{ Introductory Material } PASCON AGAN ARLUTH PASSHYON AGAN ARLOEDH (KAN AN PASSHYON) (THE PASSION POEM) (MOUNT CALVARY) Edited by Ray Edwards {Fifth Impression -- May 1996} CONTENTS Preface Page 5 The Manuscript Page 7 Language Page 10 Spelling Page 14 The Poem and its Sources Page 28 Versification The English Translation Presentation Further Reading -------------------------------------------------------- Text, Translation and Notes Page 32 -------------------------------------------------------- Envoi Page 209 Bibliography Page 211 APPENDIX References to Cornish Simplified II Page 17 Second Print, May 1993. Errors detailed in an eleven page list received from Dr David Balhatchet within days of his receiving the first print have been corrected. Just as the first print was made ready, the second edition of Wella Brown's A Grammar of Modern Cornish was published. There has not yet been time to update all the references made to the first edition in the notes but two references have been made to the second edition where this is particularly relevant. Third Print, October 1993. The second Edition of A Grammar of Modern Cornish and the Gerlyver Kernewek Kemmyn; an Gerlyver Meur by Dr Ken George have now both been taken fully into account. A number of errors which survived the second print have been corrected but there are probably still some left and it would be appreciated if readers would indicate them. Fourth Print, October 1995. This takes into account the recently published book, Cornish Today, by Dr Nicholas Williams of University College, Dublin. Fifth Print, May 1996. The MS text has now been checked against the 1860-61 edition of Whitley Stokes and a number of corrections made. Further amendments have also been made with help from Nicholas Williams and Keith Syed. Kesva an Taves Kernewek (Cornish Language Board) ISBN 0 907064 24 8 Preface In 1985 I went to the Scrif-Celt Exhibition in London and when I tried to brush up my French at the stall of a Breton bookseller I had a little brown book thrust into my hand. This turned out to be an edition of the famous Cornish Passion Poem, not only in Unified Cornish but also in the original spelling of the Manuscript, with a Breton translation. It was the first time I had seen a piece of Cornish of any length in the MS spelling so I bought it. When I got it home I turned over the pages rather than read it, and put it on the bookshelf... Two years later Kernewek Kemmyn was accepted by the Cornish Language Board and I realised that sooner or later the Board would need versions of the Cornish Texts in K.K. for their examinations as well as for general interest. From that time the idea formed in my mind to convert the Poem to K.K. One thing I did not have was an English translation, and the Breton one was of very limited use. I wrote to the Board to order their edition by Talek (E. G. R. Hooper) but was told it was out of print. Dr Ken George very kindly lent me his own copy which I photocopied. When I told Talek of my plan he sent me a correction list to his edition and a copy of the Manuscript made by Robert Morton Nance and published in instalments in the Cornish magazine Kernow. This was of great value as I was able to compare the two readings of the MS. There is more about this in the Notes on the Manuscript on page 7. I cannot do better than quote verbatim, and with permission, the greater part of Talek's introduction to his edition of 1972. The ``Passion Poem'' is a Cornish treasure and equivalent to good poetry in any language; every Cornish student ought to know it and it is with this aim that it is presented in ``unified'' or ``modern standard'' spelling. There are five manuscript copies. One, in the British Museum, Harl. N.1782 is a small quarto on rough vellum said to have been found in the church of Sancreed, was used by Whitley Stokes for his edition and English translation, published by the Philological Society of London in their transactions 1860-61. There are two copies in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, and one in the Archbishop's Library, Lambeth. This is the one used by John Keigwin for translation and published by Davies Gilbert in 1826 under the title ``Mount Calvary'' - printed for the first time. But Keigwin was badly treated by his publisher: after giving thanks that Cornish was no longer heard, Gilbert ``proceeds to butcher its remains,'' to quote R. Morton Nance, so that this edition is worthless. There is an incomplete copy in the Gwavas collection, and a fragment of one with a Welsh and English translation (Add. MS 14,934) which perhaps was used by Hals (1665-1737) for he miscopies and attempts to translate verses in his ``History of Cornwall'' as under the parish of Boyton. The Rev. Robert Williams adopted the title ``Mount Calvary'' in his Lexicon Cornu-britannicum, 1865, giving references under ``M.C.'' The scholarly edition of R. Morton Nance (Mordon) was printed by A. S. D. Smith (Caradar) in his all Cornish magazine ``KERNOW,'' serially in 14 parts, l934-36 with the original text and a greatly improved English translation. Later the two collaborated in a close study of the text with the aid of photostats, constantly consulting similar forms of expression in the Ordinalia and other texts. After this work they sometimes made notes independently or in letters, all of which I have studied, using them in printing a plain text without translation in the successor to Kernow, An Lef Kernewek. Nos. 81 to 103 (1968). The B.M. text is not easily read but Nance excelled in the reading, and writing of medieval script, and in so far as concerns the mutation of initial consonants, this text is easily the most accurate as was found by