134 FRAGMENT or GLASS IN NETTLESTEAD CHURCH. It 1 - of 931:: 68 1? go lunderstand the full import of the letter I n o a isbury mentioned by Lord Lytteltom t puts before us the very thoughts which must have been passing in the minds of the Archbishop and the Welcoming monks, between Whom there had been a djf ference during the banishment, respecting certaifi e1._ sons Whom Becket had excommunicated but of ‘V1159 , , excommunication the monks had taken no heed_a gross insult to their exiled primate. He had now sent his secretary in advance with messages of forgiveness and absolution, and the joy of the meeting must have been greatly increased by feelings of 1'econei1i-ation «md 179300 after ‘l”'ti1'1‘el. The monks were soon called upon to shew their renewed devotion to their archbishop in a widely different manner. T. G. F. Of1‘3:::'l),r_:((‘-,(\pf%1lie'tStafl}>)]';ls, l?:ii'ls of Buekingham,_ Lords of Nefllesterul; being the nave Q1’ “ I pros . usu-1.1 _r 1'ep1‘esep1erl burning) \’V1ll1ln a circle of knots, in pm.‘ )1‘ H] I ‘ }:,“l(/ ii. vnl. Iv in with an eagle s head, remaining in another wimloxv . < unm. ( It 14 axle) l>1(‘l1‘ll(‘(l to lll(' late Mr. \\1nston's ‘.-‘irt of Glass Paiiiiiwr.’ 311.2! pulyhshed. plate vii. fig. 1.] n 135 THE DIALECT OF KENT IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY} BY RICHARD MORRIS, ESQ. IT has been Well remarked by Dr. Guest, that— “ The great fault of our modern philology is that common vice of theory———the arguing from too remote analogies. Our critics Wander to the dialects of the Heptarchy or to the ‘ Scandinavian,’ when they should be diving into our manu- scripts, and seeking illustrations in our dialects as spoken some four or five centuries ago. Such research may be obscure labour, and the produce not always malleable to a theory 5 but it holds out good promise of leading to the fmzfh, which will hardly be reached by the Vague speculations of the indolent and dreamy antiquary.” Here we have the enunciation of a principle, Which, if strictly carried out, would long since have placed the English language, and all that relates to its early history, upon the same footing, as regards scientific treatment, with the language and early literature of Germany. Perhaps no language admitting of strict historical investigation has received so little attention, or been so superficially handled as our own. So many are the elements that have entered into the composition of its vocabulary, so various are the changes which have in- fluenced its grammatical structure at different periods of its growth, that a sound scholar-like acquaintance with its early literary records is absolutely necessary 1 Read at the Meeting of the Archaeological Institute at Rochester. August, 1863. 136 » THE DIALECT or KENT :01‘ the thorough discussion and explanation of existin 0I']I3I1S, whether of grammar or of vocabulary. g nglish philologists have cared so little about the matter, that it is only owing to the labours of a few zea, lous antiquaries, who have estimated aright the 1 f . Va ue 0 our L ‘l 1 , ‘ . . 1arge€';1n(}17 V1rfi:':::)L11€13e(,:(:?1l;:.tt\-VG ar: npgv E111 possession of a . c 0 ion 0 ' . Which, as yet but a partial use he b nglish authois, of ~ 9 _ _ as een made, for the puipose of adding to our historical, antiquarian and lin- guistic knowledge. ’ Tl -. C‘ .- _ A ns 1V‘tll£Ll)l€ mateiial not only iepresents our lan- guage at different periods of its development showinrr tl 1.. .../’ *3 ie oss of some i 01(lS and the acquisition of others, togethci with the gradual substitution of particles and z Kl} ~' i ' _ ,- . . . ’ . fog inflexions, but also exhibits it under van. fie"/Vm'_r1‘1 *1‘;.11° Ormsa proving that five or SIX centuries ago iqlmui t0( eclts were spolfen .111 different parts of this i :”u T W liichi the term English was equally a1)p1i(jab1e_ > ‘flat ‘ 37,1 71"‘ .'. from thdéo 11: if the NO1tl1,l1()W(/\Ol,W€L§ xciy d1.ffe1~ent fleydomitb to It 501131: 110t only in grammatical in- f~« ‘-1, 11 a so in vocabulary and in the pronunciation 0 woids common to each_ mrour m3'nuSC”Pl3S,.?tI1d that portion of our early lite- moiiuments which has had the good fortune to be piinted, exhibit principally three dialects of the English 13113113‘-gt‘, (lilting a period of at least three centifries. I W1ll1]()t here enter into the georrraphical limits and distribution of these linguistic diizisions It will be S“ffi"l(‘11t f01‘ Our present purpose to speak of our old dialects under the terms Southern, Midland and N ortli— (‘ma 01‘, its tlley are sometimes designated V,7Vest—Saxon Mercian, and Northumbrian. 