Michael of Northgate was a monk of St. Augustine's, Canterbury. From a
library catalogue of the monastery it appears that he was a lover of
books, for he is named as the donor of twenty-five MSS., a considerable
collection for those days. Their titles show a taste not merely for
religious works, but for science—mathematics, chemistry, medicine, as
they were known at the time. Four of these MSS. have been traced, and
one of them, British Museum MS. Arundel 57, is Michael's autograph copy
of the _Ayenbyte_. On folio 2 of the MS. are the words: _Þis boc is Dan
Michelis of Northgate, ywrite an Englis of his oȝene hand, þet hatte
'Ayenbyte of Inwyt'; and is of the boc-house of Saynt Austines of
Canterberi, mid þe lettres. CC._ 'CC.' is the press-mark given in the
catalogue. A note at the end of the text shows that it was finished on
October 27, 1340:
_Ymende þet þis boc is uolueld ine þe eue of þe holy apostles Symon an
Iudas_ [i.e. Oct. 27] _of ane broþer of the cloystre of Sauynt Austin of
Canterberi, in the yeare of oure Lhordes beringe 1340._
The _Ayenbyte_ has been edited for the Early English Text Society by R.
Morris. The title means literally 'Remorse of Conscience', but from the
contents of the work it would appear that the writer meant rather
'Stimulus to the Conscience', or 'Prick of Conscience'. It is in fact a
translation from the French _Somme des Vices et des Vertues_, compiled
by Friar Lorens in 1279 for King Philip le Hardi, and long held to be
the main source of Chaucer's _Parson's Tale_. Caxton rendered the
_Somme_ into English prose as _The Royal Book_. It treats of the
Commandments, the Creed, the Seven Deadly Sins, the Seven Petitions of
the Paternoster, and the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Dan Michael's purpose is stated in some doggerel lines at the end:
Nou ich wille þet ye ywyte
Hou hit is ywent
Þet þis boc is ywrite
Mid Engliss of Kent.
Þis boc is ymad uor lewede men,
Vor uader, and uor moder, and uor oþer ken,
Ham uor to berȝe uram alle manyere zen,
Þet ine hare inwytte ne bleue no uoul wen.
His translation is inaccurate, and sometimes unintelligible, and
the treatment is so barren of interest that the work seems to have
fallen flat even in its own day, when the popular appetite for
edification was keen and unspoiled. But if its literary merit is
slight, linguistically it is one of the most important works in
Middle English. It provides a long prose text, exactly dated and
exactly localized; we have the author's autograph copy to work
from; and the dialect is well distinguished. These circumstances,
unique in Middle English, make it possible to study the Kentish
dialect of the mid-fourteenth century under ideal conditions.