo el buen omne +|’.

VSM 295a ‘Esperando la ora |+ quando uerrié el mandado’: here, uerrié ’l would be possible, alongside quand’ uerrié, although the example of the Alexandre may be considered to weigh heavily here.

VSM 427c ‘oídme dixo el cuende +| amigos e ermanos’: Kbs 199 ‘oíd† dixo’; Dutton, OC, I, 162 ‘oídme diz’ el cuende’: ‘para diz por disso, dixo, véase 211c (‘oídme diz’ conceio |’) y VSD 136a’ (‘Reÿ diz’ merce·t pido’)—but neither of these actually have the speaker mentioned in the line. VSM 427c is ineluctably similar to Alex 2492a ‘Dixo ’l reÿ al áruol’, and should be construed as Oídme dixo ’l cuende.

Evidently, some lines containing ecthlipsisable el must be rejected.[156]       

 

II.ii.2   la and l’

The ecthlipsis of the definite article before nouns of feminine gender, form in the Alexandre but a sub-group of the ecthlipsis of el. The poet of the Alexandre often used el or un before nouns beginning with a–.[157] Thus one should understand 2646d ‘| de l’ alma el anzuelo’ as del alma, 349c ‘| la luz de l’ aluorada’ as del aluorada, 305a ‘Tornó a l’ aluergada |’ as al aluergada; and 747b ‘fue el engenno fecho | e l’ arca aguisada’ as el arca or, preferably, e ’l arca (see above, § II.ii.1). Similarly, espada is often accompanied by el (el espada 585a, al espada 485b; del espada 1675c, 2057c—but la espada at 94a, 123c, 457a, 489a, 917d, 1125a). Other examples of ecthlipsis can be explained as that of el following a verb (107a ‘| ’sí lo auié ’l espada’),[158] and 2223c ‘| falleçió ’l escalera’. Before o–, however, ecthlipsis of la would seem to be effected: 75d ‘fasta que uenga l’ hora |’, 164d ‘|+ a l’ otra parte passada’, 709c ‘salló·l de l’ otra parte |’, 1345c ‘| de l’ otra encontrada’. The hypometry of line 1457d ‘mas a la ira de Dios +| no·sli defiende nada’ may well indicate that this ecthlipsis also occurred before i–. The preceeding discussion would suggest that Alex 220d ‘de la onta que auién +|’ is most likely to be understood as de l’onta (cp. l’ hora and l’ otra), but that Alex 958b ‘|+ dentro en la aluergada’ (en la P][enna O) should be construed as ’nel aluergada, and 746b ‘quáles serién por nombre |+ en el arca encloídos’ as ’nel.[159] The alternation of O la, P el at 971d ‘e con la espada bota +|’ would indicate that con ’l espada is to be understood. Un asta is found at 512b, and one must understand un’ auuela at 95c ‘|+ d’ allén mar una auuela’.

The Bercean corpus shows very few examples of ecthlipsis of la: MNS 590b ‘| a l’ otra part’ passada’. Moreover, the tendency to use el before feminine nouns beginning with a vowel differs between works. Thus el alma is found only 5x at JF 52d, 53a, LV 206d, 207c (al alma), MNS 66d (al alma), 115d, VSD 489b, 527a, and further as ‘un alma peccador’ (Q] un omne p– F) at MNS 815c but la alma 47x (of which 24x MNS, but la alma is not present in JF or LV).[160] El agua is found at LV 43d, 48b, MNS 832b, SM 62a, VSD 394b, VSM 332b (del); la agua at MNS 595d, SM 60b, 61b, 246c, VSD 348a, VSM 184a. Del aluorada is found at DV 181d, as at Alex 349c; el arca at LV 84b (la arca at SM 12a, 13b, 123b, 177c; una arca at SM 11c). El az is found only in the Alexandre; but la az is seen at VSO 77a, 76a. Finally, el aliama at DV 166b (as Alex 1138d) contrasts with MNS 650a, 680a. The ecthlipsis of el or la in the Bercean corpus is rare. El before a non-stressed initial a– of a feminine noun, then, is preserved only in DV, but it may have occurred in other works, as we shall see.

Some examples of hypermetry should now be considered.

l’a–:     MNS 560b ‘fo pora la abbadessa +|’. It is customary, on the basis of MNS 590b, to emend this line to fo pora l’ abbadessa (e.g., Dutton, Oc II, 166), although really the model would have to be al aliama or el aluorada from DV 166b, 177c: fo pora ’l abbadessa.[161]

            MNS 595d ‘enfogóse en la agua +|’ (Q: la, F: el; > enfogó·s en la/el agua or enfogóse ’nel agua since in both this line and 680a, below, the alternation of la/el may indicate an unfamiliar form in the original).

            680a ‘Reptáualo la aliama +|’ (Q: la, F: el)>Reptaua·lo la/el aliama or Reptáualo ’l aliama: see above, l. 595d).

            SM 87c ‘la archa el candelero +|’: the possibilities here are rather numerous: an original which read archa e candelero, ’l archa e ’l candalero, ’l archa el candalero.  

            VSM 272d ‘|+ la acémila furtar’: the difficulty with this line is in part generated by a striking line in the Alexandre: 1742b ‘caualgarlo ’n azémilla | temién mucho tardar’; as with abbadessa, above, it would be possible to construe the line as originally ’l acémila furtar; but, as the line from the Alexandre shows, acémila can be construed without the article: thus acémila furtar may be a set phrase. Furthermore, since the word is of Arabic derivation, Gonzalo may have originally written la ’cémila which may be considered an example of apheresis or the formation of the word without the Arabic article: cp. MNS 37b ‘ca es nuestra talaya | nuestra defensïón’ (talaya also at Alex 2035b, where talaya P] atalaya O).

l’e–:     LV 201a ‘María la egiptiana +|’,[162] VSD 57a ‘María la egiptiaca +|’ (but both are probably to be construed as María Egiptiaca/Egiptiana or even Marí Egiptïaca/na), and the following would be better construed as la ’glesia: MNS 400c ‘|+ la eglesia qebrantar’, 452d ‘podriélo en la eglesia +|’, 473a ‘podriélo en la eglesia +|’, 649a ‘Leuólo a la eglesia +|’, 848b ‘|+ que en la eglesia era’, 889b ‘entraron en la eglesia +|’, VSD 300c ‘entró él a la eglesia +|’, VSM 233a ‘El ixió de la eglesia +|’, as is probably LV 180a ‘Quando era en la iglesia ‡|’, SM 280d ‘ca non farié la iglesia +|’, Alex 1635c ‘non lieuen a la iglesia +|’; and PSL 47c ‘tollié a los enfermos |+ toda la enfermedat’ as toda † enfermedat (‘every illness’).

l’o–      It is noticeable that LV has several occasions when, as at Alex 75d, ecthlipsis occurs before hora: 4d ‘|+ nin de la hora çerteros’, ‘|+ a la hora del prender’, 59a, 103c ‘|+ mas la hora non sabemos’, 159d ‘|+ a la ora amoladas’, and possibly 25c ‘quando se llegó la hora +|’, 124b ‘ante que uiniess’ la hora +|’, 167d ‘|+ a la hora de entrar’.[163] The only other possibility of ecthlipisis, SM 251b ‘siquiera para en la otra ‡|’ (I reproducing F) offers a couple of possible resolutions: siquier’ pora en l’otra, or siquiera por’ en l’otra.

We are left, then, with a puzzle: if the emendation to MNS 560b is correct, then Q and, to a lesser extent F, have conspired to hide the use of el before feminine nouns beginning in unstressed a–, and probably, therefore, in stressed a– as well.[164] The puzzle remains as to why DV should have escaped from this normalizing impulse.

 

 

II.iii Adjectives

II.iii.1 fino and fin’

Fin’ is found in the Alexandre 8x: Alex 108d, 2123b (fin’ cristal |); 851d, 860b, 1774c (fin’ oro); 856c (fin’ argent’); 1351b (fin’ azero), and 1264b ‘quiérete de fino oro +|’; fino is found as oro fino at 1155d, 2122d, 2124b, 2132d, 2643d (the choice of the order noun+adjective in oro fino presumably indicates that fino would always suffer ecthlipsis before oro), and 42a ‘Retórico só fino |’. Neither fin’ nor fino is witnessed in the Bercean corpus; finos at VSD 232a (finos çiclatones) and fina at MNS 28a, 320c (fina: Alex 909b, 1872b, 2541b, 2545c; finos: 1530b).

 

II.iii.2  fuerte and fuert’/fuer’

The full form is found as an adjective 5x in the Alexandre and 4x as an adverb;[165] and three times at the end of a hemistich.[166] The apocopated form is found as an adjective 7x, to which a further 10 resolved hypermetric hemistics may be added.[167] The adverb is guaranteed thrice in the ms. tradition, to which another two hypermetric hemistichs may be added.[168]

     In the Bercean corpus, fuerte is even rarer; it appears as an adjective twice (MNS 371c ‘| con un fuerte dogal’, VSD F 229b ‘río fuerte’ [S flumen fiero) and four times in the compound fuerte ment’ (739a ‘| fo fuerte ment’ irado’, and LV 36a ‘|+ fuerte mente fue irado’, 62a ‘|+ fuerte mente fue atado’, 157a ‘|+ fuerte mente embeuidos’— it would seem, from dulze ment’ at MNS 625d, 692d, VSD 524c, and fuerte ment’ at VSD 739a (F) that ment’ was the adjectival component to be apocopated; only if a second apocopation was necessary would the first element undergo apocopation (thus fuer’ mient’ at MNS 907c, fuert’ mient’ at VSD 442c, and LV 221d ‘dulz’ mente te saludó +|’, which shows the apocopation of dulz’ maintained but not of mente; the exception to this rule is JF 54d ‘| tan fuert’ mientre luçir’). This does not occur in the Alexandre, where the first elements always remain unapocopated.

     The apocopated form, fuert’, is well preserved in the ms. tradition, and only two hemistichs are hypermetric due to scribal expansion to fuerte: LV 55c ‘fuerte yua la inuidia +|’ and VSO 135c ‘serás fuerte enbargada +|’; both of these exist only in F, which shows a preference for the unapocopated form (fuer(t)’ Q] fuerte F at MNS 229b, 324a, 540d, 907c). The adjective is most frequently used in the VSM (14x) against only three times in the MNS and twice in the VSD.[169] The adverbial form is again most used in the VSM (6x) but 4x in the MNS and VSD.[170] Apocopation is mainly used before words beginning with e– (Alex 8x; MNS 4x; VSD 3x; VSM 8x), and also before m– (JF 2x, MNS 3x, VSD 2x), l– (Alex 2x; VSM 3x), but also before [b]–, p–, q– (Alex 2x, 1x, 2x; VSM 3x, 2x, 3x).

 

II.iii.3  grande and grand’/grant’

In the Alexandre, the unapocopated form grande is relatively rare: it is found twice in hemistich-final position: 1523d ‘el castiello tan grande |’, 1893a ‘La carga era grande |’; and once within the hemistich: 2526b ‘maguer grande la uilla |’. It would not seem that grande is ever found immediately before a noun.[171] Grande is, however, found in hyper­metric hemistichs (and should be construed as grand’) at Alex 889a (e fue grande P] τ fuerte O), 1710a (grande P] fuerte O), and 2621a (Grande era OP).[172]

     Grande is, nevertheless, more common in the Bercean corpus, although even here is found only in metrically acceptable conditions at the end of the first hemistich[173] or in the companionship of muy:  LV 75a ‘Muy grande fue el duelo |’, SM 228c ‘| de muy grande dolor’, VSD 397b ‘| por muy grande sazón’ (S][una grant F), 430b ‘| muy grande desmesura’ (S][müy grant desmesura F), VSO 109cd ‘| de muy grande dulçor/auié muy grande cuita |’. The unanimity of this evidence leads one to assume that we should read müy grande, as in the 14 occurrences in the Alexandre and the 13x within the Bercean corpus.[174] Notable within the Bercean corpus is the very infrequency of grand in the SM, in which it occurs on average every 10.6 stanzas; the norm is between PSL at 3.4 and VSD at 5.7 stanzas. The Alexandre also has an average frequency of occurrence at 5.0 stanzas.

 

II.iii.4 toda, todo and tod’

In the Alexandre, todo often suffers ecthlipsis before a vowel, namely:

 

a–: 504c (aquel), 1624b (aqueste);

e–: 141b, 1885c, 2008b (el: but see below); 672b, 646b, 727a, 983d, 1163c, 1679d, 1767c (en todo); 874a (este roido);[175] and 10d, 211a, 259d, 375a, 496a, 547a, 609a, 845c, 847a, 1065a, 1199a, 2249a, 2309b (esto);

o–: 102c, 198b, 704d (omne), 286d (ordenamiento);

 

And it apocopates before s–:

su: 579d (‘| tod’ su poder metiendo’), 645a (‘| tod’ su algazear’). Furthermore there is also 2403d ‘si non todo su lazerio +|’, and 31b ‘| de todo sabor exido’.

The results are slightly skewed by the tendency to combine todo with the definite article, «todol», i.e., todo ’l; this occurs 18x: 8c (‘mar’), 19d (‘pueblo’), 62a, 163c, 173b, 194c (‘mundo’), 195d, 199a (‘regnado’, ‘regno’), 233c (‘siglo’), 337b, 388c (‘mundo’), 607c (‘poder’), 801a, 833d, 845d, 844d, 2459b, 2496d (‘mundo’). The four-syllable phrase todo ’l mundo is particularly popular; indeed, ‘todo el mundo’ only occurs once in metrical circumstances (1204b, ‘que con todo el mundo | quieres guerra tener’; hypermetric: 290a, 1342b, 1343b). The sheer frequency of tod’ el mundo/todo ’l mundo makes it likely that ‘todo el mundo’ in 1204b is the result of transposition and so the original was el mundo todo (as is the reading in O), and this order of the words is found at 2115d, 2627b, 2649d (where tod’ el mundo would be hypometric), and as ‘del mundo todo’ at 891c, 2626b.

     Although tod’ esto is witnessed 13x, the mss. tradition has obscured ten further occasions when tod’ esto was originally to be found: 56a, 86a, 150a, 598a, 631a, 790a, 1130c, 1326a, 1332a, 2645a, 2432b). Todo esto is metrically correct at 163a, 437c, 663a, 864a, 1060c, 1192a, 2636a, 2275a, 1936a, 1640a, which provides a ratio of unecthlipsised to ecthlipsised of 5 : 12.

     Unecthlipsised todo before a vowel in hypermetric hemistchs are further found with todo a–: 988d, ‘|+ es del todo afollado’, 1113a ‘|+ todo aquí se ençierra’, 1179a, ‘cuemo es toda arena’, 1808c ‘|+ halo todo a dexar’; but only the latter offers the certainty of tod’ a.[176]

     Whilst ecthlipsis is well attested, apocopation is limited to before s–, according to the manuscript witnesses. Other possibilities of apocopation are suggested by hypermetry. Yet, of these, only tod’ christiano is convincing, since this would seem to be the cause of hypometry at 2343d, ‘Dios liure todo cristiano +| de tan mala pelambre’; tod’ christiano may be through analogy with tod’ omne (hypermetric ‘todo omne’ is found at 1244d).[177] There are three occurrences of hypermetric lines with todo l–: 604a, ‘firme en todo lugar’; 767c, ‘todo lo puede uençer’; 1926b, ‘todo lo demás perder’. The first is probably firm’ en todo lugar; ·767c is most probably todo lo pued’ uençer; at 1926b todo lo demás is only found here: this should probably be taken as the more common (for the thirteenth century) todo lo más.[178]

     Alex 1000c, ‘pero tod’ su ganançia |’, shows that toda may also apocopate before su. Toda also suffered ecthlipsis: 760c, ‘Desque fue toda ardida +|’, 1602c, ‘|+ e toda ida a mal’, and possibly 173c ‘bastió toda enemiga +|’ (more probable toda enemiga: ‘enemiga’ is found only 4x in the Alex, twice in hypermetric surroundings, whilst ’nemiga 8x), 1184a ‘Quando a toda su guisa +|’ (since cp. 1767c ‘quando de tod’ en todo |’).

     Other hypermetric hemistichs containing toda are listed below, with the more probable solution indicated by superscript:

115d       ‘perderá toda brauez’ +|’

490d       ‘que·sle iuan toda uía +|’

1136c    ‘|+ por toda la santidat’[179]

1283b    ‘|+ e toda la auantaia’[180]

1641d    ‘onde prendié toda uía +|’

Similarly, 2630d has ‘todo ua agua ayuso +|’, which is to be read either as agua ’yuso, or (less probably) agua ’yus’.[181] Overall, then, tod’ is found 36x in the Alexandre (against 191 of toda and 263 of todo). The final distribution of tod’ through the poem can be see from the following graph. There would seem to be a rough division of the poem into two halves, with a higher frequency of the use of tod’ to c. stanza 900 (one occurrence every 19 stanzas; last occurrence stanza 874); after 983d, tod’ occurs roughly once every sixty-eight stanzas. There are, also, some stretches of the poem where tod’ does not occur: between 388 and 496, 874–983, 1199–1326, 1343–1602, and 2008–2249.

Within the Bercean corpus, tod’/tot’ occurs seven times in the corpus: as tod’ el mundo (MNS 543d, VSD 462b), tod’ omne (MNS 811d), tot’ omne (MNS 304d), tod’ el seso (MNS 884b), and tod’ esfuerzo (VSM 451c), and tot’ romeo (MNS 19b). Furthermore, ‘todo el mundo’ occurs in hypermetric hemistichs at DV 171c, JF 15b, LV 29d, 93a, 114d, 159a, MNS 527d; ‘todo esto’ at LV 62a, 68a, 87d, 89d, 194b; VSM 346d; further tod’ e– is found at LV 58c ‘Quando fue todo el misterio ‡|’ and VSM 399a, ‘Pero con todo el pleito +|’. Tod’ o– is witnessed at LV 168b ‘|+ e todo ordenamiento’, but note MNS 115a, ‘Todo omne del mundo |’, where apocopation does not take place. Tod’ su is found at JF 32b, ‘|+ e a todo su fonsado’ and DV 84b, ‘toda su generación +|’, although previous editors have not followed this course with regards to the latter;[182] LV 175d may suggest an original apocopation before another possessive, ‘|+ dios a todo mi amigo’;[183] and possibly LV 196c ‘ca todo nuestro esfuerzo +|’.[184] There is one example each of possible, but unlikely, apocopation before b– and lo: LV 228d, ‘ca nuestras uoluntades |+ de todo bien son uaçías’;[185] LV 109b, ‘todo lo á meiorado +|’ (although todo·l might also provide a solution to the hypermetry, as would the omission of lo altogether).[186]

            The use of tod’ is a fixed part of thirteenth-century writing. The vast majority of examples in non-Alfonsine prose are of tod’ + vowel; in a limited range of texts, tod’ + consonant is found: tod’ b– in the Razón de amor (tod’ bien) and the Fueros de Escalona and de Usagre (tod’ uozero);  tod’ c– in the Fazienda de Ultramar (tod’ coraçón); tod’ g– in the Fuero de Cáceres (tod’ ganado); tod’ lo in the Vida de Santa María Egipçíaca; tod’ before possessives in a Jewish document of sale of 1219 and the Fazienda de Ultramar (tod’ lures, tod’ nuestro); tod’ m– in the Fueros de Escalona and the Fazienda de Ultramar (tod’ morador, tod’ mont’); tod p– in a sale document of 1237 (tod’ pode[roso]).[187] In comparison, tod’ s– is well represented: tod’ su in the Fuero de Béjar and the Fazienda de Ultramar, the latter also offering tod’ siempre, tod’ ço que and tod’ saber; the 1219 Jewish document of sale mentioned above has tod’ xustador.[188] The text which uses apocopation most extensively, the Fazienda de Ultramar, has a ratio of tod’ + vowel to tod’ + consonant of 32/12. Not all texts witness tod’ + consonant: thus, for example, the translation of the Psalter by Herman the German only offers tod’ el (14x).[189]

            In conclusion, one may observe that, in the Alexandre and the Bercean corpus, non-apocopated forms of todo compared to tod’ are as follows:

 

Alexandre                                                              Gonzalo         

todo a–            21        tod’ a–                   3          todo a–            9          tod’ a–             –

todo e–            35        tod’ e–                 55          todo e–            53        tod’ e–             38

todo o–            4          tod’ o–                  5          todo o–            1          tod’ o–              3

todo u–            2          tod’ u–                 –           todo u–            3          tod’ u–             

todo+vowel     62        tod’+vowel         63          todo+vowel     66        tod’+vowel      41       

todo su            27        tod’ su                  3          todo su            38        tod’ su 1

 

toda a–            8          tod’ a–                 1           toda a–            8          tod’ a–               –

toda e–            3          tod’ e–                 –          toda e–            15        tod’ e–                –

toda i–             3          tod’ i–                  1          toda i–             –          tod’ i–                 –

toda o–            –          tod’ o–                 –          toda o–            1          tod’ o–                –

toda u–            1          tod’ u–                 –          toda u–            4          tod’ u–                –

todo+vowel     15        tod’+vowel         2          todo+vowel     28        tod’+vowel         –         

toda su            36        tod’ su                 1          toda su            30        tod’ su                 1

 

Between the Alexandre and the Bercean corpus, then, it is worth noting the inversion of the absolute use of todo e– and tod’ e–; the slight but marked preference for (or, rather, tolerance of) unapocopated toda and an avoidance of apocopation of todo with the exception of JF and LV.

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

todo

17

1

7

16

77

8

45

54

33

18

tod’

1

2

14

5

1

2

1

%

5%

22%

47%

6%

2%

6%

5%

 

Frequency of tod(o) (per stanza):

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

todo

12.5

21

11

14.5

12

13

6.6

14.5

15

11.5

tod’

210

38.5

16.5

198

777

244.5

205

both

11.5

21

8.5

8

11

13

6.6

14

12.5

11

 

Comparable figures for the Alexandre are:—

            todo : tod’       202 : 65           frequency of tod’         24%

Overall stanzaic frequency:

            todo: 13           tod’: 41           both: 10

 

The relative frequency of todo/tod’ within the Alexandre is close to that of JF; but far exceeding all is LV. It goes without saying that the use of tod’ in the Alexandre is more frequent, and with a wider range of words, than in the Bercean corpus as a whole. The stanzaic frequency of tod(o) in the Alexandre is comparable to DV, MNS, VSO. H and SM are marked by the infrequency and frequency, respectively, of todo and the total absence of the apocopated form. PSL also lacks apocopated forms, but its overall frequency is close to the VSD, which has only one example of tod’, and that in a highly formulaic phrase.

 

 

II.iv Adverbs and Conjunctions

II.iv.1  ante and ant’, antes

Ant’ is found 34x in the Alexandre, but shows a steep decline in the last third (1st third, 12x; 2nd, 14x; 3rd, 7x):[190] and at 977d OP both offer the doubly hypermetrical «ante perderién las cabeças», which is emended by Nelson to ante perderién las cabeças, undoubtedly correctly (followed by Cañas, Casas).

     Although ante suffers ecthlipsis rather than monosyllabic rey being employed at 786a ‘| ant’ el reÿ rezadas’ (ant’ el P][delant el O), it does not apocopate before l– at 792d ‘quant’ bruscos ante lobos |’, where the apocopation of quanto is preferred. There are two occasions when ante le is the cuase of hypometry 1253c ‘ante le fizo el reÿ +|’ (P, O def.) – 1282c ‘Ante le costarié mucho +|’ (P, O def.); but these are the only occurrences of ante followed by object pronouns (cp. 113c ‘ant’ lo auié comido |’ and MNS 148c ‘si ante lo sopiessen |’, 477c ‘ante lo compraredes |’). Thus one suspects that Alex 1253c and 1282c as … ante·l ….