7 ’ The chief test of dialect is the inflexion of the Verb in the plural of the present tense indicative mood The people of the Southern counties, remaining faithful to the traditions of the old language, retained to a verv IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 137 late period not only the broad features of the West- Saxon speech, but very many idiomatic peculiarities. Thus we find the peasantry of the South, from the thir- teenth to the sixteenth century, conjugating their verbs (as their ancestors had done when they first settled in this country,) after the following model :— INDICATIVE MOOD. PRESENT TENSE. PAST TENSE. I love I lovede Thou lovest Thou lovedst He lovth He lovede We loveth We loveden Ye loveth ‘ Ye lovedzm Hi, heo loveth Hi, heo lovedeni The VVest-Saxon plural (present) in Hz is still to be heard in some of the south-western counties, as ‘they criath ’ for ‘ they cry.’ In Devonshire this usage is very common, and we find the following example in the Exmoor Scolding :—-“ Oll the nei;/labom"-/zoozlcm /lwnozircifli thee to be aveakiiig, blazing, tiltish hussey.” Traces of this inflexion may also be found in O111‘lli]]g‘llSl) Bible. The inhabitants of the Midland counties, at least as early as the beginning of the tliirtecnth century, hat: adopted a more uniform system of verbal inflexions, and instead of separate forms for the plurals of the p.1’CS(‘,]1? and past tenses, they employed the one termination em for both tenses. Thus, instead of ‘ we lover‘/2,’ etc., wr- have- PRESENT TENSE. PAST TENS}?- VVQ loven We lovedm Ye low“ Ye lovedmt He, they loven H0; they 1°V9‘l”"/ This uniformity of Verbal conjugation, perhaps, caused the Midland or Mercian dialect to be Cl10S€11 RS ti”? standard or literary language towards the latter half of the fourteenth century. It was not till the i'01?§“ "i 138 THE DIALECT or KENT Elizabeth that the plurals of verbs in en became dis- used, and Ben Jonson says truly that We have cause to regret the loss of this inflexion. . The Northern or Northumbrian dialect, influenced, it Is said, by Scandinavian influence, adopted a still more uniform mode of verbal inflexion, and employed but one form in 3 for all the persons of the singular and plural of the present tense, indicative mood, as- PRESENT TENSE. I loves ‘l/Ve loves Thou loves Yhe lgves He loves Thai loves The Northumbrians also conjugated the verb #0 be in a manner equally simple, and said, ‘ I 03, then (>3, he es.’ It has been doubted whether they said, we es, yhe es, etc. Garnett takes Tyrwliitt to task for making theYorkshire— man, in Chaucer’s tale of the Miller, say “ Ye is ;” but there is good written authority for these apparently un- couth forms. It is to this Northern dialect that We owe several peculiarities of spelling,-——the pronouns 8/16,1?/Ifiy, 25/zeir, 2‘/zem, oars, y/ours, and numerous words which have at present lost all traces of being dialectical. The Mercian of Lancashire was greatly influenced by the Northnmbrian, and we find the Lancasliire folks in the fourteenth century saying, as they still do, ‘ I love (oi love), thou loves, he loves,’ but ‘ we loyen,’ etC., in accord- ance with the. Midland dialect. “'0 occasionally find traces of what may he called an East .\lidland dialect, which exhibits a fondness for Northumbrian forms, hav- ing a tendency to reduce the number of its grammatical inflcxions, and contrasting strikingly with the more complicated structure of the \Vest~Saxon idiom.’ 1 One has only to compare the Ormulnm and the Old English Bestiary (in \Vri_«_:ht’s Reliq. Antiq.) with La3amon and the Ancren Riwle; and .l,,l21\’(‘lOCl( and Syr Gavrayne with the ‘Owl and Nightingale ' and the ‘ Moral Ode,’ to be convinced of this fact. IN THE FOURTEEN-TH CENTURY. 139 For all purposes of intercommunieation, these leading dialects were as‘poWerful barriers as are separate and distinctive languages at the present day. A work writ- ten in the Northern dialect, before it could be read by those speaking a Southern or Midland 1Cl101'Il, had to be partially translated. VVe have only to take up the work of a popular writer of the fourteenth and fifteenth cen- turies, and we shall be sure to find several vers1ons.of it ' and We may derive no small amount of valuable 1n- formation from a careful attention to the several ren- derings Which they furnish us With. As an example, We may take the common Word worry ;1 this term had originally, as it still has in Lowland Scottish writers, the meaning of to strangle. In the fourteenth century it is to be found only in Northumbrian compositions, the corresponding Southern term being str(m_(fly. In the fifteenth century, showing how pure Northern Words got further South, We find the word w0r7']/ (’w0T0w) 111 the East Zlnolian counties, and in evidence of this We , L t L O ( ' , may quote the ‘ Promptoriuni 1’arvulorum, “worowen, sntfoco, strangulo.” _ _ The words 1222M‘, ]270u_r//2, fro, were origmally Collfilml to the North of l*ln9;land, and it will be a difhcult matter to find them in any S0z,n‘I1mi’21, writer prior to the year An 1350 The corresponding VVest-Saxon forms were f];6(g»fg7- dprlg day‘/5 (dark), z1.