Ayenbite of Inwyt

Not to be confused withPrick of Conscience.

TheAyenbite of Inwyt—alsoAȝenbite(Agenbite)of Inwit;literally, the "again-biting of inner wit," or theRemorse(Prick)of Conscienceis the title of a confessional prose work written in aKentishdialect ofMiddle English.

Rendered from the French original, one supposes by a "very incompetent translator," (Thomson 1907: 396) it is generally considered more valuable as a record of Kentish pronunciation in the mid-14th century than exalted as a work of literature.

Origins and content

TheAyenbiteis a translation of the FrenchSomme le Roi(also known as theBook of Vices and Virtues), a late 13th century treatise onChristianmorality;the popularity of this latter text is demonstrated by the large number of surviving copies. The subject-matter is treated primarilyallegorically;for example, theseven deadly sinsare identified with the seven heads of theBeastof theApocalypse.

The surviving copy of the work was completed on 27 October 1340, by aBenedictinemonk,Michael of Northgate.This can be stated with rare certainty, for the author specifies all these details himself, writing in the preface,

þis boc is dan Michelis of Northgate / ywrite an englis of his oȝene hand. þet hatte: Ayenbyte of inwyt.

This book is [the work of] don Michael of Northgate, written in English in his own hand, that's called: Remorse of Conscience.

And in a postscript,

Ymende. þet þis boc is uolueld ine þe eve of þe holy apostles Symon an Iudas / of ane broþer of þe cloystre of sanynt Austin of Canterburi / ine þe yeare of oure lhordes beringe 1340.

Let it be known that this work was fulfilled on the eve [of the feast] of the holy apostlesSimonandJude,by a brother of the cloister of SaintAugustine of Canterbury,in the Year of our Lord 1340.

It is usually assumed that Michael of Northgate was himself the translator, not merely a copyist; the library of St Augustine's contained two copies of the French work at this time (Gradon 1979).

Language

Since the work was intended for the use of Kentish commoners, its language has a number of unusual features.

Firstly, the vocabulary shows a marked preference for translating technical terms into compounds of English words, rather than borrowing French or Latin terminology. The title itself is a common example: it usesayenbite,"again-bite", for modern English "remorse", andinwyt,"in-wit", or 'inward-knowledge', for modern English "conscience", both terms being literal translations (calques) of the Latin words. Even "amen" is often translated, into the phrasezuo by hit( "so be it" ). It is thus an early example oflinguistic purism in English.

Secondly, the orthography transparently reveals many details of pronunciation. Most notably, initial fricatives are regularly voiced: the word "sin" is speltzenne,"father" becomesvader,"first" becomesverstoraverst.

The spelling is unusually consistent for the time, which implies that it is an accurate representation of the author's speech: it has been described as "as close to a 'pure' dialect as we can get" (Freeborn 1992:172). As such, and particularly given our precise knowledge of its place and date of writing, it is an invaluable resource in reconstructing the linguistic history of southern England.

The text is also notable for its archaicmorphologycompared to other specimens of Middle English. For instance, theneuter genderanddative caseofOld Englishare still distinguished;þetchild bed oureLhorde,þetgernier/to þe gerniere.The spellingLhord(e) (Old Englishhlaford(e)) also suggests retention of the Old English /hl/ consonant cluster. None of these features are found in theOrmulum,fromLincolnshire,which is almost two centuries older.

Reception

As Michael explains in his postscript, theAyenbitewas intended to provide a confessional treatise that would be accessible to "lewede men," those who could read neither French nor Latin, for the good of their souls. In this aim it can be compared toRobert Mannyng's contemporaryHandlyng Synne,but unlike that work, theAyenbiteappears not to have gained any popularity; only one copy has survived, in theBritish LibraryArundel MS57, and that is almost certainlythe original(Treharne 2000:526). No demonstrable influence on later works has been found; a 19th-century theory thatChaucermight have used the work as a source for hisParson's Talehas long been abandoned.

In the 20th century, the work gained some recognition when its title was adopted byJames Joyce,who used it numerous times in his novelUlyssesas a trope for conscience, especially in referencingHamletandWalt Whitman.In Joyce's spelling,agenbite of inwit,the title has gained a limited foothold in the English language.

References

Edition

• Morris, Richard, ed, revised by Gradon, Pamela (1965).Dan Michel's Ayenbite of Inwyt or Remorse of Conscience.EETS O.S. 23. Oxford University Press.

Criticism

• Freeborn, Dennis (1992).From Old English to Standard English.London: Macmillan.
• Gradon, Pamela (1979).Dan Michel's Ayenbite of Inwyt or Remorse of Conscience,volume 2 (introduction and commentary). EETS O.S. 278. Oxford University Press.
• Thomson, Clara L. (1907). "Later Transition English: Legendaries and Chroniclers", in Ward, A.W., and Waller, A.R., eds.The Cambridge History of English Literature,vol. IFrom the Beginnings to the Cycles of Romance,374-401. Cambridge University Press.
• Treharne, Elaine, ed (2000).Old and Middle English: An Anthology.Oxford: Blackwell.

External links

• Full text at Archive.org