None of her writings now exists; if any existed, it would be in Latin, and perhaps little better than the earliest poem in English, that of the earliest English poet.

In 1113 nine canons of Laon in northeast France traveled through southern England, raising money to restore their church through miracles wrought by their relics of Mary, and casually giving us the earliest information as to the vogue of the Arthur-tradition after the Norman conquest. At the great nunnery of Wilton in Wilts they were shown the grave of the Venerable Bede (containing a relic perhaps, hardly the body); “prope quern sepulta est inclyta versificatrix, quae proprio nomine vocata est Murier.” Defuncta adhuc loquitur. A feverish patient who had been hoping for a cure from Bede was warned in a dream by “Murier ilia versificatrix” to betake himself to the mother of the Lord, who was descending among them. From all this we can draw several inferences. She enjoyed for whatever reason high fame at Wilton; not only the canon's manner of speaking, but her grave near Bede's, seemingly with her name on it, shows this. They believed also that her repute as a poetess was great and wide. The surprising word versificatrix, probably on her tomb, may show unwillingness for some reason or other to call her poeta or votes; probably also that she excelled especially in the technique of verse, as her correspondents did. Her strange name was unfamiliar to the canons, but is little corrupted if at all: by proprio nomine they tell us that Murier is her proper name and not a distortion of mulier.

A discussion of the significance of the letters AOI in the Chanson de Roland should properly begin perhaps with a description of the appearance of these letters in the Bodleian manuscript, Digby 23, of Oxford, the only manuscript in which they occur. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way of determining with certainty whether these mysterious letters were invariably written by the hand (or hands) responsible for copying the text of the poem. Sometimes no differences of transcription can be perceived between a line of the poem and the AOI that accompanies it. Occasionally, however, slight variations in the forms of the letters, in the alignment, in the color of the ink, or in the thickness of the strokes would seem to indicate that the AOI was written some time after the verse beside which it stands had been penned. In the latter case, it may be that the scribe waited only until he had copied a whole page—or several pages—of text before adding the letters; it may be, on the contrary, that he waited longer, or that some other person interested in the interpretation of the poem put them there. Certain it is, at any event, that the letters occur at variable intervals: some pages are without them, some present but a single instance, others contain a relatively large number of examples.

Es ist in der neueren Literatur über die deutsche Dorfpoesie verschiedentlich versucht worden, die eigenartige Stellung des Dichters Neidhart von Reuental zu erklären, ihn gleichsam zu erlösen aus seiner “splendid isolation,” in der er sich als Anreger einer vorher in der deutschen Literatur nie überlieferten Gattung befindet. Für. seine formellen und stilistischen Eigenheiten wurde auf die Carmina Burana verwiesen. Sicher bestehen auch direkte Beziehungen zwischen Neidharts Dichtung und der früheren Vagantenlyrik, wie das Günther darstellt. Aber trotz vieler verblüffender Übereinstimmungen, trotz Natureingang, Mutter-Tochterdialogen, Gespielinnen- und Tanzliedern, die alle schon bei den Vaganten vertreten sind und von hier z.T. über die lateinische Schulpoesie bis auf spätklassische Vorbilder zurückgeführt werden können, bleiben doch bei Neidhart und seiner Schule eine Menge neuer Motive. Namentlich die Winterlieder sind reich an Zügen, die der Vagantenlyrik fremd sind und die auch die Pastourelle nicht kennt. Zu einem Teil sind sie geschichtlich bedingt, wie die Kritik der protzigen, süddeutschen Bauern, die fast gleichzeitig in der ganzen mhd. Literatur auftaucht, aber doch von Baiern-Österreich ausgeht. Dann aber handelt es sich auch um mehr oder weniger geschickte dichterische Ausgestaltung älterer Anekdoten, wie sie besonders von den Neidhartianern eifrig gepflegt wurde.

By a remarkable coincidence, three scholars of different nationalities, working, one may suppose, in entire independence, have almost simultaneously declared against the existence in Spanish of any so-called “ametric versification.” G. J. Geers of Holland asserts (p. 179) that the distinction between “poesía amétrica” and “poesía ritmica acentual” is “absolutamente voluntariosa.” Prof. Juan Cano of Toronto uses almost identical language: “No estamos de acuerdo con el Sr. Ureña en distinguir entre la poesía amétrica y la ritmica; creemos que toda la poesía es rítmica.” Professor Cano does not mention the Poema del Cid specifically, but because he is occupied with later verse; it is clear that his conception of Spanish meter requires him to find regularity of rhythm in the Cid, since it is neither ametric nor syllabic. And Prof. W. E. Leonard of Wisconsin, skilled metrist and distinguished poet, has devoted an article in English and a longer one in Spanish to showing, or attempting to show, that the Poema del Cid was written in accentual or rhythmic verse. Professor Leonard did not, like the other two, make an assertion covering all Spanish verse, but the Cid is, of course, the chief exemplar of “ametric” verse; if it is to be removed from that category, the other alleged cases can certainly be made to follow it.

