105, read on ȝouþe þat he haueþ idrowe: omit l. 132, þu; l. 149, owe; l. 152, þu; l. 188, hit; l. 189, scholde, forþ; l. 192, nowiht, and read ll. 191, 192 as an alliterative line: omit l. 205, ne, he; l. 209, blyþe and; l. 210, þe mon: l. 219-23, with the help of T we may restore, Ne ared þu nouht to swiþe | þe word of þine wyue. | If heo be i wreþþed · myd worde oþer dede; l. 231, for þat wymmon read heo; comp. T: l. 242 omit þe mon: l. 249, see note: l. 254, omit þe before wule: l. 262 omit þe, see note: l. 275, for schulle bicumen read bicumeþ: l. 280, for none read no: ll. 294, 296, omit þu: l. 324 omit þe. vi. The rhymes may, in some cases, have been spoiled by the substitution of alien dialectic forms; it is tempting to read ihere 10, iherd 205, but the _u_ forms do not appear to belong to the dialect of the scribe of J: at l. 102 helde, a patois form (Bülbring § 175 note), might be read: at l. 240 þon. The combinations brouhte : myhte, 181, 182; ayhte : nouhte, 274, 275 are remarkable. Many intractable lines remain, such as 284, where perhaps bet has been lost at the end. Elision and slurring are frequent; pronounce þeorl 4, lawẹlyche 47, euẹlyche 49, euẹruyches, owẹre 54, &c. #Introduction:# The ascription of the Proverbs to Alfred rests on no firmer ground than an affectionate remembrance of the great king as a sage and teacher of his people. The only part of the poem which could with even artistic fitness be attributed to him is ll. 19-64, the rest is mostly the cautious wisdom of the common people, varied by reflections in a higher strain on the favourite mediaeval theme of the shortness and uncertainty of life. Up to l. 64 the poem is connected; afterwards it is without apparent plan, though there is occasionally a slender thread of union between the stanzas. The editors indeed see a new exordium and the beginning of a second section in stanza xiii, which appears to me to be a weak imitation of stanza vii. Perhaps a structural difference may be detected between the more general observations of the first part and the advice to an individual which begins with stanza xiv. Stanza xxi appears to have strayed from its natural place beside stanza vii. The version of MS. J is not necessarily the more primitive because it is shorter than that of T. A poem of such loose structure readily lends itself to selection on the part of the copyist; and the scribe of MS. J was evidently a critic. If the suggestions offered in the section on metre have any weight, a considerable time and several copies must have intervened between the original and the present form of the poem. The composition of that original should, I think, be placed somewhere about 1180 A.D.