Many of these dative forms may be explained as occurring in 'petrified' phrases, i.e. to phrases (involving datives) that were in common use. 'These,' says Mr. Manly, 'are the phrases which have given rise to the supposition that the regular ending of the dative in Chaucer is _-e_. An examination of the facts, however, will shew that this is not true. The dative ending was preserved in certain phrases which were transmitted and used as phrases, the force of the dative as such being no longer felt. This will appear from a comparison of such phrases as _a bedde_, _to bedde_, _over borde_, _to dethe_, _for fere_, _a-fere_ (afire), _to-hepe_, _a-lyve_, _a-slepe_, _to wyve_, _to the brimme_.' So also _to rede_, T. iv. 679: _in house_, D 352. Nevertheless, a few true datives in _-e_ occur, though they are certainly scarce. We can hardly explain the use of _horne_ in Book Duch. 376 as occurring in a petrified phrase. Cf. also _on a berne_, C 397; _of his lone_, D 1861; and, in particular, the curious instances in which the A.S. nom. has disappeared. Thus the A.S. _h[=i]w_ is always _hewe_ in Chaucer, in all cases; the A.S. _gr[=a]f_ is always _grove_; the A.S. _hol_ is _hole_; _sore_ in A 2743 is a nom. case; and so on. s. 69. ARCHAISMS. The easiest way of understanding Chaucer's language is to remember that it is _archaic_; the use of the final _-e_ was fast disappearing, and he probably was anxious to retain it for the sake of metrical effect. He could not but have remarked its usefulness in Old French poetry; and his study of Italian must have led him to admire the frequency of the vowel-endings in that language. But the use of the English final _-e_ had become extremely uncertain, owing to the complete fusion of the nom. and acc., and the loss (to a large extent) of the dative, except in old phrases which contained (usually) some common preposition. s. 70. THREE TYPES OF STRONG SUBSTANTIVES. If I may beg leave to offer my own view of the forms of Chaucer's substantives of the strong declensions, I should be inclined to explain his usages in the following way. Let us put aside the weak declension, and the etymology of the A.S. words, and let us look at the actual forms of the singular nouns. And, since the genitive case, in Chaucer, usually has a form of its own, let us consider the nom., acc., and dative only. All the representative words given in Sievers (A.S. Gram. s. 238, &c.) can be collected under a few general types, for the present purpose. The fem. sb. _giefu_ had the accus. _giefe_; but as _-u_ and _-e_ both became _-e_ at a later period, the nom. and acc. are, practically, alike. Further, datives in _-a_, as _sun-a_, _feld-a_, became datives in _-e_, and may here be so considered. Hence, in very late A.S. and in Early English, we find, neglecting stems in _-r_, the few words which shew mutation in the dative, and others which do not affect the general result, the following uses. 1. Every dative case ends in _-e_.