     The following two hypermetric hemistichs present uncertainties in apocopation, but the evidence points away from—although it does not rule out, either—the loss of the final vowel of ante: 362a ‘Quando fueron ante Paris +|’ (OP; cp. 1680c ‘quando uinién ant’ él |’, but ecthlipsis is not the same as apocopation: ante p– at 667b, 887c, 1335d, 1521c, and MNS 480c, whereas ant’ p– is only found at Alex 997d), 2608a ‘Fue ante de mediodía +|’ (OP; there are no examples of ant’ de—but see below, n. 210; Nelson construes this line as Fue ante de meidía and Cañas, Fue ant’ de medio día).

     Ant’ is found in the Bercean corpus mostly before el or elli/él (13x and 4x, respectively): MNS 223a, 757b, SM 7a, 205c, VSD 192a, 450a, 544a (all ant’ el), 600b (ant’ elli), 607b (ant’ él), 642c, 689a (ant’ el), 737b (ant’ que), VSM 30b (ant’ elli), 69b (ant’ sabe), 331a (ant’ el); & JF (F) 64d ‘|+ por ante él paresçer’, LV 19a ‘|+‡ ante que esto fuese complido’, 26b ‘uirgo fuiste ante del parto ‡|’,[191] 42d ‘non osauan ante él +|’, 105c ‘éste fue ante d’ ellos otro ‡|’ (but see 26b), 124b ‘ante que uiniéss’ la hora +|’, 125b ‘quando ante el sepulcro +|’ (cp. Alex 1680c ‘quando uinién ant’ él |’), 177d ‘|+ ante la su catadura’, MNS 388c ‘prisieron un conseio |+ ante fuera a prender’ (most likely is ant’, as adopted by Dutton and subsequent editors), PSL 35a ‘|+ ante el enperador’, VSO 69a ‘Oria que ante estaua +|’. However, LV 6b ‘|+ como ante tan cumplida’ was in all probability originally com’ ante tan cumplida and 29d ‘|+ qual non fue ante de ella’ was qual non fue ante d’ella; VSD 110d ‘ante que fuesse la alma +|’ (cp. VSM 387d ‘| ante que fues’ quedado’, thus ante que fuesse la alma).

     In the Bercean corpus, ante is found with the following frequency: DV 4x (but 2x at 1*); JF 4x; LV 10x (but 4x at 1*); MNS 31x (of which only 2x at 1*); PSL 3x; SM 9x; VSD 22x (but 4x at 1*); VSM 11x (and only 1x at 1*); VSO 9x (and 2x at 1*).[192]

     Antes is found 21x in the Alex, but in the Bercean corpus only at PSL 48c and SM 30c (together with F’s version of VSM 446d, where other mss. offer ante). With antes in the Alexandre, however, ms. variation is the norm; with agreement on the form only being found 6x (from a potential 32x), and only two of these instances are not at hemistich-end.[193]

 

II.iv.2 como/cuemo and com’/cuem’

Within the manuscript tradition of the Alexandre, com’ or cuem’ is witnessed 6x, always as ecthlipsis: com’ un(–), 512b (P] como O), 2117c (com’] con O, commo P); com’ a, 1621b (O] commo P); cuem’ el, 428bd (cuem’ el O][commo P), 1946a: cóm’ era (O] commo P). As we shall see, this preference for vowels is scribal, but, even so, as regards hypermetric hemistichs containing como/cuemo, the word is found mostly before a vowel. Apocopations would seem to take place roughly once for every two examples of the full form for como preceeding a– and e–, but one for one regarding i–, o–, and u–.[194] A particular instance of apocopation is before omne, which, with only two exceptions, should always be read com’/cuem’ omne: 51a, 104c, 153d, 173c, 418d, 476a, 547d, 803a, 1304d, 1547d; the exceptions are 394a, ‘| cuemo omne granado’, 1151c, ‘| cuemo omne de tiento’. In contrast, como omnes is always metrical: 563c, 789b, 2200c, 2546d.

     Furthermore, como/cuemo may require apocopation before

b–: 476d ‘|+ cuemo buen campeador’; O — the P reading differs markedly;

de–: 44c, ‘|+ e cómo deuen finar’, 557c, ‘iuan como de pecado +|’; 992a ‘cuémo destruyó el templo +|’, 2266b, ‘como de chiqueza fue +|’)[195]

f– (326a, 749b, 1051d, 2099ab);

l– (420c, ‘Leuáuanlos cuemo lieua +|’, 1481d, ‘ca mengua cuemo la Luna +|’; and 968c ‘|+ cuemo·l oyestes contar’).[196]

non (529b, ‘cuemo non sopo quién era +|’);

s– (27a, 326b, 403a, 463d, 647b, 890b, 1004b, 1005a, 1148c);

yazié (2504d, ‘mas cómo yazié o non +|);

and perhaps once before m– (2661d ‘|+ como mal auenturadas’—although the last word may well have been, as at 1708d, ‘mal uenturado’). The graph below plots the apocopated or ecthlipsised form (com’/cuem’: dots indicate occurrences) against the full forms (como/cuemo: black) in the poem; what immediately strikes the eye is the relative scarcity of apocopated forms in the second half of the poem after stanza 1621, and their reappearance between stanzas 1861–2504.

In the Bercean corpus, the manuscript tradition has preserved rather more examples of ecthlipsis and apocopation: com’ a–: MNS 86a, VSD 228c, VSM 260d; com’ e–: VSD 114c, VSM 251a, 338c; com’ la: MNS 852b, 464b; com’ non: MNS 104b; com’ qui: MNS 777d, VSD 105b. Resolutions of hympermetry provide the following additions to this list:

com’ a–: LV 16, 141c, 121d; MNS 637c; VSM 2260.[197]

com’ e–: LV 37c, 51b, 69d, 130c, 225a, 233d;[198] MNS 385b, 584c; VSM 119d; VSO 191b.[199]

com’ i–: LV 177d

com’ o–: LV 139a, ‘|+ como omne acordado’

Only at LV 139a is com’ omne to be understood; on the other occasions that como omne is used, there is no question of apocopation (MNS 183d, 210d, 427b, VSD 86d, 114a, VSM 460c, VSO 159b); como omnes, as in the Alexandre, does not see ecthlipsis of como: JF 13c; MNS 415b; SM 29d; VSM 383d.

Apocopation would seem to have originally ocurred before

de–: LV 60b, 109c, 136c; MNS 763b; SM 269c; VSM 353a.[200]

l–: LV 154b, 163c, 209b; SM 251c; VSM 97a; VSO 115b.[201]

n–: JF 64d; LV 83b.

qui: MNS 201c, 339d, 528c.[202]

s(vowel)(–): LV 79a, 133b, 164c, 188b, 189c; VSM 479d

tu(s): LV 218b; VSD 323d

Unlike the use evidenced in the Alexandre, there are no examples of com’ [b]– or com’ u– to be found in the Bercean corpus. And again, unlike the Alexandre’s manuscript transmission, roughly 50% of the occurrences of com’ have been preserved in the manuscript traditions of MNS, VSD and VSM. The ratio of como : com’ in the works is small (apart from those works in which com’ is not witnessed—DV, H, PSL), the average ranges from SM at 3%, VSD at 5%, JF at 6.25%, MNS at 8%, stretching up to VSO at 12% and VSM at 15%. These figures are far below that for LV, at 45%.

     The frequency of use goes from LV at one occurrence in just under every four stanzas, to JF (4.8) and VSO (5.1), PSL (5.8), MNS (6.2), VSD (6.9), H (7), SM (8.0), VSM (8.2), DV (8.4).

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

como

25

7

15

33

135

18

36

106

51

22

como/com’

1

27

11

1

6

9

3

total

25

7

16

60

146

18

37

112

60

25

 

II.iv.3  estonçes and estonz’/entonz’

The Alexandre offers five occurrences of the apocopated form: 413d ‘| entonz’ de la freiría’ (entonz’] enton O, P om.), 1224c ‘| es estonz’ replegada’ (estonz’ O] estonçe P), 1952d ‘estonz’ casan algunos |’ (estonz’] enton O estonçes P), 2265c ‘Estonz’ dixieron todos |’ (estonz’] eston O estonçes P), 2562d ‘Estonz’ fazié atupno |’ (estonz’] eston O estonçes P), together with one definitely hypermetric form at 1160b ‘|+ oui estonçe ueído’ (P] he uisto O), and other possible resolutions of hypermetric lines at 21b ‘|+ entonçe le assomaua’ (P] non assomaua O), 734b ‘estonçe acorrerá +|’ (P] estonçes nos acorrera O).[203]

     The full form is found at 407a ‘Estonçe dixo Calcas |’ (P] entonça O), 599c ‘Estonçe dixo Éctor |’ (P, O def.), 777d ‘Si entonçes fues’ muerto |’ (entonçes P][estonçes O), 1297c ‘Más traía entonçe |’ (P, O def.), 2394d ‘entonçe suele él |’ (e. s. é.] el entonçe suele P [estonçe se suel’ él O), 2422b ‘| entonçe·s ençerrar’ (e.·s e.] entonçes ençerrar P, estonçes ençerrar O). Nevertheless, the form is rarely used in the poem (an average frequency of 223). There is a roughly equal ratio of apocopated to unapocopated (7:5).

     The comparison with the Bercean corpus could not be more clear. The apocopated form is found at DV 119a; MNS 18c, 54a, 243c, 294a, 431c, 502c; PSL 41d; SM 33b, 35b, 43c, 182a; VSD 286c, 662d, 668b, 734c; VSM 49d, 390d, 432a (estonz’); JF 4d, 72d; VSM 363a (entonz’). It is also found in hypermetric hemistichs: DV 53c ‘|‡ bien de estonces los abuelos’;[204] LV 31a ‘|+ estonçe en oriente’, 186d ‘|+ lo que estonçe ganastes’, 188b ‘estonce conoceríamos ‡|’ (leg., estonz’ conoceriémos); SM 288d ‘|‡ fue entonce establecido’, 289a, ‘Fue estonce establecido ‡|’; VSO 42d ‘estonçe perdió la pierna +|’, 134d ‘|+ estonze serás pagada’; only once is it impossible to establish the form: SM 121a, ‘Quanto podién estonçes |’.

Thus, within the corpus, it is possible to say that, within metrical constraints, the form always used is estonz’ or entonz’, and, with the exception of SM 121a, it is never found at hemistich-end (cp. Alex 1297c and possibly 2422b). The word is used frequently in SM (6x; average frequency: 50 stanzas per occurrence), but much less so in other works: MNS 6 (av. freq.: 152); VSD 4 (194); VSM 4 (122); LV 3 (78). It is striking that there are no occurrences of the word in the MNS after 502c.

 

II.iv.4  mucho and much’

     The apocopated form is rare in the Alexandre: it occurs only once in the manuscript tradition, and can be restored only a further three times: Alex 321c ‘óuola much’ aína |’ (O] mucho P); & 141c ‘|+ rico e mucho honrado’ (O, P def.),[205] 1189a ‘|+ mucho más que los primeros’ (P] maores O), and 2241c ‘mas que mucho uos digamos +|’ (OP, but cp. 1113a ‘Que mucho uos digamos |’ OP). Mucho, in contrast, shows an increasing frequency in use over the length of the poem (123x: 1st third, 32x; 2nd, 41x; 3rd, 49x; number of stanzas per occurrence: 1st, 27.9; 2nd, 21.8; 3rd, 18.2).[206] The following graph shows the varying frequencies of mucho over the poem, and shows a marked change after c. stanza 1180.

     In the Bercean corpus, much’ is limited to three works: VSD 319a ‘| era much’ embidiosa’, 506c ‘| eran much’ allongados’, VSM 106c ‘issió much’ encubierto |’, & VSM 237d ‘|+ e mucho demonïado’, VSO 104a ‘Los cielos son mucho altos +|’, 114c ‘|+ conbentos mucho honrrados’, 153a ‘|+ don Munno mucho plazer’. In comparison, mucho is of course present throughout (apart from H), but the work that uses the word least, respective to length, is SM—almost double the average number of stanzas per occurrence. At the other extreme lie PSL, VSO and JF.[207] VSO and JF are perhaps to be expected to use mucho more than other works, given their visionary or eschatological nature.

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

mucho

12

9

14

42

8

10

44

23

20

freq.

18

9

17

22

13

30

18

21

10

 

II.iv.5  quando and quand’

Given the interchangability of final –t and –d, it is usually only sense, rather than orthographic form, that determines whether a word is to be understood as quand’ (=apocopated form of quando) or quant’ (=apocopated form of quanto).

     Quand’ may be deduced only 8x from the Alexandre’s manuscript tradition: Alex 213a ‘Fue quand’ uío la senna |’ (]quando O, quant P), 431d ‘|+ quand’ uos dixo su rencura’ (]quant O, quando P), 604b ‘ouo quand’ esto uío |’ (quand’ esto O][quando lo P), 1014c ‘| Clitus quand’ recudieron’ (]quan P, quando O), 1563d, ‘| quan’ la ouo ganada’ (P][ant’ O), 1677c ‘Quand’ toda nuestra cosa |’ (]ca O, quando P), 2180d ‘| quand’ el día caliente’ (quand’ O] quando P); 2307c ‘quan’ que él e que ellos |’ (P] ca O), 2426d ‘quan’ temié que la duenna |’ (P] ca O). This paltry yield is clearly a huge diminishment of the original crop of quand’, as can be seen from the occurrences of hypermetry involving quando.[208] The following graphs show that the fundamental alteration in the frequency of quand’ is found between stanza 215 and 291 (left), but that quando is remarkably regular in its use (right); quando is used roughly three times more than quand’.

 

 

 

In absolute comparison to the Alexandre, quand’ can only be considered to be rare in the Bercean corpus, with one exception, as we shall see. The manuscript traditions of the various works preserve quand’ or similar forms at MNS 574c, 683c, VSD 71d (quan’), VSM 31c, 212d, and 79b, 156a, 196a, 410c (quant’). However, hypermetry provides a much greater harvest of examples from the LV (27x)[209] and, to a much lesser extent, MNS (3x), SM (3x), VSD (1x), VSM (10x), and VSO (1x).[210] The occurrences of quand’ against quando may be tabulated; these show the remarkable preference in LV for quand’ rather than quando, and the paucity, and sometimes absence, of quand’ in the other works in the corpus.

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

quand’

27

5

4

2

10

1

quando

18

6

11

74

9

68

64

55

6

%

71

6

6

3

15

14

 

LV not only offers the highest ratio of apocopated to unapocopated; it also offers one of the most frequent uses of both quand’ and quando (once every 6.1 stanzas), surpassed only by SM (once every 4.1 stanzas); VSM also offers a high frequency (7.5). The other works vary between MNS (11.5) and VSO (13.7).

 

II.iv.6  quanto and quant’

The manuscript tradition of the Alexandre has preserved two occurrences of quan(t)’: 792d, ‘quant’ bruscos ante lobos | quando auen grant fambre’,[211] 2307c ‘quan’ que él e que ellos |’ (P] ca O), but hypermetry suggests another six occurrences were originally present: 43d ‘|+ quanto un dinero ual’, 210d ‘|+ e quanto auemos ganado’, 770b ‘que quanto éstos fizieron +|’, 797b ‘|+ quanto quisieron leuar’, 1290a ‘Quanto que Dario me manda +|’, 2346c ‘Quanto allega Cobdiçia +|’. Quanto is used 90x, but not with the same regularity throughout: 1st third, 45x; 2nd, 23x; 3rd, 22x. This imbalance is also seen with quant’: 1st third, 5x; 2nd, 1x; 3rd, 2x.

     The apocopated form in the Bercean corpus is transmitted at DV 146c (2x), LV 101bc quant’ grant’ , 224b quand’ grandes, MNS 420b quand’ grand’, 544c ‘quand’ grand es e quan’ bono |’, VSD 431d quant’ grant’, VSM 384c quand’ grand’. Furthermore, LV 38b quand’ grande, 146b ‘ca quanto abían mester +(+)|’, 194a ‘|+ quanto oýdo auemos’, VSM 342b ‘|+ que quanto auién ganado’. Quan(d)’ mostly accompanies grant/grand in this corpus; but it is a usage wholly absent from the Alexandre. As a point of note, the scribes of neither the Alexandre nor the Bercean works preserved any examples of quant’ + vowel. Quanto is very infrequent in the DV (one occurrence every 70 stanzas), far from the LV (46.6), VSM (44.5), VSO (41), VSD (38.9), SM (37.1), which are themselves somewhat distant from MNS (26.8), PSL (26.3), JF (25.7).[212]

 

 

II.iv.7  sólo and sól’

Sól’ is found with increasing frequency through the Alexandre[213] (1st third, 5x; 2nd, 11x; 3rd, 8x; 1st half, 10x; 2nd, 14x).[214] Sólo is found 11x in the first third of the poem; 2nd, 10x; 3rd, 8x).[215] Thus we see a slight increase in the use of sól’ against sólo over the length of the poem.

     The picture provided by the Bercean corpus is elegant in its simplicity: sól’ is only found in identical hemistichs at JF 7c and 17d, ‘sól’ non será osado’ (cp. Alex 2234d ‘| sól’ non eran osados’);[216] sólo is found throughout the corpus.[217] The adjective, solo, does not apocopate in either corpus.

 

II.iv.8  suso and sus’, yuso and yus’

Sus’ is not found in the manuscript tradition of the Alexandre. Yet two hypermetric hemistichs may imply that it was used: 329c ‘|+ de suso su escriptura’ (P] sobre si la escritura O), 457d ‘de suso puso un yelmo +|’ (puso un P] el O; but Nelson suggests de suso su ’scriptura and Cañas de suso puso ’l yelmo, respectively). Suso is found at 455c, 578b, 723a, 962a, 1153a1*, 1598a, 1982b1*, 2015a1*, 2549b. In contrast, yus’ is found 11x (97b, 227b, 396d, 489a, 738c, 1125a, 1171a, 1204c, 1529b, 2170b, 2504b) and yuso only 3x: 34c, 863d1*, 2223d1*. This mismatch between suso/sus’ and yuso/yus’ may only be explained by an unwillingness to use sus’ since this would confuse the word with the third person masculine possessive adjective. One observes a general decline in the use of yus’ over the poem (1st third, 5x; 2nd, 4x; 3rd, 2x), but there is no corresponding increase in the deployment of the full form—indeed, throughout the poem, yuso is only found once in a metrically specific location (34c, and here it is a deduction by Nelson, since P «ujo» and O «tanto».

     Sus’ is not found in the manuscript transmission of the Bercean manuscripts, either. But two occurrences of hypermetry suggest that the phrase sus’ e yuso was originally used: JF 56c ‘uolarán suso e yuso +|’, MNS 83c ‘buscando suso et iuso +|’. Suso is found in certain works of the corpus; it is most frequent in the VSO (5x), SM (5x), JF (1x), MNS 11x) and VSD (5x), VSM (2x). In contrast, yus’ is found in the manuscript tradition: VSD 723b ‘| de yus’ el çerbiguiello’, VSM 28b ‘auié de ius’ las pennas | cueuas fieras sobeio’; and yuso at JF 56c1*, 73b, MNS 83c1*, 408c1*, 558d, 592b, VSD 661c.

 

III.iv.9            tanto and tant’, atanto, etc.

The apocopated form, tant’, is found 43x in the Alexandre.[218] In comparison, tanto occurs 112x (of which 53 at the beginning of a hemistich). The use of tant’ shows a steady decline through the poem: 1st third, 18x; 2nd, 13x, 3rd, 9x, where tanto shows an increase in the last third: 1st, 33x; 2nd, 34x, 3rd, 45x; the overall use of tant’/tanto is roughly equivalent, then, throughout the poem (1st, 51x; 2nd, 47x; 3rd, 54x); the use of tanto at hemistich-end, however, does vary: 1st, 2x; 2nd, 6x; 3rd, 7x.[219]

     In the Bercean corpus, tanto suffers only ecthlipsis: DV 47a ‘Tant’ era la mi alma |’, VSD 135b ‘| tant’ eran desarrados’, 234c ‘| tant’ era de lumnosa’, VSM 210a ‘Tant’ auién que ueer |’, 222d ‘| tant’ ouo grant sabor’; hympermetric hemistichs may also be resolved through tant’ at DV 63a ‘|+ tanto era mesurado’, 163c ‘|+ tanto éramos cansadas’, LV 157d ‘|+ tanto eran encendidos’, VSO 29d ‘|+ tanto eran de bellidas’, 38d ‘tanto era de enfiesta +|’ (cf. VSD 234c ‘| tant’ era de lumnosa’ for the preservation of de with apocopation). Tant’ is not used at all in the MNS, SM or PSL (and H, JF). The frequency of use of tanto/tant’ is highest in DV (one occurrence per 13 stanzas), which is close to the overall frequency of the Alexandre (once per 17.3 stanzas), but far from other works in the corpus (PSL 26.3, VSM 27.2, VSO 29.3; VSD 37.0, JF 38.5, LV 38.8; MNS 47.9). The other extreme is the words relative absence from SM (59.4). And despite the preference of LV for apocopated forms, the use of tant’ in this poem is not that different from that of other works in the corpus.

     Atanto occurs at most 7x in the Alexandre, exclusively in the last two thirds of the poem: 1222c ‘El Sol es siet’ atanto |’ (seven times bigger), 1236b ‘| non faría atanto’ (as much), 1337c ‘mas era por atanto |’ (for all that), 2249c ‘Prometieron atanto |’ (as much), 2366c ‘Qui se desdiz’ atanto |’ (so much). Manuscript variants may suggest two more: 489c tanto que li P][atanto que·l O; 1381c Tanto lo pudo P][Atanto ouo O; 1823d tantos malos pesares P][atantos de p– O.[220] Hypometry may suggest two more: 544d ‘Eneas con tanto –|’, 640d ‘Patroclo con tanto –|’. Atanto is found in the Bercean corpus solely at MNS 83c, 172a; atanta at MNS 280a, SM 240b.

 

 

II.v      Prepositions

II.v.1 adelante and adelant’; delante and delant’

Adelant’, like adelante, is found in metrically correct hemistichs only in hemistich final position. Adelant’: Alex 141d1* (O, P def.), 422d1* (OP), 433d1* (P] delantre O), 793b1* (O] adelante P), 821d1* (P] adelantre O), 1387b1* (OP); adelante: Alex 66d1* (P] adelantre O), 1722d1* (P] adelantre O).

     Delant’ is more flexible in its positioning: Alex 468d ‘estonçes delant’ ella |’ (delant O] delante P), 631c ‘el que delant’ fallauan |’ (OP); and at hemistich-final position: 74c1* (P] delantre O), 521b1* (O] delante P), 864a2* (delant’] delante P delantre O), 1121d2* (delant’] delante P delantre O), 2068c1* (P] delantre O), 2187b1* (P] delantre O); and 1241a ‘Estaua más adelant’ +|’ (P, O def.), 2582d ‘mas delante corrié Ruédano +|’ (P] delantre O). Delante is found under metrical conditions at 345b (delante] delantre O ant P), 973b (P] delantre O), 2071a (P] delantre O), 2352b (P] delantre O); and the following at hemistich-final position: 552b1* (P), 850c1* (P] delantre O), 1006b1* (P] delantre O), 1043c1* (P] delantre O), 1352c2* (P] delantre O), 2233b1* (P] delantre O). The form delantre is also found at SM 110c (B).

     In the Bercean corpus, adelant’ is found but once: VSD 570a ‘Desende adelant’ |’; but adelante is found, with the exception of MNS 70a, always at hemistich-final position: LV 136d1*, MNS 141a1*, VSD 33a1*, 93c1*, 222b1*, 461a1*, 674b1*, VSO 57a1*, 76c1*, 83a1*. Delant’ is found at MNS 321a, 324c, 389a, SM 227c, VSD 424c, 543c, 575a, 579b, 594a, 636d, VSM 112c1*, 350b.

