This item is
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)
Publicly Available
and licensed under:Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)
Files for this item
Download all local files for this item (1.13 MB)
- Name
- aspr-1936.txt
- Size
- 1.13 MB
- Format
- Text file
- Description
- Version of the work in plain text format
<t a1.1> Us is riht micel # =$t we rodera weard, | wereda wuldorcining, # wordum herigen, | modum lufien! # He is m$gna sped, | heafod ealra # heahgesceafta, | frea $lmihtig. # N$s him fruma $fre, | or geworden, # ne nu ende cym* | ecean drihtnes, # ac he bi= a rice | ofer heofenstolas. # Heagum *rymmum | so=f$st and swi=feorm% # sweglbosmas heold, | *a w$ron gesette # wide and side | *urh geweald godes # wuldres bearnum, | gasta weardum. # H$fdon gleam and dream, | and heora ordfruman, # engla *reatas, | beorhte blisse. # W$s heora bl$d micel! | *egnas *rymf$ste # *eoden heredon, | s$gdon lustum lof, # heora liffrean | demdon, drihtenes # duge*um w$ron | swi=e ges$lige. # Synna ne cu*on, | firena fremman, # ac hie on fri=e lifdon, | ece mid heora aldor. # Elles ne ongunnon | r$ran on roderum # nym*e riht and so*, | $r=on engla weard # for oferhygde | dw$l% on gedwilde. # Noldan dreogan leng | heora selfra r$d, # ac hie of siblufan | godes ahwurfon. # H$fdon gielp micel | *$t hie wi= d . . .
- Name
- readme-1936.txt
- Size
- 7.72 KB
- Format
- Text file
- Description
- Version of the work in plain text format
THE ANGLO-SAXON POETIC RECORDS This file was originally prepared by Greg Hidley, evidently from a collation of an early form of the electronic text of the OE corpus held by the Dictionary of Old English with the printed text of the Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records. The procedures used to generate it are not known. It would seem that it was never quite finalised (from the presence at the start of The Battle of Maldon of an annotation "NEED TO ADD lines 289-294 ...?" - though the lines are in fact present), and it contains many inconsistencies and errors. The present revision rests primarily on a computer comparison with files representing the latest available update kindly made available by DOE. This has been supported by as much visual checking against the printed text, and in some cases other editions and facsimiles, as time has allowed, and where this brought to notice fuller information about manuscript readings it would have seemed foolish not to incorporate it, as in Solomon and Satur . . .
