The English Dictionary before Cawdrey [Reprint 2014, Facsimile Reproduction of the Original. ed.] 9783111664873, 9783484309098

Citation preview

LEXICOGRAPHICA Series Maior Supplementary Volumes to the International Annual for Lexicography Suppléments à la Revue Internationale de Lexicographie Supplementbände zum Internationalen Jahrbuch für Lexikographie

Edited by Sture Allén, Pierre Corbin, Reinhard R. K. Hartmann, Franz Josef Hausmann, Hans-Peder Kromann, Oskar Reichmann, Ladislav Zgusta

9

Published in cooperation with the Dictionary Society of North America (DSNA) and the European Association for Lexicography [EURALEX],

Gabriele Stein

The English Dictionary before Cawdrey

Max Niemeyer Verlag Tübingen 1985

CIP-Kurztitelaufnahme der Deutschen Bibliothek Stein, Gabriele: T h e English dictionary before Cawdrey / Gabriele Stein. - Tübingen : Niemeyer, 1985 (Lexicographica : Series maior ; 9) NE: Lexicographica / Series maior ISBN 3-484-30909-1

ISSN 0175-9264

© Max Niemeyer Verlag Tübingen 1985 Alle Rechte vorbehalten. O h n e G e n e h m i g u n g des Verlages ist es nicht gestattet, dieses Buch oder Teile daraus photomechanisch zu vervielfältigen. Printed in Germany. Druck: Weihert-Druck G m b H , Darmstadt.

1

ACKNOWLEDGMEM'S1

In the preparation of this book, I have been deeply indebted to Fräulein Evelyn Witt and Dr Roger Böhm for their scholarly assistance and advice. To Frau Inge Wentzlau belongs the credit for typing a long and difficult manuscript. Responsibility for error, emission or other inadequacy, however, is mine alone, but I would say with John Rider (1589)

1

First reade me; With others oonferre

me; Then censure me. '

GS, Septenber 1985

vii

2

CONTENTS

Pages 1

Acknowledgments

2

Contents

3

Introduction

ν vii 1-7

4

The Leiden Glossary

8-13

5

The Corpus Glossary

14-19

6

The ¿BC-Glossary

20-31

7

The London Vocabulary ( British Museum Add MS 32,246 and Plantin-Moretus MS No. 32, Antwerp)

32-43

The Vocabulary of Names of Plants

44-52

9

The Mayer Nominale

53-65

10

The Pictorial Vocabulary

66-73

11

The Medulla grarnnatice and the Ortus vocabulorum

74-90

12

The Promptorium parvulorwn

13

Ihe Catholicon Anglicum

107-120

14

John Palsgrave : Lesalarcissement de la langue francoyse

121-139

15

The Dictionary of Syr Thomas Elyot

140-156

16

William Salesbury : A Dictionary in Englyshe and Welshe

157-164

17

Robert Estienne and John Veron : Dictionariolum puerorum

8

18

91-106

tribus Unguis Latina, Anglica & Gallica conscription

165-180

Richard Huloet : Abecedarium Angliao-Latinum

181-193

19

John Withals : A shorte Dictionarie for longe Begynners

194-204

20

Thomas Cooper : Thesaurus Linguae Romanae et Britannicae

205-225

21

Peter Levins : Manipulus vocabulorum

226-244

22

A Dictionarie French and English

245-272

23

John Baret : An Alvecurie or Triple Dictionarie, in Englyshe, Latin, and French

273-295

24

Simon Pelegrcmius : Synonymorum sylva

296-311

25

Thomas Themas : Dictionarium Linguae Latinae et Anglicanae

312-332

26

Jchn Rider : Bibliotheca scholastica

333-352

27

Richard Percyvall : Bibliotheca Hispanica

353-377

28

John Florio : A Worlde of Wördes

378-409

29

A Chronological List of the Relevant Works

410-431

30

An Alphabetical List of the Works Studied

432-444

3

INTRODUCTION

Histories of English usually give a more or less detailed account of the linguistic changes that occurred in the spelling, pronunciation, grammar, and the lexicon of the different varieties of English. They rarely discuss contenporary authors or works that describe English at a particular stage of its development. Among the exceptions are the early orthoepists whose accounts of spelling and pronunciation are occasionally dealt with in sane detail. This gives credit to their important contribution to our present-day knowledge of Early Modern English pronunciation. Earlier contemporary accounts of problems of English graimar are usually not discussed. The reason may be that they had no inpact on understanding the English graimar of their time. The conceptual gramratical frame-vrork was highly Latinized and accordingly inadequate to capture the structure of English. As to the lexicon the description par excellence of the word stock of English at a particular time of its history are vrord lists and dictionaries. The function of such reference works was (as it still is) to explain the meaning of words by means of the language and idicm of the period in question. The method of presentation may have been modelled on that of another language, e.g. Latin, but contrary to the case of granmar, the lexicographical frame of reference did not disguise the language structure to be described. Word lists and dictionaries are thus the best overall portraits of the ward stock of a language at a particular time. Even if in earlier word lists and dictionaries there was no attempt to include ail the words of the language, the word lists actually campiled nevertheless recorded an essential part of the language. There were no better records of the language vocabulary. The description of the lexicon in books on the history of English does not exploit the wealth of linguistic information included in the contenporary lexicographical works.^ It usually discusses neologisms, borrowings frati other lan1

This also holds for those cases in which there are references to such eminent lexicographers as Samuel Johnson and Noah Webster. The surveys focus more on their lexicographical achievements as compilers of dictionaries than on the vocabulary described by them.

2 guages, losses of items, and changes in meaning. For the categories mentioned a number of examples are listed. But the basic word stock camion and current at the period under considération is not characterized. All such accounts of the earlier stages of the English vocabulary are therefore biassed towards lexical increase and lexical decay. Words, idioms, phrases and proverbs are the linguistically crystallized record of hew a speech ccmnunity viewed the extralinguistic world surrounding than. The lexicon encapsulates the cultural and social attitudes and beliefs of that camtunity as well as the advancement in learning and human knowledge. A detailed study of the vrord hoard of a speech ccmnunity will therefore help us to a better understanding of that comunity. In the absence of a comprehensive historical analysis of the English vocabulary, one of the aims of the present book is to stimulate scholarly interest in the study of the English vocabulary as it is presented in its word lists and dictionaries and in the contemporary concern for the language that may be reflected in them. Ihe question of the vernaculars is in this respect of central importance for the period covered in the present study. Lexicographically speaking, English was dominated by Latin up to the first decades of the sixteenth century. Hie first breakthrough in this tradition was the publication in 1530 of John Palsgrave's Esolaroissement de la langue frdnooyse whose third part consists of an English-French dictionary. The increasingly greater importance attributed to the vernaculars of the time and the gradual decline in the knowledge of Latin is also manifest in the polyglot vocabularies where Latin, it is true, was usually the language of the headwords, but where it was only one language among a nimber of spoken vernaculars. The polyglot word lists date from the 1530's and enjoyed more and more popularity during the whole of the sixteenth century (see the chronological list at the end of the book). In the period between 1530 and 1570, Palsgrave' pioneering work and the onset of bilingual English dictionaries describing contemporary vernaculars, William Salesbury compiled a WelshEnglish dictionary in 1547 and three years later William THcmas produced the first Italian-English word list. During the last three decades of the sixteenth century a nurrber of vernacular dictionaries appeared which amply document the shifting linguistic preoccupations of the time, away from Latin towards the vernaculars, French, Spanish, Italian, and English. Fran here it is only one further step to descriptions of one single vernacular. It is therefore no wonder that the period of the compilation of bilingual vernacular dictionaries for

3

English almost coincides with that in which the first monolingual English dictionaries appeared. Dictionaries and word lists are carpiled for users. An account of the changing and increasing usership of English dictionaries is bound to make a contribution to the history of learning and education in English society. If the present study could arouse scholarly interest in this area, it would have achieved another aim. Since dictionaries are produced for users a further field of interest has been the actual making of dictionaries. Modern English dictionaries are so similar in structure and lay-out that one wonders where this style or tradition has cane frati. How old is present-day lexicographical practice and hew did it develop? In order to prepare an answer to this question I went back to the very beginnings of lexicographical activities in Anglo-Saxon England and followed the development up to 1604, the date when the first monolingual English dictionary appeared. I have in particular been interested in the compiling of the word lists, the lemratization of the headwords, the structure of the equivalents and the metalinguistic information provided for the headwords. Such information includes indications of pronunciation or spelling, descriptions of grammatical use and social, regional and subject field usage restrictions. I have distinguished between the information itself and the way in which it is given. In modern English dictionaries, for instance, different senses of a word are usually differentiated by means of numbers that precede each sense. This practice was almost non-existant in the lexicographical period under consideration. The only exception is Jeto Rider who first used the figures 1, 2, and 3, to distinguish between the literal, the figurative, and the old or obsolete sense of a word. Hie 16th-century lexicographical method of distinguishing different senses of a word was either by means of punctuation marks, as in sene modern English dictionaries, or, above all, by means of such sense-discriminators as "also", "moreover" , "sometimesetc. This method differed sharply frcm that common in the fifteenth century : word lists of that period were not yet so elaborate. Yet words that had the same (or very similar) form but differed in meaning were listed as barographs. The headword was often followed by a generic noun, synonym or synonymous expression to distinguish one holograph frcm the other. In 16thcentury dictionaries holographs are usually listed under one single headword. Another guiding interest has been the question of vAiether modem lexicographical practice can learn frcm that canton at earlier stages of the language. Ihe answer is clearly positive. I shall illustrate this with two examples. One

4 of the findings of this study is that headword explanations often include a reference to the first person, e. g. Antipodes...People which goe directlie against vs with the soles of their feete against ours.

This shews that the reference point of earlier English lexicographers was not exclusively the impersonal third person, but also the first person. I have tried to identify and describe in detail which types of headword are prone to producing such equivalents with a first person pronoun reference. These include among others items that denote a spatial relationship, an emotion or feeling, and interjections or expressions used in a similar way. It looks as if the categories established fron earlier English dictionaries represent general difficulties for practicing lexicographers. When checking the proofs of a new English dictionary in preparation I came across the following examples : matter...the physical material of which everything that we can see or touch is made, as opposed to thought or mind. nothing...nothing doing si no; I won't £ 5?" " Nothing doing".

: " Will you lend me

Although the dictionary in question is not a reference book for children, the proofs included definitions with the pronouns

you

and

your

instead of

one

or

one 's as in the following examples : local

2

...someone who lives in the area where you find them

op art...a form of modern art("optical art") using patterns that play tricks on your eyes overtone...a colour that you think you can see when looking at another colour.

The three examples fall within the range of categories established. We might therefore learn frcm the historical account that the definition of the categories outlined needs a reference point. A general policy decision will have to be taken for first or third person reference and the definers' attention should be drawn to this particular problem area. We may also learn frati the success that sane earlier dictionaries had. This holds in particular for John Withals' and Simon Pelegrcmius'

Synonymorum

Shorte

sylva.

diationarie

for yonge

begynners

Both dictionaries have a semantic

arrangement which is combined with alphabetical order. In our own time the need for semantically organized reference books is far frcm being satisfied.

5 The theoretical interest in the close study of earlier English dictionaries is twofold : are theoretical principles observed, are theoretical issues discussed in the prefaces to these vrorks? Secondly, could such a detailed investigation be of import to a theory of lexicography which we do not yet have? One of the points that the present study has demonstrated is that the modern lexicographical concept of the 'headword' or 'lama' has to be redefined if it is to be applicable to earlier English dictionaries. The research interests outlined and the aim to stimulate more scholarly activity in this field have given the book its structure. But my title calls for a word of explanation. The study is not restricted to those lexicographical works that are dictionaries but includes glossaries and vocabularies as well. The period of investigation therefore stretches frctn the first Latin-Anglo-Saxon glossaries to the year 1604. Ulis is the date of publication of the first monolingual English dictionary, Robert Cawdrey1 s Table Alphabetioa.il.

Further

research into the history of English lexicography may w=ll challenge the date 1604 as the beginning of monolingual English lexicography. Libraries such as the British Library in London, and the Bodleian Library in Oxford hold a wealth of English documents which are far frati having been brought to scholarly notice. Mf conparing of some edited Middle English vocabularies with their original, for instance, led me to discover several Latin-English, English-Latin synonym word lists vdiich obviously change our picture of the lexicographical activities in medieval England ( see Chapter 9). Ihe perusal of manuscript catalogues in search for undiscovered interesting early English word lists vrould have been a study in itself. With respect to the Old and Middle English periods I have therefore concentrated on those outstanding works which.have been discussed in the literature or which I have myself discovered. A survey of all the existing glosses would not have been of much interest, and I have not included the early glossaries and vocabularies in my 2 chronological list of works at the end of the book. Otherwise, the list embraces all those lexicographical works that include English and that were first published before 1604. It also notes further editions up to 1700. Hie reader can thus see how popular seme early dictionaries were." Because of their great lexicographical interest I have discussed nearly all 2

A survey of these works is being prepared by J. Schäfer, cf J. Schäfer, "Elisabettianisehe Lexikographie", Wolfenbütteler Renaissance Mitteilungen, III, 3 (1979), pp. 111-114, and " Elizabethan Glossaries: A Computer-assisted Study of the Beginnings of Elizabethan Lexicography" ALLC Bulletin, 8 (1980), pp. 36-41.

6

the bi- and trilingual dictionaries involving English which were published before 1604. Hie popular polyglot vocabularies as well as the polyglot dictionaries of the time, Ambrogio Calepino's dictionaries, Adrianus Junius' Nomenclátor and Hieronymus Megiser's Thesaurus, have not been given any detailed treatment. In such polyglot works English is one language among many others, often even the last language added to a set of tongues included in previous editions, and the very number of languages listed precludes any detailed treatment of any of them. Seme of them were used by the compilers of the bi- and trilingual dictionaries, but their overall contribution to the development of English lexicography is very slight. In my study, each dictionary is described in detail. The analyses are based on a close scrutiny of the A to Ζ text because the introductions of these early English dictionaries do not tell us very mach on the authors' policies. For each work its specific and characteristic lexicographical features are singled out. They are at the same time put into relation with earlier works so that the new and original aspects in the development of English lexicography are highlighted. In order to retrace the gradual development of English lexicography, the dictionaries are presented in chronological order. Special attention has been given to the following aspects : larrmatization, the indication of stress or pronunciation, the inclusion of grammar, the explicit introduction of usage ccmments, e.g. pragmatic, social, regional and subject field specifications, the structure of the translation equivalents, the inclusion of citations or illustrative exairples, attempts at etymologies, the use of graphic or pictorial illustrations. The historical survey of the lexicographical features will help us to understand Modern English lexicographical practice. Yet it is ny hope that the book may also have another function. We are far freni having untangled the conplex interrelations that are characteristic of the early European dictionaries. For the English context D. T. Starnes' pioneering book Renaissance Diationaries. English-Latin and Latin-English

has disclosed many sources from which

the dictionaries were compiled. But much more research it needed. Hie illustration of these salient features, with carefully selected examples, may help to identify further sources. Ihe description of each dictionary is then followed by an extract from the work itself. The extract includes lexicographically relevant parts of the in3

D. T. Starnes, Renaissance Dictionaries. English-Latin and Latin-English (Austin : University of Texas , 1954).

7

traduction and a sample from the letter Β. I have indicated expansions of abbreviations by a change of fount. Hie reader will thus be able to follow the development in the prefatory matter of a dictionary and he will be able to compare different dictionaries for himself. This is my reason for choosing the same letter of the alphabet for illustration. It makes the book also usable in university classrooms. Each chapter concludes with a list that includes all the editions of the vrark. For each edition it specifies the libraries that hold a copy of it, for one of the great problems of any historical survey is access to the works.

8 4

ΊΗΕ LEIDEN GLOSSARY

The first lexicographical activities in the history of English lay in collecting glosses. When reading Latin texts and encountering an unknown or difficult word, students in Old English times did what is a canton practice for any foreign language learner : they scribbled explanations or translations of the hard words between the lines or in the itargins. These words or phrases with their explanations and/or translations, these glosses, were then copied from the manuscript. Monasteries were the places of learning where texts were read and memorized, where languages were taught and studied. Scribes would copy manuscripts as well as glosses. They gradually developed the habit of collecting glosses from various manuscripts and of listing them in the order of the manuscripts frcm which they had been taken. Quite a number of such glossaries, or collections of glosses, have cane d a m to us. In 1885, the four oldest collections of glosses preserved were published in one single volume, Henry ι Sweet's bock The Oldest English Texts. 'Ihe glossaries in question are : the Corpus Glossary ( MS no. 144 in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge), the Epinal Glossary ( MS no. 17), the Erfurt Glossary (MS no. 42 fol. in the Amplonian library at Erfurt, East Germany), and the Leiden Glossary ( MS Voss.Q0 Lat. no. 69 in the library of the Un-versity of Leiden). The Erfurt manuscript contains two glossaries2of which the first " shews the same text as Epinal, whose gaps it fills up". There are also two glossaries in the Corpus manuscript, the first including only a few English words. The Epinal, Erfurt and Corpus glossaries show the beginning of alphabetization. This is the reason why this history of English lexicography starts 1

H. Sweet, ed., The Oldest English Texts. Early English Text Society 83 (London : Trübner & Co., 1885). Cf also 0. B. Schlutter, " Zu Sweet's Oldest English Texts I," Anglia, 19, N. F. 7, (1897), pp. 101-116; O.B. Schlutter, " Zu Sweet's Oldest English Texts II," Anglia, 19, N. F. 7, ( 1¿97) , pp. 461-498 and -O. B. Schlutter, " On Old English Glosses", Journal of Germanic Philology, 1, (1897), pp. 59-65.

2

Ibid., p.3.

9 with the Leiden Glossary. The Leiden text illustrates what has to be assumed to have been the first stage in the collecting of glosses. With respect to the dating of the nranuscript, however, the Corpus Glossary is usually regarded as the older. The age and the origin of the Leiden manuscript have been studied in detail by J.H. Hessels vàio, on the basis of paleographical criteria, concluded that we have, as far as I can see, no choice but to ascribe the glossary to the latter end, say the last decade, of the 8th century, and regard St. Gallen as the place where it was written. It is difficult to say whether the writer was an Irishman or a South German; several glosses are interpreted by O.H.G. words, but the scribe may have found them in the M.S. which he copied. 3 Eleven years later, R. Sauer investigated the language of the Leiden Glossary. His conclusions were that the basic stock of the glossary was Mercian, and that there were also parts in the Kentish dialect. The date suggested for the 4 origin of the linguistic document was the first half of the eighth century. The Leiden glossary has been edited by a number of scholars. Apart fran the two editions by Sweet and Hessels mentioned there is one of the complete text by P.P. Glogger,

and another one for the Old English part only by F.

6

Holthausen. 3

J.H. Hessels, Λ Late Eighth-Century Latin-Anglo-Saxon Glossary Preserved in the Library of the Leiden University (MS Voss. Q Lat. No. 69) (Cambridge: University Press, 1906), p. xiii.

4

R. Sauer, Zur Sprache des Leidener Glossars, Cod. Voss. lat. 4° 69. Programm des kgl. humanistischen Gymnasiums St. Stephan in Augsburg (Augsburg: Ph.J. Pfeiffer, 1917) (= Diss. Munich, 1917); Sauer's monograph was reviewed by E. Eckhardt in Englische Studien, 54, 1920, pp. 287-288.

5

P.P. Glogger, Das Leidener Glossar Cod. Voss. lat. 4° 69. 1. Teil: Text der Handschrift (Augsburg: Ph.J. Pfeiffer, 1901); 2. Teil: Erklärungsversuche (Dissertation Munich) (Augsburg: Ph.J. Pfeiffer, 1903); 3. Teil A: Verwandte Handschriften und Ergänzungen (Augsburg: Ph.J. Pfeiffer, 1907); 3. Teil B: Indices (Augsburg: Ph.J. Pfeiffer, 1908). See also J.H. Kern's review in Englische Studien, 36, 1906, pp. 111-115 . Çlogger's reply "Zum Leidener Glossar," Englische Studien, 37, 1907, pp. 453-458 and J.H. Kern's reply, "Entgegnung," Englische Studien, 37, 1907, pp. 458-460.

6

F. Holthausen, "Die Leidener Glossen," Englische Studien, 50, 1916-1917, pp. 327-340. Cf also in this respect O.B. Schlutter, "Beiträge zur altenglischen Wortforschung," Englische Studien, 37, 1907, pp. 177-187; O.B. Schlutter, "Weiteres zu Holthausens kritischer Ausgabe der ae. Leidenglossen," Anglia, 45, N.F. 33, 1921, pp. 408-412.

10 The glossary ( fol. 20aa-36aa of the Leiden manuscript) displays an interesting nunber of lexicographical features. Hie glosses are not given as a continuous text but arranged in columns, each page being divided into two columns. Headwords are usually separated frcm their Latin explanations or their Old English or Old High German equivalents by either a simple point, a semicolon or a colon. Ihe sarte punctuation marks are also used to indicate the end of a line. The beginning of a line is usually highlighted by the initial letter of the headword which has either a capital or an uncial. A very interesting feature is the treatment of Latin lemmata for which Germanic equivalents are given. Hessels has already drawn attention to the early lexicographical practice of marking them : With a few exceptions all the Germanic glosses are marked in our MS. either by a horizontal (sometimes waving) stroke above them, or by an insulated ν, also written above one or more letters of such glosses.8

The glosses themselves are listed in the order of the texts to which they belong. For each batch of glosses the source text is given as a heading. Nfcst of these source texts of the Leiden Glossary are ecclesiastical. Since there is no alphabetization throughout, Sweet wanted to reserve the title ' glossary' for the Epinal, Erfurt, and Corpus glossaries : All of these glossaries, except the first the Leiden Glossary , are alphabetical. L. cannot , in fact, be strictly regarded as a single glossary, but rather aSga collection of smaller glossaries not yet digested into a single whole.

This is not quite correct though, the first two chapters of the Leiden Glossary shew alphabetization in its first or most primitive form. Hie first letter of the lenmata has been taken into account; that is, all items beginning with A have been grouped together, then all those beginning with the letter B, etc. This type of alphabetical arrangement has been called ¿-order.10 For the following extract of the glossary, I have chosen Hessel's edition 11

because it is more faithful to the original of the manuscript.

F. Holthau-

sen's edition is later, but Holthausen's policy was quite different when he 7

A facsimile of fol. 26 is included in Hessels' edition, pp. 240-241.

8

J.H. Hessels,op.cit., pp. xxxii ff.

9

H.Sweet, op.cit.,

10

H. Sweet, op.cit.,

p. 6.

11

I have not seen the original myself. My choice is based on the relevant literature and criticism.

p. 6.

11 Ich habe beim abdruck der glossen die sicheren besserungen sowie die quantitätsangaben gleich beigefügt ... 12 The extract focusses on glosses that have Old English explanations.13 They represent a good sample of such glossae aolleatae. But they have also been selected in such a way that they illustrate further characteristics of interlinear glosses. Since the headwords were taken frati actual texts,they often appear in inflected forms (e.g. [V] 15 Pruriginem, 22 Fibrarum, [XXXV] 292 Ruderibus]); that is, lenmata are not always quoted in their 'dictionary form'. In addition we find repetitions of words, either in the same forms or in different inflected forms (e.g. [IV] 83 Ruder: mixin·, - [XXXV] 292 Ruderibus: TTvixviWAiTi', [IV] 24 CtzI>Zcis¿ v.G^vas — [XXXV] 122 CctZZosj tensüm eutem: idest uarras). The items [XLVII] 51-70 provide evidence that literary texts were not the only sources of collections of glosses. This was pointed out by Sweet as early as 1885: But it is evident that the glossaries were not compiled from literary sources alone; the purely colloquial half-Romance forms of many of the Latin words, such as accearium (steel), morgit = mulget, roscinia = luscinia ..., the number of technical words and names of animals and plants coming together in groups even in the alphabetical glossaries, cannot well have been taken out of ordinary books. In L. [Leiden glossary] the latter class of words are thrown together under the headings Verba de multis and Item alia, and are evidently taken directly from classglossaries, in which names of beasts, birds, fishes, minerals and other natural objects were collected in separate groups. Thus, 201—20 [[xLVIl] 51-70 in Hessels' edition] seem nearly all to be names of birds, the next three are names of fishes, then follow four names of animals, all of the

12

F. Holthausen, op.cit., p. 327.

13

Comments on individual spellings, readings, etc. have been ignored. The history of the manuscript and the relation between the Leiden Glossary and the Epinal, Erfurt and Corpus glossaries is discussed in detail in H. Sweet, op.cit., pp. 5 ff., J.H. Hessels, op.cit., pp. xi ff. and W.M. Lindsay, The Corpus, Ëpinal, Erfurt and Legden Glossaries. Publications of the Philological Society 8 (London: Oxford University Press, 1921). The Old High German part of the glossary was first edited by L. Bethmann, "Alte Glossen," Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum, 5, 1845, pp. 193-311; pp. 194-198; for corrections of it see E. Martin, "Leidener und Brüsseler Glossen," Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum, Neue Folge 2, 1869, pp. 191-192; p. 191. Compare also E. Steinmeyer and E. Sievers, edd.. Die althochdeutschen Glossen, gesammelt und bearbeitet von Elias Steinmeyer und Eduard Sievers. 5 vols. (Berlin: Weidmann, 1879-1922), vols. I and II; E. Steinmeyer, "Lateinische und altenglische Glossen," Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum, 33, 1889, pp. 242-251; p. 248; G. Götz, ed., Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum: a Gustavo Loewe incohatum auspiciis Academiae Litterarum Saxonicae composuit, recensuit, edidit Georgius Goetz (Leipzig: Teubner, 1888-1923), reprint 1965 Amsterdam: Hakkert), 7 vols.

same type ... Further proof of these words being taken from class-glossaries is afforded by the fact of the great majority of them being in the nominative, while the literary words appear, as we have seen, as often, or oftener, in some oblique case. 14 [ill] UERBA DE SANCTI MARTYNI STORTA 11 34 35 37 38 48 53 57 63 64 65 66

Anfibula; oberlagu: Fatescit: briudid: Promontorium; hog: Abenis; halsledir Toracina; haeslin; Murmur: uastrung. lacuna: floda: lurida: pox; Labefacare: agleddçgo: Ultro; citro: hidirandidir Arguta: ordancas: Exenia: madmas

[IV] INCIPIT IN LIBRIÍM ECCLESIASTICE ISTORIAE 24 66 71 74 75 76 77 83

Callas; uarras; Terebrantes ; borgenti; Peripsima, gaesuope; Trogleis; hlgdrg Latriuncula; herst; Pusti; brandas Cäutere; tunderi; Ruder: mixin;

[V] ITEM DE ECCLESIASTICA STORIA: 2 5 11 15 19 21 22 30

Colomelias; lomum Carbunculi: poccas; Labrum . ambonem . idest haet; Pruriginero: bleci Publite: hamme Editiones. thestisuir Fibrarum ; darmana; Sescuplum: dridehalpf

[XXXV] 1 Tragoedia . bellica cantica . 3 6 55 59 66 69 73 74 75 122 14

DE EUSEBIO; ..

Prorigo: urido cutis, idest gjccae Tentigo: tenacitas uentris. idest ebind: Lacerta; adexa: Fornice, scelb: uel drep; Ignis acer; orna; Uixilla et labrum, idem sunt, idest segin: Codicibus: liguis in quibus incidunt codex: stofun; petigo; tetrafa; Jugeres; gycer Callos; tensam cutem: idest uarras; H. Sweet, op.cit., pp. 10-11.

157 158 165 175 176 183 203 204 233 289 292

Furtunam: fatum; geuiif; Rogus: beel: uel sad: Fatum; uyrd; Graticulis ferreis factis. Baratrum: loh; uel dal, Laciniosa: slitendç: Extale, snedil daerm; Puplites . homm§; Lineolis: dredum; Inuisum; luad Ruderibus; mixinnum;

[ XLVII ] ITEM ALIA; 1 7 9 10 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27

Abellana: hel: Calomaucus: het: Platissu: fole; Balera: hron: Caefalus: haerdhera; Perna; flicci; Umbrellas; stalo to fuglam: Uertigo; eduallç; Buculus; nordbaeg, Truffulus; felospric; Famfelvcas: laesungae; Inuolucrus; uuluc; Mordatius: clox: Erpica; egida; Alga: uuac; pessul . leer; Opilauit; gigisdae; Colostrum: beust;

51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70

Garallus, hroc: Parula: masae; Sturnus; stgr: Noctua; necthrefn; Turdella; drostlae; Ciconia; storhc: Arpa; arngeus. Scorelus; emaer; Ac ega; hoithona; Cucuzata; laepiuincg; Tilaris; laurice; Ruscinia; nectigalae; Turdus: scruc. Perdvlum; hragra; Sticulus; gaeuo; Picus: higre: Marsopicus: uinu; Ficetuia: suca, Fringella: uinc; Cardella . distyltige

herst

14

5

THE CORPUS GLOSSARY

The Corpus Glossary is preserved in only one manuscript, new in the possession of the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge (MS no. 144). J.H. Hessels" edition of 1890 is an exact reproduction of the whole manuscript.^ The later edition by W.M. Lindsay is an edition of the text with an apparatus criticus, meant by the author himself as a canpanion-volume to Hessels' edi2 tion. The date of the manuscript has repeatedly been discussed in the literature. T. Wright had no "hesitation in ascribing the writing to the eighth century". H. Sweet ccrrpared the Epinal and the Corpus Glossaries and arrived at the following conclusion: As Epinal and Corpus do not show any difference of dialect they were probably written in the same place. It is therefore highly improbable that any later scribe would copy the imperfect Epinal instead of the more complete and convenient Corpus text. The orthography of Corpus is more advanced and less clumsy than that of Epinal, substituting p and S for the ambiguous d and the digraph th of the latter, and introducing w for the cumbrous uu of Epinal. So also with the language, as shown by Corpus' disuse of ae in unaccented syllables, its levelling of inflectional ae and i under e, its development of fractures in such words as heolstras against the helustras of Epinal, and many other features. If, then, Corpus was written, as is, I believe, universally assumed, early in the eighth century, Epinal must have been written "at least a generation earlier". 3

1

J.H. Hessels, ed., An Eighth-Century Latin-Anglo-Saxon Glossary Preserved in the Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, (MS. No. 144) (Cambridge: University Press, 1890). There are three earlier editions of the Old English part of the manuscript: T. Wright, ed., A Volume of Vocabularies. Vol. II (1873), pp. 98-124; T. Wright, ed., Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies. Second edition, edited and collated by R.P. Wülcker. Vol. I: Vocabularies (London: Trübner & Co., 1884), cols. 1-54; H. Sweet, ed., The Oldest English Texts. Early English Text Society 83 (London: Trübner & Co., 1885), pp. 35-107.

2

W.M. Lindsay, ed., The Corpus Glossary with an Anglo-Saxon Index by Helen, if^M. Buckhurst (Cambridge: University Press, 1921), p. viii.

3

H. Sweet, op.cit., pp. 2-3.

15 Sweet was contradicted by Hessels : As regards the age of the MS., Mr Bradshaw was of the opinion that it must have been written in the beginning of the 8th century, and I do not think that we should be justified in placing it later... I do not think that the Epinal Glossary should be dated earlier than the Corpus. Its handwriting shows it to be of the first half of the 9th century, and the organic changes and scribal corruptions, observable in the spelling of Latin words, are already more advanced, and in some cases show a greater slovenliness, than in the Corpus Glossary, though occasionally it has preserved more correct forms than the latter. In my opinion the Epinal MS. stands, in point of time, much nearer to the Erfurt Glossary, wh^ch is attributed to the end of the 9th century, than to the Corpus. The Corpus Glossary is thus the oldest Latin-Old English glossary that has been preserved. This is undoubtedly the reason why Lindsay called it "England's oldest dictionary". Ihe manuscript consists of two alphabetical glossaries. C deals with Hebrew 6 2 and Greek words with very few English items, C interprets Latin lemmata by neans of Latin or Old English words. The two glossaries together contain 8712 7 1 glosses. The first part of the glossary, C , has an alphabetical arrangement o of 4-order òr " first-letter order", that is, alphabetization does not go be2 yond the initial of the headword. In C alphabetical order is more advanced, it includes the second letter of the headword. We thus have an /IB-order. Ulis is one factor that suggests that the Corpus Glossary is not an original work. The material has not only9been taken fron interlinear glosses or marginalia, but also frcm glossaries. When copying items frcm such glossaries the scribe could rearrange them according to the letters of the alphabet. Another factor is the linguistic form of many glosses " which are

so corrupt and altered

4

J. H. Hessels, op.cit.,p. ix. For the relation between the Epinal, Erfurt and Corpus Glossaries see also H. Gruber, "Die Hauptquellen des Corpus-, Epinaler und Erfurter Glossars," Romanische Forschungen, 20 (1907),pp. 393494; W. M. Lindsay, The Corpus, Êpinal, Erfurt and Leyden Glossaries. Publications of the Philological Society 8 (London: Oxford University Press, 1921).

5

W. M. Lindsay, op.cit.,p. v.

6

N. R. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957), p. 49 characterizes C as follows:"... The 34 OE glosses on these leaves are not to words of Greek and Hebrew origin but to the miscellaneous lemmata noticed by Lindsay, p. 188."

7

J. H. Hessels, op. cit., p. xlv.

8

J. A. H. Murray, op. cit.,pp. 11-12.

9

For the glossary sources of the Corpus Glossary see W.M. Lindsay, op.cit., pp. v-vi.

16

from what they originally must have been, that they are almost entirely un10

intelligible."

The linguistic alterations and spellings of the Latin words

of the glossary have been studied in detail by J.H. Hessels. His work at a Medieval Latin Dictionary and his carparison of the Corpus Glossary with the Catholicon Angliaum made him observe an examination of the Corpus Glossary brings out the fact that, though there is an interval of eight centuries between it and the Catholicon Anglicum, which is dated 1483, both these glossaries, written in England, stand in precisely the same stage with regard to deviations from the classical spelling of Latin caused by pronunciation, and changes caused by misreadings of certain letters."11

The glosses in the oldest Old English glossary are arranged in columns thus facilitating consultation and memorization. New lines start with capital letters which in sane sections of the manuscript are illuminated and marked 12

in red, green and yellow.

Letmata and explanations and/or equivalents are 13

separated by a point "whichmore than once takes the form of a short caima." The end of a line is usually marked by a point. Two interesting lexicographical features of the glossary are the following: the Anglo-Saxon (that is, the non-Latin) words in the text are marked. We have noticed the same lexicographical practice in the second oldest glossary, the Leiden Glossary. The other feature is the occasional indication of accents. Fran the items that are given accent markings it is not easy to deduce their function: C1: C P P 2 C :: A A E E Η I 0 0 S

10

71 Crepidinem. * neojpoúard. 241 Philippus. es lampadis. 243 Pilatus, os malleatoris. 200 490 35 262 122 134 233 271 423

Ad penses. * tô nyttum. Alueum. * edúaelle. Edilitatem. * hám scire. Ependiten. * cóp. 14 Hiantes. ós aperientes. Infandura. * mänful. Orbita. * hueolrâd. Osci òs. aperi. hoc est. Sorix. * mus.

J.H. Hessels, op.cit., p. xv.

11

J.H. Hessels, op.cit., ρ, xx.

12

J.H. Hessels, op.cit., p. ix.

13

J.H. Hessels, op.cit., p. x.

14

But note 289 Erenditen.

* cop.

17

1 The following is an extract of C manuscript.

2 and C

based on Hessels' edition of the

Only glosses with Anglo-Saxon equivalents are given. Since the

letter Β does not contain exanples for all the types of equivalents that occur in the text, illustrations have been taken from C as well. There are four basic types of glossing a Latin headword: 1. There is only one Anglo-Saxon equivalent: a. There is a one-word Anglo-Saxon equivalent: Β Β

3 Bacidones. * raedinne. 4 Bagula. * bridéis.

b. The Anglo-Saxon equivalent consists of more than one word: C 630 Cocleae. * lytle. sneglas. C 530 Conquilium. * jpiloc. seel. C 863 Conca. * musclan. seel. 2. For the Latin headword two Anglo-Saxon equivalents or synonyms are given: Β 178 Bolides. * sundgerd in scipe uel * metrap. C 317 Cepa. * ynnilaec. cipe. C 564 Commercium. * ceapstou. * gestrion. 3. The Latin headword is followed by a Latin explanation and then an AngloSaxon equivalent: C 670 Cors, numerus, militum. * tuun. C 857 Consobrinus. filius. patruelis. uel

* moderge.

4. The Latin headword is glossed by an Anglo-Saxon equivalent which is then followed by an explanation, synonyms or further specifications in Latin: Β 66 Beta. * bere arbor dicitur. C 361 Chaus. * duolma prima confusio omnium rerum. C 695 Commanipularius. * gescota. uel conscius. socius. collega. C 947 Culix. * mygg. longas tibias, habet. C1:

34 57 69 70 71 88 89 92

Adsida. * flood. Caluarie locus. * cualmstou. Coliferte. * gefciofta. Clauis. * helma. Crepidinem. * neojpoúard. Doleus. * byden. Dasile. * boor. Decurat. * hornnaap.

15

Hessels' edition is an exact reproduction of the manuscript and observes the punctuation used in the original. Since lexicographical presentation is an important factor in the historical development of English lexicography the extracts are based on Hessels' edition and not on Lindsay's later edition which is not as faithful to the original (it gives colons instead of points).

16

But see also C 616: Consobrinus. * gesuigran and C 717 Consobrinus * sueor. This is an interesting item beeause it occurs three times and each time with a different equivalent.

18 135 136 137 142 146 147 185 196 197 198 199 215 216 220 221 222

Ferula. * hreod. Fundus. * bodan. Foratorium. * buiris. Gemellus. * getuin. Gacila. * snithstreo. Glebulum. * hrider. Iungula. * geocboga. Ledo. * nepflod. Lancola. * cellae. Libitorium. * saa. Liguarium. * uuidubinde. Mantega. * taeg. Malina. * fylied flood. Mappa. * cneoribt. Maculosus. * specfaag. Menta. * minte.

2 C :Β 3 4 6 8 9 17 19 21 23 24 25 35 38 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58

Bacidones. * raedinne. Bagula. * bridéis. Balsis. * teter. Ballista. * staeflidre. Basterna. * beer. Batuitum. * gebeaten. Baccinia. * beger. Ballena. * horn. Barritus. * genung. Battat. * geonath. Basterna. * scrid. Balbus. * uulisp. Balus. * isernfeotor. Bachantes. * uuoedende. Baratrum. * dael. Basis. * syl. Ballationes. * cnop. Balbutus. * stom. piisp. Ban. * segn. Bapis. * treuteru. Baruina. * barriggae. Balneum. * stofa. Balatus. * bletid. Bariulus. * reagufinc.

61 66 68 70 71 75 77 85 89 91 93

Beacita. * stearn. Beta. * bere arbor dicitur. Aeneficium. * freomo. Berrus. * baar. Berruca. * uearte. Bellicum. * slag. Berna. * higrae. Bena. * atg. Bebella. * sperta. Becta. * stçrt. Bettonica. * aturlacte.

