And in another,--

HERKINS how long King Edward lay,

With his men before Tournay.

The singularity of these "Lays" consists in coming down to us in a

written form, evidently with great care and fondness, bearing their

author's unknown name. They might have appropriately been preserved in

Percy's "Reliques of English Poetry."[12]

Three centuries had now passed, and still the national genius languished

in the Norman bondage of the language. But the commonalty were

increasing in number and in weight, and an indignant sense of the

destitution of a national language was not confined to the laity; it was

attracting the attention of those who thought and who wrote. Richard of

Bury, Bishop of Durham, who put forth the first bibliographical treatise

by an Englishman, and may he ranked among the earliest critical

collectors of a private library, in his celebrated treatise on the love

of books, the "Philo-biblion,"[13] breathes all the enthusiasm of study;

but while he directs our attention to the classical writers of

antiquity, he stimulates his contemporaries to emulate them by composing

new books. Although he himself wrote in Latin, he regrets that no

institution for children in the English language existed; and he

complains, that our English youth "first learned the French, and from

the French the Latin." Our youth were sent into France to polish their

nasal Norman. This writer flourished about 1330, and thus ascertains,

that in the beginning of the reign of Edward III. no English was taught.

The "Polychronicon," a Latin chronicle compiled by the monk Higden, was

finished somewhat later, about 1365; and we find the complaint more

bitterly renewed. "There is no nation," wrote this honest monk, "whose

children are compelled to leave their own language, as we have since the

Normans came into England. A gentleman's child must speak French from

the time that he is rocked in a cradle, or plays with a child's breche."

The Latin Chronicle of Higden, twenty years later, was translated into

English by John de Trevisa. On this passage the translator furnishes the

important observation, that, since this was written, a revolution had

occurred through our grammar-schools: the patriotic efforts of one Sir

John Cornewaile, in teaching his pupils to construe their Latin into

English, had been generally adopted; "so that now," proceeds Trevisa,

"the yere of our Lorde 1385, in all the grammere scoles of Engelond,

children leaveth Frensche and construeth and lerneth in Englische." The

innovation had startled our translator, for, like all innovations, there

was loss as well as profit, when, quitting what we are accustomed to,

we launch dubiously into a new acquisition. The disuse of the French

would detriment their intercourse abroad, and, on great occasions, at

home. This was a time when Trevisa himself, in selecting some Scriptural

inscriptions for the chapel of Berkley Castle, where he was chaplain,

had them painted on boards in Norman-French, and Latin, in alternate

lines. They are still visible. English itself was yet too base for the

service of God.

It was still a debateable question, as appears by the prefatory dialogue

between Trevisa and his patron, Lord Berkley, whether any translation of

the Chronicle were at all necessary, Latin being the general language.

It was, however, a noble enterprise, being the first great effort in our

vernacular prose. This mighty volume is a universal history, which, in

its amplitude and miscellaneous character, seemed to contain all that

men could know; and the version long enjoyed the favour of all readers

as the first historical collection in the English language. It bears the

seal of the monkish taste, being equally pious and fabulous. It not only

opens before the days of Adam, but, like the creation, has its seven

divisions; it has monsters, however, which are not found in Genesis. The

monk is doubtful whether they came of Adam or of Noah. They, indeed,

came from the elder Pliny, to whose puerile wonders and hasty

compilation we owe the foundation of our natural history.

It was about the period that Higden concluded his labours, that Sir John

Mandeville deemed it wise, having written his Travels in Latin and

French, to compose them also in the vernacular idiom;--a strong

indication of the rising disposition to cultivate the national tongue.

The policy of our Government now accorded with the general disposition;

and hence originated the noble decision of Edward III., in 1362, to

banish from our courts of law the Norman-French; but so awkward seemed

this great novelty, that the statute is written in the very language it

abolishes,[14] and, indeed, to which our great lawyers, the timid

slaves of precedents, long afterwards clung in their barbarous

law-French phrases mingled with their native English.

A mightier movement even than the royal decree in favour of fostering

the national language was a translation of the Scriptures, by the

intrepid spirit of Wickliffe. This had been done with the pledge of his

life, for that was often in peril while he thus struck the first impulse

of that reformation which not only influenced his own age, but one more

remote. The translation of Wickliffe was a new revelation of the Word of

God in the language of many. The streets were crowded with Lollards, as

his followers were denominated, of which, like similar odious names

attached to a rising party, the origin remains uncertain; Lollardy was,

however, a convenient term to describe treason in the Church and the

State. Wickliffe's translation of the Old Testament still lies in

numerous manuscripts, for our cold neglect of which we have incurred the

censure of the foreigner. The New Testament has happily been

printed.[15]

If we place by the side of the text of Wickliffe our later versions, we

may become familiar with that Saxon-English which our venerable Caxton

subsequently considered was "more like to Dutch than English."

But the picturesque language of our emotions, the creative diction of

poetry, appeared in the courtly style of Chaucer, who nobly designed to

render the national language refined and varied, while his great

contemporaries, the author of Piers Ploughman lingered in a rude

dialect, and Gower was still composing alternately in Latin and in

French.

