Log in / Register
Home arrow Language & Literature arrow Small dictionaries and curiosity. Lexicography and fieldwork in post-medieval Europe

Edward Lhuyd’s Glossography

The first wordlist which Lhuyd sent off for publication after his return to Oxford in 1701 was not one of his own: it was the work of Robert Kirk of Aberfoyle, which we mentioned in Chapter 15 as a possible example for Lhuyd’s use of Ray’s Dictionariolum as a prompt-list for field lexicography.

Kirk actually made two wordlists in his life. The first calls for a brief account here; it was a product of Kirk’s supervision of the printing of the first Gaelic Bible meant for Scottish readers, an edition in Roman type of the translation into classical Gaelic which had been made some decades previously under William Bedell’s supervision (the original edition had been printed in the distinctive Irish type, which imitates medieval Irish letterforms, and which Scottish readers found difficult).1 Kirk’s Bible for the Highlanders appeared in 1690, with a glossary of classical Gaelic words which might have been unfamiliar to a speaker of vernacular Scottish Gaelic filling up five pages which would otherwise have been blank at its very end, some of the glosses being in Scottish Gaelic but the majority in English.2 A manuscript copy of this glossary with nearly two hundred additional entries, together with an Irish poem addressed to Lhuyd, was made in Cork by one Seamus О Broin between 1736 and 1739.3

Kirk’s second wordlist, the one which came into Lhuyd’s hands, was rather different. It was, as we have said, based on Ray’s Dictionariolum, though it only translated twelve of the thirty-two sections of the original dictionary, running to about four hundred and thirty entries.4 Some sections were abbreviated, and some slightly expanded: to the sequence ‘Frost. Hoar-frost. Ice. An Ice-cicle. Thunder. Lightning’ of the original, Kirk or his informants from the wintry Highlands added ‘Nipping-frost . . . Black, or Hard frost . . . Permanent-Frost, with blew Sky . . . A suddain Frost, after a Thaw . . . Frost that causeth Isicles . . . Freezing-showers’ and, a few entries later, ‘A Storm of Frost’.5 Lhuyd sent a copy of this wordlist to Robert Sibbald, who communicated it to William Nicholson in or before August 1701, and Nicolson published it, with Lhuyd’s permission, in The Scottish Historical Library, a guide to Scottish history which he was at the

  • 1 For the first Irish and Scottish Gaelic Bibles, see Mandelbrote, ‘Bible and national identity’ 175-9.
  • 2 Biobla Naomhtha, ‘Tiomna Nuadh’, sigs. L10r-L12v; О Baoill, ‘Kirk’s Egerton glossary’ 124-5.
  • 3 О Baoill, ‘Kirk’s Egerton glossary’ 126.
  • 4 Entry-count by Lhuyd, in Kirk, ‘Vocabulary’ 346. 5 Kirk, ‘Vocabulary’ 335.

Small Dictionaries and Curiosity. First edition. John Considine.

© John Considine 2017. First published 2017 by Oxford University Press.

time preparing for the press.[1] Lhuyd made two additions to Kirk’s original in the copy which he sent to Sibbald: he provided Welsh cognates for about one hundred and sixty of Kirk’s entries, and he added a terse afterword which points the cognates out, and then reproduces the tables of equivalence from his Irish vocabulary notebook in a slightly improved version, making Welsh [gw] rather than [g] correspond to Irish [f], keeping the correspondence of[p] and [k], and then stating simply that Welsh [h] corresponds to Irish [s], without confusing the issue with references to Irish [f] and English [s].[2] The demonstration of the regular relationship between Welsh and Irish was therefore first published in a book which had little to do with Wales, Ireland, or indeed language, tucked away between an address to Sir George Mackenzie and some learned notes on a recent edition of the Chronicle of Melrose. This obscure publication venue may have been chosen from genuine diffidence: in a letter of 1703, Lhuyd wrote that ‘I am troubled with a hypothesis of C Britons and P Britons’, anticipating the terminological distinction between Q Celts and P Celts which was first made in the late nineteenth century, but holding back from claiming his distinction as a certainty.[3]

