An Apology For The Study of Northern Antiquities by Elizabeth Elstob
E >>
Elizabeth Elstob >> An Apology For The Study of Northern Antiquities
[Transcriber's Note:
This text includes a number of citations from languages other than
English, and in scripts other than Roman. They are shown as:
*Saxon*
+Greek+
++Hebrew, Gothic++
#black-letter type# (German, Middle English, Old French)
Characters that could not be shown in 7-bit ascii have been
"unpacked":
edh, thorn > [dh], [th]
"ae" ligature (Latin, Saxon) > ae
eta, omega > e:, o: ]
THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY
ELIZABETH ELSTOB
An Apology for the Study of
Northern Antiquities
(1715)
Introduction by
Charles Peake
Publication Number 61
Los Angeles
William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
University of California
1956
* * * * *
GENERAL EDITORS
RICHARD C. BOYS, University of Michigan
RALPH COHEN, University of California, Los Angeles
VINTON A. DEARING, University of California, Los Angeles
LAWRENCE CLARK POWELL, Clark Memorial Library
ASSISTANT EDITOR
W. EARL BRITTON, University of Michigan
ADVISORY EDITORS
EMMETT L. AVERY, State College of Washington
BENJAMIN BOYCE, Duke University
LOUIS BREDVOLD, University of Michigan
JOHN BUTT, King's College, University of Durham
JAMES L. CLIFFORD, Columbia University
ARTHUR FRIEDMAN, University of Chicago
EDWARD NILES HOOKER, University of California, Los Angeles
LOUIS A. LANDA, Princeton University
SAMUEL H. MONK, University of Minnesota
ERNEST C. MOSSNER, University of Texas
JAMES SUTHERLAND, University College, London
H.T. SWEDENBERG, JR., University of California, Los Angeles
CORRESPONDING SECRETARY
EDNA C. DAVIS, Clark Memorial Library
* * * * *
INTRODUCTION
The answerers who rushed into print in 1712 against Swift's _Proposal
for Correcting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Tongue_ were
so obviously moved by the spirit of faction that, apart from a few
debating points and minor corrections, it is difficult to disentangle
their legitimate criticisms from their political prejudices. As
Professor Landa has written in his introduction to Oldmiron's
_Reflections on Dr. Swift's Letter to Harley_ and Mainwaring's
_The British Academy_ (Augustan Reprint Society, 1948): "It is not
as literature that these two answers to Swift are to be judged. They
are minor, though interesting, documents in political warfare which
cut athwart a significant cultural controversy."
Elizabeth Elstob's _Apology for the Study of Northern Antiquities_
prefixed to her _Rudiments of Grammar for the English-Saxon Tongue_
is an answer of a very different kind. It did not appear until 1715;
it exhibits no political bias; it agrees with Swift's denunciation
of certain current linguistic habits; and it does not reject the
very idea of regulating the language as repugnant to the sturdy
independence of the Briton. Elizabeth Elstob speaks not for a party
but for the group of antiquarian scholars, led by Dr. Hickes, who
were developing and popularizing the study of the Anglo-Saxon origins
of the English language--a study which had really started in the
seventeenth century.
What irritated Miss Elstob in the _Proposal_ was not Swift's eulogy
or Harley and the Tory ministry, but his scornful reference to
antiquarians as "laborious men of low genius," his failure to
recognize that his manifest ignorance of the origins of the language
was any bar to his pronouncing on it or legislating for it, and his
repetition of some of the traditional criticisms of the Teutonic
elements in the language, in particular the monosyllables and
consonants. Her sense of injury was personal as well as academic.
Her brother William and her revered master Dr. Hickes were among the
antiquarians whom Swift had casually insulted, and she herself had
published an elaborate edition of _An English-Saxon Homily on the
Birthday of St. Gregory_ (1709) and was at work on an Anglo-Saxon
homilarium. Moreover she had a particular affection for her field
of study, because it had enabled her to surmount the obstacles to
learning which had been put in her path as a girl, and which had
prevented her, then, from acquiring a classical education. Her
_Rudiments_, the first Anglo-Saxon grammar written in English, was
specifically designed to encourage ladies suffering from similar
educational disabilities to find an intellectual pursuit. Her personal
indignation is shown in her sharp answer to Swift's insulting phrase,
and in her retaliatory classification of the Dean among the "light and
fluttering wits."
