§ 51. But there is one point about Clanvowe's verse which renders it, for the fifteenth century, quite unique. In imitating Chaucer's use of the final _-e_, he employs this suffix with unprecedented freedom, and rather avoids than seeks elision. This gives quite a distinctive character to his versification, and is very noticeable when attention has once been drawn to it. If, for example, we compare it with the Parliament of Foules, which it most resembles in general character, we find the following results. If, in the Cuckoo and Nightingale, we observe the first 21 lines, we shall find (even if we omit the example of _hy-e_ in l. 4, and all the examples of final _-e_ at the end of a line) the following clear examples of its use:--_low-e_, _lyk-e_, _hard-e_, _sek-e_, _hol-e_ (twice), _mak-e_, _hav-e_, _wys-e_, _proud-e_, _grev-e_, _trew-e_, _hert-e_, i.e. 13 examples, besides the 5 examples of final _-en_ in _mak-en_, _bind-en_, _unbind-en_, _bound-en_, _destroy-en_. But in the first 21 lines of the Parliament of Foules there are only 2 examples of the final _-e_ in the middle of a line, viz. _lust-e_ (15) and _long-e_ (21), whilst of the final _-en_ there is none. The difference between 18 and 2 must strike even the most inexperienced reader, when it is once brought under his notice. However, it is an extreme case. Yet again, if the _last_ 21 lines in the Cuckoo be compared with ll. 659-679 of the Parliament (being the _last_ 21 lines, if we dismiss the roundel and the stanza that follows it), we find in the former 7 examples of final _-e_ and 2 of _-en_, or 9 in all, whilst in Chaucer there are 7 of final _-e_, and 1 of _-en_, or 8 in all; and this also happens to be an extreme case in the other direction, owing to the occurrence in the former poem of the words _egle_, _maple_, and _chambre_, which I have not taken into account. This suggests that, to make sure, we must compare much longer passages. In the whole of the Cuckoo, I make about 120 such cases of final _-e_, and 23 such cases of final _-en_, or 143 in all. In 290 lines of the Parliament of Foules, I make about 68 and 19 such cases respectively; or about 87 in all. Now the difference between 143 and 87 is surely very marked. The cause of this result is obvious, viz. that Chaucer makes a more frequent use of elision. In the first 21 lines of the Parl. of Foules, we find elisions of _men'_, _sor'_, _wak'_, _oft'_ (twice), _red'_ (twice), _spek'_, _fast'_, _radd'_; i.e. 10 examples; added to which, Chaucer has _joy(e)_, _love_, _knowe_, _usage_, _boke_, at the cæsura, and suppresses the _e_ in _write_ (written). But in ll. 1-21, Clanvowe has (in addition to _love_, _make_, _lowe_, _make_ (twice), _gladde_ at the cæsura) only 3 examples of true elision, viz. _fressh'_, _tell'_, and _mak'_ (15).