XXXII SOLILOQUIES TO ALFRED'S OTHER WORKS
3. We should not be influenced by the fact that there is but one manuscript, and that in an impure Saxon of the twelfth century, for even the Boethius and the Orosius occur in but two manuscripts each, one of which is of the twelfth century.
As additional reasons in favor of Alfred's authorship, Wülker argues:
1. A monk would scarcely make such additions to the original matter, but it would be in keeping with the character and rank of a king to do so.
2. The vocabulary is the same as that used by Alfred in the works known to be genuine.
3. There is a striking similarity between the Soliloquies and Alfred's version of Boethius in the use of the dialogue and terms for the interlocutors, in the modes of expressing abstract ideas, and in the various set phrases for opening and closing divisions.
4. The general method of handling his Latin original is in harmony with Alfred's practice in his other trans lations, and especially in the Boethius.
5. This may be the Encheiridion, Manual, or Handbook of Alfred, to which Asser refers.
The only other considerable contribution to the arguments in favor of Alfred's authorship was made by Professor Frank S. Hubbard. As this is chiefly an indirect result of his study, and bears more directly on the relation of the Soliloquies to the Boethius, it will be treated under that head.
In the recent works on Alfred, the authors are still somewhat at variance as to this question: Wülfing, Earle, and Draper agree with Wülker that Alfred is the author, while others disagree or are silent.
1 op. cit. 77.
1 op. cit. 77.
3 Mod. Lang. Notes, IX. 161-171.
8 Cf. Introd. p. XXXV.
- Wtilfing: Die Syntax Alfreds des Grossen.