     Delant’ is witnessed, when not in hemistich-final position (2x), before e–: MNS 321a, 389a, SM 227c, VSD 424c, 543c, 575a, 579a, 594a, 636d, VSM 350b.[221] End-hemistich: MNS 324c2*, VSM 112c1*. The sole exception to the rule of ecthlipsis is LV 51a ‘Delante tres de los suyos +|’; the Alexandre has one example of delant’ f– (631c) and one of delant’ c– (2582d ‘mas delante corrié Ruédano +|’. Delante, as in the Alexandre, is also more flexible in its position, and is found at DV 128b, JF 63b, LV 161c, MNS 29d, 80b, 118c, 407b, 517a, 764c, PSL 74b, SM 99a, 164b, 235a, VSD 298b, 425b, 248d, 335c, 352c, 391a, as well as at first hemistich-final position (and the following at first hemistich-final position,[222] and in rhyme position: PSL 86b). However, delante del(–) is found at MNS 29d, 80b and VSD 425b; delante e– at MNS 517a, PSL 74b, SM 235a, VSM 335c, 352c. Neither delante de nor delante e– occurs in the Alexandre. In comparison, deuant’ is found at MNS 44b (deuant’ dichas), but it is not found in Alexandre, although de ante is, at Alex 2148a ‘Mouiése por amor | de ante recabdar’.

 

II.v.2   allende and allent’/allend’/alién’/allén; d’ aquende and d’ aquend’; ende and end’, dende and dend’

Allende is found at Alex 2379c, and allent’ possibly the line before, 2379b—but where allent’ la P][allende O—; d’ allén’ at 95c (d’ allén’ P][allén’ O). The full form is absent from the Bercean corpus: alién’ at VSD 421b, allén’ at VSD 421b, and allend’ at VSM 463c. D’ aquend’ is found in apocopated form only at MNS 477c, but d’ aquende at LV 168b, MNS 393b, VSD 655c1*. The latter word is absent from the Alexandre.

     End’ is witnessed 26x in the Alexandre with increasing frequency through the poem (1st third, 6x; 2nd, 9x; 3rd, 12x).[223] Ende is found 32x (1st third, 5x; 2nd, 10x; 3rd, 17x),[224] showing a similar increase in the use of the word over the length of the poem.

     In the Bercean corpus, end’ or other forms of representing the apocopation are found at DV 97a, LV 27d (en’), MNS 90d, 128d, 138d, 175d, 303a, 381b, 408d, 422d (en’), 617d, 815b (ent’), 858b (ent’), 896a, 908d (ent’), SM 50c (ent’), 207d (ent’), 236c (ent’), VSD 60d (ent’), 62d (ent’), 141a, 276b, 325c, 332d (en’), 352d, 386a, 501d (en’) 529d, 532b, 533a, 645b, 702d, 736d, VSM 28d, 138b, 172b (ent’), 244a, 289a, 382a, and LV 16d ‘pues ende uíno en tierra +|’, 35c ‘|‡ por ende se yuan cuytando’, 36b ‘|+ por ende era quexado’, 77c ‘manó ende sangre e agua ‡|’ (probably), 77d ‘por ende sancta Yglesia +|’ (probably), 137d ‘por ende te diçen todas +|’ (probably), MNS 151a ‘Ende al día terzero +|’, VSO 60b ‘por ende tienen los cáliçes +|’, 96b ‘|+ dios sea ende laudado’, 122d ‘|+ dios aurié ende despecho’ 171c ‘por ende de la su uida +|’ (probably), 171d ‘yo ende lo saqué esto +|’, 190d ‘|+ o sodes ende salida’,

     Ende is found: DV 6x (32d, 87d1*, 92c, 95d1*, 124d, 184b), JF 1x  (67c), LV 7x (10b , 20b, 65d, 77c, 116c, 197a, 210b1*), MNS 8x (313c, 353d, 384c, 451c, 577c, 681b, 795a, 807b), SM 4x (37c, 172d, 250c1*, 283c), VSD 9x (26c1*, 62d, 71d, 139c, 241d, 242d1*, 405d, 556b1*, 753b), VSM 2x (371d1*, 484c), VSO 4x (7d, 81d1*, 126a, 157d).[225]

     Dend’, however, is another story: it is found as den’ (O] dende P) at Alex 934a, as dent’ at 168d1* (P, O om.), 285a1i (OP), 286ab1i (O] de ally P), 760a1iii (O][dend’ P), 1453a1ii (O] dende P), and, through emendation metri causa, two examples of apocopation also come forth: 1302d ‘ca dende a otro día +|’ (P, O def.), 1771c ‘|+ fue dende çertificado’ (P] desende O); dende is found, further, at 207c (dende·s P][den se O), 598d1* (P, O def.), 1604a (P][ende O), 1723b (P][ende O), 2042a (P, O om.).

     In the Bercean corpus, dend’ is found at VSD 473a, 750d, and DV 158b ‘|+ dende a otro lugar’, LV 8c ‘|+ dende se leuantaría’,[226] 102c ‘sacó dende a sus amigos ‡|’;[227] dende is found at LV 122c, VSM 463c, and in hemistich-final position at VSD 137b1*, 435c1*, VSO 16d1*.

     The overall figures within the Bercean corpus for (d)end’ and dende point to a clear division in usage: in certain words, end’ is more frequent, or roughly as frequent, as ende (thus VSM 6x (d)end’ : 3x (d)ende, MNS 14x : 8x; VSD 17x : 11x; VSO 6x : 5x, SM 3x : 4x, and possibly LV 6–9x : 8–11x) but we see these figures reversed in DV 2x : 6x. The word is remarkably not found in PSL or, less remarkably, in H.

     Desend’ is witnessed only in the MNS, SM, VSD and VSM; desende is absent from JF, H, VSM and VSO.[228] It is only present once in the Alexandre (1722d ‘desende adelante |’), but 16x as desent’, with a roughly constant frequency through the work.[229]

 

II.v.3   cabo and cab’

Cabo is found in ecthlipsised form twice in the Alexandre: 66d, ‘mas ir cab’ adelante |’ (O] cabo PG) and 1199b, ‘yazién cab’ una sierra |’ (O] cabo P). Hypometry would indicate that two further uses of cabo as an adverb of place were originally apocopated: 483b, ‘|+ siempre cabo el costado’ (P] siempre a costado O), and probably 540a, ‘Uio cabo un ribaço |’ (OP), where one should probably read Uío cabo un ribaço (see above, § I.iii.7). However, at 1656b ‘| e cabo mí uos tengo’ (cabo O][çerca P) there is no question of cabo apocopating—if that is the correct reading. The evidence, then, offers the tentative conclusion that cabo suffers ecthlipsis before a vowel.

     The composite adverb of time, a cabo de, is always contained in hypermetric lines which may usually be reduced in no other way: 15a ‘A cabo de pocos annos +|’ (OP), 501d ‘|+ a cabo de dos iornadas’ (OP), 803c ‘|+ a cabo del mes sallido’ (OP), 805a ‘A cabo de pocos días +|’ (OP), 913a ‘A cabo de pocos días +|’ (OP), 1182a ‘A cabo de quatro días +|’ (OP), 1915b ‘|+ a cabo de terçer día’ (O] al P). There is only one exception to this sequence: 1908a ‘A cabo de siete días +|’ (siete P] doze O), where it might be considered that siete could apocopate, although this is unlikely.[230] The phrase at 619b, ‘al cabo d’ una cuesta’ is reproduced in O as «a cabo d’», but in P hypermetrically as «al cabo de»; however, since this is referring to place, not time, P’s reading al is undoubtedly correct, as much as is O’s fidelity to the ecthlipsis of de. (The masculine noun, cabo, occurs 21x, but never apocopates).

     The consistent form for the Alexandre poet, then, was a cab’ de. However, the most frequent use of cabo is in the composite adverb en cabo (74x, but of which 14x at hemistich end); only two occur in hypermetric hemistichs: 1357a, ‘Pero en cabo de cosa +|’ (de cosa P] O om.);[231] 1782c, ‘Podiste flumen todo |+ fasta en cabo andar’ (P).[232] Thus the apocopation of en cabo, if it happens at all, is extremely rare. The last adverbial use of cabo is de cabo, which is found only thrice: 556c ‘| tornaron ý de cabo’ (OP), 901d ‘| de cabo recadía’ (OP), 1187d ‘| Alexandre de cabo’ (OP); the rhymes at 556 and 1187 are otherwise in –ado.

     In the Bercean corpus, the adverb suffers ecthlipsis but once: VSD 51c, ‘el lino cab’ el fuego |’, and is found in unapocopated form before l– at MNS 433b ‘| cauo la orellada’, and LV 134d ‘| cabo la magestad’. Thus, on this meagre evidence, we may say that the ecthlipsis of cabo before a following vowel applies in the same way as in the Alexandre. A cabo de, however, is found in metrical hemistichs at LV 147a ‘A cabo de cincuenta |’ (annos is understood), VSD 545a and 580a, ‘A cabo de tres días |’, VSM 414d ‘| a cabo de dos meses’; and in apocopatable form at LV 121b, ‘a cabo de pocos días +|’, 151b ‘a cabo de siete semanas ‡|’. The difference – apart from the LV – with the Alexandre is clear.[233]

     De cabo always occurs as the last element in the first hemistich (differing from the use in the Alex, but only as regards position): DV 168d, ‘resucitarié de cabo +|’; MNS 470c/473b, ‘cometiólo de cabo |’, 811b, ‘uisitólo de cabo |’; VSO 105a, ‘Dixo·l aún de cabo |’. En cabo (51x) occurs only once in hypermetric surroundings: LV 233d, ‘como en cabo ayamos +| el regno çelestial’, but this is evidently como en cabo ayamos. The noun occurs but three times (LV 183b, MNS 47c, VSM 410d); and once in Eya velar (DV 184b), but never in the form al cabo de. The difference in the frequency of use is notable between the Bercean corpus and the Alexandre.

 

II.v.4   de and d’

I do not consider del as an example of ecthlipsis, since there are no exceptions (i.e., there are no examples of de el). In the Alexandre, d’ is found 161x (1st third, 65x; 2nd, 45x; 3rd, 51x). There are only four cases of excessive ecthlipsis that result in hypometry (209a, 927c, 1119a, 1321a). Further examples of d’ that have been lost in manuscript transmission may be found in hypermetric hemistichs (1st, 12x; 2nd, 8x; 3rd, 2x).[234]

            The complexity of the Bercean corpus’s types of ecthlipsis is displayed in the table below, which indicates the number of occurrences in which d’ and de appear before a vowel.[235]

 

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

d’+a–

36

1

2

8

3/4

1/1

3

1

1

de+a–

51

3

3

1

1

9

2

5

10

4

7

d’+e–

107

7

1

18

24

­–

11

35

19

5

de+e–

15

1

7

4

11

3

5

d’+i–

2

3

1

de+i–

14

2

1

1

1

1

d’+o–

23

1

4

2

3

de+o–

50

3

11

2

10

15

7

10

d’+u–

16

1

1

de+u–

11

1

11

1

6

1

7

total

d’+vwl

184

8

1

4

33

29

14

41

21

7

total

de+vwl–

141

7

3

2

1

40

4

21

43

16

30

d’/tot. %

57

53

25

67

97

42

40

49

57

19

freq. d’

14.5

26.3

21

19.3

7

31.5

21.2

19.0

23.3

29.3

freq. de

19

30

7

38.5

233

22.8

21.3

14.1

18.1

30.6

6.8

 

The absence of d’ from PSL and the very high frequency of the same in LV (to the near exclusion of de + vowel) are both striking results from this survey. Furthermore, the form d’agora is only found in JF and SM (but not the Alexandre); SM is problematic regarding the frequency of d’: the one example in the critical text is found only in one manuscript; F gives an equally metrical reading which avoids d’agora (F ‘nin enna que agora’ vs.  B ‘nin en la ley d’agora’), and the hypometric 191d2 may be construed as exen de aquest’ grano, rather than exen d’aqueste grano (although de aquest– is never found in metrical circumstances: Alex 592a ‘Dixo Áyaz de aquesto +|’, LV 16b ‘otro igual de aquesti +|’, 117a ‘Dexémosnos de aquesto +|’). We should conclude, then, that aquest– does not apocopate; de aquessas is, however, found at SM 116b. ‘Fiyos de Israel’ is, essentially, a set phrase.

            LV offers only two uses of de used with word initial vowel. Both are suspect. LV 167a ‘Estos tienen las llaues | de abrir e çerrar’ may well disguise d’abrir e de çerrar; 189c ‘|+ de entre ambos saber’ may be construed either as d’entre ambos saber or as de entr’ambos saber (as Dutton, Oc III, 103), but, moreover, entre ambos for entrambos is not an error made by F elsewhere (cp. VSD 675b); the reading d’entre ambos is thus the more likely.

            The form de ende is only found once: VSD 450d ‘ca en ora estauan | de ende se ermar’; otherwise dend(e) (Alex 207c, 598d, 1302d+, 1604a, 1723b, 1771c+, 2042a; DV 158b+; LV 8c+, 102c+, 122c; SM 288c; VSD 137b, 435c, 734a (dend’), 750d (dend’); VSM 563c; VSO 16d) or dent’ (Alex 168d, 285a, 286a, 286b, 760a, 934a (den’), 1453a; LV 6a). De ella is only found at MNS 140d ‘qui de ella se parte | es muy mal engannado’ (no variants supplied by the manuscript tradition); otherwise d’ ell– is always found.

 

II.v.5   en el and ’nel

’Nel is found twice in the ms. tradition of the Alexandre, and only in O. Both are metrical, and therefore particularly interesting

 2311d ‘non es bestia ’nel sieglo | que non fues’ ý trobada’ (O] en el P; Nelson bestia en sieglo, followed by Cañas, Casas.)

2416b ‘al que comen los bueitres | doze uezes ’nel día’ (O] al P, followed by Nelson, Cañas, Casas).

This unusual form would seem to underlie some hypermetric hemistics, such as: 1499d P «non ha bestias en el mundo» vs. O «non ha bestias enno mundo», where ’nel would explain the expansion of P and O; the alternation of en el and enno is found at 1778d ‘en el sieglo tan temprado’ (P)/‘enno s. t. t.’ (O);[236] and, in a feminine variant, 746b ‘en el arca encloídos’ (P)/‘enna a. e.’ (O), where either ’nel arca or en l’arca would render the line metrical. Here we may surmise that ’nel or en (‘)l(’), offering as it did an unfamiliar form to both scribes (or even the scribes of their models), produced the expansion in P to en el and the western form in O of enno. An apheresistic form, ’no, is also offered by O where P has en el: 1758d ‘non ha peor no sieglo’ (O)/‘en el mundo peor’ (P)—the original reading may well have been non ha peor nel sieglo; there is also several occasions where both OP offer a hypermetric reading:

with mundo/sieglo:

87d ‘non treguaua en el sieglo +| a iudío nin moro’ (OP)

389d ‘mas sepas que en el mundo +| non sé yo tan uellida’ (P; O: ‘en el sieglo’)

921d ‘bien creo que en el sieglo +| non áue sus calannas’ (OP)

1496d ‘otros omnes en el sieglo +| non son tan auondados’ (OP)

2151d ‘nunca fueron en el mundo +| gentes tan aquexadas’ (OP)

2242b ‘non es en el sieglo premia +| tamanna nin mayor’ (OP)

 

before a vowel:

528d ‘fincógela en el ombro +| mas por su amargura’ (OP)

1366b ‘por dar ad Alexandre |+ grant colpe en el escudo’ (OP)

1494d ‘que uendimian en el anno +| la segunda uegada’ (OP): cp. 1865c en ’l anno

2135d ‘todos eran en el áruol +| metidos e soldados’ (OP)

 

an exception:

2666d ‘metiólo Tolomeo |+ en el sepulcro honrado’ (PO): this tomb is mentioned as having been built at 2666b, so therefore a reading of en † sepulcro honrado (adopted by Nelson, Cañas) is unlikely; the article should be maintained through ’nel sepulcro honrado.

In these examples it would be wholly legitimate to read ’nel, as it would in the lines witnessed solely by P: 2619c ‘íuasele el alma |+ en el cuerpo angostando’, 1338c ‘Aiuntáronse en el campo +| los dos emperadores’; and the one example found in O where P is deficient: 2486b ‘guïándolos el fraire |+ metiólos en el sendero’.[237]

     This agreeable picture is, however, complicated thanks to the five occasions on which metrical el que in P is matched by equally metrical enno in O (1758b, 1810a, 2222b, 2408b, 2499c), by hypometrical enn’ (2224c), or by the equally hypometrical ’no (1733b); or, conversely, when en in P is matched by the unmetrical en el in O (745a ‘Metieron en conseio |’, 1742b ‘De subir en cauallo |’, 2263c ‘el que anda en mar |’ (but see below), 2431a ‘| en campo esperar’, 2670d ‘que en poder del mundo |’;[238] or viceversa: 666d ‘en otero’, 2133a ‘Quantas aues en çielo |’).

     Some variation in the manuscript witness, however, may indicate that originally ’nel was present in a line: 731a ‘Dirán que semeiamos |+ al que nada en la mar’ (P; O: ‘en el’); ‘en mar’ is found only at 2263c (cited immediately above), 2310d ‘mas destaiado era | que en mar non morrié’ (OP), 2263c (cited above) or in the phrase ‘| en tierra e en mar’ (1000a), which parallels the more common phrase ‘por tierra e por mar’ (1097b, 1502b, 2295d); the vacillation at 731a may well indicate that the original read nada ’nel mar. Furthermore, 1663c ‘más quiero esperarlos | en el campo morir’ (P) may be set alongside O ‘τ en campo morir’, which would suggest that P reflects the reading, e ’nel campo. A rather different type of puzzle is offered by line 1740a, which is ‘Mandaron el cauallo | a Dario caualgar’ in P and ‘Mandaron en el cauallo +| Darïo caualgar’ in O. Caualgar usually takes the direct object, but, for example, 1742b offers ‘caualgarlo ’n azémilla’ (’n O] en P) to describe a similar action. Caualgar in 1740a should, then, also require en; O’s ‘en el’, therefore, suggests a feasible reading of  the line as originally  having been Mandaron ’nel cauallo | a Dario caualgar. To explain the occurrence of en el in O against el in P as a resolution of ’nel provides alternative readings of certain lines: 270d ‘| no·l cabié el pelleio’ (P) vs. ‘non cabié en el pelleio’ (O: a very slight change of sense); 1861c ‘commo el fierro el fuego +| fízo·l amollecer’ (P) vs. ‘Cuemo el fierro suele | en el fuego amolleçer’ (O: suggesting a metrical reading of cuem’ el fierro ’nel fuego | suele [or fizo·l] amollecer);[239] 1820d ‘el día del Iüiçio | non les ualdrán uozeros’ (P) vs. ‘En el día …’ (O, suggesting ’Nel día …: cp. 2416b ’nel día).

     To summarize, then. The manuscript transmission of the text has undoubtedly erased a number of occasions in which the poet used ’nel; it is also easy to understand how «nel» in the act of copying could become en el, or, depending on the noun, en la. The nouns to which ’nel may be most frequently associated are mundo/sieglo, (parts of) the body and the vocabulary of warfare. Some of these nouns could undoubtedly be used without the definite article: en campo, for example, meaning ‘on the battlefield’, is well represented (676c, 1985b, 2431a), and at 61d is witnessed in OP, but rendered hypermetrically as ‘en el canpo’ by G; but en el campo, meaning exactly the same thing, is also found at, for example, 2983a ‘Fincaron en el campo | como firmes uarones’. The manuscript tradition, represented here by O, offers both ’nel sieglo and ’nel día. It also offers en ’l+vowel–. A graph of the potential occurrences is represented below, showing a distinct increase in frequency after shortly before stanza 1500.[240]

Given the original instability of en el, it is unsurprising to find that the manuscript tradition offers variants to lines containing these words in what would seem to be an attempt to avoid possible confusion (or, perhaps to express this point better, one might say that the manuscript variants are the result of such confusion): 831b ‘fuera bien en el tiempo |’ (en el P] del O); 942a ‘Sólo en el asseo |’ (en el P] Sólo con la fabla O); 974d ‘assaz he yo del prez |’ (del P] en el O); 1385d ‘Auié ý de meiores | pocos en el real’ (P] Auié ý pocos meiores +|– en todo ’l real O); 1488c ‘| en el cuello atada’ (P][al pescueço atada O); 1840b ‘en el mejor lugar’ (P][por hy meior estar O).

     The Bercean corpus offers no examples, and few possibilities, of deducing the use of ’nel or en ’l. The majority of hypometric lines containing en el may be resolved through apocopation: LV 11c, 43c, 127b, 156d, 176a, 179d, PSL 59a, VSM 114a, 419c, VSO 67d, 78b; others by omission of e: DV 153d–as Alex 2031b; through inversion of words: LV 128a; or through omission: SM 162a, VSM 391a (Koberstein, p. 191; Dutton, OC I, 391), VSO 45d (Dutton, OC V, 101). However, some examples from the SM stand out:

               161c ‘el uino torna en sangne +| salud de christiandad

               162a ‘En el pan y en el uino +| hí finca el sabor’

               165c ‘el uino torna en sangne +| en carne la oblada

All three may be understood as witnessing to an original with ’n(–). 161c1 and 165c1 are identical. Cátedra, pp. 999, 1001, leaves the hemistichs hypermetric; Dutton, OC V, 37, suppresses en (el uino torna † sangne). At 142a, Dutton omits en and inserts que (‘El pan que torne † carne’, against the metrical reading of IB, ‘El pan torne en carne’, with the reason given being ‘para mantener el paralelismo con 142bc’ (Oc  V, 34): ‘el uino torne sangne | la que nos redemió/ torna cosa angélica | lo que carnal nació’; the stanza ends, ‘que nos tornen al cielo | ont’ Lucifer cayó’. It is, however, quite clear that tornar en and tornar without preposition can be used to signify the same thing. At 162a, Dutton, Oc  V, 37, omits the conjunction, ‘e (I) / y (B)’, rather than the preposition; the only explanation for the removal of this word (rather than ‘en’) is that the emendation is carried out ‘por razones métricas’. Cátedra, p. 999, omits en. In comparison with 142ab ‘El pan torne en carne | en la que él murió/el uino torne sangne | la que nos redemió’, however, the candidate for suppression is en in both 161c, 165c. This leaves 162a, ‘En el pan y en el uino’, where ’nel would be a mode of resolution, although, since this would be the only example offered within the work and the wider corpus, the suppression of y or en (the latter is my own preference) would be the better course. We may conclude that, beyond the SM, there is no strong evidence to suspect that ’nel or en ’l existed in the Bercean corpus.

 

II.v.6   entre and entr’

The preposition entre suffers ecthlipsis before e– at Alex 1224a (entr’el O] entre el P), 1364a (OP), 1508a (entr’ellos O][en ellos P), 1511c (entr’ellos O][en ellos P), 2016c (entr’ellos amos solos P] entre los otros ambos O); although entre e– is found at 1746b (entre] entr O), 1817d (P] entr O). Entr’ is also found as part of entr’ambos at 347d (O] anbos P), 407b (P] ambos O), 538a (P] ambos O), 563a (P][estauan O), 589a (entrabos P, O def.), 617d (entramos O] entrabos P), 638d (P] entre nos O), 691c (OP), 1025d (P][entramos O), 1031d (P] amos O), 1043d (P] entramos O), 1357b (P] amos O), 1392c (P] amos O), 2197c (P] amos O). It is P which generally preserves the form, particularly after 1031d upto 2197c. Entre is found increasingly throughout the poem: 1st third, 16x; 2nd, 26x; 3rd, 58x. Entr’, on the other hand, is equally present in the first two thirds of the poem (1st, 8x; 2nd, 9x) but, in the last third, is only witnessed twice.

