SOURCE: Gillespy, Frances Lytle. “The Narrative Art of Layamon's Brut and a Comparison with Wace's Brut.” University of California Publications in Modern Philology 3, no. 4 (November 24, 1916): 378-96.

[In the following essay, Gillespy compares Wace's Brut with Layamon's and argues that Layamon's descriptions of time and place are richer and more artful.]

I. TIME-SETTING

The supposedly historical character of the work governs, to a large extent, the use of time-settings in both writers. Wace, following Geoffrey in the main, makes frequent statements as to the duration of reigns and events within reigns, and Layamon in his turn takes Wace as his model for the time skeleton of his work. He dates, however, more frequently and in more exact terms than does Wace,¹ and he goes far beyond the French writer in the description of attendant circumstance. He occasionally describes wintry weather.² Now and then he tells of a pleasant day when the sun is “swiðe briht.”³ At times he adds a circumstance indicative of direct observation, as in the statement that Lent came and the days began to lengthen (30627). The coming of the dawn is usually mentioned with some slight picturesque touch—“the third day it dawned fair” (21853 f) and more vividly “shields glistened there, light began to dawn” (21725 f) and again “It dawned and animals began to stir” (26940 f). The approach of night parts combatants as 28328. “The battle ended when the sun went to rest;” but the night itself is rarely described. It is thrice dusky (as 9802) and occasionally the moon is mentioned, as 20607 f. where we read that it shone directly south. In connection with the marvelous sight that Uther saw in Wales the sun shone “well nigh as bright as the sunlight” (17861).⁴ All of these descriptive suggestions appear meagre enough in comparison with the lavish coloring of modern poetry—but it is important to note, in comparison with Wace, that they all appear to be additions by the English writer.

The longer descriptions of time-setting also received greater elaboration in Layamon. The one exception is the description of a moonlight night, which is fuller in Wace.⁵ This description is, however, more than offset by such comparatively elaborate accounts as that found in Layamon's picture of the spring:

þa æstre wes aȝonge (24195)
and Aueril eode of tune
and þat gras was riue
and þat water wes liðe
and men gunnen spilien
þat wes Mæi at tune.(6)

In addition to his further elaboration of descriptive features, the English poet frequently adds or deepens emotional coloring.⁷ Regret for the past, a longing for the good old times is frequently suggested or expressed, not only in the speeches of the characters, but by the writer speaking in his own person, as

… alle þa burhȝes (2065)
þe Brutus iwrohte
& heora noma gode
þa on Brutus dæi stode
beoð swiðe afelled,
þurh warf of þon folke.(8)

The beginning of the poem shows that it is partly in this mood of regard and regret for the days that were gone that the whole work was conceived—a mood which is totally lacking in Wace's introduction.

On the whole, however, the use of time-setting is meagre and unskillful enough if Layamon's work be considered per se or the almost inevitable comparison with modern poetry be instituted. But in comparison with Wace the English poet's treatment appears remarkably full. He follows Wace in giving durations, but he dates more frequently and in more exact terms. He notes the time of day, when it adds to the sense of reality even when the action does not absolutely demand any specification. He mentions picturesque circumstance rather frequently. Wace almost never. In the English Brut there are several comparatively elaborate descriptions, in the French work almost none. The treatment of the passage of time as a whole is much the same in the two books, but an emotional coloring is more frequently present in the Layamon's poem. The treatment of the later poet, then, is more realistic and at the same time more suggestive.

II. PLACE-SETTING

The pseudo-historical character of the Bruts has its effect on the treatment of place as well as of time—an effect, however, that is largely superficial. To it is due the richness of geographical names. Literally hundreds of localities are mentioned by both writers, but distinctive bits of description are few and far between. Wace tells us that Scotland is a wooded country (1323) and gives a suggestion of vineyards in France in the line “Ne cep de vigne à estreper” (10386). Layamon speaks of the “wild land that Welsh men love.” Both poets describe the lakes of Scotland at considerable length. But except for these and a few other attempts at individualization the countries might be all one so far as their landscapes are concerned. And the time might be the same, for in both writers Brutus and his men at the beginning are evidently conceived as living in much the same sort of place as Cadwalader and his people at the end.

