Skip to main content

Full text of "Publications"

See other formats



Modern Language Association 
























I. A Study of the Romance of the Seven Sages with special 
reference to the Middle English Versions. By KILLIS 
CAMPBELL, _... _._._! 

IT. A Study of Goethe's Printed Text: Hermann und Dorothea. 

By W. T. HEWETT, - 108 

III. Zum Speculum Humanae Salvationis. By H. SCHMIDT- 


IV. Color in Old English Poetry. By WILLIAM E. MEAD, - 169 

V. From Franklin to Lowell. A century of New England 

pronunciation. By C. H. GBANDGENT, - 207 

VI. The Work of the Modern Language Association of America. 

By C. ALPHONSO SMITH, - - - - - - - 240 

VII. Are French Poets Poetical ? By P. B. MABCOU, - - - 257 

VIII. Luis De Le6n, the Spanish Poet, Humanist, and Mystic. 

By J. D. M. FORD, 267 

IX. The Latin and the Anglo-Saxon Juliana. By JAMES M. 

GARNETT, '- - 279 

X The Semasiology of Words for 'Smell' and 'See.' By 


XI. Proper Names in Old English Verse. By JAMES W. 

BRIGHT, - 347 

XII. Nicholas Grimald's Christus Redivims. By J. M. HART, - 369 
XIII. Pepper, Pickle, and Kipper. By GEORGE HEMPL, - - 449 

XIV. A hitherto unnoticed Middle English manuscript of the 

Seven Sages. By A. S. NAPIER, 459 

XV. Elizabethan Translations from the Italian: the titles of 
such works now first collected and arranged, with annota- 
tions. By MARY AUGUSTA SCOTT, - . . * - - 465 






Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Modern 
Language Association of America, held at the University 
of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va., December 27, 28, 29, 1898. 

Addresses of welcome, - - iii 

Address of the President of the Association, ALCEE FOBTIEB. 
Subject: Historical and social forces in French litera- 
ture, iii 

1. Are French poets poetical ? By P. B. MARCOU, - xii 

Discussion : By T. ATKINSON JENKINS, - xii 

2. A neglected field in American philology. By THOMAS FITZ- 

HUGH, xiv 

Report of the Secretary, xiv 

Eeport of the Treasurer, ' - - xiv 

Appointment of committees, xv 

The Goethe celebration, xv 

The Philological congress, - - - xv 

3. La vie de Sainte Catharine d' Alexandrie, as contained in the 

Paris MS. La Clayette. By H. A. TODD, xvi 

4. Luis de Le6n, the Spanish poet, humanist, and mystic. By J. 

D. M. FORD, xvi 

5. German- American ballads. By M. D. LEARNED, - - - xvi 

6. The Latin and Anglo-Saxon Juliana. By JAMES M. GAR- 

NETT, xvi 

7. Transverse alliteration in Teutonic poetry. By O. F. EMER- 

SON, xvi 

8. Modern poetry and the revival of interest in Byron. By 


9. The sources of Cynewulf's Christ, Part I. By ALBERT S. 

COOK, xx 

Report of the Auditing Committee, ------ xx 

10. Lemercier, and the three unities. By JOHN R. EFPINGER, 

JR., ^ xx 

Discussion : By A. COHN, ; xx 



11. Adversative-Conjunctive relations. By R. H. WILSON, - xxi 

12. The sources of Opitz's Buck von der deulschen Poeterei. By 

THOMAS S. BAKER, - - - - - - xxi 

13. The origin and meaning of 'Germani' (Tac. Germ. 2). By 

A. GUDEMAN, -...._._ xxi 

14. The International Correspondence. By EDWARD H. MAGILL, xxii 
The Committee on the International Correspondence, - - - xxii 

15. Old English musical terms. By F. M. PADELFORD, - - xxii 
Annual Meeting of the American Dialect Society, - - - xxii 

Social Reception, xxii 

Report of the Committee on Place of Meeting, .... xxii 

16. The origin of the Runes. By GEORGE HEMPL, ... xxiii 

The Report of the Committee of Twelve, xxiii 

Election of Officers, xxiv 

17. The influence of the return of Spring on the earliest French 

lyric poetry. By W. STUART SYMINGTON, ... xxv 

18. From Franklin to Lowell. A century of New England pro- 

nunciation. By C. H. GRANDGENT, .... xxv 

19. Some tendencies in contemporary English poetry. By COR- 


20. The development of the long u in modern English. By 


21. Experiments in translating Anglo-Saxon poetry. By J. 


22. The influence of German literature in America from 1800 to 

1825. By FREDERICK H. WILKENS, - xxvi 

23. Archaisms in Modern French. By T. F. COLIN, ... xxvi 

Final vote of thanks, xxvi 

List of Officers, xxvii 

List of Members, xxviii 

List of Subscribing Libraries, xlii 

Honorary Members, xliv 

Koll of Members Deceased, xlv 

The Constitution of the Association, xlvi 




Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Central Divi- 
sion of the Modern Language Association of America, held 
at Lincoln, Nebraska, December 27, 28, 29, 1898. 

Addresses of welcome, and the President's address, ... H 

Keport of the Secretary, Hi 

Report of the Treasurer, liii 

Appointment of Committees, ------- Hy 

1. Certain structural peculiarities of the I-novel. By KATHA- 


2. The stem-changing verbs in Spanish. By A. H. EDGREN, - Ivi 

3. Leonard Cox and the first English rhetoric. By F. I. 


4. The tense-limitations of some of the modal auxiliaries in 

German. By W. H. CARRUTH, ----- Ivii 

5. The poetic value of long words. By A. H. TOLMAN, - - lix 

6. The origin of some ideas of sense-perception. By F. A. 

WOOD, ---------- lix 

7. Historical Dictionaries. By A. H. EDGREN, - lix 

8. Dramatic Kenaissance. By M. ANSTICE HARRIS, lix 

9. A method of teaching metrics. By E. P. MORTON, - Ix 

10. Wilhelm M tiller and Italian popular poetry. By PHILIP S. 


11. The history of the Sigf rid legend. By JULIUS GOEBEL, - Ixi 
Keport of the Committee of Twelve, ------ Ixvi 

12. Le Covenant Vivien. By RAYMOND WEEKS, - Ixvi 

13. The Finnsburgh Fragment, and its relation to the Finn epi- 

sode in Beowulf. By LOUISE POUND, - Ixvii 

14. Poe's critique of Hawthorne. By H. M. BELDEN, - - Ixvii 

15. The concord of collectives in English. By C. ALPHONSO 

SMITH, --- -- Ixix 

16. The true relation of the Belfagor novels of Machiavelli, 

Doni, and Brevio. By A. GERBER, - - - Ixx 

Election of Officers, Ixxi 

Report of the auditing committee, Ixxi 

Vote of thanks, ---------- Ixxi 








The main object of this study has been to investigate 
thoroughly the relations of the Middle English versions of 
the Seven 'Sages of Rome. 

As preliminary to this investigation, a review of the history 
of the romance in the several stages through which it has 
passed before reaching English has been made. This survey, 
a recapitulation of the results which modern scholarship has 
attained in the study of the romance, has been made im- 
partially, and with a view to set forth the most approved 
views that have been held rather than to advance any new 
theories of my own. Where these views are conflicting, as is 
particularly the case with respect to the eastern versions, I 
have endeavored to sift truth from error, though here 
naturally some difficulty has been encountered. It is only 
on the question of transmission of the romance that a view 
differing from that of the best authorities has been taken. 

The chapter on the French and the Italian versions has been 
based in large part on the work of Gaston Paris, whose Deux 



Redactions has superseded all previous contributions, repre- 
senting as it does the most recent and the best results that have 
been attained in this branch of the study of the romance. 
Additions which have been made consist largely in informa- 
tion as to a number of manuscripts which were unknown to 
Paris, or which have since been found. 

The second and major part of the study has been devoted 
to the Seven Sages in English. Here I have been preceded 
by Petras and Buchner, the one dealing mainly with the 
Middle English group, the other especially with the relations 
of the Wynkyn de Worde and Eolland versions. The 
dissertations of these two scholars are the only real contri- 
butions which have been made to the study of the English 
versions. It is therefore not surprising that many of the 
current theories with regard to these versions are shown on 
closer examination to be erroneous. The most far-reaching 
of these misconceptions is, I believe, that which regards the 
Wright version as independent of all other English versions. 
My investigations lead me to the conviction that at least seven 
of the eight Middle English manuscripts are related to each 
other through a common Middle English original. 

I regret that I have been forced to forego consideration of 
one of the Middle English versions, the Asloan. I was 
denied access to this manuscript by its owner, Lord Talbot 
de Malahide, and learned of the existence of a transcript of it 
in the University Library at Edinburgh when it was too late 
to avail myself of it. Prof. Yarnhagen believes it to have 
had an immediate basis on some Old French manuscript; 
there are reasonable grounds for doubting this belief, however, 
and I am unwilling to subscribe to it until a further comparison 
with the remaining Middle English versions has been made. 

This study leaves undone the most interesting, if not the 
most valuable part of the work I had planned, a comparative 
study of the stories themselves ; for not even the stories of 
the Bidpai collection have enjoyed a wider vogue than those 
of the Seven Sages. The task of tracing these in their travels 


and of collecting their analogues will be attempted in a future 
publication, when it is hoped that an edition of one or more 
of the unpublished Middle English manuscripts may also be 


I (a). The Romance in the Orient. 

It is universally held to-day that the great collection of 
popular stories known in the West as the Seven Sages of Rome, 
in the East as the Book of Sindib&d, is of Indian origin. 
This was well established by Deslongchamps already in 1838, 
in his Essai sur les Fables Indiennes, 1 and has never since been 
seriously brought in question. The Indian original, however, 
has not yet been discovered, nor is it probable that it ever will 
be; and it even admits of very considerable doubt whether 
the romance ever existed in India in a form very near to that 
in which it is first found. 

All attempts, too, to show a kinship between the romance 
and some surviving Sanskrit story have proved in large part 
futile. Benfey first pointed out the analogy between the 
introduction to the Pantchatantra and the framework of 
the Sindibdd, 2 but he very justly concluded that the Pantcha- 
tantra was indebted to the Sindibdd rather than the Sindibdd 
to the Pantchatantra. In a later publication, 3 he called atten- 
tion to the similarity between the Sindibdd and the legend 
of Kunala and Asoka, and Cassel has boldly assumed this 
legend to be the ultimate basis of the romance. 4 

The story of Kunala is widely known in Sanskrit litera- 
ture. Asoka, a famous Indian king, had, after the death of 
his first wife, married one of the latter's attendants. The 

1 Published at Paris, 1838, in conjunction with Leroux de Lincy's edi- 
tion of the Sept Sages de Rome. 

8 Pantchatantra, Leipzig, 1859, i, \ 8; also Melanges Asiat., ill, p. 188 f. 

3 Orient and Occident, in, p. 177 f. 

4 Mischle Sindbad, Berlin, 1888, pp. 10 f., 62. 


new queen had been rejected previous to this by Kunala, 
the son of Asoka by another wife, and bore in consequence the 
greatest hatred toward him. The prince is sent by Asoka to 
one of the provinces to put down a rebellion, where he wins 
great distinction for himself. In the meantime the king is 
stricken with a fatal disease, and determines to recall the 
young prince and place him on the throne. The queen, 
realizing what this would mean to her, offers to cure the king 
provided he grant her one favor. Having been restored to 
health through her agency, the king agrees to grant her what- 
ever she may desire. She asks to be permitted to exercise 
supreme authority for seven days, during which time, at her 
instigation, the prince's beautiful eyes l are put out. Kunala 
subsequently presents himself before his father in the guise 
of a lute-player, and is recognized. The queen is burned in 
expiation of her crime. 2 

Such in brief outline is the legend, which, if it is indeed 
the ultimate origin of the Sindibdd, at least does not suggest 
an obvious relation to it. 

Abundant proof of a Sanskrit origin of the Sindibdd, how- 
ever, is had in the nature or content of its stories and, in 
particular, of its framework, which is distinctly Buddhistic. 
Cassel has treated this aspect of the problem at great length. 3 
He would concede as the result of his investigations that some 
of the many varying stories were not found in the hypotheti- 
cal original, and that no one of the extant versions faithfully 
represents this original. Nor is it strange that this should be 
the case, for it would be a very miracle had the collection 
remained intact throughout a possible half-dozen redactions. 
It is, accordingly, impossible to determine which of the stories 
were in the original, or which not; this, for the present at 
least, must remain largely a matter of conjecture. Still, this 

. 10. 

2 For further details of this legend, see Burnouf, Introduction d Phistoire 
du Buddhisme indien, Paris, 1844, pp. 144 f., 406. 

3 Mischk Sindbad, p. 82 f. 


much may be accepted as established, that some of the original 
stories, the ethical purpose, and many of the general charac- 
teristics of the Indian prototype have been preserved. 

The Eastern group comprises a Hebrew, a Syriac, a Greek, 
an Old Spanish, two closely related and a third somewhat 
anomalous Persian, and three cognate Arabic versions. All 
these differ more or less from each other, but, as compared 
with the Western group, with which they have in common 
only four stories and the framework, they distinctly stand 
apart and make up a separate group. There are many 
important details in which the two groups differ, but the 
most marked features which characterize the Eastern group 
are, first, that each sage tells two tales as against one each in 
the western versions 1 a feature which was probably not 
in the Sanskrit original ; and, secondly, in contradistinction to 
the entire western group with the exception of the Dolopathos, 
that the prince has only one instructor, the philosopher Sindi- 
bad. This illustrious teacher is the central figure of all 
versions in the East, where by general consent the romance 
is called after him the Book of Sindibdd. 2 

The origin of the name Sindibdd is in dispute. Benfey 
traces it back to *Siddhapati, 3 Teza to *Siddhapala; i Cassel, 
on the contrary, holds that the word was coined first after 
leaving India, and is neither Siddhapatl nor Siddhapala, but 
*Sindubadhjdja = Indian teacher. 5 

The name of the prince has not been preserved, but the 
king is named in each one of the representative eastern texts. 
In the Syriac and the Greek he is called Kurus; in the Old 

1 This is the case in all eastern versions save the Seven Vezirs and the 
version of Nachshebi : in the former some sages tell one, some two stories ; 
in the latter each sage tells only one. 

2 Prof. Khys Davids in his work on the Jatakas (Buddhist Birth Stories, 
Boston, 1880, vol. i, pp. XLI, xciv) seems to have confounded this romance 
with the story of Sinbad the Sailor of the Arabian Nights. The two are in 
no way related. 

3 Pantchatantra, I, \ 5 (p. 23). 

4 II Libro del Sette Savj, ed. D'Ancona, Pisa, 1864, p. XLVTI. 
6 Mischle Sindbad, p. 66. 


Spanish, Alcos, which may be considered a variant of Kurus 
(Al-Curus), since the Spanish holds very closely with the 
Greek and Syriac, and goes back to the same original. The 
Hebrew version, on the other hand, calls the king Pal Pur, 
or, as Ben fey has suggested, Kai (king) Pur, and Cassel 
would identify this Pur with the Indian king Porus, ruler 
of India at the time of the Alexandrian invasion, and third 
before King Asoka of the Kunala story. Porus, Cassel 
maintains, is a substitution for the less famous Asoka of the 
original a transference of the Asoka tradition to Porus. 1 
The Kurus of the Greek and Syriac he would explain in like 
manner as a similar transference, after leaving India, from 
Porus, or Asoka, to the far-famed Cyrus of the Persians. 2 

The route of transmission from India westward is very 
generally assumed to have been through Pahlavi into Arabic. 3 
There seems to be little evidence, however, of the existence of 
a Pahlavi version, unless the current tradition to that effect, 
or the fact that the Kalila wa Dimna had such an inter-, 
mediate stage, be regarded as such. Hence Cassel takes a 
radically different view from that generally held, maintaining 
that the lost Arabic text goes back not to a Pahlavi but to 
a Syriac version, which, in its turn, goes back to the San- 
skrit, the collection, then, having been transmitted westward 
through the agency of the Manicheans in the third or fourth 
century of our era. 4 The Hebrew and the lost Arabic versions 
he conceives to be coordinate redactions of this early Syriac 
version, finding support of this theory, so far as it concerns 
the Hebrew text, in the Syriac influence which the language 
of the latter exhibits. At the same time, although he thus 
claims for the Hebrew version the greatest antiquity of any 
text which has been preserved, Cassel admits that, in addition 
to the Syriac influence, the Hebrew text also contains traces 
of a Greek influence (as, for instance, in the names of the 

1 Ibid., pp. 63, 212. 2 Ibid., p. 61 . 

3 So Comparetti, Noldeke, Clouston, and others. 
4 Mischle Sindbad, pp. 61, 310. 


sages)/ which is of itself sufficiently indicative of the lack of 
conclusive proof of his thesis. 2 

The Arabic text, unlike the early Syriac, is in no way 
hypothetical, but the evidence that it once existed, even as 
late as the thirteenth century, 3 is conclusive. Its influence 
has been very wide, and, until Cassel, it has been generally 
assumed to be the source, either mediate or immediate, of the 
entire Eastern group. The Syriac Sindban and the Old 
Spanish version are believed to be its closest representatives. 
Its author, according to the testimony of the introduction to 
the Syntipas, was a certain Musa, and its date has been con- 
jecturally placed by Noldeke 4 and others in the eighth century. 

Only ten versions belonging to the Eastern type have sur- 
vived. These are the Hebrew Mischle Sindbad, the Syriac 
Sindban, the Greek Syntipas, the Persian Sindibdd-ndmeh and 
its source, the text of As-Samarquandi, the Old Spanish Libro 
de los Engannos, the three Arabic versions of the Seven Vezirs, 
and the eighth night of the Tuti-ndmeh of Nachshebi. 5 

The relative age of these is not definitely known. Early 
scholars as a rule held that the Hebrew version antedated all 
others ; but this view was summarily rejected by Comparetti 6 
and his followers, who claimed greatest antiquity for the 
Syntipas, a distinction of which it was robbed by Rodiger's 
discovery of the Syriac version. The Nachshebi version has 
also been held to be the oldest, 7 and Clouston in recent years 

1 These are, according to Cassel (p. 219 f.), Sindibad, Hippocrates, Apu- 
leius, Lucian, Aristotle, Pindar, and Homer. 

2 Mischle Sindbad, pp. 222, 310. 

3 The Old Spanish version was made from it in 1253. 

4 In his review of Baethgen's edition of the Sindban in Zeitschrift d. d. 
Morg. Gesellschaft, xxxni, p. 518. 

5 A11 these, with the exception of the text of As-Samarquandi, have been 
rendered accessible either in the original or in translations, and in most 
cases in both. 

6 Comparetti, Book of Sindibad, p. 53 f. Citation is made from the English 
translation by Coote, for the Folk Lore Socy., London, 1882. The original 
Eicerche appeared at Milan in 1869. 

7 Brockhaus for example. 


has contended for the Sindibdd-ndmeh as representing most 
closely the hypothetical original. 1 The result of the latest 
investigation, as has been seen, is to return to the view of 
early scholars, which gives to the Hebrew text first place both 
as regards date and fidelity to the lost original. Such is 
CassePs conclusion, which, although somewhat revolutionary, 
is arrived at by argument which at least serves to invalidate 
Comparetti's assumption that the Hebrew text stands for a 
late and very free version of the romance. It is hardly legiti- 
mate to conclude, from the circumstance that the Mischle 
Sindbad stands apart from the remaining members of the 
Eastern group, that it is, on that account, less faithful to 
the original tradition. Nor is Comparetti's argument for the 
identification of the Joel to whom the work is attributed by 
Rossi and the British Museum manuscript, with the Joel 
who is reported to have translated the Kalila wa Dimna into 
Hebrew, and the consequent establishment of a thirteenth 
century date for this version, any more valid. 2 At the same 
time, it is to be regretted that Cassel has attained no definite 
results as to chronology. 3 

The Mischle Sindbad 4 contains twenty stories, three of 
which, Absalom, The Disguised Youth, and The Humpbacks 
(amatores), appear in no other version of the Eastern group. 
Its first three stories come in the same order as in the Syriac, 
Greek, and Old Spanish versions. Other agreements which 
are evident on reference to a comparative table serve appar- 
ently to hold these four texts together; 5 this, however, is 
probably rather due to a more faithful preservation of the 

1 Clouston, Book ofSindibdd [Glasgow], 1884, p. L f. 

2 Comparetti, Book of Sindibad, p. 53 f. * Mischle Sindbad, p. 310. 

4 The Hebrew text has undergone the following editions: Sengelman 
(with German translation), Halle, 1842; Carmoly (with French transla- 
tion), Paris, 1849; and Cassel (German translation and copious notes), 
Berlin, 1888. 

6 For the most complete comparative table, see Landau, Quellen des Deka- 
meron, 2d ed., Stuttgart, 1884; see also Cassel, p. 362 f., and Comparetti, 
p. 25. 



ultimate original on the part of these than to any very close 
relationship with the Hebrew, and comparison will show not 
only that these three have much in common which does 
not appear in the Hebrew, but also that the latter has many 
features (the naming of the sages, for example) which are 
peculiarly its own. Additional importance attaches to the 
Hebrew text from the fact that it probably bears a closer 
relation to the Western group than any other known eastern 
version. 1 

The Syriac Sindban was discovered by Rodiger in 1866, 
and was published with a German translation by Baethgen in 
1879. 2 The text is unfortunately fragmentary, especially at 
the end. Although at first doubted by Comparetti, it has 
been satisfactorily shown by Noldeke to be the Syriac basis 
of the Syntipas, alluded to in the prologue of the latter. 3 The 
immediate original of the Sindban must then be the last 
Arabic text of Musa. Noldeke believes it to belong to the 
tenth century. 

The Greek Syntipas is, in interest and importance, second 
only to the Hebrew text. As compared with its Syriac origi- 
nal, it is much more full and ornate, an almost unfailing 
characteristic of a later text. Its author was, as the prologue 
establishes, a certain Michael Andreopulos and the translation 
was made at the command of one Gabriel /AeXcovv/jLos. Com- 
paretti would identify this Gabriel with Duke Gabriel of 
Meliteue, and thus establish the date of the work as the 
second half of the eleventh century; 4 but this, while a gain 
in a measure, is little more than a happy suggestion. Far 
less probability has CassePs proposition that the reference is 
to the angel Gabriel. 6 The text was first published by 

J See the next chapter on "The Transmission of the Romance to the 

8 Baethgen, Sindban, oder die Sieben Weisen Meister, Leipzig, 1879. An 
English translation by H. Gollancz appeared in Folk Lore, vin, p. 99 f., 
June, 1897. 

3 ZeUschr. d. d. Morg. Gesellschaft, xxxin, p. 513 f. 

4 Book of Smdibdd, p. 57. Mischle Sindbad, p. 368. 


Boissonade, and has been lately critically edited by Eberhard. 1 
A modern Greek adaptation of the older text is of little value 
in a comparative study of the romance. 2 

The Libro de los Engannos, like the Syriac text, was not 
known until late in the century. It is, according to its pro- 
logue, a translation from the Arabic, made in the year 1253. 
The text is complete, but very corrupt. Its closest affinities 
are with the Greek and Syriac versions, with both of which it 
exhibits intimate agreement in content and order of stories. It 
seems to have had no influence at all on modern Spanish litera- 
ture. The first edition of the text appeared in Comparetti's 
P,icerche,'m 1869; a second edition, with an admirable Eng- 
lish translation appended, appeared in the English edition of 
this book in 1882. 3 

The Persian Sindibad-ndmeh 4 " dates from the year 1375. 
It purports to be based on a Persian prose text which goes 
back to the Arabic. Clouston first suggested that this origi- 
nal was the text of As-Samarquandi, which was known in the 
early part of the century, but which had subsequently been 
lost sight of. By the rediscovery of a manuscript of this 
version in 1891, he has been enabled to establish this conjec- 
ture as a fact. 5 The As-Samarquandi text agrees closely with 
the Sindibdd-ndmefi in content, the only important difference 
being the substitution on the part of the latter of one or two 
extraneous stories for those it found in its original. The 
agreement in order of stories is close throughout. The date 
of the prose text falls late in the twelfth century. It differs 
considerably from the rest of the Eastern group, but is nearer 

1 Eberhard, Fabulae Romanenses Greece, etc., I (Teubner), Leipzig, 1872. 

2 For the Syntipas in later literature, see Murko, " Die Geschichte v. d. 
Sieben Weisen b. d. Slaven," Wiener Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. CL, cxxn, 
No. x, p. 4 f. 

3 Book o/Sindibad, pp. 73-164. 

4 This text has not yet been edited. An abstract of it was given by 
Falconer in the Asiatic Journal, xxxv, p. 169 f. and xxxvi, pp. 4 f., 99 f. ; 
a complete translation into English appears in Clouston's Book of Sindibdd. 

5 Athenaeum for Sept. 12, 1891, p. 355. 


to the Syriac, Greek and Spanish versions than to the Hebrew. 
There appears to be no evidence to support Clouston's sugges- 
tion that it represents the Sanskrit prototype more faithfully 
than any other known version ; neither is Modi's contention 
for a close relation with the story of Kaus, Sonddbeh, and 
Sidvash 1 by any means convincing; but the tradition which 
makes its origin in the Arabic text is doubtless well founded. 

Under the head of the Seven Vezirs fall three versions which 
have been introduced into the frame of the Arabian Nights. 
These are the texts of Habicht and Scott, and the Boulaq 
edition. 2 They are of late composition, and of comparatively 
slight value for the present purpose. 

The text contained in the eighth night of Nachshebi 3 is 
one of the most interesting of the Eastern group, and has 
given rise to much speculation. It differs considerably from 
all other related versions, having but six stories, only five 
of which appear elsewhere in the Eastern group. All five of 
these in the fuller versions are second vezir's tales, and as 
they were also found originally in the Sukasaptatl (though 
not connected as with Nachshebi), it has been conjectured by 
Comparetti that they were first introduced into the Sindibdd 
after leaving India, and that Nachshebi, observing this, again 
inserted them in his free translation of the Tutl-ndmeh. and 
practically in the same form in which he found them in the 
Sindibdd. 4 Comparetti would further identify the collection 
before and after this addition with the ' Greater ' and ' Lesser 9 
Sindibdd referred to by the tenth century Mohammed Ibn el 
Warrak. A radically different theory has been advanced by 
Noldeke, who maintains that the ' Greater ' Sindibdd has been 
lost. 5 As for the version of the Sindibdd whence Nachshebi 

1 Modi, Dante and Viraf and Gardis and Kaus, Bombay, 1892. 

2 1001 Nights, Breslau, 1840, xv, pp. 102-172; Scott, Tales, Anecdotes and 
Letters, Shrewsbury, 1800, p. 38 f. ; 1001 Nights, Boulaq, 1863, in, pp. 75-124. 

3 Brockhaus, Nachshebl's S. W. M., Leipzig, 1845; translated by Teza, 
D'Ancona ed. of Sette Sayj., p. xxxvn f. 

*ook of Sindibdd, p. 37 f. 

6 Zeitschr. d. d. Morg. Gesellschaft, xxxiu, p. 521 f. 


drew, both Comparetti and Noldeke concur in the belief that 
it was the text on which the Sindibdd-ndmeh was based, or 
that of As-Samarquandi. The date of the Nachshebi version 
is late, as its author died in 1329. 

Besides the ten versions catalogued above, the existence of 
certain others which have been lost is proved by sundry refer- 
ences from oriental writers. A Persian text is attributed to 
Azraki by Daulat Shah, and there are several references from 
the ninth and tenth centuries to works which do not seem to 
be identical with anything which has been preserved. The 
best-known of these, probably, is Masudi's (943) statement 
that in the reign of Kurush " lived es-Sondbad, who is the 
author of the book of the seven vezirs, the teacher and boy, 
and the wife of the king. This is the book which bears the 
name Kitdb-es-Sindbdd." l A still earlier reference is that of 
Al-Yaqubi (880). Both of these may refer to the Arabic 
text of Musa, though this is by no means certain. Most 
perplexing of all is the reference, already mentioned, to a 
f Greater ? and a ( Lesser 7 JBook of Sindibdd. 

Doubtless many more versions have been lost than this 
would indicate ; but since nearly a third of the known texts 
have been revealed only within the last generation, it may be 
hoped that the near future has in store many revelations 
which will materially serve to dispel the mist which now 
surrounds almost the entire question of relations in the East. 

I (b). Transmission of the Romance to the Occident. 

The Greek Syntipas and the Old Spanish Libro de los 
Engannos are the only representatives of the Eastern group 
which have arisen on European territory. Neither one of 
these, however, can be considered a connecting link in the 
chain of transmission; nor can, in fact, with all certainty, 
any one member of the Eastern group claim this distinction. 

1 Masudi, Meadows of Gold, translated by Sprenger, London, 1841, p. 175. 
Masudi was not well acquainted with the romance, as follows from the fact 
that he attributes its authorship to Sindibad. 


The question of transmission is, and must doubtless always 
remain, very much shrouded in darkness. The two groups, 
having in common only four stories and the framework, and 
having in these, also, many radical differences, cannot be 
thought of as connected through free or literal translation, 
nor by intermediate redactions; the only valid explanation 
of the enormous gap existing between them must repose in 
the assumption of a basis for the western original in popular 
tradition. This alone can explain the difference between the 
two groups. 

But this assumption should not carry with it (as with 
Comparetti apparently; 1. c., p. 2) the further assumption 
that, since the medium of transmission was oral, all possi- 
bility of ever determining the specific original of the Western 
group is thereby done away with. This need not follow at 
all. The oral tradition on which the western parent version 
had its basis, must itself have had some basis, and this cannot 
have been the entire Eastern group, nor with any degree of 
probability any two of its members ; it was some one member 
of the Eastern group. Accordingly it is legitimate to endeavor 
to determine which one of the Eastern versions is the origi- 
nal, or the closest representative of the original, of the Western 

Modern scholars in general have refrained from any investi- 
gation of this stage of the history of the romance. With a 
single exception, the only judgments upon the problem date 
from the earlier part of the century. Dacier, Keller, Deslong- 
champs, Wright, D'Ancona, and others put forth claims for one 
or another of the Eastern group (some for the Greek, others 
for the Hebrew), as the original of the western type. But 
all these claims were unsustained by any evidence adduced, 
and were in every case scarcely more than conjectures. The 
modern scholar who alone has put himself on record here is 
Landau ; * and he is, at the same time the only one of the 

1 Marcus Landau, Quellen des Dekameron, 2d ed., Stuttgart, 1884. 



whole number who has made a serious effort to sustain his 
position. At the basis of Landau's work, however, lies the 
assumption that the Latin prose Historia Septem Sapientum 
(H) is the parent version of the Western group, an assump- 
tion which is entirely gratuitous, for surely Gaston Paris has 
succeeded in demonstrating that H is not the original western 
text; while the majority of Landau's arguments therefore hold 
also in a comparison of the oldest texts with the Eastern 
group, it is in view of this fundamental misconception on his 
part that he has in reality proved nothing more than that the 
fourteenth century Historia is nearer the Hebrew than to any 
other eastern version. 

With the proof of the unoriginality of H, the question 
as to the nearness of the various sub-types of the western 
group to the parent version has been left open. The oldest 
text preserved is the Dolopathos; but this is a unique version, 
and, as will be shown in the next chapter, cannot with the 
slightest probability be looked upon as the western original, 
though it is assuredly connected in some way with the pre- 
vailing, type of the Western group, the Seven Sages of Rome. 
Next to the Dolopathos the Scala Coeli (8) and Keller (K) 
texts have been treated as the oldest by the latest and best 
authorities ; to these, in view of its prime importance and the 
uncertainty as to its relations, we should like to add the type 
A*. 1 No proof of the priority of any one of these has yet been 
brought forward ; moreover, the earliest dating proposed for 
any of them is the first half of the thirteenth century. We 
may begin, then, with the assumption that the immediate 
parent version of the Western group has been lost. At the 
same time, since the Dolopathos, which dates from the last 
quarter of the twelfth century, is evidently based on some 
version of the prevailing western type, we may assume for 

1 The Old French versions A, C, D of Paris (Deux Redactions) have been 
" starred " throughout in order to avoid confusion with the Middle English 
(M. E.) versions A, C, D. 


this lost original a date not later than the middle of the 
twelfth century. 

A twelfth century original having been assumed for the 
Western group, the Libro de los Engannos (xin cent.), the 
Sindibdd-ndmeh (xiv cent.), and the Seven Vezirs (very late) 
may be eliminated from the investigation ; likewise the unique 
text of Nachshebi for reasons that are obvious. There remain 
the Misdde Sindbad, the Sindban, and the Syntipas, no one 
of which can be dated later than the eleventh century, if 
we accept CassePs view as to the comparative antiquity of 
the Hebrew text. Further, since the western original of the 
Western group has been lost, comparison can be made with 
the latter only on the basis of the constant elements appearing 
in its most ancient versions, 8, K, A.* Accordingly, the 
comparison must be instituted between the Hebrew, Syriac, 
and Greek versions, on the one hand, and 8, K, JL* on the 

The framework of the romance has undergone a radical 
change in the course of its transmission westward. There is 
no longer mention of a philosopher Siudibad, but the seven 
sages of Eome become the central figures, and play the double 
r6le of instructors and defenders of the prince. Sundry other 
characteristic features of the Eastern group, such as the prince's 
early stupidity, the multiplicity of the king's wives, etc., have 
been lost; but the most far-reaching change consists in the 
curtailment of stories, each sage telling only one story in 
the Western group as against the prevailing number of two 
in the Eastern. 

In these variations the Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac versions 
present essential agreement ; but there are several features in 
which these three texts do not agree, and it is significant here 
that where the Western group preserves any of these features, 
it is always in agreement with the Hebrew, and in no single 
instance with the Greek or the Syriac. 


The following features peculiar to the Hebrew text as 
compared with the rest of the Eastern group reappear in the 
oldest western versions : l 

(1). The seven sages are not referred to simply as such, 
but are mentioned by name 2 (Landau, p. 48). 

(2). They vie in their efforts to secure the office of instructor 
of the prince 3 (Landau, p. 48). 

(3). These sages, and not the vezirs or counsellors of the 
king as with the rest of the Eastern group, relate the stories 
which preserve the prince's life 4 (Landau, p. 48). 

The mode of punishment of the guilty queen offers nothing 
determining. The eastern texts have little in common here 

'All these several bits of argument adduced here and on the following 
pages, with the exception of those under the story avis, have been advanced 
by Landau (pp. 47- 50) ; in addition to these, owing to his false hypothesis 
of the originality of H, Landau has made use of two other features in which 
H agrees with the Hebrew text versus the remainder of the Eastern group, 
but which must be cancelled, since they are also peculiar to H. These are 
( 1 ) the disguised-youth incident of H, which Landau (p. 48 f.) inclines to trace 
back to the seventeenth story of the Mischle Sindbad, and (2) amalores, the 
twelfth story of the Historia, which is ultimately the same as the Hebrew 
story of the Hunchbacks (M. S. 18 ; see BeMier, Les Fabliaux, Paris, 1893, p. 
201 f.). Neither of these appears in any other western version, whence 
the only legitimate inference that they were not in the lost western original, 
but are late incorporations on the part of if into the frame of the collection. 

2 This, a characteristic feature of the Western group, appears in all 
western texts save those (as S) which have been abridged. The names 
of the sages in the Mischle Sindbad are Sindibad, Hippocrates, Apuleius, 
Lucian, Aristotle, Pindar, and Homer (Cassel, p. 253); in the Western 
group, Bancillas, Ancilles, Malquidras, Lentulus, Caton, Jesse, and Meros. 
For variants of these, see Landau, Quellen des Dekameron, p. 60 n. 

3 In the Hebrew (see Cassel, p. 255 f.) one proposes to instruct him in 
five years, another in two years, a third in one year, and finally Sindibad 
offers to make him wisest of all men in six months. The term of years 
proposed by the sages in the western versions varies from seven to one. 

4 Carmoly (p. 65) states expressly that these were the king's counsellors, 
and not the sages, who, he says, were now in hiding to avoid the king's 
anger; but, as Landau (p. 48) points out, the sage Aristotle is referred to 
by name at the end of the third story as having saved the prince's life by 
his stories on the preceding day (Cassel, p. 267); accordingly, although 
there is a slight confusion, it is evident that Carmoly is in error. 


beyond the bare outline. In the Greek and As-Samarquandi 
texts, the woman is condemned to wander through the streets 
on an ass, with her head shaved and her face soiled, and with 
two criers proclaiming her shame. In the Hebrew text, she 
is, at the prince's request, pardoned unconditionally. The 
Syriac text is fragmentary here. Of the western feature of 
condemning the queen to die the death prepared for the 
prince, there seems to be no hint in the eastern versions. 

A comparison of the four stories (canis, aper, avis, and 
senescalcus) common to the two main groups also shows many 
variations, but here, too, where the Mischle Sindbad differs 
from the Syntipas and other versions of the Eastern group, it 
will be seen to accord in several particulars with the Western 

(1). Canis. The story canis, the only one found in all 
versions of the Seven Sages, both eastern and western, exhibits 
in the earliest western versions no noteworthy variations from 
the prevailing type of the story in the East. In the Sindibdd- 
ndmeh it is a weasel or ichneumon which attacks the sleeping 
child ; in all other versions it is a snake. The child is left in 
charge of nurses in the western versions, a feature entirely 
foreign to the Eastern group. The derivative types, Dolo- 
pathos and Historia, introduce a bird (Dolop., a goshawk; 
H, a falcon) which wakes the child on the snake's approach. 
This and several other additions, especially to the Dolopathos, 
are not found in the types 8, K, and J.*, a circumstance which 
well warrants the inference that they were not in the western 
parent version. 

(2). Aper. This story, like canis, has been subjected to 
considerable alteration in the course of transmission, e. g., in 
the East, the boar comes to his death as the result of holding 
up his head in the expectation of more fruit (the sinews drying 
up) ; in the West, he is slain by the shepherd, who, descending 
the tree until in reach of him, " claws " him on the back until 
he falls asleep, and then dispatches him with his knife. But 


the special value in the collation of this story lies in the fact 
that the Hebrew text coincides with the Western group in 
having a man chased up the tree, while in the remaining eastern 
versions it is a monkey who thus flees from the boar. This 
coincidence, first noted by Deslongchamps (I. c., p. 110 n.), 
is one of the most striking agreements of 'the Hebrew text with 
the Western group. 

(3). Senescalcus. A comparison of the various versions of 
senescaleus reveals no eastern motive reproduced in the West 
which is not common to the entire Eastern group. The 
western version of the story agrees in general outline with 
the eastern, but is distinguished from it by the introduction 
of even more objectionable details than those which characterize 
its oriental original. The western texts vary in the method 
of punishing the seneschal : in S he is hanged ; in jfiT, JL*, 
and the prevailing sub-groups, he is banished by the king on 
pain of death in case he return. In the East the bathman 
(=: seneschal) dies by his own hand. 

(4). Avis. The essential features of this famous story have 
been preserved remarkably intact thoughout all versions. 
There are, however, two features which occur in the East 
only in the Misehle Sindbad which have been preserved in 
the western texts. These are (1) that the wife goes on the 
house-top in order to sprinkle water over the bird's cage, and 
(2) that she is aided and abetted in her efforts to deceive the 
bird by her maid. Of the first of these we have in no other 
eastern version any hint ; likewise, for the second, there is no 
real suggestion in any of the Eastern group besides the Misehle 
Sindbadj for, although there is mention elsewhere of the maid, 
it is only as having been suspected of informing on her mis- 
tress, and never in the r6le assigned her in the Hebrew and 
the western versions. 1 

1 The arguments made by Landau under avis are not valid. That the 
bird speaks Hebrew as well as Latin, is not true of any of the oldest 
western versions, but appears to be peculiar to H; while the argument 
from the killing of the bird in H and the Hebrew text is altogether in- 


To recapitulate then, the features peculiar to the Hebrew 
and the oldest western texts are as follows : 

(1). The seven sages are mentioned by name. 

(2). There is a rivalry between the sages in their efforts to 
secure the tutelage of the prince. 

(3). The sages, not the king's counsellors, defend the prince. 

(4). In aper, the adventure happens not to an ape, but to a 

(5). In avis, (a) the deception is practised on the bird 
through an opening in the house-top, and (b) the maid appears 
as an assistant of the faithless wife. 

A comparison with the Syntipas fails to bring out any 
feature exclusively common to it and the Western group. 
The same holds for the Syriac and later versions. The 
question is then narrowed down to the significance of the 
agreements between the Hebrew and the western texts. Are 
they only accidental, or have they a real significance ? Cer- 
tainly they do not prove a direct relationship between the 
Hebrew and any western version, as Deslongchamps and 
Landau have maintained ; nor are they sufficient to justify 
the thought of a connection of the Eastern and Western groups 
through intermediate literary stages; indeed, they yield no 
conclusive proof of anything with regard to the problem of 
relationship. Nevertheless, they are in a measure significant ; 
though some of them are in all probability accidental, yet it 
does not seem possible that all of them can be mere coinci- 
dences. They justify, at least, the negative conclusion that 
neither the Syntipas (nor the Sindban) was the eastern original 
whence sprang the tradition which culminated in the parent 
version of the Western group. And while they do not prove 
the Hebrew text to represent this eastern original, they 
do, nevertheless, establish this as a probability, with the 
only other alternative in the supposition that the eastern 
original of the Western group has been lost. 

valid, since the same feature is found in all eastern versions save the 
Syniipas, and would be in any case of little value for the purpose to which 
Landau would put it, since it is a simple and natural variation. 


I (c). The Romance in France and Holy. 

Between the eastern and western types of the Seven Sages, 
as has been seen, there is a very wide difference. Four of the 
original stories and the main outline of the eastern framework 
have been preserved in the western versions, but, as Comparetti 
has aptly said, " there is no eastern version which differs so 
much from the others as the whole Western group differs from 
the Eastern, whether it be in the form of the fundamental 
story or in the tales which are inserted in it." In explanation 
of this wide difference a basis has been assumed for the Western 
group in oral accounts. 

Where these oral accounts first took literary form has not 
been, and probably never will be, satisfactorily determined. 
Some have maintained an origin on Latin territory ; but the 
probabilities favor a French origin, though it is more than 
possible that the parent version was written in the Latin 

The oldest form, apparently, under which the western type 
has come down to us is the Dolopathos. There can be little 
doubt, however, that the more widely known Sept Sages de 
Rome, of which there survive many manuscripts dating from 
a period but a little later than that of the earliest version of 
the Dolopathos, preserves more nearly the form and contents 
of the western parent version. And it is under this form that 
the romance has acquired its marvellous popularity in France, 
whence it has penetrated into nearly every other country of 

With regard to the relationship of these two forms or groups 
under which the romance appears in the West, early scholars 
were very much in error. For a long time it was believed 
that the poetical version of the Dolopathos found its source in 
the Latin prose Historia Septem Sapientum-, 1 again, it was 
always assumed as fundamental that the Historia antedated 

1 The most widely known of all versions of our romance ; see below. 


and was the ultimate western original of the entire Western 
group, these two misconceptions pervaded the entire litera- 
ture on the romance during the first half of this century. The 
error of the first was first shown by Montaiglon in 1856, 1 and 
its utter absurdity was conclusively proved a few years later 
by Oesterley's discovery of the Dolopathos of Johannes, from 
which Herbert had made his poem. 2 The second was current 
even until the appearance of Gaston Paris's Deux Redactions' 
in 1876, in which the comparatively recent date of the His- 
toria, and its immediate dependence on J.*, has been placed 
beyond question. 

1 . The Dolopathos. The Dolopathos exists in two versions, 
the Latin prose of Johannes de Alta Silva and the Old French 
poem of Herbert. The latter is preserved, so far as is known, 
in but three manuscripts ; 4 of the former, there are known, 
besides the original manuscript discovered by Oesterley, three 
late copies pointed out by Mussafia, 5 an Innsbruck, 6 and 

1 In the preface to his edition of the Herbert version : Li Romans de 
Dolopathos, ed. Brunei and Montaiglon, Paris, 1856. 

8 This manuscript was discovered by Oesterley in 1873, and was published 
by him in the same year: Johannis de Alta Silva Dolopathos . . . ., Strasburg. 
See reviews by Paris, Romania, u, p. 481 f. ; by Studemund, Z.f. d. A., xvn, 
p. 415 f. and xvin, p. 221 f. ; and by Kohler, Jahrb. f. rom. u. engl. Lit., 
xiu, p. 328 f. Several manuscripts discovered by Mussafia ( Wiener Akad. 
Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. Cl., XLVIII, p. 246 f., 1864) prior to this, and at first 
supposed to be original, were soon shown to be fifteenth century copies 
of the older manuscript. 

'Published in the Soc. d. Anc. Textesfr. for 1876. For the Historia, see 

4 See Paris in Romania, n, p. 503. A leaf of a fourteenth century MS. of 
the Herbert version has been lately acquired by the BibliothSque Nationale 
Nouv. 934, No. 6 (Bulletin de la Soc. d. Anc. Textesfr., for 1896, p. 
71 f.). See also Haupt's Altd. Blatter, I, p. 119 f., for a' German version of 
six stories of the Dolopathos. 

6 See Wiener Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. Cl., XLVIII, p. 246 f. 
6 Also brought to light by Oesterley. 

7 Usually overlooked ; see Ward, Catalogue of Romances, London, 1893, n, 
p. 228 f. 


Johannes de Alta Silva, the author of the Latin original, 
was a Cistercian monk of the monastery of Haute Seille. His 
work bears the title Dolopathos, sive Opusculum de rege et 
septem Sapientibus. It was dedicated to Bishop Bertrand of 
Metz, who had jurisdiction over the monastery of Haute Seille 
from 1184 (when it was transferred from the see of Toul to 
the see of Metz) to 1212, during which period, since Johannes 
would naturally dedicate to his own bishop, we may safely 
place the composition of his work. Paris favors a dating 
between 1207 and 1212 (Romania, II, p. 501). 

The Old French poem of Herbert was made from the Latin 
prose text of Johannes toward the end of the first quarter of 
the thirteenth century (Montaiglon, 1223-1226 ; Paris, before 

This type of the romance diifers from all other western 
types in having only one instructor for the prince. For this 
reason it has been conjectured that it was founded on some 
oriental original, but there is no real evidence in support of 
this. In the suppression of the queen's stories, a feature in 
which it agrees with the JNachshebi version, equally as little 
indication of an immediate eastern original is to be found. 

The Dolopathos has only one story (cam's) in common with 
the Eastern group, and inasmuch as this, together with three 
other of its stories (gaza, puteus, and inclusa), is also found in 
the Sept Sages de Rome, it is reasonably certain that the monk 
Johannes was acquainted with some version of the latter type. 1 
There is only one alternative supposition, viz. that both types 
grew up independently of each other and almost contempo- 
raneously, the one drawing only one story from the traditions 
brought from the East, while the other drew this and three 
others in addition, with the further coincidence that both 
receive, as the result of like influence and environment, three 
stories (gaza, puteus, and inclusa) in common which were not 

1 See Comparetti to the contrary ; Vergil in the Middle Ages, translated by 
Benecke, London, 1895, p. 234 f. 


in the eastern framework. That such was the case is, to say 
the least, very improbable. 

But, in any case, the prose Dolopathos was made not from 
written, but from oral sources. This is expressly stated by 
its author who says he wrote non ut wsa, sed ut audita and 
is borne out by the introduction of the Lohengrin story, which 
appears here for the first time, 1 as well as by the variations to 
which both framework and stories have been subjected. 

The poetical version of Herbert is based directly on the 
Latin prose version of Johannes. It contains many details 
and several important episodes which do not appear in the 
text discovered by Oesterley, chief among which additions are 
(1) the story inclusa, which has been fused with puteus in 
the poem, and (2) a very interesting episode with which gaza 
has been supplemented. Gaston Paris 2 thinks that these were 
contained in Herbert's original, which he believes to have 
been an enlarged copy of the first draft of the work as seen 
in the Oesterley manuscript ; but whether they are to be thus 
explained, or are to be attributed to the independence of the 
poet, has not yet been definitely settled. 

The Herbert version is very long, containing nearly 13,000 
lines. In both length and style it stands in striking contrast 
to the Keller metrical version of the Sept Sages de Rome (K), B 
which, although it has nearly twice as many stories, has only 
5,060 lines. The Dolopathos has an introduction of about 
4,800 lines where K has but 68. 

The king in this branch of the Western group bears the 
name Dolopathos, and rules over the island of Sicily. The 
prince is called Lucinius. Before his birth it is predicted that 
he will become very wise, but will undergo many hardships, 
and will ultimately become a worshipper of the true God. 

1 See Todd, La Naissance du Chevalier au Cygne, Introduction, p. in f., in 
Publications of the Mod. Lang. Assn. of America, vol. iv, 1889. See also Paris's 
review in Romania, xix, p. 314 f. 

2 Romania, u, p. 500. 

3 See the dissertation of Ehret, Der Verfasser des Roman des Sept Sages und 
Berbers, Heidelberg, 1886. 


The prince's instruction begins when he has reached the age 
of seven. He is sent to Rome, and put under the care of the 
poet Vergil, whose figure is supreme throughout the romance, 
and gives to it one of its strongest claims upon our interest. 1 
The sages, who are, owing to Vergil's prominence, placed 
somewhat in the background, come up as in the other western 
versions, one each day and in a most mysterious fashion, 
always just in time to save the prince's life. The prince 
relates no story at all, but Vergil tells the eighth and last. 
The order of stories is as follows : (1) cam's (Dog and Snake), 
(2) gaza (King's Treasury), (3) senes (Best Friend}, (4) creditor 
(the Pound of Flesh episode of the Merchant of Venice), 2 (5) 
viduae filius (Widow's 8on), (6) latronis filius (Master- Thief \ 
(7) cygni eques (the fabled origin of Godfrey de Bouillon), (8) 
inclusa-puteus (Two Dreams and Husband Shut Out). 3 

2. The Sept Sages de Rome. The Sept Sages de Rome, in 
contradistinction to the Dolopathos, comprises a very large 
number of more or less closely related versions. Probably 
one hundred manuscripts of its type are already known, and 
many others, we may be sure, remain to be revealed by further 
research. The immediate source whence these have sprung 
has not come down to us. The date, too, of the parent ver- 
sion is uncertain, but, in view of its influence on the Dolopathos 
and the comparatively large number of thirteenth century ver- 
sions, it must be placed as early as 1 1 50, and it may fall in a 
time considerably anterior to this. 

The normal number of stories in this branch is fifteen ; of 
these the queen relates seven, the seven sages one each, and 

1 See Comparetti, Vergil in the Middle Ages, p. 232 f. 

'Ward, Catalogue of Romances, n, p. 122, makes the slight oversight of 
asserting that the casket-episode of the Merchant, of Venice is also intro- 
duced into the Dolopathos. 

3 These stories have had a wide currency, and, in several instances, a 
most interesting history. For the fullest collections of analogues to them, 
see the editions of Montaiglon-Brunet and Oesterley, and the appendix to 
the latter's edition of the Gesta Eomanorum. 


the prince the fifteenth. The scene of action is prevailingly 
Rome, though in two instances K and D it is Constanti- 
nople. 1 The emperor's name is Diocletian. 2 

The interrelation of the various sub-types into which the 
Sept Sages falls has been the subject of almost continuous 
investigation for more than half a century. The first serious 
attempt at an orderly classification was made by Goedeke in 
1866 (Orient und Occident, m, p. 402 ). He was followed 
two years later by Mussafia, 3 in a study which possesses great 
merit, and which served very much to clear the way for sub- 
sequent investigation. But it is to Gaston Paris above all 
that credit is due here for bringing order out of chaos. The 
Preface to his Deux Redactions is by far the most significant 
contribution to the study of the Seven Sages which has yet 
been made, and leaves but the one regret that he has not 
extended his investigations so as to include the problems of 
the origin and propagation of the romance. It goes without 
saying that the excellence of Paris's work has been recognized 
on all sides, and that his conclusions have been almost uni- 
versally adopted. 

Paris classifies in five sub-groups, as follows : 

1. S. The Scala Coeli abridgment published by Goedeke. 

2. K. The well known metrical version of Keller. 

3. H. The very large group, of which the Historia is the 

* 4. J. The Versio Italica. 

5. French prose versions (other than H), including A*, 
L, D* (V\ and M. 

1. 8. The first of these, the text contained in the Scala 
Coelij a compilation of the early fourteenth century by the 
Dominican Johannes Junior, is a Latin prose abridgment of a 
lost Liber de Septem Sapientibus. For the latter, Goedeke 

1 This is only partly true of D; see Paris, Deux Redactions, p. 1. 

8 There are several exceptions to this : in K he is called Vespasian ; in 
D*, Marcomeris, son of Priam (I) ; in H, Pontianus, the name Diocletian 
being transferred to the prince. 

3 Wiener Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. 01., LVii, p. 37 f. 


(who has published the text according to the Scala Coeli in 
Orient u. Occident, m, p. 402 f.) conjectures a date in the first 
half of the thirteenth century. An extract in the Summa 
Recreatorum (xv cent.), which agrees very closely with S, has 
been pointed out by Mussafia (Wiener Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. 
Hist. 01., LVII, p. 83 f.). 

8 differs materially from H, and is almost as far from K 
and Z)*. It stands nearest to L, having in common with it 
the two stories filia and noverca in the place of Roma and 
inclusa of the remaining types. The agreement with D*, in 
that the queen is defended on the last day by a champion, is 
doubtless a mere coincidence (Paris, I. c., p. vm). Its only 
influence seems to have been that exercised on L. For 
Goedeke's claim that it is the closest extant representative 
of the western original no sustaining argument has yet been 
brought forward. 1 

2. H. The type of the second group is the well-known 
Historia Septem Sapientum Romae. Buchner 2 enumerates six- 
teen manuscripts in which the Historia has been preserved. 
Its first edition appeared at Cologne in 1472, and the bibli- 
ographers report many of subsequent date. The latest edi- 
tion, and only nineteenth century reprint, is that of Buchner. 3 
An Old French translation, printed at Geneva in 1492, has 
recently been republished by Paris as the second text of 
his Deux Redactions (pp. 55-205). The Historia Calumnia 
Novercali (Antwerp, 1496) differs from it mainly in the 
omission of all Christian features. 

The Historia is by far the most widely known of all 
western versions, having had equally as great a vogue in 
some other European countries Germany for instance as in 
France. In English the Wynkyn de Worde text (to which 

1 Ward, Catalogue of Romances, n, p. 200, erroneously states that Paris 
upholds Goedeke here. 

3 Erlanger Beitrage zur englischen Philologie, v, p. 1. Of these six were 
first pointed out by Paris, /. c., p. xxxix, eight by Varnhagen, Eine Ilal. 
Prosaversion d. Sieben Weisen, p. xv. 

3 Erlang. Beitr., v, pp. 7-90. An Innsbruck MS. which dates from 1 342. 


the many English chap-book versions owe their origin), the 
Copland, and the Holland versions found in it their ultimate 
original. With the Germans the Historia type is practically 
the only one which has found acceptance, and the number of 
versions, either in Latin or German, which are contained in 
their libraries is very large. 1 It is under this form, also, that 
the romance has acquired its popularity in other Germanic 
and in the Slavonic languages. 2 

The history of opinion with regard to this type of the 
romance possesses much interest. Until quite recently, as has 
been seen, H was supposed to be the oldest member of the 
Western group. Goedeke, in 1866, was the first to break 
with this tradition, but without showing why. Paulin Paris 
followed in 1869, throwing the question open. 3 Comparetti, 
also, in the same year, expressed the opinion that H was far 
from representing the western original. 4 The matter was not 
satisfactorily cleared up until the appearance of Gaston Paris's 
book in 1876. The results of Paris's investigation (L c., p. 
xxvui f.) are to entirely dethrone H from the position which 
had been traditionally accorded it, and to establish for it a 
date in the first half of the fourteenth century, and an im- 
mediate basis on type .A*. 5 

The distinguishing features of jfiT, aside from its slight 
difference from A* in the order of stories, are the introduction 

1 For the first general discussion of the romance in Germany, see the 
preface to Keller's Li Romans des Sept Sages, Tubingen, 1837. A more 
comprehensive discussion of the German versions accompanies his edition 
of the Hans von Buhel metrical version, Diocletianus Le/jen (Quedlinburg, 

8 Keller enumerates versions, either in manuscript or in print, in Dutch, 
Welsh, Icelandic, Swedish, Danish, Polish, Hungarian, Russian, and Arme- 
nian ; see the prefaces to his two editions cited above. See, also, Murko, 
"Die Geschichte v. d. Sieben Weisen b. d. Slaven" in Wiener Akad. Sit- 
zungsb., Ph. Hist. Cl., cxxn, 1890, and " Beitr. zur Textgesch. d. H. S. S." 
in Zdtschr.f. vergl. Lit.-gesch., pp. 1-34, 1892. 

*Biblioph. Fran$ais, IV, p. 69 f. *Book of Sindibad, p. 47. 

5 It is hard to see how Landau, Quellen des Dekameron, 2d ed., p. 51 f., 
and a few others, can still persist in their adherence to the old view. 


of the stories amatores and amid (the latter appended to 
vatidnium), the fusion of senescalcus and Roma, and its 
unusual mass of details. 

3. K. The Old French metrical version, Li Romans des 
Sept Sages, was published by Keller, at Tubingen, in 1836. 
Of this version there exists only one complete manuscript, to 
which its editor gives a date in the late thirteenth century. 
A fragment of a metrical text agreeing closely with it in 
content, but differing slightly in order of stories, is preserved 
in MS. 620 of the Library of Chartres. 1 An edition of this 
has been promised by Paris. 

K has the same stories as Z)* and -A* 9 but in a different 
order. The agreement in order, as also in incident, is, as a 
rule, closest with jD*; in the stories vidua, Roma, inclusa, and 
vatidnium, however, K exhibits a very close, at times even 
verbal, agreement with A*. In explanation of this, the possi- 
bility of an influence of K on A* is precluded by the fact that 
the former is of earlier date ; hence it is necessary to posit for 
A* and K a common source, designated by Paris as V. 

4. /. The Versio Italica was first so styled by Mussafia in 
his study of the Italian versions, in Jahrb. f. rom. u. englische 
Lit., iv, p. 166 f., 1862. This group consists of six versions, 
three of which are in Latin. One of the latter has been 
brought to light only within the last few years; 2 one was 
published by Mussafia ( Wiener Akad. Sitzungsb., Ph. Hist. 
CL, LVII, p. 94 f.) in 1868, and is well known; and the third 
is the British Museum MS. Addl. 15685. 3 Of the Italian 
versions one is in verse, 4 but of late date, Rajna in his 
description (Romania, vii, pp. 22 f., 369 f. ; x, p. 1 f.) plac- 

1 See Paris, I. c., p. in n., and Paul Meyer in the Bulletin d. I. Soc. des 
Anc. Textes fran$ais, 1894, p. 40 f. The order of stories here is tentamina, 
Roma, avis, sapientes, vidua, Virgilius, inclusa, vatidnium. For the order in 
K and other versions, see the comparative table, p. 35. 

2 By Murko ; see Romania, xx, p. 373. 

3 Ward, Catalogue of Romances, n, p. 207 f. Hitherto unnoticed in this 

4 Edited by Kajna, Storia di Stefano, Bologna, 1881. 


ing it between 1440 and 1480. The two remaining Italian 
versions early underwent publication, one in 1832 by Delia 
Lucia/ the other by Cappelli in 1865. 2 

The order of stories in I is materially different from that 
in any other group or version. The queen in this group, 
instead of relating the first story, follows in each instance the 
sage, thus reversing the order, 2 becoming 1, 4-3, and so 
on. In consequence of this innovation, the number of stories 
is reduced to fourteen, the seventh being crowded out. 3 

In the absence of the filia-noverca and amatores-amici 
features, I groups itself with K, JD*, and A*. Its closest 
agreement in incident 'is with J.*, in which recent scholars 
believe it to have had its source. 4 

The modern Italian Erasto, which at one time was placed 
by itself as representing a free adaptation of the romance, 
and as bearing a somewhat similar relation to the remaining 
Italian versions as the Dolopathos to the prevailing French 
type, is now universally acknowledged to be an offspring of 
the Versio Italica. The Erasto has been very popular in its 
own country, and has been translated into other languages. 
The first edition of it appeared at Venice in 1 542, the last in 
1841. An English translation was made by Frances Kirkman 
in 1674. 

5. French Prose Redactions. The number of French prose 
redactions is very large. Paris already in 1876 knew of nine- 
teen manuscripts in Paris, besides the four in Brussels, and 
one in the Cambridge University Library. A number of 
others have been since pointed out. 5 

1 Delia Lucia, Novella antica scritta nel buon sec. d. lingua, Venice, 1832. 

2 Cappelli, II libro dei sette savi di Roma, Bologna, 1865. 

3 Jt is interesting to note here that the story thus discarded is senescalcus, 
a feature in which the Versio Italica has anticipated one of the English 
versions Cambridge Ff, n, 38 (F). 

4 See, for the most recent opinion, Rajna in Romania, vii, p. 369 f. 

5 These are mentioned under the discussion of the various groups into 
which they fall. 


(1). Paris classifies under the sub-groups D* (F), L, A*, 
and M. Of these M the Male Marastre is of little interest 
other than as showing the immense popularity of the romance 
in the thirteenth century. Only three manuscripts of it have 
so far been brought to light. In all these the emperor is 
Diocletian and the prince, Fiseus; Marcus, son of Cato, 
is given prominence; and, a feature which distinguishes this 
sharply from all other groups, six new stories are substituted 
for a corresponding number of those in the prevailing types. 
The original of M is believed to have been made on a very 
mutilated manuscript of the J.*-type. The new stories, which 
are of a much lower order than those they displace, are proba- 
bly the invention of the author. 1 

(2). With M may be associated the numerous ' continuations ' 2 
of the Sept Sages in French, of which the most important is 
the Marques de Rome. This type originated in Picardy in the 
thirteenth century. A version of it has been recently pub- 
lished by Alton (Li Romans de Marques de Rome, Tubingen, 
1889). In the introduction to this edition, the editor states 
that the romance was certainly not written later than 1277, 
and probably even forty years earlier (Alton, p. xiv). It 
seems to have met with considerable popularity, as Alton 
describes ten manuscripts which still survive. It doubtless 
had its ultimate basis in A* Alton thinks with M as an 
intervening stage, but Paris (Romania, xix, p. 493) denies 
this, maintaining that M is posterior to the Marques. 

(3). D*. The Version Derimee, a unique prose manuscript 
published by Paris as the first text of his Deux Redactions 
(pp. 1-55), is thus called on account of the numerous instances 
of rime still discernible in the text, and which prove beyond 
doubt a metrical original. 3 

1 See Paris, 1. c., p. xxiii f. 

s For these compare P. Paris, Les MSS.frangais de la Bibl. du Roi, Paris, 
1836, i, p. 109 f. More accessible in Leroux de Lincy, /. c., p. x f. 
8 This was first shown by Paris, Deux Redactions, p. V f. 


.D* agrees more closely with K than with any other known 
version. It cannot have been based on K, however, as Paris 
has shown, but the two doubtless flow from a common source, 
which Paris designates as V. From this V, also, the Chartres 
manuscript was in all probability made (Paris, 1. c., p. x.) 

(4). There remain the two families L and A*. The first 
of these comprises all versions of the type of the first Leroux 
de Lincy print, 1 in which the order of stories is arbor, canis, 
aper, medicus, gaza, puteus, senescalcus, tentamina, VirgiHus, 
avis, sapientes, noverca, filia. Only six manuscripts (four 
strictly according to L, and two slightly influenced by J.*) 
were known to Paris (1. c., p. 10 f.). To these must be added 
the Catalan version in ottava rima, edited by Mussafia ( Wiener 
AJcad. Dmkschr., xxv, p. 185 f., 1876), and five Old French 
prose manuscripts, partly fragmentary, enumerated by Paul 
Meyer in Bulletin de la Soc. des Anc. Textes fr. for 1894, 
p. 38 f. 2 

In its employment of the stories filia and noverca, L at once 
groups itself with 8. This, however, is not the only feature 
which the two types have in common. A general comparison 
with the rest of the Western group serves to show that (if we 
may except A* for the time being) 8 is also nearest to L in 
motive (Paris, I. c., p. xii). In order of stories, too, 8 and 
L fall together, the only differences being the reversal on the 
part of L of tentamina and puteus, and the suppression of 
vidua and vaticinium. Paris has therefore concluded that L 
was made on a manuscript of 8 which was mutilated toward 
the end, and that the scribe has in consequence had to trust to 
his memory for his last stories (L c., p. xm). 

1 Leroux de Lincy, Romans des Sept Sages, Paris, 1838, pp. 1-76. 

2 Meyer does not express himself definitely as to the class of but one of 
these the Chartres MS., which he groups with L. He implies, however, 
in his statement that the Bib. Nat. fragment (p. 39, n. 2) belongs to A*, 
that all the rest belong to L. Nevertheless, his notices leave the impres- 
sion that some of these manuscripts (possibly all except the two just 
mentioned) have not been handled, and that a part of them may yet be 
found to belong to the larger group A*. 


(5). A*, the largest and most important of all French 
groups, has been reserved for the last place. To this family 
pertain, besides its immediate members, the groups Marques, 
M, 7, and H; it is, then, the original, either directly or indi- 
rectly, of four-fifths of the manuscripts and prints of the 
romance which survive. It is not only the ultimate source 
of all Italian versions, whether direct, as with the D'Ancona 
edition, or indirect through /, but it is also, through H, the 
parent of almost all the manifold versions of the Sept Sages 
outside of Romance. And, what is of prime interest and 
importance to the English student, it was some manuscript 
of this group which furnished the immediate original of the 
Middle English versions. 

Under group A* Paris includes all manuscripts of the type 
of the Italian version published by D'Ancona. 1 He enumer- 
ates in his preface (p. xvi ), in addition to the Italian 
version whence the group is named, fourteen manuscripts 
in Old French, 2 several of which date from the thirteenth 
century. Four other manuscripts, pointed out since the 
appearance of Paris's work (Brit. Mus. Harl. 3860 [xiv cent.], 
St. Jno. Bapt. Coll., Oxf., 102 [xiv cent.], 3 Cambr. Univy. 
Liby. Gg. 6, 28, 4 and a fragment in the Bib. Nat.-Nouv. 
Acq. fr. 1263 [xm cent.]), 5 increase the number of French 
versions to eighteen. To this family, also, belongs the British 
Museum Italian prose version published by Varnhagen. 6 

The text of A* 7 falls into two parts, the first eleven 
stories (^4i*) being textually very close to L, while the last 
four (^2*)> as Paris has shown, agree very closely with K. 

1 11 Libro dei Sette Savj di Roma, Pisa, 1864. 

2 One of these is the manuscript 2137 of the Bib. Nat., published in part 
by Leroux de Lincy, pp. 79-110. 

3 For these two, cf. Varnhagen, Z.f. rom. Ph., i, p. 555 f. See also for the 
first, Ward, I c., n, p. 199 f. 

4 Romania, xv, p. 348. 

5 Delisle, MSS. lat. et fr. ajoutees aux Fondes, etc., Paris, 1891, I, p. 259. 
*Eine Ital. Prosaversion der Sieben Weisen, Berlin, 1881. 

7 By this is meant the second Leroux de Lincy redaction. Other versions 
of this type, as, e. g., MS. 6849 (new No. 189), are not so close to L. 


The composite nature of the text Paris explains as due to the 
fact that the scribe primarily employed a fragment of L con- 
taining only eleven tales, and that K, or its source, F, has 
been used for the remaining four tales. 1 And this seems to be 
borne out by internal evidence ; for A 2 * not only falls in with 
K as regards incident, but, as in the case of D*, there is often 
even a textual agreement in which entire lines that appear 
in K are reproduced. 2 Yet, as already observed, this metrical 
original of A?* cannot have been K, since there are a number 
of ^.^-manuscripts which antedate the latter, especially if we 
may accept Keller, who despite his maintenance of the priority 
of Kj ventured a date no earlier than 1284, or later in all 
probability than the composition of the English parent text. 
Moreover, a comparison of A%* with K and D* will show 
that each of the latter possesses features in common with J.* 
which are not found in the other. The original of A^ must 
therefore be sought in some other version than JT, probably, 
as Paris assumes, in F. 3 

1 Deux Redactions, p. xvin. 

~ Ibid., p. xix, for a citation of parallel passages from A 2 * and K. Almost 
as noteworthy agreement will be found in some of the remaining stories. 

3 But can this be final ? Is it not possible, however improbable it may 
seem, that the manuscripts of A* which have survived were ultimately 
based on a metrical text which preserved the -4*-order of stories (or, at 
least, was nearer the -4*-order than the K-, C*- or D*-order), and which was 
closely related with F? In this case, of course, L (the first eleven stories), 
would have to be explained as based on A* (rather than the reverse, as 
with Paris), and A 2* as representing a prosing of a portion of the metrical 
A*, to which K has very nearly approached. Against this view would 
be the strong evidence submitted by Paris. In favor of it, however, are 
the considerations (1) that this would better account for the popularity 
of the -4*-type during the first half of the thirteenth century; (2) that the 
Middle English versions both favor a metrical original and were based on 
a text nearer to K in many details than is the De Lincy print of A* ; (3) 
that to base A* on L, and consequently, as Paris maintains, ultimately on 
S, is to connect it with a different line of tradition from that which it 
seems to follow (cf. certain textual agreements with K which A*, L exhibit : 
p. 16 : " comme il fist au cheualier de son leureier " = K 1141-2 : " Comme 
il fist au cheualier, Ki atort occist son leurier ; " p. 39 : " II apela son senes- 
chal "= K 1509 : " Lors apiela son seneschal ; " p. 40 : " Vos gerrez auec le 


Resume\ Looked at externally the Western group falls 
into two main sub-groups, the Dolopathos and the Sept Sages 
de Rome. The Dolopathos, however, did not develop from 
the Eastern group independently, but must have had an 
ultimate basis (doubtless through an oral medium) on some 
version of the larger group. 

The Sept Sages de Rome, as regards order and content of 
stories, also falls into two groups, one represented by 8 and 
L, the other by K, D*, (7*, (F), and A* and its variants, J, 
H, Mj and Marques. Peculiar to the former group (8, L) are 
the stories filia and noverca, to the latter the stories Roma 
and indusa. 

Which of these groups represents most faithfully the lost 
western original is, at the present stage of our knowledge, 
impossible to determine, but the fact that the Dolopathos of 
Herbert contains the story indusa seems to point to the 
priority of the K-, D*-, J.*-group. 1 

With respect to the separate sub-groups, L may have been 
based on A* and 8, though the view of Paris, that it had its 
basis in 8 alone, carries with it greater probability. Either 
explanation leaves the origin of S unexplained. K, D* 9 (7* go 
back to the same lost metrical original, V. A* is probably to 
be explained with Paris as having its source in L and F, though 
this, as yet, has been by no means established. It is not 
improbable that a metrical version of A* existed at some time. 

roi"= IT 1531 : "Auoeques le roi vous girois;" p. 50: "Qui me ferra, je 
trerai ja"=.T3938: "Ki me ferra, je trairai ia"); (4) that we may still 
find in A*, what appear to be reflections of a versified original ; thus, p. 15 : 
" Celz que je mout amoie et en qui je me fioie ; " p. 23 : " Li sangliers vint 
vers 1'alier, si commenpa a mengier," and " quant il vit le sanglier, si s'en 
volt aler;" p. 33: "Quant eles virent lor pere trainer, si commencierent 
(a brre et) a crier;" p. 50: "Sire, il ot en ceste vile un clerc qui ot non 
Vergile." When all this is said, however, the case is by no means strong, 
and we would not presume to insist on this theory as presenting the proba- 
bility, by any means, which attaches to the view set forth by Paris; it is 
merely suggested as an alternate possibility, which has not yet been dis- 
posed of. 

1 See also, Paris, Romania, iv, p. 128, for the additional evidence in 
support of this view drawn from the story Roma. 



Table of Stories in the Western Versions. 1 

























fin AT* 

cuan PQP 













































ten tarn. 
























vid. fil. 






sen. Rom. 



latro. fil. 









in cl usa 







cyg. eq. 




vatic, -j- 

TTO-f QYVklrtl 




The enormous popularity of the Seven Sages in French 
found but a faint reflection in early English. So far, only 
eight Middle English versions have been brought to light, 
and as at least seven of these go back to the same lost origi- 
nal, it appears that the romance did not at first take a very 
firm root in English soil. Nor has it in more recent times 
acquired the popularity in England that it enjoyed in other 
countries of Europe ; for, besides the numerous chap-book 
versions, all which are of a low order of excellence, there 
have survived only two versions belonging to the Modern 
English period. 

Yet, despite this comparatively small popularity of the 
romance in England, it is very evident that the English 

1 The order of the fragmentary Old French metrical version C* is as 
follows : tentamina, Roma, avis, sapientes, vidua, Virgilius, inclusa, vaticinium. 
In the Varnhagen Italian prose version, puteus has been supplanted by a 
new story, which V. calls mercator. All the Middle English versions save 
F (for which see p. 62 of this study) follow the ^4*-order. The later Eng- 
lish versions belong to group H. 


versions have not received attention commensurate with their 
importance. Indeed, there is no department of the study of 
the Seven Sages, much neglected though all have unfortu- 
nately been, which has been more neglected than the English. 
Weber, the first in the field, offered with his edition of the 
Auchinleck text practically no introduction at all. 1 Likewise 
Wright, in the essay which accompanied the Cambridge text 
(Dd, i, 17), while he presented an abstract of the Historia, 
confined the discussion of his own text, singularly enough, to 
less than two pages. 2 Besides these, Ellis in his Specimens, 3 
Clouston in his Book of Sindibdd* and Gomme in the preface 
to his reprint of the Wynkyn de Worde edition 5 have sub- 
mitted analyses of the Weber, Wright, and Wynkyn de Worde 
editions respectively, and sundry others have made incidental 
references ; but there has so far appeared only one detailed 
and serious investigation of the problems which the English 
versions present the dissertation Ueber die mittelenglischen 
Fassungen der Sage von den sieben weisen Meistern, Breslau, 
1885, by Paul Petras. This scholar, in dealing with the 
source and inter-connection of the English versions, has 
arrived at some very gratifying results, but his work leaves 
much to be desired. Three of the eight Middle English 
versions have escaped notice at his hands, as also, for some 
unaccountable reason, the well-known edition of Wynkyn de 
Worde, and a good half of his conclusions may be overthrown 
by a more thorough investigation. In view, then, of this 
manifest neglect of the English versions another detailed 
study of them especially of the relations of the Middle 

1 Metrical Romances, Edinburgh, 1810, i, p. LV and m, pp. 1-153. 

2 The Seven Sages, Percy Society Publications, vol. xvi, p. LXVIII, London, 
1845; also in Warton's History of English Poetry, ed. Hazlitt, London, 1871, 
i, p. 305 f. 

3 Specimens of Early English Metrical Romances, London, 1811, in, pp. 

4 Book ofSindibad [Glasgow], 1884, p. 327 f. 

5 The History of the Seven Wise Masters of Rome, published for the Villon 
Society, London, 1885. 


English manuscripts will not, it is believed, be deemed 

II (a). The Middle English Versions. 

The Middle English group comprises eight known versions, 
in as many different manuscripts. All these are in verse, 
and in the octosyllabic or four-stressed couplet. 

They are as follows : Auchinleck (A), Arundel 140 (Ar), 
Egerton 1995 (E), Balliol College 354 (B), Cambridge Ff, 
n, 38 (F), Cotton Galba E, ix (O), Cambridge Dd, i, 17 (D\ 
and Asloan (As). 1 

I. Description of the Manuscripts. 

A. The Auchinleck MS. of the Advocate's Library, Edin- 
burgh, denoted throughout as A. For a general description 
of this manuscript, see Kolbing, Englische Studien, vii, p. 
185 f. The text of the Seven Sages occupies ff. 85a-99d, 
and is fragmentary at both beginning and end, only 2645 
lines remaining. It has been published by Weber, Metrical 
Romances, Edinburgh, 1810, in, pp. 1-153, where it com- 
prises lines 135-2779, the Cotton MS. (C) having been used for 
the remainder. For a collation of this edition with the manu- 
script, see Kolbing, Englische Studien, vi, p. 443 f. Copious 
extracts with an analysis may be found in Ellis's Specimens, 
London, 1811, in, pp. 1-101. With regard to date of com- 
position there is no internal evidence other than linguistic; 
since, however, the Auchinleck MS. dates from about 1330, 
the composition of A must fall before that time. 2 The form 

1 1 have handled and made transcripts of all these manuscripts save those 
which have been printed and the Asloan. Five of them (A, E, C, F, and 
D) have been studied either in whole or in part by Petras, and the Asloan 
MS. was also known to him through Laing's very incomplete description of 
it in the preface to his edition of the Holland text, p. xn. Of the Arundel 
and Balliol manuscripts Petras was apparently unaware. 

2 Cf. Morsbach, M. E. Grammatik, Halle, 1896, p. xr, and Brandl in Paul's 
Grundriss, n, 1, p. 635. 


hardly justifies a dating earlier than 1300. In text and 
metre A is, as a rule, very good, though in both there are 
occasional imperfections and corruptions. 1 The dialect is 
Kentish, though not of the strict type. 2 

Ar. MS. Arundel 140 of the British Museum, cited as 
Ar. Paper, dating from the first half of the fifteenth century. 
For general description, see Ward, Catalogue of Romances, II, 
p. 224. This text occupies ff. 152-165b, and is fragmentary, 
beginning with the conclusion of aper (3) and ending with 
the 21st line of vaticinium (15); 2565 lines remain. It is 
very much faded, and in many cases illegible, especially at 
the end of the b- and at the beginning of the c-columns. With 
regard to initial capitalization, it is very irregular. A line 
has been lost after 1. 618 ; after 1. 919 an extra line has been 
introduced with no corresponding rime. The text is metri- 
cally very poor, and many final e's have to be inserted in 
order to secure the required four stresses; there are also a 
number of imperfect rimes (such as yspede: saue, 243-4) 
and other textual irregularities ; nevertheless, Ar, as is shown 
below, is the closest representative of the lost M. E. original. 
The dialect is Kentish. 3 The text has not been published. 

1 There are many emendations which lie on the surface and which are 
sustained by the closely related versions Ar, E, etc. Some of these are : 
(1) for schild 1016 read schuld(e) cf. F 1487, Ar, B, E; (2) for swich 1031 
read syke or seke cf. Ar 91, etc.; (3) for tol of 2050 read to to/ cf. E 2082, 
etc. ; (4) for to-delue 2417 read go delaecf. B 2509, etc. ; (5) after He 2657, 
insert \>ou%t cf. Ar 1782, etc. 

8 A. S. y is regularly represented by the e-sound, though this may not 
always be graphic. Of the 27 determining rimes, 22, or 81 per cent., 
have the e-coloring. There is nothing in other developments to contradict 
this result. The only Northern forms in the rime are a pres. part, in 
-and, 1977-8, and two instances of the third pers. sing, of the present tense 
in 5, 615-6 and 937-8. 

3 To the development of A. S. y (stable or unstable, long or short) into e, 
there is only one certain exception : wyne ; syne, 691-2. Elsewhere we find 
only the e-quality; cf. nede: hyde, 383-4; ifet: ifcnet, 601-2 ; gardyner : fyr, 
863-4, 872-3; also 892-3, 939-40, 979-80, 1433-4, 1515-6, 1535-6, 1541-2, 
1583-4, 1761-2, 1847-8, 2059-60. The additional rime-evidence is alto- 
gether confirmatory of a Southern scribe : A. S. a > o unexceptionally, the 


E. MS. Egerton 1995 of the British Museum, 1 cited 
throughout as E. Ff. 3-54b. Paper, dating from the fif- 
teenth century, probably the second half. 2 Written in single 
columns, with initials in red. Very regular as regards capital- 
ization. Complete, containing 3588 lines, and bearing the 
title Seven Sages of Rome, with the colophon Explidunt Septem 
Sapientes. Before the first story, arbor, stands the simple 
rubric, " He[re] begynnythe the fyrste tale of the Emperasse;" 
before nine others, there is substituted for this a couplet indi- 
cating the contents of the story which follows, as e. g., canis 

(695-6) : 

1 Here begynnythe the tale of a knyght 
That cylde hys grehounde with unryght.' 

The stories avis, vidua, Roma, inclusa, and vaticinium have 
nothing corresponding to this. The dialect is Kentish, though 
less strongly marked than in Ar. 3 No edition of E has yet 
appeared. An extract, including 11. 22512358, accompanies 
the monograph of Petras, "Anhang," p. 54 f. 

B. MS. No. 354 of Balliol College Library, Oxford, 
denoted as B* Ff. 18a-54b. Paper, belonging to the early 

pres. part, (except buland : blynd, 1589-90) ends in -ng, the verb is Southern 
(save cry en: mene, 2556-7, where we have a Midland form), the past part, 
preserves, as a rule, the prefix, and rejects (in the case of the strong verb) 
the ending, etc. Within the line, however, there are occasional Northern 
forms, particularly of the pres. part., as buland, 1588, 1591, 1599, brynand, 
1922; but these are by no means the rule, the Southern form being in 
general preserved as well within the line as in the rime. 

1 For a general description of this manuscript, see Ward's Catalogue, u, 
p. 218 f. 

*See the sixth article: " Gregory Skinner's Chronicle of the Mayors of 
London, ending in 1469," ff. 113-122b. 

3 The usual development of A. S. y is e, or the e-quality, see the rimes 
of 11. 245-6, 577-8, 783-4, 845-6, 1323-4, 1545-6, 1799-1800, 1821-1822; 
but occasionally y, cf. kynne: lynne (O.N. linna), 1317-8 and wynne: syne, 
1635-6. The evidence is otherwise strongly indicative of a Southern scribe, 
though a few Northern forms are borne out by the rime ; cf. hondys : stondys 
(3d sing.), 439-40, also kynge: yonge, 93-4, and yonge: connynge, 3581-2. 

* The existence of this version of the Seven Sages was first pointed out by 
Varnhagen, in his Eine Ital Prosav. d. Sieben Weisen, Berlin, 1881, p. xi ; 
see in the same connection his review of Petras, Eng. Stud., x, p. 279 f. 


sixteenth century. 1 In single columns ; irregular in capitali- 
zation. Described in Coxe's Catalogus, I, p. 110, as in the 
hand of John Hyde. The text is complete, containing 3708 
lines. The first rubric, which contains the title, reads as 
follows : " Here begynneth ]?e prologes of the vii. sagis or 
VII. wise masters which were named as here-after ffollowing." 
Each story has a heading or title, as e. g., arbor: "The 
empresse tale off the pynote tree." At the end of the text 
stands the colophon : " Thus endith of the vn. sages of Borne, 
which was drawen owt of crownycles and owt of wrytyng of 
old men, and many a notable tale is ther-in, as ys beffore 
sayde. Quod Richard Hill." This manuscript contains very 
few abbreviations, and the language is much modernized. In 
line 1761 : a On the ffall suche as fell to a old man by his 
wif," we have two lines in one. The rime is, if anything, 
slightly better than in A, Ar, and E, but is, nevertheless, 
occasionally imperfect, cf. visage : noyse, 459-60 ; assonance, 
as in all other related M. E. texts, abounds ; often four lines 
rime together, and occasionally six, cf. 2583-8. The dialect 
is Southern. 2 No edition of the text has yet appeared, but 
the E. E. T. S. has for some time been advertising the entire 
manuscript as needing editing. 

P. MS. Ff, n, 38 (formerly marked More 690) of the 
Cambridge University Library, denoted as F. 3 Ff. 134a- 
156d. Paper, dating from about the middle of the fifteenth 
century. Written in double columns of about 40 11. to the 
column. Handwriting uniform ; irregular as to capitaliza- 
tion, though most lines begin with a capital. The beginnings 
of stories indicated merely by large initial capitals in red. 

1 Cf. Art. 31, "Memoranda of Kichard Hill," and Art. 98, "Names of 
Mayors (of London)." 

* Southern forms are sustained by the rime almost without exception. 
A. S. y is represented by both y and e, in about equal proportion ; the rimes 
in e are probably to be explained, however, as reminiscences of a Kentish 

3 Cf . Halliwell, Thornton Romances, Camden Society, vol. xxx, p. xxxvi f., 
and the Cambridge Univ. Lib. Catalogue of MSS. } IT, p. 408. 


The text is fragmentary ; ff. 141 and 144 (or less than 400 
11.) have been lost, and fol. 135 is in a mutilated condition; 1 
2555 11. remain. Criteria for determining the dialect are not 
abundant, as the manuscript is late and the forms are some- 
what mixed ; but the bulk of the evidence favors a Southern 
dialect. 2 The text has not been edited, although, in view 
of its uniqueness, it is not uninteresting, and in its last four 
stories is of considerable value. Extracts are given by Halli- 
well, Thornton Romances, p. XLJII f., Wright, The Seven Sages, 
p. JLXX f., and Petras, 1. c., p. 60 f. 

C. MS. Cotton Galba E, ix, of the British Museum, 
denoted as (7. 3 Ff. 25b-48b. Vellum ; in double columns, with 
initials in blue and red, and in a very plain hand of the first 
third of the fifteenth century. Complete, in 4328 11. Bearing 
the title ~pe Proces of Ipe Seuyn Sages. Each prolog and each 
story marked off by rubrics : in the case of the former, such 
as " Here bigins ]?e fyrst proces " (called " prolong " after the 
fourth story), with the latter, " Here bygins j>e first tale of 
J?e whyfe," etc., the number being given in each instance, 
and, in the case of the masters' stories, their names also. 
The dialect is Northern. Both text and metre are very 
pure; 4 the rime, especially, stands in marked contrast to the 
Southern versions, being almost free of assonance and the im- 

1 The Cambridge Catalogue fails to specify the leaves which have been lost. 
Petras (p. 8) and others go to the other extreme in asserting that the text 
is very incomplete. 

*A. S. a > o, and the forms of the verb, with the exception of the strong 
past part., where -en is the usual ending, are Southern. The scribe, how- 
ever, probably belonged rather to the middle or western South than to 
Kent, or its neighborhood ; cf. the rimes in y where the it-quality prevails : 
tyme : kynne, 813-4 ; wytte : pytte, 845-6 ; hym : kynne, 871-2 ; 1348-9, 1636-7, 
etc. The rimes bedd: hydd, 200-1, and kende: sende, 1890-1, are probably 
to be traced to the Kentish original. 

3 Cf. Ward's Catalogue, n, p. 213 f., for a general description of this manu- 

4 There are very few verses that are too short (among these are 84, 443, 
911, 1868, 1901, 1918, 2973), and almost none that are too full (cf. 843). 
Among the few inexact rimes are sages: message, 355-6; brend: assent, 2321- 
2; hew: mowe, 2842-3. 


perfections in which the latter abound. No complete edition 
of C has so far appeared ; but lines 1-134 and 3108-4328 
are printed in Weber, Metr. Rom., in, pp. 1 f. and 108 f., 
where this text has been employed to supplement A. The 
story avis, comprising lines 2411-2548, appears in the "An- 
hang " to Petras's monograph, p. 56 f. 1 

D. MS. Dd, I, 17 of the Cambridge University Library, 
cited as D. 2 Ff. 54a, col. 1 63a, col. 3. Parchment ; in 
treble columns; appears to belong to the end of the fourteenth 
century. 3 Textually very imperfect, and plainly the work of 
a careless scribe. Thirteen lines have apparently been lost, 
after 1312, 1417, 1696, 1719, 2094, 2293, 2695, 2840, 2960, 
3057, 3134, 3365, 3395. Irregularities in rime are numerous, 
but in most cases easily emended. 4 The dialect is southeast 
Midland, with an intermixture of Northern forms. 5 The 
text has been edited by Wright (Percy Society for 1845, vol. 
xvi, pp. 1-118). For a collation of this edition with the 
manuscript, see Kolbing in JEnglische Studien, vi, p. 448 f. 
An analysis of the romance on the basis of this text appears 
in Clouston's Boole of Sindibdd, p. 327 f. 

As. MS. Asloan, in the possession of Lord Talbot de 
Malahide, Malahide Castle, Ireland, denoted by As. For a 
general description of the manuscript (quoted from Chalmers), 

x An edition of this manuscript by the lamented Dr. Kobert Morris was 
announced by the E. E. T. S. many years ago ; and an editor was advertised 
for for some time after Dr. Morris's death, but in the recent issues of the 
publications this advertisement no longer appears. It is the purpose of 
the present writer to prepare a critical edition of this text within the near 

8 For a general description of this manuscript, see the Cambridge Cata- 
logue, i, p. 15 f.; Skeat, Publications of E. E. T. S., vol. xxxvin, p. xxnr f.; 
and Halliwell, Manuscript Rarities of Cambridge, p. 3. 

3 Morsbach, for some unknown reason, would place it earlier, "1300?"; 
see his M. E. Orammatik, p. 9. 

4 Lines 337-9 may be explained as a triplet, but it is better to suppose 
that a verse has been lost. A more probable example of the triplet in 
M. E. is found in A, 915-7. 

5 See Skeat, E. E. T. S., vol. xxxvin, p. xxv, and Brandl, in Paul's 
Grundriss, IT, 1, p. 635. 


see Schipper's Poems of Dunbar, Vienna, 1891, Pt. 1, p. 5 f. 1 
The text of the Seven Sages occupies ff. 167-209, and bears 
the title The Buke of the sevyne Sagis. According to Laing 2 the 
text is incomplete, extending to only about 2800 lines, and the 
twelfth and thirteenth stories are wanting entirely. It begins, 

'Ane Empriour in tymes bygone 
In Kome callit Dioclesiane ' 
and ends, 

' Syne geld till heuyn and sa do we 
Sayis all Amen for cherite. 1 

Its dialect is Scottish. 3 A complete transcript, made by D. 
Laing in 1826, exists in the University Library, Edinburgh. 
An edition, long ago promised by Varnhagen, is expected to 
appear shortly in the Scottish Text Society Publications. 

2. Interrelation of the Middle English Versions. 

With regard to the relationship of the Middle English 
versions there has been a variety of opinions, and, as in the 
case of the French versions, there has existed no little ignor- 
ance and error. The general tendency has been to consider 
any and all versions of the M. E. period independent trans- 
lations from the French. This has been nowhere better 
demonstrated than in Petras's dissertation, where it has been 
boldly maintained that at least four of the M. E. versions 
(Ay C, F, D) are unrelated save through a common foreign 
original. And while others have been more conservative 
than Petras, the prevailing opinion seems to have been that a 
majority at least of the M. E. group are independent of each 
other. It will be one of the results of this study, however, it 
is believed, to show that seven of the eight M. E. versions 

*A further description, together with an extract containing the story avis, 
has recently appeared in Englische Studien (xxv, p. 321 f.), through the 
kindness of Prof. Varnhagen. 

z The Seven Sages in Scottish Metre ( Holland), Edinburgh, 1837, p. xn. 

3 Chalmers says of it: " Evidently written by a Scotish versifier in the 
reign of James IV, as a number of Scotish terms occur, which would not 
have been introduced by a Scotish transcriber of an English work." 


are ultimately related through a common M. E. parent ver- 
sion (x), and it is held not improbable that the eighth (As) 
is also thus related to x. 

All the M. E. versions, however, do not represent the same 
line of tradition. One of the texts, D, as later shown, is a 
development from #, independent of the rest of the M. E. 
group, and Varnhagen holds that As was made directly from 
the Old French. The remaining versions fall together into 
one connected group, all related through a common original 
(y), which goes back to x, but which was not identical with 
it. This group will be designated as Y. 

The close relationship of the texts which constitute this 
group Y is confirmed by evidence from all sides, but it can be 
no more effectively illustrated than by a comparative table of 
lines. For this purpose a line-for-line comparison of the 
section which the five most important texts of this group (A, 
Ar, E, B, C) have in common has been made, the comparison 
being restricted to identical lines and similar rimes, with the 
following results : l 

(1) 4 = 1816 11. (4) 5=1931 11. 

Total IL Ident. II. Sim. rimes. Total II. Ident. II. Sim. rimes. 

Ar ..... 1916 234 722 A ..... 1816 154 537 

E. ...... 1843 125 636 4r...l916 137 646 

B ...... 1934 154 537 -E.....1843 83 558 

C ...... 2067 26 * G ..... 2067 13 281 

(2) Ar = 1916 11. (5) C= 2067 11.' 

A ...... 1816 234 722 A ..... 1816 26 * 

E. ..... 1843 169 746 4r...l916 19 413 

B ...... 1931 137 646 E ..... 1843 11 352 

C ...... 2067 19 413 B ..... 1931 13 281 

(3) E= 1843 11. 

A ...... 1816 125 636 

Ar ..... 1916 169 746 

B ...... 1931 83 558 

11 352 

1 An illustration of the method by which these figures have been arrived 
at may be found in the appendix to this study. F, owing to special features 
which are discussed below, is excluded from this comparison. 

2 Petras, p. 11, finds A and C t the entire texts being compared, to have 
1096 similar rimes. 



But this comparison, while valuable as far as it goes, serves 
only to show a connection between the texts compared ; it 
does not suffice to show the nature of this connection. 
Accordingly, in addition to this, a comparison of motive or 
incident as a safer basis for classification has been made 
for the entire Middle English group ; and it is by means of 
this, in the main, that our results as to the interrelation of the 
M. E. versions have been reached. The limits of this publi- 
cation, however, preclude the submitting this except in part, 
so that only the tabulation for the story vidua (Matron of 
Ephesus) appears here. 

(1) A certain knight had a 








A* 80, u un 

wife. (A, Ar, B, D state 

vicomte en 

that he was a sheriff.) 


(2) They loved each other 








exceedingly. (Ar only 

relates that he loved her. 

In F, he will not permit 

her to go half a mile 

from him, "neither to 

church nor to cheping.") 

(3) A new sharp knife is 







given them. 

(4) While playing with this, 

f in the 

i t \ th limb 
he cuts her < .? 



[ womb. 



A*, "el 

(C, in the finger; F, in 


the hand; D is silent 

as to part. F adds that 

the wife was paring a 


(5) For dole he dies on the 







morrow. (F adds that 

he asks for a priest be- 

fore he dies.) 

(6) This was great folly. 








(7) He was richly buried 








on the morrow. (B does 

not specify that it was 

on the morrow. E, B, C 

state that this occurs 

after a mass. D adds 

that the place of burial 

was outside the city, 

since there were objec- 

tions to his being buried 

within the city.) 

(8) The wife refuses to leave 









the grave. 

(9) Her friends try to com- 







A*, "ses lig- 

fort her. 


(10) They suggest that she is 






young, and may marry 

bele." (No 

again, and beget chil- 

mention of 


A*, but see 

K and the 



(11) She rejects their sugges- 





A* 81. 

tions, assuring them that 

she will die on his grave. 

They are sorry. 

(12) They make for her a 






A*, "une 

"logge" on the grave. 


(13) Also, a fire. (D, she 







makes the fire herself. 

An addition of D is 

that she sends for her 


(14) Her friends leave her; 








she moans. 

(15) On the same day three 








A*, "a celui 

thieves have been taken. 


(E, on a day before ; B, 

silent ; F, one thief.) 

(16) They were knights who 







had wasted the country, 

and had been hanged as 

soon as captured. 



(17) A certain knight was to 
guard the bodies for the 








A*,"un chev- 
alier la 

first night. (A adds that 


he was to watch for three 



(18) Becoming cold, he spies 
the fire in the " church- 








A*, " cime- 

haw," goes thither, and 

finds the lady. 

(19) He asks to be let in. 







(20) She refuses his request. 







In A she swears by St. 

(John, in Ar, E, B, by 

"St. Austyn.") 

(21) He assures her that he 






A* (K 3768, 

will do her no harm, 


and that he is a knight. 

rart le fil 


also D* 37.) 

(22) She lets him in; he 









warms by the fire. (In 

D there is no mention 

of the wife's refusing 

to permit the knight to 


(23) He sees her making 







dole, and tells her she 

is foolish to do so, that 

she may yet marry some 

knight. She replies that 

he was so kind that she 

may not love any other. 

(D adds that she begins 

to love him when she 

finds him to be a knight ; 

and that he lies with 


(24) By and by he thinks of 







his charge. 

(25) And fearing guile, he 









rides fast to the gallows, 

only to find one of the 
bodies stolen. (A, Ar, E, 

B, he rides on a foal.) 



(26) He fears he will lose his 








advancement if unable 

to recover the body. 

(27) Bethinks himself that 





A* (the order 

"wimmen cou}>e red." 

of 26-7 re- 

versed in the 


(28) So going to the widow, 








A* (cf. K, 

he asks counsel of her. 


(29) She agrees to help him if 








he will marry her. (B, 

E, she proposes only that 

he be her "leman," 

he suggests matrimony. 

In Cj she asks if he has 

a wife. ) 

(30) This being agreed to, she 









advises that they dig up 
the body of her husband, 

which is done. 

(31) But the knight objects 







to hanging up the body. 

(32) The lady puts a rope 








round the neck of the 

corpse. (E, the knight 

does it.) 

(33) She draws the body up, 






and hangs it fast. 

(34) The knight is aghast at 






(35) The knight recalls that 








A* 84, " une 

the thief had a wound in 

plaie en la 

his head, and fears that 


the " guile may be per- 
ceived" unless the hus- 

band have a similar one ; 

this the wife advises him 

to make with his sword. 

(36) He declines to do it. 







(37) She asks for his sword, 








proposing to do it herself. 



(38) She smites with all her 









strength " amid the 

brayn." (In A she 

wounds him with a 


(39) The knight now knows 






her to be false. 

(40) He remembers that the 









thief's fore-teeth had 

been broken out. (Z>, 

F, in agreement with 

A*, K, have two teeth; 

but see D* 39, toutes les 


(41) She proposes that he dis- 
figure her husband inlike 






manner, but he refuses. 

(42) She does it herself with 









a stone. (In A, Ar, E, 

J5, F, she knocks out all 

his teeth ; in Z), only two. 

F inserts here another 

disfiguration the loss of 

two fingers. In Z>, the 

body is not hung up till 

after the mutilation. ) 

(43) The wife states that she 







has now won his love, 

which he denies, adding 

that he would marry her 

for no treasure, lest she 

serve him as she has 

served her lord. 

(44) The sage wishes Diocle- 








A* 85. 

tian such fortune if he do 

not respite the prince. 

(45) He asks that judgment 







be suspended till the 

morrow, when the prince 

will speak for himself. 

(46) The emperor agrees to 
this, and the crowds dis- 











(47) The emperor goes to 









his bower; the empress 

" lours " on him. ( A, Ar 

add that his " sergeants 

make solace " with him.) 

(48) The emperor is brought 
abed with riche baudekines. 



(49) The empress is silent till 







the morrow. 

(50) When she asks if he has 






A*, K 2347, 

heard the "geste," etc., 

" feste aus 

why men made a feast of 


fools. 1 (Ar, "HowKome 

was in great dread." D 

likewise makes no men- 

tion of the feast of fools.) 

A. A is naturally the most valuable of all Middle Eng- 
lish versions, since it is found in the oldest manuscript which 
has come down to us, and doubtless in many respects best 
preserves the original. In view of its age one would at least 
hope to find in it either the parent English text or the closest 
representative of it, but a close collation with the remaining 
manuscripts shows that it is neither the one nor the other. 
It is not even a link in any one of the chains of development. 
This is established by the fact that A often abridges where all 
the other texts of Fare true to the French. 2 

There are, however, some features in which A appears to 
reflect the original more faithfully than any other member 
of its group. Thus, we find in A 666, "Deu vous doint 
bonjour" = jL 15, " Diex vos doint bon jor," where none 
approximate A save B 652, "And sayde, deux vous garde 
bonjour;" or, in A 743, "The levedi stod in pount tournis"= 

1 For the origin of this feature, see Paris, Romania, iv, 128. 

2 This phenomenon does not seem to be confined to our text, but appears 
also in other poems of the Auchinleck MS., as has been already observed 
by Kolbing ; cf. his Arthour and Merlin, iv, p. GLUT, and his Bevis of Ham- 
toun, E. E. T. S., Ex. Ser., LXV, p. XLI. 


L 17, "sur le pont torneiz," where C reads "on a vice," and E, 
J5, " in the castle on high." And there are sundry details of 
the original which A reproduces in common with only one 
other text ; but these are easily explained by the circumstance 
of A's closer proximity in time to the parent text, in conse- 
quence of which it has suffered less from the ravages of time, or 
at the hand of the modernizer, than have some of the later texts. 

The abridgments of the original which characterize A fall 
chiefly in the conclusions of certain stories. In fact it is a 
noticeable feature due probably to the desire to avoid repeti- 
tion that it is almost entirely in the ' epilogaciouns ' (as some 
of the H- texts name them) that A has made any serious altera- 
tions, while there is a very marked agreement, and only 
occasional freedom, exhibited in the body of its stories. 

This tendency to abridge is manifest throughout the ^L-text. 
It is most violent, however, in the stories aper y gaza, Vlrgilius, 
and avis. Chief among the passages in other versions which 
find nothing corresponding in A, are the following : (1) aper, 
AT, 1-20 = E 949-968 = B 933-948 = C 1041-1058 = 
Z, p. 25 ; (2) Virgilius, AT 1280-1288 = E 2204-2212 = B 
2244-2252 == C 2370-2376 = L, p. 55 ; (3) avis, AT 1433- 
1446 = E 2367-2372 = B 2401-2414 = Z, p. 59. 

There is, in addition to these, in the conclusion of gaza, a 
fourth passage which A abridges radically, and which, since it 
is a comparatively close paraphrase of the Old French, may 
be cited here as giving a graphic illustration of this pecu- 
liarity of A, and, at the same time, as showing once for all 
its unoriginality, and its subordinate importance in settling 
the question of the interrelation of the English versions. 
This passage is, in Ar, 11. 456479 ; the corresponding lines 
are, in E 1401-1426, B 1393-1420, and C 1472-1490. Cita- 
tion is made from Ar as best representing the lost text Y. 

Ar 456 ' Loude )>ei gonne on hym to crye, L 34. ' Chascun li escria : 

And saide, lentylyon kyj>e >y mastry, Ha! mestre, or pansez de 
Helpe >y disciple at Ms nede. vostre deciple.' 

pe master a-lyjt J>o of his stede, . . . ' et descent de son 



460 And grete )>e Emperowr on his kne. '. . . et s'en vient devant 

UnneJ>e wold he hym see. l'empereur, si le salue : . . 

pe Emperour saide, J>ou fals man, Li empereres respont au 

Be hym J>at al men-kynde wan, salu qui li a dit : Ja dex 

pou art fekell and fatour, ne vos beneie.' 

465 Losenger and eke traytow. 

A, why syr leue lord ? 'Avoi ! fet messires Lan- 

So nas I neuer, saue \>j word. tules, pourcoi dites vos ce? 

Syr, J?y gentyll wyue late us her, ' Ge le vos dirai, fait li 

And with goddes helpe we schull us empereres, je vos avoie 

skor. baillie mon fil a aprendre 

470 I gow toke my son to loke et a endoctriner, et la pre- 

And for to tech hym on boke, miere doctrine que li avez 

And Km first bygan to tech, faite, si est que vos li avez 

By-nome his tong and his spech, la parole tolue ; 1'autre qui 

And taugt hym sith with mor stryf, veult prendre ma fame a 

475 Ffor to nyme forth my wyf. force. Mes ja Dex ne vos 

ge schull wite >eir-of nougt ; en doint joir ; et bien sa- 

Bot when he is to de)>e brougt, chiez que tantost comme 

I schull dampne J>e and \>j feren il sera morz, vos morroiz 

479 To drawe and honge by )>e swyren.' apres, et seroiz destruit 


As against this A has only the following lines (1387-92) : 

'And th' emperour wel sone he fond : 

He gret him faire, ich understand. (= Ar 460) 

Th' emperour saide, so God me spede, (= AT 462) 

Traitour, the schal be quit thi mede ! 

For mi sones mislerning, 

Ye schulle habbe evil ending ! ' 

Other less important omissions occur in the conclusions to 
aper and puteus : aper the people invoke the master to help 
his disciple (L 25, C 1064, E, B); puteus the empress 
threatens, on learning of the respite of the prince, to leave on 
the morrow. Ar 6245, "And saide scho wold away at 
morowe. Nai dame, he saide, jef God it wyll. . . ." = L 38, 
"je m'en irai le matin. Non ferois, dame . . . . se dieux 
plest." The same incident is omitted in the J.-text of avis ; 
cf. L 59, AT 1440-1. 

In the body of the stories, as already observed, this tendency 
is not nearly so marked. There is in fact no significant 


feature of the stories of the original which has been preserved 
in any other English version that does not appear also in A. 
The nearest approaches to such are the following, both from 
the story Roma: (1) An old wise man (= J.* 86, "un home 
viel et ancien. . . .") makes the proposition that the city be put 
in charge of seven sages, a bit of detail which is omitted by no 
other English version ; (2) after these sages have kept the 
city for a month, the food supply is exhausted ; cf. Ar, E, B, 
C, F, and A* 86, " vitaille failli a ceuls." In addition to 
these there are certain other minor details in which one or 
more of the related English versions preserve the French 
more closely. For example, in medicus (A 1149), Ypocras 
pierces the ton in 1000 places, as against Ar (208), E, B, F, 
which agree with L 28, -c- broches. Likewise in Virgilius, 
A (1977-8) translates the O. F. "arc de coivre et une sajete, 
bien entesse " (L 50) as " arblast .... and quarel taisand," 
while the remaining members of group F render more literally 
bow and arrow; in sapientes, C, Ar, E, B have the masters 
ask Merlin his name, in agreement with L 60, u et li demand- 
fcrent commant il avoit a non," where A abridges ; to which 
add that A makes no mention of the divine service at the 
burial of the husband in vidua, where E, B, C, fall in with 
J.* 80, and that in the same story, A (2618) has the knight 
come to the gallows to watch three nights, while Ar, E, B, C 
fall together in their adherence to the French A* 81, " la 
premiere nuit," and we have the sum of A's noteworthy 
variations within the body of its stories. 

Additions in A are even less numerous. An occasional 
extra couplet (so far as the evidence of the remaining English 
versions goes) now and then crops out, as e. g., 645-8, and we 
also find here and there additional details, such as (1) in Vir- 
gilius, where the poor, in addition to warming themselves at 
the magician's wonderful fire, are represented as also prepar- 
ing their food by it (A 1973); and as (2) in sapientes, Herod 
is described as the richest man in Christendom (A 2340), 
neither of which appears in any other text, whether English 


or Romance. But such additions are very few in number, 
and, in any case, too insignificant to play a prominent part in 
solving the problem in hand. They are, nevertheless, con- 
firmatory of the evidence already adduced, with which they 
unite in demonstrating conclusively the unoriginality of A. 

We have, then, in A a secondary development from the 
lost y. It cannot have been based on any manuscript of which 
any other text of Y is a close transcript, since it preserves 
the original in some places more faithfully than any other 
M. E. text. On the other hand, it cannot have been the 
source of any of the known M. E. manuscripts, since all these 
preserve features of the French which A omits. 

Ar. Nearest to A stands the fragmentary text from MS. 
Arundel 140. This version, while most important as repre- 
senting in all probability the lost y more closely than any 
other known text, has been singularly neglected by former 
investigators. Petras makes no mention of it, whence we 
draw the inference that he was unacquainted with it. And 
apparently the only notice which has been accorded it, beyond 
Varnhagen's several references to it, 1 is that of Ward in his 
Catalogue of Romances (u, p. 224 f.). From a comparison 
of the introductory lines of Ar with the corresponding passages 
in A y E, C, Ward observed that its affinities seemed closest 
with E-, and this indeed holds for the conclusions of several 
of the stories (Ward deals with a conclusion ; cf. our parallel- 
ling of lines for medicus, in Appendix), where A has been seen 
to be often free, and where Ar, in consequence, frequently 
agrees more closely with any other text than with A. It does 
not hold, however, as regards the stories themselves, where 
E yields the first place to A. 

Except in these conclusions, Ar agrees with A very closely. 
Their intimate relation is evident at once from our line-for- 
line statistics on p. 44. Of the 1916 lines of the Jr-section 
(= A 1816), 234 are identical with lines in A, and there are 

1 First referred to in his Eine Ital. Prosaversion d. Sieben Weisen, p. xi, 
and later in his review of Petras, Eng. Stud., x, p. 279. 


722 similar rimes. Next comes E (1843 11.) with 169 iden- 
tical lines and 746 similar rimes, a slightly larger percentage 
of rimes than for A } and an apparent discrepancy, which is, 
however, easily reconciled by the fact of A's characteristic 
curtailments; B (1931 11.) has 137 lines identical with Ar 
and 646 like rimes, and (7, which comes last, has only 19 lines 
identical and 413 similar rimes. 

But the closer relationship of Ar to A develops conclusively 
only from a comparison of details. Here, while a careful colla- 
tion of Ar with all other members of Y reveals no noteworthy 
bit of detail in common with any other single text when con- 
trasted with A y there are several interesting and significant 
agreements of Ar with A against the rest of Y. Among these 
are the following : (1) A 1462, " Ich wille bicome wod and 
wilde," which is identical with Ar 552; in E 1498, the 
empress (who is speaking here) seeks to slay herself (cf. L 36, 
"seroie-je morte"). (2) A 1580, "And he com als a 
leopard " = Ar 668, "pane cam he rynnyng as a lyvarde." 
(3) A 1588, "Bihote hem pans an handfolle " = Ar 676, 
" Behote heme pens a pours full." (4) A 2396, "Al to loude 
thou spak thi latin " = Ar 1518, "To loude ]?ou spake J?y 
latyn." (5) A 2744, "Withe riche baudekines i-spredde" = 
Ar 1868, "With rich clones all byspred." None of these 
verses have anything corresponding in any other English text. 
Doubtless some of them are only accidental, but such cannot 
be the case with all. Their evidence is well supported by 
such further agreements as in senescalcus, where A and Ar 
unite in retaining the twenty marks of the original, other 
M. E. texts varying, or as in vidua where these two agree in 
that the wife is cut in the womb, while E, B preserve the 
French in the thumb (A* 80, el pouce), C states that the 
wounded part is a finger, E the hand, and D is indefinite. 
Of these agreements there can be only one explanation, namely 
in the assumption of a connection between the two texts. 
What the nature of this relation is, however, can be best 


determined after a collection of corresponding data for the 
other manuscripts. 

In comparing the remaining texts with Ar, one is at once 
struck with the remarkable agreement of B, E with A, Ar. 
These four versions have a number of features in common 
which do not survive in C, F, or D. Thus (1) in gaza, the 
son stabs himself in the thigh (= L 33, en la cuisse), where 
C, F are free, the one reading cheke, the other honde. (2) In 
senescalcus, the king falls sick " by God's vengeance " (not in 
L also omitted by C, D, F omitting the entire story). (3) 
Again in the same story, the king offers twenty marks or 
pounds for a lady to lie with (= L 40, xx mars), where C 
reads ten pounds, and D simply " gold and silver." And this 
is still more apparent in a line-for-line collation, as is suffi- 
ciently demonstrated in the Appendix. 

At the same time, also, one cannot but remark certain 
occasional agreements of Ar with E, B in opposition to J., For 
instance, (1) the king in senescalcus, with the former, has 
great delight in women, where A on the contrary, in agree- 
ment with the O. F., as also with C, D, describes him as 
disdaining women above all things (L 39, " II desdaingnoit 
fame seur toutes riens "). And (2) in sapientes, the sages in 
Ar, E, B ask respite for seven days, where A, C give four- 
teen days, F 12, L 4-8, and K 15. Likewise (3) the servants 
of the king in sapientes dig under his bed " four feet or five " 
in Ar, E, B, while A makes no mention of the distance, but 
says ten or twelve men dig ; so L 62, xx homes. To which 
is to be added (4) the agreement of Ar, E, B in having the 
husband in vidua (Ar 1756) swear by 8t. Austyne; by 
St. Johain in A (2630). Nevertheless, these are not of such a 
nature as to contradict the classification of Ar with A, but 
merely indicate that in such cases, Ar best preserving the 
original, independence has been asserted by the poet of A. 

But in view of these and of A's frequent abridgments, we 
cannot look for the basis of Ar in A, nor as it is hardly 
necessary to add, after the citation of textual agreements with 


A in E or jB, and still less, for even more obvious reasons, 
in C or F. The marked agreement of AT with A, however, 
begets the assumption of a development of the former, parallel 
with the latter, from a common source r, through which 
they both go back to y. 

Certain agreements of Ar with E against all other versions 
including A (treated more at length under E) are not alto- 
gether easy to reconcile, but owing to Ar's nearness to other 
texts A in particular as against E, it is impossible to con- 
sider Ar as derived from it ; we are led rather to the converse 
assumption, of a partial connection, or contamination, of E 
with Ar, or, in more likelihood, with the latter's immediate 
source r. 

That Ar so far as it goes, best preserves the lost M. E. 
original is borne out on all sides : (1) by its close agreement 
with the texts A and E, which otherwise best reproduce this 
source ; (2) by the fact that F in the last four stories (in 
which we should expect a close adherence to its original) is 
closer to it than to any other text; and (3) that while A, 
especially, and E, B, in a less degree, often add or omit lines, 
Ar almost never adds, and in only rare cases abridges. 1 

However, that no manuscript which has survived was based 
on Ar follows from its occasional freedom, as e. g., (1) its 
rimes to 171-2, 227-8, 463-4, etc., which are parallelled by 
no other text, and (2) in Roma the names of Julius and July, 
where all other texts better preserve the Genus (Janus) and 
January of the French. 

E. With the exception of Ar, the Egerton MS. would be 
of most value in preparing a normalized text, since it next 
best preserves the original, and especially since it is complete. 

The value of E is considerably impaired, however, by the 
fact that its author or more probably its scribe has made 
an unusual number of textual abridgments, as a rule for 

1 The only addition in the first 1900 11. is 1871-2 : 

' When day bygane to sprynge, 
And j>e foules mery to synge.' 


single couplets only, yet in a few cases for a half-dozen or 
more lines. Some of these are the following : (1) after 996 
= A 991-2, (2) 1024 =J. 1019-20, (3) 1216 =A 1211-2, 
(4) 1400= A 1385-6, (5) 1500= A 1465-6, (6) 1530 =A 
1500-1, (7) 1558 =A 1529-30, (8) 1578 =A 1549-50, (9) 
1646 =J. 1615-6, (10) 1652=^1 1623-4, (11) 1662 =.4 
1633-4, (12) 1784 =J. 1749-50, etc., and, most radical of 
all, (13) after 2472= .A 2424 f., where ten lines have been 
lost. 1 In consequence of this, E is somewhat shorter than 
either of the other complete texts, B and C. For the 2564 
lines of the Arundel fragment, it has only 2365 ; and this 
number in reality should be reduced 18 lines, since the couplets 
with which E heads nine of its stories, and which have been 
included in this numbering, did not belong to the original, it 
is safe to assume, and should not, for purposes of comparison, 
be regarded as part of the text. 

But beyond these slight abridgments, the author of E has, 
in the handling of his original, exhibited almost no independ- 
ence. One looks in vain for such abridgments as characterize 
A, as also for significant additions such as are found in F and 
C. Excepting such occasional freedom as the assigning to 
the incident in Roma the date of the first of January, and the 
changing of the barber in tentamina into a borowe a scribal 
error, doubtless we shall find scarcely one other feature ex- 
clusively peculiar to E, until we have reached almost the end 
of the poem, when the poet for once appears to assert his inde- 
pendence, and we have in consequence the very interesting 
addition that 

' whenne that his fadyr dede was, 

He lete make a nobylle plas, 

1 The additions are less numerous. Among those which are parallelled 
by no more than one other text, or are peculiar to E, are (1) 986-7 (after 
A 974), (2) 1015-6 (a. A 1012), (3) 1245-6 (a. A 1238), (4) 1621-2 = A 
1591-2, (5) 1693-6 (a. A 1664), (6) 1761-2 (a. A 1726), (7) 1809-10 (a. A 
1780), (8) 2097-2103 (a. A 2068), (9) 2291-4 (a. A 2246), and (10) 2349- 
51 (a. A 2298). 


And a fayre abbeye he lete begynne. 
And vii. schore monkys brought thereyn, 
And euyr more to rede and synge 
For hys fadyr wit^-owte lesynge.' (3561-6) 

All other important variations in E are repeated in some 
one or more of the related M. E. versions. The agreement 
here is closest with B and Ar. Its near relation to the latter 
has already been shown, and it has been pointed out that 
there are features in which the two are alone ; and there are 
also cases in which the two are alone in textual abridg- 
ments : e.g. Ar 227-8 =.#1171-2. It has also been seen 
under Ar, that B in several instances falls in with E, Ar, as 
against A, C, F. 

It remains to point out some of the motives common to 
E, B versus the remaining texts of Y. The most important 
of these are the following: (1) arbor lords and ladies begin 
to weep when they see the prince led forth to be hanged ; 
(2) arbor Bancyllas assures the emperor that the prince 
will recover his speech; (3) sapientes both omit the detail 
of A, Ar, C that Merlin declines the offer of money made 
by the man whose dream he has interpreted; (4) vidua 
the wife is cut in the thumb, where other texts have vari- 
ously womb, finger, and hand ; as also (5) vidua the knight's 
disregarding the widow's suggestion that he knock out her 
husband's teeth ; (6) Roma the sage who makes the propo- 
sition for saving Rome is called Junyus (A, C, F, Gemes ; Ar, 
Julius; D, Gynevcr). In several of these, to wit 3, 4, 5, it will 
be observed, E, B are truest to the French. 

Such evidence as this precludes the thought of a basis of E 
in Ar, but in view of the agreements between the two already 
noted, and, especially, of the fact that there is a greater num- 
ber of Jr-lines than of .ZMines identical with E's (cf. p. 44), 
it does not seem improbable though I am unable to prove it 
that the author of E has known and been partly influenced by Ar. 

On the other hand there is abundant evidence of an all but 
immediate connection between B and E\ (1) in the agree- 
ments in details just cited, and (2) in the textual omissions 


and additions which the two have exclusively in common. 
Thus, of the thirteen .J-omissions collected above, six (1, 7, 
9, 10, 11, 12) are also in B; and of the ten additions cited in 
the foot-note (p. 58), three (1 , 8, 9) are common to J9, or a 
total of 9 out of 23 a remarkable showing when it is borne 
in mind that in ten of these cases E is alone, agreeing in only 
one case (abridgments 9) with any other text than B. 

Despite these, however, E cannot have been based on J5, 
since it preserves in agreement with other texts notably 
Ar features of the original which B omits. 

In the next section it will be shown, also, that B was not 
based on E, and it will be further demonstrated that the two 
are related through a common source. 

B. The Balliol text, like E, is complete and of late com- 
position. The analogy between the two does not stop here, 
however ; there are many things which bind them together, 
not only when looked at externally, but also from an interior 
point of view. One of the most striking phenomena which 
they have in common, and which one cannot but remark in 
comparing them with Ar and the remaining F-texts, is the 
tendency to reverse the order of words, or to substitute 
synonymous or analogous expressions, in consequence of 
which the identity of the line and often the rime is destroyed. 
This is equally as prominent in B as in E, if not more so. 
In B especially, the change of epithet often flows, one feels, 
from a desire to modernize, rather than from a conscious 
effort, as might be supposed, to conceal the source. 

In some other respects, however, B and E are very unlike. 
For instance, while it is characteristic of E to drop out one 
or more couplets for every column, B is exceptionally free 
from such slight curtailments, while its additional couplets 
are comparatively numerous. 1 Moreover, while E is at first 

l ln the first 1000 lines of the part selected for a line-for-line comparison 
(=B 933-1951), B has 16 couplets which do not appear in any other 
manuscript, and which were accordingly, in large part in all probability, 
its own additions. E, on the contrary, has only 4, or one-fourth as many 
(1015-6, 1245-6 and 1693-6). 


close to the original more so by far in the first thousand 
lines than anywhere else and becomes more and more free, B 
exhibits just the reverse tendency, and we find it in the last 
third of the poem textually almost as close to the original 
as is E. 

As regards incident, B is usually more free than any 
one of the texts so far treated. Its chief variations in the 
nature of additions largely are the following : (1) aper 
the herd fills both arms and sleeves (later laps) with the haws; 

A, E, laps = L 23, girons; C, Z), hood. (2) medicus the ille- 
gitimate father of the sick prince, called in the remaining 
members of Y either the earl or the king of Naverne (= L 27, 
li quens de Namur) is not named. (3) puteus besides the 
feature peculiar to F, viz. that the burgess would only marry 
some one from a distance, B adds that he also would marry 
no poor woman, with the additional information that he 
already had had two wives. The feature of A, E, Ar } that 
he made a covenant with the bride's father, does not appear in 

B. (4) senescalcus while in the remaining texts the steward 
is banished, in B he is put to death and by pouring molten 
silver and lead down his throat. This incident, which consti- 
tutes the most violent freedom of -B, is apparently borrowed 
from Virgilius, where Crassus dies a similar death. The 
punishment in either case is fitted to the crime. (5) tenta- 
mina the wife wishes to love the parish priest, where A, Ar } 
E, F, C have simply priest = L, provoire (but see D* 27, 
Messire Guillaume le chappelain de la parroise). (6) sapientes 
they meet with the old man after two days; other texts not 
definite as to time. (7) Roma the town is put in charge of 
two wise men; in other texts it is seven. (8) inclusa the 
knight has travelled only one month before he comes into 
the land of his lady ; according to other M. E. versions it is 
three months (K, D*, A* 89 3 trois semaines; but cf. Varn- 
hagen's Ital. Prosaversion, p. 36, tre mesi. (9) inclusa the 
wife's ring had been given her as a New Year's gift, an 
invention of B. 


But while B has thus many features peculiar to itself, it 
possesses very few exclusively peculiar to itself and any one 
other text, a circumstance which renders the problem of its 
relations somewhat difficult of solution. We may resort, 
however, to the verse-omissions or additions, and it is signifi- 
cant here that the evidence from motive -comparison (submitted 
already under E] which pointed to a relation with E, receives 
very strong confirmation. In almost every instance in which 
B agrees in an addition or omission with only one other text, 
this text is E. Thus, in the first thousand lines of the con- 
stant element in Y (= B 934 f.), there is a total of ten such 
variations, of which nine are in agreement with E the tenth 
being with (7, an agreement which can only be explained as a 
coincidence or, at least, as signifying nothing. The agreements 
with E, however, cannot well be accidental. They offer strong 
confutation of the evidence of the line-collation (p. 44), which 
seems to indicate a closer relationship with A or Ar. 

That B was not based on either of the latter A, Ar 
follows from the fact that it preserves certain features of the 
original (cf. 3, 4, 5 of motive-agreements of E, B, p. 59) which 
they have either lost or altered. 

And that both B and E go back to y independently of each 
other is rendered improbable in the highest degree by their 
agreements in omissions and additions. We are forced then to 
the assumption of the existence at some time of a manuscript 
denoted by s which served as the common source of B 
and E. 

F. There is no one of the M. E. texts of the Seven Sages 
which has been more imperfectly reported than that contained 
in the Cambridge University MS. Ff, n, 38. Wright as early 
as 1845 was acquainted with this version, and printed in the 
introduction (p, LXX) to his edition of D the opening lines, 
but vouchsafed no further description of the text than that it 
presented many different readings from A and was much 
mutilated. And Petras, on the basis of this description, and 
with the aid of about 190 lines of the text, has inclined to the 


view that F is nearer to C than to any other M. E. version. 1 
Neither Wright nor Petras, however, has made reference to 
the description of Halliwell in his Thornton Romances (Cam- 
den Society Publications, xxx, p. XLII f.), and both were 
evidently ignorant of it. 

The description of Halliwell is the most reliable which has 
up to this time appeared ; yet in one or two instances it, too, 
is inaccurate. For example, the thirteenth story of F has 
been overlooked entirely; again it implies that there is only 
one new story introduced into this version, the one which 
he prints on p. XLIII f. In reality there is a second story in 
F which is peculiar to it, the ninth story, to which Halliwell 
gives the name The Squyer and his Borowe. This tale is 
complete and runs as follows : 

' Hyt was a squyer of thys centre, 
1115 And full welbelouyd was he. 

