Furthermore, its grammatical forms lacked
variety and, while it abounded in monosyllabic words, it was short
of the much-resounding polysyllabic words, so that a rhythmical
grace was not so inevitable as in Latin or Greek.
variety and, while it abounded in monosyllabic words, it was short
of the much-resounding polysyllabic words, so that a rhythmical
grace was not so inevitable as in Latin or Greek.
Cambridge History of English Literature - 1908 - v03
'
A satirical effect might be obtained by onomatopoeic reduplication
such as 'rif-raf,' 'tag-rag' and 'hugger-mugger,' though this
formation, being crude and mechanical, failed to maintain a
literary rank. A word like 'find-fault' would be coined with an
eye to alliterative effect, 'gravel-blind' with a view to a play upon
the word 'sand-blind' (i. e. sam-blind); while other coinages, like
‘ablesse' and `idlesse,' 'goddise' (deity) and 'grandity,' 'mobocracy'
'fathership,' 'foehood,''praecel' (excel) and "Turkishness' (bar-
barism), though they represent a blending of material, intelligible
then and now, were rendered unnecessary by forms otherwise con-
structed, which, in some way or other, have maintained themselves.
Then, again, literary influences at work on the elements of the
native vocabulary often resulted in the formation of expressions
and phrases to which their authors, indirectly, gave a wide currency
and a permanent value. Many of them were to enter into daily
conversation, while their innate beauty still renders them fit for
the highest literary usage. The main sources of this influence
were the works of Spenser and Shakespeare, and the English
Bible. From Spenser, we get such forms as 'elfin,''Braggadochio,
'blatant,' 'derring-do' and 'squire oi dames’; from Shakespeare,
such expressions as 'benedict,' 'the undiscovered country,' 'the
primrose path,''single blessedness,''to die by inches,''to eat the
leek,''this working-day world' and 'coign of vantage'; while from
the English Bible come the forms, ‘loving-kindness,' “heavy-laden,'
'peacemaker,' 'scapegoat,''shibboleth,' 'mammon,' 'Babel' and
'helpmeet, as well as the phrases, the fat of the land,' 'the
6
2
>
6
>
9
6
>
## p. 456 (#478) ############################################
456 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
eleventh hour,' the shadow of death,' a soft answer' and 'a labour
of love'l. Many of these expressions have attained the dignity of
unidentified quotations, but, nevertheless, they are contributions
to the growth of the language, and, as such, are possessed of
as much significance as separate additions to the vocabulary.
While these changes, due, largely, to external influences, were
taking place in the vocabulary, the language was also undergoing
further changes in its grammatical structure, its syntax and its
pronunciation, such modifications being due to those internal
influences continually at work upon a living language.
In the first place, it is only natural to find that, while Old
English inflections had, for the most part, been levelled, traces of
earlier constructions still remained, and in larger quantity than at
a later date. Disregarding archaic forms such as 'perishen' (they
perish) and ‘killen' (they kill), which appear in Pericles as obsolete
expressions, we find other constructions, which, while they preserve
something of the archaic, are still legitimate survivals. For
instance, the adverbial form ‘moe' is distinguished from the
adjectival ‘more,' the one indicating ‘more in number,' the other,
'greater in size. ' 'Can' and 'may’are still capable of being used in
their earlier senses? As in Old English, a verb of motion is some-
times omitted after will’and ‘shall,' 'must' and 'be,' while the old
imperative is still in use in the expressions go we,' 'praise ye the
Lord,' though periphrastic forms like ‘let us go' are far more
general. The subjunctive is still used in principal sentences to
.
express a wish, also in conditional and concessive clauses, and in
temporal clauses introduced by 'ere,' or 'before. ' But already
this use is obsolete in the spoken language, and, as a result, its
appearance in literary English is somewhat irregular.
The pronominal inflections, as in modern English, are, for the
most part, retained, owing to the monosyllabic character of the
words. The -8 of the old genitive, of course, survived, though the
modern apostrophe was not employed as yet. With this inflection
is found, occasionally, the older word-order, as in ‘Yorick's skull the
king's jester. ' This construction, owing to the uninflected character
of the word in apposition, in this case 'jester,' involved a certain
ambiguity, which had been wanting in Old English, and the idiom,
consequently, was not destined to survive. Of still greater interest,
however, is the use of his,' instead of the genitive -8, in phrases
like 'Sejanus his Fall,' 'Purchas his Pilgrimage,' 'Christ His sake'
1 See Bradley's Making of English, ch. vi.
2 Cf. they can well on horseback' and 'I muy (can) never believe. '
6
9
6
## p. 457 (#479) ############################################
Results of Loss of Inflections
457
and 'Pompey his preparation. This construction, which appears, at
first sight, to be a popular adaptation of the regular suffix -8,
represents, in point of fact, the survival of an idiom found in Old
English and other Germanic languages, and which can be traced in
Middle English, in such phrases as 'Bevis is hed. ' It was, doubt-
less, a form which had come down in colloquial speech, for its
early use in literature is only occasional, and it still occurs in
modern dialectal and colloquial expressions. Its more extended use
in Elizabethan English points to the close connection which then
existed between the spoken and literary languages. Another
survival of an Old English form was that of participles in -ed,
adjectival in their force and derived from nouns. In Old English,
there had occurred occasional words such as "hoferede' (hunch-
backed), and, in Elizabethan times, the manufacture of such forms
as 'high-minded' and 'barefaced’ proceeded apace and added
considerably to the power of expression.
The earlier loss of inflections had begun by this date, however,
to produce certain marked effects. What had once been a
synthetic language had now become analytic, and it was in process
of developing its expression under the new conditions. The im-
mediate result was a vast number of experiments which often led
to confused expressions, more especially as the brevity and concise-
ness formerly obtained with inflectional aids was still sought. Thus,
ellipses were frequent, and almost any word that could be supplied
from the context might be omitted. Intransitive verbs were used
as transitive! , ordinary verbs as causal”, and the infinitive was used
with the utmost freedom, for it had to represent active, passive and
gerundial constructions.
But if the loss of native inflections resulted in a certain
freedom of expression, together with a corresponding amount of
vagueness and confusion, it also led to some new and permanent
usages. In consequence of the fact that final -e had now become
mute, many of the distinctions formerly effected by that suffix
were levelled, and the various parts of speech became inter-
changeable, as in modern English. Thus, adjectives could be used
as adverbs, or, again, as nouns, and nouns could be used as verbs 6.
The old grammatical gender had, moreover, been lost, together
1 Cf. depart the field,' moralise this spectacle. '
3 Cf. "to fear (to terrify) the valiant. '
3 Cf. “he is to teach' (=he is to be taught) : 'why blame you me to love you' (for.
loving you).
6
6
6
* Cf. "to run fast,' 'to rage fierce. ' 5 Cf. the good,''the just. '
6 Cf. to man,' 'to paper. '
.
)
## p. 458 (#480) ############################################
458 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
with the noun-suffixes upon which it was based, and, therefore, in
addition to the modern gender based upon sex, poetic gender
became possible, which meant, from the literary point of view, a
more lively presentment of various phenomena. Flectionless
words permitted any gender to be assigned to them, according to
the imagination of the writer ; thus, words which suggested
strength, as, for instance, 'sun,' 'death,''war' and 'winter,' could
be treated as masculine, while words like 'patience,' 'beauty,'
church,' 'ship' and 'nightingale,' with more gentle associations,
could be regarded as feminine. Although the basis of this personi-
fication was mainly psychological in character, it was sometimes
influenced by other considerations. In some cases, old mytho-
logical notions directed the choice, as when 'Love' is treated as
masculine, 'Fortune'as feminine. Ben Jonson, on the other hand,
was wont to consider the etymology of the word. But, whatever
the method of assigning poetic gender, it was a literary device that
only became possible in consequence of levelled inflections?