Throughout the narratives there are almost no set descriptions. England as a whole is characterized three times in terms that are a sort of combination of direct visualization and knowledge of phenomena. The accounts occur in both narratives but are far fuller in the English. Where Diana in Wace merely says that England is an island beautiful to dwell in, excellent for cultivation (W 681 ff), in Layamon she tells of birds and fish, wild places, and pleasant springs (L 1235-40). Wace gives an account of what Brutus saw when he surveyed his country with a list of natural objects as montaignes, valées, plaignes, and so on, but the English writer adds mention of animals, birds, and fish, characterizes the pleasant woods and fair meadows, tells us that the forest blossomed and speaks of the growing corn (L 2003 ff). A third description of the same sort is given under Belin's reign—a meagre account but one in which Layamon adds the work of human hands—burwes and tunes (L 4819, cf. W 2649)—to the landscape. The only other set descriptions of any length in either work are those of the lakes in Scotland. These accounts, however, belong more properly with the marvelous and will be treated under that head.⁹

Many landscape features are mentioned in connection with the action in both writers. They are elaborated, however, far more frequently in the English writer, who, for instance, describes with some circumstance the valley in which the Romans awaited part of Arthur's army (L 26932 ff), while Wace merely says “liu convenable trovèrent, à faire lor embuissement” (12529 f). A more striking illustration is the lack of any suggestion in Wace of the comparison of the hiding places of the Britons to those of badgers, while in Layamon we have a really picturesque simile:

Þet iherde Bruttes (12814)
þer heo wuneden i þan puttes,
inne eorðen & inne stockes
heo hudeden heom alse brockes
i wude i wilderne
inne hæðe & inne uærne
þat ne mihte wel neh na man
nenne Brut iuinden.

An odd touch of characterization is used by the English writer in the case of the field of Ambresbury. Every time it is mentioned it has a conventional tag (in much the same way as a character often seems to have a special adjective, i.e., a fixed epithet assigned to him). It is a field “that was pleasant (muri)” (15188), “broad and very pleasant (muri) (17157), and again it is a field

þe is wunder ane brad (17453)
he is brad & swiðe muri.

The characterization is itself slight and highly conventional but it seems to betray a desire not shared by Wace to tell something of the appearance of the famous field where

… Hengest biswæc (17456)
Bruttes mid sæxen

—to make it appear in some way different from an ordinary field.

Occasionally the English writer introduces a bit of setting in such a way as to emphasize the action of an individual, as when Locrin's father-in-law threatened him with a battle-ax and “smote the stone where he was standing so that it was shattered into fragments.”¹⁰ Now and then Layamon mentions some landscape feature, not in connection with action but apparently merely to add to a picture, as when the knights find Merlin sitting by the edge of a spring which he loved (17025 ff) and again when the hermit comes upon him standing under a tree (18802).¹¹

Rivers appear in both narratives when necessary for the action, but with almost no characterization. Gaie une ève corant is as full an expression as Wace ever uses, while Layamon rarely goes beyond such colorless adjectives as fair, hende, long, (often preceded by the adverb swiðe). The most interesting account of a river in either work is that of the Avon in the English Brut, where the interest comes from the figurative language and not from any direct description of the stream itself. Arthur says of Baldus: “Yesterday was Baldus boldest of all knights. Now he stands on the hill—”

& Auene bi-haldeð (21322)
hu ligeð i þan stræme
stelene fisces—
mid sweorde bi-georede
heore sund is awemmed
heore scalen wleoteð
swulc gold-faȝe sceldes—
þer fleoteð heore spiten
swule hit spæren weoren.