Yn dedys of armys and yn justyng [145 b.] 

He bare hym beste yn hys begynnyng. 

So hyt befelle he had a systur sone, 

That for syluyr he had nome, 
1 120 He was put yn preson strong, 

And schulde be dampned, and be hong. 

The squyer faste thedur can gon, 

And askyd them swythe anon 

What byng he had borne a-way ; 
1125 And they answeryd, and can say, 

He had stolen syluyr grete plente ; 

Therfore hangyd schulde he bee. 

The squyer hym profurd, permafay, 

To be hys borowe tyll a certen day, 
1130 For to amende that he mysdede, 

Anon they toke hym yn that stede, 

And bounde hym faste fote and honde 

And caste hym yn-to preson stronge. 

They let hys cosyn go a-way 
1135 To quyte hym be a certen day. 

Grete pathes then used he, 

And men he slewe grete plente. 

Moche he stale and bare a-way, 

And stroyed the centre nyght and day. 

a See his dissertation, p. 31. Cf. also Varnhagen, in his review of Petras, 
Englische Studien, x, p. 281 f. 


1140 Bot upon J>e squyer )>oght he nothyng 

That he yn preson lefte lyeng, 

So that tyme came as y yow say, 

But for the squyer came no paye. 

He was hanged on a galowe tree. 
1145 For hym was dole and grete pyte, 

When the noble squyer was slon, [145 c.] 

For hym morned many oon. 

That odur robbyd and stale moche )>yng, 

And sethyn was hangyd at hys endyng. 
1150 Thus schall be-tyde of )>e, syr Empmmr, 

And of thy sone, so gret of honour.' 

Otherwise HalliwelPs description is characterized by the 
strictest accuracy, and leaves no room for the assumption, 
apparently made by Petras, of an identity in the order of 
stories between F and the remaining M. E. versions. 

The correct order of stories in F is as follows : (1) arbor, 
(2) puteus, (3) aper, (4) tentamina, (5) gaza (end of), (6) vidua, 
(7) Riotous Son (beginning of), (8) canis (end of), (9) Squyer 
and Borowe, (10) avis, (11) sapientes, (12) medicus, (13) Roma, 
(14) inclusa, and (15) vaticinium. Eight stories then (1, 3, 5, 
10, 11, 13, 14, 15) retain their usual order. The two new 
stories, 7 and 9, supplant senescalcus and Virgilius, taking their 
respective order. For the remaining five stories, 2 changes 
place with 8, 4 with 12, 6 with 2, 8 with 4, and 12 with 6. 
For this order there is no parallel either in other English or 
in foreign versions, and there can be little doubt that it was 
original with the ^-redactor. 

In content, also, .Fis very unique. In some cases the orig- 
inal story has been altered almost beyond recognition. This 
alteration consists largely in textual abridgments, but it is also 
very evident in the many new incidents that have been intro- 

The introduction, in contradistinction to the stories of the 
first part, is but slightly abridged. It exhibits several more 
or less interesting variations, but the only one of any signifi- 
cance is the assigning to the king's steward the distinction 


(accorded the king's retinue in the other texts) of making the 
petition which saves the prince's life the first day. 

'Then come forthe the steward, 
And seyde, syr, thys was not forward, 
When that y helde the thy londe, 
When ii. kynges bade )>e batell with wrong, 
And then ]>ou swere be heuen kyng 
Thou schuldest neuer warne me myn askyng. 
Geue me thy sones lyfe to-day, 
Yentyll Emperour, y the pray, 
And let hym to-morowe be at J>y wylle, 
Whethur K>u wylt hym saue or spylle. 
I graunt the, seyde the Emperour, 
To geue hym lyfe be seynt sauyowr.' (380-391) 

Arbor is very much abridged, the story proper comprising 
only twenty lines. There is no mention of the burgess's going 
away from home, nor of the trimming away of the branches 
of the old tree. 

Of cam's only a short fragment is left, for which compare 
Halliwell, Thornton Romances, p. XLIV. 

Aper has to do with a "swynherde" who has lost a "boor," 
and who 

' durste not go home to hys mete 

For drede hys maystyrs wolde hym bete,' 

but climbs a tree, and is making a repast of acorns when the 
wild-boar of the forest comes up. 

Medicus is one of the last four stories, hence agrees faith- 
fully with its original. 

Only the conclusion of gaza has been preserved. 

Puteus has undergone radical alteration: (I) The curfew 
of the original is omitted. Instead of it there is a law in 
Rome that whosoever shall be found away from home at 
night with any woman other than his wife shall be stoned 
to death on the morrow. (2) The lover here is a " squire of 
great renown." (3) The burgess uses a rope in trying to get 
his wife from the well. (4) He has already had two wives 
before his marriage with the one who figures here. This 


feature has been transplanted from the introduction to tenta- 
mina, where it properly belongs. 

Senescalcus and Virgilius do not appear in F. 

Tentamina is characterized by the addition of a fourth trial, 
the killing of the knight's hawk. Other features are (1) the 
assigning to the wife the office of the gardener in the first 
trial (she fells the tree, and sets " dokys and nettuls " in its 
stead), (2) the omission of mention of the church as the meet- 
ing-place of mother and daughter, and (3) the transference to 
puteus of the ' two- wives '-feature. 

Avis, though textually free, contains no unusual details 
other than (1) that the lover is a priest, and (2) that the wife 
is killed by the enraged husband. 

In sapientes, however, there are several striking variations : 
(1) The sages build a " horde-house" just above the city gate, 
which renders the emperor blind whenever he tries to pass it 
in going out of the city. (2) There is no mention of Merlin's 
first dream-interpretation, a feature in which F agrees with 
D, an agreement, however, which can only be accidental 
since F contains the search for and meeting of the sages with 
Merlin, which we find no hint of in D. 

Vidua has the following peculiar features : (1) The husband 
will never let his wife go a half-mile from him, " neither to church 
nor to cheping." (2) The wife is paring a pear when she cuts 
herself. (3) There is mention of only one thief, and he is not 
alluded to as a knight. (4) A " pyke and spade " are used in 
digging up the corpse. (5) In addition to the mutilations 
usually recorded, F adds a fourth, the cutting off of two 
fingers which the knight claimed that the thief had lost. 

The last three stories, Roma, inelusa, and vaticinium, offer 
essential agreement in detail with the other texts of Y. 

The variations of F are thus seen to be very numerous. 
Yet, significant though many of them are, they tell only half 
the story. The whole truth is revealed only when it is con- 
sidered that along with these, and partly consequent upon 


them, the length of the poem has been reduced by about 
one-third, or to little more than 2500 lines. 

And what is most noteworthy about this abridgment is 
that it is not carried through the entire text, but extends only 
through the eleventh story. Up to the conclusion of this 
story the greatest freedom prevails, old incidents are rejected 
and new ones introduced at will, and, again resorting to 
figures for forcible illustration, the text is reduced from a 
normal 2500 lines to scarcely more than 1000. 1 In the 
remaining four stories, however, there is, as has been seen, 
close agreement with the remaining texts of Y. 

How to account for this wholesale mutilation to which F 
has subjected its original is not an easy problem. One would 
think of a basis for the first part in oral accounts, but this is 
rendered extremely improbable by the fact that throughout 
this part there is frequent agreement of rimes, and not unusual 
identity of lines, with other M. E. versions. Or again, there 
is a possibility that F was made from some very fragmentary 
manuscript, but there is no substantial basis for this supposi- 
tion, and the changed order of stories is distinctly against it. 
The most probable view, by far, seems to be that the poet had 
before him a complete manuscript, which, for some reason, 
possibly to conceal his source, he has for the first eleven stories 
arbitrarily altered ; and that beginning with the twelfth story, 
having grown tired of his task, he has for the remaining stories 
reproduced his original with fidelity. 

'With the acceptance of this explanation, the problem of F'a 
relationship is rendered comparatively simple; for, if the 
variations of the first part are attributable to the poet, this 
part is of little value for purposes of comparison, and we are 
accordingly restricted to the last part as the basis for any 

For this part there is comparatively close textual agreement 
with E, jB, C, Ar, and A (the last two unfortunately frag- 
mentary here in part). No single important detail and a very 

1 For the corresponding part, E has 2593 lines, and B, 2658. 


small percentage of the rimes have been changed, while lines 
identical with one or more of the other texts are numerous. 
The agreement is closest with Ar as a rule, with E next in 
order ; thus, for the 845 lines (F 1440-2285) which the three 
texts have in common, only 53 lines of F are identical with 
lines in E, while the corresponding figure for Ar is 116. 
Again, for this section Ar has agreement with F in 26 couplets 
which do not appear in .#(^1476-7, 1490-1, 1694-5 [B, A\, 
1714-5, 1726-31, 1738-9, 1754-5, 1774-7, 1790-1, etc). 
But despite this affinity with Ar, .F cannot have been based 
on it, for in one case (F 2280-1) Ar lacks a couplet which both 
Eand .Fhave preserved, and in other cases, it has made inde- 
pendent additions (cf. Ar 1896-7, 2374-7, 2384-5). This 
slight evidence is everywhere well supported : on the one 
hand we. find B, though much farther removed than E or Ar, 
nearest F (cf. B 1095 = F 1578); again A will be found to 
be nearest (cf. A 997 = F 1464, A 1016 = F 1487, A 1048 
= F 1518, A 1088-9 = F 1553-4) ; while in other instances 
several will agree as against Ar (cf. A 2762 = B 2848 F 
1679, and A 2751 = E 2762 = B 2833 = F 1662). 

In the face of this otherwise contradictory evidence, it is 
impossible to find the source of Fin any one known manuscript. 
At the same time there is nothing to indicate a partial basis 
on any two of them, since some exclusive agreements with 
each of the other closely related texts are found. On the 
contrary, the evidence from all sides combines to show that F 
goes back to y independently of any other known manuscript. 

C. Petras, although he showed a close agreement of C 
with A 52 lines identical and 1296 with similar rimes 
classed it apart from A, and as only related with it through 
a common O. F. source. 1 His own figures, however, as 
Varnhagen has already pointed out, justify quite another 
conclusion ; for it is inconceivable that two independent trans- 
lations from a foreign source should have 52 out of about 
2500 lines identical, or 1300 with like rimes. The rather are 

1 See his dissertation, p. 21. 


we to conclude that C is ultimately based on the ultimate 
common original of A, Ar, E, B, F, and belongs with them 
to group Y. 

Of all M. E. texts C is the fullest and, from a literary 
point of view, the most perfect. At the same time it is, with 
the exception of F, the freest of the texts which comprise Y. 
This freedom, however, does not consist in the changed order 
of stories nor the wholesale mutilation of text which charac- 
terize F- nor is it violent or spasmodic. It flows from 
an independence or individuality of a much higher type, which 
neither eliminates old motives nor introduces new ones of a 
startling nature, but which contents itself, on the one hand, 
with a slight variation of the episode (generally in the nature 
of additions), on the other, with the enlargement and embellish- 
ment of the often more or less lifeless language of its original, 
in both cases with the purpose of heightening the poetic effect. 
So that, while we see in A the most important of the M. E. 
texts from an historical viewpoint, in AT the most faithful 
representative of the lost y, we have in C preeminently the 
most perfect poem, holding, as it does, in language, style, and 
metre, the first place in the early English group. 

As regards fidelity to the original, as already suggested, C 
does not occupy a very high rank. Its variations, however, 
consist rather in amplification than in invention, as is well 
illustrated by the fact that, while 600 additional lines have 
been interwoven into the text, there are only the following 
noteworthy variations of incident : (1) The step-mother in 
bringing about the prince's downfall seeks counsel and assist- 
ance from a witch (297). (2) In arbor, the tree with which 
the story deals is a pineapple-tree ; A, E, B y F read pynnote- 
tree, and D, apple-tree. (3) The queen in medicus states that 
it has been twelve years since the Earl of Naverne had visited 
her (1167) ; other texts indefinite. (4) The patient in the same 
story is advised to " Ete beres fless and drink ]?e bro " (1184). 
A, AT, E, B, " beef's flesh with the broth " (E, " with the 
blood ") ; L 27, char de buef. (5) There is mention of only 


two clerks mgaza, where the remaining English and the French 
texts have seven, five of whom are stationed away from the city 
(1319). (6) In the same story the father alone goes into the 
tower Cressent, while in the other texts both father and son 
go (1340). (7) In tentamina, the history of each of the two 
deceased wives is related separately; in other texts it is simply 
stated that the husband had survived two wives (1879). (8) 
In the same story, also, it will be noted that only the right 
arm of the wife is bled. (9) In VirgiHus, the two brothers them- 
selves fill the two " forcers " ; elsewhere the King has them filled. 
Other variations here are the changed order of incident in 
burying the treasure, and the omission of the name of the 
Emperor (Crassus). (10) There is, in avis, no mention of a 
maid as assisting the faithless wife. (11) The lord of the 
castle in inclusa is playing chess when the knight rides up 
(3294). (12) The son in vatidnium learns of the whereabouts 
of his father through a vision (4135). 

"We may judge from this enumeration how faithfully C has 
reproduced the subject-matter of the original. It has altered 
very few details, and none radically, while no single significant 
feature, either from the body or from the end of its stories, 
has been omitted ; at the same time, only an occasional bit of 
detail has been added, a remarkable showing, indeed, when 
the large increase in the number of lines is considered. 

But there is more specific evidence of C's fidelity to its 
original. There are certain details in which it appears to give 
a more faithful reflex of the Old French than any other M. E. 
text. Thus, in aper, the boar on reaching the tree finds 
" hawes ferly fone " (987) ; cf. L 23, " s'il se merveille mult 
durement de ce qu'il ne pot autretant trover des alies comme 
il soloit faire devant." According to other M. E. versions the 
boar finds no haws at all. Another illustration may be had 
from inclusa, where C (3264) preserves the Hongrie of the 
French (A* 89) as the land into which the knight finally 
comes in search of his lady ; M. E. variants are Pktys in Ar, 
and Poyle in E, F, and D. 


And there are also instances in which C is in agreement with 
only one other text in its preservation of the French : (1) With 
A in its rendering blanche leuriere (K 2604 ; L 45, only leu- 
riere} by gray bitch, where Ar, E, B render greyhound, F 
simply hound. (2) With F in giving, in Roma, the informa- 
tion as to the origin of the word January at the beginning of 
the Janus-episode ; other M. E. versions, where they preserve 
this detail, depart from the O. F. order in placing it at the 
conclusion of the story. 

It is to these facts in the main that we have to resort to 
determine C's immediate relations ; for the theory of a direct 
translation from the O. F. can no longer be defended in the 
face of the evidence from a comparison of rimes, etc. From 
this comparison it is evident that C is nearly related to the 
other versions of group Y. That it cannot have been based on 
any one of them, however, follows from its agreements (just 
cited) with the French where the remaining M. E. texts are 
free. And this also derives confirmation from the features 
which it has exclusively in common with only one M. E. ver- 
sion and the O. F., for neither of the two M. E. versions in 
point here (A and F} can possibly have been its original. 

We have, accordingly, to assume for C an independent basis 
in the lost text y. Whether one or more manuscripts inter- 
vene between C and y cannot be determined so long as they 
are not forthcoming ; in any case there seems nothing to sup- 
port Varnhagen's proposition (Eng. Stud., x, p. 280) of a 
" miindliche Ueberlieferungsstufe " between the two. 

D. Version D, as compared with the texts so far con- 
sidered, is unique, and cannot be classed with them in group 
Y. Though it is written in the same metre as the remaining 
M. E. versions, and while it preserves, also, the .A-order of 
stories, it differs from each and every text of Y much more 
radically than any one of these differs from any other. And 
so great has this difference seemed that scholars have been 
unanimous in assuming for D an immediate basis in the Old 
French. The thought of a near kinship with any other M. E. 


version appears never to have been entertained. "Wright's 
testimony is to the effect that "The two English metrical 
versions (by which he meant A and D) are altogether different 
compositions ; but .... were evidently translated from the 
same original. . . ." l And the views of Petras (p. 44 f.) and 
others are of like import. Scholars without exception seem 
to have blindly accepted Wright's view, with no effort what- 
ever to test its validity. 

That Wright's assumption is unwarranted, however, may 
be demonstrated, it is believed, beyond question. And it 
will be the purpose of the following pages to make good this 
assertion. With this end in view, we may first bring together 
the chief variations in incident which D exhibits. 

The introduction of D contains no significant alteration 
of the original. A unique feature is the naming of the queen 
Helie (variant Elye, 223) where the French is silent, but 
where I^has the name Milicent (or Ilacenf). In not giving a 
name to the prince it falls in with the French ; other M. E. 
texts call him Florentine. There is a slight enlargement in 
the account of the meeting of the father and son, in which 
we have possibly a more faithful preservation of the French 
than in Y. Other slight variations are the additional nature- 
touch in having the queen ask to see the prince " In a myry 
mornyng of May" (261), and the requiring the sages to 
come to court within three days after the receipt of the royal 
message (312). 

Arbor preserves all the essential motives of the French. 
A slight abridgment is the omission of mention of the knight's 
going away for the sake of " chaffare " ( A, E, _B, C, L). 

Canis, on the other hand, contains a number of interesting 
variations : (1) The infant has only two nurses ; in A, E, jB, C, 
K, L, there are three, cf. L 17, "Li enfes avoit -in- norrices." 
(2) D also fails to catalogue the duties of the nurses, which is 
otherwise a constant feature in both English and French (cf. 
7, K, L 17). (3) A third curtailment is the complaint of the 

1 See the preface to his edition of the D-text, Percy Soc., xvi, p. LXVIH. 


knight against women when he finds his child alive. (4) A 
very original addition is that the knight drowns himself for 
sorrow in a fische-pole in his garden (883) ; L 21 and Fhave 
him go on a pilgrimage by way of atonement. 

Aper exhibits comparative agreement with F, except in the 
conclusion which has been much abridged. 

The tale medicus is very much condensed. The ton-motif 
is cancelled altogether (L 28 f., A 1142 f.), and there are 
numerous less important omissions : e. g. (1) mention by name 
of the Earl of Navern ( F, L 27, " li quens de Namur ") ; (2) 
the cure of the invalid (F, "beef's flesh," etc. ; L 27, "char 
de buef"); (3) specific allusion to the prince as an avetrol 
(L 27, avoltres, so F, except JF, C read Jiorcopp). A single 
addition is that the queen of Hungary is accompanied by ten 
or twelve maids (1082). 

Gaza. Omissions are (1) the names of both emperor and 
tower (Octavian and Oressent, respectively, in A, Ar, E, B, O 9 
L 30), and (2) the warden's finding the headless body, and his 
endeavor to identify the same, a feature which is preserved 
and worked out in detail in all other related versions (cf. L 
32 f., A 1319-48). 

Puteus. (1) No mention of the Roman law until late in 
the narrative (1413 f.) ; in other versions it appears at the 
beginning of the story ( F, L 36). (2) This law is not alluded 
to at all as curfew (cf. L 36, coevrefeu). (3) The wife makes 
no threat of drowning herself in the well ( F, L 37). (4) The 
husband's excuse for being out thus late is that he thought he 
heard a spangel, which he had " mysde al thys seven-nyght " 

Senescalcus. (1) Much abridgment of the scene between 
the seneschal and his wife on the former's announcing his 
infamous purpose. (2) Abridgment also of the early morning 
scene, notably the dialogue between the king and his seneschal. 
(3) An omitted detail is the bestowing the wife on a rich earl, 
which is found in F, but which seems not to have been in 
the Old French. 


Tentamina variations are (1) the wife herself contrives the 
" tentamina." In all the related versions, they are proposed 
by the mother. (2) A brother of the sage assists in the blood- 
letting. Omissions are (1) mention of the sage's having sur- 
vived two wives (cf. L 43 and all M. E. versions except F\ 
and (2) the wife's third visit to her mother, and the implied 
r6le of the parish-priest of the original and the remaining 
M. E. versions. 

Virgilius. (1) A. striking and altogether unwarranted alter- 
ation is the substitution of Merlin for Vergil (1880). (2) 
Allied with this is the very radical variation probably the 
most radical of all in D in the omission of the entire first 
episode, the incident of the mirror-pillars alone being preserved. 
Other less striking variations are (3) the two coffers of gold 
are buried, not as in the remaining M. E. versions, at the gates 
of the city, but in " lyttyl pyttys twaye" (1926); (4) the 
emperor is not asked to divide half with the brothers, nor does 
he accompany the latter to their place of digging, but sends 
one of his men with them (1932 f., 1950) ; (5) the brothers set 
fire to the foundation of the pillar before going to their inn, 
and even visit the emperor to bid farewell before taking final 
leave of the city; (6) instead of pouring molten gold down the 
emperor's throat, a ball of gold is ground to powder and his 
eyes, nose, and throat are filled with it (2067-71). 

Avis. Instead of the pie of other texts we have a popynjay 
(2145), and (2) instead of the maid, a boy as the wife's assist- 
ant. (3) Only the boy goes on the house-top. (4) He breaks 
great blown bladders in imitation of thunder. (5) There is 
no mention of the husband's discovery of the wife's deception. 

Sapientes. Important omissions are the search for, and find- 
ing of, the child Merlin and the incident, dependent thereon, 
of the interpretation of the dream. 

Vidua. (1) An interesting invention is the husband's burial 
" withouten the toun at a chapel " (2484), since, in view of 
the manner in which he met his death, "In kyrkejarde men 
wolde hym nout delve " (2482) ; A* 80, simply au moustier. (2) 


The wife herself kindles the fire and makes her bed beside the 
grave (2502 f.), having first sent after her clothes (2500). (3) 
The knight is permitted to enter immediately on knocking ; 
in other texts, he has to repeat his knocking and petitions. 
(4) The wife does not, as in other texts, propose matrimony 
to the knight. 

Roma. (1) There are three heathen kings instead of seven 
as in the original (2649). (2) The page is not named till 
towards the end of the story, when he is called Gynever (2730); 
cf. ^L* 86, Genus; A, B, C, F, Gemes; E, B, Junyus; Ar. 

Inclusa. This story presents remarkable agreement with 
Y, the chief and only important variation being the temporary 
omission of the knight's explanation of the reason for his flight 
from his native land in that he had slain there another knight. 
This excuse is employed later in the story, but originates with 
the lady (2961). 

Vaticinium. (1) The father also has the power of inter- 
preting the language of birds (3138). (2) The name of the 
father is omitted (A* 101, 7T4919, Girart lefts Thierri; B, 
C, F, Jerrard Noryes sone; E } Barnarde Norysshe) y and there 
is otherwise much condensation of the narrative. 

Such are some of the variations of D. And these are doubt- 
less what led Wright to his classification of this version. But 
since all these variations are peculiar to D they can in no way 
be held to confirm Wright's view. They are in fact of no 
value whatever in determining Z>'s relations, except in so far 
as they put one on guard against laying too much stress on 
any agreements which D may be found to have exclusively in 
common with any particular group or version. 

Wright's theory, however, does seem to derive some sup- 
port from another quarter, namely that Z), in a number of 
instances, preserves the Old French more faithfully than any 
other M. E. version. 1 These are as follows : (1) In senescalcus, 
the king rules in Apulia (so L 39) ; in Y 9 he rules over both 

1 Wright, however, has not adduced any of this evidence. 


Apulia and Calabria. (2) In sapientes, after all the sages 
have been slain and the cauldron has become clear, Merlin and 
Herod ride out of the city by way of testing results ; the king, 
on reaching the gate, regains his sight (D 2409 f., L 63). 
Other M. E. texts omit this feature. A less significant agree- 
ment of D with the Old French in the same story is that the 
king remains blind from the time he goes outside the city 
gates, where F represents him as being blind only when with- 
out the city, and as always recovering his sight on his return. 
(3) D 2803, J.* 89 have the knight in inclusa travel three 
weeks in a fruitless search for the lady of his dream. Ar, E, 
C y F have him travel three months, J5, one month. 1 (4) In 
vaticiniunij the father and the son, at the beginning of the 
story, are on their way to visit a hermit on an island in the 
sea (3141 f.). This feature is suppressed in the remaining M. 
E. versions, but appears in all the important O. F. versions ; 
.A* 98, " por aler a -i- reclus qui estoit seur -i- rochier," and 
jST4693 4, " Naiant en vont a un renclus, ki en un rochier ses- 
toit mis." (5) In the same story (3327), the city to which 
the father comes in his poverty, is, in agreement with J.* 101, 
Plede (cf. also .IT 49 18, "Ales moi tost au plaseis" which 
Godefroy identifies with plaisseis = cldture). The city is not 
named in Y. 

Of these agreements two (the 2d and 4th) are very signifi- 
cant, and serve at least to show that D was not based on the 
common original (y) of the six versions so far treated. They 
do not prove, however, that D goes back to the French unre- 
lated with these, for there still remains the possibility of a 
connection of D with y through a common M. E. original (x), 
which y does not for these features faithfully reproduce. Yet 
it must be granted that this explanation would seem to 
have little in its favor could not some agreements of D 
with certain members of Fas against the French be shown. 

1 The Italian prose text published by Varnhagen agrees here with the 
M. E. versions ; see p. 36, tre mesi. 


Among these agreements are : (1) with A and (7, in canis, 
in that the knight cuts out the dog's rygge-boon (D 859) ; in 
the French, he cuts off his head (L 20, "si li cope la teste") ; 
(2) in aper, with (7, in that the herd fills his hood with haws 
(D 945), J., E, B, L, his laps; (3) in Virgilius, with the entire 
group Yj in that there are only two brothers who bring about 
the overthrow of the image (D 1899) ; L 51, on the contrary, 
"in- bachelers"; (4) in vidua, with F, A* 84, in that the 
wife is called on to knock out only two of her husband's teeth 
(D 2592) ; according to A, Ar, E, B, C, all are knocked out; 
see also D* 39, toutes les dens; (5) in inclusa, (a) with the 
entire group F, in the substitution of Hungary for the Mon- 
bergier of A* 89, K, as the land whence the knight comes (D 
2787), (b) with E, F in the substitution of Poyle for the 
illogical Hungary of the French (A* 89, K) as the land into 
which the knight finally comes (JD 2805), and (c) with F in 
the additional detail, that the earl had been warred against 
for two years (D 2849). 

But here it is possible that these agreements were accidental. 
Furthermore, inasmuch as the ultimate O. F. original of the 
M. E. versions has in all probability been lost, 1 it may be 
argued that those features in which D and other M. E. 
versions are in accord as contrasted with the Old French may 
have been just those in which their common original varied 
from the known O. F. manuscripts. Hence no final conclu- 
sion may be had from this quarter. 

There remains the evidence of phraseology and of rime, and 
it is in this that we have a final proof of the error of Wright's 

The following are some of the parallel passages revealed by 
a comparison of A and E with D. 2 Others might be cited, 
but these will suffice for the purpose. 

1 See the section devoted to a study of the source of the M. E. versions. 
* Where A is fragmentary, E has been selected in preference to Ar, since 
the latter is also largely fragmentary. 


D. E. 

In Kome was an emperour, Sum tyme >ere was an Emperoure, 

A man of swyth mikil honur. That ladde hys lyfe with moche 
Is name was Deocdicius. honowre. 

Hys name was Dioclician. 

(1-2, 4) (3-5) 

Uppon his sone that was so bolde, The chylde wax to -vii- yere olde. 

And was hot sevene wyntur olde. Wyse of speche ande dedys bolde. 

(13-14) (15-16) 

The emperour for-thoght sore Hys ffadyr was olde and ganne to 
Tha the child ware sette to lore. hoore, 

His sone thoo he sette to lore. 

(15-16) (19-20) 

Whilk of thaym he myght take To hem he thought his sone take 

Hys sone a wyes man to make. Forto knowe the letters blacke. 

(23-24) (23-24) 

The thirde a lene man was. The -m- mayster was a lyght man. 

(49) (51) 

And was callid Lentulus. His name was callyd lentyllous. 

Hee sayed to the emperour thus. He sayde a-non to the kyng. 

(51-2) (54-5) 

And er ther passe thre and fyve, Uppon payne of lemys and lyfe, 

Yf he have wyt and his on lyve, I shalle teche hym in yerys -v. 

(55-6) (59-60) 

And inred man he was, The -mi- mayster a redman was. 

And was callid Maladas. Men hym callyd Malquydras. 

(61-2) (61-62) 

The sevent mayister answerd thus, The -vii- mayster hette Maxious, 

And was hoten Marcius. A ryght wyse man and a vertuous. 
(91-2) (99-100) 

D. A. 

Evermore wil he wooke, Whan o maister him let, another him 
When on levede, anothir tooke. tok; 

He was ever upon his bok. 
(159-60) (189-90) 

By God, maister, I am noght dronken, Other ich am of wine dronke, 

Yf the rofe his nougt sonken. Other the firmament is i-sonke. 

(209-10) (211-2) 

Hym byfel a harde caes. Ac sone hem fil a ferli cas. 

(222) (222) 

And to have anothir wyf, Ye libbeth an a lenge lif : 

For to ledde with thy lif. Ye sholde take a gentil wif. 

(231-2) (227-8) 



A good childe and a faire, 
That sal be oure bothe ayere. 
For sothe, sire, I hold hym myn, 
Also wel as thou dost thyn. 


Than sayd mayster Baucttlas, 
u For soth this his wondir cas : 
Tharefore take counsel sone 
What his best to don, 
The childe answerd ther he stood, 
" I wyle gyf sou counsel good ; 
Seven dayes I mot forbere 
That I ne gyf no answere ; 

(360-3, 368-71) 
I schal saue thy lyf a daye. 


Thus they were at on alle, 
And wenten agayen into the halle. 


By hym that made sone and mone, 
He ne hade nevere with me done. 


" Kys me, yf thy wylle bee, 
Alle my lyfe hys longe on the." 

Callid to him a tormentour. 


Also mote bytide the 
As dyde the fyne appul-tre. 


Than sayde Baucillas, 
"A ! sire emperour, alas ! " 


And hir clothes al to-rent, 
Afte the thef wold hir have shent. 


That knave kest hym frnyt y-nowe, 
And clam a-doune fra bough to boghe. 


And rent hys wombe with the knyf, 
And bynam the bore hys lyf. 


"A ! sire," quod mayster Ancilles, 
" God almighty send us pees ! " 


Hit is thi sone, and thin air ; 
A wis child, and a fair. 
For thi sone I tel mine, 
Alse wel als ton dost thine. 

(283-4, 289-90) 
Than seide master Bancillas 
Here is now a ferli cas I 
Counseil we al herupon ; 
How that we mai best don. 
Than seide the schild, Saunz fail, 
Ich you right wil counseil, 
This seven daies I n'el nowt speke; 
Nowt a word of mi mowht breke ; 

I schal the waranti o dai. 


With this word, thai ben alle 
Departed, and comen to halle. 


I swere bi sonne and bi mone 
With me ne hadde he never to done. 


Kes me, leman, and loue me, 
And I thi soget wil i-be. 

And cleped forht a turmentour. 


Ase wel mot hit like the 
Als dede the pin,note tre. 


Than seide maister Bancillas, 
Sire, that were now a sori cas. 


Th' emperour saide, I fond hire to- 
Hire her, and hire face i-schent ; 


He kest the bor doun hawes anowe 
And com himself doun bi a bowe. 


The herd thous with his long knif 
Biraft the bor of his lif. 


Than saide maister Ancilles, 
For Godes love, sire, hold thi pes. 




That ge bytyde swilk a cas 

As bytyde Ypocras, 

That slow hys cosyn withouten gylt. 


With my lordefor to play, 
And love wax bytwen us twey. 


Oppon a day thay went to pleye, 
He and hys cosyn thay twey. 

And mad hym myry, and spendid 


Al the wylle that hit wolde laste. 
He that lokyd the tresour, 
Come a day into the tour. 

Bot hastilich smy t of my hede. 


Byfore the dore, as I gow telle, 
Thare was a mykyl deppe welle. 


To do thy wyl by a-night, 
Yf I schal helle the aryght. 


Now he slakys to lygge above ; 
I wyl have another love. 


Er the myrrour be broght a-doune, 
And than gyf us oure warrysoun. 


And sayed, we wyte, sire emperour, 
About this cite gret tresour. 

And dolvyn a lytyl withinne the 

And the tresour was sone founde. 


The ton sayed, sire emperour, 
Undir the pyler that berys merour. 


Gladlich, sayed scho, 
The bettyr yf hyt wylle bee. 

And hadde seven clerkys wyse, 


On the falle swich a cas 
Als fil on Ypocras the gode clerk, 
That slow his neveu with fals werk. 

With mi louerdfor to plai; 
And so he dede, mani a dai. 


So bifel upon a dai 
He and his neveu yede to plai. 


And beren hit horn wel on hast, 
And maden hem large whiles hit 


Amorewe aros that sinatour, 
And sichen to-bregen his louerdes 

And hastUiche gird of min heved. 


But thou me in lete, ich wille telle, 
Ich wille me drenchen in the welle. 


Have womman to pleie aright, 
Yif ye wil be hoi aplight. 


Ich moste have som other love ! 
Nai, dowter, for God above ! 


Who might that ymage fel adoun, 
He wolde him yif his warisoun. 


And said, al hail, sir emperour ! 
It falleth to the to lof tresour. 


And ther thai doluen in the gronde ; 
A riche forcer ther thai founde. 


Than saide the elder to the emperour, 

Under the ymage that halt the mirour. 


Bletheliche, sire, so mot ich the, 
So that ye wolde the better be. 

He hadde with him seven wise. 




Who so army swevene by nyght, 
O morne when the day was bryght. 


The emperour and Merlyn anoon 
Into the chambyr thay gonne gone ; 

Hyt was a knyght, a riche schyreve, 
That was lot hys wyf to greve. 
He sate a daye by hys wyf, 
And in hys honde helde a knyf. 


Bot sayed for non worldlys wyne 
Schulde no man parte horn a-twyne. 


In hyr hoond scho took a stoon, 
And knockyd out twa teth anoon ! 



Made to fle with hys boste 
Thre kyngys and hare hoste. 

The knyght that met that sweven at 


Of that lady was so bright, . . . 
Ryght a lytyl fram the toure 
Thare was the lady of honour, 
And ate the wyndow the lady he see. 
(2822-3, 2826-7, 2831) 
He bytoke undyr hys hond, 
And made hym stywarde of al hys londe. 
Oppon a day he went to playe, 
Undir the tour he made hys waye. 


Lenand to the mykyl toure, 
To do in hys tresour. 
Thorow a q weyntyse he thout to wyne 
The lady that was loke there-inne. 


That who that mette a sweven anight, 

He scholde come amorewe, aplight. 


The emperour him ladde anon, 
Into his chaumbre of lim and ston ; 


Sire, he saide, thou might me leue, 
Hit was a knight, a riche scherreue, 
So, on a dai, him and his wif 
Was i-youen a newe knif ; 

(2563-4, 2569-70) 
The leuedi saide, for no wenne, 
Sche ne wolde neuer wende thenne. 

Than wil ich, she saide, and tok a 

And smot hem out euerichon. 



And made more noyse and boste 
Thenne wolde a kyng and hys hoste. 
And soo there come rydyng thys 


That had sought the lady bryghte. 
He lokyd uppe into the toure, 
And say that lady as white as flowre ; 
And anon, as he hyr say, 

And toke hym hys goodys in-to hys 

And made hym stywarde ouyr alle hys 


So oppon a day, with moche honoure, 
The knyght come playnge by the 



To make a chambyr byfore the toure 
That may ben for my honoure. 
Thenne thought he uppon sum quent 


Howe he myght to that lady wynne. 
(2962-3, 2968-9) 


Oppon a day stylle as stoon The knyght toke workemen a-non, 

He sent eftyr masons anoon. And made a chambyr of lyme and 


(2901-2) (2966-7) 

And sate stille and made hym glade. And bade hym ete and be glad, 

And thus hys wyf made hym made. And euyr he sat as he were mad. 

(3021-2) (3110-1) 

Into Plecie when he was comen, Amorowe the kyng thedyr came, 

Ner hysfadir hys in was nome. And with hysfadyr hys in he name. 

To mete when he was redy to gon, He and hys baronys euerychone 

After hys fadir he sent anoon. Wente to mete vrith hym a-non. 

(3336-9) (3473-6) 

It is impossible to account for these agreements as mere 
coincidences, or as flowing from a translation from the same 
O. F. source. Some of them may indeed be, and doubtless 
are, due to the often stereotyped style, or the fondness for like 
epithets or collocations which characterize the M. E. romance ; 
but all of them cannot be so explained. They warrant this 
assumption alone, that D and y are related either through 
the derivation of one from the other, or through a common 
M. E. original. 

And inasmuch as D cannot have been based on y or on any of 
the texts which have developed from it, since in all the latter 
some of the O. F. features are lacking which are preserved in 
D, or, conversely, y on Z), in view of the very many inde- 
pendent variations of the latter where y is faithful to the 
French, we can only conclude that both y and D go back to 
the same lost M. E. version x. 

We may accordingly sum up our results as to D as follows : 

(1) it is remarkably free, and exhibits many unique variations; 

(2) it does not represent an independent translation from the 
French, but is connected with at least six other M. E. versions 
through a common M. E. source ; (3) this source was not the 
same as the more immediate common original of these six 
versions (y), but was a version one or more stages nearer the 
Old French. 


As. The Asloan version is at present inaccessible in the 
original manuscript, 1 and, as only about 200 lines of it have 
been printed, 2 any discussion of its relations must be very 
unsatisfactory. We may be permitted, however, to bring to- 
gether the few facts which are known about it, and to draw 
from these such conclusions as their evidence may justify. 

From the descriptions which have appeared, it is established 
that As, so far as it is not fragmentary, preserves the usual 
M. E. order of stories, but that beyond this it is, in many respects, 
extremely free. The names of the sages are much garbled, 
and they vary in the introductory enumeration from their 
form in the stories themselves. They are, moreover, in no 
case close to those of any version now in print, or to those of 
the remaining M. E. manuscripts. 

Avis, too, the story which has been printed, exhibits very 
radical variation from other versions, both textually and as 
regards incident. There are apparent no significant agree- 
ments in rime or phraseology with any other M. E. version, 
while two new episodes, 3 well-known in other collections, but 
otherwise foreign to the Seven Sages, are woven into the narra- 
tive. And there are other variations, besides, such as the intro- 
duction of the wife's mother as a go-between, and mention of 
the burgess's name first Annabili, later Balan. 

But none of these serves to shed any light on the question 
of relationship. All the new features of As, as compared with 
the remaining M. E. versions and the accessible Romance ver- 
sions, are peculiar to it, and hence afford no grounds for deter- 
mining its connections. 

1 As already stated in my " Word of Introduction" (p. 2), Lord Talbot de 
Malahide declined to permit my consulting this manuscript. His reasons 
for doing so are, I understand, the same as those given by certain other 
possessors of valuable M. E. manuscripts, for which I beg to refer to Dr. 
Furnivall, Temporary Pref. to the Six-Text Ed., Chaucer Soc., 1868, Pt. I, p. 6. 

*ln a contribution by Prof. Varnhagen (Englische Stvdien, xxv, p. 
321 f.), who will edit the text for the Scottish Text Society. 

3 See Englitche Sludien, xxv, p. 322. 


Prof. Varnhagen claims that As was made directly from 
some O. F. version, 1 and the lack of textual agreement between 
it and other M. E. versions in the story avis may seem to offer 
some support to this view, but by no means necessarily, since 
it is evident that the author of As worked very independently. 2 
And that the evidence offered by Varnhagen in support of his 
claim, viz., the agreement in order of stories with the O. F. 
J.*-type, is not adequate, he himself, I believe, will concede 
on reconsideration. 

3. Authorship of the Middle English Versions. 

It has been assumed in the preceding chapter that the Eng- 
lish original (x) of the seven M. E. manuscripts A t Ar, E, B, F, 
C y and D, has been lost. It remains to inquire when, where, 
and by whom this original was made. For this purpose we 
unfortunately have almost no data at all, and can only resort 
to indirections to find directions out. 

(1) For the determining the date of x the Auchinleck MS. 
(A) is of first importance. This manuscript dates from around 
the year 1330 ; this, then, must be the superior limit for the 
dating of y. And since, as has been shown, A was not derived 
directly from y, but rests in all probability on a lost manuscript 
r, which may have been based on y directly or through an inter- 
vening manuscript, and since, moreover, it is highly credible 
that A had already been composed some time before the Auch- 
inleck copy was made, it is not probable that the date of y 
would fall later than the beginning of the fourteenth century. 

And inasmuch, now, as y cannot have been this parent version, 
since D, though closely akin to it, was neither based immedi- 
ately on it nor on any of its derivatives, but was connected with 
it through a common source, which source we may assume to 
be either identical with, or based directly on, the translation 

1 Ibid., xxv, p. 322. 

' F offers even more radical variation from other M. E. versions in some 
of its stories than does ,4s in avis. 


from the French, it is necessary to assign to this parent ver- 
sion a date before the year 1300. The year 1275 would, it 
is believed, represent a conservative conjecture. 

(2) Available material for determining the place of transla- 
tion of this parent text is somewhat more satisfactory. Of the 
entire group of seven versions which have been shown to be 
based on x, only one is in the Northern dialect, and this ((?) 
is of comparatively late date. One other (D) belongs to the 
south-east Midland, while the rest (A, Ar, E, B, F) belong to 
the South, a fact which well justifies the assumption that x 
was also Southern. Furthermore, inasmuch as three of these 
versions (A, Ar, E) possess marked Kentish features, and two 
others (B, F) show a Kentish influence, but less marked, we 
seem justified in a further restriction to the eastern South 
Kent or its neighborhood as the home of the parent text. It 
is further confirmatory of this view that just those versions 
(Ar, E) which are most faithful to x are most distinctly 
Kentish. 1 

(3) But while we are thus justified in indulging in conject- 
ure as to the time and place of composition of x y in the mat- 
ter of its authorship we have no grounds for such an indulgence. 
The nature of the subject might establish a slight probability 
in favor of lay authorship, but not at all necessarily ; and the 
same is true of the references to priests, in tentamina and avis, 
as adulterate lovers, especially since in the only story in 
which it is a constant feature (tentamina), it was also in the 
Old French ; so that, in respect to this side of the problem 
in hand, we have, for the present at least, and probably for all 
time, to content us with absolute ignorance. 

With regard to the authorship of the texts which have been 
preserved, we are equally at a loss for definite information. 

An ingenious and praiseworthy effort has been made by Dr. 
Kolbing to demonstrate a community of authorship for the 
JL-text and the Auchinleck texts of the Arthur and Merlin, 

1 The dialect of D southeast Midland also offers support to this view. 


Kyng Alisaunder, and Richard Coer de Lion ; l but without 
meaning to discredit his conclusions in general, it is necessary, 
we regret to say, to reject them in so far as they concern the 
Seven Sages. Kolbing's argument is made on the basis of 
features (rime, language, etc.) exclusively, or almost exclu- 
sively, peculiar to these poems. The only part of his argu- 
ment which holds is that which concerns the expletives cert 
and vair. These appear only in the A-text, being either orig- 
inal with it, or, if in y, having been displaced in the remaining 
texts by other rimes. On the other hand, of the 18 rimes 
which Kolbing cites 2 (one of which, 2803-4, bataitte: mer- 
vaile, should be cancelled, since it is taken from (7), a com- 
parison with the remaining members of Fshows 12 to reappear 
in the corresponding lines in Ar, 9 in E, etc. The evidence 
to which Kolbing attaches most importance, that of certain 
textual agreements between Arthur and Merlin (1201 f.) and 
A (2389 f.), 3 is likewise not valid, as is manifest from the 
following parallel comparison of these passages with Ar and 
E. Compare 

1 Merlin in J>e strete }>o pleyd, ' On a dai >ai com ber Merlin pleid, 

And on of his felawes him trayd.' And on of his felawes him traid.' 

(A.M. 1201-2). (42389-90). 


1 So )>ei come )>eir )>e child played, ' Thenne come they thorowe happe 
And on of his felawes hym by trayed.' there he playde, 

One of his felowys hym myssayde.' 
(Ar 1511-2). (#2437-8). 

Compare further, as against his citation of 

' Foule schrewe fram ous go ! ' 'And cleped him schrewe faderles.' 

' pou hast yseyd to loude J>i roun.' 'Al to loude >ou spok bi latin.' 

pat haj> me sougt al Ms ger.' ' pat han me sought al fram Ecme.' 
(A. M. 1204, 18, 20). (A 2392, 6, 8). 

1 Arthur and Merlin, Leipzig, 1890, p. LX f. 

* Ibid., p. LXXXII. 3 Ibid., p. civ. 


the following from Ar and E: 

'And clepyd hym schrewe faderlese.' 'And calde the chylde fadyrles.' 

1 To loude >ou spake J>y latyn.' 

1 pat haue me sougt fro gret Rome.' ' That have sought me fro Rome.' 

(Ar 1514, 18, 20). (E 2440, 6). 

From these it is evident that any inference as to A 9 s author- 
ship made on this basis will apply equally as well to Ar and 
E. Accordingly the parallels pointed out by Kdlbing must 
either be explained as accidental, or as traceable either to an 
influence of Arthur and Merlin on the source of A, Ar, and E, 
or, conversely, of some one of these on the Arthur and Merlin. 

4. Source of the Middle English Versions. 

The question of the ultimate source of the M. E. versions 
has, to all intents and purposes, been settled by Petras. 1 We 
need only present here his general argument and his conclu- 
sion, inserting where deemed expedient additional proofs, and 
adding here and there details which he has omitted. 

But first of all it is necessary to state that such expressions 
(which Petras [p. 32] inclines to accept as evidence) as A 2771, 
'So seigh ]>e rime' 2 (to which add F 1690, 'as seyj? J>e ryme') 
proves nothing, for by a like reasoning we might, on the basis 
of Ar 1906, ' as it saij? in latyn/ prove a Latin source for the 
M. E. versions. It is not on such formulae that the pre- 
sumption in favor of a metrical original of the lost M. E. 
original must repose ; this must rather rest on the fact that 

1 See his dissertation, p. 31 f. Our investigation must differ from his, 
however, in that we are concerned only with the source of the parent ver- 
sion, x (As being disregarded), while Petras has assumed each of four ver- 
sions (A, C, F, D) to be independent translations from the French. Since, 
however, he begins with the assumption that the same O. F. version was 
the source of all these, his argument is essentially the same as ours. 

2 References to source in the M. E. versions are numerous: A 317, 1245, 
2766, 2770; Ar 1900, 1906, 2206, 2261, 2442; #1253,2779,2784,3445; 
295, 1235; F928, 1683, 1690, 1973; 622, 1324; D 1385, 1520, 2690, 


this original (x) was itself in verse, and, hence probably made 
from a metrical text, and that this does not permit of any 
definite conclusion it is hardly necessary to add. 

It is not improbable, however, that this original of x was, 
like itself, composed of octosyllabic couplets, and it is needless 
to state that it was in the French language. 

There exist three O. F. metrical versions, the Dolopathos, 
the Keller text (K), and the fragmentary version (7*. The 
first of these, the Dolopathos, must, for obvious reasons, play 
no part in this investigation. The unique version Z>* should, 
however, since it represents a prosing of a lost metrical ver- 
sion, receive equal attention with .IT and (7*. 1 

The only one of this group which has ever been proposed 
as a possible source of the M. E. versions is K; but a com- 
parison of the two types as regards order of stories 2 reveals a 
considerable difference between them, only ten stories (1, 2, 4, 
6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15) having the same position in each. 
Such a comparison, however, while bearing with it much 
weight, can in no wise be accepted as determining, as it would 
be quite natural for the redactor, or even the translator, to 
change about the stories at will, either with artistic purpose or 
with a view to making his source less apparent. Hence the 
safest test of relationship should be from the consideration of 
content, rather than of order of stories. And it is on this basis 
that Petras's comparison has been made. The Cotton- Auchin- 
leck (C-A), or Weber, text he finds to contain only 460 lines 
which could be possible translations from the Keller text. 8 
And since the latter contains over 5000 lines, it is not probable 
that even numerous intermediate redactions could have made 
such a difference. Besides this, there are many variations in 
incident, all which unite in making it extremely improbable 
that K was used by the English translator. 

1 For the Dolopathos, K, C*, and D* t see the chapter on "The Romance 
in France and Italy." 

8 For the order of stories in the various sub-types of the Western group, 
see our comparative table on page 35. 

3 See p. 33 of his dissertation. 


The fragmentary text (7*, though differing somewhat from 
JTin order of stories, seems, nevertheless, to be much nearer 
to it than it is to the English. 

The prose version D*, representing a lost metrical version 
V y exhibits still less agreement with the M. E. type, and 
possesses many unique features. In the content of its stories, 
however, it is comparatively close to K, so that in denying 
the claims for it, the legitimacy of any claim for D* is also 

K y C* 9 and D* having been eliminated from the problem, it 
is necessary to conclude that the O. F. original, if metrical, 
has been lost. It remains to show whether or not the M. E. 
parent text was based on any of the prose texts which have 
come down to us, or, at least, which one of them nearest 
approximates the lost original. 

The most widely known of the prose versions, the Historic*, 
must be ruled out at once, since Paris has shown that the 
earliest date which can be given it is around the year 1330, 
or some time after the composition of the derivative M. E. 
version A. Other circumstances, such as the order of stories, 
the introduction of amatores, and the amices-legend, as well 
as the fusion of Roma and senescalcus, together with its many 
modern touches, all unite in invalidating any claim for H. 

The Scala Coeli (8) also exhibits many features at variance 
with the M. E. type, and its two new stories, filia and noverca, 
are sufficient to exclude it from the list of possibilities. 

Likewise the first Leroux de Lincy (L) version, although 
it agrees very closely with the Middle English versions for 
the first eleven stories, cannot be considered their source, 
since it also contains the stories filia and noverca. 

Nor to the Versio Italica does there attach any more proba- 
bility, its distinguishing feature the reversal of the order 
of stories finding no parallel even in French. 

There remains group J.*, or the family represented by the 
second text of the Leroux de Lincy edition. A presumption 
in favor of some member of this family is at once established 


in the fact that it has the same order of stories as the M. E. 
group. This circumstance has led Paris and others to see in 
this group the source of the M. E. texts, but no explicit claim 
has been made as to which one of the ^-manuscripts served 
as this original, though Petras has made a detailed investiga- 
tion with a view to arriving at some definite conclusion. 1 

The results which Petras reaches, 2 however, are wholly 
negative. He shows in the first place that MS. 6849 [new 
No. 189] of the Bibliotheque Rationale, which Ellis had 
suggested as the probable source of the M. E. versions, is not 
even a possible source, but belongs to group L. He next 
endeavors to show that the Leroux de Lincy text of J.* (the 
only one of the O. F. manuscripts of this type yet published) 
is not as close to the M. E. versions as are some of the 
unpublished manuscripts belonging to this family. Among 
the latter, he finds the MS. 4096, Laval. 13, to be nearest 
to the M. E. versions ; thus, by way of illustration, where L, 
A* call the seventh sage Merons, this manuscript names him 
Meceneus, which approximates the M. E. Maxencius much 
more closely. Despite this fact, however, he is not willing to 
concede that this text was the source of the M. E. group, but 
maintains that the latter had its basis in a lost manuscript 
which is connected with the former through a common lost 

And in this conclusion Petras is probably correct, and 
assuredly so as regards the Leroux de Lincy text, as is estab- 
lished by certain features, which are not in J.*, but which the 
M. E. texts have in common with JTand other O. F. versions. 
A few of these are the following : (1) in tentamina, A, C read 
gray bitch = K 2604, blanche leuriere; L (A* 45), only une 
leuri&re; (2) in Virgilius, L (A* 51) has lost the feature of 
VergiPs casting images also for the east and west gates of 
Rome, which has been preserved in K 3960 f. and the M. E. 
group ; (3) in vaticinium, the child, when discovered alone on 
the island, has had nothing to eat for four days in E y B, C y 

Petras, p. 37 f. 


and K4725 ; 4* 99 and D*, only three days. These suffice 
to indicate the result which would follow from a detailed 

In view of this conclusion, the problem of the source of the 
M. E. parent text must, so far as a specific source is con- 
cerned, remain for the present unsolved. Examination of all 
J.*-rnanuscripts will doubtless bring us nearer to the truth, 
and, it is hoped, settle the question. 

II (6.) Sixteenth Century and Chap-book Versions. 

Under this head fall the Wynkyn de Worde version and 
the many chap-books founded on it, the lost Copland text, and 
the Holland metrical version, all which fall together into one 
distinct group apart from the M. E. group. 

1. The Wynkyn de Worde text is in prose. Its date is not 
definitely known ; in the British Museum catalogue it is 
entered as 1520, though Hazlitt (Handbook, p. 660) gives it 
a dating fifteen years earlier. Only one copy of the original 
text has been preserved, and that is imperfect. A reprint 
made by Gomme for the Villon Society (1885) makes the text 
accessible. 1 

This version seems to have been the first prose version made 
in English, and, as already noted, it can in no way be related 
with the M. E. metrical versions which antedate it. In length 
alone the contrast is sufficiently striking to justify a serious 
doubt as to any immediate relationship between them, the 
prose version comprising 180 pages in Gomrne's edition. It 
is based on some member of the Historia family probably a 
Latin 2 rather than an O. F. text. As a translation of H it 

1 The History of the S. W. M, of Rome, London, 1885. A few pages missing 
from the Wynkyn de Worde text are supplied from a chap-book version 
printed in 1671. 

2 Graesse enumerates a half-dozen or more prints between 1483 and 1495, 
any one of which may have served as the basis of this version. 


is comparatively close, though it abridges at times, and also 
makes occasional independent additions. 1 

2. The Wynkyn de Worde edition served as the basis of a 
second prose edition, attributed to the printer Copland, which 
has been lost. The superscription to this edition, which alone 
has been preserved, agrees almost word for word with that 
of the Wynkyn de Worde edition, and it is more than 
probable, as Buchner suggests, 2 that it is only a reprint of it. 
The date of the Copland text is variously placed between 1548 
and 1561. 

3. The Holland version is a very long poem written in 
heroic couplets, and in the Scottish dialect. The original edi- 
tion bears the date 1578, but Laing has shown it to be probable 
that its composition dates from the year 1560. It seems to 
have been very popular in its day, undergoing at least five 
editions (1590, 1592, 1599, 1606, 1620) in little more than 
half a century after its first publication. A modern reprint 
was edited by Laing for the Bannatyne Club in 1837. 

Sundry conjectures as to the source which Holland employed 
have been made. Laing maintained that he used either the 
Copland print, or some O. F. or Latin text of H. Petras, 
who did not know of the Wynkyn de Worde version, and who 
makes the Holland version his " Redaction C," investigated 
the question at some length, 3 and concluded in favor of the 
O. F. translation of H as Holland's original. 4 But that 
neither of these views is correct, and that the Holland text 
was the rather based on the Wynkyn de Worde version, has 
been conclusively proved by Buchner in his dissertation in the 
Erlanger Beiirage, v, p. 93 f. This he established by show- 
ing that where there are differences between the three versions 
H (either Latin or French), the Wynkyn de Worde, and the 
Holland the last two are in almost every instance in accord 

1 See Buchner, Erlang. Beitr., v, p. 95. 

*Erlang. Beilr., v, p. 96. * See his dissertation, p. 47 f. 

4 The second text of Paris' s Deux Redactions. Its date is 1492. 


with each other. A large number of textual parallels be- 
tween the two English versions are cited in further support 
of this. 

(4) The English chap-book versions merit but little atten- 
tion. They have been numerous, but of poor quality, the 
later versions especially having deteriorated from the original. 
In some of these, new stories have been introduced, and in 
almost all of them the old stories have been abridged in 
some of them, so as to be scarcely more than epitomes of their 
prototypes. That they were very popular for a long time, 
however, is indicated by the fact that the British Museum 
alone contains at least twelve various prints, one of which 
purports to have reached its twenty-fifth edition. Another 
was published at Boston in 1794, the most recent at War- 
rington in 1815. 

All versions of the chap-book group contain the distinctive 
features of H. They doubtless go back to the Wynkyn de 
Worde, or to the Copland, text. 

In addition to the four versions or groups already described, 
there is evidence that there once existed another sixteenth cen- 
tury version, which, like the Copland text, has not survived. 
This is a dramatic version, bearing the title The Seven Wise 
Masters of Rome, which is mentioned in Henslowe's Diary l as 
having been made by Dekker, Chettle, Haughton, and Day, 
and as having been acted at London in March, 1599-1600. 
No later notice of its presentation has been pointed out, how- 
ever, and it is altogether probable that the work was lost 
without undergoing publication. 2 

1 Ed. Collier, London, 1845, pp. 165, 167. See also the Dramatic Works 
of Dekker, ed. Shepherd, London, 1873, I, p. xn. 

* The enumeration of the late English versions should also include refer- 
ence at least to the Seven Wise Mistresses of Rome, a chap-book modelled 
after the chap-book version of the Seven Wise Masters of Rome, and a sort of 
counterpart to it. The English libraries contain several versions of this 
type, but, though very interesting, they possess little value. 



[Containing the story medicus according to Ar (1-228), with a tabulation 
of the corresponding lines in A, E t B, (7, -P.] 

Hys comaundement J?ei dide be-lyve. 152a. 

]?ane wex J?ei? mochel stry ve 

Be-tuen kynge and baron, 

ffor J>e Emperowr wold scle his son, 
5 J?e Emperowr hym nold save. 

He lete a-none to spoile j>at knaue, 

And with scourges hys body swynge ; 

To foul dethe thei wold hym brynge. 

A-none after that, god it wote, 1 
10 He bade hem to hange hym fote hote. 

With scourges J>ei dide hym swynge, 

To foull de]?e ]>ei wold hym brynge. 

He was lade forj?e with-oute pite 

Jjorouj-oute all ]?at fai? cite ; 
15 J>ei? be-gan a rewfull cry 

Of many gentyll lady. 

All J?e folke oute of Rome 

A-jeyne ];at gentyll child come. 

Waleway, J?ei saide, with wronge 
20 Schall )>is child nowe be honge. 

Rygt a-mydward J?at like pres 

Come rydynge Maxilles, 

And he sawe ]?at rewfull cas ; 

Hys second master forsoj?e he was 
25 Hys scole? to helpe and to rede 

All J>e folke to hym J?ei bede ; 

A-none to court he gan ryde, 

And with ]>e Emperowr in reson chide 

ffonde to let J?e Empero^r wronge 
30 )?at his son be noujt an-hange. 

1 This line is repeated after 1. 12, but is erased. 


SwyJ>e fast fro J>e folke he rode, 

His palfray a-none to J?e paleys glode : 

]?o come he by-fo? |?e Emperoitr, 

And grete hym fai? with honour. 
35 J?e emperour by hym styll stode, 

And by-helde hym with steren mode 

he saide to hym, " master, j?ou haue 

]?e cors of god for techyng of ]>is knaue. 

je haue by-nome my sone his spech ; 
40 ]?e devyll of hell I J?e be-tech, 

Thyn felows and ]?ou be my swye? ! 152b. 

je schull haue lytyll hye?." 

" O Syr Emperowr, knyjt of prys, 

In dedes J?ou schold be wa? and wyse. 
45 It is no wysdome no lyuys hale 

To by-leue no womans tale. 

Mo? to harme ]?ane to note 

A womans bolt is son schote. 

ffor jef J?ou sclest hym, I be-sech 
50 On J?i heued fall J?at, ilke wrech 

J>at fell on Ypocras, J>e good clerk, 

)?at sclewe his scole? J?orouj fals werk." 

" Master, I pray J>e, tell f>at cas 

Of J?at clerke Ypocras." 
55 " Sy?, )?is tale is noujt lyte ; 

ffor jef J?ou wyllt jef J?y son respyt, 

A-for to-morowe day lyjt, 

I wyll ]>e tell a-none ryjt, 

A-jenst ]>e lawe, with grete wowe, 
60 How Ypocras his nefew sclowe." 

" I jeue hym respyt," said J?e Emperowr, 

And saide anone with-oute soiou?, 

Mon schold a-jeyne feeche his son, 

And put hym in-to preson. 
65 J>e chyld was brougt oute of ]>e ton 

With well grete procession. 


}>o he cam to )?at hall, 

He a-loutede ]?e barons all ; 

And in to prison y-put he was. 
70 Now tell we for];e of Ypocras. 

ly?," saide Maxillas, " paramour, 

Ypocras was a clerke of grete honnottr ;' 

Of lechcraft was none his pe? 

Neuer jit in J>is londe he?. 
75 He hade with hym his nefewe 

J?at he schold leren of his vertue. 

He saw J?at child comyng of lo?, 

J?at he nold tech hym no mo? ; 

ffor he j?oujt, and saide also, 
80 J>at he in lo? wold to-fo? hym go. 

J>e childe perseuyd full well, I-wis, 

And hid it full wele in hert his. 

His nefys herte he gan a-spye, 152c. 

When he couj>e all |?e mastrye. 
85 Ypocras gins understonde, 

J>orouj werkes of J?e childes honde, 

J?at he couj?e all his mastrye. 

He ba? to hym grete envye. 

Sy by- fell apcw a J?ynge, 
90 Of hongre ]mt ilke kynge, 

Hade seke a son gente ; 

To Ypocras a messenge? sente, 

]?at he schold come his son to hele, 

And haue he schold of gold full a male, 
95 Ipocras wend ne myjt ; 

He clepyd his nefewe anone ryjt, 

And bade hym wende to J?at londe, 

To nyme J?at chylde under honde ; 

And whane he hade so i-do, 
100 He schold come ajeyne hym to. 

J?e child was set on a palfray, 

And rode hym for];e on his way. 


j?o he to J?e kynge came 

)?e kynge hym by ]>e honde name, 
105 And lade hym to |>e seke childe. 

Ihesus cryst to us be mylde ! 

J>at jonge man sawe J>e childes payne, 

He tastes his armes and his veyne ; 

He asked an urynall, as I wene, 
110 And schewed fat uryn kenge and qwen, 

Of J?e childe all god it wyt, 

And saide it was mys-by-get. 

He gan ]?e qwene on side drawe, 

And saide, " dame, a-knawe, 
115 What man haj>e by-gete ]>is childe?" 

" Bel amy," scho sayde, " art ]?ou wylde ? 

Who schold bot j?e kynge ? " 

" Dame, say |?ou for no Vj n g e > 

He was neue? of kyngges streen." 
120 " Lat," scho saide, " soch wordes ben ; 

Or I schall do J>e bete so, 

J>at ]?ou schalt neuer ryde no? go." 

" Dame," he saide, " with soch tale, 

]>y childe schall neue? be hale. 
125 Tell me, dame, all ]?at cas, 

How J>e childe by-gete was." 

" Bel amy, saist fou so ? " 

" Sertes, dame," he saide, "no." 152d. 

He schoke his hede upon j? e qwene, 
130 And saide, " J?ouj ]?ou do me to-scleyne, 

May I noujt do J?y childe bote, 

Bot je me tell hede and rote, 

Of what man he was be-geten." 

" No man," scho saide, " may it weten ; 
135 ffor jef my counseill we? un-hele, 

I schold be sclowe with ryjt skyll." 

" Dame," he saide, " so mot I the, 

No man schall it wyt for me." 


"Syr," scho saide, "it so by-fell, 
140 ]?is oj?er day in Auerell, 

J>e kynge of nauerne come to Jns J>ede, 

On fai? hors and in rich wede, 

With my lord for to play, 

And so he dide many a day. 
145 I gan hym son in herte to loue, 

Oner all J?ynge so god aboue ; 

So J>at for grete drewrye, 

I late ]>e kynge be me lye ; 

So it was on me by-gete : 
150 Sy?, late no man J?at i-wete." 

" Nay, madame, for soj>e, i-wys, 

Bot for f>at childe was gete a-mys, 

He mot both drynke and ete 

Contrarious drynke and contrarious mete, 
155 ffresch beef and drynke J>e brop>e." 

He jaf a-none ]?e child forso|?e. 

);e childe was heled fai? and wele. 

];e kynge hym jaf many Jewell, 

A wer hors i-charged with siluer and gold, 
160 A Is moch as he nyme wold. 

He dide hym forj>e a-none ry^t, 

And come home in J>at nygt. 

J>e master hym asked gef he we? sond 

" ja si?," he saide, " be seynt Symond ! " 
165 )?o asked he, " what was his rnedecyne?" 

He saide, " fresch beef good and fyne " 

" )?an was he a nauetroll." 

" )?ou saist so)?e, be my poll ! " 

" O," qwod Ypocras, " be goddes dome ! 
170 J?ou art by-come a good grome." 

I 70 by-gan Ypocras to ];ench 

To sole his nefewe wM some wrench. 

)?ei?-afte?, J?e }>ride day, 153a. 

With his nefew he went to play, 


175 Yn-to a fai? grene gardyn ; 

J>ei? wex many an erbe fyn. 

]?e childe sawe an erbe on J>e grounde, 

]?at was myjty of mochell monde ; 

He toke it and schewed to Ypocras, 
180 Bot he saide a better J>ei? was ; 

For he wold J>at child be-cach. 

He stoupyd soch on to rech. 

J>o fyle Ypocras with a knyf, 

He nome his nefewe of his lyf. 
185 He dide hym bury unkonnynglych, 

As he had dyed sodeynlych, 

And afte?-warde, swy]?e jerne, 

He dide his bokes all to-bryne. 

God of heuen, J?e hyje kynge, 
1 90 J?at is oue?-sea? of all J^ynge, 

Sende Ypocras for his treson, 

J;e foul rankkeland menyson. 

Ypocras wyst wele, for his quede, 

];at he schold son be dede ; 
195 Bot for no )>ynge J?at he couj?e }>ynch 

)?e menyson he no myjt quench. 

A nempty ton he dide for|?e fett, 

And full of clene water he it pyt, 

Also full to |?e mou)?e ; 
200 ffor he wold it we? cou]?e, 

And dide after sende mochell and lyte, 

Nejboitrs hym to bysyte. 

He saide to-fore hem euerchon 

J?at ]>e de]> was hym apon, 
205 All with ryjt and noujt with wouje, 

ffor his nefewe J?at he sclowje. 

J>at treson he gan hym reherce. 

On J>e tone a C. holes he gan perce. 

When ]?e holes we? mad so fell, 
210 He dide hem stope with dosell, 


And saide to hem once or tweye, 

" je schall see of my ruastrye." 

He smered ]?e dosells all a-boute, 

And made he me after- ward drawen oute. 
215 A droj?e J?ei?-of oute ne came; 

]?a?-of merveiled many man. 

Ypocras saide, " water y can stope, 

J>at it ne may unej>es drope ; 1 53b. 

But y ne may stope my menyson. 
220 All it is for ]?at foul treson, 

J?at y my nefewe sclewe vylengly, 

ffor he was wyse? man J>ane y. 

I no? no man unde? eon 

geue me helpe ne can, 
225 Bot my nefewe o-lyue we?. 

Ryjt it is ]?at y mys-fai?. 

To soiFre wo it is skyll 

ffor y sclouj my lyuys hele." 





B C 

933 1041 
934 1042 










\ V(JI ) 



10 (958) (1438) 

J An identical line is indicated by an asterisk (*), an omission by a dash 

( ), an addition by brackets ([]), a corresponding but not similar line 

by leaders ( ), and altered rimes by parentheses (). 



960 (1052) 
961 942 1054 



























^ ' 
























































\ / 


^ ' 


















ini 1 


































































JL\Jl 1 




JLVJ. tj 



JL ^r t/O 


























































































































V. / 





1053 1057 (1041) (1143) (1524) 

1054 1058 (1042) (1144) (1525) 
115 1055* 1059 1043 (1145) (1526) 

1056 1060 1044 (1146) (1527) 

1057 1061 1045 1147 1528 

1058 1062 1046 1148 1529 
1059* 1063 1047 1149 1530 

120 1060* 1064 1048 1150 1531 

1061* 1065 1049 1151 1532 

1062* 1066 1050 1152* 1533* 

1063 (1067) 1051 (1153) 

1064 (1068) 1052 (1154) 
125 1065 1069 1053* 1155 

1066* 1070* 1054* 1156 

1067 1071 1157 

1068 1072* 1158 

1069 1073* 1534 
130 1070 1074 1535 

1071 1075 1055 1159 1536 

1072 1076 1056 1160 1537 
1073* 1077 1057* (1161) 1538* 
1074 1078 1058 (1162) 1539 


135 1075 (1079) (1061) (1163) (1540) 

1076 (1080) (1062) (1164) (1541) 

1077* 1081 1063 1165 (1542) 

1078 1082 1064 1166 (1543) 

1079 1083 1065 1167 1544 
140 1080 1084 1066 1168 1545 

1081 1085 1067 1169 (1546) 

1082 1086 1068 1170 (1547) 
1083* 1087 1069* 1171 1548* 
1084* 1088 1070 1172 1549 

145 1085 1089 1071 1173 1550 

1086 1090 1072 1174 1551 


Ar A E B OF 

1087 1091 1073 1175 1552 

1088 1092 1074 1176 1553 

1089 1093 1075 1177 1554 
150 1090 1094* 1076 1178 1555 


1091 1095 1077 (1179) 1560 

1092 1096 1078 (1180) 1561 
1093* 1097 1079* 1181 1562* 
1094 1098* 1080 1182 1563* 

155 1095 (1099) 1081 1183 1564 

1096 (1100) 1082 1184 1565 


1097 1101 1083 1191 1566 

1098 1102 1084 1192 1567 

1099 1103 1085 1193 1568 
160 1100* 1104 1086 1194 1569 

1101 (1105) (1087) (1195) 1570 

1102 (1106) (1088) (1196) 1571 

1103 1107 1089 (1197) (1572) 
1104* 1108* 1090 (1198) (1573) 

165 1105 1109 1091 1199 1574 

1106 1110 1092 1200 1575 

1107 1111* 1093* (1201) (1576) 

1108 1112 1094 (1202) (1577) 

1109 1113* 1095 1203 1578 
170 1110 1114 1096 1204 1579 

(1111) (1115) (1097) (1205) (1580) 

(1112) (1116) (1098) (1206) (1581) 

1113 1117 1099 1-207 1582 

1114 1118 1100* 1208 1583 
175 1115 1119* 1101 (1209) 1584* 

1116 1120 1102 (1210) 1585 

1117 1121 1103 (1211) (1586) 

1118 1122 1104 (1212) (1587) 

1119 1123 1105 1213 1588 


Ar A E B OF 

180 1120 1124 1106 1214 1589 

1121 1125 1107 (1215) (1590) 

1122 1126 1108 (1216) (1591) 

[17-20] [92-93] 

1123 1127 1109 (1221) 1594 

1124 1128 1110 (1222) 1595 
185 1125 1129 1111 1223 1596 

1126 1130 1112 1224 1597 

1127 (1131) (1598) 

1128 (1132) (1599) 

1129 1133 1113 1225 1600 
190 1130 1134 1114 1226 1601 

1131 1135* 1115* 1227 1602* 

1132 1136 1116 1228 1603 

1133 1137 1117 (1229) 
1134* 1138* 1118 (1230) 

195 1135 1139 1119 1231 

1136 1140* 1120 1232 
[cf. 1142] [33-34] 

1143 (1141) 1121 " 1235 1604 

1144 (1142) 1122 1236 1605 

1145 1143 1123 1606 
200 1146 1144 1124 1607 

1137 1145 (1125) (1237) 1608 

1138 1146 (1126) (1238) 1609 

1139 1147* 1127 1239 1610 

1140 1148 1128 1240 1611 
205 1141 1149 (1129) (1241) (1612) 

1142* 1150 (1130) (1242) (1613) 
[cf. 1136] 

1147 1151 1131 1614 

1148 1152 1132 1615 

1149 1153 1133 1243 1616 
210 1150 1154 1134 1244 1617 

1155* 1135* 


Ar A E B C F 

1156 1136 

1151 1157 1137* 1245 1618* 

1152 1158 1138 1246 1619 
215 1153 1159* 1139 1247 1620 

1154 1160 1140* 1248 1621 

1155 1161 1141 (1249) 1622 

1156 1162 1142 (1250) 1623 

1157 1163 1143 1251 1624* 
220 1158 1164 1144 1252 1625 

[59-60] [53-54] 

1161 1165 1145 1255 1626 

1162* 1166 1146 1256 1627 

1163* 1167 1147 1628 

1164 1168 1148 1629 

225 1165* 1169 1149* 1257 1630 

1166 1170 1150 1258 1631 



This partial table will serve to illustrate the correspondences 
between the various members of group Y. The array of 
figures may look repellent, but I have preferred to submit 
the tabulation for an entire story rather than to give only a 
part of it, or to resort to any printer's devices to compress it, 
and thereby incur the risk of impairing its value. 



The standard Weimar edition of Goethe's works is based 
upon the final edition of his collected works, Ausgabe letzter 
Hand, which was published 1827-30, and contained his 
latest revisions. Forty volumes appeared during his life. 
As regards the form and appearance of the edition, the 
editors state that their purpose is to adhere strictly to what- 
ever is known to have had Goethe's personal authorization. 
" The Ausgabe letzter Hand is his legacy, and he himself 
regarded it as the conclusion of his life work. With great 
circumspection, and with a care such as had been employed 
in the case of no other edition of his writings, he exerted 
himself for the purity and perfection of this edition. The 
evidence of his active participation is shown in his corre- 
spondence with K. Gottling, to whom he entrusted the 
examination and correction of his manuscript, and with 
Reichel, the foreman of the Cotta press. We can follow his 
cooperation, first, in the single volumes of the Taschenaus- 
gabe (C), and, similarly, later in the octavo edition (C), 
which was based on a revision of the previous edition, and 
constitutes his final survey of the text." " No departures 
were to be made from the readings of C except for impera- 
tive reasons. Changes based upon the manuscripts or earlier 
editions, or upon independent criticism must be shown to 
be necessary." As regards changes, however, which Gottling 
admitted in various places, silently or without Goethe's 
express authority, fuller liberty was granted to the editors to 
amend, where a criticism of the text was based on the poet's 
use of words. In case of necessity a return to the former 
reading was allowed. The octavo edition was made authori- 
tative for orthography and punctuation. A slavish adherence 


to this text was not contemplated so that the new edition 
should be a mere reprint of the old. Defects, inconsistent 
usages, and lack of uniformity in printing were to be banished, 
so far as was practicable, while everything that was necessary 
to illustrate the sound and the pronunciation, especially in 
foreign words, was to be retained. In cases of doubt regard- 
ing readings, the general usage of the poet was to be con- 
sidered, and where no clear and unequivocal usage was 
evident, preference was to be given to modern forms. 1 No 
other basis for a standard edition can be conceived than that 
it should rest primarily upon that form which presents the 
author's final revision. To make an earlier edition the founda- 
tion of the text would be to ignore the apparent wish of the 
writer, and not to follow his final judgment as regards literary 
form. At the same time, in the absence of the original auto- 
graphs, or of the revised text which was submitted to the 
printer, it is impossible to determine accurately how far 
Goethe actually participated in the revision of any given 
work, how far changes received his approval, or occurred in 
the progress of a volume through the press. Goethe was not 
indifferent to the purity of his text, but, on the contrary, 
insisted on the greatest fidelity to the original. He wrote to 
Cotta, relative to the first edition of his works, saying that he 
desired that it should present an attractive appearance, " but 
correctness is of far more importance to me, and for this I 
most urgently entreat. You see that the copy has been gone 
over and corrected with the greatest care, and I should be in 
despair if it should again appear disfigured. Have the kind- 
ness to entrust the proof-reading to a careful man, and I 
enjoin expressly that the volume which I send should be 
accurately followed, that nothing in the orthography, punctua- 
tion or aught else be changed, and that even if an error 
should remain, it be printed with the rest. In short, I 
desire and require nothing save the most accurate copy of 

] See the Vorbericht to the first volume of the Weimar edition, where the 
general principles which should guide the editors were laid down. 

110 W. T. HEWETT. 

the original which I transmit." l With a manifest desire for 
accuracy, Goethe entrusted the revision of his works largely to 
others, and he often failed to take the most obvious measures 
for securing the purity of his text. In publishing the 
Schriften, he took, as Professor Bernays has pointed out, 
the corrupt Himburg reprint as the basis for a portion of his 
text. From this reprint, numerous errors passed into the 
edition of his Schriften in eight volumes. Similarly, the edi- 
tion of the Schriften in four volumes with its numerous errors 
became, in part, the foundation of the corresponding sections of 
the Werke (A). Certain works he subjected to careful, personal 
revision; others he entrusted mainly to his literary assistants, 
Kiemer, Eckermann, Gottling and others, or to his amanu- 
enses. Detailed work of this nature was irksome to him, and 
a long habit of dictation and working through others caused 
him to place an unjustifiable reliance upon men whose train- 
ing and literary judgment were unequal to the task. He 
himself had no fondness for strife about verbal questions, and 
could detect " no grammatical vein in himself." 2 In many 
cases it must remain unsettled what amendments were actually 
authorized by the poet. Where an autograph revision is not 
preserved, the various editions often show changes due to 
accident or to the caprice of compositors. Goethe did not 
always have his own printed works at hand. He was often 
also without copies of his separate works, and on several 
occasions sought to buy or borrow a copy of Hermann und 
Dorothea? In a letter to Sommering of August 21, 1797, 
he stated that he had not had a complete copy of his writings 
in his house for years, and desired him to purchase at auction 
in Frankfurt the ten volumes of his Schriften, even prescribing 
the price which should be paid. His own writings were like 
emancipated children which would not abide with him. 4 

1 Briefe, xix, 65. See also his letter to Gotta of Feb. 7, 1805. 

2 Letter to W. von Humboldt of July 16, 1798. 

3 Letter to Eichstadt of Oct. 22, 1804. 

4 Letter to Eichstadt of Feb. 19, 1806. See also Eckermann, vol. nr, 
p. 196 (Jan. 31, 1830). 


In studying Goethe's poem of Hermann und Dorothea, 
various readings appeared, and I have examined the suc- 
cessive editions in order to determine when these amended 
forms first constituted a part of the text. The history of the 
collected works in which this poem appeared has been investi- 
gated, mainly to ascertain their relation to the poem. 

Goethe's Hermann und Dorothea was published in Sep- 
tember, 1797. It is possible that the successive steps in its 
composition can be more continuously traced in it than in 
any one of his longer poems. In the whole poem there was 
a definite purpose as regards the unity and perfection of the 
metrical form. It therefore presents a definite material for 
the study of Goethe's printed text. As its form had been 
carefully elaborated in the beginning, so we may assume that 
later changes must have been made with a definite purpose. 
An examination, therefore, of the various forms which the 
text of this poem assumed will illustrate possibly, but in a 
limited field, some features in the history of the printed text 
of all of Goethe's works, and also of his personal relations 
to the successive editions. 

Goethe's earliest mention of the poem is contained in his 
letter to Schiller of July, 1796. He chose in the poem the 
purest material in order to accomplish, as regards form, all 
of which his powers were capable.' The immediate work of 
composition was begun, as appears from his diary, on Sep- 
tember 11, 1796. He had carried about with him the subject 
of the poem for several years, but the execution, which, as 
Schiller says, took place under his own eyes, 1 occurred with 
a lightness and rapidity incomprehensible to him. Goethe 
wrote at one time over one hundred and fifty hexameters 
daily for nine days in succession. Even a month earlier, the 
first four of the six cantos, which were originally planned, 
were substantially complete in their earliest form. 2 After 
further revision it was sent, on June 8, to the publisher, 
Vieweg, in Berlin. There were long periods in which Goethe 

1 Letter to Korner of Oct. 28. * See Goethe's diary from Sept. 9 to 19. 

112 W. T. HEWETT. 

was apparently engaged in simply perfecting the mere form 
of the poem. As its composition progressed, it was read at 
court and to the groups of friends in Jena and Weimar. 
The relation of Schiller and of Wilhelm von Humboldt to 
the poem was especially intimate. They entered heartily into 
its spirit, and were helpful in the discussion of the verse. 
The poem was also read to Wieland, Bottiger, Knebel, Mac- 
donald, Brinckmann, and others. 

At the same time Goethe studied carefully the master- 
pieces of ancient poetry, and especially their metrical form. 
He read Hermann, On the Metres of the Greek and Roman 
Poets; SchlegePs Greeks and Romans; Voss's poems and 
translations of VergiPs Eclogues; Wolf's Prolegomena; Aris- 
totle's Poetik; Homer, the Elegies ascribed to Cornelius Gallus ; 
Propertius, Tibullus, Aeschylus and Klopstock. The discus- 
sion of classical verse and of classical metres in German 
verse, and the characteristics of epic and idyllic poetry were 
subjects of constant discussion and investigation. Under such 
influences as these, Goethe sought to embody his views of 
poetic art. The first four cantos were sent to the printer on 
April 17. While proof-sheets were returned to the author, a 
supervision of the poem during its progress through the press 
was entrusted to Wilhelm von Humboldt, who was in Berlin, 
Dresden, and Vienna during the printing. He was permitted 
to make any corrections that seemed necessary to him. The 
conclusion of the poem was sent to the publisher on June 8. 
The correction of the proof seems to have been shared equally 
by the poet and his friend. Humboldt expressed his amaze- 
ment at the marvelous care which Goethe dedicated to the 
details of the poem. 1 It was not, however, certain that 
the final proofs were received by Goethe before he left for 
his Swiss journey at the end of July, for we find him request- 
ing Bottiger to send the last sheets of his epic poem as soon 
as possible to Meyer in Zurich. 2 

' See his letter of June 28, 1797, to Goethe, in Goethe's JBriefwechsel mil 
den Gebrudern von Humboldt, edited by Bratranek. 
3 See his letter from Frankfurt of Aug. 16, Goethe's Briefe, xn, 241. 


Goethe did not receive the Calendar which contained Her- 
mann und Dorothea until after his arrival in Nuremberg 
on November 6. His friends were not satisfied with the 
appearance of the poem in the form which the size of 
the calendar imposed, and an arrangement was made with 
Vieweg to publish an octavo edition in Roman type after 
the Easter Fair of the following year. The second edition, 
however, appeared early, in May, 1799. Goethe wrote that 
he had no corrections to communicate for it. 1 

The first edition of Goethe's collected writings was, as is 
generally known, not arranged by himself, but was made 
without his authority by a bookseller in Berlin, of the name 
of Himburg. Two parts were issued in 1775 the first con- 
taining Werther, and Goiter, Helden und. Wieland, and the 
second, Gotz, Clavigo and Erwin und Elmire. As small as 
the collection was, it seems to have had a successful sale, for 
two subsequent editions were issued in 1777, and 1799. A 
third volume was issued in 1776, 1777, and 1779, and a 
fourth in 1779. Several reprints of these volumes followed, 
at Carlsruhe, at Frankfurt and Leipzig in 1778-80, at Reut- 
lingen in 1784, and at Carlsruhe again in 1787. 

In the announcement of the first authorized edition of the 
Schriften, Goethe wrote in June, 1786, saying: "You are 
familiar with the causes which finally compel me to issue a 
collection of all my writings, both of the published and of 
those as yet unpublished. On the one hand, I am threatened 
again with a new edition, which, like the preceding, seems to 
have been planned without my knowledge and consent, and 
may possibly be like them in misprints and other defects; 
and, on the other hand, a beginning has been made of printing 
in fragments my unpublished writings, of which I have occa- 
sionally communicated copies to friends. As I cannot give 
much, I have always wished to give that little well, and to 
make my works which are already known more worthy of 

1 Letter to Vieweg of July 12, 1798. 

114 W. T. HEWETT. 

approval, and to devote my final attention to those in manu- 
script which are now complete; and, with greater freedom 
and leisure, to finish in a favorable mood those which are as 
yet unfinished. But in my situation, all this seems to remain 
a devout wish ; year after year passes, and even now only a 
disagreeable necessity could determine the resolution which I 
desire to announce to the public." l Having been thus forced 
to prepare a collected edition of his writings for the press, it 
became necessary for him later to include in a new edition all 
that he had subsequently published. 

As early as in May, 1799, he considered the possibility of 
a new edition of his works. 2 Schiller had also urged him to 
undertake this task. Goethe's thoughts turned naturally 
to the publisher Cotta, whose intimate relations with Schiller 
he knew, and whose honorable and generous character made 
him prominent among German publishers. 

Goeschen in Leipzig had published the first authorized 
edition of Goethe's Schriften in eight volumes (1787-90), but 
the continuation in seven volumes in the Neue Schriften 
(1792-1800) had been entrusted to Unger in Berlin. When 
the latter urged Goethe to submit material for an eighth 
volume, Goethe answered that he could not consent, because 
his most recent works had been promised to Cotta, with 
whom he had every reason to be content. 3 Unger, however, 
died before definite arrangements had been made for the 
publication of the Werke (A). 

Goethe's personal acquaintance with Cotta had begun dur- 
ing the latter's visit to Weimar in May, 1795, and had been 
increased during his own visit to Stuttgart, on his journey 
to Switzerland in 1797. On September 22, 1799, Goethe 
promised to Cotta a preference in the publication of his 
works in the future. In the following year Cotta assumed 
the publication of the Propylaea (1798-1800), and, a little 
later, of several separate publications of Goethe, as Was wir 

1 Hempel edition, vol. 29, p. 275. * See his diary of May 23. 

3 See Goethe's letter to Zelter of Aug. 29, 1803. 


bringen, Mahomet, etc. (1802). Schiller's intervention was 
active in arranging with Cotta for the first collected edition 
of Goethe's works (A). 1 

On April 19, 1805, Goethe wrote to Schiller and enclosed 
his former agreements with Goeschen, in order to determine 
whether any obstacle existed to an arrangement with Cotta 
for the new edition. As none appeared, on May 1, 1805, 
Goethe wrote formally to Cotta announcing his purpose to 
publish a new edition of his works and enclosing the contents 
of the twelve volumes proposed. The terms were agreed 
upon at Lauchstedt on August 12. 

It was Goethe's intention to send the text and manuscript 
for this edition in three parts, each containing four volumes. 
As early as on September 30 of that year, the text of Wilhelm 
Meister was forwarded, which was designed to constitute the 
second and third volumes ; other volumes followed rapidly, 
according as the material was new or already in print; volume 
first, containing the poems, the first part of which was in 
manuscript, was not sent until February 24, 1806. The 
fourth volume, with the exception of Elpenor, was dispatched 
on August 19, 1806. Elpenor followed on October 27, but 
volumes five, six and seven, which were apparently ready on 
October 27, were not sent until December 8. Faust had 
probably been given to Cotta personally during the latter's 
visit in Weimar, April 25, 1806. The contents of the sepa- 
rate volumes as published followed, in the main, the original 
order. The eighth volume, however, contained Faust, instead 
of the tenth, as originally proposed. 2 The ninth contained 
what had been intended for the eighth, viz., the Gross-Cophta, 
Triumph der Empfindsamkeit, Die Vogel, Der Burgergeneral, 
the Gelegenheitsgedichte, etc. The matter for the ninth, and 

1 See Schiller's letters of Oct. 16 and Dec. 30, in Vollmers Briefwechsel 
zwischen Schiller und Cotta (1876), also Goethe's letters to Cotta of May 1, 
and Aug. 12, and to Schiller of April 19, 1805. Briefe, Bd. xix. 

2 Faust was once destined to constitute the fourth volume. See Goethe's 
letter to Cotta of Feb. 24, 1806. 

116 W. T. HEWETT. 

for the eleventh volumes ( Werther and Brief e aus der Schweiz) 
was also sent at this time. 1 All the material for the entire 
edition had now (December 8, 1806) been sent, save that for 
volumes ten and twelve. The twelfth volume followed on 
May 7, 1807. 2 The first four volumes bear the date 1806. 
Their publication occurred near the end of February in the 
following year. 3 We find Goethe writing to Cotta on January 
23, 1807, saying that the proof of the first, third and fourth 
volumes had been received, but that of a portion of the 
second was still lacking. He had not been able to revise 
these volumes seriously. Many things impressed him at the 
first glance as needing change, but this might pass. The first 
four published volumes were forwarded to the author on 
March 2. 4 Only two volumes bear the date 1 807, the fifth 
and sixth. The tenth volume which contained the epic 
poems, Reineke Fuchs, Hermann und Dorothea, Achitteis and 
Pandora seems to have been the last volume sent. 5 On 
November 1 a single volume remained to be sent to the pub- 
lisher. On September 21 and 22 he was engaged in the 
revision of Achilleis. We find in Goethe's diary of December 
7, 1807 : "The epic poems gone through. . . . After dinner, 
proceeded with the epic poems, and discussed various points. 
December 8 several things in the epic poems arranged and 
this volume packed. . . . The last volume dispatched to 
Dr. Cotta in Tubingen." The sixth, eighth and subsequent 
volumes bear date 1808. 

The publication of the remaining volumes (vi-xn) of 
Goethe's works was long expected and long delayed. The 

1 See Goethe's Briefe, Bd. xix. Letters of Sept. 30, 1805 ; Feb. 24, June 
20, Aug. 19, Oct. 27, and Dec. 8, 1806; and the corresponding lists in the 
Lesarten, pp. 505 and 512. See also the Tagebiicher, Bd. in. 

8 See also Goethe's letter to Zelter of May 7, 1807. 

3 The publication of these works was announced in the Morgenblatt of 
Feb. 27, and they were received by the poet on March 16. On Dec. 16 he 
wrote to Zelter that the second installment of his works had not been 
received, and again on May 3, 1808. 

4 See the letters to Cotta of March 18, and to Zelter of March 27. 

5 Letter to Cotta of Nov. 1, 1807. 


two divisions were issued at the same time, about May 12, 
and were received by the author about the end of June, 
1808. 1 The first four volumes were subject to much con- 
temporary criticism on account of the typographical errors, 
which they contained. 

It is now of interest to determine how far Goethe con- 
templated, and how far he actually revised Hermann und 
Dorothea for this edition of his works. Goethe sought to 
make the poem the instrument for testing how far the rules 
of classical verse might be illustrated in German verse. In 
announcing the order of the proposed edition of his work to 
Cotta, May 1, 1805, Goethe wrote that Reineke Fuchs and 
Hermann und Dorothea were to be published ft revised in 
accordance with his later convictions of prosody." During 
the previous year he had again reverted to the questions of 
metre, possibly incited by the presence of the younger Voss, 
with whom he had read the Greek dramatists, especially 

Goethe says in the Tag- und Jahreshefie for 1806 : "The 
proposed new edition of my works compelled me to go over 
them all again, and I devoted appropriate attention to each 
separate production, although adhering to my old purpose to 
actually remodel nothing, or change it in any considerable 
degree." He hoped once more to write in hexameters, and 
to proceed with greater assurance in this form of verse, 
also to execute his long cherished purpose, "conceived on 
Lake Lucerne and on the way to Altorf," to write an epic of 
William Tell. The amount of attention which he paid to 
individual works was by no means uniform. 

His former interests having been thus revived, he entrusted 
a revision of Hermann und Dorothea to the young Heinrich 

1 See his letters to Zelter and to Keinhard of June 22. 

It does not seem possible in all cases to accept the view that the presen- 
tation copies were the earliest. In many cases it can be shown that they 
were the latest, and were, on several occasions, not received until some 
months after the first publication. 

118 W. T. HEWETT. 

Voss, at that time a professor in the Gymnasium in Weimar, 
in whose advancement Goethe was especially interested. A 
certain unjustifiable respect which the great poet often showed 
to the judgment of his works by others was manifested here. 1 
Voss's effort had reference to the metrical structure of the 

" Goethe is occupied with the publication of his collected 
works. Riemer and I have likewise received our task in 
connection with it. Goethe has given to me an interleaved 
copy of Hermann und Dorothea. I am to review the hexa- 
meters, and to indicate all my suggestions under the names 
' changes ? and ' proposals.' We shall afterward hold confer- 
ence and discuss the readings. You can readily conceive that 
this is to me both an agreeable and instructive occupation." 2 

" Hitherto I have not devoted myself seriously to the work 
entrusted to me, namely, Hermann und Dorothea; but in 
these days I have made a beginning. The six following 
days I purpose to undertake it with all zeal. I notice (1) 
the quantity of separate words, (2) the regular structure 
of the separate hexameters, and finally (3) the connection of 
the hexameters with one another. I frequently find six 
unexceptionable hexameters in succession, which, if I mistake 
not, recur with a monotonous effect ; I then reflect how this 
is to be remedied without the diction suffering at the same 
time. I .write my suggestions upon them, and in certain 
passages I have already been so successful as to discover an 
improvement." 3 

He wrote again later : " Within the last fortnight I have 
had a work of a peculiar kind, which has occupied me 
entirely and from which I steal but a few moments, viz., 
when I write to you [Abeken and Solger]. Goethe has 
entrusted to me the revision of his Hermann und Dorothea, 
and I am permitted to change where and as I will [in it]. 

1 Knebel to Goethe. Dec. 22, 1795. 

An K. Solger, Archivfur Lit.-Gesch., xi, 126. May 22, 1805. 

3 H. Voss to Goethe, July 31, 1805. G.-J., v, 48. 


With this object he has given to me his manuscript, where 
the single lines are so far apart that I can write much between 
them. I was at first timid in connection with it, but now I 
have corrected furiously since he would not have it otherwise. 
" Seek to remove not only the sins which I have committed, 
but also the sins of omission." I now lay every hexameter 
on the scales (Goldwage) and seek also to make the poem 
perfect in this respect, without sacrificing at the same time 
its naive language and perfect diction. Goethe is now in 
Lauchstadt : I report to him every week how far I have 
advanced, and when he returns we intend to go through the 
poem together. Goethe is satisfied with the beginning of my 
work, which he has seen, and has said it was well considered 
(besonnen) and accompanied by insight into his meaning, and 
this testimony gives me courage to proceed unweariedly. 1 

The manuscript entrusted to Heinrich Voss is preserved 
in the Goethe-Schiller Archives. It is not the original manu- 
script, but was written by his secretary, Geist. Its early date 
is shown by the fact that it contains the poem in its original 
division into six cantos. The division into nine cantos, 
according to the Nine Muses, was made before April 8, 1797, 
when the first mention of that fact is made, and after March 
21, when it was still in the original form. 2 The manuscript 
presents various tentative readings in Goethe's hand, entered 
at different times; also amendments suggested by Voss. It 
is not certain that Goethe ever intended definitely to publish 
the poem in this changed form. The proposed readings were 
experimental. In any case, the work which had proceeded 
so far was finally abandoned and was not made use of for 
subsequent editions. It shows, however, how earnestly the 
poet was occupied with his poem after its rapid composition. 
This edition (A) is the only one of which a definite revision 
of the poem by Goethe himself can be positively predicated. 

1 Biedermann, Goethes Gesprdche, Bd. vin, pp. 292-93. From a letter of 
H. Voss to Abeken, dated Aug. 3, 1805. 

*See Schreyer, Goethe-Jahrbuch, x, 204; also the Introduction to my edi- 
tion of the poem, 1891. 

120 W. T. HEWETT. 

But before the publication of A, a long series of pirated 
reprints had been issued, which influenced the text. No 
uniform law of copyright was then enforced throughout 
Germany. One of the Wahlcapitulationen of the Emperor 
Leopold II. in 1790, had been the promised enactment of a 
law in behalf of property in literary works. As a matter of 
fact every state possessed the right to control all publica- 
tions within it's borders. Some states openly favored these 
unauthorized reprints. Cotta made energetic protests to the 
Prince-Bishop of Bamberg and to the Austrian government, 
in order to protect Schiller's works against the lawless inter- 
vention of printers in those states. Even the Free Cities 
exercised the right to control publication within their borders, 
and at the beginning of the Goethe-Zelter correspondence, 
issued after the poet's death, there are copyright privileges 
from the kingdom of Wiirtemberg and the eity of Frank- 
furt. 1 In the year in which Hermann und Dorothea was 
published, reprints were issued in Berlin, the city of the 
original publication. Of the two reprints which appeared in 
1798, one bearing the place of publication (Berlin), and the 
other having simply the date, the former presents numerous 
differences in readings from the latter, but these do not seem 
to have influenced so much the later text. 2 The second, issued 

1 The Act of the German Parliament of Nov. 9, 1837, seems to have been 
the first adequate measure for establishing a general copyright law. See 
Schiirmann, Die Rechtsverhaltnisse der Autoren und Verleger, 1889. 

2 A few of these differences may be noted. The date 1798 as here used 
refers to the original text in the Taschenbuch, and 1799 to the reprint of 
that year. The Berlin edition gives I, 24, manchen for manchem; 70, andre 
(1798, A) for andere (1799, 1806, etc.) ; n, 98, keineswegs (1806) for keines- 
weges (1798, A); in, 20, schmutzigen for schmulzigem; iv, 14, von for vom; 
42, niemal for niemals; 100, sollen for sollten; 120, verbirgest (1798) for 
verbirgst (1806, A) ; 187, Garten for Garten (1806, A) ; 225, erscheinet (1798) 
for erscheint (1799, 1806, A) ; vi, 7, reinerem for reineren ; 88, zeigt' for zeig'; 
130, Pfarrer (1798) for Pfarrherr (1806, A) ; 169, Andre for Andere; 175, 
gesehenket for gesehenkt; 205, ernahrt for erndhret (1798, 1806, A); 210, 
zuruckbleibet for zurilckbleibt (1798, 1806, A) ; 251, darauf for drauf; 291, 
dem (1798) for den (1806, A); 295, den for dem; 302, Pfarrherr (1798) for 


without the place of publication, has been the fruitful source 
of corruption in the text. The false readings introduced by 
the second reprint (apart from mere differences in orthography), 
perpetuated in later editions and which constituted finally a 
part of the accepted text are : IV, 120, verbirgst for verbirgest; 
187, Garten for Garten; v, 225, erscheint for erscheinet; VI, 
130, Pfarrherr for Pfarrer ; 271, andern for anderen; 291, 
den for dem ; 302, Pfarrer for Pfarrherr ; 314, Staubes for 
Staubs; 156, steht for stehet : ix, 65, Pfarrherr for Pfarrer; 
77, im guten Sinne for in gutem Sinne; 161, stillen for s^e; 

265, uns for wnd, etc. The reprint of 1799 which was from 
different types, contains all these errors, and even reproduces 
such crude mistakes as vin, 101, Fern for fern; ix, 286, Fus 
for Fusz. Errors which originated in the reprint of 1798 (b) 
and which survived for some time but were eliminated 
in A are : I, 70, andre for andere ; n, 53, thut for thu' ; vii, 
155, zerstreuen for zerstreun. From this date to the publica- 
tion of A in 1808, nine reprints were issued, all save the first 
apparently based on some previous unauthorized edition, and 
perpetuating or introducing new errors. 

The culmination of these reprints is found in the edition 
of 1806, which was published at Reutlingen about ten miles 
from Tubingen, where A was issued. 1 

Pfarrer (1806, A); 314, Staubs (1798) for Staubes (1799, 1806, A) ; vn, 55, 
hieher for hierher ; 63, notiget for notigt; 73, darauf for drauf (1798, etc.); 
83, freun for/rewen; 155, zerstreun for zerstreuen (1799, 1806); 156, Stehet 
(1798) for steht (1799, 1806, A) ; 176, gesehen for gesehn; vin, 19, kluges for 
gutes; ix, 65, Pfarrer (1799, A) for Pfarrherr (1806); 77, in gutem (1798) 
for im guten (1806, A); 97, den Armen for der Armen; 141, Stille (1798) for 
stillen 1806 (stitt A) ; 252, an for am; 255, Erinnerung (1806) for Erinnrung 
(1798, A); 261, gehen for gehn; 265, und (1798) for uns (1799, 1806 A) ; 

266, vom for von; 299, Erschiitlerung for Erschiitlrung. Other errors, chiefly 
orthographical and not affecting the metre, are found as in : i, 24, 71, 89, 
168, 173; ii, 11, 247; in, 31, 39, 66, 88; iv, 29, 136, 176, 184, 223; vi, 30, 
114, 164, 283, 309; vii, 17, 26, 56, 57 (2), 154, 164, 203; vm, 180, 261, 
277, 286. 

1 My own copies of this edition (A) do not correspond as regards the dates 
of publication with the statement made by E. Schmidt in the Goethe-Jahrbuch, 
Bd. xvi, 262. He states that in A, volumes vi and vn bear the date 1807, 

122 W. T. HEWETT. 

Out of sixty or more readings in which A differs from 1798, 
the first edition (A) introduces forty-six original readings, or 
what may be so regarded, and presents, at least, twenty 
readings based upon this reprint. These readings are : n, 29, 
75; iv, 103, 120, 122, 187; v, 188, 225; vi, 130, 271, 
291, 293, 302, 314; vn, 16, 156; vm, 19; ix, 42 (?), 
72, 230, 265, 317, which remain as a constituent part of 
the text. 

If the text of A, including both the syntactical and metri- 
cal forms, was affected by the reprint of 1806, we should 
expect that the orthography would also be affected with 
greater or less uniformity. The preterit of gehen (ging, 
gingen), is so printed in the edition of 1798 in sixteen 
instances: I, 145, 165; n, 24, 60, 204; iv, 2, 4, 22, 39, 77; 
V, 130; VI, 170, 189; VII, 14; vm, 1; ix, 55. In the 
edition of 1808 (A) the same forms are printed gieng, giengen, 
save in four cases, viz., in I, 145; iv, 77; v, 130; ix, 55. 
If we compare the parallel readings in the reprint of 1806, 
we find that the same orthography prevails, save in a single 
instance (i, 145) ; that is, the orthography of A is based, in 
this particular, upon the reprint, and in the four instances 
in which it differs, corresponding variants are, in three cases 
(iv, 77 ; v, 130 ; ix, 55), found in its prototype, the edition 
of 1806. Similarly if we compare the preterit forms of 
hangen (king, hingeri), in 1798, and in A (iv, 29 and vm, 88), 
we shall find that they are printed in A, hiengen and hieng, as 
previously in the reprint of 1806, and as in no preceding 

while in A x the same volumes bear the date 1808. In one of my copies, 
volumes i-iv have the date 1806, vols. v and vn 1807, and vols. vi, vin 
and the remaining volumes 1808. In a second and third copy (A 7 ?) the 
dates of the foregoing volumes are, i-iv, 1806 ; v and vi, 1807 ; vn-xn, 
1808. The readings of the first copy correspond with those given by 
Strehlke (Hempel edition, vn, 196-299, quoted by Minor, Weimar edition, 
vm, 341-2), except that on p. 255, 1. 25, Vertraue (W. and No. 1) stands 
for Vertrau (No. 2) ; p. 292, 1. 11 liettts (W. and No. 1) stands for lies't 
(No. 2) ; and p. 299, 1. 25, Streit (Nos. 1 and 2) stands for Schritt (W.). 


authorized edition. The reprints of 1803 and 1804 have, 
however, these forms. 1 

Similarly if we compare the form dies and die$ in the 
editions of 1798 and 1808 (A), we shall find that in 1798 dies 
is used either alone or in diesmal, in at least six cases (rv, 108; 
V, 81; vn, 153; vui, 36; ix, 307, 313), and die$ four times 
(i, 19; vn, 20, 30; ix, 195). If we turn, in these selected 
instances to A, we shall find that dies, alone or in compounds, 
is used in seven instances (i, 19; iv, 108; V, 81; vn, 20, 
30, 153; ix, 195), and diefy in three instances (vin, 36; ix, 
307, 313). Comparing now these readings with the reprint 
of 1806, we find that the reprint uses the form dies and die$ 
in exactly the same passages; that is, where 1806 changes the 
spelling of the first edition (1798), A coincides with it; and 
where 1806 fails to make a uniform change, A follows it pre- 
cisely and exhibits the same readings. Schreckliche is thus 
printed in 1798, but Schrekliche in 1806 and 1808; Reizen 
(i, 88) is printed Reitzen in 1798, but Reitzen in 1806 and 
1808 (A); Ernie is thus printed in 1798, but Erndte in 1806 
and 1808 (A); Schwert is so printed in 1798, but Schwerdt in 
1806 and 1808 (A) ; Eretter appears in this form in 1798 (i, 
126), but in ix, 38 and 42, asBreter and breterne; it is spelled 
uniformly in 1806, and also in 1808 (A). 

A does not follow in all cases the orthography of the reprint 
of 1806 ; Ungeberdig in 1798 and 1806 is spelled Ungebdrdig 
in A; Grenze in 1798 and 1806 is Grdnze in 1808 (iv, 54, 
94, 99) ; Heirath (n, 102; ix, 70) in 1798 and 1806 is Heirat 
in A, but Heirath again in B. Parthey in 1798 and 1806 
(v, 113) is Parte in A (owing to a typographical error), but 
Parthei in 1799 a , and Parley in 1799 b . But these changes 

1 The name Gothe is thus spelled in the authorised editions of 1798, 1799 
(2), 1803, 1805, 1806, 1807, 1808, 1812, 1814 V [1816], 1820, 1822 [1823], 
1826, 1828, 1829 V (2), 1830, and in the reprints of 1798 (2), 1799, 1801, 
1803, 1804 (but Goethe on the portrait), 1806, 1810 Wien. and Prag. and 
Koln, 1814 (?) ; it is printed Goethe in the Schrift&n (1787-90), N. S., n. s., 
A., a., 1814 C., 1816 Bauer, 1817, B'., B., 1829 C., C'., C., Q., and in the 
reprints of 1822 Tr., 1822 Stuttg., 1823 Prose, 1823 Luxem., 1828 Trans. 

124 W. T. HEWETT. 

are no greater than occur naturally in the usage of different 
printing offices, or through the varying standards of composi- 
tors. A certain uniformity not exhibited in the first edition is 
shown in the orthography of A ; as in the case of the numerals, 
zwey (iv, 40, 229); zweyte (vn, 197; vm, 254; IX, 254); 
drey (i, 163; IV, 40), also in beyde (i, 65; II, 226; vn, 56, 
106, 113; vm, 7, 39; ix, 50, 53, 184, 189); in the forms of 
the verb to be, seyn (i, 39; IV, 160); sey (vi, 147, 275; ix, 
100, 234), and seyd (v, 66) ; iufrey (iv, 115 ; V, 173 ; VI, 7, 
141; vm, 62; ix, 173, 277); Freyheit (vi, 10; ix, 259); 
freylich (i, 35, 96 ; n, 254; in, 91 ; vi, 253 ; ix, 101, 157 ; 
and befreyen (ix, 135). 

The question arises how this reprint could have become in 
part the basis of the accepted text, and at the same time per- 
mit Goethe's amended readings to be incorporated. We have 
seen that the tenth volume containing Hermann und Dorothea 
was the last to be sent to the printer, and was not forwarded 
until nearly six months after all the other volumes had been 
sent (December 8, 1807). There is no positive evidence in 
Goethe's diaries or in his correspondence in the absence of 
his letters to Cotta that he revised the proof of the epic 
poems. It is, however, possible, yet the uniformity of men- 
tion of such revision previously, makes it uncertain. It seems 
probable that the poem was sent to the printer, not in manu- 
script, but in a volume of Vieweg's edition, with the changes 
indicated in the margin, but that these changes were not all 
transferred to the cheap reprint, published in the vicinity, 
which was used for convenience, at least, in part by the com- 
positors as the basis of the text, and so in numerous cases the 
more correct forms of the earlier editions were not incorporated 
in the new volume. 

An edition of Hermann und Dorothea without date, pub- 
lished in the Spitz'sche Buchhandlung / Cologne, from which 

1 The widow of a book-binder, Joh. Wilhelm Spitz, had a stationery shop 
in 1797 ; Wilhelm Spitz was a book-binder in 1813 ; later he was a printer, 
and in 1819 he conducted a circulating library. He issued reprints of 


so many unauthorized reprints emanated, presents a divided 
text. It follows in part the pre-Cotta editions and in part 
the later editions. A comparison of its readings shows that 
the early text before A obtains with great uniformity in 
certain cantos or parts of cantos, while the later Cotta text is 
employed in the remaining parts. This would show that the 
work of composition was entrusted to two compositors and 
that editions of different dates were assigned to them. The 
date of this reprint is, therefore, subsequent to 1808, and may 
be placed approximately at 1814. 

The copyright of the first edition of Goethe's works (A) 
extended from Easter, 1806, to Easter, 1814, and the poet 
entered actively upon the preparation of a second edition (B) 
at the beginning of the latter year. In the first two months he 
was engaged in the revision of his minor poems. In July, the 
order of the new edition was determined and further revision 
of the first volumes undertaken. Cotta visited Goethe in 
May, and the final arrangement with him for the publication 
of his works was apparently decided in the January following. 

It is not certain when the eleventh volume of Goethe's 
works, which contained Hermann und Dorothea, was sent to 
the printer, 1 but it probably occurred in the late summer or 
early autumn of 1816. Goethe was busied at Tennstadt, 
from July 20 to September 10, with the preparation of his 
works for the press. On July 25 the first book of Reineke 
Fuchs was revised ; on August 24 he took up Hermann und 
Dorothea and considered the suggestions for changes which 

Hermann und Dorothea, Iphigenie, Wilhelm Tell (1816), and of Goethe's 
Gedichte (1814). 

1 The text of the new edition of Goethe's works was sent to Cotta, so far 
as I can determine: 1815, Feb. 20, Vols. 1 and 2; March 27, Vols. 3, 4, 5, 
6: 1816, March 11, Vols. 7 and 8; May 11, Vol. 9; July 8, Vol. 10; Aug. 
31(?),Vol. 11; Oct. 23, Vol. 12; Dec. 18, Vols. 13 and 14 : 1817, Feb. 24, 
Die guten Weiber ; April 18, Vols. 17-19 ; (?), Vol. 20. The publication of 
the first volumes was delayed, so that Zelter wrote that the sale of the 
Vienna reprint, in spite of its defects, was increasing in Berlin. Letter 
of Feb. 18, 1816. 

126 W. T. HEWETT. 

had been proposed. He wrote in his diary : " Old plans 
of epic poetry revised." The third division of his works, 
volumes nine to twelve, was published at Easter, 1817. The 
eleventh volume contained Hermann und Dorothea. No per- 
sonal revision of this poem on the part of the poet can be 
shown. The text follows A with great exactness and the few 
differences are probably due to printers 7 errors, among which 
were the readings gern for gerne, I, 84 ; wolltest for wollest, n, 
263 ; the omission of the semicolon, n, 98 ; ein for cZem, m, 
46 ; the insertion of er, vn, 181, which errors have remained 
permanently in the text. Certain changes in the orthography 
are manifest, following probably the usage of the Gotta press 
at this time. The preterit forms of gehen and hangen were 
printed ging (i, 145, 165; II, 24, 60, 204; iv, 2, 4, 22, 39, 
77; v, 130; VI, 170, 189; vn, 14; vm, 1; ix, 55) and 
king (iv, 29 ; vm, 88) ; the spelling die$ (iv, 108 ; VII, 20, 
30; vm, 36; IX, 195, 307), when used alone, and in diefymal 
(i, 19; v, 81 ; vn, 153; vm, 36; ix, 313), is made uniform; 
the form giebt of A is printed gibt (n, 31 ; iv, 145, 236 ; v, 
53, 172). Numerous minor changes appear: as, schreckliohe 
(n, 112) for shrekliohe in A; Klavler (n, 221, 244, 270) for 
Clavier in 1798 and A ; Kattun (i, 30, 32 ; vi, 133) for Cat- 
tun in 1798 and A; Kollegen (iv, 176) for Collegen in 1798 
and A ; Heirath (n, 102 ; ix, 70) for Heir at in A ; Schwert 
(vi, 181) for Schwerdt in A; did$ (iv, 108) for dies in 1798 
and A ; diefymal (v, 81) for diesmal in 1798 and A ; Ernie (i, 
47, 52 ; iv, 38) for Erndte in A ; breterne (ix, 38) and Breter 
(ix, 42) for bretterne and Bretter in A ; giebt in A is printed 
gibt in B and C; there is also a tendency to use more 
frequently a capital letter in Jeder (n, 163 ; in, 105 ; v, 200, 
272 ; ix, 21, 270), and Jeglicher (vi, 273 ; vn, 35) ; and 
Niem, and (iv, 6) which are written without a capital in 1798 
and A. One peculiarity of this edition is the employment of 
two single s's ff (Idtft, IV, 221) for the compound character . 
The Vienna edition of B (B') has attracted interest of 
late as possibly presenting an independent revision of cer- 


tain of the poet's works. 1 In the present poem it differs 
from B in II, 140, where it has hierher for hieher, an unusual 
reading which, however, occurs in the reprint of 1816, but 
not in the Cotta edition of 1817; in n, 263, where it has 
wollest, thus agreeing with the earlier authorized editions, and 
also with the above-mentioned reprint; in IV, 122, where it 
has den for dem, thus following all editions prior to 1808, 
except the reprint of 1806. This, however, is an error, whose 
correction would naturally suggest itself to an intelligent 
compositor; the form, allzu gelind (v, 113), coincides with 
the reprint of 1816, in which alone these words are printed 
in this manner. B' avoids the errors of B also in having 
dein (in, 46) ; und bereuet (vii, 181). 

If we note peculiarities of orthography, there are certain 
general features which are common to both 1816 and B', 
which may be due to the dominant orthography in Vienna 2 
at that time, or, possibly, to the fact that the two editions 
sustain a certain relationship. Thus the two editions coin- 
cide in printing the following words : Clavier (11, 244, 270) ; 
Candle (m, 30); Collegen (iv, 176), but not Kattun (1816, I, 
30; VI, 133) ; Mahl in Seeks Mahl (m, 33) ; jemahls (ix, 267, 
270) ; einmahl (ix, 87, 263) ; niemahls (iv, 158) ; tausendmahl 
(ix, 291); zweyten Mahl (ix, 254); Ofimahls (iv, 164); die$ 
Mahl or diefymahl (v, 81); erste Mahl (vni, 30); gebiethen 
for gebieten (v, 197; vn, 198; IX, 115); hohlen for holen (il, 
196 ; IX, 81) ; triegen for trugen (vi, 16 ; IX, 289) ; Altern or 
Aeltern for Eltern (iv, 159; VI, 255 ; vii, 163 ; vni, 12 ; ix, 
56, 60, 248). The spelling in these cases does not agree with 
that in B. Other differences weigh against any connection, 
at least in certain cantos; as in the readings in 1816, rolW 
(i, 194); gerne (i, 84); Pfarrherr (i, 185) ; Verbirgest (iv, 
120); Andern (v, 235); anderen (vn, 133) ; stehet (vii, 156); 

1 Seuffert, B., Goethes Erzahlungen, " Die gut&n Weiber," Goethe-Jahrbuch, 
Bd. xv, 148. 

* It may not be without interest to note that vol. vni of the reprint of 
the Neue Schriften presents in many points a like orthography (1801). 

128 W. T. HEWETT. 

ahndungsvolle (vm, 4); kluges (vin, 19); gerne (ix, 21); 
Frende (ix, 230) ; andern (ix, 251). There are also minor 
differences ; as in spazieren (m, 96) ; Grdnze (iv, 54), etc. 
The Vienna edition (B') presents further an extended and 
independent series of textual errors for which it is alone 
responsible; as, Drum for Darum (11, 155); soil for soltte 
(178) ; den for der (179) ; eigenes for eignes (181) ; sadeln for 
sadeiten (207) ; swm schmutzigen for zw schmutzigem (in, 20) ; 
mahles for ma/ifc (iv, 57) ; ezgwis for eigenes (74) ; treffliche for 
trefflichste (v, 120) ; acA (in, 77) for lachte; vom for von (ix, 
266); Graben (in, 14) for Grdben; stehen (in, 84) for ste/w. 

The contract with Cotta for the second edition of Goethe's 
works (B) expired at Easter, 1823, and, as before, prepara- 
tions were immediately begun for a new and final edition 
of all his writings. Riemer, who had been Goethe's main 
assistant in the revision of the preceding editions of his 
works, was again called to his aid, and Eckermann, a young 
scholar and poet from Hannover. 

Goethe's acquaintance with Eckermann began on June 
10, 1823, soon after the latter's arrival in Weimar. Goethe 
expressed a wish for him to establish himself there for 
a time, and entrusted to him two volumes containing his con- 
tributions to the Frankfurter gelehrte Anzeigen in the years 
1772 and 1773; he asked him to estimate the value of these 
early productions for a future edition of his works, since he 
himself could form no proper opinion of their present merit 
as they were now so remote from him. In the period which 
followed, the relation between the two became more intimate, 
and much preliminary work on the new edition of his works 
was entrusted to Eckermann. 1 Goethe desired that Ecker- 
mann and Riemer might aid him in this task, and, in case of 
his death, assume the work in question. Goethe's earlier 
purpose was to entrust the revision of his works to Schubarth 
in co-operation with the preceding. In his letter to Staatsrath 

*See Eckermann's Gesprache mil Goethe, for June 11, and Oct. 2, 1823, 
and May 6, 1824. 


Schultz he defined the task of the corrector. He desired the 
revision of the twenty volumes which had already been printed 
as well as of those which were to be issued later. The 
volumes were to be read with a grammatical eye, and to be 
examined with critical discernment, to determine whether any 
typographical error was concealed ; in that case a conjecture 
was to be noted, and so the whole would rest upon a sure 
foundation which it would retain. At the same time no effort 
was to be made to improve the expression in any considerable 
degree, however possible it might be to do so. This work 
was entrusted later to Gottling. 1 

Gottling (1793-1869), whom Goethe had called to his aid 
in this responsible task, was a young professor in Jena, a 
scholar of attractive personality and of keenness in criticism, 
whose wide learning and later services in behalf of classical 
study gave a high reputation to the university. 2 Gottling's 
training in the study of ancient manuscript had given to him 
certain definite theories, and with these he entered upon his 
work. Goethe's invitation to him to participate in this final 
revision was made in his letter of June 10, 1825. His actual 
work began when Goethe entrusted to him on January 22, 
1825, the first two volumes of the preceding edition of his 
works for revision. It is not possible, until the complete 
treasures of the Goethe Archives are published, to determine 
when the fortieth volume of Goethe's works, containing 
Hermann und Dorothea, was sent to Gottling, probably after 
September 12, 1830, the date of the return of the thirty-sixth 
volume which contained Rameaus Neffe. 

Goethe was not permanently satisfied with the changes 
which Gottling made, even although they may have been 

1 See Goethe's letter to Staatsrath Schultz of June 28, 1824, in the Berlin 
collection, Goethe's Briefe, Bd. in, Abt. IT, p. 1324 ; also to Schubarth of 
March 21, 1825, in Brief e Goethes an K. Schubarth in the Deutsche Rundschau, 
Vol. 5, p. 38 (1875). 

*For the history of Gottling's relation to this edition of Goethe's 
works, see Briefwechsel zwischen Goethe und K. Gottling in den Jahren, 1824- 
31, Miinchen, 1880. 


130 W. T. HEWETT. 

admitted with his consent. A more exact adherence to 
classical theories pleased the reviser, but not the poet. 1 Thus, 
on May 28 Goethe wrote to Gottling: "You must indulge 
me in one idiosyncrasy. I cannot give up the inflexion Kost- 
lichen Sinnes; it is interwoven with my whole being, so that 
I must regard it as expressing myself (mir gernajjachten), 
even if not correct." He had reflected how such an impres- 
sion could, in his case, have originated. Lessing's Briefe 
antiquarischen Inhalts and other examples had occurred to 
him, and therefore he found more occasion to hope that he 
might be indulged. And again he asked for a certain con- 
sideration in the use of particular forms as a native of Upper 
Germany. 2 In another letter Goethe made a mild protest 
against Gottling's procedure, saying that he knew how to 
value the profession of the grammarian, but, as a poet, he 
craved from him certain liberties. 

Goethe published a prospectus of the new edition dated 
March 1, 1826. 1 He gave in detail the contents of the first 
thirty-eight volumes, save for volumes xxx-xxxm, which 
were to contain articles of a literary and biographical charac- 
ter, reviews from the period of the Frankfurter Anzeiger (1772) 
to those of the JeimAllegemeine Zeitung (1804); there would 
possibly be room for instructive earlier studies on Gotz von 
Berlichingen, Iphigenia, etc. While this order was in the 
main adhered to, certain volumes required greater space than 
was anticipated, and the contents of the volumes as published 
does not coincide with the numbers to which they were origi- 
nally assigned. In this prospectus Hermann und Dorothea 
was intended for the twelfth volume as in the preceding edi- 
tion (B). It was, however, actually published in the fortieth 
volume, Faust taking its place. The expression, "Ausgabe 
letzter Hand," was interpreted as meaning that the author 
had contributed his best and final touches to the edition with- 
out, at the same time, being able to regard it as perfect. "As 

1 See Eckermann, March 17, 1830. 
1 Letter to Gottling of Oct. 8, 1825. 


was to be seen from the previous editions of his works, he 
was little inclined to make changes in his writings, and few 
would be found in this edition. That in which he had origi- 
nally succeeded, he was not afterward successful in improving. 1 

Goethe applied to the representatives of the German Con- 
federation for a copyright on this edition that he might be 
protected from unauthorized reprints. This was unanimously 
granted by the Diet on March 24, 1825, but the ratification 
by the separate states was not immediately obtained. This, 
however, was effected, for the most part, during the year 
1825. 2 The business details for this edition with Cotta were 
completed on January 30, 1826. 3 From this time Goethe 
was constantly engaged in perfecting this final edition of his 
works. Eight volumes were to be issued at uniform inter- 
vals. Printing began in October, and the first instalment 
was announced for Easter, 1827. The first four volumes 
were issued so as to be received by the poet on February 17, 
and the remaining four on April 22. In July, 1830, thirty- 
five volumes had appeared, and five more were issued at 
Michelmas of that year. The final volume contained Her- 
mann und Dorothea. 

The Taschenausgabe of 1830 (C') and later the octavo 
(C) present the results of Gottling's revision. They show a 
text based upon B, the errors of which are in many cases 
retained, with a regulated but not entirely uniform orthog- 
raphy. Many of the caprices and inconsistencies which dis- 

1 Boas, Nachtrdge zu Goethe's sdmmllichen Werken, Bd. u, 224-232. 

"See Goethe's letters to the Saxon Minister of Nov. 1, and to Staatsrath 
Schultz of Dec. 18. Goethe's Brief e, Berlin, in, 2, p. 1372. 

3 For Cotta's relation to this edition, see the correspondence between 
Goethe and Boissere'e in Sulpiz Boisseree, Bd. n, from Dec. 12, 1823 to Sept. 
29, 1826. 

Goethe continued his labor on the as yet unpublished volumes, and on 
Jan. 5, 1831, had ten new volumes almost ready for the press.* On May 
15, he signed, in connection with Eckermann, a contract containing the 
terms under which Eckermann should publish after Goethe's death the 
volumes which were already complete, as well as the remaining. 

*To Miiller, Jan. 5, 1831, Biedermann, vm, 3; the same, vni, 84. 

132 W. T. HEWETT. 

figured B were removed. Both of these final editions of 
Goethe's works were issued with type especially cast, and 
upon better paper than that employed in the earlier collected 
editions, the quality of which had been severely criticized. 
When compared with the first edition of 1798, C presents 
three hundred or more variants from the first edition. Of 
these about one-third are in the spelling of words, and a less 
number in capitalization and in the use of the apostrophe. 
Other changes affect the text, syntax or metre. The changes 
in spelling from B are confined to a limited number of words. 
Certain systematic changes were, however, carried out. There 
was an effort to limit the excessive use of capitals in the indefi- 
nite pronouns and pronominal adjectives; as in the words, all, 
ander, beide, jeder, jeglicher, niemand, viel, etc. The contrac- 
tion of the preposition with the article in the accusative was 
uniformly indicated; as an's, vii, 190; auf's, in, 49; durch's, 
VI, 270; vii, 152; vm, 86; in's, n, 264; v, 118, 240; VII, 
2, 7 (ins C'), 180; vm, 108; ix, 48, 220, 232 (ins C'); vor's, 
n, 16; also with the dative in bei'm, in, 31 ; IV, 182; v, 2, 
61 ; Vii, 104, 201 ; IX, 30, in C, but beim in C' ; but not in 
am, ix, 22; im, vm, 11, 84, 87; ix, 41 ; vom, vm, 94, or 
zum, vm, 9. The elision of the vowel e is indicated ; as, er's, 
VI, 55 ; ich's, n, 220 ; Ihr's, VI, 207 ; ist's, I, 6 ; m, 107 ; 
vm, 30 ; mich's, n, 215 ; mir's, in, 107 ; ix, 221 ; war's, 
VI, 182; versteht's, vii, 182; lass', vii, 153; los'te, II, 48; V, 
109; VI, 38; ix, 169, 265; bess'rer, m, 5, etc. 