Thereafter, Lhuyd worked more on his records of spoken Irish and Scottish Gaelic. He collated his Argyllshire wordlist with Kirk’s, from which he made separate extracts in the same manuscript notebook.[4] After these in his notebook is a list of eleven words, all localized to Inverness and some with additional localizations, with the heading ‘Different Irish of the High Land; as dictated by R. St. Aug. 29. 1704’. R. St. is doubtless the ‘R. Stew. of Inner Ness’ mentioned elsewhere in the manuscript, and is probably the informant who gave Lhuyd 1099 new words from Inverness, and confirmed that 407 of his Argyllshire words were also current there.[5] This information was added to the Argyllshire wordlist after the words from Kirk and some words from the Irish of Munster had been added.[6] However, after his return to Oxford, Lhuyd naturally worked more extensively on written Irish than on spoken Scottish Gaelic or Irish, returning to the dictionary ‘for my own particular Use’ on which he had begun to work as he read his first Irish texts in the mid-1690s.

He likewise worked on Cornish from early written sources. A vocabulary using Thlfric’s Old English-Latin glossary as a template to collect 961 vernacular-Latin glosses in Cornish, Welsh, Breton, Old English, and even Norman French, which had been compiled in the eleventh or twelfth century, was by Lhuyd’s day in the Cottonian library in London, which had recently been bought for the nation.[7] Although a previous owner had identified it as Welsh, Lhuyd perceived that it was Cornish rather than Welsh or indeed Breton.[8] He added forms from it to the ‘Geirlyer Kyrnweig, distinguishing them with red ink, and to an alphabetized Latin manuscript wordlist, where he marked them as obsolete with a dagger t.[9]

The first volume of his projected magnum opus was published in 1707 under the general title

Archaeologia Britannica, giving some account, additional to what has hitherto been publishd, of the languages, histories, and customs of the original inhabitants of Great Britain, from collections and observations in travels through Wales, Cornwall, Bas-Bretagne, Ireland, and Scotland.

The volume title was Glossography, and this emphasized lexicography, for the only English book title in which such a word had previously appeared had been an English dictionary, Thomas Blount’s Glossographia of 1656 (another English dictionary called Glossographia Anglicana nova would appear in the same year as Lhuyd’s Glossography). Since, on account of Lhuyd’s premature death in 1709, no further volume appeared, the single volume of the Archaeologia Britannica is often referred to by the title intended for the whole work—‘a title I understand not’ complained his correspondent Roderick O’Flaherty—but Glossography suits its contents better.[10]

The liminary materials to Glossography included prefaces in English and Welsh, the latter of which included the first wordlist in the book. This was a surprising exoticum: an Irish-Welsh-Basque vocabulary of about a hundred entries, in each of which the Irish headword was dissimilar to the Welsh equivalent but similar to the Basque equivalent.[11] This was meant to support the argument that the Irish were originally of Spanish origin (which Lhuyd knew to be stated in medieval Irish historiography), and had brought Basque, which as we have seen was regarded as the original Spanish language, with them to the British Isles.[12] Elements of Basque, according to this argument, survived when the Irish adopted the British language, and accounted for some of the differences between Irish and Welsh which could not be explained in terms of regular sound correspondences. As early as 1692, Lhuyd and John Aubrey had discussed a report that some Basque words were identical with their Welsh equivalents, suggesting a relationship between the two languages (Lhuyd wished that the gentleman with whom the report originated ‘had taken a catalogue of those [words] he observd’).[13] It was probably a decade later, after the great research j ourney, that Lhuyd acquired some knowledge of Basque by studying the Bodleian copy of the Basque New Testament and a manuscript of the grammar composed in 1653 by Rafael de Micoleta, which included a wordlist.[14] At least three manuscript wordlists were prepared in the course of Lhuyd’s work towards the printed one in the Welsh preface to Glossography. The first is Lhuyd’s own work: a Basque-English vocabulary of some three hundred words, with some equivalents in Latin and some references to other languages, put together from the wordlists of Vulcanius and Micoleta.[15] It was written on the blank pages of a letter of October 1702, presumably while that letter was readily to hand, and therefore in late 1702 or early 1703.[16] The second and third are two versions of a Latin-English-Basque wordlist. One of these is written as a single table of nineteen columns on the reverse of a single-sheet draft of Lhuyd’s Irish dictionary, the very large sheet in question being made by pasting smaller sheets together.[17] The other, of more than a thousand words, was made on the interleaves of Lhuyd’s transcript of Plunkett’s Irish dictionary, in other words in or after 1702, and is presumably copied from the nineteen-column table. This wordlist was compiled by an assistant who tried to compare the Basque New Testament with an English translation, and then tried to add Latin equivalents to the English; error inevitably crept in at the former stage, and the assistant’s Latin was poor enough for it to creep in at the latter too.[18]