Further changes, due, very largely, to the same cause, were the
development of the passive forms characteristic of modern English,
and of personal constructions in preference to impersonal. In older
English, the passive had been rare, the usual form having been the
active with the indefinite nominative 'man' (Mid. Eng. 'me') .
But, with the loss of inflections in the oblique cases of nouns, an
earlier object was easily taken as the new subject; and, since the
indefinite 'man' had become obsolete, and was not yet replaced
by the modern form 'one,' the verb naturally assumed a passive
form. The result of this change was to render the interest personal
throughout; the psychological and the grammatical subjects fell
together and the expression gained in directness.
Similarly, the number of impersonal verbs, which had figured
largely in earlier constructions, became, during this period, con-
siderably reduced. This was due, in part, to the levelling of case-
forms in nouns; for an impersonal construction with an uninflected
dative would thus readily pass into a personal construction with a
direct nominatives. Other causes, no doubt, contributed to this
change, one being the influence of analogy exercised by the
numerous personal constructions upon the much rarer forms
of an impersonal kind; and this influence would be inevitable
1 See Franz, Shakespeare-Grammatik, $ 50.
9 Cf. his brofor Horsan man ofsloh' (his brother Horsa was slain), O. E. Chron. 455.
3 Thus, the quarto reading of Richard III, Act II, sc. 2. 99 is that it please your
lordship,' while, in the folio, it stands, 'that your lordship please to ask. ' See Franz,
Shakespeare-Grammatik, $ 473.
6
## p. 459 (#481) ############################################
Influences on Elizabethan Idiom
459
in a sentence such as This aunswer Alexander both lyked and
rewarded,' where the impersonal form 'lyked' is linked with a verb
of the personal type.
The classical influence upon Elizabethan idiom was but slight,
for grammars, unlike vocabularies, never mix: the borrowing of
grammatical forms on any considerable scale would involve a
change in the method of thought, which is an inconceivable step
in the history of any language. Occasional traces of classical idiom,
of course, exist in Elizabethan literary English. The Latin use of
quin is seen in such a sentence as 'I do not deny but,' and the Latin
participial construction in the phrase 'upon occasion offered. ' Com-
paratives are sometimes used where no comparison is intended, as
in 'a plainer (rather plain) sort,' while a phrase such as of all
others? the greatest' (i. e. the greatest of all) is, plainly, a Grecism.
Individual authors, such as Hooker, will, sometimes, be found to
omit auxiliary forms, or to give to certain emphatic words a
Latinised importance of position. But, in general, attempts to
convey Latin idiom into Elizabethan English were few, and, where
they existed, they added no new grace. Such attempts were, in-
deed, foredoomed to failure, for their object was to imitate, in a
language almost stripped of inflections, certain constructions which,
in their original language, had depended upon inflections as aids to
clearness. And this was the reason why the oratio obliqua was a
dangerous experiment, while the long Latin sentence, with its
involved relative clauses, simply tended to create a confused and
inelegant method of expression.
With regard to Elizabethan pronunciation, certain differences,
as compared with the sound-values of earlier and later times, may,
perhaps, be noted. By 1600, Caxton's pronunciation had undergone
certain changes, but it has also to be remembered that the sound of
a given word might vary even within one and the same period, and
this was due not only to the existence of doublets and dialectal
variants at an earlier date, but, also, to the survival of sounds
which were becoming archaic alongside their later developments.
The Middle English open ē (seen in ‘leaf' and 'heat') retained the
fifteenth century sound (heard in pail'), which prevailed down to
the eighteenth century, but it was frequently shortened in closed
syllables, particularly before dentals, though no change was made
in the orthography (cf. 'bread' and 'death '). The Middle English
close ē (seen in 'deep' and 'bleed') also retained its fifteenth century
sound (heard in 'pail'), but, at the same time, it was adopting a more
modern value, namely, the sound heard in 'peel': before r, however,
1 See Bacon's Essays, ed. West, A. S. , p. 293.
6
## p. 460 (#482) ############################################
460 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
6
6
an open value might still be retained (cf. ‘hear'). In the spellings
'indide' (indeed), 'quin' (queen), 'bin' (been), the classical i
stands for this later sound of the Middle English close e Middle
English open 7 (seen in 'goad' and 'stone') also retained its
fifteenth century value (heard in 'pole '), and, to this, the word
'one' is no exception. The modern pronunciation of this word, as
if with an initial w, was certainly not usual in Elizabethan times,
and this is plainly suggested by such forms as 'such an one,'
'th'one,' and, also, by Shakespeare's rime of 'one' with "Scone. '
It seems, however, to have been general in the seventeenth century
and may have been a provincialism in the sixteenth: the form 'whole-
some,' with the w, appears in 1550. The Middle English close 7
(seen in 'doom'), while it retained its fifteenth century sound
ard in 'pole'), also approximated its modern value (heard in
'pool'); and, about this date, Middle English i and ū (ou) seem to
have developed diphthongal values. The earlier value 7 (heard in
he') moves on towards the modern sound heard in while'; and,
similarly, the earlier sound of ū (heard in ‘boot') approximated
the modern diphthongal value heard in ‘house'?
With regard to consonants, the differences between Elizabethan
and modern pronunciation are comparatively slight. It would
appear that re was strongly trilled, for 'fire' and 'bire' appear in
Shakespeare as dissyllabic, 'Henry' and 'angry' as trisyllabic; and,
again, the pronunciation of gh (as f) seems to have been more
frequent than at a later date, when, however, we have it in words
such as “laugh' and 'draught. ' In Chapman, 'wrought' and
taught' appear with this sound-value; in Shakespeare, after' is
found riming with daughter's,
The task of ascertaining these sixteenth century sound-values
was one of some difficulty, owing to the fact that Caxton's spelling
was no longer capable of representing any changes in pronunciation.
Fortunately, however, these values were preserved as a result of a
series of attempts made by certain scholars * to denote the current
pronunciation with the help of phonetic symbols. The works
proceeded from various motives: one aimed at amending English
orthography, another at teaching the pronunciation of Greek; but,
3
1 Letters of Queen Elizabeth (Ellis's collection 1553—76).
Further differences between Elizabethan and modern pronunciation are suggested
by the rimes 'all,' 'shall’; “racks,' takes'; 'steel,' 'well'; 'concert,' 'right'; 'join,'
‘shine'; 'seas,' 'press’; although rimes are not invariably correct tests of pro-
nunciation.
3 The Taming of the Shrew, Act I, so. 1. 244-5.
* See bibliography.
## p. 461 (#483) ############################################
Elizabethan English as a Literary Medium 461
whatever their objects, their phonetic systems have preserved
sixteenth century sound-values. The most important of these
contributions was due to William Salesbury, who, in 1547, compiled
A Dictionary of Englishe and Welshe, and, subsequently, wrote a
tract on the pronunciation of Welsh (1567). In the dictionary, he
had transcribed into Welsh characters some 150 English words;
and, since he had clearly denoted in his tract the sound-values of
Welsh letters, the pronunciation of the transliterated English
words may thus be easily inferred.
Some of the main points in the development of the language
during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries have now been touched
upon: namely, the evolution and development of a standard literary
dialect, the rapid extension of the vocabulary and the completion
of the change from an inflected to an uninflected character. It
now remains to attempt an estimate of Elizabethan English as a
literary medium, so far as such an estimate is possible.