Minor changes in orthography are apparent ; frey and its 
derivatives freylich and befreyen were spelled with ei, but not 
freyen, marry (vi, 169 ; 272) or its derivative Freyersmann 
(VI, 257, 267); beyde, Schreyn (i, 140; vii, 196); Geschrey 
(i, 131 ; IX, 193) ; Schkyer (vm, 3). The suffix -ley in man- 
cherley (i, 117; n, 167; vii, 170) of the earlier editions was 
spelled with ei ; so, also was the preposition bey when used 
alone or in compounds : echt of the earlier editions became 
dcht (i, 168). 1 The octavo edition of 1830 (C) is, in general, 

lr The canon of orthography which Gottling followed in this edition is 
reprinted in the Weimar edition, vol. i, p. xxii. 


a faithful reproduction of the Taschenausgabe of the same 
year, which preceded it. There are, however, minor differ- 
ences, and the marks of a revising hand are manifest in a few 
instances: as in i, 19, where rolW appears for rollt; n, 186, 
where und has been restored before dieZeiten; VI, 314, where 
we find Staub's for staubes (Staubs, 1798); vii, 187, bessere 
for the corrupt bessre; IX, 230, Freude for the corrupt Freuden. 
A. slight difference in orthography is noticeable in a few words : 
as in i, 30, 33 ; vi, 133, 175, where we find Kattun for Cattun 
(in 1798, A, B and C'); and in in, 30, where the Kandle of 
1798, A and B is printed Candle in both C and C', as in B' ; 
Kaffe, 1798, A and B is printed Kaffee (in, 90); feiern (i, 
199) in 1798, A and B was printed feyern; erwiedern (ii, 11), 
erwiderm; Clavier and Collegen (iv, 164), and Candle (in, 30) 
were printed in their earlier forms, as in 1798, and A, and 
not with K as in B; Wochnerin (n, 43, 54; vii, 131, 186) 
was printed with a single final n; the plural of Schar (i, 
49; VI, 310) is Sehaaren in distinction from 1798, A and B 
(Schareri). The capitalization of Ihr, l you/ was not uniform 
in 1798, but is so in C'. 

From the year 1814 two parallel editions of Hermann und 
Dorothea were issued by the original publisher Vieweg and 
by Cotta, the editions of the former being based after 1808 
upon the revised text in Cotta (A). While there was a 
conservative adherence to the latter, the Vieweg editions, 
especially after the appearance of the royal octavo edition in 
1822, presented a revised text which avoided some of the 
changes, and, occasionally, the errors in A. This edition 
shows: I, 19, rollt 7 for rollt; 185, Pfarrherr for Pfarrer; 
II, 29, erblicket for erblicklet; 75, Durfiigste ; 155, Herrmann; 
163, period at end instead of comma; iv, 103, tiefen; 120, 
verbirgest; 122, den; 187, Garten; VI, 150, erfahrnen; 217, 
Pfarrer; 225, von; Vl\,anderen; 291, dem; 293, ihn; 314, 
Staubs; vii, 1 1 , betrachtet'; 55, hieher ; 105, schwatzen; 133, 
anderen; 163, wie es ; vin, 19, kluges; ix, 43, harrte; 
141 and 161, stille; 230, Freude; 317, stdnde, in which there 

134 W. T. HEWETT. 

is a reversion to the earlier type. An intelligent deviation 
from the later accepted text is noticeable, however it is to be 

In many cases it is easy to see how errors were introduced. 
Thus the reading ihn fuhrte (vi, 293), appears in the first 
edition where ihn seems to relate to Fuszweg, ' along the path.' 
The Neue Schriflen, possibly finding something obscure in 
this use of the personal pronoun alone to express distance, 
transposed the letters so that it read hinfuhrte, ' conduct 
thither ; ' the edition of 1806 changed this form to heimfuhrle, 
'to conduct home;' which has remained as the permanent 
reading. Another interesting case is found in the use of 
Iduges for gutes (vni, 19). Dorothea asks Hermann how she 
can satisfy the claims of both father and mother. Hermann, 
recognizing the wise foresight of the question, answers : 

"O, wie geb', ich dir recht, du kluges, treffliches Madchen," etc. 

The compositor, glancing at the word gute in the line above, 
set this in type, and the form has been preserved to the 
present time. Similarly, Dorothea assures Hermann that the 
wants of the ' most needy ' (n, 75) shall be relieved. The 
reprint of 1806 changes Durftigste to Durftige, making the 
statement that the relief shall be general and not confined to 
the ' most needy/ thus destroying the idea of discriminating 
care which was originally expressed. 

It seems therefore established that there was only a single 
elaborate revision of the poem by the author, which was made 
for the collected edition of his works (1806-8); that a series 
of errors were introduced from two reprints, one of 1798, 
and one of 1806, which latter was used in part for the text 
of 1808. It has also been shown that these unauthorized 
editions followed one another, the later ones adopting almost 
invariably the readings of the preceding. 


In the collation of the text of Hermann und Dorothea, I 
have used all the editions issued by Goethe's authorized pub- 
lishers during his lifetime, as given in Goedeke's Grundriss, 
IV, 689-690, except the editions published by Vieweg in 1811 
(k), 1813 (1), 1814 (m), 1815 (p) ; the Gotta edition of 1829 
(w) 1 ; and the reprint at Bonn of 1806, which I have been 
unable to find in any library in Germany, the existence of 
which is at present uncertain. 1 have also collated the Vie- 
weg edition of 1803 without illustrations, which is identical 
with that catalogued by Goedeke, but is not a mere Titelauflage 
of the edition of 1799, 2 as he states ; and an octavo edition of 
1812, pp. 235, not mentioned by either Goedeke or Hirzel ; 
also the following unauthorized reprints which are of interest 
in studying the history of the text : Herrmann und Dorothea, 
von J. W. von Gothe, Berlin, 1798, 8vo, pp. 176; the same, 
without place, 8vo, pp. 152, differing from the preceding; 3 the 
same, Zweite verbesserte Auflage, 1799, without place, 8vo, pp. 
152, differing from the preceding; the same, Koln bei Heinr, 
Rommerskirchen, 1801, small 16mo, pp. 181; the same, in 
Goethe's Neue Schriften, Achter Band, neue Aufl. Mannheim, 
1801; the same, Stuttgardt, 1803, pp. 166, I2rno, with six 
woodcuts. This reprint was also issued in the same year, 
without place or illustrations, but corresponding in the text ; 
the same, 1804, without place, small 8vo, pp. 97, with Goethe's 
portrait engraved by Oberkogler, with three engravings ; the 
same, Reutlingen in the J. J. Macken'schen Buchhandlung, 
1806, small 8vo, pp. 164; the same, Wien und Prag, 1810, 

1 There were two editions of this poem which appeared in 1799 one 
containing 235 pages (1799 a ), and one 231 pages (1799 b ). These two 
editions present the same text, but minor differences in orthography ; as, 
ergotzend (1799 b ) for ergelzend (i, 60; iv, 188); betrachtet' for betrachtet (vn, 
11) ; dringet for dringt (n, 32). 

2 The two Vieweg editions, royal octavo, of 1822 and 1829, show ortho- 
graphical differences; as, Hermann (1829) for Herrmann; Pfarrer for 
Pfarrherr (i, 185). 

3 The errors originating in the first unauthorized reprints of 1798 and of 
1806 were recognized, and removed in my fifth edition of the poem (1895). 

136 W. T. HEWETT. 

8vo, pp. 127; the same, Gothe's Hermann und Dorothea, 
Koln in der W. Spitz'schen Buchhandlung, date about 1814; 
Hermann und Dorothea von Goethe, in Goethe's Gedichte, 
Dritte Abtheilung, Neueste Auflage, Wien, 1816, bey B. Ph. 
Bauer; the same, Stuttgart bei A. F. Macklot, 1822, 8vo, 
pp. 1 20 ; the same, Mit einer Eeurtheilung im Allgemeinen, 
Luxemburg, 1823, 8vo, pp. 75, 

In the references in this investigation to Goethe's works, 
I have followed the usual designations : the capital letters 
A, B, B', C', C, indicate the various authorized editions of 
Goethe's complete works, 1806-10; 1815-19; 1816-22 
(Wien); 1827-30, 16mo, and 1827-30, octavo. Q denotes 
the edition revised by Riemer and Eckermann after Goethe's 
death, 1836-37. The small letters, n. s., represent the reprint 
and continuation of the Neue Schriften, and a the Vienna 
reprint of A by Anton Strauss (1810-17) in twenty-six 
volumes. In the dates of the various editions, C. and V. 
indicate Cotta and Vieweg as the respective publishers, and 
Tr. indicates the text in the translations of 1822 and 1828. 



Das speculum humanae salvationis gehort zu der grossen 
anzahl theologisch moralisirender gedichte des mittelalters, 
denen zwar vom aesthetisch literarischen standpunkt aus nur 
geringer wert beigelegt werden kann, die aber kulturgeschicht- 
lich eine nicht zu unterschatzende bedeutung gehabt haben. 
Wie sehr diese dichtung dazu beigetragen hat has geistige 
interesse des volks rege zu erhalten, erhellt, ganz abgesehen 
von dem kiinstlerischen beiwerk der illustrationen, schon aus 
dem umstande, dass sie mehrfach gegenstand der iibersetzung 
und iiberarbeitung gewesen ist, nicht nur in Deutschland, wo 
das werk hochstwahrscheinlich entstanden ist, sondern auch 
in den nachbarlandern. 

Vor langer zeit schon ist das speculum gegenstand der 
untersuchung gewesen zur schlichtung einer rein technischen 
frage. Es existiren narnlich mehrere incunabeln, darunter 
als alteste zwei lateinische und zwei hollandische ausgaben, 
letztere unter dem titel Speghel onser behoudinisse, von denen 
einer neben dem bilde Costers die jahreszahl 1428 enthalt. 
Diese spater als falschung erkannte angabe war der anlass zu 
dem lange gefuhrten streit iiber den erfinder der buchdrucker- 
kunst. Dieser hollandische druck ist jetzt als die jiingste der 
vier ausgaben erwiesen, die Utrecht 1470-1483 datirt werden, 
ohne dass fur die einzelnen drucke genaueres anzugeben ware. 
Der zweite lateinische druck ist noch teilweise xylographisch 
hergestellt. Uber die ganze sehr interessante frage orientirt 
jede moderne darstellung der geschichte der buchdruckerkunst. 
Eine ziemlich vollstandige bibliographic giebt P. Poppe in 
seiner dissertation Uber das speculum humanae salvationis und 
eine mitteldeutsche Bearbeitung desselben, Strassburg, 1887, 
p. 9-10, et passim. Zu den dort angefuhrten werken fiige 
ich noch hinzu : Aretins Beitrage, v, 170; Samuel Leigh 
Sotheby, Principia lypographica, wo band I, 145-180, der 



frage eine ausfiihrliche untersuchung gewidmet wird ; Xylo- 
graphische und typographische Incunabeln der Koniglichen 
offentlichen Bibliothek zu Hannover, beschrieben von Eduard 
Bodernann, Hannover, 1866. Weigel, DieAnfdnge der Buch- 
druckerkunst, vol. i, 220 ; u, 145 ; Adelungs Magazin, II, 3, 
p. 90 ; J. H. Hessels, Haarlem the Birth-Place of Printing, 
not Mentz, 1887. 

Das speculum wird durch einen prolog eingeleitet, der den 
zweck und die anlage des buches bespricht und an dem 
gleichnis vom eichbaum, der abgehauen zu verschiednem 
gebrauch dient, zu illustriren versucht. Dem eigentlichen 
prolog folgt dann noch eine kurze summirung des inhalts. 
Die folgenden 42 kapitel erzahlen dann die gescbichte der 
schopfung des menschen, des falls, sowie das leiden Christi 
bis zu den ereignissen nach dem gericht. Und zwar wird 
von kap. 3 ab jedes kapitel in vier abschnitte geteilt. Der 
erste bespricht ein begebnis des neuen testaments, mit dem 
dann drei ereignisse des alten testaments oder auch der pro- 
fangeschichte in verbindung gebracht werden, als anzeichen 
oder prophezeihung dessen, was spater zu Christi zeiten 
kommen solle. Ein beispiel aus dem inhaltsverzeichniss des 
berliner codex qrt. 1246 moge das illustriren ; dort heisst es 
fol. 7a : ' In dem 29 cp. wirt gesagt wie christus den tufel 
vberwant ; vnd daz het vns vilnt der starke bananias vor 
beziechnet, der zu dem lowen gieng ab in sin cisternen vnd 
strakt in dar nider mit siiiem stab vnd er tod in. Vnd 
daz ist vns och vorbeziechnet bi sampson, da er den lowen 
zerzart, vnd bi ay och, der den kunig aglon den aller weisesten 
durch stach mit sinem swert.' Die letzten drei kapitel 
handeln von den leiden Christi, den sieben leiden und freuden 
Mariae, ohne typus und antitypus. Samtliche kapitel sind 
nun mit bildern geziert, und zwar ist jeder typus und anti- 
typus durch je ein bild vertreten ; kapitel 43 bis 45 haben 
je die doppelte anzahl, also acht bilder, was fur den voll- 
staudigen codex die zahl von 192 illustrationen ergiebt. 


Nach Piper, Mythologie der christlichen kunst, p. 151 seq., 
und Guichard, Notice sur le speculum humanae salvationis, 
p. 9 seq., zahlt Poppe (p. 70) sieben entlehnungen aus der 
profangeschichte auf. Hinzuzufugen ist noch das beispiel 
vom straus (strucio liberavit pullum suum de vitro per sangui- 
nem vermiculi, kap. 28, iv) zu stellen, das jeden falls aus 
einera physiologus stammt. Die kremsmiinster handschrift 
citirt die historia scholastica; der berliner quarto 1246 bezieht 
sich auf die biicher Salomonis. 

Tiber den verfasser des speculum ist bis jetzt irgendwie 
zuverlassiges nicht bekannt; auch sind die verschiedenen 
lateinischen handschriften noch nicht auf ihren inhalt genauer 
untersucht. Es ware irnmerhin moglich, dass verschiedene 
autoren oder iiberarbeiter daran tatig gewesen sind, sodass die 
divergirenden deutschen redactionen auf bestimmte lateiu- 
ische originale zuriickgingen. Ebenso wenig steht liber die 
zeit etwas fest. Man hat die entstehung in den anfang des 
vierzehnten jahrhunderts verlegt ; gewohnlich wird das jahr 
1324 nach den zwei lateinischen handschriften der arsenal- 
bibliothek und der nationalbibliothek in Paris als entste- 
hungszeit angegeben. Erwahnt werden von den schreibern 
als quellen Jacobus de Voragine, Petrus Comestor und 
Franciscus von Assisi ; das datura der historia scholastica 
ware demnach der terminus a quo. 

Das speculum fand bald die weiteste verbreitung, zunachst 
in Deutschland, spater auch in andern landern. Das in 
leoninischen reimen abgefasste gedicht wurde wahrscheinlich 
gegen ende des vierzehnten jahrhunderts in prosa aufgelost. 
Die alteste, genau datirbare handschrift auf deutschem boden 
ist der miinchener codex num. 33, aus dem jahre 1356 ; auch 
die wiener bibliothek besitzt vier manuscripte aus diesem 
jahrhundert (nos. 883, 1311, 1636, 3352). Iin.ganzen zahlt 
Poppe 85 handschriften auf, von denen mehrere nur frag- 
mente sind. Ihre zahl ist wie der verfasser auch bemerkt- 
Jbedeutend grosser, da sich die zusammenstellung nur auf 


die gedruckten handschriftenkataloge bezieht. Ich habe mir 
noch die folgenden lateinischen codices angemerkt : 

Wigan, Bibliotheca Lindesiana, lat. 27, pergament, xiv 
saec., speculum h. s. in versen ; die handschrift gehorte nach 
der buchmarke friiher Volprecht von Schwalbach, Statthalter 
der Boley Francken, Comrnenthur zu Ellingen vnd Nurin- 
berg, Teutsch Ordens ; cf. Priebsch, Deutsche Handschriften 
in England, Erlangen, 1896, p. 189, anm. 

Karlsruhe, handschrift St. Blasien 78, dat. 1440; in versen. 

Bodleiana, coll. Francis Douce, ein lat. ms. mit 184 bildern, 
cf. Sotheby, loc. cit., I, 145 seq. 

Wolfenbiittel, helrastadter handschrift 588, quarto, fol. 
100-164 (1454-58 ?). x Sie ist mit den beiden andern von 
Poppe erwahnten gleichlautend, ebenfalls in prosa und ohne 
illustrationen. Zu korrigiren ware Poppes notiz dahin, dass 
cod. helm. 291 den text des speculum erst auf blatt 126b 
beginnt. Unter den ms. germ, der koniglichen bibliothek zu 
Berlin befindet sich eine handschrift, die den lateinischen 
versifizirten speculum nebst deutscher prosaiibersetzung ent- 
halt. Dergleichen doppelausgaben finden sich haufiger ; cod. 
5893, sowie 7450, der miinchener bibliothek gehoren zu 
dieser klasse, wie wir spater genauer sehen werden. Ich 
bespreche die handschrift an dieser stelle. Ms. germ, quarto 
1246 ; wasserzeichen : an drei bandern hangendes horn, und 
zwei andere damit wechselnd; 224 blatter zu 22x15 cm.; 
einspaltig von einer hand geschrieben und von derselben 
hand rubrizirt, XV jahrhundert. 

Bl. la: 'Incipit prohemium cuius nomen intytulatur specu- 
lum humanae salvationis. . . . Hie vahet an ein vorlauf eins 
busches einer nuwen zesamen legung, des nam vnd vber 
gescrift ist genemp ein spiegel alles monschliches geslechtes 
behaltung .... gantzes ' und darauf das register iiber kap. 
1-50, bei jedem erst lateinische verse, dann deutsche prosa ; 
schluss: bl. lla: 'rich sol weren.' Der rest von bl. lla, ferner 

erganzung meiner notizen aus der bibliothek zu Wolfenbiittel 
verdanke ich der giite des herrn dr. G. Milchsack. 


bl. lib und 12a, sind leer. Bl. 12b, einleitung: 'Ad justiciam 
qui erudiunt multos fulgebunt. . . . Welche vil lut vnder 
wisend zu der gerechtigheit .... da von ban ich gedacht ze 
samen legen dis buch zv einer anwisung vil luttes dar an 
ovch die lesenden mugen in selben nemen ler vnd andren 
luten auch ler geben. Aber in disem gegen wertigen leben so 
weis ich, daz dem monschen nut nuczers sie den sineu got 
vnd sinen sopher vnd sin eigen wesen erkennen. Vnd daz 
wesen mugen die gelerten haben von gescriften, aber die 
leigen vnd die vngelerten sollen vnder wiset werden mit 
legen bucheren, daz ist mit gemelde. dar vmb ze eren vnd zv 
vnderwisuug der vngelerten so ban ich betrachtet mit gottes 
helfe ze samen legen (bl. 134a) (Ich ban betrachtet mit 
gottes hilf ze samen legen) ein buch den legen. daz ez aber 
phaffen vnd legen moge ler geben, so wil ich mich flissen 
dise buch mit etlichen lichten gedichten zeluchten/ etc. Mit 
bl. 15b beginnt das eigentliche werk ; es steht zunachst jedes 
kapitel lateinisch, dann folgt ihm die deutsche prosaiiberset- 
zung. Schluss : bl. 223b : vnd an helf von im belip amen. 
Auf dem innern deckel steht Speculum humane saluacionis 
in latino et uulgari. antonius anneberger. Auf dem hinter- 
deckel : Georgius Wittmansdorjfer de hallis fallisem frater 
ordinis thewtunicorum. Johannes Weitmansdorffer de hallis 
frater thewtunicorum; auf bl. 224b federproben, und hinter 
einem lustigen verslein der name Johannes de Kampidona 
Studens erfurdensis. 

Interessant ist die handschrift besonders wegen der gros- 
seren kapitelanzahl. So ist zunachst nach kap. 34 als kap. 35 
das symbolum Athanasii eingeschoben. Dass dies moglicher- 
weise vom schreiber selbst herriihrt, wird durch die doppelte 
zahlung der erwahnten abschnitte als kap. 34 wahrscheinlich 
gemacht, ein irrtum, der erst beim 39. kap. verbessert wird. 
Das letzte (45.) kapitel der vollstandigen specula ist in 
dieser handschrift also das 46. ; als eigentliches schlusskapitel 
bezeichnet es auch der schreiber in dem proemium, bl. lOb : 


In XLVI capitulo agitur de septem gaudiis eiusdem gloriose 


Et terminantur capitula huius libelli et voluminis. 
Predictum prohemium de contentis huius libri compilaui 
Et propier pauperes predicatores apponere curaui, 
Quot si nequunt forte totum librum coraparare, 
Si sciunt hysterias, possunt ex ipso prohemio predicare. 

Wir haben hier ein direktes zeugnis fiir den zweck des 
speculum : Das lateinische original war ahnlich den tractaten 
und raanualen ein studienbuch fur den theologen. Noch 
deutlicher geht das hervor aus dem schlusspassus des prologs, 
bl. 15b: Vnd dar vmb han ich disu merkliche ding hie her 
gemerkt, wand ez mich den, die in disem buch studierent, han 
gedacht nutz ze sin, dar vmb vb die studenten in disem buch 
vinden, daz su denne wissen, daz disu wise des vslegens der 
serif I also si vnd daz si mir daz nut verkehren. Die pauperes 
predicatores konnten ihrem gedachtnis durch einsicht in den 
ausfiihrlichen index zu hilfe kornrnen ; fiir dieselben war 
jedenfalls auch die biblia pauperum zusammengestellt, trotz 
der versuchten andersdeutung des namens. Illustrationen 
hat der urspriingliche lateinische speculum wol nicht ent- 
halten ; dieselben warden erst hinzugefiigt, als man das buch 
dem laien zuganglich machte. Fiir das neue publikum 
war natiirlich iibersetzung in die muttersprache bedingung. 
Parallelausgaben mogen studenten willkommen gewesen sein, 
wie ja auch unser codex eigentum eines studiosen gewesen ist. 1 

1 Nachdem das obige bereits geschrieben, kam mir der artikel von pro- 
fessor dr. F. Falk, " Zur Entwickelung und zum Verstandnis des speculum 
humanae salvationis" zu gesicht (Centralblattfur Bibliothekswesen, September, 
1898). Angeregt durch die bezeichnung der im monacensis num. 4523 ent- 
haltenen armenbibel als speculum ein, nebenbei gesagt, schon von andern 
gehegter verdacht und gestiitzt auf die im proemium sich findende charak- 
terisirung des speculum als 'nova compilatio,' kommt er zu dem schluss, 
dass das speculum eine nachahmung der armenbibel ist. " Diese sogenannte 
Biblia pauperum ist wesentlich dasselbe wie das speculum h. s., jene ist alter 
als dieses, und dieses ist eine Ausdehnung jener nach riickwarts. Das 
speculum beginnt mit dem Neuen Testament, die Biblia mit dem Alten und 


Nach dem 46. kap. zahlt der cod. 1246 folgende weitere 
abschuitte auf, die ich nach dem proemium citire : 

In XLVII capitulo agitur de septem horis canonicis brevissimis. 
In XL viu capitulo agitur quomodo christus edificauit suam 

sanctam matrem eclesiam. 

In XLVIIII capitulo agitur de bona et nobili prosapia, 
Que orta est de beata anna et de virgine matre Maria. 
In dem L capitel(!) agitur quomodo christus mundo horribilem 

finem dabit, 
Et de ortu antichristi et de ipsius vita et quam diu regnum 

eius durabit. 

Der deutsche text giebt nun nach dem 47. kap. eine reihe 
anderer zutaten, die der materie des speculum fremd sind : 
Die sieben gaben des heiligen geistes, die sieben sacramente, die 
6 werk der erbermde, die 8 seligkeiten, 5 sinne, van zwifaltiger 
geselschaft, die 2 strassen, von dem weg der JBosen, du samenung 
der bosen(ty, etc., etc. Man sieht, der schreiber geht seinen 
eigenen weg. Es war bereits Poppe aufgefallen, dass das 
typus und antitypusschema mit kap. 42 wegfallt ; von hier 
ab schwinden entweder die illustrationen oder werden in den 
sogenannten vollstandigen speculis auf die doppelte anzahl 
erhoht. Der jenenser codex bringt anstatt der letzten drei 
kapitel ein gedicht iiber die funfzehn zeichen vor dem jiingsten 
gericht, ein gegenstand, der im mittelalter haufig behandelt 
ist und sich auch neben andern in der helmstadter handschrift 
332, fol. 1 13-114 befindet. Es unterliegt kaum einem zweifel, 
dass das speculum in seiner urspriinglichen fassung mit kap. 
42 abschloss. Spatere bearbeiter fiigten drei fernere abschnitte 
hinzu, denen dann aus erbauungs- und gebetbiichern weitere 
zusatze sich anschlossen. 

Wenden wir uns nunmehr den deutschen handschriften zu. 
Yon einfachen prosaversionen verzeichnet Poppe zwolf, acht 

schreitet fort bis zum Neuen, dasselbe einschliessend ; Variationen sind 
da, aber unwesentlich, sie diirfen die gesamtauffassung nicht storen." Der 
verfasser hat meiner ansicht nach damit das richtige getroffen. 


davon sollen sich in der nmnchener bibliothek befinden. In 
den wiener sitzungsberichten, bd. 88, p. 809, spricht Schonbach 
von sieben miinchener iibersetzungen in deutscher prosa. 
Beide angaben bediirfen der berichtigung. Es existiren in 
Miinchen zehn handschriften. Cgm. 252 ist von Poppe 
iibersehen; zu cgra. 1126 bemerkt er: "Diese Hs. ist a. a. O. 
verzeichnet als gereimte deutsche Ubersetzung. Das ist sie 
aber nicht ; vielmehr enthalt sie nur den lateinischen text in 
den bekannten gereimten Versen und eine deutsche Uberset- 
zung in Prosa. Die Angabe im Kataloge ist also danach zu 
berichtigen." Trotzdem fiihrt er sie unter no. 103 unter 
den gereimten versionen auf! Die von ihm registrirten 
miinchener codices num. 5893 und 7450 gehoren zu den 
latinij die das werk auch deutsch en thai ten, ersterer nur als 
bruchstiick. So erklart sich auch der irrtum Schonbachs. 

Unter den bearbeitungen in versen erwahnt Poppe (no. 
108 und 109) zwei wolfenbiittler codices ; " die erste ist eine 
papierhandschrift des XV jh., 47 Bl. mit schwach illumini- 
erten Federzeichnungen ; die andere, ebenfalls mit Feder- 
zeichnungen des xv. Jh., findet sich unter den Blankenburger 
Hss." Er stiitzt sich dabei auf die angaben Schonemanns 
(Zweites und drittes Hundert Merkwiirdigkeiten der Herzog. 
Bibl. zu Wolfenbuttel, p. 34). Die erste von Schonemann 
genannte handschrift ist heute 1. 12 Aug. fol. (vergl. den 
wolfenbuttler handschriftenkatalog, n, bd. 1, no. 1622). Diese 
handschrift ist aber in prosa und ganz verschieden von der 
andern (blankenb. 127a), sowohl im text als in den bildern. 
Geffckens bilderkatechismus, auf den sich der verfasser gleich- 
falls beruft, handelt sp. 176 nicht vom spiegelder mensehlichen 
seligkeit, sondern von stiicken des kateehismus. Der blanken- 
burger codex wird dort wegen des zwei ten in ihm enthaltenen 
stiickes (bl. 78-86b, lob der messe) angefuhrt, aus dem einige 
verse abgedruckt werden. 

Schonbach bemerkt (a. a. o., p. 809), dass die hofbibliothek 
zu Wien neben der versifizirten auch eine prosafassung des 
speculum aus dem fiinfzehnten jahrhundert bewahre. In 


meinen excerpten finde ich keine notiz dariiber und muss 
mich rait diesem hinweis bescheiden. 

Von den poetischen bearbeitungen halt Poppe die mittel- 
deutschen fiir die altesten ; dafiir spricht jedenfalls das hohe 
alter der handschriften, von deneu die karlsruher aus der 
mitte des vierzehnten jahrhunderts stammt, wahrend die 
jenenser gegen ende desselben geschrieben wurde. Dazu 
kame noch die spater zu nennende berliner handschrift, die 
ebenfalls in diese periode gehort. Auch der engere anschluss 
an das original deutet auf friiheren ursprung. Freier wurde 
das speculum benutzt von Konrad von Helmsdorf, dessen 
werk, um das jahr 1400 entstanden, in einem st. galler 
fragment auf uns gekommen ist. Ungefahr um dieselbe zeit 
verfasste auch Andreas Kurzmann, ein steiertnarker monch, 
seinen heilsspiegel, dessen 8000 verse uns ein vorauer codex 
iiberliefert hat. Im jahre 1437 vollendete Heinrich Laufen- 
berg sein 15000 verse umfassendes gedicht; leider ist die 
handschrift, vielleicht von dem dichter selbst herriihrend, auf 
immer verloren gegangen : sie wurde beim strassburger brande 
im jahre im 1870 mit andern biicherschatzen vernichtet. 

Mit einschluss der die erweiterte fassung enthaltenden 
zahlt Poppe zwolf handschriften auf. Er scheint sie samtlich 
fiir hoch- resp. mitteldeutsch zu halten, wahrscheinlich ver- 
leitet durch Schonbachs benierkung : " Es giebt auch zwei 
niederdeutsche gereimte Bearbeitungen, vergl. Oesterley," etc. 
(a. a. o., p. 809). Sein verzeichnis enthalt mehrere unge- 
nauigkeiten ; zudem sind, wie zu erwarten, inzwischen einige 
weitere handschriften ans tageslicht gezogen, so dass die 
bibliographic des versifizirten heilsspiegels zur zeit ein ganz 
anderes bild bietet. Ich gruppire der besseren iibersicht 
wegen das material nach dialekten. 

Die bibliographic der niederdeutschen iiberlieferungen hat 

Jellinghaus in seinem artikel iiber die mittelniederdeutsche 

literatur (Pauls Grundriss, n, 424) einigermassen richtig ge- 

stellt, nachdem sich falsche und unzulangliche angaben lange 



zeit durch die literaturgeschichtsbucher geschleppt batten. 
Wir besitzen folgende niederdeutsche manuscripte : 

I. Alteste handschrift in Kopenhagen, aus dern vierzehnten 
jahrlmndert ; nach Jellinghaus ins niederlandische schim- 
mernd. Probe bei Nyeru p, Symbolae ad literaturam teutonicam 
antiquiorem, Havniae, 1787, p. 446452; abgedruckt davon 
ist diepraefatio und ein teil des ersten kapitels von Oesterley, 
Niederdeutsche Dichtung im Mittelalter, p. 4951. 

II. Handschrift der alten handschriftensammlung der 
koniglichen bibliothek zu Kopeuhagen, No. 17, fol., bl. 1- 
82a, vierzehntes jahrlmndert. 

III. Konigliche bibliothek zu Kopenhagen; fiinfzehntes 
jahrhundert. Probe bei Nyerup, I. c., p. 454-459 ; die danacli 
bei Oesterley veroffentlichte stelle (p. 52) ist ein teil des 34. 
kapitels. Jellinghaus entdeckt in ihr bedeuteude abweich- 
ungen von den andern versionen. 

IV. Wolfenbiittel-blankenburger handschrift 127a, in 2, 
fiinfzehntes jahrhundert. Dieser wertvolle codex, der unter 
anderm auch Ludolph von Suchens Itinerarium in terrain 
sanctam, sowie das leyen doctrinal enthalt, bringt bl. 2-75 
den speghel der mynsliken salichet. Er ist mit federzeich- 
nungen illustrirt, welche das obere drittel jeder seite ein- 
nehmen, die ersten sechs auch mit farben. Eine praefatio ist 
nicht vorhauden. Das erste kapitel beginnt folgendermassen : 

Rubrum : Lucifer superabitur diabolus sit (!) dominus in 
celo sedes eius. 

Dyt boek ys den vnghelarden luden bereyt 
Vnde het eyn speghel der mynslyken salicheyt. 
Dar an mach men prouen, dorch wat sacken 
God den mynschen wolde maken ; 

Wo de mynsche vordornet wart van des duuels valszheyt 
Vnde wedder salich wart van godes barmherticheyt. 
Lucifer vorhuff sik jeghen synen heylant; 
Do wart he vorstot jn de helle alto hant. 


Dar vmme wolde god den mynschen schapen, 

Dat he myt em den val mochte maken. 

Dat hate de duuel vnde dachte in synen moet, 

Wo he den mynschen bedroghe, dat dochte em goet. 

He koes vt alle creaturen ene slanghe, 

De hadde eyn mynschen houet vp ghericht to ganghe. 

Dar in so wande de dusentlystige droghenere 

Vnde sprak to deme wyue ene droghenaftighe mere. 

He vorsochte dat wyff vnde nicht den man, 

He vruchte dat em to kloek were vader adam. 

He sochte dat wyff, dar he se alleyne vant wanderen. 

Enen allene bedrucht men bat wan sulff andere ! 

So brochte de duuel moder euam to valle, 

Dar vmme worden vordomet ore kyndere alle. 

De man wart vt dem paradyse ghemacht, 

bl. 3b. Kubrum : Deus fecit euam de costa Ade dormientis. 

Dat wyff wart jn deme paradyse ghewracht; 

Dat dede god to eren der vrowen vnde to prise, etc. 

Diese kurze probe moge geniigen um zu zeigen, dass die 
blankenbnrger handschrift von no. I abweicht und sich an 
einigen stellen eng an den wortlaut des mitteldeutschen texts 
anschliesst. Doch hat sie einige lesarten nur mit dem nieder- 
deutschen (I) gemein. 

V. Ms. I, 85 der koniglichen bibliothek zu Hannover; 
papier, wasserzeichen : ochsenkopf mit stern ; I + 68 bl., 
20 x 1 4 cm., von einer hand sehr sorgf altig geschrieben, ein- 
spaltig in ca. 25 zeilen ; die verszeilen sind abgesetzt ; fiinf- 
zehntes jahrh. Jedes kapitel fullt, wie bei den meisten 
handschriften, vier seiten und beginnt mit roter initiale. 
Einband : holzdeckel mit riicken von rotem leder, der innen- 
deckel mit beschriebenem pergament beklebt (bruchstiick 
einer lateinischen grammatik). Auf bl. 67b unten rot : Si 
quis inuenit alberto hertogen reddere debet. 

Die praefatio fehlt ; bl. la beginnt mit dem ersten kapitel. 
Von den 45 kapiteln fehlen die folgenden : 14, 15, 35, 36, 


37, 38, sowie alles nach 40. Da Poppe das 25. kapitel nach 
der mitteldeutschen karlsruher handschrift, mit den varianten 
der jenenser, als textprobe veroffentlicht hat, so gebe ich hier 
denselben abschnitt nach dem hannoverschen manuscript. 

bl. 45a. Rot : ludei deriserunt christum in cruce veritas. 

WI hebben gehort, wu vse ihesus cryst 
Van den bosen joden ghedodet ist. 

Dar en noghede den bosen mordern [nicht] an, 

Se wolden on na synem dode to spotte han. 
5 Dat was ok vor bewyset wol 

An konige dauites wyue nycol. 

Dauid sprak vnd harpede gode to eren ; 

Dat wolde om sin ffrowe nycol vorkeren. 

Se sach dorch eyn venster vnd belachede oren man ; 
10 Dar en noghede or noch nicht an 

Se bespottede on noch dar nach 

Mit smeliken worden vnd sprach, 

Dat he hedde spelet nicht erlik, 

He hedde dan eynem bouen gelik. 
15 By nycol de jodesschop bewyset ist 

Vnd by dauite vse here ihesus crist. 

De harpe, 1 dar he vppe sangk, 

Dat iis sin cruce breyt vnd langk, 

Dar vp on de joden ut breyden 
20 Vnd reckeden on alz eyne seyden. 

Do sangk he eynen vtermaten soten sangk, 

De bouen an dem ouersten trone klangk. 

He wenede vnd rep myt luder stympne 

Vnd bat vor vse sunde dar jnne. 
25 He sangk ok ghar soter wiis 

bl. 45b. Rot: Nicol derisit regem dauid psallentem in 
citara prima figura. 

1 MS. He harpede. 


Do he dem scheker louede den paradiis 

Vnd do he johanse gaff sine moder, 

Dat he scholde sin ore sone vnd hoyder. 

Dat was ok gare eyn sote sangk, 
30 Do he an dem cruce esschede den drangk, 

Wen om dorstede na vser salicheyt ; 

Vnse vorderffnysse was om van herten leyt. 

De sangk was allerbest, 

Do he sprak : consumatum est. 
35 Et iis nu allent vullenbracht, 

Dat myn vader hadde gedacht 

Vnd wat he van my hebben wolde, 

Dat ek vor den mynsschen lyden scholde. 

Mit dessem soy ten sange vnd martir vil 
40 Hadden de joden ghe noch ore spil. 

Dar en nughede on nicht an ; 

Se wolden on ok to spotte han, 

Do he al rede was dot ; 

Se bespotteden on smeliken ane nod. 
45 Dat was ok vor bewyset an dem schonen absolon ; 

Men vyn bescreuen also dar von, 

Dat he an eyner eke hingk 

Vnd van joab dre sper sin herte vntffyngk. 

Dar genoghede dem knecht nicht an, 
50 Se wolden on ok myt den swerden slan. 

By absolon is betekent crist, 

bl. 46a. Rot: Absolon pulcherrimus confessus in arborem 
confixus tribus sagittis. 

De ju de schoneste was vnd 1st. 
De hadde an synem herten dre sper, 
Dat was drygerhande herte swer. 
55 Dat erste was van sines sulues pyn, 

Dat ander van der droffnisse der moder sin, 
Dat drytte was vmme de to der helle komen, 


Den sin bytter [pin] nicht scholde vromen. 

Dar genoghede den joden nicht an, 
60 Se wolden on noch mer to spotte ban, 

Do se on nach synem dode dorch steken 

Vnd raenych sundich wort vp on spreken. 

Dat sulue don se hute 

Vsera leuen heren alle lute, 
65 De motwillens sundeghen weder got 

V^nd vorsman ores schippers gbebot, 

De lude cruseghen vsen leuen beren anderweit 

Vnd vor nyghen om sin herteleyt. 

De lude sint ok vore bewyset, 
70 Alz men van eynem koriige lyset, 

Embuerodach (!) was sin nara ; 

De to hau sines vader licbam 

An dre hundrert partenyn 

Vnd gaff ed eten den ghirin. 
75 Also don vele bose cristen l lude 

bl. 46b. Rot : Dux emmedorach corpus patris secuit in 
300 partes dans volucribns. 

Orem hymelschen vader hude, 

Wen se vorsman sin ghebot 

Vnd sundeghen ieghen om sunder nod. 

Dyt deyt om wers, de on vorsmat in dem hymelrike, 

80 Wen de on doden vp dem ertryke. 

We sek ffrowet vnd romet siner sunde, 

De vornyget vnsem heren sine wunde. 

De lude beyden vsem heren schimp vnd spot, 

De gud don dorch ydel ere vnd nicht dorch got. 

85 De lude halsvlecken vsen heren, 

De andern lude achter kosen vnd vneren. 

De lude slan god an syne wangen, 

De vp ander lude vnder or oghen reden schande. 

1 MS. crislen bose. 


De lude schengken cristo gallen drangk vnd rayrren, 
90 De van vnrechtem gude almesen gheuen dorren. 

De coplude willen gode de oghen vorbynden, 

De vngheue gud witliken kunnen gewynnen. 

De man dorch drucket cristo myt dornen dat houet, 

De kerken vnd godeshus berouet. 
95 Dem vor reder judas is ghelik de man, 

De myt houet sunden to godes dissche darn gan. 

De lude bespigen dat antlat vses heren, 

De on vmme sine gaue nicht louen vnd eren. 

O sote ihesu, help vns, dat we dy beyden alsolke ere, 
100 Dat wy van dy gescheyden werden numbermere. 

Dass die sprache des originals nicht niederdeutsch ist, 
zeigen die reime. Anfiihren liessen sich folgende formen : 
han : an (v. 4, 42, 60) versus hebben ausser dern reime; von : 
absolon (v. 46), wahrend sonst van die regelmassige form ist ; 
ist : Grist (v. 2, 52) ; sprach : nach (v. 12) ; och : toch (bl. Ib). 
Verdachtiger sind hute : lute (v. 63 ; cf. 75 !), sowie das eben- 
falls aus dem original mechanisch herubergenommene drytte 
(v. 57). Wir haben aber noch einen weiteren beweis fur 
die abhangigkeit von einem mitteldeutschen original : der 
spater ausfiihrlich zu behandelnde berliner codex fol. 245 
iibergeht dieselben kapitel. 

VI. Ms. I 84a, ebenfalls der koniglichen bibliothek zu 
Hannover gehorig ; papier, 497 bl., 31 x 21 cm., bl. l-165a 
zweispaltig ; drei hande, die bl. 1, 14b und 169 beginnen ; rot 
rubrizirt; holzband mit gestempeltem leder. Bl. 340b : Ex- 
pliciunt quinque liberi(ty Moysi sub anno domini MCCCCLXXVJ. 

Aus dem reichen inhalt hebe ich hervor: bl. 1 168b, Der 
zelen trost; bl. 410a-417a, Hir na heuet an sik wo de sele stridet 
mit dem licham; bl. 426a-440a, Incipit sibilla; bl. 440b-464b, 
eine dorotheen, katherinen und margarethenlegende. Der rest 
enthalt sermones, exempla, recepte nnd dergl. Das speculum 
findet sich auf bl. 363b-410a. Die verse sind fortlaufend 
wie prosa geschrieben ; im allgemeinen bietet die handschrift 


denselben text, wie die vorhergehende, mit auslassung der 
selben kapitel : doch linden sich kleine abweichungen. Die 
iiberlieferung ist sehr fehlerhaft. Nach einer notiz auf dera 
inneren vorderdeckel gehorte das buch dem kloster Marien- 
stuhl (bei Egeln). 

Die beiden ihm bekannten mitteldeutschen bearbeitungen 
hat Poppe untersucht ; es sind dies die codices in Jena und 
Karlsruhe. Erwahnt aber nicht mitgezahlt, da er auf eine 
anfrage hin auf der grossherzoglichen bibliothek trotz der 
eifrigsten nachforschungen nicht gefunden werden konnte, 
wird ein darmstadter codex 1 des fiinfzehnten jahrhunderts 
(1436). In Haupts altdeutsche Blatter, i, 380, wird die hand- 
schrift kurz beschrieben ; nach den dort angegebenen ein- 
leitungsversen ist der spiegel mittelfrankischer herkunft. 

Ein weiteres exemplar ist inzwischen von Keuffer auf der 
stadtbibliothek zu Trier entdeckt worden ; er giebt dariiber 
nachricht im CentralblattfurBibliothekswesen, IX, 235. Falsch- 
lich wird der spiegel Heinrich von Laufenberg zugeschrieben ; 
es handelt sich in wahrheit um eine ubersetzung des latein- 
ischen originals. Allerdings ist in it dem inhalt ziemlich frei 
geschaltet, wie aus Keuffers beschreibung. die jedoch auf 
falschen praemissen beruht, hervorleuchtet. " Dabei, so aus- 
sert er sich, folgt nicht regelmassig einem Bild des neuen 
Testaments ein solches des alten, sondern beiderlei Arten 
flechten sich zwanglos ineinander; so zwar dass der Prototyp 
vorausgehen und die Erfiillung folgen kann und umgekehrt. 
Manchmal treten 2 bis 3 Vorbilder zu demselben Stoffe 
hintereinander auf. Es sind im ganzen 96 Bilder und Vor- 
bilder, fol. 2'-26." Welche kapitel das speculum birgt, wird 
nicht angegeben ; nach der kurzen probe beginnt er mit dem 
ersten kapitel und ist ebenfalls mittelfrankischen ursprungs. 

*Es ist um so mehr zu bedauern, dass dieses manuscript verloren 
gegangen zu sein scheint, als der zweite teil eine niederdeutsche iiberset- 
zung des gewohnlich Jan de Clerk zugeschriebenen dietsche docirinale ist. 
Von dieser iibersetzung existirt sonst nur eine kopie in der blankenburger 
handschrift 127a ! Da einer meiner schiiler z. z. an diesem thema arbeitet, 
werden weitere nachforschungen nach diesem manuscript angestellt werden. 


Weiteres material habe ich auf der berliner koniglichen 
bibliothek gefunden. Im sommer 1896 machte mich dr. W. 
Seelmann auf eine im handschriftlichen katalog als nieder- 
deutsch aufgefiihrte magdalenenlegende aufmerksam, 1 deren 
sprache vielleicht mitteldeutsch sei. Der augenschein lehrte, 
dass Seelmanns vermutung richtig war. Der codex enthalt 
nun in seinem ersten teile einen heilgspiegel, der gleichfalls 
als niederdeutsch bezeichnet war, jedoch dem mitteldeutschen 
sprachgebiet angehort. Ich gebe hier eine kurze beschreibung. 

Ms. germ., fol. 245. Starkes papier (wasserzeichen : zwei 
gekreuzte schliissel; lamm mit fahne in einem kreise), 122 bl. 
40x27J cm., einspaltig, in wechselnder schrift, aber wahr- 
scheinlich von einem schreiber geschrieben, funfzehntes jahr- 
hundert. 2 Jede zeile begin nt mit grossem, rot durchstrichenem 
buchstaben. Auf bl. la und 71a grosse blau und rote ini- 
tialen ; alle iibrigen initialen (je zwei zeilen hoch), sowie die 
iiberschriften sind rot. Bl. la-70a auf jeder seite oben em 
bild (schwarze zeichnung, kolorirt), in dem abschnitt 71-122 
sind 34 ebensolche bilder. 

Bl. la : Speculum humanae salvationis in deutschen versen. 
Bl. 71 a : Legende der heiligen Maria Magdalena in deutschen 

Auf einem vorgehefteten pergamentstreifen steht (15. jh.): 
Item Dyt boich iss gehoerende zo steynuelt ynt doester jnd Nyss 
kelner dess cloesters geweest iss y vnd broeder symon schrijnmecher 
ind eyn conuers broeder geweest iss ym seluen doester vu (rse ?= 
vurscreuen ?) vnd hant dyt boich langh jairen vnder yn beiden 
gehat geleesen ind wael verwart hant. got haue loff ind ere. 
JJiesus Maria Potentinus. 

1 Diese handschrift ist die einzige bis jetzt bekannte, anscheinend voll- 
standige fassung in mitteldeutscher sprache. Ein fragment von 132 versen 
wurde von Steinmeyer in ZfdA., xix, 159 veroffentlicht und von Zupitza 
in AfdA., vi, 111 identifizirt. Die tiberlieferung der berliner version ist 
sehr fehlerhaft und ohne weitgehendste konjekturalkritik kaum lesbar ; 
sie wird in einer vom verfasser vorbereiteten ausgabe der deutschen mag- 
dalenenlegenden ihre stelle finden. 

* Der berliner katalog setzt das 14. jh. an. 


Auf bl. la steht erne altere bibliothekssignatur (17/18 
jh.): LOG. 2%3tius N. 7 mo ; auf der ruckseite des streifens, 
anscheinend von derselben hand : Joannes Paulus Easier. 
Alter holzband mit braunem, gestempeltem lederiiberzug, 
ehemals mit messingbuckeln und zwei schliessen. 

Von dem inhalte des vollstandigen werks bringt das ber- 
liner manuscript das folgende : Prolog ; er bricht auf bl. 2b 
mitten in der erzahlung von Simson ab, wahrscheinlich weil 
der text fast wortlich auf bl. 6 la (kap. 32, n) wiederkehrt. 
Von den kapiteln hat er dieselbe auswahl wie die beiden 
niederdeutschen handschriften aus Hannover. Es fehlen also 
zuvorderst kap. 14 und 15; da das erstere als typus die 
Maria Magdalena aufweist (Maria Magdalena egit penitentiam 
laerimans lavans et crinibus tegens pedes domini), so schien mir 
vor einsicht in die andern handschriften der gruiid ziemlich 
sicher : der schreiber liess mit riicksicht auf die noch folgende 
legende die erzahluug von der grossen siinderin aus und 
iiberschlug dabei gleich aus versehen das nachste kapitel, was 
bei der oft unterbliebenen numerirung wol nicht unwahr- 
scheinlich ist. Ich mochte jetzt diese erklarung fiir das 
original der codices, denen diese abschnitte fehlen, aufrecht 
erhalten. Es scheint mir die annahme, dass eine altere 
handschrift ausser dem speculum noch die magdalenenlegende 
enthielt, dafiir aber auf kap. 14 verzichtete und, wie ver- 
mutet, auch das folgende kapitel ausliess, die wahrscheinlichste 
losung der frage zu bieten. Ein ahnlicher grund lasst sich 
auch fiir die weglassung der andern kapitel geltend machen ; 
es sind dies kap. 35-38 inch, sarntlich die jungfrau Maria 
betreffend, wie aus den iiberschriften der kapitel zu ersehen 
ist : ' Conversatio beatae virginis post ascensionem domini ; 
Oristus rex celorum assumpsit Mariam in celum; Maria 
mediatrix nostra placat iram Dei contra nos ; Maria est 
nostra defensatrix et protectrix.' Das original dieser ver- 
kiirzten spiegel mag eine die jungfrau Maria betreffende 
hymnen- oder gebetsammlung enthalten haben, wie solche 
im mittelalter in unzahl vorhanden war. Ein ansatz dazu 


findet sich schon in kap. 44 and 45 nach unserer friiher 
begriindeten auffassung. Die septem tristitia und gaudia, 
sowie die horen passen kaum in den ramen des speculum, sie 
sind erst spater zu kapiteln geworden. 

Kapitel 40 (extremum judicium) beschliesst das ganze. 

Ich gebe hier als probe den prolog, den anfang des ersten 
kapitels, sowie das 25. kap. vollstandig. 

bl. la. Dit buch ist der paffheit vvol bekant, 

Speculum humane saluacionis ist iz genant. 

Hie hebet sich an des buches prologus, 
Das ist eyn vorrede vnd bedudet alsus : 
1 Qui ad iusticiam erudiunt multos 
Fulgebunt quasi stelle in perpetuas eternitates. 
5 Wer vil lude leret die gerechtekeit, 
Der luchtet als die sonne der ewekeit.' 
Dar vmb wil ich machen eyn buch zu duden, 
Dar vsz man leren mag die lude. 
Daz ist des menschen notz uber alle wyszheit, 

10 Daz er got bekenne vnd sin eygen krangheit. 

Disz bekentenisz hant die phaffen vsz der schriffl 
Genomen ; da(s) dis den leyhen zu swere ist, 
Den wil ich machen eyn lere buchelin 
Das sal mit bilden intworffen sin. 

15 Do wil ich bedudunge schriben mit der schrifft ; 
Des biden ich dich zu helffe, herre ihesu christ. 
Eyn lerer sal die schrifft nit me usz geben, 
Want yme noch der redde der czijt komet eben. 
Daz ander sal er vnder wegen laszen, 

20 Das sin lere icht werde virdroszen. 

Das ir diese rede destabaz moget virstan, 
So wil ich uch eyn glichenisze vorsan. 
In eyner aptie eyn grosze eyche stunt, 
Die sulde man abe hauwen vnd machen runt. 

25 Da quamen die amptlude gegangen, 


Eyniegelicher 1 wolde sin deyl do von intphangen. 

Der smyde meyster den vnderstam vsz kousz 
bl. Ib. Dar uff fast er syn ambesz. 

Der schuchmeister liesz dy rynnen ab schelen, 
30 Da von macht er lowe zu synen fellen. 

Der swein meister lasz zu hauff dy eichelin, 2 

Da myde wolde er mesten dy swein. 

Der zymerman den rechten balcken nam, 

Der ym zu syme buwe eben qwam. 
35 Der schiffman daz krum holtz usz suchte, 

Daz yn zu dem schiffe eben duchte. 

Der mollen 3 meister daz krum holcz vsz suchte, 

Daz yn zu der sclyp schybeu eben duchte. 

Der back meister hiesz die czwige zu hauff lesen, 
40 Die yn zu backen duchte gut wesen. 

Der kirch meister dy gruneu bleder abe brach, 

Da midde er dy kirchen ynwendig bestach. 

Der schryber 4 lasz usz dy eich eppeliu, 

Dy ym zu syner dinten solden eben sin. 
45 Der kelner daz bodem holcz zu ym nam, 

Daz ym zu synen fassen eben qwam. 

Zu lest qwam der bademeister 5 myt syme wagen 

Vnd furt dy spene alle zu samen. 6 

Ein yeclicher amptmain syn deyl usz laz, 
50 Daz ym zu sym ampt eben waz. 

Ein ieclicher lerer sal haben dy wyse ; 

Der sich an nucz vnd 7 ere wyl pry sen, 

Der sal van der schryfft daz wort usz lesen, 

Daz ym kompt zu syner lere eben, 
55 Vff daz syn lere nit werde droszam. 

Heldet ir daz, so wirt syn lere eben. 

1 ie als ei spater hinzugesetzt. 3 n aus r korrigirt. 

2 i aus e korrigirt. 4 schreiber ausgestrichen. 

5 aus balckmeister geandert. 

6 hiernach gestrichen : Eyn ieclicher meyster sal haben dy wyse. 
1 vnd iiber der zeile zugefugt. 


bl. 2a. Ir sollet auch wissen, daz dy heylyge schryfft 

By weichem waz beczeichent ist, 

Daz so gedan bilde an im l inphehet, 
60 Dy in dem ingesygel geschriben stent, 

By wilin einen arin, by wylen eynen leben. 

Sa plecht man dy schrifft vsz zu legen. 

Eyn dyng beczeichent by den wylen vnsern schopper, 2 

Daz auch vnder wylen bedudet luczefer. 
65 Da dauid gude werck beginck vnd behilt dy gebot, 

Da beczeichent er 3 vnsern herren got ; 

Da er aber eyn morder vnd vor reder waz, 

Da beczeichent er den bosen sathanas. 

Auch wyssent, daz vnser herre ihesus christ 4 
70 Auch etwan by eym bosen raenschen beczeichent ist, 

Vnd by des menschen myssedat, 

Der er so vil an ym hait. 

Absolan hatte vil boser list, 

Doch waz by ym beczeichent crist. 
75 Absolon ist der schonste gewesen, 

Von dem wir in der schrifft lesen. 

Wir lesen, daz er an eyrne baurae 5 hing, 

Da ane 6 er synen dot enphing. 

Also ist vnser her ihesus crist 
80 Der schonste gewesen vnd noch ist, 

Vnd starp hangende an dem baum. 

Wir horen eyn ander glichenisz von samson. 

Sampson qwam in siner vinde stad 

Vnd slieff by eyme wybe dy nacht. 
85 Syn vinde sloszen dy porten zu 
bl. 2b. Vnd wolden yn 7 doden des morges fru. 

Zu mytter nacht stunt er uff von sloffe, 

Als man her nach findet dy rechte mase. 

1 iiber der zeile zugefugt. 

*Dazsdbe beczeichent vnsern schopper gestrichen. 

3 iiber der zeile. 5 bnume vel aste spater iiber die zeile gesetzt. 

4 spater zugefugt. 6 das e von spaterer hand. 7 MS. urspriinglich in. 


Kap. 1. 

Dysz buch ist gelorten luden bereit, 

Es heiszet spjgel menschlicher selikeit. 

Hy mag man pruffen, durch waz sachen 

Got den menschen wolde machen ; 
5 Wy er verdumet waz von des dufels falscheit 

Vnd wart selig von gotes barmherczikeit. 

Luczifer erhup sich gein got sym heylant 

Vnd wart gestoszen in daz apt grunde zu hant. 

Dar vmb wolde got den menschen schaffen 
10 Vnd mit ym den val wyder machen. 

Daz hassete der vint in synem rnudt 1 

Vud gedochte, wy er den menschen betruge yn 
duchte gut. 

Er erkosz usz alien creaturen ein slangen, 

Der hat menschen heubet vnd plag dick zu gande. 2 
15 Er versuchte daz wip vnd nit den man, 

Er fochte, daz zu klug wer adam. 

Er versuchte isz also vil, bisz er sy fant ; 

Den appel gap er ir in dy hant. 

Also brocht der dufel eua zu falle; 
20 Da waren wir verdammet alle. 

Der man wart vsz dem paradisze gemacht, 

Daz wip wart in dem paradyse follen brocht. 

Daz det got der frauwen zu pryse, 

Daz er sy macht in dem paradyse. 
25 Er machte nicht sie also von erden, 

Er wolde sy von fleisch vnd von beynen lassen 
werden ; 

Nicht von den fussen, daz sy der man nicht 

Noch von dem heubet, daz sy den man icht vber 

1 verbessert aus mude. 2 der schreiber hatte zunachst gende geschrieben. 


bl. 3a. Got brach eva von adaras syten ; 

30 Sy wolde werden sin genos vnd syn gesellin. 

Wer daz wyp in den groszen eren blyben stan, 

So belt ir der man nymer leit gethan. 

Da folgete sy des tufels lere, 

Des ist der manne vber sy herre. 
35 Daz wyp glaubete dem tufel vnd nicht dem man, 

Vnd der man wart von dem wybe vnderthan, etc. 

Kap. 25. 

bl. 46b. Wir ban gebort, wy ihesus crist 

Von den juden gedodet 1 ist. 

Do gnuget den morderen auch nicht an, 

Sy wolden in noch dem dode iren spot ban. 
5 Daz waz auch vor bewyset wol 

An konig dauides wybe nicol. 

Dauid sprang vnd harpete got zu eren, 

Daz wolt ym sin wyp verkeren; 

Sy sprach durch ein fenster vnd belachte iren man. 
10 Da in gnugete er dannach nicht an ; 

Sy spotte sin auch dar noch 

Mit smehen worten vnd sprach, 

Er hette gespylet nicht erlich, 

Er hette getan eyme buren glich. 
15 By nicol dy judischeit betczeichent ist, 

By dauid vnser her jhesus Crist. 

Dy harffe, da er uff sang, 

Daz ist daz krutz 2 breit vnd lang, 

Dar an in dy Juden bereitten 
20 Vnd deneten in alz man dut den seiten. 

Da sang er vsz der mossen ein guden sang, 

Daz iz in den obersten tron er klang. 

Er weinde vnd rieff mit luder stymme 

Vnd bat sin vater vor vnser sunde. 

1 MS. godet. * MS. kurtz. 


25 Er sang auch gar susse wysz, 

Da er dem schecher labete daz pardysz, 

Da er Johann befaliich sin muter, 
bl. 47a. Vnd er sin sulde ir son vnd huter. 

Daz waz auch gar ein susser sang, 
30 Da er an dem krutze hiesz den drang, 

Wan in durste noch vnser selikeit 

Vnd vnser betrupenisze was ym leyt. 

Der sang was auch aller lest, 

Da er sprach : consommatum est. 
35 Es ist nu follen brocht, 

Daz myn vater hatte (er) erdocht 

Vnd waz er von [mir] haben wolde, 

Daz ich vor den menschen lyden solde. 

Mit dyesen suszen sengen hatten die juden ir spil 
40 Vnd verspotten sin gnug vnd vil. 

Da benuget in aber nicht an, 

Sy wolden in zu spotte han ; 

Da er gereyde waz dot, 

Sy sprochen ym gar smehe wart, 
45 Daz vor bewyset waz an absolon ; 

Man findet geschriben also da von, 

Daz er an einer eychen hyng 

Vnd von Joab dru sper enphing. 

Da gnugete den knechten nicht dar an, 
50 Sy wolden in auch mit swerten slan. 

By absolon ist beczeichent Crist, 

Der ye der schonste waz vnd ist. 

Der hatte in syme herczen dru sper, 

Daz waz druwer hande hercze swer. 
55 Daz erste waz von sines selbes pin, 
bl. 47b. Daz ander von dem betrupenisze der muter sin ; 

Daz [dritte] ist, die zu der hellen sollen komen, 

Den sin pin l nicht mochte fromen. 

Da gnugete den Juden aber nicht an, 

1 MS. phin. 


60 Sy wolden in auch noch me zu spotte ban, 

Da sie in nach syrue dode sachen 

Vnd sraehe wort uff in sprachen. 

Daz selbe dunt auch noch lude 

Vnsem lieben herren hude, 
65 Dy mit mutwillen sundigen wyeder got 

Vnd versmehen ires schappers gebot, 

Dy lude cruczigen got an der weyde (!) 

Vnd ir nuwen ym sin herczeleit. 

Dy lude sint auch vor bewyset, 
70 Alz man von eyme konige leset. 

Euylmeradach l waz ein man, 

Der zu hiewe synes fater licham 

In dru hundert quateren 

Vnd gap in zu freszen green vnd dieren. 
75 Also dunt vil boser lude 

Irem hiemelschen fater hude, 

Wan sie vor smehen sin gebot 

Vnd gegen in sundigen ane not. 

Im dut weres, der in versmehet in hiemelrich, 
80 Wan dy judeu, die in doten uff erterich. 

Wer sich rumet siner sunde, 
bl. 48a. Der ernuwet vnsem herren sin wonden. 

Dy lude byden vnsem herren spot, 

Dy gut dun durch der werlde rum vnd nit durch got. 
85 Dy lude halszslagen zu rucke vnsern herren, 

Dy affter sprache dunt mit vneren. 

Dy lude slagen vnsern herren got an synen wangen, 

Dy ander lude besprechen mit schanden. 

Dy lude schencken vnsem herren gallen vnd mirrcn, 
90 Dy von vnrechtem gude almusen geben durren. 

Dy kauffiude wollen gode dy augen verbinden, 

Dy bose gut mit falsche gewynnen. 

Der man durch drucket got sin heubet, 

Der kirchen vnd godes huse beraubet. 

1 MS. Eyulmeradach. 


95 By judas ist geglichet der man, 

Der mit heubet sunden getar zu godes leichenam gen. 
Dy lude verspotten vosern hern, 
Dy ym syner gobe nit dancken vnd eren. 
O Jhesus, giep, daz wir dir byden soliche ere, 
100 Daz wir von dir numer gescheiden werden. 
Nu sprechent alle samen 
In godes namen amen. 

Aus einer vergleichung des obigen mit den andern mittel- 
deutschen handschriften ergiebt sich der engere zusammen- 
hang mit der karlsruher iiberlieferung. Vorlage kann sie 
nicht gewesen sein, da sich auch ubereinstimmungen mit 
dem jenenser codex vorfinden. Anlehnungen an den ersteren 
finden sich im 25. kap., v. 7, 11, 13, 14, 17, 20, 34, 36, 39, 
51, 58, 63, 69, 70, 72, 73, 85, 98, 99 ; an den letzteren in v. 
2, 3, 6, 29, 32, 65, 76, 87. Mehr oder weniger genaues 
zusammentreffen in der diction des Ms. I 85, Hannover, und 
der karlsruher und jenenser handschrift verteilt sich auf 
folgende verse: karlsruher, v. 7, 11, 13, 14, 17, 28, 32, 34, 
51, 58, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 95; jenenser, v. 2, 3, 6, 24, 27, 
29, 36, 39, 56, 63, 65, 76, 85, 86, 87, 89, 93, 98, 99. Das 
jenenser manuscript steht mehr abseits; ihm allein fehlen auch 
die verse 43-50, 77, 78, 88. 

Was die sprache anbelangt, so steht der berliner folio 245 
dem niederdeutschen lautstande naher als die beiden erwahn- 
ten iiberlieferungen, fiir die Poppe schlesischen ursprung 
wahrscheinlich zu machen sucht. Unser codex ist sehr 
stark vom mittelfrankischen beeinflusst. Falls die auflosung 
der schwer lesbaren abkiirzung (' vurscreuen ') richtig ist, 
entstand die handschrift in Steinfelden bei Schleideri, im 
ripuarischen gebiet. Interessant ist wie der schreiber zu 
werke ging. In der iiberschrift zum prolog kornnit sein dia- 
lekt zur vollen geltung ; in den mir zur verfiigung stehenden 
excerpten findet sich kein weiterer fall eines unverschobenen 
t. Beispiele des unverschobenen d sind sehr zahlreich, e. g., 


kap. 25: dode, v. 4, 61, dut, v. 20, guden, v. 21 ; luder, v. 
23; drang, v. 30; byden, v. 83, 99; bleder, prol. v. 41, etc. 
Gegen labiale affricata straubt'sich der schreiber wenigstens 
in der gemination und nach liquiden, auch anlautend bleibt p 
gelegentlich, e. g., kap. 1 : plag, v. 14; appel, v. 18; kap. 
25 : harpete, v. 7 ; schappers, v. 66 ; prol. : porten, v. 85 ; 
eppelin, v. 43 ; schopper, v. 63. Von den diphthongen ist 
ie haufig erhalten, auch gelegentlich fur i eingetreten (cf. 
Weinhold, mhd. gr., 48), so z. b. kap. 24 : hiemelrich, v. 79, 
hiemelschen, v. 76, giep, v. 99. Von den neuen diphthongen 
findet sich ei an vielen stellen, narnentlich auf den spateren 
seiten. Dass dies der vorlage entstammt, geht wol aus dem 
verbesserten 'schreiber' hervor (cf. prol., v. 43 anra.). Inter- 
essant ist auch die form waz mit geschwundenem guttural 
(pro!., v. 58). Vieles andere liesse sich noch anfiihren, was 
mit sicherheit auf den westen weist ; das gegebene geuiige 
als beweis fur die abschrift eines codex des funfzehnten 
jahrhunderts aus dem ostlicheren mitteldeutschland von 
mittelfrankischer hand. 

Auf der berliner bibliothek befindet sich noch ein frag- 
ment, welches als quarto 574 verzeichnet ist. Es umfasst 
nur vier blatter, 15x22 cm.; auf jeder seite oben ein bild 
mit lateinischer unterschrift und 25 zeilen deutschem text. 
Die bilder sind von spater hand z. t. karrikirt und mit 
scherzworten glossirt. Das fragment scheint friiher in besitz 
Hoffmanns von Fallersleben gewesen zu sein ; von ihm stam- 
men noch vier blattchen nachweise zum speculum, die nebst 
einem kalender aus den jahren 1432-63 dieser nummer 
beigelegt sind. Soweit die literaturnachweise nicht schon 
bei Poppe sich finden, gebe ich sie hier der vollstandigkeit 
halber : 

Dibdin, bibliogr. decameron. I, 345 ; Celsii histor. bib- 
lioth. Stockholm, p. 208, 59 ; And. Sam. Gesneri progr. de 
speculo hum. salv. in seinen exercit. ph. varii argument!. 
Nrb. 1780, 8, p. 322; Frankische acta erudita et curiosa, 
15. sammlung, Nrb. 1729, 8, p. 256-260 ; Hamburger 


vermischte biblioth., bd. 2, p. 81 ; Heller, geschichte der 
holzschneidekunst, p. 375 seq. ; Home's Introduction to the 
study of bibliography, t. 2, append., p. x seq. ; Murr's 
Journal, in, 10 ; Meermanni orig. typogr., i, 100 seq. ; 
J. E. Noweitz(?), verniinftige gedanken iiber histor., etc., 
materien, Frankf. a. M., 1739, 8, p. 34-44; Santander, 
dictionn., m, 362 seq. ; Seelens abhandlung in der nova 
biblioth. Liibeck, vol. 1, No. 4. 

Die textblatter sind nicht richtig geordnet, wie sich 
aus der folgenden inhaltsangabe ergiebt. Von den bildern 
scheinen zwei iibergangen zu sein ; der deutsche text bezieht 
sich nicht auf das daruber stehende bild. 

Bl. la. Bild, mit der unterschrift: Lapidem quern repro- 
bauerunt edificantes hie faetus est in caput. Dies gehort zu 
kap. 32, iv ; den text bildet kap. 32, n, und entspricht dem 
berliner codex fol. 245, bl. 61a. 

Bl. Ib. Bild mit unterschrift: Jonas fuit in venire ceti 
tribus diebus et tribus noctibus = kap. 32, in ; text : kap. 32, 
i = fol. 245, bl. 60b. 

Bl. 2a. Bild : Hie regina interficit regem abimeleeh = kap. 
38, in ; text : kap. 38, I ; im berliner fol. nicht vorhanden, 
wie auch die andern teile des kap. 38. 

Bl. 2b. Bild : Rex saul misit seruos ad Interficiendum 
dauid = kap. 38, iv ; text : nach der karlsruher iiberlie- 
ferung sollte der inhalt sich auf die iiberschrift moyses belegete 
di stat sabba alumme beziehen. Der berliner quarto 1246 
giebt als inhalt des 39. kap. folgendes an : 'In dem 39 c. wirt 
gelert wie Maria vnser behutterin ist von dem zorn gottes vnd 
von den striken des tufels vnd von der akust der welt vnd von 
der anvechtigung vnsers vleses behut su vns. das erst ist offenbar 
durch die frowen tharbis du die stat saba behub vor moysij etc. 
Diese erzahlung wird aber hier mit dem vorhergehenden 
abschnitt verbunden und sehr kurz abgetan, an seine stelle 
tritt eine lang ausgesponnene aufzahlung von des teufels 


Bl. 3a. Bild : Cristus ostendit patri volnera orans pro mundo 
= kap. 39, i ; text : kap. 38, in. 

Bl. 3b. Bild : Antipater ostendit volnera cesari prima figura 
kap. 39, ir ; text : kap. 38, IV. 

Bl. 4a. Bild : Homo abijt in regionem longinquam prima 
figura = kap. 40, n ; text : kap. 39, iv == fol. 245, bl. 67b. 

Bl. 4b. Bild: Extremumjudicium kap. 40, 1; text: kap. 
39, m = fol. 245, bl. 67a. 

Das fragment hat also nur das 38. kap. und zwar, wie es 
scheint, in eigener ausfuhrung vollstandig bewahrt. Von kap. 
32 ist die erste halfte, von kap. 39 die zweite halfte iiberliefert. 
Die sprache ist mitteldeutsch und zeigt in alien fallen den 
neuen diphthongen ; auch monophthongirung ist eingetreten. 
JSTach sprache und schrift ist sie ans ende des funfzehnten jahr- 
hunderts zu verweisen, bildet also zeitlich den abschluss der 
soweit bekannten mitteldeutsehen heilsspiegel. Ich lasse den 
ersten teil des 38. kap. folgen. 

bl. 2a. Wir ban gehort, wie maria ist vnsir sunerynne. 

Nu hore wir, wie sie ist vnsir beschirmerynne. 

Sie beschirmet vns vor gotis czorn vnd grymmikeit, 

Vor des teufils anuechtin vnd vor der werlde valscheit. 
5 Das vns maria beschirmet vor gotis czorn, 

Das was beweiset in der aldin ee hy vorn. 

Moises belegete di stat czu einer czeit, 

Vnd do was nymant, der di stai hette gefreit. 

Moises was ein wundir schoner man, 
10 Den sach des koniges tachter von der mawer an ; 

Das werte also lange, bis sie en lip gewan. 

Czu leczte lis sie eren vater di rede vorstan ; 

Sie sprach, sie welde sich ym gerne czu weibe gebin, 

Vnd also machte man das orlew vor ebin. 
15 Dem konige behayte der rot vnd tet also, 

Di stat wart irlost vnd di gefangen fro. 

Got hatte mer wenn tausunt yar 

Kein desir werlide ein orlewge czwar. 

Vns kunde nymant seine holde irwerbin, 


20 Her wolde vns alien ewiclichen vorterbin. 
Czu leczte quam maria, vnsir beschirmerinne, 
Vnd machte das orleuge czu sune vnd czu mynne, 
Do sie den allirgeweldigen got so lip gewan, 
Das her sie czu einer mutir wolde enpfan. 

25 Also hat vns maria beschirmet vor gotis czorn. 
bl. 2b. Wer das nicht geschen, wir weren alle vorlorn. 
Maria beschirmet vns auch vor des teufils list, 
Wenn seine bekorunge mancher hande ist. 
Etliche leute bekoret her mit der hochfart, 

30 Alzo ysabel, balthazar, holofernus bekort wart. 
Mit hasse bekorte her cayn, der sein brndir irslug, 
Jacobs sone vnd andir leute genug. 
Mit roche bekorte her absolon vnd semey, 
Sante iacob, sante iohannes, di sone zebedei. 

35 Mit crankem glowben bekorte her moyses, den guten 


Konig achab, achas vnd konig yerobeam. 
Mit wedirstrebikeit vnd mit vngehorsam 
Bekorte her datan vnd abyron, kore vnd cham. 
Mit bosem rote bekorte her balaam vnd yonadab 

40 Vnd anathophel, der kein konig dauid bosen rot gab. 
Mit vntrewe bekorte her triphon vnd iudas 
Vnd yoab, der ein vngetrewer morder was. 
Etliche bekorte her mit morden, alz manasses, 
Tyrus vnd antyochus, dooch vnd herodes. 

45 Etliche bekorte her, das sie sich toten vnd lossen slan, 
Alz iudas vnd antiophel, abimalech vnd saul han 


Dese bekorunge vnd manche bose list 
Hat der vint, der vnsir wedirsache ist. 
Adir(!) gotis muter maria, di mayt reine, 

50 Mag vns beschirmen vor desir bekorunge algemeyne. 

Ob unter den andern bei Poppe erwahnten handschriften 
sich noch eine mitteldeutsche befindet, vermag ich nicht 


anzugebeu. In betracht kamen der prager codex num. la. 
37 und der wiener num. 3085 ; nach den von Kelle im 
serapeum, xxix, 117, mitgeteilten spriehwortern, die sich 
im prager manuscript vorfinden, haben wir wol das speculum 
als oberdeutsch anzusetzen und auch der wiener codex diirfte 
seinem aufbewahrungsort sprachlich nahe stehen. Von der 
miinchener bibliothek geht mir die nachricht zu, dass der cgm. 
5249 (no. 44) ein bruchstiick enthalt von 3J bl. pergament 
in quarto, gereimt und mit bildern, aus dem f iinfzehnten jahr- 
hundert. Schonbachs bemerkung, dass er auf der leipziger 
universitatsbibliothek eine bearbeitung 1 in versen eingesehen 
habe, bezieht Poppe auf den lateinischen text; es ist aber 
eine deutsche version gemeint. An derselben stelle wird auch 
als wahrscheinlich einen speculum en thai tend die handschrift 
genannt, welche in ZfdPh., ix, 108, erwahnt ist. Dieses von 
director Schauenburg in Paris erworbene manuscript aus 
dem ende des vierzehnten oder anfang des fiinfzehnten jahr- 
hunderts scheiut allerdings dem inhalt des speculum sich 
stark anzuschliessen ; nach der beschreibung kann man aber 
zweifelhaft sein, ob es sich um einen echten speculum humanae 
salvationis handelt. Schauenburg sagt dariiber : " Es ist, wie 
verschiedene lesefehler beweisen, die abschrift eines alteren 
originals. Die sprache ist alemannisch. In diesem manu- 
script befindet sich eine ziemliche anzahl nicht ungeschickt 
behandelter bilder, wobei auf je einer seite neben einem bilde 
aus dem neuen testament immer ein entsprechendes aus dem 
alten steht, und so symbolisch das verhaltniss des alten testa- 
ments zum neuen als ein prophetisches bezeichnet wird." 
Sollte dies vielleicht eine altere ' compilatio ' sein, dem spater 
der heilsspiegel konkurrenz machte? Das manuscript ware 
einer genaueren untersuchung wert. 

1 Diese handschrift war schon Hoffmann von Fallersleben bekannt, der 
in seinen oben genannten excerpten dariiber eine notiz hinterlassen hat. 
" In einer handschrift der pauliner bibliothek zu Leipzig wird der 
verfasser Henricus de Lichtenstein genannt, siehe Freytag, anal, litt., 
p. 891." 


Noch zwei andere handschriften finde ich erwahnt ; v. d. 
Hagen und Biisching, litterarischer grundrisz zur geschichte 
der deutschen poesie, p. 455, nennen ein zu Elchingen 
befindliches manuscript, wobei auf Adelungs magazin, n, 3, 
p. 90, verwiesen wird. Den andern verzeichnet Hoffmann 
von Fallersleben in seinen handschriftlicheu notizen als 
" papierhandschrift, 1433, fol. no. 31." Ich habe ihn hier- 
nach nicht identifiziren konnen. 

Den beriihrten fragen weiter nachzuforschen oder gar auf 
eine filiation der iiberlieferungen einzugehen, sehe ich mich 
bei dem mangel an literarischen hilfsquellen und ausreich- 
endem handschriftlichen material ausser stande. Hoffentlich 
beschaftigt sich jemand, der den quellen naher ist, bald 
eingehend mit diesem interessanten gegenstande. 








It is a somewhat singular fact that although students of 
our language and literature have been carefully gleaning 
their chosen fields and leaving scarcely any entirely new 
theme for investigation, there should remain practically un- 
touched a subject of high interest and aesthetic importance, 
I mean the use of color in poetry. To some extent the 
matter has attracted attention in the study of other literatures 
than ours. Critics often remark upon the brilliant color- 
sense of the Celtic poets and of the writers of the Old Norse 
sagas and poems. Gladstone devoted a long section of his 
Homeric Studies to the color-epithets in the Iliad and the 
Odyssey; and a German scholar, with characteristic thorough- 
ness, has made an exhaustive study of the color-words in the 
entire body of the Latin and Greek classics. But an ade- 
quate investigation of the development of the color-sense in 
English poetry is yet to be written. I know of but one 
paper that treats the matter in any detail, and that paper * is 
confessedly tentative and leaves the older periods untouched. 

1 H. Ellis, The Colour-sense in Literature, Cont. Rev., LXIX, 714-730. 


170 W. E. MEAD. 

As for color in Old English poetry, a few words by Pro- 
fessor March * and a few more in a very rare paper by Dr. 
Sweet 2 exhaust about all that has been said on the subject. 

The scientific study of color has strangely lagged behind 
that of other natural phenomena. In fact, it is only of recent 
years that men of science have attempted to construct a scien- 
tifically accurate color nomenclature. Most of us have a very 
limited color vocabulary, and we differ hopelessly in our 
terminology as soon as we move away from a few sharply 
defined colors. There are now listed (in Biedermann's 
Chemiker Kalender) about three hundred and fifty com- 
mercial dyes, of which probably less than a twentieth could 
be properly named by the average person. When we con- 
sider, furthermore, that the number of shades produced by 
mixing is practically unlimited, and that nature proceeds in 
her work without much regard to the deficiencies of our 
vocabularies, we can understand how there may be an initial 
difficulty in assigning an exact value to the color-words in 
Old English poetry. Aelfric's Nomina Colorum (Wright- 
Wiilcker's Vocab., I, 163) and other glossaries aid somewhat, 
but the Latin equivalents have not always a settled color- 

The remarkable fact about a great number of the Old 
English words that possibly are to be taken as color-words, 
is that they are so indefinite in their application as scarcely 
to permit us to decide whether a color-effect is intended or 
not. 3 Take for example the word Adr, hoary or gray, or, 
secondarily, aged. Does the emphasis of this word when 
applied to persons lie upon the grayness or upon the age 
implied by it? The answer is by no means certain. On the 

1 The World of Beowulf in Trans, of Am. Phil. Soc. for 1882, p. xxi. 

*H. Sweet, Shelley's Nature Poetry, Lond., 1888. Twenty-five copies 

3 The peculiar fondness of Old English poetry for formal, conventional 
phrases adds an element of doubt, in many cases, as to whether the color- 
word is to be regarded as anything more than an epithet, without a special 


other hand, when the word is used in describing a stone or a 
suit of armor, a color-effect is doubtless intended the dull 
mixture of black and white which we call gray. Similar 
questions arise in regard to the words deorc, mire, nvpan, 
ivan(n), gold, blod, and others. 

To discuss all the problems that are suggested by the topic 
would far transcend the limits of this paper. I shall be 
compelled, therefore, in this preliminary discussion to leave 
many important matters altogether untouched, or at most 
merely referred to in passing. In a full discussion, the rela- 
tion of each poem to its source, with a consideration of the 
probability of a large transfer of borrowed color-epithets, 
should hold a prominent place. But such an investigation, 
if made at all, must be made in detail, and must therefore be 
reserved for another occasion. 

One of the first things that strike the reader of Old 
English poetry is the comparatively small number of genuine 
color-words that it contains. Some important colors do not 
appear at all. Blue, for example, is practically non-existent, 
although one instance occurs. 1 This color, by the way, has 
never been much used in English poetry until our own cen- 
tury. Yet in a single page Tennyson uses it twice, and 
Byron and Shelley and Browning and others find it useful. 
This early neglect of blue is the more remarkable, since 
modern psychological tests have shown that in some quarters 
blue heads the list of favorite colors. 2 Possibly, however, 
what we distinguish as blue our ancestors were content to call 
merely dark. 3 

1 Ex. 476. Wses seo hsewene lyft heolfre geblanden. 
3 Sixty -six Columbia students, tested for preference of color, gave the 
following results: 

blue, . . 34.9 per cent. yellow, . . 7.5 per cent, 
red, . . 22.7 " green, . . 6.1 " 

violet, . 12.1 " white, . . 6.1 " 

no preference, . . 1 0.6 per cent. Psych. Rev., 3, 635. 
I am indebted for this note to Dr. C. H. Judd. 
a Cf. Ellis, The Colour-seme in Lit., p. 727. 

172 W. E. MEAD. 

If we take the entire body of Old English verse we find 
that the most frequent of the genuine simple colors is green ; 
next comes red, and then yellow. But violet, indigo, and 
orange do not appear at all. These last three colors are, in 
fact, very slightly represented in the English poetry of any 
period. Violet is almost wholly used as the name of a 
flower ; indigo is too technical a term for poetry ; and orange 
has only now and then appeared, more perhaps in our own 
century than in any other. Of the mixed colors, fealv,j brun, 
and hunt are most pronounced. These will be discussed in 
their proper place. 

The list of Old English colors is at best a rather short one, 
and its meagreness is the more striking as soon as we begin 
to compare it with the richness of color that appears in 
Chaucer, or the mediaeval romances, or in Shakespeare. The 
difference is seen not merely in the greater amount of color 
used by the later poets, but in the greater vividness and 
freshness with which the color-words are applied. Look for 
a moment at Chaucer's Prologue, which contains 858 lines. 
The color-words are indeed simple, black, white, brown, 
blue, green, grey, pers (sky-blue), red, yellow, but they 
are deliberately employed for a picturesque effect, which is 
enhanced by the use of comparisons, a device never used for 
this purpose in Old English poetry. The Frankleyne's beard 
is as white as a daisy ; a purse is as white as morning's milk ; 
the monk's neck is white as the fleur-de-lys. The mere men- 
tion of this lack of comparisons tells us much in a negative 
way with regard to the Old English use of color. The 
nearest approach to anything like comparison with color- 
words appears in the use of such compounds as blodfdg, gold- 
fag, and in the words descriptive of brightness heofonbeorht, 
sigelbeorht, sigeltorht, heofontorht, swegltorht. It is not too 
much to say that after the Norman Conquest and after the 
contact with French literature, English poets acquired a new 
sense, which enabled them to see (or at least to express) 


things only dimly apprehended before. How great the differ- 
ence is can be shown only by detailed comparison. 

If we had authoritative tabulations of the colors used by 
the English poets in different periods, with a list of the 
objects to which the colors are applied, we should have a 
solid basis for generalization. This is in part supplied by 
the concordances to Shakespeare, Milton, and Pope, but the 
lists found in these books should be supplemented by a great 
number of others. In the lack of such tabulations I have 
limited my comparison mainly to Old Saxon, Old High 
German, and Icelandic poems, and to the Celtic poems con- 
tained in the so-called Four Ancient Books of Wales. 

The comparative lack of color in Old English poems does 
not necessarily mean that they are without poetic value. A 
lavish use of color is not necessarily an excellence. Over- 
luxuriance is rather a token of weakness and of immature 
taste. The Latin poets of the decadence, such as Statius and 
the mediaeval imitators of Ovid, are far more free with their 
color-phrases than is Horace or Vergil, and they try to make 
up for their lack of imagination by a liberal use of the paint- 
pot. An almost colorless poetry may have life, movement, 
imagination, strength, picturesqueness, but it will lack pic- 
torial richness and be less alluring to the general taste. In 
Old English poetry the appeal to the senses is common 
enough, but some of the best passages of the Beowulf m The 
Battle of Maldon, though almost Homeric in life and vivid- 
ness, are well-nigh destitute of color. Yet they have a vigor 
of conception and a depth of feeling that amply compen- 
sate for the lack of superficial glitter. A brilliant instance 
occurs in Beow., 1896-1913, where the voyage of Beowulf is 
described, yet there is not a word of color in it, unless we 
count the phrase fleat famig-heals. There is opportunity 
enough in all of the poems that are not religious hymns or 
versified sermons for far more color than is used. The Old 
English mind was evidently fixed upon something else. 

174 W. E. MEAD. 


In marked contrast with the small number of color- words 

1 is the great variety of terms expressing light and darkness. 

These are in many cases used symbolically, and find their 

proper place in the religious poems or in passages having a 

religious turn. That this is still true of religious poetry may 

be verified by any one who will turn the leaves of a collection 

of modern hymns. One may almost say that the charac- 

P teristic words in Old English religious poems are such terms 

\ as beorht, leoht, torht, sunne, s&r, sclnan, and such as deorc, 

I niht, ]>iestre, sweart. It is to be noted also that a large number 

of these words are used conventionally. 

The relative frequency with which these two groups of 
words are used is shown by the following rough lists, which 
are approximately correct as far as they go. In the first list 
I include the words expressing light or brightness. 

Beorht (with its compounds or derivatives, beorhte, beorhtian, 
beorhtllc, beorhtlice, beorhtnes, beorhtu, selbeorht, eallbeorht, 
efenbeorht, goldbeorht, heafodbeorht, heofonbeorht, hiwbeorht, 
rodorbeorht, sadolbeorht, sigelbeorht, sigorbeorht, sweglbeorht, 
wlitebeorht) is used 204 times ; blican, 26 times ; hador, hadre, 
13 times; leoht (sb.), leoht (adj.) (together with leohte (adv.), 
leohtbaire, leohtan, in-, on-leohtan, onlyhtan, aifenleoht, fyr- 
leoht, heofonleoht, morgenleoht), 193 times; leoma, 33 times; 
lixau, 25 times; scinan (and its compounds), 73 times; scima, 
9 times; scir (adj.), scire (adv.) (and compounds), 45 times; 
sunne, 59 times; sun-wlitig, once; scyne (and compounds), 
29 times ; torht (and compounds), 88 times. These make an 
aggregate of 798, and still do not entirely exhaust the list of 
words that suggest brightness. 1 

1 For example, more words for flame and fire might have been added, 
compounds like fyrleoma, kennings for sunne, the word glaeshluttur (Run. 
30), the verb glitinian, etc. See also the discussion of the words in the 
" white group." 

For some remarks on "verba des leu ch tens, glanzens, scheinens," see 
Sievers, Paul and Braune's Beitrage, xn, 196-197. 


The total number of passages in which light or brightness 
is mentioned or suggested considerably exceeds 800. But if 
now we estimate the whole amount of extant Old English 
poetry at about 30,000 lines, we see that on an average we 
have one word suggesting light or brightness in every thirty- 
seven lines. When we consider that the great majority of 
these words occur in the religious poems, we find that the 
actual frequency is considerably greater. 

If we turn to the words denoting or implying darkness, 
we find an equally striking group. As in the preceding list, 
there is difficulty in deciding where to draw the line of exclu- 
sion. I have, however, included such words as sweart and 
wann, on which, along with some others, I remark later. A 
great number of words of this class are used symbolically and 
conventionally, but I cannot take the space necessary for 
illustration. For the sake of brevity I present merely the 
base-words, and do not specify compounds. 

blaec 13 niht 131 J>eostre | 

deorc 43 mpan 6 (bystre) ) 

dim 15 sceadu 11 warm 37 

drysmian 1 scuwa 9 

heolstor 16 swearcan 12 448 

mire 7 sweart 84 

Of course not all these words (particularly dim and niht) 
have a distinct color value. The most notable fact is that 
the words expressing light or brightness are about twice as 
numerous as those expressing darkness, even though we 
exclude such words as dceg and hwlt from the first list. The 
words in the second list, as well as those in the first list, 
occur mostly in the religious pieces. 

When we take out these two groups of words, we have 
comparatively little color left. We may not very inaptly 
describe Old English religious poetry as a series of studies in 
black and white, or, rather, darkness and light, the darkness 
applying to hell and devils, and the light, to heaven and 
angels and saints. Blackness and darkness meant to the 

376 W. E. MEAD. 

primitive Germanic mind something fearful and terrible. 
Light, on the other hand, was symbolic of joy and bliss. 1 


Having thus cleared the ground by excluding a large 
number of words that are in the strictest sense colorless, we 
may look at the color-words proper. The simplest and, on 
the whole, the most satisfactory method of treatment will be 
to arrange the color-words in groups, and to specify the 
frequency with which they are used and to what objects they 
are applied. The list of examples is intended to be practi- 
cally complete, and it contains several passages overlooked 
by Grein. 2 

1. WHITE. The words belonging to this group are hwtt, 
blaCy blanCy and possibly fdmig, and fdmigheals. 3 Nearly all 
the passages where these words are used imply something 
bright or shining. Blanc is used but three times, 4 and is 

1 Cf. Gummere, "The Use of Black and White in Germanic Tradition," 
Haverford College Studies, I, 12. 

2 Most of the abbreviations referring to O.E. poems will be recognized 
without further explanation. The following may need expansion : 

A. = Andreas (Grein-Wulker). 

B. = Beow. = Beowulf ( Wyatt). 

B. D. D. = Be Domes Dcege (E.E.T.S.). 

C. and S. = Christ and Satan (Grein-Wulker). 
Sol. = Solomon and Saturn (Grein). 

Wyrde = Be Manna Wyrdum. 

The texts used are as follows : Grein-Wulker, Bibl d. ags. Poesie, I, II 
( except Beow.) ; Gollancz, Exeter Book, Part I ; all others from the older 

3 If blat, livid, pale, ghastly, can be counted as a color-word, it should be 
included in this group. Examples occur, A. 1090, 1281, Chr. 771. Cf. 
bldtende ni, Gen. 981. 

4 B. 855. mearum ridan 

beornas on blancum. 
El. 1183. se e foran IsedeS 

bridels on blancan. 
Eid. 23:17. brohte hwatfre 

beornas ofer burnan and hyra bloncan mid. 



applied to the white, well-groomed steeds that shine in the 
sun. The word is the same as the mod. Ger. blank, bright 
or shining. 

Bide is merely an ablaut form of the stem of btican, to 
shine, and perhaps hardly means white at all. In a few cases 
it evidently means pale or ghastly. It is properly applied to 
the fire, 1 or the fire-light, 2 and even to the red flame, 3 or to the 
lightning, 4 or to the light of the stars. 5 Of the twenty-eight 
instances where the word occurs, either alone or as part of 
a compound, nearly all seem to lay emphasis on the bright- 
ness rather than on the whiteness. The word is used in 
describing the bright spots on the tail of the Phoenix, 6 and 
in referring to armor 7 or clothing. In such expressions as 
blachleor ides? when referring to Judith, or bldcne, when 
describing the ghastly face of the dead Holofernes, 9 the near- 

1 Dan. 246. bseron brandas on bryne blacan fyres. 

*B. 1516. fyr-leoht gesah 

blacne leoman beorhte scinan. 
A. 1540. Him >set engel forstod, 

se fta burh oferbrsegd blacan lige. 
.8^.4:44. blacan lige. 
Eun. 16. Cen byj> cwicera gehwam cu> on fyre 

blac and beorhtlic., byrnefl oftust. 
3 Chr. 808. blac rasetteS 

recen reada leg 
4 Az. 105. wolcna genipu 

and J?ec liexende ligetta hergen 
blace breahtum hwate 
Dan. 380. and >ec ligetu, 

blace, berhtmhwate, >>a J>ec bletsige. 
*Met. 4 : 8. blacum leohte beorhte steorran 

*Ph. 295. }x>nne is se finta fsegre gedseled 

sum brun, sum basu, sum blacum splottum. 
^Ex. 212. sseton sefter beorgum in blacum reafum 

Rid. 11:7. brimes and beames on blacum hrsegle 

*Gen. 1969. Sceolde forht monig 

blachleor ides bifiende gan 
on fremdes fseiSm. 
Jud. 128. blachleor ides 

9 Jud. 278. funde "Sa on bedde blacne lic^an 

his goldgifan. 


W. E. MEAD. 

est approach is made to suggesting whiteness. But even in 
these there is no pure white. 

Other instances of the use of bide, and of the occurrence 
of flodbldc, heorobldc, mgbldc and of the verb blddan are 
given below. 1 

The form blcec = bide occurs, Dom. 56, Pan. 26, An. 

The word hunt occurs thirty-one times, commonly with a 
suggestion of brightness or light, though some instances of a 
literal use of the epithet in the modern sense appear to be 


Ex. 120. 

EL 91. 

B. D. D. (Exon.) 66. 

Wyrde 41. 

Almosen (Grein, II, p. 

Ex. 496. 
B. 2487. 

Ex. 204. 
Run. 90. 

Seaf. 91. 


ofer leodwerum lige scman, 
byrnende beam. Blace stodon 
ofer sceotendum scire leoman, 
scinon scyldhreo'San, 
neowle nihtscuwan neah ne mihton 
heolstor ahydan. Heofoncandel barn 
Hsefde foregenga fyrene loccas, 
blace beamas, bellegsan* hweop 
in J?am herej>reate, hatan lige. 
wses se blaca beam bocstafum awriten 
beorhte and leohte 
on ful blacne beam bunden fseste 
blac on beame bide^S wyrde 
350) 6. leg adwsesce, )>aet he leng ne mseg 
blac byrnende burgum sce'SiSan. 

sawlum lunnon 
faeste befarene, flodblac here 
gu"S-helm to-glad, gomela Scylfing 
hreas [heoro-] blac. 
werud waes wigblac 
Ear [tir] byb egle eorla gehwylcun, 
"Sonn fsestlice fliesc onginne]> 
hraw colian, hrusan ceosan 
blac to gebeddan bleda gedreosaj> 
wynna gewita>, wera geswicaK 
Yldo him on fare's, onsyn blacaft 
gomelfeax gnornai5. 


unquestionable. The apparently literal instances are cited 
below. 1 

In addition to these literal uses of the word, there are a 
number of cases in which hunt is used to emphasize the shin- 
ing of light, or of a roof, or a helmet, or a gem, or the gleam 
of silver. 2 

On the border between mere white and shining may be the 
use of hwit to describe the raiment of the blessed. 3 In such 
cases some degree of symbolism is doubtless introduced, a 
symbolism as old as Christianity. Largely symbolic too 
must be the instances in which hmt is applied to the angels 

l Zaubersegen, I, 54. and >aere bradan here waestma 

and J?sere hwitan hwsete waestma 
Brun. 62. J>one hasu-padan 

earn, seftan hwit 
PA. 297. sindon >a fi>ru 

hwit hindan-weard 

Eid. 16 : 1. Hals is mm hwit and heafod fealo. 

Rid. 41 : 98. ne hafu ic lu heafde hwite loccas 

Chr. 1110. J>a hwitan honda and >a halgan fet. 

Run. 25. Haegl byj> hwitust coma ; hwyrft hit of heofenes lyfte. 

*Gen. 614. nu scmeS J> leoht fore 

glsedlic ongean, \><xt ic from gode brohte 
hwit of heofonum. 

Gen. 1820. Abraham maftelode, geseah Egypta 
hornsele hwite and hea byrig 
beorhte blican 

B. 1448. ac se hwita helm hafelan werede 

Rid. 11:8. sume waeron hwite hyrste mine. 
Met. 19:22. gimmas 

hwite and reade. 
Ex. 301. Hofon hereciste hwite linde, 

segnas on sande. 
Reim. 66. graft hafaiS 

searo hwit sola>, sumur hat colaiS. 
Gen. 2731. ac him hygeteonan hwitan seolfre 

deope bete. 
3 Chr. 447. >89t J>ser in hwitum hraaglum ge werede 

englas ne ofteowdun 

Chr. 454. J>set hy in hwitum \>ser hrseglum o^5y wden. 
in )>a aej>elan tid swa hie eft dydon. 


W. E. MEAD. 

who live in the light of heaven. The examples explain 
themselves. 1 

Famig, foamy, occurs nine times, 2 always in a literal sense. 

l Oen. 254. Hsefde he hine swa hwitne geworhtne ; 

Swa wynlic waes his waestm on heofonum, \>ai him 

[com from weroda drihtneV 

Gelic waes he >am leohtum steorrum. 
Gen. 349. Wses aer godes engel, 

hwit on heofne, oft hine his hyge forspeon 
Chr. 895. engla and deofla 

hwitra and sweartra 
Gen. 265. cwaeS, beet his He waere leoht and scene, 

hwit and hiowbeorht. 
EL 72. Jnihte him wlitescyne on weres hade, 

hwit and hiwbeorht haele'Sa nathwylc. 
Chr. 1017. iSonwe sio halge gecynd 

hwit and heofon-beorht heag-engla masgen. 

B. D. D. 289. paer hsera hwittra hwyrf maedenheap. 

blostmuw behangen. 
Gen. 603. \>(Kt hire >uhte hwitre heofon and eoriSe 

and call J>eos woruld wlitigre and geweorc godes 

micel and mihtig. 
Chr. 545. aer J?on up-stige, ealles waldend, 

on heofona gehyld hwite cwoman, 

eorla ead-giefan, englas to-geanes. 

C. and S. 200. and ymb \>cet hehsetl hwite standa 

engla feftan and eadigra. 
8 Gen. 1417. For famig scip 1 and c 

nihta under roderum 
Mel. 26 : 26. ferede on fifelstream famigbordan 

i>riereiJre ceol. 
A. 1524. famige walcan 

mid aerdsege eor^San >ehton. 
El. 237. Leton )>, ofer fifelwaeg famige scriftan, 

bronte brim^isan* 
Sol. 156. o$ j?83t him heortan blod 

famig flodes baatJ fold an gesece"S. 
Rid. 4 : 19. famig winners 

waeg wi"S wealle. 
Rid. 4 : 32. feore bifohten fsemig ridan 

ytJa hrycgum 
Gen. 1452. hwae'Ser famig see 

deop >a gyta dael senigne 

grenre eorftan ofgifen haefde. 
Gen. 2213. famige fiodas 


Fdmig-heals, 1 foamy-necked, the beautiful epithet applied to 
the ship, is found three times. Fdmig-bosma, fam and fam- 
gode occur once each. 2 These words may not in the strictest 
sense be regarded as color-words, but they certainly suggest 
color, and white more definitely than any other. The ex- 
amples given below are grouped according to their relations. 

2. BLACK. To the black group belong blcec, sweart, swear- 
tian, (ge)sweorcan, gesweorc, wann, salowigpad, earp, and 
probably some of the other words already given in the list of 
terms denoting darkness. Just as the words of the white 
group pass by insensible stages into meanings that suggest 
light, so the words of the black group shade insensibly into those 
suggesting a mere absence of light. The indefiniteness with 
which words like mire and deorc are used leaves us some- 
what in doubt as to whether a color-effect is really intended. 
Opinions on this matter will necessarily differ, and the de- 
cision must be subjective. 

BlcBG is our modern black, and is used comparatively 
seldom once in describing the black sea-roads, 3 once as 

*. 218. flota fami-heals fugle gelicost. 

B. 1908. sse-genga for, 

fleat famig-heals forS ofer yfle. 

A. 496. is J>es bat ful scrid, 

faereS famigheals fugole gelicost. 
*Ex. 493. Famigb5sma flodwearde sloh. 

Rid. 3 : 3. gifen blS gewreged, 

[flod afysed], fam gewealcen. 
Ex. 481. flod famgode 

9 A. 1261. is brycgade 

blsece brimrade 

B. 1799. reced hlluade 

geap ond gold-fah ; gaest inne swaef, 

oj> )>aet hrefn blaca heofones wynne 

bliiS-heort bodode ; fta com beorht scacan 

[sunne ofer grundas]. 

Sol. 471. blodige earn as and blace nasdran 

Bid. 58 : 1. peos lyft byre-S Htle wihte 

ofer beorghleotSu, J>a sind blace swfSe, 

swearte salopade. 

182 W. E. MEAD. 

applied to the raven, once in referring to adders, and a few 
times in other cases cited in the examples. Conventional and 
symbolical is the use of black in mentioning evil spirits. 1 

The most characteristic word for black is sweart, which is 
used more frequently than all the other words of this group 
combined. Eighty-four instances occur, if we count the adv. 
swearte. In the religious poems its use is mainly symbolic, 
figurative and conventional, and it is applied to hell and 
black souls. But it is also used literally of black nights, of 
the black raven, of black mists, of black water. Nine times 
it is used as an epithet with %, flame. In these cases we 
may have to do with a pitchy, smoky flame, such as was 
doubtless very familiar to the Old English people, or pos- 
sibly we may assume a certain degree of symbolism in the 
expression. The conception has long been a familiar one in 
English poetry. Compare Milton's lines : 

A dungeon horrible on all sides round 

As one great furnace 11am' d ; yet from those flames 

No light, but rather darkness visible 

Served only to discover sights of woe. Par. Lost, I, 61-64. 

Quarles (Emblem xv) presents the same image : 

Rid. 88 : 18. Nu ic blace swelge 

wuda and waetre. 
Rid. 52 : 1. Ic seah wrsetlice wuhte feower 

samed siftian : swearte wieran lastas 
swaftu swiSe blacu. 

1 C. and S. 196. hu >a blacan feond 

for oferhygdum ealle forwurdon. 
C. and S. 71. Blace hworfon 

scinnan forscepene 

geond \>wt atole scref 
Chr. 895. engla and deofla, 

beorhtra and blacra 
C. and S. 721. blac bealowes gast 
Sol. 25. worpafl hine deofol 

on domdsege draca egeslice 
bismorlice of blacere li$ran. 


a dying spark 

Of Vulcan's forge, whose flames are dark, 
A dang'rous, dull, blue-burning light, 
As melancholy as the night. 

We now pass to the cases under examination. The great 
number of examples, many of which are essentially of the 
same sort, makes it impracticable to present all of the cita- 
tions in full. The more striking instances, however, are 
given, and all the examples and references are arranged in 
groups. As might be expected, the literal and symbolic uses 
of the word are not in all cases kept sharply apart, and some 
of the examples belong as much in one group as in another. 

(1). In the first group the literal meaning is in the fore- 
ground, though the use of the word is doubtless influenced 
somewhat by conventionality and symbolism. 1 

l Gen. 1449. He ha ymb seofon niht sweartum hrefne 

of earce forlet aefter fleogan 

ofer heah wseter haswe culufran 

on fandunga, hwsefter famig sse 

deop H, gyta diel senigne 

grenre eorftan ofgifen hsefde. 

Gen. 1438. let >a ymb worn daga, 

1441. sunu Lameches sweartne fleogan 

hrefn ofer heahflod of huse ut. 
Hid. 50 : 4. Hwilum on J>am wicum se wonna >egn, 

sweart and saloneb 

Soul and Body 54. ne nsenigum gesybban, J?onne se swearta hrefen. 
Brun. 61. sweartan hrefn. 

Finns. 35. Hrsefen wandrode 

sweart and sealobrun, swurdleoma stod 

swylce eal Finnsburuh fyrenu wsere. 
.Rid 13: 3. festebinde 

swearte Wealas 

Rid. 22: 10. and mm swaeS sweotol sweart on 6$re 

Rid. 58 : 1. J>eos lyft byreS lytle wihte 

3. swearte salopade 

Met. 4 : 22. ser se swearta storm 

Jul. 472. sweartum scurum 

Gen. 1413. lago ebbade, 

sweart under swegle 

184 W. E. MEAD. 

(2). Conventional and symbolic are the following cases: 1 

Oen. 1299. )>u scealt friS habban 

mid sunum Jnnum, "Sonne sweart wseter, 

wonne waelstreamas werodum swelgaft. 
Gen. 1325. symle bi"5 >y heardra, J>e hit hreoh wseter, 

swearte ssestreamas swifter beataft. 
Oen, 1374. egorstreamas 

swearte swogan 
Oen. 1354. )>a be utan beoft earce bordum, 

bonne sweartracu stigan ongmne'S 
B. 3144. wud[u]-rec astah 

sweart ofer swioftole 
Rid. 4 : 46. feallan lta 

sweart sumsendu seaw of bosme 

Rid. 41 : 31. and ic fulre com J>onne >is fen swearte. 

Rid. 41 : 92. se micla hwsel 

se )>e garsecges grund bihealde'S 

sweartan syne. 
Rid. 42 : 1. edniwu 

|>set is moddor monigra cynna, 

]>aes selestan, j'aes sweartestan 
Rid. 42 : 94. sweartan syne 

Gen. 118. sweart synnihte 

Met. 4 : 6. swylce seo sunne swear tra nihta 

Chr. 870. scire gesceafte swa oft sceatSa faecne 

}>eof ]>rlstlice \>& on ]?ystre fareiS 

on sweartre niht. 

Other examples occur, B. 167, B. D. D. 198, Chr. 934, Gen. 109, 134, 
Guth. 678. 

Gen. 390. hafa us god sylfa 

forswapen on >as sweartan mistas 
Met. 5 : 45. sunne for J?8em sweartum mistum 

Met. 23 : 5. and of him selfum >one sweartan mist. 

B. D. D. 104. Eal bitS eac upheofon 

sweart and gesworcen, swifte ge>uxsa^5 

deorc and dimhiw and dwolma sweart. 
Rid. 52 : 2. swearte wseran lastas. 

Rid. 27:1. si^ade sweart-last. 

l Chr. 1605. t5aet sceolon fyllan firen-georne men 

sweartum sawlum 
0. and S. 51. Da him cwtdsweradan atole gastas, 

swarte and synfulle. 
Chr. 895. onhSlo gelac engla and deofla 

beorhtra and blacra weorJ>e"S bega cyme 

hwitra and sweartra 



(3). Hell is five times referred to in the interpolated por- 
tion of the Genesis with the accompanying epithet, sweart, 

Chr. 1104. swearte syn-wyrcend. 

Sol. 148. manfullra heap 

sweartne geswencan 
Guft. 650. mine myrftran and man-sceaj>an 

swearte sigelease 

Jul. 468. sweartra gesyrede 

Partridge, 6. and ge hellfirena 

sweartra geswicaft 

Soul and Body, 73. swearte wihte 

Chr. 268. se>elan rice, 

Jjonan us ser J>urh syn-lust se swearta gsest 

forteah and fortylde 
Jul. 311. }>us ic wraj>ra fela 

mid minum brojrum bealwa gefremede 

sweartra synna 
C. and S. 639. hu hie him on edwit oft asettaft 

swarte suslbonan 
Gu%. 666. "Sa eow se waldend wra^e bisencte 

in \>(xt swearte susl 
El. 930. ond J>ec \>onne sendeft in }>a sweartestan 

and J>a wyrrestan witebrogan 
Gen. 72. heo on wrace sy"5iSan 

seomodon swearte sifte 
Gen. 732. ac hie to helle sculon 

on }>one sweartan si^. 

Chr. 1411. sar and swar gewin and sweartne dea"5 

Gen. 477. ponne wses se oiSer eallenga sweart, 

dim and )>ystre : \>cet wses deaftes beam. 

A few miscellaneous examples, not especially notable, occur, Rid. 13 : 13, 
18 : 7, 71 : 9, Sol. 488, C. and S. 704, Gen. 487. 

The following instances of the figurative use of the adverb swearte seem 
to belong to group (2) : 

C. and S. 371. 
0. and S. 445. 

C. and S. 578. 

Gu*. 625. 

Satanus swearte ge]>5hte 

and heo furftor sceaf 
in \><xi neowle genip nearwe gebeged, 
J>aer nu Satanus swearte Hngaft 

him \>(zt swearte forgeald 
earm seglseca inn on helle. 
swearte beswicene, swegle benumene. 

186 W. E. MEAD. 

but this precise combination appears not to be found else- 
where in O.E. poetry. 1 

Scarcely to be distinguished from genuine color-words are 
such terms as gesweorc, (ge)sweorcan, sweartian, but the| literal 
uses shade easily into the figurative and the symbolic. 2 

*Gen. 312. on J>a sweartan helle. 

Gen. 345. Satan siiSiSan, het hine t>sere sweartan helle. 

Cf. Gen. 529, 761, 792. 
Jul. 553. Da hine seo faemne forlet 

sefter J>raec-hwile J>ystra neosan 

in sweartne grund 
Ps. 142 : 7. wese ic earmum gelic, 

\>e on sweartne grund siftftan astigaft. 

With these cases may be compared the following, which might, perhaps, 
have been put into group (2): 

Gen. 1925. for wera synnum wylme gesealde 

Sodoman and Gomorran, sweartan lige. 
Gen. 2414. \><xi sceal wrecan 

swefyl and sweart lig, sare and grimme 
Gen. 2504. Unc heht waldend for wera synnum 

Sodoma and Gomorra sweartan lige, 

fyre gesyllan, 
Gen. 2538. pa sunne up, 

folca fritScandel furftum eode, 

ba ic sendan gefrsegn swegles aldor 

swefl of heofnum and sweartne lig 

werum to wite. 
Gen. 2856. and blotan sylf 

sunu mid sweordes ecge and >onne sweartan lige 

leofes lie forbsernan. 
Chr. 983. fsere-S sefter foldan fyr-swearta leg 

weallende wiga 
Chr. 1531. \>at on J>set deope dsel deofol gefeallaft 

in sweartne leg. 

Cf. also Chr. 966, 994. 
S J5. 1789. Niht-helm geswearc 

deorc ofer dryht-gumum. 
A. 372. wedercandel swearc 

Gu^S. 1279. swearc norft-rodor 

Ex. 461. lyft up geswearc : 

fsegum stsefnum flod blod gewod. 
Gen. 807. gesweorc up 


Wann, 1 dark, dusky, is also a favorite word, being found 
thirty-seven times. Unlike sweart it is commonly used in a 
literal sense. It is thus applied to a variety of objects, to 
the raven, to the dark waves, to the gloomy height overlook- 
ing the sea, to the murky night, to the dark armor, etc. The 
examples given below supply the details. Now and then 
the word seems to be a mere conventional epithet and to be 
introduced largely for the sake of the alliteration. 2 

B. D. D. 108. and seo sunne forswyrcS sona on morgen 

ne se mona nsefS nanre mihte wiht, 
\xzt he J>aere nihte genipu msege flecgan. 

C. and S. 78. he sweartade, ftorme he spreocan ongan, 

fyre and attre. 

Gv&. 1052. hefige set heortan hre^er innan swearc 
B. 1766. o^Se eagena bearhtm 

forsiteiS ond forsworceS. 

Jul. 78. geswearc J?a swift-ferft sw5r sefter worde 

Wand. 58. for)>on ic ge}>encan ne mseg geond |)as woruld 

for hwan mod-sefu mm ne gesweorce. 
Deor. 28. SiteiS sorgceorig saelum bidiSled 

on sefan sweorce^. 
1 For brunwann, see brun. 
*B. 3024. ac se wonna hrefn. 

Gen. 1983. Sang se wanna fugel 

under deore'Ssceaftum, deawigfe'Sera 

hrses on wenan. 
Jud. 205. pses se hlanca gefeah 

wulf in walde and se wanna hrefn 
EL 52. hrefen uppe gol 

wan and wselfel. 

Ex. 164. wonn wselceasega. 

B. 3154. wael-fylla wonn. 

Rood. 52. J>Jstro haafdon 

bewrigen mid wolcnum wealdendes hrsew, 

scire sciman ; sceadu for^Seode, 

wann under wolcnum. 
B. 702. Com on wanre niht 

scrlSan sceadu-genga 

Gu%. 1028. in l?isse wonnan niht 

Rid. 85:8. wudubeama helm wonnan nihtum 
Mel. 11 : 61. Hwset ! t>a wonnan niht 

mona onlihte'S 

188 W. E. MEAD. 

S. 649. oj>i$e nipende niht ofer ealle, 

scadu-helma gesceapu scriftan cwoman, 

wan under wolcnum 
Wand. 103. hrfS hreosende hrusaw bindeft 

wintres worn a bonne won cymei5 

mpeft niht-scua nor)>an onsendeft. 

hreo hsegl-fare haeleftum on andan. 
PA. 98. seo decree niht 

won gewiteft 
Gen. 108. geseah deorc gesweorc 

semian sinnihte, sweart under roderum 

wonn and weste 
Gu$. 1279. swearc nortS-rodor 

won under wolcnum 
A. 886. sceadu 8we"Serodon 

won under wolcnum 

Met. 5 : 4. gif him wan fore wolcen hangaft. 
Gen. 118. wonne wsegas 
Gen. 1301. wonne wselstreamas 

A. 1168. pa for J>sere dngo'Se deoful setywde 

wann and wliteleas, hsefde weriges hiw. 
Gen. 1378. wreah and ]>eahte 

manfiehtSu beam middangeardes 

wonnan wsege. 
Gen. 1460. Gewat se wilda fugel 

on sefenne earce secan 

ofer wonne wseg 
Gen. 1429. )>a hine on sunde geond sidne grund 

wonne yfta wide bseron. 
Rid. 4 : 37. won wsegfatu 

B. 1373. )>onon yi5-geblond up astige'S 

won to wolcnum. 
Bid. 4 : 19. famig winne-S 

wseg witS wealle ; won ariseiS 

dun ofer dype. 
Gen. 210. Fsegere leohte 

\>cet li^Se land lago yrnende, 

wylleburne ; nalles wolcnu fta giet 

ofer rumne grund regnas bseron 

wann mid winde. 
Chr. 1422. and mec H on heostre alegde 

biwundenne mid wonnum claj>um 
Rid. 54 : 7. wonuum hyrstum. 

Rid. 50:4. Hwilum on )>a,m wicum se wonna |>egn. 


Salowigpdd, 1 dark-coated, is applied a few times as an 
epithet to the raven, the eagle, and to gnats: Wyrde 37, 
Jud. 211, Brun. 61, Rid. 58:3. Salo and salonebb are also 
slightly used. Earp (eorp), dusky, dark, is used three times : 
Rid. 4:42, earpan gesceafia; Ex. 194, eorp werod (of the 
Egyptians) ; Rid. 50 : 1 1 , eorp unwita. 

3. GRAY. Remarkable in Old English poetry is the 
fondness for mixed and neutral colors. A group of such 
colors is found in the wordsf^rce^, flodgrceg, flintgrceg, hdr, ^ 
haw, blondenfeax, gamolfeax. The color gray lies somewhere 
between white and black, with nothing to determine pre- 
cisely where. 

Grceg is used seven times, and its compounds are found 
once each. 2 In every case it is used literally. It describes 

Eid. 41 : 105. Mara ic com and fsettra, >onne amsested swm 

bearg bellende on boc-wuda 

won wrotende wynnum lifde 
Hid. 85 : 14. is mm bsec 

wonn and wundorlic. 

Chr. 1564. won and wliteleas hafaft werges bleo. 
Rid. 53 : 5. J>ara oftrum wses an getenge 

wonfah Wale 

A parallel to the expression, se swearta leg, is found in se wonna leg ; 
and a similar explanation doubtless applies to both. 

B. 3114. Nu sceal gled fretan 

(weaxan wonna leg) 

C. and S. 715. hwilum se wonna leg 

liehte wi^ J?es laj>an 

Chr. 964. "Sonwe eal J>reo on efen nimeiS 

won fyres wselm wide tosomne 
se swearta lig 

1 For the etymology of sa/o, see Uhlenbeck in Paul and Braune's Beitrage, 
20, 564. 

2 Gen. 2864. ac hine se halga wer 

gyrde grsegan sweorde. 
B. 2680. Naegling forbterst, 

geswac set ssecce sweord Blowulfes, 
gomol ond grseg-msel. 
Finns. 6. gylleft grseghama, guiSwudu hlynne^, 

scyld scefte oncwy'S. 
B. 333. fsette scyldas, 

grsege syrcan ond grim-helmas. 


W. E. MEAD. 

the sword, the shirt of mail, the wolf, the seamew, the flood 
of the sea, the ash-spear with the gray bark still left on the 
shaft, the curling smoke, the hoar-frost. Especially pictur- 
esque is the mention in one of the Riddles (4:19) of the 
flintgrcegne flod. 

Hdr, hoary, is used more conventionally than grceg, and 
appears at times to be chosen more for the sake of the 
alliteration than for the sake of the color. Har occurs 
twenty-seven times, 1 and unhdr, feaxhdr and rceghar once 
each. Seven times hdr is applied to the hoary, gray stone, 
once to the gray cliff, four times to armor, once to a sword, 
once to the ocean, once to the gray heath, three times to the 
wolf, twice to the frost, and seven times to warriors, in each 
case with some touch of conventionality and with an appar- 
ently slight feeling for the color. Even unhdr seems to 
emphasize the age of Hro^gar quite as much as his grayness. 
In feaxhdr cwene the color element appears to predominate. 

Brun. 64. \>aet grsege deor, 

wulf on wealde 
Onom. (Ex.) 149. Gryre sceal for greggum, graef deadum men. 

Hungre heofeS, nales J>aet heafe bewindeS 

ne huru wsel wepeft wulf se grffiga. 

A. 370. horufisc plegode, 

glad geond garsecg and se graega mSw 

wselgifre wand ; wedercandel swearc. 
Onom. I. 30. Ea of dune sceal 

flodgrseg feran. 
Met. 7. Swa oft smylte sse su'Serne wind 

grsege glas-hluttre grimme gedrefed 

B. 330. sesc-holt ufan grgeg. 
Rid. 4 : 19. Ic sceal to stafte J>y wan 

flintgrsegne flod. 

1 B. 887. he under harne stan, 

B. 1415. ofer harne stan. 

B. 2552. stefn in becom 

heafto-torht hlynnan under harne stan. 
B. 2743. Nu iSu lungre geong 

hord sceawian under harne stan, 

Wiglaf leofa. 
A. 841. ymbe harne stan 

tigelfagan trafu 


Ruin. 40. weal eall befeng 

beorhtan bosme, >ser )>a baj>u wceron 

hat on hre}>re ; \>(Kt wses hyflelic : 

leton )>onne geotan .... ofer harne stan 

hate streamas 

Rid. 41 : 74. se hara stan 

Met. 5 : 12. Swa oft sespringe ut aweallefl 

of clife harum col and hlutor. 
Heil. 210. paenne embe eahta niht 

and feowerum \>cette fan gode 

besenctun on ssegrund sigefsestne wer, 

on brime haran 
Jud. 327. Iseddon 

to Ssere beorhtan byrig Bethuliam 

helmas and hupseax, hare byrnan, 

guftsceorp gumena golde gefraetewod 
Wold. II. 16. feta, gyf u dyrre, 

aat "Sus hea'Sowerigan hare byrnan. 
B. 2153. hare byrnan 

B. 2988. hares hyrste Higelace bser. 

Wold. I. 2. huru Welandes geworc ne geswicefl 

monna senigum, "Sara "Se Mimming can 

hearne gehealdan. 
Ex. 117. }>y Ises him westengryre 

har hse^ 

Rid. 22 : 3. har holtes feond 
Wand. 82. sumne se hara wulf 

deaSe gedselde. 
Wyrde. 12. sceal hine wulf etan 

har hseftstapa. 
Rid. 88 : 7. hwilum hara scoc 

forst of feaxe. 

A. 1257. swylce hrim and forst, 

hare hildstapan haelefta e$el 
lucon, leoda gesetu. 

Brun. 38. on his cy^Se nor Constantinus, 
har hilderinc ; hreman ne florfte 
meca gemanan. 

B. 1306. J>a W83S frod cyning 

har hilde-rinc 
B. 3135. Keeling boren, 

har hilde [-rinc], to Hrones nsesse. 
Maid. 168. pa gyt \>cet word gecwas'S 

har hilderinc 

192 W. E. MEAD. 

Haso, 'gray/ is found seven times, 1 and the compounds 
hasofdg, hasupdda, haswigfeftra, once each. Haso is used 
with an apparent definiteness of color-feeling, and is applied 
to the dove, to the eagle, to the curling smoke, to the leaves 
of plants, and even to the heresfrceta, the highways with their 
dusty, dirty-white surfaces. The examples are not suffi- 
ciently numerous to enable us to decide whether it was often 
used conventionally, but there is certainly little evidence in 
the instances cited that such was the case. 

Blondenfeax, blended-haired, that is, gray-haired, is hardly 
a color- word at all, but it occurs four times in Beowulf, twice 

B. 1677. Da wses gylden hilt gamelum rince, 

harum hild-fruman, on hand gyfen. 
Ex. 240. Gamele ne moston, 

hare heaftorincas, hilde onj>eon 
Ex. 181. hare heorawulfas hilde gretton 

B. 356. pser Hroflgar sset 

eald ond un-har. 

Rid. 73 : 1. Ic waes faemne geong, feaxhar cwene. 
The picturesque word rceghdr, meaning gray with moss or lichen, i& 
used in describing a broken wall in the Ruin 9-10. 

Oft )>aes wag gebad 
rseghar and readfah rice aefter 6J>rum. 

l Gen. 145. has we culufran 

Rid. 25 : 4. hwllum ic onhyrge J>one haswan earn 
PA. 121. swa se haswa fugel. 

beorht of J>aes bearwes beame gewitefl 
Rid. 12:1. Hrsegl is mm hasofag. 
Brun. 62. J>one hasu-padan 

earn, seftan hwit 
PA. 153. -Sonne biiS gehefgad haswig-feftra 

gomol gearum frod [g]rene eorftan 
Rid. 2 : 6. recas stigatS 

haswe ofer hrofum. 
Rid. 14 : 8. meahtum aweahte mu'Sum slitan 

haswe blede. 
Rid. 41 : 60. swylce ic eom wraiSre >onne wermod sj, 

[J>e] her on hyrstum heasewe stondeft. 
Ex. 283. Wegas syndon dryge, 

haswe herestrseta. 


in Genesis and once in the Battle of Brunanburh with about 
the same meaning as har. 1 Gamolfeax, old-haired, gray- 
haired, occurs three times, Beow. 608, Seafarer, 92, Edg. 46. 
4. BROWN. Brown is an indefinite color, which may 
shade through various degrees of duskiness into black or red. 
We may, however, properly enough speak of a brown group, 
though the variants brunfdg, brunwann, sealobrun occur but 
once each. Brun is used eleven times, apparently with a 
variety of meanings. 2 Brunecg is found twice. When applied 
to helmets or to the edge of the sword the term brun possibly 

1 .B. 1593. J?set wses yft-geblond eal gemenged 

brim blode fah. Blonden-feaxe 
gomele ymb godne on geador sprsecon 
B. 1790. DuguS eal aras ; 

wolde blond en-feax beddes neosan, 
gamela Scylding. 
B. 1872. hruron him tearas 

B. 2961. pser weart> OngeniSIow ecgum sweorda 

blonden-fexa, on bid wrecen. 