Caradar in his study of mutation (lenition) that one mutation was missed in 74 lines whereas in Bewnans Meryasek it is one in 9˛/3rds. Nance wrote ``Such a poem, intended for popular devotional use, must have been copied over and over again, and this copy has some obvious blunders of which the author would have been incapable. It is unlike other Passion Poems, English, French, or Breton in having no final verse to promise 100 to 500 days of pardon to those who learn or listen to it. Here and there a later pen has inked over words that have grown faint, not always correctly. This is the only Cornish MS that has the added interest of illuminations...they are rather more in the mood of modernist art than typical of the fifteenth century.'' I am very grateful to Talek for the help he has given and also to Wella Brown and Dr Ken George who have read and annotated my rough draft. Many of their comments are incorporated in the notes. I am most grateful to Dr David Balhatchet who has done a lot of research in Sussex University Library. Much of the information on the sources of the Poem (page 28) is the result of this. He has also been through the whole book with his ruthless tooth comb and made many valuable suggestions. I am fully responsible for any errors that remain. And not least, I am grateful to Les Pierce who has provided the cover illustration, based on Celtic crosses at Bodmin and Sancreed. Thus there is a link with the Manuscript which is ``said to have been found in the church of Sancreed''. Maybe the writer actually saw this cross! If any reader disagrees with any comments made or can add to the information given, I shall be very glad to hear. K.D.L. books are made in very short runs and the computer disk can easily be amended to accommodate corrections or alterations. Ray Edwards Mis Ebryl {April}, 1993 The Manuscript I have worked from two copies of the British Museum MS Harleian N. 1782. I started with the copy printed in Passyon agan Arluth edited by Goulven Pennaod and published by Preder in Brittany in 1980. In his preface, which Dr Ken George has kindly translated for me from the Breton, Pennaod tells us that he copied the Whitley Stokes edition in the Bibliothčque Nationale in Paris and had it corrected by Talek. After I had begun work, Talek very kindly sent me the version that was printed in Kernow in 1934-36 from Nance's reading of the MS Although both readings are from the same MS there is a large number of small discrepancies between the two. These are listed on pages 9-13, with the version which I have used in the text shown in bold type. I have chosen whichever seemed the more appropriate. When reading the MS the following points have to borne in mind: 1) v and u are interchangeable; e.g. in 1/2, levn = leun and in 1/6, lauarow = lavarow. 2) z usually represents dh; e.g. 1/3, zeugh = dhywgh. 3) th may represent dh: e.g. in 1/7, worthyans = wordhyans; or th: e.g. in 11/8, worthebys = worthybis. 4) sc represents sh or sshy; e.g. in 1/4, basconn = basshyon. 5) j was really an alternative form of i and was used both for the vowel i and for the consonant j {[dZ]} that was coming into use. It seems likely that the initial sound of names like Yesu and Yowann was beginning to move from Y to J about the time of the MS. j was not used exclusively for the modern j sound until the 17th century (Chambers). 6) The guttural sound spelled gh in K.K. and K.U. may appear as h; e.g. in 3/4, werhas = wyrghes; or as gh; e.g. in 7/1, begha. 7) Yesu(s) is almost always written ihesu(s). The h crept into the name because very few scribes knew Greek. The h actually represents the Greek letter eta (the long e ) which is exactly the same as H in the capital form and which was written as well as the normal letter e. It is still met in modern editions of the Cornish texts published in Unified Cornish. Up to the nineteenth century s often looked like f which explains the occasional confused readings. Mostly, editors have printed s. The mutation of the initial letters of proper names, in particular Crist/Cryst and Pylat/Pelat is inconsistent in the MS. Following G.M.C. §19(8); G.M.C.(2) §23(3h) I have not mutated them in the Kernewek Kemmyn version as they are not Celtic names. The rather haphazard rhyming scheme of unstressed final syllables suggests that there were often, if not always, pronounced as neutral vowels. It is unfortunate that Kernewek Kemmyn does not have a symbol for these, but neither does English. The MS seems to use e most frequently to show a neutral vowel, though any vowel letter seems possible. Nicholas Williams is of the opinion that in general unstressed syllables contain neutral vowels (§13.33) and he tells me he does not feel a special symbol for shwa is necessary if they are treated as such. Letters shown in brackets are ones which are illegible in the Manuscript and have been supplied by conjecture, presumably by Stokes or Nance or both. There is a facsimile of the first page of the MS in The Cornish Language and its Literature by Peter Berresford Ellis. It is set out in lines of fourteen syllables. The first page of the MS contains the first four and a half verses as currently edited, but the page does not show these verses clearly and although there are some Arabic numbers to the right of the lettering they do not seem to refer to lines or verses. At the foot of the page is one of the illustrations mentioned by Talek in his Introduction. The present edition has followed Hooper {i.e. "Talek"} and Pennaod in dividing these lines into two lines each of seven syllables. The tradition of doing so goes back to Edward Lhuyd who printed the first four lines of seven syllables in his ``Catalogue of