DATE AND DIALECT OF THE POEM.
The mere examination of an Early English work with respect to its vocabulary and grammatical forms, will not enable us (as Price asserts) to settle satisfactorily the date at which it was written. The place of composition must also be taken into consideration, and a comparison, if possible, must be made with other works in the same dialect, the date of which is known with some degree of certainty. The date of the text before us must not, therefore, be confounded with that of the manuscript, which is, perhaps, a few years earlier than A.D. 1300. A careful comparison of the poem with the Bestiary, written in the same dialect, and most probably by the same author[[9]] (and printed by Mr Wright in the Reliquiæ Antiquæ, p. 208, and by myself in an Old English Miscellany), leads me to think that the present poem is not later than A.D. 1250.[[10]]
The vocabulary, which contains very few words of Romance origin,[[11]] is not that of Robert of Gloucester, or of Robert of Brunne, but such as is found in Laȝamon's Brut, or Orm's paraphrases, and other works illustrating the second period of our language, i.e. the twelfth and earlier part of the thirteenth centuries.
The employment of a dual for the pronouns of the first and second persons marks an early date (certainly not much later than the time of Henry III.) even in works composed in the Southern dialect, which, it is well known, retained to a comparatively late period those Anglo-Saxon inflections that had long previously been disused in more Northern dialects.
The Corpus manuscript is evidently the work of a scribe, to whom the language was more or less archaic, which accounts for such blunders as ðrosing for ðrosem, waspene for wastme, lage for vn-lage, insile for vn-sile, grauen for ðrauen, etc.
The original copy of Genesis most probably terminated with ll. [2521]-4:
"And here ended completely
The book which is called Genesis,
Which Moses, through God's help,
Wrote for precious souls' need."
The concluding lines, in which both the author and scribe are mentioned, seem to me to be the work of a subsequent transcriber:
"God shield his soul from hell-bale,
Who made it thus in English tale (speech)!
And he that these letters wrote,
May God help him blissfully,
And preserve his soul from sorrow and tears,
Of hell-pain, cold and hot!"
The Ormulum is the earliest[[12]] printed Early English work which has come down to us that exhibits the uniform employment of the termination -en (-n) as the inflection of the plural number, present tense, indicative mood; or, in other words, it is the earliest printed example we have of a Midland dialect. I say a Midland dialect, because the work of Orm is, after all, only a specimen of one variety of the Midland speech, most probably of that spoken in the northern part of the eastern counties of England, including what is commonly called the district of East Anglia.
Next in antiquity to the Ormulum come the Bestiary, already mentioned, and the present poem, both of which uniformly employ the Midland affix -en, to the exclusion of all others, as the inflection of the present plural indicative.
There are other peculiarities which these works have in common; and a careful comparison of them with the Ormulum induces me to assign them to the East Midland area; but there are certain peculiarities, to be noticed hereafter, which induce me to believe that the work of Orm represents a dialect spoken in the northern part of this district, while the Story of Genesis and Exodus, together with the Bestiary, exhibits the speech of the more southern counties of the East Midland district.[[13]] Thus, if the former be in the dialect of Lincoln, the latter is in that of Suffolk.[[14]]
The chief points in which the present poem and the Bestiary agree with the Ormulum are the following:—
I. The absence of compound vowels.
In the Southern dialects we find the compound vowels ue, eo, ie, ea (yea). In the Ormulum eo occurs, but with the sound of e, and ea in Genesis and Exodus is written for e.
II. The change of an initial ð (th) into t after words ending in d, t, n, s, that is to say, after a dental or a sibilant.[[15]]
"ðanne iſ tis fruit wel ſwiðe good."—(Gen. and Ex., l. [334].)
"ðe firſt moned and te firſt dai,
He ſag erðe drie & te water awai."—(Ibid., l. [615]-6.)
"ðin berg and tin werger ic ham."—(Ibid., l. [926].)
"at te welle[n]."—(Ibid., l. [2756].)
This practice is much more frequent in the Bestiary, which is a proof, perhaps, that the present poem has suffered somewhat in the course of transcription.
"neddre is te name."—(O.E. Miscellany, p. 5.)
"it is te ned."—(Ibid., p. 6.)
"ðis lif bitokneð ðe sti
ðat te neddre gangeð bi,
and tis is ðe ðirl of ðe ston,
ðat tu salt ðurg gon."—(Ibid., p. 7.)
"at tin herte."—(Ibid., p. 7.)
III. Simplicity of grammatical structure and construction of sentences.[[16]]
1. The neglect of gender and number in nouns.
2. The genitive singular of substantives end in -es in all genders.[[17]]
3. The absence of the gen. pl. of substantives in -ene.
4. The employment of an uninflected article.[[18]]
5. The use of ðat (that) as a demonstrative adjective, and not as the neuter of the article. The form ðas (those), common enough in the fourteenth century, does not occur in this poem or in the Ormulum.
6. No inflection of the adjective in the accusative singular. The phrase 'godun dai,' good day, in l. [1430], p. 41, contains a solitary instance of the accusative of the adjective, but it is, no doubt, a mere remnant of the older speech, just like our 'for the nonce' (= for then once), and is no proof that the writer or his readers employed it as a common inflection. The form godun is a corruption of godne, as it is more properly written in works in the Southern dialects as late as the middle of the fourteenth century.
