The Teaching and Cultivation of the French Language in England Part 9

TUDOR TIMES

CHAPTER I

THE FRENCH LANGUAGE AT COURT AND AMONG THE n.o.bILITY

At the beginning of the sixteenth century the gradual changes which brought about the extinction of Anglo-French were complete to all intents and purposes; this corrupt form of the language lingered only in a few religious houses and the law courts. The French spoken at the English Court in the Middle Ages had remained purer than elsewhere; for centuries the kings of England were as much attached to France as to England; they had spent much of their time in France and fought for the French crown as their natural right, not as Englishmen in strife with Frenchmen. From the thirteenth century, however, English was understood, though not widely spoken, at Court. It progressed gradually until, two centuries later, in the reign of Henry VI., it was used more frequently than French. By the sixteenth century French was an entirely foreign language at the English Court, and it was round the Court circles that developed the new and more serious study of the language which then arose--a study which led to the production of so important a work as John Palsgrave's _L'Esclarciss.e.m.e.nt de la langue francoyse_. It will therefore be well to consider the extent to which French was used among the n.o.bility and gentry of the time.

The personal ascendancy of the Tudors and the pomp of their Court began to attract the attention of foreigners, and to excite their curiosity.

Consequently numerous travellers made their way to the English capital; and later in the same period religious persecution, raging on the Continent, drove many Protestants, frequently men of distinction, to seek refuge in England. What language would these visitors employ in their intercourse with their hosts? English is excluded from the purview, because at this time, and indeed for some time after, our language received no recognition, and certainly no homage from any foreigner, and but scant deference from English scholars themselves.[132]

Several foreign visitors in London have left an account of their impressions on hearing this entirely unknown and strange language spoken. Thus Nicander Nucius, the Greek Envoy at the Court of Henry VIII., says of the English that "they possess a peculiar language, differing in some measure from all others"; although it is "barbarous,"

he finds in it a certain charm and attraction, and judges it "sweeter"

than German or Flemish.[133] Others formed a less favourable opinion.[134] The physician Girolamo Cordano, for instance, when he first heard Englishmen speaking, thought they were Italians gone mad and raving, "for they inflect the tongue upon the palate, twist words in the mouth, and maintain a sort of gnashing with the teeth." The Dutchman, Immanuel von Meteren, gathered the impression that English is broken German, "not spoken from the heart as the latter, but only prattling with the tongue."

We have, however, to recollect that, among the learned, Latin was in general use as a spoken language; it was the ideal of the Humanists to make Latin the universal language of the educated world. Erasmus was able to live several years in England, and in familiar intercourse with Englishmen, without feeling the necessity for learning English or using any other modern language; but he mingled almost entirely with scholars, such as Grocyn, Linacre, Latimer, Colet, and More--men with whom Henry VIII. loved to surround himself. Still, the great Dutchman was an exception even amongst Humanists, who nearly all, at some period in their lives, forsook Latin for their native tongue. Moreover, Latin was not fluently or colloquially spoken by the majority of the English n.o.bility and gentry. The poet, Alexander Barclay, tells us that "the understandyne of Latyn," in the early years of the sixteenth century, was "almost contemned by Gentylmen."[135] [Header: THE SPEAKING OF LATIN] "I have not these twenty years used any Latin tongue,"[136] said Latimer at his trial for heresy in 1554--a striking testimony on the lips of one whose natural sympathies were towards Humanism. Some years later the great Huguenot scholar, Hubert Languet, wrote to his young English friend, Sir Philip Sidney--then newly returned from continental travel--to express his apprehension lest the young man should forget all his Latin at the English Court and entirely give up the practice of it; he urges him to do his best to prevent this, and maintain his Latin along with his French. Languet affirms that he has never heard Sidney p.r.o.nounce a syllable of French incorrectly, and wishes his p.r.o.nunciation of Latin were as perfect.[137] Sidney, however, does not appear to have considered Latin of as much importance to a courtier as French: "So you can speake and write Latine not barbarously," he wrote to his brother Robert in 1580,[138] "I never require great study ordinarily in Ciceronianisme, the cheife abuse of Oxford." No doubt Sidney voices a general sentiment in this verdict. It is increasingly clear that the supremacy of Latin was beginning to be questioned on all sides, and, while Latin remained to a large extent the language of scholars, it was not generally employed in society.