Gen. 2600. Ne wiste blondenfeax 

Gen. 2340. self ne wende, \>at him Sarra, 

bryd blondenfeax, bringan meahte 
on woruld sunu. 
Brun. 44. gylpan ne horfte 

beorn blandenfex billgeslihtes. 
*B. 2614. ond his magum setbser 

brun-fagne helm. 
Jud 318. hyrsta scyne, 

bord and brad swyrd, brune helmas, 
dyre mad mas. 
Hid. 18 : 7. hwilum ic sweartum swelgan onginne 

brunum beaduwsepnum. 
B. 2577. \>set sio ecg gewac 

brun on bane. 
B. 1545. Ofsset )?a J>one sele-gyst, ond hyre seax geteah 

brad, brun-ecg. 
Mold. 162. Da ByrhtnotS breed bill of sceSe, 

brad and bruneccg [sic] 

Ex. 69. wiston him be suSan Sigelwara land, 

forbserned burhhleo'Su, brune leode 
hate heofoncolum. 

194 W. E. MEAD. 

means bright, glittering, or flashing, with a suggestion of 
redness. In the Ep. Gloss, burrum is glossed by bruun, and 
burrum is the equivalent of rufus. As applied to the sword- 
edge, the word appears to be used somewhat conventionally. 
In the Exodus the Ethiopians are called brune leode, brown 
people. In the poem on the Phoenix (296) that wonderful bird 
has a tail partly brown. But the Latin original (1. 31) reads : 

Caudaque porrigitur fulvo distenta metallo, 

which implies a reddish-yellow or tawny cast. The raven is 
referred to in the Fight at Finnsburh, 36, as sweart and 
sealobrun, which means a sallow or dusky-brown. This I 
take to be the dull, rusty, brownish black color which dark 
feathers may assume in some lights. In the Andreas, 1306, 
night is described as brunwann, a color that can scarcely be dis- 
tinguished from ' dark/ Milton twice uses a similar expression : 

To arched walks of twilight groves, 
And shadows brown that Sylvan loves. 

// Pens., 133, 134. 

and where the unpierc't shade 
Imbrown'd the noontide bow'rs. 

Par. Lost, iv, 245. 

PA. 295. ponn is se finta fsegre gedseled 

sum brun sum basu sum blacum splottum 
Ex. 497. fteste befarene, flodblac here 

siSSan hie onbugon brun yppinge 
Sid. 88 : 9. Siftftan mec isern innanweardne 

brun bennade. 
Sid. 27 : 8. spyrede geneahhe 

ofer brunne brerd. 
A. 519. se "Se brimu bindeft, brune yfta 

Sid. 61 : 6 ac mec uhtna gehwam y$ sio brune 
Mel. 28. pa weard ceald weden 

stearc storma gelac : stunede sio brune 

yft wi^S oftre. 
Finns. 35. Hrsefen wandrode 

sweart and sealobrun 
A. 1304. 0$ iSset sunne gewat to sete glidan 

under niflan nses: niht helmade, 

brunwann oferbrsed beorgas steape. 


The passages where the waves are called ' brown' may 
mean simply that they are dark, with perhaps a trace of 
muddiness. Yet possibly the suggestion of Merbach 1 has 
some force, when he says that the waves may mirror the sky 
and thus seem like a molten mass of bronze. 

Brown was a favorite color with English poets of the 
eighteenth century, 2 but it appears in our own time to be 
much less popular. 

5. RED. No color is more distinctive than red, yet its 
use in Old English poetry is comparatively restricted. The 
only words properly belonging to the red group appear to be 
read, read/ah, and baso. Such words as blod, blodig, blodfdg, 
swdtig, have only a secondary claim to be regarded as color- 

1. Head. Of the twenty passages in which read occurs, 
all but four are found in the religious poems. The four 
exceptions occur in the Riddles. But the word read does not 
once occur in the Beowulf or in any other heroic poem or in 
the lyrics. In the Ruin (10) occurs the compound readfdh, 
describing the shattered walls of the desolate city. 

The various objects with which the word is used are as 
follows : Flame or fire is five times described as red, partly 
perhaps for the sake of the alliteration. Roses are twice 
called red. In Exod. 296 the waters of the Red Sea are 
referred to as reade streamas, as though the poet really 
imagined them to be red. 3 We have also four passages in 
which gold is called red. This is a familiar convention of 
the Middle Ages, which may be due to the fact that the gold 
of that time was often darker than that of our own, and con- 
tained a considerable alloy of copper. Red trappings are 
referred to in the Riddles. The cross, reddened with blood, 
is mentioned in Chr. 1101; the red edges of the sword are 

A .Das Meer in den Dichtungen der Angelsachsen, p. 16. 

2 Ellis, The Colour-sense in Lit., p. 720. 

3 This is very different from the cases in which the Red Sea is merely 
referred to by name. Cf. Ex. 134; Ps. 105: 8, 9, 18; 135: 13, 15. 

196 W. E. MEAD. 

spoken of in describing the sacrifice of Isaac (Exod. 412). 
Some other miscellaneous examples are found in the list 
given below. 1 

We see, then, that the color which is strongest and most 
effective has a relatively restricted use, and that an obvious 
convention has determined the choice of the word in many 
passages where it occurs. 

Red is probably suggested now and then by the words 

l Ruin. 9. Oft J>aes wag gebad 

rseghar and readfah rice aefter 6J>rum 

ofstanden under stormum. 
Gen. 41. pa he hit geare wiste 

sinnihte beseald, susle geinnod, 

geondfolen fyre and fsercyle, 

rece and reade lege. 
Chr. 807. \>onne frsetwe sculon 

byrnan on baele ; blac rasette'S 

recen ; reada leg re)>e scribed. 
B. D. D. 149. readum lige 

bi"S emnes mid J>y eal gefylled. 

Donne fyren lig blaweiS and brasla^S 

read and refte 

Wyrde, 46. read re$e gled. 

Met. 9 : 12. gif >aet fyr meahte 

lixan swa leohte and swa longe eac 

read rasettan. 
-B. D. D. 286. J>ser )>a serendracan synd selmihtiges godes 

and betweoh rosena reade heapas 

}>ser symle scinaft. 

pser bsera hwittra hwyrfS msedenheap, 

blostmum behangen, beorAtost wereda. 
Ex. 295. nu se agend up arserde 

reade streamas in randgebeorh. 
Rid. 49 : 6. Ryne ongietan readan goldes 

guman galdorcwide 
Gen. 2403. gesawon ofer since salo hlifian, 

reced ofer readum golde. 
Jud. 338. sweord and swatigne helm, swylce eac side byrnan 

gerenode readum golde. 

Dan. 59. bereafodon t>a receda wuldor readan golde 

Met. 18 : 5. HwseiSer ge willen on wuda secan 

gold >set reade on grenum treowum ? 


blodig, blodfdg, dreorig, heolfor, swdtig, which in the 
aggregate are used much more frequently than read. One 
cannot always be sure that a color effect is intended, but 
some passages appear unmistakable. I present a few selected 
examples : * 

6. YELLOW. From the frequent reference to gold in Old 
English poetry one might perhaps expect yellow to be often 

Rid. 12 : 1. Hrsegl is mm hasofag, hyrste beorhte 

reade and scire on reafe [ramum]. 

Reden der Seelen. 57. Ne magon J>e nu heonon adon hyrsta J>a readan. 
Chr. 1101. "Sonwe sio reade rod ofer ealle 

swegle seined on Here sunnan gyld 

on J?a forhtlice firenum fordone 

swearte syn-wyrcend sorgum wlitaft 
Ex. 411. wolde slean eaferan sinne, 

unweaxenne ecgum reodan. 
Met. 19 : 22. seftele gimmas 

hwite and reade and hiwa gehwaes. 
Rid. 27 : 15. Nu >a gereno and se reada telg. 

Chr. 1174. "Sa wearft beam monig blodigum tearum 

birunnen under rindum reade and Mcce 

sep wear?? to swate. 
Rid. 70 : 1. Ic eom rices seht reade bewsefed, 

stift and steap wong. 

BttsOy purple or crimson, occurs twice, once in Dan. 724, baswe bdcstafas, 
and once in the Phoenix 296, in describing the bird's tail : 

>onne is se finta fsegre gedseled 

sum brun, sum basu, sum blacum splottum. 

J S. 484. Donne waes J?eos medo-heal on morgen tid 

driht-sele dreor-fah, ]>onne dseg lixte, 

eal benc-helu blode bestymed, 

heall heoru-dreore. 
B. 847. Dser wses on blode brim weallende, 

atol yfta geswing eal gemenged 

baton heolfre, heoro-dreore weol. 
B. 446. ac he me habban wile 

d[r]eore fahne, gif mec deaft nime'S 

byre blodig wael. 
B. 934. J>onne blode fah, 

husa selest heoro-dreorig stod. 
B. 1416. wseter under stod 

dreorig ond gedrefed. 

198 W. E. MEAD. 

mentioned. But of the use of geolo only four instances occur, 
and three of these are plainly conventional. Twice the word 
is used in the compound geolorand, once alone in referring to 
linden shields, and once in describing fine cloth. 1 

Fealo. This is a somewhat indefinite color which occurs 
seventeen times. The prevailing meaning appears to be a 
pale yellow shading into red or brown, and in some cases into 
green. Two compounds, fealohilte and appelfealu, occur once 
each. A tolerably clear use of the word is in the Battle of 
Maldon, 166, where the sword is called fealohilte. This evi- 
dently means ' golden-hilted.' Fealwe mearas (Beow. 865) are 
probably bay horses of a golden color shading into red. 
Fealwe strcete (Beow. 916) may be roads covered with pale 
yellow sand or gravel. Fealwe linde (Gen. 2044) probably 
means the yellow borders of the linden shields (cf. geolo), 
which were either painted or gilded. The most common use 
of fealo is in connection with water. Some of the examples 

already cited appear to involve a genuine realization of the 
color. But the various passages in which the sea is referred 
to as the fallow flood seem to be more conventional and to 
introduce the word, in part, perhaps, because of the con- 
venient alliteration. I hardly think that in these passages 
the word means dusky, as is sometimes suggested, but per- 

Ex. 448. Wseron beorhhliftu blode bestemed, 

holm heolfre spaw. 
Ex. 571. Gesawon hie >ser wealles standan ; 

ealle him brimu blodige buhton 
Chr. 934. sunne 

on blodes hiw 

Chr. 1085. beacna beorhtast blode bestemed 
Wold. 153. se full caflice 

braid of )>am beorne blodigne gar. 
1 B. 2609. bond rond gefeng 

geolwe linde, gomel swyrd geteah. 
B. 438. geolo-rand to gu$e 

El. 118. garas ofer geolorand on gramra gemang 

Rid. 36 : 9. Wyrmas mec ne awaefan wyrda craeftum 

J>a J>e geolo godwebb geatwum frsetwaft. 



haps yellowish green, a common color in the English and 
Irish channels. 

A more vivid sense of color is found in fealo fag (Ph. 218), 
the yellow flame in which the Phrenix is consumed, and in a 
few other examples cited below. 1 

1 J5. 1949. 

A. 420. 
Brun. 35. 
A. 1536. 

A. 1588. 
Wand. 45. 
Gnom. II. 51. 

Bl Monna Or&flum, 53. 

B. 865. 
B. 916. 

Oen. 2043. 
Ph. 217. 
PA. 310. 

PA. 74. 
Rid. 72 : 15. 
Rid. 56 : 9. 

Rid. 16: 1. 
Maid. 166. 
B. 2163. 

hio Offan flet 
ofer fealone flod be feeder lire 
sifte gesohte. 

Lang is bes siftfset 
ofer fealuwne flod 

cread cnear on flot, cining ut gewat, 
on fealone flod feorh generode 
Weox wseteres )>rym ; weras cwanedon, 
ealde sescberend ; wses him ut myne 
fleon fealone stream. 

J>ser in forlet 

flod fseftmian, fealewe wsegas. 
Donne onwsecneft eft wineleas guma 
gesih'S him beforan fealwe wsegas 

Storm oft holm gebringej> 
geofen in grimmum sselum ; onginna'S grome 

fealwe on feorran to lande. 

sum fealone wseg 
stefnan steore^. 
on geflit faran, fealwe mearas 
Hwilum flitende fealwe strsete 
mearum mseton. 

\>cet meahte wel seghwylc 
on fyrd wegan, fealwe linde. 

hreoh onette'S 

fealo lig feormetS and Fenix byrae'S. 
sindon J?a scancan scyllum biweaxen 
fealwe fotas 

ne fealle-S Sser on foldan fealwe blostman 
and swiora smsel, sidan fealwe. 
J>ser wses hlin and ac and se hearda iw 
and se fealwa holen. 
Hals is mm hwit and heafod fealo. 
feoll >a to foldan fealohilte swurd 
Hyrde ic, }>83t J>sem frsetwum feower mearas 
lungre gelice last weardode, 

200 W. E. MEAD. 

Gold. In addition to the strict color- words we may have 
to include in the yellow group the word gold, which in some 
passages appears to suggest a color effect. 1 There is room for 
much difference of opinion as to how many of the passages 
are genuine instances of the use of the word for this purpose, 
but such compounds as goldfdh, goldtorht, goldbeorht appear 
unmistakable. The primary word with its various deriva- 
tives is used something like a hundred times in Old English 
poetry. How many of these cases are to be taken as clear 
instances of color-words can be shown only by detailed dis- 
cussion, for which I have not space here. I will, therefore, 
reserve the topic for later examination. 

7. GREEN. As might perhaps be expected, the favorite 
color in Old English poetry, taken as a whole, is green, the 
color of growing plants. The extraordinary fondness for this 
color in English ballads has been often pointed out. But, 
singularly enough, the examples in Old English poetry are 
found almost wholly in the religious poems, one-third in 
the Genesis alone. Yet not a single example occurs in the 
Beowulf or in any other heroic poem. In the religious poems 
the word is commonly used in a somewhat conventional way, 
and seldom with a keen appreciation of the color. The earth, 
the fields, the grass, the trees, the hills, and other objects are 
mentioned, but the color-word appears to be added in many 
cases as a mere epithet. Now and then, however, the color- 
word seems to be used in order to make the passage more 
vivid. Thus the rod of Moses is called a grene tdne (Exod. 
281). Green streets leading to the home of the angels are 
once mentioned (C. and 8. 287). Two instances of the 
deliberate use of green for descriptive purposes are found 
in the Phoenix, a somewhat artificial poem based upon a still 
more artificial Latin original, but nevertheless containing a 
greater variety of color-words than any other Old English 
poem. We read (1. 293) that the back of the bird's head is 

1 Etymologically, gold is, of course, " the yellow metal." 


green, heafod hindan grene, and then (1. 298), se hols grene 
nioftoweard and ufeweard. In these passages the Old English 
poet is evidently trying to reproduce the viridante zmaragdo 
of his Latin original (1. 135). Yet in no passage do we find 
anything like the easy mastery of color-phrases that is so 
marked in Tennyson and Shelley and Keats. 

The examples given below are intended to be complete, and 
they are self-explanatory. 1 

l Gen. 1517. eorfle aelgrene and eacen feoh 

Chr. 1128. eorftan eal-grene and up-rodor 

A. 797. hwa set frumsceafte furSum teode 

ecu-San eallgrene and. upheofon. 
Gen. 1453. J>a gyta dSl senigne 

grenre eorSan ofgifen hsefde. 
Ph. 154. [gjrene eor'San 

Gen. 1560. }>a him wlitebeorhte wsestmas brohte, 

geartorhte gife grene folde. 
Ex. 311. wod on wsegstream, wigan on heape 

ofer grenne grand. 
Rid. 67 : 3. sses me sind ealle 

flodas on faeiSmum and }>as foldan bearm, 

grene wongas. 
Guti. 476. Ssegde him to sorge J>set hy sigelease 

J>one grenan wong of-giefan sceoldan. 
Heil. 206. \><xi us wunian ne mot wangas grene 

foldan frsetuwe. 

Gu?8. 746. Stod ee grena wong in godes waere 

Gen. 1655. Gesetton >a Sennar sidne and widne 

1657. heora geardagum, grene wongas. 
Rid. 41 : 50. Eom seghwser brsedre 

and widgielra >onne )>es wong grena. 
Rid. 13 : 1. Fotum ic fere, foldan slite, 

grene wongas, >enden ic gaest bere. 
Rid. 16 : 5. ordum ic steppe 

in grene gras. 
Gen. 1137. si'SSan Adam stop 

on grene grses, gaste geweor^od. 
Gen. 116. Folde wses >a gyt, 

graes ungrene : garsecg J>eahte, 

sweart synnihte side and wide 

wonne wsegas. pa wses wuldortorht 


W. E. MEAD. 


We have thus gone through the color-words found in Old 
English poetry and rapidly observed the way in which they 
are used. If the list is somewhat disappointing, it is at all 
events far more striking than anything that the Old High 

heofonweardes gast ofer holm boren, 

miclum spedum. Metod engla heht, 

lifes brytta, leoht forft cuman. 
Oen. 510. brade synd on worulde 

grene geardas and god site's 

on J>am hehstan heofna rice 
Gen. 1017. forSon heo J>e hr6$ra oftih-S 

glaemes grene folde. 
Oen. 1920. Him >a Loth gewat land sceawigan 

be lordane, grene eorftan : 

seo wses wsetrum weaht and wsestmum Jeaht, 

lagostreamum leoht 
PA. 33. sun-bearo lixeiS 

wudu-holt wynlic waestmas ne dreosa'S 

beorhte blede, ac >a beamas a 

grene stondaft swa him god bibead. 
PA. 78. on >am grses-wonge grene stonda> 

gehroden hyhtlice haliges meahtum, 

beorhtast bearwa. 
Gen. 1479. ac heo land begeat, 

grene bearwas. 

PA. 13. J>set is wynsum wong, wealdas grene 

Gen. 841. on )>one grenan weald 

Sal. 312. Lytle hwile leaf beoS grene. 

Met. 19 : 5 Hwsefter ge willen on wuda secan 

gold j>set reade on grenum triowum. 
Gen. 1472. IfSend brohte 

elebeames twig an to hande, 

grene blsedae. 
Dan. 517. o$ \>cet eft cyme 

grene bleda 
Ex. 280. hu ic sylfa sloh and J>eos swiiSre hand 

grene tane garsecges deop. 
Gen. 2548. Lig call fornara, 

\>(Kt he grenes fond goldburgum in. 
PA. 293. heafod hindan grene 


German literature has to offer, for this, as represented by 
Otfrid and other versifiers, is almost utterly destitute of 
color- words. The Old Saxon, as represented by the Heliand 1 
is almost equally barren. The equivalents of O.E. blcee, brun, 
feala, grceg, hdr and haso are not found at all. Blek (O.E. 
bide) occurs four times; gelo (O.E. geolo) once; rod (O.E. read) 
once ; groni (O.E. grene) six times ; swart (O.E. sweart) five 
times. Berhi and torht are also found, but they play a minor 
role. Not much perhaps is proved by such a comparison, 
for if more poems, of a different type, had been preserved, we V 
might have a different story to tell. But there is nevertheless 
some interest in finding that several of the rarer color-words 
of Old English poetry are rare or non-existent in Old Saxon 
poetry, and that green and black (swart) hold a prominent 
place in Old Saxon, as they do in Old English poetry. 

In so far, then, as Old English poetry is compared with 
contemporary Germanic poetry it more than holds its own. 
When, however, it is put beside the Celtic poems contained in~] 
the so-called Four Ancient Books of Wales or the Icelandic 
poems found in the Corpus Poetieum Boreale, it is seen to be i 
lacking in vividness and richness of color. In the Welsh 


Ph. 297. sindon )>a fi>ru 

hwit hindan-weard and se hals grene 

nioj>o-weard and ufe-weard. 
Ps. 141 : 4. On J>yssum grenan wege. 
C. and S. 286. Gemunan symle on mode meotodes streng$o, 

gearwian us togenes grene strsete 

up to englum. 
A. 775. foldweg tredan 

grene grundas. 
Guff. 231. sceoldon wraec-msecgas 

ofgiefan gnornende grene beorgas. 
Onom. 1. 34. Beorh sceal on eorj>an 

grene standan. 

Eid. 22 : 9. me bi"5 gongendre grene on healfe 
Met. 11 : 57. leaf grenian. 

1 The recently discovered O.S. original of the interpolation (11. 235-858) 
in the O.E. Genesis, is of course to be credited with all the color- words 
occurring in that long passage. 

204 W. E. MEAD. 

poems we meet twelve times the color blue which is found 
but once in Old English poetry. In every case the word 
seems to be used with a sharp definition of the object, even 
though the exact shade of color may vary. Note these lines : 

A shield, light and broad, 
Was on the slender swift flank, 
A sword blue and bright, 
Golden spurs and ermine 1 
or this, 

With his blue streamer displayed, while his foes range the sea.* 

Yellow occurs thirteen times ; black, fourteen times ; brown, 
seven times ; green, nineteen times ; red or purple, thirty-five 
times; white, fifty-three times. Lack of space forbids further 
illustrations, but they would show brilliantly beside almost 
any example from Old English poetry. 

Very different too from the Old English color-scheme is 
that presented by the Old Icelandic poems. I have gone 
through the first volume of the Corp. Poet. Bor. (comprising 
374 pages) and collected all the color-words. The first 
notable fact is the comparative lack of words for light and 
darkness, words which play so prominent a part in Old 
English poetry. The symbolic use of color is also less 
marked than in Old English. The leading color in Icelandic 
poetry is red the most brilliant color of all. This occurs 
forty-six times, and, it must be confessed, is often used some- 
what conventionally. The suggestive phrase, to ' redden the 
spear/ or to ' redden the sword/ occurs more than once. 
t Red rings ' and ' red gold ? are also favorite expressions. 
White occurs thirty-one times, usually with a keen appre- 
ciation of the value of the color. We find the phrases 
'sun-white/ ' swan-white/ * drift-white maid/ ' whiter than 
egg-film/ ' linen-white/ ' white-throated/ ' red and white 
shields/ and the like. Black occurs thirteen times. We read 

l Four Anc. Books, I, 374. 
Tbid., i, 402. 


of bears wfth black hide, of something blacker than a raven, 
of black targets, of a coal-black ox, and so forth. Gray is 
found eight times, in every case apparently used for the sake 
of a genuine color-effect. The wolf is once called ' the gray- 
coated beast/ as in Old English poetry, and the eagle is 
referred to as ' the gray bird of carrion.' A novelty is found 
in the mention of a gray mouse and of gray silver. Blood 
is used eight times, and bloody five times, with a sort of 
color-effect ; but the favorite way of referring to blood is to 
suggest it by indicating the color which it gives to the sword 
or to the field. Green occurs but six times, and is used in 
the most commonplace way. It is applied as a mere epithet 
to the fields, to paths, herbs, and the forests, once to the 
ash -tree Yggdrasil, and once to the city of the gods. When 
we remember how freely green is used in Old English poetry, 
we see that the difference is remarkable. 1 Brown is found 
only three times, and twice is used as an epithet describing 
hair. Yellow occurs twice, once as an epithet for the sword 
and once in describing hair. A fallow steed is mentioned 
once. Blue is twice used, once to describe a coverlet and once 
to describe a sark. But this blue was probably not blue in 
our sense, but more like a deep raven black hrafnbldr. 2 

I need hardly say that this sort of numerical comparison 
is very rough and arbitrary, and that it attempts merely to 
point out some broad lines of difference in two or three con- 
siderable bodies of poetry. In order to make the comparison 
perfectly fair, we ought, if possible, to take pieces of about 
the same length and of the same general type, but in so rapid 
a sketch as the present one I can do no more than call atten- 
tion to salient characteristics. I cannot undertake in the 
present paper to make generalizations or to enter upon theo- 
retical explanations of the facts, and I cannot, therefore, make 
further comparisons, for which I have collected material. I 

'Yet the rarity of green in most of the O.E. secular poems must be 

8 Of. Paul's Grundriss der germ. Phil, II., n, 237. 

206 W. E. MEAD. 

realize clearly the tentative character of the paper in its 
present form, but I cannot do more without opportunity for 
more extended discussion. The two notable facts to consider 

j are, that the color-sense in the Old English poets is compara- 
tively feeble, and that conventionality plays a large part in 
the passages where color is used at all. Genuine freedom 

~~ln the employment of color-phrases does not come until long 
after the Norman Conquest, but the tendency to individuality 
in this respect is one of the most striking characteristics of 
Elizabethan poetry, as it is also of nineteenth century literature. 



So hwen sBm endjel, brai div^in komsend, 
wrS reizig tempests /^ks e gilti Isend 
(set/ aez ov lt or p^l Britaenye psest), 
kselm aend sirln hi drmvz 'Si fyuries blaest ; 
send, pllzd -S olmmtiz orderz tu perform, 
reidz in "Si hwerlwind aend d^irekts "Si storm. 

So %i pytir limpid strlm, hwen fQul wrS st^nz 
ov ri3/irj torents aend disendig r^nz, 
wrarks itself klir, aend sez it renz, rifeinz ; 
til, b^i digrlz, 'Si flotig mirer/Binz, 
riflekts It/flgur 'Saet on its border groz, 
send e nti hevn in its f^r b^zem /oz. 

This passage from Addison, reproduced, in a slightly modi- 
fied version of the American Dialect Society's alphabet, 1 from 

1 Phonetic spellings and all phonetic symbols (except/) will be printed, 
in this article, in Roman type. A dot and a hook under a vowel letter 
(as e, e) indicate respectively the close and the open sound. The only 
characters that require explanation are the following : 

a : a in father 1 : ea in beat 

8 : u in hut g : ng in sing 

a : French a in patte o : o in hot 

a : French d in pdte d : New England o in whole 

se : a in hat 6 : o in hole 

K : Western a in fast o : German o in Sonne 

dg :j in jug o : German oh in Sohn 

ft : th in this o : o in born 

eieinbet u:oomfoot 

a : a in sofa u : oo in boot 

& : ai in bait fishin ship 

e : German ee in See tf: ch in chip 

e : French e in Ule \> : th in thin 

e : it in hurt y : y in yet 

i : i in bit 5 : si in vision. 



a phonetic transcription by Benjamin Franklin himself, may 
be taken as a sample of Franklin's pronunciation. Angel was 
more commonly sendjel in the 18th century, and chamber, 
danger had the same vowel ; 6ndjel, t/kmbar, dendjar, accord- 
ing to Noah Webster, were less elegant. The use of $i before 
consonants as well as vowels is noteworthy, and may be due 
to carelessness. For tu = to } Franklin also said to. Bszam 
was perfectly good in his day. 

From Franklin to Lowell is almost exactly a century, 1790 
to 1891, if we reckon from the death of each. A longer 
period 1706 to 1819 separates their dates of birth. As to 
the qualifications of these men to represent New England, no 
one will question those of Lowell ; but as Franklin went to 
I Philadelphia in 1^23, one may at first be inclined to doubt 
the purity of his Boston accent. He had, however, at least 
one trait that (according to Webster) was peculiar to the 
East the pronunciation -eiftar for t$ar = either ; and he had, 
as far as we can tell, no characteristic that was foreign to his 
birthplace. It should be added that in his day Boston and 
Philadelphia were linguistically far closer together than they 
are now. The distinctive features of the present New Eng- 
land speech are the suppression of consonant r unless it 
precede a vowel, the use of a and o where other dialects have 
respectively se and o, and the shortening of 6 to 6 : all these 
phenomena, except perhaps the last, have developed since 
Franklin's time. 

The purpose of this paper is to trace, as well as may be 
with the scanty material available, the history of the principal 
changes in Yankee pronunciation from the middle (roughly 
speaking) of the last century to the middle of our own, and 
even, in many cases, to the present day. The period of rapid 
transformation, from 1775 to 1825, will receive especial atten- 
tion. My treatise, though limited thus in scope, may be 
regarded as a continuation of the investigations of Victor, 1 

1 Die Aussprache des Englischen nach den deutsch-englischen Grammatiken 
vor 1750, Marburg, 1886. 


Bohnhardt, 1 Lowisch, 2 Holthausen, 3 and Luick, 4 or as a small 
supplement to the monumental work of Ellis 5 and the invalu- 
able compendium of Sweet. 6 I need hardly say that it is 
very imperfect, as many sources of information must have 
escaped me; subsequent research may, therefore, invalidate 
some of my conclusions. 

Franklin's pronunciation is known to us through A Scheme 
of a New Alphabet and Reformed Mode of Spelling? which he 
prepared in 1768. His phonetic alphabet is ingenious and 
simple, although it calls for several new characters, and leaves 
at least one important sound unrecognized. The remarks on 
the vowels and consonants and their symbols are very brief; 
the chief value of the little work lies in a few texts, written 
in the proposed orthography, which represent the author's 
pronunciation. They were reprinted (from a very faulty 
edition) by Ellis in the fourth volume of his Early English 
Pronunciation. There is in Franklin's alphabet no letter for 
a, which is noted sometimes e, sometimes v ; a, also unmen- 
tioned, probably did not exist in his language; e and -B were in 
his speech distinguished only by quantity; i, ti were monoph- 
thongs, and " long a," " long o " were respectively $ and 6. 

The Lowell who concerns us here is the Lowell of the 
Biglow Papers. The two series appeared in 1848 and 1867, 
and each contains some interesting remarks on pronunciation 
in the introduction. As the Papers are based on the poet's 
recollection of the rustic speech he heard during his boyhood, 
we may infer that they represent the country usage of eastern 
Massachusetts from 1825 to 1835. A sample of the Biglow 

'"Zur Lautlehre der englischen Grammatiken des XVII. und XVIII. 
Jahrhunderts," in Phonetische Studien, II (1888), 64. 

*Zur englischen Aussprache von 1650-1750, Kassel, 1889. 

3 Die englische Aussprache bis zumJahre 1750 nach ddnischen und schwedischen 
Zeugnissen, Goteborg, 1895. 

4 Untersuchungen zur englischen Lautgeschichle, Strassburg, 1896. 

5 On Early English Pronunciation, London, 1869-89. 
6 A History of English Sounds, Oxford, 1888. 

7 Works of Benjamin Franklin, edited by Jared Sparks, Boston, 1840, vi, 295. 


pronunciation will be found at the end of this article. Many 
features of this dialect had certainly found a place, at that 
time, in the language of the well-educated. Holmes, in his 
Autocrat of the Breakfast Table, 1857, gives us a few hints 
concerning the Boston practice of the forties and fifties. 

Between these two extremes we find, published in Boston 
in 1789, a treatise of great importance for our subject, 
Noah Webster's Dissertations on the English Language, which, 
although it has been carefully examined by Ellis, in his Early 
English Pronunciation, iv, is not widely known. Another 
authority, of considerable interest but of less weight than 
the preceding, is an Essai Raisonne sur la Grammaire et la 
Prononciation Angloise, d, I'usage des Francois qui desirent 
d j apprendre I'Anglois, par Duncan Mackintosh et ses deux 
filles, Boston, 1797. This work has, I believe, never before 
been utilized. Its value is somewhat impaired by the dogma- 
tism of the author, who advocates a very elaborate style of 
utterance, and has a tendency to describe what should be 
rather than what is. Moreover, his pronunciation is unmis- 
takably Scotch in some respects. 

In addition to the sources mentioned, we have at our dis- 
posal not only the dictionaries of Webster and Worcester, but 
a host of grammars, primers, and spelling-books published 
between 1777 and 1840. Not less surprising than the multi- 
tude of these text-books, and the great number of editions 
attained by many of them, is the variety of places of publi- 
cation : no hamlet in those days was too insignificant to 
support a printing-office and aid in the diffusion of learning. 
The best known works of this class are those of Noah 
W'ebster and Lindley Murray and the American (frequently 
more or less Americanized) editions of Perry and Walker. 

Authorities of this sort are, of course, to be used with 
caution. The orthoepist is by nature conservative, more given 
to copying his predecessors than to recording actual usage. 
Occasionally, however, we come upon an author whose inde- 
pendence or ignorance enables or forces him to listen for 


himself; and even in the more conventional treatises we 
sometimes find innovations, which can immediately be dis- 
cerned if we are well versed in the foregoing literature. 

The present study is based on an examination of some two 
hundred text-books, most of which are contained in the 
Library of Harvard University. Nearly all were printed in 
New England, but I have in some rare cases taken the 
testimony of a work published in a neighboring state. I 
have, moreover, consulted a score of German grammars 
written in America. As was to be expected, the great 
majority of these volumes yielded no results whatever. In 
fact, only twenty-two of them are worth quoting. I give 
below a chronological list of these and of the other authorities 
I have mentioned, with the abbreviations which I shall use 
in referring to them hereafter : 

FRANKLIN. Benjamin Franklin : A Scheme of a New Alphabet and He- 
formed Mode of Spelling, 1768. Franklin was born in Boston in 1706. 

GR. INST. Noah Webster : A Grammatical Institute of the English Language, 
Hartford, Conn., 1784 (3d ed.). Webster was born in Connecticut in 1758. 

PERRY. W. Perry : The Only Sure Guide to the English Tongue, Worcester, 
Mass., 1785 (8th ed.). The work was originally written in Edinburgh in 
1777. Perry was "Lecturer in the English Language in the Academy, 

ASH. John Ash : Grammatical Institutes^ orcester, Mass., 1785 (new ed.). 

THOMAS. Isaiah Thomas : New American Spelling-Book,WoTcester, Mass., 

Diss. Noah Webster: Dissertations on the English Language, Boston, 
Mass., 1789. 

AM. SP. B. Noah Webster : The American Spelling-Book, Boston, Mass., 
1794 (9th ed.). 

BINGHAM. Caleb Bingham : The Young Lady's Accidence, Boston, Mass., 
1794 (8th ed.). 

FRASER. Donald Fraser : The Columbian Monitor, New York, 1794. 

DEARBORN. Benjamin Dearborn : The Columbian Grammar, Boston, 
Mass., 1795. 

Y. L. G. SP. B. The Young LadieJ and Gentlemen's Spelling-Book. Title- 
page lacking. Probably published in Boston, Mass., about 1795. 

MACKINTOSH. Duncan Mackintosh (and Daughters) : Essai Raisonne, 
etc., Boston, Mass., 1797. 

HALE. E. Hale : A Spelling-Book, Northampton, Mass., 1799. 


MURRAY. Lindley Murray: English Grammar, Boston, Mass., 1802 (2d 
Boston ed.). Murray was born in Pennsylvania in 1745, went to England 
in 1784, and died there in 1826. 

COMPANION. Caleb Bingham: The Child's Companion, Boston, Mass., 
1805 (llth ed.). 

WEBSTER. Noah Webster: A Compendious Dictionary of the English 
Language, Hartford and New Haven, Conn., 1806. 

ALDEN. Abner Alden : An Introduction to Spelling and Reading, Boston, 
Mass., ] 813 (6th ed.). 

WARE. Jonathan Ware: A New Introduction to the English Grammar, 
Windsor, Vt., 1814. This book has, for correction, texts spelled phoneti- 
cally according to the rural pronunciation. 

CUMMINGS. J. A. Cummings: The Pronouncing Spelling-Book, Boston, 
Mass., 1822 (3d ed.). 

HAWES. Noyes P. Hawes: The United States Spelling-Book or English 
Orthoepist, Portland, Me., 1824. Based on Walker. 

KIRKHAM. Samuel Kirkham : English Grammar, New York, 1830 
(20th ed.). 

CLARK. Schuyler Clark: The American Linguist, Providence, K. L, 
1830. Clark has a curious system of phonetic notation, in which sounds 
are represented by dots, dashes, and curves. 

WORCESTER. J. E. Worcester: A Comprehensive Pronouncing and Ex- 
planatory Dictionary of the English Language, Boston, Mass., 1830. 

FOLLEN. C. Follen : A Practical Grammar of the German Language, 
Boston, Mass., 1831. 

FOSDICK. David Fosdick : An Introduction to the German Language, 
Andover, Mass., 1838. 

WILLARD. Samuel Willard : The General Class-Book, Greenfield, Mass., 
1840 (19th ed.) . Willard was the author of the Franklin Primer and Reader. 
He was a much better observer than most of the authors enumerated. 

MONTEITH. A. H. Monteith : A Course of Lessons in the German Language, 
New York, 1844. 

LOWELL. James .Russell Lowell: The Biglow Papers, 1848 and 1867. 
Lowell was born in Cambridge, Mass., in 1819. 

HOLMES. Oliver Wendell Holmes : The Autocrat of the Breakfast Table, 
1857. Holmes was born in Cambridge, Mass., in 1809. 

If, now, we compare Franklin's pronunciation with that of 
the Biglow Papers, or with that of our own childhood, we 
are struck by several marked divergences; and there are 
many others that are not so apparent. These various differ- 
ences I shall now consider in detail, treating first the vowels, 
next the diphthongs, and then the consonants. 



[a in father."] 

In England, from 1550 or 1600 down to about 1780, there 
was no long a, except perhaps in a few foreign words. The 
Middle English a had become se. Sheridan, 1780, has no a in 
his vowel-scheme. In Nares' Elements of Orthoepy, London, 
1784, we find a vowel resembling our a before f, s, )?, n -|- 
consonant, 1m, and even in trans- and -graph, but apparently 
not before r, as clerk and sergeant have se. Walker, in 1791, 
is the first to report a return of the full a-sound : according 
to him, a was used universally before an r that was final or 
followed by a consonant ; before spirants, usage was divided ; 
before n -f- consonant, a was going out of use, and was 
regarded as inelegant. This would seem to indicate a very 
sudden incursion of a into London pronunciation between 
1780 and 1790 ; it may have existed a decade or so earlier in 
vulgar speech. But for many years after Walker a and se 
struggled for the supremacy. The German grammars written 
in English in the early years of our century give as the 
equivalent of German a either English aw or something 
between 'aw and a in father. In our own time, before an r 
that is final or precedes a consonant, we find that a has pre- 
vailed everywhere, except in some rural dialects; before a 
voiceless spirant, and before n followed by a consonant, a has 
gained the upper hand in southern England, but not in 
the north. 

In America a was apparently slower in making its way. 
Franklin did not know it : he said fseiSar and hserdli ; and 
Thomas, 1785, said som for psalm. Nowadays a is universal 
before r final or + consonant ; moreover, in the greater part 
of New England, in about 150 words, for a (or au) before a 
voiceless spirant, 1 a nasal + cons., 2 or an Im = m, 3 a is in 

1 Laugh, pass, path, etc. 3 Calm, salmon, etc. 

9 Aunt, branch, can't, chance, etc. 


common use, and prevails in about fifty of them. But west 
of the Connecticut River, as in almost all the rest of the 
United States, a is scarcely heard, except before r, in father, 
and occasionally before m = Im. In words that have au 
followed by nch, nd, or nt, 1 a has had to contend both with 3d 
and with o : in New England a prevails decidedly, & being 
almost unknown ; all the rest of the country favors o, although 
a and sd may be heard in most regions. 

I have found but few traces of a in America in the 18th 
century. Perry, 1785, recommends what is probably Je in 
bask, blanch, blast, brass, chant, glance, etc., and also in aunt, 
craunch, daunt, flaunt, haunch, jaunt, paunch, scraunch, 
although he admits o as well in haunch and paunch; part 
has se (possibly &). Webster, Diss., 1789, prefers se in aunt, 
jaunt, sauce, although the English use o. Fraser, 1794, has 
"aa" (se or a?) in aunt, launch. Mackintosh, 1797, gives se 
before spirants and nasals (ba3J>, da3ns, kwsef) and generally 
before r (33 rt, fser, fsers, Iserdj), but a in arm and are; 2 in 
augment, aunt, balm, qualm, vaunt he uses o; he ascribes a 
pronunciation with a to many words of French or Latin 
origin (clamor, claret, Paris, etc.), but I do not feel sure that 
this represents the New England practice of his day. Hale, 
1799, seems to have short 33 before r (gserd, ks3rv, maBrt/", 
pa3rt, skserf), long se before spirants and nasals (seft, bsem, 
bsesk, draft, gient, hsef, taint, etc.). 

Early in our own century, however, a had established itself. 
Murray, to be sure, 1802 (2d Boston ed.), mentions no a : 
with him aunt, flaunt, gauntlet have 83. And Alden, 1813 
(6th ed.), does not recognize our vowel : his back and bark 
have respectively short and long a3 ; draught, laugh have p. 
But Webster, in 1806, finds a place for "Italian a," and 
sharply criticizes Sheridan for " omitting " it; he says it is 

^Launch, laundry, haunt, etc. 

* This is the only instance of a in are that I have found 'before 1830. 
The word is regularly eT or ser in the 18th century. Franklin always 
writes it er. 


used in such words as ask, dance, demand, father, psalm. 
Kirkharu, N. Y., 1830 (20th ed.), has "Italian a" in bar, 
farther, but & in glass. Willard, 1840 (19th ed.), speaks of 
" long Italian a," as in aunt, calf, cart, gaunt. Clark, 1 830, 
knows our a, and prescribes it in aunt, father, guard, heart, 
ma, pa. In the same year appeared Worcester's first dic- 
tionary, containing both a and the intermediate &, which 
latter sound he uses before spirants and nasals : he declares 
that " to pronounce the words fast, last, glass, grass, dance, 
etc., with the proper sound of short a, as in hat, has the 
appearance of affectation ; and to pronounce them with the 
full Italian sound of a, as in part, father, seems to border 
on vulgarism." This compromise vowel, which was recom- 
mended also in England, does not seem to have been adopted, 
in actual speech, by any considerable number of Americans; 
it may be heard, however, on Cape Cod. Lowell, 1848, 
shows an extension of a to some words outside our class, such 
as handsome; and Holmes, 1857, condemns as vulgar such 
pronunciations as " sahtisfahctory," " a prahctical mahn." 
One may still hear, from elderly New England rustics, apl, 
harna, mata, pantri, satdi for apple, hammer, matter, pantry, 
Saturday. It seems likely that the present cultivated eastern 
New England usage was established between 1790 and 1800, 
although there were doubtless sporadic cases of our vowel 
before that. Whether the a was a native growth, or was 
imported from England, I cannot say. In vulgar Yankee 
speech the a may have developed, or been adopted, a little 
earlier, and it certainly spread with great rapidity, forcing its 
way into many words that have since cast it out. It was 
probably at the height of its popularity between 1830 and 
1850. At present it seems to be declining, both in urban 
and in rural speech. The vicissitudes of this vowel afford a 
striking refutation of the doctrine that a phonetic develop- 
ment cannot retrace its steps. 


fi, 1, 0, tr. 

[Ai in baity ea in beat, oa in boat, oo in 

These vowels were certainly monophthongs in the 18th 
century : 1, 6, u were probably close ; was doubtless in 
England until 1750 or thereabouts, and then gradually 
became e. With Franklin, 6 is still open : he describes it 
as a long e. In Mackintosh, 1797 : e in scene is like French 
i; oa in boat is like French 6; u in rule is like French ou in 
roule; a in hate is like French 6, but English ai and also 
a in -age, -are, -ation, -ave and in acre, april, bathe, cane, 
capable, range, same, tame, and many other words, are like 
French e. The change from to e probably took place in 
New England during the last quarter of the century. 

All these vowels, unless they be followed by r, are now 
strongly diphthongal in southern England, and more or less 
so in America. The amount of breaking depends, with us, 
on the length of the vowel, and that is regulated by its posi- 
tion in the word or phrase. The extreme types, in New 
England, rarely go beyond 6e, ii, 60, tiu, but , 6 may some- 
times reach the stage 6i, 6u. When did this development 
take place? Smart, in 1810, identifies English a with 
French 6, and French and German grammars of 1814, 1821, 
1823, and 1832, written for Englishmen, describe the " long 
a " as French ^ or German eh or ee. Readers of Miss Edge- 
worth will remember that the Irish lady, in The Absentee, 
who tries to affect an English accent, substitutes i for her 
native Q in such words as taste; this could hardly happen 
unless the sound imitated were e. I do not know when the 
breaking began in England. In America the first mention 
of it that I have been able to find is in Willard (19th edition 
in 1840); he is very explicit : "o begins with a sound, which 
is never heard alone, except in the New England pronuncia- 
tion of such words, as whole, home, stone, which they pronounce 
shorter than hole, comb, bone," and ends with u, "as in do; " 


the a of cane begins with the e of men and ends with the e of 
me. He says nothing about 1 and u, but the diphthongal 
character of these sounds is not so easily recognizable. By 
1820, then, the development of 6, 6, and doubtless of all four 
vowels, was complete in New England. Follen, 1831, says 
that the German e is " nearly like a in fate, yet closer, and 
without the sound of an e which is slightly heard at the end 
of long a in English." 

In a great many words 6 is shortened and slightly advanced, 
in rustic New England speech, becoming 6. This vowel is 
used by educated New England speakers in about fifty common 
words and their derivatives, and it certainly prevails in the 
cultivated usage of this region in Polk, polka, whole, and 
probably in both, folks, Holmes, most, only, and some others. 
Franklin does not mention the sound ; but Webster says in 
his Diss., 1789 : " o is sometimes shortened in common par- 
lance, as in colt." Among Dearborn's "Improprieties/' 1795, 
we find "hum." Hale, 1799, remarks: "the short sound of 
6 is found in too few words to make a distinct class : they 
are home, none, stone, whole, and their compounds." Willard's 
observation concerning " the New England pronunciation of 
such words, as whole, home, stone" has already been quoted. 
Dearborn's " hum " is doubtless intended to represent horn, 
not hem, although U is actually used in Connecticut ; I have 
never heard it elsewhere, and Lowell once told me he had 
never heard it. Similar, in a way, to short 6 is the short u 
in such words as hoof, proof, roof, room, soon. It goes back 
to the last century, but was probably regarded until recently 
as a vulgarism. Dearborn, 1795, gives "huff, ruff, spunfull" 
in his list of " Improprieties." 

When these vowels are followed by r, as in pare, peer, pore, 
poor, their fate is different : the vowels do not break, but an 
indistinct vowel-glide develops before the r. This glide will 
be discussed under r; it goes back certainly to Franklin's 
day, and probably much farther. The " long a," under these 


circumstances, retains either its old or its older se sound ; 
the pronunciations pe^ar and psear exist side by side, se being 
perhaps the commoner in New England. They have both 
been in use during our whole period : Franklin notes fair as 
fi$r, there both as iSsear and as $<*r. Hale, 1799, has before r 
a sound that is probably se. Cummings, 1822, gives a in 
layer, mayor, & (= ?) in care, pair. Willard observes : " a 
in care, and a in carry, are exactly alike in everything, but 
the time that is spent in pronouncing them, as much alike as 
a dollar and a half-dollar." " Long e " is frequently lowered 
to i ; and, although none of our informants mention it, we 
may be tolerably confident that a pronunciation piar has 
existed beside piar throughout our period. Similarly, pore 
may be either pgar or poar. The southern English pro- 
nunciation poa has become very popular in the vicinity of 
New York and Boston ; I have found no trace of it before 
1850, but it may have existed very much earlier as a vulgar- 
ism. Such words as for, short, where o precedes an r that is 
final or followed by a consonant, form a different class, and 
in them o has been o for a couple of centuries or longer ; the 
exceptional cases, such as porch, pork, port, sport, in which 
the o is sounded 6, have, as far as I can discover, been pro- 
nounced substantially in the same way, in New England, 
during our whole period, 1 although nowadays, in the neighbor- 
hood of Boston, they share the fate of words like pore. " Long 
oo," like i and 6, may have either the close or the open pro- 
nunciation, puar or puar. In some dialects this u is further 
lowered to o, Q, and even o ; in New England this practice 
exists only for a few words, such as sure and your, and is 
frowned upon everywhere but in Boston, where yoaz = yours 
is very common. It certainly goes back to 1795, when we 
find /oar for sure noted as an " impropriety." 

1 Dearborn, 1795, condemns "coard" for cord. Hale, 1799, has 6 in four, 
hoar, hoard, store, worn, and o (!) in forge, horse, snort. Willard has 6 in roar, 
etc., but, very curiously, o in board. 



[Au in caught, o in cot.~\ 

These two vowels, in England, are rounded, and are uttered 
with a tongue-position similar to that of o and Q, but lower. 
This was doubtless the American practice in the 18th century, 
although some speakers, while sounding the o of or as o, 
apparently gave to au and aw the value a, Nowadays Ameri- 
can o is nearly always unrounded, and is formed by drawing 
the tongue as far back and as low down as it will go; 
American o has generally become a retracted a, or a, but in 
Maine, and with many speakers in all eastern New England, 
it retains a little rounding. 

Franklin makes no distinction between the vowel of storm 
and that of awl; moreover, according to him, the o of ball 
and the o of folly differ only in quantity, both of them 
" requiring the mouth opened a little more [than for 6], or 
hollower." Mackintosh, 1797, identifies o in dot with French 
6; o in born is the same sound lengthened ; but au in haul is 
like the French d, " mais plus long encore." Our other 
authors throw but little light on the subject: Ware, 1814, in 
his clumsy phonetic spelling, represents D by aw, o by au; 
Willard describes o as " the long German sound," o as short 
o. If this last description is to be trusted, o and o must have 
lost their lip-modification by 1820; but they evidently had 
not acquired their present character, for our o and o could 
never have been regarded by a careful observer, like Willard, 
as the long and short of the same sound. It is possible that 
our unrounded o is the descendent of Mackintosh's a = au, 
aw, which has attracted and swallowed up the original rounded 
o = o(r) ; in Franklin's pronunciation, on the other hand, o 
had apparently absorbed &. 

In very many cases there is in America a difference of 
usage between o and o. The doubtful words may be classified 


as follows : those containing a or au before 1 -+- consonant ; l 
those containing o (or, after w or u, an a) before a voiceless 
spirant, 2 a voiced spirant, 3 a nasal, 4 a voiced stop, 5 an 1 or 
an r. 6 All these words commonly have o in England. In 
America those of the first class have o almost universally, 
although o is sometimes heard in New England ; those of the 
third and sixth classes, and most of those of the fourth and 
fifth, have o in New England, but long, etc., dog, gone, want, 
and a few others are usually pronounced with o ; those of the 
second class have both sounds in New England (o predomi- 
nating), and almost always o everywhere else. This confusion 
has probably lasted through our whole period, but I find 
nowhere any mention of the third and fifth classes, nor any 
recognition of the sixth except solv (Perry) : in these the 
o was doubtless regarded as vulgar. Perry prescribes o in 
cloth, cross, loft, moth, off, etc., and also in solve. Mackintosh, 
1797, gives the sound o to the a of salt. Hale, 1799, has o 
in cost, dross, frost, froth, moth, scald, soft, tongs, o in fault, 7 
gone, halt, malt, swan, vault, 7 wand, wash. It seems likely 
that o has gained a little, in the last hundred years, in culti- 
vated New England pronunciation. 


[ U in hurt, u in hut.~\ 

These two vowels, e and , are now generally distinguished, 
although both of them are differently pronounced in various 
localities. In central New York and southern New Jersey 
they are said to be regularly identical, both being sounded B ; 
this may be the case in some other regions ; it is also the 
Irish pronunciation. On the other hand, the substitution of 
e for B before r -f vowel, as in courage, hurry, is very common 

1 Also, alter, fault, scald, etc. *Long, on, romp, etc. 

2 Cloth, lost, often, wash, etc. *Dg, Ood, squab, etc. 

3 Bother, novel, rosin, was, etc. *Doll, horrid, quarrel, swallow, etc. 

7 The earlier 18th century pronunciation was fot, vot. 


in the West and South. The vowel B in England and in 
Maine is formed nearly as far back in the mouth as 6 ; in the 
greater part of the United States it is less retracted, and in 
the South it has a decidedly " mixed " quality. The English 
e is unrounded, and is described by Sweet as " low-mixed ; " 
the American sound is very often slightly rounded, and 
requires the tongue a little higher than the English variety. 
By the middle of the 18th century "short u" had probably 
been unrounded and lowered into v, and it has not materially 
changed since then, except before r final or -f- consonant. 
Here, also, in the neighborhood of 1750, u (and o in word, etc.) 
had the sound TS while e and i vacillated between v and e. 
In the second half of the century popular usage tended to 
level all these groups to BF, and good speakers were divided 
between this practice and an effort to keep the value er, or 
something approaching it, for at least a part of the words 
with er, ir. Sheridan, 1780, seems to follow no method in 
this matter : he has e, for instance, in firm, herb, pearl, stern, 
V in fir, first, her, stir. Walker, 1791, says that er, ir -f- con- 
sonant have " the sound of short u exactly," except in birth, 
firm, girl, girt, girth, mirth, skirt, whirl; er, ir at the end of a 
syllable (and in the words just mentioned) "approach the 
sound of short u;" many people "corruptly" give the sound 
B to er, ir, ur indiscriminately. We should like to know more 
of the nature of the vowel resembling B a sound obscurely 
described by several authors long before our period : was it a 
stressed a, or was it already the American type of e ? Some 
kind of e was in regular use in 1810, when Smart wrote his 
Practical Grammar of English Pronunciation : ur, he says, 
"has an open 1 which corresponds with the shut 1 sound," 
B . . . ; " this open sound is never heard on any other occa- 
sion ; " er, ir, he adds, are usually pronounced like ur, " but 
with polite speakers, we hear a deviation from the latter 
pronunciation," approaching er. The foreign grammars of 

1 With Smart, "open" means dose, and "shut," open. 


English that I have been able to examine, down to 1832, 
make no distinction between is and e ; Gratte, Cours de Langue 
anglaise, Brussels, 1814, for instance, says that i in birch, 
bird, fir, third, etc., is "comme o ouvert," which is also his 
definition of " short it." Ollendorff, in 1839, defines German 
6 as English i in bird. We may safely infer that e was 
developed and came into general use in England between 
1780 and 1810 j 1 but whether it grew out of rar, or out of er, 
or, as is far more likely, out of a compromise between Br and 
er, we cannot be sure. 

When did e first appear in America ? Franklin does not 
distinguish it from 12 ; both ur and er, ir he sounds rar. The 
Gr. Inst., 1784, tells us that "the proper sound of e and i 
before r " is " short e, nearly," a vowel different from e and 
from TB, as in birth, earth, firm, person; but 12 is heard in bird, 
fir, her. Perry, 1785, defines er, ir, ur as rar, without excep- 
tions. Ash, 1785, has 'e in bird, third. In the Diss., 1789, 
Webster informs us that " rnarcy," etc., is common in the 
vulgar dialect of New England (and "dark, sargeant" in 
cultivated speech), while " murcy " is an error of " fine 
speakers," the correct form being mersi. Fraser, 1794, 
recommends i for i before r final or -}- consonant, but cites 
numerous exceptions. Mackintosh, 1797, says that the French 
e ofje is used in but, cur, fir, her, under; he gives no excep- 
tions. Hale, 1799, prefers i in whirl. Murray, 1802, gives 
us ra in first and flirt. The Companion, 1805, makes no dis- 
tinction between fir and fur. Alden, 1813, has E in birch, 

*A sound resembling e, probably accented a, must have existed^ in the 
dialect of some speakers at a much earlier date. Boiling (cited by Holt- 
hausen in his Englische Aussprache), a Norwegian, whose Fkddkommen 
Engelske Grammatica was published in Copenhagen in 1678, says that first, 
thirst have Danish 0, while church, nurse have u. Sterpin, a Frenchman 
living in Denmark, brought out, about 1665 or 1670, a French-English- 
Danish grammar called Institutiones glotticce, in which ir is said to be 
equivalent to Danish 0r: see Holthausen in the Archivfur das Studium der 
neueren Sprachen u. Lit., xcix, 3-4. See also Sweet, History of English 
Sounds, pp. 264-5. 


bird, dirty first, flirt, shirt, sir, stir, third, thirst, e in chirp, 
dirge, firkin, firm, gird, girl, girt, mirth, skirmish, skirt, smirk, 
stirp, twirl, virge, virgin, virtue, whirl. Ware, 1814, in his 
popular pronunciation, always has ur (" btird," "purfec," 
"survant," "vurtoo"), except in earth, which is "arth." 
Willard affirms that " e before r in serve, sermon, serpent, and 
the like, is to have the same kind of sound, which it has in 
berry, but it is to be nearly twice as long ....;" " it is not 
to be pronounced like u in surly, nor like a in Sardis, nor 
like a in care; " ur in burst, on the other hand, has long a, 
or, as he tells us, a vowel of the same quality as that of bur, 
burrow, dove, worry. In Worcester, 1830, we find e recog- 
nized as a vowel distinct from all others, and as the regular 
pronunciation of er, ir, ur. Turning to the German grammars, 
we find in Follen, 1831, that 6 has "no correspondent sound 
in English ;" while Fosdick, 1838, regards 6 "nearly as the 
English u in /Mr." Monteith, 1844, says: "6 is pronounced 
like the French eu. The inflection given by a native of 
London to ir, in such words as birth, mirth, is a still more 
correct pronunciation of the 6." We may gather from all 
this testimony that a sound approaching e was sometimes 
used by 1784, but that Br (and, in artificial speech, er) pre- 
vailed until the neighborhood of 1820; that e was fully 
developed and much employed by 1830, but that it could 
still appear a foreign sound in New England in 1844. In 
America, as in England, it seems likely that er first belonged 
to the er, ir words, and was the result of a conscious or 
unconscious compromise between -er and er. 


[0o in food, eu in feud.~\ 

The pronunciation of "long u" has long been* a source of 
trouble to orthoepists. At present, in New England, the 
sound is : yu at the beginning -of a word or after h * (in this 

1 Use, hue, etc. 


latter case the y is often unvoiced) ; yu (rustic i'u) after b, f, 
g, k, m, p, v ; l regularly u (but sometimes, especially in the 
country, i'u) after 1, r, s, /, y, z, 5 ; 2 u or i'u (about equally 
common) after d, n, t, J>. 3 

Franklin probably pronounced iu in the first two cases, u 
in the last two : we find in his texts fiu, nu, rul, tru. Webster, 
Diss., had a diiFereut pronunciation : according to him, " long 
u" always had the same sound, which was neither u nor a 
diphthong, but " a separate vowel, which has no affinity to 
any other sound in the language," and is best pronounced by 
countrymen and children ; in new, he says, no e is heard, 
except in Virginia, where they affect to say " ne-oo, fe-oo." 
In Webster's Connecticut pronunciation, apparently, some- 
thing resembling the old ii still remained, perhaps a " high- 
mixed" vowel. This sound, though doubtless foreign to 
Franklin's Boston pronunciation, was probably common in 
rural New England, and must have been an important factor 
in the later confusion of u and i'u in rustic speech. Some of 
the English country dialects point to a similar preservation 
of a " high-mixed " vowel. Perry calls for " long u " (does 
he mean i'u or ii?) in June, luce, prune, ruse, spruce, strew, 
sure, truce, truth, yew, and condemns u in absolute, presume, 
true. Walker, on the other hand, advocates the three treat- 
ments of "long u" represented by tyun, flt/ar, rud, for which 
he is roundly abused by Webster in 1806. 

There is no doubt that the counsels of Perry and Webster 
were misunderstood by later orthoepists, and led to an intro- 
duction of yu or i'u, in polite speech, after dentals, and to 
heroic attempts to pronounce one of these groups after all 
consonants. The ensuing confusion probably did much to 
mix up u and i'u in the rural dialect. This mixing we see 
already in Ware's representation of Vermont speech in 1814 : 
" tu "= two, " trooth," " hooman," " redoosing," " obskoor," 

1 Scanty, few, Gulick, cue, muse, pew, view, etc. 
2 Lure, rheum, sue, sure, yew, resume, juice, etc. 
3 Due, new, tune, thews, etc. 


"noomerator," "dootee," "dispooted," "constitooshun," "du" 
= do. Hawes, 1824, gives as words pronounced alike rood 
and rude, room and rheum. The Biglow Papers are full of 
instances. Willard says of eu, ew, ue: "these diphthongs, 
when they follow r, Mr. Walker pronounces like o in do, as 
in brew, true, etc. In most other cases, they have the natural 
sound of u [i. e. i'u], as blue, blew." He criticizes the pro- 
nunciation " juty, chune, multichude," which, he says, " is 
affected by some persons, who pretend to follow Mr. Walker." 
Djuti, t/un, etc., which are mentioned by Webster, 1789, as 
common but undesirable pronunciations, are no longer used 
here, except by the Irish. The confusion between u and i'u 
was probably at its height about 1820; the present tendency 
seems to be to revert to Franklin's practice. 

When " long u " follows the principal or secondary accent, 
it is, of course, shortened to yu or u, and frequently obscured 
to ya or 9. After n, as in continue, the suppression of the 
y is now vulgar. Otherwise this "u" is treated like the 
accented one, unless it be preceded by t, d, s, or z : in this 
case the consonant combines with the first element of the "u," 
and tu, du, su } zu become t/a, dga, /a, ja. This pronunciation 
is practically universal among good speakers, in spite of the 
efforts of modern orthoepists to force upon the public such 
combinations as ne^tyur, verdyur, isyu, plezyur; in the country, 
however, a different treatment of tu, du is to be found, namely, 
the omission of the y, and the development ta, da. These last 
two groups are probably the only ones whose pronunciation 
has changed during our period. But for these two the de- 
velopments ta, da (or til, du) and t/a, dja existed side by side 
in the 18th century, and in New England the former certainly 
prevailed. Franklin said nsetaral. Webster, 1789, declares 
that ne"tur, v^rdiir (or netar, v^rdar ?) is the only good usage. 
Thomas, 1785, says century is pronounced like sentry. Perry, 
1785, condemns both n6tar and n^t/ur (as well as /uprlm). 
The Y. L. G. JSp. B. has : captor = capture, coulter- = culture, 
"feter" (defined as "a bad smell ") = feature, jester = gesture. 


Murray, 1802, favors dyu in verdure. Ntar, etc., probably 
became vulgar early in this century. 

Ware's Vermont forms, 1814, show the same confusion 
for unaccented as for accented " u : " " vallooing," " vurtu," 
"figyur," " misfourtins," " unokkoopiid," "kreetyoor," "abso- 
loot," "kontinoos," "naychoor," "nayter," "nacher," "sitooa- 
shun," " kontribbited." The forms without y prevail in the 
Biglow Papers. Cummings, 1822, gives as identical captor 
and capture, valley and value. Kirkham, 1830, tells us that 
d is to be sounded " j " in educate, grandeur, verdure. Willard 
says : (f tu, in the syllable following the accent, has a sound 
resembling that of chu, as in nature, virtuous; " the d in 
assiduous, he remarks elsewhere, has " very nearly the sound 

, e, o, i, u : a, e, a, i, oo in fat, fet, sofa, fit, fooL~] 

The short B, as in hut, and o, as in hot, have already been 
discussed. There remain se, e, a, i, u, which have probably 
not changed in sound during the epoch we are studying. 
Early in the 18th century, " short a " was perhaps , but it 
must have become se before Franklin's time. Mackintosh, 
1797, informs us that a in arc (" short a") is like French &, 
that e in bed is equivalent to French e, that the vowel in bit 
is "plus breve et plus gutturale que Yi Frai^ois le plus bref," 
and that u in pull is the same thing as French ou iupoule; 
he does not speak of 9. Franklin confuses a both with e and 
with B. We have no specific mention of this sound until we 
reach Willard, who says it is identical with B. 

The rustic use of e for i, so common in Lowell, can be 
traced back to the 18th century: Dearborn, 1795, criticizes 
" sense" for since and "sperrit" for spirit; Hale, 1799, has 
"ben" for been; in Ware, 1814, we find "entu" for into; 
Cummings, 1822, mentions without condemnation "desk" 
for disc, " set " for sit. Lowell's use of e for B, in words like 
brush, such) is exemplified in Webster, who says that " shet " 


for shut "is now becoming vulgar/' and condemns "sich" 
for such; in our century it has existed only as a dialect 
pronunciation, and it seems now to be disappearing. The 
substitution of e for SB in certain words, now a characteristic 
of rustic speech, we find in Franklin, who said hez for has; 
The Y. L. G. Sp. B. has keif for catch; Ware has " hev " and 
" hed ; " Lowell furnishes numerous examples. According to 
Webster, Diss., quadrant, qualify, quality, quandary, quantity, 
shall are pronounced both with SB and with o ; he prefers 83. 
Webster tells us also that such words as drop, oft, soft are 
often spoken with SB among the descendants of Scotch and 
Irish. In a few words, such as friend, get, yes, yesterday, the 
(or ie) was usually sounded i in the 18th century : Franklin 
said frind and git; Mackintosh has blis for bless; in the 19th 
century this practice ceased to be fashionable, but git still 
lingers among the uncultured, and i for e is a regular feature 
of the Irish brogue. 

[Ai, oi, au : y, oy, ough in by, boy, bough."] 

" Long i," in New England, is now generally sounded ai, 
less frequently m or sei. Franklin pronounced it Bi, as in 
/einz = shines, rarSar = either. Webster, 1789, defines it as 
ai, and condemns a fashionable pronunciation " keind, skey 
gueide," meaning kyseind, skysei, gyseid, forms that flourished 
through the first quarter of our century, and have not yet 
entirely gone out of use. Mackintosh, 1797, says i in ice is 
like French ai. Clark, 1830, tells us that mine is equivalent 
to ma in in the sentence " is ma in ? " Willard, on the other 
hand, has rai, the vowel of bur -j- that of me. 

The usual pronunciation of oi is now oi. This is also 
the sound given to it by Webster, 1789, and Perry, 1785. 
Mackintosh, 1797, says that the oi of point is like French oi 
in pointe probably an erroneous statement. Ware, 1814, 


represents oi as " aw-i : " joys = " jawis." Willard describes 
it as made up of the vowel of north -f- that of pin. 

The confusion of ai and oi, which has now become very 
vulgar, was extremely prevalent throughout the 18th century. 
Fraser, 1794, contains this couplet : 

" The sound of o i custom reconciles 
With that of i spoke long ; as, witness toils." 

All lists of words pronounced alike contained such pairs as 
bile boil, engine enjoin, file foil ', pint point, tile toil. These we 
find, without condemnation, as late as 1822. Dearborn, 1795, 
on the other hand, mentions " bile" and " brile" as " impro- 
prieties/ 7 and Willard calls "ile, pint, line," for oil, point, 
loin, " very old-fashioned." 

The diphthong ou was "ou" (probably QU) in the speech 
of Franklin and of Webster, From the Diss., 1789, we 
learn that ou, especially after p and c, is often improperly 
sounded " ion," as " kiow," " piower ; " but ground, round, 
etc., are pronounced "with tolerable propriety" by "the most 
awkward countryman." Mackintosh, 1797, analyzes ou as 
French aou, which may indicate a3u, but more probably 
stands for au. Willard defines it as ou, and remarks : " many 
persons give to the o in this diphthong the Italian sound of a 
in car : and what is unspeakably worse, many others give it 
a flat sound, as in care." He adds careful directions for the 
pronunciation of cow. Lowell shows regularly the form yseu 
or aeu, which has become a striking feature of our rural dia- 
lect. The urban pronunciation is now au. 


The suppression of initial h followed by an accented vowel, 
a vulgarism that has flourished for some time in England, 
perhaps existed here toward the end of the 18th century. 
Franklin has no trace of it, and I do not find it mentioned in 
Webster. Perry, 1785, says that the h in hewer, human, etc., 
" sounds as if it began with ay;" does this mean that the h 


is silent ? The Y. L. G. Sp. B. gives as words pronounced 
alike : alter halter, am ham, and hand, arbor harbor, ark 
hark, arm harm. Murray, 1802, says : " From the faintness 
of the sound of this letter, in many words, and its total 
absence in others, added to the negligence of tutors, and the 
inattention of pupils, it has happened, that many persons 
have become almost incapable of acquiring its just and full 
pronunciation." It is very likely, however, that this was 
written with reference rather to English than to American 
usage; and the list of homophones just quoted may have 
been copied from an English book. The practice certainly 
never took root in America; there is no evidence of it in 


In the 18th century, both in England and in America, 
final unaccented -ing was currently pronounced -in. Frank- 
lin, however, has -in, and the American authorities do not 
countenance -in, being stricter in this respect than the Eng- 
lish. Dearborn, 1795, classes it among his " Improprieties." 
Murray, 1802, says: "The participial ing must always have 
its ringing sound; as, writing, reading, speaking. Some 
writers have supposed that when ing is preceded by ing, it 
should be pronounced in; as, singing, bringing should be 
sounded singin, bringin : but as it is a good rule, with respect 
to pronunciation, to adhere to the written words, unless 
custom has clearly decided otherwise, it does not seem proper 
to adopt this innovation." In Lowell, -in is regular, and 
this is still the rustic and the vulgar urban usage; among 
cultivated people it has become rarer and rarer, although it 
is still occasionally heard from educated speakers. 

In the reaction against -in, the sound g was substituted, by 
the ignorant, for the n of final unaccented -in, as in curtain, 
fountain, mountain. This pronunciation, which is still alive 
in many rural dialects, goes back at least to the latter part of 
the 18th century. Dearborn, 1795, includes in his " Impro- 
prieties : " " brethering," " linning," " sarting," "severing." 



At present, with most speakers in eastern New England, 
r is sounded as a consonant only before a vowel; before a 
consonant, or at the end of a phrase, it is either silent or 
pronounced as a vowel ; in the speech of old-fashioned rustics 
it is sometimes omitted even before a vowel, as in bei = bury, 
fam =from, wei = worry. But in most of Connecticut and 
Vermont, and in Massachusetts west of the Connecticut River, 
r, with the majority of speakers, always has its consonantal 
value, although of course it is never trilled. This is the 
practice in the rest of the North and the West, while the 
South agrees with eastern New England. The r-country 
seems to be increasing rather than diminishing; and even in 
the r-less region, especially in cities, consonant r is probably 
gaining ground, partly through school training and partly 
through Irish influence. 

In southern England the usage is almost identical with 
that of eastern New England and our South ; in northern 
England r has been better preserved, although the r of that 
region is not so strong as the usual American type. The loss 
of consonant r, both in England and in America, probably 
took place, in the main, during the latter part of the 18th 
and the first years of the 19th century. Sheridan's dictionary, 
1780, and Smith's Attempt to Render the Pronunciation of the 
English Language easy to Foreigners, London, 1795, admit for 
r only one sound, doubtless meaning the tip-trill. Noehden's 
German Grammar, however, in 1800, informs us that r "is 
deprived of much of its force and shrillness by the English 
mode of pronunciation . . . . ; " "in English the sound is 
particularly slight at the end." 

Meanwhile Walker, 1791, distinguishes two kinds of r: 1 
" the rough r is formed by jarring the tip of the tongue 

*Ben Jonson's English Grammar, 1640, says that r is "sounded firme in 
the beginning of the words, and more liquid in the middle, and ends " a 
statement that lends itself to various interpretations. It indicates, at any 
rate, a difference in the sound of r according to its position. 


against the roof of the mouth near the fore teeth : the smooth 
r is a vibration of the lower part of the tongue, near the root, 
against the inward region of the palate, near the entrance of 
the throat ; " the first is to be used before vowels, the second 
under all other conditions ; but " in England, and particu- 
larly in London, the r in lard, bard, card, regard, etc., is 
pronounced so much in the throat as to be little more than 
the middle or Italian a, lengthened into laad, baad, caad, 
regaad." This statement, if it be at all correct, teaches us 
three interesting things : in the first place, r before a vowel 
was still sounded, in 1790, as a tip-trill ; secondly, r before a 
consonant (and r final ?) had already been reduced, in London 
and elsewhere, to a vowel glide; thirdly, in the speech of 
many Englishmen, r final or -f- consonant was a sort of velar 
spirant, possibly a trill. In some regions a " burred " r still 
persists, having crowded out the lingual roll ; l while in other 
dialects a weak open velar consonant, a kind of unrounded 
w, takes the place of " rough r," the " smooth " variety being 
completely lost or vocalized. 2 With most speakers, however, 
r not followed by a vowel first developed into our modern 
unrolled type, which then supplanted the "rough r" before 
vowels, at the same time weakening into an a when no vowel 

This development is indicated by Smart, in his Grammar 
of English Pronunciation, London, 1810. The "rough r" 
he defines as a trill of the tongue-point against the gums ; the 
" smooth r is produced by curling back the tongue till its tip 
almost points toward the throat, while its sides lean against 
the gums of the upper side teeth and leave a passage in the 
middle for the voice" an excellent description of the modern 
consonant r. " Rough r," he says, is to be used before vowels, 
" smooth r " under all other circumstances. This consonant, 
he adds, "is more frequently the cause of a defect in pronun- 

^ee Sweet's Primer of Phonetics, Oxford, 1890, 211. 
8 1 have noted this pronunciation in nearly all the Oxford men I have 
met. It is occasionally heard in America. 


ciation than any other." In London, he continues, t( smooth 
r " is often substituted for " rough," and a vowel sound for 
the "smooth;" the Irish, on the other hand, use the "rough" 
for the " smooth ; " some persons can pronounce no r, others 
have a guttural " burr." 

Just when the " rough r " was discontinued in England, 
and the London substitution of a vowel glide for "smooth r" 
ceased to be a local peculiarity, I cannot tell. The actual fall 
of r before a consonant, in many cases, must have begun long 
before Walker's time. It doubtless disappeared first before 
s and /: in harsh its fall dates back to Middle English, in 
marsh at least to the 17th century. In many other words it 
must have vanished before s, in the vulgar speech of England 
and America, before ^r became er and before ser became ar 
that is, probably, before 1780 : witness burst = b^st, curse = 
kiss, first = fust, nurse = m?s, purse = pss, worse = wras, and 
arse = aes, dar'st = dses, scarce = skaes. 

Let us now trace the history of r in New England. 
Franklin's r is made with "the tip of the tongue a little 
loose or separate from the roof of the mouth, and vibrat- 
ing ; " the word there he writes both $$r and iSaeer, the latter 
form indicating the development of a glide before the r. 
Perry observes : " If r be preceded by a vowel, and followed 
by e in the same syllable, in spite of every effort to the con- 
trary, there will appear two distinct sounds in that pretended 
syllable, as in Hare, sere, dire, etc." Webster says in the Gr. 
Inst., 1784, that r "always has the same sound, as in barrel, 
and is never silent;" higher and hire he pronounces alike. 
In the Diss., 1789, he remarks: "Some of the southern 
people, particularly in Virginia, almost omit the sound of r, 
as in ware, there. In the best English pronunciation the 
sound of r is much softer than in some of the neighboring 
languages, particularly the Irish and Spanish." In the Am. 
Sp. B., 1794, he repeats the statement that "r has only one 
sound, as in barrel." Bingham, 1794, cites as a vulgarism 
" voff " for wharf. In the Y. L. G. Sp. B. we find among 


the pairs of words " similar in sound : " bust burst, calk cork, 
dust durst, father farther, fust first. Dearborn's list of "Im- 
proprieties," 1795, contains: " dazzent," " gal," "kose" = 
coarse, " skase " scarce, and also " feller," " lor," " sor," 
"taters," "widder," "winder," showing the addition of r, 
now very prevalent in eastern New England after 9, a, o, 
especially when the next word begins with a vowel. Hale, 
however, in 1799, tells us that r "is formed by turning up 
and quickly vibrating the end of the tongue in the middle 
of the mouth." 

Passing to our own century, we find Murray, 1802, follow- 
ing Walker: (( r has a rough sound; as in Rome, river, rage: 
and a smooth one; as in bard, card, regard." "Re, at the 
end of many words," he adds, " is pronounced like a weak 
er ; as in theatre, sepulcre, massacre." In Ware, 1814, occur 
the forms "galz," "konfeeld." Cummings, 1822, includes 
among his homophones : alms arms, bust burst, calk cork, dust 
durst, father farther, fuzz furze, pillow pillar. Hawes, 1824, 
repeats Webster's statement with a significant modification : 
" r has one sound only, with little variation, as in barrel, and 
is never silent." According to him, dire, hire, lore, lyre are 
pronounced like dier, higher, lower, liar. Kirkhain, 1830, 
copies Murray. Willard is more independent: "R, is never 
silent. In the beginning of a word, and when it comes 
between two vowels, as in rag or very, it has a great deal of 
sound ; but when it comes before a consonant, as in harm or 
bird, it has very little sound. After several vowels, however, 
it is heard almost as a distinct syllable, thus hire, more, and 
the like are necessarily pronounced like higher, mower, while 
feared, corn, etc., differ little in pronunciation fromfe-ud and 
caw-un." " The long common sound of i, o, and u," he says 
elsewhere, meaning e, "is often pronounced short, so as to 
make first appear like fust, worth like wuth, and burst like 
bust. This is very improper." According to Lowell, "the 
genuine Yankee never gives the rough sound to r when he 
can help it, and often displays considerable ingenuity in avoid- 


ing it even before a vowel." From his spellings (" ap'il/* 
" Pom," " fust/' " the winta of"), and from the actual prac- 
tice of his generation, it seems tolerably clear that the "rough 
sound " meant to Lowell merely the unrolled consonant r, the 
trill being unknown to him as an element of English speech. 
Some of the 19th century orthoepists who copied Walker or 
Smart may have used " rough " in the same sense. 

Can we draw any conclusions from this testimony? In 
the first place, we can, I think, safely assume that from the 
beginning of our period an r final or -\- consonant, when pro- 
nounced with a consonantal value, has been preceded by an 
indistinct glide, which, however, is hardly noticeable after 
the low and " mixed " vowels, a, E, ss, e, e, and o ; this glide 
was probably short and weak as long as the r was trilled, but 
became conspicuous as soon as the rolling ceased, and in 
modern New England speech has taken the place of the r. 
We may infer, moreover, that in Franklin's day r was trilled 
under all circumstances ; that Webster always pronounced it 
as a consonant, but perhaps without vibration, although the 
rolled r remained in use in some regions until the end of 
the century; that the modern practice was established at 
least as early as 1820. There is no trace of velar r, nor 
of the peculiar New York i*. In the vulgar dialect (and 
doubtless sporadically in cultivated usage) r was frequently 
vocalized or lost before consonants in the latter part of the 
18th century; this weakening of r final or + consonant 
probably became universal in the rustic speech, and was 
extended to many cases of r -|- vowel, during the first ten or 
twenty years of our century. 


Webster wrote, in 1789 : "The pronunciation of w for v is- 
a prevailing practice in England and America ; it is particu- 
larly prevalent in Boston and Philadelphia. . . . Many 
people say weal, wessel for veal, vessel." He adds that this- 
pronunciation is not heard in Connecticut, his native state. 


We have abundant evidence that the substitution of w for 
v (and, in a misdirected effort at correctness, of v for w) was 
very general in England in the second half of the 18th 
century, and was not necessarily a sign of illiteracy. In the 
first half of our century this practice came to be regarded as 
a Cockney vulgarism, and it has now almost disappeared. 

In America I find no traces of its existence except in 
Atlantic seaport towns, whither it was doubtless imported 
from the mother country. Bingham's Young Lady's Acci- 
dence, Boston, 1794, contains, in a list of incorrect sentences : 
"I cotch a werry bad cold" and "The wessel lays at the 
voff." This pronunciation must have died out in Boston 
early in our century. In New York, judging from dialect 
stories, it lingered in the slums as late as the sixties. In 
Philadelphia it could still be occasionally heard, about 1850, 
from elderly and not necessarily ill-educated people. 


In the 18th century most speakers, both cultured and 
ignorant, used w for hw, and this practice still prevails in 
southern England. However, the pronunciation hw (or voice- 
less w) either was kept alive by some purists, or was resusci- 
tated (in America, at least) about the time of the Kevolution. 
Perry, 1785 (Edinburgh, 1777), says that h is silent in wharf, 
but not in which. Thomas, 1785, tells us that weal and wheel, 
wet and whet, wight and white, witch and which are " nearly 
alike in sound." " Voff" and " wether" (= whether) are given 
as vulgarisms in 1794 and 1814. Cummings, 1822, puts 
into a list of homophones wet and whet, wight and white, witch 
and which. Lowell, in 1848, declares that the Yankee "omits 
altogether" the "h in such words as while, when, where." 
This practice has almost died out in New England, even 
among the uneducated. It is still to be found, however, in 
Salem and Gloucester. In the words whoa ! and why ! the 
use of w for hw is common everywhere, and woaf for wharf 
is usual in seaport towns. 



One of the striking differences between American and Eng- 
lish pronunciation is due to our development (or the English 
loss) of a secondary accent in such words as difficulty, necessary, 
where the main stress is on the fourth syllable from the end. 
It is interesting to read in the Gr. Inst. y 1784: "It is a 
general rule that every third syllable has some degree of 
accent. . . . When the full accent is on the first syllable, 
there is generally a half accent on the third." In the Diss. 
he mentions also the New England drawl. 

I quote the following passage from Murray, 1802 : "There 
is scarcely anything which more distinguishes a person of a 
poor education from a person of a good one, than the pro- 
nunciation of the unaccented vowels. When vowels are under 
the accent, the best speakers and the lowest of the people, with 
very few exceptions, pronounce them in the same manner; 
but the unaccented vowels in the mouths of the former, have 
a distinct, open, and specifick sound, while the latter often 
totally sink them or change them into some other sound." 


The printed form of words has long had, both in England 
and here, a powerful influence on their development. That 
influence seems, at the present day, to be considerably stronger 
in America than in the old country. Webster complained of 
it in 1789. He cites as instances kuld, wuld, plrt, n6taiv in 
the Eastern States, and in the Middle States " prejudice " and 
" practise." Pirt is still to be heard in the country. 


The following pronunciations, noted between 1788 and 
1814, perhaps deserve special mention : 

again : Alden, ogen ; so always in the 18th century, 
beard : Diss. approve brd, condemn bird. 


because : Diss. say bik6z is frequent in N. E. 

chaise : Diss. condemn /e\ 

china : Alden, t/6na. 

chorister : Alden, kwiristar ; common in English manuals. 

clerk : Alden, klserk. 

clothes : Alden and Y. L. G. Sp. B., kl6z. 

colonel : Perry, Mackintosh, Alden, kernel. 

deaf: according to Diss., the English say def, the Americans 
usually dlf. 

deceit (conceit, receipt) : in 1ST. E., according to Diss., the 
accented vowel is 6, in the Middle and Southern States 
and in England, i. 

door (floor) : Y. L. G. Sp. B., u. 

either (neither) : Diss., ai only in N. E., in Middle and 
Southern States and in England, i; Murray, 1. 

European : Diss. approve accent on the o, but say that the 
modern fashion is to stress the e. 

ewe : Diss., yu in America, y6 in England. 

fierce (pierce, tierce) : Diss., e in England, 1 in Middle and 
Southern States. 

heard : Diss., American pronunciation is bird, but since the 
Revolution fashionable people imitate the English 
herd or h^rd. 

immediate (comedian, commodious, tragedian) : Diss., dj for 
di is common in good society, but not to be recom- 

keg : Alden, kaeg. 

leap : Diss., Up in America, lep in England. 

leeward : Alden, li'uard. 

oblige : Diss., ai and i equally good. 

once (twice) : Diss., in Middle States wenst, t waist, these pro- 
nunciations being common among well educated people 
in Philadelphia and Baltimore. 

quay : Alden, k. 

quote : F. L. G. Sp. B., k6t. 


raisin : Diss., rizn very popular in two or three principal 
towns in America ; often recommended in text-books. 

Rome : Diss., 6 and u both in good use. 

sacrifice : Diss., in America in first syllable. 

salad (ballad) : Perry, d = t ; common in English manuals. 

schedule : Murray, sch = s. 

sewer : Alden, /6ar. 

sigh : Perry, saiiS ; condemned by Dearborn. 

tempt (empty) : Murray, p silent. 

to : Franklin, t6 ; cf. Lowell, also Dickens in Martin Chuz- 

tyranny : Diss., in America ai in first syllable. 

vat (veneer) : Alden, v = . 

wound : Diss., in England u, in America generally QU. 

wrath : Diss., in America nearly always se. 

yellow : Alden, se. 

zealous : Diss., ziles in America. 

In Dearborn's Columbian Grammar, Boston, 1795, is a list 
of " Improprieties," some of which are quoted below : 

acrost furder 

artur = after gin = given 

bamby = by and by ginerally 

batchelder hankicher 

bekays = because hearn = heard 

cheer = chair hizzen = his 

chimbley housen =houses 

clostest = closest keer = care 

cornder = corner keerds = cards 

cotch = caught kivver = cover 

crap = crop larnin 

disjest = digest lemme = let me 

drap = drop mild = mile 

dreen = drain neest = nest 

drownded nunder = under 


ourn sildom 

outdacious sitch 

pardener = partner sot 

parson = person sparrowgrass 

quoin'd = coined speek = spike 

reasons = raisins study = steady 

riz = risen theirn 

rozom = rosin townd = town 

scythe = sigh want = was not 

seek = sex war = were 

seed = saw water mi ly on 

shear = share week = wick 

shot, shet = shut yourn. 


In the introduction to the First Series of the Biglow Papers, 
Lowell gives the opening speech of Richard III in the rustic 
New England pronunciation, as well as he could reproduce it 
injthe ordinary characters. Here it is in phonetic spelling: 

Nseu iz $9 winta av a3ua diskantent 

med g!6rias s^ma ba Sis sun a Yok, 

sea ol fta klaBudz Sat Iseuad apun seua ha3us 

in Sa dip bezam a Si 6/in berid ; 

nseu ea a3ua brseuz bseund iS viktdrias riSz 

aeua bri'uzid amz h-Bij 'Bp fa monimans ; 

seua stan alaramz t/sendjd ta meri mitinz, 

aeua drefl mat/iz ta dalaitfl m^jaz. 

Grim-vizidjd wo he); smiuSd hiz rigkld fi"Bnt, 

sen na3u, instid a mseuntin beabid stidz 

ta frait Sa s6lz a fefl edvaseriz, 

hi k^paz nimli in a ldiz t/aamba, 

ta Sa lasivias plizin av a Itit. 



In one of his most characteristic essays Matthew Arnold 
has discussed the literary influence of academies. He reminds 
us that " In the bulk of the intellectual work of a nation 
which has no centre, no intellectual metropolis like an 
academy .... there is observable a note of provinciality.' 9 
This note of provinciality, he further says, is due to one or 
both of two causes : (1) To remoteness from a " centre of 
correct information ; " and (2) to remoteness from a " centre 
of correct taste." Remoteness from a centre of correct infor- 
mation gives rise to provinciality of ideas ; while remoteness 
from a centre of correct taste gives rise to provinciality of 
style. Arnold declares, for example, that Addison, though 
free from provinciality of style, is yet provincial in his ideas. 
He is not a moralist of the first rank, says Arnold, because 
"he has not the best ideas attainable in or about his time, 
and which were, so to speak, in the air then, to be seized by 
the finest spirits. . . . He is provincial by his matter, though 
not by his manner." 

I have quoted these words of Arnold because they seem to 
me to express with admirable clearness the purpose of our 
Association. That purpose is by united effort to establish a 
centre of correct information for the settlement of questions 
relating to the Modern Languages and Literatures. We wish 
to make accessible to every advanced student and to every 
teacher of the Modern Languages " the best ideas attainable 
in or about his time." When Sir Isaac Newton was asked 
why he was able to see into the secrets of nature farther than 
other men, his reply was, " Because I stand on the shoulders 

l Address of the President of the Central Division of the Modern 
Language Association of America, at its Annual Meeting held at the 
University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Neb., December, 1898. 



of giants." And so the teacher of Modern Languages who 
does not stand upon the heights already reached, who does 
not utilize the results already attained, not only misses the 
Pisgah sights but dooms his own labor to the realm of 
the provincial and the fragmentary. 

Of course books may do much, but I question whether any 
number of books can create the atmosphere that one finds at 
an association of representative scholars. The various points 
of view represented, the unexpected suggestions, the stimu- 
lus of personal contact and intercourse, the assaults upon 
positions long considered unassailable, the very titles of 
papers read, will often do more toward lifting the teacher 
out of the routine of thought or method into which he may 
have drifted, than any book or books can possibly do. 

Teachers and students of language are in constant danger 
not only of working in grooves, but of announcing discoveries 
that are not discoveries. The editors of philological, educa- 
tional, and literary journals all agree that the articles that 
fill their waste-baskets and "go the primrose way to the 
everlasting bonfire," owe their rejection not to lack of con- 
scientious and prolonged effort on the part of those who write 
them, but to lack of enlightened up-to-date effort. Every 
department of Modern Language study is to-day occupied by 
busy workers, the results of whose labors must be known, at 
least in part, to every teacher or student who aspires to 
eminence or influence in his work. 

Let us take a practical illustration. I do not believe that 
our country has ever had a more devoted toiler in philology 
than Noah Webster; but, largely on account of conditions 
unalterable by him, he was an isolated toiler. He died in 
1843, and all his etymological work had at once to be revised, 
for it was hopelessly behind the times. He had access to no 
" centre of correct information ; " he was not in touch with 
" the best ideas attainable in or about his time." 

Where can you find a better illustration of the note of 
provinciality than in Webster's labored and conscientious 


efforts to explain the linguistic difficulties that confronted 
him? He noticed, for example, that his New England 
countrymen said kiow instead of cow and he declared, after 
due meditation on the subject, that the New England people 
owed this peculiarity of pronunciation to " the nature of their 
government and the distribution of their property." With 
this clue can you divine his meaning ? It is in substance as 
follows : The country people of New England have few 
slaves, few large fortunes, and few social distinctions. Hence 
they have a "drawling nasal tone" instead of that air of 
authority found among those who own slaves and pride 
themselves on social distinctions. Thus in the South the 
master says to his slave, " Milk the cow ; " but in New Eng- 
land they advise : " Will you please milk the kiow ? " 

Now I do not censure Webster for not belonging to the 
Modern Language Association of America, but I use his 
revered name as an illustration of the misdirection and 
futility that so often attend the best laid efforts of those who 
have access to no centre of correct information and who are 
therefore not in touch with the best ideas attainable in or 
about their time. Webster lived at a time when Jacob Grimm 
had laid securely the foundation of historical grammar, when 
August Wilhelm von Schlegel had laid the foundation of 
Sanskrit philology, when Franz Bopp had laid the founda- 
tion of comparative grammar, and when August Friedrich 
Pott had laid the foundation of scientific phonetics ; but, like 
Gallic, Noah Webster " cared for none of those things." 

Arnold tells us again that the provincial spirit invariably 
"exaggerates the value of its ideas for want of a high standard 
by which to try them." Hence we find Webster declaring 
that he has pushed his philological inquiries " probably much 
farther than any other man," and has made discoveries that 
will " render it necessary to revise all the lexicons Hebrew, 
Greek, and Latin now used as classical books." But it 
need not be further emphasized that in a department so broad, 


so varied, so filled with illustrious names, as that of language 
study, isolated effort means futile effort. 

Now the Modern Language Association of America stands 
for united effort. It seeks by annual meetings and by publi- 
cations to organize the agencies and to elevate the standard 
of Modern Language study in every State and County of the 
Union. It endeavors to educate public sentiment in regard 
to the Modern Languages so that the note of provinciality 
shall no longer characterize either the investigations of Ameri- 
can scholars or the methods of American teachers. This 
Association does not believe that the profoundest scholar or 
the most successful investigator is always the best teacher; 
but it does believe that without the atmosphere of investiga- 
tion, without the spirit of research, teaching becomes formal 
and learning fragmentary. 

That there is need for an Association of this sort, will be 
apparent to any one who will review, even cursorily, the 
trend of opinion in regard to the Modern Languages. It is 
astonishing to see how slow these languages and literatures 
have been in coming to their own. Every inch of ground 
has been contested. There was not a professorship of Modern 
Languages in this country until 1816, when the Smith Pro- 
fessorship of French and Spanish was founded at Harvard. 
There was no regularly appointed tutor of French at Harvard 
before 1806, though Harvard was founded during the life- 
time of Corneille, Moli&re, and La Fontaine ; nor was there 
an official teacher of German before 1830. The Modern 
Languages, says an honored President of the Modern Lan- 
guage Association of America, James Russell Lowell, were 
not deemed worthy to be taught except " as a social accom- 
plishment or as a commercial subsidiary." It has been shown 
by statistical investigation that, in the Southern States of the 
Union, the study of the Modern Languages did not find a 
recognized place in higher education until after 1870; that 
before 1860 there were, in the South, probably not more 
than three Modern Language professorships. 


English, on the whole, has fared, I think, worst of all. 
"It was in 1874," says President Eliot, "that we established, 
for the first time, an examination in English for admission to 
Harvard College." It is well known that in the Grammar 
Schools of England, from the foundation of Winchester in 
Chaucer's time to the present day, Latin has been the domi- 
nant subject of study, and in many cases the only subject. 
The first book ever used for the formal teaching of English 
grammar was Dr. John Colet's Introduction to Lily's Latin 
Grammar written in the beginning of Henry VHFs reign. 
This book remained the standard of grammatical reference in 
England for over two hundred years. Now the significant 
fact is that neither Colet's Introduction nor any book emanat- 
ing from it was properly an English grammar at all. They 
were translations of Latin grammars and were designed to 
introduce the pupil to the study of Latin, not to the study 
of English. Colet himself calls his book "An Introducyon of 
the Partes of Spekyng for Chyldren and Yonge Begynners 
in to Latyn Speche," and there is no reason to believe that 
he ever anticipated the use of his Introduction except as an 
elementary text-book of Latin. 

It hardly needs to be said that the teaching of English 
out of books like these was simply Procrustean, because the 
grammatical rules of a highly inflected ancient language were 
foisted upon a Modern Language that had been steadily 
dropping its inflections from the dawn of its historical period. 
English grammar was defined as an art, but it was taught as 
a science ; for there was no attempt made to give practice in 
composition or to increase the range and fulness of the pupil's 
power of interpretation. And it is only in recent years that 
English grammars have begun in some measure to throw off 
the incubus of a servile adherence to Latin grammars, and to 
claim the right of a separate and independent language to a 
separate and independent treatment. 

And yet one becomes somewhat reconciled to the neglect of 
English grammar in Renaissance times when one considers the 


remarkable treatment that other Modern Languages received 
at the hands of the Englishmen of that day who essayed 
to write popular text-books. One of the French grammars 
most widely used in England during the sixteenth century 
was prepared by John Palsgrave, a native Londoner. Pals- 
grave, it seems, had made some original investigations in 
French phonetics, and had arrived at the conclusion that 
the French people covet harmony in their speech above all 
else. By way of simplifying the matter to young and tender 
minds Palsgrave thus explains how the Parisians attain their 
harmony of speech : " To be armonyous in theyr speking, 
they use one thyng which none other nation dothe, but onely 
they. That is to say, they make a maner of modulation 
inwardly ; for they forme certayne of theyr vowelles in theyr 
brest and suiFre not the sounde of them to passe out by the 
mouthe, but to assende from the brest straight up to the palate 
of the mouth, and so by reflection yssueth the sounde of them 
by the nose." Palsgrave taught French to Henry VHFs 
sister. She died early. 

The vicissitudes of the Modern Languages in their struggle 
for recognition by the side of the Classical Languages form 
an interesting and in certain aspects a unique chapter in the 
history of education. It is held by all writers on the origin 
of grammatical study that grammars were first written for 
the purpose of expounding to later generations some great 
literary masterpiece that had made its language the norm 
for the period. Grammars were at first, therefore, merely 
expository, not at all regulative. Thus if a Shakespeare or 
a Dante should happen to be born among the negroes of the 
South, the negro dialect would soon have its grammar so as 
to make possible to a wider circle the interpretation of its 
dramatic or epic literature. Literature naturally precedes 
grammar, or rather grammar follows literature, for grammar 
is the key by which we unlock the treasures of literature. 
And yet when it could no longer be denied that masterpieces 
of prose and poetry had been produced in the Modern Lan- 


guages, when Dante, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Luther, Moli&re, 
and Cervantes had spoken into existence a sovereign litera- 
ture, responsive to the newer needs and pulsing with the 
newer life of their centuries, the language of this literature 
was deemed unworthy of scientific study. The literature had 
come, but the language in which this literature lay incarnate 
had to plead for centuries for even the most meager recogni- 
tion, and still pleads for adequate recognition. 

The most significant lines, in my judgment, that Ben Jonson 
ever wrote, are those in which he confidently pits the work of 
his dead friend, William Shakespeare, against the sum 

"Of all that insolent Greece or haughty Kome 
Sent forth, or since did from their ashes come ; " 

and yet a reading of Ben Jonson's English Grammar demon- 
strates that his appreciation of the height to which English 
literature had risen in Shakespeare had yet left him an unbe- 
liever in the corresponding worth and dignity of the language 
that Shakespeare used. Indeed the only writer throughout 
the whole of the sixteenth century, so far as I know, who 
dared to raise his voice in behalf of English as against Latin 
was the now forgotten Richard Mulcaster (died 1611). "I 
love Rome," said he, "but London better; I favor Italic, 
but England more; I honor the Latin, but I worship the 

I shall not enter into any discussion of the relative merits 
of the Ancient and the Modern Languages. The task is 
one of peculiar difficulty, and, like the fox in the fable, I find 
some tracks leading into this den, but none leading out. The 
Socie"te" de Linguistique de Paris, founded in 1865, wisely 
forbids in its constitution the reading of any paper devoted 
either to the origin of language or to the creation of a uni- 
versal language.* We would do well to incorporate these 
inhibitions into our constitution (though I believe we have 
never violated either of them), and to add a malediction 
on him who should essay to hold the balance between the 


Modern Languages and the Classical. This Association does 
not seek to depreciate any language, far less the almost sacred 
tongues of Homer and Vergil. 

But I wish to touch upon a certain attitude of mind toward 
the Modern Languages that has served, I think, to retard a 
proper estimate of their structural peculiarities. These lan- 
guages differ most obviously from the Classical Languages 
in retaining but a small number of their earlier inflections. 
Now comparative philologists habitually speak of the loss of 
inflections as a sign of decay, a sort of autumnal stage through 
which some languages pass. The Modern Languages, there- 
fore, are but worn-out relics of their originals, whether these 
originals be the Classical or the earlier Teutonic tongues. The 
throwing off of inflections is regarded as a form of degenera- 
tion and corruption. Phonetic change is called phonetic 
decay. The earliest known form of a language is taken not 
only as the starting point, but as the standard. Accordingly, 
such poor languages as French, English, and Danish, which 
have lost most of their patrimony of inflections, are looked 
upon as prodigal sons, who have wasted their substance with 
riotous living. 

Ampere, in his recent Histoire de la langue frangaise (2nd 
ed.), speaks of the processes necessary " to repair the ruins," 
"to remedy the disease," " to avoid the confusion," caused by 
the dropping of inflections. Schleicher, whose influence has 
dominated Indo-Germanic philology since the publication of 
his famous Compendium in 1861, declares that the languages 
spoken now are " senile relics ; " that in historical times " all 
languages move only downhill." Schleicher was doubtless 
led to these extreme views from two causes : first, from 
the emphasis that he placed on the Indo-Germanic parent 
language, or " Ursprache " (he being the first to introduce the 
term); and, second, from his conception of* language as an 
organism, not unlike a tree. His estimate of a language, 
therefore, was purely the morphological estimate. He even 
instances modern English as an example of " how rapidly the 


language of a nation, important both in history and litera- 
ture, can sink." One of his expressions deserves especial 
notice, for in it Schleicher seems to me to reduce his own 
theory perilously near to absurdity : he speaks of " the sub- 
jugation of language through the evolution of the mind." 

A few dissident voices, but only a few, have from time to 
time been raised. Madvig, the Danish grammarian of Latin, 
affirms that the analytic languages are just as good as the 
synthetic, because thought can be expressed in both with 
equal clearness. Jacob Grimm maintained fifty years ago 
that the Modern Languages, though they have fewer means 
than the ancient, are more effective. The most decided state- 
ments on this subject have been made by two scholars in 
the last decade, Krauter (in Herrig's Archiv, 57, 204) and 
Jespersen (in his Progress in Language, p. 14). Krauter 
asserts that " The dying out of forms and sounds is looked 
upon by the etymologists with painful feelings : but no 
unprejudiced judge will be able to see in it anything but 
a progressive victory over lifeless material. Among several 
tools performing equally good work, that is the best which 
is simplest and most handy." Jespersen takes still more 
advanced ground : " The fewer and shorter the forms, the 
better ; the analytic structure of modern European languages 
is so far from being a drawback to them that it gives them 
an unimpeachable superiority over the earlier stages of 
the same languages. The so-called full and rich forms of the 
ancient languages are not a beauty but a deformity." 

An American scholar, widely known as an appreciative 
commentator on Shakespeare and as a popular writer on the 
use and abuse of words, has called English "a grammarless 
tongue;" but English is not a grammarless tongue, nor is 
even Danish a grammarless tongue. Their grammar is not 
the grammar of elaborate inflections nor of varied verb-forms, 
but it is none the less grammar. Every falling away of 
inflection, provided the linguistic consciousness does not take 
a different turn, is followed at once, or rather is preceded, by 


some equivalent syntactical formation. Language maintains 
its old function of expressing thought. As the mood-endings 
are dropped, the auxiliaries take their places; as the case- 
endings weaken, the prepositions step into the breach ; and if 
the nouns lose their terminal distinctions of subject and object, 
the order in which these nouns stand in the seritence pro- 
claims their relations as plainly as if they wore the frontlets 
of inflection. There is no loss, there is only replacement. 
Grammatical distinctions have come to be differently ex- 
pressed ; but tense, mood, case, subject and predicate are still 
there, because these things are of the very essence of thought 
itself. Grammatical facts are mental facts, because they 
express logical processes. 

The insistence on these simple truths is the more important 
because the opinion is almost universal that the analysis of 
the Modern Languages does not furnish the mental discipline 
offered by the Classical Languages. I believe, on the con- 
trary, that while Latin and Greek make heavier demands on 
the memory, the uninflected languages make the stronger 
appeal to the reasoning faculties. You can see syntactical 
distinctions in the ancient languages, because each word wears 
the inflectional badge of its function; but in the Modern 
Languages you must feel these distinctions. It is for this 
reason Jhat I have always considered the study of Old Eng- 
lish as valuable not merely as an historical introduction to 
the structure of Modern English, but as a logical introduction 
through patent forms to the implied relations of our unin- 
flected speech. 

It is only in this sense that the words of Whitney find 
their justification. " Give me a man," says he, " who can 
with full intelligence take to pieces an English sentence 
brief, and not too complicated even and I will welcome him 
as better prepared for further study in other languages than 
if he had read both Caesar and Vergil, and could parse them 
in the routine style in which they are so often parsed." 


It is thus seen that the claims of the Modern Languages 
and Literatures have met with determined opposition ; but 
their course has been steadily onward. Not a backward step 
has been taken, and no position once gained has ever been 
lost. It was only after vigorous fighting that science was 
given a place in the schools, the champions of science being 
usually the champions also of the Modern Languages. To 
a reader of Combe's famous lectures on Popular Education, 
delivered in 1833 before the Edinburgh Philosophical Asso- 
ciation, there is much significance in the fact that during 
the second meeting of the Modern Language Association of 
America, a committee from the Society of Naturalists for the 
Eastern United States presented the following resolution : 
"That the Society of Naturalists of the Eastern United 
States, recognizing the great importance of a thorough knowl- 
edge of Modern Languages, especially of German and French, 
to students of Natural History, regard it as a hopeful sign 
that a Conference of Professors in this department is now 
assembled at Columbia College, and hereby express their 
hearty sympathy with this work." 

But science was not the only ally that came to the aid of 
the Modern Languages; a little later, the study of history 
was extended so as to include modern movements, modern 
social developments and sociological questions. Both of 
these advances, the scientific and the historical, have been 
of great service in accelerating the recognition of the Modern 
Languages; for it is beginning to be perceived that these 
languages and literatures are a part of modern history ; that 
they alone bind nation with nation, and link the present with 
the past; that they furnish worthy material for most rigid 
scientific study ; and that so far from diminishing the interest 
in the Ancient Languages, they add to that interest by furnish- 
ing an invaluable basis for comparative study. They exhibit 
the principles of linguistic growth, of phonetic change, of the 
influence of race and environment on idiom and vocabulary, 


in a way that makes their study indispensable to the investi- 
gator in any department of language. 

These are some of the considerations that make the student 
of the Modern Languages enthusiastic in his work and justly 
hopeful of the future. 

I have stated what I conceive to be the central purpose of 
our Association, and have enumerated some of the difficulties 
and misconceptions that the Modern Languages have had to 
contend with in their struggle for academic recognition. It 
remains now to trace briefly some of the movements that 
facilitated the founding of the Modern Language Associa- 
tion of America, and some of the results that it has already 
attained ; for, though it is true that our Association finds the 
reason of its existence in the problems that still confront it, 
it finds no less surely the warrant of its perpetuity in the 
results that lie behind it. Few if any language associations 
have better vindicated the wisdom of their founders or attested 
the timeliness of their organization. 

The Modern Language Association of America is not of 
a fortuitous birth, but is the product and continuation of 
forces that have found increasing expression from the very 
beginning of our century. The centuries that are gone have 
had their renaissance, their new learning ; and this century, 
too, has ushered in a new learning, but it is the learning 
stored in the Modern Languages not in the tongues of Greece 
and Rome. 

In the earlier part of the century, the influence of Walter 
Scott's writings was an important factor in the formation 
of numerous Scotch clubs and societies organized for the 
purpose of publishing the historical and literary material 
which, till his time, had been almost totally neglected. One 
of these clubs, the Bannatyne, Scott himself founded, and 
became its first president. The publications of these societies 
marked a new era in the efforts made in English-speaking 
countries toward the rescue of the materials on which the 
study of our vernacular must be based. Attention was thus 


called afresh to the vast stores of inedita that lay idle in the 
libraries of Scotland and England. In 1842 the English 
Philological Society was organized, and fifteen years later 
began to agitate the publication of a great dictionary that 
should trace the life-history of every word that forms, or has 
ever formed, a part of the English vocabulary. The appear- 
ance in 1884 of the first instalment of this dictionary, known 
as The Oxford Dictionary, marks an epoch in English. Such 
a work as this, however, would have been impossible had it 
not been for the beneficent activity of Dr. Furnivall, who in 
1864 organized the now famous Early English Text Society. 
The publications of this society alone have not only made 
possible the scientific study of Old English and Middle 
English, but have stimulated a new interest in the whole 
subject of dialectology. " Members of the Society will learn 
with pleasure," said Dr. Furnivall, in 1890, "that its example 
has been followed, not only by the Old French Text Society 
which has done such admirable work under its founders,. 
Professors Paul Meyer and Gaston Paris, but also by the 
Early Russian Text Society, which was set on foot in 1877 r 
and has since issued many excellent editions of old MS. 
Chronicles, etc." It is gratifying to know that amid all the 
discouragements incident to the work of the Early English 
Text Society, Dr. Furnivall has found "aid and cheer" in 
the sympathy and ready help extended by scholars in the 
United States. 

In 1869 the American Philological Association was organ- 
ized, the influence of which has been felt not only in the 
Classical and Oriental Languages, but in the Modern Lan- 
guages as well. Its annual meetings are held during the 
summer months, and its membership is now about four 
hundred and twenty-five. In 1876 the Johns Hopkins Uni- 
versity was founded and the scientific study of the Modern 
Languages first introduced. It would be hard to overesti- 
mate the influence of this University in giving full academic 
recognition to the Modern Languages, in stimulating original 


research by basing it on purely scientific methods, and in 
bringing about a more enlightened attitude toward these 
languages in other centres of learning. In 1880 the American 
Journal of Philology was founded, and Professor Gildersleeve 
became its editor. It is open to original communications in 
all departments of philology, classical, comparative, oriental, 
and modern. The name of its editor is a sufficient guarantee 
of the standard of scholarship that it has maintained ; but I 
wish to add a personal tribute to the suggestiveness of its 
articles and reviews to the student of the Modern Languages. 
To the domain of English syntax, at least, the American 
Journal of Philology has made permanent contributions. 

But a growing need had long been felt for some organi- 
zation devoted exclusively to the Modern Languages and 
Literatures, and in December of 1883, at Columbia College, 
New York, the first meeting of the Modern Language Asso- 
ciation of America was held. To no two men does the 
Association owe so much as to Professor A. M. Elliott, who 
laid its foundation and shaped its policy, and to Professor 
James W. Bright, whose loyalty to its interests and whose 
exacting labors in its behalf have made every member his 
debtor. The Association has grown steadily from the begin- 
ning and now numbers about five hundred members. The 
list printed after the second meeting of the Association, 
December, 1884, shows an enrolment of one hundred and 
thirty-five, twenty per cent, of whom represent states lying 
west of the Mississippi and Ohio rivers. These states now 
furnish forty per cent, of the total membership, having just 
doubled their quota. 

It was evident, therefore, almost from the start, that the 
formation of a Western, or Central, Section or Division 
would eventually become necessary. The meetings were very 
naturally held almost exclusively in the East. Distance 
and consequent expense thus made it impracticable for the 
members in the Western and Middle States, as well as for 
those along the southern course of the Mississippi, to attend 


as regularly as they desired. They received the Publications 
of the Association, but were deprived of the privilege of 
personal acquaintance and the mutual exchange of ideas 
enjoyed at the annual meetings. The initiative in the new 
movement was taken by representatives of the Universities 
of Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa; and in December of 1895, 
at the University of Chicago, the first meeting of our Central 
Division was held. 

Such has been the history of the Modern Language Asso- 
ciation of America. I wish that it were in my power to 
portray its influence as clearly as I recognize it and as 
strongly as I feel it. It found the Modern Language forces 
wholly unorganized ; there was no centre, no cooperation ; 
teachers in adjoining States or in the same State knew noth- 
ing of one another's methods except by the most casual 
intercourse. Able teachers were, of course, found here and 
there, but Modern Language instruction was not receiving, 
nor seemed likely to receive, the academic recognition that 
it merited ; and scientific research, with a few exceptions, was 
practically unknown. 

During the fifteen years of its existence, it has united and 
consolidated the Modern Language forces into an agency 
whose influence is recognized as paramount by the leading 
Colleges and Universities of thirty-nine States. It has not 
only caused the formation of smaller associations of like 
character in the different States, but has led to the organi- 
zation of the first American Dialect Society. This Society 
issues independent publications, or Notes, and is gathering 
material for a compendious American Dialect Dictionary, 
similar to the English Dialect Dictionary now in process of 

Not only have graduate courses in the Modern Languages 
been introduced into many institutions since 1883, but funda- 
mental courses also have been added, such as those in Old 
English, Middle English, Old Norse, Old High German, 
and Old French. In 1875 there were only twenty-three 


Colleges and Universities in the United States in which any 
instruction was given in Old English. The subject was not 
taught at such institutions as the University of Michigan, 
Dartmouth, Princeton, and Vanderbilt. To-day a college 
giving no instruction in Old English or in Chaucer is the 
exception rather than the rule. In 1887, as a further indi- 
cation of the progress that the Modern Language sentiment 
had made, Harvard led the way in placing advanced admis- 
sion examinations in French and German upon a level with 
those in Latin, Greek, Mathematics, and all other subjects. 
For admission to Harvard, examinations must be passed in 
at least two advanced subjects. " These advanced subjects," 
said President Eliot, addressing the Modern Language Asso- 
ciation in December, 1889, " used to be with us, as in most 
other American institutions, only Latin, Greek, and Mathe- 
matics; but .... now any candidate for admission may 
present as advanced subjects, French and German, if he 
chooses .... and I submit to you that this is a considerable 
step towards the introduction of advanced teaching of these 
languages into the secondary schools." 

It is only in the last fifteen years that the latest results of 
French and German investigation have begun to find wide- 
spread and appreciative welcome in the American centres of 
Modern Language instruction ; and more gratifying still has 
been the reciprocal influence of American thought. The 
Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 
not only take their place in the libraries of foreign Universi- 
ties as aids in advanced investigation, but prove that the day 
has come when the organized efforts of our own country in 
behalf of the Modern Languages are beginning for the first 
time to receive accredited recognition wherever these lan- 
guages are studied. 

We make our appeal for cooperation, therefore, to all who 
are interested in the Modern Languages, to the teacher in the 
Secondary School as well as to the professor in the College 
and University. Ours is a common cause and we press 


toward a common goal. The good of the one is the good 
of the other, for the triumph of the one is the triumph of 
the other. Let us take with us into the discussions in which 
we are about to engage, and into the class-rooms that we have 
left for a season, these brave words of Milton : " The light 
which we have gained, was given us not to be ever staring 
on, but by it to discover onward things more remote from 
our knowledge." 



The question is not an idle one. At least many persons 
of discernment have answered it in the negative, and it may 
be worth our while to try to find out what grounds there 
may be for a judgment which strikes a Frenchman as little 
short of stupendous. And first, when French poetry is criti- 
cized, we may be sure that popular poetry or folk song cannot 
be meant. Surely that country cannot be barren of folk poets 
which has given us such gems of folk song as Jean Renaud, 
and Derri&re chez mon p&re, to mention only two of the best. 
France has always had plenty of popular poetry that appealed 
to the masses and fulfilled its function of intensifying their 
emotion. William's Frenchmen of Normandy rushed at 
their English foes with the song of Roland on their lips, 
and Beaumarchais' " tout finit par des chansons " is still true. 
Stand near a big factory in Paris between eleven and twelve 
when the workmen are having their midday meal : you will 
as often as not find them listening to a fiddler playing and 
singing a song on the latest event of public interest. To cite 
two cases that came under my observation, the death of Pasteur 
and the loss of La Bourgogne were thus commemorated. 

As far as popular poetry is concerned there can be no 
question ; that, at least, has always been poetical in that it 
has always fulfilled its function ; it has always multiplied the 
people's emotions and set their hearts throbbing. 

But the charge is rather made against the literary or artistic 
poetry of France. 

When as kindly and humane a philosopher (or shall we say 
a poet ?) as Emerson can write : 

When France, where poet never grew, 
Halved and dealt the globe anew, 
Goethe, raised o'er joy and strife, 
Drew the firm lines of Fate and Life. 

Emerson, Solution. 

258 P. B. MARCOU. 

When one of England's greatest poets, who surely was any- 
thing but a foe to France, conies right out with this 

And Boileau, whose rash envy could allow 

No strain which shamed his country's creaking lyre, 

That whetstone of the teeth monotony in wire ! 

Childe Harold, Canto IV, St. 38. 

surely something is amiss. Either the charge is true, or some 
fatal dimness blinds the eyes of these men as soon as they 
take up a book of French verse. 

That the first alternative is correct, no one whose heart 
has ever throbbed to the noble idealism which has made of 
France a beacon light of cheer to downtrod men in every 
land, and who has beheld the eyes of a French crowd light 
up as the rhythm of some mighty line stirred their very souls, 
will admit for one moment. Surely, he will say, both the 
substance and the form of poetry are here. Have we not 
love-sorrow breaking into verse through its very intensity in 
de Musset, the largeness of vision and rythmic sweep of Hugo, 
the intense coloring and noble world-sorrow of Leconte de 
Lisle, the white heat zeal for duty and honor of old Corneille, 
the fearless gaze and matchless song of Villon ? 

We are thus perforce driven on to the other horn of our 
dilemma ; it must be that these men of English speech whom 
we have quoted, when it comes to French verse have eyes 
that see not, ears that hear not. Now what is this blindness 
and deafness of theirs due to ? Perhaps some less sweeping 
judgments may assist us in reaching a conclusion. 

First, to go for once beyond English or American expres- 
sion of opinion, hear what one of the very greatest German 
lyric poets has to say. 

Heine, protesting against the charge that he has become a 
Frenchman, writes : 

"Ich habe auch nicht eine Borste meines Deutschthums, 
keine einzige Schelle an meiner deutschen Kappe eingebiisst, 
und ich habe noch immer das Recht, daran die schwarz- 
rothgoldene Kokarde zu heften. Ich darf noch immer zu 


Massmann sageu : ' Wir deutsche Esel ! ' Hatte ich mich in 
Fraukreich naturalisieren lassen, wiirde mir Massmann ant- 
worten konnen : ' Nur ich bin ein deutscher Esel, du aber bist 
es nicht mehr' and er schliige dabei einen verhohnenden 
Purzelbaum, der mir das Herz brache. Nein, solcher Schmach 
habe ich mich nicht ausgesetzt. Die Naturalisation mag fur 
andre Leute passen; ein versoffener Advokat aus Zweibriicken, 
ein Strohkopf mit einer eisernen Stirn und einer kupfernen 
Nase, mag immerhin, um ein Schulmeisteramt zu erschnappen, 
ein Vaterland aufgeben, das Nichts von ihm weiss und nie 
Etwas von ihm erfahren wird aber Dasselbe geziemt sich 
nicht fur einen deutschen Dichter, welcher die schonsten 
detitschen Lieder gedichtet hat. Es ware fur mich ein ent- 
setzlicher, wahnsinniger Gedanke, wenn ich mir sagen miisste, 
ich sei ein deutscher Poet und zugleich ein naturalisierter 
Franzose. Ich kame mir selber vor wie eine jener Miss- 
geburten mit zwei Kopfchen, die man in den Buden der 
Jahrmarkte zeigt. Es wiirde mich beim Dichten unertrag- 
lich genieren, wenn ich dachte, der eine Kopf finge auf ein- 
mal an, im franzosischen Truthahnpathos die unnatiirlichsten 
Alexandriner zu skandieren, wahrend der andere in den 
angebornen wahren Naturmetren der deutschen Sprache seine 
Gefiihle ergosse. Und, ach ! unausstehlich sind mir, wie 
die Metrik, so die Verse der Franzosen, dieser parfumierte 
Quark kaum ertrage ich ihre ganz geruchlosen besseren 
Dichter, Wenn ich jene sogenannte Pofaie lyrique der 
Franzosen betrachte, erkenne ich erst ganz die Herri ich keit 
der deutschen Dichtkunst, und ich konnte mir alsdann wohl 
Etwas darauf einbilden, dass ich mich ruhmen darf, in diesem 
Gebiete meine Lorbern errungen zu haben. Wir wollen auch 
kein Blatt davon aufgeben, und der Steinmetz, der unsre 
letzte Schlafstatte mit einer Inschrift zu verzieren hat, soil 
keine Einrede zu gewartigen haben, wenn er dort eingrabt 
die Worte : ( Hier ruht ein deutscher Dichter.' " H. Heine, 
Sdmmtliche Werke, Hoffman and Campe, Vol. 10, pp. 74-75. 

260 P. B. MARCOTJ. 

Here we find the "Alexandrin " held up to special ridicule. 
Again in Byron's note to the passage we have quoted we 
find, "Perhaps the couplet in which Boileau depreciates 
Tasso, may serve as well as any other to justify the opinion 
given of the harmony of French verse : 

"A Malherbe, & Kacan preTe*rer The*ophile, 
Et le clinquant du Tasse & tout Tor de Virgile." 

Again the unhappy "Alexandrin" is held up to our scorn. 
Emerson once said that the only French poetry he appre- 
ciated was the song recited by Alceste in Le Misanthrope. 

Si le roi m'avait donne* 

Paris, sa grand' ville 
Et qu'il me fall At quitter 

L' amour de ma mie, 
Je dirais au roi Henri : 
Reprenez votre Paris, 
J'aime mieux ma mie, O gue" ! 

JPaime mieux ma mie. 

and this is far removed from "Alexandrin " verse. 

Finally here is what one of the most conscientious and 
painstaking of English verse writers as well as one of the 
greatest of English poets, Tennyson, has to say : 

" I never could care about the Alexandrines. They are so 
artificial. The French language lends itself much better to 
slighter things. Some of Beranger's chansons are exquisite, 
for example, his lyric to Le Temps with the chorus " O par 
pitie, lui dit ma belle, Vieillard epargnez nos amours." 

Alfred Tennyson. A Memoir. Vol. II, p. 422. 

So we see that Tennyson, like Thackeray and so many 
other Englishmen, considers that Be"ranger is the French 
poet /car e^o^v. Let us read the first stanza of this ' lyric ' 
which he admires so much : 

Pres de la beaute* que j'adore, 

Je me croyais e*gal aux dieux, 
Lorsqu'au bruit de Tairain sonore 

Le Temps apparut & mes yeux. 


Faible comme une tourterelle 

Qui voit la serre des vantours, 
Ah ! par pitie", lui dit ma belle 

Vieillard, e*pargnez nos amours. 

There we have them, the eighteenth century poetical plati- 
tudes which Beranger clings to so fondly : the beauty I 
worship, the sounding brass ; and the dove and the vulture. 
If that is the kind of verse Heine is thinking of when he 
speaks of " Poe"sie lyrique," his " parfiimierte Quark " comes 
very near hitting the mark. 

Each poet then we find, either directly or by implication, 
especially damns the "Alexandrin," and those poets in whose 
eyes some French poets find favor chose poems with short 
lines, and this peculiarity makes them willing to overlook 
many obvious blemishes. 

From all this it seems fair to presume, that the one 
unpardonable sin is the sin against rhythm. To the foreign 
poet's ear the "Alexandrin" has a fatal monotonous sing- 
song not to be endured. They crave a varied rise and fall of 
stress, which their reading of the French "Alexandrin " does 
not give them, and which they fancy they get in the short- 
line pieces. Here we touch, I think, the fundamental reason 
for the widespread lack of appreciation of French poetry. 

Rhythmic sound moves the human animal and intensifies 
his life. Some kind of drum beat lies at the base of all 
poetry and music. At first they are hardly distinguished, 
though the music is by far the most moving of the two, and 
even now if we take the songs that stir men most, we shall 
find that it is the tune and not the words which give the 
heave, as it were, to the ground-swell of human passion. To 
take a very familiar instance, in John Brown's Body the poor 
words are nothing, the march is everything. This is so true 
that when Mrs. Howe wrote to the same tune the Battle Hymn 
of the Republic, a song of distinct poetical value, the old words 
were still sung by the marching thousands, just because it was 
easier not to change, and each one could voice his unspoken 

262 P. B. MARCOU. 

passion in the almost meaningless jingle. And it is always 
so. In every large city, each year, above the hum and din 
of the street there rises some tune or other that seems to 
make the whole town vibrate ; the words are but froth on the 
stream, most people hardly know more than the first line, 
and yet this silly song intensifies for the time being the 
passion and struggle of daily life and makes men's souls ring. 
For that is the function and use of song and poetry ; they 
strike, as it were, a human sounding board, set it quivering, 
and so multiply our joy and sorrow. But in order that 
poetry may have this effect, the right sound must strike the 
right sounding board ; otherwise no vibration, no emotion, 
and the poor poem is nothing but sorry, artificial prose, per- 
fumed curds, strutting turkey-cock and the like. The whole 
fantasmagory of poesy fades away unless this first condition 
be fulfilled. Now that is just the trouble with French verse : 
it fails to make the English or German sounding board 
vibrate. The flow of French verse, like the flow of French 
speech in general, is too even, the rise and fall of stress are 
too slight to stir the pulse of those not to the manner born. 
The speech measure of French is the last thing a foreigner 
acquires. Though his French be otherwise flawless, some- 
thing in the emphasis of his sentences will betray him. His 
emotional howl, to use a familiar though forcible expression, 
has not the right length or intensity ; and so, when he reads 
French verse, he unconsciously uses the cadences of English 
or German verse : he exaggerates the emphasis, brings it 
out strong where he has been told it comes, and swallows up 
sounds which should be dwelt upon. And even if he hears 
French verse read as it should be, by a native, though it may 
not repel him, though it may even please him somewhat, it 
does not move him. He looks in vain for the rhythm of his 
own land and if he has learnt his prosody, he may, like Mr. 
Saintsbury, pity the French poet who has only iambics, and 
must struggle along without anapest or trochee. 


We have thus a physical reason. Is this reason sufficient 
to account for this damning faint praise or absolute dislike of 
most people, sufficient to account for the opinion of the poets 
we have quoted? We should expect them at least to base 
their judgment not wholly on this ground ; we should hope 
that they at least could perceive other poetic qualities in verse 
besides those of rhythm. Perhaps the relation of English to 
French, and the history of French poetry as influenced by the 
history of the language itself may throw some light on the 
question, and show that our English poets are not without 
some excuse at least for their harsh judgment. 

English, ever since the French or Norman conquest of 
1066, has been flooded by successive alluvia of French and 
Latin words, which have wonderfully increased its efficiency 
and delicacy ; but the backbone of the language is still 
Germanic, and elevated passion and deep-felt emotion are 
almost wholly expressed by words of Germanic origin. The 
words of French and Latin origin, weighed in the emotional 
scale, are lighter than the words of kindred meaning which go 
back to Anglo-Saxon : compare love and amour, foe and enemy, 
heathen and pagan. Hence for the English reader an impres- 
sion of lightness, of trifling, of flimsiness almost, when the 
same French words are used by the French poet to express 
the deepest feelings of man. 