(0l,izul (still used in Devon- , , , . , , shire), and fram (from . It will hardly be believed that the common and fa- miliar Word egg was at one time only understood in the North of England. In the fourteenth century it seems t have been confined to Northumbrian writers, and in ( L A ' . t}) my] art of the fifteenth had found its way Into bl1el“1l1(f]1§l]i1‘P l\lereian F01‘ ‘-‘5%"o"S the Southmin folk re 42. (k 4 A -— < - 1 . _ - D »'. \ '. Th. said, as they still do, ezierr, (0. ’L11‘gi‘(’?a (W W111 explain a passage in Caxton s 1 mac 7 ‘ a “ ‘ It appears in 0 Encv. under various forms. 1:-ornvlh '""“".'/~ , , . . ,, THE DIALECT OF KENT relates to Kent, seems worth quoting; and We must remember that Caxton 1s speaking of a'per1od no earlier than 1490. " And certainly our language as now used varies far from that which was used and spoken when I was born, for we En- glishmen are born under the domination of the moon., which is never steadfast, but ever wavering, waxing one season, and Waneth and decreaseth another season ; and that common En- glish that is spoken in one county Varies from another inso- much that in my days it happened, that certain merchants were in a ship in the Thames for to have sailed over the sea into Zealand, and for lack of wind they tarried at Foreland, and Went to land for to refresh them. And one of them, named Sheilield,l a mercer, came into a house and asked for meat, and specially he asked after 05/gs ; and t-he good Wife answered that she could speak no l"ren(.-li, and the merchant was angry, for he also could speak no French, but would have had eggs, and she understood him not ; and then at last another said that he would have re‘:/rcu. Then the good Wife said that she under- stood him well. Lo! what should a man in these days now write, eggs or eyren '? Certainly it is hard to please every man because of the diversity and change of language.” As showing the importance of some acquaintance with the earlier forms of our language, and the dialect they represent, and the light which the modern provin- cialisms throw upon grammatical forms, I will direct your attention to one or two points which our lexico- graphers and grammarians have wrongly treated, from sheer ignorance of the older dialectical forms of our language. In discussing such words as (£.S‘]I0}'(’, rzbacb, alizre, ((8b£’(‘]7, Cl res/2., rm'.(//2,2‘, etc., they tell us that the prefix (1, is a cor- ruption or a contraction of the Anglo-Saxon preposition on. This statement certainly disposes of every difficulty connected with the change, but does not explain it. (‘/hange of form is not always a corruption, as We shall SUC. ‘ Evidently a Nortli~country man. IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 141 In a small manuscript collection of Kentisms,‘ by the Rev. Samuel Tegge, vicar of Godmersham, we find that the common people were in the habit ofisaying “ put your hat cm” for “ put your hat on.” So in Sussex they say upcm for upon. In fact an was the genuine VVest—SaXon or Southern form of on.“ In Southern writers as late as the time of Trevisa we find it constantly employed in the sense of “in ” or “ on.” They joined it to nouns and adjectives, as we now do, but like our article ‘ an,’ it became (I when used before a Word commencing With a consonant. Thus they said “ rm eve,” “ om urth,” “ an cast,” for “ in the evening, on the earth, in the east ; ” but “afoot, afire, aright.” It was employed more fre- quently than at present, and nothing is more common than “ a summer,” “ a winter,” “ a land,” “ cc water,” “ a. I first,” “ a last,” for “in winter,” etc. The Northern dialect, on the other hand, preferred on to an, and in Northumbrian literature We meet with such phrases as “ on sleep,” “ asleep,” “ on life,” “ olive,” “ on loft,” “ oloft,” instead of “ asleep, alive, aloft.” This will explain the Nortliern forms again for again ; obovmz for above); (above), obout for about, etc? But we must now turn to the Kentish branch of the 1 This little tract, entitled ‘An Alphabet of Kenticisms, containing Five Hundred \Vords and Phrases,’ is now in the private library of Sir F. Madden, who very kindly allowed me the use of it. 2 It is also the Old Saxon form. 3 Through not understanding the force of the prefixal element a, we have nearly lost a really useful and, moreover, grammatical form of ex- pression,—-as “ the house is a.-building,” for which some purists would sub- stitute the awkward periphrasis “ the house is being built.” In the old romance of ‘ Horn Child’ (published by the Bannatyne Club), we have the following examples of this a :— “ He set him or knevvelyng And grette Wel the gode king.” (Page 297.) “ Athul fel a knee Bivore the king.” (Page 284.) The peasantry of the Southern and VVestern counties still use it to advantage. It is the local dialect of the South that explains the some- what anomalous Word av;/0. In Devonshire, llorsetshire, and \Viltslnr:-. 