As a linguistic historian she has no difficulty in exposing Swift's
ignorance, and in establishing her claim that if there is any refining
or ascertaining of the English language to be done, the antiquarian
scholars must be consulted. But it is when she writes as a literary
critic, defending the English language, with its monosyllables and
consonants, as a literary medium, that she is most interesting.
There was nothing new in what Swift had said of the character of the
English language; he was merely echoing criticisms which had been
expressed frequently since the early sixteenth century. The number
of English monosyllables was sometimes complained of, because to
ears trained on the classical languages they sounded harsh, barking,
unfitted for eloquence; sometimes because they were believed to impede
the metrical flow in poetry; sometimes because, being particularly
characteristic of colloquial speech, they were considered low; and
often because they were associated with the languages of the Teutonic
tribes which had escaped the full refining influence of Roman
civilization. Swift followed writers like Nash and Dekker in
emphasizing the first and last of these objections.
There were, of course, stock answers to these stock objections.
Such criticism of one's mother tongue was said to be unpatriotic or
positively disloyal. If it was difficult to maintain that English was
as smooth and euphonious as Italian, it could be maintained that its
monosyllables and consonants gave it a characteristic and masculine
brevity and force. Monosyllables were also very convenient for the
formation of compound words, and, it was argued, should, when properly
managed, be an asset rather than a handicap to the English rhymester.
By the time Swift and Miss Elstob were writing, an increasing number
of antiquarian Germanophils (and also pro-Hanoverians) were prepared
to claim Teutonic descent with pride.
Most of these arguments had been bandied backwards and forwards
rather inconclusively since the sixteenth century, and Addison in
_The Spectator_ No. 135 expresses a typically moderate opinion on
the matter: the English language, he says, abounds in monosyllables,
which gives us an opportunity of delivering our thoughts in few
sounds. This indeed takes off from the elegance of our tongue,
but at the same time expresses our ideas in the readiest manner,
and consequently answers the first design of speech better than
the multitude of syllables, which make the words of other
languages more tunable and sonorous.
It is likely that neither Swift nor Miss Elstob would have found much
to disagree with in that sentence. Swift certainly never proposed any
reduction in the number of English monosyllables, and the simplicity
of style which he described as "one of the greatest perfections in any
language," which seemed to him best exemplified in the English Bible,
and which he himself practised so brilliantly, has in English a very
marked monosyllabic character.
But in his enthusiasm to stamp out the practice of abbreviating,
beheading and curtailing polysyllables--a practice which seemed to
him a threat to both the elegance and permanence of the language--
he described it as part of a tendency of the English to relapse into
their Northern barbarity by multiplying monosyllables and eliding
vowels between the rough and frequent consonants of their language.
His ignorance of the historical origins of the language and his rather
hackneyed remarks on its character do not invalidate the general
scheme of his _Proposal_ or his particular criticisms of current
linguistic habits, but they did lay him open to the very penetrating
and decisive attack of Elizabeth Elstob.
In her reply to Swift she repeats all the stock defenses of the
English monosyllables and consonants, but, by presenting them in
combination, and in a manner at once scholarly and forceful, she
makes the most convincing case against Swift. Unlike most of her
predecessors, Miss Elstob is not on the defensive. She is always ready
to give a sharp personal turn to her scholarly refutations--as, for
instance, when she demonstrates the usefulness of monosyllables in
poetry by illustrations from a series of poets beginning with Homer
and ending with Swift. There can be little doubt that Swift is
decisively worsted in this argument.
It is not known whether Swift ever read Miss Elstob's _Rudiments_,
though it is interesting to notice a marked change of emphasis in
his references to the Anglo-Saxon language. In the _Proposal_ he had
declared with a pretense of knowledge, that Anglo-Saxon was "excepting
some few variations in the orthography... the same in most original
words with our present English, as well as with German and other
northern dialects." But in _An Abstract of the History of England_
(probably revised in 1719) he says that the English which came in
with the Saxons was "extremely different from what it is now." The
two statements are not incompatible, but the emphasis is remarkably
changed. It is possible that some friend had pointed out to Swift that
his earlier statement was too gross a simplification, or alternatively
that someone had drawn his attention to Elizabeth Elstob's
_Rudiments_.
All writers owe much to the labors of scholarship and are generally
ill-advised to scorn or reject them, however uninspired and
uninspiring they may seem. Moreover when authors do enter into dispute
with "laborious men of low genius" they frequently meet with more than
their match. Miss Elstob's bold and aggressive defense of Northern
antiquities was remembered and cited by a later scholar, George
Ballard, as a warning to those who underestimated the importance of
a sound knowledge of the language. Indeed, he wrote, "I thought that
the bad success Dean Swift had met with in this affair from the
incomparably learned and ingenious Mrs. Elstob would have deterred
all others from once venturing in this affair." (John Nichols,
_Illustrations of the Literary History of the Eighteenth Century_,
1822, IV, 212.)