In the first place, the language, at this date, was in an eminently
plastic condition, which made the utmost freedom of expression
possible. Men wrote very much as they spoke; the literary
language has probably never stood nearer to the colloquial, and,
consequently, it was peculiarly adapted to express the exuberant
thought and feeling of the age.
But, while this freedom gave to Elizabethan utterance a
naturalness and a force which have never been surpassed, it also
led to numerous structural anomalies, frequent and even natural
in ordinary speech. Literary expression was now less hampered
than ever by inflectional considerations, and writers, not cognisant
as yet of the logic which was to underlie the new grammar,
indulged in expressions which set rules of concord at defiance.
Thus, the form of a verb might be determined by the character of
the nearest substantive, or two constructions might be confused
and merged into one: almost any arrangement seemed justified,
provided the sense were reasonably well conveyed. And this
irregularity, the inevitable concomitant of Elizabethan freedom
of expression, is, also, one of its disabilities, for it introduced an
element of vagueness and ambiguity into contemporary writing.
But such irregularity was not wholly due to the influence of
colloquial speech: it could arise out of the undeveloped condition
of the grammatical machinery then in existence. The conjunctions
often gave but slight indications of the relation of the sentences
which they joined: a word like 'but' would have to convey
Dumerous meanings and would be represented in modern English
## p. 462 (#484) ############################################
462 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
by 'if not,' 'except,' 'when,' 'that,''without that. Prepositions,
too, were used in a manner far from definite: 'in' and 'on,' 'of'
and 'from,' 'with' and 'by,' were yet to be distinguished, while
'for' would have to do duty for the phrases 'as regards,' 'in spite
of,' 'for want of.
' Then, again, the subjective and objective
genitives were not clearly distinguished ; a phrase like your
injuries' had to stand for either, and the same indefiniteness
occurs in such phrases as 'distressful bread' (bread hardly-won)
and 'feeling sorrows' (sorrows deeply felt). The context, in each
case, had to correct what was ambiguous in the expression and to
supply its actual meaning.
Some efforts, were, of course, made to obtain greater clearness
and precision, for the uninflected language was beginning to work
out its expression under the new conditions. For instance, the
neuter form 'its,' which aimed at avoiding the confusion caused by
the older use of ‘his,' for both masculine and neuter, occurs as
early as 1598, though it was not until the second half of the
seventeenth century that it was fully recognised. The suffix 'self'
was used more frequently to indicate reflexives, and a pronoun
would often be inserted to help out an expression. But, generally
speaking, clearness was not always the first aim, and, as often as
not, writers were content with an expression which sacrificed pre-
cision to brevity and pregnancy of utterance.
With all its tendencies to run into confused expression,
Elizabethan English was, however, pre-eminently the language
of feeling, and it was such in virtue of its concrete and pictur-
esque character and its various devices for increasing vividness
of presentment. In the first place, it contained precisely the material
for expressing thought with a concreteness and a force not since
possible. Comparatively poor in abstract and learned words,
though these were being rapidly acquired, it abounded in words
which had a physical signification, and which conveyed their meaning
with splendid strength and simplicity. And this accounts for the
felicitous diction of the Bible translations. The Hebrew narratives
were made up of simple concrete terms and objective facts, and
the English of that time, from its very constitution, reproduced
these elements with a success that would have been impossible for
the more highly developed idiom of later times. Between the
Hebrew idiom and that of the Elizabethan, in short, there existed
certain clear affinities, which Tindale had fully appreciated.
Then, again, this absence of general and abstract terms gave to
Elizabethan English a picturesqueness all its own. The description
a
## p. 463 (#485) ############################################
6
a
6
Its Musical Resources 463
of the Psalmist's despair as a 'sinking in deep mire,' or a'coming
into deep waters,' is paralleled in character on almost every page
of Elizabethan work; and it was this abundance of figurative
language which favoured Euphuism, and which constituted something
of the later charms of Fuller and Sir Thomas Browne. Nor can the
effect of a number of picturesque intensives be overlooked, as
seen in the phrases 'clean starved,' 'passing strange,' shrewdly
vexed' and 'to strike home. The discarding of these intensives
and the substitution of eighteenth century forms like 'vastly'
and 'prodigiously,' and the nineteenth century'very' and 'quite,'
have resulted in a distinct loss of vigour and colour? .
Further, the Elizabethan writer had at his command certain
means for heightening the emotional character of a passage and
for increasing the vividness of presentment. Thus, the dis-
criminating use of 'thou' and 'you' could depict a variety of
feeling in a way, and with a subtlety, no longer possible. 'You' was
the unimpassioned form which prevailed in ordinary speech among
the educated classes, whereas 'thou' could express numerous
emotions such as anger, contempt, familiarity, superiority, or love.
The ethical dative, too, added to the vividness of expression,
suggesting, as it did, the interest felt by either the speaker or
the hearer; while even the illogical double negatives and double
comparatives* were capable of producing a heightening effect in
the language of passion.
The freedom and brevity, the concrete and picturesque character,
of Elizabethan English, were, therefore, among the qualities which
rendered it an effective medium of literary thought. At the same
time, the language is seen to lend itself easily to rhythnical and
harmonious expression, and it is not improbable that the sixteenth
century translators of the Bible were among the first to realise
with any adequacy the musical resources of the vernacular, they
themselves having been inspired by the harmonies of their Latin
models. The language of the Vulgate was certainly familiar to
sixteenth century readers, and the translators must have worked
with its rhythm and its tones ringing in their ears; while the close
resemblance between the constructions and word-order of the
Latin text and those used in English would render it an easier
task to reproduce other qualities of that text. At all events, in
)
1 Cf. , also, the substitution of certainly,' 'indeed,' for 'i'faith,'. i'sooth,' iwis,'
certes. '
2 E. g. 'villain knock me this gate. ' 8 E. g. nor no further in sport neither. '
* E. g. 'more elder. '
6
## p. 464 (#486) ############################################
464 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
a
the Biblical translations and the liturgy of the sixteenth century
we find the broad vowels, the musical rhythm and the tones which
bad been the glory of the Vulgate: the English ear had become
attuned, for the first time, to the vocalic music of the vernacular.
Consonantal effects, which were still more characteristic of English,
had long been turned to account in the native alliteration.
For the purpose of working out these rhythmical effects and of
heightening the natural harmonies of the spoken language, certain
linguistic aids were available. In the unsettled state of the lan-
.
guage, there were certain variant forms, some of which were
obsolete, which could still be utilised in prose as well as in verse.
For instance, verbal forms in -eth (3rd pers. pres. sing. ) were seldom
used in ordinary speech; but, in a line like 'It blesseth him that gives
and him that takes,' both the archaic and the current forms appear,
to the improvement of the rhythm. Similarly, final -ed could be
pronounced or not according to the required rhythm, as in the line
'Thou changed and self-cover'd thing,' and these devices have since
remained with the poets. Then, again, the particle 'the could, if
necessary, be omitted in archaic fashion, for its modern definitive
character had not yet been assumed. Advantage might, also, be
taken of the unsettled state of the accent in Latin words, like
'complete' and 'extreme,' to accentuate such words in accordance
with metrical exigencies; while the unemphatic 'do,' though ob-
solescent at this date, might frequently help out the rhythm in
both verse and prose?
As regards its musical resources, however, Elizabethan English,
as well as later English, had certain marked limitations. It was a
language overloaded with consonants, many of them harsh and
dissonant in character; and it was the prevalence of consonantal
endings that made the language poor in rimes, as contrasted with
the Italian, which abounded in words with vowel terminations.