96 Bicoca. * haebreblete. 100 Bitumen. * liim.

19 103 Bitiligo. * blaecthrust.fel. 108'Bile. * atr. Ill Bitulus. * bere. 118 Biothanatas. * seolfbonan. 135 Bitricius. * steopfaeder. 136 Birbicariolus. * perna. 137 Bitorius. * erSling. 138 Bipertitum. * herbid. 140 Bilance. * tuiheolore. 141 Bibulta. * billeru. 142 Blitum. * elate. 143 Blattis. * bitulum. 144 Blessus. * stom. 146 147 148 150 152 164 165 166 167 171 176 178

Bothonia. * erabrin. Blohonicula. * stoppa. Bofellum. * falud. Bona. * scaet. Boreus. * east nor&find. Bobulcus. * hri&hiorde. Bouestra. * radre. Bacarius. * meresuin. Bofor. * lendis lieg. Borabosa. * hlaegulendi. Botrum. * clystri. Bolides. * sundgerd in scipe uel

179 181 182 183 185 186 187 188 189 195 196

Briensis. * honduyrm. Brahiale. * gyrdels. Bratium. * malt. Bradigabo. * felduop. Broel. * edisc. * deortuun. Broellarius. * ediscueard. Bruchus. * cefer. Bruncus. * Prot. Braciae. * cian. Brittia. * cressa. Brangina. * barice.

197 198 199 206 208 211 213 223 226 227 228 229

Bulla. * sigi. Bux. * box. Butio. * cyta. Bubo. * uuf. Buculus. * rondbaeg. Burrum. * bruun. Bubalis. * Jpeosend. Buccula. * buue. Bucitum. * seotu. Butio. * frysca. Bunia. * byden. Bubla. * flood.

230 Byssum. * tuin. 232 Byrseus. * leèeruyrhta.

* metrap.

20 6

THE ABC- GLOSSARY

Fran the manuscripts that have cane down to us,we may safely conclude that alphabetization was a very gradual lexicographical development and acquisition. The MS

Harley 3376 in the British Museum Library illustrates one of

the early intermittent stages. In addition, it displays a number of interesting glossographical features. The 94 leaves of the manuscript contain 5563 entries.

For the majority of

the Latin lerrmata the interpretamentum is in Latin, yet more than 1500 lemnata have an Old English explanation. The latin-Old English part of the glossary was first published in the second volunte of T. Wright's collection of glos2 saries and vocabularies. Wright's edition was revised by R.P. Wülcker in 3 4 1884. The ccnplete iranuscript was first edited by R.T. Oliphant in 1966. The glossary found in MS

Harley 3376 is only part of a larger glossary.

It breaks off at the entry Future merois. Two more leaves have been discovered. One of these leaves has been identified.^ It is the MS

Lat. Misc. a. 3. f. 49

1

R.T. Oliphant, ed., The Harley Latin-Old English Glossary Edited From British Museum MS Harley 3376 (The Hague - Paris: Mouton & Co, 1966), p. 11. For corrections to this edition see R. Derolez' review in English Studies, 51 (1970), pp. 149-151.

2

T. Wright, ed., A Volume of Vocabularies. 2 vols. (London: Privately printed, 1857-1873); Vol. 2: A Second Volume of Vocabularies, pp. 125-152.

3

T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, edd., Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies. 2 vols. (London: Trübner & Co., 1884); Vol. 1, cols. 192-247. For corrections to this edition see A.S. Napier, Old English Glosses, chiefly unpublished (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1900); P. Boll, Die Sprache der altenglischen Glossen im MS. Harley 3376. Bonner Beiträge zur Anglistik, 15 (Bonn: Manstein, 1904) und H.D. Meritt, Fact and Lore About Old English Words (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1954), pp. 193-194.

4

See note 1.

5

N.R. Ker, "Harley 3376 + Cheltenham, Phillipps Collection (?)," The British Museum Quarterly, 15 (1939-1940), pp. 80-81, and N.R. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957).

21 in the Bodleian Library. It was edited in 1961 by H.D. Meritt^ and contains lemnata beginning with In. The other leaf was first mentioned by N.R. Ker. ^ In his Catalogue of Manuscripts of 1957 he described it as follows: "The untraced T.ihri-Phillipps leaf contained words beginning with the letters Is. An OE. gloss is pr[inted] frcm the facsim. of 2 lines of this leaf in the g Τ .i bri sale catalogue, Napier, 1900, no. 60." When editing the leaf in the Bodleian Library H.D. Msritt mentioned another leaf fron the glossary at the University of Kansas. No hint was given as to whether the Kansas leaf was the same as the 'untraced Libri-Phillipps' leaf. R.T. Oliphant in his edition of the caiplete glossary also mentions a further leaf of the glossary at the University of Kansas, without giving any more details. Ker's Supplement to his Catalogue of Manuscripts of 1976, hcwever, settles the matter: "The untraced leaf is new in the Department of Special Collections, Kenneth Spencer 9 Research Library, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas (Pryce MS. P2 A: 1)". R.T. Oliphant's comparison of the size of the Corpus Glossary with that of the glossary found in MS Harley 3376 suggests that the latter was more comprehensive: "In Corpus the entries A - F number 3566, while [in] Harley the entries A - F nurrber 5563, suggesting that the original glossary was a third again as large as Corpus."^ The glossary is written as a continuous text. The Latin lermata have capital initials. Illese capitals occasionally vary in size which might be taken as an indication that the scribe tried to highlight the beginning of a lemma within the continuous text. Lerma and Latin or Old English interpretamentum are separated off by a siirple point or by the abbreviation .i. for id est. The end of the interpretanentum is signalled by another point. The Old English explanations of the latmata are either interlined or written on the same line as the lemmata or in the margin. N.R. Ker and R.T. Oliphant have both drawn attention to another interesting feature of the manuscript: In Harley 3376 Latin lemmata glossed in Old English are underlined, with the total number of glosses noted at the bottom of the pages on which

6

H.D. Meritt, "Old English Glosses, Mostly Dry Point," JEGP, 60 (1961), pp. 441-450; p. 447.

7

See note 5.

8

N.R. Ker, op.cit.,

9

N.R. Ker, "A Supplement to Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing AngloSaxon, " in Anglo-Saxon England, 5, ed. P. Clemoes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), pp. 121-131; p. 124.

ΙΟ

1957, p. 312.

R.T. Oliphant, op.cit., pp. 11-12.

22 they appear. N.R. Ker pointed out that this underlining was probably done by John Joscelyn, Latin secretary to Archbishop Matthew Parker. The Bodleian leaf, on the other hand, has no such underlining. Hence, Ker concluded, the fragmentation of the manuscript may well have taken place prior to the time it came into Joscelyn's hands." 11 When describing the glossary scholars have always referred to it as an 12 alphabetical glossary. T. Wright called it an "alphabetical glossary", N.R. Ker maintained that "the glossary is arranged in alphabetical groups, according to the first two letters of the lemmata", and R.T. Oliphant followed this scholarly tradition by characterizing it as "arranged alphabetically in 14 AB order".

Yet a close study of the manuscript reveals that all these assess-

ments are superficial. As a glossary of an /IB-arrangement its alphabetization would not go beyond that of earlier glossaries, e.g. the Corpus Glossary. The first scholar to have drawn attention to the fact that alphabetization is more advanced in this glossary than in earlier ones was J.A.H. Murray who noted: In at least one glossary of the tenth century, contained in a MS. of the British Museum (Harl. 3376), the alphabetical arrangement has been carried as far as the third letter, beyond which point it does not appear to have advanced. 15 The outstanding feature of the Harley Glossary is indeed its more advanced alphabetization. This is the reason why I have called it the 'ABC Glossary'. Yet the second part of Murray's statement has to be modified. In his well-justified criticism of R.T. Oliphant's edition R. Derolez remarked: ... yet there are unmistakable indications that the scribe went considerably further, viz. by using capitals of different sizes or by rubricating his capitals, or even by starting to write on a new line. Thus, the following lemmata with initial Β are distinguished by larger capitals (fol. 5r ff.): Β 188 Bianor, B. 192 Bicamexata, Β 200 Bidental, Β 206 Bifax, Β 215 Bigamus, Β 222 Biheres, Β 232 Bimatur, Β 238 Binas, Β 244 Bipennis, Β 249 Birrica, Β 260 Bisarius (not Bifarius, as printed by 0.), Β 278 Bitidus, etc., all pointing to an ABC order. There are even traces of attempts to arrive at an ABCD order: Β 456 Blandus, Β 466 Blasphemia, Β 467 Blatis, Β 474 Blauum get larger capitals, and so do C 260 Capax, C 287 Caperata,

11

R.T. Oliphant,op.cit., p. 12. See also N.R. Ker, op.cit., 1957, pp. 312-313.

12

T. Wright, op.cit., p. 125.

13

N.R. Ker, op.cit., 1957, p. 312.

14

R.T. Oliphant, op.cit., p. 11.

15

J.A.H. Murray, The Evolution of English Lexicography (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1900), p. 12.

23

etc. I admit that not all entries coming after one distinguished by a larger capital are in the right places, but one cannot deny that the scribe had recognized the importance of further refining the AB order. 16 C 297 Capilli, C 302 Capite census,

There are, hcwever, further features with respect to alphabetization which should be mentioned because they might help to identify further sources of the glossary. The letter A is in part uncharacteristic of the whole of the glossary in that it contains only 52 items altogether. Most of the latitata begin with the letters aba- or abd-. The letter itself breaks off after the first item beginning with the sequence ad-. Letter D, on the other hand, begins with dec-lenmata. There are no words beginning with da-. Within alphabetization, derivational relationship seems to have occasionally been taken into account, e.g. the grouping of F 685 Fraus, F 686 Fraudulenter, F 687 Fraudulentas, etc. or F 771 Frons, F 772 Frontes. The most interesting feature, however, is the alphabetical arrangement in letter B, which so far seems to have escaped scholarly notice. Apart fron the ABC or occasional ABCD order we note a further suborder according to vowels and consonants. If we disregard four exceptions at the end of the letter (Buxeas, Buxo, Buxeo, Buxus), we find that the scribe first listed groups of words in which the second letter is a vowel, in the order of the vcwels in the alphabet, that is Ba-, Be-, Bi-, Bo-, Bu-, and then those in which the second letter is a consonant, that is Bl-, Br-, The last batch consists of lermata the second letter of which is y. This unusual arrangement recalls another peculiar ar17 rangement in the Glossae Affatim. The purpose of R.T. Oliphant's edition, in the author's cwn words, is "to present accurately and in a useable form the contents of the manuscript." R. Derolez has put forward a number of corrections. There is another rather serious deficiency of the edition which R. Derolez did not mention in his review. The nanuscript contains a nunber of entries in which the Old English explanations are provided with acute accent marks. These accents are preserved 16

R. Derolez, op.cit., p. 149.

17

Under the entry gloss, glossary of the Encyclopaedia Britannica (11th edition, Cambridge, 1910) J.H.H. writes: "A peculiar arrangement is seen in the Glossae affatim ... where all words are alphabetized, first according to the initial letter of the word (a, b, c, &c), and then further according to the first vowel in the word (a, e, i, o, u)." For an edition of the Glossae see Georgivs Goetz, ed., Corpvs Glossariorvm Latinorvm. Vol. IV: Glossae Codicvum Vaticani 3321 Sangalliensis 912 Leidensis 67F (Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1965), pp. 471-581.

24 in Wright's edition of "the glossary. For reasons not clear to me they were dropped in R.P. Wtilcker's later edition of 1884. Since these accent marks are unusual in early English glossography I shall list the accent-marked items 18 of the glossary.

A carparison with the Corpus Glossary reveals that spell-

ings with two vcwels correspond to spellings with one accented vowel in the Harley Glossary, e.g. Corpus liim - Harley lîm, Corpus buua - Harley búa, Corpus hood - Harley hod, the accent in the Harley manuscript thus obviously indicating vowel length in the above exanples. That these accent markà might provide seme clues for the tracing of the sources of the glossary should not go unmentioned: Bigener, aworden, vel dòc. Bitumen, scip-ter, vel lim. Borbus, cena, slim. Buccula, bue. Blasphemie, vituperatio, tal. Calcis, finis, lim, tah-spura. Calcis viva, gebarnd lim. Capitium, hod. Cementum, i. cesura lapidis, vel lim, vel mendacium cogitatum. Chronographus, tid-scriptor. Cirta, âc-drenc, vel nomen loci. Cimentum, stan-lim. Communi dividendo actio, gemanan gedâl. Completorium, gefylling-tid. Concessum, gemot. Convictor, conviva, gebêor. Crebris, i. spissis, gelómlicum. Crimen, i. peccatum, scyld, lehte, mân-daed. Depositum, i. commendatum, Ifen. Detractatio, vituperatio, tál. Elimino, i. distruo limitem, foras ejicio, expello, 1c ut-anyde, vel drife, vel adyde. Erugo, rust, óm, vel tinea, i. vitium frumenti vel ferri. Evanesco, i. evaneo, ic fordwine. exauctoravit, deordinavit, gehende. Excidit, cecidit, vel gewát. Excussatio, lád, ladung, vel wroht. Fedus, deformis, turpis, vel ful. Feda, vel polluta, ful. Finium regum, dorum actio, gemœra gedál. Flagitiosus, i. corruptor, criminosus, mánful. Flagrantis furie, byrnendes gálseipes, vel re]?nesse. Fluentis, i. lascive, gâbre. 18

The list is based on Wright's edition and has been compared with the original.

25 Frigida pestis, còlcwyld. Fumus, rèe, llg. Funeratus, morte vel râw. Ihe sources of the glossary have been studied by a number of scholars and 19 sate have been identified. A saitple fron the Corpus Glossary and the ABC Glossary will leave no doubt that the scribes must have had access to different glossae oolleatae and sources. For the exanples from the letter Β the differences are much more striking than the few correspondences. There are very few Latin lerrmata for which the Old English explanation or equivalent is the same: CORPUS GLOSSARY

HARLEY GLOSSARY

Balus. * isernfeotor. Balsis. • teter. Boreus. * east nordfind. Buccula. * buue. Bunia. * byden.

32 53 352 391 425

Balus. * isernfeotor. Balsis. * teter. Boreus. * east nordwind. Buccula. * bue. Bunia. * byden.

Differences between the two glossaries are occasionally based en variant spellings, in most cases, however, the Old English explanations differ: CORPUS GLOSSARY 57 Balatus. * bletid. 8 Ballista. * staeflidre. 15 Balbus. qui dulcem linguam hab[et]. 35 Balbus. * uulisp. 52 Balbutus. * stora, flisp. 54 Bapis. * treuteru. 23 Barritus. * genung.

49 39 70 96 140

Baratrum. * dael. Baratrum. sepulcrum. Berrus. * baar. Bicoca. * haebreblete. Bilance. * tuiheolore.

HARLEY GLOSSARY 36 Balatus. * hlowung. 46 Ballista, catapulta, uel jq machina belli ..i. * searu. 47 Balbus. gui uult logui et non potest. * wlips uel * swetwyrda. 48 Balbutus. * stomer. 69 Bapis. i. hortus. uel * teru 73 Barritus. * ge&ota. * rarung. * geonung. uel dissimilis. 87 Baratrum. i. terre hiatus. * dael. uel * faerseafc. 160 Berrus. * bera uel * bar. 197 Bicoca. * haferblœta. 225 Bilance. • twiwœge. uel * heolore

19

See in this respect H. Lübke, "Über verwandtschaftliche Beziehungen einiger altenglischer Glossare", ASMS, 44 (1890), pp. 382-410; pp. 403-409; A.S. Napier, op.cit., p. xii; O.B. Schlutter, "Lexical and Glossographical Notes," MLN, 15 (1900), pp. 206-211; pp. 206-208; O.B. Schlutter, "Anglo-Saxonica," Anglia, 31, N.F. 19 (1908)rpp. 521-542; pp. 521-525; F.J.H. Jenkinson, ed., The Hisperica Famina. Edited with a short introduction and an index verborum. With three facsimile plates (Cambridge: University Press, 1908), pp. xiv-xvi.

20

See R. Derolez, op.cit., p. 150.

26 CORPUS GLOSSARY

HARLEY GLOSSARY

108 lOO 137 167 178

223 282 285 320 328

Bile. * atr. Bitumen. * liim. Bitorius. * erdling. Bofor. * lendis lieg. Bolides. * sundgerd in scipe uel * metrap. 171 Bombosa. * hlaegulendi. Bothonia. * embrin. Blohonicula. * stoppa. Botrum. * clystri. Bubalis. * Peosend. Buculus. * rondbaeg.

366 367 370 381 392

212 Burrus. niger.

435

227 Butio. * frysca. 143 Biattis. * bitulum. 183 Bradigabo. * felduop.

445 467 488

CO Ln

146 147 176 213 208

341

517

Broel. * edisc, * deortuun. 188 Bruncus. * prot. That the scribe

532

Bile felle. * attre. Bitumen. * scipter, uel lim. Bitorius. * wrenna. bitriscus Bofor. * lsrobis lieg. Bolidis. * sundgyrd on scipe. uel * ne trap. Bombosa. * hlowende. * tutende . Bothonia. * aembern. Botholicula. * stoppa. Botrus. » clystra. Bubalus. • wesend. Buculus. uel bucularis. * randbeag. Burrus. rufus. niger. burlis. * brun. Butium. * cyta. * frisca. Blatis. * bitelum. Bradigatio. ploratio campi. * feldwop. Broel. hortus ceruorum. * deortun. uel * edisc. Bruncus. » wrot.

of the Corpus Glossary and that of the Harley Glossary must

have used different sources is manifest frati another factor: lenrrata believed to be of Greek or Hebrew origin are often marked as such in the Harley Glossary. Examples fran the letter Β are: 4 6 15 28 33 103 106 115 505

Bacha graece insania, dementia, a furore dicta est. Bachor graece insanior. fio démens. Bacuceus graece turtur. uel rusticus. Baista. graece. * glasin. Bali, graece. emittere. Bath, ebraice. linum. Bathus. ebraice. antiquus. Behemoth, ebraice. exclusus iatine. animal, leviathan. Bresit. ebraice genesis graece. Iatine principium.

R.T. Oliphant has pointed out that a "notable scribal practice of Harley 3376 21

is the frequent use of elliptical forms".

Cases in point are entries such as

55 Cals, sis, 56 Calx, ais where the abbreviated forms sis and ais stand for the genitive forms aalsis and calais. That such elliptical fonts are also tosed for Old English items has been shown by H.D. Meritt. He described one particular type of elliptical forms as follows: "A camón characteristic of glosses containing two alternative renderings in which one is a ccrrpound 21

R.T. Oliphant, op.cit., p. 16.

is

27 to write only part of the other gloss and so leave it as an elliptical can22 pound." In the following entry F 66 Falcastrum .i. ferramentum curvum. a similitudine falcis uocatuDj. * wudubil uel * foddur.

the Old English gloss wudubil uel foddur may thus stand for wudubil uel foddurbil. A distinctive feature of the ABC Glossary are its Latin and/or Old English equivalents. R.T. Oliphant has already stressed the fact that we often find leimata with multiple interpretations. In his discussion he focus ses on the merging of originally separate entries into a single one and the resulting variety of interpretations for one lemma. He also tries to account for sane equivalents which are difficult to interpret. Β 211, for instance, Β 211 Bifarus .i. bilinguis uel piscina, fiscwelle.

suggests that bifarius was regarded as a variant of uiuarius which was glossed as piscina, fiscwelle. Another possible result of these mergings is the richness in synonymic expressions that we encounter with seme lemmata. A Latin lerrma may have as many as 14 Latin equivalents all rendering different shades of meaning, e.g. E 549 Explico .i. manifesto, expono, compleo. reuelo. demonstro, resero, aperio. finio, inquiro. indico, indago, profero, expedio. narro. E 717 Explorât .i. inquirit. auscultai, inuestigat. praedat. petit, expellit. interrogat. exprobat. extinguit. perspicit. uastat. * herga£>. excludit. eicit. elidit.

Old English equivalents do not seem to go beyond five in nurrber: D 575 Dispendium .i. daprium. inpedimentum. defectio. periculum. detrimentum. * afwerdla. * wonung. * worn. * wana. uel * henjsa. F

7 Fastidium .i. altitudo. odium, longvun. contemptum. uel nausia. uel * aejprot. * unmsegnes. * «meines. * aelengnes. uel

* cisnes.

The use of vel and i for id est illustrates that the lexicographical metalanguage is Latin. This is confirmed in the very few cases in which we have a beginning of usage indications ccrrmenting on alternative forms (C 2160 Cuncto. pro cunctor, E 22 Ecquid. pro enquid. interiectio increpantis, F 345

22

H.D. Meritt, op.cit., p. 193.

28 Firi. quasi fieri.) or an indication of a word-formational relationship (B 16 Baculus. bacillun. perdiminutiuirrc, F 256 Femella, femina dixninutiue, F 974 Furca. furcula diminutiue.

* g®fie).

Fran a lexicographical point of view sane further characteristics of the glossary should be mentioned. Among the entry words we find quite a nuntoer of proper names, e.g. Β Β Β Β Β

128 162 292 314 361

Β Β C C C C

363 513 157 350 472 551

Benacus. lacus italiae. Berenica. urbs in graecia. Bizantium. nomen prouincie. Boetia. prouincia elladis. Bosforum. a transitu boum nomen habet uel uentus. uel nomen insulae. Bosphoron. nomen insulae. Britium. nomen insule est. Calabria, prouincia bene uenti. Carpatos. nomen insule. Caspium. nomen maris. Catullus, nomen poete.

Names of animlas are often referred to the genus without any indication of the specific characteristics, e.g. Β Β C C

294 303 137 729

Boas, ncmen serpentis. Bobua. nomen serpentis. Calamites, nomen piscis. uel ramos. Centupeda. a multitudine pedum dicta. nomen serpentis. C 834 Cecula .i. nomen serpentis ... C 1616 Columella, nomen auis.

The same holds for a number of names of plants, e.g. Β Β C C C F F

43 347 98 121 727 237 334

Balanis, genus querci. Bonfaticus. nomen querci agresti. Calta, genus floris. Calicularis. nomen herbe. Centauria. nomen herbe. Feletes. nomen arborum. ï'incerus. nomen herbe.

as well as names for gems, e.g. Β 525 Bronia, nomen gemme. C 52 Calcitis. nomen gemme. C 61 Calcofanus. nomen gemme. C 416 Caristeum. marmor. uel nomen gemme. C 751 Celedonia .i. nomen gemmae.

29 The following is the list of Latin lamata of the letter Β which have one or more Old English glosses. The list is based an R.T. Oliphant"s edition to vAiich the accent narks of the manuscript have been added. Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

25 28 31 32 36 37 46

Β

47

Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

48 53 54 56 57 69 73

Β

80

Β Β

86 87

Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

89 104 108 112 119 12o 121 122 125 126 131 132 135 136 138

Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

141 145 148 149 160 163 164 170

Β 179 Β 180

Bainus. * fcerscel. Baista. graece. * glasin. Balidus. * dun. Balus. * isernfeotor. Balatus. * hlowung. Balatio. * crop. Ballista, catapulta, uel machina belli .i. * searu. Balbus. qui uult loqui et non potest. * wlips uel * swetwyrda. Balbutus. * stomer. Balsis. » teter. Ballum. * £c|>er. Baltheum. cinguluro. uel * belt. Balla loca prasinum. * brunbasu. Bapis .i. hortus. uel * teru. Barritus. * gejpota. * rarung. * geonung. uel dissimilis. Barbarus .i. truculentus. gentilis seruus. uel * ungereord. Barius. uarius. * fah. Baratrum .i. terre hiatus. * dael. uel * fœrseaj?. Baratorium. * byre. Bathma .i. femora. * fceoh. Baxus. * sicol. Beabis. beatum facis. * i>u gleadgast. Beneficimi) .i. donum. * freme, gif e. Benetum. * scirbasu. Beneficus. benefactor. * fremful. Beneplacita. » gecweme. Bena. * ate. Benignitas. * fremsumnes. Belliger .i. miles, bellator. * waepenbora. Bellicosus. pugnandi cupidus. * wigbaare. Beiliter. * cene. Bellator. * fihtling. Bellona .i. furia, dea belli, mater matris. * wylfen. Bellica. » wiglic. Beluae. bestiae maris. * wylfene. Belsarum. * £>yfela uel * boxa. Betica. * wic^egn. Berrus. * bera uel » bar. Berruca. * wearte. Berbex. * rom. Bibliotheca .i. librorum repositio. * bochord. uel * fodder. Bibulis buccis. * hleostrum. Bibultum. * bilhergas.

30 Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

197 198 205 208 209 211 213 217

Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

220 223 225 231 237 238 239 242 244

Β 264 Β 265 Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

266 270 272 274 282 285 289 291 305 320 322 324

Β 325 Β 328 Β 334 Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

338 341 352 356 366 367 370 371 377 379 381 382 384

Bicoca. * hsferblœta. Bictonatus. * selfbona. Biennis. * twiwintre. Biforma. * twihiwe. Bifori. * twidœledre. Bifarius .i. bilinguis. uel piscina. * fiscwelle. Bifida, bis diuisa. * twidasled. Biga, ubi duo equi currui iunguntur. * horscrœt. Bigener. * aworden. uel * dóc. Bile felle. * attre. Bilance. * twiwage. uel * heolore. Bilustris. * twiferum uel * hiwum. Bimus .i. biennius. * twiwintre. Binas. * butu. Binas quinquies. * tuwa fife. Bino muñere. * twifealdre gife^^ Bipennis. securis. * twilaste «ex. uel * twibile. Bistinctus coccus. * twegra bleo. ^ Bis tincto cocco. * of twi bleoum derodine. uel * of twi tal gedum. Bissina. candida. * hwit. Bissemis. * twiga healfum. Bisso retorto. * hwite twine gefcirawne. Bisterque. vi. * twiga £>riga. Bitumen. * scipter. uel * lim. Bitorius. * wrenna. bitriscus. Biuligo. niger uelamen. * rift. Bizus. * tysca. Bobella. * swearte. Bofor. * lambis lieg. Boia, arcus. uel * geoc. Boias. catenas. * sweorcopsas. uel * handcopsas. Boi. * scaettas. Bolidis. * sundgyrd on scipe. uel * netrap. Bombus. uox inepta, sonitus tumultus. * hlowung. uel sorbellus. clangor, tubis. * cyrm. Bombicinum. * seolcen gegerla. Bombosa. * hlowende. * £>u tende. Boreus. * east nordwind. Borbus. cena. * slim. Bothonia. * aanbern. Botholicula. * stoppa. Botrus. * clystra. Botrax. * yce. BoueHum. * fald. Bouile. * scipen. Bubalus. * wesend. Buban. * raredumle. Bubimus. * waser.

23

R. Derolez, op.cit., p. 151.

24

R. Derolez, op.cit., p. 151.

Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

390 391 392 403 405 407 408 411 414 415 417 425 427 435 438 439 445 446 447 448 456

Β 457 Β 459 Β 460 Β 461 Β Β Β Β

462 466 467 468

Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

474 480 485 487 488 489 490

Β 506 Β 508 Β 517 Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β

518 519 531 532 534 538 543 548 553

Bucula. iuuenca. uitula. * stire. Buccula. * búc. Buculus. uel bucularis. * randbeag. Buccis. buccellis. * welrum. Bucleamen. * hearthama. Bucetum. * ri£fold. Buccina. * geofola. Bulla, gemma, flumen. uel * sigi. Bullifer. * bulberende. Bulbile. * bucce. Bullas, ornamenta cinguli. * for£>gegyrdu. Bunia. * byden. Busius. * fealu. Burrus. rufus. niger. burlis. * brun. Burro, panno, lacerno. * hacole. Burris. curuamentum aratri. * sulhbeam. Butium. * cyta. * frisca. Butiuncula. * tunyncel. Butros. * clystra. Buturnus. * heope. Blandus. lenis. placidus. iocundus. suauis. * li£>e. Blanda, iocunda. * lijpe. * swaes. * oliccung. Blandís sermonibus. lenis uerbis. * li}?um. uel * swetwyrdum. Blandide. » gesweese. Blanditur. adolatur. * olecca}?. * geswaeslac¡?. * lijperca}?. ancillatur. fouit. Blandiens. * oliccende. Blasphemia. uituperatio. * tèi. Blatis. * bitelum. Blatea. lucifuga. * wicga. uel genus purpure. uel uermis. Blauum. color est uestis. * bleo. Blurus. caluus. * blere. Bracile. * slyten. Bratium. * mealt. Bradigatio. ploratio campi. * feldwop. Brateolis. laminis. * platungum. Bratea fila, torta aurea fila. * £a ajprawenan gold Jpraedas. Bresion. * bulut. Brigacus. * scearbeam. Broel. hortus ceruorum. * deortum. uel * edisc. Broellarius. * ediseweard. Brogus. * Brumela. bellicuro. uel * sia. Bruncus. * wrot. Bruntus. * won. Brugma. * barice. Bruuinus. * lytel wicga. Byrsarius. uel byrseus. * le£>erwyrhta. Byrrum. • casul.

32

7

IME LONDON VOCABULARY ( BRITISH MUSEUM ADD MS 32, 246 AND PLANTINMDRETTUS MS NO. 32, ANTWERP)

Alphabetization in Old English glossography does not seem to have developed beyond the state reached in the ABC Glossary. In a well-preserved glossary of the 11th century in the British Museum Library (MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, r ν ff. 5 -75 ), for instance, alphabetization is restricted to the first letter of the Latin lenmata.^ Yet whereas the ABC Glossary breaks off after the letter F this glossary covers the letters A to P. The display of the glosses is very clear: the initial letter of the latina is very conspicuously separated off from the rest of the word and the Old English explanation is usually written above the Latin lemta in a script that is smaller than that of the Latin headword, e.g. A

j^ectcx-rrv

Each manuscript page has two columns of glosses, thus facilitating the finding of the Latin item in question. The headwords themselves still shew many inflectional forms, and the number of Old English words marked by an acute ac2 cent is substantially greater than that in the previous glossaries. The more scribes observed alphabetical order, the more they tended to drop infontation on the sources of the glosses. The MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 5 r -75 v is interesting in this respect: it has a first letter order but also provides information on S O I E of its sources in the form of sigla in the margin, e.g. 1

The glossary is described by N.R. Ker, op.cit., no. 143. N.R. Ker believes that the MS Cotton Otho. E. i. may have been a complete copy of MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 5 r - 7 5 v before it was damaged in the fire of 1731 (cf N.R. Ker, no. 184). The glossary was first edited by R.P. Wülcker in T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, edd., op.cit., col. 338-473. There is also an unpublished dissertation, which was not available to me: William Garlington Stryker, The Latin-Old English Glossary in MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, Stanford University, Ph.D. dissertation, 1951.

2

There is only one single accent mark in R.P. Wülcker's edition (Albugo, eagfleà), although the total number of accent marks for Old English words exceeds 250. Latin items that are provided with an acute accent are: bis, báriona, cóx, celidrum, colléga, fàr serótina, fràgos, fur, inlibktae, lêx, lis, mala, nàt, ós.

33 dì

(f. 26v), eoi

(f. 13v), ni¡i

(f. 15r), réagi

(f. 44r), etc., already iden-

3

tified by N.R. Ker.

Glossaries, whether alphabetized or not, were not, however, the only type of word list in Old English times which teachers used to irrprove their pupils' oaimand of the Latin vocabulary as well as their own. The other type of word list was the so-called class glossary or vocabulary. A class glossary lists classes of items that relate to specific topics, e.g. the parts of the body, instruments, ships, etc. The item arrangement is thus topical, and not alphabetical. A nurrber of such vocabularies has been preserved. Archbishop Vocabulary,

Alf

rie's

as dated and printed in T. Wright's Volume of Vocabularies

was for 4 a long time regarded as the oldest vocabulary that had been preserved. T. Wright's collection of glossaries and vocabularies includes three other 11thcentury vocabularies: MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 76r-91v and Cotton Julius A II, ff. 120V-130V, both in the British Museum Library, and the MS 1828-30 (185), ff. 36-109, in the Royal Library, Brussels.5 There has been much controversy about 'Archbishop Aelfric's Vocabulary'. And this for a nurrber of very good reasons. One moot point has been the authorship of the vocabulary. When it was first edited in 1857, T. Wright attributed it to Archbishop Aelfric and described it as follows: The vocabulary, or glossary, of archbishop Alfric, is the oldest monument of this description of the English language now extant. It is printed from one of the manuscripts of Junius in the Bodleian Library at Oxford; it usually follows Alfric's Anglo-Saxon translation from the Latin Grammar of Priscian, which was the favourite class-book of the mediaeval schools. It

3

Cf N.R. Ker, op.cit., no. 143, pp. 180-181.

4

Cf T. Wright, op.cit., pp. 15-48, p. 15; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op. cit., col. 104-167.

5

For MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 76r-91V see T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit., col. 258-283. J.J. Quinn's doctoral dissertation The Minor Old English Glossaries in MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, Stanford University, 1956, has unfortunately not been published. See also N.R. Ker, op.cit., p. 182. For MS Cotton Julius A II, ff. 120V-130V s e e τ. Wright, op.cit., pp. 70-86. T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit., col. 304-337; J. Zupitza, ed., Aelfrics Grammatik und Glossar. Sammlung englischer Denkmäler in kritischen Ausgaben, Abteilung: Text und Varianten: Bd. 1 (Berlin: Weidmann, 1880), and N.R. Ker, op.cit., nos. 2, 17, 71, 154A, 158, 227, 362, 398, 405, 406. For the MS in Brussels see T. Wright, op.cit., pp. 62-69; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit., col. 284-303; N.R. Ker, op.cit., no. 9. For corrections to the Wright-Wülcker editions of MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 76r-91v and the Brussels MS see H. Logemann, "Zu Wright-Wülcker I, 204-303", ASNS, 85 (1890), pp. 316-318; see also F. Liebermann, "Aus Aelfrics Grammatik und Glossar", ASNS, 92 (1894), pp. 413-415.

34 was transcribed, not always correctly, by or for Junius, from a MS. in the possession of Reubens the painter, which is no longer known to exist. This manuscript, from an apparent reference to King Cnut, seems to be not older than the eleventh century, when Alfric's original vocabulary was perhaps considerably modified ... 6 Ihe identification of Aelfric with Archbishop Aelfric had been refuted two years earlier by E. Dietrich who proved that the author of our vocabulary was 7 8 Aelfric, abbot of Eynsham. Aelfric flourished at about 1006, was well kncwn at the tine for his homilies, translations, and his famous Latin Gramnar: g he was known as 'Granxnaticus'.

E. Dietrich's identification made R.P. Wülcker

correct T. Wright's view in the revised edition. Another confusion arose frati the fact that there is another work which is referred to as 'Aelfric's Glossary'. ^ The glossary in question begins with the item Deus omnipotens and ends with the words We ne magon sua peah ealle naman awritan ne furpor gepencan. T. Wright referred to it as an 'Anglo-Saxon Vocabulary (of the eleventh century)'. He saw the relation between this glossary and Aelfric's Vocabulary as follows: Although there seems to be little room for doubt that the first of the Vocabularies printed in the present volume is rightly ascribed to Alfrie, yet in the known MSS. Alfric's Grammar is followed by a vocabulary which is differently arranged, and more condensed. This vocabulary is here printed from a copy in MS. Cotton.,Julius A II., in the British Museum. Another occurs in the MS. in St. John's College, Oxford ... 12 Aelfric's Glossary, or at least parts of it, have been preserved in quite a

6

T. Wright, op.cit., p. 15.

7

E. Dietrich, "Abt Aelfrik. Zur Literaturgeschichte der angelsächsischen Kirche," Zeitschrift für historische Theologie, 25 (1855), pp. 487-594, and 26 (1856), pp. 163-256.

8

Cf L. Stephen and S. Lee, edd., The Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. I (London: Oxford University Press, 1973).

9

The grammar was printed by W. Somner in his Dictionarum Saxonico-LatinoAnglicum (London: Daniel White, 1659).

10

R.P. Wülcker writes in his preface: "A mistake slipped into the superscription of No. 4. It was entitled according to Wright as Archbishop Aelfric's Vocabulary, however, according to Dietrich's excellent investigation, the author was Abbot Aelfric. In the table of contents I have thus also changed it".

11

Cf J. Zupitza's edition, Note 5.

12

T. Wright, op.cit., pp. 70-86; p. 70.

35 number of manuscripts.

13

T. Wright's edition is the first based on the MS

Cotton Julius A II. It is, hcwever, not the first edition of Aelfvio's Glossary. As early as 1838 Sir Themas Phillipps had edited part of the Glossary 14 based on a manuscript in the archj.ves of Wbrcester Cathedral. lhat Aelfvio's Glossary was well known at the time may be concluded frati the fact that there is a Cornish translation of it. The Vooabulariwn Covnioim was first edited by J.C. Zeuss at the end of his Celtic Granmar.^"' It breaks off after the item sella. H. Schuchardt who compared the Cornish vocabulary with Aelfvio's Glossary as edited by T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker came to the conclusion that Aelfvio's Glossary might have been the basis for the Cornish translation or that both, Aelfrio's Glossary and the Vooabulariwn Covnioum, might have been copied from another third original: Die lat. Schlagwörter des korn. Vokabulars (12. Jhrh.) weisen genau die gleiche Reihenfolge auf wie die des englischen welches in Wrights und Wülckers Anglo-Saxon and Old-English Vocabularies 184, I, 307 ff. unter Nr. X abgedruckt ist (11. Jhrh.), sodaß jenem dieses als Vorlage gedient haben muß oder beiden zusammen ein drittes. Nur erscheinen zuweilen zwei unmittelbar aufeinander folgende Wörter in verschiedener Stellung, so nach pulcher - formosus; deformis - speciosus, uel decorus 308, 24 f. = speciosus 1. decorus - deformis 1067,10, indem hier die Bedeutung, dort die etymologische Beziehung in den Vordergrund trat. Die letztere wurde hier (nicht dort) berücksichtigt, wo es für die erstere nichts ausmachte: dominus, uel berus - matrona - domina 309,43 ff = dominus 1. herus domina - matrona 1068,14 f. In diesen Fällen haben wir den Eindruck daß im korn. Vok. eine Verbesserung angestrebt wurde; in anderen wie uernaculus - seruus 310,4 f. = seruus - uernaculus 1069,2 sind die Stellungen gleichwertig. Wenn 306,8 labia vor dens - dentes - lingua - palatum, aber 1066,8 nach diesen Wörtern steht, so ist es wahrscheinlicher daß hier ein übersehenes Wort nachgetragen worden ist, als daß dort vier Wörter zunächst übersehen und somit eines vorweggenommen. Das korn. Vok. hat gegenüber dem englischen viele Lücken und geht außerdem über nichil - aliquid sella 332,6 ff. = 1081,3 nicht hinaus. Andererseits hat es manches mehr, und zwar an zwei Stellen mehr oder weniger geschlossene Massen, unter den Namen der Kleidungsstücke 1079,4 ff. mantellum und tunica bis vagina (nach 328,10 und 11) und unter denen der Nahrungsmittel 1079,13 ff.

13

See N.R. Ker, Note 5. The Semi-Saxon Vocabulary of the 12th century, edited by T. Wright, op.cit., pp. 87-95, isbelieved to be a shortened and fragmentary version of Aelfric's Glossary.

