Next in antiquity to the Ormulum come the Bestiary, already mentioned, and the present poem, both of which uniformly employ the Midland affix _-en_, to the exclusion of all others, as the inflection of the present plural indicative. There are other peculiarities which these works have in common; and a careful comparison of them with the Ormulum induces me to assign them to the East Midland area; but there are certain peculiarities, to be noticed hereafter, which induce me to believe that the work of Orm represents a dialect spoken in the northern part of this district, while the Story of Genesis and Exodus, together with the Bestiary, exhibits the speech of the more southern counties of the East Midland district.[13] Thus, if the former be in the dialect of _Lincoln_, the latter is in that of _Suffolk_.[14] The chief points in which the present poem and the Bestiary agree with the Ormulum are the following:— I. The absence of compound vowels. In the Southern dialects we find the compound vowels _ue_, _eo_, _ie_, _ea_ (_yea_). In the Ormulum _eo_ occurs, but with the sound of _e_, and _ea_ in Genesis and Exodus is written for _e_. II. The change of an initial _ð_ (th) into _t_ after words ending in _d_, _t_, _n_, _s_, that is to say, after a dental or a sibilant.[15] "ðanne iſ _tis_ fruit wel ſwiðe good."—(_Gen. and Ex._, l. 334.) "ðe firſt moned and _te_ firſt dai, He ſag erðe drie & _te_ water awai."—(_Ibid._, l. 615-6.) "ðin berg and _tin_ werger ic ham."—(_Ibid._, l. 926.) "at _te_ welle[n]."—(_Ibid._, l. 2756.) This practice is much more frequent in the Bestiary, which is a proof, perhaps, that the present poem has suffered somewhat in the course of transcription. "neddre is _te_ name."—(_O.E. Miscellany_, p. 5.) "it is _te_ ned."—(_Ibid._, p. 6.) "ðis lif bitokneð ðe sti ðat _te_ neddre gangeð bi, and _tis_ is ðe ðirl of ðe ston, ðat _tu_ salt ðurg gon."—(_Ibid._, p. 7.) "at _tin_ herte."—(_Ibid._, p. 7.) III. Simplicity of grammatical structure and construction of sentences.[16] 1. The neglect of _gender_ and _number_ in nouns. 2. The genitive singular of substantives end in _-es_ in all genders.[17] 3. The absence of the gen. pl. of substantives in _-ene_. 4. The employment of an uninflected article.[18] 5. The use of _ðat_ (that) as a demonstrative adjective, and not as the neuter of the article. The form _ðas_ (those), common enough in the fourteenth century, does not occur in this poem or in the Ormulum.