corruptions. Without therefore going so far as Ritson (whose opinion of itself was little worth), that "the vulgar English of the period was essentially different from the Saxon used in the charters of the Conqueror; or Sir Francis Palgrave, who thinks "that a colloquial language, approaching nearly to modern English, seems to have existed concurrently with the more cultivated language which we call AngloSaxon," there are many reasons to induce us to believe that the spoken language in the reign of Edward the Confessor did not materially differ from that which is found in manuscripts a century later.

That the dialects of the western, southern, and midland counties contributed together to form the language of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and consequently to lay the foundation of modern English, seems unquestionable; and it is remarkable that the same period is pointed out by philologists for the origin of Italian from the ancient and varied dialects of that country.'-Pref., pp. xxv.-xxviii.

An

The above statement furnishes a very probable view of the subject, and we are by no means prepared to say that it is not the correct one. However, we would observe that there are few matters more difficult than to determine, à priori, in what precise form a vernacular composition of the thirteenth century might be written, or what form it might assume in a very short period. Among the Anglo-Saxon charters of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, many are modelled upon the literary Anglo-Saxon, with a few slight changes of orthography and inflection, while others abound with dialectical peculiarities of various sorts. Those peculiarities may generally be accounted for from local causes. East Anglian scribe does not employ broad Western forms, nor a West-of-England man East-Anglian ones, though each might keep his provincial peculiarities out of sight, and produce something not materially different from the language of Elfric. It is not very easy to affirm what course was taken by Layamon. It is not improbable that he might write in the dialect of his district, or, at all events, that traces of it might be found in his work. If we assume this, which is not absolutely certain, two questions of no very easy solution arise-whether those broad Western forms, so prominent in the poem, actually emanated from the author, and whether they really belonged to the North Worcester district? To decide the first point, it would be necessary to have access either to the priest's autograph or to a more faithful copy of it than it was the practice to make either in his age or the succeeding one. A transcriber of an early English composition followed his own ideas of language, grammar, and orthography; and if he did not entirely obliterate the characteristic peculiarities of his original, he was pretty sure, like the Conde de Olivares, 'd'y mettre beaucoup du sien.' The practical proof of this is to be found in the existing copies of those works, almost every one

of

of which exhibits some peculiarity of features. We have Trevisa and Robert of Gloucester in two distinct forms- Piers Ploughman' in at least three-and Hampole's Pricke of Conscience' in half a dozen, without any absolute certainty which approximates most to what the authors wrote. With regard to Layamon, it might be supposed that the older copy is the more likely to represent the original; but we have internal evidence that it is not the priest's autograph, and it is impossible to know what alterations it may have undergone in the course of one or more transcriptions. Again, assuming that he would write in the dialect of his district, it may be doubted whether the Western peculiarities in question really belonged to that district. The most prominent ones occur pretty frequently in charters and other documents of the Channel counties, and those immediately adjoining, from the twelfth century downwards; but we have not been able to trace similar ones in Worcestershire documents, which are pretty numerous, and of much the same period. We should rather expect, in the locality of Arley-Regis, a dialect resembling that of Piers Ploughman,' as edited by Dr. Whitaker; and if we could suppose that a transcriber south of the Avon substituted v for initial f, and eth for final en in plural indicatives, it would be no more than has actually been done in other instances. Sir F. Madden observes that forms belonging more properly to the Mercian and Anglian dialects occasionally present themselves, and though they are too few to ground any positive conclusion on, it is by no means impossible that they may be vestiges of a more original type of the poem, Questions of this sort are to be decided by evidence, and we must be content to let the present one remain in abeyance till we meet with the author's own copy, or find direct proof of the prevalence of a Western dialect in North Worcestershire, As the poem now stands, the preponderance of forms belongs to the literary Anglo-Saxon, or may be directly deduced from it; the numerous provincialisms are those of the southern and south-western counties, and might easily be introduced by transcribers of that district.