Other bodies of water are quite unimportant, with the exception of the sea, which is so significant that it will be discussed in a section of its own.

Passing on to the other part of place-settings—that which has to do with the works of man—we find that the work of the French writer is markedly less full than that of Layamon. In both narratives the setting is homogeneous—Aeneas's castle in Italy is evidently conceived in the same terms as one of a much later time and a different country, such as that of Vortiger. Both writers are very sparing of formal descriptions. But the use of details by the two contributes to a totality of impression that is markedly different. If every scrap of information in Wace were collected, the picture of the dwellings would still be a bare one, while in Layamon the many concrete details serve to present us with a picture that is at once vivid and comparatively full. In the building of Vortiger's castle, for example, the earlier Brut says merely

Cil ont commencié à olvrer, (7513)
Pière mortier à aloer,

while the later poet tells us that the king is advised to erect a castle with strong stone walls, on the mount of Reir (15442 ff), and the details of building follow:

dic heo bigunnen sone, (15463)
hornes þer bleouwen,
machunes heowen,
lim heo gunnen bærnen.

Later it is told that

heo lim & stan
leiden to-somne
of machunes þer wes wunder.

Towers are evidently thought of as coming under the same head as castles, or as synonymous with them, for Layamon writes

and of castles ner þer na þing (7081)
bute þat tur þe makede Belin king.

But the tower built by Caesar at Boulogne was apparently quite an unusual piece of architecture, for it is described at some length by both writers and almost solely for its own interesting features without regard to action. Wace tells us that it was “d'estrange compas” (4299), very wide below and grew narrow as it extended upward:

Maint estage i ot et maint estre (4303)
Si ot desus mainte fenestre
Une pière tant solement
Covri le plus halt mandement.

Compared with the bare account in Geoffrey, “turrim quam in loco, quae Odnea vocatur, construxerat” (IV, 7), his description is remarkably full, but it contains nothing so vividly suggestive of its peculiar construction as Layamon's

þer mihten sitten in þon grunde (7779)
cnihtes sixti hundred
& þa turres cop mitte weoren
a cniht mid his capen.

Another sort of habitation that is evidently exceptional is the underground dwelling or cave that Locrine built for Æstrild, but here the English writer furnished all the details, for while Wace simply mentions a “célier desos terre parfondement” (1424 f). Layamon tells of

… an eorð-hus (2360)
eadi & feier
þe walles of stone
þe duren of whales bone.

In the case of the baths near which Bladus' temple was built, the English writer has more information to give. Wace says they were “chauz et saluables” (W 1675), while the later author tells that Bladus made a

… muchele ginne (2846)
mid ane stæn cunne
al swa great swa a beam,
þe he leide in ane walle stream;
þe ilke makeð þat water hot;

and he built near these hot springs a temple to Minerva.

As regards buildings that have nothing unusual about their construction, the details given in the English writer are often meagre enough, but however meagre they may be they are almost invariably fuller than those of Wace. Sometimes there is merely the addition of an almost colorless adjective such as “very fair,” “rich,” “lofty.” But frequently there is direct visualization, as in the case of Diana's temple, which to Wace is simply “un temple d'antiquité” (634) while Layamon sees it “great and lofty, built of marble.”

Parts of buildings are mentioned more frequently in Layamon and serve to give reality both to action and to setting. For example, in the English Brut we hear that Brian's sister hid herself “on the benches between two widows” (L 30822—not in Wace). And again, that Ygerne went to her bower and had the king's bed spread with fine cloth (19042 ff—not in Wace). Constance's murderers found him in his bower sitting by the fire (L 13562—not in Wace). Many concrete details are added in the case of the king's coming to Tyntagel. Uther's men cried to the gate-ward to undo the gate-bolt (18992). The knights ran up on the wall, thought they recognized Gorlois and his men. Then they “weighed up the castle gate” (19002 f). Later, after they had decided to surrender to Uther, “they let down the bridge” (19242).¹²