unprinted writings in the Ancient Language of Britain'' (Antiqua Britannić Lingua scriptorum quć non impressa sunt Catalogus) which he included in his Archćologia Britannica. They are photocopied below. Lhuyd explains (in Latin) that the MS was given him by Mr John Anstey whom he praises highly. It is on parchment but without any title, indication of the author or when it was written though the handwriting indicates the fifteenth century. However, the Kernow edition of the MS preserves the long line format. Since writing the above and publishing the Fourth Print I have had the opportunity of comparing the MS readings I had with those of Stokes. At the 1995 Gorsedd Keith Syed kindly gave me a photocopy of these and Harry Woodhouse checked them through for me and gave me a list of discrepancies. I am most grateful to both for their valuable help.The list showed that in general Nance was in agreement with Stokes with very few differences but Pennaod had made a large number of errors in copying from Stokes and I had made even more in copying from Pennaod and Nance! I have therefore now corrected the present MS version to agree with Stokes/Nance and have preferred Nance to Stokes in the very few cases of difference unless there were special reasons for not doing so. These have usually given rise to a note to the text but having Stokes to support Nance has made the list of discrepancies between Nance and Pennaod which was included in previous prints unnecessary and it is therefore omitted. Most of the changes are minor and of little consequence and only rarely have they occasioned an alteration to the Kernewek Kemmyn text. In a few cases there is a slight change of meaning and therefore to the translation. The Stokes edition has copious and very interesting notes though no doubt many of these are out of date now. Due to the need to prepare this fifth print quickly I have not worked through them as yet. Language Confusion of Present and Imperfect Subjunctive As is to be expected in a narrative poem, most of the verbs are in the past tense, exceptions being where conversation occurs. In the narrative passages, I have counted fifteen cases where the MS appears to have a present tense verb, usually a third person singular ending in -o, while the grammar calls for an imperfect. Conversely in conversations there are six cases of an imperfect subjunctive where the grammar requires a present. The verbs involved are bos, mos, klywes, galloes, gul, y'm beus and kavoes. Each case is indicated in the notes on the text. In the Unified versions Hooper ``corrected'' thirteen cases and left eight as in the MS, whilst Pennaod ``corrected'' seven and left fourteen. I have ``corrected'' all twenty-one as an aid to comprehension though such a degree of confusion leaves open the question as to which form actually is ``correct.'' Nicholas Williams (§12.4) maintains that this confusion is due to the vowel ending in each case becoming neutral and so always sounding the same though the confusion is not limited to the third person singular as he suggests. Unn used as an Indefinite Article Current grammars of Cornish state that the Indefinite Article (`a, an') is not usually expressed. See Cornish Simplified, §1, and Cornish for Beginners, lesson 1. Grammar of Modern Cornish §92(3) [Second Edition, §95(3)] gives unn as meaning `one', or `a certain'. Similar definitions are found in the Nance Dictionary and the Gerlyver Meur. I have counted unn used eight times in our Poem where the only sense compatible with the context is that of the indefinite article, and four times which would admit this, or `a certain.' All these cases are indicated in the notes on the text. Edward Lhuyd recognises this usage on page 240 of the Archaeologia Britannica, as does J.C. Zeuss on page 239 of Grammatica Celtica where he quotes 16/2, war ben un meneth; 84/1, un venyn; 214/1, on burges; and 217/2, on mareg (his spelling) as examples. Insertion of particle a between a part of bos and a preceding complement This occurs in 29/8 and 44/6, and is unusual. See notes on text. According to Cornish Simplified §100 and G.M.C. §317(4a); G.M.C.(2) §333(4a) a complement preceding bos is usually followed by the particle y or the part of bos with soft mutation but without a particle, e.g. marow y fydhons or marow vydhons. The latter is more usual in current use. Use of gweles Although few modern Cornish writers realise this, the tendency seems to be to omit any auxiliary verb before gweles, similar to the French idiom, although `can' is commonly used in English. In other words:- My a wel. = Je vois. = `I can see.' I have noticed two examples in our Poem, in 64/6 and 220/5. They are similar to each other, the first being Ny welens yn fas and the second, Ny welen yn fas. They both refer to seeing in the literal physical sense, and the obvious translation into normal, idiomatic English is: `They/We could not see very well.' On the other hand, there is an example in 60/1, Ni a yll gweles, which implies an ability to follow an argument as to how Christ died for mankind. Similarly in 12/6, Ni a yll gweles. = `We can see', understanding, not physical seeing is meant. 96/1-2, Gans kweth y benn y kwethens; Gweles banna na ylli clearly uses ylli with gweles because Jesus literally could not see as he was blindfolded. Yn krows When one is familiar with the English expression `On the Cross', it is a little disconcerting to find yn krows on no less than eight occasions and one instinctively suspects a missed mutation and an omitted apostrophe. However, it becomes apparent that following verbs like ladha, gorra, and synsi, it is the equivalent of `crucify'. The examples are indicated in the text notes. Adjective plus rag/dhe plus verb noun = `....enough to' There are four examples of this interesting and useful construction which could drive lowr out of business. They are as follows:- 105/8 ....krev rag y synsi = `strong enough to hold him' 214/8 ....hardh dh'y notya = `bold enough to make it known' 234/3 ....hardh dh'y notya = `bold enough to make it known' 250/7 ....hardh dhe wortos = `bold enough to stay' The construction is mentioned in G.M.C. §141(17); G.M.C.