7. Adjectives and adverbs with the termination -like.
The Southern form is, for adjectives, -lich (sing.), -liche (pl.); for adverbs -liche. Thus the adoption of this affix really (though at first it appears a matter of no importance) marks a stage in the language when the distinction between the sing. and pl. form of adjectives was not very strictly observed, and was, moreover, a step towards our modern -ly, which is adjectival as well as adverbial.
Even in this poem adjectives occur in -li, as reuli = piteous, which is the earliest example I have met with. Orm employs double forms in -like and -liȝȝ (= ly?). -ly has arisen not out of -lich or -liche (which would have become lidge or litch), but out of some such softened form as liȝ.
8. The tendency to drop the initial y, i (A.S. ge) of the passive participles of strong verbs.
The Ormulum has two or three examples of this prefixal element, and in our poem it occurs but seldom.
IV. A tendency to drop the t of the second person of verbs, as as, hast; beas, beëst; findes, findest.
Examples of this practice are very common in the Bestiary and Genesis and Exodus, but it occurs only four times in the Ormulum.[[19]] It was very common for the West-Midland to drop the -e of 2nd person in strong verbs. See Preface to O.E. Homilies, 1st Series.
V. The use of arn, aren, for ben of the Midland dialect, or beð of the Southern dialect.[[20]]
VI. The employment of the adverbs thethen, hethen, quethen (of Scandinavian origin),[[21]] instead of the Southern thenne (thennen), thence; henne (hennen), hence; whanne (whanene), whence.
VII. The use of oc, ok (also, and), a form which does not occur in any specimen of a Southern, West-Midland, or Northern dialect that has come under my notice. The use of on, o, for the Southern an or a, as onlike, olike, alike, on-rum, apart, on-sunder, asunder, is also worth noticing.
VIII. The coalition of the pronoun it with pronouns and verbs, as get (Bestiary) = she it (ȝhöt in Ormulum; cf. þüt = thu itt, thou it); tellet = tell it; wuldet = would it; ist = is it, is there; wast, was it, was there, etc. þit = þe + hit = who it, occurs in O.E. Homilies, 2nd Series.
The Ormulum, the Bestiary, and Genesis and Exodus have some few other points of agreement which will be found noticed in the Grammatical Details and Glossary. There are, however, grammatical forms in the latter works which do not present themselves in the former, and which, in my opinion, seem to indicate a more Southern origin. (See Preface to O.E. Homilies, 2nd Series.)
I. Plurals in n.
I do not recollect any examples of plurals in n in the Ormulum, except ehne, eyes; in this poem we have colen, coals; deden, deeds; fon, foes; siðen, sides; son, shoes; steden, places; sunen, sons; tren, trees; teten, teats; wunen, laws, abilities, etc. (see p. xxii.)
II. The pronoun is (es) = them.[[22]] In the fourteenth century we only find this form is (hise) in pure Southern writers.[[23]]
"Diep he iſ dalf under an ooc."[[24]]—(Gen. and Ex., l. 1873, p. 54.)
"For ſalamon findin iſ ſal."[[25]]—(Ibid., l. 1877, p. 54.)
"He toc iſ."[[26]]—(Ibid., l. 2654, p. 76.)
| "Alle hise fet steppes | ðer he steppeð, |
| After him he filleð, | Oðer dust oðer deu, |
| Drageð dust wið his stert | ðat he ne cunne is finden."[[27]] |
| (O.E. Miscell., p. 1.) |
Our author, however, employs this curious pronoun in a way quite peculiar to himself, for he constantly joins it to a pronoun or a verb,[[28]] and the compound was at first rather perplexing. Hes = he + is, he, them; wes = we + is, we, them;[[29]] caldes, called them; dedis, did (placed) them; settes, set them; wroutis, wrought them, etc.
"Alle hes hadde wið migte bi-geten."[[30]]—(Gen. and Ex., l. [911], p. 26.)
"Vndelt heſ leide quor-so heſ tok."[[31]]—(Ibid., l. [943], p. 27.)
"Ðe culuer haueð costes gode,
alle wes ogen to hauen in mode."[[32]]—(O.E. Miscell., p. 25.)
"Bala two childre bar bi him,
Rachel caldes dan(.) neptalim;
And zelfa two sunes him ber,
Lia calde is(.) Gad(.) and asser."[[33]]—(Gen. and Ex., l. [1700], p. 49.)
"ðe tabernacle he dedis in."[[34]]—(Ibid., l. [3830], p. 109.)
"He settes in ðe firmament."[[35]]—(Ibid., l. [135], p. 5.)
In the Kentish Ayenbite of 1340 he never coalesces with hise (them), e.g.:—
"He (the devil) is lyeȝere and vader of leazinges, ase he þet made þe verste leazinge, and yet he hise makeþ and tekþ eche daye."—(Ayenbite of Inwyt, p. 47.)
(He is a liar and the father of leasings, as he that made the first leasing, and yet he them, i.e. lies, maketh and teacheth each day.)