Suggestion of an occasional grim decoration of the hall is given in the mocking song of Childric's men where they boast that they will make a “bridge (brugge)” of Arthur's back, take all the bones of the noble king, and join them together with golden ties and lay them in the hall door where each man goes forth (20993 ff). The idea of decoration is not unlike that found in the Beowulf where Grendel's hand is used to decorate the Hall Heorot. Another account which likewise appears to have an Anglo-Saxon ring and which mentions almost every important part of the castle in a few lines is that of the giant's attack on Howel's castle:

þa ȝaten alle he to-brac (25885)
and binnen he gon wende
He nom þare halle wah [wall?]
and helden hine to grunde
þæs bures dure he warp adun
þat heo to-barst a uiuen
he funde i þan buren
fæirest alre bruden.(13)

In addition to places of abode and their component parts, we hear frequently of the burghs or towns in which they are situated, but there is little visualization in either writer. The fullest description is that of Caerleon, but here Wace follows Geoffrey, and Layamon, Wace, almost slavishly.¹⁴ The English author's account of London is slightly the longer, and an interesting touch occurs in the lines

riche ane burhe (2024)
mid bouren & mid hallen
mid hæȝe stan walle,

which seem to suggest that bowers and halls were sometimes separate buildings (as in the Beowulf, ll. 138 ff).

We hear little of habitations in the country outside the towns. Glimpses of the rural are rather frequent, especially in times of peace, but they are glimpses of occupations rather than of places and belong more properly in the field of social settings. The rural people probably dwelt within the burgh for protection instead of having individual homes. Mention is frequent of the streets and ways which crossed the country, but in Wace the mention is usually restricted to formal accounts while Layamon often uses them as a bit of localizing place-setting, as when Merlin is found playing in a broad way (15553) and Uther meets the messengers in a broad street (18126).

Of the building of bridges and ways Wace has rather more to say than has Layamon. Belin

Par vax, par marès et par mons (2655)
Fist faire cauciés et pons;
Bons pons fist faire, chemins haus
De pière, de sablon, de caus.

The ditch built by Severus is described with a little more detail than in Layamon and with a little less insistence on the depth and strength that made it unlike all other ditches.¹⁵ The description appears to be given merely for informational purposes.

Another bit that is introduced for its interesting features per se rather than as an integral part of place-setting is the equestrian statue constructed in memory of Cadwalan (15081 ff). It was made of copper, the likeness being that of a chevalier on a horse. In it was entombed the body of the king. The statue was then placed on a gate at London, facing west.¹⁶

The evidence seems at first glance contradictory. The general method is the same. Formal descriptions are few and are introduced usually for some reason other than their contributions to place-setting per se. Of those that are found, three—that of the tower built by Caesar, of the “earth-house” of Æstrild, and of the equestrian statue—are elaborated because of certain novel features of construction. The lakes in Scotland are chiefly interesting for their connection with the marvelous. The building of Vortiger's castle is stressed for the same reason. The description of Britain is due probably to the author's feeling that it is necessary to give a somewhat elaborate account of the land which is to be the main scene of action, and possibly Layamon's amplification may be attributed to his pride of country.¹⁷ Neither writer is interested in place-setting per se, but minor touches of description are many and especially in the English writer serve to give a sense of reality to the places in which actions occur.

