we must now consider and see what we can learn from the epigraph. this was the cue whereby hickes introduced the jewel into the argument of his dissertatio epistolaris, and there gave us the cream of the discussions which had been developed in the space of twelve years from the discovery. observing that in a saxon inscription which dr. hans sloane had communicated to the philosophical transactions (no. 247) only two letters of anglo-saxon form occurred, the c and the g, he proceeded to describe and discuss the jewel in all the points of view which up to that time had occupied the attention of the curious. the forms to which he adverted were the angular c and g, which however are rather epigraphic than saxonic forms. these11 square letters occur (as mr. falconer madan informs me) in the inscriptions of the sixth and seventh centuries in gaul, spain, and britain. hickes added that all the other letters of the epigraph were in ordinary roman characters[4]:
aelfred mec heht gewyrcan
in fact there was only one place where a distinctly saxon character might have come in, namely in the place of the w, which instead of the runic wên (?) is composed of two roman v’s. there is no place for the runic thorn (t).
he had been pursuing an argument, of which the aim was to show that from the time of alfred the characteristic features of anglo-saxon writing were less used, being superseded by gallic or italic forms. he attributes the change to the teachers which the king had drawn from gaul. that such a change was taking place in alfred’s time is quite manifest, but its12 beginnings were further back; the taste for frankish fashions having been introduced by his grandfather ecgberht, who had passed years of exile at the court of charlemagne. doubtless the movement grew under the influence of alfred, who not only had visited rome, but in all probability had resided there for some years.
if now passing from the alphabetic characters we consider the syntax of this sentence, we shall find that it varies so widely from our habits of speech at the present time as to furnish something like a measure of the intervening period, and as it were to render some account of the lapse of a thousand years. let us begin by translating the sentence verbally with the minimum of change, retaining the selfsame words in their modern guise. on this plan the sentence will run thus: ‘alfred me hight work;’ where the baldness of the diction exhibits roughly the gulf there is between this epigraph and our present usage. each word is english, but the sentence is far from being so. this great contrast is the result of a combination of causes, and it may be resolved into four chief13 movements which have slowly operated during the long interval.
a change has taken place in the collocation of words in forming a sentence. the governed pronoun stands in a place where it is now inadmissible: the present habit of the language requires that the pronoun ‘me’ should come in after its governing verb. if we make this change, we shall see that the sentence will become a trifle more like english, thus: ‘alfred hight work me.’
another movement is that which in process of time takes place in the usage of words. there is a fashion in the choice of words for the clothing of our ideas, and that fashion changes sometimes capriciously and fitfully, but for the most part so slowly and gradually that it takes an era of time to make the change conspicuous. words are liable to this kind of alteration in various degrees, and this inequality of change is observable even in a sentence of four words. the verb heht, hight, has undergone so great a change of sense that to the general reader it is apt to be unintelligible[5]. 14 but while this verb has altered greatly, the verb ‘work’ has altered little. still, it has altered, and it is no longer the right word for its place.
the remaining two words have in usage undergone no change at all. the pronoun mec has suffered alteration in form by dropping a consonant, but it is absolutely unchanged in its application. indeed, it may be stated as a general law, that pronouns as a class are among the slowest of words to admit semantic change.
nevertheless there is a group of words which are still more unchangeable in signification, and these are the proper nouns. external changes of form they do admit, but not the internal change of sense. the name ?lfred is the form prevalent on the coinage of his reign, but there are variations, thus: ?lfred, ?lbred, elfred, elfered; and there is the form alfred, which has become established in modern english in consequence of the fact that our earliest popular histories of the king were derived from latin books, in which language his name was commonly spelt alfredus. but15 whatever changes may pass over the visible representation of the word, there is no alteration possible in the relation between this word and the memory of that royal person whose proper name it was.
if now we remove the words that have suffered a semantic change, and substitute those which at the present time seem most natural, the sentence will take this form: ‘alfred ordered make me;’ and thus it approaches another step towards the present manner of our speech.
the third movement to be noticed is that from the flexional to the phrasal method of syntax. the word gewyrcan is a flexional verb, the last syllable, -an, being the sign of the infinitive mood, and indicating the syntactical function of that word in the sentence. by slow degrees this method of syntax fell out of use, and another way came up of expressing the same function. instead of the syllable -an at the end of the verb, a little word, ‘to,’ was set before the verb, with the same effect of expressing the infinitive mood. if now we add this change to the other modifications of our16 sentence, we shall bring it considerably nearer to current speech, thus: ‘alfred ordered to make me.’ but still it wants something to reduce it into the shape which we can recognize as modern english.