After these liminary materials, Glossography was divided into ten sections. The first was a ‘Comparative etymology’, surveying the ways in which two words in different languages might be related, with good commentary on semantic change and kinds of sound change. The correspondences which Lhuyd had sketched in his notebook at the end of 1699 are naturally presented here, as are others, such as the observation that [k] in Greek, Latin, Welsh, and Irish ‘is changd into H in the Teutonic Languages, as in the case of Greek kuon, Welsh ci (Lhuyd gave the plural кйп, i.e. own), Latin canis, and German Hund ‘dog’ (cf. English hound).[19] This first section introduced a ‘Vocabulary of the original languages of Britain and Ireland, alphabetically ordered by Latin headwords.[20] The ‘original languages’ were Welsh, Breton, Cornish, Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Manx, written in a phonetic transcription of Lhuyd’s own devising.[21] The alphabetized manuscript list of Welsh, Breton, and Cornish words mentioned in Chapter Fifteen was a partial draft of this wordlist. With the ‘Comparative vocabulary’ belongs the eighth section of the book, ‘An essay towards a British etymologicon, with English headwords, followed by an alphabetical pan-European polyglot wordlist of basic vocabulary with Latin headwords, by Lhuyd’s assistant David Parry.[22] The third and fourth sections, ‘An Armoric grammar and vocabulary’, were translations from the French of Julien Maunoir’s Breton grammar and wordlist, executed by Lhuyd’s assistant Moses Williams, who became a significant scholar of medieval Welsh.[23] Fifth was a supplement to John Davies of Mallwyd’s Dictionarium duplex, which drew on manuscripts in the learned Welsh lexicographical tradition and on Davies’ own annotations to a copy of his dictionary.[24] This short section came closer than any other to providing the Welsh antiquarian material which some of Lhuyd’s sponsors had expected, and one copy of Glossography has been marked by an early reader in this section, where about fifty words are underlined, and at only one other point, namely the paragraph in the preliminary acknowledgements which refers to the hospitality shown to Lhuyd by Welsh people on his research journeys, this paragraph being perhaps marked in a reproachful spirit.[25] Sixth was ‘A Cornish grammar’ (with a preface in Cornish, one of the last attempts at sustained prose competition in that language before its extinction), including a list of medieval Welsh words, and seventh was an overview of unedited Welsh manuscripts.[26]

Ninth was ‘A brief introduction to the Irish or ancient Scotish language, being an Irish grammar with notes on prosody, translated from the first printed grammar of the language, that of Proinsias О Maolmhuaidh (Francis O’Molloy), printed in 1677, with additions from another.[27] Last but by no means least was an Irish-English dictionary, running to more than ten thousand entries on more than a hundred unnumbered triple-column folio pages, with a preface in Irish and a short appendix listing Irish manuscripts.[28] This was the culmination of Lhuyd’s collection of words from Irish texts. Sigla indicated the authorities for a number of words: Pl. for Plunkett’s dictionary, K. for the Irish history of Geoffrey Keating (Seathrun Ceitinn), which had a wide manuscript circulation before its first publication in 1723, Fl. for Roderick O’Flaherty’s Ogygia, and so on.[29] This dictionary was printed before other parts of Glossography, which is why the pages are unnumbered, and Lhuyd tried to take advantage of its early completion by sending out a few copies to friends who might be able to improve it; another advantage of doing this was that it stimulated the writing of liminary poems (three of the eleven commendatory poems at the beginning of Glossography are therefore specifically in praise of the Irish dictionary), and a third was that a copy was for a long time available for interested persons to inspect at an Irish bookseller’s, where it excited some interest.[30] Several alphabetical ranges survive with generous annotation by O’Flaherty, which Lhuyd printed as an appendix to the Irish dictionary, suggesting that readers should mark their copies of the dictionary up to show which entries were corrected in the appendix.[31] One of O’Flaherty’s annotations shows his sense of the dictionary as registering classical, literary Irish of the sort for which good authorities should be given: at an entry which cites him for the etymology of Belfast, he writes

