Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 26, 1915.djvu/111



It is a matter of hearty congratulation, alike to students of folklore and of mediaeval history and literature, that we at length have a worthy edition of the text of this famous and interesting book. It should have been undertaken long ago, and by an Oxford scholar, seeing that the unique manuscript is one of the treasures of the Bodleian Library. This is not to undervalue the work of Thomas Wright, who prepared for the Camden Society the only previously printed edition. That edition has been useful to students. But Wright, if he ever saw the manuscript, neither copied it himself nor collated his copy with the original, and he certainly exaggerates the difficulty of the handwriting. As we should expect, therefore, his printed text swarms with errors, and no one who has had occasion to consult it has felt that he could rely on it. The exactness of scholarship, however, has made progress since 1850, when Wright's edition was issued; probably mediaeval palaeography has progressed too. To produce the present edition a "rotograph" has been prepared. But Dr. James has not been satisfied with this; he has personally consulted the manuscript. His wide learning has enabled him to make emendations in the text where they were fairly certain (duly recording the original in the notes), and to suggest others, to trace a large number, at all