Further, when the English did speak Latin, foreigners had considerable difficulty in understanding them, on account of their notoriously bad p.r.o.nunciation. The great scholar Scaliger, who was in England in 1590, tells that he once listened to an Englishman talking Latin for a quarter of an hour, and at last excused himself, saying that he did not understand English![139] To the same effect is the observation of Tom Coryat, the traveller, who, on his journey on the Continent,[140] found his Latin so little understood, that he had to modify his p.r.o.nunciation.

At a later date, when the Grand Duke of Tuscany, Cosmo III., visited the two English Universities,[141] he was unable to understand the Latin speeches and orations with which he was greeted. A Latin comedy which the Cambridge students performed in his honour was equally unintelligible to him. "To smatter Latin with an English mouth," wrote Milton in a well-known pa.s.sage, "is as ill a hearing as Law French."

At the same time a quickened interest in modern languages generally was felt in England as in other countries. Two of these, Italian and Spanish, entered the arena to challenge the supremacy of French in the world of fashion and intellect. The real issue of the contest, however, was never in doubt. The Renaissance and the new Humanism appeared for a time to favour the Italian rival,[142] but the inherent merits of French, with its particular genius for precision and clarity, easily won the day. Those circles--often very brilliant circles--of distinguished men and women for whom the Renaissance was as the dawn of a new day, often made Italian a more serious object of study than French; but though it was widely learned for the sake of its literature, it was never so widely spoken or so universally popular as French. Italian, and to a minor degree Spanish, were indeed seriously cultivated by the Tudor group of distinguished linguists,[143] and so became a sort of fashion, which, spreading to more frivolous circles, soon degenerated into mere affectation. These dilettanti had been at a great feast of languages and stolen the sc.r.a.ps, to use Shakespeare's words. Such affectation was naturally felt to be dangerous. While Roger Ascham renders due homage to the linguistic attainments of his queen,[144] he finds it necessary to reproach the young gentlemen of the day with their deficiency in this respect. [Header: INTEREST IN MODERN LANGUAGES] Professional teachers of modern languages likewise complain of the lack of seriousness on the part of many of their pupils. John Florio,[145] for example, bewails the fact that when they have learned two words of Spanish, three words of French, and four words of Italian, they think they have enough, and will study no more; and a French teacher[146] expresses the same thought in almost identical terms; according to him they learn a little French one day, then a bit of Italian and a s.n.a.t.c.h of Spanish, and think themselves qualified for an emba.s.sy to the Grand Turk. Shakespeare's Falconbridge, the young baron of England, may be taken as a fair example of such dilettantism.[147]

Thus Italian was never a really dangerous rival to French, which had struck its roots deep into the English soil long before Italian influence reached our sh.o.r.es. Not only was this the case, but French was also widely known throughout Europe. Even in the early years of this period, the poet Alexander Barclay, himself the author of a French grammar, affirms that French was spoken even by the Turks and Saracens.

The French themselves are said to have been in love with their own language, and, as a result, to have neglected Latin;[148] when the English amba.s.sador at Paris, Sir Amias Poulet, sent to England for a chaplain for his household, he wrote: "Yt were to be wished that he had at the least some understandinge in the French tongue for his better conference with the Frenche ministers, whereof many are not best able to utter there mynde in Lattyn."[149]

We may therefore safely conclude that French was the language commonly spoken by Englishmen in their intercourse with foreigners, although Latin was sometimes used in conversation, and Italians were occasionally addressed in their own tongue. English was so little used in the Court and its circles that foreigners were apt to forget that England had a language of her own; one of them considers it a merit in Henry VIII.

that he was able to speak English! In London, indeed, the use of French was so common that several foreign observers deemed the fact worthy of note. Nicander Nucius, the Greek envoy who visited London in 1545, remarks[150] that, for the most part, the English use the French language, besides having a great admiration for everything else French--an observation which cannot safely be taken as referring to any other cla.s.s than the n.o.bility, as his relations would be almost wholly restricted to that cla.s.s. When the Duke of Wurttemberg visited the court of Elizabeth, where he found ample occasion to exercise his own admirable knowledge of French, he left on record the fact that many English courtiers understood and spoke French very well. The spread of French at the English Court attracted the attention of Frenchmen also, and several years after Nicander's account, Peletier du Mans states that in England, at least among the princes and their courts, French is spoken on all occasions.[151]

