From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Tue May 5 16:48:28 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 5 May 92 16:48:28 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8525; Tue, 05 May 92 16:54:01 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8107; Tue, 05 May 92 16:53:43 BST Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 10:15:55 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Peter S. Baker" Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses X-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO I am following the DMG/DRH exchange with interest. Would prefer you didn't go private, if you don't mind eavesdroppers. PSB From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Tue May 5 17:00:47 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 5 May 92 17:00:45 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8936; Tue, 05 May 92 17:06:19 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8330; Tue, 05 May 92 17:06:01 BST Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 11:37:26 EDT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses In-Reply-To: Message of Sat, 30 May 1992 10:28:28 -0400 from Status: RO ALso not bored, though a mere spectator. Your "Nielsen ratings" may be higher than you think! -- Rick From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Tue May 5 19:19:15 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 5 May 92 19:19:15 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2803; Tue, 05 May 92 19:24:52 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1047; Tue, 05 May 92 19:24:52 BST Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 12:50:40 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Erik R Kelemen Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO I, too, would like to see this thread continue publicly. Erick Kelemen ekelemen@brahms.udel.edu From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Wed May 6 19:49:57 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 6 May 92 19:49:56 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2799; Wed, 06 May 92 19:55:32 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6999; Wed, 06 May 92 19:52:09 BST Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 09:42:26 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "D.MACRAE-GIBSON" Subject: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO David -- Thank you for both e- and s-mail material. It will take me a little time to examine it in detail, but meantime I am unhappy on two general points. First, the proposition that although cases where we do have two versions of one piece of text don't suggest that OE scribes were carefully exact copyists of poetic material, the Beowulf scribe has nevertheless "transmitted nearly perfectly" an "exact fixity of the authorial text" - especially if we have to add the proviso that this does not apply, however, to word-division, in which he was heedless of the author's intention. Second, although the Rhetorica ad Herennium regards the creation of balanced sections by deliberate counting as childish, and assumes that a good writer will acquire an instinct of mind which will automatically produce it, when I suggest that the Beowulf poet had such an instinct, and might be expected to produce passages which balance in total perceived weight, without necessarily yielding exactly equal counts in whatever units we painfully apply to assess them with, you won't have it, but assume I am opposing a general romantic "feel" to any clear structural intention. I woud assert as vigorously as you that the poet's "singularly delicate sense of form" (Klaeber's phrase) extended far beyond the line-by-line versification to which Klaeber particularly applies it (and of course I am not doubting the use of mathematical methods by writers whose languages lend themselves to exact counting, and where many copyists can testify to their exactnesses, or that resultant features of their work can be carried over into Old English by an understanding translator). However, if despite my doubts it is the case that Beowulf, using modern grammarians word-divisions, shows such regularity of patterning as it offends reason not to suppose deliberate, then either my doubts must be set at rest or I must find other hypotheses to explain them. >From the fact that nobody else has intervened in our exchanges I conclude that screenfulls of annotated parallel phrases are boring our colleagues, so unless anyone posts to say not I shall move to personal mail for a detailed response to your latest material -- DMG ["to explain this", not "..them". Sorry!] From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Wed May 6 19:51:48 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 6 May 92 19:51:46 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2974; Wed, 06 May 92 19:57:28 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7148; Wed, 06 May 92 19:54:05 BST Date: Sat, 30 May 1992 10:28:28 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: W Schipper Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses In-Reply-To: <9205051351.AA28459@morgan.ucs.mun.ca>; from "D.MACRAE-GIBSON" at May 5, 92 9:42 a To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO > > >From the fact that nobody else has intervened in our exchanges I conclude + that > screenfulls of annotated parallel phrases are boring our colleagues, so unless > anyone posts to say not I shall move to personal mail for a detailed response > to your latest material -- DMG ["to explain this", not "..them". Sorry!] > Duncan: While I have not "intervened" I have found your exchange with David very interesting and instructive, particularly you because you have gone to the trouble of trying to put David's hypothesis to the test. So if you don't mind, I would like to continue seeing this in public. Bill Schipper From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Wed May 6 20:06:47 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 6 May 92 20:06:46 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4057; Wed, 06 May 92 20:12:26 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7853; Wed, 06 May 92 20:12:06 BST Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 11:23:46 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Juris G. Lidaka" Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO >> >From the fact that nobody else has intervened in our exchanges I conclude > that screenfulls of annotated parallel phrases are boring our colleagues, so >> anyone posts to say not I shall move to personal mail for a detailed response >> to your latest material -- DMG ["to explain this", not "..them". Sorry!] >> >While I have not "intervened" I have found your exchange with David very >interesting and instructive, particularly you because you have gone to >the trouble of trying to put David's hypothesis to the test. So if you >don't mind, I would like to continue seeing this in public. > >Bill Schipper I concur, with one suggestion. Please consider making paragraph breaks, laying out things in easily-read columns, putting 2 spaces between the end of one sent. & the start of the next, etc. One reason (other than teaching duties) I have not used David's suggestions & all to try it out myself is that I simply cannot read such detailed material when it is presented as an extremely solid block of characters. I'm sorry, but the eyes just can't do it. There. My spleen feels better now. So don't stop, folks! Keep it up! Juris G. Lidaka Internet Lidaka@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU Bitnet Lidaka@WVNWVSC From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Wed May 6 22:36:38 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 6 May 92 22:36:37 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1384; Wed, 06 May 92 22:42:17 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1701; Wed, 06 May 92 22:42:08 BST Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 22:41:04 EDT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Brian Whittaker Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 5 May 1992 09:42:26 BST from Status: RO I do hope that the discussion of precise local structures in Beowulf does not go underground. Although I have not participated beyond the initial stages, I have been reading with great interest. I do perceive some dangers in equating the instinctual (as opposed to mechanical) sense of precise forms advocated in the Ad Herennium with a "romantic feel". Such precision may become more or less automatic as the result of rigorous training. At one time I worked with a French-trained scholar who would have regarded as the need to either recognize or write alexandrains "by deliberate counting as childish"; he simply knew when a line had twelve syllables because it sounded like an alexandrain. This was not a matter of "romantic feel", but rather the result of a literary training as formalized as the training that enables a musician to recognize an octave scale without counting. Part of the conceptual difficulty for the modern reader may be a tendency to think in terms of style as something extra, added by way of ornament... What a lot of bother: not only did the poet have to tell a story *and* keep his Sievers types straight, he or she also had to worry about golden sections and word counts. For the most part the Ad Herennium is a very practical little manual, a handbook for lawyers on how to make a speech, and most of the advice focusses on how to generate the speech and how to remember it. The patterns under discussion here are patterns for generating text and for structuring it in a way that can be visualized for mnemonic purposes. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Whittaker BRIANW@VM2.YorkU.CA Atkinson College, York University (Please do not omit the W) -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Thu May 7 03:06:42 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 7 May 92 03:06:41 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7969; Thu, 07 May 92 03:11:42 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7882; Thu, 07 May 92 02:37:54 BST Date: Wed, 6 May 1992 10:47:37 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "D.MACRAE-GIBSON" Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO In response to overwhelming public demand (well, moderately whelming) I'll stick with the net. But I may find myself referring to material snailed to me by DRH. Thanks for expressions of interest -- DMG From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Thu May 7 03:54:26 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 7 May 92 03:54:25 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2169; Thu, 07 May 92 04:00:08 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9205; Thu, 07 May 92 03:59:45 BST Date: Wed, 6 May 1992 15:48:00 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: HOWLETT@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX Subject: Re: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO PTo Peter and others who want public discussion. Herewith a model for the form of composition exhibited by the Beowulf poet, the Prologue to St John's Gospel. No accents here, and subscript letters appear on line. Ready? Read. 1 a En arxhi / b hn / c o logos / d kai o logos / e hn / pros ton t+heon / g kai / f't+heos / e' hn / d' o logos / c' outos / b' hn / en arxhi pros ton t+heon ./ Rats. Supply f and a'. 2 a panta / b di' autou egeneto / c kai / b' xwris autou egeneto / a' oude ev ./ 3 a o gegonen en autwi / b zwh hn / c kai / b' he zwh hn / a' to fws twn ant+hrwpwn ./ 4 a kai to fws en thi skotiai fainei / a' kai h skotia auto ou katelaben ./ John's ideas from the beginning of the first half of part 1a and the end of the first half of 1f are combined at the end of 1a'. Then 'was' b goes with 'was' b', 'the Word' c with 'He' c', 'wand the Word' d with 'the Word' d', 'was' e with 'was' e', 'God' f with 'God' f'. Count the words: 12 in the first half and 12 in the second half. Count the syllables: 16 in the first half, 1 in the middle, and 16 in the second half. Count the letters: 37 in the first half, 3 in the middle, and 37 in the second half. Again in part 2 'all things' are balanced by 'not one thing' a', 'through Him came into being' b by 'without Him came into being' b', with 'and' at the centre in c. Five words in the first half and five in the second. The syllable count appears to be off by one because editors print di' autou, but if John wrote dia autou, the syllable count is perfectly balanced, 11-11. The letter count appears to be off by one, for the same reason. Restore the alpha in dia, and you will find 23 letters in each half. An imbalance of 1 is allowed, as the Rhetorica ad Herennium tells you that you can be off by one or even two. Here we don't have to worry at all. Now divide the whole by extreme and mean ratio to find the author's message: 'in Him was life'. Do it for the number of words, the number of syllables, and the number of letters. The golden section falls at the same place. Note that all the verbs are past, aorist, or perfect, except one in the present tense -- fainei. This analysis, confirmed by the capital letters and pointing of the earliest Insular MSS (do your own analysis of the Vulgate text, which works by symmetry and by extreme and mean ratio because Jerome was very good at reproducing this in Latin from both Hebrew OT and Greek NT) shows that John ended his sentence after 'not one thing', not after 'what came into being '. It also suggests that he wrote 'dia' not 'di''. And it gives us very good reasons for believing that if a distinguished critic like Bruce Metzger tells us that this prologue is 'confused' there may well be confusion, though not in the mind of St John. The next sentence after the Prologue begins the Gospel proper: 'There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came for testi- mony, to bear witness to the light.' The chiastic pair to that is the last sentence: 'This is the disciple [whom Jesus loved] who has written these things and bearing witness to these things, and we know that his testimony is true.' John, testimony, witness, balanced by witness, testimony, and name of the au- thor, woven into the fabric of his Gospel without being explicitly written. The entire text of the Gospel is the text of the Prologue writ large. See for yourself, one miracle at the pool of Bethesda, another at the pool of Siloam, and on and on, in a great diptych, into which John has inserted seven great discourses, 'I am the Good Shepherd', vine, way, bread, ..., each of which is thematically appropriate to the Jewish liturgical feast in which it is set. So the whole is a great mnemonic of narrative and number and a liturgical calendar as well. About the numbers. How many tribes? How many disciples? 12. How old was Jesus? 16+1+16. How many days was He in the wilderness before the beginning of the Galilaean ministry? How many days was He with disciples between the Resurrection and the Ascension? 37+3. In part 2, about Jesus' making of the universe, note 10 words, 22 syllables (Bill, remember your question about Hrabanus De rerum natura?) and 46 letters. Why 46? Answer. That is the number of perfectio dominici corporis (see Augustine of Hippo), the number of words in the Hebrew account of Sabbath perfection in Genesis 2.1-4, the number of years it took to build the temple (as human creations should reflect the work of God in Creation), and the numerical value of alpha delta alpha mu in ADAM. Nancy and those like her who incline to dismiss this sort of thing are, of course, entitled to ignore it. But they have a great deal to explain away, in- cluding the explicit testimony of the most learned, articulate, and imaginative writers of the early middle ages. Compare the account of the Creation in Gene- sis with the account of the construction of the temple. Bang. Then compare the account of Creation by Hrothgar's scop with the account of the construction of Heorot. If you don't hear the bang drop me a note. DRH From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Thu May 7 10:08:47 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 7 May 92 10:08:46 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1440; Thu, 07 May 92 10:14:28 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4293; Thu, 07 May 92 10:14:13 BST Date: Thu, 7 May 1992 10:01:00 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: HOWLETT@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX Subject: RE: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO Duncan, The word division and inconsistent orthography and inaccurate fitt numbers of our Beowulf MS show that the text has not been transmitted with absolute fidelity. But it's all we have, and it is mostly sound. The reason for starting with texts that survive in thousands and hundreds and scores of MSS is to establish the method as reliable for the mending of texts that sur- vive in only one or two.One of the delights of applying the method is that it affords virtually certain recovery of an author's ipsissima verba, even his orthography. OOne of the difficulties is that it forces us to read texts in ways drastically different from those we learned. When the author of the Rhet- orica tells us that it would be puerile to count, he does not mean that he doesn't do it, but that this a method appropriate to the earliest stages of education. If, as nearly everyone else seems to assume, we infer that he means that counting is 'childish' and therefore not to be admitted by an accomplished rhetorician, we'll go astray. Competence at this sort of composition seems to me to entail an amazing polyvalence, so that the fixity of word and structure does not coincide with fixity of meaning. The meanings deepen and ramify and leave one with great admiration for the architectonics but less and less cer- tainty that there is a single correct orthodox interpretation to be grasped. This is more than a little unsettling for someone whose job is to interrogate quotation slips every day, asking 'What does this say?' and 'What does this mean?' There is a box of them calling me from the next room. DRH From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Tue May 12 09:45:24 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 12 May 92 09:45:23 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6102; Tue, 12 May 92 09:51:31 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1156; Tue, 12 May 92 09:51:24 BST Date: Tue, 12 May 1992 09:36:00 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: HOWLETT@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX Subject: RE: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO Duncan, You will see from the unmistakeably patterned recurrences of the divine name in Genesis that the writer uses three forms: from A to A' inclu- sive; between A and A' exclusive; and including one but excluding the other. I use different diction to represent the different methods of reckoning the recurrence of words. Try analysing fit I, looking only for chiastic arrange- ment in the account of the building of Heorot and the scop's account of the Creation, and for reversed chronology in the account of Grendel's ancestry. You can count later. Connie Hieatt outlined some of it in an excellent art- icle about envelope patterns in Canadian Studies in English in 1975. DRH From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Tue May 12 10:16:41 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 12 May 92 10:16:40 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7664; Tue, 12 May 92 10:21:55 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2217; Tue, 12 May 92 10:20:52 BST Date: Tue, 12 May 1992 10:12:00 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: HOWLETT@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX Subject: RE: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO Duncan, As most of today's e-mail has come through in multiple copies, I reply more than once, but saying different things. While it is true that the sort of composition I have been adducing is a bit like making things out of lego, the Beowulf poet was more like my son than like me. Neither of them likes to do exactly the same thing over and over. The repertoire of his tricks is compara- ble with the variety found in the Bible, so it is ill-advised to search for a single pattern repeated. Look first always for the chiastic and parallel pat- terns. Those are the bases. The line- and word- and syllable-counts and the words that recur at fixed intervals are better dealt with once the outlines established on semantic grounds are perfectly clear. Sorry, the phone keeps ringing, and Ive lost the thread. Only your last four lines are still visible. More later. DRH From HIEATT@Edu.Yale.YCC.YaleVM Wed May 13 02:57:18 1992 Message-Id: Received: from nsf.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 13 May 92 02:57:17 BST Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id ; Wed, 13 May 1992 02:58:53 +0100 Received: from YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2540; Tue, 12 May 92 21:57:44 EDT Received: from YALEVM (HIEATT) by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (Mailer R2.08 PTF008) with BSMTP id 5005; Tue, 12 May 92 21:57:43 EDT Date: Tue, 12 May 92 21:52:24 EDT From: HIEATT@Edu.Yale.YCC.YaleVM Subject: Howlett's recent message To: "O. D. MACRAE-GIBSON" Status: RO I trust you know as well as I do that what I had to say about envelope patterns in BEOWULF has little (if anything) to do with what David is now claiming. I shudder to be associated with the Howlett point-of-view--but don't want to be publicly quoted on that! Thus I send off a grumbling private reply to you. If others take it that I am one of THOSE, I guess I'll have to grin and bear it. I did, after all, join AKH in one numerological exploration--the article about "The Bird with Four Feathers," many years ago. Some people don't see our point about stanzaic works being DIFFERENT in the way they lend themselves to numercial analyses. --Connie From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Wed May 13 09:05:02 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 13 May 92 09:05:01 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3141; Wed, 13 May 92 09:11:09 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9205; Wed, 13 May 92 09:11:08 BST Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 09:10:00 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: HOWLETT@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX Subject: RE: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO Duncan, To return to yesterday's questions, I do not ignore the word divisions in the Beowulf MS. Part of the argument for identifying the poet depends upon unusual word division in the signature passage. But where other lines of evid- ence converge they allow one to override the single consideration of word divi- sion. Take, for example, two artefacts, the Franks Casket and the Ruthwell Cross, neither liable to too much modern editorial interference. On both ob- jects every letter, every rune, every point has been scrupulously counted, and the structures are perfect. What sort of word division do they exhibit? Here is another example. Begin with Aldhelm's Aenigma XXXIII. Then look at the photo- graph in Malcolm Parkes' article in ASE I. Then look at the Riddle in the Exe- ter Book. You will probably produce an edited text of the Leiden Riddle that looks like this. Mec se ueta uong uundrum freorig ob his inna#dae aerest cenda+e. Ni uat ic mec biuorhta+e uullan fliusum herum #derh hehcraeft hygi#doncum minum. Uundnae me ni bia#d uefla+e ni ic uarp hafa+e ni #derih #dreatun gi#dra+ec #dret me hlimmith. Ne me hrutendo hrisil scelfath ne mec ouana aam sceal cnyssa. Uyrmas mec ni auefan uyrdi craeftum #da #di geolu godueb geatum fraetuath. Uil mec huethrae suae#deh uida+e ofaer eor#du hatan mith ha+eli#dum hyhtlic giua+ede. Ni anoegnu ic me aerigfaerae egsan brogum #deh #di numen sia+e niudlicae ob cocrum. Wrong. Read cendae. Now set it out as Rick requests. A1-2-3 Mec uong cendae 4abcd Ni uat ic mec B1abcd Uundnae me ni bia#d uefla+e 2 #dret Cabcd Ne me hrisil scelfath C'abcd ne mec aam sceal cnyssa B'1abcd Uyrmas mec ni auefan 2 godueb A'123 Uil mec eor#du hatan 4abcd Ni anoegnu ic mec Parallel lines 1 and 11 both alliterate on 'u'. Parallel lines 2 and 12 allit- erate on vowels and 'h'. Parallel lines 3 and 13 resemble each other syntactic- ally, and they assonate, both a-verses ending '-ae' and both b-verses ending '-um'. Parallel lines 5 and 9 both have double alliteration on 'u'. Parallel lines 6 and 10 assonate, their b-verses ending '-ith' and '-ath'. The metre is so exact that of 28 half-lines only 4 in the first half do not match their par- allel members in the second half: 1a and 11a, 4a and 14a, 5b and 9b, 6a and 10a. All the others exhibit the same type as their parallel members, as lines 2-3 and 12-13, all AA, and lines 7-8, both CA. There are 14 lines in the poem, 7 in each half, and 88 words, 44 in each half. Shall we assume that originally the orthography was internally consistent, always a+e not ae, and always #d not th? Try it, and see what you get. One simply cannot impose this sort of struc- ture on a work in editing it unless its original author composed it thus. If the scribes and editors who have transmitted the work to us have garbled it, that is regrettable, but good poets try to protect their work against that sort of thing. It would not be smart to pay undue heed to the word division or the orthography of the scribe of the Leiden MS. Nor indeed of the Beowulf MS, which supplies us with rather more evidence of exactly this type. Nor especially of the generally received opinion which refuses to take this sort of analysis on board. Satis? DRH From U47C2@EARN.WVNVM Fri May 22 15:34:57 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 22 May 92 15:34:56 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1890; Fri, 22 May 92 15:42:22 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4794; Fri, 22 May 92 15:42:20 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (U47C2) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 9429; Fri, 22 May 92 10:36:36 ED Date: Friday, 22 May 1992 10:36:36 EDT From: "Patrick W. Conner" To: Subject: Re: More net troubles In-Reply-To: Message of 05/22/92 at 08:38:14 from D.MACRAE-GIBSON@aberdeen.ac.uk Status: RO Duncan-- I've set you to REPRO again, although I have no idea why the setting was apparently lost or what to do about that. The command, which you can issue from that side, too, is: SET ANSAX-L REPRO Include it as the one and only line in a message addressed to LISTSERV@WVNVM.BITNET Bill Schipper is maintaining our archives. Send him a note to get back you last two postings. The one to Howlett ending the discussion on the encoded structure was, I thought, brilliant. --Pat From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Wed Jun 3 21:41:37 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 3 Jun 92 21:41:36 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1354; Wed, 03 Jun 92 21:48:25 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3068; Wed, 03 Jun 92 21:48:24 BST Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1992 14:38:00 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: HOWLETT@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX Subject: RE: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO Duncan, Before going away for half-term adventures with my children I inad- vertently deleted a communication in which (I think) you rejected my magister- ium. Returning from lunch, but before going back to invertere, let me say that I want you not to accept my magisterium but to see something wonderful in the texts. Can we try again with something short and snappy, from a time during which the fortunes of the English language were even dicier than in the ninth century? Herewith Zupitza's edition of Godric's Hymn to the Virgin. Sainte Marie uirgine, moder Iesu Cristes Nazarene, onfo, scild, help t+hin Godric, onfang, bring hehlic wi#d t+he in godes ric. Sainte Marie, Cristes bur, maidenes clenhad, moderes flur, dilie mine sinne, rixe in min mod, bring me to winne wi#d self God. Here is Eric Dobson's text, a travesty of an edi- tion. Saint"e Mari"e vi"ergen"e, moder Je'su Cristes Nazaren"e, onfo'o, schild, help t+hin Godrich; onfang"e, bring he3lich"e wi#d t+hee in Godes rich"e. Saint"e Mari"e, Cristes bur, maidenes clenhad, moderes flur, dili"e min sinn"e, rix in min mood; bring me to winn"e wi#d t+he self"e God. Here is 'mine' and putatively St Godric's. Sainte Marie Uirgine Sainte Marie Cristes bur moder Iesu Cristes Nazarene . maidenes clenhad . moderes flur . onfo. schild. help t+hin Godrich . dilie mine sinne . rixe in min mod . onfang. bring hehlich. wi#d t+he in Godes rich. bring me to winne wi#d t+he selfe God . Sorry about the spacing. Add points after Uirgine and bur. 'St Mary, Virgin Mother of Nazarene Jesus Christ, take up, shield, help thy Godric. Taken up, bring [him] honourably with thee into God's kingdom. St Mary, Christ's bower, maidens' purity, mothers' flower, wipe out my sin, rule in my heart. Bring me to joy with Thy self, God.' Lay it out to exhibit its Biblical style. 1 Sainte Marie 2ai Uirgine ii moder b Iesu Cristes Nazarene 3 onfo schild help 4 t+hin Godric 5 bring hehlich 6 wi#d t+he 7 in Godes rich. 1 Sainte Marie 2b Cristes bur ai maidenes clenhad ii moderes flur 3 dilie rixe 4 min mod 5 bring me to winne 6 wi#d t+he selfe 7 God. The parallels account for 39 of 43 words. There are 13 rhyming syllables in 8 lines. There are 24 alliterating syllables in 8 lines. In both stanzas there are 4 words in the second line and 8 words in the fourth line. In the first stanza the 3 words of the first line and the 5 words of the third line are the minor and major parts of the golden section of 8. In the second stanza the 4 words of the first line and the seven words of the third line are the minor and major parts of the golden section of 11. Both stanzas begin identically and end similarly. The central word, 22 of 43, is Marie. After uirgine the 22nd word is maidenes. Between moder and moderes there are 22 words. Between t+hin and min there are 22 words. After bring bring is the 22nd word. Between wi#d t+he and wi#d t+he there are 22 words. Between Godes and selfe God there are 22 words. After the poet's first reference to himself, Godrich, the 22nd word is the first of another reference to himself, min mod. The golden section of 43 falls at 27 and 16. Between Cristes and Cristes there are 16 words. From mine to me inclusive there are 8 words, of which the golden section falls at 5 and 3. From mine to min inclusive there are 5 words. There are 36 syllables and 100 letters in the first stanza and 36 syllables and 100 letters in the second. The golden section of the 20 words of the first stanza falls at 12 and 8, after the poet's name. The section of the 23 words of the second stanza falls at 14 and 9 at min mod. The section of the 100 letters of the first stanza falls at 62 and 38, in the middle of God/rich. This is the oldest English text for which anything like original music sur- vives. Look at the edition by Dobson and Harrison, Medieval English Songs, Lon- don & Boston 1979, as grotesquely deformed musically as EJD's verse text. There is said to be a facsimile of the Royal MS as frontispiece to Saintsbury's His- tory of English Prosody. It has been torn from Bodley's only copy in the Rad- cliffe Camera, and I cannot find a copy in college libraries on OLIS. What fol- lows derives only from reading Harrison's edition in the light of Boethius's teaching. If a look at the original next week in London suggests that this is impossible I will eat humble pie. In the first stanza Marie should begin on the third note and occupy 8 notes. In the second stanza the central word Marie should begin on the third note and occupy 11 notes, 8 and 11 being the section of 19. St I ends on D; st II ends on D; the central word Marie begins on D, the central note, 58 of 115. St I ends DCFEDD, st II ends DCFEDCD, the last 2 notes echoing the beginning of st II on Sainte CD. At the seventh note in Marie begins a sequence CBA, which re- curs in Nazarene 25 and in Godrich 36. The disposition of this sequence illus- trates duple proportion 2:1, 77:38, for the last note of the sequence is 38. Those 38 notes divide by duple proportion at 19 and 8. Between the end of CBA in Nazarene and the beginning of CBA in Godrich there are 8 notes. After 38 the same duple proportion is illustrated by the remaining 77 notes, which begin with the sequence FGGF at 39. The same sequence recurs in mine sinne. 77 div- ides by duple at 25.7 and 51.3. The 91st note in mine is 25th from the end. At 11 in uirgine begins a sequence FGFGA, which recurs in -lich of hehlich at 44, again in Cristes bur 69, again in moderes flur 80. The disposition of this sequence in 115 notes illustrates hemiolus, 3:2, 69:46. From the beginning to uirgine inclusive there are 15 notes, and after moderes flur to the end there are 31 notes, together 46, which divide by duple at 15 and 31. After uirgine from moder to moderes flur inclusive there are 69 notes, which divide by hemio- lus at 41 and 28. Between uirgine and -lich there are 28 notes. From -lich to moderes flur inclusive there are 41 notes. 41 divides by hemiolus at 25 and 16. >From Cristes bur to moderes flur inclusive there are 16 notes, which divide by hemiolus at 10 and 6. Cristes bur and moderes flur occupy 5 notes each, to- gether 10. Between them are 6 notes in maidenes clenhad. At 6 in Marie begins a sequence BAGF, which recurs at 77 clenhad, and at 87 dilie, and at 96 rixe. The disposition of this sequence illustrates epitrite, 4:3, 66:49. The first note of this sequence is 66. The last notes divide by epitrite at 29 and 21. >From 66 in Marie to 86 in dilie there are 21 notes. From 87 in dilie to the end there are 29 notes. 21 divides by epitrite at 12 and 9, 29 at 17 and 12. From the first note of the first sequence to the first note of the second inclusive there are 12 notes. Between the end of the first and the beginning of the third there are 17. The end of the fourth is 17th from the end. From the end of the third to the end of the fourth there are 9 notes. The epogdous of 115 falls at 102 and 13. The words Sainte Marie st II include the central word and the cent- ral note and occupy 13 notes. Observe that verse 1 begins and ends on A. So do 2, 3, 7. Verse 5 begins as 8 ends, on CD. Both 5 and 6 end on A. 4, 6, 8 all begin on F. At the caesuras, in 1 the first part ends on F and the second be- gins on F, in 2 the second part begins on F, in 5 the second part begins on F, in 6 the second part begins on F. Some may think Godric's hymns transport us only to the lower slopes of Heli- con. We have it on Zupitza's authority that 'alle drei gedichte sind so einfach und kunstlos, dass wir sie einem manne von Godric's geringer bildung sehr wohl zutrauen k"onnen'. J. W. Rankin informs us that they are 'childish songs' and states that 'for these simple, awkward verses Godric was not indebted "in the matter of form" to any literary source whatever'. So. Do you imagine that I or anyone else could impose this sort of form on any text unless its author had so composed it? Why hasn't it been seen before? Because scholars like Zupitza have assumed that it is kunstlos and others like Dobson have wrenched into a shape that they suppose the author should have left it in. Final question. What did Godric know that the author of Beowulf did not know? Very little, as far as I can see. Now. Cane et lege feliciter! DRH From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Thu Jun 4 14:20:34 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 4 Jun 92 14:20:33 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9375; Thu, 04 Jun 92 13:49:57 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 0889; Thu, 04 Jun 92 13:49:56 BST Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1992 13:48:00 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: HOWLETT@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX Subject: RE: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO Duncan, A copy of the facsimile of the Royal MS of Godric's Hymn to the BVM, which arrived this morning from Susan Rankin leaves the theory intact. It gives a good, but not perfect text, e.g. in stanza I it omits one of the Gs in the FGGF sequence, though one infers from the inclusion of two Gs in the Harley MS and in the recurrence in stanza II that the four-note sequence is original. Correct what I mistyped about the division of 38: by symmetry it is 19+19; by duple it is 25+13. The first note of CBA in Nazarene is 25th. Begin- ning musical analysis is both gratifying and tiresome, the former because it may provide an independent set of criteria useful for mending damaged texts, the latter because it obliges one to return yet again to texts supposed to be complete without it. Time to brush up a score for Beowulf. DRH From ANSAX-L@EARN.WVNVM Thu Jun 4 19:02:53 1992 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 4 Jun 92 19:02:53 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 0139; Thu, 04 Jun 92 19:11:19 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8968; Thu, 04 Jun 92 19:11:13 BST Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1992 18:18:10 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: D.MACRAE-GIBSON@UK.AC.ABERDEEN Subject: RE: Beowulf analyses To: Multiple recipients of Status: RO David -- In my posting which you have mislaid (and I can't recover verbatim because my net setting of REPRO slipped out of gear, and Bill Schipper hasn't retrieved it for me yet) I expressed my grateful interest for all the non- Beowulf texts you've been posting and mailing to me, on which I'm quite happy to accept your assurances, pending time to check the facts for myself, that elegant use of numerically based structures is evident. But that doesn't mean that the same is true of Beowulf, where for all I've seen so far it is not evident. Your apparent magisterium appeared in your phrasing about what I should look first for in Beowulf; what the "bases" are. That not having ever been demon- strated I could only take it as given ex cathedra. -- Duncan From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Thu May 6 10:37:58 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 93 10:37:57 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2506; Thu, 06 May 93 10:05:35 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7301; Thu, 06 May 93 10:01:16 BST Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 09:41:36 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "O. D(uncan) Macrae-Gibson" Subject: Re: 'cleverly hidden structure' (DRH thread) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- "Why do so many people deny so vehemently that this tradition ... ever existed?" On this network, at least, has anyone done that? It's when you extend to assert, with complete assurance, that Beowulf (for instance; I take it as the example I spent a great deal of time on during our earlier thread) is constructed with the same mathematical precision as the texts on which you were working when, as you explain, the prevalence and importance of such structures became clear to you, that you risk losing credibility. The poet may well have known of the tradition, and used it in constantly changing ways and with different degrees of precision, through the poem; but the evidence seemed to me (after much close examination) equally consistent with the hypothesis that he had a natural sense of form, which naturally created structures having features in common with some of those which might have been created by a writer deliberately using the tradition. This loss of credibility then risks reflecting back into those aspects of your demonstrations which are in fact impregnable, which is a pity. -- Duncan (M-G) From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Thu May 6 12:37:27 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 93 12:37:27 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4620; Thu, 06 May 93 12:42:56 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4102; Thu, 06 May 93 12:42:56 BST Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 12:39:02 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: 'cleverly hidden structure' (DRH thread) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Evidence of vehement response is mostly in the private file, which will go public one day when one is feeling olympian. Not this week. I note what you say about Beowulf. But if you consider the structure of fit 2, which I posted on the network, colour the parallelisms, colour the chiasmoi, colour the words echoed folios and folios away in the balancing fit, and then ask whether this has issued from the mouth of an oral poet or from the pen of a literate poet who does things by general feel or from the pen of a literate poet who has planned, as if on a grid, the disposition of every word and line, don't you incline to the third possibility? Incline, mind. I can't be dogmatic. But the poem already seems to me to be more won- derfully and exactly wrought than, apparently, to others. If it was composed not on a grid or on an extensive series of waxed tablets but off the top of a poet's head, I'm gobsmacked. HOW could anyone do this? I know that early medieval scholars exercised routinely functions that we don't. But this would be more complicated -- by orders of magnitude -- than anything anyone I know (even Leofranc) could manage. A simple example. When I came to the UK we still used duodecimal currency. If five of us went to dinner and the bill came to 7 pounds 14 shillings eight pence halfpenny we reckoned the tip and divided the sum in our heads. No one had calculators and we generally did not write on the tablecloth. One rarely got wrong change in a system that divided by 2,3,4,6,12, and 20, or 21 if you reckoned in guineas (a height I didn't often rise to). Now if I darken the door of MacD's or similar with children or godchildren and the bill comes to 7 pounds 14 pence and I pay 10 pounds I am very likely to get 7 pounds 14 pence in change. No one is cheating the firm. The kiddies are simply used to pressing buttons and doing so little in their heads that they have no idea what the correct sum might be. If one suggested return to the duodecimal sys- tem howls of protest would rise. Far too difficult for the man in the street. Yet anyone over 25 can remember that it worked. Composing great poetry, and Beowulf is at the very least that, is a bigger deal than reckoning duodecimah- out the grid and waxed tablets. Which is to say, perhaps, that I am not an Anglo-Saxon poet. I know in part what they did. If they did it as you imply, as distinct from the mechanical way I imply (an no offence in the word 'mech- anical') they were more astounding than I have claimed. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Jun 15 10:39:06 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 15 Jun 93 10:39:04 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9819; Tue, 15 Jun 93 10:40:32 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1167; Tue, 15 Jun 93 10:40:32 BST Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1993 10:17:41 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Elizabeth, I have posted on the network analyses of annals 755 and 891, maybe 892, but I don't remember clearly. 893 would take a lot of space, but we could do it if you liked. Isn't it more fun to get there on your own? Start with Dumville's edition of the Regnal Table. Colour ancestors in one shade, rulers in another, women in another. Then count. Alfred is 23 at his accession, the 23rd ruler, the 23rd generation from Woden. Count the regnal years from Cerdic to Ine and from Ine to Alfred. Count the number of annals from Ine's abdication forward and from Ecgbriht's accession backward. See where the middle is. In the middle start with the 'wif' and work forward and backward both times. Even adverbs like 'thereto' and 'therein' and nouns like 'door' and 'gate' and references to the British hostage must be in the same relative places in both parts of the story. Your pronouns will admit no confusion whatever once you've got the structure right. Whitelock's assertion about the shift from direct to indirect discourse being the mark of an unpractised writer is off beam. The writer didn't shift, and he wasn't unpractised. For icing on the bun consult the facsimile of the Parker Chronicle. Note capital letters, punctuation marks at the ends of penultimate sentences, and capital letters and punctuation marks in the last sentences. Note the number of names in the regnal table and the structure of them. Lay it side by side with Matthew's genealogy of Jesus and see what happens. Note the women again. Note the regnal year attributed to Augustus in the first annal A.D., and reckon Alfred's age in the last annal of the first recension, 891. Note what happened in the second annal A.D. from the east and what happened in the last annal from the west. Anyone who cannot see the mind of this annalist and put his finger on chapter and verse for his models must have been sleeping through Sunday school. The whole compilation of Regnal Table, Chronicle, and Laws is propaganda of a very high order, utterly coherent, punctiliously exe- cuted, by more than one writer who knew how to control his pronouns. Put your modern critics, historians and literary scholars alike, to one side, and listen to your annalist HIS way. He'll tell you, not everything, but what he wants you to hear, and he'll give you every aid. Every time I read him I find new reasons to admire his craft. And he was one of seven. The others were not less competent. You can lay hands on the names and works of every one of them. They were all, I think, good at pronouns. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Jun 22 11:05:51 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 22 Jun 93 11:05:50 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3668; Tue, 22 Jun 93 11:12:12 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4466; Tue, 22 Jun 93 11:12:11 BST Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 11:02:53 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "O. D(uncan) Macrae-Gibson" Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- I have long admired, and commended to students, the structural elegances of the 755 annal, in which the two fights are linked by balancing phrases, most obviously "&T;a ... gehierdun &t;&ae;t &t;&ae;s cyninges &t;egnas" in lines 23-4 (I'm working from Earle and Plummer, pp 46ff; the lineation is very similar in Sweet's Reader, which some of us will have more conveniently at hand) answering "t;a ongeat se cyning &t;&ae;t" at the beginning, and "hie ... feohtende w&ae;run o&t; ... alle butan anum ... oft gewundad (38-42) answering "hie ... feohtende w&ae;ran o&t; ... alle ... butan anum ... swi&t;e gewundad" (21-3) at the end. The phrases in the second fight are more expanded than their equivalents in the first, which is appropriate since the whole description is more expanded. I have regularly pointed out to students that although the writer had these qualities, he hadn't realised the problems pronouns present in indirect speech, leading to the clumsy and confusing sequence in the passage "7 &t;a gebead he ... (29ff) [3~ [3~ [3~ [3~ [3~ " (29ff), in which "he him hiera ... h ie him ...him ... hiera ... him ... him ..." have to be understood as referring variously to Cyneheard, Cyneheard and his supporters, and the King's Thanes. If my view can be corrected by a demonstration that a structural scheme which an informed reader of the time would have recognised makes all the changes of reference clear, I shall be delighted, but I cannot at present even arrive at the scheme you perceive from the guidelines in your e-mail. I am not, to start with, clear what the "both parts" of the story in this scheme actually are. "In the middle start with the 'wif'" - I take it this must refer to her appe aranc [3~ [3~ appearance in line 17, but of what is it "in the middle" that should at once lead me to start with it? Then "work forward and backward both times" - what are these two times on both of which I should work forward and backward? I quickly came to a standstill from this start, but assumed I would be able to infer the limits of the "both parts" from the dispositions of the illustrative features you give which "must be in the same relative places in both". "Adverbs like 'thereto' and 'therein'": "adverbs like" is too imprecise to work with (in what respects "like"?), but there is certainly one "&t;&ae;rto" (28) and one "&t;&ae;rinne" (39) (if one accepts that they are indeed single words) which are close enough to each other to be a balancing pair. The second is almost at the end of the "story", befoe the chronicler reverts to plain analystic style in line 43; only some 30 words follow it. The only pause point I can find after an approximately equivalent advance from "&t;&ae;rto" is after "noldon" (31), between an offer and its rejection, which can hardly be the break between the "parts" you intend. "Nouns like 'door' and 'gate'" poses a similar problem with "like". "Duru" itself occurs in line 14, and not again, so its equivalent must presumably be sought in the semantically congruent "gatu", which appears twice (28, 38). The first precedes "&t;&ae;rto", so is also in the first "part" if that word is, and can't be the second-part equivalent of "duru". The second is only just before "&t;&ae;rinne", whereas "duru" is a long way before "&t;&ae;rto", so that gets me nowhere either. Then "references to the British hostage" - but there is only one of these (22). If you mean "references to the British hostage and his later equivalent, the alderman's godson" (22, 41), they certainly occur at equivalent positions in the two fights, being part of the phrases I adduced above in support of my structural contention. Please, David, would you specify what the structure as you see it is, and how it helps with the pronouns? I think some of the testiness that tends to enter this running skein of threads comes because you are so clear in your own mind about the sort of analysis that should be made of a passage that you do not realise when you are not making yourself clear to others, and you tend to assume that if they do not see what you see they can't be trying. On the other side, if colleagues anxious to learn better methods of illuminating the texts they study make genuine attempts to follow your guidance, and find themselves as I have done on this occasion up a gum tree, they will be reluctant to spend their time in the same way again, which will not promote recognition of your work. -- Duncan M-G P.S. When you say that "the writer didn't shift" [from direct to indirect discourse (you mean the other way round, though)], you are I take it not disputing that the second person pronoun in "eowre geferan" (37) represents a change of mode from the previous third persons, however you label it? If you are just saying that to open inverted commas at some arbitrary point before it misrepresents the style, which one has no reason to see as that of an unpractised writer, then I entirely agree with you. From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Jun 22 13:03:02 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:03:01 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9503; Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:09:21 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8176; Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:09:20 BST Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 13:05:32 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, My apologies to you forunclarity and to other readers for repetition. A1 [H]er Cynewulf 2 benam ... da+edum 3 buton Hamtunscire 4a 7 ... aldormon bi t+he him lengest wunode ii 7 hiene t+ha Cynewulf iii on Andred adra+fde b'i 7 he t+ha+er wunade ii ot+ht+ha+et hiene an swan iii ofstang a+et Pryfetesflodan a' 7 he wra+ec t+hone aldormon Cumbran B1a 7 se Cynewulf ... feaht b uuit+h Bretwalum 2a 7 ymb ... ha+efde b he wolde adra+efan 3a anne a+et+heling b se wa+es Cyneheard haten b' 7 se Cyneheard wa+es a' t+ha+e Sigebryhtes brot+hur 4a 7 t+ha ... werode b on wifcyt+ht+he on Merantune ci 7 hine ... beeode ii a+er ... wa+erun 5a 7 t+ha ongeat se cyning t+ha+et b 7 he on t+ha duru eode c 7 t+ha unheanlice hine werede 5'a ot+h he on t+hone a+et+heling locude b 7 t+ha ut ra+esde on hine c 7 hine miclum gewundode 4'a 7 hie alle ... ha+efdon b 7 t+ha on t+ha+es wifes geba+erum cii onfundon t+ha+es cyninges t+hegnas t+ha unstilnesse i 7 t+ha t+hider ... radost 3'a 7 hiera b se a+et+heling a' gehwelcum 2'a feoh 7 feorh gebead b 7 hiera na+enig hit get+hicgean nolde :. 1'a [A]c hie ... la+egon b butan anum ... wa+es . B'1a [T+H]a on morgenne gehierdum t+ha+et b t+ha+es cyninges ... wa+erun b' t+haet ... wa+es a' t+ha ridon hie t+hider 2 7 his aldormon Osric 7 Wifert+h his t+hegn 3 7 t+ha men ... a+er 4 7 t+hone ... la+eg 5a h t+ha gatu him to belocen ha+efdon b 7 t+ha t+ha+erto eodon 6a 7 t+ha gebead he him b hiera agenne dom ... ut+hon ci 7 him cyt+hde ii t+ha+et ... wa+eron iii 7 ... noldon i' 7 t+ha cua+edon hie ii t+ha+et him ... hlaford iii' 7 hie na+efre ... noldon 6'a 7 t+ha budon hie hiera ma+egum b t+ha+et hie gesunde from eodon ci 7 hie cua+edon ii t+ha+et ta+et ilce hiera geboden wa+ERE iii t+he a+er mid t+ham cyninge wa+erun i' t+ha cua+edon hie ii' t+ha+et hie geferan iii' t+he mid t+ham cyninge ofsla+egene wa+erun 5'a 7 hie t+ha ymb t+ha gatu feohtende wa+eron b ot+ht+ha+et hie t+ha+erinne fulgon 4' 7 t+hone a+et+heling ofslogon 3' 7 t+ha men t+he him mid wa+erun 2' alle butan anum se wa+es t+ha+es aldormonnes godsunu 1' 7 he ... gewundad A'1 7 se Cynewulf 2 ricsode .xxxi. wintra 3 7 his lic ... Ascanmynster 4a 7 hiera ... Cerdice bi 7 t+hy ilcan geare ... Seccandune 7 his lic lit+h on Hreopadune <7 he ricsode .xli. wintra, MSS DE, but the verb was probably originally heold> ii 7 Beornra+ed ... ungefealice b'i 7 t+hy ilcan geare ... wintra ii 7 his sunu ... daga . a' [S]e Offa ... Wodening :. Most of this seems to me to be so obvious as to need no commentary whatever. If we go to the heart of the matter we see in 5 and 5' t+ha gatu in a and the adverbs t+ha+erto and t+ha+erinne in b. The pronoun hie in B'5a is supplied from MSS BCDE. Parallelism with 5'a confirms that it is original. At the crux in 6 and 6' the Chronicler relates promises in a, the terms offered in b, and the responses in c. Common sense implies that the subject of the verb in 6ci must be one of Cyneheard's party within the gates. Biblical style implies that the verb should be singular, as in MSS DE. The use of cyt+han distinguishes this phrase from the others with cwet+han, and it implies that Cyneheard is still speaking in 6ci, as in 6a. The point of the story lies in loyalty to a single man. The kinsmen of Osric and Wiferth within the gates are loyal to him, Cyneheard, in 6cii and iii, not to his followers. At 6'b the pronoun him is supplied from MSS BCDE. Parallelism with 6b confirms that it is original. At 6'cii' Professor Whitelock accepted the reading of the Parker MS and stated that the shift from indirect to direct speech is the sign of an unpractised writer. The preferable reading supported by MSS BDE is confirmed by the indir- ect discourse of the parallel phrases 6cii and ii' and 6'cii. The Chronicler refers to Cynewulf in B1 and B'1, to his loyal subjects in B2 and B'2, to the thanes in his werod in B4 and 4' and B'4 and 4'. He also mentions t+hone bur in B4 and t+ha+ere byrig in B'4, t+ha duru in B5 and t+ha gatu in B'5. The conclusions of B and B' are almost identical. The last parts of A and A' are numbered 4 and divided into 4 parts. The crucial parts of B are numbered 6 and 6', divided into 3 parts, of which the third are subdivided into 6 parts. The 534 words divide by extreme and mean ratio ar 330 and 204. Parts ABA' comprise 331 words and part B', relating the deeds of the hero of the annal, 203 words. A century after this annal the ealdormon of Hampshire is still named Osric, and his name alliterates with those of Alfred's mother Osburh and her father Oslac. At exactly the nadir of the national fortunes, at the crux of the annals between the abdication of Ine and the accession of Alfred's grand- father, during the period in which Alfred's male ancestors were excluded from the kingship (with dire consequences) his maternal ancestors were still serving the best interests of the kingdom. Propaganda of a fairly high order, I think. And the prose isn't bad either, thoughe great and the good haven't yet thought so. Ask who intruded the bad rulers on to the West Saxon throne. Who married his ghastly daughter off to the usurper and colluded in the exile of Alfred's grandfather? Why did Asser go to such lengths to tell terrible stories about her? Why do we have that Thryth episode in Beowulf? Yet we read not a word that reflects badly on any of the Mercian subjects over whom Alfred claims sover- eignty. Is this tactful or what? DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Jun 22 13:05:27 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:05:26 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9653; Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:11:41 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8259; Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:11:40 BST Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 13:07:45 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, As your letter flashes again across my screen I see that you have accused the Chronicler of clumsiness. I beg to differ. DRH From SKEEFER@TrentU.ca Tue Jun 22 13:23:13 1993 Received: from nsf.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:23:12 BST Received: from TRENTU.CA by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id ; Tue, 22 Jun 1993 13:26:47 +0100 Received: from TRENTU.CA by TRENTU.CA (PMDF #3443 ) id <01GZO7PQN03M000VBO@TRENTU.CA>; Tue, 22 Jun 1993 08:26:37 EST Date: 22 Jun 1993 08:26:37 -0500 (EST) From: Sarah Larratt Keefer Subject: ??????? To: d.macrae-gibson@aberdeen.ac.uk Message-Id: <01GZO7PQN9QS000VBO@TRENTU.CA> X-Vms-To: IN"d.macrae-gibson@aberdeen.ac.uk" X-Vms-Cc: SKEEFER Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Status: RO Dear Duncan, As the person who started this thread (by asking who ate the horses, Danes or English), I have been VERY grateful to you for valiantly trying to decipher what David says. But, even after he posted more fully in response to your last, most articulate and intelligent attempt to apply his principles, I remain in the dark (and can't BEGIN to make his arcane advice to me re the horses, work in anyway). He's moved away from my chosen passage in the ASC, although I recall that he DID include what he's now talking about in what he told me to scrutinize when "counting it out". To put it in a nutshell, what on earth is he talking about? I am ABSOLUTELY at sea here: can you explain it? Sarah PS Who do YOU think did the horse-eating, Danes or English? From rwaterh@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au Thu Jun 24 07:14:08 1993 Received: from nsf.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 24 Jun 93 07:14:07 BST Received: from laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id ; Thu, 24 Jun 1993 07:18:02 +0100 Received: by laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au id AA26929 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for D.MACRAE-GIBSON@aberdeen.ac.uk); Thu, 24 Jun 1993 16:17:21 +1000 From: Ruth Waterhouse Message-Id: <199306240617.AA26929@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> Subject: Re: ASC755 To: D.MACRAE-GIBSON@aberdeen.ac.uk Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 16:17:20 +1000 (EST) Cc: rwaterh@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Ruth Waterhouse) In-Reply-To: from "D.MACRAE-GIBSON@aberdeen.ac.uk" at Jun 1, 93 09:48:41 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 591 Status: RO Dear Duncan, David Howlett's break-down of ASC 755 is very interesting. I didn't take it nearly as far when I considered the theme and structure of the same annal, but I was trying to make some of the same points (though I didn't particularly bother with the direct/indirect speech issue). If you want to have a look at it, it was in _Neuphilologische Mitteilungen_ 70 (1969), 630-640. Several later considerations of the annal didn't seem to take any notice of it, so perhaps it didn't make its point. Perhaps it needs David's comments to drive the point home! Hearty good wishes, Ruth From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Jun 29 12:52:00 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 29 Jun 93 12:51:59 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6930; Tue, 29 Jun 93 12:58:26 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2040; Tue, 29 Jun 93 12:58:25 BST Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 12:48:28 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "O. D(uncan) Macrae-Gibson" Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO As promised, I have now carefully studied DRH's detailed posting on the 755 annal. Clearly I was right that a main problem of communication in these matters is that DRH has his methods so ingrained in his mind that he simply cannot believe that what he sees will not be seen by anyone else who looks properly ("Most of this seems to me to be so obvious as to need no commentary whatever."). However, if his carefully-phrased opening sentence, apologising to me for unclarity and to other readers for repetition, really means that he thinks I am the only net reader to whom his former posting was unclear, I can assure him he is wrong. Indeed, I think the boot may be on the other foot. How many of us, having read in that posting that "even adverbs like 'thereto' and 'therein', and nouns like 'door' and 'gate' ... must be in the same relative places in both parts of the story", will now agree that that should have pointed us to DRH's B (beginnning "And se Cynewulf oft miclum gefeohtum feaht uui&t; Bretwalum" - lines 5-6 in Earle and Plummer p.46) and his B' (beginning "&Da; on morgen gehierdun &t;&ae;t &t;&ae;s cyninges &t;egnas" - 23-4) as the "both parts", or that by any means except arbitrary sectioning and labelling the references to "&t;a duru" (14) and "&t;a gatu" (18) can be seen as "in the same relative places" in these parts (the adverbs not appearing in this link at all; they merely support a parallelism with the second appearance of "&t;a gatu" (38) within the second part)? How many of us, even after studying the full analysis, are now clear about where the "'wif' in the middle" is, and how "working forward and backward both times" would help us to start establishing such an analysis; how many still with me in the dark? I continue to think that the sequence of third person pronouns in "Ond &t;a gebeah he him ..." (29) is clumsy; DRH doesn't - no matter for dispute. But can anyone point out to me how his structural analyses will assist my common sense (to which even he makes one appeal) in resolving the references? The only point where, as it seems to me, they look as though they might do so, they mislead. DRH is led by his parallel analyses to see in both 6 and 6' "the responses in c". But in 6 "the response" does not appear until the second part of c (ci'...); 6c opens "7 him cy&t;don/cy&t;de &t;&ae;t hiera m&ae;gas him mid w&ae;ron &t;a &t;e him from noldon" (30-31), the stick that balances the carrot of the money and land ("if you attack us you'll be killing your own kin"), to which there is no equivalent in 6'. How many of us are attracted to an analysis which treats "7 he h&ae;fde &t;a o&t; he ofslog &t;one aldormon" as one structural unit (A4a), running over the transition to the top-level subordinate clause, then breaks at the transition to the second-level subordinate, "&t;e him lengest wunode", which becomes A4bi, and then places as structurally on the same level as this, as A4bii, a partial clause "7 hiene &t;a Cynewulf" which is syntactically parallel with "and he h&ae;fde &t;a ..."? DRH's structure displays "wunode .... hiene" (4) and "wunade ... hiene" (5) in parallel positions; does anyone share my concern that he may have forced an unnatural breakdown on the passage because of a preconception that that sort of verbal patterning must be a prime structural basis? Can anyone see value in a labelling structure that identifies the return to "se Cynewulf" (43) by making that the start of a section A', parallel with A, which starts "Her Cynewulf" (1), if it has to proceed to mark as though in some useful way equivalent A4bi "&t;e him lengest wunode" (3-4) and A'4bi "7 &t;y ilcan geare mon ofslog &A;&t;elbald Miercna cyning on Seccandune 7 his lic li&t; on Hreopadune <7 he rixade xli wintra>" (45-6)? And so on, in ways that would be wearisome to pursue. Ruth Waterhouse has reminded me (I think in a private message, not on the net) of her article in Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 70 (1969) pp. 630-640, an admirably lucid examination of the annal, particularly in a full demonstration of the parallelism between the two fights (13-23, 23-42) to which I briefly pointed in my previous posting. If we were all polled on whether we found her analysis or DRH's the more illuminating, I would be surprised if I could not predict which way the vote would go. It does not of course follow that where they differ (and naturally they coincide at a number of points) DRH's is wrong or inferior. It is perfectly possible that his knowledge of classical teaching on good literary structure leads him to see what a contemporary of the writer would have seen, where others err in trying to see what a modern reader would see. But I believe others will share my view that his demonstrations do not always do his case good service, and my wish that he should be more willing to recognise that serious scholars, seriously trying to follow him, run into serious difficulties. I shall not return to Beowulf fit 2. It is clear we would again end up at unprofitable loggerheads. Our former exchanges on Beowulf are there in the archive if anyone is still interested -- Duncan M-G From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Jun 29 14:02:11 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 29 Jun 93 14:02:10 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 0981; Tue, 29 Jun 93 14:08:28 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4511; Tue, 29 Jun 93 14:08:09 BST Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 06:04:55 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: James W Earl Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question X-To: ANSAX-L@wvnvm.bitnet To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, you have been very, very patient in this case, and you are to be commended for containing--though barely--your mounting anger. You are not alone, of course. I hope you will remember this during the storm which is likely to break over your head at any moment. I continue to credit David's analysis as the product of a mind capable of seeing things that I cannot, due perhaps to a genetic deficiency like color-blindness on my part. I credit them in theory, but the demonstration of the Cynewulf passage did nothing to cure my deficiency in practice. I have the same problem, however, when reading music, where some people see structures clearly and I must wait for the concert, or more likely the tenth hearing of the piece, before finally seeing it. So I imagine it is possible to be completely dumbfounded at David's analysis and still blithely assume its validity at some other level than my experience. I have been waiting for someone to report that he or she has independently reproduced the results of one of these analyses, and I thought Duncan might be the man--but I thought Abbot would do it too, and he, if I remember correctly, also confessed he hadn't yet got it, for all his willingness. Who will step forward next? Soon I will have to admit that my genetic deficiency is a dominant trait among scholars. Jim Earl From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Jun 29 17:22:05 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 29 Jun 93 17:22:04 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7120; Tue, 29 Jun 93 17:28:22 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 5342; Tue, 29 Jun 93 17:28:18 BST Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 17:22:10 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Let me relieve you of a difficulty. The analysis I sent does not entail breakdown of the text of annal 755. The structure of numerals and letters and indentings of clauses and phrases in syntactically incomplete lines is not to beaccepted de fide. You are not obliged to believe in their existence any more than in the existence of senses I define in the Dictionary. Indeed, you had better not. The numberings and letterings and indentations are my own devices, nowhere exhibited in manuscripts, to help me to do on paper what I think medieval composers and poets and prose writers did in their heads. I was telling you exactly how I arrived at that perception of the structure of the annal, beginning with the references to the 'wif' and the gates and the doors and the adverbs and working inwards and outwards on a grid. The ease with which everything falls into place is one of the indications of correctness in the analysis. Playing to the gallery is not a good way to get at the truth. Nor is the taking of straw polls. The asking of questions is. Ask yourself why I suppose A4bi to be parallel to A'4bi. Symeon of Durham will help. Publication of one's opinion about the incompetence or clumsiness of a com- position we do not yet fully understand is also inappropriate. If you like, you can have a long list of texts much more impressive than annal 755 which the greatest scholars of our century have pronounced to be ill-composed or -- my favourite -- the illustrious Metzger on St John's Prologue: 'confused'. We are dealing with something as basic as key signature in music theory, as basic as theorems in Euclidian geometry, as basic as grammar. The easy way is to begin at the beginning and work forward. A harder and more fruitless and destructive way is to begin with modern preconceptions and work backward. If you do that, things will continue to look clumsy and confused even when they are not. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Wed Jun 30 22:13:08 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 30 Jun 93 22:13:07 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6572; Wed, 30 Jun 93 22:19:36 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1100; Wed, 30 Jun 93 22:19:36 BST Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 22:11:45 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "O. D(uncan) Macrae-Gibson" Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- You do me no justice. I can read Old English manuscript as well as you, and of course I know that your labelling devices do not appear in the manuscripts. But they represent a structure which you believe to have an objective existence in the texts preserved in those manuscripts. You have not in fact told us "exactly" - or at all - how you arrived at your perception of that structure for the 755 annal "beginning with the references to the 'wif'". You speak of "everything falling easily into place". This must imply that there exists some limited and definable structural system, independent of any particular text, as the "place" into which an actual text may be shown, on limited and definable criteria, to fall or not fall. This will be the structure on which you construct your "grid". I, and I think others, as we genuinely try to follow you, do not find ourselves clear about the nature and limits of this structure and these criteria. Can you illuminate the matter for us, so that we can assure ourselves that "everything falls into place" has a specific enough meaning for one to be able to say confidently that it occurs or does not occur? I do not play to the gallery. I am a scholar, seeking as I have done throughout my career fuller understanding of the subject I profess. I propose no straw poll. But if, as Jim Earl's posting suggests may be the case, there os no other scholar in the field who can make sense of some of your analyses, I ask you at least to understand why the possibility raises itself in the mind that this may be because they do not make sense. "We are dealing with something as basic as theorems in Euclidian geometry." Good. Then it can be demonstrated in the same way, by first asserting any necessary axioms, and then establishing the truth of its propositions, step by step, rigorously, from that basis. Are you willing to justify your comparison with Euclid by at least some specimen demonstrations? And in the particular case of your A4bi and A'4bi, since I plainly did ask myself why you suppose them to be parallel, are you willing to tell me, instead of waving me away in the direction of Simeon of Durham? -- Duncan M-G From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Thu Jul 1 11:30:50 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 1 Jul 93 11:30:49 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1288; Thu, 01 Jul 93 11:37:02 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 5281; Thu, 01 Jul 93 11:37:01 BST Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 08:56:42 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "O. D(uncan) Macrae-Gibson" Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- I apologise for the tone which I allowed to enter a posting that I would have done better to file overnight and revise before transmission this morning. I let myself be stung by some features of your posting which you also probably now wish you had not committed to the net. Please exchange forgiveness with me. Yet my requests for clarifications still stand. I ama scholar who has spent my professional life with Old English. I reckon myself a reasonably fluent and responsive reader of the language, to the extent that this is possible across centuries, and certainly to the extent that I see no reason not to express my opinion that some writing in it is clumsier than other. You are a scholar who has - is "rediscovered" the word? - principles of composition of which I was ignorant, which you are convinced underly a great deal of Old English writing, so that my claim to be a "responsive reader" becomes unsound. I hope I state a consensus view of good scholarly practice in such a situation when I say that you will not resent the fact that although I am willing to be convinced that my claim is unsound, I require to be convinced of it. You will not resent that my present opinion, based on serious attempts to follow your analyses, is that in your enthusiasm for your discovery you are willing to play Procrustes with texts, forcing divisions on them where they do not divide, and extracting as significant linking features what are not present as such. You will want on the contrary both to make clearer the general bases on which you analyse, so that I will no longer be led to see you as I have described, and to correct me on particular points. You will entertain the possibility that in certain cases it may be you who are wrong. You will be the more anxious to do this if it proves that my misunderstandings of you are extensively shared among our colleagues. Can we proceed on this basis? -- Duncan M-G From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Thu Jul 1 11:31:12 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 1 Jul 93 11:31:11 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1324; Thu, 01 Jul 93 11:37:25 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 5297; Thu, 01 Jul 93 11:37:22 BST Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 10:14:35 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I thought I had posted to you many moons ago the analyses of the text of Genesis in Hebrew and Latin and Old English and the text of the Prologue to John's Gospel in Greek and Latin, with references to the Talmud and the Tim- aeus and the Rhetorica ad Herennium and Cicero De Oratore and Boethius De Consolatione Philosophiae and De Institutione Arithmetica and De Institutione Musica. Have you worked your way through these texts? What about the accounts of Creation in Job and Isaiah and Wisdom? And the suggestion, put forward more than once or twice on the network, that men who transmit such texts as accounts of God's work in the universe commend the same as models of human literary creation? In the Insular tradition alone, beginning with Pelagius's Commentary on the Pauline Epistles, which exhibits every rule to obvious and unmistakeable per- fection, the chain of transmission is clearly demonstrable. Columban quotes Gildas and Vinniau. Cummian quotes Pelagius and Patrick and Gildas. From the first monuments of literacy in these islands we're into a web of connected transmission so tight that it cannot be gainsaid. For every one of these authors, none of whom is the least bit coy about what he has read, this style is exactly what you have attributed to my analyses -- a preconception, part of the mental furniture which many literate persons in the British Isles could arrange and rearrange ad By the time Old English literature begins to flourish this tradition is in its third century in these islands. Begin at the beginning and work forward, and everything will make sense. Don't and it won't. The Book of Letters of Saint Patrick the Bishop will be out from Four Courts Press in Dublin by 6 November this year. Demonstration of all the rules fits into about ten pages of introduction. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Thu Jul 1 11:31:12 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 1 Jul 93 11:31:11 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1324; Thu, 01 Jul 93 11:37:25 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 5297; Thu, 01 Jul 93 11:37:22 BST Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 10:14:35 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I thought I had posted to you many moons ago the analyses of the text of Genesis in Hebrew and Latin and Old English and the text of the Prologue to John's Gospel in Greek and Latin, with references to the Talmud and the Tim- aeus and the Rhetorica ad Herennium and Cicero De Oratore and Boethius De Consolatione Philosophiae and De Institutione Arithmetica and De Institutione Musica. Have you worked your way through these texts? What about the accounts of Creation in Job and Isaiah and Wisdom? And the suggestion, put forward more than once or twice on the network, that men who transmit such texts as accounts of God's work in the universe commend the same as models of human literary creation? In the Insular tradition alone, beginning with Pelagius's Commentary on the Pauline Epistles, which exhibits every rule to obvious and unmistakeable per- fection, the chain of transmission is clearly demonstrable. Columban quotes Gildas and Vinniau. Cummian quotes Pelagius and Patrick and Gildas. From the first monuments of literacy in these islands we're into a web of connected transmission so tight that it cannot be gainsaid. For every one of these authors, none of whom is the least bit coy about what he has read, this style is exactly what you have attributed to my analyses -- a preconception, part of the mental furniture which many literate persons in the British Isles could arrange and rearrange ad By the time Old English literature begins to flourish this tradition is in its third century in these islands. Begin at the beginning and work forward, and everything will make sense. Don't and it won't. The Book of Letters of Saint Patrick the Bishop will be out from Four Courts Press in Dublin by 6 November this year. Demonstration of all the rules fits into about ten pages of introduction. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Thu Jul 1 15:39:10 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 1 Jul 93 15:39:09 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6336; Thu, 01 Jul 93 15:37:45 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4059; Thu, 01 Jul 93 15:37:21 BST Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 14:25:31 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, A request put gently and handsomely as 'please exchange forgiveness with me' is irresistible. Round the corner from the room in which Wesley's heart was strangely warmed the phenomenonrecurs. For which thanks. A natural conservative, I have lived mostly under authority, content. So, to learn daily of serious disorder in every one of our institutions at the same time, the crown, the courts, the police, the church, parliament, the press, the health service, and the universities, is unnerving. Authority is not only not seen to be right, it isn't right. Under the circumstances I dis- incline to advance my views as authoritative; not from my own authority, as I am not claiming any, and certainly not from the authority of the Academy I work for or the university I work in. I have been trying not to impose my own views on texts, but to put at the disposal of other scholars the ancient foundations in Hebrew and Greek and Latin on which medieval men designed and fashioned and propagated their liter- ary culture. One day when I am not feeling irritated I will write about the varied and persistent attempts to stop this. At the moment obstacles to pub- lication are crumbling, but there will be others. Two phenomena have often made me disquiet. One is a recurrent request for 'the correct answer'. The other is the appeal to authority. When a man like Eric Stanley says to me 'I don't believe you about the Old English because I don't believe you about the Latin. If you were right about the Latin a scholar like Michael Winterbottom would already have seen this.' I turn to Winter- bottom, chairman of the very committee to which I am professionally respon- sible. In editing Gildas he emends the text -- against the evidence of the manuscripts -- to make it conform with the Vulgate, despite the overhwelming indications that Gildas was using the British form of the Vetus Latina, the traces of which he effaces from his edition. More. he states explicitly and at some length that 'Gildas knows nothing of this [rhythm], or chooses to ignore it. He has cut himself off from something continental stylists had always prided themselves on. He has abandoned the practice of his own sources.' Refutable from every single sentence in the first 26 chapters of the book he edited. One gets nowhere attacking the views of such men, and as I am fond of Michael I wouldn't attack him personally. I am well aware of what happens to scholars who differ from the views of those in power but who make mistakes themselves. I have taken greater pains to ensure the accuracy of what I write than most people would think worthwhile. I have hoped that those who cared would work their own ways through the para- digms sent over the network, and see from the inside, not from any authorita- tive pronouncement, why so many scores and hundreds of texts are the way they are and no other. Hope deferred maketh the heart sick. Well. Things aren't as bad as all that. But some days one gets just the littlest bit discouraged. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Fri Jul 2 12:22:40 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 2 Jul 93 12:22:39 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9339; Fri, 02 Jul 93 12:29:09 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7029; Fri, 02 Jul 93 12:29:06 BST Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 12:21:37 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "O. D(uncan) Macrae-Gibson" Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- Well, well... It is precisely because I (and others "who care") have tried to "work my own way through (some of) the paradigms sent over the network", but found that the text did not appear to fit the paradigm, or that features you asserted to be present did not appear to be present, that the current unsatisfactory series of exchanges have developed. When I ask about these apparent discrepancies, your wish (I take it) not to seem to impose your own authority forbids you from answering. If I (I take it) "had worked my way through" the large number of texts you have referred me to, I should then be able to answer for myself. So none of us who have failed to make sense of your analyses, but are unwilling or unable to spare enough time to work through the texts on which you claim to base them, are entitled to challenge even what seem to us evident unsoundnesses in what your methods produce. I have only once before in my career found myself in this situation, and that in relation to a person with whom you would certainly not wish to fellow, who proffered proofs "so tight that they could not be gainsaid" that the works of Shakespeare were written by somebody else, and I was not to challenge what seemed evident nonsense in some of his material unless I first made myself master of the principles of authorial cryptography from works to which he referred me. I do not want to thrust you into such a comparison, but it is a measure of my frustration that I can find no other. However, you have performed a distillation from all the authorities you have used, and we will have it in November, and those of us who are still convinced that you have discovered things of value will then have what should be a manageable task in going through your ten pages of introduction. Until then there is nothing more usefully to be said (which is as well, since I shall now be away for various periods of weeks, during which I shall have defensively to set myself NOMAIL). I retain meantime the provisional opinion I stated, and I continue to regret that you will not engage in discussion of particular, limited, points. -- Duncan M-G. From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Fri Jul 2 13:12:21 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 2 Jul 93 13:12:20 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2415; Fri, 02 Jul 93 13:18:45 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8714; Fri, 02 Jul 93 13:18:43 BST Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 13:15:31 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I am unaware of a single instance in which anyone has suggested that a feature I have adduced in any text is not there. Nor until your remark about the passages in annal 755 has anyone affirmed that texts I have presented as parallel are not parallel. Recurrence of the name Cynewulf, the nouns bur, wif, duru, gatu, looks to me like incontrovertible fact. So does the balancing of accounts of long reigns by long reigns, short reigns by short reigns, and the killing by a king of one of his own men by the killing of a king by one of his own men. In no case is any text commended as a literary model longer than one or two pages of A4. In every case they have been texts well known to have been known in the Latin West. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Fri Jul 2 13:13:02 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 2 Jul 93 13:13:01 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2461; Fri, 02 Jul 93 13:19:29 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8735; Fri, 02 Jul 93 13:19:28 BST Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 13:16:49 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: A Simple ASC Question To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Again. Has anyone found me slow to answer? Please. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Sun Jul 4 12:34:49 1993 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.AC.UK by aberdeen.ac.uk; Sun, 4 Jul 93 12:34:48 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3065; Sun, 04 Jul 93 12:41:18 BST Received: from UKACRL by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4274; Sun, 04 Jul 93 12:41:17 BST Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1993 12:33:54 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "O. D(uncan) Macrae-Gibson" Subject: toDavid To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- Nobody has suggested that you are slow to answer. But you tend not to answer the questions that were asked. Most notably in our recent exchanges about the "'wif' in the middle". I asked in my e-mail of 22 June for an explanation of what exactly this means, and how your argument proceeds from it (I re-raised the point in my e-mails of 29 and 30 June). Your e-mail of 29 June asserts that you "were telling me exactly how you arrived at your perception of the structure, beginning with the references to the 'wif'" but in fact you have never done so. (My quote not verbatim from your e-mail, but merely adjusts a pronoun or two). As to "suggesting that a feature you have adduced in any text is not there", if I may expand to "is not there, or is there only by such careful selection of evidence as amounts to misrepresentation", then I have suggested in my e-mail of 29 June that the feature "in 6 and 6' the Chronicler relates promises in a, the terms offered in b, and the responses in c" is not there, for it is only in the second half of 6c that "response" appears, the first half being occupied by a feature which is certainly not "response", so that your statement suggests a degree of parallelism between 6 and 6' which is not there. I mentioned that one, as illustrating the difficulties I was finding, because it bore on the third person pronouns in "7 &t;a gebead he him..." (your 6a and on), on which we had been in disagreement. But for that I might instead have suggested, without the expansion, that the feature "The Chronicler refers to his [Cynewulf's] loyal subjects in B2..." is not there; your B2 refers to a point in Cynewulf's reign at which he wished to expel..., breaking off before specifying whom he wished to expel (certainly no "loyal subject"). I'm sorry; I have now to be away for a fortnight, and to prevent unmanageable cluttering of my mailbox I shall have to set myself NOMAIL. We shall have to leave these - alas - so far quite unprofitable exchanges for the present. [Sorry for what was meant to be a "save" instruction appearing in the transmission] -- Duncan M-G [Bother. It didn't appear. Apologies for the apology] From owner-ansax-l%EDU.WVNET.WVNVM@VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU Thu Sep 8 10:23:51 1994 Message-Id: Received: from nsf.ac.uk by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 8 Sep 94 10:23:46 BST Received: from vtbit.cc.vt.edu by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id ; Thu, 8 Sep 1994 10:18:22 +0100 Received: from VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU by VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7946; Thu, 08 Sep 94 05:15:08 EDT Received: from UMDD.UMD.EDU (NJE origin $MAILER@UMDD) by VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5617; Thu, 8 Sep 1994 05:15:05 -0400 Received: from UMDD.UMD.EDU by UMDD.UMD.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0191; Thu, 08 Sep 94 05:14:43 EDT Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 10:14:23 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Original-Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: DRH and measure (was pentameter/OE meter) X-To: ANSAX-L%WVNVM.BITNET@VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Sender: owner-ansax-l%EDU.WVNET.WVNVM@VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU Status: RO James, An OE poet who imposes parallel and chiastic shapes on his work and dis- poses recurrent words at mathematically fixed intervals, who also uses as many words in his prologue as he uses lines in his poem gives us clear indications of his word boundaries and verse units. One who fixes patterns of half-lines, normal lines, and hypermetric lines, as the Ruthwell Crucifixion Poet, who also counts words and runes, gives us clear indications of his metrical theory. So do Cynewulf and the Exeter Gnomic Poet and the Cotton Gnomic Poet. So does an apparently eccentric versifier like the translator and adapter of Genesis B. So does the metrically exact beowulf Poet, and the author of Brunanburh and the author of Durham. The latter even makes his alliterative patterns parallel. There is also rhyme, not noticed previously because it is disposed not aabbcc but abccba in large patterns. Sometimes, to suggest that they were able types, authors would perform per- fect tricks that cancel each other. A happy example is the Irishman Cormac, a twelfth-century chappy whose colophon Cormacus scripsit hoc psalterium ora pro eo Qui legis hec ora pro sese qualibet hora exhibits two elisions in the first line which the music counteracts, there being one note for each syllable, i-um-o-ra-pro-e-o. Some of the difficulties posed by OE metrical theorists disappear on discovery that a good poet can do more than one thing at once. But these things are more difficult to find if we don't attend to their comprehensive theory of composition. DRH From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Tue Sep 27 22:06:41 1994 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.ac.uk by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 27 Sep 94 22:06:40 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2151; Tue, 27 Sep 94 22:00:23 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4880; Tue, 27 Sep 94 22:00:22 BST Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 14:17:23 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tony Jebson Subject: ASC entry for 755 X-To: ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO DRH, I was browsing through the ANSAX archive the other day and found the old ASC Questions thread... In this there was much discussion of the structure of the 755 annal which I thought I would try to understand. You suggested: "Start with Dumville's edition of the Regnal Table. Colour ancestors in one shade, rulers in another, women in another. Then count. Alfred is 23 at his accession, the 23rd ruler, the 23rd generation from Woden. Count the regnal years from Cerdic to Ine and from Ine to Alfred. Count the number of annals from Ine's abdication forward and from Ecgbriht's accession backward. See where the middle is." OK, I don't have Dumville's Regnal Table, but using a copy from Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England, Barbara Yorke and also looking at the MS A annals I get the following: Dumville MS A Cerdic 538-554 519-534 Ine 688-726 688-728 Ecgbryht 802-839 800-836 (out by 2-3 yrs) Alfred 871-899 871-899 >From shading the regnal list it is obvious that the kings between Ine and Ecgbryht are not related to Alfred, and I'm assuming that 755 fits some significant point within this low-point for Alfreds family. Attempt 1. From Dumville the midpoint of this interregnum is 764... failed. Attempt 2. From MS A (assuming it is internally consistent about the displaced annals between 746 and 845), the mid-point is again 764... failed. I also tried various calculations using ratios from the regnal years of Cerdic-Ine-Alfred like 728 + 72*(154/337)=761 and I still don't see the significance of 755. Where am I going wrong? or have I missed the point completely? However, one thing I also did was to take your proposed ABB'A' structure for the 755 entry and did a few quick word counts to try to find some kind of pattern. A 52 words B 169 words B' 201 words A' 112 words (with DE fragment) total 534 words. Hmm, 534? that's when Cerdic died according to MS A. Also, where does B' start? after 221 words. 531+221=755. Is this a coincidence? I'm now totally confused. Could someone please point out the error of my ways... [hoping I'm not being completely stupid...I bet you hate beginners] Tony --- Tony Jebson --- International Computers Limited (ICL) --- +44 625 617193 --- +44 61 223 1301 ext 3099 (work) --- aj@wg.icl.co.uk --- All opinions expressed here (however stupid) are my own, ----------------------- and nothing stated here is an official statement by ICL. From ANSAX-L@WVNVM.EARN Wed Sep 28 21:12:55 1994 Message-Id: Received: from earn-relay.ac.uk by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 28 Sep 94 21:12:51 BST Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4339; Wed, 28 Sep 94 21:04:00 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1837; Wed, 28 Sep 94 21:02:53 BST Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 20:48:05 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@VAX.OX.AC.UK Subject: Re: OE meter and encoding To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Herewith a little kitejust flown for the Musici Oxonienses. Munich,Bayerische StaatsbibliothekMus.MS 3154f.47v-48r, reproduced byD. Plamenac in Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart IX Tafel 116. In hydraulis quondam Pithagora Admirante melos, phthongitates Malleorum, secutus equora Per ponderum inequalitates, Adinvenit muse quiditates. / Epitritum ast hemioliam Epogdoum et duplam perducunt Nam tessaron penthe concordiam Nec non phthongum et pason adducunt Monocordi dum genus conducunt. / Hec, Oggeghen, cunctis qui precinis Galliarum in regis latria, O practicum tue propaginis Arma cernens quondam per atria Burgundie ducis in patria. / Per me, Busnois, illustris comitis De Charulois indignum musicum, Saluteris tuis pro meritis Tamquam summum cephastropidicum: Vale, verum instar Orpheicum. / 'On an occasion when Pythagoras was wondering at the tones in water organs, the tonalities of hammers, having followed with his eyes the surfaces according to the inequalities of the weights,he discovered the essential natures of the muse [with play on "music" and "water"]./ These produce [lit. "lead through to"] epitrite and hemiola, epogdous and duple, for they lead toward the harmony of fourth, fifth, and also tone and octave, while they connect [lit. "lead togeth- er"] the species of the monochord. / Ockeghem, you who sing before all in the service of the King of the Gauls, O strengthen the practice of your generation, examining these things on occasion in the halls of the Duke of Burgundy in your fatherland. / By me, Busnois, unworthy musician of the Count of Charolais, be greeted for your merits as the highest trope-uttering Cephas [i.e. Peter]; farewell, true image of Orpheus.' A celebration of theory and practice. The 80 words divide by 9:8 at 42 and 38, at Hec | Oggeghen;the last 42 at 22 and 20, at per me | Busnois; of those 42 the first 22 at 12 and 10, at |tue propaginis,'your' being Ockeghem's; the last 20 at 11 and 9, at | tuis pro meritis, 'your' being Ockeghem's. In the first 38 theepogdous falls at epogdoum |. The 80 words divide by 3:2 at 48 and 32, at pason; the 32 divide by hemiolus at 19 and 13,at hemioliam. The 80 wordsdivide by 2:1 at 53 and 27,atconcordiam |. After muse the 53rd word is musicum. From phthongitates to phthongum inclusive there are 24 words, which divide by duple ratioat duplam |. Do this again with the -ducunt verbs. Or again, 1:1. Inthe firsthalf 10 lines, 100 syllables,252 letters. Ditto inthe second half. The theory celebrated herein was known to Wulfstan the Cantor, to Petrus King Athelstan's chaplain, and to Aldhelm among the lettered, and to Godric and Caedmon among the allegedly unlettered, all of whom perform the same tricks (though they don't talk about them all the time). Once you detect these guys doing these things at the correct places you know that theyunderstood the theory. And when you detect them balancing these things with identical grammatical and rhythmical and metrical equivalents you know that these features (whatever our poets called them) were conscious elements in their composition,not the constructs of modern theorists. Boethius and Cassiodorus and Martianus Capella and Isidore all tellus, as they told the Anglo-Saxons, that we cannot have one art without the other six. The evidence of Old English, as of Anglo-Latin poetry, is that the poets took this to heart. So should we. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Nov 8 09:57:24 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 8 Nov 94 09:57:16 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 8 Nov 1994 09:54:02 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9312; Tue, 08 Nov 94 09:53:15 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9464; Tue, 08 Nov 94 09:53:12 GMT Date: Tue, 8 Nov 1994 09:52:24 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, If you worked your way through the Biblical paradigms I posted to you a year or so ago, you saw that there was no trace of doubt about the limits of words in the Hebrew text of Genesis. Nor was there in Jerome's Vulgate translation of the same, which exhibits such punctilio as the rendering of a Hebrew proclitic v' with Latin enclitic -que, where three other renderings were available. Nor was there any doubt about the limits of words in AElfric's translation of Gene- sis. We have discussed more than thirty texts on the network, many of which re- quired no editing at all and more of which required only minor adjustments (as the choosing of a reading from respectable manuscripts ignored by other editors or the restoration of internally consistent orthography) to make them play. It has only recently occurred to me that Boethius made his poetry fulfil the re- quirements of two separate systems at the same time (as everyone knows Ambrose did and I believe Hebrew poets did). Rochelle has adduced stunning evidence of coherent system in what used to look like what you have called the vagaries of scribal word division. What form of argument is going to persuade you that more Old English authors and scribes had clear notions of word boundaries than did not? DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Nov 9 10:38:35 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 9 Nov 94 10:38:30 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 9 Nov 1994 10:35:31 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4723; Wed, 09 Nov 94 10:12:57 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4870; Wed, 09 Nov 94 10:08:18 GMT Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 10:09:50 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, Yes, we have participated in much discussion of OE texts on the network. Had you ever been willing to consider my specific objections to your specific statements in specific cases I would have found it more profitable. And please, don't answer in pained terms that you cannot think of any case in which you were less than most prompt in dealing with any questions raised, and (when I do not at once reply yet again with a selection of cases, and I can't because it would mean another dredge through a huge saved file for which I do not at the moment have time) rely on everyone else agreeing with you that I am a hopeless bigot. Sorry for the tone of this; I really think your "what form of argument is going to persuade you" could expect no other -- DMG From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Nov 10 05:51:40 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 10 Nov 94 05:51:37 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 10 Nov 1994 05:48:18 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0254; Thu, 10 Nov 94 04:15:53 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2907; Thu, 10 Nov 94 04:08:12 GMT Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 16:21:10 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum X-Cc: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <199411090953.EAA02123@chuma.cas.usf.edu> Status: RO > An example I posted long ago is Psalm 58, > which has in the Hebrew text 100 words, chiastically arranged, of which the > centre of the crux is fifty-first. Now, detach the heading, and count the > hyphenated compounds as single words. Eighty. Where is the centre? Same place? > Was our poet doing two things at once? Is he the only person who knew how to > do this? Of course not. Should we expect everyone else to do exactly what he > did? Of course not. Every day of the week you hear native speakers of your > living mother tongue pronounce and stress and arrange and spell words differ- > ently, in ways that are not wrong. Why should you expect anyone else to supply > rules that satisfy twentieth-century analysts that also explain every phenom- > enon of a language written from nine to thirteen centuries ago? DRH Is this an example of the Biblical style/composition that's been talked about here? I've been wanting to sink my teeth into an example, just to understand what's being proposed. Psalm 58 has 100 words whose 51st word is indeed the first word of the second half-line of the verse in which the poem turns in its theme. But there are some problems with this symmetry. The first "verse" is the header. That leaves 5 verses to describe the evil rulers but 6 verses to curse them. The actual turning point in the content begins on the 46th word: Psalm 58:7 BHS - Elohim haras-shinneymo bephiymo \\ malt'ot kephiyrim netots YHWH: 58:6 NIV - Break the teeth in their mouths, O God; \\ tear out, O LORD, the fangs of the lions! If this is supposed to represent a composition tradition, it seems noteworthy that the Vulgate misses it. Psalm 57 in Latin has 130 words (122 without the heading verse). The halfway mark verse 66 falls in the crucial verse, but on no particularly significant word: Psalm 58:7 Deus conteret dentes eorum in ORE ipsorum; molas leonum confringet Dominus. ORE is the 66th word. Even in the Hebrew, there seems to be no indication that this is a fixed rule rather than a particular arrangement. The preceding Psalm in Hebrew (Psalm 57) has 12 verses, like Psalm 58, but it has 105, not 100 words. The next Psalm (Psalm 59) has 18 verses with 156 words. Obviously no one would argue with the fact that all authors occasionally tinker with numerical patterns. Is that all that is being advanced? It seemed as though it was being said that the rules were so fixed and universal that we could even reconstruct faulty texts to their original forms. The obvious trouble with gematria is that one never knows whether or not one is seeing an accidental pattern or one deliberately done. For example, there is obvious number play in the Middle English poem _Pearl_, but because one stanza does not fit the statistics, critics have proposed that it is a deliberate flaw, representing humanity's fallenness. So, if there is a problem with the pattern - is it faulty transmission, a more complex pattern, or is the problem with our expectations? Greg Jordan jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Nov 10 10:01:36 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 10 Nov 94 10:01:34 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 10 Nov 1994 09:58:22 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5258; Thu, 10 Nov 94 09:57:53 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3523; Thu, 10 Nov 94 09:57:53 GMT Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 09:56:40 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Greg, Here's the way Psalm 58 looks to me. To the choirmaster ... 1ai Do you indeed decree what is right, you gods [or mighty lords]? ii Do you judge uprightly b the sons of men? 2a Nay, in your hearts you devise wrongs; b your hands deal out violence on earth. 3a The wicked go astray from the womb, they err from their birth, speaking lies. b They have venom like the venom of a serpent, like the deaf adder that stops its ear, c so that it does not hear the voice of charmers or of the cunning enchanter. 4a O God, b break c their teeth d in their mouths; c' the fangs of the young lions b' tear out, a' O Lord. 3'a Let them vanish like water that runs away, like grass let them be trodden down and wither. b Let them be like the snail which dissolves into slime, like the untimely birth that never sees the sun. c Sooner than your pots can feel the heat of thorns, whether green or ablaze, may He sweep them away. 2'a The righteous will rejoice when he sees the vengeance; b he will bathe his feet in the blood of the wicked. 1'b Men will say, ai "Surely there is a reward for the righteous; ii surely there is a God Who judges on earth". In the Masoretic text in 1ai the third word tsedek is echoed by the third word in 1'ai latsadik. The second word in 1aii tishp'tu is echoed by the penultimate word in 1'aii tishp'tim. The second word in 1b adam is repeated as the second word in 1'b. The wickedness mentioned in 2a is avenged in 2'a. The evil work wickedness with 'your hands' in 2b. The righteous will wash 'his feet' in the blood of the wicked in 2'b. There are three doublets in 3 listing three forms of wickedness and three doublets in 3' listing three forms of vengeance. Com- pare those estranged from the womb in 3 with the abortions in 3' and the ser- pent in 3 with the snail in 3'. At the centre of this seven-part Psalm stand seven members, beginning with a prayer to God and ending with a prayer to the Lord. The central word of 4d is the fiftieth of one hundred words. In Jerome's Vulgate translation the central word of 4d is sixty-fourth of 128. That looks perfectly symmetrical to me. More than competent translation. But I've forgotten what else puzzled you. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Nov 10 11:39:38 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 10 Nov 94 11:39:30 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 10 Nov 1994 11:36:35 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9236; Thu, 10 Nov 94 11:35:54 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6585; Thu, 10 Nov 94 11:35:53 GMT Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 11:34:53 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Edwin, The analyses I post are NEVER based on countings of words or anything else. They are based on recognition of the chiastic and parallel statement and re- statement of words and ideas. Only when the structures are clearly established do numbers come into play. We may have to infer that authors began their com- positions with numbers of lines and words and syllables and letters in mind, but those had better be the last aspects of our analysis. They are the final guarantee that other forms of perception are correct, not the initial route to perception. Not for me, at least. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Nov 11 00:29:09 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 11 Nov 94 00:29:08 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 11 Nov 1994 00:25:53 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7907; Fri, 11 Nov 94 00:25:26 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4955; Fri, 11 Nov 94 00:25:25 GMT Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 19:25:19 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum X-Cc: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <199411101019.FAA03910@chuma.cas.usf.edu> Status: RO Thanks for your crystal clear explanation of Psalm 58 which truly does exhibit ingenious symmetry. I still think the heading looks tacked on, since it only fits in with the word count and not the parallel structure. The fiftieth word bephiymo isn't technically in the center since 100 is an even number. On the Vulgate though I was looking at the Clementine edition, and I miscounted (math-phobe that I am) 130 for 131 words in Psalm 57 (58), but either way your psalm must be shorter. Mine begins "In finem, ne disperdas. David in tituli inscriptionem. Si vere..." and verse 7 is "Deus conteret dentes eorum in ore ipsorum," so I assume your _central word of 4d_ is in the phrase "eorum in ore," perhaps "in"? What edition do you use for Jerome's Vulgate? Greg Jordan jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Nov 11 10:15:35 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 11 Nov 94 10:15:33 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 11 Nov 1994 10:12:24 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5627; Fri, 11 Nov 94 09:48:23 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0023; Fri, 11 Nov 94 09:48:23 GMT Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 09:46:58 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Greg, The edition of the Vulgate I use is Fischer's et al., Deutsche Bibelgesell- schaft, Stuttgart, principally because it is almost a reprint of the Amiatinus. You'r right. The centre is 'ex ore eorum', as in the Septuagint it is 'ev twi stomati autwn', one of those happy occasions on which everybody got it right. Pity about the Psalm, though, not one of those snappy little numbers to hum on your bike. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Nov 11 13:17:48 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 11 Nov 94 13:17:43 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 11 Nov 1994 13:14:38 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3953; Fri, 11 Nov 94 13:14:08 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6420; Fri, 11 Nov 94 13:14:07 GMT Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 13:16:23 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- The analyses you post are ... based on recognition of the chiastic and parallel statement and restatement of words and ideas (your posting in reply to Edwin Duncan). Objections, then, that elements you hold to be thus related can only be seen to be so by a predetermination that they must be, where an uncommitted reading of the text would see no such thing, are certainly not "minor in importance"; they go to the heart of your demonstrations. They are not "aesthetic". They are not "quibbles about ... treatment of adverbs". In a public discussion the actual instances raised will obviously be chosen as illustrations, and therefore "few in number". I don't presume to challenge your findings in classical languages, in which I am either wholly ignorant or at best insufficiently expert to make independent judgements. The hypothesis that rhetorical methods taught and used in these languages would be extended to vernacular compositions by those who knew them in the classics, and then perhaps even to those who didn't, is obviously a very plausible one. That there are structural devices used in Old English composition is evident on inspection. But the extent to which these devices create patterns only explicable as regular application of such methods is a matter for demonstration. That is the nature of the evidence I look for, and such demonstration would be persuasive argument. You are confident that you have thus demonstrated in your Old English analyses. I am not the only Old English scholar who has made serious, sympathetic (at least to begin with) and very time-consuming efforts to follow and confirm these analyses. I know of not one who has succeeded. If there is one, it would be most helpful to us all if he or she would enter the debate. You have told us in the past that we do not see what is there because we have not pursued the necessary underlying studies, and so come to the understanding to which these have brought you. I don't think I am disabled from identifying whether two elements have significant verbal or thematic links because I do not have the proper expectations; on the contrary, I think that such expectations might cause me to see in a text what my mental set prompted me to expect. I fear that further exchanges between us will just make us both cross (and don't say you've never been cross with me on the net, because you have, as I certainly have with you - not to my credit). But neither of us is cross now, and at this point I hope I can succeed in withdrawing, without being thought to have conceded. P.S. to Karen: have I at least cleared myself of the charge of trying to demand of David what does not belong to the case he has been presenting, as hair colour would not belong to an exposition of the law of gravity? -- Duncan From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Nov 11 14:04:27 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 11 Nov 94 14:04:20 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 11 Nov 1994 14:01:22 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6810; Fri, 11 Nov 94 13:59:59 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7916; Fri, 11 Nov 94 13:59:57 GMT Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 13:56:10 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Can an uncommitted reader not see that the two parts of annal 755 end in comparable statements, preceded by punctuation marks, introduced by capital letters, and concluded by punctuation marks? That the 'wif' is referred to twice and only twice? That 'thereto' and 'therein' recur twice? That the 'door' and the 'gate' recur in relatively the same place in different parts of the narrative? That an account of a long reign is balanced by an account of a long reign and a short reign by a short reign? That not all manuscripts imply a shift from indirect to direct discourse, from which Professor White- lock inferred that the writer was 'unpractised'. That the story is related out of chronological sequence, for which fact a coherent structure affords a good reason? No one needs a long time to work through the analysis of Dumville's edition of the regnal table, nor of my presentation of annal 891, nor of the 20 lines of 'Durham', nor of the 52 lines of introduction to 'Beowulf', nor indeed of AElfric's translation of Genesis I. Anyone who can read the language can see that either the analyses are correct or they are not. There is no editorial fudge in any of them. The last of these, AElfric's Genesis, is absolutely fatal to your objection that features of composition in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin might not have been adopted by writers of Old English. If you read that text -- even as an utterly uncommitted novice -- you will see that one of the finest did adopt them, and to splendid effect. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Nov 11 16:51:23 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 11 Nov 94 16:51:18 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 11 Nov 1994 16:48:08 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8826; Fri, 11 Nov 94 16:47:26 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5896; Fri, 11 Nov 94 16:47:25 GMT Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 16:11:33 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Sorry. For 'your' read 'an' objection. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Nov 11 19:42:28 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 11 Nov 94 19:42:26 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 11 Nov 1994 19:39:15 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2402; Fri, 11 Nov 94 19:31:58 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4155; Fri, 11 Nov 94 19:31:40 GMT Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 10:32:53 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Karen Foster." Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, No, you have not yet cleared yourself of the charge that you are trying to make David do something he is not trying to do. I have been trying to telnet to the database to find evidence in order to make my point, but we have been temporarily denied access to the gateway. After I can gain access, I will scour the database for a couple of appropriate examples of what I mean. I tried gopher but could not find what I was looking for. I will add that I have no investment in David's being right about what he claims. Some while ago he and I went through a private exercise, based on a poem he composed to a friend. I did just fine in establishing the musical principle of hemiola. But I counted wrong. That has always been my problem with arithmetic. I mess us with adding and subtracting. But I did succeed with the poem otherwise. I have even practiced composing my own poems based on these principles. It is simple, almost too simple, really. I protest your statement to David that "objections, then, that elements you hold to be thus related can only be seen to be so by a predermination that they must be, where an uncommitted reading of the text would see no such thing . . . . " For one thing, I don't believe that David goes to a piece of writing determined to find only what he's looking for. For another thing, I don't see how an uncommitted reading might not see something. In other words, it seems to me that "an uncommitted reading of the text would see no such thing" is itself a predeterminisic approach to a reading. While it is true that many have opposed David's arguments, I have not been convinced by the arguments that David is wrong. Moreover, many arguments have struck me as unnecessarily reductive. Some have taken the either/or position. If David's right, it seems to be suggested, then everyone else is wrong, and vice versa. In reality, it is possible that both positions are simultaneously correct--that's the reality of paradox. After all Galileo was certainly opposed by many contemporary scholars in his position that the universe is heliocentric. That didn't make him wrong. And it would seem to me that any "uncommitted reading" demands the willing suspension of disbelief. I have not seen a willing suspension of disbelief on the part of many of those who have opposed David's views. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu. From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Sat Nov 12 00:10:27 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Sat, 12 Nov 94 00:10:26 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Sat, 12 Nov 1994 00:07:22 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2865; Fri, 11 Nov 94 22:56:08 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3962; Fri, 11 Nov 94 22:56:02 GMT Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 17:54:42 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Karen Foster." Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Warning: this is long, folks. Duncan, I have now had an opportunity to browse the database and am prepared to respond a bit further to your question about whether or not you can be cleared of "trying to demand of David what does not belong to the case he has been presenting." In this morning's message, you write that you find the argument plausible that "rhetorical methods taught and used in these languages [classical] would be extended to vernacular composition by those who knew them in the classical . . . . " You go on to say that OE evinces structural devices, "but the extent to which these devices create patterns only explicable as regular application of such methods is a matter for demonstration," and you conclude that "such demonstration would be persuasive argument." Your statements raise two issues: the degree to which David has tried to claim that the devices he discusses "create patterns only explicable as regular application of such methods"; and the issue of demonstration. I do not believe that, in the former instance, David has made any such argument and I do believe, in the latter instance, that David has tried to demonstrate what he has claimed. I found four different subject searches profitable for this exercise: find sender Macrae-Gibson, find sender Howlett, Browse subject Beowulf analysis, and Browse subject chiasmus. In two notes to David, you indicate what think David ought to be doing to be convincing. Under "find sender Macrae-Gibson," two notes have the subject "Beowulf se rimcraeftiga." You are replying to David, addressing the issue of "prescribed patternings." I am not sure that David has ever argued that poets had to follow prescriptions. If they had rules to govern choices, that does not mean that they had to follow a prescribed set of patterns. Apparently assuming that you have clarified that David is describing prescribed patterns, you go on to argue that "one cannot apply tests for the possibility that patternings one perceives to exist may do so by chance unless one can first list comprehensively and objectively all other patterns which might have occurred and have prompted one's similar attention had they done so . . . . " (21 April 1992). You then express a concern for circular argument, based on the idea that principles of patterning could produce a predictable word, which could then be used to demonstrate the pattern. Or something like that. The next day you tell David that you and he are discussing different stages of the research process. In describing a process of discovering in the vernacular what David has discovered in classical texts, you argue that what's wrong in David's method of procedure is that "one cannot use statistics to assess this chance of a particular manifestation which one has already observed to exist." In both cases, you appear to take as invioable methods of reliable research, as well as assumptions both about how one researches and about how the Anglo-Saxon poets worked. However, I do not think that we can assume that one has to find the same patterns in all A-S poetry to believe that some of them used classical methods of composition some of the time. And that, I believe, is David's argument. Even recently David has suggested that we look at each poem distinctly first and then perhaps try to describe how they might have worked collectively over a six-hundred year period, for, he pointed out, how can we possibly assume that principles went unchanged for six hundred years? I'm going on too long, so I'll try to wrap this up. As to demonstration. Once again, it is important to keep in mind that David has picked specific texts to talk about--to talk about the principles of composition in that poem. David has demonstrated his ideas with the prologue to St. John's Gospel (6 May 1992), Godric's "Hymn to the Virgin" (for which I have inadvertently omitted the date), and _Beowulf_ ll. 4-12 and 12-19 (11 May 1992), linking the creation in _Genesis_ to the building of Heorot. No, David has not tried in any of these demonstrations to cough up what you asked for--a pervasive structuring pattern by which prescriptions for composition was derived, nothing so concrete as our knowing that the Shakespearean sonnet is an adaptation of the Petrarchan sonnet. In two other notes to you, I think David has made clear that he believes the principles he has identified are flexible. After a discussion of counting, David says, "competence at this sort of composition . . . . does not coincide with fixity of meaning. The meanings deepen and ramify and leave one with great admiration for the architectonics but less and less certainty that there is a single correct orthodox interpretation to be grasped." Finally, in message 107.1, under the subject of "chiasmus" (the date of which I forgot to get), David writes that "the most amazing aspect of this is that although I know more than 100 writers who do this ALL THE TIME in Hebrew, Greek, Classical and Late Latin, Anglo-Latin, Celtic-Latin, and Old and Middle English [to me, at any rate, more than a 100 writers from so many different traditions seems like rich field work], there are no clones. By a happy paradox, the closest adherence to identical rules of composition produces utterly idiosyncratic literary voices." If anyone else has broken the seemingly mysterious codes that David seems to have discovered, and agrees more than disagrees with him, given the opposition by the "many" that you have pointed out, why would he or she want to enter into the debate, only to have his or her ideas objected to so strongly? Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu. From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Nov 15 03:12:35 1994 Message-Id: Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 15 Nov 94 03:12:31 GMT Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 15 Nov 1994 03:09:02 +0000 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1937; Tue, 15 Nov 94 03:00:41 GMT Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0114; Tue, 15 Nov 94 02:57:57 GMT Date: Sat, 12 Nov 1994 10:53:18 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: howlett@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cynewulf and Cyneheard X-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Edwin, If a poet counts lines, words, syllables, and letters, then the reckoning which accounts for the largest number of coincidences is likely to be the one he used. If, for example, verse paragraphs are obviously identical in the num- ber of their lines, and they happen also to coincide in the number of their syllables, but they happen to be off by one in their word count because we are counting a compound as two words, we infer that the poet counted the compound as a single word. Clear? DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Mar 29 10:30:32 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 29 Mar 95 10:30:31 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 10:29:46 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8592; Wed, 29 Mar 95 10:03:49 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5743; Wed, 29 Mar 95 10:03:48 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0971 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 04:02:04 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7318; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 04:02:04 -050 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 29 Mar 95 04:01:59 ES Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <20522-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 10:03:00 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 13; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 10:02:39 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E144.AE6E9532.13@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 10:02:36 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO 'Authors have to do so much when they write that they can't be aware of half of it. This means that we can't test theories of intentionality against the conscious mental life of authors.' Absolute moonshine! Completely and demon- strably false for authors of our period and long before and long after. Look at Dolbeau's edition of Wulfstan the Cantor's 'Breuiloquium de omnibus sanctis' in Analecta Bollandiana for 1988. In the Prologue the first letters of the hexameter lines yield the acrostic VVLFSTANVS. In the Epilogue the first letters yield the acrostic NVNC ET IN AEVVM DEO GRATIAS AMEN and the last let- ters yield the telestich NVNC ET IN AEVVM SIT DEO LAVS AMEN. Line 702, in which the word AEVVM ends in both acrostic and telestich ends with the words PER AEVVM. Anyone can see from SVPERNAE in line 707 that Wulfstan spelled the word with a final E fixed by the telestich. As Dolbeau prints 'meae' 19 one infers that his other spellings like 'tue' 5 and 'e' tailed should all be spelled 'ae', and that 'Christus' etc. should be spelled the MS way 'Xpistus' etc. That done, there are exactly 696 letters in the Prologue. The 716 lines of the poem, minus the 20 lines of the Prologue, leave 696, exactly the number of letters in the Prologue. Dolbeau concluded that 'les anne'es 994-996 repre'sentent pour ce dernier ouvrage [Breuiloquium] un terminus post quem indiscutable', though he discerned no means of 'datation absolue'. Well, the Epilogue contains exactly 994 letters. Now who in his right mind is going to suppose that Wulfstan didn't know exactly what he was going to do? There is not the slightest prospect that any of this is either fudged by me or an acci- dent of transmission. It confirms absolutely the authorship of the text and the integrity of the text and its date. Within such an integer one finds all the usual conventions observed, self- reference at 1/9 and 8/9, division by extreme and mean ratio and by the ratios of music theory, sesquialter, sesquitertian, sesquioctave, duple, and symmetry, specific ratios reserved for specific features. Anyone who supposes that such an author is not making his intentions perfectly clear, recoverable, verifiable had better go out for the olympics instead. Until one is fairly confident that he has completely recovered what the poet actually put there for him to under- stand, one is ill-advised to tinker with anachronistic and inapposite theories of literary criticism in hopes of discovering anything worth knowing about such a composition. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Mar 29 10:47:07 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 29 Mar 95 10:47:05 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 10:46:16 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1457; Wed, 29 Mar 95 10:44:00 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7214; Wed, 29 Mar 95 10:43:59 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1091 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 04:41:53 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7721; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 04:41:53 -050 Received: from beech.soton.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 29 Mar 95 04:41:51 ES Received: from willow.soton.ac.uk (willow.soton.ac.uk [152.78.128.20]) by beech.soton.ac.uk (8.6.10/hub-8.5) with ESMTP id JAA18838; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 09:57:29 +01 Received: (from tr@localhost) by willow.soton.ac.uk (8.6.10/client-8.8) id JAA29048; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 09:55:04 +010 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2077 Message-Id: <199503290855.JAA29048@willow.soton.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 09:55:04 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Timothy_Reuter Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality Comments: cc: "T.Reuter" To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <199503281420.JAA08033@Brown.EDU> from "Rick Russom" at Mar 28, 95 09:20:58 a Status: RO Rick Russom: > Pat's point about significant meaning not intended by the author is a good > one, but it's logically independent of the main question raised in this > thread, which is whether the author's intention is a legitimate object of > scholarly study. It may seem unnecessary to say this, but the existence of > unintended, significant meaning is often used (illegitimately, I think) to > repress study of authorial intention. I haven't kept all the postings, but I don't think anyone even on the sceptic side of the fence has argued that the author's intention isn't a legitimate object of scholarly study. The start of the thread was rather whether texts had to be read in a manner consonant (objectively or subjectively) with the author's intention, as David Howlett argued; and a number of legitimate points have been made against this view. I'd like to offer one more. DRH's contentions about how the kinds of texts we have been talking about were composed (numerical ratios to point up meaning and so on) are much more like a Freudian or feminist reading of a text than he would probably care to accept. In each case, the person offering the reading justifies it by reference to something which is not self-evidently there (on DRH's own showing, most of us have missed these things for centuries, so they can hardly be said to be self-evident or transparent and neeeding no mediation), but which careful argument can make plausibly apparent. The further step taken by DRH which I, and I think Pat C. and others on this side of the debate, find problematic is to say that (e.g.) chiastically arranged clauses can be said to be objectively present in, say, _Beowulf_ in a way which Jungian archetypes or Derridean aporias and silences can not; and one of the reasons for arguing this is that these things, once noticed, can be said to be part of the author's intention, whereas archetypes and aporias almost by definition can not. The questions at issue are (a) is this true? and (b) does it affect our priorities if it is? Timothy Reuter, Southampton From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Mar 29 14:00:36 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 29 Mar 95 14:00:34 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 13:59:26 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3527; Wed, 29 Mar 95 13:58:33 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3571; Wed, 29 Mar 95 13:58:32 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1834 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 07:56:48 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0275; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 07:56:47 -050 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 29 Mar 95 07:56:41 ES Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <04300-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 13:57:42 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 7; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 13:57:21 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E165.79C5A8EA.7@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 13:57:21 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Timothy, In the Letter by Cummian referred to yesterday there are in the 55-word passage considered allusions to three Biblical texts, from the Psalter and Joshua and Isaiah. Every one of them is unmistakeable. Two of them are flagged by the author. The positioning of all three is determined by the same ratio, correct to the nearest integer. The points of all three allusions are not in the apparently defensive texts quoted but in the aggressive lines which immed- iately precede and immediately follow them. One way we infer that this is Cummian's deliberate intention is the consistent precision of his calculation (the entire Letter is in fact about calculation of Easter). Another is the consistent use, not only of recognisable literary texts, but also of the loaded meanings of the silences around the quotations. Yet another is that Cummian makes all the numerical words in the passage exhibit their values, like 'ter quaternis', twelfth from the end and containing twelve letters. The whole passage divides into two at the word 'biceps'. The second half divides into two at the word 'bifaris'. This is the computist's equivalent of what he does with his literary allusions. There he is pressing the silences of the unquoted contexts (which everyone knows, not least the abbot and the hermit he is ad- dressing) into the service of his argument. Here he is pressing the spaces between his numerical words into service as evidence of his competence as a computist. I am not arguing for reductionism. I am suggesting that there are demon- strable, verifiable tests for being absolutely certain about authors' ipsis- sima verba, about the completely recoverable integrity of their texts. The same rules which guarantee these things give the clearest indications of auth- orial intentions, intentions plural. Meanings plural and polyvalent. Many more of them than inapposite theories can recover. And richer. And with the great advantages of being correct. I have not devised a syllable of any of this. It is all there, he typed wearily for the nth time, in exactly the sources we know these guys used. Once one troubles to verify any of this one will discover that the historical per- iod in which it has not been apparent to very large numbers of literate per- sons is very short. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Mar 30 12:00:23 1995 Received: from by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 30 Mar 95 12:00:21 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 11:55:57 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8157; Thu, 30 Mar 95 10:45:45 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6001; Thu, 30 Mar 95 10:45:37 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3915 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 04:44:13 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3843; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 04:44:12 -050 Received: from aberdeen.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 30 Mar 95 04:44:09 ES Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 30 Mar 95 10:45:11 BS Message-Id: Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 10:45:09 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO I, for one, am most grateful to DRH for his demonstration from Wulfstan the Cantor of the exact precision with which such an author creates and realises a structural pattern (though I have sadly to admit an insufficient knowledge- base for a full understanding of the last paragraph "Within such an integer..". In one particular point (not I think obscured for me in that way) I notice a marked difference between how Wulfstan uses a device and how a comparable device is used in Old English. Wulstan places his name in a position exactly determined by structure. When Cynewulf places his name in his poems he does it in a much more fanciful way, not in any fixed position but meshing the characters variously with the sense of the lines in which they appear, playing with their order, not even particular as to the exact spelling. It seems to me likely that in other respects too Old English writers could use classical rhetorical devices rather at their fancy than by exact rule, and that this is the basis of much failure of David's mind and mine to meet when we have attempted exchanges -- DMG (macg@abdn.ac.uk) From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Mar 30 13:44:19 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 30 Mar 95 13:44:17 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 13:42:35 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6798; Thu, 30 Mar 95 13:41:48 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1250; Thu, 30 Mar 95 13:41:48 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4423 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 07:40:18 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5950; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 07:40:18 -050 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 30 Mar 95 07:40:16 ES Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <07237-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 13:41:07 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 13:40:37 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E22C.4C708F0A.10@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 13:40:34 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, A year or so ago I sent over the network an analysis of 'The Wanderer', in which the number of words in the Preface fixes the number of lines in the complete poem, exactly as Wulfstan does with letters in his Prologue and lines in his poem. The words about 'such an integer' mean that once we have assured ourselves that the number of letters and lines in the complete, integral, poem is as the author left it, we see that the same rules and the same ratios operate in the smallest and intermediate units as in the whole. You will find in the chapter 'Biblical Style in the Earliest English Texts' forthcoming in _British Books in Biblical Style_ that Cynewulf's signatures, all four of them, are by no means fanciful. He calculated correctly to the nearest HALF-line and also to the nearest word. Spot on by every criterion I can think of. If you can't wait till October, zap me, and I'll send hard copy of the analyses of his epilogues. David From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Sat Apr 1 12:12:38 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Sat, 1 Apr 95 12:12:31 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 12:11:27 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3841; Sat, 01 Apr 95 01:29:03 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6554; Sat, 01 Apr 95 01:09:00 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7159 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 31 Mar 1995 10:17:43 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5386; Fri, 31 Mar 1995 10:17:43 -050 Received: from aberdeen.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 31 Mar 95 10:17:37 ES Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 31 Mar 95 16:18:23 BS Message-Id: Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 16:18:19 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- I've looked through my saved messages to see if I've got your Wanderer analysis, but it doesn't look as if I do. I assume that in your Wulfstan text it is perfectly clear on inspection what the Prologue is. Can you see a similarly clear Preface in Wanderer? I can't. Lines 1-5 seem the best candidates for a distinct introductory section, but their 26 words are obviously not what you mean. To get an opening section whose number of words is approximately equal to the number of lines that follow I have to break unnaturally at the end of line 17, giving 96 words and 98 lines. Assuming the poet thought of "lines" as we customarily take the term, of course. I tried what we call half-lines, and got on no better. Manuscript lines? I don't have handy access to the evidence. I tried letters in 1-5 too, by the way. 133, with 110 long-lines to follow. Please explain (but I'll be away for a week, and will come back to a great many messages, so am not ignoring what I don't propmptly respond to). By lack of knowledge-base I just meant that I don't know what "sesquialter" and so on mean. Pure ignorance. -- Duncan From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Mon Apr 3 22:16:42 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Mon, 3 Apr 95 22:16:40 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 22:15:09 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7556; Mon, 03 Apr 95 21:00:14 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6974; Mon, 03 Apr 95 20:59:00 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0502 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 09:35:43 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6700; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 10:35:42 -040 Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Mon, 03 Apr 95 10:35:41 ED Received: from [132.236.236.175] (CU-DIALUP-0605.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.175]) by postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA21246 for ; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 10:36:41 -0 X-Sender: tsl1@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 10:36:47 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Timothy S. Larkin" Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO >I should have written that in 'The >Wanderer' the Prologue (1-5), Introduction to Part I (6-7), Introduction >to Part IV (88-91), and Epilogue (111-115) contain as many words as the poem >contains lines. I count (ASPR): 1-7 35 88-91 24 111-115 57 TOTAL 116 Number of lines in the Wanderer = 115. Is 116 = 115 ``close enough''? cordially, timothy larkin tsl1@cornell.edu ``A man can't be a dictator and design women's underwear. One or the other, but not both.'' Bertie Wooster From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Mon Apr 3 23:32:09 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Mon, 3 Apr 95 23:32:08 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 23:30:57 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5380; Mon, 03 Apr 95 20:52:20 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6281; Mon, 03 Apr 95 20:51:50 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9623 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 08:22:46 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3560; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 09:22:46 -040 Received: from oxmail.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Mon, 03 Apr 95 09:22:45 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail.ox.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <21647-0@oxmail.ox.ac.uk>; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 12:53:58 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 281; Mon, 03 Apr 1995 09:56:00 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E531.96048B82.281@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 09:55:59 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Forgive me for writing carelessly. I should have written that in 'The Wanderer' the Prologue (1-5), Introduction to Part I (6-7), Introduction to Part IV (88-91), and Epilogue (111-115) contain as many words as the poem contains lines. The ratios of music theory are all implicit in Plato's Timaeus, from chap- ters 32-33 onward, about the Creation. They are explicit in Boethius De Insti- tutione Arithmetica and De Institutione Musica. Symmetry (1:1) and duple (2:1) are obvious. Sesquialter is 1 1/2 : 1 or 3:2. Sesquitertian is 1 1/3 : 1 or 4:3. Sesquioctave in 1 1/8 : 1 or 9:8. Understand those and division by extreme and mean ratio and you can reconstruct most of the poetry very quickly. Simple and elegant. You don't need a number- cruching computer or even a calculator. Bede tells you how to reckon on your knuckles. Try him. He got it from the Irish, of course. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Apr 4 09:20:03 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 4 Apr 95 09:20:02 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:18:51 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2394; Tue, 04 Apr 95 09:17:59 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6375; Tue, 04 Apr 95 09:17:58 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8198 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 03:15:53 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6345; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 04:15:53 -040 Received: from oxdsa.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 04 Apr 95 04:15:52 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxdsa.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <10332-0@oxdsa.ox.ac.uk.>; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:16:35 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 3; Tue, 04 Apr 1995 09:16:31 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E5F5.3C5A2352.3@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:16:30 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Timothy, I'll bet that you've split a compound. I make it 115. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Apr 5 10:47:53 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 5 Apr 95 10:47:52 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:45:59 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4689; Wed, 05 Apr 95 09:23:31 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5721; Wed, 05 Apr 95 09:23:28 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8282 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 03:21:34 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4720; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 04:21:34 -040 Received: from oxdsa.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 05 Apr 95 04:21:29 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxdsa.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <29107-0@oxdsa.ox.ac.uk.>; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:21:56 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 20; Wed, 05 Apr 1995 09:21:54 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E6BF.26CC6CFA.20@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:21:52 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO The apparent discrepancy in counting words in 'The Wanderer' may come from the beginning. I read 't+heaht+he' as one word, giving 34, not 35 in the Prologue. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Apr 6 08:04:47 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 6 Apr 95 08:04:39 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 08:03:05 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8370; Thu, 06 Apr 95 04:37:22 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9920; Thu, 06 Apr 95 04:37:21 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7228 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 22:34:55 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8797; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 23:34:55 -040 Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 05 Apr 95 23:34:53 ED Received: from [132.236.236.90] (CU-DIALUP-1223.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.225]) by postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA24095 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 23:35:54 -0 X-Sender: tsl1@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 23:36:06 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Timothy S. Larkin" Subject: Numerical structure in the Wanderer (was Re: Beowulf and intentionality To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO >The apparent discrepancy in counting words in 'The Wanderer' may come from >the beginning. I read 't+heaht+he' as one word, giving 34, not 35 in the >Prologue. DRH I have taken the liberty of renaming this thread, which has wandered somewhat from Beowulf and intentionality. Nonetheless, I think it interesting to pursue, because it has raised important questions about the discovery of numerical structure. David has provided us with the cause of the discrepancy in count. Every edition I have consulted prints ``theah the'' as two words, but looking at the manuscript page, one sees that the space between them is small, and might be considered to be no space at all. Rather than quibble over the scibe's intention, I think it more fruitful to ask the question why it should matter whether the prologue has 34 or 35 words. It seems that one who accepts the sum to be 115 might be expected to think, ``Wow, that's neat!'', whereas the response to a sum of 116 should be ``So what?''. Why should the precise equality have such importance? Consider for a moment the process of scanning a line of Chaucer. One may expect to count 10 syllables. However, no one would doubt the meter to be pentameter just because some lines have 9 or 11 syllables. The reason for this tolerance arises from the basis of our expectation. Having scanned a few lines as pentameter, we formulate an hypothesis that the entire poem is pentameter, and since subsequent reading more or less confirms this, we tolerate a certain amount of deviation as noise in the system. So why are we not inclined to accept 116 as close enough to 115? It is because we have no theory that would allow us to make precise a priori predictions about the numerical structure of the poem, in the way that we have metrical theories about pentameter. For instance, David has offered in the past examples of structures in which some count applied to the prologue equals some other count applied to the whole work. But this is not the case with the Wanderer. The prologue doesn't have enough words, and it has too many letters. We augment this count with the number of words in the epilogue, but still fall short. Then we add in the prologue to part iv. Still short. Add the prologue to part i. Finally we hit the right number, or a number close enough. However, one naturally asks why these four passages? Leaving aside the question of the basis for dividing the poem into formal parts at all, one assumes that if the poem has a part 4 and part 1, it must have parts 2 and 3. Why weren't these also worked into the pattern? And if we are to consider that each part has a prologue, then under the Theory of Self-Similarity proposed by David previously---that the divisions of the work will be formally similar to the whole---we should expect to find that each part has its own epilogue, and that the counts of those lines also participate in the general numerical pattern. I am left with the uncomfortable feeling that the elements of this pattern have been chosen because they add up right, that they have been incorporated arbitrarily and not as the result of the application of a precise theory, by which I mean a theory that is validated not by demonstration but by prediction. Prediction is of the essence. I must be able to tell you before the work is analyzed what patterns you will find. Suppose, then, that I overcome my discomfort and grant that the Wanderer has the pattern David suggests. Then by the rights accorded to me by the Scientific Method, I am entitled to make a prediction about some other poem. I predict that if you bring me another AS poem sufficiently close to the Wanderer, the Seafarer comes to mind, you will find that it has a prologue, an epilogue, and at least four internal parts, and the the sum of the words in the prologue, the epilogue, and the prologues to parts 1 and 4 will be 124. This is left, as they say, as an exercise to the reader. From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Apr 6 09:51:08 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 6 Apr 95 09:51:07 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:49:40 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6275; Thu, 06 Apr 95 09:49:05 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8380; Thu, 06 Apr 95 09:49:05 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8537 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 03:47:21 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3781; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 04:47:20 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 06 Apr 95 04:47:11 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <17114-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:47:53 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 15; Thu, 06 Apr 1995 09:47:28 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E78B.E435D48A.15@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:47:27 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer (was Re: Beowulf and intentionalit To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Timothy, You and I are not approaching poetry in the same way. I read a poem in order to listen to what the poet is trying, sometimes across vast distances of time and space in a tradition of transmission sometimes by sensitive men and some- times by jerks and vandals, to say to me. The notion of approaching any work with a preconceived theory in mind is utterly alien to me, and if I caught my- self doing it I would stop it immediately. The notion of applying a theory de- rived from analysis of one poem to another in order to predict what the second one is going to say and where is similarly alien. Not to say pointless. Why bother to read the second work at all? It is perfectly true that if we start to read a sonnet, because the poet has called the composition a sonnet, we may expect it to contain 14 lines. If many poets sign themselves or refer to themselves at the symmetrical centre or at 1/9 or 8/9 of the way through, that is a reasonable place to look for a signa- ture. But it is not a rule for prediction. The 'rules' I have been trying to describe are models for composition. They are not prescriptive strait-jackets. The very way you have written your statements shows how regrettably destruc- tive the application of bad theory can be to a work of art. It has made you more interested in your expectations than in what someone else is trying to say to you. A living interlocutor may suggest to you with more or less grace that you have misunderstood him. A dead poet can truly speak to you, as dis- tinct from your projecting yourself backward into his work, only if you let him. You're not going to do that your way. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Apr 6 10:40:55 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 6 Apr 95 10:40:52 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:39:16 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8993; Thu, 06 Apr 95 10:38:38 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9811; Thu, 06 Apr 95 10:38:37 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8692 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 04:36:43 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4333; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 05:36:43 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 06 Apr 95 05:36:41 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <20337-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:37:48 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 21; Thu, 06 Apr 1995 10:37:23 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E792.DCEF2C6A.21@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:37:21 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer (was Re: Beowulf and intentionalit To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Timothy, If you read the earlier postings about the structure of 'The Wanderer' you will see the internal evidence of chiastic and parallel arrangement of words, which divides the poem into four parts, each coherent, with easily determined limits, but also linked to the other parts. Evidence independent of the count- ing of lines and words. But the latter evidence is wholly consistent with the lexical arrangement. 5-52-53-5 lines, in which the subject advances from self- obsession to wisdom, the poet's terms for him signalling the stages of develop- ment. It would not matter at all if no other poet ever used any of the devices evident in this work. As it happens, many other poets did use the same devices, but no one else ever used them in the way this poet did. Knowledge of the rules is like knowledge of grammar. It doesn't prescribe what an individual will do at a given juncture. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 7 00:10:59 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 7 Apr 95 00:10:55 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 00:09:25 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1711; Thu, 06 Apr 95 23:42:48 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2142; Thu, 06 Apr 95 23:42:02 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4785 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 17:14:32 -05 Return-Path: <@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU:tdh1@CORNELL.EDU> Received: from PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (NJE origin VMMAIL@PUCC) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7963; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 18:14:31 -040 Received: from PUCC by PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf008) with BSMTP id 0533; Thu, 06 Apr 95 18:14:55 ED Received: from postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu by pucc.PRINCETON.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 06 Apr 95 18:14:54 ED Received: from [132.236.236.93] (CU-DIALUP-0319.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.93]) by postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA09511 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 17:50:41 -0 X-Sender: tdh1@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 17:50:41 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: thomas d hill Subject: Numerical Structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, I think you are misconstruing Tim's argument here. The issue as I understand it is not whether the pattern you discern in the Wanderer is ( once we accept for the sake of argument that "theah the" is a compound) there, but whether the pattern is meaningful or a coincidence. The numerical pattern is not for the moment disputed -- the claim that it is meaningful,and what it means, however, necessarily involves some "theoretical" claims about Old English poetic composition.The metrical analysis of a given line necessarily depends on some metrical theory and the validity of any given metrical theory depends on the amount of data that theory can cogently explain.Similarly a "theory" of numerical composition which accounts for many patterns is more convincing than one which does not. I agree with you that the problem of numerical composition is deeply interesting; there is however a logical problem about what numerical patterns are "meaningful" and "intentional" and what patterns are either coincidental or the by-product of some other compositional technique, such as rhetorical balencing or a poets sense of compositional symmetry. If I am missing something please correct my errors as gently as your sense of justice will allow. I hate flaming, peace tom Thomas D. Hill 607-277-0182 Dept. of English tdh1@cornell.edu Cornell University From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 7 09:51:06 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 7 Apr 95 09:51:05 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 09:49:39 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8789; Fri, 07 Apr 95 09:49:04 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5825; Fri, 07 Apr 95 09:49:03 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8213 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 03:47:22 -05 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1251; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 04:47:22 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 07 Apr 95 04:47:17 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <16288-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 09:48:07 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 5; Fri, 07 Apr 1995 09:47:43 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E855.17BC30FA.5@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 09:47:42 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical Structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Tom, It seems to me that questions are being asked in an uninstructive order, those that should be reserved for the end of an inquiry being posed at the beginning, as if one could not begin to read until one's theoretical baggage were all tagged. Let us suppose that I come as a lexicographer to a box of quotation slips taken from British Medieval Latin sources, armed with Glare's Oxford Latin Dictionary, the latest theoretical word on the meanings of Latin words in the Classical period, to A.D. 200. Knowing what I do of that excellent work I af- firm on Timothy's principles that the scientific method entitles me to predict the forms and meanings of quotations in the box, and if the predictions don't work, I infer some grave flaw in Glare's theory. If I did that I would lose the great value of Glare's work. But worse, I would miss all the developments of Late Latin of the Christian period, and I would misprise the usage of those writing Latin whose mother tongues were Irish, Welsh, English, and French. Unless I want to be a disastrously bad lexicographer I must simultaneously recollect everything I think I know about earlier usage and suspend it while puzzling over the exact meaning of the form under consideration. Let's recom- mend as a way to understand the meanings of words or poems working from the inside out, from internal indications first, until one forms a picture of the integrity of the object; then comparisons. And working from the beginning for- ward. Even this entails much backtracking, as one does not always perceive things in 'correct' chronological order. In 1974 or 1975 I published a note about 'The Wanderer', perceiving the structure but not the chiastic disposition of words that fixes the limits of the internal divisions and their links. The latter I sent over the network a year or so ago with a suggestion of correspondence between the number of words in introductory and concluding passages and the number of lines in the com- plete work. Only a week ago I noted Wulfstan's infixing of a letter count in the Prologue to match the number of lines in the rest of the poem and a letter count in the Epilogue to fix the date of composition. This as a loose form of analogue to something noted in 'The Wanderer'. I haven't presented any of these things as primary facts that must be agreed by anyone else before reading the poem. Nor do I present them as facts to be incorporated wholesale into a theory which predetermines reading of any other works. Buothers keep respond- ing to these things as if I have and do. I am NOT offering a theory. I am providing tools that MAY enhance perception, help us to avoid intrusion of ourselves and our inappropriate ideas into others' works, help us to learn to listen. Some of my correspondents seem to me not to be very good at that. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 7 19:43:16 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 7 Apr 95 19:43:09 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 19:41:44 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7492; Fri, 07 Apr 95 19:40:51 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8910; Fri, 07 Apr 95 19:40:50 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1732 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:34:54 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3493; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:34:54 -040 Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 07 Apr 95 14:34:52 ED Received: from [132.236.236.87] (CU-DIALUP-0408.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.114]) by postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA18472 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:35:52 -0 X-Sender: tsl1@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:36:08 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Timothy S. Larkin" Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO > The 'rules' I have been trying to describe are models for composition. They >are not prescriptive strait-jackets. I find it difficult to reply point by point, since I recognize that I failed so utterly to make my point that we don't even have points of disagreement. I need to start all over again. David has criticized my approach as a dumb way to get at the meanings of poems. I totally agree. My message made no claim about the revealing the semantics of poems. I am addressing the question of claims made about purely formal structures being governed by numerical rules. This has nothing to do with a theory of criticism. I am not addressing questions of acrostics, or whether the Wander is a christain poem, or any similar literary or technical matter. I am concerned with one technique only, in which the poem is used in some way to generate a sequence a numbers, and then we pour over this sequence looking for matches, sums, whatever, that look suggestive of some intentionality on the part of the author. First and foremost, anyone who engages in numerical analysis must recognize that if you go fishing in the pond of numbers, you will almost certainly catch something. Catching something is of no interest, unless you can also demonstrate that you haven't just caught stochastic fish. You need to be able to show that the pond's been stocked. Consider the first five digits of pi: 31415. I see a pattern here right off: 3 + 1 = 4, 4 + 1 = 5. Other observations: 5 is the fifth digit; 3 + 4 = 5 + 1 + 1; (3 + 4) * (1 + 1) = 14 = 3 + 1 + 4 + 1 + 5. Also, [4][5 + 1 + 1] = 47 is my age, and [4 + 5][3 + 1 + 1] = 95 is the year in which I am writing this note. The question, of course, is whether these are just random fish. I'll admit right up front that they are. In fact, given a large enough random set, nothing could be easier than to find a few astounding and apparently non-random subsets. This is the nature of randomness. If you fish in the pond of numbers, you will catch something. This observation is well known in mathematics and the sciences. In fact, the field of statistics exists for the sole purpose of discriminating random fish from stocked ones. Any first year mathematician presented with my rule for the digits of pi will respond with a quick test; can I predict the next digit? Obviously it must be 1. Unfortunately, it is 9. The prediction provides (or destroys) the credibility of my pattern. The more precise the prediction, the more credible. I can predict with certainty that the digit 7 will appear somewhere in the sequence, but I am not going to win any awards unless I can say where. I know for a fact that somewhere in the digits of pi we could find encoded the texts of all the books that were lost in the Cottonian fire, as well as all the paintings burnt by Botticelli. The laws of probability guarantee this. However, I couldn't tell you where. So the issue I raise is not whether we can fish in the pond of numbers and come home with a string of them. Nothing could be more facile. The question is whether we can demonstrate that they were stocked. So how can we tell if the fish are random? Consideration of my analysis of pi will reveal a few dangers. First, I began with no constraints on the pattern, so that I allowed myself complete license to find anything my imagination might suggest. And the human mind has a phenomenal ability to find patterns everywhere. People see pictures in the constellations of the stars, they see camels in clouds. It is an amusing but ultimately trivial pursuit. Second, after I deduced my analysis, I failed to confirm it by extending it to bring a longer sequence into the fold. In fact, the challenge to do this immediately revealed the weakness of my hypothesis. Third, I didn't have to account for what is not in the pattern, that I might reasonably expect to find. For instance, 5 is the fifth digit, but 4 is not the fourth, nor is 3 the third, nor is 1 the first. The claim that the number of lines in the Wanderer matches the sum of the number of words in the general prologue, the prologues to parts 1 and 4, and the epilog, is open to the same objections. First, we must recognize that if we starting adding up the number of words in various subsequences of lines, we should not be surprised if one of those sums turns out to be 115. If we fish in the pond of numbers, we will catch something. This fact, in itself, is most unremarkable. It only becomes remarkable if A) we had identified the subseqences first, before doing the analysis; or B) could justify the selection of subsequences by some reason other than the fact they add to 115 (why, for instance, do we include the prologues to parts 1 and 4, and not 2 and 3?); or C) we could confirm this pattern by reference to some other poem; or D) we could extend this pattern in some simple way to account for a large number of related phenomena in the Wanderer. It is instructive to determine how many sums of the sort that David uses there are in the Wanderer. The number of combinations of n items taken m at a time is known to be n! / (m! (n - m)!). (! represents the factorial operation.) We have 115 sums of words taken one line at a time, 6555 sums from combinations of two lines at a time, etc, with a total of 41,538,374,868,278,621,028,243,970,633,760,767 (this is a actual calculation) possible sums derived from taking all possible values of m in [1, 115] over 115 lines. David uses 16 lines in his analysis. There are 14,980,162,794,189,827,475 sums you can make by taking different combinations of 16 lines from the poem. From these 15 quintillion sums, he has found one that adds to 115. I would be surprised if there were only one. In fact, if I have the energy, I will compute an estimate of how many of those 15 quintillion sums are 115. Of course, David would argue quite rightly that he hasn't considered all 15 quintillion possibilities; that he has, despite his statement that "The notion of approaching any work with a preconceived theory in mind is utterly alien to me", a preconceived theory that certain subsequences have artistic standing; for instance, the number of words in the prologue or epilog, or both together. Exactly, precisely what I have been arguing. The discover of some sum = 115 only begins to be distinguishable from noise when considered within the context of a theory about which subsequences of lines poets considered significant. If you fish in the pond of numbers, you will catch something. The trick is to demonstrate that the pond was stocked. But the subsequences David has selected do not fit any simple rule. Therefore it is completely legitimate, indeed necessary, to ask what the rule is, how and why it was formulated. From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Sat Apr 8 01:08:05 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Sat, 8 Apr 95 01:08:01 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 01:06:38 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6174; Fri, 07 Apr 95 23:31:25 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0182; Fri, 07 Apr 95 23:26:15 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1747 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:35:00 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3499; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:34:58 -040 Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 07 Apr 95 14:34:57 ED Received: from [132.236.236.87] (CU-DIALUP-0408.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.114]) by postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA18494 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:35:58 -0 X-Sender: tsl1@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 14:36:15 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Timothy S. Larkin" Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO >But the latter evidence is wholly consistent with the >lexical arrangement. 5-52-53-5 lines, in which the subject advances from self- >obsession to wisdom, I infer that 5, 52, 53, 5 is supposed to be an example of a chiastic arrangement. I would have defined a chiastic arrangement to be i, j, j, i. However, 52 is not the same as 53. Why don't we find 5, 53, 53, 5? I can think of any number of reasons: A) the manuscript is defective, and is missing one line (there really were 116 lines once!); B) the poet had a bad day and miscounted; C) the poet didn't consider an exact match to be all that important (although he was structuring the poem according to numerical rules.) D) more random fish. It's no good saying 52 is ``close enough'' to 53. ``Close enough'' has no meaning outside a theory about the basic techniques of numerical composition. Would 5, 51, 53, 5 be chiastic? How about 5, 45, 53, 5? Or 6, 45, 53, 5? We have to define where a numerical structure fades away to noise. What are the tolerances here? If the numbers were so important to the poet, why couldn't he get them right? From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Sat Apr 8 11:35:23 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Sat, 8 Apr 95 11:35:21 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:30:34 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6373; Sat, 08 Apr 95 11:29:58 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7879; Sat, 08 Apr 95 11:29:58 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6148 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 06:28:47 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2260; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 06:28:47 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Sat, 08 Apr 95 06:28:46 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <08066-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:30:07 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10; Sat, 08 Apr 1995 11:29:46 +0100 Message-Id: <0098E92C.839C4266.10@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:29:45 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Timothy, If you read the postings you will see that 'close enough' is your own usage. It is none of mine. Nor have I suggested that 5-52-53-5 exhibits chiastic composition of 'The Wanderer'. Rather that the four parts of the internal monologue exhibit internal chiasms and parallelisms, and that the four parts are variously linked in the whole. If you began at the beginning you would see that none of the numerical analyses was even entertained until certainty (relative) had been reached about the structure and its integrity on other, not numerical, forms of evi- dence. The numbers are considered always and only at the end of the inquiry to see whether they offer a confirmation of a status arrived at independently from them. You will find clear examples of the procedure in some experiments in text- ual reconstruction and analysis forthcoming in Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi and Peritia 9. The order of discovery of elements can be verified by several scholars who received drafts of the work in progress. You are welcome to riffle through a filing cabinet of work completed over the past twenty years, all of it done in the open without resort to smoke and mirrors. In no single case have I had to retract or even restate a view about composition of early medieval texts. Every new discovery has revealed further complexities that guarantee the integrity and authenticity of authorial composition. In no case have I adduced a form of composition or analysis which is not explicitly discussed in Antique sources. The numbers, especially the ratios of music theory, are a recent perception. Hereafter I would prefer to be held accountable for what I have written, not for what you have made of it. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Mon Apr 10 23:21:36 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Mon, 10 Apr 95 23:21:30 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 23:19:48 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2897; Mon, 10 Apr 95 21:01:00 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6793; Mon, 10 Apr 95 20:59:42 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8065 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 11:23:29 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2034; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 11:23:28 -040 Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Mon, 10 Apr 95 11:22:17 ED Received: from [132.236.236.47] (CU-DIALUP-0106.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.16]) by postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA05388 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 11:23:19 -0 X-Sender: tsl1@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 11:23:43 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Timothy S. Larkin" Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO > If you began at the beginning you would see that none of the numerical >analyses was even entertained until certainty (relative) had been reached >about the structure and its integrity on other, not numerical, forms of evi- >dence. I have looked, both in my copies of the thread "Beowulf and intentionality", and in the ASaxNet archive, for the beginning, without finding it. I would very much like to know the line numbers for each of the sections and subsections, as you see them. > Nor have I suggested that 5-52-53-5 exhibits >chiastic composition of 'The Wanderer'. I was wrong about this; in fact, you made no such claim. I inferred it, incorrectly, from the context. However, am I wrong to suppose that had the numbers been 5-52-52-5, the poem would have chiastic composition? You are correct, also, that the term 'close enough' is mine. I did not mean to imply that you had used it. I was just trying to answer a possible counter argument that might be made by someone else. I infer from your objection to 'close enough' that we are entitled to demand that numerical matches be exact. This leads me to return to the question of whether the subparts in question contain 115 or 116 words. You count ``theahthe'' in line 2 as one word, while I counted it as 2, as it is printed in the editions I have consulted. Yet, you count, apparently, ``tham the'' as two words in line 114. I am curious about why ``the'' merges with the word before in the first case, but not in the second. In fact, I am even more curious about what a 'word' is. My initial definition says that a word is a sequence of letters delimited by white space. I invite anyone following this thread to apply this definition to a reproduction of the manuscript page, for instance, page 270 of Mitchell & Robinson. I count 29 words in the prologue (lines 1--5), instead of the 26 printed on the facing page or the 25 that you count, since I count theahthe as one word, and mod cearig, lagu lade, hrim cealde, and wraec lastas as two words each. Certainly one could argue that the typographic conventions of modern editors more clearly reproduce the Anglo Saxon word unit than did the scribal conventions of the Anglo Saxons themselves. But if this is this case, and we can't count words by looking for sequences of letters delimited by white space, then we certainly need some theory that defines what, for the purposes of counting, defined a word to the Anglo Saxon engaged in numerical composition. I pose, then, two questions: what are the line numbers for the various parts of the poem? and what defines a word? From dmganz@email.unc.edu Tue Apr 11 15:44:43 1995 Received: from email.unc.edu (isisa.oit.unc.edu) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 11 Apr 95 15:44:31 BST Received: by email.unc.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA55079; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:42:50 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:42:45 -0400 (EDT) From: David Ganz X-Sender: dmganz@isisa.oit.unc.edu To: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Dear Dr. Macrae-Gibson, If it were known that Milton did not use Howlett's numerical composition, and Howlett found it in one of Milton's Latin poems, wouldn't that help the sceptics like you and I to understand how David works. Bengt Lo"fstedt, the finest medieval Latinist over here, believes no jot of what David has so far published. I can see the force of what he has done with the Columbanus letter. But the resounding silence about composition of this complexity in the texts known to me (including the Bible, Augustine and Boethius as cited by David) lead me to recall the man in "David Copperfield" who not only flew kites, but was obsessed with King Charles' head. I write because you, like me, clearly want David to help us understand why he believes what he believes, and how he might convince agnostics. With all good wishes, Yours sincerely, David Ganz From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Apr 11 16:02:09 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 11 Apr 95 16:02:03 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 16:00:21 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3992; Tue, 11 Apr 95 15:53:42 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5820; Tue, 11 Apr 95 15:53:40 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6284 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:10:51 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4791; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:10:51 -040 Received: from aberdeen.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 11 Apr 95 10:10:47 ED Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 11 Apr 95 15:12:59 BS Message-Id: Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 15:12:56 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- Since I started this by asking you to explain your reference to your _Wanderer_ analysis, and then went away for a week: I'm back; I thank you for the explanations, and I thank you and Tim Larkin for illustrating strikingly the failure of minds to meet which has made me unhappy in the past when I have tried to discuss with you. Perhaps easier to see the dynamics of the failure when not participating. Please, David, please, try not to get cross with people who are genuinely trying to understand. Or if you believe that you don't, try reading your sentence "Hereafter I would prefer to be held accountable...", placing yourself imaginatively in the position of the recipient. Please believe that others have difficulty with what seem to be two quite different voices from you. The one is gentle and anxious to guide. You offer us "tools that may enhance perception" of the poems we love. The possibility that thematic structures we all see are further supported, and a further level of beauty made visible, by an exactly framed mathematical structure, is to be enquired into. For these suggestions we are grateful. The other voice expresses a quite exceptional degree of certainty that when you have thus enquired you have always been right. How many of us would commit ourselves to a public statement beginning "in no single case have I had to retract or even restate a view"? In this voice you tell us that the methods of analysis you apply to Old English verse "are not in need of defence, but of explication" [I hope I don't misquote; I can't trace the reference (but I later did: a posting of Wed Nov 16 1994, filed under "drh". Speaking of his beliefs, he feels "detached, as about a Euclidian theorem once proven... These things require explication, not defence, if they are true. I believe that they are.")], and you are perceived to ignore, or wave away in terms easily mistaken for contempt, any contention that is any particular you may have got it wrong. I hope I am not thought to be flaming; I am concerned for the commonwealth of scholarship. In the present case, in an effort to discover at least something about where minds are failing to meet, can I put a few particular questions? You have used, of the devices you have found in _Wanderer_, the phrase "knowledge of the rules is like knowledge of grammar". Accepted, then, that they do not prescribe what a poet must do; yet if they are rules they must set limits to what he may do. They must be specifiable. They must be capable of being seen to be broken. Though Tim's quintillions of possible mathematical structures express rhetorical hyperbole, his concern lest the "rules" may be indefinitely extensible to take account of any apparent breach, and therefore be no rules at all, is a real one. Would you accept this? Are rules, setting limits, statable? Suppose the text of _Wanderer_, as preserved, omitted line 100. Could you confidently say "This poem is evidently composed under rule, but in the text as we have it there is a breach of rule. It is probable that a line is missing, or that there is a spurious word in the prologue, epilogue, or one of the inquit passages"? In the actual case, if I urge that "theah the" should be taken as two words, because the apparently comparable "oth the" "until" must be so taken or it would not be distinguishable from "oththe" "or", is the fact that if so a rule is breached a powerful argument to the contrary? Or is it a legitimate view that a poet might take from the rules a strong feeling for propriety of structure and yet not feel bound to precision in their observation? Might he indeed be aware that the precision possible in Latin was impossible in the vernacular because there was not in all cases universal agreement about what should be reckoned a word? -- Duncan (macg@abdn.ac.uk) [line 19, read "single"; line 24, read "in any particular"] From tsl1@cornell.edu Tue Apr 11 16:16:24 1995 Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 11 Apr 95 16:16:02 BST Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu ([132.236.225.85]) by postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA25868 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 11:14:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 11:14:21 -0400 Message-Id: <199504111514.LAA25868@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu> X-Sender: tsl1@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Duncan Macrae-Gibson From: tsl1@cornell.edu (Timothy Larkin) Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer Status: RO >Though Tim's quintillions >of possible mathematical structures express rhetorical hyperbole, Actually, it's not hyperbole. There really are 15 quintillion ways you can select 16 items from a pool of 115. It's the mind-boggling phenomenon the mathematicians call the Combinatorial Explosion. Thank you for your message. I was beginning to wonder, from David's responses, whether I was just being a complete idiot; at least I know now I'm not the only idiot in town! I too, BTW, was astounded at David's statement that in twenty years he's never been professionally wrong. I don't suppose even Einstein could match that record. Best regards, tsl1@cornell.edu From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Apr 18 10:42:34 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 18 Apr 95 10:42:30 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 10:39:55 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6332; Tue, 18 Apr 95 10:39:18 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4004; Tue, 18 Apr 95 10:39:18 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2947 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 05:37:57 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3144; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 05:37:57 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 18 Apr 95 05:37:25 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <16180-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 10:38:41 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 3; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 10:38:15 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F100.F9BA673F.3@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 10:38:15 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Timothy, You will see from Psalm 58 what a word is. There are 100 words in the Hebrew text. Find the crux of the chiasmus. Find the central word. Now per- form the exercise again counting hyphenated words as a single unit. See what happens. Now perform the exercise again on the Septuagint text. Now do it again on the Vulgate text. See the edition of the Epistola Cuthberti de obitu Baedae in Szarmach and Oggins, 'Sources of Anglo-Saxon Culture'. The text is not open to much doubt. It survives in about eighty MSS. In the account of Bede's last illness, from 'Grauatus est' to 'Deo gratias agere' nothing is out of place. 'Deo' is the 100th word. From the crux of the whole composition, 'Cantabat etiam', to 'Deo gratias referebat' nothing is out of place. 'Deo' is the 100th word. Note the corresponding speeches of 32 words each and the corresponding prose passages of 25 words each. The centre of the entire composition is Bede's recitation of two texts, one Old English, 5 lines and 25 words long, and one Latin anti- phon, 5 lines and 25 words long. The parallelism of the whole, flagged from the very Salutation, a miniature pattern of the complete work, shows you what Cuthbert is up to. Return to the often-cited Creation story in Genesis I. No doubt whatever about the text or about what a word is. The first sentence in the account of the first week has seven words. The number of words in the account of the first day added to the number in the account of the second day is equal to the number in the account of the third day, which is repeated in the account of the fourth day: 31, 38, 69, 69, from which point we're into the second half of the paral- lelism of the Six Days. Light on the first and fourth days, firmament and water and birds and fishes on the second and fifth days, dry land and trees and crea- tures that live therein on the third and sixth days. Division by extreme and mean ratio exactly between the only directly repeated word in the whole: b'tsalmo - b'tselem. Jerome's rendering of all this into Latin is punctilious, 600 words for the Six Days. If you want something variously verifiable try the account of the first of the Israelite Judges, Othniel ben Kenaz. A perfect chiasmus, of which the crux is 'Calev hakaton mimenu'. Divide the whole by sesquialter ratio, at 'Calev', the 52nd word, the numerical value of which in Hebrew notation is 52. The next word, of the smaller part of the ratio, is 'hakaton'. Of course. Or try Aldhelm's Letter to Heahfrith, an edition of which is forthcoming in the next issue of Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi. First sentence 88 words. 88 cola to the centre, a chiastic quotation from the Book of Proverbs, which tells the author's message, 'Stay at home. Don't go to Ireland'. Thence 88 cola to the end of the prose, 'digna' the 888th word of the letter, the 444th being the exact centre of the quotation from Proverbs, which is symmetrical by word and syllable and letter. All the Boethian ratios are correctly exhibited, 9:8 exactly at the word 'bis quaternis'. You could even divide the second half of 444 words by extreme and mean ratio to see that it falls at the name of Ald- helm's teacher Theodore. In no case is anything fudged to produce these features. The authors, not I, put them there. It would be a rank form of discourtesy to look for a set of rules that predict what any of them is going to do. You will learn things from them if and only if you suspend your own notions, your own expectations, and let them speak to you. That is, after all, why they wrote. They are, I promise you, better at their craft than we are. I would bet that any of them took less time to compose than it takes me to recover his art. If so, the only profitable bearing is that of altar boy to MC, novice to novice master. The best exercise is listening and looking and ruminating. Their way. Try it. It may change your life. DRH P.S. Here is a little treat. From the beginning of a Life of St Padarn. Xpistus Filius Dei uiui tercia Trinitatis diuine Persona coeternus et consubstancialis Patri et Spiritu Sancto dedit hoc preceptum ecclesie ut affectantius prouocaret hominum mentes ad reli- gionem ... . Did the author of this know what a Lucas series is? Did he know what a word is? What does his third clause tell you? So where was he? What language did he speak? What do you suppose he thought about Theodore? There is not a whole lot of scope for me to fiddle with his prose, is there? Lege feliciter. From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Apr 18 12:45:48 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 18 Apr 95 12:45:47 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 12:43:21 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2942; Tue, 18 Apr 95 12:42:45 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7359; Tue, 18 Apr 95 12:42:44 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3181 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 07:40:22 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4071; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 07:40:22 -040 Received: from postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 18 Apr 95 07:40:21 ED Received: from [132.236.236.17] (CU-DIALUP-0107.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.17]) by postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA21102 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 07:41:27 -0 X-Sender: tsl1@postoffice3.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 07:42:11 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Timothy S. Larkin" Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, thank you for your erudite reply. I am impressed by the extent of your reading. However, I don't see that your answer addresses my questions. How can I make them clearer? 1. On what basis do you count "theah the" as one word? 2. On what basis did you decide to sum the number of words (whatever they are) in the preface, the epilog, and the prefaces to internal parts 1 and 4? From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Apr 18 14:12:32 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 18 Apr 95 14:12:31 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 14:09:49 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9074; Tue, 18 Apr 95 14:08:57 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0138; Tue, 18 Apr 95 14:08:54 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3612 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 09:03:01 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6026; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 09:03:00 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 18 Apr 95 09:02:59 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <28385-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 14:03:45 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 5; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 14:03:19 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F11D.9EF52697.5@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 14:03:18 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Timothy, I read t+heaht+he as one word in 'The Wanderer' because the space in the manuscript is less than between other words and because the concordance shows other examples in the corpus in which it is sometimes a single word. The reason for reckoning prologue, introd. i, introd. iv, and epilogue together is that they are manifestly different in diction and statement from other parts of the poem that exhibit internal coherence and that they share internal links. Com- pare him are gebide#d, Metudes miltse, mid with him are sece#d, frofre to Fa+eder on heofonum, mid. Compare swa cwa+e#d, gemyndig, wa+elsleahta with t+has word acwi#d, gemon, wa+elsleahta. Aren't the chiastic arrangements of words in lines 8-21 and 22-38 and the parallels between them readily apparent? DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Apr 20 01:21:12 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 20 Apr 95 01:21:11 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 01:18:35 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0100; Thu, 20 Apr 95 00:06:10 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9313; Thu, 20 Apr 95 00:06:09 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7838 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 19 Apr 1995 19:03:34 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2211; Wed, 19 Apr 1995 19:03:33 -040 Received: from postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 19 Apr 95 19:03:31 ED Received: from [132.236.236.107] (CU-DIALUP-0401.