(2) §141(18) and the examples are indicated in the notes on the text. Dell with Indirect Question/Statement In his book, Notes on Spoken Cornish, Rod Lyon gives some examples from Wella Rowe and Nicholas Boson of what he describes as indirect statements introduced by dell. The Gerlyver Meur suggests that dell and fatell are of the same origin and in fact that fa- is an interrogative prefix. From this it seems that both words can mean `how', with fatell being the more directly interrogative. In most of Rod Lyon's examples the dell would translate as `how' or as `that', suggesting that the following clauses could be regarded as indirect questions rather than statements. I have found six similar examples in our Poem and in all cases the dell would translate as either `how' or `that'. They are as follows:- 8/2-4 Lavarav ... akord dell veu kemmerys. = `I will tell how/that an accord was made.' 12/6-7 ... ni a yll gweles lavar Dyw maga dell wra ... = `We can see how/that the Word of God nourishes ...' 61/6-8 ... dyskys fatell dhons dh'ow hemmeres ha dell vydhav hembrynkys. = `... learned how/that they will come to take me and how/that I shall be led away.' 123/1-2 Dh'y gour hi a dhannvonas a Krist kepar dell welsa, = `To her husband she sent how/that she had seen of Christ,' 177/1-2 Unn venyn dha a welas dell o Yesus destryppys. = `A good woman saw how/that Jesus was stripped.' 221/2-6 ... welas ... an goes ha'n lin anodho dell dheveras. = `saw ... how/that the blood and water ran from him.' It is a matter of opinion whether `how' or `that' is better in each of the above cases; and whether the clauses are statements or questions becomes rather academic. I have used `how' in the text translation but it does suggest that the tendency was for dell in such cases to mean `that' rather than `how' as time went on. It will be noticed in 61/7 above that fatell is used in the same way as dell to introduce the indirect question/statement. Nicholas Williams (§21.17) regards this as a legitimate usage in Revived Cornish O plus past participle ``With the Imperfect tense (of bos), the Past Participle denotes a continuous state and is descriptive: e.g. shyndys en "I was hurt."'' [G.M.C. §229(3); G.M.C.(2) §245(3a)]. One cannot disagree with this as a general principle but I have noticed four cases where the `continuous state' was the result of an action which had immediately preceded the time of the narration and as far as modern English is concerned `had been' seems a more appropriate translation than `was'. I have used `had been' in some cases in the translation and Hooper has done so in one case (233/4). The examples are as follows:- 177/1-2 Unn venyn dha a welas dell o Yesus destryppys. = `A good woman saw how Jesus had been/was stripped.' 219/5-6 Y hwolghas y dhewlagas gans y eyl leuv o goesys. = `He washed his eyes with his one hand which had been/was covered in blood.' 219/7-8 Dre ras an goes y hwelas Yesus Krist dell o dyghtys. = `By virtue of the blood he saw how Jesus Christ had been/was treated.' 233/4 Nowydh parys, nyns o usys. = ``Newly prepared, it had not been/was not used.'' Maybe `was' is better in 219/6 but I certainly prefer `had been' in the other cases. They are all indicated in the text. Mynnes without verb-noun Mynnes is normally used as an auxiliary verb followed by a verb-noun. However the poem has the following examples of mynnes governing a noun or pronoun object: 54/4 an kig ny vynna henna = ``the flesh did not want that.'' 67/4 Pandra yw a vynnowgh hwi? = ``What do you want?'' Use of the Present Participle The present participle formed with ow and the verb-noun is normally a verbal adjective, or is used with the long forms of bos to form continuous tenses. However, the Poem also contains the following examples of the present participle used as an oblique gerund meaning ``by/in/through doing'', similar to the ablative of the gerund in Latin or the present participle in Spanish: 86/7 Ow nagha Dyw = ``by denying God.'' 104/4 ow kwertha = ``by/in selling.'' {This is perhaps the original use of this construction since ow(th) < (w)orth = "by", "at", "beside" etc.} Long forms of bos in nominal sentences G.M.C. §315(4); G.M.C.(2) §332(4) states that the long forms of bos are used only in verbal sentences and the verb is therefore always preceded by the particle yth. However, I have found the following examples of bos used in nominal sentences without yth: 124/1 Onan esa y'n pryson. = ``There was one in the prison.'' 131/1-2 ... prennyer esa yn diwla an dhew Edhow. = ``there were sticks in the hands of the two Jews.'' 140/6 Kweth esa a-dro dhodho. 140/7-8 Prest an Edhewon debel dhe Yesus esens a-dro. = ``The wicked Jews were always around Jesus.'' I do not see any reason why the verb is plural in the fourth example but not in the second. {It is not immediately preceded by its (plural) subject so the need is felt to mark the subject rather than use the 3s as a "neutral" or unmarked form. The word order has been distorted to fit the metre. In normal speech one would probably say : An edhewon debel esa prest a-dro dhe Yesus with the plural left unmarked since the plural subject immediately precedes the verb. The "long forms" of bos are always used to signify place etc., whereas the "short forms" signify identity or quality.