There is one more fact which may be urged as an excuse 
for the English poets I have quoted ; but I bring it forward 
with considerable diffidence, because it is difficult to measure 
its influence with any approach to accuracy ; I mean the flood 
of borrowed words which covered the language during the six- 
teenth century and the resulting new poetic literary language 
of the seventeenth century. When we read Rabelais or 
Ronsard, we are astounded at the tropical exuberance of the 
speech which these men wield. The limited, but expressive 
and forceful vocabulary of Villon is replaced by a boundless 
virgin forest of struggling shoots ; the language is a turbid 
though rich vintage and sorely needs clarifying. And sure 

264 P. B. MARCOU. 

enough with the next century the woodman and clarifier 
conies " Enfin Malherbe vint " and what was left of this 
vigorous young life when he had done his work? In the 
first place, by his hard and fast rules forbidding hiatus 
between words and enjambement he made the writing of 
verse so difficult that any patient workman who succeeded 
in putting down line after line of stiff cold writing of the 
required pattern thought himself a poet and, what was worse, 
made other people think him a poet, and that doubtless many 
a poetic temperament chafed and fretted against the bars of 
the new prosody and died with its message untold. 

Then, in spite of what he said about going into the market- 
place to test your words, he did not, as Villon had done, use 
the old vigorous vernacular he would have found there. 
Was he not the king's poet, and a gentleman of ancient 
name? His verse must be noble, and so he may be said to 
have founded a new style. The bad taste of Konsard is 
eliminated, but his exuberance, his life, his poetic sweep, and 
noble aspirations are gone too. Save in a few passages where 
the frenzy of passion bursts the bounds of artifice, the seven- 
teenth and eighteenth century poetic language is pallid even 
to many modern Frenchmen who have been taught to admire 
it. The crowning of flames, the beauties and charms of the 
lady, and the rest of strange, vague love-terminology fling an 
ash-gray pall over the radiant muse of the Pleiade. The 
abstract learned words crowd out the old concrete words 
redolent of the soil, and for two hundred years French 
writers of verse stalk about on stilts, wondered at, admired, 
but rarely loved. And yet it would be a great mistake to 
deny that they were useful in their day, and that the splendid 
lyric blossoming of the present century owes much to them. 
They are pallid, for their speech is often painfully artificial, 
and they are a reflex of a reflex, a moon of the moon, as it 
were. They copy the Romans, who copied the Greeks ; but 
they are at least thoroughly imbued with the sobriety, the 
measure and method of classic writers. They know and 


observe the rules of that necessary skeleton of all successful 
writing, rhetoric, they have learned to discard diffusiveness, 
and dilution, those besetting sins of the Renaissance poets. 
The qualities of clearness and of logical sequence which in 
our day have won for the French drama and the French 
novel a unique preeminence beyond the borders of France, 
those qualities which are termed the essentially French quali- 
ties, became a part of the intellectual inheritance of France 
during those two centuries. 

And so, the pendulum having at last swung back, we have 
seen in our own day in France a renewal of the exuberance 
of the sixteenth century, but, in the best poets, the bad taste 
and diffuseness are delightfully absent. A modern French 
Browning is inconceivable. Rhythm has been enriched, color 
and music have flung their witchery over the best French 
verse of our day, delicacy and force and depth are all there. 
The strivers after art for art's sake, like the strivers after 
science for science's sake, have builded better than they knew. 
They have done their part towards making the present poetic 
speech of France a matchless instrument for a master hand. 

We may excuse Byron and Emerson, we may even excuse 
Heine ; having no ear for the music of French verse, to them 
its melody was a jingle, its as yet imperfect art was artifice. 
They doubtless would have agreed with Verlaine : 

Oh 1 qui dira les torts de la Eime ? 
Quel enfant sourd, ou quel negre fou 
Nous a forge* ce bijou d'un sou 
Qui sonne creux et faux sous la lime? 

They would have agreed with this, exaggerated though it be, 
and would have shaken their heads pityingly at the next 

stanza : 

De la musique encore et toujours, 
Que ton vers soit la chose envole'e 
Qu'on sent qui fuit d'une ame en alle'e 
Vers d'autres cieux a d'autres amours. 

Verlaine, Art Poetique. 


266 P. B. MARCOU. 

What an impossible dream for a French poet, they would 
have said ? 

But such talk will soon cease ; it is ceasing already. No- 
where is there such vigorous and delicate poetry written as 
in France to-day. Nowhere is the idealistic side of life 
preserved as it is in France to-day. If I might venture to 
prophecy I would say that somewhere in that sweet land 
of beauty and love the future genius is even now struggling 
who is to join the band of the great world poets, and would 
call out to him : 

Si qua fata aspera rumpas, tu Marcellus eris. 



In the domain of Spanish letters, where the earnest student 
of literary history still finds himself lacking many necessary 
tools, there is a crying need of a new and critical edition of 
the works, and particularly the poetical works, of the monk 
Luis de Le6n. One of the greatest of the Castilian lyric 
poets, and, as such, a fellow to Garcilaso de la Vega and 
Herrera, one of the most eminent among the masters of 
flexible and harmonious Spanish prose, which flows from his 
pen with none of the customary turgidness, he is best repre- 
sented to-day only by the meritorious but rare edition of his 
works published by Merino in the early years of this century, 
and by the unsatisfactory edition of the Biblioteca de autores 
espanoles, Tome xxxvn, which has not made the proper use 
of Merino's collection. 1 

This neglect is astonishing, if aught can astonish in the 
present state of early Spanish texts, when we consider the real 
worth of this scholar and poet, the great interest and admira- 
tion which he excited in his contemporaries, and the influence 
which he has undoubtedly exercised upon later writers of 

In the Galatea (libro vi.), published while Le6n was still 
alive, Cervantes terms him 

" Un ingenio que al mundo pone espanto, 
Y que pudiera en entasis robaros," 

and affirms himself a disciple of so great a master. Some- 
what later, Lope de Vega, dwelling at greater length in his 
Laurel de Apolo (Silva, 4*) upon the excellent work done by 
the illustrious friar, and the persecution to which he had been 

1 The writer of the present sketch is preparing a monograph upon the 
life and work of Le6n, and hopes, also, soon to render all his lyrics easily 
accessible in a new edition. 


268 J. D. M. FORD. 

subjected, heralds his fame as one of the first to recognize the 
dignity of the vulgar tongue, by placing it on a par with 
the language of Rome : 

Tu prosa y verso iguales 
Conservaran la gloria de tu nombre 
# * * * * * 

Tfi fuiste gloria de Augustino augusta, 
Tli el honor de la lengua castellana, 
Que deseaste introducir escrita ; 
Viendo que a la romana tanto imita, 
Que puede competir con la romana. 

So, also, the first editor to publish the lyrics of Luis de Le6n 
was no less renowned a personage than Quevedo Francisco 
de Quevedo Villegas who, in 1631, sought to stem the tide 
of Gongoristic production, by opposing to its flood of insi- 
pidity and Browningesque obscurity the wholesome influence 
of a writer whose poems united clearness and graceful perfec- 
tion of form to real solidity of content. The desired result 
was not at once attained, for even Quevedo himself yielded 
sometimes to the Gongoristic current ; but when the Gongorists 
and conceptists did finally relinquish their hold upon Spanish 
letters, the regenerators who established a saner poetical style 
must have drawn much of their inspiration from the lyric& 
of Le6n. Nor did his influence stop there, for in the eigh- 
teenth century he has had Diego Gonzalez for a follower, 
and in the nineteenth century such disciples as Cabanyes, and 
especially Judn Valera, in whose work more than one note 
is an echo of the lyre of Le6n. 

The main facts of Leon's life are free from obscurity. 
They may be traced, with reasonable certainty, from his birth 
in 1527, through a childhood spent in Madrid, his early 
novitiate in the Augustinian Order and his student days at 
Salamanca, his successful career as the occupant of chairs of 
Thomistic philosophy and theology at that same university, 
his persecution and long imprisonment by the Inquisition, his 
acquittal and triumphant return to the University, and his 


constant rise to new honors in his Order, which culminated 
in his election as Provincial for Castile, but a few days before 
his death, in 1591. 

There has been some uncertainty as to the place of his 
birth, the early biographers hesitating between Granada or 
Madrid, on the one side, and Belmonte in La Mancha, on the 
other; but reference to the documents of his trial before 
the Inquisition shows that he there declares himself a native 
of Belmonte. A point, too, which appears not to have been 
properly raised as yet, concerns the exact form of his name 
and, consequently, the real nature of his family connections. 
Of late it has been the habit to speak of him as Luis Ponce 
de Le6n, and this name, if true, would make him a member 
of the noble Ponce de Le6n family to which belonged the 
venturesome explorer Ju&n Ponce de Le6n. 1 It seems, how- 
ever, that his name was simply Luis de Le6n, the sole form 
appearing in the papers relating to his trial, and the only one 
to be found in so early a biographer as Nicolas Antonio. At 
all events he was apparently of noble extraction, both on the 
side of his father, the jurisconsult and magistrate Lope de 
Le6n, and of his mother, Ines de Valera. There is just 
a suspicion of Jewish blood in his veins, which may, in a 
measure, explain the vindictiveness of the Inquisition with 
respect to him. 

At Salamanca, then one of the four great universities of 
Europe, he gained much respect for his scholarly attainments, 
ranking high as a theologian and as a linguist deeply versed 
in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. At that time it was customary 
that the professors should be chosen by the students, and so, 
by the votes of the latter, he was in 1561 elected Professor 
of Thomistic Philosophy, with a large margin over his seven 
competitors. He apparently represented a strongly progres- 
sive party in the University, then rather a dangerous attitude 
for a man in his position, since, considering the close relations 

(Parnaso espafiol, v, p. xviii, Madrid, 1771) already connects 
him with the antiguos Ponces de Leon, Senores de Marchena. 

270 J. D. M. FORD. 

between things academic and things ecclesiastical, it would 
not be difficult for his enemies to construe any theory of his 
reflecting upon older methods in matters of the purely learned 
world into an heretical disapproval of certain religious beliefs 
exacted of all the faithful. They soon found a chance to do 
so, for, in 1572, he was accused to the Santo Oficio, by his 
rabid foes, Le6n de Castro and Bartolome de Medina, of hav- 
ing declared the Vulgate false in many particulars, and of 
having, in contempt of the strict prohibition of the Inquisi- 
tion, published a Castilian version of the Song of Solomon. 

In his answer to these and minor charges, he declared that, 
as to the Vulgate, he had never maintained it to be a work 
containing falsehoods, but that he did consider it a somewhat 
defective translation of its originals, since it is in many places 
obscure, merely because it does not render all the senses of 
the corresponding passages of its originals. By this reply we 
recognize the theologian who is also a humanist and philolo- 
gist, one whose motto is " Philologia theologiae ancilla" but 
who believes that the servant deserves considerate treatment 
from her mistress. As to the publishing of a Spanish trans- 
lation of the Song of Solomon, he admitted having made the 
translation for the benefit of a nun then living in Salamanca, 
but affirmed that the publication had taken place without his 
knowledge or consent. In truth, the orthodoxy of Le6n 
cannot be questioned for a moment; he never left the path 
of necessary faith and obedience to ecclesiastical authority. 

The chief arguments of his enemies fell of their own male- 
volent weight, but, nevertheless, the trial dragged on for five 
years, during which time he was kept in prison at Valladolid, 
until, in 1576, he was finally set free by a decree of the High 
Court of the Inquisition overruling the condemnation of the 
lower court, which had even voted to put him to the torture. 

At the beginning of his imprisonment he was treated with 
the harshest severity, but later on this rigor was so far relaxed 
as to allow him writing materials and certain books. Then, 


" On evil days tho' fallen, and evil tongues, 
In darkness and with dangers compassed 'round," 

he placidly annotated the works of St. Jerome. In the 
volume of St. Jerome which he used in the prison, there are 
found certain verses that indicate an intention on his part 
of composing an epic poem on the reign of Alfonso VI. 
This design he did not carry out, but he undoubtedly wrote 
in prison several prose works (los Nombres de Christo, etc.), 
and some exquisite devotional poems, especially those in 
honor of Mary, and above all, the excellent one beginning 

Vfrgen que el sol mas pura. 

Here also, as the time of his liberation drew near, he com- 
posed the verses 

Aqui la envidia y la mentira 
Me tuvieron encerrado ; 
Dichoso el humilde estado 
Del sabio que se retira 
De aqueste mundo malvado. 

Y con pobre mesa y casa 
En el campo deleitoso, 
A solas su vida pasa, 
Con solo Dios se compasa, 
Ni envidiado ni envidioso. 

Though that retirement from the world, and that com- 
munion with only God and nature, of which he sings in these 
quintittas, would have suited well the mystic side of the man, 
he was not destined to sink thus from public gaze. Envy 
now hung her head, as his Order and the University, both 
constantly loyal to him, welcomed him back with unfeigned 
delight. The civic, academic and clerical authorities marched 
out to meet him and escorted him into Salamanca in proud 
triumph. The University reinstated him in his honors and 
he began to teach again. Of course the curious flocked to his 
first lecture, hoping to hear some allusion to his recent perse- 
cution, or even, perchance, a fierce invective upon his enemies. 
But their hopes were dashed when Le6n, taking up the thread 

272 J. D. M. FORD. 

of his last discourse delivered five years before, and beginning 
very simply with the words "As we were saying yesterday," 
ignored the intervening period of unmerited suffering. 

Continuing to hold various posts at Salamanca, he published 
several works at the express command of his Provincial; drew 
up the constitution for the reform of his Order; commenced, 
but did not live to finish, a life of St. Theresa, that beautiful 
figure so closely akin to him in mysticism ; applied himself 
with ardor to the study of that other noble mystic, Luis de 
Granada; and became successively Vicar-General and Pro- 
vincial of the Augustinians of Castile, dying rather suddenly, 
it would seem, in 1591. 

Such was the life of a man who gave himself up entirely 
to the service of Mother Church and the cause of learning, a 
man of sincere piety, as well as deep culture and devotion to 
the arts. If we may believe a story set afloat by Pacheco, he 
was skilled even in the fine arts, and at one time painted a 
portrait of himself. 

As a figure in the history of Spanish literature, he must be 
judged by his works in Spanish, and therefore it is hardly neces- 
sary to enumerate his Latin works of expositive theology. Suffice 
it to say, that they give ample evidence of his humanistic bent. 

Of his works in Castilian prose, the most important are ; 
the Nombres de Christo, a devout discussion of the various 
terms by which reference is made to Christ in the Scriptures ; 
the Exposid6n del libro de Job ; a Spanish translation of his 
Latin Commentary on the Song of Solomon; and the interest- 
ing and even entertaining treatise, la Perfecta Casada. The 
last-named is really a series of sermons on the manifold duties 
of a wife, based upon texts from the book of Proverbs and 
addressed to a newly-married lady. This work alone could 
give an idea of the comprehensive reading of the man, who 
cites, in the discussion of his theories, Euripides, Phocylides 
and Simonides, 1 Homer, Plutarch, Aristotle, Vergil, Nau- 

x His knowledge of these two writers was probably derived from the 
Anthology of Stobaeus. 


machius, etc., as well as SS. Basil and Cyprian, and other 
Fathers of the Church. He shows considerable insight into 
feminine character, and common sense in dealing with it, now 
jeering at the devotee wife who neglects her household duties 
to go and " warm a seat " in church, and again chiding the 
woman who paints her face, now laughing at her who " seeing 
her contrivances upon another ," one may fancy him speaking 
of a new bonnet, " begins to hate them and lies awake nights 
seeking to devise others/' and again pouring out a passionate 
flood of vituperation upon the head of a wife untrue to her 
husband. He has also the idea that the less priestly inter- 
ference there is in a family, the better. His point of view is 
never that of the ascetic, for he is the pupil of Horace, to whose 
doctrine of measure, or moderation in all things, borrowed 
from the Greeks, he adds but the necessary Christian modifi- 
cations. Thus with regard to the boundaries between virtue 
and vice, he says : 

"Just as there are certain vices which have the appearance 
and semblance of certain virtues, so also there are virtues 
which are, as it were, provocative of vices ; for although it be 
true that virtue consists in the mean, yet as this mean is not 
measured by inches, but by reason, many times it departs 
more from the one extreme than from the other, as appears 
in the case of liberality, which is a virtue measured off by 
reason between the extremes of avarice and prodigality, and is 
much less distant from prodigality than from avarice. What 
is this but the Horatian " Virtus est medium vitiorum " l 
adapted to the requirements of Christian doctrine? Here, 
also, we find him striking the note of common sense, which 
resounds through all his work. 

The style of Le6n's Castilian prose is singularly pure and 
clear. His phrases are rhetorically constructed, sometimes 
rather long, but seldom unwieldy. He has a certain felicity 
in the handling of similes, of which he makes frequent use. 

I Epistolarum, Lib. I, Ep. xvm, v. 9 : 

Virtus est medium vitiorum, et utrinque reductum. 

274 J. D. M. FOKD. 

Important as his prose works are, they do not possess for 
us a tithe of the charm which his lyrics afford. These 
their author long looked upon as the frivolous amusement 
of his earlier years, and neglected to edit properly, until 
the complaint of a friend presumably the theologian Arias 
Montano who was annoyed at the ascription of certain of 
them to him, led Le6n to make a collection of his authentic 
poems. He divided the collection into three parts, contain- 
ing, respectively, his original poems ; those translated from 
profane poets, classic and modern ; and those translated from 
sacred sources. 

The third division, embracing, chiefly, versions of many of 
the Psalms, in various meters ; of certain chapters of Job and 
a portion of the Book of Proverbs, in terza rima ; and of the 
hymn Pange linguam, in quintillas, proves him a hymnologist 
of no mean order, wherein there is a resemblance between him 
and that other, but rebellious Augustinian, Martin Luther. 
Not included by the author in this division, and first pub- 
lished only by Merino in 1806, is his admirable translation 
of the Song of Solomon, composed in terza rima and arranged 
in the form of a pastoral poem. 1 

The second division displays well the humanistic range 
of his literary studies, and a fine appreciation of the spirit of 
beauty and balance found in the ancient world. The render- 
ing of his originals is sufficiently close, and the Spanish form 
is well-nigh perfect in rhythm and smoothness of diction. 
Here, he has not only made versions of many odes of Horace, 
but he has rendered into Castilian, out of the Greek and 
Latin classic world, using terza rima, octaves and other 
measures, the Bucolics, the whole of the first and part of 
the second Georgic of Vergil ; an elegy of Tibullus ; an ode 
of Pindar ; portions of the Andromache of Euripides and a 
fragment of the Thyestes of Seneca. 2 From the Italian cinque 

*It is of interest to note that Milton, in his Reasons for Church Govern- 
ment, also considers the Song of Solomon a pastoral poem. 

2 The last two are not free from some doubt in their attribution to Le6n. 


cento, he has taken a canzone of Pietro Bern bo and another 
of Giovanni della Casa. Petrarch he did not directly trans- 
late, but imitated in a poem of several stanzas. 

This work of translation prepared the way for his original 
poetry, which, written in diverse metres but chiefly in his 
favorite quintillas, and always sweetly melodious, derives 
from classic models its exterior correctness of form, and from 
sacred models that spirit of devout aspiration which charac- 
terizes so many of his lyrics. To these qualities we must 
add an element of gentle mysticism, inherent in the man and 
indigenous to the soil whence he sprang. In the novel 
Halma of Perez Gald6s, the cleric Don Manuel, protesting 
against the importation into Spain of Russian mysticism, 
says : " Why bring from so far that which is native to our 
home, that which we have in our soil, in our atmosphere, in 
our speech? Are abnegation, love of poverty, contempt for 
material goods, patience, self-sacrifice, an aspiration towards 
self-annihilation, all natural fruits of our land, as our history 
and our literature demonstrate, are all these to be brought 
from foreign countries ? An importation of mysticism, when 
we have enough of it to supply the five parts of the world ! 
.... Remember that we are here mystics from the cradle, 
and as such we unconsciously behave. . . . Here the states- 
man is a mystic, when he rushes into the unknown, dreaming 
of such a thing as perfection of the laws ; the soldier is a 
mystic when he longs to fight, and fights without food to eat ; 
the priest is a mystic when he sacrifices everything to his 
spiritual ministry; a mystic, too, is the schoolmaster, when, 
dying with hunger, he teaches his children how to read." 

Born and bred, then, in this land of mysticism, where in 
literature the note of mysticism has sounded from Berceo 
down the ages, Luis de Leon has come naturally by this 
quality, but he is free from that spirit of extravagance by 
which it is often accompanied, and at which Gald6s hints in 
the passage cited. His mysticism is tempered by his great 
common sense, by his respect for moderation or measure 

276 J. D. M. FORD. 

which he had gained from his humanistic studies. The 
expression of the importance of measure, which we have 
already noted in a passage from the Perfecta Casada, recurs 
in the ode ^Que va ^ e quanto vee, addressed to his friend, 
Felipe Ruiz, 1 and bearing, in one manuscript, the title, On 
the Moderate and Constant Man. The fifth stanza runs thus : 

Dichoso el que se mide, 

Felipe, y de la vida el gozo bueno 

d sf solo lo pide ; 

y mira como ageno 

aquello que no esta dentro en su seno. 

As might be expected of a mystic poet, he esteems highly 
the charms of solitude and a contemplative life, which he 
praises in two remarkably beautiful odes, viz. ; that entitled 
Al apartamiento 2 and the / Que descansada vida ! 8 At times, 
he feels that the shackles of this life are too burdensome ; the 
body is then a prison, and he longs for the final release of 
the spirit from its thraldom (Ode : Alma regidn luciente)* 
Under the influence of music, as he tells us in his exquisite 
ode to Salinas, the famous organist, his spirit can temporarily 
obtain this release, and rise in aesthetic ecstasy to that exalted 
region where it can hear the harmony of the spheres (Ode : 
El ayre se serena). 5 The great aim of his mystic elevation 
is the attainment of perfect knowledge. He longs for the 
moment when, released from this prison, he can tend towards 
heaven, and, in the sphere wheeling its course most remote 
from the Earth, contemplate the pure and unveiled truth 
(Ode: $Quando serd que pueda?). 6 Nature is for him, as 
for St. Francis, the mirror of God ; and he loves the mountain, 
the stream, and the field with its trees and beauteous flowers, 
all absorbed in a calm repose that is broken only by the 
sweet songs of the birds (Ode : / Que descansada vida /) 
Occasionally he makes a bitter reference to his unjust im- 

1 Sib. de autores cap., xxxvii, p. 7. 4 Ibid., p. 8. 
2 Ibid., p. 8. Ibid., p. 3. 

3 Bib. de autores esp., xxxvn, p. 3. 6 Ibid., p. 6. 


prisonment, particularly in his songs to the Blessed Virgin 
composed in prison ; but his bitterness is never very great or 
long sustained, for charity was his guiding-star. 

A few sonnets in the Italian style, containing some remi- 
niscences of Petrarch, belong probably to his earliest tentative 
period, when he must have been attracted into a momentary 
connection with the Italianizing school, to which belonged 
his predecessor, Garcilaso de la Vega, and his contemporary, 

Apart from all the rest of his original lyrics, stand two 
odes of a national character, the justly famous Folgaba el rey 
Rodrigo, 1 which may be considered his masterpiece, and the 
paean to St. James (A Santiago). 2 In these he ceases to be 
merely the gentle lyric poet of a mystic temperament, and 
becomes the impassioned bard who strikes the epic lyre with 
tragic force. They both show what excellent results he might 
have attained, had he carried out his plan of composing an 
epic poem. In the former of the two, treating of the first 
invasion of the Arabs, brought into Spain, says the popular 
legend, by an outraged father, the Conde Julidn, whose 
daughter Roderick the Goth had seduced, Luis de Le6n 
imitates the situation of Horace's ode, Pastor quum traheret 
per f r eta navibus. 3 

Just as the sea-god Nereus prophesies the fall of Troy, as 
a consequence of the rape of Helen by Paris, and apostro- 
phizes the Trojan prince, so does the river-god Tagus, rising 
from his watery bed, predict ruin to Spain through the sin of 
her ruler, and rebuke the feeble Roderick as he lies on the 
bank in the embrace of the fair but fatal Cava. It is 
the song of the patriot who foresees the tragic fate of his 
country, a prey to internal corruption and foreign rapacity. 
Like certain others of his original lyrics, it has been trans- 
lated into French, German, Italian, and English. There is 
an English version by Mr. Henry Phillips (Philadelphia, 

1 Bib. de autores e#p., xxxvii, p. 5. 2 Ibid., p. 11. 

3 Carminum, Lib. I, 15. 

278 J. D. M. FORD. 

1883), who had printed but one hundred copies of his little 
book containing versions of six of the chief poems of Le6n. 
In conclusion, it must be obvious that the object of this 
sketch deserves more general attention than that usually 
accorded to him, for in the history of universal culture he is 
a figure lovable as a man, admirable as a poet and humanist, 
and highly respectable as a churchman and mystic. Although 
Spanish literature has had no concentrated humanistic move- 
ment as potent as that which directed the literary destinies of 
the sister Romance lands, it furnishes, in men of whom Le6n 
is the type, individual instances of humanism carried to a 
noble degree of perfection. 1 

J The following is a list of the more important works dealing with Le6n: 
Antonio, Nicolas, Bibliotheca nova, 2nd ed., Madrid, 1783-88, ad verb. 

Ludovicus de Leon. 
Mayans y Siscar, Gregorio : Preface to his collection of the poems of Le6n, 

published in Valencia, 1761. This account is also found in Mayans 

y Siscar's Carlos de varios autores, Valencia, 1773, and in the Biblioteca 

de autores espaftoles, torn, xxxvii, pp. i-xvi. 
Sedano, Juan Jose* Lopez de, Parnaso espanol, torn, v, Madrid, 1771, pp. 

Colecci6n de documentos ineditos para la historia de Espana, por don Miguel 

Sal& y don Pedro Sainz de Baranda, toms. x, xi, Madrid, 1847-48. 

This collection contains the records of Le6n's trial. A selection 

therefrom is found in the Bib. de aut. esp., torn, xxxvii, pp. xvii- 


Ticknor, George, History of Spanish Literature. 
Gonxales de Tejada, Jose*, Vida de Fray Luis de Leon, Madrid, 1863. 
Guardia, Joseph Michel, Fray Luis de Ledn, Sa vie et ses poesies, in Le magasin 

de librairie, torn, xi (Paris, 1860), pp. 104 et seq. 
Keusch, Luis de Leon und die Spanische Inquisition, Bonn, 1873. 
Wilkens, C. A., Fray Luis de Leon. Eine Biographie aus der Geschiehte der . 

spanischen Inquisition und Kirche im 16. Jahrhundert, Halle, 1866. 
None of the more recent works mentioned can be termed really satis- 
factory. There is, however, an account of Leon as a mystic from the pen 
of a master in Mendndez y Pelayo's essay, De la poesia mistica (Estudios de 
crttica literaria, Madrid, 1884). Senor Mene*ndez y Pelayo's definition of 
mysticism would exclude Berceo and other early writers. 

J. D. M. FORD. 







In the Ada Sanctorum, volume n for February, being 
volume V of the whole work, under date of February 16th, 
the assigned date of her martyrdom, we find two lives of 
St. Juliana, both edited by Bolland himself. One of these lives 
is by an anonymous author, and is edited from eleven MSS., 
collected by Bolland from various libraries duly specified ; 
and the other is by a certain Peter, a sub-deacon, and is 
edited from MSS. at Naples and at Capua. This Life is dedi- 
cated by Peter to an " Egregio Patri Domno Petro sanctae 
Parthenopensis Ecclesiae optimo Pastori," at whose request 
it claims to have been written, and who is identified by 
Bolland with Peter, Archbishop of Naples, 1094-1111. If 
this identification ia correct, the second Life is much later 
than the first ; and it is written in a much more ornate and 
elaborate style, frequently interspersed with hexameter verses. 

Cardinal Baronius, who edited the Martyrologium Romanum 
at Rome in 1586, after stating that the Acts of Juliana are 
extant in Metaphrastes, i. e., Symeon Metaphrastes (of whom 
more hereafter), says : " We have the same in an old MS. 
translated from Greek into Latin by a certain Peter, who 



addressed it to Peter, a Neapolitan bishop, as his preface 
informs us." But his preface does not state that he trans- 
lated his work from Greek into Latin, unless we are to infer 
that from his words: "Sed ejus passio propter incompositas 
dictiones in coetu fidelium legi minime praevalet." It is 
barely possible that Peter may have spoken of the Greek 
original, if he had one, as incompositas dictiones, and so 
evidently Baronius understood him, but his Life seems to me 
to be based on the first Life, though written in a more elegant 
style, with some enlargement in certain parts. Symeon, 
however, the Byzantine hagiographer of the early tenth 
century, who lived to A. D. 965, did write in Greek, and has 
left us a very full Life of St. Juliana, which was translated 
into Latin by his editor Lip(p)oman, and incorporated by 
Surius into his work on the Lives of Saints. The Greek 
church, however, commemorates St. Juliana on December 21, 
her birthday. Symeon Metaphrastes may have drawn upon 
his imagination, as the older Latin writers did, but he has 
given us a very graphic picture of Juliana, her talks and her 
sufferings, her freedom from pain and her tears, that availed 
to quench the flames by which she was surrounded. (See 
Appendix II.) 

But who was St. Juliana ? In brief, she was the daughter 
of Africanus of Nicomedia, and was put to death, a martyr to 
her Christian faith, in the time of the Emperor Maximian, 
somewhere between A. D. 304 and 311, some think in 309. 
She had been betrothed to Eleusius in her ninth year, but in 
her eighteenth year, having become a Christian, she refused 
to marry him unless he too would renounce the heathen gods 
and embrace the religion of Christ. Her Acts include the 
various efforts made by Africanus and Eleusius to induce her 
to sacrifice and to renounce her God, both by persuasion and 
by punishments of various kinds scourging, hanging by the 
hair, torturing on the wheel, and imprisonment in a dungeon, 
where she had a long interview with Satan arrayed as an 
angel of light; but, after prayer to God, she unmasks the 


deception, seizes and scourges the deceiver, and compels him 
to confess his various misdeeds as recounted in the Scriptures, 
and to beg for release. She is again summoned before the 
tribunal of the Prefect Eleusius, and leaves the prison, drag- 
ging the demon with her. She is still further tortured, but 
her constancy converts 130 men and women (or, if the 
omitted numeral is supplied after Metaphrastes, 500 men and 
130 women) who are all beheaded by the Prefect under the 
orders of Maximian. Juliana is now plunged into a bath 
of molten lead, which leaves her uninjured but destroys 75 
bystanders, and finally, as tortures have no effect, she is 
decapitated, no remedy being found for the loss of a head. 

It is very interesting to note the details of each of these 
Lives, their differences, their omissions and additions, each 
giving play for the individual writer's imagination, especially 
so the Life by Symeon, which is not found in the Ada 
Sanctorum, but in the works of Symeon Metaphrastes, printed 
in Migne's Patrologia Graeca, vol. 114. The concluding 
sections of these Lives inform us that a certain woman of 
senatorial rank, Sophonia, or Sophronia, according to Peter, 
or Sophia, according to Symeon, journeying from Nicomedia 
to Rome, took with her the body of the Saint, and a tempest 
arising the ship was driven to Campania, to the territory of 
Puteoli (Pozzuoli), where she has a mausoleum one mile from 
the sea, as the first Life states. Peter still further informs us 
that, owing to imminent danger from the heathen (imminente 
JEthnicaferitate), lest so great a treasure might be dishonored, 
her body was transferred to the city of Cumae and there 
placed in the basilica of herself and St. Maximus, where it 
does not cease to confer very many benefits to the glory of 
God on those seeking them even to this day. 

A church was dedicated to her at Naples in 598 by order 
of Pope Gregory the Great. It was in the late sixth century 
that this translation was made to Cumae, and the body seems 
to have rested undisturbed there until 1207, when it was 
transferred to Naples, and placed in the convent of the nuns 


of Santa Maria Donna Romita, who bore the expense of 
building a church in honor of St. Juliana. Neapolitan 
writers assert that the remains are still there, but nobody 
knows where they are hidden, and many other cities in Italy, 
Spain, the Low Countries, Germany, and France, claim to 
possess them, or parts of them as relics. Brussels is one 
of the most noted of these cities. 

Bolland is more occupied with giving an account of these 
various translations of the body than with the origin of his 
MSS., about which we should like further information. He 
simply states that the Acts of St. Juliana are " very ancient," 
and were written while her body was still in the territory of 
Puteoli, not later then than 568, the date of the Lombard 
invasion of Italy, and perhaps of the translation to Cumae. 
Hessels criticised these Acts very severely, pronouncing them 
to be false, and Bolland devotes much space to refuting hi& 
criticisms. He does not deny that scribes have added some- 
thing to the Acts, but he affirms that they are extant in all 
the MS. Legendaries and Passionals, and that he has used the 
MSS. of the best character. Baillet calls it "a pitiable legend " 
and thinks that the most judicious savants would agree with 

That the meagre entries of the Marty rologies, at first 
consisting merely of name, place, and date, compiled from the 
Calendars of the several churches, were gradually added to, 
and at last comprehended voluminous Lives of the several 
Saints, more or less fictitious, is an undoubted fact ; but even 
though these Lives are fictitious, they create a desire to know 
their origin. Nobody now blames Geoffrey of Monmouth 
for his additions to the life of King Arthur, even if William 
of Newberry, writing some fifty years later, did say " no one 
.... can doubt how flagrantly and boldly he lies about 
almost everything." 

Did time permit, it would be interesting to trace the refer- 
ences to St. Juliana in the Martyrologies, but we may make 
only a hasty summary. The Fragments left us by Eusebius 


{Migne, vol. 20, of Pair. Graec.) do not contain her name, 
which is the more to be regretted because he was a con- 
temporary, and would have known the facts. Baronius 
argues that the book of Eusebius on the martyrs was not 
a mere compendium such as at present exists. He holds that 
the first Martyrology was compiled in the time of "Pope 
Clement of Rome/' i. e., the close of the first century, but it 
is placed much later by others, e. g., by Baillet, who states 
that it was compiled in the fourth century in the time of Pope 
Liberius (352-366). Baronius states that Pope Gregory the 
First (c. A. D. 600) had all the names written in one MS., 
giving merely the name, place, and date of martyrdom. 
This is the form of the most ancient Martyrologies, as, for 
example, the Martyrologium Vetustissimum, the so-called 
Martyrology of St. Jerome (Migne, vol. 30, of Pair. Lat.), 
though some deny his authorship, which has under Feb- 
ruary 16, "Nicomediae, passio sanctae Julianae virginis et 
martyris," nothing more ; and similarly in the Liber Comitis, 
also ascribed to St. Jerome, which has " Natale Sanctorum 
Onesimi et Julianae virginis," with the lessons for the day 
from the Book of Wisdom and from St. Matthew's Gospel. 
Beda (673-735) (Migne, vol. 94, of Pair. Lat.) is said to 
have been the first who added some particulars of the 
martyrdom of each saint. We have in Migne two texts of 
Beda's prose work, but in the existing form it is thought to 
have received additions from the work of Florus. 1 Beda's 
Martyrologium Poeticum contains under February one line 

[* Beda and Ado, with slight corrections, read as follows : " Et in Cumis 
natale sanctae Julianae virginis, quae tempore Maximiani imperatoris, 
primo a suo patre Africano caesa, et graviter cruciata, et a praefecto Eleusio, 
quern sponsum habuerat, nuda virgis caesa, et a capillis suspensa, et plumbo 
soluto capite perfusa, et rursum in carcerem recepta, ubi palam cum diabolo 
conflixit, et rursus evocata, rotarum tormenta, flammas ignium, ollam fer- 
ventem superavit, ac decollatione capitis martyrium consummavit. Quae 
passa est quidem in Nicomedia, sed post paucum tempus Deo disponente in 
Campaniam translata."] 


referring to her (xiv Kal. Mart.) : " Sic Juliana et bissepte- 
nas ornat honore" (Migne, vol. 123, of Pair. Lot.). 

The Martyrology of Ado, Archbishop of Yienne (Migne, 
vols. 123, 124), who flourished in the ninth century, follows 
Beda almost verbatim. Usuard, of St. Germain des Pres, 
Ado's contemporary, is more concise: "Civitate Cumis sanctae 
Julianae virginis, quae post varia tormenta, et carceris custo- 
diam, palam cum diabolo conflixit. Dein flammas ignium 
et ollam superans ferventem, capitis decollatione martyrium 

But while the Martyrologies give us in very brief out- 
line the particulars of the martyrdom, we have no complete 
Life, such as those published in 'the Ada Sanctorum and in 
Symeon's works. How then did such Lives originate and at 
what early period ? It is plain that such Lives were very 
popular. In the dearth of literature they served as the 
novels of the Middle Ages, and were read for the entertain- 
ment, as well as for the spiritual improvement, of the monks 
and nuns. In addition to the authorized Lives false Lives 
arose, and the Church endeavored in vain to repress them. 

Baillet tells us in the " Discours sur Phistoire de la Vie 
des Saints," prefixed to his Les Vies des Saints (4 vols., folio, 
Paris, 1701), that the Council of Constantinople in 692 con- 
demned to the fire all the false histories of martyrs, and 
anathematized all who received them, or gave them credence. 
He informs us further that St. Ceran (Ceraunius) of Paris, 
who lived in the beginning of the seventh century under 
Lothair II., undertook to collect the Acts of the martyrs, and 
spared no pains to have copies made of those that were in the 
different churches of France. So, also, St. Prix (Praejectus) 
of Clermont in Auvergne, who lived fifty years after Ceran, 
not only collected the ancient Acts, but composed new ones. 
St. Aldhelm, too, of Sherborne, England, who died in 709, 
made extracts from the Acts of some of the martyrs for his 
works on the praise of virginity. Unfortunately he does not 
mention St. Juliana. We see, however, by the use that 


Aldhelm made of them, as Baillet says, that the false or 
falsified Acts of Saints of the most distant provinces of Asia 
were already current in the West in his time and had even 
reached England. He remarks further that almost all the 
histories turned into fables in the hands of those who treated 
them ; the most conscientious thought themselves compelled 
to consecrate even falsehood to truth and to use pious imposi- 
tions to the greatest glory of God. The Acts of Saints were 
brought into the Missals and Breviaries, and read just as 
the Epistle and the Gospel in the churches of the West. 
They had been brought into the Martyrologies still earlier. 
Baillet's work is published with the approbation and privi- 
lege of the King (Louis XIV), and is dedicated to his 
Eminence, Monseigneur le Cardinal de Noailles, Archbishop 
of Paris, so there is no question as to his orthodoxy. Much 
else of interest is found in this " Discours " of Baillet, but 
these quotations are sufficient to show that as early as the 
seventh century collections of the Acts of martyrs were made, 
both genuine and spurious, and that MSS. of these Acts had 
even reached England. Hence an English poet, who desired 
to extol in verse the praises of any particular saint, had at 
hand a Latin Life of that saint, and it did not become him 
to be very critical as to the truth or falsity of its contents. 
As far as we can judge, the first Life of St. Juliana, pub- 
lished in the Ada Sanctorum, is the oldest, and must have 
served as the model, and MSS. of this Life must have been 
scattered through the monasteries of the Continent and of 
England. Such a MS. Beda must have had access to, and 
after him Cynewulf, who based upon it the Old English poem 
Juliana, certainly composed by him, for he has left his name 
imbedded in it in Runic letters, as in the Christ, the Elene, 
and the Fates of the Apostles. This is not the occasion to go 
into the question of the time of Cynewulf and of his genuine 
works, but we shall not go far wrong if we take him to 
have been a Northumbrian of the second half of the eighth 
century. He may easily have been acquainted with the 


works of Aldhelm and of Beda, and with their sources. If a 
man's name in his work means anything, he certainly wrote 
the Juliana, and a close comparison of his work with the 
first Latin Life of the Ada Sanctorum shows that he must 
have had such a Latin MS. to draw upon as his source. I 
shall not undertake now to read and to explain this minute 
and more or less technical comparison, but it has been made 
(see Appendix I), and with the result that, while Cynewulf at 
times omits and condenses, at times expands and dresses up 
the thoughts in poetical phraseology, and introduces allu- 
eions to native customs, he sometimes translates expressions 
verbatim, and with the poem in hand one can follow the 
Latin from beginning to end, and be convinced that he had 
no other source than a Latin Life similar to the one above- 
mentioned ; all differences can be easily explained as due to 
his poetical imagination. 

The work of Cynewulf is naturally the earliest English 
Life of St. Juliana, and we have to come down to the 
thirteenth century before we meet with another. It was in 
this century that the Legenda Aurea was compiled, but the 
Life of St. Juliana in that work is very brief, a mere 
epitome of the incidents, so that a translation of it is an 
incomplete Life. There is no English translation, as far 
as I know, of these Latin Lives of St. Juliana, or of the 
Greek of Symeon (i. e., judging from the bibliographies in 
Brunet (1865) and in Lowndes (I860)), and we must resort 
to the originals to see with what skill, and often with what 
force, the writers of the Saints' Lives have embellished 
their meagre incidents. Peter is not satisfied with following 
the older Life in stating that Eleusius wrote to Maximian 
to inquire how the converted should be treated, and that 
Maximian replied that they must be beheaded, but he gives 
us in so many words the letters of each in full, as if he had 
access to the original documents. But did not Thucydides 
and Livy do likewise in their histories ? Saints 7 literature in 
modern English seems to be very scanty, but we had much 


of it in Middle English. Rev. Alban Butler's Lives of the 
Fathers, Martyrs, and other principal Saints (best ed., 12 vols., 
1812 ff. ; 1st ed., 5 vols., 1745) gives ug a very brief account 
of St. Juliana (vol. n, p. 163), and he remarks that "Her 
Acts in Bollandus deserve no notice." On the contrary, I 
think that they deserve considerable notice, although we by 
no means pin our faith to them as to the truth of history. 
Baring-Gould, in his Lives of Saints (13 vols., 2d ed., 1872; 
3d ed., 1898), is somewhat fuller as to our Saint (2d ed., vol. 
II, p. 316), but he too thinks it necessary to warn us that 
" The Acts are not to be trusted. They have apparently been 
interpolated by those who were not satisfied with their origi- 
nal brevity." Even so, but we are very thankful to the 
original interpolator, whoever he was, for having given us a 
most graphic and interesting picture of the faith and perse- 
verance of a saint, who attracts us by her beauty of person 
and of character, who triumphs over all her enemies, her 
father, her espoused, and even the Devil himself, who con- 
verts hundreds by the example of her constancy amidst the 
most excruciating tortures, whom not even a bath of molten 
lead could harm, and who succumbs only to the inevitable axe. 
Further, as to the value of the Lives of Saints, Horstmann, 
who, by his several publications, has made the Middle English 
Legendaries a province peculiarly his own, comments in his 
Preface to the South English Legendary (E. E. T. Society, 
1887) on the neglect that these Lives have experienced at 
the hands of English writers, and argues for a wider knowl- 
edge of them, saying in conclusion (p. xii) : " So the collection 
deserves attention not only from a hagiologic, but also from a 
poetic and literary point of view. In publishing it, we only 
pay a just debt to the past." The Laud MS., which he prints, 
does not contain the Life of St. Juliana, but he gives the 
contents of some half-dozen others which do contain it. He 
supports his own opinion by quoting in a Note (p. xi) from 
Hunan's History of Israel, i, Preface : Les legendes des Saints, 
pour la plupart, ne sont pas historiques, et ne"anmoins elles 


sont merveilleusement instructives pour ce qui tient & la cou- 
leur des temps et aux mceurs." These Middle English 
legends of saints depend for the most part on the Legenda 
Aurea, but we must go back to the Latin Lives for the 
earliest ones. The Middle English Life of St. Juliana is, 
however, a wide subject and must be postponed for a future 
occasion. It is sufficient if we have made better known the 
form that Cynewulf must have used for his poem. Cynewulf 
seems to have tried his 'prentice hand on the Juliana, and a 
part of his poem is lost, but what we have left is sufficient to 
enable us to judge of the treatment of his source, and of the 
incipient poetic power which was to be still further developed 
in his later works. 


The following Appendix contains a close comparison of 
the poem of Cynewulf with the original Latin by sections. 
It will give an illustration of the manner in which Cynewulf 
condenses and expands his source. It is manifest that, as 
stated above, the poet had before him a Latin Life similar 
to the first one printed in the Acta Sanctorum. Doubtless 
if a search were made through the collections of MSS. of the 
Lives of Saints in England, such a Life could be found, 
for Bolland had access to eleven such MSS. collected from 
different libraries on the Continent. The comparison shows 
that Cynewulf was not a slavish follower of his Latin text, 
but that he worked independently. 

Comparison of Cynewulf s Juliana with ike first Life 
in the Acta Sanctorum. 

1. Cynewulf omits the few lines of Introduction begin- 
ning Benignitas Salvatoris noslri. He expands lines 1-17 on 
the persecution of the Christians from the few lines, Denique 
temporibus Maximiani Imperatoris persecutoris Christianae re- 


ligionis; lines 17-26, about the power and wealth of Eleusius, 
are expanded from the brief statement, erat quidam senator in 
dvitate Nicomedia (which Cynewulf calls Commedia) nomine 
Eleusius, amicus Imperatoris, which appellation is omitted ; 
lines 26-37 are expanded from, Hie desponsaverat quandam 
puellam nobili genere. ortam, nomine Julianam, and from the 
following description of Juliana ; but the statements as to her 
father and mother are omitted, that her father Africanus was 
a persecutor of the Christians, and that her mother was joined 
with neither the Christians nor the pagans ; lines 37-57 are 
expanded from the statement that Eleusius was eager for the 
nuptials, with additions about his wealth, but omission of 
Juliana's first condition : Nisi dignitatem praefecturae adminis- 
traveris, nullo modo tibi possum conjungi. Eleusius fulfilled 
this condition by giving money to the Emperor, only to be 
met by the answer to his messengers that he must believe in 
her God, and worship Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (which is 
paraphrased by Cynewulf), and the remainder of Juliana's 
reply is expanded from, Quod si nolueris, quaere tibi aliam 
uxorem, a much more succinct answer. 

2. Lines 58-77 are expanded from the brief statement, 
Audiens haec Praefectus vocavit patrem ejus, et dixit ei omnia 
verba quae ei mandaverat Juliana. Here we have the graphic 
touches of the battle-warriors leaning their spears together, 
and Eleusius holding his spear, before his speech, which is 
narrated more effectively in the first person ; lines 77-88 are 
a forcible expansion of the speech of Africanus : Per miseri- 
cordes et amatores hominum Deos, quod si vera sunt haec 
verba, tradam earn tibi; lines 89-104 expand in Cynewulf ? s 
manner, with further reference to the wealth of Eleusius, 
which was evidently a powerful attraction, the simple Latin 
words : Filia una dulcissima Juliana, lux oculorum meorum 
(exactly rendered mmra eagna leoht), quare non vis accipere 
Praefectum sponsum tuum? En vero volo illi complere nuptias 


Lines 105-116 enlarge the simple repetition by Juliana 
of her previous condition of marriage. The allusion to 
" wealth " is here again an addition by Cynewulf. 

Lines 117129 are an expansion of the Latin, Per miseri- 
cordes Deos Apollinem et Dianam, quod si permanseris in his 
sermonibus, feris te tradam. It will be observed that the oath 
" By Apollo and Diana " is turned into " By my life " (gif 
mlnfeorh leofaftl). 

Lines 130139 include two speeches of Juliana, the inter- 
mediate one of Africanus being omitted. Here Juliana swears, 
Per Filium Dei vivi, which is softened into " By my life ! " (bl 
me lifgendre) a second time. 

Lines 140-160 expand the statement that Africanus at once 
ordered Juliana to be stripped and whipped, asking, Quare 
non adoras Deos? Juliana answering, Non credo, non adoro, 
non sacrifico idolis surdis et mutis (literally translated dumbum 
and deafum deofolgieldum) ; sed adoro Jesum Christum, qui 
vixit semper et regnat in coelis. The concluding lines intro- 
duce the names Africanus and Heliseo for pater ejus and 
Praefecto sponso ejus. 

3. Lines 160-174 expand the Latin, but the first lines 
are almost literally translated. The Latin represents the Pre- 
fect as alone seeing her beauty ; Cynewulf adds the people 
too. In Eleusius 7 speech, dulcissima mea Juliana is literally 
translated, but sunnan sdma, and hwcet! Ipu glcem hafast, 
ginfceste giefe geogufthddes bleed, are additions of Cynewulf 
with poetic touch. Cynewulf adds also sd]>um gieldum to si 
sacrificare nolueris. 

Lines 175-183 are an expansion of Juliana's previous condi- 
tion Deum Patrem et Filium et 8piritum sanctum are rendered 
wuldres God, gcesta scyppend, meotud moncynnet, in ]>ces 
meahtum sind a butan ende ealle gesceafta. 

Cynewulf omits a short speech of the Prefect and Juliana's 
reply, and a longer speech of each, the Prefect saying that, if 
he complied with her request to receive the spirit of God, the 
Emperor would appoint a successor and cut off his head, and 


Juliana replying that, if he feared a mortal Emperor, how 
could he compel her to deny an immortal one ; let him inflict 
his tortures ; she believes in Him in whom Abraham, Isaac, 
and Jacob believed and were not confounded. 

4. Lines 184-208; 184-188 relate the scourging, but 
that it was with " four rods " (quatuor virgis) and by " three 
soldiers in turn" (tres milites vioissim) is not mentioned by 
Cynewulf; 189-208 contain the Prefect's speech much ex- 
panded from the brief command to sacrifice to the great 
Diana, or by the great Apollo he would not spare her. 
Cynewulf always studiously avoids any mention of Apollo 
and Diana, so that these names do not occur in the poem. 

Lines 209-224 are much expanded from the brief answer 
of Juliana: Noli credere quod suasionibus tuis me revocare 
poteris a Domino meo Jesu Christo. 

Lines 225-235 describe the hanging by the hair for six 
hours (per sex horas) (literally rendered, siex tlda dceges), the 
taking down, and the leading to prison, but omit the injunc- 
tion to sacrifice and Juliana's refusal with the boast, vincam 
mentem tuam inhumanam et fadam erubescere patrem tuum 
satanam, the pouring of molten brass over her a capite usque ad 
talos, but nihil ei nocuit, and the binding of her limbs (jussit 
ligamen per femora ejus mitti), before casting her into prison. 

5. Lines 236-242 omit Juliana's long prayer for help on 
entrance into prison, with its scriptural references to those 
who had been preserved in the midst of torments, and its 
imprecations on the Prefect and prayer that God's power may 
be shown in her. 

Cap. n, 6. Lines 242-257 describe the coming of the 
demon, nomine Belial (name omitted by Cynewulf) in the form 
of an angel, and his attempt to persuade Juliana to sacrifice 
and escape the torture to come; these lines are but slightly 
expanded from the Latin. 

In lines 258-266, Juliana's inquiry and the devil's answer 
are a slight expansion of the Latin, but angelus Domini sum 
is translated verbatim, ic eom engel godes. 


Lines 267-288 give Juliana's prayer to God, with omission 
of ingemiscens amarissime and oculos suos levans ad coelum cum 
lacrimis, graphic touches that Cynewulf overlooks, but in 
general the Latin is closely followed, especially the response 
of the voice to seize the demon that she may learn who he is; 

7, tenuit Belial daemonem is rendered heo }>cet deofol genom, 
but facto Christi signaculo is omitted. After 288 there is the 
loss of a leaf in the A.-S. MS. (part of section 7), which included 
the Latin from et dixit ei : Die mihi, quis es tu f et unde es ? 
vel quis te misit ad me ? to ego sum qui fed oh Herode infantes 
occidi, inclusive; it comprises some twenty-five MS. lines, 
covering the Scriptural references to Adam and Eve, Cain 
and Abel, Job, the children of Israel, Isaiah, Nebuchadnezzar, 
the three children, Jerusalem, the slaying of the children 
by Herod, and the death of Judas. A peculiar word is in 
the devil's reply : Ego sum Belial daemon (quern aliqui 
Jopher Nigrum vocant). [This sentence is omitted in Grein's 

Lines 289-315 follow the Latin quite closely, with some 
expansion, but with omission of the names Petrus et Paulus 
in connection with Simon Magus, and with insertion of the 
name Hegias in connection with Andrew. 

8. Lines 315-344 include four short questions of Juliana 
and three brief answers, with one long one, from the demon. 
The names Satanas and Beelzebub of the Latin are omitted by 

Lines 345-417 cover Juliana's short command, Ad quae 
opera justa proficiscimini, narra mihi, and the demon's long 
answer ( 9), which follows the Latin quite closely, but with 
some expansion. The specific references to hearing the Holy 
Scriptures and partaking of "the divine mystery" are omitted 
by Cynewulf. 

10. Lines 417-428 are an expansion of Juliana's ques- 
tion : Immunde spiritus, quomodo praesumis Christianis te 
admiscere ?, with addition of the reference to " Christ " and 
to the " pit of hell " (helle sea%). 


Lines 428-453 comprise the demon's reply, a partial para- 
phrase of the Latin ; confidis in Christum is rendered ]>u in 
ecne god .... getreowdes. Certain exclamations are omitted, 
and the threat by the demon to accuse Juliana to his father ; 
the allusions to the cross are inserted. 

Here follows the binding of the demon by Juliana and 
the scourging with one of her chains, which are omitted by 
Cynewulf; also the exclamation of the demon and the adju- 
ration, per passionem Domini Jesu Christi, miserere infelicitati 
meae ! 

11. Lines 454-460 are an expansion of Juliana's com- 
mand: Confitere mihi, immunde spiritus, cui hominum-injuriam 

Lines 460-530, the speech of the devil, are a consider- 
able expansion of the Latin, especially the combats, beore 
druncne, evidently a reminiscence of native customs, and 
the allusions to Adam and Eve, but many literal translations 
identify the passage. The reference to the Temptation is 
omitted, and the final apostrophe : virginitas, quid contra 
nos armaris f Joannes, quid contra nos virginitatem tuam 
ostendisti ? 

12. Lines 530-558 embrace the summoning of Juliana 
by the Prefect from prison, and the prayer of the demon to 
be dismissed, close to the Latin with some omissions. She 
goes forth dragging the demon per forum, omitted by Cyne- 
wulf, and she casts him in locum stercore plenum, paraphrased 
by Cynewulf, ]>ystra neosan in sweartne grund, on mta 

Cap. in. After line 558 one or more pages are missing 
from the A.-S. MS. They comprised 13-17 inclusive of 
the Latin, and contained the Prefect's question as to how she 
had overcome such tortures by incantations ; Juliana's reply 
that Christ had sent His angel to strengthen her, and her 
exhortation to repentance; further tortures on the wheel with 
sharp swords, and by fire, which the angel of the Lord 
extinguished ; Juliana's long prayer, and recounting of Old 


Testament deliverances, Lot, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, 
the incarnation, betrayal, crucifixion, resurrection and ascen- 
sion, and a prayer for her own deliverance ; the conversion 
of the executioners and others ; the Prefect's report to Maxi- 
mian and his order that the converts be beheaded; [500] 
men and 130 women are executed ; the Prefect's order that 
Juliana be burnt alive ; her prayer for aid, and the coming of 
the angel who scatters the fire, and Juliana stands uninjured. 

Lines 559-568 comprise their praise of God and the com- 
ing of the angel. 

18. Lines 569-606 describe the rage of the Prefect and 
the bath of molten lead, which was to Juliana sicut balneum 
bene temperatum; the leaping forth of the vessel and the 
destruction of seventy-five bystanders ; the further anger of 
the Prefect and the cursing of his gods because they could 
not injure Juliana; and finally his sentence of decapitation; 
the Latin is here closely followed even to the number killed. 

19. Lines 607-634 comprise Juliana's rejoicing, the 
coming of the devil and his urging the executioners not to 
spare her ; her looking at him and his flight, crying, Heu me 
miserum ! &c. Wd me forworhtum, &c., a close paraphrase 
of the Latin. 

20. Lines 635-671 comprise the exhortation addressed 
by Juliana to the converted and the other Christians present 
to build their houses on a firm rock, to watch against foes, 
and to pray for her, close to the Latin. Her giving peace 
to all and final prayer for herself are omitted by Cynewulf ; 
decottata est is poetically paraphrased, Dd hyre sdwl wearS 
dlceded of face to ]>dm langan gefean ]>urh sweordslege. 

[ 21. Section 21, relating the bringing of Juliana's body 
by Sephonia from Nicomedia and the landing in Campania 
near Puteoli, where she has a mausoleum, is omitted by 

22. Lines 671-695 comprise the shipwreck of Eleusius 
and the loss of thirty-four men (the Latin has twenty-four), 
whose bodies, in the Latin, are devoured by birds and wild 


beasts. Allusions to the wine-hall, the beer-seats, the rings 
and appled gold, are additions after native customs ; as also 
the burial of Juliana's body. The date is omitted. 

Lines 695-731 are a personal epilogue, sad and grave, 
appended by Cynewulf. 


Synopsis of the Life of St. Juliana in Symeon Metaphrastes. 

The works of Symeon Metaphrastes, who wrote his Meta- 
phrases, or Lives of Saints, about A. D. 914, are found in 
volume 114 of Migne's Patrologia Graeca, together with a 
Latin translation in parallel columns. The Life of St. Juliana 
extends from columns 1437-38 to columns 1451-52. The 
following brief synopsis will suffice for comparison with the 
Latin Lives in the Ada Sanctorum and with the Anglo-Saxon 
poem of Cynewulf. 

Chapter I. Col. 1438. Mater vero erat in confinio utrius- 
que, nempe et gentilium erroris simul et pietatis, et neutri 
tribuens plus quam alteri. 

II. Col. 1439. irdvra \L6ov /ai^cras, cum omnem rnovis- 
set lapidem ; /cat TTO\\OV ftpvcriov rrjv ap^rjv tovrjcrdiievos, et 
plurima pecunia emisset magistratum. Juliana made it a 
condition that Eleusius should gain the Prefecture, and after 
he obtained it, that he should worship her God, or erepav 
grjrei, rrfv (rvvoiicri<Tovo-av, quaere aliam quae tecum habitet. 

III. At this he became angry and informed her father. 
Africanus is very angry, but at first speaks gently. Die mihi, 
inquit, filia charissima, et grata lux meorum oculorum. She 
repeats the condition to him. He swears by Apollo and Diana 
that he will cast her body to wild beasts and dogs. She wel- 
comes death and he tries persuasion and blandishments. 

IV. She persists in refusing to have anything to do with 
Eleusius unless he worships Christ. Africanus puts her in 
prison and returns at night, but she refuses to sacrifice and 



worships Christ alone, so, after inflicting blows, he delivers 
her to Eleusius to use as he pleases. 

V. Eleusius, overcome by her beauty, addresses her in 
soft words and begs for marriage. She refuses unless he is 
baptized. He declines because the Emperor would deprive 
him of honor and of life. She replies : If he fears a mortal 
king, should she not fear an immortal one, who has power 
over both body and soul ? How should she be joined with 
His enemies ? Let him do as he pleases, kill, deliver to fire, 
or wild beasts, flog, or what not, he is abominable to her. 

VI. Eleusius is inflamed with anger and love, and orders 
her to be flogged until the scourgers are weary. He says, 
this is the beginning ; " sacrifice to Diana." She replies that 
she is more ready to suffer punishment than he to inflict it. 
He orders her to be hanged by the hair until the skin is 
drawn from her head and her eyebrows to her forehead. He 
then addresses her again, love inducing him to think that he 
would persuade her. 

VII. Effecting nothing, he orders iron plates, burning hot, 
to be applied to her shoulders and sides, her hands bound to 
her sides, and thus transfixed, she is led to prison. Lying 
on the ground, she prays to be delivered from her afflictions, 
as Daniel, the three children, and Thecla were from fire and 
wild beasts. "Pater meus et mater mea dereliquerunt me; 
tu autem, Domine, ne recesseris a me. Overthrow my ene- 
mies as thou didst preserve Israel in the sea." 

VIII. While she is thus praying, the enemy of all, feign- 
ing to be the angel of God, appears and tries to persuade her 
to sacrifice, for she cannot bear the punishments to come. She 
asks who he is, and he replies "the angel of God," who sends 
him that she may obey, and will pardon her on account of the 
weakness of the flesh. In terror and distress, her eyes being 
filled with tears, she prays that the evil one may not temper 
the bitter cup, but " show me who this is that pretends to be 
Thy servant." A voice is heard, " seize him and learn who 
he is." 


IX. Her chains are loosed, and she seizes him as a slave, 
saying, "Who art thou, and whence, and by whom sent?" 
She flogs him, and he confesses that Satan sent him. He had 
deceived Eve, urged Cain, influenced Nebuchadnezzar, induced 
Herod to slay the children, and Judas to betrayal and hang- 
ing, and had caused the stoning of Stephen, and the killing of 
Peter and Paul. He persuaded the Hebrews to be idolaters, 
and made naught the wisdom of Solomon through his illicit 

X. Juliana binds him with more chains and inflicts more 
blows. He begs to be set free, and laments his calamity. He 
has deceived many and inflicted many evils on them. No 
one could overcome him ; but she has put chains on him and 
inflicted blows. Was his father ignorant that nothing is more 
exalted than virginity, nothing stronger than the prayer of a 
martyr ? 

XI. The Prefect sends for Juliana to be brought before 
him, and she goes, dragging the demon. She stands before 
him in her original beauty, as if she had suffered no harm, 
but as if prepared for the bridal. He wants to know by what 
art she has effected this. She replies that it is no art, but 
divine power, which has made her more powerful than he 
and his father Satan. Christ has weakened their strength 
and prepared for him fire and hell and darkness and the 

XII. Eleusius prepares for her fire, a furnace filled with 
materials easily combustible, and they throw her in. She 
looks up to God and sheds tears, and these small drops ex- 
tinguish the flame. All the people of Nicomedia are aston- 
ished at the miracle, and five hundred cry out with one voice 
and mind : " There is one God, the God of the martyr Juli- 
ana ; we worship Him and renounce heathen worship ; come 
sword, fire, or any other death." The Prefect orders them to 
be put to death, and there were also put to death one hundred 
and thirty women, " for they were not inferior to the men in 


XIII. The Prefect, burning with anger, orders a caldron 
to be prepared, and Juliana to be cast into it. Divine grace 
made it a bath for her, but a Chaldaean furnace for the 
attendants, for it suddenly rebounded and destroyed the by- 
standers ; even the lictors were thus consumed. The Prefect 
was enraged because he could not overcome a girl, and tore 
his garments, and cried to his gods. As punishments were 
of no avail, but the constancy of the martyr was increased, 
he orders her to be beheaded. 

XIV. The demon appears again, and, standing afar off, 
rejoices and urges on the lictors. Juliana looks at him, and 
crying out, " Woe is me ! she wishes to seize me again," he 
vanishes. Juliana walks with eager face and glad eyes, talk- 
ing with the attendants and persuading them that nothing is 
more precious than the love of Christ. She first prays, and 
then bends her neck to the blow, preserving the same joy of 
mind and showing no sadness. 

XV. Sophia was by chance passing through Nicomedia 
and journeying to Rome. She took the sacred relics, and 
carrying them home erected a temple to the martyr worthy 
of her sufferings. Eleusius soon after suffers deserved pun- 
ishment. As he was journeying by sea, a violent tempest 
arose, and the ship with his companions was sunk. He was 
reserved for a greater calamity, for being cast away in a desert 
place, he became food for dogs. 

XVI. Such was the martyrdom of Juliana and such her 
end, for Christ attended her who had been espoused to Eleu- 
sius about her ninth year, but was the spouse of Christ and 
was joined to Him by martyrdom at the age of eighteen. 
Maximian was then king of the wicked, but our King, God 
and King of the faithful, is our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom 
be glory and power "nunc et semper et in saecula saeculorum. 



Since the publication, in 1879, of BechtePs Uber die 
Bezeichnungen der sinnlichen Wahrnehmungen little has been 
done in this field. In fact, the ground there broken seems 
to have become fallow again. Perhaps this is because the 
book is based on a now antiquated phonetic system. But, 
in the main, the principles there advocated are none the less 
true, even though many of the etymologies are no longer 
tenable. This paper is intended, therefore, to rehabilitate 
these principles and supply some deficiencies. 

How is sense-perception expressed ? Bechtel says, p. viii f. : 
"Die Wahrnehmungen durch die fiinf sinne werden .... 
sprachlich in der weise zum ausdruck gebracht, dass von der 
perception als solcher vollig abgesehen und statt ihrer die 
tatigkeit genannt wird, auf welche die perception erfolgt oder 
welche gegenstand der perception ist." This is, in the first 
place, because the proethnic man, and the undeveloped mind 
as well, described sense-perception as an objective phenome- 
non and, secondly, 'because words come to connote much more 
than they primarily denoted, often indeed something entirely 
different from the root meaning. For example, when I say 
" I smell," it implies not only actually, but also historically 
" it smells," and this meant originally " it smokes, it exhales, 
it reeks." But this is not the end of the investigation. It 
remains to discover the primary meaning of ' smoke/ and 
here we find what we should expect, that a word for 'smoke' 
may come from any root that may describe its appearance/ 

It is evident, therefore, that the development of a meaning 
is often brought about by the extension and then the obscura- 
tion of the original idea. To discover this original idea I 
see no other way than to reduce the several words of a group 
to a common root and, by a comparison of the various 



significations, find out the primary meaning. This is based 
on the principle I have discussed in AJP, xix, 40 ff., that 
"words of the same phonetic composition are presumably 
cognate" regardless of any difference in meaning. This 
principle is expressed thus by Bechtel, p. xiii : " Das, was 
bis hinab in die ausserste periode, in welche wir dringen 
konnen, als lautlich gleich uns entgegen tritt, muss auch 
begrifflich zusammenfallen." And yet how often do our 
etymological dictionaries separate words simply because of a 
difference in meaning, and connect others that are phoneti- 
cally unlike simply because they are synonymous. As if 
form were less persistent than meaning ! No, the form often 
remains when the original meaning is entirely lost sight of, 
and hence the original meaning has absolutely no influence 
upon the development of a secondary meaning. Thus OE. 
hefig ' heavy, grievous ' is not affected in its use by its connec- 
tion with OE. hebban ' raise.' 

In this paper, therefore, the attempt is made to refer the 
various words to their primitive roots and meanings, and to 
show how these meanings have developed into expressions 
of sense-perception. I shall consider only the words for 
sight and smell. The examples are taken mostly from the 


I. To our early ancestors ' odor, smell ' was in many cases 
synonymous with ' smoke, vapor, exhalation. 7 Odors were as 
visible as the. objects of sight. They arose from the steaming 
viands or the reeking fen, and appealed to the eye as well 
as delighted or offended the nostrils of men and gods. They 
were described, therefore, in terms of sight. 

Now what terms would be used in describing ' smoke, 
vapor ? ' We find a great variety of such words in the IE. 
languages. As words for ' smoke ' they are, of course, not all 
of equally ancient origin nor do they all go back to IE. time. 


They arose from time to time just as the first word for smoke 
arose a description of the appearance. How should we now 
describe ' smoke ' if there were no such word? Naturally we 
should say : ' It breaks forth, it rises, it eddies up, it whirls 
around, it puffs out/ etc. Finally a community would settle 
upon one or more of such expressions, and these would mean 
from their association ' smoke/ 

1. Goth. daunSj ON. daunn 'odor/ OHG. toum 'vapor, 
odor/ Skt. dhumd-, Lat. fumus, etc., from the root dhu- 
' shake, rush/ in Skt. dhUnoti 'shake, move/ Gk. Ova) 'storm, 
rage, offer sacrifice/ ON. dyja ' shake/ etc. 

To the derivative stem dhu-bho- belong Ger. duft, MHG. 
tuft 'exhalation, mist, dew, rime/ OHG. tuft 'frost/ Dan. 
duft 'exhalation, gentle wind, dust/ MDu. duf, LG. duff, 
duffig ' damp ' (Schade, Wb. s. v. tuft). To these we may add 
MHG. tuften, tuftelen 'strike, beat/ OE. dubbian 'strike, 
dub/ and the group to which Goth, daufs 'deaf has been 
assigned, viz. : OE. dofian, OHG. toben ' rage/ Gk. rO^o? 
' smoke/ TV^OCD ' smoke, stupefy/ etc. Or G. duft and its 
congeners may be related more closely tq Skt. dhupa- ' smoke, 
incense/ dhupdyati 'fumigate, perfume, smoke/ dhupi- 'a kind 
of wind/ from the base dhu-po-. 

2. Icel. hniss 'afsmak eller stark smak vid mat/ Lat. 
nidor, Gk. tcvia-a, tcvia-aa ' steam and odor of fat/ from root 
quid- in ON. hmta ' thrust/ OE. hmtan ' gore, clash together/ 
Gk. /cvlSrj ' nettle/ KVifa ' scratch/ Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. 
Kvlo-a, Brugmann, Grd., I 2 , 701. 

The root qn%-dr, qnei-d- is a derivative of qne-io-, which is 
from the simpler root qne-, qeno- (Prellwitz). From this 
come qu3-uo-, qnu-d-, etc., in Gk. /cvv^a 'the itch/ Lett. 
knudt 'itch/ Goth, hnuto 'thorn, sting/ etc. And to this 
root belongs Gk. Kovva, KVV^CL 'fleabane' (a strong smell- 
ing plant). 

The meaning ' odor, vapor ' is from the intransitive use of 
the word 'spring forth.' The same is the case with the 
words following. 


3. Lith. pa-kvimpti 'smell' (good or bad), kvepiit, kvepeti 
' exhale/ kvdpas ' breath/ Lett. kwept ' fumigate/ ktipet 
'smoke/ Lat. vapor, Gr. /caTrvco 'breathe/ KCLTTVOS 'smoke/ 
Goth, af-hwapjan ' smother, extinguish/ Cf. Fick, VWb. 4 I, 
396 ; Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. s. v. af-hwapjan. 

The element quiz- in the root qu%-p- appears also in Skt. 
kvathati ' boil, seethe/ Goth, hwafyjan ' foam ' (cf. Fick as 
above), OE. hwa]>erian ' foam, surge ; ' and in OChSl. kvasiti 
'fermentare/ ON. hucesa 'hiss.' Cf. author, Mod. Lang. 
Notes, xni, 85 f. This element qu%- may be regarded as 
shortened from qeuo-, qeue- ' beat, agitate/ for it is from this 
idea that a word for 'smoke, vapor' is frequently derived. 
We may, therefore, add to this group OE. heawan, OHG. 
houwan 'hew/ Lith. kduti 'beat/ kova 'battle/ Lat. cu-do. 
Lat. cudo contains the same elements as, and may be compared 
with, Skt. cbdati, coddyati 'incite, drive/ Goth, ga-hwatjan 
' incite, sharpen/ OE. hwetlan, etc. For further discussion of 
this root cf. author Am. Germ., 11, no. 4. 

The root form qnp- occurs also in the primary sense ' agi- 
tate.' Compare Skt.. Mpyati ' be agitated, boil, be angry.' 
With this have been connected Goth. OHG. hiufan 'lament/ 
OE. heofan, etc., and Lat. cupio ' desire.' To these we may 
add OE. hwopan 'cry out, threaten/ Goth, hwopan 'boast/ and 
also Gk. /CO/ATTO? <^*quompos (v. Brugm. Grd. I 2 , 313) 'noise, 
din, boasting/ KOfiirew 'clash, boast/ and perhaps KOTTTCO 
' strike, beat, cut/ KOTTTOPCU ' bewail, lament/ /coTrero?, tcofj,- 
//,05 * wailing/ KOTTIS 'prater, wrangler.' We have in this 
group, therefore, the ablaut qutp-, quop-, qeup-, qup-. The 
-p- of the Germ, is perhaps from pre-Germ. -pn-. The mean- 
ings of the entire group are easily derivable from 'shake, 
agitate, beat.' 

The same meaning and root are also in OHG. hwennen 
'shake, swing/ Lat. vannus, Brugm. Grd. I 2 , 321. We have 
then the following roots qeuo- ' shake, beat ; ' que-no, qud-no- 
' shake, swing; que-do-, qu-do-, qeu-do- 'beat, incite;' que-tho- 
' agitate, seethe ; ' que-po-, quo-po- qeu-po- ' agitate, beat, smoke, 


smell ; ' que-so- ' agitate, seethe. 7 The relationship in this 
group is as certain as anything in linguistics can be. 

4. ON. ]>efa ' smell, sniff, emit vapor/ OE. }>efian ' pant/ 
Skt. tdpati 'burn, be warm, glow/ Lat. tepeo, etc., Schade, 
Wb. s. v. thafjan. 

A word for * burn, smoke/ etc., necessarily comes from a 
verb expressing motion. A root tep- is found in several 
groups of words, all of which may be combined under the 
primary meaning ' shoot out, stretch out/ This we find 
in Skt. vi-tapati l stretch apart, separate/ sam-tap- 'draw 
together/ Lith. su-tdpti 'come together/ tamph, tdpti 'be- 
come/ Gk. TOTro? ' locus extentus, regio/ roTrd^co ' aim at, 
intendo/ roirelov 'cord, rope.' With these compare temp- 
'stretch' in Lith. tempiU 'stretch out/ temptyva 'sinew/ 
OChSl. tapu 'obtusus, crassus/ ON. ]>amb 'cramming' Lat. 
tempus ' time/ lempora ' temples ' (of head), templum, con- 
templor ' arez/tfo/ tempto 'touch, feel, attack, try.' Fick, 
VWb. 4 , I, 443; Brugm. Grd., I 2 , 366. 

The root tep- occurs also in Lith. tepil 'smear/ OChSl. 
tepa ' strike/ both of which are closely allied in meaning to 
Lat. tempto. Here also Gk. raTrewos, from imp- or fop-, 
1 low, base, abject, submissive, obedient/ NPers. thdftan 
'bend, oppress/ ON. ]>6/ 'throng/ Fick, VWb* i, 56. For 
these meanings compare Lat. tenuis ' poor, mean, weak, low.' 
This also connects OE. ge-]>cef ' consenting to/ \afian 'consent 
to, permit/ with which compare especially Gk. Taireivo? 
'submissive, obedient.' Bechtel, SinnL Wahrn. 110. 

5. OE. ge-stincan 'smell' (trans.), stincan 'emit vapor, 
emit odor (good or bad), rise ' (of dust), OHG. stinkan ' emit 
odor.' ON. stjpkkva 'jump, leap/ Goth, stigqan 'thrust.' 
This is an old combination, but apparently fallen into dis- 
repute. The development is right in line, however, with the 
foregoing. It is evident that the meaning 'smell, stink' 
came from 'emit vapor.' OE. stincan in the sense 'emit 
vapor' is certainly the same as in 'rise, whirl up.' It is 
simply the descriptive use of this word that came to mean 


'emit vapor' and consequently 'emit odor.' OE. stincan 'rise, 
whirl up 7 no one separates from ON. sfakkva, Goth, stigqan, 
and, as we see here, the various meanings form a graduated 
scale from one to the other. Goth, -stagqan ' strike, dash/ 
causative of stigqan, is formally identical with OE. stencan 
' scatter/ but not with OHG. stenchan ' cause odor/ denomi- 
native of stanch ' odor/ which is a derivative of the verb in 
the sense ' enri^ odor/ 

Now this Germ, root stinq-, stanq- has developed a second- 
ary ablaut as compared with Lat. stinguo, with which it has 
been combined. The IE. root is properly s&'(n)<^-, to which 
also belong Gk. o-reifico ' tread on, stamp ' (primarily ' leap 
up and down on ' = ON. st0kkva ' leap '), o-roifir) ' a stuffing, 
packing/ crrl/Bo? 'path/ etc., and Lith. stingau 'become thick/ 
Lett, stingt ' become compact/ stings ' stiff.' Lat. stinguo, 
ex-stinguo ' meant primarily ' stamp out/ or else ' stuff full/ 
like E. stifle from ON. stifla 'dam up/ from stlfr 'stiff;' 
and distinguo meant 'thrust asunder' hence 'separate/ like 
OE. stencan ' scatter.' With this root we may here connect 
OHG. irsticchan 'stifle, suffocate/ MHG. erstecken 'stuff full, 

The root stei-g^- in o-Tei/3ct), stinguo, stigqan, etc., is in all 
probability an extension of stzi-. Compare stei-g- in Goth. 
stiks, OHG. stehhan, Lat. instigo, Gk. crri^a), etc. ; stei-gh- in 
Goth, steigan, Gk. crret^o), etc.; stei-bh- in Gk. o-rlfyos 'heap/ 
<r<po9 'firm/ Lith. staibus 'strong, brave/ etc.; stei-p- in 
Lat. stipes 'post/ stipo 'press, cram/ Lith. stiprus 'firm/ 
stipti ' become stiff/ OE. stlf ' stiff/ etc. The root stei- in 
Gk. aria, o-riov, Goth, stains 'stone/ etc., probably meant 
originally 'rise, spring up/ for from this the various mean- 
ings of this widespread root are traceable. 

6. OHG. drdhen, MHG. drcehen, drcejen, drcen 'breathe, 
exhale ; smell ' (trans.) < *J?re/an, drat ' exhalation, odor/ 
OHG. drdho 'fragrant;' drdsen 'exhale, snort/ drdsod 'snort- 
ing/ thrdsunga, same, MHG. drds, drdst 'exhalation, odor/ 
OE. ]?rosm ' vapor, smoke/ ]>rysman ' oppress.' 


The common meaning of the above group is 'puff/ and 
this probably came from 'scatter, throw out.' We may, there- 
fore, refer these words to the pre-Germ. root stero-, (s)tre-, 
and compare them with the base stre- which occurs in MHG. 
$trcejen < *strejan ' spritzen, stieben, lodern/ strdm ( strom, 
richtung, streifen, strahl/ strcemelm 'strahl/ OHG. strata 
' arrow, flash/ OE. strcel ' arrow/ OChSl. strela ' arrow/ 
OHG. streno 'strahne/ Lat. strenuus 'brisk, quick/ Gk. 
<rTpr)vr)<s 'strong, rough, harsh/ OE. strcec, strec 'violent, 
mighty, stern/ with which compare OE. stearc ' rigid, rough, 
severe, violent, strong/ OHG. stare ' stark/ etc. 

The root stero-, stre-, ' scatter, throw out ' is found further 
in Gk. crre/3609 'stiff, hard/ MHG. starren 'starr werden/ 
OChSl. starti < old/ Lith. storas ' thick/ ON. storr, ' large.' 
These come from the meaning ' throw out, project, stand 
out, be stiff/ etc., the same meaning being found in many 
other derivatives. From ' throwing out, radiating ' come Gk. 
<rrepoty ' flashing, bright/ crrepoTrrj ' lightning, flash/ as in 
OHG. stra-la ' missile, flash/ and also do-rrjp, Goth, stairno 
' star.' Finally, from ' throw out, scatter, strew ' come Skt. 
strnoti ' strew/ Lat. sterno, etc. To these I should add Lat. 
sternuo 'sneeze' rather than to compare it with Gk. irrdpvv^i,. 

7. MHG. brcehen 'smell/ OE. brcfy 'odor, exhalation, 
vapor/ OHG. bradam ' steam, vapor, exhalation/ bratan, 
OE. brcedan 'roast/ ON. brdftr 'sudden, hasty/ MHG. 
bruejen ' scald, burn ' come from a root bhre-, bhero-, which is 
found further in Gk. (frpeap ' spring/ Lat. /return ' a raging, 
swelling, violence, sea/ Skt. bhurdti 'move violently/ and 
many others. Cf. Persson, Wz. 20 f. 

From the above root Persson derives OE. broc ' brook/ 
OHG. bruoh 'swamp/ etc., connecting them with Skt. bhuraj- 
' bubble, boil/ etc., though they are usually supposed to 
belong to the root bhr3-g- ' break.' I see, however, no reason 
for separating Skt. bhuraj- 'boil, bubble' from -bhraj- in 
giribhraj- ' breaking forth from mountains.' We have in these 
words the various developments of the same root. They are 


not more widely separated in meaning than MHG. briezen 
'swell, bud, break open' and OE. breotan ' break, destroy, 
kill/ one intransitive, the other transitive. This is the expla- 
nation of the variety of meanings in the root bhero-, bhre-, 
which may be one in origin wherever found. Persson, Wz. 
21, assumes at least three IE. roots bher- : (1) bher- 'bear/ 
Skt. bhdrdmi, Gk. <e/oa>, Lat. fero, etc. (2) bher- ' bore, cut ; ' 
' strike, fight/ Gk. <t>apdco ' plough/ Lat. ford ' bore/ etc. ; 
Skt. bhdra- ' battle/ Lat. /mo, ON. berja ' beat/ etc. (3) 
bher- 'move violently, bubble, boil/ Skt. bhurdti, ~Lat. fer-veo, 
fre-tum, etc. (v. supra). 

These three roots are easily connected in meaning. Prima- 
rily bhero- probably signified a starting-up motion, which 
may be loosely given as 'rise, raise' (cf. author, Jour. Germ. 
Phil., I, 442). From this developed, when used intransi- 
tively, various verbs expressing more or less rapid motion, as 
in (3). When used transitively, bhero- splits into two main 
divisions (1) ' cause to move : ' ' carry, raise, bear/ and (2) 
' set in motion, strike/ whence ' cut, wound, pierce.' 

With bhero- 'move, start up, arouse' compare the Germ, 
root ris- 'rise, raise.' This root much more than bhero- 
denoted a rising motion, and yet it furnishes several parallels 
to the development of bhero-. To ris belong MHG. risen, 
OHG. rlsan 'rise, fall/ Goth, -reisan, OS., OE. rlsan 'rise/ 
OHG. reisa, MHG. reise 'start, march, expedition/ NHG. 
reise, reisen, OE. rceran ' raise, rear, build, establish, excite, 
perform/ rces 'running, rush, attack/ rcesan 'rush, attack/ 
rdsettan ' rage ' (of fire, probably here rather than to MHG. 
rdsen, Ger. rasen < root res-, as appears from the following) 
OE. ge-rls ' fury/ rlsan ' seize.' 

For other parallels to the development 'run, flow, bubble:' 
' strike, cut ' see below under the root p$u-. 

8. OE. sfleman ' emit odor, smell sweet/ steam ' exhalation, 
hot vapor, steam/ Du. stoom, EFrs. stdm have been referred 
to Gk. O-TVCO 'erect, make stiff.' This etymology is quite 
possible, but I suggest another which seems to me more 


probable: Lith. stumiu 'thrust/ Skt. stoma- ' throng/ Notice 
the following parallels : Skt. dhunoti ' shake : ' Lat. fumus 
< smoke ; ' OHG. toben ' rage ' : Gk. rvfos ' smoke ; ' ON. 
hnita ' strike : ' Gk. /cvicra ' steam ; ' Skt. Mpyati ( be agi- 
tated : ' Gk. Kairvo^ ' smoke ; ' OChSl. tepa < strike : ' ON. 
]>efa { emit vapor ; ' Goth, stigqan ' thrust : ' OE. stincan 
' emit vapor ; ' Skt. strnoti ' scatter : ' OHG. drdhen ' exhale ; ' 
Skt. bhurdti 'agitate/ Lat./m*6 ' strike :' OE. brcfy 'vapor;' 
Lith. stumiU ' thrust : ' OE. steam ' vapor.' 

This means that when we find the same root meaning 
' strike ' and ( smoke ' the latter is the intransitive use of the 
word employed as a descriptive term. What we really have 
is ' strike : ' ' leap forth.' Therefore the intransitive use of 
any word expressing motion, especially quick or violent 
motion, may produce a descriptive term, and consequently 
a word, for fire, smoke, wind, water. But while they give 
these, they may develop in as many different ways as they 
may be descriptively applied. And this is only the begin- 
ning. Every secondary term thus formed develops new 
words whose derived meanings cocne from the secondary not 
the root-meaning. From the derived words spring others with 
with new significations, and so on, theoretically, without limit. 

To OE. steam ' vapor/ Lith. stumiu ( thrust ' we may refer 
OHG., OS. stum, Du. stom 'dumb, silent.' Compare Gk. 
TV(j)6a) 'smoke; stupefy/ Goth, daufs 'deaf/ dumbs 'dumb.' 
The root stti- upon which these are based may be defined 
'strike, thrust; leap forth.' It is the base of a large family 
of words for 'strike; spring forth ' with their various derived 
meanings. It is quite within the possibilities that OHG. 
stouwen ' scold/ Gk. o-rvco ' erect/ Skt. stduti ' praise/ Goth. 
stojan 'judge' are all from the same root. The root stu- 
then may be an extension of std-, ste- ' stand, set.' Hence 
stu- (from ste-uo- or std-uo-) would properly mean ' set up, 
fix, make stiff ; ' ' cause to start up, thrust, strike ; ' ' start 
up, spring forth/ etc. OHG. stouwen 'scold' is 'thrust' in its 
figurative sense (cf. OHG. sceltan ' scold : ' scaltan ' thrust ') ; 

308 FRANCIS A. WOOD. .- 

Gk. (TTVCO ' erect, make stiff 7 preserves the literal meaning 
'raise;' Skt. stduti ' praise' is paralleled by Lat. extotto, exalto, 
etc. ; Goth, stojan ' judge' is equivalent to 'set, establish.' 

Corresponding to Lith. stumiti 'thrust:' OE. steam 'vapor' 
are Gk. TVTTTO) ' strike,' Lat. stuped ' am astonished,' OHG. 
stioban 'scatter,' MHG. stouben 'beat up, chase:' OHG. stoup 
'dust,' OE. stofa 'bath-room,' stof-bce}> 'vapor bath,' OHG. 
stuba ' stube,' etc. (cf. author, JGPh., n, 227 f. ; and, on the 
possible extension of the root ste- } std-, Persson, Wz. passim). 

9. Skt. ghrdti, jighrati ' smell,' ghrdna- ' odor,' Gk. 6(7- 
(fipaivo/jLcu ' smell, scent, track,' Lat. frd-grd-re ' emit odor ' 
(good or bad). Brugmann, Grd., I 2 , 591. 

These words from the root g^hrd- we may compare with 
Lith. <7aras ' steam, ' gartiti 'emit vapor,' OChSl.goreti 'burn,' 
greti ' warm,' Skt. ghrnomi, jigharmi ' shine,' Gk. 0epo/j,cu 
' become warm,' Oeppos ' warm,' Lat. formus, etc. The root 
g^hero-j g^hre- to which these words belong probably meant 
at first ' spring forth ' (cf. author, AJP., xix, 49). In any 
case it denoted rapid motion. Of that we may be sure from 
the developed meanings. The same root is therefore in 
Gk. (frep-repos 'stronger, braver, better,' Lith. geras 'good,' 
primarily ' active ; ' in Gk. $prjv ' midriff, heart ' (as seat of 
passions), OHG. grun ' sorrow,' OE. gryn ' trouble,' ON. 
grunr 'presentiment' (Brugmann, Grd. I 2 , 614), in all of 
which 'agitation' is the underlying' idea; in Gk. (frop-fcos, 
Germ, gre-ga-, gre-wa- 'gray,' ablaut g^hr-, g^hre-, cf. OChSl. 
gre-ti 'warm,' Skt. ghr-noti 'shine;' possibly also in Skt. 
jigharti 'sprinkle, drip,' primarily 'cause to spring forth,' 
like G. sprengen, so that after all Skt. ghrd- 'smell' and 
ghar- ' sprinkle ' may be related as Sonne supposed (cf. 
Bechtel, p. 54), though not in the manner there assumed. 

10. OHG. riohhan 'smoke, steam, exhale, smell,' ON. 
rjfika ' smoke, reek,' OE. reocan ' smoke, steam, stink,' E. 
reek, OHG. rouh, OS. rok, ON. reykr ' smoke ' belong to a 
Germ, root ruk- 9 which according to Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 , has not 
been found outside of Germ. 


The Germ, root rule- ' smoke 7 is the IE. root rug- ' break 
forth, emit, exhale.' Properly the meaning is ' break forth/ 
as this is certainly an extension of the root reu- 'break.' 
The other significations are secondary or descriptive. This 
root is found in Gk. epevyco, epevyo/jLcu ' burst forth, belch, 
bellow,' Lat. e-rugo-, e-ructd ' belch, cast out, emit, exhale,' 
eructdtio ' exhalation,' Lith. rugiu ' vomit,' OHG. it-ruchen 
'ruminate,' O*E. roc 'cud,' roccettan 'belch, utter' (words), 
ed-rocian 'ruminate.' Cf. Kluge, Et. Wb? s. v. rauspern, 
and for the connection between Germ, ruk- ' smoke ' and IE. 
rug- ' break forth,' cf. the author, JGPh., n, 226 f. This 
connection I supposed original with myself, but afterward 
discovered it was given by Schade, Wb. s. v. itaruchjan. 

To the same root rug- ' break forth ' belong Lat. rugio 
' bellow,' Gk. tfpwyov ' bellowed.' Cf. OE. bealcan ' belch 
forth, utter,' bcelcan 'vociferate.' Here also OE. reoc 'fierce,' 
primarily ' bursting out, outbreaking.' For other connections 
cf. author, JGPh., I, 449 f. 

11. E. smell: Du. smeulen 'smolder,' ME. smolder 'stifling 
smoke' are probably from a pre-Germ. root smu-lo-. This 
may be further connected with the root smu-ro- in G. schmoren, 
Du. smoren 'roast, steam, smother,' OE. smorian 'suffocate;' 
and with smu-go- in OE. smeocan, smocian, MHG. smouch 
' smoke,' etc. These are from the simpler root smti- ' rub.' 
This gives 'wear away, consume, devour' (cf. Persson, Wurze- 
lerw. 181), and when used descriptive of fire came to mean 
'burn,' especially of a slow fire. In Germ., therefore, these 
several roots developed the meaning ' smoke/ and, in the case 
of smulo-, 'smell.' The root smu- occurs in Germ, in the 
sense ' devour, eat/ in G, schmaus, Du. smullen ' carouse/ 
smuisteren ' feast/ etc. Cf. Kluge, s. v. Schmaus. 

12. Olr. bolad ' odor/ Lett. bu y ls ' hazy, sultry air, vapor ' 
(Fick, VWb. 4 , n, 180). These evidently belong to the root 
bheu-lo- ' swell : ' Goth, uf-bauljan ' cause to swell, make 
haughty/ OHG. bulla 'pustule/ MHG. biule, OE. byte 'boil/ 
Ir. bolack (cf. as above), OE. byled-breost ' puff-breasted/ Gk. 


<f>v\ov ' troop, race/ from the root bhu- l spring up, arise be : ' 
Skt. bhdvali, Gk. (frvco, Lat./iw, etc. 

13. OE. ge-swceccan ' smell/ swcecc l smell, odor, flavor, 
taste/ OHG. swehhan ' smell, stink ; boil, gush out.' The 
pre-Germ. suego- from which this group came evidently 
meant 'flow, gush out.' It is therefore the same as sugo- 
' cause to flow, suck:' Lat. sugo, OE. sucan 'suck.' Compare 
also suqo- in Lat. sucus ' sap, juice/ OHG., OE. sugan 'suck.' 
(Cf. Persson, Wz. 8, 22.) 

The idea ' taste ' comes from ' suck, drink/ and from this 
the meaning ' savor, smell.' Compare Lat. sapor ' taste, 
flavor, savor, scent, odor.' Or the pre-Germ. *suogo- ' flow- 
ing, juicy ' developed the signification ' good-tasting ; taste, 
flavor/ * etc. The meaning ' stink ' of swehhan is a later 
growth. Any word for f smell' may come to mean ' stink.' 

With OHG. swehhan Schade, Wb. connects swach, Goth. 
sinks 'weak, sick/ etc. This is a good example of the 
superiority of phonetic comparison over such as are based 
on similarity of meaning. We must, however, explain the 
meaning differently. Pre-Germ. *seugo-, *suogo- meant pri- 
marily ' flowing out, drained, exhausted/ hence ( weary, weak, 
sick.' In the sense ' exhaust ' Lat. sugo is used. So also G. 
aussaugen. Similarly G. erschopft, Lat. exhaustus. More 
proof is not needed. 

With Persson (cf. as above) I believe these words are from 
the root $-, and in its various senses. For the primary 
meaning we may assume ' cast, pour forth ; flow out.' Here 
belong Skt: suvdti ' impel, set in motion/ the transitive of the 
root su- ; sute ' generate, bring forth/ primarily ( pour out, 
seminare; east, bring forth;' sunoti 'press out ' = 'cause to 
flow ; ' and a host of derivative roots. 

14. MHG. smecken 'try, taste, smell, perceive,' OHG. 
smecken 'taste/ smacken 'savor of/ OE. smceccan 'taste/ 
ODu. smaken, OFrs. smakia, OHG. gi-smah ' taste/ MHG. 
smac ' taste, smell/ etc. 

a Cf. Gk. xv\6s, XV/A& ( juice, liquid': 'flavor, taste.' 


These words are connected with LG. smacken ' smack the 
lips/ MHG. smackezen y smatzen ' smack/ But ' smack' did 
not come from ' taste/ but ' taste ' from * smack/ and pri- 
marily ' smack' meant ' strike, touch.' We may therefore 
compare OE. smacian ' pat.' The development ' touch : ' 
1 taste ' is natural and easy. Compare It. tastare, OFr. taster 
'feel/ whence G. tasten: E. taste; Lat. tango ' touch:' ' taste.' 
* Tasting ' implies ' touching, trying, choosing.' Germ. smaka-, 
smakka from pre-Germ. smo-go-, smo-gno- may be compared 
with sme-gho-, smo-gho- in Gk. cr/i^w ' rub/ <ryu,<w%&> ( rub, 
grind with the teeth/ from the root sme- ' rub.' 

15. Lat. oleo { smell, emit odor' is generally supposed to 
be for *odeo. I doubt it. The supposition is gratuitous and 
improbable. For why should *odeo become oleo while odor 
remained. The existence of olor ' odor ' makes it still more 

A root el-, ol- in a sense entirely adequate to explain oleo 
occurs in Lat. ad-oleo ' burn, sacrifice/ ad-olesco * grow up, 
burn, blaze up/ olesco 'grow.' The meanings ' grow : ' 
' burn ' both come from ' spring up, rise.' (Compare Kluge, 
Et. Wb. 5 s. v. lodern ( emporflammen : ' ' iippig wachsen.') 
Perhaps here also Goth, alan 'grow/ Lat. aid, etc., from 
*aft> ; and certainly OE. celan ' burn, kindle/ tiled ( fire, fire- 
brand/ OSw. eledh, ON. eldr ' fire/ and OHG. eh < *efyo- 
< yellow.' (Cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. eXai'a.) To these add 
OE. ealu, OS. alo, ON. ol 'ale/ OSlov. olto 'cider/ Lith. alus 
6 beer/ primarily ' brewed, fermented.' 

Lat. oleo therefore came to the signification 'smell' through 
' rise, exhale/ and the root el-, ol- is the same as that in Gk. 
e\-0elv ' go/ e\v-rai- ep^erai (Hesych.), e\avva) ' drive.' 
Cf. Persson, Wz. 236 ; author, JGPh., I, 452 f. Here also 
belongs the root ol- ' pass away, destroy : ' Lat. ab-olesco 
' decay, vanish/ ab-oleo ' destroy/ Gk. O\\V/M ' destroy, lose/ 
o\\vfiai l pereo.' Compare the similar development in G. 
vergehen, umkommen, Goth, us-qiman t kill , ' OS. witan ' go/ 
OE. ge-mtan ' depart, die/ etc. 


From el- 'rise, run, flow 7 come perhaps Gk. e\awv 'oil/ 
e\aid ' olive/ Lat. oleum, etc., and also Gk. o\-7rrj, oX-?? 
' oil-flask, eX7T09* e\(uov, o-reap (Hesych.), which are usually 
connected with Goth, salbon, etc. Similarly Goth, salbon 
may be referred to the root sel- 'flow. 7 Cf. Persson, Wz. 110. 

16. ON. fnykr, OSw. fnuk,fnok 'stench, filth/ pre-Germ. 
*pnu-go-, from the root pn$uo- in Gk. irvevpa ' wind, breath, 
scent/ Trvor) ' wind, blast, exhalation, odor, fragrance/ Trvew 
'blow, breathe, emit odor, smell/ with which compare pneu-so- 
in OE. fneosan ' sneeze/ Du. fniezen, Sw. fnysa, ON. fnysa 
'snort/ ON. fnidskr, Sw. fnoske 'punk, touchwood/ pre- 
Germ. *pneusqo-, *pnusqio- ' blowing : blazing 7 (cf. Goth. 
blesan ' blow : 7 OE. blcese ' blaze, torch ; ' blcest ' wind, blast : 
flame, glare; 7 Gk. irvovr) 'H^atVroto, II. 21, 355; Trvpb? 
Trvoai, Eur. Tro. 815); and pneu-to- or pneu-dho- in OHG. 
fnoton ' quassare. 7 

These are reducible to a root pne-, peno-, which appears in 
ON. /nasa, /n0sa, OE. fncesettan ' snort/ ge-fnesan i sneeze/ 
fncest ' breath, blast 7 (of tire), fncestian 'breathe hard/ OHG. 
fndstod ' anhelitus/ etc.j base pnE-so- pnd-so- ; and in OHG. 
fnehan 'breathe, pant,' fndhtente 'snorting/ base pnl-go-, with 
which compare pen-qo- in OChSl. patfiti se ' inflari. 7 Cf. 
Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. Trviyco. Gk. Trviya) ' stifle ; stew/ 
Trvfyo? ' stifling, stifling heat/ etc., represent a base pnl-go-, a 
derivative of the root pne-io-. The morphological develop- 
ment was peno-,pne-; pn<luo-,pnti-; pneu-go; pnZu-so-, etc.; 
peno-, pne-; pneio-; pnl-go-, etc. : peno-, pene-; pne-go-; 
pn$-so-, etc. These are types of various possibilities in the 
growth of roots. 

17. OChSl. achati 'odorari/ vonja 'fragrance/ Lat. (li)dla 
< *an-s-lo (Brugmann, Grd., n, 1026), Skt. dniti, Goth, -anan 
' breathe/ Gk. dve/jios ' wind/ etc., root an- ' breathe, blow. 7 

18. OE. fyian < *p(n)Jncm, tr. ' smell, blow on, intr. 
' breathe ; rush, rise 7 (of flame) or-(o)]? ' breath/ or]>ian 
' breathe, pant/ ON. or-ende, ande, ond ' breath. 7 Noreen^ 
UL. 138. The Germ, root an]>-, and- is perhaps from pre- 


Germ, ant-, an-to-, from an- ' blow ; ' to which, according to 
Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 , belong OE. anda < anger, zeal/ OHG. anto, 
anton, G. ahnden, etc. Cf., however, Brugmann, Grd., I 2 , 315. 
The connection of Goth, ansts ' favor ' with the root an- 
' breathe/ which Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb., declares ' kaum denk- 
bar/ has its parallel in Lat. adspiro ' breathe upon : favor, 
assist, sustain/ and in Gk. Trveco ' breathe : breathe favorably 

19. OHG. wdzan ' smell, exhale, blow, storm/ MHG. wdz 
1 sense of smell, odor, exhalation, wind, gust, storm/ wdze ' a 
blowing/ OHG. wdzen, MHG. wcezen 'exhale, puff out, 
bubble, spout. 7 These certainly belong to OE. w&t, ON. 
vdtr ' wet/ OE. wceter, Goth, wato ' water/ etc., from the 
IE. root u%-d-, u-d- 'wave, blow/ from the simpler root ue-, 
euo- ' wave, roll.' IE. *ue-ti, which came to mean 'it blows/ 
was primarily ' it waves, it rolls/ describing the effect of 
the wind. The same root with various suffixes described the 
rolling, waving, flowing of water, and hence came to mean 
' water.' The root ued- occurs also in the sense ' utter, speak, 
sing.' See Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. vBeto. 

20. MHG. witeren, ON. viftra 'get wind of, smell' are 
closely connected with OHG. wetar, ON. ve$r, OE. weder, 
OS. wedar, Germ. *wedra- ( wind, weather/ OChSl. vetrti, 
' air, wind/ Lith. v'etra ' wind, storm/ from the root u$-t- 
' blow/ Skt. vdla ' wind/ Gk. atfrrjs ' wind/ avr^rj ' breath, 
exhalation/ Germ, winda- ' wind/ etc. Cf. author, Am. 
Germ., II, no. 4. 

21. Skt. vdsas 'fragrance/ vdsdydmi 'perfume' contain a 
root u%s-, aus-, us- 'wave, blow, blaze, flow.' This root 
describes the waving produced by the wind, the blowing or 
blazing of the flame, and the flowing or gushing out of 
water. These ideas are frequently combined under one root 
because they all represent a similar motion. The foliage 
waves in the wind, the flame waves or flickers, the water 
waves or rolls. Hence to this root we may refer Skt. us, 
' burn/ Lat. uro, Skt. vas- ' shine/ Lat. aurora, OE. east, 


etc. ; OHG. waso ' damp ground, ooze/ i. e., where water 
springs up r wasal f rain ; ' Gk. avw, Lat. haurid, ON. ausa 
'draw water/ i. e., ' cause to flow, drain off/ cf. Prellwitz, Et. 
Wb. To these belong OHG. wesanen l become dry, rotten/ 
ON. visenn < *wisinaz < *uesenos ' withered/ OE. wisnian, 
weornian ( dry up, wither/ MHG. verwesen ' disappear, detroy .' 
This shows us the development of ues- 'consume, devour, eat.' 
Compare Lat. haurid in the sense ' consume, devour, swallow, 
drink ' with Goth, wisan ' consume, spend, eat, feast/ wizon 
1 live, enjoy life/ Lat. veseor, etc. Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. s. v. 
wizon, regards ues- l devour ' and ues- ' be ' as identical. This 
is doubtless correct, but the connection in meaning should be 
differently explained. On ues- i be ' compare author, JGPh., 
n, 219. 

II. A group of words signifying ' rottenness, filth, fetid- 
ness' is derivable from words that are descriptive of the 
conditions accompanying putrefaction, such as ' break open/ 
' gush out/ ' fall to pieces/ l waste away/ ' be consumed/ ' be 
slimy/ etc. Thus E. decay, OFr., Span, decaer, It. deca- 
dere < Lat. de -j- cadere; Germ, morseh: MHG. zer-mursen 
' crush/ Kluge, Et. Wb.; Gk. tycoa ( rottenness, putrid stench : ' 
A^wft) ' rub/ root pse-, psd- from bhse-, bheso- in Skt. bhdsati 
1 chew, crush/ Prellwitz, Et. Wb.; Lat. rodo ' gnaw : ? ' cor- 
rode; 7 Lat. fistula 'pipe:' ' ulcer, fester,' primarily, in both 
cases, ' that from which something flows ; ' Gk. PVTTO? ' filth/ 
base sru-po- from sreuo- ' flow/ Skt. srdvati, etc., Prellwitz, 
Et. Wb. ; OE. spryng ' ulcer : ' ' flux, spring ; ' G. eiter : Gk. 
ol&da 'swell;' Gk. (fiKvarw 'a breaking out, eruption:' (f>\va) 
'overflow;' OHG. wesanen 'become dry, rot:' wasal 'water/ 
root ues- ' flow.' 

1. OE. rotian 'rot, ulcerate/ OS. roton, OHG. rozzen 'rot, 
become soft/ ON. rotinn 'rotten/ etc., Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v. 
rosten 2 . The old comparison of the Germ, root rut- 'rot' 
with rut- ' weep, wail/ as in Schade, Wb. s. v. OHG. riuzzan, 
is undoubtedly correct, though one was not derived from the 
other directly but both from the primary idea ' break forth.' 


For the development ' break forth : ' ' lament ' compare the 
root rug- above. The change from ' break out ' to ' ulcerate, 
rot 9 is so simple that there can be no doubt as to the connec- 
tion. We still describe cutaneous eruptions as l breaking out.' 
So Lat. eruptio ' a breaking out, eruption of morbid matter.' 

The IE. root reu-do-, an outgrowth of reu- * break/ occurs 
in Lat. rudus ' broken stones, rubbish ; ' rudis (' broken ') 
1 rough, rude ; ' rudens (' breaking, restraining ') ' stay, rope ' 
(with which last compare reu-dho- in Skt. runaddhi ' hold 
back, hold'); and in Lith. rudynas 'swamp, marsh,' in which 
the development of meaning is the same as in OHG. bruoh, 
MHG. bruoch, G. bruch 'swamp, bog/ MLG. brok, Du. broek 
i marsh, pool/ OE. brdo l brook/ Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 

The base roudo- occurs perhaps in Lat. rodo 'gnaw, eat 
away, waste away, corrode. 7 If so, this may be compared 
directly with rot, both from the primary meaning ' break up, 
break open, the former transitive, the latter intransitive. 
Here also probably OHG. rost, rosta ' gridiron.' 

2. Gk. Taryyrj, rdyyos 'putrid swelling, rancidness/ rayylfd 
'be rancid, have ulcers.' With these compare reyyco ' moisten, 
soften/ Lat. tingo, OHG. thunkon, MHG. dunken 'tunken.' 
The common meaning for the group is ' flow.' This makes it 
probable that this root teng- ' flow ' is related to teq- 'run, 
flow : ' Lith. tebb, OChSl. teka ( run, flow/ Skt. tdkati ' hasten.' 
To these belong OE. ]>egen ' attendant, warrior/ OS. ihegan 
' degen/ etc. (cf. Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. s. v. jmts), but not Goth. 
]>ius, since the root teq- contains rather a pure velar (v. Brg., 
Grd., i 2 , 575, 578). 

3. OE. dylsta ' matter, pus/ dylstiht ' festering, mucous ' 
may be referred to the base dhu-lo-, dhue-lo- and compared 
with Gk. #0X09 ' mud, filth/ floXepo? < muddy, foul/ and 
further with Goth, dwals 'foolish.' (Cf. Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb.) 
The primary meaning of dhue-lo- is ' agitate/ as in the simple 
root dhu-. Applied to water it gives ' muddy/ hence ' thick, 
viscous;' to the air, 'dusty, cloudy.' (So G. trube is used in 
this double sense.) When used of persons it signifies ' move 


about/ as in OE. dwelian ' lead astray ; go astray, wander/ 
dwolian ' stray, err.' 

4. OE. adela ' putrid mud, filth/ adelsecfy ' cesspool, sewer/ 
E. (obs. and prov.) addle ' liquid filth, mire ; lees, dregs/ as 
adj. ' putrid/ 

These should come from a base meaning 'flow.' Such a 
base may be furnished by Skt. dtati ' go, wander, run/ dtya- 
6 hastening. 7 With this compare Gk. ao-to? < *arto9 ' slimy, 
miry/ primarily ' flowing/ avis ' slime ; ' OHG. ata-haft ' con- 
tinuous/ atar ' quick, sharp, sagacious/ OS. adro, OE. cedre 
'at once.' We have in these words the ablaut I, 5, a, and 
may add here Gk. fjrop ' heart/ yrpov ' belly/ rfrptov ' warp/ 
OHG. ddara i artery, sinew/ OE. azdre ' vein, nerve, sinew/ 
in pi. ' kidneys, spring ' (of water), wceter-cedre ' spring, tor- 
rent/ ON. ceftr ' vein.' These names for ' vein, entrails, 
spring ' plainly come from the meaning l flow, gush out.' 
Compare OE. geotan 'flow : ' geotend 'artery/ guttas 'entrails;' 
Gk. <Xe> ' vein : ' t^Xeeo ' overflow ' (Prellwitz, Et. Wb.) ; 
Lat. vena < *uesnd- : compare OHG. wasal ' water/ wesanen 
' become dry '=' flow out ' (v. supra). 

Here also belongs et- ' breathe.' Compare Lat. /return 
' swelling, violence, sea : ' OE. brcfy ' exhalation, breath ; ' 
Gk. <j>\eco 'overflow/ Lat./eo 'weep/ OHG. bldjan 'swell;' 
' blow/ OE. bldwan < blow.' So et- ' flow : ' ' breathe.' For 
derivatives of et- 'breathe' see Kluge, Et. Wb. s. v.Atem. 

All these meanings, as we see, may have developed from 
' go, run,' whence ' flow, issue, blow/ &c. To et- ' go, run ' 
we may also refer Skt. dti ' beyond, across/ Gk. en ' besides, 
still/ Lat. et, etc. Compare Gk. irepd ' beyond/ irkpi ' over, 
around/ Lat. per, etc. : root pero- ' go, cross : ' Lat. trans : 
root tero- * go through.' 

Closely connected with Skt. dti ' beyond ' is a word mean- 
ing ' end, boundary.' Compare Gk. rep/jua ' end, boundary/ 
Lat. termo, terminus, root tero- ; Gk. irepas, irelpap ' end/ 
root pero-. So to et- 'go/ eti 'beyond' we may join Skt. dtd- 
' edge, boundary/ with which compare OHG. etar, MHG. 


eter < *et-r6- ' fence, boundary, edge, enclosure/ OS. edor 
6 fence/ OE. e(o)dor ' fence, hedge, enclosure, court, dwelling, 
region, zone, prince, king/ Lat. atrium ' court ' < *9trio-. 

As ' boundary ' easily passes into ' enclosure, country, region/ 
as above, and then into ' people, race/ we may add here OE. 
o\d y e\el ' country, native land/ OHG. uodal, OS. oftil; 
OHG. adal < race, noble race/ etc. (See further Kluge, Et. 
Wb. s. v. Adel.) Compare Skt. vrjdna ' enclosure ; commu- 
nity, people/ Or this group may be more directly connected 
with the meaning 'go, wander/ For ' wander, move in' 
meant among our ancestors ' dwell in, possess/ Thus : Lat. 
verso ' turn, pasture, dwell in ; ' Skt. cdrati ' move about, 
pasture/ Gk. ireKo^au ' move/ Lat. cold ' inhabit, cultivate/ 
Av. cardna i field/ Gk. reXo? ' end, limit (i. e., ' the place to 
which one goes or where one turns, as in Lat. terminus and 
others) dignity; troop/ OChSl. koleno, Skt. kulam ' family, 
community/ Olr. eland ' clan ' (cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb.) ; Skt. 
valgati ' spring/ OE. wealcan ' roll/ ge-wealcan ' traverse/ 
Lat. volgus l people/ 

5. The IE. peu-, pu-, rot, stink ' and- peu-, pu- ' cleanse ' 
are doubtfully connected by Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. irvm. 
Of the root pu < rot ' Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 , says : " Die Grund- 
bedeutung von der idg. Wz. pu war ' den Geruch der 
Yerwesung von sich geben/" Did then our IE. ancestors, 
when they first described putrefaction, use a word that 
already meant ' putrefy t ' Certainly not. The term used 
was descriptive, and only by usage came to mean what it 
does. This remark is of the widest application. It involves 
a principle that is at the very base of semasiological de- 

The root pft-, as we see from Lat. pus, Gk. TTVOV 'pus/ 
TTvea) ' cause to suppurate/ etc., had a development similar to 
that of the root rud- i break out : ' ( ulcerate, rot/ Primarily 
p$u- f pu- ' suppurate, rot ' meant ' spring out : ' ( issue, flow/ 
Consequently this is the same root as pu- ( cleanse/ primarily 
with water but secondarily in any way. Since pu meant 


' spring out/ it gave various words for l fire ; ' for words for 
1 fire/ ( burn ' are regularly formed from such terms. Thus 
we have Gk. Trvp, OHG./m'r; Goth, fu-nins, Skt. pdva-kd-s. 
These words do not necessarily go back to IE. time. Of 
course the root pu- does, but more than that cannot be 
affirmed. In any case 'fire' was described as ' springing out/ 
This gives also ' shine, be bright ' as in Lat. purus ' clear, 
bright ' (sun). Lat. purus therefore contains both the ideas 
' cleansed, washed ' and ' shining, bright.' Another idea of 
cleansing is seen in Skt. pdvana-s i purifying wind/ pdvana-m 
1 winnowing-fan ' and in OHG. fowen ' sift/ (' winnow '). In 
this sense the root gave Gk. Trvpos ' wheat/ Lith. purai, etc.; 
or the word may be compared directly with Lat. purus, just 
as wheat is related to white. Cf. Fick, VWb*, I, 483. 

From pu- ' spring out, issue ' come several words for 
' offspring, issue/ Examples are : Skt. pu-trd-s ' child/ 
son, whelp/ po-ta- ' whelp/ Lith. pau-ta-s ' egg/ pu-tytis 
' chicken/ OChSl. pu-to ( chicken/ Lat. pu-tus 'boy/ pu-er 
1 boy/ pu-llus < *pulno- ' young animal, chicken, sprout, 
shoot 7 (Fick, VWb.\ i, 249), Goth, fula 'foal/ etc. 

From pu- ' spring out, flow ' come Lat. pu-teus ' well/ 
Lith. puta, Lett, putas ' foam/ Gk. irvap, TTVOS, Trveria ' first 
milk, beestings.' Closely connected with this idea is pu 
'suppurate, rot.' 

From pu ' flow ' come Lett, pups i female breast/ Ir. ucht 
<^ *pwptu- (Fick, VWb.*, 11, 55). Of the same origin are 
several words for ' buttocks.' For this development of mean- 
ing compare IE. *orsos, Gk. 0/0/909, etc., from the root erso- 
'flow;' Gk. TTpw/cTos 'anus:' Trpwf 'drop/ Prellwitz, Et. 
Wb. Similarly OE. bcec, ON., OS. bak, OHG. bah ' back/ 
which Persson, Wz. 190, refers to Lith. begti 'run/ Gk. 
$e/3o/jL(u ' fear/ <f>6/3r) ' mane, hair/ Skt. bhaj- ' go, flee/ and 
which Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v. Backe 1 , connects with OHG. 
bahho ' ham, bacon/ etc., are probably also related to OHG. 
bah, OS. beki ' brook/ etc. In like manner we may derive 
breech, breeches, OE. brec, OHG. bruoh, etc., from pre-Germ. 


*bhrogo-, *bhrogi-, root bhrZg- ' break/ to which brook belongs. 
In that case the Gallo-Lat. brdca is from the Germ, as Kluge, 
Et. Wb. 5 , supposes. 

We may therefore safely refer to pU- /spring, flow 7 the 
following : Gk. TTVVVOS' 6 TrpcoKros (Hes.) < *7rvcrTvo-, Skt. 
putdu ' buttocks/ MHG. vut, ON. fa$ 'cunnus 7 (Brugm., 
Grd.j I 2 , 659), base pu-to-; Gk. Trvyij 'rump/ with which 
compare Skt. puccha- ' tail 7 < *puk-sko-, base pti-go-. Goth. 
fauho ' fox/ which is commonly connected with Skt. puccha- 
(cf. Persson, Wz. 23; Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v.Fuchs; Uhlenbeck, 
Et. Wb. s. v. fauho) I should combine rather with Gk. 
'close, secret, concealed, wise, shrewd, crafty. 7 Germ. 
fohs meant therefore ' the crafty one/ a very fitting appella- 
tive for the fox, and ON. fox 'deceit 7 from pre-Germ. 
*puk(e)s- was primarily ' secrecy, deceit 7 not ' foxiness. 7 The 
base pu-ko- in these words was probably from the root pu- as 
we shall see below. To this group we may also add Skt. 
pu-nar ' back 7 (adv.), Gk. Trv-^aro^ ' hindmost. 7 Of. Prell- 
witz, Et. Wb. 

Of the same origin as pen- l spring, flow 7 is pen- ' strike/ 
i. e., ' cause to spring. 7 The two significations are simply the 
intransitive and the transitive use of the same verb of motion. 
Compare the following : 

Skt. galati 'drip, fall/ OHG. quellan 'gush out: 7 Gk. 
/3aXXft> ' throw, hit, strike, wound ; 7 Skt. srjdti ' pour out : 7 
' throw/ sarga ' stream : 7 ' shot ; 7 Skt. sisarti ' flow : 7 ' run, 
rush/ Gk. op^r) 'assault, attack; 7 Skt. dhdvati 'stream, pour: 7 
' run/ dhundti ' shake/ Gk. 6vco ' rush ; 7 Lat. /undo ' pour 
out : 7 ' cast, hurl ; 7 Goth, rign ' rain : 7 cf. Skt. rghdvan ' rag- 
ing, stormy/ rghayati 'rage, tremble/ Gk. o/o%e'a> 'shake/ 
opxeofjuai, 'leap, dance/ root oregh- : orgh- : regh- ; Lith. pllti 
'pour: 7 Lat. pello 'drive, strike; 7 Lat. pluit 'it rains/ Gk. 
TrXew ' sail/ TT\VVCO ' wash : 7 ' beat ; 7 OE. fleotan ' float, flow/ 
E. fled, flit, etc. : Lat. plaudo < *pbu-do- ' beat ; 7 Q-. worpen 
'rolling waves/ OE. ge-weorp 'surf: 7 'a tossing, throwing/ 
weorpan ' throw/ root uer- ' turn, twist, hurl : 7 OHG. welc, 


OE. wlcec ' moist/ primarily ( rolling out, gushing forth/ Lett. 
wtlgans ' moist/ etc. (Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 ) : OHG. walkan ' beat/ 
ON. valka ' roll, move back and forth ; ' OHG. wetta ' wave/ 
wallan ' bubble, spout : ' wallon ' wander ' (Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 
s. v. wallen 2 ) ; Lat. fer-veo ' boil : ' Skt. bhurdti ' stir, jerk, 
struggle/ Lat./en'o f strike ; ' OChSl. rinati ' flow : ' ' thrust/ 
To this list we may safely add p<lu- ' spring forth, flow : ' 
pu- ' strike, cut/ Here then belong Lat. pavio, Gk. Traico 
1 strike ' from *paw-jo-, Lith. piduju ' cut, mow ' from *peu-io-. 
Cf. Fick, VWb*, I, 470. From peu- come the enlarged roots 
peu-ko-, peu-go- ' thrust, pierce, strike' in Gk. TrevicdXifjLos 
{ sharp, piercing/ Trvyfjurj ' fist/ Lat. pungo, etc. From ' strike, 
pierce ? come 'compact, close; sharp, shrewd 7 in Gk. TTVKVO?. 
Cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. irvtca. Here also belongs Lat. 
puto 'cut off, trim, consider, think/ base pu-to- 'cut.' Cf. 
Brg., Grd., n, 1126. 

6. Lat. foeteo ' stink/ base bhoi-to-, may well be referred 
to the root bhl-bh^i- ' thrust, strike, cut ' in OChSl. biti 
'strike/ fyrpos 'piece of wood/ OHG. bihal, OE. bill 'ax.' 
Cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. ^09; Brugm., Grd., i 2 , 636. 
Here also, with Prellwitz, I should add Lat. foedus < 
*bhoi-do- ' foul, filthy, horrible/ from the same root as in 
~La,t.findo ' split/ Goth, beitan ' bite/ baitrs ' bitter/ etc. Cf. 
Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v. bitter. 

The strong or foul odor is here described in terms of the 
sense of feeling. (Cf. Bechtel, SW. 57.) Thus we may speak 
of odors as sharp, pungent, penetrating, offensive. 

7. Lith. smirdeti ' stink/ smdrve, stench/ OChSl. smrUdeti 
1 stink/ smradti, ' stench, filth/ Lat. merda ' dung/ base smer- 
do- (Fick, FTF6. 4 , I, 576) may be further connected with Gk. 
o-fjiepSvos, cryite/oSaXeo? 'terrible/ OHG. smerzo 'pain/ OE. 
smeart 'painful/ etc. (Persson, Wz. 65). These may all be 
referred to the root smer- ' rub/ from which develops ' rub/ 
i smear/ ^ befoul/ ' stink/ and ' rub/ ' crush/ ' pain/ etc. The 
first set of meanings is found also in OHG. smero 'grease/ 
Goth. smair]>r ' fatness/ smarna 'dung/ etc. 


8. ON. hnykr 'stench, filth/ pre-Germ. *qnu-go-, Skt. 
Icn&yaU ' be damp, stink ' have probably developed through 
the ideas 'rub/ 'smear/ 'befoul/ etc., as in smerdo- We 
may therefore refer these words to the root qnU-, qnZuo- in 
Gk. KVVW 'scratch, scrape/ ON. hnyggja 'beat/ etc. (Of. 
Perssou, Wz. 134.) Though these are reducible to the root 
qne-j qeno-, from which come Icel. hniss, hnita, etc. (cf. above), 
from the base qnld-, the development of meaning is not 
the same. 

Other words for smell which are only specializations of a 
general term of sense-perception are not considered here. 
That would lead us too far, since almost any general term 
of sense-perception may be restricted in this way. Thus, we 
perceive, observe, notice, are aware of, odors, and occasionally 
such general expressions may become fixed in the sense 
' smell/ So E. scent as compared with Fr. sentir, Lat. sentire. 
But for the most part words for ' smell ' are from terms 
descriptive of smoke or odor or putrefaction. In words for 
'see/ however, the case is different. There is nothing to 
describe except the attitude or appearance of the person look- 
ing. But this, as we shall see, is an important factor, for 
from such a description come many words for ' see.' 


Seeing in the sense of ocular perception is, in the very 
nature of the case, a secondary development of meaning. 
One large group is composed of words whose meanings have 
been specialized from general terms of sense-perception. The 
underlying ideas of this group are therefore manifold. When 
traced to their original significations they are found to mean 
grasp, aim at, turn, stretch toward, seek, be alert, active, 
watchful, etc. Thus with the eye we perceive, discern, dis- 
tinguish, make out, discover, descry, scan, examine, scrutinize, 
notice, mark, watch, regard, behold, etc. Such expressions 
for seeing occur in all periods and are sometimes restricted in 


usage to ocular perception. Thus E. behold compared with 
G. behalten. Other examples of such restricted usage are 
Gk. arevL^o) ' gaze at : ' arev^ ' stretched ' (Prellwitz) ; Lat. 
contemplor ( gaze at : ' Lith. tempiit i stretch ' (Fick, VWb. 4 , 
I, 443) ; Lith. matyti ' see : ' Lett, matit ' feel, notice/ Gk. 
parevto ' seek ' (Prellwitz) ; Skt. bddhati ' be awake : notice, 
perceive ; ' Lat. animadverto ' turn the mind to, attend to : 
see ; ' Lat. tueor ' gard : regard, look at ' (cf. Bechtel, Sinnl. 
Wahrn. 163); Typea ' guard, watch : look at intently; 7 Lat. 
sentio, percipio, etc. Words for seeing, therefore, may be as 
various in their origin as there are different ways of express- 
ing sense-perception. Examples of this character are given 
under nos. 1 to 16. Besides these there are other verbs for 
' look, see ' which describe a certain expression of countenance 
and then, by implication, mean look with such an expression. 
Examples under 17 to 20. No hard and fast line, however, 
can be drawn between these two classes. 

1. Goth, saihwan, OHG. sehan, OE. seon, ON. sjd 'see' 
are from an IE. root seq-, in regard to which opinions differ. 
We find the root seep- with four principal meanings : (1) 
'point out, show;' (2) 'see;' (3) 'say;' (4) 'follow.' I 
know of no one who connects them all. Kluge, Et. Wb. s 
s. v. sagen, connects (1) and (3), and s. v. sehen, (2) and (4). 
Brugmann, Grd., I 2 , 601, combines (1), (2), and (3). The 
old comparison between seq- 'see' and seq- 'follow' is 
doubted by Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. s. v. saihwan, and seems to be 
abandoned by Brugmann. As to the identity of these two 
roots I have not the least doubt, though I do not connect 
their meanings in the usual way. And yet the old explana- 
tion of 'see' as 'to follow with the eye' is not without 
parallel. Gk. eiro^ai is used in the sense of 'perceive with 
the intellect, understand.' In the same sense we use follow. 
Compare ' I cannot follow his arguments,' ' I cannot under- 
stand his arguments,' 'I cannot see his arguments.' We 
might therefore assume the development ' follow : ' ' under- 
stand, perceive : ' ' see.' Compare Gk. rjyeo/jiai, ' lead, guide,' 


Goth, sokjan ' seek/ Lat. sdgio ' perceive quickly.' From 
such a meaning, 'see' could easily come, as in Gk. fjuarevco 
' seek : ' Lith. matyti ' see. 7 

However, I should explain the relation between these 
roots differently. I regard 'point out, show' as the primary 
meaning of the root seq- in its various significations. The 
development was : (1) ' point out, show : ' * see; ' (2) ' show : ' 
' say ; ' (3) ' show : ' ( guide, attend, follow.' These are found 
in OChSl. so&ii ' anzeigen,' Lat. slgnum ' zeichen, token ; ' 
Goth, saihwan 'see;' Lith. sakfiti, OHG. sagen 'say,' Gk. 
v-e7rco ' say, mention,' Lat. in-sectiones ' narrations ' (with 
which compare OE. in-siht 'narrative'); Gk. eiropai, Skt. 
sdcate, Lat. sequor 'attend, follow,' socius 'attendant,' OE. 
secg ' man.' 