It also possessed a great abundance of half-pronounced vowels,
which were neither long nor short and which defeated the
attempts of the Areopagites to make the language run into
classical moulds. The choice of metrical forms, as a matter of
fact, was largely determined by the native method of accentua-
tion; the majority of words of more than one syllable developed,
naturally, a trochaic, iambic, or dactylic rhythm, and these were
the elements out of which the stately blank verse and the many
lyrical forms were built. Another inherent disability under which
6
6
1 E. g. 'Why should he stay, whom love doth press to go. ' See Franz, Shak. -Gram.
§ 444.
## p. 465 (#487) ############################################
Elizabethan and Modern English
465
Elizabethan English laboured was that its word-order was neces-
sarily more fixed, and, therefore, less elastic, than was the case
with the highly-inflected languages of antiquity, which required no
such rigidity of position.
Furthermore, its grammatical forms lacked
variety and, while it abounded in monosyllabic words, it was short
of the much-resounding polysyllabic words, so that a rhythmical
grace was not so inevitable as in Latin or Greek.
In the centuries which have followed the age of Elizabeth, the
language has undergone many changes, and these changes may be
roughly summarised, first, as the extension of the vocabulary to
keep pace with the ever-widening thought, and, secondly, as the
adaptation of the structure of the language to clearer and more
precise expression. In the course of time, the numerous national
activities, the pursuits of science and art, of commerce and politics,
have enriched its expression with their various terminologies.
Literal uses have become metaphorical, concrete terms, abstract;
many words have depreciated in meaning, and the line has been
drawn more rigidly between words literary and non-literary. There
has been in the language what Coleridge calls 'an instinct of
growth. . . working progressively to desynonymise those words of
originally the same meaning,' and this division of labour has enabled
the language to express finer shades of thought. The verbal con-
jugation has been enriched, the elements which made for vagueness
have been removed and in every way the language has adapted
itself to a scientific age, which requires, before all things, clear,
accurate and precise expression.
But Elizabethan English, alone among the earlier stages of our
language, still plays a part in modern intellectual life. Thanks to
the English Bible, the prayer-book and Shakespeare, it has never
become really obsolete. Its diction and its idioms are still familiar,
endeared and consecrated by sacred association. It yet remains the
inspiration of our noblest styles, for beyond its concrete strength,
its picturesque simplicity and its forceful directness, English expres-
sion cannot go. And so, in moments of exaltation the old phrases
are recalled, untainted by any mingling in the market place, and, with
their rich suggestiveness, they heighten the passion or beauty which
a more explicit idiom would destroy. Modern English is the fitting
medium of an age which leaves little unexplained; while Eliza-
bethan English stands for an age too hasty to analyse what it felt.
The one has the virtues of maturity, a logic, uncompromising and
clear: the other, a vigour and a felicity, the saving graces of youth.
E. L. III.
CH. XX.
30
## p. 466 (#488) ############################################
BIBLIOGRAPHIES
CHAPTER I
ENGLISHMEN AND THE CLASSICAL RENASCENCE
1
Allen, P. 8. Opus Epistolarum Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami denuo recogni.
tum et auctum. Vol. 1. Oxford, 1906.
Altmeyer, J. J. Les précurseurs de la Réforme aux Pays-bas. Brussels,
1886. [Vol. 1 deals with Erasmus. ]
Americi Vesputii Navigationes (appended to Cosmographiae Introductio).
St Dié, 1507.
Amiel, E. Un libre-penseur du xvime siècle: Érasme. Paris, 1889.
Bibliotheca Erasmiana : Répertoire des Euvres d'Érasme. Ghent, 1893.
Bibliographie des cuvres d'Érasme. Ghent, 1897.
Blomfield, R. A History of Renaissance architecture in England, 1500-1800.
2 vols. 1897.
Botfield, B. Prefaces to the first editions of the Greek and Roman Classics.
1861.
Brómond, H. Sir Thomas More. Trans. Child, H. 1904.
Bridgett, T. E. The life and writings of Sir Thomas More, Lord Chancellor
of England and Martyr under Henry VIII. 2nd ed. 1892.
Life of Blessed John Fisher. 1888.
Buchanan, George. Rudimenta grammatices T. Linacri ex Anglico sermone
in Latinum . . . G. B. Paris, 1533 (and later editions).
Buisson, F. Répertoire des ouvrages pédagogiques du xvime siècle. Paris,
1886.
Sébastien Castellion: Sa vie et son cuvre. 2 vols. Paris, 1892.
Burigny, Leveresque de. Vie d'Érasme. Paris, 1757.
Burrows, M. On Grocyn and Linacre. In Oxford Historical Society.
Collectanea, 11. 1890.
Caius, John (1510-73), refounder and master of Gonville Hall, Cambridge;
editor and translator of Galen. His Boke or Counseill against the
Disease commonly called the Sweate or Sweatyng Sicknesse 1552, in
English and in Latin, “is the classical account of that remarkable
epidemic': J. Bass Mullinger in D. of N. B. Works. Ed. Roberts, E. S.
Cambridge, 1912.
Cayley, Sir A. Memoirs of Sir Thomas More. 1808.
Colet, John. Daily Devotions, or the Christian's Morning and Evening
Sacrifice. 22nd ed. 1722. [=A righte fruitfull admonition concerning
the order of a good Christian man's life, 1534 ff. ]
Opus de Sacramentis Ecclesiae. Ed. Lupton, J. H. (also of the following
books). 1867.
Treatises on Hierarchies of Dionysius. 1869.
An Exposition of St Paul's Epistle to the Romans. 1873.
An Exposition of St Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians. 1874.
Letters to Radulphus on the Mosaic account of the Creation. . . . 1876.
## p. 467 (#489) ############################################
man,
Chapter 1
467
Conrthope, W. J. A History of English Poetry. Vol. 1, chap. v, The Early
Renaissance, and vol. 11, chap. 1, The Intellectual Conflict in Europe in the
Sixteenth Century: The Papacy, the Empire and the Nation: Catholicism
and Chivalry, etc. 1895, 1897.
Croke, Richard (1489? -1558), Cambridge scholar and pupil of Grocyn. For
his oration on behalf of Greek, when teaching in Cambridge, see J. Bass
Mullinger's University of Cambridge, vol. 1,527 ff.
Dorne, John. See Oxford Historical Society.
Drummond, R. B. Erasmus, his Life and Character as shown in his Corre-
spondence and Works. 2 vols. 1873.
Durand de Laur, H. Érasme, précurseur et initiateur de l'esprit moderne.
2 vols. Paris, 1872.
Einstein, L. The Italian Renaissance in England. New York, 1902.
Elyot, Sir Thomas. The Boke named the Governour devised by Sir T. E. ,
1531. Best edition by Croft, H. H. S. 1883.
A swete and devoute sermon of holy saynte Ciprian of the mortalitie of
The rules of a christian lyfe made by Picus, erle of Mirandula.
Both translated into englyshe by Syr Thomas Elyot, Knyghte. 1534.
Bibliotheca Eliotae- Eliotes (Latin and English] Dictionarie, by Cooper,
T. 1532, 1538, 1552 ff.
The Bankette of Sapience compyled by Syr T. Eliot, Knyghte, and
newly augmented with dyverse tytles and sentences. 1539.
The Image of Governance, compiled of the actes and sentences notable
of . . . Alexander Severus. 1540.
The Castel of Helth. 1534, 1539, 1541 ff.
Pasquil the Playne, a dialogue on talkativeness and silence. 1533;
Rome, c. 1552.
Of the Knowledge which maketh a Wise Man. 1533.
The Doctrine of Princes (trans. from Isocrates). 1534.
The Education . . . of Children (trans. from Plutarch). Before 1540.
Howe one may take profyte of his enmyes. After 1540.
The Defence of Good Women. 1545.