14

T. Phillipps, Fragment of Aelfric's Grammar, Aelfric's Glossary, and a Poem on the Soul and Body. In the orthography of the 12th century. Discovered among the archives of Worcester Cathedral (London: W. Clownes and Sons, 1838).

15

J.C. Zeuss, Grammatica Celtica. E Monumentis vetustis tam Hibernicae linguae quam Britannicae dialecti Cambricae Cornicae Armoricae. Nec non e Gallicae Priscae reliquiis. Vol. I (Leipzig: Weidmann, 1853), pp. 11001124.

36 pañis albus usw. (nach 329,6.8.10). 16 Hie popularity of Aelfric 's Glossary may have been the reason why W. Sonner wanted to include it, together with Aelfric's Grammar, at the end of his Diationarium Saxonico-Lat-Lno-Angliaum

of 1659. Unfortunately, W. Satiner chose a

manuscript for the graimar, British Museum Royal 15 Β XXII, which lacks a glossary. According to C.A. Ladd's account Somner tells us that he had consulted other manuscripts of the Grammar, and he no doubt knew that it was generally accompanied by a glossary; but instead of using one of these manuscripts to complete his text, he decided to print a completely distinct work; which he took from a transcript communicated to him by his friend Francis Junius. Junius had in fact conflated two separate items, an incomplete alphabetical glossary and a class-glossary ... 17 The third issue in the controversial history of Aelfric's Vocabulary was the question of the manuscript that was said to have been in the possession of Rubens the painter and fran viiich Francis Junius had conflated his vocabulary. The manuscript had been reported as lost. In 1885, however, two scholars drew their colleagues' attention to a manuscript which the British Museum had acquired in the previous year. Both, E.M. Thompson and F. Kluge discussed the relation that this newly acquired, but incomplete manuscript (MS ADD 32, 246) 18 bore to the Junius manuscript. Two years later, J. Zupitza provided the necessary link: he reported to the Berliner Gesellschaft für das Studium der neueren Sprachen the discovery of the rest of the manuscript in the Plantin19 Moretus library.

Fran here it was only a few steps to the identification of

the catplete manuscript with the lost 'Rubens manuscript'. The credit of having for the first time distinguished the different glossary sections in the taro 16

H. Schuchardt, "Bret, eskop } franz. escope } niederd. * skop(p)a } lat. scyphus + cup(p)a "Wasserschauf eî'," Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 33 (1909), pp. 641-658; pp. 644-645. See also O.B. Schlutter, "Das Vocabularium Cornicum und seine Beziehungen zu dem ae. Vocabulare des XI. Jahrhunderts aus MS. Cott. Julius A II, 4°, fol. 120v17 - 130v", Anglia, 33 (N.F. 21) (1910), pp. 370-390.

17

C.A. Ladd, "The 'Rubens' Manuscript and Archbishop Aelfric's Vocabulary", Review of English Studies, Ν.S. 11, No. 40 (1960), pp. 353-364; p. 353.

18

E.M. Thompson, "Aelfric's Vocabulary", The Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 41 (1885), pp. 144-152 and F. Kluge, "Angelsächsische Glossen. Addit. MS. 32, 246", Anglia, 8 (1885), pp. 448-452.

19

J. Zupitza in Sitzungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für das Studium der neueren Sprachen, ASNS, 79 (1887), pp. 85-94; p. 88. See in this context also F. Kluge, "Englische Etymologien. 4. NE. PAIL", Englische Studien, 10 (1887), and J. Zupitza, "Die ursprüngliche Gestalt von Älfrics Colloquium," Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum, 31 (1887), pp. 32-45; p. 43.

37 manuscripts goes to M. Förster.

He published the Antwerp part of the manu-

script and settled the question of the origin of the manuscript as follows: Offenbar liegt die sache so, daß Junius die handschrift von dem besitzer durch die Vermittlung des malers P.P. Rubens geliehen erhalten hat, der nachweislich mit der familie Plantin-Moretus in enger beziehung stand und mit Junius möglicherweise anläßlich dessen geschichte der antiken maierei (De pictura veterum, Amsterdam 1637) bekannt geworden war ... Wir sollten daher die bezeichnung "Rubens-glossen" endgültig aufgeben und sie fortab vielmehr "Plantin-glossen" nennen. 21 W. Förster's dating of the Latin-English class glossary is the end of the 11th century / beginning of the 12th century. The class glossary manuscript has thus a later dating than Aelfric's glossary. Since there is no evidence that the author of the class glossary in MS ADD 32, 246 and MS no. 32 in the Plantin-Moretus Library was Aelfric, bishop of Eynsham, the vocabulary should not be associated with his nane. Taking up M. Förster's suggestion of dropping all references to a 'Rubens' manuscript and of supplying a new name for the vocabulary in the iranuscript I would like to put forward the name 'London Vocabulary'. I prefer it to M. Förster's proposal 'Plantin glosses' because the major part of the manuscript is new held in the British Museum Library. Let us new have a closer look at the London Vocabulary and carpare it to the other vocabularies edited by T. Wright. Of the four vocabularies under consideration the London one is the longest. It includes irore than 1500 Latin lemmata, Aelfric'8 Glossary lists seme 1300 and the Brussels manuscript is the shortest, including less than 600 items. A feature that is by new already familiar is the marking of items believed to be of Greek origin. The extract from the original manuscript includes three items, e.g. Lepus. uel lagos, g. hara; Dammula. uel doraaa. g. hroege, and Ouis. uel mandritis. g. saep. The London Vocabulary, in contrast to the MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 76 r -91 v and Aelfric's Glossary, does not use acute accents to mark vcwel quality. Aelfric's Glossary, that is, the version in MS Cotton Julius A II, is particularly interesting in this respect: in MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 5 r -91 v

20

M. Förster, "Die altenglische Glossenhandschrift Plantinus 32 (Antwerpen) und Additional 32246 (London)", Anglia, 41 (1917), pp. 94-161. Lowell Kindschi's doctoral dissertation of 1955, The Latin-Old English Glossaries in Plantin-Moretus 32 and British Museum MS Additional 32,246, Stanford University, has unfortunately not been published and could therefore not be consulted.

21

M. Förster, op.cit., p. 155, 157.

38

there are only few Latin items that have an acute accent, in MS Cotton Julius A II, however, we find more Latin lenmata with accent marks than Old English ones. One of the characteristic features of topical glossaries is that the headwords are usually given in their 'dictionary form', that is, nouns and adjectives in the nominative singular, etc. This holds in principle for all our four vocabularies; verb forms are listed in the first person singular, present tense, e.g. plano, uel leuigo,

io geguide.

The listing of different granmati-

cal forms for one lemma seems to be an accident of the sources used, not yet a beginning lexicographical practice. Another characteristic is that these vocabularies are truly bilingual, that is, Latin lenmata are explained in Old English. Whereas alphabetical glossaries usually include Latin headwords glossed in Latin and/or Old English, Latin-Old English vocabularies are bilingual in nature: the function of the alphabetical glossaries was to explain difficult Latin wards or text passages. This function is not the predominant one in Latin-Old English vocabularies. They were meant to furnish the Anglo-Saxon scholar and pupil with the Latin words for the ccrtmon objects of life. The function was much more practical. The headword part of the vocabulary entry therefore consists typically of either a single Latin item or of two or more items which the scribe/ccrpiler regarded as semantically related, e.g. Imperator, Cesar, uel Augustus, casere.

Yet we still encounter quite a number of Latin lenmata that are followed by a Latin explanation followed by an Old English one. The most interesting feature of these early vocabularies are the topics dealt with and the items listed for each topical group. It is quite carrmon to indicate the beginning of a new group of words by subject headings. The headings in the London Vocabulary

(the British Museum part), for instance, are:

De instrumentis agricolarum Nomina omnium homi η urn communi ter Nomina Ferarum De nominibus metallorum Nomina uasorum De geneiibus potionum Nomina arborum Nòmina armorum Nomina XII uentorum Omnia nomina triciti sunt Nomina piscium

39 Nomina nauìum et instrumenta

earum

Frcm this example we can see that the subject headings are given in Latin, the lexicographical metalanguage still being Latin. Not infrequently, however, the compiler or scribe included items frcm other subject fields under a heading to which they did not belong. De Witt T. Starnes and G.E. Noyes have already drawn attention to this inconsistency. With respect to the topical fields included in (the conflated version of) Aelfrio 's Vocabulary as edited by T. Wright and R.P. Wtilcker they remarked: Though the compiler gives only fifteen headings in the text proper, there are in fact thirty topics or groups. The lists begin with the names of agricultural implements or tools and conclude with the names of ships and their parts. Included between are groups of words pertaining to ecclesiastical affairs, to officials in the church and state, to Roman law, to man, his kindred, the parts of the body, diseases, the house with its parts and contents, food, drink; the names of beasts, birds, herbs, trees, colors, clothes, games and amusements, weapons; heaven, earth, sun, moon, angel, and archangel. 22

It is difficult to detect any logical or practical order in the sequence of the subject headings given. This also holds for the subject fields in MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, ff. 76r-91v and the Brussels manuscript. The former seems to be the most detailed one as to subject headings. Apart frcm such headings as Oe auibus, Incipit de piscibus, Incipit de homine et de partibus eiusj etc. there are others for less general groups of words: Incipit de igne, Incipit ¿Le alea, Incipit de lectuolo, Incipit de suibus, etc. The subject fields covered in the Brussels manuscript have already been characterized by T. Wright: It contains fewer classes of words than the other vocabularies, and those words are chiefly on Natural History and Anatomy; but as far as it goes, it is more copious. 23

In the light of the lexicographical development of these vocabularies the order in which the items are listed in Aelfrio 's Glossary is noteworthy. De Witt T. Starnes and G.E. Noyes highlighted this very aspect when discussing medieval and Renaissance vocabularies:

22

De Witt T. Starnes and G.E. Noyes, "Medieval and Renaissance Vocabularies and the English Dictionary," in The English Dictionary From Cawdrey to Johnson, 1604-1755. Appendix I (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1946), pp. 197-211; p. 198.

23

T. Wright, op.cit., p. 62.

40 Though somewhat condensed and lacking topical headings, this vocabulary falls roughly into eighteen groups. The topics (supplied by the present writer) of the eleventh century collection run thus: (1) God, heaven, angels, archangels, sun, moon, earth, sea; (2) man, woman, the parts of the body; (3) terms of consanguinity, professional and trades people, artisans; (4) diseases; (5) abstract terms (impious, just, prudent, etc.); (6) times of year, of day, seasons, weather; (7) colors; (8) birds; (9) fishes; (IO) beasts; (11) herbs; (12) trees; (13) house furnishings; (14) kitchen and cooking utensils; (15) weapons; (16) parts of the city; (17) metals and precious stones; (18) general - both abstract and concrete terms ... In beginning with God and the angels, the planets, the earth and the sea, then proceding to man in general, particular types of professional men and artisans and their occupations; the beasts, birds, fishes; then the plants, trees, and houses, the compiler suggests a logic in disposing his topics which is uncommon among the early word collectors. Furthermore, this is the sole example I have found before the sixteenth century - though there may well be others - in which the group of words pertaining to God, heaven, earth, etc. stands at the head of the list. In the period of the ^ Renaissance, such a beginning becomes the rule rather than the exception. Although the four vocabularies vary in the content and order of the items listed, the parts that have been preserved all include names of herbs which might be taken as an indication of the high medical importance of plants, and above all herbs, in medieval times. Since the next chapter discusses a plant vocabulary I have not chosen the herbal part as an illustrative exanple for the four vocabularies under discussion. I have instead chosen a subject groiçi that highlights another topical field of interest in medieval culture (cf the Bestiary literature) : the names of beasts. The two extracts frati Aelfric's Glossary and the London Vocabulary are meant to illustrate the following points: the list in the London Vocabulary is not only longer but also more systematic in its order and detail. It also shews how easily the carpi1er could be sidetracked: he is describing animals, but when he ccmes to the horses, he also lists the typical gear of a horse. Hie Latin lemmata in Aelfrio'e Glossary are occasionally followed by another Latin synonym, in the London Vocabulary3 hewever, this synonym component is much more noticeable. This may reflect the fact that the carpi1er of the London Vocabulary used 25 other sources

and/or that he might have extended Aelfric's Glossary because

the manuscript of the London Vocabulary dates frcm a later period. Definitions 24

De Witt T. Starnes and G.E. Noyes, op.cit., pp. 198-199.

25

R.T. Meyer, "Isidorian 'Glossae Collectae' in Aelfric's Vocabulary," Traditio (Studies in Ancient and Medieval History, Thought and Religion), 12 (1956), pp. 398-405.

41 or explanations of the names of animals, just as those of plants, are still a controversial lexicographical issue and it is therefore interesting to note that keif ria'β Glossary includes sate very explicit explanations, e. g. the entires unicorn and griffus. In another case the conpiler admits that there is no Old English equivalent, Cypressus, n«f naenne Englisce naman. The following extract of Aelfria's Glossary is taken fron the WrightWülcker edition. It has been compared to the manuscript and changed accordingly ( cf for instance the accent marks). Aelfric's Glossary : Fera, wildeor. Leo. leo. Linx. gemencged hund and wulf. Unicornis, anhyrned deor; jsast deor haefj? aenne horn bufan £am twam eagum, swa strangne and swa scearpne J?a»t he fiht wiS jsone myclan yip, and hine oft gewunda on ifaere wambe of dea£. He hatte eac rinoceron and monoceron. Griffus. fiSerfote fugel, beone gelic on wastme, and earne gelic on heafde and on fijperum; se is swa mycel }?ast he gewylt hors and men. Uulpis. fox Taxo. uel melus. broc. Equus. hors. Equa. myre. Asinus. uel asina, assa. Camélus. olfend. Onager, wilde assa. Mulus. mul. Elefans. yip. Ursus. bera. Ursa. heo. Simia, apa. Lutrius. oter. Fiber, beofer. Feruncus. masr. Mustela, wesle. Talpa. wandewurpe. Cattus. uel murile gulus. aut muriceps. cât. Yricius. uel erinâcius. il. Glis. sisemus.

Mus. uel sorex. mus. Uermis. wyrm. Lúbricus. angeltwicca. Ceruus. heort. Cerua. hynd. Damma, uel dammula. da Hinnulus. hindcealf. Capreolus. rahdeor. Caprea. raege. Caper, uel hircus. bucca. Capra, uel cape11a. gat. Hedus. ticcen. Lepus. hara. Porcus. uel sus. swin. Scroffa. suga. Aper, uel uerres. bar. Magalis. bearh. Porcellus. fearh.' Bos. oxa. Uacca. uel bucula. cu. Uitulus. cealf. Iuuencus. styrc. Ouis. sceap. Aries, ram. Ueruex. we&er. Agnus. lamb. Pecus. uel Iumentum. nyten. Animal, aelc £ingc £>e cucu by. Canis. hund. Molosus. ryíía. Catulus. hwylp. Dracus. draca.

42

The extract of the London Vocabulary

is based on the British Museum ADD MS

32,246 and is here edited for the first time. The letters y, j and f> have been replaced by y, g, and w. Italics are used to expand manuscript contractions. Nomina ferarum Pecus uel iumentura.®lces kynnes nyten. Animal.aelc cuce ¡íinc. uel nyten. Unicornis.uel monocerus.uel rinocerus. anhyrne deor. Pecus. animal. Griffes, eow fi erfote fugel. Elephans. yip. Promuscida. ylpes bile, uel wrot Fera, wildeor. Urus. wesend. Bubalus. wilde oxa. Fiber. Castor. Ponticus. befer Raturus. raet. Lutria, otor. Netila. hearma. Ferunca. uel ferunculus. mear . Scirra. aquilinus. scurius. acwern. Taxus.uel melos, cuniculus. broc. Bromus marinus. seolh Belua. re e deor. Linx. lox. Glis. Siremus. Mustela, wesle. Camelus.uel dromeda. olfend. Simia.uel spinx. apa. Talpa.uel palpo, wandewurpe. Lieos, wulf. Lepus.uel lagos, g. hara. Ceruus.uel eripes. heort. Cerua, hind. Dammula. uel Dorcas, g. hraege. Capreus. rahdeor. Hircaceruus. bue heort Caprea. hraege. Hinnulus. hindcalf Ulpis. fox Aper, wildebar. Purcastor. foor lierres. tambar Magalis, bearh. Scrofa, sugu. Suilla.uel sucula. gilte Sus. swyn. Suilli. & porcelli.uel nefrendes fearas. Caper.uel hircus. ud tragos, bucca Capra aegida. gatbuccan hyrde.

Hedus. ticcen. Ibix. firinggat. Agaso. hors en. Sonipes. hors. Iumentum. hwyorif. Equa mere. Canterius. hengst Faussarius. Stada. Sagmarium. seam. Equartium. stood. Poledrus. fola. Sagma. seam sadol. Sagmarius equus. seam hors. Antela. for gyrd. Postela, aefterraepe. Subligar J>earmgyrd. Asinus. assa. Onager, wilde assa. Sella, sadul. Corbus. sadulboga. Scansile, stirap. Centrum.uel lupatum, midi. Bangula. brydel. Saliuare. bridel. Ducale, latteh. Mulus. mul. Ursus. bera. Ursa, byrene Muriceps. uel musio. murilegulus. catt. M Sorex. mus. Canis. hund. Canícula, biege. Molosus. ryá£a. Cinomia. hundesfleoge. Ricinus, hundesflooge. Bos. oxa. Uacca. cu. uel bucula. Anniculus. uel trio, steoroxa. Uitulus. cealf. Iuuencus. uel uitua. steor. Annicula uel. heahfore Iuniculus. iung hwy£er Iuuenca. iung cu. Imus. oxa on ]?am forman teame. Binus. on t>am aefteran teame. Mutinus. gadinca. uel hnoc. Altilui. faet heahfore

43 Aitile, fedels. Aries, ramm. Triennis. jprywinter uel sumer gildeto. Ouis, uel mandritis. g. scep. Mandra, uel ouile. locc. Ueruex. uel manto. wefc>er. Agnus cinist. Lamb Magnicaper. ormaste buccan.

44 8

THE VOCABULARY OF NAMES OF PLANTS

It is well known that the wealth of archaeological, cultural, and linguistic information that is held in the extant manuscripts on the early history of English has not yet in to to been recovered and brought to scholarly attention. The history of the development of English lexicography therefore depends on those manuscripts that have aroused scholarly attention. According to T. Wright general vocabularies or class glossaries " appear to h a w been numerous during 1 the later Anglo-Saxon period". He included the ones that were known to exist for the Middle English period in his volume of vocabularies as well. The collection suggests that scholars and teachers continued to carpile class glossaries. Yet few seem to have been preserved: the 12th-century2 Semi-Saxon Vocabulary is regarded as an abridgement of Aelfric's Glossary. Alexander Neckam's 3 4 Treatise de Vtensibilis, John de Garlande's Diationarius, and Walter de Biblesworth's Treatise5 are vocabularies in continuous discourse. T. Wright discussed them as " a na/ description of voc±>ularies" characteristic of the Anglo-Norman period. For R. P. Wülcker, ho?ever, English stood too mich in the b ackground in than and this was the reason why he did no longer include them in the revised edition. I myself regard them more as interesting early attempts at teaching the voc±>ulary of a foreign language than as stages of development in the history of the English dictionary. γ The same would hold for the Metrical Vocabulary (ÍS Harley 1002, fol. 113 ), believed tobe of the fourteenth century. The only vocabularies preserved for the 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries according to T. Wright are then the Semi-Saxon Vocabulary and the Vocabulary of the Names of Plants.The latter is included in both editions, yet no further explanations are given. 1

T. Wright, op. cit.,

2

T. Wright, 536-553.

3

T. Wright, op.cit.,pp.

p. ix.

op.cit., pp. 87-95; T. Wright and R. P. Wülcker, op.cit., cols. 96-119.

4

T. Wright,

op.cit., pp. 120-138.

5

T. Wright,

op.cit., pp. 142-174.

45 A history of English lexicography written in the '80s of the last century would therefore have had to acknowledge a certain break in the preservation of lexicographical documents. In the meantime, hcwever, individual scholars have tried to fill the apparent gaps in records. Yet so far nobody has attempted to write a 20th-century history of early English lexicography. On the basis of the present state of research I would like to put forward the following characterization of the lexicographical achievements in the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries. In Old English times the language taught at school was Latin. Both

Latin-English glossaries and Latin-English vocabular-

ies were based on written language. The language to be leamt was the language for which explanations or definitions were given. Glossaries, although partially alphabetized, still retained many features characteristic of the texts from which they had been taken. They could thus meet only the decoding needs of the user. Vocabularies on the other hand, by their very topical arrangement, tried to cater for the encoding needs of the Anglo-Saxon teacher and pupil. The Latin-English tradition of vocabulary-compilation developed in Old English times is continued in Middle English, in the Latin-English Medulla Grammatice^ and the 15th-century vocabularies. After the Norrtan conquest, hcwever, the language situation in England had changed completely. French was spoken besides English, French was taught and leamt besides Latin. This is also reflected in the lexicographical works that have come down to us. The Nominale sive Verbale in Gall-Lois cum expositione eiusdem in Angliais is the first vocabulary dealing with English and another language actually spoken in England at the time. The manuscript is in the library of Cambridge University (MS Ee. 2.40, fol. 162 (133)). It was discovered and edited by W.W. Skeat.7 Besides the linguistically interesting fact that it is the first FrenchEnglish word list and the cultural preciousness of the items listed,it contains a nurrfcer of features that are new in comparison to the earlier word lists. First, it actually provides a name for the type of word list. It is not a vocabulary, but a Nominale as well as a Verbale. As we shall see in

6

For a full discussion of the Medulla

Grammatice

7

W.W. Skeat, "Nominale sive Verbale", Transactions Society 1903-1906, pp. *l-50.

see Chapter of the

11.

Philological

46 Chapter 9 , both terms were quite ccrimon in medieval times for vocabularies containing nouns or verbs. In addition, it carbines mere lists of vocabulary items with lists of items that are textually embedded. This can be illustrated with seme examples frcm the section De la noyse et des faitz qe home naturelment fait: 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86

Homme parle et espire Man spekyth and vndyth Femme teinge et suspire Woman pantyth and sykyth Homme bale et babeie M. drauelith and wlaffyth F. bale et blessie W. galpyth and wlispyth

The form of presentation chosen enables the compiler to list verb forms in the 3rd person singular, present tense, and not, as noted earlier, in the 1st person singular, which is a characteristic of earlier Latin-English vocabularies. There cure 13 subject headings which in part very closely resemble those encountered in other vocabularies: De la noyse et des faitz ge homme naturelment fait Assemble de gentz proprement Les propretees coment homme doyt edifier sa meason Les nouns de temps et de tempestes Nomina arborum Nomina Fructum dictarum Arborum Nomina Bestiarum La noyse de ditz Bestes Cy orrez assemble de bestes Nomina huium La noyse de oysealx naturelment Lapparayle pur charue Lappa rayle pur charette

Verbs are no longer randomly inserted between batches of nouns. Instead, they are gathered together under special headings, the most conspicuous ones being those dealing with typical "noyses" produced by man or animals. 1he most original, and linguistically highly interesting feature, however, - which we still g

encounter in 20th-century dictionaries -

is the grouping together of words

for groups of people or animals, all of which are also given a subject heading.

8 Cf for instance Collins Pocket Dictionary Glasgow : Collins, 1981), p. 998.

of the English

Language

(London and

47

The words listed for groups of animals (Cy orrez assemble de bestes), for instance, are: 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774

Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn Vn

herde de cerfs herde de deymes soundre de porks pastroil dez asnes pastroil de mules route de boefs gurdei de vaches gurdei de veels harasse de poleyns tripe de berbis loreie de purcels mute de chiens lesse de leuerers

A A A A A A A A A A A A A

herde of hertes herde of bukkys hep of swyn hep of asses hep of mulus drofe of oxone hep of kyne hep of calfryn stode of coltes trip of schepe hep of gris mute of houndes lesse of grehoundes

One facet of the lexicographical history of medieval England are thus vocabularies for the two languages spoken in the country, French and English. Another are specialized vocabularies, that is vocabularies in which all the items listed belong to one and the same subject field. The subject field itself is not part of the daily routine and train of life of the medieval Englishman. It rather constitutes the special knowledge of experts. Fran this point of view these specialized vocabularies could be regarded as marking the beginnings of English bilingual Fachsprachen lexicography. Such specialized word lists are for instance glossaries of legal terminol9

ogy

and vocabularies of plant names. A number of iranuscripts of plant vocab-

ularies have been studied in detail and edited. They provide us with evidence that medieval herb-lore was not restricted to medical books and herbáis, but it developed a specific type of word list. Two outstanding 12th-century LatinEnglish plant vocabularies are the Laud Herbal Glossary and the Duriiam Plant Glossary. The Laud Herbal Glossary was edited in 1974,^ the Durham Plant 9

10

Cf in this respect the legal glossary edited in T. Wright and J.O. Halliwell, Reliqux Antiqus. Vol. I (London: W. Pickering - Berlin: A. Asher, 1841), p. 33, and in the Ninth Report of the Royal Commission on Historical MSS. App. 1 (1883), p. 60; H. Hall, ed., The Red Book of the Exchequer . 1 Part ills "Expositio [nes] Vocabulorum Nomina Anglica Usitata," (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1896), pp. 1032-1039, and M. Förster, "Ein englisch-französisches Rechtsglossar," Beiträge zur romanischen und englischen Philologie, Festgabe für Wendelin Foerster zum 26. Oktober 1901 (Halle: M. Niemeyer, 1902), pp. 205-212. J.R. Stracke, ed., The Laud Herbal Glossary 1974).

(Amsterdam: Rodopi Ν.v.,

43 11 Glossary was first edited by 0. Cockayne in 1864.

Cockayne's edition was

not much later reprinted in J. Earle's book English Plant Names From the 12 Tenth to the Fifteenth Century. The critical edition of 1941 is the work of 13 B. von Lindheim.

Although both vocabularies vary considerably in size, the

Laud Herbal Glossary listing sate 1500 items, the Durham Glossary not quite 350, they have certain features in camion or carmonly attributed to them. The arrangement in both glossaries is largely alphabetical up to the second letter of the headword. On the basis of paleographical criteria both editors assumed that their respective nanuscript must have been written by a Norman scribe. And finally both believe that their manuscript may have been derived frcm a trilingual original in Greek, Latin, and Old English. B. von Lindheim discussed this issue in great detail: Diese Annahme findet eine Bestätigung durch die Forschungen Β a e s e c k e s , der in seinem Buche 'Vocabularius Sancti Galli in der ags. Mission' (Halle 1933) gezeigt hat, daß das Corpus-Glossar, Epinal-Erfurt, das Leiden-Glossar, das Casseler-Glossar, der Vocabolarius S. Galli und zwei ahd. Texte auf ein lat.-ae. Glossar des 7. Jhd. zurückgehen, das er *LW nennt. Die Basis dieses letzteren sei eine griech.-lat. HermeneumataFassung (die B. *Vat. nennt), d.h. ein antikes Schulbuch, das ursprünglich zur Erlernung der lat. Sprache durch Griechen diente und dessen Verbreitung sich seit dem 3. Jhd. n.Chr. verfolgen läßt. Neben die lat. Interpretamente setzte *LW rechts die ae. Übersetzung, und das Griechische wurde, wo kein Bedürfnis vorhanden war, weggelassen (Baesecke S. 34 ff.).Doch sind Reste der Trilingue bis in unsere Handschriften hinein erhalten ... Das antike Schulbuch *Vat. könnte mit Theodor von Tarsus, dem Manne antiker Schulbildung, nach England gekommen sein; und die ae. Übersetzung *LW stammt vielleicht aus seinem Kreise.

11

0. Cockayne, Leechdoms, Wort-cunning and Starcraft of Early England. Vol. 3 (London: Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer, 1866).

12

J. Earle, English Plant Names From the Tenth to the Fifteenth Century (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1880), pp. 67-83. J. Earle also lists the sections on names of plants contained in the earlier and later glossaries and vocabularies. See also P. Bierbaumer, Der botanische Wortschatz des Altenglischen. Teil 1: Das Lsceboc (Frankfurt a.M. - Bern: Lang, 1975); Teil 2: Lacnunga, Herbarium, Apuleii, Peri Didaxeon (Frankfurt a.M. Bern: Lang, 1976); Teil 3: Der botanische Wortschatz in altenglischen Glossen (Frankfurt a.M. - Bern - Las Vegas: Peter Lang, 1979) (= Grazer Beiträge zur Englischen Philologie, 1-3) for the Old English vocabulary of plants. For the early history of botany see also A. Arber, Herbais. Their Origin and Evolution. A Chapter in the History of Botany 1470-1670. A new edition (Cambridge: University Press, 1938).

13

B. von Lindheim, Das Durheimer Pflanzenglossar Lateinisch und Altenglisch. Beiträge zur englischen Philologie 35 (Bochum - Langendreer: Heinrich Pöppinghaus, 1941); first reprinting 1967.

49 A u c h späteres ae. Glossenmaterial bietet uns noch einen Beleg dafür, daß man ein griechisch-lateinisches Pflanzenglossar mit ae. Entsprechungen versehen hat. In dem Brüsseler Glossar der Hschr. 1829 (11. Jahrh.) finden wir nämlich auf fol. 94b über einem Pflanzenglossar v o n 223 Nummern die (offenbar aus der Vorlage übernommene) Überschrift Nomina herbarum, grece et latine, während den nun folgenden ae. Pflanzennamen, wie in unserem Durhamer Glossar, nur entweder der griechische oder der lateinische Name vorangestellt wird. 14

Though there appears to be no trilingual plant glossary in existence for Greek, Latin and English which would document the original state and source of later ones, there are other manuscripts of trilingual plant glossaries. And these illustrate the third facet of the lexicographical achievement in the three centuries under consideration. These trilingual plant vocabularies carbine at the sane tine the features of the first and second facets: the second language spoken in the country, French, is incorporated and the vocabulary itself is a specialized vocabulary. Three manuscripts have ccme to scholarly notice: the Harley MS 978, fol. 24r-25r dates frcm the 13th century and has been edited by 15 T. Wright. T. Wright himself drew attention to another trilingual plant vocabulary in the British Museum Library, the Sloane MS 5, fol. 4 r -12 v (2r-10v).16 As far as I know, this vocabulary, which beqins Hie incipiunt nomina de herbis. latine, galliae. & angliae has not been edited. The third nanuscript is also in the British Museun Library, Rayai MS 12. G. IV. 6., fol. 134r-136v. It is described in the British Museun Catalogues as "Alphabetwn herbarum ... a table of synonyms. Beg. 'Aaron, barba aaron: iarus pes vituli, gallice iare, Anglioe cokouspintul'; ends 'Upia, Anglice canell." Of the 11 texts contained in this manuscript the first five manuscripts are dated as 'circa 1300', the last five as 'end of the 14th century'. The AZphabetwi hevbcxruiTi is the only one of the eleven for which no date is given· In the Plan to the M'tddte English Di-ot'ioYiccpy *

17

the date mentioned is'? c 1400.'

Of these three trilingual plant vocabularies

the Harley one is the smallest. It only lists sane 150 items, whereas the Royal 14

B. von Lindheim, op.cit., p. 6. See also G. Baesecke, Der Vocabularius Sti. Galli in der Angelsächsischen Mission. Mit 44 Tafeln (Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1933).

15

T. Wright, op.cit., pp. 139-141; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit., cols. 554-559. It was reprinted in J. Earle, op.cit., pp. 42-48.

16

T. Wright, op.cit.,

17

H. Kurath and S.M. Kuhn, edd., Middle English Dictionary. Plan and Bibliography (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Prese, 1954), p. 70. For the trilingual Alphabetum herbarum in Arundel MS 42, fol. 9 2 r - 9 8 r the BMCatalogue gives the date 'about 1400' and the list of plant names in Sloane MS 347, fol. 2 r - 7 v is said to be of the fifteenth century.

p. 139; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit.,

col. 555.

50 one gives nearly 400 and the Sloane one nearly 700. In all three the lay-out is the same, so that we might conclude that the form of presentation had already beccme a kind of set pattern: the items are no longer written as a continuous text, but neatly arranged intarocolunns per leaf and the capital initial of the Latin headwords is always touched with red to set it off. The order in which the three languages are given is Latin, French, English. This suggests that the original may have been a bilingual Latin-French vocabulary. Unfortunately these trilingual plant vocabularies have not yet been studied in detail and a carparison might well provide us with seme clues as to the possible sources. A brief carpari son of the Harley manuscript with the Laud Herbal Glossary, for instance, reveals that the carpi 1er of the trilingual vocabulary must have used other sources as well: Laud 53: Harley 978: Laud 681: Harley 978: Laud 1056: Harley 978:

Altea .i. euiscus uel ius malua. Althea i. ymalue .i. holihoc. Febrefugia .i. elisfacen. uel centauria maior. Febrefugia .i. fewerfue .i. adrelwurt. Nasturcium .1. leac cherse. Nasturtium .i. kersuns .i. cressen.

The most striking difference between the three vocabularies, apart fron the individual items listed, is the order in which they are given: the Sloane and the Royal manuscripts have alphabetical Α-order which occasionally extends to AB-order. The Harley manuscript, however, has an order that is based on the attributed function of the herbs and it thus stresses the specialized vocabulary feature of the word selection. The medieval theory of the humours under18

lies the subject headings Chaudes herbes, Freides herbes,

Inter frigidum et

oalidvm, Inter frigidum et aalidum temperatum. The fact that sane headings are in French may also be an indication that the original was a Latin-French source. The following extract is based on R.P. Wiilcker's edition with slight modifications due to a carparison with the manuscript. CHAUDES HERBES. Artimesie Marubium Ruta

18

.i. .i. .i.

mugwrt maruil rue.

.i. .i.

merherbarum. horehune

That such a functional arrangement for the names of herbs was not unusual is shown by the subject headings in a Latin-Anglo-French glossary of the 13th century which distinguishes among other things between de herbis calidis, de frigidis herbis; see J. Piebsch, "Ein anglonormannisches Glossar", in Bausteine zur romanischen Philologie. Festgabe für Adolfo Mussafia zum 15. Februar 1905 (Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1905), pp. 534-556.

Apium Buglosa Saniculum Sinapium Zizania Absinthium Elna enula Bethonica Abrotanum Pulegium Agrimonia Consolida Cumfiria Mentastrum Auencia Porius Regina Millefolium Ebulum Leuisticum Cepa Saluia Centauria Arcangelica Pollipodium Felix arboratica Saluinca Butunus Nasturtium Coliandrum Petrosillum Closera Fauida Sandix Gladiolum Febrefugia Tanesetum Pilosella Uermiculum Raffarium Silimbrium Ambrosia Althea Saxifragium Bidella Bursa pastoris Feniculum Quinquefolium Tapsus barbatus Fabaria Trifolium Diptannum Cotula fetida Persicaria Lanceolata

• i. .i. • i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. • i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. • i. .i. .i. .i. .i. • i. .i. .i. • i. • i. .i. .i. • i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. . i. .i. .i. .i. .i. • i. • i. .i. • i. .i. .i. .i.

ache. bugle sani cl e seneuel neele aloigne ialne beteine. aueioine puliol agremoine consolide cumfirie mentastre avence poret reine milfoil. eble luuesche oingnun sauge centoire mort ortie poliol pollipode gauntelee butuns kersuns coriandre peresil alisaundre fauede waisde flamine fewerfue tanesie peluselle warance raiz balsamitis ambrose ymalue saxifrage samsuns sanguinarie fanuil quintfoil moleine fauerole. tri foil ditaundere. ameruche saucheneie launceleie

. i. .i. .i. .i. . i. .i.

wudebrune. wudemerch. senei. cockel. wermod. gretwurt.

.i. .i. .i. .i. .i. • i. . i. .i. .i.

su^ewurt. hulwurt. garcliue. daiseie. galloc. horsminte. harefot. lek. medwurt.

.i. .i. • i. .i. . i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. • i. .i. .i. • i. .i. .i. .i. .i. . i.

walwurt. luuestiche. knelek. fenuern. hurdreue. blinde netle reuenfot. eueruern. foxesgloue. hoepe. cressen. chelepriem. stoansuke. wilde percil leomeke. wod. gladene. adrelwurt. helde. musere. wrotte. redich. brocminten. hindehele. holihoc. waiwurt. lechis. blodwurt. fenecel. fiflef. softe.

.i. wite clouere .i. miwe. .i. cronesanke. .i. ribbe.

52 Mater silua Sarobucus Ueruena Arundo Osmunda Olibanus Fungus Cerfolium Camomilla Nepta Argentea Enula

• i. .i. .i. .i. .i. .i. . i. . i. • i. .i. • i. • i.

cheuefoil suew uerueine rosei Osmunde encens wuluesfist. cerfoil camemilie nepte argentine aine

• i. .i. • i. . i. .i. . i.

wudebide. ellarne. irenharde. reod. bonwurt. s tor.

. i. .i. .i. .i. .i.

Villen. maiwe. kattesminte lilie. horselne.

. i. . i. • i. .i. • i. .i. • i. . i. • i. .i. .i. •.i. • i. • i. • i. .i. . i. • i. .i. • i.

morele iubarbe letue fraser grosiler popi. arasches. euenlesten

.i. atterlo£>e. .i. singrene. .i. slepwurt. .i. streberilef .i. £>efe£>orn.

FREIDES HERBES Morella louis barba Lactuca Fraga Ramni Astula regia Atriplex Mercurialis Malua Caulus Andiuia Psilliun Uirga pastoris Ypoquistidos Iusquiamus Uiola Alimonis Aizon Tucia Litargirum

malue cholet letrun luse sed. wilde tesel. hundesrose. chenille u iole wildepopi. sinfulle. tutie. escume de or.

INTER FRIGIDUM ET CALI DUM Lapis lazuli Manna.

.i. pere.

INTER FRIGIDUM ET CALI DUM TEMPERATUM Mirtus Bragagantum Mirobolani Bedagrage Bol um Arnoglosa Argentum uiuum Berberis.

. i. .i. .i. . i. .i. . i. • i.

gagel. dragagant. mirobolanam. spina alba bol. plauntein. uif argent.

.i. .i. . i. .i.

mercurial. hoc. kaul. jpugejpistel.

• i. hennebone. .i. appelleaf.

53

9

THE MAYER NOMINALE

Hiere is a striking difference between the scarcity of manuscripts of glossaries and vocáaularies for the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and the richness of lexicographical documentation for the fifteenth century. This dearth of lexicographical material has been attributed to the neglect and decline of school teaching : During the fourteenth century, school teaching seems to have fallen greatly into neglect in this country, and we hardly find any manuscripts of these educational treatises between those of the thirteenth century and those of the fifteenth. In the latter century, however, a great movement took place, - it was the age, especially, of founding grammar-schools, so many of which were re-founded at the dissolution of papal colleges under Edward VI. A similar degradation, in fact, had taken place to that which we have remarked under the Anglo-Saxons, though the causes were not entirely the same. The influence of the great development of learning in the twelfth century, and the example of the able and elegant Latin writers whom that age had produced, extended over at least a portion of the thirteenth century; but before the end of that century, the priest was already gaining the victory over the schoolmaster, and the power of the universities was yielding to that of the Popish church. During the two following centuries, learning was reduced almost to its lowest degree; and this became so apparent, that an effort was made to raise it by striking at what was supposed to be the root of the evil - the want or the inefficiency of the elementary schools. Those who undertook the task of reformers, however, mistook the cause of the evil, and did not understand that the Middle Ages were approaching their end, and that there was no remedy for the restauration of forms and principles which were expiring from their own exhaustion. Nevertheless, the effort seems to have been made with earnestness, and caused, in the fifteenth century, a considerable extension in the lower grades of scholastic education. The manuscripts of grammatical treatises - of school-books, in fact - now become extremely numerous. Latin-English vocabularies are also not uncommon during this period. Three such vocabularies are included in A Volume of Vocabularies.