French was also not infrequently used in correspondence. Apart from such diplomatic correspondence as exists, numerous examples of the interchange of private letters in French among the English n.o.bility have come down to us. Even among scholars Latin was by no means the only medium of communication. In the sixteenth century the chief scholars of the two countries corresponded with each other, and, though Englishmen never wrote in their native tongue, Frenchmen did occasionally use their own language rather than Latin. Bacon wrote in French to the Marquis of Effiat, and Hotman, on the other hand, in French to Camden: "Me sentant detraque de l'usage de la langue latine, je vous escris cette lettre en francois pour renouveller avec vous notre amitie ancienne et correspondance."[152] John Calvin corresponded with Edward VI. and Protector Somerset in French, and Henry IV. of France carried on a voluminous correspondence in his own language with his "tres chere et tres aimee bonne soeur," Elizabeth, as well as with her chief ministers.[153] [Header: FRENCH REGARDED WITH SPECIAL FAVOUR] French was thus more than a mere accomplishment for the English gentleman, and soon became an absolute necessity for all those who desired employment under the Crown. It is true that an interpreter might be had, but the practice was looked upon with great disfavour as very unsuitable where private negotiations had to be conducted. The necessity for a knowledge of French on the part of a minister of state may be gathered from the large number of pet.i.tions and other doc.u.ments addressed to them in that language and preserved among the State Papers.[154] A rather curious instance of the favour with which the use of French was regarded in official circles is supplied by the case of a Scotch prisoner in London, who, when he desired leave on parole, on the ground of ill-health, was advised to make his application in French, "to shew his scholarship."[155] Copies of proclamations, issued in foreign countries, were frequently translated into French before being sent to the English Government; and time after time we find a lack of knowledge of French regarded as a serious disqualification for diplomatic or other public service. One young gentleman regrets that he "cannot be engaged on any work of importance as he does not know French." The drawbacks arising from an inadequate knowledge of the language appear from the case of a certain Thomas Thyrleby who writes from Valance to Wriothesly in 1538 telling him how much discouraged he is concerning his knowledge of French. He says he went with the Bishop of Winchester and Brian to the Constable that morning at eight o'clock, and that he could understand them, but not the Grand Master's answer, except by conjecture, guessing at a word here and there; after dinner he had audience of the French king and bore away never one word but "l'empereur, l'empereur" often rehea.r.s.ed; and he feels he must diligently apply himself to learn the language or the king will be ill served when he is left alone.[156]

The Tudors appear to have regarded the study of French with much favour.

The first king of this line had lived for many years in France and was strongly imbued with French tastes.[157] He encouraged Frenchmen to visit England, and appointed one of them, Bernard Andre, his Poet Laureate and Historiographer as well as tutor to his sons. There were also troupes of French comedians and minstrels who performed at Court from time to time.[158] The king always received with favour at his Court those who were fluent in the French tongue. No doubt Stephen Hawes secured the king's patronage partly by his facility in the use of this language, and partly from his really profound knowledge of French literature, of which the king also was an eager student. Yet this first of the Tudor kings belongs rather to the Middle Ages and the Old Learning than to the Renaissance.

Not until we reach the period of Henry VIII., a distinct favourer of the New Learning, do we enter fully into the spirit of the new movement. In a true sense Henry may be called the first King of England, for England was his real home, and while using the ancient t.i.tle "King of France,"

he had no truly filial attachment to the country. He may thus be taken as a fair example of the att.i.tude of the cultivated English n.o.ble towards foreign languages. He spoke French fluently though he had never been in France, and also conversed in Latin with ease; Italian he understood, but made no attempt to speak. He always addressed foreigners in either French or Latin.[159] An admirer of French fashions, he copied in such matters his friend and rival, the French king, even allowing his beard to grow when he heard that Francis wore one, and having his hair dressed "short and straight after the French fashion." When the Venetian amba.s.sador, Piero Pasqualigo, came from Paris to London in 1515, Henry eagerly seized the opportunity to inst.i.tute a comparison between himself and the French king. Pasqualigo, meeting Henry at Greenwich, writes how he on one occasion beheld his majesty mounted on a bay Frieslander, and dressed entirely in green velvet; directly the envoy came in sight, he began to make his horse to curvet and perform such feats, that Pasqualigo says he thought himself looking upon Mars. He came into our tent, the narrator continues, and, addressing me in French, said, "Talk with me a while."[160] [Header: HENRY VIII.'S KNOWLEDGE OF FRENCH]

Henry then proceeded to question him about Francis and to induce him to draw comparisons between himself and the French king. The amba.s.sador remarks that Henry spoke French "very well indeed." The campaign of 1513 supplies another example of the ease with which Henry spoke French. The English king was accompanied by Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, who later incurred the royal anger by his presumption in marrying Henry's sister Mary, the Dowager of France. On the present occasion, however, the king's knowledge of French was of great service to Suffolk, who found some difficulty in pressing his suit with the Lady Margaret of Savoy, owing to his ignorance of that language. The Duke had half seriously removed a ring from the lady's finger, and, as she particularly desired to reclaim it, and he refused to return it, she called him a thief; but he could not understand the word "larron," so she was forced to call upon the king to explain.[161]

There are extant several examples of Henry's compositions in French.