At times, to be sure, the treatment appears fuller in Wace than in Layamon. Wace occasionally describes with considerable detail, and confers reality on place-setting when he is recounting the actions of groups of people.¹⁸ As a whole, however, he has far less sense of the physical reality of places in which events happen than has Layamon. He introduces suggestions of country and details of architecture less frequently. Adjectives such as the fair and hende of the English writer seldom occur. These epithets are colorless enough in themselves but their use contributes to the effect of richness in place-settings. “Swiðe fair,” for instance, in connection with a river, while it adds little or nothing to the actual characterization, does serve to give a certain emphasis to this landscape feature. Wace never uses a bit of scenery to emphasize the action or complete the picture of a single person, as does the English narrator. There is very little suggestion in his work of the elaborate architecture one usually associates with Old French writers. Wace probably knew more of the details of buildings and of roads and of statues than did Layamon, and when he speaks of them at all he uses terms that are technically correct. But the English writer has his place-settings more vividly in mind. Even in accounts such as that of Caesar's castle, and of Diana's temple, where the earlier author probably knew more of their construction, the later one has more to tell, and gives details more vividly. Wace merely says that the temple was “d'antiquité.” Layamon saw it great and lofty, built of marble. The English poet, then, visualizes more clearly and gives more minute and more vivid details. He introduces place touches more frequently and appears to keep his place-settings more constantly in mind.

THE SEA

From the very nature of the material the sea is frequently mentioned in both narratives, but it is by no means so important an element in the French as it is in the English. Layamon keeps the reader constantly aware of its presence,¹⁹ both by repeated slight touches and by occasional long descriptions. Part of the effect of richness in this field comes from the use of synonyms and compounds. We hear constantly of the sæ itself, and equivalents are frequent. It is the “saltne strem” (6116), “wilde þisse watere” (6226), the “sæ flode” (as 1080), the “sæstreme” (as 3582), and so on. The word sæ is frequently found modified by an adjective (a “fixed epithet”) which belongs to it so closely as to almost give the effect of a compound, as wide sæ, sæ brade, sæ deope, wilde sæ. Sæ-brimme, sæ-oure, sæ-stronde are used, as well as the simple forms brimme, oure, stronde, and suggest more definitely the presence of the adjacent water. Særime is frequently found, but the simple form does not, I think, occur in the A Text. Sæ-side is another compound that is used as a synonym for shore. Mention is frequent of sea-cliffs, of the sæ-grunde. We hear of sæ fisce as tribute, appropriately enough, from the king of the Orkneys. One synonym of fleet or navy is sæ-flot. Godlac says of himself and his companions “we are sea-weary men” (4619), also Pantolaus (6205). Tidings are brought by sæ-liðende men (as 7821). What is significant is, not only that the synonyms for sea and shore and ship (see below), with their compounds, are used and used frequently, but that they are employed constantly for their own sake as well as when necessary for the action. The sea is the only piece of place-setting that is so important that it is constantly kept in the reader's mind.²⁰

With the sea as an ever-present feature, voyages are of course frequent in both narratives. But with few exceptions (Arthur's setting-out from Southhampton is a notable one) the voyages in Wace are treated in a more cursory fashion and apparently with far less interest than in the later Brut. At times, the elaboration consists only of some slight addition, as in the account of Arthur's ships, which

… fluȝen after þere sæ (23139)
swulc heo fluht hafden;

or the description of the embarcation of the Saxons, where Wace's

… en lor nés entré (7307)
si ont et nagé et siglé

is amplified by the English writer into the spirited passage:

Saxes i scipe leopen (14773)
& droȝen up to coppe
hæȝe heore seiles.
& wenden mid wedere
i þere sæ wilde.

Many voyages, however, are developed with a great deal of detail. These divide themselves logically enough into two kinds—the pleasant and the stormy. To the former sort belongs that of Brutus (W 727 ff, L 1309 ff). The account is comparatively long but deals principally with the Pillars of Hercules and the mermaidens. The passage in the French author is very trite, there being little more than the conventional “Siglé ont et passé …,” with no equivalent of the order to handle the cables, draw the sail to the tops, let the wind lead, and sail with the waves, of the English text (L 1338 ff). In another journey of Brutus Layamon tells us that the heroes went out of harbor, warriors were blithe, “the wind stood at will, the wild fish played, the water was very good. They sailed till they came to shore at Dartmouth. Glad was Brutus. The ships bit on the sand”—²¹ only eleven lines, but much detail and a definite suggestion of mood that is entirely lacking in Wace (L 1778 ff, cf. W 1047 ff). The voyage after Cadwalan's recovery contains some good detail and, like that of Brutus (1778 ff), it has a distinct emotional coloring:

wind heom com on wille (30606)
heo wunden up seiles to coppe
scipen gunnen liðen
leod-scopes sungen
Ba weoren sehte
sæ & þa sune,
wind and þa wide se,
ba eke isome;
flod ferede þa scipen
scopes þer sungen.
At Ridelæt he com alond
þer wes blisse & muche song.(22)

