Lectures on the History of England

school-children even were taught in French, which must have made learning very up-hill work to them. A little before this time it had become still more fashionable to talk French rather than English, and those who wanted to appear "genteel" always tried to do so, though they spoke very queer French sometimes. 4. But soon after this one John Cornewaile, a schoolmaster, had the bright idea that children would get on with their lessons better if they learnt in their own language; and other schoolmasters catching the thought from him, in about thirty years all was changed, and in every grammar-school they were taught in English, as they are now, and learnt French as a foreign language. Just about the same time the lawyers were made to talk English in the law-courts. Now, too, the fine lords and ladies at court, the princes and princesses, kings and queens, began to talk English, and to read English books. An English knight, Sir John Mandeville, who was a great traveller, and wrote a very amusing book in French full of his adventures and the wonderful things he saw or heard of, afterwards translated it into English, that every man of the nation, "lords and knights, and other noble and worthy men," might understand it. Thus the last distinction between the conquerors and the conquered disappeared, and in this sense at least we may say that the vanquished English overcame the victorious French.

5. The writers from whom we learn most about the manners and thoughts of the people at that time were not historians, writing histories, but poets, writing either to instruct The authors. or to amuse the people amongst whom they lived. One of them was a poor man, though a scholar, and he wrote for poor people. Two others were gentlemen living near the court, and writing sometimes for the king or princes and princesses. Naturally, therefore, the books are very different; but they all agree in many points. The writers all saw the same things, and described them truthfully in their different ways; they were all keen, and clever, and clear-eyed.

William Langlande.

6. The first of them was called William, and though his surname is thought to have been Langlande, no one is quite sure what it was. Perhaps he had none at all; for in those days it was rather looked on as a mark of a gentleman to have a surname. Poor men generally only had a kind of nickname, or were called after their trades, as Tyler, or Baker, or Butcher. He belonged in some way to the Church, for he had a shaven crown; but he had a wife calle Kit, and a daughter called Calote.* He seems to have earned

LECTURE XXIX.-MEDIEVAL ENGLAND.

The English people 500 years ago. The language. The writers. The friars. The clergy.

1. NOTWITHSTANDING all his victories, we have seen that Edward III. could not succeed in becoming King of France, but had to be contented, as well he might, with being King of England. Let us now learn something more of what England was at that time. The Americans have a saying that "it takes all sorts to make a nation." We will in the next two lectures find out what we can about some of the "sorts" who made up the English nation 500 years ago,—about the knights and squires, the country gentlemen, the clergymen, the ladies, the servants, the poor people,—and see if they were at all like the same class of people now; and, again, about some people of whom we do not see much in England at present, but of whom there were plenty in those days-the monks and nuns, and the friars. We will try and see how they lived, what they liked, what they believed, and what they thought.

2. One great change had already taken place. Hitherto almost all the books we have had to read, to learn about the

The language.

history of our country, were written in Latin; but the books which we must read to learn its condition at this time were written in English. It is very oldfashioned English; the spelling is different from our spelling, and there are a good many words here and there which we do not use now. But still it is English, and if we take a little trouble we soon get to read it quite easily. If we compare it with the old English before the Norman Conquest we see the change which was mentioned some time ago; we see many beautiful words which are not in the old language, and which are a great improvement to it; but the whole substance of the language is still that of our old German forefathers.

3. After the Norman Conquest the king and the upper classes all spoke French, and it is very strange to think that all the

4. But soon after this one John Cornewaile, a schoolmaster, had the bright idea that children would get on with their lessons better if they learnt in their own language; and other schoolmasters catching the thought from him, in about thirty years all was changed, and in every grammar-school they were taught in English, as they are now, and learnt French as a foreign language. Just about the same time the lawyers were made to talk English in the law-courts. Now, too, the fine lords and ladies at court, the princes and princesses, kings and queens, began to talk English, and to read English books. An English knight, Sir John Mandeville, who was a great traveller, and wrote a very amusing book in French full of his adventures and the wonderful things he saw or heard of, afterwards translated it into English, that every man of the nation, "lords and knights, and other noble and worthy men," might understand it. Thus the last distinction between the conquerors and the conquered disappeared, and in this sense at least we may say that the vanquished English overcame the victorious French.

William Langlande.

