NORTHUMBRIAN IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY
The subject of the last chapter was one of great importance. When it
is once understood that, down to 1400 or a little later, the men of
the Scottish Lowlands and the men of the northern part of England
spoke not only the same language, but the same dialect of that
language, it becomes easy to explain what happened afterwards.
There was, nevertheless, one profound difference between the
circumstances of the language spoken to the north of the Tweed and
that spoken to the south of it. In Scotland, the Northumbrian dialect
was spoken by all but the Celts, without much variety; the minor
differences need not be here considered. And this dialect, called
Inglis (as we have seen) by the Lowlanders themselves, had no rival,
as the difference between it and the Erse or Gaelic was obvious and
immutable.
To the South of the Tweed, the case was different. England already
possessed three dialects at least, viz. Northumbrian, Mercian,
and Saxon, i.e. Northern, Midland, and Southern; besides which,
Midland had at the least two main varieties, viz. Eastern and Western.
Between all these there was a long contention for supremacy. In
very early days, the Northern took the lead, but its literature was
practically destroyed by the Danes, and it never afterwards attained
to anything higher than a second place. From the time of Alfred, the
standard language of literature was the Southern, and it kept the lead
till long after the Conquest, well down to 1200 and even later, as
will be explained hereafter. But the Midland dialect, which is not
without witness to its value in the ninth century, began in the
thirteenth to assume an important position, which in the fourteenth
became dominant and supreme, exalted as it was by the genius of
Chaucer. Its use was really founded on practical convenience. It
was intermediate between the other two, and could be more or less
comprehended both by the Northerner and the Southerner, though these
could hardly understand each other. The result was, naturally, that
whilst the Northumbrian to the north of the Tweed was practically
supreme, the Northumbrian to the south of it soon lost its position
as a literary medium. It thus becomes clear that we must, during
the fifteenth century, treat the Northumbrian of England and that of
Scotland separately. Let us first investigate its position in England.
But before this can be appreciated, it is necessary to draw
attention to the fact that the literature of the fifteenth century,
in nearly all the text-books that treat of the subject, has been most
unjustly underrated. The critics, nearly all with one accord, repeat
the remark that it is a "barren" period, with nothing admirable about
it, at any rate in England; that it shows us the works of Hoccleve
and Lydgate near the beginning, _The Flower and the Leaf_ near the
middle (about 1460), and the ballad of _The Nut-brown Maid_ at the
end of it, and nothing else that is remarkable. In other words, they
neglect its most important characteristic, that it was the chief
period of the lengthy popular romances and of the popular plays out of
which the great dramas of the succeeding century took their rise. To
which it deserves to be added that it contains many short poems of a
fugitive character, whilst a vast number of very popular ballads were
in constant vogue, sometimes handed down without much change by a
faithful tradition, but more frequently varied by the fancy of the
more competent among the numerous wandering minstrels. To omit from
the fifteenth century nearly all account of its romances and plays
and ballads is like omitting the part of Hamlet the Dane from
Shakespeare's greatest tragedy.
The passion for long romances or romantic poems had already arisen in
the fourteenth century, and, to some extent, in the thirteenth. Even
just before 1300, we meet with the lays of _Havelok_ and _Horn_. In
the fourteenth century, it is sufficient to mention the romances of
_Sir Guy of Warwick_ (the earlier version), _Sir Bevis of Hamtoun_,
and _Libeaus Desconus_, all mentioned by Chaucer; _Sir Launfal_,
_The Seven Sages_ (earlier version, as edited by Weber); _Lai le
Freine_, _Richard Coer de Lion_, _Amis and Amiloun_, _The King of
Tars_, _William of Palerne_, _Joseph of Arimathea_ (a fragment),
_Sir Gawain and the Grene Knight_, _Alisaunder of Macedoine_ and
_Alexander and Dindimus_ (two fragments of one very long poem),
_Sir Ferumbras_, and _Sir Isumbras_. The spirited romance generally
known as the alliterative _Morte Arthure_ must also belong here,
though the MS. itself is of later date.