For similar development of meanings compare Gk. (f>pd^o) 
' point out, show ; speak, tell, declare ; notice, watch, observe, 
keep in one's eye, see ; ' Skt. digdti ' point, direct, show,' Gk. 
SeiKWfjii, ' point out, show, explain,' Lat. died ; OHG. sinnan 
' go, travel, endeavor, think,' Lat. sentio ' feel, perceive, see.' 
Such examples show plainly that there is no semasiological 
reason for dividing the root seq%- ' point out, show ; see ; say ; 

This root, which we may give as se-qo-, meaning in its 
functions as adjective, noun, and verb ' pointing, pointer, point 
out/ is perhaps a derivative of the pronominal stem so-. 
The demonstrative or deictic pronouns are eminently suitable 
to form words signifying ' point out/ ' show/ ' see/ ' say/ etc. 
If we wish to call attention to an object, how can it be more 
simply done than by saying ' there ? ' This is the explana- 
tion of Goth, sai, OHG. se, se-nu ' behold ! see ! ' from *so-id. 
(Of. Osthoff, PBB., vm, 311 ff.) Similarly to the deictic 
pronoun mo-, ono- Fick, VWb*, I, 366, refers Gk. tfv, Lat. 
en 'behold!' and to the same stem belong Gk. ovo-pa, 
Lat. no-men, Goth, na-man, etc., ' name/ and Gk. ovo-fjuat 
'blame, scorn/ etc., primarily 'point out, point at/ like G. 


bezeiehnen, anzeigen, zeihen. Cf. Prellwitz, Et. W. s. v. OVO/JLO,, 

2. Gk. elSov 'saw/ Lat, video, OChSl. videti 'see/ Goth. 
witan, -aida, ' watch, give heed to/ OHG. ga-wizen, etc., con- 
tain the IE. root ueid-, uoid-, which is also in Goth, wait, 
Gk. olSa, Skt. veda, ' know/ etc. These are further compared 
with Skt. vinddti ' find, get hold of, obtain/ to which I should 
add the Germ, verb witan 'go' in OS. gi-wltan 'go/ Hild. 18 
gi-weit ' went/ OE. ge-wltan ' go, depart, die/ To the root 
ueid- in this sense belong OHG. wlsan 'guide, lead, teach, 
show/ primarily ' cause to go/ ON. visa ' direct, show/ OHG. 
wlsa ' way, manner.' 

Now these and related words show the following develop- 
ment : ' go, go after, go to ; reach, obtain, find, get hold of, 
grasp ; comprehend, perceive, know, see.' It is evident from 
the various developed meanings of this root that ' know ' did 
not mean ' having seen/ but that ' see ' and ' know ' are both 
from the more general idea ' comprehend, perceive/ and that 
this depends on the earlier signification 'go, go to, reach.' 
In Germ, this primary meaning is especially prominent. 
Compare OS. gi-wltan 'go;' Goth, ga-weison 'go to, look 
after, visit ; ' witan (' go to ') ' pay attention to, give heed to, 
look after ; ' -weitan ( pay attention to, punish ; ' OHG. wlsan 
('cause to go') 'guide, show;' Goth, -weis 'expertus, erfahren, 
bewandert ; ' wait ' know/ cf. Goth, lais ' know/ MHG. leise 
' trace, track/ 

The root uei-d- is together with many others possibly an 
outgrowth of the root uMi- in Skt. veti 'seek, strive to get, fall 
upon/ to which perhaps also Lat. via belongs. 

3. Gk. opdco 'watch, see/ $povpd < *7rpo-opa 'a guard- 
ing' is usually referred to the root uero- 'guard' in Goth. 
war ' cautious/ OE. wcer, etc. But on account of the rough 
breathing of the Gk. words, they should rather be compared 
with Umbr. seritu 'servato/ anzeria- 'observe/ Lat. servo 
' protect, watch, observe/ from the bases sero-, seruo-. 


These then belong to the root sero- ' schiitzen ' given by 
Fick, VWb*, i, 562. On the same page Fick gives sero- 
' gehen, stromen ' and sero- ' reihen.' These three roots are 
the same as can be shown. Primarily sero- meant t go, run, 
move.' This in its transitive sense would be ' set in motion, 
move on, extend, string out.' This secondary meaning of 
sero- when transitive is found in Lat. sero ' string out, string 
together, join, combine, compose, contrive/ series ('a stringing 
together') 'row, succession, line/ sors, sor-ti-s (' a casting') 
' lot/ etc. (but not Gk. el'/o&> * string, join together/ etc.). To 
this root Goth, sariva l armor ' < pre-Germ. *soruo- has been 
referred. Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb., declares arbitrarily that this 
is impossible. I assert that it is quite possible and very 
probable. If we turn to Lat. sero we shall find, among 
others, the definitions ' join together, plait, interweave ; com- 
bine, compose, contrive, make, prepare.' Under OE. searo 
are given in Sweet, Diet, of AS., ' armor, arms, machine, 
work of skill ; device, skill, contrivance, cunning, treachery.' 
I have rearranged the definitions as given by Sweet. The 
first set represent the literal meaning of *soruo- 'a joining 
together, something put together, woven.' It is quite possi- 
ble that the armor meant was originally a woven or plaited 
shield. ON. sorve ' string of beads ' also preserves the literal 
meaning. In the second set of definitions given above the 
word is used figuratively as in Lat. sero ' contrive.' So also 
in OE. sierwan ' devise, plot, conspire.' 

As we have just seen in Lat. series how the signification 
' row, line ' arose, so we may assume the same development 
for Gk. 0/009, Dor. opFo? ' boundary, limit, frontier/ 6pia) 
1 mark out, limit, bound.' From this easily comes ' enclose/ 
whence 'protect, guard, watch, observe, see/ as in Umbr. 
seritu, Lat. servo, Gk. opdco. 

Lith. sergeti ' guard,' sdrgas ' watcher ' and sergh, slrgti i be 
sick/ primarily ' confined, shut in ' are from the base ser-go- 
(or ser-gho-), and should not be compared directly with Lat. 
servo (cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 601), and much less with Goth. 


saurga, OHG. sworga, sorga 'care/ pre-Germ. suer-qo- or 

4. Goth, gaumjan 'see, perceive, observe, attend to/ ON. 
geyma, OE. gleman ( take care of/ OHG. goumjan, goumon, 
OS. gomian ' attend to, wait on, entertain' (as host), far- 
gumon, OE. for-gieman ' not heed, neglect ' are based on ON. 
gaumr ( attention/ OHG. gouma ' close attention, entertain- 
ment, feast/ OS. goma ' feast.' (Cf. Balg, Cpv. Gloss, s. v. 

These words are not, as I have shown in Am. Germ., n, 
no. 4, to be referred to OChSl. umu ' intelligence 7 (so Johans- 
son, PBB. 15, 228), but are rather from pre-Germ. g^hu-, 
g^hou- (or perhaps g^hdu-) and are next akin to Lat. faveo, 
faustus ' protect, favor/ Lith. gausus ' abundant/ OChSl. 
goveti l revere, worship, venerate, respect/ OSorb. hovic ' be 
serviceable, favor/ (Cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 600.) 

OE. gorettan ' gaze, stare ' is possibly from the same root, 
pre-Germ. *g y 'hus-adio-. Compare Lat. faus-tus, Lith. gaus- 
us. For a different explanation see below, no. 18. 

5. OHG. spehon 'spahen/ spdhi ' discerning/ Lat. specio 
'look at, behold/ Skt. spag- ' watcher/ spastd- ' visible, plain/ 
pagyati ' behold, perceive/ Av. spasyeHi ' see/ OChSl. paziti 
'give heed to 7 (cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 725) contain a base spe-ko- 
whose primary meaning must be sought outside of the words 
given above. This base is probably derived from the root 
sepo- in Gk. eirco ' busy over/ apfa-eTra) l be busy about, wait 
on, care for, guard/ Si-eTro) 'drive about, sway/ iieO-tira) 
'attend to/ Skt. sdpati 'attend, follow, serve/ saparydti 
' serve, honor/ (Cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb.) The derived root 
spe-ko- therefore meant 'attending to, watching, guarding/ 
and hence 'watching, looking at, seeing/ Perhaps to sepo- 
belong also Goth, si/an ' rejoice ' and OE. sefa ' mind/ 

6. OE. locian, OS. lokon ' look, see ' < pre-Germ. *loqn 
(Brg., Grd., I 2 , 384), OHG. luogen 'lugen' have been com- 
pared with Skt. laksayati ' notice, perceive/ (Cf. Kluge, Et. 
Wb. s. v. lugen.) But this does not give us the primary 


meaning. For that we must look for a root leg- used in a 
concrete sense. We come one step nearer to the primary 
meaning by comparing Skt. rdksati ' ward off, protect, guard, 
watch/ Gk. aXefw ( turn away, ward off, defend/ a\a\icelv 
< ward off/ OE. ealgian ' protect. 7 (Cf. Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. 
s. v. alhs; and for this connection, author JGPh. y 11, 229.) 
The root legs- ' turn away, ward off, guard ' is undoubtedly 
from leg- 'turn aside, bend:' Gk. Xofo? ' oblique/ Xe/eo? 
'pot/ Lith. linldi 'bend/ etc. (Cf. Fick, VWb.', i, 535;) 
The development in meaning is therefore ' turn aside, ward 
off, guard, watch, behold, look.' 

7. G. gewahren, wahrnehmen ' perceive, see/ MHG. war 
nemen, OS. wara nemen 'give heed to, perceive/ MHG. warn, 
OHG. biwaron, OS. waron i give heed to, notice, guard, pro- 
vide with/ OE. warian ' guard, watch over, guard against, 
ward off/ Goth, war 'caulious/ OE. wcer, etc., contain a 
widespread Germ, root war- ' guard, watch, heed.' The same 
root is also in OE. warnian ' beware of, warn, refrain/ OHG. 
warnon l beware of, guard against, warn/ ON. varna ' refuse.' 
Of these Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v. warnen says : " Sichere Be- 
ziehungen sind noch nicht gefunden." If it is not certain 
that OHG.-waron and warnon are from the same root, then 
nothing in linguistics can be certain. It would be interesting 
to know on what semasiological principles these words are 
declared unrelated. 

The same root is also in Goth, warjan 'forbid, hinder/ OE. 
werian ' defend, ward off/ ON. verja ' protect, defend/ OS., 
OHG. werian ' hinder, defend/ Gk. epvcrOai, ' guard, watch, 
draw, hinder, save/ pvo/juai, ' protect, save/ Skt. varutdr ' pro- 
tector/ Lith. veriu ' close, open/ Av. var- ' cover, check/ Skt. 
vrndti 'cover, surround, check, defend.' Cf. Prellwitz, Et. 
Wb. s. v. epvaOau ; Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. s. v. warjan. 

To the root uero- in Goth, war are generally referred Gk. 

ou/)09 ' watcher/ opo^au ' watch.' These I admit, but not 

opdco. The root uero- did not mean primarily ' look at/ nor 

' guard/ but probably ' turn.' At least this is the significa- 



tion that is most common and the one from which the others 
are most easily derived. Now from the primary meaning 
'turn' come 'turn in, enclose ' and 'turn off, ward off, defend/ 
For this double development compare Lith. veriu l close, 
open/ and Gk. e'lpyco < *uer-go 'shut in, confine, enclose, 
bound ; shut out, drive off, hinder, abstain from/ Lat. vergo 
' turn, bend/ Skt. vrj- ' turn, twist off, turn aside, avoid, leave 
out, exclude/ So throughout the simple root uero- we find 
regularly developed meanings from ' turn in ' or ' turn away/ 
From which of these a particular meaning may come it is not 
always possible to say. Thus ' guard ' may mean primarily 
' enclose, surround ' or ' ward off, defend/ So ' forbid/ 
( hinder/ ' check 9 are capable of a double explanation. 

From uero- ' turn ' come the following : Goth, wardja 
'watchman/ OHG. warto, etc., from 'turn in, enclose, guard;' 
OE. wor]> ' enclosure, courtyard, farm/ OS. wur% ' boden/ 
OE. wryndan ' found ? (a house) ; Goth, wairdus ' wirt/ per- 
haps in the sense of 'holder, possessor/ cf. OE. warian 
'guard, inhabit, possess; 7 Lat. verto 'turn/ Goth. wair]>an 
' werden/ base uer-to-; Goth, wairpan ' werfen/ base uer-bo- 
' turn, twist, throw ' (cf. OE. ]>rdwan ' twist : ? E. throw), 
OE. wyrp ' recovery ' (' return, turn for the better/ cf. Gk. 
vkoiiai ' return : ' Goth, ganisan ' recover '), cf. Lat. verb-era 
'blows/ Lith. virbas 'rod, twig/ virblnis 'snare/ Gk. pdpbos 
' sprout, rod ' (Prellwitz, EL Wb.) ; OE. weorc ' pain, grief, 
work/ OHG. werlc y Gk. epyov 'work/ etc., base uer-go- 'turn, 
twist, writhe, suffer, work/ also in OE. wcerc ' pain ; ' ON. 
ver 'sea/ ur 'dampness/ OE. wcer, ear 'sea/ Skt. vdr 'water/ 
Gk. ovpew, etc. (cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb.\ base u%ro- ' turn, roll, 
flow/ from which uer-go- in Gk ; opyds ' well-watered spot, 
teeming, fertile/ 0/9777 'passion, anger/ oprydco 'swell with 
moisture, be excited ; ' Lith. vlrli, OChSl. variti ' cook/ varu 
' heat/ to which perhaps belong OHG. warm, etc. (Bezzen- 
berger, BE. \ 6, 257), closely connected with ON. ver ' sea/ 
etc. (cf. OE. weattan 'boil, be hot, flow, go in waves, be 
agitated'); Goth, waurts 'root/ OE. wyrt 'wort/ etc., base 


uer-do- 'turn, roll, swell, grow' (cf. Goth, walus 'staff:' 
-walwjan ' roll,' and Gk. pd/38o<? ' shoot, rod : ' Goth, wairpan 
' throw,' E. warp, etc. v. supra) ; Goth, wrtyus, OE. wroty 
/herd,' Skt. vrdta-, vrd ' troop,' uero- 'turn, confine,' with 
which compare Skt. vrdjd- ' troop, band,' vrajd- 'troop, band; 
fold, stall,' vrjdna- 'enclosure; community, people,' vdrutha- 
' protection; herd, troop.' So E. band 'something to bind 
with,' and ' company, troop.' 

To uero- 'turn, twist,' whence 'fasten, bind, tie,' etc., I 
should refer Gk. elpco 'tie, bind, fasten together,' ep/j,evo$ 
' bound.' These are usually compared with Lat. sero (v. 
supra), but phonetically they are more easily explained as 
here given, and in meaning cause no difficulty. Compare 
OE. wrfyan ' twist : bind ; ' Gk. \vyifa l bend, twist : ' OE. 
lucan .' interlace, join together, close, shut.' That elpw and 
sero are synonymous is no evidence whatever that they are 
cognate unless it can be shown that etpco is from *serio, which 
I do not believe. If then elpco 'join' is from *uerio, it is 
phonetically identical with eipw ' speak.' For this root uero-, 
which is also in Lat. verbum, Goth, waurd 'word,' Lith. 
vardas 'name,' etc., we may therefore assume the develop- 
ment ' turn, twist, join together, converse, speak.' (Compare 
Lat. sero 'join together:' sermo 'speech.') The root uero- 
'join together, agree, speak,' is also in Gk. prj-rpd 'agree- 
ment,' Cypr. Fprj-rd, and in Gk. elptf-vrj 'peace' (Prellwitz, 
Et. Wb.) if this is from *euere-nd. With this uero-, ure- of 
the Gk. compare the uer- of the Germ, in OE. woer 'agree- 
ment, treaty, promise, faith, fidelity, friendship.' This is, of 
course, the same as OE. wcer 'true,' OHG., OS. war, Olr. 
fir, Lat. verus ' true,' OChSl. vera ' faith,' Goth, tuz-werjan 
' doubt,' OHG. wdrjan ' verify,' etc., Goth, un-werjan ' be 
displeased,' primarily 'disagree,' un-werei 'indignation' ('dis- 
agreement'). With the above explanation of the IE. uero- 
' joining together, agreeing, faithful, true,' the "auffallende 
bedeutungsentwickelung " of Goth. *unwers (Uhlenbeok, Et. 
Wb.) is entirely cleared up. Uhlenbeck and Kluge should 


also have given in their EL Wbb. ON. vcerr ' gentle, friendly ' 
(' agreeing, agreeable'), of which Goth. *unwers is the nega- 
tive. Cf. Balg, Cpv. Gloss, s. v. *wers. 

The natural conclusion from the above comparisons is that 
the roots uero-, uer-to-, uer-do-, uer-dho-, uer-go-, etc., in all 
of which the primary meaning ' turn ' can be traced, are one 
in origin. From uero-, ure- are also formed, with the 
suffixes -io- and uo-, the roots ure-io-, uri-; ure-uo-, uru-. 
These are the bases of other formations, as ur<!i-to-, ur^i-do-, 
etc. Hence it is possible, indeed probable, that all IE. roots 
beginning with uero- or an ablaut thereof are derivatives of 
the root uero- ' turn.' Of course I do 'not include analogical 
formations or later sporadic words. By sporadic words I 
mean words that are composed of sound-elements which, from 
association, express a certain idea. Common speech is -full of 
such words, and from time to time some of them become a 
part of the language. (Cf. Bloomfield, AJP. 16, 409 ff.) 
But aside from such formations I believe we are justified in 
assuming that " words of the same phonetic composition are 
presumably cognate/' and that it is the form and not the 
meaning that should decide whether or not words are related. 
For it is certain that the meaning of a root is not an inherent 
and inseparable part of it. Indeed it is impossible to fix the 
original meaning of a root. The most that can be done is to 
establish the common idea from which the various significa- 
tions have diverged. But the starting point no, that is lost 
in the darkness of the past. When, therefore, I speak of the 
original or primary signification of the root uero-, I mean 
only the common idea from which the various meanings have 
sprung. But this common idea, loosely expressing a certain 
thought, may be the generalization of a particular term. And 
this process may be repeated again and again. Thus G. 
schenken ' give, present ' is a generalization of ' give to drink, 
pour out ; ' and ' pour out ' is a generalization of f pour from 
cup ' (OE. scene ' cup/ etc.) ; and this word for ' cup ' is a 
generalization from some other term descriptive of a hollow 


bone or shell, pre-Germ. *skongio- or skonqhnio-, Lat. congius 
f measure for liquids/ Skt. $ankhd-s ' shell/ etc. Cf. author, 
Am. Germ., n, no. 4. Hence it follows that we must rely 
upon the phonetic composition of a word to determine . its 
derivation, not upon its meaning. But the various meanings 
are important in enabling us to find out the common point of 
divergence ; and the greater the variety, the more easily is 
this point found. 

Now a root of the form ureito- is so evidently the result of 
repeated composition, and words of this type are so easily 
derived from a simpler root uero-, that it is hard to escape 
from the conviction that the root-form uero- is the base of 
the others. Hence OE. wrfyan ' twist, bind' as well as 
wridan, wrfyan 'grow' (that is 'turn, become, change, grow'), 
pre-Germ. urei-to- <[ ure-io | to-, are from the simple root 
uero-, just as Lat. vertd is from uer-to-. In each case the 
derivative becomes the base of new formations. 

If etymologists would follow the method here indicated, 
they would be surprised at the ease with which words may 
be traced. And this ease is not secured at the cost of dis- 
regarding phonetic laws or of violating the principles of 
psychology. I venture to say that, if the exact phonetic 
composition of a word is known, there will be little left to 
explain. For example G. reiben from the Germ, root wrib-, 
which Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 , says has not been found, is probably 
from a pre-Germ. base url-po-, and may be compared with 
Gk. piTTTO) ' throw.' Both are easily explained from the 
primary meaning ' turn.' For ' turn : ' ' throw ' compare G. 
drehen: E. throw; Lat. torqueo 'turn, twist:' 'hurl, throw/ 
etc. The meaning 'turn, twist, plait' is implied in pty, 
/ot7r-o9 ' wicker-work, mat/ /6t7ro9 ' mat, wicker-hurdle/ and 
various secondary meanings in plirri 'swing, rush, whir, 
twinkling light' (of stars), etc. With these compare OHG. 
(w)riban, MHG. riben * turn, rub (so still in Bav. reiben 
'reiben, wenden, drehen'), dance (whirl, toss about), be las- 
civious,' ODu., MLG. wrlven 'rub/ ON. rlfa 'tear/ E. rive. 


Here we have the development ' turn, move back and forth, 
rub, scratch, tear.' (Compare tero-, ire- 'turn, rub, bore/ 
Kluge, Et. Wb. 6 s. v. drehen.) 

The base url- in Gk. pl-Tros (gen.), etc., is found in many 
other derivatives with similar meanings or at least with such 
as are derivable from ' turn/ Thus : Gk. pl-wrj ' file/ pl-vb-s 
'hide/ OHG. rlzan Hear, wound, write/ OE. wfitan 'engrave, 
write 7 (Brugmann, Grd., II, 1052), with which compare OE. 
wrfett < *wraitjo- ' ornament, work of art ; ' Gk. poi-ico-s 
'crooked/ pi/cvos 'bent, crooked/ cf. ME. wrie 'twist/ E. 
wry, OE. wrigian ' strive, tend toward/ and also OHG. 
-rihan, OE. wreon ' wrap up, cover ; ' Goth, wraiqs, Gk. 
pcu/36<; 'crooked/ from *ur2i-g%6-s y etc. For further possi- 
bilities in analyzing the root u$-ro-, cf. Persson, Wz. 66, and 
the author, Jour. Germ. Phil, I, 302 ff. 

8. OE. wMan, ON. fata 'look/ leita 'look for, search/ 
OE. wldlian ' look, gaze/ Goth, wlaiton ' look round about ' 
from the Germ, base wHt-, which is also in Goth, wlits ' face/ 
OE. wlite 'brightness, beauty, form/ OS. wliti, etc., I have 
elsewhere compared with Gk. l\\i%w ' look awry, look askance, 
leer' from *ui-ulidio (JQ-Ph., I, 303). The base ulld- is 
extended from uelo-, ul- ' turn ' with the suffix -id-, as in 
Gk. tyiS-, amS-, etc. (Cf. Brg., Grd., n, 383.) The base 
of iXXifs) is seen in l\\is, tXXt'S-o?, the fern, of tXXo? 'squint- 
ing ' < *ui-ulo-, from which l\\alvw ' squint/ 

The development of meaning in Greek is ' turn, look aside, 
squint;' in Germ., 'turn, look around, look at, look/ from 
which ' looks, appearance, beauty/ etc. The verbal ablaut in 
Germ, is a growth from the basal form ulid- as it is seen 
in Germ, wliti- ' appearance/ For the meaning we may com- 
pare Lat. vol-tus 'appearance/ which may likewise be derived 
from the root uelo- ' turn/ 

The root uelo- is given by Fick, VWb. 4 , I, 551, as five 
distinct roots. These, however, are easily combined under 
one. To enumerate them as given by Fick, they are : (1) 
uelo- 'wahlen, wollen/ primarily 'turn toward, look for;' 


(2) uelo ' drehen, wenden, umhiillen, umringen ; ' (3) uelo- 
' wallen ' = ( turn, roll, boil, bubble ; ' (4) uelo- ' drangen, 
zusammendrangen, versammeln,' another development of (2), 
'drehen, zusammendrehen, zusammendrangen;' (5) uelo- 'be- 
triigen ' = ' verdrehen, distort, pervert.' So we may refer 
every word containing the root uelo- to this one root. Cf. 
author, JGPh., I, 302 f. 

9. OE. be-sclelan < -*sceolhjan ' look at,' MHG. schilhen, 
schilen ( schielen : ' OE. sceolh ( wry, oblique,' OHG. scelah 
' crooked, oblique, squinting,' ON. skjalgr ' sloping, squint- 
ing' contain a pre-Germ. base skel-q^o- or sqel-q^o- which 
Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 , s. v. scheel, compares, through a root skel-, 
with Gk. <TKO\IO<; ' crooked, bent.' 

This root skel- or rather sqelo- I take to be identical with 
sqelo- 'cut, divide, separate' in ON. skilja ' split, separate,' 
Lith. skeliit ' split,' Gk. o-rcd\\a) ' stir up, hoe.' The develop- 
ment in meaning is simple : l cut, divide, separate, make 
slanting or crooked.' Likewise to the root sqero- ' cut, sepa- 
rate' in OHG. sceran ' shear, cut off,' Lith. skiriu 'cut, 
separate,' etc., we may refer Lith. skersa-s f oblique, squinting,' 
Gk. eTTi-fcdpo-ios l crosswise, athwart.' (Brg., Grd., I 2 , 581.) 

10. Gk. Sei/-8tXXft) < -*dilip 'turn the eyes about, glance 
at, make a sign to ' contains a base di-lo- ' turning, whirling, 
hastening,' which is also in OLG. tilon, OHG. zilon ' hasten,' 
OE. tilian ' strive after, intend, attempt, obtain,' OS. tilian 
'erzielen,' Goth, and-tilon ' cleave to' = ' turn to,' ga-tils 
' fitting,' OE. til ' fitting, good, gentle,' Olr. dil ' agreeable' 
(which Uhlenbeck strangely enough disallows), ON., OE. til 
'to' = ' turned toward' (cf. Goth, -walrus '-ward,' Lat. versus 
1 toward,' root uert- ' turn '), OHG. zlla ' line, row ' = ' a 
turning,' cf. Lat. versus 'line, row.' These are referred to 
a root dl- (cf. Kluge, Uhlenbeck, EL Wbb.) in OE. tima 
1 fitting time, season, time,' ON. fame, OE. tid ' fitting time, 
time,' OS. fid, OHG. zlt 'zeit,' Skt. d-diti ' unending ' = 
1 unturning, interminis.' 


This root dl- must have meant 'turn, whirl: hasten. 7 The 
ideas expressed by ' whirl ' and ' hasten ' are closely related. 
So E. whirl l turn rapidly, rotate : move hastily ; ' OHG. 
dweran ' whirl : ' Skt. tvdrate i hasten. 7 We may, therefore, 
compare Gk. Sivy, Sivo? 'vortex, whirlpool, eddy/ Blvevm, 
Slveco 'whirl, spin round, drive; wander/ Slvoco 'turn with a 
lathe, round/ Siefjuai 'hasten/ Skt. dlyate 'soar, fly. 7 Cf. 
Prellwitz, Et. Wb. To this group we may add Goth, tains 
' twig, branch/ ON. teinn ' twig, spindle/ OE. tan ' twig, 
branch/ OHG., MHG. zein 'rod, reed, arrow/ pre-Germ. 
*doi-no- ' twisting, twisted/ hence, like OE. wfyig ' withe, 
withy/ a flexible twig, vine, sprout. From *doino- came 
*doinid- ' made of withes/ Goth, tainjo ' basket/ &c. Here 
also OHG. zeinen, zeinon 'point out/ either directly from 
the meaning ' turn toward ' or else primarily by divination. 
Compare OE. tan 'twig used in casting lots/ tdn-htyta 
'diviner. 7 More directly connected in meaning are OHG. 
zeinnan 'einen zein (metal Istabchen) machen/ MHG. 'beat 
out (zeiri), plait/ ON. teina 'in fila ducere. 7 

From 'turn 7 also come 'rub, scratch, comb' and 'rub, 
caress. 7 (Cf. tero- ' turn : 7 ' rub. 7 ) Here belong OHG. zeiz 
' tender, gentle/ ON. teitr, OE. -tat ' cheerful, pleased/ tcbtan 
'caress/ primarily 'rub/ base *doido-; and OE. tcesan 'card, 
comb (wool), pull to pieces, wound, soothe 7 (once), OHG. 
zeisan 'quarrel, card/ OE. ge-tcese 'pleasant, convenient.' 
Germ, taisa- is perhaps from *taissa- < *doid-to-. The base 
*doido- probably arose by reduplication and may be also in 
Gk. SoiB-vf ' pestle 7 = ' rubber, crusher. 7 

The root dl- appears in the sense ' radiate, beam, shine/ 
and is undoubtedly the same as dl- 'whirl, move rapidly.' 
(Cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. BU/uu and Searat.) Here we 
may give OE. tlr, OS. tir, ON. tlrr ' glory, honor 7 < *dei-ro-, 
OHG. zenri, ziari ' splendid, beautiful/ ziarl ' splendor, beauty, 
ornament 7 < *dei-rio- ) perhaps Lith. dai-ltis ' beautiful ; ' 
Skt. dide-ti 'gleam, shine; 7 OE. fiber 'sacrifice, offering/ 
OHG. zebar 'opfertier/ MHG. ungezibere 'ungeziefer/ base 


*dlp-r6- i burnt offering, animal for sacrifice:' Skt. dlpra- 
1 flaming/ dlpyate 'flame, blaze, burn/ with which compare 
also Gk. Stya ' thirst/ Styios 'parched, dry, thirsty/ Si^dco 
' be parched, thirsty.' 

Gk. Sev-Si\\co is especially interesting in its formation as 
it is composed of two synonymous roots de-no \- di-lo-. 
We have seen that dl-lo- is a derivative of dl-, that is d<$-io. 
It is therefore among the possibilities that de-io- and de-no- 
go back to a common root de-. (So explained by Prellwitz, 
Et. Wb. Soveco.) The root dgno- is seen in Gk. Severn ' shake, 
agitate, stir/ Sovag 'reed, arrow' (compare Gk. Slveco 'whirl:' 
Goth, tains ' twig '), a\i- Sovos ' sea-tossed/ and perhaps in 
the first syllable of Sev-Spov 'tree.' Gk. 8ev-Si\\a> and 
Sev-Spov are types of compounds that are formed from 
synonymous roots. This may explain some cases of irregular 
reduplication. Compare Gk. Svo-7ra\i%(o 'swing, fling about' 
with Sove(D ' shake ' and vraXXw ' shake, brandish ; ' Sap- 
SaTTTO) 'devour' with Sepco 'flay' and Sdirra) 'rend.' For 
other examples see Persson, Wz. 21 6. 1 

11. Lith. regeti 'perceive, look at' is compared by Bechtel, 
Sinnl. Wahrn. 158, with the Germ, root rak-, rok- 'attend 
to, care for/ in OE. reecan ' care for, reck/ MHG. ruochen, 
OHG. ruochan 'direct attention to, care for, care, desire/ OS. 
rokjan, ON. rcekja ' care for.' This comparison, ignored by 
Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v. geruhen, is unimpeachable, for it shows 
the quite common development ' turn attention to, give heed 
to:' 'look at, see.' But 'turn attention to' is not the primary 
meaning, since no expression denoting a mental emotion can 
be original as such. 

For this root rego-, therefore, I assume the primary mean- 
ing ' stretch out.' We have then the natural development : 
' stretch out, give attention to/ from which ' see ' or ' desire.' 
Compare from the root r$go-, which is undoubtedly related 
and to which the Germ, forms could also go back, Gk. opeyco 
' stretch/ ope/cro? ' stretched out : longed for, desired ; ' G. 
langen: verlangen. Besides r%-go- and re-go- occurs r<l-qo- 


for which the same primary meaning may be assumed. These 
may all be referred to the primitive root ero-, re- 'go, move, 
extend/ Compare OHG. rdmen ' aim at, have one's eye on/ 
OS. romon, same, MHG. ram 'aim, object/ OE. romian 
'possess' (i. e., 'er-langen, er-zielen'); Lat. re-rl 'reckon/ 
Goth, -re-dan 'reflect upon, counsel/ etc. (Brg., Grd., II, 

The various significations of the root ero-, re- developed, in 
part, as follows: (1) 'go, move:' ON. arna 'go, run/ Gk. 
opvvjjLiy Lat. orior ' rise/ OE. recan ' go, rush ; ' (2) ' move, 
separate, tear apart : ' Lith. Ir-ti ' separate/ ro-nd ' wound/ 
OChSl. oriti 'separate, destroy/ ra-na 'wound;' Skt. dr-da-ti 
'move away, separate/ arddyati 'shatter, injure;' (3) 'go 
forward, move forward, stretch out, direct : ' Gk. ope-yco 
'stretch/ Lat. rego 'direct;' (4) 'go for, aim at, attack, 
assail : ' Gk. opeya) ' attack/ OE. reccan ' reprove ; ' ON. rjd 
< *re-io- 'abuse/ Lith. re-ti 'shout;' rekti 'cry out;' Gk. 
e/^-9, e/M-8-09 'strife/ epet-So) 'thrust, press upon/ from 
which ' prop up, support ' (so Lith. remti ' support ') ; (5) 
' stretch out, reach, get : ' OE. romian ' possess ; ' Goth, rikan 
'collect/ OE. racu 'rake;' (6) 'stretch toward, aim at:' 
OHO. rdmen; (7) 'stretch toward, desire, enjoy:' Gk. 
epafjuai 'desire, love/ epacr-rb-^ 'lovely, pleasant/ epav-vbs, 
same, from epaa-vos, OHG. rasta 'rest, stage/ Goth, rasta 
' stage/ razn ' house ' < *(e)ras-n6 = Gk. epav-vbs, -ov, while 
rasta < *(e)rdsta- = epacrro?, -?;, erd-s- being an extension of 
ero-, re- in Gk. epcorj, OHG. rdwa 'rest/ from which also 
re-mo- in Goth, rimis 'rest/ Lith. rlmti 'be quiet/ Skt. 
rdmate 'stand still, rest;' (8) 'aim at, give heed to, con- 
sider : ' Lat. reor. 

These are only a few of the numberless derived meanings 
that may spring from the simple root ero-. The numbers 
given do not indicate relative time of development but 
simply diverging lines. These were often simultaneous, 
the same root branching into various distinct uses. Thus the 
base re-mo- produced (1) MHG. ramme 'pile-driver/ ram, 


OE. ramm ' ram/ ON. rammr ' strong ' (Kluge, EL Wb. 5 s. v. 
Ramme), base rem- ' thrust, strike; 7 (2) Lith. remti ' support/ 
Olr. forimim ' lay, set ' (given by Uhlenbeck, s. v. rimis), cf. 
OHG. rama ' prop/ MHG. rame, ram ' prop, support, frame ' 
(cf. Gk. epeiSco thrust, strike, set against, prop up, sup- 
port) ; (3) OE. rima ' border, rim/ rand < *rom-ta- ' border ' 
(properly ( support, frame ') ; (4) OHG. rdmen ( aim at : ' (5) 
OE. romian (' reach ') ( possess ; ' (6) Skt. rdmate l rest, take 
pleasure/ Goth, rimis ' rest/ 

12. Skt. ciketi ' look, investigate, notice, observe/ root 
q^$i- 9 cetati 'look at, observe, consider, be intent upon, under- 
stand, know/ root q^ei-to-, OChSl. Ua ' count, reckon/ Olr. 
ciall ( understanding/ Welsh pwytt Census, prudential Brug- 
mann, Grd., I 2 , 605. 

It will certainly be admitted that the root q^ei- in the 
above group does not appear in its original meaning. We 
find a phonetically identical root in Skt. ci-noti ' arrange in 
order, pile up, build ; collect, get possession of/ kaya-s 
1 body/ OChSl. inti ' arrangement/ Serb. in ' form/ tiiniti 
' make/ Gk. iroiea* ' make' (cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 589 ; Prellwitz, 
Et. Wb. s. v. TToieco) ; and in Skt. cdyate ' avenge, punish/ 
dpa-citis ' recompense/ Gk. rlo-is ' atonement, penalty/ nroivri 
' price, fine, ransom, penalty/ rivco, rlvco i requite, recompense/ 
rico ' esteem, honor/ rlfjurj ' worth, honor/ Av. kaena i punish- 
ment/ Lith. pus-kainiu i at half price/ OChSl. cena ' price/ 
Brg., Grd., I 2 , 588 f., 592 ; Prellwitz, Et. Wb. 

These three groups are as closely related in meaning as in 
phonetics, the second group given above preserving the root 
in the most primitive sense : ' arrange in order.' From this 
developed ' count, calculate, consider, observe, look at ; ' and 
' count, pay, requite, make atonement.' 

Here, too, I should add the root qei-, q^ie- in Goth, hweila 
' while/ Lat. quies, quietus, tran-quilus, Skt. Gird- ' lasting, 
long/ OChSl. po-tfti 'rest/ etc. (Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. s. v. 
hweila, hweilari). The growth in meaning is : ' arrange in 
order, continue, remain, rest.' 


To qei- we may refer Lat. quaero < *q2i-so ' look into, 
investigate, seek for, desire, want, need.' These meanings 
are closely connected with those of Skt. ciketi, and also 
explain those of Lat. cura ' attention, care/ Paeligu. coisatens 
1 curaverunt,' base *q*oisa. (Cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 185.) With 
this compare Goth, us-haista ' very needy, in great want,' 
base *qois-to- ( seeking, desiring, wanting, needing.' This 
is the same derived meaning as in Lat. quaero ' want, need,' 
curiosus ' wasted, emaciated, lean,' with which compare OHG. 
Am, MHG. heisj heiser ' weak, faulty, rough, hoarse.' 

For other Germ, words that have been referred to q^ei- cf. 
Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb. s. v. haidus; Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v. heiter. 
From these we must separate Goth, heito ' fever' on account 
of the lack of labialization, and consequently ON. heitr i hot,' 
OE. hat, etc. But we may refer to this root Goth, haims 
( village,' OE. ham ' home,' Lith. kmas ' yard, farm.' Pri- 
marily *qoimo- may have meant ' watched, guarded.' 
Compare, for this explanation, Lith. kaimene 'herd' < *qoi- 
mend- ' watched/ From the primary meaning i guarded, 
kept ' may come MHG. geheim, heimelich. Notice also 
MHG. heim-garte ' eingefriedigter garten.' From i guarded, 
kept' could also develop ' cherished, loved. These may all 
be reduced to the root qei~. 

13. Gk. Sep/co/jbcu ' perceive, behold, see,' Skt. daddrga 
'have seen,' dr$ ' seeing,' Goth, ga-tarhjan 'mark out,' OE. 
torht ' bright, famous,' OHG. zoraht, etc., contain a root 
der-k-, which may be compared with der-p- in Gk. fywTrafor 
eyu-ySXeTTO), $p(t)7TT(0' SiafcoTTTO) r) SiacrKOTTW, OHG. zorft 
'bright, clear,' zorfii, zorftel 'brightness.' Cf. Persson, Wz. 11. 

These are evidently derivatives of the root der- ' separate, 
tear,' as explained by Bechtel, SW. 165. But they are 
probably not from the signification ' separate,' although that 
might easily yield ' understand, distinguish, unterscheiden,' 
and then 'see.' The primary meaning I take rather to be 
'grasp, comprehend, perceive, behold,' and this comes from 
'break off, tear, pluck.' For this development of meaning 


compare Lith. kerpti ' shear :' Lat. carpo 'gather, seize/ base 
qer-p- ' cut. 7 

We may therefore connect Gk. SpaiTrd^co ' behold, look at ' 
with SpeTTco i gather, pluck.' The two meanings are as closely 
allied as hold: behold; percipio l seize, gather:' perceive/ 
and certainly S/HWTTT&V SiatcoTTTO) is the same as SpcoTrrco' 
Siacr/coTra). From the base dre-p-, der-p- ' pluck, gather ' 
come Gk. SopTrov, 0/971-09, SopTrnj ' supper ' (cf. Prellwitz). 
Compare Lat. carpo ' gather : ' l devour ; ' and MHG. zern 
1 verzehren/ MLG. teren ' verzehren, mahlzeit halten/ etc. 
Or S6p7rov may be from *dor-q#o-, cf. Alb. darke ' supper/ 
Brg., Qrd., i 2 , 620. 

In like manner Gk. &epico/j,ai i behold/ Spotcrd^ew irepi- 
(cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 431) may be compared with Gk. 
' grasp, seize/ 8paf, Spatc-os ' hand, handful/ base 
der-k-, and with Skt. drhyati ' be firm/ Lith. dirsztu ' become 
tough/ Gk. Spaxpr) ' drachma/ OHG. zarga ^rirn, shield/ 
etc., base der-gh-. Cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 463 ; Prellwitz, Et. 
Wb.; Schade, Wb. With these compare der-gh- in OE. 
tiergan l irritate, annoy/ G. zergen, Russ. dergatt i tear.' 
Persson, Wz. 26. 

A base der-bh- i pluck, cut ' may be assumed for Skt. 
darbhd- 'grass-tuft,' ON., LG. tarf, OE. turf, OHG. zurba 
' turf/ An other base der-bh- with the intransitive meaning 
' go rapidly, whirl ' is found in OHG. zerben ' turn, whirl/ 
OE. tearflian ' turn, roll/ MHG. zirben ' whirl/ zirbilwint 
' whirlwind/ Lith. drebeti, Lett, drebet ' tremble/ Cf. Schade, 
Wb. s. v. zarbjan. 

The meaning whirl probably comes from ' go rapidly back 
and forth/ and such a meaning we find in the simple root 
der-. Compare MG. zarren 'reissend hin und her ziehen, 
zerren/ which is the active of 'go back and forth/ Here 
then belong the roots drd-, dru-, drem- ' flee, run/ which are 
simply intransitive uses of the root der- ' separate, burst 
apart, draw away/ Semasiologically there is no reason for 
separating Skt. dar- ' bersten, zerstieben, zerspreugen ' from 


drd- ' springen, laufen/ From ( spring ' develops the inten- 
sive ' spring about, tremble.' This occurs in Skt. dari- 
drd-ti ' run about, run hither and thither/ and, from the 
same root drd-, in Gk. SiSpdcrtcco 'run. 7 With the Gk. 
SiSpd- compare the Germ, titro- in OHG. zittaron ' tremble/ 
ON. titra ' shake, twinkle/ E. teeter ' auf und nieder schau- 
keln/ Prov. E. titter ' seesaw, tremble/ E.. titter ' giggle, 
tremble with suppressed laughter/ For this interchange of 
meaning compare OS. thrimman ' spring, hop : ' Lat. tremo 
' tremble ; ' Gk. rpea ' flee : ' ' tremble/ For other deriva- 
tives of the root der- ' spring, run/ cf. Kluge, Et. Wb. s. v. 
treten. These, however, may represent the development 
' draw off : ' l go/ as in G. ziehen or OE. dragan l draw : ' 
' go/ This is certainly the case in MHG. trechen ' draw/ 
Du. trekken ' draw, travel, march/ E. track. With Goth. 
trudan ' tread/ OHG. tretan, etc., compare MHG. tratz, 
trotz 'trotz 7 < pre-Germ. *drotn6-, *drtno- ' trampling upon, 
zertretung/ and MG. trotz ( confidence ' = ' a stepping on, 
relying on/ 

From der- ' tear off' comes ' hold/ as in Gk. SpeTrco f tear 
off, pluck, seize, grasp/ From the sense ' hold ' develops the 
signification of the base dreu-, drU- i holding firm, steadfast, 
strong, true : ? Gk. Spoov ' firm/ Goth, trauan ' trust/ trausti 
* covenant/ triggws ' true/ etc., OE. trum ' firm, strong, stead- 
fast, healthy/ ge-trum, truma ' a force, troop/ etc. Whether 
Prus. druwis ' belief/ OChSl. su-dravU ' strong, sound ; belong 
here is doubtful, since they may just as well be compared 
with Skt. dhruvd- ' firm, steadfast, trustworthy/ from the 
root dher- ' hold/ But to compare Skt. dhruvd- with Goth. 
triggws (as is done by Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb.) is entirely out of 
the question. For similarity of meaning is absolutely no 
ground for connecting words, since any given meaning might 
arise in a hundred different ways. If we combine Skt. 
dhruvd- with Goth, triggws because they are synonymous, 
then by all means let us add OE. ]>rymm ' strength, might/ 
l strength, might, troop/ and we shall have the dental 


series complete in tru-, dru-, dhru- ' strong/ We shall then 
have reached a point where the phonetic laws will cause no 
more difficulty. Any comparison will be possible if only the 
words are synonymous. 

Another outgrowth of the meaning ' hold ' is f hold back, 
delay, aufhalten, sich aufhalten/ hence 'rest, sleep/ This 
occurs in Skt. . drdti, Gk. SapOdva), Lat. dormid, OChSl. 
dremati ( sleep/ Compare Gk. e\i,vva) ' rest, keep holiday : 
sleep/ Of the same origin is the Germ, base tr3-ga-, pre- 
Germ. *dre-gho- or *dr%-k6-, ' holding back, slow, sluggish ; 
held back, oppressed, grieved : ' Goth, trigo ' reluctance, 
grudge, sorrow/ ON. tregr ' reluctant, slow/ tregi 'pain/ 
trega * grieve/ OE. trega, trdg l affliction/ OHG. trdgi ' trage/ 
etc. With these compare OE. tiergan 'afflict, annoy/ Du. 
tergen ' zerren/ Russ. dergati ' tear, annoy/ G. zergen, Kluge, 
Et. Wb. 6 Notice also OE. torn 'anger, indignation, grief/ 
OHG. zorn, etc., perhaps from pre-Germ. *drno-, root der-, 
as usually explained. But this does not mean ' zerrissenheit 
des gemiites/ A primitive race would describe mental emo- 
tion from its outward effects as seen or heard, not as felt. 
Compare the similar meanings in OChSl. lupiti, Lith. Itipti 
'peel, strip off:' Gk. \VTTTJ 'grief, pain/ \v7rea) 'distress, 
annoy, grieve ; ' Gk. \vyi^a) ' bend, twist, writhe, suffer/ 
Lith. Ifaztu 'break/ Lat. lugeo 'mourn/ Gk. Xu^aXeo? 'sad, 
wretched/ Lat. luctor 'struggle/ luclans 'struggling, reluc- 
tant/ (Cf. Prellwitz,^.TT6.) Perhaps OE. trceglian < pluck/ 
E. trail are genuine Germ. (cf. Kluge, Et. Wb. 5 s. v. treideln). 
In that case they may belong to Goth, trigo, etc. 

From der- ' tear away, spring forth y comes dre-so- ' sprinkle : ' 
Gk. Spocros 'dew/ Goth, ufar-trusnjan 'besprinkle/ ON. tros 
'abfall/ Lett, di'rst 'cacare/ di'rsa 'buttocks/ ( Prell- 
witz, Et. Wb. s. v. Spocro?.) Compare E. spring: sprinkle; 
G. zersprengen : besprengen ; OE. scddan ' separate, scatter, 
sprinkle, shed (blood), fall/ 

In this manner every IE. root der-, der-k-, der-p-, etc., 
may be shown to be one in origin. And certainly the changes 


in meaning assumed are natural and easy. To the words 
above given we may add : MHG. tropfe ' simpleton/ pre- 
Germ. *drpn6~: Skt. darpa- ' wild ness/ drpyati 'be crazed, 
wild/ base der-po- ' tear about/ which is really the same as 
Gk. Spe7r&> 'tear off;' OHG. zart 'tender, weak, soft, be- 
loved ; 7 l tenderness, fineness, caress, love/ zerten ' caress 7 
pre-Germ. base dor-t6- ' scratched, rubbed, caressed, made 
tender/ for meaning compare Gk. reipco, Lat. tero ' rub : 7 
Gk. repnv 'soft, delicate 7 (cf. Schade, Wb.). 

14. OHG. scouwon 'sehen, schauen, betrachten/ OE. 
sceawian i see, scrutinize, regard, select, provide/ Goth. 
us-skaus ' prudent/ skauns ' well-formed, beautiful/ OHG. 
scuwo 'shade/ scuchar 'mirror/ etc., from the Germ, root 
sku-, skau-, pre-Germ. sqouo- in Gk. Ovo-cr/coos ' priest/ /coea) 
' mark, hear 7 (with which compare qou-s- in Gk. a-/cova), 
Goth, hausjan 'hear 7 ), Skt. kavi- 'sage/ d-kuvate 'intend/ 
Lith. kavdti ' guard against/ OChSl. #uti ' feel, perceive/ Lat. 
caved, etc. (Cf. Kluge, Prellwitz, Uhlenbeck, Et. Wbb.) 

This root squ-, sqouo I regard as a derivative of seqo-, sqe- 
' cut. 7 From this develops ' mark, notice, perceive, hear, 
see/ etc. In this way the various significations are easily 
explained. Thus OE. sceawian ' regard (with favor), select, 
scrutinize 7 = 'mark, mark out; 7 Goth, skauns ' well- formed 7 
= ' cut out, shaped, shapely ; 7 MHG. schone ' schon 7 = 
' shaped, prepared, ready ; 7 Gk. KOCCD ' mark 7 needs no expla- 
nation. ' Cut, prepare 7 explains the following, which may 
be added to the above : Gk. cr/ceOo? ' tools, trappings, rustungj 
a/cevri ' apparatus, equipment, dress/ cr/cevdco ' prepare, dress, 
equip, supply. 7 Observe also that Lat. caved (which I should 
explain as *<pw- not qdu-, as done by Brugmann, Grd., I 2 , 
155) meags ' ward off 7 = ' strike, cut 7 in adversos ictus cavere 
ac propulsare, alicui cavere, etc. 

From s-qeuo- 'cut, cut out 7 comes the signification ' cover, 
protect. 7 This develops through ' something cut out, skin, 
garment, shield 7 or ' something dug out, cave, shelter 7 or 
directly from 'cut, strike, ward off, protect. 7 For examples 


of this meaning cf. Prellwitz, Et. Wb. s. v. O-KV\OV, cr/cvros ; 
Schade, Wb. s. v. scur; Kluge, s. v. Scheuer. 

I think there can be no doubt that in one or other of these 
ways the idea ' shelter, protect' arose. Compare Goth, sldldus 
' shield/ Lith. skittis ( disk : ' skeliu i split ; ' E. shed ' scheide, 
schuppe ; ' MHG. schutzen, beschilten ' protect : ' schute ' wall/ 
schutten ' schiitteln, schiitten.' And so numberless cases. It 
is impossible, indeed, even to suppose that there was an unde- 
rived root of any kind meaning ( cover.' Such an idea would 
be expressed, not by seizing a ready made word out of the 
air, but by describing the method of covering, sheltering, 
protecting. Such a word being once formed, it would develop 
according to its derived not its primary meaning. So we may 
assume all words arose. But the absolute origin, whether 
exclamatory or imitative grunt, is beyond our ken. One 
thing is certain : if we cannot rely upon the phonetic com- 
position of a word, we have no ground to stand on. 

It is probably from the idea ( cut off, separate ' that the 
signification ' shadow ' originated. The ' shadow ' was thought 
of as a separation, shelter, protection from the sun. Thus : 
OE. scuwa ' protection, shadow;' scead ' protection, shade/ 
sceadu ' protection, arbor, shadow ; ' OHG. sour ' wetterdach, 
schutz/ sciura ' scheuer/ Lat. ob-scurus, with which compare 
Goth, skura ' storm,' OE. scur ' shower' (of rain, hail, missiles), 
ON. skur, OHG. scur ' schauer/ base squ-ro- ' thro wing, ward- 
ing off, separating, protecting' (cf. E. shed, ' scheide, schuppe;' 
MHG. schutten ( schiitteln/ beschiiten ( beschiitzen ') ; Gk. a-Kid 
' shadow/ base sqe-io-, sqi- ' throwing off, protecting, shad- 
ing;' ' irradiating, shining.' Gk. o-/aafo> ' shade, overshadow, 
cover/ Kavfjba CTK. = ' aestatem defendere/ Goth, skeinan 
f shine/ etc., with which compare OE. sccenan ' break/ scla, 
scinu ( shin/ G. schiene, etc., primarily l something cut off/ 
hence i splint, splinter, strip, shin/ etc. ; Goth, skeirs ' clear/ 
OE. scir ' clear, bright/ MHG. schir, etc., base sql-ro- ( cut- 
ting, marking off; throwing off, radiating/ also in OE. sdr 
' shire, office/ Gk. crtcipov * cheese-paring/ cr/a/ao? ' any hard 
5 ' 


coat or crust/ a-Kipos f hard ; 7 and further in OHG. skero, 
sciaro ' quick/ stiari, sceri ' quick-witted/ pre-Germ. *sqei-ro-, 
cf. Gk. cr/ci-vag ' quick, nimble/ Lat. scio ' know. 7 These 
examples are enough to make it quite probable that the 
' shadow 7 in many cases is thought of as a covering, protec- 
tion, thrown over or cast by some object. 

Now we see in the above roots the bases sqo-uo-, sqU- ; 
sqe-io-, sql- ; sqo-to-, in all of which the meaning ' shadow * 
is found. After the explanation given I take it that it is not 
too much to assume that they may all be derivatives of the 
root seqo-, sqe- ' cut off, separate, throw off/ etc. 

15. Gk. o-KOTreo), a-Keirrofjiai ' search out, inquire, examine, 
look at, behold/ GIOTTO? ' watcher 7 are connected by Prell- 
witz, EL Wb., with cr/ceTra? ' covering, shelter/ a-Kejrr], same, 
cr/ce7rda) f shelter.' This is certainly preferable to the con- 
nection with Lat. specio (cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 873), but the 
explanation of the meaning as given by Prellwitz is hardly 

The base sqo-po-, sqe-po- meant primarily ( cutting off, 
separating ; cut off, separated/ Used literally this gave 
< separating, protecting, sheltering ; 7 figuratively, ' separating, 
searching out, examining/ etc. Such a development of mean- 
ing is too common to need illustration. It is the same as we 
saw above in OE. sceawian 'seek out, select, reconnoitre, 
scrutinize, see.' 

16. Lat. cer-no, cre-vl ' separate, distinguish, perceive, see/ 
Lith. sJciriil ' separate/ Gk. /celpa) 'cut off, shear/ OHG. 
sceran ' shear/ etc., root sqe-ro- ' cut. 7 (Cf. Persson, Wz. 29, 
62.) Compare ON. skil ' discernment/ ME. skil ' reason/ E. 
skill, ON. skilja i separate/ Lith. skeliu ' split/ Gk. o-/cd\\co 
' dig, hoe/ root sqe-lo- ' cut ; ' and Lat. scio ' understand, per- 
ceive, know/ de-scl-sco ' separate/ root sq%-io-, sql- ' cut/ 
(Id., ib. 38 ; 112.) So also Lat. distinguo ('thrust apart/ v. 
supra) ' separate, discriminate, distinguish. 7 

17. OE. starianj OHG. star en, MHG. starn, G. starren 
' stare. 7 These words express the fixedness of body and 


features occasioned by a sight that causes surprise or astonish- 
ment. Hence OHG. stara-blint, MHG. star-blint ' starrblind/ 
OE. steer-blind ' quite blind/ primarily with eyes ' fixed and 
glazed/ To these are related Gk. o-repeo? ' stiff, hard/ OChSl. 
staru 'old/ Lith. storas ' thick/ ON. storr ' strong/ Goth. 
stairo ' sterile/ etc. Cf. Kluge, Et. Wb. s. v. starr, Stdrke. 

Stare is a good example of a class of words which described 
primarily a certain expression and only by implication meant 
' look at/ So E. gape ' yawn : 9 ' look at with open mouth/ 
G., MHG. gaffen, ON. gapa ' yawn ; ' E. squint ( look at 
with a squint ; ' leer ' look at with a distorted expression ; ' 
peep 'peer, as through a crevice/ Similarly we may say 
frown at, smile at, sneer at, etc., implying ' look at with a 
frown, smile, sneer/ etc. 

18. OE. gorettan 'gaze, stare/ like OE. starian, OHG. 
staren, E. stare, denotes a fixed glance, and has probably 
come to its signification in the same way. Its etymon, there- 
fore, may be a word expressing stiffness. I find a group of 
words whose meanings go back to the common idea * brist- 
ling/ and this gives the meaning sought. These words are : 
OE. gyr ' fir-tree/ gorst l gorse, furze ' (compare ON. fyra 
t fir : ' OE. fyres ' furze '), Lith gaUras i hair on the body/ 
gaurutas ' hairy/ Skt. ghord- ' horrid, awful, violent ' (com- 
pare Lat. horridus 'bristly, shaggy; horrid, frightful, savage'). 
From these I should separate Goth, gaurs ' sad. 7 That is 
better taken as suggested by Uhlenbeck, Et. Wb., and may 
further be referred to the root ghu- ' pour, flow/ 

1 9. MHG. gucken, gucken, G. gucken, ' look at with curi- 
osity, peep/ This word implies either stealth or* foolish 
curiosity. In either case it may be referred to OHG. gouh(h), 
ON. gaukr, OE. geao ' cuckoo/ MHG. gouch ' cuckoo, gawk/ 
So also E. gawk is used colloquially as a verb meaning ' look 
at like a gawk/ The -ok- of MHG. gucken, gucken causes 
no difficulty . It occurs also in MHG. gucken, OHG. guccon 
' call cuckoo/ We have then two derivatives of the word for 
'cuckoo/ *gukkdn 'call cuckoo' and *gukkjan 'act like a 


cuckoo or gawk.' The -kk- as well as the -k- of the Germ, 
stem gauka- < *gaukka- is from pre-Germ. -kn-. Compare 
MHG. guggug, guggouch ' cuckoo/ which are reduplicated 
forms, and gugzen < *gugatjan ' call cuckoo/ The stem 
guga-, gukka-, gauka- may be compared with Skt. ghuka- 
' owl/ and these may be referred to the root ghu- ' shout, 
cry/ Skt. gho-sa- ' noise, shout/ ghosati ' cry, shout/ 

20. E. gloat, MHG. glotzen 'glotzen/ ON. glotta ' smile 
derisively ' come from a Germ, base *glotto < *ghludna- (or 
-dhna- or -tnd-) ' jesting, derision/ which is from ghiu- in 
OE. gleow ' glee, jest, ridicule/ gleam, ON. glaumr ' gayety, 
wantonness/ Gk. %Xeu?? 'jest/ %Xeuao> 'jeer, scoff at/ Lith. 
glauda-s ' sport/ (Cf. Brg., Grd., I 2 , 573.) 

By the side of the base ghle-uo- occurs ghle-io-: Lett. 
glaima 'jest/ glaimut 'jest, caress/ MHG. gfaen 'cry' (of 
birds), Gk. /a%\o) 'giggle/ These are from the root ghelo-, 
gU%-: ON. glam(m) 'noise, hilarity/ glama 'be hilarious/ 
galm 'sound/ OHG. gellan 'resound, yell/ galan 'sing/ etc. 
(Cf. Persson, Wz. 69, 195f.) 

Another class of verbs for 'see' is connected with words 
meaning 'shine/ (Cf. Bechtel, SW. 157.) These are, for the 
most part, like those just discussed : they are descriptive of 
an expression of countenance. Thus beam, gleam, glare as 
nouns may denote a certain expression of eye or feature, 
as verbs they may mean to look with such an expression. So 
also glance and to glance; G. blick, blicken; Gk. Xev/co? 
' bright, glancing/ \evcrcrw ' glance at, look at ; ' Lith. zvilg'eti 
'glanzen, blicken/ The further discussion of these words 
would require an investigation into the origin of the ideas 
underlying ' shine, gleam/ This is reserved for another 



It is true that the poets often allow proper names to 
disturb the rhythmic character of verse ; but there are limits 
beyond which few versifiers will be found to push any special 
license that they may be disposed to exercise in the use of 
names. The famous Shakespearean crux in the line, 

"Lucius, Lucullus, and SemproniusVllorxa," 

[Timon, III, iv, 112.] 

illustrates, for example, that degree of metric excess which 
establishes the final right of excision. However, in spite 
of the difficulties encountered in the rhythmic handling of 
names, it is the prevailing practice of the poets to conceal 
difficulty in smoothness of workmanship, 1 the current pro- 
nunciation of the name is with nicety wrought into the 
rhythm of the verse, and the marks of labor disappear. 
With this principle in mind one may turn to Old English 
poetry with the reasonable expectation of finding names, 
without violation of their accepted pronunciation, properly 

1 There is regal advice upon this subject which is so refreshingly nai've 
that it will always appraise itself: 

"That ge eschew to insert in gour verse, a lang rahle of mennis names, 
or names of tounis, or sik vther names. Because it is hard to mak many 
lang names all placit together, to flow weill. Thairfore quhen that fallis 
out in jour purpose, ge sail ather put bot twa or thrie of thame in euerie 
lyne, mixing vther wordis amang thame, or ellis specific bot twa or thre 
of them at all, saying ( With the laif of that race} or ( With the rest in thay 
pairlis,) or sic vther lyke wordis : as for example, 

" Out through his cairt, quhair Eous was eik 
With other thre, quhilk Phaeton had drawin. 

" ge sie thair is bot ane name there specifeit, to serue for vther thrie of 
that sorte." 

James VI of Scotland, I of England, The Essayes of 
a Prentise, in the Divine Art of Poesie, Edinburgh, 
1585 [Arbe^s English Reprints, No. 19, p. 62]. 



fitted into the structure of the verse. One should, therefore, 
not be expected to hesitate in reading the following lines 
in this manner : 

Abimeleche swd hine Abraham bced. [Gen. 2758.] 

X & | uX || X X X -^ I X X X 

]>d Abraham Abimeleche. [Gen. 2831.] 

X JL | x ^ || x & | 6 x. 

\a glen wees yrre god Abimelehe. \_Gen. 2741.] 
x x x ^|x -^ || x vx | ux. 

But this scansion ignores the primary law of alliteration ; 
the assumed rhythm of the name Abimelech must therefore be 
revised, and three of the half-lines just cited must be scanned: 

6 | & fc x. 

This is accordant with all the remaining occurrences of the 

[ Gen. 2621 a .] under A bimelech, x x u | 6% x. 

[Gen. 2716 a .] ]>d ongan Abimceleh, x x x u | u x. 
[Gen. 2668 a .] eorlum Abimeleh, 2 (x) | 6 ^x x. 

The alliteration is indeed now correctly restricted to the 
ictus, but there still remains a serious violation of the law 
of rhythm in the quantity of the stressed syllable. Is the 
scansion of these lines therefore to be further revised, and are 

we to infer the change of Abimelech into Abimelech ? There 
is no strong presumption in favor of an affirmative answer to 
this question, for we have to assume the persistence of the 
Latin accentuation of the scriptural names. In the case 
of Abimelec, the Hebrew compound Xbi-M6lekh (' father of 
the king') has conformed to Latin accentuation, and the 
Latin Melchisedech in like manner represents the Hebrew 
MalM-Ce'deq (' King of righteousness '). Now it is this Latin 


accentuation under which all Scripture was brought into Eng- 
land. The Anglo-Saxons said Melchlsedech for the same 
reason that they said Gregorius (more accurately, with the 
secondary accents, Melchisedech, Gregorius, or, on occasion, 
as will be shown, Melchisedech, Gregorius), and accordingly 
scanned these names, after the pattern ofAbimelech, as follows: 

[_Chr. 138.] swd se mcere lu Melchlsedech. 

xx 2\x2 || 2 \2x (D 2 ). 

[Gen. 2102.] \ad wees se mcere Melchlsedech. 
x x| - x || 2 2x . 

[Men. 39.] Gregorius in godes wcere. 
d ^xl|| x & 2x. 

[Men. 101.] Gregorius ne hyrde ic gumenafyrn. 
u|^xl||x x xx vjx |x 2. 

This formula of accentuation is also illustrated by Bethulia : 

[Judith 138.] Bethuliam Hie %d beahhrodene. 
6\JL xl || x x 2 | ^x x. 

[Judith 327.] to ftcere beorhtan byrig Bethuliam. 
x x x 2\ x & || vj|^x 1. 

That the Latin accent is always retained as an ictus requires 
no further proof; but it may still be doubted whether the 
additional initial ictus in the type of names just considered 
does not demand lengthening of the vowel. In names like 
Jacob, Joseph, Satan, etc., the required length is given ; such 
names therefore furnish no evidence pertinent to the inquiry. 
On the other hand, names like Babtlon and Holofernes, in 
which the first two syllables are short, are significant in per- 
mitting scansion without change in syllabic quantity. 

Babilon is of frequent occurrence in Anglo-Saxon poetry, 
and the metre never requires length of the initial syllable. 


[Dan. 689 a .] tycet he Babilone, x x & | + x, 

represents the scansion of Dan. 700 a ; 660 a ; Gen. 1633 a ; 
1707* ; Ps. 86, 2 a ; 136, l a ; 136, 8 a . 

Babilon burga, ux \- 1 ^x (A 2a), or perhaps better ux x | _^x, 
of Dan. 694 a , is to be compared with Babilone burh, u>$ 1 x | 2 
(E) of Dan. 601 a , which is also the rhythm of Dan. 47* ; 
99 b ; 104 b ; 117 a ; 209 b ; 229 b ; 256 a ; 449 b ; 461 a ; 488 a ; 642 a . 

The hyper metric rhythm of Dan. 455 a , wees heora bleed in 
Babilone, is satisfactorily interpreted by Sievers (Altgerm. 
Metrik, p. 142) as being x x x -^ x & | -^ x (BC). In the 
remaining three occurrences of this name we have to assume 
synizesis of ia=ja; ie=je (cf. Sievers, ibid., p. 126, 
79, 2): 

[Dan. 70 a .] to Babilonia, x Jx | 2 x. 

[Dan. 164 a .] bleed in Babilonia, 2 x | & 1 x (D). 
[Dan. I73 a .] bresne Babilonige, -^x|uxlx. 

Two instances of the occurrence of Holofernes (Holofernus) 
present the rhythmic elements already considered : 

[Judith 7 b .] Gefrcegen ic %d Holofernus. 

xx xx x ux | - x. 

[Judith 21 b .] Da wear& Holofernus. 

X X uX|-^ X. 

To complete the data for the study of this name, we have 
now to consider four instances of its occurrence as a complete 
half-line (Judith 46 a ; 180 a ; 250 a ; 337 b ). This takes us back 
to the question of the permissibility of a short initial ictus, 
which now assumes this form, shall we retain Holofernus, 
6 x | J- x, in these four instances, in accordance with the 
inference established by all the occurrences of Babilon and 
reenforced by two of Holofernus f Our answer is affirmative, 
inasmuch as it unifies a principle of scansion not only for the 
names already considered, but also for all others. Before 


discussing this principle itself, it may be desirable to increase 
the illustrations of its application. 

The name Maria has been fitted into almost all the principal 
rhythmic types. The simplest conditions are present in type C : 

\Elene 775 a .] and ]>urh Marian, x x u | ^ x. 

So also in Elene 1233 a ; Men. 20 a ; Chr. 445 a ; Ho. 84 ft . 

In Chr. 88 b , Sanda Maria, 2xx 2x, and Hym. 10, 13 a , 
Sanctan Marian, the name does not alliterate, and the scan- 
sion indicated is therefore to be preferred before a possible D, 
-^x | ulx ; on the other hand, the double alliteration in mrngft 
Maria, Chr. 176 a , establishes a preference for D 3 (Sievers, 
Altgerm. Metrik, pp. 34, 157). However, mceg Ddvides, Chr. 
165 a , in which the name does not alliterate, and the rhythm 
is therefore intended to be - x | 2. x (rather than 2. \ JL \. x), in 
accordance with the word-accent of the oblique case, clearly 
shows that the presumption in favor of mceg^> Mafia, -. \ u 1 x, 
is not strong enough to make it inadmissible to regard the 
double alliteration in this instance as merely a superadded 
grace which does not affect the rhythm, and to scan -^ x ^ x. 

Type E is represented in Sat. 438 b , ]>urh Marian had, 
x | u 1 x | 2. and again in Chr. 299 b , and \e, Maria, /or3, 
x x | u 1 x | -^, in which it is to be particularly noticed that the 
vocative, requiring the emphatic utterance of the name, per- 
mits a partial reduction of the chief word -accent. Is it the 
recessive accent of the vocative that is operative here? How- 
ever that may be, there is nothing in the present instance to 
warrant the assumption that this recession was strong enough 
to reduce the usual word-accent still further so as to result in 
x x u | x x X But this partial reduction of the word-accent, 
a reduction of the primary to a secondary accent, is also the 
characteristic feature of the following rhythms of A 2 : 

[Men. 51 a .] Marian mycle, u 1 x | - x. 

[Er. 92 b .] Marian sylfe, 6 1 x | J. x. 

[Ho. 9 b .] Maria on dcegred, 6 1 x x | J. 1. 

{And. 688 b .] Maria and Joseph, 6 1 x x 1 2. !. 


In the quantity of its initial syllable, the name Judea 
presents that variation from Maria which has been supposed 
to favor the shifting of the chief stress to the initial syllable. 
But here too, as in the case of Maria, it is not a shifting but 
rather a reduction merely of the word-accent that has taken 
place. The accented syllable is no longer supreme in its 
capacity to receive the ictus, but it at most shares this func- 
tion equally with the initial syllable, to which it may also, 
on occasion, be subordinated. 

The varieties of rhythm in which Judea occurs are very 
unequally represented. Type C embraces the largest share : 
in Judtum, x ^ | J. x, Ho. 99 b ; 103 b ; 128 b ; 131V ]>one 
Judeas, Chr. 637 a . swylce he Jud&a, x x x 2. \ 2. x, And. 166 a ; 
similarly And. 12 a ; 968 a ; 1410 a ; Fata 35 a ; Elene 216 a ; 
268 b ; 278 a ; 328 a ; 977 a ; Ps. 75, l b (cf. 68, 36 b ; if the prepo- 
sition is to receive the ictus, Elene 278 a is also to be compared). 
Type D is represented by werude Judea, $% (x) | ^lx, Ps. 113, 
2 b , and hceleft Judea, Ho. 13 b ; and type E by Judea cyn, 
JL L x | J., Elene 209 a (cf. 837*). 

In scanning Jerusalem (Hierusalem, Gerusalem) it is to 
be borne in mind that.; alliterates with h and with g. 

The most simple formula is found in the complete half-line 
Hierusalem, d|^xl (D 4), Ps. 121, 3 a ; so also Sal u. Sat. 
201 b ; 234 b . This is frequently varied by the admission of 
anacrusis: to Hierusalem, Elene 273 b ; Chr. 533 b ; Guft. 785 b ; 
similarly Dan. 2 a ; Fata 70 b ; Elene 1056 a ; Ps. 78, 3 b ; 101, 
19 a ; 121, 2 a ; 124, l b ; 127, 6 a ; 134, 22 a ; 146, 2 a . The 
anacrustic beat is expanded in \od is on Hierusalem, Ps. 67, 
26 a , and in like manner in Ps. 64, l a ; 115, 8 a ; 121, 6 a ; 136, 
6 a ; 136, 7 a . This expansion is perhaps not to be regarded 
as resulting in a hypermetric rhythm in Gif ic ]>m } Hierusa- 
l&m, J. x x | 6 \ + x ^- (AD 4), Ps. 136, 5 a (cf. Hwcet, \u eart 9 
JBabilone, Ps. 136, 8 a ), although this rhythmic phrase paves 
the way to gold in Gerusalem, Dan. 708 a , which may be 
scanned as hypermetric, ^ x 6 \ ^ x 1 ; this would be equally 
true of Herige Hierusalem, Ps. 147, l a . But in these two 


instances it is better to exclude the name from the alliteration 
and accordingly to scan thus : ^ (x x) | ^ x L, and u^ (x x) | - x 1, 
as is to be inferred from : 

[Chr. 50.] Eald sibbe gesihft sancta Hierusalem. 
xx ^|x x J. || ^ (x x)|^x 1 

[Ps. 78, 2.] Settan Hierusalem samod anllcast. 
J. (x x) ^ x ^ || & I 2. 1 x 

Here the name is released from sharing the alliteration, and 
is scanned according to its prose-accents. These are two 
important facts which at once make manifest the persistence 
of the word-accent, and the special character of the initial 
ictus of names not accented on the first syllable. The same 
phenomena will be observed in : 

[Ho. 23.] sigefcest and snottor. Scegde Johdnnis. 
[.Ho. 50.] Geseah ]?d Johdnnis sigebearn godes. 
[And. 691.] suna Josephes, Simon and Jdeob. 

Confirmation of this rhythmic use is furnished by that of 
the title tipdattilus in its Anglo-Saxon forms : 

[Men. 122.] Petrus and Paulus: hwcet, ]>d apdstolas. 
JL x x| 2 x || x xx^|x.^ 

[Fata 14.] Petrus and Paulus. Is se apostolhdd. 
[And. 1653.] \urh apdstolhdd Platan nemned. 

This riming of apostle on p is also found in JElfric (Biblio- 
ihek der ags. Prosa, in, p. 52, 1. 51) : 

swd swd se apostol Petrus on his pistole dwrdt. 

It will be to the present purpose to add from -ZElfric's 
freer rhythms further illustrations of the employment of the 
alliteration of an interior syllable which has the chief word- 


accent : Isaias alliterates with s (Bibliothek der ags. Prosa, in, 
p. 21, 1. 188); Judeiscan with d (ibid., p. 66, 1. 26; p. 71, 
1. 162; p. 101, 1. 309); Amanes with m (ibid., p. 101, 1. 311); 
Sebastianus with b (Lives of Saints, Part I, p. 122, 1. 104; 
p. 138, 1. 339; p. 144, 1. 437); Chromatius with m (ibid., p. 
126, 1. 152; p. 132, 1. 257); Policarpus with c (ibid., p. 128, 
1. 199); Tiburtius with 6 (i6id., p. 140, 1. 379) ; Lucina with 
c = s (ibid., p. 146, 1. 468); Mediolana on I (ibid., p. 116, 
1. 2) ; Agathes on # (ibid., p. 198, 1. 45) ; Basilissa on Z (i&id., 
p. 92, 1. 52 ; p. 96, 1. 99). We have thus in the decline of 
the classic regularity of the native versification an increasing 
tendency to scan names according to word-accent only, just as 
the versifier of the Metres of Boet/iius has, by way of varia- 
tion, in one instance done with the name Aulixes : 

\Metr. 26, 21.] \GL \a Aulixes leafe hcefde 

(cf. Rieger, Verskunst, p. 11, note). 

With this partial exhibition of the manner in which the 
Anglo-Saxon poet handled foreign names with Latin word- 
accent, it will be possible to consider the theory of rhythmic 
stress which has been assumed in the scanning of the selected 
illustrations. In stating this theory there will be no occasion 
to restate in detail the well known and generally accepted 
induction of Sievers (Beitrdge, x, 492 f., xix, p. 448 note, 
p. 456 note; Altgerm. Metrik, p. 124 f.), and of Pogatscher 
(Zur Lautlehre der griechischen, lateinischen und romanischen 
Lehnworte im Altenglischen, p. 16), which has been applied 
by Kauifmann to the scansion of the Heliand (Beitrdge, xn, 
349 f.). 

After Sievers had so successfully revealed the structure of 
Old English verse, and had deduced therefrom the rhythmic 
function of secondary accents, confirming and extending the 
less complete conclusions of Rieger and others, there was 
naturally nothing to expect of the Latin names in verse 
except exact conformity to the fixed laws of the five types 
of rhythm. Of these laws none was believed to be more 


inflexible than that of the syllabic quantity of the ictus; 
and whatever difficulties appeared to arise in bringing the 
accentual phrases of foreign names under the dominion of 
the rigid law of the native ictus, these were overcome by an 
appeal to the Germanic word-accent, as a further consequence 
of which the condition for the required lengthening of short 
initial syllables, it was held, was forthwith at hand. Sievers, 
in other words, concluded (in agreement with Rieger) that 
the initial unaccented syllable of foreign names received an 
accent (indeed the principal accent) in Old English, and that 
under this accent a short syllable became long ; this law was 
then extended by Pogatscher so as to embrace all learned 
loan-words (p. 31) : " In gelehrten Entlehnungen gelten die 
haupttonigen Silben als lang." But, exclusive of the proper 
names, there are very few learned loan-words which may be 
supposed to affect the present inquiry. It is therefore better 
first to consider the law in question in its application to 
the proper names only. This is the particular purpose of the 
present discussion. 

In the first place, it is pertinent to ask those who may be 
unwilling to substitute the mode of scansion illustrated above 
for that of Sievers and Pogatscher to explain, on the one 
hand, the tendency exhibited by ^Elfric to reclaim for ictus 
the original Latin stress to the exclusion of the new initial 
stress, and, on the other hand, the continuance in the language 
to the present day of the Latin accentuation of many of these 
names, such as Abimelech, Jerusalem, Elizabeth, Judea, etc. 
Lachmann's observation of the disturbing influence of the 
Germanic versification in this province led him to say (KL 
Schrifien, I, 387) : " Nur dies will ich noch bemerken, dass, 
ware in der deutschen Poesie die Form der Alliteration 
herschend geblieben, die fremden Namen sich immer mehr zu 
der deutschen Accentregel wiirden bequemt habeu." How- 
ever that may be, it is to be kept in mind that JElfric, 
whatever his innovations may be, was still under the reign 
of the old system of versification, although in justice to 


Lachmann it should also be carefully noted that he saw in 
the alliterative verse merely that force which tended to bring 
about the change gradually which it could possibly never 
wholly accomplish. 

A more complete interpretation of Lachmann's words will 
furnish the true basis for further investigation. It is unmis- 
takably this, that the alliterative verse forced its peculiar 
demands, with more or less uniformity, upon the foreign 
rhythm of names, just as would be expected in the case of 
any other system of versification. That under varying types 
and fashions of rhythm, or of versification, experience in 
incorporating foreign elements will beget correspondingly 
varying categories of structural license. All rhythmic usage 
of the names here considered, be it furnished by Cynewulf, 
by Chaucer, by Shakespeare, by Milton, or by Browning, 
must therefore be subsumed under this general principle. 

In the statement of the general principle which has now 
been arrived at, the term ' license ' implies, of course, that the 
poet's use of foreign names, while its main features will 
reflect the current pronunciation, will occasionally make dis- 
cernible possibilities of stress which are in part, or altogether, 
obscured in prose ; besides, other more or less artificial effects 
may be admitted which will remain inoperative in moulding 
the accepted form and pronunciation. A capricious accentua- 
tion of names by Chaucer and by Shakespeare, for example, 
have not disturbed the normal history of these words, but the 
average practice of these and of all the poets bears surest 
testimony to the validity of the laws of persistence and of 
change written in that history. 

Self-evident as these general propositions may be, the 
present argument will be promoted by an illustration of those 
accentual possibilities which, obscured or neglected in prose, 
are conserved by rhythm. 

Iterated acknowledgment is due Sievers for his fine dis- 
crimination in classifying secondary word-accents and in 
proving their rhythmic function in Anglo-Saxon. He has 


left for future inquiry some questions relating to an apparent 
conflict between this rhythmic function and the laws of 
grammatical inflection, but for the historic study of English 
rhythm he has made the right beginning. But, although 
Sievers has opened the way, no one has hitherto consistently 
and completely pursued the rhythmic function of secondary 
word-accents along the entire course of English versification. 

From Swinburne back to the Beowulf there remains to be 
retraced an unbroken continuity in the principal categories 
of what may be called the notes of the more subtile harmo- 
nies of the language. The poets have always exercised the 
right, and their art has always demanded that they should, 
to place the ictus upon the second member of substantive 
compounds, and in like manner to call forth the suppressed 
note of such derivative syllables as -lie (-ly), -ness, ig(y), -er, 
-en, -el, -or, -est, -ing, etc. 

In the following lines the marked ictus will illustrate the 
foregoing statement : 

With low | grape-blos|som veil|ing their | white sides. 

But coloured leaves | of latjter rose- [blossom, 
Stems of | soft grass, | some withered red | and some 

Fair and | flesh-blood |ed ; and | spoil splen|dider 
Of mar|igold | and great | spent sun [flower. 

There grew | a rose|-garden | in Florence land. 

Swinburne, The Two Dreams. 

That hath | sunshine | on the | one hand | 

And on | the ojther star- [shining. 

Id., The Masque of Queen Bersabe. 

Bread failed ; | we got | but well-| water. 

Id, The Leper. 


It is the halting line (as it is sometimes called) that attracts 
notice and excites inquiry into the principles of rhythmic 
structure, while the correct line (to borrow another erroneous 
designation) pleases the unquestioning ear (it is urged) and is 
accepted without a thought of its workmanship. This lack 
of ' correctness ' thus negatively makes manifest the quality 
violated, just as in the case of that indescribable quality called 
tact : if one has tact no one notices it, if one lacks tact, it is 
observed by all. 

Bysshe in his Art of English Poetry (London, 1714, p. 6) 
illustrates the poet's lack of rhythmic tact in the following 
lines from Davenant : 

I I I I I 

" None think Rewards rendered worthy their Worth." 

"And both Lovers, both thy Disciples were." 

"In which," he says, "tho' the true Number of Syllables 
be observed,, yet neither of them have so much as the Sound 
of a Verse : Now their Disagreeableness proceeds from the 
undue Seat of the Accent." Watts had also cited these two 
lines (Works, 1812-1813, vol. ix, 442 f.) and declared that 
" worthy " and " Lovers," placed as they are, " turn the line 
into perfect prose." Bysshe proceeds to obviate " the undue 
seat of the accent," and presents the lines in "smooth and 
easy form : " 

I I I I I 

" None think Rewards are equal to their Worth." 

"And Lovers both, both thy Disciples were." 

But surely the poet must be allowed to have his own way : 

/ / 

" None think | Rewards | render'd | worthy | their Worth." 

"And both j Lovers, | both thy | Discip|les were." 

From these lines we may select lovers and render as repre- 
senting the two principal classes of secondary word-accents 
(native and foreign), which have been at all times and are 


still available for ictus. Nouns of agency in -er have been 
studied with regard to rhythmic value in the early periods 
of the language by ten Brink (Anglia, v, 1 f.), and the 
poets of to-day are aware of the old value. The extension of 
this capability of ictus from nouns of agency and compara- 
tives through nouns of relationship (father, mother, brother, 
sister) and formations like after, never, until even water is 
overtaken, is comprised within the extremes indicated by 

Poema Morale 250, "Ne mei hit quenche salt water," and 

Rossetti's Honeysuckle, "And fouled my feet in quag- water," 
and the line already cited from Swinburne. As to render, 
the O.F. rendre coming into English should have lost its 
infinitive termination (cf. defend, offend), but it did not do so, 
presumably in conformity to the rhematic noun render. A 
dissyllabic form was thus obtained which was subject to that 
play of stress which is characteristic of French words in 
English. However, this is not the occasion to pursue the 
history of secondary word-stress. The additional law of 
rhythm which permits ictus upon logically subordinate words, 
such as the articles, the pronouns, the prepositions, and the 
inflectional endings, may also, for the present, be dismissed 
from minute attention. 

Professor Hale (Proceedings of the American Philological 
Association for July, 1895, p. xxvi) asks, "Did verse-ictus 
destroy word-accent in Latin poetry?" Surely not, as he 
then proceeds to show. Both varieties of stress are conserved 
in the music of verse, for verse is not an aggregation of 
syllables mechanically marked off by beats or by foot-measure, 
but it is an artfully planned succession of syllables rhythmi- 
cally marked off by beats or by foot-measure with a strictness 
of uniformity that may appear to be mechanical when the 
rhythmic swing, the lilt, is neglected. It must therefore be 
admitted as a fundamental rule that verse, which is con- 
structed with an artistic regard to the conflict of ictus and 


word-accent, must also be read in a manner that will render 
it possible to observe the ' conflict.' 

But let us return to Dr. Watts. It is not to be supposed 
that the author of the Horae Lyricae was unwilling to admit 
at least some of the usually approved variations of rhythm. 
Indeed he is at special pains to caution against monotony of 
movement, and is bold enough to say of Mr. Dry den, that he 
observes the iambic measure "perhaps with too constant a 
regularity. So in his Virgil he describes two serpents in ten 
lines, with scarce one foot of any other kind, or the alteration 
of a single syllable : " 

"Two serpents rank'd abreast, the seas divide, 
And smoothly sweep along the swelling tide. 
Their flaming crest above the waves they show, 
Their bellies seem to burn the seas below : 
Their speckled tails advance to steer their course, 
And on the sounding shore the flowing billows force, 
And now the strand, and now the plain they held, 
Their ardent eyes with bloody streaks were fill'd ; 
Their nimble tongues they brandished as they came, 
And lick'd their hissing jaws, that spattered flame." 

There is therefore, according to Dr. Watts, an occasional 
substitution of other feet necessary to produce the best 
harmony of iambic verse. " In the lines of heroic measure/' 
he says, " there are some parts of the line which will admit 
a spondee, * * * ; or a trochee, * * *. A happy intermixture 
of these will prevent that sameness of tone and cadence, 
which is tedious and painful to a judicious reader, and will 
please the ear with a greater variety of notes; provided 
still that the iambic sound prevails." The spondee may be 
admitted in the place of any of the five feet of a line, " but 
scarce any other place in the verse, besides the first and 
the third, will well endure a trochee, without endangering the 
harmony, spoiling the cadence of the verse, and offending 
the ear." 


Professor Browne (Modern Language Notes, IV, col. 197f.) 
is concerned with this same question of how to secure rhythmic 
variety in the iambic pentameter line " without letting go the 
design ; " but his answer differs widely and significantly from 
that of Dr. Watts. "Any variation is allowable," says Pro- 
fessor Browne, "that does not obscure or equivocate the 
genus." The permissible variation may be obtained (1) by 
dropping one, or by dropping two of the five accents; (2) 
by reversing one, or by reversing two of the five accents; 
and (3) " by combining omissions and reversals." 

Although the way has now been opened to a discussion of 
the opinions held of the manner in which poetry should be 
read, it will be sufficient, as will appear from what follows, 
to dismiss from further consideration in this connection the 
teaching that poetry should be. read as one reads prose. This 
doctrine shall be called the sense-doctrine, its advocates main- 
taining that it alone enables the reader to ' bring out' the 
meaning. It is thus that the relation of the art of poetry to 
music is ruthlessly pushed aside by the assumption that the 
harmony of the ' numbers ? must not be regarded as much as 
the logic of the sense. But it is a welcome fact that these 
disciples of logic do not press to a logical conclusion an 
application of their rule for poetry to the sister art, for that 
would result in demanding that music written for words (or 
music supplied with words) be rendered in recitativo. 

Opposed to the sense-doctrine is that which more than 
the word-play might justify one in naming the commonsense- 
doctrine; but let it be known as the rhythm-doctrine. In 
its baldest form it may be stated thus : Read poetry like 
poetry. This, it may be thought, means either nothing, or 
next to nothing. Even after the suppressed contrast 'not 
like prose ' is added, the statement remains vague, and this 
vagueness has, without doubt, indirectly begotten the first 
doctrine. Without success in finding an acceptable manner 
for reading poetry like poetry, the myopic doctrinaire has 
concluded that it must be read like prose. 


There is a third teaching which is also begotten of the 
second, but the unsatisfactory result of its application has 
perhaps been the more direct begetter of the first. It may be 
styled the ictus-doctrine, for it consists in the demand that, 
in reading verse, stress shall uniformly and exclusively be 
confined to ictus. 

It is thus seen that in the attempt to follow the second 
doctrine, as here enumerated, failure has resulted in bringing 
forth two additional doctrines. Failure in fundamentals does 
not usually lead to success, nor has it done so in this instance. 
The second doctrine is therefore still the true one, although it 
may stand in need of exposition and inculcation. 

That the rhythm-doctrine is in general better known in 
theory than observed in practice has perhaps been made suffi- 
ciently manifest. Classical scholars report an experience with 
it in reading Greek and Latin verse which is full of interest- 
ing variations in degree of satisfactory achievement ; and 
recent discussion of the theory as applied to Latin is still 
full of that unrest which is indicative of an inconclusively 
handled problem. 

An attempt shall now be made not to vindicate this 
doctrine by reasoning from the essential laws of rhythm, 
particularly as related to music, but rather to discover for 
English the manner in which the accents and vocal inflec- 
tions of our language allow and require it to be put into 
practice. To free the problem from unnecessary complication 
certain factors, important enough from another point of view, 
shall be at once eliminated. The argument will not be 
invalidated by excluding from consideration the so-called 
trochaic beginning of iambic verse, or the equally well 
authorized first foot without a thesis. The effects of caesura 
shall also be passed by, and it will not be necessary to draw 
the distinction at every step between word-accent and sentence- 
accent. Moreover, the rhetoric of verse, as it may be called, 
shall not be narrowly inquired into, important as it is for the 
full appreciation of rhythm. 


Such ( regular' lines as those quoted from Dryden comprise 
no ' conflict/ and consequently give no occasion for dis- 
tinguishing between the second and third doctrines, and* 
almost none for noting differences between these and the first. 
But such ' regularity ' in excess is a violation of the artistic 
demands of English versification which can be satisfactorily 
met only by the employment (not a uniform nor a systematic 
employment, yet with variation of degree a constant employ- 
ment) of ' conflict.' Admitting the artistic use of ' conflict ' 
in English verse, it is reasonable to expect to find within the 
limits of the accents and vocal inflections of the language, 
when unrestrained by verse, an indication of the manner in 
which, with least violence to its natural utterance, the language 
may be subjected to artificial rules. In other words, it is 
prose that must teach us how to read poetry. Verse-accent, 
or ictus, when in * conflict' reveals the language in responding 
to the exigencies of verse. In doing this the language yields 
a new class of stresses (new from the point of view from 
which the prose-stresses are usually observed). Now, if 
similar, that is, in some sense corresponding, exigencies arose 
in prose, and these were found also to yield a new class of 
stresses, something would surely be gained for the determina- 
tion of the nature of these two classes of new stresses. Such 
exigencies do not arise in prose, as we shall next proceed 
to show. 

In Carlyle's spirited, though not invariably accurate, repro- 
duction of the delightful Chronicle of Jocelin de Brakelondf 
the election to the abbacy of the incomparable Samson is 
urged with a special emphasis upon " ungoverned : " " What 
is to hinder this Samson from governing? * * * There exists 
in him a heart-abhorrence of whatever is incoherent, pusil- 
lanimous, unveracious, that is to say, chaotic, -wngoverned " 
(Past and Present, Bk. II, chap. ix). The same variety of 
emphasis is employed upon another ecclesiastical occasion : 

l Chronica Jocelini de Brakelonda de rebus gestis Samsonis Abbatis Monasterii 
Sancti Edmundi. London, The Camden Society, 1840. 


" 'Pre-eisely ' remarked the senior trustee " of the Methodist 
Church of Octavius ( The Damnation of Theron Ware). Some- 
thing akin to an ecclesiastical occasion evoked the following 
reflection and m-flection of Young Ben Lee as he left the 
deanery after his first visit : l< Je-rusalem ! if my sainted 
parent isn't a first-rate actor and a cool hand !" (The Silence 
of Dean Maitland). Under totally different conditions and 
amid other associations, Ben Gunn is recalling the piou& 
teaching of his mother, and finds a new emphasis necessary 
to assure his hearer that she was " re-markable pious " 
(Treasure Island). 

The examples cited give an indication of a wide-reach- 
ing and permanent phenomenon in our natural manner of 
employing special stresses in prose. The unaccented prefixes, 
under demands (among which contrast holds an important 
place) for special logical prominence, are easily made promi- 
nent without disturbing the fixed word-accent. The same is 
true of derivative and inflectional elements, and of the second 
member of substantive compounds. Corresponding to these 
variations which cluster around the word-accent as super- 
additions, there is in the domain of sentence-accent a class 
of new stresses which is familiar in the emphatic use, on 
occasion, of words usually unimportant and without accent,, 
such as the prepositions, the pronouns, the articles, the 
auxiliary and the copulative verbs, etc. 

It will now be apparent that the new class of prose-stresses 
under consideration are suggestive of the new poetry-stresses 
which the exigencies of rhythm call into prominence. And 
since the rhythmic use of the language must be supposed to- 
be equally subject to the inherent character of the language 
with the corresponding special prose-use, the inference is to- 
be drawn that the resultant new classes of stresses agree in 
character. Moreover, it will at once be recognized that the 
new prose-stress is not a word-stress, equal to the regular 
word-stress in expiratory force, nor a reduced form of the 
expiratory word-stress (which would be nothing more than 


a secondary-accent in prose), but a stress with a rising inflec- 
tion, a 'pitch-accent.' Therefore, the complete inference is 
that the verse-accent, the ictus, when in ' conflict/ is attended 
by a pitch-accent. 

The conclusion arrived at may be restated in a manner 
which will assist verification. Under the assumed exigencies, 
tm-governed, p*e-cisely, re-markable, and Je-rusalem (in the 
passages quoted), are naturally pronounced with a pitch-accent 
upon the first syllables, and with the undisturbed expiratory 
word-accent upon the second. It will of course be under- 
stood that when the word-accent is defined as expiratory this 
term does not exclude the inherent pitch of English stress. 
Force, quantity, and pitch are combined in our word-stress 
(or word-accent), both primary and secondary; but in the 
secondary stress used as ictus there is a noticeable change in 
the proportions of these elements, the pitch being relatively 
increased. An answer is thus won for the question : How do 
we naturally pronounce two stresses in juxtaposition on the 
same word, or on adjacent words closely joined grammati- 
cally? This is further illustrated in the specially emphasized 

words of such expressions as, ' The idea ! ' (the symbol " shall 
be used to mark the pitch-accent) : ' In that case one should 

/ / " / / " 

say not good but goodly, not brave but bravely;' 'Altho' he 

/ /" / /" 

writes, he is not a writer ; ' ' Not praise but praising gives 

him delight : 9 ' He promised to do so, and now he denies it ; 9 

I // / 

* They were not coming to him, but going from him. 1 Expres- 
sions of this type reveal the law that secondary word-accents 
may become pitch-accents, and that pitch-accents may also be 
required for words ordinarily unaccented. 

This interpretation of ( conflict ' in prose (conflict between 
the usual accents of prose on the one side, and on the other 
side the accents of prose under exigencies), may be confidently 
accepted as applicable to the rhythm of verse, and the conclu- 


sion is reached, that verse is to be read with an uninterrupted 
observance of its fundamental rhythm. Thus, 

/ " / " / 

Of Man's first disobedience, and the fruit. 

Ill 1 ' I 

To be, or not to be : that is the question. 

" I I " I 

The undiscover'd country from whose bourn 

/ " / " / 

No traveller returns, puzzles the will. 

Here, if the prose secondary-stress of the last syllables of 
" traveller" and "puzzles" were uttered just as in prose, with 
reduced expiratory force, the ictus would not be satisfactorily 
indicated. Again, if, for the sake of the regularly recurring 
ictus, these secondary word-accents were made equal in ex- 
piratory force to the chief word-accent, the result would, in 

one instance (traveller), preserve the ictus by admitting an 
unnatural and an inadmissible utterance of the word ; in the 

second instance (puzzles) the inadmissible utterance would 
render uncertain the place of the ictus. Two equal word- 
accents on the same word are therefore as impossible in verse 
as they are in prose. But the secondary word-accent may 
in verse be retained unchanged, and in that character be 
employed in the thesis; or it may naturally (i. e., in 
accordance with acceptable utterance) be converted into 
a pitch-accent for ictus, in which character it leaves the 
chief word-accent undisturbed by inadmissible rivalry. The 

/ \ 
rhythmic use of dis-o-be-dience, in the first line cited above, 

illustrates with its four syllables (as here used) as many 
recognizable varieties of stress. The first syllable has a 
secondary word-accent, raised to a pitch-accent for ictus ; the 
second is wholly unaccented ; the third has the chief word- 
accent, employed as ictus (the accent of the preceding word, 
"first," is subordinated to the rhythm); the fourth has a 
secondary word-accent which remains unchanged in the thesis. 


The conclusion that ictus in 'conflict' requires a pitch- 
accent, is perhaps applicable to Old English verse, in which 
the rhythmic use of the secondary word-stress, now in the 
arsis, now in the thesis, coincides in essential details with 
the use just described. It is possible, for example, that in 
the case of the secondary word-stresses of 2\2x (A), and 
x 2 | 1 x (C) the pitch-accent distinguishes the secondary 
word -accent as ictus from the same accent when it remains 
in the thesis. But suggestions leading in this direction cannot 
be pursued at this time. 

The second and final suggestion to be made embraces an 
application of the laws ascertained to be inherent in English 
rhythm to the scansion in Old English verse of those proper 
names which, as shown at the beginning of this study, do not 
with the exclusive metrical use of the chief word-accent meet 
the requirements of the rhythm. 

" / \ 

It has already been shown, in the case of J-ru-sa-lem, that 

a proper name in prose under exigencies yields a pitch-accent 
for a syllable not entitled to the chief word-stress. In the 
manner of this example the unaccented initial syllable of all 
proper names may on occasion receive a new stress, and this 
may, as in the case of the prefixes considered, be used for 
verse-ictus. But inasmuch as there is no grammatical analogy 
between these syllables and the prefixes, it remains to be 
shown what inherent quality of the initial syllable of a proper 
name produces the result which thus makes conspicuous the 
absence of such analogy. This inherent quality of a proper 
name which easily begets an accentual prominence of the 
initial syllable may be called its vocative quality, inasmuch 
as every proper name is ipso facto a vocative. 

Whatever place (removed from the initial syllable) in a 
name its chief word-stress may hold, its initial syllable is 
constantly prominent in the mind by reason, apparently, of 
this vocative quality. In the distinct calling out of names 
(of the form in question) the natural emphasis given to the 


name as a whole will be found to consist of a rising inflection 
on the initial syllable, followed by a strongly stressed word- 

" / \ " / \ " / \ " / 
accent. Thus, Elizabeth, Alexander, Matilda, Marie, etc. This 

vocative stress, it is now seen, finds its true analogy in the 
secondary word-stress, and is like it therefore available for 
ictus, as has been assumed in the earlier portion of this study, 
and as may be observed in modern verse in the case of names 

" / \ 
with the stresses distributed as they are in Alexander. 

In Old English verse proper names can with difficulty 
(some not at all) be used without the rhythmic aid of this 
vocative ictus. But because of the special character of 
this secondary accent (as by analogy it may be called), and 
because of the further fact that the types of rhythm, as they 
are now generally interpreted, abound in the employment for 
ictus of secondary word-accents without regard to syllabic 
quantity, it must be maintained (until new evidence for the 
opposed view may be produced) that this ictus-use of the 
initial unaccented syllable of foreign proper names does not 
involve lengthening of the short vowels. 




The existence of the Christus Redivivus of Nicholas Grimald 
was questioned by Herford, Literary Relations, &c., and denied 
by the writer of the life of Grimald in the National Dictionary 
of Biography. We now know, from Goedeke, Grundriss, 
second ed., that a copy is in the Wolfenbiittel Library. See 
my letter in the London Academy, February 9, 1895. Soon 
after the appearance of that letter I received, from Herrn 
Spirgatis, the well-known antiquarian-dealer in Leipsic, a 
friendly note, in which he called my attention to Bahlmann, 
Die lateinischen Dramen seit Wimpfeling's Stylpho, in which 
Bahlmann mentions the existence of a copy in the Berlin 
Royal Library. 

Thus there are three copies : the Wolfenbiittel, the Berlin, 
and my own. 

In view of the growing interest taken in the Latin drama 
of the sixteenth century, I have thought it worth while to 
reprint my copy, thereby rendering the Christus Redivivus 
generally accessible to students. 

Of the merits of the Christus in comparison with other 
plays, of its general significance, I am not competent to 
speak ; my knowledge of the Renaissance drama is too slight. 
I venture upon one or two suggestions only. The Epistola 
Nuncupatoria ought to have some value for the study of 
scholarship in England. The four characters : Dromo, Dorus, 
Sangax, Brumax, milites gloriosi, so to speak, are an evident 
attempt at the comic. Christ's revelation of himself to Mary 
Magdalen, in the single word " Maria/ 7 Act. Ill, sc. 5, may 
have been taken of course directly from John, xx. 16. The 
entire situation, however, seems to me an imitation of the old 


370 J. M. HART. 

liturgical drama. Is the word Orcicolce, Act IV, so. 4, a 
coinage by Grimald, in imitation of the Ccelicolce, &c., of the 
liturgical drama? I do not remember seeing the form before. 
The present text is an exact reproduction of the original, 
page by page, line by line. Exact except in the following 
features : 

1. The original is throughout in italics. 

2. The word et is in the original a ligature. 

3. Occasionally I have not been certain of the accent-sign 
(') in the original. This is due to the circumstance that, 
though the original types were sharp enough, the paper was in 
places speckled slightly. Hence one cannot always be certain 
whether a given stroke is really a (') or only a flaw in 
the paper. 

4. The long italic sibilant letter of the original is here given 
throughout with the modern Roman " s." 

The punctuation of the original is in the main consistent, 
according to the system of those days. There is, however, 
great inconsistency in the use of the hyphen for words broken 
at line ends. For these and other blemishes the original 
must answer. Thus Martonensi (for Mertonensi), at the end 
of the JEpistola f is in the original. 

The continuous pagination in square brackets at the top 
of the page has been supplied by me. The original has only 
the J.2, &c., at the bottom. The second page [2] is blank. 

J. M. HART. 




Tragica, sacra et noua. 

Authors Nicolao Orimoaldo. 


Colonies loan. Gymnicus excudebat, 
Anno M. D. XLIIL 




ratissimo uiro Gilberto Smitho, Ar- 

chidiacono Petroburgensi, Nicolaus 

G-rimoaldus a Christo domino 

S. D. 

VTrtim audacius, aut durius esset 
committere, ut opus recens confe 
ctu, per quorurauis manus et ora, 
ueluti securum uagaretur, an tuis 
ut creberrimis postulationibus ob 
sisterem, saepe*, doctissime uir, ac 
multiim et a repraehensione mihi 
cauens, et morem tibi gestum cupiens, apud me cogita- 
ri. Nonnihil equidem uerebar, ne forsan haac subita 
iuuenilis inuenti peruulgatio, penitus immatura, et an 
te diem properata, doctis ac prudentibus uiris existi- 
mari posset. Namq; si uel inter clarissimos $riptores 
memorantur, qui suas commentationes per multos an- 
nos sibi diligenter euoluendas, et frequenti studio reco 
lendas putauerunt, donee quod desideraretur, supple- 
rent, quod abundaret ac efflueret, quasi luxuriantem 
segetem paulatim depascerent: quam confidentiam ego 
prodidisse uideri potero, qui cum eosde sequi fortasse, 
nunquam adsequi, et de illis iudicium facere, nuquam 
efl&cere similia queo: tame quod propter inclementiam 
brumalis frigoris baud sine difficultate, proq; ratione 
temporis magna cum festinatione parturieba, tarn ci 

A2 t6 


374 J. M. HART. 


t6, tamq; nullo ad retractandq sumpto spacio, pdrere 
no dubitauerim ? Ac sand, si repetenti mi hi, measq; aut 
fabulosas, aut fictitias, aut ueras exercitationes, quas 
non ita pridem chartis mandabam, recognoscenti, uete 
res usq; ade6 labores displicent, ut in illis ipsis uix me- 
met agnoscam, et quodarnmodd poeuiteat operse collo- 
catae : quid scis, num nam idem posthac etiam usu mihi 
ueniat, uti meipsum ultrd castigas, istis, quee nunc prse 
cipito uerius qu&m scribo, magis elaborata et perpo- 
lita uellem sufficere? Metuebam prseterea, ne forte* 
quis me parum nauiter humeros explorasse, ac meam 
facultatem consuluisse censeat : quandoquidem ineptum 
uiribus meis onus, atq; argumentum grauius et maius 
uidear suscipere, quam quod ab homine adolescentulo 
tractari uel possit, uel debeat. Etenim cum multa3 res 
in sacra Philosophia, nequaquam facilfc cognoscutur, 
nisi quis Grsecam simul et Hebrsaam linguam tenue 
rit, nisi quis in ea perdiu nersatus fuerit, et singula 
inter se loca studiose contulerit : turn de Christi a mor 
tuis exurrectione, quam sic ante constituere, quasi si 
res iam ageretur, contendo, baud paucis difficultati- 
bus, inuoluta historia est. Neq; uer6 desunt, qui imber 
bem adhuc et crescentem cum consilio aetatem, aut a sa 
crarum lectione literarum omnino arceri uolunt, aut 
si admittunt aliquando, ut auscultricem quidem accede 
re patiuntur, ut interpretem autem nullo modo. Turn 
demum, baud mediocriter illud pertimescebam, futu- 
ros, qui nimium iust& conquerantur : ne rem gestam ri 
te digerere, ac talem tantamq; materiam digna orati- 





one uestire non posse. Nimirum, tanquam in coramuni 
hominum uita et moribus, arduum in primis habetur, 
in unaquaq; re decoru perspicere et obseruare, de quo 
sapienter a Philosophis in Ethica disciplina preeci- 
pitur : sic in poematis, consentaneam rebus et personis 
orationem adfingere, hominem peracuto ingenio, lima 
to iudicio, singulari diligentia, summed^; ocio abundan- 
tem requirit. Certum est enim, nee locupletem et te- 
nuem fortunam, nee simplicem narrationem et iacta- 
tionem Thrasonicam, nee blandam consolationem et 
querimoniam, nee coelestem uocern et tartareos clamo 
res, unum atq; idem postulare dictionis genus. Proin- 
de, perfici oportere, ut pro rerum natura, uarietate 
et modo, nunc Oratoriorum luminum et conformati- 
onum ueluti parcus, humili passu repat uersus, inter- 
dum uerd, uolubilius ac profluentius excursitet, ssep^ 
autem numero uerborum agmen instar hybernarum 
niuium ingruat, et plenis habenis prorumpens oratio, 
campum, in quo exultare possit, obtineat. Adhaec, dum 
I6gi carmiuis inseruitur, operosam quandam rem, ac 
prope desperatam esse, ita postrema uerba cum inse- 
quentibus primis copulare, ut neq; iunctura uocalium 
hiulcas, neq; consonantium concursus uoces efficiat 
asperas : itaq; compraBhensionis cuiusq; ambiturn exple 
re, ut aureis teretes et religiosse, neq; mutila et quasi 
decurtata sentiant, neq; superuacanea et redundantia. 
In primis igitur, quod ad huiusce libri Mitionem atti- 
net, uideor mihi uidere quosdam, me ut nimis ac nimis 
temerariurti arguenteis : qui cum tutius in umbratili 

A3 Philoso- 

376 J. M. HART. 


Philosophorum schola, no secus ac in aliquo nido pos 
sem delitescere : tamen multo meo cum periculo implu- 
mis euolare gestiam. Qui si nullum aliud a me respon- 
sum auferrent, nisi quod roganti Gilberto Smitho mo 
rigerari uolui, esset fortassis honesta ratio : cum prse- 
sertim et de me quam optime promerito, et bonarum 
literarum amantissimo uiro, et recta, et suo quodam 
iure poscenti, deesse nolui. Sed enim ut paulo altius hu 
iusce facti consilium repetam, cum e Cantabrigiensi 
Academia decedens, uehementer hortante te et pecu 
nias ultrd suppeditante, uenissem ad alterum Anglise 
lumen Oxoniam, nee e6 libri mei per hebdomadas ali- 
quot essent adlati : hanc sum ingressus prouinciam, et 
quia intermissum legendi cursum, fructuoso aliquo com 
mentandi genere pensare concupiui, et quia res ipsse 
sic inhserebat animo meo, ut ex memorise thesauro tan 
quam de scripto promere liceret singula. Postea uerd 
quam uersatus in Collegio doctorum, quod ab Aeneo 
naso nomen inuenit, per mensem unum et item alterum 
istam pro mea uirili Spartam ornauera, ac forte for 
tuna ita, ut fiebat, arderet pubes domestica theatrum 
consceudere, qu6 et suos excitarent animos, et ciuibus 
imaginem quandam uitaa spectandam exhiberent : con- 
tinuo ex paucis, qui meum cubiculum frequentabant, 
ccepit multis innotescere, quid molirer, quidq; in mani- 
btis haberem. Egit itaq; mecum Matthaeus Smith us 
Collegij prseses et consanguineus tuus, homo mirifi- 
ca modestia, liberalitate et sanctimonia praaditus : egit 
Robertas Cauduuellus, uir perhonestus, et insigni- 




ter doctus : egerunt lectissimi atq; optimse spei adole- 
scenteis, ut meani sibi fbetura, in Scenam producendam 
concrederem, in eaq; re, meam illis operam dicarem ac 
deuouerem. Quoniam autem negare eis turn praeclara 
petentibus, turn indole sua digna cupientibus, difficile 
mihi uisum fuit : permisi sane, ut eorum auspicijs, hsec 
ista Comoedia etiam in eruditissimorum uirorum coro 
na publicitus ageretur. Quod siruul ut faraa uoce lo- 
quaci perstrepens, in aureis tuas effuderat : me non so- 
lum per diligentissimum institutorem meum lohannem 
Aerium admonere, sed et ipse tu iterum atq; iterum 
huius poematis ditionem rogare comiter sustinuisti. 
Atque adeo, quoties egomet admiratione et pudore 
prop& confusus, ad caussas ingeniosus extiti : dicebamq; 
non posse non in adolescente uiginti plus minus annos 
nato, undiq; apparere inscientiso uestigia, habebamq; in 
obiectis omnia, quse sunt a me superius adducta : toties 
prseceptor ille meus (qua3 sua fuit et tibi obsequendi, 
et prouocandi mei sedulitas) instabat, et exemplis cum 
recentiorum, turn etiam ueterum utebatur, quorum ex- 
tarent monumenta, id setatis, baud sine sum ma laude 
conscripta. Neq; mihi magnopere sequendam esse aie- 
bat uocem ilia Horatianam, qua3 noniim in annum pre- 
mi iubet opusculum : quin potius, qu6 tibi extrema iam 
setate confecto (dum licet) gratum facerem, festinadum, 
agendum ' que in tantis meis occupationibus domesticis 
cum uiro aliquo exquisite docto, ut et legere librum 
et inter legendum uultus inimicos induere uelit. JNeq; 
si grauioribns deinceps annis, grauius industriaB speci 

A4 men 

378 J. M. HART. 


men etlere me posse confidam : continud, ab hoc proposi 
to desistendum. Vt enim (exempli gratia) M. Tullij 
, Khetoricis ad Quintum fratrem aduentante senectu- 
te coscriptis, omnem admirationem tribui uidemus : ita 
d libris de E-hetorica inuentione, quos adolescens 
composuit, suam esse laudem et commendationem. Non 
P. Vergilium detinuisse a scribendo Culicem aut Ae- 
clogas, rei rusticse describendae speratam gloriam : non 
earn cum Hesiodo contentionem, magni Homeri semu 
lationem restinxisse. Itemq; non Maronianum Aene- 
am, primis tantum in cursu, uerum et secundis, et etia 
infra seciidos quibusdam, certa elargitum esse prsemia. 
lam uer6, illud peropportune cecidisse confirmabat, 
quod in argumentum adsumerem non leuiuscula Epi- 
gram mata, non amatorios iocos, non morias, non mi- 
mos, non postremoruru hominum colloquia, non Atel 
lanam Comosdiam, no Tabernariam, aut si qua sunt 
Ethnicarum fabularum portenta, quae nihil ad mo- 
ruin conformationem, nihil ad solidam eruditionem, ni 
hil ad diuinae laudis amplificationem adferunt emolu- 
menti : sed qu6d pro creaturis, creatorem, pro perditis 
et execrandis redemptorem et conseruatorem, pro hu 
mana ostentatione, coelestis glorias propagation em, 
denique ipsum autorem carminis lesum Christum, in 
materiam carminis accepissem. Omninoq; rem dignio- 
re aut magis diuinam, ex omnibus omnium scriptis, de 
ligi nunquam potuisse. Quippe quse totius nostrse salu- 
tis quasi tabula sit, et uiuida reprasentatio. Nam qui 
reducem & morte Christum, ac pro suo scelere satis 

ab eo 



ab eo factum plane sentit, eiusdemq; spiritu sanctiorem 
ad uitam renouatur : eum inconcussa et efficaci fiducise 
uicturum, nihil sibi uel a prauarum adfectionum pulsi- 
onibus, uel & mortis periculo timentem, quin uiciorura 
colluuiem strenue fortiterq; pugnando dies in singulos 
repressurum, ut et ipse cum Christo suo mortuus pec- 
catis, uiuat uni Deo. Vnde pronunciare Petrum, bo- 
nse conscientse fcedus erga Deum constare, per exur 
rectione lesu Christi a mortuis, qui patris ad dexte- 
ram considet. Cum etenim diuinaB gratis non nisi per 
fidem in Christum participes fieri possumus : nuquam 
e6 niti ualere persuasionem nostram, si non mortem il- 
lo uindice uictam iacere, si non ilium genitori crelesti 
adsidentem regnare, si deniq; no omnibus antepositum 
et praBlatum cert6 crediderimus. Si quidem, ut subeun 
dum ipsi letum fuisse, qu6 indignationem Dei, quam so 
lus Adamus contraxerat, solus Messias tolleret, 
inq; nobismetipsis peccata perimeret: sic uita3 restitui 
oportuisse, ut ad eius ipsius imaginem et formam suo 
spiritu perpetud refingeremur, utq; suo munere iusti 
redderemur. Idcircd, ualde probandam operam meam 
in hoc negocio constantissime adseuerauit, quoniam, cu 
ius fidem ipse Christus tarn diligenter astruebat, et 
qua una in re spes atq; opes humanae omneis collocari 
debent, perfeci, non solum ut auditione accipi, sed etiam 
coram oculis proponi et statui queat. Semper inculca 
ri, semper mente et cogitatione reponi, semper fidelissi- 
ma persuasione retineri, triumphum hunc Seruatoris 
nostri de peccato et morte, summe necessarium fore : 

As turn 

380 J. M. HAET. 



turn qu6d humana ratio et intelligent^ uix ualet eum 
comprsehendere : turn qu6d improba suasio maligni da3 
monis in hoc nos maxime remorari solet, in quo nouit 
salutem nostram totam esse positam. Itaq; non modo flo 
res ex oratione lectorem deceFpturum : uerumetiam ex 
ipsa re fructus percepturum uberrimos. Quod autem 
ad uireis meas, et aBtatis rationem attineret, nihil uide 
re se dictitabat, uel impudens, uel indecorum. Priruum 
enim non id me suscipere atq; profiteri, ut reuelem ab- 
dita mysteria : sed ut nudam ac ueram historiam enar- 
rem, et modo quodam Poetico, hoc est, claro et illu- 
stri spectaculo patefaciam. Nee sibi dubium esse, quin 
earn ad rem prseter linguarum atq; librorum admini- 
cula, et diligentem meditationem, et assiduarn precati 
onem adhibuerim. Hac scilicet ratione et uia infanteis, 
paruulos ac pusillos regni Dei, citius ad germanam 
ac diuini eloquij scientiam atq; intellectum peruenire : 
qu&m Cicerones, Aristoteles, Galenos, aut quoscun 
que etiam alios, qui suo ipsorum acumine, proprio inge 
nio, et humana sapientia nitutur. Deinde, illtid maxi 
me decere et couenire, ut in Christiana Ecclesia mem 
brum nullum ocio desidiaq; torpescat : sed, qua potest 
parte, uniuerso corpori famuletur et inseruiat. Atq; 
ijs, qui tatarum rerum explicationem committi nolunt 
adolescentibus, cogitandum esse, quid' nam de Timo- 
thei iuuentute senserit Paulus Apostolus : istis uerd, 
qui ne legedi quidem uerbum illud salutiferum, Deiq; 
placita potestatem faciunt, D. Erasmi paraclesin pro- 
ponendam esse, et quid Christiana? professionis inter- 




sit, etiam atq; etiam considerandum. Postrem6, quod 
spectat ad huius Tragicse Comcedise tractationem, 
suo quseq; loco rite disponi, decorum custodiri, e rerum 
copia nasci uerborum eopiam, numeros Comicos et fe 
re Terentianos obseruari iudicabat. Belle uidelicet, 
me temporum ordine ad finem decurrisse : et magnse 
paruis, laeta tristibus, obscura dilucidis, incredibilise 
probabilibus intexuisse. Quemadmodum enim qu6 res 
ipsa nomen tueatur suum, primum Actum Tragico 
mcerori cedere, quintum uero et ultimum iucunditati- 
bus adcommodari et gaudijs : ita qu6 uarietas satie- 
tati occurrat, caeteris omnibus intermedijs, nunc lugu 
bria, nunc festiua interseri. Etiam nihil ineptum, nihil 
indecorum, nihil quod aut personse, aut rei, aut tempo 
ri, aut loco minus quadret, inueniri posse arbitraba- 
tur. Nam quis, inquit, Oratorio facultatis expertus, 
non rem gestam indicatibus et subitd colloquentibus, 
tenuem, pressum, et familiarem sermonem : non consola- 
toribus, Iseticise niicijs, atq; plaudetibus, tractam, sua- 
uem et uenustam dictionem : non gloriosis, exultabun- 
dis, et indignantibus, acrem, ardentem, et grandilo- 
quam oratione attribuerit? Loca item, baud usque eo 
discriminari censebat : quin unum in proscenium, facile 
et citra negocium conduci queant. Ac si quis mire- 
tur, uel qu6d plurium dierum historian! atque diuersa 
tempora, in unam et eandem actionem coegerim, uel 
quod funestum et perluctuosum principium, tarn plau- 
sibilem sortiatur exitum : eum intelligere debere, me 
autorem sequi M. Actium Plautum, cuius praeter 


382 J. M. HAET. 



alias Capteiuei et compluribus interiectis diebus agi 
fingutur, et ex initio moesto in laetum etia finem trans 
eunt. Deniq; certa spacia, numerates pedes, atque cir- 
cumscriptos ueluti cancellos in uersibus scrupulose sa 
tis retinuisse me adserebat : etiamsi non Christiana li- 
bertatis hominibus, sed ijs, qui se superstitiosis et an- 
xijs profanorum authorum legibus illigaret, scripsis 
sem. Et tamen, metri seruitutem, nunquam uim uerbis 
auferre, aut quasi natiuam lucem et gratiam eripere 
sentiebat. Ego uero, haec omnia, et alia permulta in 
eandem sentetiam ab eodem instructore meo perorata : 
partim eius erga me beneuolentiae, partirn animi tui 
explendi desiderio tribuenda existimabam. Sed enim, 
quomodocunq; se res habet, testificor me tuis manda- 
tis impulsum, et pen& inuitum hanc uel Comoediam, 
uel Tragcediam, uel etiam utramq; publicare esse au- 
sum. Malo etenim dum uoluntati tuse sim obsecutus, 
desiderari a te prudentiam meam, quam si non sim obse- 
cutus, animi propensionem atq; parendi studium. Nam 
quse tandem esset inhumanitas, illi, cui uictu, cui libros, 
cui demum omnia prsesidia studiorum. meoru debeam, 
qualemcunq; saltern tarn collati beneficij sui, quam re- 
lati officij mei fructum flagitanti abnuere? Nunc er- 
g6, quemadmodum antiquitatis obseruatione a priscis 
usque seculis ac hominum setatibus ducta, et diuturni 
tate temporis confirmata, receptum est : hasce primi- 
tias ingenioli mei secundum gratise modum acceptum a 
Domino, tibi, perillustris Archidiacone, nuncupo, 
consecro, et uelut in clientelam trado, ut patrocinio tuo 





defensae, turn in Dei Opt. Max. gloriam et honorem, 
turn in Christianas iuuentutis usum et emolumentum 
exire possint. Bene ualeas, et gratia Domini nostri 
lesu Christi te regat, foueat, conseruet. 
Oxonise. e Collegio Martonensi. Anno M. 



Magdalene. Manes piorum. 

Cleophis. Christus. 

Chorus Galileidum. Petrus. 

losephus Arimathiensis. Johannes. 

Nicodemus. Angel us primus, 

Cai'aphas. Angel us secundus. 

Annas. Chorus discipulorum. 

Dromo. Alecto. 

Dorus, Cleophas. 

Sangax. Amaon. 

Brumax. Thomas Didymus. 

384 J. M. HART. 



lambici Trimetri uel senarij. 

GRatia uobis et pax adsit, uiri opti- 
Sum mo Deo : factoq; iam silentio, hue 
Aureis, oculos, mentemq; uestram in- 
tendite : 

Vti, qua uenistis caussa, expeditius 
Intelligatis, hoc quid sit spectaculi. 
Christum rediuiuum, comoediam sacram, 
Diui quam suppetunt Euangeliographi, 
Vobis pra3bemus intuendam singulis. 
Et id quidem non externis tantummodo 
Luminibus, intimo sed et haustu pectoris. 
Est absq; ulla dubitatione, eiusmodi 
Res, quae ob oculos frequens uersari debeat. 
MoDstratur enim, sub aspectumq; ponitur, 
Summum Dei Opt. Max. et amplissimum 
Beneficium. Quia in Christo, supertim pater 
Penitus expressit, quo scilicet modo 
Erga genus humanum animatus extitit. 
Is enim (quse sua fuit Patrisq; charitas) 
Pro scelere nostro fecit abunde satis : 
Intimum amorem suo testatus sanguine. 
Ac ne quis precium non solutum adhuc putet, 
Noluit mortis detineri carcere : 





Quin hac, et peccato uictis atq; obrutis 

Erupit, et sanctorum regna repetijt. 

Hinc spiritus locuples in orbem effunditur, 

Dominantis iam Christi donum optatissimum : 

Nos qui suos uera sic instruit fide, 

Vt et Dei factam per Christum gratiam 

Nobis persuadeat, et efficaciter 

Sese ipsa per amorem uehementem exprimat. 

Iam Christus noster est, et nos Christi sumus, 

Ac ipse Christus corporis est nostri caput, et 

Se nobis reddidit undequaq; similem. 

Vtq; ille recepta mole reuixit carnea : 

Sic et nos (eius qui quasi membra existimus) 

In rediuiuo mortalitatis unicam 

Spem Christo figere, par est et consonum. 

Nunc autem, ea in re, qua fit illustrissimum 

Salutis eeternaB sum mam consistere : 

Quam mirifice domini gratuita bonitas 

Cum incredulitate suorum certauerit, 

In hac tota historia licebit cernere ? 

Quum ne Angelis quidem eius alumni crederem, 

Eum pdst organa resumpsisse corporis, 

Quam uis ludaica sibi uitam exhauserat : 

Semet uiuum coram exhibuit, et saBpius 

Manifestis declarauit testimonijs. 

Nam praeter mutua hinc iude habita colloquia, 


386 J. M. HART. 



Panem suo quodam more in parteis tribuit, 
Oppessulatis foribus introijt domum, 
Comedit un&, tangendum se prsebuit, 
Omisit nihil, hsec uitae recuperatio 
Nobis, ut omnibus esset persuasissima. 
Si erg6 hie Dei tanta elucet benignitas, 
Quantam non cuncta opera ostentant caetera 
Certe nullum spectrum uberiore gaudio 
Christiadum poterit pertentare pectora. 


NVnc uestra ne fallatur expectatio, 
Sic accipitote, quod primum in scenam uenit. 
Christus in eo iacet sepulchro conditus : 
Quern Magdalis cum cseteris mulieribus, 
Quse a Galilsea lesum sequutse uenerant, 
Flet ^, ludseis interemptum atrociter. 
Ast et Nicodemus, et losephus illico hac 
Viam carpent. qui cum spe animos erigent, 
Turn uer6 etiam secum illas deducent domum. et 
Actum istum, nox interuentu claudet suo. 
Ego uobiscum una spectator ero fabulaB. 