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.107]) by postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA04365 for ; Wed, 19 Apr 1995 19:04:36 -0 X-Sender: tdh1@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 19:04:36 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: thomas d hill Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO >Timothy, > I read t+heaht+he as one word in 'The Wanderer' because the space in the >manuscript is less than between other words and because the concordance shows >other examples in the corpus in which it is sometimes a single word. The reason >for reckoning prologue, introd. i, introd. iv, and epilogue together is that >they are manifestly different in diction and statement from other parts of the >poem that exhibit internal coherence and that they share internal links. Com- >pare him are gebide#d, Metudes miltse, mid with him are sece#d, frofre to >Fa+eder on heofonum, mid. Compare swa cwa+e#d, gemyndig, wa+elsleahta with >t+has word acwi#d, gemon, wa+elsleahta. Aren't the chiastic arrangements of >words in lines 8-21 and 22-38 and the parallels between them readily apparent? >DRH Pretty clearly this thread will end with some of us agreeing to disagree with others of us, but let me reconstruct the points of agreement and disagreement up to this point. We are agreed that the pattern you propose in which the number of words of the relevant lines agree with the number of lines of the poem does not exist if one accepts the editing of the ASPR editors and most other editors. Leslie apparently does print theahthe as one word if my eyes are not decieving me. Pope prints theah-the but he also prints tham-the in line 114 which would disrupt the pattern you are looking for.The other texts I have seen and I haven't been exhaustive print theah the. We or at least I would agree that the pattern does exist if we grant you theahthe as one word. What is at issue is whether this pattern is "intentional" or coincidence.With all due and serious repect for your learning (and I am not being ironic), in my judgment it is more probably coincidental than intentional. You have chosen the lines to count -- you have decided how to count the words in those lines.I would grant that your choice of lines and count of words is not entirely arbitrary but you still had choices which give you considerable leeway in your effort to find a pattern. And indeed you found one. What is at issue is the problem of coincidence. As an addendum I should mention that I haven't done any of my own counting but have relied on the numbers you and Tim Larkin have provided. peace tom hill ps I am blessed in that I have my own copy of the facsimile of the Exeter Book (ho ho) and I have recently reexamined the Wanderer in it, and if one accepts Tim's pragmatic definition of a word as a sequence of letters followed by whitespaces the ms does not support your counting or indeed the practice of all modern editors. For an Anglo-Saxon reader to notice the pattern which you propose he/she would have to copy and or memorize the poem -- edit it according to modern principles either on parchment or in his or her head, make the appropriate decisions about theahthe and thamthe and then discern the pattern you propose.I don't mean to be discourteous and as I have said before I hate flaming, but I also want to be frank about why I respectfully disagree with this analysis. Thomas D. Hill 607-277-0182 Dept. of English tdh1@cornell.edu Cornell University From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Apr 20 10:15:48 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 20 Apr 95 10:15:47 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 10:13:03 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 2881; Thu, 20 Apr 95 10:12:26 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4560; Thu, 20 Apr 95 10:12:25 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0205 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 05:10:35 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1156; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 05:10:34 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 20 Apr 95 05:10:10 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <21239-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 10:11:13 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 9; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 10:10:47 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F28F.77A46CFB.9@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 10:10:46 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Tom, Whether a pattern should or should not appear because of the decisions of a modern editor, or even an entire school of modern editors, is a matter of indifference. Their opinions are not evidence. They should be considered, if at all, only in reckonings of tertiary authorities. I wrote before that questions seemed to me to be asked in an uninstructive order. Here is another one. Intention is something to be addressed at the end of an inquiry. Until one is certain about most, if not all, of the features of a composition, one has no business whatever asking whether any of them issued from deliberateness or coincidence. Much annoyance and wasting of time has issued from those who want to decide immediately that something cannot be true, even when it has been presented neutrally as an observation of uncertain import. As here, about numbers of words and numbers of lines in 'The Wanderer'. Revert to a text for which we have much evidence, the Prologue to John's Gospel. Thousands of manuscripts. Not one of them written thus. panta dia autou egeneto kai xwris autou egeneto oude en. Most of the earliest copies written something like this. panta diautouegenetokaixwrisautouegenetoouden. If the former arrangement allows one to see that the words are arranged 5-5, the syllables 11-11, the letters 23-23, and that one reason for the arrangement of this account of Christ's Creation of the universe is that in Genesis I, to which John alludes in his first two words, God created 22 things, perfected in an account of 46 words (Genesis II 1-4), 46 also being the value of the Greek letters of the name ADAM, the number of years it took to build the Temple, the number of words in the Vulgate cosmogony of Job XXXVIII 4-7, the number of let- ters in Jerome's Vulgate translation of this same passage of John, then one would be more than a little foolish to leave these things out of consideration. Someone who affirmed that because early Greek papyri left no spaces between words no one could have constructed in his mind a text of John in which counts of words, syllables, and letters figured might be dismissed as a blockhead. Once one has seen various but converging lines of evidence that corroborate the outlines, and even the minute details, of structure of such a text, it is a matter of no value whatever that most modern editions of the Greek text spell some of the words wrongly and that most modern English translations divide the sentences wrongly. Not quite no value. There is, of course, value for study of the history of reception of the text. But no value at all as evidence for what John wrote. I am more interested in what John wrote than in what modern editors may think that he wrote. Especially if even the greatest of modern editors and critics try to tell me, on the basis of their own editions and commentaries (B. M. Metzger being the most outrageous offender in this matter) that John's prose is intolerably clumsy and opaque. Things are e that of Biblical criticism; yet the critics claim even greater authority for their views. I am not persuaded. But I am puzzled by the speed and the vehemence with which they rush to dismiss forms of evidence which they have not yet considered, as if they feared more for the fate of their own perceptions than they cared for new ways of possibly improv- ing understanding of something true. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Thu Apr 20 21:16:21 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 20 Apr 95 21:16:19 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 21:13:33 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4715; Thu, 20 Apr 95 21:04:05 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3455; Thu, 20 Apr 95 21:04:04 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2984 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:45:43 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2626; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:45:43 -040 Received: from EKU.ACS.EKU.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 20 Apr 95 14:45:41 ED Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V4.3-7 #7621) id <01HPKC8ZKV10001I67@ACS.EKU.EDU>; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:46:06 ES X-Vms-To: IN%"ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HPKC8ZKV12001I67@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:46:06 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Karen Foster." Subject: words To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Tom, In responding to DRH, you cite one of his responses to another post: >Timothy, > I read t+heaht+he as one word in 'The Wanderer' because the space in the >manuscript is less than between other words and because the concordance shows >other examples in the corpus in which it is sometimes a single word. The reason >for reckoning prologue, introd. i, introd. iv, and epilogue together is that >they are manifestly different in diction and statement from other parts of the >poem that exhibit internal coherence and that they share internal links. Com- >pare him are gebide#d, Metudes miltse, mid with him are sece#d, frofre to >Fa+eder on heofonum, mid. Compare swa cwa+e#d, gemyndig, wa+elsleahta with >t+has word acwi#d, gemon, wa+elsleahta. Aren't the chiastic arrangements of >words in lines 8-21 and 22-38 and the parallels between them readily apparent? >DRH Omitted material. You say: "We are agreed that the pattern you propose in which the number of words of the relevant lines agree with the number of lines of the poem does not exist if one accepts the editing of the ASPR editors and most other editors." I would like to know why you think that editors, and especially the ASPR editors, should be accepted over other forms, like the manuscripts? You go on: "Leslie apparently does print theahthe as one word if my eyes are not decieving me. Pope prints theah-the but he also prints tham-the in line 114 which would disrupt the pattern you are looking for.The other texts I have seen and I haven't been exhaustive print theah the." What does the hyphen suggest, anyhow? I often find it most instructive to compare many editions with the manuscript in facsimile. And these things do matter. If I recall correctly (I can double check if there's enough interest), for instance, one rather significant passage in the manuscript reads as one word, if one goes by spacing: "modthrythowaeg." This "word," is now rendered as "Modthryth," a proper name, and "waeg" as a separate word. Yes, you're right--letter count and word count would be entirely thrown off by consulting modern editions of _Beowulf_. Yet the truth may be that it is three words: "mod," "thrytho," and "waeg." Just how much value can be placed on our modern reckonings of words? If, for example, and we see it every day in newsprint, a line ends with "the," and the next line begins with "ory," and so on, most of us would have little difficulty in recognizing the word "theory." So it would be a surprise for someone to think that "the" and "ory" are two words, just as it would be a surprise to think that most people would not recognize "the" as a word alone. And I get the feeling that for most scribes, the manuscript itself was like our modern newsprint, just a conveyor, and that scribes, as well as poets, recognized word divisions just as well as we do. Ommission of material. You add: "What is at issue is whether this pattern is "intentional" or coincidence.With all due and serious repect for your learning (and I am not being ironic), in my judgment it is more probably coincidental than intentional. You have chosen the lines to count -- you have decided how to count the words in those lines.I would grant that your choice of lines and count of words is not entirely arbitrary but you still had choices which give you considerable leeway in your effort to find a pattern. And indeed you found one. What is at issue is the problem of coincidence." Omission. peace tom hill Tom, I would like to know the bases of your judgment that the pattern David sees is coincidental. If I understand your arguments, you are suggesting that structural (in this case, numerical) analysis depends on the edition used. And, since editions are often different from each other, no reliable foundation for finding a pattern can possibly emerge. Because no reliable foundation for finding a pattern can be based on modern editions of A-S poetry, then any pattern found is coincidence. If I have followed your lines of reasoning, I think the major premise is faulty. How can any sound structural analysis take its point of departure from an edition, without looking at all other possibilities, too? Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 21 09:52:55 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 21 Apr 95 09:52:53 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:50:14 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0470; Fri, 21 Apr 95 09:33:33 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6530; Fri, 21 Apr 95 09:33:33 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7916 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 04:32:09 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0948; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 04:32:09 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 21 Apr 95 04:32:08 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <21904-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:32:45 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 15; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:32:21 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F353.43CBA4E3.15@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:32:20 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Rand, Both the Boydell & Brewer books are now in print. There isn't a single way to divide some words, nor a single way to spell others. You will see from a glance at a Hebrew Bible that there are some words which are spelled invariably, but also a large number of words in which plene and defective spellings allow up to 17 variations. Orthography is more nearly fixed, but still potentially variable in both Greek and Latin. A glaring exam- ple is Xpistus, Christus, Cristus, all clearly recorded, sometimes fixed in acrostics. There is no way to impose a fixed rule of composition on writers who exercised freedom of choice and judgement. One must simply be alert to the possibilities. Get used to the idea that Old English poets knew and used EVERY feature of Biblical style that I have analysed in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. And to the idea that more than one or two of them knew the original languages. I have been collecting examples of usages which are not recorded in patristic literature known to the Irish and the Anglo-Saxons, in which punctiliously correct, even hyper-correct, spellings are explicable only from knowledge of Hebrew and Greek. Because the examples are discrete the evidence becomes weightier with every new find. But you will sometime soon read from another source quite spectacular evi- dence that bears not only on knowledge of Hebrew but on spacings of words and variant letter shapes. Reserve your judgement. It will be worth the wait. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 21 14:57:42 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 21 Apr 95 14:57:26 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 14:54:41 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6827; Fri, 21 Apr 95 14:54:05 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8482; Fri, 21 Apr 95 14:54:04 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9018 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:50:50 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5766; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:50:49 -040 Received: from aberdeen.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 21 Apr 95 09:50:47 ED Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 21 Apr 95 14:54:12 BS Message-Id: Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 14:54:09 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David does not make it easy for those who try to discuss with him. He vigorously insists that even the whole tribe of editors could provide no evidence as to the functional division of an OE text into words, yet when asked why he took "theahthe" as one word his reply included: "... because the concordance shows other examples in the corpus in which it is sometimes a single word", and the concordance took its material from editions. His other basis, from manuscript spacing, had already been shown to be doubtful by Tim Larkin, and now again by Tom Hill, since on that basis other entities which he accepts as single words would have to be divided, and it is clearly dangerous to pick selectively from manuscript evidence. He goes on to present another of his impressively exact analyses of a text in a classical language. Now in all the time this thread has been on the go, which in bursts under different subject labels has been for several years, nobody on this net has sought to challenge any of these analyses. We know that not everyone in the cclassical field agrees with him, but is it useful to fight a fierce defence on a flank from which no attack has ever threatened? We are happy to take his classical demonstrations as given. The essential question that follows, and the basis for the unhappy fact which Tom records that we will probably find ourselves in permanent disagreement (to the distress of those of us who are certainly not determined to see things as untrue, but rather anxious to see their truth acceptably demonstrated) is whether, given these facts in the classical languages, we should start examination of OE poetry with an a priori assumption that the same things will be found there, an assumption which, if false, must be shown to be false. If so, and if even one poem can be found in which numerical structure can be perceived, it is those who wish not to see it who have a case to make. I suspect that this is Karen Foster's position; I would not attempt to read David's mind. On the other hand, as I asked earlier, is it an equally reasonable assumption that poets writing in a tradition that did not lend itself to mathematical precision would compose with a feeling for structure, certainly, but not on a precise numerical pre-plan? If so, Occam will urge that numerical structure be not accepted there unless it can be shown, with a reasonable degree of probability, that what is found cannot be explained without it. Absolute certainty is of course impossible in such cases. For this purpose the evidence from a single poem will have to be very striking to be accepted as a sufficient demonstration. If a poem contains, as Wanderer does, "framing" sections and sections which they frame, it will be natural for the "framing" passages to be of substantial length, but a lot shorter than the length of what they frame. Given the normal number of words in an OE line, it will be not very unlikely that the number of words in one, or some, or all of the framing passages will be equal to the number of lines in the whole work, or the whole work with the exception of one, or some, or all of the framing passages, especially if variations in word-division, which David's latest posting agrees to exist, allow exact counts to vary. To explore this, I looked for another poem somewhat comparable with Wanderer. Wife's Lament suggested itself. It is easy to see lines 1-5 as "prologue" and 42-53 as "epilogue", though such divisions do not have the support which small capitals give to the equivalent ones in Wanderer. I count 36 words in the prologue, which is equal to the number of lines in the body of the work (i.e. excluding both prologue and epilogue). I present this "neutrally, as an observation of uncertain import". Does it tend to demonstrate deliberate mathematical structure, or merely how possible it is for ingenuity to discover such a structure? Then, in pursuit of my impression that OE poets composed with clear feeling for structure but not with precise tidiness, I looked at the Wanderer passages in which David urges us to see the chiastic arrangement of words, 8-21 and 22-38. The two together are bounded by small capitals, though a division between 21 and 22 is not supported in that way (on that score the division comes between 14 and 15), or as far as I can see on any particular numerical ratio. Within 8-21, working inwards, 8-9a appear to link with 19-21 in wording ("oft ic sceolde...[infinitive]" expanded to "ic...sceolde | oft...[infinitive]"). 10 then links not to one or more lines preceding 19, but independently to 19 itself ("ic (...) modsefan minne"). Then 13-14 link to 18 ("faeste binde...hordcofan"/"breostcofan bindath faeste"), and 15-16 make a nice balanced pair in the middle (not the mathematical centre), with the critical nouns "wyrde" and "helpe" looking respectively back to the prologue, summarised in 5b, and on to the epilogue, though thematically only, without verbal link. All these things are certainly there, but they do not suggest to me a neatly composing poet. For one thing, I have three lines for which I can see no linkages. On 22-38 I did not get on so well. For a start, 22 seems clearly to link to 35 ("geara iu goldwine minne"/"on geoguthe his goldwine"), and I suspect that 36-38 have been counted in simply to reach the next small capital (though in David's original analysis he extracted 88-91 only from the passage 88-96 which is thus bounded). Working inwards finds a link between 25 and 34 ("sele...sinc"), but I could see nothing further. What do colleagues think? From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 21 16:26:29 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:26:24 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:23:44 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1131; Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:08:40 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1448; Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:07:10 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9720 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:43:52 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8808; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:43:52 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 21 Apr 95 10:43:34 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <16427-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:44:48 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 13; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:44:19 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F387.38AC979B.13@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:44:15 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, dear heart, please do not misrepresent what I write. I suggested that editors be consulted as tertiary authorities, not that their opinions be dis- missed out of hand. The reason for citing the microfiche concordance of OE texts was to suggest that I have not confected a composite form on my own authority. If you consult my colleagues in Toronto you will discover that when they are doubtful about editorial policies and decisions they consult original manuscripts of facsimiles. My reasons for citing Hebrew and Greek and Latin sources is not to bludgeon you or anyone else into acceptance of my analyses, but to show you where I suppose the Irish and the English looked for models, every cited text being known in the Latin West during the early middle ages. I do not care twopence whether you work your way back to those sources. If they help you, fine. If not, that is also fine. Why not begin with texts of which the authors, dates, and origins are well attested, texts which were composed at exactly the same time and in the same places and by the same men who composed the earliest Old Irish and Old English texts, namely Hiberno-Latin and Anglo-Latin? You will find exactly the same phenomena, but more easily verifiable, as most of these texts survive in multiple copies. We may lay aside notions of defence against Biblical and Classical scholars, many of whom are silent for a very good reason. But I am not addressing them. I am addressing you. You have had many moons during which to read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest the analyses of Jerome and AElfric I posted to you. Every statement I have made is either confirmable or refutable. Do not expect me to believe that you are not up to deciding whether the texts and analyses are cor- rect or not. If they are not, I will gladly accept your correction. But if they are, mon vieux, ... . Salve! David From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 21 16:52:24 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:52:20 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:49:15 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4323; Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:41:43 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3088; Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:41:42 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0187 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 11:37:28 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1027; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 11:37:27 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 21 Apr 95 11:36:56 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <20516-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:38:07 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 15; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:37:41 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F38E.AEE577EB.15@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:37:40 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, again, Herewith an analysis of 'The Wanderer'. Part I, lines 8-21 and 22-38. a nis nu cwicra nan ... asecgan b faeste c binde d his hordcofan e ne maeg ... wi#dstondan e' ne ... gefremman. d' hyra broestcofan c' binda#d b' faeste a' swa ic ... saelan a si#d#dan geara iu goldwine minne b sohte seledreorig sinces bryttan c mec freondleasne d hu sli#den bi#d / sorg to geferan c' tham the him lyt hafa#d leofra geholena b' gemon he selesecgas ond sincthege a' on geogu#de his goldwine The 14 lines of the first paragraph divide by extreme and mean ratio at 9 and 5, at the end of the crux in e'. The 17 lines of the second divide by symmetry at the centre of line 30, at the crux of the chiasmus in d. The 99 words of the second divide by symmetry at 50, at the crux of the chiasmus. The first is connected to the second by a series of parallels in lines 13-33, 22-35, 22-35, 29-36, 29-37, 31-38. Part II exhibits [arallelism with internal chiasmus. a #donne sorg ond slaep somod aetgaedre b earmne anhogan oft gebinda#d c thince#d him on mode di thaet he his mondryhten ii clyppe ond cysse iii ond ii' on cneo lecge honda ond heafod i' swa he hwilum aer in geardagum giefstolas breac a' #donne onwaecne#d eft b' wineleas guma c' gesih#d him beforan d'i fealwe waegas iia bathian b brimfuglas c sorg bi#d geniwad iii maga iv geondhweorfe#d v grete#d gliwstafum iv' geondsceawa#d iii' secga geseldan ii'a swimma#d b fleotendra c cearo bi#d geniwad i' wathema gebind In part d the 22 words divide by extreme and mean ratio at 14 and 8, at the eighth word, at the crux of the chiasmus. In part d' the 61 words divide by symmetry at the 31st word, gliwstafum, at the crux of the chiasmus. Part I is linked to Part II by a series of words and phrases, werigmod 15, ofer wathema begind 24, neah 26, and sorg 30 in part I, which recur in reverse order in part II, sorg 39, geneahhe 56, ofer wathema gebind 57, and werigne sefan 57. To these one might add ceare cwithan 9, larcwidum 38, earmcearig 20, earmne 40, cwidegiedda 55, though they do not appear in chiastic or parallel order. The number of lines in I, 31, added to the number of lines in II, 19, totals 50, which divides by EMR at 31 and 19. Part III comprises 4 verse paragraphs. ai forthon ii ne maeg iii geond thas woruld bi eal ii flet ofgeafon c modge maguthegnas b'i ealra ii dreose#d ond fealleth a'i forthon ii ne maeg iii in woruldrice a wita sceal gethyldig bi ne sceal no to hatheort ii ne to hraedwyrde iii ne to wac wiga iv ne to wanhydig iv' ne to forht iii' ne to faegen ii' ne to feohgifre i' ne naefre gielpes to georn c aer he geare cunne a beorn sceal gebidan b thonne he beot sprice#d c oththaet collenfer#d cunne gearwe a ongietan sceal gleaw haele b thonne ealre thisse worulde wela weste stonde#d c oththaet ... The 8 lines and 48 words of the first paragraph divide by symmetry at the end of the fourth line and the 24th word, ofgeafon, at the crux of the chiasmus. The 36 words of the second paragraph divide by symmetry at the 18th word, wan- hydig, at the crux of the chiasmus. These paragraphs are linked by chiastic disposition of words and phrases throughout part III. 58 a thas woruld 60 b eorla 62 c swa thes middangeard 63 d ealra 74 d' ealre 75 c' swa thisne middangeard 84 b' eorl 85 a' thisne eardgeard Note the repetitive device in 804, 91-2, 108-9, 94-5, 106, 110. Parts III and IV are linked by one series of words in parallel order and another in reverse order. The number of lines in III, 30, added to that in IV, 19, totals 49, which divides by EMR at 30 and 19. Parts I-II are linked to III-IV by a series of parallels, 10-59, 12-60, 17- 64, 17-69, 17-83, 31-97, 48-102, 48-103, 48-105, 51-109. To this one might add, though not in parallel order, 9-75 and 97, 13 and 18 -102, 16-105, 16-72, 23- 102, 24 and 57 -82, 28-108, 41-109, 51-72. Unless my eye deceives me, the Prologue 1-5 begins with a capital letter and ends with a point. So does the Introduction to I 6-7. So does Part I. So does Part II. So does Part III. So does the Introduction to IV. So does the Epi- logue. The poet's descriptions of the man confirm the stages of his development from self-obsession to wisdom in lines 6, 40-1, 88-90, 111. Does this look to anyone like the work of a poet with a loose feel for structure? From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Apr 21 21:25:22 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Fri, 21 Apr 95 21:25:11 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 21:21:41 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 3691; Fri, 21 Apr 95 21:01:19 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 5904; Fri, 21 Apr 95 20:55:35 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9441 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:27:00 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7815; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:27:00 -040 Received: from beech.soton.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 21 Apr 95 10:26:08 ED Received: from willow.soton.ac.uk (willow.soton.ac.uk [152.78.128.20]) by beech.soton.ac.uk (8.6.10/hub-8.5a) with ESMTP id PAA11181 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:25:55 +01 Received: (from tr@localhost) by willow.soton.ac.uk (8.6.10/client-8.8) id PAA11128 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:23:05 +010 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 632 Message-Id: <199504211423.PAA11128@willow.soton.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:23:05 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Timothy_Reuter Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: from "Duncan Macrae-Gibson" at Apr 21, 95 02:54:09 p Status: RO Duncan sets out the difficulty fairly, I think; I'd add that scribes of our period working with _Latin_ texts reveal uncertainty of the kind we have been discussing recently about word divisions (for example in the compounds quod/si and et/si), which is of course no evidence for classical Latin, but is evidence for their perception of the Latin of their contemporaries and presumably for their perception of classical Latin. Their orthography, particularly as regards e/&ecauda;/ae, initial h or lack of it, ex/exs, c/ch, mn/min, mn/mpn, also makes letter-counting problematical, I'd have thought. Timothy Reuter, Southampton From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Sat Apr 22 02:03:50 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Sat, 22 Apr 95 02:03:46 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 01:58:39 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7039; Sat, 22 Apr 95 01:36:28 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7291; Sat, 22 Apr 95 01:31:06 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3528 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 18:46:40 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4799; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 18:46:40 -040 Received: from EKU.ACS.EKU.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 21 Apr 95 18:46:39 ED Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V4.3-7 #7621) id <01HPLZVK2E40001YBN@ACS.EKU.EDU>; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 18:46:44 ES X-Vms-To: IN%"ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HPLZVK3QC2001YBN@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 18:46:44 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Karen Foster." Subject: numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I'm sitting out this round of your'all reaping the whirlwind. I only want to say that no, you aren't right to suspect me of believing that if even one poem appears to have numerical structure, then the burden of proof is on those who refuse to believe that it is an underlying principle--if that's what you said. I have had enough music history and music theory both to know that numbers: ratios, proportions, etc. definitely underlay theories of music. I have no reason to think that it was any different with poetry. I hope that clarifies my position. I won't waste my effort; I do not have David's patience. And just now I have a splitting toothache. I'm going home. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Tue Apr 25 03:12:05 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 25 Apr 95 03:12:04 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Tue, 25 Apr 1995 03:08:44 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8832; Tue, 25 Apr 95 01:02:24 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1813; Tue, 25 Apr 95 00:50:47 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7225 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 11:29:57 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3990; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 11:29:56 -040 Received: from aberdeen.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Mon, 24 Apr 95 11:29:51 ED Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Mon, 24 Apr 95 16:32:28 BS Message-Id: Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 16:32:25 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, good friend, you said that the opinions of even an entire school of editors are not evidence, and should be considered, if at all, only in reckoning of tertiary authorities. That seems to me a good deal short of "suggesting that they be consulted...". And I say again, I am not in the least wishing to doubt your analyses of any Latin (or other classical) text. It is the extension to OE that I continue doubtful of. That OE poets write with a proper sense of form I would be blind if I denied; that they expressed it mathematically I remain to be persuaded about. Thank you for the full analysis of Wanderer. It calls for fuller examination than I can give it at this moment before I venture comment; I will get at it as soon as I can. -- Duncan From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Apr 26 04:05:31 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 26 Apr 95 04:05:28 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 04:01:39 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6622; Wed, 26 Apr 95 03:04:04 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9076; Wed, 26 Apr 95 03:00:34 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1450 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 25 Apr 1995 05:41:32 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4799; Tue, 25 Apr 1995 05:41:31 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 25 Apr 95 05:41:14 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <18609-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Tue, 25 Apr 1995 10:42:32 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 28; Tue, 25 Apr 1995 10:42:06 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F681.ABDF7F1F.28@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 10:42:05 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO George, If we think in terms of proof that would satisfy a police forensic expert we are unlikely to get far. We are dealing with works of art that issue from the minds of artists who want to communicate with us, not prove propositions. For the latter exercise they knew very well how to construct syllogisms. By all means keep your logical faculties and your sense of evidence in good order, but aim at the reading of a text that will enable you to recover the artist's mind. Herewith an example, a poem attributed to Cu' Chuimne, ob. 747. You'll find two editions, one in Henry Bradshaw Society, Irish Lber Hymnorum I 33-4 and another in Analecta Hymnica LI 305-6. Both defective, but the author's text is easily recoverable from four manuscripts. It begins thus. Cantemus in omni die concinnantes uarie conclamantes Deo dignum ymnum Sancte Marie. Bis per chorum hinc et inde conlaudemus Mariam ut uox pulset omnem aurem per laudem uicariam. Now anyone can see from the rhymes that a scribe who spells Marie with -ae or e caudata is writing wrongly and from the alliteration that a scribe who spells assimilated collaudemus is writing wrongly. The rhymes are not just terminal. In even lines there are internal rhymes -i-um -i-um and -e-au-em e-au-em, and the terminal rhymes march backward along the lines, confirming 'concinnantes', not 'concinentes'. One can infer from the beginning of the second couplet -- 2-2-twice -- that an editor who arranges these verses in patterns of 8-7-8-7-8-7-8-7 syllables instead of 15-15-15-15 is doing it wrongly. Do it right and what do you find? Twenty-six pentadecasyllabic lines followed by four octosyllabic lines followed by 'Amen'. At the end of the 26th line one reads in two MSS 'Cantemus', implying that we should do what the poet tells us explicitly in the second couplet to do, sing those lines twice. So we get thirty-one lines of hymn, one for every day of the month. If we sing the pentadecasyllabic lines twice we get fifty-two, one for every week of the year. If we sing the pentadecasyllabic lines twice and the octosyllabic lines and Amen one we get 365 words, one for every day of the year, appropriate enough, since we begin 'Cantemus in omni die'. When we come to the words 'Gabriel aduexit Verbum' we see that the poet is way through a 365-day year. The line, the word Verbum, the letter m of Verbum are all exactly 23% of the way through the text. When we come to the words 'Christi nomen inuocamus' the letter s is 888th of the hymn, 888 being the numerical value in Greek notation of the Christi nomen IHSOYS. From 'Amen amen adiuramus merita puerpere' to the last mention of 'Marie' inclusive there are 152 letters, 152 being the numerical value in Greek notation of MAPIA. Eight-ninths of the way through the poet hopes that 'scribamur litteris celestibus'. What would it matter of no manual in any discipline told a poet how to do any of this? One would have to be a complete blockhead to suppose that I could make this sort of thing up and impose it on a text extant in four good MSS. It would take something other than courage to affirm thatin a culture in which many men know how to do this sort of thing in Latin they would say to them- selves and each other, 'Of course when we write Old Irish or Old English we forget all this, and even if we remember it we don't do it in tongues that we know better than we know Latin.' Does any of this amount to forensic proof? Probably not. But the results look to my eye more likely to be correct than not. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Apr 26 12:46:16 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 26 Apr 95 12:46:11 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 12:43:12 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7971; Wed, 26 Apr 95 10:56:40 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7526; Wed, 26 Apr 95 10:56:38 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0074 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 05:54:15 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0234; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 05:54:14 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 26 Apr 95 05:54:09 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <06879-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 10:45:56 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 24; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 10:45:17 +0100 Message-Id: <0098F74B.47A51927.24@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 10:45:15 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical structure To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO George, again, I can't think why lines apparent on my screen disappear over the network. I wrote that the line about Gabriel alludes to the Annunciation, celebrated on 25 March, 23% of the way through a 365-day year. The prosody of Cu' Chuimne's hymn is bound to appear to anyone who looks even cursorily at it. Why earlier editors did not recognize it and edit their texts accordingly I cannot imagine. There is an even more blatant example in a poem edited by Michael Herren in 'Hisperica Famina: The Related Poems' in the Toronto Pontifical Institute's Studies and Texts series. Herren assumed from gibberish transmitted in two MSS that the poet's grasp of Greek was shaky at best. In fact the poet was competent, if not fluent. See how. Adelphus adelpha mater alle huius thugater dedranti thanataliter. Blepomen agialos nicatos dodrantibus sic mundi et uitam huius. Calesomen Dominum uti det boulen suum nobisque auxilium. Herren thinks there is monosyllabic rhyme throughout. But you can see in these first three alphabetical stanzas that there is, in the second, a short rhyme -s and a longer continuous rhyme -ius and a longer interrupted rhyme -i-us. Again in the third short -um, longer continuous -ium, longer interrupted -i-um. In the first short -ter, and two longer continuous -ater. But note also that the -a-e -a-e -a-e of the first line is repeated at the beginning of the second a-a and that the e at the end of the second is repeated at the beginning of the third. Thes at the end of the fourth is repeated at the beginning of the fifth -i-a-os and the -i-u at the end of the fifth is repeated at the beginning of the sixth -i-u. No one needs me to point out that huius and dedranti of the first stanza are echoed by dodrantibus and huius in the second. Now if we pay attention to the rhyme schemes we see that they are disposed by pattern. And everything else fits. There are 22 alphabetical three-lined stanzas, 66 lines 222 words, 500 syllables, and 1166 letters (MCLXVI, note the descending order of value of the roman numerals; what is missing? D, supplied from the number of syllables). I don't know why earlier editors didn't see these things, and I don't feel accountable for their failure to see them. These things are just there, along with manifest signs of linguistic competence. We find pure Hebrew, pure Greek, pure Latin, Hebrew with Greek inflexion, Greek with Latin inflexion, all making total sense. There are perfectly heptasyllabic lines, and octosyllabic lines, and ennea- syllabic lines. Of the enneasyllabic lines all can be reduced by synizesis or elision or syncope or combinations of these to octosyllabic or heptasyllabic lines. Of the octosyllables some can be reduced to heptasyllables by the same devices, and some remain irreducible. When we count the types and see 33-22-11 we suspect authorial order, not my editorial invention. The poet signed his work exactly where we might expect him so to do. He signed other extant poems, one of 66 lines exhibiting synizesis, elision, and syncope in exactly comparable dispositions. He invented a board game which Dub Innse Abbot of Bangor carried from the court of King AEthelstan to Ireland. And his Greek made its way into AEthelstan's charters. The absence of a manual that tells poets how to do this is comparable with a complaint uttered inside the cathedral in Durham that Vitruvius doesn't tell us how this building was made and no architect's drawings survive. We do, how- ever, have the building. And it will tell us much if we look at it with open eyes. DRH From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed Apr 26 17:38:05 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 26 Apr 95 17:37:58 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 17:21:19 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0104; Wed, 26 Apr 95 17:19:01 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0996; Wed, 26 Apr 95 17:18:28 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3317 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 11:45:32 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2940; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 11:45:31 -040 Received: from aberdeen.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 26 Apr 95 11:45:19 ED Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 26 Apr 95 16:48:57 BS Message-Id: Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:48:54 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Numerical structure in the Wanderer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- I've by now been able to have an extended look at your Wanderer analysis. A full critique would take longer to work out than I can spare, besides leading to a posting that would grossly overstrain the patience of the net (some of whom, as we've seen, already wish we would both shut up). What follows will be more than long enough, though I'll try to be concise. Those to whom the whole thing is mere angelic needle-dancing should delete at once, if they have got so far. Here goes: (1) Most of the links that you give in support of your analysis are certainly there. The treatment I posted of 8-21 and 22-38, and your treatment, to a large extent report the same things, because they report what exists. Nobody has doubted that the poem does contain linking of this sort. (2) Some of your links are so tenuous that I think you find them only because you want to find a link, thus 17-64 (on the routine formative element "forthon" - which also occurs in 37 and 58?), or "wac wiga" 67 - "faegen" 68 (thematic only, based on an interpretation of "faegen" which even its proponents, Dunning and Bliss, call only "not quite impossible" - ed., p.49?), or the whole structure 41b-44, which does not come to my eye as a chiasmus even on an nth reading, though it contains a nice structure "a and b and (expanded) c" [verbs], with c containing a sub-"a and b" [nouns]. But on these we could agree to differ; if your demonstrations elsewhere stood they would at the worst represent over-enthusiasm to extend them. (3) Sometimes you do not report links which I find at least as striking as those you do, but which do not fit the structures you are perceiving. Thus I continue to see "oft ic sceolde..." 8 as clearly linking to "ic...sceolde | oft..." 19-20; it's none the less there because its internal word-order is neither identical nor a neat reverse or because it untidies your linkage of 9b-11a with 19-21 (in which the "modsefan minne" link is certainly also there). (4) Your analyses agree with mine in leaving considerable and important parts of passages unlinked, both within and beyond the parts you use for your analyses. Thus the theme(s) presented in "indryhten theaw" 12 and "domgeorne" 17, between which I'm in fact now disposed to see a thematic link. You will, I take it, not agree; if you did it would spoil the symmetry of your chiasmus, getting between a and b but e' and d'. (5) 3 and 4 together strengthen me in my view that though the poet certainly had a strong sense of structure he was not creating neat structures (with the same care you use, I point out that I did not use the term "loose" of his "feel for structure"). However, If he can be shown to be using mathematical principles in creating his structures, that would be a major counter-argument. (6) For that, however, it is first essential that the work contain clearly delimited blocks. Here _Wanderer_ is very promising, for the ms. contains small capitals and points which clearly do delimit passages of evident structural importance in lines 1-5 and 6-7, and, balancing these two together, in lines 111-115. In what follows I rely on Dunning and Bliss as accurate reporters of the ms.; I can't at the moment get at the facsimile. You have evidently gone direct to it. If you can show that D & B got it wrong, part or all of my argument falls, but if they got it right your section "Unless my eye deceives me..." is nearer suppressio veri than I would be happy to have posted. It is literally true that what you label Part I "begins with a capital letter and ends with a point." It is not true that that picks it out as one section. There is a point at the end of 14 and a capital at the beginning of 15, so ms. evidence would be for a Part I 8-14 and a Part II 15-38. Similarly the ms. evidence would not be for your Part II as a continuous section, but for a Part III 39-44 and a Part IV 45-57, or for your Part III either, which breaks down into 58-65, 66-72 and 73-87. It is literally true that your "Introduction to IV" "begins with a capital letter and ends with a point" (and it is not broken as your I, II and III are). It is not true that that picks it out as a complete section. If arriving at a point terminates a section regardless of whether a capital follows, the one beginning at 58 terminates at the end of 63, not 65; and there are quite a lot of other lines terminating in points. The one at the end of 91 may well be seen as dividing sub- sections, but the break cannot be viewed as on all fours with breaks marked by point and following capital. There is another equally plausible sub-section point at the end of line 48, which you will probably not want to view so because it breaks what you want to see as a chiasmus. (7) If, then, the manuscript divisions do not give clear support to the structural units you wish to extract, great care is needed that the boundaries of these be consistently delimited if mathematical treatments are not to be sand-founded. The division of your Part I after 21 is thematically plausible, but when you count back beyond your "a" and forward beyond your "a'" to solidly marked divisions to get the lengths you will use for your calculations, you are doing something different from what you do in the "d'" of your Part II. There to get your 61 words I have to assume you counted forward beyond your "i'" to the clear break at the end of 57, but did not go back beyond your "i", leaving a passage starting in mid-line of 46 to be viewed as the unit. On the grounds, then, of uncertainty of delimitation I find the bases of your mathematical demonstrations unreliable. (8) For reliability we also need, before we start counting anything, a consistent definition of the point of a chiasmus at which a significant division must be looked for. Your definitions for 8-21, "at _the_end_of_ the crux in e'" - i.e. within the second half of the chiasmus between e' and d' - and for 22-38, "at the crux in d" - i.e. exactly between the halves, are not consistent. (9) I hold, then, that you have not demonstrated that _Wanderer_ is composed on the mathematical principles you have described. Unfortu- nately, except in the matter of the manuscript divisions, our disagreements do not belong to the "there or not there" category. Your latest posting confirms my suspicion that they are a matter of what a priori assumptions one should make about OE poetry. Yours would be that it is composed on those principles. You can't believe that the poets would say to themselves "Of course when we write... Old English we forget all this [or] don't do it in a language that we know better than we know Latin". I wouldn't put it like that. But I can well believe that composing in a learned (in both stressings!) language, with learned rules, seemed a quite different thing from composing in a native language with a long native tradition. Various amounts of what had been learned in the one might be carried over to the other, but that poets set out to construct poems in the vernacular in the way that they had studied in Latin seems to me a proposition needing demonstration, not a natural assumption needing "something more than courage" - do I take it you imply foolhardiness? - to deny. Unless in further discussion one of us should persuade the other (which doesn't seem very likely), the only possible appeal is to the consensus view of scholars who have tried to look fairly at the arguments. When I made such an appeal once before you accused me of playing to the qallery. I hope you won't again. What do colleagues think? (preferably not about those angels on the needle, about which you, David, will I hope agree with me if about nothing else, that it was a crass jibe when first made and hasn't improved over the centuries). With genuine good wishes -- Duncan From tdh1@cornell.edu Thu Apr 27 03:23:43 1995 Received: from postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu by aberdeen.ac.uk; Thu, 27 Apr 95 03:23:42 BST Received: from [132.236.236.95] (CU-DIALUP-0321.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.236.95]) by postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA03071 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 22:20:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 22:20:53 -0400 X-Sender: tdh1@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: enl011@ABERDEEN.AC.UK From: tdh1@cornell.edu (Thomas D. Hill) Subject: wanderer Status: RO Hi I will reply privately since I forswore commenting on the numerical structure of the Wanderer any more on the net.I have just looked quickly at the posting David put up and it doesn't strike me as particularly convincing. The chiastic structures in particular struck me as very loose. In part two for example he says that "thaet he his mondryten" d corresponds to "fealwe waegas" d' 1 -- EH? There are some parallels there but rhetorical and conceptual balencing are simply part of the OE poetic tradition and indeed they are common to almost all poetic traditions. peace tom hill Thomas D. Hill 607-277-0182 Dept. of English tdh1@cornell.edu Cornell University [I replied: Tom -- In fairness to David, since "his mondryhten" introduces what he "sees" in his dream and "fealwe waegas" what he sees as he wakes there is a thematic parallelism. Since his "d" chiasmus contains only "i" and "ii" leading to a central "iii", and his "d'" one contains "i", "ii", "iii" and "iv" leading to a central "v" he can't be intending a close parallelism between the two "i"s, the two "ii"s etc. [Sorry, my "he" changed reference from the wanderer to David. Hope it's not obscure.] I agree with you, though, that the parallels (which are certainly there) don't establish what David supposes they do. You'll have seen and perhaps even struggled through a long posting from me trying to argue that. I won't, of course, shake David, because it's become more and more clear that he simply knows that OE poets composed as he says because they knew Latin and knew that that was how one composed, so he doesn't need to establish that an OE poem is mathematically conceived, only to point out the ways in which it can be seen to be that way. I can see why people who reply to me privately (it's not only you!) don't want to tangle on the net with a mind as inflexibly set as David's, but it can create the impression that I'm the only old dullard resisting new ideas. He can always rely on a supporting posting or two from what I can't help seeing as his acolyte, Karen Foster. -- Duncan M-G] From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Wed May 10 04:46:57 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by aberdeen.ac.uk; Wed, 10 May 95 04:46:55 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Wed, 10 May 1995 04:42:36 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7577; Wed, 10 May 95 04:17:05 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 1817; Wed, 10 May 95 04:09:46 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6641 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 9 May 1995 11:06:04 -04 Return-Path: Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6883; Tue, 9 May 1995 11:06:03 -040 Received: from aberdeen.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 09 May 95 11:05:57 ED Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by aberdeen.ac.uk; Tue, 9 May 95 16:10:47 BS Message-Id: Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 16:10:43 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: Numerical structure To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Ah, Greg, Greg, would it were so! But have we perhaps genuinely reached agreement about what we've been disagreeing about? David's posting does not establish that _Wanderer_ was written on mathematical principles. It wasn't meant to. It was meant, given a prior assumption that an OE poet would wish to compose in that way, to show how _Wanderer_ can be read as reflecting that wish. That it does. Much the same applies to a lengthy thread on _Beowulf_ of some years ago, which came to an end rather similar to the present one, leaving me at the time very dissatisfied; but I understand better now. I hope. -- Duncan M-G From ANSAX-L%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@earn-relay.ac.uk Fri Jun 23 12:20:34 1995 Received: from mail-relay.ja.net by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 23 Jun 95 12:20:34 BST Via: uk.ac.earn-relay; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 12:19:45 +0100 Received: from UKACRL by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 9353; Fri, 23 Jun 95 12:19:08 BST X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK (LISTSERV) by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 8741; Fri, 23 Jun 95 12:19:08 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8145 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 07:19:07 -04 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6791; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 07:19:07 -040 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 23 Jun 95 07:19:01 ED Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <14355-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 12:19:20 +010 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 11; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 12:18:42 +0100 Message-Id: <009924EB.F0D753D6.11@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 1995 12:18:41 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: The "meter" discussion To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Chris, Greg has raised not merely a good point, but an argument both fundamental and central. If one considers even for a moment any of the Latin literature written in these islands from the fifth century to the eighth and beyond, one sees that it is deliberately acquired and utterly self-conscious. Every aspect of it is thoroughly scrutinized. It ismeasured and weighed in the balance and not found wanting. It is absolutely inconceivable that men who do this in a learned language do not do it in their mother tongue. [CONTINUATION DELETED] From owner-ansax-l%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@ib.rl.ac.uk Wed Jun 28 10:57:08 1995 Received: from ib.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 28 Jun 95 10:57:05 BST Received: from UKACRL.BITNET by ib.rl.ac.uk (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0038; Wed, 28 Jun 95 10:55:47 BST X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK (LISTSERV) by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 0095; Wed, 28 Jun 95 10:55:47 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0531 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 28 Jun 1995 05:55:50 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3468; Wed, 28 Jun 1995 05:55:50 -0400 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Wed, 28 Jun 95 05:55:45 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2.ox.ac.uk. with SMTP (PP) id <20381-0@oxmail2.ox.ac.uk.>; Wed, 28 Jun 1995 10:55:29 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 6; Wed, 28 Jun 1995 10:54:49 +0100 Message-Id: <009928CE.0D3F430E.6@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 10:54:48 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: The "meter" discussion To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO On encountering a nut to crack one might resort to a squeeze between thumb and forefinger or a nutcracker or a hammer. Which would Duncan prefer? Let us begin with the Old English translation of the Creation story at the beginning of Genesis, taken as a model of literary creation. We know what it was translated from, by whom, when, and for whom. We are reasonably certain of the text, a copy of which with its Latin original Duncan has had for more than one or two years. If I were convicted of misconstruction, mistranslation, faulty presentation, special pleading, or pressing the argument further than the evidence allows I would accept correction. If not, the case for Duncan's reserve collapses, and he knows it. Let him set aside texts written in or associated with centres conspicuous for transmission of Latin learning -- Canterbury, Rochester, Winchester, Exe- ter, Glastonbury, Worcester, York, Durham, Wearmouth, and Jarrow. Let him set aside texts directly translated or otherwise derived from Clas- sical, Late, and Anglo-Latin sources, and texts embedded in Latin contexts. Let him set aside inscriptions containing both Latin and Old English, both roman and runic scripts. What is left, even as a model, of the way men ignorant of Latin might have expressed themselves in Old English? I have not suggested to Rick or Karen or anyone else that they try to apply the rules of Anglo-Latin rhyming octosyllabic couplets to Old English verse or of Latin prose to English prose. Rather that by analysing the Latin, which has a long written tradition of fixed texts, and hich Englishmen were not only learning but experimenting with, they recover structural features that imply and exhibit the theoretical and practical notions underlying their works com- posed at the same time and in the same places as the Old English. Because these things are infixed one can appeal to them, in preference to the authority of Donatus or Sievers, though even these two seem to me to shed more light on the texts than methods of analysis currently fashionable. This is not a way of imposing 'my' agenda on others' studies nor a way of killing debate, rather a way to free oneself from misleading and fruitless modes of inquiry. From owner-ansax-l%WVNVM.WVNET.EDU@ib.rl.ac.uk Thu Jun 29 09:26:37 1995 Received: from ib.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 29 Jun 95 09:26:32 BST Received: from UKACRL.BITNET by ib.rl.ac.uk (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0669; Thu, 29 Jun 95 09:25:09 BST Received: from IB.RL.AC.UK by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 7843; Thu, 29 Jun 95 09:25:08 BST Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9051 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 29 Jun 1995 04:24:56 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3836; Thu, 29 Jun 1995 04:24:56 -0400 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 29 Jun 95 04:24:46 EDT Received: from ess.abdn.ac.uk (ess.if2.abdn.ac.uk) by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 29 Jun 95 09:25:30 BST Message-Id: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 09:25:28 BST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: The "meter" discussion To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- I have never rested any argument on the translation of Genesis. I believe myself to have convicted you of "pressing the argument further than the evidence allows" on Wanderer. The phrasing "...collapses, and he knows it" is offensive. -- Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Nov 23 10:06:57 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 23 Nov 95 10:06:56 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA15930; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 09:57:19 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0879 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 04:56:08 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2827; Thu, 23 Nov 1995 04:56:07 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 23 Nov 95 04:56:06 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 23 Nov 95 10:00:00 GMT Message-Id: Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 09:59:58 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO I'd add to Karen's posting that everyone who has been involved in disagreement with David Howlett should read his paper in Scragg & Szarmach. It appears to give a fully set out specimen argument of how his principles are to be applied to an OE text. It may persuade you; it may provide you with specifics that you think you can specifically repudiate. I've so far been able to look at it only briefly, at the recent TOEBI conference, where I decided not to spend 25 pounds on acquiring the whole book, and am waiting on ILL to lend it to me. I shall expect to post again, taking up one "may" or the other, shortly afterwards. -- Duncan Macrae-Gibson (macg@abdn.ac.uk) From jhill@nadn.navy.mil Thu Nov 30 15:39:15 1995 Received: from norfolk.nadn.navy.mil by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 30 Nov 95 15:39:05 GMT Received: (from jhill@localhost) by norfolk.nadn.navy.mil (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA05379; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 10:34:57 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 10:34:56 -0500 (EST) From: Prof John M Hill To: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Duncan, thank you for your carefully considered response to part of David's essay. I am sure that many of us appreciate the work you've done and I hope others respond as carefully, including David himself. I agree with you entirely on the following points: poets working in the vernacular have no particular reason to follow the compositional models they might have acquired for composing in Latin; there is probably no mathematical basis to the line by line composition of BEOWULF, although parallelism, variation, and some chiastic structures certainly appear; if there is a mathematical basis for the poem it probably exists above the fitt level regarding largescale organization and numbering. Regards, John Hill. From wsayers@access.digex.net Fri Dec 1 10:09:58 1995 Received: from access1.digex.net by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 1 Dec 95 10:09:38 GMT Received: (from wsayers@localhost) by access1.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA22054 ; for ; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 05:05:19 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 05:05:18 -0500 (EST) From: william sayers To: macg@abdn.ac.uk Subject: Howlett critique Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Dear Duncan, Thank you for your heroic effort to work through David Howlett's methodology and conclusions. Too few of us are prepared to invest the time and labour to take such a professionally responsible approach to defective scholarship and to put arrogance in its place in a cool and courteous analysis. One is left wondering with what degree of consciousness David would have allowed himself to be coopted by such a slippery set of analytical criteria, but such speculation is probably not more fit here than it would have been in your posting, the tone and content of which I again commend. Will Sayers wsayers@access.digex.net From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 1 13:06:15 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 1 Dec 95 13:06:08 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA15784; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:58:08 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5055 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:57:14 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4044; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 07:57:14 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 01 Dec 95 07:57:10 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:16:34 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 15; Fri, 01 Dec 1995 12:16:24 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A36F.4905E847.15@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:16:19 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I am deeply grateful for the attention you have devoted to the analysis of the first fits of 'Beowulf' in the Scragg and Szarmach volume. Some of the elements that appear to have puzzled you issue from the condensed introduction the editors requested. In two books, the first now published, the 'rules and adjuncts' are stated fully and exhibited in the Hebrew texts in which they appeared first (first, that is, for the purpose of documenting the transmission of Biblical style). Remember, please, that even in St John's Greek we are wit- nessing an adaptation of structural principles from a Semitic language to an Indo-European language. The Vulgate, in which I claim that early Insular schol- ars encountered this style, is the third vessel into which these things have been poured. Use of such features in Old Irish and Old English represents ad- aptation for the fourth and fifth times. You write 'David's phrasing does not conceal, but neither does it draw at- tention to, the shifting basis of location of the ends of the intervals'. In the books I have addressed this specifically. There are three ways to account: from A to A' inclusive, between A and A' (exclusive of both), and from A to A' including one end but excluding the other. You will see that I have consistent- ly used different locutions to refer to each of these methods. The range of permitted variation is not great. A passage either exhibits precise numbers, or it does not. And I have not edited these texts to make them conform to preconceived theories. The Book of Genesis survives in thousands of copies, as does John's Gospel. I have altered nothing in either. Bede's works survive in hundreds of copies, Aldhelm's in scores. I have altered nothing in either. You will agree, I think, that it would be unreasonable to demand that any author whom I claim to have composed in this style, exhibit relentlessly consistent application of symmetries of line and word and syllable and letter throughout en entire work (though some do). I do not suggest that the forms of analysis be accepted as written on stone as I have proposed them. I feel like a schoolboy who is still learning the paradigms. But after more than twenty years of having the ideas derided as contemptible it gives a pleasure deeper and more intense than I can write about that you have even considered them seriously. Salve. David From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 1 15:46:44 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 1 Dec 95 15:46:43 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA26763; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 15:36:46 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6672 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:31:06 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0842; Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:31:06 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 01 Dec 95 10:31:04 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:51:49 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 14; Fri, 01 Dec 1995 14:51:33 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A384.F6DA358F.14@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:51:30 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, again, back from lunch, One little objection to some of yourcriticism is that you are demanding too much of only one layer of analysis. Remember that the paper was delivered as a twenty-minute lecture (which ended on time). You have seen already that some of the elements you describe as snippeted or filleted appear not to fit into one chiastic or parallel pattern, though they clearly do fit into analyses of larger patterns. If you make xerox copies and use one colour to mark one form of pattern and another for another, bearing in mind that each fit exhibits one and sometimes more forms, discretely composed, but that each fit has one pair in its own fourteen-fit third of the poem, and two pairs in each of the other two-thirds of the poem, and you use different colours to mark these con- nections, you will see that in many fits there is absolutely no residue. Every- thing is accounted for. Now, any reasonable person will accept that unless some parallel and chiastic pairs are immediately apparent in the most elementary analysis of a small unit like the sentence or verse paragraph it would be fruitless to pursue the study. I am asking you to accept for the moment that the parts you infer to have been omitted because they do not fit my primary analysis are not an embarrassment. I will account for them later. But if I had told you at the outset how complicated the art of this poem is you would have dismissed me as a complete crank. Pursue the analysis, please, and you will, I hope, concur sooner rather than later that the calculus of this poem is not some invention of my out-of-office-hour ravings. It entitles the poet to greater respect, as a poet, I mean, let alone as a mathematician, than any modern scholar has yet accorded him. When you arrive at this point, a consummation devoutly to be wished, you may wonder why the man in the chair at that session, adjourned it after the second of two twenty-minute papers, allowing not a single question in the twenty minutes allotted for that purpose. I know this mode of analysis is irksome to work one's way into, in much the same way that reading and trying to understand Boethius De Institutione Arithmetica and De Institutione Musica is irksome. Stick with it, and you will perceive the benefit. 'Reap' might be a better verb. Recovery of this habit of mind will inflict a sense of deep regret for what we have lost, tempered by a delight about which it is difficult to speak in connecting with coherent human thought across millennia. I am not wasting your time. From HUTCHESO@MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 2 14:41:30 1995 Received: from muvms6.mu.wvnet.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 2 Dec 95 14:41:00 GMT Received: from MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU by MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU (PMDF V4.3-11 #6427) id <01HYBSGDVDGG000GDX@MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU>; Sat, 02 Dec 1995 09:34:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 02 Dec 1995 09:34:30 -0400 (EDT) From: HUTCHESO@MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU Subject: Re: geardagum etc. In-Reply-To: To: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Status: RO Duncan-- I'm replying privately because I don't want to get into another silly argument with somebody like Karen Foster (who, to my embarrassment, nearly always makes me lose my temper). I had precisely the same problems you have with David Howlett's article in the _Editing OE_ collection, and I thought your exposition of the weaknesses in David's argument was excellent. Your most damning point, I think, is your demonstration that by choosing words at the boundaries of his sections as either included or not in the word count he can always come up with a number divisible by three. This strikes at the very foundations of his argument, and is irrefutable. I was speaking to Don Scragg at Kalamazoo about _Editing OE_, and he said that Howlett's article was "enigmatic," or "inscrutable," or something like that. I got the impression that he thought Howlett was off in cloud cuckooland somewhere (you didn't hear that from me, but of course please feel free to post to the net, if you want to, the information that I agree with your analysis wholeheartedly). I could have gotten the ball rolling by responding to Foster's last posting by pointing out that David's argument is circular: if _dha_ is an adverb, then there is a parallel structure in the opening lines; there is a parallel structure in the opening lines, therefore _dha_ is an adverb. But I wanted to drop the matter. Thanks again for your help with my book. They never told me if the corrections you suggested made it in; we shall see. Regards, Rand From jhill@nadn.navy.mil Mon Dec 4 13:13:13 1995 Received: from norfolk.nadn.navy.mil by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 13:13:08 GMT Received: (from jhill@localhost) by norfolk.nadn.navy.mil (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA13849; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 08:08:57 -0500 Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 08:08:56 -0500 (EST) From: Prof John M Hill To: enl011@abdn.ac.uk Subject: Re: geardagum etc. In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Good, message taken. I hesitate to respond on the net only because I haven't yet done what you have so convincingly done. But next time I will respond publically if I have a response. I don't have a copy of my response to you, but you are welcome to circulate it on the net as a rhetorical invitation to others (if you have a copy of it and can send it out through your server). Otherwise, I'll wait for another posting on the topic and jump in then. Regards, John. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 4 13:29:58 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 13:29:54 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA27128; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 13:20:57 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1162 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 08:19:54 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2147; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 08:19:54 -0500 Received: from norfolk.nadn.navy.mil by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 04 Dec 95 08:19:53 EST Received: (from jhill@localhost) by norfolk.nadn.navy.mil (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA14003; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 08:20:41 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 08:20:41 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Prof John M Hill Subject: Re: geardagum etc. Comments: To: David Howlett To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099A36F.4905E847.15@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO David, you and Duncan have now embarked publically in a potentially fruitful exchange regarding your scholarly discoveries about structures of composition in classical texts and, presumably in insular Latin texts. I for one am willing to agree that some kind of arithmetical basis underlies compostion theory and practice in the texts you know best and in the families of texts they are part of. I will even entertain the likelihood of arithmetical composition for BEOWULF above the fitt level (given the tendencies shown about 30 years ago by Tom Hart). But I agree entirely with Duncan on the issue of native composition: there is no reason why a poet working in Old English heroic traditions need compose in a manner derived from the practice of those who compose in Latin under the influence of Roman or Greek mathematical and musical theories. I doubt you would claim the opposite anyway, given your rightly stated interest in empirical observation. If the kinds of patterns and countings you pursue are in fact present either exactly or nearly enough so, an objective examination of the text in a thoroughgoing way should show that (assuming we have put the right questions to the text). Regards, John. From Edward.Irving@m.cc.utah.edu Mon Dec 4 15:05:40 1995 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 14:54:55 GMT Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (ei8721@cor.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.2]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id HAA27264; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 07:50:10 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id HAA06994; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 07:50:08 -0700 (MST) Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 07:50:07 -0700 (MST) From: Edward Irving To: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Cc: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Subject: Re: geardagum etc. In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO I'm grateful for your careful examination of David Howlett's proposals about the mathematical structures he finds in BEOWULF. I agree with you on many points. David's sweeping statement, "The author of Beowulf understood these compositional rules, which he applied throughout the poem," seems quite unacceptable to me. As you suggest, it is by no means certain that writers of Latin observed these rules. It is not certain that writers of OE poetry were also fluent writers of Latin. Despite David's flat denial in a recent posting, there is abundant evidence that OE poetry shared a common origin in pre-literate Germanic poetry, and that this tradition -- stylistic, metrical, rhetorical -- continued into obviously "written" poetry, like translations of the psalms. This "oral" tradition owes nothing to Latin. The first lines of Beowulf indeed have a rhetorical structure, but it is not at all what David suggests. You point out the typical split or interrupted variation of Gardena - in geardagum - theodcyninga, ignored by David because it doesn't fit his numerical scheme. One might add the typical "double object" construction: first the word thrym, which is followed by the enlarging or expanding hu phrase in l. 3. A true rhetorical diagram would have quite a different look. Your analysis of lines 4-11 is excellent; I can add little to it. David's display is, as you point out, somewhat tinkered and tailored to "fit" an a priori pattern. It ignores the stresses that the native style puts on alliterating words and on verse-structure -- in favor of what? It is hard to believe that the poet would wish to construct the rhetorical unit David tries to illustrate: its supposed parallels in the chiastic structure don't match, and it blurs the existing structure (tripartite, as you point out) of a kind of "envelope pattern" -- running from "oft Scyld Scefing" to "thaet waes god cyning", telling Scyld's story in flashback. You have been generous in discussing this question in David's own terms, counting the words and syllables with care. I can't do that because I have a real prejudice, I'll admit. I know a good deal about poetry, and I don't think poets write good poetry counting on their fingers the whole time, or allowing arithmetic to govern their statements. It's possible someone might do that with a short poem, especially with a prayer or ritual text that they wanted to have "magic" qualities -- but not with a long non-religious poem like Beowulf. This may be taken as my own a priori statement, and I guess it is that. I admire the poem Beowulf just this side of idolatry. I would accept David's hypothesis only if it showed me that the poem is even finer than I think it is -- and he has a long way to go to prove that. TED IRVING From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 4 19:03:54 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 19:03:53 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA21622; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 18:51:54 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4020 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 11:25:32 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3148; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 11:25:31 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 04 Dec 95 11:25:22 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 16:30:01 GMT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 16:29:59 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO No, David. In response to your second posting, you really cannot say, as a serious scholar, that you know that what you have published as illustrating a precise type of structure does not do so, but that your colleagues should take it on trust that all its failures to do so can be explained on the basis of further analyses of further passages, and should spend further tracts of their time in seeking these out. When in the passage before me you treat as parallel things that exhibit no clear parallelism, I have no confidence that your various longer-range connections will be any better. My view so far is that you are imposing structure on the poem rather than extracting it from it. It is a view I will change if you provide evidence to persuade me, but I have no reason at present to believe that if I "stick with it ... I will perceive (or reap) any benefit at all". From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 4 19:36:46 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 19:36:43 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA25789; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 19:25:59 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4901 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 12:40:54 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7265; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 12:40:54 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 04 Dec 95 12:40:53 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 15:56:43 GMT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 15:56:43 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- Thank you for your careful reply. As you say, your phrasing distinguishes between intervals reckoned inclusively, exclusively, and part and part. But do you contend that given that you may, in reading a passage, invoke from instance to instance whichever the author seems to you at that point to have used, the exhibition of a series of intervals as all multiples of three in fact exhibits anything? I hold myself to have demonstrated that it does not. Can you refute me? You say flatly "a passage either exhibits precise numbers, or it does not". If the passage is a chiasmus, and the numbers can be hald to be precise with the crux counted in with the first half, or with the second half, or with neither, do you still maintain that this is a clear "either- or"? It seems clearly otherwise to me. I agree wholeheartedly that an author may use the style you demonstrate, yet without doing so consistently throughout the work. That being so, the extent to which an Old English writer in particular did so use it is a matter that requires to be evidenced in every passage in which any use of the style is held to have been made. If we can agree on that, we are fundamentally in agreement. We will still, I think, be in disagreement about the extent to which such use is evidenced in the opening of Beowulf. I have argued, with careful specificity, that this extent is small, far too small to provide criteria for editing the poem. Can you refute me? I know of nobody on this net who holds your views contemptible. I know of many who are very unhappy about your application of them to Old English poetry. Best wishes -- Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 4 20:27:09 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 4 Dec 95 20:27:08 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA00990; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 20:20:31 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4558 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 12:09:26 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5748; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 12:09:26 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 04 Dec 95 12:09:25 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Mon, 4 Dec 1995 16:38:12 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 140; Mon, 04 Dec 1995 16:37:57 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A5EF.54210070.140@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 16:37:56 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Ted, How is one to get at 'pre-literate Germanic poetry'? Let us leave aside for the moment Old English and consider, say, Gothic, which survives almost exclusively in translation of the Bible, or Old Saxon or Old High German, written down only after the conversion of Germans by Irish and Anglo-Saxon missionaries, and at that, in large measure, translations of Biblical and other Christian texts, or Old Norse, which first acquired written literature that survives in manuscripts after exposure of Norsemen to the cultures of literate Christian cultures in York and Dublin. Your statement that Latin poets did not compose mathematically takes the breath away. Consult the analysis of Boethius' 'O qui perpetua' posted on this network perhaps two years ago, now in print in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition' on pages 49-54. Or try on your own 'O stelliferi Conditor orbis'. Or long before Boethius Proverbs 8:22-31, on pages 8-11 and 19-20. For Classical Latin prose writers try the Rhetorica ad Herennium, pages 23-6, or Cicero De Oratore, pages 26-9. Displaying your prejudice will not do. I invite you either to con- vict me of outright error or to change your mind. And you had better begin at the beginning. Duncan wrote that one MIGHT see the sort of thing I analysed in Beowulf if he came to it convinced that others had done so before. To see why I affirm that writers did so before, begin with the Hebrew and Greek and Latin Bibles and the Latin prose and verse that we KNOW the Irish and the English read. Or if you want to confine your inquiry to these islands alone, begin with the Latin prose and verse that we KNOW they wrote. There are fifty examples in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition'. 'Five Experi- ments in Textual Reconstruction and Analysis' goes to press today, to appear in 'Peritia' 9 (1995), pp. 1-50. Of these Celtic Latin works, the second sur- vives only in an English MS, the third survives mostly in English MSS and is quoted by Anglo-Latin writers from the third quarter of the seventh century onward, and the fifth was written by a Breton at the court of AEthelstan. There are more than 100 Anglo-Latin texts about to appear in 'British Books in Bibli- cal Style' and 'Pillars of Wisdom', most of them edited from more than one source, all of them issuing from the same centres as the vast bulk of extant Old English literature. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 5 01:04:45 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 5 Dec 95 01:04:34 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id AAA29779; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 00:56:30 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7829 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 15:53:14 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9967; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 15:53:14 -0500 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 04 Dec 95 15:53:12 EST Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (ei8721@cor.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.2]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id NAA11377; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 13:53:50 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id NAA10749; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 13:53:39 -0700 (MST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 13:53:35 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edward Irving Subject: Re: geardagum etc. Comments: To: David Howlett To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099A5EF.54210070.140@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO David, don't fulminate at me, please. Don't you have any other tone? Do you really think that, in its basic metrical/poetic style, early verse in Germanic languages is the direct product of "literate Christian cultures"? That does take the breath away. I'll risk putting this to a vote on the net. What Latin poets did or didn't do is not my concern. Some may well have composed mathematically, peace to their ashes. All your piling up of authorities has nothing to do with what vernacular poets did with their own tradition of vernacular poetry. They had a very strong tradition of their own (strong enough to survive in some form to the 14th century). It would have been stupendously difficult, probably impossible, to combine writing good poetry in that tradition with writing in an alien tradition of numbering syllables, not one ordinarily conducive to good poetry, certainly. I expect you know classical languages and learned literature of the middle ages much better than I do. But you certainly do not know vernacular Old English as well as I do, or you could hardly be proposing such an unlikely influence. Perhaps we should each stay in our own backyard. Our understanding of all aspects of medieval literature is probably terribly incomplete, and will remain patchy and messy. tidying things up by imposing a Master Theory satisfies the soul, but not the truth. But I wish you a Merry Christmas, anyway. TED IRVING On Mon, 4 Dec 1995, David Howlett wrote: > Ted, > How is one to get at 'pre-literate Germanic poetry'? Let us leave aside > for the moment Old English and consider, say, Gothic, which survives almost > exclusively in translation of the Bible, or Old Saxon or Old High German, > written down only after the conversion of Germans by Irish and Anglo-Saxon > missionaries, and at that, in large measure, translations of Biblical and > other Christian texts, or Old Norse, which first acquired written literature > that survives in manuscripts after exposure of Norsemen to the cultures of > literate Christian cultures in York and Dublin. > Your statement that Latin poets did not compose mathematically takes the > breath away. Consult the analysis of Boethius' 'O qui perpetua' posted on this > network perhaps two years ago, now in print in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition' > on pages 49-54. Or try on your own 'O stelliferi Conditor orbis'. Or long > before Boethius Proverbs 8:22-31, on pages 8-11 and 19-20. For Classical Latin > prose writers try the Rhetorica ad Herennium, pages 23-6, or Cicero De Oratore, > pages 26-9. Displaying your prejudice will not do. I invite you either to con- > vict me of outright error or to change your mind. > And you had better begin at the beginning. Duncan wrote that one MIGHT see > the sort of thing I analysed in Beowulf if he came to it convinced that others > had done so before. To see why I affirm that writers did so before, begin with > the Hebrew and Greek and Latin Bibles and the Latin prose and verse that we > KNOW the Irish and the English read. Or if you want to confine your inquiry > to these islands alone, begin with the Latin prose and verse that we KNOW they > wrote. There are fifty examples in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition'. 'Five Experi- > ments in Textual Reconstruction and Analysis' goes to press today, to appear > in 'Peritia' 9 (1995), pp. 1-50. Of these Celtic Latin works, the second sur- > vives only in an English MS, the third survives mostly in English MSS and is > quoted by Anglo-Latin writers from the third quarter of the seventh century > onward, and the fifth was written by a Breton at the court of AEthelstan. There > are more than 100 Anglo-Latin texts about to appear in 'British Books in Bibli- > cal Style' and 'Pillars of Wisdom', most of them edited from more than one > source, all of them issuing from the same centres as the vast bulk of extant > Old English literature. > From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 5 10:30:45 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 5 Dec 95 10:30:36 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA09260; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:22:28 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4157 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 05:06:07 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5543; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 05:06:07 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 05 Dec 95 05:06:05 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:04:05 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 2; Tue, 05 Dec 1995 10:04:01 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A681.76C42BB0.2@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:04:01 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, You have just shown me the rightness of not releasing short analyses of single passages. The proper place to begin is at the beginning. Once it is clear from the Biblical passages that words and phrases not included in anal- yses of short extracts do fit into larger patterns the argument will not have to be made again. You might reasonably have inferred that I would not advance examples of intervals of three and four words as significant if I did not have scores of other examples of intervals at 7, 11, 17, 18, 19, 101, and other numbers to which your objections cannot conceivably apply. If you had heeded what I wrote earlier you would not havesupposed that it is a weakness that the text of Beowulf does not behave in every particular like the text of John's Gospel. I am advancing NOT analyses that can be used as templates for examina- tion of other texts, but principles by which authors generated FORM anew every time. Now that I think of it, you have had at your private disposal for a long time the very text from which much of this derives. I may not have sent you the Hebrew text of Genesis, but I am certain to have sent you the Vulgate and AElfric's translation of the Vulgate Genesis, in which you will see unmistake- able indications of many of the things you have been objecting to in other analyses. Begin at the beginning If you find errors in my account of those two translations I will correct them, and, if necessary, modify any of not have From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 5 16:28:58 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 5 Dec 95 16:28:57 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA27553; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 16:16:16 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5573 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 09:33:38 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1518; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 09:33:38 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 05 Dec 95 09:33:34 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Tue, 5 Dec 1995 14:03:23 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 19; Tue, 05 Dec 1995 14:03:17 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A6A2.E2F2C9A2.19@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 14:03:15 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Ted, I wasn't fulminating. But sometimes I feel exasperated at the way critics strain at my gnats while they swallow others' camels. Some correspondents, for example, have written privately that they disincline to give what I would con- sider proper consideration to the Celtic Latin and Anglo-Latin background to Old English literature, preferring to treat the latter as if the theory and practice of composition and the underlying aesthetic theory were that of 'pre- literate Germanic'. This seems to me to beg many questions, the first being how would anyone know what 'pre-literate Germanic' was? Another being, why should we suppose that texts that have come down to us in written form reflect an oral tradition that we cannot possibly know about? I try not to beg such questions and concentrate instead on the ascertainable context, the recoverable milieu from which Old English literature issued. What would we think, incidentally, of an Old French scholar who, confronted with Benedeit's 'Voyage de Saint Brendan' amd Gaimar's 'Estoire des Engleis', said that he disinclined to consider the structure and style of the 'Navigatio Brendani' and the 'Historia Regum Britannie' and the 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle', preferring to compare the Anglo-Norman works with pre-literate poetry in the langue d'oil and the langue d'oc (if there were such things)? The pre-eminent centres from which Anglo-Latin literature emerged are the archiepiscopal sees of Canterbury and York, the sees of Gloucester, Hereford, Lindisfarne (later Durham), Rochester, Winchester, and Worcester, the monaster- ies of Wearmouth and Jarrow and Glastonbury, the schools of Theodore and Had- rian and AElberht and AEthelwold, and the courts of Alfred and AEthelstan. List for me, please, the Old English texts which are NOT translations or adap- tations or glosses of Latin texts or embedded in Anglo-Latin texts and which do NOT issue from the places mentioned above. On that foundation we might be- gin to compare English texts with those in other Germanic languages innocent of Latin influence. Without begging any questions, of course. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 5 17:28:22 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 5 Dec 95 17:28:21 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA02990; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 17:18:51 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7779 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 12:06:47 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0955; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 12:06:47 -0500 Received: from GROG.RIC.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 05 Dec 95 12:06:45 EST Received: from grog.ric.edu by grog.ric.edu (PMDF V4.3-7 #8915) id <01HYG4I6VNS6003849@grog.ric.edu>; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 12:02:45 EDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 12:02:42 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Joe Carroll Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: Status: RO On Tue, 5 Dec 1995, Prof John M Hill wrote: > Regarding David Howlett's recent posting, in which he responds > to Ted Irving: the leading phrase seems to be "the recoverable > milieu from which Old English literature issued." There is much > to concern us in that "recoverable milieu" if we mean only one that > we can demonstrate elsewhere and in some clearly genetic relationship > to Old English works. Of course any such milieu would have to be > a prior literary one, no doubt a Latin and Greek one. But there > is more to "recoverable" than the demonstrable: there is also the > inferential in relation to complex and mixed appearances. > Our inferential exercises, our ability to construct resonable, relevant > models of germanic literary modes, are valid on the face of it unless > David can in fact show us that we have no signs in Old English > literature -- especially in the heroic poetry, but including biblical > paraphrases, lives, prayers, meditations and so on -- of verse forms, > rhetorical patternings, diction and compounding that are not derivable > from Latin authors, texts, and number-based modes of composition. I recognize the objections that David Howlett and others on the list make in re-constructing pre-literate Old English prosody; however, do not linguists rely on inferential evidence to re-construct the descent of Old English from re-constructed languages, such as proto-German and Indo-European? We do not seem to have a problem reconstructing, without extant texts, the grammatical history of the language from which the poetry was made; why do we have such a terrible time recognizing reconstructions of pre-literature poetic techniques? --joe carroll ******************************************************************* * Joe Carroll * * Rhode Island College And gladly wolde he lerne * * and gladly teche. * * * * E-mail: JRCARROLL@ric.edu * ******************************************************************* From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 5 17:51:58 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 5 Dec 95 17:51:56 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA05027; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 17:41:23 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6214 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:24:35 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4839; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:24:35 -0500 Received: from norfolk.nadn.navy.mil by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 05 Dec 95 10:24:33 EST Received: (from jhill@localhost) by norfolk.nadn.navy.mil (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA08255; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:25:38 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:25:38 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Prof John M Hill Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099A6A2.E2F2C9A2.19@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO Regarding David Howlett's recent posting, in which he responds to Ted Irving: the leading phrase seems to be "the recoverable milieu from which Old English literature issued." There is much to concern us in that "recoverable milieu" if we mean only one that we can demonstrate elsewhere and in some clearly genetic relationship to Old English works. Of course any such milieu would have to be a prior literary one, no doubt a Latin and Greek one. But there is more to "recoverable" than the demonstrable: there is also the inferential in relation to complex and mixed appearances. Our inferential exercises, our ability to construct resonable, relevant models of germanic literary modes, are valid on the face of it unless David can in fact show us that we have no signs in Old English literature -- especially in the heroic poetry, but including biblical paraphrases, lives, prayers, meditations and so on -- of verse forms, rhetorical patternings, diction and compounding that are not derivable from Latin authors, texts, and number-based modes of composition. I don't think David can demonstrate this; nor, I suspect, does he want to. I may be wrong, but I think David's point is that indeed some Anglo-Latin poetry is "number based" in the ways he sets forth as a style or as a sort of plumbline of composition -- not that any given numerical pattern or set of patterns becomes a template for any and all compositional moments. In his excitement, David seems either to overstate his cases or at least to overapply them, but I think the mode of composition he champions was a reality in ancient times and may have been taken up in Anglo-Latin contexts. Perhaps a useful analogy for us is that of a fairly formal poet, say a John Hollander or a Richard Wilbur, who, in working out the inspiration for a poem, decides to discipline the direction in which he goes by adopting abstractly a rhyme scheme or a line structure or a verse form. Some ancient and medieval poets may well have used a number pattern that some lines or phrasings suggested to them; I doubt very many began with a number pattern or scheme; or that if they did that they ended up with anything more interesting than a clever exercise. And of course no number scheme can a priori establish the complex propositional or semantic developments of a poem. Finally, I should acknowledge my bias in this matter of cultural milieu: I am germanic in my leanings, maugre the Anglo-Latin institutions of manuscript production. Regards, John Hill. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 5 21:15:50 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 5 Dec 95 21:15:41 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA25086; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 21:09:22 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0844 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 15:45:49 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3203; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 15:45:49 -0500 Received: from muvms6.mu.wvnet.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 05 Dec 95 15:45:48 EST Received: from MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU by MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU (PMDF V4.3-11 #6427) id <01HYGAMFYYWC001GOH@MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU>; Tue, 05 Dec 1995 14:57:57 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 14:57:57 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Rand Hutcheson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: Status: RO On Mon, 4 Dec 1995, Edward Irving wrote: > David, don't fulminate at me, please. Don't you have any other tone? Do > you really think that, in its basic metrical/poetic style, early verse in > Germanic languages is the direct product of "literate Christian > cultures"? That does take the breath away. I'll risk putting this to a > vote on the net. I'll have to side with Ted on this one. There is plentiful evidence that the basic Gmc. verse form originated, if not during the Common Germanic period, then not very long thereafter. David is of course correct that we don't have access to pre-literate Germanic poetry; but we can tell on the basis of the literature we do have and on the basis of early runic inscriptions that pre-literate Germanic poetry existed, and we also have some idea what it looked like. Rand From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 5 22:34:34 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 5 Dec 95 22:34:33 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA02837; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 22:29:34 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2054 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 16:53:30 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7529; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 16:53:30 -0500 Received: from QUCDN.QueensU.CA by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 05 Dec 95 16:53:29 EST Received: from QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA by QUCDN.QueensU.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8398; Tue, 05 Dec 95 16:49:27 EST Received: from QueensU.CA (NJE origin X400GATE@QUCDN) by QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 7795; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 16:49:28 -0500 P1-Message-Id: CA* *QueensU.CA;QUCDN.X400GATE:P@lJPQKA X400-Trace: CA* *QueensU.CA; arrival Tue, 5 Dec 95 16:49-0500 action Relayed Message-Id: <9343*> Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 16:53:30 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: George Clark Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO *** Reply to note of 12/05/95 15:44 Subject: Re: geardagum etc. I quite agree with Ted and Rand. Tom Hart who brought the poetry of numbers to Anglo-Saxon (from Old Saxon studies of the Heliand I believe) was my student in beginning AS long ago. I received various essays from him and despite my fondness for a keen and amiable scholar, two objections kept coming up which I may remember: 1) the structures supposed to be in the text often looked to me as if they were imposed on the text, and 2) even when the structure seemed to be in the text, the argument seemed to be "this occurrence of a numerical pattern cannot be coincidental, it must be intended and significant." Such statements, even if not expressed explicitly, are statistical. We need a method of proving that the pattern isn't coincidental. Has David taken his work up with people deeply versed in probablistic reasoning? George Clark English (2153) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 00:29:10 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 00:29:09 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id AAA11420; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 00:22:57 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3561 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 19:06:25 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2724; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 19:06:25 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 05 Dec 95 19:06:24 EST Received: from timromano (philly55.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09913; Tue, 5 Dec 95 19:06:56 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b2 (Windows; I; 32bit) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30C4DF59.1FBF@voicenet.com> Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 19:10:01 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Let's assume, arguendo, that at least the formal features, if not the compositional methods, of "pre-literate" Germanic poetry have survived, in whole or in part, in literate Anglo-Germanic poetry. The specific 'formal features' to which I refer here are diction, alliteration, and meter. These features, which manifest themselves in the poetry locally, so to speak, seem to me not incompatible with the sort of abstract formalism David Howlett has been describing, which operates globally (even though it can affect word count, it does not affect word choice). On the other hand, the compositional methods one normally associates with "oral-formulaic" Germanic poetry seem wholly incompatible with such abstract formalism. But in the Anglo-Germanic poetry emerging from the religious centers we may have a hybrid: an abstract compositional method overlaid upon Anglo-Germanic diction, alliteration, and meter. I don't find this possibility so far-fetched. I would like it very much if David Howlett could make at least some tentative remarks (if he has not gotten to the stage where he has drawn firm conclusions) about why the Beowulf poet would have chosen such formalism? That is, beyond a sincere desire to imitate and praise the weorc of the wuldorfaeder. What social/political/religious forces could forge such creations? Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 10:45:50 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 10:45:49 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA14330; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 10:39:08 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8516 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 05:38:12 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0787; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 05:38:12 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 05:38:04 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 6 Dec 1995 10:28:13 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 9; Wed, 06 Dec 1995 10:28:06 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A74D.FE97C62A.9@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 10:28:06 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Rand, I have never claimed that we cannot infer with reasonable certainty what pre-literate Germanic poetry may have been like. I make such inferences often. But I do not use these inferences as the bases of argument, and I do not make sweeping dogmatic statements about them or erect theories on them. My objection is that the arguments I make derive from standard texts well known in Antiquity and in the Latin West during the early Middle Ages which have demonstrable re- flexes in the Latin literature composed from the fifth century onward in these islands, as in the vernacular literatures composed he, on which arguments critics are placing demands more rigorous than any that they demand of theories based on mere inference, guesswork, and the application of anachronistic ideas. A reasonable jury may be expected to wait until all the evidence is presented before leaping to a conclusion that my analyses have been over-enthusiastically or too rigorously applied. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 11:26:06 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 11:26:05 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA15427; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:17:36 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8717 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 06:13:09 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1334; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 06:13:09 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 06:13:05 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 6 Dec 1995 10:58:51 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 21; Wed, 06 Dec 1995 10:58:48 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A752.4817DB6A.21@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 10:58:47 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO George, A principal difference between Hart's work and mine is that I start from patterns of word, idea, rhythm, rhyme, and structures otherwise demonstrable, which are confirmed at the very last stage by mathematical analysis according to a small set of fixed ratios believed to have been used by God in Creation. Hart starts with the numbers, leaving himself open to criticism that what he sees is not necessarily there or necessarily significant. Critics who wish to dismiss my analyses often behave as if I had worked in a direction exactly opposite to the one I affirm clearly that I have worked in. It may well be that authors began with the numbers, exactly as the composer of a sonnet knows as he begins that his work must have 14 and only 14 lines or as the composer of a motet about the Apocalypse knows that one voice must have 144 breves or as Dante knew exactly the number of books and cantos in the final work before he began. But the likeliest way into this mode of thought and con- struction, now alien to those of us who have lost it, is by recognition of re- peated words or restated ideas. That is where I start. Herein lies part of the sometimes frantic opposition to this form of analy- sis. It exactly reverses the direction of five hundred years of tradition of textual criticism, in which men have been obliged to work backward from the comparison of shared error toward a hypothetically error-free original. But if one begins with the author's original, as one easily can, it becomes possible to work one's way forward through the transmitting tradition, that is, in the direction in which the text came down to us, and in this exercise what used to look like error often appears as what it truly is, creative and imaginative adaptation (some things remaining, of course, as irredeemable error).But that may be discussion for another thread. The matter in hand must be to decide whether the structural patterns I am adducing are really there, confirmed by their conformity with the ratios of Creation, and transmitted through a tradi tion more than 2500 years long, or not. If I were wrong it should be a few minutes' work to prove it. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 12:38:34 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 12:38:30 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA17806; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:30:07 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9005 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 07:29:13 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2290; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 07:29:13 -0500 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 07:29:13 EST Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HYH8IG1E1C0042EN@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 06 Dec 1995 07:29:25 -0500 (EST) X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HYH8IG2P4I0042EN@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 07:29:25 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Right, David. It's premature to be calling for a vote, for a number of reasons. For one thing, except for Duncan, those who are voting appear not to have read David's article in the Szarmach volume, only Duncan's analysis of it. Duncan indicated that he was addressing only a portion of the article, and Duncan omits many of the relationships David makes among theme and his analyses. It's like judging _Moby Dick_ on the basis of Cliff's notes. We demand more of our students than that they should form their opinions on Cliff's notes. Secondly, many of the objections raised during this time around amount to a broken record type of repetition of many earlier word-battles over the matter. Those earlier objections were based on David's attempts to represent his case on the net--and in trying to do so, he has necessarily been brief, and, as he said yesterday, he's learning that such explication is not fruitful over email. Thirdly, none of us have read the books and articles that are still in proof. Let the material hit the stands before you devour it. Finally, it is well to keep in mind that the disciplines among linguistics being used to invalidate David's arguments are quite in their infancy. The disciplines David uses predate the literature under consideration by centuries. Given the time to mature, the linguistic disciplines are likely to adapt, adjust, and accommodate David's pioneering rediscoveries. If history does repeat itself, then the many linguistic theories even since the beginning of the 20th-century that have undergone change give us hope that a mature discipline of linguistics will give generous consideration to David's ideas. If, as Pat suggested, the theories governing our analysis of OE language are provisional, generosity and consideration are the demands of the day. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From Edward.Irving@m.cc.utah.edu Wed Dec 6 15:41:21 1995 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 15:41:15 GMT Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (ei8721@cor.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.2]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id IAA14606 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 08:36:20 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id IAA21286; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 08:36:19 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 08:36:18 -0700 (MST) From: Edward Irving To: enl011@abdn.ac.uk Subject: Re: geardagum etc. In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO I hope I've been doing the Cause more good than harm. I'm not qualified to analyze statistical probabilities and won't enter that area, despite David's invitations. My arguments are (like yours in part) that OE verse is based on non-Latin traditions that are demanding in themselves, and ill-adapted to the number play D. favors. That Beowulf is in no way whatever "improved" by the math patterns, but its actual structure is rather ignored. I understand that D. intends to argue that B. is strictly a Christian poem totally under Boethian influence -- and I certainly don't believe that for a minute. Again, I express my gratitude that you have, in such good temper and with such tact, opposed this silly theory, and encouraged others to join you. TED From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 15:55:06 1995 Received: from scott.cc.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 15:54:49 GMT Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by scott.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1) with ESMTP id PAA30066 ; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 15:34:47 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA29215; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 15:24:09 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0877 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 09:43:55 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8185; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 09:43:55 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 09:43:51 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 14:47:45 GMT Message-Id: Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 14:47:45 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, In your posting of Tue Dec 5, addressed to me, you say: "You might reasonably have inferred that I would not advance examples of intervals of three and four words as significant if I did not have scores of other examples of intervals at 7, 11, 17, 18, 19, 101, and other numbers to which your objections cannot conceivably apply." Let us accept pro tem (I will come back to this) that these other examples do establish that in those cases the authors did repeat significant words at mathematically determined intervals. Are you really saying that if that is so the _Deus_ sequence you present, which I have demonstrated to provide no evidence at all of mathematical placing, by some process of reflection becomes significant of it? Whatever is to be said about other cases, the proposition that the distribution of _Deus_ arises from mathematical intent on the part of the author must start life as a a hypothesis. It is inappropriate to be advanced, on Occam's principle, if such a distribution could readily have occurred without any such intent. I have shown that it could, indeed that almost any distribution of the word could as well be advanced to support a hypothesis of mathematical intent as the one that in fact appears (perhaps absolutely any, but special pleading would be needed if two instances occurred as successive words). It cannot be sound scholarship, when you have unfortunately published data which do not tend to demonstrate the phenomenon you use them to demonstrate, to try to claim that they do so demonstrate because other data demonstrates it in other cases. You say: "If you had heeded what I said earlier you would not have supposed that it is a weakness that the text of Beowulf does not behave in every particular like the text of John's gospel." I did not suppose that, or say anything that allows a legitimate conclusion that I did. I do say it is a weakness of your case that the portion of Beowulf I discussed, even as you present it, behaves in hardly any particular like the text of John's gospel as you present that, and a further weakness that it does not even behave as your presentation of it suggests that it does. I gave specific examples. Again, I cannot see it as sound scholarship to ignore my specific objections to your case and instead pretend that I raised an objection which I did not. In another posting you say: "Duncan wrote that one MIGHT see the sort of thing I analysed in Beowulf if he came to it convinced that others had done so before". I do not believe that I wrote that, or anything that could legitimately be paraphrased into that (I have looked carefully through my record of recent postings). I hope you can make good your claim that I did, for a charge of wilfully inventing a quotation from one disputant to support an argument you use to another is one I would be as sorry to make as you, I suppose, to have proved against you. I can't find Ted Irvine stating "that Latin poets did not compose mathematically" either; has a modifying adverb like "necessarily" perhaps got suppressed? But Ted is well able to take care of himself. -- Duncan (still I hope your associate in the service of scholarship) ADDENDUM FOR ANYONE STILL INTERESTED: My demonstration of evidential valuelessness does not apply to your longer interval-bases in the same absolute way that it does to 3, or as nearly so as it does to 4. Yet in all cases acceptance of variation plus-or-minus-one (which is what acceptance of inclusive or exclusive ends amounts to) greatly increases the chance that an observed distribution could have arisen without mathematical intent. The chance is also increased as you multiply the number of base lengths of which you will accept as significant any one that appears, as you multiply the number of words of which you will accept as significant any one that seems to exhibit a repetition pattern, and as you increase the amount of your data which you passed over as not showing this feature in the course of finding the scores of passages that you concluded did. It also turns critically on the number of recurrences of a word after identically-based intervals which you demand to establish significance. It is a well known tendency of the human mind to see "significant" patterning in distributions which are in fact random; it is a routine matter for any scholar claiming to have found significant patterns to consider the "null hypothesis" - that what is present requires no controlling principle to account for it - and to demonstrate its improbability. There are well-known methods for doing so (not wholly reliably in a situation in which data is first used to suggest what should be searched for, and then searched for it, but that is no reason for not applying them at all). If your "scores of examples" do self-evidently demonstrate what you believe they do, the application of such methods will confirm that by indicating only a minute possibility that they can be accounted for by chance. My impression is - but if I am wrong I apologise - that you have never even considered the need for this norm of scholarship. George Clark raises the same point. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 17:32:32 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 17:32:28 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA08586; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:23:27 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3696 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:18:32 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8218; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:18:31 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 12:18:26 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 6 Dec 1995 16:15:34 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 6; Wed, 06 Dec 1995 16:15:30 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A77E.85C1E5E2.6@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 16:15:28 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, There are throughout the text of John's Gospel many examples of recurrence of important words at fixed intervals. The reason I adduced the example of 3s is that one of them is 33, the traditional age of Jesus at the beginning of the Galilaean ministry. Recollect, please, the order in which forms of evidence are adduced in any of my analyses. Begin with the unmistakeable repetition of words and phrases and ideas. Then rhythmic patterns, clausular and cursus, and rhymes, and shifts of cadence in syllabic poetry, then recurrence of words at fixed intervals, then reckoning of ratios in small units of composition, then in increasingly larger units, but always with the same ratios in the macro as in the micro. Not everyone is going to find the same forms of evidence equally convincing. I do not myself, and do not expect others to. But as I recollect the shifting weight of various elements of composition in my perceptions at different per- iods, it has seemed better to present them on an equal footing, without intrud- ing my own impressions or values. The brute fact remains that the elements of composition and analysis I am advancing are explicitly discussed in ancient texts we know early Insular scholars to have read, and they cannot be wished away by those who simply refuse to read them. Whether I have presented them attractively is another question. It would be more profitable to others, and I am certain less tiresome, to concentrate on whether the ancient Hebrew and Greek and Classical and Late Latin and Celtic Latin and Anglo-Latin texts are correctly represented in my analyses or not. If not, then there is no point whatever in considering whether these forms may recur in Old English and, as I contend in another book, in Old French. If so, then we'll have a go at the Old English, two examples of which I am saving specially for you. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 17:32:32 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 17:32:28 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA08586; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:23:27 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3696 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:18:32 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8218; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:18:31 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 12:18:26 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 6 Dec 1995 16:15:34 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 6; Wed, 06 Dec 1995 16:15:30 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A77E.85C1E5E2.6@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 16:15:28 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, There are throughout the text of John's Gospel many examples of recurrence of important words at fixed intervals. The reason I adduced the example of 3s is that one of them is 33, the traditional age of Jesus at the beginning of the Galilaean ministry. Recollect, please, the order in which forms of evidence are adduced in any of my analyses. Begin with the unmistakeable repetition of words and phrases and ideas. Then rhythmic patterns, clausular and cursus, and rhymes, and shifts of cadence in syllabic poetry, then recurrence of words at fixed intervals, then reckoning of ratios in small units of composition, then in increasingly larger units, but always with the same ratios in the macro as in the micro. Not everyone is going to find the same forms of evidence equally convincing. I do not myself, and do not expect others to. But as I recollect the shifting weight of various elements of composition in my perceptions at different per- iods, it has seemed better to present them on an equal footing, without intrud- ing my own impressions or values. The brute fact remains that the elements of composition and analysis I am advancing are explicitly discussed in ancient texts we know early Insular scholars to have read, and they cannot be wished away by those who simply refuse to read them. Whether I have presented them attractively is another question. It would be more profitable to others, and I am certain less tiresome, to concentrate on whether the ancient Hebrew and Greek and Classical and Late Latin and Celtic Latin and Anglo-Latin texts are correctly represented in my analyses or not. If not, then there is no point whatever in considering whether these forms may recur in Old English and, as I contend in another book, in Old French. If so, then we'll have a go at the Old English, two examples of which I am saving specially for you. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 17:54:50 1995 Received: from scott.cc.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 17:54:46 GMT Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by scott.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1) with ESMTP id RAA30586 ; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:52:30 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA09139; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:36:35 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2328 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:16:25 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3641; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:16:25 -0500 Received: from golden.brown.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 11:16:15 EST Received: from [128.148.39.59] (bootp-59.hmann.brown.edu [128.148.39.59]) by golden.brown.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA05496 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:16:14 -0500 Message-Id: <199512061616.LAA05496@golden.brown.edu> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:16:14 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Rick Russom Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO There is plentiful evidence >that the basic Gmc. verse form originated, if not during the Common >Germanic period, then not very long thereafter. David is of course >correct that we don't have access to pre-literate Germanic poetry; but we >can tell on the basis of the literature we do have and on the basis of >early runic inscriptions that pre-literate Germanic poetry existed, and >we also have some idea what it looked like. Rand, Just out of curiosity, would you refer to the inscription on the Horn of Gallehus as preliterate Germanic poetry? Does control of runes count as "literacy"? I guess it would be pre-Christian (though I've never been introduced to H. H., so I couldn't say for sure). -- Rick From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 18:03:47 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 18:03:47 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA11257; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:57:15 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2709 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:26:04 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4729; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:26:04 -0500 Received: from golden.brown.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 11:25:51 EST Received: from [128.148.39.59] (bootp-59.hmann.brown.edu [128.148.39.59]) by golden.brown.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA07613 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:26:30 -0500 Message-Id: <199512061626.LAA07613@golden.brown.edu> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 11:26:30 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Rick Russom Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO >I recognize the objections that David Howlett and others on the list make >in re-constructing pre-literate Old English prosody; however, do not >linguists rely on inferential evidence to re-construct the descent of Old >English from re-constructed languages, such as proto-German and >Indo-European? We do not seem to have a problem reconstructing, without >extant texts, the grammatical history of the language from which the >poetry was made; why do we have such a terrible time recognizing >reconstructions of pre-literature poetic techniques? > >--joe carroll The many and diverse kinds of evidence showing that attested Germanic meters are derived from an antecedent common Germanic meter seem to me as strong as any kind of evidence that we have for any proposition of comparable interest for the early medieval period in Northwest Europe. The people who say we have no evidence for common Germanic meter are asking for a bizarre and unheard-of kind of evidence, quite different from the kinds of evidence used in explanatory projects that have borne some fruit. I would ask them what sort of interest they have been able to obtain by investment of their talents in the kind of evidence they evidently require. -- Rick Russom From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 20:30:58 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 20:30:56 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA26166; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 20:25:12 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3704 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:18:40 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8226; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:18:34 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 12:18:31 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 6 Dec 1995 16:22:46 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 9; Wed, 06 Dec 1995 16:22:39 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A77F.85317042.9@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 16:22:37 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Zach, It matters not at all that I was not there when Tom Hart presented his paper. I know him and have a large folder of his work. Whether what Einstein says about God is true also matters not at all. We are dealing with texts composed by men whose ideas about God are clear and explicit. It is these that I claim to find expressed in the texts. Their metaphysical truth has only a private bearing. I am neither propagating nor refuting their views, only stating that they appear to me to be reflected in literary and musical and architectural compositions, as in stone carving and metalwork and manuscript illuminations in which the same ratios recur as in the texts that they illus- trate. Comprehensive and coherent, but essentially simple, direct, and explicit. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 22:21:44 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 22:21:43 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA05630; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 22:16:09 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7495 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:11:11 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3663; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:11:10 -0500 Received: from QUCDN.QueensU.CA by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 17:11:08 EST Received: from QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA by QUCDN.QueensU.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7631; Wed, 06 Dec 95 17:06:57 EST Received: from QueensU.CA (NJE origin X400GATE@QUCDN) by QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4568; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:06:57 -0500 P1-Message-Id: CA* *QueensU.CA;QUCDN.X400GATE:P@qPAP3G X400-Trace: CA* *QueensU.CA; arrival Wed, 6 Dec 95 17:06-0500 action Relayed Message-Id: <0107*> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:11:11 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: George Clark Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO *** Reply to note of 12/06/95 05:34 Subject: Re: geardagum etc. David, You wrote ". . .theories based on mere inference," but all theories are based on inference and nothing can be inferred from nothing. We may make inferences from the similarities in the various survivals of Gmc verses, you may make inferences from the practice of poetsin the ancient Near East and in classical antiquity and the Xn MA. No need to cast aspersions on our mutual practice of inductive thought. But should we believe that the formal patterns you claim to find in given texts are intented, not coincidental, and significant? Should we believe that the story of Bwf (versus the text) is of folkloristic and even mythological origin, or based on some as yet undiscovered source you may run into any day now? George George Clark English (2153) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 22:50:17 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 22:50:15 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA08640; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 22:44:51 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7629 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:19:00 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4164; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:19:00 -0500 Received: from QUCDN.QueensU.CA by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 17:18:55 EST Received: from QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA by QUCDN.QueensU.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7727; Wed, 06 Dec 95 17:14:56 EST Received: from QueensU.CA (NJE origin X400GATE@QUCDN) by QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4821; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:14:55 -0500 P1-Message-Id: CA* *QueensU.CA;QUCDN.X400GATE:P@qRneZW X400-Trace: CA* *QueensU.CA; arrival Wed, 6 Dec 95 17:14-0500 action Relayed Message-Id: <0112*> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:19:00 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: George Clark Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO *** Reply to note of 12/06/95 07:50 Subject: Re: geardagum etc. About sonnets: not all of them have 14 lines, other lengths have been known at various times. See the sequence "Modern Love" which borrows its 16-line form from earlier sources. Still, Plato apparently came round to the belief that the ideal forms of things were the mathematical formulas expressing the law of their being--if I've under- stood that rightly. I'll try to follow that when I finish translating these Icelandic texts. George George Clark English (2153) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 6 23:10:15 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 6 Dec 95 23:10:09 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA10834; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 23:04:48 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7800 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:29:52 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4723; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:29:52 -0500 Received: from QUCDN.QueensU.CA by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 17:29:51 EST Received: from QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA by QUCDN.QueensU.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7865; Wed, 06 Dec 95 17:25:22 EST Received: from QueensU.CA (NJE origin X400GATE@QUCDN) by QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5358; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:25:23 -0500 P1-Message-Id: CA* *QueensU.CA;QUCDN.X400GATE:P@qTI4Kg X400-Trace: CA* *QueensU.CA; arrival Wed, 6 Dec 95 17:25-0500 action Relayed Message-Id: <0124*> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:29:52 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: George Clark Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO *** Reply to note of 12/06/95 10:42 Subject: Re: geardagum etc. Zach, No, I didn't say that some numerical patternings are intended and significant, but rather that we need a numerical, mathematical, statistical proof that they are--which they might be and might not be. I think Dante intended something with his three books, terza rima and so on, but how far does that take us in reading him? George Clark English (2153) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 03:56:23 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 03:56:18 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id DAA29177; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 03:50:32 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0654 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 22:33:32 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6883; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 22:33:32 -0500 Received: from ACCDVM.ACCD.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 06 Dec 95 22:33:31 EST Received: from SACADMIN by ACCDVM.ACCD.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 4757; Wed, 06 Dec 95 21:32:09 CST Message-Id: 19951206.213208.RBAILEY@SACADMIN Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 21:32:08 CST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Roger Bailey Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: note of Wed, 6 Dec 1995 17:19:00 -0500 from George Clark Status: RO From: Roger Bailey George, I think the analogy with the sonnet is useful here. Granted, all sonnets do not have the same line length, rhyme scheme or number of lines. But don't you think that there must have been some deliberate intent in Shakespeare's mind when he composed his sonnets that they would observe a uniformity in at least the above features ? Or that Spenser, whose sonnets have a tighter rhyme pattern than most other Elizabethans, made the decision to do what he did ? Perhaps it cannot be proven by statistics or mathematical demonstration that the intent was there, but it seems almost perverse to deny the intention considering all the evidence. It seems a bit like the person who was reserving judgment about human mortality just because all the evidence was not yet in. And Dante is surely a name that came to my mind, long before Daviv mentioned him today, especially when someone made the remark that attention to numbers, symmetry, antithesis, and the like diminished the poet's art. I am paraphrasing and do not wish to hang this remark ,untenable as it is, around anybody's neck. The numbers in Dante's Comedy are essential to it; surely it cannot be conceived without them. Dante was creating a vast otherworld as he imagined God might have created it, with faultless order ( sorry, Pat; I know this ain't the Dante list ). That there is at the very least occasional parallelism, antithetical structure, chiasmus, in the Bible is beyond question( has nobody remembered to mention the elaborate chiasmus in Odyssey xi ? David Howlett's presentation of his findings I find most compelling because it fits into the elaborate and seemingly endless system of correspondences which I learned about 35 or 40 years ago from the likes of Tillyard, Craig, Spencer, Lewis, and others. Also, I find it impossible to believe that writers whose main school was the Bible would not have written somewhat along the lines David is suggesting. Some postings to this list almost seem to rank his work with nitwit stuff such as Baconian cyphers and holistic medicine. But I must close a note already too long. Thank you for your patience with me and for your fair and reasoned contributions to this thread. Best, Roger From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 05:50:46 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 05:50:42 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id FAA05499; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 05:45:19 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1605 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 00:21:08 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9823; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 00:21:08 -0500 Received: from postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 00:21:07 EST Received: from [132.236.155.187] (CU-DIALUP-1213.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.155.187]) by postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA13497 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 00:21:33 -0500 X-Sender: tdh1@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 00:21:33 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Thomas D. Hill" Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO This is a comment I wrote some time ago -- actually before our discussion of numerical patterns in the Wanderer -- whenever that was. Since we are debating numerical analysis again these comments may be relevant. Before engaging in this debate, however , I want to remark that I find the courtesy and restraint of the participants pleasant and I hope we can continue in this mode. ***************************** I have been meaning to respond for some time now to David Howlett's comments on medieval numerology. It is an interesting topic and while I agree with David that it is an important issue, I find myself in disagreement with many of the specific analyses he proposes. David and I have talked about some of these issues when we meet at Kalamazoo, so some of this will be less new to him than it might be to others, but some of this has occured to me in the interval between our last mutual Kalamazoo. Let me begin by saying that I am sympathetic to numerological analysis of medieval texts. Medieval poets and men (and women) of learning were interested in number and (sometimes) structured their poems and other compositions numerically. I have myself written four papers dealing with numerical patterns in medieval texts; one (on the Icelandic poem Lilia) has been well received,two have not attracted much comment, and one ( on numerical patterns in Anglo-Saxon royal genealogies) has been hammered by hostile critics (mostly readers for journals -- the official reviewers have been nice enough.) Despite the controversy, I am unrepentant and am planning a continuation. I have thus experienced some of the predjudice against analyzing number as a compositional element in medieval texts of which David speaks, but I still think that David needs to address certain problems if he expects to persuade the unconvinced. I should add that I am addressing the problem in general in this comment -- in part because I haven't down-loaded any recent numerological analyses and in part because the general issues seem to me more interesting. Most of the discussion on the net which I have seen is focused on the question -- is the proposed numerical pattern actually there? Obviously this is an important issue and when any numerologist proposes a numerical analysis based on the lines or words of a text such as Beowulf -- in which all editors and commentators agree there are clear lacunae -- the numerologist is inviting disrespect for his analysis. It is clear that some lines are lost -- how can any critic presume to say how many ? The possibility that exactly the right number of lines would be lost for a given numerical pattern based on lines or words (for example ) to be preserved is vanishingly small. Again another issue which arises and I am thinking less of David's suggestions than some other "tectonic" analysis which I have seen, which depends on ratios, multiplication, and division and so on and ignores the fact that arabic numerals (and pocket caculators) make arithmetic operations much much easier than they were when people had to use roman numerals. Long division for example is really hard with Roman numerals. It seems to me, however, that there is still another issue which pertains particularly to the Latin and Greek texts which David has cited. It seems to me that it is perfectly possible that one can discern "real" numerical patterns in a text which occur as an accidental by-product of other compositional techniques. Any stanzaic poem, for example, is going to have a numerical pattern of some sort and any text which is rhetorically structured is going to exhibit numerical structure. Rhetorical balence is numerical balence by definition. Balenced phrases such as " of the people, by the people, and for the people" can be defined by syllable count as well as any other way, but I do not believe that Lincoln was counting syllables when he composed the phrases. As a skilled rhetorician who had been accustomed to public speaking virtually all of his adult life, he heard and understood the rythyms of effective English rhetoric; rythymic patterns have a numerical basis certainly, but a rhetorician or musician is not really concerned with the numbers as such. I would imagine -- I haven't done the research-- that a good drum solo exhibits very complex numerical patterning. The patterns are there -- but rock muscians aren't aware of them in the way that a "numerological" analysis would seem to imply. A further issue concerns the question of literary history and literary context. If numerical patterning is an important compositional technique in early medieval England, there should be many examples of obvious numerical composition in which authors used clear and immediate patterns involving very accesible features of a text such as fit divisions, chapter numbers and so on.It is after all not very plausible to ask us to believe that authors were counting words and syllables with great care, but were pretty much indifferent to larger and more immediate numerical patterns such as the number of chapters or fitts. This is less a criticism of David's specific suggestions than a desideratum which I have long wanted -- an annotated list of simple numerical patterns in OE, Anglo-Latin, and ME literature and a guide to explicit numerological discourse such as the comments on the symbolism of numbers in Byrhtferth's Manuel. I would conclude by observing that numerical coincidence does exist after all. Let me illustrate -- some scholars have argued that the line numbers in the fitts of various OE poem are significant. Now it is true -- to hypothesize an example -- that it would seem a remarkable coincidence if the line numbers of all the fitts of a given poem were multiples of seven. Or of three. Or indeed if all the fitts had even or odd numbers of lines. But given the kind of numbers which this sort of analysis will throw up -- seven or eight numbers ranging between 80 and 120 -- it is not all that remarkable if some numerical pattern could be discerned which accurately characterizes these numbers. And once the numerologist allows himself a certain amount of fudging, "remarkable" results are inevitable. In this kind of argumentation we must begin by concentrating on the the most straightforward and simple examples and then procede to the more complex and intricate instances. It seems to me that the numerical patterns which we should focus on should be overt -- i.e.based on patterns which would be readily accessible to a medieval audience. Chapters, fitt divisions, stanzas -- even rubrication are accessible to a medieval reader of a manuscript. Word numbers and line numbers of Old English poetry are much more problematical. And unfortunately there are going to be a number of examples in which the most appropriate response is not "yes" or "no" but rather something more like the old Scots verdict "not proven." peace tom hill Thomas D. Hill 607-277-0182 Dept. of English tdh1@cornell.edu Cornell University From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 09:24:25 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 09:24:18 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA13329; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 09:18:13 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2572 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 04:17:13 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3506; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 04:17:13 -0500 Received: from ns.dknet.dk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 04:17:10 EST Received: from pingnet (uucp@localhost) by ns.dknet.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with UUCP id KAA09626 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:17:47 +0100 Received: from axe by ic1.ic.dk with UUCP id AA03003 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU); Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:09:32 +0100 Received: by axe.ping.dk (UUPC/extended 1.12j); Thu, 07 Dec 1995 10:08:45 -0500 References: <199512061616.LAA05496@golden.brown.edu> X-Charset: Latin1 X-Char-Esc: 29 Message-Id: <30c7037d.axe@axe.ping.dk> Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:08:45 -0500 Reply-To: morten@axe.ping.dk Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Morten Axboe Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO In <199512061616.LAA05496@golden.brown.edu> Rick Russom writes: >Just out of curiosity, would you refer to the inscription on the Horn of >Gallehus as preliterate Germanic poetry? Does control of runes count as >"literacy"? I guess it would be pre-Christian (though I've never been >introduced to H. H., so I couldn't say for sure). >-- Rick Also the runic inscription of the 5th cent. gold bracteate from Tjurko( in Blekinge has been considered as been considered as poetry, being metric and using alliteration and a kenning for gold: wurte runoR an walhakurne HeldaR Kunimudiu - in German translation by Klaus Du(wel: Es wirkte die Runen auf dem Welschkorn Held dem Kunimund, or in English something like "Heldar made the runes on the Italian grain for Kunimund". -- Morten Axboe Bredevej 87 DK-2830 Virum Denmark Email: morten@axe.ping.dk From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 10:01:29 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 10:01:27 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA15149; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 09:54:52 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2681 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 04:52:59 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4001; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 04:52:59 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 04:52:56 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 7 Dec 1995 09:53:23 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 95; Thu, 07 Dec 1995 09:53:17 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A812.4BDC6DC2.95@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 09:53:17 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Tom, Thanks for your note, dense (in the good sense) and suggestive (ditto). A caveat or two. Could we separate the usages 'numerical' and 'numerological'? If we say that the passage in John's Gospel about Christ's Creation of the universe has forty-six letters in Greek and in Latin, that is 'numerical', simply an orthographic fact. So in Cu' Chuimne's Hymn to the Virgin, if we observe that there are 30 lines (31 with 'Amen'), 26 long lines repeated (=52), and 365 words, those are numerical facts. But if we suggest that there are 46 letters because that is the number of perfection of Dominical Creation, that is 'numerological', like the suggestion that Cu' Chuimne's first words 'Cante- mus in omni die' shows his work to be calendrical. We should not make tables of expected numbers. We should instead understand numerical theory the way our authors understood it, in the head. If you think reckoning with roman numerals tricky, try it with Greek or Hebrew letters. A way into the subject is a mid-seventh-century text edited by Da'ibhi' O' Cro'ini'n for the Toronto PIMS series, 'De Ratione Conputandi', probably by Cummianus Longus, certainly from his circle. By internalizing the theory we acquire not only their computus, but the foundations of music theory (note the number of times Boethius refers from his music book to his arithmetic book) and both of these are absolutely essential to their theory of poetics. Lots of people get interested in grammar, but the response to Da'ibhi's work has been mostly silent. A pity. Grammar and computus are the two principal pillars on which the entire edifice is erected, word and number. There is an absolutely stunning little poem, 42 lines long, by Ailera'n the Wise (ob. 665), about that most prosaic of subjects, the Eusebian Canons. It's ALL in there. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 12:18:02 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 12:17:58 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA19783; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 12:08:36 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3109 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 07:07:36 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5363; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 07:07:36 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 07:07:35 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 12:12:38 GMT Message-Id: Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 12:12:38 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- You do not accept my invitation to take up any of my detailed criticisms, or to justify your ascription to me of a statement which I deny having made, and which you must then stand convicted of having made up. But thank you for pointing out the particular significance of 33. If that number can be found clearly and comparably present in a several other cases, you may well have a good case for its significance here. It will still do nothing to suggest any significance in your other threes. I am aware of the principles of order of analysis you claim to use. But so often what you actually do seems not to be informed by them. Can you point, please, to the "unmistakeable repetition of words and phrases and ideas" which you began with in your analysis of Beowulf 4-11? I have not spent much time, certainly less than you have urged me to, on your classical analyses, because on the one hand I am utterly incapable of following them with proper understanding in Hebrew or Greek, and very imperfectly in Latin; on the other because even if they are all totally sound I cannot accept that that raises more than a possibility worth investigation that the same features occur in Old English, a field in which I am competent. I will look forward to seeing the two Old English examples you are "saving specially". I genuinely hope I have more success in concurring with your analyses of them than I have had with the others you have from time to time posted, because I am always eager to learn more about the literature to which I have devoted my professional life. -- Duncan [sorry about "a several" in line 5] From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 13:02:03 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 13:02:01 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA21617; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 12:55:27 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3575 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 07:54:21 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6711; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 07:54:21 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 07:54:20 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 7 Dec 1995 12:52:46 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 17; Thu, 07 Dec 1995 12:52:42 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A82B.5B746582.17@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 12:52:40 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I should have written that Jesus was about 30 at the beginning of the Galilaean ministry and 33 at the end of the Judaean. As I delete the day's postings and never go to the archive I thought I remembered your having written about the Beowulf analysis that unless one were convinced of the existence and use of certain forms one would not see them in that text, a positive reflex of which might be that if one were so convinced one might see them. If you wrote no such thing I do not attribute it to you. Am I, I wonder. becoming imaginative in my middle age? From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 16:27:46 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 16:27:38 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA06542; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 16:17:22 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5818 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:51:51 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5230; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:51:51 -0500 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 10:51:48 EST Received: from gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (gos.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.3]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id IAA14261 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 08:52:24 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id IAA11551; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 08:42:45 -0700 (MST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 08:42:45 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edward Irving Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: 19951206.213208.RBAILEY@SACADMIN Status: RO I forget how we all got off into a discussion of sonnets. Beowulf is not a sonnet, and if you want to call the formal features of a sonnet "numerological" it does not have any of those features, being stichic rather than strophic or stanzaic in structure. The interesting feature of sonnets is usually the ninth-line "turn", certainly in Petrarchan sonnets and often in Elizabethan sonnets -- if you want to see a contrast of 8 lines to 6 lines an example of "numbers". But here we are talking about a universally agree-upon form: no one writes sonnets without knowing what this form is. If David wishes to impose some similar form on Beowulf, he still has a very long way to go to convince most of us. TED IRVING From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 16:50:03 1995 Received: from scott.cc.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 16:49:46 GMT Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by scott.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA00310 ; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 16:30:48 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA06564; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 16:17:45 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5865 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:53:41 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5385; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 10:53:41 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 10:52:53 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 7 Dec 1995 15:40:36 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 39; Thu, 07 Dec 1995 15:40:26 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A842.CA5C8512.39@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 15:40:25 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, That little poem I mentioned earlier may relieve some difficulties. It was written, I think, in the year 650, certainly by Aileran the Wise, who died of plague in 665. The oldest copy is in the Augsburg Gospels, of which there is a facsimile in Codices illuminati medii aevi 9, carried presumably from Rath Melsige to Echternach by Willibrord. The youngest is in Bodley, from north Italy, but containing English glosses. So we can infer safely that the Anglo-Saxons knew it. It is about nothing but numbers, the Eusebian Can- ons that allow a reader to compare passages common to all 4 Gospels, to vary- ing groups of 3, to varying pairs, and passages unique to each. Aileran has made of these arid ciphers a narrative, a colloquy among four Evangelists: Quam in primo speciosa quadriga homo leo uitulus et aquila septuaginta unum per capitula de Domino conloquuntur paria. The second stanza begins 'In secundo subsequente pronitus' (note the second word), the third 'Tum deinde tertio in ordine' (note the third word), right down to 'In octauo / nunc leonis catulus' (one-eighth of the way through the stanza) and 'Nonus ordo / in quo duo pariter' (one-ninth of the way through the stanza). The text, known from 10 MSS, is absolutely secure. Let's skip over the chiastic and parallel arrangements and the rhythms and consider the words Aileran uses for the Evangelists. From 'homo' 2 to 'homo' 6 inclusive there are 18 words. Between 'homo' 6 and 'homo' 10 there are 19. Between 'homo' 10 and 'homo' 14 there are 18. From 'homo' 14 to 'homo' 18 inclusive there are 19. After 'homo' 18 the 18th word is 'Natus / Adam' 22, from which to 'homo' 26 inclusive there are 19 words. After 'homo' 26 'homo' 35 is the 38th word. 'Leo' 6 is the 24th word from the beginning. From 'leo' 6 to 'leo' 14 inclu- sive there are 40 words. From 'leo' 14 to 'leone' 22 inclusive there are 40 words. From 'leone' 22 to 'leonis catulus' 27 inclusive there are 24 words, after which, from 'Dei' 28 to 'leonem' 37 inclusive there are 40 words, and 'leonem' 37 is the 24th from the end of the poem. You can see for yourself what Aileran does with 'uitulus' and 'aquila' and 'uolucer'. The number of words that refer to Matthew, Luke, Mark, John, is 9-8-7-6. Now look at 'duo' 31 and 'duo' 36. From one to the other inclusive there are 21 words, of which the central are 'ternum septempliciter'. Note 'sexto' 21 and 'sexaginta' 36 inclusive. 66 words. Are we surprised? Between 'tertio' 9 and 'quarto' 13 there are 16 words, between 'quarto' 13 and 'quinta' 17 17 words, between 'quinta' 17 and 'sexto' 21 18, between 'sexto' 21 and 'in septimo' 25 19. Every one of these tricks locks into more than one sequence, and all this in a narrative! And the narrative is what helps us to remember by cross-checking the memory with 12, 24, 36 complementary patterns. There are whole libraries of this sort of thing written by Irishmen before the very beginnings of Anglo-Latin literature. This is why the Aldhelms and AEthilwalds and Bedes got so good so quickly. They had a brilliant standard to emulate and overtake. And they did. Both in Latin and in Old English. This is why Old French went from nothing written to brilliant literature within a single generation of their exposure to this sort of thing among the English and the Irish. The mental supplneness exhibited by this form of exercise is what we would both appreciate in our earliest literature and represent in our own if we simply recognized that they did it and let them show us how. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 7 23:58:44 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 7 Dec 95 23:58:43 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA12695; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 23:52:54 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1386 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 18:32:23 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8048; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 18:32:23 -0500 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 07 Dec 95 18:32:21 EST Received: from gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (gos.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.3]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA18882 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 16:32:56 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id QAA11742; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 16:23:15 -0700 (MST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 16:23:14 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edward Irving Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <01HYJ8NBQSZ6004M3Y@ACS.EKU.EDU> Status: RO We can doubtless all agree on something: Beowulf is not a sonnet. Could we make a distinction between a public form and a private one in poetry? Someone writing a sonnet wants the readers to know that's what he or she is writing, by title or typographical spacing or whatever. Poets writing in other forms will number their stanzas or space off their refrains so we KNOW what they're up to -- it's public. But I think the kind of encrypted form that David is speaking of is different. It's private, hidden, not easy to discover. In fact David is the first of all its many readers over the centuries, so far as I know, to discover it in Beowulf. Clearly he is right that such number-based forms do appear in some medieval works, but I am profoundly skeptical about the existence of anything like it in Beowulf. The old poets used to refer to poetry as "numbers" but they meant meter, not mystery. TED IRVING From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 08:27:14 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 08:27:13 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id IAA11777; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:22:06 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5360 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 03:21:09 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2733; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 03:21:09 -0500 Received: from vax.acs.lamp.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 03:21:08 EST Received: from [193.62.25.168] by 193.62.25.168 with SMTP; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 8:18:17 GMT X-Sender: sn005@lamp.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:20:16 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Alex Woolf Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet Comments: To: Edward.Irving@M.CC.UTAH.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Ted, It is surely wrong to think of the method of composition David describes as 'secret' simply because only he can read it 'now'. If he is correct that there are libraries of this stuff written by Hiberno-Latinists and that it was still widely known enough to influence the creators of Old French literature c.1100 then clearly it was not 'secret' even if it may have been a little elitist (like all scholarship, by definition). After all most early medieval people couldn't read or wrie at all. Would yould you claim literacy as 'secret'? The problem David has to address to quieten your unease is why, if in the early twelfth century vernacular and Latin authors were using these conceits widely, they subsequently disappeared to the extent that it was necessary for a textual archaeologist like David to excavate them rather than for a practitioner of a literary tradition to pass them on? When and why did this happen? Alex From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 09:50:19 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 09:50:17 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA14479; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:44:21 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5684 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 04:42:33 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3875; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 04:42:33 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 04:42:31 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:38:07 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 14; Fri, 08 Dec 1995 09:38:01 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A8D9.539FBFBA.14@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:38:00 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Ted, Why do you suppose the numbers are or were mysterious? They were the common property of every schoolboy, as you will see if you read the texts on their syllabus. See Boethius De Institutione Arithmetica I 2: De substantia numeri, 'Omnia quaecunque a primaeua rerum natura constructa sunt, numerorum uidentur ratione formata. Hoc enim fuit principale in animo Conditoris exemplar'. Now there is a sense in which this is the most profound mystery ever. But it was not, in the period we are discussing, the private knowledge of a secret order. Have you looked at Aldhelm's Letter to Heahfrith in 'Aldhelm and Irish Learning', Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi LII (1994), 37-75? This one letter, from the very beginning of our tradition, makes the point in a way neither you nor anyone else can quickly dismiss. Anglo-Saxons advanced in one single gen- eration from illiteracy to that letter, to the style of which you may object, but to the profound learning of which you will not. We have it on the authority of the usually reliable William of Malmesbury, who had read King Alfred's Hand- boc, that the king considered Aldhelm the finest English poet ever. There is absolutely no doubt about the Anglo-Saxons' profound knowledge of what I have been advancing, nor about their application of it to Anglo-Latin literature, which was written at the same times and in the same places and by the same people who composed Old English literature. Get used to the idea. It will not go away. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 10:21:38 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 10:21:37 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA15469; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:14:29 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5791 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 05:13:32 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4333; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 05:13:32 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 05:13:26 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:04:08 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 22; Fri, 08 Dec 1995 10:03:56 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A8DC.F1A3AF7A.22@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:03:53 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Alex, You will find the style practised in formal letters of the fifteenth century, as in the works of the Benedictine abbot of Saint Albans whose works I studied for my D.Phil. You will find it as late as the beginning of the seventeenth century in the famous forgery about the University of Oxford inserted sensitively at the crux of a chiasmus in Asser's Life of King Alfred. Elements of the style in Hebrew poetry were presented by the prodigious Robert Lowth, a mere snip of a lad, in Praelectiones de Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum, 12 of them delivered in Oxford in 1753. Lowth later became Bishop of London. More elements were recovered by John Jebb, later Bishop of Limerick, and applied to entire books of the Bible by another priest named Boys, Curate of Saint-Dunstan's-in-the-West, just round the corner from the Public Record Office, and also chaplain to the Duke of Wellington during the Peninsular War. So, you see, it hasn't ever been entirely lost. It has been understood and publicly affirmed by well-placed articulate men century after century. Why, then, is opposition to it so fierce? Why are so many of our contemporaries vehement in their assertions that the style never existed or was practised at all? I am glad that is not my problem. I don't have to an- swer for those whom Abbott describes as 'glass-bashers'. Defending their views is going to be hard work. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 14:37:48 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 14:37:44 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA25605; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 14:26:11 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6858 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:39:22 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8295; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:39:22 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 08:38:45 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 13:43:13 GMT Message-Id: Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 13:43:13 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- I wondered if it was a statement like the one you now fairly paraphrase that you had in your memory when constructing the one I repudiated. I would have said that if you were already convinced that such things would be found IN BEOWULF you might well succeed in seeing them there. You made me say that if you were already aware that they were used in other works (and as you applied it, these might be Latin or other classical works) you might well be led to find them (and as you applied it, legitimately) in Beowulf. Not the same thing at all. (I haven't searched back to find exact words; but I'm fairly sure I'm remembering fairly.) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 14:47:42 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 14:47:38 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA26017; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 14:32:41 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7106 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:01:09 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9271; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:01:08 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 09:01:07 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 14:06:15 GMT Message-Id: Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 14:06:15 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- No; I'm not going to spend time trying to decide whether a sequence of intervals 16, 19, 18, 17, 35, 37 between intances of "homo" (if I've correctly decoded your phrasing into a statement on a consistent basis) points to mathematical deliberation, either alone or in combination with data from other words. Because even if this poem exhibits mathematical deliberation it doesn't entitle you to assert it in a passage which provides no evidence for it. I say again, I am willing to grant, on a "nolle contendere" basis, that all the features you point to do occur in classical texts. The proposition that any of them occur in Old English texts requires to be established ab initio from evidence in those texts -- Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 15:11:07 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 15:11:06 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA28550; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 15:02:31 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7773 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:00:04 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2046; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:00:04 -0500 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 10:00:00 EST Received: from gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (gos.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.3]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id IAA26742 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:00:37 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id HAA02663; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 07:50:54 -0700 (MST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 07:50:53 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edward Irving Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <30C84E42.187D@voicenet.com> Status: RO What a clamorous and interesting confusion of voices. Let me try to restate what I think is essential in this discussion. I resist David's claim that significant numerical patterns appear throughout the poem Beowulf. The only evidence, on one very short passage, he has so far offered seems to have been quite effectively discounted by Duncan. If David has further evidence on Beowulf, we have not seen it. Instead, he showers us with claims about many other poems in other languages and traditions -- all pretty irrelevant to the issue of whether Beowulf, a basically secular poem even if by a Christian poet, shows any such patterns. A priori, there seems no good reason why it should show any. It has quite other fish to fry. It is quite firmly rooted in the Germanic poetic tradition that at one point David seemed, incomprehensibly, to deny the existence of, though he seems later to have become more reasonable on that point. I think if David can offer no more good evidence on Beowulf (and he claims the entire poem shows the numerical patterning) then we should table the whole debate until he does. TED IRVING From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 15:18:17 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 15:18:13 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA29222; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 15:10:00 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7471 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:36:16 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0822; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:36:16 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 09:36:14 EST Received: from timromano (philly233.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08686; Fri, 8 Dec 95 09:36:53 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b2 (Windows; I; 32bit) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30C84E42.187D@voicenet.com> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:40:02 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO On the 'privacy' and 'mystery' of numerical stuctures. Numerical structures, such as the intervals of word or phrase repetitions, would tend to produc subtler rhetorical effects than would overt, audible features such as 'slat unwearnum, bat bonlacum'. To the extent that they are less discernible than are such 'crude' audible effects, numerical structures tend towards privacy and mystery and away from public social performance--even if among the Anglo-Saxon literati and their 'school-boys' they were well known and considered not arcane. Furthermore, numerical structures may also have been understood to produce metaphysical effects upon the soul of the artist and of the listener or reader--as was held to be the case in the later pansophical tradition, in which numbers had cosmic powers. Get the numbers right, and you have ISDN access to first principles. Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 16:49:22 1995 Received: from scott.cc.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 16:49:17 GMT Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by scott.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA05494 ; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 16:10:18 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA03417; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 16:02:38 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7994 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:10:14 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2846; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:10:13 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 10:10:04 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 8 Dec 1995 14:32:28 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 14; Fri, 08 Dec 1995 14:32:23 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A902.730ABB1A.14@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 14:32:22 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Thank you. I defer to your memory of what you said and regret any embarrassment caused to you. It wouldn't do to dragoon you into support of statements you do not assent to. Yet, I hope. Salve. David From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 18:29:02 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 18:29:01 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA15700; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 18:21:29 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0019 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:44:37 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1637; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:44:37 -0500 Received: from oxmail2.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 12:44:27 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk by oxmail2 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 8 Dec 1995 17:44:50 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 17; Fri, 08 Dec 1995 17:44:40 +0000 Message-Id: <0099A91D.4ECE93D2.17@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 17:44:37 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Edwin, Twelfth-century authors who exhibit 'the rules' in their works include the authors of 'Durham', the 'Liber Eliensis', Godric's Hymns as presented by Reginald of Coldingham (these the earliest English texts extant with their original music), Reginald of Wretham as presented by William of Canterbury. Among Anglo-Norman writers, Benedeit, Philippe de Thaun, Geffrei Gaimar, the author of the Lai d'Haveloc, the Saint Albans author of the Prologue to the Vie de Saint Alexis, the Anonymous Nun of Barking, Clemence of Barking, 'Chard- ri' (probably really Richard), Thomas (author of 'Tristan'), Thomas (author of the Romance of Horn), Meistre Thomas (author of Le Roman de Toute Chevalerie), William de Briane (translator of the Pseudo-Turpin Chronicle), Jordan Fantosme, Marie, Denis Piramus, Robert Bikez, Adgar, the author of 'Chastoiment' trans- lating Petrus Alfonsi, and a longer list of anonymi -- in fact, every single Anglo-Norman writer from the beginnings of the tradition to the reign of Henry II, and quite a few after that. As to what schoolboys are capable of. Do you suppose that if you sang 'Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei' at least 52 times a year for, say, seven years, you might acquire an inkling of an idea about its structure, especially if the music you were singing it to helped you to perceive it? Do you suppose that if every single extant Anglo-Saxon manuscript of Boethius De Consolatione Philosophiae contained neums above the opening lines of 'O stelliferi Conditor Orbis' one might infer that it was sung, like the Psalms, to music that helped one to recognize its structure? Ditto with every single hymn in both the Old and the New Hymnals? Take a little look at the Regularis Concordia, and assume while you're doing that that AEthelwold meant business. How many hours a day EVERY DAY would you spend singing this stuff? For the rest of your life. Now, you could either go bananas with boredom, or as you grew more familiar with this repeated round find more and more of the delights for the mind and eye packed into it for exactly this purpose, to help you to grow, to enrich your mind, not to dull it, with repetition. I suppose neither you nor anyone else on the network wants me to drag him or her through 300 Insular texts, to say again and again -- in your face -- look at these. It would be simplest to start with what they started with from Antiquity, and internalize it. You will see how quickly it can be done. Once done, you will understand from the inside what they could do. And maybe do it. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 18:30:07 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 18:30:06 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA15851; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 18:22:58 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0157 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:49:18 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2067; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:49:18 -0500 Received: from muvms6.mu.wvnet.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 12:49:17 EST Received: from MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU by MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU (PMDF V4.3-11 #6427) id <01HYKCX11GJK002434@MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU>; Fri, 08 Dec 1995 12:46:56 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:46:55 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Rand Hutcheson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099A74D.FE97C62A.9@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO David-- I'm not sure that anybody has been making "sweeping dogmatic" statements about any kind of poetry, whether oral or literate, in the course of this discussion. I have by now read enough of your work so that I am fully and entirely convinced that the structures you see in the Anglo-Latin, Hiberno-Latin, and biblical texts you have discussed are indeed there and were put there by the poets. I haven't double-checked everything, so some your particular conclusions might be unwarranted, but I have checked enough to become convinced that the structures, numerical and otherwise, are in there, and that the poets had these kinds of things in mind as they composed their texts. I'd like to add my voice to those of Duncan Macrae-Gibson, Ted Irving and others, however, in urging you to show us more evidence that Anglo-Saxon poets used these structures when composing in OE. I certainly do not find it inherently unlikely that they did; I am not rejecting your arguments out of hand. But I've read your essay in the _Editing OE_ collection--in fact, it was the first essay that I read when I bought the book last May--and I too was unconvinced. Certainly Beo has a chiastic structure. I also happen to think that Beo is a written, as opposed to an oral, text (in something other than the self-evident way that it is indeed written down), even though it displays many of the features of oral poetry. But even if the Beo poet was fully trained in the kinds of stylistic devices you have pointed to in the Latin texts you have examined, it really does not follow that he used those devices in Beo. What several of us have been suggesting is merely that the vernacular poetic tradition might have been more important to the poet than the biblical poetic tradition. Could we have more evidence that the biblical tradition was important enough that it is fully followed in Beo? --Rand On Wed, 6 Dec 1995, David Howlett wrote: > Rand, > I have never claimed that we cannot infer with reasonable certainty what > pre-literate Germanic poetry may have been like. I make such inferences often. > But I do not use these inferences as the bases of argument, and I do not make > sweeping dogmatic statements about them or erect theories on them. My objection > is that the arguments I make derive from standard texts well known in Antiquity > and in the Latin West during the early Middle Ages which have demonstrable re- > flexes in the Latin literature composed from the fifth century onward in these > islands, as in the vernacular literatures composed he, on which arguments > critics are placing demands more rigorous than any that they demand of theories > based on mere inference, guesswork, and the application of anachronistic ideas. > A reasonable jury may be expected to wait until all the evidence is presented > before leaping to a conclusion that my analyses have been over-enthusiastically > or too rigorously applied. > From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 8 23:18:51 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 8 Dec 95 23:18:50 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA09722; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 23:13:32 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3605 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 17:41:57 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6652; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 17:41:57 -0500 Received: from relay-4.mail.demon.net by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 08 Dec 95 17:41:50 EST Received: from post.demon.co.uk by relay-4.mail.demon.net id sg.aa09783; 8 Dec 95 22:39 GMT Received: from quercus.demon.co.uk by relay-3.mail.demon.net id sg.aa27755; 8 Dec 95 22:38 GMT X-Mailer: VersaTerm Link v1.1.5 X-Smtp-Posting-Host: quercus.demon.co.uk [Fri, 8 Dec 95 22:38:22 GMT] X-Smtp-Posting-Host: post.demon.co.uk [Fri, 8 Dec 95 22:39:19 GMT] Message-Id: Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 22:38:46 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Howard Oakley Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Friends, Can an interested but novice amateur make some suggestions regarding David Howlett's fascinating theories? Perhaps I had better explain that in a concurrent incarnation, I aspire to be a scientist who has to wrestle daily with the perverse products of probability (I am a physiologist primarily working in blood flow). Sadly, I have not yet read David's papers (is there any way that abstracts if not complete papers could be posted to the ANSAX server? This is common practice in other fields, and provided that it does not breach copyright, it is one of the most valuable uses of the Internet), although I shall attempt to do so as a result of his defence here. David appears to face an almost impossible task in that providing proof of his theories seems necessarily subjective. There is also a certain circularity which could be difficult for sceptics to enter. However, I think there may be a method which could be much more objective. If the mathematical rules and patterns which David sees are robust, then he should be able to construct a protocol which an independent party could apply to sections of Beowulf. Thus, David should produce such a protocol, deliver it to an agreed third party (who has no axe to grind but is agreed to be neutral), who then chooses a number of sections from Beowulf and applies the protocol. A simple measure of goodness of fit could be used for each section. This would not of course confirm that these rules and patterns were intended by the author(s). To do that, two further tests would be necessary. The first would be for someone to produce a surrogate protocol, which specified different rules and patterns not claimed by David. (This is a technique popular in a number of fields and derived from statistical bootstrapping.) An easy way to do this would be to encode the protocol using a programming language such as Common Lisp, and then to randomly permute and recombine its elements. A simple illustration of part of this might be to look for patterns based on randomly chosen numbers, although this should be made more sophisticated. Again, a neutral party should apply the rules to the same sections used for the above analysis, tabulating the measures of goodness of fit. The second test would be for David to nominate a work which he claims does not contain such numerical rules and patterns, which would then be analysed using his original protocol by a neutral party. Measures of goodness of fit would again be recorded. We would then have three comparable sets of numbers - those from David's protocol applied to a work which he claims contains the numerical patterns etc., from a surrogate protocol applied to the same sections of the same work, and from David's protocol applied to a work which he believes does not show the numerical patterns. These would be amenable to formal statistical comparison. How about it? Perhaps I should throw a little more petrol on the fire by saying that whilst his theory sounds credible to me, I am far from convinced that anyone constructing such a great work would be able to accomplish such writing, convey their meaning, make it sound well when recited, *and* incorporate an elaborate numerical structure. But I'd be fascinated to hear the results. Howard. Howard Oakley, * Howard@quercus.demon.co.uk EHN & DIJ Oakley, Brooklands Lodge, * AppleLink UK0392; eWorld HowardOakley Park View Close, Wroxall, Ventnor, * CompuServe 70734,120 Isle of Wight UK PO38 3EQ * Tel +44 1983 853605, fax 853253 From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 9 05:30:42 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 9 Dec 95 05:30:38 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id FAA28810; Sat, 9 Dec 1995 05:25:26 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7241 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 9 Dec 1995 00:24:19 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8075; Sat, 9 Dec 1995 00:24:19 -0500 Received: from bronze.lcs.mit.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 09 Dec 95 00:24:18 EST Received: by bronze.lcs.mit.edu (Sendmail 8.6.10/950531.CACTUS) id AAA25426; Sat, 9 Dec 1995 00:23:23 -0500 Message-Id: <199512090523.AAA25426@bronze.lcs.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 00:23:23 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Greg Rose Subject: Re: numbers to infinity To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO With all due respect to Paul, I disagree almost completely with his suggestion that discussion of David's numerical patterning work should cease here. I find David's work to be one of the most important things on Anglo-Latinity in the past hundred years. The possibility of its extension to OE is extremely important -- indeed, I think that the importance of its implications is one of the reasons for the apparent heat. If David is right, we have a paradigm-shift in the offing. I haven't seen much else in our field in the last decade which has the potential of revolutionizing how we understand Anglo-Saxon high culture. It's only right that we're talking about it. I have learned more from all sides in this discussion that I have from the rest of ANSAXNET in the past year combined, and I subscribed here to learn something from my colleagues. Greg Rose Pol. Sci. UConn From Edward.Irving@m.cc.utah.edu Sat Dec 9 16:32:16 1995 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 9 Dec 95 16:32:07 GMT Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (ei8721@cor.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.2]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id JAA05360 for ; Sat, 9 Dec 1995 09:27:07 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id JAA11470; Sat, 9 Dec 1995 09:27:05 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 09:27:05 -0700 (MST) From: Edward Irving To: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Duncan: This morning I feel quite tired of the whole Howlett discussion. And I feel bad about it as well. As you know, I fear David is not quite right in the head, and poking at him as we have done only releases new floods of what I think is near mania -- all those immense generalizations and endless lists and intemperate and patronizing remarks that shouldn't be made at all in public. He won't change. He won't put up (evidence for OE) as we've asked him to, and he sure as hell won't shut up. Can't, probably, if his brain is not really wired right. Well, yes, it may be a harmless kind of nuttiness that many scholars (and some great ones) have shown, but being in contact with it gives me a creepy feeling. You may remember that Edward Sievers in his latter years "knew" that he could identify the authors and all details about them by "hearing" a passage of their OE works. Maybe he could - who knows? But nobody believed him. I've been in close contact with schizophrenia in my own family. No, I'm not diagnosing David, don't worry! But the creepy feeling is very similar. I might just sign off on this topic, for my own sake. TED From Edward.Irving@m.cc.utah.edu Mon Dec 11 15:24:34 1995 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 11 Dec 95 15:21:57 GMT Received: from gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (gos.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.3]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id IAA28300 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 1995 08:17:05 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id IAA11205; Mon, 11 Dec 1995 08:17:04 -0700 (MST) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 08:17:04 -0700 (MST) From: Edward Irving To: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: _Beowulf_ is not a sonnet In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Duncan: You're quite right to point this out. I don't have a copy of his article at hand, and am busy trying to write up an abstract for a deadline (so I can go down to Arizona and get warm in February at a conference there!), but when I have some time clear I'll work at it. What I think you demonstrated well was that even if you accept David's patterns they seem to miss the point of the passage - and are no service to the poet. And thanks for the other note. I guess it was David's impassioned and grandiose claims (ALL Anglo-Norman literature, was it?) that disturbed me most. Have a good Christmas, in case we don't communicate again. TED On Mon, 11 Dec 1995, Duncan Macrae-Gibson wrote: > Ted -- In fairness to David, the "one very short passage" which I have > discussed was not all that he presented in the paper I took it from. > I hoped some colleagues might have time to look at some of those that > follow, and see if they were inclined to discount his claims for them. > But it's a slow job closely examining what David says. -- Duncan > From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 13 04:56:10 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 13 Dec 95 04:56:09 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id EAA09485; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 04:50:05 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2589 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 12 Dec 1995 23:48:42 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2917; Tue, 12 Dec 1995 23:48:42 -0500 Received: from postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 12 Dec 95 23:48:39 EST Received: from [132.236.155.52] (CU-DIALUP-0806.CIT.