Much of his private correspondence was written in this tongue; and he also essayed to write verses in French, possibly in imitation of Francis I. Their quality may be judged from the following specimens:[162]

Adieu madam et ma mastres, Adieu mon solas et mon joy, Adieu jusque vous revoy, Adieu vous diz par graunt tristesse.

or:

Helas madam cel qe je metant [j'eme tant], soffre qe soie voutre humble svant [servant]; ie seray [vous] a tousiours e tant que ie vivray alt n'airay qe vous.[163]

We gather from Henry's spelling of French that he had learnt the language chiefly by ear.

There is a curious example of the fluency with which the king and his courtiers spoke French, in a scene described by Wolsey's gentleman usher and afterwards dramatized by Shakespeare.[164] The cardinal was among the few at the Court of Henry VIII. who did not speak French with ease.

During a banquet he was giving at the palace of Whitehall, Henry and a band of courtiers landed unexpectedly at the Whitehall Stairs, disguised as foreign n.o.blemen. Wolsey sent the Lord Chancellor to bid them welcome, because he could not speak French himself.[165] The visitors were introduced, and pa.s.sed for a time as foreigners, the Lord Chancellor acting as their interpreter to Wolsey. At last the royal joker and his companions disclosed their ident.i.ty amidst a tumult of exclamations, and then joined in the festivities.[166]

The ladies of the Court rivalled the n.o.blemen in their knowledge of French. When the French amba.s.sadors with their brilliant suite, who had come to England for the ratification of peace in 1514, were entertained in great state at Greenwich, all the ladies and gentlewomen were able to converse in good French with their French partners, "which delighted them much to heare the Ladies speake to them in their owne language."[167] It is not surprising, therefore, to find French holding an important place in the education of women of high birth. The princess Mary Tudor, one of the most attractive figures at the English Court, had, like the king her brother, been early initiated in the difficulties of the French language.[168] At the age of twelve she p.r.o.nounced in French her betrothal vows to the Prince of Castile (1513); and when it fell to her lot to marry Louis XII. of France, she continued still more to apply herself to the study of the language. She was able to write to her future husband in his own tongue,[169] and even occasionally made use of it in her correspondence with her brother, the English king.

[Header: FRENCH AMONG THE LADIES]

Henry's first queen did little to forward French tastes and never modified her natural preference for all things Spanish, but with the advent of Queen Anne Boleyn French acquired a powerful and enthusiastic patroness. Anne was entirely French by education and tastes. She had been brought up by a French governess,[170] and had from an early age used the French language in her correspondence with her father during his absences at the Court and elsewhere. It was her fluency in this language which led to her rapid advancement on her arrival at Court. She was soon chosen to accompany the king's sister Mary to France, and just before her appointment wrote to her father in French, telling him that the presence of the Queen of France would inspire her with a still greater desire to speak French well.[171] Anne stayed in France several years, first in the service of Mary during the few months she was Queen of France, then in that of her successor, Queen Claude, consort of Francis I., and finally in the more lively household of Margaret of Alencon, afterwards Queen of Navarre. On her return to the English Court she became maid of honour to Queen Katherine, and her skill in dress and her French manners[172] did much to promote the taste for French fashions. The famous Elizabethan antiquary Camden a.s.serts that Anne's French jollity first attracted to her the notice of Henry. At any rate the courtship was largely carried on in French. Out of the seventeen love letters of Henry to Anne Boleyn, which are preserved in the Vatican Library, more than half are in French.[173] One of these may be quoted as an example of the English king's powers in French prose. It was written to Anne during one of the absences she deemed expedient to make from the Court:

Ma Maitresse et amie, moy et mon coeur s'en remettent en vos mains, vous suppliant les avoir pour recommander a votre bonne grace, et que par absence votre affection ne leur soit diminue. Car pur augmenter leur peine ce seroit grande pitie, car l'absence leur fait a.s.sez, et plus que jamais je n'eusse pense ... vous a.s.seurant que de ma part l'ennuye de l'absence deja m'est trop grande. Et quand je pense a l'augmentation d'iceluy que par force faut que je soufre il m'est presque intollerable, s'il n'estoit le ferme espoir que j'aye de votre indissoluble affection vers moi, et pour le vous rementevoir alcune fois cela, et voyant que personellement je ne puis estre en votre presence, chose la plus approchante a cela qui m'est possible au present, je vous envoye, c'est-a-dire ma picture mise en braisselettes a toute la devise que deja scavez, me souhaitant en leur place quant il vous plairoit. C'est de la main de--Votre serviteur et amy,