Though in the present, and various other instances, it is difficult to arrive at a positive conclusion respecting the original form of a mediæval composition, there are certain criteria which will frequently enable us to determine approximatively in what district a given copy of it was made. Much misapprehension prevails on this subject, and many grievous mistakes have been made by editors and commentators in assigning MSS, to localities to which they could not possibly belong. It may not, therefore, be inexpedient to point out a few characteristics that may serve to guide us in a great number of cases.

The

The whole body of our Anglo-Saxon literary monuments, from the eighth century downwards, is reducible to two great divisions, West-Saxon and Anglian. Political events gave a decided preponderance to the former, so that, towards the end of the ninth century, we perceive its influence on the written language in almost every part of England. It also appears to have acted powerfully upon the spoken dialect of the Western Mercians, who were originally Angles, but who seem to have gradually adopted various peculiarities of the West-Saxon speech. The Anglian branch, including the Northumbrian division of it, once boasted of a flourishing and extensive literature; but civil commotions and the ravages of foreign invaders gradually caused the bulk of it to disappear. A few fragments fortunately escaped the general wreck. Besides the verses uttered by Bede on his death-bed, the inscription on the Ruthwell Cross, and the fragment of Caedmon printed in Wanley's Catalogue, we have in the Durham Ritual, published by the Surtees Society, and in the celebrated Gospels, Cott. MS. Nero, D. 4, undoubted specimens of the language of Northumbria in the tenth century. A portion of the Gloss to the Rushworth Gospels in the Bodleian Library, supposed to have been written in Yorkshire, is in the same dialect. The Glosses to the Psalter, Cott. MS. Vesp. A. 1, also printed by the Surtees Society, though more southern, are of the same generic character, that is to say, Anglian as distinct from WestSaxon, and, on account of the antiquity and purity of the language, they are the most valuable monument of the class. Those pieces present a form of language differing in many important points from the West-Saxon, and approximating in some degree to the Old-Saxon and the Westphalian dialect of Old-German. The dialects descended from this were, in the eleventh century, and perhaps still earlier, distinguished from those of the south and west by the greater simplicity of their grammatical forms; by the preference of simple vowels to diphthongs, and of hard gutturals to palatals; by the frequent and eventually almost universal rejection of the formative prefix ge; and by the recurrence of peculiar words and forms, never found in pure WestSaxon. Another characteristic is the infusion of Scandinavian words, of which there are slight traces in monuments of the tenth century, and strong and unequivocal ones in those of the thir teenth and fourteenth. Some of the above criteria may be verified by a simple and obvious process, namely, a reference to the topographical nomenclature of our provinces. Whoever takes the trouble to consult the Gazetteer of England will find, that of our numerous Carltons' not one is to be met with south of the Mersey, west of the Staffordshire Tame, or south of the Thames;

and

and that Fiskertons,' 'Skiptons,' 'Skelbrookes,'* and a whole host of similar names, are equally introuvables in the same district. They are, with scarcely a single exception, Northern or Eastern; and we know, from Aelfric's Glossary, from Domesday and the Chartularies, that this distinction of pronunciation was established as early as the eleventh century. Kirby,' or Kirkby,' is a specimen of joint Anglian and Scandinavian influence, furnishing a clue to the ethnology of the district wherever it occurs. The converse of this rule does not hold with equal universality, various causes having gradually introduced soft palatal sounds into districts to which they did not properly belong. Such are, however, of very partial occurrence, and form the exception rather than the rule.