            Ecthlipsis of entre before e– is not witnessed in the Bercean corpus. Entr’amb– is found, however, at VSD 675b (entr’ ambas) VSM 434a (entr’ ambas), VSM 345a (entr’ ambos), and possibly LV 189c ‘o como salle el spíritu +|+ de entre ambos saber’ (or, more likely, d’entre ambos: see above, § II.v.4).[241] DV stands out for the infrequency of the use of entre: only twice in the whole poem; the LV is slightly irregular (one occurrence every 58.3 stanzas). SM, VSD and MNS are similar in frequency (49.5, 45.7 and 43.4 respectively), as are PSL and VSM (35, 32.6) and VSO (20.5) and, with the most frequent use of entre, JF (15.4).

 

II.v.7   onde and ond’/ont’ and donde

On(d)’ is found, in the Alexandre, primarily preserved in the first third of the poem: 216c (ond’] onde O oñt P), 239b (O; P om.), 283c (O] onde P), 306b (O] oñt P), 346b (ond’] oñt P on O), 383d (O] oñt P), 1146d (O] onde P), 2450d (ond’] onde O oñt P); on’: 273a (O] non P), 385a (O] onde P), 728b (P] onde O). A later example is probably found at 2424d (fasta ont P][ata do O), and is deduced from disparate readings at 2107d ‘por do ouieron a caer +|’ (P] onde ouioron a caer O) was restored by Nelson to ond’ ouieron a caer (a reading adopted by Cañas and Casas; but Nelson also suggests substituting ouieron by auién), 2436c ‘por ond’ nunca passaua |’ is reached by Casas from P «onde» and O «u».[242] Hypermetry of lines involving onde also suggests a further eighteen examples: 20c ‘|+ onde ouo a morir’, 812d ‘onde sé que uos ueredes +|’, 830d ‘por onde Casa de Midas +|’, 878c ‘onde sallió el Apóstol’ +|’, 946a ‘Onde creo que los dios +|’, 1121c ‘|+ onde fue después pesant’’, 1222b ‘onde en todas las tierras +|’, 1227a ‘Onde luego que el Sol +|’, 1228d ‘onde un poco de rato +|’, 1641d ‘onde prendié toda uía +|’, 1810c ‘|+ la materia onde uino’, 1900d ‘|+ onde ouo a reír’, 1915b ‘onde passassen el flumen +|’, 1949b ‘onde de todos los pueblos +|’, 2058d ‘|+ onde ouo a morir’, 2242c ‘onde ouieron los griegos +|’, 2267b ‘onde auié grant pesar +|’, 2434b ‘por onde en tu cadena +|’. Overall figures for on(d)’, then, show a decrease in frequency in the middle third of the poem: 1st third, 13x; 2nd, 7x; 3rd, 12x. Onde shows an increase in frequency after the first third: 1st, 3x; 2nd, 7x; 3rd, 6x. Do, in contrast, shows a steady decline in frequency across the length of the poem: 1st third, 35x; 2nd, 23x; 3rd, 20x. Donde appears only twice, but, as in the Bercean corpus, is hypermetric: Alex 110d (P, O def.), 1865c (P] que O), cp. LV 127b, 132c, VSO 40c.[243] Ó is found in the manuscript tradition only at Alex 262c (OP), but is to be deduced at 35d (por ó] pero OP), 584b (por ó] pero P por O), 2064d (ó] a O a que P – Nelson suggests do).

            In the Bercean corpus, we find the apocopated form ond’ or ont’ is generally more frequent than onde. Unusually, whereas apocopation of words in LV mostly outstrips that in other works, we find that only 50% of occurrences are apocopated (as perhaps holds also in VSO), whereas MNS, VSD and VSM all show a marked or exclusive preference for the apocopated form. There are two curiosities in the manuscript tradition: the unusual forms don’ (DV 22c) and, as in the Alexandre, ó (LV 49b, SM 123b). The frequency of use of ond’/onde in the main hagiographies and LV (and perhaps SM) is not seen in DV or PSL.[244]

 

 

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

ond’/ont’/on’

1

4

12

2

22

15

2

onde

1

4

4

1

2

5

2

freq.

210

77

29.1

56.9

105

74.3

28.8

32.6

51.25

 

II.v.8   sobre and sobr’

Eclipthsis of sobre occurs only before el(–) or él in the manuscript tradition of the Alexandre with an abrupt decline in frequency in the second half of the poem (1st third, 5x; 2nd, 6x; 3rd, 1x; but 1st half, 10x; 2nd, 3x).[245] Hypermetry suggests the following as possibilities, but they are all unlikely:

821a ‘Sobre Éufrates el río +| los mandó ir posar’ (sic O; P: ‘Sobre Eufratres’ – i.e., om. el río; one should probably understand this not as Sobr’ Éufrates, but rather assume a transposition has taken place: Sobre el río Éufrates).

1352b ‘uenía cauallero |+ sobre un grant elefante’ (OP): one may understand sobre † grant elefante (O once offers the unmetrical sobr’ un where P correctly supplies sobre un (2646a); other examples of sobre un(–) are 324c, 328d); Nelson claims that sobr’un would be theoretically possible (and Cañas carries out just that emendation), but the former leaves the verse as it stands in the manuscripts, commenting only that a better version would be en un grant elefante; it is not, furthermore, clear from the evidence of the poem that sobr’un is licit as an emendation.

Sobre+el is found only twice, at 862a ‘Uenié sobre el reÿ |’ (P] Yua sobr el rey O), and at 992c ‘cuémo sobre el reÿ | fizo tal crüeldat’ (an emendation to cüemo sobr’ el rey would be possible, though unwise, since the mss. are in agreement over sobre el).

            In the Bercean corpus, sobr’ el is preserved 13x;[246] and hypometry provides another seven examples:

                LV           37a ‘Por caer sobre el ninno +| un coto malo puso’

                               63b ‘de testimonios malos |+ sobre él muchos pusieron’

                               65c ‘sobre él ficieron todos +| los malos hermandat’

                               168d ‘sobre él fue leuantado +| todo el fraguamiento’

                               226c ‘essa tu misericordia +|+ des sobre la christiandat’

                SM          125d ‘la que mandó la ley |+ sobre el pueblo echar’

                               161a ‘El pan que sobre la ara +| consegra el abbat’: leg. sobr’ el ara.[247]

Sobre+el is found at SM 184c ‘sobre el sacrificio |’, 212b ‘luego sobre el cáliz |’, VSD 722c ‘| sobre el tu costado’, VSM 485a ‘| sobre el so altar’ (sobr’ el + possessive adjective is never found). In LV and MNS, then, sobre + el always suffers eclithpsis, whereas this is not the case in SM and VSD. However, the frequency of sobr’ in LV and SM is much higher than in the only other two works to witness it, MNS and VSD.

 

 

II.vi     Verbs

II.vi.1  poder

In the Alexandre, pued’ is preserved only in O (343c, 503a, 554c, 639c, 697c, 1001c), but hypermetrical lines suggest some few additions to this number: 54d ‘puede en grant ocasión +|’ (OP), 425b ‘que más puede en conçeio +|’ (O] podié P), 2222a ‘|+ Non puede assí seer’ (OP), 2398a ‘|+ que nunca puede dormir’ (OP), 2442c ‘|+ esto non puede fallir’ (OP). Thus first third, 7x; 2nd, 1x; 3rd, 3x—seven of the eleven examples occur within the first seven hundred stanzas. Puede is found 52x (1st, 16x; 2nd, 8x; 3rd, 33x).[248] Apocopation of the first person preterite, pud’ is found at Alex 1155c (pude: Alex 1159b, 1334c).

Within the Bercean corpus, pued’ is not preserved by the manuscript tradition, but

may be deduced at LV 38a ‘|‡ cadauno lo puede ueer’, and possibly at PSL 45d ‘|+ el qe puede e qe ual’’ (Tesauro, ed., p. 40, om. second qe (el qe puede e val), pointing to MNS 551d ‘| al qe puede e val’; Dutton, Oc V, 151, ‘El qe pued e qe val’); VSD 326d ‘dios como lo gradece |+ al que lo puede complir’.[249] Pude is only found at LV 224a.

 

II.vi.2  querer: quiere and quier’, etc.

Quier’ is mainly preserved in O at Alex 497c1* (O] quiere P), 811b (uos quier’ O][quiere P), 971a (O] quiere P), 1226b (OP), 1806a (O] quiere P), 1853c (O] quien quiere P), 2319b1* (quïer’ O][quïere P), 2388c1* (O] quiere P), 2433bc (O] quiere P). The sole example of agreement over quier’ between both manuscripts is an example of ecthlipsis,  not apocopation, as are all the others. There is one example of hypermetry in a line containing quiere: 56b ‘como se teme de todos +|+ a todos quiere premir’ (P, O def.; Nelson, Cañas, como·s teme de todos | a todos quier’ premir, although, as Nelson notes, the omission of a is also possible). Quiere is found 4x in the first third of the poem; 11x in the second; 12x in the last. Although quiere shows an increase in frequency after c. stanza 1262, quier’ is present twice in both first and second third, but 5x in the last.

Composites, with qual, qui, si, etc., are found in both apocopated and non-apocopated forms: quequiere (352b, 354d, 1293a, 1882c, 2256a) – quequier’ (795d, 1089d, 1610d, 1696c, 1933d); siquiere (626b, 1213a 2x, 2120b, 2149c 2x), sisquiere (778b 2x) – siquier’ (45c, 859a, 1181b 2x), 1218c, 2032c 2x); qualsequiere (1998c, 2277d, 2544b), qualsiquiere (1072d) – qualsequier’ (1520a, 2018d); quiensequiere (2443c) – quiensequier’ (2090b); quiquiere (335d 2x, 2157d) – quisquier’ (33c, 92c, 100c, 102a, 111d, 201d, 844d, 942c, 955d, 978c, 1110a, 1896c). Some forms do not apocopate in the poem: comoquiere (837b, 1755a, 2443a), doquiere (310b, 1724b).

Overall, (–)quier’ shows a slight decline in the last third of the poem, whilst (–)quiere increases by 30% each third of the poem: (–)quier’, 1st third, 12x; 2nd, 12x; 3rd, 9x; (–) quiere 1st, 13x; 2nd, 17x; 3rd, 23x). As regards manuscript transmission, O consistently prefers apocopated forms, and P unapocopated forms irrespective of metricality.[250]

            Within the Bercean corpus, quier’ is found at DV 108c and LV 144c (and LV 15d, through an emendation metri causa). [251] Quiere is found throughout the corpus, most frequently in SM and JF (13x –stanzas per occurrence, 22.8– and 3x –25.7–, respectively, against, for example MNS 6x –151.8–, VSM 3x –163–, VSD 4x –194.25–). Composite forms are, however, represented through apocopated forms: comoquier’ (VSD 495b; comoquiere, MNS 671d), quiquier’ (MNS 726d, VSD 676d; quequiere, MNS 498a, 726d, VSD 87a), siquier’ (VSD 226d, VSO 146b, and may be deduced at SM 251b; siquiera is found at VSO 146a, siquiere at MNS 17b, 28b, 346b, VSD 386b (2x); sequiere at SM 31b, 39b, 117a, VSD 16d). Quiquiere is only found in unapocopated form (JF 6d, PSL 14c, VSD 229c), as is quandoquiere (VSD 444b) and doquiere (MNS 804a). The apocopation of quiere when standing alone is found only in Alex, DV and LV. In combination with si–, como–, que–, apocopated forms are found in MNS (2x), SM (1x), VSD (3x) and VSO (1x). Combined forms are not present in DV, H, LV.

 

II.vi.3  soler

O preserves suel’ thrice in the Alexandre, although this form is not preserved by P: 1016c (O] suele P), 2045c (O] σuele P), 2322c (O] σuele P). Suele is found twice in the first third of the poem, 8x in the second, and 10x in the third; further, suele is used but thrice in the first half of the poem, 16x in the last.

            The apocopated form is not found in the Bercean corpus; suele is found only four times (MNS 149b, 704c, VSD 2b, VSM 485b). It is of note, further, that inflections of the verb soler are found only in MNS, SM, VSD, VSM and VSO, although the frequency of use varies considerably (VSO most infrequently, VSM most frequently), with the MNS using soler, suele, etc. a third less frequently than the Alexandre.[252]

 

II.vi.4  tener

In the Alexandre, tien’ is found 9x, only one of which occurs in the first half of the poem.[253] Contien’ is found only at Alex 987d. Tiene occurs 21x (1st third, 4x; 2nd, 9x; 3rd, 8x).  The manuscript tradition of the Bercean corpus does not preserve examples of the apocopated form, but it may be deduced at LV 188a, 222d (but tiene at 212a), and nowhere else.[254]

 

II.vi.5  ualer

In the Alexandre, the manuscript tradition has preserved the alternation of full and apocopated forms: ual’ is found most frequently in the first third of the poem, 10x; 2nd, 3x; 3rd, 2x.[255] Uale, similarly, is found most often in the first third (6x) against only one further example: 2227a.[256]

     Ual’ is transmitted by the manuscripts of the Bercean corpus in almost all works: JF 58a, MNS 385d, 536d, 551d, 861b, PSL 45d, SM 122a, 131d, VSD 72a, 245d, 560d, 618c, VSM 27b, 127b. Uale, however, is, as in the Alexandre, more limited in use: DV 198b, MNS 231d, 304d, 341d, 432c, 703d (and 886d (F)), VSD 52c, 432a, 446d, 470c.

 

II.vi.6  ueer

The apocopation of uidi (itself found at DV 18b, 152b; MNS 768a, and MNS 607c F [uedié Q) is preserved only at MNS 609b, VSM 484c, and, as ui, at MNS 447a, VSD 109b, which is the only form used in the Alexandre in both O and P (149d, 817d, 896d, 1152c, 1156a).

 

II.vi.7  uenir

Uien’ is found at Alex 249d (O] uiene P), 1230b (uien’ grant O][uiene P), 1618a (O] uiene P), and conuien’ at 14d (O] conuiene P), 2484c (O, P def.), whilst uiene occurs 11x (conuiene: 989a). In the Bercean corpus, only LV 44d allows uien’ to be deduced: ‘|‡ uiene de mí a reçebir’.[257] Uiene is, of course, found throughout the corpus.[258]

 

II.vi.8  subjunctive forms in –asse/ás’ and –esse/és’

The frequency and use of these subjunctive forms differs between poems. I have divided the use of these subjunctives between mid-line and end-line; the mid-line examples, obviously, are guaranteed in their syllabic number whereas those at the end are not.

mid-line apocopation (number of examples 1st column; frequency, second): [259]

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

–s’

49

6

1

2

freq.

54.6

38.8

297

244.5

 

End-line apocopation is only found in the Alexandre 24x.[260]

     Full form: mid-hemistich[261]

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

131

4

1

5

40

4

6

32

22

11

20.4

52.5

77

33.3

22.8

26.3

49.5

24.3

22.2

18.6

 

Full form: end-hemistich [262]

 

Alex

DV

H

JF

LV

MNS

PSL

SM

VSD

VSM

VSO

121

19

1

29

4

8

40

23

13

22.1

11.1

233

31.4

26.3

37.1

19.4

21.3

15.8

 

Total use of subjunctives: mid-hemistich: Alex, 180x (freq. 14.9); LV 13x (17.9).

     Percentage of apocopated forms against all forms mid-hemistich: 27%; end-hemistich: 14.5%. The archetype would doubtless have had a higher frequency, since the apocopated froms are predominantly found in O; whilst these apocopated forms may in general be reconstructed by analysis of hypermetrical hemistichs where only P is extant, this cannot be performed on end-hemistich occurrences of the forms.

     Worthy of note is the wide variation in DV and LV between mid-line and end-line use offering two ends of the spectrum (in DV, in particular, compounded by the use of this form for rhymes); the rarity of the use of subjunctives in SM, and the rough similarity between the hagiographies and the Alexandre in frequency of subjunctive use and placement, although not, evidently, in the use of apocopated forms, leads to the noticable datum that yet again LV stands out; the apocopated form in the Bercean corpus is otherwise extremely rare.

     The frequency of apocopation in the Alexandre is worthy of comment. The frequency of apocopated forms tails off rapidly after around stanza 1500, after having become significantly rarer than full forms at around stanza 500; after this point, full forms gain a frequency they maintain throughout the poem. One might have expected full forms to increase proportionately to the decrease in apocopated forms, but this does not happen other than after stanza 500. The almost total cessation of the use of apocopated forms after stanza 1500 is not accompanied by an increase in frequency of full forms.

 

III       Conclusion

Although recent work on apocopation has tended to lump together all occurences of this linguistic feature in its analysis, and dating of works through the thirteenth century has been arrived at through the decreasing occurrence of apocopation, this study has shown that, whilst some words in the Alexandre do indeed decrease in their apocopation over the course of the poem, this is not always the case, and individual words can show differing degrees of frequency at different points across the poem.

     What has, however, also been shown is that the differences between the Alexandre and the Bercean corpus must finally put aside any idea that Gonzalo de Berceo was involved in the writing of the Alexandre. What the analysis of the Alexandre does not do is wholly remove the possibility of a ‘team effort’. Whilst there are clear differences of frequency of words through the poem, the points at which these frequencies change do not consistently coincide. But a number of changes in the linguistic usage of the poem would seem to take place between stanzas c. 1200–1700, roughly mid-way through the work.[263] But, conversely, the Libro de Alexandre clearly took many years to write; the work may not have been written in the order currently presented; and may, given the long years of its gestation and composition, have been written in very different places.

Regarding the Bercean corpus, the information that the analysis of apocopation and ecthlipsis has gathered provides rather further grounds for the discussion of authorship. The most anomalous of the works is Loores de la Virgen, due to the frequency of elli (§ II.i.1), of ·l (§ II.i.2), of ·s (§ II.i.3), of ·m (§ II.i.4), of éste/i (§ II.i.6.a–b), of aquel (§ II.i.6.d), of aquesto (§ II.i.6.f), of tod’ and todo (§ II.iii.4), com’ and como (§ II.iv.2), quand’ and quando (§ II.iv.5), of (d)end(e) (§ II.v.2), of d’ (§ II.v.4), of sobr’ el (§ II.v.8), of apocopated forms of the subjunctive (§ II.vi.8); the use of aquesse and of aquesti (§ II.i.6.f), of tod’ before a consonant (§ II.iii.4), of ó (§ II.v.7), of spíritu without an article (§ II.ii.1), of tien’ and uien’ (§ II.vi.4, 7) and the absence of la alma (§ II.ii.2). This is more than enough data to conclude that the Loores de la Virgen was not written by Gonzalo de Berceo.

Two other works, due to their length, are also susceptible to conclusions over authorship based upon the frequency and use of words. The Duelo de la Virgen offers another extreme to the Loores: a high frequency of elli (§ II.i.1), li (§ II.i.2), of ·m (§ II.i.3), of tanto/tant’ (§ II.iv.9), of (d)end(e) (§ II.v.2), the preservation of el before feminine nouns beginning with unstressed initial a– (§ II.ii.2), and the absence of com’ (§ II.v.2) and combined forms with –quier(e) (§ II.vi.2), the rarity of quanto (§ II.iv.6), of ond’/onde (§ II.v.7), and the infrequent apocopation of este/esti, esse/essi, and the low frequency thereof (II.i.6.a–b).

The Sacrifiçio de la Missa is marked by the relative infrequency of grand (§ III.iii.3), of mucho (§ II.iv.4), the frequency of todo (§ III.iii.4), of sobr’ el (§ II.v.8), of quiere (§ II.vi.2), the frequency and positioning of estonz’ (§ II.iv.3), and the use of qu’ (§ II.i.5), ést’ (§ II.i.6.a), aquessa (§ II.i.6.e), aquesse (§ II.i.6.f), ’nel (§ II.v.5), antes (§ II.iv.1), ó (§ II.v.7).

The Passión de Sant Laurent’ is just over four hundred lines long, and so it offers certain difficulties when an enquiry is made regarding its authorship, but the following anomalies stand out when compared to the other hagiographies by Gonzalo de Berceo: the frequency of ·l (§ II.i.2), of mucho (§ II.iv.4), the absence of d’ (§ II.v.4), of (d)end(e) (§ II.v.2), of com’ (§ II.iv.2), and the rarity of ond’/onde (§ II.v.7).

The Juicio Final is even shorter than the PSL, but one may point to the following: the frequency of éste/ésti (§ II.i.6.a) yet the low frequency of este/esti and esto (§ II.i.6.a, c), the frequency of todo and tod’ and its apocopation before a consonant (§ II.iii.4), of entre (§ II.v.6), of quiere (§ II.vi.2), the rarity of li/·l/lo (§ II.i.2), the absence of la alma (§ II.ii.2) and the use of aquessos (§ II.i.6.e), of sól’ (§ II.iv.7), and of fuert’ mientre (§ II.iii.2).

This is not the totality that can be said regarding authorship. But, when combined with information regarding the copying trajectory of individual works that can be established through the manuscript texts that we have and with an analysis of style, secure grounds can be found for excluding Loores from the corpus of works by Gonzalo de Berceo as spurious; DV and SM are at best dubious, but very probably spurious. The classification of dubia must also be applied to PSL and JF.

 

(Nota del Editor web: dada la compleja grafía del texto del Profesor Lappin, ofrecemos el texto original en formato DOC)

 

 

 

 (

 

 

 

NOTAS

[1] John D. Fitz-Gerald, Versifcation of the ‘Cuaderna vía’ as Found in Berceo’s ‘Vida de Santo Domingo de Silos’ (New York: Columbia Univeristy Press, 1905).

[2] Libro de Alexandre, ed. Juan Casas Rigall, Nueva Biblioteca de Erudición y Crítica, 27 (Madrid: Castalia, 2007); his transcriptions of the manuscripts (in .pdf format) at http://web.usc.es/~fejcr/

     (Nota del editor web: también ed. Juan Casas Rigall en http://www.bibliotecagonzalodeberceo.com/berceo/casasrigall/alexandre.htm)

[3] See Martin J. Duffell, ‘The Metric Cleansing of Hispanic Verse’, Bulletin of Hispanic Studies, 76 (1999), 151–68, and his later thoughts in idem, Syllable and Accent: Studies on Medieval Hispanic Metrics, Papers of the Medieval Hispanic Research Seminar, 56 (London: Department of Hispanic Studies, Queen Mary, University of London, 2007), p. 88 and n. 18.

[4] It will be necessary to use a large number of abbreviations and sigla; these are:

|              indicates the division of a hemistich

+   ‡  +‡ indicates that the line is hypermetric by one, two, or three syllables

–   =     indicates that the line is hypometric by one, two, or three syllables

«  »          enclose a transcription of the word(s) as found in the manuscript (distinctions between i/j, ∫/s and u/v are not observed)

]               follows the reading (given in italics) adopted in the critical text and preceeds a rejected reading

][             indicates that the rejected reading (given in roman) is also acceptable

†              indicates omission in an emended reading

bold        is used to indicate editorial additions to a critical text

subscript                is used to indicate the position of words in a line: 1 or 2 indicates the hemistich; * rhyme position; i, ii, iii the word-position in the hemistich.

superscript             is used to indicate apocopation/ecthlipsis metri causa

Alex        Libro de Alexandre; other editions used: Dana A. Nelson, ed., El libro de Alexandre (Madrid: Gredos, 1979); Jesús Cañas, ed. (Madrid: Cástalia, 1988).

Dutton, Oc            Brian Dutton, ed., Gonzalo de Berceo, Obras completas, 5 vols (London: Tamesis, 1967 – 81).

DV         Duelo de la Virgen

H             Himnos (identified as HI, HII and HIII)

JF            Juicio final

LV          Loores de la Virgen

MNS       Milagros de Nuestra Señora

PSL         Passión de Sant Laurent’

SM          Sacrifiçio de la Missa

VSD       Vida de Santo Domingo

VSM       Vida de San Millán

VSO       Vida de Santa Oria

B              BNM, ms. 1533 (containing SM).