Layamon's best combination of concreteness and suggestion is in the account of Arthur's voyage from Southampton. First we have the coming of many ships over the wide sea (25525 ff), the distribution of men to the various ships, the thronging of the men into the vessels, the weeping of “father and son, sister and brother, mother and daughter” when the host parted. Then comes the voyage itself:

Weder stod on wille (25537)
wind wex an honde
ankeres heo up droȝen
drem wes on uolken.
Wunden into widen sæ
þeines wunder bliðe;
scipen þer forð þrungen,
gleomen þer sungen
seiles þer tuhten
rapes þer rehtten.
Wederen alre selest
and þa sæ sweuede.
For þere softnesse,
Arður gon to slæpen.

The mood of the sea and the mood of the voyagers are one.

In this account the English author departs entirely from his source, where we find almost no account of the voyage itself, but a description of the embarcation, and the sailing out of harbor, that is long, vivid and crammed to the brim with nautical detail.²³ There is nothing like it in the English Brut. Incidentally, there is nothing else like it in Wace. The busy scene at the beginning—the ships attached by cables, or at anchor, or passing to and fro; the nailing and the putting-in of bolts, the raising of masts, the letting-down of the bridges for the cargo. Here are described the knights with their lances, leading their horses aboard, the farewells, the getting under way of the ships, and so on. Then comes the account of the voyage itself with an amount of nautical detail that is bewildering to a layman, but which is used appropriately by one who knows a ship and the way to sail it, not introduced merely as a parade of technical knowledge. The description of the scene before the departure gives the impression that it was written by one who has been an eye-witness of similar embarcations. The whole account is strikingly vivid and realistic.

In Wace's account of stormy voyages, however, we find nothing remarkable. At times there are as many nautical details in the earlier account. In the description of Godlac's voyage (W 2525 ff, L 4573 ff) the French writer tells us that boards and masts break, sails are torn. In the English account ropes, sails and masts are mentioned. The weather details are somewhat the same in both, but the later poet gives the direction of the storm: “Æst aras a laðlich weder.” Where Wace has grans he uses laðlich; and wradede where Wace has troubla. Wace mentions the darkening of the sky and Layamon does not, while the latter has the adjective teonfulle to characterize the water. For the rising, increase and breaking (reversèrent) of the waves in Wace, Layamon tells us they ran as if towns were burning. So far as material goes, the two accounts balance fairly well. But Wace groups all his nautical details into three lines—simply a list of things that break. Layamon scatters the detail through the description and gives an impression of equal richness, although his account is longer and his details of this sort are fewer. Indeed, he gives an impression of greater richness, for he uses the cutting of the mast by Godlac with marked effect. “He grasped a battle-ax, great and very sharp,” and hewed down the mast. The cutting of this one mast gives a more vivid impression than the breaking of all the parts of Wace's boats. The English writer's words in description of the storm and waves are more suggestive. The use of “bale was rife” and “he was no whit joyous” are characteristic. For the former, Wace has “no one dared raise his head,” etc., and for the latter there is nothing parallel in the French text. The account of Wace's storm ends with the landing, while Layamon has a suggestion of it in Godlac's remarks on reaching shore and an account in a different form in his speech to the king, which begins with the characteristic English expression, “We are sea-weary men.”