If we apply the above criteria to the concluding portion of the Saxon Chronicle, comprising the reign of Stephen, we find a systematic omission of the prefix ge in all participles except tgehaten (called); muneces (monks), for munecan; the definite article the of all genders, numbers, and cases; forms such as carlamen, scort, scæ (she), a word unknown in the West-Saxon. We have internal evidence that this portion of the Chronicle was written at Peterborough. Again, in the Suffolk charters of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, in Kemble's Codex Diplomaticus, vol. iv., and Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 14847, we meet with kirke, ekelike (eternal) alke (each), unnen (granted) for geunnen, sal (shall), and aren (sunt), itself a sufficient indication of an Anglian dialect at that period. The above peculiarities, and many similar ones, are those of the northern and eastern district already specified; and they may serve as tests of other productions of the same locality. We have no direct evidence where Orm's Paraphrase of the Gospels was written; but, when we find the same systematic omission of the formative ge, the same predilection for hard gutturals-e. gr. cwennkenn for quenchen-a definite article nearly indeclinable, thezzr (their) for heora, the plural verb substantive arrn, and moreover a strong infusion of Scandinavian words and phrases, we see at once that it is neither Southern nor Western, but Eastern Midland, and most probably penned within fifty miles of Northampton.

The language of the Southern district, of which the Thames

*The only exception as to words beginning with Sk appears to be Skilgate, in Somersetshire. Skenfreth, in Monmouthshire, is of Celtic origin. Two remarkable words are Skephouse (Sheephouse)-Pool, near Bolton Abbey, and Skutterskelf Shivering-Shelf or Cliff, near Stokesley, in Cleveland. The only Charltons in this northern and eastern district are four hamlets in Northumberland, sectional divisions of the same township, and therefore reducible to one.

It is singular that this word retained the prefix in the Northumbrian dialect, after every other had lost it.

and

and the Gloucestershire Avon may be broadly assumed as the northern boundaries, is easily distinguished from that of the eastern and northern divisions. Not to mention the topographical nomenclature, such as Charlton or Chorlton, Shipton or Shepton, Fisherton, &c. &c., instead of the hard forms above specified, we find, from the twelfth century downwards, chirche, muchel, thincke, worche, eche (eternal), hwiche, or hwuche, with a multitude of similar forms, not accidentally or partially, but systematically employed. Provincialized monuments of this branch also exhibit initial v for f, ss for sh, and in Kent, z for s,—and all that properly belong to it are remarkably tenacious of Saxon forms, which all but disappeared in some other districts before the middle of the thirteenth century. The prefix ge (y, i.) is rarely dropped; the inflections of nouns, pronouns, and verbs are West-Saxon, with slight modifications; and the archaic idioms and inversions contrast strongly with the perspicuity and simplicity of more northern compositions. Those peculiarities, and the gradual manner in which they arose, are exemplified in various charters and other documents, as may be seen, for example, in Kemble's Codex Diplomaticus, vol. iv. Chart. 773 and 799. The former of these, dated A.D. 1044, is tolerable WestSaxon; the version of the thirteenth century annexed to it shows a pretty copious sprinkling of provincial forms; also the second, written about 1300; but a mutation of a grant of 1053 is still broader; while all three, with all of the same class, retain numerous forms and inflections, which it would be vain to search for in the Chronicle of King Stephen or Orm's Paraphrase.

The Western Mercian bears a general resemblance to the Southern class in its adoption of soft palatal forms and the partial retention of archaic inflections. The shibboleth of it, as a distinct dialect from Northumbrian and North-Anglian on the one hand, and Southern and South-Western on the other, is the indicative plural in en-we-ye-they lov-en-still current in South-Lancashire. This form also appears to have been popularly known, if not in East-Anglia proper, at all events in the district immediately to the westward, since we find it in Orm, in an Eastern-Midland copy of the Rule of Nuns, sæc. xiii., and in process of time in Suffolk. Various conjectures have been advanced as to the origin of this form, of which we have no certain examples before the thirteenth century. We believe the true state of the case to have been as follows. It is well known that

It is curious to trace the gradual retreat of whilk before which, from Kent to Berwickshire.

↑ Sceolon, aron, and a few similar words, are no real exceptions, being in structure not present tenses but preterites.

the