In the re-

vised edition of 1884 R. P. Wülcker added a fourth fifteenth-century alphabetical word list. Others that have come to my notice but have not yet been edited are the vocabularies in the MSS Harley 1002, fol. 139r, 154r, Harley 1587, fol. 1 r -15 r , 15v-45v, and ADD MS 25,238, fol. 1 r -55 r . Hieseword lists 1

T. Wright,op.cit., p. xiii.

54 justify T. Wright's opinion that Latin-English vocabularies were 'not uncommon' during the fifteenth century. They do not, however, characterize the lexicographical achievement of this century adequately. The tradition of alphabetical word lists and class glossaries is continued and is illustrated by T. Wright's and R.P. Wülcker's sample vocabularies. In addition, we find first word lists for verbs and we witness the early beginnings of bilingual synonym word lists. Bie greatest lexicographical achievements of the fifteenth century, however, are the first bilingual Latinr-English and English-Latin dictionaries. Each of these new lexicographical attenpts and enterprises will be discussed in turn. That the tradition of compiling alphabetical Latin-English glossaries continued well into the 15th century is evidenced by the Latin-Middle English word list in a manuscript in the library of Trinity College, Canbridge. R.P. 2 Wiilcker edited this A to Ζ list as Ά Latin and English Vocabulary'. Alphabetization basically means ylSC-order, yet it also extends beyond the first three letters of the headword. Lexicographical features which are also found in earlier glossaries are the initial capital letters for the Latin lenmata, the inclusion of proper names as headwords, and Latin lerrmata with Latin explanations instead of Middle English ones. New features that we find in 15thcentury word lists are the abbreviations Af or Ance for Anglice which are usually inserted before the Middle English equivalent or explanation. English nouns are given with the indefinite article, but we also encounter instances with the definite article or no determiner at all. The difference seems to be related to the distinction between countable nouns, uncountable nouns, and nouns of unique reference. For verbs the formal correspondence is no longer observed: the Latin lenita is given in the first person singular, present tense, whereas the Middle English equivalent is listed in the infinitive form with to. Irregular forms of the genitive or plural are not yet generally added to the Latin headword but one notices more systematicity in the grouping together of spelling variants and of words that semantically denote a male and a female being. A specific feature of the Trinity College word list are the metalinguistic additions to SOTE entries. These Latin comments resemble modern usage notes in that they draw attention to either a 'better' or a different usage. Examples are: 567 33 Barbillus, an ce a ruget vel melius a barbyle

2

T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit., col. 560-621.

55 567 578

42

ce Batus, an a bushell vel secundum ce alios trium modiocrum an a pecke

25

Diaphosia, sunuoys vel melius soun of voys 46 ce 586 Gobio, an a gurnard vel secundum alios a goioun The class glossary tradition may be exemplified by the three 15th-century vocabularies included in T. Wright's Vollme of Vocabularies.

T. Wright himself

described them as follcws: It can hardly be doubted that the manuscripts of these vocabularies of the fifteenth century were written by schoolmasters for their own use; and we cannot help being struck by the large proportion of barbarous Latin words which are introduced into them, and by the gross blunders with which they abound, especially in their orthography. Many of the Latin words are so disguised and corrupted, that we can hardly recognise them; and in some instances, the schoolmaster has actually mistaken the genders. It is thus clear that the schoolmasters of the fifteenth century were very imperfect scholars themselves, and we can easily understand how the Latinists of the old school fell into that barbarous style of writing which drew upon them the ridicule of the classical scholars after the revival of learning, as well as their hostility to that new light which exposed their defects. These vocabularies of the fifteenth century differ so entirely from each other, both in their general arrangement and in the words introduced under each head, that there seems little room for doubt that each schoolmaster compiled his own book. This circumstance has added extremely to their philological value, as the English words in each vocabulary may be supposed to present some, at least, of the peculiarities of the dialect in which it was written. Through the preceding ages, the schoolmasters seem to have laboured under a difference of opinion as to the subject which had a claim to precedence of the others, and therefore ought to be placed at the head of the vocabulary. 3 In spite of the individual differences the three vocabularies - as well as the vocabulary in the MS Harley 1002, fol. 139r-154r which is well worth editing share a number of features in addition to those mentioned above which are characteristic of the 15th century: 1 They all begin with the group of words for the parts of the human body. 2

The Latin lemmata are given with the determiners hia3

hec,

hoc to indicate

the gender of nouns. This enables the catpiler to list the latina in its usual form with a lower case initial. 3 They include imemonic lines or verses. In the English 3

Vocabulary

T. Wright, op.cit.,

which is taken from the Royal MS 17.C.XVII, fol.

p. xiv.

56

r ν 4 21-27 in the British Museum Library these imemonic verses are highlighted by a υ in the margin which was not taken over in the editions by T. Wright and T. Wright and R.P. Wtilcker. Examples are: 23 Hec ficus, A e fyketre, uel fructus Nux, auelana, pirus, glans, et castaria, ficus, Fructum cum ligno sub eodera nomine signo. 659 2 Hic casius, eA e chese Hoc cepe, A hongon ν Casius et cepe ueniunt ad prandia sepe. 10 e 660 Hic lectus, A bede Hoc stratum, A bedlytter ν Est lectus stratum, uia regia sit tibi strata. 646

ν

There are two features in the English Vocabulary which deserve special mention. Hie British Museum Catalogue describes the vocabulary part of the iranuscript as 'Ncminalia or lists of nouns classified by their meanings'. This is correct. Yet there is one group of words that consists of verbs only. The subject heading is Uerba eoli Deo pertinanaia and the items listed are all given in the 3rd person singular, present tense: Uerba soli Deo pertinancia 664 665 665 665 665 665

41 1

2

665

Degelat, thowes, Deus suus

^ Floctat, snawes. Deus ilius 4 Ningit, snawes, Deus ipsius 5

g Tonat, thoneres, Deus sanctus

665 665

Pluit, raynes, Deus meus Gelat, freses, Deus tuus

Grandinat, hayles, Deus omnipotens ' Fulgurat, lewnes. Deus creator

8

Fulminât, idem, Deus dat omnia 7

Hie last two verbs, 665

5

8

and 665

, are at the same time an illustration of

the second feature to be noted. In earlier vocabularies or glossaries synonymous Latin headwords were listed in the form X uel 7 on one and the same line. In the English Vocabulary (and in other 15th-century vocabularies) there 4

T. Wright, op.cit., pp. 185-205; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit., col. 633-672.

5

The parts Deus meus ... Deus dat omnia seem to be later additions to the manuscript because they are written with a different ink.

57 is a change in lexicographical practice: the items in question are listed in different lines, one after the other, and the explanation for the seccnd (and third) is a Latin cross-reference idem or idem est. Other exarrples are for instance 636 636

13

Hec vnguis, A

e

nayle

14

Hec vngula, idem est 15 e

636

Hec mamma, A

pappe

636 ^

Hec mamilla, idem est

636

Hoc vber, idem est

In the Mayer Nominale this practice has been developed further. In many cases the cross-reference item idem est has been replaced by brackets. This lexicographical arrangement is quite c a m ó n in 15th-century Latin-English manuscripts. It looks to ΠΕ as if this third form of presentation might have been the immediate predecessor of the arrangement that we find in the first attempts at bilingual synonym word lists. The second exairple illustrating the tradition of the medieval vocabularies is the so-called Mayer nominale. T. Wright edited it as Ά Nominale'

because

it begins with the words "Incipit nominale sub compendio compilation tarn de fixis quam de mobilibus". In H. Kurath and S.M. Kuhn's Plan and Bibliography for the Middle English Dictionary7 it is referred to as the Mayer Nominale because it belonged to the nanuscript collection of Joseph Mayer. The manuscript is new in the possession of the British Museim Library and it is catalogued as ADD MS 34, 276. T. Wright ejqplained the term nominale in his introduction as follows: A common title for the vocabularies of the fifteenth century was that of Nominale, intimating that it was strictly a vocabulary of nouns, or names of things, classified under their different heads. 8

Neither T. Wright nor R.P. Wulcker raised the question of whether there might not also have been word lists of -verbs, verbales. And likewise, De Witt T. Starnes and G.E. Noyes did not wonder in their account of medieval and Renaissance vocabularies whether there had been verbales. They only mention the vocabulary type of the nominale. At the time of publication of T. Wright's 6

T. Wright, op.cit., 673-744.

pp. 206-243; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit.,

7

H. Kurath and S.M. Kuhn, op.cit.,

8

T. Wright, op.cit.,

col.

p. 59.

p. 206; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit.,

col. 673.

58

Volume of Vocabularies, 1857, and of the revised edition in 1884, it is true, W.W. Skeat had not yet edited the Nominale sive Verbale. The date given for a the manuscript of this bilingual French-English word list is about 1340. As far as I can find the Nominale sive Vevbale is the first word list in which English figures as one of the languages that is called a nominale as well as a verbale. We might therefore safely assume that the term nominale was already used in the fourteenth century. The Nominale sive Verbale, furthermore, provides us with evidence that there also was the vocabulary type of the verbale. I have so far been able to trace three further verbales. In all three manuscripts the word lists consist of verbs only, they are not combined with a nominal part as in the Nominale sive Verbale. The first verbale is included in the Royal MS 17.C.XVII in the British Museum Library. It begins at fol. 4 r and ends at fol. 17v. The rranuscript is inperfect, the beginning leaf is lost. We therefore do not knew whether the carpiler gave his word list a title. That he may have done so can be assumed fron the end which reads "Explicit verbale ..." The verbs are arranged in two oolunns per leaf. The overall arrangement is alphabetical, alphabetization having progressed considerably, but there is a further subcategorization according to verb conjugations, activa, deponentia, neutra. Since the element to of the infinitive in English is vised as a 'columndivider' , the lexicographical presentation is rather clear, e.g. Opulentare

to

mak plenty

Obstruere

to

stop

This cannot be said of the verbale contained in the ADD MS 34, 276 in the British Museum Library. It begins at fol. 25v with the words Verbale nirnis γ vtile scolaribus and ends at fol. 31 . The Latin-Middle English verb list is written in a continuous text. The capital initial of the Latin laura which is also touched with red on the first pages as well as a red stroke after the Middle English equivalent help the reader to identify the headwords. Within the continous text the lexicographical arrangement is morphological or etymological, that is, after the basic verb, derived verbs are listed. The basic verbs, such as rogare, stare, etc. are written in red in the left hand margin to facilitate consultation. The Latin lenita is not given in the infinitive form, but the first person singular, present tense. It is usually followed by the second person singular, present tense, and the first person singular of the perfect. The Middle English equivalent is given in its infinitive form, 9

W.W. Skeat, op.cit., p. * 1.

59 e.g. Do as dedi

i.e

to gyfe

The third verbale, included in the MS Harley 1002, fol. 117r-137r has a completely different arrangement. The overall classification is based on conjugation classes (verbs of the first, second, third, and fourth class). Within these four major verb groups a further subdivision is that into active verbs, listed first, "verba que sunt deponencia", and "verba que sunt carmuna". The verbs are then listed according to the consonant which precedes the inflectional ending of the Latin verb. For these consonants alphabetical order is observed, that is, verbs containing b before the ending are listed before verbs containing c, d, etc. Within these consonantal groups, however, alphabetization is not observed as might be illustrated by the sequence Sabo, Titiboj labo, Globo, Acerbo, etc. The Latin verb is given in the first person singular, present tense, followed by the verb ending for the second person and, as the case might be, followed by the first person singular, perfect. The English equivalent is the infinitive, e.g. D ante o Pedo as to gon on fote Do das dedi i. donare

The verbales discovered so far differ considerably fron each other, not only with respect to the verbs actually listed, but also with respect to their lexicographical presentation. This aptly illustrates the experimental spirit in 15th-century English lexicography. On the other hand it might also suggest that verbales were not yet as camion at the time or had had a shorter tradition than nominales which show much greater uniformity in presentation and style. That this may have been the case might also be suggested by the fact that the item verbale is listed and explained in two manuscripts carmonly regarded as parts of the Medulla grammatioe, the MS Harley 2257 and the ADD ΓΈ 24,640 in the British Museum Library, as well as in the Ortue Voaabulorum. The term nominale, however, is not listed, possibly because of its greater currency. A verbale is "quod descendit a verbo". This takes us back to our first example of a Latin-Middle English nominale, the Mayer Nominale, the manuscript of which is dated about 1500. It shows all those lexicographical features which I have outlined above as 15th-century features in English lexicography. The use of brackets of the form ] or of simple lines of the type χ v y

ζ

or

χ ζ y--"

60 embracing synonymous Latin headwords to avoid the repetition of the Middle English equivalent or the Latin idem est are quite conspicuous. For the subject fields covered in the vocabulary the items given are often rather specific (for the treatment of four-letter words see the next chapter). The most interesting feature of the Mayer Nominale, to my mind, are the subject fields dealt with and the order in which they are listed. They are undoubtedly the work of a very systematic mind: De vocabulis ad singula membra humani corporis spectantibus Nomina dignitatum clericorum Nomina rerum pertinencium clerico Nomina dignitatum laicorum Nomina artificium Nomina consanguinitas et affinitatis Nomina dignitatum mulierum Nomina artificium mulierum Nomina iugulatarum mulierum Nomina reprehensibilium virorum Nomina reprehensibilium mulierum Nomina rerum pertinencium uxori Nomina iugulatorum Nomina operariorum Nomina animalium domesticorum Nomina ferarum Nomina volatilium Nomina volatilium incomestilium Partes animalium brutorum Nomina piscium Nomina vermium et muscarum Nomina morborum et infirmorum virorum Nomina infirmorum Nomina arborum arabilium et florum De nominibus specierum Nomina arborum et earum fructuum Hec sunt partes fructuum Nomina domorum et rerum ecclesiasticarum Nomina domo pertinancia I am de edificiis domorum Nomina vestimentorum Nomina ludorum De vite et materiis ipsius De clbis generalibus De panibus et partibus eorum De speciebus liguminis De cibis generalibus De lectis et ornamentis eorum The singling out of specific subject fields relating to waren is of particular sociological interest. The following extract fron the nominale will therefore concentrate on these vocabulary areas. The second extract dealing with the

61 Nomina infirmorum was chosen in order to illustrate the conpiler's endeavour to provide equivalents for Latin adjectives functioning as nouns in Middle 10 English. The extract is based on the Vüright-Wülcker edition. CAPITULUM 7. NOMINA DIGNITATUM MULIERUM Hec imperatrix a e[m]prys Hec induperatrix idem Hec regina qwen Hec ducissa a duches Hec regula idem Hec comitissa a comytiss Hec baronissa a baronyss Hec domina , , , . } a lady 2 Hec hera Hec abra , .,, ; a burwoman Hec anelila Hec puella , , } a madyn Hec ampha Hec adolescentula puella xiiij [annorum] Hec materia[mi]lias huswyf Hec nutrix A c c e norysch Hec vidua a wydo Hec equitrissa que equitat Hec anus a noId wyff Hec claviger que portât c[laves] Hec ignaria que facit i[gnem] Hec ostiaria a ostylle[re] [Hec fem]ina a woman [Hec f]abrissa A c c e a smyth wyfe Hec rustica A c c e a feldman wyfe Hec obstetrix a mydwyfe Hec abatissa A c c e a abatyse Hec monialis a nune Hec patronissa idem est Hec sacerdotissa est femina dans sacra Hie, hec sinobita qui vel que manet in sinobio Hec anacorita a ankrys NOMINA ARTIFICIUM MULIERUM Hec pectrix

a kempster

Hec textrix

a Webster

Hec scutrix

a sewster

Hec tontrix Hec pistrix

a barbor a baxter

Hec pandoxatrix a brewster Hec filatrix A c c e a spynner Hec carpetrix

-Hec lotrix

10

a carder

a lawnder

Since there is no comma between the headword and the English equivalent in the manuscript, it is not printed here. The same holds for the dot at the end of the line.

62 Hec Hec Hec Hec Hec Hec Hec Hec Hec

siccatrix a dryster reciaria A c c e a kelmaker palmaria a brawdster salinaria a salster avigerula que vendit aves sereatrix a sylkmaker androchia a dayre apoticaria A c c e a spyser wyfe auxiatrix a hukster

NOMINA REPREHENSIBILIUM UIRORUM Hic Hie Hie Hie Hie Hie Hie

gulo a gluton ego -nis idem leno -nis baustrott adulter a spowsbreker mecus A c c e lechowr fornicator idem est fenerator , J a usurer Hie usurator Hic et hec scurra a rebalde Hic et hec fur a theffe Hic hec latro idem Hic ereticus , } a .herytik Hie sismaticus Hie spoliator A c c e a robber Hic explorator a spyer Hic muricidus a losynge Hie bilinguis qui habet binas linguas Hic pelinguis a horcoppe Hic murmurator a grocher Hie gareio a knave Hie sacerdotulus i. filius sacerdotis Hic spirius a basterde Hie nothus contrarius spirio Hie hec homicida a mansleer Hec hic patricida A c c e que vel qui occidit patrem Hec hie matricida que vel qui occidit matrem Hec hie parenticida qui vel que occidit parentes Hic duribuctus a dasyberd Hic aliator a haserder Hie sarberus i. ianitor inferni Hic aquariolus Hic hec exul a nowtlay Hie tortor a turmentur Hic et hec armifraudita a skratt Hie hec apostita qui bene incipit et statim recedit Hie antechristus ancryst Hic zelotopus a kukwald Hie nerenus idem est Hunc dico zelotopum cui non sua sufficit uxor NOMINA REPREHENSIBILIUM MULIERUM Hec meritrix , . } a strumpytt Hec tabernaria

63 Hec Hec Hec Hec Hec Hec Est Hec Hec Hec Hec

saga a wech fornicatrix a sinner pronuba a bawdstrott sacerdotula i. filia sacerdotis adulteria a spowsbrekere cce elena A a strumpytt meretrix elena virgo vocatur Elena caupana A c c e a taverner wyffe taberna idem est caricia i. fallax ancilla concubina a leman

NOMINA INFIRMORUM Hic infirmus a sek mane Infirmus -a -um seke Morbosus -a -um full of ewylle Languidus -a -um sorounde Leprosus -a -um leperus Limatygus -a -um lymatyke Limphaticus -a -um hafande the fransey Hie erecticius qui vexatur multis demonibus Surdus -a -urn defe Mutus -a -um dowme Hec stroba a woman glyande Mutulatus -a -urn handles Cardiacus -a -um purse Idropicus -a -um hafand the dropsy Cecus -a -um blynd Claudus -a -um Hic et hec loripes qui habet pedem ligneum Extalus media producta , . , , . . ... .. ; i. obliviosus Litergitus -a -um Hic strabo -nis a glyere Luscus -a -um he that is sandblynde Lippus -a -um blereyed Hic monoculus a oneeyed man Hie lanaculus φιί fert lanam ad oculos tergendos Paraliticus -a -um hafand the pallsy Harniosus -a -urn burstyn Calculosus -a -um hafand the stone Gutturnosus -a -um hafand the qwynsy Semicecus -a -um halfblynd Gibbdsus -a -um bochy %

account of the new lexicographical features in fifteenth-century English

lexicography would not be canplete without mention of the first attempts at bilingual synonym word lists. This aspect in early English bilingual lexicography has so far been totally neglected. There are no editions of such manuscripts. Manuscripts that include bilingual synonym word lists are: 1

Royal MS 17.C.XVII, fol. 19r-20v, British Museum Library

2

ADD MS 34,276, fol. 22v-25r, British Museum Library

3 MS Harley 1002, fol. 137v-138v, 164r-165v, 166r-175v, British Museum Library

64 4

ADD MS 25,238, fol. 57r-59v, British Museum Library

The list of synonyms given in MS Harley 1002, fol. 137v-138v ccmes closest to the style of listing synonyms that we have discussed for vocabularies. The word list covers all parts of speech, the style of presentation is that of the "bracketed synonyms": longo pene Alongo_

afor

The words "explicit parte" at the end of the list suggest

that there may have

been a completer version of this list. The word list in the ADD MS 34,276 gives Latin synonynous nouns glossed in English. The items are arranged in coluims, five per page (apart fron the last one which has only three). The Latin synonyms are listed one below the other, with the determiners hie, hee, hoa, and the Middle English equivalent is given at the end. The Middle English equivalent is underlined to indicate the end of the synonym entry: Hec profunditas Hoc profundum Hie abissus Depness

The Rayai MS 17.C.XVII, fol. 19r-20v lists synonymous Latin adjectives for which a Middle English equivalent is given. This is the only adjective word list that I have found and that might suggest that there ware also adjectivales. Each page contains four coluims of synonyms. The Latin synonym groups have a columnar arrangement, the English equivalent is given last. It is not underlined as in the ADD MS 34,276 but preceded by a lewer case a for angliae. Examples are: Quietus Placidus Pacificus _ Tranquillus

.a. .a. .a. .a.

vim um um urn

Tacidus

.a.

urn

Abortus .a. Degeneratus .a. _ . . a Dede born.

um urn

a sty11

The outstanding characteristic of the synonym word list in the MS Harley 1002, fol. 164r-165v and fol. 166r-175v is that the language order is English-Latin, and not Latin-English as in all the previous lists of synonyms. The section of fol. 164r-165v seats to consist basically of adverbs and conjunctions, e.g.

65 Soo I

more |

Sic Ita

plus magis Amplius

It is interesting to note that a number of the items listed is also included ν ν in the reversed, that is Latin-English, word list cai fol. 137 -138 . r ν The items on fol. 166 -175 are preceded by a short introductory text in which the following word list is referred to as a "tractatus" of synonyms. Exairples fron this first English-Latin synonym list ares Asse]

Cleer |

Asinus Acellus Onager Ouos

Clarus Nitidus preclarus liquidus lueidus luminosus limpidus lucifluus purus Serenus

Brynge | a a a a a a a a a a

um um um um um um um um um um

Apporto as Adduco as Infero es Ingero is

Ite traatatus sinonimorum, for which only the A to E part has been preserved, has a nominale-verbale arrangement. For each letter,nouns and adjectives are given first and then followed by verbs. Frcm the content and style of presentar ν tion the synonym adverbs and conjunctions on fol. 164 -165 constitute a perfect catplement to the noun/adjective and verb list. This tripartite presentation of lexical items obviously recalls Guarinus Veronensis' Voaabularius Breviloquus in which the declinabilia, nouns, adjectives and verbs, are followed by the indeclinabilia, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions and interjectians.

11

Guarinus Veronensis, Vocabularius Breviloquus (Basel, 1478).

66

10

THE PICTORIAL VOCABULARY

The last of the three 15th-century class glossaries edited by T. Wright displays a most unique feature: apart fren the characteristics of 15th-century vocabularies outlined for the English Vocabulary and the Mayer Nominale it contains the first pictorial drawings in the history of English lexicography. This is the reason why T. Wright referred to it as the 'Pictorial Vocabulary' J The mansuscript is in the possession of Lord Londesborough. T. Wright believed 2 that the nanuscript was "of the latter part of the fifteenth century" and that it was at the same time later in date than the English Vocabulary and the Mayer nominale. In the Plan to the Middle English Dictionary the date reference is'?a 1500.'3 According to T. Wright the rude pen-and-ink sketches "occupy the4nargins and what would have been otherwise blank places in the manuscript. " There are about 70 illustrations altogether. In most cases the carpi1er has put the Latin headword next to his drawing so that the user will be able to identify the illustrations unanbigiously. Most of them represent either objects, e.g. a calix, a schalys, campana, a belle, gladius, a swerd, or animals, e.g. a damus, a do buk, draco, a dragon, gallus, a cok. Yet we also find a nwber of drawings of hunan faces, e.g. the face of a woran with a crown on her head illustrating the regina, and three wonderful drawings of buildings for a house (dorms), a kyrke (ecclesia) and a prevy (cloaca). T. Wright assumed that the illustrations "were designed to assist in fixing the attention of the scholar on his task",^ an assumption which is not convincing at all. Why should the ccrtpiler have drawn a cock to concentrate on the nomina avium domesticorum, why a chalice or a bell to stop his mind and attention frcm tackling other 1

T. Wright, op.ci t., pp. 244-279; p. 244.

2

T. Wright, op.cit., p. 244.

3

H. Kurath and S.M. Kuhn, op.cit., p. 53.

4

T. Wright, op.cit., p. xiii.

5

T. Wright, op.cit., p. xiii.

67 subjects than nomina ecclesie necessaria? Why should the drawings have been mnemonic devices for the ccnpiler? It seems to me to be much more plausible if we attribute to this unknown compiler of the Pictorial Vocabulary the same motives that guide present-day lexicographers and publishers. Drawings of unfamiliar animals and objects, e.g. a dragon or a flaget (a leathern flask) might well have been meant as a help for the vocabulary user to identify the animal, object and the word for it. Drawings of more familiar objects, on the other hand, might just have been inserted to irake the manuscript more varied and attractive. And finally, such drawings as three stones for the nomina lapidum may not serve any lexicographical purpose but reflect a talented cartpiler's delight to exercise his gift of drawing. The Pictorial Vocabulary lists more items than the English Vocabulary and the Mayer nominale. It has at the same time the highest proportion of mnemonic Latin verses or lines. As far as I knew,the latter have not yet been studied in detail. Such a study would have to investigate the way in which these Latin "verses" were used by the ccmpiler and which function they were meant to fulfill. That the function varied emerges fron a short look at seme examples in the Pictorial Vocabularys® 1

Spelling differences are focussed upon: The ccnpiler first lists the two items in question and then differentiates them in a verse. One of the items does not serrantically belong to the subject field under discussion. In the follcwing example, for instance, servus has nothing to do in a word list of nomina animalium ferorumi 759 Hic cervus, A C e 8 ce 759 Hic servus, A

a hert. a serwant.

Hie cervus per c. scriptum sit bestia silve; S. scribatur servus, famulus vocitatur.

2

Spelling and pronunciation differences are focussed upon: The ccnpiler nay have listed the two items in question before quoting a verse, e.g. 21 ce 768^2 Hec margarita, A a perylle. 768 Hec Margareta, a mayden. Margarita lapis, sed Margareta puella.

6

The examples are based on the edition by T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op. cit., col. 745-814. Yet since the other Middle English vocabularies did not use a different handwriting for the Latin headword, the examples are quoted without italicization.

where, again, tJargareta does not constitute a member of the subject field nomina lapiditm. In other cases the second item fron which the first has to be differentiated is only mentioned in the verse: 805

23

Hec Hec Nos

navícula, , a ·, v. } b°te lembus, vestit limbus, nos vectat per mare lembus.

Verses are also used to differentiate between hcmographs: 9 ce 779 Hoc focarium, A a hartstone. 779 .. Hie ffocus, idem est. 11 ce 779 - Hic focus, An a hautere. 779 Hie ffocus, A n C e a fyir. Est altare focus, locus et focus ignis.

When hcmographs follow different declension patterns, this is usually indicated: 746 746

IO

ce ffrons, An a forhed. Hoc os, -ris, A a mowth. Frons, -dis, ramus, frons, -tis, pars capitalis.

Hic

747 22 H o c o s < ossis, A^ e a bone. 747 Hoc os, -ris, A a mowth. Os, oris, loquitur, corio vestitur os, ossis.

The same holds for hcmographs that differ with respect to gender: 37 759 „ 1er. 3 8 759 2g 759 759

Hic „ Hec Hic Hec Hic

castor, , -, } a brok. melota, taxus, taxus, a hewtre. arbor taxus, hinc taxum dico melotam.

Verses illustrate meaning differences: In the Mayer Nominale, for instance, the following three Latin nouns are glossed by one single Middle English item: Hoc über, Hec mamma, } a pape Hec mamilla

In the Pictorial Vocabulary the equivalents or explanations for the Latin headwords are often more precise and detailed. The sane three items are recorded as follwos in the Pictorial Vocabulary: 750 750

13

Hec mamilla, c A Hec mamma, A

ce

a lytyl pap. a pap of a woman.

69 750

15

ce Hoc über, A a pap of a best. Mos hominuffl proprie mamillas dicimus esse, Ubera et pecudum, sed mamme et mulierum; Cuins mamillas dixisti, dicque patillas.

So far,too little is knewn atout the sources of our three 15th-century vocabularies. A study of the Latin verses found in these bilingual vocabularies will undoubtedly provide inportant clues to the Latin sources and word lists that their carpi 1ers consulted and used. When editing his Volume of Vocabularies T. Wright stressed the great irrportance of the early glossaries and vocabularies as documents of the English language, as records of the history of education, and above all as invaluable materials illustrating the conditions of life and the manners of our forefathers in Old English and Middle English times. The vocabularies are in this respect more interesting than the glossaries because the word selection was less randcm than in glossaries. Once a ccnpiler had chosen a specific field he tried to cover it quite systematically. Our knowledge of particular spheres of the Old English and Middle English vocabulary depends in seme cases on these early word lists. It is better and more comprehensive because of these early atteirpts at a rather systenatic coverage of specific vocabulary fields. They are in a way more "complete" than they would or could have been if the collections were based on a mere reading of literary documents of the period in question. A case in point are those words that have had a long lexicographical nan-history. Mords designating the sexual organs of the human body and scatological functions were for a long time not granted rights of admission to a dictionary that registered the words of the English language. It is only quite recently that a change in attitude has taken place, - and this by no means generally . It is therefore interesting to note that quite a number of these (emitted or banned) words are listed in our Old English and Middle English vocabularies. In most cases the mention in one of the vocabularies constitutes the first textual evidence of these words. A carparison of the itene listed, of both the Latin headwords and their English equivalents, reveals an interesting change in language use and in lexicographical attitude. The language use for Old English times will be illustrated fron the items listed in Aelfria's Vocabulary, the MS Cotton Cleopatra A III, fol. 76r-91v, and the MS 1828-30 (185), fol. 36-109 in the Royal Library, Brussels. It can be summarized as follows:^

7

Since the London Vocabulary has not yet been edited, the examples have been taken from Aelfric's Vocabulary.

70 1 All vocabularies list the generic term genitalia for which the Old English equivalents are gecendlimu (keifria 's Vocabulary)3 pa aennendlioan

(MS

Cotton Cleopatra A III, fol. 76 r ff.) and pa cennedan [aennendan] (MS 1828-

30 (185), fol. 36-109 Royal Library, Brussels). 2 All three vocabularies list the item anus which is glossed as follows: Anus uel uerpus, ears£>ere Anus, bœcjpearm Anus, baecdearm

(Aelfric's Vocabulary) (MS Cotton Cleopatra A III) (MS Royal Library, Brussels)

3 Por penis there are a nunber of Latin equivalents which have different Old English translations. 1he Latin word penis itself does not seem to have been in use, it is not listed in our vocabularies before the fifteenth century: Ueretrum - waepengecynd - teors

(Aelfric's Vocabulary) (MS Cotton Cleopatra A III)

Uirilia

- i>a werlican - da wasrlican

(MS Cotton Cleopatra A III) (MS Royal Library, Brussels)

Calamus

- teors, ¡M»t waepen, uel lim

(MS Cotton Cleopatra A III)

- teors Uirilius - pintel

(MS Royal Library, Brussels) (MS Royal Library, Brussels)

One part of the m i e sexual organ is named as well, the testicles: Testiculi - beallucas - herjpan

(MS Cotton Cleopatra A III) (MS Royal Library, Brussels)

4 Por the female sexual organ there is only one word, we thus do not have the variety of designations that we have for the male sexual organ: Fernen -, - inneweard deoh Femina - innewerd Jpeoh - inneward jpeoh

(Aelfric's Vocabulary) (MS Cotton Cleopatra A III) (MS Royal Library, Brussels)

Hie changes to be noted for the Middle English period are as follows: 1 The generic term genitalia is not listed. 2 The selection of Latin words for the penis is different. We still find the item veretrwn, but virilia, calamus, and virilius are no longer listed. In-

stead we find priapus and penis. The Middle English translation equivalent is pyntylle or pyntyle, which occurred only once in the Old English vocabularies. The word that seemed to be more carman in Old English times, teors, is not listed as a Middle English equivalent. 3 Whereas the word testiculi was the only one listed for Old English as a

71

part of the male sexual organ, there are more specific items in Middle English vocabularies. The word for bollocks is no longer listed in the plural form but in the singular: Testiculus - a balloke - a balok stone

(Mayer Nomínale) (Pictorial Vocabulary)

Priapus is also described as the "finis ueretri" (MS Royal 17.C.17, fol. 21r ff.). Genitale

- a balloke stone

(Mayer

Nominale)

Piga

- a balloke code

(Mayer

Nominale)

- a balokcod

(Pictorial

Vocabulary)

The item ramex is not translated, but only glossed in Latin: Hie ramex

4

- locus genitalium

(Mayer

Nominale)

Neither the Latin word nor the Old English equivalent for the female sexual part listed in Old English vocabularies is given. Instead, we have the word vulva in all three Middle English vocabularies (MS Royal 17.C.17, fol. 21r ff., the Mayer Nominate and the Pictorial Vocabulary), which is glossed as aunt. The Pictorial Vocabulary lists another Latin synonym, the word cunnus. In addition, both the Royal MS 17.C.17, fol. 21 r ff. and the Pictorial Vocabulccry, list the item tentigo which in the Ortus Vocabulorum is glossed in Latin as "secreta pars in vulva", and which in all instances is rendered Q

by kykyre (kykyr3 ketyre). The Pictorial Vocabulary lists a further item, hec caturda, translated as a bobvelle which T. Wright explained as "caturda was used in the Latin of the fifteenth century to indicate a part 9 of the fexrale sexual organs, either the labia pudendi or the nymphae". Hie items mamma and manilla have already been discussed earlier. 5

For anus another Latin synonym is also listed, culis; both are glossed as a ners.

6

A newcomer in the word lists of the 15th century is the Latin word pubes ! Hec pubes

- joug hore

(Mayer

Nominale)

8

The word tentigo is also listed much earlier in the Corpus Glossary where it is translated as gesca. A. Campbell in his Supplement to An AngloSaxon Dictionary (London: Oxford University Press, 1972) gives hiccough as a translation.

9

T. Wright, op.cit., p. 246; T. Wright and R.P. Wülcker, op.cit., 749-750.

col.

72 Hec pubes Hec lanugo Hoc pecten

} schere

(Pictorial Vocabulary)

This brief account of the lexicographical treatment of words designating the sexual parts of the huirán body concludes our review of early English glossaries and vocabularies. The following sample frcm the Pictorial Vocabulary is based an the Wright-Willcker edition. 1he selection of the sarrple was determined by the illustrations accompanying the word lists and by the rarity of the subject field in relation to other vocabularies (nomina infirmitatum) :

NOMINA ANIMALI UM DOMES ΤI CARUM.

NOMINA AVIUM DOMESTICARUM.

Hic Hic Hic Hic Hie Hic Hie

Hic Hec Hie Hic Hec Hie Hie Hie Hie Hie Hec Hie Hec Hie Hie Hec Hie Hic Hic

dextrarius, A a stede. emissarius, a corsowyr. sucarius, A a trotore. palafridus, a palfrey. gradarius^A a hawmlore. mannus, A a hakeney. cabo, A a stalon. ce Hie caballus, A a capulle. Hie viridus, A a thylhors. Hie spado, A a gelt hors. Hic equus, A alle maner hors, ce Hec equa, A a mare. Hic pullus, A a schekyn. Hic pullus, A a fole. Pullus, -a, -um A blak. Pullus equs, pullus galline, pullus et ater. Hie asinus, } has. Hec asina. ce a palhors. Hic saginarius^ A Hic taurus, A a bole, ce a mule. Hic mulus, A A a hox. Hic et hec bos, Hec vacca, } a cow. Hec vacula,

ce gallus, A a cok. gallina, A a hene. pullus, A a cheke. ce ancer, A a gander. ce auca, A ose. ancerulus, A a guslyng. capo, -is, } a capun aitile, 'ce pavo, A a pocokk. anas, for drake. anata, a heynd. Columbus, columba, } a dowe. .ce pipio. A' dowbyrd. palumbus, , a stokdowe. palumba, ancipiter, a goshawke. erodius, a gerfawkyn. .ce a sperhawke. msus, A .ce a muskyte. Hic capus, A a hoby. Hie acensorius. A

73

NOMINA INFIRMITATUM.

CUPERUS CUM SUIS INSTRUMENTA

puscula, An C e a whele. ulcus, -ceris, An a byle. scabies, -ei^An a scabbe impetigo, An a tesyng. veruca, An a werte, ce Hec glabra, An a scalle. Hec macula, An a spote. Hec lentecula^An a frekyn. Hec lepra, An a mesellerye. a fewer. Hec ffebris, An ce the chawndyse. Hec utorica, An ce the crampe. Hic spasmus, An the cowe. ce Hie extecis, tussis, An Hec An a scunnyng Hie catarus, An a pore. ce Hec reuma, An a chynge. Hec gutta. An the gowte. Hec leantaria, An the flyx. Nominativo clunucus, -ca, -cum, A berede. , ce Hic gibbus, An a wenne.

Hic carpentarius, a carpenter. Hic cuperus, a cowper. Hoc dolebrum, a brodehax. ce Hec securis, An a hax. Hec seculicula, a hachet. Hec acia, a tyxhyl. Hoc aquiscium, a quyver. Hoc perpendiculum, a plomet. Hec regula, An a rewylle. Hoc terebrum, An a wymbylle. Hoc teribellum, An a persowyr. Hie bipennus, } a stybylle. Hie bidens, -tis, a plane, Hec leviga, An a scheselle. Hec seltis, An Hèc strofina, a gropyngyryn. ce Hec sarra, An a saw. ce Hec vibra, An"" a brake. ce Hic circulus, An a hope. Hic aser, -ris^An a borde. Hic cunius, An a sceselle.

Hec Hoc Hec Hec Hec

74

11

ΊΗΕ MEDULLA GRAMMATICE AND ΊΗΕ ORTUS VOCABULORUM

Although the manuscripts that have been discovered and described for the fifteenth century are not many in nimber, they provide us with excellent insights into the lexicographical activities going on at the time. The tradition gradually established in the previous centuries is continued, but we encounter at the same time quite a nurrber of new ventures. Yet the fifteenth century is a century that not only produced variation in lexicographical works, it also brought forth comprehensive works, the first bilingual English dictionaries. The chronology of the first bilingual English dictionaries is not easy to establish. The first chronological lists of the early dictionaries of the English language go back to J.E. Worcester, H.B. Wheatley and W.W. Skeat. In his monumental Dictionary

of the English

Language

of 1860 J.E. Vforchester at-

tempted to give a first chronology in his "History of English Lexicography".^ Five years later H.B. Wheatley published a survey entitled "Chronological Notices of the Dictionaries of the English Language" in which he put forward the following chronology: ab. 1440

Galfridus Grammaticus Piomptoiium parvulorum (MS Harley 221)

ab. 1450

Anon. Dictionarium Anglo-Latinum (ADD MS 15,562) 2

1483

Anon. Catholicon Anglicum (Lord Monson's MS)

1

J.E. Worcester, "History of English Lexicography" in A Dictionary English Language (Boston: 1860), pp. liii-lviii.

of

the

2

The ADD MS 15,562 in the British Museum Library is supposed to be a manuscript version of the Catholicon Anglicum. It was Sir Frederick Madden who conjectured the date 'about 1450' for it which was later taken over by Wheatley and Skeat.