H. R.

Of Henry's other queens, Jane Seymour and Katherine Howard were both ardent admirers of the French language. The former had, like Anne Boleyn, completed her education at the French Court. Henry's chief objection to Anne of Cleves was her lack of French refinements. We know from the French amba.s.sador Marillac that Henry was ill pleased at Anne's German costume and made her dress in the French style,[174] which, according to the same authority, had been favoured by Queen Katherine Howard and all her ladies. Moreover, the new queen could speak neither French[175] nor English, and her own language was displeasing to the king's ears; consequently he refused to converse much with her by means of an interpreter.[176] As for Katharine Parr, she was one of the most distinguished linguists of her time, and did much to encourage the studies of the royal family.

French was one of the princ.i.p.al studies of Henry VIII.'s children. It appears to have been the only modern foreign language with which Edward VI. was acquainted; he is said to have been "in the French and Latin Tongues singularly perfect."[177] Mary, on the other hand, knew Spanish as well as she did French. This is, however, accounted for by the fact that she was early destined to become the wife of the Emperor Charles V. [Header: FRENCH STUDIED IN THE ROYAL FAMILY] The emperor had even tried to persuade Henry to allow his daughter to be brought up in Spain.

His request was refused, but a promise was given that the princess should be educated in all points as a Spanish lady.[178] In addition to this, her mother, Katherine of Aragon, superintended her early education, and her attendants were all Spanish. Thus Spanish was for a time almost her native tongue. Yet French was by no means neglected, especially after the Spanish marriage was broken off. Fresh impetus was given to this study by the possibility of a French match, when in 1518 negotiations for a union with the Dauphin, son of Francis I., were set on foot. On the testimony of Marillac, Mary spoke and wrote French well; the amba.s.sador had seen letters of hers written in French at the time of her mother's divorce.[179] The princess was also well acquainted with Latin, and understood Italian, though, like many others, she did not attempt to speak it.[180]

Elizabeth alone of the royal family spoke Italian with almost as much ease as she did French.[181] "French and Italian she speaks like English," wrote her tutor, Roger Ascham, "Latin with fluency, propriety, and judgment"; and in addition she had some knowledge of Greek. When queen, she retained her early fancy for Italian, and prided herself on using no other language in the presence of Italians.[182] The Scotch amba.s.sador, Sir James Melville, a very competent judge, remarks that she spoke it "raisonable weill."[183] French, however, was her usual means of intercourse with other foreigners, even when, like Melville, they spoke English. The queen commended Melville's French. "She said my French was gud," he writes in his memoirs, where he likewise gives his own opinion of the queen's attainments in the language: "hir Maiestie culd speak as gud Frenche as any that had never bene out of the contrie, but yet she laiketh the use of the Frenche court language, quhilk was frank and schort and had oft tymes twa significations, quhilk discreit and famylier frendes tok always in the best part."[184] If not idiomatic, the queen's French is generally allowed to have been fluent.

Her accent is reported to have been harsh and unpleasing; she spoke with a drawl, and, according to M. Drizanval, resident in London for the French king,[185] she constantly repeated the phrase "_paar Dieu, paar maa foi_" in a ridiculous tone. Another visitor, the Duke of Wurttemberg, records that he once heard her deliver an appropriate speech in French,[186] which, as usual, was the language in which he addressed her. Towards the end of her reign the queen still practised the use of French and Italian. In 1598 the German Hentzner, travelling in England, describes how he saw Elizabeth "as she went along in all her State and magnificence," and how "she spoke very graciously first to one then to another (whether foreign ministers or those who attend for different reasons) in English, French, and Italian."[187] She also wrote French with some ease. One of her earliest literary efforts was a translation from the French of Margaret of Navarre's _Miroir de l'Ame pecheresse_. She likewise composed devotions and prayers in French--a habit which she retained after she had been queen for many years. At the time when her marriage with the Duke of Alencon, her "little frog," as she calls him, was under discussion, the queen compiled a curious little volume, containing six prayers, written on vellum in a very neat hand; in addition to devotions in French and English there are others in Italian, Latin, and Greek. In the front of this work there is a miniature of the Duke, and at the end, one of Elizabeth.[188] Other examples of her compositions in French are found in her correspondence, where this language holds a considerable place.