I pray doe not make use of my name for any word of y Dictionary except it be already publick in Ogygia. But for historical passages in case you haue any occasion, yu may quote me as I would account this of Belfast. ffor I wd not presum to be an author of words of ye Language; as in relation to a Dictionary!.][32]

Glossography brought together a whole set of pioneering lexicographical achievements: the first comparative wordlist of Welsh, Irish, and the languages most closely related to them; the first Breton-English dictionary to be printed; the first Irish- English dictionary to be printed; the first printed record of the differences between dialects of Scottish Gaelic, and the first appearance in print of any specimen of Manx. Lhuyd would have liked to add a Cornish wordlist, and this too would have been a first, but he ran out of space: Glossography ‘is not much, if at all to exceed a hundred sheets, he wrote ruefully (in fact it ran to 125 sheets, or 500 folio pages), and so publishing his Cornish lexical collections ‘must be deferred to the next’, which never appeared.38

At first sight, the effect is decidedly bookish. Blount’s Glossographia had been a dictionary based on its compiler’s reading.39 Lhuyd’s Glossography bears more than a casual resemblance to George Hickes’ Thesaurus, a companion to the study of early medieval Germanic texts, which was its immediate predecessor in the Oxford press, and to which Lhuyd alluded on the first page of his main text.40 Although the ‘Comparative vocabulary’ and the appendix to Parry’s ‘Essay towards a British etymo- logicon’ included some fieldwork material, this material was nothing like the whole of Lhuyd’s lexicographical field notebooks.41 The Cornish grammar likewise owed something to Lhuyd’s dealings with speakers of Cornish, but perhaps more to his study of the medieval and sixteenth-century literary monuments; his Cornish and Irish prefaces are bravura performances, but their style is writerly.42 Much of the remainder of the book is explicitly concerned with medieval language varieties, and some of it is explicitly derived from other books or manuscripts. However, as Lhuyd had made clear on his title-page, and made clear again in his dedicatory epistle, which refers in its second sentence to ‘The Fatigue of Five Years Travels, through the most retired Parts of Her Majesty’s Kingdoms, Glossography rested on a foundation of fieldwork, undertaken on an extraordinary scale, which had generated more wordlists than a reader of the printed book would guess.43

Lhuyd was not interested in preparing those wordlists for publication because his lexicography was, more than Ray’s, a means to an end, the end being his fine understanding and demonstration of the unity of the group of languages which we now call Celtic. He knew that he was in this respect a pioneer: ‘I am sensible Mr. Camden, Boxhornius and others have long since taken notice of the affinity of our British with the Celtic, he remarked, ‘but there being no Vocabulary extant of the Irish (or Ancient Scotish) they could not collate that Language therewith, which the Curious in these Studies, will now find to agree rather more than ours, with the Gaulish,’44 In that statement, ‘our British was Welsh and ‘the Celtic was ancient Gaulish. Indeed, Celtic/ Celtique/ Celtica was becoming increasingly a word to conjure with, in continental Europe and the British Isles alike, thanks in part to the appearance of Paul-Yves Pezron’s Antiquite de la nation et de la langue des Celtes, autrement appelez Gaulois in 1703, translated into English as The Antiquities of Nations; More Particularly of the Celtae or Gauls in 1706, a work accessible enough and fanciful enough (Lhuyd’s and

Leibniz’s reservations of 1698 and 1699 had been well-founded) to fuel decades of Celtomania. Pezron, however, saw the Celtic language as represented by Welsh and Breton, and not Irish.[33]