142 THE DIALECT or KENT Southern or West-Saxon dialect, which exhibits some peculiarities sufficiently marked to attract attention. From some few ancient authorities we learn that the men of Kent were noted for their provincial form of speech. N o sooner did a native of this county open his mouth in a mixed company, than it might be said, “ surely thou art one of them, for thy speech bewrayeth thee.” In an old tract, entitled ‘How the Plowman lear11t his Paternoster,’ a character is thus introduced:— “ He was patched, tome, and all to-rent, It seemed by his langage that he was borne in Kent.” Cultivated writers who were natives of this county often felt themselves unable to avoid all peculiarities of dialect, and thus it is that we find one old writer, who does not exhibit any very marked provincialisms, say- 1ng,—— “ And though mine English be sympill to mine entent, Have me excused, for I was borne in Kent.” If a Kent man could be so easily detected by his pe- culiar form of speech, it certainly must be worth while to inquire into the peculiarities of the old Kentish dialect, and points of difference between it and the standard idiom of the South and \Vest of England in the earlier part of the fourteenth century. At present, Kent and Sussex employ a less provincial form of language than the counties to the west of them (as I lainpsliire, W'iltshire, Dorsetshire, Devonshire, and Somersctshire), and we can hope to derive but little aid from them in comparing the ancient and modern forms. It must be recollccted that the language South of the Thames, during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, we may still hear aim;/cc for broken, agot for gotten, a_z/eat for eaten. The dropping of the participial ending in is as old as the thirteenth cen- tury. This a is evidently a remnant of the Anglo-Saxon ge, which became changed to 11/, 1', e, and (1.. So that ago is not an adverb, as some gram- mariauis would call it,but a true past participle of the verb to go. Aslune :: slain, and up./M12211: found. are as old as the fourteenth century. IN THE FOURTEENTHS CENTURY. 143 was tolerably uniform as regards the main features of grammar and vocabulary. The distinction between dialectical forms and the standard idiom must have con- sisted in the pronunciation of words common to the whole of the Southern and Western district, and in the use of peculiar grammatical forms.. Such I believe to have been the case, and I have therefore bestowed much attention upon the orthography of the remains of the old Kentish vernacular, and sel- dom have I found more consistency of form than that adopted by these writers whom I am now about to in- troduce to your notice. The earliest specimen of the old Kentish is found in the Works of Wiilliam of Shoreham, who was vicar of A Chart Sutton during the reign of Edward II. (1307- 1327). His writings consist of ‘Poems on Christian Doctrine and Ceremonies,’ the ‘Seven Sacraments of the Catholic Church,’ the ‘Ten Commandments,’ the ‘ Seven Deadly Sins,’ the ‘ Joys of the Virgin,’ and the ‘Doctrine of Original Sin.’ ‘ VV’illiam de Shoreharn was evidently a scholar, and he does not often employ very broad provincialisms,—— thus he avoids the use of v ferf and z for .3; but it is impossible to avoid seeing that he is unable to rid him- self of all the peculiarities of his native tongue. Mr. Thomas W’ right has edited the poetical remains of this writer for the Percy Society, but the edition is of little value, the editor having been unable to read the proof-sheets with the original manuscript. There is, however, a copy of Shoreham’s works among the Addi- tional Manuscripts in the British Museum, No.17,375.‘ ‘ Bound up with it is a translation of the Psalms, which Sir F. Madden ascribes to Shoreharn. I have carefully examined this translation, and can say with certainty that it bears no 2'm.‘crna.l evidence of being the work of any Kentish writer. It. is written in a Midland dialect, (Shore- ham uses the standard dialect of the Southern counties —the VVest-Saxon.) and is philologically and historically much more modern than anything 144 THE DIALECT or KENT The most important work, however, for the study of the Old Kentish dialect is the ‘Ayenbite of Inwyt," written by Dan Michel of N orthgate, a brother of the eloister of Saint Austin of Canterbury, in the year A.D. 1340. The author tells us that his work is written in the English of Kent, and is made for lewd (226. lay) men. It has been published by the Roxburghe Club under the careful editorship of the Rev. Joseph Stevenson. The editor erroneously translates the title of the ‘ Ayenbite of Inwyt’ by the ‘ Redemption of the Soul,’ but it is more correctly rendered by the ‘Remorse of Conseience,’—A yenbite signifying (/_z]ai~7z/277f2'n_r/, or remorse, and inmyt being the 2.727187‘ wit or sense, 5.6. conscience. Although Dan Michel employs the dialect of the “lewd,” he is by no means an illiterate person him- self, and he often condescends to tell his readers what such and such well~k11own words are in (rZ(4rg;7/. VVe might well compare him to a writer like the author of ‘ Poems in the Dorset .l)ialect,’—one who, although per- fectly conversant with the literary language of his day, yet delighted to converse with and instruct the rude and unlearned folks in his neighbourhood by means of the unpolished but forcible speech of their foret'atl1ers. I would now beg to direct your attention to the orthographical peculiarities of the ‘ Ay(w./2z'f(.'