A Preservative agaynste Deth. 1545.
Emmerton, Ephraim. Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam. Heroes of the
Reformation Series. New York and London, 1899.
Erasmus, Desiderius. Opera omnia. Ed. Le Clerc. 10 vols.
A satirical effect might be obtained by onomatopoeic reduplication
such as 'rif-raf,' 'tag-rag' and 'hugger-mugger,' though this
formation, being crude and mechanical, failed to maintain a
literary rank. A word like 'find-fault' would be coined with an
eye to alliterative effect, 'gravel-blind' with a view to a play upon
the word 'sand-blind' (i. e. sam-blind); while other coinages, like
‘ablesse' and `idlesse,' 'goddise' (deity) and 'grandity,' 'mobocracy'
'fathership,' 'foehood,''praecel' (excel) and "Turkishness' (bar-
barism), though they represent a blending of material, intelligible
then and now, were rendered unnecessary by forms otherwise con-
structed, which, in some way or other, have maintained themselves.
Then, again, literary influences at work on the elements of the
native vocabulary often resulted in the formation of expressions
and phrases to which their authors, indirectly, gave a wide currency
and a permanent value. Many of them were to enter into daily
conversation, while their innate beauty still renders them fit for
the highest literary usage. The main sources of this influence
were the works of Spenser and Shakespeare, and the English
Bible. From Spenser, we get such forms as 'elfin,''Braggadochio,
'blatant,' 'derring-do' and 'squire oi dames’; from Shakespeare,
such expressions as 'benedict,' 'the undiscovered country,' 'the
primrose path,''single blessedness,''to die by inches,''to eat the
leek,''this working-day world' and 'coign of vantage'; while from
the English Bible come the forms, ‘loving-kindness,' “heavy-laden,'
'peacemaker,' 'scapegoat,''shibboleth,' 'mammon,' 'Babel' and
'helpmeet, as well as the phrases, the fat of the land,' 'the
6
2
>
6
>
9
6
>
## p. 456 (#478) ############################################
456 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
eleventh hour,' the shadow of death,' a soft answer' and 'a labour
of love'l. Many of these expressions have attained the dignity of
unidentified quotations, but, nevertheless, they are contributions
to the growth of the language, and, as such, are possessed of
as much significance as separate additions to the vocabulary.
While these changes, due, largely, to external influences, were
taking place in the vocabulary, the language was also undergoing
further changes in its grammatical structure, its syntax and its
pronunciation, such modifications being due to those internal
influences continually at work upon a living language.
In the first place, it is only natural to find that, while Old
English inflections had, for the most part, been levelled, traces of
earlier constructions still remained, and in larger quantity than at
a later date. Disregarding archaic forms such as 'perishen' (they
perish) and ‘killen' (they kill), which appear in Pericles as obsolete
expressions, we find other constructions, which, while they preserve
something of the archaic, are still legitimate survivals. For
instance, the adverbial form ‘moe' is distinguished from the
adjectival ‘more,' the one indicating ‘more in number,' the other,
'greater in size. ' 'Can' and 'may’are still capable of being used in
their earlier senses? As in Old English, a verb of motion is some-
times omitted after will’and ‘shall,' 'must' and 'be,' while the old
imperative is still in use in the expressions go we,' 'praise ye the
Lord,' though periphrastic forms like ‘let us go' are far more
general. The subjunctive is still used in principal sentences to
.
express a wish, also in conditional and concessive clauses, and in
temporal clauses introduced by 'ere,' or 'before. ' But already
this use is obsolete in the spoken language, and, as a result, its
appearance in literary English is somewhat irregular.
The pronominal inflections, as in modern English, are, for the
most part, retained, owing to the monosyllabic character of the
words. The -8 of the old genitive, of course, survived, though the
modern apostrophe was not employed as yet. With this inflection
is found, occasionally, the older word-order, as in ‘Yorick's skull the
king's jester. ' This construction, owing to the uninflected character
of the word in apposition, in this case 'jester,' involved a certain
ambiguity, which had been wanting in Old English, and the idiom,
consequently, was not destined to survive. Of still greater interest,
however, is the use of his,' instead of the genitive -8, in phrases
like 'Sejanus his Fall,' 'Purchas his Pilgrimage,' 'Christ His sake'
1 See Bradley's Making of English, ch. vi.
2 Cf. they can well on horseback' and 'I muy (can) never believe. '
6
9
6
## p. 457 (#479) ############################################
Results of Loss of Inflections
457
and 'Pompey his preparation. This construction, which appears, at
first sight, to be a popular adaptation of the regular suffix -8,
represents, in point of fact, the survival of an idiom found in Old
English and other Germanic languages, and which can be traced in
Middle English, in such phrases as 'Bevis is hed. ' It was, doubt-
less, a form which had come down in colloquial speech, for its
early use in literature is only occasional, and it still occurs in
modern dialectal and colloquial expressions. Its more extended use
in Elizabethan English points to the close connection which then
existed between the spoken and literary languages. Another
survival of an Old English form was that of participles in -ed,
adjectival in their force and derived from nouns. In Old English,
there had occurred occasional words such as "hoferede' (hunch-
backed), and, in Elizabethan times, the manufacture of such forms
as 'high-minded' and 'barefaced’ proceeded apace and added
considerably to the power of expression.
The earlier loss of inflections had begun by this date, however,
to produce certain marked effects. What had once been a
synthetic language had now become analytic, and it was in process
of developing its expression under the new conditions. The im-
mediate result was a vast number of experiments which often led
to confused expressions, more especially as the brevity and concise-
ness formerly obtained with inflectional aids was still sought. Thus,
ellipses were frequent, and almost any word that could be supplied
from the context might be omitted. Intransitive verbs were used
as transitive! , ordinary verbs as causal”, and the infinitive was used
with the utmost freedom, for it had to represent active, passive and
gerundial constructions.
But if the loss of native inflections resulted in a certain
freedom of expression, together with a corresponding amount of
vagueness and confusion, it also led to some new and permanent
usages. In consequence of the fact that final -e had now become
mute, many of the distinctions formerly effected by that suffix
were levelled, and the various parts of speech became inter-
changeable, as in modern English. Thus, adjectives could be used
as adverbs, or, again, as nouns, and nouns could be used as verbs 6.
The old grammatical gender had, moreover, been lost, together
1 Cf. depart the field,' moralise this spectacle. '
3 Cf. "to fear (to terrify) the valiant. '
3 Cf. “he is to teach' (=he is to be taught) : 'why blame you me to love you' (for.
loving you).
6
6
6
* Cf. "to run fast,' 'to rage fierce. ' 5 Cf. the good,''the just. '
6 Cf. to man,' 'to paper. '
.
)
## p. 458 (#480) ############################################
458 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
with the noun-suffixes upon which it was based, and, therefore, in
addition to the modern gender based upon sex, poetic gender
became possible, which meant, from the literary point of view, a
more lively presentment of various phenomena. Flectionless
words permitted any gender to be assigned to them, according to
the imagination of the writer ; thus, words which suggested
strength, as, for instance, 'sun,' 'death,''war' and 'winter,' could
be treated as masculine, while words like 'patience,' 'beauty,'
church,' 'ship' and 'nightingale,' with more gentle associations,
could be regarded as feminine. Although the basis of this personi-
fication was mainly psychological in character, it was sometimes
influenced by other considerations. In some cases, old mytho-
logical notions directed the choice, as when 'Love' is treated as
masculine, 'Fortune'as feminine. Ben Jonson, on the other hand,
was wont to consider the etymology of the word. But, whatever
the method of assigning poetic gender, it was a literary device that
only became possible in consequence of levelled inflections?