On the page after his own reference to ‘the affinity of our British with the Celtic, Lhuyd used Celtic in a strikingly different way, calling the ‘Comparative vocabulary’ in which he arranges Welsh, Irish, Breton, and Cornish under Latin headwords ‘a sort of Latin-Celtic Dictionary’.[34] Nobody had used Celtic of a language family including these four languages and their closest relatives before. It might not have been the ideal word—no ancient author ever identified any of the peoples of the British Isles as Keltoi or Celtae—but a name derived from Latin Gallica might have been taken to include French, and Lhuyd’s Celtic has come to be accepted.[35] The whole of Glossography presents the evidence for the common origin of Irish and Scottish Gaelic on the one hand and Welsh on the other; shows the affinity of Breton and Cornish to Welsh; and thus knits the Celtic languages together. Wallis and Toland had both seen that Welsh and Irish had something in common, without asking in detail which languages shared their affinity and which did not; Lhuyd had seen all the Celtic languages, and only the Celtic languages, as a family. No comparable exercise in the comparison of these languages would be achieved thereafter until the middle of the nineteenth century.[36] When it was, by Johann Kaspar Zeuss in his Grammatica Celtica of 1853, it addressed grammatical structures rather than the particulars of lexicon to which Lhuyd had given such attention: one might borrow the words with which Brian Ogilvie closes his account of Renaissance natural history and say that Zeuss’ Grammatica belonged to ‘the age, not of description, but of systems’.[37]

When Lhuyd died prematurely in 1709, in his room in what is now the Old Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, Ichnographia and Glossography were his two major books. The remains of the Archaeologia Britannica project remained unpublished, and this meant that much of his topographical and antiquarian work was lost from sight, though an essay on Celtic place-name elements and some notes on river-names appeared in William Baxter of Llanllugan’s Glossarium antiquitatum in 1719.[38] Many of the manuscript books in which Lhuyd wrote were destroyed in an unlucky series of three different fires in the nineteenth century.[39] A good number of his wordlists of living Celtic languages have, as we have seen, survived, but they are scattered, and were scarcely known between his death and the twentieth century. The work published in

Glossography was used, for instance by Leibniz and his former assistant Johann Georg von Eckhardt, but they did not fully understand it: so both men tried to bring the Germanic languages back into a close relationship with the Celtic languages.[40] (Not everyone followed them: Toland wrote, in a letter published in 1726, that ‘the Celtic and Gothic, which have been often taken for each other, are as different as Latin and Arabic’.[41]) Less learned readers turned to Pezron rather than to Lhuyd for their visions of Celtic antiquity.[42] But Lhuyd’s influence may have gone beyond cases where his work was cited explicitly, as it was by Leibniz and Eckhardt. A short biographical notice of him by the historian of the language sciences David Cram concludes challengingly that ‘It is probable that L[huyd]’s monumental work exerted a profound but covert influence on comparative philology in the 19th century, but a full and scholarly account of this thinker still remains to be undertaken.’[43]

A lexicographical footnote to Lhuyd’s work is provided by the three wordlists presented by Pezron at the end of his Antiquite, all supposedly of words derived from ‘the language of the Celts, or Gaulish’: one of Greek, one of Latin, and one of Dutch and German. The Greek and Latin wordlists are of a couple of hundred words each (Pezron notes that he could have presented more than six hundred Greek words, whence the rumour of an eight-hundred-word vocabulary which Lhuyd had heard in 1698), and the Germanic one is shorter.[44] These wordlists draw on Pezron’s observation of Breton as a living language. Having decided that ‘the Bretons in France and the Welsh in Great Britain still have the same language today as was spoken in our Gaul in the times of Julius Caesar and Augustus’, he could use the words he encountered in daily speech as an antiquarian resource.[45] So, not only does every word in his hundred pages of word- lists have an equivalent from the language of ‘the Celts’, which may sometimes be Breton and sometimes from a Welsh dictionary, but a number of entries are enlivened with observations of usage: babes in arms say Mam bron to ask for the breast; ‘the peasants of Brittany’ say milin coir meaning ‘as yellow as wax’ (like the hair of Chaucer’s Pardoner); a Breton chasing a piglet will call sic sic to it.[46] Nor were his observations confined to Breton: he noted, for instance, that French amarrer is the nautical word meaning ‘to moor’ and that the word for a goat in many areas of France is une bique.59 But all these observations are in the service of the assumption that when a non-Breton word resembles a Breton word, it must come from the Breton word, which must have remained unchanged for two thousand or more years. The quality of individual observations can be judged with hindsight: Greek tauros ‘bull’ is cognate with Breton taro ‘bull’ (Pezron’s form is taru, cf. Welsh tarw), not derived from it, while Latin vinum ‘wine’ is the etymon of Breton gwin, not the other way around.60 But the weakness of the general principle should have been evident without hindsight. Lhuyd and Pezron both saw the relevance of current language to arguments about the past, but the quality of their work really was different: Lhuyd worked hard in the field to gather his data, and he brought excellent, sober judgement to its analysis.