Magdalene. Cleophis. Chorus Galilei'dum. 

O uos 



OVos iniqui ludsei, 6 scelere inflamati acerrimo, 
O uos feri, 6 uiolenti, 6 et multo crudelissimi : 
Dicite, qua tande cote hanc insigne uestra inuidientiam 
Plus plusq; sic exacuitis? Dicite, qua nam e fornace tot 
Spirant irarum sestus uobis, ac tanta ruunt incendia ? 
Credo equide, uos omneis immanitate q teterrimos, 
Rabiem satiauisse uestram, in hoc neci iam dedito. 
Scelerosa Solyma, scelerosa ludaea propagatio 
Ac soboles, integris bonis et sanctis plerisq; omnibus, 
Heu nimium pertinaciter infensa et inimica uatibus, 
Quid est quod tantopere bilem concitauerat tuam? 
In hunc spectatum hominem, quid? horainem dico? im6 

sane quidem 

Diuinum et coelestem prophetam appellaretn ueracius. 
Vt qui stupenda potentia miserrimis mortalibus 
Opem et auxilium ferens : hsec (etsi uald ingrata 


Ac turbida) lustrare loca minime recusauerit. 
Hie pro sua mera bonitate, alijs posthabitis gentibus, 
Tete sibimet unam prseter caeteras delegerat : 
Qua signis, qua meritis, qua admiradis reru miraculis 
Ad ipsum crelum usq; efferret et eueheret, quani 

demum suis 

Beneficijs et rebus gestis, sequalem olympo redderet. 
Erg6, hunc tam prseclare et magnifice de te promeri- 

uirum, (turn 

B His 

388 J. M. HART. 



His cumulas egregijs donis? ergo isti, quern prsestabilis 

Honestas exculpauerat, hsec (tanqua pra3mia uidelicet) 

Animum induxti, hospitia digna referre et rependere? 

Hsec ' cine tecta ? hasce sedes ? hosce constituisti toros ? 

Hunc ' cine honore addidisti ? 6 horredu atq; nefariti see 

O facinus nulla cuiusqua lingua oino excusabile. (lus. 

Non tot uatum uoces, no tarn clarissirna Iamb. 

Stupendaq; prodigia, non te deniq; Trimet. 

Tarn prsesens numen potuit unquam inflectere? 

Tu istam sciens uolensq; peregisti necem. 

Tu uulnificis, heu, sertis inflictura caput, 

Tu pal mas traiectas acuta cuspide, 

Tu clauis confossos pedes, 

Alta in pinu ac tristi pendenteis machina : 

Tu, tu, dico, exultans respexti hostiliter. 

Scribe hunc tibi de Christo triumphum, si uoles : 

Habe hanc laudem, ut de csede bonorum gaudeas. 

Erit, erit dies, qua te mirum in modum 

Poeniteat perpetrasse tarn indignum nefas. 

Verum ista dolorem auget commernoratio. 

Attamen ego meis una cum sororibus 

Lachrymas gemitusq; fundens et suspiria, 

Si non (mi Christe) illud corpusculum tuum, at 

Saxum, quo tegeris, tamen amplexa suauiter, 

Lubens officium tibi nunc persoluam ultimum. 

Valeto dulce decus meum, decus meum 




Yaleto ad tempus, ast' non aeternum quidem. 
Neq; enim tu iam plane atq; omnino extingueris : 
Sed astra leuem partem, terrestrem humus tenet, 
Sese tandem aliquando uisuram denud. 
Viuent, uiuent, quse fingimus ossa mortua. 
Interea, hlc molliter quiescas, Christe mi : 
Interea mi Christe, quiescas hie molliter. 


losephus Arimathseus. Nicodemus. Magdalis. 
Sal6me. Cleoph. lohann. 

AMabd te, mi Nicodeme, animum attendito, ut 
Fcemineo plangore hortus totus personat? 
Sedet Magdalis in medio posita marmore 
Capillis dilaceratis, ore pallido. 
Nee iam uocem ullam ualet amplius emittere. 
Sed magnis exanimata cruciatibus, 
Lapidi adhasret, non secus ac esset mortua. 
Alia3, non modd non hanc a mcestitia uocant : 
Verum etiam profusis indulgent fletibus, 
Pugnisq; frequentibus concutiunt pectora. 
Breuiter, omnes omnia replent luctti loca. 
Nic. losephe, mihi mediusfidius morsu quasi 
Quodam, sensum plane peracerbum inferunt. 
Atq; adeo incredibili iam ipse dolori meo 
Vel moerori potius, quern e tarn diro exitu 

B 2 Optimi 

390 J. M. HART. 



Optimi hominis accepi, uix queo resistere : 
Sed imperabo tamen meis adfectibus, 
Quin adgredimur propius ut flenteis foeminas 
(Quoad a nobis fieri et preestari potest) 
Leuemus, atq; spem illis prsebeamus aliquam. 
Quomfj; umbra terra} iam solis opacat iubar, 
Ne forte meticulosis incommodet, 
Atq; noceat nocturna concursatio : 
Exanguem in tecta reportemus Magdalim, 
Easq; singulas abducamus domum. 
los. Satis admodum tu commode mones. nam id et 
Ratio temporis, et rerum postulat status. 
Age festinanter, compellemus alacriter. 
Nic. Quousq; tandem Galila3a3 lachrymabitis ? 
Aut quam diu ad hanc petram querula} manebitis ? 
Quern ad finem in squalore iacebitis et sordibus ? 
los. Hoc non fit sane sine diuino numine : 
Vos parcitote lachrymosis questibus. 
Et iam nox ruit, ac somnum hortantur sydera. 
Vos ploratu finem atq; modum imponite : 

Octona. Sedate oportet tolerari, quod ferre necessitas iubet. 

Vos eiulatum erg6 deponite, et iam conticescite. 
Mag. Heu me quid obsecro misera, misera, 
Quid agam tandem aliud misera, misera, 
Quam quod furtim erepta sibi querens pignora, 
Philomela et noctu factitat et interdiu ? 




Turpe profectd mihi duco, post hunc mori 

Non posse me, uel sola moeroris face. 

Nic. Maria, caue Maria, ne insanis clamoribus 

Coalestis patris iras aduersum te incites. 

Mag. Eheu, mihi cur, cur non licuerit mihi, 

Christum extinctum saltern lamentari meum? 

Nic. Non est, mihi crede, non est extinctus tuus 

Christus : sed potius exemptus iam uinculis 

Corporeis, sethereo fruiscitur polo. 

Non est amissus, sed prsemissus ad Deum. 

Nee sibi finem uitse, sed initium quidem 

Aeternitatis morte consequutus est. 

Nee perijt, sed a nobis discedens et migrans, 

Ad societatem abijt superum immortalium. 

Vbi pro seruitute uitam liberam, 

Pro umbris lucem, pro rerum incertitudine 

Securitatem, pro labore prsemium est 

Adeptus, nullo inter moriturum seculo. 

Mag. In hoc equidem tibi facile adsentior, 

Qu6d quemadmodum eius ossa sepulchro dormiant : 

Ita mens cum Deo et reliquis uiuat pijs. 

Sed ut suam sortem non omnino fleam : 

Propria damna tamen, atq; incommoda publica, 

Diuinum hominem deplorare ereptum iubent. 

Nam qui mihi meisq; semper extitit 

Prsesens perfugium, portus, et opitulatio, 

B 3 Qui 

392 J. M. HART. 



Qui me torquenteis effugabat dsemonas. 
Qui Lazarum ad uitae reuocabat munera. 
Quo prsesente mea plaudebat Bethania : 
Eheu, mihi cur, cur non licuerit mihi, 
Eundem ademptum saltern lamentarier ? 
Nic. Quibus te simul et nos exornauit bonis, 
Horum fructus nobiscum perpetud manent. 
Qu&m sit iniquum autem optare, bane uitam ut 


Potius quam ubi nunc est, ipsa per te cogites. 
Tellure indignus, coelo collocatus est. 
Mundus eum respuit, exceperunt caelites. 
Quapropter neq; te destitutam dixeris : 
Et eius condition! gratulabere. 
Mag. O Nicodeme, lubens agnosco illnd equidem, 
Me sic ipsius cumulatam esse munere, 
Vt omnem in uitam sim futura melior. 
Verum, quoties tenax repetit memoria, 
Punctum corolla spinifera sinciput 
Manus adfixas, ferr6 contrusos pedes, 
Turpatos crineis, barbara cretam sanguine, 
Illusum, pulsatum, ignominiose pendulum, 
Vna cum pessimse notse latronibus, 
Deiectos oculos, ora morientia, 
Et etiam hastam cruore intepuisse lateris : 
Toties, eheu, cur non licitum erit mihi, 





Sic caesum insontem, saltern lamentarier ? 

Nic. Sane multas perdis lachrymas, 6 Magdalis, 

Ad rem amissam recuperandam faciunt nihil. 

Im6 magls nostrum dolorem exasperant, 

Quam tibi quid consolationis adferunt. 

Sed qui ex usu rei totius publicse 

Tot supra hominem res arduas olim 6didit : 

Is (ne dubites) baud absq; nostris omnium 

Vtilitatibus, uolens efflauit spiritum. 

Ac sane nescio quid istiusmodi 

Futurum, mibi prsesignificabat : etenim 

Quoni multa nocte, a ludseis metuens mibi, 

Eum consulerem, memini dicere solitum, 

Qu6d ut in agris atq; desertis locis, 

Mose serpens erectus quondam fuit : 

Ita oporteret seseipsum exaltarier. 

Quanquam quid sibi uoluit, non plane intelligo. 

Potuisset letum subterfugere, sat scio, 

Mod6 uoluisset : at sponte ipse sese dedit 

Violentis inimicorum armis obuium. 

Quid qudd summus parens iussis baud mollibus 

Vrgebat : cuius cum reliquis in omnibus, 

Turn uer6 istac in re standum est arbitrio. 

Si erg6 rectum iudicium, si modestiam 

Retinere dignam forti fcemina uoles. 

Si eius uoluntati conspirabit tua, 

B 4 Si 

394 J. M. HART. 



Si parebis Dei ipsius prudentise : 

Non erit ullo pacto, non tibi licitum erit, 

Christum occisum tarn acerbe laraentarier. 

los. Surgas nunc Magdalis, Maria consurgito : 

Abunde* suus a te tumulo datus est honos. 

Mag. Adsurgam ego ? me nullus ab hoc marmoreo 

Antro diuellet, anima dum exuperabo mea. 

Salo. Im6 surge, d senis dicto sis audiens 

O Maria, nam, quod ipsa tu nosti prob$, 

Cras festa pro recepta consuetudine 

Nobis quidem celebranda sunt solennia. 

Post reuenienteis, mod6 sic stat sententia, 

Huic aromata precioso corpori, 

Bene olentia et amoena comparabimus. 

Age"dum, Arimathsee, istanc ab humo subleua. 

Mag. Ah, quamuis a3gre mihi discedendum siet, 

Tamen amicis adquiescam hortatibus. 

Facite igitur matronae religiosissimae, ut 

SabbaticaB requietis transacto curriculo, 

Hue simul ut ortus uicerit noctem dies, 

Myrrham, costum, spicaBq; Cilissse acerrimaa, 

Et summa3 suauitatis unguenta, ueluti 

Suprema sacro sepulchro addentes munera, 

Celerem quam primum referamus pariter pedem. 

Sal. O fiat per Deum immortalem, quod petis. 

Nil etenim nos (ut pro istis quoq; respondeam) in 





Votis habemus, aut in optatis prius. 

Nunc neq; lux prona celebrare inferias sinit, 

Et hoc ipsum prohibet crastina uacatio. 

Quare, mora nulla, prirno quoq; tempore 

Perendina9 lucis ad hortum hunc properabitur, 

Vt monuisti. Locum rite notauimus. 

los. Bene habet. restat, uos ut duos, inanibus 

Remotis cruciamentis, consequamini. 

Sal. Nobis perplacet. Mag. Ac mihi certe no displicet. 


CAi'aphas de Christi obitu quodammodd 
Triumphat. Eidem obiecta recenset crimina. 
Expectat socius, Pilatum qui adi^re, uti 
Sepulchrum huius multo seruetur milite. 
Custodes adducens, responsa prsesidis 
Refert Annas. Valiant locum armata manu. 
Abeunt. Speluncse autem tutores illic6 
Sese quam ipsum Herculem plus posse iactitant. 
Turn spiritus defuncti ad manes deuolat, 
Quse animse piorum Ia3ti' accipiunt plausibus. 
Ille, illas promissum ad polum uictor uehit. 


SEcunda quidem sors est, et ad nostram fluens Trimet. 
Voluntatem, qua hunc authorem discordise, 

B 5 Antequam 

396 J. M. HART. 



Antequam adesset dies ista celeberrima, 
Se ualde digna occisione occidimus. 
Qui se passim omnium regem esse gentium, ac 
Prolem lehoua, garrire nunquam destitit. 
Qui summi rectoris dominiq; numina 
Sibi adsumens, errata confitentibns 
Impunitatem est solitus et ueniam dare. 
Qui ubi mortale corpus elanguesceret, 
Volaretq; & membrorum mens compagibus, 
Ademit penitus omnem pcenarum metum, 
Infernaq; tormenta suos ridere docuit. 
Qui uetera retractans iura (si dijs placet) 
Nouas quasdam I6ges, nouas ceremonias, 
Decreta noua, ritus nouos, sacra noua, 
Noua et inuisa et inaudita plurima, 
Per uniuersam constituit E/empublicam. 
Eisq; dolis ludseam sic plebeculam, 
Et imperitam undiq; sic multitudinem 
Deceperat, fefellerat, induxerat, 
Huius et unius obseruarent uestigia, et 
Tanquam cselesti missum ab arce colerent. 
At enimuerd scelus ille suum pectore 
Fallaci dissimulare nequibat diu, 
Quin familias frequentaret saepe impias, 
Ac se prohibitis consotiationibus 
Etiam admonitus neutiquam subduceret. 





Turn festis quoq; diebus, qneis fas est nihil 

Exercere, ipse, ut erat rebel li ? et pertinax, 

Quoscunq; morbos profligauit sedul6. 

Quid referam, ut illius consorteis publice* 

Illicitis uescebantur impune cibis ? 

Atq; ut prseter morem illotis manibus etiam, et 

Contactu spurco foedarent obsonia. 

Quasi uer6 Pater omnipotens, nunc denique 

Tot ssecula placitas reuocet ceremonias, 

Ac mentem nutans peruertat sententia. 

Quin etiam (quis probus inultum hoc relinqueret ?) 

Minitabatur se aras destructurum sacras. 

Quod omen in ipsum iustus contorsit Deus. 

Sed et in templa erecta a nostris maioribus, 

Magnificis ac pene infinitis sumptibus, 

Voluerat nefarias faces intendere. Ac 

Dudum molitus est tenebras offundere 

Phoebo, reliquorum moderatori luminum. 

Tarn adhaec ridicul^ stulta erat fiducia, ut 

Socijs moerentibus, ad lumina uitalia 

Kediturum sese coram promitteret. 

Sed nimirum, opportune nos huic malo 

Remedium adhibuimus quam prsesentissimum. 

Confluxdre ad Pilatum templi prsesides, 

My star um coetus, turba sanctorum senum, 

Pharisaei, luris prudentes, qui & satrapa, ad 


398 J. M. HART. 



Vnum omneis contend unt, ut armatos uiros 
Det, bustum defensuros noctes ac dies. 
Atqui, dum redeant, sedes hsec esto mea. 


Annas. Cai'aphas. Dromo. Dorus. Sangax. 

HOc in loco iamdudum nos Cai'aphas 
Amicus noster, un expectat cum suis : 
Dummodo statutum ei pactum non excidit. 
Ellum sedentem solum. Cai'. Ecce autem quern uolo, 
Stipatus aduentat militibus quatuor. 
Ann. Miror qu6d nullus ei adiungitur comes. 
Cai. Cur unus adest, satis exputare non queo. 
Adsurgam equidem. An. Adibo iamiam, et colloquar. 
Cai'. Nunc addiscam, acta quse sunt in prsetorio. 
An. Hem noster : Deus hunc tibi solem det prosperum, 

Cai. Et 

Tu etiam atq; etiam aueto prsesul dignissime. At 
Vbinam sunt reliqui? An. confecto negocio, 
Penates rursus quisq; petebat suos. 
Cai. Belle factum illud est. pulchre* se res habet. 
Sed dicito, quod Romanus responsum dedit ? 
An. Ilium, simul ac ad eius uentum est atria, 
Conuenimus, et apud eum ista perorauimus. 
Aduerti Ponti, imisq; repone sensibus, 
(Nee enim est leuicula res aut parui ponderis) 





Quid ^eudoprophetes uiuus adhuc uulgauerit. 
Ego (inquit) post triduum e mortis faucibus 
Euadam : et ab Oreo uicto me reducem dabo, ac 
Rediuiuus emergam. Ide6 Romulidum optime, 
Forteis et fidos ne molestum sit tibi 
Tradere, qui sarcophagi tueantur ostia, 
Vsque dum tantillum temporis effluxerit. 
Nam eius forsan comites cadauer clepere, et 
Noctu sepultum auferre furto cogitant, 
Ac postea totam urbem falsis rumor ibus 
Implere : qui nusquam est, usuram luminis 
Huius recepisse, et communem spiritum. 
Vt igitur ignis tenuis tenui de fomite 
Primum exilit, mox auctus per totam domum 
Furit, et flamma lambit extructas trabes, 
Ruinamq; patitur a3des diram et flebilem : 
Ita primo rumore, qui percrebuit 
De illius ostentis ac de uirtutibus, 
Opinionem istam sequens insania 
Multo maiore periculo grassabitur. 
Plebes leuis est, et inconstaus et mobilis, 
Plebs aucupatur stultorum rumusculos : 
Apud plebem ualebunt plus deterrima 
Qua3uis, quam si uel optima inculcabimus. 
Erg6, donee licet, principij' occurrito, et 
Insidias pelle prseses prudentissime. 


400 J. M. HAKT. 



Nobisq; potestatem facias, ut undiq; 

Spelsea circum hastatos sistamus uiros. 

Siquidem nauiter et cautfe prospici 

A nobis debet, ut uafri hominis asseclas, 

JSTostro consilio, spe sua frustrarier, 

Plane apparere possit. Atq; hsec hactenus.. 

Turn Pilatus : Quod uoltis Hebrsei, annuo. 

Ammo uobis uigilias et custodias, 

Annuo sepulchri tutores, qui ad crastinum 

Vsque diem perpetuas excubias agant. 

Sub hsec sigillum, quo hunc locum obsignem dedit, 

Cum hisce una spectatis bellatoribus. 

Deinde uiri Solymi, quisq; ad suos lares 

Abeunt simul, ouanteis et uoti compotes. 

Ego, quoniam hue me uenturum ad te receperam, 

Memet sponte obtuli, solus qui hos dirigerem. 

Idcirco uirilem operam nauate fortiter. 

Tu Dromo, latus dextrum occupato. tu Dore 

Qu6 te proripis ? Ad cornu fac sinistrum eas. 

Illic Sangax, istic Brumax consistito. 

Si quis furtum facturus hue accesserit, 

Vos post suum Christum hunc ad manes mittite. 

^Nam prseter umbram quod timeatis, est nihil. 

Quid multa ? magnanimis dictum satis puto. 

Drom. hac 
Quisquis uenerit, experietur mehercul^, 




Qu&m aptas Dromo uireis ad uindictam gerat. 

Dor. Et in me reperiet cor dignum milite. 

Sang. Quicunq; Sangacem uel procul adspexerit, 

Eum sola poterit fuga tutum reddere. 

An. Quid tu uer6 Brumax ? Bru. Quid ? per caput hoc, 

lurare ausim, qu6d si quis forte obuenerit, (tibi 

Aut ego eum occidero, aut is me fugauerit. 

An. Quod posterius dixti, credo futurum prius. 

Bru. Im& cognoscito clarissime uir, tarn et cordatos 

Et etia oculatos, ut nee ire gygas nee muscula (esse nos 

Praeteruolare per nos impune queat. 

Cai*. Quando igitur unusquisq; suum tenet ordinem, 

Nos Ia3tum hunc atq; hilarem traducenteis diem, 

Expectemu 7 huius fabulae catastrophen. 


Dromo. Dorus. Sangax. Brumax. 

Aud frustra, mento bene barbato setas mea Trimet. 

.Voltum ornauit, prsesertim cum mihi mascula 
Corda nequaquam desint. Quid est quod ego tremam? 
Ecquis tarn a uero exorbitabit, ut putet >: <l : 

Muliebrem auimum habitare in isto corpore? 
O quot ego labores exantlaui bellicos ? 
Non me durissima fregerunt praBlia. 
Neque belligerandi disciplina me latet. 
Nee & pueris mod6, sed ab ipsis cunabulis 
Sum armatus feliciter ; ac Mauorti meum 


402 J. M. HART. 



Ingeuinm finxit naturae benignitas, 

Meamq; genesin Mars influxit ferox. 

In me cum lacte materno iuraueris 

Esse imbibitam bellatricem iracundiain. 

Et hunc formidarem proiectum uermibus? 

Quern uicimus, quern uictum ex orbe fugauimus. 

Dor. Mihi uer6 quanquam in coelum non prominet 

Bicorpor atq; gygantea granditas : 

Tamen animum altum, excelsum, generosum, nobilem, 

Non uastam, et prodigiosam corpulentiam 

Justus rerum ^estimator in quoquam exigit. 

Nam mutis pecudibus adsimilantur corpora : 

Animis sequamur superis immortalibus. 

Animisq; sumus apti sydera transcendere. 

Quanta est uis animo, tanti corpus sestimo. 

Neq; enim ego magnitudine et ueluti gradibus, 

Sed potitis conditione metior uirum. 

Virtutem non prsestat figura uel statua : 

Sed omnis in corde residet uirilitas. 

Omninoq; uirum fortis animus efficit. 

Neq; uerd sumus nos ipsi corpora. 

Neq; etiam ego hsec apud uos uerba faciens, 

Corporibus iam uestris loquor, sed animis. 

Est uerum, quod circunfertur prouerbio, 

Non mercabor hominem in ulna atq; in pollice, 

Ast in precio solus habetur animi uigor. 





Quid qu6d maiora patent uulneribus corpora ? 

Quid qudd moles ingens agilitatem impedit ? 

Quid qu6d crassa caro animi uim sepelit et obruit ? 

Exigua3 corporaturse, nunc si placet, 

Vnum ante oculos uestros exeraplum ponite. 

Minutu' accipiter uos magna docere poterit. 

Superant profectd fidem, quse audet auis tantula. 

Obsecro, qu&m longum collum, quam largos pedes, 

Quam acutum rostrum, quam amplas alas ardea 

Possidet ? Attamen a dominis cum dimittitur, 

Sinistra hie ales et in sublime uolitat : earn 

Adoritur atque insequitur strenuissime. 

Ac motis pendenteis tibijs campanula 

Tuba3 sonitum supplent, crescat ut audacitas. 

Iam4; pugnae huius finem attendite. Vincit minor 

Maiorem auis, atq; rapinam apprensam unguibus 

Curuis, crebro rotundat orbe uolubilem. at 

Quid aureis hisce uestras exemplis moror? 

Ne dubitetis, quin modicus ego maxima 

Subdere ualeam, si res et caussa postulat. 

Sum equidem nunc iam seu uiuere praBsto seu mori. 

Sang. Si quis nimium nimiumq; temerarius 

Iter hac nobis fucum factum susceperit : 

Se cognoscat sum mo esse periculo proximum. 

Nam qui sentit Sangacis quid possint manus, 

Nisi me com munis philautia decepit, 

C Se rur 

404 J. M. HART. 



Se rursuru infantem cupiet maximopere 
Inter genetricis adhuc latentem uiscera. 
Equidem baud uerear cum Sampsone congredi. 
Quid in hoc corpore desideretur ? siue quis 
Proceritatem siue magnitudinern, 
Siue optime compacta membra expenderit. 
Arma illoriim, quos exteri celebres habent, 
Puto Cycl6pum esse fabricata mauibus. 
Ita non ad infligendos sunt tantummod6, 
Sed ad declinandos ictus habilia. 
Num uoltus, in quo cuiusque uelut indoles 
Relucet ac uoluntas, me planissume 
Inuictum bello, et armis terribilem indicat? 
Ac de hisce externis fari plura supersedeo. 
Hlc, hlc uiget uis qusedam innata et insita, 
Qua3 nil non audet, quod ferro est penetrabile. 
Quomq; ars, quod inchoat natura, perficit : 
Quid in re militari est, quod scientiam 
Fugit meam ? Quis me uno bellicosior ? 
En uobis quse ' nam a pra3lij ? et conflictibus 
Animos^ pugnans, uolnera reportauerim. 
Non f ne in bellando mira mihi felicitas 
Data est ? quando uirus toties euaserim ? 
Quamobrem, si molientem imposturas mod6 
Quenquam deprendero, in quern peccarit, sciat. 
Bru. Qui me irritans, potis est dextram hanc enadere, 





Hie deinceps lucro, quos aget, annos deputet. 
Adesdum, qui uitae capiens tsedium, ad 
Horae fatalis punctum cursitare uis. 
Ac stabimus hlc socij, hlc una pugnabimus. 
Si quando fuerit opus, si iste caput exeret 
Prsestigiator, reuicturum quern somniant 
Quidam, disseminante' ineptas fabulas, 
Perinde quasi posset nel magus Aegyptius 
Tarn magna operari post mortem miracula. Hoc 
Pol mihi nemo persuadebit mortalium. 
Nee aureis adhibebo magistris mendacibus. 
Ecquando & corporeis functionibus 
Qui deficiuntur semel, ab irremeabili, et 
Clauso barathro suum reducent halitum ? 
Quid ? nurn uitam retinere facilius fuit, 
Qu&m nunc restituere amissam atq; perditam ? 
Verum illud cum nequijt, neq; hoc faciet quidem. 
Sed quid speremus facturum hunc ueneficum, 
Quod nee fuit, nee extat, nee fieri potest ? 
Ideo^;, sodales, si comitum manipulus 
Hunc suffurari clanculum conabitur : 
Armati nudos, strenui infirmo' ac debiles, 
Incautos, ita parati persequamur, ut 
Nullam esse testentur pedibus podagram suis. 
Nemo igitur definitum egrediatur locum. 
Det alteri quisque animos, terrorem hostibus 

C 2 Horrificum 

406 J. M. HART. 



Horrificum incutiamus, et etiam exitiabilem. 


06 cselum, 6 tellus, prata 6 Neptunia, 
Vos Plutonem recipite, quern tartarus euomit. 
Date locum, in queni me liceat abstrudere : 
Donee lux tanta, meis resedit sedibus. 
Manes. Quam tu expectatus aduenis clarissime 
Olympi honos? Nos quam replesti gaudio? 
Venisti uanq;, uenisti, humanum ut genus 
A reguis umbrosis et sole carentibus, 
Educens, stellanti cselo sic inferas. 
Cacod. Oh, iam splendet nouis aer fulgoribus. 
Ob, uolitant agminatim ad caelum caelites. 
Nunc uisam apud nos commotas tragoedias. 


AYdistis binorum gesta dierum omnia : 
Sequitur lux tertia. Terras fit agitatio. 
Metu fracti tumuli statores concidunt. 
lesus Christus consurgit rursum 6 funere. 
Marise uerd cum emptis noctu odoribus, 
Yalde mS,ne cauernam adeunt Galilei'des, 
Perungant ut corpus telluri creditum. 
De Christo multa suo per agros uerba faciunt. 
Cum ad bustum acceditur, et de saxo quseritur 
Seponendo, insperatis atque subitis 





Ab angelis monumentum recluditur. 
Haec lohanni renunciantur et Petro. 
Citi adcurrunt, uera experiuntur. Petrus 
Animum hue illuc alternans regreditur : 
lohanne' herum resurrexisse indicat. 
P6st Magdalene sola e6 reuertitur. 
Compellat nuncios, astat forma Deus 
Agricolse, illiq; se prodit uoce solita. 
Ad eumq; modum fit et reliquis mulierculis. 
Illse discipulis, hsec narrant incredulis. 

Dromo. Dorus. Sangax. Brumax. 

DEum iminortalem, ubinam gentium sumus? Triraet. 
Commilitones, quid ' nam hoc esse creditis ? 
"Vt omnia confusa ac turbata cernimus? 
Vt aurse ruptse colluctantur in auribus ? 
Fragore ut ingenti conuulsa uox sonat ? 
Qui terrarum motus ueniunt in praelia? Vt 
Tell us mugit, mouetur, concutitur, fremit ? 
Credo ego non illam uno duntaxat in loco, 
Sed omnibus horrendum tremiscere partibus. Q , 

Dor. Bone Deus, e cauea quanta ' Dam exit fulgu- y , . 


Non armis, consodaleis, hie est utendum, sed cruribus. 
En ipsemet in fuga sum. Sang. Et me fugse dabo. 
Bru. Me item in fuga confero. Dro. Postremus no ero. 

C 3 Quis 


408 J. M. HART. 



Quis post terga sequatur, non curabo quidera, 
f Si mihi semel dabitur cunctos prsecedere. 

Sed 6 Deus bone, tuam fidem obsecro. 
Quid hoc? Hel nullus sum. Do. Perij. Sang. Interij 
Brumax. Occidi. 


Trimet. ~TTlRg6, sunt rata de me uatum prsesagia, 

jQjFinemq; suum prope adepta sunt ac terminum. 
Erg6, quod dissolubile mod6 corpu' extitit, 
Quod conditionera habuit, ut posset mori, 
Aeternitate iam imbuturn, renascitur. 
Et omni CUQI iaimortalitate sequabitur. 
Tuq; ade6 Mors, quse cseteris hominibus 
Nunquam non impendes, ut quod certissimum. 
Abiecta protinus hasta, uictorem agnoscito. 
In me posthac tantum tibi posse negabitur. 
Atque ecce tibi felix et faustum nuncium, 
Quisquis es 6 homo. Nam ut omittam tyrannidem 
c * " Peccati, mortis et inferni, a queis liber iam 

factus es, 

Ego dura3 l^gis austeritati pro te feci satis. 
Si qua igitur tanti tangit amoris gratia : 
Confide, tuam caussam sanguis aget meus. 

Magdalene. Cleophis. Chorus Galilei'dum. 



'' [39] 

BOno animo este sorores, magnam partem uiae Trirnet. 
Superauimus, et multum sequoris confecimus. 
Ast, quomodo nunc tecum Cleophis agitur ? 
Equidem te non tarn fessam esse de uia, 
Qum sollicitudine fatigatam arbitror. 
Cleop. Vix credas quoties inter eundum mihi 
Veniebant in mentem huius ardua facinora. 
Etenim memoria repetebam ultima 
Tempus, quo Chanan urbera unit cum parentibus, 
A ueteri quodam amico accitis, uenerat. 
Qui adolescent! cupido, in matrimonium 
Locabat filiolam castam et nubilem. 
Et quum iam epulis optimis pulsa fuit fames, 
Atque coronari uina potissimum oportuit, 
Ministrorum murmur csepit consurgere, 
Vacuis cadis Lysei nihil esse reliquum. 
Turn difficultateis miserata domesticas 
Pia parens, et secum uoluens incommoda : 
Nato confestim significabat suo, 
Omnem domum absumpto Baccho tristarier. 
Simul et famulos perbenigna monuit, 
Vt quod mandaret eis, obirent seduld. 
Is etsi comraotus, primum caussatus est 
Non aduenisse, quae expectaret tempora : 
Tandem tamen sex impleri a famulis iubet 
Fontanis et puris undis carchesia. 

C 4 Quse 

410 J. M. HART. 



Quae simul ut heros aspexerat : ecce omnibus 
Humor cernebatur subitd rubescere. 
Sentit aqua uireis insuetas, et induit 
Nouum quendam saporem alieno ex munere. 
Hoc nesciens quidam e numero primarius, 
Sponsum appellans, me magna (ait) admiratio 
Tenet, quid sit, qu6d prater morem [tam diu 
Liquorem ambrosise similem conseruaueris. 
Itaq; stupefacti omnes, prius incognita 
Vehementer admirantur Christi numina. 
Suamq; in eum comites conijciunt fidem. 
Fama quoq; fuit, ilium super alta maria 
Et illsesum ambulasse, et summo in gurgite baud 
Pedeis tinxisse. audieram et eius ipsius 
Dicto, compesci agitationes fluctuum : 
Et quamlibet proteruos austrL spiritus, 
Ac uenti flamina uim suam deponere. 
Sunt plurima, quse ssepe losephus mihi 
Et ludas, et Simon, et lacobus, mea 
Dulcissima narrare solebant pignora. 
Mag. Im6 si animo tuo iam comprsehenderes, 
Mihi, quse nota stint, magts obstupesceres. 
Nee ad stuporem modo res miras e'didit : 
(Quod aliqui aliquando forte prsestiterint magi) 
Verum ad salutem operabatur uir inclytus. 
Nam si uellem enumerare, baud uerbis consequi 





Quot segris, adflictis, atq; laborantibus, 

Quot hominum damDis ac incommoditatibus 

Curationem atq; medicamentum attulit : 

Non promptiorem haberet finem oratio, 

Quam si cuperera hac dictione persequi 

In Lybico quanta iaceat arena littore : aut 

Quot orbem stelligerum distinguant sydera. 

Nam quos male Erynnis uexabat pessuma, 

Quos sestus ac febris iactabat ignea, 

Quos profusis tumens hydrops humoribus 

Aut quicunq; etiam alius torquebat dolor, 

Ad sanitatem restituebat pristinam. 

Quid memorem ? numerosam turbam concurrere, 

Tarn a disiunctissimis quibusq; partibus, 

Vidisses quam a patrise propinquis finibus. 

Caecosq; turn et claudos, mutosq; cerneres, 

Lucem oculis debitam, pedibusq; uim suam, 

Et eloquendi facultatem recipere. 

At illud est in primis commemorabile, 

Quod erga foeminam miserandam prsestitit. 

Ea cum laxis uenis annos duodecim 

Flumen fuisset passa impuri sanguinis, 

Etsi iam adficeretur morbi doloribus, 

Et succo membris exhaustis pallesceret : 

Tamen exanguis tantam concepit spem suse 

Salutis apud Christum obtinendse, ut protinus 

C 5 Vel 

412 J. M. HART. 



Vel multitudine compressa sequentium, 

Ad eum ipsum pleno cursu contenderet, 

Quo saltern posset amictum coutingere. 

Yt erg6 ilium iuxta defessa steterat, et 

Manum exporgens uestem extremam apprehederat : 

Vim quandam toti subit6 infusam corpori 

Persentiscit, uenasq; patenteis claudier. 

Mulier lesum latuisse facinus hoc putans, 

Se cogitabat clanculum subducere. 

Verum fugientem scius ille reuocat, 

Cor&m in medio ut factum fateretur lubens. 

Eamq; subtrepidam ac timidiusculam, 

Sui colloquij suauitate recreat. 

Quid, qu6d et ab inferis quosdam excitauerit 

Morte oppressa ? Cum enim ab ora Sydonia 

Veniens, Nay mam adijt suis comitantibus : 

Ecce, puelli egregij corpus miserabile 

Feretro impositum, et uita defunctum conspicit. 

Genetrix moesto complens ululatu uiam, 

Filiolum immaturo flet raptum funere. 

Hanc lesus noster ut uidit, mox parcere 

Querelis iubet : et imperat corpusculo, ac 

Denud gelidis membris insinuatur anima. 

Ipse uelut expleto somno, surgens puer : 

Aperto se capulo (cunctis mirabile) 

Viuum extollit, et exiliens matrem amplectitur. 





Nee ita mult6 p6st, idem ille uirginem, 

Quse nature uitam reddiderat, cui calor 

E pectore, et omnis dilapsus erat spiritus : 

Amisso iterum isthoc donauit lumine. 

Sed enim nunc tandem ad tumulatum uenimus. 

Hlc si uidetur, ponamus uestigia. 

Vos facitote, e gremijs ne quid odorum excidat. 

At, quis'nam ha3C a clause sepulchre grandia 

Saxa euoluet, sepulchralia nos debita ut 

Possimus hie persoluere ? Dimet. 

Circunspicite, si prope quisquam auxiliariu' est. 

Hui, quid hoc est? Atat, os monumenti patet. 

Intremus. hem, perij : nihil hie relinquitur. 

Quam uereor, ne quis etiam in extinctum saeuiat. 

Qn6 properem ? ubi quseram ? quos uestigem ? nescio. 

Est animus tamen adire cum primis Petrum, 

Eumq; hac de re certiorern reddere. 

Cleo. Quseso matres, ut ab hoc loco terroribus 

Pleno, uelitis mecum una secedere. 

Vix mente consto, et cor extra se ponitur. 

Nuper latratu reboabat tellus, ita ut 

Nubes refracto respond eret aere. 

Nunc quid sibi tumulus inanis uelit, et pate = 

Factum claustrum coniectura non adsequor. 

Johannes. Petrus. 



J. M. HART. 






~T"7"Idelicet, cert6 sciebam iam antea 

V Me facil^ posse Petrum cursu prseuertere, ac 
Priusquam ille hue tardo gressu perrexerit, 
Mihi licitum erit audita inuisere. 
Pape, quid ego uideo ? nil, nisi linteamina. 
Sed iam accurrit senior, et crebro spirituum 
"Vireis uento restaurat. Petr. Quid, quid obsecro 
Fit Johannes? Vera'ne mulier omnia 
Rettulerat ? loh. omnia Simon uerissima. 
Pet. Ingressus es? lohan. Nequaqua, at conspexi tamen 
Humi positum et iacentem pannum linteum. 
Omnino, sese nusquam humatus obtulit. 
Pet. Introeamus, et exploretur meliuscule 
Cauerna. bone Deus : ecce uestem linteam, 
En qua caput inuoluebatur, calanticam. 
Nihil est preterea, ne trahamus hlc moram. 
Hui profectd res mihi magna uidetur ac 

Equidem hercle operam dabo, ut unde et quorsum 

hsec fiant, intelligam. 

Abeamus. loan. Sine dubio meliora dabit Deus. 
Quid ni reuixisse putem ? Etenim eum si quis hinc 
Furatus esset, non quseq; locasset ordine : 
Sed uestes arripuisset cum corpore. 

Magdalene. Angelus I. Ang. II. Christus. 





EEuiso mess portum atq; auram anxietudini. 
Nam iterum atq; item uel introspicere tumulu, 
In quo membra Galilsei sunt recondita, 
Meum dolorem non mediocriter leuat. 
O utinam, utinam, hunc rursum erectum cernerern, 
Vt pridem germanum intuebar, qui incubans 
Telluris gremio, iacuerat quatridimm. 
Hei mi hi, qu6d precio, qudd precibus, qu6d lachrymis 
Obruta duro fato uita redimi nequit. 
Ang. I. Qua tu 6 foemina uoce et querelis indicas 
Tristiciam? Ang. II. Expedias matrona integerrima 
Quid sit qu6d Mere ploratum non desinis. 
Mag. Eximij, pulchri et formosi adolescentuli, ex 
Hoc monumento nescio quis herum abstulit rneum. 
Sed nee misera quonam deportatu' est, scio. 
Vse mihi. Quid subit6 obstupuistis perterriti ? 
Chr. Mea mulier, hoc unum mihi uelim edisseras 
(Mod6 fides dignitasq; patietur tua) 
Qua3 tantaB caussa? est lamentationis, aut 
Quern uix orbe fugatis umbris iam quaBritas? 
Mag. Dabis hoc bone agricola uel facilitati tua3, 
Vel desiderio meo, ut si dum hortulo 
Prospicis, ac metuis Iuda3os ? eum alio 
Detuleris mihi significes, ubinam nunc siet. 
Tut6 et honorifice ilium terraB mandauero. 
Quin certum est, quare stupefiebant iuuenes, 



J. M. HART. 




Ab his cognoscere. 

Chr. Maria. Magda. hem, mi magister ? Chr. 

opiuma Magdalis 
Noli ade6 elata laetitijs incedere, et exultare 

de carnis prsesentia, lit 
Nihil intere& de me sublime cogites. 
Caue putes, te intueri morti obnoxium 
Hominem, ut prius, aut ea necessitudine 
Vobis coniunctum : sed supremo cum patre 
Ipso in cselo regnaturum perenniter. 
Animum erigito, mente alta et insuperabili 
Feraris ad cselestia. 

Quin uade, rei tantse ut fias prsenuncia, 
Eis<k, quos fraterno amore prosequor, 
Quorumq; naturam induere mihi placuit, 
Die me dein cselestem occupaturum thronum, 
Cum nostro una parente indulgentissimo. 



Cleophis. Chorus Galilei'dum. Angel. I. Ang. II. 

HVc hue nosmet referamus, et experiamur an 
Reuersio spem deturbatam reintegret. 
Sed nunc memini, ut non solum animo commota eram 
Dudum, sed et corpore toto perhorrui. 
Ang. I. Quid uos horretis 6 matres ? omittite 
Metum et formidinem, nam isti iure optimo, ex= 





Animantur consideratissimi homines. 

Vestram nihilominus moesticiam dehinc noua, ei 

Aeternum perfruenda uincant gaudia. 

Quandoquidem quern uos hinc ademptum plangitis, 

Debellato Erebi r6ge, imis ex manibus, 

Rursum has in lucis oras uictor prodijt. 

Non est qudd eum existimetis mortuum. 

Aethereis iam uescentem auris, ei integrum. 

Im6 uobi' in mentem uenire debuit, 

Quod adhuc in Galilsea uersatus dixerat, 

Oportere satum uirgine incidere in manus 

Sceleratorum hominurn, et figi funestaB trabi, 

Qu6 cunctorum suapte sponte crimina 

Deleret, et cum sole rediret tertio. 

Ang. II. Nazarenum uos uelle non sum nescius, 

Qui superiore die animam efflarit cruce. 

A iure mortis exemit se, et uinculis 

Expedijt, hinc uicturus BBUO perpete. 

Quod cum terna luce renasci promiserat, 

Reuera et facto nunc fidelis praestitit. 

Accedite, adsistite, oculis omnem locum 

Perl ustra tote, qui uacuus cadauere, 

Signum etiamdum effigiemq; sepulti corporis 

Retinet. Et exuuias, quibus implicatus est. 

Si non facile adduci potestis, ut mihi 

Credatis, nee persuadeat oratio mea, 


418 -J. M. HART. 



Vobis prsesentia prsesentem haec facient fidem. 
Quare hisce uestris officijs opus baud erit, 
Quin hinc potius uos nulla interposita mora 
Recipite et istam rem inox reliquis ostendite. 
Sui ducis et capitis qui deplorant necem : 
Sed senior! Petro in prirnis, cui scilicet 
Ter abnegatus herus gemitum conduplicat. 
Cuius conspectum si cupiscunt, conferant 
Iter ad Galilseam, ubi eundem uiuum uiderint, 
Per hsec quern collugent tempora demortuum. 
Dixi. Cleo. Videam. Ecastor, ita sese res habet. 
Eamus, nunciemus discipuli' omnia. 
Cbr. Saluere uos iubeo Marise Galilei'des. 
Abijcite pauores ex ammo, qui expectorant 
Intelligentiam, et intrepide me attendite, 
Ne non sanum sit attonitis in sensibus 
ludicium, surgite, et his osculationibus 
Finem facite, et hinc celeriter nunc uadite, 
Meisq; uisa monstratote fratribus, 
Vt in Galilseam post me proficisci queant. 


EGressis foeminis, ad sese milites 
Redeunt, et uisa sacerdotibus indicant. 
Interea, quee iussit Christus Galilei'des, 
Discipuli 7 exponunt. Sed pharisseorum quidem 





Posteaquam in parteis distractum contraria', et 
Nil certo statuens concilium dimittitur : 
Delegatur Alecto statim & cacodsemone, 
Qua? aurum singulis prseberi militibus monet, 
Orationem ut commutent, et falsa pro 
Veris fidenter in apertum proferant. 
Hij, sicut erant edocti, faciunt sedul6 : 
Ac inficias eunt Christum esse superstitem. 
Itaq; et custodes, acceptis pecunijs 
Lsetantur, et recedens quoq; Cai'aphas 
Elatus insolenti exultat gaudio, 
Quia res processum habet ex sua sententia. 

Brumax. Sangax. Dorus. Dromo 

EQuidem animi pendeo hoc quid sit negocij, Trimet 

Quorsum hie stupor alienatioq; sensuum. 
Ego sic timeo ut rerum nullam quodammodd 
Perceptionem habeam, socij uero mei 
Timore stupidi obmutuerunt, strenuus mod6 
Ipse mihi uidebar, sed qu6 confidentia 
Qu6 nunc animi uis, qu6 pristina geuerositas 
Recessit? hei iacet sepultum in pectore 
Omne meum robur, et omnis abest audacia. 
Tentabo tamen si qua spes adfulgeat 
In socijs. Tu Sangax, tu, inquam, Sangax age, 

D Surgito 

420 J. M. HART. 



Surgito, ne paueas, in tuto sunt omnia. 

Sang. Abierunt'ne igitur, abierunt foeminse, aut 

Furiae potius et flammis corusci dsemones ? 

Bru. Abi6re mihi crede. Excitemus nunc Dorum. 

Heus heus Dore : Ocyus 6 Dore expergiscere. 

Expergiscere Dore. lam nihil est periculi. 

Dor. Exurgo, mod6 non sit quidquam discriminis. 

Ah, uix apud me sum, tremor ita me occupat. 

Bru. Quam tandem hanc esse metamor<a>sin autumas? 

Tana ' ne cit6 accipitris dedidicisti audaciam ? 

Sed, ut uidetur, Dromo nee haurit anhelitum, 

Nee spiritum ullum dit. Dromo. Dromo. Dromo. 

Quid, humi prostratus, longus ut es, Dromo iaces ? 

Atat, auras incassum stultus diuerbero, 

Surdisq; auriculis me prseconem prsebeo. 

Obsecro uos, uos aureis implete flatibus. 

Sang. Dromo. Do. Dromo. Sang. Dromo. Do. Dromo 

San. Dromo. Do. Dromo. 

Bru. Hem salua res est, nobis Deus hodie fauet. 
Anhelat nunc breui subinde spiritu. 
Quid agitur Dromo? Agedum temet iam collige. 
Reuocato animum. Trepidandi causa euanuit. 
Dro. Quis Dromone appellat ? Bru. fortunse particeps 
Tuae Brumax. Age surge, ego te fulciam. 
Tenebo labentem, et corruere non sinam. 
Dro. Heu uireis deficiunt. Bru. brachia exporgito. 




Dro. Quis me, quis appraehendit ? Brumax. Brumax 

dico tuus 

Consocius. Surge, surge. Dro. ammo male est meo. 
Cor contrahitur, debilitatur, tremit. 
Mir& uexatur caput, et sensuum organa 
Vix functiones prsestant etiamdum suas. 
Incredibiliter mihi metus ossa concutit. 
Horrorq; occupat extremas parteis corporis. 
Verum sinite me respirare paululum. 
Bru. Tandem, 6, tandem nobiscum abige formidinem. 
Tenuit et hie nos pallor crepitusq; dentium, 
Euasit homo cum suis fallacijs, 
Ac prsestigijs, neq; nos terrebit amplius. 
Atqui quod facto confestim nunc est opus, 
Faciam, hsec ut cognoscant sacerdotum duces. 
Addito te Sangax adsectatorem mihi, 
Tu uer6 te Dore Dromoni adiungito. 
Dor. Vos non ita longo interuallo comitabimur. 
Quid nunc mi homo, reuixisti'ne bone Dromo? 
Quomodo uiget robur uetus in corpore ? 
Dro. Bene iam, sed longe melius opinor foret 
Mecum, si quam primum locum hunc relinquerem. 
Dor. Fiat, sequamur prseeuntes boni^ auibus. 


Petrus. Magdalene. Chorus discipulorum. 
Cleophis. Chorus Galilei'dum. 

D 2 Quid 

422 J. M. HART. 



Tnmet. /^~\ Vid narras Magdalene? certa'ne prsedicas? 

Mag. Certissima. Pet. Sic scilicet ut dicam tibi. 

Equidem tuos pauitanti' oculos existimo, 
Vana quadam ac falsa lusos imagine. 
Nam ueluti per quietem sepenumer6 
Facit in se reflexa cogitatio, 
Eorum uultus et simulachra cernere, 
Quos maxim desideramu 7 interdiu, 
Sic uel metum, uel amorem uel utrunq; te 
Aut rapuisse, aut coniecisse reor in extasin, 
Ita ut non secus ac meutiens quidam sopor 
Sensus inanis prsestringens fefellerit. 
Cho. disc. Quid'na hoc tande est? Ain tu quseso? denu6 
Nostrum uiuere dominum ? Die, 

age, die bona 

Nee aliena fide, ut sese tibi obtulit ? 
Longam (sis) narrandi continuatio seriem. 
Et & capite ad calcem, iuxta prouerbium, 
Singula diducito. De illo audire quidem iuuat : 
Ytut, quod prefers, parum, sit probabile. 
Mag. Quum de uacuo busto, tibi dixeram Petre : 
Me recipiebam protinus eodem loci. 
Cumq; ill6 adueneram : ecce repent^ mini 
Et nictu oculi, splendenteis albis uestibus 
Apparent iuuenes. In uultu plurimus honos, 
Et coeleste decus toto effulsit corpore. 





Haud nostra stirpe, exortos esse dixeris : 

Sed administros superum speciosissimos. 

Hij uer6 & me caussas exquirunt questuum. 

Sublati heri desiderio me confici 

Respondeo. Quibus dictis a tergo stetit. 

Tamen ilium nesciebam : ut qui mihi se obuium 

Dedit ignoti sub hortulani schemate. 

Credo, ne si glorificam sumpsisset faciem : 

Exanimasset me miseram prse formidine. 

Cho. disc. Qui scis igitur, Christu esse, que cospexeras ? 

Mag. Agnoui ex noce. Nam cum ab eo digressa sum : 

Statim reuocata notum accipiebam sonum. 

Quinetiam Marise me appellabat nomine. 

Tune 6 tune menti quse infundebat gaudia ? 

Quse tune toto expellebat corde tristia ? 

Sic nube sub nigra quum deprensa est dies, 

Quum coelum squalet ac sol umbris conditur : 

Aura exurgens sub Oceano, aut e montibus 

Tenebras depellit, nubilaq; dissipat, 

La3tamq; nitido faciem restiuit polo : 

Omnino taleis sentiebam in pectore 

Motus, taleis triumphos, tamq; seri6 

Turn gestiebajn, ut iam nihil mirum mihi 

Videatur, quod uix poteram olim credere, 

Expirasse aliquos hilaritate nimia. 

Et ille gaudium bene temperat meum, 

D 3 lubetq; 


424 J. M. HART. 



lubetq; non tarn corpus intuerier, 

Quarn oculis animi diuinum honorem, et ipsius 

Membra deinceps pland facta immortalia. 

Demum superiora poli palatia, ad 

Patrem se nostrum dixit uelle ascendere. 

Ego uer6 exprimere Ia3ticiam cogitans, 

Ter sum conata loqui, ter eum affarier 

Incipiebam, solitasq; uoces promere : 

Sed mihi ter hsesit lingua prorsus mutilis, 

Ter in summis labris mihi destitit sonus. 

Dumq; ha3reo, quse prima sumam exordia, 

Nimis auidos reliquerat sensus meos. 

Hsec summa est, haec ut folia SibyllaB credite. 

Hsec uoluit, ego uobis ut prima panderem. 

Cho. disc. Nimia mira, 6 socij commemorat Magdalis. 

Pet. Sunt incredibilia profect6, atq; ante hunc diem 

Inaudita. At, quid hoc, quod tarn uelociter 

Cleophis cum Galilseis hue aduolat ? 

Metuo ne quid eis obtigerit incommodi. At 

Tendamus. Ad nos recta pergunt. Cleo. uidimus 

Eia, eia uidimus (6 uiri) ilium uidimus. 

Pet. Quern' nam ilium? Die age. Gleo. Vidimus, inquam, 

Ilium ipsum Christum, que putatis mortuum. (uidimus 

Pet. Supreme lehoua. Captum ha3c superant meum. 

Scio, esse uos nee mendaceis, nee perfidas : 

Ipsa rei magnitude tamen fidem negat. 




Amab6, narra, quse uidistis omnia. 

Nam ad audiendum animos iamdudum ereximus. 

Cleo. Primum omnium, ut ill6 accessimus, at in limine 

Sepulchri stetimus, ecce tibi, duo iuuenum 

Pulcherrimorum corpora. 

Quid quaeris ? omnia ex parte fure splendidi. 

Solantur. Quidq; in Galila3a pollicitus est 

Longe anteJi Christus, reuocant in memoriam. 

Nudum locum ostendunt, in eoq; residuas 

Exuuias. At<j; nominatim te Petre 

Volu6re Euangelio hoc per nos recrearier. 

Hsec dixerant. Metum autem nostrum gaudia 

Nunc uincunt, nunc eo mutud uincuntur, et 

Sese uicissim retrudunt pugnantia, 

Atq; uiceis alternant spes et timor, usque dum 

Nos ipse alacriter salutauerat herus, 

Et aspectu ac sermone suo refecerat. 

Qui se confirmabat, in ora Galilei'de 

A uobis omnibus uelle dein conspici. 

Turn ab amplexu sistimus. Habetis ad omnia. 

Pet. Multa audiui, multa inspexi, multa didici, 

Multa memini : nihil post hominum memoriam 

Tale accepi : nihil omui aBtate huiusmodi 

Cognoui : unde induci non queo, ut adsentiar. 

Quoquomodo sit, nos nota adeamus loca. 

Cho. disc. Earn us, et eas ueridicas faxit Deus. 


426 J. M. HAET. 



,_ . I AEum immortalem, quae, quantaq; miracula 

J_>/Mod6 mihi memorauit Brumax? quemadmodu 

Imposita sigillisq; obsignata adhuc petra : 

Tamen erexit se tumulatus. Ac duo 

Lapidem dicto citius am6runt angeli. 

Vt antra sonabant occultis mugitibus, 

Ventisq; furebat solum pugnantibus. 

Et eorum, quasi si occubuissent, iacentium : 

Vt artus, intercepta anima, tenuit tremor. 

Vt auram neq; dedit neq; suscepit Drorno : ut 

Vt sine colore, sine uoce, sine mente iacuit. 

Quomodoq; audierint alloquenteis fceminas, 

Ministros angelicos, de coeli gente. Ita ut 

Dubium non sit, uiuere Christum xylonicum. 

Quid igitur ? Quid mine faciundum nobis erit ? 

Per urbeis ne hie rumor Palsestinas eat ? 

Nisi matur&'uolgi sermoni occurrimus, 

Ni astu famamjpremimus atq; extinguimus : 

Actum de nobis est, sine controuersia. 

Vse nostro turn ordini, use nostris mercibus. 

Ibo, et cogamjconsilium in unum pectora, et 

Legum, et religionis ritus callentia. 


Cacodsemon. Alecto. 





ORcicolae 6 proceres, tartarei 6 principes, 
O Acherontsei magnates itinerum, 
Voluntatum, sententiarum, faciuorum, 
Laborum, rerum deniq; nostrarum omDium 
Socij perpetui, nullisq; fatigabileis 
Periculis, mementote, ut nos perpeti baud 
Potuistis infandam conditionem, poll 
Quando regnator nobis anteponeret 
Hominum genus, ac nos deturbatos sethere, 
Formidanda ui fulminis detruderet 
In hsec loca tetra, horrenda, subterranea, 
Terribilia, foeda, senta situ et squallida. 
Prob^ bane ulti estis luculentam iniuriam. 
Nam horto Paradisiaco expulsum patrem, 
Suamq; sobolem eius contactam crimine, 
Nobiscum ad sedes deuexistis infera', ac 
Immani ditastis preeda stygios lacus. 
At enimuerd, humana sub nube et imagine 
Deus occultatus, nuper hominum gratia, in 
Terras descendit : illiusq; spiritus 
Apud nos hlc iamdudum, ut nostis, adfuit. 
Quo praesente expauimus. Infernas hie domos 
Reclusit. secum ingentem abduxit copiam. 
Fuit, fuit tempestas, qua nostro iugo 
Vel integrum terrarum orbem subiecimus. 
Ast quae nunc tanta nos tenet socordia ? 

D 5 Vbi 

428 J. M. HART. 



Vbi nunc antiques uireis, arteis, machinse, 

Doli ? Vbi nunc prisca imperij nostri gloria ? 

Sic' cine multis nobis regia spoliabitur ? 

Sic' cine rem prolabi patiemur desides ? 

Audite potius quse mea sit sententia. j 

Christum interimebant ludsei, hie se reddidit 

VitaB. Res iam multis Hierosolymarijs 

Manifestior est, quam ut dubitari queat. 

Trepidant sacerdotes, semper amici fidissimi 

Qui nobis extite~re : atq; hoc ne in publicum 

Emanet, ponere student retinacula. 

Id ad amplificandum nostrum regnum tarn ualet 

Quam quod uel plurimum. Hlc opibus uestris opus. 

Viru ? inspirate furtim animis mortalium, ut 

Hsec tarn mirabilia negent increduli. 

Atqui (quod caput est) prodi, prodi mens mea, 

Alecto prodi, cincta colubri et anguibus. 

Tibi mille nocendi arteis fbecundo in pectore. 

Tuum hoc erit munus, tuarum partium, ut 

Mystas ancipites consilio iuues tuo. 

Fac nummis obturetur os militibus, ut 

Quidquid uiderunt, se uidisse pernegent. 

Yadito, manibus pedibusq; obnix rem agito : nunc 

Tentamentis peropus est, ac fallacijs. 

Properato, horam utilem utiliter transmittito. 

Alect. Cito imperata peragam adamussim tua. 






Alecto. Cai'aphas. 

IMea quantum Adonij, 

Pen apud omneis 
Numina possunt? 
Namq; ego semper 
Ocyor euris, 
Cursito nunc hue, 
Nunc feror illuc. 
Ac ea spargo 
Dira uenena, 
Quae mi hi cornu 
Diuite, sseuus 
Sufficit orcus. 
Num tibi restim 
Ipsa ferebam 
Perdite luda ? 
Et tibi nummum 
Plena crumena 
Est data, quorum 
Sacra fames co- 
Egit herum te 
Prodere iustum ? 
Sic similem rem, 
Nirnc faciam, qu6 
Qui modo uiuit, 


430 J. M. HART. 



Vsque putetur 
Mortuus esse. 

Trimet. Euge, euge, eccum ilium ipsum, que uolo. Deus bone : ut 
Ingreditur dubitabundus, et animum scindit in 
Varias parteis ? At paulisper ego tacita 
Hlc auscultans, caute obseruabo, quid nam agat. 
P6st, hominem adoriar, sicubi tempus monet. 
Cai'a. Non hoc mehercules mihi conuenticulum 
Esse uidetur, hominum deliberantium : 
Sed toto (ut aiunt) coelo discrepantium, 
Ant, quod ego uer affirmem, delirantium. 
Vnum aut altrum Annas sublimi & solio rogat, 
Sententiam hac de re, ut pronunciet suam. Hie, 
Queecunq; uos, ait, iniungitis, ea perplacent. 
Ille, in ponderosa, et seria et graui, 
Certum spacium deliberandi postulat. 
Alius, posse negat rem tantam occultarier. 
Alius, ipsum Christum, iterato occtdi uelit. 
Reliqui nihil habuerunt, quod dicerent. 
Sum itaq; multd incertior, ac dudum abiueram. 
Alect. Hue ego tibi, si uis, bone uir scrupulu adima : et 
Faucis expediam, quid fieri oporteat. 
Cai'a. Quin immortali me tibi deuincies 
Beneficio mortalem, si hoc effeceris, 
Charissima domina. Alect. Pone metum, effectum dabo. 
Inprimis, tumuli custodes argenteis 





Fac superes muneribus, tit quae uera sunt, 

Nee proferant, nee diuulgent quouis modo. 

Nummus rex, rex nurnmus, quid non facere potest, 

In omnibus negocijs? Dimet. 

Dicam, quod sentio, omnipotens pecunia, 

Dat sola robur, uimq; sola sufficit. 

Quamobrem agitodum, et isthsec praedieta perfice, 

Tibi quae monstraui Furiarum ter maxima. Hie 

Scopus, hie meorum uerborum meta est breuis. 

Cai'a. Quam maximas habeo tibi diua gratias. 

Nemo homo potuit melius consilium dare. 

Geretur hercle mos tuis hortatibus. 

Alect. Hei, nunc ergo mine feci precium operse, et 

Nostro pergratum, perq; iucundum gregi. 

Multas regione' opplebit haac opinio, 

Qu6d Christu' e mortuis non exurrexit. 

Im6 perficiam, ut apud mundi huius filios 

Pium esse uideatur, eos occidere, 

Quicunq; syncerfc ipsius a morte reditum, 

Et inde partam gratiam deprsedicent. 

Sed me, sat scio, Tartareus expectat chorus, 

Re bene gesta, hinc memet recipio domum. 


Cai'aphas. Dromo. Dorus. Sangax. 



432 J. M. HART. 



IN hisce manibus est loculus pecunijs 
Distentus et non pauco argento turgidus. 
Intus latet, quod operator miracula. 
Intus latet, quod nil non cogit pectora. 
Est intus, quod diuinam uirtutem exeret 
Cit6, atq; me magno exonerabit metu. 
Nee dubito, quin hoc erit Annse gratissimum. 
Atq; etiam reliquis nostri ordinis hominibus. 
Satius est unius obscurari gloriam, 
Qu&m tot nostrum egregios honores eripi. 
Ecce autem, cominodum aduentare uideo 
Dromonem et Sangacem, Brumacemq; et Dorum, 
Qui me leuabunt huius onere marsupij. 
Dro. Salue pie prsesul. Do. Salue antistes optime. 
Sang. Sis saluos uir clarissime. Bru. Aue ipsa sanctitas. 
Dro. Parmenoni seruo dedimu' obuiam tuo, 
Qui te significauit, nos uelle colloqui. 
Cai'a. Volo certfc quidem : quare animum aduortite. 
Tu Dromo Christum esse rediuiuum non ambigis ? 
Dro. Equidem huius tibi rei argumenta protuli, 
Neq; pauca, neq; parua. Nimis apertum illud est. 
Cai'a. Quid dicis Dore, sic' cine se res habet ? 
Dor. Ita factum prorsus est, ut te docuit Dromo. 
Cai'a. Adfirmas ne tu Sangax hsec eade ? San. qdni ego 
Adfirmem, qui una cftm his in re prsesenti fui ? 
Cai'a. Quid tu aut Brumax ? Bru. Id quod socij dictitatc 




Cai'a. Tacete, et mentem ad ea, quae loquor, intendite. 

Debetis nostra in uota condescendere, 

Nisi exciderunt permulta in nos promerita. 

Dro. Quid est ? quod pro te aut uestrae classis quopiain 

Recusemus? Dor. Nil medius fidius, id nisi 

Summo fiat nostro darnno atque incommode. 

San. Die egregie sacerdos, prsestabimus, 

Ne dubita. Bru. Si uereis requiras corporis, 

Faciemus, quod cordatos milites decet. 

Dummodd non uersutis opponamuur magis. 

Sin animi uirtutem, constantiam, fidem, 

Quis non sentierit quoduis cum tali duce ? 

Cai'a. Statuunt primates uim certam pecuniae 

Vobis donare, ueruntamen hoc nomine, 

Vt singulis quibusque interrogantibus, 

Statim et semper respondeatis in hunc modum : 

Qu6d nocte intempesta, ut latrones perditi, 

Corpus clam fallaceis tulSre comites, 

Ac furati sunt uobis dormientibus. 

Qu6d si commentum hoc ad uestri aureis prsesidis 

Delatum erit, nos illi persuadebimus, 

Et nos tutos in portu collocabimus. 

Dro. Lubenter adsentimur. Do. Conditio placet. 

San. Cur non authoritatem tantam imitabimur? 

Bru. Sequimur decretum long^ consultissimum. 

Cai'a. Accipite, unusquisq; thesauro ditabitur. 


434 J. M. HART. 



Agitote dum, eloquimini. quid dicitis? 

Dromo, erexit/ ne se Christu' ille a tumulo? 

Dro. Non. Cai'a. Quid' nam erg6? sepulchrum uacuum 


Dro. Nox erat, exanimum clepserunt corpus alumni. 
Nostra quidem turn membra sorpor Lethseus habebat. 
Cai'a. Dore, die mihi bona et ludaica fide, 
lesus in busto cur non repertus est ? 
Dor. Abstulit hue furtiuu agmen dominatibus umbris, 
Cum nostros oculos premeret mera mortis imago. 
Cai'a. Num' nam et tu Sangax cantionem istam canis ? 
Die quid habeas animi super hac re. dicito. 
Sang. Funus iners noctu comites rapu&re dolosi, 
Quando quies nostros nectebat languida sensus. 
Cai'a. Brumax tua superest unius adsentio. 
Quomodo per omnia res acta est? edissere. 
Bru. Surripitur gelidum media iam nocte cadauer, 
Cum nos fessa graui dederamus corpora somno. 
Cai'a. Laudo uos, quod in ea diutius hseresi 
Non perseuerabitis. istue sapere quidem est. 
Dro. Nemo tarn nulla niente, uel tarn nullius 
Est consilij, qui respuat pecunias. 
Dor. Conspiranteis animos, tarn concinnat cito 
Nihil, quam hsec regina sacro sancta pecunia. 
Sang. Quis est mortalium omnium, cui inest mica 
Sani cerebri, qui hanc non ueneretur et colat ? 





Bru. O uos terq; quaterq; beatos, queis contigit 

Tanta laborum merces, quantam uix tempore 

Longo, aut talus nobis, aut alea dederit. 

Dro. Valeto fortunarum nostrarurn omnium 

Auctor locupletissime. Dimeter. 

Do. Deus te seruet nostri (ut res ipsa loquitur) 

Thesauri supremum caput. Dimeter. 

Sang. Tibi noster patronc beneficentissime 

Dies agantur candidi. Dimeter. 

Bru. Pro hisce opibus here lehora sura mis tibi 

Opera sempiternam ferat. Dimeter. 

Cai'a. Valete simul uiri fortissimi et optimi. 

O faustam, 6 niueam, 6 peramoenam hanc istam diem. 

Meos' ne labores operas atq; uigilias, 

An prolixam diua3 bonitatem, an tempora 

Vehementius extollam, plane" nescio. 

Quemadmodum eteuim cum sub nebuloso ae're 

Et opaco coelo sensus quodammodd 

Hebescunt, et cuiq; suum corpus oneri est, 

Turn si radios forte* Titan splendidos 

Fundens, fugam atris nubibus indixerit, 

Mundoq; arridens ore laeto affulserit, 

Quam mox erectam a corporeo pondere, 

Animalem illara hominis partem spe ditissima 

Pascit, quasio^; consopitos spiritus 

Permulcet, incitat, fouet, exuscitat : 

E Ita 

436 J. M. HART. 



Ita mediusfidius, furise prseclarissirase 

Beneficio, sum usq; e6 exhileratus denu6, ut 

Qui dudum adueniens, cogitabundum hunc animum 

Omnei' in parteis dubitatione ueluti 

Suspensus distribueram, nunc deniq; 

Recedam, noua et insolita prorsus Iseticia, 

Et alacritate perfusus mirabili. 


QVoniam cum Thomas Didymus aberat, 
Intrans heros fenestris atq; foribus 
Clausis, se discipulis ostentarat suis. 
Illi reuerso uiuere conclamant herum. 
Qui ut finem narrandi faciunt, ecce Cleopas 
Alio loco, inquit, se conuenisse dominum, 
Ad Emauntem dum iter castellum suscipit. 
Qtise ciim cimctis uiderentur certissima, 
Vnus Thomas se posse credere Degat, 
Tantisper dum improuisus adest iterum Deus, 
Eiusq; dubitatis confirmat fidem. 
Post illos et dictis et factis instruit, 
Quibus per populos dispergant noua gaudia. 
Ad extremum autem undeni proceres admodum 
De Christo rediuiuo plaudunt ad inuicem, 
Salutem gratulanteis ac uitam sibi, 
Deo reddenteis gloriam. 





Thomas. Petrus. Cleopas. Amaon. 
Chorus discipulorura. 

OSocij, neq; enim sumus ant& maloruru inscij, Trimet. 
Vnde hie stupor, unde hoc rairum silentium? 
Credo equidem ardentem et igne coruscum spiritum 
E nube ruisse, et penetrasse hanc domum : 
Ita statis trepidi, ita uos horror quatit. 
Pet. Nullo pauore perculsi obstupescimus 
Thoma frater : uerum rei miraculo 
Et nouitate attoniti ualde* reddimur. 
Quam si plen& pernosceres, te, sat scio, 
Velle lachrymas effundere prs6 gaudio. 
Tho. Ne uiuam, si non quid sit acciperem lubens. 
Pet. Lubentior ego rem omnem enarrauero. 
Praesentem uidimus, loquentem audiuimus, 
Ipsum Christum rediuiuum, quern nos mod6 
Multatum morte, et ademptum suspirauimus. 
Tho. Quid praedicas ? quse uox aureis intrat meas ? 
Is per Deum, iam respirat r ne denu6 ? 
An potius elusit simulachrum umbratile, 
Et effigies quaedam nobis apparuit ? 
Pet. Thoma, Thoma, illu ipsum, haud incerta praedico, 
Ilia ipsa retinentem etiamdum uulnera 
Aspeximus : ac membra palmis pertrectauimus. 
Tho. Ita' ne uero ? quaeso expone seriem 

E 2 Rei 

438 J. M. HART. 



Rei totius gestse, atq; id bona fide. 

Pet. Vespertinum tempus erat, occlusse fores, 

Occlusa fenestrarum etiam foramina. 

Nos tenuibus escis et potionibus 

Corpora refecimus et uireis reuocauimus, 

Et ad imam cuncti mensam consedimus, 

Quandd ille repentin6 coram in media domo 

Diuino lumine circumseptus constitit. 

Nos credenteis inanem adesse spiritum : 

Primo aspectu tremebundi exhorrescere 

Coepimus, ac prse metu mensas relinquere. 

Turn Christus, degenerem formidinem arguens, 

Quid, inquit, perturbato uersatis animo ? 

Cernite manus, latus, pedesq; cernite, 

Ego ipse sum : pacem una coniunctissimi 

Seruate, atq; trepidationem ponite. 

Mox omnibus trectate dicit corpora. 

Hie hlc uera ossa, et ueram carnem inueneritis, 

Quorum nouistis exortem esse spiritum. 

At nos cum adhuc mirabunda perpendimus, 

Nee herum nostrum esse ilium nobis persuasimus : 

Turn de assato pisce, et fauo apiario 

Nobiscum edere non recusans, reppetit 

Eum sermonem, in quo ante mortem plurimus 

Fuit, quern si tenuissemus, mehercule 

Ipsius abitum forti tulissemus animo. 


.' [69] 

Hsec ubi facta : is eadem uirtute subito a 

Nobis euanuit, qua intrarat lumina. 

Tho. O Petre, Petre quid uerba frustra funditas? 

Quid surdo fabellam canis? Tarn' ne stupidum 

Tarn absq; ullo iudicio et sensu me uiuere 

Putas, ut hisce fidem habeam ineptijs ? 

Nam hoc ex eo genere est, quod fieri non potest, 

Vt sese a mortuis quisquam resuscitet. 

EC' quern e prophetis, ec' quern e sanctis patribus 

Commemorabis, qui tale quidquam fecerit ? 

Cho. disc. Sic et nos uix nobismetipsis credere 

Primum poteramus, nee satis, habuimus 

Loquentem audire semel, quin pacem saapius 

Nouirf commendaus, multa de fati sui 

Necessitate, multa de nostri' omnium 

Dicebat comrnodis. Sic et Galileides, 

Quse primse ilium ipsum fceminse conspexerant, 

Tarn nos tardos inuenre ad habendam illis fidem, 

Quam tu iamdudum te prsebes incredulum. 

Quinimd Cleopee non credidimus, et suo 

Consocio, quibus ab urbe paulum euntibus, 

Antea quam a nobis uisus est, apparuit. 

Tho. De re tarn inaudita, consensum tot hominum 

Nusquam est reperire. Sed narra Cleopa omnia, 

Nam te quoq; non minus ac alios audiuero. 

Cleop. Christum' met ipsum absq; ulla contronersia, 

E 3 Thoma 


440 J. M. HART. 



Thoma, et ego et Amaon pariter aspeximus, 
Et cum illo ultrd citr6q; uerba fecimus. 
Quandd etenim dirigeremus ad arcem Emaun- 

tem iter : 

Tanquam peregrinus et hospes quidam barbarus 
Et obscurus, nobiscum ingressus est uiam. 
Quanquam nescio quid nostros prsestrinxit oculos, 
Quod eum inter eundum minimi cognouimus. 
At ille, qua de re, inquit, uos inter agitur ? 
Cur ' nam uestros adfectus continere uix 
Valetis, qu6 minus erumpant in lachrymas ? 
Ego contra : quid ais ? num' nam tu solus es 
Peregrinus hisce diebus in urbe Solyma, et 
Nescis, quae dudum perpetrata fuerint? 
Roganti quae ilia' nam essent, responsum hoc dedi^: 
De lesu Nazareno, qui uates fuit, 
Qui rebus gestis atq; uerbis prsepotens, 
Tarn apud ipsum Deum quam apud homines fuit. 
Et eum sacerdotum quo pacto principes, 
Ac primates nostri cruci suffixerint. 
Atq; ut nos omneis spes magna tenuit, eum 
Redempturum Israel, ac meliorem exitum 
Illi futurum, ut qui meliora meruerat. 
Et quo modo post triduum Galilei'des, 
Quse uacuum se tumulum uidisse, et Angelos 
Aiebant, qui affirmarent ilium uiuere, ad 





Stuporem usque adrairari nos coegerant, 

Et quemadmodum quidam e nostro consortio, 

Statim ad monumentum ipsum festinauerint, 

Sintq; expert! ueras fuisse foeminas, 

Ipsum uero Christum nusquam repererint. 

Turn ille : Ea ' ne uestros tandem animos incredulitas 

Excsecauit? Num uaticinationibus, 

Num literis ac monumentis stint tradita 

Posteritati ducis uestri discrimina? 

Num ' nam ille sic uos instruxit ? Num deniq; 

Istsec de se futura suis praadixerat ? 

Sic fatus, & Mose capiens exordium, 

Obscura et inuoluta uatum oracula 

Yeterumq; scripta Patrum de misericordia, 

Et de sapientia Dei, et de criminum 

Etiam expiatione nobi' euoluere hand 

Cessabat, ut omnia sibi crucem portenderent. 

Qu6 uindicaret a tenebris hominum genus, 

Qu6 peccatum, qu6 mortem, qu6 orcum uinceret. 

Turn uero, nos intra motus quosdam nouos 

Vterq; sentiebamus. Ita is animos 

Dictis regebat, et mulcebat pectora. 

Namq; memorabat, uti manuum laboribus, 

Et seruitutis amaro depresses iugo, 

Pharijs ab oris, ad proprios iterum Lareis, 

Legumlator ciueis eduxerit suos. 

E 4 Hinc 


J. M. HART. 





Hinc Abrahamum iussis actum coelestibus 

Charissimum filiolum ense petentem Isacon, 

Demissumq; refert angelum ipso ab sethere : 

Qui aliter suadet, ac pueri insontis loco 

Litari arietem iuxt pascentem itibet. 

Hijs adiungit losephum, fratres inuidi 

Quo funere, quibus' ue discerptum feris, 

Patri falsd dixdre, cum uenundarant 

Ilium exteris, propter descripta somnia. 

Quid loquor, aut suspensum a duce colubrum seneum, 

Quo, serpentum afflatu prostrata corpora 

Per campum surgebant sanata et Integra : 

Aut, ut natasse quosdam homines narrauerit, 

Inclusos machina, quum iam tellu' 

Et mare 

Nullo discrimine 

Agerentur, et reliquos mortalei' unda raperet. 
Omnia qua} quondam meditanda suis posteris 
Prophetse cecinerunt inflati numine, 
Ille meminit, donee processit Hesperus 
Olympo inuito, ut arbitror. 
Et peruentum nobis est ab eundem locum, 
Quern supra dixi. Sed quando ulterius iter 
Habere se simularet, impetrauimus, 
Vt idem nobiscum faceret hospitium. 
Quod ipsum syderis alis superuolans, 





Nox tacita suadebat. Mox diuersorium 

Subit. Ad mensam nobiscum adcumbit pauperem. 

Qu&m primum autem manu uidimus apprendere 

Cererem, atq; modo peculiar! frangere : 

E uestigio mens nobis est reddita. 

Agnoscimus et colimus aperta numina. 

At ille in puncfco ipso et memento temporis, 

Abijt, et fc conspectu se nostro abstulit. 

Tho. Dixti pulchr. Sed tarn impossibile facinus, 

Nemo homo quamuis uehemens, facundus, et 


Quamuis limatule et polite pinxerit 
Orationem, mihi persuadere poterit, 
Eum ipsum his oculis nisi praBsentem uidero, 
Hijs^; auribus nisi prsesentis uocem hausero, et 
Nisi hisce manibus uolnera prsesentia 
Keuera et indubitanter contrectauero. 
Verum, quid hie moramur? Repetamus domum, 
Ne quis iudeat ex ludseis primoribus. 
Bene est, omneis iam nunc tuti consedimus. 

Christus. Thomas. Chorus disc. 

Sit pax uobis, fratres longe charissimi. 
Tu uer6 age Didyme, hue hue manum admoueas, 
Admoueas in latus meum, ne dubita, ego sum. 

E 5 Tho. 

444 J. M. HAET. 



Tho. Mi domine, mi Deus, mea spes, uita mea, 
Noli quseso hanc rebellionem, et pessimam 
Incredulitatem posthac imputare mihi. 
Nse inconsultus ego, atque excoacatus impia 
Philautia fueram, qui proprio ingenio 
Tan turn attribuebam, ut rediuiuum credere 
Te factum esse nequirem ? quum et aderam 

et memini 

Quandd alios quarta iam luce solo conditos, 
Ad huius uitse munia reuocaueris. 
Nunc demum didici, quid sit a te deseri. 
Nunc demum didici, ad presidium unius tuum 
Confugere, abiectis rebus illis omnibus, 
Meo quse animo uidentur plausibilia. Nunc 
Demum, fiducise remoti' obstaculis, 
Victorise mortis et inferni gustum habeo. 
Mortem 6 faustam, mortem quse nostram interficit. 
Modis 6 omnibus utilissimam necem, 
Quae nos dehinc in uitam sempiternam asserit. 
Quas tibi grateis agam pater opt. max. 
Qui nou uel unigeno parcebas filio in 
Nostrum miserorum alioqui hominum gratiam ? 
Ad quantas, quam certasq; spes, nos antefi 
Desperabundos erexisti ? Ad quam gloriam 
Ac dignitatem accersisti per filium ? 
Quum nos peccatorum grauitate et pondere, 





Legisq; iudicio damnaremur miseri : 
Tu clementissime et benignissime pater, 
Quod nostra non potuit imbecillitas, 
Effecisti, ut natus etiam tuus unice 
Tibi dilectus, pro nobis exolueret. 
Quis autem, 6 Christe, hominum uoluptas 

et quies, 

Tarn erit ingratus, ferreus, adamantinus, 
Qui ad gratuitam tuam beneficentiam, 
Non totus desiderio tui flagret ? 
Non totus amore tui inflammetur et ardeat ? 
Et, ut ad solem cera, liquescat medullitus? 
Sed ego nescio qua corruptus dementia, 
Vt limus ad Phoebi radios durescere 
Ni tua succurrisset prsesentia, coeperam. 
Quare obsecro, facilis meam fidem adaugeas : 
Vt mini displiceam totus, uni tibi haBream, et 
Vt, qui tua solius ope sic euaserim, 
Per omnia semper te gratus depraBdicem. 
Christ. Post uisum ipsum corpus, et ipsissima uulnera 
Tandem credis Thoma : sed felicissimos 
Illos pronuncio, qui hoc persuadeant, 
Etiamsi nunquam cernant. Verum tu tamen 
Recte et facis, et loqueris. Morti caput obtuli 
Pro multi' unus, meaq; sponte, qu6 omnia 
Quse per Adamum a suo dilapsa erant statu, 


446 J. M. HART. 



Restituerem egomet maiori glorise. 

Nunc igitur, quando me summus olympus manet, 

Memori uos animo mea dicta recondite. 

In omneis mundi regiones penetrabitis, 

Et ubiq; gentium eritis rerum coelestium 

Nuncij : ut (si fieri possit) unusquilibet 

Me mortuum sibi, me rediuiuum sibi putet. 

Nihil opus erit, uetustas ceremonias, 

Aut uictimas retinere, aut sacrificia. 

Qui uiuida nixus fide, persuaserit 

Sibi, qudd gratis una et sola morte mea, 

Delicta et scelera remittuntur omnia, 

Doniq; signum huius aqua tinctus habuerit, 

Et amori meo mutua respondent 

Voluntate : is, quicunq; est, nil quidquam heesitans, 

Ccelum ut patriam nostro ex promisso uendicet. 

Qui uerd isti non crediderit Euangelio, 

Sed aud contemnit, aut uertit prseposter& : 

Nil hunc iuuabit lgis obseruatio, 

Nil philosophia, nil quaeuis professio, 

Qu6 minus seternis destinetur ignibus. 

Vos, cum res ipsa poscet, nostro nomine 

Serpenteis profligabitis, ac dsemonia 

Exterminabitis, et linguis etiam nouis, 

Quasi si eas dedicissetis, loquimini. 

Nee hausta nocebunt ueneni pocula. 





Erga aegrotos DOS ut medicos praebebitis. 

Et (quod maius quidem est) animi fbedissimos 

Morbo', arrogantiam, acediam, lubidinem, 

Ambitionem, odium, auaritiam, iram, abdomini 

Deuotam gulam, et id genus innumeros propemodum 

Diuina ui radicitus extirpabitis. 

Nam paruo post tempore, uos sethereus pater 

Coelesti afflabit et inspirabit numine. 

Quo profectd, pro me quid non audebitis ? 

Hoc duce, rges et rerum dominos purpura 

Et sceptro insignitos, nihil dubitabitis 

Adire, et ueritatem condocefacere : baud 

Longe petita erit uobis oratio, 

Neq; loquendi tempus, neq; forma et modus : 

Hlc spiritus praasens uestra ora diriget, ac 

Dabit cuiq; uim uerborum et copiam. 

Hunc, hunc animi' uestri' arrabonem accipite, qu6 

Vitse illius uobis fiat certissima 

Spes, cuius insestimabilia gaudia 

Sub cogitationem humanam non cadunt. 

Cho. disc. Vieit io, uicit leo de ludse sanguine. 

Vicit 16, uicit almum lessasi genus. 

Quis non tarn felici applaudat uictorise ? 

Hunc unum authorem et conseruatorem unicum 

Agnoscat quilibet suum. 

Qui nos fuso cruore, exemit crimine 


448 J. M. HART. 



Ab omni, et mortem morte deleuit sua 
Nostram, ac uitam nobis rediuiuus attulit. 
Aded, quse annorum tot clausa est recursibus, 
Nunc sublimis olympi ianua recluditur. 
Dies nunc est uatum promissa uocibus, 
Vt monteis et colleis resultent Iseticia. 
Nos autem, tantis iam cumulati gaudijs, 
Solymae simus, Deo canenteis gloriam. 


Habetis rem totam, auditores optimi. 
Quse si uobis uisa est iucunda et araabilis, 
Vt estis Christiani, uos de gloria 
Christi rediuiui, deq; uestris commodis 
Iam serio triumphanteis, plausam date. 

Omnis uni Deo gratia 
et gloria. 

Columna 13. litera A. in ordine personarum, pro 
Cleophas, lege Cleopas. 






When we find an English word beginning with p, we 
quite properly suspect it of being an adopted word if not 
evidently imitative or of nursery origin. For early English 
words beginning with p there are two chief sources : Latin 
(including indirectly Greek) and Celtic. If the word appears 
only in England, it may a priore have come from either of 
these languages. If it is found both in England and on the 
continent, it is almost sure to have come from the Latin. 
Pickle appears both in England and in North Germany, 
Holland, etc., and we are therefore justified in suspecting a 
Latin origin for it. It also belongs to the category of words 
that we know to have been largely drawn from Italy. In 
the earliest days the Italian traders introduced piper ' pepper/ 
vinum 'wine/ acetum 'essig/ etc. Later the Germanic peoples 
owed much of the development of the culinary art among them 
to the Christian priests and monks from Italy. They were 
fond of good living, of spices and of sauces. They brought 
with them from the South seeds and plants, and they raised 
vegetables and herbs for the table and for the cure of the 
sick. It is, therefore, but natural that we should suppose 
that so artificial a product as pickles should have had a 



similar source. These considerations and a knowledge of the 
South-German use of pfeffer in senses similar to those of 
pickle led me to associate pickte with pepper. One kind 
of pickling suggested that kipper was only another form of 
the same word. 

The following are the important forms : 

OHG. pfeffar. 

MHG. pfefer. 

NHG. pfeffer, pfefferfisch, pfeffergurke, etc., and, from Low 
German, pokel, pokelfleisch, pickelhering. 

MLG. peper, pekel, pickel. 

MnLG. peper , pekel, pickel, pekelhering, etc. 

MDu. peper, pekel. 

MnDu. peper, pekel, pekelharing, etc. 

OFrz. piper. 

MnFrz. peper, paper, pekel, pdkel, pekelherink, etc. 

OE. pipor, piper. 

ME. piper, peper, pikil. 

MnE. pepper, pickle, pickleherring, etc., kepper, kipper, 

Icelandic piparr, pcekill, saltpcekill ' saltpetre/ 

Sw. peppar. 

Dan. peber. 

The Latin word offered a temptation to dissimilate. We 
find that this happened in the two chief ways that would be 
most natural: (1) pip- > pik- ; (2) pip- > kip-. Cf. Skt. 
piplld- > Pali kipilla-, Lat. papilio > Du. pepel and kapel 
(in capellenvogel). Lat. papyrwn ]> OE. tapor, Eng. taper, 
OF. poupe ' nipple/ ' breast ' > pouque ' bag/ Ger. pumpe > 
Rhinefrankish kumpe (gumbe), Lat. plebdnus > Lith. klebonas, 
etc. Lat. hippopotamus became ypotamus in Middle English, 
with loss of whole syllable (Brugmann 2 , 1, 988) ; and children 
now usually call it hitapotamus. Eng. hickock became hicket 
and the proper names Babcock and Bartlett are often called, 
even by the members of the families, Babcot and Barldett. 
Cf. also Brugmann 2 , I, p. 853. The dissimilated forms of the 


word we have under consideration appear only in the North 
in Low German, Dutch, Frizian, English, and Scandinavian. 

In the Germanic forms the Latin suffix -er is sometimes 
exchanged with -el. Compare the same phenomenon in 
OHG. amar > MHG. amer and amel, OHG. hadara > 
MHG. hader and hadel, OHG. zinseri > MHG. zinsel, OHG. 
panthera > MHG. panter and pantel, and see Wilmanus 2 , I, 
114. The i also interchanges with e, for which see Wil- 
manns 2 , 1, 181, middle p. 235, and Morsbach's Mittelenglische 
Grammatik, 113-115. For the o of German pokel, see 
Wilmanns 2 , I, 230. 1 

The chief meanings of the words are as follows : 2 

I. pepper, pfeffer, etc. 

(1) (a) The fruit of the pepper plant, whether powdered or 
in the berry. 

(6) The latter is also called pepper-corn, which word then 
assumes the general meaning of anything small or of small 
value, also the technical meaning ' a rent or other considera- 
tion that is only nominal. 7 The verb 'to pepper' also has 
acquired a general meaning : ' to pelt with kernels of any 
grain or with other small bodies/ (English and German.) 

(2) (a) A spiced sauce containing vinegar, stewed elder- 
berries, etc. (Tyrol). A similar pearsauce, plumsauce, etc. 

(b) A sauce or gravy of which the brine forms a small or 
a large part and to which vinegar is usually added. This is 

1 It is strange that Wilmanns attributes the change of e to o to a neighbor- 
ing I or sch, and admits the influence of a neighboring labial only in the 
dialects. There are but four words in his list that do not contain a labial, 
and more than that number that contain a labial but do not contain an / or 
sch. The truth appears to be that labials and sch and / tend to labialize an 
e, and that they are particularly successful if a labial and an / or sch occur 
near the same e, just as English u is generally retained only between a labial 
and an I or sh (/it//, pull, bull, wolf, etc. ; push, bush, etc.), while it sinks and 
becomes unrounded elsewhere (but, cup, us, etc.; rush, gush, etc.). 

*The meanings of the three words are classified and arranged alike, so 
that the corresponding uses may easily be found. 


poured over the pickled meat (cf. 3 below) after it has been 
boiled (in the brine, in Bavaria) or roasted (in Hesse, 
etc.), and is about to be served. Also distinguished as ' ein 
schwarzer pfeffer ' or ' ein gelber pfeffer/ also ( pfefferbriihe ' 
or ' pfeffersauce.' Cf. English ' peppersauce.' 

(3) A brine containing spices for pickling fish, game, and 
very fat meat, especially hare, mutton, goose, and pork ; for 
example, ' einen hasen in pfeffer einmachen. 7 The period of 
pickling varies : in Silesia over night, in Hesse one or two 
days, in Bavaria four to eight days. (Silesia, Austria, Bavaria, 

Wurtemberg, Switzerland, Hesse.) 

(4) The process : to pepper, pfeffern, einpfeffern. 
(a) To strew or season with pepper. 

(6) To strew or rub with pepper, etc., as a means of pre- 
serving : gepfefferte wurste, gepfefferte hdringe, eingepfefferte 

(5) (a) The thing pickled according to 4 : hasenpfeffer, 
gdnsepfejfer ; pfeffergurke, etc. Also the thing otherwise made 
with pepper = pfefferwurst etc. 

(6) . 

(6) Figuratively: 

(a) = ' pungent ' in pepperroot etc., cf. kippernut. 

(b) = uncomfortable situation : in den pfeffer geraten; er 
liegt (or sitzt) im pfeffer; aus dem pfeffer laufen; einen aus 
dem pfeffer helfen. 

All these meanings the word pepper, pfeffer, still has in 
High-German territory. In the North and in England 
the byforms pekel, pokel, pickle and kepper, kipper, kippel have 
relieved it of some of its burden. It was natural that the 
original thing, the pepper itself, should retain the more 
original form of the word. The dealers were familiar with 
it in bills and orders and they and, in many cases, their 
customers could see the word daily in distinct letters on the 
front of the pepper drawer or can. The corrupted forms, 
therefore, attached themselves to the home preparations and 


thus the differentiated forms accommodated themselves to the 
differentiated meanings. 

II. The form pekel, pokel, pickle has the following mean- 
ings using the same numbers as above. 

(1) (a) . 

(b) 'A kernel of any kind of grain ; ' then, more generally, 
'anything of small size or value/ so ( a small amount' or 
'a small number' of anything, 'a few/ (Scotland.) Where 
mickle becomes muckle; for example, in Aberdeenshire, pickle 
becomes puckle. 

(2) (a) A spiced liquid containing a large amount of vine- 
gar and used for preserving cucumbers, peaches, pears, 
blackberries, etc. (England, Scotland, and America.) Before 
being pickled in this way, the cucumbers are immersed in a 
brine for about a day. 

(6) . 

(c) A liquid consisting of brine and vinegar for pickling 
tongue, etc. (England, Scotland, and America.) 

(3) A brine (sometimes spiced) for pickling fish and meat, 
especially herring, pork, and beef. (North Germany, Holland, 
Frisia, England, etc.) 

(4) The process : to pickle, pokeln, einpokeln, to put up 
meat, fish, vegetables, and fruit in vinegar or brine (or both), 
to which various spices and leaves have been added. 

(5) (a) The thing pickled, especially pickled vegetables. 
Thus pickled cucumbers are called cucumber pickles, cf. also 
tomato pickles, mixed pickles, and pickles in general. Fish 
and meats are usually distinguished as pickled herrings, pickled 
pork, etc. 

(6) The thing that is most commonly pickled is often 
spoken of as a pickle even before the process. Thus we speak 
of ' putting up pickles' and of ' buying pickles (= cucumbers) 
to put up.' Last fall a farmer came to the door and, when 
my wife asked him whether he had any cucumbers, he 
answered : " Not this morning, but I have some very nice 
cucumber pickles," meaning cucumbers too small to slice up 


but just right for pickling. Children and, in some parts, 
even grown people call cucumbers on the vine ' pickles.' 
Hence, too, picJcleworm ' a worm that infests cucumber vines.' 
(6) Figuratively: 

(6) = uncomfortable situation : He left us in a pretty pickle 
(England, etc.), in de pekel zitten (Holland), er liegt im pokel 
(North Germany). 

III. The form kepper, kipper, kippel is, so far as I know, 
restricted to English, kipper is now the usual form. 



(3) . 

(4) The process : to kipper, 
(a) . 

(6) 'To prepare or cure, as salmon, herring, etc., by clean- 
ing them well, giving them several dry rubbings of pepper 
and salt, and then drying them, either in the open air or 
artificially by means of smoke or peat or juniper berries.' 
Century Dictionary. 

(5) (a) The salmon, herring, or trout kippered according 
to 4. 

(6) The salmon, herring, or trout not. yet kippered, espe- 
cially one in the stage when they are (or formerly were) most 
commonly kippered, rather than eaten fresh, that is, in the 
spawning season, and particularly the spent male salmon. 
" He [Scott], and Skene of Rubislaw, and I were out one 
night about midnight, leistering [spearing] kippels in Tweed," 
Hogg, quoted in the Century Dictionary. " That no person 
take and kyl any Salmons or Trowtes, not beyng in season, 
being kepper Salmons, or kepper Trowtes, shedder Salmons, 
or shedder Trowtes," Acts Hen. VII., c. 21 . RastelFs Statutes, 
Fol. 182, a, quoted by Jamiesou. Hence the spawning season 
is called kipper-time : " That no salmon be taken between 
Gravesend and Henly upon Thames in kipper-time, viz., 
between the Invention of the Cross (3 May) and the 


Epiphany." Rot. Parl. 50, Edw. III., Cowel, Quoted by 

(6) Figuratively : 

(a) = ' pungent ' in kippernut, cf. pepperroot, etc. 


The development and the branching of the meaning of 
pepper, etc., are very natural. From the fruit of the plant 
itself it spread to various preparations containing pepper and 
other spices; cf. the use of honig in honigkuchen and of ginger 
in gingerbread, gingerpears, etc. That in the form pickle it 
was in time applied to processes in which little or no pepper 
was used is not at all strange. We find the same where the 
form pepper itself is used, namely, in pfefterkuchen, which is 
usually made without any pepper at all. But, of course, this 
extension was more likely to take place in pickle than in 
pepper, because the latter word constantly reminds one of its 
original meaning, while pickle does not. The development 
of the word was not the same in all parts. A chief point of 
difference is whether vinegar or brine is used. In most 
of North Germany brine alone is understood by pokel, while, 
on the contrary, in many parts of England the word pickle 
necessarily implies the use of vinegar. In those parts of 
England and America, in which this is the case, we hear 
of salt herring, salt pork, and corned beef, of salting down 
and of the brine not the pickle. So in parts of Germany, 
especially Middle Germany, where neither pokel nor pfeffer is 
employed, we hear of salzfleisch, salzgurke or sauere gurke (dill 
pickle), of einsalzen or in salz legen, and of salzlake or salz- 
bruhe. In some parts pokeln is restricted to pork ; herrings, 
for example, being called salzheringe or gesalzene heringe. 
In some cases, for example, in pickling ordinary cucumbers 
(pfejfergurken or essiggurken), the things to be pickled are 
first placed in a brine and afterwards in vinegar ; in others, 
for example, in pickling tongue, the pickle consists of both 
brine and vinegar. Hence the confusion of the two processes 
of preserving was almost inevitable. 


It will be well to consider briefly the etymologies hereto- 
fore given for pickle and kipper. 

No one has ever offered a satisfactory explanation of the 
word pickle pokel. The German books repeat, with more or 
less disapproval, an old story according to which the word is 
due to the name of a man who first invented the process, 
Wilhelm Bockel or Bokel. But it has long ago been shown 
that this is impossible. The change of b to p is irregular, 
and such a German form could never explain the English 
form ; moreover the English word and the process long ante- 
date Wilhelm Bockel. Koolmann, in his Worterbuch der 
Ostfriesischen Sprache, derives the word from Du. beek, Eng. 
beck, Ger. bach, assuming ' fluid ' as the original meaning ; 
but the p of pick/e, etc., makes this too impossible. The 
original character of the p is thoroughly established and in 
no way invalidated by the rare spelling bokel (for pokel), 
which is probably due to hocking and bockling ' smoked her- 
ring/ or to the erroneous association of the word with the 
name Bockel, just as Mahn contrariwise changes the name 
Bockel to Pokel to agree with pokeln. Others suggest that 
the word may be derived from Eng. pick thus Wedgwood 
calls attention to the meaning ' cleanse ' that pick is said to 
have locally, and Kluge, refers to the meaning ' prick ' that 
pick sometimes shows, evidently having in mind the sharp, 
pungent taste of pickles. But the authors of these suggestions 
make them in a half-hearted way, evidently because at a loss 
for something better. 

Two plausible but erroneous etymologies of kipper have 
been brought forward. The first derives it from kip ' point/ 
with reference to the ( beak ' that the male salmon is said to 
have when lie has spent milt. A similar idea appears to have 
been in Walton's, mind when he wrote: "Those [i. e., salmon] 
.... left behind by degrees grow sick and lean, and unseason- 
able, and kipper that is to say, have bony gristles grow out 
of their lower chaps," Complete Angler, p. 122, quoted in 
Century Dictionary. The idea, at first sight, seems a natural 


one; it is, however, a case of popular etymology. If the fish 
were named for the sort of hook that it appears to have when 
spent, we should expect it to be called at best a 'kipped 
salmon,' or perhaps a ' kip ' or ' kippie.' To call it a kipper 
would be like calling a beaked bird a ' beaker,' the horned 
owl a f homer,' the tufted titmouse a ' tufter,' the spotted bass 
a 'spotter,' or the speckled trout a 'specker' or ' speckler.' 
Nouns in -er are, for the most part, derived from verbs and 
denote an agent or actor (fighter, giver, speaker, etc.). When 
derived from other nouns, they denote a functionary (jailor, 
bencher, executioner, larderer), or one following a line of 
business (fruiter, palmer, lawyer) they never, to my knowl- 
edge, denote the possessor of a peculiarity, except in the 
comparatively recent slang of English universities. Further- 
more, the beaklike lower jaw of the spent salmon bends 
down [ a the male salmon, often especially during the spawn- 
ing season, having his nose beaked down like a bird's bill," 
cf. Jamieson under kipper nose], but a kip is an upturned 
point, a peak (especially of a mountain), and ' to kip ' is to 
turn up or to be turned up, as the horns of cattle, etc. So 
'kip-nosed' means 'having the nose turned up at the point' 
our ' pug-nosed.' A ' kipper nose,' on the contrary, is a long 
beaked nose : " This scene went on the friar standing before 
the flame, and Turn and Giffie, with their long kipper noses, 
peeping over his shoulder," Perils of Man, II, 50, quoted by 
Jamieson. The usual etymology of the word traces it to Du. 
kippen ' to hatch/ from which the step to ' to spawn ' is easy, 
and thus Skeat says a kipper is a ' spawner. 7 If this were 
true, we should expect the word to be applied particularly to 
the female fish ; but, when any distinction of sex is made, the 
term is applied specifically to the male, the female being called 
a ( shedder ' or ' roan ' (cf. Jamieson). The derivation of the 
word from the Dutch would be natural if this process of 
preserving fish and, with the process, the name for it had 
come from Holland. We know, however, that the Dutch 
have no word corresponding to kipper, and, so far as I can 


learn, even kippen is not used of fish in Holland. In Dutch 
and Low German the word means primarily to 'peck' or 
' pick/ then specifically of a young bird or chick in the egg, 
that picks the shell open ; also of the old bird or hen that 
aids it with her bill. It might be urged that kipper was not 
derived directly from the continental kippen but from a cog- 
nate English verb that is lost, but whose meaning may have 
been extended from birds to fish, from hatching chicks to 
spawning. Now, it happens that there not only was such an 
English verb but that it still exists ; its meaning is, however, 
as restricted as that of the continental kippen, and its form, as 
was to be expected, is chip not kip. As kipper is not restricted 
to those parts of England that retain original k before i, we 
should expect the word, if derived from original k, to have 
in most of England the form chipper, which to ray knowledge 
it never has. 

Both of these attempts to explain the word have made it 
necessary to ignore the natural and usual meaning of kipper 
and to seek its explanation in one of its rarer meanings. Cf. 
Skeat: "Kipper, to cure or preserve salmon. (Du ). This 
meaning is quite an accidental one, arising from a practice 
of curing kipper-salmon, i. e., salmon during the spawning 
season." The association of kipper with pepper shows that 
the most usual meaning of the word (namely, the fish pre- 
served by being subjected to "dry rubbings of pepper and 
salt," not the living fish) is the more original, as we observe 
also in the case of pickle as applied to the preserved cucumber 
and to the green cucumber. 

This etymology clearly illustrates the fact, so often for- 
gotten, that the solution of a problem in English word-lore 
frequently lies in one of the other Germanic languages. 
Without an acquaintance with the South-German usage as to 
the word pfeffer no one would have thought of associating 
English pepper, pickle, and kipper. 




In the very exhaustive and thorough account of the Middle 
English versions of the Seven Sages by Dr. Killis Campbell, 
which appeared in these Publications, xiv, pp. 37 f., I see 
that the Bodleian MS. has escaped notice. As I believe that 
no one has hitherto called attention to this version, it may be 
worth while to give a brief account of it here. I came Across 
it some years ago whilst working through a number of the 
Rawlinson MSS. in the Bodleian Library. The MS. in question 
bears the press mark MS. Rawl. Poet. 175 (New Catalogue 
14667) and is a parchment MS. of the middle of the 14th 
century, The Seven Sages occupying fol. 109-131 b . This 
Rawlinson version is in the Northern dialect and agrees very 
closely indeed with MS. C (Cotton Galba E. ix) ; in fact in 
the portions which I have examined, these two MSS. agree 
almost word for word, as the following specimen and colla- 
tions show. To give some idea of the MS. I here append (1) 
11. 1-128 1 in full, (2) the readings from the Rawlinson MS. 
which differ from MS. C in the Avis story, 2 and (3) the read- 
ings from the Rawl. MS. which differ from MS. C in the last 
portion of the whole (11. 3913-4002). 3 Contractions are 
denoted by italics. 

1 The C version of these lines is printed in Weber, Metrical Bomances, 
m, 3-8. 

2 The C version of this story will be found printed in full by Petras, 
Ueber die mittelenglischen Fassungen der Sage von dew sieben weisen Meistern, 
Breslau, 1885, p. 56. In printing the variants I disregard mere differences 
of spelling. 

3 The Aversion of this last portion is in Weber, in, p. 149. 





Lordynges J?at here lykes to dwell, 

Leues yhour spech and heres J>is spell. 

I sail yhow tell, if I haue tome, 

Of J?e seuen sages of Rome. 

Whilom lyfecl a noble mane, 

His name was Diocliciane ; 

Of Rome and of all J?e honoure 

Was he lord and emperoure. 

Ane Emperise he had to wyfe, 

pe fairest lady ]>ai bare lyfe ; 

Of all gud maners full auenant, 

And hir name was dame Milisant. 

A child f>ai had bitwix )>am two, 

pe fairest ]?at on fote myght go, 

A knaue child J?at was J?am dere ; 

Of him sone sail yhe selconthes here. 

Sone afterward bifell f>is case, 

pe lady dyed and grauen wase, 

And went whare god hir dyght to dwell ; 

parfor of hir no more I tell, 

Whether scho past to pyne or play, 

Bot of J>e son I sail yhow say. 

When he was seuen wynter aid, 

Of spech and bourdyng was he bald ; 

Florentyne his name cald was. 

Herkens now a ferly case. 

His fader was Emperour of Rome, 
A noble man and wise of dome, 
And florentyne ]>at was so fayre, 
Was his son and als his ay re. 
It was no thing ]>at he lufed mare, 


parfor he wold him sett to lare ; 
And sone he gert bifor him come 
Seuen maisters pat war in Rome, 
pe tale vs telles who to it tentes 
pat pai couth all pe seuen scientes. 
And sone, when pai war efter sent, 
Hastily to pe court pai went, 
pai come bifor pe Emperoure, 
And hailsed him with gret honoure 
He said, 'lordynges, takes en tent, 
And sese whi I efter yhow sent, 
For yhe er wysest men of lare, 
pat in pis world yhit euer ware. 
My son I will yhe haue forpi, 
To mak him conand in clergy ; 
And I will ]>at yhe teche him euen 
pe sotelte of science seuen ; 
And all yhour wisdom and yhow wytt, 
Mi will es pat yhe teche him itt. 
Whilk of yhow now will him haue, 
And fullfyll pis pat I craue?' 

Maister Bancillas spak pan, 
For of pam was he oldest man ; 
Lene he was and allso lang, 
And mast gentyll man pam omangj 
Full perfytely he couth his partes, 
And sadly of all pe seuen artes. 
' Sir/ he sayd, ( tak me ]?i son, 
Full mykell thank I will j>e kon, 
And trewly I sail teche him ]?an 
Of clergy more J>an any man. 
pat dar I vndertak )>e here 
Wtt/iin pe space of seuen yhere.' 
When )>is was sayd, he held his pese ; 
And pan said maister Anxilles, 
(He was a man metelyest, 


And of eld als him semed best, 
Of sexty wynter and no mare, 
And als he was full wise of lare) : 

' Sir, tak me pi son/ he said, 

1 And pou sail hald pe full wele payd ; 
I sail him lere full ryght and rathe, 
pat I kan and my felows bathe. 
I vndertak he sail it lere 
Within pe space of sex yhere.' 
pe thred maister was lytell man, 
Faire of chere and whyte als swan ; 
His hare was white and nothing broune, 
And he hight maister Lentiliouue. 
He spak vnto pe Emperoure, 

( Tak me pi son, sir, paramoure, 
And I sail teche him full trewly 
All maner of clergy 
pat any man leres in pis lyue, 
Within ]>e terme of yheres fyue. 7 
(fol. I09 b ) [pe] 1 ferth maister a red man was, 

And his name was Malquidras ; 
Of fyfty wynter was he aid, 
Quaynt of hand and of spech bald. 
Him thoght skorn and gret hething, 
pat f>ai made swa gret rosyng. 

' Sir/ he said, < I sail tell ]?e, 
Mi felows witt falles noght to me ; 
Ne of J?air wisdome, on none wyse, 
Will I mak no marchandyse. 
Bot, sir, Y\ son vnto me take, 
And I sail teche him for pi sake, 
pe science of Astronomy, 
pat falles to pe sternes of pe sky, 
And other sex science allswa, 

1 )>e is no longer there. 


In foure yhere witAouten rna. J 

pe fyft maister was wise of dome, 

And he was cald Caton of rome ; 

He made pe buke of Caton clere, 

pat es bigynyng of Gramere. 

He carped loud vnto pe kyng, 
' Sir, tak pi son to my techy ng, 

I wald noght he desayued ware, 

Bot I ne knaw noght my felows lare. 

Bot for to lere him I warand, 

Als mykell als he may vnderstand, 

And als his wyttes wele may here 1 

Forthermare dar I noght say, 

So pat in tyme of seuen yhere 

He sail be wise wit/iouten were. 7 

pe sext maister rayse vp onane, 

pe fairest man of pam ilkane 

lesse was his name, godote, 

Wit/ioiiten faut fro heued to fote, 

His hare was blayk and nothing broune ; 

With eghen faire als a fawkoune. 
' Sir/ he said, ' if pi will were, 

Tak pi son to me at lere. 

I sail him teche with hert fre, 

So pat within yheres thre, 

Sail he be so wise of lare, 

pat yhe sail thank me euermare.' 

II. 2 

MS. Rawlinson fol. 122. b 

2420 s It hanged] And it hynged 
2455 And thar] pare 

1 So the MS. . * Cp. Petras, p. 56. 

3 The numbering of the lines is that of Petras. 


2462 leuyng] leuenyng 

2465 cache] kage .(, 

2474 ester] efter 

2477 and night] J;e nyght 

2478 shoke] hir schoke 

2479-80 fat scho had neuer so euell rest 

Sen scho come out of hir nest. 

2492 leuenings] leuenyng 

2513 was] war 

2515 to knaw] we knaw 

2516 of hy] o sky 
2520 lok] toke 

2525 the ledder] )>at ledder 

2626 He had] And had 

2533 was gude] well gud 

2534 his wife] ]?e wife 
2638 his soth] hir soth 
2547 moght] mot. 

III. 1 

3915 Wit A reuerence and with gret honoure. 

3927 bren] brent 

3933 he sayd] he had sayd 

3935 efter] men efter 

3939 soth] als soth 

3957 gandes] gaudes 2 

3963 al the gilt] ]>e gylt 

3973 Sir] sirs. 

1 Cp. Weber, in, p. 149. 

These variants from the printed texts exceed in number the real 
variants from the MSS. According to Dr. Killis Campbell's copies and 
collations of the MSS. the variants noticed by Professor Napier in 2420, 
2455, 2462, 2474, 2478, 2479-80, 2492, 2515, 2516, 2520, 2525, 2534, and 
2538 are to be attributed to the faults of Petras's text of the Avi*; 
and Weber's text is to be held accountable for the variants 3927, 3939, and 
3957. This note is added with the kind permission of Professor Napier. 
J. W. B. 









In 1894, while preparing my doctor's thesis at Yale Uni- 
versity, on the subject, " The Elizabethan Drama, especially in 
its Relations to the Italians of the Renaissance" I began to 
study the Italian sources of the English dramatic poetry of 
the age of Elizabeth. Many of the plays are dramatized 
versions of novelle^ which, in translation, were so popular at 
that time. But I soon found that romantic fiction by no 
means exhausted the treasure-trove of Renaissance, literature 
upon which the great dramatists drew so largely, both for 
their matter and their inspiration. Italian discovery, history, 
science, manners, music, all that Italy had so abundantly 
contributed to the general stock of intellectual wealth, was 
becoming more and more familiar to the eager, open, im- 
pressionable minds of Elizabethan Englishmen, and almost 
everything of importance that appeared in France and Spain 
was sooner or later pressed into the service of English genius. 
So I purposely set aside the main subject of my inquiry, the 
Italian sources of Elizabethan plays, until I had made a 
collection, as complete as possible, of all the translations from 
the Italian during the Elizabethan period, understanding by 
that, the entire cycle of the great drama, approximately from 
the accession of Edward VI. to the Restoration, from 1549 
to 1660. With this paper, Part IV, I now complete the 
bibliography. Part I, comprising 70 numbers, on " Romances 
in Prose," will be found in the Publications of the Modern 
2 465 


Language Association, Vol. x, No. 2, June, 1895; Part II, 
82 numbers on " Poetry, Plays, and Metrical Romances," 
Ibid., Vol. xi, No. 4, December, 1896; and Part III, 111 
titles on ' Miscellaneous Translations/ 'Ibid., Vol. xm, No. 1, 
January, 1898. The present paper, an account of 139 trans- 
lations, is the second half of Part III, and as that dealt with 
religion and theology, science and the arts, grammars and 
dictionaries, and proverbs, so this instalment of Miscellanea 
treats of voyages and discovery, history and politics, manners 
and morals, and Italian and Latin publications in England. 
The whole bibliography, corrected to date, consists of 411 
translations, representing a total of 219 English translators, 
and 223 Italian authors. 

The two hundred and nineteen Englishmen include, directly 
or indirectly, every considerable writer of the period. Bacon 
is not here, but his friend, Sir Toby Matthew, the most 
' Italianated ' Englishman of his time, translates the Moral 
Essays into Italian, and dedicates them to Cosmo, Grand 
Duke of Tuscany, eulogizing his lifelong friend for " having 
all the thoughts of that large heart of his set upon adorning 
the age in which he lives, and benefitting. as far as possible 
the whole human race." Shakspere is not here, but Shak- 
spere is the soul of the romantic drama, and the English 
romantic drama not only went to Italian literature for its 
subjects, but it borrowed from the Italian drama much of 
its machinery, the chorus, the echo, the play within the play, 
the dumb show, the ghosts of great men as Prologue, appa- 
ratus in general, and physical horrors ad terrorem. The 
stories of fourteen Shaksperean dramas are found in Italian 
fiction, and several other plays contain suggestions from it. 
The list of Italian authors includes practically every notable 
Italian writer of the Renaissance, on all sorts of subjects. 

Of the foreign influences that shaped Elizabethan literature, 
unquestionably the Italian was the greatest. In discovery and 
commerce, Columbus was merely the last of a long line of 
Italian navigators, who, in the service of the western nations, 


sailed into distant and unknown seas. In history, transla- 
tions of the great vernacular Italian historians, Machiavelli, 
Guicciardini, and Cardinal Bentivoglio, prepared the way for 
our English Hall, Grafton, Stow, and Holinshed. In poli- 
tics. Sir Thomas Smith, the Earl of Mon mouth, and James 
Howell, follow in the footsteps of Malvezzi, Father Paul, 
Botero, and Paruta. Philosophy, through the intrepid spirit 
of Bruno, cast off forever the shackles of scholasticism to 
enter upon its inheritance from antiquity, and it was the 
England of Elizabeth that permitted Bruno to speak. The 
Italian astronomers reveal the secrets of the skies, and Milton, 
travelling in Italy, seeks out and visits, at Arcetri, the 
greatest of them, " the famous Galileo, grown old, a prisoner 
to the Inquisition, for thinking in astronomy otherwise than 
the Franciscan and Dominican licensers thought." Teofilo 
Folengo, Trajano Boccalini, Paolo Giovio, and Poggio-Brac- 
ciolini, helped at least to make known to the more sombre 
English the sunny smile of humor and the rapier thrust of 
wit. In manners, the Italians of the 16th century had all 
Europe for their pupils. Delia Casa's Galateo is a graceful 
and intelligent guide to good manners to this day, and II 
Cortigiano is a classic, the best book on manners that has 
ever been written. It was the fashion for young Englishmen 
of family to finish their education by the tour to Italy, and 
many of the translators are these ' Italianated ' travellers, 
Crashaw, Daniel, Greene, Drummond, Gascoigne, Howell, 
and Milton. 

In the Courtyer, a knowledge of music is said to be neces- 
sary for the well-bred gentleman, and Venice, which was 
the Paris of that time, was the most musical city in Italy. 
So we find the Elizabethan lutanists and madrigalists both 
travellers and imitators of Italian musicians. John Dowland, 
in the Epistle prefixed to his First Boole of Songs or Airs, 
refers with pride to the encouragement he had received from 
Luca Marenzio and Giovanni Croce. Thomas Oliphant, in 
La Musa Madrigalesca, accuses Thomas Morley of barefaced 


plagiarisms from the madrigali of Felice Anerio and the 
ballate of Gastoldi. In the preface to Part II. I suggested 
that a study of the relation between the Elizabethan lutanists 
and Italian madrigal writers might throw considerable light 
on the lyrical quality of Elizabethan dramatic poetry. For 
some one who knows both historical music and the Italian 
poetry of the Renaissance, I feel sure that there is something 
of value to be learned from John Dowland, John Wilbye, 
best of English madrigalists, John Ward, John Hilton, 
Thomas Weelkes, organist successively of Winchester College 
and of Chichester Cathedral, and from other Elizabethan 

Nor was all the travel in one direction. Bruno, Vanini, 
Yermigli, Ochino, and Michelangelo Florio found refuge in 
Protestant England. Other Italians came over as teachers 
of various arts. Vincentio Saviolo taught fencing and 
suggested the immortal Touchstone. Charles I. employed 
Orazio de 7 Gentileschi (Orazio Lomi) and his daughter, 
Artemisia, both painters, to decorate his palace at Greenwich. 
Girolamo Cardano visited Edward VI. in a medical capacity, 
and left an account of his impressions of the young king 
which is extremely favorable, and all the more valuable 
because it comes from a competent and disinterested observer. 

It is really wonderful how familiarly Italian and things 
Italian were known in England in Elizabeth's time. I 
question whether any foreign vogue, before or since, ever 
took such hold upon English society. Pietro Bizarri, the 
historian, said of Queen Elizabeth, "she is a perfect mistress 
of our Italian tongue," and we read how in her last illness 
the great Queen turned wearily away from matters of state 
to listen with charm to the Hundred Merry Tales. The 
Portuguese ambassador habitually corresponded with Sir 
Francis Walsingham in Italian, and among the State Papers 
of the period Italian letters are not at all uncommon. We 
see here Cecil issuing political papers in Italian, as well as 
in English and Latin. 


My next paper will essay to bring together the Elizabethan 
dramas that are Italian in source, or scene, or direct sugges- 
tion. The whole cycle of the drama, within the limits of 
this bibliography, consists, roughly speaking, and including 
all sorts of representations, of upwards of 1 500 plays, masques, 
pageants, and shows. Of these about one-half have survived. 
My studies of these surviving 700 or so plays show nearly 
300 that hark back to Italy. If imitative plays, or plays of 
remote suggestion be included, the number of ' Italianated ' 
dramas would be still greater. For example, Mr. Courthope, 
in his History of English Poetry, argues ably, and, to my 
mind, conclusively, that Marlowe produced his great plays 
under the spell of Machiavelli. Peele also wrote under 
the Italian spell. Perhaps some one some day may find the 
names of Marlowe and Peele among the English students 
of the University of Padua. Elze says that students repre- 
senting twenty-three different nations thronged to Padua 
towards the close of the 16th century, and that not a few 
Englishmen were among them. 

I have many friends to thank for encouragement and 
suggestions during the progress of this work. They will 
appreciate with me a thought from that most charming of 
books, Anatole France's Le Orime de Sylvestre Bonnard, 

" I opened a book which I began to read with interest, for 
it was a catalogue of manuscripts. I do not know any read- 
ing more easy, more fascinating, more delightful, than that 
of a catalogue." 


1555. The [three] Decades of the newe worlde or west India, 
conteynyng the navigations o.nd conquestes of the Spanyardes, 
with the particular description of the moste riche and large 
landes and Ilandes lately founde in the west Ocean perteynyng 
to the inheritaunce of the Kinges of Spayne. . . . Written in 
the Latine lounge by Peter Martyr of Angleria, and translated 


into Englysshe by E. [ichard] Eden. (The hystorie of the 
Weste Indies, wrytten by Gonzalus Ferdinandus. A discourse 
of the marvelous vyage made by the Spanyardes rounde aboute 
the worldej gathered owt of a large booke wrytten hereof by 
master A. \ntonio~] Pygafetta. The debate and stryfe betwene 
the Spanyardes and Portug ales, for the division of the Indies 
and the trade of Spices and also for the Hands of Molucca .... 
by J. Lopez de Gomara. [Francisco L6pez de G6mara~\. Of 
Moscovie and Cathay. The historie written in the latin toonge 
by P. Jovius . ... of the legation or ambassade of greate Basilius 
Prince of Moscovia to pope Clement the vij. Other notable 
thynges as touchynge the Indies. Of the generation of metalles 
and their mynes with the maner of fyndinge the same: written 
in the Italian tounge by Vannuccius Biringuczius [ Vannucdo 
Biringuccio~\. Description of two viages made owt of England 
into Guinea .... m .... M.D.L.III.). 

R. Jug. In aedibus Guilhelmi Powell, London, 1555. 4to. 
Black letter. British Museum, (3 copies). 

Francisco L6pez de G6mara, 1519-1560, was chaplain to 
Herndn Cortes, El Conquistador. He wrote Conquista de 

Gonzalez Fernandez de Oviedo y Valde"s, 1478-1557, was 
once secretary to the Great Captain. His Historia general y 
natural de Indias was published at Salamanca in 1535, folio. 

Peter Martyr, Pietro Martire, of Anghiera, by Lago 
Maggiore, was a member of the Council of the Indies, and 
secretary to Ferdinand and Isabella, and to the Emperor 
Charles V., and also the friend and correspondent of Colum- 
bus. It is said that Pope Leo X. sat up all night to read the 
Decades, so keen was the curiosity and the sense of wonder 
roused by the tales of the returning voyagers from the new 

See The History of Trauayle in the West and East Indies, 
1577, and Of F. Magalianes .... The Occasion of his Voyage, 
in Purchas his Pilgrimes. 1625. 


1577. Of the viages of 8. [ebastian] C. [abot]. See 

Anglerius, P. M. 

The History of Travayle in the West and East Indies, etc. 
1577. 4to. British Museum. 

1577. The History of Trauayle in the West and East Indies, 
and other countreys lying eyther way, towardes the fruitfull 
and ryche Molluccaes. As Moscouia, Persia, Arabia, Syria, 
Aegypte, Ethiopia, Guinea, China in Cathayo, and Giapan: 
With a discourse of the Northwest passage. . . . Gathered in 
parte, and done into Englyshe by Richarde Eden. Newly set 
in order, augmented, and finished by Richarde Willes. 

Imprinted at London by Richarde Jugge. 1577. Cum 
Priuilegio. 4to. Black letter. Huth. British Museum, (4 

Dedicated, by Richarde Willes, to "The Lady Brigit, 
Countesse of Bedforde, my singuler good Lady and Mys- 

This is a new edition of Richard Eden's translation of 
Peter Martyr's, "The Decades of the newe worlde or west 
India." 1555. 4to. Two additions to the work are, "The 
Voyages of the Spanyards round about the worlde," translated 
from the relations of Maximilianus Transylvanus and Ant. 
Pigafetta, 77 viaggio fatti dagli Spagnivoli atorno a'l Hondo, 
and An Abridgement of P. Martyr his 5. 6. 7. and 8. Decades. 

The Chevalier Francisco Antonio Pigafetta, of Vicenza, 
"for to seethe marvels of the ocean/' accompanied Ferdinand 
Magellan [Fernao de Magalhaes] in his circumnavigation of 
the globe, from September, 1519 to September, 1522. He 
was one of the eighteen survivors (out of some 280 men) of 
that splendid feat of navigation, and a journal kept by him 
during the three years 

Of moving accidents by flood and field 

is\)ur chief source of information as to the first voyage around 
the earth. 


It is more than likely that Shakspere had read Pigafetta's 
journal in Eden's History of Trauayle, for he takes from it 
the name of Caliban's god, Setebos [Tempest, i. 2. and v. 1], 
While the ships were wintering at Port St. Julian, Patagonia, 
1520, Magellan captured two of the Patagonians "by deceyte 
by loading them with presents and then causing shackels of 
iren to be put on theyr legges, makynge signes that he wold 
also giue them those chaynes ; but they begunne to doubte, 
and when at last they sawe how they were deceaued they 
rored lyke bulles and cryed uppon theyr greate deuyll Setebos 
to helpe them." 

1577. A brief e description of Moscovia, after the later 
writers, as 8. Munster [Sebastian Muenster], and J. Gastaldus 
\_Jacopo Gastaldi~\. 

See Anglerius, P. M., The History of Travayle in the West 
and East Indies, etc. 1577. 4to. 

1577. Certaine reportes of the province of China, learned 
.... chiefly by the relation of G. P. \_Galeotto Perera~\. . . . 
Done out of Italian into Engylyshe by R. W. [ittes], 

See Eden, R., "The History of Travayle in the West and 
East Indies," etc. 1577. 4to. 

1580. A Shorte and brief e narration of the Two Nauiga- 
tions and Discoueries to the North-weast partes called Newe 
Fraunce : First translated out of French into Italian by that 
famous learned man Gio: Bapt: Ramutius, and now turned 
into English by John Florio, etc. 