Further changes, due, very largely, to the same cause, were the
development of the passive forms characteristic of modern English,
and of personal constructions in preference to impersonal. In older
English, the passive had been rare, the usual form having been the
active with the indefinite nominative 'man' (Mid. Eng. 'me') .
But, with the loss of inflections in the oblique cases of nouns, an
earlier object was easily taken as the new subject; and, since the
indefinite 'man' had become obsolete, and was not yet replaced
by the modern form 'one,' the verb naturally assumed a passive
form. The result of this change was to render the interest personal
throughout; the psychological and the grammatical subjects fell
together and the expression gained in directness.
Similarly, the number of impersonal verbs, which had figured
largely in earlier constructions, became, during this period, con-
siderably reduced. This was due, in part, to the levelling of case-
forms in nouns; for an impersonal construction with an uninflected
dative would thus readily pass into a personal construction with a
direct nominatives. Other causes, no doubt, contributed to this
change, one being the influence of analogy exercised by the
numerous personal constructions upon the much rarer forms
of an impersonal kind; and this influence would be inevitable
1 See Franz, Shakespeare-Grammatik, $ 50.
9 Cf. his brofor Horsan man ofsloh' (his brother Horsa was slain), O. E. Chron. 455.
3 Thus, the quarto reading of Richard III, Act II, sc. 2. 99 is that it please your
lordship,' while, in the folio, it stands, 'that your lordship please to ask. ' See Franz,
Shakespeare-Grammatik, $ 473.
6
## p. 459 (#481) ############################################
Influences on Elizabethan Idiom
459
in a sentence such as This aunswer Alexander both lyked and
rewarded,' where the impersonal form 'lyked' is linked with a verb
of the personal type.
The classical influence upon Elizabethan idiom was but slight,
for grammars, unlike vocabularies, never mix: the borrowing of
grammatical forms on any considerable scale would involve a
change in the method of thought, which is an inconceivable step
in the history of any language. Occasional traces of classical idiom,
of course, exist in Elizabethan literary English. The Latin use of
quin is seen in such a sentence as 'I do not deny but,' and the Latin
participial construction in the phrase 'upon occasion offered. ' Com-
paratives are sometimes used where no comparison is intended, as
in 'a plainer (rather plain) sort,' while a phrase such as of all
others? the greatest' (i. e. the greatest of all) is, plainly, a Grecism.
Individual authors, such as Hooker, will, sometimes, be found to
omit auxiliary forms, or to give to certain emphatic words a
Latinised importance of position. But, in general, attempts to
convey Latin idiom into Elizabethan English were few, and, where
they existed, they added no new grace. Such attempts were, in-
deed, foredoomed to failure, for their object was to imitate, in a
language almost stripped of inflections, certain constructions which,
in their original language, had depended upon inflections as aids to
clearness. And this was the reason why the oratio obliqua was a
dangerous experiment, while the long Latin sentence, with its
involved relative clauses, simply tended to create a confused and
inelegant method of expression.
With regard to Elizabethan pronunciation, certain differences,
as compared with the sound-values of earlier and later times, may,
perhaps, be noted. By 1600, Caxton's pronunciation had undergone
certain changes, but it has also to be remembered that the sound of
a given word might vary even within one and the same period, and
this was due not only to the existence of doublets and dialectal
variants at an earlier date, but, also, to the survival of sounds
which were becoming archaic alongside their later developments.
The Middle English open ē (seen in ‘leaf' and 'heat') retained the
fifteenth century sound (heard in pail'), which prevailed down to
the eighteenth century, but it was frequently shortened in closed
syllables, particularly before dentals, though no change was made
in the orthography (cf. 'bread' and 'death '). The Middle English
close ē (seen in 'deep' and 'bleed') also retained its fifteenth century
sound (heard in 'pail'), but, at the same time, it was adopting a more
modern value, namely, the sound heard in 'peel': before r, however,
1 See Bacon's Essays, ed. West, A. S. , p. 293.
6
## p. 460 (#482) ############################################
460 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
6
6
an open value might still be retained (cf. ‘hear'). In the spellings
'indide' (indeed), 'quin' (queen), 'bin' (been), the classical i
stands for this later sound of the Middle English close e Middle
English open 7 (seen in 'goad' and 'stone') also retained its
fifteenth century value (heard in 'pole '), and, to this, the word
'one' is no exception. The modern pronunciation of this word, as
if with an initial w, was certainly not usual in Elizabethan times,
and this is plainly suggested by such forms as 'such an one,'
'th'one,' and, also, by Shakespeare's rime of 'one' with "Scone. '
It seems, however, to have been general in the seventeenth century
and may have been a provincialism in the sixteenth: the form 'whole-
some,' with the w, appears in 1550. The Middle English close 7
(seen in 'doom'), while it retained its fifteenth century sound
ard in 'pole'), also approximated its modern value (heard in
'pool'); and, about this date, Middle English i and ū (ou) seem to
have developed diphthongal values. The earlier value 7 (heard in
he') moves on towards the modern sound heard in while'; and,
similarly, the earlier sound of ū (heard in ‘boot') approximated
the modern diphthongal value heard in ‘house'?
With regard to consonants, the differences between Elizabethan
and modern pronunciation are comparatively slight. It would
appear that re was strongly trilled, for 'fire' and 'bire' appear in
Shakespeare as dissyllabic, 'Henry' and 'angry' as trisyllabic; and,
again, the pronunciation of gh (as f) seems to have been more
frequent than at a later date, when, however, we have it in words
such as “laugh' and 'draught. ' In Chapman, 'wrought' and
taught' appear with this sound-value; in Shakespeare, after' is
found riming with daughter's,
The task of ascertaining these sixteenth century sound-values
was one of some difficulty, owing to the fact that Caxton's spelling
was no longer capable of representing any changes in pronunciation.
Fortunately, however, these values were preserved as a result of a
series of attempts made by certain scholars * to denote the current
pronunciation with the help of phonetic symbols. The works
proceeded from various motives: one aimed at amending English
orthography, another at teaching the pronunciation of Greek; but,
3
1 Letters of Queen Elizabeth (Ellis's collection 1553—76).
Further differences between Elizabethan and modern pronunciation are suggested
by the rimes 'all,' 'shall’; “racks,' takes'; 'steel,' 'well'; 'concert,' 'right'; 'join,'
‘shine'; 'seas,' 'press’; although rimes are not invariably correct tests of pro-
nunciation.
3 The Taming of the Shrew, Act I, so. 1. 244-5.
* See bibliography.
## p. 461 (#483) ############################################
Elizabethan English as a Literary Medium 461
whatever their objects, their phonetic systems have preserved
sixteenth century sound-values. The most important of these
contributions was due to William Salesbury, who, in 1547, compiled
A Dictionary of Englishe and Welshe, and, subsequently, wrote a
tract on the pronunciation of Welsh (1567). In the dictionary, he
had transcribed into Welsh characters some 150 English words;
and, since he had clearly denoted in his tract the sound-values of
Welsh letters, the pronunciation of the transliterated English
words may thus be easily inferred.
Some of the main points in the development of the language
during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries have now been touched
upon: namely, the evolution and development of a standard literary
dialect, the rapid extension of the vocabulary and the completion
of the change from an inflected to an uninflected character. It
now remains to attempt an estimate of Elizabethan English as a
literary medium, so far as such an estimate is possible.
In the first place, the language, at this date, was in an eminently
plastic condition, which made the utmost freedom of expression
possible. Men wrote very much as they spoke; the literary
language has probably never stood nearer to the colloquial, and,
consequently, it was peculiarly adapted to express the exuberant
thought and feeling of the age.
