þat all þe gomes were agrise · of his grim sight 986
with skaþe wer þei skoumfyt · skape þei ne myght 86
þat þei gradden hur griþ · his grace to haue 151
how þe ludus of the land · alosed for gode 331
alosed in lond 139, 577
with all þe weies in þe won 164; if any wight in þis wonne 622
lengen in bliss 44
yee þat lengen in londe 1
teeneful tach 282
that most was adouted 33, 400
or hee fare wolde 740; pass were hee woolde 1080
hee shall grow full grim 858
his term was tint 30
þe dragoun dreew him awaie 998; he drouned as a dragon · dredeful of noyes 985
and lordship of Larisse · laught to his will 131, 161
so hee stynted þat stounde 1079
too mark þe teene 497; as mich maugre and more · hee marked hem after 932
for no grace hur grete God · graunte ne might 539
Olympias þe onorable queene 576, 738
as hym leefe thought 60
þei were a-grisen of his grym 50
for skaþe of þe scorpionus · askape þei ne miȝhte 159
whan ȝe greden ȝour grace · to graunte ȝour wille 606; whan ȝe hem greden of griþ 764
þo þat ludus in oure land · alosed arn wise 1112
alosed in land 665
and for ȝe, weihuus, of þat wn · wende ne mowe 1092
lengeþ in blisse 628
ȝif we lengede in ȝoure land 872
tenful tach 566; schamfule tacchus 463
þat was most adouted 1130
or he passe wolde 1135
þat is grimmest igrowe 252
ȝour daies to tine 589
dredful dragonus · drawen him þiddire 156
mihte lordschipe lache 264
þat i mai stinte no stounde 97
he haþ marked ȝou men · mischef on erþe 1120
þei [your gods] graunte no grace 709
Olimpias · þe onorable quene 825, 1083
as him dere þoute 1133
§ 10. But though these coincidences are striking and of considerable force, the argument from them is less conclusive than the argument derived from the peculiarities of alliteration. This point is well and carefully worked out by Dr. Trautmann, and we may, I think, accept his conclusion, against which there is no antecedent probability. I ought to add here that another result of his more careful investigation is to shew that these two Alexander-fragments are not by the author of William of Palerne, as was supposed by Sir F. Maddej, and as, at one time, believed by myself. Dr. Trautmann also expresses an opinion that the date of these fragments is later than I should put it; but here I am not convinced.
§ 11. It appears to me that there is another argument which is
