Schlutter 143 A-bregdan. The entry in the Supplement " Aslaccan. Add- dslacte dissolverat Wrt. Voc. II 25, 58. Ascaltte 106, 56" does not take cognizance of the fact that the Dictionary exhibits a-slaccan and that its basis is just the one gloss from Codex Cotton, Cleopatra A III (Wright-Wulcker I 385, 30) which the Supplement quotes from Wrt. Voc. II 25, 58. It is refashioning of the Corpus Gloss (Hessels) D 336 which the Supplement quotes next from Wrt. Voc. II 105, 56, evidently supposing that ascaeltte (so, not aseaftfehasthe MS.) stands for aslactte. For that, without doubt, it has been taken by the scribe of the Cleopatra collection. But il is by no means certain that he was right. Ascaeltte of the Corpus may represent ascaelcte and presuppose an Old English a-sccdcan, which was no longer known to the later scribe, but which may be connected with East Frisian ver-schalken=verzapfen, verzahnen. A very serious blunder of the Dictionary not corrected in the Supplement is the entry on page 114, boc-scyld 'a beechen shield,' for which the following quotation from Thorpe p. 561, 5 is brought forward: Ic ge-an [MS. geann] Siferpe mines bdcscyldes. Here observe, in the first place, that the text quoted is again shortened without proper indication and the spelling unwarrantedly meddled with. The full sentence reads thus in Thorpe: 7 ic geann Siferde pas landes cet Hocganclife 7 anes swurdes. 7 anes horses. 7 mines boc scyldes. In a foot-note to the last word, boc scyldes, Thorpe asserts this to be the reading of the Cod. Wintoniensis, adding that "Man- ning (App. ad Lye) reads boh-scyld, from boh, humerus, i.e., a shield borne on the shoulder, scutum humerale." As a matter of fact, Manning's boh-scyldes is the reading not only of the Winchester MS., but also that of the Canterbury MS. For the charter of Athelstan ^theling happens to be preserved to us in the two MSS. mentioned and that in the Canterbury MS. is, to my mind, a copy of that in the Winchester MS., though Sanders, the editor of both (Ordnance Survey Facsimiles of Anglo-Saxon MSS., part III, plate 38 and part I, plate 18) does not seern to be aware of it. I shall deal with the subject more fully in a special article. Here it suffice to say that bohscyldes is undoubtedly the reading of both MSS. and Thorpe's boc scyldes is mere repetition of Kemble's blunder (C.D. V 363, 14). While Manning-Kemble-Thorpe's print is based on the Winchester MS., Earle's print p. 224 represents the text of the Canterbury MS. which, as Sanders says, "differs slightly" from the Winchester text. But, as pointed out, bohscyldes is in both MSS. Consequently the Supplement ought to exhibit the following rectification of the Dictionary: Bdc-scyld . lege bdhscyld: 7 ic geann (so MS.) Siferfie . . . mines bohscyldes (Sanders, Ordnance Survey Facsimiles of Anglo-Saxon MSS., part III, 38 and part I, 38). (To be continued) OTTO B. SCHLUTTER.
Hartford, Conn., September 1918.