Looking back over the story of Lhuyd’s life and work, one realizes the extent to which it is a story about lexicography. Apart from his short contribution to Ray’s Collection of English Words, he saw Kirk’s translation of the Dictionariolum trilingue into print and published the dictionaries in Glossography: his own comparative etymological dictionary and the two shorter ones by David Parry; his Irish-English dictionary; his wordlists of medieval Welsh; his little Irish-Welsh-Basque wordlist; Moses Williams’ translation of the Breton vocabulary of Julien Maunoir. As well as these printed texts, he produced or commissioned translations of the Dictionariolum trilingue into Scottish Gaelic, Irish, Manx, and Breton, the latter being lost; he made a substantial Cornish wordlist; he made a Basque wordlist and commissioned another; he made a short wordlist of the English of Cornwall and a very short wordlist of the Gaelic of Inverness-shire. A fuller inventory of his lexicographical manuscripts could doubtless be provided—for instance the Irish wordlist which he wrote on spare leaves of one of the manuscripts of the astrological physician Richard Napier in the Ashmolean collection.61 The story of Lhuyd’s lexicographical work is also that of the wordlists with which he had dealings: Davies’ Dictionarium duplex, of course, and Ray’s Collection and Dictionariolum, and the printed Breton dictionaries to which he had access (he did see Pezron’s in the end), but also a number of Welsh dictionaries in the learned national tradition; the Irish dictionaries of О Cleirigh and Plunkett, and perhaps the older Irish wordlists to which he had access; the Cottonian wordlist which includes Cornish entries; and even Toland’s Irish dictionary, which appears never to have been finished and may hardly have been started, but which has its place in the flurry of dictionaries by making and consulting which Lhuyd came to the fullness of his achievement as a philologist of the Celtic languages.

  • 59 Pezron, Antiquite 333 ‘sur les vaisseaux on dit, amarer, pour lier, attacher avec une corde’; 334-5 ‘en plusieurs endroits on dit, une bique*.
  • 60 Pezron, Antiquite 364 (tauros), 419 (gwin).
  • 61 Now Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 228, fos. 282v-281 (working backwards from the back of the book), described W. H. Black, Catalogue cols. 178-9; another instance is MS Ashmole 1515, fos. 112v-110, described ibid. cols. 1416-17.