75 1499

Galfridus Grammaticus Promptorium parvulorum ^ (first edition printed by Pynson)

W.W. Skeat in his "A Bibliographical List of the Works that have been published, or are kncwn to exist in MS,, illustrative of the various dialects of 4 English"

followed H.B. Wheatley. H.B. Wheatley also referred to the Medulla

grarnmatice,

the earliest Latin-English dictionary which he supposed "to have

been ccrrpiled by the author of the Promptorium

parvulorum."^

The Promptorium

itself was first edited by A. Way who, when discussing the sources of the Promptorium, grcarmatioe

conjectured the date 1460 for the earliest copy of the Medulla known to him. ^

The history of English lexicography written by 19th-century scholars thus began with an English-Latin dictionary, the Promptorium

parvulorum

and not a

Latin-English one as one might have expected fron the fact that all bilingual glossaries and vocabularies, fron the Corpus Glossary ulary,

to the Pictorial

Vocab-

had the language order Latin-English.

A paper published in 1923 was to change this picture of early English lexicography. Its author, P. Havrorth, had discovered a fragment of a Latin-English dictionary in the library of the University of Bristol. The earliest Latin-English dictionaries being the Medulla

and the Ortue Vocabulorum he had

to carpare his fragment to these two dictionaries. After a close study of the manuscripts of the Medulla

he came to the conclusion "that the Bristol frag-

ment is at least a generation earlier than them a l l . U l i s gave the Bristol fragment a date of about 1430. The Bristol fragmsnt itself is according to P. Havrorth part of the Ortus

vocabulorum·.

3

H.B. Wheatley, ed., "Chronological Notices of the Dictionaries of the English Language," Transactions of the Philological Society 1865, pp. 218-293; p. 288.

4

See English Dialect Society Publications, (A.) Dictionaries, pp. 3-17; p. 3.

1873-1877, Section I: General.

5

H.B. Wheatley, op.cit., p. 220.

6

A. Way, ed., Promptorium Parvulorum Sive Clericorum. Dictionarius AngloLatinus Princeps, auctore fratre Galfrido Grammatico dicto, ex ordine fratrum predicatorum Northfolciensi, circa A.D. M.CCCC, XL (London: Camden Society, 1865), p. xxii.

7

P. Haworth, "The First Latin-English Dictionary. A Bristol University Manuscript, " Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, 45 (1923), pp. 253-275; p. 254.

76 There is no doubt that the Bristol MS. is a fragment of the original Hortus \bcabulorum attributed to Galfridus Grammaticus by Bale...who mentions this dictionary before the Promptorium ^1440) , which was doubtless compiled several years later than the Hortus. Hie chronology for the early history of bilingual English lexicography was thus changed to the following : ca. 1430 1440 ca. 1460

Hortus vocabulorum (Bristol fragment)

Latin-English

Promptorium parvulorum English-Latin Medulla grammatice (MS studied by A. Way)

Latin-English 9

1483

Catholicon Angl i cum

1499

Promptorium parvulorum English-Latin (printed edition)

1500

Ortus vocabulorum (printed edition)

English-Latin

Latin-English

A study undertaken twenty years later was to provide the basis for the chronology as it stands at the present.^ In an unpublished dissertation of the University of Michigan R.T. Meyer investigated the Stonyhurst MS of the 11

Medulla.

He regards this as the most complete of all known manuscripts of

the text and maintains, according to D.T. Starnes' account, that " the Stony12 hurst Medulla antedates 1400". If one accepts R.T.Meyer's view our chronological list will have to be adjusted as follows : before 1400

Medulla grammatice (Stonyhurst MS)

Latin-English

ca. 1430

Hortus vocabulorum (Bristol fragment)

Latin-English

8

P. Haworth, op. cit., p. 254.

9

For the ADD MS 15,562 in the British Museum Library Sir Frederick Madden had conjectured the date 'about 1450'. The catalogue in the British Museum, however, describes the MS, believed to be a copy of the Catholicon Anglicum, as "written late in the XVth century".

10 Cf G. Stein " The English Dictionary in the 15th Century", in Logos Semantikos. Studia Linguistica in Honorem Eugenio Coseriu. 1921-1981. Vol. I ( Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, Madrid: Gredos, 1983), pp. 313-322. 11

D. T. Starnes, Renaissance Dictionaries, op. cit., p. 367 gives as the title of R. T. Meyer's unpublished dissertation The Sources of the StonyhurstMedulla and 1943 as the year in which the doctoral dissertation was completed. The entry in the DAb, however, is Λ Chapter in English Lexicography and the year 1944.

12

D. T. Starnes, Renaissance Dictionaries, op. cit., p. 26.

77 1440 ca 1460

Promptorium Medulla

parvulorum

grammatice

English-Latin Latin-English

(MS studied by A.Way)

1483

Catholicon

1499

Promptorium

Anglicum parvulorum

English-Latin English-Latin

(printed edition)

1500

Ortus

vocabulorum

Latin-English

(printed edition)

Ihe history of 15th-century bilingual English lexicography thus begins with two Latin-English dictionaries. English-Latin ones were ccrrpiled slightly later. Research on the Medulla grœmatiae, just as research on the other 15th- and 16th-century bilingual English dictionaries, is only in its beginnings. Ihe author of the 'Marrcw of Qranmar ' is not knew η. R. T. Nteyer ' s suggestion that the authors Cwere 3 a host of obscure persons, unknown teachers : monks, friars, and obscure clerks who expounded the classics and Scriptures in the cloister or the schools

13 has quite seme plausibility

in via/ of the 16 manuscripts that have cate

down to us and the great variation which they display. For the earlier view that the author might have been the author of the

Promptorium parvulorum there

is no evidence. The different iranuscripts in existence have been described by A. Way who used them for his edition of the Promptorium parvulorum, as well as by R. T. Ifeyer in his dissertation and by J. F. ιHuntsnan. Huntsnan's University of Texas dissertation is a study of the MS 2002 in the Pepys Library, Magda14 lene College, Caitbridge. Ihe date suggested for this manuscript of the Medulla is 1480. Ihe nunber of iranuscripts preserved suggests that the Medulla grammatice was a popular work at the time. Ihe fact that the Promptorium parvulorum was also referred to as the Medulla grammatice may be taken as a further indication of its popularity. It was the first and thus the comprehensive bilingual lexicon of the time, of which many copies were in circulation. A generic term for a dictionary was not yet in existence. Any conprehensive bilingual word 13

Cf D. T. Starnes, Renaissance

Dictionaries,

op.cit.,

14

J. F. Huntsman, Pepys *f S 2002 ' VED ULLA G ROtl ATICE : An Edition.

p. 26. Ph.D. dis-

sertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 1973; DAb 34/5-6,1973, 2597-A.

73 list might therefore have been referred to as the Medulla

and the order in

vÄiich the two languages, Latin and English, were treated was secondary to the ccmprehensiveness of the work. D.T. Starnes has therefore rightly drawn attention to the different uses of the name Medulla. edition of the Promptorium

parvulorum,

The colophon of the 1510

as he has pointed out, gives

the reference to Medulla grammatices as a title by which the Promptorium was generally known. This title or subtitle was first used in the colophon of Richard Pynson's edition of the Promptorium (1499); it reappeared as Medulla grammatice on the title page of Julian Notary's edition of 1508, and on the title pages of the various editions printed by Wynkyn de Wörde. It seems obvious then that Medulla grammatice was, at the turn of the century, the title generally applied to the English-Latin dictionary first printed as the Promptorium parvulorum. Reference in Thomas's Dictionarium, after 1600, to the Promptorium as "Medull." or "Medull. Gram." would indicate that the Promptorium was so called throughout the sixteenth century. The name Medulla grammatice is, however, confusing, since there are a considerable number of fifteenth-century manuscripts of a Latin-English dictionary of the same title ... To avoid confusion, one has to remember that the term Medulla grammatice has, unfortunately, two distinct applications: (1) to fifteenth-century manuscript versions of a Latin-English dictionary, never printed, or, if so, with modifications and change of title; (2) as an alternate title to the printed editions of the first English-Latin dictionary, today better known as the Promptorium parvulorum. 15 The nunber of manuscripts preserved as well as their variation make it also plausible that the word list of the Medulla,

as R.T. Meyer m^plied, grew by

accretions through time. This theory was given sane support by D.T. Starnes who described his cwn findings as follows: My own investigation shows that at least partial support for this theory is found in the correspondence of the word list and the definitions of the Medulla (I refer especially to the word lists in the texts of the Harleian MSS 2257 and 2270) to those in Vocabularius breviloquus, an abridgment of the Catholicon; to those in the popular Latin-German lexicon Vocabularius Latino-Teutonicus and its successor, Gemma gemmarum ; and, finally, to those in the Ortus vocabulorum. 16 The actual wording in two of the manuscripts might be taken as further support. The MS Harley 1738 contains the Prologue of the Medulla

"Hec est regula

generalis pro toto libro ..." and concludes with the words "Explicit Medulla Gramatioe". At the end of the MS Harley 2270, however, the reading is "Explicit Medulla Gramatice Noviter", clearly suggesting a new, possibly revised and augmented, version of the

Medulla,.

15

D.T. Starnes, op.cit., p. 5-6.

16

D.T. Starnes, op.cit., p. 27

79 As to the coverage of the Medulla Huntsman mentions sane 17000 entries for the MS 2000' in the Pepys Library and D.T. S tames cites the figure of about 20000 words. Fran a lexicographical point of view the Medulla does not go beyond the features listed earlier for 15th century bilingual glossaries and vocabularies. The latter seem to be in parts slightly more advanced. The arrangement is alphabetical which usually means /ISC-order. The display is either one or two columns per page with capital initials for the Latin headword unless the latter is preceded by one of the determiners hie, hea, hoe as in sate nanuscripts. The beginning of a different second letter of the headword is often highlighted by a rubricated initial, following the medieval lexicographical tradition. Hie origin of the headword, whether Greek or Hebrew, is occasionally marked. Hie English equivalents for nouns are usually preceded by the indefinite article. Verses are also inserted to illustrate the meaning of the headword and, as in the MS Harley 1738, marked by a ve in the left margin. The sources of the Medulla have been investigated by R.T. Meyer in his dissertation as well as in a more recent article on "Hie Relation of the Me17 dulia to the Earlier English Glossaries." Meyer himself has demonstrated the Medulla's indebtedness to the early glossae oolleotae, glosses frcm the classics and the Bible. He has indicatedtarofurther sources, the vocabulary (class glossary) or nominale, believed to have been the basis for the major 18 part of the Medulla, and the medieval sunna or encyclopedia of knowledge. Starnes has drawn attention to the Voaabularius breviloquus, the Voaabularius 19 Latino-Teutonious and the Gemma gemmanm. He also suggested that the compiler of the Medulla might have used the same sources as the compiler of the Or tus Vocabulorum. The question of the sources of the Medulla will be taken up again when the sources of the Ortus vocabulorum are discussed. Within the history of bilingual English lexicography the Ortus voaabulorvm is the second Latin-English dictionary and the first ever to have been printed. It was first printed in 1500. The printer was Caxton's successor, wynkyn de Wörde. The name [HÌOrtus recalls of course another famous work, J. Cube's 17

R.T. Meyer, "The Relation of the Medulla to the Earlier English Glossaries," in Papers on Lexicography in Honor of Warren N. Cordell, eds. J.E. Congleton, J.E. Gates and D. Hobar (Terre Haute: The Dictionary Society of North America, 1979), pp. 141-150.

18

Cf

19

D.T. Starnes, Renaissance

D.T. Starnes, Renaissance

Dictionaries,

Dictionaries,

op. cit., p. 26

op. cit., p. 27.

80

Ortus sanitatie of 1485. The name of the carpi1er is not known, nor do we know when the Ortus was compiled. The date 1430 has been suggested for the earliest manuscript fragment preserved. For a long time scholars had attributed the Ortus to Galfridus Gramatious, the author of the first English-Latin dictionary, the Promptorium parvulorum. More recent research, however, has shown that such a theory is not very plausible. The printed edition includes a Prologue and a colophon at the end which provide us with seme information on the carpi 1er's aims and intentions. That there is such a Prologue is indicative in itself because it means that the carpi1er felt that it was necessary to address his reader and to explain the nature and structure of his work. The Prologue of the Ortus takes alphabetical order for granted for the latter is not exenplified in detail as in irany other earlier and contemporary prologues to a dictionary. It explains the abbreviations used in the dictionary to mark the gender for nomina, that is, nouns and adjectives, and the conjugation and voice class for verbs. We find similar explanations in other contemporary vrorks, and we also find the same abbreviations for the granmatical terminology used. The way in which these abbreviations are presented in the Ortus is rather striking. As could be seen fron the few instances occurring in sane of our sample texts, granmatical information for the Latin headword used to be given after the headword itself. In the Or tue, however, it does no longer folio«? the headword. Instead it is given at the end of the whole entry and is thus separated frati the very item to which it belongs by the Latin and/or English explanation: Attenuo as. to make thyne or febule. for trix uel tio verbale. a.p. Attenuatus a. um. made thyne o.s. Attentus a. urn. besye. o.s.

I have found this rather unusual presentation in one other dictionary of the time, a copy of the Catholiaon abbreviation in the British Museum Library. The Prologus gives the date 1499 for it. Exanples are: Babilon /onis. vel babilonia / nie. nomen cuiusdam patrie, f Babilonius /a /um, celluy qui est de babilone. o

81 Nearly one hundred years later, in 1593, we find a similar display in another bilingual French dictionary. In A Dictionarie French and English Claude Hollyband varies between indicating the gender for nouns in French iimrediately after the headword as in Abri, m: ou le soleil frappe toujours, a Sunnie banke,: as se mettre á l'abrie. Vn Accusateur, m: an accuser. Accusatrice, f.: celle qui Accuse: she which accuseth.

and indicating it at the end of the entry as in the Ortus vocabulorum: Abbé, an Abbot: π Abbesse, an Abbottesse: f.

The opposite arrangement, to give the grarmatical specification before the actual entry, seems to have been another lexicographical possibility. The latter is a presentation that is characteristic of the Gemma vocabulorum. Exarrples fron the 1484 edition are: η s Babbatum een hoefyser m s Babararius een hoefyser smit f in Babel interpretatur confusio

At the end of the Ortus the reader is told that the dictionary contains the meanings of all those words that are in the Catholiaon, the Breviloquus, the Cornucopia, and the Medulla grammatiae. This reference is interesting in several respects. The carpi1er explicitly names four works which he used when ccirpiling his dictionary: three Latin authorities, Joannes Balbus' Catholiaon, Guarinus Veronensis' Voaabularius breviloquus, and Nicolas Perottus' Cornucopia, and the only comprehensive bilingual English word list then available, the Medulla grammatiae. The reference to the Medulla enables us to set up a relative chronology for the first two Latin-English dictionaries. Acknowledging one's literary and textual sources is a prime duty for any scholar. In early English dictionaries we often find references to other lexicographical works which the carpi 1er lists as having consulted and used. Yet these references have to be taken with caution for they often serve other purposes as well. Ihey may have been included to give a new dictionary the authority it needed to be marketable, and they may have been added to outdo another rival dictionary, above all if the latter is mentioned as including fewer items and meanings than the new work. The characteristic of such acknowledgements is therefore that they are exaggerating statements. It is interesting to note that we find this hyperbolic feature

82 already in the first printed English dictionary: to claim that the Ortus contains all the meanings listed in the four dictionaries mentioned is sinply absurd. In the first edition of the Ortus the sources used are listed at the end of the dictionary and their advertising function may therefore have been equal to none. In the 1509 edition, hcwever, they are listed on the title page. Hie whole text of the title page is manifestly geared tcwards the user: the type of user is singled out, the usefulness of the dictionary for him is stressed, and he is asked to hurry and get his copy. Hie following text is an English paraphrase of the Latin original: The Garden of Words, in alphabetical order, containing almost all things that are in the Catholicon, the Breviloquus, the Cornucopia, the Gemma vocabulorum, and the Medulla grammatice, together with an exposition in the vernacular English. Not unworthily called "the garden of words," for just as in gardens are found abundance of flowers, of herbs, and of fruits with which our bodies are strengthened and our spirits refreshed, so in this work are diverse words accommodated to beginners desirous of the pleasures of learning. With these words they may furnish the mind, adorn their speech, and finally, if the fates permit, grow into very learned men ... Here in alphabetical order they may easily find whatever words they desire. The inflection and gender of nouns and the conjugation of verbs they will learn by a letter subjoined to such word. A work useful a n d profitable to all desirous of a knowledge of arts and sciences; and on account of the exposition of English speech, especially necessary to the realm of England. Hurry, therefore, all Englishmen, and spare not your small coins. Buy this volume while you can get it good cheap.20

Although the carpi1er of the Ortus has named his source material it is not easy at all to identify specific items or vocabulary areas that manifest direct indebtedness to one of the sources mentioned if this is not explicitly indicated. Papias, Balbus, Guarinus and Perottus were all authorities at their time and their Latin works were widely known. Any word list compiler would have been able to use the material which these works held ready for him. A study of seme 15th-century and early 16th-century bilingual Latin dictionaries will leave no doubt that there was sanething like a catmon stock of words listed in most dictionaries. It is precisely this coimon stock that irakés it difficult to prove direct indebtedness. For if a lexicographer X, for instance, used the sources A,B,C, and D, indebtedness could be traced if

20

D. T. Starnes, Renaissance

Dictionaries,

op.cit.,

pp. 30-31.

83 A,B,C, and D are dictionaries that do not have very much in common in approach and word stock. As soon as a lexicographer Y uses A,B,C,D, and X, however, the problem becomes more ocnplex. Hew can we prove that a specific definition found in A and X and used as well by lexicographer Y was taken over fron source A or X if all are literally the same? It might help to consider other headwords as veil as the order in which the items are listed. There nay be blocks of canton, traditional raterial where, again, it will be difficult to prove direct indebtedness to one particular source. Not infrequently, however, such blocks are interrupted by items that do not belong to this traditional stock. If they are listed in either A,B,C,D, or X, the assumption will be that not only the less traditional items but also the σαπηαη stock ones were taken over from source A,B,C,D, or X, as the case may be. In Papias' Voaabulariwn, for instance, the Latin headwords under Β are given in the following order: Babel Babylon Babiger Baburrhus Baburrha

In John Balbus' Catholiaon we have the following order of items: Babilon Babilonia Babilonicus Babilonius Baburus Babura

The Gemma vooabulorum begins with Baba tum Babatarius Babel Babilonia Baburrus ... Babura Babiger

The first headwords of the Ortus, however, include a set of items not listed in either of these three Latin dictionaries: Baal Baalberith Baalim Baalpharasim Baalphasis Babbatum

Babel Babilonia Babilonius Babiger ... baburus Baburra Whereas the last five headwords might be regarded as belonging to what I have called the ccrrmon stock of items, the first five obviously must have COTE fron a different source. And this source is Guarinus Veronensis' Vooabularius breviloquua. The British Museum copy of the 1478 edition has the following entry words for which I shall also give the relevant part of the definition so that the reader will be able to carpare the Vooabularius breviloquus with the sample of the Or tus given at the end of the chapter: Baal nomen Idoli cuiusdam ... Baalberith dicitur idolum coniurationis ... Baalim dicuntur idola assyriorum Baalpharasim interpretatur diuisio virorum. Baalphasis interpretatur diuisio inimicorum. Babatum dicitur illud quod annectit faber equo cum gympho. vel ein hufeysen. Babel interpretatur confusio. Inde Babylon vel Babylonia ciuitas vbi olim homines turrim ... Inde babylonia regio, et babylonius. a. um. nomen patriura vel gentile. Babiger. babosus, baburtus, idem scilicet stultus. ineptus. hebes. inops. Baburra. i. ineptia vel stultitia. Hie comparison leaves no doubt that the compiler of the Ortus drew heavily upon the Vooabularius breviloquus. This can occasionally also be seen in cases in which the item in question belongs to the canton stock found in all dictionaries. An item in point is the Latin word for berry: Papias1 Vooabularium: Bacca oliuae uel lauri pomum agrestis fructus herbarum Balbus' Catholiooni Bacca ce. per duo c. est fructus oliue et lauri. Ponitur tarnen quandoque pro quolibet fructu. et precipue arborum siluestrium ... Guarinus' Vooabularius breviloquus'. Bacca, eg. f.p. per duo c. est fructus oliug. et etiara lauri. Ponitur tarnen quandoque pro quolibet fructu. Et precipue arbor siluestrium ... Catholioon abbreviatimi Bacca / ce. fruit de laurier, ou aucune fois pour tout fruit sauuage.

85 Gemma vooabulorum: Bacca est fructus oliue et lauri ...

Ortus vooabulorum: Bacca, ce. est fructus oliue et etiam lauri, f.p.

Since early lexicographers ware not yet as consistent in their methodological approach as most modern ones the specific items which they selected out of a set of items nay also lead to their ultirrate sources. Of the Latin sources mentioned in the Ortus, Papias' Vooabularium, for instance, is most systematic with respect to the inclusion of letters of the alphabet as headword items. Papias included 19 altogether. In John Balbus' Catholioon we find eight descriptions for letters of the alphabet, in the Vooabulariue breviloquus ten, in the Gemma vooabulorum only three. The Or tus lists five, yet it is not the first Latin-English vrord list to include Latin descriptions for sane of the letters of the Latin alphabet. Two iranuscripts in the British Museum Library believed to be manuscripts of the Medulla grammatioe include sush descriptions as well. The MS Harley 2257 has descriptions for F, G, I, and K, and the MS Harley 2270 one only for M. The descriptions of the letter A in the Ortus vooabulorum is the same as the first part of that in the Vooabularius optimue Gemma vooabulorum ..., and that of M, Q, and R, again, manifests direct indebtedness to the Vooabuhxrius breviloquus. The originality of the Ortus vooabulorum is difficult to assess since its sources have not been studied in detail. The occasional references to pronunciation, e.g. Ara e. prima longa sine aspiratione. est altare, an auter. f.p. Hara e. prima breuis cum aspirationem. est stabulum porcorum. a swyne styl. f.p.

to the Greek or Latin origin of an item, e.g. Acros grece mons latine. Adros grece petra latine, a stone.

as well as the few indications of language usage in Latin, e.g. Aceo es non est in vsu. vinum aceturo firi. angl 1 . to be sharpe or sowre. n.s. Angelium quod non est in vsu sed suum compositum. Sed euangelium in annunciatio m.s.

86 seam to betray indebtedness to another source rather than originality on the part of the compiler because of the lack of consistency in the observation of these features although it has to be admitted that lack of consistency is a characteristic of most early lexicographical works. Hiere seems to be much more consistency in the word-formational ccsrponent of the Ortus. So far,I have not been able to trace its sources, or better, this characteristic in cne single dictionary. The morphological aspect manifests itself as follows: a. Verbs are often followed by the suffixes -tor, -trix, and -tio for the respective deverbal nouns. The suffixes may either be listed after the Latin headword to which they belong, e.g. Affecto as. i. vehementer cupere: afficere. Tor. trix. et tio. verbale, atus. a. um. pertinens. to couet.

or after the English equivalent, e.g. Abrompo is. penitus rompere, i. de aliis frangere, anglice. brekof. Tor. Trix. Tio.

a.t.

The morphological information is given only for Latin. There are no English equivalents. The entries thus resemble undefined run-on entries in modern English dictionaries. b. The derivative(s) is (are) introduced by means of inde which stresses the derivational character of the items in question: Accidia est pigricia tristicia anxietas uel tedium bene agendi. anglice. slowth.

f.p.

Inde accidiola, diminutiuum.

c. The word-formational process by means of vdrich the derivative has been formed is stated. The metalanguage is Latin: Aceruulus diminutiuum paruus acceruus ... Agito as facere agere. et est frequentatiuum ab ago agis, to dryue off ...

d. There seems to be a slight tendency to group nouns together with their relational adjectives, e.g. Adulatio onis. flateryng. glosynge. f.t. Adulator oris, a flatere a gloser. m.t. Adulatorculus est diminutiuum: paruus adulator, a small gloser. m.s.

87 Adulatrix. a woman flaterer gloser. Adulatorius. a. um. pertinens. Adulator oris, blandiri. Tor. trix. verbale, to flaterre or glose.

f. t. o.s. tio d'.p.

Amator oris, a louer. Amatorculus li. i. paruus amator Amatorculus. a. um. idem est Amatorcula e. idest parua amatrix Amatricula idem. Amatorius. a. um. louely or that loues.

m.t. m.s. O.S.

f.p.

O.S.

Hie following prologue to the Ortus vocabulorum is taken fron the ooypy in the 21 British Maseuu Library:

21

R.C. Alston's facsimile, R.C. Alston, Ortus vocabulorum. 1500. English Linguistics 1500 - 1800 (A Collection of Facsimile Reprints),No.123 (Menston: Scolar Press, 1968), is based on the copy of the first edition in the Huntington Library. The prologue is based on the copy in the British Museum Library. - According to A. Way, A.G. Kennedy, D.T. Starnes, R.C. Alston and the STC there are the following editions and copies of the Ortus vocabulorum: 1500: British Library, London (STC, Alston) Bodleian Library, Oxford (STC, Alston) John Rylands Library, Manchester (STC, Alston) Huntington Library, San Marina, Calif. (STC, Starnes, Alston) 1508: The edition is mentioned by Way and Kennedy, but has so far not been located. According to Way the printer was W. de Wörde. 1509: British Library, London (STC, Alston) Bodleian Library, Oxford (STC, Alston) 1511: British Library, London (STC, Alston) Society of Antiquaries, London (Alston) University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. (Alston) Yale University, New Haven, Conn. (Starnes, Alston) Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (Starnes, Alston) 1514: British Library (2), London (STC, Alston) Huntington Library, San Marino, Calif. (STC, Starnes, Alston) 1516: Bodleian Library, Oxford (STC, Alston) Corpus Christi College, Oxford (incomplete) (Alston) 1517: John Rylands Library, Manchester (Alston) An edition for 1517 is also mentioned by Way and Kennedy. 1518: British Library, London (Alston) University College London (Alston) Bodleian Library, Oxford (STC, Alston) John Rylands Library, Manchester (Alston) University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. (Starnes, Alston) Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. (Starnes, Alston) Newberry Library, Chicago, 111. (Alston) 1520: British Library, London ( Way, STC, Alston) 1528: British Library, London ( Way, STC, Alston) University Library, Cambridge (STC, Alston) 1532: British Library, London (Way, STC, Alston) 1533: According to Way and Kennedy an edition was printed by W. de Wörde. Yet so far no copy has been located for 1533.

88 Prologus in librum qui ortus vocabuloruro dicitur feliciter incipit. Vt etenim multos (nostre precipue nationis anglicos: qui igitur quod procul alatio vbi roma est in orbis ángulo sumus constituti dicimur) bonarum artium studiosos ex latinarum dicctionum difficultate illarum significationum se inscios censentes non solum magno tedio affici: verum studia ex quibus summos magistratus emolimentum vtique maximum adipiscerentur parui£acere intellexerim: multorum rogacionibus ad hoc exile opus diuersis ex auctoribus collectum vigilanter: quia correcturo imprimendum sum coactus quem propterea quod in eo fructuum copia reperiri possit ortura vocabulorum appellari decreuimus: omnes igitur quorum animus aut liberalium disciplinarum studia excercere: aut illustrium virorum gesta legere aut sacre theologie voluminibus studere flagrat atque gliscit: a studio ne desinant si ad diccionum significationum ignorantiam nouerca virtutum atque viciorum mater obliuio: aliquos perduxerit: ad hoc opus confugiant: in quo quod inuestigant per alphabeti ordinem facile se reperturos agnoscent et si in eo quod dandum sit vicio a viris erudicioribus reperiri possit absit: queso lingua detractoria atque quod in eo de delendum addendum aunt corrigendum sit ipsorum discretionibus constituo atque vt nouelli rudes quoque grammatici cuius sint generis et declinationis nomina: verba cuius generis et coniugationis ignorantes: facilius edoceantur: litteras in linearum fine per quas cerciores redentur post dictionum significationes posui: vbi est notandum de nominibus quod due sunt littere quaxum priorum genus posterior declinationem significabit: de verbis vtique altera genus altera coniugationem demonstrat m. in nominibus dictionem precedentem esse masculini generis: f. feminini, n. neutri, c. communis, o. omnis. d. dubii. e. epiceni significat. p. primam declinationem. s. secundam. t. terciam. q. quartam. q. quintam demonstrabit: in verbis a. actiuum genus, p. passiuum. η. neutrum. c. communis, d. deponens. p. primam coniugacionem. s. secundam. t. tertiam. q. quartam significat. Β ante A Baal nomen diaboli. Baalberith dicitur ydolum coniurationis. Baalim dicuntur ydola assiriorum. Baalpharasim interpretatur diuisio virorum. Baalphasis interpretatur diuisio inimicorum Babbatum dicitur ferrum quod annectit faber equo cum gumpho. Babel interpretatur confusio. Babilonia quedam regio vel ciuitas in chaldea. Babilonius a. um. nomen patrium vel gentile. Babiger babosus baburus: babillus idem stultus ineptus hebes inops. Baburra. i. ineptia vel stultia. angl. folyshnes. Barbaro, i. babellare. i. imperfecte Bacca ce. est fructus oliue vel etiam lauri. Baccalum dicitur feretrum in quo mortui deferuntur. a beer. Baccar aris. herba quedam fascinum pellens.

n.s. f.inde. f.p. o.s. m.s. f.p. loqui n.p. f.p. n.s. n.t.

Baccatus a. um. i. baocis ornatus. o.s. Bachalia vel bachalui vel bachalia orum. sunt festa bachi. f.p. Baccha ce. i. sacerdotissa. bachi. f.p. Bachalia est ecclesia. f.p. Bachanalia orum. sunt festa bachi. n.s. Bachnaliter i. furiose. aduer. Bachania e. i. furor, woodhede. f.p. Bacharia e. vel bacharium vas vineum. a wyn pote. o.s. Bacharius a. um. participi. o.s. Baccheus a. um. vel baccicus a. um. i. de baccho existens. o.s. Bachides era proprium nomen viri. cor. me. m.t. Bachinal lis. i. torcular pressorum. angl. a pressure. n.t. Bachis dis. dea bachi: vel mulier colens festa bachi. f.t. Bachio onis. a trouell. f.t. Bachius idest pes metri. m.s. Bachium. i. festum bachi, or wrengynge in the neke. n.s. Bachon grece latine. d.p. Bachor aris. i. furere. to woodé. d.p. Bacchula e. i. parua bacca. f.p. Bacula. i. coniuncta voluntas. f.p. Báculo as. i. báculo percutere. to smyt wyth a staff. a.p. Baculus li. a staffe. m.s. Bacillus li. a lyttell staffe. m.s. Bachus chi. deus vini: vel ponitur quoque per vino. m.s. Bactria est regio in oriente. f.p. Bacrus est rex orientis. m.s. Badius a. um. a bay. o.s. Badius dicitur equus quem antiqui vadium dicibant. a hakenay. m.s. Bafer grossus vel agrestis. anglice' gret wombyde. o.s. Bahen est ornamenturo colli ex arnullis aureis confeetum. η.inde Bahen etiam dicitur corona latine. Baia dicitur porticus. a hauynn towne. f.p. Baie arum est ciuitas in italia iuxta mare. Inde baianus a. um. nomen patrium. Baiulo as. i. portare sustentare. Tor trix et tio. et atus. a. um. participi, to beer a.p. Baiulum li. i. frenum equi, a brydell. n.s. Baiulus li. i. portator. a portore. or a somere or a berer. m.s. Baiulus a. um. vel baiulatus a. um. participi' o.s. Banniola lectus qui in itinere baiulatur. a trossynge bede. f.p. Baia e. interpretatur inueterata. fuit etiam rachelis ancilla. f.p. Balaam interpretatur nomen proprium vanus populus. m.inde

90 Balach interpretatur precipitaos siue deuorans Baldam. interpretatur vanus populus. m.inde, Baldeia e. idem est. f.p. Balamites i. gemma. f.t. Balanatus. a. um. balano vnctus. O.S. Balanitides dis. grappis of corne. f.t. Balanite, plr. i. vue: vel vites, grapis or vyn trees. f .t. Balanom grece dicitur glans latine. η.inde. Balanus quedam arbor est vt dicunt genus enquercinum. f.s. Balanum. i. fructus vel vnguentum ex balano factum. η.s. Balans tis. crynge as a. scheepe. o. t. Balare, i. clamare, admodum ouis. to crye as a scheepe. η.p. Basasco cis. inchoatiuum. de balo as. Balatro onis. i. clamorosus ioculator. Balatrones secundum quosdam dicuntur pro digi vel leccatores. Balatus us. ui. clamor ouium. a bletynge. Balbarostomus. he that sownds hys letters amysse. m.s. Balbo as. i. inclinare. a.p. Balbutio tis. male loqui or. flamer n.t. Balbutìens tis. flameryng. part. presentís Balbució as. tor trix vel tio verbale idem est. BaLbus a. um. participi i. balbutiens vel titubane Balden idest sine visione. Balducia e. anglice. cendys. f.p. Balducta e. creme or a posset. f.p. Balea, i. funda vel instrumentum quod vulgo vocatur balestrum. a slynge. f.p. Balearius vel baleator. idest funditor vel balistrator. he that castes with a slyng. Balearis vel hoc re i. funda, vel insula in hyspania. a stafe slynge. o.t. Baleferum. an awblaster. n.s. Balena e. quidam magnus piscis. f.p. Balestrum i. instrumentum ad iaciendum lapides. Balestro as. i. cum ilio instrumento iacere. to cast in a slynge. n.p. Balin grece. i. iacere latine to cast. Balmom grece balneum latine vocant. n. inde, Balistare, an awblaster vel tormentum. f.p. Balistarius ij. qui facit balistas. m.s. Balliuus. a balye. m. s. Balla est. a thyne clothe. Ρ· Balneo as. to bathe. Ρ· Balneorium vel balnetorium locus in quo bals. neatur. s. Balneum ei. a bathe: vel leuatom meror s s. Balneolum diminutiuum. a lytell bathe. Balnon grece. balneum latine. Balsamus est arbor quedam. bawmtre. f.s. Balsamum. i. fructus eius. n.s.

91 12

THE PROMPTORIUM

PARVULORUM

The nurrtoer of manuscripts so far discovered and the remarkable variety of lexicographical features that is displayed in them leave no doubt that there was, in the 15th centruy, a great need for, and interest in word lists for the two languages Latin and English. Since all the substantial word lists illustrated Latin headwords and thus helped the Middle English scholar studying Latin texts, it was a matter of time before someone would hit upon the idea of inverting the language order and producing the first English-Latin dictionary to satisfy the encoding language needs of the medieval scholar. The monk who set himself this task and who acquitted himself of it in an unparalleled way was a Dominican friar of Lynn Espiscopi, Norfolk. The title of the first English-Latin dictionary varies in the manuscripts and printed versions of it. It is also given as 'Promptorius parvulorum ', 'Promptorius puerorumand

'Promptuarium parvulorum olerioorum', of which the

latter seems to be the most correct one.^ In classical Latin a 'pranptuarium1 signified a store-roan, a repository, the earliest English-Latin dictionary thus being regarded as a storeroom for young scholars. That the use of the word promptuarium as a term for a vrord list or dictionary was not unusual but quite cannon among medieval authors has already been pointed out by A. Way and A.L. Mayhew who both give a list of other lexicographical works of that nane.

2

1

A.L. Mayhew, ed.. The Promptorium Parvulorum. The First English Dictionary. c. 1440 A.D. Edited from the manuscript in the Chapter Library at Winchester, with introduction, notes and glossaries. Early English Text Society. Extra Series CII (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. - Henry Trowde, Oxford University Press, 1908), p. xiii.

2

A. Way, ed., Promptorium Parvulorum Sive Clericorum. Lexicon Anglo-Latinum Princeps, Auctore Fratre Galfrido Grammatico Dicto, e predicatoribus Lenne episcopi, Northfolciensi, A.D. circa M.CCCC.XL. Olim e prelis pyn. sonianis editum, nunc ab integro, commentariolis subjectis, ad fidem codicum recensuit (Londini: Sumptibus Societatis Camdensis, M.DCCC.XLIII), p. x; A.L. Mayhew, ed., op.cit., p. xiii.

92

There are six manuscripts of the Promptorium parvulorum, and the MS Harley 221 in the British Musevm Library explicitly mentions the date 1440. The dictionary was first printed in 1499 by Richard Pynson. In the colophon of this edition the dictionary is also referred to as the Medulla grammatioe: Finit excellentissimum opus exiguis magnisque scolasticis vtillissimum quod nuncupatur Medulla grammatice.

The Medulla grammatioe, as we remember, is the title of the first Latin-English dictionary, and the fact that the same title was also used for the first English-Latin dictionary suggests that it seems to have been used as a generic 3

term where the order of the two languages listed was irrelevant.

There are

two critical modem editions. A. Way made the MS Harley 4 221 the groundstock of his edition which the Camden Society printed in 1843. A.L. Mayhew's edition of 1908 is based on the manuscript in the Chapter Library of Winchester Cathedral.5 There is also a facsimile reprint in R.C. Alston's collection of facsimile reprints.^ Scholars have repeatedly discussed the question of the authorship of the first English-Latin dictionary. A.L. Mayhew reviewed this discussion in his edition of the Promptorium parvulorum and adopted the traditional view according to which the author was Galfridus Grarmati cus: Whatever may have been his patronymic, we may confidently ascribe to the Dominican recluse of Lynn, Galfridus, designated from his special studies 'Grammaticus', the laborious achievement of the first English-Latin dictionary. 7

D.T. S tames, however, when weighing the evidence produced for this general opinion, was more hesitant in his final conclusion: It must be said, however, that these editors and the commentators whom they follow present no conclusive evidence that the recluse of Lynn, the compiler of the Promptorium, bore the name Galfridus Grammaticus. In the

3

In later editions it is even referred to as Medulla grammatice on the title page. Cf in this respect also D.T. Starnes, op.cit., pp. 5-6.

4

See note 2.

5

See note 1.

6

R.C. Alston, ed., Promptorium Parvulorum. 1499. English Linguistics 1500-1800 (A Collection of Facsimile Reprints), No 108 (Menston: Scolar Press, 1968).

7

A.L. Mayhew, op.cit., p. xvi.