The series was actively continued during the fifteenth century, when
we find, besides others, the romances of _Iwain and Gawain_, _Sir
Percival_, and _Sir Cleges_; _The Sowdon_ (Sultan) _of Babylon_;
_The Aunturs_ (Adventures) _of Arthur_, _Sir Amadas_, _The Avowing
of Arthur_, and _The Life of Ipomidoun_; _The Wars of Alexander_,
_The Seven Sages_ (later version, edited by Wright); _Torrent of
Portugal_, _Sir Gowther_, _Sir Degrevant_, _Sir Eglamour_, _Le Bone
Florence of Rome_, and _Partonope of Blois_; the prose version of
_Merlin_, the later version of _Sir Guy of Warwick_, and the verse
Romance, of immense length, of _The Holy Grail_; _Emare_, _The Erl
of Tolous_, and _The Squire of Low Degree_. Towards the end of the
century, when the printing-press was already at work, we find Caxton
greatly busying himself to continue the list. Not only did he give us
the whole of Sir Thomas Malory's _Morte D'Arthur_, "enprynted and
fynysshed in thabbey Westmestre the last day of Iuyl, the yere of our
lord MCCCCLXXXV"; but he actually translated several romances into
very good English prose on his own account, viz. _Godefroy of Boloyne_
(1481), _Charles the Grete_ (1485), _The Knight Paris and the fair
Vyene_ (1485), _Blanchardyn and Eglantine_ (about 1489), and _The Four
Sons of Aymon_ (about 1490). We must further put to the credit of the
fifteenth century the remarkable English version of the _Gesta
Romanorum_, and many more versions by Caxton, such as _The Recuyell
of the Historyes of Troye_, _The Life of Jason_, _Eneydos_ (which is
Virgil's _Æneid_ in the form of a prose romance), _The Golden Legend_
or Lives of Saints, and _Reynard the Fox_. When all these works are
considered, the fifteenth century emerges with considerable credit.
It remains to look at some of the above-named romances a little more
closely, in order to see if any of them are in the dialect of Northern
England. Some of them are written by scribes belonging to other parts,
but there seems to be little doubt that the following were in that
dialect originally, viz. (1) _Iwain and Gawain_, printed in Ritson's
_Ancient Metrical Romances_, and belonging to the very beginning of
the century, extant in the same MS. as that which contains Minot's
_Poems_: (2) _The Wars of Alexander_ (Early English Text Society,
1886), edited by myself; see the Preface, pp. xv, xix, for proofs that
it was originally written in a pure Northumbrian dialect, which the
better of the two MSS. very fairly preserves. Others exhibit strong
traces of a Northern dialect, such as _The Aunturs of Arthur_,
_Sir Amadas_, and _The Avowing of Arthur_, but they may be in a West
Midland dialect, not far removed from the North. In the preface to
_The Sege of Melayne_ (Milan) _and Roland and Otuel_, edited for the
Early English Text Society by S.J. Herrtage, it is suggested that
both these poems were by the author of _Sir Percival_, and that all
three were originally in the dialect of the North of England.
_Iwain and Gawain_ and _The Wars of Alexander_ belong to quite the
beginning of the fifteenth century, and they appear to be among the
latest examples of the literary use of dialect in the North of England
considered as a vehicle for romances; but we must not forget the
"miracle plays," and in particular _The Towneley Mysteries_ or plays
acted at or near Wakefield in Yorkshire, and _The York Plays_, lately
edited by Miss Toulmin Smith. Examples of Southern English likewise
come to an end about the same time; it is most remarkable how very
soon, after the death of Chaucer, the Midland dialect not only assumed
a leading position, but enjoyed that proud position almost alone. The
rapid loss of numerous inflexions, soon after 1400, made that dialect,
which was already in possession of such important centres as London,
Oxford, and Cambridge, much easier to learn, and brought its grammar
much nearer to that in use in the North. It even compromised, as it
were, with that dialect by accepting from it the general use of such
important words as _they_, _their_, _them_, the plural verb _are_,
and the preposition _till_. There can be little doubt that one of the
causes of the cessation of varying forms of words in literary use was
the civil strife known as the Wars of the Roses, which must for a
brief period have been hostile to all literary activity; and very
shortly afterwards the printing-presses of London all combined to
recognise, in general, one dialect only.
Hence it came about, by a natural but somewhat rapid process, that the
only dialect which remained unaffected by the triumph of the Midland
variety was that portion of the Northern dialect which still held its
own in Scotland, where it was spoken by subjects of another king. As
far as literature was concerned, only two dialects were available, the
Northumbrian of Scotland and the East Midland in England. It is
obvious that the readiest way of distinguishing between the two is to
call the one "Scottish" and the other "English," ignoring accuracy for
the sake of practical convenience. This is precisely what happened in
course of time, and the new nomenclature would have done no harm if
the study of Middle English had been at all general. But such was not
the case, and the history of our literature was so much neglected that
even those who should have been well informed knew no better than
others. The chief modern example is the well-known case of that most
important and valuable book entitled _An Etymological Dictionary of
the Scottish Language_, by John Jamieson, D.D., first published in
Edinburgh in 1808. There is no great harm in the title, if for
"Language" we read "Dialect"; but this great and monumental work was
unluckily preceded by a "Dissertation on the Origin of the Scottish
Language," in which wholly mistaken and wrongheaded views are
supported with great ingenuity and much show of learning. In the
admirable new edition of "Jamieson" by Longmuir and Donaldson,
published at Paisley in 1879, this matter is set right. They quite
rightly reprint this "Dissertation," which affords valuable testimony
as to the study of English in 1808, but accompany it with most
judicious remarks, which are well worthy of full repetition.