  • [1] Nicolson told Lhuyd that he had received the wordlist from Sibbald in a letter of 25 August 1701, inOxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 1816, fos. 517-18 (reference to wordlist at fo. 517r); he thankedLhuyd for permission to publish it, and announced that printing would begin in the following week, in aletter of 13 December 1701, in MS Ashmole 1816, fos. 521-2 (reference to wordlist at fo. 521r). For theScottish Historical Library, see James, North Country Bishop 86-8.
  • [2] In Kirk, ‘Vocabulary’ 346.
  • [3] Lhuyd, letter of 14 October 1703 to Josiah Babington, in Life and Letters of Edward Lhwyd 490-1 at491; the Oxford English Dictionary's first evidence for Q Celt and P Celt (the corresponding adjectives arelater) is from Sir John Rhys in 1891, ‘We are entitled to conclude that the Q Celts arrived in the west before the P Celts’.
  • [4] The extracts are in Trinity College Dublin, MS 1369, fos. 61r-64r.
  • [5] Campbell and Thomson, Edward Lhuyd in the Scottish Highlands 92-3 (‘R. St.’), 95 (entry counts).
  • [6] For the sequence of additions, see e.g. Trinity College Dublin, MS 1369, fo. 4v, where no equivalentfor ‘A Valley’ was provided by the Argyllshire informant, but Lhuyd then found gleann in Kirk and wrote‘K. Gleann’ and was then told by his Inverness informant that the same word was used there, and added‘Sic. I. N.’ after the reference to Kirk. At fo. 5r, the Argyllshire informant gave ‘Airgad’ as the form for‘Silver’; Lhuyd added first ‘Sic M’ and then ‘Sic IN’ on the right as his Munster and Inverness informantsagreed successively that this was the word they knew, and also added ‘K. Airgiad’ on the left from Kirk.
  • [7] Mills, ‘Vocabularium Cornicum’ (I am grateful to Dr Mills for a copy of this article); Lhuyd,Glossography 229. A page of the manuscript is reproduced as Ellis, Cornish Language and its Literature,plate 2.
  • [8] He first recorded his reasoning in National Library of Wales, MS Llanstephan 84, p 1; a fuller versionis Lhuyd, ‘To the courteous and noble inhabitants’ sigs. [A]2v-3r, translating Glossography 222-3.
  • [9] National Library of Wales, MS Llanstephan 84, p 2, ‘Nota qd rubricata in hoc dictionariolo e Cod.membranac[ea]e Bib. Cotton[ian]ae. exscripta sunt omnia’. The alphabetized wordlist is Trinity CollegeDublin, MS 1392/3, fos. 28r-29r.
  • [10] O’Flaherty, letter of 8 December 1704 to Lhuyd, in his Letters 259-61 at 259.
  • [11] Lhuyd, Glossography sigs. e1r-e1v, translated as Lhuyd, ‘Welsh preface’ 225-7 (the translation losesthe point of the dissimilarity between the Irish words and their Welsh equivalents).
  • [12] For Lhuyd’s knowledge of the Spanish origin-myth, see Glossography 435.
  • [13] Edward Lhuyd, letter of 3 April 1692 in Life and Letters of Edward Lhwyd 161-3 at 161.
  • [14] Lhuyd, ‘Welsh preface’ 224, translating Glossography sig. e1r, discussed by Zulaika Hernandez, ‘Eleuskara en la obra de Edward Lhuyd’ 306-7 and 309-11. The Basque New Testament available to Lhuydwas the one bequeathed by John Selden, identified at Glossography 31.
  • [15] Lhuyd cited Vulcanius as a source for Basque in Glossography 269.
  • [16] The letter is from James Sutherland to Lhuyd, in Bodleian MS Ashmole 1817a, fo. 494r, with wordliston the blank fos. 494v-495r and written over the address on fo. 495v; it is undated, but has a 22 Octoberpostmark on fo. 495v, and refers to the recent death of the Keeper of the Advocates’ Library in Edinburgh,and this must be that of James Stevenson, who died around 22 July 1702 (see Hillyard, ‘Formation of thelibrary’ 42); for the sources of the wordlist, see Zulaika Hernandez, ‘El euskara en la obra de Edward Lhuyd’315; for a transcription, see Urkizu, ‘Edward Lhwyd-en hiztegi poliglota’ 391-8.
  • [17] It is described by R. Sharpe in O’Flaherty, Letters 243 n 107 (see also ibid. 112-13).
  • [18] Abbott, ‘On an early Latin-English-Basque dictionary’ 56-9 (introduction, with examples of error),59-98 (text). The manuscript is Trinity College, Dublin, MS 1320.