It thus appears that the majority of the English n.o.bility and gentry spoke and understood French at least tolerably well. [Header: FRENCH TUTORS AND FRENCH GRAMMARS] We are led to ask how they came by their knowledge, and what facilities there were in England for learning French, seeing that many of them never visited France. In the sixteenth century private tuition played a large part in the education of the gentry; and the professional tutor was, in many cases, a Frenchman, who would naturally further the study of his native tongue. The Court itself encouraged the custom of employing French tutors by engaging several in its midst; and as, at this time, the Court became a powerful factor in English social life, and the chief means of entering the service of the State, n.o.blemen and gentlemen wishing to figure on the social stage endeavoured to adapt themselves to Court requirements. French tutors were to be found in all the chief families of the time. etienne Pasquier remarks that there was no n.o.ble family in England without its French tutor to instruct the children in the French language.[189] This condition of things was still further developed a few years later when religious persecution in France and the Netherlands drove increasingly large numbers of Protestant refugees to take asylum in England. All traces of the majority of these tutors have been lost; those of whom anything is known were, for the most part, either the authors of manuals for teaching French, or had won repute as writers or Humanists before leaving their native land.

One of these Humanists was Bernard Andre, familiarly called "Master Barnard," the blind poet--an infirmity to which he frequently refers. He was a native of Toulouse, and probably came to England with Henry VII., his patron.[190] It is a curious fact that soon after his accession Henry appointed this Frenchman, author of verses in French and Latin but never a line in English, Poet Laureate of England. In addition to this he bestowed on him repeated marks of favour. For a time Andre was engaged as a tutor at Oxford, and in 1496 was chosen as governor to Prince Arthur, and probably had much to do with the education of his brother, afterwards Henry VIII. Appointed Historiographer Royal, he began in this capacity to write his patron's life. Like so many other men of education, Andre was in Holy Orders; he received preferment from time to time, and was finally presented to the living of Guisnes near Calais, which he resigned in 1521, having attained an "extreme old age."

In the early sixteenth century, as in the Middle Ages, England took the initiative in the production of French grammars.[191] The numbers which appeared are so many testimonies to Englishmen's interest in the French language. The chief and best known of these grammars is the great work of John Palsgrave (1530), already mentioned, which stands out in contrast with the slight treatises which had previously appeared on the subject in England. Considering the time when it was written and the irregular and unsettled condition of the language with which it deals, it is truly remarkable for its fulness and comprehensiveness. Almost alone of its predecessors and its immediate successors, it answered more than a merely temporary and professional purpose, and is still of very great value to the student of the English and French languages at that time, and a great storehouse of obsolete words in both languages.

Perhaps the very reason which makes it so valuable to the student of to-day hindered its success in the sixteenth century; most students of French then preferred the shorter and more practical manuals. Palsgrave had a very exalted idea of the French tongue; he desired to place it on a level with the "three perfect tonges"--Latin, Greek, and Hebrew--and to make it a fourth and cla.s.sical tongue, by drawing up "absolute" rules for its use.

Palsgrave's grammar acquires additional importance from the fact that no similar work had been produced in France. It is the first systematized attempt to formulate rules for the French language, or indeed for any modern tongue. Only one year later, however, Sylvius or Dubois published his _In Linguam Gallicam Eisagoge_ (1531). In the address to Henry VIII., which precedes his work, Palsgrave speaks of the "great nombre of clerkes, whiche before season of this mater have written nowe sithe the beginnyng of your most fortunate and most prosperous raigne." All these "clerkes," he says, have treated chiefly of two things, which they judged specially useful to the English--the p.r.o.nunciation of French, and "wherein the true a.n.a.logie of the two tongues did rest." [Header: BARCLAY'S "INTRODUCTORY"] No doubt many of these treatises were in ma.n.u.script and are among the lost treasures of the sixteenth century.

Yet some have come down to us. Palsgrave mentions three writers by name, Alexander Barclay, Petrus Vallensys, and Giles Duwes, copies of whose works are still in existence.

The earliest of these grammars--so far as is known the first French grammar ever printed--was the work of Alexander Barclay, well known as a prolific writer and poet, who devoted much of his time to translation and did much to make contemporary French literature known in England.