.' I say the ‘/if/€')lbl'I‘(e,’ because I have, for reasons already stated, not made much use of S/low’/mm, except so far as he agrees with Dan Michel. that could be safely attributed to Shoreharn. It is necessary to mention this, because it has been stated by the editors of VVyeli‘IIite translations of the Bible. that Shorehznn was author of this version of the Psalms. The mere fact of the two works being bound up togctlier does not neces- sarily require that they should be the production of one author. V 1 The ‘Ayenbite of Inwyt’ is a i1‘?tI]h‘l11tiO110f‘ Le Miroir dn Monde.’ It is worth mentioning that Hampole translated this work of Frere I.-orens into the Ya)‘/L'.s*7zz71'c dialect, under the title of the ‘ )Iyr0ur of Lewed Men.’ IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 145 . I. In some parts of England where the old language of the South has kept its ground, we find the people Saying can for cam, bond for hand, etc, As late as 1520 tSl’l1S use of 0 i'or_ a,‘ as ran/c for ram/c, was a. well-known outhern provincialism. In the thirteenth and fourteenth Centunes It P1"@Va11€d Very extensively in the Midland find S0“t_h€m Counties, but we find a less number of instances in our Kentish specimens than in any other work of the fourteenth century. The following are the only ones that I have been able to find :\_ brond brand plont plant Ghonge Change stonde stand hond han d stonehe staunch honge hang thonke thank lend land The Old F1"iSi5ma Which has been quoted in support of these forms, has brand, Izoml, land, for brand, /zcmcl, and land. In the VVestern dialects this provincialism is still retained, as dark and lorlc for dark and Zar/c. II. The N orthumbrian dialect retained, as it still (-1095, IWUIY Pure Anglo-Saxon words containing the long sound of (2., which the Southern dialect changed into 0, as—— NORTHERN. SOUTH FERN. ban 1) on 0 Cl’{LW crow ham home lam loam laf loaf The ‘ Ayenbite’ contains the following forms, which I give because of their resemblance to the Northumbrian ones. I do not recollect to have seen them in any other Southern work of the same period. bald bold lang long blaw blow inaw mow chald cold nase nose knaw know I nagt not VOL. VI. 1'. 146 THE DIALECT or KENT strang strong zang song thraw throw ZaW SOW vand found III. In Old Frisian, We find onder and 0]) for under and up. So, too, in the Old Kentish we meet with on for em, in mmeathe, ondo, for mmeathe, undo, etc. The following words are also very common, and contain 0 for 1.1, :—- bocle buckle ‘ tliorst thirst (thurst) bosche bush 8 frost trust lost lust V01 full porse purse zoster sister (suster) thonder thunder IV. In the present dialect of Kent, we have such forms as dee for day, _flc_(/ for flag, reg for my, hang for hang, mcrsc for marsh. In Devonshire, We find the peasantry saying hep and harping for cap and carping. In the Old Frisian we find bend = hand, stef = stafi‘, ster/E = star/c, weter = water. The ‘ Ayenbite’ contains a large number of words which have (3 for a. bend band kest kast berk bark leddre ladder bleddre bladder leste last blest blast mentle mantle bren bran merss marsh bres brass ssel shall chef chafi“ ssede shade clepper clapper sscp shape creft craft steve staff edder adder threll thrall ele awlg treppe trap eppel apple verthing fartliing esshe ash Vet vat gerlond garland Weter Water gers grass?’ ycrd yard gled glad zech sack hebbe have zed sad hedde had '/ieterday Saturday host hast - 1 O_ Eng, cafl’. '-’ 0. Eng. ale and am]. 3 0. Eng. _qm's. IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 147 V. In Southern writers of the thirteenth and four- teenth centuries we find such words as fist, guilt, he'll, /till, hiss, etc., Written fust, gull, hull, /cull, /cuss, etc. Our orthography and pronunciation generally coincide with the Northumbrian usage. In Wiltshire the people still say huz for his, whuch for which, lap for lip, mm‘ for fire. In the old Kentish we find the vowel e in place of the Northern 77 and the Southern u,~—as hill (Northern), hull (Southern), helle (Kentish); pit (N.), put (S.),pet The following list shows that this orthographical peculiarity is worth noticing, and is one that might be useful in determining the precise locality of some of our Early English manuscripts :— bele = bile = boil. bestle = bustle. besy = busy. blend = blind. bredale = bridal. bredgrome = bridegroom. breng = bring. gelt = gult, gilt :. guilt. helle = liullc = hill. kechene = kitchen. ken = kun = kin. ken = kine (= cows). kend = kund = kind. kess = kuss = kiss. keth = cuth = known, as in un-couth and lcith. kete = kite. leme = lime = limb. inelle = Inill. Inelk = milk. mend = mund = mind. pette = put = pit. prede = prnde = pride. reg = rug = rig = back, ridge. skcle = skill (~_- reason). stcch = stick. THE DTALECT OF KENT steng = sting. selk = silk. strepe = strip. velthe fehhe } = fulthe = filth. VOTE fere zclf = sulve = silf = self. zengc = singe. zenk = sink. ZOIIDG HOTIUC The Old Frisian has sfek= stick, br'c7?ga = bring, besides such double forms as blmda and blinda, lmlpa and /u'Z]m., etc. In modern Kentish we have /met for /cm'z‘, 22161706 for mice, am)?/ix‘ for milk, pet‘ for pit, wlwisz‘. for tzvlziist. VI. In Cooper’s ‘Sussex Glossary’ We find the eu- rious Word My, meaning “look,” “ features,” as in the phrase, “This man has the big of his brother.” Mr. Pegge gives it us as a Kentish word, and quotes the phrase, “ He has the My of him,” 2'. c. “He is like him at first sight.” This word still survives in other parts under the form (1166, 0. Eng. M66, M60, “ colour, com- plexion.” But what is worth noticing is that the Kentish word is not the “Test Saxon or Southern form N66 or N60 (Anglo-Saxon bleo), but the Old Frisian blie, bli. It is } = fur, vur = fire. } = sunnc = sin. ‘ Also used in Sussex; sec ‘ Sussex Glossary,’ by VV. D. Cooper, F.S.A. 1853. This use of e for 2' is now to be met with in Dcvonshire. The published specimens of the Exmoor dialect contain the following instances :- bed bid peg pig ded did preck prick desk dusk prent print d renk drink rep rip keend kind theng thing meend mind thcnk think mence mince tram 1-rim VVe find no trace of this orthography in Robert of Gloucester. IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 149 true that We find in our Anglo-Saxon dictionaries the double forms blio and bleohand that [die or 1222' was origi- nally blio; but we must recollect that the forms with 30, as f/'66, freond, feond, i.e.free,/r2'md,fiend, are West- Saxon ones, while frio, fr/iond, fiend are either East Anglian or Northumbrian, and bear a great resemblance to the Old Frisian and Old Saxon orthography. In Old Frisian_fr2' and If/Lri are found exactly corresponding to the Old Kentish fry (vry) and t/zri, i.e. free and three. Other examples of this kind are not wanting; the fol- lowing are the most important:— By }l3O be H61-H } learn byenno lycrn 1 1 \ ' J g Y g 00 hebe loose gry grey lyese see rave if dear 4 yeve try true niede } ‘d vly flee nyedc net b .t I >:‘..‘t l ' 5* ,r'~ye,g HT is l Hwtu darkness chlese } tliyestor choose . chyeso tiene } ( _‘1_ chyew chew tyenc ‘mg’ cryepc creep viend fiend (hepe } ace vyend dyepe VP vriend . friend chyaste . Vryend} strife . . cheaste wieved diere wyeved altar } dear . , dyere wied Weed The usual Old English forms for the Kentish byemze, bryest, claiiese, cryepc, diepe, diere, Ziese, timze, wieued are been (lien), breast (brestej, clzeose (obese), crcope (crepe), deop (dcpe), deore (duere, dare, dare), lease (Zesej, teen (fem), weaved (waved). It is probable, from the forms Izry-est, dg/-epe, etc., that these words were dissyllabic. Vll. There is a tendency in most of the Southern 150 _ THE DIALECT or KENT counties to pronounce such words as beam, cart, gate, etc., as be-am, kg—art, ga—ut or ge-at, etc. In nearly all the Southern and Western-counties the people say leap, gre-ap, for leap and grape; lee-ave and free-ave for leaf and calf. In Kent one may still hear /re-af for caéf, beam for beam, and in Sussex guilt, taiist, derzw for gate, taste, and dew. This practice not only agrees with the present custom of the Frisians, but Was, no doubt, that of the Anglo- Saxons. No traces of this are to be found, as far as orthography allows us to judge, in any work of the four- teenth century, excepting the Kentish ones of Shoreham and Dan Michel. The following list contains all the words I have been able to meet with in the ‘Aye11- bite’ illustrating this practice 2- beam } b heap byeain eam h ieap bread liyoap heap } bread brycad hyap cheak cheek he-aw how cheap leaf cloapc clepe = call lyaf } loaf dead 7 lyeaf dyad dead leas dyead lyeas i lost death 1 leawde lewd dyeath } death reave rob dyath J sealt salt deaf "y V speark spark dycaf } deaf toald told (lyaf J tear doau tynre } tear dyau l dew tyear J great veald } grab great Vyml (1 fold hoalde zeald Sold lxiealde } hold zyeald hyealdc IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 151 Occasionally we find the following forms, by which we see that ea = g :— yald (yeald) =eald = old y-arm = earm = arm. year = ear. yerth = earth. Yestre = Easter. With these we may compare the modern Southern provincialisms, garm : arm, garth = eaxrtiz, geeat = eat, geeast = east, etc. VIII. In some of the VVestern counties we hear buoy for bog, choose for close, etc. The only examples of this kind that are to be found i11 the ‘ Ayenbite’ are buone : bone, guo : go, guode = good, guos = goose. The only consonantal differences worthy of notice in the ‘Ayenbite’ are (1) the use of v for f, as vingre = finger, vinde =fiml, vat : foot, etc. ; (2) z for s, as zmzol = sand, zinge = sing, zone = 3077., etc. No trace of this peculiarity is to be found in Robert of Gloucester; and although no longer known in Kent, it was very prevalent throughout the whole of the Southern counties during the seventeenth century. GRAMMATICAL PECULIARITIE S. I. In examining Northern productions of the four- teenth century we meet with very few nouns forming their plurals in en; not more than half—a-dozen at most. The ‘Ayenbite,’ however, furnishes us with a large num- ber of examples with this plural ending :— beden petitions bryesten breasts bellen bells carton carts benen prayers chambren chambers blissen blissos cherehon churches brethren brothers , children 152 THE DIALECT or KENT clauen claws nykken necks crouchen crosses pjnen pains dyevelen devils piscn peas diaknen deacons reven sheriffs do3tren daughters roten roots earen ears zaulen souls edderen adders zennen Sins elmessen ahns Zjden sides 939“ eyes snoden pieces ""11 £095 spearken sparks l1:1,l3,en saints stablen stables lieavedeii heads Stem-en Stars liennen hens tongen tongues liesten behests tokenon tokens honden hands t1-eppen tmps herten hearts Wellen wells kenipen warriors werren wars ken k1110 wodevven widows lambreii lambs womben bellies (woinbs) loinpen lamps xv end en WOI11] (ls lenden loins wrecheii wretches 1ll"P0‘1 “PS wyelien witches ITIOSSUII IIIELSSOS \,'Vyng()n_ “ring-S inodren mothers wysen ways nettlen nettles yinpen branches , N . . _ ll. lhe genitive plural in 6128 (Anglo-§axon mm) kept its ground as late as 1340 ; “ the czposflene veet ” __ It '3 51 . ., I __. tl1e feet of the apostles, “ -we; mmzc meat’ = “ meat of worms,” etc. Ill. Adjectives still have case-endings. “ Vor alsno use the angles of hevenc habbeth grat glednesse of zinc zenegere liuanne he him repenteth and doth penonce vor ll.lS zennes, alsno the dyevlen ham gledieth linanne hi n1o3e overcome and do Valle into zenne (inn qumlm; man; and the more thet he is of grab stat, the more heth he the gratter gled- nesse huanne he him may gyly, ase the Vissero heth more blisse Vor to nime «um gmfnc Visse thane rule lift,/127m.” (‘Aye1ibitc,’ p. l9l.)l ' For also as the angels of heaven hath great gladness of a sinner, when IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 153 The article is of three genders (masculine, feminine, and neuter), as in the following example :— “ . . . be thise virtue (pacience) the guode over-cometh alle his vyendes, thyme dyevel, the Wordle and that vless.” (‘ Ayen— bite,’ p. 133.)1 1 In the North of England during the fourteenth cen- tury that was not the neuter article, but a demonstrative adjective, as in modern English. The Southern nume- rals, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, following the Anglo- Saxon forms, were sevethe, eff/hethe, nithe, tethe. The Northern numerals, influenced by Scandinavian forms, were seveml, aghtend, neglzend, tend. The Old Kentish numerals, as exhibited in the ‘ Ayenbite,’ are identical with the Northern forms, but are no doubt of Frisiaat origin. IV. The modern Southern dialects have pronominal forms, which occur frequently in the Old Kentish writ- ings, but which seem to have been unknown in the North of England. (1) Ich, I ; (2) Ha, he, still repre- sented by the VViltshire Cl,--6..f/., “ One night a was coining whoaine vroin market, and vell off his hoss into the road, (1 was zo drunk.” (3) Hinc, him, preserved i11 the moderii provincialisin an or zm, as “ I see ch,” = “ I see him.” In the ‘Ayenbite’ We meet with two valuable pro- nominal forms: (1) his (hise) = them ; hisc = her (the accusative of hi, she). Dr. Guest has discussed the origin of the first of these ; but the second, hise, has as yet been unnoticed. It is he repenteth him and doth penance for his sins, so also the devils re- 'oice when they are able to overcome and lead a good man into sin; Jand the more that he is of great state, the more hath he the greater gladness when he may beguile him, as the fisherman hath more bliss for to catch a great fish than a. little (one). . ‘ . . . by this virtue (patience) the good (man) ovcrcometh all 1118 fi<‘W‘lS (enemies), the devil (masculine), the WOT“ (mnlnlnel, find the ll“-"l‘ (neuter). 