Bivar        verses of the Alex printed in Francisco de Bivar, Marci Maximi Episcopi Caesaraugustani, … continuatio chronici … (Madrid: Díaz de la Carrera, 1651), pp. 335–37

F              the ‘in folio’ copy of the Bercean corpus (RAE, ms. 4)

G             citations from Gutierra Díaz de Games, Victorial, namely: Ga BNM, ms. 17.648; Gb RAH; Gc Biblioteca Menéndez Pelayo, ms. 328

I               the copy of the Bercean corpus carried out under the supervision of P. Ibarreta, osb

M            the copy of the Bercean corpus carried out under the supervision of P. Mecolaeta, osb

O             BNM, Vit. 5-10

P              BNP, Ms. Esp. 488

Q             the ‘in quarto’ copy of the Bercean corpus, now lost; I use this letter also to indicate where I and M allow the reconstruction of the reading of this copy

[5] The text analysis software used is Concordance, version 3.2, created by R. J. C. Watt (December 2004), http://www.concordancesoftware.co.uk/

[6] See, for example, Amaia Arizaleta, La Translation d’Alexandre: recherches sur les structures et les significations du ‘Libro de Alexandre’, Annexes des CLHM, 12 (Paris: Séminaire d’Études Médiévales Hispaniques de l’Université de Paris 13, 1999), pp. 38–39.

[7] Páter nóster is also found at Alex 2674c, MNS 373b; the title of the apophthegmata, Uitas pátrum, at VSD 61b.

[8] Arizaleta, p. 47.

[9] The word is spelt gratia at LV 22a, and at similar spelling found at MNS 518b1*, SM 80c1*, 295d1*, which may indicate at trisyllabic pronunciation. Note also the sole ocurrence of graçïoso at HIII 7c.

[10] Dieresis may well explain the hypometrical hemistich, MNS 181b ‘es plena de gracia –| e quita de dición’, which should probably be construed as es de gracïa plena, the scribe having returned the phrase to the more usual arrangement from the Ave Maria (Dutton left the line hypometric; Baños suggested the unacceptable formulation es plena de gracïa; Bayo and Michael assumed haplography e es plena de gracia, but they ignored LV 22a ‘e de gratïa plena’).

[11] For a summary of the concept of ‘fit’, see Duffell, Syllable, p. 14.

[12] Uisión is recorded by Casas at Alex 1137a, 2025d. Yet in both of these cases, the manuscripts reveal that uisïón should have been followed: 1137a ‘Uínole en uisión |’ follows P, whilst O offers Uienol, indicating the possibility of a apocopated indirect object: Uino·l en uisïón; 2025d ‘| una fuerte uisión’ is taken from P fuert, which should be read as fuert’; fuerte occurs with un(a) only three other times in the Alex (348b, 1345c, 2360a) and only in the first is it contained in a metrical hemistich. Uisiones is found at 2470a ‘| todas las sus uisiones’ (O); P, however, omits sus, and it is this reading which should probably have been followed.

[13] The legal term was condiçión, trisyllabic and is found at Alex 2636a ‘Pero en todo esto | meto tal condiçión’, DV 168d ‘resucitarié de cabo +| en mejor condición’, MNS 660b ‘e con el trufán ouo | puesta su condición’, 667d ‘ca tú eres fïança | de nuestra condición’).

[14] Discretio was often used in the context of I Cor. 12, 10 ‘discretiones spirituum’ (the discernment of spirits), but also in the logical sense (cf. Boethius, De diferentiis topicis, II, ‘Rerum enim per se similium discretio maius ac minus facit’)—both senses are humourously used in JF 75c.

[15] Especiales at LV 108d.

[16] Alex 852d ‘estos dio que guardassen | a essas religiones’ may provide a counter example, although a essas religiones P] las religiones O, although the line is highly corrupt in O.

[17] LV 199b ‘tú fuisti reliquiario |’ is probably to be construed as tú fuist’ reliquïario.

[18] Sinai is found at Alex 292b ‘el monte de Sinai |’: it is impossible to tell whether it should be construed as ending with a stressed dipthong or as Sináï.

[19] The line, ‘el uiçio sodomítico | con sus abusïones’, uses the meaning of abusio as found in Petrus Lombardus, Liber sententiarum, I.i.1, ‘Nam usus illicitus abusus vel abusio nominari debet’ (itself a citation of Augustinus Hipponensis, De doctrina christiana, I.iv).

[20] The word is otherwise only found in the thirteenth century in a legal document of 1285 from San Emeterio de Dicastillo: ‘por toyller por jamas perpetuo toda materia e manera e ocasion de discordia e de dissenssion’ (ed. José María Lacarra, Gobierno de Navarra (Pamplona), 1986, p. 119).

[21] Apart from at LV 109c ‘en esto con lo ál | grant priuilegio ouo’, all other examples of priuilegio are found at the end of the first hemistich (LV 104b, 169a, 217a, MNS 866d, VSM 425d, 467b, 483b), and could, therefore be scanned priuilégïo.

[22] The alternative form, subiecçion, is found at Alex 1604b ‘quando en subiecçión | e en premia la miso’; but this could be construed also as quand’ en subiecçïón (P, in this instance, has ςubietion).

[23] 38x Alex: 4c … 2669a; DV 54c; 5x LV; 18x MNS; PSL 35d, 55b; 9x SM 113d–296a; 34x VSD; 16x VSM; 4x VSO 73d–175c.

[24] Dutton, A New Berceo Manuscript, p. 64, plumped originally for ‘derredor los dïablos’, then ‘en redor de dïablos’. However, one should also bear in mind that M (i.e., Q) and I (i.e., F) probably represent different recensions of the poem.

[25] Bayo and Michael (Milagros de Nuestra Señora, ed. by Juan Carlos Bayo and Ian Michael (Madrid: Castalia, 2006)) opt for benedición in relation to MNS 499a, but benedición does not exist in the corpora. Nevertheless, benedición, closer to the Latin root of benedictio, is found in medieval Aragonese: Fueros de Aragón. BNM 458, ed. Pedro Sánchez-Prieto Borja (Madrid: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, 2004), and in further support of this one may cite the alteration between the forms ‘bendicho’, ‘bendi(c)t–’ on the one hand, and ‘benedi(c)to’ on the other in the corpora under investigation. Nevertheless, the dieretic reading is still more convincing than the etymological, particularly in relation to other words in –ión that take on dieresis and to the complete absence of benedición from the Bercean corpus or the Alexandre.

[26] See above, n. 10.

[27] Perhaps related is preçïosa at MNS 227a ‘La madre precïosa | qe nunqua falleció’ where precïosa Q] pïadosa F; the latter reading is adopted by Bayo and Michael. There are a large number of examples of precios–, but no further of precïos–, unlike the vacillation of glorïos–/glorios–; cp. Alex 1482a ‘| piedra muy preçïada’, 858b ‘| de piedras preçïadas’, and forms of the verb preçïar: Alex 99d, 147c, 968b, 2194d. F may represent a correction to the original need for unusual dieresis (pïados– at Alex 1716c, DV 70a, MNS 33c, VSD 363a, VSM 129c, etc.; there is no evidence for piados–). My own suspicion is that precïosa is a garbled transcription of the Latinism, specïosa: ‘madre specïosa’ would, indeed, recall contemporary hymnody (for example, the thirteenth-century motet, Virgo Maria, mater speciosa (see Dolores Pesce, ‘A Revised View of the Thirteenth-Century Latin Double Motet’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 40 (1987), 405–42, at p. 416 n. 12).

[28] The formulation of Alex 299d ‘nin que en imperïo | aieno aluergaua’ (i.e., imperío) strikes me as unlikely; Nelson supposed nin que él en imperio.

[29] But note Alex 505b a piedes de cauallo P][a pies de los cauallos O

[30] Aünque was probably constant: it is found at Alex 1185c ‘aünque lo auié | por la tierra buscado’, 1298b ‘aünque por natura |+ eran mucho esforçados’, 1299d ‘aünque los rancassen |’, 1314b ‘aünque non tornassen |’; MNS 768a ‘Aünque me lo sufra |’, 769a ‘Aünque todo esto | me quiera dios sofrir’, VSD 427d ‘aúnque iurarié | desto non lo falsar’, and probably at Alex 294b ‘aünque lo sopiesse |’ (of course sopïesse would also be possible). At Alex 1932d, O and P differ; P ‘non bria connusco |+ aunque fues nuestro hermano’, O ‘non viuria connosco | si non fus nost hermano’; which has led editors to varied solutions: Nelson non bivría connusca, †que fues nuestro hermano, Cañas non bivría connucso |+ aunque fues nuestro hermano, Casas non vivría connusco | aunque fues’ nuestr’ hermano. O and P offer, through aunque and se non, opposite meanings to the line; and both can be justified (the Scythian horseman places honourable dealings above even family ties in P; in O, he expresses how those who are disnonourable will be excluded from their company—and here, in particular, he is indicating how Alexander would not be accepted by the nomads; this element is added to the speech from the relevant part of the Alexandreis). Finally, LV 193c ‘| aunque allá uayamos’—although for allá one may well have to read ý, as is often the case in the Alexandre’s transmission, but nevertheless the first hemistich begins with aquí, thereby rendering allá more likely (cp. VSO 205d ‘que allá nin aquí | nunca ueamos mal’), or the line understood as aünqu’ allá uayamos, as does Dutton, Oc III, 104.

[31] Nelson suggested that the line could be read de la müi grant fuerça, but did not alter his edition in this vein; Cañas chose füerça. Grande in the Bercean corpus is mainly transmitted in hypometric hemistichs, where it would be most attractive to read grand’; these are limited to the two works solely transmitted by F: LV 38b, 184b, 202a, VSO 59b, 115b; note also the sole occurrences of grande at end-hemistich (LV 189a, VSO 101d); other occurrences are accompanied by muy: SM 228c ‘| de muy grande dolor’ (B If); and VSD 397b ‘| por muy grande sazón’, 430b ‘| muy grande desmesura’, but in both of these, F provides an alternative, preferable reading: 397b ‘por una grant sazón’ and ‘müy grant desmesura’; yet note VSO 109cd ‘| de muy grande dulçor/auié muy grande cuita |’.

[32] Nelson suggests, and Cañas adopts, a rearrangement of the order: Ajas non se dexaua con el miedo echar. One might suppose that grant has been omitted, but miedo is found 29x in the Alexandre and is never preceeded by the definite article together with an adjective; the only adjective found is at Alex 2516b, and is, unsurpisingly, grant: ‘que era toda África | en grant miedo metida’ (cp. the use at JF 65c ‘todos aurán grant miedo |’, VSD 682a ‘Ouo ella grand miedo |’, 747d ‘auié muÿ grand miedo |’, VSM 385d ‘serié si más durasse | de grant miedo perdida’). The line would work with the substitution of miedo with pauor: Áyaz con el pauor, but there are only two occasions pauor P] miedo O (114c, 2026b, two of the three occurrences in which pauor does not occur in hemistic-final position; the other is 2599c)—and it is P who offers miedo in 589b. Nevertheless, note 1780b temió O] por miedo P. Further, although pauor occurs 16x in the Alex, it is never as con el pauor, and indeed the definite article accompanies it only once: 476b (‘con muy grant pauor’ is, however, found at MNS 381a). The spread of pauor is notable: 10x (35d–605d) and 6x (1901d–2599c), with pauores at 1486c. The synonym, pauura, is only ever found in rhyme position: Alex 1885d, 2181d, 2473d, JF 11a, 62c, 67c, LV 27d, MNS 542a, VSD 57b, 327c, VSM 112d, 439d (pauor is mostly found in rhyme position, whilst miedo is only once found assonating at Alex 579b, and the latter is used more regularly throughout the poem; it is also found in O where P has dubda: 219b, 1180b).

[33] 1574b ‘entró en traspüesto |+ por meior se encobrir’ (P). Cañas emended to entró ý en traspuesto, but Nelson only suggests the addition of se or él. One might suppose that an inversion has taken place (i.e., en traspuesto entró), although P’s order, entro entraspuesto would explain the hypometric O entro entre todos. The adjective is, on both ocurrences, trisyllabic: Alex 2502d ‘era el rey traspuesto |’, VSD 423b ‘luego que fue traspuesto |’.

[34] Note the form Eolalia (VSM 95a), which otherwise, in regular hemistichs, is Olalla or Olalia (VSM 116a, VSO 27d).

[35] It is uncertain whether the name at Alex 1638a1*, 1625a1* should be scanned Réçeüs or Reçeus; the former would seem more likely. Moses’s brother is another troublemaker: at MNS 41b, he is Aärón; the maintenance of this form at SM 14d ‘la uerga de Aärón +|’ and LV 7b ‘|+ que fue pora Aärón’, however, results in hypermetric hemistichs. One may understand Arón for both; or d’Aärón for SM 14d and por’ Aärón for LV 7b.

[36] 903b ‘que lo auié el reÿ | Darío engannado’ (OP), 1087a ‘Más plogo a Darío |’ (O] P plaςio), 1235a ‘La muger de Darío |’ (P, O def.), 1348d, 1420a ‘quando cató Darío |’, (OP), 1593c ‘Darío contra ella |’ (contra P] con O), 1747c ‘dixo·l que a Darío |’ (dixo·l P] dixo O), 1783a ‘Darío el to preçio |’ (OP), 2590a ‘| a Darío buscar’ (OP). Of these, those indicated in italics may well be construed differently: 1235a, mugïer (since P often uses muger where O offers mugier: cp. 53d, 67d, 347c, 362c, 388b, 395c, 758a, 867a, etc.), 1348d, 1420a qüando, 1747c díxoli que (although, in the latter case, the manuscripts do not support the emendation).

[37] Saint Mary of Egypt is otherwise troublesomely unmetrical in the Bercean corpus. VSD 57a ‘María la egiptiaca +| peccatriz sin mesura’ has been tampered with in numerous ways. Fitz-gerald, ed., p. xxxiii, suggested ‘Mariá la Egiptiaca’ (supported by Ramón Menéndez Pidal, ed., Cantar del Cid, 3 vols (Madrid: Bailly-Balliere e Hijos, 1908, and successive reprintings), I, 273); Federico Hanssen, ‘Notas a la VSD, escrito por Berceo’, Anales de la Universidad de Chile, 120 (1907), 415–63, at 423, rejected ‘Mariá’, and suggested the omission of the article: ‘María † Egiptiaca’ (followed by Dutton, Oc IV, p. 44). Aldo Ruffinatto, ed. (Logroño: Instituto de Estudios Riojanos, 1978), p. 89, on the basis of the apocopation of García (cp. VSD 398b, 415b, 419b ‘Garcí (or Garçí) Munnoz’): Mari, which was used as form for the name María throughout the middle ages, and not necessarily only with a patronimic: cp. ‘Mari de Moneada’ (Repartimiento de Murcia, ed. Juan Torres Fontes (Madrid: CSIC, 1960), p. 41). In the corpus of Gonzalo’s works, MNS 783c has ‘la Egipcïana’, but LV 201a offers almost exactly the same line as the present one: ‘María la egiptiana +| peccadriz sin mesura’. Since the Latin form is ‘Maria Egyptiaca’, the temptation is to omit the article. Furthermore, in Alfonsine prose, the adjective for ‘Egyptian’ is ‘egipciano’ or ‘egipciaga’. The avoidance of the ending –ïana in the VSD would suggest that the poet did not intend –ia– to be the subject of dieresis, and therefore the most probable reconstruction of the line will eschew this, and adopt either Marí la egipciaca or María Egipciaca. However, acïago (DV 140c) is marked by dieresis, and may descend etymologically from aegyptiacus [dies] (according the RAE dictionaries from 1956; previous dictionaries suggest that its origins lie in auspicium combined with the suffix –ago (from 1913 to 1947), from the Greek ά̉τη (‘fatalidad’, 1899), or from an Arabic word meaning suffering (1726, following Nebrija and Corominas and correspondingly spelt aziago, and 1884, s.v. aciago).

[38] Perhaps as a calque on medïanos, entremedïanos (Alex 1098c ‘los entremedïanos | auiéngelos matado’ P; O los mandaderos =|), but entremediano(s) at Alex 214a, 1103b, 1862b, 2189a, entremediana at LV 213d, MNS 767d, and entremedianera at Alex 1228c; however, medïada is found at Alex 2475c (but mediad–: Alex 881d, 1260b; MNS 52b, 413b, 733a, VSM 280d, 378a, VSO 188b). We find indian– at 1515a, but I am by no means confident that P gives the correct readings for this stanza.

[39] And, further, 1395c ‘Pudo más el de Grecia |’, where el de Grecia P][el grïego O; note the opposite variation at 2286c troyana P][de Troya O.

[40] Alex 283a offers O Tanto tenie Asia and P Tanto tiene esta sola; Casas adopts a mixed reading, ‘Tanto tiene Asía’, which is in my view inherently unlikely; O’s use of Asia is probably a scribal clarification, and P’s reading should have been wholly adopted: Tanto tiene esta sola +|, which admits of a metrical reading Tanto tiene esta sola.

[41] One of these, 1923a ‘Conquista has Persïa | Medïa e Caldea’, is more likely to be read as Conqüista has Persia |.

[42] The following are only found at hemistich end: Cantabria (VSM 281b, 288c, 289c), Capadoçia (111a, 839b, 1516b, 2638b). Judging from the rules expressed above, they would not be scanned Cantrábrïa.

[43] Alex 869a ‘Los rëys de Oriente |’ would, given the partiality for Orïente and the variable status of reys/reÿs (reys: 990b, 1425c, 2188a, 2200a, together with MNS 24b, VSM 395c, 433d, 434b, 436a and F’s variant to MNS 319c; reÿs: 10x Alex mid-hemistich; LV 20b and Q’s variant for MNS 319c). LV 31a ‘Nueua estrella paresçió +| estonçe en oriente’ presents metrical regularity in its second hemistich; however, estonçe is otherwise hypermetrical at LV 186d, 188b, SM 289a VSO 42d, 134d, and Alex 734b (O estonçe), 1160b. It is only metrical at Alex 407c (O estonça) and 599c (P; O def.). The more usual metrical trisyllabic form is estonçes: Alex 468d (O estonz), 1391a (O estonças), 2313a (O estonçe [!]).

[44] The following have not been considered: 114a ‘| ant’ él más yazïén’ (ante él…), 221d ‘conteçïó·l a Tebas |’ – 620d ‘pero no·l quisïeron |’ (expansion of ·l); 1156d ‘Acuçïó·s él ante |’ (problematic, because no other record of reflexive verb followed by él in this way; si·s él is found (1804d), but never with a verb; the solution, then, is probably the expansion of ·s); 2484a ‘Mas si ir quisïerdes |’ (O Mas si ir quisieres, P def.; si quisierdes ir? ‘Ir’ does not preceed any form of the verb querer apart from DV 103a ‘| allá do ir qeredes’, where the inversion is clearly for the purposes of rhyme; a transposition must therefore be considered highly likely).

[45] Although since the entire line requires two diereses to function (‘empeçóla lüego | firme a lidïar’, where lüego firme P][afirmes luego O) there is certainly room for the suspicion that some form of corruption took place in the archetype; for afirmes cp. 180b afirmes luego P] luego todos O, 430c afirmes P] todos, 671c Firiéndoles afirmes O] Faςiendoles grandes daños P, 1409d más afirmes que d’ P] mucho mas que O, 1756b afirmes O] aprisa P—and 220c afirme P][afirmes O vs. 506d afirmes P][afirme O.

[46] 81cd ‘qui quïere a otro |+ en fazienda perdonar/él mesmo se quïere | con su mano matar’ are probably best understood as having suffered a transposition line c and the suppression of elli in line d: qui quiere en fazienda | a otro perdonar/elli mesmo se quiere | con su mano matar (following Nelson; Cañas qui en fazienda quiere | a otro perdonar/después mismo se quiere | con su mano matar, since G offers «el despues mismo se quiere» for 81d1; however, mesmo/mismo does not seem to be used in this fashion elsewhere in the corpora).

[47] In relation to cüidas, one might consider Alex 1169d ‘era toda la hueste | de sed mal cüitada’ (Nelson suggests sede, la sed or muy mal), and, further, 1834b ‘quando murió su padre |– non fue más cuitado’ (P; O coytado), which could be resolved either by füe (the more common dieresis) or cüitado. The trisyllabic word cuitad– is found only at Alex 200a and between 1065b and 2622a; it is, however, relatively common in the Bercean corpus. Rïégala is parallelled by MNS 22c ‘pareze qe el riego |’ which survives only in I and M.

[48] The second half of the hemistich is also problematic: P «dios nuestro sennor» would provide dïos nuestro sennor, if it were not ‘corrected’ by O «dios el nuestro sennor».

[49] Alex 1156b P ‘e fuyle yo preguntar +|’ is the basis of the line adopted by Cañas and Casas: fuile yo preguntar; O, however, offers the metrical ‘quislo yo preguntar |’, which would provide a more satisfying line, quis’le yo preguntar; O’s reading was used, but mangled, by Nelson (quisi †le preguntar).

[50] Since O often apocopates se, it is possible that the line originally read non se dio a uagar; the line is, however, already unusual, since this is the only example of dar a uagar; elsewhere, consistently, dar uagar is found (20x Alex).

[51] It is possible that él should come at the beginning of the second hemistich, rather than the first (leg. amólos como hermanos | él diolis grant ualía), or through dieresis of dïo: él amólos como hermanos | díolis grant ualía.

[52] Further possible construals of dïo from O are to be found at 286c dios le dio P] dio dios O (> dïo dios/dio dïos), 324d ‘dio a la cort’ del cielo |’ (P][dïolo a la corte O), 642c ‘No·l dio uagar don Éctor |’ (P][No·l dïo Éctor uagar O), 682d ‘non dio por ello más |’ (P][non dïo por él más O).

[53] 1051c ‘no·l ualïó a Dario |’ should be understood, rather, as no·l ualió a Darío. Note also ualïado (VSD 388a, VSM 154a, 169b, 395b)

[54] In what is probably a misreading of fues’, O offers es at 2253d.

[55] Note also, although they have not been taken into the equation, 578d fuese P] fue·s O and 1101d fue·s O] fuese P.

[56] 837b cuemoquiere] cuemoquier O commoquiere P; 1755a, 2443a Comoquiere] Commoquiere P Comoquier O; 1998c, 2455b qualsequiere P] qualquier O; 2157d quiquiere se P] quiensequisier O; 2443c quiensequiere] quiensequier O quisquiere P; 2256a Quequiere P] Quequier O; 2149c siquiere P] sequier. Note also 1390a dios quiere P] quier dios O.

[57] I have not included Alex 444d ‘non trayé más de doze | éstas bïen cabdales’ (a composite verse, based on P «non traye mas de xij naves estas bien cabdales», and on O «non traya mas de vij : estas bien adobades»; the omitted naves from P could well be a mistaken reading of mas as an abbreviation for naues which has been lost from the second hemistich: non trayé mas de .xii. | mas éstas bien cabdales, a line which now makes perfect sense. Nelson and Cañas read non trayé más de doze | éstas bien comunales (‘comunales’ taken from the previous line in O, where P provides ‘Áyaz el Telamón | un de los mayorales’.

