"Nou ich wille that ye ywite hou hitt is ywent
Thet this Boc is ywrite mid Engliss of Kent.
This Boc is ymade vor lewede men,
Vor Vader and vor Moder and vor other Ken,
Ham vor to berze uram alle manyere Zen
Thet ine have inwytte ne bleue no uoul wen.
Huo ase God is his name yzed
Thet this Boc made God him yeue that bread
Of Angles of Hauene and thereto his red,
And underuonge his Zoule, huanne that is dyad."
[11] While Tyrwhit was busied on the "Canterbury Tales" his attention
was excited by the old cataloguer of the Cottonian manuscripts to a
_Chaucer exemplar emendate scriptum_. On a spare leaf the name of
Richard Chawfer had been scrawled, which might have been that of some
former possessor. There are two fatalities which hang over the pen of
a slumbering cataloguer--ignorance and indolence. Our present one
caught an immortal name and never travelled onwards; and, struck by
the fairness of the writing, inferred that it was a copy of Chaucer
critically accurate. It turned out to be the compositions of an
unknown poet who not willingly relinquished his claim on posterity,
for he has subscribed his name, LAURENCE MINOT. [The manuscript is
marked Galba, E. IX.; specimens were first published from it by
Tyrwhit and Warton, and the entire series ultimately by Ritson.]
[12] Ritson's first edition (1795) of Minot having become very
difficult to procure, an elegant re-impression, and apparently a
correct one, was published in 1825.
[13] "Philobiblion, sive de Amore Librorum et Institutione
Bibliothecae," ascribed to Richard of Bury, Bishop of Durham; but
Fabricius says it was written by Robert Holcot, a learned friar, at
his desire.--Fab. "Bib. Med. Aevi," vol. i. It is the bishop, however,
who was the collector, and always speaks in his own person. It has
been recently translated by Mr. Inglis.
[14] Barrington on the Statutes.
In Blackstone's "Commentaries," book iii. chap. 21, we find much
curious information, and some philosophical reflections. The use of
the technical law-Latin is adroitly defended. Under Cromwell the
records were turned into English; at the Restoration the practisers
declared they could not express themselves so significantly in
English, and they returned to their Latin. In 1730, a statute ordered
that the proceedings at law should be done into English, that the
common people might understand the process, &c. But after many years'
experience the people are as ignorant in matters of law as before,
and suffer the inconveniences of increasing _the expense of all legal
proceedings_ by being bound by the stamp-duties to write only a
stated number of words in a sheet, _and the English language, through
the multitude of its particles, is so much more verbose than the
Latin, that the number of sheets is much augmented_. Two years
subsequently it was necessary to make a new act to allow all
technical terms to continue Latin, which were too ridiculous to be
translated, such as _nisi prius, fieri facias, habeas corpus_. This
last act, in 1732, has defeated every beneficial purpose intended by
the preceding statute of 1730.
One hardly expected to find philological acumen in the dry discussion
of law-Latin, but when the _three_ words, "_secundum formam
statuti_," require _seven_ in English, "according to the form of the
statute," one easily comprehends the heavy weight of the _stamp-duty_
for _writing English_. The Saxons, who made no use of particles of
speech, had more merit than we were aware of.
[15] By the Rev. JOHN LEWIS, 1731, fo., and republished by the Rev.
H. H. BABER, 1810, 4to.
The censure of Fabricius deserves our notice. After mention of
Wickliffe's version of the Bible, he adds, "Mirum est Anglos eam
(versionem) tam diu neglexisse quum vel linguae causa ipsis in pretio
esse debeat."--"Bib. Lat.," v. 321.
It is provoking to be reminded of our neglected duties by a
foreigner. We might assuredly be curious to learn how the sublimity
and the colloquial and narrative parts of this vast treasure of our
ancient language were produced under the primitive pen of Wickliffe.
A fine copy of Wickliffe's Bible was in the library of Mr. Douce, and
I have heard, with great satisfaction, that it will probably be
edited by Sir Francis Madden.
[16] Herbert's "History of the City Companies."
[17] I derive this curious fact from Mr. Tyler's "History of Henry of
Monmouth," ii. 245.
[18] These wills are preserved in Mr. Nichols' "Collection of Royal
Wills."
[19] Le Comte de Neufchateau, "Essay on French Literature," prefixed
to the late edition of Pascal's works.
[20] "Edinburgh Review," Oct., 1839.
[21] See "Quarterly Rev.," lix. 34.--The critic is deeply imbued with
his delight of Saxon-English. "The first bursts in our literature
(probably the noblest are meant) are in almost pure Saxon." The
critic particularly appeals to Milton for two instances; yet surely
the Greekised, the Latinised, and even the Italianised Milton will
not serve to assert the pre-eminence of our venerable dialect. "A
country congregation" is its more certain test; where the language of
the people is the only language required. Cobbett's writings
throughout are Saxon-English. Coleridge considered Asgill and De Foe
the most idiomatic writers.