  • [19] Lhuyd, Glossography 1-40 (first sequence of pagination); words for ‘dog’ at 24; the much earlierobservation of the same correspondence by Goropius Becanus is treated by Van Hal, Moedertalen entaalmoeders’ 114.
  • [20] Lhuyd, Glossography 1-179 (second sequence of pagination); all further references to page numbersin Glossography are to this second sequence unless otherwise stated. The title is printed as A comparativevocabulary’ but Lhuyd called in the errata (sig. Ii2v) for ‘comparative’ to be deleted.
  • [21] For the transcription, see Lhuyd, Glossography 2 (first sequence of pagination).
  • [22] Lhuyd, Glossography 270-98. For Parry, see Ovenell, Ashmolean Museum 108-12.
  • [23] Lhuyd, Glossography 180-212.
  • [24] Lhuyd, Glossography 213-21, with a note on sources ibid. sig. b2v; see C. Davies, ‘The Dictionariumduplex’ 169.
  • [25] Edmonton, University of Alberta Libraries, P 381 G7 L68 1707 folio, marked at sig. c1v and at 215onwards.
  • [26] Lhuyd, Glossography 222-53, with medieval Welsh at 233-9, and 254-65.
  • [27] Lhuyd, Glossography 299-309; for the sources, see O’Sullivan and O’Sullivan, ‘Edward Lhuyd’s collection of Irish manuscripts’ 68-9.
  • [28] Lhuyd, Glossography 310-12, i-iv, sigs. A1r-Ee2v, and 425-36 (a continuous sequence of pages);entry count by R. Sharpe in O’Flaherty, Letters 110.
  • [29] There is an overview at Lhuyd, Glossography sig. Ii2v, and a fuller account at ‘Irish preface’ 194-8,translating Glossography 311-12.
  • [30] See R. Sharpe in O’Flaherty, Letters 125-39.
  • [31] The annotated ranges, eagam-gus, meileadh-naoidhe, and sbairn-uisgeamhuil (sigs. L-P, T, and Z-Eeof Glossography), are Trinity College, Dublin, MS 1392/8, fos. 1r-24v, where they are followed by two single-sided proof-sheets marked up by Lhuyd, with notes by him on the etymologies of Welsh personalnames on the reverse (fos. 25-6), and by two sheets of notes by O’Flaherty (fos. 27-8). Fos. 27r and 9r arereproduced as O’Flaherty, Letters plates 10 and 11. Lhuyd invites readers to mark up their copies inGlossography 426; a draft of this passage is in O’Flaherty, Letters 258-9.
  • [32] Trinity College Dublin, MS 1392/8, fo. 24v.
  • [33] On Pezron and Celtomania, see Droixhe, La linguistique et lappet de l’histoire 126-33, Kidd, BritishIdentities Before Nationalism 66-70, and Jenkins, ‘Cultural uses of the Welsh language’ 377-9.
  • [34] Lhuyd, Glossography sig. b2v.
  • [35] See Collis, ‘Celtic myths’ 199-200, esp. the numbered points 2, 3, and 4, and Collis, ‘George Buchananand the Celts in Britain’ 105.
  • [36] Campbell and Thomson, Edward Lhuyd in the Scottish Highlands xii-xiv and xxii.
  • [37] Ogilvie, Science of Describing 271.
  • [38] Baxter, Glossarium 259-77. See D. Evans and Roberts, ‘Introduction’ 23-5 and, for Baxter as a successor of Lhuyd, Jenkins, ‘Cultural uses of the Welsh language’ 377.
  • [39] Rees and Walters, ‘Dispersion of the manuscripts of Edward Lhuyd’ 157-8, 172.
  • [40] Poppe, ‘Leibniz and Eckhart on the Irish language’ 70-5; for Leibniz’s notes on Glossography, seeSchulenburg, Leibniz als Sprachforscher 286 n 357.
  • [41] Toland, Collection 1: 7.
  • [42] Kidd, British Identities before Nationalism 196-7; Mandelbrote, ‘Bible and national identity’ 162 n 20.
  • [43] Cram, ‘Lhuyd’.
  • [44] Pezron, Antiquite 332-69 (Greek; reference to ‘plus de six cens mots Grecs’ at 369), 370-421 (Latin),422-39 (Germanic).
  • [45] Pezron, Antiquite 329-30, ‘les Bretons de France, et les Gallois de la Grand-Bretagne, ont encore apresent le meme Langage, quon parloit dans nos Gaules [in the plural because Gaul was tripartite] au temsde Jules Cesar et d’Auguste.’
  • [46] Pezron, Antiquite 334, ‘Cest le mot des enfans encore aujourd’huy, qui disent, Mam bron, cest-a-dire,Maman, donnez-moy la mamelle’; 351, ‘les paisans de Bretagne disent souvent, milin coir, pour signifier,jaune comme la cire’; 363 ‘aujourd’huy quand les Bretons chassent ces animaux, ils ne disent point autre-ment, que sic sic’.
Found a mistake? Please highlight the word and press Shift + Enter  
< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >
Business & Finance
Computer Science
Language & Literature
Political science