154 THE DIALECT or KENT probably a remnant of the Gothic pronoun 32? (sh (genitive 2203, dat. izai). Robert of Gloucester employ it under the form is in the following example :- “ He Wende him vorth to chirche, and bivore the rod com, and mid mek horte pitosliche is kinges crrozme nom and sotte ZS upe the rod heved.” (Cott. MS. Calig. A. xi.) “ The guode man mid the rede of his wyve yeaf his con to his proste, thet Wes riche ; the prest hi nom blethliche and hiss zente to the othren thet he hedde/’1 (‘ Ayenbite,’ p. 153.) “ Thervore the dycvel playth ofte mid the zengere, ase doth the cat mid the mouse, thanne he his heth ynome ; and huanne he heth mid hire longe yplayed, thanne he his eth.”2 (‘ Ayen- bite,’ pp. 143-4.) V.———The Old Kentish verbs exhibit all the peculiari- ties of the ‘Vest Saxon idiom. There is no lack of in- finitives in y, as lovg/, Izatg/, tlzam/£3/, wam‘g/, 2'. e. “ to love, to hate, to thank, to want.” This remnant of an Anglo- Saxon conjugation has not wholly disappeared from the Southern counties ; we may still hear the peasants say- ing mil/cg/, mow;/, zowg, etc., 17.9. “ to milk, to mow, to sow," etc.; but it would take up too much space to dis- cuss all the peculiarities of the Southern conjugations. The few points that have been brought forward go to prove that the Old Kentish dialect was an undoubted branch of the VVest Saxon idiom.3 They also show how valuable are the ancient specimens of this dialect which, fortunately, have been preserved for the use of those who take an interest in following the history of our noble language through its various phases. ‘ The good man with the counsel of’ his wife gave his cow to his priest, that was rich; the priest took her blithely and sent her to the others that he had. 9 Therefore the devil playeth often with the sinner, as doth the cat with the mouse, when he hath caught Izcr; and when he hath played long with her, then he eateth Iwr. 3 The Kentish dialect in the fourteenth century had, probably, as broad a pronunciation as Somersetshire has at the present day, and was more arcliaic than many other of the \-Vest Saxon idioms. IN THE FOURTEENTH cnivruar. ' 155 -nfortunately we have no good specimens of the mo- ern dialect of Kent. There is not even a glossary of ords or idioms in print, so that no data exist for any remarks upon the modern Kentish vernacular. Many valuable forms still exist in this county which are gradu- ally dying out; it is to be hoped that some of our anti- quaries or philologists will interest themselves in this matter. In Ravenscroft’s ‘ Melismata’ (1611) we find the fol- lowing‘Kentish song, entitled “A Wooing Song of a Yeoman of Kent’s Sonne,” which maybe interesting to some of our readers: Ieh am my vathers eldest zonne, My mother eke doth love me well, For ich can bravely clout my shoone, And ich full well can ring a. bell. My vather he gave me a hogge, My mouther she gave me a zow ; I have a godvather dwels hereby, And he on me bestowed a plow. One time I gave the a paper of pins, Another time a taudry lace, And if thou wilt not graunt me love, In truth ich die bevore thy vace. Ich have beene twise our Whitson lord, Ieh have had ladies many vare, But eke thou hast my heart in hold, And in my minde zeemes passing rare. Ieh will put on my best white sloppe, And ich will vveare my yellow hose, And on my head a good gray hat, And in’t ich sticke a lovely rose. Wherefore cease 0H‘, make no delay, And if you’le love me, love me now, For I cannot come every day to Woo. [*** At the conclusion of the reading of this paper Ro- chester, Mr. Roach Smith remarked upon the great similarity of many of the pronunciations and inflections still U1-‘USO among the DIALECT OF KENT IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. peasantry‘ in the Isle of Wight, to those which Mr. Morris had been detailing as Kentish. I have been disappointed of a note 1n illustration of this, which I had hoped to append to this paper. The subject is of great interest, as uniting with the similarity of sepulohral remains, to confirm the tradition that the J utes occupied the Isle of Wight as well as Kent, and it is very desirable that the comparison should not be allowed to drop.—-T. G. ,;.»r-x_zw:-,‘-.. w ..4. 157 ACCOUNT OF THE SOCIETY’S RESEARCHES IN THE ANGLO—SAXON CEMETERY AT SARR. BY JOHN BRENT, JUN., F.S.A. (Cbntimoeol from Vol. V. 20. 320.) The researches at Sarr were continued on the 23rd September, 1863, almost daily, until the 17th December of the same year. N o. V.——T his grave contained no relics. No. VI.——Near the feet, and about two feet three inches from the surface, was a small black earthen Ves- sel ; on the left side lay a broken urnbo, and near it, all together, as if the contents of a bag or purse which had decayed, about fifty small circular counters of bone or BONE DRAUGHTSMEN. 1 and 9, specimens of marked men; 3, conical; 4, one of the most ordinary kind; 5 made from a tooth, the under suriaee with granulation shewn below. ivory, one or two apparently made out of some aniInal’s teeth. A sword, thirty-seven inches long; a spear-head, eight inches and a quarter, and its ferule ; a Small brass