Charles Peake
University College, London
* * * * *
* * * *
* * * * *
The
RUDIMENTS
of
GRAMMAR
for the
English-Saxon Tongue,
First given in ENGLISH:
with an
Apology
For the Study of
NORTHERN ANTIQUITIES.
Being very useful towards the understanding our
ancient _English_ POETS, and other WRITERS.
By ELIZABETH ELSTOB.
Our Earthly Possessions are truly enough called a _PATRIMONY_,
as derived to us by the Industry of our _FATHERS_; but the Language
that we speak is our _MOTHER-TONGUE_; And who so proper to play the
Criticks in this as the _FEMALES.
In a Letter from a Right Reverend Prelate to the Author.
LONDON.
Printed by _W. Bowyer_: And Sold by J. BOWYER
at the _Rose_ in _Ludgate-street_, and C. KING
in _Westminster-hall_, 1715.
* * * * *
The
PREFACE
to the
Reverend Dr. _Hickes_.
SIR,
Soon after the Publication of the Homily on St. Gregory, I was engaged
by the Importunity of my Friends, to make a Visit to _Canterbury_, as
well to enjoy the Conversations of my Friends and Relations there,
as for that Benefit which I hoped to receive from Change of Air, and
freer Breathing, which is the usual Expectation of those, who are used
to a sedentary Life and Confinement in the great City, and which
renders such an Excursion now and then excusable. In this Recess,
among the many Compliments and kind Expressions, which their
favourable Acceptance of my first Attempt in _Saxon_, had obtained for
me from the Ladies, I was more particularly gratified, with the new
Friendship and Conversation, of a young Lady, whose Ingenuity and
Love of Learning, is well known and esteem'd, not only in that Place,
but by your self: and which so far indear'd itself to me, by her
promise that she wou'd learn the _Saxon Tongue_, and do me the Honour
to be my _Scholar_, as to make me think of composing an _English
Grammar_ of that Language for her use. That Ladies Fortune hath so
disposed of her since that time, and hath placed her at so great
distance, as that we have had no Opportunity, of treating farther on
this Matter, either by Discourse or Correspondence. However though a
Work of a larger Extent, and which hath amply experienced your
Encouragement, did for some time make me lay aside this Design, yet
I did not wholly reject it. For having re-assumed this Task, and
accomplish'd it in such manner at I was able, I now send it to you,
for your Correction, and that Stamp of Authority, it must needs
receive from a Person of such perfect and exact Judgement in these
Matters, in order to make it current, and worthy of Reception from the
Publick. Indeed I might well have spared my self the labour of such
an Attempt, after the elaborate Work of your rich and learned
_Thesaurus_, and the ingenious Compendium of it by Mr. _Thwaites_;
but considering the Pleasure I my self had reaped from the Knowledge
I have gained from this Original of our Mother Tongue, and that others
of my own Sex, might be capable of the same Satisfaction: I resolv'd
to give them the Rudiments of that Language in an English Dress.
However not 'till I had communicated to you my Design for your Advice,
and had receiv'd your repeated Exhortation, and Encouragement to the
Undertaking.
The Method I have used, is neither entirely new, out of a Fondness
and Affectation of Novelty: nor exactly the same with what has been
in use, in teaching the learned Languages. I have retain'd the old
Division of the Parts of Speech, nor have I rejected the other common
Terms of _Grammar_; I have only endeavour'd to explain them in such a
manner, as to hope they may be competently understood, by those whose
Education, hath not allow'd them an Acquaintance with the Grammars of
other Languages. There is one Addition to what your self and Mr.