} 3rd singular imperative G.M.C.(2) §183/3 states ``The 3rd sing (imperative) in Modern Cornish has restored the use of the forms in -es. The 3rd sing. in -ens had taken its place in many instances.'' However there are fourteen examples in the MS of the poem of the form in -ens being used with a singular subject and only one of -es. They are indicated in the notes on the text. Double consonants in subjunctive stems In G.M.C. §185 and G.M.C. (2) §182 Wella Brown introduces the principle of doubling and hardening the stem vowel in the present and imperfect subjunctive. As far as I know this had not been given in earlier grammars but it is confirmed by the following examples in our Poem: teffa, 27/7, 162/7, 249/7; caffans, 67/6; caffons, 114/7, 154/4; caffan, 240/6; wozaffo, 14/5; geffo, 51/3; deppro, 44/7. Spelling The main purpose of this book is to make available a version of the Poem in Kernewek Kemmyn, and I have adhered wherever possible to the spellings given in the Gerlyver Meur, published in 1993 and have used conjectural spelling only where G.M. spellings are not available. However there are some words, the spelling of which calls for comment, as follows: The diphthong ay There are a number of words of French origin containing this diphthong which rhymes with `tie' in English. Most of them are spelled with ey in the MS, and their original forms in Old French and Middle English would have had roughly the same sound as the vowel in `say,' sometimes shortened to `said.' This is still the sound in the Modern English and French forms of these words, so it is difficult to see how they could have reverted to the sound indicated by ay which was an older form going back to very old French as it developed from Latin and Gallo-Roman. However both Ken George and Nicholas Williams seem to agree that this is the case. Nicholas Williams (§6.8) asserts that words with the ey diphthong borrowed from English as well as native Cornish words did change the diphthong to ay but then points out that both spellings are found in this poem for paynys and traytor and quotes other cases where the same word is found with both spellings. This, he says is evidence that the two diphthongs were not distinct and it is unlikely that Lhuyd considered them as separate, which to me suggests a rather colourless sound, varying between the two. The only definite support he offers for his ey becoming ay thesis is a number of place names where the word dreyn meaning ``thorns'' is spelt ``-drine''. These are Trendrine, Landrine and Halldrine. But his conclusion is that ey did become ay which supports the KK spelling. Nyns and Nans Nyns occurs twenty-one times in our Poem and in every case the MS spelling is nyn. Nyns is the form used in K.U. and K.K. when followed by a part of mos or bos beginning with a vowel. In the MS this verb is always prefixed with g or i (= j {[Z] or [dZ]}) suggesting a j rather than an s sound, e.g. 6/8, nyn io man. On this basis it seems better to spell nyns as nynj. Similarly we have nango twice for nans o suggesting that nans would be better spelt nanj. Marghek I have counted this word fourteen times in either the singular or the plural and in no case does the MS show a g or an h or anything to indicate a guttural consonant between the two syllables. Ken George informs me that this is also the case in all the other texts. Etymologically it should be there, he says, and he has followed Nance in keeping the -gh- in K.K. spelling. This is contrary to the principle stated in P.S.R.C. of basing Kernewek Kemmyn on Cornish as it was spoken around 1500. If all the evidence suggests that there was no -gh- sound in marghek, why put one there? {The only justification is to show that marrek/marghek "rider, knight" derives from margh "horse".} Tochya/toch These words occur in 14/6 and 158/4. It is strange to find o instead of ou as is normally the case with words derived from Old French with the ou spelling. However o, not ou is in the MS in both cases and there is an alternative Old French spelling tochier in Larousse which may justify it. {I wonder whether /ou/ really existed as a distinct phoneme in Middle Cornish. Spellings in could equally stand for /ow/ which might have been sounded as [u] when unstressed due to reduction of the vowel and vocalisation of the off-glide. Touch is perhaps the only loan word where ou is stressed, and it seems to have been substituted by the nearest native sound. Toech might perhaps have been expected, unless this phoneme was still a diphthong at the time of the borrowing. Could this suggest a date for the change [o:j] > [O:] ?} Lagha Nance offers two words as meaning `law'; lagha and lay, corresponding to the English words `law' and `lay' which seem to be of Norse and French origin respectively. The meaning of lay in both Cornish and English is `religious law or faith.' G.M. gives only lagha. Lagha or lay in singular or plural occur eight times in the Poem and show a certain disagreement between the two readings of the MS. Pennaod has it spelled five times without any h to suggest a guttural, and so indicating lay and only three times with the h which would suggest lagha. However the Nance version has h shown in brackets in every case where Pennaod omits it. As G.M. and Nance agree together I have used the lagha form in the K.K. text. O'ta (sy) Although the form osta (`you are' {strictly "thou art"} or `are you') is in common use in both Unified Cornish and Kernewek Kemmyn, Ken George pointed out several years ago that it is not found in the texts (though it is in C.W.) It is always ota or osa. This is confirmed by the seven examples I have found in our Poem. The MS spelling is ota in three cases, ote in two cases, ose in one case and oge in one case. Both Pennaod and Hooper Unified versions have ota wherever there is a t, and osa where there is s or g. Unfortunately G.M. does not give verb forms but G.M.C.