The longest and in many ways the best picture of a storm is that in which the ships of the maiden Ursele and her companions are wrecked (L 11963 ff, W 6172 ff). Here the English account is greatly elaborated. Nautical details are entirely lacking in the source and are used with good effect in the later writer. Wace merely says they thought that the weather would be good. Layamon adds vividness by showing the men drawing the sails and the ships going out under a “winsome wind.” They are out of sight before a wind arises “on the adverse side” (Wace gives no direction). The constituents of the weather description are the same, though “swurken under sunnen, sweorte weolcnen” is more vivid than “l'air noircir, le ciel oscurer;” “haȝel & ræin þer aræs” than “une nue vint pluose.” The suddenness of the storm is stressed in Wace; suggested in Layamon, by the change from fair weather. The waves in the latter are described by the figure used in the storm which overtakes Godlac—waves ran high as if towns were burning. (Wace has waves mounted one on the other). Layamon's sea is the “wildere sæ, ladliche iwraððed,” “wunder ane wod.” Wace's “enfla et fermi.” The whole account given by the English writer of the storm from the point of view of Melga and Wanis has no counterpart in his source. It is one of the most effective things in the English account. The outlaws see the boats rising and falling in the waves, disappearing and reappearing. Then the wind drops and they see “the ships sailing (wandrien) in the sea.”

Layamon's account is manifestly better at all points. It has more nautical detail and what is used is effectively distributed. Note the effect of the change from the details of the storm to the breaking of the boards and thence to the wailing of the women—three different ways of heightening the effect. His details of weather are more connotative, and more vivid. Wace ends with the lamentations of the women, with the effect that the account of their sorrow appears to be a separate thing from the account of the storm. The English writer subordinates the description of their sorrow, and uses it to add to the effect of the whole. He further deepens the impression by changing the point of view, and ends with a contrast as at the beginning. The whole passage is conceived in one mood and all the details are used to intensify the effect. The sea here is the direct opposite of that which “slept” on Arthur's voyage. It is the “wilde sæ,” “wunder ane wod,” “ladliche iwraððed”—and it is a sea which the poet loved, if the length and effectiveness of his description may be taken as evidence.

Layamon's love of the sea in all its moods naturally enough extends to (or rather embraces) a certain interest in ships. As in the case of the sea, there are synonyms (though not many) and compounds. The ships are frequently characterized by some such adjective as great, long, or good. Boat (Bat, bœt) is sometimes used, as the sceort bat which carried Arthur to Avalon. Board is often a synonym for ship (as 20935), as in Anglo-Saxon. Compounds are more plentiful. The navy is at times a scip-ferde, sailors are scip-gumen and scip men. Parts of the ship as scipes bord are almost compounds. “Scip ful” is used (23694) to express Frolles' reluctance—he would not have done it for a ship full of gold.

But the details of the ships themselves are not many. Some we have mentioned incidentally in the account of the voyages—the boards (bordes, scipes bord, etc.), the sails (seiles), the top-mast (hune, 28978 not cited before, toppa, coppe), the ropes, cables and anchors. In the sea-fight between Brenner and Godlac beak ran against beak (“Horn aȝen horne,” 4538). From the destruction of Caesar's ships (7839 ff) we get a detail or two. An unusual touch occurs in the account of Queen Delgan's ship. Godlac recognizes it because “the sail cloth was of silk” (4549). Some sort of steering apparatus is implied by the use of steoresman (11985, etc.). The method of launching is given—“they shoved the boats from the strand” (20925), and a condensed metaphor expresses the beaching: “the ships bit on the sand” (1788). A more distinctly nautical term than usual is “They veered their luffs” (20949). Certainly there is no great number of details here, and those which are mentioned are simple ones which could be given without any special acquaintance with nautical procedure. Wace's technical understanding of ships is far greater. He has more names for the vessels themselves: nés, naveles, batiax, barges, chalans, nés apresta, nés chargies. For navy he uses navie or flote. His knowledge of the parts of the ship and their uses is amazing. Oddly enough, however, it is shown only in the setting-out from Southampton. In the other sections quoted (and the unquoted parts add little information) he introduces few peculiarly nautical terms and the ones he does employ are not always effectively placed.