But, while this freedom gave to Elizabethan utterance a
naturalness and a force which have never been surpassed, it also
led to numerous structural anomalies, frequent and even natural
in ordinary speech. Literary expression was now less hampered
than ever by inflectional considerations, and writers, not cognisant
as yet of the logic which was to underlie the new grammar,
indulged in expressions which set rules of concord at defiance.
Thus, the form of a verb might be determined by the character of
the nearest substantive, or two constructions might be confused
and merged into one: almost any arrangement seemed justified,
provided the sense were reasonably well conveyed. And this
irregularity, the inevitable concomitant of Elizabethan freedom
of expression, is, also, one of its disabilities, for it introduced an
element of vagueness and ambiguity into contemporary writing.
But such irregularity was not wholly due to the influence of
colloquial speech: it could arise out of the undeveloped condition
of the grammatical machinery then in existence. The conjunctions
often gave but slight indications of the relation of the sentences
which they joined: a word like 'but' would have to convey
Dumerous meanings and would be represented in modern English
## p. 462 (#484) ############################################
462 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
by 'if not,' 'except,' 'when,' 'that,''without that. Prepositions,
too, were used in a manner far from definite: 'in' and 'on,' 'of'
and 'from,' 'with' and 'by,' were yet to be distinguished, while
'for' would have to do duty for the phrases 'as regards,' 'in spite
of,' 'for want of.
' Then, again, the subjective and objective
genitives were not clearly distinguished ; a phrase like your
injuries' had to stand for either, and the same indefiniteness
occurs in such phrases as 'distressful bread' (bread hardly-won)
and 'feeling sorrows' (sorrows deeply felt). The context, in each
case, had to correct what was ambiguous in the expression and to
supply its actual meaning.
Some efforts, were, of course, made to obtain greater clearness
and precision, for the uninflected language was beginning to work
out its expression under the new conditions. For instance, the
neuter form 'its,' which aimed at avoiding the confusion caused by
the older use of ‘his,' for both masculine and neuter, occurs as
early as 1598, though it was not until the second half of the
seventeenth century that it was fully recognised. The suffix 'self'
was used more frequently to indicate reflexives, and a pronoun
would often be inserted to help out an expression. But, generally
speaking, clearness was not always the first aim, and, as often as
not, writers were content with an expression which sacrificed pre-
cision to brevity and pregnancy of utterance.
With all its tendencies to run into confused expression,
Elizabethan English was, however, pre-eminently the language
of feeling, and it was such in virtue of its concrete and pictur-
esque character and its various devices for increasing vividness
of presentment. In the first place, it contained precisely the material
for expressing thought with a concreteness and a force not since
possible. Comparatively poor in abstract and learned words,
though these were being rapidly acquired, it abounded in words
which had a physical signification, and which conveyed their meaning
with splendid strength and simplicity. And this accounts for the
felicitous diction of the Bible translations. The Hebrew narratives
were made up of simple concrete terms and objective facts, and
the English of that time, from its very constitution, reproduced
these elements with a success that would have been impossible for
the more highly developed idiom of later times. Between the
Hebrew idiom and that of the Elizabethan, in short, there existed
certain clear affinities, which Tindale had fully appreciated.
Then, again, this absence of general and abstract terms gave to
Elizabethan English a picturesqueness all its own. The description
a
## p. 463 (#485) ############################################
6
a
6
Its Musical Resources 463
of the Psalmist's despair as a 'sinking in deep mire,' or a'coming
into deep waters,' is paralleled in character on almost every page
of Elizabethan work; and it was this abundance of figurative
language which favoured Euphuism, and which constituted something
of the later charms of Fuller and Sir Thomas Browne. Nor can the
effect of a number of picturesque intensives be overlooked, as
seen in the phrases 'clean starved,' 'passing strange,' shrewdly
vexed' and 'to strike home. The discarding of these intensives
and the substitution of eighteenth century forms like 'vastly'
and 'prodigiously,' and the nineteenth century'very' and 'quite,'
have resulted in a distinct loss of vigour and colour? .
Further, the Elizabethan writer had at his command certain
means for heightening the emotional character of a passage and
for increasing the vividness of presentment. Thus, the dis-
criminating use of 'thou' and 'you' could depict a variety of
feeling in a way, and with a subtlety, no longer possible. 'You' was
the unimpassioned form which prevailed in ordinary speech among
the educated classes, whereas 'thou' could express numerous
emotions such as anger, contempt, familiarity, superiority, or love.
The ethical dative, too, added to the vividness of expression,
suggesting, as it did, the interest felt by either the speaker or
the hearer; while even the illogical double negatives and double
comparatives* were capable of producing a heightening effect in
the language of passion.
The freedom and brevity, the concrete and picturesque character,
of Elizabethan English, were, therefore, among the qualities which
rendered it an effective medium of literary thought. At the same
time, the language is seen to lend itself easily to rhythnical and
harmonious expression, and it is not improbable that the sixteenth
century translators of the Bible were among the first to realise
with any adequacy the musical resources of the vernacular, they
themselves having been inspired by the harmonies of their Latin
models. The language of the Vulgate was certainly familiar to
sixteenth century readers, and the translators must have worked
with its rhythm and its tones ringing in their ears; while the close
resemblance between the constructions and word-order of the
Latin text and those used in English would render it an easier
task to reproduce other qualities of that text. At all events, in
)
1 Cf. , also, the substitution of certainly,' 'indeed,' for 'i'faith,'. i'sooth,' iwis,'
certes. '
2 E. g. 'villain knock me this gate. ' 8 E. g. nor no further in sport neither. '
* E. g. 'more elder. '
6
## p. 464 (#486) ############################################
464 Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare
a
the Biblical translations and the liturgy of the sixteenth century
we find the broad vowels, the musical rhythm and the tones which
bad been the glory of the Vulgate: the English ear had become
attuned, for the first time, to the vocalic music of the vernacular.
Consonantal effects, which were still more characteristic of English,
had long been turned to account in the native alliteration.
For the purpose of working out these rhythmical effects and of
heightening the natural harmonies of the spoken language, certain
linguistic aids were available. In the unsettled state of the lan-
.
guage, there were certain variant forms, some of which were
obsolete, which could still be utilised in prose as well as in verse.
For instance, verbal forms in -eth (3rd pers. pres. sing. ) were seldom
used in ordinary speech; but, in a line like 'It blesseth him that gives
and him that takes,' both the archaic and the current forms appear,
to the improvement of the rhythm. Similarly, final -ed could be
pronounced or not according to the required rhythm, as in the line
'Thou changed and self-cover'd thing,' and these devices have since
remained with the poets. Then, again, the particle 'the could, if
necessary, be omitted in archaic fashion, for its modern definitive
character had not yet been assumed. Advantage might, also, be
taken of the unsettled state of the accent in Latin words, like
'complete' and 'extreme,' to accentuate such words in accordance
with metrical exigencies; while the unemphatic 'do,' though ob-
solescent at this date, might frequently help out the rhythm in
both verse and prose?
As regards its musical resources, however, Elizabethan English,
as well as later English, had certain marked limitations. It was a
language overloaded with consonants, many of them harsh and
dissonant in character; and it was the prevalence of consonantal
endings that made the language poor in rimes, as contrasted with
the Italian, which abounded in words with vowel terminations.
It also possessed a great abundance of half-pronounced vowels,
which were neither long nor short and which defeated the
attempts of the Areopagites to make the language run into
classical moulds. The choice of metrical forms, as a matter of
fact, was largely determined by the native method of accentua-
tion; the majority of words of more than one syllable developed,
naturally, a trochaic, iambic, or dactylic rhythm, and these were
the elements out of which the stately blank verse and the many
lyrical forms were built. Another inherent disability under which
6
6
1 E. g. 'Why should he stay, whom love doth press to go. ' See Franz, Shak. -Gram.
§ 444.