[58] DV 68c ‘| de uénïe bien plena’ (de uenie bïen…, although, since uénïe is a Latinism, this latter solution through bïen is unlikely), LV 141b ‘él bïen los oyó’ (although in all likelihood correctly, Dutton, Oc III, 96, ‘elli bien los udió’), VSD 84a‘’Priso bïen la orden |’ (although emended to Apriso by Germán Orduna, ed. (Madrid: Anaya, 1968), p. 67; Dutton, Oc IV, 48; Ruffinatto, ed., p. 96), 709b ‘semeia bien monge –|’ (semeiaua bien monge’ by Fitz-gerald, ed., p. xxxviii, and subsequent editors; as Ruffinatto, ed., p. 254, comments, the emendation corrects ‘un patente error de transcripción cómo se puede comprobar […] por la lógica correlación de los tiempos’), VSM 477d ‘crean bien sin dubda’ (emended to sines dubda by Koberstein, ed., 209 and Dutton, Oc IV, 172; sines is almost only found in the phrase sines dubda: 546d, 1020c, 1778c, PSL 27d, VSM 376d (and in the sole occurrences of sines falla at Alex 573c, sines retrecha at SM 215b); nevertheless sin dubda is the more popular of the two: Alex 735b, 1631d, 1710b, 1938b, LV 105a, MNS 440b, VSD 60a, 235d, 260d, VSO 7a, 165d).

[59] The line could be Anda cuemo rüeda, but rüeda is not otherwise witnessed, whereas rueda is found 11x Alex (368a–2532c) as well as PSL 24c, SM 221b, VSM 99b.

[60] There also seems to be some reluctance to place son at the end of the first hemistich, cp. SM 265c ‘son pocas palabras –| sanctas de grant manera’, VSD 61a ‘Muchos son los padres –| que fiçieron tal uida’; and the sole occurrences in which it occurs at 1*: Alex 287c, 815d, 949c, 1470c, 2105a, VSM 448c.

[61] Regarding 495a, 1290c, 1673c, one should note that fío is always placed at the end of a hemistich in the Alexandre; but not MNS 251c, 791c; inversion would also be a possible solution for 2028a (although grande is never found after a noun in the Alexandre and the ms. tradition offers O ‘Cüemo de grant seso’ and P ‘Como era de …’—which might suggest Com’ era de grant seso), 2374a: cp. 2105a ‘Omnes astrosos son | de flacos coraçones’, although son is quite rare as an ending to the first hemistich (287c, 949c, 1470c); there may have been a certain avoidance of it in that position (but not in rhyme position); 1913b ‘como aguaducho’ (P) is contrasted in its reading by O’s ‘cuemo l’agua aducha’, a reading Nelson takes advantage of to produce como el aguaducho.

[62] These lines have generally raised varied solutions from editors. Alex 1709a ‘Qüando de la muerte | non puedo escapar’ (OP) was interpolated by Nelson, Quando yo de… and Cañas, Quando que de…. 1808a ‘Qüando ha el omne |+ d’ esti sieglo a passar’ (OP) is reordered by both Cañas (Quando el omne ha | dest’ siglo a pasar) and Nelson (Quand ha desti sieglo | el omne a pasar)—Nelson’s re-arrangement is perhaps the most convincing; but in favour of Cañas, it must be said that ha does end the hemistich at Alex 351c, 677c, 688d, 945d, 1622a, 1718d, 2067d, and DV 105d, and the similar hemistich at Alex 1807a can be taken from O ‘Quando el omne ha |’; the second hemistch must be taken from P, however: puesto en buen lugar (O puesto en algun bon logar); Casas gives Quando ha el omne puesto +| en algún buen logar; a similarly acceptable reading would be Qüando ha el omne | puesto en buen logar. 1828a ‘Qüando se bien catan |’ is formed by Casas from O Quando se omne bien catan and P: Quando bien catan. Cañas opted for a transposition, Quando se catan bien and Nelson Quando omne bien cata: only Cañas’s assumption of a transposition is worthy of consideration, since Nelson must change the person of the verb, witnessed in both manuscripts, to effect a metrical line through the adoption of omne. Se bien catan (reflexive + bien + verb) is an unusual structure, and rarely found, never otherwise in the Alexandre; bien ends a hemistich 8x in the Alexandre. Reflexive and verb are separated by bien only in the case of querer. This does not occur, however, in the Bercean corpus. A further resolution to the line would be to adopt P’s version of the line, and read Qüando bïen catan, although there are few further examples of a line with double dieresis (one being VSM 159b ‘| aÿ reÿ glorioso’, and possibly 2095a ‘Mientre el büen reÿ |). 2137d ‘qüando la çigala |’ (OP), followed by Cañas, although Nelson quando él la çigala.

[63] With regards to SM 182b, Dutton, Oc V, 40, failed to spot that the line was hypometric; Cátedra, ed., p. 1006, ‘quando nós en nos mismos’. F omits one nos from a hemistich in which it occurs twice at 157d. Another solution would be quando en nos meísmos. At SM 264a, Dutton, Oc V, 51, followed by Cátedra, ed., 1025, ‘nos li pedimos’; one might also suggest a transposition: Quando pedimos nós (cp. MNS 430d ‘mas pensémosla nós | de seruir e honrrar’, although this is not quite a useful parallel.

[64] Dutton, Oc III, 103, ‘pora siempre’ (pora: MNS 447d, 476c); there are only two occurrences of pora siempre, Alex 541d and JF 58d, against 11of por siempre (excluding the line under present discussion): Alex 169d, 170d, 2112c; LV 169d, 170d; MNS 400d, SM 255b, 256d, VSD 45c, 313d, VSM 423c.

[65] Certainly other solutions have been proposed for some of these lines. Nelson thought that 1448c (OP) should be explained by an inversion, preçio bueno ganar. Bueno, however, in the Alexandre, is placed after the noun only in rare cases: omne bueno (51c, 428a, 1256b, 1491b, 1642a, 1770c, 1940a, 2086c, 2361a, etc.), or similar words (maestro bueno 1965c; barón bueno 2366b) or in the antithesis, tiempo bueno …|… tempestad irada 1482d. The range is rather wider in the Bercean corpus: MNS 895c ‘christiano bono’; VSD 605a ‘confessor bono’; MNS 492b ‘conseio bueno’; VSD 85a ‘Grado bueno a dios’; MNS 73b, 120d ‘gualardón bueno’; VSO 155a ‘logar bueno’; VSD 407b ‘mensage bono’; VSD 56d ‘pan bueno’; VSD 207d ‘recabdo bono’; MNS 81a ‘río bono’; DV 27a, SM 74a, VSM 201a, VSD 201a ‘sennor bueno’; VSD 493c ‘sermón bono’ (an oxymoron); VSD 377a ‘uerto bueno’; SM 288a ‘uso bueno’, and those that mirror uses in the Alexandre: VSD 59a ‘maestro bueno’; DV 5a, 132c, JF 3a, MNS 176b, 218a, 234a, 283a, 309a, 467c, 486a, 488a, 491b, 494a, 650a, 705a, 832d, 895a, PSL 50b, 61c, VSD 68b, 72c, 79d, 398a, 401c, 411a, VSM 31d, 32a, 38a, 62a, 166a, 168c, 172a, 179a, 224a, 247c, 253b, 260a, 262a, 263b, 285c, VSO 204b, ‘omne bono/bueno’. Nelson’s emendation is to be rejected.

2095a is construed by Casas as Mïentre el buen reÿ; by Nelson and Cañas as Mientre que el…— but mientre que is found only thrice in the Alexandre: 1073a (om. P), 1151a, 2144a (P; O: mientre qu el); and at DV 118a, MNS 86a, 115c, 357a, 868d, SM 47b, 59a, VSD 460d, 562a, 721d.

Nelson further doubted the integrity of the line at 2160c ‘era büen filósofo | maestro acabado’ (P …+ maestro muy acabado; O: era bon …–), since maestro echoes 2160b ‘ouo muy buen engenno | maestro bien ortado’. He also altered line 1836b to darle buena finada, and suggests, beyond this, dar muy buena finada; at 1853d, he adds por to the beginning of the line; and at 1857a, suggests (but does not alter the text itself) Por la lealtad buena or … buena lealtad.

Line 70c of the Vida de Santo Domingo has received two diverse corrections: Dutton, Oc IV, 46, ‘mas esti buen christiano’ (assuming the error el<es<esti –or, indeed, essi); Ruffinatto, ed., p. 92, on the other hand, supposed haplography: ‘mas él, el buen christiano’; but this form of construction is not found in the corpus in any way. Another solution would be to suppose a transposition has taken place: el christiano bueno (cp. MNS 895c ‘mas al christiano bono’—although ‘buen christiano’ is much more common: MNS 306a, 575d, SM 191a, VSD 42a, 47d; on the other hand, the VSD is the most prone of all the works to use bueno after a noun). ‘Christiano’ is never found elsewhere in the corpus as christïano.

As regards VSM 245a, Koberstein, ed., p. 160, suggests the addition of muy: ‘bebrién de muy buen grado | vino de vinna madura’ (it might be pointed out that de muy buen grado is only found once in the corpora, and that in the highly emphatic lines from PSL 82bc ‘yo fecho lo auría | esso de muy buen grado/ca qísilo e quierolo | conplir el tu mandado’. Dutton, Oc I, p. 130, altered the line: ‘bebrién de † grado vino | de uva bien madura’, suggesting that the archetype transposed ‘buen’ and ‘bien’ since de grado and de buen grado are synonyms (although it is not clear why it should have done so, and the emendation looks more fanciful than Koberstein’s). Thus, we may conclude, most of the diereses on büen(–) stand close examination.

[66] Maguer que is found at Alex 23c, 84d, 323a, 545a, 554d, 622a, 720c, 825a, 1042a, 1356d, 1478d, 1576c, 1626c, 2469d, 2660a, 2663d; at 554d, 622a and 1576c, P offers the correct form against O’s magar; correspondingly, O offers magar que to P’s correct maguer at 554a and 627c. Maguera is only found twice in the Alexandre: in both manuscripts at 2169a, and once in O at 2469d (P maguer que); O’s maguera at 1968a is hypermetric. This latter word is found four times in the LV alone (14d, 142c, 184a, 195c, the first two times as maguera que) and at VSD 509e, VSM 377a (maguera que) and VSO 138b.

[67] Dutton, Oc III, 74, emends, ‘que reviscla los muertos | con † süave odor’ (for reuiscla, cp. MNS 749c and cp. DV 168d; for su inserted by F, see MNS 673a, 814b and VSD 68c)

[68] Alex 292b ‘| do la lëy prisieron’, 1057a ‘| por la leÿ que tienes’, 2242a ‘Lëy es bien usada |’, LV 87a ‘Dio lëy a iudíos |’, 145a ‘| en la lëy fue dado’, 151b ‘| la lëy recebieron’, SM 95a ‘Los de la lëy nueua |’, 106d ‘es de la lëy uieia |’. But note trisyllabic antigua and primera following lëy as a set phrase (eg. SM 93a, 108a, 135c, 146a, 279b). Ley/lëy occurs in hemistich-final position at Alex 933d1*, 1055c2*, 1134a1*, 1140b1*, 1143d1*, 1243c1*, 2106d1*, 2111c1*, PSL 11d1*, 89d1*, SM 3a1*,49c1*, 57a1*, 85c1*, 106a1*, 125d1*, VSD 323d1*, VSM 179b1*, 305b1*.

[69] 35b, 52c, 54d, 81a, 91a, 94a, 101b, 112b, 124c, 126c, 129a, 129b, 150c, 158b, 174d, 179b, 194a, 213c, 222c, 224a, 227a, 229c, 251a, 269d, 289a, 297c, 303b, 306d, 310d, 347d, 353d, 355b, 357a, 358b, 361b, 364a, 364b, 439a, 439b, 439b, 455a, 486d, 506c, 525b, 554b, 557d, 571a, 576d, 586b, 592b, 593a, 594c, 599b, 612b, 644c, 646d, 711b, 737a, 744b, 857b, 859d, 863c, 882a, 904b, 912c, 932b, 936b, 936b, 936c, 989b, 1030c, 1058d, 1091d, 1118a, 1124b, 1128b, 1128d, 1130a, 1169c, 1170a, 1178d, 1182a, 1182c, 1236a, 1260d, 1298c, 1305c, 1305d, 1308b, 1324a, 1342a, 1351c, 1398c, 1402d, 1409c, 1441b, 1461a, 1464c, 1467d, 1472d, 1482a, 1498a, 1552d, 1605a, 1619c, 1641c, 1686a, 1710d, 1714a, 1730b, 1766d, 1773b, 1792a, 1795b, 1795c, 1870c, 1878a, 1903c, 1917d, 1972b, 1973c, 1975d, 1976a, 1976b, 1988b, 1993c, 2023a, 2037c, 2089c, 2096a, 2126b, 2131a, 2132c, 2142c, 2157b, 2160b, 2162c, 2192b, 2194d, 2196a, 2198d, 2212b, 2236b, 2250c, 2267a, 2294d, 2298c, 2338b, 2365c, 2386c, 2414c, 2419c, 2439a, 2463d, 2474b, 2497c, 2497d, 2498a, 2518d, 2547c, 2566d, 2570a, 2570c, 2578c, 2608b, 2652c, 2658d, 2659a.

[70] 49d, 149c, 149c, 153c, 160b, 221a, 272a, 298d, 347d, 350c, 358a, 402d, 410a, 476c, 477d, 510b, 541a, 574a, 680d, 729c, 867d, 903c, 964b, 1067b, 1111b, 1146d, 1298d, 1376c, 1641a, 1834a, 1873a, 2005c, 2043b, 2093d, 2132c, 2149d, 280b, 2271a, 2361b, 2441c, 2452b, 2490a, 2529a, 2606b, 2609a.

[71] DV 2d, 18c, 33c, 52d, 53b, 122c, 148a, 162d, 177b, 191b, JF 3c, 6a, 28b, 33ad, 38c, 55a, 62c (2x), 72a, LV 67c, 75a, 86b, 134c, MNS 29a, 51a, 52c, 57b, 58d, 59b, 66d, 69a, 84c, 86c, 88d, 90b, 112b (2x), 116d, 118d, 134c, 140bd, 161c, 174ab, 204a, 205d, 218b, 226b (2x), 238c, 239a, 247b, 264d, 281d, 285c, 301d, 306c, 314a, 318cd, 320c, 327d, 346a, 349a, 357a, 381a, 386a, 388b, 404b, 405a, 408b, 413d, 415a, 417b, 422d, 426b, 467c, 469c, 483c, 490d, 529d, 531c, 533c, 535a, 537c, 540a, 561ad, 577c, 578a, 589b, 597c, 616b, 617d, 620d, 623d, 627a, 640b, 655d, 697c, 707d, 723a, 734a, 739c, 740d, 747b, 762d, 778d, 779c, 782d, 795d, 798d, 810b, 813d, 820b, 848a, 869d, 880b, 882c, 889d, PSL 3b, 22a, 25b, 45a, 47a, 69d, 72b, 77c, 82b, 83a, SM 14b (2x), 14d, 42d, 62c, 67cd, 162b, 188b, 180b, 199b, 200b, 209d, 227c, 228c, 271d, 272a, VSD 5d, 11c, 20d, 22c, 28b, 77a, 84b, 97c, 118c, 140d, 146a, 157d, 163a, 168d, 190d, 209b, 213b, 226b, 230b, 255a, 268b, 353a, 357a, 372d, 397d, 410b, 414b, 424d, 430b, 439b, 450b, 456c, 475b, 493a, 498b, 500b, 503b, 517c, 521d, 522c, 531c, 554d, 565b, 575b, 597c, 598b, 599a, 609b, 613d, 614c, 616b, 646d, 647d, 671d, 686c, 687bd, 713b, 732d, 734b, 757c, 772b, VSM 6ad, 51d, 73d, 76ab, 113b, 126a, 126b, 134b, 139c, 142b, 159a, 162d, 182c, 194c, 219a, 237d, 241a, 244b, 284b, 288d, 289b, 290a, 301b, 310bc, 322cd, 323a, 340d, 343c, 347d, 350ad, 354d, 360a, 361d, 371c, 374c, 376b, 395b, 399c, 400d, 413a, 414c, 431d, 436d, 443a, 455c, 453d, 457c, 458c, 488a, VSO 7c, 13c, 18a, 20b, 23b, 44b, 52a, 58c, 59c, 76a, 77bcd, 78a, 108c, 109bc, 117c, 123d, 135b, 145a, 154d, 162b, 183b, 186d, 202a, 204b, 205b.

[72] DV 28c, 64d, 127d; JF 15b; LV 155d; MNS 67b, 123a, 253c, 281d, 471b, 484d, 723c, 788d, 789a, 894a; PSL 71b, 76b, 78c, VSD 137c, 277c, 439d, 454c, 520a, 522b, 539a, 573b, 615c, 616a, 638b, 747d, VSM 78b, 90b, 450b, 451b, 467d, VSO 62c, 70a.

[73] The homonomous form, óÿ (from odi) is found at MNS 809a, VSD 158b, VSM 59b, VSO 120d.

[74] Alex 198a, 245c, 253c, 798b, 828a, 836a, 876a, 915c, 921a, 956c, 959c, 961a, 1107a, 1131a, 1167c, 1180a, 1233a, 1294a, 1310a, 1327b, 1426a, 1453b, 1459b, 1534a, 1557a, 1577a, 1594a, 1660c, 1671b, 1720a, 1760a, 1763a, 1775a, 1832c, 1880a, 1942c, 1955a, 1985a, 2040a, 2047a, 2055a, 2100a, 2184a, 2190a, 2195c, 2266a, 2450b, 2458a, 2501b, 2530a.

[75] Alex 5a, 6a, 161a, 174a, 174d, 197a, 224a, 237a, 312d, 312a, 316a, 353c, 358c, 359b, 399a, 434b, 437a, 452b, 554a, 777c, 786a, 802d, 804a, 809b, 824a, 853b, 874b, 880a, 905c, 907d, 908a, 913a, 925a, 991a, 1035c, 1063c, 1065, 1067a, 1068d, 1112d, 1119a, 1127b, 1128a, 1130b, 1132a, 1135a, 1166c, 1243b, 1285d, 1312a, 1335b, 1437c, 1446a, 1455a, 1520d, 1534b, 1542c, 1548b, 1569b, 1586a, 1599a, 1601a, 1670a, 1672d, 1692d, 1701b, 1709d, 1714a, 1734a, 1772a, 1803d, 1804a, 1861b, 1888a, 1897a, 1916a, 1918a, 1928a, 1930a, 1939a, 1944a, 1946b, 1947d, 1968a, 1983a, 2023c, 2036a, 2038c, 2063d, 2066d, 2089c, 2089d, 2090d, 2103c, 2108a, 2117b, 2211b, 2229d, 2254a, 2255b, 2255a, 2264a, 2282a, 2310a, 2314a, 2317a, 2321a, 2430, 2430a, 2439a, 2481a, 2485a, 2490b, 2491c, 2492a, 2493a, 2494a, 2501d, 2509c, 2528a, 2533a, 2535c, 2590d, 2598a, 2607a, 2608d, 2669ad, 2672a.

[76] Alex 22b, 26d, 93b, 104a, 111abd, 129ac, 131b, 160d, 172c, 176a, 201a, 205a, 208a, 210a, 220b, 222a, 230d, 232cd, 242a, 249a, 251a, 261a, 278b, 334a, 349d, 351b, 398a, 400a, 417c, 422a, 453a, 524a, 525c, 535b, 629a, 779c, 780b, 795a, 797d, 838b, 884a, 895d, 912b, 918b, 933c, 976a, 1005d, 1010a, 1032a, 1127c, 1147c, 1148a, 1161d, 1204a, 1238c, 1258d, 1260c, 1261a, 1268b, 1320c, 1323a, 1536c, 1546a, 1569c, 1610a, 1716a, 1741b, 1747b, 1756c, 1764c, 1831d, 1858a, 1881a, 1881d, 1884a, 1891a, 1894a, 1896a, 1908b, 1909a, 1910a, 1940c, 1942a, 1948c, 1970a, 1973a, 2027a, 2029a, 2037c, 2050b, 2097c, 2152d, 2153a, 2162a, 2174c, 2183d, 2206b, 2208a, 2217a, 2222a, 2224a, 2230b, 2235a, 2240b, 2244b, 2251a, 2257a, 2263a, 2304d, 2333d, 2479c, 2486a, 2502d, 2519c, 2520c, 2527a, 2575a, 2589b, 2611b, 2612c, 2614c, 2617a, 2624c, 2631a, 2641d, 2645a.

[77] Alex 47a, 52a, 113a, 147a, 201c, 202a, 204c, 205d, 211b, 212a, 214a, 215ad, 216b, 219a, 222d, 226a, 233a, 243b, 244a, 262a, 264b, 295a, 311ac, 317a, 319a, 320a, 327a, 332a, 347a, 350a, 385b, 403b, 418b, 421b, 431d, 557a, 762a, 773a, 794a, 797a, 845a, 862ad, 867a, 868b, 879c, 888a, 903b, 904c, 907a, 919c, 942d, 980d, 992c, 1009a, 1053c, 1055a, 1056a, 1062a, 1090a, 1125b, 1146b, 1147b, 1187d, 1253c, 1259b, 1280b, 1298d, 1328c, 1331a, 1334a, 1337d, 1348a, 1353a, 1356a, 1366c, 1373a, 1447c, 1458a, 1543a, 1544d, 1560a, 1561c, 1572a, 1589b, 1590a, 1592d, 1629d, 1639a, 1640a, 1658c, 1669c, 1682b, 1684b, 1687a, 1712c, 1717b, 1735a, 1736b, 1737a, 1739b, 1750a, 1767d, 1770a, 1812a, 1834a, 1843ab, 1862d, 1863a, 1904b, 1957c, 1962c, 1964a, 2000b, 2040c, 2041a, 2056b, 2072a, 2080a, 2092bd, 2094a, 2095a, 2111a, 2114a, 2123d, 2152c, 2155d, 2158d, 2159c, 2160a, 2163ad, 2216a, 2223a, 2228a, 2231a, 2239c, 2241b, 2245b, 2246c, 2258a, 2260b, 2262a, 2272b, 2295a, 2296a, 2300d, 2311a, 2313a, 2322a, 2324a, 2404c, 2412c, 2451c, 2466a, 2477a, 2504a, 2514a, 2515a, 2517b, 2538b, 2588b, 2596a, 2613d, 2622a, 2658c, 2659b.

[78] DV 45c, JF 27a, 49a, LV 10d, 37d, MNS 37cd, 94a, 124a, SM 47d, 128c, 153d, 158a, VSD 31d, 120a, 136a, 140c, 144b, 145d, 147a, 148a, 151b, 152c, 154a, 165a, 167e, 175a, 178a, 180a, 182c, 184a, 186a, 201a, 208a, 213a, 219a, 220a, 225a, 263a, 345b, 491c, 486c, 777a, VSM 9a, 59b, 69a, 84a, 159b, 231c, 308a, 361b, 369a, 375c, 394a, 400a, 412a, 418a, 420a, 460a, 429d, 483a, 449a, VSO 11d, 79c, 113a.

[79] DV 191c, JF 25c, 61a, LV 11c, 31c, MNS 59a, 365d, 523a, 529c, 620b, 734c, 736a, 737a, 774b, 777a, 830a, 869c, PSL 1a, VSD 14b, 127ab, 130a, 145a, 147d, 150a, 169b, 182d, 200a, 364d, 368c, 392b, 405d, 411b, 457a, 505b, 506bc, 733c, 734d, 741a, 744b, 747a, VSM 90c, 103b, 131c, 15c, 414b, 433b, VSO 66a, 100a, 177b, 205c.

[80] LV 32b, 35a, 192d, MNS 735c, 869a, SM 1a, 27b, VSD 29c, 132a, 142ab, 146a, 155d, 156a, 158c, 164c, 167c, 173a, 177a, 179a, 183a, 185e, 199c, 214d, 268a, 456b, 459b, 507c, 508d, 736b, 739a, 746a.

[81] Reÿs: 6c, 241a, 336c, 651b, 869a, 1207a, 1527c, 1603b, 1821a, 2268c, 2278a; hemistich-final: Alex 195b, 335a, 780b, 865b, 915a, 1006c, 1527b, 1971a, 2107b, 2431a, 2598a; VSM 395c, 433d, 434b

[82] 195b, 241a, 335a, 780b, 865b, 869a, 915a, 990b, 1821a, 1971a, 2269c, 2598a.