93 present state of our knowledge we can only say that the real name of the compiler of the first English-Latin dictionary is not known. 8 The linguistic and antiquarian value of the Promptorium parvulorum has rightly been stressed by A. Way: Whether we regard the Promptorium Parvulorum as an authentic record of the English language in the earlier half of the fifteenth century, as illustrative of the provincial dialects of East Anglia, or as explanatory of the numerous archaisms of a debased Latinity that pervades early chronicles and documents, its value can scarcely be too highly estimated. If, on the other hand, we take into consideration the curious evidence which it supplies to those who investigate the arts and manners of bygone times, it were difficult to point out any relic of learning at the period equally full of instruction, and of those suggestive details which claim the attention of students of mediaeval literature and antiquities in the varied departments of archaeological research. 9 The only scholar who, besides the two m o d e m editors of the work, has studied the Promptorium parvulorum in seme detail is D.T. Starnes. His chapter on the Promptorium parvulorum in his excellent monograph on Renaissance Dictionaries, English-Latin and Latin-English is based on A.L. Mayhew's edition of the text. The reason for this choice is that Mayhew's edition is closer to the manuscript original. A. Way, in his edition, rearranged the order of the entries by putting the 'nomina' and 'verba' into one alphabetical order. In addition, he emitted the graitmatical information supplied for the Latin part of the dictionary. For the same reasons the present study will be based on Mayhew's edition. Stames' treatment is a first attempt at a lexicographical assessment of the work. It can be regarded as only an attenpt because, just as with Way and Mayhew, he basically concentrates on the sources of the Promptorium and does not tackle in any detail such issues as the word selection, the presentation of senses, homographs, etc. The sources of the Promptorium parvulorum are knewn because the cctnpiler listed them himself. In the Preambulum of the MS Harley 221, as edited by Way, the friar of Lynn informs us Isti sunt auctores ex quorum libris collecta sunt vocabula hujus libelli, per fratrem predicatorem reclusum Lenne Episcopi, Anno Domini millesimo CCCC.XL . Cujus anime propicietur Deus. Et intitulatur liber iste Promptorium parvulorum. Hoc modo scribuntur nomina auctorum infra in hoc libro,

8 9

. D.T. Starnes, op.cit., p. 9. A. Way, op.cit., p. xiii.

94 Januensis in suo Catholicon Ugutio in majori volumine Ugutio versificatus Br ito Mirivalensis in campo florum Johannes de Garlondia, in Diccionario scolastico Commentarius curialium Libellus misteriorum qui dicitur Anglia que fulget Merarius Distigius Robertus Kylwarbi Alexander Neccham

CATH. UG. UG.V. .. BRIT. C.F. DICC. COMM. LIB.MIST. MER. DIST. KYLW. NECC.

Cum aliis libris et libellis inspectis et intellectis, Deo adjuvante cum tota curia celesti. 10

We might therefore assurte that the oanpiler of the Promptorium parvulorum

had

at his disposal a oopy of all the works listed in the preface to his dictionary. In addition, he m y also have consulted other sources, such as the bilingual glossaries and vocabularies available at the time whose ccnpilers were not kncwn and which did not have a title to be referred to. He thus had a rich bilingual Latin-English stock frati which to draw his word list and definitions. From this stock he selected about Ί 2000 English dictionary en11 tries.

We do not knew the criteria he used to select his items. A close

study of the dictionary itself, however, suggests that he had same lexicographical principles. One of the striking features of the Promptorium parvulorum

is that under

each letter we are first given the "nomina" and then the "verba". The cotpiler may have followed the medieval lexicographical tradition of distinguishing between nominales

and verbales.

Yet the arrangement may also reflect the pro-

cess of his word selection. When he selected his items frati his various sources he nade two lists, one for verbs and another one for all other parts of speech

(for the "ncmina" part does not only include nouns but also ad-

jectives, adverbs, pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions and interjections). Both lists then had to be put into alphabetical order. The English headwords are arranged alphabetically, but alphabetical order means basically an AB- or ABC-order. I and j as well as u and ν are not distinguished, both being entered 10

Cf D.T. Starnes, op.cit., p. 8. The corresponding passage in A.L. Mayhew' s preambulum is very similar.

11

Cf D.T. Starnes, op.cit.,

p. 9.

95 under i and υ respectively. The alphabet is continued after w with φ and 3. As far as our present-day knowledge goes the ccnpiler of the Promptorium parvulorum ventured onto new ground. The language he started frati was English and not Latin. We might therefore assume that his working method consisted in inverting the order of items he found in his Latin-English dictionaries. This assumption is confirmed by all those entries in which the English "headword" is a phrase or syntactic construction which is not lexicalized at all, and the Latin equivalent a single lexical item (the headword in a LatinEnglish dictionary) , e.g. ffader and moder in j word: ~orum Parens, -tis; commune 2 gen.,3. Joy, or play that be-gynny with sorow and endyth with gladnesse: Commedia, -ie; ffem., prime, 'Catholicon'. Joy, or pley at begennyth with sadnesse and endyth with sorow and grevowsnesse: Tragedia, -e; ffem., prime, 'catholicon'. Wyth Wyth Wyth Wyth

hyme: me: vs: yow:

Secum; adueri». Mecum; adueri. nobiscum; adueri. Vobiscum; adueri).

Another feature that may be regarded as further support for the assumption that he inverted the order of headword and equivalent that he found in his Latin-English sources is the placing of grarrmatical information which he provides for the English user of the dictionary. For Latin nouns, adjectives, and verbs he usually indicates the inflectional pattern to which they belong. Por other parts of speech that do not have inflectional forms, such as prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections, he very often specifies the word class status. When he gives the word class menbership he mentions it at the end of the entry, that is after the Latin equivalent and not after the English headword, e.g. Aboue: supra, superius, super; omnia preposiciones sunt. Alas: Euge, euge, prodolor; interlecciones sunt. Inversion, hcwever, was only one of the working methods of the Lynn friar. A close study of the dictionary reveals that there were others. There are a number of English headwords for which there is no Latin equivalent:

96 Bace, fishe Benewyth tre Barbul, seknes of the mowth Bokeram, cloth Byce, colowre Blake thorn Botyme of threde in clowsyn Beytone hors Caluar, as samone or oder fysch Chelyng, fysh

Chafur, flye Gage, lytyl bolle Garfysch. Grey, beeste Grenlyng, ffysch ^ Lych man or woman Revel Theve, brush Wold, cuntrey

We knew fron the compiler's own words which sources he used. He frequently indicates his sources within the dictionary. There are thus entries with no source specification and others with an explicit mention of the source. Not infrequently, however, we are given more than one single source for a particular item, e.g. Calfe, beeste: Vitulus, -li; Mase., 2: surus, -ri; fem., 2, 'catholicon ', ' campus Horum ' et vgucio in suo. Cape: capa, -e; fem., prime, 'campus florum': pileum, -ei; neut.,2, 1 catholicon' et 'Dictionarius ' : Capedulum, -li; neut., 2, 'campus florum'. This suggests that the Lynn friar did not simply copy and invert lexical items he found elsewhere. On the contrary, his work reveals that he most have been a very studious and conscientious lexicographer who executed his work according to a nurber of lexicographical principles. If working principles are nowhere stated explicitly they have to be extracted frati the work itself. As principles they manifest themselves repeatedly and thus give the work in question the necessary unity and consistency. My study of the Promptorium parvulorum suggests that the Lynn friar compiled his dictionary on the basis of the following policy decisions: 1. He did not take over items for which lengthy encyclopedic explanations were given. This becomes most cbvious in his selection of proper names. The najority of proper names included are first names:

12

There is, however, an entry with a Latin equivalent under Lech, man or woman: Medicus, -i; Mase., 2: Medica, -e; fem., prime.

97 Adam Alesaunder Ambrose Amye Anneyce Antony Benet Bete, betún ... Charlys Cyra Colette Elyys Emme Gybbon How, hw Jamys lone

Kyrstyan, krystyan Malkyn, mawte Margery Mary Oleve Petyr Powle Rafe Rand, radyl Rycharde Roberd Rose Stevyn Sybyl Wateere, water Wylyam

Christiana Matildis Margeria Maria Oliva Petrus paulus Radulphus Ranulphus Ricardus Robertus Rosa Stephanus Sibilla Walterus Willelmus

There are only four names of countries: Englond, Erlonde, ffraunce, and Scotland. Fflemmyng, German, Iw and Scot man are the nationalities that are listed. As towns we find Oxforth and Rome, and Teme se is the 'se at London'. 2. He did not, in general, take over indications of the pronunciation of Latin words. An exception is the entry ffayr speche where pronunciation is adduced to differentiate between two different lexical items: ffayr speche: lepos, -ris, non lepus,

-ris; Masc., 3, 'campus florum'; Rhetorica, -e; fem., prime, et est différencia inter lepus, -ris. Media correpta anglice an hare, et lepos, -ris, Media producta, Rure fugo lepores, in verbis quero lepores.

The other exception is the item ccwoh. 3. He did not follow the Latin tradition of illustrating language use, above all in the case of barographs, by means of verses. Hiere are very few instances in which the Latin equivalent is followed by a verse in Latin. Cases in point are the entries couch, ffayr speahe and ffry se. 4. The dictionary shows great awareness of spelling differences. For quite a number of English words the oarpiler lists spelling variants. The latter are occasionally also listed as headwords which are cross-referred to the more cannon spelling. Aware of the variations between a and s and a and k the compiler explicitly instructs the user. After the item oextry: sacristía, for instance, he tells the user: Quere plura vocabula habencia in prima sillaba hunc sonum C in S littera vbi E sequitur immediate S.

98 There are similar instructions - the metalanguage still being Τ at in - after Cynthynge, Karde ff or vule, and Karyn. 5. As mentioned earlier, the dictionary includes sate gratinar for the Latin part of the dictionary. In indicating the morphological pattern to which a noun, adjective or verb belongs the carpi 1er stayed within catmon lexicographical practice. He seems to follow more his cwn policy on the assignment of word class labels. Within the class of "ncmina" he quite consistently singles out the labels 'adverb', 'proper name', 'preposition', 'conjunction', 'pronoun', and 'interjection'. Nouns and adjectives are not usually provided with a part of speech label which illustrates that the Latin term 'nanen' was used in its wide sense. In the case of holographs this general practice is changed. 6. Hie most striking feature of this early English-Latin dictionary is the structure of the English "headwords". As the term inplies a headword is usually a word that is defined, explained. This also holds for the Promptorium parvulorum. Yet there are many entries where the headword is much more complex. Particularly striking examples are ffundelyng and Infeatyn: ffundelyng, as he at ys fowndyη and nomaη wot hoo ys his ffader or moder: Inuenticius, -ij; Mase., 2: Inuenticia, -e; ffem^jarime: Aborigo, -is; commune 2 gre η., 3, vgucío in orior. Infectyn, or bryng to seknesse as men take witfc pestylens or as lepers do hole men be breth or oder towchyng: Inficio, -cis, -feci, -re, -fectum; 3 con., act.

It looks as if the author explains the English words before he gives the Latin translation. In other cases, the English headword proper is followed by a number of synonyms or synonymic expressions, e.g. Lerar, lernar, or techere: Doctor, -ris: Instructor, -ris; omnia Masc., 3 deci. Lernare, or lerar, or he φ at resevyth lore: Discipulus, -li; Mase., 2. Moorderyn, or privyly kyllyn: Cicario, -as, -aui, -re, etc.; prime con., act.

Ulis unusual lenmatization derives obviously frcm the practice of changing Latin-English entries into English-Latin ones. The English lenrra is thus

99 basically still an explanation of a former Latin-English dictionary. This will also account for another type of headword. The author of the Promptorium parvulorum is aware of the fact that gender is a covert category in English. For nouns in which gender is covert he therefore lists the Latin equivalent for the male and the female, e.g. Brewster: pondoxator, -ris; Mase., 3: pondoxatrix, -cis; fem., 3. Dremare: Sompniator, -ris; Mase., 3: Sompniatrix, -cis; ffem., 3. Labowrere: laborator, -ris; Mase., 3: laboratrix, -cis; fem., 3.

If English does not use one single word but differentiates gender the author does so too in his headword: Crystynman, or woman: Cristianus, Mase., 2: Cristiana, -e; fem., prime. Cuntre mane, or woman: CompatrilOrurn

ota, -te; commune 2

gen., prune.

The practice is also extended to adjectives; Eloquent, or wel spok man or woman: Eloquens, -tis; omnis gen., 3: Dicosus,

-a, -um; vgucio in dico. One nay, hewever, wonder whether the unusual lenmatization in the Promptorium parvulorum can be accounted for only by reference to its Latin-English sources. The compiler might also have tried to make his headwords as unambiguous as possible. The one does not exclude the other. This endeavour might be at the basis of another characteristic of the Promptorium parvulorum. Names of colours, herbs and animals are quite consistently followed by a genus specification before the actual Latin equivalent is given: Agrimony, or egrimony, herbe: Agrimonia, -e. Ape, beest; Simoa, -e; fem. gen. Auburn, colowre: Citrinus, -a, -um.

And this same endeavour is also manifest in the of-, as-phrases added after the headword: Bayd, as hors: Badius, -a, -um; Vgucio in badius; nota omnes colores equorum. Ceedoff corne, as kyrnel: granum, -i; neut., 2: Semen, -is; neut., 3.

100 Cyyd of a body: latus, -ris; ηeut., 3. Cog, of A mylle: Scarioballum, -li; ηeut., 2. Copy, of a thyng wrytyn: Copia, -e. Curlyng, off here: crispitudo; ffem. 3, 'catholicon'. Crashyn of teeth: Strideo, -es, re, caret supinis; 2 con., neut.: ffremo, -is, -vi: frendeo, -es, -vi, -re, caret supinis; 2 con., neut. We thus have semantic restriction after the headword itself which are not yet typographically distinguished fron the headword. In modem lexicographical practice the bracket convention would be used: bay (of a horse): badius ... crash (of teeth): strideo ... Similar restrictions are used to differentiate hcnonyms: Bank Ripa, -e;-ris; fem.,neut., prime. Bank of of water: the see: litus, 3. Clere, as water or o er lycowre: limpidus, -a, -um: perspicuus. -a, -um. Clere of wytte and vndyrstondyng: perspicax, -cis; omnis gen., 3, 'campus fiorimi. 1 Hcmographs that belong to different word classes are differentiated by grammatical labels irmediately after the headword. Although labels for nouns and adjectives are usually not used, they are applied when two headwords can be distinguished by them: Cold, adiectiue: ffrigidus, -da, -urn: Algidus, -da, -um: Algosus, -sa, -um, 'catholicon1 : frigorosus, -sa, -vm. Cold, substantyffe: ffrigus, -ris; neut., 3: Algor, -ris; Masc., 3, 'campus florum': Algus, -vs; Masc., 4. Dedly, nominalster: Mortalis, -le; omnis gen. Dedly, Aduerbialiter: Mortaliter: letaliter; Aduerb. All the six features that I have illustrated make the first English-Latin dictionary an iirportant lexicographical achievement.

101 In the follcwing extract the first part of the preambulum has been emitted because it has already been quoted when discussing the sources of the Promptorium parvulorum. As to the extract of verbs of the letter Β I should point out that the extract does not include the very rare instances of reflexive forms. Since the latter have constituted a problem for later lexicographers I shall list the entries that contain a reflexive form:^^ Brennyη by Jperself: Ardeo, -es, -si, -re; 2 con., neut. Brestyn, or clevyn befceself:Crepo, -is, -vi, -re, -itum; 3 con., neut. g Kelyn, or waxyn Colde be p self; frigeo, -es, vi, -ere, caret supinis; 2 con., neut., 'catholicon': ffrigesco, -cis, -re, caret prêteritis et supinis; 3 con., ηeut. In Mayhew's edition of the Promptopium parvulorum the headword part is in black letters, the Latin equivalents in italics. Since this is a modern addition to facilitate reading it has not been taken over in the following extract.^ ^

13

Cf G. Stein, "English-German/German-English Lexicography: Its early beginnings," Lexicographica, 1, 1985, pp. 134-164.

14

According to A. Way there are 6 manuscripts of the Promptorium parvulorum. These are: MS Harley 221, British Museum Library; MS Harley 2274, British Museum Library (fragmentary); MS No 8 King's College Library, Cambridge; MS in the Chapter Library, Winchester Cathedral, and MS No 8306 in the Library of Sir Thomas Phillipps, Bart. (Heber Library No 1360); Add MS 22,556 British Museum Library. Acoording to A. Way, D.T. Starnes, R.C. Alston and the STC there are the following printed editions of the Promptorium parvulorum: 1499: The British Library, London (2) (Alston, STC) Bodleian Library, Oxford (Alston, STC) University Library, Cambridge (Alston, STC) Bristol Public Library (Alston) Public Library, Cambridge (Way) Althorp Library (Way) John Rylands Library, Manchester (Alston, STC) Hunterian Museum, Glasgow (STC) Glasgow University (Alston) Huntington Library, San Marino, Calif. (Alston, STC) University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. (Alston) Pierpoint Morgan Library (Alston, STC) 1508: The British Library, London (Way, STC) 1510/ The British Library, London (Alston, STC) 11: Lambeth Palace (fragmentary) (Alston) University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. (Starnes, Alston)

102 Cernentibus sollicite clericorum condiciones, nunc statuum et graduum diuersorum numerose videntur iam varij clericali se nomine gloriantes, qui tarnen in suis colloquijs passim cotidieque barbarizando, sic vsum et artem latine loquele, a[u]t pene, aut penitus perdiderunt, quod eorum quam plures quasi de doctis indoctos, de sciolis inscios, nouerca virtutum et viciorum mater degenerane produxit obliuio. Vnde ego, dictus indigue frater predicatorum lenne, sub regula paupertatis astrictus, talibus vt valeo compassus, ac iuuenum clericorum gramatizare volentium misertus, presentera libellum non tam rudern quam eisdem scribendum curaui. Potissime tarnen ipsis qui nunc ad vsum clericalis loquele velut cerui ad fontes aquarum desiderant, set latina vocabula ignorantes et instructorum ad libitum copiam vt cupiunt non habentes, sinçrultu et suspirijs vt onagri in site sua deficiunt, ac velut interna fame, sic etiam tabescunt, quod pene de illis illud Trinerorum eloquium merito cum mesticia iam possit recitari, paruuli petierunt panem, et non erat qui frangeret eis. Igitur ego prefatus, quamuis rudis et inscius, plusque aptus discere quam docere, tarnen vt ex libris gramaticorum intellexi, ad predictorum profectum, exile hoc opus collegi, precipue 'catholicon', 'campo florum', 'diccionario', alijsque opusculis et tractatibus, sepius vero ex inquisicione meliorum, set rarissime quamuis quandoque ex ingenio fallibili, et capite proprio personali. In quoquidem libello primo anglicana vocabula secundum ordinem alphabet!, prout gramaticalia gramaticorum in libris scribuntur, conscripsi, et postea s Lb i corespondent latina cum notulis partium, generum, ac declinacionum; sie tarnen vt sub qualibet litera alphabeti, nomina et cetere partes, verbis tarnen exceptis, primo pariter sunt inserta, et tunc tandem ipsorum verba breuiter declinata, ordine quo supra sunt secuta. Comitatus tarnen norfolchie loquendi modum sum solum secutus, quem solum ab infancia didici, et solo tenus plenius perfecttjiusque cognoui. Opus autem istud promptorium paruulorum, siue clericorum, potest si placeat appellari, eo quod sic seclusis scriptis gramatice curiosis, sub quodam quasi breuiloquio, medullam tamen verJborum continens, pre breuitate sui .aut in promptu, aut de facili, a cunctis clerlcis valeat possideri; et quod in eo queritur non discorrendo per multa, set statim et in promptu poterit inueniri. Cunctos tamen pedagogos, didascolos, siue etiam magristros, precibus humiliter deposco, vt cum exile hoc opus prospexerint, quod deo me iuuante sit recte scriptum approbent, et quod male aut deuie pie corrigant et emendent; quatinus granatici exiles et pueri in volumello hoc breui, tanquam in

1512: Sir R.L. Harmsworth (STC) Huntington Library, San Marino, Calif. (Starnes, Alston, STC) Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D.C. (Starnes, Alston) 1516: The British Library, London (Alston, STC) Bodleian Library, Oxford (Alston, STC) University Library, Cambridge (Alston, STC) John Rylands Library, Manchester (Alston) Winchester College (Alston) Huntington Library, San Marino, Calif. (Starnes, Alston, STC) 1518} 1519t : editions mentioned by Way. 1522 j 1528: The British Library, London (Alston, STC)

103 spectaculo, possint Inspicere, et communia vocetfjula que sunt ad linguaio latinam spectancia libere et statissime inuenire: necnon et quam plures alij absque rubore post terga metentium spicas etlem possint colligere, qui forte aut etatis, aut aliarum causarum pre pudore confusi, id quod minus sciunt ab alijs discere erubescunt. Igitur quicumque in hoc opere inculto vtilitatis aliquid solacij ve prospexerint, deo gracias reddant, et pro me peccatore misericorditer intercédant. Explicit preambulum in librum predictum, secundum vulgarem modum loquendi orientalium anglorum. Incipit liber promptorius paruulorum.

Β Babbe, or lityl chil: Infans, -tzs; „or urn „ n 2 generum: Puerulus; Masc. gen. 2 deel: Pusio. Balewyn, or bebewen, or babet: Pedippus, -i; Masc., 2: Pupa, -e; fem., prime: Ipos, -dis; Masc., 3, 'campus florum': figmentum, -i: Chimera. Baklyng, or wagelyng: Vacillacio, libellacio, -is. Babul, or bable: librilla, -e; fem., prime, 'catholicon ' : Pegma, -tis; neut., 3 deci. Baburlippyd: labrosus, -a, -um. Baker, or baxter: Pistor, -ris; Masc., 3: Pannicius; Masc., 2, 'catholicon': Panifex; commune, 3, 'catholicon': Panificator, -ris; Masc. gen., 3 deci. Base, or fundament: Basis; fem. gen., 3 deci. Bace, fishe: Bace chaumber: Bassaria, -e; fem. gen., uel camera bassaria siue camera bassa. Bace pley: Barri, -orum; Masc., 2, versus, Barri, -orum, dantur ludi puerorum. Bacenet: Cassis; fem., 3, 'catholicon' in galea. Bachelere: Bacularius, -ij, -o: Bachilarius uel Bacalarius, -ij; omnia Masc. gen., 2 deci. Bakun, fleshe: Petaso, -is: Baco, -is; omnia Masc., 3. Badde, or wykkyd: Malus, -a, -um. Badde, or now3the worthe: Inualidus, -a, -um. Badly, or wykkydly: Male, Inique; aduerMa. Baffinggis, or bavlinggis of hondis: Baulatus, -us: Baffatus, -us: omnia Masc. gen.

Bage, or bagge, of armis: Banidum, -i: Bannudum, -i, -o; omnia neut., 2 deci. Bag, or poke; Sacculus, -i, -o; Masc., 2. Bage, or sachei: Saccellus, -i, -o; Masc. Bagpype: Panduca, -e; fem. gen., KyIwarbi. Bach, or bakyng: Pistura, -e; fero, gen., prime deci. Bay, frute: Bacca, -e; fem., prime. Bay, or withstondyng: ObstacuIura; neut. gen. Bayd, as hors: Badius, -a, um; Vgucio in badius; nota omnes colores equorum. Baynyd, as benys or peson: ffresus, -a, uro. Bak: dorsum, -i, -o. Bäk of a best: Tergus, -ris; neut., 3, 'catholicon'. Bak of a man or woman: Tergum, -i, -o. Bak of an egge toole: Ebiculum, -li. Bakbyter: Detractor, -oris: Oblocutor, -ris ; omnia Masc. gen., 3 deci.: Detractrix: Oblocutrix. Bakebytyng: Oblocutio, -is: Detraccio. Bakehowse, orbakyn howse: Pistrina, -e; fem., prime: uel Pistrinum, -i; neut. Bake, or bakyn: Pistus, -a, -um. Bakyn vnder b e Askys: Subcinericlus, -a, um. Bakyng: Pistura, -e; fem. gen. prime deci. Bakyng howse: Panificium, -ij; neut., vgucio in pa. Bakestal: a retro; Aduerbium. Bakestare, supra in bakar. Bacun: supra in baconn.

104 Bakeward : Retro, Retrorsum; Aduerbia. Balle of pley: pila, -e; fera., prime. Balle of eye: pupilla, -e; fem., prime. Balk: Trabes, -bis; Mase., 3: Trabecule, -e; fem., prime. Baipley: puli ludus, -di; Mase., 2, 'cathoiicon': lipidulus, -li: lidipulus, -a, vm. Balance: statera, -e: libra, -e; omnia fem. gen., prime: Balanx, -cis; fem., 3. Basterd, corayn of gentyl fader and moder onegentyl: Nothus, -i, -o; Mase., 2: Spurea, -e; fem., prime, 1 cathoiicon': Spirius, -ij; Masc. 2: Basterda, -de; fem., prime, 1 cathoiicon'. Bastard, of fadir gentyl and modyr ongrentyl: Nothus, -thi; Masc., 2: notha, -e; fem., prime, 'cathoiicon '. Bastyl of castyl or syte: ffasceninnea, -ee; vgucio in facio. Baastynge of cloth: Subsutura, -e; fem., prime, 'cathoiicon'. Batyl: bellum, -i, -o; neut., 2: pugna, -e; fem., prime: Duellum, -i; neut., 2. Batte, stafe: perticulus, -li; Masc., 2, 1cathoiicon1 : fuscus; Masc., 3: Batillus, -i; Masc., 2, Vgucio in bachis.

Batfowler: aucubaculator, -ris; Masc., 3, 'cathoiicon' in hamis. Batfowlynge: acubaculatus, -tus ; Masc., 4. Bath: balneum, -ei; neut., 2: Balnearium, -ij: Balileatorium, -ij; vgucio. Batyldere, or waschynge betyl: feritorium, ij; neut., 2. Batylment of wallys: propugnaculum, -li; ηeut., 2. Bathynge: Balneacio, -is; fem., 3. Batowr of flowre or mei with watyr: Mola, -e; fem., prime, 'campus florum'. j , .orum Bavd: leno; commune 2 generum, tercie. Bawdkyne, cloth of sylk: Olecericus, -ci; Masc., 2: '[campus] fiorum' t Olecerlca, -ce; fem., prime, 'cathoiicon' et Vgucio in olon. Bawdryk: S[t]ropheus, -ei; Masc., 2, 'cathoiicon'. Bawme, herbe: Balsamus, -i; 2, '[campus] florum': Melissa, -se; fem., prime: Melago, -is; fem., 3. Bawme, oyl: Balsamum, -i; neut., 2. Bawston, best: Taxus, -i; Mase., 2: Melota, -e; fem., prime, 'cathoiicon'. Be: apis, -is; fem., 3.

Babbyn, or waueryn: liprillo, -as, -aui, -are, -andi, -do, -Dum; prime con., neut. Bakbygh: Detraho, -is, -xi, -re; 3 con., neut.: Detracto, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., act. Buffyn of hondis ffolwyng here pray: Nieto, -is, -vi, -re, -titum; 3 con., neut.,'cathoiicon': set proprie in 3 persona tantum: Nieto, -is, -vi, -re; vgucio in nieto: Glocio, -is, idem est. Baggyng, or Bokynd owte: Tumeo, -es, -vi, -re, -di, -do; 2 con., neut., quere infra in Botyn . Bayne, or Barkyn ajen: Relatro, -as, -aui; prime con., neut. Bakyn: panifico, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., neut.

Baffyn of hondis: Baulo, -as: Baffo, -as: latro, -as; similiter declinantur, omnia, prime con., neut., set proprie in tercia persona. Balkyn, or make a Balke in eyryd londe: Porco, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., neut., 'campus florum' in porca. Balkyn, or skyppyn: Omitto, -tis, -si, -re; 3 con., act. Bannyn, or waryyn: Imprecor, -aris, -atus, -ri; prime con., dep.: Maledico, -eis, -ixi, -re: Execror, -aris, -atus, -ri; prime con., dep. Banschyne: Bannio, -is, iui, -ire; 4 con., act. Baptize: Baptizo, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., neut.

105

Barganyyn, or make a bargany: Stipulor, -aris, -atus; prime con., dep.: Mercor, -axis, -atus, -ari; prime con., dep.: licito, -as; ' v g u c i o v e r s i f i c a t u s ' , 'campus florum'.

Baryn, or make bare: Nudo, -as, -aui; prime con., act.: Denudo, -as, -aui; similiter d e c l i n a t u r , act. Barryn Doris, or ojper lyke schettynggis: Repágulo, -as, -aui: pessulo, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., neut.

omnia

Barryn harneys: Stipo, -as, -aui, -are·, constipo, as, similiter declina tur; omnia prime con., neut. Barkyn leder: frunio, -is, -iui, -re; 4 con., neut.: Tanno, -as, -aui, -re : Tannio, -is, -iui, -re; 4 con., 'campus

f l o r u m ' in fruno.

Barterynge, or chaungyng schaffere one thyng for a-noder: Cambio, -is, -si, -re; 4 con., neut., 1catholicon': Camso, -as, -aui, -re, -di, -do; prime con., neut., 'catholicon'.

Bastyn clothys: Subsuo, -is, -vi, -re; 3 con., neut.,

1

catholicon

' : Su-

tulo, -as, -aui, -re; prime con.,

Besekyrcge: obsideo, -es, -cessi- -re; 2 con., act. Be-seke, or pray: Rogo, -as, -aui, -re: Oro, -as, -aui, -re; omnia prime con., act.: Deprecor, -ris,

-atus, -ri; prime con., Dep.: Supplico, -as, -aui, -are; prime con., neut. Besemy}?: Decet, -bat, -it, -rat; 2 con., verb,

impersonale.

Besettyn, or Dysposse: Dispono, -is, -sui, -re; 3 con., act. Bedyn, or proferyn: ffero, -ers, tuli, -re; act. et anormalum de 'catholicon '. Besayne, or welleplesyd: letor, -ris; prime con. Begetyng: Genero, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., act.: Gigno, -is, -vi, -re; tercie con., act. Begylynge: Decipio, -is, -cepi, -re; 3 con., act.: ffraudo, -as, -aui; prime con., act.: seduco, -is, -duxi, -re; 3 con., act.: Circumuenio, -is, -veni; 4 con., act. Beggynge, or thyggyng: Mendico, -as, -aui, -are; prime con.,

neut.

Beggyn bodly fode, as mete or drink: Victo, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., neut.,

'catholicon'.

Begyne: Incipio, -is, -cepi, -re ; 3 neut. con., neut.: Inchoo, -as, -aui, -are; prime con., neut. Batfowlyn: ancubaculo, -as, -aui; prime con., neut., 'catholicon' Begyne A-jene: Itero, -as, -aui- -r e ; In hamus. prime con., neut. Batyn, or a-batyn, of wyte or mesure: Be gladde or mery: letor, -aris: Subtraho, -is, -axi, -re; 3 con., act. Iocundor, -ris, -atus sum, -ari; omnia prime con., Dep. Batyn, or make Debate: Iurgor, - a r i s , -atus, -ari; prime con., Beholdyn, or to be boundyn: Obligor, dep.: uei seminare.Discordias. -aris, -atus, -ari; prime con» Battyn, or betyn with stavys: ffuspass.: Teneor, - e r i s , tentus, -eri; tigo, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., 2 con., pass. act.: báculo, -as, similiter decliBeholdyn, or sayne: Intuor, -ris, natur; prime con., act. -tus, -ri; Ζ con., dep.. Et hec est Bawmyn: Balsamizo, -as, -aui, -re; différencia [inter] Tuor et tueor,· prime con., act. versus. Est tuor inspicio, tueor defendere dico Dat tutum tueor, Be betyn: vap lo, -as, -aui; verb, tuitum tuor, ambo tueri: Inneut. pass. spicio, -is, -spexi, -re: aspicio, Be bysy: Solicitor, -aris, -atus, -ari; -is, similiter declinator; omnia 3 verb. pass., prime con. con.', act. Be borne: Nascor, -ris; -natus sum, Be-hotyn, or be-heest: Promitto, -sci; prime con., verb. dep. Be buxum, or obedyent to A-noder: -tis, -si, -re; 4 con., act.: PolliObedio, -is, -iui, -ire; 4 con., ceor, -ris, -citus, -eri; 2 con., neut. Dep.

106 Be-houyn.-oportet, -bat, -uit, -rat, -bit; 2 con., impersonale. Beytone hors: Beytyne with houndis, Ber is or ojper lyke: Commordeo, -es, -si, -re: 2 con., act., secundum 'catholicon': uel canibus agitare. Bekenyn: anuo, -is, -ui, -re; 3 con.: Nuto, -as, etc.; prime con., act., 'catholìcon'. Bekenyn with eye: Nuto, -as, -aui, etc.: anuto, -as, -aui, -re; omnia prime con., 'campus fJorum' et 'catholicon', vgucio in nuto. Be lawfulle: licet, - bat, -cuit, -rat, -bit, -r ; 3 con., impers. Be lefulle, idem est. Bellyn, or lowyn, as neete: Mugio, -is, -gi, -re; 4 con., neut., set proprie in 3 persona tantum. Bleschyng, orraakyngfeyre: Decoro, -as, -aui, -re: venusto, -as, etc.; omnia prime con., act. Beene, or haue bene: Sum, es, fui, esse uel fore, endi, -do, -dum; neut. et anormalum: existo, -is, teti, -re: subsisto, -tis, similiter declinatur; 3 con., neut., et carent supinis. Berne, lyght: Radio, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., neut., set 3 persona tantum. Beene and bewte in vysment, as wyues and men: Satago, -is, -gi, -re; 3 con., neut., et caret supinis. Benen A-Bowtyn, or amyn towarde: Nitor, -ris, -sus, -ti; 3 con., Dep.: Conor, -aris; prime con., dep. Beene a-know wylfully: Confiteor, -ris, -sus sum, -ri, sum; 2 con., dep. Beene know a-¿ene wylle, or be constray nyn g : ffateor, -eris, -sum, -ri; 2 con., Dep. Beene a-qweynt, or knowne: Noscor, -ris, notus sum, nosci; 3 con., verb. pass. Beene A-schamyd: pudeo, -es, -vi, -re, caret supinis; 2 con., neut.: Erubeo, -es, -vi, -re; neut. et caret suppinis, secundum 'catholicon': Erbesco, -scis, -re, caret preterit, et supinis; 3 con., neut.: verecundor, -aris, -atus, -ari; prime con., dep.

Bend bowys: Tendo, -dis, tetendi, -r e , -sum, -su, uel -tum, -tu, secundum 1catholicon'; 3 con., neut. Be-quethyne in testament: lego, -as, etc., prime con., neut. Bere, or to beryn: Porto, -as, -aui; prime con., act.: Gero, -is, gessi, -rere, 3 con., act.: ferro, -ers, tuli, ferre, latum; neut. et anormalum. Bere Α-way: asporto, -as, -aui; prime con., act.: Aufero, -ers, -tuli, -re; neut. et anormalum. Bere Downe, or presse Doune: Comprimo, -is, -Pressi, -re: et Deprimo, -is, similiter Declinatur; omnia 3 con., act. Beere Downe onder fote: Suppedito, -as, -aui, -re; prime con., act. Beere Downe, or cast doone: Sterno, -is, straui, stratum: prosterno similiter Declinatur; omnia 3 con., act. Bere In: Insero, -ers, -tuli; neut.et anormalum. Beere Owt: Effero, -ers, similiter Declinatur. Bere parte, or be partenyre: participo, -as, -aui, -re, -Di, -Do; prime con., act. Beere wytnesse: Testificor, -aris, -atus, -ri: Attestatur, -aris, similiter Declinatur; omnia prime con., Dep.

107 13

ΊΗΕ CATHOLICON ANGLICUM

The Catholioon Angliawn is the second bilingual English-Latin dictionary produced in the fifteenth century. The present title of the work (Catholioon means a 'remedy for all ills') is based on the colophon and seems to have been used first by A. Way. In the colophon the work is referred to as the 'Catholicon': Cum ad vtilitatem et comodum singulorum, jn grammatica precipue proficere cupiencium, hanc breuem et summariam tabulam extractam de tabula prescripta, (Catholicon breuiter nuncupatur jn linguam maternam,) deo disponente disposuj, sic anima proferre respicienti Seu studenti. Supplicane, Si qua in ea reprehensione digna jnvenerit, Aut corrigat, aut oculis clausis pertranseat, Aut saltern humane ignorancie jmputet. 1TSed jn querendo quisque prudenter caueat, tum de variacione linguarum diuersarum, tum de translacione diuersorum verborum latinorum jn linguam maternam transformandorum. 1 1fEt quicquid jnferius offenderò, michi parcat socialis dileccio. There are two manuscripts in existence. One is the Lord Monson MS which is dated 1483. The other is the ADD MS 15,562 in the British Museum Library. The datings for the latter vary. Sir Frederick Madden supposed that it was writ2

ten about the year 1450,

the British Museum Catalogue describes it as "writ-

ten late in the XVth century" and S.J.H* Herrtage's view on the issue was the following: 1

Sidney J.H. Herrtage, ed., Catholicon Anglicum, an English Latin Wordbook, Dated 1483. Edited from the MS No. 168 in the Library of Lord Monson, collated with the Additional MS 15,562, British Museum, with introduction and notes. With a preface by Henry B. Wheatley. Early English Text Society (London: N. Trübner & Ca, 1881), p. 427. The text is also printed in A. Way's edition of the Promptoiium parvulorum, pp. lxiv-lxv.

2

The date was then repeated by H.B. Wheatley in his "Chronological Notices of the Dictionaries of the English Language," Transactions of the Philological Society (1865),pp. 218-293; p. 220, and by W.W. Skeat in his "Bibliographical List of the Works that have been published, or are known to exist in MS., illustrative of the various dialects of English. Section I. General. (A.) Dictionaries." English Dialect Society Publications (1873-1877 ), pp. 3-17; p. 3.

108 Mr. Way was of opinion that it was probable that this MS. was the author's holograph, but this is very doubtful, and is contradicted by the fact that the corrections are in a different hand. In addition to this, in the next paragraph Mr. Way speaking of the Addit. MS. 15,562, assigns to it the date of 1450. But the handwritings are essentially different. Either, therefore, the date assigned to the Addit. MS. must be wrong, or Lord Monson's MS. can not be the author's holograph. But I do not believe that 1450 is the correct date of the Addit. MS. More probably it was compiled about 1475, the date assigned to it in the Museum Catalogue. The numberless, and frequently most extraordinary, mistakes in the Addit. MS. show clearly that it was a copy from an earlier MS., and probably written from dictation. 3 Herrtage's edition of the dictionary is the only one in existence. It dates fron 1881.4 The ccrrpiler of the Catholiaon Angliaum is not known. Scholars have, however, studied the language of the manuscripts in order to locate the area in which the work was written. Way assumed that the dialectal peculiarities of the Maison MS seated to indicate that the Catholiaon was carpi led in the North-Eastern parts of England.5 This view was shared by Herrtage who even went a little further: We can, however, in the present instance assert with considerable confidence that the compiler was a native of one of the northern counties. Mr. Way was of opinion that the dialectal peculiarities of the MS. indicated that it was compiled in the north-eastern parts of England, and in this he was most probably correct. He pointed out that the names of Norwich, Lincoln, York, Richmond, Ripon, Durham and Carlisle occur in it, but we can hardly attribute much importance to this fact, in as much as we also find London, Salisbury, Bath, Oxford, Winchester, and Cambridge and these are all names of places which would be likely to be familiar to a monk, and such I believe the compiler to have been, grounding my opinion on his intimate knowledge of ecclesiastical terms, as evidenced throughout the work, as well as on such slight, but, to my mind, significant entries as didimus for vn-Trowabylle. The mention of Hekbetts is more to the purpose, as these appear to have been particular to the river Ouse in Yorkshire. So also with Scurffe, which appears to obtain principally on the Tees. So again, we have the curious expression Gabrielle räche, which still exists in Yorkshire. Further, the author speaks of the Wolds, which he renders by Alpes. On the whole it is probable that the work was compiled in the north portion of the East Riding of Yorkshire: more exactly than this it is now impossible to fix the locality. The reader will notice the large number of words occurring in our work, which are illustrated by quotations from the Wills and Inventories published by

3

Sidney J.H. Herrtage, op.cit., p. xv.

