5

6

for it is more than likely that Spenser wrote not farrih, but ferragh, a form certainly closer to " Fargus, Fergus, and Ferragus " than farrih. In this instance again the spelling of the Globe text seems inaccurate. Both Grosart and Ware print ferragh. But there is stronger testimony than textual. The evidence as to the sound of this war cry tends to show that the spelling in Ware and Grosart more closely approximates it than that in the Globe. Campion in his account of this cry has faro; and Todd's note on this passage in the View" tends to confirm my contention: " "The vulgar Irish supposed the subject of this war song to have been Forroch or Ferragh (an easy corruption of Pharroh which Selden, in his note on Drayton's Polyolbion, says was the name of the war song once in use amongst the Irish kernes), a terrible giant, of whom they tell many a marvellous tale.

7

In his discussion of a third word involving the question of orthography Draper charges Spenser, by implication, with carelessness (or capriciousness at least), when the carelessness is his own. On page 119 of his article we read: "The third of the legal terms is 'tanistih,' usually spelled tanistry, the custom of choosing the successor of a chief during his lifetime from any member of his family." But "Tanistih " in the Globe text is the man, the tanist, not the custom, which is spelled Tanistrye consistently, except in one passage, where the juxtaposition of the two words, probably, was responsible for the form Tanistrih. It is strange that Draper should have overlooked such passages as these, both on the page from which he cites the word, and the preceding. For on page 611 the Globe text reads: ". . . for all the Irishe doe holde theyr landes by Tanistrye; which is, (as they say) noe more then a personall estate for his life time, that is, Tanistih, by reason that he is admitted therunto by election of the countrey."

"What is this that you call Tanistih and Tanistrye ?" And on page 612, to which Draper refers, we find: "But how is the Tanistih chosen?" "And so it may well be that from the first

P. 90, Grosart's ed.

P. 92, Ware's ed., 1809.

'Historie of Ireland, Ware's ed., 1809,

P. 39.

• Works of E. Spenser, ed. Todd, 1805, vol. vш, p. 372.

'Todd also cites Warton's note on Sir Ferraugh, F. Q. IV. II. 4, ibid. Warton might have added F. Q. IV. iv. 8.

originall of this woord Tanistih and Tanistrih came Grosart 10 and Ware,11 it may be noted, have tanist, the usual form. It is not a matter of vast importance, of course, whether Spenser spelled these words one way or the other; the establishing of his own spelling could do little towards rehabilitating his etymologies. But it is a matter of importance to realize that we cannot be certain how Spenser spelled them, and not to speculate overmuch about, or build theories upon, word-forms insufficiently attested by textual or manuscript authority.

66

The next point upon which I must take issue with Draper lies in a matter of interpretation. After showing the weakness of Spenser's derivation of palatine (pages 114-115), Draper continues: In like manner his derivation of Scot seems fanciful. He takes it from the Greek scotos,' which he defines as darkeness,' At least he seems right in that it is very likely not a Gaelic word." Draper then proceeds with an etymological discussion, and concludes with the opinion that Spenser's derivation "is probably guessed from a chance similarity." The derivation is indeed fanciful; in fact, I believe it was too fanciful even for Spenser. Surely if the sentence is read in its context it will be clear that in this passage Spenser is trying to make a joke; the only one in the

66

View," and, as might be expected, a rather feeble one. Eudoxus, one of the speakers of the dialogue, after ridiculing Stanihurst, a writer on Ireland, for his attempt to connect the derivation of the name "Scotts" with one "Scota, the daughter of Pharaoh," which he calls a "senceless fable," proceeds: ". 66 for whether Scota be an Aegyptian woord or smacke of any learning or judgement, lett the learned judge. But this Scota rather cometh of the Greeke scotos, that is, darkeness, which hath not lett him see the light of the trueth."

Irenaeus, the other speaker, replies: "You knowe not, Eudoxus, how well Mr. Stanihurst could see in the darke; perhaps he hath owles or cats eyes, but well I wote he seeth not well the light of the trueth in matters of more waight."

"12

10 The Complete Works..... of E. Spenser, ed. Grosart, vol. IX, pp. 21, 22, 23, et passim.

11 Ancient Irish Histories, Dublin, 1809, vol. 1, pp. 10, 11, 12, et passim. 12 P. 633, Globe ed.

At any rate, it seems only fair to give Spenser the benefit of the doubt. It is not my purpose, however, to attempt a defense of Spenser's linguistic vagaries. Draper has discussed them with acuteness and learning, and merits the thanks of all students of that poet for the light he has thrown on the working of the poet's mind when it was concerned with questions of scholarship outside the traditionally prescribed field. Spenser's knowledge of the Celtic languages and of philological science was, it is true, "sadly narrow." But this sad condition was rather common among educated men of his time; and, as Draper says, we must not "lay too much blame upon Spenser for this miscomprehension." Nor should we allow his errors in questions of ethnology (some of which Draper notices in his article) to arouse a feeling of contempt for the poet of the "Faerie Queene as a mere blunderer in unfamiliar provinces of knowledge, and so blind us to the real value of his methods in the "View." Elton,13 a well-known ethnologist, pays a high tribute to Spenser's originality in the field of ethnology. Perhaps, considering the "View" in its broader aspects, we may say not inaccurately of its author as he says of the Irish chroniclers, that he errs "in the circumstances, not in the matter."

The University of Texas.

18 Origins of English History, 2d. ed. rev., pp. 157-158.