"That once famous Dissertation can now be considered only a notable
feat of literary card-building; more remarkable for the skill and
ingenuity of its construction than for its architectural correctness,
strength and durability, or practical usefulness. That the language
of the Scottish Lowlands is in all important particulars the same
as that of the northern counties of England, will be evident to
any unbiassed reader who takes the trouble to compare the Scottish
Dictionary with the Glossaries of Brockett, Atkinson, and Peacock.
And the similarity is attested in another way by the simple but
important fact, that regarding some of our Northern Metrical
Romances it is still disputed whether they were composed to the
north or the south of the Tweed.... And to this conclusion all
competent scholars have given their consent."
For those who really understand the situation there is no harm in
accepting the distinction between "Scottish" and "English," as
explained above. Hence it is that the name of "Middle Scots" has been
suggested for "the literary language of Scotland written between the
latter half of the fifteenth century and the early decades of the
seventeenth." Most of this literature is highly interesting, at any
rate much more so than the "English" literature of the same period, as
has been repeatedly remarked. Indeed, this is so well known that
special examples are needless; I content myself with referring to the
_Specimens of Middle Scots_, by G. Gregory Smith, Edinburgh and London,
1902. These specimens include extracts from such famous authors as
Henryson, Dunbar, Gawain (or Gavin) Douglas, Sir David Lyndesay, John
Knox, and George Buchanan. Perhaps it is well to add that "Scottis"
or "Scots" is the Northern form of "Scottish" or "Scotch"; just as
"Inglis" is the Northern form of "English."
"Middle Scots" implies both "Old Scots" and "Modern Scots." "Old
Scots" is, of course, the same thing as Northumbrian or Northern
English of the Middle English Period, which may be roughly dated as
extant from 1300 to 1400 or 1450. "Modern Scots" is the dialect (when
they employ dialect) illustrated by Allan Ramsay, Alexander Ross,
Robert Tannahill, John Galt, James Hogg (the Ettrick Shepherd),
Robert Burns, Sir Walter Scott, and very many others.
I conclude this chapter with a characteristic example of Middle Scots.
The following well-known passage is from the conclusion to Dunbar's
_Golden Targe_.
And as I did awake of my sweving{1},
The ioyfull birdis merily did syng
For myrth of Phebus tendir bemës schene{2};
Swete war the vapouris, soft the morowing{3},
Halesum the vale, depaynt wyth flouris ying{4};
The air attemperit, sobir, and amene{5};
In quhite and rede was all the feld besene{6}
Throu Naturis nobil fresch anamalyng{7},
In mirthfull May, of eviry moneth Quene.
O reverend Chaucere, rose of rethoris{8} all,
As in oure tong ane flour{9} imperiall,
That raise{10} in Britane evir, quho redis rycht,
Thou beris of makaris{11} the tryúmph riall;
Thy fresch anamalit termës celicall{12}
This mater coud illumynit have full brycht;
Was thou noucht of oure Inglisch all the lycht,
Surmounting eviry tong terrestriall
Als fer as Mayis morow dois mydnycht?
O morall Gower, and Ludgate laureate,
Your sugurit lippis and tongis aureate{13}
Bene to oure eris cause of grete delyte;
Your angel mouthis most mellifluate{14}
Oure rude langage has clere illumynate,
And faire our-gilt{15} oure speche, that imperfýte
Stude, or{16} your goldyn pennis schupe{17} to wryte;
This ile before was bare, and desolate
Of rethorike, or lusty{18} fresch endyte{19}.
{Footnotes:
1: _dream_
2: _bright_
3: _morn_
4: _young_
5: _pleasant_
6: _arrayed_
7: _enamelling_
8: _orators_
9: _flower_
10: _didst rise_
11: _poets_
12: _heavenly_
13: _golden_
14: _honeyed_
15: _overgilt_
16: _ere_
17: _undertook_
18: _pleasant_
19: _composition_}