H. Bynneman. London. 1580. 4to. Pp. 80. Black 
letter. British Museum. Huth. 

Dedicated to " Edmund Bray, Esq., High Sheriff of Oxford- 
shire," and "To all Gentlemen Merchants and Pilots." At 
the end occurs, " Here endeth the second Relation of James 
Carthiers [Jacques Carder] discouerie & navigation to the 
newe founde Lande, by him named ' New Fraunce, 7 trans- 
lated out of Italian into Englishe by I. F." 


The original French work based on Carrier's notes is, 
Brief Recit de la navigation faite es isles de Canada, Hoche- 
lage, Saguenay et autres. 

Paris. 1545, et Rouen. 1598. 8vo. 1863. 8vo. British 

The Italian translation from the French used by Florio is 
in the third volume of the third edition of Ramusio's Navi- 
gationi et Viaggi, Venice. 1565. 

Primo volume, & terza editione delle Navigationi et viaggi 
raccolto gia da M. G. B. Ramusio & con .... discorsi, da 
lui .... dichiarato & illustrato. Nel quale si contengono la 
desorittione deW Africa & del paese del Prete Janui, con varij 
viaggi, etc. (Secondo volume . ... in questa nuova editione 
accresciuto, etc. Terzo volume, etc.) 3 vol. 

Venetia, nella stamperia de Giunti, 15637465. Folio. 
British Museum. 

Jacques Cartier was sent out to Canada by King Francis 
I., and made his first voyage during the summer of 1534. 
The second voyage was made in 1535-6 when the navigator 
wintered in New France. Hochelaga was the name of an 
Iroquois village which he found on the site of Montreal. 
Ramusio's third volume contains a two-page pictorial plan 
of the town of Hochelaga, and a general map of the New 
World in a hemisphere. 

1582. Divers voyages touching the discoverie of America, 
and the Hands adjacent unto the same, made first of all by our 
Englishmen, and afterwards by the Frenchmen and Britons: 
with two mappes annexed heereunto. \_By R. H., i. e. Richard 

(T. Dawson,) for T. Woodcocke : London. 1582. 4to. 
2 pts. Black letter. British Museum. 

Between the title and sig. A there are five leaves contain- 
ing " The names of certaine late travaylers," etc. ; "A very 
late and great probabilitie of a passage by the Northwest 
part of America," and the " Epistle dedicatorie " to " Master 


Phillip Sydney, Esquire." One of the maps is also dedicated 
to Sir Philip Sidney by Michael Lok. 

1582. Discoverie of the isles of Frisland &c. by N. Z. 
\_Nicolb Zeno~\ and Antonio his brother. 

See, Richard Hakluyt, Divers voyages, etc. 1582. 4to. 
British Museum. 

The discouerie of the Isles of Frisland, Iseland, Engroner- 
land, Estotiland, Drogeo and Icaria: made by two brethren, 
namely M. Nicholas Zeno, and M. Antonio his brother: 
Gathered out of their letters by M. Francisco Marcolino. 

The Voyages of The English Nation to America, before the 
year 1600, from Haklyyt's Collection of Voyages (1698-1600). 
Edited by Edmund Goldsmid. Edinburgh. 1889. Vol. I. 
P. 274. 

The Voyages of the Venetian Brothers, Nicolb and Antonio 
Zeno, to the Northern Seas in the XTVth Century. [Trans- 
lated, for the Hakluyt Society, by Richard Henry Major]. 
London. 1873. 

The Annals of the Voyages of the Brothers Nicolb and 
Antonio Zeno in the North Atlantic About the end of Fourteenth 
Century, and the Claim founded thereon to a Venetian Discovery 
of America. A Criticism and an Indictment. By Fred. W. 
Lucas. 50 copies. Edition de luxe. London, Henry Stevens, 
Son & Stiles. 1898. 4to. Pp. 233 and 18 facsimile maps. 

The Zeno family was one of the most distinguished in 
Venice, furnishing during the 13th and 14th centuries a 
doge, several senators and members of the Council of Ten, 
and military commanders of ability and renown. 

The adventures of the two Zeni in the North Atlantic are 
related in six letters, two from Nicold Zeno, known as "the 
Chevalier," to his brother, Antonio, a third, presumably 
addressed to some other member of the family, and three 
letters written by Antonio, after he had joined Nicol6, to a 
third brother, Carlo, Called, for his success in the war against 
Genoa, "the Lion of St. Mark." The voyages were made 


about 1390-1405, and the narrative was first published in 
1558, by Nicole Zeno, the younger, a member of the Council 
of Ten, and great-great-great-grandson of Antonio. 

In brief, the letters relate how Nicol6, the Chevalier, sail- 
ing from Venice around to the North of Europe, was caught 
in a storm and wrecked on one of the Faeroe islands. About 
to be murdered by the natives, he was rescued by a great 
chieftain, who, recognizing the rank and nautical skill of the 
stranger, gave him a post of authority in the national fleet. 
This chieftain has been identified as Henry Sinclair, Earl 
of the Orkneys and Caithness. Nicolo persuaded Antonio to 
join him, and together they undertook various expeditions, 
one of which carried them a long distance to an island in the 
western ocean. The name of this island suggests Greenland, 
but the description fits Iceland. Nicol6's health was broken 
by the cold of the western island, and he died soon after his 
return to the Faeroes, probably in 1395. 

Antonio Zeno and Earl Sinclair made another voyage 
westward, somewhere about 1400, "but, the wind changing 
to the southwest, the sea therefore becoming rough, the fleet 
ran before the wind for four days, and at last land was dis- 
covered." In returning to the Faeroes from this country, 
Zeno sailed steadily eastward for 20 days, and then for 
five days towards the southeast, seeing no land for the whole 
five and twenty days. The basis of the Venetian discovery 
of America rests upon the assumption that this land, upon 
which Antonio Zeno left Earl Sinclair to found a city, was 
Greenland. This is the conclusion of Richard Henry Major, 
who translated the Zeno narrative for the Hakluyt Society, 
and it is accepted by John Fiske in his Discovery of America. 

1582. Relation of J. Verrazano of the land discovered by him. 

See K. H. (Richard Hakluyt), Divers voyages, etc. 1582. 
4to. British Museum. 

The relation of John de Verrazano a Florentine, of the land 
by him discovered in the name of his Maiestie [King Francis /.]. 
Written at Diepe the eight of July, 1524- 


See The Voyages of The English Nation to America. Col- 
lected by Richard HaUuyt, Preacher, and Edited by Edmund 
Goldsmid. Edinburgh, 1889, Vol. II, 389. 

Verrazano sailed from Madeira, January 17, 1524, and 
having struck the east coast of America, sailed along it from 
about the 34th to the 54th parallel of latitude. At latitude 
" 41 deg. and 2 tierces " he notes a haven which " lieth open 
to the South halfe a league broad, and being entred within it 
betweene the East and the North, it stretcheth twelve leagues : 
where it waxeth broader and broader, and rnaketh a gulfe 
about 20. leagues in compasse, wherein are five small Islands 
very fruitful and pleasant, full of hie and broade trees, among 
the which Islandes any great Nauie may ride safe without 
any feare of tempest or other danger. Afterwards turning 
towardes the South in the entring into the Hauen on both sides 
there are most pleasant hils, with many riuers of most cleare 
water falling into the Sea." This describes New York harbor 
and the Hudson river, eighty-three years before Henry Hudson 
made his voyage up the North River in the Half-Moon. 

1588. The Voyage and Travaile: of M. C. Frederick, 
\_Cesare Federici], merchant of Venice, into the East India, 
the Indies, and beyond the Indies. Wherein are contained very 
pleasant and rare matters, with the customes and rites of those 

Countries. Also, Jieerein are discovered the Merchandises and 
commodities of those Countreyes, aswell the aboundaunce of 
Goulde and Silver, as Spices, Drugges, Pearles and other 
Jewflles. Written at sea in the Hercules of London. . . . Out 
of Italian by T. \homas~] H. \iclcock~\. 

R. Jones and E. White, London, 1588. 4to. British 
Museum (2 copies). 

See R. Hakluyt. The principal navigations, etc. Vol. 2. 
Pt. 1, 1598, etc. Folio. 

1589. The principall Navigations, Voiages and Discoveries 
of the English nation, made by Sea or over Land .... within 


the compasse of these 1500. yeeres: Devided into three .... 
parts, according to the positions of the Regions wherunto they 
were directed. . . . Whereunto is added the last most renowned 
English Navigation [viz. Sir Francis Drake's] round the . . . . 
Earth. [Nov. 15, 1577-Nov. 3, 1580.] 

G. Bishop and R. Newberie, Deputies to C. Barker, London, 
1589. Folio. British Museum (2 copies). Also, London, 1598- 
1600. Folio. B. L. British Museum (5 copies). 

This book, in one volume, small folio, is the germ of the 
later edition of Hakluyt, 1598-1600, with a title almost 
identical, but enlarged to three volumes. Hakluyt's Voyages 
has been called the "great Elizabethan bible of adventure." 
Besides furnishing English versions of Italian and Spanish 
discoveries, it recounted for Englishmen the undying story 
of their own great navigators; of Sir Hugh Willoughby, 
found frozen in his cabin, his hand resting on his journal 
over this entry as to the fate of his crew: "In this haven 
they died ;" of Sir Humphry Gilbert vanishing with his little 
bark into the darkness and the unknown with the words on 
his lips, " We are as near to heaven by sea as by land ; " 
of Sir Walter Raleigh, and Sir Richard Grenville, and Sir 
John Hawkins, and Sir Francis Drake. 

1597. A Reporte of the King dome of Congo, a Region of 
Africa. And of the Countries that border rounde about the 
same. 1. Wherein is also shewed that the two Zones, Torrida 
& Frigida, are not onely habitable, but inhabited, and very 
temperate, contrary to the opinion of the olde Philosophers. 2. 
That the blacke colour which is in the skinnes of the Ethiopians 
& Negroes &c. proceedeth not from the Sunne. 3. And that 
the Riuer Nilus spring eth not out of the mountains of the Moone, 
as hath beene heretofore beleeued: Together with the true cause 
of the rysing and increase thereof. 4- -Besides the description of 
diuers plantes, Fishes and Eeastes, that are founde in those 
Countries. Drawen out of the writinges and discourses of 
Odoardo Lopes [Duarte Lopes] a Portingall, by Philippo 
Pigafetta. Translated out of Italian by Abraham Hartwell. 


London. Printed by John Wolfe. 1597. 4to. Huth. 
British Museum, (4 copies). 

Reprinted in Purchas his Pilgrimes, The Second Part. 
1625. Bk. vn, Ch. mi, p. 986. British Museum. Peabody. 
Also, in ^4. Collection of Voyages and Travels. 1745. Vol. II. 

This work is a translation of Filippo Pigafetta's Relatione 
del Reame di Congo et delle circonvicine contrade tratta dalli 
scritti & rogionamenti di Odoardo Lopez Portoghese. Con 
dissegni varie di Geografia, di piante, d'habiti, d'animali & 
altro. In Roma Appresso Bartolomeo Grassi. [1591.] 4to. 

In a prefatory address to the reader, Hart well states that 
he was urged to make the translation by Richard Hakluyt, 
who, he says, gave him a copy of Pigafetta, " intreating me 
very earnestly, that I would take him with me, and make 
him English : for he could report many pleasant matters that 
he sawe in his pilgrimage, which are indeed uncouth and 
almost incredible to this part of Europe." So, he goes on, 
"I brought him away with mee. But within two houres 
conference I found him nibling at two most honourable 
Gentlemen of England, [Drake and Cavendish] whome in 
plaine tearmes he called Pirates : so that I had much adoo 
to hold my hands from renting of him into many mo peeces, 
than his Cosen Lopez the Doctor was quartered." 

1600. A Geographical Historic of Africa, Written in 
Arabicke and Italian by John Leo a More [by Hasan Ibn. 
Muhammad Al-Wazzan Al Fasi, afterwards Giovanni Leone 
Africano]. . . . Before which . ... is prefixed a generall 
description of Africa, and .... a particular treatise of all 
the . . . . lands .... undescribed by J. Leo. And after the 
same is annexed a relation of the great Princes, and the mani- 
fold religions in that part of the world. Translated and 
collected by J. [o/w] Pory. 

Impensis G. Bishop, Londini, 1600. Folio. British 
Museum, (Grenville Library). 

Reprinted by Purchas, Observations of Africa taken out 


of John Leo his nine Bookes, translated by Master Pory. 
Purchas his Pilgrimes. Pt. 2. 1625. Lib. vi, Ch. i, i- 
ix, pp. 749-851. Folio. British Museum. 

Giovanni Leone's work was first written in Arabic, and 
then translated into Italian, Latin, French, English, Dutch, 
and German. The Italian title reads, Descrittione dell Africa 
& delle cose notabili che ivi sono. It was published by 
Ramusio, in his 

Primo Volume delle Navigationi et Viaggi net qual si con- 
tiene la descrittione deW Africa, e del Paese del Prete lanui, 
con varii viaggi, dal Mar Rosso a Calicut, et infin aW Isole 
Molucche . . . . et la Navigatione attorno il Hondo. \_Edited 
by G. B. Ramusio. ~\ 

Gli Heredi di Lucantonio Giunta. Venetia. 1550. Folio. 
British Museum. 

1601. The Travellers Breviat, or an historical description 
of the most famous Kingdomes in the World. Translated into 
English [by R. J. i. e. Robert Johnson]. 

E. Bollifant for J. Jaggard. London. 1601. 4to. British 

This is a translation of a part of Giovanni Botero's Le 
Relationi Universali. Rome. 1591. 4to. 

The Relationi Universali was a very popular book, fre- 
quently reprinted. It treats of the situation and resources 
of each state of Europe, and of the causes of its greatness 
and power. The author, Giovanni Botero Benese, abbate di 
S. Michele della Chiusa, was secretary to S. Charles Borromeo, 
Cardinal Archbishop of Milan. 

See Relations of the most famous Kingdoms and Common- 
weales thorough the world. 1608. 

1603. The Ottoman of Lazaro Soranzo. Wherein is de 
livered as well a full and perfect Report of the might and 
power of Mahomet the third, Great Emperour of the Turkes 
now raigning . ... as also a true description of divers Peoples, 


Countries, Citties, and Voyages, which are most necessarie to 
bee knowen, especially at this time of the present Warre in 
Hungarie. Translated out of Italian into English by A. 

J. Windet. London. 1603. 4to. Bodleian. British 

Translated from the Italian by Abraham Hartwell the 
younger, and dedicated by him to Archbishop Whitgift. A 
chance question of the Archbishop's about Turkish " Bassaes 
and Yisiers " led to the translation. 

1608. Relations of the most famous Kingdoms and Common- 
weales thorough the world. Discoursing of their Scituations, 
Manners, Customes, Strengthes and Pollicies. Translated into 
English and enlarged with an addition of the estates of Saxony, 
Geneva, Hungary, and the East Indies, etc. 

London. 1608. 4to. British Museum. 

Relations of the most famous Kingdomes and Common- 
wealths thorowout the World. . . . Translated out of the .... 
Italian of Boterus . . . . by R. [obert\ J. [o/mson]. Now .... 
inlarged according to moderne observations ; With Addition of 
new Estates and Countries .... unto which a Mappe of the 
.... World, with a Table of the Countries, are now newly added. 

John Haviland. London. 1630. 4to. British Museum. 

A translation of Giovanni Botero's popular geographical 
work, Le Relationi Universali. Rome. 1591. 4to. 

See The Travellers Breviat. 1601. 

1612. De Nouo Orbe, or The Historic of the west Indies , 
Contayning the actes and aduentures of the Spanyardes, which 
haue conquered and peopled those Countries, inriched with 
varietie of pleasant relation of the Manners, Ceremonies, Lawes, 
Gouernments, and Warres of the Indians. Comprised in eight 
Decades. Written by Peter Martyr Millanoise of Angleria, 
Cheife Secretary to the Emperour Charles the fift, one of his 
Priuie Councell. Whereof three, haue beene formerly translated 


into English, by R. Eden, whereunto the other fiue, are newly 
added by the Industrie, and painefull Trauaile of M. Lok Gent. 

In the handes of the Lord are all the corners of the earth. 
Psal. 95. 

London. Printed for Thomas Adams. 1612. 4to. Huth. 

A later edition, without date, London, [1620?] 4to. British 

Dedicated to Sir Julius Caesar, Chancellor of the Exchequer. 
This is the first complete edition of the eight decades in 

1625. Purchas his Pilgrimes. In fine bookes. The Jirst, 
contayning the voyages .... made by ancient Kings, .... and 
others, to and thorow the remoter parts of the Jcnowne world, 
etc. 4 pts. 

W. Stansby for H. Fetherstone, London, 1625. Folio. 
British Museum, (4 copies). 

The Dictionary of National Biography gives this title, 

Hakluytus Posthumus, or Purchas his Pilgrimes, containing 
a History of the World in Sea Voyages and Land-Trauells by 
Englishmen and others. 

Purchas modelled his book on Hakluyt and repeats some 
of his material, but the likeness between a good book and a 
poor one ends at this point. 

1625. Extracts of C. F. [ Cesar e Federici] his eighteene yeeres 
Indian Observations. 

See Purchas his Pilgrimes, etc. Pt. 2. 1625. Folio. British 
Museum. Peabody. 

The Voyage and Travaile of M. C. Frederick was rendered 
into English, in 1588, by Thomas Hickock, who describes 
his work on the title-page as " Written at sea in the Hercules 
of London." 

1625. Of F. Magalianes \_Fernao da Magalhaes~]: The 
Occasion of his Voyage. . . . Gathered out of A. Pigafetta, etc. 


See Purchas his Pilgrimes, etc. 1625. Folio. Part 1. 
See, also, The History of Trauayle in the West and East 
Indies, 1577. 

1625. The Relation of G. P. \_Galeotto Pererd] that 

lay prisoner in China. 

See Purchas his Pilgrimes, etc. Pt. 3. 1625. Folio. See, 
also, The History of Trauayle in the West and East Indies. 

1625. Indian Observations gathered out of the Letters of N. 
P. [Nicolb Pimenta']. 

See Purchas his Pilgrimes, etc. Pt. 2. 1625. Folio. 

1625. The first Booke of M . P. [Marco Polo~] 

his Voyages. 

See Purchas his Pilgrimes, etc. Pt. 3. 1625. Folio. 

Marco Polo, 1254(?)-1324, was of an aristocratic Venetian 
family which had a commercial house in Constantinople. In 
1271, then a lad of seventeen, he accompanied his uncles, 
Nicold and Maffeo, on their second trading journey to Cathay, 
at that time under the rule of the great Kublai Khan, grand- 
son of the all-conquering Jenghis. Young Marco became 
proficient in speaking and writing Asiatic languages, and the 
Chinese annals of the year 1277 mention him as a com- 
missioner of the privy council. He remained in Kublai's 
service until 1292, when, in company with his uncles, he set 
out to return, arriving in Venice in 1295. Two years later, 
during a war between Venice and Genoa, he was taken 
prisoner, and held in durance for about a year. One of his 
companions in captivity was a certain Rusticiano, of Pisa, a 
compiler of French romances. Rusticiano was so charmed 
with Marco's tales of his adventures in Asia, that he wrote 
them down, not in Italian, but in French. The Italian 
version was prepared by G. B. Ramusio, and published in the 
second volume of his Navigationi e Viaggi. Some 80 MSS. 
of Marco Polo are known. 


The Book of Ser Marco Polo concerning the Kingdoms and 
Marvels of the East is one of the most famous books of the 
Middle Ages. Although some of the l marvels ' were stories 
of the fabulous kingdom of Prester John, and of the " one- 
eyed Ariruaspians," still during his four and twenty years of 
travel Marco had learned more about the geography of the 
earth than any other traveller before his time. He was 
the first to describe the great empire of China, and he knew, 
or knew of, Thibet, Burmah, Siam, Cochin China, the Indian 
Archipelago, Java, Sumatra, Andaman, Hindustan, Japan, 
Siberia, Zanzibar, and Madagascar. Up to the close of the 
13th century, the known geography of the world comprised 
Europe, with a fringe of Asia and Africa. It is no wonder 
that to Marco's contemporaries his sober statements of fact 
read like a fairy tale, or a romance of chivalry. 

1625. A Discourse of the Kingdome of China, taken out of 
Ricius \_Matteo Ricci] and Trigautius. 

See Purchas his Piigrimes, etc. Pt. 3. 1625. Folio. 

Matteo Ricci, 1552-1610, was an Italian Jesuit, who 
founded Christian missions in China. He adopted the 
Chinese dress, and taught Christianity in conformity with 
the general principles of morals he found prevalent among 
the Chinese. He wrote numerous works, in Chinese, on 
moral subjects, and on geography, geometry, and arithmetic. 
In the Chinese annals he is called Li-ma-teu. Bicci's pleasant 
way of living on friendly terms with mandarins, and learned 
men, and his liberality of m nd in accepting the moral truths 
of Buddhism, were displeasing to the Dominicans. They 
accused him of heresy, and eventually the Jesuits were expelled 
from China. Browning alludes to the quarrel between the 
two orders in the Ring and the Book, x, The Pope, 11. 1589- 


Five years since, in the Province of To-kien, 
Which is in China, as some people know, 
Maigrot, my Vicar Apostolic there, 
Having a great qualm, issues a decree. 
Alack, the converts use as God's name, not 


Tien-chu but plain Tien, or else mere Shang-ti, 
As Jesuits please to fancy politic, 
While, say Dominicans, it calls down fire, 
For Tien means heaven, and Shang-ti, supreme prince, 
While Tien-chu means the lord of heaven : all cry, 
" There is no business urgent for dispatch 
As that thou send a legate, specially 
Cardinal Tournon, straight to Pekin, there 
To settle and compose the difference ! " 

1633. Cochinchina. Containing many admirable Rarities 
and Singularities of that Countrey. Extracted out of an Italian 
Relation . . . . by C. \ristoforo~\ B. [arri] .... and published 
by R. Robert] Ashley. 

London. E. Raworth for R. Clutterbuck. 1633. 4to. 
British Museum, (3 copies.) 

1873. Travels to Tana and Persia, by Josafa Barbaro and 
Ambrogio Contarini. Translated from the Italian by William 
Thomas, Clerk of the Council to Edward VI, and by 8. A. Roy, 
Esq. And Edited, with an Introduction, by Lord Stanley of 

London : Printed for the Hakluy t Society. M . DCCC . LXXIII. 
8vo. Peabody. 

Dedicated to King Edward VI., by William Thomas, 
. ..." I have thought good to translate out of the Italian 
tonge this litell booke, written by a Venetian of good fame 
and memorie, who hath travailed many yeres in Tartarie and 
Persia, and hath had greate experience of those p'tes, as he 
doth sufficiently declare, which I determined to dedicate unto 
yo r Ma tie as unto him that I knowe is most desirouse of all 
vertuouse knowledge. Trusting to God yo* shall longe lyve 
and reigne a most happie king over a blessed countrey, most 
humbly beseeching yo r highnes to accept this poore newe 
yeres gift, being the worke of myne owne hande, as a token 
of the faithfull love that I am bounde to beare unto yo u as 
well naturally as through the speciall goodnesse that I have 
founde in yo u> 

Yo r Ma ts most bounden Servant, 

Willm. Thomas. 


The work is translated from Giosafat Barbarous, Viaggi 
[two] fatti da Vinetia, alia Tana, in Persia, in India, et in 
Costantinopoli : con la descrittione particolare di cittd, luoghi, 
siti, costumi, et della Porta del gran Turco: et di tutte le 
intrate, spese, et modo di gouerno suo, et della ultima impresa 
contra Portoghesi. \_Edited by A. [ntonio~\ M. \_anuzio~]. 

Nelle case de Figliuoli di Aldo : Vinegia. 1543. 8vo. Pp. 
180. British Museum, (2 copies). 

Barbaro states that he set out, in the year 1436, for Tana, 
" wheare for the most parte I contynewed the space of xvi 
yeres, and haue compassed all those cuntreys as well by sea 
as by lande not only w th diligence, but in maner curiousely." 

Of the second voyage, he gives this account, "During 
the warres between our most excellent Signoria and Ottomano, 
the year 1471, 1, being a man, used to travaile, and of experi- 
ence amongst barbarouse people, and willing also to serue o r 
foresaid most excellent Signoria, was sent awaie w th tham- 
bassado r of Assambei, King of Persia : who was come to 
Venice to compfort the Signoria to folowe the warres against 
the said Ottornanuo." 

Ramusio interpolates a note in Barbara's last paragraph 
which fixes the final date, " I finished the writing on the 
21st December, 1487." 

The translation of Ambrogio Contarini is a contemporary 
one, made by Mr. Roy of the British Museum. 

For an account of William Thomas, see his III. Miscel- 
laneous Translations. The Principal Rules of the Italian 
Grammar. 1550. 


[1550?] The History of Herodian .... treating of the 
Romayne Emperors after Marcus, translated oute of Greeke 
into Latin by Angelus Politianus, and out of Latin into 
Hhiglysche by N. [icholas~] Smyth. Whereunto are annexed, the 
Argumentes of euery Booke, .... with Annotations, etc. 

W. Coplande. London. [1550?]. 4to. British Museum. 


The Greek text of Herodian, with Politian's Latin transla- 
tion, appeared at Basle, in 1535. 

The British Museum contains a copy of the original, dated 

Herodiani historiae de imperio post Mareum, vel de suis 
temporibus e Graeco translatae A. \ngelo~] Politiano interprete. 
It is in Volume n of Varii Historiae Romanae scriptores, 
partim Graeci partim Latini, in unum velut corpus redacti. 
De rebus gestis ab urbe condita, usque ad Imperil Constanto- 
nopolin translati tempora [ By H. Stephanus f] 4 vo ^ 

H. Stephanus. [Geneva?]. 1568. 8vo. 

The history of Herodian extends from the death of Marcus 
Aurelius, March 17, 180, to 233, A. D., and includes the 
reigns of the Emperors Commodus, Pertinax, Didius Julianus, 
Septimus Severus, Caracalla, Macrinus, Elagabalus, Alexander 
Severus, Maximin, the two Gordians, and Maximus and 

1562. Two very notable Commentaries, the one of the origi- 
nall of the TurcJcs and Empire of the house of Ottommanno, 
written by A. Cambine, and thother of the warres of the Turcke 
against George Scanderbeg, .... and of the great victories 

obteyned by the said George Translated oute of Italian 

into Englishe by I. Shute. 

Dedicated to the ' high Admirall/ Sir Edward Fynes. There 
is a long preface by the translator on discipline and soldiery. 

B. Hall, for H. Toye, London, 1562. 4to. Black letter. 
British Museum, (2 copies). 

The first of these commentaries is a translation of Andrea 

Libro d'A. (7. ... delta origine de Turchi et imperio delli 
Ottomanni. [ With a Prefatory Epistle by D. di Giunta.~\ 

Firenze. 1529. 12 mo. British Museum. 

The second commentary I have not met with. Shute says 
he does not know its author. 

George Castriota, called Scanderbeg or Skanderbeg, from 
the Turkish Iskander Beg (Alexander Bey), was an Albanian 


chieftain who lived from 1403 to 1468. In his youth, his 
father, Ivan (John) Castriota, lord of Croya, a hereditary 
principality in Albania, between the mountains and the 
Adriatic Sea, sent him and his three brothers as hostages 
to the Ottoman Court. When John Castriota died, in 1443, 
the Sultan, Amurath II., decided to annex the principality 
to Turkey. But George Castriota returned to Albania, in 
1444, proclaimed his independence, and resisted successfully 
for twenty-three years, both Amurath II. and his son 
Mohammed II., called the Conqueror. 

Scanderbeg finally died a fugitive, at Lissus in the Vene- 
tian territory, and Albania (Epirus) was added to the Turkish 

Gibbon. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Vol. VI, 
pp. 360-4. * 

1563. The Historie of Leonard Aretine, concerning the 
Warres betwene the Imperialls and the Gothesfor the possession 
of Italy. Translated out of Latin . . . .by A. [rthur] Goldyng. 

London. Printed by Kouland Hall for G. Bucke, 1563. 
8vo. Black letter. 180 leaves, besides an epistle and a 
preface. British Museum. 

Dedicated to Sir William Cecil, in whose family Golding 
was living. 

A translation of Leonardi Aretini de hello Italico adversus 

Nicolaus Jenson. [Venice]. 1471. 4to. British Museum. 

[1570.] A very brief e and profitable Treatise declaring howe 
many counsells, and what maner of Counselers a Prince that 
will governe well aught to haue. [Translated by Thomas 
Blundeville, from the Italian version of Alfonso d' Ulloa.] 

W. Seres. London. [1570]. 8vo. British Museum. 

There is a dedication, dated from Newton Flotman, 1 
April, 1570, to the Earl of Leicester. 

The original of this is a Spanish work by Federigo Furio 


El Concejo i Consejeros del Principe .... que es el libro 
primero del quinto tratado de la institution del Principe. 
Anvers. 1559. 8vo. British Museum. 

I do not find an Italian version by Alfonso de Ulloa, but 
there is one by his friend and correspondent, the voluminous 
Lodovico Dolce, 

II concilia, overo Conciglio et i Consiglieri del Prencipe. 
Opera di F. C. . . . tradotta di Lingua Spagnuola nella 
volgare Italiana per L. Dolce. 

Vinegia. 1560. 8vo. British Museum. 

Alfonso de Ulloa was a Spaniard who knew Italian so 
well that he rendered Spanish and Portuguese works into 
that language. His most famous translation is the Vita deW 
Ammiraglio, 1571, Ferdinand Columbus's life of his father, 
a book now of priceless value, because the original does 
not survive. Washington Irving described the Vita as "an 
invaluable document, entitled to great faith, and is the 
corner-stone of the history of the American continent. " 

1572. The true Report of all the successe of Famagosta, of 
the antique writers called Tamassus, a Citie in Cyprus. In the 
which the whole order of all the skirmishes, batteries, mines and 
assaultes geven to the sayd Fortresse, may plainly appeare. . . . 
Englished out of Italian [of Count Nestore Martinengo~] by 
W. [illiam] Malin [or Malim~\. With certaine notes of his and 
expositions of all the Turkishe wordes herein necessary to be 
knowen, etc. 

J. Dave: London. 1572. 4to. Black letter. British 
Museum. 1599. Folio. British Museum. 1810. Folio. 
British Museum. 

A translation of the Count Nestore Martinengo's Relatione 
di tutto il successo di Famagosta : dove s'intende .... tutte le 
scaramuccie, batterie, mine & assalti dati ad essa fortezza. Et 
ancora i nomi de i Capitani, & numero delle Genti morte, .... 
et medesimamente di quelli, che sono restati prigioni. 

G. Angehiri. Venetia. 1572. 4to. British Museum. 


*f . 

Malim, who was headmaster successively of Eton and of 
St. Paul's School, dedicates his work to the Earl of Leicester, 
"from Lambheth, the 23rd of March, An. 1572." The dedi- 
cation occupies seven pages out of a total of forty-eight for 
the whole pamphlet. 

1 574. The true order and Methode of wryting and reading 
Hystories according to the Precepts of Francisco Patricia and 
Accontio Tridentino, no less plainely than briefly set forth in 
our vulgar speach, to the greate profite and commoditye of all 
those that delight in Hystories. 

W. Seres. London. 1574. 8vo. British Museum. 

Dedicated to the Earl of Leicester. 

This is a translation of Francesco Patrizi's Delia Historia 
diece dialoghi . . . . ne' quali si ragiona di tutte le cose apparte- 
nenti aW historia, et allo scriverla, et aW osservarla. 

A. Arrivabene. Venetia. 1560. 4to. Pp. 63. British 
Museum, (2 copies). 

See also, 

J. A. [Jacobus Acontius\ Tridentini de Methodo, etc., in 
G. J. Vossii \_Gerardus Vossius, Canon of Canterbury] et 
aliorum de studiorum ratione opuscula. 

Ultrajecti. 1651. 12mo. British Museum. 

1575. A notable Historye of the Saracens, briefly and 
faithfully descrybing the originall beginning, continuaunce and 
successe aswell of the Saracens, as also of Turkes, Souldans, 
Mamalukes, Assassines, Tartarians and Sophians, with a dis- 
course of their affaires and Actes from the byrthe of Mahomet 
their first peeuish prophet and founder for 700 yeeres space ; 
whereunto is annexed a compendious chronycle of all their 
yeerely exploytes from the sayde Mahomet's time tyll this present 
yeere of grace 1575. Drawen out of Augustine Curie, and 
sundry other good Authours by Thomas Newton. 

Imprinted at London by William How, for Abraham 
Veale, 1575. [Colophon.] Imprinted at London by William 


How for Abraham Veale dwelling in Paules Churchyard, at 
the signe of the Lambe. 1575. 4to. Black letter. 144 
leaves. Huth. British Museum. 

Dedicated, " to the Ryghte Honorable the Lorde 'Charles 
Howarde, Baron of Effyngharn." 

A translation of O. [aelius~\ A. [ugustinus] Curionis Sarra- 
eenicae Historiae libr: III. . . . His accessit V. Drechsleri 
rerum Sarracenicarum Turcicarumque chronicon, auctum et ad 
annum MD.LXVII usque perductum. 

Basiliae. 1567. Folio. Francofurti. 1596. Folio. British 

The second book contains an interesting account of the 
battle of Roncesvalles, in 778, and the death of Roland, one 
of the most popular themes of mediaeval romance. 

The translator is Thomas Newton, of Cheshire, who edited 
Seneca his tenne Tragedies, in 1581, translating the Thebais 
himself. Newton wrote the most elegant Latin elegiacs of 
the time, and often prefixed recommendatory verses, in both 
Latin and English, to the publications of his friends. His 
chief patron was Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex. 

1576. A Moral Methode of civile Policie. Contayninge a 
learned and fruictful discourse of the institution, state and 
government of a common Weale. Abridged oute of the Comen- 
taries of .... F. [rancesco~\ Patricius \_Patrizi, Bishop of 
Gaeta~\. . . . Done out of Latine into Englishe by R. [ichard] 
Robinson, etc. 

T. Marsh, London, 1576. 4to. Black letter. British 

A translation of Francesco PatrizPs F. Patritii Senensis de 
Regno et Regis Institutione libri IX, etc. [ With a preface by 
D. LambinusJ] 

Apud Aegidium Gorbinum. Parisiis. 1567. 8vo. British 

1579. The Historic of Guicciardin; containing the Warres 
of Italie and other paries, continued for manie yeares under 


sundrie Kings and Princes, together with the variations and 
accidents of the same: And also the Arguments, with a Table 
at large, expressing the principall matters through the whole 
historic. Reduced into English by Geffray Fenton. Mon heur 

Imprinted at London by Thomas Vantroullier, dwelling 
in the Black Friers by Ludgate. 1579. Fol. Pp. 1184. 
British Museum. London. 1599. Fol. Brit. Mus. (2 copies). 
London. 1618. Folio. Brit. Mus. 

Dedicated to Queen Elizabeth. 

A translation of 

L'historia d' Italia di F. G. [Edited by A. Guicciardini.~\ 

L. Torret[ino] : Firenze. 1561. 8vo. British Museum. 
Also, 1561. Folio. Fiorenza: 1563. 8vo. Venetia: 1567. 
4to. Vinegia. 

This translation of Guicciardini was the greatest literary 
undertaking of Sir Geoffrey Fenton. It was extremely 
popular, and seems to have recommended the author to the 
Queen's favor permanently. Soon after its publication, he 
went to Ireland, under the patronage of Arthur, Lord Grey 
de Wilton, where he was sworn into the Privy Council, in 
1580. He was knighted in 1589, and remained in Ireland 
as principal secretary of state through a succession of lord 

Fenton says in his Dedication to Queen Elizabeth, "I 
am bold, under fear and timidity, to prostrate these my last 
pains afore that divine moderation of mind which always 
hath holden for acceptable all things respecting learning or 
virtuous labors." He concludes, " The Lord bless your 
Majesty with a long and peaceable life, and confirm in you, 
to the comfort of your people, that course of well-tempered 
government by the benefit whereof they have so long lived 
under the felicity of your name." 

Guicciardini's Storia d' Italia extends over forty years, 
from 1494 to 1534. During the latter half of this period 
Guicciardini was in the papal service as governor succes- 


sively of Modena, Reggio, Parma, the Romagna, and Bologna. 
The fact that he was himself a conspicuous actor in the scene 
enabled him to write with a peculiarly intimate knowledge 
of the events and the personages of contemporary politics. 
Keenly observant, he was in the habit of recording his 
impressions of men and things, and it was his mental turn 
to record them in the form of aphorisms. His history is, 
therefore, rather the maxims and memoranda of a statesman, 
scientifically arranged, than a philosophical view of human 

Montaigue observes acutely of Guicciardini's moral insen- 
sibility, his cold, passionless manner of depicting a great 
national tragedy, the decline and fall of his own country after 
the French invasion of 1494, ' among the many motives and 
counsels on which he adjudicates, he never attributes any one 
of them to virtue, religion, or conscience, as if all these were 
quite extinct in the world/ "Fay aussi remarque cecy, que 
de tant d'ames et d j effects qu'il iuge, de tant de mouvements et 
conseils, il n'en rapporte iamais un seul a la vertu, religion 
et conscience, comme si ces parties Id estoient du tout esteinctes 
au monde." 

JEssais de Montaigue. LivrelL ChapitreX,p.7. Paris. 

See Two Discourses of Master Frances Guicciardinj 1595. 

1579. The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romanes, 
compared together by that graue learned Philosopher and 
Historiographer, Plutarke of Chaeronea: Translated out of 
Greeke into French by James Amyot, Abbot of Bellozane, 
Bishop of Auxerre, one of the King's Priuy Counsel, and 
Great Amner of Fraunce; and out of French into Englishe by 
Thomas North. 

Imprinted at London by Thomas Vantrouiller and John 
Wight, 1579. Folio. British Museum. 

A new title-page introduces "the Lives of Hannibal and 
Scipio Africanus, translated out of Latin into French by 


Charles de L'Ecluse, and out of French into English 
by Thomas North." 

Other editions were, 1595. Folio. 1603. Fo"lio. 1610-12. 
Folio. 1631. Folio. 1657. Folio, all in the British Museum. 
Also, Cambridge, 1576. Folio. British Museum. 

Dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, and one of the most popular 
books of her day. 

The Lives of Hannibal and Scipio Africanus were written 
by the humanist, Donato Acciajuoli. North found them in 

Les vies de Hannibal et Scipion VAfricain, traduittes par C. 
de VEscluse [from the Latin of Donato Acciajuoli]. 

Paris. 1567. 8vo. British Museum, in the third edition of, 

Les Vies des Hommes illustres Grecs et Romains, comparees 
Vune avec Vautre .... translatees de Grec en Frangois \by J. 
Amyot, Bishop of Auxerre~\. 

Michel deVascosan. Paris. 1559. Folio. British Museum. 

The earliest edition of Acciajuoli's lives I find is, 

Plutarch's Parallel Lives, translated into Latin, by various 
persons, including Donato Acciajuoli' 's lives of Hannibal, Scipio 
Africanus, and Charlemagne. 

[Rome. 1470?] Folio. British Museum. 

Among the manuscripts left by Henry Parker, Lord 
Morley, are translations of the lives of Hannibal and Scipio 
Africanus by Acciajuoli. (See II. Poetry, Plays, and Metrical 
Romances. The tryumphes of Fraunces Petrarcke. [1565?] 

North's book, as is well known, was Shakspere's store- 
house of classical learning. 

1582. The Revelation of S. John reueled as a paraphrase. 
. . . Written in Latine. . . . Englished by J. [awes] Sandford. 

London, by Thomas Marshe, 1582. 4to. British Museum. 

Dedicated to Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. 

This is a translation of Giacopo Brocardo's Interpretatio et 
paraphrasis in Apocalypsin. 

Leyden. 1580, 1610. 8vo. 

Giacopo Brocardo was a Venetian, who, in 1565, pretended 


to have had a vision in which was revealed to him the appli- 
cation of certain passages of Scripture to particular political 
events of the time. His revelations concerned Queen Eliza- 
beth, Philip II., the Prince of Orange, and other personages. 

1583. De Republica Anglorum. The Maner of Govern- 
ment or Policie of the Realme of England, etc. 

London, by Henrie Middleton, 1583. 4to. 1584. 4to. 
British Museum. 1589. 4to. Brit. Mus. 1594. 4to. Brit. 
Mus. 1601. 4to. Brit. Mus. 1609. 4to. Brit. Mus. 1612. 
4to. 1621. 4to. Brit. Mus. 1628. 4to. 1633. 12mo. 
Brit. Mus. (2 copies). 1635. 8vo. Brit. Mus. 1640. 12mo. 
Brit. Mus. 1681. 4to. 

Sir Thomas Smith embodied in this work a translation 
from Giovanni Botero's Le Relationi Universali, Part II. ; 
the extract is entitled, Relatio J. Botero de regno Angliae. 

John Budden, 1566-1620, made a Latin translation of Sir 
Thomas Smith's book, 

De Republica et Administratio Anglorum libri tres interprete 
..../. Buddeni . . . .fide . . . . in Latinum conversi. London. 
[1610?] 8vo. British Museum. 1625. 16mo. Brit. Mus. 
1630. 16mo. Brit. Mus. 1641. 16mo. Brit. Mus. 

[1584.] Ihe Praeface of J. Brocard upon the Revelation. 
[Translated from the Latin, of Giacopo Brocardo, by James 
Sandford ?] 

[London? 1584.] 4to. Black letter. British Museum. 

1590. A Discourse concerninge the Spanishe fleete invad- 
inge Englande in the yeare 1588, and overthrowne by her 
Ma tie * Navie under the conduction of the Right-honorable the 
Lorde Charles Howarde Highe Admirall of Englande : written 
in Italian by P. Ubaldino .... and translated \by Robert 
Adams]. . . . Unto the w ch discourse are annexed certaine 
tables expressinge the severall exploites and conflictes had with 
the said fleete. MS. Notes. 


A. Hatfield, London, 1590. 4to. Black letter. British 

The plates referred to were made by Robert Adams, and 
were published separately under the title, 

Expeditionis Hispanorum in Angliam vera descriptio anno 

1593. The Description of the Low countreys, and of the 
Provinces thereof, gathered into an Epitome out of the Historic 
of L. Guicchardini. [By Thomas Danett.~\ 

Imprinted at London by Peter Short for Thomas Chard. 
1593. 8vo. British Museum. (1591. 16mo. Lowndes.) 

Dedicated, "To the Eight Honorable my especiall Lord 
Burghley, High Treasorer of England, Knight of the most 
noble Order of the Garter, and Maister of hir Majesties Court 
of Wards and Liveries." 

A translation of Lodovico Guicciardini's Descrittione .... 
di tutti i Paesi Bassi, altrimente detti Germania inferiore, etc. 
Anversa. 1567. Folio. British Museum. enfrangaisbyFr. 
de Belleforest. Anvers. 1568. Folio. Brit. Mus. 

Thomas Danett's masterpiece in translation is, The Historic 
of Philip de Commines, Knight, Lord of Armenian, 1596 ; this 
work has been edited, in two volumes, with an Introduction, 
by Charles Whibley. Tudor Translation Series. (David 
Nutt.) See The Academy, July 17, 1897, pp. 44-45. Noth- 
ing is known of this excellent and vigorous translator, except 
that, besides these two translations, he put forth, in 1600, a 
Continuation of the Historic of France from the death of Charles 
the Eighth, when Gomines endeth, till the death of Harry the 
Second (1559). 

Danett's style is admirable, easily ranking him the compeer 
of Sir Thomas North. 

1595. The Florentine Historic written in the Italian tongue 
by Niccolo Macchiavelli, citizen and secretarie of Florence, and 
translated into English by T. \homas\ B. [edingfield] Esq. 


T. [homas] C. [reede] for W. [illiam] P. [onsonby], 
London. 1595. Folio. Pp.222. British Museum, (2 copies). 

A translation of Machiavelli's 

Istorie Florentine. 

Firenze : Benedetto di Giunta. 1537. 4to. British Museum. 
Also, nuovamente .... ristampate. In casa de y Figliuoli di 
Aldo. Venegia. 1540. 8vo. British Museum. 

Machiavelli's Istorie Florentine was begun after 1520, at 
the instance of Cardinal Giulio de' Medici; it was com- 
pleted in 1527, and dedicated to Cardinal Giulio, then Pope 
Clement VII. It recounts, in eight books, the whole story 
of Florence from the earliest times down to the death of 
Lorenzo de' Medici, in 1492. It is not, however, a chronicle 
of events, but rather a national biography, written from 
Machiavelli's political point of view. Having formulated a 
theory of the state in the Principe and the Discorsi, he applies 
these abstract principles to the example furnished by the 
Florentine republic. In literary form Machiavelli modelled 
his history upon Livy, a peculiarly happy choice for a his- 
torian in whom the personal equation and the sense of literary 
perspective are the strongest qualities. Following the classi- 
cal manner, he inserts here and there speeches, which partly 
embody his own comments on situations of importance, and 
partly express what he thought dramatically appropriate to 
particular personages. 

The story of Rosamund's revenge upon Alboin, found in 
the Istorie Fiorentine, libro i, is the subject of two Elizabethan 

1. The Tragedy of Albovine, King of the Lombards. Sir 
William D'Avenant. Printed, 1629. 

Plot also found in Bandello, iii. 18; Belleforest, Histoires 
TragiqueSj iv. 19; Queen Margaret's Heptameron, Nov. 32. 

2. The Witch. Thomas Middleton. Printed, 1770. 

The most important intrigue of the tangled plot of The 
Witch is again the tragedy of Rosamund and Alboin. Ward 
(History of English Dramatic Literature, ii. 509, and iii. 169, 


1899) thinks that both Middleton and D'Avenant found the 
tale in Belleforest. 

1595. Two Discourses of Master Frances Guicciardin, 
which are wanting in the thirde and fourth Bookes of his 
Historic, in all the Italian, Latin, and French Coppies hereto- 
fore imprinted ; which for the worthinesse of the matter they 
containe, were published in those three Languages at Basile 
1561, and are now doone into English \by W. /.]. It. Lat. 
FT. and Eng. 

Printed for W. Ponsonbie, London, 1595. 4to. British 

See Fenton's, The Historic of Guicciardin, 1579. 

1595. The History of the Warres betweene the Turks and 
the Persians, written in Italian by John Thomas Minadoi, 
and translated by Abr. Hartwell, containing the Description 
of all such Matters as pertaine to the Religion, to the Forces, to 
the Government, and to the Countries of the Kingdome of the 
Persians; together with a new Geographicall Mappe of all 
these Territories, and last of all is discoursed what Cittie it was 
in the old Time which is now called Tauris, (Sec. 

London, J. Wolfe, 1595. 4to. Pp. 500. British Museum, 
(2 copies). 

Dedicated to John Whitgift, Archbishop of Canterbury, to 
whom Abraham Hartwell was secretary. 

This work is a translation of 

Historia della Guerra fra Turchi, et Persiani di Giovanni 
Tommaso Minadoi .... dalV istesso riformata, and [siof] 
aggiuntivi i successi dell' anno 1586. Con una descrittione di 
tutte le cose pertinente alia religione, alia forze, al governo, & al 
paese del Regno de Persiani, et una Lettera alV III M. Corrado, 
nella quale si dimostra qual cittd fosse anticamente quella, c'hora 
si chiama Tauris, etc. 

Venetia. 1588. 4to. Pp.383. British Museum. 1594. 
4to. British Museum, (2 copies). 


Abraham Hartwell, the younger, flourished 1 595-1 603. 
He was probably the Abraham Hartwell, of Trinity College, 
Cambridge, who took his B. A. degree in 1571, M. A., in 
1575, and was made an M. A. of Oxford in 1588. About 
1 584, he became secretary to Archbishop Whitgift, to whom 
his three translations from the Italian are dedicated. He 
was an antiquarian of some note, and died rector of Tod- 
dington, Bedfordshire, where he founded a library. The 
date of his death is unknown. 

Although he was a translator of geographical writings, he 
was not himself a traveller, as has been asserted. 

Giovanni Tommaso Minadoi, 1540-1615, was a physician. 
After being graduated from the University of Padua, he 
became physician to the Venetian consulates in Constanti- 
nople and in Syria, where he collected the materials for his 
history of the wars between the Turks and Persians, 1576- 
1588. On his return from the East, he was made physician 
to William of Gonzaga, duke of Mantua. In 1596, he was 
preferred to the professorship of medicine in the University 
of Padua. He died in 1615, in Florence, where he had been 
summoned by Cosimo II., Grand Duke of Tuscany. 

1599. The Commonwealth and Gouernment of Venice. 
Written by the Cardinall Gasper Contareno, and translated out 
of Italian into English by [Sir] Lewis Lewkenor, Esquire. With 
sundry other Collections, annexed by the Translator. . . . With a 
short Chronicle of the Hues and raignes of the Venetian Dukes. 

London : Imprinted by John Windet for Edmund Mattes, 
etc. 1599. 4to. 115 leaves. British Museum. 

Dedicated to the Countess of Warwick, and with com- 
mendatory verses by Edmund Spenser, Sir John Harington, 
Maurice Kyffin, etc. 

A translation of a work by Cardinal Gasparo Contarini, 
Bishop of Belluno, entitled, 

La Republica e i Magistrati di Vinegia [translated by E. 
Anditimi]. Vinegia. 1544. 8vo. British Museum. 


The original was written in Latin, 

De Magistratibus et Republica Venetorum libri V. Paris. 
1543. 4to. The British Museum's copy is an Aldine edition 
of this, 

De Magistratibus, et Republica Venetorum. 

Venetiis ap. Aldum. 1589. 4to. 

The book was also translated into French, and was often 

Epigram 26. Book III. 

In commendation of Master Lewknor's Sixth Description of 
Venice. Dedicated to Lady Warwick, 1595. 

Lo, here's describ'd, though but in little room, 
Fair Venice, like a spouse in Neptune's arms; 
For freedom, emulous to ancient Rome, 
Famous for counsel much, and much for arms : 
Whose story, erst written with Tuscan quill, 
Lay to our English wits as half conceal'd, 
Till Lewknor's learned travel and his skill 
In well grac'd stile and phrase hath it reveal'd. 
Venice, be proud, that thus augments thy fame ; 
England, be kind, enrich'd with such a book ; 
Both give due honour to that noble dame, 
For whom this task the writer undertook. 

Sir John Harington. 

The antique Babel, Empresse of the East, 
Upreard her buildinges to the threatned skie : 
And Second Babell, tyrant of the West, 
Her ayry Towers upraised much more high. 
But, with the weight of their own surquedry, 
They both are fallen, that all the earth did feare, 
And buried now in their own ashes ly ; 
Yet shewing by their heapes, how great they were. 
But in their place doth now a third appeare, 
Fayre Venice, flower of the last worlds delight; 
And next to them in beauty draweth neare, 
But farre exceedes in policie of right. 

Yet not so fayre her buildinges to behold 

As Lewkenors stile that hath her beautie told. 

Edm. Spencer. 


1600. The Historic of the uniting of the Kingdom of Portu- 
gall to ihe Orowne of Castil/, containing the last warres of the 
Portugalls against the Moores of Africke, the end of the house 
of Portugall and change of that government. The descrip- 
tion of Portugall, their principal Townes, castles, places, rivers, 
bridges, passages, forces, weakenessfs, revenues and expences ; 
of the East Indies, the Isles of Ter ceres, and other dependences, 
with many battailes by sea and lande, skirmishes, encounters, 
sieges, orations, and stratagemes of warre. 

Imprinted at London by Am. Hatfield for Edward Blount. 
1600. Folio. Pp.324. British Museum. 

The dedication to " Henry Earle of Southampton is 
signed, Edw. Blount," but the Dictionary of National Biog- 
raphy says Blount styled it " a translation ' by a respected 
friend/ " 

The original is Girolamo Oonestaggio's, 

DdC Unione del Regno di Portogallo alia corona di Castiglia, 
istoria del Sig. Jeronimo de Franchi Conestaggio [or of J. de 
Silva, Count Portalegre f~\ Genova. 1585. 4to. British 

1600. The Mahumetane or Turkish Hystorye, containing 
three Bookes. . . . Heereunto have I annexed a brief e discourse 
of the warres of Cypres .... and .... a discourse contesting 
the causes of the greatnesse of the Turkish Empire. Translated 
from the French and Italian tongues by R. Carr, of the Middle 
Temple, in London, Gentleman. 

London : Printed by Thomas Este dwelling in Aldersgate 
street. 1600. 4to. 122 leaves. British Museum. 

Each book is dedicated to one of the three brothers, Rob. r 
Will., and Edw. Carr separately ; and The Narration of the 
Warres of Cyprus to them all jointly. The translator was 
Ralph Carr. 

See Censura Literaria, Vol. vui, p. 149, and Herbert, 
Typographical Antiquities, Vol. u, p. 1021. 


1601. Civitt Considerations upon many and sundrie his- 
tories, as well ancient as moderne, and principallie upon those 
of Guicciardin. . . . Handled after the manner of a discourse, 
by the Lord Remy of Florence \_Remigio Nannini, Fiorentino\, 
and done into French by G. Chappuys .... and out of French 
into English, by W. T. 

Imprinted by F. K. for M. Lownes. London, 1601. 
Folio. British Museum. 

The Italian original of this work is, 

Considerationi Civili, sopra V Historic di F. Guicciardini, e 
d y altri historici, tratlate per modo di discorso da M. Remigio 
Fiorentino, .... con alcune letter e familiari delV istesso sopra 
varie materie scritte d diversi Gentil'huomini, e CXL V. adverti- 
menti di F. Guicciardini nuovamente posti in luce. \_Edited by 
Sisto da Venetia.'] 

Venetia. 1582. 4to. British Museum. 

W. T. translated from Chappuys' French version, Considfra- 
tions civiles, sur plusieurs et diverses histoires tant anciennes que 
modernes, et principallement sur celles de Guicciardin. Conte- 
nans plusieurs preceptes et reigles, pour Princes, Republiques, 
Capitaines . . . . et autres Agents .... des Princes: aveo 
plusieurs advis touchant la vie civile .... traitees par mani&re 
de discours par Remy Florentin, et mises en Francois par G. 
Chappuys, etc. 

Paris. 1585. 8vo. British Museum. 

1606. A Treatise concerning the causes of the Magnificencie 
and Greatnes of Cities. Devided into three bookes by Sig. 
Giovanni Botero, in the Italian Tongue, now done into English, 
[by Robert Peterson.~\ 

At London, Printed by T. P. for Richard Ockould and 
Henry Tomes. 1606. 4to. British Museum. 

Dedicated, to ' my verie good Lord, Sir Thomas Egerton, 

A translation of Giovanni Botero's, 


Delia cause delta grandezza delle citta, libri ire. [Edited by 
S. Barberino.] Milano. 1 596. 8vo. British Museum. 

This work came to many editions, and was translated into 
Latin, French, Spanish, and German. 

1623. The Popes Letter (80 April, 1623) to the Prince 
[Charles'] in Latine, Spanish, and English. . . . A Jesuites 
Oration to the Prince in Latin and English. 

Printed for N. Butter, London, 1623. 4to. British Museum. 

A letter from Alessandro Ludovisio, Pope Gregory XV. to 
Charles I. when Prince of Wales ; a later reprint, with the 
answer, explains the general subject of the correspondence, 

The King of Scotland's Negotiations at Rome [in 1650'] for 
assistance against the Common-Wealth of England in certain 
propositions there made, for, and on his behalf; in which propo- 
sitions his affection . ... to poperie is asserted, etc. ItaL, Lat., 
Eng., and Fr. (The Pope's letter [of 20 Apr. 1623] to the 
King [Charles I~\ when Prince of Wales. [ With the answer.]) 

William Dugard. London. 1650. 4to. British Museum, 
(2 copies). 

1626. The New-Found Politick, disclosing the Intrigues of 
State .... now translated into English. [Part 3, by Sir 
William VaughanJ] 

London. 1626. 4to. British Museum. 

A translation of Trajano Boccalini's, 

Pietra del Paragone Politico tratta dal Monte Parnaso, dove 
si toccano i governi delle maggiori monarchic deW universo. 
(Nuova aggiunta alia Pietra del Paragone.) 

Cosmopoli [Amsterdam ?] 1615. 4to. British Museum. 

The head title reads, De i Ragguagli di Parnaso parte terza 
di Troiano [sic] Boccalini Romano. 

Sir William Vaughan, born 1577, was younger brother to 
the first Earl of Carbery. He "became chief undertaker 
for the plantation in Cambriol, the southermost part in New- 


foundland, now called by some Britanniola, where with pen, 
purse, and person [he] did prove the worthinesse of that 
enterprise." Anthony & Wood alludes here to the publication 
of The Golden Fleece, in 1626, a book written by Vaughan 
for the purpose of attracting emigrants to his settlement. Sir 
William Vaughan was living at Cambriol in 1628, but the 
colony does not seem to have proved successful, for in 1630 
he published The Newlander's Oure, giving, in an introductory 
letter, some account of his experiences in the New World. 
The undertaking is mentioned in Purchas, " The Worshipfull 
William Vaughan of Terraced, in the Countie of Carmarthen, 
Doctor of Ciuill Law, hath also undertaken to plant a Circuit 
in the New-found land, and hath in two seuerall yeeres sent 
thither diuers men and women, and hee is willing to entertaine 
such as will be Adventurers with him upon fit conditions." 

Purchas his Pilgrimes. Lib. x. Chap. 9. Vol. iv. P. 
1888. 1625. Folio. 

1636. MachiaveVs Discourses upon the first decade of T. 
Livius, [Books l-3~\, translated out of the Italian; with some 
marginall animadversions noting and taxing his errours. By 
E. [dward\ D. [acres']. 

T. Paine for W. Hills and D. Pakeman. London. 1636. 
12mo. Pp. 646. British Museum, (2 copies). 

MachiaveVs Discourses upon the First Decade of T. Livius, 
translated out of Italian. To which is added his Prince. [ The 
Life of Castruccio Castracani, etcJ\ With some marginal anim- 
adversions. . . . By E. D. 2 pts. 

T. N. for D. Pakeman. London. 1663. 12mo. British 
Museum. Second edition, much corrected, etc. For C. 
Harper. London. 1674. 8vo. Pp. 686. British Museum. 

A translation of Nicolo Machiavelli's Discorsi .... sopra 
la prima deca di Tito Livio. L. P. Per A. Blado de Asola 
[Rome.] 1531. 8vo. British Museum. [Including Dacres's 
translation of II Principe in the last two editions.] 


1637. Romulus and Tarquin. First Written in Italian 
.... and now taught English by \i. e. Henry Carey, Earon 
Carey of Leppington, afterwards earl of Monmouth.~\ 

Printed by I. H. for J. Benson. London. 1637. 12mo. 
British Museum. Also, 1638. 12mo. British Museum. With 
commendatory verses prefixed by Thomas Carew, Sir John 
Suckling, Sir William Davenant, Sir Robert Stapylton, and 

Romulus and Tarquin. Written in Italian by the Marques 
Virgilio Malvezzi. And now taught English by Henry Earle 
of Monmouth. The Third Edition. 

London, printed for Humphrey Moseley, and are to be 
sold at his shop at the Prince's Armes in St. PauPs Church- 
yard. 1648. 12mo. British Museum. 

" Dedicated, " to the most sacred Majesty of Charles the 
First, Monarch of Great Britaine, France, and Ireland," etc. 

This work is a translation of two of the political publi- 
cations of the Marquese Virgilio Malvezzi, // Romulo. 
Bologna. 1629. 4to. British Museum, and II Tarquinio 
Superbo. Yenetia. 1633. 12mo. British Museum. 

II Romulo is a biography with political and moral reflec- 
tions ; it was a very successful book, reprinted several times 
in Italy and translated into French and Spanish. 

To my much honoured friend, Henry Lord Cary of Lepington, 
upon his translation of Malvezzi. 

In every triviall worke 'tis knowne 
Translators must be masters of their owne 
And of their Author's language; but your taske 
A greater latitude of skill did aske ; 
For your Malvezzi first requir'd a man 
To teach him speak vulgar Italian. 
His matter's so sublime, so now his phrase 
So farre above the stile of Bemboe's dayes, 
Old Varchie's rules, or what the Crusca yet 
For currant Tuscan mintage will admit, 
As I beleeve your Marquesse, by a good 
Part of his natives, hardly understood. 


You must expect no happier fate ; 'tis true 

He is of noble birth ; of nobler you : 

So nor your thoughts nor words fit common eares ; 

He writes, and you translate, both to your peeres. 

Thomas Carew. 

To his much honoured the Lord Lepington, upon his translation 
of Malvezzi, his Romulus and Tarquin. 

It is so rare and new a thing to see 

Ought that belongs to young nobility 

In print, but their own clothes, that we must praise 

You as we would do those first show the ways 

To arts or to new worlds. You have begun ; 

Taught travelled youth what 't is it should have done 

For 't has indeed too strong a custom been 

To carry out more wit than we bring in. 

You have done otherwise : brought home, my lord, 

The choicest things famed countries do afford : 

Malvezzi by your means is English grown, 

And speaks our tongue as well now as his own. 

Malvezzi, he whom 't is as hard to praise 

To merit, as to imitate his ways. 

He does not show us Rome great suddenly, 

As if the empire were a tympany, 

But gives it natural growth, tells how and why 

The little body grew so large and high. 

Describes each thing so lively, that we are 

Concerned ourselves before we are aware : 

And at the wars they and their neighbours waged, 

Each man is present still, and still engaged. 

Like a good prospective he strangely brings 

Things distant to us ; and in these two kings 

We see what made greatness. And what 't has been 

Made that greatness contemptible again. 

And all this not tediously derived, 

But like to worlds in little maps contrived. 

'T is he that doth the Roman dame restore, 

Makes Lucrece chaster for her being whore ; 

Gives her a kind revenge for Tarquin's sin ; 

For ravish'd first, she ravisheth again. 

She says such fine things after 't, that we must 

In spite of virtue thank foul rape and lust, 

Since 't was the cause no woman could have had, 

Though she's of Lucrece side, Tarquin less bad. 

But stay ; like one that thinks to bring his friend 


A mile or two, and sees the journey's end, 
I straggle on. too far ; long graces do 
But keep good stomachs off, that would fall to. 
The Poems, Plays and Other Remains of Sir John Suckling. 

Ed. W. C. Hazlitt. 1874. Vol. i. P. 20. 

1639. The History of the Inquisition, Composed by the Rev. 
Father Paul Servita. Translated out of the Italian by R. [oberf] 

J. Okes, for H. Mosley, London, 1639. 4to. British 
Museum, (3 copies). 1655. 8vo. Brit. Mus. 1676. Folio. 
Brit. Mus. 

A translation of Fra Paolo's, 

Historia delta Sacra Inquisitione composta .... dal R. P. 
Paolo Servita ed hora la prima volta posta in luce, etc. 

Serravalle. 1638. 4to. 

1640. Nicholas Machiavel's Prince. Also, the Life of Cos- 
truccio Castracani \_degli Antelminelli, duke~\ of Lucca. And 
the meanes Duke Valentine us'd to put to death Vitellozzo Vitelli, 
Oliver otto of Fermo, Paul, and the Duke of Gravina. Trans- 
lated out of Italian into English. By E. \_dward] D. [acres']. 

R. Bishop for Wil : Hils and are to be sold by D. Pake- 
man. London. 1640. 12mo. Pp.305. British Museum. 

A translation of Machiavelli's, 

II Principe. . . . La Vita di Castruccio Castracani da 
Luca. . . . II Modo che tenne il Duca Valentino, per amma- 
zare Vitelozzo, Oliverotto da Fermo. ... / ritratti delle cose 
della Francia, et delta Alamagna .... nuovamente aggiunti. 

Bernardo di Giunta. Firenze. 1532. 4to. British Museum. 

Machiavelli's Prince is an elaboration of one line of thought 
of the Discourses, upon which he was engaged when he took 
it in hand. Although cast in the form of comments on Livy, 
the Discorsi, in toto, is really an' inquiry into the genesis and 
maintenance of the state. It is // Principe on a larger scale, 
copiously illustrated by historical examples, and enriched by 
the fruits of Machiavelli's own experience and observation. 


John Morley characterizes the two books clearly, "in the 
Prince he lays down the conditions on which an absolute 
ruler, rising to power by force of genius backed by circum- 
stances, may maintain that power, with safety to himself and 
most advantage to his subjects; while in the Discourses he 
examines the rules that enable a self-governing state to retain 
its freedom. The cardinal precepts are the same. In either 
case, the saving principal is one : self-sufficiency, military 
strength, force, flexibility, address, above all, no half- 
measures. In either case, the preservation of the state is 
equally the one end, reason of state equally the one ade- 
quate and sufficient test and justification of the means. The 
Prince deals with one problem, the Discourses with the 

As to the minor works translated by Dacres, Machiavelli's 
Life of Castruccio Costracani is more romance than history. 
Machiavelli describes Castruccio as a foundling, and depicts 
him when lord of Lucca as the ideal soldier and statesman. 
In fact, Castruccio was of the noble family of the Antel- 
minelli. He succeeded Uguccione della Faggiuola, lord of 
Pisa, at Lucca, in 1315, and was supported by the Emperor 
Louis of Bavaria, who created him duke of Lucca. Castruccio 
dominated all Tuscany, until his death, in 1328, enabled the 
Guelfs to breathe freely again. 

The story of Oliverotto da Fermo is told in the 8th chapter 
of the Prince. He was one of the captains of Cesare Borgia 
who revolted, and entered into a conspiracy against him. 
With many arts, Cesare got four of the conspirators to visit 
him at Sinigaglia, where two of them, Oliverotto and Vitel- 
lozzo, were seized and forthwith strangled. It was only a 
year after Oliverotto had become tyrant of Fermo by murder- 
ing his uncle, Giovanni Fogliani, whom he had invited to a 
banquet for the express purpose of making way with him. 

The character of Machiavelli seems to have made a pro- 
found impression on the Elizabethan dramatists. Three plays 
are named after him. 


1. Machiavel. An anonymous play, acted at the Rose theatre, 

and recorded in Henslow's Diary, under the date, March 
2, 1592. 

2. Machiavel and the Devil, a tragedy, by Robert Daborne. 

Daborne was in treaty with Henslow for this play between 
April 17, and June 25, 1613. It may have been the 
older play worked over. 

3. Machiavellus. By D. Wiburne. 

A Latin play acted at Cambridge University, 1597. 
MS., of date 1600, Douce, 234, Bodleian. 

Shakspere alludes to Machiavelli three times, 

" Alenpon, that notorious Machiavel." /. Hen. VI. v. 4. 

" I can add colors to the chameleon, i li 

Change shapes with Proteus, for advantage, 
And set the murd'rous Machiavel to school." 

III. Hen. VI. Hi. 2. 

" Peace, I say ! hear mine host of the Garter. 
Am I politic? am I subtle? am I a Machiavel ?" 

Merry Wives, in. 1. 

Marlowe brings Machiavelli on the stage in person as the 
Prologue to the Jew of Malta, expressing his admiration for 
him in the lines, 

" I count religion but a childish toy, 
And hold there is no sin but ignorance." 

Mr. Courthope, in his History of English Poetry, maintains 
that all of Marlowe's plays are but different conceptions of 
Machiavelli's principle of virtu. In this view Tamburlaine 
is the apotheosis of power as ambition ; Barabbas, of power 
as revenge; Faustus, of overweening intellectual power. 
Whether Machiavelli did indeed revolutionize the English 
drama, as Mr. Courthope's interesting contention holds, 
certain it is that he was a familiar and popular figure on 
the stage. Making mere casual notes on the subject, I find 
sixteen dramatists, in twenty -six plays, all alluding to Mac- 
hiavelli in the same way, crediting him with the craft, malice, 


and hypocrisy of the devil. Mr. Edward Meyer, in his 
dissertation, Machiavelli and the Elizabethan Drama (Weimar, 
1897), has collected 395 instances of Machiavelli's name, or 
supposed maxims, occurring in Elizabethan literature. As 
the Prince was not translated until 1640, Mr. Meyer 
argues that the source of Elizabethan Machiavellianism 
was Simon Patrick's translation of Innocent Gentillet's, 
Discours d'Estat sur les moyens de bien gouverner et mainte- 
nir en bonne paix un royaume et une prinvipaute, contre NicoL 
Machiavel. (1576.) The difficulty of this argument is, that, 
although the dedication of Patrick's translation is dated 
1577, the book was not entered on the Stationers' Register , 
nor printed, until 1602. Many of the allusions belong to 
the sixteenth century. It is possible that Patrick's transla- 
tion may have been known in manuscript ; it is also possible 
that many persons may have read Gentillet, either in the 
original Latin, or in French. From the vogue of Italian 
at the time, and from the constant travelling to and fro 
between England and Italy, I myself see no difficulty in 
supposing what must have been the fact, that educated 
Englishmen at least read Machiavelli in his own simple, 
unaffected, vivid Italian. Machiavelli is a writer who will 
never be read, except by the few, but his positive spirit, his 
practical method, is precisely of the sort that must have 
appealed most strongly to the Elizabethans. " We are much 
beholden," said Bacon, " to Machiavel and others that wrote 
what men do, and not what they ought to do." 

The Elizabethans were deeply interested in government, as 
the English have always been, and they had many perplex- 
ing problems, both in State and Church, to deal with. 
From abstract principles in the sphere of government, 
Machiavelli appealed to experience, for authority as the test 
of truth, he substituted scientific facts. All this seemed well 
enough to a people in the first blush of civil and religious 
freedom, but it was confusing, it was especially confusing 
when concretely applied to new and urgent moral questions, 


such as early Protestant England had to settle. The popular 
misconception of Machiavelli might easily have arisen in 
ignorance, it was certainly in the air, as Gentillet's book 
shows; it must have been added to by the Italian travellers 7 
reporting half truths ; Marlowe's extravagant admiration 
undoubtedly overleaped the mark ; and lastly, there is the 
vitium gentis, the natural antipathy of race and morale, to 
intensify the current opinion. 

Lord Burghley and Elizabeth probably rated Machiavelli 
nearest his proper worth, and it is well known that both these 
great personages walked in devious paths. " Party Govern- 
ment is not the Reign of the Saints," wittily says John 
Morley, in his brilliant Romanes lecture on Machiavelli, and 
goes on to show that among the canonized saints of the 
Roman Church, there have been but a dozen kings in eight 
centuries, and no more than four popes. "So hard has it 
been," he adds, quoting Cosmo de ? Medici, "to govern the 
world by paternosters." 

1641. An History of the Oiuill Warres of England betweene 
the two howses of Lancaster and Yorke. The originall where 
of is set downe in the life of Richard ye second; their e proceed- 
ings in ye lives of Henry ye 4 th Henry ye 5 th and 6 th Edward 
ye 4- th an d 5 th Richard ye 3 d and Henry ye 7 th in whose dayes 
they had a happy period. Englished by ye Right Hon lle Henry 
Earle of Monmouth in two Volumes. 

Imprinted at London for John Benson & and are to be 
sould at his shop in S* Dustans churchyard. 1641. 

The Second Part of the History of the Civill Warres of 
England Between the two Houses of Lancaster and Yorke. 
Wherein is contained The Prosecution thereof, in the lives of 
Edward the fourth Edward the fifth Richard the third, and 
Henry the seventh. Written originally in Italian By Sir 
Francis Biondi Knight, late Gentleman of the Privy- Chamber 
to His Majesty of Great Brittaine. Englished by the Right 
Honourable, Henry Earle of Monmouth : The second Volume. 


London, Printed by E. G. for Richard Whitaker, and are 
to be sold at his shop in the Kings Armes in Pauls Church- 
yard. 1646. 2 volumes in 1. Sm. folio. Peabody, in beauti- 
ful binding, full fawn calf, extra, gilt edges. Pp. 177 + 236. 
British Museum. 

The engraved title-page contains portraits (half length) of 
Charles I. and Queen Henrietta Maria, and of Richard II. 
and Henry VII., at full length. 

The work is a translation of Giovanni Francesco (Sir John 
Francis) Biondi's, 

Uhistoria delle guerre civili d' Inghilterra tra le due Cose 
di Lancastro e di lore, sotto Ricardo II, Arrigo IV, V, VI, 
Odoardo IV, etc. 

Venezia. 1637-44. 4to. 3 vols. British Museum. 

Dedicated, by the author, Giovanni Francesco Biondi, " To 
the High and mighty Monarch, Charles, King of great 
Britaine, France and Ireland." 

The Earl of Monmouth says in his epistle " To the Readers 
his beloved countrey-rnen," prefixed to the Second Part, 

"The reasons then that drew me to this (otherwise Un- 
necessary) Epistle, are ; First, to let my Readers know, lest I 
may seem to derogate from my Authour, by tacitely arrogat- 
ing to My Selfe, that the three Last lives [those of Edward 
the fifth, Richard the third, and Henry the seventh] of this 
Volume are not yet (as I can heare of) printed in Italian, 
and the Authour being dead, out of whose Papers, whilst he 
was here in England, I translated them ; I know not whether 
they may ever undergoe the Presse in the Language wherein 
they were by him penned or no. My next inducing reason 
is; That the subject of both parts of this Treatise being 
Civili Warres, and this Second comming forth in a Time 
of Civili Warres in the Same Countrey, I hope I may be 
excused for doing what in me lies to perswade to a Happy 
Peace : whereunto I know no more powerfull Argument, 
then by shewing the Miseries of Warre, which is a Tragedie 
that alwaies destroyes the Stage whereon it is acted ; and 


which when it once seizeth upon a Land rich in the plenty 
of a Long Peace, and full with the Surfeit of Continued Ease, 
seldome leaves Purging those Superfluities, till All (not only 
Superfluous but meere Necessaries) be wasted and consumed, 
as is sufficiently made to appeare throughout this whole 

1642. Discourses upon Cornelius Tacitus. Translated into 
English by Sir R. [ichard] B. [aker\. 

London. 1642. Folio. British Museum. 

A translation of the Marquese Malvezzi's, 

Discorsi sopra il libra primo degli Annali di Cornelio Tacito. 
Venetia. 1622. 4to. Discorsi sopra Cornelio Tacito. Venetia. 
1635. 4to. British Museum, (2 copies). 

Sir Richard Baker, 1568-1645, made this translation of 
Malvezzi's Discorsi sopra Cornelio Tacito for a bookseller 
named "Whittaker. It was one of the literary works with 
which he occupied himself in the Fleet prison, where he lived 
from about 1635 until his death. 

It is impossible to mention Sir Richard Baker without 
referring to his famous book, the Chronicle of the Kings of 
England from the time of the Romans' Government unto the 
Death of King James, which appeared in 1643. Baker's 
Chronicle was reprinted ten times up to 1733, was continued 
to the year 1658 by Edward Phillips, Milton's nephew 
(1660), was abridged (1684), and was translated into Dutch 
(1649). It is written in a pleasant, readable style, and was 
long popular with- country gentlemen. Addison represents 
Sir Roger de Coverley as well posted in his Chronicle, which 
he always kept lying in his hall window. One of the most 
humorsome papers of the Spectator is that (No. 329, March 
18, 1712) describing Sir Roger's going through Westminster 
Abbey with Baker's Chronicle on the tip of his tongue. 
Before the figure of Queen Elizabeth's maid of honor who 
died from the prick of her needle, he wonders why Sir 


Richard Baker has said nothing about her; he informs the 
Spectator that Edward the Confessor was the first who 
touched for the evil ; Henry IV. reminds him that t( there 
was fine reading in the casualties of that reign ; " upon the 
whole, he observes with some surprise, that Sir Richard 
Baker " had a great many kings in him whose monuments 
he had not seen in the Abbey." 

So, Fielding, in Joseph Andrews, refers to Baker's Chronicle 
as part of the furniture of Sir Thomas Booby's house. 

There is one notable accuracy in Baker's Chronicle; it 
gives for the first time the correct date of the poet Gower's 

1647. The Pourtract of the Politicke Christian-Favourite. 
Originally drawn from some of the actions of the Lord Duke 
of St. Lucar. . . . To this translation is annexed the chief e 
State Maxims .... and .... observations .... upon the same 
story of Count Olivares, Duke of St. Lucar. 

London. 1647. 8vo. British Museum. 

A translation of Malvezzi's, 

II Ritratto del Privato Politico Christiano estratto doll 9 
originale d'alcune attione del Conte Duca di S. Lucar [i. e. G. 
de Guzman] dal Marchese V. Malvezzi. 

Bologna. 1635. 4to. British Museum. 

1647. // Davide Perseguitato : David Persecuted: . . . . 
Done into English by E. [obert] Ashley. 

London. 1647. 12mo. British Museum. Also, 1650. 
12mo. ("with a picture of King Ch. I. playing on a harp, 
resembling K. David, purposely to make all the impression 
sell off, such are the usual shifts which booksellers use." 
Anthony a Wood). British Museum. 

A translation of the Marquese Virgilio Malvezzi's Davide 

Venetia. 1634. 12mo. British Museum. 


1647. The Chief e Events of the Monarchic of Spaine, in 
the yeare 1639. . . . Translated out of th j Italian copy by R. 

London. 1647. 12mo. British Museum. 

A translation of the Marquese Virgilio MalvezzPs, 

I successi principals delta Monarchia di Spagna neW anno 

1639. Anvers. 1641. 16mo. 

A Spanish translation is dated a year earlier, 

Successos principa/es de la Monarquia d'Espana en el afro 

de mil i seis cientos i treinta i nueve, etc. 
Madrid. 1640. 4to. British Museum. 

1648. A Venice Looking- Glass ; or, a Letter written very 
lately from Lond. to Card. Barbarini at Rome by a Venetian 
Clarissimo touching the present Distempers in England. 
Translated from the Italian by James HowcllJ\ 

1648. 4to. Pp. 24. 

To the Lady E., Countess Dowager of Sunderland. 

I am bold to send your La. to the Country a new Venice 
Looking-glass, wherein you may behold that admir'd Maiden- 
City in her true complexion, together with her Government 
and Policy, for she is famous all the world over. Therefore, 
if at your hours of leisure you please to cast your eyes upon 
this Glass, I doubt not but it will afford you Home objects 
of entertainment. 

Moreover, your Ladyship may discern thro' this Glass the 
motions, and the very heart of the Author, how he con- 
tiuueth still, and resolves so to do, in what condition soever 
he be, Madam 

Your most constant and dutiful Servant, 

J. H. 

1650. Considerations upon the lives of Alcibiades and 
Corialanus [sic]. . . . Englished by R. Gentilis; 
London. 1650. 12mo. British Museum. 


Dedicated to the daughter of Thomas, Earl of Strafford, 
" as a small token of the manifold obligements whereto I am 
everlastingly tied to you." 

Translated from the Marquese MalvezzPs, 

Consider ationi, con occasione d'alcuni luoghi, della vite 
d'Alcibiade e di Coriolano. 2 pis. 

Bologna. 1648. 4to. British Museum, (2 copies.) 

" Like Shakspere's of respect is Robert Gentilis's respect- 
ful, 'Alcibiades .... strives to become great, and make 
himself respectful!,, by contending with great ones." 

Considerations, etc., p. 64. 

F. H. in The Nation. July 4, 1895. 

165052. An exact Historie of the late Revolutions in 
Naples; And of their Monstrous Successes, not to be parallel' d 
by any Antient or Modern History. Published by the Lord 
Alexander Giraffi in Italian; And (for the rarenesse of the 
subject) Rendred to English, by J. H. Esq r . 

London, Printed for R. Lowndes. 1650. 

The Second Part of Mossaniello, His Body taken out of the 
Town-Ditch, and solemnly Buried, With Epitaphs upon him. 
A Continuation of the Tumult; The D. of Guise made General- 
issimo; Taken Prisoner by young Don John of Austria. The 
End of the Commotions. By J. H. Esquire. 

Truth never look'd so like a Lie 
As in this modern Historie. 

London, Printed by A. M. for Abel Roper at the sign of 
the Sun, and T. Dring at the George near S t- Dunstans 
Church in Fleetstreet, MDCLII. The two Parts together, 
24mo, pp. 345. With a colored frontispiece subscribed Effigie 
& nero Ritratto di Masianello, comandante, in Napoli. Pea- 
body. British Museum (2 copies). 1664-3. 8vo. British 

Dedicated by the translator, James Howell, " To the right 
Worshipfull, the Governour, the Deputy, and the rest of the 
worthy Company, trading into the Levant." 


The work is a translation of Alessandro Giraffi's Le rivolu- 
tioni di Napoli .... con pienissimo ragguaglio d'ogni successo, 
e trattati secreti, e paiesi. (Primo libro Manifesto del .... 
Popolo di Napoli.) Venetia. 1647. 8vo. British Museum. 
(Eight editions between 1647 and 1844 in the British 

Masaniello (Tommaso Aniello) was a young fisherman of 
Amalfi who led a popular uprising in Naples during the 
summer of 1647. The cause of the civil revolution was 
the heavy taxation of the Spanish Government then in 
possession of Naples, and particularly the duty on fruits, 
both green and dry. The first riot, incited by Masaniello, 
broke out on Sunday, July 7, 1647, and lasted ten days; 
on the third day Masaniello was made Captain-General, or 
Absolute Patron, of the city, and as Howell translates, "from 
an humble, judicious, and zelous spirit which raign'd in 
him ; he became proud, a Fool and a Tyrant." After a rule 
of but eight days and eight hours, he was assassinated, July 
16, 1647. 

The Second Part of MassanieUo describes the continuation 
of the civil war, the intervention of the French commanded 
by the Duke of Guise, and the subjugation of the city by 
Spain, in 1648, under the leadership of Don John of Austria. 

1650. The History of the rites, customes and manner of life 
of the present Jews throughout the world. Written in Italian 
by Leo Modena. . . . Translated into English by E. \_dmund~\ 
C'hilmead. Pp. 249. 

J. L. for J. Martin and J. Ridley. London. 1650. 8vo. 
British Museum, (2 copies). 

Translated from Leo Modena's 

Historia degli Riti Hebraici, Dove si ha breve e total rela- 
tione di tutta la vita, costumi, riti et osservanze, degV Hebrei di 
questi tempi. [Edited by the French mystic, Jacques Gaffarel.] 

Parigi. 1637. 12mo. British Museum. 


1650. De Bello Belgico. The History of the Low-Countrey 
Warres. Written in Latin by F. S. [Famiano Strada] ; in 
English by Sir R. Stapylton, Kt. Illustrated with divers figures. 
\_A translation of Decade I. only.~\ 

London. 1650. Folio. 1667. Folio. British Museum. 
A translation of 

F. S. . . . de Bello Belgico decasprima (secunda), [1555-90]. 
2 pts. Romae. 1632-47. Folio. British Museum. 

1651. Stoa Triumphans: or, two sober paradoxes, viz. 1. 
The Praise of Banishment. 2. The Dispraise of Honors. 
Argued in two letters by .... V. M. Now translated out of 
Italian, with some annotations annexed. 

London. 1651. 12mo. British Museum. 
V. M. is the Marquese Yirgilio Malvezzi. The transla- 
tor's dedication is signed " T. P." 

1652. Historicall Relations of the United Provinces and of 
Flanders, written originally in Italian by Cardinall Bentivoglio, 
and now rendered into English by Henry [Carey] Earle of 

London. 1652. Folio. British Museum. Prefixed is a 
portrait, by Faithorne, of the Earl of Monmouth. Also, 
1654. Folio. Brit. Mus. 1678. Folio. Brit. Mus. 

The work is a translation of Bentivoglio's, 

Relatione fatte daW IIP' 10 - Cardinal Bentivoglio in tempo delle 
sue nuntiature di Fiandra e di Francia. Date in luce da 
E. \ricio'\ Puteano. 2 vols. 

N. Pantino. Colonia. 1629. Folio. British Museum. 

Guido Bentivoglio was sent as papal nuncio to Flanders by 
Pope Paul V., in 1607; he remained there nine years, until 
the beginning of 1617, when he was transferred to France. 
He was so acceptable to France that when he was made a 
cardinal, January 11, 1621, Louis XIII. chose him to pro- 
tect French interests in Rome. He died in conclave, in 
1644, just as he was about to be elected Pope, done to death, 


J. V. Rossi (Nicius Erythraeus) asserts, by the snoring of 
the cardinal in the next cell, which kept him awake for 
eleven successive nights. 

To the Earle of Monmouih. Upon his translation 
of Bentivoglio. 

Those who could rule the Ancient World with ease, 
Could strictly governe all, yet none displease, 
Were such as cherisht Learning ; not because 
It wrapt in rev'renc'd Mistery the Lawes, 
Nor that it did the Nobles civillize, 
But rather that it made the People wise ; 
Who found by reading Story (where we see 
What the most knowing were, or we should be) 
That Peace breeds happiness, and only they 
Breed Peace, who wisely any Pow'r obey. 
Books much contribute to the Publick good, 
When by the People eas'ly understood ; 
But those who dress them in a Forraigne Tongue 
Bring Meate in cover'd Plate to make men long. 
Whilst those who Foraigne Learning well translate 
Serve plaine Meate up, and in uncover'd Plate. 
This you have done my Lord ! which only showes 
How free your Mind in publick Channels flowes, 
But if that good to which some men are borne 
Doe less then good acquir'd our Names adorne 
The ceaseless nature of your kindness then, 
(Still ready to informe unlanguag'd Men) 
Deserves less praise, if rightly understood, 
Then does your judgment how to do Men good : 
Which none can value at too high a rate, 
Judging the choice of*Authors you translate. 
The Works of S r William Davenant K*. London. 1673. Folio. P. 316. 

1653. The Scarlet Gown, Or the History of all the present 
Cardinals of Rome. Wherein is set forth the Life, Birth, 
Interest, Possibility, rich offices, Dignities, and charges of every 
Cardinal now living. . . . Written originally in Italian [by 
N. N.~\ and translated into English by H. [enry] C. [ogan] 

London, Printed for Humphrey Moseley, etc. 1653. 8vo. 
Huih. British Museum, (3 copies). Also, 1654 : 1660. 8vo. 
British Museum. 


Dedicated to John, Earl of Rutland. 

I find in the British Museum Catalogue, 

The Court of Rome. . . . Translated out of Italian into 
English by H. [enry] C. [pgan\. 1654. 8vo. British Museum. 

Possibly this is a variant title for the 1654 edition of The 
Scarlet Gown. 

1654. The Compleat History of the Warrs of Flanders, 
written in Italian. . . . Englished by . . . . Henry \Carey\ 
Earl of Monmouth. Illustrated with figures of the chief per- 
sonages mentioned in this history, with a map of the 17 provinces 
and above 80 figures. 

London. 1654. Folio. With a portrait of the Earl of 
Monmouth. British Museum. Also, 1078. Folio. British 

A translation of Cardinal Guido Bentivoglio's, 

Delia Guerra di Fiandra, descritta dal Cardinal Bentivoglio 
parte prima (terza). 

Colonia. 1632-39. 4to. 3 pts. British Museum. 

1654. A discourse touching the Spanish Monarchy; wherein 
we have a political glasse, representing each particular country 
.... and empire of the world, with wayes of government. . . . 
Newly translated into English \by Edmund Chilmead] accord- 
ing to the third edition .... in Latin. Pp. viii -j- 232. 

E. Alsop. London. 1654. 4to. British Museum. 

[1660?] Thomas Campanella, an Italian friar and second 
Machiavel, his advice to the King of Spain for attaining the 
universal Monarchy of the World: particularly concerning 
England^ Scotland and Ireland, how to raise division between 
King and parliament, to alter the government from a king- 
dome to a commonwealth. . . . Translated into English by Ed. 
Chilmead . ... with an admonitorie Preface by William Prynne. 
Pp. xiv -f 232. 

P.Stephens. London, [1660?]. 4to. British Museum. 


A translation of Tommaso Campanella's, 

Th. C. de Monarchia Hispanica discursus. 

L. Elzevir. Amstelodami. 1640. 12mo. British Museum. 

The work was also translated into Italian and German. 

In his De Monarchia Universali, Campanella, a Dominican 
monk, revives Dante's political dream of a universal Church 
and a universal Empire, substituting Spain for Germany. 

1654. Parthenopoeia or the history of the Most Noble and 
Renowned Kingdom of Naples With the Dominions therunto 
annexed and the Lives of all their Kings. The First Part by 
that Famous Antiquary Scipio Mazzella made English by Mr. 
Samson Lennard Herald ofArmes. The Second Part Compil'd 
by James Howell Esq.; who broches some supplements to the 
First party drawn on the Thread of the Story to these present 
Times. 1654. 

London, Printed for Humphrey Moseley .... 1650. Sm. 
folio. Pp. xviii + 191 + 62 + ii. British Museum. 

A translation of Scipione Mazzella's 

Descrittione del regno di Napoli. . . . Con la nota de'fuochi, 
delle impositione . . . . e dell' entrate, che n'ha il Re. E vi si fa 
mentione de i Re, che Vhan dominate, . . . . de' Pontifici e de' 
Cardinale, che si nacquero, e . . . . delle famiglie nobili, che vi 
sono, etc. 

G. B. Capelli. Napoli. [1586]. 4to. Pp. 710. British 

1654. The Court of Rome. . . . Translated out of Italian 
into English by H. C. [Henry Cogan]. 
1654. 8vo. British Museum. 

1656. I Ragguagli di Parnaso: or Advertisements from 
Parnassus, in two centuries, with the politick Touchstone .... 
put into English, by Henry \_Carey] Earl of Monmouth. 

London. 1656. Folio. With portrait of the Earl of 
Monmouth, by Faithorne. British Museum. Also, 1669 and 


1674, folio, British Museum, and 1706, folio. "Revis'd 
and Corrected by Mr. Hughes" (John Hughes, the poet). 
Pp. xvi -f- 454. British Museum. 

This is a translation of Trajano Boccalini's De y Ragguagli 
di Parnasso centuria prima. Venice. 1612. 4to. \_Milano. 
1613. 8vo. British Museum^] Centuria seconda. Venice. 
1613. 4to. [Venetia. 1616. 8vo. British Museum.'] 

The Politick Touchstone is a translation of Boccalini's Pietra 
del Paragone Politico, which had already been translated by 
Sir William Vaughan, under the title, The New-Found Poli- 
tick. 1626. 

The title of a later, and different, translation of the Rag- 
guagli reads, 

Advertisements from Parnassus .... newly done into English, 
and adapted to the present times. Together with the author's 
Politick Touchstone ; his Secretaria di Apollo ; and an account 
of his life. By N. N. 3 vols. 

London. 1704. 8vo. British Museum. 

The Ragguagli di Parnasso represents Apollo, seated upon 
Parnassus, hearing the complaints of all who come before 
him, and distributing justice according to absolute desert. 
Boccalini was a keen and daring wit, and his book, which is 
a sort of Dunciad, is full of lively satire on the lives and 
writings of famous Italians. His touch is light, with a 
fantastic turn, and some of his hits are extremely happy. 
Apropos of Guicciardini's longwindedness, he relates this 

A citizen of Lacedaemon having said in three words what 
could be said in two (a capital crime in Sparta), was con- 
demned to read Guicciardini's history of the Pisan war. 
He read the first pages in a mortal sweat; then utterly 
unable to go on with it, he ran and threw himself at the feet 
of his judges, beseeching them to imprison him for life, to 
send him to the galleys, to burn him alive, anything rather 
than prolong his intolerable weariness in reading Guicciardini. 

Dr. Richard Garnett thinks that the Advertisements from 



Parnassus probably exerted considerable influence upon 
Quevedo, Swift, and Addison. 

1656. -The Siege of Antwerp written in Latin. . . . Eng- 
lished [from the 6th and part of the 7th book of Famiano 
Strada j s De Bello Belgico decas primo (secundd)] by Thomas 
Lancaster. Gent. 

London, [May 29, 1656] 8vo. British Museum. 

1657. Political Discourses; written in Italian, and trans- 
lated into English by Henry \_Carey~] Earl of Monmouth. 

London. 1657. Folio. 

A translation of Paolo Paruta's, 

D iscorsi politid ne i quali si considerano diversifatti illustri, 
e memoraboli di Principi, e di Republiche antiche e moderne, 
[divisi in due libri:~\ Aggiuntovi nelfine un suo soliloquio, nel 
quale Vautorefd, un breve essame di tutto il corso della sua vita. 

Venetia. 1599. 4to. 2 pts. British Museum, (2 copies). 

The Discorsi is a series of twenty-five essays on Athens, 
Kome, Venice, and contemporary politics, written with a 
broad and just spirit, and in an admirable style. 

1658. The History of Venice .... written originally in 
Italian .... likewise the wars of Cyprus .... wherein the 
famous sieges of Nicossia and Famagosta, and battel of Le- 
panto are contained. Made English by Henry Carey, Earl of 

London. 1658. Folio. 2 pts. British Museum. 

A translation of Paolo Paruta's Historia Vinetiana. [Edited 
by G, Paruta and " fratelli." 

Venice. 1605. 4to. 2 pts. British Museum, (2 copies). 

Paruta's Storia Veneziana was begun in Latin with the 
design of following Cardinal Bernbo's history of Venice ; in 
three books, it covers the period from 1513 to 1552, relating 
the war with Cyprus. The style is simple, clear, and elegant. 
Paruta was not only an historian, but also an able statesman 


and diplomatist. He became Procurator of the Venetian 
Republic, and was only prevented by his death from becom- 
ing Doge. 

1663. History of the Wars of Italy, from the year 1613 
to 1644, eighteen books. Rendred into English by Henry 
[ Carey\ Earl of Monmouih. 

London. 1663. Folio. With Faithorne's portrait of the 
Earl of Mon mouth. British Museum. 

A translation of Pietro Giovanni Capriata's, 

I due primi libri delV Istoria di P. G. C. . . . sopra i movi- 
menti d'arme successi in Italia dalV anno .... MDCxmfino al 
MDCXVIII. Aggiuntivi i Sommarij de gli altri quattro libri che 
maneano al compimento dell' opera. 

Genova. 1 625. 4to. British Museum. 

DelV historia di P. G. C. libri dodici, etc. (Parte seconda 
.... 1634 fino al 1640. Parte terza [edited by G. B. 
Capriata] .... 1641 fino al 1650). 3 pt. Genova. 1638- 
63. 4to. British Museum, (2 copies). 

1664. A new Relation of Rome, as to the government of 
the city, the noble Families thereof, etc. Englished by G. T. 
\_Giovanni Torriano]. 

London. 1664. 8vo. (Lowndes.) 

1664. Rome exactly described as to its present state under 
Pope Alexander VII. , out of Italian by G. T. \_Giovanni 

London. 1664. 8vo. (Lowndes. Allibone.) 

1676. The History of France, written in Italian. . . . The 
translation whereof being begun by Henry \_Carey\, late Earl of 
Monmouih, was finished by William Brent, Esq. 

London. 1676. Folio. British Museum. 

A translation from the Italian historian, Galeazzo Gualdo- 
Priorato, Count of Comazzo, 


Historia della Rivoluzioni di Franda sotto il regno di Luigi 
XIV, daW anno 1648 sin aW anno 1654, con la continuazione 
della guerra tra le due corone. 

Venice. 1655. Paris. 1656. Folio. 

Aggiunta d'allri accidenti occorsi in Europa sino alia pace 
de' Pirenei. 

Cologne. 1670. 4to. 2 vols. 

The Earl of Monmouth was engaged upon the translation 
of this work at the time of his death, in 1661. 


1561. The Courtyer of Count Baldessar Castillo diuided 
into foure bookes. Very necessary and profitable for yonge 
Gentilmen and Gentilwomen abiding in Court, Palaice or 
Place, done into Englyshe by Thomas Hoby. 

Imprinted at London, by wyllyam Seres at the signe of 
the Hedghogge. 1561. Woodcut title. [Colophon.] Im- 
printed at London, by Wyllyam Seres, Dwelling at the west 
end of Paules, at the Signe of the hedghog. 4to. Black 
letter. Huth. British Museum, (2 copies) : 1577. 4to. Black 
letter. Brit. Mus., (2 copies): 1588. 8vo. Pp.616. Printed 
by John Wolfe, in three columns, Italian, in Italics, French, 
in Roman, and English, in Black letter. Brit. Mus.: 1603. 
4to. Brit. Mus. (With a spurious autograph of Shakspere, 
forged by S. W. H. Ireland) : London. 1727. 4to. With 
a life of Count Baldessare Castiglione, by A. P. Castiglione : 
2nd edition. London. 1742. 4to. Peabody: Another edition, 
by R. Sambre, London, 1729. 8vo. 

1571. Balthasaris Castilionis comitis de Curiale sive Aulico 
libri quatuor, ex Italico sermone in Latinum conversi. B. 
Clerke .... interprete. Non aute aediti. Apud J. Dayum. 
Londini. 1571. 8vo. Brit. Mus. : 1577. 8vo. : Londini. 
1585. 8vo. Brit. Mus. : Londini. 1603. 8vo. Brit. Mus.: 
Londini. 1612. 8vo. Brit. Mus. : Argentorati (Strassburg). 
1619. 8vo. Brit. Mus.: Cantabrigiae. 1713. 8vo. Brit. Mus. 


The Courtyer is a translation of 

II libro del Cortigiano del Conte B. C. Nelle case d'Aldo 
Romano & d j Andrea d'Asola. 

Venetia. 1528. Folio. British Museum. 

Rigutini, in his edition of II Cortigiano (Barbara, 1889), 
accounts for 45 Italian editions of the book before his own ; 
he also enumerates three Latin translations of it, two Spanish, 
two French, and one English. In this bibliography, not 
intended to be complete, I have mentioned 66 editions or 
reprints of II Cortigiano, in five languages. The Italians call 
it the "Golden Book." 

The first English edition contains "A Letter of syr I. 
Cheekes. To his loving frind Mayster Thomas Hoby," in 
which Sir John Cheeke says of the English language, 

" I am of this opinion that our own tung shold be written 
cleane and pure, unmixt and unmangeled with borowing 
of other tunges." 

To the first Latin edition, by Bartholomew Clerke, is pre- 
fixed a Latin Epistle by Thomas Sackville, Lord Buckhurst, 
and Earl of Dorset, author of Gorboduc, the earliest English 
tragedy. Clerke's Latin translation is highly commended by 
Sir John Harrington, in the preface to his translation of 
Ariosto's Orlando Furioso. 1591. 

The Huth Library copy of the Courtyer belonged to the 
poet Southey, and contains his autograph and bookplate. 

II Cortigiano is dedicated by the author, Count Baldessare 
Castiglione, to Don Michele de Silva, Bishop of Viseo; by the 
English translator, Sir Thomas Hoby, "To Right Honour- 
able the Lord Henry Hastiuges, sonne and heire apparent to 
the noble Earle of Huntington." 

"To join learning with cumlie exercises, Conte Baldesar 
Castiglione in his booke, Cortigiano, doth trimlie teache, 
which booke, advisedlie read, and diligentlie folowed, but 
one year at home in England, would do a yong jentleman 
more good, I wisse, than three yeares travell abrode spent in 
Italie. And I mervell this booke is no more read in the 


Court, than it is, seying it is so well translated into English 
by a worthie Jentleman Syr Th. Hobbie, was many wayes 
furnished with learnyng, and very expert in knowledge of 
divers tonges." 

Roger Ascham, The Scholemaster, Bk. 1, p. 61. 

" The best book that ever was written upon good breeding, 
II CortigianOj by Castiglione, grew up at the little court of 
Urbino, and you should read it." 

BosweWs Johnson. Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides. 2nd. 
Oct. 1773. G. Birkbeck Hill, v, p. 276. 

Count Baldessare Castiglione, 1478-1529, was a Mantuan 
who spent his life in the service first of the Duke of Milan 
and afterwards of Giudubaldo da Montefeltro, Duke of 
Urbino. One of his diplomatic journeys took him to Eng- 
land, whence, in 1507, he carried home, from Henry VII., 
the Order of the Garter, for his master, the Duke of Urbino. 

// Cortigiano, the result of its author's travels and observa- 
tions and social experiences, represents the highest conception 
of manners of the Renaissance. It is a mixed type of manners, 
in that the education of letters of the Renaissance is engrafted 
upon the martial discipline of feudal times. In form, II 
Cortigiano is modelled on the Decameron, of Boccaccio, and 
the De Oratore, of Cicero. It is a dialogue supposed to be 
carried on by a distinguished company of ladies and gentle- 
men who are assembled at the Court of Urbino. Among 
these personages the chief are Giuliano de' Medici, called 
II Magnifico, afterwards Pope Clement VII. ; Ottaviano 
Fregoso, afterwards Doge of Genoa ; Cardinal Bernardo 
Bibbiena, author of Calandra; Cardinal Bembo, author of 
GliAsolani; I/Unico Aretino; Elizabetta Gonzaga, Duchess 
of Urbino; and Emilia Pia, Countess of Montefeltro. 

The subject of discussion agreed upon is that proposed by 
Messer Federigo Fregoso, " the perfect courtier, what are all 
the conditions and particular qualifications required of the 
man who shall deserve that name." 


The discussion is continued through four evenings, taking 
up the subject under four heads: (I) Of the form and manner 
of a court life ; (2) Of the qualifications of a courtier ; (3) Of 
the court lady; (4) Of the duty of a prince. The debate 
on the first evening, on the form and manner of a court life, 
is conducted by Count Lodovico da Canossa. Following the 
chivalric ideal, it is laid down that the perfect courtier should 
be a man of birth, a good horseman, and able to swim, leap, 
cast the stone, and play tennis. In the education of letters, 
he should be able to speak and write well, imitating the 
diction of the best writers, of whom, in the vulgar tongue, 
Boccaccio and Petrarch are praised as models. Further, the 
perfect courtier ought to be more than moderately instructed 
in polite letters, he should understand Greek and Latin 
literature also, ' on account of the variety of things that are 
written in those languages with great accuracy and beauty/ 
So in the other arts of expression, he should know something 
of music, and be able to play upon the lute ; some skill also 
in painting increases the knowledge of the beautiful and 
cultivates the taste. 

On the second evening, the debate is led by the proposer, 
Messer Federigo Fregoso, who develops a lively and enter- 
taining discussion of wit and humor. Among many sprightly 
bon mots, here is one or two, 

The Bishop of Cervia said to the Pope, "Holy Father, the 
whole court and city will have it that you have pitched upon 
me for governor." 

"Let the fools talk," replied the Pope, "you may assure 
yourself there is not a word of truth in it." 

Marc' Antonio, being one day exasperated by some words 
of Botton da Cesena, cried, " O Botton, Botton, the time will 
surely come when thoti shalt be the button and a halter the 

Julian de Medici leads the conversation of the third even- 
ing, on the court lady. The conception of woman brought 
out is made up partly of the formal and sentimental ideas of 


the old Cours d j Amour, and partly of the colorless feminine 
light o' love introduced into Italian literature, to its immense 
damage, by Boccaccio, together with a smack of Platonism. 
The sentimental, Platonic lady is ably defended by the Mag- 
nifico, while the disparager of women is Signor Gasparo 

Signor Ottaviauo Fregoso conducts the final debate, on the 
duty of a prince. It is held that a monarchy, under a good 
prince, is the best constituted government, although Bembo 
prefers a republic ' because liberty is one of the excellent gifts 
of God.' In this book Castiglione quotes himself on the 
Prince of Wales, afterwards Henry VIII. He says that ' in 
this prince nature seemed to try to outdo herself by uniting 
in him alone enough excellencies for an infinity of men/ 

George Wyndham (Introduction to The Poems of Shake- 
speare) thinks that Shakspere derived the Platonic philosophy 
of his Sonnets from the Courtyer. As the Courtyer was far 
and away the most popular Elizabethan translation from the 
Italian, it is more than likely than Shakspere was familiar 
with it. Among other suggestions which might be made to 
strengthen this supposition, it may be pointed out that the 
Countess Emilia Pia is the type of witty, sprightly lady that 
Boccaccio first made known in Pampinea, and who is, in 
English, our fascinating Beatrice. 

I note two allusions to The Courtyer in the Elizabethan 
drama; in Westward Hoe, i. 1, by Webstor and Dekker, and 
in Marston's The Malcontent, i. 1, where Male vole says to 

"Adieu, my treu court-friend : farewell, my dear Castilio." 

[1565.] The boke of Wisdome otherwise called the Flower 
of Vertue, folowing the Auctorities of auncient Doctours and 
Philosophers, deuiding and speaking of Vices and Vertues, 
wyth many goodly examples wherby a man may be praysed 
or dyspraysed, wyth the maner to speake well and wyselie to al 
folkes, of what estate so euer they bee. Translated fyrst out 


of Italian into French, and out of French into English by John 
Larke. [1565.] Lerne my godly chyldren to eschew vyce 
[Woodcut of a philosopher pointing to the stars] and loke 
you to lerne wisdo"e of your fore fathers. 

[Colophon.] Imprinted at London in Fletestreate, beneathe 
the Conduyte, at the sygne of S. John Euangeliste by Thomas 
Col well. 8vo. 107 leaves. Black letter. British Museum, 
(2 copies). 

The Bolce of Wisdome is a translation of, 

Comencia una opera chiamata Fiore de uirtute che tratta de 
tutti i uitti humani x iyle defugire ihomini ch desidera uiuere 
secddo dio, etc. [By Tomaso Leoui? Venice. 1470?] 4to. 
46 leaves. British Museum. There are sixteen Italian edi- 
tions catalogued in the British Museum, eleven between 
[1470?] and 1538. 

In enumerating "the auctoures of thys booke," John Larke 
cites sixty-two persons, of whom the first is Jesus and the 
last " Galyen." The work consists of fifty-seven chapters, 
generally in pairs, each virtue being accompanied by its 
corresponding vice. The titles of some of the chapters are 
as follows, 

" How Prudence is cheefe buckler, and defence of all 
Vertues. And of the great goodnes, that may come of the 
same to all persons, after the auncyente Phylosophers." 

"How temperaunce is one of the flowers of Prudence. 
And how he that hath it in hym maye resiste and withstande 
many evils after the saienges of the wise men, in ye chapter 
going before." 

" How a man oughte to take gladnesse and Joye ; and of 
what thynge, and what gladnesse or Joye is." 

" Howe Heuynesse is contrarye to gladnesse ; and howe 
the wyse man oughte neuer to put any in his hearte, wherof 
heuynes and mellancolly may be engendred." 

" Howe the uertue of peace ought to be mayntayned and 
kepte; and of the greate goodnesse that comraeth of the same, 
and what peace is." 


"Howe Justyce ought to be done and howe it is that 
thynge that dothe measure all thynges upon earthe." 

"Howe Injustyce or wrong is contrary to Justyce, and 
howe manye maners there be of Iniustyce, and how Iniustyce 
demafldeth vengeaunce afore God." 

Example of Justyce. 
Apologue of the Angel and the Hermit. 

" Of Justice it is red in the life of holye fathers, that there 
was an hermyte whyche long time had serued God and had 
done greate penaunce for hys synnes, to whom God sent 
afterwarde great sicknesse; and bycause that he could not 
recouer hys healthe agayn he began to complaine of God and 
to murmure in hymselfe. So it chaunced on a day that the 
aungell of God appered unto hym, in lykenesse of a yonge 
man, and sayd unto hym, come wyth me, for God will that 
I doe showe thee of hys secret Justyce ; and dyd leade him 
into the towne, to a marchauntes house, whyche had in a 
coffre a great number of florences. And the aungell, in the 
syghte of the hermyte, did take the same florence, and did 
beare them into the house of another man, whych they founde 
in sleepe, and the aungell dyd leue the sayde florence at hys 
chambre dore, to the intente that when he should open the 
dore, that he should fynde them ; and thys doone, he ledde 
hym to the house of another marchaunte that had a chylde, 
the whyche chylde the aungell dyd kyll, in the presence 
of the sayde heremite, and the heremite seinge all these 
thynges, thoughte that the aungell had ben a deuyll, and 
wolde fayne haue departed from hym. The aungell, seinge 
that he woulde depart from hym, sayde unto hym, tarye yet 
a litle, for I wyll showe thee the reason, wherfore I haue 
doone these thinges in thy presence; knowe first wherfore 
that I haue taken the florence from the burges ; it is because 
that he had solde his herytage for the sayde florences, and 
was purposed to gyue them to certaine murtherers, whyche 
had promysed hym to kyll a man for hys sake, the whyche had 


dyspleased hym aforetymes; and the man which he wolde 
haue caused to be kylled, is a man of noble byrth, wherof 
shuld haue come greate inconuenyence, and therfore to resyst 
the euyl that might haue come therof, and also to let hym 
of hys euyll, and myscheuous wyll and purpose, I haue 
taken the sayde florence from hym ; and when he shal see 
hym selfe pore and to haue loste hys herytage and goodes, 
he wyll gyue hymselfe to the seruice of God, and where he 
shulde haue ben dampned nowe he shalbe saued. The reason 
wherfore I haue born the florence to the chambre doore of 
the other man, is because that he was a ryche marchaunte 
whyche came from beyonde the sea, and had bestowed in 
marchaundyce all the goodes that he had, and putte it in a 
shyppe, the whych shyppe did peryshe upon the sea, then 
he did remembre one daye howe that he had loste all hys 
gooddes, and had nothynge to lyue uppon, began to fall in 
dyspayre, and was purposed to hang hym selfe, and therfore 
to the intente that he shoulde not destroye bothe the bodye 
and the soule, I dyd beare hym the foresaid florences. The 
reason whereof I haue kylled the chylde, is because that 
afore that the father had him he was a very good man, and 
gaue much almons, and did many good dedes for the loue 
of God ; and sence that he had the chylde, he cared for none 
other thynge, but onelye to get rychesse, were it by ryghte 
or wronge, and therefore I haue kylled the chylde, to the 
intente that the father maye retourne to hys purpose; doe 
not meruayle nor grudge therfore, for the syckenesse that 
thou haste, for if it hadde not bene, thou shoulde ofte tymes 
haue thy mynde and courage in vanytyes wherby thou 
shoulde greatlye haue dyspleased God ; and be thou sure, 
that God doth nothyng, but by reason, but the persones 
haue not knowledge therof, for God hathe not promysed it 
them, but of two euylles he dothe allwayes take the lesse. 
And, this said, the aungell dyd departe from the heremyte. 

"And from thenceforthe, the sayde heremyte dyd neuer 
murmure againste God, for anye maner syckenesse or aduer- 


syty that he did send him, but rather dyd thanke God, and 
alwaies dyd reioyce hymselfe in his sicknes and aduersyties, 
consyderynge alwayes that it was of the goodnesse of God." 
Censura Literaria,Vo\. vn, p. 225 (Ed. 1808). 

The apologue of the Angel and Hermit is one of the stories 
of the Gesta Romanorum, MSS. Harl. 2270, ch. LXXXX., and 
its first appearance in English must have been in Wynkyn de 
Worde's translation of the Gesta, without date. 

A second translation of the Gesta Romanorum, made by 
Richard Robinson, went through six impressions between 
1577 and 1601. 

Besides the versions of the Boke of Wisdome and of these 
two translations of the Gesta Romanorum, there are four later 
ones in English. The first occurs in, Certaine Conceptions or 
Considerations of Sir Percy Herbert, upon the strange Change 
of Peoples Dispositions and Actions in these latter Times. 
Directed to his Sonne. London. 1652. 4to. Pp. 220 to 
230. British Museum. It is entitled, 

A most full, though figurative Story, to shew that God 
Almighties Wayes and inscrutable Decrees are not to be com- 
prehended by Humane Fancies. 

James Howell, in one of his Letters, To my Lord Marquis 
of Hartford, without date, gives a variant of the tale, citing 
Sir Percy Herbert's Conceptions as his source. Vol. iv. 
Letter 4, of HowelPs Letters, published between 1647 and 
1650, and p. 7 of the edition of 1655. 

The story is also found in the Divine Dialogues (Pt. L, 
p. 321. Dialogue II. Edit. London. 1668. 12mo.), of 
Dr. Henry More, the Platonist, where it is enriched with 
interesting moral reflections. And Thomas Parnell closely 
follows More in The Hermit, his most popular poem. W. C. 
T. Dobson, royal academician, contributed " The Hermit," with 
a quotation from Parnell, to the Academy Exhibition of 1842. 

ParnelPs version is said to be the tenth the story, like 
many another one, having originated in Arabic, and come 
into English by a natural process of descent. 


The story is inserted in the twentieth chapter of Voltaire's 
Zadig, De VHermite qu' un Ange conduisit dans le siecle. The 
germ of the tale occurs in the Koran, Ch. xx, where it is 
entitled the Cave. 

With More di virtu, No. 22 [Zambrini's Libro di Novelle 
Antiche, Bologna, 1868], compare the Decameron, Introduc- 
tion to Day 4, the story of the hermit's son who had never 
seen a woman. 

[1570?] The Fables of Esope in Englishe with all his life 
and Fortune .... whereunto is added the Fables of Avyan, 
And also the Fables of Alfonce, with the Fables of Poge the 
Florentyne, etc. 

H. Wykes, for J. Waley. London. [1570?]. 8vo. Black 
letter. Also, 1634. 8vo. Black letter, both editions in the 
British Museum, 2 copies of the last. 

This is a reprint of Caxton's translation of the fables of 
Aesop, Avicenna, Petrus Alphonsus, and Poggio-Bracciolini, 
1484, folio, Caxton's own imprint "at Westmynstre in 
thabbey;" and [London, 1500?], Pynson. 

The Dictionary of National Biography records, " The Fables 
of Aesop translated by Caxton from the French, folio, West- 
minster, 26th March, 1484. With woodcuts. [Unique perfect 
copy at Windsor, imperfect copies in the British Museum, 
and at Oxford.]" 

I find an early French Aesop, but of a little later date, 
Les subtilles fables de Esope, etc. [1499?] 4to. British 

The British Museum also gives, 

The Fables of Alfonce [Disciplina Clericalis of Petrus 
Alphonsus, formerly Rabbi Moses Sephardi] translated out of 
Frensshe by W. Caxton. 1484. 

Whether Caxton translated Avicenna [the celebrated Arabic 
physician, Husain Ibn 'Abd Allah (Abu 'All) called Ibn Siua, 
980-1037 A. D.], and Poggio-Bracciolini from the French, I 
do not know. 


1570. The Morall Philosophic of Doni: drawne out of the 
auncient writers. A worke first compiled in the Indian tongue 
[by Sendabar or rather Bidpai] and afterwards reduced into 
diners other languages : and now lastly englished out of Italian 
by Thomas North. Brother to the right Honorable Sir Roger 
North Knight, Lord North of Kyrtheling. 

Here follows an engraving, a bad copy of the original, 
with the motto ' The wisdome of this worlde is folly before 

Imprinted at London by Henry Denham. 1570. Sm. 4to. 
4 parts. 116 leaves. Woodcuts. Bodleian. [Colophon.] Here 
endeth the Treatise of the Morall Philosophic of Sendebar : 
In which is layd open many infinite examples for the health 
& life of reasonable men, shadowed under tales and simili- 
tudes of brute beaste without reason. Imprinted at London 
by Henrie Denham, dwelling in Paternoster Howe, at the 
signe of the Starre. Also, London, 1601. 4to. British 

The Earliest English Version of the Fables of Bidpai, 
< The Morall Philosophic of Doni/ by Sir T. North. Edited 
by Joseph Jacobs. London. 1888. 8vo. 

Dedicated to Robert, Earl of Leicester, and with com- 
mendatory verses in English and Italian. 

This is a translation from Antonio Francesco, 

Doni, La Moral Filosophia del Doni, Tratta da gli antichi 
scrittori; Allo Illustriss. S. Don Ferrante Caracciolo dedicata. 
[Engraving, with the motto HPAP3OHATOU KOSMOU 
TOUTOU MQPIA TTAPA TO 0Eft E3TI] Con privilegio. 
In Uinegia per Francesco Marcolini. MDLII. [4to.] Six 
later editions. 

The Moral Filosophia is an Italian version of the old 
Indian collection of Tales, called Kalilah wa Dimnah, or 
'The book of Kalilah and Dimnah.' It corresponds to chapters 
five and six of Silvestre de Sacy's (( Calila et Dimna ou Fables 
de Bidpai en Arabe." (Paris. 1816. 4to.) 


5. The lion and the ox ; or two friends between whom a 
crafty interloper sows dissension. 

6. Investigation of Dimnah's conduct, and his defence of 

In the Indian fable Kalilah and Dimnah are two jackals, 
who are courtiers at the gate of the King, Pingalaka, the 
lion ; but Kalilah in Doni appears as I'asino and Dimnah as 
il mulo. 

Sir Thomas North translated the first part only of Doni's 
work, which goes on, in the same volume, freshly and con- 
tinuously paged, with six treatises, entitled, "Trattati diversi 
di Sendebar Indiana filosopho morale. Allo illustriss, et excel- 
lentiss. S. Cosimo de Medici dedicati." [Engraving bearing 
the motto ' Fiorenza/] 

In Uinegia neW Academia Peregrina. MDLII; and at the 
end (p. 103) stands ( In Uinegia per Francesco Marcolini. 

The book of Kalilah and Dimnah is a collection of tales 
supposed to be related to a King of India by his philosopher, 
in order to enforce some particular moral or rule of conduct. 
In many of the stories the characters are animals thinking 
and acting just like men and women. Originally Sanskrit, 
the book passed from Buddhist literature into Persian, and 
thence into nearly every known Oriental and modern lan- 
guage. Doni's "Moral Filosophia" for example, is based on 
the Latin of John of Capua, "Directoriwn humanae vitae, vel 
ParaboleAntiquorum Sapientum (1263-1278, printed, 1480(?)) 
and this, in its turn, upon a Hebrew translation from the 

In its migrations, from the Sanskrit original of the Pant- 
chatantra, though Persian and Arabic, the names of both king 
and philosopher vary. Bidpai, or Pilpai, the philosopher of 
the Persian version known as the "Lights of Canopus" or, in 
English, the Fables of Pilpay, is a wise Brahmin who lives 
in a cave of the holy mountain of Ceylon. DonPs. Sendebar 
is from Sandabar, the name of the philosopher in the Hebrew 


version from which John of Capua translated. Possibly this 
form is a reminiscence of Shanzabeh, the Sanskrit name of 
the ox in the well-known story of the Lion and the Ox which 
is the opening tale of the original Indian book. 

In the Trattati diversi the king is Fr. Strrza, Duke of 
Milan, the philosopher is maestro Dino filosofo Fiorentino, and 
the scenes and personages are all Italian. Dino may be an 
anagram of Doni. 

1573. Cardanus Comforte translated into English [by 
Thomas Bedingfield~\. And published by commaundement of 
the Right Hon. the Earl of Oxenford. 

T. Marshe, London, 1573. 4to. Black letter. British 

Newly .... corrected and augmented. 

T. Marsh, London, 1576. 8vo. Black letter. British 

There is a dedication to the Earl of Oxford dated " 1 Jan. 
15712," which is followed by a letter to the translator, and 
some verses to the reader, both written by the Earl of Oxford. 

The work is translated from Girolamo Cardano's, 

H. C. . . . . De Consolatione libri tres. 

Venetiis. 1542. 8vo. British Museum. 

A different English translation of this book came out one 
hundred years later, 

Cardan, his three bookes of Consolation Englished. London? 
1683. 16 mo. British Museum. 

1575. Golden epistles. Contayning varietie of discourse, 
both Morally Philosophically and Divine : gathered, as well out 
of the remaynder of Gueuaraes woorkes, as other Authours, 
Latine, Frenche, and Italian. By G. [eoffrey~\ Fenton. 

London : A. Middleton for R. Newbery. 1575. 8vo. 
Black letter. British Museum. Also, London, 1577. 4to. 
Black letter. British Museum, and London, 1 582. 4to. Pp. 
347. Black letter. British Museum, (2 copies). 


Dedicated to " Ladie Anne Countesse of Oxenford." 

This work of Fenton's is a kind of supplement to Edward 
Hel lowes's, The Familiar Epistles of Sir Anthony of Guevara. 
, . . Translated out of the Spanish Toung, by E. Hellowes. . . . 
Now corrected and enlarged, etc. London. [1574.] 4to. 
Black letter. 1577. 4to. 1584. 4to. All in the British 

The Dictionary of National Biography says that Fenton 
translated the Golden Epistles from the French. I find a 
French translation, entitled, 

Epistres Dorees moralles & familieres [torn l8~\, traduites 
d'Espagnol .... par le Seigneur de Guterry, etc. (Le troisi&me 
livre des epistres illustres. . . . La Revolte que les Espaignoh 
firent contre leur jeune Prince, Van 1580, & Vyssue d'icelle; 
avec un traitte des travaux & privileges de Galeres, . . . traduit 
. ... en Frangois [by Antoine Dupinet, Sieur de Noroy.~\ 8 
torn. Lyon. 1556-60. 4to. 

1576. Galateo of Maister John Delia Casa, Archbishop of 
Beneventa, or rather, a treatise of the maners and behaviours 
it behoveth a man to uze and eschewe, in his familiar conversa- 
tion. A worlce very necessary and profitable for all gentlemen 
or other. First written in the Italian tongue, and now done 
into English by Robert Paterson of Lincolnes Inne Gentlemen. 
Satis si sapienter. 

Imprinted at London for Raufe Newbery, dwelling in 
Fleete streate, a little above the Conduit. An. Do. 1576. 
4to. 68 leaves. Black letter. 1703. 12mo. British Museum. 
1774. 16mo. Brit. Mus. 1892. 4to. Privately printed, with 
an introduction by H. J. Reid. An epitome of Galateo was 
published in the miscellany, The Rich Cabinet. 1616. 

Dedicated, "to the right honourable my singular good 
lord, the Lord Robert Dudley, Earle of Leycester, Baron 
of Denbigh, Knight of the Honourable order of the Garter, 
Maister of the Queenes Maiesties Horses, and of her Highnesse 
priuie counsell, Robert Peterson wisheth perfect felicitie." 


With commendatory verses in Italian, by Francesco Pucci 
and Alessandro Citolini ; in Latin, by Edouardus Cradoc- 
cus, S. Theologiae Doctor and Professor; and in English, 
by Thomas Drant, Archdeacon, J. Stoughton, Student, and 
Thomas Browne of L. I. Gent. 

The Refin'd Courtier; or, a correction of several indecencies 
crept into civil conversation, [/n part translated and abridged 
from G. delta Casa's Galateus, by N. W.~] 

London. 1663. 12mo. British Museum. 

The Refined Courtier. . . . Written . ... in Italian by J. 
<?., from thence into Latin by N. [athan] Chytraeus, and from 
both .... made English, by N. W. 

London. 1686. 12mo. British Museum. Second edition. 
Also, 1804. 16mo. Brit. Mus. There have been altogether 
seven editions and one epitome of Galateo in English between 
1576 and 1892. 

Galatee .... mis en Francois, Latin, & Espagnol par divers 
auteurs, etc. [into Latin by Nathan Chytraeus']. 1598. 16mo. 
British Museum. 

Galateo is a translation of Giovanni della Casa's, Trattato 
.... nel.quale . ... si ragiona de y modi, che si debbono b tenere 
o schifare nella comune conversatione, cognominato Galatheo. 

Milano. 1559. 8vo. British Museum. 

Giovanni della Casa, 1500-1556, Archbishop of Beue- 
vento, Petrarchist, and author of Galateo, has been called 
the Italian Chesterfield. Galateo is an admirable treatise on 
good manners. Differing from Castiglione's II Cortigiano, 
which prescribes the training and discipline of the man of 
birth and position, Galateo aims to be a guide to the average 
gentleman in his intercourse with his equals. Like the 
Courtier, it has enjoyed enduring fame, because its precepts 
of conduct are based on those general principles of mutual 
respect and tolerance which hold good for all peoples and at 
all times. Both books perhaps have been saved from the 
perverse fate of manuals of etiquette in general by the fact 
that in a simple, dignified way, and with singular distinction 


of style, they recognize the final sanction of tact as the mark 
of education and culture, and inculcate the importance of it 
as a universal social duty. 

The title of Galateo passed into a proverb. ' To teach 
the Galateo ' is synonymous, in Italian, with ' to teach good 
manners.' Galateo is said to have been in real life a certain 
Galeazzo Florimonte of Sessa. 

Galateo discusses social conduct with much particularity, 
instructing the young man on such points as the proper use 
of the drinking-glass at tabl