In his comprehensive work, Das deutsche Lehnsprichwort, Friedrich Seiler traces the apparent origin of a vast number of proverbs and proverbial expressions current in Germany. He finds that the Greek and Roman classics, the Bible and the works of the Church Fathers yield many of the ancient proverbs still in common use. With regard to the large number of proverbs that have seemingly come from the French, Seiler, as he well realizes, treads on uncertain ground, and much of the material that he here gathers together will have to be reëxamined. It is quite evident that many of the proverbs in this latter group are common medieval proverbs, current over a large part of Europe, which first appear in the vernacular literature and collections of proverbs of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. To attribute French source to them often requires more evidence than Seiler presents. In his treatment of this large body of medieval and international proverbs that seem to have arisen during the Middle Ages and the early modern period—proverbs that give him the most difficulty in finding a possible source—Seiler quite overlooks influences that may have come from the oriental languages, through the Arabic via Spain or into southern Europe via North Africa, or, still more probably for many of these proverbs, via the eastern European countries bordering on Tartaric, Arabic, or Turkish territory.

The close relations existing at times between two great types of medieval fiction, the romance and the saint's legend, have been pointed out by a number of scholars. Studies have been made of the development of individual saints' legends into romances or near romances, of the borrowing by legends of romantic material. One peculiar type of legend has romantic embellishments attached only to the origin or childhood of the saint, leaving to the rest of the narrative the character of sober history with probably some contamination from non-romantic folk-beliefs. Of this one of the most interesting and conspicuous examples is the story of the Syrian princess who was said to have become the mother of St. Thomas of Canterbury. Less well known, indeed largely ignored, is the confused tale of the romantic origin of St. Cuthbert as found in the Libellus de ortu (vel nativitate) Sancii Cuthberti, which is the acknowledged source of the first part of the Northern English Metrical Life of St. Cuthbert. It is the purpose of the present paper to examine the contents of this little book, to point out some of its resemblances to the Horn-Saga and other romances, and to throw some light on the methods of composition of the medieval hagiographer.

Chaucer scholars have long wondered why the scene of the Pardoner's Tale was laid in Flanders. Since the Pardoner treats two themes, the evils of drinking and of cupidity, why has the poet localized such a story in this vicinity? Was it for artistic reasons, was it because of a lost original, or did he have an ulterior motive? Certain facts connected with fourteenth-century Flanders tend strongly to justify Chaucer's choice; in fact, to make his selection seem a deliberate one. Not only was Flanders notorious for these two evils—Professor Manly has already pointed out the aptness of localizing the drinking theme there—but England in the 1380's and 90's might well have profited politically and economically by a glance at her unfortunate neighbor across the Channel.

It is well known that whoever wrote Piers the Plowman felt bitterly against the administration of the law in his day and never tired of railing against lawyers, but what has not been pointed out is that the references to the law which occur in the three texts of this poem reveal a significant increase in legal knowledge from the A-text to the later texts. Throughout the three texts William scorns the attendants of the courts as a class and arraigns the legal system for its cruelty, its injustice, and its gross favoritism towards the rich. Meed and False use as horses for their trip to Westminster a sheriff and a juryman; jurors, sumners, sheriffs, pleaders of the court of arches, over which the archbishop of Canterbury presided, all run about Meed when she arrives at Westminster; and William warns judges and others to consider what they do, for the Day of Doom will find them out. But William is perhaps most severe when he declares of the sergeants of the law:

pow mihtest beter meten pe myst Ŀ on Maluerne hulles,
pen geten a Mom of heore moup Ŀ til moneye weore schewed.

In 1873 in Trial-Forwords to Minor Poems: Further Additions and Corrections Furnivall called attention to seven records under the heading “Thomas Chaucer, esquire and vintner (?1 man, or 2)”:

[1] 1399-1400. Duchy of Lancaster. Ministers' Accounts. Div. 29, Bundle 144. Payment of £20 to Thomas Chaucer for his two Annuities, due at Easter and Michaelmas, with £10 arrears.

[2] 1406, March 12. City Hustings Roll, 133. Thomas Chausers: Deed of entail on him of City lands, near St. Paul's, by his ‘consanguineus,’ William Chaumbre, cleric.

[3] 1416, February 3. Hustings Roll, 145. Release to Thomas Chaucer of the interest of Thomas Hoo and Agnes his wife in these entaild lands.

[4] 1413, June 7. Conveyance by Geoffrey Dallyng, Citizen and Vintner, and Matilda his wife, to Thomas Chaucer, esquire, and 4 other men, of a reversion in some City houses and land (no doubt as Trustees for some City Corporation).

[5] 1426, December 7. Hustings Roll, 155. Conveyance by William Manby, cleric, to Thomas Chaucers and Richard Wyot, esquires, and 4 others, clerics, of land in the parish of St. Margaret's, Lothbury, in the City of London, seemingly as Trustees for some ecclesiastical Corporation.

