BRONDEOUS.  E. II. 24. Furious.  Chatterton.  BRONDED. H. 2. 558.  BRONDEYNGE.  AE. 704.  BURLIE BRONDE.  G. 7. Fury, anger.  Chatterton.  See also H. 2. 664.  All these uses of Bronde, and its supposed derivatives, are taken from Skinner.  “Bronde, exp. Furia, &c.” though in another place he explains Burly brand (I believe, rightly) to mean Magnus ensis.  It should be observed, that the phrase Burly brand, if used in its true sense, would still have been liable to suspicion, as it does not appear in any work, that I am acquainted with, prior to the Testament of Creseide, a Scottish composition, written many years after the time of the supposed Rowley.

BURLED. M. 20. Armed.  Chatterton.  So Skinner, “Burled, exp. Armatus, &c.”

BYSMARE.  M. 95. Bewildered, curious.  Chatterton.  BYSMARELIE.  Le. 26. Curiously.  Chatterton.  See also p. 285. ver. 141.  BISMARDE.

It is evident, I think, that all these words are originally derived from Skinner, who has very absurdly explained Bismare to mean Curiosity.  The true meaning has been stated above, p. 318.

CALKE.  G. 25. Cast.  Chatterton.  CALKED. E. I. 49. Cast out, ejected.  Chatterton.  This word appears to have been formed upon a misapprehension of the following article in Skinner.  “Calked, exp.  Cast, credo Cast up.”  Chatterton did not attend to the difference between casting out and casting up, i.e. casting up figures in calculation.  That the latter was Skinner’s meaning may be collected from his next article.  “Calked for Calculated.  Ch. the Frankeleynes tale.”  It is probable too, I think, that in both articles Skinner refers, by mistake, to a line of the Frankelein’s tale, which in the common editions stands thus: 

  “Ful subtelly he had calked al this.”

Where calked is a mere misprint for calculed, the reading of the MSS.  See the late Edit. ver. 11596.

It would be easy to add many more instances of words, either not ancient or not used in their ancient sense, which repeatedly occur in these poems, and must be construed according to those fanciful significations which Skinner has ascribed to them.  How that should have happened, unless either Skinner had read the Poems (which, I presume, nobody can suppose,) or the author of the Poems had read Skinner, I cannot see.  It is against all odds, that two men, living at the distance of two hundred years one from the other, should accidentally agree in coining the same words, and in affixing to them exactly the same meaning.

I proceed to state some instances of words and interpretations which are evidently founded upon misapprehensions of passages in Skinner.

ALYSE.  Le. 29.  G. 180. Allow.  Chatterton.  See before, p. 314.

Till I meet with this word, in this sense, in some approved author, I shall be of opinion that it has been formed from a mistaken reading of the following article in Skinner.  “Alised, Authori Dict.  Angl. apud quem folum occurrit, exp.  Allowed, ab AS.  Alised, &c.”  In the Gothic types used by Skinner f might be easily mistaken for a long s.