(2) (which has become available since the first printing of this book) gives osta/o'ta, [§64(3)] so I have decided for this printing to standardise on o'ta in all cases though it seems clear that the use of t or s in the MS depends to some extent on harmony with the adjacent sounds. Maybe a rule should be formulated to govern this. It has been suggested that ``osta'' is so well established in revived spoken Cornish that it would be very difficult to replace it with ``o'ta'' in everyday speech. Lemmyn Somewhat surprisingly G.M. tells us that the word lemen in fairly common use especially in Unified Cornish to mean `but, except', is the same word as lemmyn meaning `now'. This is confirmed by the fourteen examples in our Poem where lemen is used in the Unified versions. In nine cases the MS word ends in -yn with one m or two in the middle, so I have used lemmyn in every case, but it has to be admitted it does not aid comprehension as one has to decide whether the meaning is `now' or `but'. Onan/honan This is the G.M. spelling though in only one case in our Poem do we find honan rhyming with a word ending in -an. Ken George has come to the conclusion that these words were written with -yn, -an or -on endings depending on the words with which they were set to rhyme. In almost every case the rhyming words in the Poem end in -on so that onon/honon do likewise in the MS, implying, I would think, that these final rhyming syllables are just neutral vowels. Williams confirms this (§13.33) Out of the three, the ending -an was chosen in imitation of Welsh and Breton forms with the unfortunate result for this Poem that these syllables will appear not to rhyme and the reader will have to treat them as neutral vowels for them to do so. The MS seems to use e most commonly to indicate a neutral vowel as does modern French. Krist Murdoch quotes William Camden in his Britannia, 1586, as saying that one MS of the Poem always has Chrest for Christ in accordance with some Latin authors, and that the Cornish pronounce it Chrest. This would suggest, perhaps, that the K.K. spelling should be Krest or Kryst. However, the modern English pronunciation with the long i indicates that this vowel was long in Middle English which would support the likelihood of it being long in Cornish also, so I feel more evidence is needed before a change is seriously considered. The spelling is always Crist or Cryst in our present MS. Other biblical names Other names in our Poem in the K.K. spelling which I have used are as follows: Yesus, Yerusalem, Yosep, Yowann, Yudas, Edhow. In April 1989 I circulated a paper which concluded that most biblical names beginning with J in English should begin with Y in Cornish. No one opposed this and Wella Brown indicated to me his agreement. I was told that the Bishop of Truro's Advisory Group on services in Cornish came to the same conclusion in 1977. It seems likely that this initial sound survived right through from Hebrew through Greek, Latin and British into Middle Cornish. However, in a few cases the initial semi-vowel in Latin lengthened to become a full vowel i. The case in which we are interested is `Jew', Iudaeus in its Latin form which became Iddew in Welsh and seems to have had a dual development in Cornish as we find the spelling Ethow in the MS of our Poem, but Yedhow in the Ordinalia. However, it may be that Ethow was the earlier development and the initial y sound was put back in imitation of the Latin used in the Mass. This opinion finds some support in Richard Gendall's A Students' Dictionary of Modern Cornish which gives the following spellings from late Cornish writers: Ethow, Ethowan, Ethohan (Gwavas); Ethewan (Rowe) and Edheuan, Idheuon (Lhuyd). None of these starts with Y. I have kept Edhow in the K.K. version. Of the above names, only the spellings Jowann, Yowann and Yedhow are given in G.M. It points out that Jowann correponds to the late pronunciation Dzhűan found in Lhuyd and that Yowann is preferable However Nicholas Williams (§8.20) makes a case that Yesus and Yowann should have initial J (Jesus/Jowann) basing his argument partly on the belief that these names were lost in native Cornish and reintroduced from Breton or French after the Norman invasion. He seems to make a similar case for many other biblical names beginning with J (but excluding ``Jew'') though in these cases the reasoning is not explicit. The Poem and its Sources Like the plays of the Ordinalia the Passion Poem is based on the Four Gospels and other biblical material, with some episodes drawn from other sources, stories that were no doubt well known at the time of the Poem. It starts with the Genesis story of Adam eating the forbidden fruit which caused, or at least symbolised, the Fall of Man, and goes on to portray the Divine Plan of Salvation by which Jesus Christ as Mab Dyw ha den keffrys {son of God and man also} begged God to let him offer himself as Redeemer gans y gorf dre baynys bras {with his body through great suffering}. We see him tempted by the Devil and the narrative moves swiftly on, to his Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday with only four verses devoted to his three year Ministry. The Jews grow angry with him and Judas arranges to betray him. The story of the Last Supper, Trial, Crucifixion and Resurrection follow closely the Gospel narratives except for the horrificly realistic description of the Scourging and