NOTES. PROLOGUE. Line 63. Or steep-up spout, whereon the gilded ball Steep-up as an adjective is a peculiarly Tennysonian word. It occurs again in Queen Mary, Act iii. Sc. 4, "the steep-up track of the true faith." Shakespeare, Othello, v. 2, has "steep-down gulfs of liquid fire." One is precipitously up, the other precipitously down. Line 70. Dislinked with shrieks and laughter. Also in Vivien. "But she dislinked herself at once and rose." The use of dis for un is common in Shakespearediscompanied for unaccompanied; discovery for uncovering ; disnatured for unnatural. Vide Abbott's Shakespearean Grammar, p. 322. It occurs frequently in Tennyson. Line 80. Pure sport. Otherwhere, Otherwhere has become obsolete, while somewhere has been retained in use. It is found in Milton's writings, but not in Shakespeare. Tennyson uses it again in The Holy Grail And now his chair desires him in vain, UorM CANTO I Line 34. Proxy-wedded with a bootless calf. This is good in poetry but bad in law, as the Princess clearly points out. The ceremony of marriage by proxy was common in the Middle Ages, but it was a fundamental principle of canon and civil law, that consent (intention) was the only basis of marriage. And here we must clear our minds of a Protestant confusion between two ceremonies, which in ante-Reformation times were distinct; viz., Espousals and Matrimony-Sponsalia et Matrimonium. The two ceremonies are thrown together in the Anglican PrayerBook. Up to the giving away of the bride, the verbs are in the future tense; it is a promise, "I will "—that is espousals. Then the two join hands and the tense changes to the present, that is matrimony, that is the essence of the ceremony; the priest merely declares that God hath joined them, and gives the benediction of the Church. Forasmuch as they, M. and N., have consented, he says, therefore it is a marriage. The Prince and his father are clearly wrong in talking about proxy-wedded. It was sponsalia, espousals, not matrimonium. The second There were two kinds of sponsalia and only two: Sponsalia per verba de presente, and sponsalia per verba de futuro. The first was indissoluble, because it was virtual marriage ; for the parties were present giving consent. was not more binding than any other contract. dition was attempted to be attached to the first it, and degraded it to a contract of the second class. reason is evident. If parties to a contract de futuro lived together they became indissolubly married, for the consent was implied. The maxim of the civil law was Ubi non est consensus, non est matrimonium. The Now the Church always held (and such cases were always settled in Church courts) that espousals were not valid matrimony in the case of children espoused to each other by ! parents; unless both the parties consented when they grew up. After seven years there might be sponsalia, but there could not be matrimonium until the parties had arrived at years of discretion. It would be tedious to state the different opinions as to this age, certainly not before fourteen and twelve respectively. The Princess is sound in her law. She says, Book v., that at the age of eight there could be no consent, and she had given none since. King Gama says there was a "kind of ceremony," and the Prince even does not dare, in the presence of the Princess, to call it more than a precontract," that is sponsalia de futuro. In that case the ceremony of being proxy-wedded with a bootless calf was a very bootless ceremony; and the court lawyers ought to have had their heads cut off for advising it. Because at that age the Prince and Princess were not capable of executing a procuration for that purpose. To make this clear, let us follow the ceremony between Arthur of England and Catherine of Aragon-a wedding fraught with great events. This was an instance of espousals, per verba de presente, by proxy, but we must bear in mind both parties were of full age to contract matrimonium. Arthur appears in person. For Catherine appears Dr. de Puebla, retinue around them suitable to the occasion. Dr. de Puebla produces a procuration from Catherine, strictly worded and limited to that one thing. People could not marry under a general power of attorney. The proxy is examined, it is signed by Catherine herself, and is in due form. Then Prince Arthur steps out and declares that he consents, then Dr. de Puebla steps forward and consents for the Princess; they join hands and accept each other. The espousals are complete and indissoluble excepting by dispensation. A few months after Catherine comes to England. She publicly ratifies the action of her attorney and receives the nuptial benediction, then goes to live with her husband; and after that the Pope himself cannot legally dissolve the marriage. The proxy in the instance in the poem was invalid, the parties not being able to give one. Of course in Prince Arthur's case there was no "bootless calf." To elucidate that we must take another case. Maximilian, king of the Romans, was espoused by proxy to Anne, the heiress of Brittany, A.D. 1489. In this instance the ceremony was performed at the court of the lady; and the king's ambassador in the presence of the court put his leg, bare to the knee, into the bed of the Princess. But the Princess was a grown woman, and Maximilian had a marriageable daughter at that time betrothed to Charles VIII. of France. And it turned out that Charles VIII. broke his promise and married Anne of Brittany himself, putting double insult on Maximilian, which led to a war. This, as Hallam points out (Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 106), was a gross violation of ecclesiastical law, for the dispensation of the Pope from the first betrothal was not issued until eight days after the marriage of Anne and Charles. This bootless calf" ceremony, we are told by some writers, was common in England; but, as they do not quote instances, or cite canonical authorities, the statement is doubtful. An extract from Lord Bacon's History of Henry VII. is appended, from which it may be gathered that the ceremony was previously unknown in France. Possibly it was suggested by King Henry VII., who never allowed law to stand between him and his schemes. At that time questions of ecclesiastical law were of paramount importance in Europe. The English Reformation ostensibly originated in a dispute as to the canonical validity of the marriage of Henry VIII. with Catherine of Aragon, the widow of his deceased brother, Prince Arthur. It must be concluded, however, that in the case of the present Princess Ida, the ceremony was very badly advised. "The king having thus upheld the reputation of Maximilian, advised him now to press on his marriage with Britain to a conclusion, which Maximilian accordingly did; and so far forth prevailed, both with the young lady and with the principal persons about her, as the marriage was consummated by proxy, with a ceremony at that time in For she was not only publicly contracted, those parts new. but stated, as a bride, and solemnly bedded; and after she was laid, there came in Maximilian's ambassador with letters of procuration, and in the presence of sundry noble personages, men and women, put his leg stript naked to the knee, between the espousal sheets; to the end, that the ceremony might be thought to amount to a consummation and actual knowledge."-Bacon, History of King Henry VII. Went with it, "Follow, follow, thou shalt win." A passage parallel to this is quoted by Mr. Wace from Shelley. It occurs in Prometheus Unbound, ii. I— A wind arose among the pines; it shook The clinging music from their boughs, and then and must have, consciously or unconsciously, dwelt in Tennyson's memory when writing these lines. Line 110. And so by tilth and grange. In this sense, of land which is being tilled, the word is It is found in Milton, Par. Lost, xi. 430 rare. Beheld a field, Part arable and tilth, whereon were sheaves E |