Barclay had spent a time "full of foly and unprofytable stody" at some university, possibly Paris; he had travelled, and was well acquainted with French; from his youth upwards, he says, he had been exercised in the two languages of French and English. It was late in his literary career, when he had "withdrawen" his pen from its "olde dylygence," that he undertook to compose a grammar of the French language, at the request of the Duke of Norfolk, Lord Treasurer of England, and of "certain other gentlemen." The work appeared in 1521[192] under the t.i.tle of _Here begynneth the introductory to wryte and to p.r.o.nounce frenche compyled by Alexander Barclay, compendiously at the commandement of the right hye excellent and myghty prynce, Th. duke of Northfolke_. The printer, Robert Coplande, himself a good French scholar, composed some lines on the coat of arms of the Duke in French, and printed them at the beginning of the book; at the end he placed a translation of Lambert Danneau's _Traite des Danses_, also from his own pen.[193]

Barclay's endeavour is to make his grammar as short and concise as possible; his rules, so far as they go, are stated very clearly; he plunges straight away into his subject without any preliminary observations: "_je_ in frenche," he begins, "is as moche to say in english as I, _tu_, thou, _il_, he, _nous_, _vous_, _ilz_ or _els_: we may use sometyme _ceux_ for this worde _ilz_. If we answere to a question by this worde 'I' usynynge no verbe withall then shall not '_ie_' be set for 'I' but '_moy_,' as in this example, '_qui fist ce livre_' ... If I sholde answere saynge I, addynge no verbe withall, I must say '_moy_,' and not '_ie_.'" After giving similar rules for the second person singular, he proceeds to explain how, when the words _nous_, _vous_, _ilz_ are placed before a verb beginning with a consonant, their last consonant is not p.r.o.nounced, although it remains in the spelling; but if they come before a verb beginning with a vowel, the consonants are p.r.o.nounced. He then turns to the conjugation of the two auxiliaries and some of the most common irregular verbs, to show "how these p.r.o.nouns are ioyned with verbes." On the back of folio 4 he begins his "introductory of orthography or true wrytynge wherby the diligent reder may be infourmed truly and perfytely to wryte and p.r.o.nounce the Frenche tunge after the dyvers customes of many contress of France." Barclay, then, does not adopt an exclusive att.i.tude towards provincial accents; he rather calls attention to them,[194] though probably merely stating facts and drawing distinctions with no intention of teaching provincial forms. Palsgrave, on the other hand, deals only with the French spoken between the Seine and the Loire, which he regarded as the only pure French. Barclay's att.i.tude to dialectal forms may possibly be explained by the fact that he transcribed freely from the mediaeval treatises, especially the _Donait francois_ of John Barton. His debt was early noted by Palsgrave, who wrote: "I have sene an olde boke written in parchment, in all thynges lyke to his sayd _Introductory_, whiche, by conjecture, was not unwritten this hundred yeares."[195] So freely, indeed, and so carelessly did Barclay use his sources, that he did not even trouble to modernize the spelling, which contains many obsolete forms; in this connexion Palsgrave, who criticizes Barclay very severely when occasion arises,[196] remarks on his use of _k_ for _c_.

Having exemplified the p.r.o.nunciation of some of the French letters by comparison with English sounds,[197] Barclay suddenly[198] pa.s.ses to the consideration of the number and gender of nouns,[199] besides supplying a short list of nouns beginning with the first two letters of the alphabet. After this digression he concludes his observations on the p.r.o.nunciation,[200] and proceeds to give an alphabetical vocabulary of nouns,[201] adjectives and verbs, apparently the earliest known attempt at an alphabetical French-English vocabulary; the earlier method of arranging words under headings is discarded, though it continued to be the usual form adopted in most French grammars until the end of the eighteenth century. Barclay's vocabulary consists of a list of words pure and simple, with no indication of gender or flexions. The _Introductory_ ends with lists of ordinal numerals, days, seasons, and so on, together with words of learned origin common to both languages "amonge eloquent men," and, last of all, pieces of prose composition in both French and English, arranged in alternate lines.[202]

As is usual in these early grammars, there is an obvious lack of orderly arrangement, and the work, as a whole, gives the impression of being a collection of rough notes rather than a carefully planned treatise.

Barclay does not, however, make any claim to completeness, nor pretend to lay down "absolute" rules as Palsgrave claimed to do. He shared the opinion, common at that time among Frenchmen, that it was impossible to formulate anything like adequate rules for the French language. The sketchy nature of his rules may be judged by that given for the position of the objective p.r.o.noun: "oft times that thynge whiche cometh before the verbe in Englyshe commyth after it in frenche as il m'a fait tort ... je ne me puis lever." He was of opinion that rules were not of much use in learning French: that language is best learnt by "custome and use of redynge and spekynge, by often enquirynge and frequentynge of company of frenchmen and of suche as have perfytnes in spekynge the sayd language." This opinion prevailed throughout the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in England, and, as a result, rules are reduced to a minimum in manuals for teaching French.

