[418] For Isidorus Hispalensis, see Antonio, Bib. Vet., Lib. V. capp. iii., iv.; and Castro, Bib. Esp., Tom. II. pp. 293-344. I judge Isidore’s Latinity chiefly from his “Etymologiarum Libri XX.,” and his “De Summo Bono, Libri III.,” fol., 1483, lit. Goth. No doubt, there are many words in Isidore of Seville, that are not of classical authority, some of which he marks as such, and others not; but, on the whole, his Latinity is respectable. Among the corrupt words he uses are a few that are curious, because they have descended into the modern Castilian; such as, “astrosus, ab astro dictus, quasi malo sidere natus,” (Etymol., 1483, fol. 50. a,) which appears in the present astroso, the familiar term for unhappy, disastrous, and permitted by the Spanish Academy;—cortina, of which Isidore says, “Cortinæ sunt aulæa, id est, vela de pellibus, qualia in Exodo leguntur,” (Etym., f. 97. b,) which appears in the modern Spanish cortina, for curtain;—”camisias vocamus, quod in his dormimus in camis,” (Etym., f. 96. b,) which last word, cama, is explained afterwards to be “lectus brevis et circa terram,” (Etym., f. 101. a,) and both of which are now Spanish, camisa being the proper word for shirt, and cama for bed;—”mantum Hispani vocant quod manus tegat tantum, est enim brevis amictus,” (Etym., f. 97. a,) which is the Spanish manto;—and so on with a few others. They are, however, only curious as corrupted Latin words, which happened to continue in use, till the modern Spanish arose several centuries later.
[419] See Eichhorn’s Cultur, Band II. pp. 472, etc.;—or, for more ample accounts, Antonio, Bib. Vet., Lib. V. and VI.; and Castro, Bib. Esp., Tom. II.
[420] Gibbon, Chap. XXX.
[421] Lib. V. c. 1.
[422] Mariana, Lib. V. c. 2.
[423] Gibbon, Chap. XXXVII.; an article in the Edinburgh Review, Vol. XXXI., on the Gothic Laws of Spain; and Depping, Tom. II. pp. 217, etc.
[424] In the earliest Gothic that remains to us, (the Gospels of Ulfilas, circa A. D. 370,) there is no indefinite article; and the definite does not always occur where it is used in the original Greek, from which, it is worthy of notice, the venerable Bishop made his version, and not from the Latin. But there is no reason, I think, to suppose that the articles of both sorts were not used by the Goths, as well as by the other Northern tribes, in the fifth century, as they have been ever since. See Ulfilas, Gothische Bibelübersetzung, ed. Zahn, 1805, 4to, and, especially, Einleitung, pp. 28-37.
[425] Raynouard, Troubadours, Tom. I. pp. 39, 43, 48, etc., and Diez, Grammatik der Romanischen Sprachen, 1838, 8vo, Band II. pp. 13, 14, 98-100, 144, 145.
[426] Raynouard, Troubadours, Tom. I. pp. 76-85.
[427] See, on the whole of this subject,—the formation of the modern dialects of the South of Europe,—the excellent “Grammatik der Romanischen Sprachen von Fried. Diez,” Bonn, 1836-38, 2 vols. 8vo. For examples of corruptions of the Spanish language, such as are above referred to, take the following:—Frates, orate pro nos, instead of Fratres, orate pro nobis;—Sedeat segregatus a corpus et sanguis Domini, instead of corpore et sanguine. (Marina, Ensayo, p. 22, note, in Memorias de la Academia de la Hist., Tom. IV.) The changes in spelling are innumerable, but are less to be trusted as proofs of change in the language, because they may have arisen from the carelessness or ignorance of individual copyists. Specimens of every sort of them may be found in the “Coleccion de Cédulas,” etc., referred to in Vol. I. p. 47, note, and in the “Coleccion de Fueros Municipales,” by Don Tomas Muñoz y Romero, Madrid, 1847, fol., Tom. I.