The Cambridge Old English Reader

The Cambridge Old English Reader has, fist of all, the widest range of readings of any Old English anthology, with the possible exception of Dorothy Whitelock's revision of Sweet's reader, published by Oxford University Press. In contrast to Marsden, however, Whitelock's notes are extremely skimpy and of very little use to users working on their own. Marsden has the further advantage of very full, up-to-date bibliographies and, for the most part, more detailed introductions setting the historical and cultural context. My only negative criticism is that words in the Old English texts are frequently glossed in such a way that the student is not called on to determine what the inflected form the word is and why the syntax requires that form. Overall, though, outstanding and most welcome.

I wanted something beyond the usual suspects - e.g., "The Wanderer," "The Seafarer," "The Dream of the Rood" - and found it here. You can only read the same 10 or 12 works so many times. Although those familiar works appear here, they are accompanied by a variety of lesser known items, such as "For Vomiting" and "For Dysentery." This book is now my favorite collection of OE writing.

I could find nothing wanting. All the effort spent to ensure that there is an explanation for every word and phrase is phenomenal, even when the explanation is, "no one knows."

the stories as told when i was a kid.... good to hear them again

You should really know a few things before purchasing this book.(1.) Marsden offers far too many marginal glosses. I understand the need to gloss difficult words or unscramble problematic phrases. But basic verbs like "sculan" and "magan" are consistently glossed throughout this text, and Marsden even tells you the case and gender of many nouns, even if the case and gender are clear. This kind of information ought to be in the glossary, obviously, but it certainly doesn't need to be right next to the text. So what's the problem, you ask? Well, the heavy glossing acts as a crutch and inhibits one's learning of the language.(2.) The text contains many, many typos. "P" appears instead of "thorn" on a number of occasions; punctuation is often faulty; the glossary doesn't always offer the correct case and gender for various words.(3.) The warhorse of Old English textbooks -- Mitchell and Robinson -- is still the best way to introduce yourself to Anglo-Saxon language and literature. (The new grammar by Peter Baker isn't bad, either, but I find it a bit remedial at times.)