_Thwaites_ have done on this Subject, for which you will, I imagine,
readily pardon me: I have given most, if not all the _Grammatical_
Terms in true old _Saxon_, from _Aelfrick_'s Translation of _Priscian_,
to shew the _polite_ Men of our Age, that the Language of their
Forefathers is neither so barren nor barbarous as they affirm, with
equal Ignorance and Boldness. Since this is such an Instance of its
Copiousness, as is not to be found in any of the polite modern
Languages; and the _Latin_ itself is beholden to the _Greek_, not only
for the Terms, but even the Names of Arts and Sciences, as is easily
discerned in the Words, _Philosophy, Grammar, Logick, Rhetorick,
Geometry, Arithmetick_, &c. These Gentlemens ill Treatment of our
Mother Tongue has led me into a Stile not so agreeable to the Mildness
of our Sex, or the usual manner of my Behaviour, to Persons of your
Character; but the Love and Honour of one's Countrey, hath in all Ages
been acknowledged such a Virtue, as hath admitted of a Zeal even
somewhat extravagant. _Pro Patria mori_, used to be one of the great
Boasts of Antiquity; and even the so celebrated Magnanimity of _Cato_,
and such others as have been called Patriots, had wanted their Praise,
and their Admiration, had they wanted this Plea. The Justness and
Propriety of the Language of any Nation, hath been always rightly
esteem'd a great Ornament and Test of the good Sense of such a Nation;
and consequently to arraign the good Sense or Language of any Nation,
is to cast upon it a great Reproach. Even private Men are most
jealous, of any Wound, that can be given them in their intellectual
Accomplishments, which they are less able to endure, than Poverty
itself or any other kind of Disgrace. This hath often occasion'd my
Admiration, that those Persons, who talk so much, of the Honour of our
Countrey, _of the correcting, improving and ascertaining_ of our
Language, shou'd dress it up in a Character so very strange and
ridiculous: or to think of improving it to any degree of Honour
and Advantage, by divesting it of the Ornaments of Antiquity, or
separating it from the_ Saxon _Root, whose Branches were so copious
and numerous. But it is very remarkable how Ignorance will make Men
bold, and presume to declare that unnecessary, which they will not be
at the pains to render useful. Such kind of Teachers are no new thing,
the Spirit of Truth itself hath set a mark upon them;_ Desiring to be
Teachers of the Law, understanding neither what they say, nor
whereof they affirm, I _Tim._ I. 7. _It had been well if those wise
_Grammarians_ had understood this Character, who have taken upon them
to teach our Ladies and young Gentlemen, _The whole System of an
English Education_; they had not incurr'd those Self-contradictions
of which they are guilty; they had not mention'd your self, and your
incomparable Treasury of _Northern Literature _in so cold and
negligent a manner, as betrays too much of an invidious Pedantry: But
in those Terms of Veneration and Applause which are your just Tribute,
not only from the Learned of your own Countrey, but of most of the
other Northern Nations, whether more or less Polite: Who would any of
them have glory'd in having you their Native, who have done so much
Honour to the Original of almost all the Languages in Europe.
But it seems you are not of so much Credit with these _Gentlemen_, who
question your Authority, and have given a very visible Proof of their
Ingenuity in an Instance which plainly discovers, that they cannot
believe their own Eyes.
The _Saxons_, say they, if we may credit Dr. _Hickes_, had
various Terminations to their Words, at least two in every
Substantive singular: whereas we have no Word now in use, except
the personal Names that has so. Thus Dr. _Hickes_ has made six
several _Declensions_ of the _Saxon_ Names: He gives them three
_Numbers_; a Singular, Dual, and Plural: We have no Dual Number,
except perhaps in _Both_: To make this plainer, we shall
transcribe the six Declensions from that Antiquary's Grammar.
I would ask these Gentlemen, and why not credit Dr. _Hickes_? Is he
not as much to be believ'd as those Gentlemen, who have transcribed
so plain an Evidence of the six Declensions to shew the positive
Unreasonableness and unwarrantable Contradiction of their Disbelief?
Did he make those six Declensions? or rather, did he not find them in
the Language, and take so much pains to teach others to distinguish
them, who have Modesty enough to be taught? They are pleased to say we
have no Word now in use that admits of Cases or Terminations. But let
us ask them, what they think of these Words, _God's Word_, _Man's
Wisdom_, the _Smith's Forge,_ and innumerable Instances more. For in
_God's Word_, &c. is not the Termination _s_ a plain Indication of a
Genitive Case, wherein the Saxon _e_ is omitted? For example_, *Godes
Word*, *Mannes Wisdom*, *Smi[dh]es Heor[dh]*. _Some will say, that were
better supplied by _his_, or _hers_, as Man _his_ Thought, the Smith
_his_ Forge; but this Mistake is justly exploded. Yet if these
Gentlemen will not credit Dr. _Hickes_, the _Saxon_ Writings might
give them full Satisfaction. The _Gospels_, the _Psalms_, and a
great part of the _Bible_ are in _Saxon_, so are the _Laws_ and
_Ecclesiastical Canons_, and _Charters_ of most of our _Saxon Kings_;
these one wou'd think might deserve their Credit. But they have not
had Learning or Industry enough to fit them for such Acquaintance, and
are forc'd therefore to take up their Refuge with those Triflers,
whose only Pretence to Wit, is to despise their Betters. This Censure
will not, I imagine, be thought harsh, by any candid Reader, since
their own Discovery has sufficiently declared their Ignorance: and
their Boldness, to determine things whereof they are so ignorant, has
so justly fix'd upon them the Charge of Impudence. For otherwise they
must needs have been ashamed to proceed in manner following.