"Who so desyreth to knowe more of the sayd language, must provyde for mo bokes made for the same intent," Barclay notes at the end of his short and interesting treatise. Charles, Duke of Suffolk, the husband of Mary, sister to Henry VIII. and Dowager Queen of France, was soon to make the necessary provision. This "syngular good lorde," says Palsgrave, "by cause that my poore labours required a longe tracte of tyme, hath also in the meane season encouraged maister Petrus Vallensys, scole maister to his excellent yong sonne the Erle of Lyncolne to shewe his lernynge and opinion on this behalfe." Such was the origin of the _Introductions in Frensche for Henry the Yonge Erle of Lyncoln (childe of greate esperaunce) sonne of the most n.o.ble and excellent princesse Mary (by the grace of G.o.d, queen of France etc.)_,[203] which is undated and anonymous, but clearly the work of Petrus Vallensys or Pierre Valence, French tutor to the Earl of Lincoln, and must have been written sometime in the third decade of the century.[204] Valence is said to have taught French after a "wonderesly compendious facile prompte and ready waye,"[205] and Gregory Cromwell, whom he also counted among his pupils, is reported to have made good progress under his direction. [Header: PIERRE VALENCE, TEACHER OF FRENCH] Pierre Valence was one of the natives of Normandy, so numerous in England at this time that the fact was commented on by etienne Perlin, a French priest who visited England at the end of the reign of Edward VI. He describes them as being "du tout tres mechans et mauditz Francois," worse than all the English, which, according to him, is a very grave charge.[206] The date at which Valence came to England is unknown, but he is said to have studied at Cambridge in or about 1515.[207] He was in all probability a refugee for religious reasons. He is known to have held Lutheran opinions, and, whilst at Cambridge, caused a disturbance by defacing a copy of the Pope's general indulgence, which had been set up over the gates of the schools. Vigorous but ineffectual attempts were made to discover the writer, against whom the Chancellor p.r.o.nounced sentence of excommunication. Valence is alleged finally to have acknowledged the act as his, to have expressed contrition, and to have been absolved. There are several points of contact between this man and his greater contemporary, John Palsgrave: both were students at Cambridge, possibly at the same time, though Palsgrave was the senior; both had as their pupil the son of Mr. Secretary Cromwell--the one for French and the other for Latin; both were proteges of the Dowager Queen of France (sister of Henry VIII. and Palsgrave's pupil for French) and of her husband the Duke of Suffolk. In 1535 Valence received a grant of letters of denization,[208] and ultimately became domestic chaplain and almoner to Dr. Goodrich, Bishop of Ely, and appears to have maintained this position under the bishop's successor. He was still living in 1555, since, in that year, he visited some heretics in Ely jail, and conjured them to stand loyally by the truth of the Gospel.[209]

Among the works of "dyvers clerkes" on the French language, to which Palsgrave refers, is probably to be reckoned a short treatise bearing the date 1528. This work is only known by a fragment consisting of two leaves now preserved in the library at Lambeth.[210] These pages are of quarto size and bear the signature "B. B." The right-hand page is in French, the left in English; the former is in Roman characters, the latter in black letter. Although these two pages contain the date, and the last is not full, they do not appear to be the end of the work, as the writer refers to what is to come hereafter.[211] One gathers from internal evidence that the author was a foreigner--no doubt a Frenchman.

He speaks, for instance, of the "gentz Englois" as though he was not one of them; and it appears to be quite certain that the work was originally composed in French, and translated into English rather carelessly, and probably by another hand, for in the version it is rendered almost unintelligible by the translation of the French ill.u.s.trative examples as well as the text itself.

The contents are of a light and entertaining character. The author holds that many rules do but "trouble and marre" the understanding. He counsels students rather to follow the example of good writers as likely to be more helpful.

He treats entirely of the p.r.o.nunciation, and devotes special attention to the difficulties of the English,[212] laying emphasis on the importance of placing the accent on the right syllable. The rules are put in an amusing way, thus: "_a_ should be p.r.o.nounced fro the botom of the stomake and all openly, _e_ a lytell higher in the throte there properly where the Englishman soundeth his _e_; _i_, in the roundnesse of the lippes; _u_, in puttynge a lytell of wynde out of the mouthe."