## p. 465 (#487) ############################################
Elizabethan and Modern English
465
Elizabethan English laboured was that its word-order was neces-
sarily more fixed, and, therefore, less elastic, than was the case
with the highly-inflected languages of antiquity, which required no
such rigidity of position.
Furthermore, its grammatical forms lacked
variety and, while it abounded in monosyllabic words, it was short
of the much-resounding polysyllabic words, so that a rhythmical
grace was not so inevitable as in Latin or Greek.
In the centuries which have followed the age of Elizabeth, the
language has undergone many changes, and these changes may be
roughly summarised, first, as the extension of the vocabulary to
keep pace with the ever-widening thought, and, secondly, as the
adaptation of the structure of the language to clearer and more
precise expression. In the course of time, the numerous national
activities, the pursuits of science and art, of commerce and politics,
have enriched its expression with their various terminologies.
Literal uses have become metaphorical, concrete terms, abstract;
many words have depreciated in meaning, and the line has been
drawn more rigidly between words literary and non-literary. There
has been in the language what Coleridge calls 'an instinct of
growth. . . working progressively to desynonymise those words of
originally the same meaning,' and this division of labour has enabled
the language to express finer shades of thought. The verbal con-
jugation has been enriched, the elements which made for vagueness
have been removed and in every way the language has adapted
itself to a scientific age, which requires, before all things, clear,
accurate and precise expression.
But Elizabethan English, alone among the earlier stages of our
language, still plays a part in modern intellectual life. Thanks to
the English Bible, the prayer-book and Shakespeare, it has never
become really obsolete. Its diction and its idioms are still familiar,
endeared and consecrated by sacred association. It yet remains the
inspiration of our noblest styles, for beyond its concrete strength,
its picturesque simplicity and its forceful directness, English expres-
sion cannot go. And so, in moments of exaltation the old phrases
are recalled, untainted by any mingling in the market place, and, with
their rich suggestiveness, they heighten the passion or beauty which
a more explicit idiom would destroy. Modern English is the fitting
medium of an age which leaves little unexplained; while Eliza-
bethan English stands for an age too hasty to analyse what it felt.
The one has the virtues of maturity, a logic, uncompromising and
clear: the other, a vigour and a felicity, the saving graces of youth.
E. L. III.
CH. XX.
30
## p. 466 (#488) ############################################
BIBLIOGRAPHIES
CHAPTER I
ENGLISHMEN AND THE CLASSICAL RENASCENCE
1
Allen, P. 8. Opus Epistolarum Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami denuo recogni.
tum et auctum. Vol. 1. Oxford, 1906.
Altmeyer, J. J. Les précurseurs de la Réforme aux Pays-bas. Brussels,
1886. [Vol. 1 deals with Erasmus. ]
Americi Vesputii Navigationes (appended to Cosmographiae Introductio).
St Dié, 1507.
Amiel, E. Un libre-penseur du xvime siècle: Érasme. Paris, 1889.
Bibliotheca Erasmiana : Répertoire des Euvres d'Érasme. Ghent, 1893.
Bibliographie des cuvres d'Érasme. Ghent, 1897.
Blomfield, R. A History of Renaissance architecture in England, 1500-1800.
2 vols. 1897.
Botfield, B. Prefaces to the first editions of the Greek and Roman Classics.
1861.
Brómond, H. Sir Thomas More. Trans. Child, H. 1904.
Bridgett, T. E. The life and writings of Sir Thomas More, Lord Chancellor
of England and Martyr under Henry VIII. 2nd ed. 1892.
Life of Blessed John Fisher. 1888.
Buchanan, George. Rudimenta grammatices T. Linacri ex Anglico sermone
in Latinum . . . G. B. Paris, 1533 (and later editions).
Buisson, F. Répertoire des ouvrages pédagogiques du xvime siècle. Paris,
1886.
Sébastien Castellion: Sa vie et son cuvre. 2 vols. Paris, 1892.
Burigny, Leveresque de. Vie d'Érasme. Paris, 1757.
Burrows, M. On Grocyn and Linacre. In Oxford Historical Society.
Collectanea, 11. 1890.
Caius, John (1510-73), refounder and master of Gonville Hall, Cambridge;
editor and translator of Galen. His Boke or Counseill against the
Disease commonly called the Sweate or Sweatyng Sicknesse 1552, in
English and in Latin, “is the classical account of that remarkable
epidemic': J. Bass Mullinger in D. of N. B. Works. Ed. Roberts, E. S.
Cambridge, 1912.
Cayley, Sir A. Memoirs of Sir Thomas More. 1808.
Colet, John. Daily Devotions, or the Christian's Morning and Evening
Sacrifice. 22nd ed. 1722. [=A righte fruitfull admonition concerning
the order of a good Christian man's life, 1534 ff. ]
Opus de Sacramentis Ecclesiae. Ed. Lupton, J. H. (also of the following
books). 1867.
Treatises on Hierarchies of Dionysius. 1869.
An Exposition of St Paul's Epistle to the Romans. 1873.
An Exposition of St Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians. 1874.
Letters to Radulphus on the Mosaic account of the Creation. . . . 1876.
## p. 467 (#489) ############################################
man,
Chapter 1
467
Conrthope, W. J. A History of English Poetry. Vol. 1, chap. v, The Early
Renaissance, and vol. 11, chap. 1, The Intellectual Conflict in Europe in the
Sixteenth Century: The Papacy, the Empire and the Nation: Catholicism
and Chivalry, etc. 1895, 1897.
Croke, Richard (1489? -1558), Cambridge scholar and pupil of Grocyn. For
his oration on behalf of Greek, when teaching in Cambridge, see J. Bass
Mullinger's University of Cambridge, vol. 1,527 ff.
Dorne, John. See Oxford Historical Society.
Drummond, R. B. Erasmus, his Life and Character as shown in his Corre-
spondence and Works. 2 vols. 1873.
Durand de Laur, H. Érasme, précurseur et initiateur de l'esprit moderne.
2 vols. Paris, 1872.
Einstein, L. The Italian Renaissance in England. New York, 1902.
Elyot, Sir Thomas. The Boke named the Governour devised by Sir T. E. ,
1531. Best edition by Croft, H. H. S. 1883.
A swete and devoute sermon of holy saynte Ciprian of the mortalitie of
The rules of a christian lyfe made by Picus, erle of Mirandula.
Both translated into englyshe by Syr Thomas Elyot, Knyghte. 1534.
Bibliotheca Eliotae- Eliotes (Latin and English] Dictionarie, by Cooper,
T. 1532, 1538, 1552 ff.
The Bankette of Sapience compyled by Syr T. Eliot, Knyghte, and
newly augmented with dyverse tytles and sentences. 1539.
The Image of Governance, compiled of the actes and sentences notable
of . . . Alexander Severus. 1540.
The Castel of Helth. 1534, 1539, 1541 ff.
Pasquil the Playne, a dialogue on talkativeness and silence. 1533;
Rome, c. 1552.
Of the Knowledge which maketh a Wise Man. 1533.
The Doctrine of Princes (trans. from Isocrates). 1534.
The Education . . . of Children (trans. from Plutarch). Before 1540.
Howe one may take profyte of his enmyes. After 1540.
The Defence of Good Women. 1545.
A Preservative agaynste Deth. 1545.
Emmerton, Ephraim. Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam. Heroes of the
Reformation Series. New York and London, 1899.
Erasmus, Desiderius. Opera omnia. Ed. Le Clerc. 10 vols.
