DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.61385#0200
cxciv Chapter XVI.—Conjectured Authorship.
descendant of the family1 Foulis, whose members have long been
influential in the affairs of Scotland. Although no literary record
authorizes the testimony of Foulis, still Ritson’s quotation might be
based upon some personal communication. The statement accredited
to Sir James may be accounted for on various grounds. The Speculum
could easily be regarded as the product of the authorship of that
Al quin or Alcuin of Britain, nom de plume of Jacob Hive, who
“ went on a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land,” and whose pseudo-
translation into English of the Book of lasher2 was published in
1751. Another hypothesis is, that Foulis might have been misled
by the orthography. Finding a clue in a phonological test he
might have conjectured the -qu- of Alimin to indicate Scotch origin.
On the supposition of further investigation on the part of Foulis,
Albinus, Alcuin Albinus Flaccus, could have suggested to him a
native of Alban or a home in Alban. In this manner Alquin
(Alcuinus) could have been converted into a Scotchman without
having ever trod the Alban soil. But these conjectures are not
supported, for the language and vocabulary of the Speculum do not
indicate Scottish source for the original poem. Ritson attempts to
correct the error3 of Foulis, explaining that the Alquin here meant
(i. e. in the Speculum) was Alquinus = Albinus Alcuinus, a Saxon-
Engleishman at the court of Charlemagne; cf. A. E. Metrical
Romancees, p. xci. A blunder equally grave is involved in Ritson’s
explanation, for Ealhwine was, of course, no Saxon.
On the other hand, the underlying Latin text, De Virtutibus et
Vitiis Liber, is by no means so conspicuous as source of the Speculum
as to give to Alcuin, Alcuinus, Albinus Flaccus, who died in 804,
preceptor of Charlemagne, any claim to the authorship of the present
text. Rather the poem stands as an individual product. Its author,
the poet, must be responsible for the entire composition.
3. The poet of Ipotis as author of the Speculum. Concerning
alleged claim of the same authorship for the Speculum and for Ipotis,
nothing is to be proved. On purely external evidence the personal
1 There seems to be no connection between the family of Sir James and that
of the eminent Glasgow printers to the University, which has identified the
name Foulis with immaculate prints of the classics. Robert Foulis’s Demetrius
Phalereus on Elocution, 1742, the first Greek text printed in Glasgow, and the
celebrated edition of Horace, 1744, have immortalized themselves in the memory
of literati.
2 Cf. Holy Scriptures, Josh. x. 13 ; 2 Sam. i. 18.
3 No explanation occurs through Sir Henry Foulis’s (Bart.) Relation of a
bloody fight, etc.
descendant of the family1 Foulis, whose members have long been
influential in the affairs of Scotland. Although no literary record
authorizes the testimony of Foulis, still Ritson’s quotation might be
based upon some personal communication. The statement accredited
to Sir James may be accounted for on various grounds. The Speculum
could easily be regarded as the product of the authorship of that
Al quin or Alcuin of Britain, nom de plume of Jacob Hive, who
“ went on a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land,” and whose pseudo-
translation into English of the Book of lasher2 was published in
1751. Another hypothesis is, that Foulis might have been misled
by the orthography. Finding a clue in a phonological test he
might have conjectured the -qu- of Alimin to indicate Scotch origin.
On the supposition of further investigation on the part of Foulis,
Albinus, Alcuin Albinus Flaccus, could have suggested to him a
native of Alban or a home in Alban. In this manner Alquin
(Alcuinus) could have been converted into a Scotchman without
having ever trod the Alban soil. But these conjectures are not
supported, for the language and vocabulary of the Speculum do not
indicate Scottish source for the original poem. Ritson attempts to
correct the error3 of Foulis, explaining that the Alquin here meant
(i. e. in the Speculum) was Alquinus = Albinus Alcuinus, a Saxon-
Engleishman at the court of Charlemagne; cf. A. E. Metrical
Romancees, p. xci. A blunder equally grave is involved in Ritson’s
explanation, for Ealhwine was, of course, no Saxon.
On the other hand, the underlying Latin text, De Virtutibus et
Vitiis Liber, is by no means so conspicuous as source of the Speculum
as to give to Alcuin, Alcuinus, Albinus Flaccus, who died in 804,
preceptor of Charlemagne, any claim to the authorship of the present
text. Rather the poem stands as an individual product. Its author,
the poet, must be responsible for the entire composition.
3. The poet of Ipotis as author of the Speculum. Concerning
alleged claim of the same authorship for the Speculum and for Ipotis,
nothing is to be proved. On purely external evidence the personal
1 There seems to be no connection between the family of Sir James and that
of the eminent Glasgow printers to the University, which has identified the
name Foulis with immaculate prints of the classics. Robert Foulis’s Demetrius
Phalereus on Elocution, 1742, the first Greek text printed in Glasgow, and the
celebrated edition of Horace, 1744, have immortalized themselves in the memory
of literati.
2 Cf. Holy Scriptures, Josh. x. 13 ; 2 Sam. i. 18.
3 No explanation occurs through Sir Henry Foulis’s (Bart.) Relation of a
bloody fight, etc.