The emancipation of the national language was subsequently confirmed by

another monarch. A curious anecdote in our literary history has recently

been disclosed of Henry V. To encourage the use of the vernacular

tongue, this monarch, in a letter missive to one of the city companies,

declared that "_the English tongue hath in modern days begun to be

honourably enlarged and adorned, and for the better understanding of the

people_ the common idiom should be exercised in writing:" this was at

once setting aside the Norman-French and the Latin for the daily

business of civil life. By this record it appears that many of the craft

of brewers, to whose company this letter was addressed, had "knowledge

of writing and reading in the English idiom, but Latin and French they

by no means understood." We further learn that now "the LORDS and the

COMMONS BEGAN _to have their proceedings noted down in the mother

tongue_;" and this example was therefore to be followed by the city

companies.[16]

At this advanced age of transition, so unsettled was the language of

ordinary affairs, that the same document bears evidence of three

different idioms. We find the petition of an Irish chieftain, a prisoner

in the Tower, written in the French language, while the endorsed royal

answer is in English, and the order of the council in Latin.[17] The

bulletins of Henry V. to the mayor and aldermen of London are written in

English, but endorsed in French.

As if they designed to hold out a model to their subjects and to

sanction the use of their native English, both this prince, and his

father, Henry IV., left their wills in the national language,[18] at a

time when the nobles employed Latin or French for such purposes.

There has often existed a sympathy between ourselves and our near

neighbours of France, when not disturbed by war. This great movement of

establishing a national language, and freeing themselves from the Roman

bondage, was tried at a later period by the French government, who were

nearly baffled in the attempt. An ordinance of Louis XII. was issued _to

abolish the use of the Latin tongue_; but such was the prejudice in

favour of the ancient language, that notwithstanding that the Latin of

the bar had degenerated into the most ludicrous barbarism, the lawyers

were unwilling to yield to the popular wish. The use of Latin in France

in all legal instruments lasted till the succeeding reign of Francis I.,

who, by two ordinances, declared that THE FRENCH LANGUAGE should be

solely used in all public acts. It was, however, as late as forty years

after, in 1629, that at length the public offices consented to draw

their instruments in their vernacular language.[19] So long has general

improvement to contend with the force of habit and the passion of

prepossession; and such were the difficulties which the vernacular style

of both these great empires had to overcome.

When the learned HICKES, in his patriotic fervour to trace the

legitimacy of the English from its parent language, adjudged that

"nine-tenths of our words were of Saxon origin," he exultingly appealed

to the Lord's Prayer, wherein there are only three words of French or

Latin extraction. This startled TYRWHIT, then busied on his Chaucerian

glossary, and who in that labour had before him a different aspect of

our mottled English. That was not the day when writers would maintain

opinions against authority. Awed by the great Saxonist, the poetical

antiquary compromised, alleging that "though the _form_ of our language

was still Saxon, yet the _matter_ was in a great measure French." His

successor in English philology, GEORGE ELLIS, still further faltered and

arbitrated; suggesting that the great Saxonist, to complete his

favourite scheme, would trace some _old Gaulish_ French to a _Teutonic_

origin. In tracing the formation of the English language, we are

sensible that the broad and solid foundations lie in the Saxon, but the

superstructure has often, with a magical movement, varied in its

architecture. An enamoured Saxonist has recently ventured to assert that

"English is but another term for Saxon;" but an ocular demonstration has

been exhibited in specimens of the _modern English_ of our

master-writers, marking by italics all the words of Saxon derivation. By

these it appears that the translators of the Bible have happily

preserved for us the pristine simplicity of our Saxon-English, like the

light in a cathedral through its storied and saintly window, shedding

its antique hues on hallowed objects. But as we advance, we discover in

our most eminent writers the anglicisms diminish; and SHARON TURNER has

observed that a fifth of the Saxon language has ceased to be used. A

recent critic[20] has curiously calculated that the English language,

now consisting of about 38,000 words, contains 23,000, or nearly

five-eighths, Anglo-Saxon in their origin; that in our most idiomatic

writers, there is about one-tenth _not_ Anglo-Saxon, and in our least

about one-third.[21] A cry of our desertion of our Saxon purity has

been raised by those who have not themselves practised it in their more

elevated compositions; but are we to deem that English corrupted which

recedes from its Saxon character, and compels the daughter to lose the

likeness of her mother? Are we to banish to perpetuity those foreigners

who have already fructified our Saxon soil? In an age of extended

literature, conversant with objects and productive of associations which

never entered into the experience of our forefathers, the ancient

language of the people must necessarily prove inadequate; a new language

must start out of new conceptions. Look into our present "exchequer of

words;" there lies many a refined coinage struck out of the arts and the

philosophies of Europe. Every word which genius creates, and which time

shall consecrate, is a possession of the language which must be

inscribed into that variable doomsday book of words--the English

Dictionary. Devotees of Thor and Woden! the day of your idolatries has

passed, and your remonstrances are vain as your superstitions.

Amenities of Literature Consisting of Sketches and Characters of English Literature · 第 98 / 272 题