Crucifixion. These details are also found in the Passio Christi and other medieval plays such as the York Crucifixion. A particularly gruesome detail is the stretching of the arms with a rope to meet the holes which have been drilled too far apart. Cawley suggests that this is because cords had to be used in the plays to secure to the cross the actor who was playing the part of Jesus. Most of the following non-biblical details seem to stem from medieval legend though one or two go back to the Gospel of Nicodemus, dated about A.D. 600 and one to the Gospel of Peter, about A.D. 150. All except one also occur in the Passio Christi. References to the Bible and the Cornish Texts are given to the right of the K.K. text, but other non-biblical sources are mentioned below only. ------------------------- Verse 106 The soul of Judas could not escape through his mouth after he had hanged himself. This is in P.C., and a medieval poem in the Northern English dialect, the Cursor Mundi, says his soul went out through his belly because it might not come out at the mouth which had kissed Christ (Mardon). Verse 152 The Tree from which the Cross is made is found in water where the sun had never shone. This is linked with the Legend of the Rood which runs through the Origo Mundi. The tree is descended from the tree from which Adam took the apple. In P.C. the water is the Brook Cedron. Another version of the legend in the Cursor Mundi has the tree made into a bridge over the Pool of Siloam (Halliday). {In OM it makes a bridge over Cedron : omms:2810 degeugh an pren a thyhons kk: degewgh an prenn a dhehons omms:2811 war thour cedron may fo pons kk: war dowr Sedron may fo pons "take the tree over yonder / over the water of Cedron let it be a bridge"} Our Poem contrasts the Fruit taken from the Tree which caused Adam's fall with the Fruit now to be borne by it which will save Mankind (Adam is Hebrew for `Man.') Verses 154 - 60 This is the story of the smith who refused to make nails to crucify Jesus, and his wife who agreed to do so. One cannot help but detect an element of male chauvinism. Throughout the narrative, apart from this insertion, it is the men who do evil things and the women who do good! The story is in P.C., the Northern English Passion Play and nearly all the French Passion Plays (Longsworth). It appears in the Legend of the Holy Rood, Queen Mary's Psalter, and the Holkham Bible Picture Book (Anderson). There is a miniature of the scene by Jean Fouquet (Mâle). Note how the executioners are the first to suggest his excuse of having leprous hands. It is not made by the smith himself. Maybe this indicates how well known the story was. Verse 177 Here a woman wraps a garment around Jesus. One wonders whether this corresponds with the legend of Veronica still known nowadays. She figures in the sixth Station of the Cross (Kim), where she is shown as receiving the imprint of Christ's face on a cloth. Her name is not mentioned in our Poem, and in P.C. there is no more than a stage direction indicating that she speaks, but no lines are given for her to say or any act for her to perform. The Gospel of Nicodemus which goes back to about A.D. 600 identifies her with the woman who had an issue of blood (Mt 9 v.20). She has an important part in The Death of Pilate, a non-biblical episode at the end of the Resurrexio Domini. Also see below, verse 252. Verse 186 The Poem is more scriptural than P.C. in not naming the two thieves who were crucified with Jesus. Their names are given as Dismas and Jesmas in P.C., and Dismas and Gestas in the Gospel of Nicodemus. Verses 212-3 The Harrowing of Hell. This is a popular medieval theme. Kim quotes seventeen biblical references which, he suggests, refer to a visit made by the Spirit of Jesus to Hell after his death, but there is no mention of it in any Gospel as part of the main narrative. This is made up for by a long account in the Gospel of Nicodemus. It is also in the Resurrexio Domini. The clause, ``He descended into Hell'' is included in the Apostles' Creed in the Book of Common Prayer though it is omitted from the Nicene Creed. The account in the Poem is much shorter and less detailed than other accounts. Verse 217 John's Gospel tells us that a soldier pierced the side of Jesus with a spear. It does not say his name or that he was blind. The Gospel of Nicodemus gives his name as ``Longinus'' and Kim suggests that this might derive from the Greek word for spear used in John, logch (lonche; or longkhe, as Kim transliterates it) from which also ``lance'' is derived. Mr Thornton Edwards, a Welsh K.D.L. student living in Greece tells me the word is still used as part of the Liturgy and the first syllable is pronounced ``long'', so this would support Kim's suggestion. There is no mention that the soldier was blind but the story is in P.C. and a number of other accounts including the York play Mortificacio Christi and Jacobus de Voragine's Golden Legend (Davidson). Verse 225 I do not have any source for the story of Mary's three tears of blood. It is not mentioned even in P.C. though Murdoch says: The reaction of the Virgin at the cross occupies six stanzas, and refers not only to her tears but to the motif of an arrow striking her heart, causing her to weep tears of blood something she does also in a number of other medieval works, part of the extensive tradition of the sorrows of the Virgin. See ``Further Reading'' below. Verse 230 There is no mention of the three Marys in the Gospels, P.C. or other sources at the time when Jesus was laid in the Tomb. Mark mentions Joseph of Arimathaea, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of Joses (or Joseph) and James, and Salome. Luke and John mention