6. The first of them was called William, and though his surname is thought to have been Langlande, no one is quite sure what it was. Perhaps he had none at all; for in those days it was rather looked on as a mark of a gentleman to have a surname. Poor men generally only had a kind of nickname, or were called after their trades, as Tyler, or Baker, or Butcher. He belonged in some way to the Church, for he had a shaven crown; but he had a wife called Kit, and a daughter called Calote.* He seems to have earned his

living, and a very poor one, by singing hymns at rich men's funerals. This was not a cheerful occupation, and he had a very melancholy spirit. His long poem, which is called the 'Vision of Piers the Ploughman,' is mostly, very sad, and tells us a great deal about the evils of the times, and the sins of all classes of people. This book has hardly any of the new foreign words in it; the lower people did not use or understand them yet; it was written in what we may call a rougher language, powerful but not elegant. 7. The other principal writer was named Geoffrey Chaucer, and is called the father of English poetry. Some people think his father was a gentleman, and others that he was a tradesman; but at any rate he was very prosperous and well-to-do. Geoffrey had a busy, stirring life. He soon got offices in the court, and was thought a great deal of by some of the princes, especially by John of Gaunt. He was sent abroad several times; once he was a soldier, fought and was taken prisoner in France, but was soon set free. At other times he went to Italy, to some of the beautiful cities there, to Florence, and Padua, and Genoa, where he saw lovely country, beautiful buildings and pictures, and, what he perhaps enjoyed still more, some of the great and learned men of Italy and their books. He afterwards translated some of the charming tales he learnt there into English.

Geoffrey
Chaucer.

8. Thus there was a great contrast between the two: one grave, poor, and indignant; the other gay, prosperous, and genial. But in many points, when they happen to write on the same subjects, they agree wonderfully. They were both good men, true at heart, hating sin and loving righteousness. Each confirms the other, though they tell the tale in a very different way.

9. William, in his poem, says he had a dream in which he saw a “field full of folk," and he tells us what they looked like, and how they talked and behaved. There were gentlemen and ladies gaily dressed, poor labourers, townspeople, bakers, cooks, singers and jugglers, beggars, priests, bishops, friars, &c. Could we but have a dream like it, and see that field once! It would teach us more than reading books of history for a year. But the next best is reading in his own words what he saw and heard.

10. Chaucer tells us about just the same people, only he introduces them in another way. His was not a dream; what he says he saw he may have really seen with wide-awake eyes. He met with a knight, a squire, a lady, a monk, an innkeeper, a parish clergyman, a cook, a ploughman, a scholar, a sailor, and

many others, and gives us very perfect descriptions of them all. Where does he say all these met together? They were going on pilgrimage to the famous shrine of Thomas à Becket at Canterbury. Chaucer says, when the sweet spring weather came in all these people began to think of going on pilgrimages, and the favourite place in all England was Canterbury.

"The holy blissful martyr for to seke

That them hath holpen, when that they were seke" (or sick).

It was rather a long journey in those days from London to Canterbury, and the roads in many parts of England were not at all safe, on account of the crowds of robbers. Partly perhaps for that reason, and partly for company's sake, the pilgrims would travel together. One night in April or May a number of pilgrims of all sorts happened to be assembled in an inn at Southwark, intending to start the next morning for Canterbury. Geoffrey Chaucer says he was one of these. The innkeeper, who was a very lively, jovial sort of host, proposes that they shall amuse themselves on the long journey by telling stories, and whoever tells the best story shall be rewarded by all the others giving him a good supper on their return.

11. Going on pilgrimage in those days was not a particularly religious ceremony; it was more like a pleasure-party. The pilgrims rode very comfortably on horseback; sometimes they would have singers and bagpipe players to accompany them; this time the amusement was to be telling stories. Some of the tales are beautiful, some are droll; some of them are hardly fit to read now-a-days, and show how coarse the lower classes, at least, must have been then. The tales that the better-bred people tell the knight, the scholar, the lady, and others—are most delicately thought and expressed.

Gower.

12. The other court poet was named Gower. He wrote three principal books, the first in French, the second in Latin; and by the time he had written both of these, people had begun to read English books, so he wrote the last in English. He was a fine scholar, though not a genius like Chaucer, but we can help out our picture of the times by some of the things he says.

13. Another man who wrote a great deal, and, above all, who gave England a gift better even than the best of Chaucer's beautiful poetry, who gave her the Bible in English, was John Wycliffe, an Oxford man and a clergyman, of whom we shall hear more farther on.

Wycliffe.

« Zurück Weiter »

Books