We might give you various Instances more of the essential
difference between the old _Saxon_ and modern _English_ Tongue,
but these must satisfy any reasonable Man, that it is so great,
that the _Saxon_ can be no Rule to us; and that to understand
ours, there is no need of knowing the _Saxon_: And tho' Dr.
_Hickes_ must be allow'd to have been a very curious Enquirer
into those obsolete Tongues, now out of use, and containing
nothing valuable, yet it does by no means follow (as is plain
from what has been said) that we are obliged to derive the
Sense, Construction, or Nature of our present Language from
his Discoveries.
I would beseech my Readers to observe, the Candour and Ingenuity of
these Gentlemen: They tell us, _We might give you various Instances
more of the essential difference between the old _Saxon_ and modern
_English_ Tongue_; and yet have plainly made it appear, that they know
little or nothing of the old _Saxon_. So that it will be hard to say
how they come to know of any such _essential difference, as _MUST_
satisfy any reasonabie Man_; and much more that this _essential
difference_ is so _great, that the _Saxon_ can be no Rule to us,
and that to understand ours, there is no need of knowing the _Saxon_.
_What they say, _that it cannot be a Rule to them_, is true; for
nothing can be a Rule of Direction to any Man, the use whereof he does
not understand; but if to understand the Original and Etymology of the
Words of any Language, be needful towards knowing the Propriety of any
Language, a thing which I have never heard hath yet been denied; then
do these Gentlemen stand self-condemned, there being no less than
four Words, in the Scheme of Declensions they have borrowed from
Dr. _Hickes_, now in use, which are of pure _Saxon_ Original, and
consequently _essential to the modern English_. I need not tell any
English Reader at this Day the meaning of _Smith_, _Word_, _Son_, and
_Good_; but if I tell them that these are Saxon Words, I believe they
will hardly deny them to be _essential to the modern English_, or that
they will conclude that the difference between the old _English_ and
the modern is so great, or the distance of Relation between them so
remote, as that the former deserves not to be remember'd: except by
such Upstarts who having no Title to a laudable Pedigree, are backward
in all due Respect and Veneration towards a noble Ancestry.
Their great Condescension to Dr. _Hickes_ in allowing him to have been
a very curious Inquirer into those _obsolete Tongues, now out of use,
and containing nothing valuable in them_, is a Compliment for which I
believe you, Sir, will give me leave to assure them, that he is not at
all obliged; since if it signifies any thing, it imports, no less than
that he has employ'd a great deal of Time, and a great deal of Pains,
to little purpose. But we must at least borrow so much Assurance from
them, as to tell them, that your Friends, who consist of the most
learned sort of your own Countrey-men, and of Foreigners, do not think
those Tongues so obsolete and out of use, whose Significancy is so
apparent in Etymology; nor do they think those Men competent Judges to
declare, whether there be any thing contained in them valuable or not,
who have made it clear, that they know not what is _contain'd_ in
them. They would rather assure them, that our greatest Divines[A],
and Lawyers[B], and Historians[C] are of another Opinion, they wou'd
advise them to consult our Libraries, those of the two Universities,
the _Cottonian_, and my Lord Treasurers; to study your whole
_Thesaurus_, particularly your _Dissertatio Epistolaris_, to look into
Mr. _Wanleys_ large and accurate Catalogue of _Saxon_ Manuscripts,
and so with Modesty gain a Title to the Applause of having confest
their former Ignorance, and reforming their Judgment. I believe I
may farther take leave to assure them, that the Doctor is as little
concerned for their _Inference_, which they think _so plain from
what has been said, that they are not obliged to derive the Sense,
Construction, or Nature of our present Language from his Discoveries_.
He desires them not to _derive_ the _Sense_ and _Construction_ of
which they speak, in any other manner, than that in which the Nature
of the things themselves makes them appear; and so far as they are his
_Discoveries_ only, intrudes them on no Man. He is very willing they
should be let alone by those, who have not Skill to use them to their
own Advantage, and with Gratitude.