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.155.52]) by postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07864 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 1995 23:49:12 -0500 X-Sender: tdh1@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 23:49:12 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Thomas D. Hill" Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO This is a bit of Karen's reply to me a few days ago -- and my delayed response. For those of you like Paul who are utterly bored by this discussion, one stroke of the delete button will give you relief, and think of the trees we are sparing by conducting this discussion in e-space. >Just a quick reply to only one issue you raise: that the numerical (I'll >use David's preferred term) patterns David find could be accidental. >The reverse, of course, might also be true: the numerical principles >that inform the writers may make the verse forms accidental. However, >my own feeling (no, I'm not at the stage yet to be able to prove it, and >I do not at the moment have the time to sit down and try to demonstrate >even with _Caedmon's Hymn_, particularly given the objections I can >already hear ringing loudly in my ears) is that the various disciplines >all contribute to each other to create a tight structure. When I >learned music theory, for instance, I found that the more I learned, and >the more we analyzed a composition for rhythm, repetition of motifs, and >so on, the more each part of the structure contributed to the whole. Hi Karen Allow me to repeat myself for the sake of clarity. I am not arguing and would not argue that numerical/numerological patterns might occur by accident (although such patterning could theoretically occur) but rather that such patterns could well occur as a kind of by product of other compositional techniques. Rhetorical balence -- which might mean, for example, that the clauses of a given sentence "balence" or "are of equal weight" -- implies numerical balence. That is one could look carefully at those clauses and count syllables and one would find that each clause has the same number of syllables. Let me offer a somewhat facetious example. In the Gettysburg address, which is an important ideological document as Garry Wills showed us recently , Lincoln defines democracy in the final and climactic sentence of the speech as "government, of the people, by the people, for the people." This is a definition which is central to Lincoln's argument in this brief speech and the initial term " government" consists of one word in three syllables. One in three and three in one. The neutral term "government" is then defined by three phrases consisting of four syllables each . We thus have a single term which is both three and one defined by a sequence of twelve syllables -- Lincoln's definition of democracy, the ideological principle which unifies the American nation, thus corresponds in terms of numerological patterning to the great and commonplace Christian symbol of human community -- Christ and the twelve disciples, who in turn of course are supposed to represent the twelve tribes of Israel united under Jahweh. Now with all due modesty I would say that this is pretty shrewed numerological analysis -- although unfortunately it is certainly wrong. The numbers are there and in fact there is evidence that this numerical pattern is deliberate in that the spoken version of the Gettysburg address reported in the newspapers includes an "and" in the final phrase which Lincoln deleted in the canonical text. My point is that the phrase exhibits numerical patterning because Lincoln as an experienced -- indeed a great public speaker -- was keenly aware of rhythm, and rhythm can be counted out in terms of words and syllables. There are rhetorical and rhythmical patterns in Anglo-Latin and OE verse and prose and it necessarily follows that there are numerical patterns as well.Whether these patterns are numerologically significant is another and much more complicated question. peace tom hill Thomas D. Hill 607-277-0182 Dept. of English tdh1@cornell.edu Cornell University From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 13 16:56:40 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 13 Dec 95 16:56:38 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA14036; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 16:48:03 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8280 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 11:45:58 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2667; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 11:45:58 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 13 Dec 95 11:45:55 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 13 Dec 1995 16:38:23 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 5; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 16:38:19 +0000 Message-Id: <0099AD01.DEBA64B5.5@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 16:38:17 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Tim, Thanks for an acute note. It is worth adding, though tiresome to have to add at this remove, that golden sections are never adduced alone in my anal- yses. These simply occur sometimes, which is why Megginson was able to perform his meretricious trick years ago. The point of adducing them is that they oc- cur in passages already conspicuous for parallel or chiastic statement and re- statement of words and ideas, passages already marked by recurrence of rhythmic patterns in prose or verse, passages marked by significant disposition of lit- terae notabiliores or punctuatiuon points (if not both), and more often than not, passages marked by composition in ratios other than extreme and mean, i.e. 1:1, 2:1, 3:2, 4:3, and 9:8, passages marked further by words OUTSIDE these adduced patterns which recur either at mathemarically fixed intervals or at mathematically fixed ratios. Composition in Biblical style is not something to be dismissed by a smart-aleck tyro who supposes that by guying one element of it he can discredit the lot. Nope. The truth is that to disprove the claims I am making a skeptic must refute every single aspect of every single text adduced. If not, any that escapes censure may be cited as the essential text by which the style was transmitted to the middle ages. But it would be much simpler to verify that the texts adduced as models were known to our writers and to discover for oneself that each and every one of them participates in the tradition of such composition. When others do that I can stop. And I will be happy to stop. There are other rows to hoe. From LBRAGG@gallua.gallaudet.edu Wed Dec 13 18:30:08 1995 Received: from gallua.gallaudet.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 13 Dec 95 18:29:23 GMT Received: from GALLUA.BITNET by GALLUA.BITNET (PMDF V4.2-12 #4084) id <01HYRARYZX308WWWJ7@GALLUA.BITNET>; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 12:18:04 EST Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 12:18:04 -0500 (EST) From: LBRAGG@gallua.gallaudet.edu Subject: Your analysis of Howlett To: macg@abdn.ac.uk Message-Id: <01HYRARYZX328WWWJ7@GALLUA.BITNET> X-Vms-To: IN%"macg@abdn.ac.uk" X-Vms-Cc: LBRAGG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Status: RO Hello, An old fan of yours here.... I want to thank you for the painstaking analysis of Howlett's thesis and methodology that you posted on ansaxnet. I've been set nomail for a couple of years, but my husband forwards me items of interest from time to time and this one was pretty interesting indeed. It must have been very time consuming and may have seemed a thankless job while you were doing it, but I can assure you that it is widely appreciated -- not only the review itself, but also the knowledge that somebody out there is willing to rise to the disinformation instead of treating David like a grand joke. Best wishes for your continued critical health and a merry Christmas to you. Lois Bragg Associate Professor of English Gallaudet University Washington, DC 20002 USA lbragg@gallua.gallaudet.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 14 01:16:50 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 14 Dec 95 01:16:49 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id BAA25540; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 01:11:08 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4356 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 19:46:42 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5971; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 19:46:42 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 13 Dec 95 19:46:42 EST Received: from timromano (philly207.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09924; Wed, 13 Dec 95 19:47:21 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <0099AD01.DEBA64B5.5@vax.ox.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30CF74E1.6B9@voicenet.com> Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 19:50:41 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, The conclusion you reach seems reasonable to me: >But it would be much simpler to verify that the texts adduced >as models were known to our writers and to discover for oneself >that each and every one of them participates in the tradition >of such composition... and yet I'm not surprised at the reception you've gotten: those who have been "right there in the boat" with the seafarer, who have felt the chilly fetters and craving cares, and who know how hunger tears at a mere-weary mood, do not want to think of the these poets as avatars of Benoit Mandelbrot. Too many years ago, when I was in graduate school and teaching an English poetry survey, I brought in to class two versions of the ballad "Tam Lin", with the stanzas lined up. We proceeded to look at the differences between the two versions, how, in one version, Janet is depicted in more heroic terms than she is in the other, given more to say and more to do, and is shown rebelling against her father. One of my students was very upset by this exercise; she said she had always loved this ballad and hated very much to "dissect" it. I can still hear in my mind the way her voice seethed on the word "dissect". I suspect you're running into something similar here. And yet I don't mean to tar all the sceptics with the same brush... I'll look for the Peritia article--thanks for the reference. Tim From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 14 11:13:01 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 14 Dec 95 11:13:00 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA22693; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 11:04:06 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8462 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 06:03:05 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0135; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 06:03:05 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 14 Dec 95 06:03:04 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 14 Dec 95 11:08:40 GMT Message-Id: Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 11:08:40 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO It was not "misleading" of me to take as an illustration of David's methods the opening lines of _Beowulf_ for the reason Karen alleges - or, I hope, for any other reason. The argument was certainly NOT that "if David can do that with the opening lines of _Beowulf_, and with `geardagum' in particular, then ANY THREE-SYLLABLE WORD, FOLLOWED BY A SET OF THREE PHRASES< CAN BE SIMILARLY ANALYZED" (my capitalization). That would indeed be a pointless argument. The suggestion was that if David can do that with the opening lines of _Beowulf_ his methods are suspect. I asked others who might have the time available to follow up where I left off to see whether the bit I had taken would prove to be representative of David's methods or an uncharacteristic aberration. I did NOT "specifically ask those who find fault with David's arguments for support of my position". I simply asked people to report what they found. That certainly does not exclude Karen. If she will point to other parts of his demonstration which, in contrast to the one I took, will stand rigorous investigation that will be of great value to the discussion. Duncan Macrae-Gibson (macg@abdn.ac.uk) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 14 11:30:42 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 14 Dec 95 11:30:41 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA23458; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 11:20:59 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8533 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 06:19:53 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0348; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 06:19:53 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 14 Dec 95 06:19:50 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 14 Dec 95 11:25:27 GMT Message-Id: Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 11:25:27 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Come off it, David! "To disprove the claims [you are] making a skeptic must refute every single aspect of every single text adduced". Given the large range of possibilities available to the composer in your "biblical style" it would be astonishing if some things that could be the result of deliberate use of that style could not be found in the work or any writer with any feeling for form. Your claims are for such consistent use of that style that they can be used as criteria for recovering an author's ipsissima verba if distorted in transmission. If you merely want us to believe that OE authors sometimes wrote in ways that seems likely to have been influenced by "biblical style" I don't think anyone would be arguing with you. Not me, certainly. [sorry, end of line 5 "work OF any writer", line 9 "SEEM likely to have"] From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 15 12:56:04 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 15 Dec 95 12:56:00 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA24318; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:49:20 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3093 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 07:31:45 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1703; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 07:31:45 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 15 Dec 95 07:31:44 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:31:36 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 1; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:31:33 +0000 Message-Id: <0099AE71.BAC2F9F5.1@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:31:32 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Karen, As 'British Books in Biblical Style' is at press, due to appear early in 1996, it may be less tiresome to those who don't want to consider separate bits to await publication of the whole argument, identical in format with that of 'The Celtic Latin Tradition of Biblical Style', but demonstrating the direct- ness and variety of links between Anglo-Latin and Old English. One reason for introducing discussion on the network was to provide others with the means of analysing texts for themselves, to allow others the satisfaction of discovering things on their own, which seems to me to be more fun than replicating my re- sults (though I have derived intense private pleasure in following Stevick's routes to representation of various manuscript illuminations). There is no arrogance in the assumption that others will find the same things I have found, any more than there is arrogance in supposing that the proof of a Euclidian proposition will turn out the same way time after time or the analysis of a fugue will produce a single perception. I have tried to keep my own psychohistory out of the analyses, but in the matter of the beginning of 'Beowulf', as of the beginning of John's Gospel, the order in which things are presented in public is the reverse of the order of my private perception. I knew how the Gospel worked before seeing how the prologue works. I knew that 'Beowulf' is a three-part poem, with three monster fights that consist of one part, two parts, three parts, that begin in first three lines in a parallelism of three parts. Duncan is balking at analysis of the first three lines and suggesting that disbelief in that part of the analy- sis casts a pall of suspicion over the rest. Very well. Let us for the sake of argument say that I am completely wrong about the first three lines. Jettison that part of the analysis. What happens to the rest? Not a whole lot, I think. Duncan will say, 'Come off it, David'. But analysis of the whole poem will carry one over particular passages that don't appear to us with the crystal clarity that others exhibit. Sometimes this may be because I have presented a particular analysis badly, sometimes perhaps because the text may be slightly deranged, sometimes because we are only just beginning to recover a mode of thought and perception and expression that has been unpractised for a long time. But I affirm that the fundamental ideas of my analyses are sound, and I don't have to indulge in special pleading for them. Those who work through them will see why. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 15 13:01:48 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 15 Dec 95 13:01:47 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA24470; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:50:46 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3143 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 07:35:38 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1818; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 07:35:38 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 15 Dec 95 07:35:18 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 15 Dec 95 12:40:28 GMT Message-Id: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:40:27 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Karen -- Since your "quick question" came through the net, I'll reply that way too. My objections to David's methods concerns nothing so particular as "violating recognized verse forms" - as he says nothing about verse forms in the analyses I was looking at I don't see how that could possibly be supposed to arise. It is simply (1) that in purporting to demonstrate first a parallel and then a chiastic structure he makes illegitimate selection of parts of the original to present - ones that would support his analyses, not ones that are representative of the actual structures; (2) that in purporting to demonstrate the relationships between parts that he does present he illegitimately treats minor feature of the parts as though they were principal ones; (3) that in purporting to demonstrate arithmetical regularities he presents whichever features may be thought to show regularity and ignores those which cannot; (4) that in locating the limits of sections to be used in demonstrating arithmetical regularities, and in the number of relationships which, if found, can be regarded as regular, he allows himself such large and undefined variety as makes it impossible to investigate the possibility that what he reports could be there by chance. -- Duncan (macg@abdn.ac.uk) [line 2 read "concern", line 11 "features"] From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 15 17:06:01 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 15 Dec 95 17:05:59 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA12632; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 16:56:14 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6273 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 11:42:29 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3693; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 11:42:29 -0500 Received: from chuma.cas.usf.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 15 Dec 95 11:42:28 EST Received: (jordan@localhost) by chuma.cas.usf.edu (8.6.11/8.6.5) id LAA03973; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 11:43:12 -0500 X-Sender: jordan@chuma Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1995 11:43:11 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099AE71.BAC2F9F5.1@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO > prologue works. I knew that 'Beowulf' is a three-part poem, with three monster > fights that consist of one part, two parts, three parts, that begin in first > three lines in a parallelism of three parts. Duncan is balking at analysis of Is Beowulf really a three-part poem? Surely this is subjective - many people see it in two parts, others in more than three parts. Three monster fights? What about the flashback with young Beowulf fighting the sea monsters? That would make four and... Greg Jordan jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 15 18:13:46 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 15 Dec 95 18:13:44 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA19085; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 18:07:52 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7077 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:42:03 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6778; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 12:42:03 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 15 Dec 95 12:41:55 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 15 Dec 1995 17:42:21 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 4; Fri, 15 Dec 1995 17:42:17 +0000 Message-Id: <0099AE9D.23B326B7.4@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1995 17:42:16 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Greg, Some lines dropped from my post. I wrote that three great fights against monsters occupy one part, two parts, three parts (the third actually marked a+erest, o#dre si#de, #driddan si#de), the first beginning in fit 11, the second in fit 22, onset to the third beginning in fit 33. The other surround- ing encounters are generically distinct, illustrating syllic spell in the first third, gyd so#d ond sarlic in the second, and geomorgyd in the third, consistent with the three forms of song Beowulf reports Hrothgar as having sung (in his account to Hygelac at the beginning of the third third, a resume of the first and second parts). Note that these surrounding narratives, which set the tone of each third of the poem, marvels in the first, heroic tragedy in the second, elegy in the third, begin in fits 8, 16, 24, ... . To assure ourselves of the structure, as if the poet's own internally consistent diction were not enough, let us count the lines. At the centre of the first third, 492 lines from the beginning and 492 lines from the end, the poet celebrates poetry. 90 lines from the beginning is the scop's Creation Lay, the efficient cause of the action of the whole poem, and 90 lines from the end of the first third, the most famous of all the 'other' stories embedded in the poem, the diction of which keys it to the dragon fight at the end. Pay attention to the internal structure of the Sigemund and Fitela story, as to the internal structure of the Finnsburh story, then to the structure of the contexts into which they fit. You will observe that the poet's own stated and restated diction tells you exactly where to start and stop, and exactly where to key each internally coherent episode to its pairs, both within its own third of the poem and within the other two thirds. Try it with xerox copies, marking the parallels in different colours. You will see that in the end there is no residue. The poet uses everything, but the narrative is polyphonic, some parts not explicable until we know the whole work. A clear example of this in a different form of detail is the retainer who gets eaten fet ond folma. How much later do we discover that his name is Hondscio? Does the poet tell us straight away why Beowulf takes #done hafelan ond #da hilt? No. But there is a reason. The trick is to let the poet tell the story HIS way. It is his way, not mine. If you stopped quibbling with me and simply tried the analyses you would see that I am not trying to sell you a load of shoddy goods, but to give you evidence internal to the poem for seeing why it is as it is and not otherwise.It would be more fun to play than to argue. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 16 05:39:50 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 16 Dec 95 05:39:46 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id FAA29542; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 05:34:09 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3127 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 00:16:24 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9895; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 00:16:24 -0500 Received: from QUCDN.QueensU.CA by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 16 Dec 95 00:16:22 EST Received: from QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA by QUCDN.QueensU.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7860; Sat, 16 Dec 95 00:12:29 EST Received: from QueensU.CA (NJE origin X400GATE@QUCDN) by QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5393; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 00:12:29 -0500 P1-Message-Id: CA* *QueensU.CA;QUCDN.X400GATE:Pa@zuuAD X400-Trace: CA* *QueensU.CA; arrival Sat, 16 Dec 95 00:12-0500 action Relayed Message-Id: <5361*> Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 00:16:24 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: George Clark Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO *** Reply to note of 12/15/95 11:39 Subject: Re: geardagum etc. Well said Greg Jordan! Yes, once we start dividing texts into parts by an analysis of meaning, or what we claim to be meaning, we are into a whirlpool of subjectivity; every one of three or four or five . . . parts can be subdivided into as many parts as we choose or fancy. We perceive a great gap or division of Bwf at line 2200, but is the "real" division up to that point into two parts, Grendel, then his mother or do we count also, as you say, the seamonsters of Bwf's youth, and the five whom he bound (possibly the seamonsters, maybe not); do we count Unferth? After 2200 are the Swedish-Geatish wars one or more parts of the whole? If poets composed as David claims, perhaps knowing their method would make emendation sure, but David suggests that if the first lines of Bwf don't work, perhaps the text is deranged or disturbed. Can David emend the text convincingly? Anyway I've been reading at the article and am deeply impressed and very skeptical all at once. And I don't see that this kind of analysis gets us anywhere with the aesthetics of poetry. But then music theory, the kind my brother mastered and now my son is mastering, doesn't seem to explain the aesthetics of music either, hence the possible failure of David's theory on that head doesn't invalidate the theory. Demonstrating that these patterns are really present and not dependent on arbitary segmentations of the text is hard enough, if that be granted proving that the patterns of word and syllable placement are not coincidental strikes me as extremely difficult. As I've said, that's a statistical statement which needs a mathematical demonstration. George Clark English (2153) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 16 12:31:52 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 16 Dec 95 12:31:44 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA08968; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 12:25:51 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3911 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 07:24:30 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3365; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 07:24:30 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 16 Dec 95 07:24:29 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Sat, 16 Dec 1995 12:25:04 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 13; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 12:25:02 +0000 Message-Id: <0099AF39.FC262166.13@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 12:25:01 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Shall we pursue the thread of the 'fet ond folma'? The man eaten, as we note much later, was named 'Hondscio', a kenning for 'glove'. Into what did Grendel intend to put Beowulf? A 'glof'? Is there then some justice in Beowulf's wrenching off of this monster's 'hond, earm, ond eaxl'? Someone who pays attention to such details and incorporates the into other elements of analysis, which can be confirmed by stated and restated diction and disposition of rhythmic types and counts of lines and words and syllables is less fairly accused of sinking into a whirlpool of subjectivity than some others. That arch-skeptic R.I. Page once observed in public that mathematics is nothing if not exact. The 'Beowulf' poet was exact. He knew how to count. When someone adduces a serious error in my mathematical analyses of his work I will consider the possibility of having slipped into a subjective whirlpool. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 16 16:03:38 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 16 Dec 95 16:03:36 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA14861; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 15:57:44 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4706 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 10:56:46 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5984; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 10:56:46 -0500 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 16 Dec 95 10:56:45 EST Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (ei8721@cor.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.2]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id IAA15142 for ; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 08:57:29 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id IAA04864; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 08:57:27 -0700 (MST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 08:57:27 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edward Irving Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099A842.CA5C8512.39@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO It is not easy to see what David Howlett's latest offering of evidence about BEOWULF is supposed to mean. He finds that the three fights begin with Fit 11, 22, and 33, but an examination of these markers shows them to be pretty loosely interpreted as "beginnings". Fit 11 begins at l. 710, in the middle of Grendel's approach to Heorot: why not at the start of it, or in a number of other likely places? Fit 22 (l. 1473) again is in the middle of Beowulf's preparation, his parting speech to Hrothgar, but why not when they march to the mere, or when he starts arming, or when he gets to the bottom? Fit 33 (2312) is in the middle of the dragon's attack, and again one could think of equally likely or more likely starting-points. The same could be said of the passages that begin with Fit 8, 16 and 24. The divisions into "syllic spell", "soth ond sarlic" and "geomorgyd" don't hold up especially well. Both the fight with Grendel and the fight with Grendel's mother could equally well be termed "syllic spell", since both are extraordinary tales of the supernatural; I don't see why the fight with GM is any more "soth ond sarlic" than anything else (in fact "soth ond sarlic" has always seemed to me to mean a historical event rather than a monster-fight). - David has offered some preliminary claims about Beowulf, and one's answers must also be tentative, but I think so far not so good. TED IRVING From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 16 16:40:08 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 16 Dec 95 16:40:06 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA16056; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 16:34:32 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4821 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:33:27 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6580; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:33:27 -0500 Received: from chuma.cas.usf.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 16 Dec 95 11:33:26 EST Received: (jordan@localhost) by chuma.cas.usf.edu (8.6.11/8.6.5) id LAA29458; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:34:10 -0500 X-Sender: jordan@chuma Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:34:10 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099AE9D.23B326B7.4@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO On Fri, 15 Dec 1995, David Howlett wrote: > Some lines dropped from my post. I wrote that three great fights against > monsters occupy one part, two parts, three parts (the third actually marked > a+erest, o#dre si#de, #driddan si#de), the first beginning in fit 11, the > second in fit 22, onset to the third beginning in fit 33. My edition doesn't divide the poem up into fitts. Is "onest to the third beginning" a fudge? The other surround- > ing encounters are generically distinct, illustrating syllic spell in the > first third, gyd so#d ond sarlic in the second, and geomorgyd in the third, > consistent with the three forms of song Beowulf reports Hrothgar as having > sung (in his account to Hygelac at the beginning of the third third, a resume > of the first and second parts). Note that these surrounding narratives, which > set the tone of each third of the poem, marvels in the first, heroic tragedy > in the second, elegy in the third, begin in fits 8, 16, 24, ... . Beowulf's report to Hygelac about the songs at Hrothgar's court starting around line 2105 - is this what you mean? It doesn't say Hrothgar sang these songs. And if this is what you see as the template for the "surrounding narratives", there are several problems. One is that more than three topics of song are mentioned: feorran rehte, hearpan wynne, gyd ... soth ond sarlic, syllic spell, gioguthe ... hilde-strengo. Five. The other problem is that even if we limit it to your three, they come in the wrong order. "Syllic spell" is your "first third" and "gyd so#d ond sarlic" is your "second third" - yet "soth ond sarlic" is mentioned *before* "syllic spell." If this were the template, "soth ond sarlic" should have come first, and "syllic spell" second. As for "geomorgyd" - the word doesn't even occur in my edition of Beowulf, and it doesn't correspond to my fifth theme at all. There is a big difference between an elegy and the story of one's youth and battle prowess! > To assure ourselves of the structure, as if the poet's own internally > consistent diction were not enough, let us count the lines. At the centre > of the first third, 492 lines from the beginning and 492 lines from the end, > the poet celebrates poetry. 90 lines from the beginning is the scop's Creation > Lay, the efficient cause of the action of the whole poem, and 90 lines from > the end of the first third, the most famous of all the 'other' stories embedded > in the poem, the diction of which keys it to the dragon fight at the end. I have no idea what you're doing here. At line 492 in my edition (from the beginning of the poem?) poetry is not being celebrated. If it's from the beginning of your division of the poem into threes, I have no idea where you draw that subjective line. At any rate, I don't see anything significant about the numbers 492 or 90, and I wouldn't know how to go about finding the "most famous of all the 'other' stories embedded in the poem" - ??? > A clear example of this in a different form of detail is the retainer who > gets eaten fet ond folma. How much later do we discover that his name is > Hondscio? *drumroll* 1,331 lines later. And the significance is...? Does the poet tell us straight away why Beowulf takes #done hafelan > ond #da hilt? No. But there is a reason. The trick is to let the poet tell > the story HIS way. It is his way, not mine. If you stopped quibbling with me > and simply tried the analyses you would see that I am not trying to sell you > a load of shoddy goods, but to give you evidence internal to the poem for > seeing why it is as it is and not otherwise.It would be more fun to play than > to argue. I am letting the poet tell the story his/her way, and it doesn't seem to be a way that uses intricate numerical patterns along the lines you (not the poet) suggest. If the poet had so intended, we would surely see patterns that would be clearly nonrandom, artful patterns: perfectly regular, throughout the poem, in logical and meaningful arrays, and without any need for subjective part-analysis (as you say, numbers aren't supposed to be subjective). Greg Jordan jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 16 17:04:14 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 16 Dec 95 17:04:10 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA16875; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 16:58:08 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4946 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:48:56 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7016; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:48:56 -0500 Received: from muvms6.mu.wvnet.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 16 Dec 95 11:48:55 EST Received: from MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU by MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU (PMDF V4.3-11 #6427) id <01HYVH4X1100002YGP@MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU>; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:46:32 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:46:31 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Rand Hutcheson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099AF39.FC262166.13@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO On Sat, 16 Dec 1995, David Howlett wrote: > Shall we pursue the thread of the 'fet ond folma'? The man eaten, as we note > much later, was named 'Hondscio', a kenning for 'glove'. Into what did Grendel > intend to put Beowulf? A 'glof'? Is there then some justice in Beowulf's > wrenching off of this monster's 'hond, earm, ond eaxl'? > Someone who pays attention to such details and incorporates the into other > elements of analysis, which can be confirmed by stated and restated diction > and disposition of rhythmic types and counts of lines and words and syllables > is less fairly accused of sinking into a whirlpool of subjectivity than some > others. That arch-skeptic R.I. Page once observed in public that mathematics > is nothing if not exact. The 'Beowulf' poet was exact. He knew how to count. > When someone adduces a serious error in my mathematical analyses of his work > I will consider the possibility of having slipped into a subjective whirlpool. > I agree that the glof, the name Hondscio, and the collocations fet ond folma and earm ond eaxl are significant. Could you please make it explicit for us how they fit in to your mathematical analysis, David? Thanks. --Rand From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 16 23:59:11 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 16 Dec 95 23:59:10 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA04052; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 23:53:07 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7073 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 18:48:46 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4435; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 18:48:45 -0500 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 16 Dec 95 18:48:43 EST Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (ei8721@cor.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.2]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA28915 for ; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 16:49:22 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id QAA12279; Sat, 16 Dec 1995 16:49:20 -0700 (MST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 16:49:20 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edward Irving Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099A842.CA5C8512.39@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO If we find it necessary to divide BEOWULF, like Gaul, into three parts, common sense would suggest some probability that it goes like this: 1. The Grendel fight. Lines 1-1250 (fitts 1-18) 2. The Grendel's mother fight. Lines 1251-1887 (when B. sails away from Denmark), (fitts 19-26); or, alternatively, 1251 to 2189 (just before the 50-year leap and the dragon's arrival). 3. The rest of the poem (1888, or 2200 to 3182). Surely there are no significant numerical patterns in such a division. The recap passage that begins at 1251 sounds like the beginning of a story, and perhaps reveals a little "stitching" if you believe, as many have, that the poet sewed together three previous stories about Beowulf to make a longer one. But it is not necessary to reconstruct such previous stages, if there ever were any. TED IRVING From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun Dec 17 20:04:00 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 17 Dec 95 20:03:58 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA05709; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 19:58:00 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1341 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 14:56:52 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9541; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 14:56:52 -0500 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 17 Dec 95 14:56:51 EST Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HYX1L09IJK0002UJ@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 14:57:06 -0500 (EST) X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HYX1L09R0I0002UJ@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 14:57:06 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Rand, If I am not mistaken, David discusses the business with Hondscio, glof, and fet and folma in his article, "Form and Genre in _Beowulf_," an article that a, for Greg Jordan, discusses the syllic spel, etc., . (_Studia Neophilologica_ XLVI [1974], 309-25--BTW, I'm citing this from the article in the Scragg/Szarmach volume). I do not have this 1974 article handy, or I would cite page numbers. There could be further discussion over in ANSAXDAT. However, while I could use gopher, we had a power failure yesterday, and I can't telnet to ANSAXDAT (we've been promised that the problem will be fixed some time). The text search on gopher yielded only yesterday's discussion of glof, Hondscio, and fet and folma. If you can Telnet, you may find more, but probably not, for David's analysis (and I'm almost sure these issues form part of that article) of these things is already accessible in the above article. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun Dec 17 23:27:11 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 17 Dec 95 23:27:10 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA12696; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 23:21:14 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2498 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 18:19:42 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3396; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 18:19:41 -0500 Received: from homer23.u.washington.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 17 Dec 95 18:19:40 EST Received: by homer23.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.11/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA57047; Sun, 17 Dec 95 15:20:24 -0800 X-Sender: stevickr@homer23.u.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 15:20:24 -0800 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Robert Stevick Subject: The "geardagum" thread To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO In the lengthening exchange of messages on this topic, least relevant, as I think we can agree, is personal revulsion in the presence of "dissection." Not a lot less relevant is the conviction that _Beowulf_ must be excepted because it feels different. It is in the Germanic tradition (or it is oral formulaic, or it is heroic, ...), therefore it is not shaped by the Christian-Latin tradition. But that is not argument. Or no Anglo-Saxon poet--and possibly no poet anywhere--crafted texts in patterns of the mind exemplified by "Biblical style" or any similar method. But that is no more than a credo. Neither is it argument to counterpose a "shrewd numerological analysis" of a few words from the Gettysburg Address. That is only captious. "Found poetry" came and went a generation ago. If "Song of Myself" were offered, that would command serious attention. Argument comes in the insistent "not proven" approach, whether to set aside David's claims about Biblical style in OE texts, or to invide further demonstration, and further, ... until the point can be conceded without effort. Amidst all this there is little place for an arbiter, as experience, common sense, and the tangled web of this debate will attest. But some other comments may have a place--maybe an ameliorative effect. The will not to believe is seldom bent, much less turned about, by contentious debate. On the other hand, the best way I have found to test one's lack of consent to an argument is to try making someone else's argument convincingly. We do this all the time in the classroom, I'd guess, sometimes to offer a case or a methodology (which we may believe to be right), sometimes to set it up for revision, sometimes to point out its flaws. And sometimes the attempt will show that it is one's lack of understanding that is the source of unbelief. More than once when reading David's analyes of medieval English texts or Tom Hart's essays on Beowulf or Dante I have had an "error message" comparable to "insufficient disc space." That meant that I should try again later, with more capacity, rather than attack the author for failure to persuade me. The result more than once was that later I did understand more and did credit more of their claims. Even if this week I can see no more than thirty percent of a given analysis as valid, a change from twenty to thirty percent is the second most important thing, the first being that if no more than ten or fifteen percent is valid so far as I can find at a given time, in THIS kind of analysis the only appropriate response is to join in the enterprise, not try to subvert it. Duncan's "Come off it, David" echoes my own "Aw, C'mon, Tom" twenty years ago [by copper wire telephone, not e-mail] when Hart told me that the ratios among lengths of sections of a text in OE were geometrical. "Poetry is lineal--one dimensional--and your ratios belong to two-dimensional geometry." Later (after pulling my head from the hornet's nest of administration) I looked, and the geometrical ratios were there, as he had said. And with probing, more turned up, and still more, and they corresponded exactly and repeatedly to the ones found in structural dimensions of rectangular manuscript illuminations in Book of Kells, Lindisfarne Gospels, St. Gall Gospels, Book or Durrow, Cuthbert Gospel of St. John, and more, and in fact it turned out that the dimenions of OE verse texts and the pictures came in elegant packages beautifully bundled in linked sets of proportional relations. Superb forms, and no more inimical to expressive art than forms created in accordance with rules of polyphony. Douglas Hofstadter's "Little Harmonic Labyrinth," in _Go"del, Escher, Bach_, comes to mind as a playful composition of a similar kind. (His "Ant Fugue" is even more fun.) The point of this is that there was indeed a tradition of composition in Anglo-Saxon England (and elsewhere) that set the forms used for verbal and pictorial and plastic arts by quantitatie methods that very few nowadays have had experience with, and out job is to find out all we can about it. Virtual apprenticeship is the way I recommend. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 18 04:54:22 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 04:54:21 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id EAA23629; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:48:04 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4426 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 23:36:56 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9462; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 23:36:56 -0500 Received: from luccpua.it.luc.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 17 Dec 95 23:36:55 EST Received: from LUCCPUA.IT.LUC.EDU by luccpua.it.luc.edu (IBM MVS SMTP V2R2.1) with BSMTP id 4687; Sun, 17 Dec 95 22:37:27 LCL Message-Id: Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 22:36:00 CST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "MikeDrout@Loyola" Subject: Golden Means To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Contra those critics who have viewed it as too facile, Tom Hill's analysis of the Gettysburg Address raises important questions about the systemic behavior of rhetorical language and the means by which we may analyze it. Hill argues that Lincoln's words are crafted for solely rhetorical purposes, but yet they apear to exhibit numerical patterns. Since we know (from drafts, etc.) that Lincoln did not follow a numeric template, Hill suggests that these patterns arise out of the "natural" patterns of effective rhetorical speech. The presence of numeric pattern s, therefore, cannot lead to an unambiguous conclusion that they were a part of the author's compository process. My example is tangential, but I think useful: As proponents of the "biblical style" are no doubt aware, much classical architecture relies on a ratio known as the "golden mean" or "golden section" to determine proportions. Given two portions of a line, or two dimensions of a plane figure, the lesser of the two proportions is to the greater as the greater is to the sum of both: approx. 0.618 to 1.000. Lovers and defenders of classical architecture believe the use of "golden sections" leads to structures that are aesthetically pleasing. Interestingly, the proportions of a number of natural objects, most famously the shell of the cephalopod mollusc known as the chambered nautilus, are also pro- portioned according to the .618/1 ratio. Now no one thinks that the ancient Greeks got their architecture from the mollusc. Rather, the golden section seems to characterize objects that human have found pleasing. I don't know if the mean is, like the Feigenbaum number of 1/4.669, inherent in the processes used to generate it. But clearly all sorts of processes can generate golden means. You could have a complex geometrical theory, or you could be a mollusc generating a calcerous shell. Where's all this going? If you find a golden mean, you haven't necessar- ily found a person using a theory of geometry to generate it. Likewise, even if you find a complex numeric pattern, you can't be sure what rules were used to put it there. It might be intentional, or it might be an artifact of some other process. And, as Hill suggested, since repetition and symmetry appear to be connected to other methods of composition outside the numeric, finding the pattern is not enough to establish the method used by the composer, poet, architect, or invertebrate. I'm not sure this clarified anything; I hope it did. Happy holidays, Mike Drout, Loyola Chicago From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 18 09:20:34 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 09:20:33 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA02848; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:13:32 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5619 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:07:28 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3429; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:07:28 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 18 Dec 95 04:07:26 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 09:13:22 GMT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:13:21 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO More than the first three lines, David. First the first three lines. Then the next eight. That on top of some other sections in which I found, let us say some distinctly special pleading, in our first exchanges on Beowulf years ago. After a bit one's charitable hopes that one has just been unfortunate in the sections to come under one's scrutiny get weaker. But some other netters are hoping to have a close look at other portions cited in your Manchester paper. Let's see what they say. -- Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 18 09:35:46 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 09:35:42 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA03310; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:27:12 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5699 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:26:15 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3691; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:26:15 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 18 Dec 95 04:26:06 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 09:32:00 GMT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:31:59 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Yes, yes, David, we should look at the grand architectural sweep of your structures. If every time we look closely at a piece of your mason-work we find it held together with partial or manipulated evidence, that's quibbling. Makes one testy, after a bit. As I've just demonstrated. Sorry! From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 18 09:55:39 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 09:55:37 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA03982; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:48:13 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5819 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:46:56 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4019; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:46:56 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 18 Dec 95 04:46:55 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 09:52:51 GMT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:52:50 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO I have demonstrated that your mathematics have distinctly vague edges. If "mathematics is nothing if not exact" that seems to select their category. If by "serious error" you mean "treating a number as having a value wildly different from its real one" you are probably safe from having that adduced. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 18 09:59:49 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 09:59:48 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA04090; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:53:42 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5897 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:52:22 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4202; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 04:52:22 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 18 Dec 95 04:52:18 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:51:05 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 26; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:51:00 +0000 Message-Id: <0099B0B6.CC8BE3A0.26@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 09:50:59 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: geardagum etc. To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Ted, Can you read? I wrote that the surrounding tales, not the central monster fights, define the tone of each third of the poem. The diction I adduced is the poet's own. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Dec 18 18:35:33 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 18 Dec 95 18:35:28 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA03483; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 18:28:52 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8725 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 11:33:53 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5089; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 11:33:53 -0500 Received: from ACCDVM.ACCD.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 18 Dec 95 11:33:41 EST Received: from SACADMIN by ACCDVM.ACCD.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 0853; Mon, 18 Dec 95 10:32:22 CST Message-Id: 19951218.103221.RBAILEY@SACADMIN Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 10:32:21 CST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Roger Bailey Subject: Golden Means To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: note of Sun, 17 Dec 1995 22:36:00 CST from "MikeDrout@Loyola" Status: RO From: Roger Bailey Hi, Mike. I don't see any reason why the ancients might not have learned something about proportions from the mollusc, But of course they rejoiced in a pattern much closer to hand, to wit, the human body, the center of which, according to Vitruvius, is the navel. The distance from the top of the head to the navel is to the distance from the navel to the feet as 1 is to 1.618. Any thoughts that Vitruvius is not well aware of exact proportions expressed mathematically are quickly removed by the most casual look at his third book. Buildings and parts of buildings designed with his kind of careful attention do not simply somehow manage to manifest certain proportions in the way that the mollusc manages it. Anyway, what's simple about a mollusc ? 8-) Best, Roger From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 19 12:50:21 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 19 Dec 95 12:50:17 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA27646; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 12:44:03 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7394 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 07:29:07 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7352; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 07:29:07 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 19 Dec 95 07:29:04 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Tue, 19 Dec 1995 12:29:28 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 13; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 12:29:22 +0000 Message-Id: <0099B196.153F76BF.13@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 12:29:19 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: GOLDEN MEANS To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Kenneth, One sees that all the structural devices adduced, like all the rhetorician's devices, occur naturally. They get selected for codification in the manuals and presented for instruction because they are widely appreciated to be pleasing and beautiful. The most authoritative reasons advanced for them are that they are the means by which God created the universe. As every element occurs naturally one assumes that any particular occurrence might be merely incidental. But the concurrence of them reduces the likelihood of mere coincidence. The clearest example that has come recently to my notice is the poem by Ailera'n the Wise on the Eusebian Canons, 650 numbers that allow a reader to compare passages shared by all four evangelists, by varying groups of three, by varying pairs, and passages unique to each. When one sees these numbers con- verted into a narrative about colloquies between a man, a lion, a calf, and an eagle, and then packed with DOZENS of discrete but interlocking mnemonic de- vices, in which words for cardinal and ordinal numbers exhibit by their place- ment what they are, it would be ludicrous to suppose that any of these things, let alone all of them in concert, occurred by mere chance. Survival of such a work in many manuscripts encourages us in the inference that more than one or two recipients recognized both the mnemonic utility and the cleverness of the deviser. Further encouragement comes from Ailera'n's obituary in the Annals of Ulster, in which the word sapiens is not applied to any old scholar. You can see from Irish law codes that there were elaborate grades of profi- ciency for poets, who received fixed rewards and honour prices. Composition in the arts earned respect comparable with that due to noble birth and success in battle. Analysis of such forms of composition no way reduces admiration for the composer. Nor does it ever reduce the effect by which it moves anyone sensitive to it. But the ability to perceive can be easily lost, and, once lost, it is recovered with some difficulty. Stevick's way to recovery is best. Virtual ap- prenticeship. Actually it is not the best; it is the only way. And it has two great rewards. It teaches one from the inside how someone else worked. And it empowers one to do comparable things oneself. How did I write 'between' two paragraphs above? Read 'among'. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 19 19:59:48 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 19 Dec 95 19:59:45 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA00168; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 19:53:35 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3115 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 14:41:51 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6996; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 14:41:51 -0500 Received: from QUCDN.QueensU.CA by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 19 Dec 95 14:41:48 EST Received: from QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA by QUCDN.QueensU.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6989; Tue, 19 Dec 95 14:37:55 EST Received: from QueensU.CA (NJE origin X400GATE@QUCDN) by QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5368; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 14:37:55 -0500 P1-Message-Id: CA* *QueensU.CA;QUCDN.X400GATE:ParGw5s3 X400-Trace: CA* *QueensU.CA; arrival Tue, 19 Dec 95 14:37-0500 action Relayed Message-Id: <6789*> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 14:41:51 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: George Clark Subject: Re: GOLDEN MEANS To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO *** Reply to note of 12/19/95 07:25 Subject: Re: GOLDEN MEANS But David, When you write "it would be ludicrous to suppose any of these things, let alone all of them, occurred by mere chance"you're making, as I keep saying, a statistical statement which you should discuss with a real authority in the field of statistics. George George Clark English (2153) From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 20 18:41:44 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 20 Dec 95 18:41:40 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA11575; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 18:35:16 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4534 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 13:17:04 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5915; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 13:17:04 -0500 Received: from toe02.towson.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 20 Dec 95 13:17:03 EST Received: from TOE.TOWSON.EDU by TOE.TOWSON.EDU (PMDF V4.2-11 #3807) id <01HZ12OFEUOW8ZJQS5@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 13:15:58 EST X-Envelope-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" X-Vms-Cc: E7E4DUN Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZ12OFFX9U8ZJQS5@TOE.TOWSON.EDU> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 13:15:58 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edwin Duncan Subject: Re: Golden Means and scholars' dreams To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO >A scholar's life is spare and lean. >He doesn't have the golden means >To keep a Great House or a mare; >He builds his castles in the air. >But, oh--he's lucky, as a rule, >He doesn't "work," but stays in school. > >Sarah Love dwmlov1@uchimvs1.uchicago.edu Great poem, Sarah! I can see you've internalized the wisdom of the ancients in producing a numerically symmetrical and chiasmic work of art--6 lines, 42 words, dividing perfectly into halves of 3 lines and 21 words each, and, if I am analyzing you correctly, conforming to the following chiasmic structure: a scholar b life c spare and lean d golden means e Great House e' castles d' rule c' work b' stays a' school where a (scholar) and a' (school) are obvious parallels both allitera- tively and etymologically; where b (life) and b' (stays) are general terms for one's existence and place in the greater scheme of things; where c (spare and lean) and c'(work) suggest not only the activity required for b-b' (and a-a') but also the result of that activity; where d (golden means) and d' (rule) are both measures by which we live; and where e (Great House) and e' (castles) are the culmination of the poetic structure--the ideal abodes achieved by the steady progression of the work (i.e., the poetic structure as well as the scholar's labors). And all this in unvarying octosyllabic iambic tetrameter lines--making the syllabic structure of the lines of the first half of the poem 8+8+8 match those of the second, 8+8+8 (888 being of course the number of Christ). And, although it seems at first glance that line two has only 6 words and line 3 has 8, this actually may not be the case since `doesn't' in line two is actually two words, `does' and `not', making line two a 7-word line. Similarly, `Great House' in line three is obviously a compound (as evidenced by the coinciding metrical and phonological stress on the first element, `Great'), which means that line 3 also is a 7-word line. This means that the poem is not only a composition of 42 words but one with the structure 7-7-7-7-7-7 (or 7-14-14-7 or 14-14-14, etc.). And correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it established in an earlier Ansaxnet discussion of Beowulfian fitts and the Latin tradition that 42 was a number of special significance? And with either method of counting the number of words is precisely 42--no more, no less. As I am a novice at this type of analysis, I'm sure I'm missing all sorts of correspondences and symmetries in the poem. I have found enough I think, though, to see the underlying structure that Sarah has used and to say `Great work, Sarah. It's a beaut.' Sincerely, Edwin Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Dec 20 23:52:24 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 20 Dec 95 23:52:23 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA02148; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 23:41:49 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8209 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 18:38:13 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8318; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 18:38:12 -0500 Received: from luccpua.it.luc.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 20 Dec 95 18:38:11 EST Received: from LUCCPUA.IT.LUC.EDU by luccpua.it.luc.edu (IBM MVS SMTP V2R2.1) with BSMTP id 0190; Wed, 20 Dec 95 17:38:46 LCL Message-Id: Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 17:38:00 CST Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "MikeDrout@Loyola" Subject: Re: GOLDEN MEANS To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO On April 9, 1995, Timothy Larkin posted a statistical response to claims of numeric patterning in The Wanderer (see ANSAX-DAT "RE:Numerical Structure in The Wanderer"). Larkin calculated that there are at least 15 quintillion sums to be found in the lines of the poem and that find- ing one that equalled 115 was a random event. His aphorism "if you fish in the pond of random numbers, you will catch something" sums up one set of objections to claims of numerical composition. I have checked his numbers and the calculations seem correct. No one, as far as I can tell from my reading on ANSAX and ANSAX-DAT, has refuted Larkin on substance. Prof. Howlett wrote that Larkin was mischaracterizing his work; Prof. Macrae-Gibson wrote that perhaps there were a lot of combinations, but not 15 quintillion. The thread then died out. My questions about the process of inferring numeric composition are related to those raised by Prof. Hill a week ago: if the application of "rhetorical" patterns of balance, repetition, alliteration, etc. results in the generation of numeric patterns, we cannot infer that our finding such patterns in a text indicates that the text was intentionally composed in order to produce them. The "golden mean" is a particularly good example: Some members of the list will be familiar with the series of numbers known as the Fibonacci sequence: 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21... The sequence is generated by adding the two previous terms in the sequence to get the third (2+3=5, 5+3=8, and so on). The limiting ratio of the sequence as it approaches infinity is 1.618033989, the golden mean. Fibonacci sequences describe truly "natural" phenomena--the shell of a chambered nautilus and the reproduction of rabbit pairs, among other things. Therefore finding a Fibonacci or a golden mean _cannot_ prove that someone intentionally, consciously put it there: it may be inher- ent in the system rules, just as the numbers of Pascal's triangle are inherent in the possible number of routes through the grid of midtown Manhattan city blocks. Supporters of numerical composition need to answer Larkin's objections that the patterns they find are not random. Then they need to answer mine and Prof. Hill's that the patterns are not artifacts of other compositional techniques. They need to do this mathematically, not by reference to materials outside those in which they see the patterns. When they do this they'll have convinced me, and probably others who doubt their faith. The question is, is the necessary mathematical work justified to produce such a small effect? Happy holidays, Mike Drout, Loyola Chicago > George, > I have taken advice from professors of computing and from members of this > network competent in statistics. They can come forward in their own time. If > I had written anything statistically incorrect you would have heard from them > some time ago. f this me. If om them From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 21 04:23:43 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 21 Dec 95 04:23:42 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id EAA14522; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 04:17:23 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9402 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 21:51:41 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2692; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 21:51:41 -0500 Received: from toe01.towson.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 20 Dec 95 21:51:40 EST Received: from TOE.TOWSON.EDU by TOE.TOWSON.EDU (PMDF V4.2-11 #3807) id <01HZ1N2N7N5S8ZJ8YV@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 21:50:48 EST X-Envelope-To: ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu X-Vms-To: @ANSAX-L X-Vms-Cc: E7E4DUN Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZ1N2N8PQQ8ZJ8YV@TOE.TOWSON.EDU> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 21:50:48 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edwin Duncan Subject: Re: David Howlett: Wanderer analyses: UBI SUNT To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Hi, Tim. I don't know what went wrong with your Ansaxdat search, but there was an extended thread on this topic back in April and May (maybe even March). I think it started with the subject heading `Beowulf and Intentionality' and at some point became `Numerical structure in the Wanderer.' I am appending David Howlett's analysis of the Wanderer, but you really need to go back and read the whole thread if you're really interested. Some of the problematic areas have already been discussed there. Sincerely, Edwin Duncan [David's original posting of Fri 21 April 1995 is saved above in this file; the reposting is therefore deleted here -- dmg] +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 21 19:12:15 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 21 Dec 95 19:12:11 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA18368; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 19:05:06 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3774 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 10:31:23 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6214; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 10:31:23 -0500 Received: from tec.oz.cc.utah.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 21 Dec 95 10:31:21 EST Received: from gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (gos.oz.cc.utah.edu [155.99.2.3]) by tec.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id IAA11054; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:32:05 -0700 (MST) Received: (from ei8721@localhost) by gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id IAA04435; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:32:05 -0700 (MST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:32:04 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edward Irving Subject: Re: The "geardagum" thread Comments: To: Robert Stevick To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: Status: RO Bob: probably some of your recent strictures are aimed my way, so perhaps I need to reply. I do not feel personal revulsion at the idea of "dissecting" literature, since I have spent a long career doing just that. Analysis of literature is the only way we can come to understand it, and good literature will survive any amount of analysis. I am convinced that BEOWULF (let's limit the discussion to that one work) exists in a demonstrable tradition of secular (Germanic, heroic) literature which was at one time "oral", though it obviously also participates (if only by being written down) in a literate Christian/Latin/Mediterranean tradition. Simply because backers of this C.L.M. tradition hold all the cards (i.e., the written documents) by historical accident doesn't mean the older English tradition can be entirely disregarded, though I think many try to do just that. It certainly makes things much easier! -- As for keeping the open mind about "biblical style" and the mathematical organization of poetry (shall we keep this focused on BEOWULF?) that you recommend, I admit having some trouble with this, but I think I would have to consent to it if the evidence presented showed a very clear pattern that served the poet's apparent purposes well. Why do I have initial resistance? Because I think in the case of BEOWULF one can make out inductively a number of structural patterns (some of them like those in modern poetry and some not) that do serve such purposes well: build up important themes, make significant contrasts, induce appropriate emotions. From what little evidence I have seen of the mathematical overlays, they do not correspond with these patterns. Undeniably, some poets in history have used mathematical patterns to help make their statements, but more usually poets would resist adding more burdens to their already existing burdens of composing metrically, shaping their paragraphs, building tension, &c. Writers of strictly religious texts might well feel no such hesitation, since they might feel that Divine Meaning resided in some sacred configuration of numbers. It may be significant that mathematical enthusiasts are eager to make BEOWULF basically a religious text, a moralizing Christian document. This fits conveniently enough with the current misunderstanding of literature -- that it is propaganda with some easily detachable "message". It is not -- but I would need many pages here to explain why, in the present context. I'll just say that I think poetry seems threatening to many people exactly because they can't nail its meaning down. They want to control it. And numbers are a time-honored way of controlling things, aren't they? It's another way of bringing about what seems so devoutly to be wished by so many in recent years: the Death of the Author. But (s)he will survive you all. I hope. TED IRVING From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Dec 21 22:29:28 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 21 Dec 95 22:29:23 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA03328; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 22:23:05 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6709 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 15:03:57 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5985; Thu, 21 Dec 1995 15:03:57 -0500 Received: from homer16.u.washington.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 21 Dec 95 15:03:56 EST Received: by homer16.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.12/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA46923; Thu, 21 Dec 95 12:04:42 -0800 X-Sender: stevickr@homer16.u.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 12:04:42 -0800 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Robert Stevick Subject: Re: The "geardagum" thread To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: Status: RO Ted, Much of what you say in your posting this morning I have always agreed with--that there must have been a secular tradition of poetry, that it was oral, that it was (of course) Germanic, and presumably it contained heroic compositions. And that this tradition was not dead when _Beowulf_ and _Andreas_ were composed. We diverge, I think, when it comes to the matter of recognizing formal (quantitative) patterns in the written texts depending on whether they correspond to patterns "that served the poet's apparent purposes well." If a fitt division comes a few lines before the end of a long speech, it doesn't match an obvious pattern in the discourse structure; it may, though participate in a formal plan for the text that is commodular in every respect. My suggestion was that where there is remarkably clear form--especially of a kind NOT familiar to us--there is where we need to give special attention (and effort). Related to this, I think, is your point that "more usually poets would resist adding more burdens" by creating mathematically based forms and composing text to fit. At the fitt-level, certainly, it appears to me that Anglo-Saxon poets composed this way pretty consistently. (I would guess, too, that that would be an aid, not a burden.) Now, I know you asked to limit the discussion to _Beowulf_, and I haven't mentioned this text so far--dodged it, in fact, with "pretty consistently" just above. In respect to _Beowulf_, I think there really is no reason to see an inquiry into putative numerical formal devices to be an attempt covert or otherwise to make the poem a Christian moralizing document. And this doesn't have anything to do with "controlling" a poem, in the sense you used that term. I haven't worked on the form of _Beowulf_, so I'm still not ready to say whether its formal plan is unlike the plans of all the other long narrative poems in the same language. With absolutely no debate whatsoever: the poem will survive anything any of us does with it. From haven@voicenet.com Fri Dec 22 15:35:41 1995 Received: from voicenet.com (mail.voicenet.com) by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 22 Dec 95 15:35:33 GMT Received: from timromano (philly12.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27449; Fri, 22 Dec 95 10:29:43 EST Message-Id: <30DACFBC.6DE8@voicenet.com> Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 10:33:16 -0500 From: Tim Romano X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: enl011@ABDN.AC.UK Subject: Re: David Howlett: Wanderer analyses: UBI SUNT References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO Duncan Macrae-Gibson wrote: > > Since the analyses re-posted by Edwin Duncan were addressed to me, I > think I can fairly draw attention to a quite long reply I made. I hope > I don't need to clutter the net with a re-posting of this too; anyone > interested should be able to find it in the archives. It was sent on > Wed 26 April 1995 and begins: > > David -- > > I've by now been able to have an extended look at your Wanderer analysis. > Duncan, I will look up on ANSAXDAT again, but I believe that there is a large chunk of material missing, from April onward. I've posted my own preliminary critique of DH's Wanderer analysis today. Tim From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 22 15:47:22 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 22 Dec 95 15:47:20 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA19361; Fri, 22 Dec 1995 15:40:56 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2132 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 22 Dec 1995 10:24:59 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5407; Fri, 22 Dec 1995 10:24:59 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 22 Dec 95 10:24:58 EST Received: from timromano (philly12.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27130; Fri, 22 Dec 95 10:25:42 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <0099B312.03419AB7.14@vax.ox.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <30DACEC9.76BE@voicenet.com> Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 10:29:13 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO I have read The Wanderer looking for patterns, and I see many, as there are indeed many to see. The preliminary conclusion I have reached is that there are symmetries and chiasmoi and parallelisms and wordplay abound; but division by mean and extreme ratios is not as clear--at least in the first two parts of the poem. As I said, this is only a preliminary conclusion and I will give attention to the other sections. The first thing I did was to look for sentence boundaries, since I did not agree with some of the syntactic divisions in Krappe-Dobbie or in John D. Pope's "Seven Old English Poems"--the two editions I happen to have at hand . This syntactic analysis led me to divide the first part of the poem as follows (please forgive the spelling, it's not relevant for this discussion anyway): Oft him anhaga are gebideth, metudes miltse, theah the he modcearig geond lagulade longe sceolde hreran mid hondum hrimcealde sae, 5 wadan wraeclastas. Wyrd bith ful araed! Swa cwaeth eardstapa, earfetha gemyndig, wrathra waelsleahta, winemaega hryre. "Oft ic sceolde ana uhtna gehwylce mine ceare cwithan; nis nu cwicra nan 10 ~e ic him modsefan minne durre sweotule asecgan. Ic to sothe wat thaet bith in eorle indryhten theaw, thaet he his ferthlocan faeste binde, healde his hordcofan, hycge swa he wille. 15 Ne maeg werig mod wyrde withstondan, ne se hreo hyge helpe gefremman. Forthon domgeorne dreorigne oft in hyra breostcofan bindath faeste; swa ic modsefan minne sceolde, 20 oft earmcearig, ethle bidaeled, freomaegum feor feterum saelan. Sithan geara iu goldwine minne hrusan heolstre biwrah, ond ic hean thonan wod wintercearig ofer wathema gebind, 25 sohte sele dreorig sinces bryttan, hwaer ic feor othe neah findan meahte, thone ~e in meoduhealle mine wisse othe mec freondleasne frefran wolde, weman mid wynnum, wat se the cunnath 30 hu slithen bith sorg to geferan, ~am ~e him lyt hafath leofra geholena: warath hine wraeclast, nales wunden gold, ferthloca freorig, nalaes foldan blaed; gemon he selesecgas ond sincthege, 35 hu hine on geoguthe his goldwine wenede to wiste. Wyn eal gedreas! Thus, using the divisions I propose, the Intro runs from ll. 1-7; Part I from ll. 8-21; Part II from ll. 22-36. David Howlett would extend Part II to include line 38, which gives him 17 lines containing 99 words. "The 99 words of the second," he writes, "divide by symmetry at 50, at the crux of the chiasmus" (that is, at line 30 after "hu slithen bith..."). Whereas I have 15 lines with 88 words which divide by symmetry at word 44--that is, at "wat" in line 29b, which happens to be the first word of the main clause after an extended protasis that runs from "Sithan geara iu..." to "weman mid wynnum" (l.29a). As for division by mean and extreme ratio, David Howlett writes that the 14 lines of the first paragraph divide by extreme and mean ratio at 9 and 5, at the end of the crux [of the chiasmus]". Here's is David's shorthand schema for the chiasmus in question: a nis nu cwicra nan ... asecgan b faeste c binde d his hordcofan e ne maeg ... wi#dstondan e' ne ... gefremman. d' hyra broestcofan c' binda#d b' faeste a' swa ic ... saelan This section too divides very well by symmetry, which makes the case for division by extreme and mean ratio less compelling, I think. Or perhaps to restate it, I find the division by symmetry more apparent, for it puts us smack dab at the start of the crux of the chiasmus, that is, at the proverb ("Ne maeg werig mod wyrde withstondan") whereas division by extreme and mean ratios puts us as David says, "at the end of the crux". And the division by symmetry reinforces the reversal of thought in the section, which begins with daily lamentation and ends with the understanding that it would be more heroic to lock the feelings up. Off the topic of patterns involving counting for a moment--I did find very interesting the notion of sending one's mind "out" into the dreary world, and see that there is a network of related "geond-" words (including "geondhweorfeth" and geonsceawath") that advance this theme like a leitmotiv. Has anyone out there looked into this complex? Pondering this line of thought, I came up with what I think is the grammatical subject for the verb "Swimmath" in l 53.b -- it would be "ferth" in 54a: Swimmath eft on weg fleotendra ferth, no thaer fela bringeth cuthra cwidegiedda.. The metaphor of the mind as something "swimming" --as "sent out over the waves"-- is repeated in the lines following: Cearo bith geniwad tham the sendan sceal swithe geneahhe ofer wathema gebind werigne sefan This syntactic relationship of "ferth" and "swimmath" is obscured by the punctuation in the two editions I have at hand. How does the new edition of The Exeter Book treat this? Anyone else out there thinking along the same lines? Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Dec 22 16:16:11 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 22 Dec 95 16:16:10 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA21126; Fri, 22 Dec 1995 16:09:51 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2473 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 22 Dec 1995 11:08:04 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6584; Fri, 22 Dec 1995 11:08:04 -0500 Received: from login0.email.unc.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 22 Dec 95 11:08:03 EST Received: (from dmganz@localhost) by login0.email.unc.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA87644; Fri, 22 Dec 1995 11:08:49 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 11:08:48 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Ganz Subject: Re: The "geardagum" thread To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: Status: RO Robert, Is it relevant that the most complex geometric designing of manuscript pages seems to have been replaced by a much more clearly figural style, with frames far less elaborate, at a date before the composition of much Anglo-Saxon literature. Feliciter, David Ganz From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 23 14:04:27 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 23 Dec 95 14:04:25 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA00242; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 13:58:09 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7971 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 08:45:10 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4823; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 08:45:10 -0500 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 23 Dec 95 08:45:08 EST Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HZ513HG5BQ00176L@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 08:45:25 -0500 (EST) X-Vms-To: IN%"ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZ513HG69K00176L@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 08:45:25 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Subject: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO I'm not about to open a can of worms. I'm just going to describe what appears to be one can of worms, what may be at least part of the root of the contention surrounding numerical analysis. What we have, here, is a failure to communicate, as Cool Hand Luke said. And, as far as I know, no-one has come out and stated exactly what the issue is. There has been criticism of theories, of strategies, and even of specific examples, but no-one has come out and stated that the conflict refers to a competition between paradigms, perhaps among paradigms. That is, if I am putting my finger on the problem, and I hope I am, the real issue has to do with the claims of the linguists and metrists (whom, I am aware, are also linguists) versus the claims of the trivium and the quadrivium over the principles of verse forms and composition in OE poetry. I have been thinking about this for quite some time now, and have wanted to use a couple of ideas from both Matthew Arnold and John Stuart Mill for consideration. I have often thought of ANSAXNET, which calls itself a discussion forum, as a medium for what Arnold thought of as a principle of developing culture: the submission of ideas to a steady stream of consciousness, to light, to the cultivation of curiosity about everything. So I find myself dismayed when ideas that have been submitted for consideration are used as target practice. However good the shot may be, it defeats the purpose of discussion, the purpose of which is enlightenment. As for John Stuart Mill, he, of course, is famous for the maxim that we do not know our own argument until we know the arguments of the opponents. And I sometimes feel that the linguists and metrists do not know the argments of the opposing side. That presents a problem, I know. For, if I do not tell on myself, someone will tell on me--that I'm not a linguist and, therefore, cannot appreciate linguistic arguments. It is true that I'm not a specialist in linguistics, but I am familiar with the basics of OE meter. I can follow the arguments with some competence and appreciation. But that is only half of the picture. When one side of the debate accuses the other side of being unscholarly, for example, or of illegitimate applications of numerical principles, the first side is setting itself as competent on both sides of the issue when, in fact, that may not be the case at all. I was going to try to avoid names, but I can't. Sorry, Duncan. Yesterday you pointed at what may be described as what you may consider flippancy on David Howlett's part, in his consideration some time ago of "The Wanderer," and you used what you characterized (no, you didn't call it flippancy--I'm giving your characterization what I take to be an appropriate name) to raise a question about David as a scholar. Now. I do not for a moment assume that you accurately remembered what David wrote or that David has ever been flippant. Perhaps you consider that you are evening the score for offense that you have taken at things David has said. At any rate, asking those of us who are apprentices to take one side or the other in the debate should depend not on the virulence of ad hominem attacks but on the merits of the case presented. This means that attacks based on David's attitude have no value in comparison to attacks of his ideas. It also means that attacks of his mathematics have less value than showing the invalidity of his paradigms. Opponents of numerical analysis must show the superiority of linguistic paradigms over numerical paradigms. Ridicule of what you don't understand accomplishes two things: first, it appeals only to those who already agree with you; and secondly, you forfeit appeals to logic, which does not impress those who are neutral with the effectiveness of your evidence. And, Duncan, you have stated that you cannot fully follow David's analyses. You want to have the linguistic paradigms supersede numerical paradigms, but you cannot simply ridicule what you don't like away. You have to give people adequate reasons for believing that numerical analysis should give way to linguistic analysis. Finally, supposing that you do submit for consideration what you take to be the superiority of linguistic paradigms, those of us who have been following the matter with interest and will read David's work before deciding should be able to decide for ourselves which paradigm(s) --and ultimately it may be a combination of paradigms--best explain OE poetry. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 23 18:29:40 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 23 Dec 95 18:29:33 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA08369; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 18:23:20 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8831 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 13:14:51 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7912; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 13:14:51 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 23 Dec 95 13:14:50 EST Received: from timromano (philly08.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22818; Sat, 23 Dec 95 13:15:35 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30DC481C.70E0@voicenet.com> Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 13:19:08 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO This message is the second in a small series of those I will post on The Wanderer. In my earlier post, I pointed out that lines 22a-29a are an extended protasis, and that the section consists of two halves, splitting perfectly where protasis and main clause meet (that is, at the word "wat" in line 29b, the first word of the main clause). What follows is my representation of the chiasmus in the section of the poem that runs from line 22a through line 36b. The crux of the chiasmus that I see as informing this section occurs also at "wat"; chiasmus and symmetry jibe. Leaving no words out: a Sithan gearu iu goldwine minne hrusan heolstre biwrah b ond ic hean thonan wod wintercearig over wathema gebind, sohte sele dreorig c sinces bryttan d hwaer ic feor othe neah findan meahte e thone the in meoduhalle mine wisse f othe mec freondleasne frefran wolde weman mid wynnum % wat se the cunnath f hu slithen bith sorg to geferan e tham the him lyt hafath leofra geholena; d warath hine wraeclast c nales wunden gold b ferthloca freorig nalaes foldan blaed, gemon he selesecgas and sincthege a hu hine on geoguthe his goldwine wenede to wiste. Wyn eal gedreas. Commentary. Lines a-a. These lines allude to the death ("hrusan heolstre biwrah" and "Wyn eal gedreas") of the "goldwine" which happened long ago: "gearu iu" and "in geoguthe". Lines b-b. Outside winter scene contrasts with the hall's joys. Lines c-c. Gold-giving. Lines d-d. Searching, wandering, exile. Lines e-e. Lost kin ("kin" is how I'd read "mine" here); few beloved protectors. Lines f-f The "friendless" one seeks solace; the sorrow of the comrade ("geferan") Note: I find "geferan" to be a poignant word choice here. Insofar as its etymology would resonate for the poem's audience, it would convey the sense of "traveling in company", "one who goes with others or another". The situation of being utterly alone in the world strikes, of course, at the very heart of the man, who has defined himself as a "companion" and as "friend". Line % The speaker knows and describes what it is like for one who must endure a fate like his own. This bond of understanding is of central importance to the poem and deserves to be at the crux of this section, moreso, I think, than "slithen...sorg" (pace David). Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun Dec 24 04:11:15 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 24 Dec 95 04:11:13 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id EAA22270; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 04:05:01 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0683 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 23:03:56 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3654; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 23:03:55 -0500 Received: from is.nyu.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 23 Dec 95 23:03:54 EST Received: by is.nyu.edu; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/23Sep94-1121PM) id AA15138; Sat, 23 Dec 1995 23:04:42 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 23:04:42 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Hoover Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <01HZ513HG69K00176L@ACS.EKU.EDU> Status: RO On Sat, 23 Dec 1995, Karen Foster wrote: > I'm not about to open a can of worms. I'm just going to describe what > appears to be one can of worms, what may be at least part of the root > of the contention surrounding numerical analysis. What we have, here, > is a failure to communicate, as Cool Hand Luke said. There has been a good deal of this, to be sure. In fact, I have been relatively silent on metrical issues not only because my own work has moved in other directions, but because it often seemed to me that the discussants were talking on different planes and at cross purposes. > examples, but no-one has come out and stated that the conflict refers to > a competition between paradigms, perhaps among paradigms. That is, if I > am putting my finger on the problem, and I hope I am, the real issue has > to do with the claims of the linguists and metrists (whom, I am aware, > are also linguists) versus the claims of the trivium and the quadrivium > over the principles of verse forms and composition in OE poetry. There may indeed be some turf issues involved here. > > I was going to try to avoid names, but I can't. Sorry, Duncan. I am snipping the rest of your post, Karen, because I don't want to deal with it in detail. I will say, though, that Duncan has been, among all the skeptics, surely the most diligent, careful, fair-minded, and tolerant. His pointing out that David has not answered his detailed commentary about, for example, the Wanderer hardly constitutes an irrelevant ad hominem attack. Duncan does not need me to defend him, I know, but his responses seem to me the direct opposite of your characterization. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ David L. Hoover, Assoc. Prof. of Engl. hoover@is.nyu.edu /212-998-8832 NYU English Department, 19 Univ. Pl., NY, NY 10003 Webmaster, English Department http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/english From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun Dec 24 13:22:49 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 24 Dec 95 13:22:47 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA00109; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 13:16:36 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1630 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 08:15:08 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7204; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 08:15:07 -0500 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 24 Dec 95 08:15:06 EST Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HZ6FJ7GYGW001BI4@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 08:15:24 -0500 (EST) X-Vms-To: IN%"ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZ6FJ7LL6A001BI4@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 08:15:24 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David (Hoover): I was not calling Duncan's statement that David did not reply in April of 1995 an ad hominem attack. I was referring to the comments David "does not normally feel called on to reply to specific and detailed questioning of his analyses" and that "As I [Duncan] understand him [David Howlett], he feels that he has no need or reason to defend in niggling detail a position he takes to be by now thoroughly established, and 'not in need of defence, but of explication' [I hope that's a direct quote, but I can only trace it as quoted by me before (11 Apr 1995, where original source now noted in), not as posted by David]. It is a somewhat unusual stance for a scholar to take up." David has done plenty of replying to criticisms of his specific analyses, but the more important questions are who detemines legitimacy of approach, and on what criteria? To my mind, if it is up to us as individuals to make those decisions, then specific analyses and criticisms of them take a back seat to which approaches we as individuals decide to be guided by. In particular, it is the comment about the stance that strikes me as being an ad hominem attack. And if your reaction is an indication, it was successful. But we don't know, to begin with, if the position Duncan attributes to David is a fair reflection of David's position. My own memory of that thread suggests to me that David's silence succeeded several posts in which he tried but quite obviously failed to satisfy Duncan's questions. I'm sure that anyone who wants to find out for sure can via the database. David was up against a brick wall, so he was wise to stop. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun Dec 24 16:14:01 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 24 Dec 95 16:14:00 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA02891; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 16:07:53 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2164 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 11:06:50 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8719; Sun, 24 Dec 1995 11:06:50 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 24 Dec 95 11:06:49 EST Received: from timromano (philly230.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10875; Sun, 24 Dec 95 11:07:33 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <30DD7B9C.3637@voicenet.com> Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 11:11:08 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Here's posting #3 in the Wanderer series. Here are the results of my syntactical analysis of the next section of the poem, which are informed by a parallel structure followed by a chiasmus. This section carries forward some of the themes in the sections preceding. It is a transitional section approaching the turning point in the poem, which occurs at line 58. I will discuss this turning point further in posting #4. Again, I differ from the editions I have at hand with regard to sentence boundaries. And the chiasmus I propose is not the same as the one David Howlett sees. Forthon wat se the sceal his winedryhtnes leofes larcwidum longe fortholian. THonne sorg ond slaep somod aetgaedre 40 earmne anhogan oft gebindath, ~inceth him on mode thaet he his mondryhten clyppe ond cysse, ond on cneo lecge honda ond heafod, swa he hwilum aer in geardagum giefstolas breac. 