the fourth and last change which we must note in the habits of our speech is the great extension of the passive verb, and particularly in the infinitive mood. many infinitive phrases which were once cast in the active have been changed to the passive, and a lingering survival of the active formula may be observed to have a peculiar and exceptional air. we feel this in the phrase, ‘the reason is not far to seek.’ a more familiar example may be seen on the boards of the house agents. some of these boards say ‘house to let,’ while others prefer ‘house to be let,’—the one is homely and native english, the other is modish and reminds us of the schoolmaster. the same authority will guide us to bring our legend up to date, and stamp our version with the mint of the nineteenth century, thus: ‘alfred ordered me to be made.’
in the above analysis it has been necessary17 to depart in some measure from the course of nature by exhibiting in succession a group of changes which are due to processes more or less simultaneous. this accumulation of gradual changes furnishes a measure, partly scientific, partly sentimental, of the wide interval that separates us from the time when this epigraph was curiously woven in golden filigree by the lucky artist who executed the design of the ingenious prince.
but the epigraph has time-indications which are closer and more definite. there are features which, besides telling of the lapse of time, do also in some sense indicate the point of time; features in virtue of which this legend may be said to suggest proximately its own date. the two words ‘mec heht’ are archaic forms, the one of which is never, and the other rarely, found in the prose of the tenth century; indeed they were both archaic in the ninth. mec had given place to me, and (though less absolutely) heht to hêt; but the older forms were still at the service of the poet, and epigraphy has some share in poetic privilege. indeed it would seem that in the time of alfred mec was consciously 18 used as an archaic curiosity. there is a gold ring which i take to be contemporaneous with our jewel, and it bears an english inscription in which mec occurs twice. it will be described below[6].
it would be too much to say that the forms mec heht convey a definite date, but they certainly fit well with the time of alfred, and (but for that vague licence of epigraphy) they might even be said to suggest the ninth century as the latest probable date of a work with which they are identified.
it is worthy of notice that heht occurs in another piece of alfred’s inditing, which i will introduce here not only for the sake of the old reduplicative verb, but also because the passage is germane to the argument, and imports an illustration of a comprehensive kind. the king prefixed to his version of gregory’s pastoral care a preface in prose and a prologue in verse. the prose preface was about the main purpose of his work; the poetical prologue dealt with literary matters, the authority of his text, the history of his copy, the19 manner of his own literary operation. it is this poetical and literary prologue which i here quote:
tis ?rendgewrit
this epistle
agustinus
augustine
ofer sealtne s?
over salt sea
suan brohte
brought from the south
ieg-buendum,
to us island-dwellers,
swa hit ?r fore
just as it erst
adihtode
indited had been
drihtnes cempa
by christ’s doughty champion
rome papa.
the pontiff of rome.
ryhtspell monig
much rightful discourse
gregorius gleawm?d
did gregory’s glowing wit
gind w?d
give forth apace
eurh sefan snyttro,
with skilful soul,
searoeonca hord.
a hoard of studious thought.
fore?m he monncynnes
wherefore he of mankind
m?st gestriende
converted the most
rodra wearde:
to the ruler of heaven:
romwara betest,
he of romans the best,
20
monna m?dwelegost,
of men the most mind-rich,
m?reum gefr?gost.
and widest admired.
sieean min on englisc
at length into english
?lfred kyning
alfred the king
awende worda gehwelc,
every word of me wended,
and me his writerum
and me to his writers
sende sue and nore;
south and north he did send;
heht him swelcra ma
more ordered of such
brengan bi e?re bisene,
by the copy to bring,
e?t he his biscepum
that he to his bishops
sendan meahte:
might be able to send:
fore?m hi his sume eorften,
for some of them needed it,
ea ee l?denspr?ce
such as of latin
l?ste c?eon.
very little did know.
in the last six lines of this little poem a new attitude is taken up; the book itself becomes the speaker, and sets forth how ?lfred was the translator, how he ordered (heht) more copies of his translation to be made, and for what purpose. in mentioning purpose, the prologue communicates21 something beyond the legend, which leaves the purpose and signification of the design shrouded in symbolism. but for the rest, if we analyze these six lines, we shall find the heart and core of them to be essentially identical with the legend on the jewel—
aelfred mec heht gewyrcan
[4] ‘saxonici ductus duas tantum literas habet, c et g.’ thesaurus, vol. i, p. 142.
[5] this is briefly explained in my english philology, § 270.
[6] chapter x.