4

See note 1.

5

A. Way, op.cit., p. lxv.

109 the Surtees Society, and from Henry Best's Farming and Account Book. Many of these, such as Rekande, Spene, Bery, Scurffe, Ley, Staith, Mosscrop, and others, are peculiar to Yorkshire, or at least to the most northern counties. The Addit, MS. appears to have been originally written in a purer northern dialect than Lord Monson's MS., but it has constantly been altered by the scribe. This is shown by the order in which we find the words. Thus Spoyn was no doubt originally written Spune, as is clear from its position. Again, we have 'scho' or 'Ho' in A., where Lord Monson's MS. reads 'Sehe'. 6 Ulis then puts the two 15th-century English-Latin dictionaries that have been preserved into a unique position which was noticed by H.B. Wheatley: We can hardly doubt but that there were other English-Latin Dictionaries besides the Promptorium and the Catholicon, which have been lost, and this opinion is therefore probable, as both these appear to have been compiled in the Eastern counties, and it seems hardly probable that other districts were behind their neighbours in the production of these most necessary books. 7 Both Way and Herrtage list the following names and titles as the chief authorities of the Catholiaon Angliaums Brito, the Catholicon,

the

Doctrinale,

the gloss on the Liber equivocorurn of John of Garland, Hugutio, Papias, Vergil o and Ysidore of Seville. The editor of the dictionary added after this list g that "only Hugutio and the Liber Equivocorurn occur at all frequently".

It is

to be regretted that Herrtage silently emitted the sources in the dictionary entries, just as he emitted all grarrmatical specifications after the first items. One of the sources, John Balbus' highly esteemed Catholiaon,

has ob-

viously provided the ccnpiler with the name for his work. He was not the only cane at the time who tried to emulate his famous Genoese predecessor by calling his dictionary a 'Catholicon'. The first printed Latin-French vocabulary, published at Geneva in 1487, was also not yet called a dictionary but the Catholiaon parvim. The other bilingual French dictionary, the Catholicon 10 abbreviation, has already been mentioned. And that the term 'Catholicon' was

6

Sidney J.H. Herrtage, op.cit., pp. xx-xxi.

7

Sidney J.H. Herrtage, op.cit. , p. ix.

8

Cf A. Way, op.cit. , p. lxv, S.J.H. Herrtage, op.cit., p. xvi.

9

Sidney J.H. Herrtage, op.cit., p. xvi.

10

Cf in this respect also Christian-J. Guyonvar'ch, ed., J. Lagadeuc. Le Catholicon, dictionnaire breton-la tin-français du XVe siècle. Edition de Jehan Calvez (Tréguier 1499). Celticum 22, suppl. á Ogam-Tradition celtique 27 (Rennes, 1975) and the reviews in ZCPh, 36, 1978, pp. 304-305 by R. Ködderitzsch, in ZRPh, 95, 1979, pp. 186-188 by Κ. Baldinger, in RBPh, 57, 1979, pp. 154-156 by J. Loicq, and in FM, 46, 1978, pp. 265-266 by M. Arveiller.

110 still used much later is evidenced by the Catholiaon oder Encyelopädisohes Wörterbuch aller europäischen Sprachen by P.A. Nemnich, listed in W. Marsden's Catalogue of Dictionaries. ^ S.J.H. Heritage and D.T. Starnes have pointed out two other sources of the Catholiaon. Herrtage has drawn attention to the great similarity of words between the Catholicon and the Medulla, and Stames maintains that the Catho12 licon is mostly indebted to John of Garland's Synonyma. Herrtage estimated that the Catholicon lists about 8000 English entries (which I confirm) and that it is thus much smaller than the Promptorium parvulorum for which the estimated figures was about 12000. Since Herrtage in his edition marked all those items that do not occur in the Promptorium , it is interesting to note that although smller in coverage than the Promptorium the Catholiaon includes more than 2000 English items not listed in the Promptorium. It is not easy to establish any deliberate word selection policy in the Catholicon. If, for instance, one takes into account proper names because they can easily be identified as a separate group of items, the selection seems to be rather randan compared to that in the Promptorium. We have caution first naires for persons, but also such names as Ouyd and Virgille. The place names include a good nunber of English cities as well as Ierusalem and Troy, and among the names of countries we encounter not only European ones but also Araby and Egipte, as well as such French provinces as Burgon 'burgundia' and Gas coy η 'aquitania, vasconia1. The strong point of the carpiler of the Promptorium was the relatively great consistency with which he applied word class labels to those parts of speech he had singled out, with which he excluded references to pronunciation and etymology of the type 'grece'. In these three areas the carpiler of the Catholiaon is much more inconsistent, if not even randan. Word-class labels are often emitted, quite a number of entries include indications of pronunciation for the Latin equivalent which seem to have been taken over form the source material. The same holds for the mention that a word is of Greek origin. These characteristics, as well as the fact that 11

P.A. Nemnich, Catholicon oder encyclopädisches Wörterbuch aller europäischen Sprachen (Halle, 1791), see W. Marsden, A Catalogue of Dictionaries, Vocabularies, Grammars, and Alphabets. In two parts (London, 1796) .

12

D.T. Starnes, Renaissance

Dictionaries,

op.cit., pp. 20-22.

111 Latin noun equivalents are usually preceded by one of the determiners hie, hea, hoa put the Catholiaon in line with the state of lexicographical achievement that we have in the medieval vocabularies. The first two English-Latin dictionaries have obviously been cotpiled independently of each other. Both ccrrpilers had to rely on Latin-English sources. It is therefore no wonder that the concept of the lemma in the modern sense or as it was manifest in Latin lexicography of the time was not yet perceived that very clearly. Headwords such as an Asse mengyd with mans kynde to folow Broder in maneris lyke to a t S k y n y y chylde is lappyd in jn y y is b o t ons Weddet

moder wame

are headwords because the Latin equivalents onoaentaurus, fratrissare, vuinosus} himen or matrix, and monogamus functioned as lenmata in a Latin-English dictionary. Similar considerations hold for English verb leimata followed by a particle. The latter are not yet phrasal verbs, they aure literal translations of préfixai verbs in Latin. In the areas outlined so far the Catholiaon does not go beyond the lexicographical achievements in 15th-century England. There are, however, areas in which it does go beyond that which we find in English word lists at the time. Alphabetization within the groups of items assembled under the first two letters of the headword has not progressed much in the Catholiaon as can be seen fron the following extract frcm the letter B. Yet we note another interesting change. In the early glossaries and vocabularies it was the general practice to start a new line with a capital letter. Lerrrratization was thus achieved by capitalization. When in later vocabularies and nominales the Latin determiners hia, hea, hoa were added and then preceded the headword they came to stand at the beginning of the line. The ccrrpilers of these word lists stayed within the lexicographical practice of the day and spelled them with a capital H to indicate lemmatization. The headword proper on the other hand was listed in its unlerrmatized form, that is, with a lcwer case initial. Nouns in the Catholiaon are usually preceded by either the indefinite or the definite article, verbs by the particle to. Although they start the line, they are given in lower case. The capital is reserved for that item which the compiler regarded as the lernra proper, whether it was the noun, the verb, the object of a verb, or the complement to a copula verb. The practice was even carried over into derivatives. One of the characteristic features of the

112

CathoHoon (see further belcw) is the listing together of morphological antonyms. Such items as alene or to alose, for instance, are inmediately followed by vnolene and to vnalose. The wn-derivatives are not spelled with a capital initial as one might expect because they start the line and are not preceded by any other item. The spelling is vnClene and to vnClose. The capital is thus reserved for the headword to which the derivative belongs within the dictionary. I should add a further remark with respect to the treatment of English nouns as headwords. I said that they are usually preceded by either the indefinite or the definite article. This is correct, but one might also expect nouns without any article at all. Under the letter F, for instance, the following items are listed without any determiners Fader (as genitor), Fame (foam), Feverfew, Filosophi, Flesahe, Flewme, Floure, Fodyr, Fraunae, Frumyte. Serre of the items are proper names, others are names of substances. It would sean that the compiler of the CathoHoon observed a three-fold distinction in his dictionary: countable nouns are preceded by the indefinite article, uncountable nouns by a zero determiner and general nouns of unique reference by the definite article. There are of course inconsistencies, but the lexicographical principle as such cannot be overlooked. Since studies on the grannatical usage for the earlier periods of English are still a research desideratum it might be worth listing those nouns of the CathoHoon AngHaum which are given with the definite article and not followed by a post13

modifying of·.

t>e Air t>e Aide testament t>e Bane schawe fc>e Baptim t>e Bychdoghter t>e Ciatica £e Cok crawe t>e Colike t>e Crampe fc>e Dropsye ì>e Eclypse t>e Elemente t>e Emeraudes t>e Emygrane

13

}?e Epyphany }?e Erthe t>e Este t>e Estewynde t>e Euenstern t>e Euen tyde t>e Falland Euylle t>e Feloñ J?e Feveris t>e Feverquartayñ t>e Figes t>e Firmament l?e Firste martyr fc>e Firste Frute

t>e Flix ï>e Fransy ì?e Fryday )?e Fülle moyne i>e Godhede t>e Gowte fc>e Gulsoghte Halygaste t>e Harnes t>e Hede warke t>e Mawmoder fc>e Meldewe t>e Menyson fc>e Midday

Here, as in the other illustrations that follow, all editorial additions reflected in the printing type and all editorial comments have been ignored.

113 t>e Middis fynger t>e Mygrane t>e Moyne be Morfew be Newe laghe t>e Northe t>e Northe wynde Jpe Northe est wynde t>e Parlesy J?e Pestylence t>e Pippe t>e Placebo and dirige

l?e be be fee be be t>e t>e be be be be

Podagre Pose Ryghtehande Rynge man fyngur See Setryday Seven sterns Southe Sowthe wynde Sowthe est wynde Sowthe west wynde Squynacy

be be be b| Y be bf Y® ye γ6 Ye

Sunne Swerde & Y e bue1er Swynsy Swynsoghte Tende Ten commawndmentis Twylightynge Walde secund Heddynge Werlde Weste

Herrtage and Starnes have both errphasized another crucial feature of the Catholiaon

Angliaum.

Herrtage's characterization is rather brief:

The compiler frequently distinguishes with great acumen between the various shades of meaning of the several Latin equivalents of some one English word. 14

Starnes, whose judgement was based on his profound knowledge of early English lexicography, differentiated between two principles which he regarded as the compiler's indebtedness to John of Garland's Synonyma.

The first, the prin-

ciple of synonyrry, consists in supplying as many synonymous equivalents for a headword as possible. Hie ccnpiler of the Catholiaon

Angliaum

found this lex-

icographical principle in the Synonyma and applied it throughout the Catholiaon.

Supplying mere lists of undifferentiated synonyms for a headword might

be called the principle of inplicit synonymy. Starnes' second principle is that of "raking distinctions in the meaning and usage of terms often regarded as synonymous".15 Since the meaning of the synonymous items is made explicit I would like to call this principle the principle of explicit synonymy. Both these principles give the Catholiaon

Angliaum

its cachet. Yet I would

like to maintain that they are only part of a much more comprehensive deliberate lexicographical policy. This overall policy might be surmerized and illustrated as follows: The ccnpiler of the Catholiaon

Angliaum

has concen-

trated on the encoding language needs of the medieval student: 1 He lists as many Latin synonyms for an English headword as possible. Ble richness of Latin equivalents provides the user with good linguistic material to choose from to satisfy stylistic needs of variation.

14

S. J. H. Herrtage, op. c i t . ,

15

D.T. Starnes, Renaissance

p.

xvi.

Dictionaries,

op. cit., p. 22.

114 2

In additien, he tries to describe the meaning differences between the synonymous words listed. In doing so - and this is still done in Latin and not yet in English - he helps the user to increase and differentiate his vocabulary conmand of Latin, to find the right word in all the copia provided. It may suffice to quote two striking examples: to Cry; clamare, Ac-, con-, re-, clamitare, clangere; canum est baulare & latrare, boum mugiré, ranarum coaxare, coruorum orocare & crocitare, caprarum vehare, anatum vetussare, Accipitrum pipiare, Anserum dinger e, aprorum frendere, apum bombizare uel bombilare, aquilarum clangere, Arietum lorectare, asinorum rudere, catulorum glatire, Ceruorum nigere, cicadarum firmitare, ciconiarum croculare, cuculorum cuculare, elephantum barrire, grabarlarum fringulare, equorum hinnire, gallinarum crispiare, gallorum cucurrire, gruum gruere, hedorum vebare, hircorum mutire, hirundinum mimurrire & mimerire est omnium minutissimarum Auicularum, leonum rugiré, luporum vlulare, leperorum & puerorum vagire, lincum aucare vel nutare, miluorum pipire, murium pipare vel pipitare, mulorum zinziare, mustelarum driuorare, noctuarum cubire, olerum densare, onagrorum mugerilare, ouium baiare, panterarum caurire, pardorum folire, passerum tinciare, pauorum paupeilare, porcorum grunnire, serpentum sibilare, soricum disticare, Tigridum rachanare, turdorum crucilare vel soccitare, verris quiritare, vrsorum vercare vel seuire, vulpium gannire, vulturum palpare, vespertilionum blaterare.

Meruelle; mirum, monstrum, monstruositas, portendum, prodigium, prodigalitas, ostentum, signum. Ostentum est ostencio quedam preter consuetudinem obiciens se oculis & auribus. Portentum est quod ex formis diuersis exponitur vt homo equo mixtus. Monstrum quodcunque ex natura nasatur vt serpens cum pedibus. Prodigium quod porro ad futurum demonstrat ut in celo stella cometa, vel lux in nocte vel in die tenebre, vel sic secundum grecismum; versus: tfProdigium seu portentum concede futuris, Ostentum siue monstrum presen tibus adde, Presenti signum concedaturque futuris. Vel portentum in terra, prodigium in celo quia procul a digito. Sed hec proprietas abusione autorum plerumque corrumpitur. 1Γ Item différencia inter portentum & portentuosum quia portenta sunt que transfigurentur, sicut festur in libia mulierem peperisse serpentem, portentuosa vero leues sumunt mutacionez ut nati cum sex digitis.

3 Msaning discriminations are frequently given in the form of mnemonic verses. The Catholiaon Angliewn includes about 300 such verses. An example is a Fischer; piscator, piscarius; versus:ITPiscator prendit quod piscarius bene vendit. These verses could be memorized and they would therefore contribute to

115 making the newly learned items permanent language acquisitions. 4

lhe mnerranic verses had a considerable literary tradition at the time. The Catholioon Angliaum, however, includes also exanples with no such literary tradition. They either illustrate how the item in question is used syntactically or viiich is/are its typical collocation (s). Sane such exanples are:

16

Born; natus, ortus, oriundus & construitur cum genitiuo, vt, 'sum oriundus parcium tuarum'. to Forbed; Abdicare, abnuere, arguere, ut: arguo te ne malificos imiter is; jnhebere jmperio, prohibere iure, interdicere, vetare, euetare, dehortare. a Fredome, libertas, vindicta, vt: consecutus est plenam vindictam i.e. libertatem. to be Grete; valere, vt: 'ille est Valens homo', i.e. validus homo; grandere, grandescere, grossere, grossessere. Howe; qualiter, quomodo, quam; ut, nescis quam male loquitur iste de te; vel sic, quam bene diligis me, cum similibus. to Lenne; Accomodare, comodare, credere; comodamus amico ipsam rem, ut librum, mutuamus vel mutuum damus, vt vin um vel argentum, prestare. Partye, bipartitus, ut toga bipartita. a Provynge; Apodixis, experimentum, argumentum, vt: habitus non est argumentum religionist periculum, probacio, specimen. to Seme, or it Semes; decet, - bat personale vel impersonale; vt toga decet me, impersonale vt decet me loqui.

16

The extract omits the dagger that marks words that do not occur in the Promptorium parvulorum. It also omits the asterisk which marks all those items that were annotated by A. Way. It does not include the words and readings that occur in ADD MS 15,562. They are marked by an Λ in Herrtage's edition.

116 to sett jn stede; substituere, sufficere, ut: sufficio te in loco neo.

5

To the richness in synonymous expressions the ccrrpiler has added a wordformation oaiponent. He often lists one or more derivatives after the Latin equivalent. Nouns are often followed by a derived adjective, e.g. Araby; Arabia, arabicus participium. an Archangelle; archangelus; archangelicus participium.

In other cases the diminutive form is listed: a Begger; mendicus, mendiculus, diminutiuum. a Bleddyr; vesica, vesícula diminutiuum.

Concrete nouns may also be follcwed by a derivative denoting the place where the object in question is found: a Bur tre; sambucus, sambucetum vbi crescunt. an Esche, fraxinus; fraxinus, fraxineus; fraxinetum est locus vbi crescit.

For verbs the derived abstract noun and/or the derived agential nouns may be added: to Dresse; porrigere, jntendere; vt ille jntendit animum suum; jntensare, dirigere, -tor, -trix & cetera verbalia. bo make Manyfalde; multiplicare, -tor, -trix, -cio; multifarie, multifariam.

Nouns and adjectives may also be follcwed by the derived verb: An Apostata; Apostata; Apostatare verbum. Bare; vbi nakyd; to bare, vbi to nakydun.

We thus have quite a developed run-on entry practice for derivatives in the Catholiaon. The derivatives are usually provided with a word class label. They may be undefined or defined. In the latter case the definition is not

117 given in the mother tongue English but in the foreign language. 6

Another facet of the word-formational ccnponent in the Çatholioon

is the

listing together of morphological antonyms, e.g. Clene; jntemeratus, jncorruptus, jncontaminatus. ... vnClene; jnexpiabilis, inmundus, jnpurus. a Clennes; honestas, mundicia, puri tas, sinceritas. vnClennes ; jmmundicia, cicia, jmpuritas.

jmpudi-

Clennessabylle; expiabilis, purgabilis. vnClenceabylle ; jnexpiabilis, jnpurgabilis. to Charge; onustare, sarcinare, onerare, grauare. a Charge; cura, onus, grauamen. to dis-Charge; exonerare.

7

The policy of helping the user to find the proper word he is looking for is completed by a cross-reference system. Vbi is the metalinguistic marker used to cross-refer to semantically related items, e.g. A Baby; Infans, & cetera; vbi barne uel childe.

Hie cross-reference system, however, is not yet fully developed, that is, the items bearne and childe

do not refer the user back to the item baby,

A Barne: jnfans, jnfantulus, jnfantuosus. a Childe; paruulus, pusio, puer, jnfans, infantulus, pusillus, puerulus, puellulus, soboles; puerilis, participium; pignus, proles; infantilis, jnfantuosus.

These seven features anply illustrate the ccmpi1er1s concern for the user's encoding language needs and thus make the Catholiaon

Angliam

an outstanding

achievement in the early history of English lexicography. The following extract is taken from Herrtage's edition of the Anglzaum: 17 17

See note 16.

Catholicçn

118 Β ante Α. a bab; vbi a chylde. a Babylie; pigna. A Baby; Inf ans, & cetera·, vbi barne uel childe. Babilon; babilonia, babilonius participium. a Bacheler; bacalarius vel bacularius. a Basyn; timile, peluis. Bacon; lardum, petaso. to Bacon; dissplodere. Bacond; displosus. A Backe; vespertilio, & cetera; vii bakke. Bacbrede; vbi bakebrede. a Badildore; pecten. Bayde; A Bayge; Sacculus. a Bagpype; panduca. a Bagpyper; panducarius. Bay; badius. a Bay; bacca, est fructus lauri & oliue. A Bay; Aque. a Bafynstylkylle; gamerus, asparagus. a Bakbone; spondile, spina, to Bakbyte; blasfemare, detrahere, blaterare, derogare, detractare, detrectare, obloqui, susurrare, a Bakbyter; bias, blasfemus, detractator, detrector, delator, susurro, a Bakbytynge; blasfemia, delatura, derogacio, detractado, susurrium. a Bakbrede; rotabulum, & cetera; vii a muldyngborde. to Bake; panificare, pistrire, infornare , pinsere. a Bakehows; pistrinum, cerealium, panific[i]um, pistrina, panificina. a Bakke; dorsum, dorsiculum, tergum hominum, tergus animalium, spina, spondile. a Bak of a knyfe; ebiculum. a Bakke; blata, vespertilio, a Bäkster; artocopus, pistor, cerealius, furnarius, paneta, panificus, panificia, panifex, pistrio, pistrix. Bakwarde; retrorsum, seorsum. a Bailan; belluga, statera, examen, bilanx, libra, lanx, trutrina, trutinella, librarius participium. Balde; Audax, & cetera; vbi hardy.

» BaldestX9t; , pronubus, pronuba, jnterduca, paranimpha, paranimphus. a Baly; balliuus, villicus; villicare est tale officium excercere. Balery; Balina. a Balyngar; celo. a Balke of howse; trabs, trabes, trabis & trabus, trabicula. a Balke betwyx twa furris; creb[r]o, porca, a Balle; pila, alipatus qui iaculatur pilam. a Balle of }?e hand or of fote; callus. a Balloke stone; testiculus, testiculars participium. a Ballokecod; piga, imembrana. Balme; baisamum, colobalsamum, filobalsamum, opobalsamum. a Balme tre; balsamus. a Bancour; bancorium. a Bande; ligamen, ligatura, vinculum, a Bande of a dure; vertebra, a Bande of luffe; fedus, pignus. a Bande of a howse; lacunar, lacunarium, laquear, laqueariujji, loramenturn, a Bande of a carte or of a coppe; crusta, crustola. a Bande doge; molosus· a Bane; os, ossiculum, ossillum; osseus participium. a Banefyre; ignisossium. from Bane to bane; ossim. a Bane of a play; preludium, proludium. a Baner; vexillum, signum, tessera, a Banerer; vexillifer, hastifer, hastiger, draconarius, antesignarius, primicerius, ferentarius, primipilus. í>e Bane schawe; ossedo. a Banke; ripa fluminis est, litus maris est, margo fontis est: versus : Fontis margo, maris litus, sed ripa fluentis. riparia, ripula, crepido est concauitas ripe; litoreus, marginalis, margineus. to Banne; Annathematizare, deuouere, deuotare, derogare, detestari, tumeliare, execrari, maledicere,

119 imprecari, & cetera; vbi to curse. A Banner; deuotator, derogator, detestator, execrator, jmprecator, maledicio. a Bannynge; detestado, detestameli, execramen, maledictum, maledicc io. a Bannok; focacius, panis subcinericius. a Banqwer; bancarium, dorsorium. Banworte; consolidici. }3e Baptim; baptismus, baptisraa. to Baptyse; baptizare, a Baptizer; baptista. Barane; effetus, sterilis. a Barbycane; Antemurale. a Barbelle; barbellus, piscis est. a Barbur; barbitonsor. a Bare; aper, aperculus, aprinus, apprugnus participium, maialis, castratus, verres ; versus : Verres testículos hahet atgue domi refouetur, Est aper in siluis, nefrendis in ede tenetur; Idem maialis castratus vterque videtur. Bare; vbi nakyd: to bare, vbi to nakydun. a Bar espere; excipulujii. a Barsepay; fustibulum. Barfute; nudipes. Barlege ; incaligatus. a Barelle; cadus, emicadium. Barely;_vii nakydly. a Bargan; pactum. to Bargan; pacisci, pangere: versus: 'Pango, cano, pango, iungo, pango, paciscor, Dat pactum, pepigi, cano, panxi, iungere, pegi.' a Bargham; epiphium. Bares; barri: versus: Barri barrorum dantur ludi puerorum. a Barke; cortex, liber, codex, to Barke; frunire, effrunire. to Barke as a dog; latrare, debaulare. a Barkyng ; latratus, latramen, a Bar[k]howse; frunitorium, cerdonarium. a Barkar; cerdo, frunitor, gallarius, -ij, & gallarius a um, gallitarius, -ij, & gallitarius a um.

Barke duste or wose; frunium, ptipsana. a Barkar dog; ibercisticus. Barkefatte ; ptipsanarium. Barly; ordeum, ordeolum, ordeacius participium. Barlycaffe. A Barme; gremium, & cetera ; vbi a skyrtt. a Barmeclathe; limus, limas, pannus gremialis, vel corium gremiale. Barme; spuma, & cetera; vbi 3est. a Barnakylle; camus, a Barnakylle; Auis est. A Barne; jnfans, jnfantulus, jnfantuosus. Barnely; jnfantuose, pueriliter. A Barne; oreuro, & cetera; vbi lathe. a Baron; baro, baroniculus, bariculus, heres, grece, hero, a Barones; baronissa. a Baronry; baronia, a Barrow; cenovectorium vel scenovectorium. a Barrowemaker; vecticularius. a Barras; antemurale, valium, a Barre; clatrus, pessulum, pessellum, obex, repagulum, vectis. a Barrewarde; archophilax. a Baskyt; Aristor, prod[ucitur] a, cartallum, calathus, sephinus, corbis, qualus, quaxillum, sporta, sportula. a Basenet; cassis, galea, a Baslarde; sica, a Base; basis. a Bastarde; bastardus, fauomij, nothus ex nobili patre, spurius ex nobile matre, pelignus, & dicunt[ur] spurij quasi extra purità tem geniti; tales plerumque matrem pocius quam patrem moribus sequu[n]tur. a Bastardrye; bastardía, a Bataile; acies, ala, bellum indicitur populorum, belluluro diminutiuum; bellaticus bellicus, bellicosus participia; beilax, belliger, Auellum est jnter ciues dictum, quod auelluntur populi in duas partes; certamen loco virtutis po[nit]ur: ciuile bellum ex ciuibus constat & auellum ut supra;

120 conflictus, congressus, domesticum ex domesticis, due H u m ex duobus est, jntestinum ex parentibus; guerra, rebellio, mars, obsidio, pugna fit inter duos & inter plures; vnus contra vnum procinctus ti, procinctus tus; pallas dea belli, preliun? geritur, preliolum diminutiuum, a pre & lite vel a pre & luendo, proprie est primus congressus vel conflictus, bellum ipsa guerra: vnde dictum, romani vieti sunt in prelio sed numquam in bello, quia sepe in congressibus vincebantur vel in jpsis conflictibus sed nunquam in guerra; vel prelium de prope, bellum de longe.

a Bate; simba, facelus, & cetera; vbi a schype. Bathe; jn plurali numero, ambo. Bathe; ciuitas; bathonia, bathoniensis participium. to Bath or bathe; balneare, a Bath; balneum, balneolum, terme. Bature; batura, similago. to Bawme; vbi to balme. a Bawson; vbi A broke.

121 14

JOHN PALSCBAVE : LESCLARCISSEMENT DE LA LANGUE FRANÇOISE

The medieval tradition of English dictionary-making culminated in four substantial dictionaries: two Latin-English works, the Medulla grommatine and the Or tus voaabulomm, and two English-Latin ones, the Promptorium parvu lorum and the Catholiaon Anglioum. Of these four two only were printed at the time, the Or tus vooabulorum and the Promptorium parvu lorum. The Ortus being a LatinEnglish dictionary, and the Promptorium being an English-Latin dictionary, thus complemented each other. That there was a need for such a double dictionary is evidenced by the fact that both were also bound together. Hie British Museum Library, for instance, is in the possession of a copy of such a double dictionary. In the first three decades of the sixteenth century the Ortus and the Promptorium were repeatedly reprinted and these editions seem to have satisfied the lexicographical needs of the time. 1he last located edition of the Promptorium parvulorum dates fron 1528, and that of the Ortus vooabulorum from 1532. With Sir Thomas Elyot's Latin-English dictionary of 1538 bilingual Latin-English lexicography is continued. Yet there is a reorientation in approach and method. The rediscovery and study of the classical Greek and Latin writers directed the lexicographer's attention to these classical sources. This reorientation towards classical scholarship is, however, not the most salient characteristic of 16th-century English lexicography. The intellectual awakening of the Renaissance period nade the individual reflect upon his central position in this world, and he was to make the fullest use of his physical and intellectual potentialities. The Renaissance was -a time of hitherto unparalleled geographical and scientic discoveries. The individual took pride in his achievement and he questioned the predominant position of Latin as the language of knowledge and learning. In Italy, France, and England the struggle for the recognition of the vernacular became a public debate and a national issue which in the seventeenth century was to result in the compilation of the first monolingual dictionaries for Italian, French, and English respectively. The most outstanding characteristic of 16th-

122

century English lexicography, compared to that of the preceding century, is its turning towards the spoken vernaculars. It was in the sixteenth century that the first bilingual dictionaries for French, Italian, Spanish and English were produced. The expansion of trade and travelling created a substantial need for word lists and vocabularies. This need was met by an increasing number of polyglot vocabularies. The popular Introito e porta of 1477 seams to have been ex1 panded edition by edition. The first edition that includes three languages dates fran 1513, an edition of 1526 lists Latin, French, Spanish, Italian and German, and for the first polyglot edition in which English figures as well •

1

w-t

Ό C ιβ ja >1 rH .Η 0

s

».

< φ 4J C ιβ α

•

o

φ ηιβ Ol 0

•Ρ

« Ή Ή

Ή •β «ί Β)

o •Ρ Φ

Μ

01

ιβ >1

r—t

a IJ

< Φ

s ιβ α

φ ΟΙ ιβ ΟΙ to

»H

Γ» Ν Ο ι-» m

Ο n 0 LH φ 01 ιβ σ ε

S

01 0) Οι σ> (0 σ> φ 3 •Η Οι S

φ q ν

w

Μ ω Φ Οι *Ή ή α> Ό ή α) •Η Ή S ni η ιβ •β G Π) 00

•Ή

Ϋ g Ο • 01 φ φ & •ο φ φ >Η .-I φ 01 Ή Ή Μ •Η 0 ιβ ιβ

«Κ

Μ ο «Μ φ ΟΙ ιβ Οι Ο •Ρ »

"Η

•Η G S 0 01 Φ Ό

>Η • φ φ Ή c ιβ Ή » -Η φ •Η ιβ •Η Γ-Ι ιβ >1 ΙΒ m ΙΒ

Λ

J3 ••

S

Μ

φ φ ·· Γ-Ι 4J «Η Ιβ -Ρ ο Ο Οι Μ -Ρ •Η £5 "Β •C ·Η ιβ ιβ φ 3biM-l· » Ιβ m » ^ Vi -Η Φ •Η Οι m οι «a ·Η Φ ιβ H 3 Μ cq ο Φ 01 Ιβ •β Π)

r~i

J3

•

Φ

•β •β Β)

ιβ *

Φ

•Μ •Η 3 ω 3 Λ

Οι Β •Η ι-1 •Ρ ιβ •3 VI Οι ιβ I

•Ρ φ 4J Ι-Ι Ιβ 4J φ VI ν •Η ΟΙ ιβ "δ JJ ιβ Λ t Ιβ φ » ς "Μ VI •Ρ Ή ιβ 4J 4 £ Ή 01 -Ο •Η >3 • ja 4J «β 3 ιβ Ο 0) Φ χ. Α Ιβ ΦΛ Ό Φ RH IH Ol ιβ Ό Ιβ +J VI ιβ C Φ Ή ·Η J3 Ό VI Ή Η Μ ϋ IH φ Ή -Ρ u 3 IB •Ρ •Ο ιβ •Ρ ιβ H Ξ ιβ Ή 10 Ε) Οι 0 •Η 1-1 "Η 4J •Q ϋ Φ ιβ 3 Td 5 α 0)

I

I

I

öi S öi id oq

to M 0 •rH kl kl id S

0 Μ

1

1

I

1

φ ^

UH

0 •Ρ

0

ta

•

3> kl Οι φ ld Λ Öl 4J Id φ 0) σ ι 0 c¡ •Ρ 0 to Φ Ol kl π) Ol •ri to kl to id s u J


1

3

a VI ai Ό A< c ai id

^

· g

ai •Ή IO

CQ

ai o c IO •H

Ό 01 rH

Ή

ai

rH

Τ3

, s Vi οι 01 ç 3 01

χ (H •Η Ol Ό

id en

ai JJ vi .Q 1 H 0

1 •H ta

Ό » 0 e 10

Ol JJ

3

(U

Ä

Ό C Ol Q
10 H β) Ή 0 Ol 0

3

c 3 Κ

h Ο

al

01 ai H •D •H • 0 Ό «1 01 JJ 'S 3 c h-)

n

A

Ol

•

IH •μ

•μ 10

Κ-) Ο

A V

3

1« Ή

0

α> JJ 01 » •H 3 & «ι A m •ο οι e

CQ

A

•H

M O)

VI

Β rH 3 Ο

Οι 0 4J 01 01 rH

lu

rH

3

ο Ό 41 ο Ή •Γ-ι •Η VI 0) 01 Λ Ό (U

•Η Μ

JJ

C Ol

0 JJ

>1 C m

Ol

c 10 Ό

3

a

5 i 01 rH >8 Ό rH α) • CQ og 3 «M 1 3 c Ό 01 -ι ι» Φ 01 0

JJ

·· 01 ai

4-1 3 g

b

ai •H

JJ Ό

01 3

•

>1

01

C Q| Ή 3 Ή •Η •Ή rH t 10 CQ ιβ •h 8> en 10 ••"I M •s Ή io CQ

•

•

ε »

( φ σ> ε ο* 10 σ> χ· · •Ρ 10 ιβ Λ s ιβ C 0 s -Η Ή c "Η Ή Ό 10 ΚΙ CQ

4-1 C φ Ρ Ξ k Φ 3 Ο Οι

Φ Di Di ιβ Oí

ν 01 •Ή •-Η Ή •Ή 10 CQ

s q 0 Ή Ή "Ή •O oq

(H 01 C bi •H 10 m

ιβ s •Ή "-Η rH "Η Ifl CQ

+J ιβ Λ

•

ιβ

φ Λ 4J ιβ Λ

ιβ s C Ή 10 CQ

»

*

Φ σι Di ιβ Οι 10 s q O -Η "Η •Ή •0 0Q

•

Λ

4-1 10 XI ιβ κ q •Η ιβ CQ




· fc 3 0 O •ri . Ή C 01 ιβ 3 b< c •H C 01 X 4-> M ιβ 01 X> C bi o *Ή 4J io m

Oi C •H Λ JJ 10 X) ιβ s 01 >H •H 0 c

&

•ή Ifl 05

•

•

ε

Ο 4J

·· φ 01 01 •Η

^

C 5

Χ

3 C* Ή Ol 3 tr

ιβ Η Μ 01 0) •Η ιο CQ

M 01 Ol •Ή 10 m

Ä S

C φ 4J U-I O

ε •

φ 01 01 •Η

H φ

"H 01 3 bi

10 s >H 01 01 ••H 10 CQ

h

01 oi -r| 10 OQ

C fc-

10 •u

1

1

01 ε 01 01 ••H Ό CQ

S 0 r-H

Ol C •H M X)

0 4-1 *

(H 01 01 01 "H Ifl Q)

*

Φ Οι C •r|

φ xi 3 4-1 tu ιβ "Η XI φ 3 Ο fa' -ρ q Ol

Φ οι (0 •Η Λ!

•

c •ri

I

40 ν Ol M 'Ή O Ε δι •Η 10 CQ

φ

υ •ri

tu 10 Ή "Η Ή •Η 10 0Q

ιβ Λ

À

>Η c ιβ

ν

Λ V

C c 01 -H

Φ

ιβ

tu C •r4

V IH 3 Ol 3 b> Ή -Η

•

•Η rH >1 Ιβ XI

JQ 3 4J

•M u Ή 3 O 01 o 3 ·Η bl r-l Ή Ol >1 3 C b> ιβ

•

φ Uh •Η rH >1 ιβ α

•

to- ·

ε

Χ

Λ

01 φ rH UH

·· φ •ri S •Η

χ

•

01 Ό ·

„

•Η 3 •r| Οι

•

Ή •ι Ό ο
3 3 •Η Λ —•r| Dl φ VI ν 3 4-1 -r| 4-1 »01 • Οι 10 Ό Φ O Ο 0 •υ 4J •Ρ Ό Ç * «Β Οι Ih 01 φ Η Ο

&

•Η r-l

ν φ IH •Ή Ο • Ε XI &Ο •η •Ρ Ό CQ

3

0 4-1

—

3 b> Ή φ 3 bi

M φ 01 •Ή ifl CQ

Ο rH

Ο· C •Η 01 01 •rH Λ!

s q

Ol C •ri Ih XI

ιβ

0 4-1

^

•

Φ 01 01 •Η

Χ

(Η φ 0) 'Ή Ό 0Q

¿3

I

I

1

s IH Ol 01 01 •r| m CQ

267 •α) ρ

•

Ih

ro σι ιη «Η

Ό C m Λ >1 Η Ι-Η 0 S •

υ

•

Η Ή 4J οι οι « IH α) η ο Λ •Ή - 0 m Ή0 « 'Ιβ JJ01 0 to

φ .-H ι η c Ή 3 3 id rC Ό ^

01 lH M 01 -u Cl Ih •u c 0 υ »01 0) 01 •H Ιβ O)

·«

"M *

ai 01 c Id Ό 3 O

•

Τ) H ιβ •Η Η

id

ε·· en C ν •ri "Η υ

01 φ Ol φ 0 .Χ 0 U • G 10 u rH

Λ

0 4-1 ' S G V O I IH 01 Φ •u 4J 4J -ιΗ 0 Λ 1-H 3 Ό m

•ρ c C ·Η 0) φ

ai

χ

5

.

ο 5 •U 3 Ο ν a Μ Φ UH 4J Ο 4J Ο Ό •η Ή c S •Η Λ|

Ol > 5

>4 «i •H 01 a a c

>1 οι >. α

Ό "M C!

3 n ο Ol Μ Ό M n o o tu

o 01 -p c ai

ë

Β" 01 >. -Ρ ΟΙ Λ -Η VI Ή 3 dl Ol Ή (Η G 4J 01 O O 01 01 -d C «H 01 C Ό Ή -4 Ό c m ft ~ c "* o m 01

i ih 0) 4-1 Ό 01 c 01 -ri 01 M 0) •U C m "H 3 10 -H -P

à

m

οι •H 0

οι ® TJ UH η)

01 Xi

•s o m π>

•Η •G C

* £

- Ή rH Β>

ί ν

Ol H dl -g c 10 μ -υ ο ω

O 00 in H

A

id

Ό G 10 Λ >1 rH rH 0

κ q o M •H

®

01 Ό

U

M 3 01 "H rH Ή 10 m

φ to 3 Ο

»

rH rH O I Λ

Λ

Φ io Ή 5

10 Κ

0) Uh Ό Ο

I

14 φ

ft φ

φ 3 Ol

01 01 IH =3 Ol •Η "Η Ή >0 Β)

Ol 3 O •i-I

tu G •Η

ft φ "Id φ

3 01

01 rH 10 n>

φ •G 01 4-1 01

φ s·.