Joseph only. P.C. says Joseph, Nicodemus, Mary the Mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, John, and others. Verses 241-51 This story of the four soldiers keeping watch at the Tomb gives far greater detail than the brief account of the setting of the watch in Matthew. There is some degree of elaboration in the Gospel of Peter, dated about A.D. 150, where we are told there were four soldiers keeping watch two by two, and in the Gospel of Nicodemus. It occurs in many medieval plays and poems. Woolf says the most highly developed treatment is in the Chester and Coventry plays. It is in R.D. and there, as in our Poem, it is the fourth soldier who overcomes the panic of his colleagues and persuades them they should tell Pilate the truth about the Resurrection of Jesus. All the accounts make the soldiers responsible to Pilate although Matthew makes it clear that they were the men of the chief priests. Verse 252 At the empty tomb the Three Marys are again mentioned as in other medieval versions including R.D. and also the Coptic Book of Bartholomew which dates from the fifth, sixth, or seventh century (James). This names Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome who tempted him, Mary who ministered to him, and Martha her sister, Joanna (or Susanna), the wife of Chuza, Berenice who was healed of an issue of blood, Leah, the widow whose son was raised at Nain, and the woman to whom he said, ``Thy sins which are many are forgiven thee.'' But further on it seems to confuse Mary Magdalene with Mary the Mother of Jesus. It seems too, that the woman with the issue of blood was called Berenice which must be another form of Veronica as mentioned under verse 177. Biblical references are as follows: Matthew mentions Mary Magdalene and `the other Mary'; Mark mentions Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James, and Salome; Luke mentions Mary Magdalene, Joanna and Mary the Mother of James. John mentions only Mary Magdalene and Peter, so, again, the Three Marys are not fully biblical. Versification In the present edition, as in those of Hooper and Pennaod, the Poem consists of 258 verses of eight lines, and one (208) of ten, though the arrangement is different in the MS. See page 8. Each line has seven syllables, often with an alternating stress pattern, but not always so. In some verses every line ends in a stressed syllable; e.g. verse 1. In others it ends in an unstressed syllable; e.g. verse 4, and in some verses stressed and unstressed syllables alternate; e.g. verse 3. Alternate lines usually rhyme, though sometimes rhymes are missed or are assonances rather than rhymes; e.g. verse 4. Sometimes, differing unstressed final vowels seem to be intended to rhyme, suggesting that these were neutral vowels rather than having the value indicated; e.g. verse 12. According to Zeuss it resembles old Irish verse. The result is a steady rhythm which carries the verse along, yet is to some extent irregular so that it does not get monotonous. This is essentially the same as the verse pattern used in the Cornish plays and it has been imitated in modern Cornish verse, notably Caradar's epic Tristan hag Ysolt and Devedhyans Sen Pawl yn Bro Leon. In this latter poem Ken George deliberately set out to imitate the versification of Passhyon agan Arloedh. Whilst Talek considers that ``the Passion Poem is a Cornish treasure and equivalent to good poetry in any language,'' Goulven Pennaod disagrees fundamentally with this opinion, saying that the rhymes are very limited and the natural order of the sentences is contorted. Henry Jenner ``was clearly unimpressed with the literary quality of the work'' (Murdoch). The reader may be inclined to agree with Jenner, but be that as it may, we who study the Cornish language owe it to what literature has come down to us to try to understand it, appreciate it, and maybe even apply a little ``positive discrimination''. The English Translation With the comfort of Talek's translation as a starting point, and some help from Pennaod, the aim has been to produce a version as close as possible to the original which is at the same time good modern English. These aims are often mutually incompatible so that the result may not be always completely satisfactory. Presentation The Poem is printed using a two-page spread with the MS version and the English on the left-hand page. Opposite the MS on the right is the new Kernewek Kemmyn version. Under this are notes on the text, grammar, translation and verse pattern. To the right of the K.K. text are references to the Bible and the Cornish texts. Other non-biblical sources are discussed above. Further Reading Since writing the above and publishing the Fourth Print I have read the chapter on ``The Poem of the Passion'' in ``Cornish Literature'' by Brian Murdoch. In it he mentions a dissertation by Mark Herniman (1984). I have not yet seen this and I understand it is unpublished but I gather from Harry Woodhouse who has seen it that it is a very full treatment of the Poem and may be obtainable from the University of Exeter. Murdoch also makes reference to an article written by him called ``Pascon agan Arluth: the literary position of the Cornish Poem of the Passion'' in Studi Medievali, 22 (1981) and ``The Virgin's Tears of Blood'' by Andrew Breeze in Celtica 20 (1988). Lauran Toorians has also sent me a long essay he has written on the Poem. This was published in the Dutch magazine Kruispunt in 1990. Unfortunately it is in Dutch so needs someone to translate it. Perhaps the Cornish Language Board should take steps to make such writings as these more available to students of Cornish. ---------------------------------------------------------