In Old Kentish Sermons (Old Eng. Miscell p. 28) has = ha + es = he them.
III. The pronoun he, they (Southern hii, heo; Northumbrian thay). Orm uses þeȝȝ, as well as þeȝȝer (their), þeȝȝm (them).[[36]]
IV. hine, hin, in = him. This form occurs as late as 1340, and still exists under the form en, un, in the modern dialects of the South of England, but is not employed by Orm; nor do we find any traces of whan (whom), another very common example of the -n accusative inflection, either in the Ormulum or the present work.
V. The substitution of n for a vowel-ending in nouns. Dr Guest has noticed this peculiarity, but he confines this substitution to the nominative case of nouns of the n declension,[[37]] and to the definite form of the adjective, which has, no doubt, given rise to the O.E. himseluen, etc., bothen (both), as well as, perhaps, to ouren (ours), heren (theirs), etc.
In the present poem, however, the n seems added to the vowel-ending of all cases except the possessive, in order to rhyme with a verb in the infinitive, a passive participle, or an adverb terminating in -en, and is not always limited to nouns of the -n declension, but represents in A.S. an a or e: 'on boken,'[[38]] on book, l. [4]; 'on soðe-sagen,' on sooth-saw, l. [14]; meten, (acc.) meat, l. [2255], (nom.) [2079]; sunen, (nom.) son, l. [1656]; 'of luuen,' of love, [635]; 'after ðe wunen' (after the custom), l. [688]; steden, (nom.) place, [1114]; 'for on-sagen,' for reproach, [2045]; wliten, (nom.) face, [3614], (acc.) [2289]; 'wið answeren,' in answer, [2673]; bileuen, (acc.) remainder, [3154]; uuerslagen, (acc.) lintel, [3155].
Dr Guest considers this curious nunnation to be a Northern peculiarity, but as we do not meet with it (as far as I know) in any Northumbrian work, his statement is rather doubtful. On the other hand, it is well known that the plurals bretheren (broðeren[[39]] in Shoreham), calveren[[40]] (calves), children,[[41]] doren (doors),[[42]] eyren (eggs),[[43]] honden (hands),[[44]] kine,[[45]] lambren (lambs),[[46]] soulen (souls)—very common forms in the Southern dialects in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries—are examples of the substitution of n for, or in addition to, the vowel-ending, and were unknown in the Northern dialect.
The Southern dialect could drop or retain, at pleasure, the n final in the past participles, the preterite plurals, and infinitive mood of verbs.
VI. A very small Norse element in the vocabulary.
The only words of undoubtedly Norse element that occur in the present poem, and were unknown to Southern English, are—fro (from), ille (bad), for-sweðen (to burn), flitten (to remove), laðe (barn), lowe (flame), mirk (dark), ransaken (to search), swaðe (flame), til (to), uglike (horrible), werre (worse).[[47]]
The Ormulum, being more Northern, contains a larger number of words that must be referred to one of the Scandinavian idioms:[[48]]—afell (strength), afledd (begotten), beȝȝsc (bitter), *blunnt (blunt, dull), bracc (noise), *braþ (angry), *braþþe (anger), *brodd (shoot), brodden (to sprout), broþþfall (fit), *bun (ready, bound), *clake (accusation), *croc (device), *derf (bold), *dill (sluggish), *eggenn (to urge, egg on), *egginng (urging), *ettle, *flittenn (to remove, flit), *flitting (change, removal), *forrgart (opposed, condemned), *forrgloppned (disturbed with fear, astonishment), *gate (way), gowesst (watchest), *haȝherr (dexterous), haȝherleȝȝc (skill), *haȝherrlike (fitly), hof (moderation), hofelæs (immoderately), *ille (bad), *immess (variously), *kinndlenn (to kindle), *lasst (crime, fault), leȝhe (hire, pay), *leȝȝtenn (O.E. layte, inquire, seek), o-loft (aloft), *loȝhe (fire), *mune (must, will), naþe (grace), nowwt (cattle, O.N. naut; the Southern form is neet, nete, A.S. neát), *ploh (plough), *radd (afraid), *ros (praise), *rosen (to boast), *rosinng (boast), rowwst (voice), *scaldess (poets, O.E. scald, a great talker, boaster, E. scold), *sit (pain), *sket (quickly), *skirpeþþ (rejecteth), *sloþ (track, path), smikerr (beautiful, Eng. smug), sowwþess (sheep), stoffnedd (generated, O.E. stoven, trunk, stem), *summ (as), *till (to), *tór (hard, difficult), *trigg (true), uppbrixle (object of reproach, O.E. brixle, reproach), usell (wretched), *wand (rod), *wandraþ, O.E. wandreth (trouble), *werre (worse).
As most, if not all, of the words in the foregoing list are not found in works written in the Southern dialect,—so far as we at present know them—we may reasonably suppose that they indicate fairly the Danish element in the English literature of the 12th and 13th centuries. In the Northumbrian, and the West, and East-Midland productions of a century later this element prevails to a much larger extent, and Herbert Coleridge's list of such words may be largely increased (Phil. Soc. Trans., 1859, p. 26-30).