[83] Alex 35d, 178b, 204d, 206a, 213a, 266b, 300b, 303a, 340d, 406b, 465a, 478a, 515a, 521a, 539ac, 543c, 554b, 588b, 666c, 669b, 756c, 809c, 814c, 895b, 961d, 994a, 1063a, 1065b, 1377a, 1387a, 1420b, 1506a, 1534c, 1575a, 1948a, 2034a, 2063a, 2159c, 2197a, 2232b, 2304b, 2316b, 2361c, 2506c, 2507a. First hemistich-final position at Alex 15b, 116b, 175b, 180a, 232d, 604b, 683c, 891a, 908c, 1235c, 1250c, 1352d, 1963b, 2081c, 2153a, 2186a, 2194a, 2316a, 2469c, 2544c; MNS 587a, 700d, VSD 257d, 398d, VSM 79b, 156a, 162c, 438b.

[84] Further unmetricalities found in the manuscript variance are: additions of a word (543c uío P] Quando uio O), omission of a word (756c quien uío nunca P] quien vio O), substitution of a word (1063a vío O] entendio P), transposition (2063a la cosa | vío P] uio la cosa O); variance which is metrical: transposition (669b Quando lo vío Éctor] Quando lo vio Etor P Ector quand esto uio O); substitution of a word (2304b uío P] ouo O).

[85] As I detail below, the original form of uío was probably, regularly, uido; this would have been orthographically different enough from uïó not to cause confusion; but once lenition had taken place on uido, the two forms became indistinguishable, written as «uio», «vjo», etc. Casas understands both 206a and 213a as uío, but note MNS 683c ‘quand’ su ora uïó |’, which is almost identical to Alex 206a ‘Quando uïó su hora’. Alex 213a could be either, but one should prefer uïó due to the implicit sense.

[86] 540a ribaço P] ribeiro O, but both mss. give ribaço at 2465d.

[87] Visiones only at Alex 2470a ‘| todas las sus uisiones’ (rhymes in –ones), but las sus O] las P; the latter manuscript provides for a non-exceptional scanning of the word: todas las uisïones. Bayo and Michael, at 854c, scan do vío la visión (wrongly, in the light of this evidence).

[88] Uío: DV 36c, 37ab, LV 44a, 115a, MNS 63b, 169a, 173b, 242a, 247a, 357c, 358a, 528c, 563a, 586d, 610a, 700c, 894c, PSL 34a, 63a, 98a, VSD 66a, 234d, 248b, 252c, 320a, 601c, VSM 46a, 135b, 149a, 159a, 174d, 196a, 222c, 229c, 255a, 334c, 335c, 438d.

[89] This is found at 1065b vío P] ueye O; 1420b víose] vios O veyese P.

[90] Alex 178b, 300b, 303a, 340d, 406b, 465a, 539a, 809c, 895b, 961d, 994a, 1377a, 1387a, 1506a, 1534c, 1575a, 1948a, 2334a, 2159c, 2197a, 2232b, 2316b, 2506c (266b, 588b P; O def.); uido P ][ uío O at 204d, 515a, 521a, 554b, 2351c.

[91] Cf. further VSO 177b, 205c ‘| el buen rey spirital’. One may note a contrary movement in F at SM 22a (sines ley B] sin lëy F), but this is undoubtedly due to the modernization of sines; Q shows itself rather more amenable to dieresis than B in SM: lëy at 28b, 215b (los de la ley B] de la lëi Q), 28c la ley B] lëi Q); öi at 50b (ley nin su sennal B] lëi nin sennal) 93d (oy in día B] öi día Q), 94a (Oy en aqueste día B] öi en esti día Q).

[92] The variant at VSD 467b siempre S] muy bien F may be a misreading (∫iepre > u be > mube).

[93] The manuscript evidence does not support the assertion that the poet of the Alexandre used, for example, como for disyllabic pronunciation and cuemo for trisyllabic.

[94] Duffen, Syllable, pp. 89, 92–96.

[95] See, for example, Gerold Hilty, ‘La fecha del Libro de Alexandre’, in Homenaje a Felix Monge. Estudios de lingüística hispánica (Madrid: Gredos, 1995), pp. 223–32; Enzo Franchini, ‘El IV Concilio de Letrán, la apócope extrema y la fecha de composición del Libro de Alexandre’, La Corónica, 26:1 (1997), 31–74, and ‘Los primeros textos literarios: del Auto de los Reyes Magos al mester de clerecía’, in Historia de la lengua española, ed. Rafael Cano, Ariel Lingüística (Barcelona: Ariel, 2004), pp. 325–53. The fundamental studies of apocopation by Rafael Lapesa, ‘La apócope de la vocal en castellano antiguo. Intento de explicación histórica’ and ‘De nuevo sobre la apócope vocálica en castellano medieval’, in his Estudios de historia lingüística española (Madrid: Paraninfo, 1985), pp. 167–97 and 198–208 (first published in vol. II of Estudios dedicados a R. Menéndez Pidal (Madrid, 1951) and Nueva revista de filología hispánica, 24 (1975), 13–23, respectively).

[96] ‘Problems in the Attribution of Works to Gonzalo de Berceo’, in Manuscripts, Texts, and Transmission from Isidore to the Englightenment: Papers from the Bristol Colloquium on Hispanic Texts and Manuscripts, ed. by David Hook (Bristol: HiPLAM, 2006), pp. 11–66.

[97] The problem is discussed briefly by Nelson at p. 116.

[98] cuemo/como: 195c, 463d, 1427a, 2129cd, 2455d; for él enant’ ?>elli ante cp. 104c ‘perdiólo él enant’ |’ (P] el ante O); ende: 1804d ‘| si·s Él ende pagar’’ (O] el se querie rogar P); fuesse: 1083c (OP); en él ?> ’n elli: ?115d, 411b, 620a, 641b, 677c, 911c, ?1251b, 1910b, 2230c, 2233c (although there are no occasions when ‘… en él |’ could be metrically construed as ’n elli; cp. 70d OP; 1304b P, O def.; 1397a OP); puede: 1924d; quando: 115d, 168d, 194c, 637c, 2089d; quanto: 242b, 208b, 1628d; que él ?> qu’elli: 185bc, 214c, 677d, 942d, 988d, 1073c, 1289a, 1297d, 1362c, 1365c, ?1626d, 1933d, 2034d, 2144a, 2307c, 2587d; (–)quiere: 1289b, 1724b; quisiesse: 2113b; se ?>·s: 126bd, ?242b, 694c2, 1812d, 1901d, 1984d, ?2129cd, 2306d, 2499c, 2501a; tanto: 2501a; todo: 1251b. Él at end of first hemistich: 125b, 147d, 172d, 181c, 266b, 424a, 480c, 489d, 507a, 525b, 532b, 576c, 578ad, 580d, 642b, 644c, 689d, 1036a, 1132d, 1137c, 1304b, 1361c, 1385c, 1397a, 1459c, 1590c, 1642d, 1680c, 1720d, 1902b, 2033d, 2039a, 2223b, 2234d, 2314d, 2367d, 2394d.

[99] The line is emended to read como era pïadoso | ouo d’ élli pïadad by both Koberstein, p. 135; and Dutton, OC I, 110. But PSL 79c ‘qe lis darié Decio –|+ por elli muchos dineros’ suggests, rather, an error of transposition (... daríe por elli | Decio muchos …, as did Dutton, OC V, 156) rather than apocopation of elli (as carried out by Tesauro, p. 50, who did not correct the first hemistich).

[100] Percentages for total usage of elli against él+elli are as follows: VSM 15%, VSO 16%, SM 23%, VSD 27%, MNS 30%, LV 31%, PSL 32%, DV 40%.

[101] These are: 12c, 16b, 16b, 16d, 20c, 20b, 35d, 35c, 36a, 37b, 37d, 51b, 58c, 63a, 76c, 86b, 101d, 104d, 111c, 111d, 112c, 115c, 146d, 152d, 152d, 156a, 156b, 157a, 159d, 164c, 170b, 174a, 174a, 181a, 181c, 182d, 184a, 185d, 187c, 189d, 189c, 190a, 190c, 198b, 221d, 224b, 232d, 236b, 242b, 254c, 254c, 295b, 299c, 304a, 327b, 359d, 359c, 359b, 393d, 396a, 396a, 399a, 399c, 404a, 418a, 426c, 429c, 453a, 467b, 467a, 478a, 478a, 481b, 483b, 485a, 485a, 488b, 488d, 488c, 489b, 489c, 489a, 490a, 490b, 491b, 492b, 493a, 495b, 499a, 507d, 510a, 521d, 522a, 525d, 526c, 528c, 528c, 530a, 532c, 539d, 542c, 542d, 544c, 549c, 549d, 561c, 570b, 572b, 575d, 579d, 579b, 580d, 582d, 583d, 584a, 584b, 584c, 585d, 586c, 586b, 588b, 614b, 614b, 621b, 634d, 636c, 639b, 639b, 641c, 643d, 644a, 645b, 645c, 645c, 659c, 669b, 683b, 683d, 689b, 690c, 695c, 702c, 702d, 702a, 702a, 706b, 709c, 725c, 725a, 725d, 748d, 767b, 771d, 836c, 842a, 855d, 896a, 902c, 904d, 908b, 919b, 919b, 932d, 937a, 954b, 955c, 955b, 956a, 964a, 968c, 981b, 981c, 1000b, 1018d, 1018d, 1022c, 1022c, 1023a, 1023b, 1023c, 1023d, 1025b, 1031b, 1034d, 1034c, 1036c, 1038c, 1039c, 1040c, 1040d, 1043c, 1049c, 1058a, 1063c, 1064b, 1066d, 1071b, 1075c, 1075a, 1075b, 1087c, 1125b, 1125c, 1127c, 1133d, 1136b, 1142b, 1145c, 1147c, 1154d, 1158c, 1167d, 1192a, 1197c, 1218d, 1235c, 1235d, 1236b, 1236a, 1254b, 1254b, 1280c, 1293a, 1323c, 1346a, 1350d, 1350d, 1350c, 1353d, 1357b, 1371c, 1371b, 1371b, 1372b, 1372b, 1374c, 1380c, 1381c, 1385c, 1391b, 1395d, 1403c, 1427c, 1429c, 1437d, 1477b, 1486d, 1508d, 1509a, 1534a, 1534b, 1534c, 1537c, 1578c, 1586c, 1591c, 1592a, 1644b, 1667a, 1675d, 1675c, 1675a, 1698a, 1702b, 1716c, 1720b, 1723a, 1747c, 1772a, 1775b, 1809b, 1843d, 1861c, 1863b, 1880b, 1881d, 1947b, 1984c, 1999d, 2041c, 2051b, 2091c, 2107a, 2145a, 2159d, 2192a, 2193a, 2231c, 2251d, 2252a, 2255d, 2262b, 2262c, 2326b, 2329d, 2332c, 2352c, 2355d, 2363d, 2364d, 2365c, 2365a, 2367d, 2400d, 2431d, 2433a, 2440a, 2452a, 2479c, 2486a, 2489b, 2520b, 2520d, 2521b, 2521d, 2522b, 2527c, 2535d, 2539d, 2575b, 2596c, 2612d, 2638c, 2639b.

[102] These are: 36c, 38b, 57c, 102c, 106d, 111b, 116b, 140d, 172d, 177b, 178a, 360c, 464a, 490d, 534c, 590d, 639a, 692d, 696b, 722d, 767c, 981d, 995d, 1018b, 1037d, 1052d, 1253b, 1253d, 1239d, 1282d, 1293c, 1320c, 1325c, 1327d, 1331b, 1332b, 1336b, 1339b, 1469d, 1580d, 1647a, 1700a, 1926b, 2035a, 2069c, 2260d, 2283c, 2303c, 2355b, 2403c, 2444d, 2480d, 2490a, 2504d, 2551b, 2636d.

[103] LV 4c, 8a, 16d, 22c, 25c, 37c, 61d, 64b, 64d, 84b, 84c, 91d, 113b, 121c, 154b, 164d, 169d, 170d, 181d, 202c.

[104] Alex 23b, 50d, 117c, 160c, 201c, 201c, 398d, 480d, 511c, 523d, 580b, 678b, 701c, 1334a, 1582d, 2619d, & 571b ‘alçáronsele los pelos +|’.

[105] Alex 310b, 429d, 521b, 535c, 1006b, 1020c, 1078b, 1348d, 1361d, 1375b, 1407c, 1419b, 1432a, 1579c, 1605d, 1669b, 1880c, 2042c, 2050a, 2061b, 2187b, 2322b, 2401b, 2619c.

[106] Alex 3d, 25d, 134c, 371d, 381d, 401d , 471a, 809d, 816d, 920a, 1057a, 1061b, 1088b, 1151d, 1378d, 1836c, 1886b, 2227d, & 27d, 36c, 251d, 574d, 1615b, 1686d, 1926a, 2481a, 2492b

[107] The frequency for ·m, where it is worth calculating is Alex: 99; DV: 35; LV: 29; MNS 182; VSO 68; and for me, Alex: 14; DV: 3.2; JF: 7; LV: 16.6; MNS 8.3; PSL 4.8; SM: 27; VSD 7.7; VSM 23.3; VSO 5.7. It is perhaps unsurprising that SM offers few examples, since direct speech is almost wholly absent; but the figure for the VSM is more interesting as regards the style of the poem.

[108]Me: DV 1c, 10c, 11d, 12a, 13a, 17d, 17d, 29b, 29d, 34d, 34c, 45a, 47c, 51a, 54d, 54d, 57d, 59a, 59c, 74c, 78d, 79a, 79b, 79a, 80c, 81bd, 81c, 94a, 97a, 99abc, 106c, 108a, 121d, 122b, 122d, 127a, 133d, 136c, 136d, 137a, 137d, 138bc, 140b, 140b, 143a, 143c, 145d, 146a (2x), 146b (2x), 149d, 151d, 152b , 158b, 159b, 159d, 159a, 160b, 160a, 160a, 163d, 204a, 205d, 210d, JF 28abc 28d (2x), 29b, 30a, 33b, 34ac, 64a, LV 2c, 28c, 33bbd, 53c, 98dd, 170d, 177c, 180bcd, 231c, MNS 1b, 5c, 6d, 45cd, 46d, 46b, 61bc, 61d, 96d, 96d, 108c, 108b, 205bc, 205a, 224a, 229d, 251d, 293bdd, 294b, 297d, 297a, 297b, 369d, 419bc, 447c, 448b, 450c, 475d, 475a, 488c, 500c, 501c, 517d, 517c, 521d, 525d, 536b, 542c, 543c, 545a, 550a, 571d, 583c, 606a, 607d, 608a, 609c, 632d, 633d, 634a, 634b, 638d, 639d, 640c, 641a, 644cd, 646b, 652c, 655d, 655c, 658c, 665c, 671b, 689a, 716d, 728a, 736bc, 740b, 751b, 753c, 753b, 753b, 754c, 758c, 759b, 760d, 761b, 762c, 763c, 764b, 769b, 775b, 778c, 782a, 786b, 787d, 788a, 796b, 797ac, 799c, 808d, 809d, 809a, 815b, 816b, 818bb, 818d, 827c, 828c, 820c, PSL 8d, 10d, 36b, 63d, 64bc, 65cd, 67c, 69c, 70b, 82d, 87bcd, 99d, 40b, 94a, 13c, 66b, 105a, 105a, SM 1c, 84c, 107c, 126bc, 138a, 145a, 207c, VSD 52cd, 53d, 64c, 99c, 100d, 100b, 102c, 103d, 111d, 126a, 132ad, 133d, 144d, 145b, 146c, 148a, 149d, 158d, 159d, 160b, 166b, 175a, 176a, 177d, 178a, 178b, 183b, 183c, 184b, 185c, 185a, 198d, 222c, 229a, 235a, 236a, 236c, 239abd, 244a, 244c, 244d, , 278a, 315b, 321d, 341d, 341c, 342a, 342b, 376b, 387aad, 410d, 411d, 411b, 494a, 496a, 510d, 512b, 512c, 515d, 518d, 524b, 576c, 576c, 584d, 618d, 618d, 653d, 658c, 664d, 670d, 694bc, 695bbd, 696d, 708d, 712bccd, 714bc, 715c, 715c, 717ab, 718d, 758d, 759a, 760bc, 760c, 761c, 761d, 776c, VSM 17c, 19c, 60ac, 61bc, 80c, 81b, 109a, 116d, 119c, 149d, 181d, 264c, 267d, 269a, 286d, 299b, 320b, 321d, 365a, VSO 35c, 53a, 71dd, 71b, 72d, 74bb, 97a, 122d, 133d, 149b, 151d, 152ab, 156c, 160c, 166ad, 173d, 173b, 174c, 174d, 185ad, 190c, 190b, 193ac, 193b, 194c, 196c, 196d, 198ab, 202d; ·m: DV 18a, 37c, 80a, 79cd & 26b, LV – & 1a, 3cc, 85b, 98a, 180a, 231bd, MNS 534c, 767b & 251d, 524d, 551d, SM 137a, VSD 315a, VSM 321c, VSO 173a, 192d, 193a.

[109] Not included in this list are those lines where, whilst qu’ is possible, another emendation is much more likely, such as 873b ‘que a qual parte que iuan +|’, where either qu’ a qual or qu’ iuan is theoretically possible, but the only real solution is the apocopation, part’; thus also 1048d ‘que estaua ya açerca +|+ del otro emperador’ should be constured que estaua ya ’çerca….; 1241d ‘|+ e la Torre que es alta’ is more likely to be la Torr’; 2568b ‘|+ que era fuerte ninnuelo’ (fuert’); 1927c ‘ca ya ueen que han preso +|– de ti mucho males’ (Nelson: ca † ueen que han preso | de ti mucho de males; or through inversion: ca ya ueen † de ti | han preso muchos males); 2113a ‘que obra de mano fecha +| non podié firm’ estar’ (mano apocopates in the manuscript tradition only in the phrases man’ a mano (Alex 301a) or at VSM 229a, man’ a maxiella; it can also be deduced at Alex 50a 1354b (‘mano a mano’), 510c 1355c (‘dio de mano a la …’), 630d (‘mano a maxiella’), 660c (‘|+ al que la mano besaron’); and also the variation at DV 34b (‘mano en massiella’)—the deduction de man’ may well provide a solution to 2113a que obra de mano fecha); or MNS 848a ‘ueyéndolo el pueblo |+ que en la eglesia era’ (where en la ’glesia is much more probable than qu’ en la eglesia).

[110] And, more generally, 2471d estaiar P][destaiar O; however, the word is rarely reproduced in both mss.: 105b estaiar P][deliurar O; 653a uos quiero destaiar P][lo cuydo a liurar O; 974a estaiar P][acabar O; and 2098b destaiar O][escansar P–this form is not otherwise attested in the mss., and may point towards a model which had estaiar.

[111] F gives preterites for a gerund (VSD 56d S ‘comiendo’: F ‘comieron’) and several imperfects (MNS 631a, 873d, VSD 371c, Q, S ‘entendién’: F ‘entendieron’; VSD 568b S ‘podién’: ‘podieron’; and in the singular, MNS 20c Q ‘entendié’: F ‘entendió’; VSD 607b S ‘podié’: ‘podió’). The process could also go the other way (MNS 429d Q ‘entendieron’: F ‘entendían’; MNS 597c, VSD 642b Q, S ‘fiçieron’: F ‘fazían’; VSD 524c S ‘respondiéronle’: F ‘respondiénlis’). In all of the cases of a plural switch between imperfect and preterite, only at VSD 524c is F metrical—and there F offers an imperfect.

[112] Obispo is found in regular metrical conditions at Alex 1139a, 1142c, 1154a,1161d; the only exception should probably be construed at 2511c ‘|+ del Obispo santiguada’. Nelson, followed by Cañas, en esti bispo·l he. ’Bispo is the most common form of the word in Gonzalo de Berceo’s works, being used 1.4 more times than the full form in the MNS, 1.5 in the PSL, 1.6 in the VSD, but 2.2 in the SM; obispo is only used once in the VSM (455c), against nine occurrences of ’bispo; the latter form is not found in the VSO, but obispo is twice (VSO 61b, 62b); the LV only has one occasion in which obispo is used (10d).

[113] There are only two examples of este comedio in metrical hemistichs in the Alexandre: 903a ‘Fue en este comedio | el mege acusado’ has an interesting variant Fue P] Pero Opero is used by O at times at the end of the poem for P mas: 1987b, 2016b, 2074d, 2097d, 2179c; 1250a is extant only in P, but this (as with ‘ste’ at 65b, 1040a) reads «sti».

[114] Mont’ is found at Alex 288a, MNS 576c, VSM 42a, 69d; in these examples, monte would seem to only suffer ecthlipisis rather than apocopate under any conditions (cp. also VSO 139b ‘fue a Monte Oliueti +|’ (and, further, 147b, 154c), VSD ‘| Monte d’ Oca moión’; LV 127b ‘en el monte la octaua +|’ may require suppression of la (en el monte † octaua), the apheresis of en (’nel monte …), or, finally, mont’.

[115] Ésti/éste 69c, 373b, 409a, 442c, 446d, 447d, 1258d, 1340a, 1383d, 1721c, 1805d, 2367c, 2376b, 2404c, 2434c, 2442a,; esti/este (este in italics): 28a, 65b, 69b, 72b, 104a, 108b, 135d, 142d, 144b, 190c, 236c, 239d, 310c, 351c, 352c , 472a, 626c, 699d, 732b, 744a, 744d, 772d, 811b, 874a, 903a, 903d, 909b, 999a, 1035d, 1061b, 1072a, 1151a, 1176a, 1250a, 1321b, 1512c, 1547a, 1554b, 1566d, 1652a, 1657b, 1660b, 1771d, 1805a, 1972d, 1978d, 2079d, 2144a, 2154a, 2219c, 2329c, 2354b, 2404a, 2515b, 2655a, 2670b, 2671a.

[116] SM 250d ‘que iaze so este grano’ is undoubtedly que iaze so este grano: iaze only occurs metrically once in the SM (28b) against six occurrences of iaz’/yaz’ (33d, 143d, 157d, 205d, 208d, 294d).

[117] The verb empïar is found twice elsewhere: MNS 295b ‘porqe empïadaua |’, VSD 600a ‘| que lo empïadaron’.

[118] Qui este roman(z)’ fizo is also a possibility (cp. PSL 1d, romanz’, and SM 296c ‘el romançe es cumplido +|’; VSM 362b romaz’.

[119] The unusual lack of apocopation presumably placing the stress on este, although it is worth noting that this stanza also contains the only example of este comedio (903a).

[120] The manuscripts display no clear patterns, with O marginally reproducing es’ more often than P: es’ O] ese P (32d, 123d) or es’ O] esti P (1434a), and es’ derecho O] esti trecho P (273b), enchir es’ O] sallir aquel P (2551a); but 851c es’ B] ex P esse O, and 1123c, 2098c, 2458b es’ P] esti O. The mss. agree at 933a, 1007d, 1180c, 2422a. P def. at 136c

[121] Nelson suggests tiénenla por el miedo would be a better solution, since el>e∫>e∫∫e; Cañas, however, has es’ miedo. ‘Por miedo’ is well represented (674d, 675c, 842a, 1262b), but note 1288b ‘non lo fiz’ por su miedo | nin por el su amor’, which inclines one, slightly, to prefer es’ miedo.

[122] Nelson, followed by Cañas, considers this as an example of thwarted asyndeton (p. 91), and thus construes the line as esse mismo uestido.