10 r~ Ν O

» -Η C U ® G £ Ή

c •Η Μ

fi

ιο ^

αι

fi fi Ol 3

&

φ

>1 C IO •

Ol

fi

3 ai 0 Ό •H

fi fi

Ol q IO ai s Öl UH

Ol 0 Ό Ό Ol q Ό S q Λ Si OQ

1 10 Λ

S· S 0 u

io ν

10

Ol 3 Οι *Ή Ή

oi Β R 0 5 •a

°Ö •

Ol Ό q ¡3 0)

C Φ

s

01 Ό U4 q 0 Ό 0)

1

0) Ä

e w io o m ja υ -η

01 0 -u

- ςι 1 rH rH 0 ® »

•

Ό C

>,

Λ

0 •Ρ — Φ •μ

0

JJ

U Ν

Μ αι Ό s Ό m

HH ··

C •H IH •μ to

ra

ν 3 m ω 1 JJ

•

αι υ

io Ό C Φ

α

rH m

α

Λ 4-1 •Η 3

0

•Μ 0 Vi

Ό C 3 0

M C

S

Ν

VJ

ID

κ 3 m Ol JJ q 0 M 1 ι—( i-Η 0 s ü

ν Ih φ •Ή q io Q.

•

Ή

°s

t* (li

E

IO Λ

X

M C

Ό C io H bí

Φ •C •Ρ •

ft

10 E •0 c «a 10

X 01 3 3 Cl 0 3 3 4J •P Q. E ε 0 3 οι 01

&

•u io · •P Cl κ φ 3 b> Cl 3 &1 q 3 b> c 0) •H 10 •m Λ

£

•

•P 01 10 φ «M >»H 0 •P

CP c •H •P •P φ 3 w c 10 Λ

*

4-1 Φ 3 0< c 10 XI 0 •P

•p q 10 •u φ 3 b> q 10 cq

ν M φ -P φ 3 tu c Si m

s

c •rH n 0,

•

o co in

ΉIO Λ >1

JJ φ & tH CU Ή q •d o.

φ

c s Χ)

Ή •β

φ Λ •Ρ

O s O) g S

Ό § g

di q io (ρ

•

M φ

M c IO Χ) IO ^

Ih φ ••-I 3 tp q io K)

Φ

IO · Φ +J α. 3 H Λ; c io XI

IO

>1 IO

*

I

•Ρ Ol IO φ IM

•Ή .f Κ

0) I

•u CI 3 b< q io n>

1 io c •H •P φ 10 XI

•

01 φ c Id XI

id •P q φ E φ -u φ 3 tn q io cq

φ

Λ

•Ρ ν οι q io íq

•

01 c •H 4-1 φ λ: c io X) φ Ή In φ 4J φ 3 Sr q •0 m

1 c id

Λ

id s. 4J q Cl E Φ -u Φ 3 b< q 10 oq

n ιβ e

>1 Φ 3 XI XI 0 ο -ρ •Ρ φ

M c

•

0< C •H 4-> φ

X

^ υ

01 c q Φ Ό Ü •Q ΓΗ

"I

Φ V4 01 0 IH φ 4J Φ 0 «C

φ c H 10 Λ

c 0 UH

0

οι φ C ιο XI

φ Λ 4J >η Cl 01 Ή 4J

ft

υ u

XI 3 •Ρ 0* c -Η c >Η 10

if •q

Λ

"io

10

Ol q ,0 "H Ol φ

u

φ JJ •Ρ 10 . ^ "Μ ιο 0)

φ -Ρ c 0 1 •Η 3 Μ X) U s 0 Β -P φ XI oi q 0 10 -Ρ •Q φ 01 υ φ c 01 φ 0 Ih •Η φ γ-Η •u φ Μ •q 0 0

οι •Η

0 •Ρ

V Η φ -Ρ φ 3 bí q io cq

01 φ c io XI

t c φ •Ρ 01 -Η χ: ο 0 4-1 ^

IH φ Ν •Η -Ρ ο. Ό m

χ; +1

Λ 3 •Ρ

κ IH φ 01 Ή •Ρ ο< ιο •q

O* c •I-I c M 10

•IO

β

Ol q ,0 ΊΗ

ν o αϊ c •u w 1 Η ΓΗ 0 S U

•

11 Ή Oi C a^ 3

ai •H 4-1 Ή •H 4-1

0 •p ai 3 •H ai υ ai •a

a

3 ω

4-1 •H 41 a m Ό

ν -u m Ή m and French:... ( London : Henry Denham, 1573). N. van Barlemant, Colloquia cum dictionariolo sex linguarwn : Teutonicae, Latinaej Germanicae, Gallicae, Hispanicae, et Italicae... ( Antverpiae : apud Henricum Henricium, 1583). A. Bart-Rossebastiano , " I < Colloquia > di Nòel de Berlaimorit nella versione contenente in portoghese", Annali dell' Istituto universitario orientaley Sezione romanza, 17 (1975), pp. 31-85.

434

C. Beaulieux, " Liste des dictionnaires, lexiques et vocabulaires français antérieurs au " Ihrêsor" de Nicot (1606)", in Mélanges de Philologie offerts à Ferdinand Brunot à l'occasion de sa 20 année de professorat dans l'enseignement supérieur, par ses élèves français et étrangers ( Paris : Société Nouvelle de Librairie et d' Edition, 1904), pp. 371-398. L. Bethmann, " Alte Glossen", Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum, 5 (1845), pp. 193-311. P. Bierbaumer, Der botanische Wortschatz des Altenglischen. Teil 1 : Das Lsceboc. Grazer Beiträge zur Englischen Philologie 1 ( Frankfurt a. M. - Bern : Lang, 1975) ; Teil 2 : Lacnunga, Herbarium, Apuleii, Veri Didaxeon. Grazer Beiträge zur Englischen Philologie 2 ( Frankfurt a. M. - Bern : Lang, 1976); Teil 3 : Der botanische Wortschatz in altenglischen Glossen. Grazer Beiträge zur Englischen Philologie 3 ( Frankfurt a. M. - Bern - Las Vegas : Peter Lang, 1979). P. Boll, Die Sprache der altenglischen Glossen im MS. Harley 3376. Bonner Beiträge zur Anglistik 15 ( Bonn : Manstein, 1904). C. B. Bourland, " The Spanish Schoole-master and the Polyglot Derivatives of Noël de Berlaimont's Vocabulare", Revue Hispanique , 81 (1933), Première Partie, pp. 283-318. H. Bradley, ed., Dialogues in French and English by William Caxton. (Adapted fron a Fourteenth-Century Book of Dialogues in French and Flemish). Edited fron Caxton's printed text ( about 1483), with an introduction, notes, and word-lists. Early English Text Society, Extra Series 79 ( London : Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., 1900). E. E. Brandon, Robert Estienne et le dictionnaire français au XVI siècle (Baltimore, 1904). A. Calepino, Dictionarium decern linguarum. Ubi Latinis dictionibus Hébreae, Graecae, Gallicae, Itali cae, Germani cae et Hispanicae, itemque nunc primo & Polonicae, Ungaricae atque Anglicae adiectae sunt ( Lyon : Etienne Michel, 1585). A. Cameron and A. Kingsmill and A. Crandell Anos, Old English Word Studies : A Preliminary Author and Word Index ( Toronto : Toronto Press, 1983). E. Campanile, " Elementi lessicali di origine inglese nel Vocabularium Cornicimi" , Studi e saggi linguistici, 10 (1970), pp. 193-201. A. Campbell, A Supplement to An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary ( London : Oxford University Press, 1972). L. Chanbrun, Giovanni Florio. Un apotre de la Renaissance en Angleterre à l'époque de Shakespeare ( Paris, 1921). S Claes, Bibliographisches Verzeichnis der deutschen Vokabulare und Wörterbücher, gedruckt bis 1600 ( Hildesheim-New York : Olms, 1977). P. elendes, ed., Anglo-Saxon England. VOl. 5 ( Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1976). T. 0. Cockayne, Leeohdoms, Wortcunning, and Starcraft of Early England (London : Longman & Co., 1864-1866). R. L. Collison, Dictionaries of English and Foreign Languages. Second edition ( New York : Hafner Publishing Ocnpany, 1971). J. E. Congleton and J. E. Gates and D. Hobar, edd., Papers on Lexicography

435

in Honor of Warren N. Cordell ( Terre Haute : The Dictionary Society of North America, 1979). T. Cooper, THESAVRVS LINGVAE ROMANICAE& Britannica... ( London : ill adibus quondam Bertheleti cum priuilegio Regia Maiestatis, per Henricum Wykes, 1565). E. Dietrich, " Abt Aelfrik. Zur Literaturgeschichte der angelsächsischen Kirche", Zeitschrift für historische Theologie, 25 (1855), pp. 487-594, and 26 (1856), pp. 163-256. E. J. Dobson, English Pronunciation 1500-1700. VoL. I : Survey of the Sources. Second edition ( Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1968). J. Earle, English Plant Names From the Tenth to the Fifteenth Century ( Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1880). A. J. Ellis, On Early English Pronunciation. Part III ( London : Asher & Co., Berlin : Trübner & Co., 1871). T. Elyot, The DICTIONARY of Syr Thomas Eliot knyght ( London : in adibus Thorns Bertheleti, 1538). R. Estienne,Dictionariolum Puerorum Tribus Unguis Latina Anglica & Gallica conscriptum London 1552. The English Experience No. 351 ( Amsterdam and New York : Da Capo Press, 1971). L. E. Farrer, Un Devancier de Cotgrave. La vie et les oeuvres de Claude de Sainliens alias Claudius Holyband ( Paris : Honoré Champion, 1908); reprint (Geneva : Slatkine Reprints, 1971). J. Florio, A WORLDE of Wördes, Or Most copious and exact Diationarie in Italian and English ( London : Arnold Hatfield for Edw. Blount, 1598). J. Florio, A Worlde of Wördes. 1598. Reprint ( Hildesheim and New York : Olms, 1972). M.Förster, " Ein englisch-französisches Rechtsglossar", in Beiträge zur romanischen und englischen Philologie, Festgabe für Wendelin Foerster zum 26. Oktober 1901 ( Halle : Max Niemeyer, 1902), pp. 205-212. M.Förster, " Die altenglische Glossenhandschrift Plantinus 32 ( Antwerpen) und Additional 32246 ( London)", Anglia, 41 (1917), pp. 94-161. D. O.Frantz, " Florio's Use of Contemporary Italian Literature in a Worlde of Wördes", Dictionari-es, 1 (1979), pp. 47-56. D. P. Fry, " On a chronological mistake in the preface of M. Génin, the editor of Palsgrave", Transactions of the Philological Society (1867), pp. 4143. 0. Funke, " Spanische Sprachbücher im elisabethanischen England", in Studies in English Language and Literature, ed. by Dr. S. Korninger. Wiener Beiträge zur Englischen Philologie, ed. by Dr. F.Wild, IXV, (Stuttgart : Wilhelm Braumüller, 1957), pp. 43-57. F. J. Furnivall, " Pynson's contracts with Horman for his Vulgaria, and Palsgrave for his Lesclarcissement , with Pynson's letter of denization", Transactions of the Philological Society (1867), pp. 362-374. S. α amber ini, Lo studio dell' italiano in Inghilterra nel '500 e nel '600 (Messina/Firenze : Casa editrice G. d'Anna, 1970).

436

F. Gênin, L'Eclaircissement de la langue française par Jean Palsgrave, suivi de la Grarrmaire de Giles du Guez, publiés pour la première fois en France ( Paris : Imprimerie Nationale, 1852). P. G. W. Glare, ed., Oxford Latin Dictionary ( Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1976). P. P. G logger, Das Leidener Glossar Cod. Voss. lat. 4° 69.1. Teil : Text der Handschrift ( Augsburg : Ph. J. Pfeiffer, 1901); 2. Teil : Erklärungsversuche ( Dissertation Munich) ( Augsburg : Ph. J. Pfeiffer, 1903); 3. Teil A: Verwandte Handschriften und Ergänzungen ( Augsburg : Ph. J. Pfeiffer, 1907); 3. Teil Β : Indices ( Augsburg : Ph. J. Pfeiffer, 1908); Cf J. H. Kem's review in Englische Studien, 36 (1906), pp. 111-115. P. P. G logger, " Zum Leidener G lossar", Englische Studien, 37 (1907), op. 453458. G. Götz, ed., Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum : a Gustavo Loeue incohatum auspiciis AcademLae Litterarum Saxonicae composuit3 recensuit, edidit Georgius Goetz ( Leipzig : Teubner, 1888-1923); reprint (Amsterdam : Hakkert, 1965). P. B. Gove, ed., Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language. Unabridged ( Springfield, Mass. : G . & C. Merriam, 1961). H. G ruber, " Die Hauptquellen des Corpus-, Epinaler und Erfurter Glossars", Romanische Forschungen, 20 (1907), pp. 393-494. C.-J. Guyonvar, ed., J. Lagadeuc. Le Catholicon, dictionnaire breton-latinfrançais du XVe siècle. Edition de Jehan Calvez ( Trégnier 1499) Celticum 22, suppl. à Ogam- Tradition celtique 27 ( Pennes, 1975); cf the following reviews : R. Ködderitzsch, ΖCPh, 36 (1978), pp. 304-305; Κ. Baldinger, ZRPh, 95 (1979), pp. 186-188; J. Loicq, RBPh, 57 ( 1979), pp. 154-156; M . Arveiller, FM, 46 (1978), pp. 265-266. L. H., A Dictionarie French and English ( London : H. Bynneman for Lucas Harrison, 1571) ( Colophon : 1570). H. Hall, ed., The Red Book of the Exchequer ( London : Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1896). P. Haworth, " The First Latin-English Dictionary. A Bristol University Manuscript", Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, 45 (1923), pp. 253-275. T. Hayashi, The Theory of English Lexicography 1530-1791 (Amsterdam : John Benjamins, 1978). S. J. H. Herrtage, ed., Catholicon Anglicum, an English-Latin Wordbook, Dated 1483. Edited frcm the M S No. 168 in the Library of LordMonson, collated with the Additional M S 15, 562, British Museum, with introduction and notes. With a preface by Henry Wheatley. Early English Text Society ( London : Trübner & Co., 1881). J. H. Hessels, ed., An Eighth-Century Latin-Anglo-Saxon Glossary Preserved in the Library of Carpus Christi College, Cambridge ( MS No. 144) (Cambridge : University Press, 1890). J. H. Hessels, ed., A Late Eighth-Century Latin-Anglo-Saxon Glossary Preserved in the Library of the Leiden University ( MS Voss. Q Lat. No. 69) (Cambridge : University Press, 1906). J. Higgins, ed., Huloets diationarie3newely corrected, amended, set in order and enlarged ( Londini : in œdibus I.Marshii, 1572).

437

C. Hollyband, The Treasurie of the French tong ( London : Henrie Bynnenan, 1580). C. Hollyband, A Dictionarie French and English (London : T. 0. for T. Woodcock, 1593). F. Holthausen, " Die Leidener Glossen", Englische Studien, 50 (1916-1917), pp. 327-340. J. R. Hulbert, Dictionaries, British and American (London : André Deutsch, 1955); revised edition ( London : André Deutsch, 1968). R. Huloet, ABECEDARIVM ANGLICOLATINVM, PRO Tyrunculis ( London : Gulielmus Riddel, 1552). J. F. Huntsman, Pepys MS 2002' Medulla Grammatice : An Edition. Ph. D. dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 1973; DAb 34/5-6 (1973), 2597-A. F.J. H. Jenkinson, ed., The Hisperica Famina. Edited with a short introduction and an index verborum. With three facsimile plates ( Cambridge : University Press, 1908). A. Junius, The Nomenclátor, or Remembrancer ...Written by the said Ad. Iu. in Latine,Greeke, French, and other forrein tongues : and new in English, by lohn Higgins ( London : Ralph Newberie, and Henrie Denham, 1585). A. G . Kennedy, A Bibliography of Writings on the English Language, from the Beginning of Printing to the End of 1922 (Cambridge : Harvard University Press - New Haven : Yale University Press, 1927). N. R. Ker, " Harley 3376 - Cheltenham, Phillipps Collection ( ? )", The British Museum Quarterly, 15 (1939-1940), pp. 80-81. N. R. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1957). N. R. Ker, " A Supplement to Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon", in Anglo-Saxon England. Vói. 5, ed. P. Clemoes ( Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1976). J. Kerling, Chaucer in Early English Dictionaries. The Old-Word Tradition in English Lexicography down to 1721 and Speght's Chaucer Glossaries (Leiden : Leiden University Press, 1979). J. Kerling, " English Old-Word Glossaries 1553-1594", Neophilologus, 63 (1979), 136-147. J. H. K e m , " Entgegnung", Englische Studien, 37 (1907), pp. 458-460. L. Kindschi, The Latin-Old English Glossaries in Plantin-Moretus 32 and British Museum MS Additional 32,246. Ph. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1955. F. Kluge, " Angelsächsische Glossen. Addit.MS. 32,246", Anglia, 8 ( 1885), pp. 448-452. F. Kluge, " Englische Etymologien. 4. NE. PAIL", Englische Studien, 10 (1887), pp. 180. W. Knapp,A Concise Bibliography of Spanish Grammars and Dictionaries from the Earliest Period to the Definitive Edition of the Academy's Dictionary, 1490 -1780 (Boston, 1884). H. Kurath and S. M . Kuhn edd., Middle English Dictionary. Plan and Bibliography ( Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press, 1954).

438 A. Iabarre, Bibliographie du Dictionarium d'Ambrogio Calepino ( 1S02-1779). Bibliotheca Bibliographica Aureiiana XXVI ( Baden-Baden : Editions Valentin Koerner, 1975). C. A. Ladd, " The 'Rubens'Manuscript and Archbishop Aelfric's Vocabulary", Review of English Studies, η.s. 11, No. 40 (1960), pp. 353-364. Κ. Lambley, The Teaching and Cultivation of the French Language during Tudor and Stuart Times. With an Introductory Chapter on the Preceding Period. Publications of the University of Manchester No. 129 (Manchester : Manchester University Press, 1920). S. I. Landau, dictionaries. The Art and Craft of Lexicography (New York : Charles Scribner's Sons, 1984). M . Lehnert, " Das englische Wörterbuch in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart", ZAA, 4 (1956), pp. 265-323. P. Levins, MANIPVLVS VOCABVLORVM. A Dictionarie of English and Latin Wördes... (London : Henrie Bynneman, 1570). F. Liebermann, " Aus Aelfrics Graiimatik undGlossar",ASNS, 92 (1894), pp. 413 -415. B. von Lindheira, Das Durheimer Pflanzenglossar Lateinisch und Altenglisch. Beiträge zur englischen Philologie 35 ( Bochum-Langendreer : Heinrich Pöppinghaus, 1941); first reprinting 1965. W. M . Lindsay, ed., The Corpus Glossary with an Anglo-Saxon Index by Helen ifM Buckhurst ( Cairbridge : University Press, 1921). W. M . Lindsay, The Corpus,Er-,inai,Erfurt and Leyden Glossaries. Publications of the Philological Society 8 ( London : Oxford University Press, 1921). S. S. Linskij, " Nekotorye osobennosti lexsikograficeskich trudov ν Anglii XVI v. i rol 'T. El iota ν istorii angli jskoj lexsikografii", in Issledovanija po angli jskoj filologii [ Sbornik statej. Otv. red. : I. P. I W O AA], III (1965), pp. 107-120. H. Logemann, " Zu Wright-Wülcker I, 204-303", ASNS, 85 (1890), pp. 316-318. P. W. Long, " English Dictionaries before Webster", Bibliographical Society of American Papers, 4 (1909), pp. 25-43. H. Lübke, " Uber verwandtschaftliche Beziehungen einiger altenglischer Glossare", ASNS, 44 (1890), pp. 382-410. W. Marsden, A Catalogue of Dictionaries, Vocabularies, Grammars, and Alphabets. 2 parts ( London : Privately printed, 1796). E.Martin, " LPidener und Brüsseler G lossen", Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum, Neue fblge 2 (1869), pp. 191-192. M . M . M a t h e w s , A Survey of English Dictionaries ( London : Oxford University Press, 1933); second edition ( New York : Russell & Russell, 1966). A. L. Mayhew, ed., The Promptorium Parvulorum. The First English Dictionary, c. 1440 A. D. Edited frcro the manuscript in the Chapter Library at Winchester, with introduction, notes, and glossaries. Early English Text Society. Extra Series CII ( London : Regan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. Henry Trowde, Oxford University Press, 1908). J. Ε. B. Mayor, " Latin-English Lexicography", Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology, 2 (1855), pp 271-290.

439

J. Ε. Β. Mayor, " Latin-English and English-Latin Lexicography", Journal of Classical and. Sacred Philology, 4 (1857), pp. 1-44. A. Mazzi, " Ambrogio Calepino. Alcuni appunti bibliografici", Bollettino della Civica Biblioteca di Bergamo, 1 (1907), pp. 3-14. S. J. McCoy, The Language and Linguistic Interests of Sir Thomas Elyot. Ph. D. dissertation, University of North Carolina, 1933. H. Megiser, Thesaurus Polyglottus : vel, Dictionarium Multilingue ...( Francofurti adMoenam : sumpt. Authoris, 1603). H. D. Meritt, Fact and Lore About Old English Words ( Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1954). H. D. Meritt, " Old English G losses, Mostly Dry Point", JEGP, 60 (1961), pp. 441-450. A. L. Messeri, "Giovanni Torriano e il suo Dizionario Inglese-Italiano", LN, 17 (1956), pp. 108-111. R. T. Meyer, A Chapter in English Lexicography. Hi. D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1944. R. T.Meyer, " Isidorian "Glossae Collectae1 in Aelfric's Vocabulary", Traditio, 12 (1956), pp. 398-405. R. T.Meyer, " The Relation of the Medulla to the Earlier English G lossaries", in Papers on Lexicography in Honor of Marren N. Cordell, edd. J. E. Congleton and J. E. Gates arai D. Hobar ( Terre flaute : Hie Dictionary Society of North America, 1979). J. Minsheu, A Dictionary in Spanish and English ( London : Edm. Bollifant, 1599). G . Morelius, Verborvm Latinorum cvm Graecis Anglicisque coniunctorum, locupletissimi Commentarij... ( Londini : In aedibus Henrici Bynnemanni, per assigna tionem Richardi Huttoni, 1583). J. A. H.Murray, The Evolution of English Lexicography ( Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1900). A. S. Napier, Old English Glosses} chiefly unpublished ( Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1900). P. A. Nemnich, Catholicon oder encyclopädisches Wörterbuch aller europäischen Sprachen (Halle, 1791). D. O'Connor, " John Florio's Contribution to Italian-English Lexicography", Italica, 49 (1972), pp. 49-67. D. O'Connor, " Voci non spiegate nei dizionari de John Florio", Studi di filologia italiana, 31 (1973), pp. 207-246. D. O'Connor, " Ancora sui primi dizionari italiano-inglesi", LN, 38 (1978), pp. 94-98. R. T. Oliphant, ed., The Harley Latin-Old English Glossary Edited From British Museum MS Harley 3376 ( The Hague - Paris : Mouton & Co., 1966); cf R. Derolez' review in English Studies, 51 (1970), pp. 149-151. 0. Olivieri, " I prii.ii vocabolari italiani fino alla prima editione della Crusca", Studi di filologia italiana, 6 (1942), pp. 64-192. J. Palsgrave, LESCLARCISSEMENT DE LA LANGUE Francoyse ( London : R. Pynson, fynysshed by J. Haukins, 1530).

440

S. Pelegramio, Synonymorum sylva... ( Londini : Thomas Vautrollerius, 1580). S. Pelegrctnio, Synonymorum sylva... ( Londini : Sumptibus trium virorum, 15 94). J. Percyvall, Bibliotheca Hispánico. ( London : John Jackson for Richard Watkins, 1591). J. Piebsch, " Ein anglonormannischesGlossar", in Bausteine zur romanischen Philologie. Festgabe für Adolfo Mussafia zum 15. Februar 1905 ( Halle : Max Niemeyer, 1905), pp. 534-556. T. Phillipps, Fragment of Aelfric's Grammar, Aelfric's Glossary, and a Poem on the Soul and Body. In the orthography of the 12th century. Discovered among the archives of Worcester Cathedral ( London : W. Clownes and Sons, 1838). S. Policardi, John Florio e le relazioni culturali anglo-italiane agli albori del XVII secolo (Montuoro, 1947). S. Policardi, " I dizionari diGiovanni Florio", LN, 9 (1948), pp. 54-60. A. W. Pollard and G. R. Redgrave,A Short Title Catalogue of Books Printed in England, Scotland, & Ireland and of English Books Printed Abroad, 1475-1640 ( London : The Bibliographical Society, 1926); second edition, revised and enlarged, Vol. 2 : I-Z ( London : 1he Bibliographical Society, 1976). B. Quemada, " L'inventaire des dictionnaires bilingues. A propos du < Diction^ naire français-néerlandais > de N. de Berlaimont", Cahlex, 2 (1960), pp. 6778. B. Quemada, Les dictionnaires du français moderne. 1539-1863. Etude sur leurs histoire, leurs types et leurs méthodes (Paris : Didier, 1967). J. J. Quinn, The Minor Old English Glossaries in MS Cotton Cleopatra A III. Ph. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1956. R. Quirk et al, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language ( London : Longman, 1985). J. Rider, Bibliotheca scholastioa,... ( Oxford : Ioseph Barnes, 1589). J. L. Rosier, " Lexical Strata in Florio's New World of Words", English Studies, 44 (1963), pp. 415-423. S. Rossi, " Un < Italianista > nel Cinquecento inglese : William Themas", Aevum, 40 (1966), pp. 281-314. W. Salesbury, A Dictionary in Englyshe and Welshe... ( London : John Waley, 1547 . A. Salvioni, Di Ambrogio Calepino e del suo dizionario. Ragionamenti di A. S. ( Bergamo, 1839). R. Sauer, Zur Sprache des Leidener Glossars, Cod. Voss. lat. 4° 69. Prograitm des kgl. humanistischen Gymnasiuns St. Stephan in Augsburg ( Augsburg : Ph. J. Pfeiffer, 1917); cf E. Eckhardt's review in Englische Studien, 54 (1920), pp. 287-288. J. Schäfer, " Elisabethanische Lexikographie", Wolfenbiitider Renaissance Mitteilungen, 3 (1979), pp. 111-114. J. Schäfer, " Elizabethan Glossaries : A Canputer-assisted Study of the Beginnings of Elizabethan Lexicography", ALLC Bulletin, 8 (1980), pp. 36-41. 0. B. Schlutter, " Zu Sweet's Oldest English Texts I ", Anglia, 19, N.F.7 (1897), pp. 101-116.

441

O. Β. Schlutter, " Zu Sweet's Oldest English Texts II ", Anglia, 19, N. F.7 (1897), pp. 461-498. O. B. Schlutter, " On Old English G losses ", Journal of Germanic Philology, 1 (1897), pp. 59-65. 0. B. Schlutter, " Lexical and Glossographical Notes", MLN, 15 (1900), pp. 206211. 0. B. Schlutter, " Beiträge zur altenglischen Wörtforschung", Englische Studien, 37 (1907), pp. 177-187. Ο. Β. Schlutter, " Anglo-Saxonica", Anglia, 31, N. F.19 (1908), pp. 521-542. Ο. Β. Schlutter, " Zum Epinalglossar", Anglia, 35 (1912), pp. 137-141, 426-427. Ο. Β. Schlutter, " Wsiteres zu Holthausens kritischer Ausgäbe der ae. Leidenglossen", Anglia, 45 (1921), pp. 408-412. 0. Β. Schlutter, " Das Vocabularium Cornicum und seine Beziehungen zu dam ae_ Vöcabulare des XI. Jahrhunderts aus MS. Gott. Julius A II, 4 , fol. 120v 130v ", Anglia, 33 (1910), pp. 370-390. R. H. Schräm, Synonymy in the English-Latin and Latin-English Dictionaries 14401589. Master's Thesis, The University of Texas, 1950. H. Schuchardt, " Bret, eskop } franz. escope} niederd. * skop(p)a} lat. scyphus + cup(p)a " Wasserschaufel", Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 33 (1909), pp. 641-658. R. Schwartz, Die Wörterbücher der französischen Sprache vor dem Erscheinen des Dictionnaire de V Académie française. Ph. D. dissertation, Jena 1875. R. C. Simonini, " Italian- English Language Books of the Renaissance", The Romania Review, 42 (1951), pp. 241-244. R. C. Sirronini, Jr., Italian Scholarship in Renaissance England. The University of North Carolina Studies in Comparative Literature 3 ( Chapel Hill : The University of North Carolina, 1952). 6,000 Words. A Supplement to Webster's Third New International Dictionary .Unabridged ( Springfield,Mass. : G . & C. Merriam Co., 1976). W. W. Skeat, " A Bibliographical List of the Works that have been published, or are kncwn to exist in MS., illustrative of the various Dialects of English", English Dialect Society Publications (1873-1877), Section I. -General. ( A.) Dictionaries, pp. 3-17. W. W. Skeat, " Nominale sive Verbale", Transactions of the Philological Society (1903-1906), pp. * 1-50. J. H. Sledd, " Baret's Alvearie, an Elizabethan Reference Book", CSP, 43, 2 (1946), pp. 147-163. J. H. Sledd, The Alvearie of John Baret. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Texas, 1947. J. H. Sledd, " The English Verses in the Huloet-Higgins Dictionarie of 1572", MLN, 63 (1948), pp. 251-254. J. H. Sledd, " A Footnote on the Inkhorn Controversy ",University of Texas Studies in English, 28 (1949), pp. 49-56. J. H. Sledd, " Nowell's Vocabularium Saxonicum and the Elyot-Copper Tradition", Studies in Philology, 51 (1954), pp. 143-148.

442 J. H. Sledd, " A Note on the Use of Renaissance Dictionaries", MPh , 49 (1957), pp. 10-15. W. Samer, Dictionarium Saxonico-Latino-Anglicum (London : Daniel White, 1659). V. Stamparlato, " Giovanni Florio : un amico del Bruno in Inghilterra ", La evitica, 21 (1923), pp. 56-60, 113-125, 189-192, 313-317, arri 22 (1924), pp. 56-61, 116-124, 246-253. D. T. Starnes, " Sir lhanas Elyot and the Sayings of the Philosophers", University of Texas Studies in English, 13 (1933), pp. 11-12. D. T. Starnes, " Bilingual Dictionaries of Shakespeare's Day", PMLA, 52 (1937), pp. 1005-1018. D. T. Starnes andG. E. Noyes, The English Dictionary From Cawdrey to Johnson, 1604-1755 ( Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina, 1946). D. T. Starnes, " Thomas Cooper's Thesaurus·. A Chapter in Renaissance Lexicography ", University of Texas Studies in English, 27 (1948), pp. 15-48. D. T. Starnes, " An Elizabethan Dictionarie for Yonge Beginners", University of Texas Studies in English, 29 (1950), pp. 51-76. D. T. Starnes, " Ihcmas Cooper and the Bibliotheca Eliotae", University of Texas Studies in English, 30 (1951), pp. 40-60. D. T. Starnes, " Richard Huloet's Abecedarium : A Study in English-Latin Lexicography" , SPh, 48 (1951), pp. 717-737. D. T. Starnes, Renaissance Dictionaries. English-Latin and Latin-English (Austin : University of Texas Press, 1954). D. T. Starnes and E. W. Talbert, Classical Myth and Legend in Renaissance Dictionaries in Their Relation to Classical Learning of Contemporary English Writers ( Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press - Edinburgh : Themas Nelson & Sons, 1955). D. T. Stames, Robert Estienne's Influence on Lexicography ( Austin : University of Texas Press, 1963). D. T. Starnes, " John Florio Reconsidered", Texas Studies in Literature and Language, 6 (1964), pp. 407-422. G . Stein, " The English Dictionary in the 15th Century", in Logos Semantikos. Studia Linguistica in Honorem Eugenio Cosería, 1921-1981. Vol. I ( BerlinNew York : Walter de Gruyter -Madrid : Gredos, 1983), pp. 313-322. G. Stein, " English-German/ German-English Lexicography : Its early beginnings", Lexicograpgica , 1 (1985), pp. 134-164. G . Stein, " Forms of Definitions in Themas Elyot's Dictionary", in Kontinuität und Wandel. Aspekte einer praxisoffenen Anglistik. Festschrift für Leonard Alfes zum 8. Februar 1985 ( Siegen, 1985), pp. 195-205. G . Stein, " Definitions and First Person Pronoun Involvanent in Thcrtas Elyot's Dictionary", in Festschrift Jacek Fisiak ( The Hague : Mouton, forthcoming). G. Stein, " Peter Levins : A Sixteenth-Century English Word-Formationalist",in Festschrift Herbert Ernst Brekle ( forthccming). R. J. Steiner, Tuo Centuries of Spanish and English Bilingual Lexicography (1590-1800). Janua Linguarum, Series Practica 108 ( The Hague and Paris : Mouton, 1970).

443

E. Steinmeyer and E. Sievers, edd., Die althochdeutschen Glossen, gesammelt und bearbeitet von Elias Steinmeyer und Eduard Sievers. 5 vols.(Berlin : Weidmann, 1879-1922). E. Steinmeyer, " Lateinische und altenglische Glossen", Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum, 33 (1889), pp. 242-251. L. Stephen and S. Lee, edd., The Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. I ( London : Oxford Unversity Press, 1973). L. Stephen and S. Lee, edd., The Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. XV (London : Oxford University Press, 1937-1938). W. Stepney, The Spanish Schoole-master ( London : R. Field for John Harison, 1591). J. R. Stracke, ed., The Laud Herbal Glossary ( Amsterdam : Rodopi Ν. V., 1974). W. G. Stryker, The Latin-Old English Glossary in MS Cotton Cleopatra A III. Ph. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1951. H. Sweet, ed., The Oldest English Texts. Early English Text Society 83 ( Iondon : Trübner & Co., 1885). G. Tancke, Die italienischen Wörterbücher von den Anfängen bis zum Erscheinen des " Vocabolario degli Accademici della Crusca" (1612) ( Tübingen :Max Niemeyer, 1984). T. Thaïes, Dictionarium Linguae Latinae et Anglicanae ( Londini : Richardum Boyle, 1587). Ε . M . Thompson, " Aelfric's \tocabulary", The Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 41 (1885), pp. 144-152. J. Thorius, The Spanish GRAMMAR... ( London : lohn Wolfe, 1590). R. \ferdeyen. Colloquia et dictionariolum Septem linguarum. 3 vols.( Antwerpen/ s' Gravenhage : Uitgave van de Vsreeniging der Antwerps che Bibliophilen, 1925-1935). G. Veronensis,

Vocabularius Breviloquus ( Basel, 1478).

A. Way, ed., Promptorium Parvulorum Sive Clericorum. Lexicon Anglo-Latinum Princeps, Auctore Fratre Galfrido Grammatico Dicto, e predicatoribus Lenne episcopi, Northfolciensi A. D. circa M . CCOC. XL. Oliir. e prelis pyn. sonianis editum, nunc ab integro, carnentariolis subjectis, ad fidati oodicum recensuit ( Londini : Sumptibus Societatis Camdensis, M . DCCC. XLIII). E. Weisker, Uber Tweck und Einrichtung, Reime und Accentangaben, Wortschatz und Quelle des ersten frühneuenglischen Reimlexikons ( Manipulus vocabulorum. 1570).Ph. D. dissertation Göttingen ( Halle : Ehrhardt Karras, 1902). R. A. Wells, Dictionaries and the Authoritarian Tradition ( The Hague : Mouton, 1973). H. Β. Wheatley, " Chronological Notices of the Dictionaries of the English Language", Transactions of the Philological Society (1865), pp. 218-293. Η. B. Wheatley, ed., Manipulus Vocabulorum. A Dictionary of English and Latin Wordsy arranged in the Alphabetical Order of the last syllables, by Peter Levins. First printed A. D. 15 703 nou re-edited, with a Preface and alphabetical index ( London : Canden Society, Nichols and Sons, 1867).

444 Η. Β. Wheatley, ed., Manipulus Vocábulorum : A Rhyming Dictionary of the English Language, by Peter Levins (1570). With an alphabetical index. Early English Text Society ( London : HurnphreyMilford : Oxford University Press, 1867); reprint 1937. R. 0. Williams, Our Dictionaries and Other English Language Topics ( New York : H. Holt & Co., 1890). D. Wing, Short-Title Catalogue of Books Printed in England, Scotland, Ireland, Viales, and British America and of English Books Printed in Other Countries 1641-1700. 3 vols.,Vol. I ( New York : Columbia Press, 1945), second revised and enlarged edition ( New York : Hie Index Ccmtiittee of the Modern Language Association of America, 1972); Vol. II ( New York : Columbia Press, 1948); second revised and enlarged edition ( New York : The Modern Language Association of America, 1982); Vol. Ill ( New York : Columbia Press, 1951). J. Withals,4 shorte Dictionarie for Yonge Begynners ( London : Hieras Berthelet, 1553). H. E. Wiegand, " Was ist eigentlich ein Latma? Ein Beitrag zur Theorie der lexikographischen Sprachbeschreibung", Germanistische Linguistik, 1-4, 82 (1983), pp. 402-474. L. Wiener, " English Lexicography", MLN, 11 (1896), pp. 352-366. J. E. Worcester, A Dictionary of the English Language ( Boston, 1860). L. B. Wright, " Language Helps for the Elizabethan Tradesman", JEGP, 30 (1931), pp. 335-347. T. Wright, ed., A Volume of Vocabularies illustrating the condition and manners of our forefathers... from the tenth century to the fifteenth. Edited from MSS. ( London : Privately printed, 1857-1873); reprint 1882. T. Wright, ed., Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies. Second edition. Edited and Collated by Richard Paul Wülcker, Vol.1 : Vocabularies ( Iondon : Trübner & Co., 1884), Vol. II : Indices ( London : Trübner S Co., 1884); reprint ( Darmstadt : Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1968). T. Wright and J. 0. Halliwell, Reliqus Antiqus. Vol. I ( London : W. Pickering - Berlin : A. Asher, 1841). F. A. Yates, John Florio. The Life of an Italian in Shakespeare 's England ( Cambridge : University Press, 1934). J. C. Zeuss, Grammatica Celtica. E Monumentis. vetustis tarn Hibernicae linguae quam Britannicae diatecti Cambricae Cornicae Armoricae. Neo non e Gallicae Priscae reliquiis. Vol. I ( Leipzig : Weidmann, 1853). J. Zupitza, ed., Aelfrics Grammatik und Glossar. Saimilung englischer Denkmäler in kritischen Ausgaben, Abteilung : Text und Varianten. Vol. I ( Berlin : Weidmann, 1880). J. Zupitza, " Die ursprüngliche G estalt von Älfrics Colloquium", Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum, 31 (1887), pp. 32-45.