[6] 1428, May 20. Hustings Roll, 156. Conveyance by William atte Watir, barber, and John Cole, junior, Citizen and Vintner, of a tenement in Fleet Street to Thomas Chawsere and 12 other men—all 13 being described in one part of the Deed as Citizens and Vintners, evidently as Trustees for the Vintners' Company.

[7] 1428, June 11. Release to Thomas Chawsere and his 12 co-trustees—Thomas Chawsere and another (Lewis John), being called esquires, the rest Citizens and Vintners— of the estate of Thomas Croften, as mortgagee in possession, in the said tenement in Fleet Street.

During the last decade of the seventeenth century the rapidly increasing influence of female readers found public acknowledgment in many of the projects of John Dunton, London book-seller and publisher. To the Fair Sex he dedicated in 1691 and 1692, first monthly, then fortnightly, and finally weekly numbers of his Athenian Mercury; to them he made special appeal when sales were slow; and to them he presented, in 1693, a short-lived and most unedifying Ladies' Mercury, a publication that may fairly be called the first English periodical for women.

Discussion of the Homeric question, the Carolingian epic, the ballads, and Arthurian romance remains, and seems destined to remain for some time a conflict between two hypotheses. One may be called the traditionalist hypothesis; for it emphasizes the origins of narrative themes in oral traditions more or less remote from the first recorded versions, and attempts to trace genetic relations between the surviving versions and to explain differences between them on the assumption that originals or intermediate stages or both are lost. The second hypothesis may be called that of literary craftsmanship, for it minimizes or denies the existence of any oral tradition, finds the source of our surviving texts either in other written texts or in the creative imagination of the author, and attempts to explain the differences between one version and another by some artistic or rational motive controlling the later author. A classic of the traditionalist school is Professor Gilbert Murray's Rise of the Greek Epic; a classic of the contrary school is M. Bédier's Légendes Épiques. The traditionalist hypothesis emphasizes the genetic relationship of story-patterns to their sources; the hypothesis of literary craftsmanship emphasizes the intellectual and artistic processes which create or modify story-patterns.

When, in December, 1883, forty teachers met in New York and organized this Association, Victoria was still on the throne; Tennyson, Ruskin, and Arnold, Holmes, Aldrich, and Louisa Alcott were all blamelessly writing; and great scholars like Kittredge, Lounsbury, Grandgent, March, Hemple, Garnett, and Todd had heretically attained preëminence without the doctorate. It was an unsophisticated, safe, and comfortable world. Today it has undergone disintegration. And we, to a certain degree, have disintegrated with it. Never before, unless I mistake, has it been so important as now, at the close of our first half-century, to take stock. In what direction are we moving, and to what end?

It is well known to students of the Italian Renaissance that the regained supremacy of the vernacular in the latter half of the fifteenth century, first in Tuscany and then in other parts of the peninsula, did much to stimulate the revival in the study of Dante. The haughty contempt, implicit or explicit, that many of the early humanists felt for the Divina Commedia then gave way to enthusiastic efforts at text interpretation and æsthetic appreciation on the part of poets, artists, and scholars. Nor was this renewed interest in Dante confined to Italy; indeed, the Divina Commedia was much studied even beyond the Alps, where it was edited and translated several times.

Renaissance students know the story told by Pasquier concerning a gathering of legal notables and their friends during the Grands Jours at Poitiers, wherein one day a keen observer espied a flea proceeding across the bosom of the erudite but engaging Catherine. Straightway the muses of the assembled guests were set to work, the result being a quantity of facetious or merely ingenious verses on the subject of the venturesome flea and its fair prey. If, as we realize, the aesthetic quality of the product is dubious and the literary interest from that point of view scant, the milieu deserves better at our hands. It is the purpose of this study to present this milieu and to bring out its significance, which is real, for we have here no accidental or inconsequential gathering, but a true salon in the sixteenth century meaning of that term, italianate in origins and character, parallel to many of its more highly praised contemporaries, and as important as they in the evolution of social form in the century to come.

In the present state of our knowledge it is best to assign the Tractatulus eximii doctoris Henrici de Hassia de arte praedicandi to an auctor incertus. The name Henry of Hesse was borne by two scholars in the fourteenth century; but we have no proof that this is the work of either. They were both professors of theology, both brilliant preachers, and practically contemporary; and the works of one have in the past often been attributed to the other.

On the afternoon of December 27, just fifty years ago, forty gentlemen assembled at Columbia College, New York City, for the purpose of discussing subjects pertaining to modern language study. Thirty-five of them were from New England and the Middle Atlantic States, two from the South (Virginia and Tennessee), two from Michigan, and one came across the Mississippi—from the city of St. Louis.

The explanation of Middle English run presents many difficulties. These could easily be solved if one succeeded in proving, or at least in making probable, the existence of an Old English runnan.

During the earlier portion of the [18th] century, an English scholar, Francis Knapp, a graduate of St. John's College, Oxford, lived the life of a literary recluse at Watertown [Mass.]; and glorying in a personal acquaintance with Alexander Pope, he attempted to reproduce, on “the bleak Atlantic shore,” and amid “solitudes obscene,” the poetic notes of his master.