45 THonne onwaecneth eft wineleas guma, gesihth him biforan fealwe wegas, bathian brimfuglas, braedan fethra, hreosan hrim ond snaw, hagle gemenged. THonne beoth thy hefigran heortan benne, 50 sare aefter swaesne. Sorg bith geniwad thonne maga gemynd mod geondhweorfeth, greteth gliwstafum, georne geondsceawath secga geseldan; swimmath eft on weg fleotendra ferth, no thaer fela bringeth 55 cuthra cwidegiedda. Cearo bith geniwad tham the sendan sceal swithe geneahhe ofer wathema gebind werigne sefan. In the first section (39a-50a), there is parallelism which serves to reinforce the contrast between the exile's yearning and the raw actuality confronting him; the parallelism also highlights a the wanderer's grim perception of the parody of fealty in the image of the birds lowering their heads when they dive ("bathian")and extend their limbs ("braedan fethra"), just as he lowers his head and raises his arms, to place them on the knee of his liege-lord. (There are other examples of this kind of grim joking in Old English literature; in moments of deep suffering and tragedy, parodies of the heroic come as salt to the heart's wounds.) The section consists of 76 words, such that it divides by mean and extreme ratio at "mondryhten" and "braec", reinforcing the theme of fealty. a Thonne sorg ond slaep somod aetgaedre earmne anhogan oft gebindath, b thinceth him on mode thaet he his mondrythen clyppe ond kysse c ond on cneo lecge honda ond heafod d swa he hwilum aer in geardagum giefstolas breac. a Thonne onwaecneth eft wineleas guma b gesihth him biforan fealwe wegas, bathian brimfuglas, braedan fethra c hreosan hrim ond snaw hagle gemenged d thonne beoth thy hefigran heortan benne sare aefter swaesne. Commentary. Lines a-a. The wretched man asleep; the joyless man awake Lines b-b. The man thinks he sees his liege-lord; he sees the ocean, the birds. This hallucination ("thinceth him on mode") is an effect of his long suffering, the effects of which are the subject announced in the two-line transition which bridges the prior section and this one: "Forthon wat...longe fortholian", ll.37-38). The vision is replaced with the sight of the birds floating on the sea, spreading their wings: "gesihth him biforan fealwe wegas, bathian brimfuglas...". Lines c-c. This act of fealty ("one cneo lecge honda and heafod") and the comfort and security of which it is emblemmatic, is contrasted sharply with exposure to winter's elements; it resonates with the preceding section in which winter was set against hall-joys. Lines d-d. Gift-giving ("giefstolas breac", extending the theme of fealty; and the heavy heart, as the wanderer years for the beloved lord "swaesne". The phrase "heortan benne" --heart's wounds--show that the wanderer is thinking perhaps of the manner of his liege-lord's death. The next section (50b-57b)is informed by chiasmus. It consists of 40 words and divides by symmetry at word 20, "ferth", which is the crux of the chiasmus. Here begins some very interesting word-play, namely in the "geond-" complex of words which have to do with knowing, remembering, perceiving, understanding, and accepting, which are of central importance in the poem, as I said in an earlier posting; their importance is probably not a matter of dispute. Jumping ahead a bit, at the middle of the poem, in line 58, the phrase "gethencan...geond" will occur, and it will lead us to "ongietan" in line 73. Further discussion of this complex of words, in relation to numerical patterns, to follow in a subsequent posting. Here is my representation of the chiasmus: a Sorg bith geniwad thonne maga gemynd, mod geondhweorfeth b greteth gliwstafum, georne geondsceawath secga geseldan % swimmath eft on weg fleotendra ferth b no thaer fela bringeth cuthra cwidegiedda a Cearo bith geniwad tham the sendan sceal swithe geneahhe ofer wathema gebind werigne sefan. Proposed translation (as there has been a history of debate over the words "fleotendra ferth" and the subject of "swimmath"): Sorrow is renewed when men's memory sends the mind out to wander, (when it) hails with a happy song of greeting, (and) eagerly looks out for (i.e. expecting to encounter) the minds of warriors; the seafarers' spirit swims back, does not bring back with it much music of familiar voices; care is renewed for him who must send his weary mind again and again out over the waters. Commentary. Lines a-a. "sorg bith geniwad" vs. "cearo bith geniwad"; "mod geondhweorfeth" vs. "sendan..over wathema gebind". Lines b-b. "greteth gliwstafum" vs. "cuthra cwidgiedda", that is, greeting and reply. Line %. Reversal of spirit-direction. If we take the two sections discussed above, minus the the two-line introduction that serves as the bridge to the introductory section of the poem (and which lies outside of the parallelism), such that we have ll. 39a--57b, and then divide the 105 words that result by mean and extreme ratio, the breaks would occur after "wineleas guma" (l.46b) and after "swaesne" (l.50a). The latter break occurs on a verse-paragraph boundary, the former on the line which moves from dream-state to wakefulness. Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Dec 26 03:38:39 1995 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 26 Dec 95 03:38:38 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id DAA03133; Tue, 26 Dec 1995 03:32:17 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6657 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 25 Dec 1995 22:30:52 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2645; Mon, 25 Dec 1995 22:30:51 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 25 Dec 95 22:30:51 EST Received: from timromano (philly229.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20088; Mon, 25 Dec 95 22:31:37 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30DF6D71.43E5@voicenet.com> Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 22:35:13 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Posting #3b. Another minor yet significant modification to one of my earlier postings. In posting #3, I referred to the chiasmus in lines 50b-57b: a Sorg bith geniwad thonne maga gemynd, mod geondhweorfeth b greteth gliwstafum, georne geondsceawath secga geseldan % swimmath eft on weg fleotendra ferth b no thaer fela bringeth cuthra cwidegiedda a Cearo bith geniwad tham the sendan sceal swithe geneahhe ofer wathema gebind werigne sefan. After additional consideration, I would restore MS 'oft' in line 53b, which has been emended to 'eft' by John Pope in his edition, as well by Dobbie in ASPR. MS 'oft' is to be restored for exactly the reason Pope advanced on behalf of the emendation. He writes on p.83 of _Seven Old English Poems_: "The traditional emendation is better than the MS 'oft'... because it sticks to a single imagined situation instead of generalizing." But the passage does, indeed, generalize ("mag_a_ gemynd", "fleotend_ra_ ferth"--genitive plurals both, both followed by singular nouns). One may infer from Pope's statement that he regards a "single imagined situation" as somehow better or more poetic than a generalization; but a tendency towards generalization is central to the speaker's worldview; the ability to generalize is, indeed, his consolation. The proposed translation should therefore read "the seafarers' spirit many times swims on". The chiasmus thus hinges upon the wanderer's repeated unsuccessful attempts to hail the spirits of his companions; the soul or mind of one in such circumstances must keep moving on, must be "oft on weg". Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Jan 1 15:51:56 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 1 Jan 96 15:51:55 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA23169; Mon, 1 Jan 1996 15:44:46 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3477 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 1 Jan 1996 10:43:36 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1130; Mon, 1 Jan 1996 10:43:36 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 01 Jan 96 10:43:35 EST Received: from timromano (philly204.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18515; Mon, 1 Jan 96 10:44:20 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30E80201.58AF@voicenet.com> Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 10:47:13 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: Validating arithmetic and geometric hypotheses To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Howard, Only recently have I become interested in the rhetorical techniques David Howlett has been describing; I am speaking only for myself and as a "virtual apprentice". Moreover, it has been a long time since I read any Old English literature--since about 1982. But all of last year I _did_ write computer programs to perform quasi-statistical analyses of recidivism rates for inpatient mental health care providers whose patients were suffering from the same kinds of problems, according to the considered judgment of mental health professionals. I do not claim to have thoroughgoing expertise in statistics, but I am conversant with this kind of "problem": how to measure a situation that contains a number of ephemera--things that cannot be completely pinned down--such as the diagnostic judgments of mental health professionals regarding patient symptoms, or the judgments of scholars regarding literary signifiers. I think you mistake the nature of the problem when you write: "Matches according to rules - which themselves can be probabilistic or fuzzy - can be partial, and although it takes a bit of effort to make the rules and their assessment explicit, this should be little more than a formalisation of expression..." The rules are not fuzzy. The rules of division by symmetry or by mean and extreme ratio are precise. What is sometimes fuzzy is the segregation of texts into discrete sections to which the rules can then be applied. The rules can sometimes help in the process of segregation, just as an indicator of focal length on a lens can help one bring a viewed object into clarity. But section boundaries cannot be based just on the numbers, just as you would not presume to have a clear image in your viewfinder merely because you have set focal depth to 1 meter in that you have presumed the object to be about three feet away. You might not see the petals on the bloom. But when several features -- syntax, parallelism of phrase or idea, significant thematic word, or other notable literary signifier -- corroborate the finding, then there is a comfortable degree of certitude. Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Jan 2 04:02:36 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 2 Jan 96 04:02:30 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id DAA12326; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 03:55:35 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6261 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 1 Jan 1996 22:54:30 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0267; Mon, 1 Jan 1996 22:54:30 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 01 Jan 96 22:54:29 EST Received: from timromano (philly204.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02452; Mon, 1 Jan 96 22:55:13 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30E8AD4E.F05@voicenet.com> Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 22:58:06 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO This is posting #4 on The Wanderer. In the previous passage, the afflictions of the exile are expressed in terms of the seafarer sending his mind out again and again over the waters, attempting to hail comrades, but without success. In the second half of the poem, beginning at line 58, the metaphor of the exile mind's seeking to hail the spirits of his companions ("mod geondhweorfeth") gives way to a more general contemplation("gethencan ... geond") of mutability, of the decline and fall of all human enterprise. Here is the next verse-paragraph: Forthon ic gethencan ne maeg geond thas woruld forhwan mod sefan minne gesweorce. 60 THonne ic eorla lif eal geondthence, hu hi faerlice flet ofgeafon, modge maguthegnas, swa thes middangeard ealra dogra gehwam dreoseth ond fealleth. Forthon ne maeg weorthan wis wer, aer he age 65 wintra dael in woruldrice. It consists of 48 words, which divide by symmetry at "flet ofgeafon". David Howlett's analysis and mine are in agreement with respect to the chiasmus that informs this section; its crux occurs at "flet ofgeafon": a Forthon ic gethencan ne maeg geond thas woruld b forhwan mod sefan minne gesweorce. c Thonne ic eorla lif eal geondthence d hu hi faerlice % flet ofgeafon d modge maguthegnas, c swa thes middangeard ealra dogra gehwam b dreoseth ond fealleth a Forthon ne maeg weorthan wis wer aer he age wintra dael in woruldrice Note on the text: I read "mod" (tentatively) as the subject of the (transitive?) verb "gesweorce", with "sefan minne" as (asm.) object. Compare "sefan" as accusative object in "werigne sefan", which appears in the passage immediately preceding this one (l. 57b), and also "gemynd mod geondhweorfeth" (l.51, discussed in a prior posting) where one facet of the psyche acts upon another. Proposed translation: "Indeed I cannot think about this world because my mood (or my thought) would darken my mind." Commentary. Lines a-a. Contemplation of the world darkens his mind; a man cannot be wise before he can claim a number of winters in the world. These thoughts are not exactly parallel, although both express a relationship of "mind" in the "world". The theme of youth vs age, which was introduced early in the poem, is brought to the fore again. Lines b-b. The darkening of the mind is expressed in terms of the decline and fall of all things in the world. Lines c-c. "eorla lif" is restated in even more general terms: "middangeard ealra dogra gehwam". Lines d-d. Speed, high-spirits: the impetuousness or rashness of the (young) retainers ("faerlice" vs "modge"); their rashness will contrast with the "patience" of the older counselor in the passage that follows this one. Line %. Death of (young) retainers expressed in terms of departure; departure anticipates the "hwaer com" passage that follows. Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 3 01:13:51 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 3 Jan 96 01:13:50 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id BAA05724; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 01:05:43 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5619 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 19:55:22 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1493; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 19:55:22 -0500 Received: from popserver.Stanford.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 02 Jan 96 19:55:21 EST Received: from [36.75.0.16] (CornPB.Stanford.EDU [36.75.0.16]) by popserver.Stanford.EDU (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA14450 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 16:56:10 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: brown@popserver.stanford.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 16:55:47 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "George H. Brown" Subject: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO I hope David Howlett and Robert Stevick will forgive me for remaining dubious about the hypothesis of numerical patterns in OE even after all that they and others have written on this thread (rope? hawser?). At the risk of making David find my criticism "tiresome", I should like to remind us of what George Johnson writes in _Fire in the Mind: Science, Faith and the Search for Order_: "Once a person becomes enmeshed in an ideology or a scientist in a hypothesis, it is difficult not to see confirmation everywhere. Our brains are wired to see order, but we are prisoners of our nervous systems, cursed with never knowing when we are seeing truths out there in the universe and when we are merely inventing elaborate architectures." Although I'm an orderly person and enjoy order, try as I might to be sympathetic to these nuemrical theories, I can only see a grand "inventio" constructed by an eminent lexicographer's mind. With Timothy Larkin, Michael Drout, and many another, I remain quite unconvinced despite my best efforts. And, until I can study more extended expostion and attempt at proof than is possible on e-mail, perhaps it is time to move onto some other topic. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 3 04:25:56 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 3 Jan 96 04:25:56 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id EAA14066; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 04:18:58 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7236 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 23:17:55 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6035; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 23:17:54 -0500 Received: from chuma.cas.usf.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 02 Jan 96 23:17:50 EST Received: (jordan@localhost) by chuma.cas.usf.edu (8.6.11/8.6.5) id XAA00303; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 23:18:40 -0500 X-Sender: jordan@chuma Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 23:18:39 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" Subject: Re: Validating arithmetic and geometric hypotheses To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <30E9BBF0.1CBA@voicenet.com> Status: RO On Tue, 2 Jan 1996, Tim Romano wrote: > I think you are splitting hairs here, Greg. By "rhetorical" I mean the way the > words are put together. I wasn't intending to split hairs; I was just wanting to clarify that you were not suggesting the supposed numerical patterns had propositional, persuasive content. But now that I know what *you* mean by rhetoric, OK - I'm a Humpty Dumpty myself. > Also, you quote me out of context here: > >>But section boundaries cannot be based just on the numbers > > Of course they can. By stanzas of equal numbers, by sections of equal > > numbers of words or letters or verses, etc. I wasn't, am still not, sure what the context was. Excuse me. > I hope this will clear things up for you: in reading some Old English poems, it > is not always easy to tell where sentences begin and end, or where the poet is > beginning a new "verse paragraph" or "section boundary". (I was using the terms > interchangeably.) When one reads an Old English poem closely, looking for > rhetorical patterns and for the boundaries of verse paragraphs, one should not, > I think, impose arbitrary divisions upon the text by starting with the numbers; > rather one should look at the poem's syntax first, look at the poem as formal > speech which derives its beauty by its special relationship to the spoken > tongue. One should try to see where the poem breaks "naturally" into sentences, > and where these sentences cohere into groups of sentences with a common thread > of meaning. Section boundaries should not be based just on the numbers. > > Catch my meaning now? I caught that much before. What I meant is that a numerically-minded poet *could* structure his/poem starting with numbers. Sentence boundaries can be vague, but verse boundaries less so - often they're marked in the manuscripts, and there is pretty close agreement on versification by scholars. So a poet who set out to write in numbers surely would not encase his/her numerical puzzle/masterpiece inside of a fuzzy frame. He/she would almost certainly start with fixed stanzas or some sort of general fixed-number set for the whole poem; the correlation with verses or sense would be too obvious to miss or doubt (what poet would want his/her effect missed or doubted?). I know of several such poems. Each number pattern would be encased within another pattern, up to the level of the entire poem - making it one grand ornament. This would be what I would consider proof that a poet was engaging in such play. If there are no stanzas or regular-throughout-the-poem numerical sets (of letters, words, verses, sentences, *anything*) that clearly correspond with sense, then I would say the poet has played sloppily, and more likely he/she wasn't playing like that at all. Examine some of the poems yourself & see. Greg Jordan jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 3 15:20:21 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 3 Jan 96 15:20:17 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA04744; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 15:12:50 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0720 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 09:55:52 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6595; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 09:55:52 -0500 Received: from chuma.cas.usf.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 03 Jan 96 09:55:51 EST Received: (jordan@localhost) by chuma.cas.usf.edu (8.6.11/8.6.5) id JAA09168; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 09:56:40 -0500 X-Sender: jordan@chuma Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 09:56:39 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <30E8AD4E.F05@voicenet.com> Status: RO On Mon, 1 Jan 1996, Tim Romano wrote: > It consists of 48 words, which divide by symmetry at "flet ofgeafon". David How > lett's > analysis and mine are in agreement with respect to the chiasmus that informs thi > s > section; its crux occurs at "flet ofgeafon": > > a Forthon ic gethencan ne maeg geond thas woruld > b forhwan mod sefan minne gesweorce. > c Thonne ic eorla lif eal geondthence > d hu hi faerlice > % flet ofgeafon > d modge maguthegnas, > c swa thes middangeard ealra dogra gehwam > b dreoseth ond fealleth > a Forthon ne maeg weorthan wis wer aer he age wintra dael in woruldrice Is there significance in 48 as a number? Why does 48 not divide in the scheme at 24/24? As it is, it divides 23/25 down the middle. Why are the parallel lines not equal in number of words? Is this entire poem written in series of chiasmus of exactly this shape, one after the other? Why are the lines not exactly parallel in form and sense? I don't see much if any parallelism in b and b', or c and c', or d and d'. Does "dreoseth ond fealleth" really look parallel to "forwhan mod sefan minne gesweorce"? Basically, only a and a' look even vaguely parallel, with "forthon ... ne maeg ... woruld..." which are more likely traditional deployment of concatenated poetic connectives and repetition/"echoing." > Lines a-a. Contemplation of the world darkens his mind; a man cannot be wise before he > can claim a number of winters in the world. These thoughts are not exactly parallel, > although both express a relationship of "mind" in the "world". Or not even a and a'. Talk about hedging. Greg Jordan jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 3 18:37:04 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 3 Jan 96 18:36:49 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA17901; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 18:28:48 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2641 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 12:49:39 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3645; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 12:49:39 -0500 Received: from popserver.Stanford.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 03 Jan 96 12:49:37 EST Received: from [36.75.0.16] (CornPB.Stanford.EDU [36.75.0.16]) by popserver.Stanford.EDU (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA17019 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 09:50:25 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: brown@popserver.stanford.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 09:50:03 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "George H. Brown" Subject: Re: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Knowing full well how the Irish were (at least to some) zanily preoccupied with biblical lore ("Who was the first widow?" "Dinah." etc.) and the magical logic of numbers, I'm sure David Howlett's analysis of Aileran the Wise's "Interpretatio Mystica" may very well be valid. Also knowing, for example, Augustine's discussion of why Christ sent out 72 disciples, I am as aware as you that the Fathers enjoyed the numbers game, even though I'm not convinced that the Fathers or Bede wrote by the numbers. But to the more important point on Ansaxnet: Like Greg Jordan and Ted Irving, I'm quite dubious that the Old English poets used numerical devices in the contruction of OLD ENGLISH poetry, _pace_ the postings of Romano and Appleyard and Stevick and Howlett. The very texts they cite as proof and the "evidence" put forth has brought about my incredulity. It seems to me the perpetrators of this hypothesis overlay a template (_Schablone_) onto the body of verse and force a patterned conformity in an eagerness to universalize a quirky, learned praxis of late antique aureate writing, embraced with childlike fervor by early Irish masters but not at all the controlling mode of Germanic verse makers. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ George Hardin Brown ~ e-mail: brown@leland.stanford.edu Department of English ~ office: 415 723-3014 Stanford University ~ fax: 415 725-0755 Stanford, CA 94305-2087 ~ home: 415 852-1231 From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 3 22:01:32 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 3 Jan 96 22:01:30 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA00917; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 21:54:37 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4982 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 16:53:18 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3070; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 16:53:17 -0500 Received: from homer27.u.washington.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 03 Jan 96 16:52:27 EST Received: by homer27.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.12/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA87279; Wed, 3 Jan 96 13:53:18 -0800 X-Sender: stevickr@homer27.u.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 13:53:17 -0800 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Robert Stevick Subject: Re: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: Status: RO George, It is salutary to be reminded from time to time of the risks of finding what we hope to find even if it may not really be there. Hamlet twitted Polonius in this line, and we're all aware of the problem of the figure in the carpet. Still, I can't quite see the relevance of the citation from _Fire in the Mind_ to the question whether Old English poems were written to carefully devised forms (as opposed, say, to improvised according to the duration of inspiration or the duration of dictation sessions). It doesn't have to do with whether forms ARE there or not. And after all, it begins with "once a person becomes enmeshed" (a loaded expression) and goes only so far as to say "It is difficult not to see". That doesn't settle whether some things that are found have been there all the time, put there by the poet (or illuminator or architect or goldsmith), and observable when we know how to recognize them. You've mentioned my name twice (the message copied below, and another one today), and that tends to wake me up. Your today's posting speaks of the "zany" Irish who may have "embraced with childlike fervor" "a quirky, learned praxis of late antique aureate writing," and then reasserts your doubt that the Old English poets writing OLD ENGLISH poetry would ever do such a thing. That seems to me to forbid the question by the form in which you have brought it up. I cannot speak for the others you mention (Romano, Appleyard, and Howlett), but I will speak for myself. _The Phoenix_ is divided into eight sections in the Exeter Book MS. The lengths of these sections, measured in metrical lines, are 84, 97, 83, 85, 74, 94, 71, 89. There is no pattern recognizable here if you are looking for common denominators, and no two are the same! Pattern begins to emerge (in perception) when one sums the various combinations of successive sections: there is 1 x 84, 2 x 84, 2 x 84, 4 x 84, 6 x 84, 7 x 84. A bit more emerges when one works through natural, triangular, and solid numbers to find that the seventh solid number is 84. And a bit more when (classical) number theory has a harmonic sequence whose factors are 1, 4, 7 headed by 84. And a bit more when the measure from the ends of 7 x 84 and 4 x 84 laid out at right angles measures 677, the length of the whole text. And so on. And in that last instance, there is the clue as to how the putative plan could have been produced in Anglo-Saxon England (and even twentieth century USA): a graphic model--which is to say, by graphic computation. Still no reason to think it may have been planned? What about the number symbolism in relation to the "contents" or the poem? The first seven sections are integrated by the modular 84, and the eighth is not. The first seven sections concern the temporal world. The eighth has to do with eternity. The numbers seven and eight were commonplace symbols for these aspects of existence. The full argument is in Chapter 10 of _The Earliest Irish and English Bookarts_. If _The Phoenix_ was different in this way from other long religous verse texts in Old English, we would have a new question--about the form of _The Phoenix_. But if there are others .... And if the forms "found" in poems are made in the same way as the forms of illuminations in the great Gospels manuscripts.... And if in some of the illuminations one can SEE the constructions marks that were used in producing those forms.... This is a long way from doubting the existence of pattern except in the mind a person enmeshed in an ideology. On Tue, 2 Jan 1996, George H. Brown wrote: > I hope David Howlett and Robert Stevick will forgive me for remaining > dubious about the hypothesis of numerical patterns in OE even after all > that they and others have written on this thread (rope? hawser?). At the > risk of making David find my criticism "tiresome", I should like to remind > us of what George Johnson writes in _Fire in the Mind: Science, Faith and > the Search for Order_: > > "Once a person becomes enmeshed in an ideology or a scientist in a > hypothesis, it is difficult not to see confirmation everywhere. Our brains > are wired to see order, but we are prisoners of our nervous systems, cursed > with never knowing when we are seeing truths out there in the universe and > when we are merely inventing elaborate architectures." > > Although I'm an orderly person and enjoy order, try as I might to be > sympathetic to these nuemrical theories, I can only see a grand "inventio" > constructed by an eminent lexicographer's mind. With Timothy Larkin, > Michael Drout, and many another, I remain quite unconvinced despite my best > efforts. And, until I can study more extended expostion and attempt at > proof than is possible on e-mail, perhaps it is time to move onto some > other topic. > From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 4 01:02:02 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 4 Jan 96 01:02:00 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id AAA11180; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 00:55:00 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6010 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 19:47:09 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7820; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 19:47:09 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 03 Jan 96 19:47:07 EST Received: from timromano (philly222.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09287; Wed, 3 Jan 96 19:47:47 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30EB2481.1F40@voicenet.com> Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 19:51:13 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Gregory Jordan (ENG) wrote: (quoting my representation of one of the chiasmoi in The Wanderer) a Forthon ic gethencan ne maeg geond thas woruld b forhwan mod sefan minne gesweorce. c Thonne ic eorla lif eal geondthence d hu hi faerlice % flet ofgeafon d modge maguthegnas, c swa thes middangeard ealra dogra gehwam b dreoseth ond fealleth a Forthon ne maeg weorthan wis wer aer he age wintra dael in woruldrice > > Is there significance in 48 as a number? Greg, I am not approaching the poem looking for significance in particular numbers ("numerology"). Rather I look for verse paragraphs, and then look to see whether a pattern informs them, and then I report the results when said verse paragraph is divided by symmetry or by mean and extreme ratio, as the case may be. > Why does 48 not divide in the > scheme at 24/24? The section divides after the 24th word. That seems pretty clean to me. > Is this entire poem written in series of chiasmus of exactly this shape, > one after the other? No. The size of the verse paragraphs vary. Sometimes there is chiasmus. Sometimes there is parallelism of the 'abcdabcd' variety. It varies. And the variation is meaningful in context. I am still rereading the second half of the poem. > Why are the lines not exactly parallel in form and sense? (Note that the "granularity" in my representation of the chiasmus is not as refined as that in David Howlett's. I prefer to keep the clausal units largely intact.) Symmetry in the chiasmus is not "exactly parallel in form and sense". Does it have to be exact to exist and be meaningful? The symmetry can be of idea, or it can echo the phrase or word. Sometimes there is symmetry of syntax (cf. "maga gemynd" and "fleotendra ferth"--discussed in one of the earlier postings). > I don't see much if any parallelism in b and b', or c and c', or d and d'. > Does "dreoseth ond fealleth" really look parallel to > "forwhan mod sefan minne gesweorce"? In this section, the poet establishes a relationship between his mind and the things that represent human endeavor on earth. The very words for thinking and contemplation have a spatial, phenomenological core ("geond-"). And in that context, the "decline and fall" of things on earth is parallel to the darkening of his mind ("dreoseth ond fealleth" vs "gesweorce"). There is a parallelism of idea. > Basically, only a and a' look even vaguely parallel, with "forthon ... > ne maeg ... woruld..." which are more likely traditional deployment of > concatenated poetic connectives and repetition/"echoing." The syntax in this poem is beautifully precise. There are no throw-away words, no relatively meaningless or insignificant segues, if that is what you mean by "poetic connectives". Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania P.S. I've tried to send you via email my discussion of the first half of the poem. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 4 10:05:53 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 4 Jan 96 10:05:50 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA01600; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 09:58:03 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8986 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 04:41:35 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7692; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 04:41:35 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 04 Jan 96 04:41:33 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 4 Jan 1996 09:42:14 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 2; Thu, 04 Jan 1996 09:42:09 +0000 Message-Id: <0099BE11.60B17EAA.2@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 09:42:08 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO George, If you doubt that Bede wrote by numbers, begin with 'Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum' and 'Praefatio' and read to 'Explicit Praefatio'. Set that out per cola et commata. The syntax coincides exactly with the cursus rhythms and the punctuation marks of the Leningrad and Moore MSS. There are exactly 100 lines and exactly 731 words. Remind yourself of the year of publication. If any lingering doubt remains, try the Prologue in prose to John the Pres- byter and the verse introduction to the poetic Life of Cuthbert. The Old English translator of the HE did not reproduce the artifice of the Preface, but he did reproduce the structures of two clear examples of composi- tion in Biblical style, the story of the conversion of the Northumbrians, the passage about Coifi and the sparrow, and the account of Caedmon. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 4 10:07:17 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 4 Jan 96 10:07:16 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA01792; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 09:59:43 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9065 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 04:55:25 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7926; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 04:55:24 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 04 Jan 96 04:55:24 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 4 Jan 1996 09:56:01 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10; Thu, 04 Jan 1996 09:55:56 +0000 Message-Id: <0099BE13.4E3E2748.10@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 09:55:56 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Is the number of verse lines entirely in Old English in 'The Phoenix' a mere coincidence? From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 4 16:51:03 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 4 Jan 96 16:50:59 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA19282; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:43:30 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1647 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 11:34:27 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8172; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 11:34:27 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 04 Jan 96 11:34:26 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:30:47 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 12; Thu, 04 Jan 1996 16:30:44 +0000 Message-Id: <0099BE4A.74EC667D.12@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:30:43 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO While we're on the same thread, remind me whether George is skeptical about whether Old English writers in general or merely Old English poets composed by numbers. If the former, is he going to affirm that AElfric's translation of the Creation story in Genesis I is not composed in Biblical style? If the latter is he going to except the thousands of lines of verse that are trans- lated from originals in the Biblically influenced Late Latin of Christian poets, like Lactantius, and a few dozen other writers whose works survive in copies from Anglo-Saxon England? From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 4 22:38:27 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 4 Jan 96 22:38:23 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA15300; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 22:30:58 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6516 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 17:08:48 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4942; Thu, 4 Jan 1996 17:08:47 -0500 Received: from homer13.u.washington.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 04 Jan 96 17:08:16 EST Received: by homer13.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.12/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA140268; Thu, 4 Jan 96 14:09:06 -0800 X-Sender: stevickr@homer13.u.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 14:09:06 -0800 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Robert Stevick Subject: Re: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099BE13.4E3E2748.10@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO David, I suspect a trap in in your question, and so will comment on it rather than hazard an answer. Coincident with what? Subtract the eleven macaronic lines at the end from the 677 lines of the whole text and you have 666, which coincides with--or has associated with it--a meaning in Christian tradition. That fact doesn't answer the question, necessarily. Subtract those macaronic lines from the total of the last fitt, and the ratio of the all-English to the total, 78 : 89, is the same as the ratio of the lengths of the last seven fitts to the total length of the text. That fact doesn't answer the question, necessarily, either. My only purpose here is to use your question to offer a clear example of the difference between associating quantities with things outside a formal scheme and associating them with the other quantities within a formal plan. The first is essentially study of meaning, the second is study of form. On Thu, 4 Jan 1996, David Howlett wrote: > Is the number of verse lines entirely in Old English in 'The Phoenix' a mere > coincidence? > From haven@voicenet.com Sat Jan 6 14:15:39 1996 Received: from voicenet.com (mail.voicenet.com) by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 6 Jan 96 14:15:35 GMT Received: from timromano (philly23.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14788; Sat, 6 Jan 96 09:08:49 EST Message-Id: <30EE8363.6D28@voicenet.com> Date: Sat, 06 Jan 1996 09:12:51 -0500 From: Tim Romano X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: enl011@ABDN.AC.UK Subject: The Wanderer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO Duncan, Recently you sent me DRH's analysis of The Wanderer. I have found a number of your replies to David when searching the archive via the Labyrinth (which for some reason works better than searching ANSAXDAT Folio directly). Here is an excerpt from one of them: "On 22-38 I did not get on so well. For a start, 22 seems clearly to link to 35 ("geara iu goldwine minne"/"on geoguthe his goldwine"), and I suspect that 36-38 have been counted in simply to reach the next small capital (though in David's original analysis he extracted 88-91 only from the passage 88-96 which is thus bounded). Working inwards finds a link between 25 and 34 ("sele...sinc"), but I could see nothing further." You did invite comments from colleagues at the end of your posting. I'm not technically a colleague in that I don't hold a university position, though as a graduate student I did write a short article on _Beowulf_ that was published in _Neophilologus_ in 1982. I am curious to know what you think of my recent series of postings -- especially with regard to the section referenced above, which in my reading goes from line 22 to 36. Hope you're not too sick of hearing about the subject... Tim Romano From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Jan 8 14:43:06 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 8 Jan 96 14:43:05 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA29245; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 14:30:40 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8917 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 09:20:18 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3571; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 09:20:18 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 08 Jan 96 09:19:49 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 8 Jan 96 14:27:00 GMT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 14:27:01 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Karen -- You say "David has done plenty of replying to criticisms of his specific analyses". Could you find me some instances of criticisms of his OE analyses of the sort of particularity of mine of his analyses of the beginning of Beowulf in the Scragg-Szarmach volume, to which he has replied actually taking up the points raised? My present impression is that, contrary to the usual practices of scholarly debate, he very seldom does so; but I will correct my impression on evidence to the contrary. [No "sort of" is wrong, 5 lines up; "level of" would be better - nitty-gritty points, not questions of "which approaches to be guided by.] In responding to such criticisms on the open net one is not "up against a brick wall" even if one supposes them raised by an obdurate, because of all the other receptive folk who are in on the discussion. --Duncan M-G (macg@abdn.ac.uk) From hoover@is.NYU.EDU Tue Jan 9 16:23:12 1996 Received: from is.nyu.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 9 Jan 96 16:22:59 GMT Received: by is.nyu.edu; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/23Sep94-1121PM) id AA12214; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 11:15:50 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 11:15:50 -0500 (EST) From: David Hoover To: enl011@abdn.ac.uk Subject: Re: drh and Learning Old English In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO On Tue, 9 Jan 1996 enl011@abdn.ac.uk wrote: > David -- Thank you for your generous view expressed in my defence at > a time when I was in fact away from the net and unable to take up > cudgels myself. If I have given that impression generally it is > considerable reward for much labour. I don't think I was being generous, just accurate. Surely one cannot take Ms Foster's responses as typical. I find her obscure, careless, inattentive, and often miserably uninformed. It is infuriating to attempt to converse with her. Working out exactly what David's > phrasings mean, so as to be neither unfair to nor bamboozled by what > he says, is a slow business - and one I shall really have to withdraw > from for the present as it has been taking up more time than I can go > on sparing. I have not had the time to pursue his arguments either, and my lack of Latin makes things difficult, since much of the already published work deals with Latin texts. I have promised myself to look at the Scagg-Szarmack and at the book when it comes out, but I am not working much in OE these days. The trouble is that he will go on posting with undiminished > confidence, and newcomers to the debate will go on being impressed by > the apparent assured sweep of his knowledge. I wish I knew how solid > he is in Latin and other classical languages. I'm not competent to do > there what I can do in OE, but I certainly caught him fiddling his > evidence in Latin too in the Scragg-Szarmach volume. Fortunately others > are now in the field too. True. What is needed, though, is people who do not just dismiss, but who take up the arguments and analyses with care and in detail, as you have done. [UNRELATED CONTINUATION DELETED: SEE OE_CALL/LOE/enquiries] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ David L. Hoover, Assoc. Prof. of Engl. hoover@is.nyu.edu /212-998-8832 NYU English Department, 19 Univ. Pl., NY, NY 10003 Webmaster, English Department http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/english From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Jan 9 17:04:47 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 9 Jan 96 17:04:41 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA27795; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:52:16 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2386 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 11:27:55 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9148; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 11:27:54 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 09 Jan 96 11:27:53 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 9 Jan 96 16:35:08 GMT Message-Id: Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:35:08 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Karen -- Would you mind quoting back to me the passage in which "in my response to the first three lines that David analyzes in the Szarmach volume, I object to the verse paragraph divisions that David delineates"? I thought I had my posting safely saved, but I can't find it. I don't see how his verse paragraph divisions could have been relevant to my objections to his analysis of these lines, and would be grateful to recover what I in fact said. On your other points - once it is accepted that OE poems were composed on mathematical principles, these principles can be used to establish word and other boundaries. If one is trying to demonstrate that they were so composed, they can't be; the argument becomes circular. Similarly, if you accept that any pattern that looks significant it, because the presence of significant patterns is fully established, no limits need be set [sorry, "that looks significant is,"] to what is to be accepted as significant. If you are trying to demonstrate significance you must examine, and show to be implausible, the hypothesis that what looks significant is in fact due to chance. If you won't set limits you can't do that, and so you can't demonstrate significance. A lot of our disagreement comes, I think, from the fact that you, with David, have already accepted that OE poets composed numerically; I still regard it as needing demonstration. -- Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Jan 9 17:33:02 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 9 Jan 96 17:33:01 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA00731; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 17:23:00 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3194 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 12:21:35 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1591; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 12:21:35 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 09 Jan 96 12:21:31 EST Received: from timromano (philly49.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03859; Tue, 9 Jan 96 12:21:58 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <199601091416.IAA36539@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <30F2A544.63C5@voicenet.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 12:26:28 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer as autobiography? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Roy M. Liuzza wrote: > = > Tim Romano notes that _The Wanderer_ "is written in the first > person." This is not true: > = > Lines 1-5 are in a sort of generalized third person which may or may not = be > spoken by the same person who speaks the rest of the poem, 6-7 are in the= > third person, an introduction to lines 8-110, which are then in the first= > person -- though the speaker keeps creating other speakers, most notably = at > lines 92-105 (or 110? I still can't decide where that imaginary extra fir= st > person speaker, whom we might call "Ubi", should end). Then lines 111-115= > are a conclusion, again in the third person homiletic mode. > = > So the poem is, strictly, a dramatic monologue; this is not "a > reading [to] entertain with an open mind," as Tim Romano puts it, but the= > only sensible way to understand the voice(s) of the poem. > = > And there is no reason to assume the speaker is a poet, any more > than to assume that Beowulf is a poet because he reports his adventures t= o > Hygelac in verse when he returns from Heorot. > = > -- Roy Liuzza > = > ________________________________________ > = > Roy M. Liuzza > Department of English > Tulane University > New Orleans, LA 70118 > rliuzza@mailhost.TCS.tulane.EDU Roy, I can't agree with you when you claim your reading to be "the _only_ sensib= le way to = understand the voice(s) in the poem" [emphasis mine--you probably would put= the accent on = 'sensible']. = Lines 1-5 do consist of two general statements: "Oft him anhaga are gebidet= h..." and "Wyrd = bith ful araed". But who is speaking these lines? Would your reply be 'the= omniscient = narrator'? My reply is: the 'ic' who speaks throughout the poem. = You describe ll. 6-7 as an introduction to lines 8-110. But 'cwaeth' is pre= terite. "Thus = said the wanderer..." -- the tense makes it just as likely, if not more lik= ely, that the = lines refer back to the lines _preceding_ them. And in my reading, the "dir= ection" of = reference is significant; but let me set the scene a little before explaini= ng what I mean = by that. = The 'ic' of the poem does call forth a 'he' later in the poem, in line 88. = 'Se thonne = thisne wealsteal wise gethohte...deope geondthenceth' -- "He, therefore, wh= o thinks deeply = with wise thoughts about this place of buildings..." But this 'he' is not = a character or = a different voice; it is the Voice of Correct Philosophical Conclusions. T= he word = "thonne" is only a little word but it is very important here; go back to li= ne ll. 73ff. = for a moment: = Ongietan sceal gleaw haele hu gaestlic bith = thonne eall thisse worulde wela weste stondeth, = 75 swa nu missenlice geond thisne middangeard = winde biwaune weallas stondath... = [Note: eall is a minor emendation, insignificant for the argument.] "The wise man must perceive how ghastly it will be when this world's wealth= stands all in = waste, as now in some places throughout this middle-earth wind-blasted wall= s are = standing..." Given these things, "He, therefore, who thinks deeply...about this place...= will often = think, much removed, of the many slaughters and will say these words...". T= his is not a = new speaker but a rhetorical device. Also, notice how the section (ll. 73-9= 2) is unified = by the echoic sounds of 'wela','weallas','wealle','wealsteal','waelsleahta'= =2E = The 'ic' of the poem puts these words in the 'mouth' of 'him who thinks de= eply'. I don't = think this voice has an identity in the way you suggest. I think the 'snottor on mode' in line 111, the 'se' in line 88, and the 'an= haga' in the = opening of the poem are all meant to be the same, generic 'anyone who has s= een these = things and experienced what I have experienced and has thought about them i= n sufficient = depth'. = The 'ic' identifies with 'anyone who' is in the same boat, so to speak; thi= s = identification begins in lines 12ff: Ic to sothe wat = thaet bith in eorle indryhten theaw, = thaet he his ferthlocan faeste binde, = and is made more explicit in lines 29b and ff.: = wat se =FEe cunnath = hu slithen bith sorg to geferan, = tham the him lyt hafath leofra geholena and occurs again in lines 37ff: Forthon wat se the sceal his winedryhtnes = leofes larcwidum longe fortholian and in lines 50ff: Sorg bith geniwad = thonne maga gemynd mod geondhweorfeth, greteth gliwstafum, georne geondsceawath = secga geseldan; swimmath oft on weg = fleotendra ferth, no =FEaer fela bringeth = 55 cuthra cwidegiedda. Cearo bith geniwad = tham =FEe sendan sceal swithe geneahhe = ofer wathema gebind werigne sefan. Put another way, the 'ic' knows his own case to be not unique and is able t= o generalize = from it; this generalization is a step on the path to his enlightened accep= tance of this = dark life. Now, as to explaining what I meant by the "direction of reference". The 'lo= ne ego' is the = organizing principle of the poem. The opening and closing sections, in both= of which occur = the phrase 'swa cwaeth', do not "frame" the 'ic' -- they _emanate from_ th= e 'ic'. And the = voice that speaks the 'hwaer com?' passage ('thas word acwith'), the 'philo= sophizing = voice', also emanates from the 'ic'. I do not see these as separate voices = but as = surrogates for the 'ic'. We may agree more than we disagree, and the ostens= ible = disagreement may be a matter of emphasis. You wrote "the speaker keeps crea= ting other = speakers". I would point out that these 'other speakers' are not really giv= en distinct = identities. And you say yourself that they come from the speaker, the 'ic'.= It was Rilke, I think, who said in praise of Shakespeare's _Tempest_ that, = after dangling = his puppets before us, Shakespeare "runs the wire through his own head". Or= something like = that. And in this poem, I believe, the poet reveals himself and the progres= s of his own = mind, from lamenting 'anhaga' to 'snottor...aet rune' who understands that:= = Til bith se the his treowe gehealdeth=FE, ne sceal naefre his torn to ryce= ne = beorn of his breostum acythan, nemthe he aer tha bote cunne and = Wel bith tham the him are seceth, = frofre to faeder on heofonum, =FEaer us eal seo faestnung stondeth= When I say the poem can be read as soth-gied, or as autobiography, I mean t= he poet "runs = the wire through his own head". The snake swallows its tail. = Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Jan 9 20:27:44 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 9 Jan 96 20:27:37 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA11499; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 20:18:22 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5396 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 15:07:42 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8589; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 15:07:42 -0500 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 09 Jan 96 15:07:41 EST Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HZT631EF9S000HU7@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 09 Jan 1996 15:07:27 -0500 (EST) X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZT631HP02000HU7@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 15:07:27 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Since I've come up empty-handed in my search, too, I feel that replying publicly is probably okay--a bit of laziness on my part. Anyway, I could not find your analysis of the first three lines of _Beowulf_ in response to David's article, and I'm almost sure I printed that out deliberately. I must have it somewhere, and I'll find it when I'm not looking for it. I was not able to telnet just now to do further searches. However, if that is in anyone's backlog, would you mind forwarding that to me privately? I would like to look at that again. In any case, the list of 19 messages (all but a few between you and David) under the subject of Beowulf analysis _is_ a discourse of several messages in which David replies to specific things you say about his analysis. It was, I think, in one of those that I saw your statement that he must justify his word boundaries, etc., and that reminded me of what you said in your lengthy analysis of David's article. I think where you and I most disagree is not in the idea that I already accept what you feel has not been demonstrated, but that I think David has amply demonstrated what you feel he has not demonstrated. He answers your questions patiently and fully, but he does not give you the answers you want. He becomes exasperated, it seems to me, (and when he becomes exasperated, it may be true that he gets off track), after he explains what you reject as an explanation. That is why I referred to the 19 messages under the subject of beowulf analysis in the database. They seem to me a good example of just the type of exchange in which David has answered, but you don't get the answer you want. I sometimes think you are more interested in casting suspicion on David's ideas than on raising legitimate questions. Note, for example, that in responding to me on Dec. 14, 1995, you state that you were not misleading in taking the opening lines of _Beowulf_ "as an illustration of David's methods." You disclaim my suggestion that you were not arguing that, as I wrote, "if David can do that with the opening lines of _Beowulf_, and with 'geardagum' in particular, then any three-syllable word, followed by as set of three phrases can be similarly analyzed." You state that such would be a pointless argument, and add: "the suggestion was that if David can do that with the opening lines of _Beowulf_ his methods are suspect." That, at any rate, is the impression I have gotten from time to time. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Jan 9 22:18:48 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 9 Jan 96 22:18:47 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA21553; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 22:10:50 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6715 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:33:11 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2708; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:33:11 -0500 Received: from homer16.u.washington.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 09 Jan 96 16:33:08 EST Received: by homer16.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.12/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA14458; Tue, 9 Jan 96 13:33:37 -0800 X-Sender: stevickr@homer16.u.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 13:33:36 -0800 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Robert Stevick Subject: Re: putative numerical formal devices To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: Status: RO Duncan, I'm glad to have your questions. They can't be answered fully in a brief posting, but it may be possible to characterize the kind of answers that may be appropriate. Why the multiples of 84 offset, so to speak, rather than stacked, or strung along, in regular measures? The latter is like bricks, for which regular measure is very practical to a builder; it makes good sense, too, for poetry composed in stanzas long or short. But to compose in quantatative units NOT modular in that way cannot be said NOT to make good sense. This doesn't give you a reason in response to your why-question, though, and all I can offer is another question: why are virtually all the rectangular illuminations in the great Gospels codices not modular in this way? The fact is they aren't. And the fact is that, say, the evangelist portrait pages or evangelist symbol pages in a given manuscript are not the same shape, let alone modular (which would make some parts of the designs easier, probably, though certainly much different). Nonetheless, they all have a coherent design based on the _division_ of a quantity (a unity) by a simple chain of simple ratios; this can best be seen in the St.Gall Gospels evangelist pages, in which portrait pages come in pairs by overall shape and differing derivation of inner form in each pair. Same for Macdurnan Gospels. For Echternach and Lindisfarne Gospels no pairing, but otherwise the schemes for the sets are similar. For some, some of the construction marks are visible. Now that's talking about illuminations rather than poems, of course, but the question you raise applies to both. To bring this back in the direction of OE poetry: all the long religious texts seem to have been designed similarly--which is to say, by dividing a given quantity (in count of metrical lines) by a coherent geometry (most of them) or a coherent plan derived from elementary number theory. The opening five sections of Andreas, for example, are 600 lines, the sections of uneven length; yet one grouping of two and three is that of the golden ratio, the other grouping of two and three [successive, in both cases] is that of the other of the "two true measure of geometry." That's the beginning of it. --The point of this paragraph is merely that to ask why The Phoenix doesn't have 84-line sections one after another until seven had been completed is in one way to ask why it is _not_ different in formal type from the other OE poems. Questions about why it does NOT have 3x84 and 5x84 probably don't have direct answers, either--explaining something that isn't there. Answers can be found, though (I believe) in terms of what a clear plan does not include. Our metrist friends are willing to explain this sort of thing at the drop of a keystroke: certain constructions are excluded by the rules of meter. The same holds, I think, for poetic forms. But I have gone on perhaps too long, when this tends to be abstract especially when confined to prose. I've given the best explanation of the how as well as the why for the lengths of the sections of The Phoenix in Chapter 10 (first half) of _The Earliest Irish and English Bookarts_. Again, I'm glad to have your questions. --Robert On Tue, 9 Jan 1996, Duncan Macrae-Gibson wrote: > Robert -- > > OK, 1 x 84 is obvious; 83 + 85 and 74 + 94 give the two 2 x 84, and since > they are successive that's the 4 x 84 too; 97 + 83 + 85 + 74 + 94 + 71 > give the 6 x 84, and since they follow the simple 84 that's the 7 x 84. > > But (if it's possible in a mere posting) could you give some indication > of why it should be done that way instead of writing regular sections of > 84 each? Is it important that 3 x 84 and 5 x 84 are not present? Does this > relate to the existence of "the harmonic sequence whose factors are 1, 4, > 7, headed by 84"? And what "natural, triangular and solid numbers" are? > And how one lays out at right angles, and measures, a "measure from the > ends of 7 x 84 and 4 x 84"? Or if it's impossible in the limits of a > posting, whether's a relatively accessible way of finding out? I'm not a > mathematician, but not innumerate either. > > -- Duncan (macg@abdn.ac.uk) > [Sorry, "whether's" is what my keyboard, or something, did to "where there is"] > From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 10 10:08:06 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 96 10:08:05 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA28895; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 09:59:18 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3586 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 04:58:29 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4574; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 04:58:29 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 10 Jan 96 04:58:03 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 96 10:05:25 GMT Message-Id: Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:05:25 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Karen -- Your pejorative wording in suggesting that I "am more interested in casting suspicion on David's ideas than in raising legitimate questions" is unfortunate. I am profoundly intereseted in the question whether he has or has not demonstrated mathematical methods of composition in Old English poetry. This is a wholly legitimate question, and in pursuit of it it is necessary to keep challenging his use of what seems to me partial or manipulated evidence. Each particular case will necessarily involve detail, and call for reply in detail; it is not legitimate to push them all aside with the boo-word "niggling", as you tend to do, or to ignore them all, as David tends to do. Obviously if he can say "look, I've given full explanations in several similar cases you've previously raised; don't go on raising what is substantially the same objection again and again", he has every right to do so. But I continue to ask you for even one actual case in which he has answered a specific objection to his use of evidence "patiently and fully", and you continue merely to assert that he has done so. An objection of the form, for instance "your analysis treats your passages b and b' as significant parallels; you offer in support only a casual similarity in a marginal matter". ["of the form" does not mean that my quote here is of an actual specific example - just to clear myself in advance from any challenge. Perhaps I should have written "as it might be" rather than "for instance"]. If I can say "I've raised legitimate doubts about partial or manipulated evidence in several cases, and got no satisfactory answer about any", general suspicion of method becomes a legitimate suspicion. I'll have another go at making private e-mail contact with you, and if it works I'll send you my reply to the Scragg-Szarmach article, as you ask for someone to do. -- Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 10 10:58:43 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 96 10:58:41 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA00503; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:49:58 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3863 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 05:41:24 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5526; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 05:41:24 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 10 Jan 96 05:41:22 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:34:50 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 24; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:34:55 +0000 Message-Id: <0099C2CF.BEC60E40.24@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:34:55 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, Part of the reason we appear to be misfiring is that I think I have pre- sented articulate statements of 'the rules' from Hebrew, Greek, and Latin texts from Antiquity. They are really less 'rules' than guides to a mode of thought and expression, and, once they have been understood and assimilated they become natural and obvious. The very statements of these 'rules' show what degrees of latitude they allow. But you appear repeatedly to assume that the latitude is manipulation on my part of evidence that cannot be brought into play without fudging or suppresio ueri. I am trying to give you something expressed in the terms that Ancient and Medieval writers themselves used, and you keep pressing me to answer you in other ways. That has its uses, and I am grateful (mostly) for the further precision that your requirements drive an explicator to. But often when you suppose that I am not answering your objections it is because I am waiting for you to hear directly from Plato and the author of the Rhetorica ad Herennium and Cicero and Boethius and the Talmudists how this works. A single author, and he the finest, will make it abundantly clear to you that Old English writers understood and represented in their work the system I have been writing about. You have, I think, a script of AElfric's rendering of the Creation story in Genesis I. It survives in more than one manuscript, and I have fudged nothing in the presentation of it. The missing s in suppressio above was not lost in a hiss. Salve. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 10 15:13:00 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 96 15:12:57 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA13718; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 15:03:09 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5296 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 09:41:41 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0591; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 09:41:41 -0500 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 10 Jan 96 09:41:40 EST Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HZU9PZOIIO000OZ1@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 09:41:07 -0500 (EST) X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZU9PZQMTE000OZ1@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 09:41:07 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I used your wording--you called his methods suspect. But all right. I will dig up and present to you privately (I did receive your analysis--thank you) what I have considered full and patient answers to your questions and your rejections of them (I'll have to summarize for you, but I will provide the information that you can use to go check for yourself). I still wish you would respond to the questions I have raised: what makes David's methods illegitimate ("illegitimate," just as "niggling," is your word choice, not mine--you stated that David does not normally feel bound to defend himself in niggling detail); what makes linguistic/metrical methods of determining such things as word, verse, phrase, sentence, and paragraph boundaries superior to other methods of determining such things? Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Jan 10 16:39:48 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 96 16:39:43 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA21094; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 16:28:15 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6590 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 11:03:48 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5266; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 11:03:48 -0500 Received: from toe02.towson.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 10 Jan 96 11:03:44 EST Received: from TOE.TOWSON.EDU by TOE.TOWSON.EDU (PMDF V4.2-11 #3807) id <01HZUCOYPS288ZKYF4@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 11:04:13 EST X-Envelope-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" X-Vms-Cc: E7E4DUN Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZUCOYR4AA8ZKYF4@TOE.TOWSON.EDU> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 11:04:13 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edwin Duncan Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David Howlett wrote this to Duncan Macrae-Gibson: >But often when you suppose that I am not answering your objections it is >because I am waiting for you to hear directly from Plato and the author of the >Rhetorica ad Herennium and Cicero and Boethius and the Talmudists how this >works. My question to David Howlett would be this: Does the above response mean that you yourself are unable to articulate the `rules' (or compositional guidelines) the ancients employed? If so, could you possibly provide specific works and page numbers for the sources you have cited above--or, better yet, direct quotations for their statements regarding the `rules'? If you can't or if you won't, then is it fair to bring them up at all? If you *are* able to articulate the `rules', then why not lay them on the line once and for all so that everyone on Ansaxnet can be relieved of this endless bantering? If you are asserting that you have discovered a method of composition the OE poets used that no one else previously knew about, then isn't it your responsibility to set out their methodology as clearly and specifically as you know how? Must chiasmoi be present? How about parallelisms and/or other symmetrical structures? Which ones? In what way? Which numbers are significant? Would the answer to that be related to the poem's content? Must word count be precise? If so, when? If not, when? Must extreme and mean measures be included? If so, when and under what conditions? Are there any constraints whatsoever? If so, what are they? And, if you declare, as you do, that the Wanderer poet and the Beowulf poet were precise in their word count and word placement, then is it asking too much for you to provide some clarification as to what you think constitutes a word in Old English? Is _thaem the_ one word or two? Is a poetic compound one word or two? Is a verbal prefix (prefixual adverb) considered a separate word or as part of the following simplex? That is to say, should we follow modern editorial conventions or manuscript spacing--or some combination of the two? And if it is some combination, then what combination? I asked you these questions about word composition last year, and, although you never gave me a direct answer, the gist of your response, as near as I could determine, was that it depends. Was that right? If it is, then my question would be `depends on what?' On the word count needed to make the structure symmetrical? Did the OE poets have license in this regard, and if they did, then how much? If such collocations as _thaem the_ can be counted as one word or two, or if _gear dagum_ can be one word or two, or if _ofer swam_ can be one word or two, then doesn't that create such a fudge factor that precision is no longer an operable term? And at this point wouldn't the possibility of random occurrence come into play and the demonstration of poetic intention become advisable? Just trying to understand, ____ _____ / (_) | o (_) \ \__ __ | _ _ __ _ _ | |_ __ _ __ __, _ _ / / \| | | | | |/ | _ | || ||/ | / ) / | |/ | \____)\__/|_ \/ \/ |_| |_) ( /\___/ \_/|| |_\___/\_/|_| |_) duncan-e@toe.towson.edu Department of English http://www.towson.edu/~duncan Towson State University 301E Linthicum - (410) 830-2847 Towson, Maryland 21204 From ENGFOSTE@ACS.EKU.EDU Wed Jan 10 17:05:15 1996 Received: from acs.eku.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 96 17:05:03 GMT Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HZUDMHMX1S000Q9T@ACS.EKU.EDU> for enl011@abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 1996 11:55:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 11:55:19 -0500 (EST) From: ENGFOSTE@ACS.EKU.EDU Subject: Re: my posting To: enl011@abdn.ac.uk Message-Id: <01HZUDMHOO5E000Q9T@ACS.EKU.EDU> X-Vms-To: IN%"enl011@abdn.ac.uk" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Status: RO Duncan, I'm still not able to telnet to the database and extract that reperesentative discussion I mentioned with the subject header, "Beowulf analysis." Once again, I refer you to that set of exchanges for an example of what I mean in saying that David replies and you reject his answers. I gophered to the database, and pulled up what seemed an incomplete rendering of the thread last April, "Numerical Structure in the Wanderer." You can get the full discussion by gophering to the monthly log (4/95) for ANSAXDAT. However, I did find a couple that may help me show what I'm talking about. In replying to Greg (May 10, 1995), you state that David's posting on "The Wanderer" was not meant "to establish that 'The Wanderer' was written on numerical principles," but to show that, "given a prior assumption that an OE poet wouold wish to compose in that way, to show how _Wanderer_ can be read as reflecting that wish." You had been away for a week, and when you returned, you thanked David and others for several replies, and then you rejected David's statement that "knowledge of the rules is like knowledge of grammar." While you conceded David's statement that "they do not prescribe what a poet must do," you claim: "yet if they are rules they must set limits to what he may do. They must be specifiable. They must be capable of being seen to be broken." You reject David's discussion of "theathe" as one word and claim it has to be two for the sake of precision. David does not respond to such claims because he doesn't see the poets working that way, as he has stated time and again. I could suggest that the assumptions underlying your statements appear to be linguistic--that if mathematical principles (or rules) are employed, then we should recognize a breach of a rule, just as we would recognize a comma splice or a sentence fragment. That seems to me a misapplication of what David is talking about, and why I wish folks would quit talking about structures, forms, and rules in referring to numerical principles, but use the word principles to talk about principles. In other words, the poet composing the _Wanderer_, using numerical principles, may have had a model before him. He's not necessarily aiming to replicate his model or to "obey rules" of numerical principles. He's experimenting with his model(s) and applying the principles he sees in his model(s) in his own unique way. He's hoping that he can replicate principles of order he sees in the universe. I've got ten minutes, so I'll wrap this up. I was mistaken in stating that you object to David's division of verse paragraphs in your analysis. I had remembered verse paragraphs, but you actually talked about phrases. You stated that parallelism disappears because "theodcyninga" does not stand along but is part of the phrase Gardena and is split by "in geardagum." You also state that "the parallelism requires a sense of "[dh]a" which would not otherwise seem likeliest, citing stress, and using the objections raised by folks on the list as support. I don't know what sort of rebuttal from David you expect to these sorts of claims. Karen Foster. From stevickr@u.washington.edu Wed Jan 10 20:58:58 1996 Received: from homer15.u.washington.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Jan 96 20:58:51 GMT Received: by homer15.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW96.01/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA82877; Wed, 10 Jan 96 12:51:06 -0800 X-Sender: stevickr@homer15.u.washington.edu Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 12:51:06 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Stevick To: macg@abdn.ac.uk Subject: Your request Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Duncan, _The Earliest Irish and English Bookarts: Visual and Poetic Forms before A.D. 1000_, Univ of Pennsylvania Press, 1994 (ISBN 0-8122-3220-8). This is my wrap-up and synthesis of work done over fifteen years or so. It should make a lot more sense than any of the bits and pieces that can be transmitted in short notes or in brief exchanges at conferences, because the exposition shuttles back and forth between poetry and page illuminations, using the same derivational methods for both; and because the computation is essentially graphic--i.e., done by drawings based on a given quantity--they make a lot more sense when you see the drawings. The given quantity is simply an extension in the illuminations, nearly always the width of the frame; for the poems it is an extension (a line length) representing the total number of lines for the poem. The introductory chapter (and the concluding one) should make things a lot easier to understand--to see (in modern jargon) where I'm coming from and then where I've been. I'll be very interested to hear about what you make of it, when you can find the time. --Robert From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 11 11:19:53 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 11:19:52 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA28596; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 11:11:13 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7733 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 06:10:22 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5133; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 06:10:22 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 11 Jan 96 06:10:19 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 11 Jan 1996 11:02:27 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 5; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 11:02:20 +0000 Message-Id: <0099C39C.BD705320.5@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 11:02:19 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Edwin, How long have you been reading my postings? How many times have I directed you to the Antique sources from which you might discern these things yourself? Since you ask, I have stated 'the rules' as clearly as I know how in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition of Biblical Style' (Dublin: Four Courts, 1995) ISBN 1-85182-143-0, on pages 1-54. I do not suppose that they are a complete cata- logue. They are what I could see when I was writing that book. In Hebrew one may hyphenate certain words or not. Certain words are spelled invariably, others by plene and defective modes as many as sixteen different ways. That is not fudge. It is the way the language was written. In the 'Rhetorica ad Herennium' IV xx 27-8, to which I must have referred twenty times, the author discusses the numbers of syllables in isocolon in two respects, actual equality and apparent equality. He is not fudging. He is tell- ing you how to do something in more than one way, and he says that in apparent, as distinct from actual, equality, one may be 'off' by one or two without offending the ear. He exhibits what he means with unobtrusive examples of each. In Anglo-Saxon England one could spell, as some did in irreformable ways on seals and in acrostics, Christ as XPC, xps, Crist, Christ, and many others. So one man might make 'thaerto' one word and another two. That's just the way they did things. Try to understand things their way and you are more likely to get things right than by imposing criteria from our end. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 11 12:39:32 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 12:39:28 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA01127; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 12:30:34 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7933 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 07:18:44 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5787; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 07:18:44 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 11 Jan 96 07:18:43 EST Received: from timromano (philly18.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14129; Thu, 11 Jan 96 07:19:12 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <30F50177.28FE@voicenet.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 07:24:23 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO This is posting #5 in the Wanderer series. This section of the poem (ll. 73-84) begins with an exhortation: = a wise man has to get how spooky it will be when this world=92s = wealth lies all in waste; and it ends with the image of a grave. = Structurally, it contains 66 words and consists of two chiasmoi, = followed by the =91sume=92 catalog which consists of 4 lines of 6 = words each, each line having 12 syllables. Ongietan sceal gleaw haele hu gaestlic bith, = thonne eall thisse worulde wela weste stondeth, = 75 swa nu missenlice geond thisne middangeard = winde biwaune weallas stondath, = hrime bihrorene, hrythge tha ederas, woriath tha winsalo, waldend licgath = dreame bidrorene, duguth eal gecrong, = 80 wlonc bi wealle. Sume wig fornom, = ferede in forthwege; sumne fugel othbaer = ofer heanne holm; sumne se hara wulf = deathe gedaelde; sumne dreorighleor = in eorthscraefe eorl gehydde. = [Note minor emendation to =91eall=92 in line 74, following Pope.] Here is the representation of the two chiasmoi: a Ongietan sceal gleaw hu gaestlic bith b thonne eall thisse worulde wela % weste stondeth. b swa nu missenlice geond thisne middangeard a winde biwaune weallas stondath. c Hrime bihrorene, hrythge tha ederas d woriath tha winsalo % waldend licgath d dreame bidrorene c duguth eal gecrong wlonc bi wealle Commentary. a-a. =91gaestlic=92 vs =91winde biwaune weallas=92, a metonymic image = that embodies the adjective = b-b. =91when in a time yet to come the world=92s wealth in its = entirety=92 vs. =91now in some places about this world=92. % the crux falls on the phrase =91stands in ruin=92 c-c. Image of snow and ice covering the places people live in = vs. the inhabitants lying dead beside the places they lived in, = where snow and ice connote death. Notice the poignant irony in = the soundplay of =91gecrong=92 and =91wlonc=92. This sharp contrast also informs the entire section. d-d. The wine-halls fall into ruin vs =91bereft of delights=92. The name for the hall here emphasizes happiness and merriment. Notice also how the sound =91wor=92 is picked up in =91dror=92. %. The crux falls on the phrase =91lord lies dead=92. These two chiasmoi reflect each other. They are structurally = similar; and the verbs at the crux are noteworthy: =91stondath=92 = and =91licgath=92. I have not yet determined whether division by = ratios is signficant in this section of the poem; division by = symmetry is clearer. Note how the soundplay throughout this section reinforces the = sense of desolation. The words almost echo in the ruins: 'eall', 'wela','weallas','wealle'. Here is the =91stanza=92, also chiastic, which contains the catalog = of images relating to death in battle: a Sume wig fornom, ferede in forthwege b sumne fugel othbaer ofer heanne holm b sumne se hara wulf deathe gedaelde a sumne dreorighleor in eorthscraef eorl gehydde The verse paragraph is a marvel of poetic economy. It progresses from the very euphemistic =91wig fornom, ferede in forthwege=92, = with its connotations of the glory of those who fall in battle, = to the devastating, inglorious =91sumne dreorighleor in = eorthscraef eorl dehydde=92. The =91eo=92 vowel in the line virtually = keens: =91drEOrighlEOr in EOrthsraef EOrl gehydde.=92 = The two =91animal=92 images in the middle are likewise devastating = in their contrast; the first I take to be an image of a dead = hero being carried out to sea in a funeral boat; the second to = be an image of the wolf eating the corpse of man on the = battlefield. (I discuss this theme of dignified burial versus = the lack of burial, as it relates to AEschere in _Beowulf_, in = an article that appeared in _Neophilologus_ in 1982. The = emotions raised here in this pasage are similar. The article may = also offer an answer to those who wonder how it is that the wolf = can 'deal death' to an already fallen victim.) Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 11 14:00:38 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 14:00:32 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA05068; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 13:51:26 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8584 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 08:47:05 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8750; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 08:47:05 -0500 Received: from toe01.towson.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 11 Jan 96 08:47:04 EST Received: from TOE.TOWSON.EDU by TOE.TOWSON.EDU (PMDF V4.2-11 #3807) id <01HZVKURFP7Q8ZGVAL@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 08:46:58 EST X-Envelope-To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" X-Vms-Cc: E7E4DUN Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZVKURFP7S8ZGVAL@TOE.TOWSON.EDU> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 08:46:58 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Edwin Duncan Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO >Edwin, > How long have you been reading my postings? How many times have I directed >you to the Antique sources from which you might discern these things yourself? >Since you ask, I have stated 'the rules' as clearly as I know how in 'The >Celtic Latin Tradition of Biblical Style' (Dublin: Four Courts, 1995) ISBN >1-85182-143-0, on pages 1-54. I do not suppose that they are a complete cata- >logue. They are what I could see when I was writing that book. Actually, I was referring specifically to those sources you hoped might enlighten Duncan Macrae-Gibson and which you mentioned in your last posting to him, namely Plato, Cicero, Boethius, the author of the Rhetorica ad Herennium, and the Talmudists. By Plato, I was guessing that you were referring to _Phaedo_ and by Cicero maybe certain passages from _De Oratore_. But I wasn't sure. > In Hebrew one may hyphenate certain words or not. Certain words are spelled >invariably, others by plene and defective modes as many as sixteen different >ways. That is not fudge. It is the way the language was written. When I mentioned fudging, I was referring specifically to Old English. I really can't see how it would matter what they did in Hebrew unless one could show that the Old English poets followed exactly the Hebrew technique. > In the 'Rhetorica ad Herennium' IV xx 27-8, to which I must have referred >twenty times, the author discusses the numbers of syllables in isocolon in two >respects, actual equality and apparent equality. He is not fudging. He is tell- >ing you how to do something in more than one way, and he says that in apparent, >as distinct from actual, equality, one may be 'off' by one or two without >offending the ear. He exhibits what he means with unobtrusive examples of each. Again, this would be relevant to the discussion of _Beowulf_, _the Wanderer_, and other OE poems only if you can demonstrate that the OE poets were precisely following the same technique. My guess would be that syllable counting is going to present different problems in `syllable-timed' languages (like Latin) and `stressed-time' languages (like Old English). A look at OE meter and the stress sequences actually used suggests that some slurring was also allowed in OE poetry, but not in all contexts. Can you give me an OE poem in which the syllable counting is symmetrical and must therefore be exact? And once again, when I spoke of fudging, I was referring specifically to word counting in Old English. Latin poets did all sorts of things that Old English poets didn't-- and vice versa. > In Anglo-Saxon England one could spell, as some did in irreformable ways on >seals and in acrostics, Christ as XPC, xps, Crist, Christ, and many others. >So one man might make 'thaerto' one word and another two. That's just the way >they did things. Try to understand things their way and you are more likely to >get things right than by imposing criteria from our end. I fail to understand how a scribe's method of spelling Christ explains how a poet counted words. If by the above paragraph you are saying that there was no established method of counting words, then you and I are not that far apart in this regard. But then we are back to the `fudge factor' I was talking about. When you say something like `there are 56 words in this part and 39 words in that part' in one of your analyses, isn't what you are really saying more like `there are 56 words plus or minus two or three in this part and 39 words plus or minus two or three in that part'? And I am trying to understand things their way and not trying to impose criteria from our end. I just hope you aren't seeing Latin and Hebrew methods of composition in places where they didn't apply. I'm off to a conference and won't be back until late Sunday. Sincerely, Edwin Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 11 15:31:59 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 15:31:58 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA11893; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:21:09 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9803 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 10:19:56 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3101; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 10:19:56 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:19:53 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 15:27:05 GMT Message-Id: Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:27:06 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David -- Oh, dear. The trouble is that if you accept that there is still a need to demonstrate that OE poets did compose on the principles you enunciate, the various latitudes allowed have to be statable before it is possible to consider the likelihood that what you identify as showing composition on these principles could have been written without any use of them. When these latitudes appear to extend, as in a case you know about, to treating something as significantly placed within a whole poem because it is separated from the beginning by an intercept equal to half the length of the poem as reduced by removing a prefatory section, I don't think it my duty to see whether Plato or some other classical authority permits such things; it seems so much more likely that this is misuse of principles. And when I object that you are treating as parallel phrases which exhibit no striking parallelisms, or offering a summary of the structure of a passage that simply ignores those parts of the passage that don't fit the structure, this again seems much more likely to be misapplication of principles than use of legitimate latitudes within sound principles. I've never sought to question that Old English writers understood and used the principles. I do question that Old English poets used them with such consistency and accuracy that methods of mathematical analysis are usefully applicable to their work. Therefore since my field is Old English poetry I really can't be expected to devote time to acquaint myself thoroughly with a system that you tell me was a basis for its composition, but that leads you to such distortions when you try to illustrate how. Best wishes -- Duncan From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 11 16:00:12 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 16:00:09 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA13907; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:47:30 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0176 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 10:40:43 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4306; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 10:40:43 -0500 Received: from abdn.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:40:24 EST Received: from fs3.abdn.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 15:47:50 GMT Message-Id: Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:47:51 GMT Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Duncan Macrae-Gibson Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Karen -- No; I swear I have never used "niggling" except to describe a pejorative view of detailed questions which I on the contrary believe to be important. I think you should avoid quasi-quoting me in indirect speech unless you can found your version on a direct quotation. Let me try to answer your two questions explicitly. What makes some of David's applications of his methods illegitimate is that they distort the evidence they represent themselves as founded on. What makes linguistic/metrical methods of determining boundaries in a linguistic and metrical document superior to ones based on a mathematical system whose applicability to the document has still to be demonstrated is precisely that latter fact. -- Duncan P.S. I shall be very grateful for your extraction of what you identify as examples of full and fair answers by David to my specific objections. If they show me to have been unfair to him in claiming that he avoids answering such objections I will admit it and apologise. If the answers are such that I ought to have been able to extend them to answer for myself objections I later raised my abashed gratitude will be the greater. From ENGFOSTE@ACS.EKU.EDU Thu Jan 11 19:48:21 1996 Received: from acs.eku.edu by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 19:47:59 GMT Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HZVXHPRMZU00060Q@ACS.EKU.EDU> for enl011@abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 14:39:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 14:39:02 -0500 (EST) From: ENGFOSTE@ACS.EKU.EDU Subject: Re: my posting To: enl011@abdn.ac.uk Message-Id: <01HZVXHPROVW00060Q@ACS.EKU.EDU> X-Vms-To: IN%"enl011@abdn.ac.uk" X-Vms-Cc: ENGFOSTE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Status: RO Duncan, I, too, must move on to other things, but I will reply both to this message and to your public messages (I'll combine those into one). In your reply, you raise four questions. I'll treat the first two separately and then the last two together. First, you ask if demonstration of numerical structure in _Wanderer_ is possible. Yes, it is possible. David has demonstrated it--in the thread of 4/95. Second, you ask if I consider a rule sensible if it has no limits, that is, if it is possible for a limitless rule to be recognized if it has been broken. I think you are going at this in a completely inappropriate way. Just in the last day or two, David has suggested that his identification of "rules" is less a set of rules than guidelines. You are endowing David's use of the word "rule" with a restrictive connotation. You may be thinking in terms of grammar, or whatever. But David means, once again, that the trivium and the quadrivium provided poets and other writers with a set of tools; think of them as tools, not rules to break or obey. That is why your dismay at the fact that David's analysis of the first three lines of _Beowulf_ does not show a precise rendering of St. John's gospel is misplaced. The poet is not parroting St. John's gospel. David is attempting to show how the poet, understanding the principles employed in the Latin and Greek, created his own unique rendering of principles at work in creation. With your third and fourth questions, it seems to me that you are looking backwards at what David does. You act as if counting is all he does. You seem to think that David interprets what he reads from the numerical structure that he imposes on what he's reading. Several times he has indicated that the counting is the final thing he looks at. Thus, I would not think that for David, "theathe can be treated as one or two [words] at a poet's choice." Rather, it is my impression that after David has gone through a much more complicated process than just counting words (he has looked at fitts, story patterns, for example), if he discovers that other features of the poem, or work under consideration, fall into structural patterns, the word count can be used to help determine if the poet counts a compound as one word or two. Moreover, you say that "all word-count arguments in OE are approximate, and statements that they can be exact are to be avoided." It depends, once again, on what you mean by exact. If, by exact, you mean that because David has claimed that the _Beowulf_ poet understands and applies the principles of composition employed in St. John's gospel, the poet must make his section of _Beowulf_ (the first three lines, and then the first eight, and then the first 14) a precise replication of those same lines in St. John's gospel, then, again, it seems to me that you are too narrowly restricting David's position. Rather, the exactness applies to the _Beowulf_ poet's adaptation of the opening of the gospel. If an architect wants to use the plan of a Victorian house as an initial starting point, does that mean he can't create a house that in some ways appears Victorian, but has modern, post-modern, and even other kinds of features in it? I read David's analysis very differently from you, when you ask if it is proper to "take the phrase 'Gardena theodcyninga,' extract one half, ignore the other, and use the half as though it was a self-standing element in present the structure of a passage." I am not sure I know what principles you are applying, if not metrical, when identifying 'Gardena theodcyninga' as a phrase. For me, each part of 'Gardena theodcyninga' is a phrase. Gardena is a phrase, theod is a phrase, cyninga is a phrase, theodcyninga is a phrase. They are self-standing elements. Each is not a verse, true enough. But yes, David's use of these make sense to me, the way that the repetition of a phrase of music, which can be as few as two notes, makes sense to me as an echo, or parallel. Karen Foster From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 11 21:31:23 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 11 Jan 96 21:31:14 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA13896; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 21:23:12 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 4794 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:54:45 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1398; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:54:45 -0500 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 11 Jan 96 15:54:44 EST Received: from ACS.EKU.EDU by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01HZW06IHZKG0007JF@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:54:25 -0500 (EST) X-Vms-To: IN%"ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <01HZW06IKX1U0007JF@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:54:25 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Duncan, I'm going to try to address both issues in this one post, which may make it quite long, for I'm going to quote you. First, niggling. Niggling is not a word I use with any frequency at all. In fact, I wouldn't even consider it part of my ideolect; thus, I would use it only in response to its use. You claim that you use it only pejoratively, and that, I take it, is why you considered my use of it as pejorative. On December 22, 1995, you are talking about "The Wanderer," and you refer to an April 26, 1995 posting, and state that David did not reply to your detailed response about his analysis: "David did not reply. . . . As I understand him, he feels that he has no need or reason to defend in niggling detail a position he takes to be now thoroughly established." I see that I should be able to condense the other examples I was going to use by referring to your suggestion that David's methods are suspect because they distort the evidence--with your reply of December 15, 1995. In this post you state the following (I'll raise my questions interlinearly). I will restrict myself to the ones that seem most important: " . . . in purporting to demonstrate first a parallel and then a chiastic structure he makes illegitimate selection of parts of the original to present - ones that would support his anlaysis, not ones that are representative of the actual structures." The "actual structures," Duncan? What are the actual structures, who says, and how do they know? " . . . in purporting to demonstrate the relationships between parts that he does present he illegitimately treats minor feature of the parts as though they were principle ones." Illegitimate? How is legitimacy determined? How are you determining legitimacy? Your answers to the above statements of yours and my questions about them would be appreciated, Duncan. Finally, however, I want to get to your claim that David never responds fully to the questions you ask. As I've said more than once now, I've been unable to telnet to the database and pull up that 19-message discourse on Beowulf analysis. I came up to UK in order to try to pull that up on Netscape, but I forgot that Netscape logs the database differently, and I was unable to get that thread. However, given your statement that you have kept a backlog of correspondence with David and he does not answer in the manner you insist, I'm not sure that I could convince you even if I could get the thread--you and I are on different wave lengths, clearly, if I think you have been answered and you think you never have gotten what you asked for. I did find in the monthly log for 4/95, however, a post that, in my opinion, is an answer that you ought to have been able to extend to answer for youself objections that you have raised since. I have chosen this post as representative, and hope that it will answer some of Edwin's questions, as well. This was David's first posting in April, and I don't know what the question was, for the two posts preceding David's were on other topics. This subject header is "_Beowulf_ and Intentionality." David, addressing you, Duncan, writes as follows: "Forgive me for writing carelessly. I should have written that in 'The Wanderer' the Prologue (1-5), Introduction to Part 1 (6-7), Introduction to Part IV (88-91), and epilogue (111-115) contain as many words as the poem contains lines." David refers you to Plato's Timeus, from chapters 32-33 onward, about the Creation. He refers to Boethius' _De Institione Arithmetica_ and _de Institutione Musica_ as texts that discuss musical ratios explicitly. He explains symmetry, duple, sesquialter, sequitertian, and sequioctive. "Understand," he says, "those and division by extreme and mean ratio and you can reconstruct most of the poetry very quickly." You were answered then, as you had been answered before. Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Jan 12 17:29:44 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 12 Jan 96 17:29:43 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id RAA22696; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 17:19:17 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7689 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:54:18 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5835; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:54:17 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 12 Jan 96 11:54:15 EST Received: from timromano (philly317.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21222; Fri, 12 Jan 96 11:54:40 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <30F6938D.1D24@voicenet.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:59:57 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: Re: The Wanderer: Symmetries & Chiasmoi: Yes; M/E Ratios:? To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO This is posting #6 in the series on The Wanderer. The next section of the poem (ll. 85-110) is informed by single = chiasmus. It divides by symmtery (almost perfectly) into two = sections (one of 74 words, the other of 76). I would suggest = that the lack of perfect symmetry is intentional; the lack of = perfect symmetry is a correlative for the =91imperfection=92 = symbolized in the =91wyrm=92 motif on the =91weal wundrum heah=92; and = the 'weal' itself, the main symbol in this section, correlates = with the poem itself. This is the largest chiasmus in the poem. If the section is divided by mean and extreme ratio, the = divisions fall, significantly, I think, upon "bune" and "wyrd": = to drink the cup that has been given. Here is the section: Ythde swa thisne eardgeard aelda scyppend = oththaet burgwara breahtma lease = eald enta geweorc idlu stodon. = Se thonne thisne wealsteal wise gethohte = ond this deorce lif deope geondthenceth 90 frod in ferthe feor oft gemon = waelsleahta worn ond thas word acwith: = Hwaer cwom mearg? Hwaer cwom mago? Hwaer cwom maththumgyfa? = Hwaer cwom symbla gesetu? Hwaer sindon seledreamas? = Eala beorht bune! Eala byrnwiga! = 95 Eala theodnes thrym! Hu seo thrag gewat, = genap under nihthelm, swa heo no waere. Stondeth nu on laste leofre duguthe = weal wundrum heah, wyrmlicum fah. = Eorlas fornoman asca thrythe, = 100 waepen waelgifru, wyrd seo maere, = ond thas stanhleothu stormas cnyssath, = hrith hreosende hrusan bindeth, = wintres woma, thonne won cymeth, = nipeth nihtscua, northan onsendeth = 105 hreo haeglfare haelethum on andan. = Eall is earfothlic eorthan rice, = onwendeth wyrda gesceaft weoruld under heofonum. = Her bith feoh laene, her bith freond laene, = her bith mon laene, her bith maeg laene, = 110 eal this eorthan gesteal idel weortheth!" = Here is the representation of the chiasmus: a Ythde swa thisne eardgeard aelda scyppend oththaet burgwara = breahtma lease, eald enta geweorc, idlu stodon. b Se thonne thisne wealsteal wise gethohte ond this deorce = life deope geondthenceth, frod in ferthe = c feor oft gemon waelsaehta worn ond thas word acwith: d hwaer com mearg? Hwaer com mago? Hwaer com maththumgyfa? = e Hwaer com symbla gesetu? Hwaer sindon seledreamas? f Eala beorht buna! Eala byrnwiga! Eala theodnes thrym! F Hu seo thrag gewat genap under nihthelm swa heo no waere. E Stondeth nu on laste leofre duguthe, weal wundrum heah wyrmlicum fah D Eorlas fornoman asca thrythe, waepen waelgifru, = wyrd seo maere C and thas stanhleothu stormas cnyssath, wintres woma, thonne won cymeth nipeth nihtscua, northan onsendeth hreo haeglfare haelethum on andan. = B Eall is earfothlic eorthan rice, onwendeth wyrda gesceaft = weoruld under heofonum A Her bith feoh laene, her bith freond laene Her bith mon laene, here bith maeg laene. Eal this eorthan gesteal idel weortheth. Commentary. a-A. The place of dwellings is desolate; there is no sound of = inhabitants; the old constructions stand =91idlu=92. Vs. Wealth, = friend, man, woman are but for a while here. The whole = foundation of this earth becomes =91idel=92. = Cf also =91eardgeard=92 and =91geweorc=92 vs. =91eal this eorthan = gesteal=92 ; also =91burgwara=92 vs. =91freond=92,=92mon=92,=92maeg=92. b-B. "Whosoever with wise thoughts and experienced heart would = think about this place of dwellings and this dark life" would = reach this conclusion: "All full of woe is earth=92s realm; the = operation of Fate changes the world for the worse under the = heavens." The conclusions in =91B=92 are a sequitur to =91b=92, a = generalized statement of the conclusion one would reach if = thinking wisely about =91this deorce life=92. c-C. =91waelslaehta worn=92 vs. =91haelethum on andan=92. The enmity = of battle is expressed metaphorically in terms of a winter storm = coming =91out of the north=92, and also in terms of falling = darkness: =91won cymeth=92, =91nipeth nihtscua=92. d-D. =91mearg=92, =91mago=92, =91maththumgyfa=92 In this tableau of the = lord and his retainers, the horses imply a military context; the = men are prepared for war, not peace. Thus, the parallel in = =91eorlas fornoman asca thrythe, waepen waelgifru=92. The horses also connote power and strength , readiness and = preparedness, but =91wyrd seo maere=92 is yet more powerful. I hear = an echo in 'mearg' and 'maere' which reinforces this irony. e-E. The seats in the hall ('symbla gesetu') evoke the memory = of the individuals who were wont to sit in them; each would have = had his assigned place. But the =91gesetu=92 are now empty, and are = thus paralleled by the phrase =91stondeth nu on laste leofre = duguthe=92 ("stands now instead of the beloved company"). The = image of the building invoked obliquely by =91seledreamas=92 is also = paralleled by the image of the =91weal wundrum heah'. There is also a play of meaning here in sitting vs. standing. = Sitting evokes harmony and companionship, as sitting is = associated with feasting; standing evokes loneliness, sorrow, = and desolation: =91wyrde withstondan=92, =91weste stondeth=92, =91winde = biwaune weallas stondath=92, and now here, =91stondeth nu on laste = leofre duguthe.=92 (And recall: =91waldend licgath=92.) The serpent or dragon motif on the wall symbolizes Fate or Chaos = or Evil or =91Wyrda gesceaft=92-- whatever name one would give to = the force of destruction which operates =91under heofonum=92. The = =91weal wundrum heah=92 stands as the epitome of human creative = endeavor but it is carries a reminder of creation=92s nemesis. = f-F. The brightness of the cup and byrnie, the lord=92s glory = vanish under the =91helm=92 of darkess as though they never had = been: Eala beorht buna! Eala byrnwiga! Eala theodnes thrym! Hu seo thrag gewat, genap under nihthelm, swa heo no waere. Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennslvania = = =FEonne won cyme=F0, nipe=F0 nihtscua nor=FEan onsende=F0 hreo h=E6glfare h=E6le=FEum on andan. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Jan 13 12:17:52 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 13 Jan 96 12:17:51 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA22729; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 12:09:40 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1060 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 07:08:50 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8618; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 07:08:49 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 13 Jan 96 07:08:48 EST Received: from timromano (philly15.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07575; Sat, 13 Jan 96 07:09:18 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <30F7A241.5171@voicenet.com> Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1996 07:14:57 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Subject: The Wanderer As Autobiography: Devil's Advocate To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Randi Eldevik wrote: > > As for whether the Wanderer is or is not a _scop_ who has lost his lord, > I must reiterate that there is no proof positive of this, and on the whole, > it seems among the less likely possibilities. I do think the burden of proof that the wanderer is something other than a scop rests with those who claim that he is someone other than who he says he is--an 'eorl' who is 'ethle bidaeled', who is destitute, who seeks the "favor" of a patron who may have heard of him and his kin, who "dares not speak his true mind" to anyone now among the living, who recalls with great sorrow the death of his patron and of other young hall-companions, and who comes to accept that this is the way of the world and has written a philosophical and didactic (not a criticism) work about his experience, possibly for the benefit of others similarly situated--included among these the fraternity of scops. I realize that this attitude may seem awfully literal-minded, but that is as good a starting point as any, when one is being asked to suspend disbelief. I'm also interested in what was meant by 'soth-gied' and have to some extent been playing devil's advocate. > I am having trouble seeing the point of some of Tim > Romano's other postings--the structural analysis, or whatever it is, of > _The Wanderer_. Could you briefly recapitulate what you're trying to > accomplish, for those who haven't been following closely? I will try to be not too long-winded. When I joined ANSAX fairly recently, one of the very first postings I saw was something from David Howlett instructing someone to divide what he had written by mean and extreme ratio and his meaning would become clear. Of course, I had no idea what he meant, and so thought the man was wacko; that was hubris on my part, true, but it was my honest reaction at the time. But I saw a second posting by David Howlett the following day, which was informed with a remarkable erudition, and so I decided to dredge up from ANSAXDAT all that I could find on the topic of composition by proportion, which he has written about extensively, both on the network and in publications. Briefly: widely-known and thoroughly studied treatises in Anglo-Saxon England--more famous then than Jacques Derrida today, if that is possible--discussed how to apply to one's own literary and artistic works the proportions found in Creation. This practice requires an understanding of the architectonic quantities relevant to the kind of work--geometric quantities in the case of the visual arts, arithmetic quantities in the case of the "linear" arts--music and literature. Some there's some counting of words and syllables and lines, and a focus on symmetries and other structural patterns. This tradition is one that is very old, and is not only used but is explicitly discussed in the Talmud (DRH has written about his) as well as in the Bible. My precis does not do the subject justice and you should not stop with it. I noticed that David's suggestions that we look at works long familiar, and presumed to have been composed in an 'oral formulaic' manner, in order that we may see the play of aesthetic principles relating to divine proportion, were being met with the sort of opposition that I felt well up in myself upon reading, when I first joined ANSAX, the posting by David instructing someome to divide what he had written by mean and extreme ratio. Most, not all, of his interlocutors were not taking the time to sit down with a text and study it closely. Most of his best examples, David Howlett selected from Latin or Hebrew texts, and while these may convince (persuade?) a sceptical audience that the tradition existed, and may even have been known in Anglo-Saxon England, unless he were to come up with a good example in an Old English poem, the sceptics would remain sceptics. David's analysis of The Wanderer (insofar as I can know it from the posting that Duncan Macrae-Gibson generously forwarded to me--the library was closed for winter break during the time I was making my own analysis, so I did not read David's article written in the 70s) was, in my opinion just enough out of focus to keep the poem from being accepted as a persuasive example of this tradition in action. However, I believe that I have shown in my postings that David Howlett was absolutely correct in his selection of The Wanderer as a poem informed by this tradition. Inasmuch as you seem interested in reading The Wanderer as an allegory of Christian alienation, you may eventually find my postings on Symmetry/Chiasmoi to be of interest. But one must start at posting #1 and read carefully (after having read some of David's own postings); jumping into this topic _in medias res_, as I learned myself, is not a good idea. Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania > These issues we have been debating have been very interesting. But > with all due respect, I am having trouble seeing the point of some of Tim > Romano's other postings--the structural analysis, or whatever it is, of > _The Wanderer_. Could you briefly recapitulate what you're trying to > accomplish, for those who haven't been following closely? Thanks. > Randi Eldevik, English Department, Oklahoma State University From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Jan 15 14:13:25 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 15 Jan 96 14:13:16 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA08897; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:02:27 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5969 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 08:50:10 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8635; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 08:50:10 -0500 Received: from muvms6.mu.wvnet.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 15 Jan 96 08:50:09 EST Received: from MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU by MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU (PMDF V4.3-11 #6427) id <01I017MN41KM002RN0@MUVMS6.MU.WVNET.EDU>; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 08:47:46 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 08:47:45 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Rand Hutcheson Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <0099C2CF.BEC60E40.24@vax.ox.ac.uk> Status: RO On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, David Howlett wrote: > Duncan, > Part of the reason we appear to be misfiring is that I think I have pre- > sented articulate statements of 'the rules' from Hebrew, Greek, and Latin texts > from Antiquity. They are really less 'rules' than guides to a mode of thought > and expression, and, once they have been understood and assimilated they become > natural and obvious. The very statements of these 'rules' show what degrees of > latitude they allow. But you appear repeatedly to assume that the latitude is > manipulation on my part of evidence that cannot be brought into play without > fudging or suppresio ueri. I am trying to give you something expressed in the > terms that Ancient and Medieval writers themselves used, and you keep pressing > me to answer you in other ways. That has its uses, and I am grateful (mostly) > for the further precision that your requirements drive an explicator to. But > often when you suppose that I am not answering your objections it is because I > am waiting for you to hear directly from Plato and the author of the Rhetorica > ad Herennium and Cicero and Boethius and the Talmudists how this works. > A single author, and he the finest, will make it abundantly clear to you > that Old English writers understood and represented in their work the system I > have been writing about. You have, I think, a script of AElfric's rendering of > the Creation story in Genesis I. It survives in more than one manuscript, and I > have fudged nothing in the presentation of it. > The missing s in suppressio above was not lost in a hiss. Salve. > David-- It is not the _articulation_ of the rules that I, at least, have problems with; rather, it is with the _application_ of these rules to the OE texts you've discussed on the net and in your article in the _Editing OE_ collection. I have read five or six of your articles on (mostly) Hiberno-Latin, and I find your analyses convincing. I do not find your analyses of the OE texts you have presented convincing in the same way. The lack of concord between my views of your work on Latin and my views of your work on OE are either my fault or they are yours. I'm willing to be convinced that they are mine, but I agree with Duncan that the only way for you to convince me is to respond to Duncan's arguments in which he maintains that the numerical patterns you perceive may simply be the result of chance. I find Duncan's point about the way you count the words in groups of three particularly damaging: if you can include either one of the two words that you are counting between, or both, or neither, then any two words whatever can be presented as being separated by a number of words that is divisible by three. If this kind of fudge factor is built into the rules themselves--and I didn't get the impression that it was--then it is clearly a logical impossibility for you to prove that OE texts are composed according to numerical principles, let alone numerical principles that are rigorous enough to be used as editing criteria. So may I join DMG in asking for some _specific_ responses to his objections, or for further demonstration that OE texts are composed in _strict_ biblical style? Many thanks. --Rand From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Jan 15 14:40:08 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 15 Jan 96 14:40:03 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA10773; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:29:26 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6548 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 09:28:30 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0101; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 09:28:30 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 15 Jan 96 09:26:56 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:26:51 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.1 VAX) id 26; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:26:54 +0000 Message-Id: <0099C6DD.FAE34200.26@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:26:53 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: the nitty gritty To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Rand, As it's a good idea to begin with texts that survive in multiple copies, try AElfric's Genesis. The OE won't be published in my analysis until later this year, but if you follow my analysis of the Hebrew and Latin in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition', you will be able to set out AElfric's text yourself (and I'll bet your analysis will differ hardly, if at all, from mine). There- after we might try another text that survives in multiple copies with minimal variation, namely 'The Battle of Brunanburh', which has the added advantage of a sensitive rendering into Latin by Henry of Huntingdon, who was trying to represent prosodic features of the OE. If you agree about these, then we can advance (or regress) to texts that survive in unique copies. No. Sorry, I for- got. There is also 'The Leiden Riddle', which I analysed on the network maybe two years ago. Start from the structure of Aldhelm's original. Lay out the Northumbrian text as a reflex of that, do the word count and the metrical anal- ysis (finally even the letter count) of this text because it has a Latin model and also a West Saxon (degenerate, if only because non-authorial) version as well. I am not much interested in presenting my analyses for you to say whether or not you agree with every particular. I am much interested in engaging you to do this sort of analysis without me. Stevick's gently offered advice is sound: virtual apprenticeship is the best way in. It may take you longer at first than if you were following me, but if you learn to do it yourself you will notice what it does for your own thought. It is infinitely more exhilarat- ing to establish direct contact with a great man's thought than to be intro- duced to it by a fallible intermediary. Try it. AElfric and the Brunanburh poet and the Riddler are more interesting viva voce than I am in writing about them. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Jan 22 13:34:06 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 22 Jan 96 13:34:05 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA20962; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 13:23:56 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0437 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:23:00 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0691; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:23:00 -0500 Received: from voicenet.com by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 22 Jan 96 08:22:58 EST Received: from timromano (philly71.voicenet.com) by voicenet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10227; Mon, 22 Jan 96 08:23:32 EST X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <3103919C.4178@voicenet.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:31:08 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Tim Romano Organization: __________________ Subject: Re: _The Wanderer_ (Paul -- delete this one) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Randi, These are the first fruits of the structural, numerical, and numerological analysis of The Wanderer that I posted in sections over the winter break: 1) it untangles several knotty textual issues, and shows how the MS makes perfectly good, in fact poignant, sense in places where it has been presumed to be flawed; 2) it shows that the poem is informed by chiasmus throughout--it is indeed a masterpiece in this form, and the poet was aware of the achievement; 3) it shows the poem to be a figurative reply to the famous question "What does Ingeld have to do with Christ" as to that question's modern variation "What does Christ have to do with Ingeld?" 4) it shows the poem could not have been composed in an improvisational manner; 5) the word counts of individual verse paragraphs, whose boundaries are corroborated by chiasmus and other notable features, and the divisions by mean and extreme ratio, shine a spotlight on the poem's biblical allusions (to John's gospel, and to the Book of Revelation). The paragraph that contains the image of the ruin, for example, has 66 words. Dividing the last large verse paragraph/chiasmus by ratios shows the divisions to fall upon "cup" and "fate". 6)it shows that this poet was aware of the syllable as a significant quantity -- not just within the context of Sievers types; 7) its clarification of the text in several places tends to lend support to a reading of the poem in terms of the meditative tradition and in terms of the Augustinian tripartite psyche, rather than as a dramatic colloquy involving separate voices. 8) And there's more... Tim Romano Swarthmore Pennsylvania From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Feb 2 04:51:31 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 2 Feb 96 04:51:30 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id EAA08185; Fri, 2 Feb 1996 04:42:06 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9138 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 1 Feb 1996 15:24:45 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0771; Thu, 1 Feb 1996 15:24:44 -0500 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 01 Feb 96 15:24:35 EST Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from dyn067.berlin.netSurf.DE with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0ti56J-0025tsC; Thu, 1 Feb 96 20:55 MET X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 20:55:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Dear Mr Finton, the number 12 was cited by me only as an example, I could have chosen any number which used to be regarded as signifcant in number exegesis. And I didn't say that it is impossible to ascertain intentional use of numbers for formal elements (letters, syllables, words, verses, stanzas, chapters, books), I only said that usually this task will be more difficult and less promising, if the sort of intentions we are looking for were informed by the context of biblical exegesis. There were other contexts, of course, you named music. But for me it's first things first. We have tons of exegetic sources which demonstrate how numbers in biblical texts (or even in works of ancient poetry) were dealt with, and we also have several works of medieval literature, though not tons, where the author explicitly states to have used numbers with regard to this exegetical context. Such autoexegetic statements are not a necessary condition, and in the end the evidence has to be ascertained in the numeric patterns of the text itself. But such statements exist and can point into the direction where to look and which context to take into consideration. Whereas I have not yet heard of an author who stated to have chosen a certain number of words, verses, stanzas, chapters or books in order to reproduce a musical ratio. Nor have I heard of a treatise on music which would have taught him to do so (with syllables and metrical feet, yes, but with larger portions of text, no). Things could have been done, of course, without being taught or confessed in explicit words, and works which may have taught or confessed them could have gone lost. But if research can be done on relatively (sic!) sure and promising ground, and has not yet been sufficiently done, why not do it first? It's not a question of taking one and leaving the other, just a question of setting the right priorities. You, if I understand you right, argue for numerical patterns of form conditioned by the oral performance of poetry. How far, according to your opinion, would such patterns extend? Would they inform the formal makrostructure of the text -- which in a long text would make them to be dead patterns, unperceivable for human hears --, or would they be confined to mikroscopic units like single verses or stanzas? In the latter case, I assume that you don't want to imply that they have been neglected by modern sholars. Sincerely, Otfried Lieberknecht From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Feb 6 19:33:29 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 6 Feb 96 19:32:47 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA18764; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 19:22:03 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3104 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 14:00:45 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9108; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 14:00:45 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 06 Feb 96 14:00:43 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Tue, 6 Feb 1996 19:01:02 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 235; Tue, 06 Feb 1996 18:02:13 +0000 Message-Id: <0099D845.B454B626.235@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 18:02:12 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Otfried, For an author wboth tells you how to do something and then shows you how he does it try Boethius De Institutione Arithmetica and De Institutione Musica, then De Consolatione Philosophiae, and particularly three metra: O Stelliferi Conditor Orbis, and O Qui Perpetua (smack in the middle of the whole book), and Felix Qui Potuit (at the very end of book III, a metron Alfred put at the very centre of his translation). The first two tell you something about Creation in the universe and creation in poetry. The last is about the power of music, a power great enough to control forests that move, rivers that stand still, hinds in the teeth of lions, hares in the teeth of hounds, power great enough to move the three-headed Cerberus, the three-headed Charon, the three Furies, finally the lord of hell himself. This from a poet who is systematically working his way through metres. Why do you suppose this last is in glyconics? What will these have looked like to medieval poets? Work your way through the structure of this amazing composition, then try to persuade yourself that Boethius is not telling you things about technique as well as about ideas. The man is simply incomparable. Then treat yourself to Alfred's translation and ask whether the king understood the consul. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Feb 7 01:55:37 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 7 Feb 96 01:55:35 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id BAA24270; Wed, 7 Feb 1996 01:45:43 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9187 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 20:23:30 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3070; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 20:23:30 -0500 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 06 Feb 96 20:23:26 EST Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from dyn071.berlin.netSurf.DE with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0tjxvv-0025twC; Wed, 7 Feb 96 01:40 MET X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 01:40:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO > For an author wboth tells you how to do something and then shows you how >he does it try Boethius De Institutione Arithmetica and De Institutione Musica, >then De Consolatione Philosophiae Dear David, could it be that you are using the terms somewhat loosely? Neither of the two _Institutiones_ is a treatise which teaches how to use numbers in the composition or reception/interpretation of a linguistic text (the latter is not even an instruction to compose music). Augustine's _De musica_ in fact *does* teach how to observe numerical ratios (I hope this is the correct anglicized form) in the meters of Latin verse, but his doctrine is limited to what can be heard by human ears and therefore does not yet provide the explicit context for the sort of *macro-structural* patterns you yourself seem to be after. Whereas exegetical literature is abundant with explicit doctrine about how to deal with numbers when interpreting (sacred) texts. And most of the autoexegetic statements of medieval authors which I myself have read refer to this exegetical context (and to the elementary bits of Boethian arithmetics which had been adapted in this context) when they explain how they want the numbers in their own works to be understood. Since we have the evidence of a rich exegetic and, though less rich, autoexegetic tradition, why should we dismiss it or even read the texts against it? And, if it comes to Boethius and to his medieval reception, why should the medieval commentaries and glosses to _De consolatione philosophiae_ be less significant for its medieval understanding than King Alfred's translation? How could the first have ignored or kept their silence about numerical structures which, as you say, even the author of the latter had understood? But maybe I am misunderstanding and misrepresenting the approach which you recommend. At Berlin, it needs a long breath to lay hand on your publications, and I am still in a state of perfect ignorance about what you really do, except for some of your messages which I read in the archives of ANSAX-L and which, being only short e-mails, of course could only offer pepper where I was begging for beef. Sincerely, Otfried Lieberknecht From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Feb 7 18:44:33 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 7 Feb 96 18:44:31 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA27676; Wed, 7 Feb 1996 18:33:06 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7630 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 7 Feb 1996 12:56:40 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7715; Wed, 7 Feb 1996 12:56:39 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 07 Feb 96 12:56:33 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 7 Feb 1996 17:45:12 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 35; Wed, 07 Feb 1996 17:44:04 +0000 Message-Id: <0099D90C.553513D7.35@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 17:44:02 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Otfried, There are two ways (but not only two) to approach this subject, one adopted by Augustine, a popularly acclaimed bishop, another by Boethius, a patrician senator. The former says 'Lo, chaps, here's how to do it: first, second, third, ...'. No lexicographer, certainly not this one, will decry such a meth- od. But the other is more interesting. Speaking characteristically in interior dialogue, Boethius says 'Understand', and then in poetry that moves one to the depths, even the two-hundredth time, exhibits what he means without ever saying a word about what he's saying. Do NOT be misled because he has not presented his work as a technical treatise into supposing that he is not inculcating the highest forms of technique all the time. A composer of a yet unpublished motet, English, about 1400, shows that he understood Boethius perfectly by writing Musicus est ille qui perpensa racione non tantum cognouit opus sed qui speculari gaudet et arte magis splendet quam uoce serena; limite suppremo libri primi canit erus doctrina mira uirtute Boecius ista ... . So does Anthoine Busnois in 'In hydraulis', praising Ockeghem as theorist (like Pythagoras) and performer (like Orpheus) and, a(exactly at 9:8) composer, for which see the current issue of 'Plainsong and Medieval Music'. So, long before him, does Abaelard, for whose 'Historia Calamitatum' see 'Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi' LI. So, long before him, does Cu' Chuimne, for whose hymn see 'Peritia' IX. In a text with embedded performance instructions, 30 lines long, repeated parts 52 lines long, with 365 words, appropriate for those who sing 'Cantemus in omni die', he makes 'Gabriel aduexit Verbum' occur by line, by word, by letter exactly as far through his hymn as 15 March occurs through the year; he makes the last letter of 'Christi nomen inuocamus' 888th, equal to the numerical value of IHCOYC in Greek notation; ditto the space between occurren- ces of MAPIA (152). Long before him Aldhelm made his 888-word letter to Heah- frith divide by 9:8 exactly at 'bis quaternis', for which see 'ALMA' LII 37-75. For his calendrical 'Carmen Rhythmicum' see 'ALMA' LIII 119-40. Long before him the Irish author of 'Versus de Annis a Principio' and even before him Mo-Sinu maccu Min never even HINT at what they are doing. These guys learned well from Boethius how to communicate, hardly ever the way Miss Paglia does, in your face, a mode also admirable, but for different reasons. They all did what Stevick advises us to do, adopt virtual apprenticeship to make us fit to per- ceive and generate form anew, not copy it. For a list of explicit values assigned to numbers you might find Heinz Meyer and Rudolf Suntrup, 'Lexicon der Mittelalterlichen Zahlenbedeutungen' (Munich 1987) helpful. It's a prodigious work of the finest scholarship. But it won't lead you to great poetry or music from the inside the way Boethius may. I don't know a finer or surer guide. He may take you longer than, say, an author of an ars dictandi, but when you travel his way, you learn things you wouldn't other- wise. Try those glyconics in 'Felix qui potuit', and you'll see. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Feb 8 02:28:51 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 8 Feb 96 02:28:49 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id CAA09243; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 02:18:29 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3986 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 7 Feb 1996 20:56:17 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4330; Wed, 7 Feb 1996 20:56:17 -0500 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 07 Feb 96 20:56:15 EST Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from dyn068.berlin.netSurf.DE with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0tkLbQ-0025twC; Thu, 8 Feb 96 02:56 MET X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 02:56:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Dear David, it seems that we are discussing several different but related points, which I myself did not disentangle clearly enough in my last message and in my earlier message to Kenneth H. Finton. One point (a) is the question whether significant occurrences of numbers should be expected rather on the level of the 'littera' (numbers of letters, syllables, words, verses, stanzas, chapters, books: everything which belongs to the corpus sensibile of the text), or on the level of the 'res significatae per litteram' (things, persons, animals, plants, events etc treated in the text, present not to the senses, but only to the imagination of the reader). This is in part a historical question, depending on the context (biblical exegesis, music, arithmology, astrology, etc) which can be assumed to have informed the text. The context of biblical exegesis for instance would suggest to analyse rather (not exclusively) numbers of the 'res significatae', while musical theory for instance would rather inform use of numbers structuring the corpus sensibile of the text. Different contexts, of course, can inform one and the same text. Another question (b) is how much weight you want to put or not to put on sources which attest explicitly how numbers were dealed with and how authors or exegetes were expected to deal with them. For me the existence of commentaries to the Bible (and to non-biblical texts from authors like Vergil, Ovid, Boethius) offers the possiblity to study how such texts were read, to analyse the methods of exegesis and to chose some of these methods in order to find out whether medieval texts were produced with the intention to become an object of such exegetical methods. The existence of medieval texts where the author explicitly states to have used certain numbers with certain intentions can be helpful for this kind of research, but I agree with you that this sort of autoexegetic revelation or confirmation is not a necessary condition. Things could be done in a given text without being explicitly told in this same text, especially when they were an object of daily teaching in hundreds of other texts. But I would be reluctant to assume techniques of production (and of correlative reception) to have been practiced which neither are attested in explicit form (in exegetic or autoexegetic, metapoetic or other doctrinal statements), nor seem to be compatible with (or seem to be at least a logical consequence of) the techniques wich in fact *are* attested in explicit form. Someone like Jerome, for instance, who explained so profusely in his exegetical writings and in his letters how he wanted the Bible to be understood, such a person, I think, cannot reasonably be expected to have consciously preserved and reproduced in his Latin translation of the Bible numerical patterns of a sort which never became an object of explicit teaching in his other works. The "biblical style", as Jerome understood it, can be expected to have been the very same which he explained in his other writings, and as far as I know these writings, arithmetical or musical rationes (or medietates) ruling numbers of verses or chapters or books had no essential place, if any, in his concept of biblical style. But you have cited or mentioned several examples from medieval poetry or literatur (I only wish I had your vast reading and were able to make sense of all the names and abbreviations). Two of them, if I understand your interpretations correctly and if these interpretations are valid, demonstrate that, with regard to question (a), intentional use of numbers in order to structure the corpus sensibile in fact is to be expected: >So, long before him, does Cu' Chuimne, for whose hymn see >'Peritia' IX. In a text with embedded performance instructions, 30 lines long, >repeated parts 52 lines long, with 365 words, appropriate for those who sing >'Cantemus in omni die', he makes 'Gabriel aduexit Verbum' occur by line, by >word, by letter exactly as far through his hymn as 15 March occurs through the >year; he makes the last letter of 'Christi nomen inuocamus' 888th, equal to the >numerical value of IHCOYC in Greek notation; ditto the space between occurren- >ces of MAPIA (152). Long before him Aldhelm made his 888-word letter to Heah- >frith divide by 9:8 exactly at 'bis quaternis', for which see 'ALMA' LII 37-75. I will certainly try to look up Cu' Chuimne's hymn (hoping innocently that a man with such a difficult name nevertheless was compliant enough to compose his hymn in Latin) and will look up also Aldhelm's letter, because both seem to offer evidence against my general assumption that gematria had no great importance for poetic composition, esp. for the choice of formal numbers. On the other hand, what concernes our discussion, both cases are in accordance with the evidence which is offered by autoexegetic statetments in patristic and later carolingian literature. These autoexegetic statements, as far as I know them (Haubrichs in _Ordo als Form_, whatever else one may think of his book, has provided a useful collection of such statements), in fact use to point the reader to formal numbers structuring the 'littera' (esp. numbers of books and verses, while I do not recall such a statement about numbers of words, except in the rather case of carmina cancellata or figurata), but not -- or less often -- to numbers of the 'res significatae per litteram'. One reason for this, I think, is that numbers of the first kind in each text occur necessarily, and usually are many, which makes it more difficult for the reader to decide which are significant and which are not, while numbers of 'res significatae per litteram' do not occur necessarily and are easier to be evaluated and interpreted by the reader even if he is not guided by an explicit autoexegesis. Both examples also fit into the context of biblical exegesis, although exegetic sources do not attest it as a current praxis (at least not in Christian exegesis) to count the number of *words* in a given biblical chapter or even book. But it certainly was a current praxis to count the number of Psalms and of biblical books, although it still can be said that such numbers of the 'littera' were far less important for biblical exegesis than numbers of 'res significatae per litteram'. I take this from my working through Meyer/Suntrup's _Lexikon_, and from my own study of exegetical sources during the last ten or so years. And I don't find it suprising, because the primary use for numbers and arithmetical knowledge in the field of biblical exegesis was to be subsidiary for allegoresis, for interpreting things, persons, events etc. as signs for other things on the grounds of their having similar qualities, among which qualities there was their occurrence in an equal number or in numbers which can be related with each other by arithmetical operations. To take the biblical text itself, its 'littera', as a 'res' and to interprete its numerical structure as signifying other 'res', was only a less important variant of normal allegoresis, but nevertheless a current and well established variant, and this variant seems to have been counted on by the two authors which you have cited and by those who pointed their readers explicitly to their choice of certain numbers of verses or books. The numerical evidence which you cite, with the exception of the division by 9:8 (you would have to explain to me how this division can be alluded to by the words "bis quaternis"), seems to be evidence that exegetical or liturgical interpretation of numbers, not Boethian theory, has determined their choice and use in both texts. The numbers have been taken from this context, and their understanding and the method of interpretation which has to be applied. Which means that the structure of these texts is "numerological", very similar to the one which, for instance, Cassiodore believed to detect in the first 118 Psalms, when he explained their number to signify by its first component 100 the ecclesia as prefigured by the centennial construction of Noah's arc ("quae ... centum annis legitur fabricata"), and to signify by its other component 18 = IH the name of IHSOYS. Like in this case your numbers 888 = IHSOYS and 152 = MARIA signify persons in the history of salvation and were established with that gematrical sense, though not by the Bible itself, at least by liturgy, no less than the number 365 or the special number of days which, according to you, coincides with Annunciation (are you really sure about having to date Annunciation on 15 March, or was it only a typo for 25 March?). I know that you don't like your work to be associated with "numerology", but to judge from these two examples, numerology is what you are dealing with, not -- except for the somewhat unclear case of division by 9:8 -- Boethian music or arithmetic. The other texts which you mention with special regard to Boethius cannot tell me much before I have looked up, for instance, how you connect the _Historia calamitatum_ with your understanding of Boethius. And in the case of the Latin verses from the late medieval motet I doubt that they confirm your idea of Boethius having been (and having been understood as) a poet who in his work created numerical patterns according to musical theory; what they praise, I believe, is rather musical speculation as compared to musical praxis, although I have to admit that the two last verses of your citation are not very clear to me. Sincerely, Otfried Lieberknecht From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Feb 8 11:56:29 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 8 Feb 96 11:56:27 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA20581; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 11:43:40 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7736 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 06:42:19 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9208; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 06:42:19 -0500 Received: from uucp-1.csn.net by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 08 Feb 96 06:42:18 EST Received: from circles.com (uucp@localhost) by uucp-1.csn.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with UUCP id EAA14705 for ansax-l@wvnvm.wvnet.edu; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 04:43:00 -0700 Received: by circles.com id 0SAPG003 Wed, 07 Feb 96 20:08:35 -0600 X-Mailer: TBBS/TIGER v1.0 Message-Id: <9602072008.0SAPG00@circles.com> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 20:08:35 -0600 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Kenneth Finton Organization: MacCircles BBS 303/526-2219 Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, by word you can be a powerful writer when you want to be. I really would like to understand what you two are talking about. You seem to agree more than disagree. And it does sound quite fundamental and important. Both of you, please keep up the good work. Thanks. -Ken From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Feb 8 23:19:44 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 8 Feb 96 23:19:42 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA15436; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 23:09:03 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6413 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 18:05:59 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7803; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 18:05:59 -0500 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 08 Feb 96 18:05:57 EST Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from dyn066.berlin.netSurf.DE with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0tkfQ9-0025tyC; Fri, 9 Feb 96 00:06 MET X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 00:06:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Dear David, thank you for replying to my questions, and forgive me if I give you the impression to be stubborn. We seem to agree, more or less, on that part of your approach which approaches what I termed (although you don't like it) "numerology", that is use of numbers with regard to the (symbolic) sense which was established for these numbers in biblical exegesis and/or in liturgy. This is where your and my approach overlap, although I try to analyse, if possible, numbers of 'res significatae per litteram', while you seem to concentrate on numbers of words and verses. But we seem to disagree when it comes to detecting numerical ratios used for esthetical or other (but not symbolical) devices, because this demands to leave the comparably safe ground of well documented exegetical procedures. In the beginning of your message, You wrote: > Every compositional element I write about was discussed explicitly in anc- >ient sources we know to have been read in these islands. Whenever one of these >features occurs in the smallest unit of composition you may expect in the lar- >gest, as in all the intervening units. I never doubted that the arithmetical and musical theory of ratios which you find applied tacitly in literary (or liturgical) texts was taught explicitly in doctrinal writings which can be assumed or proven to have been available to such authors. I happen to have read myself some of these writings (although it is true that I never was very successful to understand musical theory). But I have difficulties to follow your logic that features which occur in 'small units' of text can *always* be expected to occur also 'in the largest'. Such differences of quantity, according to my opinion, can be very decisive, not only in numerology, but also in musical theory. Augustine in _De musica_ gives reasons *why* the meter of Latin verse does (or should) observe certain numerical ratios: they are intended to affect the (auditive) senses of the hearer, to produce a beauty which can be *heard* even when the hearer is not aware of the numerical cause of this effect. But these reasons would have fallen flat if such numerical ratios had been observed to construct larger portions of texts which exceed the capability of the human ear to perceive (even unconsciously) such ratios. I don't doubt that your findings of this sort can be enjoyed by you and others as adding to the beauty of the texts. But we are dealing not simply with numbers, but with human beings using numbers consciously and intentionally for certain devices. This -- and my being a philologue, not a mathematician, by training -- is why I think that numerical evidence alone cannot be decisive. And why I would find it reassuring if there were sources supplying the theory which Augustine does *not* supply. Your understanding of the two Boethian _Institutiones_ may be different and certainly is better than mine, but my own reading did not detect the kind of theory I am asking for. Dito about Martianus Capella, Isidore, Cassiodore and the few later writings _De arithmetica_ and _De musica_ which I have read. I would find it even more reassuring (and would forget instantly all my begging for theory), if there were commentaries -- to biblical or non-biblical texts -- which attest that such ratios were expected and found to rule large portions of text. Do you know such commentaries? Commentaries which offer more than the few explanations which Heinz Meyer (_Die Zahlenallegorese im Mittelalter_, p.68s.) adduces from Rupert of Deutz? > You will find in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition' pages 1-13 and 29-49 the >clearest evidence that Jerome was both an articulate explicator and an exqui- >sitely sensitive implicit inculcator, who combined the greatest virtues of both >Augustine and Boethius (with none of the former's defects). I have mentioned my difficulties to locate your publications at Berlin, but will be able to give it another try next week. In the meantime, I wonder whether we are talking about the same things. I am familiar with many of Jerome's explanations of numbers in the Bible, but I have not yet seen -- and from what I have read, I have no reason to expect ever to see - him counting the total number of the words which constitute a chapter, Psalm or book of the bible; and I have not yet seen him intersecting such chapters, Psalms or books and claiming that numerical ratios rule such intersections, or that they rule the given number of chapters, Psalms or books. Thus I will be more than surprised if there really should be evidence in your book that Jerome was an "articulate explicator" of such things. It is true for other commentators that a lot of intersections were made and numbered through by them in order to work out 'divisiones' of the biblical text (or of other texts), but this came into use only centuries later, and was used principally for the needs of litteral exegesis. Even in scholastic times, when they had become more or less obligatory, I have not yet seen a commentator who applied symbolic or arithmetic or musical explanation to the number of such divisions. I am sceptical about this part of your approach, which does not mean that I am not interested, in the contrary. And I would like very much to see what your approach -- the part of it which deals not with "numerology" -- can add to the understanding of a text where I myself believe to have reconstructed, more or less, the numerological understanding. Unfortunately, although your field of research is vast, I myself have been (or believe to have been) successful with such a small number of texts, that I cannot expect them to be among those which your research already has covered. There might be a small chance if you had done work on Sedulius Scottus (he is Hiberno-Latin enough to mention him on ANSAX-L whithout my usual bad conscience to be an intruder and illiterate on this list), so if you have and have published it, please tell me where I could find it. Sincerely, Otfried Lieberknecht From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Feb 9 01:58:42 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 9 Feb 96 01:58:41 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id BAA29415; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 01:48:19 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9609 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 09:59:02 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7177; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 09:59:02 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 08 Feb 96 09:58:53 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Thu, 8 Feb 1996 14:06:49 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 4; Thu, 08 Feb 1996 14:06:44 +0000 Message-Id: <0099D9B7.23A20218.4@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 14:06:43 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Otfried, Every compositional element I write about was discussed explicitly in anc- ient sources we know to have been read in these islands. Whenever one of these features occurs in the smallest unit of composition you may expect in the lar- gest, as in all the intervening units. You will find in 'The Celtic Latin Tradition' pages 1-13 and 29-49 the clearest evidence that Jerome was both an articulate explicator and an exqui- sitely sensitive implicit inculcator, who combined the greatest virtues of both Augustine and Boethius (with none of the former's defects). Epogdous is 'one on top of eight', sesquioctave ratio, which gives you both the tone and the octave, the micro and the macro, the smallest unit and the complete work; that's why authors refer to themselves and their work and their patrons there. (For a stunning example see the 'Lorica' of Laidcenn mac Baith Bannaig in 'Peritia' IX (1995) 1-50; he does this 15 times, stanza after stan- za). Aldhelm makes his Letter exhibit the ratio 9:8 at 'bis quaternis', because that is a distributive way of writing 8; you can always rely on Aldhelm to com- municate indirectly. I read and enjoy both those who tell me what they are doing (like the Anon- ymous of Whitby in the Vita Gregorii and Uynfreth/Boniface, who supplies the answers to his aenigmata in internal acrostics, and Dungal, who supplies a preface describing both his elegiac couplets and his descending acrostic, and Columbanus of Saint-Trond, who tells us how to compose adonic verses) and those who don't. The latter are more fun. You correct my typo kindly, for which thanks. I DO know when the Annuncia- tion is celebrated. Pronounce Cu' Chuimne's name 'koo kweevneh'. He is accessi- ble, as are all these writers. You will see from the Irish Liber Hymnorum that the seventh-century Hiberno-Latin texts are equipped with a Middle Irish com- mentary. There is in the PRO an unpublished Old French commentary on Walter of Chatillon's Alexandreis. These texts aquired gradus almost as soon as they were published, treated exactly like Biblical texts and standard Classical authors. One last point. In motets about music and musicians, composers who set dif- ferent texts for each voice nearly always treated theory in the triplum and practice in the duplum or celebrated contemporaries in one voice and ancient authorities in another. Busnois, in setting a single text in 'In hydraulis', celebrates everything in the same poem, but confines theory and its terminolo- gy to the first half, practice to the second, with Ockeghem at the centre. All these guys knew that Philosophia had appeared to Boethius bearing both the theta and the pi, representing both theoretike and praktike. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Feb 9 21:27:30 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 9 Feb 96 21:27:13 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA06312; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 21:13:45 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8465 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 16:10:00 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1485; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 16:10:00 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 09 Feb 96 16:09:58 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 9 Feb 1996 21:10:31 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 2; Fri, 09 Feb 1996 21:10:27 +0000 Message-Id: <0099DABB.7F311614.2@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 21:10:26 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Otfried, You will find an analysis of a little poem attributed by Daibhi O' Croinin to Sedulius Scottus in my book. The poem, written on the Continent, praises the scholars of his home monastery of Clonard, Aileran the Wise, Vinniau the founder, and a contemporary, Fergus. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Feb 13 16:56:32 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 13 Feb 96 16:56:29 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA00788; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 16:39:17 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2306 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 11:37:57 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0876; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 11:37:57 -0500 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 13 Feb 96 11:37:53 EST Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from dyn067.berlin.netSurf.DE with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0tmNkO-0025tsC; Tue, 13 Feb 96 17:38 MET X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 17:38:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO In my earlier messages I had been antagonising D. R. Howlett by asking him for sources which attest in explicit form that arithmetical or musical ratios were applied or expected to be applied in literary or sacred texts, not only within the single verse, where Augustinian esthetics of numbers with the help of arithmetical interpretation of ancient meters teach them to be applied, but also in "larger portions" of text, where they no longer can affect the auditive sense of the audience and thus would need another theoretical/ideological background which Augustinian esthetics do not supply. I did not doubt the general possibility that such a background could have existed, at least for some authors, but I was demanding for more than only numerical evidence in order to ascertain such a background as a historical fact. Now Ulrich Ernst, _Carmen figuratum. Geschichte des Figurengedichts von den antiken Urspru"ngen bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters_, Ko"ln et al.: Bo"hlau Verlag, 1991 (= Pictura et Poesis, 1), p.554ss. has brought to my attention a computistical 'carmen quadratum' of Abbo of Fleury, which he reproduces from PL 90,729s. and from a manuscript written in England in the early 12th cent. (Paul Getty Museum, Collection Ludwig, cod. X.II.5, f.65r). I reproduce it from Ernst with some minor changes (using capital letters to highlight initials of words, bracketing initials of columns with ** or with //, and using some abbreviations which are explained below): col. I col. II col. III col. IV col. V ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 /A/ r d u a /C/ o n e x e /L/ i b a t S /a/ c r a r i /a/ F o r m a e 1 *T* i r o S *u* i s q;N o *t* a t D e u *e* x i L u m *i* n a C e l i 2 *H* i s U t /L/ u n a r i *s* N o s c a /t/ u r T e r /M/ i n;O d i s 3 12 /B/ i n o D *o* n a t u s /M/ a g n i L *u* s t r a m *i* n e G i r i 4 *A* d S u a /T/ r i c e n *i* s M o m't *a* E x p l e *N* d a D i e b; 5 *Q* u a e P /h/ e b o D e *b* e t P+I u /g/ i s L u m /i/ n i s U s u 6 15 /C/ e u D e *r* i u a t i /N/ a t i u i *s* A m n i b *u* s a m n e s 7 *H* e c E t /Q/ u e N o u *i* U o b i s /C/ o m m u n /i/ a S o l i s 8 *Q* u o s D /e/ d i t A l *t*%n a r e D *i* u N a t u *r* a C o e u a 9 18 /D/ u m S o *l* I n u i t /o/ C a s u C *o* n f i n i *a* N o c t i s 10 *F* e r t I /n/ p+u i s o *P*+m i t V e /l/ C o r n u /a/ P h e b e s 11 *Q* u e D e /b/ e t T o t *i* s D i u i *s* i P a r t *i* b;O r b i s 12 21 /E/ o o D u *m* S e C o m /p/ o n e n s /V/ l t i m a /S/ c a n d a t 13 *C* l a r a /K/ a p u t D *u* d u m R a *d* i i s E x *e* s a d i e i 14 *H* a c t e *n*;E x e g i *L* u n a r i *s* T r a m i *t* i s O r a s 15 24 /F/ a n d o /S/ o l a r i /Q/ u e s i t /L/ e x C u d /o/ L a b o r i 16 *A* n n u a /G/ i r a t i *R* e p e t a *t* u r L i n *e* a M u n d i 17 *Q* u a m S *o* l D e c u *r* r i t E t /S/ e r o N a /n/ q^S u e t o 18 27 /G/ i r a t /P/ u r a F o /r/ i s N o n *V* n o M e n *s* e D i a n a 19 *I* d Q u o /d/ G e r m a *n* u s T o t *o* P%u a d i *t* I n A n n o 20 *E* s t V i *a* P%S p a t *i* o L e n i /S/ e c t a n /d/ a M e a t u 21 30 /H/ i c S e /m/ p%S e r u /s/ H e c E s *t* V e l o c *i* o r E t s i 22 (1) *A* m b o s *A* e q u a l *i* C u r s u /C/ i e t V n /i/ u s O r d o 23 *Q* u i n q^*V* a g i D e *m* u m P+m a *n* t C a n t *i* b;i g n e s 24 3 /I/ p s i s /I/ n C e l o /T/ e r r a r *u* m I u r e *P* o t i t i s 25 *Q* u i P%Z *o* n a r u m *V* i t a l i /a/ S i g n a /F/ u r e n d o 26 *D* i s c u /r/ r u n t P%*S* e V i x N *o* t a S e d *e* L o c a t i 27 6 /K/ a r t a /F/ i n i t a /V/ o t i D e /p/ r e n d i /M/ u s O d a s 28 *A* l m e D *e* u s T e N *o* s s e M i *h* i C-c e d *e* F i d e l i 29 *P*%T u a D *o* n a T i b *i* P l a c e *a* m P+V i r *i* b u s O r o 30 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 The abbreviations which I have used are: semicolon (;) for -us, plus (+) for -ro, accent (') for -en-, circumflex (^) for -ue, percent (%) for -er, and minus (-) for -on. The text consists of 30 verses with 30 letters in each verse, and it is written in five columns which begin with the 1st, 6th, 12th, 18th and 24th letter of each verse. In columns I and III, the initials highlighted by // give the first 20 letters of the alphabet (A-K, L-V) and intend, according to the additional commentary in prose, to represent the "numerus epactarum", which, if I understand Abbo's and Ernst's explanations right, is the number of days between a given day (22 March) and the last preceding new moon, changing with a difference of plus 11 from year to year, but returning identical with every 19th year (beginning with B=12 one has to add eleven for every following letter of the alphabet). In column IV, the initials highlighted by // are the initials of the names of the zodicacal signs (A for Aries, T for Taurus, etc), and the corresponding initials in column V are the initials for the corresponding months (A for Aprilis, M for Maius, etc). These letters in columsn IV and V are following each other by alternating steps of two or three, which are said to represent the two and a half days which the moon stays in each zodiacal sign. The sense of column II is completely obscure to me (and the higlighting of letters, which follows Migne and Ernst, seems dubious in some cases when compared with the manuscript). I also omitted a sixth column of single letters and numbers, which I do not understand. What makes this text relevant for our actual discussion is the explanation, given in the prooemium, why the columns intersect each verse with its 6th, 12th, 18th and 24th letter: "Cujus divisio per quinque senarios facta, lectori occasionem tribuit ut se exerceat in singulis mathematicae disciplinis. Siquidem continuatis proprietatibus medietatum trium artium talis divisio ostendit arithmeticae 6, 12, 18, musicae 12, 18, 24, geometricae 6, 12, 24". In fact the initials of columns II, III and IV give the arithmetical means 18-12 = 12-6; and the initials of columns II, III and V give the geometrical means 24:12 = 12:6. But the initials of colums III, IV and V do not give the musical means ("medietas ... in qua quemadmodum maximus terminus ad parvissimum terminum ponitur, sic differentia maximi et medii contra differentiam medii atque parvissimi comparatur" according to Boethius, _Inst. arithm._ II, 47), because 24:12 is not equal to (24-18):(18-12). They present another case of arithmetical means: 24-18 = 18-12, or of the 'medietates' which in Boethius are numbered seventh: 24:12 = (24-12):(18-12), and eighth: 24:12 = (24-12):(24-18). How ever this error (?) is to be explained, the proemium attests that simply the intellectual fun (not to be confounded with esthetical delight) to exercise quadrivial knowledge was reason enough for Abbo of Fleury to arrange his columns in accordance with arithmetical ratios and the ensuing 'medietates'. It's not yet the kind of evidence for 'large portions' of text which I had been asking for, because the intersections, though running through the whole text, are applied to the single verses. But the intention explained in the proemion obviously has nothing to do with Augustinian esthetics of numbers and thus could have extended its technique also to making significant intersections between whole groups of verses (maybe Abbo in fact has made such intersections between his 30 verses, but my own understanding of the computistical matter is far from being sufficient to find out). I can be stubborn and slow and unwilling to convert, I know, but from time to time I try to learn. Otfried Lieberknecht From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Feb 13 23:20:06 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 13 Feb 96 23:19:59 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA08311; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 23:09:09 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6376 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 18:08:03 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3674; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 18:08:03 -0500 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 13 Feb 96 18:08:02 EST Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from dyn069.berlin.netSurf.DE with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0tmTpw-0025twC; Wed, 14 Feb 96 00:08 MET X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 00:08:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO David, you can be stubborn too. You wrote: > You distress me a bit by supposing that your questions antagonized me. >They did not. For a good answer to one of your queries see the first book >of Vitruvius. What he writes of both the human body and buildings fit for >men to inhabit harmoniously is true of all the other arts he insists that >an architect understand, notably arithmetic and geometry and music and astro- >nomy: the smallest measure is replicated and magnified throughout the compo- >sition or structure. Not a very sparkly writer, but clear, nicht wahr? I myself may be neither a sparkly, nor a clear writer, especially when I try to write English, but what I had been asking for -- several times, often enough to transmit this rather simple idea even in my more or less English words -- were sources attesting such or similar notions with regard to *texts*, sacred or profane, not with regard to the cosmos, to the microcosmos of human body and/or soul, to architecture or to music. Since we know many of the doctrinal works where the authors we are discussing learned or expressed their notions about numbers in *texts*, it seems reasonable to ask whether the specific techniques we are discussing were mentioned in such works, and, if not, it seems reasonable to give this lack of explicit attestation some thought. We may still be able to build interpretations on possible analogies -- like between literature and architecture or music --, but if we have to do so (and have to do so with regard to centuries which were very fond of drawing and explaining analogies almost everywhere, but happened to keep their silence about the specific analogies we expect them to have seen), we should be aware of it instead of claiming or suggesting that the monastic libraries were full of such books (the kind of books I had been asking for) for everyone who daigned to read them. _De architectura_ neither by its content is such a book, as far as I can recall from my cursory reading: it's not only no good answer to my question, it's not an answer at all. Nor can it prove a lot for the early authors and periods you are dealing with, if we don't have extant manuscripts or attestations of lost manuscripts or at least citations by Irish/Hiberno-Latin or Anglo-Latin authors before ca. 800. Even after 800 it will not be easy to find an author who made any use of Vitruvius when writing about literary techniques or when explaining numbers in sacred or profane texts. To be true, I have been told by others less ignorant than me in this field that even specialised writings dealing with architecture show scarce or no influence at all in the time before the 15th century, although some twenty (or let it be thirty) manuscripts of _De architectura_ seem to be extant from or attested for this time. And they cannot have been more or less inaccessible to such authors because all the time they were in the hands of poets studying them in order to learn how to construct their own works, nicht wahr? > Abbo is, of course, a remarkable writer who turned his mind to varied sub- >jects, and always profitably. But he's late. For really competent compositions >from the period of first exposure to Latin culture, when men had gone from >illiterate barbarism to complete fluency in a single generation, look at the >works of Irishmen from the sixth and seventh centuries and of Englishmen from >the seventh and eighth. No shortage of these, but there's little for comparison >anywhere else. > For me, who is dealing also with authors from the 10th century onwards (some of them, like Dante, having certain literary merits too), Abbo is not too late, although I would hesitate to take this single and in many respects singular text for a paradigm which can easily be found also in other texts of the following time. And he should not be too late for you, since it was you who cited even motets of the 15th century as confirmation of your understanding of Boethius. Yours, Otfried From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Feb 14 21:22:39 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 14 Feb 96 21:21:01 GMT Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA07221; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 21:08:24 GMT Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 7398 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 15:31:46 -0500 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8337; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 15:31:46 -0500 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 14 Feb 96 15:31:44 EST Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:32:17 +0000 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 9; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:32:13 +0000 Message-Id: <0099DEA3.FC179BAC.9@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:32:12 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: NEW MEMBER'S SEL To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Otfried, We have to deal with an almost complete, if not complete, silence. I do not know a single writer who explicitly states how a writer of prose or verse should apply rules from quadruvial manuals to trivial texts. But then, I do not know a single ancient writer who tells one how to compose clausulae. So I must depend upon the author of the 'Rhetorica ad Herennium', who does tell how to compose isocola, and exhibits the rules for counting exactly in the passage in which he writes that it would be childish to count, and upon Cicero, who does something similar in 'De Oratore' III. It happens that we have a MS of this latter, written in the hand of Lupus of Ferrieres (who pointed enough of the clausulae to suggest that he could recognize one when he read it) and copied from an exemplar we know he borrowed from Einhard. I have to infer that Irish scholars had something similar from which they learned to compose clausulae before the end of the sixth century. It matters not at all that we have no really early MS of Vitruvius, as we can read Alcuin quoting him. Again I have to infer that Cogitosus and Aldhelm and Aediluulf had something similar from which they learned to write architectural prose and verse, about buildings, while they were pretending to be writing about other things. It would take more than usual insensitivity not to see Eriugena combining mathematics and astrono- my and architecture (and a good deal else) in his poem about Charles the Bald's church. No one needs a manual to tell him what Eriugena was doing, any more than one needs an architect's drawing to recognize the proportions in the cath- edral at Durham. I agree that it would simplify one's task of presenting anal- yses if there were such manuals, but we shouldn't be paralysed by the lack of them. Given that lack, it seems to me best to proceed from principles articu- lated in books that survived to the fifth and sixth centuries. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu May 2 16:50:28 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 2 May 96 16:50:26 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA29697; Thu, 2 May 1996 16:45:32 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9528 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Thu, 2 May 1996 11:08:11 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6210; Thu, 2 May 1996 11:08:11 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Thu, 02 May 96 11:08:01 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uF01Y-0025u2C; Thu, 2 May 96 17:10 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 11:08:11 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: authors and their public (was: Re: exceptional A-S women) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 15816 David Howlett and George Clark in their exchange seem to have reached the usual impasse where strong convictions about the textual evidence of cryptic numerical patterns are opposed by no less strong convictions about their incompatibilty with the obvious didactical objectives of these texts and the assumed interpretative competences of their original public. David may be demanding too much from us (or too little from himself) by refering us to textual evidence which has been created by editorial emendations already based on those same convictions he wants (?) us to share. But George, on the other hand, could very well be wrong by assuming that authors with a Latin training who wrote in Latin or vernacular languages would have chosen ALL their literary techniques with regard to the objective of inculcating doctrine in the minds of those of their readers/hearers who still lacked and therefore needed it most. Personally, I don't believe that medieval authors would have set up numerical patterns in order to submit them not to human understanding, but exclusively to God, as has been claimed not on this list, but for example by Tschirch. And even in this case it would be reasonable to assume that the authors' notions of their divine reader would have evolved from their experience of human reading, which means that their compositional techniques would have been, to a certain degree, a complement of the interpretative techniques they had learned. I also have difficulties to understand David, when he seems to admit that even the -- according to him -- many authors who used to set up numerical patterns in their works would not necessarily have detected and have been expected to detect such patterns in the works of others who did the same. If, for instance, it really was a habitual practice to corroborate or even to substitute the explicit dating and signing of charters by their numerical composition, and if it did not ruin the existing legal system instantly, we have to assume that this compositional practice would have produced unambigous results, and that it went conform with a habitual interpretative practice for which there should be better evidence than only the fact that many or most medieval scribes were unwilling or unable to apply it, but only garbled the numerical patterns so carefully supplied. Which is why I vote, once again, for an approach which takes the documented techniques of interpreting numbers as its starting point, instead of reinventing techniques which seem, with or preferably without the help of textual emendations, to produce stunning results. The best, although not unique, documentation we have is, of course, not for interpreting numbers in legal documents, but for interpreting numbers in the Bible. And we have also a few cases of autoexegesis, where authors explain the numerical pattern of their own works, adopting usually methods and notions derived from this same tradition of biblical number exegesis. Furthermore, the tradition of biblical exegesis can also supply us with the notion of a STRATIFIED public, and this notion, even if adopted only by a few authors, would help us to accept and explain why in their case one and the same work can seek the objective to inform a majority of untrained readers/auditors, while presupposing at the same time a minority of trained readers (like the happy few or "perfecti" addressed in Hbr 5,14) able to detect and understand patterns and/or meanings which were invisible for most of their contemporaries. The best case of addressing such a stratified public in the vernacular languages is Dante, whose intent to divulgate high moral standards and doctrine to a broad and untrained majority of readers/auditors is evident and pronounced in explicit form, but who nevertheless expected also a distinguished learned minority of "beati pochi", forming a minority also among those contemporaries who had a Latin training, and described at lenght in the first book of the Convivio (which was not addressed to such readers) or addressed in explicit form in the second canto of the Paradiso. Dante's commentators use to dismiss this ambivalent attitude and its eventual relevance for our understanding of his work, or assume that they themselves, even if only standing on the shoulders of six centuries of Dante commentary, would range among the "beati pochi" and are qualified to comment the text from their perspective. Training in medieval exegesis of numbers usually does not count among their outstanding abilities, while it might have counted among those of the contemporary "beati pochi". Dante, of course, wrote under circumstances which were very different from those of Old English or early Anglo- and Hiberno-Latin authors. But there may be similarities with regard to the fact that at both times authors with a more or less recently acquired Latin and theological learning (not the usual learning to be obtained by an urban layman like Dante, or by an Anglo-Saxon poet) had undertaken to transmit their acquirements to a broader illiterate (vernacular) public, but might have expected at the same time also more learned readers to take interest in their vernacular works. And the same attitude can be found even within the boundaries of Latin literature, where one and the same work can provide very different options of understanding to certain Latin readers more and to other Latin readers less prepared. One such case, which I had already mentioned in earlier messages, is Sedulius Scottus, who on the Continent, in the surroundings of bishop Hartgar of Liege, seems to have found or contributed to create a "coetus fratrum" where different degrees of learning could lead to different degrees of understanding. My best example is his carmen XXXII, a bipartite poem praising the beauty and hospitality of (very probably) Hartgar's house. The first section describes the beauty of a fourcoloured representation of the Cross in this house and explains a spiritual sense of these colours by relating them to the human and divine natures of Christ (lines marking intersections of the text inserted by myself): Quadricolor croceis signet vestigia plantis Titanis rutilos excipiens radios. 5 Altera sed vestris, si fas est dicere, tectis Multicolor varians Iris honore micat. ------------------------------------------------------- Aureus in primo color enitet ordine flagrans, Gramineus sequitur veris honore virens; Purpureum flagrat specimen mirabile visu, 10 Saphirus ridens spargit in astra decus; Emicat et vitreus supter supraque coruscus, Glaucicomum pelagi gaudet habere modum: Nobilis altithroni crucis exprimitur decus almum, Vitrea qua varium linia carpit iter. ......................................................... 15 Aureus ac viridis, croceus color aereusque Conveniunt domino, qui regit astra, deo: Sic ruber ac viridis hominem per vulnera passum, Aureus, aereus sceptra deique canunt. --------------------------------------------------------- Phoebus amat talem, niveis et crinibus aulam 20 Dedicat illustrans, aspicit atque polo. Tempore brumali pollent hic verna serena Fitque hiemps aestas tempore nubifero. The explicit exegesis (vv.15-18) is by no means difficult to understand, and similar explanations had already been given to the colours of the celestial rainbow, which also in this poem offers a point of comparison with the 'altera Iris' in Hartgar's house. But by unveiling this spiritual meaning, the explicit exegesis at the same time veils or at least leaves unexplained several other spiritual meanings of the same colours and of their preceding description (vv. 7-14), detectible only for a reader who had a certain familiarity with traditional interpretations of the number four. One biblical subtext, which such a reader would have had to associate, is formed by the four rivers of Paradise (as described in Gn 2,10ss.) and their traditional exegesis as figure of the four cardinal virtues (as established in two differing variants by Augustine and Ambrose): 1) The colour of the first zone described, the aureus color, corresponds to the Phison (Ganges) "qui circuit omnem terram Evilat / ubi nascitur AURUM / et aurum terrae illius optimum est..." etc. (Gn 2,11s.), and to the virtue 'prudentia', the treasures of which -- as was said -- are like pure gold. 2) The colour of the second zone, grass-green (gramineus), corres- ponds to the Geon (Nilus) "qui circuit omnem terram Aethiopiae" (Gn 2,13), famous for the temperating and fertilizing effects it produces in Egypt. While Ambrose explains Geon to represent the virtue of Temperantia as opposed to the heats of carnal desire, for Augustine it is Fortitudo "calore actionis alacris atque impigra". The term "virens" in Sed. might point to Fortitudo, but the colour green and the association with spring rather point to the temperating forces of Temperantia. 3) The Purple of the third zone corresponds to the third river, the Tigris "[qui] vadit contra Assyrios" (Gn 2,14): for Augustine, this river represents Temperantia running against the "Assyrii", representants of libido; whereas for Ambrose, who refers to the etymology Tigris "velocior omnibus", the Tigris represents Fortitudo which never "aliquibus cursus eius impedimentorum haeret obstaculis". Whether for Sed. it is Fortitudo or rather Temperantia again seems difficult to decide, but the relation with Tigris is easy to detect, because Isidore tells that the Assyrians were the first to invent the use of purple and of cosmetics, laying by this the ground for the "luxuria" of the later Romans and other peoples. 4) The fourth zone, which is described in three verses instead of one, and with three varieties of color (saphirus, glaucicomus, vitreus), and which sems to be the origin of (or to bundle?) the other three zones (qua varium... carpit iter), remains for the fourth river, Euphrates, for which Gn does not give any geographic or other specifications. For Augustine and Ambrose, this river represents Justitia, not specified in the Bible because this virtue is not located in a specific part of the soul and not opposed to a specific vice, but results from the harmony of the three lower virtues, when Fortitudo and Temperantia or the forces controlled by them follow the advices of Prudentia. Justitia is the "concordia" and "quasi mater omnium" (Ambr.), the "copulatio atque ordinatio" of the lower virtues (Aug.), and this might explain why this zone in Sed. occupies three verses instead of one and is the origin of the three other zones. Especially the first variety of its colour, "saphirus", seems appropriate to represent Euphrates, because this river according to Isidore is "copiosissimus gemmis". And even more appropriate seems to be the epitheton "(saphirus) ridens", enforced by "gaudet" in v.12: this is consistent with a Greek etymology of the name Euphrates, cited by Ambrosius and translated by him "a laetando, eo quod hominum genus nullo magis quam iustitia et aequitate laetetur" Other quaternaries, traditionally linked with the four rivers and/or with the Cross, are equally involved in this description. I will give three examples: The Four Elements: Water is explicit in the description of the sea-blue colour of the 4th zone (Glaucicomum pelagi gaudet habere modum). Fire can be represented by the "Purpureum specimen flagrans" of the 3rd zone. Earth can be associated with the 2nd, grass-green zone, esp. since this zone represents Geon/Nilus, the names of which were derived from Greek gh (terra) and from Latin limus. This leaves for the element of air the 1st, golden zone: Air is not necessarily golden, but here it is, because aurum was derived "ab aura". The Four Seasons (explicit in the closing lines 21s.): Icy Winter can be associated with the glassy/blue colouring of the 4th zone, and the heat of summer with the burning Purple of the 3rd zone, while Spring is an explicit point of comparison in the description of the 2nd, grass-green zone. This would leave Autumn, maybe with regard to the colour of ripe fields or of fading leaves, as the season of the 1st, golden zone. The "quatuor species totius creaturae", which can be distinguished according to the faculties of "esse, vivere, sentire, et intel- ligere" (Hraban): "esse" applies to minerals or other inanimate materials like the gold of the 1st zone; "vivere" to plants as associated with the grass-green of the 2nd zone. "Sentire", the specific faculty of animals, can be associated with the 3rd zone, where it is stressed that its purple colour affects the visual sense. This leaves "intelligere", the special faculty of human and angelic creatures, for the 4th zone. Here "saphirus", "vitreus" and 'glaucicomus modus pelagi' might rather point, once more, to the inanimate sphere of "esse"; but the anthropomorph imagery of "ridens" and "gaudet" also suggest for this zone another distinctive faculty of man, his faculty to laugh, which made him to be seen as the "animal ridens" by definition. These interpretations are not exhausting, and they may need correction or corroboration in several points, but I think that they can show how Sedulius offers very different options for a spiritual understanding: one rather plain understanding apt to feed and satisfy a reader or hearer who accepts the explicit exegesis and goes on to read or hear the rest of the poem; and a more complex understanding to be obtained only by readers who knew by themselves how to work out such an exegesis, and who shared the authors specific theological (and grammatical) training. As it seems, both understandings are not in contradiction with each other, but harmonize well: by relating in his explicit exegesis the colours red and green to the human, suffering nature of Christ, and the colours golden and blue to the the divine, reigning nature of Christ, Sedulius does not only follow what seems to be the most obvious and realistic mode of association (green and red for the terrestrial sphere and passion, blue and gold for the celestial sphere and government), but he also seems to take into account that the first pair of colours represent the two lower cardinal virtues of Fortitudo and Temperantia (red and green, or vice versa), while the second pair represents the two higher virtues of Prudentia (gold) and Justitia (blue), to which the lower virtues are subordinated. I know that David will not easily be impressed by a case of "numerology", which demands quite conventional methods of biblical exegesis, while he himself is after numerical patterns encrytping dates or corresponding to arithmethical/musical ratios and thus demanding methods of interpretation which, as it seems, no documented exegetical tradition can provide. And I would agree with George that a case like this does not yet prove anything for OE poetry, though it might help to conceive which kind of numerical composition might have been applied in OE poetry, too. But for me it would already be much if this example could help to give the notion of a stratified public a certain place in the current and recurrent debates of numerical composition. Otfried Lieberknecht Schoeneberger Str. 11 D-12163 Berlin Tel. (and fax on demand): 030 - 851 66 75 E-mail: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri May 3 14:14:36 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 3 May 96 14:14:35 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA24536; Fri, 3 May 1996 14:09:53 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 1762 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 3 May 1996 08:53:21 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3198; Fri, 3 May 1996 08:53:21 -0400 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 03 May 96 08:53:18 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Fri, 3 May 1996 13:50:54 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 6; Fri, 03 May 1996 13:50:50 +0100 Message-Id: <009A1C80.002458A4.6@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 13:50:49 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: authors and their public (was: Re: exceptional A-S women) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 3212 Otfried, Can we agree to common usage? If I suggest that in Columban's poem 'Mundus iste transibit' the couplet 'lubricum quod labitur / conantur colligere' is an anagram of 'Columba clanculo loquitur ridet Benguirr' or that the central line of Laidcenn's 'Lorica' 'capitali centro cartilagini' is an anagram of 'ti[bi] practica Lorica Laitgenni' or that at the golden section of 'Adelphus Adelpha Mater' 'Galileos in anctera' is an anagram of 'Israel g[rammaticus] cano Lati- ne', THAT may be 'cryptic'. But the numerical patterns I adduce in literary texts cannot reasonably be so described. The patterns are manifest in one Greek and four Hebrew accounts of Creation. The numbers are explicitly dis- cussed in the Talmud, and the ratios are explicitly discussed by Plato and Boethius. They are the most elementary computistic commonplaces. Second, the texts in which I analyse these features are NOT my editorial confections. Those on which my arguments are based survive in hundreds of cop- ies that have been transmitted intact across millennia, also in translations that have been similarly transmitted. Even in texts inaccurately copied the only changes I make are justified on the grounds of correct etymology, orthog- raphy, grammar, rhythm, and the internal consistency of an author's usage, NOT on numerical considerations. Consider 'Versus de annis a principio', which bear internal dating to 645 A.D. If we spell everything correctly the square of the number of ages about which the poet writes equals the number of lines, which squared equals the num- ber of letters. Consider the Carmen Rhythmicum, in which the number of the line at which Aldhelm refers to St Paul's Day is the number of its day in the calendar. Consider Cu Chuimne, who in 'Cantemus in omni die' (a poem of 30 lines, repeated to 52, with 365 words) rhymes the adverb 'plane' with the adjective 'humane', my change of a modern editor's 'humanae' is not even tendentious. 'Humane' is manifestly the poet's original spelling, which, once heeded, re- veals the last of 'Christi nomen inuocamus', i.e. IHCOYC, as 888th, the value of the name in Greek notation. So in 'De omnibus sanctis' the telestich fixes Wulfstan's spelling as not 'euum' but 'aeuum'. Correct spelling reveals as many letters in his prologue as there are lines in the poem and as many letters in the epilogue as years in the millennium in which he wrote it. One's opinion about any of this is no more or less relevant than one's opin- ion about a Euclidian theorem. These poems either function as I suggest they do, or they do not. It is the work of a few minutes to verify that they do. You will find Columban's poem in MitLat Jahrbuch a year or so ago and Wulf- stan's in the next issue of the same, Laidcenn's and Cu Chuimne's and Israel's in Peritia 9 and Versus de annis in Peritia 10, Aldhelm's Carmen in Archivum Latinitatis 53. So verify the claims, please, and give me no more of this stuff about the convictions, firm or otherwise, of those who have not verified them or cannot be bothered to verify them. We are dealing not with a debatable theory, but with a series of facts. Read a full stop before 'my change', please. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri May 3 23:07:02 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Fri, 3 May 96 23:06:58 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id XAA17033; Fri, 3 May 1996 23:04:12 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8528 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Fri, 3 May 1996 17:43:13 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2684; Fri, 3 May 1996 17:43:13 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Fri, 03 May 96 17:43:07 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uFSfU-0025u5C; Fri, 3 May 96 23:45 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 17:43:13 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public (long message, again) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 9621 >Otfried, > Can we agree to common usage? David, We may be able to agree about several things, but I have difficulties with your style to handle disagreement. > If I suggest that in Columban's poem 'Mundus >iste transibit' the couplet 'lubricum quod labitur / conantur colligere' is an >anagram of 'Columba clanculo loquitur ridet Benguirr' or that the central line >of Laidcenn's 'Lorica' 'capitali centro cartilagini' is an anagram of 'ti[bi] >practica Lorica Laitgenni' or that at the golden section of 'Adelphus Adelpha >Mater' 'Galileos in anctera' is an anagram of 'Israel g[rammaticus] cano Lati- >ne', THAT may be 'cryptic'. But the numerical patterns I adduce in literary >texts cannot reasonably be so described. The patterns are manifest in one >Greek and four Hebrew accounts of Creation. The numbers are explicitly dis- >cussed in the Talmud, and the ratios are explicitly discussed by Plato and >Boethius. They are the most elementary computistic commonplaces. If I understand you right, you have, on one hand, sources which treat certain numbers and ratios, but do not discuss their occurence as textual patterns; and you have other texts where you find or believe to find these numbers tacitly used in order to create numerical patterns of text. These are what I call cryptic. It's not a depreciative term, but if you don't like it, we may use other words like "latent". With regard to their cryptic or latent character, there is no difference between the patterns which you and I are after. This is why I argued for taking into consideration the notion of a stratified public, where a minority of trained readers would have been expected to detect latent structures and contents besides the manifest and explicit ones. But there is a difference between us regarding the methods which are necessary to detect them. The methods which I presuppose and use are explained in hermeneutical treatises, they are applied in exegetical treatises, and sometimes they are even applied in auto-exegetical statements. Not only the contents produced with the help of these methods, but also the methods themselves were common, at least among those who had a training in biblical exegesis. Medieval authors could expect such methods to be applied to their own works, and could prepare their works in a way that would allow their trained readers to reach a more or less predictible understanding of their numerical patterns. The methods which you presuppose and apply, or some of them, cannot be found in similar hermeneutical or exegetical or other sources to have been explained and explicitly applied to biblical or other texts. At least not in Latin sources, as far as I know (I except the exceptional case of the computistic poem which I once cited on this list as proof for the explicit intersecting of a text in accordance to arithmetic ratios). There were no Latin and, I believe, no Greek sources -- maybe there were Hebrew sources, I don't know -- at the time of Cu Chuimne which taught to count all the letters of a given text in order to find gematrical values of Greek nomina sacra. There were no sources, none that I am aware of, which taught to count the verses of a poem or even what you call 'lines' of a prose text in order to find the year A.D. of its composition. And there were no sources, none that I know of (except the computistic poem mentioned above), which taught to count the verses or letters or other unities of a text in order to interpret textual intersections in their eventual accordance with arithmetic ratios. Given that the exegetical methods which I myself presuppose and apply obviously needed a lot of explicit teaching for being learned and applied, I wonder why your methods did not need any teaching and nevertheless gained this kind of quasi-omnipresence in poems and even in charters, where even the common lore of biblical numerology had, if any, only a very limited space. I don't say that you are wrong, because highly improbable theses in the end can be right, but I have problems with your assessment of the probabilities. > Second, the texts in which I analyse these features are NOT my editorial >confections. Those on which my arguments are based survive in hundreds of cop- >ies that have been transmitted intact across millennia, also in translations >that have been similarly transmitted. Even in texts inaccurately copied the >only changes I make are justified on the grounds of correct etymology, orthog- >raphy, grammar, rhythm, and the internal consistency of an author's usage, NOT >on numerical considerations. I may have been wrong on this point. I was thinking of an earlier message where you wrote: >ten early English >charters composed by different drafters between 679 and 704 that depend for >their confirmation, lacking seals and autograph signatures and autograph signs >manual, widespread recognition of their internally fixed authenticating de- >vices (like placing 'septuaginta quinque', the number of granted hides, as >the seventy-fifth word, something not noted by the alienator who erased the >original and wrote XL If you have other MSS (hundreds?) which attest the reading LXX or "septuaginta quinque", or if the original MS has been preserved and allows to restore this reading from the erasure, then my bewilderment in fact is out of place. Though in the latter case I still would think that maybe the contractors only changed their mind about the number and had it changed in the charter, without even thinking of what you count as the number of lines. > Consider 'Versus de annis a principio', which bear internal dating to 645 >A.D. If we spell everything correctly the square of the number of ages about >which the poet writes equals the number of lines, which squared equals the num- >ber of letters. Yes, if we spell everything correctly. But there was little consent about and concern for correct spelling at the times we are dealing with. I don't say that grammatical treatises did not treat questions of spelling, and that there were no treatises _De orthographia_. But a considerable number of facultative variants was in use, and could be used even by one and the same author. Where the number of letters was relevant, as it was the case with 'carmina figurata', appropriate measures were taken to prepare the MS page in order to keep the correct spelling. Where such measures are not attested by the MSS, we have a strong case to assume that the number of letters was not relevant. Concerning the numbers you assume to be applied because their squares occur and coincide: for my own work, I have made it a rule to disregard numbers if not these numbers themselves, but only their squares or other products or sums are textualised in the text, except when appropriate intersections or groupings of units attest how the total is to be composed. > Consider the Carmen Rhythmicum, in which the number of the line at which >Aldhelm refers to St Paul's Day is the number of its day in the calendar. > Consider Cu Chuimne, who in 'Cantemus in omni die' (a poem of 30 lines, >repeated to 52, with 365 words) rhymes the adverb 'plane' with the adjective >'humane', my change of a modern editor's 'humanae' is not even tendentious. >'Humane' is manifestly the poet's original spelling, which, once heeded, re- >veals the last of 'Christi nomen inuocamus', i.e. IHCOYC, as 888th, the value >of the name in Greek notation. > So in 'De omnibus sanctis' the telestich fixes Wulfstan's spelling as not >'euum' but 'aeuum'. Correct spelling reveals as many letters in his prologue >as there are lines in the poem and as many letters in the epilogue as years in >the millennium in which he wrote it. Again, you build a lot on what you regard as correct spelling. If you build it on the spelling attested in the MSS, I would say that this is a weak fundament, and that the medieval authors would have known this fundament to be weak. But if the spelling which for you "reveals" the significant numbers has to be reconstructed by emendation, I would say that the fundament is even weaker. In any case, one iota added or taken, and the whole building goes to the ground. > One's opinion about any of this is no more or less relevant than one's opin- >ion about a Euclidian theorem. These poems either function as I suggest they >do, or they do not. It is the work of a few minutes to verify that they do. You make large claims by comparing the validity of your interpretation of textual data to Euclidian theoremes. I have inherited from my grandfather a small bronze sculpture, and it needs only seconds to find out whether it works or not if I use it for fixing a nail in the wall. In fact, it works, and this, too, can be no more open to doubt and discussion than a Euclidian theorem. > You will find Columban's poem in MitLat Jahrbuch a year or so ago and Wulf- >stan's in the next issue of the same, Laidcenn's and Cu Chuimne's and Israel's >in Peritia 9 and Versus de annis in Peritia 10, Aldhelm's Carmen in Archivum >Latinitatis 53. > So verify the claims, please, and give me no more of this stuff about the >convictions, firm or otherwise, of those who have not verified them or cannot >be bothered to verify them. We are dealing not with a debatable theory, but >with a series of facts. We are not dealing with facts, but with their interpretation, and with different opinions about how to interprete them. All these interpretations and opinions are more or less debatable, and I and others are trying to find out which are the less debatable. With your help, if possible. Otfried Lieberknecht From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat May 4 12:41:41 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk ([130.246.9.130]) by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 4 May 96 12:41:40 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA21310; Sat, 4 May 1996 12:27:15 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2249 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 4 May 1996 07:23:46 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7840; Sat, 4 May 1996 07:23:46 -0400 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 04 May 96 07:23:43 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Sat, 4 May 1996 12:26:16 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 3; Sat, 04 May 1996 12:26:13 +0100 Message-Id: <009A1D3D.587601E4.3@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 4 May 1996 12:26:12 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: authors and their public (long message, again) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 2849 Otfried, I take it as demonstrated that certain patterns are infixed in John's Gospel. I infer that because of the insistence of Orthodox and Catholic Christians that there is no secret 'gnosis' in this work, recognition of these patterns was widespread. By asking for explicit reference to the struc- tures I adduce within the texts themselves you are asking the literary equiv- alent of explications of music theory within Mozart's compositions. Sometimes there are hints, sometimes jokes, sometimes actual explicit statements, but usually, as in, say, Cormac's polyphonic colophon to his own psalter, he was content to make all three voices sing in unison the vowel a on the note A without hammering the point home, saying, 'Look here, chaps, we are all sing- ing the same note at the same time, with a musical and literary equivalence.' Most people who enjoy jokes would find that sort of explicit statement destruc- tive of humour, ruin of the fun. There is, I assure you, point in the reckoning of lines, verses, rhymes, syllables, and letters, as well as verse types and forms of prose rhythm in every single Insular Latin author of the sixth and seventh centuries. For this there are two explanations. One is the extreme punctilio of Romano-British Latin authors, from those like Pelagius, at the upper end of the literary reg- ister, to Saint Patrick, supposed by many to have written toward the lower end. You can see that this tradition of high competence survived the departure of the Romans in the works of Gildas, ca 540, which compare very favourably with the works of, say, Gregory of Tours. It survived among the Welsh right into the seventh century, as you will see from the 'Orationes Moucani' and from a con- siderable number of inscriptions on stone in competent Classical quantitative metres. This Latin tradition was preserved by well educated Insular churchmen, whose usage was not contaminated by an evolving proto-Romance vulgar. First the irish and then the English learned Latin by the book, from ancient books, not from native speakers, the proof being the astonishing correctness of their Latin, in stark contrast to that of, say, seventh-century Roman inscriptions or notarial instruments from Ravenna or Merovingian Gaulish charters. Part of the reason these features may be hidden is that some of their works are pre- served only in Continental copies, written by native speakers whose written Latin was way out of synch with their spoken proto-Romance. ALL early Insular writers conformed with the usage practised among the Irish and explicitly inculcated in treatises by both Bede and Alcuin DE ORTHOGRAPHIA. They imposed their correct Insular usage on Continental scriptoria, but at varying speeds. That is what accounts for the apparent mess, underlying which there are perfectly coherent explanations. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat May 4 12:52:42 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk ([130.246.9.130]) by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 4 May 96 12:52:42 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA21482; Sat, 4 May 1996 12:38:09 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2283 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 4 May 1996 07:35:06 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7981; Sat, 4 May 1996 07:35:06 -0400 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 04 May 96 07:35:04 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Sat, 4 May 1996 12:37:15 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 2; Sat, 04 May 1996 12:37:12 +0100 Message-Id: <009A1D3E.E11941D8.2@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 4 May 1996 12:37:11 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: authors and their public (long message, again) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 857 Otfried, again, About the lack of a manual that tells one what to do. Read the account of the first of the Israelite Judges in the Book of Judges, chapter 3. The Hebrew text is a very neat chiasmus, composed by symmetry and by sesquialter ratio. The number of words in the account divides by 3:2 at 52, at the name 'Chalev' (Caleb), at the crux of the chiasmus, at the fifty-second word, the numerical value of which in Hebrew notation is 52. The text is not open to dispute. Is there anyone on the planet who is going to affirm that this series of coinci- dences is merely coincidental, or that even if there were no manual that told one how to do this, the author did not do it and deliberately? Read Jerome's translation of the same passage in the Vulgate and observe the punctilious representation of every feature that the Latin language allows. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat May 4 13:04:15 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk ([130.246.9.130]) by abdn.ac.uk; Sat, 4 May 96 13:04:14 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA21737; Sat, 4 May 1996 12:49:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2339 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sat, 4 May 1996 07:46:04 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8132; Sat, 4 May 1996 07:46:04 -0400 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sat, 04 May 96 07:46:03 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Sat, 4 May 1996 12:48:30 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 1; Sat, 04 May 1996 12:48:25 +0100 Message-Id: <009A1D40.7239A759.1@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 4 May 1996 12:48:24 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: authors and their public (long message, again) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 865 Otfried, again, again, Did you read what I wrote? Cu Chuimne's infixed rhymes show what his spelling must have been. You cannot spell the adverb 'planae'. If all MSS spell 'plane' correctly while only some spell the adjective 'humane' and others intrude the Classical diphthong, spelling the word 'humanae' (because that is the way their house style demands it be spelled or because they have seen it so spelled elsewhere or for whatever reason), it is perfectly reason- able to infer that Cu Chuimne spelled his rhyming words identically. There are other confirming examples in the same poem. In the Wulfstan poem the spelling of 'aeuum' with 'ae' IS FIXED BY A TELE- STICH. That evidence would override the evidence of misspelling by any number of scribes or editors. In no case have I emended a text without evidence as compelling as these indications. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun May 5 19:49:54 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 5 May 96 19:49:52 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA28965; Sun, 5 May 1996 19:47:12 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9564 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:17 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4830; Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:16 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 05 May 96 14:33:07 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uG8ed-0025u5C; Sun, 5 May 96 20:35 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:17 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public (long message, again) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 2541 >Otfried, again, > About the lack of a manual that tells one what to do. Read the account of >the first of the Israelite Judges in the Book of Judges, chapter 3. The Hebrew >text is a very neat chiasmus, composed by symmetry and by sesquialter ratio. >The number of words in the account divides by 3:2 at 52, at the name 'Chalev' >(Caleb), at the crux of the chiasmus, at the fifty-second word, the numerical >value of which in Hebrew notation is 52. The text is not open to dispute. Is >there anyone on the planet who is going to affirm that this series of coinci- >dences is merely coincidental, or that even if there were no manual that told >one how to do this, the author did not do it and deliberately? > Read Jerome's translation of the same passage in the Vulgate and observe >the punctilious representation of every feature that the Latin language allows. > David, as I said in my last message, I am not concerned with the intentionality of eventual numerical patterns in the Bible itself, but with their intentionality in patristic and medieval literature. I don't know anything about the original text of the Book of Judges, but, judging from what you describe and take to be conclusive evidence, I suppose that you will find many people on this planet who will find these coincidences inconclusive. I myself would not give a dime for this interpretation if it were presented for a Latin text, unless it were confirmed by external evidence. Jerome, on the other hand, has written if not a manual, at least a lot of books and treatises and letters where he makes plain how he wanted the biblical text to be interpreted. I have not read them all, but I am quite confident that in these writings you will not find him anywhere counting the words of a biblical chapter or book (although he may have been acquainted with this practice in Hebrew tradition), reckoning ratios of their numbers, and relating the results to their gematrical values (although he occasionally used gematria -- Greek gematria, not Hebrew gematria, as far as I know -- to explain the spiritual sense of an explicit number or of a name in the biblical text). As I see it, Jerome is one of the worst claims which you can make: one would have to disregard his exegetical writings (as far as I know and understand them), in order to be able take into consideration your assumptions about his literary techniques in the Vulgate. Otfried P.S.: Correct "worst", or put the stress on "one". Ambrose, Augustine or Gregory the Great would be even worse. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun May 5 19:50:20 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 5 May 96 19:50:19 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA29094; Sun, 5 May 1996 19:47:57 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9535 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:09 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4779; Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:09 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 05 May 96 14:33:01 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uG8ee-0025u6C; Sun, 5 May 96 20:35 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:09 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 3186 >Otfried, again, again, > Did you read what I wrote? Cu Chuimne's infixed rhymes show what his >spelling must have been. You cannot spell the adverb 'planae'. If all MSS >spell 'plane' correctly while only some spell the adjective 'humane' and >others intrude the Classical diphthong, spelling the word 'humanae' (because >that is the way their house style demands it be spelled or because they have >seen it so spelled elsewhere or for whatever reason), it is perfectly reason- >able to infer that Cu Chuimne spelled his rhyming words identically. There are >other confirming examples in the same poem. > In the Wulfstan poem the spelling of 'aeuum' with 'ae' IS FIXED BY A TELE- >STICH. That evidence would override the evidence of misspelling by any number >of scribes or editors. > In no case have I emended a text without evidence as compelling as these >indications. > David, I read what you write. I did not challenge your reading of adverbial "humane" instead of "humanae" (I myself would not even demand a rhyme on "plane", if the syntactic constructions grants the adverbial character of "humane"), but challenged your confindence in being able to build numerical interpretations on the numbers of letters in Latin texts. If you say that you have good reasons -- and other reasons than only your assumption of a certain numerical pattern -- for each emendation, I take this for granted. I am sure that you know much more about editing Latin and Insular Latin than I myself will ever learn. But if, for example, your analysis of Wulfstan's poem had led you to assume a number of letters to be intended which could only be reached by admitting (not within the telestich, of course) once or several times the spelling "e" (caudata) instead of "ae" for open /e/, wouldn't you have preffered this spelling for the good reason that it was quite usual? For one of Hraban's poems, where his name is spelled "Hrabanus", and where this spelling is granted by its being the intext of the 'figura', I myself have proposed, with some reservations, to interprete a formal number as encrypting the name "Rabanus" (presupposing a variant spelling which is fixed by the 'figura' of another poem as a possible variant). I don't say that it is always impossible to decide the correct spelling of a word, and I don't deny that sometimes it can be reasonable to take even numerical evidence into account for this kind of decision. But if you want to determine the total number of letters in a given Latin text, or something like 888 letters in a section ending with "Christe", I am sure that usually this text, even an Insular text, will offer several words with different options of spelling, each of these options defendable by more or less good reasons, and few of them -- I believe -- really compelling. And this is why I myself would not build or recommend to build interpretations on this kind of reckoning. The ground seems not sure enough to me, and I see no reason to work on it, if even the exegesis of the time, as far as I know it to be documented in sources, avoided it and restrained from interpreting more than the number of letters of a single name or verse. Otfried From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sun May 5 19:51:50 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Sun, 5 May 96 19:51:49 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA29241; Sun, 5 May 1996 19:49:33 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9544 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:14 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4785; Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:12 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Sun, 05 May 96 14:33:04 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uG8eb-0025u4C; Sun, 5 May 96 20:35 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 14:33:14 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 6100 Dear David, On Sat, 4 May 1996, you wrote: >Otfried, > I take it as demonstrated that certain patterns are infixed in John's >Gospel. I infer that because of the insistence of Orthodox and Catholic >Christians that there is no secret 'gnosis' in this work, recognition of >these patterns was widespread. My own expertise, if I may call it like this, is limited to patterns or numerical meanins which the Christian Fathers said to be given in the Bible, and to cases of adoption/imitation in patristic and medieval literature. I am no expert for the Bible itself, but am used to assume that the number exegesis of the Christian Fathers had little to do with the original intentions and techniques of the biblical authors. I also am no expert for the relations -- secret or not -- of the Gospel of John to the Gnosis, and don't remember to have seen this issue discussed by "Orthodox or Catholic Christians" in premodern times. Anyway, you would have to explain to me how this question is related to our actual debate. > By asking for explicit reference to the struc- >tures I adduce within the texts themselves you are asking the literary equiv- >alent of explications of music theory within Mozart's compositions. Sometimes >there are hints, sometimes jokes, sometimes actual explicit statements, Your comparison gives by no means the "literary equivalent" of what I had asked or stated, in fact there is no equivalence at all. It's just one of your exagerations which use to make objections more stupid than they are. I had asked for, and stated the absence of, sources which attest in explicit form that the interpretative methods which you presuppose in fact were used. I would ask the same if you were proposing interpretations of Mozart's music, and if I had reasons to believe them not to be confirmed by -- or even to be in contradiction with -- the contemporary context provided by treatises about music or other relevant sources for musical production/performance/reception. Hints and jokes would not help me a lot, and "explicit statements" you have not yet adduced. And there are possible contradictions between your methods and the context of Christian exegesis: it is not a conclusive argument against your approach, but I believe that your kind of reckoning the hundreds (or even thousands?) of letters or words would have been regarded by most Christian exegetes as a 'Judaizing' practice which clings to the 'letter' and misses or even kills the 'spirit'. Please don't believe that I share the anti-Judaic notions of the Christian Fathers, but I think that they should be taken into account, except for those exceptional, but given and important cases where we are dealing with authors who did not share this common attitude. > but >usually, as in, say, Cormac's polyphonic colophon to his own psalter, he was >content to make all three voices sing in unison the vowel a on the note A >without hammering the point home, saying, 'Look here, chaps, we are all sing- >ing the same note at the same time, with a musical and literary equivalence.' >Most people who enjoy jokes would find that sort of explicit statement destruc- >tive of humour, ruin of the fun. Again, I did not ask for any "Look here, chaps" statements -- although auto-exegetic statements can be very helpful --, but for external evidence corroborating that your fun was intended by the authors and shared by (part of) their original audience. > There is, I assure you, point in the reckoning of lines, verses, rhymes, >syllables, and letters, as well as verse types and forms of prose rhythm in >every single Insular Latin author of the sixth and seventh centuries. For this >there are two explanations. One is the extreme punctilio of Romano-British >Latin authors, from those like Pelagius, at the upper end of the literary reg- >ister, to Saint Patrick, supposed by many to have written toward the lower end. >You can see that this tradition of high competence survived the departure of >the Romans in the works of Gildas, ca 540, which compare very favourably with >the works of, say, Gregory of Tours. It survived among the Welsh right into the >seventh century, as you will see from the 'Orationes Moucani' and from a con- >siderable number of inscriptions on stone in competent Classical quantitative >metres. This Latin tradition was preserved by well educated Insular churchmen, >whose usage was not contaminated by an evolving proto-Romance vulgar. First >the irish and then the English learned Latin by the book, from ancient books, >not from native speakers, the proof being the astonishing correctness of their >Latin, in stark contrast to that of, say, seventh-century Roman inscriptions >or notarial instruments from Ravenna or Merovingian Gaulish charters. Part of >the reason these features may be hidden is that some of their works are pre- >served only in Continental copies, written by native speakers whose written >Latin was way out of synch with their spoken proto-Romance. > ALL early Insular writers conformed with the usage practised among the Irish >and explicitly inculcated in treatises by both Bede and Alcuin DE ORTHOGRAPHIA. >They imposed their correct Insular usage on Continental scriptoria, but at >varying speeds. That is what accounts for the apparent mess, underlying which >there are perfectly coherent explanations. You are right to point me to the difference between Irish and Continental traditions. But nevertheless I think that, if EACH letter counts, even Insular texts will offer cases of doubt: can we exclude, for instance, "euum" as a facultative variant besides "aeuum" (BTW: I never challenged your correction of adverbial "humanae" into "humane"), or "Criste" and "caritas" besides "Christe" and "charitas", or variants of "ph" (correct or hypercorrect) and "f"? I also doubt that there are safe grounds for determining the exact number of "words" (how, for example, do we know what to do with "-que"?). And I find the grounds extremely shaky which you have entered by determining the number of "lines" in texts of prose, Insular or not. Otfried From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon May 6 14:49:03 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 6 May 96 14:49:02 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA18322; Mon, 6 May 1996 14:46:22 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5006 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 6 May 1996 09:12:11 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5956; Mon, 6 May 1996 09:12:10 -0400 Received: from acs.eku.edu by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 06 May 96 09:12:09 EDT Received: from 157.89.34.56 (157.89.34.56) by ACS.EKU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11885) id <01I4DP7RD7IO005J7G@ACS.EKU.EDU> for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 06 May 1996 09:14:44 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: Message-Id: <318E2668.2F9A@ACS.EKU.EDU> Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 09:18:48 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Karen Foster Organization: Eastern_Kentucky_University Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 4451 Otfried Lieberknecht cites David Howlett: > > By asking for explicit reference to the struc- > >tures I adduce within the texts themselves you are asking the literary equiv- > >alent of explications of music theory within Mozart's compositions. Sometimes > >there are hints, sometimes jokes, sometimes actual explicit statements, >Ottfried replies: > Your comparison gives by no means the "literary equivalent" of what I had > asked or stated, in fact there is no equivalence at all. It's just one of > your exagerations which use to make objections more stupid than they are. I > had asked for, and stated the absence of, sources which attest in explicit > form that the interpretative methods which you presuppose in fact were used. Ottfried, you are beating a dead horse here. David has many times stated that there are no manuals on poetic composition from A-S times. There may never have been. Rather, he has stated, many times, also, that the models used by the Anglo-Saxons were the classical writers, that some A-S writers some of the time, and a very few all of the time, employed principles derived from their models. You go on: > I would ask the same if you were proposing interpretations of Mozart's > music, and if I had reasons to believe them not to be confirmed by -- or > even to be in contradiction with -- the contemporary context provided by > treatises about music or other relevant sources for musical > production/performance/reception. Hints and jokes would not help me a lot, > and "explicit statements" you have not yet adduced. And there are possible > contradictions between your methods and the context of Christian exegesis: > it is not a conclusive argument against your approach, but I believe that > your kind of reckoning the hundreds (or even thousands?) of letters or words > would have been regarded by most Christian exegetes as a 'Judaizing' > practice which clings to the 'letter' and misses or even kills the 'spirit'. Quite the contrary, David has tried to suggest that the principles A-S writers found in their models allowed them to retain the spirit and experiment with the "letter" of the law. More importantly, on this discussion we have muddled distinctions between rules and principles. David has talked about principles employed by A-S writers. David's readers on this list, whose views you seem to take as reflective of David's ideas, have unsuccessfully tried to turn the principles David has adduced into rules. David's recovery of rules of biblical style, if he has called them rules, should be understood as principles of composition. They are not rules to be obeyed or broken, and they certainly are not correctly understood as reflections of linguistic probabilities--the rules of grammar, for instance. The patterns of alliteration in A-S poetry are evidence in and of themselves of form. We have no evidence at all that the Anglo-Saxons had rulebooks that told them how to follow Sievers' seven types, or that they had any rules that governed the patterns of alliteration. We have the simple evidence of alliterative patterns. And we have that evidence in poem after poem. Is it so difficult to suppose that if David sees evidence of harmonic, geometric, algebraic, etc. principles in the poetry, that such principles of composition just might be there? You cite David further: > > but > >usually, as in, say, Cormac's polyphonic colophon to his own psalter, he was > >content to make all three voices sing in unison the vowel a on the note A > >without hammering the point home, saying, 'Look here, chaps, we are all sing- > >ing the same note at the same time, with a musical and literary equivalence.' > >Most people who enjoy jokes would find that sort of explicit statement destruc- > >tive of humour, ruin of the fun. > > Again, I did not ask for any "Look here, chaps" statements -- although > auto-exegetic statements can be very helpful --, but for external evidence > corroborating that your fun was intended by the authors and shared by (part > of) their original audience. Once again, you are beating a dead horse. David has said there are no rule books. The external evidence David has found in the works of other writers, not in non-extant rule books. He has provided plenty of 'evidence' in other texts. If you choose to reject that evidence as having validity, then what is your point in continuing the discussion? Karen Foster, engfoste@acs.eku.edu From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon May 6 15:59:01 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 6 May 96 15:59:00 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id PAA25552; Mon, 6 May 1996 15:56:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 5908 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 6 May 1996 10:33:16 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9700; Mon, 6 May 1996 10:33:15 -0400 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 06 May 96 10:33:14 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Mon, 6 May 1996 15:35:40 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 1; Mon, 06 May 1996 15:35:34 +0100 Message-Id: <009A1EEA.1F00C5BA.1@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:35:30 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: authors and their public (long message, again) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 602 Otfried, Like Jerome, the Venerable Bede wrote a great deal of exegesis. He also wrote the Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum, which he published in A.D. 731. The text of the Preface is not doubtful. If you arrange it per cola et commata, something that syntax and rhythms and manuscript punctuation make it very easy to do, you will find exactly 100 lines and exactly 731 words. Does Bede EVER write a word about this sort of trick? Is it a device I have wil- fully imposed on his text? Doe it matter whether anyone else has ever written explicitly about this feature in this text? No. No. No. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon May 6 16:19:20 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 6 May 96 16:19:18 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA27532; Mon, 6 May 1996 16:16:35 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6207 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 6 May 1996 10:55:33 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1705; Mon, 6 May 1996 10:55:33 -0400 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 06 May 96 10:55:31 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Mon, 6 May 1996 15:58:05 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 4; Mon, 06 May 1996 15:58:03 +0100 Message-Id: <009A1EED.44F853AD.4@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:58:02 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 1208 Otfried, If I replied to your responses 'Ah, well, slings and arrows', I would rely on a recipient's mental supply of 'of outrageous fortune', as on his knowledge of the source and context. I am not aware that the young are instructed either in school or on the streets by manuals formal or otherwise in this form of play. Nor does one buy handbooks at W.H. Smith or on railway platforms that instruct one in the intricacies of rhyming slang or limericks. But someone who insisted that these were not widespread features of our linguistic culture and refused to believe in their existence unless I documented them might lay him- self open to a charge of obtuseness. As a matter of fact, I hhave supplied, over the network and long before pub- lication in books, chapter and verse of ancient authorities, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, for every analytic feature I discuss. I have also presented in some de- tail the lines of transmission from these ancient authorities to Insular men of the sixth and seventh centuries. So allow for a twinge of irritation at the suggestion that I proceed without having established grounds of procedure and that I exaggerate to make objections look stupider than they are. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon May 6 20:47:08 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 6 May 96 20:47:07 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA22756; Mon, 6 May 1996 20:44:37 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9510 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 6 May 1996 15:31:11 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6065; Mon, 6 May 1996 15:31:10 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 06 May 96 15:30:50 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uGW20-0025u5C; Mon, 6 May 96 21:33 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:31:11 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 3646 Dear Karen, I may be beating a dead horse, as you say, but at least I don't saddle and ride it. As it seems, it's rather you who got something wrong. I did not ask for manuals of poetics confirming the poetical techniques David believes to have detected. Such manuals would serve me -- and would serve David -- well to support his findings, but I am well aware of the fact that such manuals don't exist, though you are wrong to assume that no poetic manuals existed at all. In Latin -- and the current debate has focused on Latin literature -- you will find a lot of writings _De arte rhetorica_, _De arte grammatica_ (often helpful for literary techniques, too) and (less frequent) _De arte metrica_, but they are not very profuse about techniques of _dispositio_ or composition. But: what I had been asking for are sources supporting the INTERPRETATIVE procedures which David applies and supposes to have been applied by contemporary readers, or at least by some of them. And I can assure you that the field of interpretation and exegesis, including exegesis of numbers in texts, is one of the best documented fields in patristic and medieval times. We have masses of hermeneutical treatises and prologues, and much larger masses of commentaries to the Bible and to ancient, patristic or medieval literature. They offer profuse and explicit evidence of the methods which learned readers -- sometimes the very same persons whose own poetical or literary products are the object of David's interpretations -- applied, and this is why I think that the interpretative methods -- and the complementary methods of literary production -- which we assume for readers/authors trained in this field should be supported or at least not contradicted by this kind of contextual evidence. Especially if the object of research is termed "biblical style", the commentary tradition of the Bible and what it said in explicit words about the Bible cannot easily be dismissed, right? I don't understand very well what your distinction of 'principles' and 'rules' wants to prove, but however we call it: methods of interpretation in Latin theological tradition (and, to a minor degree, also in profane commentary tradition) were highly regulated by imitative procedures and by explicit prescriptions. And this makes these methods quite predictable, far more predictable than those applied in predominantly popular/vernacular contexts, or than those applied in modern times. One reason more, according to my opinion, not to disregard this context of hermeneutical/exegetical sources if we want to infer from literary texts which were produced in or informed by this context the methods of interpretation for which they were produced. If I am beating a dead horse by asking David for contextual confirmation of this kind, I don't think it is my fault if the horse does not comply. But please don't think that I say or believe that David's interpretations are rubbish. I have seen (and have produced myself) far less impressive interpretations which I believe, with reservations, to be right. And I have had reasons, more than once, to change my own assumptions as to which kind of exegetical methods are attested and which are not. The field of patristic/medieval exegesis is far from being exhausted, and unexpected, but well established branches of tradition can turn up if we look for them, and can provide the kind of contextual support which before we seemed to lack. But as long as they have not yet turned up, we should make this clear, take account of it in our assessment of the evidence of textual patterns, and allow objections to be made. Otfried From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon May 6 20:47:16 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 6 May 96 20:47:15 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA22773; Mon, 6 May 1996 20:44:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9493 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Mon, 6 May 1996 15:31:05 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6022; Mon, 6 May 1996 15:31:05 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon, 06 May 96 15:30:46 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uGW23-0025u8C; Mon, 6 May 96 21:33 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:31:05 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 3076 >Otfried, > If I replied to your responses 'Ah, well, slings and arrows', I would rely >on a recipient's mental supply of 'of outrageous fortune', as on his knowledge >of the source and context. I am not aware that the young are instructed either >in school or on the streets by manuals formal or otherwise in this form of >play. Nor does one buy handbooks at W.H. Smith or on railway platforms that >instruct one in the intricacies of rhyming slang or limericks. But someone who >insisted that these were not widespread features of our linguistic culture and >refused to believe in their existence unless I documented them might lay him- >self open to a charge of obtuseness. David, I have explained it often enough, so I can be short this time: since authors like Jerome and Bede and those informed by them in fact HAD books and WROTE books which taught what to do with numbers in text, and since there obviously was a lot of need for such books in order to learn what they taught, it makes sense to ask you whether your methods of numerical interpretation are supported by this kind of contextual evidence. If they are, you should be glad. If they are not, you might have reasons maybe not to withdraw your interpretations, but to point very clearly to this fact. And to be slightly less enraged if some of us dare to doubt the validity of your findings. > As a matter of fact, I hhave supplied, over the network and long before pub- >lication in books, chapter and verse of ancient authorities, Hebrew, Greek, and >Latin, for every analytic feature I discuss. I have also presented in some de- >tail the lines of transmission from these ancient authorities to Insular men >of the sixth and seventh centuries. So allow for a twinge of irritation at the >suggestion that I proceed without having established grounds of procedure and >that I exaggerate to make objections look stupider than they are. > It's true that this is not the first time that we, too, are having this debate with each other. I use to ask you for explicit evidence of the methods you apply, and you use to reply that there is abundant evidence of this kind, and use to point me to sources like Boethius's _Institutio arithmetica_ or to texts which, according to you, show the numerical patterns in question to everyone who knows to read. I use to reply that Boethius does not teach anything about constructing or interpreting numerical patterns in texts (or that authors like Jerome and Bede teach a lot about it, but nothing which confirms your presumed methods), and that the second kind of texts does not offer the kind of explicit evidence I had been asking for, and in the end you use to say -- or at least once you said almost as much -- OK, there is no such evidence, but my findings can live without it, since I have supplied everything which they need to convince everyone (who can read), and it's somehow irritating to be asked for more. It's a sort of understanding which we reach in the end, so I don't think it is necessary to go through the motions again and again. Otfried From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed May 8 05:26:09 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 8 May 96 05:26:07 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id FAA05318; Wed, 8 May 1996 05:23:26 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 9641 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Tue, 7 May 1996 12:45:28 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7389; Tue, 7 May 1996 12:45:28 -0400 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Tue, 07 May 96 12:45:25 EDT Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Tue, 7 May 1996 17:47:05 +0100 Received: by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) id 19; Tue, 07 May 1996 17:46:53 +0100 Message-Id: <009A1FC5.A1F39239.19@vax.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 17:46:49 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 3337 Otfried, An oblique way toward resolution of the problem of explicit application of analytic technique. There is, as you know, an immense corpus of music theory manuals, a few of which, not many, say, 'Look, chaps, this is how the big boys compose'. You will see in analysis of the motet 'In hydraulis' in 'Plainsong and Medieval Music' IV (1995) 185-91 that Busnois makes the classical terms for theoretic ratios, epogdous, epitritus, hemiolus, and duplus, exhibit them- selves (often several times) by appearing at their own proportions of the way through the text. If we note Aldhelm playing with the same theoretical terms in his Letter to Heahfrith of 672, illustrating the ratio 9:8 at 'bis quater- nis', and Laidcenn in his Lorica, datable to 659, using the same ratio, as Busnois does, for self-reference, 15 times, we may infer that all three men understand the same theory in the same way, as it all derives from a single work of Boethius we know they read. Still, none of them is explicit about what he does. I know no ancient rhetorician who lists the acceptable forms for clausulae. When we read Rhetorica ad Herennium IV xx 27-8 and Cicero De Oratore III about rhythmic composition in isocolon, they exhibit without naming what they are discussing. They even share the same blind, using the word 'puerile', as if neither would consider doing anything so childish as what both of them proceed systematically to do. Again, as you will see from the edition of 'Adelphus Adelpha Mater' in Peritia IX, Israel nowhere suggests that he is presenting a prosodic catalogue of tricks to reduce 66 verses (33-22-11) from (partly) ennea- and octo- to (mostly) heptasyllables. Nor does he tell you that he is experimenting with four different rhyme schemes, though if you label them ABCD you can see in a flash what he is doing. I know no medieval theorist who tells us how to compose carmina figurata, yet there they are, in polychrome. One, in my Celtic book, by Joseph Scottus, makes the embedded verses 1/9 of the whole and among them the address to Charlemagne, lege feliciter Carle, 1/9 of the embedded verses, in a cross at the crux. These things are just there, as surely as Joseph's play in his 'Abbreuiatio' of Jerome's commentary on Isaiah for Alcuin with the ratio 2:1 and the word 'breuior'. The principal assurance of rightness we have is the rigourous consistency with which these men play. Their forms of play are partly devices for flaunting their learning and wit, partly a consequence of their belief in a Creator who both revealed and hid himself in Creation. As if He had asked them, and they ask us, 'Can you find me?' We should want neither to miss the fact that these things are there, nor to forget that it is play, a sort of solemn fun. I don't give a toss whether others concur with every detail of my analyses. I have probably made many mistakes, and would welcome correction from those who see more clearly than I do. But it is hard to accept criticism of the methods devised to understand these texts, as they are (as completely as I can make them) derived from and consistent with the most explicit statements from Antiquity I can find. The rest is as ruthlessly logical as I know how to make it. I detect no comparable rigour or internal consistency in the responses of most opponents. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu May 9 03:28:30 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 9 May 96 03:28:28 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id DAA07591; Thu, 9 May 1996 03:25:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8183 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 8 May 1996 07:43:39 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3036; Wed, 8 May 1996 07:43:39 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 08 May 96 07:43:35 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uH7h4-0025u6C; Wed, 8 May 96 13:46 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 07:43:39 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 7380 >Otfried, > An oblique way toward resolution of the problem of explicit application of >analytic technique. David, I am not at all against oblique ways to solve problems. Even the approach for which I myself argue, that is, to analyse literary texts with the methods documented by the context of biblical exegesis, to a certain degree is oblique, because it demands to transfer such methods from biblical to non-biblical texts. > There is, as you know, an immense corpus of music theory >manuals, a few of which, not many, say, 'Look, chaps, this is how the big boys >compose'. You will see in analysis of the motet 'In hydraulis' in 'Plainsong >and Medieval Music' IV (1995) 185-91 that Busnois makes the classical terms >for theoretic ratios, epogdous, epitritus, hemiolus, and duplus, exhibit them- >selves (often several times) by appearing at their own proportions of the way >through the text. If we note Aldhelm playing with the same theoretical terms >in his Letter to Heahfrith of 672, illustrating the ratio 9:8 at 'bis quater- >nis', and Laidcenn in his Lorica, datable to 659, using the same ratio, as >Busnois does, for self-reference, 15 times, we may infer that all three men >understand the same theory in the same way, as it all derives from a single >work of Boethius we know they read. Still, none of them is explicit about what >he does. Though I myself have no special competences in this field, I have no doubts that treatises on music and techniques of musical composition -- even if the latter are not explained by such treatises -- can enlighten us about techniques of literary composition. I only wonder why there was so little use for musical theory (or for arithmetical 'rationes' and 'medietates' in general) when numbers in texts were explained. And I think -- maybe because I have seen too much bad modern scholarship in this field, and not enough of your own -- that the coincidence of a certain word or name with a numerical intersection that might be relevant in musical or arithmetical theory can offer very weak evidence. But I certainly would not dismiss as weak evidence if such a coincidence, in one and the same text, recurs fifteen times. > I know no ancient rhetorician who lists the acceptable forms for clausulae. >When we read Rhetorica ad Herennium IV xx 27-8 and Cicero De Oratore III about >rhythmic composition in isocolon, they exhibit without naming what they are >discussing. They even share the same blind, using the word 'puerile', as if >neither would consider doing anything so childish as what both of them proceed >systematically to do. Nobody denies, certainly not me, that we have to infer literary techniques from primary texts, where we lack a context providing their explicit description. We even may have to do so where such a context exists, since theory and practice may (and usually will) diverge. But if such a context exists, diverging or not, we have to take it into account. If we had, for example, a 6th cent. treatise describing the use of clausulae, it would help us to analyse and confirm their use in the literary practice of the time, and if there were discrepancies to be found, we would have to explain them. For the significance of numbers in texts, we have such a context in biblical and other commentary tradition, and this is why I want it to be taken into account. > Again, as you will see from the edition of 'Adelphus Adelpha Mater' in >Peritia IX, Israel nowhere suggests that he is presenting a prosodic catalogue >of tricks to reduce 66 verses (33-22-11) from (partly) ennea- and octo- to >(mostly) heptasyllables. Nor does he tell you that he is experimenting with >four different rhyme schemes, though if you label them ABCD you can see in a >flash what he is doing. This is highly interesting, especially for my own research on literary applications of 'perfect' and 'trigonal' numbers, but, if I understand you right, it is not built on the kind of numbers of letters or words or prose lines (and not on musical or arithmetical ratios) which had raised my objections or questions. It is true that I myself focus on analysing the number of "significata per litteram" (things, persons, events) instead of formal units, but nevertheless a number of 66 metrical verses and of their syllables might very well have been within the horizon of interest of readers trained in biblical exegesis, as I understand it. > I know no medieval theorist who tells us how to compose carmina figurata, >yet there they are, in polychrome. Exactly, in polychrome. And/or written in columns which fix the position of each letter. Which is why we don't need further contextual evidence to prove that they are 'carmina figurata'. And if we needed it, you know and I know that we have prologues and additional declarations which explain what they are and, if not how to compose, at least how to read them. On the other hand, have you ever tried with a poem NOT marked as a 'carmen figuratum' to detect intexts which form a real figura (not only acrostics, mesostics or telestics of the more common type)? Or would you try, and even recommend, to do it? > One, in my Celtic book, by Joseph Scottus, >makes the embedded verses 1/9 of the whole and among them the address to >Charlemagne, lege feliciter Carle, 1/9 of the embedded verses, in a cross at >the crux. These things are just there, as surely as Joseph's play in his >'Abbreuiatio' of Jerome's commentary on Isaiah for Alcuin with the ratio 2:1 >and the word 'breuior'. They may be there, but we have to evaluate their intentional or unintentional character. I find it hard to imagine circumstances under which a ratio 2:1 coinciding with the word brevior would strike me as strong evidence for the intentionality of a numerical pattern. > The principal assurance of rightness we have is the rigourous consistency >with which these men play. Their forms of play are partly devices for flaunting >their learning and wit, partly a consequence of their belief in a Creator who >both revealed and hid himself in Creation. As if He had asked them, and they >ask us, 'Can you find me?' We should want neither to miss the fact that these >things are there, nor to forget that it is play, a sort of solemn fun. Agreed. > I don't give a toss whether others concur with every detail of my analyses. >I have probably made many mistakes, and would welcome correction from those >who see more clearly than I do. But it is hard to accept criticism of the >methods devised to understand these texts, as they are (as completely as I >can make them) derived from and consistent with the most explicit statements >from Antiquity I can find. The rest is as ruthlessly logical as I know how to >make it. I detect no comparable rigour or internal consistency in the responses >of most opponents. > I don't doubt the rigour of your analyses, and I don't doubt their consistency with the sources you take into account, but I have some doubts that you take enough account of eventually contradicting evidence in the context of biblical exegesis. I think it was you who termed the object of your research not arithmetical style or musical style or computistical style, but biblical style. My doubts, and maybe even those of others, may lack the rigour of your own deductions, but this should not make it hard for you to accept criticism. Otfried From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu May 9 03:28:33 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Thu, 9 May 96 03:28:32 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.130]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id DAA07594; Thu, 9 May 1996 03:25:53 +0100 (BST) Received: from WVNVM.WVNET.EDU by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 8185 for ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU; Wed, 8 May 1996 07:43:46 -0400 Received: from WVNVM (NJE origin SMTP@WVNVM) by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3040; Wed, 8 May 1996 07:43:40 -0400 Received: from berlin.netsurf.de by WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 08 May 96 07:43:39 EDT Received: by berlin.netsurf.de from Lieberknecht.berlin.netsurf.de with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 [@@]) id m0uH7h3-0025u5C; Wed, 8 May 96 13:46 MET DST X-Sender: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 07:43:46 -0400 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Re: authors and their public (long message, again) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 2397 >If I might intrude in this discussion I would pose a question about the >reader's ability to recognize the 100 lines and the 731 words. No question >about the fact of the 100 lines or the 731 words, but simply to ask whether >the "average" reader would ever have recognized such? To recognize the use >of these two numbers would certainly have demanded that the reader, 1, be >looking for such, 2, stop and painstakingly count lines and words - and that >would have demanded considerable time. And I presume that the text contained >no hint suggesting that the reader make such an effort. Thus unless one >assumes that readers were regularly looking for such numerical features, must >he not suppose that some (many?) such structures went unnoticed. Would that >have disappointed Bede? George Beech, Kalamazoo > George, As I have tried to explain in my earlier message (the one which started this thread), the concept of an average reader can be inappropriate (not necessarily, but eventually) when we are dealing with a clerical/monastic culture where literary techniques might have been chosen rather with regard to a stratified public, in order to feed different types of readers by one and the same text, but without feeding one and the same food to all of them. The tradition of biblical exegesis would provide such a concept, distinguishing between different groups of readers like "parvuli" or "incipientes", "progredientes" and "perfecti", and assigning different levels of understanding to them. In this tradition, methods of interpreting numbers would be part of the general apparatus of allegorical exegesis, which was expected to be applied only by readers of the more advanced kind. But, to judge from the commentaries and hermeneutical treatises which had been written by and for such advanced readers, the special technique of counting all the words of a prologue or of counting the "lines" of a prose text would not -- not usually -- have been part of their exegetical training. This may or may not cast doubts on the validity of the interpretation in question (I myself am among those who say it does). But the cryptic or latent character of a numerical pattern in itself should not raise any doubts, because latency would even be -- to a certain degree -- a necessary quality of the textual and semantic structures reserved for the happy few. Otfried Lieberknecht From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Mon Jun 17 14:14:36 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Mon, 17 Jun 96 14:14:35 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.23]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA28587; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 14:07:54 +0100 (BST) Message-Id: <199606171307.OAA28587@listserv.rl.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 13:54:23 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: origins of _Beowulf_ To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 1300 Karen, There are many convergent forms of evidence for the date of composition of 'Beowulf'. But here are two simple ones. Alfred clearly understood the five- book structure of Boethius 'De Consolatione Philosophiae', as he refers to the boundaries of the books. But he restructured the work into an unnumbered pro- logue and 42 fits in three chiastic cycles of 14. 'Beowulf', with an unnumbered prologue and 42 fits in three chiastic cycles of 14, seems to me not unrelated to this. Contracted forms which ruin the metre of the poem can be decontracted by restoring the spelling of the Alfredian Boethius. Fits march pari passu (15 being a particularly happy example). Fit 2 of the poem affords a clear example of seven-part narrative that begins with an announcement of the story, followed by a report of its outcome, followed by double internal regression, an unusual manner of telling a tale that I have noticed elsewhere only in Asser's Life of Alfred, where it recurs three times. There is a triple justification for the fixing of the line numbers in which the poet signs himself, paralleled from so early a period only in Insular texts. I think it could not have been written before 893-5, and there are good reasons for believing that it was written not long after. They're in page proof. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Tue Aug 6 21:32:55 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Tue, 6 Aug 96 21:32:54 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.23]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA19789; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 21:23:47 +0100 (BST) Message-Id: <199608062023.VAA19789@listserv.rl.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:13:55 -0700 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Gernot Wieland Subject: Re: Numerical Analysis To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: <199607181536.IAA24293@unixg.ubc.ca> Status: RO Content-Length: 1918 David: You ask me to allow your "general competence to recognize and to compose in Biblical style and to know when I am doing it." Granted, and I never did not allow it. You ask further that I should recognize that you feel "no need to advertize to the whole world each occasion on which I do it." There was no need for you to advertise; I asked you for examples in my first posting; you gave me a few, and it was interesting for me to note that you gave the whole rather than the first part of the Prologue. From what you say, and from what I did with the first part of the Prologue I still infer that the numerical patterning can be imposed by someone as ingenious as you. This, however, does not mean that it is therefore necessarily written by the original author. No, I am not wilting: I am trying to resolve what seems a genuine problem. If there is a numerical pattern, has it been put there by the original author or is it the nature of numbers that they can be manipulated to create a pattern? For me this is no frivolous question. It is one that your book raises. I don't see why I need to reserve discussion "of composition of analytical passages" - I assume you mean "to". Why should I? If I want to know whether numbers can be manipulated to create a pattern, why should I look at a passage which you have already analyzed? It is clear that there is a pattern in the passage you have analyzed. What is not clear is whether there are patterns in passages not analyzed. And in order to find out, I need to ask the author whether s/he has intended to put a pattern there. Am I unwilling or unable to deal with the question as posed? Not at all, but does that not allow me to ask further questions? Questions that are central but which you did not ask aloud in your book? I won't be back till Aug. 12, by the way. So if there is no response to your answer for a while, you'll know why. Cheers, Gernot. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Wed Aug 7 14:27:58 1996 Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by abdn.ac.uk; Wed, 7 Aug 96 14:27:57 BST Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.23]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA13480; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:16:37 +0100 (BST) Message-Id: <199608071316.OAA13480@listserv.rl.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:59:56 +0100 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Numerical Analysis To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Status: RO Content-Length: 2405 Gernot, You are asking important questions I am incompetent to answer. Are our brains numerically programmed? In conceiving and executing patterned works are we exercising imagination and will or following circuits? I don't know. In trying to understand ancient and medieval compositions transmitted across long stretches of time during which tastes and modes of perception have changed drasticly, I have come to numerical analysis backwards, noting features of arithmetic composition only after perceiving arrangement per cola et commata with parallel and chiastic statement and restatement and rhyme and rhythm. Once these other elements are clearly perceived, the numer- ical patterning appears as complete corroboration of the others. It cannot have been imposed as a form of decoration at a late stage. If it is there, it must have been there ab initio, the basic foundation on which all the rest was erected. Take Hlothhere's charter to Beorhtwald. Arrange it per cola et commata. Inevitable. There is only one way in which it can be done. In that arrangement (confirmed by syntax and faultless clausular rhythms, 33 lines and 240 words) the ninth line from the beginning is identical with the ninth line from the end, 'iuxta notissimos terminos a me demonstratos et proacuratoribus meis', nine words. Mere coincidence? Like the express date, A.D. 679, coincident with the 679 syllables? Again. The Prologue to the anonymous of Whitby's Life of Gregory, beginning with three clausulae, three verses from the Psalter at the centre, ending with three cursus rhythms. Seventy-seven words, the quotation coming from Psalm 77 verse 7. My clever imposition of a smart-ass notion on a text innocent of this form of composition? An improvement by a transmitting scribe? Or a window into the mind of the author? First things first. One has to decide whether these features exist (not necessarily exactly as I suggest, but THERE, in the compositions, as distinct from my imagination). if we can accept those as data, then we can address the question of deliberateness or authorial intention or accident. Clearly I like and admire this form of composition, but whether I write this way or not is an irrelevance. Whether ancient authors did is the question. Then whether medieval authors did. Then whether their quotations from earlier works imply conscious knowledge of what they were doing. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Nov 22 09:10 GMT 1996 Received: from listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk (listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA24480 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:10:28 GMT Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id BA638F40 ; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 9:08:29 +0000 Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.23]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA16781; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:07:23 GMT Message-Id: <199611220907.JAA16781@listserv.rl.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 19:46:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Prologue to John's Gospel (was: Re: Wulf and Eadwacer) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 7100 Status: RO >Melissa, > The point of dealing with structures of texts (putatively authorial) is >that once you recognize the structure certain readings are definitely ruled >out, and that allows you to concentrate on the remaining possibilities. > If you notice in the prologue to John's Gospel this structure: > panta > dia autou egeneto > kai > xwris autou egeneto > oude en, >perfectly symmetrical by word and syllable and letter, the numbers in accord >with the numbers of the Creation story in Genesis I (appropriately, as this >is about Christ's Creation of the universe), you see that the editorial divi- >sion 'ouden o gegonen' is an inauthentic editorial confection, interesting, >perhaps, in the history of Christian doctrine or textual criticism, but nothing >whatever to do with the author. So with Old English texts, most of which sur- >vive in only one copy, attention to structure is even more important than in >better attested compositions. Structural analysis is often the only way we >have of demonstrating certain readings to be bogus. That is in no small measure >the reason so many oppose it. > Dear David, As it happens, this message arrived when I was just going through some notes which I had made when reading your introductory pages to _The English Origins of Old French Literature_, where you adduce the same biblical prologue both in Greek and Latin as your example to introduce what you call "the adjuncts of biblical style" (roughly: those compositional techiques which are not merely based on repetition and parallel or chiastic arrangement of words/ideas, but include also precise numerical arrangements of words/syllables/letters and eventually clauses/lines). In your book you simply make your textual division "oude en. O genonen en autwi [sic] zwh hn.." (instead of "oude en o genonen. En autow zoh hn..."), but you don't offer any arguments for this division nor do you point out that this is not the common way to divide (and in the case of "autowi" to read) the text, as in the case of the Vulgate, where you boldly use a capital "Q" to mark what you regard as the exact division: "et sine ipso factum est nihil. Quod factum est in ipso uita erat...". I assume that you have discussed the problem elsewhere, and I wonder -- since you take it for granted that Jerome would have divided the text like you do -- whether you have found any citation in his works which would *not* rule out the possibility of reading "Quod factum est in ipso uita erat..." (instead of "... quod factum est. In ipso uita erat..."). Leaving the numerical evidence aside for a moment, I really believe that you misread Jerome's translation, whereas I have no opinion regarding the correct understanding of the Greek text. But this does not mean that I am not willing to consider your idea that the numerical evidence might be conclusive, or might at least be a guide to the authentic understanding/division of the text. As you state above, the verses are "perfectly symmetrical by word and syllable and letter". In your book, you write (I use * instead of ' to mark corresponding numbers): Again the author writes chiastically in B, balancing 'all things' in 1 with 'not one thing' in 1* and 'through him came into being' in 2 with 'without Him came into being' in 2* around the central 'and' in 3. [...] In B there are ten [sc. words], arranged five and five. [...] In B there are twenty-two syllables arranged eleven and eleven. [...] In B there are forty-six letters arranged twenty-three and twenty- three. This refers to what you call part B of the prologue: words syllables letters ------------------------------------------------------- 1 panta 1 2 5 2 di(a) autou egeneto 3 (8) (15) 3 kai 1 1 3 2* xwris autou egeneto 3 8 17 1* oude en 2 3 6 ------------------------------------------------------- 10 22 46 Let us assume a very sollemn performance where "di(a)" in fact would have two syllables and three letters, as you count it without pointing to the eventual problem. To reach your 'perfect symmetry' by word (5+5), syllable (11+11) and letter (23+23) we would have to assume that "kai" is in no way "central" -- as you yourself arrange and term it --, nor could we take it as the first word of the second clause -- which it quite obviously is --, but we would have to take it as the last word of the *first* clause. This is what I would call to force a text into a numerical pattern for which there is no evidence, neither in the text itself nor in its context (at least not as far as I can judge the context, but then I don't know why you believe that your interpretation is supported by the account of Genesis I). The most natural disposition would yield 4+6 words, 10+12 syllables, 20+26 letters. Or, if you insist on understanding "kai" as "central", maybe even 4+1+5, 10+1+11, 20+3+23. But not 5+5, 11+11, 23+23. The mere *possibility* to reach a symmetrical arrangement by taking "kay" as the last word of the first clause is not yet a sufficient reason -- at least not for me -- to divide the text against its obvious syntactic and semantic structure. And the same problem occurs in the following part of the prologue -- part C, which would have to support your division of "oude en. O genonen en..." -- where what you first claim to be the "central" "kai" you then count as the last word of the first half in order to reach a number of 7+7 words, 11+10 syllables and 23+23 letters (btw, I don't understand your count of syllables in this part). So I don't think that there is sufficient numerical evidence to dismiss the traditional division of the text as an "inauthentic editorial confection, interesting, perhaps, in the history of Christian doctrine or textual criticism, but nothing whatever to do with the author". I would even go further and say that although the text certainly offers parallel and chiastic dispositions of his statements and thus fulfills your description of "biblical style", this disposition nevertheless does not extend to precise numerical arrangements of the words, syllables and letters and by consequence does not exhibit what you describe as the "adjuncts of biblical style". This said with regard to parts B and C as discussed here, but I reached the same conclusions with regard to parts A and D (and with regard to Jerome's translation). Yours, Otfried --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Otfried Lieberknecht, Schoeneberger Str. 11, D-12163 Berlin Tel.: ++49 30 8516675 (fax on request), E-mail: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de Homepage for Dante Studies: http://members.aol.com/lieberk/welcome.html ORB Dante Alighieri: A Guide to Online Resources: http://orb.rhodes.edu/encyclop/culture/lit/Italian/Danindex.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Nov 22 11:13 GMT 1996 Received: from listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk (listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA11243 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 11:13:42 GMT Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id F1DCB350 ; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 11:11:44 +0000 Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.23]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA25252; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 10:33:00 GMT Message-Id: <199611221033.KAA25252@listserv.rl.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 09:22:11 -0500 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: "Sarah L. Higley" Subject: Re: Wulf and Eadwacer To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L In-Reply-To: David Howlett "Re: Wulf and Eadwacer" (Nov 19, 1:07pm) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1700 Status: RO >. . .and I see clearly that much which passes for orthodoxy >now will be recognized as rubbish when others take note of it. Those who do >take note of it will share (with our ancestors) a vision at once more sharply >focussed and broader than those who do not. David, I think you are "divinizing" your system a bit. This is merely my opinion. I cannot "show you where your errors are" anymore than I can prove to the fervent missionary that his God doesn't work in my system of beliefs. If I am remiss in acts of charity by remaining agnostic or unconvinced, I apologize. I will allow you, if that's what you need from me, your right to your vision of all medieval poetry--but I thought you already had that. If that's the case, how on earth do I have the power to make you or save you from looking "foolish?" I take responsibility for my own foolishness, and if I'm foolish here, then so be it. It is merely my stubborn sense that the poems of the Exeter Book are many and varied and composed and collected under a variety of conditions and varying vastly in sophistication and intent and that fitting them to one system of composition and thereby making decisions as to their meaning (especially something like Wulf and Eadwacer which might come to us in damaged form) is to do a disservice to reading and interpretation. I have seen over the years what happens to people who get embroiled with you in this controversy. You can level me, if you want to, with one withering blast of your blow torch and consign me to the damned and the unvisionary if you like. So be it. But I'm entitled to my skepticism, if not, perhaps, the harsh way I worded it the other day. Mea culpa. Sarah H. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Nov 22 16:16 GMT 1996 Received: from listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk (listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA25629 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 16:16:11 GMT Received: from listserv.rl.ac.uk by listservx.cis.rl.ac.uk (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id 367AD350 ; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 16:14:18 +0000 Received: from listserv (listserv.rl.ac.uk [130.246.132.23]) by listserv.rl.ac.uk (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id QAA22444; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 16:13:09 GMT Message-Id: <199611221613.QAA22444@listserv.rl.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 13:29:59 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Prologue to John's Gospel (was: Re: Wulf and Eadwacer) To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2324 Status: RO Otfried, Thank you for your close attention to the analysis. Your difficulty issues from not having begun at the beginning. The rules and adjuncts belong to a Biblical style which is fully developed in the text of the Hebrew Bible. The texts I have presented from the New Testament represent these features because they were written by Jews who were trying -- by their own explicit testimony (o anaginwskwn noeitw) -- to write Scripture according to the rules long estab- lished in Hebrew. It is one mark among many of Jerome's genius that he repre- sented so much of this elegantly and naturally in Latin. The specific problem that exercises you, about reckoning of the centre, is one of the features ex- plicitly discussed in the Talmud, quoted in both 'The Celtic Latin Tradition' and 'British Books'. There is no rancour on my part in saying that you are not entitled to tax me with having misread Jerome if you have not begun with his Greek model in John I, the first two words of which tell you as clearly as possible that John's model was Genesis I, the numerical structure making in indisputably clear that the model was the Hebrew, not the Greek, text of Genesis I. For the syntactical division direct your attention to the arrangement 'per cola et commata' in the oldest extant pandect of the Vulgate, the Codex Amiatinus. If that does not convince you on its own, consider the same passage in the Lindisfarne Gospels. If the agreement of both of them leaves you unsatisfied, see the modern 'authority' for this in 'Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Versionem', ed. B. Fischer et al. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, dritte verbesser- te Auflage, 1983). What you have queried is not my editorial or analytic con- fection; it is the way the Anglo-Saxons read and laid out the text, demonstra- ble, in Articles language, 'by most certain warrant of Holy Scripture'. 'The English Origins of Old French Literature' was meant to appear fourth in a series of books chronologically arranged. Because it was easier to set it jumped the queue, so some of the historical detail for ancient foundations of the tradition may not yet be in your hands. All the problems that puzzle you are dealt with in the other books, and the publisher quite reasonably wants the arguments not to be restated fully again and again. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Sat Dec 14 14:07 GMT 1996 Received: from listserv.ja.net ([130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA24932 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 1996 14:07:35 GMT Received: from listserv (130.246.132.24) by listserv.ja.net (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id 4AFF2720 ; Sat, 14 Dec 1996 14:01:24 +0000 Message-Id: <199612141407.OAA24932@abdn.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 14:33:00 MET Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: Otfried Lieberknecht Subject: Prologue to John's Gospel again To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 9869 Status: RO Dear David, On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 19:46:00 MET, I had offered some critical comments on your analysis of the prologue of John's Gospel as presented briefly in the introductory pages of your book "The English Origins of Old French Literature" (and in more satisfying form, according to the tenor of your reply, in other publications of yours like "The Celtic Latin Tradition" and "British Books"). One of the points which I had addressed is your division of the verses Io 1,3-4 both in the Greek original and in the Latin translation of Jerome's Vulgate. I wrote: In your book you simply make your textual division "oude en. O genonen en autwi [sic] zwh hn.." (instead of "oude en o genonen. En autow zoh hn..."), but you don't offer any arguments for this division nor do you point out that this is not the common way to divide (and in the case of "autowi" to read) the text, as in the case of the Vulgate, where you boldly use a capital "Q" to mark what you regard as the exact division: "et sine ipso factum est nihil. Quod factum est in ipso uita erat...". I assume that you have discussed the problem elsewhere, and I wonder -- since you take it for granted that Jerome would have divided the text like you do -- whether you have found any citation in his works which would *not* rule out the possibility of reading "Quod factum est in ipso uita erat..." (instead of "... quod factum est. In ipso uita erat..."). Leaving the numerical evidence aside for a moment, I really believe that you misread Jerome's translation, whereas I have no opinion regarding the correct understanding of the Greek text. To this you replied: >[...] > There is no rancour on my part in saying that you are not entitled to tax >me with having misread Jerome if you have not begun with his Greek model in >John I, the first two words of which tell you as clearly as possible that >John's model was Genesis I, the numerical structure making in indisputably >clear that the model was the Hebrew, not the Greek, text of Genesis I. For the >syntactical division direct your attention to the arrangement 'per cola et >commata' in the oldest extant pandect of the Vulgate, the Codex Amiatinus. >If that does not convince you on its own, consider the same passage in the >Lindisfarne Gospels. If the agreement of both of them leaves you unsatisfied, >see the modern 'authority' for this in 'Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Versionem', >ed. B. Fischer et al. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, dritte verbesser- >te Auflage, 1983). What you have queried is not my editorial or analytic con- >fection; it is the way the Anglo-Saxons read and laid out the text, demonstra- >ble, in Articles language, 'by most certain warrant of Holy Scripture'. >[...] Since the first two words of the prologue fail to tell me clearly what they and their parallel in Gn 1 have to do with the problem of dividing Io 1,3-4 -- and since you yourself did not regard this to be sufficiently important to be explained in your analysis of John's prologue in "The English Origins" --, please allow me to leave this argument (?) aside, but to focus on the syntactical problem of the verses 3-4. What you regard -- if your reply is to be taken as a serious reply, and not simply as evasive rhetoric -- as conclusive evidence to determine Jerome's syntactical understanding of these verses are (apart from the numerical patterns which you find in the text) the Codex Amiatinus (Northumbria, saec. VIII) and even the Lindisfarne Gospels and Anglo-Saxon readers or scribes, but apparently not Jerome's own exegetical writings, where he cites these verses in several places and even discusses the syntactical problem we are dealing with. As it happens, your reference to these later insular witnesses of the Vulgate is not entirely pointless, because it is true that in fact -- and here I have to correct my earlier views -- there **was** a tradition which divided the biblical passage as you divide it. And it was not only a marginal tradition, as I myself would have thought (or as the witnesses adduced by you might suggest), but it was well represented by influential fathers like, for instance, Augustine, who adopts it in his _Tractatus in Iohannis evangelium_. But the existence of this tradition in Jerome's own times and its impact on some (though not all) later textual witnesses of the Vulgate are not yet conclusive for Jerome's own understanding of the biblical passage when he translated it, and should therefore not dispense you -- or me -- from taking his own explanations of this passage into account. Yesterday, when I had a spare hour in the Staatsbibliothek while I was waiting for other books to arrive, I used this occasion to look up those of his exegetical writings which are edited in the _Corpus Christianorum_ (because these volumes offer comfortable indexes to trace his biblical citations), and you may be interested to know what I found. Contrarily to my own assumptions, there is in fact one citation, in his commentary _In Abacuc_, where Jerome clearly accepts your textual division when he writes (I leave M. Adriaen's interpunction untouched, because I don't know on what it relies, but I suppose that the comma should rather be put after "ipso" than after "est"): "... sed iam non nouimus eum iuxta carnem" (II Cor 5,16), uerum iuxta spiritum, quia: "Quod factum est, in ipso uita erat, et uita erat lux hominum". (II, iii, 4, CC 76A, p.625) Maybe it is interesting to note that one manuscript (Paris, B.N. Lat. 1836, saec. IX) offers the reading "est" instead of "erat", in accordance with the translation occurring also in Augustine and trying, as it seems, to eliminate the difficulty of the temporal/aspectual shift from "quod factum est" to "uita erat". There are several other citations in Jerome where the same syntactical understanding is at least possible, though not to be taken for granted: in these cases the preceding clause "omnia per ipsum facta sunt et sine ipso factum est nihil" is cited as ending with "nihil", without the ensuing "quod factum est". One might infer that in citations of this kind Jerome regards "quod factum est" as the beginning of the next clause -- as you do -- and that he omits it for this reason, but it could as well be that he regards it as a relative clause referring to "nihil" but adding nothing essential and therefore occasionally to be omitted: - Hebraicae quaestiones in libro Geneseos, I, 1, CC 72, p.3 - In Esaiam, XVIII, lxvi, 1-2, CC 73A, p.770 - In Ionam, III, 3-4, CC 76, p.405 ibd. IV, 10-11, p.418 - In Micheam, I, ii, 9-10, CC 76, p.450 - In Zachariam, I, iv, 2-7, CC 76, p.781 - In Mattheum, IV, CC 77, p.232 - Tractatus in Marci evangelium, X, CC 78, p.518 And there are finally several places of a third type where he cites "quod factum est" clearly as a relative clause referring to "nihil" and ending the whole clause, which excludes your understanding of the passage: - In Esaiam, IV, xi, CC 73, p.148 ibd. XII, xliv, 24-28, CC 73A, p.502 - In Hieremiam, VI, 37, 6, CC 74, p.334 - In Hiezechielem, XI, xxxvii, 1-14, CC 75, p.512s. - In Amos, III, vi, 12-15, CC 76, p.309 To this group belongs also one lengthy passage, in Jerome's Homily to John's prologue, CC 78, p.518s., where he makes the problem explicit, stating plainly that your reading of the passage is accepted by 'many', but that it is a 'bad' reading, because the text has to be divided after, not before, "quod factum est": "Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil quod factum est". Multi enim male legunt, dicentes: Quod factum est in ipso uita erat. Sed ita distinguitur: Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est hihil quod factum est; hoc est, sine ipso quod factum est non est factum. [follows a passage explaining this sense with regard to the creational status of the three persons of the Holy Trinity] "Et uita erat lux hominum..." etc So I was wrong to insinuate boldly that **every** citation of Io 1,3s. in Jerome's writing would rule out your reading of his translation in the Vulgate, but I was right to assume that at least some of them contradict you. What we have -- after checking only a selection of Jerome's writings, which would have to be completed by checking those works and epistles not yet edited in the CC -- is **one** passage which clearly supports your view, **eight** passages which are inconclusive, and **six** passages -- one of them very firm -- which clearly contradict your view. As it seems, Jerome had changing (but nevertheless occasionally very firm) views about how the passage should be divided. Maybe the dating of his writings would allow to infer what his attitude was at the time when he translated the Gospel of John. In any case, there is a lot of evidence to be considered -- evidence of greater relevance than the Lindisfarne Gospels, I would say --, and since neither I nor, as it seems, you have considered it all I would say that the authentic division of the passage in his translation remains open to discussion, even if you may regard the numerical patterns which you can reach with the help of 'your' division as sufficiently striking to silence every doubt. Otfried --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Otfried Lieberknecht, Schoeneberger Str. 11, D-12163 Berlin Tel.: ++49 30 8516675 (fax on request), E-mail: lieberk@berlin.netsurf.de Homepage for Dante Studies: http://members.aol.com/lieberk/welcome.html ORB Dante Alighieri - A Guide to Online Resources: http://orb.rhodes.edu/encyclop/culture/lit/Italian/Danindex.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 2 18:04 GMT 1997 Received: from listserv.ja.net (listserv.ja.net [130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA25905 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:04:49 GMT Received: from listserv (130.246.132.24) by listserv.ja.net (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.95513E80@listserv.ja.net>; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:58:39 +0000 Message-Id: <199701021804.SAA25905@abdn.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:55:51 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Prologue to John's Gospel again To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2488 Status: RO Otfried, You err, sir. If you have read much of Jerome's writing you will know that he writes vehemently and authoritatively both when he contradicts Augustine and when he contradicts himself. I am not obliged to flag or account for Jer- ome's changes of mind, which were numerous. Nor am I obliged to provide you or anyone else with a history of variant readings of widely disseminated texts. In my books I do what I set out to to, that is, to exhibit from ancient author- itative texts in Hebrew and Greek and Latin a mode of thought and composition and to chart the transmission of that tradition through Insular texts both Latin and vernacular from the fifth century through the thirteenth. 'The Celtic Latin Tradition of Biblical Style' is 400 pages long. 'British Books in Bibli- cal Style' will be 800. No commercial publisher, especially a heroic little enterprise like Four Courts Press, whose editors accepted my work knowing how many of the great and the bad had tried to keep it out of print (without asking for a subvention), would tolerate for two seconds the inordinate expansion re- quired for the leisurely consideration of possibilities that you seem to want. Once you understand that the numerical structures I explicate are not decor- ation tacked on to nearly completed work, but essential to the original concep- tion and execution of compositions, you are not entitled to 'lay aside' that part of the argument. Nor are you entitled to devalue the concerted witness of the Codex Amiatinus (the oldest extant pandect of the Vulgate) and the Lindisfarne Gospels and other Insular Gospel books. These are exactly the models to which Insular authors turned when they were conceiving and executing their own compositions. What they MIGHT have done if they had followed readings of other parts of the tradition is not my concern. Nor, if you are reviewing my work, should it be yours, though you are free to address any question you like in other circum- stances. I have based my analyses upon texts that survive in thousands of copies, citing only original texts and secondary authorities known among the Irish from the sixth century onward and among the English from the seventh century onward. I will thank you for discovering and drawing to my attention errors of representation, of translation, of reckoning, which I will do my best to correct. But I will not be held accountable for what I did NOT write. Nor will I accept charges of 'evasive rhetoric'. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Thu Jan 2 18:29 GMT 1997 Received: from listserv.ja.net (listserv.ja.net [130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA26487 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:29:23 GMT Received: from listserv (130.246.132.24) by listserv.ja.net (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.037419C0@listserv.ja.net>; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:23:13 +0000 Message-Id: <199701021829.SAA26487@abdn.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:07:10 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: Prologue to John's Gospel again To: Multiple recipients of list ANSAX-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1066 Status: RO Otfried, again, It will not do to cite editions in Corpus Christianorum, even when produced by competent editors. The text of Jerome's explanation of 'mazaroth' appears, for example, without a variant in the apparatus, though I could show you good English copies in the Bodleian that exhibit variant spellings as clear as day. If I do not read secondary literature at all and verify even good editions of primary texts against Insular manuscripts of the same and then rely upon them, then I have done enough. It is not my job to correct the misapprehensions of those who do not have direct access to these sources. It is my job to provide the means by which others can acquire direct access to the original texts. If they want to spend their time correcting others' mistakes that will be fine. But as I am, in actuarial terms, maybe two-thirds of the way through my life, there is a limited time in which to write what I can write and others do not yet. So deal, please, with what I have written, and leave other aspects of the history of the universe for later. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Mar 14 14:18 GMT 1997 Received: from listserv.ja.net (listserv.ja.net [130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA25160 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 1997 14:17:59 GMT Received: from listserv (130.246.132.24) by listserv.ja.net (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.1E4BD820@listserv.ja.net>; Fri, 14 Mar 1997 14:15:07 +0000 Message-Id: <199703141417.OAA25160@abdn.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 13:59:38 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: SFEMS presents.../How to define oral vs. literate chiasmus? To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3091 Status: RO Karen has understood correctly, Duncan not. I have never suggested that OE poets composed in fixed forms like sestinas and sonnets, any more than I have sugested that the illuminators drew from templates. Manifestly they did not. I have suggested rather that they were informed by the idea of form, which they tried, in Stevick's felicitous phrase, to generate anew, not to copy, each time they composed. I have tried to recover and present a grammar of the formal principles they employed, all habits of thought and mathematical and harmonic ratios explicitly articulated in the Ancient sources mentioned yesterday, all of them known early in the Latin West. Duncan's skepticism would be useful even to me if it were not so exasper- atingly perverse. I direct him to a widely read manual like the Rhetorica ad Herennium that says in striving for 'conpar' (isocolon) one may work in either of two ways, actually symmetrical or apparently symmetrical. The former must exhibit exactly equal numbers of syllables; the latter may exhibit a divergence of ONE or TWO, not my idea of great flexibility. The author then demonstrates both techniques by line, by word, by syllable, by letter, in a passage shorter than this note, with chiasmus and prose rhythm and recurrence of words and syllables at fixed intervals as well. Yet Duncan continues to respond as if the latter were a form of cheating of my devising, rather than the tightly regulated code that it is. Occasionally in adducing what seems to him a speci- fic difficulty he fails to remember that the artist may have been doing two dozen things at once and that what may seem to be an irregularity is actually a consequence of a more important formal decision implemented elsewhere. Some musicologists have assumed comparably that a text defective (in their opinion) in isorhythm is incompetent, ignoring the fact that the composer was performing at once three dozen tricks, among which isorhythm was by no means the most im- portant. Once upon a time I heard a lady say in public that anyone who had tried to follow Stevick's analyses could see instantly that they don't work. From which I knew instantly that she had not tried to do what she pretended to have done. So with my own analyses. Anyone who works through the original paradigms will see not only that they work but how and why they work. Opponents who do not want to do that often deflect attention away from what I have actually written to what they might wish I had written. As in an earlier exchange with Otfried Lieberknecht, who taxed me with failure to consider variant readings in John's Gospel, of which I am well aware, but of which the Insular Gospel books we were considering (which are also the ones our authors read) bear no trace. There is one particular Karen may have misunderstood. My analyses quite often coincide with Sievers's types, in that patterns that I see chiastically as ABCD D'C'B'A' exhibit the same Sievers's types in the paired parts. This is not incompatible with Rochelle's analyses on another, not necessarily con- trary, track. From owner-ansax-l@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Fri Mar 14 18:26 GMT 1997 Received: from listserv.ja.net (listserv.ja.net [130.246.132.24]) by abdn.ac.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA01889 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 1997 18:26:53 GMT Received: from listserv (130.246.132.24) by listserv.ja.net (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.E3A80360@listserv.ja.net>; Fri, 14 Mar 1997 18:24:01 +0000 Message-Id: <199703141826.SAA01889@abdn.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 18:04:03 +0000 Reply-To: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum Sender: ANSAXNET Discussion Forum From: David Howlett Subject: Re: SFEMS presents.../How to define oral vs. literate chiasmus? To: ANSAX-L@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1813 Status: RO Duncan, I mean that if an author shows clearly that he knows how to write some passages with exact symmetry and that he writes some others with the appar- ent symmetry that is off by only one or two, both of these forms of composi- tion are evidence of authorial intention. This only for counting of words and syllables and letters. Ratios, of course, cannot be approximate. They are either spot on or spot off. I do not discuss the latter. I thought you had objected earlier to a triple form of reckoning -- from A to B inclusive, between A and B, and from A to B including one but excluding the other. This also is legitimate and demonstrable, in that some authors em- ploy all three forms in strict rotation, though one should not try to use this form of analysis in cases involving multiples of 3. Last weekend while my son was talking about architecture something occurred to me, so simple that I am embarrassed not to have thought of it earlier, about indications of consciousness of divisions between words. In ancient Hebrew and Greek and Latin texts there were no spaces between words -- points sometimes between Latin words in papyri and on stone inscriptions, but not spaces until the Irish devised that little trick. How then do we know that Greek-speakers recognised what a logos was in ENARXHIHNOLOGOCKAIOLOGOCHNPROCTONT+HEON? Final sigma. And in Hebrew all the final consonants. No other purpose whatever than to mark the ends of words. Also the word-counting tricks that work both ways in Hebrew texts, once counting each word as a separate, and once again counting hyphenated words as a unit. This is like the two possibilities allowed by the author of the Rhetorica ad Herennium, exact and approximate, except that in Hebrew one can make both possibilities work in the same passage.