The difference between the part that the sea plays in the work of the two poets, then, is very marked. In Layamon the occasional touches that suggest the sea come oftener and appear frequently when the action does not necessitate their use. Richness of effect is given by many compounds and synonyms and fixed epithets. In the earlier writer the sea is often overpassed even where the action suggests its mention. The synonyms and compounds are few and mer parfont is the only combination of adjective and noun that is used frequently enough to suggest a compound. Wherever a voyage occurs the English Brut almost invariably gives a fuller account of it than does the French. Wace knows a great deal about technical detail and is at his best in describing busy scenes where crowds are engaged, as the embarcation and the brisk getting under way of the fleet at Southampton. The later poet knows little of nautical procedure but uses the simple details he has at his command vividly and effectively. He often adds to an effect by the introduction of a dramatic act by a single individual, as in the cutting of the mast by Godlac. Wace attains his finest results where a busy scene is to be described, and does it with much realism. The English writer is at his best in describing a voyage, pleasant or stormy, where the tone and unity of impression are the important things and all the details are subordinated to a unified emotional effect. His excellence in description is that of an artist who successfully uses tone and selected details, rather than that of an artisan who can explain the machinery.

Notes

1. See for example L 3914-3923, where the reigns of five kings are specified “half a year,” “eight weeks,” “thirty weeks,” “five years” and one less exactly where the king was “soon dead.” No dates in Wace (2179 ff). See also L 21854 for the addition by the English writer of the exact time of day.

2. As L 28302 ff. No equivalent in Wace.

3. As L 7237 ff, 8121 f. No equivalent in Wace.

4. In the lines that follow the comet also is described, but its treatment belongs properly to the marvelous. It is no mere circumstance of time-setting.

5. Cf. Wace 3043 ff and L 5776 f.

6. No equivalent whatsoever in Wace.

7. See for example, the proud answer of the British bishops to Austin, “we have been of Christian kin three hundred years and they are newly come.” L 29776 ff. No equivalent in Wace.

8. No equivalent in Wace. See also such expressions as that used in connection with Castle Tyntagel: “It was of the race of his ancestors” (18609), and the remark about Arthur's meeting place: “It was enclosed fast in old stonework” (24885). No equivalents in Wace.

9. See p. 489.

10. L 2313 ff. Wace merely writes (1410 f) that Corinéus approached Locrin as if he would kill him.

11. Neither of these in Wace.

12. None of these concrete details appear in Wace.

13. No equivalent in Wace.

14. Cf. Geoffrey IX, 12, W 10469 ff, L 24258 ff.

15. Cf. W 5430 ff, L 10348.

16. There is no suggestion of this statue in Layamon.

17. See p. 472 ff. below.

18. See, for example, W 10614 ff, L 24431 ff.

19. Except in a few passages, such as the account of Arthur's inland wars.

20. In Wace there is none of the richness of effect that the mere use of compounds gives. Sea is usually merely la mer or marine. Occasionally the term mer parfont is found. The shore is usually simply rivage. Nor is the mention of the sea when the action does not demand it common, as it was in the English work. When tidings are brought by seafaring men in the English poet (as 7821) Wace has his characteristic “Ne sai comment l'orent oï” (4336).

21. Here and elsewhere where quotation or full and exact translation seemed unnecessary paraphrases have been used.

22. Wace has nothing for this but

    Ses nés a fait metre en la mer; (14664 f)
    En Quidelès arriva droit.

    Here are lacking the nautical details, the singing of the “leodscopes,” the suggestion of weather, which in Layamon are happily combined to give an effective emotional impression.

23. Madden suggests (III, p. 395) that Layamon may not have understood these nautical terms—a theory that is highly probable and would account in part for the difference in treatment in the two works.