[123] Although Dutton, Oc III, 75, suggests the omission of the article in both hemistichs of the line: en éssi vino la pluvia | en ti el Rëy divino, but this requires two alterations, one to a line that is not hypermetric, in order to justify itself. Since ést’ was used by the poet of LV (see above), there seems little objection to supposing es’ here.

[124] LV 11c, 140d, MNS 109d, 165c, 166a, 643b, SM 58c, 163c, 201c, 276c, VSD 153d, 364c, 438d, 620b, VSM 147c, 269b, 447bd, VSO 192c.

[125] In the phrase sin éste O][sin esto P, the word is found at 373b, 409a, and in sin éste P][sin esto O at 526a (but cp. 2650a Sin esto P] Pongo O); alternatives are also offered at 707b esto P][éste O, 1978d esti P][esto O and 310a, 714a, 795a, 887a, 1490c, 1548a esto P][esso O (& 710a esto] esso O aquesto P; cp. 2407a esto O] exo P. Errors in reproducing esto are found at 562d éste O] esto P, 1805d este O] esto P. Regarding aquesto, see 58d aquesto PG][tu esto O, 788d en aquesto PB][en esto a O, 1215a Cueido a esto dar P][Puédouos dar d’aquesto O, 2419b con esto P][d’aquesto O; 373d, 674a esto O] aquesto P; 838a esto fue P] aquesto O, 910c Esto que yo te P] Aquesto que yo O; but note 963a, 1089a, 1724a aquesto P] esto O.

[126] 158d (P, O def.), 376c (O), 725b (OP), 814d (OP), 816c (OP), 886c (OP), 910a (OP), 941b (OP), 988c (OP), 1114d (O] en ese P), 1162a (OP), 1268d (P, O def.), 2133c (OP), 2194c (O, P def.), and possibly 4d (algo Med P][aquel O), and a series of variants between stanzas 504 to 549: 504c (tod’ aquel][todo el P), 512d (aquel fi’ de nemiga O][al fi’ de enemiga P), 545d (P][esse O), 549c (al griego P][a aquel O).

[127] Aquella(s) is found at Alex 818b, 830a, 1379d, 2140c, 2313a (and possibly at 1492b de todas abondadas P][d’aquellas alumpradas O); JF 51b, LV 17a, 47a, 197d, MNS 758a, SM 117b, 118b, 124d (and, in F, 76b; in Q, 116b), VSD 200d, 483c, VSO 145b; three of these are ‘de/en aquella sazón’ (SM 117b, 124d, VSO 145b).

[128] Here the If reading is preferable: cp. SM 77ab ‘Quando dize por omnia | con la uoz cambïada/a Christo representa | quando fizo tornada’.

[129] De always apocopates before aques–: cp. VSO 52d ‘| d’ aquesta su calanna’, Alex 2428a ‘Mas d’ aquesto non quiso |’ (and further Alex 1624b ‘| tod’ aqueste roído’), with the following hypermetric hemistichs at LV 117a ‘Dexémosnos de aquesto +|’, SM 191d ‘|+ exen de aqueste grano’, and Alex 592a ‘E dixo Áyaz De aquesto ‡|– te daré razón’ (P, O def.; all editors, following Alarcos, read †Dixo Áyaz…; Nelson suggests, for the second hemistich, yo te daré razón, and Cañas a variant on this: te daré yo razón; nevertheless, te daré la razón would also be acceptable. Worthy of note, however, is that both 592a and 592b have, in the sole manuscript, a metrical structure of +|– (since 592b ‘parientes oue muy nobles +|– maguer muertos son’: editors usually correct by omitting muy and inserting (maguer) que (but see above).

[130] 58d (aquesto P][tu esto O), 214d (OP), 218c (O] el esfuerço P), 257a (P] estas O), 521a (OP), 554b (OP), 592a (P, O def.), 788d (P][esta a O), 963a (P] yo esto O), 970a (OP), 1089a (P] esto O), 1103c (OP), 1235c (P, O def.), 1724a (P] esto O), 1948a (OP), 2178c (OP), 2428a (OP).

[131] O’s error at 1691c (esta for aquesta) would suggest that O’s equipollent variant at 1673b (esta for aquesta, yente for gent’) is in part a product of chance; a similar example is provided by 82c la tu gent’ P][tu gente O. Furthermore, there are no other occasions in the ms. tradition where gente] gent/yent, but numerous occasions when gent’] gente/yente, slightly more P] O (at 408b, 882b, 1079c, 1641b, 1673b, 1948a, 2086c, 2228d, 2509d — 1641b, 1673b being relatively close to 1691c; cp. also 1386d argent’ P] argente O), than O] P (285b, 426bd, 818c, 2009d, 2041d, 2271a, 2495b — these are restricted to the beginning and end of the poem), and three occasions where gent’] –ente (1265c P, O def.; 1386b OP, 2570b OP, and cp. 1386c sergent’] sergente O seruiente P).

[132] The line reads in the mss. P «fecho fue duna costilla de un pescado corpudo», O «fecho fue de costiella : dun peçe corpudo», which can be combined together to give ‘fecho fue de costiella | d’ un pescado corpudo’, although one may also combine O and P to produce ‘f. f. d. c. | de un peçe corpudo’ (for peçe, cp. 1482b1* where O peçe, P pes—i.e., pez; the word for pitch, la pez is found at 586d pez O] pes P and 1315b P pes, O def.).

[133] The hemistich offers various solutions: P «de yus d el estar», O «de iuso so si estar» provides two possibilities: de iuso d’él estar or de ius’ so sí estar, depending on which words one chooses to take from each

[134] d’ O] de P: 20c, 195a, 238a, 252d, 254a, 326a, 371bc, 376d, 378d, 433d, 456b, 609c, 704c, 785d, 818b, 853b, 856a, 1171a, 1176a, 1183b, 1228a, 1467c, 1479a, 1503b, 1735b, 1777b, 1808b, 1842d, 1896b, 1988d, 2038d, 2042a, 2089b, 2126c, 2148d, 2185d, 2215d, 2231d, 2299a, 2315d, 2354b, 2359d, 2430c, 2535a, 2615c; further 226d d’ oueia] de oueia P de uieia O, 593d uno d’] uno de P (O def.), 1529c d’escaño] de escaño P de sayo O; conversely, de P] d’ O at 168c, 229a, 380a, 734a, 859d, 871d, 1065c, 1120c, 1142b, 1155d, 1407a, 1497d, 1514c, 1523d, 1574a, 1715d, 1903a, 2021b, 2122d, 2124b, 2132d, 2180a, 2545d, 2565b. Equipollent variants are found at 48a de la P][d’esta O, 95a d’escuela P][de scola O, 105a d’ exa P][de la O (exa = essa, cp. 209a, 280c, 283d, 339d, 389b, 614c, 2581d; ex: 851c), 132d d’ello P][de nos O; 174b O «cvemo se lo tenia: el traedor asmado», P «commo lo tenja bien de ante el traydor asmado», which can give ‘cuemo lo tenié bien | el träidor asmado’ (Casas), como lo tenié ante | el träidor asmado (Nelson), or como lo tenié bien | d’ante’l traidor asmado (Cañas), but may be resolved as cuemo lo tenié bien deante | el träydor asmado; 469d de falagos P][d’afalagos O; 2161c de una P][d’una muy O; 2208d uierbo de amistat P][paraulas d’ amizat O; 2297a pensaron de P][τ pensaron d’ O;

[135] de P] O om.: 206b, 208a, 224a, 304d, 449a, 461c, 720a, 1043c, 1437c, 1536d, 1718c, 1722b, 1742c, 2067d, 2101c, 2421d, 2168d, 2223d, 2237a, 2331c, 2520c. P adds hypermetric de at 105d, 113c, 151d, 225cd, 238c, 378c, 482a, 563d, 670a, 725d, 758c, 890d, 1101d, 1348c, 1457b, 1496bc, 1785d, 1809c, 1849b, 1946a, 1949a, 2026c, 2093c, 2370d, 2458a, 2478b, 2530a, 2543b. P provides de when O offers another preposition: de P] a O, 385a, 390c, 640d, 675b, 821c, 1441c, 1517b, 1647c; de P] con O, 271c, 456b, 477b, 870a; de P] en O, 282a, 623a, 643a, 646b, 727d, 847b, 862d, 1434a, 1540b, 1582a, 1797d, 2133d, 2160d;de P] entre O, 258d; de P] τ O, 128b, 1618b; de P] por O 496b, 721b, 889d, 2674d.

[136] de O] P om. 256d, 586b, 604a, 626d, 826c, 1522c, 2319a, 2452c, 2478b; there is one variant: 89b era día santero] e era dia santero P [en día de santero O

[137] is omitted in both parts of the ms. tradition: tú P] O om., 52a, 312a (tú has P), 314c, 375d, 385a, 1057c, 1088a, 1690b, 1783b, 1924b; tú O] P om., 785a, 1927a, 2256a; further variance usually affects the whole phrase (apart from 237d tú P] a O, 1783b tú P] tan O): , 240a tú lo destruyeres O] merçet le oujeres P (repeated from 240c), 688c Tú tienes el peso P] eres buen peso O, 1707d derecho | Tú seas öy comigo P] agora |+ seas en este dia c. O (but one could read en este día); and equal variants: 52d tu has P][tienes O traes G, 369a esto P][tú lo O384d si lo tu P][ca si lo O, 1691d uiste tú noche P] noche ouieste O, 2275b sol’ que tú P][solo que O. A small number of variants, from the beginning of the poem, regard the change of singular to plural: 49d tú eres O] vos σodes P, 51c tú lo has aguisado P] tenedeslo bien aguisado O [faslo bien aguisado Gb, 85b tú ganarás O] ganaredes P. In relation to 1572d, cp. 1690b ‘por nada tú non uayas |’ and 1838c ‘| por doquier que tú uayas’

[138] Oy at SM 93d (oy in día B][öi día Q), 152d (B If).

[139] See, for example, SM 201a ‘El sancto sacrificio’, or for nuestro, cp. the Ordo missae romanae at this point: ‘offerimus […] hostiam puram’, in Dutton, Oc V, 10.

[140] Although it is less likely with ’l infant’ at 180a ‘El infant’ quando los uío +| luego los fue ferir’ (O infañt, P infante) and 187b ‘el infant’ como estaua +| de sus armas guarnido’ (O infañt, P infante); in both of these examples, quand’ and com’ would be perfectly respectable resolutions (for quand’ los, cp. 2175c ‘Quando los ouieron presos +| mandolos ençender’; for com’ est–, 338a ‘Sedié cuemo es derecho +|’). Similarly, 941a ‘El emperante uestido +| de un xamet’ uermeio’ (OP): although ’l emperante uestido is possible, El emperant’… is much more likely, as at 1187a ‘El emperant’ de Persia |’ (and, inconclusively, at 864b2*, 1121a2*, 1308a1*).

[141] Omne/ombre as ‘no-one’ is found 5x: 392b ‘non te entienda ombre | que eres cauallero’, 1064d ‘e que nunca ombre fizo +| atán mala fazanna’, 1721b ‘dizié que nunca fizo | omne cosa tamanna’, 2269b ‘a lo que nunca pudo | omne cabo fallar’, 2624d ‘a qual nunca llegó | omne de madre nado’; as ‘anyone’, 6x, the most interesting of which is 1c, which also contains deue: ‘deue de lo que sabe | omne largo seer’; further examples are 654a ‘Omne que por espaçio | lo quesiesse asmar’ (P; O def.), 1174d ‘Omne que beuiés’ d’ ella | serié de grant uentura’ (P; O ‘tod’ombre’), 1469b ‘más claro que espeio | por ombre se ueer’ (OP), 2356b ‘cómo sabe Enuidia | a omne deçebir’ (OP), 2388c ‘omne que bien lo quier’ | tanto·s puede doler’ (OP).

[142] It may be claimed to occur at 2492b ‘demóstrame so nombre |+ de quien me deue matar’ (O, P def.), but Cañas there offers ‘† quien me …’, and Nelson ‘de qui·m deve …’—here Nelson’s alteration is probably correct, since quien is used in both O and P at the same point on only five occasions: 1812d, 2261b, 2670a, 2671a, and 1637a (O ‘quien quisier’; P ‘quien me quisiere’; Nelson and Cañas, qui·m quisiere). However, the use of quién is more frequent, witnessed eight times at the same point in both mss.: 36b, 529b, 534c, 756c, 814c, 891a, 1623c, 2675a. Otherwise quien in O is matched by qui in P 36x (64c, 132d, 239c, 307c, 330c, 335d, 697b, 767a, 796d, 833b, 945d, 1032b, 1068d, 1150d, 1521a, 1539abc, 1647a, 2036c, 2210c, 2212c, 2214a, 2227d, 2239b, 2281c, 2292d, 2319ab, 2338d, 2477d, 2508c, 2539d, 2576c, 2636d, 2668c); quien O] el que P at 126d, 578b; quien O] que P at 531c, 575b, 1492c, 1637d, 1697d, 2165d, 2471b—these may well be misreadings of «q» for «qi». Finally, quien P] O def.: 56c, 57d, 152b, 159b; quien O] P def.: 145d, 2492b. Whilst quien was obviously used by the poet (perhaps particularly in a question), quí, in contrast, is limited to the very beginning and end of the poem: 329d (P] quien O), 379d (OP), 2023b (OP), 2261a (P] quien O), 2410c (P] quien O). The result of this excursus is to show the overwhelming likelihood of O’s having substituted quien for qui in the model. Other variants: qui O] quien P 9x: 121b, 131d, 458d, 820b, 1092d, 1135d, 1505d, 2648bd; quien P] que O: 2165d, 2471b. Potential apocopation of deue is also found at LV 17c ‘a quien deue obedeçer ‡| tras toda crïatura’: Dutton, Oc III, 76, alters the line to ‘a qui dev obedir | tras toda creatura’, although these emendations are by no means inevitable († qui deue obedir, for example: cp. MNS 868d ‘menbrarle deue esto |’ for deue following the infinitive—the only example of this in the Bercean corpus). In any case, LV cannot be used to correct the Alexandre without extreme caution.

[143] Yet, and yet, en fazienda is a remarkably unlucky phrase: in the five times it occurs in the Alexandre, only once is it included in a metrical hemistich (126c ‘al sennor en fazienda | muy bien lo ayudaua’). Apart from 1630a, two of the hypermetrical hemistichs are easily resolved: 152a ‘Quando entra en fazienda +|’ (P, O def.), 1299b ‘|+ de en fazienda entrar’ (P, O def.); but 81c ‘qui quïere a otro |+ en fazienda perdonar’ (P] quien a otro quiere Ga Gb, O def.) is not susceptible of simple emendation other than transposition (qui quiere en fazienda | a otro perdonar, as Nelson has it, or qui en fazienda quiere | a otro perdonar, as has Cañas).

[144] As regards cabo el, at 483a ‘andaua·l a Menálao |+ siempre cabo el costado’, cabo’l is of course possible, but, given that cabo so often apocopates to cab’, and in particular as an adverb, it is unlikely (see below, § II.v.3).

[145] Casas here and at 29a construes the line as … el ínfant’ |, but, as I show here, this is unnecessary. Other possibilities are unlikely: but probably not 2645a ‘Fue el rey en todo esto +|’ which was almost certainly tod’ esto; nor 1253c ‘ante le fizo el reÿ +| tamanna pïedat’ (P; def. O), since the lack of one manuscript witness makes restoration difficult, but ant’ l– is found: 113c ‘ant’ lo auié comido | tanto era glotón’ (and the reconstructable hypermetric lines 1282c ‘Ante le costarié mucho +|’ (P, O def.), 1454b O ‘|+ ante las madres amidos’; nor 878c ‘onde sallió el Apóstol +| una lengua ardida’, where onde is preferable.

[146] Although this is the solution adopted by Cañas, it does not solve the hypermetry completely; Nelson opted for enceso fue el rey (‘encesas’ at VSM 215c). Fue may be correct: cp. Alex 529c ‘ouo tan fiera ira | e fue tan ençendido/cuemo osso rauioso | que anda desfambrido’, and the ms. variants 94a, 174c fue P] era O, and 445a, 446d, 1548a, 2215d fue O] era P, and 1156c ‘qué era o dón’ uenié |+ o quál era su andada’ (OP), 1246d ‘|+ de dó era natural’ (P, O def.), 2024d ‘que si passar pudiesse |+ la cosa era liurada’ (era P] serie O), 2271d ‘Por esto era en cueita +|’ (era P] eran O).

[147] Cañas offers mostrógelo ’l pecado, but Nelson mostró†lo el pecado. With regards to the suppression of –ge–, it may be observed that P includes hypermetrical ge at 22d (auiéngelo), 37d (otorgógela), 113b (dáuagelo); with O it is rather more frequent: 119c, 217a, 234b, 1123b, 1384b, 1430d (before verb); 130c (respondiólgel), 189d (obedeciógel), 907c (fizogelo), 1025b (diogelo), 1559b (deuiéngelo), 2282a (tóuogelo). In neither case, however, is it terribly frequent.

[148] Alex 183a ‘Golpólo el infant’ |’, 572b ‘connoçiólo el ninno |’, 645b ‘connoçiólo el otro |’, 1683a ‘Creyólo el buen omne |’, 1834a 2092b ‘Entendiólo el reÿ |’, 1928a ‘| quiéralo el senado’, 2050c ‘Esperólo el reÿ |’, 2216a ‘Fízolo el buen reÿ |’, 2292c ‘mas diz’lo el maestro |’, 2402b ‘muéuelo el mal uiento |’, 2402c ‘Fázelo el dïablo |’, 2543a ‘Guarniólo el maestro |’.

[149] 36a ‘Empeçó·l el maestro | al infant’ demandar’, 189d ‘obedeçió·l el fiio |’, 404a ‘| creçió·l el coraçón’, 585d ‘mas puso·l el escudo |’, 669b ‘| quebró·l el coraçón’, 683d ‘quebró·l el coraçón |’, 706a ‘iua·l el cuer fallendo |’, 981b ‘batié·l el coraçón |’, 1235c ‘| crebó·l el coraçón’, 1437d ‘deuié·l el Crïador |’, 1578c ‘Acreçió·l el esfuerço |’, 2041c ‘Uino·l el mandadero |’, 2575b ‘creçié·l el coraçón |’. There is no objection to –le el or –li el: 360b ‘mas óuole el padre |’, 1075c ‘diole el su cauallo |’, 1810d ‘| fázele el boçino’, 1947c ‘porfiiarle el fiio |’, 2619c ‘íuasele el alma |’, 1509b ‘| dáuanli el cordal’.

[150] There is the possibility of Menálao thrice: 392c, 509a ‘El prínçipe Menálao |’, and 483b ‘andaua·l a Menálao |’ (O; P: ‘a Menalao andaua·l’); in the first two, the line is most likely to be construed as El príncep’ Menelao; and, at 483b, P’s reading, which is metrical, should be followed. Nicólao is also possible on two occasions (137b ‘reçebiolo Nicólao |’, 139a ‘El infante a Nicólao +|’—for both P def.—); the lines should be construed recebió·l Nicolao and El infant’ a Nicolao. The vacillation of Menalao between three and four syllables is noted by Nelson, p. 85.

[151] Further uses of fasta/hasta are found at MNS 816c ‘hasta uea la carta |’, SM 69d ‘| hasta faga tornada’, VSD 556b ‘| fasta fo aforçado’, VSO 179d ‘| fasta fue soterrado’, and also VSD 247d ‘fasta que salga mi alma +|’, possibly VSM 143d ‘fasta que fuesse el término +|’ (or fasta que fues’).

[152] ‘Pora el’ only occurs in a hypermetrical verse from Alex 2628c.

[153] It may be that LV 91a ‘Éste libró a Dáuid |+ del osso e del león’ was originally del osso e ’l león.

[154] Prendrá is assured by the numerous times that F substitutes resçibir for it (see MNS 403d). For the omission of ‘bon’, cp. VSD 605a ‘Gracias al confessor bono +| aýna recabdaron’, a line that was construed Gracias al confessor † by Fitz-gerald, ed., p. xxxvii, followed by Hanssen, Notas, p. 63, and Orduna, ed., 165; but other editors have assumed there has been a transposition: Gracias al bon conféssor (Labarta Chaves, ed., followed by Dutton, Oc IV, 129 and Ruffinatto, ed., p. 228 with the support of VSD 580b, ‘gracias al bon conféssor’).

[155] Cp. Alex 499a ‘Tiró·l de una saeta +|+ fincógela al costado’ (P, O def.), 666a, 2197b ‘echó la lança al cuello +|’ (666a Echó P] E la O; 2197b echó P] ech O), 1042c ‘|+ maldiziendo al pecado’ (P] diziendo el pecado O), VSD 46d ‘ca non querié al so grado +|’ (although Koberstein, p. 104, and Dutton, Oc I, 88, om. ‘ca’).

[156] On the grounds of apocopatable verb: LV 11d, 30b, 150d, SM 191a, 274b, VSM 265c, VSO 105c; apocopatable adverb: LV 37c (como el), 125b (quando ante el), 178b (quando el), 189c (‘o como salle el spíritu +|’), 209b (‘como lo pasa el rayo +|’: como or como·l), 225a (como el), MNS 385b (como el), PSL 35a (ante el), VSM 331d (quando el); apocopatable adjective: LV 85c ‘este compuso el archo +|’ (although l’archo is a perfectly acceptable variant), VSM 188a; pronoun: LV 222c, SM 270d; omission: LV 123a ‘Titus el otro Uespasianus ‡+| con ellos lid ouieron’ (most probably one should omit el otro); or substitution: LV 161d ‘irié por allí el regno +| todo a perdiçión’ ý (although por ý is found only in Alex); apheresis: VSD 516a. However, DV 48b ‘del agua fiço uino |+ el pan fiço prouesçer’ may have originally been, before a transposition, fiço ’l pan prouesçer (Dutton, Oc III, 81, emended to del agua … | † pan fiço prouesçer).

[157] El águila (324b; un águila 862b); el agua (883d, 886b, 940a, 1489d, 22627d (del agüa); un agua 821b, 1769c) vs. 883, 1602b ‘una agua cabal’; el alma: 10x vs. la alma 2x Alex (118b, 507d, 1061b, 1235d, 1575c, 1632c, 1804d, 1911ac, 2619c vs. 712c, 1418d); del aluorada (349c); el aliama (1138d); el alua (1738d); el arca (291d, 738d, 746b, 1241b); al az (572d), el az (1383a); and perhaps el arena (1172c). Almofalla offers both del (301b), and de la (2036b), toda la (888b).

[158] 585a ‘Condesó el espada |’ (el P][su O) may have originally been Condesó l’ su espada, which would explain the variation between the manuscripts. The following variants may also suggest that the original was l’espada: 66b de espada OP][del espada Ga Gb (but Gc has the unmetrical, but indicative, «de la espada»), 79b de espada P][del espada O,

[159] Further, Alex 1283b ‘|+ e toda la auantaia’ is problematized by auantaia’s not appearing with the article elsewhere: 363b, 701d, 785c. At 971d ‘e con la espada bota +|’ (e con la O] el que con el P)

[160] DV 108d, 109a, 158d; HI 2d, HIII 6b, MNS 85b, 94c, 128c, 138b, 163d, 168d, 173d, 176a, 204d, 208b, 209b, 234d, 257c, 260b, 269d, 275d, 278d, 350d, 382d, 611a, 751c, 771c, 772c, PSL 7b, SM 43b, VSD 153b, 404c, 498d, 521d, 758d, 767a, VSM 17b, 110d, 299a, 301d, 309a, 318b, VSO 17d, 90d, 111c, 177d. La almiella is found at VSM 343d.

[161] Alternatively, la ’badessa; the apheresised form is found in the Cantigas de Santa Maria, in the miracle which narrates the same story as this (7, l. 11; Walter Mettmann, ed., 3 vols (Madrid: Castalia, 1986–89), I, 76) and in a Leonese document of 1332).